don't forget the 911 teleconference and other stories
draft agenda for Wednesday 28 September Teleconference
Sep 24, 2016, 7:29 PM
From 9/11 and Other Deep State Crimes Teleconference
Details
9/11 and Other Deep State Crimes Teleconference
Draft Agenda for 9/28/16 Teleconference
8pm (ET)/5pm (PT) Teleconference # 1-218-895-6835 Access code: 9112001#
Greetings all,
We are honored to announce that the "Dean of the 9/11 Truth movement," yes, David Ray Griffin himself, will be joining us for the first part of Wednesday's teleconference. This prodigious author has yet another book in publication -- he'll give us his first-hand account of it and answer our questions. Don't be late for this one!
Last month's teleconference featured an appeal by veteran 9/11 Truth activist Fran Shure on how to support Colorado 9/11 Truth's Colorado Public Television fund drive, featuring the video Demolition of Truth :Psychologists Examine 9/11 , by veteran Hollywood filmmaker Charles Ewing Smith. "Chuck" will join us on Wednesday to give a short report on the making of this outstanding 9/11 truth documentary, and to answer any questions.
Wayne Coste is at it again, this time with a presentation challenging the "9/11 mini-nuke" hypothesis (as presented by Jim Fetzer on last month's call). Wayne's accompanying PowerPoint presentation, replete with graphics, can be viewed or downloaded here.
Postponed from last month is Pablo Novi's request for the Teleconference's endorsement of his 9/11 Truth Unity Manifesto, which can be viewed here.
Nita Renfrew will bring us up to date on the harassment (by the usual suspects) experienced during the recent Christopher Bollyn speaking tour on the East Coast.
And Cheryl Curtiss offers a special rule for our consideration that would require only those present for an issue's discussion to vote on decisions regarding it (see below for details).
As always, a final opportunity for your announcements of importance.
Please join us Wednesday for this very special Teleconference!
Peace,
Ken Freeland
Cheryl Curtiss
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DRAFT AGENDA for Wednesday 28 September Teleconference
I Roll Call, minutes approval, agenda (5 min)
II Motion to expel David Slesinger from the Teleconference [Craig McKee, Cheryl Curtiss, Barbara Honegger] (5 min)
"On our August teleconference, David Slesinger accused Kelly David, the COO of AE911Truth, of being a police agent. He was offered the opportunity on our list serve to substantiate this allegation and he could not. He also has made it clear that he will not retract his remarks. In fact, he has created a web site to smear Kelly’s name.
Subsequent to this, David issued a series of threats against the teleconference (in addition to calling us all sycophants and cowards with no integrity). He threatened to cause problems for us as he had done to three other business entities. Worse than that, he said he would begin helping the adversaries of the 9/11 Truth Movement if we expel him from the call or if we don’t allow him to continue his attack on AE911Truth on the September teleconference.
"We move that David Slesinger be expelled from the teleconference, effective immediately."
III Bush and Cheney: How they ruined America and the World [David Ray Griffin] (15 min plus Q & A)
IV The Demolition of Truth: Psychologists Examine 9/11 [Charles Ewing Smith] (5-10 min + Q & A)
V Challenging the mini-nuke theory [Wayne Coste, PE] (15 min, including discussion)
VI Proposal for 9/11 and Other Deep State Crimes Teleconference endorsement of 9/11 Truth Unity Manifesto [Pablo Novi] (10-15 min) { Postponed from previous teleconference}
VII Update on Chris Bollyn tour [Nita Renfrew] (5-10 min, including discussion)
VIII Special rule proposal [Cheryl Curtiss] (5 min)
"On any decision made by the teleconference, only those present from the commencement of its discussion are eligible to vote."
IX Announcements
X Any available updates on issues of identified ongoing concern (if any remaining time -- highly unlikely):
28 pages campaign
New articles, books, and films
The 9/11 Crash Test
Cass Sunstein and cognitive infiltration, official statements on “conspiracy theorists”
The MSM treatment of 9/11 Truth
The 9/11 Consensus Panel
William Pepper’s efforts with AE911Truth against NIST and the Dept. of Commerce
Deep State crimes in the news
9/11 Truth political candidates
XI Adjournment (by 9:30 p Eastern if possible)
--------------------
Heat is online
https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... d-researchMarine life
Baby lobsters in hot water as ocean temperatures rise
A new study by scientists in Maine found that if global warming trends continue, lobsters will struggle to survive by the year 2100
Link du jour
http://www.occurrencesforeigndomestic.c ... struction/uncle ed tatro just sent this in.
http://www.lobster-magazine.co.uk/free/ ... allace.pdfMac Wallace and the finger of guilt (Winter 2014) - Lobster
www.lobster-magazine.co.ukMac Wallace and the finger of guilt Garrick Alder This essay concerns disputes over the identification by latent fingerprint
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nationa ... -1.2802077KING: It's time for nationwide boycotts to end police injustice in U.S.
