COLORADO WOMEN SUES LOCAL NEWSPAPER FOR AIDING IN THE 911 COVER-UP - by Jack Blood
Is it possible that for the last four plus years that we have been going about this thing all wrong? We have complained tirelessly about the establishment media cover-up of the facts, ALL the facts about
Now thanks to one brave woman in
Judith Pfeif, no relation to Barney Fife, has taken the infowar to a new level for 911 truthers as she takes on
Judith became aware of the 911 controversy when researching why our young men and women were REALLY fighting in Iraq
Says Judith, "
I have sent her every DVD I received as soon as I had it to send and have been
sharing the truth over e-mails and now she is avoiding me like the plague.
They have truely stolen my daughter with the BIG LIE."
As she peeled the proverbial onion back a few layers, she, like most of us, realized that the American people, and the people of the world were not only not told the whole truth, but indeed our bloated, centralized, and consolidated establishment media were covering for the administration, and therefore depriving good people everywhere of the information needed to make a judgment about what happened that fateful day.
Yes, NOW you can get all the facts with a quick google search of 911 (Results 1 - 10 of about 102,000,000 for 911, the first few of which are Government, Michael Moore, and 911truth.org)
BUT… people are still conditioned to believe only what they see in the newspapers, and depend on them to tell the truth. ALL of the truth. Unfortunately that is where it all begins, and once one’s appetite is whetted by the other side of the story, they crave more, and go off googling… But in the end it is a Newspaper’s responsibility to be objective, even if it means going against the government’s wishes, as the media has a job to be that “check and Balance.” It is their responsibility to cover ALL sides of a debate, not just the sides they themselves believe, or have been coerced to believe!
Judith initially tried writing a letter to the editor, (we have all done that) nothing. She then gathered over 200 hundred signatures on a formal petition (many from strangers she was brave enough to confront) and she arranged a meeting with the Durango Herald editor, and publisher. They made nice with Judith and her colleagues, and then gave them the ol’ “Don’t call us, we’ll call you” routine.
Not to be detoured, Judith filed a small claims court lawsuit against the paper for negligence in not providing what could be life or death information to the citizens of Durango Colorado, in that the sons and daughters of the community have and are going to war and giving up their lives, and liberties based on a lie. She says she filed in small claims court because the judiciary gives her no other options. I suspect this is not true and that eventually a case like this could be heard by the Supreme Court, but be that as it may, if the Durango Herald loses they will pay a symbolic 7500.00 in damages (to cover the time and expenses to do all the research herself), and most importantly... They will have to admit they are wrong. Judith is representing herself “Pro Se.”
The suit itself is only a token gesture I know, and it is unlikely (but still possible), that a judge would rule in favor of Judith Pfeif… Though the pressure that can be brought to bear on one corporate news organization by this and the wave it causes might just be the silver bullet in getting out the facts. Just the facts Mam – Right.
I interviewed Judith on my nationally Syndicated radio program on
We await the verdict. Will the Durango Herald succumb to our relentless pressure; or will they stand their ground.
Judith Pfeif, if nothing else, has proved that one person can create change... Not governments, or principalities, but one person can lead the charge to demand answers in their own community!!! And therefore retain liberty, and accountability in society today.
The moral to the story is that the more pressure put on the status quo, the better... Which is why I have written this out. That all who read this will join us in putting these creature’s hooves to the fire and making them ACCOUNTABLE for lies by omission pertaining to 911. That all local news outlets might suffer the same fate until they come clean and open up the debate.
We have come a long way since the beginning when no one would listen to our call for truth. Millions have joined in the fight, and millions more are waking up to the horrible truth everyday. Elements in our own Government, including George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, CondiLIEzza Rice, and General Richard Myers… are the real terrorists! The polls prove this; the nervous choir of the establishment shills is palatable! The cockroaches fear the light of the facts which are coming out hourly.
