911Blogger.com Wins DailyKos Fund Raiser for 1 Minute of Airtime on Air America's Sam Seder Show

In an interesting and somewhat ironic twist, tonight 911blogger.com won a bid for 1 minute of airtime on Air America Radio - specifically on 'The Sam Seder Show'.

'The Sam Seder Show' is a progressive radio show which airs weekdays from 9am to noon weekdays on Air America, and which I frequently listen to on my lunch break. Sam routinely hosts leaders of the 'progressive blogosphere' on his show including Markos - the founder of dailykos.com, and the sponsor of the 1 minute give away. The contest (details here) was part of a fund raiser for their YearlyKos Convention - which is where the 'ironic' part comes in.

There have been numerous visitors of this site who have had run-ins on DailyKos when discussing 9/11. Most notably a number of users here have been banned for not following the rules specifically laid out regarding 9/11 in the DailyKos FAQ. While some blog entries regarding 9/11 have received overwhelming support by their community, 9/11 is rarely a topic of any real focus, and more frequently the cause of banning other 'progressives' who are perhaps a bit too progressive.

This 1 minute spot on Air America will be a chance for the 9/11 community to have the ear of not only Air America listeners, but the owner of DailyKos and the larger 'progressive blogosphere' as well. It is my intention to use this spot to direct a message at these groups in regards to their overall handling of 9/11 news. While Markos has commented on being called a 'gatekeeper' before, it is time that criticisms of these 'progressives' in regards to their handling of 9/11 news be given a voice - if only for 60 seconds.

So, if you had 1 minute to say whatever you wanted on Air America, what would you say? What news do you think they should have covered and didn't? What changes would you like to see happen regarding the 'left' and the discussion of 9/11? Post some quick thoughts, or perhaps write up an actual script - just be sure it would fit in 1 minute. We will be checking out ideas and coming up with our 1 minute spot over the next week or so and we will post new details as they come up.

It is worth noting that this year's YearlyKos in August will be in Chicago, recent home to a major 9/11 convention. We hope that many will make plans to attend this event to make the voice of the 9/11 community heard - whether from the inside or from the outside of their community.

A big thanks to everyone who chipped in to our advertising fund raiser, we hope that this use of the funds will have a large bang for their buck!

Show "we got no friends above us" by RELLIKDNAR
Show "mention TRUTH911.NET in the" by truth911.net
Show "anyone who gave my post a" by truth911.net

:sigh: i didnt do it, but

:sigh: i didnt do it, but just a guess? maybe its because you not only pimped your site but took a swipe at 911blogger.com in the process? dont take it personal man, people vote me down all the time.

I voted you down because the

I voted you down because the only reason you ever comment is to pimp your site. Also I have seen you diss many other sites while propping yours up, now including this one and 911truth.org.

Also, I don't refer anyone to websites which mix absolute disinformation with real information -> http://www.members.shaw.ca/truth911/truth911/anomalies.htm

And finally because your opening animation takes over a minute to load even on highspeed, in which time most people will just move on.

Oh, and I voted down this comment too because you always tell others to "fuck off" when they say they don't like your site. Which of course is ironic given your comments on others sites in the past.

Corporate manslaughter?

I am an Englishman and as such have no knowledge of the American legal system, but here goes...

A while back, I remember reading on here that because the twin towers were officially brought down as a result of the two planes flying into them in a terrorist act then that meant that the investigation into the deaths of people who were in the twin towers came under the jurisdiction of the FBI and as such could not be investigated by NYC/NY Port Authority (help me out here) - somebody mentioned that if it was 'recognised' that explosives brought down the twin towers then jurisdiction would be switched from the FBI.

It has recently been pointed out on here that somebody died in the WTC7 building collapse - put that together with Silverstein's 'pull it' comment and isn't that enough to bring a case through NYC/NY Port Authority - over here it would be called corporate manslaughter.

Any thoughts on this?


Hmmmm... Good thinking, but...

Yorkshireman, this is good thinking -- but as it happens, it seems a bit off-topic to the particular thread here, which is about what to say on a 60 sec. radio spot. Unless you are proposing that they/we mention this legal angle?

It does look like your idea has considerable merit on its own. I hope someone can make use of it.

But for these 60 seconds the fellow will need to get accross the glaring evidence, the big stuff, avoiding anything resembling legal details.

In fact, I do propose that the 'pull it' remark itself be left out of these 60 seconds -- and I notice that I am disagreeing here with lalo's post below. The culpability of that remark is denyable, and Silverstein has already denied that he meant that they pull the building down. Let's stick with the undeniable stuff.

No "pull it"

I agree that no time should be wasted on it.

Ooo Ouyay reay osay levercay andraykilleray

Ouyay reay osay levercay andraykilleray

Show "and on tv-----if they wore" by RELLIKDNAR


Give 'em facts!Molten steel, "Pull it", "why did Rudy happen to have a face mask at the ready?",Bldg. 7, statements by one "professor" after another.

A poem, a jingle, a catchy tune?
Mentions of Nuremburg justice for all those found complicit by the International 911 Truth Council( to be formed some day soon?), especially those in the MSM, esp. the "Pop. Mech.", the Nation, the Progressive, shills and traitors all!
O'reilly, Hannity, someday your grandchildren will be ashamed to carry your name.

And smugster yupsters, your grandchildren will look at you with those bright eyes and say "But anyone can tell those are controlled demolitions, why couldn't you admit it?" And you'll have to admit that you were so caught up with the material goods, that you were scared that your comfortable life would come to an end.

Appeal to the smart people? Appeal to the smug yuppies listening as they cruise the 101 in their Saabs? Warn those in denial that we are not going away, even Halliburton can't build concentration camps fast enough compared to the rate at which are numbers have grown in the last 3 months?

The Pentagon Lawn, the circular hole?
After all these years and such an obvious deception, I can't believe we're still fighting for the G- D*mned TRUTH !!!

Best Luck to ya!

Physical and non-physical evidence

"why did Rudy happen to have a face mask at the ready?"

I don't think time should be used on fairly easily explainable details like that.

As regards physical evidence, this is what I tried to have published on the BBC page:
- - - - -
True, steel has lost half of its strength at around 650 degrees Celsius (however, according to tests I've read, the required temperature is higher in real-world buildings, in which steel members are not exposed on all sides to fire, as they are in simple laboratory settings). However, none of the WTC steel samples analyzed by NIST showed temperatures anywhere near that. And even if the steel temperatures had been around 1000 degrees Celsius, as NIST nevertheless felt (ex post facto, so to speak) necessary to claim, there is a long way from some local softening to even a partial collapse of a single floor, let alone to a sudden, symmetrical destruction of 110 floors, and at the speed of 7 to 8 floors per second (meaning, of course, that the much more massive and sturdier lower portions of the skyscrapers offered practically no resistance at all) after a period of burning - in the case of the South Tower, 56 minutes - in which a Finnish midsummer bonfire just begins to be ready for sausage grilling.
- - - - -
The pretty much resistance-less total collapse of three buildings might be worth mentioning. Other things worth mentioning: the destruction of evidence (NIST: "no steel was recovered from WTC 7"), the fact that NIST struggles with its WTC 7 report, the fact that NIST's twin tower report is a pre-collapse theory.

Non-physical evidence:

- the obstruction of investigations as detailed by Jon Gold -the disappointment of the widows and widowers in the Commission report
- FBI "has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11"
- top bin Laden expert: the "confession video" is fake

I would suggest going the

I would suggest going the Jon Gold route, and mentioning press for truth type issues, and the struggle of 9/11 victims to get satisfaction from an investigation. Also maybe something about the first responders and their struggles and how the majority of them support the work of the 9/11 truth movement.

News editor at The Watchman Report, www.watchmanreport.com, delivering 9/11 truth to the Christian community

I would stress the need for

I would stress the need for a real investigation to answer the plethora of unanswered questions and stay away from any particular theories. I think it's likely that the wackier theories out there are precisely why 9/11 is banned from being discussed at plances like dailykos. It's probably just as likely that these theories originate in the minds of not-so-well-balanced individuals as well as being planted purposely as easily debunked or even laughed at nonsense. It's time to start moving away from the crazies... while they temporarilly swell numbers, in the end it will doom the whole movement.

why is 9/11 banned from dailykos?

because of the crazy theories? Nooooo. Because by his own admission, Traitor Kos accepts that the attacks were the work of al Qaeda and the muzzle-'im hijackers. This leaves absolutely no room for perfectly sane theories or even problems being pointed out with the official conspiracy, both that will get you banned on dkos. I think it's obvious why that site bans discussion of 9/11--they are suppressing the truth.


Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero

WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force



Because he wants to maintain his credibility in the eyes of the power establishment, his readers, and the majority of Americans.

Are you really oblivious to how dangerous this is for many people? Do you fail to comprehend how violently people want to reject this idea - not because they are traitors, but because it is horrifying to think your own government is a bunch of mass murderers.

I spent an evening presenting the evidence to a friend whjo is an architect. He was extremely resistent at first. So we went through all the evidence until he finally saw it.

He threw up. He won't talk about it now. He was truly horrified.

It is really hard to take people seriously who cannot acknowledge the severity of what they are advocating, how difficult it is for ordinary people to accept, and how high the standard of proof has to be as a consequence.

Agreed, realizing the truth about 9/11 can be very traumatic

for some people and you always need to be ready to provide a lot of support to those who are so affected.

metalious - I hope you will help him work through it and help him realize the peace and beauty that comes from embracing the truth and throwing off the lies. Please don't leave him in a state of fear and depression. Help him find his light.

We are all brothers and sisters on this big, beautiful, blue ball.

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

So it wasn't easy

for your architect friend, but in the end he overcame his resistance, 'went through all the evidence until he finally saw it.'

Good for him. Good for all those like him who've overcome such reluctance over the past 5-1/2 years.

If all these people can manage it, however unpleasant the experience, then what, pray tell, is Daily Kos' excuse?

And what's this reference to 'how difficult it is for ordinary people to accept'? Apart from our rejection of the official story of 9/11, don't most people currently in this movement qualify as 'ordinary people' in most every other respect?

hear hear rm

except I would say that there are some pretty extraordinary people in the truth movement. we, unlike many, can handle the truth without tossing our cookies. I find it incredible that kos actually has apologists on this subject. Ïf kos wanted to maintain credibility, he would speak the truth, or at the very least stop making claims about something he at best doesn't understand at all. Now, if what he really wants is to suck up to the power elite who want this issue to go away, THEN he's going about it the right way. Too bad, he chose... poorly.


Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero

WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force


he threw up?

cool. no really. thanks for sharing. I worked the Spielberg/Obama party last night at the Bev Wilshire. Supposed to have been about 700 guests. Lots of fancy cars and tinted windows. One huge stretch really slowed down to look at my sign. Just me and a guy with a sign that no one could read. Something about the CIA stages auto accidents. Don't worry. They could read mine. Also worked the Crenshaw rally. I'm beginning to think this is a one-man-show out here in L.A.

keep it up man

i thought I was a one man show but persistence paid off and a small movement seems to have sprung up around me here in the boston area. every little bit helps, it really does. the cavalry is on its way!


Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero

WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force


thanks yt and rt

I'll follow up with ArtV. I guess I have to register to respond. I'm associated with http://www.911truthla.us and I am trying to drive home the importance of ... v-i-s-i-b-i-l-i-t-y.

yeah you have to register

to respond there - I tried your contact link here first but it's turned off - keep up the good work

The Eleventh Day of Every Month

turned on

I just turned it on. I guess when I set up my account here, I wasn't sure what that was about. This provides a way for us to communicate off the main pages I take it. That's a good feature.

the angle i will be going

the angle i will be going for will not be that of trying to prove anything regarding 9/11 in 60 seconds other than that so called 'progressives' refuse to cover 9/11 news - even that which is not even close to being 'controversial'..

examples of where the 'progressive' media should have been vocal on 9/11 news, but weren't, is really what i am looking for.. or subjects which the progressive media should be going after, but aren't..

Why doesn't the MSM ever mention WTC #7?

And why they avoid the story completely. 911 is a story they should be going for but aren't! Why has it not been reported exactly where all the money came from that Atta used? All the ties to Wally Hilliard, the CIA, etc. And the now indicted(or maybe it's yet to be?) Brent Wilkes.
Alas, 60 seconds isn't going to accomplish much.
Paul Thompson's timeline.
If some of the alledged hijackers are still alive then who actually did it?
Why isn't OBL charged by the FBI for 911?
The mainstream media, or I should say the former mainstream media has let us all down!
The 911 Jersey Girls.
Shit, I could go on but 60 seconds?
Maybe mention the best sites to learn about all the discrepencies regarding 911.

Well, it's not just that

Well, it's not just that they ignore the issue, they have now started outright attacking it. Here in this piece, it explains why:

Where George Monbiot clearly states right in the blurb:
"These conspiracy idiots are a boon for Bush and Blair as they destroy the movements some of us have spent years building"

He obvious feels entitled to lead the public wherever his personal ideology sees fit and he's pissed off at any upstarts stirring up popular support without his personal approval. I've seen this sort of holier than thou from the left before. It's worse than ignoring the truth, it's actively working against it for a personal agenda - and one that's sepparate than the agenda of the regular bad guys even.

As for other proclaimed progressives, it's a mixed bag really... places like Counterpunch are clearly counterproductive, Kos is just irrelevant, but Think Progress and Raw Story I would consider 'okay' if not outright good. At times it almost seems as if another ideology is emerging, one more open to new ideas and stark reality and that scares the hell out of the old school progressives who've actually become rather conservative in their thinking and actions.

George Monbiot

.. has enabled a free-ranging discussion at the Guardian, which is unprecedented in the UK and now into its 3rd record-breaking occurrence in just 2 weeks.

If all media outlets provided similar forums for dissent..

I posted Moonbat's article on Blogger and it was voted down

I felt his sick, lying Orwellian Doublespeak was worthy of study.


You are going to put Seder on the defensive.

You are going to put Seder on the defensive.  Your criticisms will lead to a tit for tat as to whether or not Air America gives enough airtime to comspiracy "nuts." You can't win this way.

This will also distract their listeners from the critical issue of what really happened that day and why we all should question the government's account.

You really want to stimulate their listeners to ask questions and not just try to prove how lame Air America is.

Just my 2 cents. 

Thanks for all of your hard work!

i disagree. and i love how

i disagree. and i love how you frame it too-giving "conspiracy nuts" airtime. isnt it usually the "debunkers" that call people who question 9/11 conspiracy nuts? hmm. this isnt about tit for tat, this is about the sad truth that the progressive and much of the alternative media have failed us just like the MSM that they criticize. DZ doesnt have to attack, just lay out the truth of the progressive medias performance and maybe let the listeners know a few quick facts about 9/11 that the MSM and "alternative" media doesnt like to bring up much(WTC7,wargames,insider trading,ISI money trail etc. it wouldnt take much time to drop a few quick facts and point out how the media has failed).

I'm afraid you misunderstood me...I am not calling us nuts...

It is debunkers that call us conspiracy nuts - which is exactly what Seder will do if we criticize him and Air America.  HE will refer to us as conspiracy nuts.  DZ may not mean it as an attack but that is how it will be perceived by Seder.  I listen to him all the time.  He will be like a cornered animal and go into one of his diatribes defending his right to his beliefs and how wonderful and righteous air America is (even though they are just another MSM outlet.)  We will not have a chance to rebut Seder so I still believe attacking the Progressive media is not our goal.  Our goal should be to enlighten the listeners for 60 seconds as to the unanswered questions of 9/11.  Not our theories.  Not our opinions of "progressive" media.  

 Just the questions...

oh, so capitulate to Seder

oh, so capitulate to Seder because hes going to throw a fit? shape our message so as not to be called a conspiracy nut by Sam Seder and other weak minded people? the reason we have to lay out info in the spot is because outlets like Air America(except for Malloy) refused to do so in the first place. i dont see the big deal with at least mentioning this in the spot and to me it would be a glaring ommission.

Sam Seder Problem?

If you think Sam Seder is going to be a problem for 9/11 truth and our lucky one minute of airspace we have than let's contact him about it:


If you want to comment on Air America Radio Programming, use these methods:
Voicemail: (212) 871-8150
E-mail: comments@airamericaradio.com

Or call in to Sam Seder and show your support for the truth regarding 9/11 (9am --> 12pm EST)

The Truth is an Offense, but not a Sin -- Bob Marley.

Push the Truth.

I don't see it as a capitulation...

I see it more as a way to control the message and the tone of the rebuttal that will follow the 60 second spot.  At the end of the spot would you rather have Seder saying "Well, they certainly raised some interesting points..." or "You guys are a bunch of..." and start calling us names?  All I want to do is try to shape the conversation that will follow.

And I agree that it is a good idea to mention the failure of progressive media but I do not think it should be the entire focus in the spot.

I was a big fan of Malloy and since his removal from AA I have cut way back on my listening time.  So far as I can tell, Randi Rhodes is our only hope on that station now.

I really wonder whether Seder is a shill or just an idiot. 

i see your point but this is

i see your point but this is where i divert with some truthers in their approach. i dont really care what Sam Seder(or insert various "debunker" names here) says about the movement or 9/11 itself. its about what the 1 minute spot says and i think it would really grab people and be useful to point out the medias, the WHOLE medias failure in covering 9/11 objectively. Seder has never questioned 9/11 has he? then it really doesnt matter what he says, its going to be predictable either way. and yeah, i forgot about Randi Rhodes, ive always had a soft spot for her. she knows whats up and her hearts in the right place. air america is pretty weak for the most part now though.

Truth at Air America: Thom Hartmann

Thom is a Portlander who is taking over Al Franken's slot -- he currently does both a local and a national show on AA. He's a good guy. On his LOCAL show (probably an important distinction) he helped our local group pimp both PFT and more recently, 9/11 Mysteries. When a member of our group called in to announce our show of 911M on the 11th, he acknowledged that he'd seen it and he thought it was good. When his sidekick tried to pooh-pooh it as being "about those conspiracy theories" he disagreed with her and said it's full of material that raises real questions. Anyway, I'm keeping my expectations for his newly-scheduled national show low, but at least I know he has his head screwed on straight.

failure of progressive voices re 911

"examples of where the 'progressive' media should have been vocal on 9/11 news, but weren't, is really what i am looking for.. or subjects which the progressive media should be going after, but aren't.."

A very recent example of suppression of 911 news is seen in the following quote, regarding recent, new info on the "dancing Israelis", from antiwar.com:

The story of how this line of investigation was suppressed, both in the law enforcement community and in the media, is a saga in itself. I know that Ketcham worked on this story long and hard, and had supposedly firm commitments from both Salon.com and The Nation to publish his work. Both projects were killed at the last minute, in one case an hour before it was scheduled to run. What’s particularly stupid, in the case of Salon, is that they ran his previous piece, on the "Israeli Art Student Mystery," years ago – and now refuse to follow up their own story.

Also, the fact that the 911 Commission would admit that NORAD had lied to it, and then NOTHING becomes of that outrage - not from Congress, not from the Main Stream Media, and not from the chatter classes, shows you how pathologically sick our society is. Where are the calls from "big name" progressives and liberals for convening another 911 commission, with subpoenas issued to NORAD near the top of the agenda? Why is it that even the "alternative" media has trouble connecting the dots, which point to a US government coverup with the main stream media as a partner in crime?

The answer, of course, is that the "alternative media" is also a partner in the crime of coverup. As 911 was used as a pretext for war, it's quite clear that a complicit media is also guilty of war crimes.

You might point out to Mr. Seder and Mr. Markos that if gatekeeping leads to the nuking of Iran, the radioactive fallout may well end up poisoning our troops in Iraq, and permanently spoil the notion of Israel as a homeland for any living human, regardless of religious disposition. Also, can anybody doubt that an irate Iran, which possesses nuclear materials (as opposed to a nuclear bomb), would not feel obliged to dirty bomb Israel in return for their nuclear misfortunes? I expect that they would do this to both Israel and Saudi Arabia.

Furthermore, a consequence of a thoroughly destabilized (and perhaps radioactively contaminated) Middle East may reduce the US to the status of a beggar nation. $250 a barrel oil will do that sort of thing, you know.

Now none of this would be very good for their precious Democrats, would it? Doubtless, the "impeachment off the table" Democrats would just blame the Republicans, but a destitute American populace is likely to place blame squarely on where it belongs - which is to say on both the D's and the R's.

