PatriotsQuestion911.com - 100+ Senior Military, Intelligence Service, Law Enforcement, and Government Officials; 140+ Engineers and Architects; 130+ Professors; 100+ 9/11 Survivors and Family Members; 70+ Entertainment and Media Professionals

LA 9/11 Truth Conference a huge success - CSPAN to air segments this week. The 9/11 American Scholars Symposium concluded in Los Angeles Sunday and was extremely well received by the thousand plus in attendance.

A Reuters article summarizing the event presented a reasonably balanced appraisal of the intentions and scope of the conference, mirroring a burgeoning climate of accurate 9/11 truth movement coverage. Reflecting a positive trend embraced by an earlier New York Times article, the Reuters report on the conference mainly sticks to the facts and avoids the scoffing, sneering tone of similar reports about 9/11 events we have seen over the last few years.

The Reuters article has mainly been picked up by foreign news outlets. From previous experience we know that newswire gatekeepers, ostensibly operating out of London, selectively sideline sensitive stories and order them not to receive substantive nationwide attention. The Reuters piece has not been picked up by any US or European news outlet thus far. Reuters is based in London, England, in the heart of the British Empire.

Video footage of Charlie Sheen's appearance as well as a raft of other presentations and interviews with keynote speakers will feature in free video clips and extra footage at PrisonPlanet.TV and Infowars.com over the next two weeks.

Pirate News TV attended the 9/11 Con in L.A. and will also post video of the event ASAP.

American Scholars Symposium - All 24 hours broadcast by PNTV

Anthony Hilder interview of billionaire Jimmy Walter at 911 Con - Video by PNTV

Charlie Sheen speaks at Hollywood 9/11 Conference

911 Conference LA panel discussion

Most Police, Firefighters Now Believe 9/11 Inside Job - NY CITY - Saying that the "entire atmosphere had changed," Alex Jones explained how police support for protesters at ground zero had gone from 20% support two years ago to around 60% support now - with many willing to affirm that sentiment on camera and many knowledgeable about Alex Jones' work and the 9/11 truth movement. "Police just saying 'keep your investigation going, we appreciate you' on video," said Jones. 9/11/2006

Canadian Broadcasting Corp reports that Bush Gang perped the 9/11 terrorist massacres - Professor David Ray Griffen, Loose Change, $60-million blowjobs and "so-called conspiracy theories" exposed as Truth on 9/11/2006

911 Loose Change on CNN with Paula Zahn - Terrorist George Bush Jr perped the 911 Massacres - September 13, 2006

British Broadcasting Corporation reports that Bush Gang perped the 9/11 terrorist massacres - Interview with Professor David Ray Griffin - 10 September 2006

The Debate: Loose Change vs Popular Mechanics - Courtesy of Democracy Now radio

911CitizensWatch.org - 9/11 families demand new investigation on CSPAN broadcast from National Press Club on 9/11/2006

911CitizensWatch.org - On the fifth anniversary of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, a group presses for a new investigation into the attacks. Participants include the producers of a film 9/11: Press for Truth and relatives of victims. Mr. Thompson is the author of The Terror Timeline: Year by Year, Day by Day, Minute by Minute: A Comprehensive Chronicle of the Road to 9/11 - and America's Response, published by Regan Books. CSPAN broadcast from National Press Club on 9/11/2006

911PressForTruth.com - Myspace trailer for nice Jewish movie tries to point fingers at innocent Arabs and away from Zionist Jews and Jewish Israelis just like Jew Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 911. Quote of the Day by US chairman joint chiefs of staff General Dickie Myers: "The goal has never been to get Bin Laden."

9/11 Press For Truth - Full length feature documentary with the Jersey Girls on Google Video

June 26, 2006 - About 1,200 people gathered over the weekend for what organizers billed as the largest conference on the conspiracy theories that consider the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks to be a result of official negligence or a U.S. attempt to incite world war.

"There are so many prominent people . . . who have stated that the evidence is overwhelming that 9/11 was an inside job," syndicated radio talk show host Alex Jones said at a news conference.

Conspiracy theorists are convinced that the U.S. military command "stood down" on the day of the attacks, that the hijackers were trained at U.S. military bases and that the World Trade Center towers collapsed because of a series of controlled explosions set before they were hit by two hijacked planes. Suggested motives include expected benefits for U.S. arms and oil conglomerates, and revolutionary plans for a new world order headed by the United States.

Tens of thousands of raucous paradegoers braved a steady downpour and lined Fifth Avenue for the annual gay pride parade. It was one of several gay pride parades across the country over the weekend, including a similar-size one in San Francisco.

The U.S. population -- 299,061,199 as of midday yesterday -- is on target to hit 300 million this fall, and it is likely that the milestone baby, or immigrant, will be a Mexican citizen illegally in the USA. Latinos are driving the population growth and accounted for almost half of the increase last year, more than any other ethnic or racial group, the Census Bureau said.

A University of California chancellor died Saturday in an apparent suicide jump from a 43-story apartment building, authorities said. Denice Dee Denton, 46, the chancellor of the Santa Cruz campus, was depressed about personal and professional problems, her mother, Carolyn Mabee, told the San Francisco Chronicle. Denton had been criticized for demanding $600,000 in renovations to her house on the campus and a $192,000-a-year university position created for her longtime partner, Gretchen Kalonji.

Keith Olbermann mentioned the Chicago 9/11 event on his show this evening in a segment on the recent confessions by treasonous Jew Judith Miller about receiving prior warning of a major attack by Al-CIAduh prior to 9/11. While he provided little detail on the event, it is quite a change to see 9/11 skeptics being given some form of recognition - maybe next they will notice that a former Bush cabinet member presented at the event and believes 9/11 was an inside job himself.

Alex Jones keynote speech at Chicago 911 Con

Dr Steven Jones speech at Chicago 911 Con

Dr Morgan Reynolds speech at Chicago 911 Con

Rick Seigel at Chicago 911 Con

Rick Seigel: Israeli TV's 9/11 helicopter ninjas

Press conference and various speakers at Chicago 911 Con

Alex Jones Bull Horns for 9/11 Truth in Downtown Chicago

CHICAGO, NY Times, June 4, 2006 — In the ballroom foyer of the Embassy Suites Hotel, the two-day International Education and Strategy Conference for 9/11 Truth was off to a rollicking start. Such was the coming-out for the movement known as "9/11 Truth," a society of skeptics and scientists who believe the government was complicit in the terrorist attacks. In colleges and chat rooms on the Internet, this band of disbelievers has been trying for years to prove that 9/11 was an inside job. It was, in tone, half trade show, half political convention.

There were talks on the Reichstag fire and the sinking of the Battleship Maine as precedents for 9/11. The former owner of a recycling plant outside St. Louis, Mr. Berger joined the movement when he grew skeptical of why the 9/11 Commission had failed, to his sense of sufficiency, to answer how the building at 7 World Trade Center collapsed like a ton of bricks. It was his "9/11 trigger," the incident that drew him in, he said. For others, it might be the fact that the air-defense network did not prevent the attacks that day, or the appearance of thousands of "puts" — or short-sell bids — on the nation's airline stocks.

Such "red flags," as they are sometimes called, were the meat and potatoes of the keynote speech on Friday night by Alex Jones, who is the William Jennings Bryan of the 9/11 band. Mr. Jones, a syndicated radio host, is known for his larynx-tearing screeds against corruption.

At the lectern Friday night, beside a digital projection reading "History of Government Sponsored Terrorism," Mr. Jones set forth the central tenets of 9/11 Truth: that the military command that monitors aircraft "stood down" on the day of the attacks; that President Bush addressed children in a Florida classroom instead of being whisked off to the White House; that the hijackers, despite what the authorities say, were trained at American military bases; and that the towers did not collapse because of burning fuel and weakened steel but because of a "controlled demolition" caused by pre-set bombs.

The movement's answer to the government's report was written by Steven E. Jones, a professor of physics at Brigham Young University and the movement's expert in the matter of collapse.

A poll released last month by Zogby International found that 42 percent of all Americans believe the 9/11 Commission "concealed or refused to investigate critical evidence" in the attacks. This is in addition to the Zogby poll two years ago that found that 49 percent of New York City residents agreed with the idea that some leaders "knew in advance" that the attacks were planned and failed to act.

VILLAGE VOICE - Oliver Stone and Paramount are intent on getting out the message that World Trade Center doesn't traffic in fringy speculations about the 9-11 attacks—since the unabashedly liberal director's JFK (1991) stands as the most mainstream movie elaboration of conspiracy theory to date.

Studio reps screened portions of the film on Capitol Hill a few weeks ago in a preemptive strike against potential red-state congressional grumblers. And indeed, right-wing pundits have so far embraced the movie: "It is one of the greatest pro-American, pro-family, pro-male, flag-waving, God Bless America films you will ever see," Fox News' Cal Thomas gushed in his syndicated column.

But Stone's attempt at muffling his JFK rep has raised hackles within the burgeoning world of conspiracy theorists. David Slesinger of 911courage.com - one of countless sites devoted to alternative explanations of the events of September 11 - organized a "call to action" to his fellow "9-11 Truth activists." Slesinger proposes staging nonviolent protests on the film's opening weekend by flyering and picketing "suburban mall theaters" that explicitly prohibit such activity, in hopes of garnering media attention through activist arrests. TheResistanceManifesto.com, run by one "John Conner" (presumably self-styled after The Terminator's hero), denounces World Trade Center as "the biggest 9/11 whitewash in history." Asks Conner: "Was Stone used by the Illuminati as an unknowing pawn to whitewash the 9/11 conspiracy theories to the masses?" When lefty news aggregator the Raw Story posted a release linking to Slesinger and Conner, it drew so many readers that Conner's site temporarily crashed from bandwidth overload.

Another site, PrisonPlanet.com, argues that advance clips from World Trade Center seem to include the sounds of bombs going off in the buildings. "Only when Oliver Stone's movie is rolled out nationwide," PrisonPlanet writes, "will we be able to comb through it for more proof that Stone is clued in to the 9/11 truth movement and the complete fraud of the government fairy tale."

Thanks to this active online community, 9-11 Truth seekers don't need Stone to see their theories propounded in cinematic form. In the half-decade since 2001, as a loose congeries of varied political fringe groups and conspiracy hounds melded with a newly radicalized crop of Bush-burnt Americans to form a growing network of like-minded skeptics, the movement has fostered a robust filmmaking subculture of its own. Nearly 20 feature-length videos have been circulating through its ranks, first on DVD, more recently for free through video services like Google and YouTube. Directors have become important figures within the movement.

And the audience is out there—more than you might think. An oft quoted May 2006 Zogby poll found that 42 percent of Americans believed that "there has been a cover-up" about 9-11 on the part of the government and the 9-11 Commission.

With forthright titles like The Truth & Lies of 911, The Great Conspiracy, and September 11th the Con, the Conspiracy, the Cover-Up, these home-brewed affairs play like the audiovisual descendants of old self-published conspiracy books: cheaply made, but spiced with highly idiosyncratic, lurid aesthetics. Their world-historical urgency is often endearingly undercut by an ill-lit, room-toned cable-access vibe, or the pasteboard rented-studio stiffness of a late-night infomercial. Their raison d'être, without exception, is the presentation of "evidence" that key parts of the standard narrative just don't "add up."

