Journalist Alan Hart interviewed by Kevin Barrett: Controlled Demolition and Mossad/Zionist Israeli Involvement on 9/11?
John Bursill Thu, 05/27/2010 - 7:28am
Interview with Alan Hart: http://noliesradio.org/archives/16222
Please listen to this Podcast with Kevin Barrett and Alan Hart as it is very interesting and important. Some of you will bill this as more proof that Mossad and Israeli Zionists "did 9/11" and yes it is more opinion that that is possibly the case; It is not proof though. As Alan Hart says if this is the case it requires support within the US Government, the Military and the Intelligence Agencies to allow that to happen.
Clearly Zionism, the Neo-Conservative Movement and the Bush Cartel were all advantaged by 9/11. The Mossad, the CIA, the Large Multi-National Corporations and the big Media Corporations have played their role also it seems? In this interview Alan Hart is careful to say that he is speculating about Mossad and Israel's involvement in the 9/11 Attacks as likely unlike Dr Sabrosky who says it is 100% certain! Hart suggests that Israeli Zionists could be the attacks instigator with out providing new evidence, although he makes the point accurately that their influence in America is massive and their ambitions are not restricted by the constraints of a fear of the American Congress, where they clearly have great influence.
It appears to me that 9/11 was not possible with out a "Stand Down" of the US Military and without access to the aircraft, the airports and the buildings. The cover up was not possible without strong influence in the Main Stream Media, the Foundations and the Government. How much of this is was "self censorship" and by "symbiosis" is anyone's guess and how much was control/influence by the Israeli Zionists is very difficult to measure.
I'll put to you that two things I view are problematic with this interviews message. The first is that we do not have the evidence to say Israel/Mossad "did or orchestrated 9/11" and we also do not know that the planes involved were swapped. The unsupported claims of "impossible speed" by some of the "Pilots for 9/11 Truth" is not helping us in this campaign, just as taking a position on who was running the attacks will marginalise us as a movement.
Staying reasonable with our position is the path to success!
Lets let the cards, when they fall, fall where they may. Until then lets keep being factualists (a new word :)) not conspiracy theorists!
Kind regards John Bursill
--
9/11 24/7 until justice!
9/11 24/7 until justice!
- John Bursill's blog
- Login to post comments
Excellent interview....BUT....
One thing that the Zionists have in their favor is the notion held by most of the US (and western) public that "Zionism" and "Judaism" are one and the same. In other words, to criticize Zionism is equivalent to anti-semitism, Holocaust denying, Jew hating, and all the other baggage that revolves around such. AIPAC, the rest of the powerful US Israeli lobby alongside such organizations as the ADL and SWC use this state of mass ignorance and self-deception to justify the blank check the US and the West has issued to Israel, which states: "Go ahead: You can do whatever you like, with impunity and immunity".
The Israeli leadership, for decades, has taken the blank check, and filled it with huge numbers of their choosing .... accumulating the world's 3rd (or 4th) largest nuclear weapons cache, defying countless UNSC resolutions, attacked their neighbors on a regular basis, even bombing and strafing a US Navy ship (USS Liberty), committing large scale massacres of Palestinian civilians in refugee camps in Lebanon and Jordan, committing serial acts of terrorism throughout the occupied territories, even spying on America. Neither the mainstream media, nor the US government, nor most of the US public even dare to raise any points criticizing Israel, lest their names get forever branded as Holocaust deniers etc.... The hardline Zionists (who absolutely do *not* represent the mainstream Jewish community) are fully aware of this state of cognitive dissonance and play it to the maximum.
This is an excellent interview, re. the Arab Israeli conflict. Alan Hart has been there... he saw what happened on a first hand basis, in the thick of the action, so to speak. He throws light on so much of the (dumbed down) history of the region from the end of WWII onwards, how and why the Arab-Israeli wars were started, and delves into the largely forgotten (or unbroadcast) reasoning for such, and the geopolitics behind all the maneuvering.
Alan Hart's material about 9/11 starts around half way into the 50 minute interview. This sounds like the first time he has gone public with it. ... after all, he is 82 years old, and probably feels its relatively safe to go public, (after 8.5 years has passed, with the notion that 9/11 was not what was sold to the world becoming a mainstream, rather than fringe, realization). One thing that I did find most frustrating: He said that the "world's leading civil engineering firm had examined the collapse of the Twin Towers" and had come to the conclusion that "explosives were used". BUT.. he refused to name the company.
Come ON, Alan. If you are going to make a claim as potentially earthshaking as this, please let us all know the identity of this civil engineering firm, the people to whom you spoke, the people who conducted the study, and evidence of the text of the study! Without *evidence*, these allegations are of no use to anyone. Unlike the promoters and supporters of the official position on 9/11, the 9/11 Truth Community is all about finding out what happened on that day using verifiable, indisputable and solid evidence that would stand up in a court of law, and use it to bring the perps to justice. The psychopaths who conceived, planned and executed 9/11 are still out there, on the loose, and as we all know, the the false flag M.O. always works its evil magic on a dumbed-down, scared and thus malleable population... and they will doubtlessly pulling another stunt in due course.
Alan, if you have verifiable information which could be used to help the cause, lets have it... and ASAP. We have little time.
Yes Alan please tell us the name?
I agree this is frustrating and especially for the likes of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth.
This interview gives me hope that someone like outspoken Journalist John Pilger may come forward soon as well?
Kind regards John
9/11 news and 911blogger
No submission necessarily reflects the views of 911blogger, or the person submitting it; material may be submitted primarily to document it's existence, make people aware of it, and promote civil discussion of the material's credibility and value. I didn't make the decision to approve this post or promote it to the front page, but this article is of news value, simply because Alan Hart, former BBC journalist, is the one saying these things. It is noteworthy that Hart offers no new evidence linking Mossad, Israel, Zionists or Jews to the 9/11 attacks; he simply states his opinion about their involvement. For instance, Hart speculates that; "It was possible, and this is Alan Hart speaking, that the planes were fitted with transponders, and these guys were calling in the planes to the targets. It's not impossible." While this may be in the realm of possibility, again, it's speculation and no evidence is offered indicating this is how it was done.
Hart said, "one of my friends is a consultant for one of the world's leading engineering firms. I'm not going to name him. They've studied the films and they've found that there's no doubt whatsoever that ... the towers were brought down by controlled ground explosion." People have a right to anonymity, but how valuable is this? It's an unverifiable 2nd hand assertion; it's hearsay.
Hart also said "it's been very well documented" that Cheney and Israel are planning to use the Minot missing nuke/s to stage a false-flag attack in the US. Yet he provides no evidence.
Hart is an outside observer who is saying things that they can't prove; the only thing really newsworthy about it is that it's Alan Hart saying these things- same with Alan Sabrosky's recent comments.
