Update & Photos From 9/11 Truth Conference in Chicago

[veracity]

http://tvnewslies.org/blog/?p=391

Update 2 & Photos From 9/11 Truth Conference in Chicago
Jesse's blog recounts highlights from day two of the conference..... great photos are included!

[FogerRox]

1. Ralph from WBAI was there........... cool

Hes in the background, to the left of the podium...

[RedSock]

2. good stuff!!!

small note: i believe it's "jim maars" -- and not like the planet.

as someone whose first name is usually misspelled, i tend to see these things.

[veracity]

5. thanks

I've written Jesse to correct the spelling. It's not his forte...:-)

[mirandapriestly]

3. Thank you so much for posting that here

I wish I could have gone. Nice blog, too.

[veracity]

4. sad thing is...

....that this is not considered important news....even in the progressive alternative media. This was originally posted in the 'general discussion' - because so few people even know the Conference is going on. This remains the ONLY totaly untouchable and taboo topic everywhere.

Even here, 9/11 is relegated to a 'topic' - rather than a major hoax on the nation and the world that has never been investigated....and the evidence that has been unearthed has never been shown to the public. That ridiculous 'photo' of the Pentagon hit was released and accepted as 'proof' - even though NOTHING was new about the film and it showed NO PLANE AT ALL.... on and on.

But thanks for the thanks...:-)

[mirandapriestly]

8. yes, I hardly hear anything about the conference

and believe me I am painfully aware of the sitch here at DU.

[greyl]

6. The blog design is from a template, not an original.

No comment on the rest of the story, because I don't see any content to comment on.

[Grateful for Hope]

7. Who are you responding to, Greyl?

It is a little confusing.

[veracity]

9. huh?

The blog is on Jesse's blog page. What's the beef? Also... Jesse just completed his own presentation at the convention. He was scheduled to present at 9 this morning....and I'm sure he'll post the reactions of his audience. So, watch his blog at http://tvnewslies.org/blog

[greyl]

10. to the person that said "nice blog" nt

[veracity]

11. new photos taken Sunday

Check them out here:

http://tvnewslies.org/blog/?p=392

[petgoat]

12. NY Times coverage here:

http://www.nytimes.com/glogin?URI=http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/05/us/05conspiracy.html&OQ=_rQ3D1&OP=4e07b67cQ2FAQ3C-Q3DABQ3EMLhQ3EQ3EQ7CRAReeQ27AeQ27Ae_AiLAe_MQ3EVLQ3B5hQ24Max3Q7CQ20Q3A

500 Conspiracy Buffs Meet to Seek the Truth of 9/11
By ALAN FEUER
Published: June 5, 2006

[LARED]

13. You guys are in big trouble

From the Times Article


The former owner of a recycling plant outside St. Louis, Mr. Berger joined the movement when he grew skeptical of why the 9/11 Commission had failed, to his sense of sufficiency, to answer how the building at 7 World Trade Center collapsed like a ton of bricks.

I'll never figure out why people think the 9/11 commission report would have addressed the WTC 7 collapse. It doesn't even address WTC 1& 2 collapse. It states right up front its purpose was not about investigating the collaspe but rather investigating the terrorism.


The movement's answer to that report was written by Steven E. Jones, a professor of physics at Brigham Young University and the movement's expert in the matter of collapse.

:rofl:

[petgoat]

14. It states right up front that its aim "has been to provide the fullest

possible account of the events surrounding 9/11 and to identify
lessons learned."

Its failure to even mention building 7 is a symbol of its failure to
consider anything that didn't match the cover story that the government
put out two says after 9/11 and that hasn't changed since. Since it
was very difficult to conntect WTC7 with Osama, it didn't exist.

In the same way, the excess put options, since they didn't connect to
Osama, were of no significance.

As were the hijackers' sources of funds.

The collapse of Building 7 was part of the terrorism that day, and leaving
it out of the report was a dereliction of the duty to provide the
fullest possible account and to consider all the possibilities.

[LARED]

16. Lets get it right

From the 9/11 commission report

Our mandate was sweeping. The law directed us to investigate "facts and circumstances relating to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001," including those relating to intelligence agencies, law enforcement agencies, diplomacy, immigration issues and border control, the flow of assets to terrorist organizations, commercial aviation, the role of congressional oversight and resource allocation, and other areas determined relevant by the Commission.

