"News Fit to Transmit in the Post Cassini Flyby Era"
9/11 & Hustler * Improbable * SmokeMirrors
27 January 2007The individual is handicapped coming face to face with
a conspiracy so monstrous, he cannot believe it exists.
-- J. Edgar Hoover1) London Guardian and 9/11 News
- - More 9/11 Emergency Calls Released in 2007
- - Huslter Magazine and 9/11 Truth Making Time
- - Only 16% Think Government Telling the Truth about 9/11
- - The 9/11 Movement: Those Who Divide and Those Who Unite
- - Michael Berger & “Improbable Collapse” Spring NE2) ChemTrails and the New World Order
Editor's Notes:While the media spins news of the protests today in Washington, D.C., this issue inflates, too, closer to the bursting point. Meanwhile keep an eye on updated reports at WorldReports.org. The first item in this issue opens with the Guardian, London, newspaper covering Loose Change 9/11:
The power of the film is that it lays down layer upon layer of seemingly rational analysis
to end up with a conclusion many would find incredible. It is compiled from original footage
from numerous news sources, narrated in Dylan's mild, almost monotone voice, and backed
by an soundtrack from DJ Skooly and others that induces a sense of the ominous.
Then comes a link to the Hustler Magazine current issue that is covering 9/11 truth. It is a wild world. Then comes a New York Times / CBS News Poll stating that only 16% believe the Bush Administration is telling the truth regarding 9/11/01. Since Bush has about a 28% approval rating, then this means that at least 12% per cent of his supporters are out rightly dishonest. What a group! But reality keeps sinking in, and if Bush gets the surge, he will dig our soldiers and our country deeper into the abyss.
Fred Burks, former language interpreter for Presidents Bush and Clinton, writes in the first item, too, on his experience with Steve Jones and Jim Fetzer’s split up – on those who unite and divide us. The last article in the first item is a press release for a Spring tour with “Improbable Collapse: The Demolition of our Republic”
film and producer, Michael Berger. FN and Western Massachusetts 9/11 Truth Alliance
are making such a critical tour happen. Although it was not hit by an airplane, the 47-story skyscraper WTC 7
folded in on itself and collapsed into its footprint at 5:20 pm on Sept. 11, 2001,
in what the "untrained eye" might mistake for a classic controlled demolition.
Tenants at this unusual building included the CIA, the Department of Defense, the
New York Mayor's Office of Emergency Management, and the offices of the Securities
and Exchange Commission, which was storing paper files on 200 ongoing securities fraud
investigations.. For a growing number of people, the fall of WTC 7 is a smoking gun indicating
that explosives were used in bringing down that building as well as the Twin Towers themselves.
The second item is about a science that has gone astray, and dipped in madness. This article from London tells of the US military’s design to deal with Global Warming by reflecting sunlight by dispersing elements into our atmosphere. The Lord of the Ring has taken its toll, kin to the NAZI blitz into dark elements of US, UK, and Russian intelligence-soul. Power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely.
-- Lord Acton
1) London Guardian and 9/11 News
- - More 9/11 Emergency Calls Released in 2007
- - Huslter Magazine and 9/11 Truth Making Time
- - Only 16% Think Government Telling the Truth about 9/11
- - The 9/11 Movement: Those Who Divide and Those Who Unite
- - Michael Berger & “Improbable Collapse” Spring NE
London Guardian and 9/11 News
'They're all forced to listen to us'
It began as a tiny internet film attacking the 'lies' surrounding 9/11. Now, millions of people have heard its message. Like it or loathe it, you can't ignore Loose Change, says Ed Pilkington
Friday January 26, 2007
Four hours' drive north of Manhattan in the Catskill Mountains, Oneonta is as close to redneck country as you can find in the state of New York. As the road winds upward, the terrain thins out into wooded hills dotted with bungalows, with rusting Cadillacs parked outside. At this time of year, the area should be buzzing with skiers from the city, but El Niño and global warming have put paid to that. In the absence of snow, this famously beautiful part of America looks depressed and down-at-heel.
