Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
OWS-NYC Finally embraces 911 Truth into its movement!
#1
[TABLE="align: center"]
[TR]
[TD="width: 550"] March from Liberty Plaza to WTC 7 at noon each day.
Occupy the park in front of WTC 7 until nightfall.
General Assemblies will be held at 2pm each day to discuss the direction and continuation of the Occupy Building 7 occupation after 11/20.



To all those who continue to fight for the truth about 9/11 to be revealed:

It is time for us to occupy.

The Occupy Wall Street movement is a much needed response to decades of growing inequality, financial deregulation, and zero accountability for the crimes that brought about our current economic crisis. Millions throughout the nation and across globe who feel they have no voice in our political system have come to embrace "Occupy" as an expression of their anger, frustration and hope.

Ten years later, it is time for us to give voice to our own growing frustration by aligning firmly with the Occupy movement and making 9/11 one of the key issues the Occupy movement stands for.

[TABLE="width: 210, align: right"]
[TR]
[TD="align: center"][Image: OB7.jpg] Spread the Word
Visit OccupyBuilding7.org to download the flier and web banner [/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
On Saturday November 19 and Sunday November 20, we will march from Liberty Plaza to Building 7 and occupy the park in front of Building 7 until nightfall. We hope this will mark the beginning of a sustained Occupy Building 7 movement that will grow and finally bring meaningful attention to the obvious demolition of World Trade Center Building 7 and the dire need for a new 9/11 investigation. At 2pm each day we will hold a General Assembly to discuss the direction and continuation of the Occupy Building 7 occupation after November 20.

Go to OccupyBuilding7.org to learn more and to start following #OccupyBuilding7 on Twitter. On the website you will find fliers that you can print and hand out at Liberty Plaza as well as web banners that you can post on your website to help spread the word.

We are attempting to get Occupy Building 7 on the official Occupy Wall Street calendar, and we anticipate being joined by hundreds of Occupy Wall Street protesters. Most of the protesters at Liberty Plaza are keenly aware of 9/11. A lot of them already knew about it; others have been educated over the last several weeks thanks to the 9/11 activists who have given their time and energy to be there. Let us hope that by the time November 19 rolls around, there will be hundreds, if not thousands of Occupy activists eager to help us make Occupy Building 7 a part of the broader Occupy movement.

If you can make it to New York on November 19, please meet us at Liberty Plaza at noon, and let's make history.

OccupyBuilding7.org
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
"Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws. - Mayer Rothschild
"Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience! People are obedient in the face of poverty, starvation, stupidity, war, and cruelty. Our problem is that grand thieves are running the country. That's our problem!" - Howard Zinn
"If there is no struggle there is no progress. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and never will" - Frederick Douglass
Reply
#2
It's pretty clear the two movements had to combine at some point. Even with a robust economy this movement should have been done 10 years ago when the CIA took over our government under Bush. Let their underestimation of the American people and what they'll do when their democracy is betrayed be the last mistake they'll ever make.
Reply
#3
Unfortunately this is inaccurate. The general assembly, I believe, did not embrace the bldg 7 action which was on two days last month. There were no more than 50 people at the building for the demonstration and they were 911 truth activists. Obviously various groups who identify as being not part of the 1% are using the OWS to either lend support to OWS or to use the publicity that OWS is getting to shine some light on their issue. The bldg 7 event was clearly an agenda driven one which was not part of the OWS paradigm. Unfortunately not many people (or enough) people were at the demonstration to get any notice on the local news. I'd call it a flop in that sense.

OWS is much bigger than 911Truth and trumps it in many ways. It's managing to get more people in the streets in a few months all around the country and the world than 911truth has been able to in 10 yrs.
Reply
#4
I don't believe the official story of 9/11 because I know the official story of 9/11!

During the past 10 years I have not met a single individual who, after doing research on the subjectpen, switched from questioning the official narrative of the events of 9/11/2001 to believing the official narrative of those events.. It is always the other way around. Why do you think that is? There are good reasons for this, and I will try to explain this phenomenon right now.

The term "conspiracy theorist", perhaps the most misapplied description in our vernacular, is often used to describe 9/11 truthers. Perhaps that term does apply to a segment of the 9/11 truth movement. But in most cases a more accurate description of 9/11 truthers is probably "expert", or "scholar", or "researcher." You see, much of the doubt cast on the official narrative of the events of 9/11 has not come in the form of speculated accusations, or "theories." In fact, it has come in the form of questions that have been raised after a careful study of the official and undisputed events and details.

