We Are Change has Amy Goodman on the run

A compilation of Amy Goodman's responses to questions concerning Building 7, Architects & Engineers, and the 911 cover up including a new confrontation at DePaul University by We Are Change Chicago

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• amy goodman
• democracy now
• we are change
• 911
• inside job
• richard gage
• alex jones
• new world order
• global government
• los angeles
• colorado
• building 7
• architects and engineers
• depaul university
• illinois

[mbeing]

We lost respect for Amy Goodman she came through Atlanta. She was hawking her book and her brother more than what is troubling the country and citizens. I think she is a distraction and temporary salve for the Left, but she is part of the problem, not the solution because she won't use her platform to draw serious attention to 9-11. Instead recommends someone else investigate it. Is she not a investigative reporter? She is a distraction not a solution. She lost us as friends.

[baydood510]

Amy Goodman is a fraud. questionsquestions(dot)net/gat­ekeepers

[12gdemos]

Rothschild/Rockefeller 101.... Controlled opposition 

[ZanzibarJose]

I think a greater degree of journalistic treason is the Democracy Now's support of the aggression against Libya.

[watertonrivers]

Amy Goodman is a fascist SELLOUT, like Noam Chomsky!!!

[fiscornioman]

I never trusted this woman.

[mispistoleros]

@xjtbarnesx, "tv gig" was sarcasm i simply don't find your explanation "compelling" and judging from comments, others don't either. as for zinn, “I don’t know much about the situation and the truth is, I don’t care that much about it, that’s passed….that’s a diversion from what we really have to do,” adding that debating who was behind 9/11, “gets in the way of dealing with the immediate situation”.

as i stated in my initial comment, it does matter, more than anything else.

[xjtbarnesx]

@mispistoleros Okay, they aren't after careers (as you initially suggested), so what's stopping them? I'm not interested in Kokesh. This is a video on Amy Goodman and I mentioned Chomsky and Zinn. Why would they stay their criticism if they found the evidence compelling? They wouldn't. They simply don't find it convincing.

[mispistoleros]

@xjtbarnesx, they're established. the adam kokeshes aren't. i'm not familiar with "albert". everything is so binary for me...get a life.

[xjtbarnesx]

@mispistoleros Amy has her own TV gig; she has for years. It's absurd to suggest that Chomsky, Albert, the late Zinn, etc... are after TV spots. Are you at all familiar with their work? Why isn't it possible that your internet phenom may not pass the muster of their academic standards? Everything is so binary for you sort: believe us or you're a fraud. Come to think of it _you'd_ make a good TV anchor!

[mispistoleros]

@xjtbarnesx, a tv gig, like cenk uygur?....cheers

[xjtbarnesx]

@mispistoleros I said that your reaction was interesting, no one else's. You don't think it's a little curious? These are people whose professional reputations (and, indeed, livelihoods) are based on their criticism of power. People who regularly find fault with the US state for far less severe crimes. What do they stand to gain from acquiescing in this one particular instance?