Friday, January 23, 2009

9/11 Truth, Lies @ Salon

I often post over at Unclaimed Territory, Glenn Greenwald's blog at

Oftentimes, the subject of 9/11 Truth comes up. Glenn is not too keen on this as it is disruptive and generally "off topic". And as he says it quickly degenerates into a shouting match between the two opposing camps.

So today I offered to let people who want to discuss this in a more appropriate venue come here to Contumacious to discuss and of course YELL!

It's all good. Let the chips fall where they may.

My position is pretty clear, I don't buy the official story. I have no clear idea how they did it, as I am not privy to all the facts or the evidence, but I am sure that any good theory has to explain the facts, and my reading is that the official story fails to do this in many many ways.

So if anyone from Salon, or anywhere else for that matter, has something to say. Please feel free to say it here.


Some interesting links:

Operation Northwoods, the first draft for the 911 attack?

Pilots for 911 Truth:

Prof. David Ray Griffin video:

Architects for 911 Truth:



Operation Northwoods, which had the written approval of the Chairman and every member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, called for innocent people to be shot on American streets; for boats carrying refugees fleeing Cuba to be sunk on the high seas; for a wave of violent terrorism to be launched in Washington, D.C., Miami, and elsewhere. People would be framed for bombings they did not commit; planes would be hijacked. Using phony evidence, all of it would be blamed on Castro, thus giving Lemnitzer and his cabal the excuse, as well as the public and international backing, they needed to launch their war."
- James Bamford, Body of Secrets

A big objection to 911 being an "inside job" is the sheer size of the operation, and the ability of the conspirators to maintain secrecy after the fact. The truth is we don't know how many people had to be in on it, because we don't know exactly what happened. It is true that in the past we have things like the Manhattan Project that even Harry Truman knew nothing about until he became President.

Operation Northwoods is not a conspiracy theory, it happened but was rejected by President Kennedy. What this teaches us is that there were elements within the military, indeed the leadership of the military Admiral Leimnitzer was prepared to

1) Start rumors (many). Use clandestine radio.
(2) Land friendly Cubans in uniform "over-the-fence" to stage attack on base.
(3) Capture Cuban (friendly) saboteurs inside the base.
(4) Start riots near the base main gate (friendly Cubans).
(5) Blow up ammunition inside the base; start fires.
(6) Burn aircraft on air base (sabotage).
(7) Lob mortar shells from outside of base into base. Some damage to installations.
(8) Capture assault teams approaching from the sea or vicinity of Guantanamo City.
(9) Capture militia group which storms the base.
(10) Sabotage ship in harbor; large fires -- napthalene.
(11) Sink ship near harbor entrance. Conduct funerals for mock-victims (may be in lieu of (10)).
And this is just a partial list! If you want to read the whole story go here.

Did they think they could keep this a secret? Yes. Did they keep it a secret for almost 50 years? You bet.
The parallels between what happened and what was planned in America, by Americans, in 1962 are massive.javascript:void(0)

Update 2
Excellent video that documents the use of Thermate at the WTC.
H/T Frank!



«Oldest   ‹Older   401 – 562 of 562
Anonymous said...

Hi Ya All,

I've just discovered a fine little blog. Run by a fellow called Tim Wilkinson in some pieces he tears a strip out of those compliant gate keeping journos who bandy around the term "conspiracy theorist" in order to close down questions.

He was very good on Dr Kelly. Try him out:

Surely Some Mistake

Anonymous said...

Nan Yar:

"Law is his area of expertise. He would have a very hard time misrepresenting that material. But otherwise like most he can slip and slid and fudge."

Well he manages to slip, slide and fudge his way around the laws governing gravity, motion and the conservation of energy well enough.

As such I don't find him trustworthy at all even if in every other respect he is correct.

Afterall, the laws that govern the physical world around us are far bigger and completely un malleable unlike man's laws.

Nan Yar said...

Until an increasingly influential and powerful group began to have problems with the Ptolemaic theory, most people accepted on authority that the sun went around the earth. The group was composed of scientists especially astronomers. Something similar is happening now. The scientists who have examined the events of 9/11 have come to a radically different conclusion than that presented by the ruling class. Only when a comparably powerful element in society begins to have real trouble with the conventional explanation will the scientific viewpoint take precedence. But that could be years from now. Even now most persons would do just fine in their everyday lives believing the sun went around the earth. Most people now do just fine believing that Al Qaeda was the actor on 9/11. Most persons live by authority. Hence, they always support the authorities. I do not know if it is at all realistic to imagine most persons as capable of more independence and critical thought. Dependence and thoughtlessness may be a flaw in evolution. In any case we are forced to concede that there is a hierarchy: some persons are very intelligent and knowledgable and others just the opposite. I do not think that really intelligent persons are unethical. True, some are brilliant in an area or two but lag far behind in other important ones. The intelligence that I am thinking about is not necessarily measurable by tests.

Nan Yar said...

Bill Owen--As a Canadian you are no doubt quite aware that today is the anniversary of the 2010 Toronto G20 Summit. It would appear that the authorities have gotten off scott free. (see for some excellent investigative reporting by Paul Jay--a Canadian) Just as in the 1930's we are witnessing a new tide of Fascism. This time it appears that the USA will play the role of Nazi Germany and make its own attempt at the American version of the Third Reich. Unfortunately Obama lacks the brilliance and vision of an Adolf Hitler. So rather than rebuild America first, Obama who cares little for this country will simply use the drones to initiate more wars without Congressional approval. But like all governments now the citizen comes last in the list of priorities.
Still regarding Canada I had hoped there would be some governmental investigation in pursuit of the culpable persons. But such is not to be apparently. My suggestion is to get rid of Harper. He has like Obama that look of the gangster.

Bill Owen said...


Yes, as a Canadian I am disgusted with what happened at the G20. Unfortunately Canadians are: propagandized, naive, misinformed by the corporate media and even if they have some apprehension of how Canada has been hijacked, they are afraid.

The Toronto Police Chief just issued a "mistakes were made" report, but not a single person was named, not one.

Bill Owen said...

@Nanyar. Getting rid of Harper. Easier said than done. If Ignatieff had won the election, nothing would have changed. Nothing. He supported torture, he supported Iraq, he would not have even decriminalized marijuana, saying it was "not important" and it would annoy America. Iggy loves Israel and has actually claimed to be an American! Jesus! He was our Obama. Yet, somehow the electorate pulled one our shadowy masters and voted strongly for the NDP. Unfortunately since then the NDP has been moving toward the centre, abandoning many of their previous positions. Clearly, they imagine themselves close to power and like so many before them, are willing to "compromise" "just a little" "until we get in", then they can return to their true colours. Or so they think. Compromise is dangerous.

Nan Yar said...

Bill Owen: So we can no longer make any disparaging remarks about the Germans of the 1930's unless we do so in drawing parallels with our own societies now. We have, I believed, advanced to the stage where there is no turning back. In this slow motion view, the trigger has been pulled. At some point it was realized that only by taking extreme measures could certain goals be attained. That preceded 9/11 --probably during the Clinton Administration. Clinton, Bush and Obama are three very shadowy characters drafted to play very dirty roles. I don't know at what point Hitler has a firm plan in place. Maybe by '36. The longer a plan is around the more real it seems. The more inevitable. Word of God. Collapse the democracies. Multiply the wars. Create economic austerity. Keep people frightened of foreign enemies. Put weak men in office. Blackmail the rest. Create unimaginable suffering. Then tender a solution. A new United Nations.

teri49 said...

You can read your salon archive. Google "Nanyar on" and you'll find links to your some of your posts, including "read nanyar's other letters" archives, which you can access. Unless you meant a particular couple of letters were deleted forever, rather than saved in the archive?
I'm curious, because Glenn deleting a post he disagrees with is stupid enough (with the caveat that there have been some particularly loathsome racial/homophobic screeds he probably should have erased and didn't); deleting the letter from the archive is just unnecessary and petulant over-kill.
I don't know how all this internet stuff works. Maybe once he actually hits 'delete', it automatically deletes a letter from everywhere, even the archive.
He sure picks and chooses - in some surprising ways - and why 9/11 is such a tender spot for him is inexplicable.

Anonymous said...

goodkurtz here

Richard Gage was in London recently. He gave a presentation at RIBA (Royal Institute of British Architects).

The clown and Times columnist David Aaronovitch pronounced the proceedings "bonkers".

Bit of a subsequent old ding dong as to whether RIBA should have allowed the gig.

Anyway there is now a truther thread running in an online architect journal called "Building Design"

Hearteningly most Barney Rubbles types are on the side of the truthers.
Why not join the fun?

Nan Yar said...

"Tactics of mistake" --Below is the address of an excellent 9/11 article.

Bill Owen said...

To everyone complaining about blogger, Google has just announced a major overhaul. They are even changing the name to "Google Blogs". I am hoping that they will fix the problems that so many have complained about.

Anonymous said...

Hi goodkurtz here

Richard Gage was in London a couple of weeks ago giving a presentation at the Royal Institute of British Architects.

Some Official Conspiracy Theorists got the knickers in a twist about it and complained. An article about it appeared in bdonline.

There is a thread running on it. Anthony Szamboti has been contributing as has a notorious misinformation agent previously unknown to me called Albury Smith.

Why not come and join in the fun?
You can register for free:

Bill Owen said...

@London Lad, aka Good Kurtz

Thanks for that link. It's a very good discussion. One thing I noticed is how much better the conversation is there, then say at Salon, where the attack dogs start snarling the second they see the number 9...

Blogger is due to be upgraded soon, so am looking forward to a better comments section.

IraqVetForHumanRights said...

@Little Brother & London Lad

Just wanted to let you know you are missed over at UT!

Anonymous said...

Hello, All--I just finished listening to a fascinating interview with Dr. Graeme MacQueen
on the program "Guns and Butter",
the title of which is, "Connecting the Anthrax Attacks to 9/11". Dr. Macqueen has done his homework! I am sure you will find the interview most interesting. Find it at The Interview is conducted by Bonnie Faulkner. It can be brought up from the archives at "Guns and Butter" Thank You, Frank McElroy

Anonymous said...

Hi, Bill and everyone--Here is the link for the above mentioned interview:
Wish I could hyperlink it, but I know you computer savants can manage. It's worth a listen, IMHOP

Anonymous said...

Hi, London Pilchard Paris Face here

Thanks for the kind comment IraqVetForHumanRights.
I'd have signed up again but can't be arsed.
Greenwald's got on my wick.
Doesn't the wretched man know how difficult it is to dream up new avatars all the time?
They don't come easy you know. Not at my age.

Mind you, I do miss taking the piss out of saltfuck.

Nan Yar said...

Anders Behring Breivik: not a terrorist because not Muslim; not justified in what amounts to minor killings and building damage because not a NATO nation leader . . . So what are we left with? Mass murder sounds too glamorous. Not a serial killer though the killings were one after another. A loner because he did not, as do President Obama and Cameron have, other like minded men to socialize with. Undoubtedly a bit of psychopath. Well, he has made a place for himself in Norwegian history. Because as he said, perhaps quoting almost verbatim, something that Bill Clinton or George Bush or Obama has said, atrocious but necessary. Kind of a world leader type but without a nation behind him to make it a humanitarian intervention. Something surely to reflect on.

Nan Yar said...

"Do you support the policies and political fortunes of President Barack Obama, the Nobel Peace Prize laureate? Then this is what you support: cowardly, cold-blooded mass murder. You support mass murder. You support the shredding to pieces of innocent people, many of them children, week after week, month after month. You support the murder of children. You support the cultivation of extremism and hatred: hatred aimed at you, and your children, for the mass murder -- the state terrorism -- committed in your name by your progressive president. You support extremism. You support hatred. You support terrorism." --Chris Floyd

Bill Owen said...


So Obama is just as bad as Brievik?

Yes, yes, he is.

At least Brievik had the guts to do it himself.

Obama just orders his minions, kill this one, blow up that one, do it now. Over 1000 dead civilians in Pakistan alone.

