According to the dictionary, "wonks" are experts. In our Orwellian world, where there is a great disparity between a media constructed reality terrifying the public into supporting war and an increasingly oppressive police state and the real world, those who can challenge the big lies and give hope to the universal desire for a world without war, where truth and justice have actual meaning are needed.

Rachel interviewed me on Friday, I was actually napping when she called, exhausted from four days of events. Richard Gage, AIA, founder of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth spoke to a nearly full house at the Commonwealth Club on Tuesday evening. Wednesday and Thursday, we held the film festival, which did draw Swedish TV, even if we were somewhat ignored by the American press. A large cover story, going into great scientific detail into the case for controlled demolition of the World Trade Center was published in the Silicon Valley Metro on September 9th entitled "Explosive Theory." On Friday, I joined with others in downtown San Francisco for our usual 9/11 Truth Visibility action, since direct dialogue with the public has been the foundation for the growth and acceptance of the Truth Movement. Polls show that distrust of the media and government continue to expand.

Rachel called me again, and emailed me to get the date of the first screening of a 9/11 documentary, Aftermath: Unanswered Questions from 9/11 (which did fill the Herbst Theater and we had to turn 300 people away). It was in April 2003- to set the record straight.

I know that our topic is very serious, but we did include art, music, comedy, and hoped to inspire people to take action and become more involved. The film festival was also a benefit for NYCCAN, the New York City Coalition for Accountability Now, which is trying to get an initiative on the ballot in New York City for a new investigation of 9/11 with subpoena power. Over 80,000 New Yorkers have signed their petition, and the battle to approve the signatures was just won.

In the past couple of years, the film festival filled the Grand Lake Theater. I believe a two day festival split the audience, and that we would have had a better turnout had we had more lead time. Our final program was decided less than a month before the event and we simply had a hard time getting the word out.

I am a mother with three sons, two of them now in college. I have spent nearly eight years of my life working on this issue because I believe that if the public knew some of the basic facts about 9/11, so well masked by the media, that people would demand accountability, real change and the transformation of US foreign and domestic policy, which currently poses a great threat to Americans, as well as the rest of the world. I see the Truth movement as a continuation of Gandhi's "satyagraha movement," which began over a hundred years ago on September 11, 1906. Truth is the vital force needed to give strength and power to the waning, timid, peace movement, as well as the movement against corporate globalization, and the sheer looting of the wealth of society that we see in the controlled demolition of the economy with bailouts for bankers, and the robbing of the vast majority. When Rachel Corrie was very little she asked her parents, "Is being brave part of growing up?" I think the best chance for humanity is to grow up, face uncomfortable truths, take more responsibility, rein in our criminal government, and realize our individual and collective power to determine our future.

Thank you, Rachel, for your open-minded coverage, which illustrates the dismaying reality of the 9/11 Truth movement--that so much is known about the impossibilities in the official accounts, and that so few care. The 9/11 widows are still waiting for answers to 70% of their questions. 860 architects and engineers for 9/11 Truth are calling for new investigations because the government reports on the World Trade Center are incomplete, dishonest, and unbelievable.

A great obstruction to the movement is elements that promote discrediting and self-serving programs. Perhaps when we take serious steps to protect the movement's integrity from wackos and jackals it can begin to achieve the influence it deserves.

Rachel,

Excellent article, very perceptive and contextual, which is rare. I appreciated that you included the state of the peace movement as well.

Importantly, I don't think this article could have appeared anyplace except the East Bay Express (and possibly SFBG) at this point -- a report and commentary unwilling to deride and undermine the "truthers" for the sake of an agenda -- which underscores the increasing divide between corporate controlled media and the rest of us.

The huge development in the 9/11 movement in 2008-2009 has been the science, which is great for scientists, less so for those who are not.

The science came because over the years, real scientists who understood that what they were hearing from officials were lies about science, could not stand by and do nothing. These are people whose whole career has been spent at universities studying their field of work, publishing their work, conducting experiments.

The first scientist to break into the news this way was Dr. Steven Jones, and once he came on, many more were willing to come on board too. Many have had to lose their jobs in the process. It's quite a sacrifice, when you think about it.

Three papers and letters by scientists challenging the official version of events were published in US science journals in 2008. In 2009, the groundbreaking paper by Dr. Niels Harrit and Dr. Steven Jones, along with 7 other authors, was published and showed that both ignited and unignited nanothermite was discovered in the WTC dust (see www.STJ911.org) -- 'Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe'.

At this point, we have more than the smoking gun.

In an honest world, with a real media, there would not be a need for more films and events to try to, person by person, get the facts out to people. In that reality the new investigation would be underway and already, perhaps finally, some would be being held accountable.

In some countries around the world -- outside the US -- audiences are seeing the facts and questions, hearing them. In Norway, for example, on this 9/11 anniversary, a documentary featuring Niels Harrit and David Griffin was shown on state television, viewed by a half million. Niels Harrit sat down with the reporter in his lab at the University of Copenhagen in the Nanoscience Center and showed her the dust. There was no "debunking" agenda. Harrit has been a chemist at his university for over 37 years -- they don't consider him a "truther", but a scientist, who has something very interesting to say about his experiments.

Imagine if that could happen here.

Your article is a little taste of that other reality.

Thanks,
Victoria

My colleagues have expressed already their view of what is good about this article. I have to take Ms. Swan (or perhaps her editor) to task for for the general tone of the article and what was written about me in particular.

Apparently my colleagues have been so beaten down by the "get a load of this" derisiveness of the mainstream media that someone who doesn't hit them as hard seems like a friend. To be called "an odd bunch" and for evidence at the level of high school physics to be described as "blindingly complex" are unsympathetic characterizations, to say the least. I cannot deny the accuracy of the first of those characterizations, but the media has played a clear role in keeping us from reaching more mainstream people.

"Wednesday night wound up being the cool, hip-hoppy half of the festival and Thursday the nerdy, academic half"? WHO CARES? Such an observation reads like a high school student's personal blog. I and the others you interviewed gave you evidence of high treason, evidence that shows our country has gone to war on a false pretext, and you're treating it all like various cliques anticipating the prom. Your conception of your job as a journalist and your responsibilities as a citizen do not exactly shine here.

Several of your statements about me were incorrect. I was not "hawking" the nanothermite paper, I was showing it to you -- borrowed from the table of someone else who was selling it (for no conceivable profit, by the way, considering how little she was asking for a color copy). I did not edit the paper for 911Research.com, but rather for publication in a peer-reviewed scientific journal, the Open Chemical Physics Journal, which was of course printed right there on the paper, and which I thought you took a note of when I said it. I never said nanothermite was a "combustible" compound; it is explosive as the paper and its references make clear. Your use of the word "belief" rather than "conclude," and everything else about your description of the paper -- which was written written mostly by scientists, not just an "out-of-work technical writer" -- made it sound like some crank screed that I cobbled together by myself in my Ted Kaczynski cabin in the woods.

9/11 is a controlled demolition, inside job, false flag Reichstag fire type operation.
This per IRREFUTABLE, conclusive scientific evidence.

Nanothermite, high military explosive, was found at the site of pulverized WTC towers.
Towers exploded, imploded, vaporized at a speed of 10 floors per second, close to the the speed of free fall.
Pools of molten steel found weeks after the attack. All utterly impossible, other than controlled demolition, explosive aided.

Question, do you think that retarded chimp would recognize, looking at the footage, that is it a controlled demolition?

http://911UnitedWeInvestigate.blogspot.com - http://twitter.com/911news - http://911Truth.org - http://911blogger.com - http://ae911truth.org