I wrote this review for Amazon on December 19, and it did not get posted for a whole month!

*********************************************************************************

Anyone who has done serious research into 9/11 will come to the inescapable conclusion that rogue elements of the government orchestrated the attacks as a false flag operation to arouse patriotism so the nation would support a war of global domination.

However, there is a very strong contingent of Americans who react emotionally, rather than rationally, to any argument suggesting government complicity on any level, let alone outright orchestration. These are the ones, who for decades, have believed America is the best thing for humanity since sliced bread. They believe our government would never murder its own people (even though they have NO trouble believing OTHER govts would kill THEIR own people), and anyone who thinks as such must be paranoid and even anti-American. Indeed, most of the positive Amazon reviews seem to be of this mentality. Such Americans, comfortable in their established paradigm of reality, will find comfort with this book.

No offense to this site but I am 100% positive that there are neo-con dis-info agents on this blog trying to slow down and disorganize the system. I am sure that 911 blogger is a reputable site, but there is no way of keeping those shills out. I enjoy this site a lot and understand there is no way to keep these people away. The only thing you can do is ignore them and expose them.

YOU CAN USUALLY TELL A SHILL (DIS-INFO AGENT) THIS WAY;

You will notice that they usually are in a small minority opposition voice to any good idea. When a person suggests an idea and 12 people are pro, and 3 people are against it, you can be sure that at least 1 if not all 3 are dis-info agents. That’s how they work.

They always want to seem to slow you down by trying to get you to waste time talking to them instead of actually doing anything. They will try to debate you all the time instead of actually getting anything done. IGNORE THEM…

Don’t let these people talk you out of doing things that will help spread the word. They are here to make you feel awkward and say things like “It will not work” or “Don’t do that you might get someone upset” HOGWASH

I just read that Fetzer has kicked out Steven Jones for censoring Rick Siegel. What I thought was particularly interesting was that he described this move as "temporary" until a
more formal structure for the Scholars can be implemented.

The fact that I could do such a thing as founder of Scholars, however, no doubt qualifies as another reason for the need for the society to incorporate and attain more formal structure.

That's straight from the horse's mouth.

I would ask why Fetzer decided to excercise this authority when he himself admits that his authority is illegitimate, but it's really a moot point.

The Scholars Group has imploded. I think it's time to take a good hard look at what's been going on in the name of Truth, and to reappraise the situation. Do we want to create a mini-industry with a star system? What are our larger policitical goals? Wehere should we be focussing our energies? Frankly I think we ought to be pushing for impeachment and for a new investigation as part of those proceedings. I also think the evidence of foreknowlege, the war games, and NORAD's lying to the commission ought to be front and center.

I wrote to Kevin Barrett and asked if he was planning on leaving Scholars for 9/11 truth. He wrote back the following. It seems written for public consumption so here it is:

No and yes.
More on this later...meanwhile see, below.
Kevin

As activists, when people ask us "what do you think of X theory about what happened," our answer should always be "well, that theory is no more improbable than the official story, whose probability is zero...but our job is not to prove what happened, but to show that the official story is demonstrably false, and force a new investigation."

The case of st911 is tricky, because it's dedicated to research more than activism. I think researchers have to be willing to allow other researchers to propose hypotheses, no matter how outlandish-sounding. The best response is evidence-based critique, not ad-hominem attack.

Morgan Reynolds, who was himself critiqued way too harshly by Jim Hoffman, seems to have caught the ad-hominem bug in his silly attacks on Steven Jones, which mix legitimate critique with ill-founded invective. I hope Steve can keep his cool and his trademark professional politeness, ignore the misrepresentations, and stick to evidence-based critique of whatever new hypotheses are proposed. So far Steve and David are the two researchers who have best combined lucid research with professional demeanor, and I don't expect that to change any time soon.

Meanwhile I hope to have Steve on the new GCN radio show "The Dynamic Duo" ASAP. I think a case can be made that my co-host on that show and st911 colleague Jim Fetzer is jumping the gun by prematurely hyping the exotic weaponry hypothesis, and I want to argue that activists should focus on the gaping holes in the official story, not exotic weaponry.

Above all, the format for proposed 9/11 debates needs to be a simple pro versus con on the 9/11 Commission Report -- that's the only debate that matters, and it's one we can't possibly lose.

Kevin

P.S. Important caveat: I haven't had time to look at the exotic weapons arguments in enough detail to have an informed opinion of their scientific (as opposed to rhetorical) merits.

I received this article in a bulletin on myspace and thought it would be of interest to some here:

"Man of Steele"
by Citizen Emily
editor@thecitizine.com

Lethargy struck late last Tuesday nite and after playing with the coat hanger jig on my tv I finally got FOX in without snow. I tuned in for a program I have never heard of before called "Standoff."

"Standoff" is a one hour prime-time crime drama. Ron Livingston plays a suave FBi hostage negotiator who saves the day once a week. Typically this Hollywood Dept. of Homeland Security scripted bull isht is not what I'm interested in. But before finding the remote in search of PBS (Public Bull Isht) something said on "Standoff" caught my attention.

Soon enough "Standoff" was introducing a character that was so mocking independent journalist and radio talk show host Alex Jones that I had to sit down and convince myself I wasn't dreaming. This character dissing Alex Jones, "Avery Steele," an energetic, suspicious, conspiracy theorist, was a radio talk-show host with a panache for revealing government cover-ups. As this episode of "Standoff" developed a hostage taker had called into "Avery Steele's" controversial talk-show for advice. By the end of the program, the FBi hostage negotiators set up a sting for the talk show host and the hostage taker who had 'phoned into his show for Constitutional advice. Ron Livingston rides again, I guess.

