Who says the MSM report negatively on the 9/11 Truth Movement? How the World changed after 9/11.

I found this article today.

I thought it was a very fair piece of journalism and one that may even be the green shoots of the MSM beginning to question the OS?

Maybe not, but certainly bringing attention to a number of the anomolies relating to that most infamous of days, as well as mentioning some key names. And bringing this to the attention of everyday folk, here in the U.K.

And from Starbucks, I went down the rabbit hole. I found myself at a conference on Walker Street called 'How The World Changed After 9/11'. It was packed, but I managed to slide in at the back, to hear a guy called Webster Tarpley chant his own list of names. The names of the 46 military exercises and hijack drills (called things like 'Vigilant Guardian') that were actually taking place on the morning of September 11. "The greatest density of drills in US military history," Tarpley said.

The journalist covers the number of drills that were taking place and why the reaction to the actual events unfolding was not what the American people should have expected.

Fake radar blips, dummy hijacks, dummy attacks, fighter jets sent off to Turkey, the skies left unprotected, with the FBI's top anti-terror experts stuck on a training exercise in California. The drills, said Tarpley, were important, because not only did they weaken and confuse US air defence, but there was also a military drill for each major component of the 9/11 attacks. The drills were cover, and the dummy threats were made real.

There were a number of key speakers including an ex CIA analyst called Ray McGovern. I think he brought along one of the more revealing facts.

He drew attention to an extraordinary story, barely touched by the mainstream press, that Richard Clarke, who was the White House counter-terrorism czar at the time of the attacks, has recently accused the CIA of deliberately suppressing information before 9/11, information that might have prevented the attacks. Clarke claimed: "There was a high-level decision in the CIA ordering people not to share information." And who made this decision? "I would think it would have been made by the director".

At the end of the article the Journalist suggests that people should do some of their own research on some of the names mentioned during the speeches, pointing to the fact that Googling Cass Sunstein might be a good starting point.

We have to do something. Even if that something is simply to Google 'Cass Sunstein' and start from there. Begin your own cognitive infiltration. Google 'Vigilant Guardian' or 'Able Danger'. Crosscheck 'Abdel Hakim Belhadj' and 'Al-Qaida'. Begin digging. Begin thinking. And stop believing.

At last a MSM article not calling all Truthers 'Loony Tunes'. Take a look at the article and see what you think.

www.guardian.co.uk...

The Gaurdian have been reporting stories like this for quite a while. They have been covering the bilderberg meetings and of course helping spread wikileaks.

I'm still not sure of their agenda. Maybe it's a double bluff to get the reaction TPTB want. I'm not sure.

reply to post by Cobaltic1978


Uh, hate to burst your little bubble but the Guadian isn't exactly mainstream and the author of the piece appears to be a blogger that specializes in promoting conspiracies.

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by Cobaltic1978

 

Uh, hate to burst your little bubble but the Guadian isn't exactly mainstream and the author of the piece appears to be a blogger that specializes in promoting conspiracies.

It's a U.K Mainstream Newspaper, so not exactly bursting my Bubble. It does have a rather large circulation, albeit teachers, civil servants and the like.

There isn't any mention of the buildings collapsing, so I am a bit surprised you left a comment. Oh, it's posted in 9/11 conspiracies that you are probably paid to try and de-bunk.

Uh, hate to burst your little bubble but the Guadian isn't exactly mainstream and the author of the piece appears to be a blogger that specializes in promoting conspiracies.

How ingenious and industrious of you to attempt to discredit an individual few, if any, of us know without mentioning a thing about the information put forth. Is that something which is taught in Debunking 101?

reply to post by SphinxMontreal


Maybe Hooper is really Cass Sunstein??