Our Advertisers Represent Some Of The Most Unique Products & Services On Earth!


Barrett Questions
Amy Goodman On Building 7
By Kevin Barrett

Thanks to Matt Naus of http://ts911t.org for his stellar camerawork.
Please, write Amy and ask her to invite me on her show to continue the conversation
I attended Amy Goodman's speech at the University of Wisconsin-Madison last night, Thursday, 9/27/2007. She talked about doing "ground zero reporting" and said "our job as journalists is to go to where the silence is."  I wanted to confront Amy over her reprehensible silence about the 9/11 truth debates in general, and her refusal to cover the demolition of Building 7 in particular. After all, she was present at the pre-announced demolition of Building 7:
If I were confronting a hopelessly evil 9/11-complicit creep like Guiliani or McCain I'd be a lot more confrontational. But, as Col. Bob Bowman pointed out on my radio show, which will be rebroadcast next Friday, 10/5/07 4-6 pm CT on <http://gcnlive.com>http://gcnlive.com network 2, Amy is a potential ally, albeit a maddeningly silent one so far. And her audience, who are also potential allies, loves her. So I wanted to get in her face, but with a 'tough love' approach spiced with humor, rather than venting the anger we all feel about Amy's betrayal of the truth.
Amy began the question period by announcing that nobody would be tasered for asking questions.
Kevin: "Well, if anyone were going to be tasered here, it probably would be me. Hi Amy. Kevin Barrett here. I appreciate your great work on so many issues, and I agree with your quote that 'our job as journalists is to go to where the silence is.' Now there's a very popular youtube video that's especially popular among the 100 million Americans who know that 9/11 was an inside job, according to a New York Times poll. It shows you present at the controlled demolition of Building 7."
Amy: "I did not demolish Building 7."
Kevin: "Well, okay, I'm glad we got that straight. My question would be, if your job is to go to where the silence is, Building 7 is a great place of silence, as I'm sure you know. It's a 47 story building that came down into its own footprint for no apparent reason at about 5:30 p.m. on September 11th. A countdown to the demolition of Building 7 went out on New York police radio. I was in New York for the sixth anniversary, and every cop I talked to knows that that went out on police radio. The BBC reported that Building 7 had collapsed twenty minutes before it happened, with Building 7 standing in the background behind the reporter. And we have eyewitnesses--I can give you their contact information--who were inside Building 7 at [around] 9 o'clock in the morning who witnessed massive explosions that killed large numbers of people and devastated the lobby. There were pre-demolition explosions. You're right there in New York, you're right next to Ground Zero, and you talked about doing 'ground zero reporting' -- so when are you going to get around to doing some 'ground zero reporting' on Building 7?"
Heckler: "Why don't you shut up, this is not your night."
Amy: "Overall, I would say that everything that happened on September 11th should be fully investigated. Of course I don't think that the 9/11 Commission was an adequate investigation. And I agree that there are a lot of questions that have to be answered."
[well jeez Amy, you're a journalist, you're based right next to Ground Zero...why don't YOU try to get some answers??!!!]
While I stood in line to get my Amy Goodman book autographed, I autographed Amy a copy of my own book Truth Jihad: My Epic Struggle Against the 9/11 Big Lie:
I also carried a copy of the best photo book on 9/11, Eric Huffschmid's Painful Questions, open to the page showing the demolition of Building 7. When I arrived in Amy's exalted presence, the following dialogue transpired:
Amy: "I guess you're famous here."
Kevin: "Not as famous as you, Amy. Here's my book, with my phone number, in case you want to invite me on your show, or appear on one of my three radio shows. Also, I was wondering if you could autograph this book (Eric Huffschmidt's Painful Questions) here on the Building 7 page (page 65, featuring still shots from the demolition of WTC-7) so when you break this story..."
Amy: "I don't want to mess up your page."
Kevin: " I think when you break this story it'll be valuable..."
Matt Naus (off camera): "You were there, Amy! I saw the video of you. You were there!"
Amy: (smiling) "I work right there."
Kevin: "I mean, if you break this story...if anybody does, it might be you...and if you sign this, this will be a very valuable book."
Still smiling, she declines to sign.
Please write to Amy and ask her to invite Kevin Barrett on her show either (A) for a friendly chat about the 9/11 truth movement, or (B) to debate any bunker who dares to try to take me on. Her address: mail@democracynow.org
From:"Kevin Barrett"
Dear Jeff Rense,
