Brian Holtz: ‘9/11 Truth Becoming An Issue In LNC Chair Race’

Posted by Brian Holtz at Libertarian Intelligence. Reproduced here for the purpose of discussion. Although Brian also writes for IPR, IPR as a blog/website takes no position on LNC races, 9/11 truth, etc. And while I (Paulie) do take positions on all of the above, they often differ from Brian’s.



A story yesterday on Independent Political Report about the Libertarian National Committee Chair’s race has generated a lot of discussion about Chair candidate Ernest Hancock’s statement that “if we’re not out there telling the Truth on things like 9/11″ then the LP is “not relevant”.  Here is a comment by Jill Pyeatt, who is on the Executive Committee of the Libertarian Party’s largest affiliate, California:

We shouldn’t stay away from the 911 Truth issue because it is becoming a force that WILL be reckoned with, sooner or later. Out of respect for a mentor of mine in the party, I kept my 9/11 beliefs quiet when I ran for office in 2008. I find it increasingly difficult to do so, though, because our Iraq and Afghanistan wars are closely tied to the events of that day, and the abominable Patriot Act is also a direct result. Since anti-war is the focus of my activities, I simply won’t keep quiet about the subject any longer.

As the new chair of Region 63 (which is the Pasadena/Glendale area of CA), I organized an event last month where an engineer came out from Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth and gave a presentation of WTC Tower 7 and its baffling collapse. We had more guests that night than we have in months, maybe years in Region 63, and many of them were new to the group and the Libertarian party. We made $80, as well! The subject is no longer “verboten”.

Tom Blanton was on the LP Virginia Central Committee as recently as 2006, and later was national Chair of the Boston Tea Party.  He wrote in the same discussion:

The events of 9/11 have unleashed a shit storm of unprecedented proportion. The size, scope and power of the government has increased at a rate not seen in most of our lifetimes, justified solely on 9/11. The facts of what lead up to 9/11 and why remain shrouded in a cloak of mystery because of government obfuscation. Even if you believe the cover-up exists merely to minimize government incompetence and blowback caused by bad policies, the truth should be known. To say there is no libertarian principle involved in this issue is to say that government accountability should not be addressed.

The profile of 9/11 Truth within the LP had already been raised somewhat last October, when Las Vegas police shot and wounded former LP Nevada Chair Jim Duensing, who founded the Libertarians For Justice caucus demanding a new investigation into 9/11.

Hancock has long been an advocate for 9/11 Truth, and apparently believes the government can and has purged selected information about 9/11 from the Internet. On Hancock’s 2004-05-07 radio show, he talked about the  recollections of air traffic controllers that were recorded soon after 9/11, and how the tapes were soon destroyed by government agents:

Then you start doing some searches, and I can’t find anything. You see on airlinesafety.com, you go to these obscure things that deal with air traffic, and they’ll have a reference to a report that kinda sorta looked at it, but they don’t really get into the meat of the story. It’s like it’s been purged from the Internet, and I’m wondering can they do that? Well, of course they do it. If they can, will they? Of course they will.

Two new 9/11-themed posters for the Hancock campaign* are now available online:


*Footnote from Paulie: In comments on this post, Brian Holtz makes it clear that the posters are actually his own artwork based on statements Ernie Hancock has made, and that the Hancock campaign did not make or distribute the posters. I did not know this when I originally posted this here for discussion, and I apologize to anyone who feels misled.

89 thoughts on “Brian Holtz: ‘9/11 Truth Becoming An Issue In LNC Chair Race’

  1. Thane Eichenauer

    I have made an effort to be aware of those who feel a passion on this issue. I don’t feel that same passion as others do about September 11th.

    That day came to pass either as a result of the government failing to prevent the attack or they had a hand in the attack or a combination of they might have known, they might have had a hand in it.

    Either way there is no piece of information that I have heard of that implicates any specific person as being responsible and without that this is all a fine exercise in seeking to find the truth with no particular likelihood that there is a smoking gun to be found.

    I have the position that given that the occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan are arguably bad ideas without getting into the how or why the US Army got there, why should the LP commit to push this issue?

  2. Eric Dondero

    Isn’t it funny how all these 9/11 Conspiracy Truthers say absolutely nothing about the Oklahoma City Bombing and Tim McVeigh and Terry Nichols’ connections to Saddam Hussein and Iraqi Intelligence.

    Nichols visited the southern Phillipines 5 times! the year before the bombing a hotbet of Radical Islamic terrorism. He wasn’t there on a sightseeing tour.

    23 witnesses, including a City Councilman and his two staffers, saw and Islamic looking man fleeing the Murrah Building, minutes after the bombing, with McVeigh.

    This is all fully documented by Jayna Davis, CBS News Investigative reporter in OKC, and the very first reporter on the scene after the bombing.

    But Leftists and their allies on the leftside of the libertrarian movement are completely silent on OKC.

    Doesn’t fit their template: “Republicans always evil, Democrats good.”

  3. Eric Dondero

    Lefty Libertarians why the silence on OKC bombing?

    Why no comments about Clinton covering up at Waco?

    Why do you all completely ignore the overwhelming evidence that Obama has not produced a valid birth certificate?

    Is it only in the cases of conspiracy theories that benefit Democrats, that you all raise issues on?

  4. Thomas L. Knapp

    “Lefty Libertarians why the silence on OKC bombing?”

    What silence?

    “Why no comments about Clinton covering up at Waco?”

    Why indeed?

    “Why do you all completely ignore the overwhelming evidence that Obama has not produced a valid birth certificate?”

    Because the evidence for that is not only not “overwhelming,” it’s non-existent.

  5. LP pragmatist

    Is this 911 truth stuff going to once again snatch potential victory or at least some respect from the hands of our CANDIDATES?
    Way to go guys.

  6. Brian Holtz

    Ernest Hancock is proud of how he has passed out tens of thousands of Obama Deception DVDs. For anyone who doesn’t have time to watch the full two hours on YouTube, I’ve condensed some of the crazier parts into this 7-minute version:

  7. Sludge Puppy

    I don’t know squat about this but I do know that the Loch Ness monster has been sighted once again and Bigfoot is about the woods just outside my door. In fact I heard this gawdawful scream last night that reminded me of a cat being declawed and a one of them things in a B movie. Scary I tell ya!

  8. Gene Berkman

    Alex Jones (in Obama Deception excerpt) says that The Communist Manifesto calls for establishing “private central banks.”

    Actually The Communist Manifesto calls for establishing total state control over money & credit through a government owned central bank.

    Clearly the Federal Reserve is a government owned central bank. Not just communists but statists in general call for state control of money & banking,

  9. Alan Pyeatt

    I certainly hope we don’t elect a LNC Chair based on whether they are “truthers.” The fact is, this issue will not be settled within the LP for a long time to come. In the meantime, we can’t let this disagreement distract us from our goal: creating a libertarian society through electing appropriate candidates. That means that whoever becomes our next chair will have to lead and represent truthers and non-truthers alike.

    Those of us in California have already dealt with one divisive issue (and I would say, dealt with it successfully). We’re not in any mood to let this difference of opinion split us into factions now.

