Truth News Australia

Subscribe to TNRA
Subscribe to TNRA

Latest LIVE show

Hereward Fenton

December 13, 2014
Climb aboard the ship of truth with Hereward Fenton at the helm, as we plough through uncharted waters of geo-politics, scandals, cover-ups, war and tyranny.

Listen Live or Call In !

Recent News & Podcasts

9/11 families remains lawsuit dismissed

12 July 2008 | Permalink | comments: 0

Categories: [ 9/11 Truth Movement ]

SBS: Tuesday, 8 July, 2008


A US judge has dismissed a case brought by families of victims of the September 11 attacks who said the city denied proper burials by sending debris containing possible human remains to a garbage dump.


The lawsuit, filed in 2005 by a group called WTC Families for a Proper Burial, sought to have the estimated 1.2 million to 1.8 million tonnes of rubble originally from the World Trade Centre site transferred out of the Fresh Kills landfill located on New York's borough of Staten Island.


The families said the city should move the residue that had been finely sifted multiple times to a more suitable location and have a cemetery created.


US District Judge Alvin Hellerstein, saying the city's decisions about where to offload the debris "were difficult and complicated", found the city had "acted responsibly" in bringing about a "swift and efficient recovery from the terrorists' attack".


"Plaintiffs have no property right in an undifferentiated, unidentifiable mass of dirt that may or may not contain the remains of plaintiffs' loved ones," he said.


There are no New York laws that require burying the debris in a different location, he said, "however worthy the citizen and however honourable the deceased".


About 1,100 out of the 2,749 people killed at the World Trade Centre site perished without leaving a trace. Full bodies were recovered for only 292 victims and partial remains for 1,357, sometimes only a fragment of a bone, the ruling noted.


Almost immediately after the attacks, all visible human remains were removed from the debris, bagged and taken to collecting points.


Victims' families argued that debris surrounding some remains would have contained other bone fragments and remains.


The president of the WTC Families, Diane Horning, lost her son, Matthew Horning, in the attacks. His wallet and a piece of his occipital bone were recovered from debris at Fresh Kills.

Hellerstein concluding his ruling by suggesting a "beautiful nature preserve" and memorial at the garbage site and said the families of victims "have suffered a wrong for which there can be no remedy".


"No matter the authority and power of this court, it cannot bring back the loved ones lost, and it cannot bring peace to the plaintiffs or surcease to society's collective grief around the events of September 11, 2001."


Source: AAP  


TNRA 10 July 2008

July 10, 2008, part 1 of 1.
Download mp3 » click here

11 July 2008 | Permalink | comments: 7

Categories: [ ]

correction: It was claimed on the show that the gardasil vaccine contains "live virus". According to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration gardasil is a "recombinant" vaccine and contains no live virus.

Another long show this week - there is so much to talk about these days!

Today we have a special guest, John Bursill, who heads up, an 9/11 truth activist organisation currently making strong headway with the NSW Greens, making the case for a new investigation of the events of 11 September 2001.

John gives us a breakdown of his involvement in the 9/11 truth movement, and we get into an animated discussion of the recent BBC production: The Conspiracy Files: The Third Tower.

For more information about Truth Action Australia you may contact John Bursill directly by email or phone him on +61 414 878499.

In the second half of the show we are joined by the redoubtable Dan Collins, with whom we discuss a number of news topics on the Australian front.

Links for today's show:

Simplify Garnaut report findings: ACT Oppn
The ACT Opposition says Labor governments must simplify the Garnaut report's findings so the public can more easily digest its conclusions.

Porn block trial complete
THE federal government has completed a trial of blocking pornography and other online content deemed inappropriate for children at the internet service provider level.

The Conspiracy Files: 9/11 - The Third Tower

The Conspiracy Files delves into the final mystery of 9/11: a third tower at the World Trade Centre, which along with the Twin Towers, also collapsed that day. But this skyscraper was never hit by a plane.

Teen arrested for 'blasphemous T-shirt',23599,23919553-2,00.html
A GOLD Coast teenager who wore a T-shirt by English extreme metal band Cradle of Filth that reads 'Jesus is a c**t' has been charged with offensive behaviour.

