Counterpunch and 9/11 and Alexander Cockburn: From exposing the truth to complete 9/11 censorship and insults...in just 2 years

The alternative media has been hijacked, conquered, by forces that will not allow the truth of 911 to even be discussed. What in the world has happened? Here is one example.

In 2002, Counterpunch runs an article deeply questioning the official story, one that could be found on 911 blogger, with information that shows clearly that something is wrong with the official 911 story.

In 2004, Counterpunch runs a story that insults the 911 movement, calling us "conspiracy nuts", and never again runs any story at all that has any of the mounting and well documented evidence that shows the official story to be at least conflicted.

What happened during the years from 2002 to 2004? Alexander Cockburn was the editor throughout it all. Was he threatened, or convinced of something, or did he receive some kind of support from foundations that would ultimately not want the real truth to come out?

The exact same thing happened with Justin Raimondo at antiwar.com. In fact, Raimondo even sold a book about the Israeli connection to 911. And then he went mum, except to also insult 9/11 truthers.

Something is going on, and I wish someone would come forward with what it could possibly be.

in 2002...

http://www.counterpunch.org/loughery1001.html

and 4 years later . . .

http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn09092006.html

A big tent is for the circus

pfgetty said ...."Something is going on, and I wish someone would come forward with what it could possibly be."

It looks pretty obvious to me.

pfgetty said ......"What happened during the years from 2002 to 2004? Alexander Cockburn was the editor throughout it all. Was he threatened, or convinced of something, or did he receive some kind of support from foundations that would ultimately not want the real truth to come out?"

Uh....Cockburn is telling you what happened in his article. So what's the mystery?

Cockburn said....

" in the first paragraph of the opening page of the book by one of their high priests, David Ray Griffin, The New Pearl Harbor. “In many respects,” Griffin writes, “the strongest evidence provided by critics of the official account involves the events of 9/11 itself…"
http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn09092006.html

DRG is not my "leader" evidently Cockburn thinks he is...:. DRG sells books that tell people Mark Bingham using his first and last name indicates the cell phone call was fake when it wasn't a cell phone call and his own mother said it wasn't unusual at all. DRG supports CIT and their slander of an innocent cab driver. And he is a pentagon no planer. Why wouldn't Cockburn be turned off to "9-11 truth" when this is 9-11 BS?

Cockburn said:

"It’s awful. My in-box overflows each day with fresh “proofs” of how the WTC buildings were actually demolished, often accompanied by harsh insults identifying me as a “gate-keeper” preventing the truth from getting out."
http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn09092006.html

He points out that not agreeing with certain "theories" gets you accused of being "in on it" to some degree, making him think perhaps these 9-11 "truthers" are rather "paranoid". Many of us are accused of being "agents" and so on.....why wouldn't he be turned off by this?

Cockburn said:

"Their treatment of eyewitness testimony and forensic evidence is whimsical. Apparent anomalies that seem to nourish their theories are brandished excitedly; testimony that undermines their theories – like witnesses of a large plane hitting the Pentagon -- is contemptuously brushed aside."
http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn09092006.html

You so called truthers refusing to admit that planes flew into buildings are "no planers" wether you like the term or not, and BTW....you are not helping.

Cockburn said:

"Naturally, there are conspiracies. I think there is strong evidence that FDR did have knowledge that a Japanese naval force in the north Pacific was going to launch an attack on Pearl Harbor. Roosevelt thought it would be a relatively mild assault and thought it would be the final green light to get the US into the war."
http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn09092006.html

In other words...he's willing to listen, but not to preposterous insane BS, and I don't blame him.

Cockburn said:

"There is a one particularly vigorous coven which has established to its own satisfaction that the original NASA moon landing was faked, and never took place. This “conspiracy” would have required the complicity of thousands of people , all of whom have kept their mouths shut. The proponents of the “fake moon landing” plot tend to overlap with the JFK and 9/11 nuts."
http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn09092006.html

And here he points out that 9-11 truth movement is just another bunch of conspiracy theorists. Why not think that? If so called truthers don't practice discernment and reason this is to be expected.

Cockburn said:

"One notorious “deductive” leap involves flight 77, which on 9/11 ended up crashing into the Pentagon. There are photos of the impact of the “object” -- i.e., the Boeing 757, flight 77 -- that seem to show the sort of hole a missile might make. Ergo, the nuts assert, it WAS a missile and a 757 didn’t hit the Pentagon. As regards the hole, my brother Andrew -- writing a book about Rumsfeld and the DoD during his tenure -- has seen photos taken within 30 minutes of Pentagon impact clearly showing outline of entire plane including wings. This was visible momentarily when the smoke blew away"
http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn09092006.html

A passenger jet hit the pentagon. The witnesses saw it, the rescue crew cleaned up the mess, and the physical evidence confirmed it. He has no reason to listen to any so called truth movement that refuses to deal with reality.

