Top Menu

9/11 Truthers say support new KPFA Morning Show (but not too truthfully)

KPFAThe new all volunteer KPFA Morning Show got a resounding endorsement from Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth this week. The group says its mission is to promote the idea that there is “sufficient evidence to conclude that the World Trade Center buildings #1 (North Tower), #2 (South Tower), and #7 (the 47 story high-rise across Vesey St.) were destroyed not by jet impact and fires but by controlled demolition with explosives” on September 11, 2001.

On Tuesday, the outfit put out an action alert calling on its supporters to let the Berkeley, California listener supported station know that they like the signal’s new volunteer “Morning Mix” lineup, which replaced recently purged hosts Aimee Allison and Brian Edwards-Tiekert:

“[a] new show, ‘Morning Mix’, hosted by several volunteers, including Project Censored’s own, Mickey Huff, is in place at 8:00am. Mickey is a supporter of all things truth and will undoubtedly have us on as a guest if the show is continued. AE911Truth is highlighted in the last 3 Project Censored books. However the new radio show’s tenure is in jeopardy. We need your help.”

So calling all 9/11Truthers, continues the message—tell KPFA’s new General Manager and Program Director that you dig the new show! But, well, maybe leave a few details out of your e-mail:

“For this particular show of support,” the missive concludes, “we should refrain from mentioning 9/11—a very contentious issue at KPFA. Discussion of it in this circumstance will only complicate and thwart our efforts to keep the ‘Morning Mix’ on the air.”

Yeah, the whole truth always complicates things. Better just to omit minor deets like the real actual reason you support the new program out of your message of support.

I wonder if there are other truths that 9/11Truthers around KPFA think that it’s best to keep on a low profile.

Just one dollar a month makes you a patron of Radio Survivor. Help us through our Patreon Campaign!



9 Responses to 9/11 Truthers say support new KPFA Morning Show (but not too truthfully)

  1. trancuan January 28, 2011 at 5:58 pm #

    These darn Truthers think they can trick us!

  2. J.T. Waldron January 28, 2011 at 7:07 pm #

    Pretty petty goddamn gripe against those attempting to carefully present what is the primary target for the likes of the Cass Sunstein or the ADL. Sounds like you’ve never been the target of a government lobby. Sorry, but the next time you discover something that contradicts some official, laughable conspiracy theory for the next false flag, I’ll get just as petty as you choose to tread lightly. You know what? I don’t see it. You wouldn’t have the balls to even try.

  3. Matthew Lasar January 28, 2011 at 8:07 pm #

    Sorry about the petty. I feel particularly bad in this instance because you 9/11 Truthies are always so nice.

    And Cass Sunstein is in on this too? All coming together now.

  4. Jack Radey January 28, 2011 at 10:54 pm #

    I happen to believe that it is highly unlikely that steel suddenly lost its usual properties on 9/11, and that the building’s falls looked like controlled demolition to me. That aside, I want our Morning Show, and its staff back, I want the whack jobs back off the air (they get plenty of air time). And I also believe that the Pacifica National Director has some confused notion of how KPFA works. We, the listeners pay for it. Oh, and we pay a big chunk to Pacifica, too. We elect our Local Station Board, who are supposed to hire the station manager, and like that. If we don’t like the way the station is run, we elect a new LSB. Since when does the Pacifica Director (who we didn’t vote for) get to say who is on the air and not, and who is station manager or not? Hey, you independent listeners, you guys who say you like democracy. What is democratic about throwing people off the air and off the LSB after we elect them? Why doesn’t the PNB Director go back to Pacifica and let KPFA run itself?

  5. Barbara Jean January 29, 2011 at 8:25 am #

    Some of the listeners, including myself, would like all the name calling to end. Stick to the issues! 9/11 is massively suspicious, the whole history of this governments dirty deeds is documented. See on the JFK assasination and the gangster state. There is no argument with govt. conspiracy and false flag operations to start the hundreds of wars of imperialism. This fight is ridiculous to me. We have all wanted young people and new people involved for years. Let’s work to get along.

  6. ResearchGuy January 29, 2011 at 1:53 pm #

    The truth DOES complicate things when you are dealing with people who are making decisions based on fear or favor rather than intellectual integrity. US law includes many provisions for excluding truthful statements and evidence from court cases because of their potential to prejudice the jury.

    If you want to see the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth come out about 9/11, why don’t you apply your writing skills and time to getting the government to release ALL the data regarding its computer modeling of Building 7? Their excuse for not releasing it is ridiculous and strangely convenient for them. Or why don’t you push for a new investigation with subpoena power, this time, without any conflicts of interest, and without predetermined conclusions being circulated in a secret document? See Philip Shenon’s book The Commission for documentation of all this.

