As I write this, the newest issue of the Rock Creek Free Press is rolling off the press. It is a truly blockbuster issue with twenty articles, including two new articles by Webster Tarpley.
Here is one of them.

9/11 Truth Squads Bring Reality of Inside Job to Primary Campaigns - A "Macaca" Moment for Giuliani in the Bronx

by Webster G. Tarpley

Republican front-runner Rudolph Giuliani, Democrat Barak Obama, GOP candidate Sam Brownback, 2004 Democratic nominee John Kerry, George Bush the elder, former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, former NSC Director Zbigniew Brzezinski, Senator Chris Dodd, Wall Street heavy David Rockefeller, Arab-hater Alan Dershowitz, Democratic contender John Edwards, Democratic Congressman and House fundraising boss Chris Van Hollen, neocon chickenhawk William Kristol – what these ruling class figures all have in common is that over the past three months they have been confronted in public by 9/11 truth activists challenging them on the premise of their entire world outlook: the 9/11 Big Lie, as codified in the bankrupt 9/11 commission report. These interventions have generated a new wave of 9/11 inside job publicity on cable television – especially on Hannity and Colmes of Fox News Channel -- on talk radio of all stripes, on the internet. Since January, the 9/11 truth squads have become the leading edge and main thrust of the 9/11 truth movement, and the principal means of keeping the 9/11 resistance in the public eye.

Giuliani was confronted in the Bronx on May 31 by Sabrina Rivera, a truth activist whose boyfriend’s father was a fireman who died on 9/11. She asked Giuliani why he and his staff had received a special warning that the twin towers of the World Trade Center were going to collapse, when the people in the buildings never got that warning. Giuliani’s response contradicted everything he has ever said about 9/11 – he denied that he had ever received a warning that the twin towers were going to come down. We never though the towers would implode, stammered Giuliani. But that is not what Giulaini had told Peter Jennings of ABC news on the afternoon of 9/11. At that time the Mayor said: “I went down to the scene and we set up headquarters at 75 Barclay Street, which was right there, with the police commissioner, the fire commissioner, the head of emergency management, and we were operating out of there when we were told that the World Trade Center was going to collapse. And it did collapse before we could actually get out of the building, so we were trapped in the building for ten, 15 minutes, and finally found an exit and got out, walked north, and took a lot of people with us.” [ABC News, 9/11/2001]

Was Giuliani lying then, or is he lying now? The question goes to the heart of his campaign, since he is running as Mr. 9/11, America’s Mayor for the Global War on Terror. And the issue is material: hundreds of office workers, cops, firemen, and others in the South Tower never got the warning that Giuliani originally said he received. Instead, they were told to stay put. Now voters can make up their mind, since the Sabrina Rivera intervention was covered by New York City stations WNBC channel 4, WCBS channel 2 (in both local news telecasts and website postings), and Hannity and Colmes on Fox, as well as Rawstory and other leading internet sites. It may not be immediately obvious, but this answer and the issue it points to are a true macaca moment, a fatal crack in Giuliani’s demagogic front that sooner or later will knock him out of the race if the 9/11 truth movement does its job. This is all thanks to the courage and emotional power of people like Sabrina Rivera and her friends.

Robust 9/11truth squad activity is ongoing New York City, Austin, Texas, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, upstate New York, Washington DC, and elsewhere. The goal of this mobilization is to inject almost six years of research into 9/11 as a coup d’etat by the intelligence-security bureaucracy of the US in to the ongoing presidential primary campaigns in particular.

Between now and February 2008, we will be in the realm of retail politics. About two dozen contenders from the two major parties, plus third party candidates of all types, are running all over Iowa (where the first caucuses are held), New Hampshire (which has the first primary election), South Carolina, Nevada, and elsewhere. No president or rive president is running so far. Retail politics means that these candidates are compelled to answer questions from ordinary people, meeting, greeting, and glad-handing in barber shops, places of business, factories, old folk’s homes, town hall meetings, house gatherings, outdoor rallies, and the main street of Manchester, New Hampshire. This activity is too vast to control, too chaotic for would-be totalitarians to banish and strangle the pointed questions of the 9/11 Socratic dialogue.

