Following the 31st January Civil Disobedience for 9/11 Justice outside Downing Street which was organized in solidarity with Jon Gold’s action in Washington D.C., a second action was held on the 26th February.

After meeting at 12pm near Trafalgar Square we headed down Whitehall to Downing Street and took our positions outside the gates of Downing Street. On one side of us was a constant stream of photo-taking tourists and on the other 3 machine gun-toting policemen.

The effects of 9/11 on civil liberties can in fact be directly experienced when taking part in this sort of action, as since 2005 any form of demonstration within this area of London without approved consent from the Metropolitan Police is illegal. Section 132 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 allows the police to impose conditions on demonstrations and arrest unauthorised protesters within 1km of Parliament including Downing Street.

After this legislation was passed by British Parliament, the environmental and political activist George Monbiot commented that:

“The measures that the government claims are meant to stop fake butlers breaking into royal palaces and to prevent the lone anti-war protester Brian Haw from camping on the pavement in Parliament Square also have the effect of banning any spontaneous protest outside parliament or in Trafalgar Square, and of permitting the home secretary to ban demonstrations in places “designated” by him to be “in the interests of national security”. Which means they will be used to prevent protests at airbases, arms exhibitions, government buildings and anywhere else of symbolic or practical importance.”

Such protestations, however, have little impact in post-9/11 Britain, no matter how eminent or well-respected the mouth from which they emerge.

Back to the pavement outside downing street on a rainy February afternoon:

Within a few minutes of arriving at Downing Street we were approached by one of the Downing Street police officers who told us we couldn’t do what we were doing. After respectfully informing him that we were planning to stay he ‘radioed in’ and after a short while two more officers attended the scene. They advised us that that we weren’t allowed to do be outside Downing Street and asked us to move on. We peacefully declined their offer.

The rest of the afternoon saw further and more senior officers being called upon to attend the scene, including an Inspector, a Special Sergeant and the Head of Events for the Metropolitan Police Westminster. Citing Section 132 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act we were warned that if we didn’t leave we would face arrest, a £200 fine and a day in court.

After the events of 31st January, we were expecting to be arrested relatively quickly. Instead, 3 and half hours after we started, the 2 officers who’d been waiting 10 metre’s away since we began walked over to us with some news. They produced a ‘processing form’ and explained how they’d been issued with an order to take our contact details. If upon reviewing the case they decided to investigate this further, they would be in contact. So a few minutes later they walked away with our details, which actually amounted to our names and email addresses.

One hour later at 5pm we decided to end the action. Although it didn’t turn out quite as expected we were pleased to have maintained a presence outside Downing Street for most of the afternoon. Thousands of tourists and passers by saw our signs, many of them took pictures. Rabbit remarked that it was by far the most relaxed and calm action he’s ever been on. Maybe that had something to do with Douglas’s ‘9/11 Truth 4 Peace’ sign? Maybe we were witnessing political policing? With the recent popular civil resistance in the Tunisia and Egypt maybe PM David Cameron has to be seen to allow peaceful protest as any police intervention, with pictures like those from 31st spelling a PR nightmare? Either way we are not going away.

We are demanding an end to the social, political and cultural injustices of the post-9/11 world. We are calling for justice for those who lost their lives on 9/11. Justice for the families and friends who continue to see their loved ones names used to justify so many atrocities. Justice for the victims of torture and rendition. Justice for those from muslim and non-white communities who have been subject to discrimination. Justice for the victims of the 9/11 wars.

Photos by Peter Marshall and Chrissy – More at the 9/11 Truth News Blog

Our next Civil Disobedience for 9/11 Justice will be Saturday 19th March.

If you want to join us, please do.

We will be meeting at 12pm at the Charles I roundabout below Trafalgar Square and soon after heading to Downing Street.

Visit/Join this Facebook Event for more information including where to meet, what to bring, etc.

The post Civil Disobedience for 9/11 Justice at Downing Street II appeared first on 9/11 Truth News.

On Monday 31st January 2011, in solidarity with Jon Gold’s action outside the White House, I took a ‘911 Truth’ sign to Downing Street – the British Prime Minister lives at No. 10 – and sat down outside the gates. Within seconds I was approached by a policeman carrying a machine gun who demanded I immediately move, a request with which I respectfully declined to comply with. After ten minutes I was approached by two Ministry of Defence policemen who issued the same request. We talked a little about 9/11. Moments later a police van pulled up and four police officers got out – I was also surprised to see a further four Ministry of Defence policeman approaching to see what was going on. After explaining that I was respectfully going to decline all further requests to move on I found myself being dragged from where I was sitting, put into the police van, and driven away to Charing Cross Police Station

I was released later the next evening having been detained for 30 hours. I’m glad I took a good book!

An Interview with GN

9/11 Truth News: Why is 9/11 worth going to jail for?