At the end of the journey is a white clapboard cabin surrounded by muddy fields and a couple of dilapidated sheds. Inside, the house is sparsely furnished with plastic chairs and a worn brown carpet. Three young men in their early 20s are sitting around on a futon in the back bedroom watching Family Guy, the animated TV show, on a large plasma screen and playing with a puppy. On the desk in front of them are three computer screens showing, incongruously, the skyline of Manhattan in segments, like a 21st-century triptych.
At first glance, this seems an unlikely setting for what can reasonably be called a revolution in film distribution. There is nothing Beverly Hills about this room, or the twentysomethings sitting around in it. But when you stop to reflect, it is the perfect setting for the command-post of a phenomenon that has turned normal movie logistics on their head, challenged assumptions about documentary film-making and journalism, and created an army of hundreds of thousands of devoted "info warriors".
This is the bedroom of Dylan Avery, the director and creator of Loose Change, the most successful movie to emerge from what followers call the 9/11 Truth Movement. More commonly, they are referred to as conspiracy theorists. They believe - or rather, they insist they can prove - that the attacks in New York and Washington on September 11 2001 were not the work of Osama bin Laden, but of elements within the US government itself. They reject the term "conspiracy theorists", arguing that if you accept the official line on 9/11 you have in any case signed up to a theory about a conspiracy - an al-Qaida conspiracy.
Many people find the world of such anti-establishment sceptics, to use polite terminology, deeply suspect and verging on the offensive. A few of the families of the victims of 9/11 have said as much to the Loose Change crew, although Avery says many more have offered support. But push aside any instinctive distrust there might be about what they are saying - we'll come back to that later - and consider for a moment its impact.
The movement of 9/11 sceptics has had an astonishing success in sowing doubt across the US. Recent polls suggest more than a third of Americans believe that either the official version of events never happened, or that US officials knew the attacks were imminent, but did nothing to stop them.
That's an impressive statistic in itself. Now look at the success Loose Change has had. Google Video acts as a portal for the movie, where you can also see the running tally of the number of times it has been viewed since last August. As I write, it stands at 4,048,990. By the time you read this, it will have risen considerably higher. On top of that, the movie was shown on television to up to 50 million people in 12 countries on September 11 last year; 100,000 DVDs have been sold and 50,000 more given away free. Then there are many more who have watched the film but are never counted, as a result of the active encouragement the film-makers give their supporters to burn the movie and distribute it to their friends. Avery says 100 million people - "easy" - have seen it. That may be an exaggeration, but it's fair to say that something extraordinary is going on.
The Loose Change story begins in May 2002 on the opening night of a Mediterranean restaurant in Oneonta where Avery, then aged 19, is working as a dishwasher. A friend of the owner, James Gandolfini (aka Tony Soprano), is a guest at the party and Avery gets chatting with him. "We started talking about movies and shit," Avery recalls. "Gandolfini told me, if you want to do something that matters, you have to talk to the entire world. You have to have something to say."
Avery had just finished high school. He'd long been a film buff, a fan of Tarantino, Fight Club and The Matrix. He was inspired to begin writing a novel/film-script. He began toying with the idea of a fictional work that would explore the fantasy that 9/11 hadn't been carried out by 19 Arabs with box-cutters, but by the American government as an attack on the minds of its own people. At that point, he was writing pure fiction. But as he began researching September 11 for background to the story, he began to come across evidence that made him change direction. All the footage and the eyewitness accounts he gathered, he says, "just didn't add up".
The second of the three twentysomethings enters the scene. He is Korey Rowe, now aged 23 and Dylan's best friend from Oneonta. Five years ago, Rowe joined the army because he had nothing better to do and he'd heard the golf was good at training camp. Then 9/11 happened and "everything went crazy". He was posted to Afghanistan for six months and later for a year to Iraq. Rowe extracted himself from the military in 2005 and joined Avery full-time in making Loose Change. By now, it was taking shape as a part fiction, part reality movie, but eventually they decided they had enough material to go all-out as a documentary.
