Outspoken Arizona Senator Questions 9/11 Official Version Of Events
Republican attacked for expressing opinion on September 11th cover-up
Steve Watson, Infowars.net, Friday, April 25, 2008
State Sen. Karen Johnson, R-Mesa, has come under fierce criticism for going on record with her doubts over the government's version of events surrounding the 9/11 attacks.
Following a vote in the Senate Appropriations Committee on Arizona's 9/11 Memorial, Johnson told Capitol reporters "There are many of us that believe there's been a cover-up."
Details of Johnson's comments come in an vicious hit piece article in the Arizona Republic entitled Drinking the 9/11 Kool-Aid:
The senator gave details about her theories. The World Trade Center buildings could have been rigged with thermite to melt girders. The aircraft could have been drones rather than the commercial airliners most of us thought we saw crashing into the Twin Towers. As to what became of the missing passengers in the aircraft that (theoretically) did not explode against the towers: "That's what I would like to know," she said.
Citing no research whatsoever on such theories, and without referring to the hundreds of engineers, scientists, professors, former government and intelligence officials and prominent public figures who have voiced similar concerns over the official version of the attacks, which is about as water tight as a paper bag, the Arizona Republic continues the attack:
Now, we take no issue with private citizens believing whatever fever-swamp nonsense, however outlandish, they wish about their government.
We do take serious issue, however, with a public official affecting public policy on such grounds.
The conservative Republican senator, who has represented Mesa’s District 18 for nearly two decades, is renowned for her outspoken politics and devotion to the US constitution.
In the past she has chastised big government initiatives and social programs such as No Child Left Behind, saying they infringe on state’s rights.
She has previously come under attack, as "nutty" for voicing concerns on the secretive Security and Prosperity Partnership, which she, like many others, has warned represents a bureaucratic undermining of national sovereignty.
“It’s all because it’s going to be open,” Johnson has previously told Capitol Media Services. “It’s all going to be a ‘North American community,’ just like the European Union,” complete with the creation of a single currency just like the Euro.
“We will have no sovereignty, we will have no Constitution left... we are going to be ruled by unelected tribunals, bureaucrats that are unelected,” she said.
In February 2007 Johnson introduced Senate Concurrent Memorial 1002, a bill urging U.S. withdrawal from the SPP, and a North American Union. The text of the legislation is similar to other resolutions offered in South Carolina, Utah, Virginia, and Washington.
Johnson has also worked hard to introduce bills to overturn legislature outlawing carry concealed weapons on community college and public university campuses, a move that would give students, teachers and administrators a chance to protect themselves during a mass shooting.
She has also introduced a bill prohibiting schools from collecting fingerprints, hand geometry, voice recognition, facial recognition, iris scans and retinal scans
from students. Bill 1216 passed the Senate earlier this year. Johnson has also fought against REAL ID and the biometrically enhanced driver’s license.
Johnson has also been criticized in the past for holding a position on the board of the Church of Scientology’s Citizens Commission on Human Rights. The sum of her work here has consisted of sponsoring bills on its behalf to limit use of psychotropic drugs on children and to oppose mandatory mental health screenings for children.
A senator that actually cares about constitution law and US sovereignty, questions big corporate infested government and promotes freedom? Karen Johnson is undoubtedly kooky and most possibly evil.
_________________ "The conflict between corporations and activists is that of narcolepsy versus remembrance. The corporations have money, power and influence. Our sole influence is public outrage. Extract from "Cloud Atlas (page 125) by David Mitchell.
Arizona Senator: I Want To Find Out The Truth About 9/11
Steve Watson, Infowars.net, Tuesday, April 29, 2008
State Sen. Karen Johnson explains why she went public with questions on 9/11
An Arizona state Senator who went public with questions over the official government version of events on 9/11 has provided further details of her position and why she chose to make her views known.
"I guess I define myself as a truth seeker, that is what I want, I want to find the truth." says Senator Karen Johnson, representative of Mesa’s District 18 for nearly two decades.
