The Obama administration has the worst track record when it comes to prosecuting whistleblowers. Obama once claimed he'd work hard to have a transparent government, but many have faced retaliation for revealing controversial government information. Sibel Edmonds, who is a whistleblower, waited 340 days for FBI clearance of her memoir but finally released it on her own. Edmonds, founder of the National Security Whistleblowers Coalition, joins us for more.
-------------------------------------------------
Edmonds talks about her experience with the controlled mass media, the cover-up of pre-911 intelligence and also general corruption in Government departments - with individuals inside the USA working with foreign nations (presumably Turkey and Israel) to the detriment of US National Security.
Regarding Bin Laden, and Bin Laden related groups, according to Sibel, the CIA and State Department had been working with them throughout the 90s, right up to, and AFTER the attacks of September 11. In other interviews she has also said that the US had intimate ties to Osama Bin Laden right up to the day of the attacks.
This is the real world we live in. The billion dollar budgeted intelligence agencies DO have tentacles everywhere, but they don't talk about it. They know what's going on and manipulate things to serve certain geopolitical interests. This sort of thing has been going on for a long time. And >> if these interests find themselves with no serious threats, or rather no military excuse to intervene in foreign countries, like at the end of the Cold War, then they lose a measure of their ability to control events - hence the War on Terror.
This is a great clip.
And note: when asked about bombshell information, Sibel states she did not release information that she knew was classified. There is obviously more story to tell. However, what we do know is damning enough.
Related Info:
FBI Blocks 9/11 Whistleblower’s Book
Two more recent interviews with Edmonds
Debunking the Debunkers:
FBI Whistleblower Sibel Edmonds is Credible... and Yes... She is a Truther Too!
Sibel Edmonds, SNAFUs, and Freedom Fries!
Nitpicking the Nitpickers: Curley's Mistranslation
Curley's Mistranslation - Part Deux!
Refuting the Hollow Arguments of the So-called 9/11 Debunkers & Truthers
Tuesday, May 22, 2012
Saturday, May 19, 2012
WTC 7 Petition to the National Institute for Standards and Technology, U.S. Congress, and President Obama
Revise the U.S. government final report on the collapse of Building 7
http://avaaz.org/en/petition/Revise_the_US_government_final_report_on_the_collapse_of_Building_7/
Building 7 of the World Trade Center, a 47 story building, contained offices of the CIA, the Secret Service, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) several financial institutions and then-Mayor Giuliani's Office of Emergency Management.
Despite never being hit by an airplane, Building 7 was reduced to a pile of rubble in about 7 seconds at 5:20 p.m. on September 11, 2001. After 9/11 this fact has been widely covered up by the U.S. mass media and was even omitted from the 9/11 Commission Report.
NIST, the National Institute for Standards and Technology (a U.S. government agency) was authorized by Congress to determine “why and how WTC 7 collapsed.” NIST produced a preliminary draft of their final report in August, 2008 omitting the fact that Building 7 fell at free fall acceleration for part of its descent. After a physicist challenged NIST on this point the final report, in November 2008 admitted free fall acceleration for 105' or 2.5 seconds.
NIST wrote, “A more detailed analysis of the descent of the north face found . . . (2) a freefall descent over approximately eight stories at gravitational acceleration for approximately 2.25 s . . . .” (Final Report on the Collapse of World Trade Center Building 7, NIST NCSTAR 1A, page 48)
However NIST claimed that this was consistent with their own fire based collapse theory which alleged that the entire collapse began because column 79 became laterally unsupported and buckled due to heat. NIST has refused to disclose their entire computer model and this column 79 theory was not based on any hard evidence.
NIST has already admitted the scientific fact of free fall acceleration in Building 7. This is remarkable! Now we ask that NIST tell what this means: that the entire building structure below for at least eight floors was removed just as Building 7 began to fall. Does this not imply use of explosives? We petition for a response.
This may give a very different understanding of what really happened on 9/11.