Thursday, September 22, 2016, 2:32 PM
FBI OCTOPUS ...making tentacles visible
http://jamaica-star.com/article/news/20 ... -terrorism FBI to help Jamaica tackle terrorism
Jamaica Star Online-
The United States Embassy in Jamaica has established a local FBI office in ... Crime Investigation Branch has already been put in touch with the new FBI agent.
http://www.boston.com/news/politics/201 ... -wish-listIn a Facebook post announcing his decision to endorse Trump, a man he’d once called a “pathological liar” and “utterly amoral,” Cruz called control of the court the most important issue at stake in the election.
Did FBI agents tweet before assassinating
Martin Luther King?
2 stories
1.
http://touch.latimes.com/#section/2426/ ... -91548837/September 23, 2016, 8:05 p.m.
Can police prevent hate crimes by monitoring racist banter on social media?
Researchers will be testing this concept over the next three years in Los Angeles, marking a new frontier in efforts by law enforcement to predict and prevent crimes.
During a three-year experiment, British researchers working with the Santa Monica-based Rand Corp. will be monitoring millions of tweets related to the L.A. area in an effort to identify patterns and markers that prejudice-motivated violence is about to occur in real time.
2.
http://www.ctka.net/2016/book-review-pe ... -king.htmlThe Plot to Kill King: The Truth Behind the Assassination of Martin Luther King Jr., By William F. Pepper
Reviewed by Martin Hay
Posted August 1, 2016
The dust jacket for The Plot to Kill King quotes former United States Attorney General Ramsey Clark as stating that “No one has done more than Dr. William F. Pepper to keep alive the quest for truth concerning the violent death of Martin Luther King.” This is unassailably true. Dr. King's murder has never received anything approaching the level of attention and scrutiny that has been afforded the assassination of President Kennedy but, for nearly three decades, Pepper has worked tirelessly to uncover the truth and bring it to the attention of the American public. As he chronicles in his latest book, Pepper was the last attorney for accused assassin James Earl Ray before his death, and tried every avenue available to him to gain his client the trial he had been denied in 1969 when the state of Tennessee and his own lawyer, Percy Foreman, broke Ray down and coerced him into entering a guilty plea.1 Pepper and his investigators spent many, many hours locating overlooked witnesses, uncovering leads, and assembling a case. Then in 1993 he took part in a televised mock trial that resulted in a “not guilty” verdict for Ray.2 After Ray died in 1998, and any and all possibility of a real criminal trial went with him, Pepper worked with the King family in filing a wrongful death lawsuit against Loyd Jowers and “other unknown co-conspirators” so that the information he had uncovered could still be put before a jury. After 14 days of testimony from over 70 witnesses, the jury found that Jowers and others, “including governmental agencies”, were responsible for the death of Martin Luther King.3
William Pepper
Yet Pepper is and always has been a controversial figure, even among those who share his disbelief in the official story. For example, Harold Weisberg – who worked as an investigator for Ray's defense team in the early 1970s and wrote the classic MLK assassination book, Frame Up – referred derisively to Pepper as “a would-be Perry Mason” and described his work as “worse than worthless.”4 On the other hand, the late, great Philip Melanson once described Pepper's research and investigation as “groundbreaking” when it came to “establishing the presence of Army Intelligence and Army Intelligence snipers” in Memphis on the day of the murder.5 Over the years, this reviewer has adopted something of an agnostic position when it comes to areas of Pepper's work. Whilst there is undoubtedly great value in what he has uncovered and accomplished, it nonetheless remains true that there a number of legitimate reasons for doubting important elements of Pepper's research.
