Saturday, June 30, 2007

9/11 Truth Industry


NOAM CHOMSKY: 9/11 Truth Movement Pushes Non-Scientific Evidence
"There's a big industry in the United States, on the left as well. I mean, you should see the emails I get - this huge Internet industry, from the left, trying to demonstrate that this was all faked and it was planned by the Bush Administration and so on. If you look at the evidence, anybody who knows anythings about the sciences would instantly discount that evidence." - Noam Chomsky

The Public Campaign to Stop
the Lies and the Denial of
the Main Motive for the 9/11 Attacks:
U.S. Support for Israel

If you think steel can't be affected by fire, why do you think they spray fireproofing onto steel trusses in the first place?

WTC 7 was severely damaged on the south side of the building and was on fire for about 7 hours.

WTC Pre-Collapse Bowing Debunks 9/11 "Controlled Demolition" Theory

Read NIST FAQ

The very thing that Griffin points to as a feature of a fire caused collapse we can see in photos of the World Trade Center.

Jones has some sort of problem. He misrepresents many things in his paper. Chairman of the BYU department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Dr. Miller, is on record stating in an e-mail, "I think without exception, the structural engineering professors in our department are not in agreement with the claims made by Jones in his paper, and they don't think there is accuracy and validity to these claims."

Jet Fuel Debunks 9/11 "Controlled Demolition" Theory

http://representativepress.blogspot.com/2007/06/911-truth-industry.html

Wednesday, June 27, 2007

I Heard Back from the YouTube Team about the CENSORED VIDEO

I Heard Back from the YouTube Team about the CENSORED VIDEO


Hi,

Thank you for your notification. The video(s) have been reinstated.

Regards,

Nidhi
The YouTube Team

Sunday, June 24, 2007

If Americans Knew What Israel Is Doing! VIDEO WAS CENSORED!

If Americans Knew What Israel Is Doing! VIDEO WAS CENSORED!


Those who want to suppress the facts have dishonestly contacted YouTube and claimed that the video "If Americans Knew What Israel Is Doing!" was a Terms of Service Violation. The video is clearly NOT a TOS violation. You can see why they don't want you to see it. Some little shit had emailed me saying "You have violated YouTube terms of use policy with your anti-Semitic hate videos. You must remove them IMMEDIATELY! Thank you for your cooperation." Soon after that, YouTube had removed my video.

Waging Peace by Scott Ritter


Waging Peace: The Art of War for the Antiwar Movement by Scott Ritter

Friday, June 22, 2007

Saturday, June 16, 2007

Khalid Shaikh Mohammed Transcript Excerpts

Khalid Shaikh Mohammed 3/10/07 Defense Department Transcript Excerpts

"For sure, I'm American enemies. Usama bin Laden, he did his best press conference in American media. Mr. John Miller he been there when he made declaration against Jihad, against America. And he said it is not no need for me now to make explanation of what he said but mostly he said about American military presence in Arabian peninsula and aiding Israel and many things. ...

As consider George Washington as hero. Muslims many of them are considering Usama bin Laden. He is doing same thing. He is just fighting. He needs his independence. Even we think that, or not me only. Many Muslims, that al Qaida or Taliban they are doing. They have been oppressed by America. ...

If you and me, two nations, will be together in war the others are victims. This is the way of the language. You know 40 million people were killed in World War One. Ten million kill in World War. You know that two million four hundred thousand be killed in the Korean War. So this language of the war. Any people who, when Usama bin Laden say I'm waging war because such such reason, now he declared it. But when you said I'm terrorist, I think it is deceiving peoples. ...

Because war, for sure, there will be victims. When I said I'm not happy that 3,000 been killed in America. I feel sorry even. I don't like to kill children and the kids. Never Islam are, give me green light to kill peoples. Killing, as in the Christianity, Jews, and Islam, are prohibited. But there are exception of rule when you are killing people in Iraq. You said we have to do it. We don't like Saddam. But this is the way to deal with Saddam. Same thing you are saying. Same language you use, I use. ...

I mean the language of the war is victims. I don't like to kill people. I feel very sorry they been killed kids in 9/11. What I will do? This is the language. Sometime I want to make great awakening between American to stop foreign policy in our land.

I know American people are torturing us from seventies. [REDACTED] I know they talking about human rights. And I know it is against American Constitution, against American laws. But they said every law, they have exceptions, this is your bad luck you been part of the exception of our laws. ...

