September 9th, Oakland Unanswered Questions About 9-11 event

Are the people running this nonsense about Bush being responsible for 9/11 being funded by the CIA to discredit all anti-war protesters?

It is a shame that grassroots energy that could be used constructively for other purposes is being channeled into this bosh. This country has serious issues and they need to be dealt with seriously, not by namecalling and lapses in critical thinking. Use tactics that have even a remote chance of winning a single convert to your cause instead of alienating potential converts.

Asking questions about a huge event which our government has tried to cover up is damaging the progressive community?? What sort of community is it that isn't allowed to question the government? Doesn't sound very progressive to me.

If some questions feel out of line to you, you don't have to listen.

But in the meantime, why don't you answer the questions then - explain to me why it took 1 1/2 hours to get the jets scrambled to defend against the attacks?

Even the middle and upper-class families are asking questions from the administration on this, even Michael Moore is asking these questions, and hearings are being held in Congress, thus even Congress will be asking questions.

But, oh right, we'll be damaging the progressives if we ask questions in the wrong way.

Personally, if it's framed as Bush Did It or Unanswered Questions, or Blow Up Everything, I really don't care - I'd like some answers and these people are working to answer them.

A film titled America 9-11 We Will Never Forget by Camera Planet, a man and woman who got out of the WTC talked of a third explosion. The woman is lighting up a cigarette. It may be fuel , but could the WTC have been imploded?

A film titled America 9-11 We Will Never Forget by Camera Planet, a man and woman who got out of the WTC talked of a third explosion. The woman is lighting up a cigarette. It may be fuel , but could the WTC have been imploded?

Was our pilot president,ever informed of muslims learning to fly jumbo jets here in this country? Most important, Donald Rumsfeld to Sam Donaldson of ABC This Week 9-16 when asked why fighter jets were not scrambled immediately, replied,"THIS WAS A JOB FOR THE FBI".

Please tell us more about this film. I'd like to see it.

The two evening events - one on the 9th at Humanity Hall in Oakland, and one on the 11th at the Uhuru House in Oakland - sponsored by the All Peoples Coalition will have a number of speakers and at least one video on the 911 issues (although not this particular one Beverley appears to be talking about.)

Do you guys remember that terrorists tried to knock down the WTC in 1993? So I guess by your logic, Dubya had been planning this for a long time.

This event was originally scheduled so that the author of the book The War on Freedom, Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed,
http://waronfreedom.mediamonitors.net/index.html, would have a chance to speak publicly. We also hoped to show a new video by Guerrilla News Network,
http://www.guerrillanews.com/war_on_terrorism/ , on 9-11. Ahmed was also going to be speaking in DC, NY, SF, Palo Alto... but just cancelled his trip because he needs to be home with his wife and newborn daughter. Rather than caqncel the event, we decided to go ahead with the publisher John Leonard, and Joyce, who has written quite a bit on 9-11 and participated at a 9-11 Teach-In at SFSU last spring, and me. I organized a march and meeting with legislators last January Demanding a Congressional Inquiry of 9-11. In response Bush and Cheney asked that the inquiry be limited and overseen by the CIA!!! From my research, the CIA had a hand in this, and the current "inquiry" strikes me as a "whitewash."

There are some excellent videos on this subject, as well as books, magazines, websites for those who want to know the truth about what happened. Certainly we don't know "all the answers" and have "more questions" than answers, but we do believe that the questions need to be raised. Many people are afraid to speak, afraid to act, but in the face of what has happened and the current path that we are now on, I believe we need to be brave and challenge "The Big Lie" which is being used to justify agression abroad and repression at home.

I'm not sure if GNN will complete their 9-11 documentary by September 11th, but we hope that we will be able to show it at the Uhuru House, 7911 MacArthur Blvd. Oakland on September 11th.

Try to get to Richmond for the Unanswered Questions, June 10th press Conference video on Sept. 4th- if you can. (check the calendar for details).

http://www.public-action.com/rescue.html
Asking questions about the Pentagon attack in particular . . .

Read from former FAA Investigator Rodney Stich who writes extensively about 9/11. This is must reading!

See:
http://www.unfriendlyskies.com
http://www.defraudingamerica.com
http://www.druggingamerica.com

About Rodney Stich: Rodney Stich writes about corruption in federal courts, judicial retaliation against government agents seeking to report high level corruption in government, selective and widespread misuse of federal courts to block exposure of corrupt, criminal, and treasonous activities.

Rodney Stich was a navy pilot and flight instructor in World War Two, an airline pilot for airlines throughout the world, a federal air safety investigator. His discovery of fraud-related air disasters caused him to become an independent prosecutor in the FAA, file federal lawsuits, and publish three editions of "Unfriendly Skies", seeking to halt the tragedy-related corruption. The author has appeared as guest and expert on over 3,000 radio and television shows since 1978 in the United States, Canada, Mexico, France, Germany, and Turkey.

Rodney Stich's information needs to be read and gotten out to the general public!

http://www.indybay.org/news/2002/04/121418.php

I think now is the time we can take the old crank term - "politically correct" - and turn it on its creators.

It is not politically correct to question 911. It is not politically correct to question the war. It is not politically correct to question apartheid in Israel.

Apparently, it is also not politically correct to post opposing viewpoints on this site. Given the information on the subject of 'trolls', it appears as though if you make a comment that is not in line with the direction of this media outlet, or you challenge them in any way, or you poke fun of their political positions, or if you get in their face and tell them off, or you make any other sort of comments that's not conducive to their mission, you are a troll.

Do what you feel you must. Try your best to create an environment where you believe those who stumble upon this site will listen to only your side of the issue. If you want to believe you're creating a inpenatrible bubble around yourself so you can feel safe and warm, that's your business. But don't be surprised when many of us come towards you with stick pins and deflate your little world, which is exactly what will happen every time

POP!!!!!!!!!!.

nobody here has a problem with people who come for the strict purpose of dissent.
But flaming, baiting, outright distortion etc are unwelcome.
You seem to be trying to frame this as a free speech issue. It is not.
This is a typical troll ploy.
When trolls find that their efforts are being successfully resisted, they often complain that their right to free speech is being infringed. Let us examine that claim.

While most people on the Internet are ardent defenders of free speech, it is not an absolute right; there are practical limitations. For example, you may not scream out "Fire!" in a crowded theatre, and you may not make jokes about bombs while waiting to board an airplane. We accept these limitations because we recognize that they serve a greater good.

Another useful example is the control of the radio frequency spectrum. You might wish to set up a powerful radio station to broadcast your ideas, but you cannot do so without applying for a license. Again, this is a practical limitation: if everybody broadcasted without restriction, the repercussions would be annoying at best and life-threatening at worst.

The radio example is helpful for another reason: with countless people having a legitimate need to use radio communications, it is important to ensure that nobody is 'monopolizing the channel'. There are only so many clear channels available in each frequency band and these must be shared.

When a troll attacks a message board, he generally posts a lot of messages. Even if his messages are not particularly inflammatory, they can be so numerous that they drown out the regular conversations (this is known as 'flooding'). Needless to say, no one person's opinions can be allowed to monopolize a channel.

The ultimate response to the 'free speech' argument is this: while we may have the right to say more or less whatever we want, we do not have the right to say it wherever we want. You may feel strongly about the fact that your neighbour has not mowed his lawn for two months, but you do not have the right to berate him in his own living room. Similarly, if a webmaster tells a troll that he is not welcome, the troll has no "right" to remain. This is particularly true on the numerous free communications services offered on the net. (On pay systems, the troll might be justified in asking for a refund.)