portland independent media center  
images audio video
composted article

Why Does The Indymedia Network Refuse To Look Into The Events Of 911?

The silence from the indymedia network on the issue of a 911 investigation is noteworthy. Aside from a couple local imc's, Indymedia has ignored one of the biggest stories in US history. Why?
Why has Indymedia allowed the Bush administration and US Intelligence agencies to shape the story exactly as they please with hardly any resistance, even though there are gaping holes in the official story?

Not only has the FBI admitted to finding not one piece of hard evidence, but there is a significant amount of evidence pointing elsewhere.

This is the result of starting an investigation with the culprit already decided. You cannot find evidence against them, and you ignore the evidence that points elsewhere. It is high time to demand an investigation.

Even with people like Michael Moore and Mike Ruppert talking to overflowing crowds around the country as they ask the hard questions, Indymedia has ignored the story. . .Even when a Congresswoman publically demands an investigation, not only into 911, but also names Bush and Cheney as people that should be investigated, which is an inspiring act of courage in these times, and still the story is ignored by Indymedia. Even Atlanta Indymedia in Congresswoman McKinneys home state has said nothing.

This is an unbelievable failure for an organization that talks about speaking truth to power.

Is Indymedia afraid to challenge this bullshit story? There is a strong racism regarding Arabs and Muslims in this country. When you say terrorist, people almost automatically think Arab. Perhaps Indymedia has also fallen prey to this bias? It is confusing really.

Here is the story that is the backbone of the current "war on terrorism"; the story that has allowed the US to openly talk of attacking and dominating numerous countries; the story that has created an atmosphere making the US sponsored war in Colombia more acceptable to the public and Congress; political coups more likely (Venezuela); the story that has allowed the US and other governments to strip citizens of their rights, impose harsh new laws, and introduce emergency laws declaring martial law and involuntary conscription at any time. This story that has opened the door for a major advance of world fascism has remained mostly unchallenged - and this when there is alot of credible evidence that the story is false and the truth of what happened and how remains hidden and wthout any serious investigation.

This is an investigative journalists dream. . .the story of a lifetime. . .and a golden opportunity to strike a blow for truth and justice.

The commercial media has seemingly assisted the government to convince the US citizens of the FBI explanation of what happened, and has not bothered to question even obvious and glaring contradictions in the official story. This is not surprising to me that this has happened. One can almost say that it is their job to do so.

What really is surprising, and very disappointing, is that Indymedia has hardly done any better. A few sites have had some coverage, but the rest not a peep. On a few sites, indymedia people themselves have come out and called inquiry into what happened "conspiracy theory" and summarily dismissed such investigation as a waste of time, even though the official story is so much smoke.

Indymedia is dropping the ball big time on the one of the most important stories of our times.

IMC "silence" understandable 03.May.2002 01:33

LeTiand

I follow Indymedia regularly, and if I hadn't, I would never have heard of this. There have been editorial pieces around the world, but most importantly the newswire has been full of questioning 9-11 stuff.

There's a lot of conspiracy theory flowing on the IMC newswires. I mean real, unfounded, conspiracy theory. Stuff that has not a single shred of evidence but "proves" it's point by saying "can you prove me wrong?". Stuff mentioning the ZOG in other words, the evil left-wing "Illuminati", or even communist conspiracies involving the UN. Extreme right-wing conspiracy crap, basically. Certainly, corporate media lies and governments lie, but that doesn't make any alternative narrative automatically "true". And these alternative narratives also tend to contradict eachother.

Given this, it shouldn't be surprising that a lot of IMC volunteers have been a tad skeptical to the "questioning 9-11" stuff. There are several "investigating" websites, some which also have a link collection to holocaust revisionism etc. It takes a while to find the serious investigation, like Mike Rupperts website, and even longer to read through the evidence and credentials and discover that there actually are some solid facts at the bottom of this.

What I'm saying is that IMC skepticism on this issue has been founded, but that IMC still has worked as a distribution network for info on it - good and bad. If you want to convince more editorial volunteers this is worth looking into; you'll need to be carefull pointing out your sources and that there are sources who have a strong reputation for critical journalism, and who are not right-wing nutcases.

I certainly hope you'll succeed in raising the demand of a thorough and serious investigation. Even if the explanation for foreknowledge and refusal to act is simply gross incompetence, that certainly should cost the heads of some govt. agency leaders and the administration.

i agreed many months ago 03.May.2002 10:26

deva

i agreed with that point many months ago. . .

however that argument no longer is valid in my opinion.

first, for months now, there have been sound, well written and well researched articles all over the newswires

read a few of those and the open mind cannot help but be appraised that this is a serious story and not to be labeled conspiracy theory. . .the official FBI story is a big conspiracy theory with shadowy terrorists who slip through all security as if it were not there and leave not a trace even after 7 monhs of investigation. . .at the least in articles should be the words "alleged perpetrators". . .

but no. . .not only Indymedia, but the great majority of the progressive left never says alleged. . .the official story, which is so much smoke, which is a colossal conspiracy theory, which the FBI says it has no evidence for, is accepted hook line and sinker.

if the FBI story were the story being spread around the internet by individuals, it would be ignored as absurd conspiracy theory, without any facts to back it up. . .

Perhaps it shows just how much people still believe the media reports truth, and that the government, when push comes to shove, is still to be trusted. . .

Perhaps it also shows just how much latent nationalism is lingering below the surface

Second. . .if not before, then since Congresswoman McKinney has gone public, then for sure the story is demanding coverage. . .here is a really cool woman, taking a public stand against mighty forces, and actually naming Bush and Cheney.

Other than 2 local imc's, one being this one, not a peep from the indymedia network. . .

almost a complete failure on what may well be the biggest story of our times. of course, if the progressive left remains silent, then Bush may well succeed in keeping it a non story. thankfully, other people are taking up the cry.

Third. . .now the FBI itself admits publically it has not been able to uncover a single piece of solid evidence. . .not one. ..in 7 months of looking. This is an extrordinary admission.

The entire basis for the "war on terrorism" are the 9/11 attacks and who is supposed to have done it. Afghanistan was attacked and thousands of civilians were killed and a puppet government installed on the basis of the official story, which now the FBI says it was unable to find a single piece of hard evidence for

what the fuck?!?!?!?

and not a peep from indymedia. . .this is just let pass as if it is nothing. what a stunning failure. . .

Evidence is There--Where's IndyMedia? 03.May.2002 11:07

JT

The evidence is there. Look at the photos of the Pentagon:

 http://www.asile.org/citoyens/numero13/pentagone/erreurs_en.htm

When a big aircraft hits concrete and the ground (like it is supposed to have happen) there is tons of wreckage.
Some fanatics will try to refute these photos with one photo that has one, strategically placed piece of aircraft wreckage in it. The piece was small enough to be carried there and placed by hand. Just further support that the official story is a lie.

Furthermore, about a month ago CNN put the security camera footage from the pentagon on the web. It was there for less than a day. Someone realized that it clearly didn't fit the official story and had the video quickly removed. The object was a missle--much too small to be a 757.

MSNBC has an edited version of this video on there website--search for Pentagon 9/11 video. You can see that the frames before impact have been removed with a dissolve.

There is a ton of info out there about the inconsistencies of the official story. For those who want proof for their own eyes--I suggest starting with the Pentagon photos.

This needs the attention of indymedia and activists worldwide. The implications are incredible. And if more people investigate this instead of just dismissing as "conspiracy theory" we could expose many in the American gov't. & media for what they are--liars & murderers.

If you want to get involved, there is an activist kit available from  findtruth40@hotmail.com and/or
 findtruth200@hotmail.com

Stop this silliness now! 03.May.2002 12:48

A regular IMC user

I'm sorry to see an Indymedia local - especially one as active as Portland IMC - slipping into paranoia.

Let's just take a look at some of the copy in your features section for today:

"Truthout has conducted a poll, and presented the results to various Congresspeople. Thruthout [sic] asked if they would support a full investigation that also included the executive branch. Besides Cynthia McKinney (D-GA), two more Congresspeople, U.S. Representative Major R. Owens (D-NY) and U.S. Representative Loretta Sanchez (D-CA) have said they support such an investigation."

No problem here. I certainly support a congressional investigation such as the one that Rep. McKinney has suggested. But support for a congressional investigation into the incompetence of intelligence agencies should not be confused with support for the conspiracy theory being advanced by Ruppert et al.

