Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

9/11 Truther calls on New York DA to investigate

Posted by Joshua Holland at 10:38 AM on April 6, 2007.


Joshua Holland: What about Atta's stay in Brooklyn?
cropcentermiddle180180yesvarusers9427e29f8dbe928e4b945f65f10ed1156b57.jpg
hicks

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get Joshua Holland in your
mailbox!

 

As regular readers know, I'm right up there among the 9/11 "Truth" movement's pantheon of evil Left Gate-keepers. Yet, I'm also a friend of Sander Hicks, one of the prominent voices within the movement and author of The Big Wedding: 9/11, The Whistle-Blowers, and the Cover-Up.

If we were a couple of hard-nosed cops, it'd make a great buddy film.

Anyway, it's Friday -- a day for guest-blogging -- so I offered Sander a guest post. Here it is; these are his opinions and don't necessarily represent the views of bla, bla, bla and all that …

April 4, 2007

An Open Letter to Kings County District Attorney Charles Hynes

District Attorney Charles Hynes

Office of the District Attorney

Kings County

350 Jay Street

Brooklyn, NY

11201-2908

Dear Mr. Hynes,

It's been three months since I wrote you my letter of January 9th, 2007, urging your office to open an investigation into the horrific terrorist attacks of 9/11/01. Based on original research and sources, I urged you to focus on the social network that helped 9/11 hijacker Mohamed Atta in our hometown of Brooklyn, NY. I have not yet received a response, so I am sending you this second letter, with key updates. It will be published in the April issue of The New York Megaphone (circulation 66,700) as well.

I realize this is a controversial topic. But remember, we at the Megaphone support and understand your courageous, ongoing prosecution of CIA-linked, mafia-linked FBI agent Lindley DeVecchio. DeVecchio might be the New York FBI's biggest scandal, but to us, he's just the tip of an iceberg of Federal corruption. (We covered the DeVecchio story last year, see: http://www.voxpopnet.net/tausdevecchio.html)

Since I wrote you last, a few things have changed: The conviction of Bush advisor Lewis Libby, and the controversy over Attorney General Gonzalez show that we're dealing with a yet-to-be determined level of opportunistic criminality in the Bush White House. The new paperback United States vs. George Bush, et al. (Seven Stories, 2006) makes a strong legal case for a Federal Grand Jury indictment of the Bush Administration for knowingly hoodwinking public opinion into supporting the Iraq bloodbath. While not an official legal document, this sharp little book is a compelling case made in the court of public opinion by former Federal prosecutor Elizabeth De La Vega. It's our thesis in the New York 9/11 Truth Movement, that the 9/11 attack was the stimulus the Bush administration needed to fulfill its documented obsession with wars of foreign aggression.

The 9/11 attack and the response from the Federal government derailed our democracy, threatened the protections of the Bill of Rights, and suspended habeas corpus. But you have jurisdiction to open a serious 9/11 investigation with subpoena power. We know from congressional testimony of Lt. Col. Anthony Schaffer, and others, that Mohammed Atta, et al. visited the politically-charged mujahedeen recruiting grounds, El Farouq Mosque, on Atlantic Avenue. It's likely that the crime of conspiracy was committed, here in your jurisdiction of Kings County.

As Brooklyn's leading published author of 9/11 skepticism, I feel it's my duty to keep you apprised of new findings. I was recently sent a little-known unpublished book called "The Graham Report." This report corroborates an insidious pattern of special treatment from Federal agents and military top brass, of the 9/11 attackers.

Dr. David M. Graham was a Louisiana radio host, an amateur sleuth, a Vietnam veteran, and a dentist. According to his unpublished manuscript, 10 months before 9/11, Dr. Graham met 9/11 terrorists Nawaf al-Hazmi and Fayez Banihammad. Their Pakistani handler, a grinning albino car salesman named Mohamed Jamal Khan, had mysterious, unrestricted access to the local Barksdale Air Force Base in Shreveport. Khan told Dr. Graham he wanted to buy a truck like the one used as a bomb in Oklahoma City. Dr. Graham was a conservative Christian who felt Khan was possibly planning a terrorist attack on the the "mighty B-52s" flying out of Barksdale AFB. When Khan bragged about a family connection to Osama Bin Laden, and introduced Graham to certain strange Arabs, Graham then called the FBI.

