Chomsky’s Hypocrisy Knows No Limits: Tweets About “voluntary propaganda of the intellectual class”

by Scott Creighton

I follow Noam’s Twitter feed, Daily_Chomsky and today these little gems popped up telling his followers to actively work to counter voluntary propaganda from the intellectual class. Immediately I recalled Noam’s little “Truther” debunking he offered up last month at the University of Florida in which he ultimately concluded that no one in the Bush administration contributed to the events of 9/11 or planned them because “they aren’t lunatics”

Well, I debunked his debunking, basically doing exactly what Mr. Chomsky suggested we all do today… I countered his voluntary propaganda and I think I did so quite effectively, since Chomsky himself is on record saying that there is no evidence bin Laden had anything to do with 9/11. Well, if Chomsky knows that bin Laden didn’t do it, then who does he think did?

Continue reading

Noam Chomsky’s 9/11 “Truther” Debunking Debunked: Yes Noam, They Were Lunatics

by Scott Creighton

UPDATE:

Chomsky’s Hypocrisy Knows No Limits: Tweets About “voluntary propaganda of the intellectual class”

——

Chomsky’s conclusion: “They weren’t lunatics so they didn’t do it”

Noam Chomsky is dead wrong regarding 9/11 and you don’t have to be a physicist to understand it. You just have to think for a minute.

What is being hailed as the End-All-Be-All of “truther debunking” is disturbing to watch. This video is mentioned on places like the Huffington Post as something to show to “anyone who still buys into the 9/11 truther stuff”. It’s a video of Bob Tuskin asking Noam Chomsky a question about Building 7 at a speech Noam gave at the University of Florida.

(see video at the end of this article)

Here is my effort at debunking a man who I have defended for apparently far too long. His ignorance of the geopolitical climate prior to the invasion of Afghanistan is, quite frankly, unforgivable given his acute awareness of such matters. His forgetting that he himself has stated on many occasions that there is no evidence of bin Laden being involved in 9/11 is also quite telling here. I will break down his 3 uncontroversial “facts” which prove the Bush administration had nothing to do with 9/11 and I will also expose his hypocrisy and the petty little debunking tricks he uses to marginalize those of us who still question the events of 9/11.

But in the end, it’s his statement that the Bush administration wasn’t run by lunatics that leaves me most disgusted by the man and the activist I revered so much because it is a lie and he knows it is a lie.

Ergo, here I offer my Chomsky mia culpa by way of debunking his pathetic debunking of 9/11 truth activists. To my great shame and disappointment, Noam Chomsky exposes himself as not only a left-wing gatekeeper but also a flat out liar and hypocrite.

Continue reading

Bin Laden’s Son-in-Law? Iran? Give me a break….

by Scott Creighton

Everything to do with the bin Laden story is always surrounded by lies of one form or another.

NBC “News” is reporting that bin Laden’s son-in-law Sulaiman Abu Ghaith was captured by the Iranians back in 2001 with a bunch of other “al Qaeda” members and held all this time in a “black box” for over ten years and that he was somehow released, they assume, and arrested again by the CIA in Jordan.

Continue reading

“CHANGE”: New Memo Details How Pres. and “Top Officials” Can Kill You Without Due Process

by Scott Creighton

“Certain aspects of this legal framework require additional explication. First, the condition that an operational leader present an “imminent threat” of violent attack against the United States does not require the United States to have clear evidence that a specific attack on U.S. persons and interests will take place in the immediate future.” page 7 of Obama memo justifying the assassination legal killing of U.S. citizens and anyone else

Obama of the Peace Prize and “top administration officials” can take you out anywhere in the world (thanks to the NDAA 2012 opening up the entire planet as the battlefield) without judicial review and without you even planning an attack on the U.S., it’s troops or anyone else for that matter if they so choose to do so. So says a 16 page memo given to congress last June. They can kill anyone they want, anywhere in the world if it will advance their Global Free Market Wars agenda. And it’s not called an assassination, it’s called a “lawful killing in self-defense” and this administration (and all those too follow once this precedent is set), only have to have say that an “informed high level official” has intelligence that their target poses an “imminent threat” and that is good enough for a president or any other “top administration official” to have you killed. The “imminent threat” guidelines are rather vague to say the least.

A report Monday night on the nature of the administration’s drone program has the potential to dramatically revamp the debate over President Barack Obama’s foreign policy and the confirmation process for his incoming cabinet.

The report, by Michael Isikoff of NBC News, reveals that the Obama administration believes that high-level administration officials — not just the president — may order the killing of “senior operational leaders” of al-Qaida or an associated force even without evidence they are actively plotting against the U.S.

“A lawful killing in self-defense is not an assassination,” states the Justice Department white paper quoted by Isikoff.

The 16-page memo, given to Congress in June, is not the final Office of Legal Counsel memo that news organizations have sued to obtain. But it offers plenty of insight into the government’s justification for killing American citizens in overseas drone strikes.

