"If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stomping on a human face -forever." --George Orwell
Fight Orwell's vision, or get ready for a boot in your face!
Visibility 9-11 Welcomes Jon Gold
Interview by John Bursill
This week on Visibility 9-11 we have Jon Gold, a long-time 9/11 truth activist who is currently building bridges between the 9/11 truth movement and the peace movement. Jon talks about two very important and groundbreaking events that he is participating in March. The details are below.
This event brings together peace activists, whistleblowers, alternative media and 9/11 truth advocates to a conference discussing the issues and problems produced by the 9/11 attacks and cover-up. Jon will be the MC at this event and the speakers include Richard Gage AIA, Cindy Sheehan, Lt. Colonel Anthony Shaffer, Bob McIlvaine, Daniel Sunjata and Luke Rudkowski just to name a few! Neither left nor right, this gathering is truly groundbreaking.
Peace of the Action
Washington DC
Washington Memorial March 13th of March
Direct Acts of Resistance Begin on March 22nd
The bold plan to stop the Masters of War by bringing their system to its knees by peaceful resistance might just work! If Gandhi could do it so can Sheehan with our help and determination. Why not get a peace of this action yourself?
Jon will speaking about 9/11 at the Peace of the Action events.
At the end of the show we discuss good methods for reaching out to people who ordinarily wouldn’t be open to 9/11 truth. It should be noted that Jon is considered controversial by some in the 9/11 truth movement because of his very critical approach to the evidence of the crimes of 9/11. Jon prefers to stick to the facts that “speak for themselves” and Jon is not a promoter of the controlled demolition hypothesis. I and a great many others would agree that being careful with evidence is a must, although we would strongly argue that the destruction of WTC 7 does “speak for itself”; screaming out “Controlled Demolition!”. But as Jon likes to remind us, the advocacy of any particular hypothesis is not a prerequisite for being a 9/11 truth activist.
To listen to this program, click Play in the embedded player below. Click download if you would like to download the file for your media player or iPod.
Unplug the Signal: The Truth Will Not Be Televised by Nathan Janes PUPAGANDA.com
A flow of information is constantly streaming from the television set; a bombardment of words and pictures. The speed at which this information is communicated makes it easy for the signal to take control, switching the viewer’s brain to stand-by as information is absorbed without analysis or question. Today the television’s constant signal shapes the conclusions of the masses and produces the collective norm. The signal prescribes what is news and what is truth through the words of so-called experts and authorities, gelding the consciousness and independent thoughts of those subjected to it. Through television, the masses can be made to accept the most monstrous distortions of reality. The signal is a chill wind of continuous oppression over the minds of the masses. It controls the management of society and culture, creating uniformity across all subjects.
The fuel for this vehicle of mass deception is a technique known as perception management where an array of psychological techniques are used to alter the truth, leading the viewer to a desired conclusion. Some call this spin or propaganda while others know it as lying. According to Joseph Goebbels, Propaganda Minister for Adolph Hitler, “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it… It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” Most of what can be found on the nightly news is nothing but advertisements selling more government and a false reality that benefits only those in control. Television is the dictator of information; newspaper and radio are the whisper campaign of the television’s message.
An Honest Skeptic’s View of the Great American Conspiracies: Lincoln to 9/11 – Interview with Dr Stephen Juan
Interview by John Bursill
It is a great pleasure to welcome bestselling author, media personality and lecturer Dr Stephen Juan to Visibility 9-11 to talk about “honest” skepticism of the great American conspiracies. This is a very interesting interview as we touch on many common themes in historical events setting the climate for the 9/11 Attacks. We explore the Lincoln assassination, the sinking of the Maine and Lusitania, Pearl Harbor and the JFK assassination. It is also a little special in my view as this skepticism is being presented in a balanced and conservative way by an intellectual who is not connected to the 9/11 Truth Movement, but rather to the mainstream.
The views expressed and questions asked by Dr Juan are really what we should be hearing from the broader academically based media communities, publications and personalities, but we most certainly and unfortunately are not. As far as I know, with this broadcast, he is the first Australian media science personality to honestly question the official story of 9/11. Please may there be more to follow soon! Dr Juan makes it clear that he is not an expert in these matters but he follows the principles of scientific research when reviewing events like 9/11. In the last part of the interview, Dr Juan says he has many questions around the building collapses appearing to him to be “controlled demolitions…hello” and he thinks that the supporting evidence for the government’s account is often simply ridiculous in nature. Dr Juan believes it is very important for us all be skeptical of our government’s excuses to go to war based on his experience and that “conspiracy theorists” should be taken seriously when serious questions remain unanswered.