So in answer to what happened? The 9-11 truth movement can stop trying to blame others and start blaming itself.

That's slick stuff, by Cockburn,

and you fell for it.

No journalist would take a few instances where SOME truthers are not correct, and, having looked at all the rest, not seen any reason to pursue the rest of the very well documented and well analyzed areas of the 9/11 truth evidence.
He is really slick, but it all falls far short of being a good excuse for not understanding and following up on the facts.
DRG would eat him alive in a rational, careful debate, much as he has done with Cass Sunstein.

Has Cockburn not realized that there are 1270 A& E's that see something desperately wrong with the story that the buildings fell via fire alone? Has he just by chance skipped over that information?
No, of course not, and he cannot refute any of it.
It is a fact, FACT, that the buildings fell via controlled demolition

To know so much about the truth movement and not have any explanation, or concern, about what has been shown to be the truth about the collapses of the WTC shows that he is purposely censoring, and insulting, the 9/11 truth movement.
The question is why.
It seems to be a crime to me going on................something like operation Mockingbird................but I'd like to know more.
You haven't helped a bit.

Did I get "fooled" too?

pfgetty said ...."and you fell for it."

Are you sure? Or perhaps I'm "in on it" too and covering up for my colleges who used their nifty voice morphing technology on 9-11? Maybe my real name really is Jimd3100stein and I'm a secret agent? I could be one of those "fake truthers" who's really an undercover Zionist.

pfgetty said....."DRG would eat him alive in a rational, careful debate"

You mean one of the "high priests" of 9-11 truth? That evidently speaks for you? Yea, I think infallible is the word. Fake phone calls, and a missile hitting the pentagon, as the plane fly's over and fools everyone is certainly very rational.

pfgetty said..."You haven't helped a bit."

On the contrary, I would think that exposing myself as a "fake truther" secret Zionist agent would be very helpfull in your accusations of other "gatekeepers" being "in on it" in some fashion.

Whew!

If I was going to attack you or accuse you I don't have to do it..............you've done it already!
Good job.

I see you really, really don't like DRG much. Good for you. Maybe Cass Sunstein is more to your liking, as I'm sure he doesn't think much of DRG.

Well, you can have your ideas, and I'll have mine.
Your idea, that it is perfectly reasonable that almost ALL of the alternative media sites, like DemocracyNow, Alternet (did I meet you on Alternet one time), Counterpunch, Znet, Truthout, antiwar.com, CommonDreams.............all of them..............all those great writers and progressive thinkers..............just ALL happen to have missed the evidence compiled by Richard Gage and Kevin Ryan and Steven Jones and the rest of the 1270 Scientists on ae911truth.org and only have thought about some of the points of 9/11 for which much more evidence is needed. NONE of them, NOT ONE, even thinks a new investigation is warranted, or happen to think that the finding of nanothermite is a reasonable issue for publishing on their sites.........NOT ONE!
You don't think that is odd. How weird. But as I say, you are free to have your ideas, and I'll have my ideas.
Frankly, though, you have to be very, very dense, or agenda filled, to have your ideas. But I'm not attacking you! You've already done it!

The company we keep

Notice the date?

Just to be clear on our cult leaders: I respect only the truth, and accept only the truth as authority. So if lies or factual inaccuracies are told, there's going to be conflict with whoever is telling them. DRG has written many books. Within them, there are many flaws. Many of those flaws are parroted on a daily basis and provoke refutation by well read debunkers.

Can, you, wielding your mighty DRG books, answer this dilettante's questions?

Can you, using DRG's books and his unimpeachable philosopher's logic, sustain the implied no-hijacker / no plane crash (AA 77, UA 93) / no passenger theories by properly addressing the questions listed above?

Just see this as a stress test for the grand Iranian 9/11 'truth' / Holocaust denial / The Joooos Did It conference in 2011.

You see, one specific, rather intelligent truther, who fell from grace and then became a Holocaust denying, paranoid loon who accuses Cosmos/YT of having a double identity as an OCT supporter has called this particular hit piece "sophisticated".

Well...here's the thing. It's only "sophisticated" if you take the books of David Ray Griffin as gospel. If, however, you research 9/11 on your own, you will find there are better, more reliable alternatives than Griffin, and no debunker will dare confront you. The only you thing you have to do is follow the truth wherever it leads, and let go of conspiracy fantasies that merely float around because they are sensationalist, not because they have any basis in fact. Such as the sensationalist nonsense of a Pentagon flyover or Atta being alive somewhere on a tropical island, sipping piña coladas, or Bin Laden, the dead fake NWO ventriloquist dummy who publicly supported climate change so that the American people will support it too (??)

