Media Complicity

3-Minutes - WTC-7 - Exposed!

It only takes 3 minutes to see and realize the greatest lie ever placed upon the USA and world. WTC-7 is 9/11's smoking gun. Thanks to Bob Bowman who produced the compilation of the condensed video clip.

 

3-Minute Blowout Youtube Video Clip
9/11 - WTC-7 - Exposed!
Video segment produced by
Robert Bowman
National Commander, ThePatriots.US

 

URL for video segment:

www.youtube.com/profile?user=creativewindspirit#p/u/2/EJAVMUMjr3Q


 

 

 

UPDATED AND BETTER! 9/11 & NWO: MEANS, MOTIVE, and OPPORTUNITY - Parts I & II

UPDATED AND BETTER! 9/11 & NWO:  MEANS, MOTIVE, and OPPORTUNITY - Parts I & II

"The Pearl Harbor of the 21st century took place today." President George W. Bush

"It is important for the American People to understand, there are cold blooded killers, who want to come to our homeland, and wreak havoc through death."  -  George W. Bush

“Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists.”  (Applause.) George W. Bush

“The election is over.  We won.”  (Reporter’s voice - “How do you know that?”)  “Its all over but the counting.  And we’ll take care of the counting.” - Congressman Peter King

"One of the least understood strategies of the world revolution now moving rapidly toward its goal is the use of mind control as a major means of obtaining the consent of the people who will be subjects of the New World Order." -- K.M. Heaton

"According to some estimates we cannot track $2.3 Trillion in transactions," Rumsfeld admitted, September the 10th, 2001

"An offer they couldn't refuse" - (on the CIA and Hollywood) - guardian.co.uk

An offer they couldn't refuse

The CIA is often credited with 'advice' on Hollywood films, but no one is truly sure about the extent of its shadowy involvement. Matthew Alford and Robbie Graham investigate

Everyone who watches films knows about Hollywood's fascination with spies. From Hitchcock's postwar espionage thrillers, through cold war tales such as Torn Curtain, into the paranoid 1970s when the CIA came to be seen as an agency out of control in films such as Three Days of the Condor, and right to the present, with the Bourne trilogy and Ridley Scott's forthcoming Body of Lies, film-makers have always wanted to get in bed with spies. What's less widely known is how much the spies have wanted to get in bed with the film-makers. In fact, the story of the CIA's involvement in Hollywood is a tale of deception and subversion that would seem improbable if it were put on screen.

The model for this is the defence department's "open" but barely publicised relationship with Hollywood. The Pentagon, for decades, has offered film-makers advice, manpower and even hardware - including aircraft carriers and state-of-the-art helicopters. All it asks for in exchange is that the US armed forces are made to look good. So in a previous Scott film, Black Hawk Down, a character based on a real-life soldier who had also been a child rapist lost that part of his backstory when he came to the screen.

No matter how seemingly craven Hollywood's behaviour towards the US armed forces has seemed, it has at least happened within the public domain. That cannot be said for the CIA's dealings with the movie business. Not until 1996 did the CIA announce, with little fanfare, that it had established an Entertainment Liaison Office, which would collaborate in a strictly advisory capacity with film-makers. Heading up the office was Chase Brandon, who had served for 25 years in the agency's elite clandestine services division, as an undercover operations officer. A PR man he isn't, though he does have Hollywood connections: he's a cousin of Tommy Lee Jones.

A Ticket to The Hague for Dick Cheney?

mainstream mention of Cheney's

A Ticket to The Hague for Dick Cheney?

www.harpers.org/#hbc-90003846

By Scott Horton

Gene Burns is one of the nation's most popular talk radio hosts. For years he has dismissed accounts of torture; America, he has said, does not torture. But last night, after watching Torturing Democracy and realizing that he had not understood how important and serious an issue torture had become, Burns abruptly changed his tune.

Here's a transcript of his remarks:

"I now believe that some international human rights organization ought to open an investigation of the Bush Administration, I think focused on Vice President Dick Cheney, and attempt to bring charges against Cheney in the international court of justice at The Hague, for war crimes. Based on the manner in which we have treated prisoners at Guantánamo Bay, and the manner in which we have engaged in illegal rendition–that is, surreptitiously kidnapping prisoners and flying them to foreign countries where they could be tortured by foreign agents who do not follow the same civilized standards to which we subscribe.

