Support 911Blogger


SPLC Attacks Colorado Public TV For Programming on 9/11

The Southern Poverty Law Center ("SPLC") lists WeAreChange organizations on its "Hatewatch" List. And recently printed an Article on its Website criticizing Colorado Public TV Station KBDI for presenting programming on 9/11 conspiracies (among other "conspiracies.")

http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2010/03/11/the-unlikeliest-conspiracy-monger-colorado-public-tv/

So I posted this comment on the Blog for that Article:

Attacking Colorado Public TV.

Wow … that’s what this Group is about?

I came over to this site because I heard that an organization that holds itself out as a guardian of the poor, a protector of minorities and upholding the rule of law had defamed groups who are questioning the government’s explanation of what occurred on 9/11. (BTW – I see that your organization has over $100M in assets. It sure would be interesting to trace where all that money came from.)

Now you use words such as “Hatewatch” and phrases such as “Keeping an eye on the radical right.” And then poster “Tom” states that “Recall that the ‘progressive’ political Left promoted the theory that the Bush/Cheney administration was behind the 9-11 attacks.”

Okay … SPLC … I don’t know who you are, what your agenda is, or how you came about amassing such wealth, but as to your attacks on those who question the government on 9/11, you need to get a few facts straight. Let’s start with your efforts to lump these people into a homogenous group or label them.

Tom – you say that questioning the 9/11 story has its roots in the “Left” or “Progressive” political movements, as a means of attacking Bush/Cheney. Really? Name one reputable person on the political Left who proactively questions the government’s 9/11 Story. Politician? Media figure? Scholar? Commentator? Name one. Do you just make your facts up?

Now it seems the SPLC does not think much of Glenn Beck. Well when it comes to questioning the government’s story on 9/11, the SPLC is in lockstep with Glenn Beck. I doubt that Glenn Beck is more passionate about any subject beyond his avowed “hatred” for anyone who merely questions the government’s 9/11 Story.

There are millions of people of question the government’s 9/11 Story. And it is the government’s official 9/11 Story that has spawned the Patriot Act, Wars, financial ruin and untold human death and misery. And the people who question this story cover the full political spectrum, and they can be found in every Nation on the planet and they certainly have no racial identity.

But there is one distinctively unique quality among the people who question the government’s 9/11 Story versus those who treat it as religious Gospel.
We have ALL the scientists and engineers on our side.

I have a degree in Physics from one of this nation’s top Science/Engineering schools. It took me quite awhile to agree to look at 9/11, because I just naturally assumed that if there were any major defects in the story, then surely I would have heard about it in the Media.

Now why this topic has been censored within the Media is a story unto itself. There is a media watchdog outfit – ProjectCensored – that goes back to the 1960s, and you can go look up their comments on how all the top-rate questioning of the 9/11 Story (questioning by some of the best minds in the world) has been completely and utterly censored within the Mainstream Media. You’ll note that ProjectCensored has a stellar tradition of exposing all forms of Media censorship – including censorship of many topics that presumably are near and dear to the hearts of the SPLC.

So when I was finally prodded to review the official 9/11 Story … I was completely and utterly shocked. The government’s story is an absolute fairy tale. It’s ridiculous and absurd. It is scientifically impossible – in clear violation of the laws of physics. It is the scientific equivalent of claiming that the world is flat. And yet a group like the SPLC has taken it upon itself to identify those who question this fairy tale as … Dangerous?!

You try producing the name of a single reputable scientist who has looked at the Official 9/11 Story who would be willing to defend the Official Story. Just one. And while you are working on that task … you should look through the names of the scientists and engineers on the following Website, who have stated that the Official Story is a ridiculous joke and impossible:

http://www.patriotsquestion911.com/professors.html

They include scientists and engineers who have won America’s top Science Awards, as well as top NASA and Military scientists and engineers.

And yet this is all censored in the Media, and the SPLC denigrates a Public TV station in Colorado for breaking with that censorship. Unbelievable.

And in this regard the SPLC stands side by side with FOX News, Murdoch, Beck and O’Reilly, who all share the same view as the SPLC: The view that anyone who questions the official government 9/11 Myth should be silenced, ridiculed AND labeled as dangerous.

Somehow I doubt that the SPLC amassed all of its millions from common American citizens. It sure would be interesting to see SPLC’s corporate donor list.

...

I agree with most of the piece. Not this however:

"Really? Name one reputable person on the political Left who proactively questions the government’s 9/11 Story. Politician? Media figure? Scholar? Commentator?"

Political figures would include Cynthia McKinney, Ralph Nader, Cindy Sheehan, Hugo Chavez; media figures would include Harry Belafonte, Ed Asner and many others; a plethora of anti-capitalist scholars whose writings appear on sites like globalresearch etc.