At this point, there is no conclusive proof of who knew/did what, and how. Too much information is being suppressed, and too many questions remain unanswered. Even so, a great deal of material has been put out since 9/11 occurred that seeks to place the blame for 9/11 primarily on Mossad/Zionists/Israel/Jews, and it seems there's been an increase in recent months. Some of those hyping this material may simply be jumping to conclusions. Otoh, some of this may be part of an intentional effort to divide and discredit the 9/11 truth movement; this material has had that effect, and it has been used by the MSM to tarnish the image of the 9/11 truth movement and to alienate the public.
Col. Jenny Sparks posted this link below, to Adam Holland's blog; commentary on the interview w/ a partial transcript; worth checking out, imho:
http://adamholland.blogspot.com/2010/05/alan-hart-israel-did-911-and-may...
In my view, there needs to be a full investigation of 9/11, which would ask questions and address evidence apparently ignored by the 9/11 Commission. It would examine the role played by principals in the US defense, intel, investigative and law enforcement agencies, and in the Bush and Clinton administrations, who swore an oath to defend the Constitution and were charged w/ protecting the nation, who could have and did not disrupt the alleged plot, who may have aided and abetted it, and who may have even helped to plan and engineer it. Many people must have been involved in mining the WTC towers with explosives. Some of these people are Jewish Americans and/or Zionists and neocons; many of them are not Jewish or Zionists. People in private and public orgs in the US MIC need to be investigated as well. And the evidence of involvement by elements in the Mossad, Pakistan's ISI, and the Saudi Royals/GID needs to be investigated.
Complete 9/11 Timeline
http://www.historycommons.org/project.jsp?project=911_project
I Met Alan Hart A Few Days Before The Interview
Hello Truthseekers & Truthtellers,
I met up with Alan Hart at the Islamic High School in Milwaukee a few days before his interview with Kevin. We discussed 9/11 and he seemed very interested in talking about it and with his upcoming radio interview with Kevin Barrett. I'm glad he is coming out now with his views on 9/11.
Take Care Matt
Some wisdom from the past
Ecclesiastes 12:12
"of making many books there is no end; and much study is a weariness of the flesh."
Let's do a small substitution:
of making many theories about - WHO orchestrated and executed 9/11 - there is no end; and much debate about "WHO" will keep us tied up for another decade."
So let's keep focusing on the "WHAT?"
WHAT has been found in the dust from all three buildings?
WHAT physical law allows a building to fall at the acceleration of gravity for 2.25 seconds while simultaneously destroying 24 steel central columns and 58 steel perimeter columns
over eight stories?
You get the picture.
A quote from (I don't remember where) is: "Let them discuss themselves to death."
Let's not.
Well said!
What is where the action is until we can get them into court!
Thanks for a thoughtful perspective...
Kind regards John
Agreed wholeheartedly. Our
Agreed wholeheartedly. Our efforts should be for getting a new investigation. Upon achieving this, then -and ONLY then- will questions begin getting answered.
9/11 Truth for World Peace and Justice...
...this shoe is fitting better and better all the time...
This is the best "people's movement" in world history...and there have been some very, very significant movements...
The oligarchs are soon to be exposed to all mankind...
...and good people will assemble to make some important changes to this structure...
...peacefully and thoughtfully...
9/11 Truth for World Peace and Justice
Love, Peace and Progress...
Robin Hordon
Kingston, WA
Over the Top
There's too much focus on the Zionists and not enough on the world-wide criminals involved who are not Jewish.
I'm getting some heat for posting this here!
This is news, right or wrong and if we do not address it we will be marginalized just as we will if we support conclusions without evidence!
If you go to Alan Hart's Wiki Page this is last paragraph;
"In May 2010, Alan broke his silence on 9/11 while speaking on the Kevin Barrett Show by revealing that the world’s most prominent civil engineering company told him directly that the collapse of the twin towers was a controlled demolition.[5]"
Those that are disappointed that I have posted this need to realize, people will have legitimate questions about this site if it was not reported here.
I have my disagreements with Barrett which I express strongly and often, but the fact is that this is an important interview as Alan Hart is a highly respected well connected journalist.
Please let me know what you views are on this matter?
Kind regards John
John, you did the right thing.
John , who is giving you heat for posting this, I wonder?
Yes, this is a vitally important discussion and you did absolutely the right thing by posting this interview. The Israel-Arab conflict this is a major factor in the 9/11 issue, and the perps are taking full advantage of the reticence of the public (even sections of the 9/11 truth community) to discuss it. Despite the noble aim of freedom of speech and expression, putting Zionism under the microscope (and associated material) has been rendered the exception (even taboo) in not just the mainstream media, but also many alternative "liberal" (!) publications and websites..... which by all rights should be setting a better example. We must not submit to the ranks of people who perpetually resort to bullying tactics and their predictable volley of ad hominem attacks, to silence us. Unless we can integrate this issue into the 9/11 discussion in a mature and rational way, the answers we seek will never be forthcoming, imho.
John
I've noticed this too. I am not a prejudice man, however bringing up Christopher Bollyns research , Dov Zakhein, the dancing Israelis and anything associated with just simple questioning brings some very strange responses
For some reason i can't help feel this is hitting a nerve.
I have posted on. these topics before to seriously ask what others here feel, and have found out about this only to have been what i feel somehow attacked. To me it seems like there is a definite connection. Why isn't this brought up and discussed here?
John
I tried to blog this last night.
Top Construction Firm: WTC Destroyed By Controlled Demolition: Veteran Middle East correspondent Alan Hart: Largest engineering firm studied collapse of twin towers and said there was no doubt it was a controlled explosion
Paul Joseph Watson
Propaganda Matrix
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
http://www.propagandamatrix.com/articles/may2010/052610_controlled_demol...
[this comment was previously a repost of the article without a link to the original. It's fine to quote articles in comments, but full articles should not be posted in comments. When possible, include a link to the source, and/or cite the source- loose nuke]
No heat here
It seems that everyone who has cared to comment here is supportive John.
I think your article was very balanced. 10 out of 10.
I now look forward to seeing Mr. Hart come forward with names, places and dates. As we know, provable facts are the only things that matter in this game.
cheers (:
whether or not?
This is a great discussion.
absolutely should be posted John.
Thanks!!
Thanks to Alan Hart for his courage. Thanks to Kevin Barrett for this important interview. Thanks to John Bursill for posting it on 911blogger. Belatedly, thanks also to Dr Sabrosky.
I respect the extensive experience of Alan Hart and Dr Sabrosky and am always thrilled when anyone supports 9/11 Truth. Surely we are astute enough to decipher between evidence and speculation and to appreciate both.
In my humble opinion the biggest problem facing 9/11 Truth is the bitching and infighting. I tune out to the constant accusations of ‘gatekeeper’, ‘shill’ or ‘disinfo agent’. If you support 9/11 Truth, I support you. We should save the venom for those who truly deserve it.