Solicitor charged after intervening in drug search at pub
A SOLICITOR and civil liberties campaigner was arrested, handcuffed and allegedly had his rib broken by police after offering legal assistance to a man being searched in public.

MP blocked from shopping centre demands change
GARY GRAY was on the hustings last year when he was confronted by a serious hurdle to democracy in the 21st century. He was denied entry to a shopping centre.

Cancer vaccine linked to illness in women,23599,23974632-2,00.html?from=public_rss
THE new cervical cancer jab is believed to be behind a huge jump in the number of women and girls suffering bad reactions to vaccinations .

Warm regards to all listeners from the TNRA team!

Josh & Hereward

Seymour Hersh On Covert Operations In Iran

10 July 2008 | Permalink | comments: 0

Categories: [ 9/11 Truth Movement ]

Listen online

In this candid interview Seymour Hersh discusses false flag operations in Iran and the erosion of democracy in the US.

The interview is exceptional in its engagement with the fascist shift now well advanced in the United States.

Highly recommended.

From NPR:

"Investigative journalist Seymour Hersh believes that the United States may be closer to armed conflict with Iran than previously imagined. He writes about Congress' funding of covert military operations in the upcoming issue of The New Yorker.

A regular contributor to The New Yorker, Hersh exposed the Abu Ghraib prison scandal in a series of articles published in the magazine early in 2005.

During the Vietnam War, Hersh was the first to report on the My Lai massacre. He has been the recipient of the Pulitzer Prize, five George Polk Awards, two National Magazine Awards, and a dozen other prizes. He is also the author of eight books, including Chain of Command about Abu Ghraib."

The Conspiracy Files: 9/11 - The Third Tower

09 July 2008 | Permalink | comments: 0

Categories: [ 9/11 Truth Movement ]


The Conspiracy Files delves into the final mystery of 9/11: a third tower at the World Trade Centre, which along with the Twin Towers, also collapsed that day. But this skyscraper was never hit by a plane.


The 47-storey tower collapsed seven hours after the Twin Towers and it has become the subject of heated speculation and a host of conspiracy theories which suggest it was brought down by a controlled demolition.


Nearly seven years on, the final official report on the World Trade Centre is due to be published in July.


Official investigators are expected to conclude that fire caused the collapse of this third tower at the World Trade Centre. But that makes this the first and only skyscraper in the world to collapse solely due to fire.


The Conspiracy Files explores many unanswered questions to try to find out what really happened, and why some people think there was a sinister plot to destroy the building.


Produced and Directed by Mike Rudin
Assistant Producer: James Giles



Truth Rising: the 9/11 Chronicles

09 July 2008 | Permalink | comments: 0

Categories: [ 9/11 Truth Movement ]


Seven years after the attacks of September the Eleventh, a global awakening has taken place, the likes of which the world has never seen. As the corporate-controlled media dwindles into extinction, a new breed of journalists and activists has emerged.

Join Alex Jones, Luke Rudkowski and others as they set out on a mission determined to expose the ruthless global elite, and alert the masses to the truth about 9/11.

Strap in and get ready to ride along as criminal overlords David Rockefeller, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Bill and Hillary Clinton, Alan Greenspan, John McCain, and many others are confronted about their lies and manipulation.

Including interviews with Jesse Ventura, Rosie O'Donnell, George Carlin, Willie Nelson and Martin Sheen, this film is unlike anything you have ever seen. the only question after viewing it is, will you become part of the Truth Rising.


The documentary provides an in-depth look at the plight of 9/11 first responders, many afflicted with serious health problems from the toxicity of Ground Zero. Truth Rising reveals and challenges the astounding arrogance and negligence of the government in regard to the heroic efforts of first responders, police, and fire-fighters. Truth Rising indicts the administration of Rudy Giuliani and that of the EPA and Christine Todd Whitman, who proclaimed the air in lower Manhattan was safe to breathe, contrary to numerous warnings to the contrary.


9/11 third tower mystery ‘solved’

07 July 2008 | Permalink | comments: 0

Categories: [ 9/11 Truth Movement ]

By Mike Rudin


The final mystery of 9/11 will soon be solved, according to US experts investigating the collapse of the third tower at the World Trade Center.