So, perhaps they will spare you the usual imputations of lunacy and treat 911 responsibly, as American citizens, rather than political hacks.

also Brezinski on false flag leading to Iran was under-reported

Recently, Brezinski gave testimony wherein he suggested that a false flag operation might be carried out to make an attack on Iran politically possible. (He didn't use the term "false flag"). I know this was censored and/or not given proper attention in the main stream media.

I don't know what the status of Brezinski's comments are in the "alternative press", but if it's what I think they are, you also have another strong argument showing the failure of "progressive voices" to deal with 911-type stuff.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that the most censored and ridiculed stories by our Orwellian press involve treasonable acts against American citizens. Whether these acts involve killing them (911, Oklahoma City bombing, JFK assassination, Roosevelts' perfidy leading to Pearl Harbor -see "Day of Deceit"), or abusing them (importation of crack cocaine into the US by the CIA), these acts are major no-nos to talk seriously about in the press, or deal honestly with in American history books.

The cover-ups continue "forever". If you go to Amazon.com and read Stinnet's comments regarding his book ("Day of Deceit"), you will learn that the government is RE-CLASSIFYING documents that Stinnet used for his book. We're talking about a war that ended over 60 years ago!

That is why activists should focus on building a CREDIBLE, AUTHORITATIVE, ALTERNATIVE, NON-COMMERCIAL MEDIA, OWNED AND CONTROLLED BY SUBSCRIBERS. You will never completely reform our current media - it serves to "manufacture consent" for policies already decided by elites. I tip my hat to those trying for a total reform, but at the same time, I ask them to remain realistic.

It's now more than 5 years since 911, and AFAIK, the collapse of WTC 7 has still not been seen on American television. Does that not tell us anything?

It's techinically possible to bypass our media. My boilerplate:

>> Putting the NY Times Out of Business <<
Proposal to replace ALL corrupt media

I have posted a proposal on the Randi Rhodes show forum for replacing our current media with a new, sustainable media that facilitates the selection of "filtering agents". You can think of these as honest gatekeepers that YOU trust - and that keep out trivial information, rather than very important information that groups with economic and other hidden agendas prefer to hide from you.

Broadband access is now up to 42% in the US, so it is quite possible to target TELEVISION, which is how about 48% of Americans get 30+ minutes of news per day (as opposed to only about 9% over the internet). See http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=282

The thread is entitled: "Putting the NY Times Out of Business"
The thread is subtitled: "Proposal to replace ALL corrupt media"



Good call.

Mention that Brzezinski, REPUBLICAN Congressman Ron Paul, and former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury Paul Craig Roberts for Reagan are all warning about a false flag contrived event.

Good suggestions

The points raised in your two posts (Brzezinsky's and Paul's warnings, etc) above would be well worth mentioning.

The anthrax attacks? (after it turned out that they were an inside job)

And what about the rising suspicions - by the world-renowned war correspondent Robert Fisk, among others - that the suicide bombings in Iraq are actually false flag operations?


collapse of WTC7 on TV

Actually, I've been told that the WTC7 collapse was shown once or twice on Sept. 11, before falling into George Orwell's Black Hole of Censorship.

The point remains that the media is highly manipulated, and the manipulation is obviously designed to portray an image of America that obscures how power really works, that continually reinforces the notion that we are good and others bad (no matter what crimes the US perpetrates against them) and to what depraved depths the real wielders of power will go to implement their agendas. Including killing them and getting them addicted to drugs.

So, perhaps dz will do best to direct Seder's audience to 911blogger.com, where continuing 911 news appears, and in so doing outdoes the multi-billion dollar media industry.

Frankly, perhaps only for the not-so-noble purpose of entertainment, I'd prefer that the left gatekeepers be queried primarily about left gatekeeping, and only secondarily about 911. Some of them merely are afraid of losing credibility, others are afraid of losing their jobs, and some work directly for the Dark Side of the Force.

We might be able to glean which of these cases applies to individual gatekeepers if we pop the right questions.

As you mention the lack of 9/11

Truth coverage in the MSM and the 'controlled press' the one thing that I would mention that I think would be more beneficial than stating any 9/11 facts in a 60 second time period would be simply to ask the listeners to simply go to Google Video and search for "9/11 Truth". This will open thousands of listeners up to the many 9/11 documentaries that have been created.

Afterall, the internet is why so many people have become aware of the truth behind 9/11. Use this to your best advantage.

"A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves" – Edward R. Murrow

Air America Blurb.

Maybe go after it by pointing out the historical stories that the Media (progressive or otherwise) have failed to get right. And then tie that in with why it is important to cover 9/11. For instance.

The Reichstag building in Germany.
The Gulf of Tonkin.

These stories were the precepts for war, but only found out to be false much later after the fact. Due to this history of misreporting events leading up to war, we should take extra effort to report on 9/11.

That is all I can think of dz. I trust that you will do a damn good job and no matter what.. it is just great that we have a minute on Air America. We can't screw it up. Put out your views with confidence and the rest will take care of itself. Peace bro. And thanks and congrats and all that. Keep us posted.

What Possible Value Could That Have?

If people think we're all a bunch of nutcases, then they will be grateful the "gatekeepers" aren't letting us through.

I don't know what reaction you are trying to elicit, but I can tell you what reaction you will get.

You will cast 911 truthers as unreasonable, and shrill.

Why? Because, unless people believe that we are credible, and accept our contention that 911 was an inside job, they will see our exclusion as being warranted.

What you should be doing is using you 60 seconds to acheive three basic objectives.

1. Make it clear that you are not crazy by seperating yourself from the crackpot theories like holograms and space beams.

2. Cast yourself and us as sincere rational Americans who are merely trying to get to the bottom of 911.

3. Use your remaining 40 seconds to present a synopsis of the most rock solid, credible evidense you know of for why the official story is wrong.

As I said in my extended comment below, you should see your statement as a response to the criticism that is already floating around. The plebes have been misinformed, not only by the government, but by their fellow plebes.

You have to approach it with humility and understanding of just how hard this is for people.

"Look, I know you guys think we're crazy, but there are some serious things that don't add up." And cite off about 5, bam, bam, bam, bam, bam.

When enough people start to come around, then going after the gatekeepers will be effective.

But if you have to get a jab in, save it for the last sentence. If your presentation seems credible, and makes people think, then you can say, "look, we think this subject is important enough to be discussed, and we feel like real, thoughtful progressives should have the courage to seek the truth, no matter how painful it may be.

You see? Know what your audience is thinking, and then move it down the road. Not too fast, or they'll jump off.

I second that

I agree Metalious, thats exactly the best way to proceed.
We must firstly answer some of the cowardly and spurious attacks that the recent msm rhetoric has put out there to dissuade newcomers. We need to say that believing these theories is not something done out of some psychological desire for self deception so we feel good. It DOESNT feel good, but it is the responsible thing to do, to take responsibility for our opinions and not have them formulated out of lies, so that when we open our mouths, it isnt something we later regret. I know how poor I feel when I realise I have spoken out in ignorance; very sorry and never again.
So our motives are right and honest.

Why talk about what you disagree with

2 and 3 are great, but I disagree with 1. Why bring up a theory you think is discrediting? Other than in the British press, and because of Shayler, I've seen little if any coverage of holograms. The "space beams" argument also seems like an inside dispute. Why separate yourself from something that is not in people's minds -- aren't you just putting it there?

Why not go with what people agree on, which I hope will include controlled demolition in a general sense, without speculation as to the exact mechanism of destruction. We all agree that the official NIST story cannot be true - is that not enough? Once people understand that, they are not going to be put off by a "space beam" theory, however absurd they think it is, because they will know that some explanation is required.

Mention this:

Mention this:

Top 25 Censored Stories of 2007 by Project Censored
#18 Physicist Challenges Official 9-11 Story
“Research into the events of September 11 by Brigham Young University physics professor, Steven E. Jones, concludes that the official explanation for the collapse of the World Trade Center (WTC) buildings is implausible according to laws of physics. Jones is calling for an independent, international scientific investigation “guided not by politicized notions and constraints but rather by observations and calculations.”


“We're an empire now, and when we act we create our own reality."

All the eggs in one basket.

Too many people obsess over the trade center demolition theory. There is a world of evidence that doesn't rely on convincing people there were bombs in the buildings (which if they don't believe by now, they probably won't be convinced in 60 seconds of talk).

There should be a script prepared -- perhaps posted here for comment and input by the experts. That way you can touch on the full spectrum of 9/11 without getting caught on any one argument that may not interest people.

70 Disturbing Facts About 9/11

John Doraemi publishes Crimes of the State Blog

johndoraemi --at-- yahoo.com.

I disagree

You are missing the point.

Steven Jones has physical evidence. This is enough to start a criminal investigation. We don't need any more proof.  In my opinion this evidence can't be disproved.  It's impossible.  It's a slam dunk. 

There is no other possible explanation for more than 4 months of molten steel.  The molten steel can't be disproven either because it's in the FEMA report. 

The media has ignored it. I'm saying: Let's make them pay attention.

And contrary to what you say he is not an easy target. People who attack him often come across as morons... or worse.

Why do you think they are so afraid of Steven Jones? 

I'm not saying promote only Steven Jones.  I'm saying he has given us the strongest case for a new investigation.  Therefore it is worth mentioning the Project censored story.    

The fact that this story is being censored should wake some people up.

“We're an empire now, and when we act we create our own reality."

Has Mr. Jones published his

Has Mr. Jones published his findings on the steel samples in a peer reviewed scientific journal (somewhere other than the Journal he edits). Has he published his findings on the steel samples at all?

I agree that his studies could provide some very substantial proof of US complicity, but unless his finidings have been made public and have been duplicated Steven Jones' work doesn't amount to proof. Perhaps it will in the future, but we HAVE TO BE CAREFUL and not make false claims.

That's Dr. Jones to you,


Dr. Steven Jones

submitted his first paper for review. It was reviewed by five PhD's, three of them PhD's in physics.

They have been trying to get a general scientific journal, like Science to publish it.

Dr. Jones is working on a second paper which he intends to submit for peer review and publication, as well.

We should all relax, let the man do his research and keep in mind that he has a family, too. (not just us)

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


Why Indeed Did the World Trade Center Buildings Completely Collapse?

It would be a huge victory for the 9/11 truth movement if he could get this published in a major journal. However...

An argument is not proved or disproved based on which journals it is published in... that is a "call to authority"—a logical fallacy.