GN: As a result of Monday’s action many of the Downing Street and Ministry of Defence security detail got to find out there was guy with a ‘911 Truth’ sign refusing to go away who had to be carried off by police officers. That starts off all kinds of conversational chain reactions. So in that respect it was worth it.

A friend said to me once that the only rightful place for a peaceful person to be during times of war is in prison. I think it’s a really interesting statement and one I believe to be true. If every person of conscience, every person claiming to be against the war performed non-violent civil disobedience of this kind, the state could no longer claim to be legitimately democratic. It’s certainly a tactic that I intend to repeat and I hope others explore for themselves.

It is also worth mentioning a UK act of Parliament called the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005. This legislation, similar in tone to the US Patriot Act, not only grants the police unprecedented powers to search and arrest people but certain sections of the act ban all unauthorised protests within 1 kilometre of Parliament unless written permission is requested from the police 6 days in advance. Even if authorisation is obtained the police are allowed to impose conditions on a protest – and in the case of Downing Street all protests have effectively been banned. Instead they allow protestors to stand in fenced box over 30 metres away across the road, where you can’t be seen.

Unjust laws are one of the consequences of the Post-9/11 world. Brutal wars, torture, demonisation of muslim and non-white communities are some of the other undesirable social, political and cultural injustices and there are many, many more. All are excellent reasons for civil disobedience.

911TN: At what level do you find the receptivity to this topic within the anti-war movement in England? Is there the same sort of disconnect that we’ve seen in the USA, where people don’t seem to quite grasp the relevance of the legitimacy of the 9/11 story (or lack of it) to the prosecution of what we’ve been promised is an endless war?

GN: The receptivity in the UK is poor, no doubt about that. I have spoken privately to representatives of the largest UK anti-war organisation – the Stop the War Coalition – and although many of them have expressed doubts about the official story, I strongly suspect the reason they don’t speak publicly about them has to do with the ‘third rail’ recently written about by Jon Gold. Defined by Wikipedia as “a metaphor in politics to denote an idea or topic that is so ‘charged’ and’untouchable’ that any politician or public official who dares to broach the subject would invariably suffer politically.” I think that sadly with the subject of 9/11 a similar fear is a major contributing factor to the deafening silence from the leading figures of the anti-war movement. Despite the fact there is more than enough compelling evidence proving high level US complicity in 9/11, no one wants to be labelled a ‘conspiracy theorist’ – as nonsensical as this ad hominem term is it has a very powerful effect on people.

I don’t really want to speculate beyond that but I think we should be aware that the military industrial complex are fully cognisant of the effect organised and popular resistance has on the war machine and therefore are likely to have attributed resources to limiting these efforts. We know from historical examples like the FBI COINTELPRO program in the Sixties that it happens.

What I find disappointing among the anti-war movement – regardless of the inability to connect the evidence of a staged pretext to legitimise the war and create public support for it – is the complete silence in respect of tax strikes, another form of civil disobedience. If a fraction of the millions who marched in London in 2003 knew that it was a viable strategy, and pro-peace organisations offered support and guidance then it would certainly go some way to bringing these wars that we are directly funding to a peaceful end.

911TN: What is one of the biggest challenges you’ve faced in trying to educate others about the 9/11 topic and how have you sought to overcome that challenge?

GN: The effect finding out about 9/11 had on my relationships with my friends and family was definitely a challenge. Initially I found talking about the issue a demoralising and mostly unsuccessful venture. Their rejection of the information hit me pretty hard but I knew I lacked a strong grasp of the subject matter. I undertook 3 months intensive study. It sounds so odd thinking about it now but it was only after the studying, upon venturing out to a 911 meeting in London, that I first met others that had come into the same information. That was just under 5 years ago. Now so many more people seem to be acquainted with the facts and the movement has evolved considerably. I guess the lesson I learned with my friends and family is that you can only do your best, give them d.v.ds, books, recommend the best websites etc and give them space and time to digest the information. Ultimately it’s their choice if they want to engage with the subject or not.

Something else I have found far less challenging but significant enough to mention is being a target of crude and unsubstantiated attacks. It seems that if you demonstrate a commitment to responsible promotion of the message, attempts will be made to discredit you and your work. But I take comfort from the fact that I’m by no means alone and that similar attacks are occurring again and again to people who have a long history of successful campaigning. I have come to accept that it’s just part of the terrain. If anything it’s a sign that you must be doing something right.

911TN: You’re not just a 9/11 justice activist. What are some of the other causes you work on and how does it fit in with 9/11?

GN: I was involved with the ‘Kew Bridge Eco Village’ – an experiment in sustainable community living and permaculture farming methods that existed from June 2009 until May the following year. Its original intention was to highlight the inequalities inherent in Britain’s land rights and provide a response to the converging economic, energy and ecological crises, inspiring real debate on real solutions. To a large extent it was very successful. Around 30-40 people of all ages and backgrounds were able to co-exist in relative harmony. We got a tremendous amount of mainstream media coverage, most of it fair and supportive.