The 47-storey third tower, known as Tower Seven, collapsed seven hours after the twin towers. 


Investigators are expected to say ordinary fires on several different floors caused the collapse. 


Conspiracy theorists have argued that the third tower was brought down in a controlled demolition.
Unlike the twin towers, Tower Seven was not hit by a plane.


The National Institute of Standards and Technology, based near Washington DC, is expected to conclude in its long-awaited report this month that ordinary fires caused the building to collapse.


That would make it the first and only steel skyscraper in the world to collapse because of fire.


The National Institute of Standards and Technology's lead investigator, Dr Shyam Sunder, spoke to BBC Two's "The Conspiracy Files":


"Our working hypothesis now actually suggests that it was normal building fires that were growing and spreading throughout the multiple floors that may have caused the ultimate collapse of the buildings."


'Smoking gun'


However, a group of architects, engineers and scientists say the official explanation that fires caused the collapse is impossible. Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth argue there must have been a controlled demolition.


The founder of the group, Richard Gage, says the collapse of the third tower is an obvious example of a controlled demolition using explosives.


"Building Seven is the smoking gun of 9/11… A sixth grader can look at this building falling at virtually freefall speed, symmetrically and smoothly, and see that it is not a natural process.


"Buildings that fall in natural processes fall to the path of least resistance", says Gage, "they don't go straight down through themselves."


Conspiracy theories


There are a number of facts that have encouraged conspiracy theories about Tower Seven.

Although its collapse potentially made architectural history, all of the thousands of tonnes of steel from the skyscraper were taken away to be melted down.

The third tower was occupied by the Secret Service, the CIA, the Department of Defence and the Office of Emergency Management, which would co-ordinate any response to a disaster or a terrorist attack.

The destruction of the third tower was never mentioned in the 9/11 Commission Report. The first official inquiry into Tower Seven by the Federal Emergency Management Agency was unable to be definitive about what caused its collapse.

In May 2002 FEMA concluded that the building collapsed because intense fires had burned for hours, fed by thousands of gallons of diesel stored in the building. But it said this had "only a low probability of occurrence" and more work was needed.


But now nearly seven years after 9/11 the definitive official explanation of what happened to Tower Seven is finally about to be published in America.


The National Institute of Standards and Technology has spent more than two years investigating Tower Seven but lead investigator Dr Shyam Sunder rejects criticism that it has been slow.


"We've been at this for a little over two years and doing a two or two and a half year investigation is not at all unusual. That's the same kind of time frame that takes place when we do aeroplane crash investigations, it takes a few years."


With no steel from Tower 7 to study, investigators have instead made four extremely complex computer models worked out to the finest detail. They're confident their approach can now provide the answers. Dr Sunder says the investigation is moving as fast as possible.


"It's a very complex problem. It requires a level of fidelity in the modelling and rigour in the analysis that has never been done before."
Other skyscrapers haven't fully collapsed before because of fire. But NIST argues that what happened on 9/11 was unique.
Steel structure weakened


It says Tower Seven had an unusual design, built over an electricity substation and a subway; there were many fires that burnt for hours; and crucially, fire fighters could not fight the fires in Tower 7, because they didn't have enough water and focused on saving lives.

Investigators have focused on the east side where the long floor spans were under most stress.


They think fires burnt long enough to weaken and break many of the connections that held the steel structure together.


Most susceptible were the thinner floor beams which required less fireproofing, and the connections between the beams and the columns. As they heated up the connections failed and the beams sagged and failed, investigators say.


The collapse of the first of the Twin Towers does not seem to have caused any serious damage to Tower Seven, but the second collapse of the 1,368ft (417m) North Tower threw debris at Tower Seven, just 350ft (106m) away.


Tower Seven came down at 5.21pm. Until now most of the photographs have been of the three sides of the building that did not show much obvious physical damage. Now new photos of the south side of the building, which crucially faced the North Tower, show that whole side damaged and engulfed in smoke.