Instead of questioning the future 9/11 attackers, the FBI doubted, and intimidated Graham. Graham had observed that Jamal Khan had boxes in his kitchen labeled with the names of al-Hazmi, Banihammad, and a third 9/11 hijacker, Khalid al-Mihdhar. 9/11 researchers know that the terrorists Graham suspected were already known members of Al Qaeda-CIA today admits they had been tracking al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar since before the year 2000 Malaysian "terrorism summit" both future terrorists attended. This was corroborated at the confirmation hearings of CIA director Michael Hayden in January 2006. Al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar made phone calls from San Diego to a NSA/CIA phone-tapped line at a Yemeni safehouse.

Dr. Graham was paid multiple visits by the FBI and Secret Service, but he wouldn't give up. In his manuscript, Graham specifically warns the FBI about Mohamed Jamal Khan, and possible threats to Barksdale AFB. Shreveport FBI agent David Spoon calls Graham back, passing along a thinly-veiled death threat. "We got a mysterious phone call saying 'they will take care of whoever turned in Jamal.'" he told the dentist.

Dr. Graham died on the 17th of September, 2006, in Houston, Texas. His son believes he was poisoned. So does the local ABC News affiliate in Shreveport. Dr. Graham was on the verge of testifying against Jamal Khan in an INS deportation courtroom. Today, the Shreveport FBI claims that Graham did not contact them before 9/11, but Graham had documents and eyewitnesses who recorded his November 1, 2000 meeting with FBI Special Agent Steve Hayes.

An FBI investigation of Khan and his men might have stopped Nawaf al-Hazmi from joining Flight 77's suicide attack against the Pentagon on 9/11. Or maybe not. According to the new book by National Security News Service's Joseph and Susan Trento (Unsafe at Any Altitude, Steerforth, 2006), al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar were agents of the General Intelligence Directorate (GID) of Saudi Arabia. Trento told me he was tipped off by "multiple sources…inside Western and Saudi intelligence." Trento is a national expert on CIA, as author of Secret History of CIA (Prima, 2001), and Prelude to Terror (Carroll & Graf, 2005). Trento trusts his sources, and is certain the same terrorists Graham suspected were agents of the GID, the CIA of Saudi Arabia.

Let me stop and re-focus this on your jurisdiction of Brooklyn/Kings County. The 9/11 attacks murdered Brooklynites. A significant sector of the public believes the Federal government's explanation is a whitewash, due to many anomalies. In 2006, three national polls showed widespread skepticism of the official story. The strange protection that Dr. Graham's Saudi agents/9-11 terrorists received from Federal law enforcement was partly (if not primarily) at fault. The special treatment that al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar received is the same treatment received by Mohamed Atta. All three were protected from Defense Intelligence Agency operation Able Danger, in early 2000, by Pentagon top brass, according to Congressional testimony from Able Danger's Lt. Anthony Shaffer. I have more information for you on this, upon request.

The Graham Report and the Able Danger hearings jibe with other credible sources. According to Michael Isikoff in Newsweek, al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar used to live in San Diego with an FBI informant. In 2002, CNN reported the FBI was "investigating" Saudi Princess Haifa (wife of Saudi Prince Bandar, the man the President calls "Bandar Bush") regarding why she wired $3,500 a month to 9/11 hijackers in San Diego in year 2000. The recipients of her largess were al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar.

As I'm sure you remember from my January 9 letter, I was a part of a group of 9/11 researchers who last November supplied the Joint Terrorism Task Force with information about terrorist Mohamed Atta's American drinking buddy, Wolfgang Bohringer. When the JTTF seized Bohringer on November 17th, the first words out of his mouth were, "You can't arrest me, I'm working for CIA." He was then released, and my JTTF-affiliated sources pressured me not to do this story. But I printed it in this newspaper, The New York Megaphone.

