One thing that's important, and perhaps optimistic, is that this sort of peddling requires very large sums of money to maintain. If it weren't for the millions pumped into the MSM, the stretchings of truth, the constant mis-associations to promote Empire (already proven anachronistic in the modern age), etc. it's clear that most Americans would have nothing to do with it.

They need to keep pumping a lot of effort and money into the system, otherwise people would -- naturally -- gravitate back to the (sustainable) truth. Therein lies our hope.

Truthseeker58 hits the proverbial nail on the head. Keep researching the truth and lies of 9-11 and the only logical conclusion is that it was an "inside job". Eventually, but probably too late, the truth will emerge...Pearl Harbor? We let it happen. 9-11? We let it happen. The elections of 2000 and 2004 were stolen, so why worry about the so called candidates in 2008? A little knowledge of the truth renders all the coverup and fabrications ridiculous.

Kelmer,

"Gee and they attack Nader as a traitor. What if Lieberman had been Vice President instead of Cheney? I am sure that on 9 11 they would have been drawing up plans to attack iraq."

Thanks for saying it first.

Gore enthusiastically supported Gulf Slaughter I and reiterates the endorsement in his most recent book & has not one critical word to say about Clinton's bellicosity; nor has he ever, in any sppech I can find, mentioned the obscenity of DU munitions. And he was happy enough to go to the White House to be photographed with the war criminal -- did he really think that merely saying "You see, George, there really IS a global environmental emergency?" face to face would make a difference?

I wonder how much lieberman's kick backs are from the israeli lobbyists ... this guy definitely wins the should of would of could of don corlione's cement shoe award

another question, how the hell did gore get involved with this shmuck? and does gore still buddy up with joe?

One person writes: People seem to disagree, but I always have argued that Lieberman is a Republican in Democrat clothing.

I don't think their any argument. Lieb is a repub.

Chris Dodd is a man with courage in the senate. Too bad he did not develop his machine earlier to get more votes. Now we have sad sack Hillary trying to humanize herself after her series of hawkish votes over the last 6 years.

Just wanted to say, THANK YOU, maggie50 (3:45pm) for posting that reminder of basic logic. My quick scan doesn't reveal anyone else (hey, I said it was quick) noticing your excellent point here in the comments, and I just wanted you to know it wasn't totally missed.

While I don't think the reiteration (by the more rational of folk) that most of the 9/11 hijackers came from Saudi Arabia is truly meant to indict the royal family in complicity, I think it's a useful point to make (as the author did) as a reminder that it wasn't Iraq (or Iraqis) who "attacked" us. If AIPAC or whatever other puppetmaster is throwing shoes in the machinery has decided to replay this tired lie of an Iraq-9/11 connection, then it's still worthwhile to scream at the top of one's lungs that it's utter hooey. I do wish, along with you, that the point that most of the men were Saudi doesn't mean we've "just got the wrong country" (as the author didn't do) but also to stress the fact that this (9/11) was not aggression perpetrated by one country against another, and therefore the response to 9/11 shouldn't now be or ever have been war against any other "country."

The downside to this logic is unfortunately more potential spinning and wordsmithing our way into endless fighting against anyone and everyone: the GWOT or whatever they want to call it.

I'm just glad there are clearer heads out there and in the thick of it to offer up reminders. Thanks again.

"But totally implying it."

No one here has shown this, including the author. You can believe what you want, but if you don't take the facts and show your work through correct reasoning than what's it worth?

Getting thru to these people, the liebermans of the world, is appearing more futile than ever. I recently received a link to an online video written to a gaggle of right wingers. The vid demonstrated, uh, conclusively, that Moslems are out to finish the job Hitler started. Since then i ended up debating an ex-leftist (supposedly) israeli. The Iraq war was legit because, i quote, 'America had to prove to the Arabs that they're not paper lions.' This guy, who otherwise seems decent, is convinced Moslems are plotting to take over the world and i had better wake up or poof! it's gone. What exactly i don't know. How 'they' are going to do this, take over the world, is a mystery, but that's what iraq was about, stopping this menace, and that's why an attack on iran is necessary. Shrill. Paranoid. Deluded, take your pick. But i'm starting to believe the neo cons really believe their own blather (could they really? i used to wonder and guess they're actually rolling over laughing to be playing with so much power) and nothing's gonna change their minds. It's hrd for me to see light at the end of this tunnel...