The most visible figures on the left are mostly silent on the issue, as with the most visible figures on the right.

Does Ralph Nader

Does Ralph Nader "proactively" question the government's position on 9/11? Or is he more like Amy Goodman?

Hugo Chavez is not an American political figure - neither is Cindy Sheehan.

Nobody knows who Cynthia McKinney is ... except for people in this Movement. And she is no longer a politician - most likely due to her position on 9/11.

Ed Anser and Harry B. are actors.

You see .... you miss the point. The point is that this guy makes a statement that others would accept as true, if not challenged. And if challenged, then he has to support his point. If he attempts to support his point with the names you mention, he'll look ridiculous.

His point is that the 9/11 movement is nothing more than a discredited and lame political attack upon an opposing political party and administration - so that it may be dismissed as such. That assertion is flat-out ridiculous. Democratic politicians, media figures and commentators run away from the issue. Obama himself states that the identity of the perpetrators of 9/11 is not a matter of debate. If it were otherwise - then it would be in the mainstream media. By making it look like a political smear -- then it de facto must be ridiculous or it would be used in political attacks --- and it is not.

Yet we have 100% of the Scientists. Now that is not technically true either .... but if he attempts to name any Scientists or Engineers on his side ..... again he'll look ridiculous. I know there are a few. But I can I handle that.

I am making the challenge. Let him rebut it. Then he's mine. I know how to argue this.

...

Well, Sheehan did run against Pelosi, so she was, at one point at least, a politician. Cynthia was the Green Party's candidate during the 2008 election (and received the endorsement of Noam Chomsky, no less). Quite a few people are aware of her existence, both Republican and Democrat. Whether Nader's position on 911 is "proactive" or not is a matter of debate. He's certainly not in the same league as McKinney. Re: Chavez -- point taken, however I didn't realize you were limiting your analysis to Americans only.

Asner and Harry B. are undoubtedly "media figures", though I'm guessing you were referring to pundits like Olberman or O'Reilly?

My main concern was that you seemed to be implying that no "reputable" "Scholar" or "Commentator" from the "left" has endorsed 911 truth. This is false. However I agree with your taking issue with the SPLC's characterization of 911 truth as a partisan (ie anti-Bush) exercise.

I think Nader at this point waste of time

Nader has always been about Nader first of all. He's made a lot of enemies in the activist community in DC by stealing other people's credit and camera time after others had done all the leg work. He's also known to treat his own employees like crud. Low/no wages, part time hours, no benefits.

Nader is in his 70's now. Past his prime, and just isn't at the top of his game anymore.

I saw Nader in person this winter

& I think he's past the physical point of massive positive change.

Very interesting & brillant man, but new leaders have to take charge.

Danse

I am not really disagreeing with you factually.

It seems you are motivated to say "Yes there actual smart and dedicated political figures, political commentators, media types who believe and herald our view on 9/11."

I completely agree with you factually and I know who a lot of these people are. Let me provide my own example of an excellent media person -- Peter B. Collins. He is now mostly out of mainstream media (internet broadcast) like McKinney is out of mainstream politics, and Cindy Sheehan cannot crack in and win - neither could Crowley (and both do not fully embrace the movement - more like Medina down in TX - who is effectively attacked on the subject). These people are courageous.

But here is the real point - the public for the most part does not know these people. They are not mainstream figures. In the eyes of the public, they are fringe. When you allow the opponents of the 9/11 movement to caste it as a political attack - then you've allowed it to be caste as a fringe movement, because all the people caught up in the political fighting between democrats and republicans, which includes the mainstream media and the politicians themselves, have never heard their champions use 9/11 to attack the other side. So in their minds - it must be fallacious or their champions would use it. And that is precisely what you would expect to be the case, but in order to pull off a 9/11, you need to have the power to control the mainstream media and to control both political parties, which the 9/11 criminals do have.

But you cannot jump ahead and explain that to people. What you need to do is use our strongest arguments, which is science. You cannot debate science. This is how ordinary people are brought into the movement. This is what the movement needs. The obvious science of what occurred is being censored from the public, and the public is being played for fools. And the public does not like being played the fool and that's how you win them over.

And the other side cannot debate this - not effectively anyway. They want this portrayed as crank, fringe political attacks on Bush/Cheney. And the response by the common people and "incredulous" media figures is that they just cannot believe that Bush/Cheney -- whatever else they may have done wrong - would or could (competently) attack Americans. Allowing them to frame the issue in that manner is a losing proposition. Staying clear of all that and pushing the science on the public is the way to go. And when the media figures ask "well then how come I have never heard of all this science?" you tell them "because you are not doing your job."

