Cindy Sheehan On The 9/11 Issue - NYC - 1/22/2010
In this video Cindy Sheehan re-affirms that she strongly supports the broad goals of the 9/11 Truth movement, while calling for a "narrowing" of focus.
Cindy Sheehan further suggests that the movement should unify around positions which, because narrowly focussed, will have the broadest appeal. She implores the 9/11 truth movement to drop the fringe theories and promote the demand for a new investigation.
Visibility 9-11 Welcomes Richard Gage AIA, ae911truth.org
January 26th, 2010
play/download audio: click here
In this episode of Visibility 9-11, John Bursill welcomes Richard Gage AIA back to the program. This interview was inspired by the recent news that Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth had reach the milestone of 1,000 qualified and licensed members. Gage who is an experienced San Francisco Architect, member of the American Institute of Architects and the founder of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth describes some of the groups recent success's world wide and talks about his recent tour of Australia, New Zealand and Japan. We hear about the up coming Press Conference planned next month to announce the 1,000 A & E members to the world, which includes approximately 40 Structural Engineers. Richard also mentions some celebrations that are planned for the A & E members, please see the site for more details www.AE911Truth.org
Later in the show Bursill and Gage discuss the recent debate between him and explosives expert Ron Craig and what was learned by the encounter. See www.ae911truth.org/info/151. They also touch on the issue of the CIT "flyover" and "what hit the Pentagon". Gage makes it clear that he does not think that the "flyover" is proven and that he does not support CIT. Gage says he does not know what did or did not hit the Pentagon.
Towards the end of this interview Gage joins Bursill in a call for support of www.911Truth.org and Janice Matthews and they also call for direct financial support for the ongoing work that the Architects and Engineers Group continue to do, day in and day out until justice.
Lord Monckton on climate change fraud
Today we are joined by Lord Christopher Monckton, British peer, mathematician, and former advisor to the Prime Minister.
Lord Monckton, currently in Australia on a speaking tour, is one of the most outspoken and influential anthropogenic climate change sceptics, bringing a level of passion and intellectual rigour which is often missing in public debate. He is chief policy adviser to the Science and Public Policy Institute, a non-profit institute of research and education "dedicated to sound public policy based on sound science".
Lord Monckton rose to prominence in the global warming debate with articles published in November 2006 disputing whether global warming is man-made, suggesting that it was unlikely to prove catastrophic, and criticising the science presented by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Lord Monckton also played a role in a 2007 UK High Court of Justice legal challenge in a bid to prevent the Al Gore film, "An Inconvenient Truth" being shown in English schools without offering alternative, balancing opinions. He was involved in distributing the documentary, "The Great Global Warming Swindle" to schools as a riposte.
During the interview Lord Monckton recounts the reasons why he came to be an anthropogenic climate change sceptic, in the context of his experience as a policy advisor to former PM Margaret Thatcher. He goes on to enumerate some of the more egregious lies and distortions made by the IPCC scientists and then turns to look at the anti-democratic agenda of the politicians and business leaders who he describes as corporate fascists. These interests, he asserts are striving to create a dictatorial, unelected world government which will oppress and exploit ordinary working people on a global level.
- Lord Monckton tour dates
- Alan Jones talks to Lord Christopher Monckton
- Lord Monckton is on the fringe: Barnaby Joyce
- Climate sceptic Christopher Monckton to 'prove Rudd wrong'
- British climate sceptic Lord Christopher Monckton slams Kevin Rudd's ETS
- Climate denier lords it over scientists and their `global warning nonsense'
Introducing the Australian Pirate Party
Tonight we welcome to the show David Crafti, President of the Pirate Party of Australia to discuss these and more questions.
What is the Pirate Party all about? From the pp website:
Real property is something that you can touch. In simple terms, if one person possesses it, another person cannot possess it at the same time. Intellectual property is information. If a person makes a copy of a song, the person who owns the original is not deprived of the song.
The Pirate Party is dedicated to protecting civil liberties with an emphasis on reform of copyright law, freedom of speech and protection of privacy. Other policy areas include opposition to internet censorship, support for an R18+ rating for games and providing parents with software tools to manage access to the internet.
The Australian Pirate Party has affiliations with movements around the world which are rapidly gaining in popularity.