Judith has of today served the 3 officers (Two owners and an agent) of the Durango Herald her lawsuit, and is waiting for a response. Will YOU have her back? Are you so busy or so cynical that you won’t make a call, or write a letter to let the Durango Herald know that Judith isn’t alone?
It doesn’t matter where you live, what part of the 911 conspiracy that you believe, or what you do already. The only thing that matters is that when one of us is in the fight, we all jump in and guarantee a win.
To Write the
To Call: (970) 247 – 3504
To Email letters to the editor: www.durangoherald.com
( EDITOR@DURANGOHERALD.COM AND HERALD@DURANGOHERALD.COM )
Here is a sample of what I wrote:
Dear Editor,
It has come to my attention that you refuse to print the entire story as it pertains to 911, and the CONSPIRACY perpetrated by the Bush Administration; IE: That 19 Arab high-jackers with box cutters destroyed 4 of the most heavily defended buildings on earth. (The Pentagon, WTC 1, 2, and specifically Building 7 - which was not even hit by an airliner!)
We support Judith Pfeif's efforts to see that you, even once, will print ALL of the relevant questions regarding 911, and the massive, glaring cover-up perpetrated by the 911 commission.
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/columnists/13760721.htm
9/11 ATTACKS - Avoiding the hard questions
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=GRI20060129&articleId=1846
The Destruction of the
Russian General:
http://www.geocities.com/killtown/911smokingguns.html
150+ 9/11 Smoking Guns - Found in the Mainstream Media
http://www.outragedmoderates.org/2006/02/dod-staffers-notes-from-911-obtained.html
DOD Staffer's Notes from 9/11 Obtained Under FOIA
911 REVISITED: At 40 minutes, this free video presentation is a MUST SEE for all who might believe the "official Story"1993 WORLD TRADE CENTER BOMBING AN FBI STING:
World trade Center 1993 - the real deal.: Jack Blood interviews Webster Tarpley
www.st911.org (Scholars for 911 Truth)
To name just a few....
1# - You risk being behind the curve, getting on board last will damage your credibility with your readers!
You are already losing many young readers to the internet, why not do something to stop the bleeding?
2# - Kids are DYING in wars justified by 911, and all of us are losing our liberties, including YOU!
3# - The Unholy cost of this thing, and all that it represents.
4# - We will no doubt be hit again by the very same perps, and need to warn an unsuspecting public that this all could be an "Inside Job"
YOU OWN THIS TO YOUR READERS!
Most respectfully yours in Truth,
Syndicated Radio Host - Genesis Communications Network
www.gcnlive.com
http://nw0.info/index.php?dir=Radio/Jack%20Blood%20Radio%20Archive/2006/May/17/
NEW DEVELOPMENT JUST IN: The Durgano Herald has just published a story about the lawsuit filed by Judith Pfeif. They say they will defend the newspaper against it's readers. (MAKE THIS IMPOSSIBLE FOR THEM BY WRITING AND CALLING TO LEND YOUR SUPPORT!)
This is a VICTORY as it begs the question, IS THE DURANGO HEARALD COVERING UP 911?
Inquiring minds want to know!
MORE INFO: http://disc.server.com/discussion.cgi?disc=149495;article=101332;title=APFN
NEWEST DEVELOPMENT: A new take on newspaper warnings
Dave Danforth -Sat 05/20/2006 09:01PM - Aspen Daily News
They sued a Durango newspaper this week for covering up the 9/11 investigations. What's next?
A woman named Judith Pfeif -- no phone number listed -- claimed that somehow the paper had suppressed her theories as to how the attacks came to be. The suit was filed on behalf of the "Durango 9/11 Group," with 193 signatures.
Let the games begin.
The suit stands little chance, we all know. But it raises a fascinating issue: When may publishers be held accountable not for what they printed, but for what they did not?
Could anyone sue the Durango Herald not for what showed up, but for what didn't?