By sticking to the Science - you show to the common people that they are being played for fools.

And by sticking to the Science - you show to the media that they are incompetent.

People to do not like to be seen as fools or incompetent.

Lets discuss racism

The SPLC is first and foremost an opponent of racism

I've been raising issues to assist reaching out to the left for years. Soon before my Howard Zinn interview
http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20090309141651530
I realized that ALL LEFTISTS should cease hostility to asking the hard questions about 911 BECAUSE of their consistent stand against racism.
Success by 911truth would necessarily diminish racist hatred toward Arab and Muslim people, undercutting support for wars and making life better for Arab Americans and Muslim Americans. This in no way suggests anything about the evidence. That has to stand objectively, as it should. It does, however, fully counter Zinn's position that 911truth is a distraction.
.
I have not found one truth activist who is historically progressive who has publicly acknowledged this argument is of value. Since truth activists are risking our lives by doing our activism and leftists have been persecuted far more than a decade, I ask my truth activist associates to put aside your resentment of my truth movement criticism and weigh in on this issue of racism. Many of you have done much more to confront racism than I have. If I'm wrong about any of this, say so.

Most truth activists are not particularly leftist. They are also no more racist than the next citizen, which is not perfect, but a lot better than adults in the 50's. To show the subtleties of racism, think how most people have a harder time recognizing someone of another race they don't know well from someone else of that race. The way I put it is that white people have no place claiming they aren't racist. They do have a right to claim they are antiracist.

A special note here is praise for the communists, who I've never been a fan of. I'm more of an anarchist in my sympathies. Tolstoi tended toward anarchism AND pacifism. Communists are EXTREMELY antiracist, Credit where credit is due.

Truth activists who are conservative have a right to express that activism. Conservatives are legitimately concerned about the hypocrisy of liberal office holders ignoring illegal immigration. Since its rare to find me asking for a law to be enforced, I'm less hypocritical. It's reasonable for left defenders of latino rights to assert that such opponents of latino rights have a large racist element. There may be opponents of immigration rights who are dedicated to not being racist, but they are a tiny minority.

When people are active on the 911 truth issue AND other issue, they risk weakening one or the other issue in some people's eyes. I'm active against nuclear power and believe climate change is THE BIGGEST problem. However, my heart is with 911 truth, so that's mainly what I do.

I like the fact that 911 truth includes people from a variety of places on the political spectrum. it's VERY unusual. I think Harold Saive is the greatest thing since sliced bread, but we disagree on issues outside 911 truth. Makes life interesting. This is another reason why I plead with truth activists to TRY harder to work things out with other truth activists. I consider it common sense.

I propose 2 things to address the problem of SPLC.

1.People of left background should reach out to SPLC about the evidence.
2.We all should start discussing the problem of racism

David - Your point about

David -

Your point about racism is very well made, as the false 9/11 story has certainly fanned the flames of racial hatred directed at Muslims and Arabs, but .....

I have a fundamental disagreement with the underlying premise of treating this issue within the "political spectrum."

There is NO POLITICAL SPECTRUM when it comes to 9/11. We're not talking about economic theory here - federal power vs. states rights - or any other matters of legitimate political disagreement and shades of gray.

When I confronted the truth about 9/11 ... it led me to abandon all my previously held beliefs about the legitimacy of American politics, the political parties and the American media. It demonstrated to me that we are now living in an Orwellian State - Period.

The truth about 9/11 is as simple as 2+2=4. They say 2+2=5. And yet we are the ones who are ridiculed. And we attempt to respond with reasoned debate regarding a matter that is not subject to debate. WHICH IS PRECISELY WHY THEY CANNOT AND WILL NOT DEBATE IT!!!

Whenever I engage with someone who dismisses the issue as ridiculous --- then I respond by ridiculing them - which is what they deserve and it is fighting fire with fire. If people within the 9/11 movement are too polite or not experienced in debate .... then they should not engage others in debate on this matter. Leave it to those who know what they are doing.

praise and disagreement

Thanks so much for the too little seen ability within our movement you have shown to be able to agree with some things and disagree with others.

There is a kernel or more of truth in your call for disassociation of 911 truth from the normal political spectrum. It is obvious within our movement that the issue is integrity. Nevertheless, those of us with left political backgrounds are in a better position to engender dialog with leftist adversaries, who have justified in their own minds a refusal to ask the hard questions. I suspect my decades long relationship with Howard Zinn made the difference in my ability to secure his time for that interview. If and when I do civil disobedience in challenge to top left media, my background will be relevant.

Debate is appropriate for an audience. Persuasion is more useful in showing leftists how they are not standing for their own values.

