The Top Censored Stories From 2009-2010: ONLINE!- #14. Increased Tensions with Unresolved 9/11 Issues HERE
The Top Censored Stories From 2009-2010:

1. Global Plans to Replace the Dollar

2. US Department of Defense is the Worst Polluter on the Planet

3. Internet Privacy and Personal Access at Risk

4. ICE Operates Secret Detention and Courts

5. Blackwater (Xe): The Secret US War in Pakistan

6. Health Care Restrictions Cost Thousands of Lives in US

7. External Capitalist Forces Wreak Havoc in Africa

8. Massacre in Peruvian Amazon over US Free Trade Agreement

9. Human Rights Abuses Continue in Palestine

10. US Funds and Supports the Taliban

11. The H1N1 Swine Flu Pandemic: Manipulating Data to Enrich Drug Companies

12. Cuba Provided the Greatest Medical Aid to Haiti after the Earthquake

13. Obama Cuts Domestic Spending and Increases Military Corporate Welfare

14. Increased Tensions with Unresolved 9/11 Issues

15. Bhopal Water Still Toxic Twenty-five Years After Deadly Gas Leak

16. US Presidents Charged with Crimes Against Humanity as Universal Jurisdiction Dies in Spain

17. Nanotech Particles Pose Serious DNA Risks to Humans and the Environment

18. The True Cost of Chevron

19. Obama Administration Assures World Bank and International Monetary Fund a Free Reign of Abuse

20. Obama’s Charter School Policies Spread Segregation and Undermine Unions

21. Western Lifestyle Continues Environmental Footprint

22. 1.2 Billion People in India to be Given Biometric ID Cards

23. Afghan War: Largest Military Coalition in History

24. War Crimes of General Stanley McChrystal
25. Prisoners Still Brutalized at Gitmo
Censored 2011- New Book Release on 9/15
14. Increased Tensions with Unresolved 9/11 Issues
Top 25 of 2011


PR News Wire, “1,000 Architects & Engineers Call for New 9/11 Investigation: Cite Evidence of Explosive Demolition at Three World Trade Center Towers,” February 19, 2009,—engineers-call-for-new-911-investigation-84768402.html.

Shawn Hamilton, “Over 1,000 Architects and Engineers Have Signed Petition to Reinvestigate 9-11 Destruction,”, February 23, 2010,

Architects & Engineers for 911 Truth, “1,000+ Architects & Engineers Officially Demand New 9/11 Investigation,”, January 18, 2010,

Global Research, “1,000 Architects & Engineers Call for a Real 9/11 Investigation,” January 25, 2010,

Sue Reid, “Has Osama bin Laden Been Dead for Seven Years—And Are the US and Britain Covering It Up to Continue War on Terror?” Daily Mail (UK), September 1, 2009,—U-S-Britain-covering-continue-war-terror.html.

Daniel Tencer, “Obama Staffer Wants ‘Cognitive Infiltration’ of 9/11 Conspiracy Groups,” RawStory, January 13, 2010,

Student Researchers:

Mike Smith, Nolan Higdon, and Sy Cowie (Diablo Valley College)

Mikey Hemkens, Ryan Huffman, and Colin Doran (DePauw University)

Greg Bernardi (Sonoma State University)

Faculty Evaluators:

Mickey Huff (Diablo Valley College)

Andrea Sununu and Kevin Howley (DePauw University)

Rick Luttmann and Peter Phillips (Sonoma State University)

Several contentious issues still plague the US government and their version of the events of September 11, 2001. Those in political power along with media elites would like to see the ongoing grassroots debates surrounding unanswered 9/11 questions and discrepancies disappear, despite the mountains of evidence that suggest that American citizens were told little about the truth of the biggest single-day attack on their homeland in history. Nearly ten years after the events, many unanswered questions still exist: How did Building 7 fall? What caused the destruction of the twin towers? Where is Osama bin Laden? Are people that question the official story of 9/11 dangerous conspiracy theorists?