The reason this matters in 2012 is that the U.S. continues to kill countless people in the so called war on terror all based on the assumption that the World Trade Center attacks were done solely by Muslims. Muslims would not have had the access to Building 7, the equipment, the knowledge of the sophisticated process of controlled demolition nor the time to arrange it.
I want peace for myself, my family and friends and millions of people I don’t even know.
http://avaaz.org/en/petition/Revise_the_US_government_final_report_on_the_collapse_of_Building_7/
Debunking the Debunkers: World Trade Center 7: An Engineered Collapse
http://avaaz.org/en/petition/Revise_the_US_government_final_report_on_the_collapse_of_Building_7/
Building 7 of the World Trade Center, a 47 story building, contained offices of the CIA, the Secret Service, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) several financial institutions and then-Mayor Giuliani's Office of Emergency Management.
Despite never being hit by an airplane, Building 7 was reduced to a pile of rubble in about 7 seconds at 5:20 p.m. on September 11, 2001. After 9/11 this fact has been widely covered up by the U.S. mass media and was even omitted from the 9/11 Commission Report.
NIST, the National Institute for Standards and Technology (a U.S. government agency) was authorized by Congress to determine “why and how WTC 7 collapsed.” NIST produced a preliminary draft of their final report in August, 2008 omitting the fact that Building 7 fell at free fall acceleration for part of its descent. After a physicist challenged NIST on this point the final report, in November 2008 admitted free fall acceleration for 105' or 2.5 seconds.
NIST wrote, “A more detailed analysis of the descent of the north face found . . . (2) a freefall descent over approximately eight stories at gravitational acceleration for approximately 2.25 s . . . .” (Final Report on the Collapse of World Trade Center Building 7, NIST NCSTAR 1A, page 48)
However NIST claimed that this was consistent with their own fire based collapse theory which alleged that the entire collapse began because column 79 became laterally unsupported and buckled due to heat. NIST has refused to disclose their entire computer model and this column 79 theory was not based on any hard evidence.
NIST has already admitted the scientific fact of free fall acceleration in Building 7. This is remarkable! Now we ask that NIST tell what this means: that the entire building structure below for at least eight floors was removed just as Building 7 began to fall. Does this not imply use of explosives? We petition for a response.
This may give a very different understanding of what really happened on 9/11.
The reason this matters in 2012 is that the U.S. continues to kill countless people in the so called war on terror all based on the assumption that the World Trade Center attacks were done solely by Muslims. Muslims would not have had the access to Building 7, the equipment, the knowledge of the sophisticated process of controlled demolition nor the time to arrange it.
I want peace for myself, my family and friends and millions of people I don’t even know.
http://avaaz.org/en/petition/Revise_the_US_government_final_report_on_the_collapse_of_Building_7/
Debunking the Debunkers: World Trade Center 7: An Engineered Collapse
Saturday, May 12, 2012
James Kust of the University of Wisconsin–Eau Claire is Misinformed
This statement is misinformed.
Thousands Of Victims' Family Members Believe 9/11 Was An Inside Job
http://www.911blogger.com/news/2006-09-22/thousands-victims-family-members-believe-911-was-inside-job
We, the undersigned Families, First Responders and Survivors of September 11 raise our voice with those from across our country and around the world in support of NYC CAN and the establishment of an independent, impartial subpoena powered investigation into the events surrounding the September 11 attacks on our nation.
http://nyccan.org/signatories.
Respected Leaders and Families Launch 9/11 Truth Statement Demanding Deeper Investigation into the Events of 9/11
http://www.911truth.org/
Scholars and Family Members Submit Request for Correction to 9/11 NIST Report
http://stj911.org/press_
9/11 Family Member Patty Casazza: Government Knew Exact Date and Exact Target
http://911debunkers.blogspot.com/2009/09/but-if-911-was-conspiracy-people-would.html
Bryan Hunt, FDNY, retired 8-15 Years
“I retired from FDNY in 1998. I knew many of the guys who died in the WTC collapses. May they rest in peace. I’ve read tons of information re. the deaths of my brothers on 9/11. I’ve watched the videos, listened to the rantings on both sides. It wasn’t until 2006 that I began questioning the “official story” and did my own research. There is bad info on both sides, but I’ve concluded that the “official story” doesn’t add up. It sounds like a whitewash. The 9/11 Commission didn’t investigate anything–they just took statements. We need a real, independent investigation, with supeona powers. If the “offical” version is correct, so be it. And if heads are going to roll at any level of the government or military, so be it. Let’s do it, and let’s not be afraid of the truth. The brothers deserve that much.”
http://
More “offended 9/11 family members” support ae911truth!
