OT:

Whistleblower Scott Durr Dead??

My recent post on another blog below: 'check out whistleblower Mr. Durr on a yahoo forum'. There is great
probabilty he is now dead of an apparent heart attack.
Take a closer look...
.
[original post]
Since they keep mentioning 911...
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/911_free_discussion/
.
Be sure to catch 'Scott Durr' [inside CIA whistleblower] and his comments suggesting the continuation of evil doing.
.
Funny how whistleblowers 'Scott' and Richard A Grove both uncover info on H.A.A.R.P. and questions about disasters.
.

Someone call ABC and tell them that maybe the smartest thing to do is make the show go away. wink...wink...

http://www.theconservativevoice.com/article/15902.html

OT: Too funny...

Go to http://www.cnn.com/

...and notice the news altert banner

"There are no signs that North Korea is preparing to launch a second long-range Taepodong missile, U.S. officials with access to untelligence reports tell CNN".

I got a kick out of the "untelligence" part.

Very Strange 9/11 Aircraft Registrations

Rumor Mill News | July 6 2006

Here are some very strange findings regarding the paper-fate of the four aircraft that went "missing" on 9/11. The following info is copied directly from www.planecrashinfo.com . You're free to verify the data yourself if you want to do the homework. I did...

11 Sep 2001 New York City, New York

United Air Lines
Boeing B-767-222
N612UA 65/65
11 Sep 2001 New York City, New York

American Airlines
Boeing 767-223ER
N334AA 92/92
11 Sep 2001 Arlington, Virginia.

American Airlines
Boeing B-757-223
N644AA 64/64
11 Sep 2001 Shanksville, Pennsylvania

United Air Lines
Boeing B-757-222
N591UA 44/44

It shows the four flights of 9/11, including tail numbers and crash information on the links. The information below is copied directly from the Federal Aviation Administration's N-number registry

The first plane listed is American Airlines Flight 11, tail number N334AA,
which crashed into the WTC North Tower. Note reason for cancellation, and
cancel date.

FAA Registry
N-Number Inquiry Results

______________________________---

N334AA is Deregistered

Deregistered Aircraft 1 of 1

Aircraft Description
Serial Number 22332 Type Registration
Corporation Manufacturer Name BOEING Certificate Issue Date
01/06/2000 Model 767-223 Mode S Code 50722254 Year
Manufacturer 1987 Cancel Date 01/14/2002 Reason for
Cancellation Destroyed Exported To

Next is American Flight 77, tail number N644AA, which hit the Pentagon.
Please note the same details, reason for cancellation and cancellation date.

FAA Registry
N-Number Inquiry Results

______________________________---

N644AA is Deregistered

Deregistered Aircraft 1 of 1

Aircraft Description
Serial Number 24602 Type Registration
Corporation Manufacturer Name BOEING Certificate Issue Date
05/08/1991 Model 757-223 Mode S Code 52072030 Year
Manufacturer 1991 Cancel Date 01/14/2002 Reason for
Cancellation Destroyed Exported To

Next is United Flight 175, tail number N612UA, which hit the South Tower
of the WTC. Please note the same details.

Deregistered Aircraft 1 of 1

Aircraft Description
Serial Number 21873 Type Registration
Corporation Manufacturer Name BOEING Certificate Issue Date
01/18/1984 Model 767-222 Mode S Code 51773757 Year
Manufacturer 1983 Cancel Date 09/28/2005 Reason for
Cancellation Cancelled Exported To

Hmmm. What? Cancelled registration on 9/28/05? Not destroyed and
deregisterd in early 2002? What about the last flight, United Flight 93,
tail number N591UA, the one that allegedly crashed near Shanksville,
Pennsylvania.

Deregistered Aircraft 1 of 1

Aircraft Description
Serial Number 28142 Type Registration
Corporation Manufacturer Name BOEING Certificate Issue Date
07/01/1996 Model 757-222 Mode S Code 51721341 Year
Manufacturer 1996 Cancel Date 09/28/2005 Reason for
Cancellation Cancelled Exported To

Huh? Cancelled? On the same date in 2005? Not destroyed and cancelled
in early 2002?

