Information Clearing House has published an even straighter piece by Paul Craig Roberts. Hopefully, more high profile former and current officials will follow his lead as the situation gets so obviously critical.
A Wake-up Call
By Paul Craig Roberts
07/19/07 "ICH" -- -- This is a wake-up call that we are about to have another 9/11-WMD experience.
The wake-up call is unlikely to be effective, because the American attitude toward government changed fundamentally seventy-odd years ago. Prior to the 1930s, Americans were suspicious of government, but with the arrival of the Great Depression, Tojo, and Hitler, President Franklin D. Roosevelt convinced Americans that government existed to protect them from rapacious private interests and foreign threats. Today, Americans are more likely to give the benefit of the doubt to government than they are to family members, friends, and those who would warn them about the government’s protection.
Intelligent observers are puzzled that President Bush is persisting in a futile and unpopular war at the obvious expense of his party’s electoral chances in 2008.
Perhaps 9/11Truthers should think seriously about starting their own political party and nominating a candidate for President for 2008. There are enough of us. Perhaps even mainstream and disenfranchised voters might be persuaded to vote for a 9/11Truth prez candidate on the basis of a campaign to get a real 9/11 investigation going.
Although he wasn't granted the same floor time as Moe, Larry, and Curly....I mean McCain, Romney, and Guliani, Ron Paul held his own fantastically. His answer to "Don't ask Don't Tell" regarding gays in the military was brilliant as he reminded us that classifying people into groups to begin with disregards the 1st amendment, and is a topic that shouldn't even be an issue.
This MSNBC shows Ron Paul after 30,000 votes, has 60% of the vote for who did best, with ALL the rest in single digit percentages.
I encourage all to chime in at this poll, http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18963731/,
Pay close attention to the questions since 2 of them ask "Who had the most rehearsed answers?" and "Who avoided the questions?", both of which Guiliani scored highest, and Ron Paul finshed 4th behind the top 3 spectacles.
I had a great time with Cosmos on his show, I hope you all enjoy it. We talked about our upcoming Vancouver conference, activism, truth squad confrontation, and breaking the left/right paradigm among other things;
There's alot more to the conference that we didn't get a chance to talk about, please visit www.v911truth.org for a full list of presenters and material.
Webster Tarpley on Rense: Truth Squads can overpower MSM - tonight 11pm-1am ET
How to Beat the Odds: 9/11 Truth Squads
Webster Tarpley is a creative political strategist with inspired ideas how to get to a 9/11 Truth breakthrough. It's an urgent matter with him, not so much about research into history, as the making of history - saving the world from the "neocon fascist madmen."
As an activist, Tarpley always looks for the most effective tactics - the "most bang for the buck," as he likes to say.
When I first met Webster in 2004 he was promoting an Independent International Truth Commission on 9/11. It would be modeled on the Bertrand Russell War Crimes Tribunal, which played such a role in mobilizing the world's intellectuals against the Vietnam war. The IITC is still an excellent idea with great potential and well worth pursuing.
Last year, Webster's innovation was to mobilize 9/11 truth troops to call in to talk radio shows and beat the drum for C-Span's broadcast of the Los Angeles Neo-Con 9/11 agenda panel. It was a roaring success. So many people tuned in that C-Span aired the panel four times, making it the most popular program in their history.
The 9/11 Truth Movement is a novel creature. Born by inevitable reactive consequence from back-room treason, which was itself nurtured by our own longstanding political complacency, which again in turn masked an underlying sense of helplessness, which yet again in turn was, I believe, scientifically inculcated within us over decades by practitioners of Bernays' cynical manipulativeness (and which can be traced back still further, by the serious historian), it is at once both a grim and desperate challenge as well as a unique opportunity to radically alter our country's destiny. More about that later. For now, let's look at where we've gotten so far.
The story of the 9/11 Truth Movement thus far (March 2007, as I write this) is largely, though not entirely, a story taking place on the left side of the political divide. So let's look there first.
“We are not deceived by their pretenses to piety. We have seen their kind before. They are the heirs of all the murderous ideologies of the 20th century. By sacrificing human life to serve their radical visions--by abandoning every value except the will to power--they follow in the path of fascism, and Nazism, and totalitarianism. And they will follow that path all the way to where it ends: in history's unmarked grave of discarded lies.”
— George W. Bush, Address to a Joint Session of Congress and the American People, September 20, 2001
So who is participating in the 911 cover-up.
The entire mainstream media. Literally hundreds of TV stations, and newspapers, weekly news magazines, the wire services, and a few hundred radio stations, not only in the USA, but in Britain, Australia, and much of Western Europe. These people are either totally unreliable, too stupid to see what is right in front of them, or too scared to do their jobs properly. Would you ever again trust any reporter who decided to support the official government conspiracy, even though he/she knew it was a cavalcade of lies, because that person was afraid of losing their income?