We took our inspiration from the Native Americans and individuals like Gerard Winstanley who in the mid 1600’s, with fourteen other men took over and farmed vacant and common lands in England, producing food that was distributed evenly among those who participated and other needy peoples. Winstanley believed that the earth and its fruits were “a common treasury for all”. Further writings he distributed in the form of pamphlets expressed a worldview that envisioned a symbiotic relationship between humans and nature, acknowledging the inherent connections between people and their surroundings. He once declared that “true freedom lies where a man receives his nourishment and preservation, and that is in the use of the earth”. Similar writings and practices appear throughout history in indigenous communities predating western culture.

We found that what we were trying to achieve with the Kew Bridge Eco Village became contagious and other projects sprung up locally and in other parts of the UK. Towards the end we made significant steps in being completely self-sufficient but due to planning permission being granted for luxury apartments we were forcefully evicted from the land.

Some of us then decided to take our message to the centre of the political establishment in the UK, setting up a ‘Democracy Village’ in Parliament Square opposite the Houses of Parliament. Similar in ethos to the Kew Project we focused our attention on campaigning for an end to the war in Afghanistan. The result was a blitz of peaceful direct actions. Buildings were scaled (including our Houses of Parliament, twice!) and banners were hung. The actions took place throughout the area until, three months after it began, a High Court injunction was approved and we were again forcibly removed from the land.

Currently I’m involved in the early stages of a Transition Town project in my local area.

I think the link between these actions and 9/11 stem from a belief that war and international terrorism exist because of an over-reliance on fossils fuels. These fossil fuels appear to not only be running out but their use is having an alarming effect on our planet, potentially making it uninhabitable in the long-term.

The academic Nafeez Ahmed has made substantial efforts to understand these issues in his recent book A Users Guide to the Crisis of Civilisation: And How to Save it. In it he draws upon a wealth of scientific data to point out that these major crises affecting our planet are symptoms of one single ailing global system. I’m recommending it to everyone, not because my friend Dean Puckett is making a film inspired by the book, but because the information within it is genuinely important.

Our way of life is unsustainable. It doesn’t need to be.

911TN: What have you found to be the most effective method of educating others about 9/11?

GN: Generally I find people are receptive to the story of the victims’ families – The Jersey Girls, Bob Mcllvaine – and documented in the film 9/11: Press For Truth. The nature of their extraordinary fight to get an investigation to find out what happened to their loved ones is remarkably powerful and one which seems to make the subject matter more accessible and palatable for newcomers.

The works of Peter Dale Scott and Nafeez Ahmed are hugely useful in the detailing of the deeper historical and geopolitical context of 9/11. Their work seems to bring a very real understanding of not only how 9/11 happened but why.

The documentation supporting Anglo-American covert links to Al Qaeda as an actual asset furthering specific economic and strategic interests is pretty damning. There is just no room for dispute with that sort of information.

911TN: Where do we go from here?

GN: More outreach. More civil disobedience. More commitment to promoting responsible information. More alliances. More recognition of why 9/11 happened.

It’s time for the world to find out that the 9/11 Truth movement not only wants peace but is capable of helping achieve it.

Photos by Neil

The post Civil Disobedience at Downing Street for 9/11 Justice appeared first on 9/11 Truth News.

Behrooz Sarshar worked as a GS 12 language specialist with Top Secret Clearance at the FBI Washington Field Office. After leaving the FBI in 2002, he provided his testimony on “Kamikaze Pilots” to several Congressional offices and investigators, including staff of the Senate Judiciary Committee and the Committee’s leading Democrat at the time, Senator Patrick Leahy, and the Justice Department’s Inspector General Office. The congressional sources familiar with Mr. Sarshar’s case and briefing found him and his report credible:

A former Grassley investigator says he found Sarshar credible, too. “We thought he was a pretty credible guy,” said former Senate Judiciary Committee investigator Kris Kolesnik.

In April and June of 2001 a long-term FBI informant told two FBI agents from the Washington field office that his sources in Afghanistan had provided him with information regarding a terrorist plot to attack the US in a suicide mission involving airplanes. Mr. Sarshar acted as an interpreter at both meetings after which the case agents filed a report (on 302 Forms) with their squad supervisor, Thomas Frields. Here is what Mr. Frields told the reporter when questioned about the case:

Frields, now retired from the bureau, says the case is too “sensitive” to discuss.”It involves very sensitive matters that took place while I was an on-duty agent, and I have absolutely nothing to say,” said Frields, reached at his Washington-area consulting office.

