Aug 242014
 

On the heels of, and inspired by, the successful pilot project “9/11 Truth: Good for America,” activists all across the country and around the world will be continuing the popular and positive outreach of that campaign next month.

The Anatomy of a Great Deception

We will be sharing and screening the powerful new movie The Anatomy of a Great Deception, which will premiere on the following days in these locations:

■Sept 5 Detroit, MI
(Fillmore Theater)

■Sept 11 New York City
(Theater 80 — Groundzero911)

■Sept 11 Houston, TX
(Bayland Park Center — Houston 911Truth)

■Sept 11 Tempe, AZ
(ASU Campus)

■Sept 11 Oakland, CA
(Grand Lake Theater — SF911Ttruth)

The effort to expose the truth about 9/11, specifically the destruction of the three WTC skyscrapers, has been building gradually over the past 13 years. Momentum has surged over the past 12 months in particular. Our work at Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, the efforts of the ReThink911 campaign, and the contributions of many outstanding scholars, researchers, and dedicated activists have combined to make a remarkable impact.

New York City Actions

As the momentum builds, and the AE911Truth New York Times Billboard is raised, now is the time to increase the call for 9/11 truth and justice.

You can do that by either coming to New York City for the 13th anniversary events or by taking part in activities in your own area. For all who can travel to New York, there will be events going on from Thursday 9/11/14 through Saturday 9/13/14.

Thursday — 9/11/14

Our outreach efforts will be held at Ground Zero near the 9/11 Memorial & Museum, where we’ll inform the public about what they won’t find there by handing out the alternative guide to the museum.
■11 AM: AE911Truth Press Conference
■ 2 PM: The NYC premiere of “The Anatomy of a Great Deception” — Theater 80, East Village

Friday — 9/12/14
■10 AM: Outreach at 9/11 Memorial Park, corner of Liberty St. & Greenwich St.
■ 3 PM: Outreach actions at the NY Times ReThink911 Billboard
■ 7 PM: 9/11 Truth Café – live music and socializing at 6th Street Community Center, 638 East 6th Street, between Avenues B & C in the East Village

Saturday — 9/13/14
■2 PM: Symposium — “The 9/11 Awakening Goes Mainstream.” Speakers include: 9/11 survivor Ricki D.; attorney William Pepper; firefighter Rudy Dent; architects Bill Brinnier and Richard Gage; family members Bob McIlvaine, Vance Green, and Catherine Montano.

For those who cannot be in New York with us, we urge you to host your own screening of The Anatomy of a Great Deception – the “ultimate red pill.” As you can see, the 13th anniversary events will be action-packed. Please spread the word — and stand by for more details!

More information: http://www.ae911truth.org/

Tags: 9/11, 911, AE911, AE911Truth, ReThink911

Aug 242014
 

August 23, 2014

As the United States government ponders its response to the global jihad, especially with the likes of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) now tearing through Iraq, al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) squeezing the life out of Yemen, Al Shabaab terrorizing both Somalia and Kenya, Boko Haram is Nigeria, Al Nusra Front leading the charge in Syria and other Islamist groups, the news media are focusing attention on what’s commonly referred to as the 9/11 Truth Movement.
During the days following the devastating destruction and death that occurred on Sept. 11, 2001, there were a number of Americans who questioned the media’s coverage of what actually happened to the World Trade Center and the U.S. Pentagon.

While in the midst the President George W. Bush administration there were several media outlets that gave credence to the voices from the 9/11 Truth Movement — of Truthers, for short — but when President Barack Obama took office, those same news media voices were no longer interested in pursuing the story and theories put forward by the so-called Truthers.

However, on April 3, 2014 the well-respected and relatively unbiased C-Span cable television show “Washington Journal” invited the usually bombastic Democratic congressman, Representative Jim McDermott who appeared to have opened up the 9/11 controversy once again.

Read more here

Aug 222014
 

from SGT Report.com:

James Corbett, The Corbett Report.com: Investigative journalist, writer, filmmaker, prolific truth teller. Please watch & share James’ new documentary: Century of Enslavement: The History of The Federal Reserve

Read more at http://investmentwatchblog.com/911-the-fed-the-united-state-of-enslavement-james-corbett/#EMutdsBVM6cMcVTK.99

Aug 192014
 

Putting a 9/11 Mystery on the Ballot

By Russ Baker on Aug 14, 2014

I was standing blocks from Building 7 of the World Trade Center complex and staring directly at it when it collapsed.

Working for the Los Angeles Times, I arrived that morning just in time to see an enormous cloud of dust and people running away. I had not yet known of the rapid and deadly descent of the South and North towers. That afternoon, I called in a series of reports to a staffer in the New York bureau.

