VIEW Recent Articles
Browse by Category
Graphic image for 9/11 foreknowledge
Graphic: unanswered questions
Graphic of paper shredder- destruction of evidence
Graphic: conflict of interest
Cui bono graphic
Alleged Hijacker graphic
9/11 Commission Shield

New Project Censored Book Makes Media Revolution

January 20, 2011
by Dr. Paul Rea
911Truth.org

censored2012bookcoverHuff, Mickey and Project Censored, Eds. Censored 2012: The Top Censored
Stories and Media Analysis of 2012
. New York: Seven Stories Press, September
2011. $19.95.

Even more than its predecessors, Censored 2012 makes for highly engaging and
informative reading. This collection is a well mixed bag containing much that
we need to know but too often don’t.

This deficit occurs because many Americans are, in Neil Postman’s memorable
phrase, “amusing ourselves to death” and in part because many exhibit
an aversion to discussing issues. But above all the deficit results from increased
media malpractice and censorship. When a study shows that regular viewers of
Fox News are less informed–and likely more misinformed–than those
who don’t follow the news, something is seriously amiss.

According to editor Mickey Huff, the corporate media are serving up a diet
of “junk-food news to avoid telling the public what is really going on
at home and abroad” (p. 12). If this strikes many readers as obvious,
fewer seem fully aware of just how pervasive this censorship has become–how
very little coverage many significant issues receive.

As a result, even Americans who consider themselves informed don’t understand
how their government attempts to minimize or even eliminate public awareness.
On the climactic final day of the Durban Conference on Climate Change, NPR’s
“Science Friday” featured a long segment on bedbugs (12/9/11). Censored
2012 reveals that even less coverage–none at all, in fact–is afforded
to ongoing federal preparations to… Continue reading

Imagine having to rely on government-sanctioned media and publishers

Imagine …

Having to rely on government-sanctioned
media and publishers
to “allow” you access to history or current events and government actions.

No 911truth.org …
No Historycommons.org …
No Wikipedia.org …
No Secrecy News sharing CRS Reports, No CLG, No Information Clearinghouse, No access to information released because of FOIA efforts
… No more of whatever sources you rely on to be in-the-know so that you can make informed decisions …

Imagine a United States with No Human Being-managed information sources accessible
online …

STOP SOPA &
PIPA

Learn
more

Take
action TODAY

“An informed citizenry is the only
true repository of the public will.”

“What country can preserve its liberties
if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the
spirit of resistance?”

“In matters of style, swim with the
current;
In matters of principle, stand like a rock”

Thomas Jefferson

10 reasons the U.S. is no longer the land of the free

By Jonathan Turley

Washington Post

Every year, the State Department issues reports on individual rights in other countries, monitoring the passage of restrictive laws and regulations around the world. Iran, for example, has been criticized for denying fair public trials and limiting privacy, while Russia has been taken to task for undermining due process. Other countries have been condemned for the use of secret evidence and torture.

Even as we pass judgment on countries we consider unfree, Americans remain confident that any definition of a free nation must include their own — the land of free. Yet, the laws and practices of the land should shake that confidence. In the decade since Sept. 11, 2001, this country has comprehensively reduced civil liberties in the name of an expanded security state. The most recent example of this was the National Defense Authorization Act , signed Dec. 31, which allows for the indefinite detention of citizens. At what point does the reduction of individual rights in our country change how we define ourselves?

While each new national security power Washington has embraced was controversial when enacted, they are often discussed in isolation. But they don’t operate in isolation. They form a mosaic of powers under which our country could be considered, at least in part, authoritarian. Americans often proclaim our nation as a symbol of freedom to the world while dismissing nations such as Cuba and China as categorically unfree. Yet, objectively, we may be only half right. Those countries do lack… Continue reading

The Stakes Have Never Been Higher

January 11, 2012
by James Hufferd, Ph.D., Coordinator, 9/11
Truth Grassroots Organization

Most of the recent big, commonly noticeable and objectionable changes in our
controllable circumstances in America — including many downright atrocities
— have happened since September 11, 2001. And a goodly number of them
have developed as a direct consequence. Although that day still seems,
in many ways, very recent, it appears to have marked not only a beginning of
our current and accumulating woes, but also the end of a long age of relative
bliss, freedom, and a degree of personal opportunity that we haven’t experienced
since.