Ten years have passed since the infamous events of September 11th, 2001 took place, and the majority of people still don't know a damn thing about the actual details of that event. They don't know what was going on in the country with regard to our military that day. They don't know the history or the activities of key members of our government, defense establishment or intelligence community, on, or during the weeks, and in some cases the years leading up to that day. They don't know what took place during or immediately following the events of that day. And they don't know what actions were taken by those key people following that event.

As is the case with so many issues, people tend to stand strong and argue a position or voice an opinion about an event like 9/11. But, when questioned about the many details surrounding that event they have no answers. They are clueless. And they are, in the end, dumbfounded.
I can not tell you how many times I have discussed the events of 9/11 with an outraged citizen who can not believe that I would "accuse our own government" of such a terrible thing as conducting a false flag operation, only to hear the phrase "no, I did not know that, is that true?" repeated over and over as I "educate" them about those little things called DETAILS. I can not count the pale-faced stunned looks on people's faces as I exposed them to some of the "official facts" they never suspected, and never knew. I have walked away from many a confrontation with newly educated "patriotic Americans", only to worry about whether or not they would again resume breathing correctly.

They would never do such a thing

A common start and end to any intelligent discussion about the events of 9/11 is prefaced by the assumption that no American would betray his or her country by allowing or conducting an attack on the American people. Well, the people who take this position know nothing about history, let alone human nature. They also don't know about the public positions, declarations, speeches and published documents written by the people who ran our nation on that day.

False flag operations have taken place for generations, in this nation and nations around the world. Many of these operations have been exposed, but proof of many of these activities is probably hidden away in secret documents that may one day come to light. You can however, start your exploration on the topic by researching one plan for American self-inflicted terrorism that became public, Operation Northwoods. Do I detect my first "I did not know this, is it true?" May I suggest you also peek into the neoconservative teachings of the principles involved in running our nation at the time of the "new Pearl Harbor" that took place in 2001.

But the 9/11 Commission did not find anything wrong

I can not believe how many people do not know the genesis or mission of the 9/11 Kean Commission. From the initial appointment of one of America's most nefarious political figures as its original leader, Henry Kissinger, - to its executive director whose area of expertise and education were in the creation and maintaining of public myths, Philip D. Zelikow,- people have no idea as to who comprised or what the mandate was for this commission.

To give you some kind of idea as to why the "findings" of this commission can NOT be used to back up any talking points on the topic of 9/11, let me remind you what the official task of this commission was. The Kean Commissions was told to document the official story and make national security recommendations based on that story. The only information that was to be included in the official report had to match the official story. If any one member of the committee objected to any testimony or finding, that piece of information was to be left out of the report For some examples of this you can talk to the thousands of people who became 9/11 truthers as a result of their testimony being omitted from and contradicted by the final report.

Start with the WTC worker credited with being the last man out of the WTC William Rodriguez. See if he can tell you why, after being invited to the White House and meeting with George W. Bush, his testimony about witnessing explosions in the sub basement of the WTC moments prior to the first plane hitting the building was omitted from the Kean report. And for more details you can read David Ray Griffin's book called The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions And Distortions. It pretty much translated the Kean report into a stack of rather harsh and useless toilet paper. Are the "I did not know this, is it true?" responses piling up yet?
Are you even qualified to discuss the issue?

What people don't understand when discussing issues like 9/11 is that not everyone is qualified to join the discussion, let alone impose an "opinion" on the topic. 9/11 is not really a topic that is open to opinion. The conclusion you draw from the facts are open to opinion, but what many people don't realize about the 9/11 truth movement is that its opinions are based on facts, and grounded in the reality that its members know more of the facts than the average person. If you have a discussion with a doctor about medicine your opinions and views on the subject don't exactly merit the same consideration as do those of a group of physicians..

Similarly, someone like me (and many 9/11 truthers), has the equivalent of 3 PhD's on topics such as 9/11. I am a full time journalist. I research this kind of stuff every single day and I have been doing so since 2003. Not everyone is qualified to debate me on an issue like 9/11. We can discuss it. You can ask a great number of questions and perhaps inform me about aspects of the issue of which I am not aware. But you can't impose your "opinions" on me, nor can you do that to a majority of 9/11 truthers. And by the way, when it comes to opinions vs. facts, facts win. FOX News watchers don't seem to be able to grasp this concept.

