Dick Cheney

Griffin on Bush, Cheney, and the ‘miraculous’ destruction of the WTC

Bush and Cheney: still working hard to ruin the world in 2008. (AP Photo/Ron Edmonds)

On ruining America and the world: new book marks a return to 9/11 for Truth Movement’s most prolific author

By Craig McKee

It would have taken a miracle. A bunch of them, actually.

For the official story of 9/11 to be true, numerous physically impossible things would have to have taken place that day. This is the case made by prolific 9/11 researcher David Ray Griffin in his latest book, Bush and Cheney: How They Ruined America and the World. It is the 12th Griffin-penned volume that takes on the official government claims of what happened—and did not happen—on 9/11. It also marks his return to (more…)

9/11 researcher exposes failure of 2001 false flag ‘Anthrax attacks’

By Barrie Zwicker (Special to Truth and Shadows)macqueen-cover-298x447

The “anthrax attacks” that followed on the heels of the “9/11 attacks” have receded into memory for most people, even including those of us who were extremely skeptical about alleged al-Qaeda biowarfare at the time.

Prof. Graeme MacQueen, in his latest book, The 2001 Anthrax Deception: The Case for a Domestic Conspiracy, [1] sheds light on why most of us have all but forgotten the sensational “anthrax attacks.” They’ve been dropped down the memory hole as a touchstone to justify the “war on terror” because the “anthrax attacks” fraud fell apart.

In his tight (just 214 pages) but definitive account, MacQueen proves beyond doubt that the “anthrax attacks” were a false flag operation. Those who need to be persuaded need look no further than this overdue book.

The “anthrax attacks” were intended as a powerful evil twin of the 9/11 terror fraud. Taken together these ops were to be a one-two punch that would launch the “war on terror,” while simultaneously justifying the illegal invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. The invasion of (more…)

The Barbara Honegger Show: DC 9/11 conference spun as new consensus

Panel 2

Pentagon panel: From left, Deets, Honegger, Sullivan, and Barrett.

By Craig McKee

Barbara Honegger calls last month’s “9/11: Advancing the Truth” conference “historic” and a “major triumph for the movement.”

More than that, she thinks it’s a huge step towards that elusive “consensus” about the Pentagon that so many of us have thought was neither possible nor particularly desirable.

But who can blame Honegger for her enthusiasm? It was clearly her show. Not only was she part of the organizing committee for the conference, but she spoke both on Saturday and on Sunday. The latter talk went on for nearly two hours – longer than the other two Pentagon speakers combined (I’ll return (more…)

Dzhokhar’s boat ‘confession’ the most unbelievable part yet of Boston bombing psyop

Martial law 1

Who benefits? This was the result of the Boston bombing: a martial law precedent.

By Craig McKee                       

Remember the notes that accompanied the anthrax deliveries right after 9/11? They said things like, “Allah is great!” “Death to Israel,” “Death to America!” and “9-11-01: This is next.”

In other words, THE MUSLIMS DID IT: the same ones who had so handily defeated the world’s greatest military machine on Sept. 11, 2001. And they did it because they hate us and our freedoms … the usual. They apparently really wanted to rub salt in the wounds of a traumatized America after the largest supposed terrorist attack ever on U.S. soil. And it worked; people were suitably freaked out.

The problem was that the Muslims didn’t carry out the anthrax attacks, which was later proven by the fact that the anthrax was highly weaponized and was manufactured at a U.S. military facility. The whole thing was later pinned on American scientist Bruce Edward Ivins after he had allegedly committed suicide. We also learned that Bush, Cheney and other key administration officials were put on the anthrax-preventing antibiotic Cipro in early September 2001, long before (more…)

Hollywood 9/11 feature to favour human drama and ‘safe’ evidence

By Craig McKee

Can you make an “uplifting” Hollywood movie about 9/11? Should you try?

If your goal is to encourage people to question the official story, should you focus on the human cost of this horrific event with an eye to making the film a successful piece of dramatic entertainment? What evidence should be examined and what should be left out to avoid controversy within the Truth movement and condemnation from the media?

These questions haven’t been simple ones for first-time screenwriter Howard Cohen, who has written the script for A Violation of Trust (original title: Confession of a 9/11 Conspirator). The setting is the first day of a fictitious new (more…)

Sanctions in Gallop 9/11 lawsuit send a message: seek justice at your own risk

By Craig McKee

The message is loud and clear. Go after justice for 9/11 in the courts, and not only will you lose, you’ll be punished.

That’s what April Gallop and her lawyer, William Veale, found out as their lawsuit against former vice-president Dick Cheney, former secretary of defense Donald Rumsfeld, and former Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman Richard Myers concluded with a final slap in the face. This came in the form of a $15,000 fine levied against Veale for filing a “frivolous” appeal (the appeal had already been turned down in April of last year).

The decision was handed down by a three-judge panel headed by Justice John M. Walker, who just happens to be George W. Bush’s cousin – proving that the American justice system has a twisted sense of humour at times. (more…)

When did they know? 36 truthers on how they awakened to the 9/11 lie

By Craig McKee

Myth: Most “conspiracy theorists” thought 9/11 was an inside job from day one, because these types of people always imagine elaborate conspiracies even though the evidence rarely backs them up. Most are paranoid and obsessive.