Mike Rudin (BBC): Controversy and conspiracies

30 June 2008 | Permalink | comments: 0

Categories: [ 9/11 Truth Movement ]

BBC Editor's Blog

27 June 2008


In my last blog earlier this month about the London bombings of 7 July 2005 there was a lot of concern expressed by people who say that when they question such events they're told they're "mad, crazy or in a state of shock". I haven't done this and won't.


What we will do is investigate an issue. For the new series we have looked for key proponents of alternative theories.


So for the new programme about World Trade Center Building 7 ("The Conspiracy Files: 9/11 - The Third Tower" for next Sunday) we have interviewed at length the architect Richard Gage, the former professor of physics Steven Jones and the writer of Loose Change Dylan Avery.


We have then taken their questions and arguments and tested them.


We've looked for new photographic and physical evidence, for key eyewitnesses and spoken to experts and investigators who have been involved in trying to understand what exactly happened to bring down Tower 7.


It does matter that a lot of people think the US Government is "hiding something" about 9/11. According to one American poll more than a third of those questioned thought government officials either assisted in the 9/11 attacks or allowed them to happen.

And it does matter that according to the official explanation Tower 7 was the first skyscraper to collapse because of fire. Smaller buildings have collapsed due to fire but never a 47-storey skyscraper.


The final official report on 9/11 by the National Institute of Standards and Technology is eagerly awaited not just by critics but also by those who want to know how safe skyscrapers are.


I'm happy to debate the issues. In next week's programme we will look at the what some people have said was the neat symmetrical collapse of Tower 7, we will look at the dust found around Ground Zero, we will look at the BBC's alleged involvement in a conspiracy, and many other issues.


But I've seen there's already a campaign for letters of complaint well before the programme has been aired.


Alex Jones' Prison Planet website ended an article headlined BBC Hit Piece by urging readers to comment on this blog. And comments in urged people to prepare a "counter strike" and to start letter writing and e-mailing. A lot of the later comments on my last blog came soon after those.


It would be good if people watched the programme first. So far we've put out a three minute trailer:


In response to dotconnect: yes I'm interested in investigating a host of issues such as the death of Anna Politkovskaya, the financing of al-Qaeda, British agents in Northern Ireland - and it does not as you suggest hinge on whether "our side" was allegedly "behind it". But the BBC has already covered these stories and is currently investigating many of them.


In response to cyncastical: the original allegation made in the papers was that we had paid Nicholas Kollerstrom to appear in the programme about 7/7. We did not. We reimbursed him for £30 worth of his expenses. The newspapers corrected their original copy.


"The Conspiracy Files: 9/11 - The Third Tower" to be broadcast on BBC 2 at 2100 BST on Sunday 6 July, repeated on BBC 2 at 1120 BST on Tuesday 8 July, and on Signzone at 0130 BST on Wednesday 9 July.


Mike Rudin is series producer, The Conspiracy Files



Naomi Wolf: Call sex crimes what they are

30 June 2008 | Permalink | comments: 4

Categories: [ 9/11 Truth Movement ]

Sydney Morning Herald

26 June 2008


Naomi Wolf

Sex crime has a telltale signature, even when those directing the outrages are some of the most powerful men and women in the United States. How extraordinary, then, to learn that one of the perpetrators, Condoleezza Rice, has just led the debate in a special session of the United Nations Security Council on the use of sexual violence as a weapon of war.


I had a sense of deja vu when I saw the photos that emerged in 2004 from Abu Ghraib prison. Even as the Bush Administration was spinning the notion that the torture of prisoners was the work of "a few bad apples" low in the military hierarchy, I knew that we were seeing evidence of a systemic policy set at the top. It's not that I am a genius. It's simply that, having worked at a rape crisis centre and been trained in the basics of sex crime, I have learned that all sex predators go about things in recognisable ways.


We now know that the torture of prisoners was the result of a policy set in the White House by the former secretary of defence, Donald Rumsfeld; the Vice-President, Dick Cheney; and Rice - who chaired the torture meetings. The Pentagon has also acknowledged that it had authorised sexualised abuse of detainees as part of interrogation practices to be performed by females. And documents obtained by the American Civil Liberties Union have Rumsfeld, in his own words, "checking in" on the sexualised humiliation of prisoners.