My supposition, which I’ve voiced here before, is that 9/11 wasn’t
just an “inside job”, but rather was done at the bequest of an international
elite firmly in control of our (government + corporate) establishment, as well
as those in other countries, the main trunk of the giant controlling octopus
being international central banking.

Within a year or two after 9/11/01, at least a small segment of the populace
was beginning to note that a credible (and routine) investigation of the background
and modus operandi of 9/11 still hadn’t been conducted by the criminal
justice system. The lack of initiative in this case seemed puzzling due to nearly
all Americans’ faith at the time in the strength and reliability of the constitutional
machinery of due process. The ensuing insistence by many that such routine procedures
be carried out and criminal accountability be exacted stemmed from a shocked
observation that… Continue reading

Justifying War with Iran

By Russ Baker
December 26, 2011
WhoWhatWhy.com

A growing body of evidence points to a concerted campaign to prepare Americans and the world for war against Iran. This is not idle speculation. It fits a pattern that repeatedly preceded previous hostilities.

Here are the recent examples on Iran:

-The claim that Iran is a WMD threat. Pretty much everyone is familiar with the long-term, continuing efforts to paint Iran as some kind of nuclear threat. This ignores the possibility that Iran is telling the truth in contending it is embarked on solely non-military nuclear research (debatable), and serious doubts among many experts that Iran is preparing nuclear weapons. Perhaps most important, it discounts the fact that many countries (including Iran’s arch-enemy Israel) have nuclear weapons, and disregards the undoubted truth that if a country like Iran ever did launch nuclear weapons, it would be wiped out in a nanosecond, creating a very strong disincentive for offensive use. At the same time, by encouraging other countries and internal foes to believe that it has nuclear weapons, Iran creates an inexpensive protective shield for its regime. A dangerous game, to be sure, but without further evidence of Iranian nukes, hardly a reason to launch a war that would surely cause even more death and destruction than the misguided Iraq invasion.

-The claim that Iran tried to hire Mexican drug cartel hit squads to kill a Saudi ambassador on US soil (fizzled). Remember this one? So ludicrous that even ultra-cautious corporate news organizations… Continue reading

Appeals Court Revives EFF’s Challenge to Government’s Massive Spying Program

Justices Find that Spied-On Telephone Customers Have the Right to Sue

Electronic Frontier Foundation, EFF.org

San Francisco – The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals today blocked the government’s attempt to bury the Electronic Frontier Foundation’s (EFF’s) lawsuit against the government’s illegal mass surveillance program, returning Jewel v. NSA to the District Court for the next step.

The court found that Jewel had alleged sufficient specifics about the warrantless wiretapping program to proceed. Justices rejected the government’s argument that the allegations about the well-known spying program and the evidence of the Folsom Street facility in San Francisco were too speculative.

“Since the dragnet spying program first came to light, we have been fighting for the chance to have a court determine whether it is legal,” said EFF Legal Director Cindy Cohn. “Today, the Ninth Circuit has given us that chance, and we look forward to proving the program is an unconstitutional and illegal violation of the rights of millions of ordinary Americans.”

Also today, the court upheld the dismissal of EFF’s other case aimed at ending the illegal spying, Hepting v. AT&T, which was the first lawsuit against a telecom over its participation in the dragnet domestic wiretapping. The court found that the so-called “retroactive immunity” passed by Congress to stop telecommunications customers from suing the companies is constitutional, in part because the claims remained against the government in Jewel v. NSA.

“By passing the retroactive immunity for the telecoms’ complicity in the warrantless wiretapping program, Congress abdicated its duty… Continue reading

Senate Approves Requiring Military Custody [of US Citizens in US] in Terror Cases

By Charlie Savage
November 29, 2011
New York Times

WASHINGTON — Defying the Obama administration’s threat of a veto, the Senate on Tuesday voted to increase the role of the military in imprisoning suspected members of Al Qaeda and its allies — including people arrested inside the United States.