The litany of examples changes, but is drawn from a common pool: The twin towers and nearby WTC 7 could only have fallen the way they did from a controlled demolition, key video messages from Osama bin Laden appear to portray a bin Laden impostor, no footage exists of a plane hitting the Pentagon, and so on. The conclusion, always, is that 9-11 was an "inside job." Though the skeptics don't agree on the perpetrators, most point to the Bush administration and neocon high-ups, and nobody seems to think Al Qaeda acted alone. On first viewing, some movies can be powerfully effective. For viewers already distrustful of Bush, they function as epistemological horror films, evoking fears that the state of the world may be even worse than it already is, due not to apparent hubris, negligence, and ineptitude, but rather a thrillingly brilliant cabal of evil elites: the perfect movie villains, and the inverse of the neocons' own terrorist demons.

A few conspiracy films include original interviews with witnesses (or more often, an echo chamber of fellow skeptics). The bulk of footage consists of the analysis of media artifacts found online: website pages of "buried" news stories, animated diagrams, tinny compressed video clips, and neo–Ken Burnsian digital zooms into pixelated photos. In this respect, these Truth movies feel like the birth of a documentary form uniquely native to the online culture: the DIY results of hours upon hours of Googling, blogging, and Photoshopping.

The most shoestring works, like Eric Hufschmid's Painful Deceptions, could barely be called movies, operating merely as multimedia slide shows with theorizing voiceover. [Hufschmid's sister, supermodel actress Sarah O'Hare, is married to Lachlan Murdoch, the son of multi-billionaire Sir Rupert Murdock Jewish Knight of the British Empire who is a citizen of Australia who owns Fox News, is married to Communist Chinese citizen Wendi "Ho" Deng, and they live in Bejing, the capital of Communist China. Hufschnmid's book Painful Questions is still the most professional book about 9/11.] Others, like BYU physicist Dr Steven Jones's 9-11: Scientific and Ethical Questions, are little more than videotaped live PowerPoint presentations (though Jones's soft-spoken Midwestern timbre adds surprisingly powerful drama). The most extreme example of this info- centrism is 911 Stranger Then [sic] Fiction, in which a computer-generated voice reads scrolling text for two hours, occasionally interspersed with a flash of something grabbed from Google's image search. It's so sparsely experimental that one might mistake it for a work of video art. That is, until it begins railing against the "Zionist mafia"-—another unfortunate tendency of the genre.

Other directors have begun to uplift Truthie cinema. Austin, Texas, talk- radio host Alex Jones [heard on WBCR 1470am in Alcoa, Tennessee] has pumped out a string of slicker productions, including Martial Law 9-11: Rise of the Police State, 911: The Road to Tyranny, and Police State III: Total Enslavement, in addition to earlier pre–9-11 videos about other conspiracies. A strident opponent of the "New World Order," Jones cuts a more Michael Moore–esque figure, inserting footage of himself "bullhorning" at protests, interviewing bystanders, and being subsequently harassed by police—and in his recent TerrorStorm, briefly confronts Moore himself. Jones's preacherly theatrics have helped him rack up a few Hollywood connections. Charlie Sheen is an outspoken fan, and Jones has contributed animated cameos in Richard Linklater's films Waking Life and A Scanner Darkly.

22-year-old director Dylan Avery of Oneonta, New York, has emerged as the hot young star of the skeptic set with his 2005 'tude-filled feature Loose Change. Avery claims in a recent Vanity Fair profile that he's received over 50,000 orders for the Loose Change DVD and over 10 million viewings online, and says he's in talks with a number of studios to release an updated cut of the film on September 11, 2006. His name frequently pops up in Technorati's daily list of most searched-for keywords, and his MySpace profile boasts over 3,500 friends. By mainstream media standards, Loose Change remains ultra–low budget, but with Avery's casual, no-nonsense voiceover, tight editing, and hip-hop DJ'd score, it's by far the most accomplished and accessible example of 9-11 Truth cinema, though not free of the questionable fact-sourcing practiced by its peers (most egregious: "According to Wikipedia . . . ").

In true Internet fashion, Loose Change has even spawned a counter-video. Mark Iradian's Screw Loose Change takes on "911 deniers" by subtitling a running commentary over Avery's video, parrying and mocking his arguments as they unfold. William Lewis and Dave von Kleist's woefully titled 911 in Plane Site also generated a critique, Not in Plain Sight. In this case, the attack comes from within the movement: Not in Plain Sight's anonymous author claims that In Plane Site is so full of errors that it must be intentional disinformation created to mislead and discredit the movement. (Not in Plain Sight also includes the most wonderfully bizarre music of any of these works: looping, whoomping synth blurts that resemble discarded takes from the 1980 Flash Gordon soundtrack.)

Despite these limits, the 9-11 conspiracy docs will surely inspire further imitation, and their wiki-style muckraking is bound to dig up something important during an administration addicted to data-fudging and cover-ups. In a world that increasingly seems all fringe and no center, other radical and niche ideologies will undoubtedly embrace the no-holds-barred, blog-friendly, direct-to-YouTube format. With any luck, we'll see a whole new batch three years from now, made by embittered, paranoid conservatives who have been voted out of power.

LONDON GUARDIAN - Oliver Stone immediately plans second 911 documentary.

VANITY FAIR - With $6,000 and a laptop computer, three kids from upstate New York made a documentary about 9/11 that spread across the Internet and threw millions for a loop

Nine-eleven conspiracy theories have been circulating for years, producing millions of Web links, scores of books, and a nationwide collection of doubters known as the "9/11 Truth" movement.

In 2005 the State Department responded by posting some "clues" to "identifying misinformation" on their Web site. "Does the story claim that vast, powerful, evil forces are secretly manipulating events?" it asks. "If so, this fits the profile of a conspiracy theory. Conspiracy theories are rarely true, even though they have great appeal and are often widely believed. In reality, events usually have much less exciting explanations."

One of the first American officials to publicly acknowledge conspiracy theories in connection with 9/11 was President George Bush, who on November 10, 2001, in a speech to the General Assembly of the United Nations, said, "Let us never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories concerning the attacks of September 11."

Yet according to a May 2006 Zogby poll, 42 percent of Americans now believe that the U.S. government and the 9/11 commission "concealed or refused to investigate critical evidence that contradicts their official explanation of the September 11th attacks," and that "there has been a cover-up."

For those who can't find information about the alleged cover-up on the nightly news, there is Loose Change, a documentary about 9/11 conspiracy theories which just might be the first Internet blockbuster. Since it appeared on the Web in April 2005, the 80-minute film has been climbing up and down Google Video's "Top 100," rising to No. 1 this May, with at least 10 million viewings.

"We beat the woman getting punched in the face," says its director, 22-year-old Dylan Avery, from Oneonta, New York (population 13,000), referring to an oft watched video.

"We beat the guy who beats his computer with his keyboard," says his producer, 23-year-old Korey Rowe, also from Oneonta and an army specialist who served in Afghanistan and Iraq.

"We beat the [Stephen] Colbert speech," says Jason Bermas, 26, their researcher. "The viral videos, we dominate them."

Told in MTV-style jump cuts, illustrated by high-end graphics, and scored with hip music written by a few of their friends, Loose Change is an investigation into the official story of 9/11 as told by The 9/11 Commission Report, asking a number of highly controversial questions:

What, for example, were the explosions some witnesses heard after the towers were hit by planes? Why was the site of the collapse not treated as a crime scene, and why was the debris shipped off as waste to several foreign countries?

Why were the black boxes from American Airlines Flight 11 and United Airlines Flight 175 never found, when the passport of one of Flight 11's alleged hijackers, Satam Al Suqami, turned up unscathed a few blocks from the World Trade Center?

How did American Airlines Flight 77, which crashed into the Pentagon, disappear into a 20-foot hole, leaving no trace of its 124-foot wingspan on the building? And what's with all the forewarnings that the government ignored?

For the past three months, 20,000 people a day have been clicking on to the official Loose Change Web site, loosechange911.com; more than 50,000 have placed orders for the DVD since its release. ("But we're not really making any money," says Rowe, "because we gave away like 100,000 copies for free.") Millions more have been downloading the film from a growing number of unaffiliated sites.

It's safe to say that, if it were a theatrical release, Loose Change would be one of the most popular—and incendiary—movies in the country right now. Avery and Rowe say they are talking to several major movie studios about releasing a third and "final cut" of the film on September 11, 2006. They wonder if the government may be watching, too. "I hope so," says Avery.

In the opening credits of Loose Change, we hear Mick O'Regan, a host on Australian radio, asking the late Hunter S. Thompson, in a 2002 interview, "How would you rate the American media in their coverage of the events of the attack last September?"

"Well let's see, uh, 'shamefully' is a word that comes to mind," says the father of gonzo journalism. "I've spent enough time, well, on the inside of the White House and political campaigns, and I've known enough of the people who do these things, to know that the public version of the news or whatever event is never really what happened."

Most of what we see on-screen during Loose Change are actually news reports from mainstream-media outlets like CBS News, Newsweek, CNN, the Associated Press, even Fox News—the "loose change" which Avery adds up into a conspiracy theory. "Some people accuse me of like, Oh, you're taking quotes out of context," he says. "I'm giving you the article and the date. Go look it up yourself."

Loose Change runs clips from almost every major TV news organization on that horrible day, wherein we see footage of people escaping the towers, firemen, and reporters who talk of hearing explosions after the planes hit; for some this raises questions of whether there were pre-set bombs going off in the buildings. Here's Bryant Gumbel on CBS: "We understand there has been a secondary explosion on Tower One … "

Freeze-frame images of the towers going down show what some say appear to be demolition "squibs," or horizontal plumes of smoke and debris being ejected during the collapse, also suggesting explosions.

Loose Change also delves into the question of why the United States' elaborate air-defense system failed to thwart the September 11 attacks. The 9/11 Commission Report says "there was no one to blame." The film points to a 20-page instruction from June 1, 2001, issued by the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff which reassigned the authority for aircraft interceptions and shoot-downs to Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.

Titled "Aircraft Piracy (Hijacking) and Destruction of Derelict Airborne Objects," the instruction states that henceforth "the NMCC [National Military Command Center] will … forward requests for DOD assistance to the Secretary of Defense for approval." Neither the president nor the vice president is mentioned in the new directive as being part of the chain of command. By military protocol, the authority belonged to Rumsfeld, who later claimed he was "out of the loop."

'Are you sort of suggesting that [9/11] worked in the favor of the Bush administration?," Mick O'Regan asks Hunter S. Thompson in Loose Change.

"Oh, absolutely. Absolutely," Thompson says. "You sort of wonder when something happens like this, well, who stands to benefit? Who had the opportunity and the motive?"

The film's answer to this is the September 2000 report from the Project for the New American Century, a neoconservative think tank whose members include Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, Jeb Bush, and Paul Wolfowitz. Titled "Rebuilding America's Defenses," it envisions a future of burgeoning defense spending and the overthrow of Saddam Hussein. "The process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event—like a new Pearl Harbor," Avery reads from the report in voice-over.

It's a long leap from all this, however, to claiming, "The government did it." There is no conclusive evidence in Loose Change of U.S. government involvement in 9/11. The film relies too heavily on already published reports, some of which have been discredited. For example, the segment on United Flight 93 cites an early story from a Cincinnati ABC News affiliate, WCPO, on the plane's safe landing at a Cleveland airport on the morning of September 11. WCPO later retracted the story.