- From Jan 25-29, Oz websites will turn their lights out to inform Australians about the threat of Internet censorship
- Bin Laden takes credit for the underpants bomber, threatens more attacks using white females
- David Kelly post mortem to be kept secret for 70 years as doctors accuse Lord Hutton of concealing vital information
- IPCC chief admits Himalayan glacier fraud
- Italy to impose draconian internet censorship measures
- France prepares to crack down on web pirates and users alike
- Photographers protest over UK terror search laws
Exploring the hidden truth of HIV and AIDS
In tonight's show we bring you a gripping interview with American film maker Brent Leung, whose documentary on AIDS, House of Numbers, has collected a swag of awards at film festivals across the United States. The interview was conducted on the Radio Skid Row 88.9 FM breakfast show in Sydney on 21 Jan 2010.
The film explores a controversy which has been all but hidden from the general public due to blatant censorship in mainstream media over several decades, and consists of a series of interviews with some of the most distinguished biomedical scientists of our age, including two Nobel Prize winners.
At its core the controversy over AIDS is easy to state: there are many qualified experts who vigorously assert the HIV does not cause AIDS.
This claim however belies deeper questions about whether AIDS is really a disease at all, since the label is applied in different countries based on quite different criteria. An added complication is the fact that there are major uncertainties about whether the HIV anti-body tests actually work, which has led some scientists to question the fundamental existence of the HIV virus.
The AIDS controversy may be an obscure and perplexing scientific problem, but the politics of AIDS is a reality which affects billions of people all over the world, leading to public policies which, if based on flawed science, may have caused the death of millions by the use of highly toxic chemical treatments.
Nobel Prize winner Luc Montaigner states in the film that AIDS in Africa could be eradicated by improved nutrition and the provision clean drinking water instead of costly and unproven programs of mass medication and vaccination. This approach was also advocated by former president of South Africa, Thabo Mbecki, who was pilloried in the press as an "AIDS Denialist".
This broadcast is one of the most important we have done at TNRA - please share it around and take a good look into the issues raised.
- HIV-AIDS hypothesis out of touch with South African AIDS – A new perspective
- Scientific Papers on AIDS by Peter H. Duesberg Ph.D
- Oncogenes, aneuploidy, and AIDS: a scientific life & times of Peter H. Duesberg
- VirisMyth.org - A rethinking AIDS website
- Since When Is the Expression of Fear and Ignorance a Basic American Right?
- Filmmaker, Brent Leung Responds to Huffpo Blogger, Thomas DeLorenzo
- A Daughter's Death, A Mother's Survival
- Christine Maggiore, vocal skeptic of AIDS research, dies at 52
- AIDS Denialism Under Fire From Researchers
- Mbeki admits he is still an AIDS dissident six years on
- AIDStruth.org - The scientific evidence for HIV/AIDS
Obama staffer wants ‘cognitive infiltration’ of 9/11 conspiracy groups
By Daniel Tencer | January 13th, 2010
In a 2008 academic paper, President Barack Obama's appointee to head the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs advocated "cognitive infiltration" of groups that advocate "conspiracy theories" like the ones surrounding 9/11.
Cass Sunstein, a Harvard law professor, co-wrote an academic article entitled "Conspiracy Theories: Causes and Cures," in which he argued that the government should stealthily infiltrate groups that pose alternative theories on historical events via "chat rooms, online social networks, or even real-space groups and attempt to undermine" those groups.
As head of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Sunstein is in charge of "overseeing policies relating to privacy, information quality, and statistical programs," according to the White House Web site.
Sunstein's article, published in the Journal of Political Philosphy in 2008 and recently uncovered by blogger Marc Estrin, states that "our primary claim is that conspiracy theories typically stem not from irrationality or mental illness of any kind but from a 'crippled epistemology,' in the form of a sharply limited number of (relevant) informational sources."
By "crippled epistemology" Sunstein means that people who believe in conspiracy theories have a limited number of sources of information that they trust. Therefore, Sunstein argued in the article, it would not work to simply refute the conspiracy theories in public -- the very sources that conspiracy theorists believe would have to be infiltrated.
Sunstein, whose article focuses largely on the 9/11 conspiracy theories, suggests that the government "enlist nongovernmental officials in the effort to rebut the theories. It might ensure that credible independent experts offer the rebuttal, rather than government officials themselves. There is a tradeoff between credibility and control, however. The price of credibility is that government cannot be seen to control the independent experts."
Download a PDF of the article here.