Anonymous said...

your comparison with that son of a bitch Long Form Flag Pin to Brievik is both shocking but utterly accurate.
Check this:

Under fire from afar: Harrowing exhibition reveals damage done by drones in Pakistan


Anonymous said...

To all who follow the events of 9/11/01 please give careful attention to the following site:

Thanks, Frank McElroy

Anonymous said...

A new A&E DVD has been made.
Watch trailer here:

(The Chomskys & Greenwalds of this world better sharpen up. The days of the lefty gate keepers is coming to an end. Their gate keeping has done immeasurable harm and they have some serious 'splaining to do.)


Bill Owen said...

Some interesting news today, has posted a story about the missing documents and loot from the 911 attacks.

Anonymous said...

Yeah, now all we need to do is find the bust in good order somewhere else in the world removed before 9/11 and we'll have found "The Smoking Rodin".

Which will sit nicely on the mantel piece along with all the other smoking guns people still wilfully choose to ignore.


Nan Yar said...

Deep and extensive analysis of the towers (9/11). This qualifies as a must for those interested in what really happened. It is by a scientist (PhD).

Nan Yar said...

Recently I watched the three interviews of Dr Judy Wood by Jeff Rense of Clearly she is an excellent and devoted scientist though I have the impression that she has upset some apple carts. Her anomalies collection does make the explosives explanation seem unlikely. I think one needs to see her amazing book to get the full impact. I am disappointed to hear that the AE911 people are angry at her. After all the truth is what we want. Who cares whose explanation makes the most sense as long as we get to the real truth. One thing her theory accomplishes is that it leaves the door completely open to other possible assailants. I think we can be certain that the Russian and Chinese scientist have been very interested in 9/11 and have noted the peculiarities she points to. I hope someone coming here has also watched these interviews. I have followed Rense for years and he is a very careful guy and a great interviewer. The fact that he thinks highly of her work is a very strong and good recommendation. The interviews are at YouTube under Jeff Rense and Dr Judy Wood.

Nan Yar said...

Has everyone abandoned this blog? And just when these three interesting interviews have come along. The more I reflect on Dr Wood the more convinced I am that her findings are irrefutable and that the anomalies she has pointed to can not be accounted for either by the shoddy NIST explanation nor the far more sophisticated explanations offered by AE9/11Truth. Hers is the only hypothesis that accounts for the vanishing mass of the huge buildings. I do recall one engineer saying that there ought to have been about 40 stories worth of debris below each Tower. And the controlled demolition approach could not account for the "dustification" of 80 or 90 percent of the buildings. This obvious fact seems to have been overlooked by the AE9/11 people.

Bill Owen said...

Ha, perhaps!

I did not reply about Dr. Wood because she is widely regarded as a loon, even within the movement.

Her explanation is, I think, extremely far fetched and to complex by half.

I don't even know of any energy weapons that could do what she says. This so called Hutchinson effect is something itself that is quite dubious. He is a Canadian, self taught, bit of a nut, not that that disqualifies him!

There is a lot of evidence for explosives, not much for energy weapons. If such a device was used it would leave traces in the atmosphere, and no doubt would be picked up by sensors in China, Russia, etc.

I read her theories years ago and was not impressed. Many in the movement believe that she is a disinfo type, whose role is to discredit the movement. The "no planes" bunch is in that crowd too.

The simplest explanations are usually best.

Bill Owen said...

Blogger redesign has started. Google is rolling it out gradually.

Can't wait, looks great!

Bill Owen said...

911 Truth movement. Falling apart? Internal divisions now rampant.

FWIW I think Fetzer is a nut. A very very smart one, but a nut nonetheless. It is hard, once one has gone down the rabbit hole, to decide where to stop.

The Debate over 9/11 Truth: Kevin Ryan vs. Jim Fetzer
by Jim Fetzer

The publication of “Is ’9/11 Truth’ based upon a false theory?” has led to many attacks upon me by Kevin Ryan, Niels Harrit, and others, as anyone who reviews the comments on that article can ascertain for themselves. In addition, a rather heated exchange has taken plane on an email thread initiated by T. Mark Hightower, the collaborating author of that article, which initially included Steven Jones, Kevin Ryan, Neils Harrit, and many others.

Bill Owen said...

Further to Fetzer.

I don't want to leave the impression that he has not made some very very important contributions. He has.


LittleBrother said...

Part One of Two:

FWIW, I've been lurking here, but just haven't passed that "tipping point" to comment.

But I might as well chime in with some long-winded agreement or validation with Bill.

First of all, no offense to Nan Yar, but I am also highly skeptical of Judy Wood for the reasons Bill stated in his August 7th comment. I have noticed a few enthusiastic references to Wood in CommonDreams comments, where I mostly "hang out" these days.

Trutherphobes must be as afflicted with the Summertime Blues, or Dog Day Doldrums, as Yr. Humble Narrator, because I expected those approving Wood references to bring down the Trutherphobes en masse-- but they didn't.

And now for the especially long-winded, anecdotal part of the recital:

It must have been a couple of years now since I meandered about on Google while pursuing some JFK assassionation interests, looking for information on a "Judith Vary Baker".

To digress or parenthesize as briefly as possible, Baker is a fringe character who claims to have had a relationship that blossomed into a love affair with Lee Harvey Oswald during the early 1960s. She also claims to have been a science prodigy who caught the attention of teachers and professors while she was in her early teens, such that she was eventually recruited by either the CIA or US military intelligence to participate in top-secret biological warfare projects involving causing and curing cancer.

All of this is off the top of my head, so please Google yourself if you're intrigued; the gist is accurate enough.

Anyway, I stumbled onto a long, contentious "Judith Vary Baker" thread on an Internet discussion board called "The Education Forum -> JFK Assassination Debate". I was pleasantly surprised, even thrilled, to find that James H. Fetzer was one of the most prolific participants in this thread. There were also several other well-known "names" in JFK research posting along the way.


LittleBrother said...

Part Two of Two:

I was familiar with Fetzer from his book "Murder in Dealey Plaza: What We Know Now that We Didn't Know Then", a compendium of scholarly or otherwise solidly-researched JFK assassination-related articles edited and commented upon by Fetzer.

So for about a day or so, I felt as if I'd magically acquired the equivalent of a "backstage pass" to a favorite superstar rock band's dressing room. I couldn't comment myself-- it required registration, and I frankly didn't think I was qualified enough to join in.

But as I read the thread, I became convinced of two crucial points: first, that this Judith Vary Baker person is literally incredible and highly dubious at best. Second, that Fetzer, who found Baker utterly credible and purported to be not only a supporter, but a sort of sponsor, agent, and eventually go-between for her on this thread, is an egomaniacal or megalomanical loon.

Having only seen Fetzer's sober, rational published work, I was stunned in the first place that he would uncritically buy into Baker's highly questionable, problematic, and conflicting accounts of her past. It was clear that since he'd pronounced her not only "genuine", but crucial to the truth about JFK, and taken her under his wing, that he was determined to aggressively defend her to the death.

His comments were way over the top in every respect. First of all, he habitually "quoted", i.e. copied and pasted, all of the previous comments related to his present comment, and added his own attachments and graphics to his extensive, fulminating rebuttals. So every Fetzer comment was a turgid mini (and not so "mini") treatise of its own.

Worse still, he constantly hectored and belittled anyone who persisted in disagreeing with his position, or offered lucid and persuasive counterpoints. He loftily reiterated his own credentials as a Ph.d and long-time teacher and generally asserted rational and logical superiority and authority-- all the more ironic when the substance of his comments became an increasing dog's breakfast of defending the indefensible.

He also regularly veered into vindictive, vituperative personal attacks against well-regarded JFK researchers who took issue with him, in one case dredging up some former dispute about royalty payments from his book, and including graphics of cancelled checks to ostensibly discredit the person who dared to contest Fetzer's position! It was off the wall.

Browse the thread and see for yourself, if you wish; since it's a record-setting 200+ pages, I suggest diving in anywhere in the last fifty pages or so.

Fetzer also digressed into his self-proclaimed 9/11 expertise, which sadly revealed the same penchant for locking in like a rabid pit bull to the most speculative and improbable political and "scientific" theories about the true nature of the events, and allying himself with the most suspect and far-fetched proponents of such theories.

I agree that Fetzer has made important contributions to the JFK and 9/11 skeptical inquiries. He has the intellect and expertise to initially come off as a powerful, credible authority. His abilities and reputation the "Scholars for 9/11 Truth" organization that he founded weight and promise. But eventually, his "Mr. Hyde" side became so overbearing that it caused a schism that left Fetzer in charge of a dwindled and discredited remnant-- the cream of the crop moved on to a successor organization, "Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice".

I still lurk at the JFK Education Forum, to which Fetzer only fitfully contributes these days. But after that first dazzled day, it became obvious that this seemingly-elite forum was a typical Internet loony-bin. There are a handful of participants worth reading, and a lot of bitchy adolescent cat-fights in between.

So, as stated, I concur that "Fetzer is a nut. A very very smart one, but a nut nonetheless."

Nan Yar said...

Bill Owen-- I can appreciate your skepticism. However, I have not been able to find a solid account for where the mass of those buildings went. And explosives won't account for it. I was able to follow her reasoning and found it quite intelligible. Very good scientists are often a bit looney. Have you looked at her book or listened to the interviews? And then there are the automobiles. No, I think she has picked out some important anomalies which no one else has accounted for. How often in history it has been the ugly duckling that has been right. I would like to hear a really sound refutation of her position and not merely ad hominem ones. Perhaps you can direct me to one!

Nan Yar said...

"If such a device was used it would leave traces in the atmosphere, and no doubt would be picked up by sensors in China, Russia, etc." In the interview she refers to this, and there were effects picked up at that time. Without taking in the interview it would be hard to judge at this point. "Years ago" is a long time in a matter of this nature. Also I am generally unaffected by the crowd and usually find they are just following one or two who claim superior knowledge. In the case of hearing a voice one can be deceived of course but after years as a psychotherapist I have gotten fairly good at detecting insincerity. Dr Wood seemed quite sincere and good hearted.

Nan Yar said...

A final word: I think it highly unlikely that another official investigation will ever be held; and even if one were, I doubt it would satisfy anyone. Nations just can not afford to rectify the recorded past. Like humans they become very attached to what they told themselves once upon a time. Rigidity is very human. Once formed opinions harden into verities.

Bill Owen said...


"Missing mass"? Not sure what you mean by that, perhaps the infamous, so called "dustification" of the concrete? That certainly is an important, very important question which comes down to simple physics (the only kind I understand). Apparently, and I rely on those who have done the math, there was not enough energy in the collapse alone to pulverize the concrete into, well, dust.

As I said I am not aware of ANY energy weapon, let alone a space based one that can deliver the kind of energy to destroy those towers from space. She claims that there is some use of the Hutchinson effect. If you look up Hutchinson you can see the actual man doing some amazing things, but he is a long way from a space weapon. He does claim to have been visited by military scientists, and that I can believe.

Some cogent debunking on Prof. Wood can be found here:

I'm still going with thermate.

Bill Owen said...

@Little Brother!

Nice to see you back! We miss you over at UT.

I'd like to comment on some of your remarks, but can't right now.

So will do later.

You might have noticed the blog looks a little different. Google has been talking up their redesign for months now. But so far all we have a few new (yawn) templates. No progress on the comments system, which is about as bad as Salon.

I was really looking forward to getting a better comments system. I can do something on WordPress but it will take many hours of work, and I am lazy.



Bill Owen said...

Jesse Ventura is supportive of "space beam" theories.

The comments section is not impressed.

I also just read that Prof. Jones has made some similar remarks. Haven't found them yet.

I like Jesse. I like Jones.

It's extremely hard of course, but I am trying to keep an open mind. Even up to the point where I could be convinced it was al Qaeda. That however, would require some very serious evidence.

Bill Owen said...

Pictures of burning or burned cars.

I see very little that is odd about the burned cars at the WTC.

Bill Owen said...

Someone named "Gary Null" interviews Dr. Wood.

Long long preamble, actual interview starts at: 36:52

Bill Owen said...