But it would give major credibility to the 9/11 truth movement.

I'd like to know why it hasn't been published in an "official" journal yet. Has he tried? Does anyone know more details about this?

“We're an empire now, and when we act we create our own reality."

Stephen E Jones

.. is an easy target. A Mormon; a supporter of cold fusion, which has been in scientific limbo for 18 years since Fleischman & Pons failed to convince their peers; his former co-chair Fetzer now discredited.

Far better to go with the victims' families who aren't satisfied with the whitewash of the first 911 commission.



I really don't think the "wackos" are that big of a deal. My opinion is that millions more Americans believe 911 was an inside job than dare admit to it. Comfortable middle-class way of life is at stake. One of my instructor's this morning said how she wouldn't want an impeachment of Bush because of the disruption it would cause-she's in her early-mid 50s. My mother doesn't believe the truth, she couldn't handle believing that governments, esp. that of "The Land of the Free", could be evil. I think most college students couldn't give a lesser shit about 3,000 dead (and growing) New Yorkers, they got papers due and got to get a piece of ass on Fri. night. I mentioned in class that maybe some of you ( my mostly zombie fellow students) would take war a little more seriously if there was a draft. No comments, in their pie-hole and out there arses. Not a lot of non-grey hair when our local Truth group gets together.

Nice, respectful to mention the responders, but that doesn't accomplish the efficient goal of getting the TRUTH through people's thick skulls in 60 seconds.

Somebody, if you're on one of those shows, ask them quietly if they "really believe the governments story", and wait for the "pause" that gives away their thoughts!There's fear of the consequences of the Truth, hate to be so elitist but we Truthers are the balls of the country, I mean that in the best way!!!


I think the wackos are a big deal and they destroy credibility. Mark my words now, the tide will turn against us if this sort of thing continues.... there has just been a flurry of hit pieces, expect more. All of our evidence has to be rock solid and completely understandable to the averyage layperson or it works against us. No more holograms and photon torpedos.









Here's what you do...

You hire one of those fast-talking voice-over guys to read as many questions as possible.  Let him rattle off so many that it boggles the mind and grabs attention.  Then end it with something like "and who told Rudy Giuliani the building was about to collapse?" or "why did NIST change their story 5 times about building 7?" or "Why has NORAD changed their story 3 times about the apparent stand-down?" or "who benefited?" or "Why didn't the 9/11 Commission think it was important to follow the money trail?"

DON"T just stick an intellectual on to sound scholarly.  Nothing against the Stephen Jones type, but you've only got 60 seconds.  Find an MTV-type spot producer to put something together that's fast and compelling.

OK, the fast talking idea may be lame, but 60 seconds is not a lot of time.  We must be clever.  Produce it like a Superbowl commercial so it grabs attention and demands answers. 

Another idea: An announcer's voice comes on and says, "Eyewitness testimony from the first responders of 9/11" and then play the audio from a bunch of the clips we've all seen here on 911Blogger.com that talk about explosions as well as building 7.  As the clips play they speed up as an indication that there are so many we have to speed up the tape to fit them in.  Then it slows down to normal speed to ask a few remaining - and very damning - questions (as above).  Maybe the final question should be - " why did the governement do everything in its power to prevent the release of these clips?"

I feel strongly this should be compelling – and it should end with a knockout punch.

Also, no theories, just questions!

I am not a writer, but I would be happy to produce/edit the spot in my recording studio.   

I like Ken's idea!

The "Another idea:" part! Then at the end, have a 911 victim's family member say something like "Why can't I find out the truth about my loved one's demise?"
Maybe too emotional?
It needs to be something that grabs your attention for sure!
Good luck!


it should be emotionally compelling IMO.

Very good suggestion, I know

Very good suggestion, I know the perfect clip. Bob McIlvaine at the end of this CBC special:

Great suggestion.

make it practical

Some anti-war folks just don't see how investigating 9-11 helps end the war. They see it as a distraction. I hope you can make the case that the only way regain credibility and reaffirm our Constitution, is to apply the justice system to 9-11. If we don't do that, we will continue the cycle of illegitimate wars and black ops and shadow government and the military industry ruling our every day lives.

But whatever you do, I hope you do not speculate. If you mention evidence of explosions, don't say that means CD. Say it means cover up because the administration never looked at the evidence. Norman Mineta's testimony doesn't mean stand down, it means cover up because it wasn't included in the report. Allow the listener to reach their own speculative conclusions. Even if they are obvious.

That's my 4 cents.

Justice deferred is justice denied-MLK

Simpler Approach

I suggest driving home one main idea in your one minute.
To focus on a lot will be a distraction in my opinion.

The single card that can be pulled. To bring down the whole house of cards. Is the official story doesn't obey the laws of physics. Anything else can be twisted and turned.

Why isn't that fact addressed in the MSM or KOS?

Drive home that point over and over and over. Good TV commericals have simple messages.

Having a professional speaker is a good idea to deliver the message.

“it is possible to fool all the people all the time—when government and press cooperate.” George Seldes - "legendary investigative reporter"

Craft it

I picked out these quotes from Ken's post: "Produce it like a Superbowl commercial..." and "Also, no theories, just questions!"

Congrats dz, it's great to

Congrats dz, it's great to see another massive step for the movement.

My own opinion, for what it's worth, would be to suggest (whatever of the mountain of evidence you choose to pull from) to think of it as a court case, meaning;-

Only use information that will stand up in a court of law.

 Also use mainsteam news sources to back up your case.Very best of luck.

here is a quick attempt.. it

here is a quick attempt.. it can be read in just under a minute.. i would consider doing a press release of this as well to coincide with the airtime..

An Open Letter to the So Called Progressive Media

Why is it that the so called 'progressive movement' are so afraid to discuss 9/11? Why is it that they allow this administration to use 9/11 to justify their opinions, but any mention of the many valid questions surrounding 9/11 is deemed unacceptable? Why is it that major players in the progressive media provide no voice to the growing 9/11 community?

How 'progressive' is any news outlet that doesn't mention 9/11 family members fighting for declassification of 9/11 related materials, or 9/11 family members holding press conferences calling for a new investigation, or 9/11 family members calling the 9/11 commission report a 'hollow failure', or 9/11 family members releasing a movie named '9/11: Press for Truth' which is begging for progressive media to finally cover their story, or a recent NYTimes poll stating only 16% of Americans believe we are being told the whole truth about 9/11? How can any news outlet claim to be 'progressive' while avoiding these stories and others?

Demand your progressive media to discuss 9/11, for them to stop pretending that activists for a new 9/11 investigation are inferior to other progressives or that somehow 9/11 is the ONLY subject the Bush administration has NOT lied about. Stop being scared of the conspiracy label, stop mimicking the mainstream press in fearing to discuss the hard subjects, and help support progressive media who aren't afraid to discuss the turning point of modern day history and the basis for the fraud that is the 'War on Terror'.

Visit patriotsquestion911.com to see all of the great American patriots who aren't afraid to ask questions about 9/11, and visit 911blogger.com to stay on top of 9/11 related news.

I'm thinking that any sort of argument or presentation of current best evidence should come by way of mentioning a web URL for people to visit for a good current summary of our top information, or by putting a link to such info on the top of our page when the ad runs..

so.. based on that idea, what websites could/should we refer people to for a quick and easy briefing on the evidence? or, should we just list a few topics to research at the end? or perhaps just suggest a few books or movies on google video or netflix?

thanks for the opinions so far!

Show "that sux you need to give" by GODZILLA

I like it so far, especially

I like it so far, especially the part about why does the progressive media give the Bush administration a pass on 9/11 when it constantly brings up all of its lies in any other subject, before, and after 9/11.

sixty second blast

There are a lot of great ideas here. I like this (above)suggestion because it asks questions rather than making suggestions. Intelligent people don't like to be preached to, they need to reach their own conclusions. One more suggestion. Don't overwhelm the listener with too much info. Even intelligent people c\an get information overload. Keep it simple succint and thought provoking.
PS Maybe you could recruit some help from the White House propaganda spinners. After all they are servants of the American people and they are the best at their craft. ;)

Tell the Story.

Phaedrus might be right about information overload. Maybe just make a flat out emotional appeal for people in the progressive movement to start paying attention to the requests of the "Jersey Girls" Widows of 9/11, Press For Truth. I mean as an American I think it is appalling that we are ignoring our own citizens who suffered the biggest losses on 9/11. It is like the soldiers who fight for us and we ignore their medical needs when they come home. Disgusting and a great entry point for people just coming into the 9/11 movement. ??

Emotional Appeal vs. Information Pushing.


Friend, IMO, this is it, dz. You got it.

As for websites, I feel very good about http://911review.com/ There are of course others that you can rely on. If you mention 911review.com it is also necessary (alas!) to mention AGAINST the disseminating website set up to mimic it, 911review.org.

Editing suggestions

I think your text is making the right points for a 60-second intro spot. I have some suggestions as to tone and rhetoric. Keep in mind that diplomacy is often war, by other means. If your logic is invincible, then diplomatic (but crisp!) language is a sign of strength.

Remember, most audience members probably think as you do. And yet they listen to AAR and label themselves as progressives.

I believe you have an error: the opinion poll you cite was not by the NY Times, but Scripp-Howard.

Now I might pick a different site to recommend, if I were doing it, but this is your minute.

So here's my re-edit (I actually get paid to do this kind of stuff). You'll see the content is the same, except for what seem like logical additions ((in double brackets)).

No title, to save time. Your version is 287 words. If you read it with proper emphasis, it will probably take more than a minute! I think you can cut the second-to-last paragraph and lose relatively little.

The following version, without the parts in brackets, is 260 words (with brackets: 340).


Certain voices in the progressive movement seem to fear any discussion of September 11th. Why? This administration always uses 9/11 to justify its policies. Why would progressives want to suppress legitimate questions about it? Why is the growing 9/11 truth community allowed so little time to present its own case, and let the audience decide?

((The 9/11 Commission Report is based on secret evidence.)) ((All anomalies about the day are attributed to incompetence, but not one official has ever been held accountable for their supposed failures.)) ((Acts of perjury were committed by the likes of Condoleezza Rice.))

Relatives of September 11th victims are leading the fight for accountability, for transparency, for disclosure and declassification. They have called for a new investigation. Isn't that a story that progressive radio should cover?