Dr Juan says the truth about 9/11 is coming out much quicker than it did with the JFK assassination; so we the truth seekers should remain optimistic that the truth will out and he encourages us that many in what he calls the “underground corporate media” are trying to raise awareness of these issues when possible, sometimes indirectly. He also explains from his experience in the media that these opportunities for the truth of 9/11 are very difficult to come across. To find more about Dr Juan please visit his Wiki page or his website.
At the beginning of the show I mention the shock illness of Janette MacKinlay and that our best wishes are with her at this worrying time. For more info see www.911blogger.com/node/22568.
FEAL GOOD FOUNDATION RESPONSE TO NEWS THAT THE PRESIDENT of the UNITED STATES DOES NOT SUPPORT H.R. 847
Dear Fellow First Responder:
As you may already know, today we have learned that President Barack Obama no longer supports H.R. 847, the Congressional bill that would guarantee funding for health care and research. While this news is stunning, and a complete reversal of his position on this bill during his 2008 presidential campaign, please be assured that the Feal Good Foundation alongside its friends in labor and the N.Y. Congressional Delegation will continue to fight for this bill and to advocate for full Presidential support. Our fight is not over.
Nearly eight and one half years ago we, the First Responder Community, demonstrated our strength, resilience and determination of spirit following September 11th. We must do so again. While the President’s current stance on H.R. 847 represents an obstacle, we have surmounted such obstacles before and will continue to overcome them now. “Never Forget” is more than a campaign slogan or bumper sticker to the men and women who bravely immersed themselves into the toxic Ground Zero air to save the lives of strangers and rebuild New York City and this country. We will “Never Forget” and today I tell all those opposed to H.R. 847 “We Will Never Give Up.”
H.R. 847 is about guaranteed health care treatment, monitoring and research; nothing more, nothing less. We have witnessed First Responder after First Responder fall victim to 9/11 illnesses over the past several years. Just this week another firefighter and friend perished as a result of his heroic actions. While the White House and detractors of H.R. 847 are quick to point out that treatment for First Responders currently exists at the Centers of Excellence, such arguments are missing the central mandate of the bill – guarantees!
The reluctance of the White House to support this bill merely 8 ½ years after the worst terrorist attack on United States soil merely solidifies the need for guaranteed care now. Shall we rely on “discretionary budgetary spending” twenty years from now when the World Trade Center attack is a distant memory to new administrations?
Are we to trust that presidents in the years to come will allocate sufficient funding for treatment and research when we are already being told that current administrations “don’t have the money to make us healthy? We cannot and will not give up hope that this government will recognize its moral imperative to care for the World Trade Center First Responders.
The Feal Good Foundation will not give up its efforts on behalf of the First Responders. It is our sincere hope that you will continue to join us in our quest for justice.
The Obama administration stunned New York’s delegation yesterday, dropping the bombshell news that it does not support funding the 9/11 health bill.
The state’s two senators and 14 House members met with Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius just hours before President Obama implored in his speech to the nation for Congress to come together and deliver a government that delivers on its promises to the American people.
So the legislators were floored to learn the Democratic administration does not want to deliver for the tens of thousands of people who sacrificed after 9/11, and the untold numbers now getting sick.
“I was stunned — and very disappointed,” said Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, who like most of the other legislators had expected more of a discussion on how to more forward.
“To say the least, I was flabbergasted,” said Staten Island Rep. Mike McMahon.
The 9/11 bill would spend about $11 billion over 30 years to care for the growing numbers of people getting sick from their service at Ground Zero, and to compensate families for their losses.
In this episode of Visibility 9-11, John Bursill welcomes Richard Gage AIA back to the program. This interview was inspired by the recent news that Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth had reach the milestone of 1,000 qualified and licensed members. Gage who is an experienced San Francisco Architect, member of the American Institute of Architects and the founder of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth describes some of the groups recent success’s world wide and talks about his recent tour of Australia, New Zealand and Japan. We hear about the up coming Press Conference planned next month to announce the 1,000 A & E members to the world, which includes approximately 40 Structural Engineers. Richard also mentions some celebrations that are planned for the A & E members, please see the site for more details www.AE911Truth.org
Later in the show Bursill and Gage discuss the recent debate between him and explosives expert Ron Craig and what was learned by the encounter. They also touch on the issue of the CIT “flyover” and “what hit the Pentagon”. Gage makes it clear that he does not think that the “flyover” is proven and that he does not support CIT. Gage says he does not know what did or did not hit the Pentagon.
