Judy Wood

What if you knew about a complicated crime?
One that was beyond the reach of ordinary minds?
Would you stand up defending all that’s right and good?
Well Judy, Judy, Judy, Judy would

What if the criminals could threaten your career?
Would you disregard the easy road, and climb up through the fear?
Would you call out from the mountain even if you could?
Well Judy, Judy, Judy, Judy would

How is a tower like a tree?
What does this mean to you and me?
Can we solve this mystery?
Can we find the energy?

Can we get our mind around disintegrating walls…
…with billiard balls?

What if your television tortured every truth?
What if your story got all twisted and abused?
Would you simplify the picture when the world misunderstood?
Well Judy, Judy, Judy, Judy would

(How is a tower like a tree?)
Judy, Judy, Judy, Judy would
(Where was the hidden energy?)
La la la la la la la la la la la la
(Can we solve this mystery?)
Judy Wood

acebaker.com/9-11/JudyWood/JudyWould.html

pumpitoutRadio: 9/11: Justice & Accountability Round Table – part ll; Disinfo, Division, and Opinions

Jeffrey Hill (Pump It Out Radio) in discussion with guests Jon Gold, John Albanese and Jim Dorman.

9/11: Justice & Accountability Round Table – part II; Disinfo, Division, and Opinions

(click image for mp3)

Part l:

9/11 – Justice & Accountability: Round Table Discussion

A MUST HEAR: 9/11 – Justice & Accountability: Round Table Discussion

Jeffrey Hill (Pump It Out Radio) in discussion with special guests Jon Gold, John Albanese and Nicholas Filippelli.

9/11 – Justice & Accountability: Round Table Discussion

(click image for mp3)

Erik Larson: Critique of David Ray Griffin’s 9/11 Fake Calls Theory

Erik Larson: Critique of David Ray Griffin’s 9/11 Fake Calls Theory

… Griffin makes a case that is seemingly compelling. However, as I show in this essay, there is no actual evidence the phone calls were faked, while there is a substantial body of evidence demonstrating the calls were not only possible, but did happen.

9/11: Dårlig info og desinformasjon i Norge

Hvorfor holde oss til det vi vet, når vi kan gjette oss til det vi ikke vet?

9/11-sannhet i Norge er i ferd med å drukne i spekulasjon, feilinfo og regelrett desinfo. Ikke bare fra MSMs og Skepsis.nos side, men også fra såkalte sannhetssøkere.

Tåkeprat og svadateorier er uhyre skadelig for sannhetens fremmarsj. Hvilket ofte er intensjonen.

The result is the same; the truth is obstructed with “misleading” information. How can we tell if someone is intentionally trying to mislead us? Is intent relevant? Not if the truth about 9/11 can be obfuscated by any misleading arguments regardless of intent. We do not need to distinguish intent to show that misinformation and disinformation equally harm our ability to discern the truth. Therefore, we should equally understand and combat both misinformation and disinformation.

“Does their speculation get us any closer toward building a nationwide political movement and arresting the 9-11 plotters? Or is it a divisive strawman that will isolate us from the mainstream media and average Americans? … Suddenly it appears the controlled demolition, WTC 7, NORAD stand down, hijacking drills, war games, ‘Angel is Next’ call to Bush, living hijackers, double-agent hijackers, CIA insider put options, and ‘al-Qaeda’ links to Anglo-American intelligence are not enough. Now every researcher has their own pet theory about no planes, no hijackers, no phone calls, no Pentagon Boeing, and no flight 93 crash (they claim it landed it Cleveland and the wreckage in Shanksville was, you guessed it, planted).”

Dette er en liten liste over norske 9/11-nettsteder med dårlig info.

• 9/11 Truth Norway – ingen-fly-ved-Pentagon (“hullet var for lite”-teori) og
  sivilingeniør med «bomber i kjelleren» isteden for squibs, etc …

• Xiandos info – side med desinfo/feilinfo, ugrunnede personangrep, etc …

• Rolf Kenneth – conspiratainment; desinfo/feilinfo i monn

• Berit Ås / PK Gruppen – samme som Rolf Kenneth …

Mer om de overnevntes, Skepsis-folkets og MSMs teorier / propaganda etterhvert …

Cosmos intervjuer Jim Hoffman om desinformasjon

Hoffman: I think it’s useful to put it in a little broader context… if you look at the history of disruption in [other movements] in the past, the disinformation component isn’t as large or as important as it is in the case of 9/11… articles about COINTELPRO list… infiltration, psychological warfare, harassment through the legal system, extra-legal force and violence—those are the types of tactics that were more prominent in those operations. With 9/11… the facts of the attack are so important just disinformation… takes on a much bigger component… the main [purpose of this disinformation] is to ridicule sceptics of the official story. It becomes less viable to do really nasty things like killing people… that would actually give us more credibility. That puts all the more emphasis on the necessity to muck things up by promoting false theories, bad information, muddying the waters—all kinds of disruption to create a hostile environment in which rational critique is not possible… shrouding the verifiable evidence, clear case for an inside job—a key component of the cover-up of 9/11. . . .