The 9/11 Commissioners had initially refused to interview Mr. Sarshar. He was one of several witnesses from the intelligence and law enforcement organizations with relevant testimonies and reports who were denied access to the commission (the ones that we know of). It was only after pressure from members of the 9/11 Family Steering Committee and memorandums from the congressional offices that the commission reluctantly agreed to interview Mr. Sarshar. However, his entire testimony was omitted from their final report. According to a Chicago Tribune investigative reporter even FBI Director Mueller appeared baffled by the Commission’s lack of inquiry into this particular case:

FBI Director Robert Mueller, who expected to be asked about the case during an appearance before the commission in April, was surprised when the commissioners never raised the question, according to aides.

I do not expect to see any satisfactory explanation from the commission in response to this public statement issued by the 9/11 family members. In this case they certainly cannot hide behind their usual lame secrecy or classification mantra. Mr. Sarshar provided several testimonies and briefings to official bodies where neither the facilities nor the officials were considered secure or in possession of clearance. I was present during at least four of those meeting where the briefings were recorded and transcribed. In two of these meetings several members of the 9/11 Family Steering Committee were also present. In fact, during my short tenure with the Bureau, I was briefed about this case by not only Mr. Sarshar but other firsthand witnesses, and I saw the actual 302 forms filed with the unit’s squad supervisor (FBI language specialists get to keep a copy of their reports/forms). Further, I personally briefed the 9/11 commission investigators on the details of this particular case, which is confirmed by the commission’s memorandum:

Members of the Family Support Group requested that the Commission meet with Mr. Sarshar, Dan Marcus arranged for a meeting with Mr. Sarshar. The meeting became an interview and was recorded. Sibel Edmonds, another former FBI translator, provided information concerning Mr. Sarshar during her interview with Chris Healey and Lance Cole on February 11, 2004.

I believe not only the families of the September 11^th attacks but every American has the right to know about this case. They need to know that this significant report was completely censored by a quasi commission, that this is one of many cases that were omitted from this staged and rehearsed show to pacify the public’s need to know, and that there never was any real investigation into this horrific event used in reshaping not only our country, but the entire world. Based on my discussion with the family members who issued the following public statement, the commission will be given two business days to provide them (and the public) with answers to questions raised by this bold and appalling omission. If no response is forthcoming, on Wednesday, February 2, I will publish Mr. Sarshar’s verbatim testimony here at Boiling Frogs Post. With that said, here is the public statement by the 9/11 family members issued today:

For Immediate Release: January 31, 2011

As family members who actively fought for the establishment of the 9/11 Commission and served on The Family Steering Committee for the 9/11 Commission (FSC), we find it appalling that once again we must question the thoroughness and credibility of the 9/11 Commission and its Final Report.
 
A pattern of ignoring whistleblowers persisted throughout the Commission’s tenure, even though Governor Kean, the Chairman, promised the FSC that no credible witnesses would be turned away.  The list of whistleblowers that should have been interviewed by the 9/11 Commission included former and current intelligence agents, analysts, translators and others.  It was only after repeated attempts by the FSC that former FBI translator, Mr. Behrooz Sarshar, was finally interviewed by them.  The “Memorandum for the Record” containing this interview was just released on January 1, 2011 (http://cryptome.org/nara/behrooz-sarshar.pdf). 
 
According to previously published sources, in April 2001 Mr. Sarshar, in his position as FBI interpreter/translator, attended a meeting between a long-term, reliable FBI asset and two additional FBI agents from the Washington Field Office.  That FBI asset told the two FBI agents that his sources in Afghanistan had information of an al-Qaeda plot to attack America in a suicide mission involving planes.  It would appear that when Mr. Sarshar filed his reports within the Bureau, they were titled “Kamikaze Pilots”.
 
After leaving the FBI in 2002, Mr. Sarshar provided the same information to various Congressional offices and investigators, such as staffers for the Senate Judiciary Committee and Senator Patrick Leahy.  The Justice Department’s Inspector General also interviewed him.

 
Thus, we were shocked to find that Mr. Sarshar’s relevant information was missing from the “System Was Blinking Red” section of the 2004 Final Report issued by the 9/11 Commission.  Now, six and a half years past the publication of the Final Report, the transcript of Mr. Sarshar’s interview has been released with all of its substance redacted.  In light of the fact that the majority of his information does not meet the standard for classification, which is to protect “sources and methods”, it is unclear as to why that information was blocked.  Covering up incompetence, or worse, malfeasance, is not a valid reason for classification.  So, what happened to Mr. Sarshar’s warnings once he filed his reports?  This is exactly the type of essential information the Commission should have used in order to write its final report and issue recommendations.  How does the Commission justify omitting information from a credible source within one of our own intelligence agencies?
 
