The Official 9/11 Story – The Biggest Lie

I’d direct anyone who is interested in knowing what did and didn’t happen on 9-11 to 9-11 Research. I found this site last year and it remains the most thorough, dispassionate analysis of 9-11 on the ‘Net, covering what is known and what isn’t in great detail. You can only draw one conclusion after reading through the material on this site, but that can take some time.

It might be easier to read Muslims Suspend Laws of Physics, and if you really want to get it right, Muslims Suspend Laws of Physics Part II. If you care to read these articles and still think what every good American and Canadian thinks, then, well…..I don’t know.

But if you don’t care to read the above article, I’d understand. I know from experience that at times, ignorance really is bliss. Sometimes it’s just better to be ignorant about certain things, especially when you can’t really do anything about them.

But you have to admire physics professor Steven E. Jones of that bastion of American Radicalism, Brigham Young University. He has decided to do something about it. He has presented a paper entitled Why Indeed did the WTC Buildings Collapse? that will be published in a peer reviewed scientific journal early next year. The paper is rather long, but a could good summing up can be found here..

9-11 was surreal in more ways than I realized.


The Future of America?

Freedom of what? reads the headline at CNN today. Just the ticket for the neo-cons. Call them Neo-Con Youth – the 49 % who either don’t know or actually don’t agree that newspapers “should be allowed to publish freely without government approval of stories.” You deserve whatever you get if you don’t care one way or the other. You’re either a fascist or communist, IMHO, if you actually think the government should have a hand in filtering news. I doubt there are many communists among America’s new youth brigade.

Madness, is what it is.

Matt Taibbi’s Take on the the Bush Thanksgiving Stunt

The very witty Matt Taibbi is as usual scathing and funny in his latest column, Stuffed on Thanksgiving:In Baghdad, the fourth estate buys the fake. While he expects nothing less than that kind of stunt from Bush, he is absolutely scathing in his criticism of the reporters who went along with it, and no less to the papers who put the story on the front page.

“Rather than tune out and tell the president to pay for his campaign ads like all the other candidates, the entire American media rolled over and covered the stunt at face value, even after the administration made it clear that the only journalists they would invite along would be the ones who could be counted on to portray Bush as a cross between Christ and Douglas MacArthur.”

Beautiful. He’s right about this. One can criticize Bush for this kind of PR stunt, but it is the press that went along with it. If they weren’t there, there would be no story. Which brings me to an interview Rick MacArthur recently gave to Democracy Now!, in which he states,“…. I’m thinking that the proper response for Americans, for readers and viewers of the news, is to assume that the press is now part of the government.” Indeed.

Abdurahman Khadr – Canadian back from Guantanamo Bay by way of Sarajevo

After 2 years in Guantanamo Bay with his younger brother, Abdurahman Khadr is back where he belongs – in the country he was raised. Whatever one thinks about what he had to say in today’s press conference, this young man is a Canadian`, and our government has not accepted responsibility for him. For nearly a year, he and his 17 year-old brother have been in the legal black hole (among other things) that is Guantanamo Bay, and the Canadian government hasn’t had anything to say about this. Canada, as an apparent defender of human rights world-wide, is not even capable of defending a basic human right for its citizens abroad: the right to *not* be held indefinitely without charge.

This is very basic, and it doesn’t matter what the situation is. If there is enough evidence, an individual should be charged and tried in either civilian or military courts. We afford this basic right to even our most monstrous criminals – even the Nazis and Paul Bernardos of the world. While some may try to focus attention on the fact that he was in an “Al-Queda sponsored” training camp in Afghanistan when he was there, it distracts from the real issues: Guantanamo Bay is an illegitimate and probably illegal detention camp, and Abdurahman Khadr, who has citizenship in only one country, should have been sent to Canada and *not* Afghanistan. The US presumably decided that he was not a threat and not a terrorist, and rather than send him to Canada, they dumped him in Afghanistan without ID and let him fend for himself.

We can only presume young Mr. Khadr is innocent or he would still be held. Whatever the case of his father, who is alleged to have been associated with Al-Queda when he was alive, it has no bearing on the case of his sons. For the Canadian government to refuse to defend the rights of Canadians held in Guantanamo, and to deny them diplomatic assistance upon their release (at least in the case of Abdurahman), is simply indefensible. I mean, where else would the government have him go? He’s a Canadian, and upon release he should have been sent straight back home. Simple.

Here are transcribed excerpts of the press conference from the Toronto Star.