The paper states that the U.S. would be able to kill a U.S. citizen overseas when “an informed, high-level official of the U.S. government” determines the target is an imminent threat, when capture would be infeasible and when the operation is “conducted consistent with applicable law of war principles.”

The white paper suggests that such decisions would not be subject to judicial review and outlines a broad definition of what constitutes “imminent” threat. Huffington Post

The memo itself is unambiguously titled “The Lawfulness of a Lethal Operation Directed Against a U.S. Citizen Who is a Senior Operational Leader of Al Qaeda or an Associated Force” is not the full legal brief which purports to be the basis for which this American president claims he has the right to murder U.S. citizens and pretty much anyone else if he and his “top officials” chose to do so.

Continue reading

Glenn Greenwald Reviews the CIA’s Latest Movie Zero Dark Thirty – Can You Say “Limited Hangout”?

by Scott Creighton

Glenn Greenwald has a new article up about this horrendous piece of globalist propaganda called Zero Dark Thirty. It’s supposedly the “true story” of how the great ObamaGod got the “ebil” bin Laden via an assassination raid into Pakistan last year.

Glenn accurately points out that the film is complete propaganda. He can’t help but notice that. It was after all based on “intelligence” spoon fed to the government shill Kathryn Bigelow after she was granted an Oscar award for her other recent propaganda piece, the Hurt Locker.

“It was discovered that CIA and White House officials had met with its filmmakers and passed non-public information to them – at exactly the same time that DOJ officials were in federal court resisting transparency requests from media outlets and activist groups on the ground that it was all classified.” Glenn Greenwald

It’s clear that Operation Mockingbird hasn’t simply been revived, brought back from the dead in the wake of 9/11, it’s become the sole source of new material in Hollywood (they simply refused to make Cloud Atlas and snubbed Avatar by giving the academy award to Hurt Locker instead). The only thing Hollywood will fund these days is propaganda, pure and simple.

But Glenn misses the point (as he sometimes does when it comes to important fundamental stuff like this) by focusing his entire criticism of the film on the fact that it justifies torture to the exclusion of even the well-known facts surrounding the “official story” of the bin Laden raid.

and now for the rest of the story…

Continue reading

Dust to Dust:Testing for Residue of Conventional High Explosives in Ground Zero Dust is a Possibility

by Scott Creighton

UPDATE: Well, no replies as of yet. Perhaps dis-info campaigns such as “micro nukes”, “ray-beams from space”, and “nano-thermite” have won the day after all.

“Editors Note: It is important to point that micro nukes were most likely used at the base core of the WTC buildings in conjunction with nano-thermite and C-4.” The Intel Hub June 25th 2012

———-

Over the years I have been one of the most outspoken proponents of running standard tests on the dust collected from Ground Zero to see if in fact there are residual traces of conventional high explosive residues present in it. This type of test has been called for by many of the so-called 9/11 Truth “researchers” but they never seem to find the time to do it and then, in the end, when I pressed a few of them on the subject, they flatly refused for “PR” blowback reasons. Or so they told me.

However, our detractors could be counted on to do their best to use a negative result against us for P.R. purposes. They would say that we have a non-scientific belief, since a negative outcome from an experiment fails to shake it. ;-)    Thus, the potential costs of doing what you’re proposing and coming up empty-handed, or worse, must be considered.”  Gregg Roberts of AE9/11 truth

I even went so far over a year ago to carefully construct and publish what I thought was the best process by which to run the tests themselves.

Proposed Testing Procedure for High Explosive Residues in Ground Zero Dust

After years of research, it is my hypothesis, which I still stand behind to this day, that the Twin Towers were taken out via an explosive controlled demolition and that during the design stages of the process, they relied too heavily on the use of det cord in the floor systems (see image below) which led to the vaporization of most of the truss systems which was accidentally revealed (the metal micro-spheres) when the RJ Lee Group did their Composition and Morphology study of the Ground Zero dust samples for Deutsche Bank .

The RJ Lee study also found that temperatures had been reached “at which lead would have undergone vaporization”– meaning 1,749°C (3,180°F).

Another study was carried out by the US Geological Survey, the purpose of which was to aid the “identification of WTC dust components.” Besides also finding iron particles, the scientists involved in this study found that molybdenum had been melted. This finding was especially significant, because this metal does not melt until it reaches 2,623°C (4,753°F). Griffin

Why do I bring all of this up now?

Good question.

Simply put: I now have several small (very small) and as of yet unconfirmed Ground Zero dust samples and I am looking for your input as to what to do with them.

Let me explain…

Continue reading

9/11 Molten Steel At World Trade Center Site For Weeks After The 1 Hour Fires

Several reports of molten metal at the Trade Centers for weeks after 9/11. What is the “official” explanation for this? Friction.

.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 912 other followers