By their own admission, a large portion of the 9/11 story was based on the tortured, third party interrogations of Khalid Sheik Mohammad, the alleged “Mastermind” of the 9/11 plot.  Does this make any investigative sense?  What criteria did the Commission use to determine whom they would interview and whom they would ignore?  One must wonder how many others were similarly omitted.  It also seems that the nation’s intelligence agency(ies) had information that included kamikaze pilots and planes being used as weapons.  So how does the Commission reach its absurd conclusion that 9/11 was a “failure of imagination”? 

 
Based on just these facts alone, one could surmise that the Commission was more intent on conforming to a predetermined storyline rather than a truthful compilation of the facts revealed through an objective, thorough and effective investigation, that left no stone unturned.
 
As the public has a right to know this information, we request that the transcript of Mr. Sarshar’s interview be immediately declassified.  Furthermore, we respectfully request that the former Chairman, Governor Thomas Kean, Vice-Chairman, Mr. Lee Hamilton and the Executive Director of the 9/11 Commission, Mr. Philip Zelikow, promptly answer the questions herein.
 

 
Patty Casazza
Monica Gabrielle 
Mindy Kleinberg 

Lorie Van Auken

The post 9/11 Family Members Demand Answers from Commission appeared first on 9/11 Truth News.

9/11 Truth News: Why are you going to chain yourself to the White House?

Jon Gold: To try and bring attention to the fact that we were lied to about 9/11 and that there needs to be justice and accountability for what happened. That there are family members still seeking justice for what happened and that the people of the world deserve it. When you take into account what that day has been used for – and then think about the fact that we don’t exactly know what happened that day – that is an unacceptable situation. People are dying. If that day wasn’t what we were led to believe – and it wasn’t – then the people of the world need to know about it.

911TN: This seems like a somewhat extreme action to take. Do you think more standard forms of protest have been exhausted?

Jon Gold: I have been fighting for truth, accountability, and justice for what happened that day for almost 9 years now. I have tried every avenue I can think of to bring attention to this issue, to no avail. Contacting your Representatives does nothing. Contacting the media does nothing. As I recently wrote about in support of Richard Falk, 9/11 is the “third rail.” You are not allowed to question what happened that day without being ridiculed, slandered, attacked, and so forth. Chaining yourself to a fence in an effort to bring attention to an important cause such as this one is not extreme. Using that day to murder 1000’s upon 1000’s of people that had nothing to with the attacks is extreme. Using that day to take away our civil liberties is extreme. I am 100% sure that I am doing the right thing.

911TN: What do you hope to accomplish with this action? Do you expect any media coverage? Will the action have any effect if the media ignore it?

Jon Gold: As I said, I hope to bring attention to this very important issue. I have already been told by certain alternative media outlets that they will try to cover what it is that I’m doing, and I have asked people to ask all media to cover this action, so at least some will cover it. All good actions have an effect. I believe this to be a good action.

911TN: Have you spoken to any of the 9/11 family members about your action and if so, do they support you?

Jon Gold: I have spoken to some, and I can’t speak for them, but it seems that they support what I’m trying to do. One in particular hoped that maybe someday a group of 9/11 family members would try to do the same thing.

911TN: What advice do you have for people who are concerned about the 9/11 issue but feel helpless to do anything about it?

Jon Gold: First, I think people need to take the time to learn about this issue. Don’t believe everything you hear in movies, or articles you stumble across on the internet. Do your own research, and in time, you will have your own problems with the “official account.” Steer clear of individuals who act as though you must believe this or that, and accuse you of being this or that if you don’t. Steer clear of people that have obvious agendas. Judge people by the fruits of their labor. Be supportive of the family members that are seeking justice. Make sure to familiarize yourself with the families’ efforts of the past. When you approach someone, do so in a way that isn’t “scary” or “aggressive.” Ask simple questions of people. Questions that plant a seed. Remember that you are fighting for 2,973 people that can no longer speak for themselves. Remember their families. Remember the people being killed during the 9/11 wars. Do your best. No one can ask for anything more.

London Truth Action has announced a civil disobedience action at Downing Street on the same day, in solidarity with Jon Gold.

The post Civil Disobedience at the White House for 9/11 Justice appeared first on 9/11 Truth News.

More than nine years after the worst foreign attack in U.S. history, the Senate voted unanimously Wednesday to pass the $4.3 billion James Zadroga Health and Compensation Act.

It gives medical care and financial relief to tens of thousands of responders.

Many Capitol Hill insiders never believed the measure would pass, and some Republicans had threatened to try and kill it – even with the holidays arriving.

But a dramatic night of negotiations by New York lawmakers and the bill’s foes Tuesday night and into Wednesday won an 11th hour deal.

“It’s a good Christmas present for everybody,” said Joe Zadroga, the father of city detective James Zadroga who died from his ruined lungs and became the face of the legislation.

Jennifer McNamara, whose firefighter husband John died of cancer blamed on 9/11, wept when she heard the news, remembering how much he wanted his government to act for people who sacrificed.