The Brooklyn public is eager for a deeper explanation of 9/11. The Federal government's investigation was dominated by insiders. Their process was heavily compromised by conflicts of interest, and the evenual 9/11 Commission Report was ridiculously spotty. Only local government can mount a real investigation. Yes, this is difficult, but the American people are on your side. We will be a powerful resource. A majority of 9/11 widows and other family members support my work and have called for a new investigation. District Attorney Hynes, you and your staff have a clear moral and legal obligation to open that investigation into 9/11. It seems there's an alarming pattern of domestic protection of the 9/11 attackers, by the FBI, and the top brass of the Pentagon.

We know from documents like U.S. vs. Bush that the Bush Administration had a clearly predetermined agenda to attack Iraq, as early as 1999. In 2001, they needed a reason. They needed a violent media spectacle to motivate the population to support their agenda.

The night I met you, you led the inter-faith event in Bay Ridge with a Pledge of Allegiance to the flag. I joined you in that pledge, despite all my misgivings about the current leadership of this country. Because today under the U.S. flag, torture is condoned and practiced. Under the U.S. flag, the current President is in open criminal violation of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, as he taps phones inside the U.S. In the name of the U.S. flag, the President committed the crime of fraud by misleading the country into war. The U.S. flag is under attack, and the enemy is within. Let's do something while we can.

Sincerely,

Sander Hicks

Publisher

New York Megaphone

718 940 2084

sander(at)voxpopnet.net

CC:

Inspector Thomas Harris, 70th Precinct

Assistant District Attorney Michael Vecchione Assistant District Attorney Noel Downey Assistant District Attorney Michael Ryan

Digg!

Joshua Holland is an editor and senior writer at AlterNet.


Cynthia McKinney Detained (Again) by Israeli Defense Force; Israeli Protesters Brutally Beaten in West Bank
A tipping point approaches.
July 1, 2009.
Media White Wash: U.S.-Backed "Dirty Brigade" Operating in Iraq
Anyone surprised? Aside, of course, from those who rely on the commercial media.
June 30, 2009.
My (First) Big Fat Gay Wedding: What Was Different?
I attended my first gay marriage last night ... sort of.
June 21, 2009.
Rights and Stupidities: Why Would Iran's Disputed Election Justify Dismissing an International Treaty?
The election dispute is bringing out some truly bizarre arguments here at home.
June 15, 2009.
Obama, GM and Silly Psuedo-Constitutional Arguments
The Beltway media gives credence to, and amplifies, every partisan accusation, no matter how thin.
June 14, 2009.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
9/11 an Inside Job.
Posted by: douglashoyt on Apr 6, 2007 10:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The ruling elite will never "really" investigate the attack on the WTC. They already know who did it and why.

It has been covered up and will continue to be covered up.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: 9/11 an Inside Job. Posted by: Susan Kipping
» RE: THE REAL CULPRIT Posted by: kbest
» RE: THE REAL CULPRIT Posted by: BillDouglas
» RE: THE REAL CULPRIT Posted by: willymack
"Good Cop/ Bad Cop"=Bad Analogy.
Posted by: jeanniedean on Apr 6, 2007 12:27 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sigh. Why is Mr. Hicks' amazing article buried amongst ALTERNET's less important blah-blah (i.e. SOUTH PARK's rip on Chocolate Jesus?) Mr. Holland, if your idea of the "good cop/ bad cop" routine is the "bad cop" gets huge exposure for his mostly merit-less opposition, and the "good cop" gets in a re-buttal once every three months that doesn't even make the main thread of this 'progressive' forum--then I don't wanna see the flick. I know how it ends.

Nervy, too, Alternet--this on the very same day you asked for MONEY to keep Mr. Holland on staff. I have been trying to unsubscribe to ALTERNET ever since your last bold attempt to pump up your response/comment numbers by writing about 9/11--THE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE facing our country--with disdain and an odd contempt that I can only assume helps you get more money/ circulation/ support from your ALTERNET flaps.