People have to realize that what separates the unsuspecting mainstream masses from the 9/11 truth movement are factual information and details. Forget the claims and accusations. You don't need to go that far to understand that there is something fishy going on here. Just look at the official body of evidence. It's all there and it will make your head spin. Don't listen to the accusations, just examine the evidence.You'll understand so much if you really take a good look. In time, if you do your research thoroughly you may just compile a list of suspects, as have many of the 9/11 truthers. I have. But we are not there yet. We really have enough official evidence to lead to quite a few criminal indictments, and I am not kidding about this. But for now let's just talk about the facts and hope that some day we will have the real answers declared by juries in courtrooms. Chances are that many truthers would be proven correct in their accusations - but again, for now, just look at the facts and understand that there are a lot of questions that need to be answered. And, find out that it's okay to say, "I did not know this, is it true?"

So, are you qualified to take part in a discussion with a 9/11 truther?

If you don't know about the "coincidental" military drills taking place on September 11, 2001, or about the interesting little political cabal known as PNAC or the Project for a New American Century, or if you don't know what WTC7 is, or the 1,500 plus architects and engineers who have serious questions about how and why it dropped like a pancake on 9/11, or if you don't know about the fact that up until his supposed murder, the FBI did not list Osama bin Laden as wanted for the events of 9/11 because, in their own words, they had no proof of his involvement, then you are not qualified to enter a discussion about the event. You have a lot of homework to do before you can chime in. So on you go...study...but finish this article first. I'll bet the ranch that you'll be saying, over and over, "I did not know this, is it true?"

Why don't we accept the official story?

Here is a question that you should really think about. Don't just chime in with your own uninformed opinion because I am going to give you the answer to this question; the real honest answer. Why do you think I, Jesse Richard, founder of TvNewsLIES.org, have drawn the conclusion that the official narrative of the events of 9/11 is a crock? The answer to that is this...I did not always feel that way. As a matter of fact ,within hours of the event I emailed to all my friends a blistering attack on Islamic fundamentalism. And while some things that happened that day, or did not happen that day, (and week I should say,) seemed odd, I was not immediately suspicious of the "story" being told on TV about the event.

It took me almost two years before I saw enough "official" information to make me realize that there was something, actually many things, that were very wrong. I came across so many disturbing, yet official and undisputed facts that I started asking others about it. Most people did not know what I was talking about. Nobody knew the details. So your answer is this...I don't believe the official story because I know the official story! I don't believe the conclusion, and the little tale of 19 buffoons overtaking our national defense all by themselves. The official position on that by the way, is that they, the FBI, have no proof of the identity of the so-called hijackers or that there were any hijackers at all. They are not listed on the passenger lists, but you would not know that.

BUT...the official story and facts are what made me realize something was very wrong with the public perception of what took place that day, and who was responsible for what took place that day. The official story, when accepted and believed, morphs by any logic into a total and absolute fabrication!

So if you believe the conclusion to the official story, you had better know that story from start to finish. Don't approach this they way the Kean Commission approached it, by starting out accepting the explanation as truth. Study the events, study the officially acknowledged body of evidence and study the people who told you the story in the first place...and I bet it won't be long before you have as many questions as do I about that infamous day and about the people who control our government. And, of course, you'll be saying, "I did not know this, is it true?"

Okay, then, who really was behind the attacks on 9/11?

9/11 truthers make the mistake of starting their discussions with conclusions...I am not doing that. All I am saying is that there are a lot of questions about what happened that day that are not answered by the official conclusion or explanation. I would like some answers that add up. I did the math myself and I have my own "theories", but I am a journalist, and I deal in the facts, not the fables.

The official story, as fed to the American public is filled with unsupported and implausible explanations designed to convince a gullible public that they should ask no questions and trust their leaders to take revenge on those who hated us for our freedom. Volumes can be, and have been written about so many of them. For the most part, you have not read any of them.

In this article, I've posed many questions and have provided links to their answers - so that you will more clearly understand that there is SO much we have not been told about the attacks that took place a decade ago. But, those facts are the tip of a very well hidden iceberg, because there are so many questions that still remain unanswered.