How can American Airlines flights show the planes destroyed and the registration cancelled, while both United flights show the planes as simply being cancelled without explanation 4 years after they allegedly were destroyed? Why?

What the heck is going on here? These are public records, accessible by everyone until their purge date is reached. That is Nov. 11, 2006 for both United flights. There is no purge date listed for the two American Airlines flights.

Why would a company keep two aircraft that had been destroyed on its active lineup for four years, and then simply list the registration as "Cancelled"?
Even the most ardent coincidence theorist is going to have to think hard to come up with some rationale for this one.

Please pass this information on to anyone that you think might be able to use it.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/july2006/060706Registrations.htm

OT: An update from Ruppert...

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/070506_offices_burglarized.shtml

Keith Olbermann did a segment on the CIA closing down the Bin Laden unit yesterday.(and rightfully blamed the administration for not going after him so they could have a constant boogeyman). so far hes the only one to really even mention it, let alone do a full segment on it. the silence on this story is too obvious.

That's OK Jon, it is very important that us activists waste all our time, and everyone else's, questioning everyone's motives. That will have a much more profound effect on the exposure of the crimes of 9/11 than any sort of real activism.

I would go deliver flyers today, but I think instead I'll investigate someone instead. I will just randomly pick a name out of a hat, hold on....

... OK, looks like I'm investigating... Chris!. You hear that Chris, I will expose you as the disinfo agent that you are!!! Watch out, I'll be spending my day doing my Columbo act. This sure beats real activism...

Another Flyer

Another Flyer

Don't waste time on Nico Haupt is the point I'm trying to make.

Jon Gold
THX
:+:

The propaganda never ends. ABC is just one more in the crowd.

I was at the dentist's office this morning. While waiting I noticed that the February 2006 issue of SMITHSONIAN magazine contained an article about Sayyid Qutb, one who allegedly influenced the likes of Osama bin Laden.

Of course, the article mentions that the Twin Towers fell because they "hate us for our freedom". Again, it is simply assumed that the reader buys the "official story".

The Twin Towers and WTC 7 DID NOT fall because of the planes. And, this fact WILL REACH THE MASSES. It will be done by all of us doing our part, one by one, face to face, day in and day out, and not giving up.

I have friends now spreading the word by mouth. When people hear the information from another human, they are wide-eyed and captive. And they are interested in all of the puzzle pieces.

ABC and the likes, including Paramount and its upcoming WORLD TRADE CENTER release, will do all they want to do to spread disinformation and lies. It is up to us to not give up. Know and see in our minds ahead of time that the masses will become aware of the true atrocities that went down on 9/11.

When will the masses begin to separate fact from fiction. This is getting rediculous:

http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/07/06/london.bombings.newvideo/...

What did we find out on May 11th, 2006 in an article entitled, "7/7 bombers acted alone, intelligence report says"?

The July 7 suicide bombers in London were inspired by al-Qaeda but were not directed by a terrorist mastermind.

What are they telling us today?

Osama bin Laden's publicity machine announced plans yesterday to release a video that strongly suggests a link between Al Qaeda and the bombing of London's transit system nearly one year ago.

I am SO FUCKING SICK of the convenience factor for every tape released, and NOBODY questions the legitimacy of it.

we serve that purpose Jon. questioning the entire "war on terror". and we are growing. lets hope we make real progress before the next false flag......

I hear you Jon. I am getting fed up too! It seems that the lies are getting easier and easier for us to spot. So maybe, just maybe, more people will start seeing through this crap.

I can see it:

(1) Home grown terrorist plots to strip us of our freedoms, step up martial law and control the masses

(2) Al Qaeda plots used to wage further war in the middle East.

That defies all logic.
So the moment a movement starts growing in England to have an investigation, osama releases a tape admitting his involvement?????? The way Blair is fighting THEIR equivalent of OUR 911 commission is all the proof anyone needs.

It'd be funny if it weren't so sad. I'm amazed that people who choose to believe the official lies don't stop and think about the coincidence of these tapes being released.

Jon,
What amazes me is that people DO question the authenticity, motives, etc... of these tapes.

