Palin a 9/11 truther

[j6p]

YouTube - Sarah Palin Supports A New 9/11 Investigation (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DPDbmQmV6O8)

[FrankRep]

Something tells me that Glenn Beck won't attack her.

Double standard Glenn? Agenda Involved?

[itshappening]

bump

[DAFTEK]

Something tells me that Glenn Beck won't attack her.

Double standard Glenn? Agenda Involved?

:D Yup!

[j6p]

Speard this far and ride. Twitter, digg and free republic

[CharlesTX]

somebody email to Beck and the rest of the shills.

[Bergie Bergeron]

somebody email to Beck and the rest of the shills.
+1

[FrankRep]

Email the Youtube to Politico!

http://www.politico.com/aboutus/feedback.html

[jmdrake]

somebody email to Beck and the rest of the shills.

He'll never respond to the email. Someone needs to call the show and say "Hey Glenn. Did you see the video on YouTube where Palin was asked if she thought there should be a new 9/11 investigation and she said yes? Do you think someone like Palin who accepts that there may be unanswered questions about 9/11 deserves to be the leader of the Tea Party movement"?

[j6p]

We need to spread this far and wide.

[jmdrake]

Email the Youtube to Politico!

http://www.politico.com/aboutus/feedback.html

Done.

[sevin]

He'll never respond to the email. Someone needs to call the show and say "Hey Glenn. Did you see the video on YouTube where Palin was asked if she thought there should be a new 9/11 investigation and she said yes? Do you think someone like Palin who accepts that there may be unanswered questions about 9/11 deserves to be the leader of the Tea Party movement"?

this

[FrankRep]

I just emailed Rachel Maddow. This will be a hot story for her.

rachel@msnbc.com

[johnrocks]

What about Michelle Malkin's article six months after 9-11?

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/michelle/malkin030802.asp

She had a lot of questions, where was the outrage with her because I never saw it.

http://www.NewsAndOpinion.com -- THE six-month anniversary of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks is upon us. Here are a half-dozen unsolved mysteries still on my mind:

What really happened on United Airlines Flight 93? As the Philadelphia Daily News reported back in November, many folks in Shanksville, Pa., where the hijacked Boeing 757 crashed, believe the plane was shot down. Eyewitnesses reported seeing a small, unmarked jet flying overhead immediately after impact; others are convinced they heard the piercing sound of a missile. A federal flight controller told The Telegraph of Nashua, N.H., that an F-16 had indeed been in "hot pursuit" of Flight 93 until it hit the ground. One of the 911calls from a passenger on the flight indicated that there was an explosion aboard the plane. The FBI immediately confiscated the tape.

The eight-mile-wide debris field seems to bolster claims of an on-board explosion. So did the discovery of a one-ton chunk of the plane's engine far from the rest of the crash site - which some say points to evidence that a heat-seeking missile targeted the flight. Then there's the eight-minute gap from the time all cell phone calls from the plane ceased and the time it crashed.

Although both the cockpit voice recorder and flight data recorder were recovered, not a single scrap about what was on the black boxes has been officially released. This despite the government's otherwise routine release of such information. (Recall that after American Airlines Flight 587 crashed in New York last November, the feds released detailed information from one of the black boxes within less than two days.)

The feds insist on keeping all the Flight 11 data secret because disclosing such information might "interfere with enforcement proceedings." Against whom? All the hijack culprits are dead.

What really happened on American Airlines Flight 11? Did one of the hijackers have a gun on board? Was it planted before the flight took off, or was it smuggled on? Either way, shouldn't someone be held accountable if such an egregious security breach did in fact take place? Investigative reporter Paul Sperry, formerly of Investor's Business Daily and now with Worldnetdaily.com, scooped the mainstream press by exposing a high-level, internal report from the Federal Aviation Administration. It detailed the alleged shooting of Flight 11 passenger Daniel Lewin by hijacker Satam Al Suqami.

According to the document, which was later obtained by the Washington Post, USA Today, and others, an onboard flight attendant reported in a phone call that "one bullet was reported to have been fired" during the flight, killing Lewin before the plane crashed into the north tower of the World Trade Center. FAA officials dismissed the leaked memo as a draft and claimed that the very specific report of gunfire - including the names of the victim, shooter, and their precise seat numbers -- was an editing error.

Just a typo, huh?

[j6p]

Anyone have twitter? post this video and articles every where. Should post this on Free republic. lol

[j6p]

Does Glen beck have a fourm we can post this video on there

[catdd]

Beck didn't even question her on the topic. This should clear Medina and give her the push she needs.
How do we get this story to the mainstream?