Towards the end of this interview Gage joins Bursill in a call for support of www.911Truth.org and Janice Matthews and they also call for direct financial support for the ongoing work that the Architects and Engineers Group continue to do, day in and day out until justice.
From their apartment, Dawn Vignola and her roommate Hugh ‘Tim’ Timmerman saw American Flight 77 hit the Pentagon, September 11, 2001. Shortly afterward, they gave witness accounts to local and national TV media. In 2007, they were interviewed by Citizen Investigation Team (CIT), who attempted to discredit their testimony. I interviewed Dawn and her husband, Dan Ferrigno, January 5, 2010 at that same apartment and found them credible; they talked openly with me, their accounts have not changed since they were first offered, and I saw for myself that Dawn and Tim could have easily seen what they claimed to have seen.
On September 11, 2001 Dawn Vignola shared a 16th floor apartment with Hugh ‘Tim’ Timmerman, in Arlington, VA, which overlooked the Pentagon and the surrounding area. They were both at home, and Dawn was on the phone with her husband, Dan Ferrigno, because of what was happening in New York. She saw the plane approaching out the West window, over the top of a line of trees, and then it turned East. She could see the AA, and in the bright sun the plane appeared to be white. (See here for photos of the Boeing 757 N64AA, the plane that was American 77 on 9/11; notice how it appears white in the photos where there is direct sun on it). It was flying above the line of trees and buildings, and seemed to be over 395 or Columbia Pike.
As the plane disappeared from view past the window’s North edge, she went over to the window on the North side and watched for the plane, which she had noticed was flying unusually low; she and Tim were accustomed to seeing airplanes flying over the area, including over the Pentagon, as Reagan National Airport is close by. She saw the plane cross in front of the Sheraton Hotel on Columbia Pike, then it disappeared from view behind some nearby buildings. She watched for it to appear in view on the other side of a neighboring apartment building; it did, and she and Tim saw it impact the Pentagon, about 3/4 of a mile away. They did not see the plane fly over- in fact, it hit so low at the base, it looked like it hit the heliport first.
At the time, there was only vacant land and buildings under construction in between their building and the Pentagon, and these did not obstruct their view of the heliport. Since then, shorter buildings have been built in that area, but they still can still clearly see the upper floors of the Pentagon. In person everything appears much larger and clearer than it does on the accompanying video; when the camera is zoomed in, it actually gives a better idea of how large everything appears in person. Dawn and Tim had a clear view of the impact side and the airspace over the Pentagon, and would have seen the plane fly over- or seen something else hit- if that had happened. In addition, Dan’s office across the Potomac River had a view of the airspace over the Pentagon; he was looking at it while on the phone with Dawn, and saw the black smoke rising, but did not see a plane flying over or away from the Pentagon.
This photo gives an approximate idea of how large the Pentagon appears from Dawn and Dan’s apartment, but still does not accurately convey how clear everything appears in person (also note that the shorter buildings in the middle were not there on 9/11; the view of the heliport was not obstructed):
This Google Earth image shows Dawn Vignola’s apartment and the line of sight to the Pentagon, as it was on 9/11/01. As can be seen from this photo, the area between her apartment and the Pentagon was largely vacant, with some construction going on:
Shortly after they saw the impact, Dawn called WUSA, the local CBS channel, and was interviewed live on the air. Tim was listening to the questions as they were asked by the TV reporter, and he can be heard in the background offering his input to Dawn, some of which she passed on over the phone. Later, Tim was interviewed by CNN. Dawn’s account has not changed since that interview; it is the same account she gave to Citizen Investigation Team in 2007 (judging by what CIT has said about it), and the same account that was given to me. Dawn is no longer in contact with Hugh ‘Tim’ Timmerman. There are a number of hits for ‘Hugh Timmerman’ online, but I did not attempt to track him down for comment; CIT has said they could not locate him.
