True Faction Shills Declaring Defeat - Blame WTCD!
By golly if they would all just QUIT already like Jo "Jenny Sparks" Cressy!!
The original sludge can be found at: http://truthaction.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6338&start=90
John A
Joined: 05 Oct 2007
Posts: 792
Posted: Mon Jun 07, 2010 4:33 pm Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
if i had to pick my biggest disappointment in the 911 Truth movement it would be Dr. David Ray Griffin - and i am forced to wonder who is left that i can believe in anymore.
can someone help me here? i am open to suggestions.
who should i believe in?
is there anyone left out there we can trust that is not singularly focused on controlled demolition - or is not hobknobbing with Kevin Barrett and CIT - or is not erecting a platform for 9/11 Truth under a leaky BIG TENT - or is not trying to tie the 9/11 Truth movement to the threat of evil zionism - or is not linking a political agenda like libertarianism and global warming hoaxes and birther issues to 9/11 Truth - or is not completely fucking insane for that matter (present company included)?
who - out there - is actively making the most credible case for 9/11 Truth these days?
i am starting to wonder if there really even IS a movement. i keep using the word like i know what the fuck i'm talking about.
***********************************************************************
Jon Gold
Joined: 29 Apr 2007
Posts: 943
Posted: Mon Jun 07, 2010 4:40 pm Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Believe in yourself. Don't rely on others. Be the activist you want other people to be. With the possible exception of Peter Dale Scott, Kevin Fenton, and Nafeez Ahmed, I haven't promoted ANYONE'S work in a long time other than my own. I was tired of being debunked using other people's work. David Ray Griffin for instance. This is part of the reason I wrote my facts piece. So I would have something I could trust.
Back to top
***********************************************************************
JohnA
Joined: 05 Oct 2007
Posts: 792
Posted: Mon Jun 07, 2010 5:31 pm Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
if there was something even approaching a credible 9/11 Truth group in the NYC area organizing events - i would be only too happy to speak - or show my film.
but there's nothing left of a movement here.
plus i don't believe in public outreach anymore anyway.
someone should be attempting to organize events aimed at universities. these events should offer stipends to various people of different scholastic and journalistic pedigrees to attend and participate.
did you ever see: "The Constitution: That Delicate Balance ? it was a forum of expects from different disciplines - print media - supreme court - entertainment - etc etc - discussing interpretation and practice.
our forum could be framed in a similar generic way - like - "Media Studies: Forum for Truth and Transparency in the Media." it qwould be moderated and videotaped.
once you have it organized - and your 'experts' are seated - you bring the focus to key points associated with 9/11 - and challenge the 'experts' to draw the line - and define - precisely - between legitimacy, public interest, truth and conspiracy theory.
'experts' like Arianna Huffington could be lured in by names like 'Columbia University' or "New York University" - and once seated - can be forced to really explain their positions of censorship on the issue of 9/11. surprise guests - like 9/11 widows could show up and pose questions.
God i wish someone had the resources to do something like this. ambush forums.
Back to top
***********************************************************************
truebeleaguer
Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Posts: 541
Posted: Mon Jun 07, 2010 5:37 pm Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JohnA wrote:
i am forced to wonder who is left that i can believe in anymore.
Maybe the issue is less who is left than who has left.
Where's the leadership? And what can we do to get them back? Why did they leave?
Disruptions in the NYC movement sapped energy, surely, but you guys know more about that than I. The truthmove guys left NYC but instead of moving to the Bay Area where they could have made major contributions they settled elsewhere. On the west coast the Tarpley-Barrett gang stirred up major disruption and schism in the Bay Area, and the Judy Wood group disrupted Seattle and took over Portland, OR. The WAC gang's energy was attractive, their self-promotion less so, but I think we mostly agree that they've been a net positive and they've certainly worked hard.
As CD became cutting edge, I suspect a lot of people pulled back, willing to let Gage and Jones speak for them. But Jones never aspired to leadership, and Gage is satisfied to lead his own group while maintaining a Big Tent attitude, and Jim Hoffman rather than seizing the momentum of his slow-aborning vindication seems almost retired.
One factor in the change is the loss of the fear factor. Fear of death pushed some of us to craziness, and some to rigorous honesty. Both are exhausting, let alone the frenetic activism that went with it. Loss of the fear factor leaves anybody free to say anything. And they do.
Why won't the Jersey Girls say something--send a smoke signal at least!
Jon Gold wrote:
I was tired of being debunked using other people's work.
It would really help if our work got more peer review, or critical review in general. A sort of a NYTBR of 9/11 books, youtubes, essays and webpages that was a critical catalog would be a great service, especially to newbies who are likely to frustrated by the plethora of material, mostly of very poor quality, that's available. Mark Robinowitz and Jim Hoffman have both provided such guides in the past, but I suspect they're somewhat dated now.
That something is imperfect does not make it useless. If we are aware of the errors in a particular work, we can still recommend it with caveats. Criticism of youtubes, in particular, might help to greatly improve their quality. They're all way too long, for starters, with way too much stuff where not enough happens.
Back to top
***********************************************************************
Jon Gold
Joined: 29 Apr 2007
Posts: 943
Posted: Mon Jun 07, 2010 6:34 pm Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I speak to Lorie Van Auken all the time. She's tired... we're all tired. Truebeleaguer spoke of people that left. When CD became the end all/be all of the 9/11 Truth Movement, a lot of people left. Way to go Church of Controlled Demolition. I suspect destroying the 9/11 Truth Movement was your plan all along. However, I still do my thing... This trial on Thursday might hopefully bring some attention to the cause. And then in July, I'm hanging with Cindy in D.C. again.
