September 24, 2010
Yesterday, at the annual United Nations General Assembly, the Iranian President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, said in his address to the gathered world leaders that the “majority of the American people, as well as most nations and politicians around the world agree with this view” (that the attacks of September 11 2001 was an inside job).
This not only causes the vast majority of the U.S. delegates to leave the hall in disgust, but it also causes the Main Stream Media to go into fits of panic as the news spreads that someone has the guts to stand up in the United Nations and say that the American Administration, under former President George W. Bush, committed the world’s worst ever terrorist atrocity against their own citizens, and not only that, but that the majority of Americans know that they did it.
You may find the full speech on video here.
The New York Times, in an effort to lessen the import of this statement, deliberately misquoted him at the beginning of their article, saying that he said that “some” Americans believe that 9/11 was an inside job, knowing full well that most readers will only skim over such an article and would only read the first two paragraphs before going off to see if Lindsey Lohan is back in jail yet.
To quote the beginning of the New York Times article:
“The president of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, issued a series of incendiary comments in his address to the United Nations General Assembly on Thursday afternoon, noting in particular that some people believe the United States orchestrated the Sept. 11 attacks as part of a propaganda campaign to “reverse the declining American economy” and to “save the Zionist regime,” meaning Israel.”
It is only later that they quote what he actually did say, far enough down in the article that most people probably would bother reading down that far. This is what President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad actually did say:
“In identifying those responsible behind the Sept. 11 attacks, there were three viewpoints,” he said. “First, that a very powerful and complex terrorist group able to successfully cross all layers of the American intelligence and security carried out the attack. This is the prevalent viewpoint which has been supported mainly and advocated by American statesmen.”
“Second: that some segments within the U.S. government orchestrated the attack to reverse the declining American economy and its grips on the Middle East in order to save the Zionist regime. The majority of the American people, as well as most nations and politicians around the world agree with this view.“
“Third: it was carried out by a terrorist group but that the American government supported and took advantage of the situation. Apparently, this viewpoint has fewer proponents.”
In the New York Times’ emergency hit piece, a rather telling sentence is written just before the quote, of which I would like to examine closer:
“Mr. Ahmadinejad framed his comments about Sept. 11 as an examination of opinions, an approach he has used in questioning the Holocaust, as well.”
This sentence is deliberately designed to make the reader equate 9/11 Truth with Holocaust Denial, a Neural-Linguistic Programming technique known as “discrediting by association”. And yet, as I myself, and many other Patriots can testify, the official accounts of what actually happened during those terrible events of the 9th of September 2001 just do not add up with the vast body of video and documentary evidence we have uncovered since the event. Even the 9/11 Commissioners and Senior former CIA Agents have grave misgivings over the official account of these events.
The British Guardian newspaper has even gone as far as doing two separate pieces on Ahmadinejad’s speech, and the proposed reaction to it by Nick Clegg, the deputy Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, when he makes his speech at the United Nations General Assembly.
The first piece, entitled “Ahmadinejad accuses US of ‘orchestrating’ 9/11 attacks to aid Israel“, even goes as far as to say that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad accused the U.S. government of ‘orchestrating’ the September 11 attacks, when in fact he did no such thing. As we have already seen above, he merely put forwards three opposing views of what occurred that fateful day, and offered to set up an independent investigation of all the available evidence.
Another thing you will notice about the Guardian article is that it keeps deliberately jumping to and from other subjects while dealing with what he actually said. This is unusual, as the Guardian are known for putting relevant background information at the end of their articles within a couple of paragraphs, and not for inserting these titbits of (dis)information right in he middle of the main story. This is another Neural-Linguistic Programming technique known as “muddying the waters” or “distraction”. Here are the first three paragraphs to illustrate what I mean:
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran has accused the US government of orchestrating the 9/11 attacks to prop up Israel.
Speaking at the UN general assembly, just a few miles away from the still open wound of Ground Zero, he prompted a walkout of the US and UK delegations from the chamber. US diplomats dismissed his comments as “abhorrent and delusional”.
At a time when Iran is being squeezed by sanctions imposed through the UN, Ahmadinejad showed no desire to extend a placatory hand and instead opted to repeat several old conspiracy theories relating to the terrorist attacks on September 11 2001. One theory of what happened on that day, he said, was “the US government orchestrated the attack in order to save the Zionist regime in the Middle East”.
The first paragraph I have already dealt with. The second paragraph gives four pieces of information, one of which is deliberately emotive as we really didn’t need to be reminded that the UN Headquarters is only a few short miles from ‘Ground Zero’. The third paragraph mentions the current situation with Iran, which again, we really didn’t need to be reminded of here, but rather, would have usually been left as a footnote at the bottom of the article. Again, using the term ‘conspiracy theories’ is a deliberate attack on the opinions he was expressing, as many people from architects to physicists to former US Senators and senior CIA agents also believe that 9/11 did not happen quite the way the discredited 9/11 Commission said it did. Finally, it deals with what Ahmadinejad said unfairly, by again deliberately misrepresenting his words through misquotation.
Now we get onto the Guardian’s next piece, entitled “Nick Clegg to denounce Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at UN“. The opening salvo is as follows:
“Nick Clegg will today issue a strong condemnation of the Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, telling the UN that his claims, made yesterday, that the US government was behind the 9/11 attacks on New York are ‘bizarre, offensive and attention-grabbing’.”
So his comments were ‘bizarre, offensive and attention grabbing’? They are only bizarre to those who have not bothered to look at the wealth of evidence available, offensive to those with guilty consciences who know that 9/11 was an inside job, and no more attention grabbing than President Obama’s claims that he will sort out the Middle East by this time next year, which is an even wilder claim to make.
“[Nick] Clegg will say: ‘I was ready today to welcome the progress made in this week’s meeting of the E3+3 group on Iran. I was ready to straightforwardly reiterate our concerns about Iran’s nuclear programme. But instead, once again, an issue of grave global concern has been overshadowed by the bizarre, offensive and attention-grabbing pronouncements by President Ahmedinejad from this podium yesterday. His remarks were intended to distract attention from Iran’s obligations and to generate media headlines. They deserve to do neither’.”
Again, this second hit piece goes on to confuse the issues and muddy the waters, as does the first. It appears that the Guardian are toeing the official ‘discredit at all costs’ line to the letter. Their masters at Whitehall and the White House must be really proud of them.
The Independent’s sole article on the subject is a little more reasonable. “EU chief slams Iran’s 9/11 attack claims” deals mostly with the official reaction to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s comments from the EU and U.S. Administrations, while only barely mentioning what all the fuss is about.
The Telegraph has one article on the subject as well – “Nick Clegg hits back over Ahmadinejad’s 9/11 comments“. Again, certain techniques are being deliberately used to pull the agenda away from what Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said to Nick Clegg’s reaction to it.
The Daily Express’ article, “UN Fury at Iran’s 9/11 Claim“, is a total hit piece from beginning to end, and would take too long to dissect here. Needless to say it uses disinformation and distraction to confuse the issues in the minds of its readership.
The one concern that I have about Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s coming out for 9/11 Truth at the United Nations General Assembly is how the American and British Administrations can now conflate 9/11 Truth with domestic extremism more easily than they could before.
Never-the-less, Main Stream Media publications like the New York Times and the Guardian, as well as all the major TV news channels, are going to attack rather heavily Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s statements. The only problem with this is that many other world leaders are also coming out for 9/11 Truth, including President Fidel Castro of Cuba, along with several Arab, South American, and European leaders.
So be wary of the Main Stream Media trying to put their spin onto everything. They do it all the time…
This article was posted: Friday, September 24, 2010 at 10:26 am