26

Jill Stein Proved Me Wrong

by Kevin Ryan

My last blog post was wrong. As of a week ago, it does matter who is elected president. That’s because one of the candidates has openly called for a new investigation into the crimes of 9/11.
In a recent statement on the subject, Jill Stein made the following important comments and promises:

“….The families and friends of those who were murdered on 9/11 deserve justice. They also deserve to know the truth…”


“…Under our administration a new inquiry would have access to the considerable body of responsible independent research that has emerged over the last 15 years….”


“…We would create an independent 9/11 Commission, not one dominated by members with an interest in protecting the reputation and careers of foreign affairs and intelligence communities…”


“…It’s time for a full accounting of what happened, and an end to the misguided post-9/11 wars that are actually making us less safe, not more safe…”

In May, a national poll showed that, “An unprecedented 91 percent of voters 28 or younger favor having an independent on the ballot, and 65 percent of respondents are willing to support a candidate who isn’t Clinton or Trump.”
Jill Stein is on the ballot in 44 states. It’s not clear what chance she has given the serious, inherent problems with the U.S. voting process and electronic voting machines. But she is the only candidate discussing what matters to the American people as opposed to what matters to the ruling oligarchy.
As Gore Vidal once said, “There is only one party in the United States, the Property Party … and it has two right wings: Republican and Democrat.” Moving away from that sad and dangerous state of affairs will not be easy but supporting courageous voices in the national discussion helps. To that end, people who want real change need to send the oligarchs a strong message on November 6 by supporting Jill Stein and the Green Party.


avatar
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
deschutes
Reader
deschutes

Vote for Jill Stein! We’ve been doing the ‘vote lesser of the two evils’ thing since at least ’92 election between HW Bush and Clinton. It ain’t workin’ out at all. Wealthy business interests bankroll both dem and repub parties so nothing will change if you vote for either Trump or Clinton. For actual change there needs to be a much, much larger number of voters voting for Stein. This means more organization at the local level, building up to the national level. It can happen! But not if people keep voting ‘lesser of two evils’. Do that and nothing will ever change.

Greg Bacon
Reader

Don’t forget that Hillary has he important DIEBOLD/ESS voting bloc locked up!

Hector Rivera
Reader
Hector Rivera

Good article. The election is on Nov 8th, not Nov 6th though.

BigB
Reader
BigB

Americans face a dilemma that I would characterise as a Hobsons Choice between a long term extinction level event and a short term extinction level event. Long term would be a POTUS whose only environmental concern is for his golf courses; short term would be a POTUS who wants to ratchet up the global tension with Russia and China and “bomb Iran with nuclear weapons”.
A vote for Stein would seem the moral imperative, but would it not just split the Democrat vote and hand victory to Drumpf?
Well I (who have no say in the outcome) don’t think that is a bad idea. Aside from sending a message to the Elite; Trump (incoherently) talks the talk; whilst Hillary walks the walk. She is the continuity MIC candidate who walks on water with the Neocon Establishment. In short, the world would probably survive the four years of a Trump presidency; but President Clinton?
So whilst Stein would get my vote, call me cynical, it is for the code writers of the electoral system to get the (predetermined) result.
Trust me, I really don’t want to be negative but I see no real alternative (except in Nevada where you can vote NOTA (none of the above.)

Jerome Fryer
Reader
Jerome Fryer

Jill Stein is likely only interested in going after the officials responsible for the CYA operation after the 9/11 attacks, and using the attacks as pretext for subsequent illegal wars on other nations.
She may have a problem due to her running mate, though:

Then there’s Stein’s running mate. After she was rebuffed by Bernie Sanders, Stein choose Ajamu Baraka, who recently wrote of Sanders’ supporters (i.e., the voters Stein is making a concerted effort to recruit), “As much as the ‘Sandernistas ‘ attempt to disarticulate Sanders ‘progressive’ domestic policies from his documented support for empire … it should be obvious that his campaign is an ideological prop – albeit from a center/left position – of the logic and interests of the capitalist-imperialist settler state.”
Baraka has called President Obama an “Uncle Tom” and contributed an essay to the conspiracy theorist tome Another False Flag, edited by Holocaust denier and 9/11 truther Kevin Barrett that features pieces arguing, among other things, that the terrorist attacks in Paris and San Bernardino never happened. (Baraka’s contribution focuses on the the “white supremacist ideology” that elevates events like the Paris attacks over the Beirut bombings that happened the same week; a spokeswoman for Baraka said he wasn’t aware of Barrett’s views.)