    As libertarians, we all agree that force and fraud are criminal acts. The disagreement over 9-11 is a disagreement over who was involved in committing the crimes of force and fraud. It is important, to be sure, not only because of our duty to obtain justice for those who were killed in the attacks, but also because of the decisions to which it contributed.

    But this is a disagreement about who was involved and how far the involvement went. We agree on the fundamental issues involved, and we still have to work together to get our candidates elected. So, we will need a LNC Chair who can work with both groups within the LP.

  10. Alan Pyeatt

    Eric @ 2 & 3, I believe you are making an incorrect assumption. I am a professional engineer and signed the Architects and Engineers for 9-11 Truth petition for a new investigation, and I have been raising concerns about the Waco attack since it happened.

    Also, one of the very first documentary films about 9-11, “9-11 in Plane Sight” discussed concerns at the Murrah Building, including subsequent explosions that collapsed individual wings of the building in their own footprints. So its absolutely mistaken to say that we don’t care about these issues, we certainly DO! In fact, your posts support the possibility of government complicity in attacks against US citizens on US soil.

    This is not about Republicans and Democrats or left and right, this is about murder and justice. So identifying the perpetrators accurately and holding them accountable is vital for libertarians as much as anybody else.

  11. Alan Pyeatt

    For anyone who wants more information on 9-11, I recommend the Architects and Engineers for 9-11 Truth website at http://cms.ae911truth.org/.

    And especially for those who are skeptical, you might find this link to concerns being voiced by senior military, intelligence, law enforcement, and State Department staff to be worth your while: http://patriotsquestion911.com/.

  12. Deran

    “saw and Islamic looking man”

    Islamic “looking”… Is that anything like Catholic looking or Republican looking? That is just plain stupid. And Terry Nichols and Saddam Hussein via the southern Philippines? You’ve been drinking too much Dick Cheney koolaid.

  13. Gen. Buck Turgidson

    Let me just say, that I have never been one to shy away from conspiracy theories. I still believe damn Ruskies had something to do with the assassination of JFK.

    But all kidding aside. We will all agree the George W Bush was not the most intelligent man to occupy The White House. It would be highly unlikely that the Bush Administration within 7 months of coming to power could conceive, plan and carry out the 9/11 attacks.
    And successfully cover it up. No one has come forward and said I was part of the plot that killed 3000 innocent Americans. Most people have a conscious and some would have come forward by now.

    9/11 was tragedy, 9/11 was intelligence failure, 9/11 was not an inside job.

    The last thing we need is to become the 9/11 truther party. I will not vote for Hancock if that is what he wants the LP to become.

  14. Jill Pyeatt

    Brian, I watched your excerpts from “The Obama Deception” (I haven’t had time to watch the whole movie). Not that this is pertinent to what we’ve been talking about, but you don’t question the single-bullet explanation of JFK’s assassination? I thought everyone did.

    And should we take this mocking of “The Obama Deception” as evidence that you’re a fan of Obama’s?

    Wow.

  15. Jill Pyeatt

    I don’t think 9/11 Truth should be the focus of the National Chair contest, and I doubt that it will be. My original point was simply to point out that the movement is no longer fringe or lunatic. There are supporters in most walks of life, and we shouldn’t be afraid of the topic.

  16. Is Holtz Creating This Issue?

    Did Hancock create those posters, or did Holtz?

    Is 9/11 Truth becoming an issue?

    Or did Holtz cherry pick a few old comments from Hankcock, and a few offhand responses from a few people, then stir and spin, hoping it turn it into a (losing, he hopes) issue?

    Is Hancock making this an issue in his chair race? Or is Holtz?

    Alan: “Those of us in California have already dealt with one divisive issue (and I would say, dealt with it successfully). We’re not in any mood to let this difference of opinion split us into factions now.”

    Holtz, OTOH, seems eager to divide the party, if he thinks the majority will land on his side.

  17. Gen. Buck Turgidson

    Jill,

    It’s the lone gunman theory. Kennedy was hit by 2-3 bullets depending upon who you believe. The jury is still out on whether Oswald was the lone gunman or if there was a second shooter on the grassy knoll.

  18. Brian Holtz

    Jill, are you saying my only available opinions about Obama are 1) “fan” and 2) thinks he’s afraid of JFK-style assassination if he disobeys his Bilderberg puppet-masters?

    The story is growing by the hour. I didn’t even know this morning when I wrote it that the LPCA ExCom had not one but two 9/11 Truth advocates, the other of which has signed an “Architects and Engineers for 9-11 Truth” petition.

    I didn’t force Hancock to say to an LP convention eight days ago: “I will not back off from this 9/11 investigation.” And: “if we’re not out there telling the Truth on things like 9/11″ then the LP is “not relevant”.

    Here’s a clip from what Hancock chose to say on a Tax Day rally on 2009-04-15:

    I can’t even keep up with Hancock’s conspiracy-think output. Here’s what he said 38m into his most recently-archived radio show (from Thursday, about AntiWar.com):

    With this kind of information, it’s turning. And it’s so threatening to them, not only do they have to keep it coming, but it has to keep getting bigger and grander. It’s Ruby Ridge that goes to Oklahoma City that goes to the World Trade Center. What’s the next one? I always say, hey, St. Louis Arch? Golden Gate Bridget? Toast, man. Done. Mushroom cloud.

    Is this what we want the voice of the LP to be saying for the next two years? Really?

    If anybody has to ask whether Hancock made the campaign posters above, that’s an interesting commentary on his candidacy.

    I’m not trying to “divide” the Party. I’m just trying to protect it — from somebody who says he’s on the verge of “targeting the national Libertarian Party as an enemy of freedom”:

  19. Jill Pyeatt

    Brian, you really are overreacting here. It’s really no big deal. There are people everywhere who question the official conspiracy theory: people at your market, people at your church, your neighbors, probably at least one person you work with, and now, as you see, your political party. I don’t think Mr Hancock’s entire chairship would be about this. For example, I didn’t know it was such a big deal to him; in fact maybe it isn’t. Maybe this issue has been blown up so someone else will win Chair.

    Don’t worry about us, since we’re not going to the Convention. I actually don’t know who I would vote for for chair, if I was going (although I know who I would NOT vote for). If you leave this topic alone, it will become one of many pressing issues that Libertarians are worried about.

  20. Brian Holtz

    Jill, that “Hancock’s entire chairship would be about” 9/11 isn’t my worry. My worry is that he would in even a single statement align the LP with the idea that 9/11 was likely an inside job or false flag op or government conspiracy.

    If Hancock doesn’t think that’s a deal-breaker for the St. Louis delegates, then I hope he adopts the campaign poster I made for him and blankets the convention with it:

  21. Is Holtz Creating This Issue?

    Holtz: “If anybody has to ask whether Hancock made the campaign posters above, that’s an interesting commentary on his candidacy.”

    I didn’t “have” to ask. I assumed it was you who made them. I was pointing out how you’re stirring the pot, hoping to divide the party.

