Alex talks with Luke Rudkowski of We Are Change in New York. Rudkowski and fellow WAC member James Lane confronted former vice president Dick Cheney in Washington, DC, during the annual Conservative Political Action Conference.
February 16, 2011
In the We Are Change video below, Marxist converted into card-carrying neocon David Horowitz reveals something not really surprising – he knows very little about September 11, 2001, or at least claims to know very little.
The events of September 11, 2001, define the pro-war, anti-Muslim agenda of the neocons, and yet Horowitz comes off as completely clueless. He is like a deer caught in the headlights. He is like a babe in the woods without his soap box at Fox News.
He feigns ignorance of the established fact that Mahmood Ahmed, then director of Pakistan’s ISI, ordered Saeed Sheikh to wire $100,000 to hijacker Mohamed Atta. On the morning of the attacks, Ahmed had a breakfast meeting in Washington, D.C., with House and Senate Intelligence Committee chairmen, Rep. Porter Goss and Senator Bob Graham.
Horowitz is also clueless about the fact that six out of ten 9/11 commissioners doubt the official story and some suspect they were deceived by the Pentagon. The co-chairs of the Commission, Thomas Keane and Lee Hamilton, said that the CIA and the Bush neocons “obstructed our investigation.”
The co-chairs of the Commissionadmitted that their report was driven by political considerations. In other word, it was steered by neocons in the Bush administration for the sake of creating an excuse to invade small countries and wantonly slaughter Muslims.
David Horowitz is a member of the neocon intelligentsia. It is difficult to believe he has no knowledge of the event that literally defines the neocons and their illegal wars against Arabs and Muslims, so far resulting in over a million and half calculated murders.
Of course, we have to take into consideration that Horowitz’s main obsession is attacking people he was once associated with as a Marxist, so knowledge about the facts surrounding 9/11 come in at best as a distant second. He is also an enemy of libertarians and especially Ron Paul because Paul is opposed to the total warfare state and the neocon mass murder campaigns in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Horowitz may be dismissed as just another ideologue on the CIA’s payroll. Horowitz’s operation has taken money from Richard Scaife, the “philanthropic” billionaire who worked with the CIA. Scaife’s Forum World Features, a foreign news service, was a CIA front that disseminated propaganda around the world.
In short, Horowitz indirectly works for the same people who pulled off the attacks of September 11, 2001.
|Your source for hot news/information/events • August 11, 2010|
|Not displaying properly? View Action Alert online
Today’s Action Alert – #4:
Help us on Capitol Hill to deliver our AE911Truth VIP
The packet includes:
1. Introductory letter
This action will take place on September 7and 8. AE911Truth will provide the materials. This activity is primarily for those of you who are nearby or who are coming to meet your Congress members. Meet us in Washington DC on Monday night (Labor Day) September 6 at a pre-arranged restaurant for coordination and socializing. Email us atCongressionalOutreach@ae911truth.org for details.
Join in on the action. Dress for success and always be polite.
You will simply say “Hi, I’m Joe Smith, I have a petition for the Congress member with the signatures of more than 1,000 architects and engineers concerned about a matter of national security relating to 9/11. May I entrust it to you? Thank you!”
Keep a checklist of the offices where you have left a packet (Member name, House or Senate district, staffer’s name) along with your name and contact information. Submit your checklist to CongressionalOutreach@ae911truth.org or give it directly to the on-site AE911Truth staff.
is on board with AE911Truth in Washington DC in September. Join Us!
The WeAreChange movie showings are back for the whole month of August, Join us every Saturday for a street action and mind blowing movie showings with amazing people. Suggested donation at the door but no one will be turned away.
On Saturday August 7th @ 7pm WeAreChangeNYC will be screening the film Defamation @ INN Studios, 56 Walker St. NYC!
Synopsis of film:
What is anti-Semitism today, two generations after the Holocaust? In his continuing exploration of modern Israeli life, director Yoav Shamir (Checkpoint, 5 Days, Flipping Out) travels the world in search of the most modern manifestations of the “oldest hatred”, and comes up with some startling answers.
In this irreverent quest, he follows American Jewish leaders to the capitals of Europe, as they warn government officials of the growing threat of anti-Semitism, and he tacks on to a class of Israeli high school students on a pilgrimage to Auschwitz.
On his way, Shamir meets controversial historian, Norman Finkelstein, who offers his unpopular views on the manner that anti-Semitism is being used by the Jewish community and especially Israel for political gain. He also joins scholars, Stephen M. Walt and John J. Mearsheimer, while they give a lecture in Israel following the release of their book “The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy”, about the un-proportional influence the Israel lobby in Washington enjoys. Yoav visits Yad Vashem, the Holocaust memorial museum in Jerusalem, the must stop for all world leaders on their visits to Israel. While in Jerusalem, he drops by the house of his grandmother that offers her insight on the issue and declares that she is the “real Jew”.