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/
To his credit, Kust goes on to state the following regarding the Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth College Outreach Team at his campus:
But as strongly as I’m opposed to this organization’s intentions, I feel even more strongly about something else — our nation’s First Amendment. There’s no law, thankfully, that prohibits this College Outreach Team from existing.As is demonstrated in the article, "Bringing Truth to the Youth: AE911Truth University Outreach Repeats its Success at St. Mary’s College," if Kust will give the the College Outreach Team a chance to inform him that they are not misinformed he will probably be changing his tune.
They are free to organize here and use student fees here and spread their message here. That message — no matter how much I personally disagree with it — is protected by law. I respect that right, and when this organization becomes active on campus, I urge you to respect it as well.
Similarly, here is a report from my mother, Kimberly Talboo, on her recent college outreach, which yet again swayed the opinion of, rather than offending, a 9/11 family member:
I was given an assignment in my Communications class at school to head a debate team. The purpose was to attempt to persuade the audience of about 15 classmates that you were correct about the theory behind the topic you had chosen for discussion. The topic was to be something you knew at least a little about and something controversial.
I first handed out fact sheets with the top questions from Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. I then showed the short film, "Architects & Engineers - Solving the Mystery of WTC 7," narrated by Ed Asner and featuring four 9/11 family members.
[Feature-length AE911Truth film Experts Speak Out viewable here.]
What happened later was a bit of a surprise. I had a hand full of students that were just children when the buildings collapsed and they weren't aware of any of the information I had supplied. They were flabbergasted and totally interested in what I had conveyed to them. Several people from the 40-50 age range said they figured there was something about the collapse of the first two towers that was questionable but didn't know about WTC7 and now were starting to question what really did happen that day. A small group said they were aware of some of the events but that I had shed new light on the situation.
One girl said she had a cousin who had received emails from someone in another country warning her, in advance, to stay away from NYC on the day of the attack. Another had lost a relative in the buildings.
The synopsis of the debate was that everyone in the room agreed that something didn't add up.
Thursday, May 3, 2012
My Top 10 Insane Conspiracy Theories
For Infowars Nightly News last night, Paul Joseph Watson counted down his top 10 insane conspiracy theories which distract from exposing real coverups. Many of them were about Alex Jones and himself. His humorous list inspired me to make a slightly more serious list of my top 10 insane conspiracy theories.
10) YouTube meddling with view counts
It's a conspiracy!
Okay, it wouldn't surprise me if YouTube does meddle with view counts, but I'm sick of people making a big deal over the fact that every video on Alex Jones' channel and other big truth/conspiracy channels gets stuck on 300 views for a while shortly after they've been uploaded. It happens to every channel!
9) The Pentagon no-plane/missile/flyover theory
The circular reasoning of Pentagon no-planers: "There's no plane debris, therefore a plane didn't hit the Pentagon." *Shows pictures of plane debris* "Those pieces of debris were planted!" "Oh really?!" "They must have been, because we know a plane didn't hit the pentagon!" "How do you know a plane didn't hit the pentagon?" "Because there was no debris!"
*Facepalm*
And don't even get me started on the flyover theory.
8) Vaccines do no good
Contrary to what some may assume, I'm not actually "anti-vaccine". Vaccines are 250-year-old technology that obviously have done a lot of good. I actually agree with skeptics on this point. It's not vaccine technology in general that's the problem, but the specific products that the pharmaceutical industry puts out.