(Source: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/features/the-case-against-jill-stein-w436362 )

John Kelly
Reader
John Kelly

What evidence can you provide that Dr. Jill Stein is interested in going to war?

marc
Reader
marc

If everything is as the US govt claims it is ( remember NIST is a govt agency that falls under US Dept of Commerce) then why would anyone worry about/ fear Stein?
America is the land of the free and freedom of speech, isn’t it?
Like it or not, many outside observers see Obama as a classic “Uncle Tom”: a well-heeled, establishment black man protecting white-dominated capital interests. Under his rule, black people have not improved their material status and police killings of black people has increased.

Jerome Fryer
Reader
Jerome Fryer

NIST is part of an international system. They haven’t got much chance of ‘hiding’ anything from peers in other nations (which includes averred ‘hostile’ nations).
Don’t confuse the corruption in the political class — and that is most severe at the national level, State legislatures are more responsive to citizens — with general systemic corruption throughout government. The US is far from perfect, but it isn’t a basket case like Ukraine.
I think the Rolling Stone article is reasonable, and points to a problem with starting as a ‘fringe’ candidate, then further isolating your position. Admittedly, the Greens (Stein) did attempt to get Sanders on their ticket, but that seemed to be a stunt rather than a serious proposition.

Ali Khan
Reader

I recently met and temporarily lived in a house with 2 americans … 1 highly educated, 30 plus knew everything scientific etc the other well educated, 50 yrs old, librarian, both liberal liberal … both going to vote for Hillary … when I asked why they weren’t going to consider Jill Stein they both on separate occasions said …”who?”

marc
Reader
marc

we had the same experience with an intelligent, university educated, fairly politically savvy American tourist visiting our country.
When we asked her for her views on Jill Stein, she asked… “who”?
Seems Americans are marinated in dis- and misinformation, courtesy of their corporate media.

Schlüter
Reader

Respect for that! See:
„Nine Eleven One And A Half Decade Ago: Whose Conspiracy?“ https://wipokuli.wordpress.com/2016/09/10/nine-eleven-one-and-a-half-decade-ago-whose-conspiracy-part-1/
Andreas Schlüter
Sociologist

mohandeer
Reader

Reblogged this on Worldtruth.

Brian Harry, Australia
Reader
Brian Harry, Australia

Given the farcical choice that has been offered to the American electorate by the two major parties in the November election, I urge the American people to vote for one of the ‘independent’ candidates who are also running, but have apparently been ignored by the Mainstream Media(and will be excluded from the election debate, also by the MSM.
Americans MUST show their disdain for the traditional parties who have turned the USA into the “laughing stock” of World politics.
For the sake of, and the future of the USA, please vote ‘Independent’. Given the performance of the two major parties since Reagan was elected, and the ‘shambles’ that the USA has become, what have you got to lose???

Brian Burgess
Reader
Brian Burgess

Why do so many Americans refuse to believe that the 9-11 attacks were exactly whatvthey appearwd to be – the result of terrorists flying planes full of fuel into the twin towers?
My theory is that Americans are geavily invested in the belief thatctheir country is all-powerful and they find it impossible to believe that this tragedy was madyerminded and executed by foreigners with no American involvement whatsoever.
It is less frightening psychologically for Anericans to delude themselves that there is some “conspiracy” or “cover up” in relation to 9-11 rather than accept the far more frightening reality that a bunch of desert dwelling foreigners managed to inflict such damage on supposedly the “greatest, most powerful nation on Earth.” By imagining a US Government cover up it allows them to continue imagining that their Government really was in control of the situation despite all evidence to the contrary.
This is all so obvious to foreigners around the world yet seemingly so hard to grasp by Americans who have been brainwashed from birth.

DavidKNZ
Reader

BB.. Try a simple experiment:
Go to your BBQ, and switch it on. Leave it for an hour.
Did the Grill melt??
Did the BBQ spontaneously disintegrate into clouds of fine dust??
If the answer to to these two experiments is NO
you might like to reconsider your position
🙂

Jerome Fryer
Reader
Jerome Fryer

Buildings aren’t designed to burn for hours (the assumption being that firefighting can take place), nor have aircraft flown into them (the WTC towers were constructed with the assumption that they could survive an accidental 707 strike, but no account was made for fuel and they were not assumed to be capable of subsequently burning for an hour).
You will be happy to learn that there have been a lot of engineering revaluations since the 9/11 attacks specifically to make buildings and other structures more resilient to terrorism and other ‘unforeseen’ events.