They just refuse to follow their thinking through to its logical conclusion.

I think there is an opportunity to use people's skepticism about this crap to pry their minds open.

"ABC will present The Path to 9/11, a dramatization of the events detailed in The 9/11 Commission Report and other sources, in an epic miniseries event. "The Path to 9/11" will begin on Sunday, September 10 and conclude on Monday, September 11 (8:00-11:00 p.m., both nights). The miniseries will air with limited commercial interruption." This is great news. The more they draw attention to 9/11 the better. 9/11 truth is self-evident. The same goes for the shills that have infiltrated the 9/11 truth movement. I hope they keep it up. There is an old saying, "Out of sight, out of mind." If these people were smart they would try to stop ALL talk about 9/11. Changing the subject, I see Ruppert is begging for more money. That figures.

yeah, i read that Ruppert piece and laughed when i got to the part about him begging for money again. maybe he shouldnt have slandered 9/11 truth.

http://wizbangblog.com/2006/07/05/teaching-911-denial-at-the-university-...

little help.

I think I'm going to puke:

The video comes on the heels of a series of al Qaeda productions in the past two weeks, including messages from both al-Zawahiri and Osama bin Laden about the death of al Qaeda in Iraq leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.

Assistant London police commissioner Andy Hayman said authorities are "aware of the tape," the release of which he said "can only cause maximum hurt and distress to the families and friends of those who died on 7/7 and the hundreds of people who were injured in the terrorist attacks."

He believes the "overwhelming majority of all communities" in Britain oppose any attempt to "justify" last year's attack.

"We would like to reassure the public that police are doing all they can to ensure their safety. It is important that people continue to go about their daily lives as normal, to do otherwise would mean the terrorist has won."

I did several posts on Wizblog yesterday. They are tough nuts to crack and may not be worth the effort.

9/11 Grunt, excellent point. It seems the real 9/11 criminals and their defenders keep focusing on 9/11, along with all the forthcoming media "entertainment" productions. This can and should work to the advantage of exposing the sham that the 9/11 "official" story is.

Ironically, it was the mainstream movie UNITED 93 that led to the "scales falling from my eyes". Up until that point, I was just kind of going along and hardly thinking much about 9/11. Once I saw that fairy tale of a movie, I started researching - and further down the rabbit hole I went.

In UNITED 93, the depiction of massive chaos on the ground and an unavailable FAA, DOD, and White House made no sense to me. From that point, my own questions began and the startling conclusions came into focus.

OT: Welcome aboard TS2006. It's not fun down the rabbit hole now is it?

there is no way around that we live in a mix of "a brave new world" and "1984"....

anyone have an extra soma???

Upstate NY concert to include some 9/11 truth: ..."There will be microphones set up so anyone can say what they wish to say between sets, Anderson said. There will also be music that was banned after 9/11, literature, deception dollars with the face of George Bush on them and a list Web sites about the war and buttons will be on sale..." http://www.auburnpub.com/articles/2006/07/06/news/go/go05.txt

this is smart. to link the war with 9/11 truth.

OT:

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/july2006/060706manraided.htm

That is a very Gestapo-like raid^, MediaPuppet! I'm glad Alex Jones is covering it.

I did several posts on Wizblog yesterday. They are tough nuts to crack and may not be worth the effort.
MediaPuppet | 07.06.06 - 11:57 am | #
___________________________________-

All I see is a whole lot of insults.

And not a single acknowledgement of the facts and evidence that show more honestly and accurately what took place on 9/11.

I did think Nick, the 15 year old from the Bay Area, was a damn good writer, though. I don't recall being able to write that well at 15 years old, but I did know a few people that could, really bright people, I might add.

I agree, don't spend too much time there and find places where people are more likely to have open minds, etc.