Three magazine sites were created by the founder of Wikipedia. One's on entertainment, one's on local news, and one's on politics. I link the one on politics, because I think it will be of most interest to this group.
Also, at some point in time, I had thought about creating a wiki site on Wikia to serve the 9/11 Truth Movement. The idea was to have a wiki dedicated to responding to mainstream media hit pieces. We don't have one spokes person, and many views differ, but it may be a good way to get a quality response together to articles we disagree with. That one could be by invite only.
I created +one+entry. Get an account, and "digg" it up!
An excerpt from a Ralph Schoenman speech on the false flag aspects of the events of September 11, 2001.
should say 175, not 75 .....
"Anti-Americanism from abroad would not be such a problem if Americans were united in standing up for their own country. But in this country itself, there are those who blame America for most of the evils in the world."
- Dinesh D'Souza, 2003.
"In this book I make a claim that will seem startling at the outset. The cultural left in this country is responsible for causing 9/11."
- Dinesh D'Souza, 2007.
Conservative author Dinesh D'Souza has a new book out, "The Enemy at Home: The Cultural Left and Its Responsibility for 9/11". D'Souza's thesis may come as some surprise to you. Perhaps you thought that "Islamofascists" were responsible for 9/11, or maybe you hold the somewhat contrarian view that 9/11 was a case of "blowback", and America's foreign policy is to blame. Could be that you view 9/11 as an obvious PsyOp, directed at the American people to catalyze public opinion into supporting the WAR ON TERROR!™
Well, turns out we're all wrong. In this new polemic, D'Souza pins the crime of 9/11 ultimately on the "cultural left" of the United States, one of the most starkly anti-American positions to be publicly taken by a pundit of the Left or Right in this country.
The fact that D'Souza's overall thesis is wrong on its face should not dissuade clever critics on the Left from showering his book with scorn, and so far that has indeed been the case. The first volley was lobbed from blogger Michael Bérubé, then James Wolcott of Vanity Fair, followed by a short burst from Mark Warren posted at Powell's. These were mere drops, and now an online search reveals a host of criticism directed at D'Souza's latest. To date, the best face-to-face mocking of D'Souza was delivered on The Colbert Report.
And, of course, the world would not be perfect without a sycophantic/hagiographic lavishing of praise for D'Souza from the typically worthless NewsMax.com. (Ok, I admit it, the NewsMax review isn't TOTALLY sycophantic.)
Although the inevitable exchanges of rhetoric being generated due to the publishing of this volume are sure to make entertaining reading, (and watching), the audience taking in this futile fusillade is merely watching a dumb show without a program, and will be left none the wiser for the next act.
Ask David: 9/11, Smoking Ban, Cannabis, PR - webcameron.org.uk
Looks like Cameron totally skirted the subject, and most likely didn't even read the trailer notes for 9/11:Press for Truth. Go check it out, post some comments here and there.
Thanks 911veritas for the heads up!
100 Hours Legislative Survey - dccc.org
Your input on the issues that are most important to you will help us formulate our strategy and guide our work in the first weeks of the new Congress.
What other issues would you like the 110th Congress to take up in the first 100 Hours?
Take a few minutes to send in your 2 cents as to what the new Congress should really be working on.
Thanks Randy for the suggestion!
[Editor's note: The piece by Steve Jones was posted on 911blogger.com with the
title, "Steven Jones Responds to the Three Stooges". Jim Fetzer posted a reply
later in the day. Here the two posts have been intergrated to join issues.]
Dear Friends and Colleagues,
This is to inform you that I (along with chemist Kevin Ryan and many others)
have withdrawn from association with Jim Fetzer (JF) and "his" version of
Scholars for 9/11 Truth, and to provide reasons for this action.
1. On the Scholars web site he manages ( www.st911.org ), Jim Fetzer casts
aspersions on my research regarding the use of thermates at the World Trade
Center on 9/11/2001 -- which is fine as long as he provides serious technical
objections, which he has not done. At the same time, JF is promoting on the web
site notions that energy-beams from WTC 7 or from space knocked the Towers down.