The first edition of Loose Change, running at 30 minutes and produced on a battered Compaq Presario laptop (price $1,500), was finished in April that year. The second, longer, edition - the one currently available on the internet - came out in September 2005 with the help of a third partner and fellow Oneonta resident, Jason Bermas, aged 27.
Entirely self-taught, and without a single journalistic qualification between them beyond a couple of media courses Jason sat at college, the three men have sought to take on the combined might of the Bush administration, the FBI, the CIA and the mainstream media. If viewer statistics are a measure of success, they have to no small degree prevailed.
One can speculate as to the reasons for their success. September 11 was such an overwhelming event that many people have been open to the wilder accounts of what lay behind it. The reaction of the Bush administration - Afghanistan, Iraq, Guantánamo, terror clampdowns within America - have generated profound fears about the president's intentions. And this openness to - even need for - alternative explanations has come at just the moment when the internet has made it possible for such theories to be disseminated rapidly and widely.
The power of the film is that it lays down layer upon layer of seemingly rational analysis to end up with a conclusion many would find incredible. It is compiled from original footage from numerous news sources, narrated in Dylan's mild, almost monotone voice, and backed by an soundtrack from DJ Skooly and others that induces a sense of the ominous.
And so to the message. The Twin Towers in New York didn't fall as a direct result of the planes hitting them and the fire that ensued; they were brought them down in a series of controlled explosions. George Bush's brother, Marvin, sat on the board of a company that insured the towers.
"I think what happened to the World Trade Centre was simple enough," Avery says in the film. "It was brought down in a carefully planned controlled demolition. It was a psychological attack on the American people and it was pulled off with military precision."
Flight 77, which supposedly flew into the Pentagon, could not have flown at that speed without going into a tailspin. There is no sign of any parts of an aeroplane in footage of the crash site, and the building looked as though it had been hit by a missile. Meanwhile, Donald Rumsfeld was safe on the other side of the Pentagon.
Flight 93, said to have come down in a field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania, never did crash there. Instead it landed in Cleveland airport shortly after the airport had been evacuated. The emotive phone calls by the so-called passengers to their relatives before they "died" were staged.
There are several flaws in the argument. The list of those who would have to have been party to the plot is implausibly long for it to have remained secret, from Bush himself to Rumsfeld and Cheney and the FBI and Pentagon ... and on and on. Much of the supporting evidence in the film was taken in the first minutes and hours after the attacks, when confusion reigned. And George Bush may be a disastrous and dishonest president, but would he be capable of such a monstrous act?
The three men have instant answers to any objections you can throw at them. There may have been a lot of people involved - they think about 100 - but only a handful of those would have known the full plot. As for Bush acting heinously, haven't leaders the world over proven themselves capable of monstrous acts?
There's a futility to arguing with them that even they recognise. "You can't stop this, you can't hold us back," Jason says. "Many outlets have tried to ignore us, but in the end they are all forced to listen to us because their viewers are demanding it." He is right. The exponential growth of Loose Change is gradually forcing the film on the mainstream media. Though it began as an internet phenomenon, its biggest spikes have come, significantly, after the film gained airplay on old media platforms such as Air America and Pacifica radio stations, local Fox TV outlets and on stations around the world, including state outlets in Belgium, Ireland and Portugal. So far though, no British channel has been rash - or as the film-makers would see it, brave - enough to bite.
"This is unlike anything I have worked on," says Tim Sparke of MercuryMedia, which handles international distribution for the film. "It has forced millions of people to question whether they can trust big media, and by bypassing the broadcasters through internet distribution it has altered the media power balance profoundly. With a little money and passion, anyone can make an important film."