[j6p]

Post this with 9/12 groups? we can post this on there too and texas blogs.

[paulitics]

Sorry, this is not the same thing. Calling for a new investigation, does not mean she thinks the government was behind the attacks.


It could mean that she supports the victims family, by investigating the events that lead to the terrorists attacks such as radical Islam, government incompetence, etc.

There is nothing that she said to suggest she is a truther, or questions the government's complicity or motives in the attacks.

This is a waste of time, and makes us look delusional. It's just going to turn off more people, who are not yet annoyed with us.

[j6p]

Spread to daily paul, digg, twitter, free republic

[FrankRep]

Sorry, this is not the same thing. Calling for a new investigation, does not mean she thinks the government was behind the attacks.

In Glenn Beck's mind it is. Asking questions about 9/11 is like "Holocaust Denial" according to Glenn Beck.

[j6p]

spread to texas blogs

[catdd]

Sorry, this is not the same thing. Calling for a new investigation, does not mean she thinks the government was behind the attacks.


It could mean that she supports the victims family, by investigating the events that lead to the terrorists attacks such as radical Islam, government incompetence, etc.




That's all Medina said too. Did you listen to the interview with Beck?

[j6p]

Anyone have lewrockwell email?

[fatjohn]

I just emailed Rachel Maddow. This will be a hot story for her.

rachel@msnbc.com

email john stewart he will make mince meat of beck

[paulitics]

That's all Medina said too. Did you listen to the interview with Beck?

Yes, I agree with that too some extent, although I think Medina left it open as to whether or not the government was behind the attacks, by saing there are alot of unanswered questions.

If the "We are change" crew asked Palin. "Do you think the government was behind the attacks?" and she responded, "Well there are alot of unanswered questions, and I can't say one way or the other", than that would be the same thing that as what Medina said.

What I am saying the best thing to do, is for us to say it is Ok to have questions about what happened on 911. We shouldn't be defensive, it is our patriotic duty to have questions. But we can't say that Palin the neocon, would distrust the government's motives on this. She uses 911 as an excuse to expand the war on terror, for christ's sake.

[fatjohn]

Sorry, this is not the same thing. Calling for a new investigation, does not mean she thinks the government was behind the attacks.


It could mean that she supports the victims family, by investigating the events that lead to the terrorists attacks such as radical Islam, government incompetence, etc.

There is nothing that she said to suggest she is a truther, or questions the government's complicity or motives in the attacks.

This is a waste of time, and makes us look delusional. It's just going to turn off more people, who are not yet annoyed with us.

you did not listen to medina did you? Did she say she thinks the government was behind the attacks?

[j6p]

Lets focous on making this go viral. send this to lewrockwell

[catdd]

Well he was calling Medina "dangerous" right from the start so I guess there lies a clue.
Sarah the teOcon princess can safely say what Debra the "dangerous" cannot. It's status quo pandering I think.

[paulitics]

In Glenn Beck's mind it is. Asking questions about 9/11 is like "Holocaust Denial" according to Glenn Beck.

This is what we need to focus on. Glenn Beck is a conspiracy theorist as well, so why is one conspiracy ok, and not the other? It doesn't make sense.

[Peace&Freedom]

Sorry, this is not the same thing. Calling for a new investigation, does not mean she thinks the government was behind the attacks.


It could mean that she supports the victims family, by investigating the events that lead to the terrorists attacks such as radical Islam, government incompetence, etc.

There is nothing that she said to suggest she is a truther, or questions the government's complicity or motives in the attacks.

This is a waste of time, and makes us look delusional. It's just going to turn off more people, who are not yet annoyed with us.

The plain fact is that many ardently anti-truther people think even calling for more investigation is trutherism. You are making a distinction most of those people do not. "9-11 truther" nowadays means questioning the high holy state's official conspiracy story (19 towelheads and Capt. Caveman did it). Whether you think the government made it happen, knew it was going to happen, or should be further investigated to settle what happened, you are questioning the official story, whose punch line is a "we know what happened, so it's a waste of time" absolutism suggested by your comments. And many of the most avid supporters of a new inquiry are the victims' families, who want one because they also question the state's complicity and motives.

[Dark_Horse_Rider]

This is what we need to focus on. Glenn Beck is a conspiracy theorist as well, so why is one conspiracy ok, and not the other? It doesn't make sense.

It doesn't make sense if you believe him to be sincere and not a puppet.

[FrankRep]

Lets see some Twitter posts!

http://twitter.com/#search?q=sarah%20palin%20truther



I'm watching!

