Some Guy Named John Elway Narrates Some Propaganda
http://rawstory.com/2009/10/john-elway-narrates-paranoid-terrorism-watch...
This story is over at 911blogger, where commenters are focusing on the narrator, who is someone many of them seem to know. It's a video describing the imminent terrorist threat from innocent-looking white people, who evidently hate our freedoms very much.
What's more interesting, however, is the organization behind the video this Elway guy appears in. It's the "Center for Empowered Living and Learning" (CELL). In fact, the video is part of a much larger CELL exhibit at the Mizel Museum in Denver (formerly the Mizel Museum Judaica), which was funded to the tune of $7 mil by a Colorado real estate developer named Larry Mizel. (The video itself was funded by the Department of Homeland Security.) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Mizel. Mizel, according to Wikipedia, was also a founder of the Simon Wiesenthal Center and in 2003 was elected the group's Chairman of the Board.
What's the significance here? I'd say file it along with the other material that suggests that one purpose of the "War on Terror" and related propaganda is to obscure the nature of violent resistance in occupied Arab/Muslim countries. The people of Palestine, Iraq, and Afghanistan are not fighting occupiers -- they're terrorists, doing terrorism. The lives of the occupiers are seriously disrupted by the terrorists, whose motivation is irrational hate, or something. That could happen here, too. I mean, wait, that did happen here, on 9/11/2001. It's just a matter of time before it happens again, and this time it could even be white people doing it! The related intention of this kind of attempt to influence public perceptions is to "normalize" terrorism -- to get people to accept that those crazy terrorists will always be with us, and thus it would be prudent of us to accept all sorts of Police State-esque violations of our civil liberties and to embrace an East Germany-esque willingness to spy and report on our neighbors.
- casseia's blog
- Login to post comments
Those evil charities
This part really made my jaw drop:
Then it flashes an image of the Holy Land Foundation building, which housed a Dallas charity that provided what they said was humanitarian aid to Palestine. The group was convicted of providing support for militant group Hamas after a lengthy trial, which ended the operations of America's largest Muslim charity. The Bush administration's first attempt to prosecute HLF resulted in a mistrial, as the government argued that by providing food, medical supplies and educational texts to Palestinian children, HLF had in effect freed Hamas from part of its financial burden, allowing the group to stage attacks on Israelis.
Wow. Ok, so the logic is that if you provide medical care or food, etc., to children within a population that is under occupation by the US or its allies, that means that you are funding terrorism, because hypothetically, theoretically, it might make it easier for somebody within that population to have more money or resources to then go out and commit a terrorist act (or resist the occupation)? How convenient for Israel and other allied colonialist powers to create another weapon to cut off any legitimate humanitarian aid for the victims of occupation and colonization. Makes my blood boil. So, now I have to worry about any Palestinian solidarity work I've ever been involved with. This is outrageous.
Oh, and if you buy/sell drugs, you are funding terrorism
It moves into a clip of a bald man apparently selling something through a car window as the narrator suggests the drug trade is a driving funding mechanism for terrorist groups.
So, better stop smoking pot folks, cuz yur just supporting terrorism. Bad bad bad bad on you. Ok children, one more time: Drugs = Terrorism, 2 + 2 = 5, got it?
PS: Oh, and of course any actual drug profits going to actual terrorism, like the US Military, CIA, and Israeli Military and Mossad mass terrorism activities being funded by either legalized drug company profits and taxes, or their illicit but well known drug trafficking of cocaine and heroine by those agencies is not to be included in this equation, mkay children?
omg this terror threat totally vindicates the LIHOPpers
or is it lie-hoppers?
Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth?
Why have you ignored everything that Richard Gage at Architects and Engineers has presented? We can say that it is a fact that the buildings came down in controlled demolitions. What about Building 7?
How about you and I stand on a corner to wake up people to the truth? You go through your odd list of facts, and I move straight into the controlled demolitions. Let's see how many people you convince compared to how many I convince.
With you in the struggle,
Bruno
WeAreChangeLA - http://www.wacla.org
Richard Gage can handle that
Richard Gage can handle that part, Jon handles the part he is familiar with. Jon isn't an architect or engineer. He's "Jon Six Pack" lol
Stand on the corner, what will happen is people will think you are fanatical, and Jon will appear better informed and logical. I've seen it happen in practice.
/////////////////////////////////
Great minds ... think for themselves.
