I was a bit surprised to hear Obama last week promote the Mars missions with such vigor. His call for manned missions to the red planet won’t be cheap and you wonder how the nation can afford to pay for them. He intends to increase NASA funding by $6 billion over the next five years – one of the few budget increases in government discretionary funding.
Democracy Now did a short story on the Obama announcement and had Victoria Samson from the Secure World Foundation on to talk about it. Amy Goodman asked her about the military connection to NASA and she denied there was one. Anyone who follows the space program knows differently.
A bit of a departure for us. This is the mostly-acoustic version of a song of green freedom. Features lots of mandolins, banjo, and a guest slide guitar from our buddy, MuffinCloud! Lyrics:
I WANNA GROW WEED
by The Gitmos
I wanna grow weed in my back yard
I’ll do it right—It won’t be hard
To keep the neighborhood kids from finding out
I’ll build a fence so high
I wanna grow weed and you will see
It’s good for our security
They say the drug trade benefits the terrorists
So why not just grow your own
I wanna grow weed like Washington
He did it right at Mount Vernon
He even separated males from female plants
It’s mentioned in his diaries!
I wanna get high
I wanna get high
And the law should comply –with me
I wanna grow weed, It’s just a plant
The stupid government says I can’t
They’d rather I get hooked prescription drugs
Or drink myself to death
I wanna grow weed and you will say
Hey that smells good, would ya smoke a jay?
You’ll find that I am most hospitable
To not would just be rude
I wanna grow weed I must confess
It’s my pursuit of happiness
I got no medical condition to relieve
I really just wanna get stoned
I wanna get high. I wanna get high
And the law should comply –with me (X2)
TOKYO —Democratic Party of Japan lawmaker Yukihisa Fujita faced bitter criticism in a Washington Post editorial this week for what the major U.S. daily described as a ‘‘bizarre, half-baked and intellectually bogus’’ conspiracy theory over the Sept 11, 2001, terror attacks on the United States.
In its Monday editorial, the newspaper presented Fujita’s views on the terror attacks, including his argument that some hijackers remain alive and that ‘‘shadowy forces’’ with advance knowledge of the plot profited from stock trading.
Arguing that his views ‘‘seem to reflect a strain of anti-American thought that runs through the DPJ and the government of Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama,’’ the newspaper said the Japan-U.S. relationship ‘‘will be severely tested’’ if Hatoyama tolerates such ‘‘reckless and fact-averse’’ elements.
The Washington Post also said Hatoyama’s actions and those of the DPJ-led government raise questions about his commitment that ‘‘Japan’s alliance with the United States remains the cornerstone of its security.’‘
Fujita, director general of the DPJ’s International Department, quickly issued a statement in which he said, ‘‘At no point did I draw the conclusion that 9/11 was a conspiracy,’’ while Hatoyama told reporters Tuesday that the views were those of an individual lawmaker and not those of the party, let alone the government.
In the English statement issued Tuesday, Fujita, who was described by The Washington Post as ‘‘an influential member’’ of the DPJ, complained, ‘‘I find it totally regrettable that this kind of biased article should be published in the Washington Post,’’ noting that there were some factual errors in the piece including his title.
The 59-year-old lawmaker also said he had given an interview to the newspaper believing it would focus on immigration issues and his comments on the Sept 11 attacks were part of ‘‘an informal chat’’ separate from the interview.
My question about the Washington Post article are why now? Yuki Fujita has been saying these things a few years now with no recognition from the mainstream US press. So, why now? Coupled with the media’s treatment of the recent Pentagon shooter (calling him a 9/11 conspiracy theorist within an hour or so of the story breaking and painting all truth-seekers as potential terrorists), this is suspicious. Why now? Why trick Fujita with an interview you never print, just to catch him saying stuff he’s already said publicly? Why no by-line on this op-ed? Who wrote it?
If the Tea Party movement is the spoiled stepchild of the American news media, then the 911 Truth movement is the mad woman in the attic of U.S. journalistic culture.
As I suggested in my previous column, the Tea Party’s notoriety and popular appeal is fueled by press coverage that is, by turns, wildly enthusiastic and wholly uncritical. In contrast, American news workers have long ignored, shunned or ridiculed the 911 Truth movement. Likewise, relatively few international news outlets have taken the 911 Truth movement seriously. Until now.
“News reports that bring up troubling questions about the official story surrounding the events of Sept. 11, 2001, are gaining traction in the international press.”
According to a new study published by Global Research, a Canadian-based independent research organization, news reports that bring up troubling questions about the official story surrounding the events of Sept. 11, 2001, are gaining traction in the international press.
Significantly, these news narratives no longer frame the 911 Truth movement as so much conspiracy theory. Rather, independent, commercial and public service news organizations the world over are giving serious consideration to allegations that challenge the veracity of the official story that emerged in the days and weeks following the 911 attacks.
A right-wing New Jersey blogger charged with threatening federal judges told a jury Thursday that his racist Internet rants were an FBI-sanctioned ruse to “flush out” dangerous neo-Nazi and white supremacist members of his audience.
“I’m not a white supremacist,” Hal Turner testified at a retrial in Brooklyn. “Never have been.”
Turner, 47, of North Bergen, N.J., has used his testimony to detail his career as a paid informant for an FBI agent investigating extremists. Prosecutors haven’t disputed he was an informant, but say he acted on his own last year when he wrote that three federal judges in Chicago “deserve to be killed” for a decision on gun control and posted their photos and the courthouse.
Asked on cross-examination Thursday about another blog posting that lauded the 2005 slaying of the mother and husband of another federal judge in Chicago, Turner insisted that the FBI had encouraged him to do it to help identify the killer.
The missive was meant to “improve my anti-government image with the people we were trying to flush out,” he said.
When losing a discussion on the facts of 9/11, a so-called 9/11 “debunker” will often rely on an old canard to “prove” that 9/11 could not have been an inside job: “So many people want their quarter hour of fame that even the Men in Black couldn’t squelch the squealers from spilling the beans,” write self-satisfied defenders of the government story. According to the logic of this argument, if there are no 9/11 whistleblowers then 9/11 was not an inside job.
So what if there are 9/11 whistleblowers? What if these whistleblowers come from every level of government and private industry, individuals who have even had their cases vindicated by internal government reports? As you are about to see, there are numerous such whistleblowers and each one is a thorn in the side of those who want to pretend that the 9/11 Commission represents the sum total of knowledge on the 9/11 attacks.
Meryl Nass presents a huge list of problems with the FBI’s anthrax investigation.