Sunstein argued that "government might undertake (legal) tactics for breaking up the tight cognitive clusters of extremist theories." He suggested that "government agents (and their allies) might enter chat rooms, online social networks, or even real-space groups and attempt to undermine percolating conspiracy theories by raising doubts about their factual premises, causal logic or implications for political action."
"We expect such tactics from undercover cops, or FBI," Estrin writes at the Rag Blog, expressing surprise that "a high-level presidential advisor" would support such a strategy.
Estrin notes that Sunstein advocates in his article for the infiltration of "extremist" groups so that it undermines the groups' confidence to the extent that "new recruits will be suspect and participants in the group’s virtual networks will doubt each other’s bona fides."
Sunstein has been the target of numerous "conspiracy theories" himself, mostly from the right wing political echo chamber, with conservative talking heads claiming he favors enacting "a second Bill of Rights" that would do away with the Second Amendment. Sunstein's recent book, On Rumors: How Falsehoods Spread, Why We Believe Them, What Can Be Done, was criticized by some on the right as "a blueprint for online censorship."
Sunstein "wants to hold blogs and web hosting services accountable for the remarks of commenters on websites while altering libel laws to make it easier to sue for spreading 'rumors,'" wrote Ed Lasky at American Thinker.
China, Iran and the new axis of evil
We lead tonight with news that Google is pulling out of China, amid renewed threats from top US military figures against Iran. We analyse these developments with an eye to the bigger picture of geoplitical strategy and note that this is bound to strengthen ties between China and Iran, as the stand-off over Iran's nuclear capability heightens.
We also bring you an excerpt from Gerald Celente's trend forecast for 2010.
In the second half we take a look at some Australian stories, including new laws banning alcohol on Australia day, and government bans on "smoko breaks".
Obama’s crackdown and your rights
DISCLAIMER - 28 Jan 2010: It has been reported that the above image is not an actual scan image.
TNRA returns to the airwaves with our first show for 2010!
We lead with Obama's announcement yesterday of new stringent measures to heighten airline security and improve intelligence gathering in relation to terrorist threats. We present this speech in full and attempt to analyse the real agenda behind these moves, including the introduction on a massive scale of invasive technology such as full body scanners (see image above).
In the second half I am joined by Chris Tolland, host of the Radio Skid Row breakfast show in Sydney, to talk about various issues of the day.
- Obama unveils tougher air safety measures
- Obama's Speech on new security measures (CSPAN Video)
- New compulsory body scanners "make curves and genitals eerily visible"
- Cowardly hit-piece in the Australian attacks the integrity of hunger striking farmer Peter Spencer
- Court Backs War Powers Over Rights of Detainees
- Important information about energy saver light bulbs (US Congress 2008)
Flight 253 passenger Kurt Haskell: ‘I was visited by the FBI’
Aaron Foley | MLive.com | 31 December 2009
Following up on a visit from FBI officials about an eyewitness account first described to MLive.com, Michigan attorney Kurt Haskell described the visit in comment sections across MLive on Wednesday.
Haskell and his wife, Lori, were aboard Flight 253 when Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab allegedly tried to destroy the plane. They say another man tried to help Abdulmutallab board the plane in Amsterdam.
Haskell had two detailed posts in two different stories. Here is Part One, originally posted here (Nothing below in the indent has been changed. Only links have been added.):
Today is the second worst day of my life after 12-25-09. Today is the day that I realized that my own country is lying to me and all of my fellow Americans. Let me explain.
Ever since I got off of Flight 253 I have been repeating what I saw in US Customs. Specifically, 1 hour after we left the plane, bomb sniffing dogs arrived. Up to this point, all of the passengers on Flight 253 stood in a small area in an evacuated luggage claim area of an airport terminal. During this time period, all of the passengers had their carry on bags with them. When the bomb sniffing dogs arrived, 1 dog found something in a carry on bag of a 30 ish Indian man. This is not the so called "Sharp Dressed" man. I will refer to this man as "The man in orange". The man in orange, who stood some 20ft away from me the entire time until he was taken away, was immediately taken away to be searched and interrogated in a nearby room. At this time he was not handcuffed. When he emerged from the room, he was then handcuffed and taken away. At this time an FBI agent came up to the rest of the passengers and said the following (approximate quote) "You all are being moved to another area because this area is not safe. I am sure many of you saw what just happened (Referring to the man in orange) and are smart enough to read between the lines and figure it out." We were then marched out of the baggage claim area and into a long hallway. This entire time period and until we left customs, no person that wasn't a law enforcement personnel or a passenger on our flight was allowed anywhere on our floor of the terminal (or possibly the entire terminal) The FBI was so concerned during this time, that we were not allowed to use the bathroom unless we went alone with an FBI agent, we were not allowed to eat or drink, or text or call anyone. I have been repeating this same story over the last 5 days. The FBI has, since we landed, insisted that only one man was arrested for the airliner attack (contradicting my account). However, several of my fellow passengers have come over the past few days, backed up my claim, and put pressure on FBI/Customs to tell the truth. Early today, I heard from two different reporters that a federal agency (FBI or Customs) was now admitting that another man has been held (and will be held indefinitely) since our flight landed for "immigration reasons." Notice that this man was "being held" and not "arrested", which was a cute semantic ploy by the FBI to stretch the truth and not lie.