    Those posters aren’t even cherry-picking facts. They’re divisive editorializing under the guise of reporting.

  22. Jim Davidson

    I look forward to Ernie keeping this issue of what happened on 11-Sep-2001 in front of the American people until the commissioners of the 9-11 commission are also satisfied that they know the truth about everything they asked about. Jill is correct in saying that it is an important issue, since two wars and trillions of dollars and thousands and thousands of American lives have been spent purportedly in pursuit of justice for what happened on that day.

    Apparently war mongers like Brian Holtz don’t want to remember that Bush the younger lied about a connection between Iraq and 9/11. Say, Brian, when are you volunteering for the war?

    It is interesting to me that Angela Keaton flipped her wig (or whatever she uses for a merkin) over Brooke Kelley asking Ron Paul about the 9-11 investigation and whether the American people deserve to know the truth. You know what Ron’s answer was? “The American people should know the truth about everything.” Great answer!

    Of course, Brian Holtz does not agree. The American people should be kept from the truth about Pearl Harbour, the truth about Waco, the truth about the OKC bombing, any inconvenient truths about the Haymarket massacre or the Kent State massacre, any ugliness of government. Otherwise they might rebel, overthrow the government, mistake Holtz for a gov’t agent and string him up with the rest of the scum. Heh.

    It amuses me endlessly to find Angela Keaton and Brian Holtz on the same side of this issue. Silence the critics! Keep Ernie Hancock from asking significant questions!

    Maybe Holtz would like to adopt Keaton’s technique of falsely accusing Brooke Kelley of stealing Tennyson McCalla’s cell phone (and then browbeating Tennyson for making it clear that his phone was not stolen), and accusing me of (!) owing her $55 for alleged travel expenses to an event a year ago which she never asked the Boston Tea Party to reimburse. (I really don’t give a shit about the $55. If she were to present bills indicating how she’s owed this money, ever, I’d be happy to have our accountants review them. What stinks is her slandering me with this allegation that I owe her $55.)

  23. Brian Holtz

    the truth about Pearl Harbour, the truth about Waco, the truth about the OKC bombing

    I hope Ernie loudly proclaims The Truth about these things to the St. Louis delegates. I’ll help him get his Truths out to the delegates any way I can.

    They’re divisive editorializing under the guise of reporting.

    There was no “guise of reporting”. This IPR story is a report by Paulie about what I wrote on my blog.

  24. Jill Pyeatt

    Brian, that’s what I’m trying to tell you: a single statement about 9/11 does NOT ruin our credibility because many, if not most, people know they’ve been lied to . Really! Go on Facebook; it’s all over there. Videos of firefighters on the scene who knew explosives were being used; eyewitnesses reporting explosions in basements and lobbies before the buildings fell, even before the planes hit. It is mainstream now! Really! Everybody’s talking about it! There remains a group of people who firmly belief the ludicrous tale from the 911 Commission, but even the people on the commission have disavowed their work.

    Really! You have the wrong take on how the issue would taint the party.

  25. Brian Holtz

    a single statement about 9/11 does NOT ruin our credibility

    Jill, I just wish you were coming to St. Louis to tell as many delegates as possible that it will be OK when Chair Hancock aligns the LP with the 9/11 Truth movement.

    And if you think I’m under-informed about 9/11, then you can dip your toe into the pool of my 9/11 research here: http://knowinghumans.net/search/label/9-11. However, I’m not going to debate any of it here. My agenda is just to inform delegates about the record of their prospective Chair.

  26. Democracydiva

    I am a Kucinich supporter…So that tells you my politics.. I feel very strongly that the truth about 9/11 is vital to the survival of this country. I am in agreement with Alan’s recommendations. However, as much as I try to stick with the science, my research points towards rogue elements within the US, allied intelligence, and the media being involved in a staged event….The important thing is, as the villains are revealed, we need to refrain from painting everyone from within their group or their country with a broad brush. We are all victims of extremists..whether they be religious, economic, or political.

    Besides the science of 9/11, “game theory warfare” is worth considering..

    “Game theory warfare succeeds in plain sight. To betray, one must first befriend. To defraud, one must create a relationship based on trust. The relationship itself induced us to freely embrace the very forces that now jeopardize our freedom—from the inside out.

    See: http://criminalstate.com/2010/01/criminal-state-documentary/

    http://www.veteranstoday.com/

  27. Jill Pyeatt

    Brian, I went to your site because I’m amazed that someone can be so steadfast in beliefs that defy logic, science and facts. Dude, the date on your info is June, 2007! Three years ago! All kinds of eyewitnesses have come forward since then, evidence of explosives has been found in the dust (and written up in a scientific publication), and many videos have been released due to the Freedom of Information Act.

    It’s a whole new ball game now. The debunking sites have mostly given up on keeping up with all the new forensic evidence.

    Anyway, I’m done with this thread. It’s been interesting, but I need to go to work tomorrow, and I really think a molehill has been made into a mountain here.

  28. Andy

    “Brian Holtz // May 3, 2010 at 1:52 am

    a single statement about 9/11 does NOT ruin our credibility

    Jill, I just wish you were coming to St. Louis to tell as many delegates as possible that it will be OK when Chair Hancock aligns the LP with the 9/11 Truth movement.”

    The 9/11 Truth Movement is a libertarian movement. Anyone who claims to be a Libertarian and who believes the official government propganda about 9/11 is either naive, stupid, or a boot licking coward (or perhaps a combination of the 3). I’m sick & tired of phony “Libertarians” who can’t accept the fact that government is made up of liars, murders, theives, and control freaks. The people who run government are not stupid, they are evil.

    “And if you think I’m under-informed about 9/11, then you can dip your toe into the pool of my 9/11 research here: http://knowinghumans.net/search/label/9-11. However, I’m not going to debate any of it here. My agenda is just to inform delegates about the record of their prospective Chair.”

    I tried to arrange a public debate at the Libertarian National Convention in 2008 (which could have been recorded and posted on YouTube) between the so called “Libertarians” who believe the statist propaganda about 9/11 and people from the 9/11 Truth side. I even spoke to a few people who are considered to be experts within the 9/11 Truth Movement and they agreed to participate in such a debate. The reason that it didn’t happen is because NOBODY from the other side had the balls to accept the challenge.

    Since when is it Libertarian to believe in government propaganda and cast despersions on those who question what government says?

    The people who question government are people whom the Libertarian Party should be going after.

  29. Jill Pyeatt

    Thanks, Andy. I’m very pleased that people across the country have come to my defense on this subject. As I said from the beginning, it isn’t a subject that has to be avoided any more.

  30. Democracydiva

    Andy..FYI: The 9/11 Truth Movement is making it’s way into the anti-war movement on the left. The elephant in the room is Israel and Jewish Americans tend to be liberal. If we think it is difficult to imagine our own government…many people who claim to be “Christians”, involved in the events of 9/11, can you imagine how frightening it would be for Jews to find out they have their own extremists..and their fear of retribution?

    Truth is the only thing that will save the countries involved. The good people from the left to the right have to call out the criminals and let the courts go from there. The biggest hurdle are the media. The voices of conscience are band from the airwaves. Do we ever hear from a representative from Jewish Voices for Peace in the MSM?