Since 9/11, various people have claimed that AA 77 did not crash into the Pentagon. As there are numerous witness accounts of an AA 757 crashing into the Pentagon, some crash skeptics have questioned those accounts. For instance, in the case of Dawn’s account, blogger Steven Welch alleged that Tim was ‘coaching’ Dawn in her account, and claimed neither testimony could be considered credible. And, according to Dawn and Dan in my interview of them, when Craig Ranke and Aldo Marquis (CIT) interviewed them in November 2007, Craig and Aldo were not simply interested in receiving Dawn’s account and verifying the view from the apartment. Rather, they sought information that would support their theory that the plane known as AA 77 had flown over the Pentagon, dismissed the elements of Dawn’s testimony that did not support this theory and attempted to persuade Dawn and Dan they were mistaken and their theory was correct. (For 2 sides to this story, see the ‘Plan271’ thread at CIT’s forum)
CIT insists they’re objective and have not done anything improper in their investigation and reporting. For instance, in a 12/12/09 podcast interview by Paul Tassopulos, Craig Ranke said, “Citizen Investigation Team, myself and Aldo Marquis, have been to Arlington, Virginia several times to interview dozens of eyewitnesses to the Pentagon attack. We went there with no pre-conceived notions about what happened- we went there with no particular theory in mind. Our entire goal was to objectively ask the people on the street what they saw, and report it, and let the chips fall where they may.” (2:05) However, it is clearly not the case that they went to Arlington with “no pre-conceived notions about what happened”; as early as 1/11/06, before Craig and Aldo joined the Loose Change forum, Aldo Marquis had posted an article online titled “Meet Agent Lloyd A. England (Pentagon Plant)“. Lloyd England says the plane knocked a light pole through his cab’s windshield, and numerous photos place him, his damaged cab and a broken light pole at the scene. Aldo attempted to show that England could not be telling the truth about what happened, and that the scene was staged. If the plane knocked the light pole through the windshield of England’s cab, the plane was on the ‘South of Citgo’ path, (not on the ‘North of Citgo’ path, as CIT claims certain other witness accounts prove), and this disproves CIT’s ‘flyover’ theory. And according to Pentagon crash witness Mike Walter, when he met Craig and Aldo at his barbeque on the first trip to Arlington, “They were saying things like, ‘Are you sure the plane didn’t land [at Reagan airport] and they set off a bomb?’ They kept coming up with all these scenarios.”
Dawn and Dan invited Craig and Aldo into their apartment, talked with them at length and gave them permission to record the view from their apartment, but declined to be interviewed on camera, as Dawn was close to 9 mo. pregnant at the time, and felt it would be invasive of her personal privacy. CIT recorded conversation at the apartment anyway, (and their phone conversations), without Dawn and Dan’s knowledge or consent. In a comment thread at 911Blogger, Craig Ranke acknowledged this at least in part, saying, “Obviously while we video taped her POV with her consent after being invited to her home our discussion with her at the time was recorded by the video camera. And we most certainly did record our initial conversations on the phone with her as we do with EVERY phone call we make in our investigation.”
“One-party consent” is all that’s required in Federal jurisdictions and 38 states, but there are differing opinions on whether it’s ethical for journalists to record subjects without their knowledge or consent; “Some journalists see taping as an indispensable tool, while others don’t like the formality it may impose during an interview. Some would not consider taping a call without the subject’s consent, others do it routinely.” Craig Ranke defended CIT doing it, stating that in Virginia “one party consent” to a conversation being recorded is all that’s required by law (true), and that they do this “so nobody can falsely accuse us of behaving inappropriately or saying or doing something underhanded or deceptive.”
CIT also recorded a conversation with Lloyd England without his knowledge or consent, and released it (in part), claiming it was a “virtual confession” and that it supported their previously-issued charge that he is an “accomplice” to the 9/11 attacks and subsequent cover up. (See this discussion thread at 911Blogger for alternative views on whether Lloyd England’s statements are a “virtual confession”). It seems another reason CIT might record interviewees without their consent or knowledge is the potential for capturing bits of unguarded conversation which they can represent as damaging to the credibility of witnesses whose testimony contradicts their ‘flyover theory’; certainly they’ve demonstrated they will release recordings if they think it does. As CIT haven’t released their recordings of Dawn and Dan, it may be there’s simply nothing on them they feel would work to their advantage if released. CIT expert Adam Larson (no relation) has documented a consistent pattern of CIT attempts to dismiss or discredit witness accounts that support the ‘South of Citgo’ path or plane hitting the Pentagon; 33 cases, including Dawn Vignola, Tim Timmerman and Lloyd England: CIT WITNESS VERIFICATION PART III: ROUGHSHOD OVER THE SUSPICIOUS ONES.
On 11/29/07, CIT published an entry on their forum titled Details of our Nov 2007 research trip to Arlington, more data proving a deception, and included this statement regarding their interview of Dawn: “Previously published witness Dawn Vignola who was coached by her former roomate [sic] Hugh Tim Timmerman on the radio as an eyewitness declined to be interviewed on camera but let us into her Pentagon City high rise apartment to get shots of her POV and the one of the best possible views of the the event from high up. Dawn swears that the plane was white and although with her panoramic view she got a great look at it approaching from a ways away, once it got near the Pentagon it was obscured by the building in front of her until a split second before the explosion. She says it hit the heliport. We know this isn’t true because there was no damage to the heliport so likely the explosion and fireball simply concealed what the plane really did.”