DHS you know not what you say.
"Stand on the corner, what will happen is people will think you are fanatical, and Jon will appear better informed and logical. I've seen it happen in practice."
DHS you know not what you say. I do this everyday and that is not my experience at all. What experience do you speak from? Are you telling us that people call Richard Gage fanatical? DHS you have crossed the line into the bizarre. Richard Gage converts people by 99.99999999% on average at any and all of his presentations.
"Richard Gage can handle that part, Jon handles the part he is familiar with. Jon isn't an architect or engineer. He's "Jon Six Pack" lol"
Ok so let's see, Jon Gold is not an engineer, that is your logic? He is not a politician either, nor is he a reporter, nor is he in the defense industry and energy industry, nor is he in the CIA, etc etc. Using the facts of controlled demolition is not about being Richard Gage, but rather about using the most effective evidence for waking people up. Any legitimacy in the odd list of facts that Jon Gold made is reduced greatly by purposely excluding Richard Gage's incredibly effective facts of controlled demolition.
With you in the struggle,
Bruno
WeAreChangeLA - http://www.wacla.org
I agree that there are
I agree that there are "incredibly effective facts of controlled demolition." But Jon Gold is not required by law to mention them, is he? I understand your frustration but it's a personal decision on which topics you choose to focus and on which not. And this brilliant list of facts is indeed effective, believe it or not.
Did you notice...
Did you notice that these 'facts' Jon has provided state that 'bin Laden' pulled off 9-11 with the help of his 'terrorists'?
With you in the struggle,
Bruno
WeAreChangeLA - http://www.wacla.org
Did you notice Fact #29? Fact #18?
Or were you too busy steaming about the lack of CD and AE911T references?
/////////////////////////////////
Great minds ... think for themselves.
DHS, just the facts please
Fact #29 takes a lot of effort to get through. I admit that I did not comprehend the full point of #29. It seems to go back and forth a lot. Maybe Jon can break this one up into paragraphs to help others comprehend the information. I can't figure out why you brought up #18.
Maybe Fact #28 threw me off. All that documented praise for the 9/11 Commission Report. I don't get it.
Fact #30 seems to conclude that the idea that the Osama Bin Laden tapes were doctored is preposterous. Maybe good intentions are there, but the actual impact of the text as it stands, goes against those intentions.
Facts #5, #20, #35, #36, #37, #41 and #44 imply that al Qaeda actually exists, yet only heresay from 'official intelligence' organizations make claims regarding al Qaeda. There is no actual evidence that al Qaeda exists. What are the facts that support any claim al Qaeda exists?
Fact #38 concludes with the implied claim that most Americans believe the government LET the terrorists attack the U.S... and it may be true that most Americans believe this, but should this be listed as one of the facts?
Fact #41 implies that Osama Bin Laden is the mastermind, that he was leading Taliban and al Qaeda troops in Afghanistan, and that the U.S. purposely let him go. This is all hearsay. Why is this included as a Fact?!
Fact #43 at first refers to 'alleged' hijackers, but then refers to them as 'the' hijackers, again and again. There is no hard evidence that anyone hijacked the planes on 9/11. It's all hearsay from 'official intelligence' sources. Yet #43 leaves the reader believing the hijackers actually existed. The people may have existed, but there is no evidence they existed as hijackers.
There are still troubling sections in this list of 'facts' as stated above. We need to work together to hone down any list of facts to be as accurate AND impacting as possible. Forgive me if I rub you the wrong way DHS. There is no need to focus on me. Let's focus on the facts.
And by the way. Fact #45 has since been added, and it makes reference to Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, and I thank and respect Jon for making this addition. We have only one 9-11 Truth movement, so let's make it the best 9-11 Truth movement possible.
With you in the struggle,
Bruno
WeAreChangeLA - http://www.wacla.org
"Facts #5, #20, #35, #36,
"Facts #5, #20, #35, #36, #37, #41 and #44 imply that al Qaeda actually exists, yet only heresay from 'official intelligence' organizations make claims regarding al Qaeda. There is no actual evidence that al Qaeda exists. What are the facts that support any claim al Qaeda exists?"
It's statements like this that have led some to compare members of this movement to holocaust deniers. Al Qaeda has very curious connections to many intelligence agencies throughout the world, but definitely does exist. Are you saying that EVERY single video, documents, etc. proving the existence of Al Qaeda are faked? If so, by whom? If you're going to make a statement along the lines of "Al Qaeda doesn't exist" you need to back that up with some evidence.