  31. Robert Capozzi

    Have Alex Jones and Ernie Hancock opined on the oil spill in the Gulf? Clearly it has the makings of a Bilderberg conspiracy, as it’s in “their” interests to keep oil prices high and US oil supplies in the ground…. ;-)

    Compulsive conspiracy mongering — even if there is SOME truth to SOME of the allegations — would not reflect well on the LP or Ls. My concern is that Hancock’s willingness and propensity to make “hard hitting” allegations will further marginalize the LP.

    Contra-indicated, IMO, for leadership of our big tent.

  32. Eric Dondero

    Okay, you an engineer talked about Waco.

    What about the Oklahoma City Bombing and the connection to Saddam Hussein and Iraqi Intelligence??

    Why is it we never hear ANY!!! 9/11 Truthers talk about OKC?

    This was a direct attack on our soil killing 160 Americans by Islamo-Fascists, backed by Radical Islamist and Arabian Supremacist Saddam Hussein. Yet, the leftwing of the libertarian movement chooses to entire ignore it.

  33. Eric Dondero

    Hey Jim Davidson, why no comments from you about House Comm. Intelligence Chairman 2007 Rep. Dana Rohrabacher and his Report on tOklahoma City which founded near conclusive evidence of Middle-Eastern terrorists involved in the bombing??

    Why are you so hell bent on blaming Bush and Republicans for 3000 dead on 9/11, yet are completely silent on Saddam Hussein killing 160 Americans in OKC through his proxxies McVeigh and Nichols?

  34. Eric Dondero

    Anyone who claims to be a “libertarian” and believes the official government explantion – CLINTON ADMINISTRATION – of what happened at Oklahoma City, is either an idiot, naiive, or a boot-licking coward.

    160 AMERICANS DIED AT OKLAHOMA CITY AT THE HANDS OF ISLAMIC RADICALS AND THE CLINTON ADMINSITRATION BLAMED IT ON TWO EX-MILITARY GUYS WHO WERE PATSIES FOR SADDAM HUSSEIN AND IRAQI INTELLIGENCE.

    Wake the ‘F’ up America!!!! Wake up Libertarian Movement. YOU WERE LIED TO BY CLINTON AND RENO. There was a third bomber. He’s identified by name.

    READ THE JAYNA DAVIS BOOK THE THIRD TERRORIST.

    READ THE HOUSE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE REPORT BY REP. DANA ROHRABACHER OF CALIFORNIA.

  35. JT

    Robert: “Compulsive conspiracy mongering — even if there is SOME truth to SOME of the allegations — would not reflect well on the LP or Ls.”

    I agree. If you think that isn’t damaging to the LP because many people have posted on Facebook about it, then you’re a deluded individual. The vast majority of the country thinks the whole thing is ridiculous. Here’s the reality: the party already struggles to show people that we’re serious and not kooky because we want to totally end the drug war, end government welfare, end the income tax, etc. Do we really need to be associated with THIS now? Give me a break!

  36. LP Pramatist

    we need a new 3rd party that is sane.
    The public lives in a 15 second sound bite world.
    This isn’t 1973 anymore.

  37. George Phillies

    JT:

    You are right.

    Fortunately, there is another choice, and it does not require associating with Fox News Republicans and their equally crazy claims about Saddam Hussein’s mythical-in-2000 weapons of mass destruction.

    Read about it at NewPathForTheLP.org .

  38. Mattc

    I understand that Holtz isn’t trying to be objective, but putting those posters up is entirely a departure from the way this site usually operates, and IPR should find this post in general disgraceful.

    If this site is just going to become blogtrash hurling insults and accusations at candidates, I’ll begin to look elsewhere for my 3rd party news. Because that is what I come here for, and this is certainly not it. (Also, I have never even heard of Hancock before Holtz’s posts, so that’s not the isssue).

  39. Brian Holtz

    Please quote any “insult” or unsubstantiated “accusation” in the posting I made on my personal blog (that Paulie chose to write an IPR article about).

    When current and former LP leaders like the Pyeatts and Mr. Blanton defend a Chair candidate’s recent statements that the LP should be “out there telling the Truth on things like 9/11″, that’s news. And when a Chair candidate turns out to have a record of claiming that 9/11 truths are “purged” from the Internet, that’s a revelation that IPR readers might be interested in knowing four weeks before the Chair election.

    Paulie’s article plainly states the he reproduced my blog posting “for the purposes of discussion”. When IPR covers a newsworthy opinion piece, it either briefly excerpts it or includes the whole thing. I might very well decide to distribute one or both of my graphics on the floor in St. Louis (like I did with some other graphics at our 2008 convention), so I don’t see how it’s a “departure” for IPR to break the story here.

  40. Tom Blanton

    Dondero is wrong about who is talking about the OKC bombing.

    Scott Horton of anitwar.com has reported repeatedly about the OKC issue. He does not subscribe to Dondero’s conspiracy theory that Saddam was behind it.

    Horton has been keeping abreast of the Trentadue court case most recently, but has done many interviews and articles about the OKC bombing.

    Horton is certainly not a libertarian of the Dondero-style liberventionist variety trying to rationalize a global war on Muslims.

    Apparently, Dondero has no knowledge of the information that has come out since neocon Laurie Mylroie and Jayna Davis started the Saddam conspiracy theory. He also has no explanation why his favorite neocon warmongers in the Bush regime would not have revealed this cover-up of Saddam’s crimes against America as they desperately sought excuses to go to war with Iraq.

  41. Tom Blanton

    About six months ago, Gordon Duff (a Marine combat veteran and a regular contributor to Veterans Today) wrote a review of John Farmer’s 2009 book: “The Ground Truth: The Story Behind America’s Defense on 9/11″.

    Here is an excerpt from that review:

    The 9/11 Commission now tells us that the official version of 9/11 was based on false testimony and documents and is almost entirely untrue. The details of this massive cover-up are carefully outlined in a book by John Farmer, who was the Senior Counsel for the 9/11 Commission.

    Farmer, Dean of Rutger Universities’ School of Law and former Attorney General of New Jersey, was responsible for drafting the original flawed 9/11 report.

    Does Farmer have cooperation and agreement from other members of the Commission? Yes. Did they say Bush ordered 9/11? No. Do they say that the 9/11 Commission was lied to by the FBI, CIA, Whitehouse and NORAD? Yes. Is there full documentary proof of this? Yes.

    Farmer states…“at some level of the government, at some point in time…there was an agreement not to tell the truth about what happened… I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described …. The [Norad air defense] tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public for two years. This is not spin.”

    The 9/11 Commission head, Thomas Kean, was the Republican governor of New Jersey. He had the following to say… “We to this day don’t know why NORAD [the North American Aerospace Command] told us what they told us, it was just so far from the truth. . . ” When Bush’s own handpicked commission failed to go along with the cover up and requested a criminal investigation, why was nothing done?