For the final cut of Loose Change, Avery says, "We're tracking down potential eyewitnesses to the landing of Flight 93 in Cleveland." He also says the third edition of the film will include more on-screen interviews; the first version had only one, with Marcel Bernard, the chief flight instructor at Freeway Airport, in Bowie, Maryland. Bernard recalls that, in early August 2001, Hani Hanjour, one of the alleged hijackers of American Airlines Flight 77, had trouble controlling and landing a single-engine Cessna 172 when he did test runs. "Average or below-average piloting skills," Bernard says.

And yet, according to the official version of events, if Hani Hanjour had been the pilot he would have had to execute a perfect 330-degree turn at 530 miles per hour, descending 7,000 feet in two and a half minutes, in order to crash Flight 77, a Boeing 757, into the Pentagon.

"[Flight 77] could not possibly have flown at those speeds which they said it did without going into a high-speed stall," Russ Wittenburg, a former commercial and air-force pilot, is quoted saying in Loose Change. The film also makes much of the visual similarities between the hole left in the west wing of the Pentagon and damage to buildings done by cruise missiles.

On May 16, the Department of Justice released two Pentagon videotapes of the crash of Flight 77 after a Freedom of Information Act request by Judicial Watch, a conservative government watchdog. "Finally, we hope that this video will put to rest the conspiracy theories involving American Airlines Flight 77," said Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton. The video "shows the nose cone of the plane clearly entering the picture," said Fox News.

You can decide for yourself by watching the Pentagon's video.

Click link for print edition.

Vanity Fair published the USAF NORAD radio air traffic control tapes from 9/11, proving the Bush white House illegally ordered the US military to stand down on 9/11/2001. Pentagon's video.

9/11 TRUTH REVOLUTION

by Jew Lev Grossman

TIME Magazine coverstory - Turns out, we need grand theories to make sense of grand events, or the world just seems too random.

Take a look, if you can stand it, at video footage of the World Trade Center collapsing. Your eye will naturally jump to the top of the screen, where huge fountains of dark debris erupt out of the falling towers. But fight your natural instincts. Look farther down, at the stories that haven't collapsed yet.

In almost every clip you'll see little puffs of dust spurting out from the sides of the towers. There are two competing explanations for these puffs of dust: 1) the force of the collapsing upper floors raised the air pressure in the lower ones so dramatically that it actually blew out the windows. And 2) the towers did not collapse from the impact of two Boeing 767s and the ensuing fires. They were destroyed in a planned, controlled demolition. The dust puffs you see on film are the detonations of explosives planted there before the attacks.

People who believe the second explanation live in a very different world from those who believe the first. In world No. 2, al-Qaeda is not responsible for the destruction of the World Trade Center. The U.S. government is. The Pentagon was not hit by a commercial jet; it was hit by a cruise missile. United Flight 93 did not crash after its occupants rushed the cockpit; it was deliberately taken down by a U.S. Air Force fighter. The entire catastrophe was planned and executed by federal officials in order to provide the U.S. with a pretext for going to war in the Middle East and, by extension, as a means of consolidating and extending the power of the Bush Administration.

The population of world No. 2 is larger than you might think. A Scripps-Howard poll of 1,010 adults last month found that 36% of Americans consider it "very likely" or "somewhat likely" that government officials either allowed the attacks to be carried out or carried out the attacks themselves. Thirty-six percent adds up to a lot of people. This is not a fringe phenomenon. It is a mainstream political reality.

Although the 9/11 Truth Movement, as many conspiracy believers refer to their passion, has been largely ignored by the mainstream media, it is flourishing on the Internet. One of the most popular conspiracy videos online is Loose Change, a 90-min. blizzard of statistics, photographs, documents, eyewitness accounts and expert testimony set to a trippy hip-hop backbeat. It's designed to pick apart, point by point, the conventional narrative of what happened on Sept. 11, 2001.

For all its amateur production values--it was created by a pair of industrious twentysomethings using a laptop, pizza money and footage scavenged from the Internet--Loose Change is a compelling experience. Take the section about the attack on the Pentagon. As the film points out--and this is a tent-pole issue among 9/11 conspiracists--the crash site doesn't look right. There's not enough damage. The hole smashed in the Pentagon's outer wall was 75 ft. wide, but a Boeing 757 has a 124-ft. wingspan. Why wasn't the hole wider? Why does it look so neat?

Experts will tell you that the hole was punched by the plane's fuselage, not its wings, which sheared off on impact. But then what happened to the wings? And the tail and the engines? Images of the crash site show hardly any of the wreckage you would expect from a building that's been rammed by a commercial jet. The lawn, where the plane supposedly dragged a wing on approach, is practically pristine. The plane supposedly clipped five lampposts on its way in, but the lampposts in question show surprisingly little damage. And could Hani Hanjour, the man supposedly at the controls, have executed the maneuvers that the plane performed? He failed a flight test just weeks before the attack. And Pentagon employees reported smelling cordite after the hit, the kind of high explosive a cruise missile carries.

There's something empowering about just exploring such questions. Loose Change appeals to the viewer's common sense: it tells you to forget the official explanations and the expert testimony, and trust your eyes and your brain instead. It implies that the world can be grasped by laymen without any help or interference from the talking heads. Watching Loose Change, you feel as if you are participating in the great American tradition of self-reliance and nonconformist, antiauthoritarian dissent. You're fighting the power. You're thinking different. (Conspiracists call people who follow the government line "sheeple.") "The goal of the movie was just really to get out there and show that there are alternate stories to what the mainstream media and the government will tell you," says Korey Rowe, 23, who produced the movie. "That 19 hijackers are going to completely bypass security and crash four commercial airliners in a span of two hours, with no interruption from the military forces, in the most guarded airspace in the United States and the world? That to me is a conspiracy theory."

It's also not much of a story line. As a narrative, the official story that the government--echoed by the media--is trying to sell shows an almost embarrassing lack of novelistic flair, whereas the story the conspiracy theorists tell about what happened on Sept. 11 is positively Dan Brownesque in its rich, exciting complexity. Rowe and his collaborator, Dylan Avery, 22, actually started writing Loose Change as a fictional screenplay--"loosely based around us discovering that 9/11 was an inside job," Rowe says--before they became convinced that the evidence of conspiracy was overwhelming. The Administration is certainly playing its part in the drama with admirable zeal. If we went to war to root out fictional weapons of mass destruction, is staging a fictional terrorist attack such a stretch?

But there's a big problem with Loose Change and with most other conspiracy theories. The more you think about them, the more you realize how much they depend on circumstantial evidence, facts without analysis or documentation, quotes taken out of context and the scattered testimony of traumatized eyewitnesses. (For what it's worth, the National Institute of Standards and Technology has published a fact sheet responding to some of the conspiracy theorists' ideas on its website, www.nist.gov. The theories prompt small, reasonable questions that demand answers that are just too large and unreasonable to swallow. Granted, the Pentagon crash site looks odd in photographs. But if the Pentagon was hit by a cruise missile, then what happened to American Airlines Flight 77? Where did all the real, documented people on it go? Assassinated? Relocated? What about eyewitnesses who saw a plane, not a missile? And what are the chances that an operation of such size--it would surely have involved hundreds of military and civilian personnel--could be carried out without a single leak? Without leaving behind a single piece of evidence hard enough to stand up to scrutiny in a court? People, the feds just aren't that slick. Nobody is.

There are psychological explanations for why conspiracy theories are so seductive. Academics who study them argue that they meet a basic human need: to have the magnitude of any given effect be balanced by the magnitude of the cause behind it. A world in which tiny causes can have huge consequences feels scary and unreliable. Therefore a grand disaster like Sept. 11 needs a grand conspiracy behind it. "We tend to associate major events--a President or princess dying--with major causes," says Patrick Leman, a lecturer in psychology at Royal Holloway University of London, who has conducted studies on conspiracy belief. "If we think big events like a President being assassinated can happen at the hands of a minor individual, that points to the unpredictability and randomness of life and unsettles us." In that sense, the idea that there is a malevolent controlling force orchestrating global events is, in a perverse way, comforting.

You would have thought the age of conspiracy theories might have declined with the rise of digital media. The assassination of President John F. Kennedy was a private, intimate affair compared with the attack on the World Trade Center, which was witnessed by millions of bystanders and television viewers and documented by hundreds of Zapruders. You would think there was enough footage and enough forensics to get us past the grassy knoll and the magic bullet, to create a consensus reality, a single version of the truth, a single world we can all live in together.

But there is no event so plain and clear that a determined human being can't find ambiguity in it. And as divisive as they are, conspiracy theories are part of the process by which Americans deal with traumatic public events like Sept. 11. Conspiracy theories form around them like scar tissue. In a curious way, they're an American form of national mourning. They'll be with us as long as we fear lone gunmen, and feel the pain of losses like the one we suffered on Sept. 11, and as long as the past, even the immediate past, is ultimately unknowable. That is to say, forever.

Note by PNTV - TIME magazine published forged photographs from the Zapruder film of the assassination coup d'etat of President JFK Sr, and locked the Zapruder film in its vault to censor the facts from the public, until Judge Jim Garrison subpoenaed it during his prosecution of CIA agent Clay Shaw. Jew Oliver Stone's 2 documentaries about JFK showed the Zapruder film, which proves Kennedy was shot from the front not the back, and forced Congress to declassify 2-million pages of JFK files, including CIA's and Pentagon's Operation NORTHWOODS in 2000, which included US Govt hijacking US airliners in USA and bombing them by remote control. NORTHWOODS included Operation MONGOOSE, which was discussed in both of Stone's documentaries on the murder of JFK by the US Govt. Note that TIME censored Operation NORTHWOODS from its gullible readers. Government prosecutors and judges use circumstantial evidence every day to arrest and convict millions of US citizens. Even the federal and state RICO Acts specifically name GOVERNMENTAL criminals in its legislation to prosecute organized crime and racketeering.

September 11, 2006

JFK Doodle Predicted "9-11 Conspiracy" - President Kennedy, known for separating his life into compartments, would enclose words and numbers inside circles and boxes. Events long after his death give one doodle an unintended chill: A small circle with the numbers "9-11" contained within. Just to the lower left on the page, the word "conspiracy" is underlined. The doodle is part of a new book, Presidential Doodles, which analyses the jottings of eight commanders in chief.

But Oliver Stone's WTC movie does show prepositioned bombs exploding throughout the WTC, and does show the controlled explosive demolition of WTC7.

Some Internet sites say Oliver Stone's 'WTC' fails to address what really happened on 9/11.

LOS ANGELES TIMES - Memo to Oliver Stone: Conspiracy theorists have a bone to pick with you.

The filmmaker's latest release, "World Trade Center," does not engage in any of the cloak-and-dagger mumblings that have made the rounds, particularly on the Internet, in the wake of the 9/11 tragedy. All this has conspiracy theorists very disappointed. They figured if anyone would be willing to — as they see it — challenge the "official" version of events, it would be Mr. "JFK" himself.

"Oliver Stone, having done 'Nixon' and 'JFK' and other movies that have been quite revealing, had a chance to use his power to ask a few very damning questions," said Prisonplanet.com radio show host Jack Blood, who is urging a boycott of the film. "Instead, what we have is an establishment movie that certainly condones and endorses the cover story that was given to us by the government on 9/11."

Stone has a simple answer: He wanted to tell the story of two Port Authority officers who tried to save lives that day but ended up fighting for their own. Politics wasn't involved.