"Meanwhile, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution ran a poll asking people if they believed the government had no foreknowledge of 9.11 and, unexpectedly, nearly 50% of the respondents said no. The paper quickly published an editorial piece about how the poll was meaningless. If that's true, why did they hold the poll in the first place? Will the paper henceforth cease citing polls in its stories since they are not, in its opinion, accurate?"

This is all you have? A poll indicating that half of the American public doesn't believe the official version of 9.11? Look, not to disparage the intelligence of my fellow Americans unnecessarily here, but let me quote you the results of another poll here: the National Science Foundation's biennial report on the state of science understanding, research, education and investment, found that the belief in "pseudoscience" is common in America.

"A survey of 1,574 adults found that 60 percent agreed or strongly agreed that some people possess psychic powers or extrasensory perception, a premise that is generally discarded as unproven by most scientists.

Although 57 percent of those surveyed disagreed that UFOs came to Earth bearing aliens, about 30 percent believe that some reported objects in the sky are really space vehicles from other civilizations."

(Here's my source:)
 http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-science01.html
Now to respond to the last part of your feature:

"While such a reaction is not unexpected, what is surprising is the almost total lack of coverage that the call for an independent 9.11 investigation is receiving from the Indymedia network. Why is one of the most important investigative stories of our time being ignored by one of the most vibrant and increasingly essential new sources of our time? Are Indymedia activists truly convinced of the veracity of a story that is being fed to them by the corporate media monolith and a government that took power by coup?"

I am an indymedia activist. I'm with the editorial board of a local IMC in North America. (I won't say which one, as I don't mean to start off a partisan war here.) And while we're doing everything we can to expose the lies and distortions of the corporate media - and the Bush regime which did in fact take power in a bogus election - we're not ready to buy into this flimsy conspiracy theory. And I'm worried that Portland-IMC is bringing down the network's credibility.

My two cents.

stop feeding the conspiracy theorists! 03.May.2002 13:00

rational thinker

enough said.

Reply to "A regular IMC user" 03.May.2002 13:06

portland indymedia activist

We're not asking you to believe any particular counter-theory about what happened on 9.11.

We are asking:

Do you believe the official government/media theory when there is little to no evidence to support it? (Especially now that the FBI has admitted it has no evidence.) And if you don't believe it, why aren't you speaking up?

and:

Shouldn't we be amplifying the voices of those who are calling for an investigation since these voices are now coming from all over the political spectrum, and from increasingly "respectable" people?

These questions are not about *proving* Mike Ruppert's case or anyone else's allegations. They are about being skeptical of a government and media that we know can't be trusted. And some of us here at portland are sincerely wondering why other Indymedia activists have been avoiding the topic, and would like to hear from them.

So I am hoping that you will return to this post and reply to these questions. Thanks!

It's Simple 03.May.2002 13:13

parsnip

The majority of IMC locals are...part of the conspiracy (of silennce)!

Get Focused 03.May.2002 13:25

imc

I am also an IMC organizer ... and I am also sorry to see IMC-Portland go this far off the deep end. Covering the issues is one thing; pointing the finger at other IMCs in a paranoid frenzy goes too far.

The unprovable assertions about 911 conspiracies really won't get anywhere. Do you think a congressional investigation will solve anything, or do anything besides strengthen a 911 conspiracy subculture? Remember the Warren Commission? I don't believe the "official" story of 911. I would imagine that most people would doubt it to some degree given a few facts. But ultimately, I don't care and I don't think most people do. The government lies about everything.

But one thing I will say -- which is there seems to be an ignorant tendency amongst the American left which I feel is fueling the focus on 911 conspiracies. And that tendency is to think that no one in the world hates everyday Americans enough to kill them. In fact, they do. In fact, there has been warfare of global scale happening for decades. And in fact, someone besides the CIA could and would pull of 911. Do you truly accept these facts?

What's more, there are real stories happening right now that aren't being covered. What about the hundreds of Arab-Americans who have been "disappeared"? What about the unprecedented INS sweeps happening across the country? What about Colombia? What about Palestine? etc etc etc ... if Indymedia coverge is lacking anywhere, it is in these critical stories which are being swept under the rug. Conspiracy theories are reactionary and attempt to play on people's naivete. The problem with that is most people arent naive. Get grounded - the world is a dangerous place, the political landscape is complex, we are attempting to push some form of marxist-influenced changes, these changes threaten existing orders of capitalism as well as status quo arab governments. We need to think strategically about where to focus our energies, and I'm far from convinced that half-cocked and contrived conspiracy rationalizations is it.

silliness? it is deadly serious 03.May.2002 14:03

deva

<<<I am an indymedia activist. I'm with the editorial board of a local IMC in North America. (I won't say which one, as I don't mean to start off a partisan war here.) And while we're doing everything we can to expose the lies and distortions of the corporate media - and the Bush regime which did in fact take power in a bogus election - we're not ready to buy into this flimsy conspiracy theory. And I'm worried that Portland-IMC is bringing down the network's credibility.>>>

i can see you are more interested in credibility, than in truth. . .

flimsy conspiracy theory?

i should assume you mean the FBI official story. . .

they are saying that these amazing terrorists worked for 5 years, and did not leave a single piece of hard evidence regarding 9.11. . .not a single piece. . .of course we know they did it they say, but please ignore all the glaring holes in the official story

in otherwords, the FBI has concocted a convoluted conspiracy theory and has no evidence to back it up,but you would rather believe them than the hard working determined truth seekers who are trying to get to the truth and who have presented plenty of evidence that the official story is a lie

you entirely give the FBI and George Bush the benefit of the doubt.

You actually believe they are telling the truth when they have no solid evidence and you go so far as to accuse anyone who questions them of being "conspiracy theorists" - a derogatory term to marginalize such people.

they got you hooked and doing their work dude. . .wake up. . .THE GOVERNMENT IS LYING

i challenge you to actually discuss facts, instead of calling a demand for the truth 'conspiracy theory' and using that is the excuse to dismiss such inquiry

deva

we are focussed. . .on the root 03.May.2002 14:26

deva

<<<What's more, there are real stories happening right now that aren't being covered. What about the hundreds of Arab-Americans who have been "disappeared"? What about the unprecedented INS sweeps happening across the country?>>>


why do you think these things are happening?

i think it is foolish to run around trying to put out the fires while ignoring the firestarter

the basis of these events, and the war in Afghanistan, Colombia and the coming one in Iraq is the "War on Terrorism"

What is the justification for the "War on Terrorism"?

Sept 11

What is a great way to undermine all these things? uncover the truth of what happened on 9.11

undermine the official story, and you pull the plug on citizen and congressional support for all these things you say need to be covered.

this is an amazing opportunity that the progressive left is squandering. . .this is why i am being so vocal on this issue.

NOW, if you or anyone else wanted to actually talk facts of the case, and could refute the collected evidence, i'll stop pushing this story. . .

however, what i have noticed now dozens and dozens of times, is that the people who cry "conspiracy theory" never actually address the issue. . .they sidestep it by ridiculing the people asking questions. . .why?

Because the facts go against their assertion.

in the meanwhile, i am going to keep posting and publishing on this issue. . .and keep pointing out how indymedia is doing Bush's work by letting him define the essential story on which all this is based.

Bush only has legitimacy in the publics mind because of 9.11 - the progressive left accepts the FBI/CIA account at face value (even though the FBI itself admits it has no evidence), and so solidifies that as the official story

if even the opposition calls the lies truth, then the dominators are home free

if you think you can give legitimacy to the very source of their power, and then simultaneously fight it and win, you are deluding yourself. . .

wake up Neo. . .red pill or blue?

On the subject of credibility... 03.May.2002 15:04

Responding to Deva...

I am very concerned with credibility. Credibility is the linchpin of any news service; and, naturally, credibility and truthfulness are interdependent. So a news source that repeatedly misrepresents, distorts, fabricates, or omits relevant facts is not credible. Take the New York Times and its coverage of the Bush administration's war crimes in Afghanistan (to raise one of countless examples from the corporate media). Not a very credible source, is it?

Well, that's all fine and good, but this particular knife cuts both ways.

IMC-Portland just lost much of its credibility today after it featured - as the lead story in the center column no less - a post by "Executive Intelligence Review," the on-line publication of the Lyndon LaRouche group. That feature quotes Mr. LaRouche himself, saying,

"Lyndon LaRouche has said repeatedly that not a shred of evidence has been presented by the U.S. government to prove that Sept. 11 was carried out by Osama bin Laden. A British judge just released an individual accused of training a number of the alleged hijackers to fly, on the grounds that no evidence was presented to the court linking the individual to Sept. 11. Although Mueller continues, incredibly, to maintain that the lack of evidence proves the 'professionalism of the hijackers,' the fact remains that LaRouche is right."