    Are John Farmer and Thomas Kean 9/11 Truthers that claim Bush was behind 9/11? The answer is no. What is rather obvious to nearly everyone is that the government is not being honest about what happened on September 11, 2001. Not one soul in the government has been held accountable for what happened on 9/11 or for stonewalling on the truth. Instead, the nation has been plunged into a nightmare of perpetual war and unimaginable losses of civil liberties. If this is not an issue, I don’t know what is. To insist upon the truth of this matter does not make one a conspiracy theorist and it does not mean one believes the government orchestrated the event.

  42. Dan Noel

    I happen to be the engineer who gave the above-mentioned 9/11 Truth presentation to Jill Pyeatt and her District 63.
    Much of the information we reviewed came straight from the U.S. government and the mainstream media. The use of high school-level observation, logic, and science led us naturally to the following conclusions:
    1. on 9/11, in the World Trade Center, a third skyscraper disintegrated;
    2. this happened through a conventional and well-executed controlled demolition;
    3. the U.S. government launched a technical forensic investigation into this event;
    4. this investigation was a fraud and a cover-up;
    5. there was a conspiracy to hide the above from the public.
    I apologize if I fanned confusion and bickering within the Libertarian Party. My intent was to clarify an important aspect of 9/11 in the minds of the members and supporters of the Party in District 63. May I kindly invite anybody who would doubt the above or request more details to contact me? DNoel@ae911truth.org.
    Love,

  43. AroundtheblockAFT

    Re #33 Mr. Dondero claiming Rep. Rohrbacher found “near conclusive evidence” of Middle Eastern terrorists involved in the OKC bombing.

    Tne report (“Chairman’s Report Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee of the House International Relations Committee – not the Intelligence Committee) concluded:
    “We have found no conclusive evidence of a foreign connection, but there remain questions…”

    You can see the 15 page report at
    http://www.terrorisminfo.mipt.org/pdf/Oklahoma-City-Bombing-Foreign-Connection-Rohrbacher.pdf

    Further, the report takes DOJ to task for showing a lack of willingness to examine certain legitimate issues.

  44. Jill Pyeatt

    Thanks, Dan.

    For the record, my intention on this thread was to point out that 911 Truth is not a subject to be overlooked. I did not render an opinion of whether Bush did it or not; I have stated that there are questions that I have about the events of that day, as do millions of other people around the world.

    Not every “Truther” says that Bush was responsible, or that it was “inside job”. Many truthers are of the opinion that someone else from another country planned it, but that our government knew about it and did nothing to stop. That is still criminal behavior, IMO.

    Again, my point is that many people have valid questions, and I don’t think talking about those questions will destroy the party.

  45. paulie Post author

    Melty,

    I understand that Holtz isn’t trying to be objective, but putting those posters up is entirely a departure from the way this site usually operates, and IPR should find this post in general disgraceful.

    You have a point. While I don’t apologize for offering Brian’s perspective up for discussion – we’ve done it before for a variety of perspectives – I did not know that the posters were not actually from Hancock, and I apologize for inadvertantly contributing to any confusion. I’ll edit the post with a footnote that makes clear that the posters are not actually from Hancock.


    If this site is just going to become blogtrash hurling insults and accusations at candidates, I’ll begin to look elsewhere for my 3rd party news. Because that is what I come here for, and this is certainly not it. (Also, I have never even heard of Hancock before Holtz’s posts, so that’s not the isssue).

    I don’t think there was anything insulting here. Ernie believes 9/11 truth is a legitimate issue that the party should address. Many other party members also agree. Brian is among the many other party members who believe it would marginalize us to deal with this issue.

    Both perspectives deserve to be discussed, and again, I don’t apologize for furthering that discussion in our attempt to help inform the delegates as much as possible to help make an informed choice on party leadership.

    But, I do apologize that I did not make it clear that the posters were actually made by Brian, which I did not know. I’ll fix that.

    -p

  46. Eric Dondero

    Jayna Davis is no “NeoCon.” She’s a hardcore LIBERTARIAN. You obviously have no clue who the woman is.

    Ditto Oklahoma State Rep. Charles Key, a friend of Jayna Davis, who led the committee hearings in the OK Legislature on OKC bombing and the Saddam Hussein connection. Oh, and did I mention Rep. Key is a self-described “libertarian,” close friend of the Libertarian Party of Oklahoma, member of the Republican Liberty Caucus, and one of the staunchest supporters of Ron Paul for President in 2008?

    Other OK Legislators who backed Davis’s calls for an investigation, libertarian-conservatives State Sen. Mike Reynolds, and Sen. Randy Brogdon. Not quite sure on Reynolds, but I know Brogdon was a big Ron Paul guy in ’08.

    Wanna try calling Ron Paul and his supporters “NeoCons”???

  47. Eric Dondero

    Golly gee, you mean some 9/11 Truthers believe that “someone from another country planned the attacks on the Twin Towers and Pentagon?”

    What a brillant statement. Geez, I’d never thought of that. Thank you sooooo much for letting us know that.

    You mean someone from another country like maybe OSAMA BIN LADEN, or maybe SADDAM HUSSEIN???

    The two guys who repeatedly attacked the United States throughout the 1980s and 90s?

    Duhhhhh!

  48. LP pragmatist

    Eric, are you going to national LP convention?
    What state will you be with, if that is the case?
    Many people don’t know who you are– especially some newbies.
    Nothing bad, just inquiries.

  49. Tom Blanton

    I didn’t say Jayna Davis is a neocon. I said her conspiracy partner, Laurie Mylroie, is a neocon. Apparenly you have no clue as to either one of these women are.

    When somebody who thinks Giuliani is a libertarian attempts to label conspiracy theorists with a pro-war agenda as “libertarians”, I have my doubts.

    Laurie Mylroie was the darling of the American Enterprise Institute because she was willing to put her credibility on the line to fabricate anti-Iraq propaganda for the neocons who had pushing for that war for years. I have serious doubts that any libertarian would partner with Mylroie.

    I suppose Davis thought the bombs the FBI took out of the OKC federal building on the morning of the attack, as covered by her station KFOR-TV, belonged to Saddam. How does she explain that away?

  50. Tom Blanton

    Dondero, why don’t you explain to us why your “libertarian” heros, Bush and Cheney, didn’t reveal the Saddam connection to the OKC bombing as they fumbled around looking for an excuse for war.

    I find it hard to believe that they would continue Clinton’s liberal conspiracy to prevent Americans from knowing that Saddam was behind the OKC bombing considering the lengths they went to in order to convince us war was necessary with Saddam.

    I’ll be waiting to hear about this, Dondero.

  51. Mattc

    for some reason I thought the post on IPR was from Holtz. my bad, guess I just got confused

  52. Tom Blanton

    Jon Gold interviewsMichael Badnarik at “End The Fed” – Philadelphia – 4/24/2010

    Badnarik:

    “Well, I support the truth. I want to know what really happened. And I don’t think that 911 truth should be a denigration or a slur. I mean, why would you be angry with somebody who wants the truth? I thought whenever you go into a court you want the whole truth, nothing but the truth, so help me God. So why not have the truth when it comes to whatever happened on 9/11 in 2001?”