So, please spare me the "respect" I'm supposed to have for a man who cites Christopher Bollyn and Thierry Meyssan as credible sources and takes a smiling snapshot with Barret and Fetzer as recent as the spring of 2010. I wish prof. Griffin well as a human being, I wish him good health, but I have grown to disagree profoundly with his 100% MIHOP buffoonery. It's just not true, and the truth shall not be bargained with.

I agree with Jim...

It's all about what's being promoted, and how people are promoting it.

What's this? An article on counterpunch advocating for 9/11 Justice? You don't say.

http://www.counterpunch.org/beattie09102010.html

Must admit I missed that, but..........

.............that is hardly an article that tries to expose the absolute truth that has been presented all these years that it WAS an inside job.

Here is a bit from the article:

"Many readers have written and asked me to address 9/11 as an “inside job.” That’s not my intention. I have no knowledge to support grand conspiracy ideologies. My comprehension resides with family grief and an acknowledgement that the 9/11 Commission was a contrivance that failed to provide a thorough, transparent, and factual assessment.

Evidence can be manipulated or ignored. An investigator can look at what he or she wants and shift an examination in any direction. Even down a road leading nowhere."

So since evidence can be manipulated, we just don't have any reason to expect to know what happened on 9/11. I see.
We have a website that for 9 years has decided that evidence that the US government is lying outright, with scientific proof just waiting to be told, is just not something of interest to this author or this site. Ridiculous.

So an article that is mostly all about grief and remembrance of loved ones, with a few bits about how maybe we don't know the whole thing..........that suffices as hard hitting investigative reporting after 9 years of NOTHING?

Those who don't want the truth of 9/11 to be presented to the public allow this kind of piece to go through, knowing it doesn't tell anyone anywhere that there is a real immediate and provable problem with the 9/11 official story. Just sort of messy stuff that doesn't make sense but is better just left alone.

Biggest story of all time, and you think this is ok after 9 years.
Amazing.

PS............the reason I missed it.............

..............is that after years of reading Counterpunch, AND contributing to the site..............after all the years of NEVER seeing anything about 9/11 except a few articles insulting 9/11 truthers, about a year ago I stopped going to the site.

Do NOT support these sites.
This is not where 9/11 truth will ever be presented in any meaningful way. The foundational support they receive has ordered them not to allow any good information from 9/11 truthers to be presented.

Our information will be presented by sites like ae911truth.org and 911truth.org and, yes, prisonplanet, and RT, and opednews and globalresearch and patriotsquestion911 and others. Support these.

This isn't "reporting..."

This is a heartfelt article written by someone who understands what it's like to lose a loved one. It is a heartfelt plea that was even read on the radio. This is an attempt by someone who is honest, pleading for justice for 9/11.

Honesty is admitting that you don't know what happened on 9/11, or who was ultimately responsible.

Because she didn't meet your standards of what should be written doesn't mean that this article, written by someone who lost someone in the "Post-9/11 World," posted on a site that ordinarily wouldn't post an article like that, linking to 9/11: Press For Truth, is any less extraordinary.

The fact that you think this article, "doesn't tell anyone anywhere that there is a real immediate and provable problem with the 9/11 official story" tells me that you don't know a damn thing about 9/11, or that you choose to ignore that which doesn't suit your idea of what happened that day.

She received SO MUCH praise for that article, and is probably still getting letters. You really have no idea.

Oh, it's a nice article................

and I like to see nice articles expressing the emotional hardships of those who lost loved ones at the WTC or Pentagon or PA. I've seen some great ones on the mainstream media, also.
Keep'em coming! We need to be reminded of the horror that can occur when war and terrorism strikes innocent people.

Just wondering, though..................Jon, do you feel that after 9 years, it is a bit suspicious that except for articles calling 9/11 truthers tin foil hat nutballs and generally insulting the movement, that there have been virtually no articles exposing the best and most important and well documented evidence that the official story is a lie?
Does it not seem odd to you that Commondreams, antiwar.com, counterpunch, democracynow, motherjones, nationmag, truthout, zmag, and others seem to follow every other story that the msm misses but has felt that 9/11 truth is not of sufficient value to present on their pages?

Does it seem ok to you that all of the fabulous work that Kevin Ryan and Richard Gage and Steven Jones and David Chandler have done to expose the coverup of NIST and the evidence that the buildings came down via controlled demolition has been ignored by all of these site? All of this is getting reviewed and spread throughout the Middle East and the rest of the world, Yet here in the US, not a word about it. And that seems reasonable to you...............Alexander Cockburn, to you, is doing a great job. After nine years he put up an article with a link to Press for Truth, which has been out and running for, what? five years?

