After 7 years, the biggest crime in American history has neven been investigated in a court of law but the left gatekeepers willingly undermine our constitutional emergency by censoring conclusive evidence that proves the government continues to coverup the events of 9/11.
Failure of the Mainstream media and, so-called, "alternative" media dangerously undermines the Constitution and threatens the national security of the United States.
These willful and complicity act to suppress knowledge of treason and/or fraud could result in imprisonment and fine under the provisions of Title 18 of US code:
It is the affirmative duty of any citizen to expose any treasonous or criminal act which comes to our attention. Failure to do so is defined as misprision.
BBC's Third Tower: 30 Pieces of Good News
by Dr. Kevin Barrett and Rolf Lindgren
The one-hour BBC program The Third Tower should have a positive effect on spreading the truth about what happened to WTC 7. Despite its attempt to debunk by twisting and omitting facts, there is much to cheer about.
Here are 30 examples from the program:
1) There is a WTC 7, many have never heard of it.
2) No plane hit WTC 7.
3) WTC 7 fell down.
4) Several videos of WTC 7 falling down are shown.
5) The collapse is compared visually to a controlled demolition.
6) Barry Jennings tells of hearing multiple explosions in WTC 7.
7) Barry Jennings was told while in WTC 7 "Get out of there, get out of there now", which sounds very suspicious.
8) Barry Jennings' time-line is not contradicted by anything Barry Jennings says.
9) After seven years, no final report on the collapse of WTC 7 has appeared. The 9/11 Commission never mentioned the collapse of WTC 7.
10) The program will generate sales and Internet hits of 'Loose Change'.
If Cheney & Co. Had Really Plotted the 9/11 Attacks ...
By Matt Taibbi, Spiegel & Grau. Posted May 19, 2008.
Matt Taibbi's hilarious re-enactment of the secret govt. conspiracy (that never happened) to conduct the attacks.
The following is an adapted excerpt from Matt Taibbi's new book, The Great Derangement" (Spiegel and Grau, 2008).
The 9/11 Truth movement is really distinguished by a kind of defiant unfamiliarity with the actual character of America's ruling class. In 9/11 lore the people who staff the White House, the security agencies, the Pentagon and groups like PNAC and the Council of Foreign Relations are imagined to be a monolithic, united class of dastardly, swashbuckling risk-takers with permanent hard-ons for Bourne Supremacy-style "false flag" and "black bag" operations, instead of the mundanely greedy, risk-averse, backstabbing, lawn-tending, half-clever suburban golfers they are in real life. It completely misunderstands the nature of American government -- fails to see that the old maxim about "the business of America is business" is absolutely true, that the federal government in this country is really just a lo-rent time-share property seasonally occupied by this or that clan of financial interests, each of which takes its 4-year turn at the helm tinkering with the tax laws and regulatory code and the rates at the Fed in the way it thinks will best keep the money train rolling.
Why "giggle"? An open letter to the editors and administrators of History as a Weapon dot com:
This morning I followed a link to the 1928 book "Propaganda," by Edward Bernays hosted on your web site ( http://www.historyisaweapon.com/defcon1/bernprop.html ) from a post in a forum I help administer. I was delighted to find a copy of this book on-line which details early thinking in the uses of propaganda for manipulating "the public mind." I was also delighted to find your site which, although I'm new to it, is obviously a repository of, as you describe it on your welcome page, "an online Left reader focusing largely on American resistance history." ( http://www.historyisaweapon.org/start.html )
However, as I began to familiarize myself with your site, contemplating spreading the news of its existence to my associates, in the context of addressing what an interested person should do if they have a suggestion for content in your FAQ, I came upon the following comment: "Of course, we reserve the right to giggle that you suggest we post 9/11 conspiracy articles." ( http://www.historyisaweapon.com/faq.html )
The following is forwarded from the Dave Rovics mailing list:
During my recent ten-day vacation in Japan I managed to get some stuff done -- including responding to a fairly massive flood of overwhelmingly positive responses to my last essay. So below, here's another one. As with all of my essays, lyrics, music, etc., feel free to post, forward and distribute wherever you see fit.
Also, for those of you who live in the northwest, I've got a little mid-day gig at Washington State University on Thursday and a keynote address and concert at a conference in eastern Washington on Friday. Next week I'm off to the midwest and the southeast to do shows in Carbondale, IL, Louisville, KY, Whitwell, TN and Asheville, NC. The last three shows will include shows for kids in the afternoon and grownups in the evening, which will hopefully be becoming a regular pattern...
Chris Hannah, frontman for the "anarchist," "anti-authoritarian," and "politically conscious" punk rock group Propagandhi, has consistently refused to address the issue of Bush administration culpability in the 9/11 attacks.