Yo Vesa, you got your Kos entry on the "Le Monde diplomatique: "9/11 - an Inside Job?" story linked to on prison planet;

http://prisonplanet.com/articles/july2006/060706diplomatique.htm

Also, and pay attention to this ppl, everybody goes on about the dicks at dalykos etc, who chat all this sh!t about the Truth Movement, BUT check Vesa's poll result bellow, there's at the most 18 of the brainless muddafonkaz who voted for "No. The governmental investigations are truthful". As apposed to the 1500 who voted in favour of "Yes. It is evident that the governmental investigations are not truthful"

http://www.dailykos.com/view_poll

LOL all this fuss is over 18 little pr!cks and some stupid "rules". Just think about that, there's hundreds of individual posters posting in 911blogger's comment sections alone, if even one quarter of us signed up we'd out number the f*ck out of those 18 abrasive douche bags in need of a good truth spanking. Who's down for it, Jon if you can arrange that blogger brigade thing you've had going for while I say we go ready the boarding planks invade those bitchs until they ban us all.

I've been slacking on the Blogger Brigade.

I'm starting to get "run down", tired, etc...

These 16 hour days for 2+ years is starting to take its' toll.

Jon, thank you for what you do here at this site.

I'm starting to get "run down", tired, etc...
Jon Gold | Homepage | 07.06.06 - 2:15 pm | #

^ I hear ya man, I've just singed up to point out to the little d!cks that there's like literally 18 of them. I've got to wait 24 hours before I can comment though. I really want to give them hell though lol. The pure crap some of them come out with is disgusting like check this;

"Jumping fucking Jesus (15+ / 0-)
Recommended by:musing85, RunawayRose, Kevin in Long Beach, Ahianne, perro amarillo, dmsilev, Goldfish, Lisa Lockwood, tvb, Do Tell, allmost liberal european, MTmofo, middleagedhousewife, Mia Dolan, Cat Whisperer
Another one of these stupid things?

How many times must you be told, Vesa? You do this shit all the time, offer nothing of value, then you get a few clueless fuckos to recommend your diary and try and support your crack-pot nonsense.

These are the points you all need to get through your tin-foil addled little minds:

It's against the rules of the site to post diaries like this one.
Kos's site, Kos's rules.
Posting here is not a RIGHT. You don't have the RIGHT to post any sort of piece of shit nonsense you want on this site.
FOLLOW THE FUCKING RULES, JACKASSES.

Vesa, the personification of 31-flavors-of-dumbass, will hopefully be banned soon, and I'd argue for the banning of people recommending these fucking diaries.

If you people can't even respect and follow simple little rules, why the fuck are you here?

Get lost, Vesa. None here shall mourn your banning, for:"

"There are no more Americans, only customers..."
-?
Anybody who said this...?

^sorry, I meant: anybody KNOW who said this?

No worries, Jon. Worst case scenario is you are still busting your ass in 20 years here fending off the likes of Nico and nothing ever gets done.

That's EXACTLY what I don't want to see happen. I can't wait until my local group starts getting active, so there's more "off the net" work to do than "on the net".

I did think Nick, the 15 year old from the Bay Area, was a damn good writer, though. I don't recall being able to write that well at 15 years old, but I did know a few people that could, really bright people, I might add.

I agree, don't spend too much time there and find places where people are more likely to have open minds, etc.
YouCrazyDiamond | 07.06.06 - 1:23 pm | #
yeah, that young dude is still kicking some ass. the people there are beyond dense, its hilarious to see a 15 year old with more sense than just about everyone there.

http://wizbangblog.com/2006/07/05/teaching-911-denial-at-the-university-...

why does this site always erase my name?

They had plans for both dipshit. Learn to read the news. Sorry, but you Bush apologists lose.

Jon Gold | Homepage | 07.06.06 - 3:48 pm | #
___________________________________________________________________________-

With regard to prior plans on invading Afghanistan:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/darkside/themes/afghanistan.html

"... This [CIA] plan was drawn up years before and was in place because of the relationship with the Northern Alliance. Tenet was able to put it on the desk at the White House [four days after 9/11]. I think the military never got over that."

This is in reference to the fake video at:
http://thewebfairy.com/911/krash/
which was referenced earlier in another thread.

In case there are still those that think it's authentic, here's the real video the above fake one was made from:
http://www.zippyvideos.com/6890079223131056/crash/

Also, here's an angle of the North Tower being hit I hadn't seen before. Those CGI guys must sure be kept busy, eh? :)

I've been wanting to ask this forever... For all those that say 911 was a bush/republican/pnac/neocon agenda item, what are we to make of the fact that the Dems have said nothing of the damning...