Alex Jones, who has an Internet radio show on Infowars.com and Prisonplanet.com, said he doesn't fault Stone for making a movie that honors the heroes of 9/11. "He is allowed to make a movie about this microcosm that was such a big part of 9/11," said Jones. "We know that the police and firefighters were heroes, and I agree with that. But there is concern in the 9/11 truth community that the movie will be used to bolster the official story."

To be sure, there are plenty of alternate views on the events of 9/11.

Some believe the CIA was in on the attacks. Others wonder if bombs had been planted inside the towers. Still others think the U.S. government knew the attacks were coming but chose not to act. In March, actor Charlie Sheen said in an interview with Jones that he too questions the "official 9/11 story."

"It seems to me like 19 amateurs with box cutters taking over four commercial airliners and hitting 75% of their targets, that feels like a conspiracy theory. It raises a lot of questions." Sheen added: "There was a feeling, it just didn't look like any commercial jetliner I've flown on anytime in my life, and then when the buildings came down later on that day, I said to my brother, 'Call me insane, but did it sort of look like those buildings came down in a controlled demolition'?"

Sheen also told Jones he wanted an independent investigation of the events leading up to 9/11. "It is up to us to reveal the truth. It is up to us because we owe it to the families; we owe it to the victims. We owe it to everybody's life who was drastically altered horrifically that day and forever. We owe it to them to uncover what happened."

Now with Stone in the mix, there's even more intrigue. Some theorists theorize: Maybe the director himself is part of the 9/11 plot.

"Was Stone used by the Illuminati as an unknowing pawn to whitewash the 9/11 conspiracy theories to the masses?" wondered blogger John Conner. "Was he approached with the project and coerced into a commitment to occupy his time in attempts to thwart any other 9/11 angle from being used? Is Stone a pawn in the game? Perhaps Stone didn't know at the time, and found out too late. Perhaps production had begun, and he was already on board when he found the 9/11 rabbit hole."

The questions just add fodder to the debate.

"At some point you will see a Hollywood film that looks at alternative views of the official 9/11 story," said Jones. "It's just who's got the courage to do it."

CHICAGO SUN TIMES - Professor Kevin Barrett believes the U.S government might have destroyed the World Trade Center. Professor Steven Jones is researching what he calls evidence that the twin towers were brought down by explosives detonated inside them, not by hijacked airliners.

These men aren't uneducated junk scientists: Barrett will teach a class on Islam at the University of Wisconsin this fall, over the protests of more than 60 state legislators. Jones is a tenured physicist at Brigham Young University whose job has made him a hero to conspiracy theorists.

'Things are happening'

Five years after the terrorist attacks, a community that believes widely discredited ideas about what happened on Sept. 11 thrives. Members trade their ideas on the Internet and in self-published papers and in books. About 500 of them attended a recent conference in Chicago.

The movement claims to be drawing credibility from a recently formed group called Scholars for 9/11 Truth.

The organization says publicity over Barrett's case has helped boost membership to about 75 academics. They are a tiny minority of the 1 million faculty nationwide, and some have no university affiliation. But some are well educated, with degrees from elite universities and jobs at schools including Rice, Indiana and the University of Texas.

''Things are happening,'' said co-founder James Fetzer, a philosophy professor at the University of Minnesota Duluth, who maintains, among other claims, that some of the hijackers are still alive. ''We're going to continue to do this. Our role is to establish what really happened on 9/11.''

Many mainstream scientists won't debate conspiracy theorists, saying they don't want to lend them unwarranted credibility. But some worry the academic background of the group could do that anyway.

'Scientist with an ax to grind'

Members of the conspiracy community ''practically worship the ground [Jones] walks on because he's seen as a scientist who is preaching to their side,'' said F.R. Greening, a Canadian chemist who has written papers rebutting the science used by Sept. 11 conspiracy theorists. ''It's science, but it's politically motivated. It's science with an ax to grind, and therefore it's not really science.''

Members of the group believe the government's investigation was inadequate, and they say that questioning widely held assumptions has been part of the job of scholars for centuries. ''Tenure gives you a secure position where you can engage in controversial issues,'' Fetzer said. ''That's what you should be doing.''

But when asked what did happen, members often step outside the data-based culture of the academy and defer to their own instincts.

Daniel Orr, a retired economics chairman at the University of Illinois, said he knew instantly from watching the towers fall that they had been blown apart by explosives. He was reminded of watching an old housing project being destroyed in St. Louis.

David Gabbard, an East Carolina education professor, acknowledges this isn't his field, but says ''I'm smart enough to know that fire from airplanes can't melt steel.''

The Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)'s publishing arm has released a book that says President Bush organized New York's Sept. 11 attacks.

The decision by the 160-year-old Westminster John Knox Press, the trade and academic publishing imprint of the Presbyterian Publishing Corp., to attribute the attacks on the World Trade Center brings into the U.S. religious mainstream a conspiracy theory long held by the world's jihadists.

In 'Christian Faith and the Truth behind 9/11: A Call to Reflection and Action,' author David Ray Griffin calls the United States the world's 'chief embodiment of demonic power, says he initially scoffed at 9/11 conspiracy theories.

But after investigating he concluded that the Twin Towers were brought down by controlled demolition, military personnel were given stand-down orders not to intercept hijacked flights and the 9/11 Commission, ostensibly created to uncover the truth behind the events of 9/11, 'simply ignored evidence' that the administration was involved in the attacks.

Griffin further asserts that such events such as that of 9/11 are part of a long history of 'false-flag attacks,' attacks orchestrated by governments against their own people to garner popular support for military action.

Griffin is a professor at California's Claremont School of Theology and Claremont Graduate University, and a codirector of the Center for Process Studies.

By Dr Paul Craig Roberts PhD
08/14/06

I was in China when a July Harris Poll reported that 50 percent of Americans still believe that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction when Bush invaded that country, and that 64 percent of Americans still believe that Saddam Hussein had strong links with Al Qaeda.

The Chinese leaders and intellectuals with whom I was meeting were incredulous. How could a majority of the population in an allegedly free country with an allegedly free press be so totally misinformed?

The only answer I could give the Chinese is that Americans would have been the perfect population for Mao and the Gang of Four, because Americans believe anything their government tells them.

Americans never check any facts. Who do you know, for example, who has even read the Report of the 9/11 Commission, much less checked the alleged facts reported in that document. I can answer for you. You don’t know anyone who has read the report or checked the facts.

The two co-chairmen of the 9/11 Commission Report, Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton, have just released a new book, “Without Precedent: The Inside Story of the 9/11 Commission.” Kean and Hamilton reveal that the commission suppressed the fact that Muslim ire toward the US is due to US support for Israel’s persecution and dispossession of the Palestinians, not to our “freedom and democracy” as Bush propagandistically claims. Kean and Hamilton also reveal that the US military committed perjury and lied about its failure to intercept the hijacked airliners. The commission even debated referring the military’s lies to the Justice Department for criminal investigation. (But the Pentagon's version was proven true by the NORAD audiotapes declassified as rebuttal to the 911 Commission lies, proving the White House stand down order, despite pleas by the military to shoot down the aircraft.) Why should we assume that these admissions are the only coverups and lies in the 9/11 Commission Report?

How do you know that 9/11 was a Muslim terrorist plot? How do you know that three World Trade Center buildings collapsed because two were hit by airliners? You only “know” because the government gave you the explanation of what you saw on TV. (Did you even know that three WTC buildings collapsed?)

I still remember the enlightenment I experienced as a student in Russian Studies when I learned that the Czarist secret police would set off bombs and then blame those whom they wanted to arrest..

When Hitler seized dictatorial power in 1933, he told the Germans that his new powers were made necessary by a communist terrorist attack on the Reichstag. When Hitler started World War II by invading Poland, he told the Germans that Poland had crossed the frontier and attacked Germany. (Just like the Reichstag arson of the German Congress, in Operations Himmler and Cannded Goods, Nazi Germany attacked itself and blamed Poland, to start World War 2. These self inflicted terrorist attacks were confessed during the Nurenberg trials and resulted in death sentences for all top German politicians who failed to suicide themselves and their families.)

Governments lie all the time--especially governments staffed by neoconservatives whose intellectual godfather, Leo Strauss, taught them that it is permissible to deceive the public in order to achieve their agenda.

Some readers will write to me to say that they saw a TV documentary or read a magazine article verifying the government’s explanation of 9/11. But, of course, these Americans did not check the facts either - and neither did the people who made the documentary and wrote the magazine article.

Scientists and engineers, such as Clemson University Professor of Engineering Dr. Judy Woods and BYU Professor of Physics Dr. Steven Jones, have raised compelling questions about the official account of the collapse of the three WTC buildings. The basic problem for the government's account is that the buildings are known to have fallen at free fall speed, a fact that is inconsistent with the government's "pancaking" theory in which debris from above collapsed the floors below. If the buildings actually "pancaked," then each floor below would have offered resistance to the floors above, and the elapsed time would have been much longer. These experts have also calculated that the buildings did not have sufficient gravitational energy to accommodate the government's theory of the collapse. It is certainly a known and non-controversial fact among physicists and engineers that the only way buildings can collapse at free fall speed into their own footprints is by engineered demolition. Explosives are used to remove the support of floors below before the debris from above arrives. Otherwise, resistance is encountered and the time required for fall increases. Engineered demolition also explains the symmetrical collapse of the buildings into their own foot prints. As it is otherwise improbable for every point in floors below to weaken uniformly, "pancaking" would result in asymmetrical collapse as some elements of the floor would give sooner than others.

Scientific evidence is a tough thing for the American public to handle, and the government knows it. The government can rely on people dismissing things that they cannot understand as "conspiracy theory." But if you are inclined to try to make up your own mind, you can find Dr. Jones' and Dr. Woods’ papers, which have been formally presented to their peers at scientific meetings, on line at ST911.org.

Experts have also pointed out that the buildings' massive steel skeletons comprised a massive heat sink that wicked away the heat from the limited, short-lived fires, thus preventing a heat buildup. Experts also point out that the short-lived, scattered, low-intensity fires could barely reach half the melting point of steel even if they burned all day instead of merely an hour.

Don't ask me to tell you what happened on 9/11. All I know is that the official account of the buildings' collapse is improbable.

Now we are being told another improbable tale. Muslim terrorists in London and Pakistan were caught plotting to commit mass murder by smuggling bottles of explosive liquids on board airliners in hand luggage. Baby formula, shampoo and water bottles allegedly contained the tools of suicide bombers.

How do we know about this plot? Well, the police learned it from an “Islamic militant arrested near the Afghan-Pakistan border several weeks ago.” And how did someone so far away know what British-born people in London were plotting? (Dozens of British citizens were arrested without charges, without evidence, without bombs, without plane tickets, without passports, without confessions, while 1,000s of airport screeners in USA are illegal aliens. 10,000 illegal aliens invade the wide open US border every day, while US Govt gives those criminal terrorists an unlimited supply of free liquids to help them invade USA and wage Civil War to violently overthrow the US and state governments.)

Do you really believe that Western and Israeli intelligence services, which were too incompetent to prevent the 9/11 attack, can uncover a London plot by capturing a person on the Afghan border in Pakistan? Why would “an Islamic militant” rat on such a plot even if he knew of it?

More probable explanations of the “plot” are readily available. According to the August 11 Wayne Madsen Report, informed sources in the UK report that “the Tony Blair government, under siege by a Labor Party revolt, cleverly cooked up a new ‘terror’ scare to avert the public’s eyes away from Blair’s increasing political woes. British law enforcement, neocon and intelligence operatives in the US, Israel, and Britain, and Rupert Murdoch’s global media empire cooked up the terrorist plot, liberally borrowing from the failed 1995 ‘Oplan Bjinka’ plot by Pakistan- and Philippines-based terrorist Ramzi Ahmad Yousef to crash 11 trans-Pacific airliners bound from Asia to the US.”