Last one for tonight, a "debunking" of Dr. Wood. (pdf file)

Bill Owen said...

Okay, okay, this is the LAST one.

Go on the Offensive against Terror
By John Yoo | Los Angeles Times
Wednesday, July 13, 2005

I never heard of this. John Yoo proposing that they set up fake terrorist networks to catch terrorists.

But I thought that they did not do false flag stuff? Isn't that just conspiracy nonsense?

No, it is not, and John Yoo tells us so.

Another tool would have our intelligence agencies create a false terrorist organization. It could have its own websites, recruitment centers, training camps and fundraising operations. It could launch fake terrorist operations and claim credit for real terrorist strikes, helping to sow confusion within Al Qaeda's ranks, causing operatives to doubt others' identities and to question the validity of communications. - John (torture boy) Yoo.

Nan Yar said...

Bill & Anonymous: Please set aside for a few moments the hypothesis you associate with Dr Wood. Instead focus on the fact that she has done the most thorough and scientific forensic investigation to date! Unlike either NIST, Gage and a few others, she did not start with an hypothesis and then set about trying to prove it. The beauty of her approach is that she collected all the phenomena she could find, all the effects, and then and only then did she seek a cause of those effects.
Now the NIST hypothesis is extremely faulty and can not account for the destruction of the buildings.
The AE9/11Truth hypothesis is superior in that shape charges of nano-thermite would bring the buildings down. However, there are many phenomena which Dr Wood has carefully documented, some of which are quite obvious, that Gage's hypothesis can not account for. His thesis is deficient. It does not save all the appearances.
Therefore, the explosives hypothesis is probably not the correct one. What Dr Wood has accomplished by doing this careful homework is present what the correct theory must accomplish.
So far no theory has been entirely successful. Or I should say the appropriate technology that could produce all the effects and anomalies has not been secured.
Again I would highly recommend these three new interviews by Jeff Rense ( Jeff has one of the oldest and best alternative news sites and has done over 10,000 interviews in the last 18 years. He is very intelligent, a masterful interviewer and has an abundance of connections. A least take a few minutes and watch the first one. I believe your currently held information is sadly out of date and mistaken.
Finally, Dr Wood is not a loon. She is quick witted, knowledgeable, good tempered and as far as I can tell quite a good person. I have known several scientificly oriented women who are very bright. She has that personality type; it is quite recognizable. Please give her the benefit of the doubt. I was quite fond of the thermite also but must agree with Dr Wood on the matter. It just is inadequate.

Nan Yar said...

Bill Owen & Anonymous: If you ask yourselves why you rejected the official story backed by NIST, I am sure that the answer will go something like this: one plane, jet fuel and fire are simply incapable of bringing down a massive building. If you then ask yourselves why you embraced the Richard Gage type explanations, you will undoubtedly tell yourself it was because that hypothesis proposes a tried and tested means for collapsing a building!! So far I have no argument with either of you.
However, in science when a superior hypothesis comes along, one that does a better job of accounting for the phenomena, the good scientist adopts it--after perhaps some emotional ties are dissolved. 'Poor old hypothesis, we certainly had some good times together.'
While it is true that nano-thermite properly disposed will certainly bring a building down, it does not automatically follow that controlled demolition is the only way to bring one down.
In fact, the real beauty of Dr Judy Wood's work is that having done a fabulous foresenic investigtion (surely the best so far) she has turned up and documented anomalies which for example Richard Gage's hypothesis can not account for. So it is clear that his explanation is deficient in explanatory power. Hopefully you can see now the great service Dr Wood has rendered. The correct explanation will account for all or practically all the phenomena including some very strange anamolies.
As to "mass": a chunk of lead on the earth will weigh more than a comparable chunk on the moon--but both will have the same mass.
As to "simple explanations being the best"--well, yes provided they account for all the appearances. Consider the Browning motion. Many explanations over the centuries were offered, and the correct one would have staggered the imaginations of most who formulated theories! Also consider that the "lone gunman" is both plausible more or less while probably the actual one is very complex and filled with intrigue.
Please take a few minutes and watch the first interview of Dr Wood by Jeff Rense (; Jeff is a masterful interviewer. He is very intelligent, highly informed and has conducted ten thousand interviews in the last eighteen years. His web site is one of the oldest and best of the alternatives. I think you will be surprised if you listen attentively. Best of luck
P.S. Remember loons of a feather flock together.

Nan Yar said...

Bill Owen--I have tried twice to leave a comment but each time it gets taken and then vanished.

Nan Yar said...

Bill Owen & Anonymous: If you ask yourselves why you rejected the official story backed by NIST, I am sure that the answer will go something like this: one plane, jet fuel and fire are simply incapable of bringing down a massive building. If you then ask yourselves why you embraced the Richard Gage type explanations, you will undoubtedly tell yourself it was because that hypothesis proposes a tried and tested means for collapsing a building!! So far I have no argument with either of you.
However, in science when a superior hypothesis comes along, one that does a better job of accounting for the phenomena, the good scientist adopts it--after perhaps some emotional ties are dissolved. 'Poor old hypothesis, we certainly had some good times together.'
While it is true that nano-thermite properly disposed will certainly bring a building down, it does not automatically follow that controlled demolition is the only way to bring one down.
In fact, the real beauty of Dr Judy Wood's work is that having done a fabulous foresenic investigtion (surely the best so far) she has turned up and documented anomalies which for example Richard Gage's hypothesis can not account for. So it is clear that his explanation is deficient in explanatory power. Hopefully you can see now the great service Dr Wood has rendered. The correct explanation will account for all or practically all the phenomena including some very strange anamolies.
As to "mass": a chunk of lead on the earth will weigh more than a comparable chunk on the moon--but both will have the same mass.
As to "simple explanations being the best"--well, yes provided they account for all the appearances. Consider the Browning motion. Many explanations over the centuries were offered, and the correct one would have staggered the imaginations of most who formulated theories! Also consider that the "lone gunman" is both plausible more or less while probably the actual one is very complex and filled with intrigue.
Please take a few minutes and watch the first interview of Dr Wood by Jeff Rense (; Jeff is a masterful interviewer. He is very intelligent, highly informed and has conducted ten thousand interviews in the last eighteen years. His web site is one of the oldest and best of the alternatives. I think you will be surprised if you listen attentively. Best of luck
P.S. Remember loons of a feather flock together.

9 August, 2011 4:00:47 PM EDT

Bill Owen said...


Thanks for letting me know. Google automatically labels some posts spam, I have no idea what triggers that. I went to the spam folder and labelled them as okay.

Sorry about that!

Nan Yar said...

Thanks, Bill. I thought your site might have a case of stomach flu. I don't know what on the net Pepto Bismo would be.

Nan Yar said...
I have read through this paper now. Unfortunately the writer is a bit wordy. Unless I am mistaken he is bothered by the quality of the seismic data but does credit the authors with also noting this. The "toasted" cars may have been closer to the Towers than later on. The "bath tub" may have sustained damage. And the type of destructive technology the authors suggest troubles him. I do not know either what the facts are here. Were the cars moved? Is there reliable seismic data available? Was the "bath tub" damaged in a way consistent with the collapse of the Towers? The paper is not by any means a fatal refutation of Dr Wood's main thesis or findings. It merely raises some problems. I would not desert her on the basis of this material. In any case the advanced technology is not of primary importance. What is is were the Towers brought down by controlled demolition or not?
By the way bystanders mention that while the cars burst into flames there was not any heat. Neither did nearby paper ignite. The best thing I think is to fold Dr Wood's work together with Richard Gage's work. It would be nice and helpful if they worked together.
The United States could not handle the consequences of 9/11 being revealed as an inside job. That is why it will never receive a genuine investigation.

Nan Yar said...

long and extensive article on Willy Rodriguez--details I had not come across before. Worth reading.

Bill Owen said...


I would like to read that, I find Rodrigues a compelling and important witness. Unfortunately, the link you provided does not work.

Nan Yar said...

Bill Owen: I just copied and tested this one. It worked.

But it is quite long. Good luck.

Bill Owen said...

Thanks! It worked this time. After I posted yesterday, I tried some of the other links, the whole site was messed up. It's all good now. Haven't read it yet. Not familiar with that site, but based on the number of comments it seems very very popular.


Nan Yar said...

Glenn Greenwald had an excellent article today. I looked at the comments for a while. I think Americans need to face the fact that the USA is not so different from the old USSR and even with a shift in government is unlikely to become a very human place. Protestantism is not easy to live with.
Anyway the comments section seems filled with time killing opportunities. Living in America is one of those ancient Greek punishments for telling lies.

Nan Yar said...

Viewing Glenn's comment section I can see that the real action is over here. Yes, it may be a little silent but Silence is eloquence! This is kind of the Native American sight where people with forked tongues are too scared to speak. And everyone else, too wise except on special occasions. By the way three cheers for Anonymous. BART is a bad bunch.

Nan Yar said...

I have been doing a bit of sociological research over at Glenn's. It seems to be a group of coteries or cliques. Some are attorneys that like to chew over legal details; some are heavy into politics. Etc. It seems much like a European coffee shop circa 1910. Maybe Vienna. Or between the wars in Paris. The anarchists, the socialists, the communists. There may be Evangelicals but they are unself revealing if so. A few foreigners like Bill Owen. Probably some snoops waiting for someone to suggest violence. Etc. I believe Glenn's refers to his place as "Unclaimed Territory" which is properly ambiguous. Surprisingly for a rather liberal if rowdy group there are some Ron Paul supporters.
If I were going to criticize the crowd, I would say that the deep thinkers are not abundant. The real lack of historical consciousness leaves persons floundering around.
Religion plays a big role in America; call it Christian if you want to but Puritanism is probably more accurate.
Ideas take a long time to suffuse the body politic but once there they are like stains at the atomic level. And America is profoundly stained.
It is not enough to fight the appearances. Until the ideas are extracted which might be the work of centuries, the social philosophy in America will continue to be extremely primitive and cruel.

Nan Yar said...


"the new and revolutionary means of destruction" of which Harry Truman was so proud. Video inspired by a poem by the Trappist monk Thomas Merton.

Nan Yar said...

Important article regarding 7/7 and 9/11 . . .

The Establishment/Power Elite will go to any lengths to prevent the truth from becoming known and acted on. I am afraid it goes way beyond a David and Goliath tale. I just can not imagine the Establishment ever admitting to anything or ever allowing itself to become cornered by a rebellious people. It is the Leviathan par excellence. Maybe if Superman had not expatriated. Perhaps letting them have their way is best as they will burn out at some point and become effete.

Anonymous said...

I was out night hunting and I spied the light from your cabin. Very nice. We are pretty much on the same page on this subject and I don't know what I could add at this point but I plan to come back and visit from time to time.
Hello my LIttle Brother. It's good to see you.

n said...

Bill Owen: Have you taken in the fact that the First Responders are not invited to the 9/11 ceremony? This seems fairly drastic.

Nan Yar said...

Bill Owen---"Canadians with mental illnesses denied U.S. entry"
So you were feeling a bit depressed and got some tranquilizers and now the USA is saying no to your visit! Well, the truth is that we have so many crazies here already that the solution is getting too strong.

Bill Owen said...

Hi Nanyar

Jeez, I am bad, leaving my blog all to itself. Summertime, sick cat, posting at Salon and working on other projects.

Thanks for all the posts. No, that wasn't me but it might as well have been.

We actually did have a Canadian prof who was denied entry because they googled him at the border and found an old article about how he taken LSD at university WHEN IT WAS LEGAL! But they denied him anyway. He has family there and had crossed many times. That is so bad, so crazy.

There is a truther discussion raging at Salon right now. Justin Eliot. Started the post by saying, "The Truthers are wrong..." obvious the guy knows nothing about the question.

You could always re-register under a new handle you know. Lots do, god knows.

Have you thought about emailing Glenn and asking him to reconsider the ban? You got zapped early on in your career there, and I think you have some good things to say. Could be worth a try.


ION I am bringing Glenn to Ottawa to speak, Nov. 3.

Coming? Can't help you at the border, Harper doesn't like me much.

Bill Owen said...

