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


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.


Remains from Flights 93 and 77 Burned and Dumped in Landfill “Shortly After 9/11″

by Scott Creighton

In a report released by the Pentagon and a subsequent press conference, it has been made clear that remains of passengers from Flight 93 (Shanksville) and Flight 77 (supposedly struck the Pentagon) were incinerated and dumped in a landfill somewhere in Virginia. According to a statement made at the press conference, this practice of burning and dumping the remains of the passengers started “shortly after 9/11″

Is anyone else here wondering how they could have separated the body parts of the passengers on Flight 77 from the body parts of the office workers who died in the Pentagon on Sept 11th 2001 without doing DNA testing PRIOR to making that determination?  How is it that just the Flight 77 passengers’ remains went to the dump and not the office workers? Hmmmmm…….

Continue reading

An Unfortunate Alliance: Senator Gravel Moves on to “Capitalize” on Occupy Wall Street

by Scott Creighton

What is listed below is my reply to Senator Gravel’s response to an article I wrote about the way in which he handled his departure from 911CC, an organization that he founded and campaigned for looking to get a initiative on the ballot for the formation of a  citizens commission to re-investigate the events of 9/11. I did not find his comment to be completely forthright nor do I appreciate his apparent flippancy regarding the harm he ultimately caused those who invested in his efforts. I post this reluctantly because as Gravel himself put it, he is preparing “to capitalize on the OWS spring offensive”. Given the timing and the way he handled both his departure and the funds donated by Truth advocates, I am left wondering if he wasn’t “capitalizing” on the 911CC effort from the beginning. Below my reply is Sen. Gravel’s comment.

UPDATE: Mike Gravel claims that someone else wrote the article I found that contradicts what he told the Truth movement about what he believed happened on 9/11. Unfortunately for the senator, he wrote other articles for the Huffington Post. One of which says this:

“Despite what the Bush administration claims, Iran was a great enemy of the perpetrators of 9/11 long before 2001. In the 1990s Iran waged a covert war against the Taliban and Wahabi-Sunni terrorist networks like Al-Qaeda.

… So why not let Ahmadinejad pay his respects at Ground Zero? Why not let him send a message to the Muslim world that 9/11 was an atrocity that everyone, including fundamentalist Muslims, should mourn?”  Mike Gravel

Were both of these articles written by someone else? Are we to believe that the Huffington Post is just writing these things themselves or posting articles submitted by a third party without checking with the person who’s name is attributed to the work? Or is something else happening here?


Sen Gravel:

Let me see if I understand this:

You’re suggesting that the Huffington Post, a large website with about a million hits a day (back in  late 2007 during the election campaign) and obviously a legal team on staff or retainer, published an article under your name without checking with you or even your campaign staff about the legitimacy of said article, during your PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN?  That’s your answer?  Wouldn’t that be… illegal… for them to do that? Could they be sued for slander or libel?


Continue reading

Dwain Deets Goes Full Retard: Pushes “Ray Beams from Space” and “Mini-Nukes”

by Scott Creighton

BYU’s “nanothermite” distraction is finally doing what it was designed to do: implode on itself leaving the Truth movement scrambling for a new hypothesis to get behind. Some guy has finally said that “nanothermite” isn’t a high explosive and it could not have “blown up” the Twin Towers. Funny. I’ve been writing that very same thing for years.

But while all of this is going on, Dwain Deets pops back up going all “Simple Jack” on us backing any stupid demolition theory that was ever made to make us look like idiots. Dwain seems to have forgotten that famous advice from Tropic Thunder “never go full retard”

Continue reading

My “SPAM” Reply to Mike Gravel’s Email

by Scott Creighton

I sent Mike Gravel a copy of the article I wrote the other day about his folding the 9/11CC group and transferring the donated money to an old not-for-profit he runs. He didn’t like what I wrote and insinuated that either I or my “old friend” (JD) was CIA. He has finally written a response to the 9/11CC’s board letter that told the donors about Gravel leaving the organization. In it, he mentions me as a part of their “plan” in some form. He asked me to publish his letter in fairness, and in fairness I agreed in my email back to him.

But guess what? Mike Gravel added me to his SPAM list so that reply to his email got bounced back. Nice huh?

So, I will publish my reply to his email, here. Guess he will see it eventually? First here is what he wrote as a note to his answer to the 9/11CC board letter.

Continue reading

Did Mike Gravel Scam the Truth Movement?

by Scott Creighton

UPDATE:    My “SPAM” Reply to Mike Gravel’s Email


Say it ain’t so Mike!

It was recently brought to my attention by an old friend that Mike Gravel pulled a bunch of funding out of his foundation that was formed to put a measure on a state ballot in 2012 to create a new investigation into the events of 9/11. The organization that Gravel himself started was called the 9/11 Citizens Commission and the intention was to create a new commission, with subpena powers, like a Grand Jury of sorts, that could re-open the case and provide a new, truly independent investigation into the events of 9/11.

Largely due to the hard work of many Truth activists (networking on Facebook, petitions, ect… ) they had managed to make some real headway in their efforts. They apparently had (if you believe the letter that was sent out) collected a nifty little nest egg to use in their campaign which should have been kicking off in full swing this close to the upcoming elections in November; somewhere in the neighborhood of 30 grand or so. Not Mitt Romney or Barack Obama money, but nothing to sneeze at either.

