Jeffrey Tucker: The New York Times Wants You Consumed by Fear, Isolation, and Misery.
William Anderson: A Wave of Abusive Federal Prosecutions Might Be Coming.
Becky Akers: Judas Giuliani
Ron Paul: Libertarian Terrorists?
Nick Kollerstrom: There Is No Pandemic: A British View of the Imposture.
Children’s Health Defense Team: 329 Deaths + 9,516 Other Injuries Reported Following COVID Vaccine, Latest CDC Data Show.
Bill Sardi: The Covid-19 Coronavirus Gullibility Test
Selwyn Duke: Beware the Left’s Empire of the Mask, Rand Paul Warns.
Stefanie Haeffele and Anne Hobson: Alternatives to a Burgeoning Bureaucracy: Lessons from Ludwig von Mises’s Bureaucracy.
David Chapek: How Free Speech Drives Economic Progress.
Activist Post: The Big Tech Exodus Has Begun — Join Us! (Updated).
Big League Politics: Secession Fever Sweeps Across America as Biden Regime Loses Legitimacy.
This week would have been the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s 92nd birthday. He was assassinated in 1968.
King was very much opposed to violence and believed strongly in the importance and effectiveness of non-violent, peaceful protest. (Today’s Antifa and BLM, who took part in extremely violent riots, property destruction, looting and arson, burning hundreds if not thousands of businesses to the ground in several different cities, could learn a thing or two from Dr. King’s philosophy and example of non-violence.)
The below video (that’s really all audio) is his great speech from 1967 on why he was opposed to the Vietnam War.
Too bad the people on the left are not as opposed to war as they used to be. I guess Democrat Presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama softened all that, with the aid of such political apparatchiks as Joe Biden (Who knows how many wars he’s going to start as President…), Al Gore, Joe Lieberman, Madeleine Albright, and many others now, as they rationalized, voted for or perpetrated more wars and more violence against foreigners who were of no threat to Americans.
The FBI harassed and spied on King, and kept a dossier on him, for political reasons and not because they legitimately suspected him of criminality. I wonder what King would have said today regarding the Democrats’ and Obama regime’s spying on the Trump campaign and administration and attempting to frame Trump with a dirty dossier.
This Martin Luther King, Jr. speech on why he opposed the Vietnam War was given in April, 1967 at Riverside Church in New York. Antiwar.com has the full transcript.
This is the 30th year of the U.S. government’s criminal war of aggression against Iraq, led by President George H.W. Bush in January, 1991. I wrote about that at the time of the 22nd year of that. It had never ended, with all the sanctions and no-fly zones, etc., and it continued with the Bush II renewed escalation in 2003.
I wrote this post a year ago on the 18th anniversary of the September 11th attacks in 2001. So, now it is the 19th anniversary today and I am reposting this. It gives information that, if you are still very young, your parents and teachers probably didn’t give you about 9/11, and if you are older it gives you information that the brain-dead, zombie government-stenographer mainstream news media also didn’t give us, and they still don’t.
Post from a year ago:
Today is the 18th anniversary of the September 11th, 2001 terrorist attacks on the New York World Trade Center, the Pentacon, and in Pennsylvania. Where was I on that day? Well, I was here in this same apartment sitting at my table doing some writing and my father (now deceased) called at around 10 am saying that their trip that they were going to go on that day was canceled and he told me why. Hmm.
The government’s propaganda began immediately on that day and after. 99% of the news media were the White House press spokesmen. There was no discussion of the attackers stated motives, or the history of U.S. government and military’s invasions, bombings and occupations of the Middle East in the 10 years prior to that time. Anyone who did mention those things was labeled “Anti-America,” or “blaming America” for the attacks. Sean Hannity has been especially bad in that regard ever since that time. He is the worst of the worst as far as apparatchiks for the national security state are concerned. I just thought I’d mention that.
However, given that Hannity and all the other radio ditto-heads are accepting of the idea that actual U.S. government FBI, CIA etc. abused their powers including FISA spying in the Russiagate fiasco, maybe now some of these obedient worshipers of the national security state can at least consider the possibility that the official 9/11 narrative isn’t what the government has been telling us for 18 years. (But, I am not holding my breath.)
So, I’m sure that a lot of people reading this post will just skim it and not really take it seriously or click on any of the links for further information. This is because they are satisfied with what the government and its spokespeople of the mainstream media have been telling us since September 11, 2001. All these things they haven’t heard about must be merely whack-job “conspiracy theory” and all that. But there are still some people who are open to the truth.