    I’m not just tweaking you, I would really like to know why you’re concerned with getting the full truth out is so extremely one-sided.

  7. Dan Noel January 29, 2011 at 2:34 pm #

    Why should 9/11 be a point of contention at KPFA? It is common knowledge that:

    * the 9/11 terrorists were the remarkably organized team of experts, featuring top-notch engineers, who demolished the twin towers with shock, awe, explosives, and 2,000+ civilians inside;

    * the U.S. government provided these terrorists with cover and protection, blaming Osama bin Laden and his fanatics instead;

    * this cover-up was mediocre at best;

    * just about every major leader and organization worldwide who would normally be counted on to denounce the above ignored it instead;

    * this amazingly global and persisting censorship allowed the 9/11 conspirators to implement a flurry of nefarious activities, including grand crimes against humanity such as the ongoing Afghan war;

    * just as the twin towers’ demolition engineers were highly unlikely to take their job without prior assurances of a cover-up, Bush and his accomplices were highly unlikely to provide that cover without prior assurances that it would be censored;

    * the responsibility for the decade of worldwide misery 9/11 has fostered lies less with the neocons and the 9/11 terrorists than with the literally tens of thousands of organizations worldwide that ostensibly oppose neocon power and policies but have tried so hard to bury their heads in the sand;

    What could be worthier of KPFA’s attention and energy?


  8. Peter January 29, 2011 at 8:11 pm #

    Many thanks to Matthew Lasar for a balanced and fair presentation of a newsworthy issue. I would volunteer the opinion, however, that the reason why the 9/11 Truthers in question here (ostensibly Huff and the others) would not want to put the spotlight on the so-called “slant” of KPFA’s morning show is not due to any lack of candor, but rather ideological modesty and simple tactical considerations. It should be pretty clear why this is so. The Truther community has nothing to lose and everything to gain by letting their opponents strike first and reveal their own true colors. In this, they have much in common with the past movements established by Mahatma Ghandi and Martin Luther King Jr.

    The giggling and condescension over whether or not some public figure was “in on” some nefarious activity or not loses its force once this is understood. It’s like saying that Bull Connor was “in on” segregation in the South.

    If we, as a society, fail to perceive certain obvious truths that had been in plain sight, in front of our faces, the entire time…I am afraid that the joke’s on us.

  9. Matthew Lasar January 30, 2011 at 6:02 pm #

    Bottom line: not one of these 9/11 Truth responses concedes there is any problem with lobbying KPFA while omitting the honest reason for the effort. Instead they dodge the question, insisting that being candid about their motives isn’t a real issue, when of course it is.

    I find the above replies evasive, but understandable. The way I see it, being a 9/11 Truth person is about deciding how much of what you think to reveal—or, to put it more cosmetically, it’s about layering your message:

    Like the intelligent design crowd, 9/11 Truthies try to package their story in the language of science—the temperature at which steel melts, the angles at which airplanes can fly, etcetera. But once you say that the WTC was destroyed by a controlled demolition inside the buildings, you have to explain the airplanes in Manhattan, the Pentagon, and Pennsylvania. Were they remotely controlled vehicles, cruise missiles . . . holograms? If they weren’t civilian planes, what about those supposed civilian passengers? Were they fictional? If the planes were military, how did they get past emergency or military radar?

    And how was this all kept under wraps? (And please, spare me the lame Manhattan Project analogy—Manhattan was one of the worst kept secrets in military history. After Hiroshima happened, it became the most famous scientific project in the world, its leaders global celebrities).

    So the next thing you know, your "inside job" theory involves hundreds if not thousands of extremely disciplined, complicit people in the military, government intelligence, Congress, finance, and the media. And then you have to explain the dark, self-interested "real" reasons why ordinary people like me question these theories.

    Some 9/11 Truth folk don’t care how crazy their version of the plot sounds. But others want to appear reasonable, so they layer their explanations, foregrounding the scientific sounding stuff, while low profiling the meta-scenarios that they know will read like bizarre nonsense to many people. These get shared with the conspiracy conference crowd—the 9/11 "deep politics" list-serve Truthorati.

    Compared to this, not telling KPFA’s General Manager the real reason why they support the Morning Mix is a walk in the park.

    That’s the last word on this thread. But it may surprise some of my non-admirers to learn that I think that 9/11 whodunnit questions belong on Pacifica radio and community radio in general (and no, not just at 3 AM). The question is in what context—a problem to be taken up in a future post.

Powered by WordPress. Designed by WooThemes