Naomi
Agreed ! The truth stands up to all questions.
Absolutely right on.
Naomi, I am in total agreement with this. Those who get into infighting are playing into the hands of the perps and the shills who support them. We must never shoot holes in our own ship. Furthermore, those who get bogged down with placing "political correctness" before truth-seeking are hijacking our quest.
Unfortunately Politics are important to a degree!
I feel we need to consider our Political credibility at all times while continuing the search for the truth.
News is news:)
Regards John
FYI re: Alan Hart
http://adamholland.blogspot.com/2010/05/alan-hart-israel-did-911-and-may...
Whilst I am a friend and
Whilst I am a friend and supporter of John, these are the types of comments I find extremely unhelpful.
Please elaborate?
Jenny is just showing us the spin used against us and I'm pointing out Adam, not Alan is also clearly not perfect as he believes the official story of the towers?
Any way, please elaborate?
Regards John
Being involved is NOT THE SAME as “did 9/11”
«Some of you will bill this as more proof that Mossad and Israeli Zionists "did 9/11" and yes it is more opinion that that is possibly the case; It is not proof though.»
Certainly not proof enough, moreover not convincing either. Being involved is NOT THE SAME as “did 9/11”.
Sibel Edmonds had hinted of evidence that Tyrkey possibly was involved. Other evidence is that the alliance House of Saud, House of Bush, linked to the criminals behind BCCI who are/were from Muslim countries, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, were involved.
We know that a lot of secret services have been involved with al-Qaida-terrorism. There is evidence enough to suggest that al-Qaida is noting more than a series of Western intelligence operations.
In any case, the US government IS RESPONSIBLE for the stand-down that day. That is in my humble opinion the core of the problem. Outsourcing of the action doesn’t change that. Don’t forget Norman Mineta’s testemony about Dick Cheney’s words that morning.
Even if 9/11 was a joint venture – in my opinion that is the most probable − the US government is the responsible part. The US-government doesn’t mean people like Norman Mineta, it doesn’t mean all kind of agencies, but the most powerful people in that government.
I do not endorse everything from Michael Morrissey, but I think he had a point stating:
«Obviously not EVERYONE working for the US govt was involved. Nobody has ever even implied this. Why even say it? I was a clerk-typist in 1963; does that mean I am guilty for the Vietnam war? Similarly, no one has ever suggested, as far as I know, that other govts are innocent in the 9/11 story. But the overwhelming fact, and the fact that people (mostly but not only Americans) are desperate to ignore, is that the US govt is the only logical main perpetrator of the crime(s) and cover-up.»
The Mossad-link is not more interesting than all the other links.
Sorry John
Apologies John - thought you meant Alan not Adam. Sorry. You know you're my hero!
The "US Government" ? (!)
Two points: Firstly, we have to be extremely careful with our use of words and phrases, for example "the US Government". Time and time again I see debunkers latch onto this, and smugly claim that skeptics believe "the US Government" did it. The "US Government" is a huge, complex, lumbering, mostly benign entity employing tens of thousands of people in departments as diverse as the USGS, the Post Office, the IRS, The National Weather Service, and so on. Anyone who makes a (rash) claim accusing "the US Government" of committing 9/11 leaves themselves open to ridicule.
Secondly, in the eyes of the law, if you know about a crime before it takes places, you are considered an "accessory before the fact", which in many cases carries penalties as severe as those meted out to the actual criminals themselves. Had the law been applied, those 5 Mossad agents (for a topical example) who were arrested, dressed as Arabs and filming the attacks from the NJ side would have been charged with accessory before the fact to the mass murder of 3000 people, the destruction of 10s of $billions in real estate, and the trashing of at least two commercial airliners, and numerous other heavy duty illegal acts. They even admitted on Israeli TV that "we were sent there to document the event". In my first comment, I mentioned the immunity and impunity regarding all things Israel in the eyes of the US power structure... here is a prime case of exactly that. There is more evidence to charge and convict those 5 dancing Israelis (re. accessory) than there is against Osama bin Laden!
In the current climate of favoritism and duplicity on the part of the D.C. power structure/corporate media re. the Israeli-Arab conflict, to publicly question or dilute Muslim involvement in 9/11 can render one a target of those who resort to "Jew-hating" slurs and ad hominems at the first opportunity.
Reality check
>>It is noteworthy that Hart offers no new evidence linking Mossad, Israel, Zionists or Jews to the 9/11 attacks; he simply states his opinion about their involvement.
What I'm seeing is a big uptick in both the "Jews Did 9/11" theme and that parallels the increasing racism and hate in general in the US, ever since Obama has come into office. The most recent example can be seen in the Arizona legislation, and earlier examples include several murders by white supremacists and the far right extremists.
The "Jews Did 9/11" theme and racist extremism typically have the same origins and shared interests, in White Supremacy, and rightwing militias.
Kevin Barrett is apparently not a white supremacist, but he plays into their game and grows their movement by allowing a person to make claims about Israel's or Zionists' involvement in 9/11 without any evidence, go unchallenged. There is a lot of evidence of Israel's involvement in 9/11 which is well documented. But Kevin Barrett's guests are typically not actually citing strong evidence, but are making emotionally charged claims without a basis in fact. John, that's part of why I have a problem with you promoting Kevin Barrett in this way, even as I know you have the best of intentions.
What white supremacists do is prey on any type of group they can possibly find a way into to create a magnet for their hate.
An example of someone who has one foot in the White Supremacy movement and one in 9/11 is Christopher Bollyn. He can be heard in an interview with David Duke decrying the idea that black men be allowed to date white women. He takes his many years of experience in Israel and he uses it to create a false legitimacy for himself as an opponent of Zionism but his real beliefs -- racism, that whites are superior while all other races are not, that whites are in danger from mixing with other races, etc -- are only rarely actually seen in interviews like this --
DAVID DUKE: But she talks about how she had this great love affair with this black person -- they didn't show any of it on the screen, thank God -- but again it was teaching all of the young blonde girls and white girls in the audience, basically, and the white guys, that it's perfectly OK, that it's just fine, and if you're a pretty white girl it's absolutely normal for you to have a love affair with a black person.
CHRISTOPHER BOLLYN: Yeah, this kind of intermarriage and interracial dating seems to have become very popular, not popular, but it's been accepted in countries like Sweden, Scandinavian countries and in Holland. You see it more and more and it's almost like these rather naïve European girls, they accept what they're being told on MTV, and they flock to these boys, many of whom, in Europe, are not, they're not even European, in the sense that they haven't grown up there. They're often immigrants from Africa and the cultural difference between these European girls and these African boys is so great that it can't make for a very good relationship in any way. But like you say, this has been forced on Europeans and Americans by MTV . . .
http://www.davidduke.com/mp3/dukeradiobollyn30april05.mp3
What's worse, amongst the real and credible points about the 9/11 attacks, a veiled white supremacist will typically make ridiculous claims like this, discrediting the movement --
"The plane that struck the South Tower, for example, had shapes, bulges, and holes which have led many analysts to believe it was a Boeing 767-300 refueling tanker that had been disguised as a 767-200 United Airlines passenger jet."
http://www.bollyn.com/index/?id=10708
And Kevin Barrett has no interest in challenging claims like those either. He promotes them.
