Talking Govt. Lies, Wars, & 9/11 with Denver’s Peter Boyles

Denver KNUS host Peter Boyles and I had another rattlin’ good chat today about the continuing cover-up of 9/11.  Boyles has made himself an expert on the details of the Saudi involvement and is doing a great job of hammering this issue week after week.  I commented that the Bush administration kept the lid on 28 pages of the congressional report in part so that they could demonize Saddam Hussein and drag the nation to war against Iraq in 2003.

Boyles talked about how key accusations against Iraq were produced by torture. I commented, “Rather than exposing ticking time bombs, torture is a helluva lot more likely to gin up false accusations that the governments uses to go and kill vast numbers of innocent people. I have been appalled that more Americans have not been mortified by the evidence of the U.S. torture after 9/11.”

Boyles asked why I thought Obama has not brought out the 28 pages on the Saudi involvement on 9/11. I said it reminds me of what Lyndon Johnson said about another senator when he was Senate Majority Leader in the 1950s: “I’ve got his pecker in my pocket.” I added, “Presidents get in the habit of covering up the lies of prior administrations – that’s how the government maintains its credibility. It is in the interest of every president for people not to recognize that previous presidents were pathological liars on some issues.”

*”People should not trust the government to be more honest in the future than it was in the past.   How long will it take us to learn of the lies used to justify U.S. bombing in Libya and Syria?”

*”Folks need to have a radical skepticism when politicians are urging us on to war.  Americans have not had that skepticism and that is part of the reason politicians have done so much damage.”

*”There are a number of Middle Eastern nations that have done false flag operations that tried to pull the United States into their conflicts. The U.S. has been conned again and again by nations in that part of the world. It is not likely that our policymakers will become savvy enough to figure out the next con.”

*”Since 9/11, the government has been off the leash because the media was the dog that didn’t bark.”

*”The government has done a pretty good job so far of plugging up its rabbit holes on the 9/11 attacks.  I hope we finally see the 28 pages and the tens of thousands of other pages we deserve to see.”

Boyles asked about Sen. Rand Paul’s stance on the 9/11 coverup.  I said he was pushing on this but had not filibustered on it.  I mentioned, “There are a lot of issues on which Rand Paul is the best person in the Senate.”

We talked about the response of Americans to the 9/11 attacks; trust in government doubled in the weeks after the attacks. Here’s a link to an Investors Business Daily oped that I wrote a few weeks after 9/11.   That surge in trust in government opened a Pandora’s Box of political evil from which this nation still suffers – long after the trust subsided.

Here’s a link to a 2003 USA Today oped I wrote on how Bush’s lies paved the way to the Iraq war (“By Accident or Design, Bush Hyped the Case for War”).

Here is a link the KNUS hour long program.

Here is a link to the edited 29 minutes of the interview at my blog.

On Twitter @jimbovard

16 thoughts on “Talking Govt. Lies, Wars, & 9/11 with Denver’s Peter Boyles”

  1. I'm afraid you boys might be berrying the lead here. I know its politically incorrect to say such things but there were many top members of the Bush white house with deeply toxic connections to members of the very Saudi elite involved in 911 not to mention Israeli intelligence.

    I'm not suggesting some ridiculous conspiracy involving drones and controlled demolitions but rather a Pearl Harbor type scenario where certain people in the right places simply looked the other way. It's ugly to think such things but based on the rabid duplicity and total moral dereliction of that administration is it not a possibility worth discussing? Do you really think a sociopath like Cheney would lose any sleep over a couple thousand dead Americans for the "greater good" of his beloved empire?

    I think these kind of questions need to be asked even if we do run the risk of being blackballed as "Truthers".

    As Gore Vidal once mused "I am not a conspiracy theorist, I am a conspiracy analyst." All I'm saying is lets analyze these possibilities.

  2. Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth.
    Another thing that rarely gets mentioned are the small bone fragments from *first responders* found scattered across the rooftops of buildings such as the Deutsche Bank Building.

    Besides, how did they go about establishing the "hijackers" identities?
    Is it still the old "we found their ID laying around" trope?

    1. What gangster is referring to is Appendix C of the FEMA report from May 2002 states that samples of steel from the towers and WTC7 were attacked by an extremely high temperature corrosive attack involving oxidation and sulfiization. The edges of these massive steel beams were razor sharp with silver dollar sized holes eaten through the steel. They further state that the steel was attacked by sulphur but they have no idea where the sulphur came from. FEMA actually says all this.

      These observations cannot be explained by a hydrocarbon fire of jet fuel (kerosine) and everything one might expect to find in a modern office building built to fire codes.