The final test for Avery and co is yet to come. They are putting together Loose Change: the Final Cut using an upgraded Power Mac G5 (price $5,000). They have filmed original interviews with Washington players, employed lawyers to iron out copyright issues with borrowed footage, commissioned 3D graphics from Germany, and recruited a theology professor to act as fact-checker and consultant. The end result, they hope, will be seen at Cannes and have a cinema release in America and across the world on the sixth anniversary of 9/11.
If that happens, they will have squared the circle. The underground film-makers will have come up for air, exposing millions more people to their argument - and themselves to intense scrutiny. Stand back and enjoy the fireworks.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2007http://film.guardian.co.uk/features/featurepages/0,,1998430,00.html
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =- - More 9/11 Emergency Calls Released in 2007
9/11 Emergency Call Tapes Released
Tapes of World Trade Center Emergency Calls Amid Sept. 11 Attacks Released
By AMY WESTFELDT
The Associated Press
NEW YORK - A 911 operator, speaking to a woman trapped on the 83rd floor of the World Trade Center, offered hope of a rescue team that never appeared, recordings of emergency phone calls from Sept. 11 released Wednesday show.
"Listen to me, ma'am," the operator told a panicked Melissa Doi during a 20-minute phone call. "You're not dying. You're in a bad situation, ma'am."
A portion of Doi's conversation was played for jurors in April at Sept. 11 conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui's trial, but the rest was wasn't released until Wednesday with a batch of taped 911 calls from the day of the attack.
"I'm going to die, aren't I?" Doi asked the dispatcher. "Please God, it's so hot. I'm burning up."
The operator encouraged Doi to keep her composure: "Ma'am, just stay calm for me, OK?"
The conversation was one of more 1,613 previously undisclosed emergency calls from the morning of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. They include the voices of at least 19 firefighters and two emergency medical technicians killed when the twin towers collapsed, although most of the calls are from firefighters asking dispatchers where they should report for duty, the Fire Department said.
The calls "reveal extraordinary professionalism and bravery," the department said. It lost 343 firefighters that day.
The New York Times and families of Sept. 11 victims sued for access to the emergency calls and firefighters' oral histories. Attorneys said they wanted to find out what happened in the towers after two hijacked jetliners crashed into them and what dispatchers told workers and rescuers in and around the buildings.
The calls also include 10 previously unreleased 911 calls made by people trapped in the towers, although those calls will include only the voices of the operators who heard their pleas.
The city in March released transcripts of 130 calls from people trapped in the towers, including only the voices of operators and other public employees. The callers' voices were cut out after city attorneys argued that their pleas for help were too emotional and intense to be publicized without their families' consent.
Thousands of pages of emergency workers' oral histories and radio transmissions were released last August.
Fire Commissioner Nicholas Scoppetta ordered his department to search for additional recordings when another tape turned up shortly after the March release. City officials listened to all calls to emergency and fire dispatchers between 8:45 a.m. and 10:45 a.m. on Sept. 11 to locate all available recordings.
The fire department said Tuesday that when it first turned over its emergency calls, officials "misinterpreted instructions they were given on what kinds of calls to copy" and "failed to capture" other 911 calls they knew had to be made public.
"The department regrets the delay," it said in a statement.
Attorney Norman Siegel, who represents Sept. 11 families, called on Mayor Michael Bloomberg to pledge that no more emergency recordings from that day exist.
A spokesman for the mayor declined to comment Tuesday.
Families of the 21 rescuers who were identified in the calls have been notified, the department said. Because they were public employees, their entire calls will be released on Wednesday. The department said that the voices of other firefighters who died may also be released, but said it couldn't positively identify them.
Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=2319328
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = - - Huslter Magazine and 9/11 Truth Making TimeSingle PDF - 1MB (Update: Updated to include page 5)
We've put up a local archive of the pages here:Page 1 - 3MBPage 2 - 3MBPage 3 - 2.5MBPage 4 - 2.5MB
Update: Added page 5 - continuation of Alex Jones interview.Page 5 - 2.5MB
Source - http://911blogger.com/node/5437
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =- - Only 16% Think Government Telling the Truth about 9/11
Angus Reid Global Monitor : Polls & Research
Americans Question Bush on 9/11 Intelligence
October 14, 2006
- Many adults in the United States believe the current federal government has not been completely forthcoming on the issue of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, according to a poll by the New York Times and CBS News. 53 per cent of respondents think the Bush administration is hiding something, and 28 per cent believe it is lying.
Only 16 per cent of respondents say the government headed by U.S. president George W. Bush is telling the truth on what it knew prior to the terrorist attacks, down five points since May 2002.
Al-Qaeda operatives hijacked and crashed four airplanes in the U.S. on Sept. 11, 2001, killing nearly 3,000 people. In October, after Afghanistan’s Taliban regime refused to hand over al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, the U.S. launched the war on terrorism.
On Aug. 6, 2001, a Presidential Daily Briefing titled "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S." mentioned "patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York."
On May 17, 2002, Bush discussed the situation, saying, "The American people know this about me, and my national security team, and my administration: Had I known that the enemy was going to use airplanes to kill on that fateful morning, I would have done everything in my power to protect the American people."
On Sept. 11, Bush referred to the attacks, saying, "Five years after 9/11, our enemies have not succeeded in launching another attack on our soil, but they’ve not been idle. Al-Qaeda and those inspired by its hateful ideology have carried out terrorist attacks in more than two dozen nations. And just last month, they were foiled in a plot to blow up passenger planes headed for the United States. They remain determined to attack America and kill our citizens—and we are determined to stop them."
When it comes to what they knew prior to September 11th, 2001, about possible terrorist attacks against the United States, do you think members of the Bush Administration are telling the truth, are mostly telling the truth but hiding something, or are they mostly lying?
Truncated, for summary poll numbers, see:www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm/fuseaction/viewItem/itemID/13469
For the complete The New York Times / CBS News Poll
Telephone interviews with 983 [US] American adults,
conducted from Oct. 5 to Oct. 8, 2006. Margin of error is 4 per cent.
See Complete Poll (PDF):www.angus-reid.com/admin/collateral/pdfs/polls/NYT_October2k6.pdf
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =- - The 9/11 Movement: Those Who Divide and Those Who Unite
by Fred Burks ~ received via email fredburks(at)earthlink.net
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 11:24:05 -0800
Dear valued leaders and members of the 9/11 movement,
First, I want to thank you for the contributions you have made to this movement. Every one of you on this list has played a key role in the 9/11 movement in one form or another. We've seen huge breakthroughs in the last year to the point that the 9/11 movement is now even debated in the media. Thank you for playing your important part. For an excellent compilation of excerpts from major media articles which have been supportive of the movement, click here.
A common topic which arises in discussions among members of the 9/11 movement is disinformation agents -- those who are pretending to be members of the movement, but are actually on the payroll of the perpetrators of 9/11 trying to secretly disrupt and divide the movement. I have found that the rampant accusations of various individuals being disinformation agents do little to help, and actually tend to hurt our efforts by causing many to become overly suspicious of others in the movement.
Yes, of course there are disinformation agents. But it is very difficult to determine who is and who is not an agent. That said, it is not difficult to tell who is causing division in the movement, regardless of whether or not they are disinformation agents. And it is clear that while some individuals are causing a lot of divisiveness, others are working very hard to unite us in the cause. I would suggest that rather than spending time and energy accusing others of being disinformation agents, we instead focus on discerning who is consciously or unconsciously serving to divide us, and who is serving to unite us. Let us support all who are bringing us together in getting the truth of 9/11 out to the public.