In an short interview (see video below), the Republican Senator explained that in the many in the Arizona legislature have privately told her they agree with her position but are too afraid or are unable to start asking the same questions themselves. Johnson echoed her previous statements when she told Capitol reporters "There are many of us that believe there's been a cover-up."
"There are so many unanswered questions regarding 9/11 and there never ever would have even been a Commission called for by Mr Bush and the Federal Government if it hadn't have been for the Jersey Girls." Johnson said, referring to the activist group of widowed mothers and wives from New Jersey and New York who have continued to question the events of 9/11.
"When Bush appointed Henry Kissinger, of all people, to head up that Commission, those Jersey Girls asked for a press conference with him. They went in there and started asking him about all his ties with the Bin Laden family... and he backed down." She continued.
Senator Johnson was attacked by the media for voicing her questions over 9/11 last week in the midst of a controversial debate concerning a 9/11 memorial in Arizona which contains phrases and thoughts of residents there.
The Arizona state Senate voted on legislation concerning what sort of remembrance phrases the 9/11 Memorial should include. The legislation would have extracted some locutions that were critical of the U.S. and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
A vote in the Senate Appropriations Committee had the measure passing narrowly - until it came to Johnson, whose vote against changing the memorial's phrases created a tie, killing the legislation for now.
As Johnson explains in the video, the monument was privately funded, placed on privately owned land with no State involvement. Therefore, in her opinion, the State should not claim authority over what appears on the monument, and should not claim to preside over people's opinions of the 9/11 attacks.
As shown in the video below, some of the phrases also hint at government prior knowledge of the attacks and the backing off of the intelligence agencies in the months prior to 9/11. Thanks to Karen Johnson these will remain on the monument for now.
"Who are we as a legislature to tell these private folks what they can and can't do with that monument?" Johnson commented.
Sen. Johnson is renowned for her outspoken politics and devotion to the US constitution.
However, she will not continue in office after this year despite serving nearly two decades, because as she explains:
"I can't handle serving any longer with the folks that I sit with... The majority of them are more worried about passing a bill about talking on your cell phone as you go down the freeway than the fact that our country is falling down around us."
"In an short interview... , the Republican Senator explained that... many in the Arizona legislature have privately told her they agree with her position but are too afraid or are unable to start asking the same questions themselves. Johnson echoed her previous statements when she told Capitol reporters "There are many of us that believe there's been a cover-up." "
Well they need to start justifying their positions or get swept up in the Fascist state forming around them. If THEY can't even ask questions what the hell do they expect is ever going to change things!!! _________________ "The conflict between corporations and activists is that of narcolepsy versus remembrance. The corporations have money, power and influence. Our sole influence is public outrage. Extract from "Cloud Atlas (page 125) by David Mitchell.
Karen S. Johnson: Backing my claims about 9/11 questions
Karen S. Johnson, East Valley Tribune, Monday, May 5, 2008
A recent letter to the editor asked for evidence of my claims regarding the tragedy of 9/11. Below I present some points that are presently known. I won’t be able to convince anyone who doesn’t want to be convinced, but for those who are willing to deal with factual evidence, consider the following:
• 37 different people reported explosions in the basement of the World Trade Center Towers before the first plane hit, and seismic equipment recorded both the explosions and the impacts. In addition, people were injured by the explosions in the basement, providing well-documented evidence. Yet this evidence is ignored.
•The media and government have promoted the “pancake theory” as the cause of the collapse of the Twin Towers — that is, fire weakened the steel support beams, causing the upper floors to collapse. Then the weight of the collapsing floors above caused the floors below to collapse. This theory is not consistent with scientific principles or the facts. Frank Legge, who has a doctorate in chemistry, and Tony Szamboti, a mechanical engineer, reported in December in the Journal of 9/11 Studies: “It appears therefore that the official concept of a free-fall collapse of the upper portion through the initiation story, due to heat effects from fire, is a fantasy. If the temperature did become high enough for collapse to occur” — and everyone agrees that it did not — “it could not have happened in the observed manner. In particular it could not have been sudden and thus could not have produced the velocity, and hence the momentum and kinetic energy, upon which the official story depends for the second stage of collapse.”
