Rather than address trace elements of explosives found in the WTC dust, molten iron in the rubble of three demolished skyscrapers, or rapid descent of the three demolished buildings, “Dirty Wars” producer Jeremy Scahill thinks we should dismiss the pursuit of 9/11 truth and continue ‘honest dialog” about U.S. policy. How could such dialog be honest if it’s poisoned by the dishonest premise of 9/11?
Scahill’s stance on 9/11 drew renewed interest as he recently insulted Alex Jones on CSPAN. While Scahill considers Jones an easy target, he finds it objectionable that a caller mentions Jones in the same sentence as Amy Goodman. Obviously, Scahill doesn’t see how Goodman’s laissez-faire treatment of the 9/11 truth movement is as offensive as Jones most ridiculous antics. Both Jones and Goodman are popular figureheads. One seems to have the purpose of discrediting the 9/11 truth movement and the other pretends it doesn’t exist.
Check out Professor James Tracy’s article for an excellent take on the concept of ‘real journalism”.
When, in an effort to fight terrorism, you send a drone to murder a U.S. citizen without due process, you are committing an act of terrorism. It is terrorism regardless of how many unconstitutional executive orders were created to justify the murder of a U.S. citizen without due process. One unique U.S. Senator recognizes this dilemma and is willing to act within her power to call for the impeachment of Barack Obama. Texas Senator Kesha Roberts states:
with the avowed assassination of at least four American citizens, Anwar Al-Awlaki, his 16-year-old son, Samir Khan, and Jude Mohammed, without benefit of due process of law. Indeed, the death warrants against these individuals were effectively signed in secret, in a committee which is overseen directly by the president.
On May 22nd, 2013, the Obama administration admitted to killing four U.S. citizens in drone strikes outside of Afghanistan and Iraq. U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder states in a letter sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman:
Since 2009, the United States, in the conduct of U.S. counterterrorism operations against al-Qa’ida and its associated forces outside of areas of active hostilities, has specifically targeted and killed one U.S. citizen, Anwar al-Aulaqi. The United States is further aware of three other U.S. citizens who have been killed in such U.S. counterterrorism operations over that same time period: Samir Khan, ‘Abd al-Rahman Anwar al-Aulaqi, and Jude Kenan Mohammed. These individuals were not specifically targeted by the United States.
As a means to distract attention from the obviously facilitated attacks against U.S. citizens on 9/11/01, an unverifiable enemy whose name was derived from a database would give birth to unprecedented media craze. “Al Qaeda” blossomed into a supreme illusion to promote a distracting narrative that contradicts the implications of World Trade Center demolitions. This vague enemy remains a convenient justification for an endless war on terror that is ironically run by terrorists.
On 9/11, the wheels of justice ground to a halt and have been spinning backwards to this day. Kesha Roberts brings a modicum of sanity to a world gone mad with the endless ‘war on terror’. Roberts cites the following violations that justify impeachment:
- Violated the Constitution and the War Powers Act with Libya,
- Violated the First, Fourth, Fifth, and Eighth Amendments of the Constitution with the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA),
- Violated the 4th Amendment with the NSA,
- Violated the 5th Amendment by committing an act of terrorism with drones
- Violated the Preamble of the United States Constitution through the Affordable Care Act and the Wall Street Bailout.
This is a response to the hit piece attacking architect Richard Gage and his organization, Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, which consists of over two thousand architects and engineers citing evidence of controlled demolitions for World Trade Centers One, Two, and Seven.
It’s difficult to comprehend how many people will voluntarily protect the political agenda of those who facilitated the terrorist attacks on 9/11/01. Are we to believe that your editorial staff, writers and producers elected to betray their own intellect, abandon what minimal scientific education was provided to them to exhibit genuine ignorance? Not likely.
Do you really think your organization will be excused in the public eye for continuing to lie to the public and protect those who were capable of orchestrating this deadly PR stunt?
We understand how the NSA and the Pentagon have littered the web with operatives trying to debunk the fundamental laws of physics, but those nameless shills will disappear as the number of people who acknowledge the demolitions continues to grow. This elementary scientific disclosure will spread throughout a substantial portion of the population, but the Sun News Media will have nowhere to hide. What follows are long discussions over whether major propaganda tools like your Sun News can be considered accessories to the terrorist attacks of 9/11. One small footnote in recent history is Judith Miller and the New York Times selling WMD lies to promote war crimes in Iraq. That was simply one branch in the standing oak aftermath of 9/11. The Toronto Sun knowingly perpetuates the myths of 9/11 to fulfill the political agenda behind those terrorist attacks. The memory of your paper’s act will be forever etched in the minds of those who were betrayed by your lies.