In the years prior to the attacks, Congressman Ron Paul had several times warned that the U.S. government’s interventionist policies and war that it started against Iraq and elsewhere and Iraqi sanctions would cause blowback and retaliation within our shores. (And the response? Crickets.)
Addendum: For information on the U.S. government’s pre-9/11 sanctions on Iraq throughout the 1990s and their effects, see Jacob Hornberger, Sanctions: the cruel and brutal war against the Iraqi people, and James Bovard, Iraqi sanctions and American intentions: blameless carnage?
It’s amazing just how brainwashed so many people can be by daily propaganda, watching the TV news, listening to chickenhawk warmonger conservative talk radio, and so forth. “Al Qaeda.” “Osama bin Laden,” and “Islamic” were words that people heard over and over and over, but they rarely heard about Saudi Arabia and blowback.
I don’t know what else to write so I will post links to some new and old articles on the subject, and maybe some videos.
James Bovard on the 9/11 Commission, a bootlicking national disgrace.
Paul Sperry from the New York Post writes this week how Robert Mueller helped Saudi Arabia cover up its role in 9/11.
Related to that, a year ago “28 Pages,” which documents Saudi Arabia’s role in 9/11, had an exclusive article on FBI telling a counterterrorism agent not to help 9/11 victims build their case against Saudi Arabia because that might harm U.S.-Saudi relations. (Doh!)
Paul Craig Roberts writes today:
Over the years I have reported the findings of scientists, engineers, and architects that indicate that the official story is false.I had an open mind for two reasons.One is that having been an engineering student, I could tell the difference from a building falling down from asymmetrical structural damage and a building blowing up.The other is that having been involved in policy issues in Washington for a quarter century I knew that such a humiliating defeat suffered by the world’s only superpower at the hands of a few Muslim terrorists would have brought instant demands from the White House, Congress, and media for investigation into how every aspect of the American national security state failed simultaneously on one morning.Instead the White House resisted the 9/11 families demands for an investigation for one year and never delivered a forensic investigation.Instead, the country was given a 9/11 Commission Report that was merely the government’s official story of what happened.No heads rolled.No one was fired or even reprimanded.To hold no one accountable for such a massive failure and humiliating defeat is not a believable response if the official 9/11 story is true.
Washington’s Blog: Everything we’re doing now was planned before 9/11. And Washington asks, Will the mainstream media ever report on the numerous admitted false flag terror attacks? Many examples given. And another post about U.S. government’s foreknowledge and aiding and abetting the terrorists.
The Guardian: Osama bin Laden had ties to CIA
David Ray Griffin asks, Where is the evidence that Osama bin Laden had responsibility in 9/11? (Remember, Hannity et al. have been complaining ad nauseam, and rightly, that people accusing Trump of “Russia collusions” do not have any evidence, and so on. Evidence is important.) The FBI’s 10 most wanted list included Osama bin Laden because of the African embassy and USS Cole bombings, but NOT because of 9/11 because they had no evidence linking the two. Further info from the Muckraker Report. Read Griffin’s book, Osama bin Laden: Dead or Alive?
In 2009 the Daily Mail asked, Has Osama bin Laden been dead for 7 years?
An early 2002 Dan Rather CBS News report on bin Laden’s serious illness:
A December, 2001 Fox News story, still online: Bin Laden already dead.
Of course, how could Osama bin Laden have been killed and thrown out to sea by SEAL Team 6 in 2011 if bin Laden had already died in 2001 or 2002? Paul Craig Roberts again with some questions.
Another question to ask is what caused the helicopter crash in Afghanistan that killed several SEAL Team 6 members who were involved in the Osama bin Laden “killing” just a couple months before that.
And Paul Joseph Watson on the Bin Laden fable shortly after he was “killed” in 2011. While Steve Watson explains the U.S. government’s history of fake bin Laden tapes.
Former CIA asset Susan Lindauer, a whistleblower who was railroaded and labeled a psychiatric case by USGov, explains more truth about 9/11, and the missing security tapes for the World Trade Center.
Here is an interview in which Lindauer tells about her experiences:
James Corbett with an hour-long discussion on who was really behind the 9/11 attacks:
And here is a video documentary from Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth explaining the evidence that explosions brought down the World Trade Center, and not the fire caused by planes crashing into the buildings:
I admit it. I’m a “truther.” That’s because the truth is important. And as the late Justin Raimondo wrote, the opposite of a “truther” is a “liar.”