Killing is prohibited in all what you call the people of the book, Jews, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. You know the Ten Commandments very well. The Tell Commandments are shared between all of us. We all are serving one God. Then now kill you know it very well. But war language also we have language for the war. You have to kill. But you have to care if unintentionally or intentionally target if I have if I'm not at the Pentagon. I consider it is okay. If I target now when we target in USA we choose them military target, economical, and political. So, war central victims mostly means economical target. ...

War start from Adam when Cain he killed Abel until now. It's never gonna stop killing of people. This is the way of the language. American start the Revolutionary War then they starts the Mexican then Spanish War then World War One, World War Two. You read the history. You know never stopping war. This is life. But if who is enemy combatant and who is not? Finally, I finish statement. I'm asking you to be fair with other people."

Khalid Shaikh Mohammed also spelled "Khalid Shaikh Muhammad"
Read full text here: http://www.defenselink.mil/news/transcript_ISN10024.pdf

See The Public Campaign to Stop the Lies and Denial of the Main Motive for the 9/11 Attacks

Friday, June 15, 2007

Campaign to Stop the Lies and the Denial about U.S. Support for Israel

The Public Campaign to Stop
the Lies and the Denial of
the Main Motive for the 9/11 Attacks:
U.S. Support for Israel
It is depraved to deny the main motive for the 9/11 attacks.Things you can do:
Join the Email List
TinyUrl.com/JoinEmailList
  • Promote the video "Sit Down!" The Power to Silence,
    send the link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7EB1FxENxQ to everyone you can.
  • Tell the media you want the lies and denials to stop.
  • Email Leo Braudy and ask him for a public apology.
  • Email Terry McDermott and ask him to do a story on this, tell him speak up and tell the truth about support US for Israel.
  • Support the campaign with a button.
  • Support the campaign with a donation
  • Thursday, June 14, 2007

    Michael Moore played the same game the 9/11 Commissioners admit they played.

    Michael Moore played the same game the 9/11 Commissioners admit they played.

    Michael Moore played the same game the 9/11 Commissioners admit they played. "In their view, listing U.S. support for Israel as a root cause of al Qaeda's opposition to the United States indicated that the United States should reassess that policy." (this is a quote from the book "Without Precedent" by 9/11 Commissioners Thomas H. Kean and Lee H. Hamilton) Both Michael Moore, with his movie "Fahrenheit 911" and the 9/11 Commissioners with their "9/11 Rerport" misdirected many Americans away from the undeniable motive which Philip D. Zelikow, the Executive Director of the 9/11 Commission, mentioned in his Staff Statement before the 9/11 Commission: "the al Qaeda leader wanted to punish the United States for supporting Israel."
    It is depraved to deny the main motive for the 9/11 attacks.
    Michael Moore, the MSM and others, for example an editor at crooksandliars.com, keep censoring mention of the main motive. Yes, Philip D. Zelikow said the above quote to the 9/11 Commission BUT if you look at what made it into the 9/11 Report, they paraphrase the sentences before and after the above sentence YET they skip mention of his sentence about the al Qaeda leader wanting to punish the United States for supporting Israel! And MICHAEL MOORE plays the same game making his seriously flawed movie "Fahrenheit 911."

    Had more people been honest about the 9/11 motives and if people pointed out that Bush lied to the American people about why we were attacked on 9/11, I think it would have been harder for the Bush Administration to sell the Iraq War.

    Monday, June 11, 2007

    Friday, June 08, 2007

    Permanent War Economy

    Permanent War Economy
    "Government Must Be The Savior"

    "The term "permanent war economy" is attributed to Charles Wilson, CEO of GE, who warned at the end of World War II that the US must not return to a civilian economy, but must keep to a "permanent war economy" of the kind that was so successful during the war: a semi-command economy, run mostly by corporate executives, geared to military production. Among other very important contributions, Melman has written extensively on the harmful effects of gearing much of the economy to military production rather than to civilian needs.