This is not to say that disagreement is not welcome in the movement. We are most certain to have a wide variety of thoughts and opinions as to what really happened on 9/11 and on the best way to inform the public and turn this whole thing around. Diverse opinions are more than welcome, but baseless accusations, name calling, and disrespectful language does not help our cause. Let us be united in our primary goal of supporting each other to inform the public and demand that the government release withheld documents.
I am writing all of this with some sadness. I've been through a rather bitter, time-consuming experience in the past two months that has resulted in a split in one important 9/11 group. I am sad to say that though he has made invaluable contributions in the past, I have found Prof. Jim Fetzer, the main founder and force behind the highly influential Scholars for 9/11 Truth (S9/11T) movement, to be extremely divisive of late.
Many of you are likely aware that there has been a split in S9/11T, arising out of a conflict between Prof. Jim Fetzer and Prof. Steven Jones, the co-chairs of the group. In early November, Fetzer began publicly promoting theories that energy beams directed from WTC 7 brought down the towers, that they fell faster than possible according to physics, and most infamously that a grand piano would take three times as long as a billiard ball to fall from the height of the WTC towers (contradicting the findings of Galileo at the Tower of Pisa). These claims were even made in prominent links direct from the home page of the group's website.
Physics professor Steven Jones, co-chair of the group, was understandably disturbed by these claims and especially by the fact that they were being promoted on the home page of the group. Jones criticized Fetzer's theories, asking for scientific evidence to back his claims, and was seriously concerned that these claims were presented on the home page of the website. When Fetzer responded by then attacking the theories of Jones, some ugly exchanges occurred. Fetzer unilaterally "fired" Jones from his co-chair position, proclaiming that as sole founder and the major force of the group, he alone had the right to determine what happened with S9/11T. Jones soon thereafter resigned in protest from all membership in the group, as did many others who felt Fetzer could no longer be trusted. A new scholars group was formed with a new website at www.stj911.org
My personal friend of 10 years Alex Floum, who was involved in the founding of the group (as was I to a small extent), knowing of my mediation skills, asked me to contact the two professors to see if something might be worked out to avoid a major split in this influential and important 9/11 group. Though Alex was concerned with Fetzer's disturbing claims, he was doing his best to be neutral in the conflict.
So in late November, I talked with Jim Fetzer on the phone. He was thankful for the call and quite willing to work towards a resolution of these differences to prevent a split in the group. However, a strange twist happened within days of that phone conversation. When S9/11T was originally forming, Alex had procured the domain names for the group. At the time this dispute arose, he still had ownership of the two URLs of the S9/11T website. Fetzer demanded that he turn over ownership of those names immediately and threatened to sue Alex if he did not do so. He somewhere found a lawyer none of us had ever heard of who was willing to work pro bono (Jerry Leaphart), who then began more formal legal threats.
Alex was rightly concerned that Fetzer was not always thinking of the good of the group. He thus was very reluctant to turn the domain names over without some sort of agreement by the two co-chairs or by the steering committee or membership of the group. When threats of a lawsuit were not effective, however, Fetzer's lawyer took a new tack by threatening to file a complaint to the state bar against Alex, who is also a lawyer. Though Fetzer had no grounds for a legitimate lawsuit against Alex, the state bar complaint literally could have cost Alex his job and means of support for his wife and two young girls. As Barrie Zwicker commented to me, this constituted "unconscionable bullying" on the part of Fetzer and his lawyer.
At this point, I determined to step in. I agreed very much that turning the domain names over to Fetzer without the approval of the membership or at least the steering committee (all of whom later either resigned in protest or were unilaterally removed by Fetzer) was highly inappropriate. Alex, by the way, was a member of the steering committee until Fetzer unilaterally relieved him of that position as a result of all of this. Alex asked around to see if any key members would be willing to take over trusteeship of the domain names in order to take the heat off of him. As no one else stepped forward, I agreed and am currently owner as trustee for the scholars group of the domain names.