Enough. I've had enough. Please remove me from this list or tell me how to do it myself, or I'll start flagging you as spam.

Mr. Hicks, thank you again for a most informative article. I think your goal here is well thought out/ may be the most solid way to get this horror story to a jury. (Lord knows, Brooklyn could get it done.) Let me know if there's anything I can do...

Yours,
Janine Winter
WTC Emergency Task Force
Sept. 17th 2001 - Jan. 2, 2002

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: "Good Cop/ Bad Cop"=Bad Analogy. Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: "Good Cop/ Bad Cop"=Bad Analogy. Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: "Good Cop/ Bad Cop"=Bad Analogy. Posted by: Joshua Holland
» Flame bait Posted by: HeroesAll
» RE: Flame bait Posted by: Gisele
» RE: Flame bait Posted by: oregoncharles
» RE: Flame bait Posted by: HeroesAll
» RE: Flame bait Posted by: blitzmesser
» RE: Flame bait Posted by: HeroesAll
» "Good Cop/ Bad Cop"? Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: "Good Cop/ Bad Cop"=Bad Analogy. Posted by: oregoncharles
Poor neo-con Josh!
Posted by: asilsfable on Apr 6, 2007 2:09 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm amazed at the vitriol you've incurred. Completely insane and so WRONG!

But, I have to admit, also hilarious!

(Take Red for a walk--you'll feel better)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Still no mention of the anthrax attacks...
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Apr 6, 2007 2:29 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And here we have an unpublished manuscript by a dead guy, plus lots of innuendo. Why not just go back and look at the August 6th PDB and the 7/10 Rice-Tenet meeting, and the FBI headquarters refusal to seek FISA court warrants as requested by FBI field agents... obviously, Bush was warned that terrorist hijackings were imminent and decided to let them go forward.

The anthrax attacks just served to ratchet up the fear, and have been completely ignored by the media - down the memory hole! Remember the terror? Remember people rushing out to buy yards of black plastic and bleach? Remember the run on antibiotics, and Colin Powell waving around the little tube of 'simulated anthrax' at the UN in order to justify the war with Iraq? We still hear about the 'Nigerian yellowcake", but progressives have apparently decided to forget about the anthrax attacks.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

THE REAL TRUTH BEHIND 9/11
Posted by: kwalla on Apr 6, 2007 5:03 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
THIS IS YET ANOTHER ELABORORATE LIE TO HIDE THE REAL TRUTH ABOUT 9/11: ALIEN-HUMAN HYBRIDS TRAINED BY BLACK-OP UN SPECIAL FORCES HAVE HYPNOTIZED THE ENTIRE EARTHS POPULATION INTO BELIEVING THAT THE WTC BUILDINGS WERE DESTROYED. THE TRUTH IS THAT THE BUILDINGS ARE STILL STANDING TODAY, BUT NO ONE CAN SEE THEM BECAUSE THEY ARE HYPNOTIZED. MY PODIATRIST, WHO IS ALSO AN AMATEUR CHANNELER AND PART-TIME DIESEL MECHANIC PROVED THIS CONCLUSIVELY USING A MODEL AIRPLANE, TWO GALLONS OF JET FUEL AND AN OLD SHOE BOX. TWO DAYS AFTER HIS EXPERIMENT HIS MEDICAL LICENSE WAS REVOKED BY THE ATF!! WHY DOES EVERYONE THINK I'M A NUTJOB FOR TRYING TO EXPOSE THE TRUTH??!??

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: THE REAL TRUTH BEHIND 9/11 Posted by: HeroesAll
» RE: THE REAL TRUTH BEHIND 9/11 Posted by: Mamarianne
» RE: THE REAL TRUTH BEHIND 9/11 Posted by: blitzmesser
They must have been double agents.
Posted by: Sojourner on Apr 6, 2007 6:46 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
They were probably telling the FBI all about talk of the proposed WTC attack. So the FBI believed that with such insiders, they'd know when to pull the rug out from under them. Opps. The primary loyalty of the double agents turned out to be al Qaeda. Gosh. And you mean the FBI refuses to go public with that?