There is a reason why he did a radio program with Jim Fetzer for as long as he did, and it's not because he had such amazing guests and programs . . .
John, we've had discussions like these, for example on the thread with your Big Tent post --
http://911blogger.com/news/2009-02-16/911-truth-and-big-tent-approach-sh...
The racist extremists will target Big Tent just like they will try to use Free Speech and any other type of argument to keep a foot hold in the movement to drag others into their realm whom they see as vulnerable, prey to plant the seeds of their hatred.
That's WHY they don't need any actual evidence to say that Mossad, Israel, Zionists or Jews were involved in 9/11 -- it doesn't matter, because it's just another way to connect to others who harbor the same "gut" level beliefs (not evidence) which can be nurtured into outright hatred.
"The "Jews Did 9/11" theme
"The "Jews Did 9/11" theme and racist extremism typically have the same origins and shared interests, in White Supremacy, and rightwing militias."
"The racist extremists will target Big Tent just like they will try to use Free Speech and any other type of argument to keep a foot hold in the movement to drag others into their realm whom they see as vulnerable, prey to plant the seeds of their hatred.
That's WHY they don't need any actual evidence to say that Mossad, Israel, Zionists or Jews were involved in 9/11 -- it doesn't matter, because it's just another way to connect to others who harbor the same "gut" level beliefs (not evidence) which can be nurtured into outright hatred."
And that, boys and girls, is how dog-whistle politics work:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog-whistle_politics
http://agonist.org/ian_welsh/20060925/just_a_comma_dog_whistle_politics
http://rationalwiki.com/wiki/Dog_whistle_politics
And it's not just in the 9/11 truth movement...
Thanks Jenny this is the discussion we need to have:)
This is what blogger is all about in my view, detailed deep and thoughtful discussion and reporting the 9/11 Truth Movements News and successes.
Lets get into it....
Regards John
not sure this is a success . . .
Another example of the recent explosion in racism in the US:
Rand Paul Tells On Self and Fellow Tea Partyers
A Black Agenda Radio commentary by Glen Ford
It was like pulling teeth, but Tea Party star Rand Paul finally blurted out his core, racist ideology in front of national TV cameras. Property rights trump Black rights, every time. "White supremacy is the connective link that holds the 'Tea Party' together - that, and relentless media coverage."
http://truthaction.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6538
John, Rand Paul (son of Ron Paul) is considered a "hero" by many people in the US right now -- the county is a powder keg around the issue of race. Hosting thinly veiled anti-semites and likely racists on a radio program to supposedly expose 9/11 truth helps no one except but these types of movements which are all about hate and money. It spreads their word to people who are vulnerable to being recruits.
Strawmen....
Just like the absurd strawman invoked by "debunkers" who claim that skeptics say that "the US Government" pulled off 9/11" (see post above), a similar strawman set up by the shills and supporters of the official fairy story, is to regularly accuse skeptics of claiming that "the Jews did 9/11". Obviously this is a meaningless statement in that there are 10s of millions of Jews throughout the world... but somehow, they all had a hand in pulling off 9/11 (!!!!). Unfortunately, these ridiculous (5th grader) statements somehow manage to gain traction within a section of a populace which seemingly is unable to discern between a strawman and a genuine argument, when it comes to believing that the skeptics are "crazy".
On the other hand, people are free to claim that "the Muslims did 9/11", without any limitation or comeback, because such a notion falls neatly inside the majority's pre-conditioned comfort zone. There are a billion or so muslims all around the world, and yes, "they all had a hand in doing 9/11" (!). People have no problem with *that*, and seem eager to believe it. Such an absurd notion is reflected in official US government foreign policy, which has been to wage war against the Islamic people worldwide, on the basis of 9/11.
Regarding Washington DC: If there is a favored/privileged/approved community, and a disfavored/reviled/disapproved community, then the attitude of the US power-brokers (for decades) towards the Jewish and Muslim communities, respectively, represent those two extreme positions. Washington D(upli)C(ity) indeed.
There is no escaping that fact.... but a large majority of the US people are completely comfortable with it.
The 'Jews did 9/11' meme
bloggulator; "Just like the absurd strawman invoked by "debunkers" who claim that skeptics say that "the US Government" pulled off 9/11" (see post above), a similar strawman set up by the shills and supporters of the official fairy story, is to regularly accuse skeptics of claiming that "the Jews did 9/11""
It's true that CNN, other MSM, Simon Wiesenthal Ctr and Screw Loose have all portrayed the 9/11 Truth Movement as being anti-semitic, and making claims akin to "the Jews did 9/11."
It's also true that certain people have repeatedly given them an "excuse" for doing so; since 9/11, certain people have attempted to pin 9/11 primarily or exclusively on Jews/Israel/Zionists/Mossad, while discounting/ignoring evidence that non-Jews were involved. These type of claims can be found all over the web, some have made these claims at 911blogger, and this is what Hart has done in his interview.
Regarding evidence of involvement/cover up by non-Jews, Jew-blamers have frequently claimed this evidence is disinfo, and/or that it indicates that Israel/Jews have American puppets, and/or that some non-Jewish Americans are collaborating with Jewish Americans/Israel to cover up Jewish complicity in 9/11 crimes. This requires believing (or pretending to believe, in order to divide/discredit the 9/11 truth movement) that the US, with it's multi-trillion $ MIC, billions in annual aid to Israel, and 700 or so military bases around the world, is actually Israel's client state and not the other way around. The claim has often been made that the reason the Democrats and Republicans see no evil re Israel's war crimes against the Palestinians is cuz they're in the Jew's pockets, not so much cuz the elite have mutual political, social and economic interests, such as in the geo and resource strategic middle east, in the alleged 'war on terror', and in justifying continued massive taxpayer funding and support for the MIC- which many of them are heavily invested in, financially and ideologically. Congress still hasn't passed an Armenian Genocide Resolution, either- cuz Turkey spends huge sums lobbying against it, and cuz Turkey is a valued ally in the 'war on terror'.