As trustee, I informed the leaders of both sides of this conflict that if they came to an agreement, I would be happy to follow whatever they agreed to. As no agreement was reached, I initiated a vote of the entire membership of Scholars for 9/11 Truth. With only two options -- turn the domain names over to Jim or put up a joint home page with links to both new groups -- the members just recently voted by an overwhelming six to one ration for the joint home page, which is now in place at both http://www.st911.org
Jim Fetzer has initiated an arbitration complaint against me to try to get the domain names back in his sole possession. He is almost certain to lose given the circumstances, and given that both Alex and I have paid all costs associated with these domain names all along. Please feel free to contact me if you want more information or have suggestions on what we might do about this.
The long and short of all this is that I sadly have to say that Jim Fetzer clearly has become one of the most divisive people in the 9/11 movement. He has resorted to name calling and threats with almost everyone who disagreed with him in this split, even when they were being most rational and civil. Fetzer has set up a new steering committee for his group with Rick Siegel as one member. Rick is an even more divisive individual who not only has made frequent use of obscene language with me and others, he has made direct threats particularly to Alex, telling him to "sleep with your eyes open."
I encourage any of you who have a connection with Fetzer, to work to help him to realize what is happening. I don't want to turn anyone against Fetzer, yet I believe it's important to understand what's happening here and to use good judgment when dealing with him. Fetzer has made tremendous contributions to the movement in the past, and I am deeply saddened that he has become so divisive. If we all encourage him to focus on working together and to not surround himself with divisive individuals, I am still hopeful that he and his capable skills can further serve the 9/11 movement.
I very much welcome any thoughts on all of this. Most of all, I encourage each of us to notice where we might be doing anything that is divisive and to choose instead to work towards uniting our efforts in the most effective way towards educating the public to the truth of 9/11 and demanding that the government release the many secret documents and videos related to 9/11. Let us do our best work together so that we can move forward with creating a brighter future for us all. Thanks again for all that you are doing, and even as we work to stop disempowering behavior like that shown by Fetzer, let us remember that we are all human and honor the divine spark that I know is there in each one of us.
With gratitude and very best wishes for a fabulous new year,Fred Burks
, founder of WantToKnow.info
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = - - Michael Berger & “Improbable Collapse” Spring NE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Michael Berger and film, “Improbable Collapse: The Demolition of our Republic”
From April 11 through April 23rd will be on tour through New England
Contact: Western Mass 9/11 Truth Alliance
Jonathan Mark – FlybyNews.com
The film, “Improbable Collapse: The Demolition of our Republic” features interviews with scientists and engineers proposing to show hard core evidence that that the mechanism of the World Trade Center building collapses on September 11, proposed by US government investigators is extremely unlikely. Hence, the title of the film. Improbable Collapse is the first film interview with Steven Jones, Ph.D., a professor of physics at Brigham Young University following his influential research paper, "Why Indeed did the WTC Buildings Collapse?"
Improbable Collapse not only shows the footage of WTC-7, a 47-story skyscraper ‘that folded in on itself and collapsed into its footprint at 5:20 pm on Sept. 11, 2001,’ but reveals the censorship in not allowing this to be seen on national media. Tenants that had been using this unusual building included the CIA, the Department of Defense, the New York Mayor's Office of Emergency Management, and the offices of the Securities and Exchange Commission, which was storing paper files on 200 ongoing securities fraud investigations.
For a growing number of people, the fall of WTC 7 is a smoking gun indicating that explosives were used in bringing down that building as well as the Twin Towers themselves. Following the film, the audience will be invited to comment and ask questions. Michael Berger is the media coordinator of 911Truth.org. You may recognize him through his appearances on CNN's "Showbiz Tonight" and radio's K-Rock.