The sexualisation of torture from the top turned Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay into an organised sex-crime ring in which the trafficked sex slaves were US-held prisoners. Looking at the classic sadism-and-masochism nature of some of this torture, it is hard not to speculate that someone setting policy was aroused by all of this.


The non-sexual torture ranged from beatings and suffocation, electrodes attached to genitals, and forced sleep deprivation, to prisoners being hung by the wrists from the ceiling and placed in solitary confinement until psychosis was induced. These abuses violate both US and international law. Three former military attorneys, recognising this blunt truth, refused to participate in the "military tribunals" - rather, "show trials" - aimed at condemning men whose confessions had been elicited through torture.


Although we can now debate what the penalty for water-boarding should be, America as a nation, maintaining an odd silence, still cannot seem to discuss the sexual crimes involved.

Why? It's not as if the sex crimes that US leaders either authorised or tolerated are not staring Americans in the face: the images of male prisoners with their heads hooded with women's underwear; the documented reports of female US soldiers deployed to smear menstrual blood on the faces of male prisoners; and the reports of military interrogators or contractors forcing prisoners to simulate sex with each other, to penetrate themselves with objects, or to submit to being penetrated by objects. Indeed, the Military Commissions Act of 2006 was deliberately written with loopholes that gave immunity to perpetrators of many kinds of sexual humiliation and abuse.


There is also the testimony by female soldiers such as Lynndie England about compelling male prisoners to masturbate, as well as an FBI memo objecting to a policy of "highly aggressive interrogation techniques". The memo cites a female interrogator rubbing lotion on a shackled detainee and whispering in his ear - during Ramadan when sexual contact with a strange woman would be most offensive - then suddenly bending back his thumbs until he grimaced in pain, and violently grabbing his genitals. Sexual abuse in US-operated prisons got worse and worse over time, ultimately including, say doctors who examined detainees, sodomy.


All this may sound bizarre if you are a normal person, but it is standard operating procedure for sex offenders. Those who work in the field know that once sex abusers control a powerless victim, they will invariably push the boundaries with ever more extreme behaviour.


Abusers start by undressing their victims and, once that line has been breached, you are likely to hear from the victim about oral and anal penetration, greater and greater pain and fear being inflicted. There is more and more carelessness about exposing the crimes as the perpetrator's inhibitions fall away.


The perpetrator is also likely to engage in ever-escalating rationalisations, often arguing that the offences serve a greater good. Finally, the victim is blamed for the abuse: if the detainees would only "behave", and confess, they wouldn't bring all this on themselves.

Silence, and even collusion, is also typical of sex crimes within a family. Americans are behaving like a dysfunctional family by shielding sex criminals in their midst through silence.


Just as sex criminals - and the leaders who directed the use of rape and sexual abuse as a military strategy - were tried and sentenced after the wars in Bosnia and Sierra Leone, so Americans must hold accountable those who committed, or authorised, sex crimes in US-operated prisons.


Throughout the world, this perverse and graphic criminality has added fuel to anxiety about US cultural and military power. These acts need to be called by their true names - war crimes and sex crimes - and people in America need to demand justice for the perpetrators and their victims. As in a family, only when people start to speak out and tell the truth about rape and sexual assault can the healing begin.


Naomi Wolf wrote The End Of America: Letter Of Warning To A Young Patriot and the forthcoming Give Me Liberty: How To Become An American Revolutionary. She is the co-founder of the American Freedom Campaign, a US democracy movement, and is part of Project Syndicate, 2008.


Page 91 of 108 pages ‹ First  < 89 90 91 92 93 >  Last ›

Listen Live

Recent Comments

Wayne Hall,

I think with posts like the one you linked, the “chemtrail movement” is taking apart itself. Pointing out facts (i.e. debunking) may not not help the movement, but probably one or the other individual.

Instead of talking about “people” and “groups” all the time, my preference is to discuss facts and laws of nature, like the impossible physics I mentioned in my previous post.

You are moving off-topic again. Still no evidence for chemtrail spraying.

By Josh on 2012 10 05 - 19:40:58
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Do you WANT to help the “chemtrail movement”? Debunkers, including the most aggressive of them, always claim to be “wanting to help”.