Back to top
***********************************************************************
truebeleaguer
Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Posts: 541
Posted: Mon Jun 07, 2010 7:07 pm Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Certainly the CD movement has had downside factors, and it's been suboptimally effective, but the reasons the CD movement came to the forefront were that 1) the professional qualifications of its roster of architects and engineers brought new credibility and 2) it seemed to have more momentum than other branches of the movement and 3) the anti-CD faction didn't provide a viable alternative.
As far as I'm concerned, the essential fact of the movement is that 91% of the widows' questions weren't answered properly (if at all) and they deserve answers--and more importantly, we all need answers if we are to maintain any claim that we are the open democratic society we used to claim to be. Has the Constitution, as someone put it recently, become just a National Decoration? Just a souvenir of our past aspirations? 9/11 Truth isn't really about 9/11 at all any more, it's about overturning the apparently-illegal rule of the Continuity of Government emergency instituted after 9/11 and still in effect today, it's about accountability and thus the restoration of the rule of law, and it's about restoring the credibility and integrity of the press, academia, the legislature, and the judiciary.
A parallel essential fact IMHO is that the reports on the World Trade Center are not plausible, and engineers around the world know this instinctively and they're afraid to speak out about it. Since that's where my interests and experience lie rather than in the analysis of geopolitical history, that's where I do the bulk of my work. And this is equally applicable to the restoration of the open democratic society, and perhaps the most viable crowbar into the problem if we can convince honest scientists to look at the information and acknowledge reality and throw off the perceptual blinders that the environment of their professional and economic culture puts on them.
I have always considered raising doubts about the veracity of the NIST report to be simply a second front on getting the widows' questions answered, and if they'd asked me to quit doing CD theory because it was counterproductive then, if they offered any viable alternative, I would have stopped. I wish they had used their authority to pin some real bad actors' (Ranke and Barrett, for instance) ears back, because they could have shut those clowns up quick simply with general statements about their dismay about tendencies in the movement toward bigoted theories, toward demonizing witnesses, and indulging unsubstantiated claims. They didn't. I've been looking to them for guidance for years, and I haven't gotten it. Here in 9/11 kindergarten you can't complain that somebody took your toy drum if you weren't playing with it.
Thanks for your great work, Jon. Keep it up. (Take a break if you need it, and return with new vision!) Don't let the haters get you down. Good luck with your trial. Say hi to Cindy for me.
Last edited by truebeleaguer on Mon Jun 07, 2010 7:17 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
***********************************************************************
Jon Gold
Joined: 29 Apr 2007
Posts: 943
Posted: Mon Jun 07, 2010 7:15 pm Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Didn't provide an alternative? Bull. Support the families, support the responders, ask questions (the right questions, remember... if they can get you asking the wrong questions, then they never have to worry about the answers), demand answers, and promote the ridiculousness of the 9/11 Commission. This was working before CD, it has worked for me throughout the CD movement, and is working for me to this day. However, I am just one person.
Back to top
***********************************************************************
truebeleaguer
Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Posts: 541
Posted: Mon Jun 07, 2010 7:39 pm Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We did all that, Jon. It wasn't working. I couldn't believe it when "Press for Truth" sank out of sight. I thought it was a slam dunk! My friends who are into theories involving social engineering say that the last ten years has been a process of making sure we didn't care about more and more stuff:
We didn't care about stolen elections, crooked voting machines, dead innocents in Afghanistan and Iraq, about getting Osama, lies about WMD, male prostitutes in the White House, global warming, degradation of the news media, about Constitutional government, accountability, rule of law, torture and rendition, about Pat Tillman, US soldiers getting their legs blown off, about unbelievable official reports or the dying first responders or the widows and their questions.
Because somehow even as all this unprecedented horrific shit was going on, we still had sunny days and the trains ran on time.
We in the CD movement have supported the first responders, though they've been very slow to support us. Probably that is because we did such a piss-poor job of policing the crazies among us that repelled them. Who'da thunk that they'd be offended by the idea that 343 firemen were killed by holograms?
Maybe CD's momentum is running down, and maybe Dr. Jones's earthquake fiasco is a symptom of that, and if anyone has ideas for a new front (other than ZIHOP) I'm willing to hear it. A return to good old LIHOP might be justified if somebody could make a good movie or book out of that. I'd work on a return to the classic program, but only if the widows are willing to lift a finger. How can I support the families if by hiding they give the impression they want nothing to do with us?
Back to top
***********************************************************************
JohnA
Joined: 05 Oct 2007
Posts: 794
PostPosted: Mon Jun 07, 2010 7:56 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Quote:
We did all that, Jon. It wasn't working.
actually it was working. we had some really positive polling in the early days. but - like you said - and like i say to my wife practically every day - the american public is incredibly embarassingly despicably apathetic.
pile on top of that the avalanche of disinformation - and the poor judgement of so many of our activists - and 9/11 became a joke. lets face it... most people view us now as crazy as the birthers and tea party. we're conspiracy theorists and anti-semites. Crying or Very sad
Back to top
***********************************************************************
truebeleaguer
Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Posts: 544
PostPosted: Mon Jun 07, 2010 8:39 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
JohnA wrote:
we're conspiracy theorists and anti-semites. Crying or Very sad
And that could change next week if the widows, Janice, Code Pink, and Cindy Sheehan together issued a statement calling for us to overtly reject conspiracy theorists and anti-semites.
Of course drawing the line on conspiracy theories is a tough one, LIHOP being a conspiracy in itself but there'd be ways to phrase it emphasizing the importance of substantiated research over speculation. If they'd ask the CD movement to back off from the "We've proven CD" claim and rest on the inadequacies, mendacity, and implausibility of the official reports I'd be delighted.