By a vote of 61 to 37, the Senate turned back an effort to strip a major military bill of a set of disputed provisions affecting the handling of terrorism cases. While the legislation still has several steps to go, the vote makes it likely that Congress will eventually send to President Obama’s desk a bill that contains detainee-related provisions his national-security team has said are unacceptable.

The most disputed provision would require the government to place into military custody any suspected member of Al Qaeda or one of its allies connected to a plot against the United States or its allies. The provision would exempt American citizens, but would otherwise extend to arrests on United States soil. The executive branch could issue a waiver and keep such a prisoner in the civilian system.

In recent days, several top national security officials — including the secretary of defense, Leon E. Panetta; the director of national intelligence, James R. Clapper; and the director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Robert S. Mueller III, have voiced opposition to the proposal, as have several former counterterrorism officials from the Bush administration.

But among Republican senators, there was nearly unanimous support for keeping the detainee… Continue reading

A Noble Lie: Oklahoma City 1995

December 26, 2011
ANobleLie.com

noblelie300Noble Lie: A myth or untruth knowingly told by the elite to maintain social harmony, or the social position of the elite. – The Republic, Plato

The 1995 bombing in Oklahoma City was a direct blow to the heart of America. One hundred sixty-eight people were killed, including nineteen children. For those watching the nightly news, terrorism had come home. For years following the bombing, countless victims’ family members, survivors, rescuers and ordinary Americans have questioned the official accounts about that fateful day.

Hoping to shed light on answers long ignored and censored, both by prominent media outlets and the U.S. government, A Noble Lie peels back what we thought we knew about the bombing and its perpetrators. This film exposes information never before examined or brought to the attention of the American public.

A Noble Lie is the culmination of years of research and documentation conducted by independent journalists, scholars and ordinary citizens. Often risking their personal safety and sanity, they have gathered evidence which threatens to expose the startling reality of what exactly occurred at 9:02 am on April 19, 1995 in Oklahoma City.

Utilizing footage and eyewitness testimony, previously unseen,
A Noble Lie will change forever the way you look at the true nature of terrorism.

On Voting One’s Conscience…

 

Editor’s Note:
No, dear reader, reposting of this editorial does not mean that 911truth.org specifically “endorses” Ron Paul, nor does it mean we’ve suddenly taken up any particular ideological bent. Rather, it is offered here for your consideration because Mr. Jaeger offers thoughtful commentary about one of the main reasons people are told to NOT vote their conscience. Whether you support one of the DemoPublican candidates or a third-party candidate, are boycotting the voting process until more of your fellow Americans figure this out, are in another country wondering what’s wrong with Americans, or are just contemplating the falsity of the media-defined Republican/Democrat/Right/Left nonsense paradigms through which we are told our social and political life must be interpreted, this is valuable food for thought.

 

Why Ron Paul Can Win

by James Jaeger
TheDailyBell.com

If you have been watching the news, you know that Ron Paul is now beating both Gingrich and Romney in the polls and could walk away with a win in Iowa.

Some say he could also walk away with a win in New Hampshire, and possibly even win the Republican (GOP) nomination.

For the Republican National Committee (RNC), this must be uncomfortable − the idea that they would be forced to nominate a principled, Constitutionalist just because WE THE PEOPLE demanded it.

But here’s what really terrifies them: Ron Paul is in a position to hand the election of 2012 over to Barack Obama and the Democrats because he would be a “spoiler.” But even… Continue reading

No War with Iran

by Jon Gold
December 20, 2011

Before I begin, I’d like to say that I am neither a fan of Iran, or an opponent of Iran. I just don’t want anymore damn wars.

Recently, a Judge ruled “that Iran was complicit in the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorists attacks that killed nearly 3,000 people, including 18 Bucks County residents.” Here is the evidence according to the article:

Using a team of experts, including former members of the 9/11 Commission, and the testimony of three Iranian defectors, the lawyers put on a four-hour presentation for Daniels on Thursday.