Jakenewton-
You are clinging to tiny scraps of 'evidence' and bits and pieces of superfluous information in a desperate effort to provide credibility to Liebermann, the Iraq conflict, and the 9/11 official story when there is overwhelming evidence to the contrary. You seem to be a person in the middle of a large forest that picks up a small rock, holds it up, and says "The forest is made of stone! I have the proof right here!"
The bush adminstration has already been proved to have lied about the existance of WMD to start the Iraq conflict. The 9/11 story has more holes in it than a block of swiss cheese. The blur has already been proven regarding the Iraq-9/11 connection. Liebermann is just parroting the same old worn-out BS. He IS implying that Iraq had something to do with it. The man has no credibility at all.
It isn't your fault. Millions of Americans have been affected by the beguiling and believe the "Arab Attackers" or the "Evil Saddam" nonsense. You aren't alone and don't have to be afraid. Please try to listen to the posts. People are trying to wake you up.

"But i'm starting to believe the neo cons really believe their own blather (could they really? i used to wonder and guess they're actually rolling over laughing to be playing with so much power) and nothing's gonna change their minds."

Yes, Virginia, there really is a neo con base that really believes its blather. And, they are ruthless and slippery.

And, oh, jakenewton - you're slippery.

Americans need to realize that the Democratic Party is also owned by the corporatocracy. Those people don't like us "People." We're "the mob" that must be controlled. It has ever been so -- that's why we created a government that originally was supposed to keep us from being enslaved by these sons-of-bitches. Guess what? Anyone out there struggling with onerous debt? Jefferson called that slavery, and he was right.

And incidentally, attacking Iraq was about stealing their oil and establishing American control of affairs in the Middle East. 9/11 provided the pretext. You can read about this at www.cooperativeresearch.org; or you can read how American foreign policy works in John Perkins, "The Secret History of American Empire," or "Confessions of an Economic Hit Man." Or, you can get it from the horse's mouth at www.aei.org -- the website of the American Enterprise INstitute, the architects of current Middle East policy.

Why doesn't ole Joe just come out of the closet and admit he's a neo-con republican? And, most importantly, why don't other dems just simply disown him? Where is Paul Welstone when you need him? Sigh.

LIEberman is one big lying blowhard SOB and is hated by most of the usa but he is adored by the israeli lobbyists who can't get enough of their team leader

"You are clinging to tiny scraps of 'evidence' and bits and pieces of superfluous information in a desperate effort to provide credibility to Liebermann,"

You are way off track. I discredited Durang by showing he created a straw man. My argument there stands.

What I really want to see is you Truth guys debate "made it happen" vs. "let it happen". That would be interesting.

"The bush adminstration has already been proved to have lied about the existance of WMD to start the Iraq conflict. "

Just curious if the Downingstreet Memo is your best example.

durgaya: I send my support to you in your travails. Just keep telling yourself: "It's not a train, it's just a solar flare. It's not a train, it's just a solar flare. It's not a train, it's just a solar flare."

Of course, the end result is the same, but for myself, going out with a smile on my face is the plan. Thank the goddess for 24-hour 7-11 stores with plenty of whiskey here in Taiwan! Well, my liver doesn't thank them, but my addled brain certainly does. In the end, even Prometheus would have chosen Johnny Walker, methinks.

There were no hijackers. That is proven. This is classic CIA disinfo. It has the appearance of being an alternative 'truth' piece and attacking the official propaganda but it actually solidifies the core of that propaganda; that we were in fact attacked by a foreign terrorist group called 'Al Qaeda'. We were not. 9/11 is unquestionably and clearly and without doubt a high level US military inside job which also involved the participation of foreign secret services such as MI6.

Here are the indisputable facts:

The towers fell at near free fall speed, INTO the path of MOST RESISTANCE by collapsing into the columns of steel core. They did not fall from fire but by planned demolition.

The hole, in the pentagon was only large enough for a missile, not a plane. And, there was no indication on the lawn in front of the hole to indicate a plane crash. These facts were evident to everyone at the Pentagon that day which makes the absolutely irrefutable and conclusive point that it was the US military/Pentagon (and not an ad hoc independent Arab terrorist group) and other secret service conspirators that planned and executed and quickly removed evidence (CLEANED UP) on 9/11.