False Flag News
Friday, November 17, 2006 Broadcast

Show download:
http://mp3.rbnlive.com/Dan/0611/20061117_Fri_Dan.mp3

Partial transcript...

A: The Pentagon is boosting their war unit.

We know that through OPERATION MOCKING BIRD the CIA and intelligent agencies have collaborated, worked with and owned many of the editors and publishing houses and news paper outlets in this country.

We know that at the Bilderberg meeting top level people from NEWSWEEK, TIME -- the major media outlets go there and never tell their readers… People from THE NEW YORK TIMES -- all of them going to the Bilderberg and never reporting it. This is where the world’s elite meet and argue and set up the agenda for the way the world will be shaped.

Given the deliberate disinfo we sometimes get on this site, posting this article seems appropriate (of course, they don't mention targeting the 9/11 Truth Movement):

Pentagon steps up 'battle of ideas'
By Simon Hooper for CNN

(CNN) -- The Pentagon's latest recruits are not soldiers, spies or scientists but spin doctors, bloggers and YouTube DIY filmmakers as it prepares to launch a vigorous new media campaign in support of its ongoing military efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan.

On Monday the U.S. Defense Department announced it was setting up a "rapid response" operation in order to "get inside the 24/7 news cycle" amid growing criticism of the conduct of the war in Iraq and the leadership of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

The new operation is dedicated to providing "more timely responses to breaking news," reacting promptly to critical coverage and offering Pentagon-friendly "information products" to media organizations.

As well as providing experts, guests and analysts to speak publicly on the Pentagon's behalf to the traditional TV, radio and print media, the new operation will also concentrate on harnessing the growing power of new media as a means of getting its message across.

One branch will be dedicated to "creating products and distributing information" for the Internet such as blogs, podcasts and video content for Web sites such as YouTube.

Read full article.

About 1 month ago there was a man who worked for NORAD who came out on the alex jones show and in a newspaper editorial confessed he thinks 9/11 was an inside job. He also claimed that he heard talk of an actual stand down order. Alex Jones was promoting this guy and had him on his show 2 days in a row, and he got himself fired from his software job but after that i heard absolutely nothing about him. Any word on him now? I know most of the posters in here though it was disinfo, but i have not come to a conclusion yet .

"Fool's gold exists because there is real gold." -13th century Persian poet Rumi
I'm requesting that everyone consider not contributing to this website until the site owner, dz, makes an effort to ban people who are spamming it relentlessly with theories about no planes, TV fakery, space beams, etc..

It's my opinion that 911Blogger.com has become a safe haven for such individuals, who are IMO purposely trying to destroy the credibility of all 9/11 research by promoting these controversial theories -- theories that the overwhelming majority of 9/11 researchers believe to be divisive, deceptive, destructive, etc..

I'm not advocating banning someone for occasionally presenting these theories, or other controversial theories, but we all know that it hasn't been an occasional occurrence here at 911Blogger.com. Instead it seems to be an every minute of the day occurrence.

So, until dz takes the appropriate steps to get rid of the 911Blogger.com spammers, please contribute elsewhere.

I want to make it clear that I'm not speaking for anyone but myself. However, I do encourage those who agree with what I've written in this blog to not contribute to this website in any way until dz improves the situation. If he decides not to, I respect that -- however, I request my membership at 911blogger.com be terminated if he chooses not to.

Donahue doesn't let Pinhead O'Reilly push him around

Please anyone who gets this in time:

go over to the Rolling Stone Blog
and help out.

There are tons of posts by people pretending to be Truthers and smearing us with anti-semitic propaganda. Pretending to be for 9/11 Truth and then ranting about "Jews"

It's bad.

Thanks for the help if your able.

And if you're an agent reading this, you've got my curse.

I've been reading Fetzers. "The Great Zapruder Hoax" and you would not believe the amount of trouble that went into falsifying the data. The cover up and spin was bigger work than the original operation. This "operation" at Rolling Stone is definitely deliberate. It's not even skillfully done. But a trap for the sheeple, nevertheless.

:)

I am posting this as a Blog entry so that it's more visible, since the original reply that I just posted to Jim Fetzer, is in the comments section of a topic that'll soon have disappeared from the main 911Blogger page. I want it to be more visible so that he sees it.

As someone of Fetzer's apparent intelligence, who pretends to be well researched, he couldn't honestly believe the non-evidence nonsense that he promotes, supports and propagates about the Pentagon, in an obvious, subversive effort to try to help destroy the work of real, honest, good intentioned people involved with 9/11 research and activism -- guilt by association being a primary motive. But not the only one.

A former senior British Army Intelligence Officer now says the "liquid bombing plot" was part of a "pattern of lies and deceit." He also casts doubt on the London bombings.

This breakthrough article by Nafeez Ahmed, published in Raw Story, helps blow the lid off of the whole terror scare strategy used by Britian, the U.S. and other nations.

It is helpful for 9/11 truth, as it helps document government scare tactics, protecting patsies, and other techniques of fear and deceit -- of which false flag attacks such as 9/11 are a part - which governments use to control their populations and justify their imperial agendas.

"Lieutenant-Colonel (ret.) Nigel Wylde, a former senior British Army Intelligence Officer, has suggested that the police and government story about the "terror plot" revealed on 10th August was part of a "pattern of lies and deceit."

British and American government officials have described the operation which resulting in the arrest of 24 mostly British Muslim suspects, as a resounding success. Thirteen of the suspects have been charged, and two released without charges.

This man is a snake in the grass, the entire 911-Truth Movement needs to distance ourselves from him. He doesn’t represent me or 99.99% of the Movement!! What he represents are the perpetrators of the attack IMO!