Now, if any of these people in the alternative media are friends of yours, I understand, and I'd be loyal to them also. But otherwise, I'd like to know how you rationalize all of this. I'm wondering why you decide to attack me, and not mention the reasonableness of what I have expressed should be going on in what is called the alternative media. I'm really at a loss in trying to figure out where you all stand. You DO want all of this information to come out, don't you? You ARE on DRG's side when he responds to Cass Sunstein in his newest book, right? You follow his logic, don't you?

Someone told me that you used to be the manager, or were the founder, of 911 blogger. That's impressive. Anyway, it would seem that your main objective is getting the word out..................not just having a medium in which the choir preaches to the choir. I hope that here and there journalists will look at 911 blogger and take the information and put it where the general public will see it.
That IS what you want, isn't it? Or do you like it all just staying here, away from the alternative or msm?

Just wondering.
Anyway, this is a great site and I thank you if you have had anything to do with starting it.

THIS EXACTLY

Sorry pfgetty but jimd3100 is absolutely right. Our movement now has to re-approach most of the left wing journalists who are MOST CERTAINLY open-minded to reason and begin to disconnect ourselves from the audacious theories which have been shoved in most of the liberal media's faces. In other words, the hit pieces have worked. They have framed the 9/11 truth debate around a few speculative theories and then knocked them down. These discredited theories, ie (DRG, fake cell phone calls, no planes, Fetz, AJ, Tarp) are now commonly known about by MOST PEOPLE in this country. So we as the truth movement have to take it on ourselves to re-reach out to the left without terms like gatekeepers and also making it clear that we do not support bizarre speculative theories or the extremists who spread them. 9/11 Truth's psuedo poster boys, like AJ/DRG either come of as angry yelling raving extremists, or so drone like and boring that we are put to sleep and lost in ambiguous details (keep that one in mind when you consider DRG in a debate setting, not only is this guy pushing "fake cell phones" and "no planes" but his debate on Democracy Now with Chip Berlet was downright SAD). 9/11 Truth does not attack people who attack us! We stay open minded and show them the truth reasonably and logically. If we call them names like gatekeepers, we lose and look even crazier then we have been framed already in the process.

Oh, so jimd3100 is absolutely right! I see.

So you didn't think his reply was a bit over the top.
I'm amused.
I'm also amused by how you are a commenter on 9/11 blogger, but have so very little respect for David Ray Griffin. Do you spend a lot of time on sites that have great respect for people that you do not like at all?
Funny you pick a few most controversial topics, and that is what you feel needs to be held up as the best of the 9/11 truth movement.
Funny you are not concerned that none of the alternative sites, not alternet, commondreams, democracynow, counterpunch, antiwar.com, truthout, nationmag, motherjones, etc etc, have had any articles investigating or presenting the massive material compiled by Kevin Ryan and Richard Gage and Steven Jones and others on ae911truth.org.
That is very, VERY interesting.

What do YOU think about their evidence.
I'd like you to answer this: do YOU feel that it has been proven that those buildings came down via controlled demolition?
Do you see any other explanation for the nanothermite, besides the obvious one: that the government was involved and placed it in those buildings?
Where do YOU stand on these questions.
Remember, this IS a site where people who believe the official 9/11 story is not worthy of being called truth. Is that what you also feel?
This is NOT the comment section of alternet.

"Funny you pick a few most

"Funny you pick a few most controversial topics, and that is what you feel needs to be held up as the best of the 9/11 truth movement."

Which are you talking about?

"What do YOU think about their evidence"

Kevin Ryan, Gage, Jones - Generally very on point

"I'd like you to answer this: do YOU feel that it has been proven that those buildings came down via controlled demolition?"

I feel like some of the experts like Jones and Gage can properly articulate how this has been proven. However does this mean that controlled demolition has been proven in the sense of its generally accepted by most Americans as totally proved, 100 percent, and we know how the explosives were placed...NOPE And if/when we do, it's a hard topic for someone who is not an expert in physics to really take on and not get discredited by the logical fallacy that they are NOT A QUALIFIED AUTHORITY.

"Do you see any other explanation for the nanothermite, besides the obvious one: that the government was involved and placed it in those buildings?"

Yes. Saying "the government" was involved and placed it is SUCH A VAGUE TERM that it most certainly not be proven. Could explosives been placed by a private defense contractor that had nothing or very little to do with "the government?" Absolutely. Looks like we don't "KNOW."

"Remember, this IS a site where people who believe the official 9/11 story is not worthy of being called truth. Is that what you also feel?"

Poorly written sentence, but if you are asking me what I think you are asking me, you MUST be a newb to this site and the movement and should probably, maybe, I don't know read any of the blogs I have posted over the years.