Following this, on 1/15/08, on CIT’s forum, Aldo Marquis posted an entry titled, Witnesses List Broken Down, No such thing as 104 “impact” witnesses, and under a sub-heading for witnesses categorized as, “Only saw plane (possibly from far away location), could not see pentagon, light poles or impact, either deduced or are lying OR do not directly mention or CONFIRM seeing an impact”, he listed Dawn Vignola as “(TALKED TO by CIT, claimed the plane was white seemed unsure of final position)”
1/21/08, ‘plan271’ confronted Craig and Aldo on the CIT forum regarding inaccurate/misleading statements about ‘coaching’, the view Dawn and Tim had of the plane, the Pentagon and the crash, and what they had said about it. Craig and Aldo defended making an issue out of Tim interjecting comments during Dawn’s TV interview, although in dialogue with plan271 they referred to it as Tim ‘helping’ Dawn. They also denied accusing Dawn and Tim of lying, but continued to insist they could not have seen what they said they saw:
Craig Ranke, 1/21/08: “As soon as we saw the view from their apartment I knew instantly that there is no way she would have been able to physically see an impact and could only have deduced it based off the explosion.”
Aldo Marquis, 1/21/08: “We believe Timmerman and Vignola merely deduced the impact.”
12/5/08 (perhaps earlier) CIT posted this .gif of video from Dawn and Dan’s apartment:
Notice this was filmed wide angle, from the middle of the apartment (not from Dawn’s vantage point); this gives uncritical viewer’s the impression that Dawn and Tim could barely see the Pentagon, which is not true.
Dawn and Dan are aware of the allegations and misrepresentations regarding Dawn and Tim’s accounts. Dawn told me that after seeing the plane crash into the Pentagon, she felt it was important to alert the media, but hadn’t expected to be put on the air live, and had not wanted to attract attention. But now they’re part of the controversy over ‘what’ hit the Pentagon.* Dawn and Dan OK’d my coming to their apartment to record the view and spoke with me for over an hour, but due to their experience with CIT, they did not want the conversation recorded, and I didn’t. As Dawn explained in a January 2, 2010 email to Michael Wolsey, which she authorized for public release, “I am now hesitant to have a telephone conversation recorded or even to be interviewed since my experience has been that I cannot trust how it will loaded onto the Internet or whether others will be able to access it and then edit it, unjustly, for their own pursuits. The last time I trusted someone in this sort of matter, in particular Craig and Aldo, I found my words being distorted, taken out of context, and/or insinuations that I meant something other than what I said.” In the near future, Dawn and Dan will be launching a website that will host photos, video, Dawn’s personal account written down shortly after witnessing the Pentagon crash, and other related material, in an effort to set the record straight.
For more information on Citizen Investigation Team, see the articles written by Arabesque and Adam Larson.
*NOTE: This article was written to shed light on Dawn Vignola’s and Tim Timmerman’s witness accounts, and the manner in which CIT has conducted its investigation and reporting. I support independent research and investigation of 9/11, and there are many reasons to question the official version of events. I take issue with selective interpretation of evidence, absolute claims regarding events for which contradictory or incomplete evidence exists, and the promotion of speculation as fact.
Certainly, the US government should release all photos, video and documentation related to ‘what’ hit the Pentagon. By withholding evidence, the US government is diminishing its credibility, as well as fueling the controversy about ‘what’ hit, and this in turn has distracted from larger questions, including the questions about why the Pentagon was hit at all; about the reason there was no air defense over D.C. more than half an hour after the second WTC impact, close to an hour and a half after the first signs of hijacking, after a ‘summer of threat’ that included warnings from different nations about an impending attack on the US using planes, when the CIA, FBI, NSA and SOCOM had developed their own intelligence on the impending plot, when the FAA, NMCC, NORAD and NEADS have procedures that enable quick interception of aircraft and had known for decades of attempts to use aircraft as missiles, and when the NSC and White House were aware of “patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York.” (Aug 6 PDB)
The 9/11 Commission omitted and distorted facts that are part of the public record, including in its own and other government reports. The Complete 9/11 Timeline at HistoryCommons.org gives a comprehensive overview of what’s known about 9/11 and related entities and events, based on ‘mainstream’ sources. In addition, 9/11 Research, and the Journal of 9/11 Studies, document many unanswered questions and disturbing facts related to the total destruction of WTC 1, 2 & 7, and about NIST’s investigation of same. The big picture and thousands of details make the case that there needs to be a full, independent investigation of 9/11, before that day- or any other terrorist attack- are used again to justify increased funding for the military-industrial complex, foreign interventions, and draconian domestic security measures.
