September 11th is indisputably the greatest crime in modern history. Everyone agrees that it has been the catalyst to excuse everything that has taken place in America since: wars, illegal surveillance, and torture, most notably.
It is the story of the century and it is still not to be questioned by the leading so-called alternative news websites that have reached mainstream levels of viewership. 9/11 is the stinky fart in the newsroom, where everyone with half-a-brain knows who cut the cheese, but because the boss is the culprit they’re afraid to be ridiculed or fired for speaking out. It’s authentic cowardice in the first degree.
A recent article on Disquiet Reservations called out specific “alternative” news sites for their cowardly unwillingness to mention 9/11 at all costs. The story they refused to cover happened last week in Australia, where the country’s top Union official, Kevin Bracken, caused international uproar when he was attacked for claiming on a national radio show that “the official story of 9/11 does not stand up to scientific scrutiny.” Of course, on the surface this doesn’t seem like a big story, but what is a huge story is that when the Herald Sun posted an online poll about it, an astounding majority (76.79%) agreed with Bracken, as reported by Excavator:
The Herald Sun posted an online poll on their website, asking readers the question: “Do you think Kevin Bracken’s comments were reasonable?” with a “Yes” and “No” reply. As of 12:30 am on Sunday October 31st, 10778 people have answered, 8277 of which have said Yes (76.79%), while 2501 votes have said No (23.21%).
According to the Herald Sun poll, which obviously is not scientific, over seventy five percent believe that Mr. Bracken’s comments about 9/11 were reasonable and sane. But this is bit of news not considered important if you’re an editor or journalist working for one of the many alternative media organizations that are listed above. Apparently, one of the biggest stories to emerge in the global anti-war movement does not deserve any attention from the progressive left, or anti-war sites. Are they afraid of the truth, or ashamed that they’ve censored it for this long?
These alternative media sites, by their silence, are still defending the obvious sham official story of 9/11. The good news is that their tacit denial is really starting to affect their credibility with a growing majority of the public. Time and time again online polls show a healthy majority of the public are now questioning the establishment version of events. It’s clear to all reasoned people that the official story simply “does not hold up to scientific scrutiny.” That much is becoming common sense to everyone but the willfully ignorant.
The mainstream media, who lost their credibility long ago, use a very deliberate playbook to challenge 9/11 questions. The Australian Broadcasting Channel radio interview with Bracken is a textbook display of the mainstream media’s methods. First, they attack the guest as making “nutter” conspiracy claims to immediately discredit them. Specifically, Bracken’s views were attacked as “ridiculous, extreme, and unacceptable” and he was told that they reflect poorly on his organization. Next, they try to cast the guest as “lunatic fringe,” seemingly as an attempt to prevent listeners from joining the growing ranks. Finally, they invoke the number of people killed that dreadful day as if to say, “How dare you disrespect the victims with your questions?”
It’s very eerie to witness the exact same method for attacking “questioners” being used all the way across the world. Listen to the interview for a taste of the MSM kill tactics in action and judge for yourself if it is a fair exchange of ideas:
That is some pretty sad journalism, but a brilliant display of trying to put the guest on the defensive. However, as indicated in the poll afterward, this tactic seems to be getting stale and is increasingly blowing up in their face. But at least the MSM’s offensive style flaunts their clear desire to keep something hidden. It was precisely the mainstream media’s lost credibility that gave rise to “alternative news” empires in the first place. Given all that has transpired since 9/11, are we to believe that the operators of leading alternative sites aren’t intuitive enough to question it? Of course they are, and that’s why their silence makes them disingenuous cowards.
One would think that this emerging massive majority should be enough incentive to drive the topic of discussion on these sites, yet it remains stunningly off-limits. This angry majority realizes that 9/11 is a dam of lies that holds back the flood of truth, and the dam is now leaking like a sieve. Surely, it would draw a massive audience for whomever has the guts to provide an honest forum for it instead of openly censoring it.
Watch the important clip below where former Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura discusses when Huffington Post censored his article, and why he questions 9/11:
It seems the growing majority of the public is beginning to see the forest for the trees and it’s high time a top alternative news site grows some cajones and gets real. They may lose some corporate sponsors (despite guaranteed traffic increases), but it’s better than losing all integrity and credibility.