So, I will end this article with a sampling of the questions that must be answered, or in the very least, investigated by impartial truth seekers.. They must NOT be ignored, or accepted simply because they were offered to a frightened nation by an administration defined by its lies. They are legitimate questions, based on legitimate suspicions. They are not, for a single moment, conspiracy theories"
Why did the news agencies report that WTC 7 collapsed almost 1/2 hour before it did, even though it was not hit by a plane, only had a few floors on fire, and gave no indication that it was in any serious danger?
Why do we still believe the tale of the 19 hijackers when so many of the accused hijackers showed up ALIVE within days? And why do we sill believe the fable of the 19 hijackers when the FBI admitted that they are not sure about either the identity of the hijackers or if there were any hijackers at all?
Why was WTC 7 rebuilt, reopened and reoccupied with no press attention? Wouldn't this be an important victory in American resolve and perseverance?
Why were the NORAD rules changed for the first time several weeks prior to 9/11, taking responsibility/authority for shooting down hijacked lanes away from NORAD military command for the first time in its history, and given to a civilian, Donald Rumsfeld, and then returned to NORAD the day after 9/11?
Why would hijackers planning on attacking NY and Washington DC drive from Florida, pass both DC and NY, and drive all the way to Maine and hinge this huge operation on a connecting flight from Maine to Boston, where we are told they hijacked their plane? Why wouldn't they fly out of any of the airports that are visible from their targets, like Newark, La Guardia or JFK...or even some of the smaller local airports that would have given them a clear easy path to their target and reduce the amount of time that our air defense systems would have to stop them?
Who placed all of those put options on the airlines just prior to the event, as if they knew that the stock prices on those specific airlines would lose a huge amount of value?
Why did George W. Bush's Secret Service detail not rush the president to safety when it was evident that the nation was under attack? If the nation was under attack, and they did not know the scope of the attack, and the president's location was known, how did they not worry about being attacked in Florida?. Why did they act as if they knew that there was no threat? And why, when our nation was under attack, did the president not rush into action? If you say he was concerned about upsetting the children, you are the ultimate apologist. He could have told them that his mommy was on the phone and he had to see what she wanted. Our county was supposedly being attacked and he/they waited 20 minutes before they moved. This is the smoking gun of smoking guns.
Why did the FBI never list Osama bin Laden as being wanted for 9/11? Actually, we know this one...because they admitted that they had no evidence linking him to the event.
Why was their molten metal flowing under the wreckage of the WTC for months? No jet fuel can melt metal, and nothing explainable could melt that much metal and keep it hot enough to remain molten for a month.
How did a passport of one of the so called hijackers make it through the huge fireball and end up on the street?
Why have photos from the 80+ cameras confiscated at the Pentagon never been released?
Why did the airplane that supposedly crashed at Shanksville vaporize so that nothing remained, not bodies, not luggage, not metal, - nothing - for the first time in aviation history? However, we are told that even though the plane vaporized at Shanksville, a hand-written note from a hijacker was found.

Of course, there are so many more. We deserve the answers. We deserve the right to ask these questions in public forums like the corporate media....who will not touch them with the proverbial ten foot pole. We have gate keepers on the Internet who actively ridicule and dismiss anyone who dares to raise these questions. Will you be one of them? Or, after really thinking about them, will you hope that one day, when we know what went on before, during and after the attacks on 9/11, - we can all say: "I did not know this, but I'm now absolutely convinced that it is true."

Think about it...it's really time to think about it.

Jesse Richard is Founder of TvNewsLIES.org
"Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws. - Mayer Rothschild
"Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience! People are obedient in the face of poverty, starvation, stupidity, war, and cruelty. Our problem is that grand thieves are running the country. That's our problem!" - Howard Zinn
"If there is no struggle there is no progress. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and never will" - Frederick Douglass
Reply
#5
Thanks for that article. He raises some excellent questions. One of them about the heat under the pile might be (likely is) explained by the fact that when you mechanical shred, crush, grind, rip apart, 1.2 million tons of material enormous heat is released. That heat can explain a few of the observed phenomena... the huge billowing clouds carrying fine debris up into the sky and away from the site. No mystery there... this is basic Boyle's gas laws in play. Secondly the debris from the dissociated materials came mostly down and concentrated below the foot prints and so the heat was also concentrated in some locations. We do know that the pile continued to burn and was hot for months and months on the top and when they got down to the bottom of it, the the debris over top had acted as an insulator and help maintained the high temps at the bottom.