Also, "Al Qaeda doesn't exist" is a theory, much like everything else you promote as fact. This paper is about facts. If you're going to represent the interests of the victims, family members, and movement you should probably learn to differentiate between theory and fact.
Justin A. Martell
www.FormYourOwn.org
jamartell.blogspot.com
In a soldier's stance, I aimed my hand at the mongrel dogs who teach! Fearing not that I'd become my enemy in the instant that I preach! My pathway led by confusion boats...mutiny from stern to bow!
#45 is beyond weak
"NIST's questionable report on building 7 caused people that were once on the fence regarding the collapse of those buildings on 9/11, to think that those advocating something different than NIST's conclusions, responsibly, might be right."
Fact #1 is that those buildings were blown to shit and it is completely obvious.
Sorry I didn't say this "responsibly." but I think that ignoring the single most important fact, and the cause of most of the deaths, is irresponsible.
Then...
Write your own fact sheet.
Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? Do we deserve to know how and why 9/11 happened?
with truthers like these...
Justin "the Hammer" Gets Hammered
Must really suck to be a fake truther these days--they've apparently lost control of the voting over there and the real (anti-LIHOP) truth is actually being voted up!
Transcript taken from the
Transcript taken from the BBC documentary"The Power of Nightmares
VO: In January, 2001, a trial began in a Manhattan courtroom of four men accused of the embassy bombings in east Africa. But the Americans had also decided to prosecute bin Laden in his absence. But to do this under American law, the prosecutors needed evidence of a criminal organisation because, as with the Mafia, that would allow them to prosecute the head of the organisation even if he could not be linked directly to the crime. And the evidence for that organisation was provided for them by an ex-associate of bin Laden’s called Jamal al-Fadl.
JASON BURKE , AUTHOR, “AL QAEDA” : During the investigation of the 1998 bombings, there is a walk-in source, Jamal al-Fadl, who is a Sudanese militant who was with bin Laden in the early 90s, who has been passed around a whole series of Middle East secret services, none of whom want much to do with him, and who ends up in America and is taken on by—uh—the American government, effectively, as a key prosecution witness and is given a huge amount of American taxpayers’ money at the same time. And his account is used as raw material to build up a picture of Al Qaeda. The picture that the FBI want to build up is one that will fit the existing laws that they will have to use to prosecute those responsible for the bombing. Now, those laws were drawn up to counteract organised crime: the Mafia, drugs crime, crimes where people being a member of an organisation is extremely important. You have to have an organisation to get a prosecution. And you have al-Fadl and a number of other witness, a number of other sources, who are happy to feed into this. You’ve got material that, looked at in a certain way, can be seen to show this organisation’s existence. You put the two together and you get what is the first bin Laden myth—the first Al Qaeda myth. And because it’s one of the first, it’s extremely influential.
VO: The picture al-Fadl drew for the Americans of bin Laden was of an all-powerful figure at the head of a large terrorist network that had an organised network of control. He also said that bin Laden had given this network a name: “Al Qaeda.” It was a dramatic and powerful picture of bin Laden, but it bore little relationship to the truth.
[ EXCERPT, CNN EXCLUSIVE VIDEO : BIN LADEN AND SOLDIERS ]
VO: The reality was that bin Laden and Ayman Zawahiri had become the focus of a loose association of disillusioned Islamist militants who were attracted by the new strategy. But there was no organisation. These were militants who mostly planned their own operations and looked to bin Laden for funding and assistance. He was not their commander. There is also no evidence that bin Laden used the term “Al Qaeda” to refer to the name of a group until after September the 11th, when he realized that this was the term the Americans have given it.
[ CUT TO MANHATTAN SKYLINE ]
VO: In reality, Jamal al-Fadl was on the run from bin Laden, having stolen money from him. In return for his evidence, the Americans gave him witness protection in America and hundreds of thousands of dollars. Many lawyers at the trial believed that al-Fadl exaggerated and lied to give the Americans the picture of a terrorist organisation that they needed to prosecute bin Laden.