Funny, Interesting

To whittle down your impression of the work

of Richard Gage and the others..................
none of it really is of much value, and certainly nothing proven, as long as we cannot say " its generally accepted by most Americans as totally proved, 100 percent". Do you really mean that?

And since you are uncomfortable with that one sentence I wrote that was not very proper grammatically (I usually am typing while people at work are talking to me, sorry), here it is expressed another way: this website is for people who understand that the official 9/11 story is not valid. It does not matter if 100 percent, or even a majority, or even a lot, of the American people believe the official story or not. This site is all about discovering major improbabilities and impossibilities in the official story, to the degree that we make the case that a new investigation should be pursued, so that these conflicts with reality can be resolved. It is without doubt to all of us that the 9/11 truth movement has shown this to be the case, that the official story contains enough untruths that render it an unacceptable account of the events of 9/11, and a new investigation is warranted and necessary.

It is without doubt, also, that the evidence for this has been clearly made available to those who edit and write in the alternative media. They could not possibly, after so many years, be completely ignorant of the best that the 9/11 movement has offered as proof of the official story being invalid. The discoveries of the nanothermite and free fall speed, the coverup of the information by NIST, and hundreds of other bits of evidence are all more than enough for any person with normal intelligence to understand and realize that there are great stories of enormous significance. That you think these journalists haven't been given adequate information, or are impossibly confused because of bad information from the truth movement, is amusing and suspicious.

And what is this bit about how can anyone say that the government must be involved when nanothermite and other evidence for controlled demolition is presented? While the purpose of bringing out all of this information is to ensure that any logical thinking person would see the need for a new investigation, it is hard to imagine that anyone, understanding the evidence, could avoid thinking that the government is involved. To say that there is easily other scenarios that could be considered is whimsical.....................what other agent could have access to tons of nanothermite? What other agency would see to it that NIST, full of demolition expertise and even expertise in nanothemitic materials, would do all it could to avoid investigating these claims?

Amusing...................I'll leave it at that!

pfgetty wrote: "To whittle

pfgetty wrote:
"To whittle down your impression of the work
of Richard Gage and the others..................
none of it really is of much value, and certainly nothing proven, as long as we cannot say " its generally accepted by most Americans as totally proved, 100 percent". Do you really mean that?"

I didn't say that. You didn't quote me there. Reread my statements a few times. I say it is up to us to point to these experts but that we cannot attempt to speak like qualified engineers if we are not. If they can prove it, we must direct people to their expert articulations of their ideas. Not attempt to sound like nano-thermetic experts ourselves. So that's actually the opposite of what you claim i said. "None of it is really of much value" (don't know where you came up with that at all)

"And since you are uncomfortable with that one sentence I wrote that was not very proper grammatically "

I assure you I am quite comfortable and responded to your statement accordingly. It is silly, and has nothing to do with my critique of your Ahmadinejad worshiping, to suggest that I somehow support the official story.

"That you think these journalists haven't been given adequate information, or are impossibly confused because of bad information from the truth movement, is amusing and suspicious."

Really? Cause I think you nailed it perfectly there. And I think most people in the truth movement agree. The alt. media and msm have been given adequate information that is also mixed with so much bad information that its very hard to decipher which is which. (This is true for most average American's now considering how much the topic has been covered in the mainstream, even the tv show South Park) If one googles 9/11 truth one can quickly see how pertinent bad information is. Bad info is the only weapon the actual perps of 9/11 have left.

"And what is this bit about how can anyone say that the government must be involved when nanothermite and other evidence for controlled demolition is presented? While the purpose of bringing out all of this information is to ensure that any logical thinking person would see the need for a new investigation, it is hard to imagine that anyone, understanding the evidence, could avoid thinking that the government is involved. To say that there is easily other scenarios that could be considered is whimsical.....................what other agent could have access to tons of nanothermite? What other agency would see to it that NIST, full of demolition expertise and even expertise in nanothemitic materials, would do all it could to avoid investigating these claims?"

Here's another quote of yours that makes me think you need to re-read my comments. You also have to think about them to. I am saying that using the term "the government" is to vague. I'm saying that our movement has been framed around the quote "The Government Did It." Since most American's have heard this bold big tent statement and it more often than not turns them off, we need to BE MORE SPECIFIC see? Like Jon Gold said, it's about HOW WE PRESENT OURSELVES. "Defense contractors" or "rogue elements within our government" sounds a lot more reasonable and educated than just saying vaguely "The Government Did It." Obviously based on the latest reactions to Ahmadinejad's words and the OPEN ARMS COVERAGE OF THEM, dropping unspecific statements with bold conclusions which have taken you YEARS TO CONCLUDE about 9/11 only close minds rather than open.

So if you plan on responding to this, please read my comments thoroughly first.