Reality: Many if not most of the members of the 9/11 Truth movement took months or years to begin doubting what we have been told. Those who have become leaders of the movement tend to be intelligent and well educated, and they were open-minded enough to consider evidence that we hadn’t been told the truth by the government or the media.

I decided to pose a question to some of the most notable members of the movement to find out exactly when they twigged that 9/11 was an inside job and not a terrorist attack perpetrated by fundamentalist Muslims. Here’s the question I sent them:

“When did you come to believe that the 9/11 official story was false and that 9/11 was an inside job – and what piece or pieces of information convinced you?”

For the purpose of this article, I’m defining “truth leaders” as being people who have been active in the movement in some visible way – spreading the word either by organizing activities or by researching and writing about or making films about 9/11 to raise awareness. It does not connote an endorsement of their various positions on 9/11.

I was fortunate to receive responses from the majority of the best known truth activists I wrote to. These included David Ray Griffin, Barrie Zwicker, Barbara Honegger, Mike Gravel, Rob Balsamo, Cynthia McKinney, and 30 others listed below. All responses are original and were sent to me by the respondents with the exception of Balsamo’s, which he offered from a previously posted statement.

As you will read, the respondents’ backgrounds run the gamut. There are academics, authors, pilots, engineers, chemists, architects, journalists, politicians, musicians, filmmakers, lawyers, soldiers, and citizen researchers and activists of all kinds. There is a former U.S. senator, a former congresswoman, a high-level NASA executive, a policy analyst in the Reagan White House, and a Nobel Peace Prize nominee.

It’s an impressive group to say the least. In assembling it, I deliberately did not restrict myself to people I most agree with – or who most agree with each other. I sent the question to as many members of the Truth movement as I could. I’m not interested in entertaining criticism that one person or another should have been excluded. I think it’s much more interesting to read responses from people with disparate views. The length of the answers varies greatly, and cuts were kept to a minimum.

Here are the participants in this order:

David Ray Griffin, Barrie Zwicker, Cynthia McKinney, William Veale, Barbara Honegger, Mike Gravel, Craig Ranke, Rob Balsamo, Cindy Sheehan, Niels Harrit, Shelton Lankford, James Fetzer, James Hufferd, Adam Syed, George Ripley, Adam Ruff, Sheila Casey, Bruce Sinclair, Elizabeth Woodworth, Josh Blakeney, Aldo Marquis, Frances Shure, Maxwell C. Bridges, Anna Yeisley, Mark Gaffney, Giulietto Chiesa, Paul Zarembka, Ken Freeland, Jonathan Mark, Dwain Deets, Jeffrey Orling, Massimo Mazzucco, Nelisse Muga, Matthew Witt, Simon Shack, Graeme MacQueen.

And here’s what they said:

 David Ray Griffin (Retired theology professor; past nominee for the Nobel Peace Prize for his 9/11 work; founder, Consensus 9/11 Panel; author of 10 books on 9/11)

In the fall of 2002, one of my students at the Claremont School of Theology told me that a visiting professor said that 9/11 was an inside job and asked if I wanted to meet him. I said yes, and after talking with him, I told (more…)

The 9 biggest 9/11 stories of 2011: old fights and new directions

By Craig McKee

Paul Simon stepped to the microphone at Ground Zero and something amazing happened.

The legendary singer/songwriter had been asked to sing the non-threatening Bridge Over Troubled Waters at the ceremony for 9/11’s 10th anniversary ceremonies in New York, but he didn’t. Instead, he launched into a haunting version of another classic that begins, “Hello darkness, my old friend.” Simon had decided that the most appropriate statement for this occasion would come from (more…)

Truth and consensus: jury still out on Griffin’s new 9/11 expert panel

By Craig McKee

Maybe we should start calling it the 9/11 Consensus Movement.

Recent developments in the struggle to widely expose the truth about the fake “terrorist attacks” of Sept. 11, 2001 have focused on apparent efforts to overcome divisions between different factions in the movement. Ironically, these attempts at consensus have themselves been highly controversial.

The latest, and possibly most consequential, move towards consensus is the creation of a collection of experts in a panel called “Consensus 911: The 9/11 Best Evidence Panel.”

The group, announced in September, was put together by prolific 9/11 researcher and author David Ray (more…)

Teach kids conspiracy theories are ‘bad for society’: an interview with Jonathan Kay

By Craig McKee

It’s a challenge to interview someone you’d rather be debating. That was the case when I interviewed Canadian writer and journalist Jonathan Kay this week. Kay, an editor with the National Post, is the author of Among the Truthers, which attempts to examine and explain the world of conspiracy theorists. Why do these otherwise intelligent people believe the “bullshit” that they do, he wonders? He sees the 9/11 Truth movement as being ridiculous and based on arguments that “even an eight-year-old” would see through. I chose to try and cover as much ground in 45 minutes as I could rather than getting into an in-depth debate on any one point. I did find things in his arguments that cry out for further argument , and I will offer my analysis of his remarks in a subsequent post. I encourage readers to offer their own comments at the end of this article.

CM: What is the difference between a conspiracy theorist and someone who does legitimate research to unearth a real conspiracy?

JK: I define according to the method of argumentation of the people who advance the theory in question. I give the example of Iran/Contra, Teapot Dome, the Sponsorship Scandal or Watergate, which of course were real historical conspiracies. If you’re advancing something like this, one person will advance evidence and the other person will refute it, and by that method you (more…)