Glenn Greenwald denies turning turtle on evidence against Bruce Ivins

I posted a link to my article on Glenn Greenwald's blog on Salon last night, and Greenwald has replied with this comment:

"None of what you wrote or accuse me of has anything to do with what I think. I never said I know who perpetrated the anthrax attacks because . . . I don't know, because . . . I haven't seen the evidence. What I have seen is unconvincing, but I find people like you who just invent theories without facts and then think you've discovered Truth to be exactly the same as those who blindly believe whatever the Government says."

All I want from him is an explanation, as I said here:

Greenwald backpedals

On August 3, 2008, Glen Greenwald wrote in Salon:

"It is so vital to emphasize that not a shred of evidence has yet been presented that the now-deceased Bruce Ivins played any role in the anthrax attacks, let alone that he was the sole or even primary culprit."

Now, in his retraction, er, update from yesterday, he writes:

Can Truth Retain Its Independence? By Paul Craig Roberts

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article20013.htm

Can Truth Retain Its Independence?

By Paul Craig Roberts

30/05/08 "ICH' -- - Justin Raimondo has a good column this morning on Antiwar.com. It is written as a fundraiser. But what it shows is that journalists (and whistle-blowers) who tell the truth in America are more likely to be pummeled than rewarded, whereas those who lie for powerful interest groups live high on the hog.

It wasn’t just Bush, Cheney, and the neoconservatives who deceived us into an illegal war in behalf of a hidden agenda. It was the American media. Raimondo names some of the culprits who are complicit in the deaths of some one million Iraqis, an unknown number of Afghans, and thousands of American soldiers.

It was all for a lie. A lie told by the President of the United States and his handmaidens in the media.

June issue of The Rock Creek Free Press is out

The Rock Creek Free Press is one of the very few off-line newspapers that tell it like it is about 9/11. To view the latest issue, go to: http://rockcreekfreepress.com/

I just submitted my story "Media Echo White House 9/11 Talking Points" on Digg under Political Opinion. Please read and give it some diggs to move it to the homepage!

Digg it at http://digg.com/all/political_opinion/upcoming

Thank you!

Sheila

Telling Truths That Can't Be Said, by Anthony Arnove

(Note: Just a plug and an FYI . . . "War, Inc." is being released on DVD July 1, 2008 . . . . Betsy)

http://socialistworker.org/2008/05/20/telling-truths

Column: Anthony Arnove

Telling Truths That Can't Be Said

A look at John Cusack's satire War, Inc., and why we desperately need more commentary like it today.

May 20, 2008

IN THE Orwellian world of U.S. politics, often, it takes artists to say the truth that otherwise can't be said--or heard.

Stanley Kubrick brought home the reality of militarism and the madness of U.S. nuclear doctrine in Dr. Strangelove as no nonfiction work of the time could. Sidney Lumet's Network did the same for the corporate takeover of our culture.

Today, John Cusack's War, Inc. fires a similar shot across the bow of our tortured political discourse.

War, Inc. is a Swiftian allegory of the world not as it might be in some possible future, but as it is today, with a performance from Ben Kingsley as memorable as Peter Sellers in Dr. Strangelove. (It also features a deconstruction by Hilary Duff of her own fame and our twisted, sexist culture that has to be seen to be believed.)

Ventura’s 9/11 Questions Break Through Mainstream Media Dam (On FOX - Hannity & Colmes)

Ventura’s 9/11 Questions Break Through Mainstream Media Dam

http://www.infowars.com/?p=1393

Jesse ‘The Mind’ Defends Questions About Towers’ Telling Collapse on Hannity & Colmes and National Talk Radio Programs: "How can two planes bring down three buildings?"

Aaron Dykes / Jones Report | April 8, 2008

Former Governor Jesse Ventura broke through enemy lines yesterday, exposing major inconsistencies with the official 9/11 story and holding his own against some of mainstream media’s most disingenuous hosts, including Fox News’ Sean Hannity and Opie & Anthony from XM Satellite radio.