Anonymous | 07.06.06 - 4:48 pm | #

Well, the Democrats had Pearl Harbor.

http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=408

Payback time? Except back then the Republicans actually tried to figure out what the f*ck happened. The minority reports were summarized to a degree in "Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace", Harry Elmer Barnes, ed. (1953).

However, if you seek out the above volume, I don't recommend purchasing it new, the current publisher is questionable to say the least.

I've been wanting to ask this forever... For all those that say 911 was a bush/republican/pnac/neocon agenda item, what are we to make of the fact that the Dems have said nothing of the damning (to the "official" story) 911-related facts that we are so freely able to disseminate and view over the net (at least for the time being)?

Does it not suggest complicity on a grander level than just the elephants et al?
Anonymous | 07.06.06 - 4:48 pm | #
of course both parties are at fault, all of them are silent(with the exception of McKinney).but 9/11 could not have happened without PNAC's main players in place in my opinion.incidentally they are all republicans.republicans have a better realtionship with big business,big oil and the military industrial complex in general, so naturally they are bound to be much worse than the democrats.(hence both Iraq wars and 9/11 happening on their watches). that said, the democrats are about useless for the most part.the media is so rightwing now because as i said corporate=republican, that the democrats are trying to be like the republicans. they are terrified to call the war on terror what it is: a farce. if they did that, they would have the entire MSM against them more than they already do. thats no excuse, i detest them for it, but thats reality.

" I've been wanting to ask this forever... For all those that say 911 was a bush/republican/pnac/neocon agenda item, what are we to make of the fact that the Dems have said nothing of the damning..."

The reason why the Democrats haven't said anything is because they are the other side of the same coin. Both Democrats, and Republicans are scum. They both serve their master, the corporations, or the ones who insure their campaign warchests are full come election time. The Democrats know that if they expose the crimes of the Bush Regime, they will have to, in turn, expose their own crimes, which are closely connected. Which is why every Democrat you heard endorsed the 9/11 Report. Neither side wants to give up its' power.

There are exceptions to both sides of the isle.

Democrats
Cynthia McKinney
Robert Byrd
Russ Feingold
John Conyers
Barbara Lee

Republicans
Ron Paul
Ron Paul
Ron Paul
Ron Paul
Ron Paul

It's all about the next election, and how do you keep your power.

hell yeah, Ron Paul is the most realistic republican out there.

Ask yourselves why a 2 party system in America is mandatory. Ask yourselves why 3rd party candidates get arrested for trying to enter Presidential Debates.

Then, go read some of what these people have to say...

http://www.opendebates.org/

Then, ask yourselves why campaign reform is next to impossible to pass in Washington D.C.

True, democrats have their own cover-ups, OK City being the most massive in recent history.

yeah, but Jon, Robert Byrd was in the KKK, so everything he says now means nothing. nevermind that Bushs grandpa was a nazi and his father helped kill a U.S. president.HA,just kidding, i forgive Byrd, hes done a lot of good work since his KKK years.

I honestly didn't know he was in the KKK... I just remember a story about him being the only one on the Senate Floor looking to debate the war in Iraq, and no one else was there.

How does one set up a poll at Kos? Haven't been able to find a way...

I have a pretty good idea for one :)

Remember folks... politicians come and go, but the "system" is always in place.

yeah,he was, and the mostly racist goons in the rightwing media never miss a chance to mention it.

Byrd was great in the run-up to Iraq. he says thats the vote hes most proudest of.voting against the war.

I would love the quote on the Senate floor about the debate where nobody showed up.

Also... You ask about the difference between Democrats and Republicans.

When the black members of the House were looking for a signature from the Senate, ANYONE from the Senate, in order to question the decision of the Supreme Court regarding the Gore/Bush election, NO ONE was willing to sign it. If I remember correctly, both Democrats and Republicans were sitting in their seats smiling as the black politicians made their case, etc... it was fucking disgusting.

"Why is this chamber empty? Why are these halls silent?"