7) Lady Gaga is a man
Stefani Germanotta as a little girl
Lady Gaga is kind of a guilty pleasure of mine. Most people in conspiracy circles believe she's an Illuminati puppet who's part of some demoralization agenda. While there probably is some truth there, you have to admit she's very talented, at least compared to many other popular "artists" today (*Cough* Justin Bieber *Cough*). Also, her songs translate quite well to heavy metal![1] [2] [3] [4]
I've never really cared much for celebrity conspiracy theories. Could Kurt Cobain, Michael Jackson, Whitney Houston and Amy Winehouse have really been murdered? Well, it wouldn't surprise me, but I haven't really researched any of them so I don't know. Could Disney teen sensations be under some form of mind control? Again, it wouldn't surprise me. We're all under mind control to some degree. That's what propaganda, marketing and indoctrination is. The theory that Lady Gaga is a secretly a man though is just silly.
6) The Moon-landing hoax theory
Back when I was a teenager I actually used to believe this. Eventually I realised a lot of people would have to be involved and fully aware of the hoax. Compartmentalization would be stretched beyond its limits. In 2008, MythBusters pretty much answered my remaining questions.
5) The man in the "fatty" Bin Laden video isn't Bin Laden
Al-Zawahiri and Al-Harbi talking to a fat guy in a suit... apparently.
Again, this was something I used to believe until this 9/11 Myths article set me straight. See, we agree with the debunkers on some things!
4) The Intelligent Design = Creationism conspiracy theory
This is a conspiracy theory advocated by those who attack us: the skeptics. Basically, in early drafts of the intelligent design book, Of Pandas and People, the authors used the word "creationism" instead of "intelligent design". Then in a subsequent draft, all instances of the word "creationism" were replaced with "intelligent design" and all instances of the word "creationist" were replaced with "design proponent", and in one case, since I guess the Ctrl-H function didn't exist in the 80s, "cdesign proponentsists". This is cited as proof by many that intelligent design is simply a conspiracy to sneak creationism into the classrooms. And "cdesign proponentsists" has been widely ridiculed as the 'missing link' between creationism and intelligent design.
I'll admit, it's kind of funny. The problem is, "creationism" and "intelligent design" are just labels. The "skeptics" have it backwards. This doesn't prove that intelligent design = creationism. All it proves is that what we now call intelligent design was at some point during its development referred to as creationism. That doesn't change the fact that they are two distinctly different ideas. Also, there are references to the term "intelligent design" and "intelligent designer" going back to the 1700s. The term was even used by Charles Darwin in 1861.
The Skeptics Society: Hard forensic evidence isn't good enough evidence for the 9/11 conspiracy theory, but a few old, mined quotations and a typo is all the proof you need for the ID = creationism conspiracy theory! Don't believe the anti-establishment conspiracy theories, believe the pro-establishment conspiracy theories!
3) "That's No Moon!"
I'm fairly open-minded about a lot of what David Icke says, even the reptilian stuff. I'm not saying I believe it, but I'm not completely close-minded to it either. I've heard of crazier beliefs (*Cough* Scientology *Cough*). But his most recent claim that "the moon is not real" is just too much. It's not so much the theory itself but the new age belief that it's part of. Icke essentially believes that thousands of years ago the world was like Pandora from Avatar. There was an abundance of life and we were all spiritually connected and everything was in harmony etc. And then the evil moon - which was actually built by aliens - came a long and screwed it all up. The problem is, if we didn't have a moon, we wouldn't be here!
Because of complex gravitational interactions with the outer planets, the tilt of the Earth would, if it didn't have a large moon, vary chaotically. We know this because we can observe it happening to Mars. The Earth's tilt is at a relatively constant 23 degrees. If we didn't have a moon it would vary between 10 and 40 degrees over periods of millions of years. Millions of years may sound like a a long time, but in evolutionary terms it's really not. Such variation in tilt would cause an erratic climate which would prevent complex life from evolving in the first place. So the moon sort of functions as a cosmic tail rotor. It's not bad. It doesn't screw up a perfect balance. It's a neccesary part of one!
2) "It's the Joooooos!"
Suck my jaggon, anti-semites!
