For anyone watching the TV show "Jericho", which was just canceled, the obvious parallels between it and 9/11 are both interesting and fascinating. They took it a few steps further in the TV show, like the collapse of the government, and it was nuclear on the show, but we still have some time left for the Bush Administration (or whomever) to go nuclear on us, so it could still happen. (I don't think it will, but it could)

And, when you think about it, "Truth is stranger than fiction" wins out again.

Here are a few comparisons:

"Jericho" versus 9/11

False Flag event versus False Flag event

Blamed on Osama bin Laden, "Al-Qaeda", Afghanistan and Iraq (and others)) versus Blamed on Iran and Korea

Rogue elements of U.S. Gov't. involved versus Probable rogue elements of U.S. Gov't. involved

Jennings and Rall versus KBR - Kellogg Brown & Root (via Haliburton, et al.)

Ravenwood versus Blackwater

Kind of, but not really.

We got another mention on "Bill Moyers' Journal" this week. And, although it's not what I was hoping for, it was better than nothing. (ANY mention in the "mainstream media" (MSM) is better than nothing these days — you know: due to the information blackout about 9/11 Truth and Justice)

This week's piece was a follow up to the DRG-D911D 'fiasco' that we saw unfold before our eyes the last few weeks. (blog post links below) To quickly recap: I made a post suggesting we join in on the fun at Bill's blog and suggest a specific 9/11 Truth book in their 'contest' for what book the next President should take with him/her to the White House, which would then be reported the next week on air. So some of us went over there and suggested David Ray Griffin's "Debunking 9/11 Debunking", which was then arbitrarily disqualified in a supreme act of intellectual dishonesty on Bill Moyers' part. (and/or his staff)

I made a post last week suggesting people head over to Bill Moyers Journal blog and vote for one of David Ray Griffin's books for their "contest" for what book, other than the Bible (typical Xtiancentricity — I didn't see anyone call them on that, and no other religious books were counted in the final report — that's probably telling as well), that "we" would take and/or the next president should take with him/her to the White House.

http://www.911blogger.com/node/13676

The "results" were going to be reported on this week's show. And they were. But Bill Moyers punked out and took the lesser, low road rather than the high road. Instead of being the brave, courageous man many think him to be, and garnering a special place for himself in history, he went Ron Paul on us.

Although we got an off hand, indirect, non-specific mention by Bill Moyers, and you can see DRG's "Debunking 9/11 Debunking" several times during a montage of the replies being scrolled on the screen, that was the best they could do. The mention was this:

"We detected only one organized campaign behind a certain book and we disqualified it as a result."

How convenient.

Yes, you read me right.

She interviews author Philip Shenon, whose book, "The Commission: The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Investigation", just came out, but she won't interview David Ray Griffin about any of his books???

At this point she's just as bad as Faux News and all the rest.

She's a Bitch! with a capital 'B' and an exclamation point by pretty much any definition of the word. If she was male I'd call her a bastard, and probably a few choice other names.

I think it's time we take her out. At some point she's doing more harm than good. And it's now well-past that point.

So we need to start a boycott of her sponsors and doing other activist actions against her and her show to make her go away.

She needs to be 9/11-heckled at any appearances she makes.

It's what she deserves.

We took out Rudy Ghouliani, and now it's her turn.

Good riddance.

This week on Bill Moyers Journal, Bill reported on the answers by the democratic candidates about what book, other than the Bible, they would take to the White House.

And now Bill wants to know what book we would take. We can post responses on his blog. And he will report the answers next week on his show.

To make a greater impact, one that they theoretically cannot ignore, let's PLEASE all choose the same book to give it an extremely high rating.

I'm just going to pick one, because it's not the specific book that is important (in this scenario), it's that we all choose the same one! (and that it is about 9/11 Truth, and have "9/11" in the title)

So let's use: "Debunking 9/11 Debunking" by David Ray Griffin

If you add additional comments, please make them short and on a separate line after a blank line after the above title of the book.

Here is the link to his blog post response: (just scroll down to the bottom of the page.)

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/blog/2008/01/power_reading.html

Typically, you now see every reason under the Sun espoused by so-called pundits as to why Rudy Ghouliani's candidacy died — except the most probable reason:

The effect all of the 9/11 Truth and Justice Movement activists made as they dogged Rudy from venue to venue, city to city, state to state, pointing out why he should not be considered. (and pointing out all of his flaws, lies, asininities, etc., as well)

Not to mention all of the extensive online truthination on top of it.

He never had a chance.

Good job people.

Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world.
Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has. — Margaret Mead U.S. anthropologist & popularizer of anthropology (1901 - 1978)

For Immediate Release — This Just In!

Earth, Jan. 1, 2008 (APÜPI) — In a stunning, surprising and groundbreaking state of circumstances, the Simon Wiesenthal Center has decided to include themselves and their website in their own self-produced 2008 edition of their "Digital Terrorism & Hate" CD. (DT&H Compact Disc) How could something like this stranger-than-fiction occurrence occur? Well, read on, and you will be enlightened.

read more...

Someone named Tom Murphy wrote an "article" for OpEdNews.com titled "9/11 - Living in the Problem".

link: (text included below for analysis and critique)
http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_tom_murp_080118_9_2f11___living_in_the.htm

The Submit Content page for that site says, "We love to see well written, creative, penetrating, insightful, humorous, information, commentary, investigation, and reporting on OpEdNews."