Makes me think of my favorite theory of the JFK assassination. JFK thought he could hire the mob to assassinate Castro, and so the mob was granted protections and privileges. Problem was they used those to assassinate JFK.

It's a bit tricky trying to guess what people who will lie to your face will do when the time comes. What makes us think that if they are lying to the other side they won't lie to our side?

How we do love the drama of international intrigue, of outsmarting your opponent, of pulling off a coup, of pulling a fast one. It all falls down when some no-account makes the final decision.

Speaking of truth-telling: how can you tell the truth from a lie?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Thank you Joshua
Posted by: JSFFive on Apr 6, 2007 9:20 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thanks for posting this letter.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Explosion of the 9-11 Truth Movement -- U.S. Media's Dirty Little Secret
Posted by: BillDouglas on Apr 7, 2007 6:30 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I wrote this article for Newtopia Magazine years ago, and its had over 500,000 readers. It is still just as relevant as it was then, even though Alter-net and others media by now know that the official 9/11 myth is a lie.

A mass movement and a mountain of disturbing evidence has been growing beneath the radar of U.S. media. The U.S. media (including alternative media) has done an extraordinarily superhuman job of "hearing" "seeing" and "speaking no evil." However, almost immediately after 9-11-2001's horrendous attacks on New York and Washington D.C., many researchers, ordinary citizens, and journalists [who've been given precious little print in U.S. papers or TV] began to smell something rotten . . . not in Denmark . . . but rather, right here in the good ol' US of A.

This movement's early roots began when many people scratched their heads in wonder at "how 4 commercial jet liners could fly hijacked for nearly an hour and a half the morning of 9-11, without any Air Force fighter interceptor jets turning a wheel until it was too late," as stated by acclaimed Canadian TV journalist, Barry Zwicker. Zwicker's powerful documentary "The Great Deception," which suggests top Bush Admin. officials were likely complicit in the 9-11 attacks, aired on Canada's Vision TV network which is viewed by millions of Canadians. Unfortunately Americans in the U.S. have been "protected" from viewing this critical documentary.

READ MY ENTIRE ARTICLE AT:
http://www.bigeye.com/911.htm

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We don't need bad cops
Posted by: EricVerlo on Apr 7, 2007 10:24 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Mr. Holland, why do you feel we need a good cop / bad cop on the 9/11 issue? There are already too many of bad cops.

Why not stick to your ordinarily great posts and quit editorializing about 9/11 where the only role you play is gatekeeper, trying to keep the door closed.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: We don't need bad cops Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: We don't need bad cops Posted by: Roverton
The Truth Will Come Out
Posted by: sabr on Apr 7, 2007 10:58 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
www.patriotsquestion911.com

Visit the site, they all know the truth has not yet been told.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Bravo Sander Hicks! High Five to JOSH!
Posted by: channing on Apr 7, 2007 11:14 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is exactly what I've long thought is required to bring the "cabal" DOWN: PUBLIC EXPOSURE...

Sander's efforts may work, but it also may just get someone in NY fired/smeared or worse. Regardless, the publicity IS having the effect of opening more and more people to the need to uncover massive corruption at the top of government AND commerce by none other than self-proclaimed "patriots".

Today, there are dozens of potential can-openers in the works, any one of which may turn out to be the one that opens all the others to "public questioning", which is the main missing ingredient today.

BTW, There is no need to be discouraged by some of the nay-saying going on around here, just keep up the good work. These are heroic times for speaking truth to power!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Good letter, Preferred Take
Posted by: oregoncharles on Apr 7, 2007 12:14 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hicks's letter is very good (I assume he left the political stuff out of the version he sent.) It actually supports my own preferred take on the issue:

That the Bushies knew it was coming, but let it happen. I wish the stuff about the failure of fighter interception were clearer, as that would confirm it.

The biggest advantage of this version is that it's already established, by the 9/11 Commission (granted their limitations) and other official info. Officially, they were warned but did nothing. The remaining question is mostly just motive: was that incompetence, or malice? And, of course, the issue of this letter: did they actively suppress interference with the plot. We know of investigations that were closed or stymied; this would be another.