The commission report makes zero reference to how any building collapsed. Your straw-man about Osama is just that, a distraction. The simple truth is that the 9/11 commission was not looking at the collapse of any building and because WTC 7 was not attacked it was not mentioned.

[petgoat]

17. "WTC 7 was not attacked"

How do you know it wasn't attacked?

It certainly looks like it was attacked. Your assumptions, and
the 9/11 Commission's assumptions, are not justified. You give
us assumptions instead of answers.

For instance, did the Commission ever consider the possibility that
agents of al Qaeda who were tenants in Building 7 or had infiltrated
its security contractor were able to install explosives in the
building? Would this issue not have been of interest in providing
"the fullest possible account of the events surrounding 9/11"?

Your implication that the mandate of the Commission was limited is
not supported by a reading of Public Law 107-306.

http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/terrorism/pl107-306.html

Sec. 604 (a) (1) (B) (xvii) gives the Commission a blank check to investigate
"other areas of the public and private sectors determined relevant by the
Commission for its inquiry."

Sec. 603 defines the purposes of the Commission quite broadly.

(1) examine and report upon the facts and causes relating to
the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001....
(4) make a full and complete accounting of the circumstances
surrounding the attacks, and the extent of the United States'
preparedness for, and immediate response to, the attacks....


Building 7 seems to be well within the scope of the Committee's mandate.
In particular some commentary on why the NYFD chose not to fight the fire
seems appropriate, and if it's true that there was no water available
to fight the fire, that seems worthy of examination and recommendations.

[LARED]

19. How do I know it was not attacked?

A rational, objective evaluation of the facts.

Listen, if you want to believe the commission should have considered

the possibility that agents of al Qaeda who were tenants in Building 7 or had infiltrated its security contractor were able to install explosives in the building? Would this issue not have been of interest in providing "the fullest possible account of the events surrounding 9/11"?

Why stop there. Why not insist they consider the possibility of covert technology stolen from alien worlds. Then we are getting close to the fullest possible account of the events surrounding 9/11"?

[petgoat]

21. "Why stop there?"

Why not insist they consider the possibility of covert technology stolen
from alien worlds.

Because there is no evidence suggesting it and no mysteries requiring such
an elaborate hypothesis.

What facts lead you to believe WTC7 was not attacked? The fact that NIST's
final report on WTC7 is six months overdue does not trouble you?

[petgoat]

22. "A rational, objective evaluation of the facts."

Ah, so "The LARED Report" says there's nothing to see there.
But the report is a secret, so we just have to take your word
for it.

Thanks for sharing.

[Americus]

24. Use skies (OCT'ers) must be getting really desperate. Layoffs coming?

Actually, the fact that use skies (OCT'ers) are acting like you've "lost it" is a good thing...for people that have just recently realized the OCT is total baloney. I guess the OCT Spin Doctors and shills are having a harder and harder time trying to prevent the public from learning the truth.

[petgoat]

15. Analysis of NYT Coverage

http://newsbusters.org/node/5681

“500 Conspiracy Buffs Meet To Seek the Truth of 9/11” made Page 1, and that very headline gives the conspiracy-mongers the undeserved accolade of truth-seekers when they’re actually just crawling for scraps of evidence “proving” that Bush, not radical Islamic terrorism, was responsible for 9/11.

Feuer explains: “Such was the coming-out for the movement known as "9/11 Truth," a society of skeptics and scientists who believe the government was complicit in the terrorist attacks. In colleges and chat rooms on the Internet, this band of disbelievers has been trying for years to prove that 9/11 was an inside job.”

[mirandapriestly]

23. A conservative site he calls them "wacky"

funny how all the freepers who make comments sound exactly like the OCT posters on this forum.

[RayUbinger]

18. "Truth conference in Chicago" wasn't in Chicago

It was in Rosemont, truth be told.

[DemInDistress]

20. good stuff and thanks for posting that ... I noticed a picture of

les jameson from 911truth.org. I recently had a talk with les about 911. Terrific guy as well as all the 911 researchers looking for the "smoking gun" that will bring the M-U-R-D-E-R-E-R-S (BUSH CRIME FAMILY) to justice.
My feeling is 911 will be solved soon. We just need 1-2 people to come forward with absolute proof the government was connected with the crime. So much doubt about the Official 911 Report has been cast and this without documents/videos and pictures from the FBI,FEMA,NIST that all it would take is Daniel Ellsberg like character to leak 911 material and the murderers will be brought to justice.

Thanks for sharing the night in Chicago..