Building 7 which fell did so after; it was reported to have already fallen by a BBC correspondent! The plans for that day were apparently widely known inside certain international secret services and their prepared media assets.

Common Dreams has never accurately reported on these events though numerous films and reputable individuals have presented the overwhelming evidence of an inside, high level and well-planned job. And, that in itself makes Common Dreams very suspect as a CIA supported and crafted spin site to guide the 'progressive' movement by seeding it with false facts, ideas and dead end projects.

These are very serious issues and propagandists don't just wear Neo-con clothes. They are running most of the 'alternative' sites, at least those not being censored. Think. Think hard. Many people have had their lives threatened for speaking out on this issue including myself. Think.

On 9/11 the US military attacked the people of the US to convince them to give up all their rights as private citizens and to solidify them into a nation in perpetual war.

The US military is not guided by the interests of the people of the US but rather by international secret services, banking and political interests.

The US fights 'wars without end' for the sake of the profiteers of war who do include some Americans but are still principally based in Europe.

The staging of 9/11 has been very profitable for the major military/power-elite stake holders around the world. For this reason and this reason alone, little that is true about 9/11 will ever be revealed on the pseudo-progressive and mainstream supported sites such as Common Dreams.

So munch1, you are a "made it happen" guy. What do you say to the "let it happen" guys?

Making popcorn...

The 'let it happen' guys are paid spin doctors.

Anyone who has seen the films has realized that only the US military could have been behind a missile attack on the Pentagon. Furthermore, 'In Plane Site' reveals that the plane that hit the tower in the video was not a passenger plane.

The US military had also taken pains to avoid the possibility of interception. And, the demolition was done by military experts and in the minds of many physicists also required certain top secret weaponry to accomplish the impeccable timing of the fall.

So, yes, the CIA is seeding the discussion with lots of 'let it happen' people. I recently had a vist from one but, the 'let it happen' absurdity/hoax is just a lot of noise in the lame attempt to prevent the truth from being exposed.

The US military attacked the last vestiges of sovereignty and recourse of the American people. This action is and was absolutely criminal and any who make light of it or spin it are traitors to the people of this country and to the peoples of the world.

These state sponsored acts of terrorism are in support of the programs of genocide that have maintained elitist interests since ancient times. And, false flag terrorism is as old as the pyramids.

"By deception, you will make war."

and

"All war is based on deception." Sun Tzu

Finally, war-making is the manner in which kings, and the elite have ruled down through the centuries. It keeps the majority in fear and downtrodden and increases the power of the ruling class.

So 'No', we did not 'allow' it to happen! Who would have wanted to design such a great plum for the US and European military and ruling elite? Don't be ridiculous! Also, add to this that Bin Laden was another convenience funded by the CIA! And, do you think with the aid of even Mapquest the US (actually funded to the tune of many many billions of technolgy dollars) could not see where Bin Laden was?

Give me a break!

"The 'let it happen' guys are paid spin doctors. "

misanthrope? What do you think?

"Anyone who has seen the films has realized that only the US military could have been behind a missile attack on the Pentagon. Furthermore, 'In Plane Site' reveals that the plane that hit the tower in the video was not a passenger plane."

So those "passengers" on those "planes" were spirited away to an undisclosed location, right?

Sun Tzu also knew the wisdom of battle plans that were not needlessly complex.

You sticking with the "there were no airliners" theory?

First deal with what we DO KNOW. Then after you have acknowledged it, the other questions can be asked. The fact that we do not know about the passengers does not mean that a military plane is a passenger plane. I think that is obvious.

Next, people DO disappear. And, the CIA is quite expert in MAKING people disappear. So, though I have not dealt with this issue since it is actually unnecessary to proving that the US military attacked the citizens of the US on US soil with determined and long term premeditation, it does not prove the infeasibility of my assertion.

We know about MK-Ultra and other human experimentation exercises by agents working for the US military. We know about the CIA world-wide drug trade. We know about secret arms and human trafficking and complicity by various military agencies.

Just because the crimes are heinous and not what most people want to consider as being normal business procedures by 'US' military agencies, it does not change the facts that we know about this case in particular nor what is known about other instances involving US military and secret services abuses of power, including renditioning.

"The fact that we do not know about the passengers"

We do though.

"We do though."

Please provide a specific definition for 'We'. Thank you.