I was literally on the phone with the office at 5:21 p.m., describing the fires burning in the structure as the building began—and completed— its remarkably fast, smooth descent to the ground. I described the building neatly pancaking, and the Pulitzer Prize winner on the other end taking my dictation declared: “That sounds like a controlled demolition.”
- See more at: http://whowhatwhy.com/2014/08/14/putting-a-911-mystery-on-the-ballot/#sthash.1psSjkkY.dpuf

Aug 122014
 

http://www.ae911truth.org/en/news-section/41-articles/909-why-do-good-people-become-silentor-worseabout-911-part-9-brain-r…

Why Do Good People Become Silent—or Worse-About 9/11? Part 9: Brain Research, Part 2 – Moral Psychology
Written by Frances Shure, M.A., L.P.C.
Friday, 08 August 2014

911-experts-shureFrances Shure, M.A., L.P.C.

Summary/Editor’s Note: Frances Shure, M.A., L.P.C., has performed an in-depth analysis addressing a key issue of our time: “Why Do Good People Become Silent—or Worse—About 9/11?” The resulting essay, being presented here as a series, is a synthesis of both academic research and clinical observations.

In answering the question in the title of this essay, last month’s segment, Part 8, reported on some of the brain research that shows we humans have differences in our brain structures, and these differences help explain why some of us are more open to new ideas and can handle ambiguity better than others. Additionally, the research, which demonstrates the brain’s tenacious hold on belief, despite contrary evidence, helps us understand why the task of educating people about 9/11 becomes as much psychological as it is evidence-based.

We continue Ms. Shure’s analysis in Part 9: Brain Research, Part 2, which examines the interface of brain research and moral psychology.
Part 9: Brain Research, Part II – Moral Psychology

How do we acquire our values and our morals? Through reasoning, through emotion, or both? Do conservatives and liberals differ in their values? Does morality vary across cultures? Does our neurology affect our morality?

These are the types of questions that moral psychologists and neurologists are trying to answer, and recently, research in moral psychology has increased voluminously. It is a hot topic.

A few scholars in the humanities and sciences drafted a list of points on morality research upon which they could all agree. Among their points of consensus was that human morality is both innate and culturally derived. The innate building blocks of human morality are the products of evolution, with natural selection playing a critical role. 1

A question that 9/11 activists often ask is, “Why don’t more people become active in our movement, or at least support us, when they clearly understand that 9/11 was a staged event?” Why do they instead become silent? Many conclude from the evidence — and from the implications of that evidence — that elements within our government had to be involved in this mass murder. They know that, in the aftermath of 9/11, hundreds of thousands of our fellow human beings have been murdered, nations have been ruined, and civil liberties have been gutted; and they are aware that, to this day, these atrocities continue.

What keeps people from doing the right thing? What keeps our independent journalists from doing the right thing? What keeps our congressional representatives from doing the right thing? These representatives surely know the implications of the 9/11 evidence, but they are more silent — and worse — than most citizens of our country.

This is a moral issue. I challenge moral psychologists to grapple with this issue, instead of joining the conspicuous silence!

Georgy Lakoff has looked at the research in moral psychology. In his book, The Political Mind, he summarizes some of the findings that give us some insight into the profound silence of those who have at least accepted the 9/11 evidence and its implications, but who choose to keep quiet.

Lakoff theorizes that our brains are wired to direct us toward well-being. Well-being is tied to right behavior, which is guided by our moral convictions, many of which are built into the human nervous system. For example, research into mirror neurons shows that we are hardwired for empathy and cooperation. A mirror neuron is a type of brain cell that responds in the same way when we observe a specific action by another as it does when we are performing that very same action ourselves. This discovery by neuroscientists helps to explain our human capacity for empathy.

The mirror-neuron mechanism translates into the moral value common to many religions: “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” In Judaism, for example, “mitzvah” means a commandment to do good, and in everyday speech, mitzvah has come to mean a simple act of human kindness. But why is mitzvah a commandment? From the view of brain research, says Lakoff, this commandment and others similar to it manifest from our neural wiring: we feel good when we are kind to others. From this mirror-neuron point of view, when we see others happy, we become happy.

This innate structure can make it difficult for 9/11 skeptics to present the evidence showing that we have not been told the truth about 9/11, because virtually no one is going to feel happy upon hearing this information. If we are psychologically healthy, we do not want to cause distress in others. Nevertheless, a higher moral calling drives activists in the 9/11 Truth Movement forward, so that they courageously transcend their inner taboo barriers and intrepidly present their evidence. There is too much at risk, they believe, to not do so.

Lakoff theorizes that moral convictions are hardwired in our brains. If he is correct, we can easily see how these innate convictions help explain why good people become silent — or worse — about 9/11.