The film questions our perceptions and terminology when an event proclaimed by some as anti-Semitic is described by others as legitimate criticism of Israel’s government policies. The film walks along the boundary between anti-Zionism, rejecting the notion of a Jewish State, and anti-Semitism, rejecting Jews. Is the former being used to excuse the latter? And is there a difference between today’s anti-Semitism and plain old racism that is affecting all minorities?
Opinions often differ and tempers sometimes flare, but in Defamation we find that one thing is certain – only by understanding their response to anti-Semitism can we really appreciate how some Jewish people today, and especially modern Israelis, respond to the world around them, in New York and in Moscow, in Gaza and Tel Aviv.
$10 suggested donation – no one will be turned away. All proceeds go to the Our Lives Post-9/11 Conference WeAreChangeNYC is hosting this September.
WASHINGTON: A treasure trove of US documents implicating Pakistan in its support for terrorism exploded in the public domain on Sunday, sending officials in both countries scurrying to defend a dubious alliance and straining a phony partnership based on a misreading of the ground sentiment and situation.
WikiLeaks, a whistleblower organization that publishes sensitive government leaks from anonymous sources, put a staggering 91,000 documents, mainly ground reports from US military personnel, in public domain on Sunday. Many of the documents exposed Pakistan’s double-faced policy of fuelling terrorism in Afghanistan while claiming to be fighting it as an US ally.
In effect, the chronicles suggested that Washington was blindly paying Pakistan massive amounts of money for access to Afghanistan even as Islamabad uses its spy agency, ISI, to plot the death of American and Nato troops, allied Indian personnel, and undermines US policy. The most devastating leaks showed that Pakistan allows representatives of its spy service, ISI, to meet directly with the Taliban in secret strategy sessions to organize attacks against American soldiers in Afghanistan, and even hatch plots to assassinate Afghan leaders, including President Hamid Karzai.
WikiLeaks worked with three media organizations–The New York Times, Germany’s Der Spiegel and The Guardian–to make sense of the massive cache of documents, while not disclosing how it got hold of it. Stunned Washington experts compared it to the leaking of the Pentagon papers during the Vietnam War. What the cache highlighted most was the continuing Pakistani perfidy, and American credulity in accepting Islamabad as an ally and funnelling billions of dollars in aid even as it helped plot US downfall in the region and killed American soldiers.
“Americans fighting the war in Afghanistan have long harboured strong suspicions that Pakistan’s military spy service has guided the Afghan insurgency with a hidden hand, even as Pakistan receives more than $1 billion a year from Washington for its help combating the militants,” the New York Times said in its assessment of the report. “The records also contain firsthand accounts of American anger at Pakistan’s unwillingness to confront insurgents who launched attacks near Pakistani border posts, moved openly by the truckload across the frontier and retreated to Pakistani territory for safety,” it continued.
“The behind-the-scenes frustrations of soldiers on the ground and glimpses of what appear to be Pakistani skullduggery contrast sharply with the frequently rosy public pronouncements of Islamabad as an ally by American officials looking to sustain a drone campaign over parts of Pakistani territory to strike at Qaida havens,” it added.
That policy of ambivalence and appeasement continued even into the hours after the WikiLeaks expose, as US and Pakistani officials rushed to control the damage. US national security advisor James Jones condemned the “disclosure of classified documents by individuals and organizations”, which, he said, “could put the lives of Americans and our partners at risk, and threaten our national security”, when, in effect, the documents suggest it is Washington’s appeasement of Pakistan which is doing that.
US officials also argued that the documents posted by WikiLeaks covered a period from January 2004 to December 2009 and pre-dated President Barack Obama’s new strategy announced on December 1, 2009, when they suggested there began a turnaround “with a substantial increase in resources for Afghanistan, and increased focus on Al Qaida and Taliban safe-havens in Pakistan, precisely because of the grave situation that had developed over several years”.
“I don’t think anyone who follows this issue will find it surprising that there are concerns about the ISI and safe havens in Pakistan. In fact, we’ve said as much repeatedly and on the record,” one official explained. “The period of time covered in these documents (January 2004-December 2009) is before the President announced his new strategy. Some of the disconcerting things reported are exactly why the President ordered a three-month policy review and a change in strategy.”
But the official also cast aspersions on WikiLeaks and its motive, saying, “It’s worth noting that WikiLeaks is not an objective news outlet but rather an organization that opposes the US policy in Afghanistan.”
Pakistan, as usual, reacted with fury to the disclosures, calling the leaks “malicious and unsubstantiated”. An unnamed official in Islamabad was quoted as saying, “They were from raw intelligence reports that had not been verified and were meant to impugn the reputation of the spy agency.”
A more restrained reaction came from Pakistan’s ambassador to the US Hussain Haqqani (whose book chronicles the Pakistani military’s jihadi connections and outlook). “The documents circulated by WikiLeaks do not reflect the current on-ground realities,” Haqqani said, plying the current Washington-Islamabad line that whatever happened was in the past.