@Little Brother

Sorry, same excuse. I wish you'd come back to UT though. Our friend is pretty scarce there these days since his contretemps with RR.

Same to you. Coming to see Glenn?

Nan Yar said...

Bill Owen--Thanks for the note; my cat was sick for a few days then got fine again. Only symptom was loss of appetite. A weak later the dog got loose bowls from a bone! I found out at 5:30 a.m. Interesting morning. Actually speaking of coming back . . . well, keep an eye out. I don't want to say too much as Glenn may have spies around.:) Speaking of 9/11 David Ray Griffin has a new book out which sounds excellent. I did some research on Janet Napolitano--she is half Italian and a Methodist--but the other half is not characterized. Makes me wonder even more about her. Good luck with your cat.

n said...

Living in Colorado and having most of my social interactions a matter of exchanging pleasantries, I had recently my first encounter with two persons who clearly take 9/11 seriously, even religiously. Both were Jewish and one was also a New Yorker. It is clear to me now the 9/11 has become a religious event not unlike the Holocaust, and questioning either, being a revisionist, is not permissible! Anyone in the public eye who challenges the Official Story is definitely asking for a lot of trouble. Noam Chomsky and Glenn have almost certainly decided not to take on that battle. Perhaps wisely.

Nan Yar said...

Bill--a must read on 9/11

Bill Owen said...

@Nan Yar.

Thanks, very interesting article.

There was another interesting story with new details of the bin Ladin murder.

It was just on CBC's 5th Estate program. I haven't even watched it yet, but that show isn't bad, it's still establishment media, but even the strongest propaganda contains elements of truth.

Bill Owen said...


I agree with you absolutely. The psycho-dynamics of why people feel that way, are incomprehensible and opaque to me, but it is definitely what this has become; a rigidly held belief system identical to a religion. One that shall NOT be questioned.

I go back again to my usually calm and reasonable friend - who became insanely enraged when I attempted to challenge his beliefs about what happened. He won't read an article, look at a picture or watch a video that challenges his beliefs. It's insane, especially coming from a person with a Master's degree in Anthropology.

People seem to insert, and strongly integrate, the official narrative into their existing belief systems to such an extent, that any questions or counter-narrative statements about 911 are seen as an attack on Israel/Judaism, or America/Christianity, and even them personally as the challenge implies that they lack mental acuity. I think this fact of fanatic belief has a lot to do with how the official version was deliberately inserted into their belief systems. It was no mistake that agents on teevee were squawking "bin Laden, bin Laden" in front of live pictures of the burning, and later collapsing, towers. That was a very powerful way to ensure that the "shock and awe" of the false flag were deeply embedded into people's psyches.

Bill Owen said...

Bilejones, a long time and most excellent poster at Salon, posted this on Sept. 10. I liked it so much I thought I would repost it here.

Saturday, September 10, 2011 04:42 PM ET

You should be aware that Glenn takes editorial direction from one G.H.W.Bush

"let us never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories concerning the attacks of September the 11th"

You are however allowed to tolerate this one:

The Official Version of 9/11 goes something like this…Directed by a beardy-guy from a cave in Afghanistan, nineteen hard-drinking, coke-snorting, devout Muslims enjoy lap dances before their mission to meet Allah…Using nothing more than craft knifes, they overpower cabin crew, passengers and pilots on four planes…And hangover or not, they manage to give the world’s most sophisticated air defense system the slip…Unphased by leaving their “How to Fly a Passenger Jet” guide in the car at the airport, they master the controls in no-time and score direct hits on two towers, causing THREE to collapse completely…Our masterminds even manage to overpower the odd law of physics or two… and the world watches in awe as steel-framed buildings fall symmetrically – through their own mass – at free-fall speed, for the first time in history. Despite all their dastardly cunning, they stupidly give their identity away by using explosion-proof passports, which survive the fireball undamaged and fall to the ground… only to be discovered by the incredible crime-fighting sleuths at the FBI Meanwhile down in Washington…Hani Hanjour, having previously flunked 2-man Cessna flying school, gets carried away with all the success of the day and suddenly finds incredible abilities behind the controls of a Boeing…Instead of flying straight down into the large roof area of the Pentagon, he decides to show off a little…Executing an incredible 270 degree downward spiral, he levels off to hit the low facade of the world’s most heavily defended building……all without a single shot being fired…. or ruining the nicely mowed lawn… and all at a speed just too fast to capture on video……Later, in the skies above Pennsylvania…So desperate to talk to loved ones before their death, some passengers use sheer willpower to connect mobile calls that otherwise would not be possible until several years later…And following a heroic attempt by some to retake control of Flight 93, it crashes into a Shankesville field leaving no trace of engines, fuselage or occupants… except for the standard issue Muslim terrorists bandana……Further south in Florida…President Bush, our brave Commander-in-Chief continues to read “My Pet Goat” to a class full of primary school children… shrugging off the obvious possibility that his life could be in imminent danger…In New York…Trade Center leaseholder Larry Silverstein blesses his own foresight in insuring the buildings against terrorist attack only six weeks previously…While back in Washington, **** Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz shake their heads in disbelief at their own luck in getting the ‘New Pearl Harbor’ catalyzing event they so desired to pursue their agenda of world domination…And finally, not to be disturbed too much by reports of their own deaths, at least seven of our nineteen suicide hijackers turn up alive and kicking in lamestream media reports and if you don't believe this, you are a conspiracy theorist.

Not original to me but I can't remember where I got it.


Anonymous said...

Thought you might like this, Bill. Your buddy the Indian "People of the Mountains".

Nan Yar said...

Bill--an excellent concentrated piece by David Ray Griffin which I have not seen before:
this is so well written that no intelligent person could read it and not be stopped in his tracks . . . and so don't read it if your religion says no. Satan can quote 9/11 Truther stuff these days. Is there any truth to the rumor that you are writing a novel about 9/11?
Well, you may want to keep that a secret I suppose. Someone needs to.

LittleBrother said...

I go back again to my usually calm and reasonable friend - who became insanely enraged when I attempted to challenge his beliefs about what happened. He won't read an article, look at a picture or watch a video that challenges his beliefs.

FWIW, this resonates with an ongoing and more or less friendly argument or difference of perspective between me and my one and only brother. He is the Big Brother to whom I am the Little Brother.

My brother is a very intelligent and well-informed expatriate living in a religious community in France; he writes theology and teaches, and purports to have a natural "teacher" mind-set. He contrasts this with what he calls my "prophet" mind-set or style, but we don't have to get into that distinction here.

We both regularly check out articles published at CommonDreams, which as far as I can tell is run by moderate progressive liberal-lites. They obviously prefer "respectable" middle-of-the-road progressives. They often run Glenn's articles. They are-- surprise, surprise-- extremely leery about 9/11 "truth" perspectives, to the point of being censorious.

They like polite, low-key people like Bill McKibben and Amy Goodman. And they dote on recycled "inside politics" pundits and wonks, e.g. Robert Reich, Tom Engelhardt, etc. If you aren't familiar with these people, don't worry; it's not that important.

Our difference of opinion arose after I blasted a few writers for being mealy-mouthed or uncritically accepting conventional narratives about, say, 9/11 or the Bin Laden Caper.

In his response, my brother suggests I'm too ready to slam the CD writers for not going far or deep enough with their analyses and critiques. He thinks I'm too hard on them. In his opinion, I fail to understand that they are (or may be) writing in the "teaching" mode: seemingly pulling their punches, but in the service of connecting with a less educated and sophisticated audience.

Exactly as you say about your "calm and reasonable friend", my brother describes cases to me of people he's encountered who are unexpectedly confronted with powerful, disturbing truths, and become so overwhelmed or shocked that they more or less freak out, shut down, and flip into traumatized denial or incomprehension.

For instance, he told me that some time ago, he recommended James Douglass's superb book "JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters" to a "calm and reasonable" acquaintance-- a professor or faculty member at a West Coast university, IIRC. Apparently this guy had never questioned or thought much about the official "Lone Nut" explanation.

According to my brother, reading the book truly shattered the man's composure and peace of mind. It didn't drive him to suicide or ruin, but it badly shook him up to a point where he felt lost and unmoored. More to the point, he told my brother that he couldn't handle thinking about the implications of the JFK book and what for lack of a better general term might be called deep politics.

So my brother thinks I should be more tolerant of seemingly half-baked, half-true CommonDreams articles on the grounds that they might be helpfully meeting well-intended information-seekers where they live instead of preaching to the choir and alienating less radical thinkers in the bargain.

But I'm not as optimistic as my brother that people can be "taught" to gradually raise their consciousness and become appropriately skeptical and open-minded. I think, as you suggest, that regardless of a person's IQ or education, most people are successfully programmed by Establishment consent manufacturers, and cling ever more tenaciously to their personal comfort zone, come hell or high water-- in fact, they cling all the harder as hell or high water approaches.

Bill Owen said...

Okay, okay. I am sick of 911 for today. Even (especially) al Jazeera is deep in the narrative that must be believed.

So, here the spider cat. He made me laugh. That was a good thing.

Fritz is not good today. That is a bad thing.

Bill Owen said...

CBC radio did a whole series of pieces this AM on the Sunday Edition, their flagship radio news show.

It was all the usual boilerplate. Boring as hell.

Then they said they would do something on Truthers. I was NOT shocked to hear and interview with the National Post reporter who has done a book on conspiracy theories. I turned him off.

None of this crazy talk about how the bible is not the literal word of god. Not on the CBC, who still loves Obama.

Nan Yar said...

In this world those who have the ambition of rising to the top or near there learn that taking up the party line whatever it might be(Stalin is a great man; Hitler and Nazism will save Germany; 9/11 was done by bin Laden) is the modus operandi. People interested in truth can study philosophy or maybe science. Drive the ride kind of car, dress the right way, live in the right neighborhood . . . But if you love freedom this regime may become annoying. However, do not confuse the goals of these two kind of persons. Those who are after the truth and those who are after some material good. For example, Alexander Cockburn is a savvy and experienced journalist; his Counterpunch frequently has good articles on it. But he is anti-truther. Why? Well, one might guess that it has to do with power politics. Certainly his reasons for buying the Official Version are hog wash. At least Glenn does not write articles in which he displays ignorance by attacking the Truthers (at least I have not seen any). I am willing to accept that there are practical reasons for his abstence from this arena. But Cockburn goes out of his way rather often to denounce the Truthers. Troubling to say the least.

Bill Owen said...

Cockburn is a swine. Okay, so you don't buy it. Why go out of your way as you say to attack Truthers?

I have never bought this bullshit they float about how it's a "distraction". Distraction from what? Reading the Daily Kos?

I hates Cockburn and Kos is naive at best, and an agent at worst.

Did you know that he once wanted to be a CIA agent?

LittleBrother said...

"9/11: A Conspiracy Theory"

If you haven't seen this short video yet, watch it now!

It's only five minutes long. And it's funny because it's true.

Share it with Trutherphobes if you dare.

It's produced by James Corbett. I'd checked out The Corbett Report a while back and liked what I saw, but between the Paul Craig Roberts interview and this I think he deserves more attention.

If nothing else, I guarantee that this short video will take the funky aftertaste of Alexander Cockburn out of your mouth.

Bill Owen said...

Holy lord thundering Jesus! That was good!

Just posted it on the Cockburn thread...

"fuck you cockburn"

Wow, great stuff.

Thanks Little Brother!

But now Sheri Lynn will say I am stupid. Don't know if I will survive... lol.

Nan Yar said...

Fellows: The Cockburns are a bit strange. I read the several articles about Patrick's mentally ill son. He comes across as fairly conservative and limited. I simply do not read Alexander's articles anymore.
It is really all about money. The more lies a person can tolerate they more money they can potentially get. Usually. Exceptions abound I am sure.

Nan Yar said...

Little Brother--Great video. Funny and true. Can someone post this at UT without being molested? It could be seen as supportive of Glenn? I do like Corbett and have made a practice of checking there now and then.

Bill Owen said...

CIA foreknowledge of 911 attack.