“Working for this day was such a part of my husband’s existence, and mine,” an emotional McNamara said.

“This is something that will help take care of people, and that’s something John would be proud of,” she said. “My Christmas is good. I’m done. This is the best present I’m going to get because my husband is never coming back.”

Some first responders who fought for years to get a lethargic Congress to act were awash in relief – even though the $4.3 billion bill approved was $2 billion less than planned.

“They’re going to celebrate Christmas knowing that help is on the way,” said Ground Zero construction veteran John Feal, whose FealGood Foundation led the fight. “I never won Lotto, but that’s got to be a pretty good feeling for people.”

“Am I 100% happy? No,” Feal added. “But we’re leaving Washington with a victory. On a scale of zero to 10, I give it a seven, and zero helps nobody – seven saves lives.”

The deal, first reported on nydailynews.com, finally came together Wednesday morning after marathon negotiations between Sens. Chuck Schumer and Kirtsen Gillibrand, Rep. Carolyn Maloney, and GOP Sens. Mike Enzi and Tom Coburn.

“With this vote, Congress repaid a long-overdue debt and answered the emergency calls of thousands of ailing 9/11 first responders and survivors,” Maloney said. “This bipartisan compromise is a strong program that will save lives. Thanks in great measure to the Daily News’ steadfast advocacy, help is finally here for the thousands of Americans who are suffering because of 9/11.”

“The Christmas Miracle we’ve been looking for has arrived,” Schumer and Gillibrand said in a statement.

“Over the last 24 hours, our Republican colleagues have negotiated in good faith to forge a workable final package that will protect the health of the men and women who selflessly answered our nation’s call in her hour of greatest need,” the added.

Besides cutting the price from $6.2 billion, the new bill covers up to six years, instead of 10.

And rather than create a $3.2 billion health fund, it will be $1.5 billion.

The compensation portion is $2.8 billion, some of which will be paid out relatively soon, with the final payment in six years.

Other concessions negotiators had to make to Coburn and Enzi included capping all lawyers’ fees at 10%, with no exceptions, and even stronger reporting requirements and Government Accountability Office reviews than were already in the bill.

Although people who took money from the recent 9/11 lawsuit were already accounted for in the Zadroga bill, Republicans insisted on stronger language ensuring they could not double-dip.

Their legal settlements will be subtracted from any Zadroga bill payments.

One key provision the New York side refused to budge on was cutting the medical treatment pay scale, which was set at 140% of Medicaid because of high local medical costs.

The GOPer had hoped to set rates for sick responders at less than what federal workers get for workers’ compensation claims.

The House is expected to sign off this afternoon.

The post Senate Approves James Zadroga 9/11 Health Bill appeared first on 9/11 Truth News.

It’s true! The Democratic Platform for the state of Colorado is the first major party in the US to adopt a resolution for a new investigation into the official story of the events surrounding 9/11.

It started in 2004 when I, a complete novice in political processes, decided to participate in my precinct caucus in order to try to make a difference here in Colorado.1 The night before, I learned that the caucus is also a time to bring policy resolutions for consideration. Hurriedly, I wrote a resolution for a new, independent investigation into 9/11, figuring that here is an opportunity, at least, to educate a few more people. To my surprise, my precinct caucus neighbors voted for it!

The next step was to get it passed at the county level: the Denver County Assembly and Convention. To do this, I needed to get 10% of the attendees to sign a petition – another chance to educate more people! I needed 200 signatures, which I managed to get with the spontaneous help of a couple of other 9/11 truth activists. Now I could present this resolution to the Assembly, at the end of a long hard day, which wound up being attended by about 100 of the most serious participants.

Managing to transcend my considerable stage fright, and fearing I might be tarred and feathered, I read the full resolution aloud. The call for a vote came. To my shock, the resolution passed by 98%!

Discovering that the next step was the Colorado Platform Committee, I attended that meeting. Other dedicated activists were there as well, trying to figure out this mysterious process. (We could attend and comment, but not vote.) We were stunned to see that the Committee did not even have copies of the passed county platforms by which to determine what should be included at the state level. They were just going to decide unilaterally what they wanted on the state platform!

I firmly but politely confronted the chair of the committee about this. He replied testily, “We’re doing the best we can!” (I.e. sit down and shut up!) I replied back as testily, “No, you are not! Democracy has just flown out the window!”

Those more politically savvy than I informed me that the Democratic Party is controlled from the top down. What people want at the grassroots is not welcome, and when controversial resolutions are passed, they can be mysteriously removed at the state level. The State Platform Committee balks at including any resolutions not supported by the party’s presidential candidate – just the opposite of how a representative democracy is supposed to work.