During the hearing, defector Abdolghassem Mesbahi, who was once an aide and close confidant of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the Islamic Republic’s founder, revealed that he had firsthand knowledge of terrorist plots dating to the 1980s.

Mesbahi, whose identity was kept secret until the hearing, said he knew in August 2001 that there was a plan in place to hijack airplanes and fly them into buildings.

Another defector testified that he was with al-Qaida’s second in command, Ayman al-Zawahiri, when the terrorist attended four days of meetings with top Iranian officials in January 2001 to plan the 9/11 attacks.

The third defector told the judge that he helped write up the debriefing reports of Iran’s al-Qaida liaison, Imad Mugniyeh, after he returned to Iran from Afghanistan following 9/11.

To further prove Iran’s complicity in the attacks, Mellon presented the testimony of Janice Kephart, a former counsel to the U.S. Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Technology, Terrorism… Continue reading

US Court Claims Iranian 9/11 Link

Engineering Consent For Attack On Iran

US Court Claims Iranian 9/11 Link

By RT (Russia Today)

December 17, 2011 — A US court has won a default judgement that Iranian officials, including its supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, provided help to the 9/11 hijackers behind the worst terror attack on American soil. The lawsuit was filed by the families of the atrocity’s victims. There was no Iranian representation in court. RT talks to Michel Chossudovsky, Director of the Center for Research on Globalization.

Iran Accused Of 9/11 Role

By Fox News

May 20, 2011 “Fox News” — NEW YORK: Two defectors from Iran’s intelligence service have testified that Iranian officials knew in advance about the attacks of September 11, 2001, says a US court filing that seeks damages for Iran’s “direct support for, and sponsorship of, the most deadly act of terrorism in American history”.

Iran Accused Of September 11 Role To Plan, Train & Escape WTC Attacks 21/5/11:

One of the defectors also claimed that Iran was involved in designing the attacks, the filing said. The defectors’ identities and testimony were not revealed in the filing but were being submitted to a judge under seal, said lawyers who brought the original suit against Iran on behalf of families of dozens of September 11 victims.

The suit says Iran and Hezbollah, the Lebanese militant group with close ties to Tehran, helped al-Qaeda with planning the attacks and with the hijackers’ training and travel. After the attacks, the suit says, Iran and Hezbollah helped al-Qaeda operatives and their families to escape, in some cases providing them with a safe haven in Iran.…

Continue reading

9/11 Consensus on Face to Face

Last week Elizabeth Woodworth, Coordinator and Co-Founder of the 9/11 Consensus Panel joined host Jack Etkin on “Face to Face” for a 30-minute interview. The show aired four times this week in the Victoria, BC area and is now available online. Here’s more.

Description from YouTube (user channel of ictvvictoria):

This week our guest is retired medical librarian Elizabeth Woodworth, who coordinates a newly formed panel calling itself “Consensus 9/11″ — which recently announced the release of statements constituting 13 Consensus Points” challenging the official government account of the events of September 11, 2001. Co-chaired by Elizabeth and scholar David Ray Griffin, the points were produced using a version of a methodology designed to identify best evidence known as the Delphi method. According to Woodworth, “The strength and credibility of the Delphi method is based on the fact that respondents are blind to one another through several rounds of review, during which feedback is continually refined until consensus is reached.” The Consensus 9/11 panel conducted “three survey rounds with 22 respondents, and reached an average consensus of 94% on 13 points of evidence that directly contradict the fundamental claims of the official account of September 11th.”

The survey points, backed by 81 literature references, include failures of the government to explain massive explosions in the Twin Towers reported by 100+ firefighters; the free fall collapse of the 47-story steel-frame WTC 7; pervasive high-tech nanothermite (an incendiary explosive) in the WTC dust; the horizontal ejections of huge sections of the… Continue reading

The Danger from Politicizing ‘Terror’

December 13, 2011
ConsortiumNews.com

By politicizing who is and who is not a “terrorist” — pinning the label on American adversaries and sparing purported American friends — the U.S. government created confusion at FBI headquarters that contributed to the failure to stop the 9/11 attacks, reports ex-FBI agent Coleen Rowley.