As part of a new series of interviews from Visibility 9-11 with Michael Wolsey, Guest Host John Bursill talks to 911Truth.org Executive Director, Janice Matthews.
In the first part of this wide ranging interview Janice talks about “The Hard Evidence Tour Down Under” in Australia and New Zealand in which she participated. She also touches on conversations she had with other speakers in Sydney about what’s working for 9/11 Truth and what 911Truth.org means to them now and what role it should play in the future. See www.TheHardEvidence.com for more on the tour, and also Janice’s brief report at http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20091124044913656.
John in the second half puts Janice on the spot with questions about our direction as a movement and the problems we continue to face with disinformation, like the continually reoccurring theme “the Jews did 9/11″. John expresses strongly his view that we as a movement must try to be “reasonable” with our approach to evidence and when considering what is worthy of public consumption.
Janice wraps up the interview talking about her belief that structural system change comes about only through personal resistance and how 9/11 truth as a specific issue helps build the broad understanding and participation needed to bring about this larger change.
To comment on this interview John Bursill can be contacted at johnbursill [at] gmail.com and Janice Matthews can be contacted at janice [at] 911truth.org.
Intermission music by Judith.
Ending music by AC/DC.
Obama staffer wants ‘cognitive infiltration’ of 9/11 conspiracy groups By Daniel Tencer Wednesday, January 13th, 2010 The Raw Story
In a 2008 academic paper, President Barack Obama’s appointee to head the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs advocated “cognitive infiltration” of groups that advocate “conspiracy theories” like the ones surrounding 9/11.
Cass Sunstein, a Harvard law professor, co-wrote an academic article entitled “Conspiracy Theories: Causes and Cures,” in which he argued that the government should stealthily infiltrate groups that pose alternative theories on historical events via “chat rooms, online social networks, or even real-space groups and attempt to undermine” those groups.
As head of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Sunstein is in charge of “overseeing policies relating to privacy, information quality, and statistical programs,” according to the White House Web site.
Sunstein’s article, published in the Journal of Political Philosphy in 2008 and recently uncovered by blogger Marc Estrin, states that “our primary claim is that conspiracy theories typically stem not from irrationality or mental illness of any kind but from a ‘crippled epistemology,’ in the form of a sharply limited number of (relevant) informational sources.”
By “crippled epistemology” Sunstein means that people who believe in conspiracy theories have a limited number of sources of information that they trust. Therefore, Sunstein argued in the article, it would not work to simply refute the conspiracy theories in public — the very sources that conspiracy theorists believe would have to be infiltrated.
Sunstein, whose article focuses largely on the 9/11 conspiracy theories, suggests that the government “enlist nongovernmental officials in the effort to rebut the theories. It might ensure that credible independent experts offer the rebuttal, rather than government officials themselves. There is a tradeoff between credibility and control, however. The price of credibility is that government cannot be seen to control the independent experts.”
Sunstein argued that “government might undertake (legal) tactics for breaking up the tight cognitive clusters of extremist theories.” He suggested that “government agents (and their allies) might enter chat rooms, online social networks, or even real-space groups and attempt to undermine percolating conspiracy theories by raising doubts about their factual premises, causal logic or implications for political action.”
“We expect such tactics from undercover cops, or FBI,” Estrin writes at the Rag Blog, expressing surprise that “a high-level presidential advisor” would support such a strategy.
Estrin notes that Sunstein advocates in his article for the infiltration of “extremist” groups so that it undermines the groups’ confidence to the extent that “new recruits will be suspect and participants in the group’s virtual networks will doubt each other’s bona fides.”
Sunstein has been the target of numerous “conspiracy theories” himself, mostly from the right wing political echo chamber, with conservative talking heads claiming he favors enacting “a second Bill of Rights” that would do away with the Second Amendment. Sunstein’s recent book, On Rumors: How Falsehoods Spread, Why We Believe Them, What Can Be Done, was criticized by some on the right as “a blueprint for online censorship.”
Sunstein “wants to hold blogs and web hosting services accountable for the remarks of commenters on websites while altering libel laws to make it easier to sue for spreading ‘rumors,’” wrote Ed Lasky at American Thinker.