For those who are unfamiliar with Mr. LaRoche and his followers, I'd like to direct your attention to a series of articles by Chip Berlet and Joel Bellman:

 http://www.anti-fascism.org/cult7a-2.html

While Berlet and Bellman's 1989 paper may be a bit old, their findings are no less relevant today. Don't want to click through that link? Okay, then, try this list of LaRouche quotes:
=========

Judaism

"Judaism is the religion of a caste of subjects of Christianity, entirely molded by ingenious rabbis to fit into the ideological and secular life of Christianity. In short, a selfsustaining Judaism never existed and never could exist. As for Jewish culture otherwise, it is merely the residue left to the Jewish home after everything saleable has been marketed to the Goyim."
"The Case of Ludwig Feuerbach", Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr., (under pen name L. Marcus), The Campaigner, December 1973

"America must be cleansed for its righteous war by the immediate elimination of the Nazi Jewish Lobby and other British agents from the councils of government, industry, and labor."
"A War-winning Strategy", Editorial, New Solidarity, March 1978

Jazz
"Jazz was foisted on black Americans by the same oligarchy which had run the U.S. slave trade, with the help of the classically trained but immoral George Gershwin and the Paris-New York circuit of drug-taking avant-garde artists."
"The Racist Roots of Jazz", Back Cover, The Campaigner, September-October 1980

AIDS

"So far, the world's leading experts see no way in which the Soviet biological-warfare apparatus could have created AIDS in a test-tube. However, it is in the strategic interests of Moscow to see to it that the West does nothing to stop this pandemic; within a few years, at the present rates, the spread of AIDS in Asia, Africa, Western Europe, and the Americas would permit Moscow to take over the world almost without firing a shot."
"The Lesson of the Merchant of Venice", Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr., Executive Intelligence Review, November 1, 1985

The Jones Cult

"The two official U.S. government agencies most directly responsible for the Symbionese Liberation Army and the Jones Peoples Temple cult are the U.S. Air Force Intelligence and the Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI). Until the massive BritishZionist controlling penetration of those two elements of the Pentagon's intelligence establishment is cleaned out, untold horrors will continue to proliferate in the United States."
"Now, Do You Sleep With One Eye Open?", Lyndon H. LaRouche Jr., Campaigner Special Report, Copyright 1978

Impotence

"To the extent that my physical powers do not prevent me, I am now confident and capable of ending your [NCLC members'] political - and sexual - impotence; the two are interconnected aspects of the same problem."
"The Politics of Male Impotence", Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr., (under pen name L. Marcus) NCLC Internal Document, August 16, 1973

The Beatles

"The Beatles had no genuine musical talent, but were a product shaped according to British Psychological Warfare Division (Tavistock) specifications, and promoted in Britain by agencies which are controlled by British intelligence."
"Why Your Child Became A Drug Addict" Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr., Campaigner Special Report, Copyright 1978
========
I could quote more, but you get the idea. (And to think - the Beatles had no genuine musical talent!)

Look, it's one thing to see LaRouchies popping up on the newswire, but it's entirely another to see an editorial collective feature such right-wing conspiracy theorists because they fit with the 'celebre du jour'.

Credibility is important. Let's not lose ours.

it's not about LaRouche 03.May.2002 15:24

portland indymedia activist

If I follow the logic of the above comment, then I will need to stop opposing the WTO because Pat Buchanan also opposes the WTO.

So what if LaRouche's organization mentioned the story about the FBI Chief admitting to no evidence? So did the BBC and the Miami Herald. It was an actual event that occured, and its truth -- that the FBI has no evidence -- is not changed by the fact that LaRouche noticed the story too.

ignoring the central facts 03.May.2002 17:28

deva

you focus on a discredit of Larouche as if that has anything to do with the points that are being raised.

this feature is not about LaRouche. . .i don't personally know much about LaRouche and now from what you posted, i would have used one of the other articles about the same subject to prevent such an easy distraction. . .however, your focus there is clearly a means to avoid the central questions and what the feature is about

it is about a 9.11 investigation. . .it is about the Patriot Act, the Office of Homeland Security, and the Shadow Government that is currently functional and active and which is entirely outside the law and the other powers that have been grabbed by an illegitimate pResident who took power through a coup and managed to validate that power through the events of Sept 11th. . .

it is about asking for the truth about the single central event which has been used to move this whole country much closer to an overt fascist government.

and it is about why Indymedia has almost completely ignored the story. . .

when looking for who committed a crime, you ask certain questions. . .who benefitted? who had motive? who had means? and so on. . .you can answer the illegitimate Bush administration to all three. . .couple that with an impropable hole-filled story of what happened, and all the evidence that refutes it, and you have a solid basis to question.

to call someone who does ask the question a conspiracy theorist is a form of blind reaction, that inadvertantly supports Bush and the other conspirators who have grabbed power

For example:

Convicted Iran-Contra conspirator John Poindexter has been made the head of a newly created Information Awareness Office

Elliott Abrams, assistant secretary of state for Inter-American Affairs during the Reagan years, now works for the National Security Council overseeing human rights and democracy issues. He was pardoned by former president George H. W. Bush

Otto Reich ran a State Department office during the Iran-Contra affair that engaged in illegal covert propaganda against the Sandinistas, and was involved in support for a convicted terrorist (Bosch, who shot down an airplane) Now he's the new assisant secretary of state for Western Hemisphere affairs.

John Negroponte was the US Ambassador to Honduras and facilitated a clandestine quid pro quo deal, under which the Reagan Administration sent aid to Honduras in return for Honduran assistance to the Contras at a time when Congress had banned the administration from assisting the Contras. Negroponte is currently the United States' ambassador to the United Nations.

right there are 4 accused or convicted conspirators from the Iran-Contra crimes that are back in power. . .talk about conspiracy, its right in front of your face. . .shall i name more?

lets see. . .the US just conspired to overthrow the government of Venezuela (with a couple of the above named conspirators already named as possibly involved). . .i guess anyone who talks about that is also a conspiracy theorist and should be ridiculed. . .

come on. . .throw some more subterfuge. . .look for another way to avoid a serious and openminded discussion of the facts. . .this is the very denial i accuse the left and indymedia of. . .if you really engage this issue, i believe you will have no choice but to face the truth of how dark the people who have grabbed power in this country are

9.11?

they are entirely capable of not only allowing it to happen, but to fund, train and manipulate some people who hate the US to carry the attacks out.

it is easy for wealthy, powerful, unscrupulous people to convince someone to pull a trigger. . .

ok. . .take this one following point:

The FBI says that a number of the terrorist/pilots were trained at certain small-engine flight schools in Florida.

The instructors at those schools freely admit that such training would have been of no significant help to someone wanting to fly commercial airliners. They are "completely different systems."

Remember that the hijacker-pilots were near-universally recognized to have "extraordinary skill," (Washington Post, Sept. 12). (and numerous other documented sources including military experts)

It would seem to take significant amount of discipline and training to be able to fly a jet airliner, travelling at 480 miles an hour, (apparently, twice the legal speed) into a target not much wider than an airplane. (Not to mention the above-noted "acrobatics" over the Pentagon)

Here's how the various instructors described these "pilots,"

Mohammed Atta, and Marwanal-Al-Shehhi, (Flight 11)
"neither man was able to pass a Stage I rating test to track and intercept."
The Washington Post (September 19, 2001)

Nawaq Alhazmi, Khaid Al-Midhar, (Flight 175)
"Their English was horrible, and their mechanical skills were even worse... like they had hardly even ever driven a car ... in the plane, they were dumb and dumber."
The Washington Post (September 24, 2001)

And how about Hani Hanjour? -the alleged pilot of Flight 77 who was supposed to do the Pentagon air-show?
"... Hanjour went into the air in a Cessna 172 with instructors.... three times... [hoping] to rent a plane from the airport.... after three times in the air, they still felt he was unable to fly solo.... [he] had 600 hours listed in his log book... and instructors were surprised he was not able to fly better with the amount of experience." (pg. 1.) The Prince George's Journal (Maryland), September 18.

right there the official story has a huge gaping hole in it. . .you don't need anything more than that to say that something is seriously amiss. . .if the people who the FBI says flew the planes were not capable, then who did?

and why has the FBI not addressed this discrepancy?

come on. . .address this one simple point, and then we can go on to others. . .i'll be pleased to actually discuss the evidence rather than fend off the constant accusations from progressives

i have been through this dozens of times. . .present a bunch of solid evidence. . .then some people call you a conspiracy theorist. . .then they disappear, and never actually address the facts, critically examine the facts with a mind that is open to see something other than the official story. The pattern is very clear now.

deva

But you are ignoring what I am saying also. 03.May.2002 18:08

anarchist - imc'er

I posted the earlier comment about getting focused.