911Blogger does not blame people for 9/11 by religion/race or ethnicity; 9/11 was a crime committed by people, and the US and global elite culture of corruption made both the crime and the coverup possible. The Bush Administration, while publicly claiming they were not blaming Islam, used 9/11 to launch a de facto war on Islam, inflaming the so-called "Clash of Civilizations" that Huntington wrote about. It is truly unfortunate that many Americans have bought into that idea as it suits their prejudice, just as many have apparently bought into the "Jews did 9/11" meme cuz it suits their prejudice.
imho, this interview is only valuable in that it's providing a forum for these issues to be discussed. Jew-blamers have frequently claimed that 911blogger censors discussion of the evidence of Mossad/Israeli/Zionist foreknowledge/involvement in 9/11, but this is a false accusation; all the evidence has been covered and discussed here, many times, and if any new evidence surfaces, it will be covered and discussed. What some would like to see is a focus on blaming Jews, and that's not going to happen; what isn't tolerated here is racism/hate, and mis/disinfo will be confronted and exposed whenever it's found- including the "Jews did 9/11" meme.
ZIHOP as Limited Hangout by Scott N.
http://truthaction.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2906&highlight=zihop
BRAVO!
BRAVO.... we need to discuss it here, where the debate is honest(in the most part) by people who really care about our success as a movement.
Just one part of a fabulous post I would like to endorse...by quoting you!
"Regarding evidence of involvement/cover up by non-Jews, Jew-blamers have frequently claimed this evidence is disinfo, and/or that it indicates that Israel/Jews have American puppets, and/or that some non-Jewish Americans are collaborating with Jewish Americans/Israel to cover up Jewish complicity in 9/11 crimes. This requires believing (or pretending to believe, in order to divide/discredit the 9/11 truth movement) that the US, with it's multi-trillion $ MIC, billions in annual aid to Israel, and 700 or so military bases around the world, is actually Israel's client state and not the other way around. The claim has often been made that the reason the Democrats and Republicans see no evil re Israel's war crimes against the Palestinians is cuz they're in the Jew's pockets, not so much cuz the elite have mutual political, social and economic interests, such as in the geo and resource strategic middle east, in the alleged 'war on terror', and in justifying continued massive taxpayer funding and support for the MIC- which many of them are heavily invested in, financially and ideologically. Congress still hasn't passed an Armenian Genocide Resolution, either- cuz Turkey spends huge sums lobbying against it, and cuz Turkey is a valued ally in the 'war on terror'."
Kind regards John
PS - Do you think Alan Hart is genuine in his beliefs in this interview?
"Do you think Alan Hart is genuine in his beliefs ... ?"
I'd like to know if he is or isn't, but I don't know or have an opinion.
Even if this is his opinion, as I said above, I don't think it's responsible or helpful to leap to conclusions like he's stated, without a full investigation, and based simply on the incomplete public record, while ignoring a great deal of the public record. http://www.historycommons.org/project.jsp?project=911_project
It's a significant "coincidence" that Hart's comments come on the heels of Sabrosky's equally speculative and unsubstantiated assertions, which came on the heels of http://www.rediscover911.org/ (i'm purposely directing people to an alternative that comments on the orig).
It all boils down to this: In
It all boils down to this: In the search for the truth about what really happened on 9/11, and who conceived, planned, organized and executed the attack, no one party should be held blameless by default, or immune to investigation. To exclude any particular group from the microscope of examination and discussion, in the interest of some arbitrary sense of political correctness, is utter folly. Such duplicity will insure that we will never achieve our final goal, of proving the perps' identity beyond all reasonable doubt, and bringing them to justice.
Unfortunately, there does exist a "sensibility" (albeit inverted) in mainstream America that it is in "bad taste" to assume that the Zionist community is not 100% squeaky clean. The Zionist clique is taking full advantage of this pressure to conform to this mode of political correctness.
We must also never forget the fact that the vast majority of all crimes, especially a brazen, premeditated, complex and multifaceted crime like 9/11, are committed because of motivation: 9/11 was not a crime of passion committed in the heat of the moment, but a deliberate act designed to change political strategies globally. People don't organize such risky/drastic plans unless there was a huge and lasting benefit to be gained.
The only motivation that the Bush Administration mentioned re. 9/11 was "because they hate our freedoms": this might have appealed to the broad base that has pre-existed for decades within middle America, of distrust or even hatred of the Arab and the Muslim. However, it was both an unrealistic over-generalization, and has no basis in reality. Even the **alleged** hijackers apparently "took full advantage of our freedoms" and lived very un-Muslim lifestyles. The (approx) 7 million Muslims who live in the US have a higher than average income and have a lower than average criminal statistics than their non-Muslim counterparts, and homegrown Muslim terrorism in the US is virtually non existent.
When any cop, from the greenest rookie to the seasoned professional detective investigates a crime, motivation is the issue that is looked at first when trying to determine a list of the most likely suspects. So in the "light" of the the Bush Administration's and the 9/11 Commission's non-examination and subsequent dismissal of the all important *motivation* aspect of 9/11, it is vital for the Truth Movement to determine which party/parties would have been likely to benefit from the 9/11 attacks, in both the short and long term. As far as the world's Muslim community is concerned, as one suspect amongst several, how might they have benefitted from launching such an attack on the world's premier military power? Perhaps they really wanted to be bombed back to the Stone Age by the industrialized West in a series of endless wars? Um, no.
We must never forget who were instantly blamed by the corporate media, the Government, all the military "experts and analysts" before the South Tower came down, before any suspects were named: "The Muslims"... It was a done deal, almost scripted... just like the stooge in the Harley Davidson tee-shirt "interviewed" by Fox News, who led the cheerleading for the "explanation" of how the Twin Towers collapsed. We all know here that the Government's story is a big fat lie.... and as such,, to put all parties under scrutiny is mandatory. No party can be excluded, if we are to find the truth.
OK: Since the thread is all about Zionism, the Israeli-Arab conflict, US foreign policy in the Middle East and 9/11, can anyone come up with any possible motivation for Zionists to have had a part in any prior knowledge/planning/consultation/execution etc of the attacks? If anybody is willing to exhibit a little political incorrectness in the interest of truth seeking, lets hear from you!
You're right
and spot on, but that doesn't mean there was no Israel /Mossad link to 9/11. There ARE actually hints- like a french intelligence paper accessed by german news magazine "Die Zeit" and Oliver Schröm, claiming Israel spys living door to door with Atta. (so far only adressed by Justin Raimondo at antiwar)
Or the high fiving WTC zippo lighters with the white explosive ingedrients van to "document" the event.
If I was the perp, I would do anything to involve other groups who are known for efficiency, like the saudi royal family and probably the Mossad. the more the better, to get a spiral of silence.
EDIT: Did mean Victronix- posting order is confusing
Thanks Victoria for your opinion and your references!
You know I am completely aware of the gist of your review here. I am fighting from the same perspective and agree that the Zionist theme is a very dangerous one indeed.
Points to consider;
I do not know one 9/11 Truth Advocate that supports radical Zionism or the destruction of Palestine. This could be the the same within the Peace Movement where I do see Zionism questioned in disgust often. So the point being we do not need to educate the 9/11 Movement about Zionism as they know already?