But a funny thing happened on the way to the Diebold machines… a week ago a correspondence goes out to the 9/11CC donors saying Gravel had split, taken the money and rerouted it to another foundation he had been running since 2001, and stopped responding to the other members of their organization.

Did Mike Gravel scam the Truth movement from the start? There are some interesting facts that may suggest he did just that.

Continue reading

Pepsi Image is Definitely of 9/11

by Scott Creighton

A can found in a chow-line in Iraq is stirring up a lot of controversy here back home. The can of Pepsi (which I call the “9/11 can“) seems to have an image on it that depicts the World Trade Centers on the day of the attack of 9/11. There are a lot of people running from website to website trying to claim it’s not 9/11 and that instead it’s one of 7 special cans Pepsi Dubai created for the anniversary of their 40 years of being in the United Arab Emirates. In fact, over at Above Top Secret someone named Brian put together their first ever “news recap” video in which they seem to be reading directly from a Pepsi PR statement about the can and they make that very claim. That’s bunk. Below, I have posted Pepsi’s own promotional photo of those 7 cans and the “9/11 can” is nothing like them.

Also after the break, I have shown you with simple outlines of the buildings in the sky line, the image of the “9/11 can” next to iconic images of the World Trade Center and the 9/11 attacks.

There is no question that the image on the can is indeed meant to remind you of the WTC and 9/11.

Continue reading

Iran Did 9/11?: Part 1 – The Excellent Foppery of the World

by Scott Creighton

Families of a very small percentage of the victims of 9/11 seek to steal 2 billion dollars from the people of Iran based on Donald Rumsfeld quotes, the absence of an Iranian stamp on passports given to the hijackers by the US State Department, and the hearsay testimony of an already discredited MEK terrorist.

“This is the excellent foppery of the world, that,
when we are sick in fortune,–often the surfeit
of our own behavior,–we make guilty of our
disasters the sun, the moon, and the stars: as
if we were villains by necessity; fools by
heavenly compulsion; knaves, thieves, and
treachers, by spherical predominance; drunkards,
liars, and adulterers, by an enforced obedience of
planetary influence; and all that we are evil in,
by a divine thrusting on: an admirable evasion
of whoremaster man, to lay his goatish
disposition to the charge of a star” William Shakespeare, King Lear, Edmund the Bastard, 1.2.132

Edmund the bastard lays bare the excellent foppery of the world, that as we suffer from the our own misdeeds, we find ways to lay the blame elsewhere as if by some divine plan our fate was not of our own design. The Sun (al Qaeda), the Moon (Iraq), and the Stars (Iran) have now all been blamed for what was our own invention, all that we are evil in. Thus is the nature of whore-master man.

Continue reading

Occupy Wall Street Current Official Demands, Voting Closed Oct. 21, 2011

(Re-investigate 9/11 generated the most votes by an extremely large percentage.  Overall some 70,000 + people voted on this measure to be adopted in the OWS official demands poll and “Yes” beat out the “No” votes by a margin of something like 6 to 1 (60 thousand to 12 thousand). Another interesting aspect to all of this is the little known fact that the Federal Reserve central banking system, privately owned and the model of what we are forcing on other nations across the world, can be bought back from the banks that own it at a cost of only 1 billion dollars.  Buying it back and ending the FED in that way is one of their demands that they have adopted by a vote of 83% in favor.)

by Ralph Lopez, ADS

At the official Occupy Wall Street media site Voting software prevents voting from the same ISP more than once. The following is an initial demands list on which voting closed on Oct. 21, 2011.   Items required a vote of 2/3 “yes” or more to remain on the list.  Voting is still open on other demands.

From “Occupy Wall Street – Official Demands”

The Sovereign People’s Movement, represented nationally through the people occupying the various Liberty Square locations across this great country, have laid out and democratically submitted and are currently voting on the list of following Demands to then be distilled into one Unified Common demand of the people.

Demand synopses

Official Voting Page


1. Repeal of the Patriot Act

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” — Fourth Amendment to the Constitution

Forty-five days after 9/11, Congress passed the USA PATRIOT Act without reading it. This new law was supposed to protect you from terrorism, but it has really left you unprotected against lawless federal agents. The Patriot Act contains numerous violations of the Fourth Amendment. It gives federal agents vast new powers that have been abused to investigate innocent Americans.


3. Forced Acquisition of the Federal Reserve for $1Billion

No Congress, no President has been strong enough to stand up to the foreign-controlled Federal Reserve Bank. Yet there is a catch – one that President Kennedy recognized before he was slain – the original deal in 1913 creating the Federal Reserve Bank had a simple backout clause. The investors loaned the United States Government $1 billion. And the backout clause allows the United States to buy out the system for that $1 billion. If the Federal Reserve Bank were demolished and the Congress of the United States took control of the currency, as required in the Constitution, the National Debt would virtually end overnight, and the need for more taxes and even the income tax, itself. Thomas Jefferson was concise in his early warning to the American nation, “If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.”

Article I, Section 8, Clause 5, of the United States Constitution provides that Congress shall have the power to coin money and regulate the value thereof and of any foreign coins. But that is not the case. The United States government has no power to issue money, control the flow of money, or to even distribute it – that belongs to a private corporation registered in the State of Delaware – the Federal Reserve Bank.

4. Re Investigate the Attacks of 9-11-2001

More and more evidence is being released to the public surrounding the suspicious circumstances surrounding 911. This measure would be included in the list of demands to show that the original investigation was significantly flawed.

Continue reading


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 852 other followers