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UfLUXfoS9h4

    Under the standard set by Holtz, Badnarik is a 9/11 Truther who believes Bush orchestrated the 9/11 attacks. Holtz supported Badnarik for President in 2004 (despite Badnarik’s call for a new 9/11 investigation then) and Badnarik for Congress in 2005.

    Did Holtz design any 9/11 Truth posters for Badnarik? Was Holtz a 9/11 Truther himself? If so, when did Holtz stop believing that Bush was behind the 9/11 attacks?

  53. Robert Capozzi

    tb quoting mb: I mean, why would you be angry with somebody who wants the truth?

    me: not sure who Badnarik’s referring to here. I don’t know anyone who is “angry” with Truthers…I’m not, I see no evidence that Holtz or Knapp are, either.

    Above all, I want truth in all things. What concerns me about those who identify with 9/11 Truth is they seem to have built a case that has many, many, many holes. There are some facts surrounding 9/11 that seem unexplained, but to leap to the conclusion that it was an inside job or that the Bush Administration was complicit seems like a (wild) stretch.

    Some of us think that having a person who aggressively promotes the Truther line as LP Chair is contra-indicated. I surely take this view, since making wild accusations — particularly one of the magnitude that the Truthers do — would reflect very poorly on the LP. It would likely further relegate us to the fringes, which impinges our ability to advance the cause of liberty.

    Do you disagree, and if so, how so?

  54. Tom Blanton

    Capozzi, I do not know how to make it any clearer that I disagree with the basic assumption that you and others make that if one wants the truth about 9/11 that they therefore must believe that it was an inside job.

    That is the leap that is “contraindicated”.

    Some “libertarians” supported the illegal war of aggression against Iraq, this does not mean all libertarians did. Some white people are racist. This does not mean all are.

    I’m not so sure that Hancock has promised to “aggressively promote the Truther line” – whatever that line may be.

    Badnarik brought the issue up in 2004. He called for a new investigation. I don’t remember it being an issue then within the LP.

    This issue is contrived and to insist that anyone who wants the truth about 9/11 believes it was an inside job shows either profound ignorance or extreme dishonesty.

    Holtz merely demonstrates how control freaks behave when they fear losing control of a debate. If Hancock has said that he believes 9/11 was an inside job, then prove it. If Hancock wants 9/11 to be a major LP issue, then show us posters that HE has made instead of making them up.

    To smear Hancock for his apparent belief that the official 9/11 story is not the entire truth, is to also smear:

    Karen Kwiatkowski, Wesley Clark, Joel M. Skousen, Scott Ritter, Ray McGovern, Robert Baer, Coleen Rowley, Robert G. Wright, Jr., Sibel Edmonds, Max Cleland, Bob Kerrey, Louis Freeh, Walter Mondale, Mike Gravel, Lincoln Chafee, Bob Graham, Mark Dayton, Patrick Leahy, Jesse Ventura, Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich, Cynthia McKinney, Morgan Reynolds, Paul Craig Roberts, Daniel Ellsberg, Michael Badnarik, David Cobb, Peter Dale Scott, Michael Meacher,

    and 9/11 Commission members Thomas Kean, Lee Hamilton, Timothy J. Roemer, John J. Farmer, Jr.,

    and many others.

  55. Tom Blanton

    Badnarik again:

    And I don’t think that 911 truth should be a denigration or a slur. I mean, why would you be angry with somebody who wants the truth? </i?

    Capozzi, it is my guess that Badnarik is referring to those who slur or denigrate 9/11 truthers. We all know that you are above the human emotion of anger and that you are able to denigrate others without being angry. But, often when people slur or denigrate others, an element of anger may be present. But since you don’t know who Badnarik is referring to, you are free to disregard his statement:

    And I don’t think that 911 truth should be a denigration or a slur.

    Obviously, you, Holtz and others feel quite comfortable with denigrating others for merely saying they don’t believe the government’s conspiracy theory regarding 9/11 in its entirety.

  56. Robert Capozzi

    tb, your comment surprises me. Do you disagree that Hancock has been and continues to promote some form of 9/11 Truth going into this Chair race? Can we stipulate to that?

    Badnarik was not running for anything at that point, therefore your point seems off point.

    You highlight Root’s recent history, and I consider that within bounds as it pertains to this Chair race. I think Hancock’s promotion of 9/11 Truth to be within bounds, too. I have no particular with his and others promoting the idea that more investigation on 9/11 is a good idea…it’s low on my list, but I don’t oppose the idea of more investigation. Of course, I’m OK with investigating the Gulf of Tonkin and Pearl Harbor, too, and the Kennedy and King assassinations, and the Rodney King beating, for that matter.

    As Chair (of a party you quit), Root’s history is a non-starter for you. Some of the things he’s said and done I too am not enamored with, as apparently so is he! That’s the human condition, after all…some regrets about SOMETHING.

    As Chair, I’m persuaded that Hancock’s Truther interest and promotion of that cause is a non-starter for me.

    Others will make up their minds with more truth about our chair candidates than in years past…a good thing, as I see it.

  57. Robert Capozzi

    tb 58, I assure you I DO NOT denigrate those who hold those views. I just don’t think they should be Chair…that’s all.

  58. Thomas L. Knapp

    “Badnarik was not running for anything at that point, therefore your point seems off point.”

    Except, of course, for President of the United States.

  59. Robert Capozzi

    tk, reread 55. It says the quote was earlier this year, 2010, not 2004.

    Clearer

    Blanton says Badnarik had called for another investigation in 04, but he didn’t provide a quote. Calling for another investigation in 04 seems more appropriate and germane, given it was closer to the event and the first investigation.

    For a candidate for Chair calling for an investigation of 9/11 9 years later doesn’t trouble me, either. Emphasizing it, handing out conspiracy-theory DVDs, etc, does.

    See the difference?

  60. Brian Holtz

    Blanton, please cite me Badnarik doing anything like the following before winnning the LP nomination:

    • Saying: “if we’re not out there telling the Truth on things like 9/11″ then the LP is “not relevant”
    • Saying: “not only do they have to keep it coming, but it has to keep getting bigger and grander. It’s Ruby Ridge that goes to Oklahoma City that goes to the World Trade Center. What’s the next one? I always say, hey, St. Louis Arch? Golden Gate Bridget? Toast, man. Done. Mushroom cloud.”
    • Saying: “These young minds, they already know The Truth. They know The Truth about the Federal Reserve. They know The Truth about things like 9/11.”
    • Handing out tens of thousands of DVDs saying that Lincoln and JFK were assassinated by international banking elites.

    I was not involved at all in the 2004 LP nominating race, and I was not a delegate in Atlanta. However, the LP dodged a bullet by not nominating Aaron Russo. He went on to claim outright that “the government was involved in 9/11″, and that it was a case of “controlled demolition”.

    Holtz and others feel quite comfortable with denigrating others for merely saying they don’t believe the government’s conspiracy theory regarding 9/11 in its entirety.

    What “denigrating” can you quote me doing? All I’ve done is encourage Hancock to fully exhibit the courage of his 9/11 convictions to the St. Louis delegates. I’m confident that the right thing will happen if he does so.