There are other plausible explanations. For example, our puppet in Pakistan decided to arrest some people who were a threat to him. With Bush’s commitment to “building democracy in the Middle East,” our puppet can’t arrest his political enemies without cause, so he lays the blame on a plot.

Any testimony against Muslim plotters by “an Islamic militant” is certain to have been bought and paid for.

Or consider this explanation. Under the Nuremberg standard, Bush and Blair are war criminals. Bush is so worried that he will be held accountable that he has sent his attorney general to consult with the Republican Congress to work out legislation to protect Bush retroactively from his violations of the Geneva Conventions.

Tony Blair is in more danger of finding himself in the dock. Britain is signatory to a treaty that, if justice is done, will place Blair before the International Criminal Court in the Hague.

What better justification for the two war criminals’ illegal actions than the need to foil dastardly plots by Muslims recruited in sting operations by Western intelligence services? The more Bush and Blair can convince their publics that terrorist danger abounds, the less likely Bush and Blair are ever to be held accountable for their crimes.

But surely, some readers might object, our great moral leaders wouldn’t do something political like that!

They most certainly would. As Joshua Micah Marshall wrote in the July 7 issue of Time magazine, the suspicion is “quite reasonable” that “the Bush Administration orchestrates its terror alerts and arrests to goose the GOP’s poll numbers.”

Joshua Micah Marshall proves his conclusion by examining the barrage of color-coded terror alerts, none of which were real, and, yes, it all fits with political needs.

And don’t forget the plot unearthed in Miami to blow up the Sears Tower in Chicago. Described by Vice President Cheney as a “very real threat,” the plot turned out to be nothing more than a few harmless whackos recruited by an FBI agent sent out to organize a sting.

There was also the “foiled plot” to blow up the Holland Tunnel and flood downtown New York City with sea water. Thinking New Orleans, the FBI invented this plot without realizing that New York City is above sea level. Of course, most Americans didn’t realize it either.

For six years the Bush regime has been able to count on the ignorant and naive American public to believe whatever tale that is told them. American gullibility has yet to fail the Bush regime.

The government has an endless number of conspiracy theories, but only people who question the government’s conspiracies are derided for “having a conspiracy theory.”

The implication is even worse if we assume that the explosive bottle plot is genuine. It means that America and Britain by their own aggression in Iraq and Afghanistan, and by enabling Israel’s war crimes in Palestine and Lebanon, have created such hatred that Muslims, who identify with Bush’s, Blair’s, and Israel’s victims, are plotting retaliation.

But Bush is prepared. He has taught his untutored public that “they hate us for our freedom and democracy.”

Gentle reader, wise up. The entire world is laughing at you.

Paul Craig Roberts is an economist and a former Senior Research Fellow at the Hoover Institution, a former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan Administration, and a prolific and popular journalist. He is nationally syndicated columnist for Creator's Syndicate and Investors Business Daily. He is a former editor and columnist for the Wall Street Journal, Business Week, and Scripps Howard News Service. He is a graduate of the Georgia Institute of Technology and he holds a Ph.D. from the University of Virginia.

NEW YORK DAILY NEWS - Father, uncle and cousin surface in new biography.

Mayor Giuliani — a former federal prosecutor who won notice for pursuing the Mafia — had relatives linked to organized crime, including a mobbed-up cousin who was gunned down by FBI agents in 1977, a new book says.

Lewis D'Avanzo, a son of the mayor's uncle and a guest at Giuliani's first wedding in 1968, was a "ruthless and widely feared mob associate" who headed a massive stolen car ring, according to FBI documents and interviews detailed in "Rudy! An Investigative Biography of Rudolph Giuliani," by Village Voice senior editor Wayne Barrett.

Due in stores next week, the book sketches a largely unflattering portrait of the clan, depicting his father, Harold, as a hothead and the "muscle" behind a brother-in-law's loansharking operation, run out of a Brooklyn bar.

Along with cracking heads, it says the mayor's father served time in state prison for a stickup, rarely held an on-the-books job and once was a gunman in a mob shootout in Brighton Beach, Brooklyn.

The book never makes clear how much of the family's alleged dark side is known to the mayor, who has talked lovingly of his father, who died in 1981 of prostate cancer — the same disease that the mayor is fighting.

The mayor's spokeswoman, Sunny Mindel, said yesterday that Giuliani "hadn't seen the book and had no comment." On Tuesday, Giuliani defended his father as "a complete man" who taught him the value of honesty, but the mayor refused to address questions about his father's alleged criminal past.

"The details of his life died with him," the mayor said.

And they almost stayed that way.

Barrett said a source told him the elder Giuliani had spent time behind bars, but the author couldn't find city court records documenting it.

Barrett eventually looked in the 1934 state prison archives in Albany and discovered a single sheet — a Sing Sing Prison receiving blotter — that listed Harold Giuliani at the top of the page. On the next line, Barrett found the key to the story: Harold Giuliani's alias, Joseph Starrett.

Barrett then found all the New York court records under the name Starrett. Initial excerpts of the book appeared in Talk magazine and in this week's Voice; another excerpt was released yesterday.

According to the book, Giuliani's cousin Lewis D'Avanzo was known as "Steve the Blond" and listed as armed and dangerous in FBI bulletins. His criminal record included a 10-year federal sentence for the armed hijacking of a truck loaded with $240,000 worth of mercury. The book alleges that he was suspected of taking part in several murders.

D'Avanzo was gunned down by the FBI in October 1977, when he tried to run down an agent after being stopped on a warrant that accused him and two associates of transporting 100 stolen luxury cars.

Quoting an unnamed friend of D'Avanzo, the book describes a 1962 shootout pitting a local mobster against the mayor's father and Leo D'Avanzo, Lewis D'Avanzo's father.

The book says Leo was later sanctioned by mob bosses for shooting at a Mafia member.

Born two years apart, Giuliani and his cousin attended the same elementary and high schools, but Giuliani's father forbade the two from spending much time together. Giuliani met D'Avanzo's wife, Lois, only once — at the mayor's first wedding, to Regina Peruggi, the book says.

The book says Leo D'Avanzo, who was known in family circles as a black sheep, ran loansharking and gambling operations out of a Brooklyn bar where Giuliani's father worked as a bartender.

In his role as debt collector, his father "broke legs, smashed kneecaps, crunched noses," the book says.

Leo D'Avanzo left town after the shootout, and gave the bar to Harold Giuliani, the book said.

Based on interviews with family members, the book also claims that Joan Ellen D'Avanzo, a cousin who at one time lived with Giuliani when he was a youngster, became a drug addict who was beaten to death in 1973 at age 34. Her cause of death was listed as undetermined, but several family members said she was murdered.

NOTE: When PNTV's John Lee special ordered this book from Borders Books, it was printed with pages backwards and upside down.

London Daily Mirror - Towers that fell 'like a controlled demolition'. Planes that vanished then mysteriously reappeared, and crucial evidence that has been lost for ever.

In the Pentagon, a top secret team drew up a plan to simultaneously send up two airliners painted and numbered exactly the same, one from a civil airport in America, the other from a secret military airbase nearby.

The one from the airport would have military personnel on board who had checked in as ordinary passengers under false names.

The one from the airbase would be an empty drone, a remote-controlled unmanned aircraft.

Somewhere along their joint flight paths, the passenger-carrying plane would drop below radar height, and disappear, landing back at the airbase and unloading its occupants in secret. Meanwhile, the drone would have taken up the other plane's designated course. High over the island of Cuba, it would be exploded in mid-air after broadcasting an international distress call that it was under attack from enemy fighters.

The world would be told that a plane load of blameless American holidaymakers had been deliberately shot down by Fidel Castro's Communists - and that the US had no choice but to declare war and topple his regime.

This Top Secret 'agent provocateur' plan - code named Operation Northwoods and revealed in official archives - dates from 1962 when the Cold War was at its height and was declassified in 2000.

"ABC News - May 1, 2001 - Operation NORTHWOODS may be the most corrupt plan ever created by the U.S. government. Operation Northwoods had called for nothing less than the launch of a secret campaign of terrorism within the United States in order to blame Castro and provoke a war with Cuba." —James Bamford

"In the early 1960s, America's top military leaders reportedly drafted plans to kill innocent people and commit acts of terrorism in U.S. cities to create public support for a war against Cuba.

Code named Operation NORTHWOODS, the plans reportedly included the possible assassination of Cuban émigrés, sinking boats of Cuban refugees on the high seas, hijacking planes, blowing up a U.S. ship, and even orchestrating violent terrorism in U.S. cities. The plans were developed as ways to trick the American public and the international community into supporting a war to oust Cuba's then new leader, communist Fidel Castro.

America's top military brass even contemplated causing U.S. military casualties, writing: "We could blow up a U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba," and, "casualty lists in U.S. newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation."

The plans had the written approval of all of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and were presented to President Kennedy's defense secretary, Robert McNamara, in March 1962. But they apparently were rejected by the civilian leadership and have gone undisclosed for nearly 40 years. The Joint Chiefs at the time were headed by Eisenhower appointee Army Gen. Lyman L. Lemnitzer, who, with the signed plans in hand made a pitch to McNamara on March 13, 1962, recommending Operation Northwoods be run by the military.

Whether the Joint Chiefs' plans were rejected by McNamara in the meeting is not clear. But three days later, President Kennedy told Lemnitzer directly there was virtually no possibility of ever using overt force to take Cuba, Bamford reports. Within months, Lemnitzer would be denied another term as chairman and transferred to another job.

Ironically, the documents came to light, says Bamford, in part because of the 1992 Oliver Stone film JFK, which examined the possibility of a conspiracy behind the assassination of President Kennedy. "The scary thing is none of this stuff comes out until 40 years after," says Bamford."

VIDEO - Operation Northwoods - James Bamford from ABC News

"We could blow up a drone (unmannded) vessel anywhere in the Cuban waters. The presense of Cuban planes or ships merely investigating the intent of the vessel could be fairly compelling evidence that the ship was taken under attack. The US could follow with an air/sea rescue operation covered by US fighters to "evacuate" remaining members of the non-existant crew.

Casualty lists in US newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation.

We could develop a Communist Cuba terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Flordia cities and even in Washington. The terror campaign could be pointed at Cuban refugees seeking haven in the United States.

Use of MIG-type aircraft by US pilots could provide additional provocation. Harassment of civil air, attacks on surface shipping, and destruction of US military drone aircraft by MIG type palnes would be useful. An F-86 properly painted would convince air passengers that they saw a Cuban MIG, especially if the pilot of the transport were to announce that fact. Hijacking attampts against US civil air and surface craft should be encouraged. It is possible to create an incident which would demonstrate convincingly that a Cuban aircraft has attacked and shot down a chartered civilian airliner from the United States.

An aircraft at Eglin AFB would be painted and numbered as an exact duplicate for a civil registered aircraft belonging to a CIA proprietary organization in the Miami area. At a designated time the duplicate would be subsituted for the actual civil aircraft and the passengers, all boarded under carefully prepared aliases.

The actual registered aircraft would be converted to a drone.