As the latest Time magazine Person of the Year reminds us, the protagonist of the New Media is YOU – the dedicated, intelligent, courageous activist who willing to get up at 5AM or brave the ostracism and elbows of a crowd of true believers to pose the reality-based questions about 9/11 without which no political progress is possible in this country or the world. 9/11 truth activists can create the news event, and then publicize it at sites like 911truthsquads.com, 911blogger, wearechange.org, pnacitizen, Manhattan Neighborhood Network, and youtube in general. The exposure generated there can then force the major corporate media onto the defensive, make them change their agenda, break through the controlled environment of mass brainwashing, and continue the demolition of the 9/11 myth. The Austin intervention by the Project for the New American Citizen, originally a University of Texas campus group, is a case in point: when asked about controlled demolition of WTC 7 (always a big Achilles heel of the official version), 2004 Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry remarked with his usual blasé dilettantism that he seemed to remember something about that. This percolated on the internet for a couple of weeks, and then generated an invitation to the present writer to appear on Hannity and Colmes on May 10. In the process, Fox News was obliged to show a film of the collapse of WTC 7, a subject which the media generally want to avoid. Hannity and Colmes were both at their most hysterical, but a few facts got through. Most of all, the world public could see that there is still resistance to the 9/11 Big Lie, through 7.5 minutes of air time seen by an audience of almost 2 million political devotees. Students at Temple University in Philadelphia and at SUNY Albany have also vigorously confronted establishment poo-bahs. If this becomes a campus fad in the fall, the ruling class will be in big trouble.

A 9/11 truth squad ideally consists of at least three people: one has the question, and another has the follow-up. Since no one can be sure who will get to intervene first, these roles must be interchangeable. The third teammate has a camcorder or a video-camera cell phone, with the latter preferred where totalitarian screenings are expected. Larger groups are better, but questioners need to be battle-hardened activists, since it takes guts to brave the hysteria of a roomful of fanatics. Most of the main candidates have already been confronted at least once, so there is no point in taking another round of the usual “I’ll look into it” brush-off as a serious reply. If they have not looked into it by now, they are not qualified for the presidency, and especially to clean up the mess left by Bush, and they need to be confronted with that fact.

The window of opportunity, as noted, extends to about the first week of February 2008. After that two dozens candidates doing retail politics in multiple states may well go down to two candidates at 35,000 feet planning their next million-dollar media buy. The latter scenario makes it much harder to intervene, so the time to intervene, and forcefully so, is now. And once the current phase is over, the ruling elite would like it to be forever: Joel Achenbach’s article “New Wave Politics,” published in the Washington Post Sunday magazine on May 20, 2007, indicates that the power-brokers would like to phase out Iowa-New Hampshire retail politics completely. If you want to stop them, do something about it right now.

On the other side, the youtube internet which made the first macaca moment possible in the form of Virginia Senator George Allen’s self-destruction on video tape last August, may itself be on the way to extinction. The Pentagon now prohibits access to Myspace through military computers. Other controls, including the abolition of net neutrality, may soon follow, all designed to muzzle dissent. If you don’t like this prospect, do something about. The First Amendment lives either through us, or it dies.

In the meantime, the party realignment rolls along. If 9/11 truth explodes into a national catharsis, the outcome could be highly progressive; if not, fascism could be on the immediate agenda. Both parties are splintering. We may soon have four parties, not two: first, a Tancredo-Knownothing-Minuteman-Mexophobia party of disgruntled and crazed petty-bourgeois and unemployed supplemented by KKK, white supremacists, neo-Nazis, and racists generally, eager to scapegoat terrified and super-exploited foreign workers for the collapse of the US standard of living; this would be the vanguard of an actual US fascist mass movement, which has been lacking so far. Then, a corporate-country club-chamber of commerce respectable Republican group led by someone like Romney, McCain, or Giuliani, with a program of monetarist “free enterprise” by monopoly cartels and top-down dictatorship. Then, a neocon warmonger Democrat grouping, with Hillary Clinton, Joe Lieberman, and Joe Biden, backed up by Soros, Robert Rubin, Rohatyn, and the left bank of Wall Street, all pushing a wider war in the Middle East and Malthusian totalitarian liberalism with a human face. Finally, a left-progressive, anti-fascist, anti-police state, and anti-war party might emerge and, providing it embraced 9/11 truth and rejected the Bush-FBI “global war on terrorism,” it could be viable. At that point it would come down to economic program: if the left anti-war grouping chose an economic program based on the Franklin D. Roosevelt New Deal in adjusted modern form, the future prospects for human life in North American would improve.

As we go to press, there are reports of an emergency organizing meeting to be held in Philadelphia on July 4 under the heading “Which Way the Peace Movement?” This meeting will address the obvious impasse of the peace movement after the shameful pre-Memorial Day capitulation of the Democratic Party to Bush’s demand for open-ended war funding. The view here is that since Bush cites 9/11 in every Iraq war speech, the only way to stop him is to dismantle his basic premise, the 9/11 nightmare vision. Peace “leaders” with Democratic Party ties and foundation funding from Ford, Soros & Co. have struck out; they must be replaced by leadership dedicated to making 9/11 truth the cutting edge of all agitation. The peace movement, in short, needs a head, and 9/11 truth can provide it.