Additions to the Journal of 9/11 Studies, and thoughts for 2Kten
by Dr. Steven E. Jones Journal of 9-11 Studies
I am pleased to announce the translation of the peer-reviewed article on “Active Thermitic Materials” by Prof. Niels Harrit et al. into Spanish and German, published in the Journal of 9/11 Studies:
May I take this occasion to wish all of you a Happy New Year.
In the past I have urged all to acquire at least a three-month (preferably 1-year) supply of food and water, wherever this is legal. Now to add to this – I urge you to have a rural place of safety to go quickly to, perhaps in groups of families or friends, far away from the large cities. In a case where trucking of food into the cities is curtailed, or the electric power is out, or an EMP blast, or any number of scenarios where services to cities are cut, it will clearly be prudent to have pre-arranged retreat(s). The goals of self-sufficiency and voluntary-simplicity that some have been discussing “theoretically” in the Truth Movement for years can be quickly achieved with pre-planning and work and cooperation.
I anticipate an adventuresome 2010, for I think the next several years will prove an adventure for all of us. We’re in it together.
Steven E. Jones
In an effort that has stretched nearly a decade, some families of 9/11 victims have fought to have the remains of their relatives identified and put to rest.
In 2002, they organized as the WTC Families for Proper Burial Inc. They sued the city in 2005, then appealed after they lost in 2008.
On Wednesday, in a spirited hearing interrupted occasionally by gasps, a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit listened to arguments on behalf of the 17 plaintiffs in what is quite likely their final legal chance. The families seek to have nearly one million tons of material from Fresh Kills on Staten Island, where debris from the World Trade Center collapse was taken, moved to a nearby site so it can be sifted and put in a cemetery.
“It comes down to this: Are we prepared to leave hundreds of body parts and human remains on top of a garbage dump?” said Norman Siegel, the lawyer for the plaintiffs, arguing that to do less would deprive relatives of their constitutional rights.
The group of plaintiffs, which says it has support from 1,000 other relatives, was challenging a July 2008 decision by Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein of Federal District Court, who found that city workers had done everything in their power to find remains.
But as it did last year, the city argues that the plaintiffs have no claims to the remains because they cannot prove they belong to their relatives, which also makes them ineligible to bring a complaint on behalf of non-family members. The removal would also be too costly, the city says.
In the hearing’s sharpest exchange, when Judge Anthony O. Calabrese Jr. asked what it would take to prove someone’s identity, James E. Tyrrell, a lawyer representing the city, said, “You have to be able to particularize and say it’s your body part.”
“All that’s left here is a bunch of undifferentiated dust,” Mr. Tyrrell added, eliciting gasps and muttered “no’s” from a crowd whose members wore laminated photos of deceased relatives around their necks.
But Diane Horning of Scotch Plains, N.J., whose son Matthew worked on the 95th floor of the north tower, said she found many trade center-related items at the landfill on dozens of trips there. She produced some of them outside the courtroom.
A corroded key, marked with the words “World Trade Center,” came from a gulley formed after a rainstorm, she said. In a plastic bag, there were two sizeable bone fragments that Ms. Horning said came from Fresh Kills, though she had never had them tested for DNA to see if they belonged to victims of 9/11.
With methane gas bubbling up from the soil there, “it’s a disrespectful, dishonorable place,” said Ms. Horning, the president of the group.
During the hearing, which was also presided over by Judge José A. Cabranes and Judge Barrington D. Parker, Mr. Siegel accused the city of reneging on its promise to set aside victims’ remains, a change in policy that he said happened in July 2002.
“They commingled it, and then they dumped it,” Mr. Siegel said of the remains’ being mixed with household trash, adding that a Fresh Kills worker had witnessed city employees use that mixture to fill potholes.
The reference brought a shake of the head from Valerie Speller, who was there to honor her brother John Candela, who worked in the north tower.
“I think the whole thing’s pretty deplorable,” Ms. Speller said after the hearing. “I don’t think there was any human compassion from the city.”
the contrarian – The Truth About Pearl Harbor
December 07, 2009
by Dave McGill gather.com
Today lives in infamy, but not for the reasons you’ve been told. The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, exactly 68 years ago today, was not an unprovoked, dastardly assault on an unsuspecting nation. It was a carefully orchestrated trap, engineered by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt. FDR’s purpose was to overcome domestic opposition to America’s involvement in the European war thousands of miles from the Pacific isles.
A tri-party agreement between Japan, Germany and Italy, executed one year earlier, gave Roosevelt the key he needed to get into Europe through the “back door.” The agreement stipulated that a war against any one of the parties would be considered to be a war against all three.
These facts would still be buried in the dustbin of history but for some sixteen years of work by author Robert Stinnett, uncovering and examining documents under the Freedom of Information Act. His eventual book on the subject is entitled Day of Deceit.