Yes, I know, this doesn't even address the "collapsed-in-their-own footprints" question. That's what drives a lot of the controversy: those films are just so implausible. Tall objects just don't do that. Here I confess radical agnosticism: I don't know what happened, you don't either, I don't think we'll ever know - not in my lifetime, anyway. And it drives us a little crazy.

So all told, I think Joshua found an intelligent way of dealing with such a burning story. It's not such a bad idea to keep acknowledging it: at the very least, it gives the Bushies heartburn, especially when the questions raised are so very cogent. And we all have that fantasy of seeing them all tarred and feathered and run out of town on a rail. SO gratifying (yes, of course we hate them: they scare us to death.)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Good letter, Preferred Take Posted by: oregoncharles
» RE: Good letter, Preferred Take Posted by: blitzmesser
Eric Larsen
Posted by: Eric Larsen on Apr 7, 2007 12:44 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I've already written in support of Sander Hicks' brave and right crusade urging Brooklyn District Attorney Hynes to take up the 9/11 investigation. But I'll post here again my earlier comments:
I wholeheartedly support the contents of Sander’s letter and am happy to endorse it fully, as I did his earlier letter to District Attorney Hynes. I also thank Sander heartily for his dedication and for his writing of these letters. Thanks to the unflagging efforts of people like Sander, and the authors of books like his “The Big Wedding” (not to mention his subsequent 9/11 research with Daniel Hopsicker, published on www.AlterNet.org ), the moment is growing nearer when the 9/11 Truth movement will consist not of a minority but a majority of the population. That moment can’t come too soon, since, as Sander knows as well as anyone, time is running out. I trust that the District Attorney will respond favorably to what Sander-and his many readers and supporters-are asking. It’s a matter not only of justice but of preserving the Constitutional republic.
Eric Larsen
http://www.ericlarsen.net

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Reality check.
Posted by: blitzmesser on Apr 7, 2007 6:52 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why would any government prevent the investigation of such an horrendous event ?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: eality check. Posted by: jwc
» RE: eality check. Posted by: famouspipeliner
Seek and you shall find
Posted by: wawa on Apr 9, 2007 6:41 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Scholars for 9/11 truth:

http://911scholars.org/


Mark Gaffney's latest-with photos of the 9/11 Mystery Plane

http://rense.com/general76/missing.htm

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

run with it
Posted by: DrXyzzy on Apr 9, 2007 7:08 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thanks, Josh, for giving Sander Hicks a voice. Let's take it a step further. Someone open to 9/11 dissent should be a regular contributor at Alternet. Or have a column with rotating authorship. Stories are still breaking - like the premature BBC report of the collapse of building 7. Let Alternet take the lead in giving this topic regular and serious discussion.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

CHENEY and MOSSAD DID IT!!!
Posted by: AlohaTerry on Apr 9, 2007 9:11 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Nuff said!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Get off Josh's back... he's coming around...
Posted by: xbj on Apr 9, 2007 11:05 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Remember, not everyone comes to the truth at the same rate or in the same way or at the same time. For those of us who saw it the second it happened (indeed, some of us were actually waiting for it to happen, just didn't know how far the bastards were willing to go to launch their moneyminting war), it IS frustrating waiting for the rest of America to catch up.

But have no fear; the rest of America IS catching up to the rest of the planet, and WILL eventually. Soon there will be only the 8% certifiably insane that will also loudly proclaim OJ's innocence. Not the same group, but the same percentage, thereabouts.

Truth is inevitable. Never forget this. And keep pushing, proclaiming, and stand on it. The wall WILL fall.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A sad state of affairs
Posted by: willymack on Apr 9, 2007 12:41 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Who could have imagined prior to the 2000 election theft, the hideous crimes committed in our name, but benefitting only a few neocon scumbags, or the fact that so many of us want out "leaders" in jail-or worse? How much longer will we permit these evil bastards to victimize us?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]