1) TV fakery and fake phone calls
What the September Clues people are arguing essentially is that the entire population of New York City was involved in the 9/11 conspiracy. It's no surprise that I would put the TV fakery theory at number one. The reason I'm putting the fake phone call theory at number one as well is because I honestly believe it to be equally offensive.
Tuesday, May 1, 2012
9/11 Tarpley vs Kay Debate
Editor's note: I strongly disagree with many of Tarpley's conclusions about 9/11 and his unfounded allegations against several other 9/11 researchers.
9/11 Tarpley vs Kay Debate
Date: Saturday, April 28, 2012
ProgressivePress.com
Tarpley noted that conspiracies aren't needed under dictatorship or mob rule, but that they flourish under oligarchy.
Kay bases his arguments on the assumption that real conspiracies are small and large ones are fanciful. Conspiracy theorists keep expanding the scope of the conspiracy to explain away "new evidence" in the form of reports from e.g. the 9/11 Commission, NIST or the media. But these are not new facts, they are only reiterations of the appeal to authority fallacy.
Tarpley pointed out that the increased distrust of authority is due to the failure to give people the goods in terms of a better standard of living. In his presentation he gave facts about drills on 9/11 and pointed out that the Founding Fathers and A. Lincoln were firm believers in a conspiracy against freedoms of the people.
Kay takes examples where conspiracies came to light as proof that our free, open society is fool-proof against conspiracies, so that 9/11 couldn’t have succeeded as an inside job. His examples are the 1933 plot against Roosevelt and Operation Northwoods. Tarpley calls him on this, pointing out that the news of the 1933 plot was suppressed by the media, that the plotters got off scot-free, and that the plot against FDR continued. As for Northwoods, it was essentially implemented in the form of the Tonkin Gulf hoax. Moreover, the instigator of Northwoods, Gen. Lyman Lemnitzer, became the chief of NATO where he installed Gladio units to carry out false-flag operations. Someone from the audience refuted Kay’s allegation that conspiracy theories are disproved by history, pointing out how belief in a conspiracy around the JFK assassination has grown from a small minority to a huge majority.
Kay repeats the old argument that someone somewhere would blow the whistle. Tarpley replied that they would risk their lives or their livelihoods by breaking their vow of silence. Kay betrays a complete lack of understanding of social structures such as exist in the intelligence community, special forces and organized crime. The perpetrators or moles are not going to talk. That goes for the patsies, too, who as Tarpley pointed out, often can’t talk because they are liquidated. As for the media, Kay assumes we have never heard of Operation Mockingbird.
Kay made a point that the internet has allowed people to find “factoids” to support their point of view, whatever it may be. In other words, that opinion drives people’s perception of reality.
When asked what aspect of the inside job argument he felt was strongest, he spoke of his background in metallurgy and his interest in the studies on the building collapses. He said the best propaganda point for 911 truth was the video of WTC 7 collapsing, but that this clip shows the side of the building that was undamaged. Of course he didn’t explain how a steel building is supposed to burn down, apparently due to his own herd-instinct subjectivity overruling his metalurgy.
Kay had the last word in an appeal for investigative journalism rather than just connecting the dots. He mentioned cases like the NYT publishing the Pentagon papers.
I suppose Kay would consider it an outlandish conspiracy theory if one were to point out that this is an efficient way for an oligarchy to rule. Keep up the façade of a free open society by allowing diversity of views, while suppressing only the really dangerous facts that would threaten Wall Street rule. Moreover this very fiction of a free society helps the empire expand by harnessing young fools abroad to join color revolutions to overthrow their national governments, which are then replaced by kleptocrat klients of Wall Street.
9/11 Debate: Webster Tarpley vs. Jonathan Kay.
Published on Apr 30, 2012 by Bullsh!tPolitics
Although, I think this is not one of Tarpley's best debates, due to time restrictions. It was still a very cogent and convincing presentation on the subject. Kay, acting as the religious status quo inquisitor, brings up couple of good points about the mentality of the truthers, though it didn't save his speech from being banal & lacklustre. Overall, Kay's efforts i thought, lacked the ideal form of focus, substance and facts, which is the key ingredient for any competitive debate. In simpler terms, "he brought a knife to a gun fight".