The academics and intellectuals who have tried to answer these questions have been ignored or derided by corporate mainstream (and even some progressive leftist) media, political pundits, and government officials who clearly intend to silence the so-called 9/11 Truth Movement, or anyone who questions the officially sanctioned government stance on the matter. However, the questions will not go away and increasingly beg for answers.

As of spring 2010, over 1,200 architects and engineers are calling for a new investigation into the events of 9/11. These building professionals and academics are motivated by the fact that the 9/11 Commission Report has been proven erroneous on multiple counts, scientific explanations have been flawed and contradictory, and the American people deserve a more fact-based explanation.

At the same time, new evidence of explosives that can be used in controlled demolition has been found in the dust traces of the World Trade Center (WTC) towers and Building 7 of the WTC complex. After careful examination of the official story about 9/11 (in which the commission never even mentioned Building 7), along with the forensic data omitted from official reports, these professionals have concluded that a new independent and transparent investigation into these massive and mysterious structural failures is needed.

Richard Gage, a San Francisco–based architect and founder of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, states, “The official Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and National Institute of Standards and Technologies (NIST) reports provide insufficient and fraudulent accounts of the circumstances of the towers’ destruction.” Gage, along with other architects and engineers, attacked NIST’s first reports such that NIST eventually changed their conclusions, addressed new evidence, and released a new draft report in 2008. In the thirty days after the 2008 draft report was released, NIST took public questions on the report. Gage’s group sent a letter that covered myriad inconsistencies and omissions in the 2008 report. However, the final report released later in 2008 addressed almost none of the concerns raised. The scientific method was not adhered to in this study.

Gage and Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth’s actions pushed NIST to recognize that Building 7, a forty-seven-story skyscraper that was not hit by an aircraft, did come down at free fall acceleration for more than one hundred feet. An explanation as to how or why it fell at free fall speed was not provided by NIST. NIST continues to state that looking at the thermitic materials found at Ground Zero noted in the demolition theory “would not necessarily have been conclusive.” Despite their own claim that evidence of demolition is inconclusive, they decided not to test or address it at all, as if this could not and/or did not happen (see chapter 7 of this book for more details). Again, the scientific method was not fully followed by government agencies.

In other 9/11 related matters, there is the ongoing mystery regarding the whereabouts of the alleged perpetrator, Osama bin Laden. Even though bin Laden did not take credit for the incident (he in fact claimed the contrary, nor is the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) holding him as a suspect in those crimes due to lack of evidence) government officials of both parties regularly refer to bin Laden as the one responsible for the 9/11 attacks (see story #16 in Censored 2008).

Furthermore, Dr. David Ray Griffin, a former professor at California’s Claremont School of Theology and author of numerous books on 9/11 issues, suggests that Osama bin Laden has been dead for nearly nine years. He argues that bin Laden died on December 13, 2001, of kidney failure or a kidney-related illness. There are records of bin Laden being treated in an American hospital in Dubai for a urinary infection, often linked with kidney disease, and a related order for a mobile dialysis machine, essential to his survival, that was shipped to Afghanistan. Griffin, along with doctors that he cites, says it would be impossible for bin Laden to survive in a cave with that machine for any substantial period of time. Griffin goes on to note that the US and British governments are aware of bin Laden’s death, and have been covering it up to continue the war on terror. (See Griffin’s book on the subject, Osama bin Laden: Dead or Alive?).

In other ongoing tension concerning 9/11 on the home front, President Obama’s appointee to head the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), Harvard law professor Cass Sunstein, claims that the United States government should infiltrate and discredit activist groups.

Sunstein’s call to discredit groups includes those who challenge the official views of the 9/11 attacks, the so-called 9/11 ‘truthers.’ Sunstein acknowledges that the US government has been involved in conspiracies in the past, but he confidently believes that this is no longer a problem. (See the Truth Emergency section of this volume for more on this issue, especially chapter 6.) He claims that groups that question the events of 9/11 are dangerous and could lead some people to violence (while presenting no concrete evidence to prove this).