Hardwired convictions that are especially relevant to the subject at hand include the following: We will be better off if 1) as children, we obey our parents than if we disobey; 2) we are with our community rather than opposed to it; and 3) we do not challenge those who have more power than we have. 2

Since we commonly understand governing institutions in family terms — that is, we see authority figures as parental figures — then if we are to feel good, our hardwiring leads us to obey and believe our governing institutions. Given our hardwiring, we are also predisposed to be in conformity with our community’s beliefs.

Therefore, according to the brain’s drive toward well-being, morality requires staying within the boundaries of our community — adhering to the current consensus reality and the mores of the culture. To challenge these boundaries is seen by the brain as deviant, and being deviant is synonymous with being immoral. 3 This is so even if the challenge to the community is obviously from a higher moral calling, as in the case of the White Rose student resistance that protested Nazi Germany’s warmongering and concentration camps. In this tragic case, the authorities saw these students as immoral deviants threatening the power structure. They were jailed, and after a show trial, the brave, young leaders were summarily executed. These students had famously insisted, “We will not be silent!” — a motto that lives on in spirit in today’s activists of all stripes, but especially those championing difficult, taboo subjects like 9/11.

The questions then become, “If we are hardwired to conform to authority, how does change ever occur? Why are there revolutions against tyranny and corruption? Why does consensus reality ever change?”

It appears that humans are very tolerant of their authority figures, but when parents or governing institutions go too far in abusing or deceiving, other biologically wired moral convictions kick in, including:

1) Morality means Fairness

2) Morality means Honesty

3) Morality means Happiness

4) Morality means Freedom 4

Research into the fascinating subject areas of the brain and moral psychology will surely continue, giving us greater clarity into our human resistance to information that contradicts our sacred mythologies, and giving us more insight into why those who know the evidence about 9/11 do not find their voice — in their silence leaving only the sound of chirping crickets.

Shifting to other lenses through which to understand why some people can become aggressively zealous about their chosen worldview, our exploration leads us next to the theories of Terror Management Theory and Systems Justification Theory.

Editor’s note: Electronic sources in the footnotes have all been archived. If they can no longer be found by a search on the Internet, readers desiring a copy may contact Frances Shure [ Here ] for a copy.

This series will be continued in our next newsletter with both Part 10: Terror Management Theory and Part 11: Systems Justification Theory.

[1] A statement of consensus reached among participants at the Edge.org conference, The New Science of Morality (June 20–22, 2010), http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/morality10/morality_consensus.html.
[2] George Lakoff, The Political Mind (Penguin Books, 2009), chap. 4.

[3] Ibid.

[4] Ibid.

Aug 122014
 

Anger over 9/11 Museum exhibit that casts doubt on link between health problems and toxic Ground Zero air

Committees representing 9/11 survivors and first responders are demanding the museum rewrite three of the panels in the ‘After 9/11’ exhibit because they say they contain inaccurate information about the connection between exposure to toxic dust and widespread health issues.

BY Dan Friedman /

NEW YORK DAILY NEWS /

Sunday, August 10, 2014, 8:02 PM

WASHINGTON — The government has recognized that first responders became ill from working near Ground Zero — but the 9/11 Museum isn’t so sure.

Responders and surviving family members are furious that panels at the museum’s “After 9/11″ exhibit present the connection between the toxic dust around Ground Zero and the subsequent health issues of many workers as uncertain.

It’s the latest in a long list of complaints about the museum’s management and mission by victims’ families and responders, who point out that the 2011 James Zadroga Act, which helped cover victims’ health needs, settled the issue.

Read article here

Aug 052014
 

Last Year It Was WTC 7;
This Year It’s the Twin Towers
Help Us Take On The New York Times with a New ReThink911 Billboard

We at AE911Truth are thrilled to announce the first of our 13th Anniversary projects: the September 2014 New York Times Billboard!

With your support, this billboard – which features the explosive destruction of the North Tower along with our rebuke to New York Times chief correspondent David Sanger’s jaw-dropping comments last year – will stand directly outside The New York Times Building throughout the month of September, including on the 13th Anniversary of 9/11.
rethink9112014timessquare
Like us, you were probably flabbergasted when you heard Sanger say on C-SPAN, “We’ve not found any evidence so far to suggest that the building collapses were caused by anything other than the two airplanes.” The following day, more than 1,000 AE911Truth supporters contacted the Times and Sanger himself to say, “Clearly, you haven’t been looking.”

Now we are sending the message even more loudly with a billboard the newspaper’s employees and the public cannot possibly ignore. Like last year, this 29′ x 13′ billboard, standing just across the street from the Times Building and the Port Authority Bus Terminal, will be seen by 100,000 people each day. With the image of the North Tower grabbing the eyes and the minds of everyone who has a clear sight line, this one is sure to get the attention we all know it deserves.