• The theory that the buildings collapsed due to controlled-demolition explosives, however, is consistent with scientific principles and the facts. The “demolition” theory, in fact, is the only one which scientists have been able to corroborate. That is, “… all observations are in accord with the use of explosives in a time sequence.” (Legge and Szamboti, December, Journal of 9/11 Studies.)
• Peer-reviewed reports indicate that the masses of dust particles created by the disaster contained tiny pieces of metal that had been exposed to both extreme temperatures (higher than could have been produced by a burning office or burning airplane fuel) and extreme pressure (such as an explosion) that would fragment material into minute particles. Official reports ignore this.
• In December, physicist Steven Jones announced the discovery of thermite chips in World Trade Center dust samples. The chemical composition of these chips are an exact match to known thermite samples used in controlled demolitions — further corroboration that explosive devices were involved.
• Steel support beams recovered from the site of the World Trade Center exhibit cut edges that are characteristic of thermite used to slice steel support beams in building demolitions but are not characteristic of steel beams that have been burned in a fire.
When the 9/11 Commission Report was finally released, it was woefully inadequate. It never even addressed the collapse of Building 7, for example. Former FBI Director Louis Freeh has stated that there are inaccuracies in the report and unanswered questions. Even the two chairmen of the 9/11 Commission — Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton — have accused the CIA of “obstructing” the commission, and one commissioner, U.S. Sen. Max Cleland, resigned, stating that the commission was “compromised.”
Private individuals with specialized knowledge — scientists, engineers, architects, demolitions experts, and the firefighters and police officers who were on the scene on Sept. 11, 2001, have tested theories, constructed models, provided testimony, and dug for the truth about what really happened on 9/11. They have been ignored by media and the government.
The mainstream media parrot the less-than-credible conclusions of the 9/11 Commission without giving any thought to the many omissions and inconsistencies. In a truly free country, the press would ask hard questions and do real investigating, but this is not happening. Only the alternative media, such as Internet news sites, have done any solid investigating.
The events of 9/11 led immediately to the creation of the Department of Homeland Security and passage of the Patriot Act (what double-speak), both of which deprive us of Constitutional rights and have brought us to the brink of becoming a police state. Homeland Security is currently trying to force a national ID card down our throats, although some governors have politely (or not so politely) told Secretary Michael Chertoff where he can go.
If we’re going to sacrifice our freedom, there ought to be a very good reason, and we have a right to know what that is. It isn’t enough for government to say, “Trust me.” It’s way past time for Congress to authorize an independent investigation of 9/11 that will consider the mass of new evidence that has been gathered in the past seven years. The longer they stall, the more suspicions grow.
Sen. Karen S. Johnson, R-Mesa, represents District 18.
_________________ "The conflict between corporations and activists is that of narcolepsy versus remembrance. The corporations have money, power and influence. Our sole influence is public outrage. Extract from "Cloud Atlas (page 125) by David Mitchell.
Karen S. Johnson: We deserve the full truth about 9/11
Karen S. Johnson, The Arizona Republic, Monday, May 5, 2008
Regarding "Drinking the 9/11 Kool-Aid" (Editorial, April 24):
After three government investigations and more than six years, we still don't have answers on 9/11.
Why, for example, did Building 7 collapse? It wasn't hit by a plane, as the towers were. The 9/11 Commission Report completely ignores Building 7. The Federal Emergency Management Agency report discounts fire as a cause and concludes that the reasons for the collapse of Building 7 are unknown and require further research. But when FEMA issued this report, it already cleared the site and disposed of the dust and steel (evidence from a crime scene), thus possibly committing a felony and complicating any "further research."
The National Institute of Standards and Technology, a federal agency, which evaluated the collapse of the towers, has yet to issue its report on Building 7. "We've had trouble getting a handle on Building 7," said the acting director of their Building and Fire Research Lab.