Show "I think reading your comments closely is a waste of time, " by pfgetty

Now you have illustrated some fantastic points for us "pfgetty"

pfgetty wrote:

"Here is the point: the evidence and arguments coming from the 9/11 truth movement are so overwhelming in content and science and logic, that to have all of the more popular alternative so-called antiwar media completely ignore it, even calling 9/11 truthers nutballs, is INSANITY, UNLESS we realize that they are under some kind of control, coercion, payments, etc. Nothing else makes sense.

And frankly, I'd have to say the same about you and jimwhatever and Jon Gold."

Nothing else makes sense? Sorry but a number of us have already articulated how much this makes sense. But if you didn't read the comments I'd understand how you can see no alternatives. Also why did you tie in other bloggers names?

Oh and I love this part about how you are saying it's a waste of our time to be polite. We have been set back years by juvenile behavior and name calling. This approach has never worked efficiently. The best part about this thread to me now and some others you have posted is that you keep poorly attempting to convince us......

--Don't spend any time reaching out to ANY media because they are all bought and payed for. And that we have recieved no positive media coverage?
--Sit and wait around for only a couple of pseudo "leaders" or "spokespeople" in the 9/11 truth movement to do everything and don't be critical of any of their behavior or information they spread?
--Rally around controversial characters as well as ones who make speculative, or downright inaccurate statements about 9/11 (like Ahmadinejad) BLINDLY and cheer them on with no critique?
--Don't craft our 9/11 debate and also people skills to sound ADULT AND SPECIFIC and don't be critical of vague big tent statements?

I say 9/11 truth will fail or be set back years and years if we follow your (pfgetty's) logic and make 9/11 truth appear as the most unapproachable political group around. Many of us have more patience with opening people's minds. We don't yell and call names. We don't start accusing folks of being corrupt for simply asking questions of a highly controversial point we are trying to show them.

pfgetty's comments and ideas he and many have attempted to spread through the last 9 years (bullet points I just listed above) are designed to completely divide us from the left-wing anti-war movements AND most americans AND the average person. You can choose to behave one way or the other. To many of us who have tried both approaches over the years, it is OBVIOUS which approach always consistently works and which approach fails and divides. Consider your actions is what I ask and behave as adults. If we see someone acting like a child, or saying childish things, or saying things that sound ridiculous, IT IS OK AND FRANKLY IMPORTANT FOR US to be critical of their immaturity. If we all agree on a critical and adult approach, 9/11 truth will build a greater strength and momentum, and we can root out disinformation and by SIMPLY SPREADING GOOD INFORMATION.

Show "In fact, I'm a little amused................." by pfgetty

Not possible

It is simply not possible that no one in the media, MSM or the so called "left" media, questions the OCT.

The writers and reporters have all been given the message that to question 9/11 is a career ender. [or worse]

Some are tools but some are doing what they can from within the system. Railing about it every time one of these hit pieces comes out is tilting at windmills.

We are the new media. Just the fact that they are trying to discredit us proves we are being successful at keeping the Truth alive. Bring it on!

The best we can hope for is to have them write scads of articles and keep 9/11 in the public consciousness. The more they fight us the more thinking people will become curious and start looking into it.

Chris, it's been 9 YEARS!

If it hasn't happened yet............
If the alternative media hasn't presented the evidence of 9/11 truth by now...........
It will never happen.

There are no possible allies in the likes of alternet, counterpunch, democracynow, antiwar.com, nationmag, motherjones, huffpost, truthout, etc etc.
They have already sold their souls.

DO NOT SUPPORT ANY OF THEM!

I don't

Just sayin that there are some who know what the real deal is but are not allowed to say it.

I agree with you.

But I don't see it changing just because we treat them nicely and don't challenge them and try to find out just what is going on with the alternative media.

You know, I think a lot of those in our Congress also know, but I have seen the 9/11 truth movement fully supportive of the tactics of We Are Change in getting right in their faces and challenging them to questions that are embarrassing.
That is supported by us all. Me too!

So why the kid gloves when handling the people in the alternative media who have destroyed any chance of the 9/11 truth being presented to the American public.
I don't see one being any better than the other, except that we have always EXPECTED politicians to lie and cheat. I used to think journalists were a wrung above politicians on the morality ladder. Now, I think, they may be a few wrungs below.

If you want to get people to agree with you

it is best to be polite and respectful. Say what you have to say sincerely and clearly.

David Ray Griffin, Richard Gage, Steven Jones, Neils Harrit, Kevin Ryan, Ken Jenkins and John Bursill would all prefer that we be polite when representing the Truth Movement.

There are many "inside" the media and government who know what's going on and would like to join us. Getting in their face puts them on the defensive shuts them down. We are not going to convince the hard core "believers" so getting in their face gives them something else to use against us.