For his piece, I will give Tom points only for 'creative' and 'commentary', and just a few points for each, out of, let's say... 100. (I would give him points for 'humorous', but that's supposed to him being funny, not us laughing at him and his writing and ideas and such)

In his piece, Tom is inappropriately and erroneously using a well-known phrase from motivational and "addiction recovery" circles: "Don't live in the problem, live in the solution"; "You are living in the problem, not the solution". (and variations on that theme — I do not know where Tom got the idea to use this concept as the basis for his piece, and I refuse to speculate on it, as well)

The ignorant person who wrote the "article" below mixes and matches several logical fallacies to make his illogical point(s). Most people will read it and nod their heads in agreement and go about their business, very much none the wiser.

Without going into too much detail, as a quick example, suffice to say that it should be self-evident (but is not for way too many people) that making the claim that since 20 people think something is false and only 5 think something is true, it must "logically" be false.

Most of these "articles" are like a Where's Waldo of logical fallacies and other poor writing.

Unfortunately, unwittingly, or intentionally, they tend to have their desired affect on too many people.

On the plus side, AE911Truth is being increasingly attacked because it is making a difference.

http://911-engineers.blogspot.com/2008/12/architects-and-engineers.html

Architects and Engineers

I'm not big on the whole "New World Order" thing, but I admit that it is not all wrong. (that's how these things work — you mix truth and fact and reality with lies of various types and forms and degrees (including skew, spin, etc.) and fiction and fantasy, stir well in a blender, and pour out a high-octane cocktail of pareidolia-laced hyper-paranoid Six Degrees of Separation propaganda and disinformation — to what degree I am right (or wrong) about this is arguable, so we do, but let's just agree to disagree for now)

The events of 9/11 were most probably performed for a number of reasons, not just one. And it may be (probably is) a huge, complex, tangled web of reasons. There were so many people (groups, etc.) who benefited, directly and indirectly, immediately and afterward, that it is sometimes difficult to grasp the forest for all of the trees and other forest denizens. Some of the reasons and outcomes were obviously intentional and planned, others were obviously not so. And because "The System" ('everything') is SO complex, and SO inter-connected, it is near-impossible to figure out what is really going on. (or what really happened, and why, and....)

Which actor do you want to play you in "the movie". (even if your character will probably never make it past the cutting room floor, if even the first or final draft of the screenplay)

And you can nominate suggestions for others, like some of the more well-known "players", major and minor, if you will. (and you known of whom I speak regarding the latter ;o) )

Have fun. It doesn't hurt to lighten the heavy load of the greater and lesser issues at hand from time to time, and it probably even helps.

I'll start us off: (in no particular order and don't take offense to my selections or forgetting to include you in the list)

Me: Brad Pitt (I called dibs!)

Richard Gage: Stanley Tucci
Prof. Steven Jones: Oliver Platt
David Ray Griffin: Martin Sheen
Kevin Ryan: Charlie Sheen
Dylan Avery: Matt Damon
Jason Bermas: Ben Affleck
Janice Matthews: Emily Procter
Victronix: Angolina Jolie
Col. Jenny: Hillary Swank
Alex Jones: George Clooney
Jim Hoffman: Steve Buscemi
Judy Woods: Phyllis Diller (okay, I know that's kind of mean, in a way, but you have to admit it's pretty funny, too)

This was brought to my attention, so I thought I would share the information in case anyone can help out.

A 9/11 Truther, Steve Gliksman, needs a liver transplant due to Hepatitis C infection, which is going to cost about $500,000 because his health insurance plan doesn't cover it. He's pretty sick and doesn't have a lot of time.

Give as much as you can to help out. Literally, every little bit helps. (even $1.00!!!) And spread the word!

(if near 100,000 people all gave $5, that would just about do it, so it's doable)

http://www.iwilltryit.com/

http://gift-fundprogram.org/

(with all the scams around these days, it behooves people to be careful about things of this nature — although I'm not familiar with the website, they have been around since 2002, with a foray into 9/11 Truth issues around 2005, and I did some Googling, and it looks legitimate — also: http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.iwilltryit.com*)

(Contrary to PhoenixRising's comment below, I don't think it's asking too much to have people NOT send anti-semitic emails to the SWC. Please don't. Leave that up to the COINTELPRO types who no doubt will. -rep.)

I don't know whether this is more offensive, silly, stupid, and/or just sad. (sometimes mixing and matching is called for)

Now, before I get into the meat of the matter, if you will, I would like to encourage people to respond to this information maturely, intellectually, and with decency. That is, try to keep the negative, derogatory, hurtful, attacking, anti-semitic, etc., e-mails to the SWC and Mark Weitzman down to a minimum. Zero would be nice, but I know that's probably asking too much. Be that as it may, it never hurts to ask.

I should also point out that I am a "supporter" of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, though not a card-carrying member, if you will, and I have visited their Museum of Tolerance in Los Angeles several years ago and enjoyed it. I encourage everyone to go. I am not Jewish (heritage / ethnicity / nationality), nor Judaic (religion), not that that should matter one way or another.