Toronto Sun’s hit piece is included in Press for Truth’s Gage coverage below:
The term “Conspiracy Theorist” helps sustain the prevailing delusion. It has its own feature of indoctrination as it implies that those who look at the world with a critical eye are outsiders. This helps society alienate dissidents and reject out of hand any critical thoughts. This convenient function eliminates the task of further analysis or review of such thoughts and discourages independent logic. When you see this function at play, you’re witnessing a form of willful ignorance.
con·spir·a·cy noun \kən-ˈspir-ə-sē\
: a secret plan made by two or more people to do something that is harmful or illegal
: the act of secretly planning to do something that is harmful or illegal
Should anyone make the suggestion that Bin Laden’s nineteen hapless Saudis are one of the least feasible of conspiracy theories about 9/11, you get this condescending sidestep about how ‘some people just can’t accept that horrible things happen in the world’. Actually, what lies beneath the WTC demolition rubble is far more horrible and damning than an attack orchestrated by cave dwellers. That’s why the net is littered with armies of operatives and useful idiots attempting to debunk fundamental laws of physics. When justifying the extremely rapid rate of descent of World Trade Centers One, Two and Seven, they try to make mincemeat out of the conservation of momentum while constantly bargaining over how fast those buildings collapsed. This pathetic distraction only serves to delay the inevitable widespread realization that explosives were used to bring down the three WTC buildings.
This conspiracy label escape hatch has been used so often it’s become a crutch for the intellectually lazy. For example, watch Reuter’s reporter Andrew M. Seaman parrot the Jounal of the American Medical Association’s label of those who are skeptical of allopathic medicine as conspiracy theorists. Seaman states:
Like the theories about conspiracies to infect African Americans with HIV and to prevent citizens from accessing alternative medicines, the other theories on the list had mistrust of government and large organizations as themes.
Is a mistrust of government to adequately provide what’s best for a patient a conspiracy theory? Is government incompetence a secret plan by one or more to do something illegal? Is a large bureaucracy losing a patient’s records fit the definition of a conspiracy theory? Certainly not. If JAMA failed to make this distinction, then our minimal expectation of journalist Seaman is to raise the intellectual bar and acknowledge these differences.
The entirety of the quote above shows how those who like to bandy about the term “conspiracy theorist” also love to mix or associate the most feasible conspiracies with the more outlandish or controversial conspiracy theories. This technique is often used by the lord of cognitive infiltration himself, Cass Sunstein. Three hours before the Reuters article, Sunstein published an article called, “The Conspiracy of Conspiracy Theories” showcasing an analysis as hysterical as its title. For example:
People who believe that Osama bin Laden was already dead when U.S. forces invaded his compound are more likely to believe that he is still alive.
Apparently, when you’re attacking conspiracy theorists, it’s O.K. to defy logic. Those who remember Bin Laden’s kidney disorder and accept the obituaries and conventional knowledge of various statesmen and intelligence analysts that Bin Laden died in December of 2001 “are more likely to believe he is still alive”?
Further along in his new article:
“If you tend to think that the Apollo moon landings were faked, you are more likely to believe that the U.S. was behind the 9/11 attacks.”
Right. He sees lunar skeptics as even less credible than those who believe that “the U.S. was behind the 9/11 attacks.” Coming from Cass Sunstein, these clumsy comparisons are part of a greater propaganda message.
Sunstein, while serving under Obama as head of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, published an infamous paper in 2009 called “Conspiracy Theories: Causes and Cures”, which called for “cognitive infiltration” of 9/11 Truth groups. The purpose was to have infiltrating agents use covert propaganda to introduce distracting theories to discredit the groups and waste their time.
Desperate times call for desperate measures and we learned through the Snowden documents that the terrorists who took over this country have been performing the very tasks suggested by Sunstein’s illegal campaign since September 11, 2001. Sunstein appears to be taking on the role of promoting widespread acceptance of the use of covert propaganda to distract those seeking the truth about 9/11. This is a similar form of deception that was employed at the time of the 9/11 attacks and is part of the ongoing effort to protect the conventional least feasible conspiracy theory about 9/11. Facilitators of 9/11 continue to evade justice and show trials of tortured Muslim patsies in Guantanamo. As he served in his official capacity for the Obama administration, Cass Sunstein participated in promoting the political agenda of the terrorist attacks on 9/11.
Does that make him an American terrorist? Let’s say he takes the stand in a courtroom. To legally squirm out of the charge of accessory to terrorism, he could make two claims. First, he’ll state that the articles he published were not requested by the Obama administration and that he was just working in his own intellectual capacity. This despite the fact he was heading the “Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs”. The second, more dubious legal claim is ignorance. Sunstein, like so many others, would claim that he was so emotionally distraught, he betrayed his own intellect and abandoned what minimal scientific eduction he received in order to perform a therapeutic form of mental yoga. One defense we would never see is an analysis of the destruction of the three World Trade Center buildings. Imagine having Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth present their findings in a Sunstein libel hearing. A corrupt judiciary would pull out all the stops to prevent such a presentation from appearing on record. Their best tool so far is to engage in illegal, covert propaganda to confuse the public for as long as possible. The shelf-life of this tactic is already in sight.
“Conspiracy Theorist” has become such a hackneyed cliché that its effectiveness in alienating critics and discouraging scrutiny is starting to decay. It’s a term that immediately alerts the smarter half of the audience to watch for the propaganda.
UPDATE: This post used to state “It is illegal for the U.S. government to use propaganda against U.S. citizens.” That sentence was removed because it is in error. In July of 2013, the law barring domestic U.S. propaganda was repealed as part of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).