Sunstein maintains that refuting these groups in public is not productive. He suggests that the most effective method of refute is to infiltrate and cogitatively discredit their internal sources. Sunstein is essentially calling for a return of the Counter Intelligence Program (COINTELPRO) from the cold war days when agents of the US government covertly infiltrated antiwar and civil rights groups with the intent to disrupt and discredit their activities—provoking violence or planning illegal acts themselves in order to bring groups up on criminal charges.

Sunstein’s call for infiltration of private citizen groups plays to the very concerns of many 9/11 activists—concerns that they may be targeted or infiltrated, tried on some trumped up terrorist or criminal charges, and then may not get a fair public hearing. (For more on this, see story #6 in Censored 2009, and story #20 in Censored 2008.)

Such a climate of fear and intimidation does not bode well for First Amendment rights, nor for academic freedom in the US, let alone the possibility of discovering the truth about what really happened on September 11.

Update by Shawn Hamilton

Over one thousand architects and engineers have signed a petition to reinvestigate the 9/11 destruction.

When I went to San Francisco to cover the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth (AE911Truth) press conference, I didn’t tell the news department with which I am most closely allied; I was afraid I’d be told not to do the story. This may not surprise anyone considering mainstream media’s deafening silence on 9/11 issues, but this wasn’t an organ of mainstream media; it was an alternative radio station founded on principles that encourage coverage of underreported stories. To be fair, no news director said I couldn’t cover the story, and the story ran that weekend. The point is that I had felt constrained by the prevailing atmosphere of suspicion and fear surrounding media reception of 9/11 topics generally—including at this “progressive” station where people are sharply divided on the issue. I’ve never seen such general weirdness surrounding media coverage of an issue except for the Kennedy assassination. In the 1970s people mocked those few who suggested Lee Harvey Oswald didn’t act alone, branding them “conspiracy nuts,” just as 9/11 activists now are labeled “truthers,” which sounds like “flat earthers.” Some of these activists have embraced the “truther” tag, but I suggest they should refrain. The term is not meant to be a compliment.

I asked theologian David Ray Griffin, who spoke at the conference, why he thought the media was acting so bizarrely towards 9/11 issues. Griffin pointed out how the terms “conspiracy theory” and “conspiracy theorist” are manipulated to make reporters fear losing their reputations and jobs. “You know how it works. Everybody in the media knows how it works,” he said. “Nobody has to be explicitly threatened; they just know the rules.”

The press conference was a newsworthy story whether or not anything the group claims is true. It’s a valid story because so many citizens are questioning the official explanations for the tragedy of September 11, 2001. The fact that over a thousand licensed architects and engineers are demanding a new investigation increases that relevance. If what they say is even partly true, the implications are profound, but either way, there’s a legitimate story. I don’t expect news agencies to endorse the views of groups like AE911Truth; that’s not their proper role. I do expect them not to run for cover when they hear those unsettling words: “9/11.” Democracy is not served by reporters fearing to cover sensitive stories.

As of summer 2010, AE911Truth ( has gotten more than 1,200 building professionals to sign its petition to Congress demanding a truly independent investigation, and a new group has formed called Firefighters for 9-11 Truth ( that challenges official reports and public misconceptions of what occurred on September 11. A group called New York City Coalition for Accountability Now ( is attempting to convince the New York City Council to investigate the anomalous circumstances surrounding the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 ( All the Web sites I’ve mentioned have links to some of the more credible 9/11 Web sites. The AE911Truth links page is a good place to start. I will be following related issues on this Web site as well: My email address is

Update by Daniel Tencer

In May 2010, the New York Times Magazine ran a comprehensive profile of Cass Sunstein, the first such profile to be found in the mainstream media since the law professor took over as head of the White House’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA). The article’s title—“Cass Sunstein Wants to Nudge Us”—is an understatement given the views Sunstein has expressed over the years, but it at least heads in the right thematic direction: that much of Sunstein’s academic writing has been focused on social control and government control over information.

Not surprisingly, the article treated Sunstein with kid gloves and largely glossed over the more controversial elements of his ideas. It focused on him as one of the leading proponents of the concept of “libertarian paternalism,” a burgeoning new field of study that blends behavioral psychology with free-market economics and posits that people can be “nudged” into making the right choices (i.e., the government’s desired choices) not by laws and regulations, but by making the “right” choice seem more psychologically appealing.