Just a question, could that mean that the man in orange had no passport?
However, a few hours later, Customs changed its story again. This time, Mr. Ron Smith of Customs, says the man that was detained "had been taken into custody, but today tells the news the person was a passenger on a different flight." Mr. Ron Smith, you are playing the American public for a fool. Lets take a look at how plausible this story is (After you've already changed it twice). For the story to be true, you have to believe, that:
1. FBI/Customs let passengers from another flight co-mingle with the passengers of flight 253 while the most important investigation in 8 years was pending. I have already stated that not one person who wasn't a passenger or law enforcement personnal was in our area the entire time we were detained by Customs.
2. FBI/Customs while detaining the flight 253 passengers in perhaps the most important investigation since the last terrorist attack, and despite not letting any flight 253 passenger drink, eat, make a call, or use the bathroom, let those of other flights trample through the area and possibly contaminate evidence.
3. You have to believe the above (1 and 2) despite the fact that no flights during this time allowed passengers to exit off of the planes at all and were detained on the runway during at least the first hour of our detention period.
4. You have to believe that the man that stood 20 feet from me since we entered customs came from a mysterious plane that never landed, let its passengers off the plane and let this man sneak into our passenger group despite having extremely tight security at this time (i.e. no drinking even).
5. FBI/Customs was hauling mysterious passengers from other flights through the area we were being held to possibly comtaminate evidence and allow discussions with suspects on Flight 253 or to possibly allow the exchange of bombs, weapons or other devices between the mysterious passengers from other flights and those on flight 253.
Seriously Mr. Ron Smith, how stupid do you think the American public is?
Mr. Ron Smith's third version of the story is an absolute inplausible joke. I encourage you, Mr. Ron Smith, to debate me anytime, anywhere, and anyplace in public to let the American people see who is credible and who is not.
I ask, isn't this the more plausible story:
1. Customs/FBI realized that they screwed up and don't want to admit that they left flight 253 passengers on a flight with a live bomb on the runway for 20 minutes.
2. Customs/FBI realized that they screwed up and don't want to admit that they left flight 253 passengers in customs for 1 hour with a live bomb in a carry on bag.
3. Customs/FBI realize that the man in orange points to a greater involvement then the lone wolf theory that they have been promoting.
Mr. Ron Smith I encourage you to come out of your cubicle and come up with a more plausible version number 4 of your story.
For the last five days I have been reporting my story of the so called "sharp dressed man." For those of you who haven't read my account, it involves a sharp dressed "Indian man" attempting to talk a ticket agent into letting a supposed "Sudanese refugee" (The terrorist) onto flight 253 without a passport. I have never had any idea how it played out except to note that the so called "Sudanese reefugee" later boarded my flight and attempted to blow it up and kill me. At no time did my story involve, or even find important whether the terrorist actually had a passport. The importance of my story was and always will be, the attempt with an accomplice (apparently succesful) of a terrorist with all sorts of prior terrorist warning signs to skirt the normal passport boarding procedures in Amsterdam. By the way, Amsterdam security did come out the other day and admit that the terrorist did not have to "Go through normal passport checking procedures".
Amsterdam security, please define to the American public "Normal passport boarding procedures".
You see the FBI would have the American public believe that what was important was whether the terrorist in fact had a passport.