      1. Must have been UFOs.

        Seriously, will this bullshit never stop? If you want to look for a conspiracy, you better look through rooms of records and analyze political connections, instead of of findings by nutters looking for extraordinary "explanations"

        1. The laws of Chemistry and Physics will never stop but they absolutely dodisprove the official 'story' of 9/11. You can dismiss all this all you want with your snarky attitide but it only shows your too stupid and dense to understand a scientific argument.

          The Fema report says everything stated above. They even show pictures in the report of steel beams with razer sharp edges and holes eaten through the steel. A hydrocarbon and/or office fire cannot do this. You can can put a fire, fueled by aviation fuel (kerosene) to a steel beam forever and it will do absolutely nothing.

          I know knuckleheads like you don't believe in science, whether it be Climate Change or the collapse of the WTC towers, or that Nuclear power is inherantly unsafe (Fukashima).

  3. I don't buy any of that Engineers for 9/11 Truth sh*t. I have little doubt that sh*t went down the way we're told they went down in the public record. We know planes were hijacked. We know who hijacked them. We know how the operation went down. We also know the administration was warned, repeatedly and explicitly, by numerous veritable sources and nothing was done. We also know that the neocons had close relations with the very Saudi's who made the attacks possible as well as Israeli intelligence who were keeping close tabs on the hijackers.

    Coincidence? Maybe. In confidence? Possible. But this is not bullsh*t!! This IS real!!! Don't lump me in with the other crackpots who steal focus from the real facts. A conspiracy of silence is very possible. Remember Pear Harbor? They knew what was going to happen. They didn't need to make it happen. They just let it happen because they needed it to happen to get the war they wanted. What makes you so damn sure that Rumsfeld and Cheney wouldn't do the same?

    Take your own advice, GET REAL!!!!!

    1. It's really easy to dismiss what the 2,350 Architects and Engineers are saying if you stick your head in the sand and doing actually read what they are saying. Also if you never took high school level physics and don't know who Isaac Newton was then that also is very helpful if you steadfastly wish to believe airplane impacts and jet fuel yadda yadda brought down those two massive towers at free fall acceleration as the lead investigor for the NIST investigation admitted was indeed the case. Except that silly argument ignores that building 7 was not hit by a plane and there was no jet fuel and the final report by NIST also admits that WTC7 fell at free fall for 2-1/2 seconds.

      However the laws of motion state an object in motion will stay in motion unless it is acted upon by another force. How can hundreds of thousands of tons of steel and concrete crash through hundreds of thousands of tons of steel and concrete an that not be another force to at a minimum decelerate the collapse if only a little? How is that possible?

      If the building fell at free fall, which they did, then they encountered zero resistance. That is impossible unless the resistance was removed by explosives.

      1. Your ignoring a pretty basic problem with the whole demolition theory, it's totally unnecessary. Why go through all the trouble of planting bombs in heavily populated towers, when all you really have to do is look the other way and let sh*t go down. America has more than enough enemies to go around without having to do there dirty work for them.

        As for my physics knowledge, you got me Georgy. Science has never really been my best subject. I prefer statistics and what statistics tell me is that the sheer amount of man power it would take to pull off your gargantuan, Byzantine-esque, conspiracy extravaganza would be enormous. We're talking hundreds if not thousands of agents. The likely hood of even being able to find that many people willing to commit such an act (not all spooks are heartless neocons, after all) but to keep it a f**king secret is about the same as me waking up with a second dick tomorrow.

        It also might interest you to know that for every Truther architect or engineer that you can dig up there's at least twelve that will tell you that its more then possible to drop a tower with a commercial airliner but I guess there all in on it too.

        Look, I'm a conspiracy buff too but conspiracies are kind of like religion in that you should never let what you WANT to be true get in the way of the facts. That's what separates the the open minded from the zealots.

        Nothing personal, just a little food for thought from a fellow friend of Winston Smith.

  4. Jimmy Bovard is a national treasure.

    If you read or listen to him and you're not mad then you aren't paying attention.

  5. ”The government has done a pretty good job so far of plugging up its rabbit holes on the 9/11 attacks. I hope we finally see the 28 pages and the tens of thousands of other pages we deserve to see.”
    Why can't we have a proper investigation?

  6. I have always had a problem with the 28 page crowd who are ONLY focused on the 28 page issue. I role of Saudi Arabia and what is in those redacted pages is certainly very important, but it is only one of many many chapters in a long long book. The subject of the 28 pages dovetails with many other areas of 9/11 research.

    It has always been amazing to me how little is known about the jaw dropping research of Daniel Hopsicker and his astonishing book: WELCOME TO TERRORLAND: Mohammed Atta and the 9/11 Cover-up in Florida.

    Much has been written about the Saudi Nationals who split before the attacks while ignoring all the other revelations in Hopsickers book. I find this very strange

  7. Much has been written about the Saudi Nationals who split before the attacks while ignoring all the other revelations in Hopsickers book. I find this very strange

Comments are closed.