".i'll be pleased to actually discuss the evidence rather than fend off the constant accusations from progressives"

I am not a "progressive". I am an anarchist. As such, I dont need convinced that the government does bad things. But you are ignoring what I am saying -- no one cares even if they do believe you.

Nothing was funnier to me than a protest at our local congressperson's office ... demanding an investigation into 911. So, the theory is that the people who killed their own countrymen are now going to legitimately investigate themselves? Hahaha.

There is no doubt that the right-wing guard in this country is taking advantage of this opportunity to do a lot of things they've wanted to do. It really doesn't matter who was at the wheels of a jetliner crashing into the world trade center. All your raving and ranting about this right-winger was appointed here, this person was appointed here ... no shit. They've done bad things before, they will do bad things now. Realize that this is business as usual, and snap out of it.

"i think it is foolish to run around trying to put out the fires while ignoring the firestarter"

That's because you arent Arab-American or subjected to INS sweeps, I would guess. If Indymedia is to be an effective frontline weapon against the state/capitalism/whatever, dwelling on "conspiracy clues" does nothing while we let our allies get disappeared and have their lives ruined in political persecutions. Showing some conspiracy theory was right in 10 years (and that is how long you will be at this, let me tell you, 10 years at least) does nothing to help people today ... to advance the movement today ... et cetera.

Let me guess... again you will ask why IMC's are "suppressing this story"?? And more and more people will see Portland IMC slipping into the quagmire of conspiratorial nonsense. The shit has really hit the fan on Sept 11th ... that much is true. Now are you going to stand up and fight back or retreat and squabble with us over the words of right-wing nutjobs like Lyndon LaRouche?

P.S. If you didnt know who Lyndon LaRouche was, but yet you are putting him on the homepage of an IMC, then I must question exactly how "well-researched" this all is, and how much of it is just repeating whatever paranoid rant fits in with you at any given moment.

reply 03.May.2002 18:51

deva

<<<I am not a "progressive". I am an anarchist. As such, I dont need convinced that the government does bad things. But you are ignoring what I am saying -- no one cares even if they do believe you.>>>

you did not say that point before. . .i can only ignore something that you have said, not something that you have not said. . .

and i'll make that many progressives and many anarchists too. . .take the comment from ChuckO - as far as i am concerned, Osama and a bunch of his buddies did it and i don't want to hear anything else (exact wording may be slightly off) - proof that anarchists aren't immune to a totally closed mind

if nobody cares, then it is not likely they are going to care whether arabs are rounded up either. . .i start with a different assumption which is backed up with packed halls wherever Michael Moore and Mike Ruppert go. . .not to mention Moore's book is #1 bestseller. . .seems some people do care.

i am not suggesting that efforts to inform people and prevent roundups from happening should cease

however, it is important to not ignore the truth of the events that made that possible. . .

we can do both at the same time. . .

it is the same rationale of working on local issues, and always tying them to corporate globalization

in fact, i will assert that efforts to prevent those people from being rounded up will be augmented by undermining the false reason for doing so. . .

when you let some fascist goons define a false reason for rounding people up, you are basically letting them get away with it

by spending your time arguing against an effort at investigation which can delegitimize their support for doing so, you are assisting those fascists to round people up. . .

<<<P.S. If you didnt know who Lyndon LaRouche was, but yet you are putting him on the homepage of an IMC, then I must question exactly how "well-researched" this all is, and how much of it is just repeating whatever paranoid rant fits in with you at any given moment. >>>

once again, character assassination (from supposed allies) rather than a meaningful discussion of the issues. . .it is a disappointment, but not a deterrent

well, bring it on. . .i expected to get flak for this feature and am willing to take it in order to make my point. . .this story is too important to let it lay dormant. . .

<<<Now are you going to stand up and fight back or retreat and squabble with us over the words of right-wing nutjobs like Lyndon LaRouche?>>>

you have lost sight of things. . .this feature is not about LaRouche and the article is only used for the quote from FBI Chief Meuller. . .LaRouche is irrelevent. . .

and i am standing up and fighting. . .everyday. . .full time

come on down to the red and black cafe on saturday and ask for deva at the indymedia editorial meeting at 4pm. . .

deva

thank you deva 03.May.2002 21:32

a counterweight to 'anarchist' above

keep swinging. Some of us IMC-ers are on your side and wish we had your 'brass' and endurance. All the scorn and ridicule makes it hard to keep a focus on the skimpiness of the 'official story'.

reposting 03.May.2002 21:56

above

here, this was posted to sf-imc on this topic:

I wish
by Jesse Burns Friday May 03, 2002 at 07:48 PM

I just don't think the mainstream media or really maybe even indymedia will get into it. Maybe its just too disturbing a concept for some people. I remember reading an article by a columnist who basically states that its impossible for a conspiracy by the US and other governments to hatch 9/11, due to the media hounds appetite for the big story. Good reasoning. Except for the fact that the columnist NEVER mentioned what the fallout would be if the news media ever printed a link between the US knowing beforehand of 9/11. The US government actually knowing of 9/11? Mmmmm. Smells like alot of pissed off Americans to me. Even if there is no conspiracy, there are more holes in this "war on terrorism" than swiss cheese.


Boy, the shit has really hit the fan 03.May.2002 22:17

Wankstor X. Muzzlebutt systemp@dog.com

Wonderful. The Portland IMC has a hard-on for a conspiracy theory involving 9/11. A regular whodunit.

How about starting to CONFIRM your fucking SOURCES, and DOING SOME REAL SHOELEATHER WORK ON A STORY instead of collecting shitloads of links and quotes, constructing them into a "story," and screaming, "Look at me! Look at me! I am an investigative journalist! I am exposing facts!!!"

No, what it seems you're doing is throwing a tantrum that not enough of the Indymedia network is paying attention to the wonderful pseudo-scoop you have concocted, as if your story was the one we ALL should be focused on, at the expense of other "lesser" stories, until we get to the bottom of it.

Sorry to burst your fucking bubble, but as a commenter above said, there's plenty of story fodder to go around. I personally feel other stories are much more important right now and deserve my time and effort. I will work on those, you are free to keep working on this.

But why is it that I get the feeling that you folks here will be sitting here 20-30 years from now, grizzled and surly, gnawing at the same goddamn bone, much like folks still do about the Kennedy assasination and the Grassy Knoll connection. Nice waste of energy, to beat the same fucking drum forever, never satisfied until YOUR pet beliefs are legitimated in full (which in this case may be never). If that's your bag, then fine, but stop dissing the rest of the IMC network who are doing great work on plenty of other stories that you have CHOSEN not to cover because you think this one takes precedence.

You know, muckraking does involve piecing together a puzzle. However, the pieces won't be handed to you on a platter, some you may have to find out on your own. And some pieces of the puzzle may evolve, as you run down leads and double-check "facts." You may want to try that sometime, as that would actually have you practicing some semblance of journalism. I will take you much more seriously when I see YOUR information. Not somebody ELSE'S information that you've conveniently wrapped up and tied with a pretty little bow, but the information that YOU YOURSELF have uncovered. What, can't be bothered to actually do a little digging on your own? Then what fucking good are you doing for the rest of us?

Now, please don't take this as a critique on the 9/11 investigation angle, or on the whole Mike Ruppert controversy. That's a whole other issue, which involves critical thinking skills (we can discuss those when you get some), and I also agree that an investigation (a real one) is warranted. I am commenting on principles and practices of journalism here. And frankly, I don't see any in your latest screed.

What pisses me off right now is the fact that the Portland IMC has, seemingly, taken it upon themselves to designate their coverage as somewhat more "newsworthy" than what other IMCs are doing, and are attempting to place themselves up on some sort of uber-pedestal of holiness for carrying the torch of what Indymedia's supposed to be about. I thought this was a collective effort, of which all of us combined were working to change the world - not put notches in our belts for personal gratification or to fulfill some convoluted notion of what "news" is. That, my friends, is what we all hate in the corporate media, and you're falling into the same fucking trap, and don't even see it.