Take off times of the drone aircraft and the actual aircraft will be scheduled to allow a rondevous. From the rondevous point the passenger-carrying aircraft will descend to minimum altitude and go directly to an auxiliary airfield at Eglin AFB where arrangements will have been made to evacuate the passengers and return the aircraft to its original status.

Meanwhile the drone aircraft will continue to fly the filed flight plan. The drone will be transmitting on the international distress frequency "MAY DAY" message stating it is under attack by Cuban MIG aircraft. The transmission will be interrupted by the destruction of aircraft which will be triggered by radio signal. This will allow IACO radio stations to tell the US what has happened to the aircraft instead of the US trying to "sell" the incident.

It is possible to create an incident that will make it appear that Communist Cuban MIGs have destroyed a USAF aircraft over international waters in an unprovoked attack. On one such flight, a pre-briefed pilot would fly Tail-end Charlie. While near the Cuban island this pilot would broadcast that he had been jumped by MIGs and was going down. This pilot would then fly at extremely low altitude and land at a secure base, an Eglin auxiliary.

The aircraft would be met by the proper people, quickly stored and given a new tail number. The pilot who performed the mission under an alias would resume his proper identity. The pilot and aircraft would then have disappeared.

A submarine or small craft would distribute F-101 parts, parachute, etc. The pilots retuning to Homestead would have a true story as far as they knew. Search ships and aircraft could be dispatched and parts of aircraft found." — Jewish Zionist General L.L. Lemnitzer, chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff at Pentagon, Memo to Secretary of War Robert McNamara - Subject: Justification for U.S. Military Intervention in Cuba - Operation NORTHWOODS, March 13, 1962

(declassifed in 2000)

BOSTON GLOBE - Nearly 5 years later, lawsuits are stalled.

In the aftermath of Sept. 11, 2001, a tiny percentage of people who lost loved ones or were injured in the attacks sued the aviation industry, spurning a federal compensation fund that ultimately distributed more than $7 billion to more than 5,500 victims.

Now, nearly five years after the historic disaster, roughly 60 lawsuits are still grinding their way through court. And the families pushing ahead with litigation, including numerous New Englanders, are mired in a massive legal case that has become a complicated behemoth for the federal judge overseeing it.

``I've never been in any litigation more frustrating than this," said Frank H. Granito, Jr., a New York lawyer who represents the family of an American Flight 11 passenger and several insurance companies in the matter.

The case pits those who consider the day's events an unpreventable tragedy against others who believe government and aviation officials ignored clear warnings that such an assault was possible. That lapse, in their view, led to the deaths of beloved friends and relatives, and they now want accountability and answers.

For some litigants, their decision to sue was met by public disapproval from skeptics who questioned their motives and dismissed their quest for justice as futile. But in interviews with the Globe, many family members said they are committed to pursuing the case until government, airline, and security officials are held responsible for their roles in the attacks. And they are aware that litigation is a gamble that could produce neither answers nor money, they said.

The New York-based case has been slowed by the federal government's sweeping refusal to release materials on aviation security, outraging lawyers for both sides. It has also been stalled by the South Carolina law firm Motley Rice, which made billions suing the tobacco industry and represents 53 victims in the case, or nearly 60 percent of all plaintiffs. Its clients include the families of Flight 11 pilot Captain John Ogonowski of Dracut, crew member Madeline Sweeney of Acton, Rhode Island native David Angell, creator of the sitcom ``Frasier," and many high-earning New England executives.

``Right now we have it under a magnifying glass, and it's impossible to really determine whether what Motley Rice is doing is a good or a bad thing," said Margaret Ogonowski, a mother of three who was widowed in the attacks, adding that she feels ``well treated by the firm."

``Motley is driving a new course," she said, ``and we have to step back and examine it when it's all finished to make a better determination as to whether they did a good job or maybe they botched it."

While other lawyers have resolved most or all of their cases -- at least 32 of the roughly 90 total lawsuits have settled -- Motley Rice has settled only three. Of the cases left to settle, all but 7 are being handled by Motley Rice, whose founding partner, Ronald L. Motley, said in an interview that his clients ``won't take cheap early money."

The firm is advancing to trial, where it says it can win jury awards larger than the settlements being offered and expose systemic failures that allowed the attacks to take place.

Waiting for a trial date

Motley Rice has maintained its stance despite repeated urgings to settle by US District Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein, who so far has denied requests by Motley Rice and other firms to schedule a trial. Hellerstein has also chastised Motley Rice, pledged to prevent ``rewarding holdouts who prefer to settle later rather than earlier in the hope that they might be able to use leverage to gain additional funds later on," and warned that not settling could mean ``you will not only be litigating for my lifetime but your grandchildren's lifetime."

Still, many of the firm's clients say they sued not for financial gain, but because they believe litigation will fully reveal whether government and aviation officials could have anticipated and prevented the events of Sept. 11. Some also sued because life insurance and other ``offsets" would have reduced their payments from the compensation fund, which awarded $2 million in death cases and $400,000 in injury cases, on average.

``We did not join this lawsuit or choose to sue for monetary reward," said Carie Lemack, whose mother, Judy Larocque of Framingham, chief executive of a market research firm, died on Flight 11, which originated in Boston. ``It was always about accountability and it remains about accountability today, because reforms that are desperately needed are not happening."

``You only settle when it's appropriate to settle, and if other families felt they needed to settle I can't judge that," said Lemack. ``For people who've chosen not to settle, I completely respect their decision and think the judge owes them a trial date. They deserve that. We deserve that."

Lemack and other plaintiffs reject suggestions that, by suing, they have prolonged an emotional ordeal that delays closure, strains families, presents unknown risks, and potentially enriches the lawyers representing them -- without a guarantee that they will find what they are searching for.

``If by litigating you're looking for answers, you might be disappointed," said Faith R. Arter, board president of the Massachusetts 9/11 Fund, founded to support people who lost loved ones in the attacks. ``Litigation's just not fun, and my real concern is emotional: How much more can you bear? But I want the families to get some peace out of the process, and if that has to be in a trial I support it."

According to several lawyers and plaintiffs in the case, Motley Rice has made unusually high settlement demands, often 5 to 10 times higher than similar plane crash cases. The higher demands stem from Motley's calculations for what it calls ``terror damages" -- compensation for the amount of time frightened victims knew they were fated to die -- of between $750,000 and $1 million a minute, according to those lawyers and clients, who requested that their names not be used because the settlement process is confidential.

Passengers aboard the airliners hijacked on Sept. 11, 2001, are believed to have known for as long as 46 minutes that death was imminent.

``I can tell you categorically we're not saying a minute is worth X or Y," said Donald A. Migliori, a Motley Rice partner. ``But, yeah, we probably value them differently because this is a very different case for us. We are adamant about getting value that is appropriate and reasonable and will stand review by courts of appeal, and whatever that number is, we're going to get it, by verdict or settlement -- and these defendants know we're not bluffing."

Migliori declined to disclose exact valuations, but said some of the firm's demands are ``past the eight-figure number" because the victims had extremely high incomes. Motley Rice will receive part of any settlements or verdicts reached.

Migliori and Motley also vowed to keep fighting for information that the Transportation Security Administration has tried to keep secret, such as airport security measures in effect before September 2001. TSA has also tried to bar plaintiff lawyers from conducting live depositions and to prevent them from hearing responses to their questions.

`Not going to settle'

Depositions of several airline and security company executives, as well as airport security screeners, begin Sept. 11 -- a date some family members criticize as insensitive -- and will be the first test of the Transportation Security Administration's proposed restrictions.

``We are driven to keep pushing for information about what happened, and when that is resolved only then will we stop," said Migliori, who insists Motley Rice is ready to try cases despite the administration's roadblocks.

There are risks to pushing toward trial. The consolidated case encompasses a wide array of claims for deaths, injuries, property damage, and insurance matters, but Hellerstein is trying to settle the death and injury cases first because, he has said, ``these are not just dry negotiations. Lives with extraordinary potential have been wiped out."

However, if Hellerstein senses settlement talks are fatally stalled, he could open settlement negotiations in the property claims for buildings damaged in the attacks, estimated at up to $50 billion, which could rapidly exhaust the roughly $10 billion to $20 billion total insurance coverage in the case. If the cases don't settle and a trial takes place, he has the legal power to reduce an outsized jury verdict.

Motley Rice lawyers say they are unruffled by those possibilities.

``We're not holding out to get more money, and we're not looking for the attention to be drawn to Motley Rice. We're representing our clients and trying to achieve our goals," Migliori said.

Mediations, led by New York attorney Sheila L. Birnbaum, continue this week and could spur additional settlements, as could the depositions of aviation officials slated to begin next month.

If the parties reach a stalemate in some cases, Hellerstein will have to decide whether to end settlement talks and schedule trials, or perhaps a single trial, for whatever cases are unresolved.

Motley, for his part, said depositions ``most certainly will turn out to be meaningless because of the irrational position of the federal government" on, for example, not releasing pre-9/11 security policies. A trial could be inevitable, he said, if certain clients refuse to accept settlements.

``All of these cases aren't going to settle," Motley said. ``They are absolutely not going to settle. My clients have a right to decide to end this, and as long as I've got a client who says, `I don't want their blood money; I want accountability through a jury verdict,' no force on earth can change that."

Motley, who had not handled an aviation case before Sept. 11, is critical of what he describes as ``the cozy relationship between plaintiff lawyers and defense lawyers that exists in the aviation bar after decades of inbred litigating."

Other firms, Motley said, have settled 9/11 cases for ``magnitudes less" than their clients deserved. ``There was an extraordinary system breakdown and an extraordinary failure of aviation security," he added, ``so they ought to have to pay the maximal damages, not the minimal."

The judge has repeatedly prodded Motley Rice to push aggressively for settlements.

``Why aren't you settling your cases?" Hellerstein said to Migliori at a June 8 hearing in US District Court in New York.

``We're working on it," Migliori replied.

``You're not working hard enough. Ms. Birnbaum [the mediator] tells me she is getting no response from you. . . . Tell your colleagues that the judge is getting very impatient with this."

``I will," Migliori said.

``And will not put up with more delay," Hellerstein added. ``There's much too much delay that has gone by and much too much work to be done in this case. I will not tolerate it."

`They're doing a service' In addition to settling three of its cases, Motley Rice is now in ``striking range" on about five others and ``there's optimism on both sides that those numbers can be bridged," Migliori said.

Lawyers for American and United airlines, who are defendants in the case, declined to comment and did not return requests for comment, respectively.

Motley Rice, one of the country's largest plaintiff litigation firms, may be best known for helping the states win a $246 billion settlement from the tobacco industry. The firm has turned the Sept. 11 attacks into a business opportunity, establishing a ``9/11 and antiterrorism" legal practice and hiring Mary F. Schiavo, former inspector general of the US Department of Transportation, in 2003.

Several Motley Rice clients said they have a practical view of the firm's stake in the Sept. 11 cases.

``Of course they're in it for the money," said Loretta Filipov of Concord, whose husband, Alexander, was on Flight 11. ``But they're also doing a service for the country, they're doing a service for the people."

``It's never been about the money," Filipov said of her decision to file a lawsuit. ``There was never any question I'd take money from the government. This was about answers."