In May, 2007, as an organizer for Winnipeg's three-day series of 9/11 events--including presentations by Richard Gage and Barrie Zwicker--I confronted Chris as to why he and his band haven't made any statements or made a stand regarding the official story of the 9/11 attacks. As a world-renowned, politically themed punk rock band, Propagandhi, one would think, ought to be concerned, or at the very least curious, about the increasing skepticism toward the Official Conspiracy Theory and the rising interest in the controlled demolition hypothesis.
Matt Bors is Portland OR based cartoonist who's done work for The Nation and ACLU and yet he does this hit piece on the truth movement.
Note that websites at the bottom of his cartoon are fake.
I've been talking about the 9/11 so-called truth movement lately and how they have grown increasingly irritating as time goes on and all their claims have been answered or debunked. (for all my liberal friends reading this who buy into it, please order this issue of skeptic magazine). Hurricane Katrina gave birth to the claim the the levy was blown up so capitalists could build condos in the 9th ward (I guess gentrification wasn't working) so I figured this would spawn some crapola as well. I was right.
Eric Alterman has written extensively on the false claims of liberal media bias. He seems to be on the correct side of most issues, but here's a clip from his latest post:
If you wanted to find the root problem of how and why the Bush administration has screwed up the world, the answer I think lies less in the fact of 9-11 than in the opportunity that 9-11 gave the neocons to implement a strategy they that long sought. This is not even remotely to say the same thing as the fact that they planned or allowed 9-11 to happen. (I once had to leave the Air America studio while co-hosting with Janeane G because she was buying into this argument sans, of course, evidence.) It is merely to note that had it not been 9-11, it would likely have been something else. And you can find its most pristine expression here from the man Matt Y called "America's Worst Pundit," Charles Krauthammer, who announced in February 2001: "America is no mere international citizen. It is the dominant power in the world, more dominant than any since Rome. Accordingly, America is in a position to reshape norms, alter expectations and create new realities. How? By unapologetic and implacable demonstrations of will."
Am I the only one who detects more than a whiff of fascism in this naked celebration of the triumph of "will"?
We are still being dissed as wild conspiracy theorists.
Blog Home | Blog Archives | RSS Feed
Downsize DC Blog
Our Position on 9-11 Truth
Home » blogs » Perry Willis's blog
Our Position on 9-11 Truth
Today's Downsizer Dispatch . . .
Please share with concerned friends . . .
Quotes of the Day:
With great power comes great responsibility.
-- Spider-man (Stan Lee)
Big claims require big evidence.
-- a fundamental principle of critical thinking
Subject: Our Position on 9-11 Truth
Given the subject of our latest campaign it seems incumbent upon us to state where we stand on the subject of 9-11 Truth.
We feel there is sufficient evidence to assert that the federal government had all the powers and resources it needed to prevent the 9-11 attacks.
* It knew that Osama bin Laden was planning to attack the United States.
* It knew that Al Queda agents were operating in the country.
* It knew that suicide attacks with airplanes were a real possibility.
I'm sure many Truthers are planning to make an appearance at the rallies and marches against the Iraq War this weekend. I'll be at Portland's protest tomorrow with a sign that says "End the 9/11 Lies, End the 9/11 Wars." I'm interested in accounts by Truthers of their experiences at these events, where 9/11 Truth is received with varying levels of enthusiasm, so to speak.
Just now, on C-SPAN's coverage of the event in DC, I saw two 9/11 Truth signs -- one right up front in the crowd, and one visible over Cynthia McKinney's shoulder as she was speaking. Good work, folks in DC!
Keith Olbermann asks the key question whether the statistics were intentionally or unintentionally wrong. David Boies, Olbermann's guest and the author or "Courting Justice", basically avoided the question saying it is just important that the data are wrong and we need to do something about it so we are safe.
Wrong answer. This prolongs the presumption that 9/11 was carried out by UBL etc., and that we remain in grave danger from Islamic terrorists. It also absolves anyone/everyone invloved with the bad data of guilt.
Later Olbermann asked "What are the risks going forward using bad data?"
Wrong question. He should have pressed the issue of possible government complicity in falsifying this data.
Maybe someday one of these self-proclaimed newsmen will get a spine and give up their anchor jobs for the truth. Charlie Sheen did not lose his job for 9/11 truth. Would Olbermann? What about Jack Cafferty?
Perhaps a write-in campaign asking them to sacrifice their jobs for truth.
Where are Dan Rather and Ted Koppell on the topics? Doesn't anyone out there in TV newsland have a conscience and a set of cajones?
katherine@ commondreams.org, email@example.com
Commondreams has devolved into yellow journalism. You guys don't care much for honest debate or real demonstrable facts.
Even Monbiot has the gall to admit: "I believe that they were criminally negligent..."
When more than one person is involved in a crime that is conspiracy by definition. Even Monbiot, even Commondreams admits in black and white there was a conspiracy involved by the US government on 9/11. Then we are supposed to accept your pig ignorant excuses for why it's not important!!!
Here are the facts of 9/11, and there are plenty more. So far your magazine has shown no interest in them.