Inadvertently (or maybe not), you will piss some folks off when you diss them like that. Including folks like me, who actually understand journalism and care about its proper, ethical, and effective use for our collective enlightenment.

I'll take you all a lot more seriously when I see you actually reporting something that you've taken the time to discover and write on yourselves - something unique - not just re-hashes of Art Bell program material and cites from a plethora of questionable sources (of which Lyndon LaRouche is one, boy, was that a doozy).

I'd urge you to take a step back and look at the bigger picture here - look at the world as a whole, not just how it meshes with *your* worldview.

This seems to be a general problem among the "left" - single-issue activists who get so wrapped up in their own personal crusades that they alienate their supposed allies out of some misguided sense of fundamentalist drive. Last time I checked, millions of people are dying at the hands of the United States and its imperialist agenda - that's several times more than those who died on 9/11, as a result of a conspiracy or not.

If this keeps up, pretty soon the Portland IMC will be reduced to nothing more than a soapbox for folks who just can't seem to expand their journalistic focus. If you're so damn sure that you're work is the be-all and end-all of independent journalism, then stop tangentially bashing the rest of us and let the work stand on its merits.

Oh, wait, there isn't much merit to see yet. Maybe later, I'll keep checking back. In the meantime, try to think outside of the box you've made for yourselves, okay?

-wxm

re WXM 04.May.2002 00:16

deva

not much in all those words to reply to. . .its mostly personal attacks, and a careful avoidance of the issue raised. . .

i will say this. . .i do not consider myself a journalist. . .i am not a particularly good writer. . .indeed i have done litle more than organize existing information

whether i do a good job or a poor job presenting the story does not change the truth

this is about this story and its importance, and the fact that indymedia is dropping the ball big time on it. . .

attacking me will not change that. . .actually looking at the evidence with an open mind will

ok. . .take this one following point:

The FBI says that a number of the terrorist/pilots were trained at certain small-engine flight schools in Florida.

The instructors at those schools freely admit that such training would have been of no significant help to someone wanting to fly commercial airliners. They are "completely different systems."

Remember that the hijacker-pilots were near-universally recognized to have "extraordinary skill," (Washington Post, Sept. 12). (and numerous other documented sources including military experts)

It would seem to take significant amount of discipline and training to be able to fly a jet airliner, travelling at 480 miles an hour, (apparently, twice the legal speed) into a target not much wider than an airplane. (Not to mention the above-noted "acrobatics" over the Pentagon)

Here's how the various instructors described these "pilots,"

Mohammed Atta, and Marwanal-Al-Shehhi, (Flight 11)
"neither man was able to pass a Stage I rating test to track and intercept."
The Washington Post (September 19, 2001)

Nawaq Alhazmi, Khaid Al-Midhar, (Flight 175)
"Their English was horrible, and their mechanical skills were even worse... like they had hardly even ever driven a car ... in the plane, they were dumb and dumber."
The Washington Post (September 24, 2001)

And how about Hani Hanjour? -the alleged pilot of Flight 77 who was supposed to do the Pentagon air-show?
"... Hanjour went into the air in a Cessna 172 with instructors.... three times... [hoping] to rent a plane from the airport.... after three times in the air, they still felt he was unable to fly solo.... [he] had 600 hours listed in his log book... and instructors were surprised he was not able to fly better with the amount of experience." (pg. 1.) The Prince George's Journal (Maryland), September 18.

right there the official story has a huge gaping hole in it. . .you don't need anything more than that to say that something is seriously amiss. . .if the people who the FBI says flew the planes were not capable, then who did?

and why has the FBI not addressed this discrepancy?

come on. . .address this one simple point, and then we can go on to others. . .i'll be pleased to actually discuss the evidence. . .the sources for the quotes are there. . .

i notice not one person has dared to try and defend the official FBI story directly. . .just indirectly by attacking the person(s) raising the questions

the classic symptom of denial

deva

to those who cry conspiracy theory 04.May.2002 00:48

deva

do you dare actually have a debate about the evidence?

pleased do. . .i'll challenge anyone right here on the site, to a thorough discussion of all the evidence

and do remember, that the official story from the FBI is full of gaping holes and what you are really doing when you cry conspiracy theory or other some such. . .IS SAYING YOU BELIEVE THE FBI AND CIA EVEN THOUGH THEY HAVE PROVIDED NO PROOF WHATSOEVER. . .since when are they trustworthy?

they have provided a real conspiracy theory full of unfounded allegations, super terrorists who can evade all efforts to uncover a single piece of hard evidence (yet amazingly, the FBI still claims to know exactly who they are and what happened), wildly lucky 'evidence' such as the miraculous passport that survives the plane crashing into the WTC, and the ensuing fireball hot enough to allegedly melt steel, makes its way out of whatever place (bag or pocket) where it is kept, and ends up on the ground a few blocks away virtually unscathed. . .and lo and behold, it belongs to the so called ringleader. . .wow, what good fortune

the FBI story is one of the biggest crock of shit conspiracy theories i have ever heard. . .and in a classic case of doublethink, anyone who uses some common sense, who dares to question it and inquire into what really is going on, is labeled a conspiracy theorist !!!

anyone care to address the evidence provided in the previous post about the inability of the alleged hijackers to fly the planes?

the startling evidence 04.May.2002 01:09

anarchist

This will be my last post here since what I am writing is being ignored. I will attempt one last time. You do not have evidence. What you have is holes in the official story. No one doubts that there are holes in the official story. No one doubts that the government is lying to us about what happened. But also, no one cares. There are more important things going on. You will not be able to construct the truth no matter how hard you try. What is important is to recognize your role in the struggle, and get busy on things we can prevent from happening. You can continue to scream and yell at how everyone should be paying attention to you and your collection of mike ruppert links, but that doesnt really help people who are really under attack right now.

IMC Portland, I urge you to re-think what is important right now. And get out there and make connections in your community.

Well 04.May.2002 07:43

Emiliano

Dear "anarchist", I partially agree with you. There are probably more important problems than the investigations on 9-11. But to know and make the people know that government lies not only about taxes or about covert operations abroad but also about the killing of 3.000 civilians in New York (I don't know why they lie; but we know the lie!) could be an important success.
I live in Italy, in our country the State have always near to masonic lodges, golpist officials, CIA operatives, mafiosi, but who in the people knows? If everybody knew how much the power is corrupted, well, anarchy would probably nearer than now.

Emiliano

P.S. don't believe the story of the ghost-boeing in the Pentagon, it was a hoax

What do we agree on? 04.May.2002 09:13

anon

Activists should make the demand for an investigation one of the many causes out there right now.

That's NOT to imply one way or the other whether there was foreknowledge.

C. McKinney made this excellent point: we investigate simple plane crashes when they happen, to find out what went wrong. So that whatever went wrong can be avoided in the future. Why, then, is 9-11any different?

Incidentally, does anyone remember, as I do, reading an article last September in which Joseph Lieberman called for an investigation? I think that was the point at which Bush initially denied the need for an investigation.

My personal feeling is that there may not have been any foreknowledge, but the administration is so secretive that they'll block any serious investigation into ANYTHING.

It does seem suspicious to me, however, that the Pentagon, the headquarters of the US military, was not better prepared for ALL kinds of attacks.

re: anarchist 04.May.2002 10:28

deva

what you are saying is not being ignored

i and others simply disagree with you. . .i believe pushing this story out will do alot to undermine the authority of those in power.

how about you actually ask a question, how about we engage in a serious discussion of tactics and strategy. . .without even asking us the rationale and motivation for covering this story, and not knowing the people involved, you assign a motive that is base and low. . .and proceed assuming that to be the case. . .which is both closedminded, and insulting

This is a direct thrust. . .an offensive action, rather than a defensive action. . .i believe it is a good time to take it to the entrenched powers and not just react to each new fire.