    What he describes is correct and important, but there are other dimensions to be considered. After World War II, most economists and business leaders expected that the economy would sink back to depression without massive government intervention of the kind that, during the war years, finally overcame the Great Depression. The New Deal had softened the edges, but not much more. Business understood that social spending could overcome market catastrophes as well as military spending, but social spending has a downside: it has a democratizing and redistributive effect while military spending is a gift to the corporate manager, a steady cushion. And the public is not involved. People care about hospitals and schools, but if you can "scare the hell out of them," as Senator Vandenberg recommended, they will huddle under the umbrella of power and trust their leaders when it comes to jet planes, missiles, tanks, etc. Furthermore, business was well aware that high-tech industry could not survive in a competitive free enterprise economy, and "government must be the savior," as the business press explained. Such considerations converged on the decision to focus on military rather than social spending. And it should be borne in mind that "military spending" does not mean just military spending. A great deal of it is high-tech R&D. Virtually the entire "new economy" has relied heavily on the military cover to socialize risk and cost and privatize profit, often after many decades: computers and electronics generally, telecommunications and the Internet, satellites, the aeronautical industry (hence tourism, the largest "service industry"), containerization (hence contemporary trade), computer-controlled machine tools, and a great deal more. Alan Greenspan and others like to orate about how all of this is a tribute to the grand entrepreneurial spirit and consumer choice in free markets. That's true of the late marketing stage, but far less so in the more significant R&D stage. Much the same is true in the biology-based sectors of industry, though different pretexts are used. The record goes far back, but these mechanisms to sustain the advanced industrial economy became far more significant after World War II.

    In brief, the permanent war economy has an economic as well as a purely military function. And both outcomes -- incomparable military force and an advanced industrial economy -- naturally provide crucial mechanisms for foreign policy planning, much of it geared to ensuring free access to markets and resources for the state-supported corporate sector, constraining rivals, and barring moves towards independent development." - "The Savage Extreme of a Narrow Policy Spectrum" Five Questions with Noam Chomsky By MERLIN CHOWKWANYUN

    We have State-Capitalism NOT Capitalism

    "The word to use remains "security," not "subsidy," as Air Force Secretary Stuart Symington advised in the early days of the Cold War, when government was being mobilized as the "savior" of private power, which could not survive in a competitive economy, as the business press frankly acknowledged.

    The Fraud of Neoliberal Economic Theory

    Costs are socialized, profits are privatized

    Interventions Noam Chomsky

    Interventions Noam Chomsky

    Monday, June 04, 2007

    Chavez, Venezuela, TV

    Yes Fox is very bad but the rest of MSM is very bad too. The truth about the TV station not having the licence renewed has been misreported across MSM, not just on FOX.

    "RCTV and other commercial TV stations were key players in the April 2002 coup that briefly ousted Chavez's democratically elected government. During the short-lived insurrection, coup leaders took to commercial TV airwaves to thank the networks. "I must thank VenevisiĆ³n and RCTV," one grateful leader remarked in an appearance captured in the Irish film The Revolution Will Not Be Televised. The film documents the networks’ participation in the short-lived coup, in which stations put themselves to service as bulletin boards for the coup—hosting coup leaders, silencing government voices and rallying the opposition to a march on the Presidential Palace that was part of the coup plotters strategy" - Coup Co-Conspirators as Free-Speech Martyrs, Distorting the Venezuelan media story

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxBSnaR-Ulw


    http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=45&ItemID=12962

    http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=45&ItemID=12986

    Saturday, June 02, 2007

    Jones has some sort of problem.

    "Though I have to say I wanted to piggyback what thinkpad15 talked about regarding the tests done," writes mconn2112.

    I looked through the comments and I see that thinkpad15 relies on Steven Jones. I have researched the claims the "9/11 Truth movement" makes and they are simply wrong.

    Prof. Jones is one of the main culprits, if not the main culprit, spreading the falsehoods and ignorance. His 9/11 paper shows that the man has a problem reasoning or, because it is so extreme, it looks like he is deliberately deceiving people. With regard to the NIST report, it appears that he simply doesn't understand what he is reading or that he has some sort of problem. Either way, he has demonstrated that he is embarrassingly not fit to publish scientific papers on this topic. I explain it at this link:

    Prof. Steven E. Jones and his 911 paper

    There is no way around it, what he doesn't understand (and there is no good reason for not understanding it) is CENTRAL to why the buildings collapsed and it is backed up by evidence that he is ignoring either deliberately or out of incompetence. The man demonstrates clearly that he should not be writing a paper like this or be involved in any academic endeavors because if he can't understand what NIST is saying in their report, he has no right trying to write scientific papers. I don't know what the defect is with his mind but there is a problem of some sort, given the evidence he indicates he doesn't understand. It really is disgusting that his ignorance or deception has gone this far. Please read what I wrote at the link, I think it is cut and dry.

    Prof. Steven E. Jones and his 9/11 paper
    or Google: "Jones has some sort of problem."