Yet a number of private-sector engineers, architects, and demolition experts have not had that problem. They think Building 7 came down by controlled demolition. The building collapsed suddenly, straight down, at nearly free-fall speed. People heard the explosions, and saw the squibs and the characteristic billowing clouds of pulverized concrete so unique to demolitions. There is no reason to think that Building 7 came down for any other reason than explosive demolition.
And speaking of pulverized concrete, fire does not pulverize concrete. Even the collapse of one floor upon another wouldn't pulverize concrete the way the Twin Towers disintegrated.
Think back to that day: Those towers didn't just fall down. If they had, we would have had huge chunks of concrete breaking apart and falling into a massive pile of rubble. The buildings likely would have toppled erratically sideways and left a much larger pile of debris.
But that's not what we witnessed. The towers didn't collapse - they disintegrated.
We watched them explode into dust, not knowing exactly what we were seeing. Very little intact concrete was found in the rubble. The sheer energy required to pulverize that much concrete into dust can only come from an explosive process.
Reputable scientists, engineers, architects and firemen with no political angle dispute the 9/11 Commission report and say that the evidence indicates the Twin Towers and Building 7 came down due to controlled-demolition explosions. Tests corroborate the presence of thermite, an explosive used in building demolitions, at the site of the Twin Towers and Building 7.
Thermite also explains the pools of molten steel in the basement, which no one has been able to otherwise explain and which the National Institute of Standards and Technology simply denies. Why is the government refusing to even consider demolition as a possibility? What are they afraid of?
Time magazine reported in September 2006 that 36 percent of Americans believe the government was complicit in 9/11. A Zogby poll reported that 51 percent of Americans want Congress to investigate 9/11 further.
Even the co-chairmen of the 9/11 Commission are upset with the commission report. They have accused the CIA and the military of "obstructing" the investigation. Former Commissioner Max Cleland resigned, stating that the Commission was "compromised." Former FBI Director Louis Freeh has criticized the report for its inaccuracies and unanswered questions.
The events of 9/11 have never been properly investigated. It's about time they were.
The writer, a Republican from Mesa, represents District 18 in the Arizona Senate.
_________________ "The conflict between corporations and activists is that of narcolepsy versus remembrance. The corporations have money, power and influence. Our sole influence is public outrage. Extract from "Cloud Atlas (page 125) by David Mitchell.
Do we have any contacts in the US who can contribute to this??
Quote:
These are responses that appeared in the East Valley Tribune today. (This paper covers the Phoenix suburbs.) If you want to write a response to them, you can email it to: forum@evtrib.com
Quote:
East Valley Tribune
May 7, 2008
We deserve better from a leader
By Raymond Moers
Commentary
In a free society such as ours, obviously everyone is entitled to their opinion. We’re forever reading assorted news reports and editorials from the mainstream media that have bashed the Bush administration regarding some outlandish government-sponsored conspiracy theory of one form or another.
Often the facts regarding these theories have been distorted, and more often than not this bias is based primarily on that particular media’s own political opinion.
The mainstream media also reports the completely unqualified, unknowledgeable opinions of celebrities, who use their status to make outrageous accusations based on their twisted personal views and often a basic hatred for America.
In my humble opinion, that’s even worse than misreporting the facts. Does it really matter what these supposed celebrities think? After all, who really cares what someone like a Rosie O’Donnell believes? She’s a private citizen, someone who makes her living as an actress/comedian. Seems to me her personal political opinions don’t deserve true seriousness.
On the other hand, when we read outrageous opinions regarding a government conspiracy theory about 9/11 from an elected official such as state Sen. Karen S. Johnson (“Backing my claims about 9/11 questions,” [http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/story/115376] Saturday) that lends pause. We need to take our elected officials’ opinions seriously.
But, this 9/11-Bush administration conspiracy theory is so outlandish, if not downright offending, it deserves be exposed for exactly what it is — a false and seditious accusation based on Johnson’s personal libertarianism/anarchist ideology. It’s an opinion she’s certainly entitled to have, but in this case, one that’s totally misguided.