CIA Threatens 9/11 Researchers After Discovery Of Cover Up Details

Revealing identities of analysts involved could end in federal prosecution
Steve Watson
Sept 13, 2011
The CIA has issued legal threats against two film producers who have discovered intimate details of a cover up regarding the intelligence agency and two of the purported 9/11 hijackers.


Duffy and Nowosielski also interviewed former counterterrorism czar Richard Clarke, who told them on the record that he has intelligence that three former top CIA officials – George Tenet, Cofer Black and Richard Blee – knowingly withheld key information on the alleged hijackers from the White House, the FBI, Immigration and the State and Defense Departments.

Anonymous said...

Lots of good, interesting comments here. The FM radio station I'm addicted to recently (sept 11) ran a good program, "911's Footprint on America Ten Years Later" It cvan be found at: I think it's worth listening to. Frank McElroy

Nan Yar said...

Alex G hosts this LIVE three hour special, with guests including Andy Thomas and Ian R Crane. Ten years on, why are more people than ever before convinced that 9/11 was an ‘Inside Job’?

I am just now starting this almost 3 hour show. It looks very good. Will let you all know later on.

Nan Yar said...

The video I just mentioned: I am now well into it. This is a whole new angle coming from a high level policeman in England who has placed both 9/11 and 7/7 as inside jobs and has lost his position in Yorkshire! And he is taking his case through the courts. He had 17 years service and was considered exemplary. I think you will find it most interesting and valuable addition to your present knowledge. My guess is that his case will eventually become a famous one. It clearly illustrates just how fearful the Power Structure is now.

Nan Yar said...

Despite ten years of pursuing this I am still finding things out; this video is an excellent source of new bits of information and very well done. The format is a discussion with clips which are then discussed. I am sure you will enjoy and benefit.

Bill Owen said...

Big big news today, very good news. CBC Radio's flagship news show, The Sunday Edition, just did a really excellent, fair and open minded interview with Barry Zwicker. Zwicker is a well known Canadian journalist and professor. He was one of the first to come out publicly with a show on the Vision channel on the subject of 911 Truth.

The host, Michael Enright, knows Barry very well, having worked with him in his newspaper days. The interview was respectful, informed and Michael let Zwicker talk. There was no sneering, no derision. It was a real interview, straight up. Barry was given every chance to make his points and he made them very very well! Kudos Michael, kudos CBC! This is a first for a major journalism outfit.

Everyone who is interested in this question should listen and pass it on.

It hasn't been posted yet, but it will be available here:

I mentioned in an earlier post about how I have been bugging Enright for several years to do this show, and after last Sundays hit piece with the execrable liar and propagandist Jonathan Kaye, author of "Among the Truthers", I had almost given up hope of our ideas getting a fair hearing.

Well, today they did!

Thanks again Michael! Thanks Prof. Zwicker!

Nan Yar said... Explosive Evidence - Experts Speak Out, Full-length, Pre-Release-v1.3; Low-Res.
New AE9/11 Truth video!! Very professional.

Also regarding the lengthy video of English provenance, one thing really stuck out which I have not seen mentioned much before: namely, the distinct difference in the appearance and results of the Twin Towers as opposed to Bldg. 7 in their respective destructions.
The towers basically disintegrated into massive dust clouds. Whereas number 7 was like a typical controlled demolition. Clearly something different occurred in the case of the towers. What? Maybe Judy Wood has a valid point. Whereas there was little in the way of debris at the base of the towers, apparently there was the normal 12 1/2 percent at the bottom of number 7.

Nan Yar said...

It occurs to me that the Twin Towers needed to be destroyed in such a way as to not be identical to the usual controlled demolition. So the artists of demolition created a new form . . . the fountain. Building 7 was rightly regarded as almost unnoticeable. And so the normal job was adequate. The work put into the Twin Towers must have been very extensive. Weeks, not days.
While UT is exciting, I doubt much will or can come from it. Whereas the more people who view excellent videos like this most recent one by AE 9/11 Truth the closer we come to some kind of show down. An event even more potent than 9/11 itself.

Anonymous said...

Please go to look up "Guns and Butter" Bonnie Faulkner interviews Kevin Ryan re "Demolition Access to WTC towers" Frank McElroy

Nan Yar said...

Bill: have you investigated the goings on at the Allen Memorial Institute? Apparently there was CIA funding and many ghastly experiments on people by psychiatrists.
Over the years money went out to all the prestige university medical schools and hospitals. Pretty horrible stuff which eventually went to Latin America for testing and later to Iraq and so on. HUMAN RESOURCES Social Engineering In The 20th Century HQ FULL --
One of the best documentaries I have come across; produced by a Canadian woman whose aunt died as a result of one of these "experiments".

Bill Owen said...

Yes, read about it years ago in a book on MK Ultra. It is also reasonably well known here in Canada. CBC did a number of stories on the place. Hell on Earth, "psychic driving", all at the behest of our good friends at "the agency".

Another interesting Canadian Connection is the way that CSE (our NSA) used to spy on Americans for the NSA! I don't think they need to bother with such niceties these days, the NSA just spies themselves. It's all good.

Nan Yar said... has certainly made a mess of things with their new look/system. For the life of me I can not see why they did not leave things as they were. At least the system worked.
What do you think, Bill, as a long time letter to the editor writer?
A warning even would have been a good idea. It doesn't look like posts are getting placed; and Glenn is basically shut down at this point.

Bill Owen said...


Yes, it's very bad. They haven't even improved the look, it's really ugly. And where did they get that picture of Glenn? Are they serious? It's a HORRIBLE picture.

And the comments section is barely improved. I am very very disappointed. Not only that, I can't log in! It will not accept my old password! I can log in using my Google account, but it won't let me use anything other than my old email addy as my user name! What??

I do web development, this is amateur hour. Andrew O'heir said there was a new comment section coming, in a comment, but that was the only warning. No one asked for input. There was NO official warning.

I think Salon is in a lot of trouble. I can only guess that the techies were given unreasonable demands, and or bad advice from Salon Staff.

They really messed up. This won't even slow the amateur trolls down. The professional ZioTrolls will be back in the catbird seat almost instantly. They really think that making us use a Google account is going to slow Zorkna down?

Stupid. Stupid. Stupid. Arrogant.

Nan Yar said...

Bill Owen-- Just by accident I found out how to do it. When the first window comes up you use your regular log in name--on the left side. Then go to right and click Google. At that point it should put up a new window that allows you to connect to your old name. But by now you may have gone too far. Try it though.
I agree whole heartedly. This is the addiction to change even if it destroys your world. Change=progress=salvation. Well, probably not. This is 19th century stuff. Small Is Beautiful anticipated this quagmire. Intermediate technology. Knowing when to stop, when good is good enough. Anyway I ended up creating two new Google accounts and a new name for Salon before I got in. And I already had a sort of gmail through Stanford University. But it was definitely not going to let me in until I screamed uncle.

teri49 said...

Hey, Bill,
I won't do the PAY TO COMMENT thing over at salon. (What the hell? They make plenty of money on all the ads - I'm not going to pay to write comments.) Nor will I give them my gmail name and password. Had a very weird experience trying to log in that way and have decided it's not worth it.
Anyone sees titonwan around, tell him his anchor sugar baby says bye and will miss him. (Sob. The end of a beautiful thang.)
Bunch of people I'll miss over there; at least I can check in with you here and Che over at his blogspot - that's a little something anyway!
Best, Teri

Anonymous said...

That "Sherrie Lynn" is a piece of work! Over at Salon, in Cockburn's article on 9/11 she said Hanjour faked his incompetant flying ability to disguise the fact that he was a Top Gun type. I wish everyone would listen to this:
After much research, Kevin Ryan explains how the Trade Center towers could have been rigged with explosives.

Bill Owen said...

Hi Teri49

Very sorry to hear that are leaving Salon! I agree with you 100% on the privacy issue. It's pretty obvious at this point they want to eliminate anonymity on the internet entirely.

There are ways to set up an anonymized Google or FB account if you ever change your mind.

Right now I seem to stuck with an old email address as my username! The developers there appear to be low grade morons. But to be fair, I imagine a site that old and big must look like a giant hairball. Patches, patches on the patches, undocumented code, idiosyncratic variable names, and prolly of bunch of databases held together with bear skins and stone axes!

You're always welcome here!

LittleBrother said...

I finally gave up my addiction to Glenn's comments threads earlier this year-- and eventually even his posts-- for idiosyncratic, and arguably petty, reasons.

The domination of certain "alpha" commenters, especially, the Trutherphobe contingent, just became too oppressive.

And Glenn's own censorious attitude toward the 9/11 issue, and his tacit encouragement of the bumptious Trutherphobes, was the last straw.

All that said, I still wish he would find a better gig than Salon. I realize that he's probably treated well there because by now he's their biggest and most enduring star.

But it really is a pathetic, creepy liberal-lite cyber-rag. I respect David Talbot as the author of "Brothers: The Hidden History of the Kennedy Years", but I don't trust his rhetorical promises of a Salon renaissance.

I only visit the site in fitful, brief bursts. But the latest transmogrification and the restrictive "new, improved" comments platform is off-putting in the extreme.

Of course, I'm ticked because I lost the personal resource of my Letters Archive

I note with especial scorn their hype about soliciting reader input in this latest make-over.

I still bitterly recall being burned by these utterly mendacious promises last time around.

It's obvious that they are going to re-work the site according to their bean-counters' "business model", and that soliciting reader feedback and suggestions is simply a Big Lie to create the illusion of bottom-up empowerment.

In fact, Salon's approach mimics that of the Democratic Party they resolutely support.

During the last Salon overhaul, I snidely wondered whether Salon had effectively claimed Glenn's "un"claimed territory. Even as a lapsed participant, it distresses me that this is so.

Nan Yar said...

All---One wonders if they got some funds from the Koch brothers. But Salon always struck me as juvenile--even their book reviews and all are sugary and immature generally. But that is what Americans want.
I am not sure privacy is best obtained by trying to find it. Perhaps the best approach is simply to practice the art of being a nobody. After all unless you have status and money why would anyone waste their time. The country is full of complainers and critics and some have guns.
No, we won't have much to worry about until later on.
At some point someone will invent a nuclear type virus and blow out all the data bases. It can be done. A tiny program slipped everywhere over a couple of years that slowly corrupts everything but in such a way that it is hard to detect. Seems like natural errors. Like termites towards the end when the beams come crashing down. The data base plague.
And then it will be paper again.

Nan Yar said...

I think Glenn should begin considering other possibilities. I don't know what kind of contract he has but maybe the disaster would allow him to quit. A lot of people have dropped by the way. It feels like a Stephen Kind novel. A town destroyed by something on a website. People just falling down dead. Vibrations that attack heart waves.
Maybe a civil liberties site with contributions from writers he knows. I don't know how tied down people like Hedges are or Paul Craig Roberts--be sure and read his current article at Prison Planet. He advises young people to leave the country. But not I guess to Canada--right, Bill?
We have reached the point where the law really doesn't matter because the courts won't touch a lot things anymore. Obama is the law now mostly. It is up to him.
In the end they will find ways to kill lots of people. Billions probably.

Bill Owen said...

Hi LB!

You sound dismayed. It's sad times. It's true about Salon, in his post, whatshisname, the new editor, said that Obama was "well meaning". That's wrong, as we know. Any conclusions that follow from that premise, are, by definition, faulty.

But it's status quo all around isn't it? I don't go to FDL, so I have no opinion, don't like Alternet, I used to like Cole a bit, but he seems to have the DT's or something. Raw story is good, but I never read the comments there, and I like the editorial comment aspect of Salon, if it were better implemented by say, better journalists. Taibbi is good on so much and so bad on 911. I am mystified. WTF?

I should tell you that I am bringing Glenn to speak in Ottawa this Nov. 3. He is going to do something on his usual topics with a Canadian slant. Link is here if you want to read about it.

It should be fun. I'm doing it in an old Art Deco movie theatre, it will be interesting to see what movie opens for him!