I have invited Jim repeatedly to view the video of my talk given 11/11/06 at the
University of California at Berkeley which provides the latest physical
evidences for thermate use, reinforcing the data in my published paper. He
Ed Haas, Muckraker Report, Nov. 7, 2006
If (as of 0527 Central, not an "if" - rep.) the Democrats take control of the House of Representatives as a result of today’s elections, Americans need to immediately launch an aggressive letter writing campaign to the new Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA 8th), requesting swift congressional hearings on the following topics:
· Bush Administration’s prior knowledge of 9/11 attacks
· Events of September 11, 2001
· Pre-war faulty intelligence that was used to justify invading Iraq, and whether the Bush Administration purposely misrepresented intelligence
· War profiteering
· Illegal wiretaps
It’s down to the wire and Democratic 9/11 truth candidate Dr. Bob Bowman has a shot at winning a congressional seat in Florida’s 15th district.
If you want to have an independent 9/11 investigation this is your best chance.
Bob needs money for last minute advertising. He doesn’t take any from lobbyists or corporate interests and his incumbent opponent does.
I’m flat broke and I gave him money.
Talk is cheap, Contribute
Bruce Marshall, Green Candidate for Congress in Vermont, Airs Concerns About 9/11 on Vermont Public Radio
Interview: Bruce Marshall, U.S. House Candidate - Vermont Public Radio
As part of VPR's continuing midterm election coverage we're speaking with a wide variety of candidates for statewide office.
Today, Green Party candidate for the US House Bruce Marshall talks with Mitch Wertlieb about the central issue of his campaign, which he says is more important than anything any of the major party candidates or the mainstream media is willing to talk about.
Mr. Marshall gets straight to the point in this 6 minute long interview with Vermont Public Radio. Marshall's central reason for running is to expose the lies surrounding 9/11.
You can find the 3MB MP3 of the interview via the link above, or archived at 911podcasts here.
Please note that we have added a banner in the action items section which lists all 9/11 candidates, please do your best to help them however you can!
Ok my stand on the 9/11 ordeal is simple. I think that the governent definitly had some involvment in it. To what extent? I'm not sure. But one thing I do know is the fact that the government is trying to cover their own ass while killing innocent bystanders in the meantime. If this doesn't sicken the percentage of the schmuck's who voted for this idiot president of ours, then I don't know what to say. Look on the news. See how many innocent children are being killed. How would you feel if you were sitting in your house, minding your own business and all the sudden
you're dead. You've done nothing to deserve this, but yet because you are in that paticular area, you should die. Honestly, it's sickening.
Four U.S. Congressional Candidates from Arizona Support a Truly Independent Reinvestigation of All 9/11 Evidence and Events - Press Release (PDF attached to this post)
Tucson, AZ, Oct. 22, 2006 - Statewide results of the 2006 Congressional Candidate 9/11 Truth Poll are in. The survey was conducted by 911Truth-Tucson by mailing questionnaires to the winners of the recent Arizona primary races for US House and Senate in all Arizona congressional districts. The surveys were provided by 911Truth.org -- a leading national 9/11 Truth group. The survey asked candidates for their opinions regarding the attacks of September 11 and the official investigations that followed.
Five candidates responded to the poll:
Richard Mack Senate Libertarian Mark Yannone CD3 Libertarian Don Karg CD4 Republican Warren Severin CD5 Libertarian David Nolan CD8 Libertarian
(more after the jump, be sure to download the original PDF attached)
Reprinted from Resistance Intelligencer
I think everyone can agree that the campaign to get the information out there to the people has been a resounding success thus far, the results to every poll are a testament to that.
Is it time to take the next step and start wielding some of the power this movement has accumulated? It is often said that senior citizens wield a considerable amount of political might in the United States. For the most part this is because they have numbers and they get out and vote, reliably and consistantly. While I think their power has somewhat decreased in recent years, there can be no doubt that political candidates make concessions to this power, and even at times go out of their way to mollify them, if for no other reason than through the fear that this voting bloc may come out in strength against them. I feel that the Truth Movement could rival this power and most likely excede it.
We certainly have the numbers on our side. Just look at any of the many online polls and you see the numbers... remember the Charlie Sheen poll? How about the 0wnage of the United 93 forums? Hell, check some net traffic reports or data on search terms, 9/11 Truth sites are some of the busiest out there. That's some serious numbers.
Building a Brighter Future
The Current Situation
Together, we can and will build a brighter future. Yet in order to give meaningful suggestions for this, we first
need to speak candidly about what's happening in the world at present. Based
on the abundance of reliable, verifiable information provided on the www.WantToKnow.info website, it appears that there are factions within the world's power elite which desire to exert as much control over the world as possible. Their primary means for establishing control are through promoting fear, secrecy, and polarization, and through distracting people from their deeper purpose in life. As these factions gain ever greater power and control, our freedoms and liberties are increasingly taken away, sometimes without our even realizing it.