Loyd Jowers
Take for example the man at the very centre of Pepper's conspiracy narrative, Loyd Jowers. In 1968, Jowers was the proprietor of Jim's Grill, a restaurant located underneath the rooming house from which the state alleges Ray fired the fatal shot. For many years the only thing Jowers had to say that was of any interest to investigators was that a white Ford Mustang had been parked directly in front of the grill on the afternoon of the assassination; corroborating Ray's claim of where he had parked his car and helping establish the presence of two white Mustangs on Main Street. But in 1993, Jowers appeared on ABC's Prime Time Live claiming that Memphis-based produce dealer and alleged Mafia figure, Frank Liberto, had contacted him shortly before the assassination and paid him $100,000 to hire someone to assassinate Dr. King. He was then visited by a man named Raul who handed him a “rifle in a box” and asked him to hold onto it until “we made arrangements, one or the other of us, for the killing.”6
On the face of it, Jowers' story seems plausible enough. There is no doubt that he was at the scene of the crime and in a position to assist in carrying out the assassination. Additionally, parts of his account were corroborated by two other witnesses: former Jim's Grill waitress, Betty Spates, and local Memphis cab driver, Jim McCraw. Also, Jowers' claim that Frank Liberto brought him into the plot recalls the statement of civil rights leader John McFerren that, sometime in the afternoon shortly before Dr. King was shot, he overheard Liberto telling someone on the telephone to “Shoot the son of a bitch when he comes on the balcony.”7 And yet Jowers was, by any definition, a most unreliable witness. By Pepper's own admission there were numerous different versions of his story. In fact, he contradicted himself on virtually every important detail.
Jim's Grill
He initially named black produce-truck unloader Frank Holt as the gunman he had hired but changed his mind after Holt was found alive and well and passed a polygraph test, denying any involvement.8 Jowers then hinted that deceased Memphis Police Lieutenant Earl Clark was the real gunman only to tell Dr. King's son, Dexter, that he “couldn't swear” that he was because “All I got was a glance of him.”9 To Dexter, Jowers said that the gunman handed him the still smoking rifle, yet at an earlier time he had claimed to have picked it up after it had been placed on the ground.10 Around this time he also changed his mind about ever having been asked to hire the gunman, saying instead that he had simply been told to be out in the bushes behind Jim's Grill at 6:00 PM and that he didn't even know Dr. King was going to be killed.11 In this scenario, Jowers merely held onto the $100,000 until it was collected by a co-conspirator.
Perhaps even more troubling than these inconsistencies – of which there are more – is the fact that Jowers and his friend Willie Akins are known to have contacted Betty Spates in January 1994 saying that they were interested in doing a book or a movie and they needed her to change her story. If she would say that she saw a black man handing the rifle to Jowers immediately after the shooting, they could all make $300,000.12 And if that wasn't bad enough, in an April 1997 tape-recorded conversation with Shelby County district attorney general's office investigator, Mark Glankler, Jowers basically disavowed his confession by stating that Ray's rifle was the real murder weapon and that “there was no second rifle.”13
It may also be seen as significant that Jowers never did repeat his conspiracy allegations under oath. He was not actually present for the King v. Jowers civil trial, apparently owing to ill health. The only time he gave a legal deposition after his appearance on Prime Time Live was during the 1994 Ray v. Jowers lawsuit, at which time he reverted to his 1968 story and insisted that he was in the bar serving drinks when the shot was fired. Jowers had agreed that the transcript of his Prime Time Live appearance could be entered into evidence but, through his attorney Lewis Garrison, stipulated “that the questions were asked and Mr. Jowers gave these answers”.14 Thus he did not swear to the accuracy of his alleged confession, he merely agreed that he had given it.
In The Plot to Kill King, Pepper attributes Jowers' many contradictory assertions to his fear of being prosecuted and an understandable desire to minimize his own role when talking to members of the King family. Pepper also argues, in spite of Jowers' attempt to encourage Spates to lie for her share of $300,000, that it is “arrant nonsense” to suggest that he fabricated his story “in anticipation of a book or movie deal.” In fact, he says, “Jowers lost everything. Even his wife left him. There was no book or movie deal, and he was, for the most part, telling the truth.”15 Yet none of these arguments preclude the possibility that Jowers' confession was invented as part of a money-making scheme that backfired.
That being said, it should be borne in mind that Jowers' initial Prime Time story did not come completely out of the blue. Suspicion had already been cast on him by statements that Spates and McCraw had given to Pepper, after which Jowers', through Garrison, had contacted the Shelby County district attorney general offering to tell everything he knew in exchange for immunity from prosecution. Needless to say his proffer went completely ignored without anyone even attempting to speak with him. Assistant district attorney general, John Campbell, would later attempt to justify this total lack of interest by stating that the story looked “bogus” and that if they had given Jowers immunity “it would imply we thought there was some validity to his story, and that would increase the value of what he could sell it for.”16 Precisely how they were able to deduce immediately and without even talking to Jowers that his story was “bogus” is anyone's guess.