DavidKNZ
Reader

Jerome, let me simplify your many, long and convoluted posts 🙂
Aviation gasoline in the fuel tanks of two aircraft caused the demolition of 80,000 tons of structural steel and converted a even greater mass of concrete into high temperature pyroclactic dust.
There – fixed it for you 🙂

Brian Harry, Australia
Reader
Brian Harry, Australia

“Aviation Gasoline”= Kerosine.
Kerosine used to be used to heat homes using Kerosine heaters made of thin, sheet iron. The burned for hours at a time, and, to my knowledge none ever melted down.
Don’t waste your time on Jerome, he’s just a shit-stirrer……….

CloudSlicer
Reader
CloudSlicer

I see you are still here Jerome, continuing to try to sell us your conviction that the ‘official’ collapse narrative is basically correct, in spite of abundant scientific opinion that it’s pure hokum.
Destruction of the building through controlled demolition is the only hypothesis which accounts for ALL of the features observed in the collapses of the twin towers and building 7. Repeat: controlled demolition accounts for ALL the features observed in the collapses.
Global building collapse caused by fire (the official NIST explanation) accounts for NONE of the observed collapse features. Repeat: demolition through fire accounts for NONE of the features observed in the collapses.

Jerome Fryer
Reader
Jerome Fryer

“Why do so many Americans refuse to believe that the 9-11 attacks were exactly whatvthey appearwd to be – the result of terrorists flying planes full of fuel into the twin towers?”
That number is declining. More Americans are likely to believe in Bigfoot than ‘nano-thermite’ (or at least that is what sceptics in the ISL / JREF forums seem to think).
What Jill Stein wants an investigation into is not the physical reality of events (already established): it is the official cover-up for the incompetence and stupidity that allowed the attacks to occur, and also the subsequent use of the attacks as a ‘justification’ for the invasion of other nations.

Greg Bacon
Reader
Greg Bacon

An obvious sign of someone who lost an argument is that they try to confuse and misdirect the discussion by tossing out nonsensical distractions, like equating BigFoot with 9/11 Truth.

Jerome Fryer
Reader
Jerome Fryer

Belief in the existence of Bigfoot is past the twenty percent mark:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/10/24/study-democrats-are-more-likely-than-republicans-to-believe-in-fortune-telling-astrology-and-ghosts/
This poll gives twenty-nine:
http://www.livescience.com/18869-bigfoot-belief-americans-canadians.html
‘Alternative’ explanations for 9/11 gets twenty-four:
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/60-minutes-vanity-fair-poll-conspiracy/
II think it is, at best, a draw. This is, of course, only Americans. Americans seem more susceptible to ‘conspiracy theory’ than other people, but I can’t find any good polling on Bigfoot elsewhere. The global average for the US government being behind the 9/11 attacks is around fifteen percent, according to this:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polls_about_9/11_conspiracy_theories

Brian Harry, Australia
Reader
Brian Harry, Australia

“whatvthey appearwd”……… “geavily”……….”Anericans” etc, etc……
Sorry……….either your keyboard needs attention, or you need to try harder…….

paulcarline
Reader

They refuse to believe it for the simple reason that the facts don’t confirm the appearances. The ‘appearances’ – planes flying into buildings – were concocted. Exactly how we don’t know – but Richard D. Hall’s recent discovery of anomalous radar data, plus the physical fact that real planes can’t fly at 580mph at 700 feet off the ground without breaking up, and real planes can’t melt into steel-framed buildings like a hot knife into butter, all say loud and clear: no real planes crashed into buildings on 9/11.
If no planes, then no hijackers etc. That whole story – including the phone calls that didn’t happen, and “jihadists” wearing bandanas and getting lucky four times in one day with plastic knives – was implanted in people’s minds by the government’s lie machine and the servile media. No-one ever saw any hijackers – because there were none. And of course Osama bin Laden had nothing at all to do with it – until his ghost had to be resurrected to help Obama win a second term.
No – the thing that is really difficult to understand is that after 15 years of solid research confirming the obvious (towers ‘exploding’, not collapsing; no planes at the Pentagon or Shanksville etc.) people like Brian Burgess are still trying to defend the Big Lie.

radguy
Reader
radguy

Wow, you’re certain of the cause of the collapse of building 7 despite the simulation modelling not being released for scrutiny for reasons of public security?
Could you make a bonfire collapse symmetrically? I don’t think you could with a lifetime of practice.

pm61
Reader
pm61

You can vote for Stein in 48 states. You have to write her in in 3 states.