I personally see this as a great way to help Arab people living in this country. . .there is no proof yet given that Arabs even were the perpetrators, yet you go right along with that story and call anyone who dares to question it a conspiracy nut. . .look at who the hell you are helping by doing that ! certainly not the Arab people. . .and the majority of Arabs and Muslims around the world may see you as just another American who automatically assumes they are the terrorists and the perpetrators. . .

oh yes, we should automatically assume it was Arabs, just because the FBI and CIA say so, thus tossing them to the wolves, because it might hurt our legitimacy to question the official story. . .

no thanks

in this and other ways you are giving Bush and cronies, and the powers they represent, a huge advantage by accepting the official story at face value and using it as the baseline for all further arguments. . .you concede the high ground, and then hope to win a battle. . .

to undermine the legitimacy of the Bush regime would be a great blow to strike on behalf of freedom worldwide. . .why the hell are trying your best to deter that effort? (and not through honest and collaborative discourse)

this is exactly the denial that is at work. . .a refusal to open discourse and an examination of the facts and a hiding behind accusation and denigration. . .here you are, fighting to stop people from uncovering the lies told by the Bush Administration and US Intelligence. . .

on the issue of evidence. . .yes, there is evidence. . .lots of it. . .it is not just holes in the official story

the fact that you say there is no evidence, shows that you have not actually looked into it much. . .you have made a final decision for which there is no further open discussion, and not even really looked at the case

you have not asked one open question. . .just launched right into a campaign to discredit and deter, and are not even well informed on the information that is being put forth. . .and once again, make no effort to discuss the issues being put forth, but find every way possible to ignore and distract them

this could be such a fruitful discussion about these issues. . .unfortunately you prove my point well

btw - this is but one story that portland indymedia is covering. . .we are and will continue to cover lots of issues in the portland community

portland indymedia is expanding on many fronts. . .stay tuned

distributed regional indy possible 04.May.2002 11:19

NW winlundn@efn.org

I've been trying to tell various officials at indymedia for months about proper distribution of news content ...

First, make sure you know network from media:

the network is technical (network ops, bandwidth)
the media is news, everything else

There is currently a problem with indymedia's network model. It is a flawed network model because it is blocking important news media like the controversial 9/11 discoveries. All the indymedias I know exclusively RELY on their own central group of administrators and Web designers. When I say central I mean geographically central as in local people.

This is OK because local people establish themselves, get known and become trusted. The problem is when that central group of people form agendas to keep other people or news out because they can or think it's OK.

Understanding better how that works means understanding who takes responsibility for writing policy for an indymedia site. This goes beyond process.indymedia.org and Web design. Who lets who make what actions on a given indymedia site, like posting content? In base terms it's ownership and operations; in legal terms: clear ownership and future security. these things apply to both 501[c]3s and for-profits.

Who is posting articles to the site, like portland.*, sf.*, seattle.* and nyc.*? Where are the agreements and charters about policy for doing this? Who is affiliated with who or what organization(s) and where & when do they meet? How are policy decisions reached and set? The reader should think of this as a form of accountability. If the policies, charters, agreements, what have you are publicly available it means indymedia WANTS other prospective activists to audit indymedia's activities. Those who need to know should see openly where the flow is coming from and where the flow is going to.

Need to know and flow? What's that? Anyone who has established themselves in a community with time and effort is going to have the best shot at engendering trust and becoming a part of something like indymedia. The flow is the logistics and operations of indymedia (this includes aspects of administration, finance and function) a small percentage of activists have intimate knowledge with.

Hopefully with network decentralization and opensource computer security being practical and cost-efficient those intimacy or familiarity levels will accomodate increasing activist participation and demand. Personally one day I hope to earn portland.indymedia's trust and be able to assist them with improving their network operations. One word: wireless.

Our argument to indymedia has always been to use central trust metrics (local, regional control) but distributed in terms of availability of local content. Why can't we have a NW.Portland.Indymedia.Org or
NW-Glisan.Portland.Indymedia.Org or something even more specific to improve and facilitate the AVAILABILITY of LOCAL NEWS? Progressive systems administrators know the above examples are possible using redundant DNS and dynamic hosting, so what are we waiting for? More local, accurate timely neighborhood news is what we want, not limits or censure for any reason.

Currently the central administrators at portland.* indymedia and respective regions CONTROL access to network and media on in and out indymedia newsfeeds now. Maybe in the future agreements can be drafted to stipulate how more dynamic, adaptable and ultimately sustainable methods of news content can be delivered, posted and archived. The agreements have to be signed by indymedia and participants and executed or "given the go" by a third party reviewer/mediator who's looked over the agreement and can see it's fair for all sides in the trade.

I do mean trade, btw. Content subscription and on-demand news delivery will soon be revenue-generating for-profit enterprises. This will work best with distributed processing models and opensource back-end systems forcing compliance and demanding open standards and interoperability for doing SIMPLE things like DOCUMENT REVIEW, POSTING DOCUMENTS and MIRRORING them for archival protection.

Peace, --Nick Winlund ( winlundn@efn.org)

Who will watch the watchers? 04.May.2002 12:09

Chris Herz cherz@xecu.net

Who will lead this investigation? Will it be the Congress-
persons who have just voted in favor of ethnic cleansing in
Palestine?
Who will testify in the investigation? Will it be Tom Ridge
the "Homeland Insecurity" director? He has asserted that
his office is immune from Congressional oversight. Will it
be the War Department? Will they admit that even though they outspend the rest of the planet on "defense" these enourmous resources are basically wasted. What of the
"intelligence community"? Will they admit that the $329
billion per year they recieved prior to 9-11 was likewise
a waste of the American peoples' resources?
We in the opposition know what leads our country. In the
fullness of time, these criminals, themeselves the worst
terrorists in the world will answer for what they have done.
It is up to us to organize in our homes and communities to
make this happen. When we have a real democracy, then we
can investigate and actually get somewhere.

Venceremos

re: nick 04.May.2002 12:44

deva

<<<Our argument to indymedia has always been to use central trust metrics (local, regional control) but distributed in terms of availability of local content. Why can't we have a NW.Portland.Indymedia.Org or
NW-Glisan.Portland.Indymedia.Org or something even more specific to improve and facilitate the AVAILABILITY of LOCAL NEWS? Progressive systems administrators know the above examples are possible using redundant DNS and dynamic hosting, so what are we waiting for? More local, accurate timely neighborhood news is what we want, not limits or censure for any reason. >>>

hi nick. . .this is off the topic of this thread, but it is a very interesting discussion. . .

we can do what you suggest right now. . .the only thing stopping what you are suggesting, is people to come do it

indymedia rocks man. . .anything can be done. . .i would love to see more solid local neighborhood content from around portland. . .

right now we are working on integrating reporting and editorial groups from around the state to cover their news. . .for example, there is a small group of people from Corvallis who have approached portland indy wanting to develop good coverage of Corvallis. . .they do not have the resources to start their own IMC, but it will work nicely to include Corvallis coverage on the Portland site making it a more statewide site. . .the same thing can be done for say NE Portland. . .indymedia is a work in progress and open to new ideas

now back to the current thread :-)

re: Chris Herz 04.May.2002 13:41

deva

that is a good question. . .

some people may have hope for a Congressional Investigation. . .i do not much focus on that

for me, the primary effort is to break the hold Bush and cronies have established over the US psyche

if a solid doubt is established in the minds of a majority of people that the government is lying about 9.11 and may have let it happen for their own ends, that will seriously undermine the very basis for the so called "war on terrorism". . .a trial or hearing is not necessarily needed for that. . .

it will also further exemplify that the established powers do not have the interests of humanity at heart and push people to seek alternatives

though some people want to dismiss this effort with ridicule, working on the 9.11 investigation may have a coherent vision of why and for what reason and may be playing an important role in the world.

i myself feel it is a critical work to undertake. . .however, i do not demand that the broader Indymedia take up that work. . .my point is that Indymedia has avoided it altogether

in this time of puppets nodding their heads as Bush speaks, the fact that Cynthia McKinney has publically challenged Bush and Cheney is amazing news. . .yet was virtually ignored by Indymedia

Cynthia McKinney was one of the featured speakers at the A20 rally in DC, yet Indymedia is silent when she publically dares to confront the powers that be !!! What the fuck is that?!?!?

Something is bizarre in that total silence


thankfully there are the newswires. . .the heart and soul of indymedia. . .if it were not for them, and their true openness, the McKinney story and the broader 9.11 investigation would not have been seen nor heard by most Indymedia readers. . .

response to some comments... 04.May.2002 15:43

emily

Wow - I can't believe the VENOM that has come out in this "discussion" about 911. The personal attacks and unwillingness to engage in the heart of the issue are really disturbing.

I would think that, of all people, IndyMedia activists would be the last to dismiss this issue as a "conspiracy theory" without rigorous engagement with the facts, and the last to defend Bush and his warmongering agenda. I think that Portland IMC is fully justified in challenging other IMCs to address this story. It's being addressed all over the newswires, so the argument that "no one cares" or "no one's interested" is obviously bullshit.

