Some of you may have noticed that there are a number of wonderful distractions taking place within the 9/11 Truth Movement right now.

We have a "tiff" taking place within the "Scholars For 9/11 Truth." We have "investigations" taking place that are meant to discredit otherwise trustworthy, more productive members of this movement. We have wonderous "theories" being promoted by individuals that do not have the credibility of this movement in mind.

As a result of these distractions, people have spent a considerable amount of time focusing on them, rather than participating in activism.

On 9/11/2006, Donna Marsh O'Connor, Michelle Little, and Christina Kminek, along with Kyle Hence, and Paul Thompson, called for a new investigation into the attacks of 9/11.

Did they make this request for their health? Did they make this request because they had nothing better to do with their time?

No.

They made this request because they want to end the nightmare brought on by the September 11th attacks, and because they want closure for themselves, this country, and this world.

This movement has always been about absolute truth and absolute accountability. Neither will be attained if we continue to focus on obviously deliberate, and manufactured distractions.

Thanks to Chris for sending this in: 

http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_1287.shtml

Oct 6, 2006, 01:17

With US mid-term elections one month away, it is not surprising to find
Washington’s elite criminal factions (neocon and neoliberal) engaged in
a new game of political chicken over 9/11 red herrings. The appearance of
bickering hides the fact that operatives of both factions are lying. Both
sides are cynically continuing the massive bipartisan cover-up of 9/11 and
the “war on terrorism."

Undeniable fact: all of Washington “knew” about 9/11

It is an amply documented fact -- no news whatsoever -- that the Bush
administration had absolute foreknowledge of 9/11, and deliberately
ignored warnings received within the US and from officials and
intelligence agencies outside the US.

As written by Michel Chossudovsky, “the foreknowledge issue itself is a
red herring, a fallacy in which an irrelevant topic is presented in order
to divert attention from the original issue . . . Of course the Bush