Skip to content

9/11 – A Cheap Magic Trick

How false flag attacks are manufactured by the world's elite.

Former Congressman and 2012 Presidential Candidate Ron Paul believes you deserve to know what’s in the 28 pages of the 9/11 report that have been classified since the report was issued in 2002.

Though criticism has come to those who are certain that we do not know the full story of what happened that fateful day, it is important for us to set aside the conjecture and come together on the principle that we must always seek the truth.

Members of Congress are pushing to bring the truth to light, and they need your support. Congressman Walter Jones (R-NC) and Congressman Stephen Lynch (D-Mass.) introduced legislation at the end of 2013—H. Res. 428—to get the administration to reveal the redacted information from the 9/11 report.

Jenna Orkin is the author of “The Moron’s Guide To Global Collapse.” After 9/11, she was among the first to question the EPA’s announcement that the air was safe to breathe. She went on to co-found the World Trade Center Environmental Organization as well as other lower Manhattan activist organizations that revealed and testified to the EPA’s lies. Later, she wrote for fromthewilderness.com, the website founded by 9/11 investigative journalist Mike Ruppert who sadly killed himself in April of this year.

The Liberal Delusions That Provoked Putin

By John J. Mearsheimer
September/October 2014 Issue
Foreign Affairs

According to the prevailing wisdom in the West, the Ukraine crisis can be blamed almost entirely on Russian aggression. Russian President Vladimir Putin, the argument goes, annexed Crimea out of a long-standing desire to resuscitate the Soviet empire, and he may eventually go after the rest of Ukraine, as well as other countries in eastern Europe. In this view, the ouster of Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych in February 2014 merely provided a pretext for Putin’s decision to order Russian forces to seize part of Ukraine.

But this account is wrong: the United States and its European allies share most of the responsibility for the crisis. The taproot of the trouble is NATO enlargement, the central element of a larger strategy to move Ukraine out of Russia’s orbit and integrate it into the West. At the same time, the EU’s expansion eastward and the West’s backing of the pro-democracy movement in Ukraine — beginning with the Orange Revolution in 2004 — were critical elements, too. Since the mid-1990s, Russian leaders have adamantly opposed NATO enlargement, and in recent years, they have made it clear that they would not stand by while their strategically important neighbor turned into a Western bastion. For Putin, the illegal overthrow of Ukraine’s democratically elected and pro-Russian president — which he rightly labeled a “coup” — was the final straw. He responded by taking Crimea, a peninsula he feared would host a NATO naval base, and working to destabilize Ukraine until it abandoned its efforts to join the West.

Putin’s pushback should have come as no surprise. After all, the West had been moving into Russia’s backyard and threatening its core strategic interests, a point Putin made emphatically and repeatedly. Elites in the United States and Europe have been blindsided by events only because they subscribe to a flawed view of international politics. They tend to believe that the logic of realism holds little relevance in the twenty-first century and that Europe can be kept whole and free on the basis of such liberal principles as the rule of law, economic interdependence, and democracy.

Read more

Aug 16, 2014
Falguni A. Sheth

Here’s why I’ll never have mercy on torturers — no matter what any of our presidents might say

Obama Guantanamo Bay

About a week ago, for the first time ever, the U.S. government, through the comments of its chief executive no less, confirmed that “folks were tortured.” Simultaneously, he observed that there ”was little need for sanctimony” given the heightened fears of the American public in the wake of the 9/11 attacks and the enormous pressure that law enforcement officials were under to prevent future attacks.

The president’s official confirmation that “folks” were tortured and not just undergoing “enhanced interrogation techniques” was remarkable. His words were striking not so much because the public learned something new, but because they should have ramifications for those who designed, justified and endorsed torture as part the U.S.’s national security strategy to combat terrorism.

For those who provide the legal cover for torture, including John Yoo and Jay Bybee, there might be some fear that an official U.S. confirmation of torture will have ramifications for them. But they claim not to be afraid of prosecution. Given the soothing, exculpatory tone of the president’s remarks and Attorney General Eric Holder’s lapdoggish compliance, (despite his resolute acknowledgment in 2009 that waterboarding is torture), they have every reason to believe it.

Yet, his remarks are notably deceptive on a number of fronts. The president’s remarks suggest that torture was an accidental practice, one deployed under pressure and randomly, rather than in the way that we understand now, as intentional and systematic. In fact, we have had official confirmation of torture since at least 2004, when pictures revealed the abuses of prisoners in Abu Ghraib. We also know that the plan to engage in torture was not the result of passion and mere patriotism. Rather, it was part of a series of policies that were designed to evade the charge of torture. These plans were carried out systematically by the CIA staff under the instruction and endorsement of high-level Bush administration officials (despite their denials). The CIA had the approval, the endorsement and the “legal” architecture of a policy to conduct intentional, deliberate, systematic torture of enemy combatants.