Writing at the Huffington Post, Russ Baker criticized the New York Times for “burying” Sunstein’s more controversial assertions thirty-five paragraphs into the story, where we are finally told that he advocated for the “cognitive infiltration” of conspiracy theory groups. The Times then quotes Sunstein suggesting that, as a government official, he would not execute the more radical or experimental elements of his academic ideas. But, as Baker points out, that comment was made in the fall of 2009—before Sunstein’s paper on conspiracy theories came to light in the media. What appears in the Times to be Sunstein backing off his more controversial ideas is, in actuality, no such thing.

Understanding Cass Sunstein and his effect on government and society is made difficult by two things. The first is that he is a political chimera who has supporters and detractors on both sides of the political spectrum. Among conservative critics, the populists have come out against him, while the intellectuals appear to have thrown their weight behind him. Even as Glenn Beck declared Sunstein to be “more powerful than the Fed” and desirous of “controlling your every move,” columnist George F. Will declared that his ideas would lead to better, smaller government and would “have the additional virtue of annoying those busybody, nanny-state liberals.” In the UK, Sunstein’s works are “required reading for aspiring Conservative MPs,” reports the Daily Telegraph.

The second element making it difficult to understand Sunstein is that his position inside the government deals primarily with dry, bureaucratic issues that fail to capture the imaginations of either the mainstream press or the alternative media. As head of OIRA, Sunstein is responsible for reviewing all new government regulations. Yet thus far his decisions—those that we know of—have been on a small scale and largely technical, such as his call to streamline the process of naming and writing regulations so that citizens have better access to them.

Sunstein did, however, manage to anger environmentalists recently when he blocked a new Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulation that would list coal ash as a dangerous carcinogen. Environmentalists accused him of caving to the coal industry, which doesn’t want to see its coal ash disposal costs rise under the new rule.

So where is Sunstein headed? Is he likely to attempt the sort of information control programs that he has advocated in the past? Even if he does, it’s likely the mainstream media will support at least some of his efforts to push the political debate towards an “acceptable” center. In a 2009 New Yorker review of his book On Rumors, Sunstein is given credit for predicting the circumstances that would lead to the rise of Internet rumors such as the “birther” claim that President Obama wasn’t born in the US, and the “death panel” allegation about health care reform. He is then cast as the hero fighting against these trends. Given the existing precedent, it’s likely that any attempt Sunstein makes at shaping the content of public information will likely find a positive hearing in the old guard media.

Project Censored’s “Censored 2011: The Top Censored Stories of 2009-2010″ is now available for pre-order here! This year’s volume is truly Media Democracy in Action. Not only does it cover the most under-reported stories the corporate media ignore, but this year’s Censored Deja Vu, Junk Food News and News Abuse, Signs of Health, and FAIR’s 10th anniversary of Fear and Favor in the News Room. A full Truth Emergency section debuts this year for “Censored 2011″ to address State Crimes Against Democracy as well as analysis of the corporate media spin that led to the Iraq War and continues to hide US allied atrocities in the Middle East. Project Censored now has over 30 college and university affiliates contributing on our expanding websites and we introduce this year the Project Censored International section of the book, reviewing global trends in media control and censorship. Former director Peter Phillips and new director Mickey Huff describe the new directions of the Project and research methodology plus an update from Dave Mathison on Being the Media, London’s Index on Censorship and much, much more! From now to September 15th, anyone donating $30 or more to the Project will receive a signed copy of “Censored 2011″ by the editors. Regular orders can be sent through the store on the Project Censored website for $19.95 plus $3 shipping and handling. Mail orders can be sent to Media Freedom Foundation, P.O. Box 571, Cotati, CA 94931. Thank you for your support of Project Censored and for helping fight media censorship

available for pre-order here!