Robert Byrd

thats right Jon, the congressional black caucus is great.(and of course in danger of dissolving) i was almost brought to tears watching that scene in Moores movie when one after another they were asking for signatures, and calling Al Gore(senate president) Mr. President and he just kept knocking his gavel.i wonder how Gore felt at that moment. what a sad day.

I forgot that was in Moore's movie.

Ask yourselves why a 2 party system in America is mandatory. Ask yourselves why 3rd party candidates get arrested for trying to enter Presidential Debates.

Jon Gold | Homepage | 07.06.06 - 5:42 pm | #
___________________________________----

Ask also about the mathematical necessity to change the voting and tabulating procedures in order for a multi-party system (as in more than two)to ever have a chance of providing something closer to a true democracy.

(Science News had an article or two on this topic in the last decade, I'm sure.)

In other words, we have been intentionally constrained to a two-party system by the nature of our one vote for one candidate procedure.

For those who may not have seen it yet.

Internet Archive Gaps

http://www.democraticunderground.com/duforum/DCForumID35/26635.html

Blob... I discovered that a long time ago... I love the "Wayback Machine".

Yeah, but there are lots of people out there Jon. Some of them know less than you, some more, that's how it is.

Jon, if you know meaningful things regarding 9/11 you should mention them. Never seen you mention that one.

Heh... there are a lot of tidbits I "know", but it takes something to "spark" that memory.

Norwegian state radio picks up the LMD story:

41% av New Yorkere tror at USAs regjering visste at angrepene 11. september 2001 var planlagt. Mange amerikanere er skeptiske til den offisielle versjonen av hva som hendte 11. september, og World Trade Center ble rammet av et angrep, samtidig som to andre fly skal også være blitt styrtet.

Men hvorfor skrives ikke disse historiene i den vanlige pressen? Nå kommer de i bøker og på film, og ikke minst på nettet.

Dette er altså Kulturbeitet i P2, og vi hyller tidløs design. Volvo Amazon fyller 60 år i år, solide saker, med andre ord.

Vi åpner med Jens Book-Jensen og Willy Weeds Caba-orkester. De pleide å spille på restaurant Caba i Oslo, der det virkelig svingte i 1935, som vi kan høre.

(swing)

Med litte granne humør, åpnet Booken Kulturbeitet i NRK P2 idag.

«11. september er en innsidejobb,» skriver Le Monde diplomatique over førstesiden i sitt juli-nummer, med et spørsmålstegn bak.

Artikkelen viser til de historiene om 11. september-angrepet som ikke stemmer med den offisielle versjonen om hva som skjedde, da bl.a World Trade Center styrtet til grunnen. Flere bøker og filmer forteller disse historiene, men hvorfor har det kommet en mur mellom dem og media?

Ola Tunander, forsker ved Fredsforskningsinstituttet (PRIO), som har sett mye på sammenhengen mellom terror og etterretningstjenester, hva er det amerikanerne er skeptisk til?

Ja, dels er det sånn at når man har gjort gallup-undersøkelser nylig, så har man funnet at ca 40% mener at man ikke har undersøkt hva som skjedde den 11. september ordentlig. At regjeringen visste hva som skjedde, at man lot det skje, eller at man var involvert på en eller annen måte. Og 40% er jo ganske mye, eller 41%, det er ganske høye tall.

En av bøkene som har kommet ut, er antologien «9/11 & American Empire : Intellectuals Speak Out», og der bidrar du. Hva er det som kommer frem i disse andre historiene, som ikke kommer frem i de offisielle versjonene?