Deva said it well, but it bears repeating - by accepting the official story that those crazy Arab terrorists were responsible for 911, we are permitting and justifying the slaughter, imprisonment, torture, and general discrimination against Middle Eastern people world-wide. I don't understand why people concerned with the lives and well-being of our Middle Eastern brothers and sisters would stand for the lies that are being thrown at them. Why is it so much easier for Americans to believe a conspiracy about cave-dwelling Arab terrorists (when there is no evidence against them, even according to the FBI), instead of a conspiracy about, say, the CIA (who are PROVEN terrorists)?

If it's a question of tactics, then let's talk about tactics. One tactic that definitely does NOT work is attacking each other. How about a real discussion of the actual issues? Why is there so much fear and denial around what really happened??

What official story? 04.May.2002 18:03

August West

Thank you, deva and Portland IMC in general. I'm disgusted with the way in which the IMC's are in general aiding the cover-up, accepting the official conspiracy story.
But have they noticed that the FBI director said on 4/19 in a speech at the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco that the FBI has failed to uncover a paper trail, comments that the mainstream media ignored in the US, though the BBC picked it up on May 1st. The speech is on the FBI's own website. So it's official, the official story is a pack of lies.

deja vu all over again 04.May.2002 18:49

Oginga Odinga jaramogi68@yahoo.com

This is not the first time in recent history that we have experienced this phenomenon of the 'left' buying into government propaganda and buttressing the state's efforts to circumscribe civil liberties. The same thing that happened with the Oklahoma City Bombing is happening with 9-11 - the left took the position that since McVeigh and Co. were White Supremists, it was okay for the government to go after them. Indeed, the OKC event was partly responsibly for trimming the sails of the Gingrich revolution since it was no longer so fashionable to be an avowed right winger. But as with 9-11, the left completely ignored the abundant evidence - even from the FBI itself with its scandal of 'lost files', that there was much more to the OKC event than the government story permitted, and did not cover the trials of Mcveigh and Nichols very closely at all. To his everlasting credit, Gore Vidal looked into McViegh's plight, such as it was, and came to the conclusion that the OKC event was wide ranging conspiracy. Inquiries into 9-11 are not 'conspiracies anymore than any other issue - its just another news story. The conspiracy designation simply means - lets not talk about things that big bro' doesn't want us poiking our heads into and lets continue with being the loyal opposition dutifully showing up at protests and providing a meaningless counterpoint to mainstream cant. Don't ask any real questions about the power structure. 9-11, Enron, Venezuela, Colombia - its all good!

Keep Fighting for the Truth 04.May.2002 20:22

Max Kolskegg

The work that Portland IMC has done and is still doing to bring out the truth about the events on 9/11 is fantastic and much appreciated! It's great to see Deva hang tough in the face of the nasty slanders and putdowns that stream from the "anarchist" and the "Muzzlebutt" etc. There's something awfully familiar about this slimy ad hominem attack strategy, right down to the use of personal markers like ChuckO's favorite putdown, "nutjob". Deva, you smell the rat aright.

There's another aspect to this Indymedia issue, once again brought out clearly by Deva (not only a clear thinker, but a fine writer as well, and don't let these guys intimidate you!): "the newswire is the heart of Indymedia". The hiding of the newswire at indymedia.org was the work of a cabal of people behind the scenes, but we know ChuckO the Denier was real strongly pushing it. On threads at Infoshop weeks before he said big changes were coming down at Indymedia that were going to put a lid on all the "conspiracy nutjobs". Behind the scenes he and his allies have pressed for the hiding of the newswire, and they have plans for further controls, like requiring registration and log-ins for posting stories. One of their main objectives, it's clear to me, is to shut down newswire postings on 9/11.

Carl Bernstein, who exposed the Watergate crimes, has said that the most effective and important control a news outlet exercises is what it puts on its front page: "The biggest part of reporting the truth is the news agenda itself. What we choose to put on the air, what we think is a page one story, what our priorities are." Indymedia's recent anarcho-Stalinist coup shows that news is not a priority. This is the first step in an ongoing attempt to wrest indymedia away from the public. It must be stopped.

Finally, we can really stop worrying about the slander term "conspiracy theory". Peter Dale Scott has spent years studying what's happening to our society, and has proposed the concept "Deep Politics" to replace "conspiracy theory". We are dealing with a system of control and criminality, not separate, random episodes of conspiracy. The real politics of our era is hidden, "deep", and not visible in press releases and state propaganda. We do not live in a democracy. A new and excellent book by Daniel Hopsicker, "Barry and 'the Boys'" refers to Scott's theory: "Secrecy and law-breaking are how our 'deep political system' works, Scott says... It's not a high cabal of Satan-worshipping Illuminati that brought the scourges of the past forty years... It's just 'the way things are.' This concept of 'deep politics' sees 'what happens' as the normal result of how our system works." We're not conspiracy theorists, we're trying to illuminate the depths of the real system of social control. We're deep political theorists, going beneath the surface appearances that people like ChuckO are mired in.

Deva and Portland comrades, thank you for your fantastic contributions.

Group think does not equal fact finding... 05.May.2002 08:37

Freethinker

I'm really sorry to see this happening. I've followed Indymedia since Seattle WTO and I've always - well, almost always - been impressed with the ability of various imc locals to come up with well-researched center column stories. But now, this imc seems to have gone off the deep end.

By the way, it's worth repeating that only the www.indymedia.org site has "hidden" the open news wire (it's still only a click away). This was not done istantaneously - all of the locals had a chance to vote on it, and the vote was unanimous.

reply 05.May.2002 12:50

deva

<<<I'm really sorry to see this happening. I've followed Indymedia since Seattle WTO and I've always - well, almost always - been impressed with the ability of various imc locals to come up with well-researched center column stories. But now, this imc seems to have gone off the deep end. >>>

thanks for the compliment

it's about time more people go off the deep end, rather than sit in the safe shallow water of conformity

and if you care to actually discuss the issue, rather than toss ridicule, i'll back up my point with a solid coherent argument and show that portland imc is still coming up with well-researched center column stories. . .and that is why the naysayers refuse such discussion and hide in character assassination. . .the classic symptom of denial

the CIA had some of the alleged hijackers under surveillance months before 9.11

this is proven because the CIA released information from phone conversations and timetables of physical meetings which shows that phones were tapped and suspects followed

and US intelligence was warned by 4 foreign governments (russia, israel, and germany - forget the fourth at the moment)

you mean these alleged plotters were so capable that they could plan such a thing, while being followed and and having their phones tapped by a forewarned CIA and remain so stealthy that the CIA didn't have a clue what was going on? i find that preposterous

then amazingly, these same people are given visas. . .and then the CIA 'lost track' of them. . .

these security police seem to have no trouble stopping activists at borders or from getting on planes, yet they cannot manage to stop these so called terrorists who arrived using their own names. . .even though these people had been watched and US intelligence had been warned. . .

then, when the 9.11 attacks take place, US intelligence puts together the whole plot, and backtracks the trail of the people they 'lost track' of in just a few days and informs the US public exactly who did it and what happened. . .only now they admit they don't actually have any evidence linking their alleged culprits to the planning of the attacks

the true marvel is that some people who call themselves reformers, revolutionaries, progressives, anarchists, actually continue to spend their time defending the CIA and FBI (with a long and well documented history of conspiracy, terrorism, murder and so on) even though the story they feed the public is an absurdly blatant pile of bullshit.

what is up with Indymedia that it refuses to cover this story???

Authoritarian browbeating 05.May.2002 13:12

Mark Bialkowski mbialkowski@rogers.coMAPSBLOCK

Am I the only one who finds the claims of "IMC cover up of 9/11" and "aiding the conspiracy" a bit... authoritarian?

A demand that all IMCs devote their space and time to posting links about a possible conspiracy, spend time giving exposure to every last theory and half-baked notion (including the asinine fake-Boeing story that doesn't go beyond saying "it wasn't a plane" and fails to explain anything else), and ostracism of anyone who tries to post links to or cover any other story that might have just as much significance on a local scale smacks of groupthink, of telling everyone else what to do. There seems to be this bizarre intolerance for dissent among the radicals as well as "patriots" (for lack of a better term) when it comes to 9-11. The patriots can't believe that anyone *but* insane Arabs could do this; certain radicals seem to believe every last conspiracy theory, no matter how half-baked. Anyone who questions the more baseless theories get accused of "buying into the US conspiracy" - kind of like being told "you dare question me? YOU must be with THEM!" It's paranoid, it's closed-minded, and it's just as dangerous as buying the government line without question.