Not to be deterred, in the months following, a few of the citizens who had been educated by our Colorado 9/11 Visibility speaking events joined the Colorado Democratic Platform Committee. In 2008, these people informed other committee members about the need for a new 9/11 investigation. In this same year, other Colorado citizens presented resolutions in their caucuses and county assemblies across the state. This time, they actually reached the Colorado Democratic Platform Committee, and, lo and behold, the following resolution was passed:

“We hereby declare that the investigations into the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the illegal invasion of Iraq, Abramoff and other lobbyists, the hurricane Katrina response, and other major issues were inadequate and warrant review.”

Not at all unhappy with this, several of us proceeded to try for a stronger statement in 2010, beginning with the precinct level. At my precinct caucus, there was a backlash waiting, and I was unsuccessful. Other activists, however, were successful in getting their resolutions passed at precinct and county levels. To my utter surprise, the Colorado Platform Committee kept the previous resolution and added another to the 2010 Colorado Democratic Platform:

“Whereas many disturbing facts were consciously ignored by the 9/11 Commission; Be it resolved, therefore, that the CDP calls for the establishment of a truly independent Grand Jury and public investigation into these and other anomalies in order to find the truth of the September 11, 2001 attacks, so that we have a greater probability of preventing attacks of this nature in the future.”

Now understanding the controlling and top-down nature of the Democratic Party, I fully expect a backlash, and realize that the grassroots desire for a new investigation into 9/11 will likely never be considered by the Democratic National Committee (unlike the Green Party [2]). However, activists in any state with the caucus system [3] can use this political process to at least educate our fellow citizens. It is a rare opportunity in which the audience is right there waiting for us to speak our truth!

The 2008 version of the resolution may be viewed here.

The Resolution presented at the caucus in 2010 may be viewed here.

[1] There are two methods by which states choose their delegates and pass resolutions for the national conventions: the caucus and the primary. Caucuses are simply neighborhood meetings, open to all registered voters of the party, in which delegates and resolutions are chosen for the county conventions and assemblies. The states that have primaries do not have this grassroots advantage. They are open to all registered voters, and voting is done through a secret ballot as in general elections.

[2] In 2004, the National Green Party called for an independent commission, with full participation of surviving family members, to investigate the government’s handling of 9/11 and information leading up to the attacks. To date, this is the only national political party to support a new, independent investigation.

[3]States with the caucus system are Alaska, Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, Minnesota, North Dakota, Iowa, Nevada, Nebraska, Washington, Maine, Wyoming, Texas, and Utah.

The post How We Got 9/11 on the Colorado Democratic Platform appeared first on 9/11 Truth News.

The post Manny Badillo Talks to Janet Napolitano appeared first on 9/11 Truth News.

World Trade Center 7 was the third skyscraper to be completely destroyed on September 11, 2001 – despite not having been hit by an airplane.

The ad began airing on election day and will run through November 10 on 13 channels, including CNN, MSNBC and VH1. NYCCAN, the group who created the ad, estimate that it will be seen by nearly 900,000 viewers. The group plans to commission an opinion poll after the run of the ad and send the results to every City Council member.

“We’ve been educating the City Council about Building 7 and the need for a new investigation for the past six months,” said Bob McIlvaine, father of Bobby McIlvaine and one of the 9/11 family members who appear in the ad. “We are asking them now to do something about it.”

Manny Badillo, another family member who appears in the spot, said “For the next two weeks, we the people will see, many for the first time, the demise of the Salomon Brothers building on the day of my uncle’s murder. What you witness allows critical thought about details of the crime that we have not been told by our elected officials or corporate media. Knowing all the facts of the case leads to decided actions for the better. The truth saves countless lives in a million ways, and properly memorializes our loved ones.”

The post Ad Focusing On WTC 7 Begins Airing in New York City appeared first on 9/11 Truth News.

The $7.4 billion bill passed easily 268 to 160. Seventeen Republicans supported the measure, while three Democrats voted against the bill.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi spoke out on the House floor in favor of the bill, saying it will help those who jeopardize their health to rescue others, secure necessary medical treatment especially for the unique exposures suffered at Ground Zero, and ensures survivors and victims’ families can attain compensation for their losses.

“They and those who rushed to the scene in real time when it happened risked their lives and their health to do so. They didn’t ask any questions. Is anybody going to take care of me? They were there to help,” Pelosi said. “Today we remember all the heroes of 9/11, we praised the strength of thousands of firefighters, rescue workers, first responders and medical personnel who turned tragedy into inspiration, and gave themselves, of themselves, to help a city and our nation rebuild.”

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg praised the House for passing the bill, but urged the Senate to pass the bill during the lame duck session of Congress after the congressional midterm elections.