Read more

Aug. 16, 2014
Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth

banner-911-G-4-America-web
Most Americans celebrating Independence Day last month were feeling patriotic, but we’re guessing they also had a sobering sense that things are not quite right in their country these days — that their historic freedoms are slipping away, one by one. So, in an attempt to help our fellow citizens reclaim their constitutional and civil rights, we in the 9/11 Truth Movement spent the Fourth of July articulating the country’s deep-seated concerns, ranging from loss of civil liberties and NSA spying to a $4.5 trillion war on terror, torture, and assassination by drones. And, more importantly, we offered an explanation and a solution.

The new brochure is positive, colorful, and catchy. Keep the momentum rolling right into the 9/11 anniversary in your town!

We led our listeners back to where it all started: 9/11. And we showed them that there’s a huge problem with the official story, especially the part about the destruction of the World Trade Center, which is the focus of AE911Truth. To aid them in cutting through the 9/11 lies and discovering the truth, we launched a new campaign, 9/11 Truth: Good for America, accompanied by a dynamic new brochure, whose positive message is proving to be the perfect antidote to the nation’s 9/11-induced woes.

AE911Truth founder Richard Gage, AIA, spent the day handing out the brochure at a July 4th parade while on an out-of-town excursion. “We simply hollered, ‘Restore America with the Truth,’ and most people would reach out eagerly for our patriotic-looking brochure,” he recounts. “Our local AE911Truth Action Group ran out of hundreds of brochures in just an hour.”

“It’s the positive message that people are needing in order to be able to digest the difficult implications of 9/11 Truth.” — Richard Gage, AIA.

Read more

16 August 2014

KevinRyan
KevinRyan

In 2002, the US National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) was tasked by the US Government with “determin[ing] why and how WTC 1 and WTC 2 collapsed following the initial impacts of the aircraft and why and how WTC 7 collapsed.” After years of work, the final reports were released (in 2005 and 2008 respectively) with the conclusion that all three had collapsed primarily due to fire. But just how “meticulous, exhaustive, and very realistic” was this research? Had it really answered all the questions and provided a trustworthy explanation that supported the official narrative of 9/11?

This week we welcome to the programme once again Kevin Ryan, co-editor of the Journal of 9/11 Studies and author of the book Another Nineteen, who joins us to share with us his assessment of the NIST reports, and why he believes them to be “false and unscientific.”

Aug. 15, 2014
By Pepe Escobar
Asia Times Online.com

First, passenger airliner MH370 vanished from Planet Earth. Then MH370 vanished from the news cycle. First, MH17 was shot down by “Putin’s missile” – as Planet Earth was told. Then MH17 vanished from the news cycle.

Where’s Baudrillard when we need him? Had he been alive, the dervish of simulacra would have already deconstructed these two Malaysian planes as mirror images; from absolute vanishing to maximum exposure, then vanished again. They might as well have been abducted – and shot – by aliens. Now you seem them, now you don’t.

Black boxes, data recorders – everything MH17 is now floating in a black void. The British are taking forever to analyze the data – and if they have already done so, they are not talking. It’s as if they were singing, I see a black box / and I want it painted black … void.

The Pentagon, with 20-20 vision over Ukraine, knows what happened. Russian intelligence not only knows what happened but offered a tantalizing glimpse of it in an official presentation, dismissed by the “West”. The best technical analyses point not to “Putin’s missile” – a BUK – but to a combination of R-60 air-to-air missile and the auto-cannon of an Su-25.

Read more

by Ran HaCohen
August 02, 2014
Antiwar.com

ltisrl60x75

The Israeli occupation of the West Bank, Gaza and the Golan Heights is now 47 years old. Two generations of Israelis have grown up, matured and been educated in a country depriving millions of their political rights. In Israel’s political leadership, settlers residing in the Occupied Territories and recent immigrants from the former Soviet Union are over-represented. No wonder, then, that basic notions of democracy have been virtually abandoned.

For example, in a step highly reminiscent of anti-Semitic boycotts against Jews in Eastern and Central Europe during the late 19th and early 20th centuries, Israel’s foreign minister Lieberman explicitly urged Israelis (i.e. Jews) to boycott businesses of Israeli Arabs. Having grown up in a Soviet dictatorship, it is the same Lieberman who found Putin’s 2011 elections in Russia fair and democratic.

Given this kind of inspiration from one of Israel’s most influential politicians, one should hardly be surprised by reports of neo-Nazi Jewish gangs practicing manhunts and lynchings on Arabs and “leftists” in the streets of Tel Aviv or Jerusalem. Persecution of ethnic, religious and political minorities and dissidents – whether carried out by the state through legislation or advocacy by the likes of Lieberman, or privately, in the form of discrimination and planned street violence – is completely incompatible with any concept of modern democracy.

Media Mobilizing the Masses

Almost totally absent from the Israeli media’s discussion of these issues is good old-fashioned critical thinking. The only exception is Ha’aretz, who apparently remain open to diversity of thought in their news and op-eds. The remainder of the Israeli media appears mobilized for war. Where critical voices are heard, they are immediately dismissed, ridiculed or violently silenced in real time.