August 20, 2006

Motley Crew - Trillion dollar lawsuit sues members of Bush Gang's Carlyle Group for perping the 911 terrorist massacres in USA, and extorts Pirate News TV to shut down its websites

Knoxville Tennessee lawfirm sues members of Bush Gang's Carlyle Group for perping 9/11 terror massacres. - Bush Crime Family trial lawyer James "Go Ahead And Invade Kuwait Mr Saddam" Baker is the Carlyle defense lawyer defending the alleged Arab terrorists. Jewish terrorists who trained the alleged 911 Arab hijackers make second assassination attempt to murder Knoxville lawyers JD Lee and judicial candidate David Lee on Motley 911 dream Team?

Knoxville Tennessee lawfirm sues Sir George Bush Sr Knight of the British Empire's White House staff using RICO Act for perping narcoterror bombing massacre - Bush Sr and CIA confessed they perped the terror bombing of a press conference that killed US journalists in La Penca, Nicaragua, as part of their cocaine trafficking and treasonous terrorist operation. Knoxville lawyer JD Lee was on the Dream Team of 100 trial lawyers for Christic Institute that started the Iran-Contra trials and convictions of Bush Sr's White House staff. Lee took the deposition of US ambassador Lewis Tambs, who was expelled by Costa Rica for using his diplomatic immunity and the US embassy for narcoterrorism by importing cocaine into USA

911 families use RICO Act to sue Bush Crime Family for perping the treasonous 911 terror bombings in USA - Numerous lawsuits filed in US District Courts accuse Bush Jr and Sr and their White House staff for orchestrating the 911 terror massacres in USA as fraudulent pretext to invade Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and Iran

911ForTheTruth.com - 911 families use RICO Act to sue Bush Crime Family for perping the treasonous 911 terror bombings in USA. Lawfirm posts court documents from East Coast lawsuits filed in US District Courts

SueTheTerrorists.net - 911 families sue Bush Crime Family for perping the treasonous 911 terror bombings in USA. Lawfirm posts court documents from West Coast lawsuits filed in US District Courts

911 widow Ellen Mariani shares her letter to terrorist President Bush Jr who she sued under RICO Act for perping the 911 Massacres - Mariani tells how JEB Bush illegally seized the business records of Jewish Huffman Aviation that trained the elleged 911 Arab hijackers in Florida, which is the same Jewish narcoterrorists now running Knoxville's McGhee Tyson International Airport

Ellen Mariani - RICO Suit Against Bush - A condensed talk given by Ellen Mariani and her lawyer Phil Berg about their RICO suit against the Bush Administration, seeking the truth about 9/11

Ellen Mariani - RICO Suit Against Bush - "I was disgusted how the 9-11 Commission were yawning, closing their eyes, looking around... they didn't care to be there."

Ellen Mariani - RICO Suit Against Bush - A condensed talk given by Ellen Mariani and her lawyer Phil Berg about their RICO suit against the Bush Administration, seeking the truth about 9/11. Regardless of what you think happened and who was responsible for 9-11, to hear how this widow was treated while Bush flew the Saudis and Bin Ladens out of USA should be enough to make any American mad! Lawsuit documents online at Geocities.com/ForTheTruth911

William Rodriguez in WTC on 9/11 - A 20-year employee at one of the World Trade Center buildings hit on September 11, 2001, Rodriguez risked his life in saving many people and was honored for his heroism. And then Rodriguez testified in closed session to the official 9-11 commission about explosions in the sub-basements before the plane hit. Rodriguez sued President George Bush Jr under the RICO Act for perping the 9/11 Massacres. By INNWorld Report. Phil Berg is his lawyer, formerly with Ellen Mariani

"'Enterprise' means any individual, sole proprietorship, partnership, corporation, business trust, union chartered under the laws of this state, or other legal entity, or any unchartered union, association or group of individuals associated in fact although not a legal entity, and it includes illicit as well as licit enterprises, AND GOVERNMENTAL, as well as other, entities."
—Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), TN CODE 39-12-203 (state RICO Act) and US CODE TITLE 18, PART I, CHAPTER 96, Sec. 1961 (federal RICO Act) ("The Enterprise" was the name that the Bush Crime Family called its Iran-Contra narcoterrorist bombing crime spree)

The representative of the largest group of 9/11 families says that the official version of events is a fallacy and that the NORAD stand down and evidence of incendiary devices used to bring down the towers amount to government complicity in the attacks - a conclusion shared by half of the 9/11 families he represents.

Bill Doyle heads the Coalition of 9/11 Families and lost his own son Joey in the collapse of the twin towers.

"If you want to believe what they want to snow you under on like the 9/11 Commission - that's a total fallacy," said Doyle.

"The continuing cover-up is beyond belief," Doyle told GCN radio host Alex Jones.

Doyle questioned why WTC steel that was withheld from NIST for examination for explosives was used instead to build a battleship.

"Isn't it amazing how they got it out of this country within days," said Doyle as he addressed the cover-up of the physical evidence from a crime scene.

Doyle said he had personally talked to six different individuals who were at the World Trade Center site and described incendiary devices before the collapse of the towers.

"It's documented proof that tower 7 was not hit by a plane yet it goes up in flames then the owner of the place Larry Silverstein himself ordered it to be pulled at 4 o'clock that afternoon and all of a sudden it exploded straight down."

"We have two planes fly into the towers and all of a sudden they get blown up within an hour and a half - that's impossible," said Doyle.

Doyle estimated that around half of the family members his organization represents think that there was government complicity in the attacks.

"It looks like there was a conspiracy behind 9/11 if you really look at all the facts - a lot of families now feel the same way."

"Where was NORAD," asked Doyle as he highlighted the implausible gap between the known hijacking times of Flight 93 and Flight 77 and their eventual destruction.

"It was called a step-down - don't do anything - let it happen."

"From everything I look at I'm sure there was a lot of complicity - in the least there had to be a lot of complicity - if you read all the facts there's no way that nineteen hijackers carried out this mission," Doyle told Jones.

Doyle also spoke out on establishment charities withholding large portions of donations from 9/11 families and how 9/11 whistleblowers have been punished meanwhile individuals who facilitated the attacks were rewarded.

Prison Planet.tv members can hear this entire interview by clicking here.

July 8, 2006

CoalitionOf911Families.org

Emotional shell game accusation of 'disgracing victim's memories' doesn't jive anymore.

Another 9/11 family member has gone public to rubbish the conspiracy theory that the attacks were planned and executed by nineteen incompetent Arabs with box cutters who were getting drunk in a strip club the night before and barely even made it to the airport on time. Meanwhile, hit pieces against the 9/11 truth movement continue in the lead up to the fifth anniversary of the event.

A familiar emotional shell game on the part of the debunkers is to proclaim that questioning any aspect of 9/11 disgraces the memory of the victims. This tactic is clearly not working anymore especially in light of the fact that Bill Doyle, representative of the largest group of 9/11 family members - says that half now completely distrust the official version of events.

Bob McIlvaine's son Bobby was working for Merrill Lynch in the 103rd floor of the south tower when Flight 175 struck. He was likely one of the unfortunate individuals who obeyed the Port Authority's ridiculous order for workers to stay in the building and not evacuate even after Flight 11 had ploughed into the north tower.

McIlvaine is convinced that the attacks were an inside job orchestrated by elements within the US government.

"Today, there are no ifs or buts in my mind that this was an inside job. The US government orchestrated it with the help of MI6 and Pakistan and Mossad. What they are telling us is bullshit. The hijackers were patsies and Osama bin Laden was set up," McIlvaine told the London Independent.

McIlvaine has since devoted his life to educating others on what really happened on 9/11.

Despite the best efforts of Jewish American Adam Yehiye Gadahn "converting" to Islam and joining the AllCIAduh AllMossaduh terrorist gang to propagandize the reality of the Al-Qaeda myth, Americans are becoming increasingly skeptical of 9/11 and if the recent rash of hit pieces against the 9/11 truth movement are anything to go by, the establishment is stricken with concern. ("Al-Qaeda" is translated and defined as "The Database" computer file of CIA employees in Afghanistan.)

There were another two major 9/11 semi-debunking pieces over the weekend, one in the San Francisco Chronicle and one in Reuters. Expect a deluge of them for the next two weeks as the five year anniversary comes to pass.

The most incongruous sentence from the Chronicle piece is where CIA involvement in 9/11 is characterized as "the epitome of preposterous beliefs that start with a conclusion and work backward to find evidence."

Wasn't it media talking heads and government officials in the hours after the attacks who were reading off the same script and ascribing blame to Bin Laden with no substantiating evidence? Did they then not present alleged "evidence" to work backward to the already pre-determined conclusion? So-called evidence that is insufficient to federally indict Bin Laden for involvement in 9/11 five years after the attack - despite the fact that it took less than three months to indict him for the 1998 embassy bombings. Then the US Govt allowed all of the convicted USS Cole bombers to escape from maximum security prison.

September 4, 2006

PRISON PLANET - Existence of "Al-Qaeda" is Crap; quite literally. Did Osama really choose to name his terror network after potty humor or was it a computer database he used to chat with his CIA handlers?

The origins of the name "Al-Qaeda," and its real arabic connotations prove that every time the Bush administration, Fox News, or any individual who cites the threat of "Al-Qaeda," as a mandate for war and domestic authoritarianism, they are propagating the myth that such a group ever existed.

An organization by the name of "Al-Qaeda" does not exist and has never existed outside a falsely coined collective term for offshoot loose knit terror cells, the majority of which are guided by the Pakistani ISI, Mossad, the Saudis, MI6 and the CIA, that were created in response to America's actions after 9/11 - as the recent NIE report shows.

According to the BBC documentary The Power of Nightmares, the infamous footage of Bin Laden marching around with armed soldiers was a ruse on the part of Osama himself, graciously propagated by the lapdog press, in which actors were hired off the streets, given uniforms and guns and told to look aggressive.

Note the video states Bin Laden only took on the Al-Qaeda mantle post-9/11 after the U.S. government began parroting the term. The only error is the now debunked myth that 9/11 was carried out by "Al-Qaeda."

So if the group doesn't exist, where did the name come from?

You have heard before that "Al-Qaeda" roughly translates into "the base," but were you aware that "Ana raicha Al Qaeda" is arabic colloquial for "I'm going to the toilet"?

Would hardened terrorists hell bent on the destruction of the west name their organization after a euphemism for taking a shit?

The truth about where the name "Al-Qaeda" originated explains why no would-be fundamentalist suicide martyr could have been involved in its creation.

Former Leader of the House of Commons Robin Cook, who admirably resigned in protest of the 2003 Iraq invasion, penned a piece in the London Guardian shortly before his death that shed light on the true genesis of the name.

"Al-Qaida," states Cook, "literally "the database", was originally the computer file of the thousands of mujahideen who were recruited and trained with help from the CIA to defeat the Russians."

Former French Military Intelligence official Pierre Henry Bunel expands, noting that "Al-Qaeda," was an early form of intranet, which was used by Islamic nations and influential families to communicate with each other. It was also used by the "American agent," Osama bin Laden to send coded or covert messages back to his CIA handlers from Afghanistan.

It's worthy to conclude with Bunel's assertion that "Al-Qaeda" as an organization is about as genuine as George W. Bush's Texas brush clearing cowboy image.

"The truth is, there is no Islamic army or terrorist group called Al Qaida. And any informed intelligence officer knows this. But there is a propaganda campaign to make the public believe in the presence of an identified entity representing the 'devil' only in order to drive the 'TV watcher' to accept a unified international leadership for a war against terrorism. The country behind this propaganda is the US and the lobbyists for the US war on terrorism are only interested in making money."