Because of the controversial nature of the information uncovered, Stinnett’s findings were subjected to considerable scrutiny before being endorsed and promoted by the Independent Institute of Washington, D.C., an organization that sponsors studies by top scholars on major policy issues.
The Independent Institute has a reputation for adhering to high standards in its pursuit of the truth, regardless of public opinion, political implications or social considerations.
It’s an indisputable fact of history that, prior to Pearl Harbor, Americans were very much against getting involved in “Europe’s war.” The isolationist movement was spearheaded by, among others, the Hearst newspaper chain, Henry Ford, the American hero Charles Lindbergh, and many of the nation‘s business and financial leaders, including Prescott Bush, grandfather of ex-President George W. Bush.
“Earlier this year I wrote a review of CIT’s “National Security Alert” in which I recommended that we all take a closer look at the eyewitness accounts supporting the “North path” of American Airlines Flight 77 at the Pentagon. CIT’s investigation includes detailed in-person interviews which appeared quite compelling. As AE911Truth’s focus is the destruction of three buildings at WTC, I didn’t perform an exhaustive review of CIT’s material and methods. My quick statement should not be portrayed as an endorsement of CIT’s conclusion that the airliner ‘flew over’ the Pentagon.”
Richard Gage, AIA, Architect
Founder of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth
Boiling Frogs Post is an online news, editorial, analysis, and Podcast interview site covering select but significant blacked out stories and issues, while defying blinded partisanship. Each one of our partner investigative journalists brings 20+ years of investigative journalism experience in reporting controversial and daring topics. Our weekly Podcast interview series, the Boiling Frogs Show, features in depth original interviews with well-respected and controversial guests.
This site has been set up to bring together members of the irate minority club: Those who have gotten tired of the very-dependent mainstream media & and the agenda-driven and partisan pseudo alternative fluff sites. We may be the irate minority out there, but over here we are the majority, so we rule. Together we hope to increase our numbers and take back our hijacked nation.
Sibel Edmonds is the founder and president of the National Security Whistleblowers Coalition (NSWBC), a nonprofit organization dedicated to aiding national security whistleblowers. She has appeared on national radio and TV as a commentator on matters related to whistleblowers, national security, and excessive secrecy & classification, and has been featured on CBS 60 Minutes, CNN, MSNBC, NPR, and in the New York Times, Washington Post, Vanity Fair, The American Conservative, and others. Her book, ‘Shooting the Messenger’, co-authored with Professor William Weaver, is forthcoming from Kansas University Press in the fall of 2010.
PEN American Center awarded Ms. Edmonds the 2006 PEN/Newman’s Own First Amendment Award for her “commitment to preserving the free flow of information in the United States in a time of growing international isolation and increasing government secrecy”. She is also the recipient of the 2004 Sam Adams Foundation Award.
Ms. Edmonds worked as a language specialist for the FBI’s Washington Field Office. During her work with the bureau, she discovered and reported serious acts of security breaches, cover-ups, and intentional blocking of intelligence that had national security implications. After she reported these acts to FBI management, she was retaliated against and ultimately fired in March 2002. Since that time, court proceedings on her issues have been blocked by the assertion of “State Secrets Privilege”, and the Congress of the United States has been gagged and prevented from any discussion of her case through retroactive re-classification issued by the Department of Justice.
Ms. Edmonds began her career in 1993 as Project Director for the Rostropovich Foundation, a non-profit humanitarian organization providing medical and food aid to children of the former Soviet Union. She re-located to St. Petersburg, Russia and managed correspondence, shipments, inventory and security precautions in the largest children’s hospital in St. Petersburg. Later, she worked as the Executive Director & Co-Founder of Edmonds Industries, a Consulting and Holding Company, investing in international business and residential real estate development. Ms. Edmonds also worked as a volunteer for the Alexandria CASA program (Court Appointed Special Advocate) for abused children, and as an instructor for the Alexandria Office on Women’s Domestic Violence Program.
Ms. Edmonds has a MA in Public Policy and International Commerce from George Mason University, a BA in Criminal Justice and Psychology from George Washington University, and AA degree in Science from NVCC. She is certified as a Court Appointed Special Advocate and as an instructor for the Women’s Domestic Violence Program. She is fluent in Turkish, Farsi and Azerbaijani.
This week on Visibility 9-11 we have Jon Gold, a long-time 9/11 truth activist who is currently building bridges between the 9/11 truth movement and the peace movement. Jon talks about two very important and groundbreaking events that he is participating in March. The details are below.