Related:
Debunking Jonathan Kay, his book Among the Truthers, and Other 'Debunkers'
Debunking 911myths.com: War Games
9/11 Tarpley vs Kay Debate
Date: Saturday, April 28, 2012
ProgressivePress.com
Tarpley noted that conspiracies aren't needed under dictatorship or mob rule, but that they flourish under oligarchy.
Kay bases his arguments on the assumption that real conspiracies are small and large ones are fanciful. Conspiracy theorists keep expanding the scope of the conspiracy to explain away "new evidence" in the form of reports from e.g. the 9/11 Commission, NIST or the media. But these are not new facts, they are only reiterations of the appeal to authority fallacy.
Tarpley pointed out that the increased distrust of authority is due to the failure to give people the goods in terms of a better standard of living. In his presentation he gave facts about drills on 9/11 and pointed out that the Founding Fathers and A. Lincoln were firm believers in a conspiracy against freedoms of the people.
Kay takes examples where conspiracies came to light as proof that our free, open society is fool-proof against conspiracies, so that 9/11 couldn’t have succeeded as an inside job. His examples are the 1933 plot against Roosevelt and Operation Northwoods. Tarpley calls him on this, pointing out that the news of the 1933 plot was suppressed by the media, that the plotters got off scot-free, and that the plot against FDR continued. As for Northwoods, it was essentially implemented in the form of the Tonkin Gulf hoax. Moreover, the instigator of Northwoods, Gen. Lyman Lemnitzer, became the chief of NATO where he installed Gladio units to carry out false-flag operations. Someone from the audience refuted Kay’s allegation that conspiracy theories are disproved by history, pointing out how belief in a conspiracy around the JFK assassination has grown from a small minority to a huge majority.
Kay repeats the old argument that someone somewhere would blow the whistle. Tarpley replied that they would risk their lives or their livelihoods by breaking their vow of silence. Kay betrays a complete lack of understanding of social structures such as exist in the intelligence community, special forces and organized crime. The perpetrators or moles are not going to talk. That goes for the patsies, too, who as Tarpley pointed out, often can’t talk because they are liquidated. As for the media, Kay assumes we have never heard of Operation Mockingbird.
Kay made a point that the internet has allowed people to find “factoids” to support their point of view, whatever it may be. In other words, that opinion drives people’s perception of reality.
When asked what aspect of the inside job argument he felt was strongest, he spoke of his background in metallurgy and his interest in the studies on the building collapses. He said the best propaganda point for 911 truth was the video of WTC 7 collapsing, but that this clip shows the side of the building that was undamaged. Of course he didn’t explain how a steel building is supposed to burn down, apparently due to his own herd-instinct subjectivity overruling his metalurgy.
Kay had the last word in an appeal for investigative journalism rather than just connecting the dots. He mentioned cases like the NYT publishing the Pentagon papers.
I suppose Kay would consider it an outlandish conspiracy theory if one were to point out that this is an efficient way for an oligarchy to rule. Keep up the façade of a free open society by allowing diversity of views, while suppressing only the really dangerous facts that would threaten Wall Street rule. Moreover this very fiction of a free society helps the empire expand by harnessing young fools abroad to join color revolutions to overthrow their national governments, which are then replaced by kleptocrat klients of Wall Street.
9/11 Debate: Webster Tarpley vs. Jonathan Kay.
Published on Apr 30, 2012 by Bullsh!tPolitics
Although, I think this is not one of Tarpley's best debates, due to time restrictions. It was still a very cogent and convincing presentation on the subject. Kay, acting as the religious status quo inquisitor, brings up couple of good points about the mentality of the truthers, though it didn't save his speech from being banal & lacklustre. Overall, Kay's efforts i thought, lacked the ideal form of focus, substance and facts, which is the key ingredient for any competitive debate. In simpler terms, "he brought a knife to a gun fight".
Related:
Debunking Jonathan Kay, his book Among the Truthers, and Other 'Debunkers'
Debunking 911myths.com: War Games
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)