Full article: No George Monbiot, These Are The Facts of September 11th 2001
Response to The UK Guardian Hit Piece...
These last two interviews are with a young man and woman that were working at the vending tables stationed outside the auditorium
Both of them made their living working for the "progressive" media, so our discussions were much longer and little more heated.
I'm sure we've all have had similar conversations within our own local antiwar/antiglobalization/activist communities.(Thanks, Chomsky!!!!!!)
In these interviews I continued to stay away from a debate on the evidence and stick with the general theme of Left Media and The role of 911 Truth.
First Interview Part !
First Interview Part 2
(unfortunately, this second interview got cut short because I ran out of film, but our conversation did continue for some time..We started debating so loud that security came and asked us to stop immediately or take it outside.)
This list is getting longer by the minute. At some point it becomes prudent to ask whether these left gatekeepers (Chomsky, Cockburn, Pitts, et al.) are being paid off in cash or scared off by anthrax? What else could possibly explain the lock step tone and tenor of this sudden deluge of "9/11 Truth Movement" hit pieces? In this latest installment, we are accused of ignoring "reality".
Eventhough Mr. Frank concedes that many unanswered questions remain, he somehow makes the leap that no possible answer "would ever indicate the US government was behind the (9/11) bloody affair". But he accuses "us" of being disconnected from "reality"?
Mr. Frank goes on to accuse the Truth Movement of "willfully ignoring that we’ve got real wars going on in the Middle East right now", never once making the connection that 9/11 was the "new Pearl Harbor" upon which these real wars were launched.
There is a saying that "ignorance is temporary, but stupid is forever". In Mr. Franks case, it's six in one hand, half dozen in the other, in as much as his column is among the most stupidly ignorant that I have read in a long time. Believe me... that's saying alot!
Unfortunately, with the increasing level of instability being displayed by Bush and his administration, we are all living in a new "reality" that is becoming increasingly dangerous to ignore.
National Columnist Leonard Pitts Joins the long list of government apologists and shameless shills with his latest column casting those who would have the temerity to question the "official record" as nothing more than "rote rejectionist" incapable (or perhaps unworthy) of "honest debate".
Posted on Fri, Sep. 15, 2006
IN MY OPINION
Just the facts . . . at least as we know them
BY LEONARD PITTS JR.
I beg your pardon.
Apparently I made a major error of fact in a recent column. It turns out, contrary to what I wrote, there never was a Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attack on the United States. It wasn't hijacked airliners that brought down the twin towers of the World Trade Center. Nor did any airplane plow into the Pentagon. Nor did United Flight 93 come to Earth in a field in Shanksville, Pa. Rather, this tragedy was staged by the U.S. government in order to dupe the nation into an oil war in the Middle East.
Or at least so I am told by a surprising plurality of readers. Add to that Hugo Chávez, president of Venezuela and renowned loose cannon, who said in a speech Tuesday it's possible the U.S. government had a hand in attacking itself on Sept. 11.
I found your posting to be highly persuasive in general for most people, whom I'm sure you're happy to serve. Yet your easy-ish dismissal of the inside possibilities (nay, probabilities) seems based on a rather innocent if not wholly ignorant understanding of how things can and often DO work. And in this case, 9/11, a far better explanation is reached beyond the box-cutter story by FIRST knowing possibility, and calculating the most likely probability. Come-on, you've heard this before.
I do not know who pulled-off "9/11", however the popular narrative happily stoked by Official-sounding reports and endless suggestions that it was 'solely the act of an outside aggressor, hell bent on the destruction of our freedoms', strains credulity and ultimately, believability. That's why every article like yours that continues to belie facts in-search of truth, makes me want to puke.
I certainly feel that my freedoms are currently suffering direct and very personal attacks, however old Binny and his boys could NEVER do what this domestic gang has been extraordinarily successful at by playing upon the whipped up fears of my more innocent and less cynical brethren citizenry.
This post is cross-posted at indoctriNATION.
I received an email earlier today from a reader suggesting that I balance TheFilter.ca’s coverage of 9/11 with an Alex Cockburn article posted to Znet called “The 9/11 Conspiracy Nuts: How They Let the Guilty Parties of 9/11 Slip Off the Hook”
I thought I would post my response, simply because it expresses some of the frustration I’ve had over the last week with much of the alternative media’s coverage of the fifth anniversary of 9/11.
Thanks for your interest in the site, and your story suggestion.
I had actually read Cockburn’s article when it was put up on Counterpunch, and some similar pieces from other Big Alternative sites, and decided to pass on posting them. Reading Cockburn’s again, I felt the same way I did about it the first time around: disappointed, but not surprised.
The article is one of the most hollow, dishonest outbursts that I’ve seen in a long time on an alternative news site and frankly, it really knocks Counterpunch, Znet, and the Nation (who also published it), down a few pegs on the integrity board.