Barrett considers the 1.5 Billion Muslim's in the world an untapped resource for us that are encouraged by our exposing of Zionism throughout the world? In my view this is of little value in the west where I believe the education campaign must be won, but this is Barrett's view, that it normalises it with them?
Why I believe this story needed to be reported here?
1. This site is under attack in many subtle and not so subtle ways and an argument is being made by many people that censorship here is to prevent Zionism and it's involvement being discussed. This is blatantly false but still these claims are made. Posting this article proves it is not the case again.
2. Alan Hart is an important Journalist and he has not done another interview so we only have the Barrett one.
3. Believe it or not all the comments I have got back in e-mail approaching 2 dozen all express questions about Alan Hart's analysis being without new or compelling evidence. Many people see the theme that you talk of as they are not idiots, although in this case as I do they do believe Hart is genuine?
4. Hart's talking about the Engineering people he's talked to is valuable to boost our confidence and his reminding us of the influence of Israel in Media and in Congress is worthy of report.
Vic in closing my gut was 51% favour of posting this, and of those who are prepared to speak publicly you are the only one that has disagreed with it?
I will not be posting Kevin here again unless another situation like this arrives, where he has the scoop and it is important news. Barrett in my view and he knows this is that he is bad for both our credibility and our campaign with the people "that I think" we need to influence. He is not going away and he I believe thinks he is doing good, so we must deal with that reality.....engaging and educating along the way:)
Kind regards John
>>Barrett considers the 1.5
>>Barrett considers the 1.5 Billion Muslim's in the world an untapped resource for us that are encouraged by our exposing of Zionism throughout the world
The Muslims don't need to join our cause because they think we are against Zionists. They need to join our cause because of our evidence.
And if he gains Muslims by hosting people making weak or false claims which can result directly in violence and hatred in the US, what are we really gaining? A movement of people who don't care about evidence but hate Israel? I doubt that's where we want to go, John, and it's not where we need to go.
There are a ton of groups that focus on Israel and Zionism. The 9/11 Truth Movement does not need to be that. Most typically, bringing Israel/Palestine into groups will tear them apart.
>>He is not going away and he I believe thinks he is doing good
I'm sorry that he thinks that a person who calls me a CIA agent is doing good, a person who called Reprehensor a jackbooted thug is doing good, a person who called Arabesque a Nazi, is doing good, a person who labels anyone who disagrees with his tactics an "Islamphobic" is doing good.
Getting a statement from an important reporter about 9/11 that was not dipped into the swamp of anti-semitism/zionism, etc. would have been "good". Turning off Americans, stirring up racist hatred, so you can supposedly reach Muslims -- not good John.
What data do you have to show what Muslims ALREADY believe?
My guess is that they already know much more than Americans.
This is the classic disinfo technique -- wrap something unique and important in something distasteful and offensive, and then see who takes the bait.
I'm not defending Barrett's position, I'm simply stating it!
Again your points are well made, and Barrett's record of emotional slurs is appalling! Thanks for reminding those that may have forgotten, I am not one of them:)
This discussion is needed at this time and in this place, we are having it because of the post.
Educating the core of the most diverse and freedom loving movements of all time requires a respect for their intelligence? If you speak truth and make articulate and thoughtful arguments they will be persuaded. How we hope to influence "the core" without this discussion is beyond me.
When I write and read here my thoughts and delivery are focussed, which I find gives me clarity and confidence. I hope you'll see that many gain that here as well, for then we are all befitted?
Kind regards John
IMHO
IMHO Victronix has hit the nail right on the head.
it seems to me that some people have a vested interest in keeping 9/11 Truth's wagon hitched to the anti-semitic holocaust denial joos did it run-away horse.
In 2007 the Simon Wiesenthal Center fingered 9/11 Truth as anti-semitic. how horrible is that?
i sense that my feelings of profound shame - to have my name associated with a movement that is labeled by a very well-respected holocaust survivor's organization as 'anti-semitic' is - perhaps - by design - and a useful tool for those who wish to DISCOURAGE 9/11 Truth's recruitment efforts.
and so we see it again and again. again and again we see those who intentioanlly want to connect 9/11 Truth to holocaust denial and anti-semitism.
and in my OPINION it is shameful that this story appears on the front page of 911Blogger - because it simply offers NO NEW EVIDENCE - other than continuing to beat the drums and repeat the mantra about zionism and israel and the jews.
enough already
Thanks John and I know it's from the heart!
Regardless it is "9/11 Related News" and it has been reported widely.
The constraints of "anti-Semitism" are of concern absolutely, but should it mean that we do not speak the word "Zionism". Just like Sabrosky, Hart has many Jewish friends and associates, so does this not help in the Hart case in particular? He is not an anti-Semite in my opinion or I would have never touched this interview. Aren't the bloody and oppressed Palestinian's Semites counted?! Reality check.
Anyway, I am feeling your disgust and it makes me upset and uncertain about this. But as I hoped comments like yours provide the balance and the perspective we need here. Even though I feel it is overstated.
Kind regards John
PS - Your presentation at the "Treason in America" Event was my favourite, but I imagine parts of that event made you uneasy as well?
PPS - Did you ever think that you were just able to make these points because this article and interview is here?
Regarding Zionist Terrorists
April 10, 1948
Mr. Shepard Rifkin
Exec. Director
American Friends of the Fighters
for the Freedom of Israel
149 Second Ave.
New York 3,N.Y.
Dear Sir:
When a real and final catastrophe should befall us in Palestine the first responsible for it would be the British and the second responsible for it the Terrorist organizations build up from our own ranks [Jewish].
I am not willing to see anybody associated with those misled and criminal people.
Sincerely yours,
Albert Einstein
This is interesting...
...but its not up to us to assume what Albert means:
"the second responsible for it the Terrorist organizations build up from our own ranks [Jewish]."
You assume he means "Jewish", but as he is addressing the Exec. Director for "American Friends of the Fighters
for the Freedom of Israel", it seems that is what he means by "our own ranks", ergo, American supporters for the "Freedom of Israel"--which would include a mix of Jews and gentiles.
In any event, Mr. Einstein is unequivocal in who he believes has PRIMARY responsibility--the British. Which it is safe to assume means the British government, particularly those branches dedicated to protecting its HRM Imperial interests at the time, thought you may quibble on that point.
"Israeli Zionists COULD BE..."
"Israeli Zionists COULD BE the attacks instigator WITH OUT providing new evidence" (my caps)
Does this sound like another trap for 9/11 Truth, or what?
And his sole contribution is that his UN-NAMED friends, working for an UN-NAMED leading corporation, tell him the WTC's looked like controlled demolitions. Is that convincing or original? But it has no direct connection with the 'Israel-did-it' hypothesis!