If you want to get people to agree with you, speak to them in a way that they would prefer. Put yourself in their place. What would get you to open up to 9/11 Truth?

Again, I say, it has been 9 years!

Time is running out. Some day all of this will be like the JFK assassination.
And meanwhile a few more million Muslims and Arabs and Persians will have been slaughtered, maimed, lost their homes forever, and the billion Muslims will continue to be humiliated and insulted about their religion, and in the end these people will become more angry and vengeful.

And we have all of this BECAUSE of the media, all of the journalists, conspiring to make sure it all continues.

And they will not change unless somehow forced to change. Journalists will continue to maintain their censorship and keep the American people from knowing what their government is doing in their name..........basically a Holocaust with no end in sight.

But, I see, we must be so polite as to not make them uncomfortable. They may not like us if we point fingers at them.

They are in charge. We, the people, must be respectful and wait and wait and see if maybe, someday, they will look over at us, feel sorry for us, and say, oh, it's been thirty years...........maybe now we can give these weirdos a little publicity and let them tell their interesting story............

Let me address your last sentence, Chris..............

What would get ME to open up to 9/11 truth?
Ok. Good question.
I'd say, maybe being shown, over six or more years, mountains of evidence.
Maybe when somebody hands me a paper that says it proves that the official story of 9/11 is a lie.
Maybe, being a journalist in an outlet that is already "alternative", I'd be interested in a story that the msm hadn't picked up.
Maybe, in fact for sure, I'd be perusing some of the other alternative sites, some of which present 9/11 truth.
Maybe I'd want to listen to hundreds of architects and engineers, retired CIA agents, high ranking military retired people, former heads of state, and other highly accomplished and respected people all over the world that are saying that there is substantial and even irrefutable evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.
Maybe I'd read some of the great comments presented in my own website that present the evidence of lying about 9/11, and proof of the coverup of the information that has been presented by the 9/11 truth movement.
Maybe I'd actually go to some of the websites presented in these comments.
Maybe I would ban from the comment section those who bring up 9/11 information.
In fact, having my whole career dependent on my bringing out information that the msm won't bring out would, I'd think, make me very, very interested in all of what the 9/11 truth movement says.
I think I'd dwell less on whether 9/11 truthers are arguing about planes or no planes, and zero in on a subject that is indisputable, like the finding of nanothermite in the dust of the WTC collapses.
I think I'd present to the public what a high school physics class proved, that the buildings came down a free fall speed. NIST simply couldn't refute it, although they lamely tried, as it crushed their whole explanation of the collapse of the buildings. What a great story. This Mr. Chandler and his class trumps the huge national agency that is tasked with investigating the collapses, with some of the greatest scientists in the world, exposing the agency as engaging in fraud and outright lies. Has there ever been a bigger story? Had this story been pushed, and repeated throughout the alternative media, there is no way it would not have gone viral, and ended up, if not in the controlled US media, at least in Der Spiegel and The Guardian and Al Jazeera. Could the msm handle the embarrassment of the whole world knowing this great story, but they continue to censor it?

C'mon...................any editor or senior writer in the alternative media would be aching and yearning for stories even half this good...................if they were honest, not under some kind of control, some kind of deal.
It is impossible to think otherwise.

And do you think you will change their minds by being polite, just sitting around for years, waiting.............waiting...................til that day when all of a sudden a Joshua Holland or Alexander Cockburn or Matt Taibbi or Amy Goodman or Justin Raimondo for some reason just happen to decide to publish something about 9/11?

Won't happen. Ever.

We will have to rely on Ahmadinejad to get the word out, because the 9/11 truth movement wants to be "polite" to journalists that are criminally censoring the truth about the most important event in US history.

What happened to the nanothermite article (or Bentham)?

http://www.bentham-open.org/pages/content.php?TOCPJ/2009/00000002/000000...

Not Found
The requested URL /pages/content.php was not found on this server.

Additionally, a 404 Not Found error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request.

Actually, this brings up an empty page:

http://www.bentham-open.org/

It has been rumored

that Bentham is defunct.

I wonder what the story is there..............

could its demise have anything to do with the nanothermitic material study?

Something's up...

This could answer partly your question...

http://blogs.wiley.com/publishingnews/2009/09/21/bentham-affair/

It doesn't actually say that.

Maybe someone else knows more of this story

pfgetty wrote "They have

pfgetty wrote

"They have already sold their souls.

DO NOT SUPPORT ANY OF THEM!"

This is ridiculous and sounds crazy.