I don't know what to do with these salon people. I only go there for Greenwald. But this new comments system. I just discovered that my letters archive is gone too. I can't link to my account so I can't see it. I used to be able to find it on Google, but now the link is broken. Obviously they have been moved to a new URL, or behind some kind of firewall.

Good to see you again!


Nan Yar said...

Bill Owen: So I called Salon in San Francisco but got a woman in New York. I told her I was psychotherapist which is true and that they were creating nervous break downs on their site. Well,not exactly. She acted impressed by the degree of screw up Salon had initiated and said she would do something. She is vice president of business. I think we should not abandon Glenn but see to it that Salon apologizes and creates a good comment section or goes back to the one they had. What a sloppy job they did.

n said...

It is the desire to have threads that is part of the problem now. I think Salon would need to have a system tailor made . . . but they lack that kind of money. I am not sure why the old system was removed. Not perfect but people were used to it.
I like Glenn as a journalist-attorney-researcher. On the other hand, he is not my kind of person. Paul Craig Roberts for example is someone I would greatly enjoy knowing.
Salon is basically targeting the young to middle aged successful educated(but not too much) person who likes to think of himself or herself as knowledgeable and a bit artistic. For real news with teeth has proved over the years to be most valuable.
I continue to think Glenn needs to get away from these artsy yuppie ah and ooh types. How much his position on 9/11 is determined by his association with Salon I can not tell--but it is certainly unlikely that a person with a splendid mind like his could really buy the Official Report. So it is clearly politics.
It is a fairly slimmy bunch of journalists that he has to associate with. It must feel like one is around prostitutes or call girls. That is men and women who have sold their intregity. After all being political is an obligation in this kind of a society not the pursuit of the aristocracy. Or some other select group. You can be a rodeo type and be honest and political. But you can hardly be a journalist and get anywhere and be honest. So the journalists are generating very bad karma. The idea that someday I will tell the truth does not work. When the day arrives you no longer have the capacity.

Bill Owen said...

Good Police Officer knows the Truth about 9/11 - YouTube

Nan Yar said...

9/11 Masterminds - Explosive Connections
This is new information. It seems valuable. Take a look.

Nan Yar said...

Rabbi confesses that israel conducted the 911 attacks ---

????hard to know how real this is????

Bill Owen said...

Yes, it seems that the blog has pretty much been deserted. Oh well, this has happened before.

It's my fault, I don't keep things up. Too busy with real life matters.

Very very disappointed over the postponement of the Greenwald event. I will try again in the spring.

It's not that I am "against" Dr. Wood, I just find her scenario too complicated by half, and it seems to employ devices whose presence and use would be detected.

Bill Owen said...

Watching now!

Nan Yar said...

niBill Owen--you can ignore her hypotheses and simply appreciate the evidence she points to which is what she considers most important anyway.
True, she does suggest an unusual explanation but that is not her most significant value.
I am not ae9/11 truth adequately accounts for some of these anomalies.
Are you?

Nan Yar said...

Bill O.--here is a recent presentation by Dr Wood--
You can tell immediately that she has had a great deal of scientific training and is presenting the material just the way a professor would want here to. It is very well done. First: what happened? And only after that has been answered satisfactorily can how it happened be approached. Give her another try. She knows what she is doing and doing it well.

Nan Yar said...

Dr Judy Wood's Presentation---

Really this material is quite simple. Both Dr Wood and Richard Gage agree that the events of 9/11 were not primarily caused by planes nor were they the result of some natural phenomenon like a cyclone.

Dr Wood going carefully over the evidence collected a number of anomalies which ae9/11 can not explain with their theory. For example, "toasted" cars and cars simply missing their engines. She has quite of number of these bizarre phenomena.
On the other hand she provides a reasonable alternative explanation for the nano thermite found in the dust. And for explosions.
Her claim is simply this: in a normal, conventional controlled demolition a large pile of debris or rubble end up at the bottom. A pile whose mass is nearly that of the building brought down. Also there is not a huge cloud of super fine dust rising into the sky and drifting away. And she is right. So it is legitimate to ask where did the buildings go because the rubble left in the aftermath is much smaller than it should have been.
Really she does a very good job of saving all the appearances, that is, accounting for all the available evidence.
She admits she does not know how this was done but speculates that it might be related to machines designed by Tesla. Who knows.
Richard Gage and his group can not or have not so far accounted for the anomalies. So I would say that Dr Woods has a superior hypothesis. It is too bad that they can not work with Dr Wood in a joint effort. But that is human nature.

Nan Yar said...

Bill Owen--Is it true that you have been kidnapped by anti-9/11 Truthers and are being held until you make a tape recanting your current, heretical views. Hope not. But the silence here is reminiscent of the 9/11 Commission when asked important questions.

Nan Yar said...

A real eye opener:

Bill Owen said...

Calling all truthers!

Hi all

Just wanted to wish everyone a good new year and that you all have much health and many friends! We'll need them in the troubled days ahead.


Nan Yar said...

Thanks and same to you. I see over at UT that Glenn is trying to praise Paul but not seem to be a Paul supporter. If he votes for Obama I will stop reading his stuff. No Republican can outdo Obama for evil.
And maybe Paul will be the candidate for the R's.

Bill Owen said...

Hi Nanyar!

I wouldn't worry about Glenn voting for Obama! It does seem that he is leaning towards Paul. He may not have actually made up his mind. Who knows? Not me!

As an enemy alien I legally can't vote for Paul, but probably would if only because I hate the status quo and he seems the only one willing to change it. Obviously I don't agree with some of his positions and seriously doubt he could slow down the military, let alone reduce their capacity.

But then I don't really think that the President is really in charge anymore either.

Nan Yar said...

Actually one of the few things a president can do without congressional approval is reduce the military. He can bring the troops home, close bases, etc. That at least is fully and Constitutionally within his scope. He can also reduce the cabinet, close departments, etc. He can put good people in office. He can fight crime with a good attorney general. No, he can do so much people's heads will swim. What exactly about Ron Paul bothers you?
Glenn can be rather sly. His remark about horrible past actions is really baseless. I can not imagine Paul doing something horrible--so this is tossing a bit of meat to his opponents. Not sure I approve.

Nan Yar said...

Bill Owen--While GG writes articles of interest (and I will continue to read them when I have time) on the whole the comments section strikes me as filled with immature persons. Not all of course. Unfortunately I find persons both on the far right and the far left have a lot in common. Of course, strong opinions and prejudices--but beyond that, a kind of psychological need that somehow gets satisfied by holding positions that aggravate others. In effect these groups seem to need a marginal life in order to feel complete. In my reading and listening I range across the whole spectrum regularly.
The other critique I have of Gleen's UT is that few there read anything other than topical material. It is rare to come across anything that evidences a knowledge of political or legal theory. Or even history. Well, it would be interesting to know more about the people but that is impossible. My guess is that they are people with a little above average intelligence and perhaps formal education. They happen to be interested in politics but there are so many taboo topics that can not be discussed because of the low level of maturity. I also find the use of vulgar slang excessive and meaningless. So reading through the comments has for me become a waste of time. Maybe one out of every twenty or thirty has something worthwhile. And in the meantime my eyes are treated to a lot of mental garbage.
The real important issues in my opinion are: 9/11 as an inside job--seems very obvious. Obama's failure to qualify for president due to not being a "natural born citizen"--a lot of research by legal scholars has now made that very obvious. This is completely independent of his place of birth. The economy of course and the Fed. The imperial presidency; election fraud; un-Constitutional legislation; a really horrible judiciary. Prisons and the drug war. While some of the above can be discussed, it is usually not long before the comments degenerate into nonsense. I would like to find a place where persons are more philosophical and better read. Where if I mention someone like Eric Voegelin or Hobbes or Ronald Dworkin I won't be met with stony silence. Where ideas can really be discussed. There may not be such a place though. Well, I hope you keep up the 9/11 work; we may be looking forward to one that will make 9/11 look minor. Obama and in general that cabal need another attack for the sake of America's gargantuan military budget and for Home Land Security as well. Best of luck!

Bill Owen said...

@Nanyar, Quick Response:

You make some astute observations about the comments section. Sturgeon's Law applies, as always.

I don't think I could keep up with your literary and philosophical references myself. I do think that you would have liked William Timberman, out of Arizona of all places, who was an active poster back in the early days of UT.

Altmanada(sp) touches on many of your issues...

LittleBrother said...

Happy New Year-- or Crappy New Year, whichever seems right.

And remember: before Sturgeon, G.K. Chesterton supposedly wrote or said, "Nine-tenths of mankind is stuff to fill graves."

I often mutter this under my breath when I stand in a supermarket checkout line, trying not to look at the covers of the lurid periodicals screaming from the racks.

Bill Owen said...

Wow, great to see you LB!

Or as brother Dostoievkski said,

The vast mass of mankind is

mere material, and only exists in

order by some crossing of races

and stocks, to bring into the

world at last perhaps one man

out of a thousand with a spark of

independence. One in ten

thousand perhaps - I speak

roughly, approximately - is born

with some independence, and

with still greater independence

one in a hundred thousand. The

man of genius is one of millions,

and the great geniuses, the crown

of humanity, appear on earth

perhaps one in many thousand


Crime and Punishment

Nan Yar said...
excellent and recent

Nan Yar said...

I see, Bill, that you have vanished again. 9/11 is the heart of all that is happening now. It is the sina qua non of the Establishment and a jewel in the crown of the Elite. Second only to that is Obama achievement of the presidency without being qualified. The latter has been so thoroughly researched that only those that chose to be blind (like mysterposter at UT) can still claim that Obama is qualified. But I see this second though lesser jewel as also important because it is an important step in debunking the Constitution which is still an obstacle to the goals of the Elite which are among other things to extinguish the nation state. A world government would be an awful mess to live in. Far from disappearing ethnic groups, nationalities, religious affiliations seem stronger than ever. Just take a look at France where the Muslims are starting to get on the nerves of the Parisians in quite a big way. Good luck.

Nan Yar said...

“AA Exposes Bush’s ‘Big Lie’: Flight 11 DID NOT FLY on 911!”

By Len Hart

"American Airlines itself is the source for information that AA Flights 11 (North Tower) and 77 (Pentagon) did not fly on 911. These flights are critical to the the government's crumbling cover up! Bush's 'official conspiracy theory' of 911 is, therefore, a lie! If either of those 'flights' were mothballed on 9/11, then Bush's 'big lie' –the official conspiracy theory –is not merely false, it is a bald-faced lie . . . "

Bill Owen said...

Hi Nanyar

No, I'm still here. January is a bad month for me. No sun, no warmth, no energy!

If not a world government than what? The current system? Sure the Muslims are getting on the nerves of the French, but they aren't bombing them. Nova Scotia does not go to war with New Brunswick over fishing rights in the Bay of Fundy, cause Ottawa sorts it out, more or less fairly. We have problems with Quebec, but we are working it out.

I think part of what RR is doing is just having fun, he loves to argue. I also think that he has not looked into with anything like an open mind.

ION I am bringing Glenn to Ottawa on April 13th, that's a Friday. OMG

Bill Owen said...

While I am here I should post this:

It's quite a good piece on 911 Truth on Pacifica Radio.

Thanks for passing that on Frank!

Anonymous said...

You are most welcome, Bill--I hope You, your family and the animals are OK. Yours in Truth, Frank

Nan Yar said...

The new all white look. Polar exposure. Canada in winter. A light yellow might warm it up a bit.
What we now have are competing oligarchic groups. Romney's will differ from Bush's group or Obama's. And any time a 9/11 or a 7/7 is needed one will be produced.

Nan Yar said...