The same families who once lobbied for the 9/11 Commission now dismiss its report as a 'hollow failure.' In the movie, '9/11: Press for Truth,' they practically beg progressive media to give their questions the treatment they deserve: As a subject of investigative journalism.

A Scripps-Howard poll found that only 16 percent of Americans believe we have been told the whole truth about 9/11.

How can a 'progressive' news outlet avoid these stories? You, the audience can demand that your media address 9/11. Those who fight for a new investigation are not inferior to other progressives. It's time to stop fearing the "conspiracy" label - the official story itself is a "conspiracy theory." It's time to drop the fairy tale that by some magic, 9/11 is the ONLY subject that the Bush administration has NOT lied about.

((Don't let the mainstream press set the agenda. You can support the media who aren't afraid to take on the turning point of modern-day history and the basis for the fraud that is the 'War on Terror'.))

Visit patriotsquestion911.com to learn about the great American patriots - pilots and scientists, professors and government officials - who aren't afraid to ask questions about 9/11. Visit 911blogger.com to stay on top of 9/11 related news.

"Truth is not measured in mass appeal."


I like it. well done.

Don't Use the One Minute to Reply to the Kos Types

You only have one minute, so use it to speak to the common people, not to attempt to reply to the DailyKos type of controlled "left."

Like lalo said above, lay out some hardcore facts in Alex Jones-style rappid fire, and then offer some good documentation websites for people to learn more for free.

For example, mention the yellow-hot molten metal seen cascading off of the South Tower right before it collapses, which proves a thermite-like incendiary was used, as it cannot be created from burning jet fuel, office materials, or building materials.

Mention that quite a number of the supposed 9/11 hijackers were trained on U.S. military bases and had their legal residences on U.S. military bases. For massive amounts of documentation on that, see my below article:

"9/11 'Hijackers' Trained on U.S. Military Bases," August 12, 2006 http://www.armleg.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=58&mforum=libertyandtruth

Below are more facts that one can mention:

- The PNAC document in 2000 calling for "a new Pearl Harbor" as a pretext for Middle-East domination.

- The fact that the October 2001 Afghanistan invasion was planned months beforehand (thus, the U.S. government was certain months before the 9/11 attacks that a pretext would present itself allowing the U.S. government to invade Afghanistan, and lo and behold such a pretext arrives right on time).

- The fact that the supposed hijackers weren't Muslim extremists but did cocaine, hired prostitutes, drank alcohol, partied hard, etc.

- The fact that the supposed hijackers apparently knew that they had protection from the highest levels of the U.S. government and repeatedly went out of their way to draw attention to themselves as crazed, potential terrorists, as if to build a "legend" back-story.

- The fact that the many FBI agents attempting to invastigate these supposed hijackers were repeatedly and consistently blocked and ordered not to investigate these supposed hijackers, despite forceful protestations from said FBI agents that terrorist attacks were going to happen.

- The fact that U.S. government agents who tried to investigate the supposed hijackers were persecuted yet those in the government who blocked the investigations were promoted and given bonuses.

- The fact that many of these FBI agents went to David Schippers, the former Chief Council for the House Judiciary Committee, informing him (in an attempt to try and get something done) months in advance of the 9/11 attacks about the planned attacks and that they were threatened with the National Security Act not to pursue their cases and not to talk about them.

- The fact that David Schippers tried to get high-level functionaries (such as John Ashcroft) in the U.S. government to listen to him but they weren't interested.

- The fact that Osama bin Laden is a protected CIA asset and that before the 9/11 attacks a number of governments offered to arrest Osama and turn him over to the U.S. government but every time the U.S. government wasn't interested, despite the fact that he was supposedly wanted in connection to a number of previous terrorist attacks.

- The fact that the U.S. government worked with, supplied and used Osama's al-Qaeda terrorist network against the Serbian government all the way up into at least 1998, despite the fact that Osama was supposedly wanted in connection to a number of previous terrorist attacks.

And the list of such facts documented by the mainstream major media news articles and in primary documentation (such as the PNAC report) go on and on and on. The above is barely even scratching the surface on such facts as can be found in the mainstream public record.

For massive amounts of documentation on the above see the below:

The below post by me contains the November 10, 2003 article "September 11--Islamic Jihad or Another Northwoods?" by Tim Howells, Ph.D., which is a very good, short introduction to just some of the more damning mainstream major media articles and U.S. government primary documentation which proves up one side and down the other that the 9/11 attacks and the following anthrax attacks were a Hegelian dialectical PsyOp staged by the U.S. government as a pretext in order to obtain more power and control. I append my own additional endnotes at the conclusion of Dr. Howells' article, in order to add further mainstream documentation.

From: James Redford
Newsgroups: soc.college,alt.education,alt.education.alternative,alt.education.research,misc.education
Subject: The U.S. Government Staged the 9/11 Attacks
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 13:49:56 GMT

And see the below article by me:

"Documentation on Government-Staged Terrorism," September 30, 2005 http://www.armleg.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2&mforum=libertyandtruth
"Terrorism is the health of the State."--James Redford, author of "Jesus Is an Anarchist," June 1, 2006 http://praxeology.net/anarchist-jesus.pdf

i am not sure that any rant

i am not sure that any rant of facts in 60 seconds will do anything but come off sounding crazy and be blown off without a thought.. likewise im not sure anything i could say about specific evidence would appease everyone - there just isnt enough time to mention everything related to 9/11.. and proving anything related to 9/11 in 60 seconds is pretty impossible..

seems to me the goal should be to try to get people to start doing research, to realize there is a coverup, and to stop allowing other progressives to ignore 9/11.. to spark discussions, or at least a desire for discussions, of 9/11.. because they never talk about it at all..

it cant be held against

it cant be held against you....
that you were thinking in terms of
one successful website vs another

it must be a real gas for you to have gotten 911blogger going----and you have these awesome moments---and you think about all those other sites whose ass that you totally kick
this is a great opportunity to lay down the wtc7

Mentioning WTC 7 Would be Good

Yes, GODZILLA, mentioning World Trade Center building 7 would also be good. Something along the lines of "World Trade Center Tower number 7 collapsed, yet no plane hit it."

"Terrorism is the health of the State."--James Redford, author of "Jesus Is an Anarchist," June 1, 2006 http://praxeology.net/anarchist-jesus.pdf

Hence Mentioning Good, Free Documentation Websites

The point in doing so (i.e., lalo's and my recommendation on this matter) isn't to instantly win everyone over as converts to the objective facts. The point is to get them thinking and to provide some good websites where people can find out more for themselves for free.

Nor does one have to "rant." Speak in a calm but authoritative voice, yet don't take forever to read out a sentence. One can get out quite a bit in one minute if one is a fairly good speaker.

"Terrorism is the health of the State."--James Redford, author of "Jesus Is an Anarchist," June 1, 2006 http://praxeology.net/anarchist-jesus.pdf

what you are doing right

what you are doing right now.....in american history is as cool as being editor for any famous paper

this is going to be remembered by journalism students in the future as the most awesome example

you are ALREADY at coolness---you dont have to justify yourself in comparison to daily kos or anything like that

which brings me to my next point------alot of people in 911truth are such nice people that sometimes it makes me worry a little bit

you've got to realize------the ball is in YOUR court-----youre the one thats gonna be bragging about this era in time when youre old------youre the hero

theyre the bitchasses-------you dont have to prove shit


BE------"THE SHIT"
think about how you would like to remember it in the future when youre daydreaming about how cool the 911truth movement was


Simplicity-a short, well spoken, reasoned rant.

I would state that the 9/11Truth movement is growing each day as more people are exposed to the evidence behind the crime and subsequent coverup.
-The 9/11 event has brought on a weakening of our Constitution and Bill of Rights.
-The 9/11 event has shown our leadership to be a pack of liars, our country a nation of vicious aggressors. The world is losing faith in us because of our poor leadership, and the continual manipulation of the media.
-The 9/11 event has divided our country.
-The 9/11 Truth movement can reverse this trend once the real story of this crime is exposed, accountability is restored, and our leadership understands the seriousness of this crime of aggression. Without a government we can trust, there is no United States of America. The Truth will restore faith in our institutions one step at a time.

How quickly we forget

Yeah, it is a bit of a problem that they can just reply to allegations of gatekeeping by saying "We don't agree with your theories and will air the stories as we see fit." Much like the interview with Guy Smith.

It was the omissions that were the most persuasive showing of bias in that interview, not the direct accusation of bias. This case is different because the gatekeepers didn't even cover the 9/11 truth movement, but it still needs to focus on compelling stories and facts that were omitted.

You gain listeners not by telling them that they've missed something, but by showing them what they've missed, so they can research it themselves and prove to themselves that the gatekeepers are not doing their jobs.

But you need to avoid the cliche, and tell them something they probably haven't heard before, so they can't just dismiss it as "that thing that is spreading around the internet."

My 60 seconds on Air America


The Spanish Government investigated the Madrid train bombings for three years before prosecuting the crimes.

The US Government investigated the 9/11 attacks for less than two months before invading Afghanistan.

Now the FBI admits that they don't know who the 9/11 hijackers were and that they have no evidence connecting Osama bin Laden to 9/11.

Isn't it time we had a real investigation?

9/11 is the largest crime to occur on American soil. Nearly 3,000 people from 80 countries died that day and two wars were started in its name.

Isn't it time we had a real investigation?

The World Trade Center was destroyed and the city of New York was poisoned with toxic dust and we still don't know who did it.

America, it's time we had a real investigation into 9/11.

Contact your Congressperson and Senators and demand a new investigation into 9/11.


I could tweak it endlessly, but that's about it, I think.

Do we want to plug 911 blogger or 911 truth.org?

The choice of voice is always important, perhaps a voice like Sophia's on 9/11 Mysteries would be best.

I hope that you're all well.

The madness in AZ is coming up soon.

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

If I had to choose three

If I had to choose three pieces of evidence they would be (a) WTC7 (b) molten steel (c) War game "simulations" of hijacked plains flying into buildings. These are all taboo subjects amongst the DU crowd, however, so you may want to soft-ball them instead.

I iike LeftWright's intro. I also like your initial piece. I would not recommend the rapid fire approach. Calm and collected is the way to go.

Focussing purely on the evidence would be a mistake. So would an attack on the gatekeepers, no matter how warranted. The important thing is to reach out to the wishy-washy liberals; that means appealing to them in the name of truth and justice and the wishes of the family members.