The high temperatures might be explained by a exothermic chemical reaction... many many them... such as fires or incendiaries such as thermite which continued on well after the collapse and were some how concentrated at the bottom and then covered by cooler non reacting material above. We can rule out fire because oxygen starvation under the pile would have extinguished such flames. So whatever WAS causing the heat at the base of the pile was a reacition which did not require a supply of atmospheric oxygen. Thermite can react without oxygen if enough heat is present to kick it off. The reaction draws the required oxygen from the iron oxide. The questions are... was thermite present... or could a similar reaction have been created by the building materials themselves? The thermite reaction requires iron oxide, aluminum and sulfer. All of these were present in WTC building materials. Yet it seems a stretch to imagine that the vioilet mixing and crushing could get these materials together to begin an exothermic reaction. But it's not impossible... and can't be ruled out because it seems unlikely. The notion that thermite was present and a cause of the destruction... or some other high temp process... seems to contradict at least in the case of the two towers what was observed... which was a top down destruction. How would the cause of this... a presumed high temp event end up underneath the pile? Why were there no signs of it on top of the pile where all that was observed was relatively cold unreacted (chemically) steel, mangled building materials and lots of dust, grit and pulverized concrete? We did not see the towers destroyed in the more understandable approach to demolition where the structure at the base is destroyed and gravity then collapse it down on itself (bottom up). Had this taken place we would expect to find the tell tale signs of the destruction of the columns at the base. But note... much of the perimeter (facade structure) was standing after then conclusion of the event... so these were not *undermined*. And photos of the site immediately after show the *stubs* of many of the core columns remaining after the collapse of the twin towers... so these were not *undermined*... plus we can see the core columns fail from Euler buckling AFTER the floors collapse/destroyed and the facade had peeled/feel away... indicating that they there failure was NOT the cause of the floor collapse.. more likely a consequence of it.

If one accepts the notion that the collapses were gravity driven... floor destructions... followed by dismantling of the frame which was unable to stand erect without the bracing that the floor system provided (this notion is resisted by most of the truth movement)... the use of heat to destroy the floors makes little sense. In a *CD* scenario of progressive floor destruction from top to bottom... one would expect to witness multiple sequenced explosions on each floor which shattered them. These explosions showed no signs of dismembering the structure in a top down sequence as far as I can see anyway. A gravity driven collapse of what ever cause... would have to displace the 18,000 cu yards of air between each floor and this would be forced away from the towers and would carry with it dust and lighter debris and appear as mass ejections... because it WAS mass ejections... Whether the cause was ALSO explosives has yet to be demonstrated... but collapsing mass within the chute of the walls would mostly definitely cause over pressure of air and outward mass dsibursal of light debris.

One needs to understand that what was observed WAS related to the size, configuration, construction and mass of those buildings.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  The movement Matt Grantham 0 3,800 05-07-2018, 08:06 PM
Last Post: Matt Grantham
  NPR censors 9/11 truth (hangs up on caller) Ed Jewett 1 2,100 19-10-2011, 06:59 AM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  9/11 Conspiracy Theories Finally Laid to Rest New: Witnesses Prove Government Was Right After All Ed Jewett 2 2,366 14-10-2011, 02:31 AM
Last Post: Ed Jewett
  The 10th Anniversary of 9/11 and the search for Truth Henry Platsky 0 1,578 18-09-2011, 04:25 PM
Last Post: Henry Platsky
  Is "9/11 Truth" based upon a false theory? James H. Fetzer 12 4,727 09-08-2011, 09:44 PM
Last Post: Kyle Burnett
  The Debate over 9/11 Truth: Kevin Ryan vs. Jim Fetzer James H. Fetzer 1 2,521 08-08-2011, 03:42 PM
Last Post: James H. Fetzer
  The Case for 9/11 Truth Urgency Ed Jewett 0 1,966 30-05-2010, 04:11 AM
Last Post: Ed Jewett
  9/11 Truth Red Herring (by Scott Creighton) Ed Jewett 0 2,546 27-05-2010, 07:21 AM
Last Post: Ed Jewett
  Norwegian State Radio initiates public debate on 9/11 Truth Paul Rigby 1 2,476 21-06-2009, 06:12 PM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  Wikipedia Editors Attempt Controlled Demo On 911-Truth Peter Lemkin 0 1,925 01-05-2009, 06:13 AM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)