While there is a great deal of word flow at UT much of it is contentious and much of it seems like subconscious rage release. I do like PeteDickins new comment: BANNED USER. It is succinct and usually to the point.
Mysterposter must have been a playground bully. He claims he is an attorney but evidently without clients--not hard to guess why.
Glenn continues to write good article. I wonder at what point his site will be the source of dissident persons discovered and tracked? Will there be a detention camp with lots of UT posters? Humor aside it seems likely.
Reading a few comments here and there I find I am not tempted to jump into this bar room fight. I would like to find a political site where most are courteous and a bit more mature.
Taboo topics for some reasons are: 9/11; Obama's qualifications for the Presidency? any real non volatile mention of religion, gender, abortion, etc. I at least imagine there are grown ups who can talk about these things without having seizures or using massive amounts of vulgar slang. Like Jonathan Swift I do not like slang. It is hard enough to know what people are trying to communicate--or is it just a pretense? I see you there occasionally, Bill. You must know of some other sites worth commenting on. Or am I a dreamer?
Glenn is getting good coverage these days. All he needs now is a Pulitzer to be in the top echelon. He is a good gad fly as he has excellent reasoning talent and evidently an outstanding memory power.
People who still believe 9/11 was the work of Muslims have had ten years to find out the truth. I believe Dickins became a BANNED USER for pressing the topic? During those years these apparently incurious people have been advised by spouse, relatives, friends, employers or others that holding such an outrageous view as "inside job" would have negative consequences! With people like Glenn or Noam Chomsky there may have been genuine threats of harm. Maybe we will find out the truth in a detention camp. I imagine Harper has some you Canadians. Glad I live where it is not so cold as detention camps may be on thin budgets: food or heat today. One good reason to avoid commenting on UT is who wants to be with mysterposter perhaps for years? And there are others. I can hear him now denying that the camp is a camp. Well, best of luck.

Bill Owen said...

Nar, I don't think that there are any "better" places, if by better you mean politer.

The moderated sites are politer, but they tend to cut things that they don't like.

CBC is okay, but you can wait an hour to have a single comment "approved" or NOT, which is extremely annoying.

Some like Fire Dog Lake, Ondelette has moved there. You would have liked him, even if you did not agree with him. He was no bully, very very smart guy, interesting too.

I don't think Heard is being nice to you at all, and it is unwarranted. Write Glenn? Make a public plea on the thread! Ask people if this is okay with them. I think a lot of people don't like it but are "afraid" to say anything. They are aware of his tenacity, on whatever tack. So he is bad guy to get on the wrong side of.

I have no idea what you "did".

Simply refusing to engage can work.

Anderson, the sardonicism bot, dogged me for years, I would reply, insult, denigrate but nothing worked. He just hates me, says I am a "nut" and "pompous".

In any event this is probably not the best place to be talking about other posters, but you asked, so I thought it was only polite to reply.

I have no influence with RR. We just kind of co-exist... not really intersecting.

Glenn has been really clear why he limits 911 discussions, it's disruptive and it's not his interest. That is what it is. He does so much other good work, I am most certainly not going to condemn him for it.



Bill Owen said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Nan Yar said...

Thanks for the response, Bill. Perhaps UT is an opportunity for some to work out domestic frustrations or work related stuff. I sort of suspected that UT was about as good as it gets. I put a comment now and then on another wordpress blog, and there is a strange guy there who writes comments that can not really be understood most of the time. Real characters are still around!

Nan Yar said...

So, after Steel Light said she was quitting I decided to take your advise and write Glenn. It also occurred to me that sarcasm really is the main theme music at UT. Now John Ashberry who is a major American poet writes his poems to Brahms. So it has occurred to me that there must be just the right music to write comments to. But have not yet found it. Maybe Stravinsky. Or John Cage. I have a few strange CD's around I might try depending on the kind of response I get from Mr. Greenwald. One problem is that Glenn himself is a bit sarcastic. Is sarcasm healing? Might an herb do better? These are of course deep questions.:)

Bill Owen said...

Good for you, I don't think anything you posted came near to trolling and I agree that comity in a comments section is important and productive.

Glenn is a "little sarcastic"? lol

He can be!

Busy lately working on Glenn's speaking engagement here in Ottawa! Things are going extremely well so far!

Are you coming?

Nan Yar said...

Never received a reply from Glenn. Well, I doubt he is that interested. I realize that one or two comments per day with several days off is probably about right.
The level of education, real education, is very low in my opinion. And most are pretty much followers and not leaders. The USA has bad educational standards. People simply don't read enough good material when they are young. And later on it really shows. The law schools by the way are not so good either. Really the USA is in serious and permanent decline.

Bill Owen said...


I have to agree about the quality of education in America. I like to think I am pretty much self educated, so if I am deficient; I have no one to blame but myself.

I wouldn't blame G too much for not responding. I can't even begin to imagine the volume of mail he gets. I am just doing this little event in Ottawa, and I am swamped.

I would try again, or post something openly, write about ou dilemma as you see it.

Nan Yar said...

"Dick Gregory Got Warning To Leave New York Night Before 9/11
Other high profile figures received similar messages."
[I see that href does not work here; glad I did preview.]

So the psychics were busy the first part of September '01?
I would like to come to the event in your town, but it is a very long drive from Colorado. I refuse to fly anymore. My son and daughter were there a few weeks ago.
As regards UT---I have located a number of hot spots. You may know others.
1. Ron Paul--personally I think he would be a healthy change-like going from a heavy meat diet to vegetarian one.
2. Of course 9/11. It really helps to avoid the evidence.
3. Obama's eligibility. Two fold. Scholars define "natural born citizen" as born of two citizen parents in the land. There is even a definitive 19th century Supreme Court Justice saying this in a majority decision. After Sheriff Arpaio's investigation it is no longer clear that Obama could produce acceptable evidence that he was born in the USA. He may not be a citizen as by law his mother was too young. Big mess.
4. Just about anything legal that gets on the mental nerve of an attorney or psuedo attorney. And as is well known attorneys are often wrong to the detriment of their clients in the USA. The America judiciary is a shambles and a real disgrace.
Being an old timer you must know others.
Sergeant Bales? Another Sirhan Sirhan? Can't remember. No witnesses. Was this a planned attack with Bales as the patsy? It is beginning to sound that way. How do you prosecute someone without evidence? I would of course not put this at UT as I would be immediately attacked by the "experts" and others who do not believe in intuitions.
I did not really expect Glenn to respond. What could he say. Mysterposter reminds me of the Young Republicans. He is ultra conventional and probably still paying off student loans with a meager law practice that leaves him hours of frustrating time. I should never respond to his attacks. I should not even read them. Poor guy. I wonder if he could be a plant of some sort?

Nan Yar said...

Bill--I am surprised that any Canadian blog would be banned from but that apparently is the case. I have tried on a number of occasions to link to "Snippits and Snappits" but the Salon filter disallows it. It is the blog of quite a nice woman named Noor. I wrote Salon--but of course no response. Did you know they filtered blogs? Given Canadian standards it seem incredible. Any ideas?

Nan Yar said...

I have been slowly doing a survey of the various blogs. In my opinion is one of the most contentious that I have come across so far. Sometimes there is a cooperative flow but usually there is a lot of attack with plenty of sarcasm. I am gradually reducing the time I spend there and the number of comments. I hope to eventually have nothing to do with it except read GG articles that attract my attention. I think it is easy to form bad habits on that site.

Nan Yar said...

eBill--I have been going to poorrichard's blog recently. It is quite good as in the right hand column he has other blogs which indicate the current article and this area updates regularly. As a result I have discovered a number of fine blogs. Most do not have the aggressive and contentious comment section that UT has. I think it is in the nature of GG's location. is one of those respectable alternative sites. And GG is out there with the masses. So the site attracts persons who are the typical American barbarians. Not all of course. Coram Nobis has manners. Morning's Minion almost does. You do. There is poor John Anderson. But then there are the wolves and sharks. There is a lot of anger and spite going on. Unless one has an appetite for punishment or a very thick skin . . . so my modus operandi is to read the articles of GG. Occasionally I will drop in an article or comment and ignore the responses. Maybe that will benefit someone. In any case I save myself the emotional abuse.

Bill Owen said...


Thank you for your kind words. I am glad that you found some places more amenable than Salon.

Yes, there is an attack culture there, I am guilty of this myself sometimes. I do it when I see something outrageous or dangerous or insulting. But that is no excuse.

Glad you still read Glenn. He was very good on Maher, considering the situation, which was very biased.

There are others you did not mention who are polite I think, Pedinska, Bystander, others...

Nan Yar said...

Bill--some additional 9/11 material that you probably have not seen. The information is down a bit in the article. Sounds true.

Bill Owen said...


Omg! Friend used to post at Glenn's but not surprisingly, he got a rather bad reception! Still reading, sounds interesting.
Victor Bout, the man who knew too much!

The Greenwald arrives in Ottawa tomorrow afternoon. Should be fun.

Wish us luck!

(My cat jumped out the window tonight, and we spent an hour looking for her) She's okay! That would have been so bad.

Thanks for the tip!


Nan Yar said...

Bill--I see that the event you arranged for Glenn was an outstanding success and very useful for Glenn and us. I hope you continue your work there and best of luck which I feel we will need more and more as time goes on.

LittleBrother said...

Hi, Bill. Hope all is well.

I noticed this interesting item in an e-mail from Cindy Sheehan (sent to subscribers to her blog, Cindy Sheehan's Soapbox):

Osama: The Walking Dead

In this excellent linked article by Salon columnist, Glenn Greenwald, the point is made that the Obama administration is making as much political hay out of the Zombie Osama as the Bush regime did.

(FYI: We had scheduled and confirmed an interview with Glenn Greenwald a couple of months back and he just never "showed up" for it and after that would never respond to my producer about what happened. I still think he is a brilliant analyst of the Empire and his slight of the Soapbox won't change that fact, but if anyone knows how to reach him, maybe we can find out what happened?)


My impression is that Cindy is a little too "Sphere of Deviance" for Glenn, but I haven't been following him lately. I wonder what happened?

Bill Owen said...

Hey Little Brother, great to 'see' you. I was just thinking about you the other day. I was hoping you might drop in on UT again one of these days.

Hope things are good with you too! We are fine, my old cat is not well with failing kidneys, he is 18. That's sad.

As for Glenn and Cindy, that seems very odd. She may be outside the SOD, but he did agree to the interview, so what's up with that? Something happened obviously.

He certainly came through for me, our event went great with his extraordinary hard work, and that's not just bullshit Glenn polishing. He really did come through, and kept his word.

I haven't been posting here as there have not been any interesting new developments on the 911 issue. I wish there were.

We are in check at the moment I think.

Please stay in touch, always great to hear from you!


Anonymous said...

First post of June--If you have not seen this video. around 2 hrs., it might be of interest.

William St. George said...

This is actually Nan Yar--I have had identity troubles with gmail and passwords not working, so time for a new identity.
Glenn continues to roll out fine critical material. More 9/11 stuff keeps surfacing. Some quite excellent. More fraudulent documents and stuff about Obama continues to drift to the surface. The 1930's are doing a redux with the USA playing Nazi Germany as the current most "advanced" society. Will Romney make a better Hitler or should we stick with the current try out? Will school children some day in China watch films that show the "Nazis" of the last war with Obama, Bush, Panetta, Holder . . . ? And also in Russia? Will they be told how this will never be allowed to happen again as they are shown the death camps in which Muslims were gassed and cremated? Will the shadows wear USA insignia to display their rebellion? Time for a good lengthy epic set in the future. Phillip Dick style. Hope all is well in Canada though it does not sound like it down here in Colorado.

William St. George said...

Unfortunately Bill your site is beginning to remind me of neighborhoods in the Rust Belt . . . empty houses and empty parks . . . and the down towns with their empty commercial buildings . . . On at least one site the proprietor has been running photos of deserted America. Ghost towns and cities. My guess is that there are now thousands of deserted blogs. Some now for years. I run across these occasionally. An article dated several years before and then nothing. What happened? Did the originator pass away? Get married? Get arrested?
Something about the blog should be written into wills. Eventually a massive virtual ecological disaster may occur due to these and other abandoned sites.

Bill Owen said...

Ha, yes, it is, what can I say. No one reads this, and no one will. How many blogs are there now? 50 billion?

And it's summertime in Canada, all one month of it!

My Dad is named William St. Clair, and I am William George Ross, so I like your name!

I want to post, but it's very discouraging. To build an audience is a full time (unpaid) job, and I have to eat...

Hope things are well in your town!

William St. George said...