    I don’t accept the government’s version of 9/11. I accept al Qaeda’s version of 9/11.

  61. Reminder of Asses in the LP

    “This issue is contrived and to insist that anyone who wants the truth about 9/11 believes it was an inside job shows either profound ignorance or extreme dishonesty.”

    I agree. These guys are smart enough to know that. They’re just being ornery and stubborn.

    And Dondero keeps changing the subject.

  62. Andy

    Eric Dondero said: “160 AMERICANS DIED AT OKLAHOMA CITY AT THE HANDS OF ISLAMIC RADICALS AND THE CLINTON ADMINSITRATION BLAMED IT ON TWO EX-MILITARY GUYS WHO WERE PATSIES FOR SADDAM HUSSEIN AND IRAQI INTELLIGENCE.”

    LOL! Those Islamic Radicals were working for the US Feds!

  63. Limbineer

    BH@64
    “I don’t accept the government’s version of 9/11. I accept al Qaeda’s version of 9/11.”

    You know what bugs me? That i don’t even know Al Qaeda’s version of the story. I mean I got the little news digested crapola. But it was PURE crapola.

    What is Al Qaeda’s version of 9/11? I am woefully ignorant of even the pop culture understanding beyond, “Taliban bad – bomb Afghanistan”, because my bullshit alarms went off very early and I turned off the disinformation.

  64. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed

    You know 40 million people were killed in World War One. Ten million kill in World War. You know that two million four hundred thousand be killed in the Korean War. So this language of the war. Any people who, when Usama bin Laden say I’m waging war because such such reason, now he declared it. But when you said I’m terrorist, I think it is deceiving peoples. Terrorists, enemy combatant. All these definitions as CIA you can make whatever you want. [...]

    When I said I’m not happy that three thousand been killed in America. I feel sorry even. I don’t like to kill children and the kids. Never Islam are, give me green light to kill peoples. Killing, as in the Christianity, Jews, and Islam, are prohibited. But there are exception of rule when you are killing people in Iraq. You said we have to do it. We don’t like Saddam. But this is the way to deal with Saddam. Same thing you are saying. Same language you use, I use. When you are invading two- thirds of Mexican, you call your war manifest destiny. It up to you to call it what you want. But other side are calling you oppressors. If now George Washington. If now we were living in the Revolutionary War and George Washington he being arrested through Britain. For sure he, they would consider him enemy combatant. But American they consider him as hero. This right the any Revolutionary War they will be as George Washington or Britain. So we are considered American Army bases which we have from seventies in Iraq. Also, in the Saudi Arabian, Kuwait, Qatar, and Bahrain. This is kind of invasion, but I’m not here to convince you. [...]

    The language of the war is victims. I don’t like to kill people. I feel very sorry they been killed kids in 9/11. What I will do? This is the language. Sometime I want to make great awakening between American to stop foreign policy in our land. I know American people are torturing us from seventies. – I know they talking about human rights. And I know it is against American Constitution, against American laws. But they said ever law, they have exceptions, this is your bad luck you have been part of the exception of our laws. [...]

    Killing is prohibited in all what you call the people of the book, Jews, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. You know the Ten Commandments very well. The Ten Commandments are shared between all of us. We all are serving one God. Then now kill you know it very well. But war language also we have language for the war. You have to kill. But you have to care if unintentionally or intentionally target if I have if I’m not at the Pentagon. I consider it is okay. If I target now when we target in USA we choose them military target, economical, and political. So, war central victims mostly means economical target. So if now American they know UBL. He is in this house they don’t care about his kids and his. They will just bombard it. They will kill all of them and they did it. They kill wife of Dr. Ayman Zawahiri and his two daughters and his son in one bombardment. They receive a report that is his house be. He had not been there. They killed them.

  65. Limbineer

    Did the Taliban ever try diplomatic processes for conflict resolution with the US?

  66. Not amused

    Which one of you jokesters wrote the above posting @ 68? Haha, we get your joke.

    Maybe this thread will now die a well-deserved death.

  67. Not amused

    Gee, I wonder if the initials of the person who posted the above @ 68 has the initials of “BC”?

  68. paulie

    I think 68 is a response to 67. I don’t think the initials are BC, although I have a pretty good guess who it is, even without checking. No, I won’t speculate. And I have a prety good guess who you are too, also without checking. Hmmmmm?

  69. paulie Post author

    Curiosity got the better of me and I checked. I was 1 for 2…correct on the Sheikh, incorrect on NA. I don’t know why I’m telling you this, as I won’t say what my guesses were :-)

  70. George Phillies

    For those of you interested in issues closer to what the LNC does, the next segment of the New Path plan is up at GoldAmericaGroup.com and will soon be up here.

  71. Andy

    “However, the LP dodged a bullet by not nominating Aaron Russo. He went on to claim outright that “the government was involved in 9/11?, and that it was a case of “controlled demolition”.”

    Badnarik has also said that 9/11 was an inside job.

  72. Andrew

    I don’t think you are hypocritical by saying that that anyone that questions the government about 9/11 shouldn’t be LPNC. Since when did Libertarians stop questioning the Government and blindly, and mindlessly believe everything the Government says. Was it after they murdered men, women, and children at WACO, http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4298137966377572665#
    or was it after we learned about operation Northwoods, or the FAKE Gulf of Tonka incident to get us in Vietnam. Perhaps Libertarians are relying to much on there Government Propaganda Brainwashing Educations, and not enough on seeking out the TRUTH . What discuss me the most is your intolerance to someone demanding the Truth.

    Someone like Ernie Hancock has rock solid Libertarian principles and philosophy. He believes in a persons responsibility to find out the Truth and Expose the Lies.

    Seeking the Truth is never to Radical, Suppressing the Truth is!

    Saying that someone seeking answers to their questions that you don’t want to ask or look into shouldn’t be LPNC, then perhaps soon asking about how the Architects of the FED Bank Conspired to take control of our Economy in 1913, or advocating Austrian Economics will soon be to RADICAL for the LP.

    http://ernesthancock.org/

    Frosty Wooldridge and Ernest Hancock go head to head on the issue of Immigration and the “Papers Please” SB1070 law that passed in Arizona

    http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Uploads/001/Media/2010-04-28-ernie-a.mp3

    http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Uploads/001/Media/2010-04-28-ernie-b.mp3

    Tracey Harmon is back from her trip to Iraq and brings back some facts. Tracey was US Army and now “Iraq Veterans Against the War”. Tracey went privately with a humanitarian group.

    http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Article/068361-2010-05-04-declare-
    your-independence-with-ernest-hancock-morning-may-4th-2010.htm

    http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Uploads/001/Media/2010-05-04-ernie-a.mp3

    http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Uploads/001/Media/2010-05-04-ernie-b.mp3

  73. Robert Capozzi

    Hmm, yes, and the naive believed the story that Cheney was getting “stints” implanted in his heart valve. The Truth is that the Grays were replacing his neural receptors so he could maintain constant communication with the Mothership. ;-)

  74. Andy

    “Eric Dondero // May 3, 2010 at 9:18 am

    Anyone who claims to be a “libertarian” and believes the official government explantion – CLINTON ADMINISTRATION – of what happened at Oklahoma City, is either an idiot, naiive, or a boot-licking coward. ”

    I agree. The OKC bombing was a US government sponsored inside job as well.