And I have to admit I don't exactly like Kevin Barrett, the author of "Truth Jihad: My Epic Struggle against the 9/11 Big Lie" - is that title a bit counterproductive?
Just my 2 cents. But thank you, John B, for your many, many efforts.
his own image on FOX TV . . .
Speaking of "My Epic Struggle", and since we're into this whole thing of discussion, here's a well-written review of that book --
Juvenile and Narcissistic, an Embarrassment to the Truth Movement, October 6, 2009
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0930852990/ref=cm_r8n_gvthanks_cont?ie=...
Judging a book by its cover is normally poor practice, but the semiotic justice of this cover portraying the author engaging in symbolic autofellation makes such judgment apt.
Barrett fell in love with his own image on FOX TV news back in 2006 and never got over himself. The book's opening is revealing: "It was just a few days after Steve Nass had made me famous." Like we should care? "Call me Ishmael" it's not. As presidents tend to confuse maintenance of their own public image with national security, Barrett came to confuse his own self-promotion with 9/11 Truth. His incorporation of his own (presumably previously unpublished) poetry in his text suggests the author had a high degree of artistic control in this work.
The book's title, juxtaposing the word "truth" with about the most despised word in the English language, does about as much damage as any two words can do to the 9/11 Truth movement. His insistence that "jihad" means what Barrett wants it to mean (struggle and self-improvement) and not what it means to the American mainstream (religious war) reveal a solipsistic myopia that serves to marginalize truthers in proportion to the influence and attention Barrett gets. His disregard over the years for journalistic standards of accuracy and verifiability certainly shows truth to be a struggle for him, and recent interviews suggest he's losing the fight for self-improvement as well. Unfortunately, Barrett considers himself a leader of the truth movement, and the mainstream media are happy to cast him in the "Kooky Truther" story they love so well. Barrett obligingly trips himself up on facts.
For Barrett's new book, "Questioning the War on Terror", he seems to have located a publisher in his home town of 900 souls. Allah is indeed great! Such luck is surely an indicator of the book's quality.In promoting it Barrett appeared on a mainstream AM radio station that reaches half the country, revealing an amazing ignorance about the Nuremberg trials while claiming to be an expert in international law. He also characterized the holocaust as "toasting six million Jews", demonstrating a cultural insensitivity that lends credence to the suspicions of many of us that his alleged interfaith organization, the Muslim Jewish Christian Alliance, has been a sham organization--nothing more than a website--all along.
To see a video on Barrett's radio comments about the holocaust google: Kevin Barrett room
(Update: as of December, 2009, the MUJCA website has gone dead.)
Hardly Fair Vic...that review is by Brian Good?
Brian Good...you know who he is don't you?
Brian Good as a disruptor and personal enemy of Barrett, hardly unbiased!
Brian Good is also a stalker of Carol Brouillet and a man bent on discrediting William Rodriguez.
Sorry to rain on the parade, I will delete this comment if you do the same?
Regards John
PS - I am not supporting BARRETT!! In case anyone is confused:)
Content, not the messenger
It doesn't matter who wrote the review, what matters is what they say. Brian was labeled a "sex stalker" by Barrett -- I have yet to see any evidence of that -- so it's not surprising he would be retaliating. John, if you have some evidence that Brian was a "sex stalker", can you email me and share it? Otherwise it looks like Brian is just another victim of false claims made by Barrett where he calls activists Islamophobic, Nazi, CIA/Mossad, Thugs, etc.
Show me where Brian is calling Barrett any names like that.
And the fact is, because Brian keeps track of Barrett, he's got the facts organized pretty well. so he's a good resource to efficiently deliver the info that is most relevant.
Brian isn't perfect, but he has also been a dedicated activist in local Bay Area groups, both anti-war and 9/11. He did a huge service for our Lifting the Fog conference, helping out in ways no one else could have, transporting equipment and producing materials.
The points Brian brings up about Willie R. are the weak links that WR should address. Has he? If activists in our own movement are not exposing weak links, the JREFers and the MSM will do it for us. So Brian does a service by doing that, much as people may not like it.
Brian is not banned from most 9/11 forums, but Kevin Barrett is. There's a reason for that.
Hi Vic...no offence meant by this entry...
Ok your bent...
Why did you not put his name at the top in the beginning?
From what I have heard from sources very close to Carol, Brian made her very distressed indeed. I know these people of which you would know also...maybe you should ask them? Or call me/e-mail me? The reason I won't use their names is they are worried Brian may make them the target of his keen and unrelenting focus.
I've seen him make unreasonable claims about Willy and it disgusted me, although I looked into to it!
You simply cannot use Good for good in this way; surely you could do you own review. It makes it extremely easy for people to demonstrate flaws in your arguments when you hand it to them on a plate like this. Especially when all the other reviews are good it seems? You can't make points like this!
The only reason I spoke was in worry for your reputation; Barrett's is already ruined I would of though? For those that care about such things...
Regards John
PS - Maybe I was wrong and we are not mature enough for this debate?
"It doesn't matter who wrote
"It doesn't matter who wrote the review, what matters is what they say. Brian was labeled a "sex stalker" by Barrett -- I have yet to see any evidence of that -- so it's not surprising he would be retaliating. John, if you have some evidence that Brian was a "sex stalker", can you email me and share it? Otherwise it looks like Brian is just another victim of false claims made by Barrett where he calls activists Islamophobic, Nazi, CIA/Mossad, Thugs, etc."
IMO it does matter--this is why Kevin Barrett is poison--it doesn't matter how many hidden gems of wisdom he might have--he's still a crypto-Nazi, domestic abuser, ergo has no political cred.
HOWEVER--I've yet to see compelling evidence of this "sex stalker" business, nor any indication Mr. Good has been reported to the authorities or tangible legal action has been taken against him given the nature of the accusations and the financial status of the accuser(s).
"From what I have heard from sources very close to Carol, Brian made her very distressed indeed. "
Distressed enough to call the police? Make no mistake--if Mr. Good has behaved in an irresponsible fashion and failed to respect clear communications he was to leave Carol alone, then he definitely owns her an apology and needs to cop to his extreme error. But so far as I know there's been no evidence of anything apart from some back and forth yawn worthy tanty emails. What that looks like is manufacured drama .
In the real world when people are stalked /harrased they notifiy the police.
In the real world when people keep recieving unwanted email, they bock the email address.
They do not use supposed "harassment" as material for an online "poor me" pity platform instead of calling the police. Especially if they are educated, middle-class and are not lacking the financial means for direct legal action.
Someone needs to put up or shut up re: the "sex stalker" business.
>>Why did you not put his
>>Why did you not put his name at the top in the beginning?
Because people would ignore the content and instead focus on Brian himself.