I've always thought Indymedia could be a great resource for getting out uncomfortable truth. This means investigation of claims, doing real legwork, asking hard questions, possibly even getting into trouble. This doesn't mean linking to every last site claiming a conspiracy and demanding to know why other volunteers and contributors aren't devoting gobs of space and time to reposting the same stuff over and over.

There are a lot of stories to cover, and they require poeple like you and me to do it. There's no sense screaming at other people to do the work for you; it's just as likely you'll be ignored even more.

A large number of Americans want a full investigation into the events of 9-11. This isn't being ignored here; indeed, I haven't seen word of this kind of dissent anywhere else. I just spent four days with no TV or Internet access after a move. It's unbelievable how much goes unreported, unmentioned, unsaid. IMCs, local and global, are covering Colombia, Venezuela, May Day, the kidnapping of hundreds of Arab-Americans, the mess in the Middle East (hello, IMC-Palestine and IMC-Israel, remember them?), and many other local and regional issues that didn't get mentioned.

I think if we spent more time really investigating claims, instead of taking the word of other sites that they're doing all the investigating for us, we would get a lot farther in finding out the truth behind 9-11. Check sources. Re-check sources. Follow paper trails that get left hanging. Personally, I'd like to know who stood to gain millions from the put options purchased days before 9-11 - who's investigating that?

If you want something done right, you've gotta do it yourself. If you perceive a hole in 9-11 investigation, fill it yourself. Indymedia was created because some activists saw no point in trying to demand that mainstream media fill gaps in their coverage of activism. They filled the gaps themselves.

(sigh) 06.May.2002 00:34

Wankstor X. Muzzlebutt systemp@dog.com

Okay, one last time to try and take a stab at where I'm coming from. I was not attacking the substance of Portland IMC's claims of what happened on 9/11, as THAT WAS NOT THE POINT of what I wrote. You are free to believe what you want to - for what it's worth, I believe the truth lies somewhere in between the two extremes of stories.

The point of what I wrote was about Portland Indymedia's editorial standards and integrity, and whether or not that rightfully lives up to the level of what we expect as critical media consumers. Not checking facts, using questionable sources etc. and simply conecting links together is not that, in my view. This is an issue that is vitally important, even more so if we are to BELIEVE what we read from Portland IMC. Not whether we *want* to believe, but that we can honestly do so.

I do not dislike deva, the portland IMC, or anything like that. I am concerned about Indymedia in GENERAL. While each one stands alone as an indivdual site with a unique perspective, we are growing in size and influence on the public consciousness. If that is to continue to be the case, then let's do good work. It is the merits of our collective effort which will stand the test of time and scrutiny. I think Portland IMC is unfairly taking shots at the rest of the IMCs because "we" don't subscribe to "their" worldview.

Lisen, I'm sorry many folks took my initial post as a personal attack, these are only words on a screen - but you also should look up the definition of "slander." You're throwing it around unjustifiably and out of context. This is basic journalism knowledge, what those terms mean and all. That is, if we collectively assume that IMCs are sources of NEWS and the like.

So, I'm still waiting for a response to my initial comments. Brushing them off as an ad hominem attack is a good rhetorical move, but a sloppy one.

In the interim, I found some excellent links on critical thinking and argument fallacies. Check them out and spread the knowedge:

Informal Fallacies:
 http://www.kcmetro.cc.mo.us/longview/CTAC/fallacy.htm#Equivocation

The Fallacy Files:
 http://gncurtis.home.texas.net/index.html

The Reasoning Page:
 http://www.augustana.ab.ca/~janzb/critthink.htm

And let's remember - we're all on the same side in the end

-wxm

See the NBC Tapes - Still A Believer? 08.May.2002 15:25

George teslapress@aol.com

Is it wise to take the NBC version of 911 at face value? See the tapes. You decide.

Somebody I know had the wherewithall to stick extended-play video cassettes into his VCR beginning at about 7:30 AM our time on that momentous day to catch Tom Brokaw and Katie Couric doing 911 on Channel 8. That VCR was kept going for six tapes, about 30 hours.

Maybe you know someone who did similarly. But, if you don't, I have got the tapes and have been sharing them with folks who are interested.

It is revealing to review this footage, now that the smoke has cleared. Especially interesting are early on-the-ground reports. These were suspiciously rare at NBC that day. Early footage has Pat Dawson reporting on his interview with NYC Fire Safety Chief, Albert Perry, who said explosives were planted inside the tower. (Tom Brokaw: no comment.)Also interesting are the downtown reports by Ashleigh Banfield, who was pushed out by the police and cut short by NBC. Then there are all these official voices, mostly intelligence and national security insiders we rarely hear from. Were they scripted? Andrea Mitchell seems less than credible now as NBC News lead spokes for the bin Laden theory. What is left out of NBC's coverage is as interesting as what is allowed in.

E-mail if interested. Subject: 911 tapes.

George
 teslapress@aol.com

keeeee-ryst! 15.May.2002 10:21

bill gorz

couple quick comments:

first i don't think other indymedia sites are ignoring the story, maybe you folks could dig down in the old memory banks and remember that indymedia is run by volunteers. every imc person i've ever talked to has said that they are shorthanded, which is why i spent a couple hours cleaning dcimc up last month when every one else was in a feverish rush.
maybe some more folks ought to volunteer.

the point being that the story is'nt really being ignored it's just not the primary focus of other sites. i agree that it should be given more attention on imc, however we should also remember that indymedia is not the activist community's only source of info, commentary, discussion, etc. There are a lot of pamphlets, zines, stickers, flyers, graffiti, and ever real magazines, etc., that are putting out the story about the govt.'s bullshit. i talk to a lot of people in the southeast (including atlanta indymedia which i think was unfairly maligned in an earlier post) and no one in the activist community that i know of believes the official line!

the basic info about the governments lies, distortions, and obvious coverup is getting out there to the "masses".

the real question is what is to be done about it.

on another note i would like to voice my agreement with other voices in this thread who have commented on the availability of evidence. we are severely hampered by mostly operating on the 'non-evidence' of the feds bullshit story.
Personally i think that a lot of political hay can be made out of the facts that credible foreign media has shown that the feds were warned that something was going to happen - Putin even warned that 2 dozen terrorists were being flight trained for jetliner attacks on buildings, and the shit was going down soon. which is pretty fuckin specific.
The other thing is the story about the airforce not sending up jets to intercept- even the nonactivist old timers i talk to know somethings fishy there.

what we really need are investigative reporters, problem is that we have no funding and the folks who know what we need to know probably won't talk to us.

and finally, i just got to say that y'all need to put up some serious disclaimers around any coverage of Lyndon LaRouche. i fully agree that right wingers are fully capable of dredging up some good info, however, we got to make sure that people who don't know whats up don't get confused.

thank you very much Portland IMC for putting so much effort into this story. it's very important and we very much need to get to the bottom of it.

I'd like to see some discussion about what to do about all this info, beyond public education of course. this particular posting is getting very big and its brand new - perhaps the subject need its own discussion board on the site that won't slide off the side of the newswire.

indie not so indie anymore 18.Aug.2005 11:03

jakdjill

Ruppert dropped the 9/11 investigation in favor of his peak oil. Perhaps you didn't hear-the "window of opportunity has closed"...nothing to see here -move along.

Analysis of Ruppert's recent split personality on 9-11: "just forget about it, move on."
at this link:
 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2005/01/308782.shtml

When others expressed outrage over this, others dismissed it as exaggerated outrage.
Well- I haven't seen Ruppert write one thing on this latest development, nor post articles from others on this (pro or con).
It's been in the headlines for over a week now and nothing has from ftw.
So- if you want to support the investigators out there...support the ones that are working on this investigation re-opening. The window is now open.

Peak oil is not going to lock em up in jail for the elite deviant crimes they committed, and gold is only gonna make the Freeport McMorans & Kissingers of the world richer, while polluting the planet!

The fact that many who claimed responsibility for the investigations, and now are nowhere to be found with this would sadly be part of why many have abandoned this issue.
I am greatly disappointed in the so-called independent media all across the net for this.
The truth cannot be marginalized by the supposed party lines....... it is up to us to stop the neocon propoganda machine from running right over this with ridiculous lies intended to cloud the truth.

Okay-that's enough of a rant-but I am pretty pissed at the independent media focusing on the same news that the majors have-not very independent anymore.
It's not just with 9/11-many have been mimicing the majors for some time now.