October 6 2006

The Next Stage of the 9/11 Truth Movement - Bill Moyer, author of Doing Democracy The MAP Model for Organizing Social Movements, a strategist for Martin Luther King, Jr. who had been organizing and empowering activists for forty years, was with us. He taught that all social movements have been about the struggle between power-holders and the rest of us, that societal myths allow power-holders to maintain their position, and that exposing their secret violation of those myths, ideals, values is a catalyst for social change.

LOS ANGELES TIMES - The scattered movement has mainly gained steam on the Internet, but before the anniversary of the attacks, activists make their voices heard.

Striding into Washington Square Park with a fistful of photocopied circulars and an earnest expression, Eric Williams could have been an environmental canvasser or a hip missionary. In fact, he is a pastry chef — or was until last week, when he quit his job to devote himself full time to proving that the World Trade Center attack was ordered not by terrorists but by officials in the U.S. government.

Williams approached a pushcart vendor from Bangladesh: "Do you believe the official story, that Osama bin Laden and 19 hijackers took down the towers?"

"Yes," said the vendor.

Williams moved on to a Dominican woman. "Do you believe the government allowed the attacks to happen?"

The woman smiled, baffled, and asked her 10-year-old daughter to translate. "Do you believe Bin Laden was responsible for the attacks?" he asked the girl. The child shrugged expressively.

But he hit pay dirt with Nikolaos Vitoroulis, a freshman engineering student at Stevens Institute of Technology who was in the eighth grade at the time of the attacks. Vitoroulis, 18, said he had never believed a fire could cause a building to collapse that way, into its own footprint. The hijacked-plane scenario, he said, "seems a little fishy."

As New York readied for another anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks, conspiracy theorists and researchers who belong to a group known as the 9/11 Truth Movement gathered in Greenwich Village. Among them were proponents of the "LIHOP" theory, who believe that members of the government "let it happen on purpose," and the "MIHOP" theory, who hold that government officials "made it happen on purpose."

Polls show that many Americans distrust the government on the subject of Sept. 11. A Zogby International poll taken in May found that 42% believed the government concealed evidence that contradicts official accounts. A Scripps Howard-Ohio University poll taken in August found that 36% believed it "very likely" or "somewhat likely" that federal officials allowed the attacks to occur because "they wanted the United States to go to war in the Middle East."

The theories — especially the notion that the towers fell in a controlled demolition — have become widespread enough to prompt official responses.

Last week, Brigham Young University announced that physics professor Steven E. Jones, co-chairman of the group Scholars for 9/11 Truth, would be put on indefinite leave while authorities investigated his claims that the buildings were intentionally demolished using explosives.

"Culturally, as a society, it becomes unhealthy," said Christopher Farrell of the conservative think tank Judicial Watch, which successfully filed suit against the government seeking the release of a video showing American Airlines Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon. The think tank was hoping to put to rest beliefs that the explosion was caused by a missile.

"If an individual demonstrated this sort of behavior, medical health professionals would recommend they treat it," said Farrell, a former military intelligence officer and the organization's director of investigations and research. "There's healthy skepticism, and then there's unhealthy."

This weekend's gathering in New York drew together strands of a scattered movement that has, until now, gained steam principally through the Internet.

There was radio host and activist Ralph Schoenman, who, during the course of a dizzying two-hour speech Friday, said that "not only was Mohamed Atta monitored by Mossad and the CIA, but he was being run by German intelligence," and that Hurricane Katrina "had been on the drawing board for years" as a way to "de-concentrate population" in inner cities.

There was Harvey Newman, a retired market researcher, who wrote a Caribbean-influenced "9/11 Truth" anthem ("Was the Pentagon building hit by an air-o-plane?/ And if it wasn't, please can you explain?")

There was Korey Rowe, 23, an Iraq war veteran from upstate New York who helped produce the documentary "Loose Change," which has been viewed online 10 million times. His baseball cap twisted backward, Rowe warned the audience about "agents provocateurs" who may have infiltrated the group in advance of anniversary events at ground zero. "We need to identify them now, and we need to remove them," he said.

A man in his 30s, conservatively dressed and soft-spoken, said he told almost no one about his attendance at 9/11 Truth meetings — not his co-workers at a corporate law firm and not his girlfriend. "It's considered part of the loony left," he said. "I'm very careful. I tell people who love me and will accept me for what I am."

For Williams, the former chef who lives in Duxbury, Mass., his fascination with the events of Sept. 11 grew so intense over the last two years that making pastries seemed pointless, then unbearable. He broke up with his girlfriend and now devotes six to eight hours a day to researching and writing, and hosts an Internet radio show and website. He has just sold the German and Turkish rights to two of his books, "The Puzzle of 9/11" and "9/11 101."

Europeans are always interested, he said. Engaging New Yorkers is more challenging. After an hour, he and his team left the park, drained.

Behind them, holding the Sept. 11 pamphlets, were three friends in their 20s. They were sitting on a wall in the sun, resting after a film shoot.

"At first, I thought, 'Oh, my God, a kook,' " said Shelley Rogers, 26, a graduate student in education at New York University.

But her friend Antonio Cisneros, 20, was fascinated.

"I think they're too extreme for me," he said, "but there are a lot of questions that need to be asked." He said he was glad someone was doing it.

Asked if they believed the government would murder Americans for strategic reasons, all three, without pausing, said yes.

September 10, 2006

WASHINGTON POST - He felt no shiver of doubt in those first terrible hours.

He watched the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon and assumed al-Qaeda had wreaked terrible vengeance. He listened to anchors and military experts and assumed the facts of Sept. 11, 2001, were as stated on the screen.

It was a year before David Ray Griffin, an eminent liberal theologian and philosopher, began his stroll down the path of disbelief. He wondered why Bush listened to a child's story while the nation was attacked and how Osama bin Laden, America's Public Enemy No. 1, escaped in the mountains of Tora Bora.

He wondered why 110-story towers crashed and military jets failed to intercept even one airliner. He read the 9/11 Commission report with a swell of anger. Contradictions were ignored and no military or civilian official was reprimanded, much less cashiered.

"To me, the report read as a cartoon." White-haired and courtly, Griffin sits on a couch in a hotel lobby in Manhattan, unspooling words in that reasonable Presbyterian minister's voice. "It's a much greater stretch to accept the official conspiracy story than to consider the alternatives."

Such as?

"There was massive complicity in this attack by U.S. government operatives."

If that feels like a skip off the cliff of established reality, more Americans are in free fall than you might guess. There are few more startling measures of American distrust of leaders than the widespread belief that the Bush administration had a hand in the attacks of Sept. 11 in order to spark an invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq.

A recent Scripps Howard/Ohio University poll of 1,010 Americans found that 36 percent suspect the U.S. government promoted the attacks or intentionally sat on its hands. Sixteen percent believe explosives brought down the towers. Twelve percent believe a cruise missile hit the Pentagon.

Distrust percolates more strongly near Ground Zero. A Zogby International poll of New York City residents two years ago found 49.3 percent believed the government "consciously failed to act."

You could dismiss this as a louder than usual howl from the CIA-controls-my-thoughts-through-the-filling-in-my-molar crowd. Establishment assessments of the believers tend toward the psychotherapeutic. Many academics, politicians and thinkers left, right and center say the conspiracy theories are a case of one plus one equals five. It's a piling up of improbabilities.

Thomas Eager, a professor of materials science at MIT, has studied the collapse of the twin towers. "At first, I thought it was amazing that the buildings would come down in their own footprints," Eager says. "Then I realized that it wasn't that amazing -- it's the only way a building that weighs a million tons and is 95 percent air can come down."

But the chatter out there is loud enough for the National Institute of Standards and Technology to post a Web "fact sheet" poking holes in the conspiracy theories and defending its report on the towers.

Yeah, as if . . .

The loose agglomeration known as the "9/11 Truth Movement" has stopped looking for truth from the government. As cacophonous and free-range a bunch of conspiracists anywhere this side of Guy Fawkes, they produce hip-hop inflected documentaries and scholarly conferences. The Web is their mother lode. Every citizen is a researcher. There's nothing like a triple, Google-fed epiphany lighting up the laptop at 2:44 a.m.

Did you see that the CIA met with bin Laden in a hospital room in Dubai? Check out this Pakistani site, there are really weird doings in Baluchistan . . .

The academic wing is led by Griffin, who founded the Center for a Postmodern World at Claremont University; James Fetzer, a tenured philosopher at the University of Minnesota (Fetzer's an old hand in JFK assassination research); and Daniel Orr, the retired chairman of the economics department at the University of Illinois. The movement's de facto minister of engineering is Steven Jones, a tenured physics professor at Brigham Young University, who's studied vectors and velocities and tested explosives and concluded that the collapse of the twin towers is best explained as controlled demolition, sped by a thousand pounds of high-grade thermite.

Former Reagan aide Barbara Honegger is a senior military affairs journalist at the Naval Postgraduate School in California. She's convinced, based on her freelance research, that a bomb went off about six minutes before an airplane hit the Pentagon -- or didn't hit it, as some believe the case may be. Catherine Austin Fitts served as assistant secretary of housing in the first President Bush's administration and gained a fine reputation as a fraud buster; David Bowman was chief of advanced space programs under presidents Ford and Carter. Fitts and Bowman agree that the "most unbelievable conspiracy" theory is the one retailed by the government.

Then there's Morgan O. Reynolds, appointed by George W. Bush as chief economist at the Labor Department. He left in 2002 and doesn't think much of his former boss; he describes President Bush as a "dysfunctional creep," not to mention a "possible war criminal."

You reach Reynolds at his country home in the hills of Arkansas. His favored rhetorical style is long paragraphs without obvious punctuation: "Who did it? Elements of our government and M-16 and the Mossad. The government's case is a laugh-out-loud proposition. They used patsies and lies and subterfuge and there's no way that Bush and Cheney could have invaded Iraq without the help of 9/11."

They are cantankerous and sometimes distrust each other -- who knows where the double agents lurk? But unreasonable questions resonate with the reasonable. Colleen Kelly's brother, a salesman, had breakfast at the Windows on the World restaurant on Sept. 11. After he died she founded September Eleventh Families for Peaceful Tomorrows to oppose the Iraq war. She lives in the Bronx and gives a gingerly embrace to the conspiracy crowd.

"Sometimes I listen to them and I think that's sooooo outlandish and bizarre," she says. "But that day had such disastrous geopolitical consequences. If David Ray Griffin asks uncomfortable questions and points out painful discrepancies? Good for him."

Griffin's book, "The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions About the Bush Administration and 9/11," never reviewed in a major U.S. newspaper, sold more than 100,000 copies and became a movement founding stone. Last year he traveled through New England, giving speeches in whitewashed churches and gymnasiums. He came to West Hartford, Conn., on a rainy autumn evening. Four hundred mostly middle-aged and upper-middle-class doctors and lawyers, teachers and social workers sat waiting.

Griffin took the podium and laid down his ideas with calm and cool. He concluded:

"It is already possible to know beyond a reasonable doubt one very important thing: The destruction of the World Trade Center was an inside job, orchestrated by domestic terrorists," he says. "The welfare of our republic and perhaps even the survival of our civilization depend on getting the truth about 9/11 exposed."

The audience rose and applauded for more than a minute.

"Reality is a thin line between denial and paranoia." - Author unknown, but often quoted by the 9/11 truth movement

"Me?" You've asked the Rev. Frank Morales, the bohemian Episcopalian minister with the hipster goatee, where he stands on the na