Again.................NINE years.....................

and instead of hundreds and hundreds of articles of investigative reporting and presenting the mountains of evidence against the story that the 911 Commission told us, we have a few articles insulting the 911 truth movement, and a few that bring up contentious issues in the movement, mostly to discredit the movement, much as I'd expect Cass Sunstein to zero in on................and he has ADMITTED he wants to destroy the 9/11 truth movement, which he has said is "dangerous".
Do any of you here, arguing with me, want to destroy the 911 truth movement, or think it is dangerous?
I wouldn't think so, as if you are here, you'd want it to succeed, and success for the truth movement means getting the information out of the 9/11 sites and into the media where the general public will see it.
You DO all want that, don't you? Or am I in the wrong place?

Do any of you think we should support media sites in which the senior writers call the 9/11 truthers, us, nutballs, or crazy conspiracy theorists? That is what Cass Sunstein would call us.

Do you think we should spend our money on maintaining these alternative web sites that insult us? Or do you think there are better places to spend our money. You really think it is crazy to contribute to sites that don't call us crazy nuts? You think it is NOT crazy to contribute to sites that call us crazy nuts? Which is it? Can you take a stand here?

Do any of you know Cass?

Does GuitarBill ring a bell for any of you?

of course they avoid 911 truth

from "Ramifications of 911 Truth" on the probable outcome if 911 Truth is ever fully exposed/accepted:

"...The legal implications, both foreign and domestic, would be a disaster. There’d be no back-stepping, no believable spin. How many hundreds of thousands have died so far? How many more would die if an inside 911 plot became exposed? The potential disruption is so enormous that it is frighteningly inconceivable. The US government would be gutted, even with the new administration. No clean-up of this would be manageable as it is a case beyond imagination. It would take years to overcome. But be sure that life as you now know it would never be the same again because the US government (and military, and media, and business) would lose any remaining credibility, become insolvent, and the economy and status of authority would most definitely alter and suffer beyond any calculable anticipation. Your summer vacation plans? Your favorite burger joint? Happy hour drinks with your co-workers? American Idol? This web page? Imagine them gone….

So now, when you scratch your head or rant or scream whenever you see another political nitwit skirt a 911 issue; when FEMA or NIST release another “investigation”; when the media, be they left or right, calls you a tin-foil-hat conspiracy theorist; when people seem block-headed and refuse to listen…
...well, do you think they may have already thought of this scenario, whether wittingly or subconsciously? Guess what? Yeah, they probably already decided to keep their mouths shut and look the other way for this very reason, even work actively to discredit 911 “troofers”, because they are just trying to save their own status quo and maintain the fabric of this current society for themselves and everyone else (now that’s what you call a deal with the devil!). Basic risk management would indeed calculate just such a response. Think about it, for one to do otherwise could actually be seen as promoting their and everyone’s own demise, which oddly, could be construed as unethical in some warped way. And such a perverse viewpoint could even put the 911 truthers in some bizarre position as lackeys for the very same societal collapse and potential oppression which they were originally working against in the first place. Suddenly Orwell was right, and the widespread mantra has indeed become two plus two equals five!..."

http://thingsbyme.weebly.com/ramificationsof911.html

and this line sums up our plight against the media et al.

"...I have to give credit to the 911 perpetrators for coming up with the ultimate tool to get away with it: they are simply black-mailing us with life as we know it. ..."

Great bit of writing and thinking there. Thanks.

It is true that our whole world would go topsy turvy over the exposure of 9/11 truth.
And for many of us, that could be a difficult world to get along in. Our lives could be much more difficult for a long time.

But, of course, as usual, this is all from the American perspective. We are the people that count. We OWN the empire. And we bask in its glory and the rewards...........empire IS financially rewarding for many at home. And for many throughout Europe and the G20. We are the people that matter, and we don't want to face any hardships.

Far less important is that 9/11 brought to the Muslim and Arab and Persian world horrors as bad as the world has ever seen. Millions of innocent people killed, babies deformed by DU, children maimed for life, millions still left homeless, tens of thousands imprisoned, tortured. Families continuing to live in fear of unmanned drone attacks.............monsters in the sky that could come at any moment.
And then there are the Muslims, a billion of them, here and all around the world, all of whom suffer from the intense humiliation and insults to their culture, their religion, their ancestry and history. Little kids growing up in the US, well aware of the hatred and suspicion of their American neighbors of their ethnic background, reading in the papers the horrid things that are told about their culture and beliefs.

What kind of world is it that doesn't care about any of that, but worries that we'd interrupt the fun American way of life for a while?

What kind of people are journalists? Are they any better than those who brought about the 9/11 attacks? I'm not so sure.
The 9/11 attacks killed 3000.
The media's censorship of the truth has killed millions, and who knows where else this is all going.

I know...........most of the 3000 were people who count: Americans.
The millions who die are the brown people who don't count.
Ahmadinejad thinks they count.
I think those people will listen, and realize they count.
And when they do, and they have any way to get us all back for the horrors ALL of us are responsible for, it will not be pretty!