De som nå har diskutert disse spørsmålene, er et antall professorer, både med teknisk og samfunnsvitenskapelig perspektiv, og naturvitenskapelig. Det fins en mengde problemer som ikke er særlig klare når det gjelder den offisielle versjonen. Dels har man intervjuet 7 stykker, tror jeg det er, av de såkalte flykaprerne, i Saudi-Arabia og Marokke, og på BBC, blant annet. Og de er da i live, disse personene som man vanligvis regner som aktører i kapringen. Og da man senere intervjuet FBI-sjefen om det, så sier han at vi egentlig ikke vet hvem det var, for folk kan jo ha så mange ulike pass. Så det hersker en betydelig uklarhet på dette punktet. Men det som kanskje er mer problematisk, er at det på disse videofilmene synes tydelige eksplosjoner og slikt, hele veien ned, når det gjelder disse tårnene som faller. Og så fins det en mengde smeltet stål nedenfor, ved basen for tårnene. Og da må man spørre hvor det kommer fra? Og det fins en mengde vitner, bl.a brannmenn, et hopetall, 20-30 personer, som detaljert beskriver slike eksplosjoner. Så det er åpenbart at den offisielle historien ikke stemmer, men hva som har skjedd er jo en annen sak.

Hvilke implikasjoner vil det ha hvis den offisielle historien ikke stemmer, men det som Le Monde diplomatique forelegger oss, som er en mengde vitneutsagn, som gir andre versjoner, som du sier, at det var andre eksplosjoner i World Trade Center, at det aldri var et fly som rammet Pentagon, militærets hovedkvarter? Det er jo også vitneutsagn som kommer i en film som heter «Loose Change 9/11», som vises på dokumentarfilmfestivaler og kan sees på nettet. Men hva betyr det egentlig, politisk?

Jeg tror at man fra massemedienes side er forsiktig, fordi det i såfall ville innebære for mye, om det var riktig. Det ville stille den amerikanske administrasjonen i et dårlig lys, og det betyr så i neste omgang at folk må revurdere sitt allmenne verdensbilde. Og det gjør man jo helst ikke. Og derfor er det problematisk å skrive om det, og ta det opp i massemediene.

Tore Slaatta, professor i medievitenskap ved Universitetet i Oslo, du har sett filmen «Loose Change 9/11» og lest artikkelen i Le Monde diplomatique denne måneden. Er disse historiene vel nok begrunnet til å kunne komme på trykk i Dagbladet, Aftenposten og VG?

Det er vanskelig for en tredjepart å si. Det som er interessant er jo at disse filmene nettopp rører ved den usikkerheten som alltid finnes i forhold til informasjon som gjelder denne type ting. Man sier jo gjerne at det første offeret i en krig, er sannheten. Det står mye på spill her. Og det er klart at det disse filmene gjør er å åpne opp noen av de spørsmålene, eller stille spørsmål ved ting man kanskje tidligere tok for gitt, eller har trodd på. Det er i hvert fall skapt en usikkerhet, og skapt en åpenhet for å diskuterer mer hva som egentlig skjedde.

For vi kan høre hvordan det hørtes ut 12. september i radioen... [US, Norwegian radio news clips]

Det sa korrespondenden dagen etter angrepet. Og Ola Tunander ved PRIO, 44% i disse meningsmålingene i USA, som er gjengitt i Le Monde diplomatique, sier at Bush-administrasjonen utnyttet angrepene 11. september til å gå til angrep på Irak. Hvordan brukes terrorisme politisk, historisk sett?

Jo, først kan man si at det nå er kjent at den gruppen som skulle bli til Bush-administrasjonen, allerede på 90-tallet ville ha et angrep på Irak. Så det er allerede bekreftet, at man ønsket dette angrepet, og at det ikke hadde noe med 11. september å gjøre. Og der har jo Richard Clarke ved Det hvite hus skrevet at dagen etter 11. september, så mente Rumsfeld at man skulle bombe Irak, fordi det ikke var noen gode bombemål i Afghanistan. Men historisk sett er det en hel del eksempler, også fra amerikansk side, på at man ønsket terroristangrep, som man selv produserte, og siden brukte til å legitimere angrep mot andre. På Cuba på 60-tallet, i 1962, ville den amerikanske forsvarssjefen ha et angrep på Cuba. Og for å legitimere det, ville han ha en terroristkampanje i USA, igangsatt av egne agenter. Så skulle man pågripe cubanske agenter, for å legitimere denne hendelsen. Og dette fremgår klart av et dokument, så det er uomstridt. Og senere fins det en mengde ting i Italia, der det var et antall terrorangrep på 60- og 70-tallet, der det etterpå har vist seg gjennom de rettssaker som har vært i Italia, at amerikanerne ikke bare var innblandet, men egentlig drev hele dette prosjektet.