It seems a self-defeating program to call for new investigations while claiming simultaneously that we've already got the answers.
Back to top
***********************************************************************
truthmover
Joined: 19 Oct 2007
Posts: 1292
Location: Los Angeles
PostPosted: Mon Jun 07, 2010 8:57 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Quote:
actually it was working. we had some really positive polling in the early days. but - like you said - and like i say to my wife practically every day - the american public is incredibly embarassingly despicably apathetic.
pile on top of that the avalanche of disinformation - and the poor judgement of so many of our activists - and 9/11 became a joke. lets face it... most people view us now as crazy as the birthers and tea party. we're conspiracy theorists and anti-semites.
I agree with John. I really wish more people who still care about this being a movement of it's own, founded on some really essential values and insights, wouldn't feel like ignoring our failures is somehow noble or good for the team.
Honestly, people with talent moved on. I got involved just after the movement peaked around the 2004 anniversary. From that point on myself and others been fighting a downhill battle to prevent total collapse of the core. The number of honest and thoughtful people left just can't outnumber or even likely overpower those who are less honest or more careless.
But that doesn't mean I'm quitting. That's what they want you to do. So I'm just going to keep being someone who knows what's up and speaks my mind. And I'm going to keep trying to work with others who view this movement, or it's general values, as something that must remain.
Back to top
***********************************************************************
truebeleaguer
Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Posts: 544
PostPosted: Mon Jun 07, 2010 9:07 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
We should ask 9/11 activists to acknowledge that 9/11 belongs to the families, not to us. Too many of us--even, sadly, many in NYC--lack the sense of reverence that those who were closer to the events feel.
It's no mistake that it was a couple of Californians who had the utter gall to fly out to Virginia and interview Arlington cemetery workers to support the Californians' self-aggrandizing conspiracy fantasies.
truthmover wrote:
people with talent moved on.
Moved on to where? I'd like some ideas.
Back to top
***********************************************************************
Arcterus
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
Posts: 606
Location: Jacksonville, FL
PostPosted: Mon Jun 07, 2010 10:10 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
JohnA wrote:
Quote:
We did all that, Jon. It wasn't working.
actually it was working. we had some really positive polling in the early days. but - like you said - and like i say to my wife practically every day - the american public is incredibly embarassingly despicably apathetic.
pile on top of that the avalanche of disinformation - and the poor judgement of so many of our activists - and 9/11 became a joke. lets face it... most people view us now as crazy as the birthers and tea party. we're conspiracy theorists and anti-semites. Crying or Very sad
I was talking to a good friend of mine about that just recently. We've gone from a time where we could stand side-by-side with the anti-war movements and have turned into a bunch of nutters. Just another conspiracy group. Another moon landing denial, holocaust denial, etc... group who wastes everyone's time with bogus theories. That has become our perception, and it's a travesty that so many people have been so careless that it has turned out that way.
_________________
http://arcterus911.blogspot.com
**************************************************************
Posted: Tue Jun 08, 2010 2:53 pm Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
its frustrating because public calls for justice and accountability are always more powerful - from a grassroots organizing standpoint - than presenting conspiracy theories and video evidence of physical evidence based on advanced physics and chemistry.
just look at the growing frustration over the oil spill. already people are questioning whether BP will be allowed to wiggle off the hook - like Exxon did - and get away with murder. just the fact that there IS a liability cap in place that needs to be lifted is obscene. if someone cared enough to start organizing this rage - some very powerful leverage could be created for legal action and legislation.
but we squandered all of our momentum on 9/11. we allowed material like the Loose Change films to become a central theme in our local meetings - with theorized plane swaps and pods and flashes and missing planes at the pentagon.
one can only imagine characters like "Buzzy" Kronegard laughing their ASSES off.
****************************************************************
truebeleaguer
Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Posts: 546
Posted: Wed Jun 09, 2010 9:46 pm Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I haven't seen that calls for justice and accountability have been at all compelling to the American people. Stolen elections, wiretapping, torture, lying us into war, outing CIA agents, Katrina--none of it has generated any outcry. The last ten years has been a program of step-by-step desensitization to horror, and inducing the citizens to ignore the widows' plea for justice has been only one step among many. Haven't calls for accountability for pure negligence devoid of any conspiracy theorizing gotten rather stale by now?
The geopolitical evidence of cui bono and PNAC and the New Pearl Harbor and the Grand Chessboard involves just as much conspiracy theory as controlled demolition does--and the latter has the advantage that the scientific evidence can be examined on its own merits without any fingerpointing or even any theorizing. I'd be happy to join any parade the widows want to lead, but the evidence is that they avoid any parade that has me in it. In the meantime I'll do what I can as I can and where I can.
- gretavo's blog
- Login to post comments
can someone explain how we here
...at the "church of controlled demolition" have prevented Jon Gold and his widows, orphans, and family members from taking the world by storm with their truth message? isn't it kind of like they have totally failed, possibly (at least in the case of Gold) by design, and need to explain that somehow by blaming someone else? If his brand of truthing is so great, why hasn't it taken off?
this is as massive a group shark-jumping as I've ever seen!
All these losers who have been talking about making their own "site by veterans of this movement" have apparently given up on that dream to instead bitch and moan about the "failure" of the movement that had "so much promise" when it was all about Mike Ruppert spewing his Peak Oil LIHOP crap and Jon Gold just beginning to salivate over Mohammed Atta's pork chops!