You are apparently not an anthropogenic climate change sceptic but your thinking on chemtrails/geoengineering, if it is sincere, shows many affinities with the thinking of climate change sceptics in relation to ecologists and climate change true believers.

They have detected elements of mindlessness, irrationality and fear-mongering in the “climate change movement” and expend much of their energy reacting against it. The political passions that are generated in the process end up obscuring what should be the point under discussion, i.e. whether there are grounds for concern in what is happening to the earth’s climate.

Just as the political antagonism between the “superpowers” generated the nuclear arms race, so the political antagonism between the two sides of the climate change debate generates the most insane forms of geoengineering, whether as proposals or as practice is secondary when we examine this aspect of the situation.

This is the dynamic the late E.P. Thompson called “exterminism”. The subject of analysis in his day was of course the nuclear arms race, but there is linear continuity between what was happening then (and of course is still happening) and what is happening now (the newer aspects).

You say you could not stay calm any longer when you saw people fearmongering. Well, perhaps the situation is as simple as this, to use the parallel of G. Edward Griffin: you are temperamentally a cat rather than a dog. As Griffin says, if you throw a stone at a cat it looks at the stone. If you throw a stone at a dog it looks at YOU.

By Wayne Hall on 2012 10 05 - 18:20:16
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Wayne Hall,

let me be clear: I’m not Jay Reynolds, nor do I always approve with his style of communication. And please don’t mix up aggressiveness with an insisting demand of evidence. This should be seen as a virtue.

I did not start off by deciding to be a debunker all of a sudden. I just couldn’t stay calm any longer seeing people fearmongering and spreading the same bunk over and over again, without any attempts to try and properly confirm what they are posting.

Why, for instance, did the poster of the “zig zag flight path” video not even try to double check? It would have been as simple as googling for “flightradar24 zig zag”. I did this during breakfast and no, I’m not particularly clever.
(Besides, I think you will agree that the flight path in the video defies all physical laws; a jet plane can’t turn on the spot like a helicopter.)

Instead he goes on urging people to take in even more bunk.

Does this help the “chemtrail movement”? I think not.

By Josh on 2012 10 05 - 17:58:51
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

OK. Congratulations. This is not my game and I was just checking up on you. I don’t think there would be much point trying to get a response to this from the original source. Anyway it’s not my priority, but my acknowledgements to you for doing your chosen job well enough to checkmate me, who am basically playing on a different pitch.

Fortunately debunkers nowadays seem to sit at home more than they used to, waiting for the input to come it. They were much more aggressive ten years ago.

By Wayne Hall on 2012 10 05 - 17:09:42
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Wayne Hall,

once again Google was helpful.

When flight TAY274B arrived in Europe, its ‘counterpart’ was already on the way down to Africa - with the same flight number.

This leads to errors in the flight path display on flightradar24.

You can play back the historical paths by entering the time and the flight number. The zig zag starts around 21:00 UTC, and if you keep on playing, it moves southward again, all the way to Africa.

See this forum post on flightradar24:

By Josh on 2012 10 05 - 16:50:24
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.  scroll down

By Wayne Hall on 2012 10 05 - 15:12:35
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

I wonder if there are any examples of debunkers undergoing crises of conscience????  I have seen it happen with some of the former entourage of Jay Reynolds, who turned on him at one point like a pack of dogs. But it didn’t seem to result in them then becoming normal human beings. The twisted element was still there.

By Wayne Hall on 2012 10 05 - 14:16:36
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Have the debunkers developed plausible counterarguments to befuddle the dills on this one too Josh??? Go and check it out with your mates if you don’t know.

By Wayne Hall on 2012 10 05 - 14:11:59
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

“do you prepare what you’re going to say or just make it up as you go because honestly Hereward that’s how it comes across”

A pretty harsh judgement there Frank, from somebody who “has always looked for the good and positive aspects” of what he sees.

I think you need to take a look in the mirror before casting nasturtiums at others.

By Hereward Fenton on 2012 10 04 - 02:57:14
From the entry 'Interview with Jan Irvin'.

Winston Smith,

do you have a picture or video link of what you describe?

By Josh on 2012 10 03 - 18:02:42
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.