By Coleen Rowley

Glenn Greenwald’s critique — regarding the recent U.S. indictment of 38-year-old Iraqi Faruq Khalil Muhammad Isa (currently in Canada) — is spot on about “terrorism” coming to simply mean opposing United States’ interests or resisting U.S. military invasions.

U.S. authorities have now dropped any requirement that the “terrorists” target or kill civilians as part of a political objective, the classic definition of terrorism. Isa stands accused of “providing material support to a terrorist conspiracy” because he allegedly backed a 2008 attack in Mosul, Iraq, killing five U.S. soldiers.

As Greenwald wrote, “In other words, if the U.S. invades and occupies your country, and you respond by fighting back against the invading army — the ultimate definition of a ‘military, not civilian target’ — then you are a . . . Terrorist.”

But the reverse of Greenwald’s example is also true, that those “terrorist” groups throughout the world who commit violent acts or kill civilians at U.S. instigation, encouragement or in line with U.S. interests are NOT considered “terrorists.”

For example, before 9/11, the Chechen “rebels” — who had orchestrated mass civilian hostage takings, suicide bombings and hijackings and who were accused of having planted bombs in… Continue reading

‘A Noble Lie: Oklahoma City 1995′ Available December, 2011

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
December 2011
ANobleLie.com

New Film, A NOBLE LIE: Oklahoma City 1995, asks questions about the Oklahoma City Bombing

Produced in Oklahoma, this newly-released documentary by FREE MIND FILMS and Director James Lane takes a fresh and in-depth look at the circumstances surrounding the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing.

But instead of accepting at face value the Federal Government’s deeply-flawed investigation, A NOBLE LIE features groundbreaking information and eyewitness testimonies that refute the official story.

The April 19, 1995 bombing that destroyed much of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building involved far more revealing evidence than the FBI maintains. A NOBLE LIE presents interviews with police officers, first responders, victims, journalists and investigators whose evidence demonstrates that not all the perpetrators were brought to justice.

Among the interview subjects are General Benton Partin, former head of weapons development for the Air Force, State Representative Charles Key, members of the Oklahoma Bombing Investigation Committee and Jesse Trentadue, whose brother Kenneth was tortured and murdered in Federal custody in the days following the bombing.

A NOBLE LIE is the only full-length documentary that addresses and answers many of the questions people have asked about the bombing. Details as to what really happened regarding this horrific event, taking the lives of 168 people, have been summarily covered up by the Federal Government. A NOBLE LIE re-examines the tragedy in a measured, informative and scholarly way, and in the process exposes the treachery that has gone unpunished.

For more information please visit www.ANobleLie.com… Continue reading

Are Americans in Line for Gitmo?

By Ray McGovern
Consortiumnews.com

Exclusive: Though the 9/11 attacks occurred more than a decade ago, Congress continues to exploit them to pass evermore draconian laws on “terrorism,” with the Senate now empowering the military to arrest people on U.S. soil and hold them without trial, a serious threat to American liberties, says ex-CIA analyst Ray McGovern.

Ambiguous but alarming new wording, which is tucked into the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) and was just passed by the Senate, is reminiscent of the “extraordinary measures” introduced by the Nazis after they took power in 1933.

And the relative lack of reaction so far calls to mind the oddly calm indifference with which most Germans watched the erosion of the rights that had been guaranteed by their own Constitution. As one German writer observed, “With sheepish submissiveness we watched it unfold, as if from a box at the theater.”

The writer was Sebastian Haffner (real name Raimond Pretzel), a young German lawyer worried at what he saw in 1933 in Berlin, but helpless to stop it since, as he put it, the German people “collectively and limply collapsed, yielded and capitulated.”

“The result of this millionfold nervous breakdown,” wrote Haffner at the time, “is the unified nation, ready for anything, that is today the nightmare of the rest of the world.” Not a happy analogy.