Seriously, where are the holy family members and valiant anti-warriors? Are we really to believe that it's our fault that they don't embrace Jon Gold's big list of facts and move forward for justice? If Gold's racist LIHOP fantasies are so compelling then why haven't Cindy Shehaan and Lori Van Auken called a joint press conference to publicly endorse the Big Fat List of Facts? What are they waiting for? I mean to be perfectly honest I would prefer to see them speak out loudly for LIHOP than to continue to do nothing.
Hey, true faction shills, I'm talking to you! If your approach is so much better, prove it! Build a movement better than the one that exists--or STFU and go home already! Stop controlling 911blogger! Start that site you keep talking about! DO SOMETHING FOR 9/11 TRUTH, as opposed to constantly complaining about everyone else whose approach you don't like!
A-F'ING-MEN.
A-F'ING-MEN.
Attempted Controlled Demoltion
Interesting...these people claim to be veterans and architects of a movement they now see as a failure but at the same time they want to blame others for the failure.
These very same 911 Truthers have been pimping people like Steve Atlen, Sibel Edmonds, Tony Able Danger Shafer and Colleen Rowley for years. None seem interested in 911 Truth. These same 'whistleblowers' seem almost embarrassed to even mention the 911 Truth movement and give the silent-treatment when it comes to explaining the gaping hole that CONTROLLED DEMOLITION puts in their Islamic Extremism theory.
Then, on the other side of the isle, the research that Jon Gold and his buddies seem so against (controlled demolition, CiT) are doing great! Richard Gage is still opening minds. DRG is hanging tough. The CIT debate is basically over. Because, at the end of the day, 10+ witnesses all witnessing the same thing in generally the same area...is pretty damn significant.
They are right, in a way
The 9/11 [LIHOP] Movement has failed, while the 9/11 Truth Movement is kicking ass. Like a group of over-the-hill womanizing men who have finally been forced to face the reality that their fake charm and manipulative tactics that worked so well for so long with women are no longer enough to compensate for their declining physical attractiveness - the girls just don't seem to be interested at all anymore - these fakes are finally acknowledging that their heyday is long gone and is never coming back. They were only succeeding as long as most people were not exposed to the hard physical evidence of controlled demolition and the Pentagon deception, and everything else that contradicts the muslim hijacker backstory.
Forced into a corner, these shills have run out of options and credibility capital as evidenced by their increasingly desperate attacks against David Ray Griffin - arguably the [real] Truth Movement's most credible advocate.
The Mike Ruppert/John Judge/Jon Gold/John Albanese/Mike Wolsey Fake LIHOP Movement's prospects peaked around 2004 - 2005, just before controlled demolition evidence exploded across people's consciousness, but has been on a steady decline ever since. The more they attack people like David Ray Griffin, the sooner their credibility capital will be depleted and their time will be up. Knowing this, and realizing that they have run out of options must really suck for them.
Poor Jon Gold
He's so sad now ....I can almost hear him crying - ahhhhh, bull! I really wanted to be respected, oh darn!, I've tried so hard, I have given my life for this cause! Those Californians, they really make me mad!! Oh god, I really wanted a movement I could be leader, I mean proud of!! I hate it when I'm called names!! I'm so tired!! Oh well, I'll see Cindy and the other girls soon enough!! I know, we could call ourselves IDEHOPPERS!!! Yeah, it didn't even happen on purpose!! Then the msm would respect us and listen to us!! Oh well, I'm off to court for some REAL action and results!!
Gretavo, I loved your comments on these so-called 911 truthers. I find Jon Gold and company humorous, but not really a danger to 911 truth. He seems like he is sincere, I'll give him that!
I am quite amazed at theTrue Faction posts. Thanks for sharing.
Lillyann
:)
I think this thread is a great opportunity for a sock puppet soundoff... ;-)
John Albanese shows his ignorance again
already people are questioning whether BP will be allowed to wiggle off the hook - like Exxon did - and get away with murder. just the fact that there IS a liability cap in place that needs to be lifted is obscene.
Can anyone point to anything in John Albanese's movie or anything he has written or said ever about the liability caps protecting the airlines and Larry Silverstein that were written into law right after 9/11?
And they call ME COINTELPRO??
Translating some of the LIHOPer [LIAR'S] hidden meanings
***********************************************************************
truebeleaguer
Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Posts: 544
PostPosted: Mon Jun 07, 2010 8:39 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
JohnA wrote:
we're conspiracy theorists and anti-semites [Translation: Real truth advocates are intent on focusing on the best physical evidence, which unfortunately tends to discredit our LIHOP slop, and following the truth wherever it leads, including Israeli/Mossad complicity, which we are tasked with covering up at all costs]. Crying or Very sad
And that could change next week if the widows, Janice, Code Pink, and Cindy Sheehan together issued a statement calling for us to overtly reject conspiracy theorists and anti-semites.[We are attempting to use whatever underhanded tactics in our bag of manipulative tricks to get the widows, Janice, Code Pink, and CIndy Sheehan to reject the best physical evidence, such as CD, and help us cover up any Israeli/Mossad complicity, and to sign on to our utterly discredited LIHOP slop as a last desperate strategy]
Of course drawing the line on conspiracy theories is a tough one, LIHOP being a [totally and utterly discredited and unlikely] conspiracy in itself but there'd be ways to phrase it emphasizing the importance of substantiated research over speculation [which is, of course, absolute hypocracy, since it is our ridiculous LIHOP crap that constitutes speculation]. If they'd ask the CD movement to back off from the "We've proven CD" claim [actually, we wish the CD folks would just go away because CD is too easy to prove, which makes our job of pushing LIHOP impossible], and rest on the inadequacies, mendacity, and implausibility of the official reports I'd be delighted [because limiting 9/11 "truth" to such a characterization is necessary for the cover-up to succeed].