Stress that 911 truth is the defining issue of our time and needs to be addressed; it can no longer be ignored, censored, ridiculed or attacked. Time to open the gates. Poll numbers are good. An appeal to authority might help; you could even begin with a quote by some former CIA official.

I definitely WOULD plug 911 blogger. It's ultimately about activism and people need to have a meeting place.

The Eleventh Day of Every Month

don't use this

sorry, but the largest crime ever committed on American soil was the Native American Holocaust.


LeftWright going in the right direction

Forget about all these labels -- "progressive" media, "conservative" media, "liberal" media -- it's all meaningless.

Forget about physical evidence. Molten steel and all that crap. It's not going to translate.

The focus of "Isn't it time we had a real investigation?" I believe is the way to go. And I belive the best way to frame it is in terms of the ignored warnings pre-9/11 and the stonewalled investigation post-9/11.

Specifically, I would point out that both Dick Cheney and George Bush personally implored then-Senate majority leader Tom Daschle NOT to investigate 9/11.

"Why NOT electromagnets, Ms. Bo Peep?"
--Lester Ginn, Therein Lies the Problem

"Pull it" is only evidence that you guys don't think very well.

I've done this topic to death, enough to raise "reasonable doubt." That's a concept you should look up.

It's enough that Jim Fetzer is running the movement over a cliff on BBC. Must you guys stick your heads up your asses with every media exposure opportunity?

70 Disturbing Facts About 9/11

John Doraemi publishes Crimes of the State Blog

johndoraemi --at-- yahoo.com.

Do not try to convince them, get them curious

Hey dz, this could be huge. The key is to keep it simple and on message. Trying to cram in evidence is definately not the way to go, as people will just tune it out and dismiss you as a CT. In addition it has always been my experience that you can't make a believer out of someone just by talking facts to them. You must get them personally interested in this and for them to investigate it for themselves. That should be your focus, get people interested in 9/11 Truth without immediately turning them off with "fantastic claims", ie demolitions (no matter how well researched they are to us, to non truthers these are tinfoil and automatically ignored) These are the critical points to get accross:

1. Many family members are fevereshily lobbying for a new investigation, that over 70% of their questions weren't answered by the commision and that they believe the 9/11 Commision was a hollow failure.

2. So many unanswered questions from that day that have yet to be answered directly including over a dozen specific warning of hijacked aircraft at the WTC, the ever shifting story of NORAD in explaining its failure to protect America, and the implosion (FEMA's term!) of the 47 story tall WTC 7 building in less than 7 seconds and even to this date there has been no definative explanation for it (do NOT mention the "pull it" statement, which has nothing to do with this)

3. Join us in pressing for a new investigation to get the answers, for both the victims of that terrible day and those who continue to die in its name.

Then give links for 9/11 Press for Truth (mention it is free on Google Video), stj911.org (New scholars site), wtc7.net, and 911blogger so that they can get more information.

This is a rough outline but these are the key points to get across. We need to legitmize 9/11 Truth in the eyes of everday people, and destigmatize questioning the event, that is our number 1 goal right now.

Show "hi....my name is" by GODZILLA

A few thoughts

Decide on your tone; somewhere between the dispassionate, monotone rationality of Paul Thompson and the high energy of Alex Jones. Ultimately a dignified and rational style.

Explain briefly the critical thinking, focus on the evidence approach, typical of the strongest Truth advocates and evident in the main strand of 911Blogger.

Make a request that people attempt to answer the relevant questions rationally; to challenge their assumptions, and not try to attack the posers of the questions. To focus in good faith on the issues and evidence that have great merit in themselves.

Keep the evidence simply stated. Point to only three examples, ones readily visualized by a lazy or biased mind. Frame these examples with a nuanced rhetorical spin that demands critical thinking be applied.

i think it should be something like...

I think 911 needs to be investigated because...

then 1 sentence answers from a variety of people.

and by answers i mean questions.

something like that.

911dvds@gmail.com - $1 DVDs shipped - email for info

something like...

Bush's 'let us never tolerate....away from the guilty' bit

Then an assertive retort, asking questions.

like... (different people asking)

Who is responsible for the attacks of September 11th?

What evidence is there to prove it?

When will the entire 911 Commission Report be declassified?

Where was the accountability for the failures featured in the report?

Why was this administration so hesitant to investigate 9/11 yet so anxious to punish those who were not responsible?

How was the air in New York deemed 'safe to breathe' when it was, in fact, not?

Questions are not Conspiracy Theories.

Learn more at 911Blogger.com and 911facts.net

I just threw 1 question for each who what when where why and how, as an example.

911dvds@gmail.com - $1 DVDs shipped - email for info

Best introductory website to mention


because it relies on credentials, government and academic

Show "Why do I bother with these morons?" by murph

Why indeed do you bother with us morons?

Murph, this is quite a rant you have sent in. It is also off-topic, don't you agree?

This quote about the Pop. Mech. debunking article looks odd to me, where you say that it "ripped the demolition theories apart..."

Did Popular Mechanics explain the near-free-fall speed feature of the the collapses? The molten metal spilling out of the towers? The collapses into their footpriints, a difficult task for demolition experts to manage? The molten metal underground six weeks after 9-11? And how on earth 33 ton pieces (I think it was; big pieces) of steel girder would be tossed laterally for 400 ft., so as to crash into bldg. 7?

You have a lot to learn, Student.

Students usually learn to do research on their own. If you had read the book, you wouldn't be here asking those questions already answered.

That is just one of many reasons the 9/11 Truth Movement is biting the dust.

9/11 Daily Debunker
"Chronicling the irrational thinking and myths of the "9/11 Truth Movement" and its lemming-like march to self-destruction."

My two cents...

Dear Media,

Within the last few months, you've given a lot of attention to the 9/11 Truth Movement. In rare circumstances, we've even gotten a "fair shake."

However, your guests have consisted of Dylan Avery, Corey Rowe, Jason Bermas, James Fetzer, Kevin Barrett, Dave Von Kleist, Charlie Sheen, Alex Jones, Dr. Robert Bowman, Michael Berger, Paul Thompson and Dr. David Ray Griffin.

We don't know if you're aware or not (you haven't reported on it), but the original members of the 9/11 Truth Movement have been busy as of late.

On August 4th, 2006, 9/11 family members Lorie Van Auken, Patty Casazza, Mindy Kleinberg, and Monica Gabrielle released a statement that questioned the "entire veracity" of the 9/11 Commission's report.

On September 5th, 2006, a documentary endorsed by the families that fought for the creation of the 9/11 Commission was released entitled, "9/11: Press For Truth."

On September 11th, 2006, at the National Press Club in Washington D.C., family members Donna Marsh O'Connor, Michelle Little, and Christina Kminek asked for, "a new investigation into the events of September 11th, and this time, a truly bipartisan, global, with families invested from the beginning, middle, and throughout the end."

On October 14th, 2006, Monica Gabrielle, Lorie Van Auken, Mindy Kleinberg, and Patty Casazza released a petition that calls for, "the immediate declassification and release of all transcripts and documents relating to the July 10, 2001 meeting that took place between former CIA Director George Tenet and then National Security Advisor, Condoleezza Rice" as well as "the declassification and release of both the redacted 28 pages of the Joint Inquiry Into The Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001 (JICI) and the CIA Inspector General’s report, "CIA Accountability With Respect To The 9/11 Attacks". In the span of three days, they've managed to get 2041 signatures.

Considering all of the nice publicity you gave to Ann Coulter, don't you think it's time you started giving OTHER members of the 9/11 Truth Movement a "fair shake?"

We do. You have been challenged.


The 9/11 Truth Movement

"So where is the oil going to come from?... The Middle East, with two-thirds of the world's oil and the lowest cost, is still where the prize ultimately lies."

Richard Cheney - Chief Executive Of Halliburton

Show "Time better spent" by murph

your intent is sound

but I think it's too long, and it contains far too many names. I think we need to repeat an idea, not confuse the issue with a list of names.

The talking points should contain "9/11 families" and "first responders," but not lists of their names.

I would also avoid endorsing specific people within the 9/11 Truth Movement. That idea (and intramural turf war) is too complex for a 60 second spot directed at people who are not familiar with the issues.

Focus on something "progressives" understand: Bush & Co. are liars.


Verbatim... that's already an old article. However it talks about what I think are important. dz's got the idea.

"So where is the oil going to come from?... The Middle East, with two-thirds of the world's oil and the lowest cost, is still where the prize ultimately lies."

Richard Cheney - Chief Executive Of Halliburton

If You mention victims names, don't forget Ellen Mariani

Thats up to you dz, but reading Ellens open letter to Bush is a good one. I think it would give some insight about how you would like to proceed with your 1 single minute. You will come up with what feels right, just don't drive yourself crazy. There are a lot of good suggestions from the bloggers here.
Ellen's letter is here; www.scoop.co.nz/stories/WO0311/S00262.htm

Gratz for winning this!

Whatever is said should not force the target audience into the defense. Why not illustrate some glaring absurdities and get them thinking?

Point out that 9/11 truth had to actually buy airtime to be granted a voice, and expand slightly on that - Is it symptomatic for our media? Is it desirable for a democratic system? Should money get to decide who will be heard? Isn't asking questions part of responsible citizenship?

Point out there are still hundreds of important unanswered questions asked by hundreds of reputable people - that NIST refuses public debate, denies facts and doesn't even offer any halfway plausible explanation for the events up to this day. That suppression, either by censorship or ridicule, is their only answer, which includes not only the government, but the media as well.

Maybe bring in that Chomsky quote about gatekeeping:

"The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum - even encourage the more critical and dissident views. That gives people the sense that there's free thinking going on, while all the time the presuppositions of the system are being reinforced by the limits put on the range of the debate."

Maybe also emphasize the pivotal role of 9/11, it being the foundation of basically everything the left dares to protest.

Ignotas nulla curatio morbid - do not attempt to cure what you do not understand

But don't just machinegun them with facts...

I applaud this community..

for the patience and time you are taking to get this right. Bruce's first two paragraphs fit in perfectly with the message we want to send. They would complement the origional open letter by dz very well.
Slow and calm would be the best. People who have not asked questions to this point will be defensive and will want to find a reason to keep their heads in the sand. IMO, the families and first responders are the only things that will not get attacked and their exclusion by the media has the potential to anger both sides.
Thank you again for your time.