SAM SCHMIDT , DEFENCE LAWYER EMBASSY BOMBINGS TRIAL: And there were selective portions of al-Fadl’s testimony that I believe was false, to help support the picture that he helped the Americans join together. I think he lied in a number of specific testimony about a unified image of what this organisation was. It made Al Qaeda the new Mafia or the new Communists. It made them identifiable as a group and therefore made it easier to prosecute any person associated with Al Qaeda for any acts or statements made by bin Laden—who talked a lot.
BURKE : The idea—which is critical to the FBI’s prosecution—that bin Laden ran a coherent organisation with operatives and cells all around the world of which you could be a member is a myth. There is no Al Qaeda organisation. There is no international network with a leader, with cadres who will unquestioningly obey orders, with tentacles that stretch out to sleeper cells in America, in Africa, in Europe. That idea of a coherent, structured terrorist network with an organised capability simply does not exist.
VO: What did exist was a powerful idea that was about to inspire a single, devastating act that would lead the whole world into believing the myth that had begun to be constructed in the Manhattan courtroom.
BRIGADIER LANE : The hunt for Al Qaeda Taliban goes on, and we stand shoulder to shoulder with the United States and our other coalition allies in the global war on terrorism.
[ TITLE : FIVE WEEKS LATER ]
INTERVIEWER : But how many Al Qaeda have you captured?
LANE : We haven’t, uh, captured any Al Qaeda, but…
INTERVIEWER : And how many have you actually managed to kill here in south-east Afghanistan?
LANE : We haven’t killed any.
VO: The terrible truth was that there was nothing there because Al Qaeda as an organisation did not exist. The attacks on America had been planned by a small group that had come together around bin Laden in the late 90s. What united them was an idea: an extreme interpretation of Islamism developed by Ayman Zawahiri. With the American invasion, that group had been destroyed, killed or scattered. What was left was the idea, and the real danger was the way this idea could inspire groups and individuals around the world who had no relationship to each other. In looking for an organisation, the Americans and the British were chasing a phantom enemy and missing the real threat.
JASON BURKE , AUTHOR, “AL QAEDA” : I was with the Royal Marines as they trooped around eastern Afghanistan, and every time they got a location for a supposed Al Qaeda or Taliban element or base, they’d turn up and there was no one there, or there’d be a few startled shepherds, and that struck me then as being a wonderful image to the war on terror, because people are looking for something that isn’t there. There is no organisation with its terrorist operatives, cells, sleeper cells, so on and so forth. What there is is an idea, prevalent among young, angry Muslim males throughout the Islamic world. That idea is what poses a threat.
damn straight.
Uh oh! YT and Jon Gold better send in their sock puppet brigade
to vote those anti-LieHOP comments back down, LOL!
I especially love this part of Justin's rant:
It's statements like this that have led some to compare members of this movement to holocaust deniers. Al Qaeda has very curious connections to many intelligence agencies throughout the world, but definitely does exist. Are you saying that EVERY single video, documents, etc. proving the existence of Al Qaeda are faked? If so, by whom? If you're going to make a statement along the lines of "Al Qaeda doesn't exist" you need to back that up with some evidence.
BWAHAHAHAHA! This Justin clown is going for broke - holocaust deniers! Un-frikken-believeable!
Oh, and once again, this Justin LieHOP character reverses that burden of proof thingie to claiming that if you haven't proven that Al Queda doesen't exist, therefore that means that they do exist. Um, nope Justin. Once again, the burden of proof is on those insisting that Al Queda exists, not the other way around. You need to either study logic 101, or stop pretending to be stupid.
BTW, most of those comments were from 2008, but I just noticed them today, as apparently you did as well. Still as timely as ever, though.
no, not every single one...
just half. the other half are genuine. because that makes total sense.
Timely as ever is right, I
Timely as ever is right, I didn't even notice the dates and assumed they were new comments. Things havent changed much.
By the way all, in the media criticism magazine-"Extra" last month one of the letters in the front section chastised the magazine for failing to criticize the media over its handling of the 9/11 questions. The Editor (by the way, Chomsky is involved with this magazine, but so is Ed Asner) gave some bullshit answer about how there was no story. This month there was a link provided in the letters section saying how they got a lot of mail about "9/11 conspiracy theories". To their credit they at least posted these:
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=3905
Welcome to Terrordome: Denver's Terrorism "Museum"
Newsweek: (video inside too)
Welcome to Terrordome: Denver's Terrorism "Museum"
We Are Change Colorado: (good)
Denver’s Terror Museum Under Scrutiny (UPDATE)