By Sonny Bunch - Book Review - "Among The Truthers" By Jonathan Kay
The most disheartening aspect of the 2012 election cycle (so far) has been Donald Trump's effort to press the "birther" argument, claiming that President Barack Obama may not have been born in Hawaii in 1961 but somewhere else—Kenya, perhaps. A survey in February recorded that 51% of GOP primary voters believed Mr. Obama to be a non-native son. In a victory for common sense, support for the position plummeted with the recent release of Mr. Obama's long-form birth certificate.

Liberals should avoid crowing too loudly, though, since they have their own share of nutters. In 2007, pollster John Zogby asked Democratic voters about the terrorist attacks of 9/11; 42% of respondents said that George W. Bush and Dick Cheney either allowed the attacks to happen or deliberately caused the attacks to happen, presumably for political gain or to reap a financial windfall by waging a war for oil in the Middle East.

Daily Telegraph, 4 April 2011

Sunday Times, 3 April 2011

Wall Street Journal Europe, 5 April 2011

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

UK: Bombers who killed a policeman in Northern Ireland may have used explosives from Libya

This article is important not because it is so well thought out, but because it is found in the Wall Street Journal, a very respected and widely circulated newspaper.  It is owned by Ruppert Murdoch, the owner of Fox.  Ruppert is apparently doing all he can to contain the growing 9/11 Truth Movement.  As usual, there is no attempt to prove in any way that the evidence provided by the Truthers is unreliable or false.  Instead, just insults are hurled against them.  Hopefully the readers of the WSJ will begin to see how empty these attacks are. 

The Wall Street Journal

SEPTEMBER 28, 2010

What Ahmadinejad Knows

Iran's president appeals to 9/11 Truthers.

• By BRET STEPHENS

Let's put a few facts on the table.

• The recent floods in Pakistan are acts neither of God nor of nature. Rather, they are the result of a secret U.S. military project called HAARP, based out of Fairbanks, Alaska, which controls the weather by sending electromagnetic waves into the upper atmosphere. HAARP may also be responsible for the recent spate of tsunamis and earthquakes.

• Not only did the U.S. invade Iraq for its oil, but also to harvest the organs of dead Iraqis, in which it does a thriving trade.

• Faisal Shahzad was not the perpetrator of the May 1 Times Square bombing, notwithstanding his own guilty plea. Rather, the bombing was orchestrated by an American think tank, though its exact identity has yet to be established.

• Oh, and 9/11 was an inside job. Just ask Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

The U.S. and its European allies were quick to walk out on the Iranian president after he mounted the podium at the U.N. last week to air his three "theories" on the attacks, each a conspiratorial shade of the other. But somebody should give him his due: He is a provocateur with a purpose. Like any expert manipulator, he knew exactly what he was doing when he pushed those most sensitive of buttons.

He knew, for

The Wall Street Journal has presented an article entitled,

Islam's Encounters With America

A survey by Elaph, the most respected electronic daily in the Arab world, saw 58% object to the building of the WTC mosque.

link:  http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703743504575493711825224290.html?mod=djemEditorialPage_h#articleTabs=article

and a lively discussion developed.

I was astounded that the Wall Street Journal has not censored many of the comments posted.  Many of these comments would have been removed by Alternet or CommonDreams or Counterpunch or Truthout.

I responded with a comment and it has not been removed, even though it was boldly pro 9/11 Truth.  How long they will let it stay there remains to be seen.  Maybe some others could post.  Here is my comment:

Following is an article published in the The Guardian, UK, 4 November 2009 -

But also note this "link" to a Wall Street Journal OpEd article that soft pedals criminal behavior in face of International Law.

Italian court finds CIA agents guilty of kidnapping terrorism suspect

• Italian court convicts Robert Lady and 23 others in absentia
• First prosecution for US abduction of suspects to torture states

John Hooper in Rome
* guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 4 November 2009 22.50 GMT

Twenty-three Americans were tonight convicted of kidnapping by an Italian court at the end of the first trial anywhere in the world involving the CIA's "extraordinary rendition" programme for abducting terrorist suspects.

The Wall Street Journal, by way of Siobhan Gorman, reports that "Civilian air-traffic computer networks have been penetrated multiple times in recent years, including an attack that partially shut down air-traffic data systems in Alaska, according to a government report."

The concerns are reiterated on the website of congressman Tom Petri.

But the notion that the FAA could allow (direct or indirect) internet access to flight control systems is dubious. What could be the reasons behind this publication? Let's examine some hypotheses.

• Genuine concern - Some security breaches to non-critical systems are blown out of proportion, but are made public in genuine concern for FAA IT security as it relates to national security
• Fearmongering - Fan the flames of the security hype, easing the adoption of new laws, allowing the government draconian control over internet infrastructure

The story itself is so predictable it's hardly worth reading, but the comments are very satisfying. Realize too, this is the Wall Street Journal Law Blog . . . enjoy.

August 12, 2008, 1:09 pm
[[http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2008/08/12/mukasey-not-every-wrong-or-every-violation-of-the-law-is-a-crime/
|Mukasey: ‘Not Every Wrong, Or . . . Every Violation of the Law, is a Crime’]]
Posted by Ashby Jones
Mukasey said today that neither Monica Goodling nor Kyle Sampson (nor anyone else, it seems), will face prosecution for considering improper political considerations in their hiring of judges and lawyers. (Click here and here for earlier posts on the topic.) “Not every wrong, or even every violation of the law, is a crime,” he said. “In this instance, the two joint reports found only violations of the civil service laws.”
etc.

Comments
Report offensive comments to lawblog@wsj.com

So the so-called most powerful attorney in the US Government is telling people that “not every violation of law is a crime.”

Source: http://biz.yahoo.com/seekingalpha/070322/30330_id.html?.v=1

SeekingAlpha

Post 9-11 Backdating Issues: The War at Home

Thursday March 22, 5:04 am ET

James A. Kaplan submits: A recent lead article in the Wall Street Journal, “Companies Say Backdating Used in Days After 9/11” (March 7, 2007), was an obvious attempt to pluck at the readers’ heartstrings. In my case, it worked.

The article reads, in part, ..the nation’s stock markets were closed from Sept. 11 to Sept. 14. When they reopened the following week, the Dow Jones Industrial Average skidded more than 14%, in the worst full week for the blue-chip average since Germany invaded France in May 1940. Scores of companies rushed to grant options during the market’s trough…. some companies said it was pure happenstance, while others said it was intended to help motivate executives through the difficult period. But until recently none had admitted the award dates reflected improper backdating.

Edward Jay Epstein has an editorial in today's Wall Street Journal that deals with details of the alleged Al Qaeda plot on 9/11 and the CIA's contention that the plot was contained to a small group of Al Qaeda insiders, contrary to what a Spanish investigation into an alleged Madrid cell is saying. It's complicated, but consider this sliver of skepticism that concludes the piece:

"Yet if Mr. Garzon is correct about the Spanish connection to 9/11, it is not only the effectiveness of the CIA's interrogation of its al Qaeda prisoners that is called into question. The information from Binalshibh, KSM and other detainees was used to fill in the missing pieces of the jigsaw, and those gaps concerned the contacts the 9/11 conspirators might have had with others wishing to harm America. By saying that no one else was involved--not in Spain, Iran, Hezbollah, Malaysia, Iraq, the Czech Republic or Pakistan--these detainees allowed the 9/11 Commission to complete its picture of al Qaeda as a solitary entity.