My advice would be: 1) Don't say anything to upset anyone. Like someone posted earlier, that'll just put Mr. Seder on the defensive and get us nowhere. 2) Try to make it as clear and to the point as possible. No need to try and solve the mystery of 911 in one minute, only raise awarness. I would totally plug some websites...911blogger, 911truth, st911 etc... When is this supposed to air?

A 1 minute commercial (1st try)

OK. Here goes with a 1 minute commercial:

Here's why 9-11 truth is so important!

9-11 is the defining moment of this century. A wrecking-ball was unleashed upon the world - and NO one is safe from it.

The criminals in the US Government had to break cover and take great risks for such a bold and complex operation on that day, but they can't hide forever behind political correctness and fake patriotism.

On the day that a critical mass of Americans demand some honest answers, the real perpetrators will be forced to cut and run. They are few - and we are many. No amount of espionage, wiretapping, secrecy or wealth will save their hides this time.

These are the people who have dogged us for decades with their dirty, phony wars.

They say that history is written by the victors. It is all of us together who will write the last chapter of this one. Come on! Victory is within our grasp.

(finish with V For Victory type music etc)

Chris Shaw
Feral Metallurgist

Wargames and WTC 7.

I would pound wargames and WTC 7 for about a third of that time. Say something like "Who ran the wargames that paralyzed our air defense?" and "How did a skyscraper that wasn't hit by a plane collapse like every other controlled demolition in history?" Throw in some buzzwords like Sibel Edmonds, General Ahmad, Indira Singh, and David Schippers.

2 cents.........

mention the people that are STILL dying today. Fealgood Foundation, etc?? They want justice too, and we want it for them.

HA! god i love poetic

HA! god i love poetic justice. you people kick ass. long live 911blogger.com(and GREAT call on deciding to make note of the censorship and gatekeeper tactics in the spot.)

my other 2 cents

OBL is NOT WANTED for 911, the people NEED to know this.

Americas # 1 Public myth: Osama is wanted for 911 - lol

Who does the talking?

With only one minute allowed we should have a fast talker who can get in the most information out in the allotted time. My choice would be Alex Jones or Webster Tarpley.

My vote would be for Donna

My vote would be for Donna Marsh O'Connor, a well-trained public speaker who brings emotional wallop by virtue of having lost her daughter on 9/11. I think it would be a mistake to ask one of the usual suspects.

I would also like to see the last line in the "rant" be a challenge to Seder to have David Ray Griffin on the show for a full segment to discuss 9/11.

DRAFT of 1 minute for Air America ...

[means optional


Hi my name is xxxxxxxxxxxxx from/on behalf of 911blogger.com.

Everything that I am about to say (and more), including the web links that I will provide will be posted as a special article on the main page of 911blogger.com

Many/most people say/agree that 9/11 changed everything
The attacks of 9/11 are the reason that the US invaded Afganistan and were used as a reason to invade and occupy Iraq. They were used a justification for the Patriot act, the Military Commission act and numerous other US laws that take away our freedoms.

So what really happened on 9/11? The government story, rubber stamped by the 9/11 Commission is that 11 Arab Moslems with box cutters hijacked 4 planes outsmarting and out maneuvering the airlines, the US intelligence services, the US military and the US government.

Do you believe the governments story about 9/11? The latest poll from xxxxxx say that ##% of Americans do not.

The Jersey girls, the 911 family members most responsible for forcing the Government to establish the 911 Commission after ### days don't and they have released a movie called "911 Press for Truth" You can watch it for free on Google Video or buy at http://www.911pressfortruth.com

At 911blogger.com, we freely question the official story and seek the truth about 9/11. We ask the important questions that the main stream [corporate controlled] media fails to ask.

* Why did WTC 7, a 47 story building collapse to rubble in 6.6 seconds virtually equivalent to gravitation free fall? More than 5 years later the government has no answer for this question. Were explosives planted and by whom?

Physics Professor Stephen Jones has presented evidence that explosives were used to bring down the 3 WTC buildings. Project Censored ranked this as one of the Top 25 Censored Stories of 2007


* Where was the military response that day and why did the military tell three contradicting stories to the 9/11 commission? The two 9/11 commission co-chairs wrote in a their book that they thought that the military was lying to them, yet did nothing about it. Why? Who were they protecting?

[* Why did the fires at ground zero burn for more than three months despite being sprayed by water constantly. Where did the heat come from. Could it have been as the firemen report who were there reported. explosives?]

* Why was so much evidence destroyed or withheld. Why was the steel from ground zero shipped to China and India to be recycled. If the government has nothing to hide why is it hiding everything? [We are told that a plane hit the pentagon and that it was caught on 84 separate cameras. Why have these videos not been released?]

There are literally 100s of unanswered questions about 9/11 and at 911blogger.com we ask the questions and look at the facts. We provide links to sites that seek the truth about 9/11, news about the ongoing effort to find out what really happened on 9/11, and a forum to discuss this most important issue.

Thank you for taking the time to consider what really happened on 9/11.

This has been xxxxxxxxxxxxx from/on behalf of 911blogger.com.

alot of good ideas here

I'll chime in here because Free Truth just brought up some things that I was thinking, that I hadn't read up until now. So, I'll expand on that a little.

I like: We are constantly reminded that the world changed on 9/11. 9/11 gave us the Patriot Act, Military Commissions Act, the Global War on Terror. This war which will not end in our lifetime. Yet, only 16% of Americans believe we are being told the truth about what really happened on that day. Which conspiracy theory do you believe? Do you really believe that (beefing it up a little here) 19 flight school dropouts with boxcutters carried this out under the direction of OBL from a cave in Afghanistan with a laptop? Defeating the most powerful military force on the planet?

Insert some of the other good ideas here. I kind of like ahey's referencing a couple of movies. Say ... Google 9/11 Mysteries, Loose Change, Press For Truth. End with go to 911blogger.com (maybe work in a quote that doesn't even have to be directly 9/11 related. I'm thinking forefathers, statesman, patriotic ... there are so many to choose from, or something like ... ) Ask questions. Demand answers. (Repeat) 911blogger.com. Just a few ideas.

ok, my mind is really running away with this now ...

Is there a celebrity who would possibly lend their voice to this? I think Alex Jones would sound too much like an Alex Jones commercial. What have you got to lose by asking Ed Asner, Charlie Sheen, Peter Coyotee (I've always liked his voice since he played the guy in the spacesuit in E.T.) Rosie, James Brolin? Hi. This is James Brolin. And I'm Barbara Streisand. OMG. Hey it's time to pull out the big guns, if you got 'em. I even like Dylan Avery's voice, especially since he's not narrating Loose Change Final Cut. He could even say: Watch for Loose Change world-wide theatrical release. Still like alot of ideas here. Forgot to say firefighter's recordings are always powerful. 911blogger.com tag is a must.

produce radio piece and movie ad for 911 Mysteries

Pull the curtain back on building 7 and the twin towers.

A movie ad for 911 Mysteries, don't underestimate how many people have still NOT seen this movie!

It's key to be direct and focused. A woman's voiceover that leads into a promo for 911 Mysteries...

I think the radio piece needs to point someone towards a specific tool of information (usually an ad would be for a product or service)

""over 5 years later, questions left unanswered and facts still buried under ground zero... a push for truth about what happened that day is apolitical at it's roots and if you still are unaware of the problems about 3 steel framed buildings falling in New York, watch this film before casting aside ALL the information as "consipiratiorial". Forget theories, look at the facts.

Americans are looking for the FACTS about 9/11. An unimpeded investigation back into ground zero first and foremosts is demanded for the families of lost loved ones who STILL have not seen justice- over 5 years later.

3 buildings. Free falling. Watch the movie and see for yourself what this is all about. 911 Mysteries, a glimpse at the official story and full evidence of a cover up.""

something along these lines..perhaps use audio clips from the movie (from FEMA, NIST, etc)


Hello Fellow Americans and Peoples of the world.

We are entering a time of great turmoil and unrest. A time that will change the course of history forever.

Should we rely on our leaders to guide us down this continuing path of preimptive wars of agression fueled by a coalition of lies. Lies told to us by those whom we should trust the most. Untruths supported and propogated by a media which has long been bought and paid for by those who benefit from those lies.

Should we listen to the main stream sources of information who, if not controlled, are fearful of the retribution which will follow asking the questions that need to be answered. Those who are not being dilligent in following the stories which must be told.

We are being lied to on all levels and all involved are complicit. It is our responsibility to seek the truth. A truth which is self evident.

A truth which will alter the fate that our leaders are determined to lead us toward.

We want to know the true events of September 11th, 2001. We want a true and independent investigation of those event. We want answers to the questions that should have been asked. Answers from those people who should have questioned under the proper jurisdictions, sworn under oath in a court of law.

The evidence needs to be made transparent so the people can judge for themselves the depth of the evidence and know the questions which must be answered and those who need to be called to testify.

We all know that conspiracies happen and it is up to us....the people... to insure that another event of this magnatude never happens again.... and that the people truely responsible pay the price for their role.

Our government has been taken from the people and we will not stand for the attacks upon this country. From the killing of 3,000 Innocent Americans and the wars of aggression which have killed countless thousands more to the blatent theft of our liberties with the assault on the foundations of this country....The Constitution of the Unites States of America and the Bill of Rights.

Lies become truths in the minds of the believers. We can continue to believe or we can restore the virtues of truth.
Ignorance is NOT Bliss


60 seconds is NOT much time. Most of you guys are writing 5 minute pieces here!

I would focus completely on pointing out proveable false flag events....

By the way, I'd be happy to do the voiceover and production, it's what I do.....here's a sample:


Here's my version

I would say the goal of this message is to undermine certainty about the 9/11 Commission Report. 60 seconds isn't enough time to enumerate questionable facts about 9/11. Instead, simply ask why progressives are so confident in the Commission's findings? And if they aren't confident, then why do they resist re-examining 9/11?

It's not perfect, but here goes:

"America, this message is from concerned citizens who want to know what happened on September 11, 2001. We want to know, in particular, why our president and his administration took over a year to begin to investigate this historic tragedy? We want to know why the 9/11 families had to fight for an investigation? We want to know why President Bush and Vice President Cheney only agreed to meet with the 9/11 Commission if their testimony were not recorded, were offered in private, and were taken together?