In the end, it will be up to each individual researcher to decide which, if any, of Jowers' varying accounts to believe. Whilst it is true that the jury in King v. Jowers did find him partly responsible for the assassination, it is also true that his assertions were not thoroughly tested at the trial because neither Pepper nor Garrison were looking to undermine Jowers' credibility. Legendary attorney, author, and activist, Mark Lane, was critical of the trial for that very reason, telling this reviewer that in his opinion, “It was not a real trial ... both sides offered the same position and I have reason to doubt that the position they offered was sound. The jury, having seen no evidence to the contrary, had no choice. In my view, the court system should not be utilized in that fashion.”17
Mark Lane with James Earl Ray
Lane's assessment is, in my view, somewhat off the mark in that it suggests a type of collusion between Pepper and Garrison that was likely not the case. In truth, Garrison was in an extremely awkward position. He could not simply deny the existence of a conspiracy without calling his own client a liar, so his strategy was to attempt to minimize Jowers' role and convince the jury that, as he stated in his closing argument, “Mr. Jowers played a very, very insignificant and minor role in this if he played anything at all. It was much bigger than Mr. Jowers, who owned a little greasy-spoon restaurant there and happened to be at the location he was.”18 In that regard, it worked to Garrison's advantage to allow Pepper to put on a case for a wide-ranging conspiracy without offering a rigorous challenge. Nevertheless, the result of this strategy, as Lane suggested, was that the jury essentially heard one story from both sides and for that reason the verdict was far from surprising.
By noting these circumstances, it is not meant in any way to suggest that the civil trial or the jury's verdict were entirely without merit. On the contrary, as Pepper details in The Plot to Kill King, numerous witnesses gave significant and often startling testimony under oath – many for the first time – and put important evidence on the record. For example, a succession of witnesses provided evidence establishing the manner in which Dr. King was, seemingly intentionally, stripped of all reasonable security, and left entirely vulnerable to a sniper's bullet. Of particular note is the testimony of Memphis Police Department homicide detective Captain Jerry Williams who had been in charge of organizing a unit of black officers that had previously provided protection for Dr. King on his visits to Memphis. Williams said that he was not asked to form his unit on Dr. King's final, fatal visit, and was later falsely informed that Dr. King's organization, the SCLC, had said Dr. King did not want protection.19 Additionally, as University of Massachusetts Professor Philip Melanson testified, MPD Inspector Sam Evans had ordered the emergency services' TACT 10 unit removed from the vicinity of the Lorraine Motel, claiming this too was done at the request of someone in the SCLC. As Pepper writes, “When pressed as to who actually made the request, he said that it was Reverend [Samuel] Kyles. The fact that Kyles had nothing to do with the SCLC, and no authority to request any such thing, seemed to have eluded Evans.”20
Not only had Dr. King been stripped of protection but a last-minute switching of his motel room had made the assassin's job all the easier. Former New York City police detective Leon Cohen testified that Lorraine Motel manager Walter Bailey told him on the morning after the assassination that Dr. King had originally been allocated a more secur
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... called-911Black Baltimore man who called 911 for help dies after being punched by police
According to an incident report, Tawon Boyd attempted to enter two police cars, ran to a neighbor’s house and shouted: ‘Help! Call the police’
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng- ... s-databaseNumber of people killed by police in 2016
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... udi-arabiaSeptember 11 2001
Obama's veto of 9/11 bill aimed at Saudi Arabia sets up standoff with Congress
The bill, which would have allowed families to sue, sailed through both chambers of Congress and lawmakers are expected to override president’s move
Obama, in a statement accompanying his veto message, said he had ‘deep sympathy’ for the 9/11 families, but the bill would be ‘detrimental to USnational interests’.
Friday 23 September 2016 17.14 EDT Last modified on Friday 23 September 2016 17.25 EDT
Setting up a potential override by Congress, Barack Obama vetoed a bill Friday that would have allowed the families of 9/11 victims to sue the government of Saudi Arabia.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/ ... dit-trollsWho is Palmer Luckey, and why is he funding pro-Trump trolls?