Så Tore Slaatta, professor i medievitenskap: Hvis vi lytter til den historien som mange vitneutsagn bekrefter, om at det var andre krefter enn dem man skylder på, som kan ha vært i alle fall medvirkende til 11. september-angrepene, hvorfor skrives det så lite om dette? Jeg kommer tilbake til det spørsmålet.

Jo, det er et viktig spørsmål. Og det er gjerne slik, at egentlig akkurat når vi trenger uavhengige og frie medier aller mest, så er det dessverre slik, at det viser seg at avhengigheten også er veldig stor. Det er to ting som man er opptatt av når vi forsøker å forske på og forstå nyhetsproduksjon, i forbindelse med slike store, politiske og historiske begivenheter. Det ene er at det er mye som står på spill ved det å forklare og beskrive og definere den virkeligheten. Historien skal fortelles, og det handler jo egentlig om politisk legitimitet og handlingsrom. Og det andre er at journalistikk og nyheter er en form for rutinepreget, profesjonelt arbeid, som føler bestemte regler for hvordan denne virkeligheten skal beskrives, som nyheter. Dette gir ofte nyhetskilder, eller autoritative kilder, i dette tilfelle den amerikanske presidenten, og Det hvite hus, en veldig stor makt til å definere virkeligheten, for resten av verden. Og uten tvil skjedde det en ganske bestemt lukning i den amerikanske offentligheten, ganske raskt etter 11. september.

Ola Tunander, du vifter med hånden her.

Ja, man kan si, jeg leste svensk presse på 30-tallet, jeg leste pressen fra 30-tallet -- jeg er ikke så gammel, og da fant jeg ut at den beskrivelsen av Hitler, for eksempel, den var slik at han var en normal politiker, og konsentrasjonsleirene var så å si umulig å ta opp, fordi dette skilte seg så radikalt fra den virkeligheten som folk hadde.

Man kan i hvert fall informere seg på nettet, og i akademiske bøker, og på film. Men takk for at dere var med; Ola Tunander, forsker ved Fredsforskningsinstituttet (Prio), og Tore Slaatta, professor i medievitenskap ved Universitetet i Oslo. Det er det vi rakk i denne omgang i Kulturbeitet, vi er tilbake etter Dagsnytt, blant annet feirer vi altså Amazonen, som fyller 50 år i år.

Eventually, your brain becomes full.

I have a passable understanding of this and can say that this is a balanced and objective coverage.

They talk about the high percentage of Americans who find the official investigation unsatisfactory or even covering things up discuss why the MSM doesn´t cover 9/11.

They point out quite correctly that journalists are dependent upon official sources for their presentation of our "reality" and the stakes are very high as that presentation is concerned. The White House in effect produces reality for the rest of the world. And without doubt a certain "closure" occurred at that reality source after 9/11.

This according to a norwegian professor of media science. I guess he's very politely implying that we had WH manufactured bunk force fed down our throats.

But we all knew that, didn´t we ?

What is meaningful is hearing this reasoning not only here but also on Norwegian State Radio.

And guess what; after discussing the meager MSM coverage they say

you can always search for information on the net, in books by academians or in 9/11 films. :)

The White House in effect produces reality for the rest of the world. And without doubt a certain "closure" occurred at that reality source after 9/11.
Blob | 07.06.06 - 7:23 pm | #
you are so right about that. remember Bushs famous speech at the U.N. the day after the attacks? he said "let us never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories, that seek to shift the blame from the guilty party." even then they knew people would see through the bullshit official story, so that was Bush sending a warning to the world at the U.N.

Chris, actually I was quoting a norwegian media science professor. But this reasoning is often seen here, maybe presented a little differently. The meaning is prewtty much the same.

Our reality is certainly created by the media, papers, TV, films etc. and who feeds the media and sets its guidelines? Corporations who also own oil, drug, armament and financial interests to name a few. And politicians don´t get elected unless they are sponsored by those corporations and have their mugs in the media ! It's a one corporate party political system ! War is huge business and so is terror and endless armies of security.