We want to know why the 9/11 Commission was underfunded and staffed with White House insiders such as Philip Zelikow and Lee Hamilton? Why was the commission not allowed to interview key witnesses? Why to this day does the FBI say it has "no hard evidence" to indict Osama Bin Laden for the crimes of 9/11? Why, America, have the omissions and distortions of the 9/11 Commission Report gone unchallenged by the progressive community, and why has the progressive community shown such contempt for those who consider the crimes of 9/11 still under investigation?

If 9/11 is the basis for Bush's foreign wars of aggression and domestic attack on the constitution, we must know the whole truth about 9/11, or we will never fully understand what an appropriate response should be.

The Bush administration lied to get America into an unnecessary war in Iraq. It lied about intelligence warnings prior to 9/11. It lied about the air quality at Ground Zero on 9/11, and now thousands of first responders have fatal illnesses.

With so many lies, omissions, and distortions surrounding 9/11, we must demand a new independent investigation to preserve the integrity of our laws and our government."

I like this. It covers

I like this. It covers everything that needs to be said, and it's lucid.

Daniel Ellsberg said it best...in his book "Secrets" pg 43

..."The reality unknown to the public and to most members of Congress and the press is that secrets that would be of the greatest import to many of them can be kept from them reliably for decades by the executive branch, even though they are known to thousands of insiders." This is the crux of our current problem...

Whatever is said in this 60 second spot...keep it simple and to the point. It seems most scary to me that even though much of America is fairly onto the truth...we can't really know (and most likely won't really ever know exactly) what happened with the events surrounding 911. We need to stay sane, remain a strong alliance, find credible evidence, maintain focus on the things we do know and wait for enough brave individuals to come forward and speak the truth.

Had an idea or two...

How about...

The first 5 seconds, something to GRAB their attention (not sure what, maybe phone ringing, alarm clock etc).

The next 25 seconds, presidential quotes about "it's patriotic to question the government" and "watch out for the military industrial complex" - that sort of thing.

Then the last 30 seconds tell them about the need for a real investigation and to visit 911blogger.com for more info.

Before the show make sure you have a nice "page" setup specifically for these new visitors (BIG link on the front page or TOP story) with a basic FAQ, keep it simple and try to remember what it was like when you all first woke-up.

Good luck in whatever you choose, best wishes

I Had A Dream

Don't rapid fire facts. Think bigger . We need the emotion and powerful clarity of a Martin Luther King Jr. Wheres George Washington he can turn a phrase. Remember that rousing defense speech by James Spader on Boston Legal ?, something more 911 specific but with the same fire and dignity. Imagine David Ray Griffin and Bob Mcalvaine. There will be an attempt to create a rift with the "left" over this , do not succumb to it.

Fool me once...

A warning about future Iran False flag event may also be pertinent.

Give the public a challenge

Everyone loves a challenge...and most people think they have all the answers.

Ask the public maybe 3 questions about the events that surround 911 to which the TRUTH movement has actual,well documented, factual, answers. Give them a,b, & c answers or "d (I don't know) as another option...

Then give the answers with a website URL (hopefully a credible site) where the listeners can research the facts for EACH question.

I think if you can within 60 seconds mention 3 credible sites for information...I would site Thompsons Timeline as one, Steven Jones site as another and ??? (so many to choose from...) you will make a bigger impact on the listener.

If you can hook the people in with really "well thought out and worded" questions, that is half the battle.

Many people that I randomly ask (about 911) don't even know that the official story is in question.

And remember, with Air America, we'll be (once again) preachin' to the choir. What we really need is someone like Keith Olbermann to discuss the topic "on Air".

Good Luck.

k eichler...

Ken, I like your idea. Maybe include real short audio of the people screaming and the rumbling of the collapsing towers, get that emotional feeling on, then switch to some logical questions. J Redford-Man, that's alot material, I think most of it is way beyond necessary for the non-Truther crowd.

Can someone psychoanalyze the collective minds of those relatively intelligent people that refuse to even consider the truth of 911? I have friends like that, you can't argue when they tell you about how "the fuel ran down the stairwells, then ignited and weakened the steel resulting in the collapse"-( and you slap yourself on the head and reach for another beer!).

Murph, what a rant, obviously you have some degree of skill with the written word- but who are you working for? We're on the topic of a 60 second audio piece that doesn't turn people away from the Truth Movement, but makes them curious, to think that maybe there is something here that demands a quick Google search when they're sitting bored in their cubicle at work.

Getting any good ideas, dz?

(Just watched this clip-any useful audio? I think just the ending is pretty powerful!):

Bob McIlvaine and Lorie Van Aukin

Split the time. Allow Jersey Girl Van Aukin to tell how the Investigation was a fraud and then let Bob McIlvaine (father of Son killed on 911-Press For Truth) to tell how he and other "family" are convinced 911 was an "inside Job".

After 911 Press for Truth was released Bob came out and admitted he knew the truth


My vote for who

Would be 911/mysteries narrator. She sounds sincere, has professional cadence, and her inflection/pronunciation is excellent – is easily understood. Reminded me of a public service notice or scholarly voice-over.

I like the idea of talking about the dead, both on 9/11 and since... even the rescue dogs. I just can't see an obvious BITE-able connection for the average listener to connect 9/11 to the truth behind the attacks/wars on Afghanistan and Iraq.

We’ve had to work SO hard to make it clear that these wars are not about getting the ‘terrorists’ Al Queda or Bin Laden… To try and connect the wars would be too much IMO… It would just confuse the issues.

I say use the shysters’ techniques against them…
Appeal to emotion not logic… Once they’re on the hook and open to suggestion, THEN give them truth. Unfortunately we have to concern ourselves with wrapping the message in a palatable format… or at least a provocative one. Something that with either piss folks off, and thus get them thinking or something that will get them righteously indignant, and visiting the site to teach us all a lesson.

Once they’re here who knows what might happen.?

Don't waste it



1. Acknowledge that it is almost unimaginable that members of our government could have deliberately allowed 911 to happen for political purposes, much less had anything to do with it.

2. Acknowledge that there are a lot of crackpot theories out there from the idea that no planes flew into the buildings to the idea that the towers were brought down by "space beams." Make sure that they know that you know the difference between rational investigation and tin foil.

1 and 2 are essential to gain some credibility with many listeners who are already programmed to believe we're all a bunch of nutcases. Humor should be elicited with the mention of space beams to demonstrate how absurd that notion is. Then, everything you say afterwords will seem a lot more plausible.

3. "But we are just concerned Americans who are troubled by the many unanswered questions of 911. Like the 911 family members, we are troubled by the failure of the 911 commission to answer these questions."

3 is essential to casting yourselves, hopefully accurately, as rational, sincere, and patriotic Americans who are merely seeking to find the truth about the events of 911.

4. ..."Questions like..."

Here, it is imperative that you not overreach. Some questions like what hit the Pentagon are controversial even amongst serious and sincere 911 researchers. Don't bother with it. If you have to broach the subject of controlled demolitions, you can have more impact focusing on building 7. Don't claim to know for a fact that it was destroyed. Pose it as a question and entice the listener to seek more information on their own.

As a physicist I can tell you, the most compelling evidence for controlled demolition is the molten iron and the evaporation of the steel. And one of the most compelling citations of this evidence, as it relates to WTC7, is the one made in a New York Times article:



A combination of an uncontrolled fire and the structural damage might have been able to bring the building down, some engineers said. But that would not explain steel members in the debris pile that appear to have been partly evaporated in extraordinarily high temperatures, Dr. Barnett said.

This is the NYTimes reporting an unexplained phenomena. Very "credible." To AA listeners anyway.

Also is the response of controlled demolition expert Danny Jawenko who was never told what building he was looking at and immediately recognized WTC7's collapse as a controlled demolition. When informed of the fact that he was looking at WTC7 on 9/11, he was shocked, but refused to accept any other explanation for the building's collapse other than by controlled demolition.

This is powerfull stuff if you can figure out a compact way to convey it. I wouldn't even mention towers 1 and 2. You don't have enough time.

The listeners of Air America will be far more inclined towards LIHOP so I would pull the most striking "questions" from '9/11 - Press For Truth'. Warnings. If you have to focus on collapse, the other most compelling evidence, aside from forensic steel, is testimonial evidence of explosions. But since you don't have time to read everyones explosion related testimony, you need to convey just how broad the consensus was amongst the first responders and journalists that there were explosions.

It needs to be framed as: the media immediately pushed the line that the building were brought down by fire, but almost everyone who was there thought there were explosions in the building.

Personally, I would use this line: 'For all I know, al Qaeda planted the explosives, but when you hear all these police officers and firefighters describing explosives, it becomes very hard to dismiss their testimony."

Even though I do not believe that "al Qaeda" planted the explosives, I understand that convincing people that the Bush administration et al was responsible for the collapes or 911 in general should not be the objective. The objective should be to convince people that explosives were used. The rest will follow. Plus, there is a possibility that Bushco didn't know about the explosives. Maybe that little surprize was compliments of Urban Moving Company. The primary objective should be to get people to ask, "hey, who blew up WTC7." Once people are at this stage, we win.


Conspiriacy theroies

Your 1 minute of fame:

Mr and Mrs America, On Sept 11th 2001our country suffered the deaths of 3000 country men at the hand of 19 terrorist, who hijacked 4 jets and outmanuvered the worlds tightest air defence system, and with out the use of air countrol were able find their targets hundreds of miles away, one of which was able to make fighter pilot like turns with a jumbo jet and crash into the Pentagon with out leaving a scratch on the lawn or any debris on the outside of the building. We all witnessed the distruction and death of some of the most couragious people this country has ever known, as the Twin Towers crumpled into a nice neat pile in the basement , And were exposed to believe this conspiracy therory with out question. NOT

this is the idea, put out all the outlandish BS that they use for an excuse and it be comes obvious that it couldn't happen the way they said.


Challenge of free speech to dkos

Issue quick public challenge to dkos, at the end of the 60 seconds, to offer you a feature diary blogspot covering many aspects of 9/11 with free comments section based on discussion of the facts.

(That would be the hottest diary of the year)

Again...too much info....

You guys are trying to put WAY too much info into a 60 sec. spot.

You have time for ONE big message..that will be easily understood by the Air America listeners.

Think about the audience here.


That's ALL you have.......

Please don't waste this opportunity.