It seems a self-defeating program to call for new investigations while claiming simultaneously that we've already got the answers. [Of course, we know that even though CD is proven, calling for new investigations might lead to uncovering the perpetrators of CD, which would be counterproductive to the cover-up, so it's best to spew nonsense like you can't believe in CD while still wanting to have a new investigation at the same time, and hopefully people won't see through our blatant mischaracterization of the issue.]
Back to top
***********************************************************************
truthmover
Joined: 19 Oct 2007
Posts: 1292
Location: Los Angeles
PostPosted: Mon Jun 07, 2010 8:57 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Quote:
actually it was working. we had some really positive polling in the early days. but - like you said - and like i say to my wife practically every day - the american public is incredibly embarassingly despicably apathetic.
pile on top of that the avalanche of disinformation - and the poor judgement of so many of our activists - and 9/11 became a joke. [Er...9/11 LIHOP became a joke once the evidence of CD became widely known] lets face it... most people view us now as crazy as the birthers and tea party. [Well, ok, the truth is that in the years since 2004, when we thought we could succeed in smothering the truth movement with LIHOP crap, that damn CD issue took over and gained the real truth movement much credibility, so that a lot less people think the 9/11 truth movement is crazy compared to the early days, darn it!] we're conspiracy theorists and anti-semites.
I agree with John. I really wish more people who still care about this being a movement of it's own, founded on some really essential values and insights, wouldn't feel like ignoring our failures is somehow noble or good for the team.
Honestly, people with talent moved on. [Er, that is, some of our best fakes, like Mike Ruppert, moved on once they realized that LIHOP was loosing out to the real truth] I got involved just after the [LIHOP] movement peaked around the 2004 anniversary. From that point on myself and others been fighting a downhill battle to prevent total collapse of the core [of the failed LIHOP psyop]. The number of honest and thoughtful people left just can't outnumber or even likely overpower those who are less honest or more careless [Translation: the number of fake LIHOP operatives left just can't outnumber or even likely overpower those who are more interested in the best most credible physical evidence and a full disclosure of the truth].
But that doesn't mean I'm quitting. That's what they want you to do. So I'm just going to keep being someone who knows [that LIHOP is total BS and is getting harder and harder to sell, but as long as I get a pay check I'll just keep on keep'n on]. And I'm going to keep trying to work with others who view this [LIHOP] movement, or it's general values, as something that must remain.
Back to top
***********************************************************************
truebeleaguer
Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Posts: 544
PostPosted: Mon Jun 07, 2010 9:07 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
We should ask 9/11 activists to acknowledge that 9/11 belongs to the families, not to us. [That way, if we can pretend that 9/11 only concerns the family members as victims, particularly those family members who help push LIHOP and hence, the justification for the war on terror, we might be able to get people to forget that 9/11 truth is really about the millions of innocent arab and muslim people that have either already been killed or are slated to be killed well into the future, hopefully. The truth is that 9/11 truth belongs more to the millions of innocent arabs and muslims that are being genocided, but we are racists and don't give a rat's ass.] Too many of us--even, sadly, many in NYC--lack the sense of reverence that those who [we can use to push LIHOP because of peoples' natural or manipulated sympathies they engender, whether or not they are real victims/family members].
It's no mistake that it was a couple of Californians who had the utter gall to fly out to Virginia and interview Arlington cemetery workers to [do an end-run around our "don't question the Pentagon OCT" crap and actually uncover some very damaging evidence that threatens to finish discrediting LIHOP once and for all].
truthmover wrote:
people with talent moved on.
Moved on to where? I'd like some ideas.
Back to top
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
its frustrating because public calls for justice and accountability [that are hollow and don't threaten real justice and real accountability as long as the real perpetrators are covered up are what we wanted to contain the movement to, but those darn real truth advocates who use video evidence of physical evidence based on advanced physics and chemistry that totally discredit our LIHOP crap are always more powerful than presenting wild conspiracy theories about super-human box-cutter-wielding 'mooozlim' fanatics controlled from a cave in Afghanistan.]
bravo, among the best read
bravo, among the best read between the lines explanation I have seen!
nicely explicated Keenan!
here's an imaginary conversation...
random person (RP) comes across two truthers. one a LIHOP fake truther (LFT) and the other, a real truther (RT).
RP: Look honey, there's some of those 9/11 conspiracy theorists! Let's see what they have to say...
LFT: Good afternoon there, sir--did you know that the Bush Cheney criminal cabal knew that al Qaeda was going to strike us on 9/11 and that they deliberately did nothing so that they could justify invading the middle east and grabbing their oil?
RP: Huh? I know that Republicans are jerks and crooks, but you're talking about a truly evil conspiracy.
LFT: They ARE evil--did you know that Bush's grandfather funded Hitler? And the Bush family has lots of business ties with bin Laden's family, not to mention with Saudi Arabia, where most of the hijackers came from on visas that they should never have been approved for! Not just that but the CIA created al Qaeda with the help of Pakistan, which wired a lot of money to the lead hijacker--and the guy who approved that transfer was in Washington D.C. on 9/11.
RP: Hold on, you're saying that Bush is a Nazi, and for that reason used his connections to bin Laden to have the CIA facilitate al Qaeda's attack using Saudi agents funded by Pakistan...
LFT: And Turkey. Turkey had something to do with it because there was this FBI translator named Sibel Edmonds who got fired for showing that the Turkish lobby was using lesbians to blackmail a U.S. congresswoman.
RP: Uh OK so Nazi Bush, al Qaeda which is realy the CIA, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Turkish lesbians all got together to attack America.
