Media Roots Interview with Author, Activist David Swanson

Media Roots Radio Interview with David Swanson by Media Roots

This is an exclusive Media Roots Radio interview with David Swanson conducted on May 19, 2011. David is the co-author of "The 35 Articles of Impeachment and the Case for Prosecuting George W. Bush". He was press secretary for Dennis Kucinich's 2004 presidential campaign, and is the co-founder of, creator of and Washington Director of, a board member of Progressive Democrats of America, the Backbone Campaign, and Voters for Peace, and a member of the legislative working group of United for Peace and Justice. He has written two best selling books: Daybreak: Undoing the Imperial Presidency and Forming a More Perfect Union, and War is a Lie.


Great job

A really fine interview which draws a broad, comprehensive arc over our recent historical and current political milieu. Though David does not address the specifics of 9/11 as this blog does, it sets the context. The scientific evidence that is available, and people's growing awareness of it, will eventually tie it all together.

Abby, a truly fine interview. Well worth the time.


Thank you!

Thank you so much for listening and for realizing how the conversation relates to the broader historical context. I am hoping that with interviews like this, more people will be willing to open their minds to the bigger picture.

Swanson is a putz on 911. I

Swanson is a putz on 911.

I tried to present him with a bundle of DVDs and he angrily declined telling me (to paraphrase) I was making the anti-war movement look idiotic.

Hundreds of others attending the "Progressive Forum" in Dallas gladly accepted the info.

I came to the conclusion he was happy to profit from his posturing.

Same in Boston

an activist I know did the same thing and got basically the same reaction from Swanson. This is a tough one cuz he's "spot on" on so much other important stuff. This is an interesting case study on what we might expect as 911 truth gets more mainstream. There's gonna be more people like him. Swanson is calling for a 911 investigation, but as you say, out of the other side of his mouth he's saying we make the anti-war movement look idiotic. To use a local expression, It's "wicked haad" to turn the other cheek, but maybe the best thing to do is remind him that we support in his efforts even if he doesn't support us, which, IMO, means we are the ones rising to the top. And what anti-war movement is he talking about? Last I checked they curled themselves under a rock.

This is one of Abby's best interviews, though when 9/11 came up, I was hoping she or Robby would hold his feet to the fire about his slams of the 9/11 truth movement.

Me too...

I was planning on it, which is precisely why I tried to ask him what about the event was a lie, but unfortunately the conversation shifted when Robbie told him to talk about it without "going down the rabbit hole" as soon as I asked the question. Oh well. On a side note, has David actually come out and bashed the movement?

Thanks for listening guys!

he did to me.

I figured he was afraid of the TRUTH and was happy to sell books and would not jeopardize that.


I don't think he is afraid of the truth, he is an amazingly committed person to the causes of peace and justice and I think it's time to build bridges with the peace movement!

I agree, I just wish there

I agree, I just wish there was a peace movement.


If he's not afraid of 911 truth, he definitely has a mental lapse when dealing with it. He's not a stupid person and it's not as if highly credible people who support our movement are keeping their concerns secret. He can pick up the phone or send an email or read a book as easy as the next person. What's stopping him from calling Cindy Sheehan and asking her what she means when she says, "I think 9/11 was an inside job, I just don't know how deep inside it goes?" Nothing is stopping him except for fear. This demonstrates how much a quest for the real truth threatens one's world view. If anything, we need to learn how to combine patience and compassion with our unrelenting zeal.

We constantly attempt to build bridges with the Peace Movement. Unfortunately, we keep running into "Swanson-type" people who think it's more important to put down our "conspiracy" theories than it is to deal with the obvious questions about what we've been told by the govt. about 9/11 and to demand accountability. Thankfully, the resistance from the Peace Movement doesn't deter us one bit, nor should it ever. We are a legitimate part of the Peace Movement whether they want to acknowledge it or not.

Those who don't speak up about 9/11 will regret it later

Time for this chap to peel back the blinders and heed the words of Saman Mohammadi:

"Voices of resistance transform history, and help societies recover lost freedoms. All we have is our voice so we have to use it with determination. Those who don't speak up about 9/11 and the high treason that is taking place will regret it later. The most powerful and peaceful means we have to resist tyranny and state evil are words. We must speak and write boldly. The enemies of public liberty and public peace who have taken over the U.S. government and the governments of other Western countries must know that we exist and that we are defiant. We have to look the tyrants in the eyes and tell them: You will not win, and you will be hanged when this mad dream is all over."

You can read the whole article at

Swanson is definitely a putz on 9/11.

Joe is right... Swanson = "putz on 9/11"
...I remember being in the area when Joe tried to present him with a bundle of DVDs. We were kind of shocked at his allergy to 9/11. Swanson is not the real deal; he is just a "pretender trying to keep a job".