I was in the process of making a music video in recognition of the 911 victims. I came across the vidoes about the cover up. I had seen this before and some what doubted it. Then as I was remembering what I was doing five years ago while I lay awake watching a rebroadcast of the Today Show from 9/11/01on MSNBC today. It came to me. I would hope to say that five years and counting of higher education would consider me an educated individual. There are three things that don't add up. The interview of a man in the Pentagon at the time of the "Plane Crash" basically proved the questionable facts I had gained from watching the video about a year and a half ago. To much of my surprise there has been ample amounts of facts proven in the newer versions. Either way, I still doubted it till about an hour ago. The questions I had about the Pentegon where, how does one here a crash/explosion and not evacuate the building. I don't care if it is built to withstand war time. Anyone would seek shelter in fear of other attacks, per se. He was being interviewed in his office with a co-worker, he didn't seem frightened to me. Rather, nervous his story wasn't adding up. Lastly, I was watching the rebroadcast and I thought to myself, when the Towers fall if it imploads then it was a cover up. Unfortunately, it didn't. The point where the plane hit first began to crumble appearing to bring down the other sections of the Towers outwards. I thought then see no cover up. One last fact that came to me was I remembered thinking to myself, at the point of the first tower collapsing, that it didn't seem logical or scientifically possible to me. I had class so I shrugged it off and ran off. So in answer to my question about the imploading. They had to have poorly placed the explosives in a manner that would make it seem as if it wasn't a planned demolition. One other thing that comes to mind is, I also noticed that later on in the year or perhaps the new year following 9/11 I remembered hearing about several members of Bush's administration resigning. I then thought to myself, why is every one doing this so fast after 9/11?
Republican Congressional Candidate, Author and Political Scientist, Dr. Mary Maxwell has responded to my earlier post
"I doubt that Sen Gregg actually said that. No New Hampshire Republican would take such a position against the Constitution. More likely, the words were supplied by the editor of The Union Leader (also known locally as The Management Follower). I believe many quotes in newspapers are written without benefit of a telephone call to the speaker. In any case I suspect that the episode of the professor would not have made the news (after all it is not an event) but for the fact that I am running for Congress here in New Hampshire, and on Thursday another paper came out with the jaw-dropper that I had labeled 9/11 a false flag operation. I am indeed proud of the Nashua Telegraph for letting me say my piece..."
Click here for more information about Dr. Maxwell's Congressional campaign.
From New Hampshire's Nashua Telegraph
By ALBERT McKEON, Telegraph Staff
Published: Thursday, Aug. 24, 2006
A Republican candidate for this area’s congressional seat said Wednesday that the U.S. government was complicit in the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
In an editorial board interview with The Telegraph on Wednesday, the candidate, Mary Maxwell, said the U.S. government had a role in killing nearly 3,000 people at the World Trade Center and Pentagon, so it could make Americans hate Arabs and allow the military to bomb Muslim nations such as Iraq.
Maxwell, 59, seeks the 2nd District congressional seat. The Concord resident opposes the incumbent, Charles Bass of Peterborough, and Berlin Mayor Bob Danderson in the Republican primary Sept. 12.
Maxwell would not specify if she holds the opinion that the government stood by while terrorists hijacked four domestic airliners and used them as weapons, or if it had a larger role by sanctioning and carrying out the attacks.
But she implicated the government by saying the Sept. 11 attacks were meant “to soften us up . . . to make us more willing to have more stringent laws here, which are totally against the Bill of Rights . . . to make us particularly focus on Arabs and Muslims . . . and those strange persons who spend all their time creating little bombs,” giving Americans a reason “to hate them and fear them and, therefore, bomb them in Iraq for other reasons.”
In Oklahoma's historic 5th district congressional race, the State's largest newspaper utilized an underused adjective to describe '9/11 Truth' candidate Matthew Horton Woodson's statement 'any objective observer realizes that domestic criminal must have been involved with the horrors of 9/11' as 'malarkey'.
History was made when this very conservative newspaper in the 'home of the heartland' printed the words 'controlled demolition' of 'one of the buildings that collapsed near the Twin Towers'. The Daily Oklahoman has only printed the words "World Trade Center 7" twice in it's history. So I call this progress!
It should be noted that the Daily Oklahoman's office building was damaged in the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, and now has it's headquarters in a modern high rise.
While Mary Fallin and Mick Cornett have tried to win Republican voters in the 5th District congressional race, an independent seeking the office has gone about advancing 9/11 conspiracy theories. Matthew Woodson sent an e-mail this week that mentioned a "controlled demolition" of one of the buildings that collapsed near the Twin Towers. "Any objective observer realizes that domestic criminals must have been involved with the horrors of 9/11." That kind of malarkey, similar to state House candidate Charles Key's fixation with the Oklahoma City bombing, costs a candidate all credibility.