Ralph Schoenman

is as anti-capitalist as they come, who has spoken at several 9/11 truth events. He cites media gatekeepers as examples of 'the limits of liberalism,' and likes to tell audiences (concerning the powers we're up against), 'Brothers and sisters, we can't reform them--we must overthrow them.'

Hosts a program on Pacifica radio. Author of 'The Hidden History of Zionism.' Former director of the Bertrand Russell Peace Foundation.

I certainly think he would qualify as a commentator, media figure, perhaps even a scholar of the political left who picks apart the 9/11 official story and other instances of false-flag terror.

I think the real mistake here

is confusing Democrats with the political left..
If you rank most Democrats with a tool like political compass, I think you'll find they're center-right.
All mainstream press is economically right wing though they try to cover it by being on the social "left", as if that's as important.
There is no political left in the US.

SPLC uses the fear of "Hate Mongering" to raise money

While Alexander Cockburn is completely brain dead on the issue of 911, he is really good in many other areas, including exposing groups like the SPLC who basically raise a lot of their money by scaring liberals about the latest threats from racist/nationalist groups. Don't get me wrong, there is a surge in right-wing nazism, and should be resisted by anti-racist action groups, but this is not that much different in scope to the surge in the 90s when Clinton was president. Read this article:

King of the Hate Business
http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn05152009.html

I see the SPLCs move here as another funding angle. They recognize that most of the liberal media gatekeepers won't touch the 911 issue (as recently demonstrated by the Huffington Post), and its likely they want to tap this audience as a funding source, IMHO.

The angle that most of the left-gatekeepers take these days is to denounce 911 because of rhetoric coming out of the Alex Jones et al camp. I tend to agree about their analysis of Jones' politics, which is a mix of 911 and right wing nationalism while lacking any systemic analysis of capitalism. So a lot of the left gatekeepers stay away from Jones. And because of his rhetorical right wing style, it's easy to see why left-leaning blogs won't touch 911 (besides their own cowardice plus institutional bias and economic need to remain "credible"). Indeed, I stay away from Jones' when discussing 911 with my radical friends.

I see SPLCs move here in this context.

"This is not a capitalistic society, it is over... " G. Celente

Gerald Celente: "What's going on? I'll resume it in 6 words:

It's Princeton, Harvard and Yale. It’s the Bullets Bombs and Banks,

That is the business out there, they are all running this show, they are in control of this country, they are running this show... " Gerald Celente

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CHHAK6F2RXQ

The Political Atheist's Gospel According to Gerald Celente

KINGSTON, NY, 17 March 2010 —Yesterday, on Fox Business's “Happy Hour”, Gerald Celente explained – in six simple words – the powers responsible for the destruction of America's capitalist system.
Who is behind transforming the world's greatest entrepreneurial empire into a doomed merger of Big Government with Big Business? Celente identified who and what is responsible for:
Bailouts that bail out only the biggest, greediest, most incompetent, and most unscrupulous Stimulus packages that mainly stimulate government workers and special interests Tax relief for mega-billionaires
Draining an already depleted treasury to wage endless, exorbitantly expensive wars in foreign countries.
Health reform that will cost trillions and, as with virtually every other government initiated enterprise, is doomed to fail.
The list goes on. Given the all-encompassing scope of the destruction, some conspiracy theorists contend it is a sinister plot to deliberately bring the American system down.

“We are not conspiracy theorists” said Celente. “The dissolution of America is being accomplished in broad daylight, with full disclosure, for all to see. But, the fact is that the powers, principles and practices in place could not be doing a better job to destroy the nation if it were deliberate.”

What are those forces hastening the fall?

In less than six minutes, Trends Research Institute Director and publisher of the Trends Journal® , Gerald Celente, boiled the 60 complex years that have pushed America to an economic precipice and military quagmire into six simple words. Here they are (Click here www.youtube.com/watch?v=CHHAK6F2RXQ )

Comment of Dr Beeth: Alex Jones is doing a good job to expose the criminal elite and to highlight news-snippets that can help us better understand what is going on. Gerald Celente is frequently on the show, and he is as good a guy as any I know to give an analysis of the current state of capitalism...

The point made that Southern Poverty Law Center's essential role should be combating racism is a very good one. At this very moment, hundreds of thousands of people have been killed thanks to the media pushing the scientifically proven FALSE official version of the mass murders of September 11th 2001. There is absolutely no proof that any Muslims were behind these atrocious acts, and still our main stream media continues to flare hate and fear against Muslims and people characterized as fanatic Islamic terrorists. We should energetically correct the hypocritical SPLC on these issues.

Dr Beeth, Brussels, Belgium www.mp911truth.org/#Beeth

SPLC's essential role should be combating racism...

The burden of the war that the 9/11 myth created falls disproportionately on the families of certain racial minorities as well.