As a result, the narrative fed to the Israeli public becomes whatever the Israeli political leadership decides it ought to be that day. They are apparently ignorant of the ancient rule that a liar should have a good memory. Netanyahu and his cabinet can’t even manage to stick to their own lies, jumping from one to another in a matter of days, all with the support of an obedient Israeli media.

This time, it started with the kidnapping of three settlers in the West Bank, two of whom were minors. True, they shouldn’t have been there in the first place, but this did not give anybody the right to kill them. The fact that they were already murdered was known by Israeli authorities within a matter of hours, but they hid this information from the public, cultivating the illusion that the victims might still be found alive. The charade continued for almost three weeks.

This period of planned national hysteria was used, first, to incite the masses against “the kidnappers” of “our children”. Whipped up by the hysteria and taking the law into their own hands, Jews burnt a teenage Arab boy alive. Second, the drama enabled Netanyahu to blame Hamas for the kidnapping – an outright lie, since the names of the kidnappers were known to Israel all along. Clearly they were not Hamas activists. Third, the run-up period was used to drag Hamas into the fighting: Hamas (in Gaza) denied responsibility for the kidnapping (which took place in the West Bank) and refrained from firing at Israel (it was the Islamic Jihad who fired), yet Israel still attacked Hamas targets, in an obvious effort to drag them into the war.

Read more

Vote for Anyone But a Republican

By Philip Giraldi
August 12, 2014
shutterstock_117192478-600x652

Even though most congressmen spend relatively little time on foreign policy, the most important issue confronting any elected official is that of war or peace. The Iraq War, which was based on lies, killed tens or possibly even hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and nearly 4,500 Americans. By one estimate, it will cost $5 trillion before all the bills are paid and it had a devastating effect on the economy in general as well as on the national debt. And the results were terrible with Iraq currently dissolving into chaos and a bloodthirsty radical Islamic regime poised to pick up many of the pieces.

The upcoming November midterm congressional elections are a good opportunity to begin to look at candidates in terms of whether they are likely to continue the ugly national predisposition in place since 9/11 to use military force rather than to try to resolve international problems by other means. Here in Virginia my congressman Frank Wolf is retiring and I have been following closely the race to replace him. Wolf certainly had his faults, most notably his jumping on the band wagon in 2009 to derail the nomination of Chas Freeman as head of the National Intelligence Council. Freeman, who has been suspicious of America’s unnecessary wars would have been a breath of fresh air in examining disastrous foreign related policies, but he failed to obtain the seal of approval from the Israel Lobby and Wolf and others pounced. Wolf to his credit did propose and serve on the commission set up by the Iraq Study Group in 2006, which recommended withdrawing US ground troops from Iraq and negotiating with both Syria and Iran. The White House ignored the recommendations.

It would be hyperbolic to suggest that any of the five Republican candidates to succeed Wolf might in any way have been promoting an antiwar or even a non-interventionist agenda, but the winnowing process resulted in the selection of the candidate most strongly promoted by the GOP establishment, Barbara Comstock. Comstock, to give her her due, is probably on balance little better or worse than most other candidates for office. Inevitably a lawyer, relentlessly ambitious and absolutely loyal to her party, she reportedly has a formidable work ethic and has been described as having a “wonderfully devious mind” in connection with her involvement in various investigative committees, most notably in pursuit of the Clintons. Her website pushes all the obligatory GOP buttons, that she is a “common sense” pragmatic conservative, self-made, a working mom, against abortion, pro-gun, in favor of offshore drilling, and anti-Obamacare. It is the conventional resume for a Republican, though it omits that she worked as a Capitol Hill lobbyist, acting inter alia on behalf of the notorious contract security company Blackwater when it was being investigated for killing Iraqi citizens.

Read more

August 13, 2014
Paul Craig Roberts

Are Western propagandists fooling anyone but themselves?

The latest absurdity coming out of Ukraine, the EU and Washington is that the humanitarian aid that Russia and the Red Cross are trucking into the former Russian territories that comprise eastern Ukraine is a trick, a deception, a pretext for Russia’s invasion forces. Such a preposterous lie tells us that Western propagandists have no respect whatsoever for the intelligence of Western peoples.

Even a moron should understand that if Russia wants to send military forces into Ukraine, Russia doesn’t need any pretext, much less a joint humanitarian venture with the Red Cross. The eastern Ukraine, following Crimea’s lead, has already voted both independence from Kiev and in favor of rejoining Russia. If Russia needed an excuse, the decisions by the eastern Ukrainians made months ago suffice. But Russia needs no excuse to rescue Russians from being slaughtered by Washington’s stooges like Palestinians in Gaza.

By its inaction, the Russian government is providing Washington’s vassal states in Europe time to comprehend that Washington, not Russia, is the problem, and that Washington intends for the cost of its conflict with Russia to fall on Europeans.

The opposition from Washington, Washington’s EU vassals, and Washington’s stooges in Kiev to the inflow of humanitarian aid is due to the West’s desperate attempt to keep the world from knowing about the massive destruction by Washington and its stooges of civilian lives, housing, and infrastructure in those former Russian territories who are directly threatened by the Russophobic extremists that Washington has installed in power in Kiev.

Read more

Better Tag Cloud