Under the name NimbleRichMan, Oculus founder secretly funded Reddit users dedicated to electing Trump by flooding threads with negative Clinton memes
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/bro ... -1.2805096A Brooklyn rally intended to bring awareness to black-on-black violence following two murders at the J’Ouvert celebration nearly three weeks ago morphed into a larger protest about the recent police killings of African-American men across the country.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nationa ... -1.2804972God bless America. We need it.
Two black men were shot down in a matter of days like rabid dogs by police officers in Tulsa and Charlotte because cops just assumed the men had guns. Perhaps that’s because the cops just assume that most black men are armed, even though white males make up 61% of gun owners according to Pew Research.
While blacks are much more likely than whites to be victims of homicide, African-Americans are only half as likely to have a firearm in their home. Yet blacks have a 2.7% higher chance of being shot by
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/que ... -1.2805022To hell with the cell.
A group of activists who want to slam the cell door on Rikers Island for good held a rally Saturday calling for the closure of the scandal-plagued jail complex.
Hundreds of protesters, including celebrities, politicians and former inmates, made their way through the streets of Astoria en route to the rally.
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/tru ... y_20160924Truthdigger of the Week: CIA Whistleblower Jeffrey Sterling, in Prison and Fighting for His Life
Posted on Sep 24, 2016
By Natasha Hakimi
Former CIA officer Jeffrey Sterling leaves the federal courthouse in Alexandria, Va., with his wife, Holly, after being convicted in 2015 on nine counts of leaking classified information to a New York Times reporter. (Kevin Wolf / AP)
Every week the Truthdig editorial staff selects a Truthdigger of the Week, a group or person worthy of recognition for speaking truth to power, breaking the story or blowing the whistle. It is not a lifetime achievement award. Rather, we’re looking for newsmakers whose actions in a given week are worth celebrating.
When Jeffrey Sterling was in his last year of law school, he was drawn to a newspaper ad that announced the promise of travel while serving the country as an agent for the Central Intelligence Agency. Part of a family of military service members, Sterling dreamed that the CIA would allow him to give back to the United States. Little did he know that his employment at the agency, which began in 1993 and ended in 2001, would turn into a nightmare of racial discrimination and persecution that would last decades.
Early in his career at the CIA, Sterling began to sense that he was treated differently because of his skin tone, a fact highlighted to him when he was pulled from an assignment in Germany with the explanation that “a black man speaking Farsi” would seem conspicuous. Sterling says this is just one example of the many ways his spy agency career was held back because of his race. Years of mistreatment led him to become the first African-American to file a racial discrimination suit against the CIA, an act of bravery the U.S. government would make him pay dearly for.
When, after the 9/11 attacks, Sterling felt inspired to help the agency tackle terrorism, he offered to drop his suit. Instead of enthusiasm for his dedication, he was met with a dismissal. As one of his colleagues put it, quoting a song by the late Jim Croce, he had “tugged on Superman’s cape.” The Intercept’s Peter Maass explains the ways in which Sterling’s heroism got under the CIA’s skin in a thorough piece about the whistleblower’s ordeal, “How Jeffrey Sterling Took On the CIA—and Lost Everything.”
Advertisement
In 2001, as he was leaving the agency, he filed a federal lawsuit that said the CIA retaliated against him for making an internal discrimination complaint, and that he had indeed faced a pattern of discrimination there. The suit was dismissed by a judge after the CIA successfully argued in pre-trial motions that a trial would expose state secrets by disclosing sources and methods of intelligence-gathering. An appeals court upheld that ruling, though it noted that the dismissal “places, on behalf of the entire country, a burden on Sterling that he alone must bear” by being deprived of his right to a trial. The dismissal spared Sterling’s supervisors from testifying about their interactions with him. The government has not provided specific responses, in court or to the media, about his accusations of racial discrimination, other than to generally state that he faced none.
He tugged on the CIA’s cape in other ways. He wrote a memoir, tentatively titled Spook: An American Journey Through Black and White, and submitted chapters for pre-publication review. According to a lawsuit Sterling filed in 2003, the CIA determined that his manuscript contained classified information that should not be published, and demanded that he add information that, his suit said, was “blatantly false.” Facing a tough legal battle with a presiding judge who seemed sympathetic to the CIA, Sterling eventually agreed to drop the suit. His manuscript has not been published.
Also in 2003, Sterling met staffers from the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence to let them know his concerns about the mismanagement of a classified program he worked on at the agency. Merlin, as the program was called, involved the CIA giving Iran faulty nuclear blueprints. If the blueprints were used, Iran’s nuclear program would be delayed.