Fox Commentator Threatens 9-11 Activist
Bill O’Reilly is a tool. This is the kind of stuff we have unfortunately come to expect from the Reich-wing of the political-media-corporate complex these days. So much for America, the product of the Enlightenment and the land of inquiry and transparency.
Bill O’Reilly, the host of “The O’Reilly Factor” on the Fox News Channel, has suggested that Kevin Barrett, an outspoken 9/11 truth activist, belongs “in the Charles River floating down”.
James H. Fetzer, founder and co-chair of Scholars for 9/11 Truth, a non-partisan society of more than 300 members dedicated to exposing falsehoods and revealing truths about 9/11, said that the absence of response from the FCC, Fox News, and the national media speaks volumes about the state of the nation. “When public threats can be made to a citizen’s life for expressing his opinions on a controversial topic and neither the government nor the media respond,” he observed, “that is a sure sign we are living in a fascist state.”
on August 17th, 2006 at 2:19 am
Perfectly Precise, yet Perfectly Vague
“Most Americans don’t even realize that the official government account of 19 Islamic fundamentalists hijacking four commercial airliners under the control of a man in a cave in Afghanistan is itself a conspiracy theory”, he said. “We are critics of the government’s theory, which appears to be indefensible in every significant detail. Their names were not on the passenger manifests. None of them was subject to any autopsy. They could not have flown the planes. Those cell phone calls would have been impossible at those altitudes and speeds. The American people are being played for saps”, he added, wistfully. “All we want is for the nation to know the truth about its own government, which had the motive, means, and opportunity to pull off 9/11.”
James H. Fetzer
Amen, Mr. Fetzer; I could not have said it better myself.
I agree whole-heartedly with Andy’s recent introduction to the documentary, Loose Change: 2ed, in which he suggested that the directors of the film were too hasty in there accusations. Now as we know, there are different “levels” of revolution, just as there are different “levels” of truth. The determining factor in which level you personally reside in is focus. Pure unadulterated focus; an attempt to understand the root of the root and the bud of the bud. Do we rise up, as Mr. Michael Moore would have us do, and blame George W. Bush personally, for sheer stupidity; ascertain that in order to save these united States of America we must vote Democratic?
No, that would be much too hasty.
Now I am personally a member (meaning, my name is on the website and any subsequent NSA lists) of The Scholars for 9/11 Truth. Would I put my name on Dylan Avery’s homepage? No, because the kids who made Loose Change are three potheads who could get picked up for possession at anytime, if we believe the “Government” is as powerful as it is, and all members of the group would then be scrutinized by the “liberal media” as “guilty by association”. That is what interested me about this group; at least on paper they looked good on paper. They still were saying everything I believed, but were not too hasty (as they are accredited academe/academia) in formalizing a perpetrator. Nor had they anything in the last 40 years to hide.
Michael Moore represents the first level of truth, sponsored by a “liberal media”, which then advertises fervent partisan polarization in sequential media outlets. Should we then move to “alternative” and “radical” centers for “the real truth”, such as Alex Jones’ (a producer of Loose Change) inforwars or prisonplanet.com? They would tell us that it’s not a specific person or administration, but an “illuminati” or “elite”, are responsible for the events of 9/11 and all other related state terrorism.
Whom do you go to for the truth?
You could, as the Buddha would do, seek the middle way. This is a problem, I find, with most people who are on some level interested in debating this subject. I understand that the Government’s report is flawed, on a fundamental basis, but I can not tell you why. I have been told to blame al ‘Qaeda, I have been told to personally blame Bush, I have been told to blame “the administration”, I have been told to blame Democrats and those who oppose “the administration”, I have been told to blame the bankers, I have been told to blame the Zionistic media and the Zionistic agenda as a whole, I have been told to blame secret societies in general (one of which George Bush and John Kerry are both members of), I have been told to blame masons and the Illuminati, I have been told to blame Catholics and Jesuits who control the masons and the father group of the Illuminati, and I have been told to just blame the whole damn system.
I am NOT a “conspiracy theorist”. I hate that label. It’s touted by every talking head you see on the teevee and every ignorant co-worker you have who is oblivious to the fact that “your country” is going to war with Iran and possibly Syria very soon, not to mention the fact that we are already in Afghanistan, Iraq, and God knows how many other countries. These people would rather talk about what cast member on the CBS program “Big Brother” (ironically) was allowed to eat pizza this week instead of “slop”. My actions and beliefs reflect a respect in the Liberty of all peoples. The Constitution, although written by white Protestants, enforces on a fundamental and legal basis, the Liberties of all peoples - black, white, gay, hispanic, you name it; the Liberty to understand and ponder such “conspiracy theories”, ALL other ideas and thought patters contradictory to the status quo, and the Liberty to do something about it.
Can you believe in anything?
Hot damn, check out your dusty copy of the Constitution.
The Libertarian party (that’s right ladies and gentlemen, there is a ANOTHER option…) has, at the moment, the most agreeable interpretation of the document that has supposedly held us together trough all this. But at what cost has it done so? Check out http://www.publicinterestpictures.org/unconstitutional/ to understand that the “status quo”, which has been offered and accepted by the people and the Congress of these united States of America, is no more than a legal denial of our un-deniable rights as citizens of these united States.
Notice the syntax there. The word “united” is not capital. This interpretation comes from the document that preceded the Constitution, the Articles of Confederation. Loosely united States, or republics. Even my Microsoft endorsed spell-checker wanted to capitalize “united”. Why? Are we a democracy, or a republic? Is the united States of America a democracy where majority rules, or a republic where the states/people decide?
It’s actually up to you.
Constitutionally, “We the people”, can ignore Congress at any time and focus our local energies elsewhere.
Aleksandr D. Mezera
alek@donet.com
http://www.st911.org/
http://peirceforohio.com/
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=constitution+class+for+patriots
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7828123714384920696&q=peace+and+the+promised+land
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/video1037.htm