Johnson spins a lot of rhetoric about the opinions of engineering experts who have claimed that it would have been physically impossible for the twin towers to collapse due to the impact caused by the two jets that slammed into the towers. Therefore, the only way a collapse could have happened is the towers had to have been dynamited just prior, or just after the jet’s impact. In other words, this was all pre-planned by the government.
Is Johnson suggesting that the Bush administration conspired with Osama bin Laden and his henchmen to coordinate the most heinous manmade disaster this country has ever seen? Is she suggesting they know each other? Or is she suggesting that the government didn’t know about bin Laden’s plan, but was planning to blow up the twin towers coincidently on the same day anyway?
If the latter is true, the government was obviously unaware of any hijacked aircraft. Thus, when the jets slammed into the twin towers, the burning fuel ignited the dynamite that was already pre-planted. What a stroke of luck and what an even more amazing coincidence. See how absurd this all is?
But why would the government commit such an atrocity? Because as Johnson summarizes near the end of her commentary, it’s all part of a grand scheme, and the necessary evil needed to ignite the Afghanistan/Iraq invasions, the formation of Homeland Security and the Patriot Act, which Johnson obviously believes was George W. Bush’s ultimate goal when he became president — to take away our civil rights in his quest to make America a police state while he becomes America’s fuehrer.
Unfortunately, this is the same kind of distorted propaganda that’s been used throughout history to fuel bigotry, hate and anarchy by those who thrive on creating a fictional bully pulpit and stepping stone as a way to extort their own political agendas.
Is Johnson’s conspiracy theory the best we can expect from our elected officials? Don’t we deserve professional representation, and not some distorted theory motivated by this particular senator’s political ideology, which serves more to draw attention to herself while insulting our intelligence?
Raymond Moers of Gilbert is a business owner and novelist.
♦◊ ♦◊♦◊ ♦◊
Quote:
Letters to the Editor
Not impossible, but still crazy
East Valley Tribune
May 7, 2008
Like I have always said, people believe what they want to believe and refuse to believe what they do not want to believe, as Sen. Karen Johnson once again demonstrates (“Backing my claims about 9/11 questions,” Opinion 2, Saturday).
The History Channel did a program examining 9/11 conspiracy theories and offered evidence that these theories were not credible. But it is not possible to prove, of course, that our government did not attack America and destroy the World Trade Center. It is possible to think this is a silly and dangerous idea. Once an event happens it becomes history and can only be reconstructed from less-that-perfect evidence. This invites everyone to give it his or her own two-cent ideas.
To concentrate on proving our government is this evil is to ignore the reality of our enemy. They have proven motive, means and opportunity for 9/11. They have been killing Americans for more than 40 years now and have in their own thoughts been at war with America for a long time.
It would be wrong to ignore the problems in our intelligence community and in the State Department, that have persisted through several administrations, of all persuasions, that has given us such a poor understanding of the Middle East.
JAMES R SCHER
♦◊ ♦◊♦◊ ♦◊
Quote:
Wacky and wackier
East Valley Tribune
May 7, 2008
What a double-header on the Opinion 2 page Saturday! I wasn’t sure whether it was “Dumb and Dumber” redux, or nut and nuttier. I’ll settle for the latter, because Tibor Machan and Sen. Karen Johnson probably are intelligent, just wacko.
Machan’s column is over the top, even for your lousy paper. Wesley Snipes broke the law. He did it knowingly and with forethought. I suspect he thought that he would be immune because he is such a celebrity. But he cheated, he got caught, and now he’s going to jail. Hooray.
Machan’s reasoning is so faulty that there is no way to follow it. It seems that he believes that we should only pay for government services that we personally want, and that people are rational enough that they will pay voluntarily. Right! The fact that this guy is the guiding guru for Freedom Communications really makes me wonder what’s in the water in Orange County.