Seriously think about this people. You have a suicide bomber who had recently been to Yemen to but a bomb, whose father had reported him as a terrorist, who supposedly was on some kind of U.S. terror watchlist, and most likely knew the U.S. was aware of these red flags. Yet, he didn't go through "Normal passport checking procedures." What does that mean? Maybe that he flashed a passport to some sort of sympathetic security manager in a backroom to avoid a closer look at the terrorist's "red flags"? What is important is that the terrorist avoided using normal passport checking procedures (apparently successfully) in order to avoid a closer look into his red flags. Who cares if he had a passport. The important thing is that he didn't want to show it and somehow avoided a closer inspection and "normal passport checking procedures." Each passport comes with a bar code on it that can be scanned to provide a wealth of information about the individual. I would bet that the passport checking procedures for the terrorist did not include a bar code scan of his passport (which could have revealed damning information about the terrorist).
Please note that there is a very easy way to verify the veracity of my prior "sharp dressed man" account. Dutch police have admitted that they have reviewed the video of the "sharp dressed man" that I referenced. Note that it has not been released anywhere, You see, if my eye witness account is false, it could easily be proven by releasing the video. However, the proof of my eyewitness account would also be verified if I am telling the truth and I am. There is a reason we have only heard of the video and not seen it. dutch authorities, "RELEASE THE VIDEO!" This is the most important video in 8 years and may be all of two minutes long. Show the entire video and "DO NOT EDIT IT"! The American public deserves its own chance to attempt to identify the "sharp dressed man". I have no doubt that if the video indicated that my account was wrong, that the video would have already swept over the entire world wide web.
Instead of the video, we get a statment that the video has been viewed and that the terrorist had a passport. Each of these statements made by the FBI is a self serving play on semantics and each misses the importance of my prior "sharp dressed man" account. The importance being that the man "Tried to board the plane with an accomplice and without a passort". The other significance is that only the airport security video can verify my eyewitness account and that it is not being released.
Who has the agenda here and who doesn't? Think about that for a minute.
Dutch add body scanners for US flights
31 December 2010 | AP
Passengers flying to the United States from the Netherlands will have to undergo body scans after a bid to blow up a Detroit-bound airliner from Amsterdam, the interior minister said Wednesday.
Guusje ter Horst told reporters that all available scanning machines at the city's Schiphol Airport would be put into use next month.
"It has been decided to use body scanners at Schiphol for all flights to the United States," she told a press conference.
"All 15 of the scanners currently available at Schiphol will be put into use within the next three weeks," once new software has been installed, the minister said.
This would "significantly improve passenger security as the machines can detect non-metal objects." Security at Schiphol is "good", she said.
Her announcement comes amid investigations into how a 23-year-old Nigerian was able to board a jet in Lagos bound for Amsterdam and then take a connecting flight to Detroit, while wearing underpants containing explosive chemicals.
Ter Horst said the investigation had so far failed to establish if Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab had visited the Netherlands in the past.
The Dutch minister told reporters that the plot to blow up the plane over Detroit had been fairly professionally planned but that its execution was "amateurish".
"The preparation of the failed attack against passenger flight NW 253 Amsterdam-Detroit was fairly professional, but its execution was amateurish," ter Horst said.
"The explosive used is not easy to make and its production is not without risk," she added, quoting findings of the probe launched by Dutch authorities.
"The modus operandi and explosive are similar to earlier attacks," she said, without giving further details.
The attempt to blow up the Northwest airliner was foiled when a passenger leaped on Abdulmutallab as he struggled to detonate the explosives which had not been detected during a routine scan at the airport.
Body scans at airport security points are considered effective but privacy advocates oppose the machines because they scan beneath clothing to detect items that may be hidden from ordinary view.
Security experts believe, however, that the scanners could have detected the explosives that Abdulmutallab allegedly hid last week.
The Dutch government said after an initial scan, further checks would only be carried out if an anomaly was detected.
"This is a good alternative which respects privacy," ter Horst said, adding that the Netherlands did not need European parliament approval to use the system.
As Schiphol does not have enough scanners to screen all US-bound passengers, those not undergoing a body scan will be submitted to what she called a "deep search."
The 150,000-euro ($A240,572) scanning machines have so far only been used in random checks, said the country's national coordinator for counterterrorism, Erik Akerboom.
Airport spokeswoman Mirjam Snoerwang told AFP that only passengers on European flights were being screened if they agreed to the procedure.
Schiphol, the Netherlands' main airport, handles five million passengers to and from the United States a year, according to Snoerwang.
An al-Qaeda affiliate in the Arabian Peninsula claimed Monday it was behind the failed bombing and threatened new attacks on the West.
In an internet posting the group said a "technical fault" caused the plot's failure.
© 2010 AP