LFT: Isn't it obvious? Here, take this big fat list of 1000 little known suspicious facts about 9/11.
RP: Uhhh, sounds like a pretty convoluted conspiracy theory actually... you know, I think my wife wants to get going...
RT: If I may, very briefly sir, give you the REAL version of 9/11 truth?
RP: No really, she's getting antsy...
RT: 30 seconds is all I need.
RP: Sigh. OK, hit me.
LFT: Sir, don't listen to this kook--he's an anti-semitic holocaust denying crypto nazi!
RP: Jeez, man, is EVERYONE a Nazi?
RT: He just doesn't want you to listen to what I'm about to tell you. You see, No matter who flew the planes into the twin towers, there's no way that could have resulted in the total destruction that we saw that day. In fact, a growing number of building professionals have signed their names to a petition calling for an investigation into the use of explosives to destroy not just the twin towers, but also building 7, which wasn't hit by a plane, and collapsed in a manner indistinguishable from a controlled demolition that afternoon. Dozens of first responders on the scene that day described explosions going off all over the buildings, including in the basements far from the plane impacts, and yet the government admits it didn't conduct a single test for traces of explosives, despite the fact that there were explosives used to attack the WTC in 1993. We're not saying we know who did this, but we feel that given how 9/11 changed our country and the world we deserve the fullest possible accounting of that day. Here's a short flyer with some resources--websites and books by serious credentialed researchers, if you want to learn more about this most important subject.
RP: Wow, I hadn't heard any of this--I thought you guys were just Bush haters with vivid imaginations--like your friend here...
RT: Well, he's not my friend--in fact I think that he does what he does precisely to give good honest citizens like you the wrong impression of what 9/11 skepticism is all about. Kind of like Nietzsche's dictum that the most perfidious way to harm a cause--
RP: ...is to defend it deliberately with faulty arguments. By golly you're right. Thank you so much for doing this. I'm really not sure what to believe, but you've given me a lot to think about.
LFT: Oh I see, just another run of the mill Jew hater.
RP: Jew-what? Who's talking about Jews?
LFT: YOU CRYPTO-NAZIS THAT's WHO! (etc...)
Who knew your average man on the street
was so familiar with Nietzsche!
But anyway, the RT spiel in this is just another inaudibly high-pitched shrieking designed to get people to hate Jews. Nice try though.
classic...
real truth markup coming soon... [edit: on second thought, wtf is the point? it can be summed up as follows: Jon Gold claims to believe that al Qaeda is real and using Saudi funding (and Pakistani pork chops) attacked America on 9/11, and the Bush and Obama administrations are covering that up. I mean, that's it. The explosive demolition of the WTC with people inside doesn't really figure into Gold's views on 9/11 apparently. Inconclusive he says, and not good evidence to share with the public because he doesn't understand it. If we're going to limit ourselves to what Jon Gold understands, I'm afraid we won't be getting very far now will we. This is all beyond obvious, and anyone associating with Jon Gold is themselves suspect at this point, except in cases where they are just dim bulbs like Cindy Sheehan.]
Jon Gold
Joined: 29 Apr 2007
Posts: 962
PostPosted: Fri Jun 11, 2010 9:00 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Scott N. wrote:
Just curious: would you say the same of the “Pakistan issue” or the “Saudi issue”? Because the evidence implicating people in these countries is incredibly flimsy, imo.
It's not flimsy.
Fact #14
The Joint Congressional Inquiry, which both Bush and Cheney tried to "limit the scope" of, released a report with 28 redacted pages. Apparently, those 28 pages talk about "possible Saudi Arabian financial links." In 2004, Sen. Bob Graham says that the Bush White House is covering up Saudi Arabia's possible connection to the two hijackers that lived in San Diego. He said the information about them, "present[s] a compelling case that there was Saudi assistance." He also says that the Bush Administration directed the FBI to "to restrain and obfuscate" any investigations into the connection. The landlord of the two hijackers was Abdussatar Shaikh, an FBI asset handled by agent Steven Butler. The FBI originally tried to prevent Butler from testifying before the Congressional Inquiry, but when he finally did, he said that he may have been able to uncover the 9/11 plot if the CIA shared their information on the two hijackers. He said, "it would have made a huge difference." [...] "We would have immediately opened... investigations. We would have given them the full court press. We would... have done everything-physical surveillance, technical surveillance, and other assets." On 1/8/2008, the Philadelphia Inquirer reported that "a huge lawsuit against the government of Saudi Arabia and key members of its royal family was put to a crucial test today as lawyers for victims of the 9/11 attacks urged a federal appeals court to reinstate the government of Saudi Arabia as a defendant." The Cozen O'Connor law firm in Philadelphia "was the first to file suit against the government of Saudi Arabia in 2003, charging that the desert kingdom bears responsibility for the attacks because it permitted Islamic charities under its control to bankroll Osama bin Laden and his global terror movement." The lawsuit "suffered a setback in 2005 when New York federal district court judge Richard Conway Casey ruled that the federal foreign sovereign immunity act barred lawsuits against Saudi Arabia and members of the royal family." On 11/13/2008, it was reported that "thousands of victims of the 9/11 attacks appealed to the Supreme Court yesterday, asking it to overturn a lower court decision barring lawsuits against Saudi Arabia for supporting acts of terrorism." On 1/6/2009, it is reported that "lawyers for Saudi Arabia have asserted in court papers that the Supreme Court should