Ventura’s notoriety as a fiercely independent upstart may have kept Hannity, for one, from playing his usual dirty tricks.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1lUhVFpwhgE

Was Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Murdered by the U.S. Government?

Crimes of the State

"After hearing and reviewing the extensive testimony and evidence, which had never before been tested under oath in a court of law, it took the Memphis jury only one (1) hour to find that a conspiracy to kill Dr. King did exist. Most significantly, this conspiracy involved agents of the governments of the City of Memphis, the state of Tennessee and the United States of America. The overwhelming weight of the evidence also indicated that James Earl Ray was not the triggerman and, in fact, was an unknowing patsy... We stand by that verdict and have no doubt that the truth about this terrible event has finally been revealed." -Statement of King Family on the Justice Department's "Limited investigation" of the MLK Assassination, January 15, 2007

Noam Chomsky, Gatekeepers And Barrie Zwickers 'Controversial' Chapter 5.

One of the most 'controversial' chapters to appear in any 9/11 book, was written by Barrie Zwicker in his 'Towers of Deception'. This 'controversial' but true, accurate and highly education chapter has found its way onto the internet, and has been reproduced as far as I can see word for word and illustration for illustration. So if you would like to analyze the methods of propaganda, and dissect through the obfuscation here are the links:

http://www.geocities.com/agent_noam_chomsky/chomsky.htm
http://www.geocities.com/agent_noam_chomsky/chomsky2.htm
http://www.geocities.com/agent_noam_chomsky/chomsky.htm3

Here are two reviews of the book from Amazon.com, which particularly mention this specific chapter as forming the basis of opinion concerning the book, and the review written about it:

The first reader gives the book 2 Starts out of 5 (2/5):
I gave the book two stars mainly because Zwicker's treatment of Noam Chomsky, with its continual oscillation between fawning adulation and vituperative disgust, is worth a read.

The second reder gives the book 5 Starts out of 5 (5/5):

Letter to The Nation Editors

May 14, 2007

The Editor
The Nation
33 Irving Place, 8th Floor
New York, NY 10003

To Whom It May Concern:

I must have missed your review of “Debunking 9/11 Debunking” by David Ray Griffin. Just joking - I searched your archive and found no such review. I’m wondering why, given the following statement from your website and your founding prospectus in 1865,

“The Nation will not be the organ of any party, sect, or body. It will, on the contrary, make an earnest effort to bring to the discussion of political and social questions a really critical spirit, and to wage war upon the vices of violence, exaggeration, and misrepresentation by which so much of the political writing of the day is marred.”

Why is "The Nation", a supposed progressive publication, refusing to address the 9/11 cover-up?

May 14, 2007

The Editor
The Nation
33 Irving Place, 8th Floor
New York, NY 10003

To Whom It May Concern:

I must have missed your review of “Debunking 9/11 Debunking” by David Ray Griffin. Just joking - I searched your archive and found no such review. I’m wondering why, given the following statement from your website and your founding prospectus in 1865,

“The Nation will not be the organ of any party, sect, or body. It will, on the contrary, make an earnest effort to bring to the discussion of political and social questions a really critical spirit, and to wage war upon the vices of violence, exaggeration, and misrepresentation by which so much of the political writing of the day is marred.”

Is THAT our best punch?

((Disclaimer: This little rant is not to offend anyone. Almost anyone here has done more than me to bring forth the truth, I guess. Yet sometimes the view of an "outsider" is useful to have a look where a "specialized community" is heading to - and when it misses a point. And thats what we currently do, in my humble opinion.))

There is an official petition and complaint being made to the BBC on behalf of their recently uncovered WTC7 "cock-up" and the funny attempts to bury it - and we manage to get about 400 votes in two days, about 15% of which are dupes and fakes.

On digg.com, the story has a stunning 35 (thirty-five) diggs right now.

This is embarrassing, to put it mildly. How many truth-seekers are out there?
We are not really that hand-full of lunatic lonely moonbats the PNAC-hitmen keep calling us, are we?!