And then there was one: Supreme Court is the last hope for 9/11 widow Ellen Mariani

An 11-year fight for truth: Ellen Mariani and her husband, Neil.


By Craig McKee
They set it up perfectly.
A government “compensation fund” would pay off most families of 9/11 victims, preventing them from ever suing anyone for what happened to their loved ones.
And those who didn’t take the money would be pressured into accepting out-of-court settlements. Everyone would be kept quiet with gag orders and non-disclosure clauses, and the truth about 9/11 would never come out in a courtroom. Brilliant.
And it worked perfectly – except for Ellen Mariani. Continue reading →

Ignorance trumps ideas during annual 9/11 ‘discussions’: a reluctant rant

 
All truth passes through three stages. First it is ridiculed. Second it is violently opposed. Third it is accepted as being self-evident.-Arthur Schoepenhauer
By Craig McKee
Why is it that ignorance and unjustified pride seem to go so well together?
Over the past two days, I’ve been knocking a few ideas around with some fellow Facebook enthusiasts concerning the 11th anniversary of everyone’s favorite fake terrorist attack. From the brilliant quote above, I got the ridicule and the violent opposition, but that was it.
Thanks to the wonderful anonymity of this “social” media site, I had the chance to trade insults with people I have never even met! Talk about progress. When you know people, it’s harder to dislike them. But when you only know them from their moronic put-downs on Facebook, there’s Continue reading →

Lone-nut scenario implanted in Colorado shooting, Holmes convicted by media

In his initial court appearance, Holmes appeared to have no idea what was happening.

August 26, 2012

By Craig McKee

The official story is set within hours – sometimes even minutes.
We saw it with the Kennedy assassination(s), the Oklahoma City Bombing, 9/11, and many other proven conspiracies. Now we’re seeing it with the Colorado “Dark Knight” shooting that took place in an Aurora movie theatre on July 20.
Once the official narrative is set, it will rarely change substantially. New details will emerge but the initial story that we’ve been fed is locked in.
The official story of the shootings (in which 12 died and 58 were injured) is that 24-year-old neuroscience student James Holmes was mentally disturbed and acted alone. This is echoed in the media with few exceptions. Any information contradicting the official spin was, and continues to be, buried. Essential questions are not asked.
In the Colorado shooting, the media have focused on whether it was too easy for the suspect to get the weapons he allegedly used. They have questioned whether his psychiatrist told authorities of her concerns about Holmes’s mental state and whether she notified police. They have questioned whether the University of Colorado should have seen the potential for Holmes to commit a violent act and taken preventative action.
Despite early reports that the shooter may have had at least one accomplice, the media have stuck to the script, Continue reading →

Contrived ridicule of conspiracy theories really means ‘Stop questioning, stop thinking’

Mel Gibson in Conspiracy Theory: just because he’s paranoid doesn’t mean everybody isn’t out to get him.

“Now it’s conspiracy – they’ve made that something that should not even be entertained for a minute, that powerful people might get together and have a plan. Doesn’t happen, you’re a kook, you’re a conspiracy buff!” – George Carlin

August 15, 2012

By Craig McKee

Every time someone makes fun of the idea of “conspiracy theories” they are exhibiting a conditioned response – like salivating when they hear a bell or believing a TV news program.
When someone asks me if I’m into conspiracy theories, I like to steal from Michael Moore and say, “Only the ones that are true.”
When I’m feeling a bit more energetic, I explain to this person that I’m interested in facts and evidence, and that the label “conspiracy theory” has been deliberately turned into a joke to Continue reading →

Fear of ‘ridicule’ leads to damaging partition of 9/11 Truth movement

According to Chandler and Romanoff, Gage and Ryan should have passed up this audience.


 
By Craig McKee
The 9/11 Truth movement is fighting a war – but it’s only wounding itself.
Self-appointed “credibility cops” have made it their mission to act as antibodies in the Truth movement’s immune system, seeking out and destroying harmful ideas, individuals, and alliances they think threaten the survival of the host. The idea is to rid the movement of any area of research that might contaminate it and invite public ridicule.
But is the cure worse than the disease?
The exaggerated need to control all aspects of the message is working against us. We have become so Continue reading →

More absurd arguments on the Pentagon: ‘propaganda team’ sets its sights on Griffin

Legge and Bursill think it’s likely that this picture shows the scene of a plane crash.

July 16, 2012

By Craig McKee


The co-ordinated group that wants the Pentagon out of the 9/11 truth discussion has won some key victories to be sure. But there’s one battle they haven’t won, and it really bugs them.
The group I described in my recent post, ‘Propaganda team’ uses contrived Pentagon fight to derail 9/11 Truth movement (Kevin Ryan, David Chandler, Frank Legge, Jonathan Cole, Jim Hoffman, John Bursill, and others) can’t stand the fact that David Ray Griffin continues Continue reading →

Media and the 9/11 cover-up: BBC accused of breaking its own fairness rules


By Craig McKee
The first time I walked into the offices of my university newspaper to offer my services, I noticed a slogan on the wall that read: “Don’t cover the news, UNcover it.”
That distinction appealed to every idealistic bone in my body. There were 206 of them then, give or take. Things have settled a bit since, but I’m still idealistic to a fault. Even so, my expectations of the mainstream media – at least when it comes to the big picture items – can’t get much lower.
Instead of uncovering the news, now I’d settle for: “Don’t cover it up.” Continue reading →

Diverse voices make Vancouver Hearings messy but intriguing

June 19, 2012

By Craig McKee

There was definitely no “party line” at the 9/11 Vancouver Hearings.
The opinions offered by 19 presenters over three days were diverse, with some openly disagreeing with each other both in their presentations and in question-and-answer sessions. Some may feel that the lack of a common front at these hearings was a problem; I don’t think that’s true.
One thing that was clear from the outset was that organizers Jim Fetzer (pictured above) and Joshua Blakeney were making no effort to emulate last September’s Toronto 9/11 Hearings – apart from the quasi-judicial structure. Where Toronto was safe and controlled, Vancouver was unpredictable Continue reading →

Pushing boundaries: 9/11 Vancouver Hearings embrace controversy


June 14, 2012

By Craig McKee

In Toronto, we saw the conservative approach to examining 9/11 evidence. In Vancouver we’re going to see something quite different.
In stark contrast to last September’s Toronto Hearings into the Events of September 11, 2001, the 9/11 Vancouver Hearings will pursue the truth wherever that leads, according to co-organizer Joshua Blakeney. The stated mission of the hearings, which start tomorrow, is to “push the boundaries of 9/11 truth.”
In an interview this week, Blakeney, Canadian correspondent for Press TV and staff writer at Veterans Today, said the Vancouver Hearings will explore a number of areas that Toronto wouldn’t touch or only briefly addressed.
One is the question of whether a plane crash was faked at the Pentagon. Another is whether there is merit in some of the more Continue reading →

The Judy Wood enigma: a discussion a polarizing figure in 9/11 research


June 2, 2012

By Craig McKee

For some time, I’ve been thinking about creating a post where the comment thread is the focus and the article more of an introduction to the discussion. That’s what I’ve decided to do here with what I hope will be an open, substantive discussion on the research of Dr. Judy Wood.
Rather than just having comments about her pop up in other discussions and other threads (usually involving name calling and ridicule), I’ve decided to create a post where her research can be rationally debated; at least I hope it’ll be rational and that the discussion focuses on science rather than hearsay.
I understand some of the regular readers of Truth and Shadows may think I’m off base by addressing Wood’s work at all, but I hope there aren’t too many who feel that way. I believe that any discussion that involves the pursuit of the Continue reading →