Larry Spencer in His Own Words

The Canadian Alliance MP and “family affairs” critic in Stephen Harper’s shadow cabinet has some interesting thoughts on homosexuality. This was just the wake up call for those Progressive Conservatives who think uniting the right is a good thing. In contrast to our neighbours to the south, being a mainstream conservative in this country usually means moderate to progressive views on homosexuality. Mr. Spencer’s thoughts can only be described as lunatic fringe.

“I do believe it was a mistake to have legalized [homosexuality]…

OK, that may be an extreme view, but I grant that for some anyways, it’s not lunatic fringe. But it gets better. There is apparently a gay conspiracy, starting with a speech made by an unnamed gay activist sometime in the 60s. Though he couldn’t remember who, what, or when, he did manage to paraphrase (I guess) a quote:

“His quote went something like this . . . ‘We will seduce your sons in the locker rooms, in the gymnasiums, in the hallways, in the playgrounds, and on and on, in this land.’ “

Gee, this is pretty scary stuff.

“The activists that organized in those days (encouraged) people of their persuasion to enter into educational fields, and to do this with the feeling of a mission, you know, of going out there as pioneers in a — quote — human rights area, and I think they were successful, as we’ve seen.”

So gays were encouraged to go on a crusade, though what the cause was isn’t clear. Was it a conspiracy to turn heteros into homos? Or was it just to have th right to be gay without going to jail for it. But he doesn’t believe that gays should be made to go to jail for their “crime”.

“I wouldn’t even suggest that there would be a penalty. I just think it’s so sad that we have to take an issue like this and be asked to put the Good Housekeeping seal of approval on it without being allowed to tell the truth and talk about facts.”

So he’s not all bad…..he doesn’t want to punish gays for being who they are, and apparently believes in Fact and Truth.

This should give long-time members of the Progressive Conservative party pause. The problem is less what he said, which is pretty loony, but that Stephen Harper must have known of Mr. Spencer’s views, yet gave him the “family affairs” position in his shadow cabinet. Surely he could have done better than Larry Spencer. He has now been fired from his position, but the damage is done. The Canadian Alliance is exposed for what it really is: a right wing fringe party. In the States, they would be mainstream. But Canada is not the US, thank you very much.

Now if David Orchard could win his fight to keep the PCs alive, we might have a viable alternative to Paul Martin’s Liberals in 5 years. Those who think that uniting the right is a good thing for democracy in this country should think again. A member of the Alliance believes the sexual identity of some should have remained illegal. That is not democracy. It’s borderline fascist.

Sources:, google news search.

David Orchard’s Fight

The big political news in Canada this week is the legal challenge of David Orchard to the proposed merger between the far right Alliance and Canada’s oldest political party, the Progressive Conservative Party (PC). This merger would create “The Conservative Party”. David Orchard’s last leadership bid for the PCs reminded me that the “progressive” in PC has a long history and is distinctly Canadian. Reading Mr. Orchard’s speech at the PC leadership convention, one could be forgiven for thinking he was giving his speech to the NDP. It turns out that many of us have forgotten our Canadian Sec V history lessons. I had forgotten all about the “Red Torys” – Mulroney made sure of that and it brought the party to ruin. The fact is, Canadian conservatives have a long history of standing for causes that are definitely progressive, and usually associated with social democrats. He points out that the party has only been successful when it embraced progressive causes (the party under Diefenbaker brough national medicare, universal suffrage, and full civil rights for aboriginals) and nation building (the Railroad, CBC, and Canadian Wheat Board).

Interesting. It seems these Red Tories were forced underground during the 1980s, with “progressive” all but purged from the PC name. With the party on the brink of death from the early 90s, they re-emerged, many of them as David Orchard supporters, and it’s no wonder. He’s the epitome of the Red Tory. Just go to his site and browse through his articles – he writes eloquently and is a strong dissenting voice. I hope he wins the legal challenge, because we don’t need “The Conservative Party”. Things are “right” enough as it is. We need people who will forcefully argue against the radical economic liberalism (yes, that’s right, liberalism) of NAFTA and the WTO, and who will defend the institutions and social policies that make this country great.

I think David Orchard is fresh political voice, and I think the “progressive” in PC should make a come back. It’s a distinctly Canadian institution. In fact, the whole notion of a “progressive conservative” or “Red Tory” is. Just go to google.

I’ll probably never vote for or join the PC Party, but more voices like David Orchard’s make it more likely that I will. If David Orchard loses his fight to keep the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada alive, it will be bad for democracy in this country, and we’ll have lost an important part of our history. Now more than ever, we need to fight Paul Martin’s Liberals. Losing the “Red Torys” of the PCs will not help.