You recently published my article linking the youtube video of me  questioning Amy Goodman about WTC-7. Unfortunately you published it  with an objectionable headline and introduction, in a format that  suggests that I am labeling Amy a "Zionist gatekeeper" and a  "mole." Here is the beginning of the article:
Zionist Gatekeeper Amy Goodman Questioned On WTC-7
By Kevin Barrett
She has always been a mole.
If you bother to write her (FOR NOTHING), include this image below.  Bottom, right of Center, zio-mole Goodman. Of her fans, how many are  also actually zio-moles?
Note that I did not write a single word of this, yet it says "By  Kevin Barrett." Those unfamiliar with your format will assume I  wrote it, and I will have to spend precious hours answering emails  and phone calls and trying to straighten out the misinformation. I  have had to do this on dozens of other occasions when false  information about me was published, and I am starting to get sick of  it. Probably one of the reasons I became the target of the "get the  9/11 professors" campaign is that unlike the tenured and retired  professors I am supporting a family way below the poverty line and  don't have the resources to hire lawyers and fight back when I am  defamed. The result is that there is a massive amount of defamatory  information about me floating around, and very little I can do to  make it go away.
While you certainly have the right to speculate on Amy's motivations  for refusing to report the story of the century, you do not have the  right to publish my work without permission, add an objectionable  headline and introduction, and put my name on them.
What makes this situation especially annoying is that you have a  history of mixing principled anti-Zionist articles (nothing wrong  with that) with occasional bigoted anti-Jewish stuff. This discredits  anti-Zionism and attracts the wrong kind of readers. Every time you  link one of my articles, I get hate mail, and once even a death  threat, for "selling out the white race" by refusing to blame  everything on "the Jews." This tendency to demonize whole  religious and ethnic groups, whether Jews or Muslims or who knows  what next, is unacceptable.
Thank you for publishing this, for standing up for free speech, and  for being open to constructive criticism.
Dr. Kevin Barrett Coordinator, MUJCA-NET:http://mujca.com Muslim-Jewish-Christian Alliance for 9/11 Truth Author, Truth Jihad: My Epic Struggle Against the 9/11 Big Lie Editor, 9/11 & American Empire: Christians, Jews, and Muslims Speak Out
Dear Kevin...
This is exactly how we received the article and had no way of knowing it was not from you. We get thousands of articles from authors each month and occasionally people will send in material not written by the credited author, and/or will add a sentence, a phrase or a word to the text. This kind of misrepresentation of an article and within an article is intolerable and we do our utmost to prevent it from happening. We NEVER change someone's writing without their request or permission.
Please understand it is simply not possible to check every word of every article as we're sure you can understand. If we could find out who originally submitted this, we could do some tracing... but with the volume we process that's impossible.
In this particular case, your headline and byline are clear at the top of your text, and show unequivocally where your article begins. We assume, now, that you did not include the box illustration. Who did? It looks like we've been duped. It has happened before and it will happen again. In this digital age, anything is possible.
We certainly regret any imposition and will pull the story immediately as is and replace it on with your story and your letter below. In the future, unless we can be positive you, in fact, are the actual one sending a story, we'll delete it upon arrival. As for unpleasant email, we get a ton of it from many different special interest groups.
As far 'mixing principled anti-Zionist articles (nothing wrong  with that) with occasional bigoted anti-Jewish stuff' we don't do so with any intent other than that of open journalism...which is supposed to present ALL sides of controversial issues and permit the reader to process and make independent judgments. No other site that we know of follows these bedrock, pure journalism ethics.  We see it as a situation of either practicing total journalism or becoming 'gatekeepers' ourselves by editing and selecting stories which results in biases. Furthermore, we can't publish what we don't receive, which makes what we do even more difficult.
We certainly publish a TON of what could  be classified as 'anti-white, anti-Christian, anti-gentile' and even 'anti-American' (to some) material as well. For example, virtually every critical story of the Bush/Cheney administration fits this paradigm with ease.
Our best to you and thanks for understanding our situation. We certainly understand yours.



This Site Served by TheHostPros