Van Jones (Obama's Czar) Denounced America the Night After 9/11

[Angus]

Van Jones and His STORMtroopers Denounced America the Night After 9/11

By Matthew Vadum on 8.29.09 @ 2:01AM

Standing Together to Organize a Revolutionary Movement (STORM), the revolutionary group formed by self-described "communist" and "rowdy black nationalist" Van Jones, held a vigil in Oakland, California, "mourning the victims of U.S. imperialism around the world" on the night after Sept. 11, 2001.

The reason this is important is because Van Jones is now President Obama's green jobs czar. He does not appear to have distanced himself from his past communist activities and is now part of the Obama administration's push to turn Sept. 11 into a National Day of Service focused on the promotion of the radical environmentalist agenda.

The vigil was reported by World Net Daily which excerpted parts of a history of the now-disbanded group.

Apparently, after the WND article was posted online, the website on which the original document was posted was overwhelmed by visitors and unavailable. I found the article in the "Way Back Machine" website (web.archive.org), an archival resource. The 2004 document, called "Reclaiming Revolution: history, summation & lessons from the work of Standing Together to Organize a Revolutionary Movement (STORM)," may be found on the archival site here. (In case that becomes unavailable, the document "Reclaiming Revolution" is available at the link embedded in this sentence.)

Jones also founded the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights, which joined in the vigil according to an Ella Baker Center press release from 2001. The press release contained this passage that quoted Jones:

"Anti-Arab hostility is already reaching a fever pitch as pundits and common people alike rush to judgment that an Arab group is responsible for this tragedy," said Van Jones, national executive director of the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights. "We fear that an atmosphere is being created that will result in official and street violence against Arab men, women and children."

"Reclaiming Revolution" also blamed the U.S. for 9/11. A passage on page 45 (27 of the PDF file) reads:

That night, STORM and the other movement leaders expressed sadness and anger at the deaths of innocent working class people. We were angry, first and foremost, with the U.S. government, whose worldwide aggression had engendered such hate across the globe that working class people were not safe at home. We honored those who had lost their lives in the attack -- and those who would surely lose their lives in subsequent U.S. attacks overseas.

Michelle Malkin discussed STORM and "Reclaiming Revolution" on the "Glenn Beck Program" on Aug. 25.

http://spectator.org/blog/2009/08/29...s-stormtrooper

[vta]

Perfect man for the job!

[jrumann59]

Obama has left me a plethora of dart board targets unfortunately I need more walls since I have run out of places to hang dart boards.

[Temo]

the revolutionary group formed by self-described "communist" and "rowdy black nationalist" Van Jones, held a vigil in Oakland, California, "mourning the victims of U.S. imperialism around the world" on the night after Sept. 11, 2001.

That never happened.

[MetalHead]

Originally Posted by Temo

That never happened.

Really?
Show me.

[CowboyMcCoy]

Originally Posted by Artie Lange

Really?
Show me.

Show me that it did happen. Did you happen to note the source of the article?

[Rogah]

Originally Posted by Artie Lange

Really?
Show me.

Speaking as someone who has no clue whether or not it actually happened - but would be very interested to hear if it did - I have to say the burden of proof falls on those who are making the claim. If you're going to say something happened, you have to demonstrate it did. You can't say it happened and then challenge others to prove you wrong.

[ShiningStar]

Originally Posted by Rogah

Speaking as someone who has no clue whether or not it actually happened - but would be very interested to hear if it did - I have to say the burden of proof falls on those who are making the claim. If you're going to say something happened, you have to demonstrate it did. You can't say it happened and then challenge others to prove you wrong.

by photos, or people, or the mere fact if he admits? How many murderers admit if they get caught?

What would be the proof if the guy did or did not do it and where would you draw what is acceptable and what is not?

[Rogah]

Originally Posted by ShiningStar

by photos, or people, or the mere fact if he admits? How many murderers admit if they get caught?

What would be the proof if the guy did or did not do it and where would you draw what is acceptable and what is not?

Let's just say that I need something a little more reliable than an American Spectator blogger referencing a WND article.

I am not saying it didn't happen. All I am saying, in response to Artie's post, is that the burden of proof falls on those saying it did. If someone says something happened, and someone responds "that never happened" as Temo did, then the burden of proof falls on those making the claim. You can't say something happened and then challenge others to "show me" it didn't.

Now, of course, if this were a proper debate and Temo said "that never happened" and someone responds by showing Temo is wrong, then it's lights-out for Temo.

[masomenos]

I really don't see anything wrong with either of the statements in the article and I don't think that either qualify as "denouncing America". The opinion that U.S. foreign policy contributed to the 9/11 attacks is a valid one and it's really just an example of what the CIA terms as blowback. Being upset with the government is not equivalent to denouncing the country.

[MetalHead]

Originally Posted by masomenos85

I really don't see anything wrong with either of the statements in the article and I don't think that either qualify as "denouncing America". The opinion that U.S. foreign policy contributed to the 9/11 attacks is a valid one and it's really just an example of what the CIA terms as blowback. Being upset with the government is not equivalent to denouncing the country.

So it was partly our fault right?...we deserved 9/11,right...?
Unbelievable.

[ScipioCowboy]

Originally Posted by Artie Lange

So it was partly our fault right?...we deserved 9/11,right...?
Unbelievable.

I think there's a difference between asserting that "America should change its foreign policy in hopes of avoiding future 9/11's" and declaring that "America deserved 9/11".

Now, whether or not there's a difference in the mind of Van Jones is anyone's guess. Given his history, we have valid reason to doubt.

[masomenos]

Originally Posted by Artie Lange

So it was partly our fault right?...we deserved 9/11,right...?
Unbelievable.

No, that's not what I'm saying at all. But if the CIA acknowledges that our actions abroad can have undesirable effects on U.S. interests, then I think it's fine for others to acknowledge it as well.

[masomenos]

Originally Posted by ScipioCowboy

I think there's a difference between asserting that "America should change its foreign policy in hopes of avoiding future 9/11's" and declaring that "America deserved 9/11".

Now, whether or not there's a difference in the mind of Van Jones is anyone's guess. Given his history, we have valid reason to doubt.

See, I think that's fair. I don't know enough about Van Jones to comment on how he feels.

[MetalHead]

Originally Posted by masomenos85

See, I think that's fair. I don't know enough about Van Jones to comment on how he feels.

I dedicated a thread for him...go look it up and see who Obama is getting advice from.