Please make your tax deductible donation using paypal below using a credit card or bank account:

Donate Here!

or Checks to: Media Freedom Foundation/Project Censored, P.O. Box 571, Cotati, CA 94931


Support Project Censored

For 34 years Project Censored has been committed to bringing the most vital stories to public awareness with the belief that genuine democracy depends on freedom of the press. The new Censored 2010 yearbook has drawn international attention to some of the most important underreported stories of our times and we are researching many stories for our next book already. We continue to need your vital support of Project Censored as we transition and expand our work to bring forth the most important news stories of the year both in print and online.

Independent media, both on the local and national level, is at risk. This is just one of the reasons that Project Censored and the Media Freedom Foundation just gave Media Freedom Awards to the KPFA Flashpoints radio team at our recent book release celebration in Santa Rosa. Help us support the critical independent voices that cover the “news that doesn’t make the news.”

Project Censored is not only working on new underreported stories but spreading the word via our new Daily Censored website, Facebook page and our Media Freedom Foundations Daily News Feed site which aggregates independent news from many of the most reliable sources around the world. We are also organizing the first Modern Media Dialogue Series to be held from February to May at Sonoma State University. This is the only university series in the United States devoted to dialogue and deliberation about the modern media.

Project Censored is also involved in an ongoing and growing collaboration with the college and university affiliates program through Media Freedom International. Peter Phillips and I not only continue to pursue censored media with this effort, but in addition there are also now over 30 affiliates with more on the way, including some from Latin America, Europe, and Asia. The 2010 book contains work from nine of the affiliates, with a few placing stories in the top ten. The MFI website will be a home base for affiliate work and continue to publish Validated Independent News stories and more detailed academic, investigative reports year round in the effort to combat censorship and the ongoing Truth Emergency in the United States and around the world.

As I begin my first year as Project Censored director I would like to personally ask each of you to consider a gift of support so that we may continue our work. Our project requires us to raise $150,000 every year and given the cutbacks in the California State system and on the Sonoma State University campus, your support is more vital to us now more than ever. Please make your tax deductible donation using paypal below using a credit card or bank account:


Mickey Huff, Director Project Censored

In cooperation with Peter Phillips, President: Media Freedom Foundation

This is great news!

I also like the write-up that they did for this book promotion.

--A tidbit note to fellow 9/11 Truthers about Building 7 and the 9/11 Commission Report.
The 9/11 Commission Report DOES MENTION the word "WTC 7".

(See page 284 or 293 where it talks about the OEM )

Excellent that they DID mention the "progressive" media also....

Here is the quote from this article:

The academics and intellectuals who have tried to answer these questions have been ignored or derided by corporate mainstream (and even some progressive leftist) media, political pundits, and government officials who clearly intend to silence the so-called 9/11 Truth Movement.

I agree. All of these "clearly intend to silence the so-called Truth Movement".

YES! They.......... including PROGRESSIVE LEFTIST (alternative) media.......... CLEARLY intend to silence the truthers.

Finally somebody besides me sees this clearly. Maybe some on 911 blogger will begin to see it also.

'...begin to see it'?!

'Finally somebody besides me sees this clearly. Maybe some on 911 blogger will begin to see it also'

'Somebody besides you'?

I don't know what you're talking about. The pernicious gatekeeping regarding 9/11 where the 'alternative' 'progressive' media is concerned is one of the most frequently commented-on topics on this site. From comments I've seen, those who have their blinders on with respect to where these news outlets stand on 9/11 truth are well in the minority. Most of us know they're against us, and have been aware of it for some time.

It's good to see that that hasn't deterred Peter Phillips from paying attention to us, and from speaking the truth about the state of 'progressive' media on this issue.