The DNA evidence was found at the three crash sites for must of the victims. "We". meaning munch1 and jakenewton, aren't on th list to be able to personally examine those remains.

The evidence that is available to the public proves that this was a US military operation.

The towers fell at free fall speed. Please give me the 'we let it happen' explanation for that (also please include the steel columns since my last encounter with a 'we let it happen' spin doctor, an Indymedia founder and 'activist', said that they did not really matter since they would have 'cracked', jumped out of the way I presumed he meant of their own accord; etc., etc., etc.)

Information that is only available to the perpetrators (or cooked by them) is kinda suspect. Don't ya think?

"The towers fell at free fall speed."

* In every video and photo you can see the perimeter columns far outpacing the collapse.

* The building took over 12-16 seconds to completely collapse. The actual event was covered by debris so no one can say for sure. One rare video has the south tower collapsing at about 22 seconds.

* Conspiracy theorists cut their videos out when the perimeter columns hit the ground and not the building.

http://www.debunking911.com/freefall.htm

Nice try.

As I said, this is a very important war-justifying, civic-liberty-destroying propaganda event. And, there was and is plenty of resources being spent on protecting this false flag propaganda asset.

The building fell at free fall speed. The matter of a second or two (it is actually 10-11 seconds) is immaterial to the discussion.

As to the fall of the building's center as opposed to perimeter, there is a dust cloud (hmm... and that is because the entire structure is virtually reduced to dust but that in itself is abnormal and indicates advanced deconstruction technology at work) that obscures the bottom but in no way prevents us from seeing the speed of the fall which can reliably be called free fall.

Interesting discussion, with jakenewton the devil's advocate.

I think the 911 truthers of all colors should be encouraged, but instead, Sen. Harman's HR 1955 will brand the Truth Movement as a risk to national security, and ultimately, its proponents, terrorists. Why would that be unless truthers are getting close to exposing covert data regarding 9/11?

Truth is stranger than fiction.

BTW, those chunks of column (displayed in your site's photographs) have been shown to have been blown outwards at an arc that also proves the use of explosives being placed in the buildings (and publicly admitted in the case of bldg 7) prior to any of the plane hits.

The site you quote grossly mis-represents the facts. The building fell at free fall. The core steel columns were given a power boost (outward and downward thrust) by the detonating charges which explains their positions in the pictures.

Pictures of the cuts made by those charges are widely available. Charges were placed in the building as is normal in a planned detonation/demolition.

jakenewton is mentally ill neanderthal.
There's no sense trying to talk reason to a person incapable of it. He is already set in his ways. He lives in the World of Fox and probably has a picture of bush on his wall. He stands tall and proud that he voted for him (probably twice). He's one of the 10% of the neocon nutballs that thinks bush is the 'best of all presidents'. He thinks the Iraq conflict is about freedom and is fully prepared to murder millions of Iranians of their non-existant nuke program. Right jake? Kill them all for Israel! Liebermann is my hero!
Don't bother talking to him about the WTC. Physics mean nothing to him. Fuel temperatures and metal fatigue statistics are meaningless to him. It takes an intelligent person to figure all that out. Whatever bush says is the way to go in his world. He will believe whatever the government says regardless of science, eyewitness accounts, photographs, video, or physical law.
I would bet some major dough that jakenewton is hopped up on religion as well.
It's sad that some people are just lost. They can never be reached. They live in continual paranoid dementia. jakenewton is the person we are trying so hard to save the world from.

Stop feeding the "jake newton" troll. He's got a hard-on for Holy Joe that just won't quit. After reading all of his above comments, I can only conclude he's a complete moron.

"jakenewton is mentally ill neanderthal."

Name calling. Classy! Everyone getting this from TheLorax? Meanwhile, my *points* about Durang's piece and the conspiracy sideshow stand because you have ignored them. That's what I notice about your last contribution.

" can only conclude he's a complete moron."

You can conclude anything you want but I'll bet you can't *prove* it and "show your work".

"Stop feeding the "jake newton" troll."

You have no idea what a troll is do you? I'll agree that I am a troll the minute you agree that the Common Dreams public comment area is nothing more than a high-fivin' back slappin; Agreement Festival where ideas go unchallanged. What say?

"Agreement Festival where ideas go unchallanged"

I have tried to post a follow-up comment that is being 'moderated' so I do not know if you will be able to see it.