The case was filed in small claims court, where damages are limited to $7,500. Small claims judges usually don't hear cases in which outfits are accused of libel or negligence, but that doesn't mean they can't.
It's a long shot to claim that a paper that avoids the latest conspiracy theory must have somehow hurt someone. Ms. Pfeif is claiming that she was hurt because she trusted the paper to warn her off something. That's not the worst claim someone could make.
It could be that publications can't win. Often warned that they could get into legal trouble because of what they run, now comes a case that claims the reverse: that the paper was so trusted that it had a duty to warn readers off a bad thing.
This would mean that -- forbid the thought -- a paper had became so trusted that its readers counted on it to disclose all the woeful schemes that might hurt them.
Let's say that city planners knew of a huge development proposed for several blocks at the edge of town. Now let's also say that the paper had heard about it, but didn't run a story immediately. The lingo in use didn't make sense to anyone without an advanced planning degree.
If the project got built too high, do we sue the paper instead of the developer or city? Or do we sue as many as possible?
Now let's say that reporters had heard about a scam around town, but hadn't quite nailed it down. The scammers were interviewing hungry renters each hour over the weekend for a deal too good to be true: $1,500 for a luxury four-bedroom joint with deluxe mountain views. The scammers take off down the road Sunday night after cashing a dozen security deposit checks, leaving anxious renters to descend on their newfound abode, all at the same time, all with copies of the same keys.
Would the paper have a duty to sniff out such a scam?
Now let's say that a vacuum salesman gets indicted for sleazy sales tactics. To get out from under the rap, the operator agrees to blow town. He splits -- to ZIP code 81611.
He resurfaces here selling a new brand of computer called Peach. Several dozen Peaches are sold before they start mysteriously quitting without provocation. He agrees to repair all Peaches so afflicted, but each bill runs at least $500. When customers refuse to pay, the Peachy merchant blames the software and refuses to return the afflicted computers without getting what he demands.
Should the paper run the story, contact prosecutors over stolen property, or both? What if does neither?
Next, a large consortium called International Ritzless appears. It picks up a few key properties downtown and assumes the mantle of downtown savior. It will cure all woes by building a project that few will be able to resist. Its glittery development will represent nirvana for all buyers and will leave real-estate types drooling with envy.
On the eve of the next local election, International Ritzless throws a few thou into the coffers of likely winners to assure it is justly remembered.
The project passes and gets built, but begins to immediately crumble before its first winter passes. It takes a professional sleuth five layers of legality to determine that the key developer once sold used carpets before being run out his prior town. He had no assets except a voice carrying sweet melodies. That is, of course, until arriving in ZIP code 81611.
The paper had heard a rumor about a carpet salesman making the rounds, but accepts a warning from the operator's lawyer to print nothing without the most thorough investigation. It comes too late for the salesman's customers.
Now, a distraction comes up. You hear from the paper that there's a plan to re-pave a tight curve in town. This would allow you to save 12 seconds on your trip, but you're on a tight leash and suspect those 12 seconds could mean your job. On your next trip, you navigate the curve as if you mean business, but you take it too tight. A too-high curb clips your bumper. When it drops off, you visit the small claims clerk and name the paper.
All over the land, corporate owners are looking to save money by laying off newspaper reporters. They don't admit this, of course, preferring such niceties as "buyout offers" and other inducements to early retirement.
You don't care, because the exact number and nature of local writers prowling around doesn't concern you. Particularly because some of them might be classified as "bloggers," which loosely means they don't check out what they write. It ranks, after all, as opinion, and opinion is protected free speech.
Writers traditionally get sued for what gets into print. "Slander" is a companion legal problem based on speech. The standard partly rests on how they might have hurt you.
In Durango, Ms. Pfeif is proposing a new standard in her claim against the Herald. Whether she knows it or not, she's contending that you trusted the writers to warn you off something. When they don't, that hurts.
Around here, we take that as a compliment.
posted by The Blood Report at 12:02 AM
5 comments