“Today’s vote acknowledges that the September 11th, 2001 terrorist attacks were an attack on America, and addressing its health impacts is a national duty. This bill recognizes that the country should be there for the tens of thousands of responders who were there for us on 9/11,” Bloomberg said. “It is imperative that we secure a commitment to bring this bill up in the Senate before the current Congress goes out of session and I will be working very hard with our Senators Kirsten Gillibrand and Chuck Schumer to ensure that happens.  The President has said he will sign this bill when it reaches his desk. It’s not enough to pass a bill in the House – we need to make this legislation law.”

Pelosi said the legislation, which was introduced by New York Democrat Rep. Carolyn Maloney, is fully paid for and does not increase the deficit.

“We pledge to do everything in our power to ensure that their health and wellbeing would be taken care of. We don’t want them to be unsung heroes. We want them to be recognized heroes,” Pelosi said. “Today we are here to honor that pledge. It’s long overdue.”

An attempt last July to get the bill through the House failed because it was brought to the floor under an expedited procedure requiring a two-thirds majority for passage, which it failed to get.

The House bill is named for James Zadroga, who was a New York City Police Department officer who died of a respiratory disease linked to his participation in rescue and recovery operations in the rubble of the World Trade Center. 9/11 rescue workers and first responders including members of the New York Police Department and New York Fire Department firefighters came to the Capitol today to witness the vote.

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-NY, said she’s working with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to bring the bill to a vote in the Senate during the lame duck session.

“This should not be a partisan issue. We have an undeniable, moral obligation to pass this legislation and provide care to the thousands of heroes and survivors who are suffering, dying, and waiting for us to deliver the care they need,” Gillibrand said. “It’s time to seize every opportunity, pass this legislation, and keep our promise to the heroes of this country who came to our rescue on 9/11.”

The post House Passes 9/11 Health and Compensation Act appeared first on 9/11 Truth News.

[…]

Suddenly, someone yelled out, “what about 9/11? There was never a credible investigation! How can you believe the lie?” Jon responded with, “I’m a (inaudible) …because I think Al-Qaeda did it?” The same person or another, (I’m not sure, I was so far in the back) said something in response, and someone asked Jon, “what about building 7!” (In reference, to WTC building 7, which was a nearby building, which fell at free fall speed despite not being struck with any planes or significant debris.). Jon responded, “well, I’m not an engineer…” to which I thought, “Jon, I MUST introduce you to an engineer, who can tell you a lot about controlled demolitions and how the WTC towers were brought down.” I hope Jon Stewart will meet Richard Gage, as I have.

[…]

After Jon said, “I’m not an engineer…” he paused as police rushed towards the activist who kept trying to talk. Jon then said, “if you stop interrupting you can stay. Did you at least by a book?” The audience nervously tittered. As the activist quieted down, Jon then said in a hilarious tone, “any more 9/11 questions?” to which I said loudly and supportively, “yeah!” Jon looked up, but I was too far in the back for him to see me. What Jon Stewart said then was extremely telling. “You know what it is folks? I live down there and its too traumatic… even now.” I knew what he meant. During the ninth anniversary of the 9.11.01 attacks a few weeks earlier, a survivor told me, “some of us still haven’t been down to ground zero. Its still too much for us…” One mother, who had lost her son, braved the effects of her trauma and went down to ground zero for the first time on 9.11.09.

As someone who lived only a few blocks away and in “the zone” that had been initially sealed off by the National Guard in the immediate aftermath of the attacks, I would never forget the hundreds of fliers posted around our hometown with faces of husbands, children, wives, some of poor immigrants… as families searched in vain for their loved ones. Left with only each other to console. At the time, I was an intern at Democracy Now. Though “shocked and awed” at first by the attacks, many eventually refused to believe the Bush/Cheney explanation and narrative and launched an independent investigation into a crime of such great magnitude that none of us expected or expected to be witnesses to. What we found is indisputable and irrefutable evidence that leads us to Dick Cheney’s door. Michael Ruppert who wrote “The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil” has said of the attacks that, “this is a crime that is prosecutable in court…”

Trauma however, is not about logic and argument and analysis. It is a severe psychological and emotional injury. Trauma is a word of Greek origin, which means, “wound” as in “our wounds are still raw and still hurt.” Jon actually said, “I still cannot handle it.”

[…]

Since the attacks of 9.11.01, those seeking the truth have included many survivors, Fire department personnel, military personnel, scientific professionals, credible long time investigative journalists, and innumerable “ordinary” citizens. Some are “patriots” and some are “anarchists”. Sometimes we don’t have much in common, and other times, we share a burning desire to know the truth and spit out the lie that makes us sick. We are forced to “handle” the truth. We are sometimes attacked and ridiculed, but we silence is not an option nor do we apologize for seeking and speaking the truth because of the 3000 plus people who died in the attacks, cannot ask questions. That is for the living to do. Us! We will not be silenced like they were.

RELATED: The Court Jester and 9/11 Truth

Thanks to simuvac for the tip.

The post Jon Stewart: "I can't handle it" appeared first on 9/11 Truth News.