Considering that Common Dreams employs the 'moderation' principal when ideas submitted challenge the various 'acceptable' ways to dissent... well, you could be onto something here;(

"I have tried to post a follow-up comment that is being 'moderated' so I do not know if you will be able to see it. "

I don't see it. Might have to do with an embeedded link? It's happened to me. Maybe someone can direct us to the right FAQ.

Actually, I see a blank post from you earlier. FYI.

It is not the blank one. I deleted that myself since it was a mistake. It has to do with the history of the Middle East and the British Empire, prompted by the post that mentioned Israel..

There is no link in the post. So... it is a piece of history that is being censored.

Try rephrasing. :-)

munch1
Ah Yes, Moderation!
I have been moderated a time or two when trying to make reference to or link to certain movies that can be viewed free on the internet. You know, like the Z movie. jakenewton is either a troll or just plain willfully ignorant. His questions seem to be aimed at dividing those with different views of 911. Most people don't want to believe that their own government could have been complicit in the 911 tragedy, regardless of all the evidence that points to exactly that. Check out this link -
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5547481422995115331

There is no link, nothing embedded. The censorship regards the facts (how-to) of US/EURO war-making in the Middle East.

I make the point that we could not have gone to war in Iraq over oil since it was already controlled by the CIA who had in fact ushered Saddam into power and guided his efforts during the Iran-Iraq war (consider that he also checked with the US state department before invading Kuwait).

I also make the point that not only the Shah was ushered into power by MI6 and CIA machinations but so was Khomeini and the people who surrounded him. In other words, the Shah's departure was a scripted 'changing of the guard' (words spoken to me by an Iranian now living in the US).

In other words, Euro/US interests have been driving Middle Eastern political, economic and social realities for quite sometime. Many in the Middle East are quite aware of it but people in the US still find this hard to believe.

I even personally know people who worked at the highest levels in predominantly Moslem countries while partnering with the Israelis and US state department.

In any case, the post was important for anyone who wants to understand the deception game being played by the creation of 'competing' 'nation' states (and their directing) to allow for the mainstream illusion that wars simply 'arise' over latent and regional conflicts when they are in fact carefully orchestrated by elitist corporate/banking/military interests.

Here's another informative link -
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5948263607579389947

Even after the tragic events of 911, they didn't think that they had an ironclad case for passing the Orwellian named "Patriot Act", so attacks on the media and Democratic leaders of congress were orchestrated using weaponized anthrax from our own government labs. It was genetically linked to there, and yet no one has been arrested. It even came in letters with faux islamic threats. In just a few weeks the Patriot Act was passed almost unanimously.
Check this out -
http://www.anthraxinvestigation.com/index

Thank you munch1 but I don't see where any of that shows that the buildings were imploded.

Freefall speeds, no airliners, planted explosives, no scrambled jets, melted steel, WTC7 "pulled", all of these point and the others you are likely to raise have been debunked years ago. What you need to do instead of just repeating them is acknowledge and counter the debunking argument that we can just find in a few seconds. What "truthers" do *that* instead of just repeating the same points that have been dubunked already?

David Ray Griffin seems to be a more "serious" debunking debunker, but guess what? The ideas in his books and papers have problems and have been dubunked.

Am I saying that the debunking arguments have no problems? No, but you can't just ignore them.

"willfully ignorant"

To simply repeat points that have been countered without dealing with the counter is either ignorant or disengenuous. I've been through these before and no one seems to do that.

"His questions seem to be aimed at dividing those with different views of 911."

"His questions seem to be aimed at dividing those with different views of 911."

I was kidding, but many of those views are incompatible.

None of the facts of a US military attack on the trade towers on 9/11 have been debunked. That is patently ridiculous.

Furthermore, my comments that have been so far officially censored obviously annoy those who monitor these discussions. They did not have embedded links, there were no swear words or names of people not already dead and known to the general public.

9/11 is nothing more than (or less than) another Reichstag fire and planned and executed by the same institutional interests that created that false flag event.

What my post showed was that the British Empire's program of regional factioning (including the introduction of Israel as a major factor in this 'divide and conquer' scenario) continues to drive Middle East policies and is also a root of 9/11.

Very few people have demonstrated the clear and obvious connections that exist between Euro power stratagems and the unfolding of these 'terrorist' events within the 'US'. And that is why there is concern on the parts of those who control the media and this comment board.