reject arguments that the desert kingdom be held accountable for the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks because, over a period of many years, it financed al-Qaeda. In papers filed with the Supreme Court, lawyers for the kingdom and several high-ranking Saudi royals say that U.S. law provides blanket immunity to Saudi Arabia from lawsuits over the 9/11 attacks." On 2/24/2009, it is reported that "the Supreme Court yesterday asked the U.S. Solicitor General's office to weigh in on whether a huge lawsuit against the government of Saudi Arabia charging that it was a source of terrorist financing before the 9/11 attacks should move forward." On 5/29/2009, the New York Times reports that "the Justice Department, in a brief filed Friday before the Supreme Court, said it did not believe the Saudis could be sued in American court over accusations brought by families of the Sept. 11 victims that the royal family had helped finance Al Qaeda. The department said it saw no need for the court to review lower court rulings that found in the Saudis’ favor in throwing out the lawsuit." 9/11 Family Member, and "Jersey Girl" Kristen Breitweiser said, "I find this reprehensible. One would have hoped that the Obama administration would have taken a different stance than the Bush administration, and you wonder what message this sends to victims of terrorism around the world." On 5/30/2009, the victims family members released two press releases. The first one states, "today the Obama Administration filed in the Supreme Court a document that expressed the Administration's decision to stand with a group of Saudi princes and against the right of American citizens -- 9/11 family members -- to have our day in court. Let there be no doubt: The filing was political in nature and stands as a betrayal of everyone who lost a loved one or was injured on September 11, 2001." The second one states, "on the day that President Obama holds his first summit with Saudi Arabian King Abdullah in Riyadh, the 9/11 Families United to Bankrupt Terrorism charged that recent actions by his administration would enable five of the king's closest relatives to escape accountability for their role in financing and materially supporting the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks." The second press release lists "allegations made in 2002 of the Saudi royal family's sponsorship and support of al Qaeda that the families believe have been ignored by the Obama Administration." On 6/9/2009, the Philadelphia Inquirer reports that this case "is likely to reach a critical juncture this month when the U.S. Supreme Court is expected to decide whether to hear arguments on Saudi Arabia's legal exposure." It goes on to say that "the hurdle for the plaintiffs, both insurers and individual victims, isn't simply facts and law, but also the political dimensions. Saudi Arabia is one of the United States' most important allies in the Middle East. It has been a forward staging area for the U.S. military, deemed an important counterweight to Iran's regional ambitions, seen as a huge source of energy, and a very big purchaser of American goods and services." Tom Burnett who lost his son on Flight 93 asks, "why would the Obama administration give less weight to the principles of justice, transparency, and security and more to the pleadings of a foreign government? It strikes a blow against the public's right to know who financed and supported" the 9/11 attacks." "Kagan's May 29 brief, representing the opinion of the Obama administration, was significant because the Supreme Court in most cases follows the solicitor general's lead." On 6/11/2009, the Philadelphia Inquirer reports that "lawyers representing victims of the 9/11 attacks charge that the government sought to "appease" Saudi Arabia by urging the Supreme Court not to hear arguments that the kingdom could be sued for its alleged role in funding the attackers." A "brief filed by the Center City law firm of Cozen O'Connor and other lawyers representing victims, employed unusually scathing and at times emotional language, suggesting at one point that the government's brief was timed to coincide with President Obama's visit to Saudi Arabia last week." "A spokeswoman for U.S. Solictor General Elena Kagan said the May 29 filing of the government's brief had been determined by the schedule of the Supreme Court, which is expected to decide whether to hear the case by the end of the month." On 6/23/2009, the Washington Times reports that a "series of closed-door meetings between the relatives' groups and Justice Department officials, arranged as an update on Mr. Obama's plan to close the detention facility at the U.S. Naval Base Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, turned instead into a sharp clash over the Saudi legal action." Apparently, "the family members demanded to be be heard on the White House's stance during a series of closed-door meetings at the State Department and the Justice Department last week." On 6/24/2009, the New York Times reported that "classified American intelligence documents related to Saudi finances were leaked anonymously to lawyers for the families." It goes on to say that Obama's "Justice Department had the lawyers’ copies destroyed and now wants to prevent a judge from even looking at the material." 9/11 Family Member Kristen Breitweiser "said in an interview that during a White House meeting in February between President Obama and victims’ families, the president told her that he was willing to make the pages (28 redacted pages of the JICI) public. But she said she had not heard from the White House since then." On 6/29/2009, it is reported that "the Supreme Court has refused to allow victims of the Sept. 11 attacks to pursue lawsuits against Saudi Arabia and four of its princes over charitable donations that were allegedly funneled to al-Qaida." The "justices refused to review the ruling by a U.S. appeals court in New York that the Saudi defendants were protected by sovereign immunity in the lawsuit brought by victims of the attacks and their families." The Supreme Court "turned down the appeal without comment."