daily censored is my new homepage

i look at: daily censored now instead of msm newspapers which BORE me- i want interesting information
i look at 911blogger of course for specialised info and discussions on 9/11 and related issues
i havent had a tv (television) in the house for ... 3 years
i only just recently started watching a tv show- George Galloway's the real deal on press TV online via my macbook
i listen to mike rupperts lifeboat hour too
when im in the cab working i listen to talksport though im not into soccer- i just like to hear people talking truthfully about what they believe, then in the evenings anyone can call in and say anything- even nutters but its freedom of speech and people of all types in the general public have called in and said they were suspicious of the official story of 9/11

since finding out about project censored i have checked out Michael Parenti a lot on youtube and was inspired to buy his book "The assassination of Julius Caesar" from reading the book i see how the ruling classes might not necessarily be one giant conspiracy marching in reptilian lockstep- in fact i think there's old money (patricians and populists- both groups from aristocracy) there's new military power- Octavian (perhaps similar to the rise of the neocons) theres assassination of a populist, julius caesar (similar to that of JFK)

the relevancy to 9/11 for me of michael's book is that 9/11 truth has awakened in me a desire to switch off the TV and learn something about political science as well as help with activism, so who better to help us learn about the control structure and power base than an activist who is a doctor of political science ? (and one who has been known to attend 9/11 truth events- he talked with barrie zwicker amongst others)

tom T- i found on page 300 in the report building 7- (7 WTC) thanks for that

Well, that's refreshing.

Thanks rm.
Seriously, I thought I was the only one who was wondering why the alternative media was censoring 9/11 truth news.
From recent posts, it seemed most felt they were either doing well with 9/11 truth, or had legitimate reasons for behaving as they have been.

I'm glad to hear from you.

Maybe we can figure out just what might be going on, and why. I'd like to know.

But one thing is for sure: the more popular alternative media outlets are doing basically the same as the msm. I don't see much difference. So I'd imagine that whatever is keeping the msm from presenting our information, is also keeping the alternative media from doing the same.
I don't know any of this for sure. This is just conjecture. I'd love to have more information.


Just search on the term 'gatekeeper' using this site's internal search engine, to see how much attention this issue has received here. Thousands of entries show up, most of them about the so-called 'alternative' media.


I see what you mean.


I wonder why I got so creamed by a few, like Kdub, and Jon Gold, when I put up something about Alexander Cockburn censoring 9/11 truth.

And nobody else on my side.

I was basically told that, first, we must be very respectful to the those in the alternative press who have ignored 9/11 truth and mocked the movement.

And secondly, I was told that the 9/11 truth movement has never given them information good enough for them to make a good story, article, about.

My head is still spinning from that session.

I don't get it.

He's been criticized here plenty

I and others have posted numerous comments on this site critical of Cockburn and Raimondo, and I don't recall them ever meeting with any disagreement. Nor was there any problem when I posted a link to Michael Parenti, critical of both Cockburn and Chomsky for their uncritical acceptance of the Warren report:

In fact, it appears someone else actually posted that article here as a blog post once, back in 2008.

What DOES elicit negative reactions is when some people seem to think it's a good idea to go to a public presentation by one of these supposedly alternative journalists--Amy Goodman, for example-- and stand up and denounce them in public. She's not going to change--the people we need to change are the members of her audience. And hurling denunciations at her is not likely to persuade many of those people to listening to what we have to say.

Something else to remember: When these gatekeepers do go into negative mode and outright attack the 9/11 truth movement, it is a sign that they are pissed off--and they're pissed off precisely because we're demonstrating success in going around them and their 'gate' in spite of them.

well, that is good to hear.

I'm glad that posts about the censorship of 9/11 truth information has been accepted by most on 911blogger without attack.
I found much the opposite, but, hey, whatever, as long as we get to the truth of things.

I also have reservations when people in the media get viciously attacked. I've seen a lot of it. I like We are change, and support them, but I sort of cringe at some of the tactics. Mostly, though, the more extreme tactics have been against political leaders, not the press.
I don't think any of it has hurt our movement. I think those in the poliical realm, and those in the media, that do not support, listen to us, or agree with us are not going to no matter how we treat them.
I guess some of it is a little bit of venting, which is often a critical part of a democracy. Venting is good, and sometimes others respond to the venting in a positive way.

I don't know what tactic is best, but sitting back and just hoping and praying that the media will do their job simply hasn't worked.


I think the thrust of the 9/11 truth movement, now, should shift a bit from research to exposure. Well, we should still refine what we know, and look for any new information.
And we were always about getting the word out.

But we have SO much information, and most of it is not confusing and is very well detailed, analyzed, an presented clearly.