Here is the event where Joe confronted Swanson...

this dog don't hunt

I had email discussion with this Swanson fellow in late 2008 and he told me quite plainly he does not support Nine Eleven Justice and Accountability. He said he would "not promote 9-11 theories I don't find convincing." At the time of this communication, I made it plain to him that I was a team member of, and a professional engineer interested only in the overwhelming evidentiary proofs that exist. This to show that he was dealing wtih a reasonable person. His is the typical attitude of "the Left" and I don't give him the time of day any more.


My father was a mechanical engineer and shared some concepts, so I was able to see problems like the absolute 2.28 seconds of free-fall of WTC7, as measured by NIST, as a REAL problem for the official narrative of 9/11. Maybe David can't. Maybe... he's afraid, as are others, of what the implication of insider involvement really means. The ante in this game is pretty high.

Everyone has a right to choose his/her own level of involvement. An old friend of mine with a liberal/progressive lean, who I reconnected with recently, is a full published professor of chemistry at a major university. He told me he knew that the Iraq chem/bio WMD scare was a crock. How? I asked. He said because you can't prevent detection from modern
technological means. I half jokingly asked why I hadn't seen him on the news saying this? He said, quite seriously for my normally good humored friend, that in his community you'd get your head knocked in. Just that simple.

I just wanted to say that the fear and threat to livelihood is real. It's funny how we in the truth community are often tagged as "needing conspiracy to explain the world" when, in fact, it's much more likely the opposite. That those do know and say nothing, or live in denial, are simply afraid of its implications.


well that doesn't hunt either

There are a myriad of other (proven) fallacies in the OCT that do not require any technical expertise to comprehend so giving someone like Swanson a pass just because he may not grasp high school physics doesn't fly. That goes for anyone.

I was trying to be kind to David....

You want me to say it? I'll say it. People are f*#&@ing frightened. They are scared. Denial, cognitive dissonance, fear, you name it.

Barry Jennings is DEAD. Maybe it's a coincidence. Maybe the private investigator hired by Dylan Avery was just pulling his leg when she said,
"This is a police matter. Here's your money back. Don't EVER contact me concerning this matter again."

That's just one example. 9/11 truth is BIG. It threatens VERY powerful people.

Go easy on the judgment is all I'm suggesting.


I'm with you

UR correct. This is serious shit and we need to learn how to work with people's fear if we are gonna have any measure of success. This is probably our biggest weakness as a movement. It's too often the case that the people who are judgmental of people's resistance to 9/11 truth have the least to lose by taking a stand, and I include myself in that category. That speaks for itself. Thanks for speaking up.

The simple and quick response...

"I understand your reluctance to get into this issue, but you have a choice.

You can either surrender to this fear or join millions of others who are working to expose the object of your fear."

Just leave them with that to ponder and keep on truthing.

Sooner or later everyone will have to deal with this reality.

The truth shall set us free, but not everyone is ready for the truth now.

Love is the only way forward, and love means never forcing the truth on those who are not yet ready for it.

we could do that

or we could stop, spend some time with people and explore the fear(s) with them. This would expose our own vulnerabilities and fears, provide insights for us into precisely what are some of these fears, convey that they are not alone with them and would undoubtedly be a huge education for us in better dealing with different constituencies within the general public. I can only imagine that a nurse, a university professor, a civil engineer and a stay-at-home mom each might have very different fears. When you compound that with their religion and political persuasion, being "real" with our own fears might, IMHO, be a better first step than saying, "Here is some truth and lies about 9/11 -- deal with it," which is too often the attitude at our public demonstrations and other types of "truthin."


Jenning's family also said that he died of completely natural causes and that he had been struggling with complications for a while. Dylan was my roommate at the time he was looking into the case and I am pretty sure nothing panned out and that he eventually got in contact with his family. Not positive though that's what I remember. But point being, just because Jennings has passed doesn't mean he was "taken out". Thanks for the feedback about the interview. I think that people like Greenwald, Goodman, Scahill, Moore and Swanson have built up their career and even if they have serious questions or concerns about the gov's involvement in 9/11, they know how vicious the media can smear and take you down and might feel it's too risky for them. Maybe it's more important to some people to keep trucking on and fighting the other fights they are involved in rather than risking losing the bases they have established. They do a lot of good work, we should continue to reach out and try to build the bridges instead of confronting them and yelling at them at events because they haven't come out and talked about 9/11 being an inside job. I started Media Roots as a way to build bridges – but I will never censor 9/11 truth. I started my political activism on that and won't ever back down from what I believe. Cheers~

Thanks Abby

I appreciate the update of your best knowledge of Mr. Jennings demise. I think you caught the gist of what I was trying to say. My initial comment was simply that Mr. Swanson has very artfully circumscribed the broader issues and your interview allowed that to come across clearly. We need to keep pushing ahead with the best, most solid evidence we have. Thanks again.