YouTube - Sarah Palin Supports A New 9/11 Investigation (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DPDbmQmV6O8)

[John of Des Moines]

Rather be a 911 Truther compared to a 911 Liar.

[angelatc]

I'm not passing it around with the "We Are Change" thing stamped across it. Sorry, but I won't.

[paulitics]

you did not listen to medina did you? Did she say she thinks the government was behind the attacks?

No, but she leaves it open as a possibility.

Glenn: Do you believe the government was in any way involved with bringing down the world trade centers?

Medina: I don't have all of the evidence Glenn. I think some very good questions have been raised in that regard.



My point, is that this is in no way makes her a truther such as an AJ, or Ventura, who have decided it was the government, but this is not anything like what Palin said. I'm trying to stay objective here, that's all.

[FrankRep]

Sarah Palin Supports New 9/11 Investigation
Alaska Governor gives unexpected answer during Ohio rally

Prison Planet.com
Tuesday, October 28, 2008

http://www.prisonplanet.com/sarah-palin-supports-new-911-investigation.html

[jmdrake]

Don't forget the attention Michelle Malkin initially gave to the Able Danger story.

http://michellemalkin.com/2005/10/19/able-danger-weldon-goes-ballistic/

http://michellemalkin.com/2005/08/12/able-dangerand-danger-enablers/

http://michellemalkin.com/2005/09/21/able-danger-the-saga-continues/


What about Michelle Malkin's article six months after 9-11?

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/michelle/malkin030802.asp

She had a lot of questions, where was the outrage with her because I never saw it.

http://www.NewsAndOpinion.com -- THE six-month anniversary of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks is upon us. Here are a half-dozen unsolved mysteries still on my mind:

What really happened on United Airlines Flight 93? As the Philadelphia Daily News reported back in November, many folks in Shanksville, Pa., where the hijacked Boeing 757 crashed, believe the plane was shot down. Eyewitnesses reported seeing a small, unmarked jet flying overhead immediately after impact; others are convinced they heard the piercing sound of a missile. A federal flight controller told The Telegraph of Nashua, N.H., that an F-16 had indeed been in "hot pursuit" of Flight 93 until it hit the ground. One of the 911calls from a passenger on the flight indicated that there was an explosion aboard the plane. The FBI immediately confiscated the tape.

The eight-mile-wide debris field seems to bolster claims of an on-board explosion. So did the discovery of a one-ton chunk of the plane's engine far from the rest of the crash site - which some say points to evidence that a heat-seeking missile targeted the flight. Then there's the eight-minute gap from the time all cell phone calls from the plane ceased and the time it crashed.

Although both the cockpit voice recorder and flight data recorder were recovered, not a single scrap about what was on the black boxes has been officially released. This despite the government's otherwise routine release of such information. (Recall that after American Airlines Flight 587 crashed in New York last November, the feds released detailed information from one of the black boxes within less than two days.)

The feds insist on keeping all the Flight 11 data secret because disclosing such information might "interfere with enforcement proceedings." Against whom? All the hijack culprits are dead.

What really happened on American Airlines Flight 11? Did one of the hijackers have a gun on board? Was it planted before the flight took off, or was it smuggled on? Either way, shouldn't someone be held accountable if such an egregious security breach did in fact take place? Investigative reporter Paul Sperry, formerly of Investor's Business Daily and now with Worldnetdaily.com, scooped the mainstream press by exposing a high-level, internal report from the Federal Aviation Administration. It detailed the alleged shooting of Flight 11 passenger Daniel Lewin by hijacker Satam Al Suqami.

According to the document, which was later obtained by the Washington Post, USA Today, and others, an onboard flight attendant reported in a phone call that "one bullet was reported to have been fired" during the flight, killing Lewin before the plane crashed into the north tower of the World Trade Center. FAA officials dismissed the leaked memo as a draft and claimed that the very specific report of gunfire - including the names of the victim, shooter, and their precise seat numbers -- was an editing error.

Just a typo, huh?

[j6p]

Please DIGG

http://digg.com/d31IbV0

[HOLLYWOOD]

DRUDGE Report?

How about to those hacks with the Debra hit pieces at:

Dallas Star News, AP, and Jimmy Orr @ the Christian Science Monitor?

[erowe1]

I don't disagree with the sentiment of the OP.

But honestly, from her answer, it sounds to me like Palin doesn't even know what the guy was asking about. What in the world do the sound bytes "never again" and "always be reminded" have to do with an new 9/11 investigation?