Johnson has never met a conspiracy theory she didn’t like. Her brain has a sign on it that says “for amusement only.” I think she is almost due to leave the Legislature thanks to term limits — now we just have to pay her retirement for the rest of her life. How about a story from the Tribune on the retirement pay for legislators? And a sidebar on the regular pay including per diem and travel allowances?
This started out to be a cancellation of our subscription (what a shame — our family has read the Trib since the 1940s), but my wife likes the bridge column and I do the crossword. We’ll try to avoid the editorial pages from here on out to help our blood pressure.
FRANK BENNETT SR.
MESA
♦◊ ♦◊♦◊ ♦◊
Quote:
Why trust Congress?
East Valley Tribune
May 7, 2008
I was saddened to read Sen. Karen Johnson’s, R-Mesa, piece (Opinion 2, Saturday) defending her belief that 9/11 was a government conspiracy. She says she can’t convince anyone that doesn’t want to be convinced and then presents the “factual evidence” that should convince those who can be convinced.
When I first saw the “evidence” some years ago, I too was intrigued by it, but then I did something that the 9/11 conspiracy folks never seem to do — I sought out knowledgeable explanations for the “evidence.”
Beyond the fact that the “evidence” is refutable, I would ask Sen. Johnson and all those who are so eager to believe in a 9/11 conspiracy (other than the actual one hatched by bin Laden), did you not believe your eyes? We saw the planes hit the buildings. The people who were on those planes are gone, are they not? We know who the hijackers were and how they trained for their hideous mission. Do you have any idea how long it takes and what is involved in preparing a large building (let alone the Twin Towers and Building No. 7) for demolition with explosives? And none of the many thousands of people who worked in those buildings every day noticed anything untoward?
Most of the 9/11 conspiracy folks tend to be leftists who are so warped by their hatred of President Bush and his “evil administration” they have no problem accepting the most absurd premises; so it is with some surprise to see Johnson, who I usually agree with politically, getting fitted for a tinfoil hat. I would ask her one last question. If she truly believes that the government was behind 9/11 and she wants “Congress to authorize an independent investigation,” how does she know Congress isn’t in on the conspiracy?
DAN DOMINEY
♦◊ ♦◊♦◊ ♦◊
Quote:
Johnson shows courage
East Valley Tribune
May 7, 2008
I would like to thank Sen. Karen Johnson, RMesa, for her column about 9/11 in Saturday’s Tribune. As she said, there are many unanswered questions about that day. It take guts to bring that opinion out. Yet it seems that if you talk to anyone about the prospect of the World Trade Center’s “collapse” being an inside job, you get looked at like you’ve got Slinkys coming out of your eye sockets. Even when asked a question about 9/11 at a political rally a few months ago, Bill Clinton replied to the person, “Oh, You’re one of those, huh?” like the guy had leprosy! I’ve also heard people try to bring it up with radio talk show hosts, but they get mocked and laughed at!
I don’t know. It just seems strange that in the history of steel skyscrapers, only three have ever collapsed and all three fell on the same day like nice accordions into the ground. I have beliefs about 9/11 but I don’t believe in Bigfoot, the Loch Ness Monster or flying saucers! I would however like anyone reading this letter to look up the definition of “false flag” if they haven’t heard of that before. Thanks, Sen. Johnson. I hope your career is not ruined.
MARK LOOSE
♦◊ ♦◊♦◊ ♦◊
Quote:
Absurd assumptions
East Valley Tribune
May 7, 2008
If Sen. Karen Johnson, R-Mesa, and her fellow conspiracy buffs are correct about the destruction of the World Trade Center (Opinion 2, Saturday), we can assume:
• The attack was more sophisticated than first believed, with the attack airplanes coordinated with explosions in the basement and demolition of the towers with planted thermite, or;
• A terrorist group other than the known Islamists in the airplanes happened to ply their trade unaware of the impending attack, or;
• The explosions heard by 37 different people and the traces of thermite in the wreckage could be attributed to something considerably less sinister, and the 9/11 Commission is correct in its findings. I prefer the latter.
KENNETH R. FOOTE
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You can attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