  75. Andy

    “Eric Dondero // May 3, 2010 at 5:48 pm

    Golly gee, you mean some 9/11 Truthers believe that “someone from another country planned the attacks on the Twin Towers and Pentagon?””

    It was likely a joint operation between people within the US government and Israelis, much like the sinking of the USS Liberty.

  76. Brian Holtz

    I can’t keep up with Hancock’s conspiracy-think output.

    I clicked into a random spot in the first hour of Hancock’s radio show today, and heard a conspiracy author tell Hancock that the wealthiest family among the Bilderbergers has “literally quadrillions of dollars”. The author claims to have seen a documents showing a single bank account holding $112 trillion dollars. He asks Hancock why the general public doesn’t know which people/families are richest.

    Hancock’s reply: “Camouflage. If you’re gonna be big big big bad uber top-of-the-heap guy, do you want to be known? I imagine you’d be pushing some other guys out in front of you too, saying ‘No, that guy’s got it. I may ultimately own all of the media that says he’s the richest guy…'”.

    Estimates of total global wealth — capital, land, natural resources, intellectual property, human capital, institutional knowledge, everything — range from $100T to $600T. The idea that some subset of “the Bilderbergers” owns “literally quadrillions of dollars” is laughable.

  77. Thomas L. Knapp

    “The idea that some subset of ‘the Bilderbergers’ owns ‘literally quadrillions of dollars’ is laughable.”

    Maybe, maybe not. There’s a lot of money in letting kids assemble their own stuff animals.

    Apoplectic demands that I strap myself to a chair and let David Icke bellow in my ear until I believe that Wayne Root is one of the reptilian puppet masters in 3, 2, 1 …

  78. RWL

    The LP is hopelessly infected with certifiably insane people. I have to listen to compromisers like Holtz, Republican trolls like Dondero or totally insane wackos like Hancock. Admittedly Hancock is the craziest of the bunch and a laughing stock who does nothing but make libertarianism look bad. If I was a conspiracy minded as he I would say he infiltrated the LP purposely to discredit it.

    The LP ought to close up shop. At one time most the people in it were actual libertarians and relatively sane. Now only those most touched in the head remain and they buy into some of the worst nonsense around.

    After decades in the LP I walked out when they nominated scum like Barr and Root. But anyone who thinks Hancock is the solution to that infection isn’t paying attention.

  79. Alexander S. Peak

    (1)

    Mr. Dondero writes, “Lefty Libertarians why the silence on OKC bombing?”

    Since all libertarians are on the left-wing of the political spectrum (see Rothbard’s “Left and Right: The Prospects for Liberty”), the term “lefty libertarian” is a bit redundant.

    Perhaps we can say the anarchist libertarians are more to the left than the minarchist libertarians, but both are to the left of the conservatives, the American “liberals,” and the state socialists and fascists.

    In any event, since I have no problem calling myself a left-libertarian, I shall assume this question is directed as much at me as any other person who identifies as a left-libertarian, and thus I shall answer it.

    Dondero writes, “why the silence.” But I must wonder, what silence?

    My position has been from day one that Timothy McVeigh acted unjustly. Innocent children were in that building. Even if every single adult in the building were to turn out to be serial killers, his bombing of the building would still be unethical. It is unethical to murder even one innocent person. Therefore, McVeigh was a murderer.

    I believe this is an important place to quote the left-libertarian Murray N. Rothbard:

    “[I]f Jones finds that his property is being stolen by Smith, Jones has the right to repel him and try to catch him, but Jones has no right to repel him by bombing a building and murdering innocent people or to catch him by spraying machine gun fire into an innocent crowd. If he does this, he is as much (or more) a criminal aggressor as Smith is.

    “The same criteria hold if Smith and Jones each have men on his side, i.e., if ‘war’ breaks out between Smith and his henchmen and Jones and his bodyguards. If Smith and a group of henchmen aggress against Jones, and Jones and his bodyguards pursue the Smith gang to their lair, we may cheer Jones on in his endeavor; and we, and others in society interested in repelling aggression, may contribute financially or personally to Jones’s cause. But Jones and his men have no right, any more than does Smith, to aggress against anyone else in the course of their ‘just war': to steal others’ property in order to finance their pursuit, to conscript others into their posse by use of violence, or to kill others in the course of their struggle to capture the Smith forces. If Jones and his men should do any of these things, they become criminals as fully as Smith, and they too become subject to whatever sanctions are meted out against criminality. In fact if Smith’s crime was theft, and Jones should use conscription to catch him, or should kill innocent people in the pursuit, then Jones becomes more of a criminal than Smith, for such crimes against another person as enslavement and murder are surely far worse than theft.”

    (2)

    Mr. Dondero continues, “Why no comments about Clinton covering up at Waco?”

    I was unaware that anybody named Clinton had tried to cover up the massacre at Waco, which would appropriately explain why I have never spoken about a cover-up.

    But, I have spoken about Waco itself, and have maintained that the U. S. federal government acted unjustly; there were innocent people in that complex, and the U. S. federal government murdered them.

    Refer again the to Rothbard quote above.

    (3)

    Mr. Dondero writes, “Why do you all completely ignore the overwhelming evidence that Obama has not produced a valid birth certificate?”

    One, because I do not believe that Mr. Obama’s rule over his subjects would be legitimate regardless of whether or not he has a birth cirtificate.

    Two, because there are so many horrible things Obama is doing (e.g., making U. S. healthcare even worse), that I believe it would be tactically unwise to waste my time arguing about something that doesn’t ultimately really matter. I’d rather focus on real issues, thereby giving me the possibility of actually explaining to modern American “liberals” why Obama is bad for America; we’re never going to get them on our side by talking about birth cirtificates, so why bother?

    (4)

    Mr. Dondero writes, “Is it only in the cases of conspiracy theories that benefit Democrats, that you all raise issues on?”

    What are you talking about, Mr. Dondero? Your comment implies that all self-described left-libertarians raise issues about (and thus believe in) conspiracy theories. But there are plenty of us self-described left-libertarians who do not hold to conspiracy theories. Can you name one conspiracy theory that I, for example, adhere to?

    (5)

    I cannot see any of Mr. Holtz’s videos in this thread.

    (6)

    Mr. Berkman writes, “Clearly the Federal Reserve is a government owned central bank.”

    I concur. I am often annoyed when someone claims that it is somehow a “private” institution.

    Sincerely,
    Alex Peak

  80. Jim Davidson

    Eric Dondero Rittberg, did you say something? I thought I heard something, but it sounded like a hooker in Djibouti screaming.

    Holtz doesn’t want anyone attacking the legitimacy of the USA government because he is an authoritarian. What such an evil troll is doing pretending to be a libertarian is anyone’s guess.

Leave a Reply