• To viktige Pentagon-spørsmål

Det er på tide å skru på bullshitdetektoren, folkens. Å hoppe fra den ene dårlige teorien til den andre er ikke fremskritt.

Disinformation Distracts and Discredits – a field guide to how disinformation is used by the government

«One of the primary means of immobilizing the American people politically today is to hold them in a state of confusion in which anything can be believed and nothing can be known… nothing of significance, that is.»

— E. Martin Schotz, «History Will Not Absolve Us: Orwellian Control, Public Denial, and the Murder of President Kennedy»

OilEmpire.us: Disinformation Distracts and Discredits – a field guide to how disinformation is used by the government

One means that Empires use to deflect effective criticism of their crimes is to control both sides of a debate. As the United States population has become more savvy about official conspiracies against democracy, especially with the rise of the internet, efforts to misdirect government and corporate critics have also accelerated. This page links to discussions that describe this tactic.

No Planes on 9/11: hoax history

Mark Rabinowitz, OilEmpire.us: The Complete «No Planes on 9/11» Timeline

The «no Boeing hit the Pentagon» claim is the most important and widespread 9/11 hoax. It was probably set up before the event since government agents seized surveillance camera videos within minutes of the crash (which is tentative evidence for foreknowledge, but not for “no plane”). It is extremely likely that the conspirators who allowed (and assisted) 9/11 would have created misdirecting hoaxes before the «attack,» since they are aware that segments of the population would have suspicions about the events and therefore they would «need» to disrupt skeptical inquiry with red herrings, hoaxes, false dichotomies, etc.

The «no plane» claim is based on misrepresentation of photos taken shortly after the crash, ignoring of physical evidence and documented reports from hundreds of eyewitnesses who saw the plane.

There is NO credible, verifiable evidence in support of ANY of the many and varied «theories» pretending that Flight 77 did not crash into the Pentagon, and therefore, 9/11 was an inside job. . . .

Pentagon Propaganda: So Much Worse Than We Thought

John Stauber and Sheldon Rampton, PR Watch / Alternet: Pentagon Propaganda: So Much Worse Than We Thought

The Bush Administration has spent millions on deceptive PR to sell the war, as recently documented in the New York Times. Where’s the fallout?

In Unity towards Stupidity: Berit Ås sprer 9/11-desinformasjon, sannhetssøkerene ikke så opptatt av sannhet allikevel

Red. anm.: Lett omskrevet 16/3-11. I 2011 er effekten av Ås’ – og andres – «aktivisme» åpenbar. Total ruin. Og hvor er de såkalte prominente nå, etter å ha disseminert en mengde sprøyt inn i «bevegelsen»? Mission Accomplished?

*** *** ***

“Den mest forræderske måte å skade en sak på, er å med vilje forsvare den med falske argumenter.”

– Friedrich Nietzsche

***

BERIT ÅS sprer (beviselig) desinformasjon, og skeptikerenes tastatur går naturlig nok varme:

Berit Vås rir igjen

SV-nestor: USA stod bak 9-11

USA-hat som drivkraft

«Til sammenligning er det tilsynelatende ingen ledende SVere som er uenige i teorien om at Bush-administrasjonen stod bak terrorangrepene 11. september.»

Her snakker vi ikke bare om «teorien om at Bush-administrasjonen stod bak», men også at terroren ble gjennomført ved hjelp av blant annet videomanipulasjon og energistråler fra verdensrommet.

Sterk kost i diskusjonsforeningen

Tviler på 9/11

BERIT ÅS sprer desinformasjon, latterliggjør og ødelegger, men fraskriver seg ethvert ansvar.

– Jeg presiserer at dette ikke er mine egne påstander, det er gjengivelser av de spørsmål som har blitt reist av andre. Jeg har ikke tatt noe standpunkt i denne saken, jeg ønsker kun å stille spørsmålene, sier Ås til Nettavisen.

Kevin Barrett’s Support for 9/11 Disinformation

Arabesque: 9/11 Truth: Kevin Barrett

Kevin Barrett is a prominent 9/11 activist. While he has significantly contributed awareness for the 9/11 truth movement, he has also damaged its credibility with damaging associations, discrediting theories, and controversial statements.

Barrett has supported 9/11 disinformation conferences such as The Science and the Politics of 9/11: What’s Controversial, What’s Not? [1] On 911blogger Barrett promoted this conference with the plea to “Join the cutting edge of the movement to save our planet.”[2] As Jim Hoffman observes, “Jim Fetzer’s conference in Madison in August of 2007… included Morgan Reynolds, Judy Wood, Dave Von Kleist, Barbara Honegger, and others, and featured conclusively debunked theories, such as hologram planes and Tower-vaporizing space beam weapons.”

(…)