2) ChemTrails and the New World Order
Published on Saturday, January 27, 2007 by the Guardian / UK
US Answer to Global Warming: Smoke and Giant Space Mirrors
Washington urges scientists to develop ways to reflect sunlight as 'insurance'
by David Adam
The US government wants the world's scientists to develop technology to block sunlight as a last-ditch way to halt global warming, the Guardian has learned. It says research into techniques such as giant mirrors in space or reflective dust pumped into the atmosphere would be "important insurance" against rising emissions, and has lobbied for such a strategy to be recommended by a major UN report on climate change, the first part of which will be published on Friday.
The US has also attempted to steer the UN report, prepared by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), away from conclusions that would support a new worldwide climate treaty based on binding targets to reduce emissions - as sought by Tony Blair. It has demanded a draft of the report be changed to emphasise the benefits of voluntary agreements and to include criticisms of the Kyoto Protocol, the existing treaty which the US administration opposes.
The final IPCC report, written by experts from across the world, will underpin international negotiations to devise a new emissions treaty to succeed Kyoto, the first phase of which expires in 2012. World governments were given a draft of the report last year and invited to comment.
The US response, a copy of which has been obtained by the Guardian, says the idea of interfering with sunlight should be included in the summary for policymakers, the prominent chapter at the front of each IPCC report. It says: "Modifying solar radiance may be an important strategy if mitigation of emissions fails. Doing the R&D to estimate the consequences of applying such a strategy is important insurance that should be taken out. This is a very important possibility that should be considered."
Scientists have previously estimated that reflecting less than 1% of sunlight back into space could compensate for the warming generated by all greenhouse gases emitted since the industrial revolution. Possible techniques include putting a giant screen into orbit, thousands of tiny, shiny balloons, or microscopic sulphate droplets pumped into the high atmosphere to mimic the cooling effects of a volcanic eruption. The IPCC draft said such ideas were "speculative, uncosted and with potential unknown side-effects".
The US submission is based on the views of dozens of government officials and is accompanied by a letter signed by Harlan Watson, senior climate negotiator at the US state department. It complains the IPCC draft report is "Kyoto-centric" and it wants to include the work of economists who have reported "the degree to which the Kyoto framework is found wanting". It takes issue with a statement that "one weakness of the [Kyoto] protocol, however, is its non-ratificiation by some significant greenhouse gas emitters" and asks: "Is this the only weakness worth mentioning? Are there others?"
It also insists the wording on the ineffectiveness of voluntary agreements be altered to include "a number of them have had significant impacts" and complains that overall "the report tends to overstate or focus on the negative effects of climate change." It also wants more emphasis on responsibilities of the developing world.
The IPCC report is made up of three sections. The first, on the science of climate change, will be launched on Friday. Sections on the impact and mitigation of climate change - in which the US wants to include references to the sun-blocking technology - will follow later this year.
The likely contents of the report have been an open secret since the Bush administration posted its draft copy on the internet in April. Next week's science report will say there is a 90% chance that human activity is warming the planet, and that global average temperatures will rise another 1.5C to 5.8C this century depending on emissions. The US response shows it accepts these statements, but it disagrees with a more tentative conclusion that rising temperatures have made hurricanes more powerful.· See the US document hereGuardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2007
This article is also posted:www.commondreams.org/headlines07/0127-05.htm For FN archives and updated reports, see:
Military Weather - Psychotronics - Chem/Nukes in Space
Translate this Page!
The views expressed herein are the writers' own and not necessarily those of Flyby News.
A "Fair Use Policy" that describes FNs' use of copyrighted material is posted at FlybyNews.com.
Your feedback for story suggestions and networking Flyby News are welcomed and appreciated.
You can write to the publisher/editor Jonathan Mark via email: email@example.com
If you would like to receive more Flyby News alerts for the New England
region, send an email to firstname.lastname@example.org & insert "subscribe" in subject
Flyby News is educational and nonviolent in focus, and has supported critical campaigns
for a healthy environment, human rights, justice, peace, and nonviolence,
since the launching of NASA's Cassini space probe in 1997.
=====News Fit to Transmit in the Post Cassini Flyby Era====>
= = = = = = www.FlybyNews.com = = = = =