Why does only Brian disgust you when he says something you don't like? Yet you are not at all disgusted by Kevin Barrett's blatant public attacks on myself, Brian, Reprehensor, Arabesque, etc? You want to spread an interview by Barrett, whom you say we should ignore because his reputation is ruined, yet you want people to ignore what Brian said because Brian bothers some people?
You post this because it's important for it being a reporter, and yet, Barrett has repeatedly stated that reporters who don't agree should be take to the scaffold. That doesn't disgust you?
I don't see anything immature about this debate/discussion. It's an honest discussion that involves emotion, but unlike Barrett, neither you nor I are calling eachother names like "Islamophobe" or "Coward" etc. We don't need to. We can disagree and argue without stooping to those levels.
Still I feel we should not stoop to this level?
We must play fair, and I feel you are not in this case.
I'm on the record standing up and against Barrett. He needs to be engaged and called on his behaviour, while many here have missed many opportunities to do so in person and on paper.
Yes as you agree to disagree, I feel that if the boot was on the other foot you voters out there would of swung it the other way against some one "not playing fair".
Until next time we will all continue to do the best we can.
By the way Tarpley, Barrett and Fetzer have all disgusted me many times in the past. Please judge me on my fruits, in this case you see them as rotten, fine:) I don't necessarily disagree....
Kind regards John
This interview is on Youtube now
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VUwUMjqy0ik
Why was this voted down?
I don't see anything wrong with posting this link here. It cuts to the part of the interview directly discussing 9/11.
This is off topic!
Off Topic!
John
No, it's not
They discuss the loose/missing nukes between approx. 51:52 and 54:52 of the interview.
YOUR QUESTION HAS BEEN ANSWERED
http://911blogger.com/news/2010-05-28/if-itpart-3-kennebunkport-hoax-and...
Former BBC Reporter Alan Hart Reveals 'Mossad' Involved in 9/11
Former BBC Reporter Alan Hart Reveals 'Mossad' Involved in 9/11 on Alex Jones Tv 1/5
Part2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HHrVo1_gRgU&playnext_from=TL&videos=Gjp-t...
Part3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HHrVo1_gRgU&playnext_from=TL&videos=Gjp-t...
Part4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uBwC4sddKTs&playnext_from=TL&videos=TQIdK...
Part5
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YEzk-AFNb84&playnext_from=TL&videos=Q4E7-...
From reading some of the
From reading some of the commentary re. this article:
(1) To express even the mildest criticism of Zionism is off limits, taboo, verboten.
(2) To question anything else in the universe is fair game.
We've got a problem.
A false accusation:
"From reading some of the commentary re. this article: (1) To express even the mildest criticism of Zionism is off limits, taboo, verboten." - bloggulator
In addition to criticizing Hart's statements, I criticized Zionist/Israeli policies towards the Palestinians in my comments on this thread, and in other ones. Your comments have not been censored- neither have the comments of the person/s who've expressed whatever opinion you're mis/interpreting, generalizing and extrapolating.
That said, everyone posting here should be familiar with the rules:
http://911blogger.com/rules
Perhaps I could put the point
Perhaps I could put the point in even plainer language: In the US, there is a glaring double standard in the way we deal with Israeli/Jewish/Zionist people/issues, compared with Arab/Muslim people/issues. The former have been rendered untouchable, unquestionable, and they are permitted to do anything they wish: terrorism, war crimes, massacres, ethnic cleansing of their Palestinian neighbors, and flouting international law on a regular basis is the norm...... and in return, nothing any less comfortable than "kid gloves" is permissable.
On the other hand, Islamophobia is more or less an approved attitude/state of mind, not only in the US as a whole, but especially within DC and US political circles. When it comes to bombing the crap out of a Muslim/Arab nation, "Middle America" rubs its collective hands together in glee at the upcoming videogame/"entertainment" spree. Yeeeehaaaaawww!!!!
What is the about Jews and Arabs which has fostered such a wildly differing way we treat these two groups? They are of the same Semitic racial stock, they originate from the same geographic region, and the two Abrahamic faiths share more commonalities than many people wish to know. 9/11 has served to widen the yawning attitude gulf that was already in existence, and had been for decades.
it makes me wonder, what kind of "racism of convenience" are we dealing with here, and what is the reason for it?
(2) To question anything else in the universe is fair game.
.. unless it involves the nuclear missiles from Minot which were discussed in the interview, in which case it will be falsely labeled 'off topic!' and down voted away.
It seems some people don't want anyone to know about the loose nukes! ... why?
So, for those who missed it the first time, here is my 'on topic!' post again:
------------------------------
'Loose Nukes'
The Mystery of Minot - Dave Lindorff
http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/cgi-bin/blogs/voices.php/2007/11/27/the_mystery_of_minot
The Kennebunkport Warning, far from being a 'hoax', had in fact warned about just such a false flag threat only days before.
More details:
http://911blogger.com/news/2009-12-14/kennebunkport-revisited-open-source-intelligence-forecasting
The problem is in your head
http://911blogger.com/news/2010-03-29/treason-america-conference-present...
Well, look at that.
When people talk about criticism of Israel or zionism being off limits at 911blogger, I have to chuckle. Its a nice way for anti-semites and holocaust deniers play the victim of censorship when nothing of the sort is happening, and all that while pretending that Muslim extremism is some sort of myth. Wahabists are just my imagination!
When extremist Muslims attack and kill artists, or ban Facebook (because of 'Everybody Draw Mohammed Day'), or when Hamas demolishes the homes of Palestinians, you will have a tough time convincing people that there are no extremist Muslims.
Zionism today is just a form of manifest destiny. Wahabism is no different. And the Westborough Baptist Church. ALL of these movements are indeed a reflection of the religions they may have spawned from, but none of them represent the majority of the religions adherents.
Alex Jones Interview?
I was disappointed to here Hart talking about the "Dancing Israelis" and how the could of been calling in the planes?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97o6HgiXw9g
If this demonstrates the information he deems as important I am afraid he's lost me as he did Jones. The reason why they were on there phones is probably to tell their friends and handlers the operation had gone ahead and then they would report what happened as it happened. Unfortunately for both Hart's and Sabrosky's "Israel" did 9/11 Hypothesis is that all this proves is that they had, like at least 10 other governments prior knowledge of the attacks? How Hart jumps to the conclusion that some how "James Bond style" they could manipulate a jet airliner at 500 MPH to hit a target 1,000 feet above is basically off the wall! As Jones says a GPS type wave-point position is far more likely using the Auto-Pilot etc; and then there is the E4B 747's up and about equipped with precision radar.
I am considering due to the mentioning of Hart has had a stroke 10 years back, that maybe he has some permanent damage to his brain that has made him a little imaginative?
Judy Wood springs to mind...
I could sense Jones was uneasy with this interview because of the lack of substance, I bet we don't see Hart return to the Jones show even Jones is turning on the charm.
Maybe Hart should change to fiction for his next novel?
Regards John