The BIG problem we have, and what has kept us smothered, is the media.
I don't know the answer, but the msm and the more popular alternative media have a lock down on us. That a few on here argue with me about that doesn't change the truth...............they have and will censor us regardless of how nice we are to them. In my opinion they are just as unchangeable as our political leaders are.

One way to break through...............go around them. Work with the media from other countries, countries not controlled so tightly by the US and covert Russia and Venezuela and Syria and Iran and Cuba, etc etc.

With the internet, hopefully they are watching everything we bring up. This would be a good site for citizens and journalists in other countries to go to for good information.

We have become our own media

No one has "smothered" us, btw. The global 9/11 truth movement is growing quite well and, while the movement and 9/11 truth could explode with honest media coverage, as long as we continue to educate the public on the facts and physics we will continue to grow, reach the tipping point and overcome our adversaries.

Let's just keep refining our methods, adding to our knowledge base and not give up until we get a new investigation and put the real perpetrators away.

Don't focus on those who refuse to look for the truth, instead teach those who have open minds and eventually the few who refuse to look will be so marginalized that they will either permanently make themselves irrelevant or they will come around to the truth.

Remember, it never hurts to be civil, it costs nothing but the eventual return can be enormous.

When I think of all the insults I have endured over the years at Alternet on this issue, and then think about the fact that the majority of the readers of that site now know that 9/11 was a false flag, I know that taking the high road is always the best course of action.

Make friends and influence people, brothers and sisters, it certainly beats the alternative.

The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.

Yes, being gentlemen is a great goal...............

...........but being oblivious to reality is not such a great one.

There is no reason anyone has to be beligerant to anyone.
What we should NEVER do is shy away from what we see and what is a rational view of what is going on in the press.

There is no reason, EVER, to shy away from seeing what could be, and seems to be, a concerted effort to subjugate the media, particularly the popular alternative media, when it becomes so obvious this is going on.
There is NO moral or ethical reason not to look at what we see going on in the progressive media, namely the virtual blockout of all 9/11 truth information, for nine years.
The subject should be looked at critically. To say this is not being nice or loving or polite is ludicrous.

Howard Fineman now editor of Huffington Post... ever think that the old guard corporate media had intentions of NOT infiltrating and taking over the "alternative???" media, just look at the history of Huffington Post.

Start with the fact that Arrianna was a republican...and a wealthy one...and remains BOTH in MY view...and then... add to HuffPo's batting order arguably the BIGGEST GATEKEEPER OF ALL GATEKEEPERS [just behind Chomsky's brilliant groupie silencing tactics]...Howard "F____n" Fineman...the WORST OF THE WORST!

...and the most influential...

Howard "Newsweek" Fineman is now serving as the ultimate filter for HuffPo's efforts and contributions.

Arrianna just "got the message"...BIG TIME!

The good is this UGLY perspective from my view...

I see the "timing" of this as a result of the 9/11TM's continuing and building exposure, and to the rather significant names of leftists/peace activists who are now BEGINNING TO SEE what we have seen all along.

Michael Parenti, Dick Gregory, Mark Crispin Miller, Don Seigleman and many others just being part of the NINTH 9/11 anniversary last September in NYC is shaking up the "usual gatekeepers" big time...and is putting significant pressure on "lotso" folks-gatekeepers.

It would be impossible for me to state clearly or loudly enough how important Peter and Mickey are to what ALL truthseekers are up to. ..and how courageous and wonderful their work is...

Peter and Mickey...YOU GUYS ROCK!

9/11 Truth for World Peace and Justice

Robin Hordon
Kingston, WA

PS: Lets hope that Project Censored continues to spread amongst the nation's and world's college campuses. From what I see, this is the ONLY solid effort to tap into college youth that there is out there since the anti-war street actions from the 60s-70s. rdh

Hadn't thought of it that way..........

but this seems to be another way to subjugate this outlet, and ensure that 9/11 truth NEVER is presented here....................except in mocking and malicious insults to the movement.
It will be interesting to watch if, and when, the movement increases in importance, how this venue will present the information about us.