Hi Bill--I see your point. I have a blog which I rarely visit except to evict a few comments. Still . . . Have you watched the video by 'September Clues'? This group carefully examined all the video footage of 9/11 including the so called "amateur" work and found all the videos had been tampered with. One by Fox in "real" time had the plane coming out the other side of the building a ways! Oops. They were running a 17 second delay and stuck the two dimensional plane in but not precisely.
Farewell Glenn Greenwald day. Glenn wrote quite a few excellent articles. While I would not call him my kind of person, I do believe he did a lot of good work.
As regards Assange Britain has gone overboard with threats of attacking the embassy. But they have shown both hands. You don't go to all that trouble over a dubious extradition for highly suspicious reasons. The Foreign Secretary was probably drunk when he gave the idea an airing. A good way to end diplomatic diplomacy for everyone.
As for Assange escaping the articles I have read reveal how few thrillers these people have watched or read. There are probably a thousands ways to free him. I have thought of few that would bedevil the British such as each day at a random time taking a large box out and driving around London. Of course the box would be empty. But would provide a distraction for the police. Then hire a number of Assange look a likes who could leave the Embassy at all hours. In the meantime work on the real escape plan. He would need to leave from a place like Ireland (another of England's friendly enemies). It should not be too hard to get across the Irish Sea. While everyone focuses on how he could get out of the building one needs to be a magician and distract. It can be done easily by the right person. How much would the USA be willing to pay to apprehend him? And if they were caught red handed in an attempt to kidnap him? I would let the USA get him out . . . by stealth and then let them walk into the light. Meanwhile Assange lands in Ecuador. Viola! Good luck in Canada.

Nan Yar said...

Glenn at the Guardian with the comments now closed today: "The accusations made against him[Assange] are serious ones, and deserve to be taken seriously and accorded a fair and legal resolution." Glenn used almost exactly this same phrase at Salon some weeks ago. Here is what Paul Craig Roberts wrote at his site recently: "What is this all about? First, according to news reports, Assange was picked up by two celebrity-hunting Swedish women who took him home to their beds. Later for reasons unknown, one complained that he had not used a condom, and the other complained that she had offered one helping, but he had taken two. A Swedish prosecutor looked into the case, found that there was nothing to it, and dismissed the case." I think Roberts conveys the real truth. I can not quite grasp why Glenn would resort to such serious language as "The accusations made against him are serious ones" unless he is splitting hairs and referring to the Swedish terminology used which is hyperbolic in this instance. What do you think? In any case I do not think the allegations should be taken seriously as it is so obviously a trap . . . there are plenty of things to take seriously that we can not afford to waste our time on silly things like this Swedish affair.
Unfortunately it is now going to be hard to comment at Glenn's as with six hours more or less of time difference the column with receive all it can hold and close the comments. Not like the old days. Plus far more readers.

Bill Owen said...


I think he says things like "serious allegations" because he has to, and it blocks one obvious line of attack. Otherwise it would be sincere and insincere attacks about how Greenwald does not consider sexual assault to be a serious problem, nonsense like that.

I agree with your characterization, but if I were to paraphrase you in public, I would get lashed and any point I was trying to make would be lost.

Just checked his latest post. Comment are not closed. I just commented 1 minute ago. Glenn said that they should stay open for 3 days.


Nan Yar said...

I am sure you are correct, Bill. However, long before Glenn started in on this and after the Guardian had gotten all it wanted from Assange, they began in a fair weather friendly way to use this exact phrase . . . As an attorney Glenn could take some time to point out what "rape" means in Sweden and let people decide for themselves.

Bill Owen said...


That's an excellent idea, I will mention that to him, a post on the crime in Sweden, vs bad behaviour in America, Canada, or Britain.

Helen Mirren just got in deep trouble for saying that date rape is not a matter for the police! Now that's not politically correct, that's not unthinking dogma.

Nan Yar said...

What I find most interesting is that finally the high court in London had to resort to their French/English dictionary in order to discover that Parliament had approved a treaty that in English read either judge or magistrate but the French word used (apparently the EU is putting its treaties in French as it was the diplomatic language in Europe for a long time)includes prosecutor. Now it could be argued that Parliament had in fact failed to approve the treaty or at least that portion of it. We both know that if it had been something involving large sums of money or very important people or the like the treaty at a later date would have been immediately invalidated. So that is a second legal snarl.
If Sweden chooses to define rape as failure to use a condom then that is their right--but the anti-Assange community is misusing that information. Surely Sweden's laws can be located and a decent translation arranged. That this has not been done and published seems like a glaring omission. Good luck.

Bill Owen said...


Coram Nobis did a good job on this on the latest GG post at TG.

I am not sure which treaty you are talking about?

Any way you cut it, Assange is a dead man. Dead or in prison for the rest of his life. That much is clear to me.


22 August 2012 6:54PM
Response to lownoise, 22 August 2012 6:19PM

Well I could be wrong but i understand he HAS been charged with rape and that is why the Swedes are trying to get him back to Sweden, in order to answer those charges.

On its face, it's an allegation, not proof or conviction of guilt as yet, so the talk about him being a rapist is -- talk. The Wiki entry on the Swedish charges seem to provide enough detail, at least to say that it ain't that simple. Sure, "rape" is one count, so is all this:

On 18 November 2010, prosecutor Marianne Ny asked the local district court for a warrant for the arrest of Assange in order for him to be interviewed by the prosecutor. As he was now living in England, the court ordered him detained (häktad) in absentia. On appeal, the Svea Court of Appeal upheld the warrant on suspicion of våldtäkt (rape), olaga tvång (duress/unlawful coercion), and two cases of sexuellt ofredande, which has been variously translated as "sexual molestation", "sexual assault","sexual misconduct", "sexual annoyance", "sexual unfreedom", "sexual misdemeanour", and "sexual harassment".

Which suggests, in normal police/prosecutor practice, that if they throw enough big charges the lesser ones might stick, which is probably what they thought they could prove in the first place.

The real issue, however, is what happens if Assange gets to Sweden. The US has a grand jury investigation pending that could involve a probable charge under the Espionage Act (18 USC 793 et seq), possibly involving a death sentence. Sweden has an expedited-extradition arrangement, and that's assuming Assange isn't simply renditioned from Sweden -- it wouldn't be the first time.

It is possible, then, that the "rape" "charge" may result in Assange going to Sweden and then to some US location (Gitmo? Bagram?) and thus subjected to the rinse cycle, a military-commission farce, or maybe just some mysterious death in custody. This would be enormously popular in the US and Obama would win a landslide victory.

All the culprits escaped through diplomatic channels.

On top of that several millions of pounds are owed by embassy staff parking illegally and refusing to pay the fones by claiming diplomatic immunity.

We must change this rotten system.

Well, yes, but if "ending this rotten system" means getting rid of inviolability for diplomats and embassies in general -- the Vienna Convention and all that -- it could become very difficult to do business if your ambassador could become a hostage at any moment. It's like burning down your house to get rid of termites -- effective, but maybe not desirable.

Whoever, in time of war, with intent that the same shall be
communicated to the enemy, collects, records, publishes, or
communicates, or attempts to elicit any information with respect to
the movement, numbers, description, condition, or disposition of
any of the Armed Forces ... or any
other information relating to the public defense, which might be
useful to the enemy, shall be punished by death or by imprisonment
for any term of years or for life. -- 18 USC 794(b)"


Nan Yar said...

The treaty I am referring to is the one which came up in the last appeal with England's Supreme Court where Assange's attorneys were challenging the validity of the extradition--issued as it was by a prosecutor and not a judge. It must be an EU treaty regarding these matters.(I assume it was written originally in French but approved of by Parliament in English--so did Parliament really approve of prosecutor as well as judge for this clause?). My faith in attorneys has vanished. There is nothing in the Constitution which gives them the power they have seized. The American Bar has proved itself to be a money and power affair.
I am a good deal more optimistic regarding Assange than you.
I remember clearly the early days of this affair. The two women having found out about each other were understandably angered; what they wanted was for Assange to take an AID's test. One of the girls had a police woman friend who went to a prosecutor who said there was nothing for a case. I think that is apt to be the really accurate assessment of the matter. These women were plenty old enough and experienced enough to know that if they take a stranger home . . . anyway. But later on another prosecutor whom I believe was out in the West was either inspired or encouraged to take up the case--I doubt that could even happen in our legal system. Glenn again today was hammering the serious allegations again. If he were playing a piano I would suggest a tuner because those keys are off. I think we all know, even Glenn, that these women suffered no harm except discovering each other! At some point we need to remove the mask of lies. Romney is now talking about going back to the gold standard. He is going to win the election as we Americans have had it with inflation and the Fed. But this is the year, the next twelve months; if America survives until next summer then America will revive. If not . . . the world will witness a long series of calamities. Thanks for the follow up. Good luck.

William St. George said...

Princeton University: Global Consciousness Project--on September 10th 2001 their instruments noted a rise in global consciousness; and on September 11 it spiked. The graph resembles those for earthquake monitoring. A steady line and then small spikes and then the major quake lines. They have already noted this many times now with respect to events, positive or negative, that grab the headlines. What this potentially means is that events gestate in the unconscious or in the Field before they manifest in the waking world of physical things. An important discovery. See "Language of the Divine Matrix" for a scientific and mystical commentary. This also means that there are no secrets.

William St. George said...

Watching some research videos regarding the JFK assassination: many striking parallels to 9/11. The internet has been a great boon for 9/11 research.
The Warren Commission was just as fumbling and misleading as the 9/11 Commission. The investigations by FBI and police as unprofessional as NIST's. The hijackers as elusive and shadowy as Lee Harvey Oswald (who clearly was not the assassin). The Assassination involved two conspiracies: one to successfully assassinate; and one to contain the event so that it did not spill into foreign affairs. A few were in both conspiracies,e.g. LBJ. This seems standard procedure. You need one conspiracy to do the deed; and one to do the cover-up. Now in all likelihood Earl Warren thought he was being patriotic. Some on the 9/11 Commission felt similarly. However, someone from the original conspiracy needs to be available to guide the white wash, and keep it from straying into dangerous territory.
As on 9/11 so on 11/22/63 the eye witnesses came away with very different stories which the cover-ups had to artfully ignore. E.g. the grassy knoll. The explosions. And so forth.
In the 1970's the United States House Select Committee on Assassinations looking into the assassination may have done some good but primarily they proved that they were also incompetent as they continued to blame Oswald and at the same time deny that the CIA was involved. JFK and his brother, the AG, were seriously considering eliminating the CIA and putting presidential protection under the DOJ. And there is considerable evidence that the Secret Service was involved.
So a new Congressional Investigation of 9/11 does not offer much hope should one ever take place as it would no doubt exonerate everyone and find some minor details to bring forth to prove they looked into it seriously. It doesn't seem to take much to persuade your American Citizen these days!
However far one goes back in American history one finds these false flags, cover-ups, major deceptions and so on. Pearl Harbor is another fine example. The whole involvement in WWI by the USA involving black mail and a sunken ship is another. The Power Elite feel they can publicly lie and deceive with impunity--and history shows they are correct. Jane Harman today on NPR assuring listeners of the great care used with drones . . . not to worry, as your government is doing just wonderfully. Backed up entirely from someone from the Brookings Institute.
Conclusion: perhaps governments are necessary. How would we know? But evil they tend to be. They represent the lowest ebb of the society and are its least moral element. No form of government is much better than any other despite many books to the contrary. Prosperity is the main factor. As the economy sinks the gov becomes more controlling and totalitarian. It is easy for wealthy and high status persons to talk smoothly and with guile about the state of things. They have a big buffer between themselves and the rougher side of everyday life. They may be amoral types who have never encounter a moral qualm in their lives. On the other hand their insensitivity is a kind of on going-punishment. With hides of a rhinoceros they miss a lot of beauty and love. As for 9/11 our reward for all the study and research is solid knowledge. For most people that knowledge is not something wanted. So we just have to recognize that the world we live in is a pretty rough and tough place. Maybe 2012 will bring some cosmic energy around that will lift the world up. I don't know.

«Oldest ‹Older   401 – 562 of 562   Newer› Newest»