Fact #20
Apparently, Lt. General Mahmood Ahmed, the head of the Pakistani ISI, someone who met with U.S. elected and appointed officials in the weeks before 9/11, on the day of 9/11, and in the days after 9/11, ordered possible MI6 Agent Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh to wire transfer $100,000 to Mohammad Atta. The 9/11 Families' submitted a question to the 9/11 Commission about this incident. Deputy Assistant Director of the FBI's Counterterrorism Division, John S. Pistole stated that their investigation "has traced the origin of the funding of 9/11 back to financial accounts in Pakistan, where high-ranking and well-known al-Qaeda operatives played a major role in moving the money forward, eventually into the hands of the hijackers located in the US." In January 2002, during a visit to India, FBI Director Robert Mueller was told about Saeed Sheikh's involvement in the 9/11 attacks by Indian Investigators. Apparently, "on the eve of the publication of its report, the 9/11 Commission was given a stunning document from Pakistan, claiming that Pakistani intelligence officers knew in advance of the 9/11 attacks." On 3/3/2006, the Friday Times reported that "Pakistan gave tens of thousands of dollars through its lobbyists in the United States to members of the 9/11 inquiry commission to ‘convince’ them to drop some anti-Pakistan findings in the report." This according to FO Official Sadiq. According to the Pakistan paper Daily Times, this story about bribery "triggered" U.S. media interest. I don't remember seeing any mention of this story at all. If you know of an American media outlet that investigated this story, and reported on the results of that investigation, please let me know. On 4/10/2006, Pakistan officially denied the allegations of bribery. “Pakistan has never indulged in the illegal activity of bribing or buying influence anywhere in the world,” said a statement issued by the FO spokesperson here on Sunday. On 10/1/2001, Lt. Gen. Ahmed and Saeed Sheikh may have been involved in another "terrorist attack" together. Recently, it was reported that Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh has been running a terrorist network from prison, and was planning to assassinate President Musharraf. Former ISI Chief Hamid Gul recently defended Lt. Gen. Ahmed regarding the allegations of the wire transfer. On 3/15/2002, Condoleeza Rice is asked a question about Lt. Gen. Ahmed. "Dr. Rice, are you aware of the reports at the time that ISI Chief was in Washington on September 11th, and on September 10th, $100,000 was wired to Pakistan to this group here in this area? While he was here meeting with you or anybody in the administration?" Her response was, "I have not seen that report, and he was certainly not meeting with me." The transcript of this has "ISI Chief" replaced with "--." On March 31st, 2006, 9/11 Commissioner Thomas Kean was confronted on this issue. He said he wasn't aware of it.
Here's what I get from that...
re Gold
Copy pasta skills: reasonable
Formatting skills (like making paragraphs): needs more work.
Pasta Skills ?
Is that Cooking or eating it?.
-Either way with a considerable amount of Baloney!
Zionist involvement = chemtrails and HAARP
"From within the 9/11 Truth movement the problem is that those trying to conflate our cause with the anti-zionist cause are rarely smart enough to stick to mature criticisms of Israel and inevitably start yammering about how the Joos own the media and run the world. Peter Dale Scott says he hasn't seen any convincing evidence connecting Israel to 9/11. As we've discussed before, there can be little doubt that many of those pursuing an anti-zionist agenda can be perceived to be motivated by bigotry--even if some of their criticisms of Israel are legitimate.
The Israel issue--like chemtrails, HAARP, and any number of other distractions, does not serve the cause of 9/11 Truth."
This is the dividing line. I have little doubt that the recent shake up at 911blogger (this quote is from truth inaction, tho) coincided with the most recent Israel debacle for a reason.
I guess Peter Dale Scott needs a "hindering truth" page (not without a sourced direct quote, of course). It's too bad -- he's such a nice man.
truebeleaguer countdown to cancellation...
for this blasphemy:
"The geopolitical evidence of cui bono and PNAC and the New Pearl Harbor and the Grand Chessboard involves just as much conspiracy theory as controlled demolition does--and the latter has the advantage that the scientific evidence can be examined on its own merits without any fingerpointing or even any theorizing. I'd be happy to join any parade the widows want to lead, but the evidence is that they avoid any parade that has me in it. In the meantime I'll do what I can as I can and where I can."
This comment says it all...
http://truthaction.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=38261#38261
Jon Gold
Joined: 29 Apr 2007
Posts: 995
Posted: Thu Jun 03, 2010 8:28 pm Post subject:
It's not even worth it to go and wreck shop in the temple. Make a sacrifice at the Alter of Division and Speculation, or kindly find the door.
Despite Lillyanns obviously provocative quesiton, I wonder who exactly she means by "us" .. a cadre of terribly misguided individuals that share among them profoundly idiotic conspiracy theories? Or some Aspie with a penchant for sock puppets? Alas, we'll probably never know.
But they sure are fans of you now aren't they? Where on this wonderful system of tubes might such a tribe of hateful pricks congregate?
I sure do miss the days when Ruppert, Albanese, Ahmed, Levis, and a handful of others were guiding lights of a promising movement.
Tell me about it... Kyle Hence, John Judge, Paul Thompson, Nafeez Ahmed, Michel Chussodovsky, Nick Levis, John Albanese, Faiz Khan, Jenna Orkin, Ray McGovern, etc... ah, those were the days... before the Church came along, and ruined it for everyone.
------------------------------
Ha! the guiding lights? Let's see...Ruppert, who helped cover up any credible physical evidence for years right from the start and replaced it with silly nonsense such as the Delmart Vreeland crap and Lie-hop BS, and then when people started to discover the physical evidence anyway, quit the movement in 2004, declaring that 9/11 was a "dead issue"? That's who they aspire to?
Albanese, Ahmed, Levis - all blatant Lie-hop liars...
Yea, John Judge, liar extraordinaire who attacked any notion of controlled demolition with identical popular mechanics style rebunker arguments, and then made up that silly story about his phantom friend AA77 stewardess fellow conspiracy researcher expert plane parts identifier etc. to prop up the OCT of AA77 having crashed into the Pentagon...Oh, and all those sekrit crash photos that John saw, but still can't locate them for anyone else to have a looksie...
Ah, those were the days ...before the Church came along, and ruined it for everyone. Those gosh darn Real Truthers who started talking about hard scientific evidence and caused a rapid expansion of the Real Truth Movement based on controlled demolition, etc., which suddenly made the Lie-hop movement look ridiculous in comparison, boo hoo hoo hoo hoo! We'll never be popular again like we almost were in 2004. Awwwwww, it's all over for us Lie-hop frauds, BOO HOO HOO HOO HOO!