What will it take to reach 100,000 people each day and make a statement that will have every Times staffer wondering about the evidence of controlled demolition? It will cost $30,000, and we can raise that money in no time, if those of us who want this billboard chip in today. Will you help us reach our target by this Wednesday?

Think about it! At 100,000 people each day and a cost of $1,000 per day, each dollar you donate will reach 100 people. With a modest donation of $10, you will personally reach 1,000 people. With $25 you’ll reach 2,500 people, with $50 you’ll reach 5,000, and so on.

Plus, on top of these millions of individual “impressions,” we have a very good chance of generating some news coverage – and maybe, just maybe, getting the Times to respond. After all, we got C-SPAN’s Washington Journal to have Richard Gage on their show yesterday after a year of nonstop phone calls. If we’re to win over the Times, too, we’ll need your help contacting its editorial board when September rolls around (stay tuned for details on that effort).

But first, we need a little bit of financial support to make this billboard a reality. Will you make a donation so we can reach hundreds of thousands of people throughout the 13th Anniversary month of September?

Please go to ReThink911.org today to chip in, and together we’ll make it untenable for The New York Times to continue ignoring the evidence.

Aug 032014
 

Obama Admits: ‘We Tortured Some Folks’

By RT
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article39300.htm
“We tortured some folks. We did things that were contrary to our values”

August 02, 2014 “ICH” – “RT” – President Barack Obama made a rare acknowledgment during a Friday press briefing concerning the United States’ past use of enhanced interrogation tactics in the wake of the September 11 terrorist attacks.

“In the immediate aftermath of 9/11, we did some things that were wrong. We did a whole lot of things that were right, but we tortured some folks. We did things that were contrary to our values,” Pres. Obama said near the end of a nearly hour-long press briefing at the White House in Washington, DC.

The commander-in-chief made the comment as he fielded a question concerning John Brennan, the director of the US Central Intelligence Agency, in-between queries from journalists regarding the situations in Gaza, Ukraine and West Africa.

Earlier this week, Brennan admitted that CIA employees had, as alleged, spied on the computer usage of Senate Intelligence Committee staffers while they worked on a report concerning the agency’s use of contentious interrogation tactics. The report, a 6,000-page study, has yet to be made public, but Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-California), the chairperson of the intelligence panel, said it is “chilling” and will show “far more systematic and widespread than we thought.”

After acknowledging that the US had “tortured some folks” during Friday’s briefing, Obama added: “That’s what that report reflects.”

Earlier this week, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Oregon) told The Daily Beast that “The American people will be profoundly disturbed about what will be revealed in this report.”

On his part, Pres. Obama added during Friday’s briefing that “The character of our country has to be measured in part not by what we do when things are easy but what we do when things are hard.”

The word “torture” to describe the tactics used by the CIA is rarely used by government officials, but Pres. Obama has indeed condemned the agency’s past abuses before. During an address last year at the National Defense University, Obama said that, in some cases, “I believe we compromised our basic values — by using torture to interrogate our enemies, and detaining individuals in a way that ran counter to the rule of law.”

“So after I took office, we stepped up the war against Al-Qaeda but we also sought to change its course. We relentlessly targeted Al-Qaeda’s leadership. We ended the war in Iraq, and brought nearly 150,000 troops home. We pursued a new strategy in Afghanistan, and increased our training of Afghan forces. We unequivocally banned torture, affirmed our commitment to civilian courts, worked to align our policies with the rule of law and expanded our consultations with Congress,” Obama said in that address from last May.

The president spoke of the report after being asked for his opinion of Brennan, who previously insisted that Sen. Feinstein was speaking erroneously when she said the CIA had spied on intelligence committee staffers.

“I am deeply dismayed that some members of the Senate have decided to make spurious allegations about CIA actions that are wholly unsupported by the facts,” Brennan initially countered the senator’s claims.

On Thursday, McClatchy reported that an investigation conducted by the CIA’s Office of Inspector General concluded that its employees “acted in a manner inconsistent with the common understanding” between the agency and the intelligence committee. Brennan then responded by meeting with Feinstein and Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-Georgia), the vice chairman of the committee, and “apologized to them for such actions by CIA officers as described in the OIG” report, a CIA spokesperson told McClatchy.

“I have full confidence in John Brennan,” Obama said during Friday’s presser.
See also

Citing redactions, Feinstein delays release of report on CIA interrogations: The Obama administration censored significant portions of the findings of an investigation into the CIA’s use of harsh interrogation methods on suspected terrorists.