The Senate bill, in effect, revokes an 1878 law known as the Posse Comitatus Act, which banned the Army from domestic law enforcement after the military had… Continue reading

Senate Wants the Military to Lock You Up Without Trial

By Spencer Ackerman
December 1, 2011
Wired.com/dangerroom

Here’s the best thing that can be said about the new detention powers
the Senate has tucked into next year’s defense bill: They don’t
force the military to detain American citizens indefinitely without
a trial. They just let the military do that. And even though the leaders
of the military and the spy community have said they want no such power, the
Senate is poised to pass its bill as early as tonight.

There are still changes swirling around the Senate, but this looks like the
basic shape of the 2012
National Defense Authorization Act
. Someone the government says is “a
member of, or part of, al-Qaida or an associated force” can be held in
military custody “without trial until the end of the hostilities authorized
by the Authorization for Use of Military Force.” Those hostilities are
currently scheduled to end
the Wednesday after never
. The move would shut down criminal trials for
terror suspects.

But far more dramatically, the detention mandate to use indefinite military detention in terrorism cases isn’t limited to foreigners. It’s confusing, because two different sections of the bill seem to contradict each other, but in the judgment of the University of Texas’ Robert Chesney — a nonpartisan authority on military detention — “U.S. citizens are included in the grant of detention authority.”

An amendment that would limit military detentions to people captured overseas failed on Thursday afternoon. The Senate soundly defeated a measure… Continue reading

Setting the Trap

Levin-McCain bill would create a presidential dictatorship. Where is the outrage?
by Justin Raimondo
Antiwar.com

Buried in the annual defense appropriations bill is a provision that would give the President the power to use the military to intern anyone — including American citizens — indefinitely, and hold them without charges or trial, anywhere in the world, including on American soil . The provision essentially repeals the longstanding Posse Comitatus Act , which prevents the military from engaging in law enforcement on US territory — the greatest fear of the Founders. Approved by a Senate subcommittee in secret hearings, the provisions open the road to a military dictatorship in this country — and for that we can thank Senators Carl Levin and John McCain , who introduced the measure. Both the FBI and the Pentagon came out against the Levin-McCain monstrosity, and Senator Mark Udall (D-Colorado) introduced an amendment striking the provision: the amendment was defeated in the Senate, 37-61 .

The mind reels. As the ACLU’s Chris Anders

puts it :

“I know it sounds incredible. New powers to use the military worldwide, even within the United States? Hasn’t anyone told the Senate that Osama bin Laden is dead, that the president is pulling all of the combat troops out of Iraq and trying to figure out how to get combat troops out of Afghanistan too? And American citizens and people picked up on American or Canadian or British streets being sent to military prisons indefinitely without even being charged… Continue reading

Civil Liberties Oversight Board Still Dormant

November 29, 2011
Steven Aftergood
Secrecy News Blog
fas.org/blog/secrecy

The Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board that was supposed to provide independent oversight of U.S. counterterrorism policies remains dormant and out of service because its members have still not been named and confirmed.

In a report that was newly updated this month, the Congressional Research Service traced the origins of the Board from a recommendation by the 9/11 Commission through its initial establishment as a White House agency to its reconstitution as an independent agency chartered by statute in 2007.

The Board was assigned two overriding missions: It was supposed to “analyze and review actions the executive branch takes to protect the Nation from terrorism, ensuring that the need for such actions is balanced with the need to protect privacy and civil liberties”; and to “ensure that liberty concerns are appropriately considered in the development and implementation of laws, regulations, and policies related to efforts to protect the Nation against terrorism.”

So had the Board been functional, it might have been a valuable participant in current deliberations over military detention authority, for example. It might also have conducted investigative oversight into any number of other counterterrorism policies, as mandated by law. But for all practical purposes, there is no Board.

Last January, President Obama named Elisebeth C. Cook and James X. Dempsey to serve on the Board. The Senate has not acted on their nomination. Even if they had been confirmed, however, they would not have constituted a quorum. Thus,… Continue reading