Today on Blogcritics
Home » 9/11 Truth Movement – Next Step to Justice

9/11 Truth Movement – Next Step to Justice

Please Share...Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

Everyone thinks of terrorism and homeland security for lessons learned from 9/11. There is another opportunity. Make our government trustworthy and truthful.

The 9/11 truth movement is stronger than ever, though it is generally derided by politicians and ignored by the mainstream media. It is fueled by people passionate about alternative explanations to the official 9/11 story. Understandable, considering that the co-chairs of the 9/11 Commission admitted: “We were set up to fail.”

In 2006 Time magazine said: “The population of [the 9/11 truth movement] is larger than you might think. A Scripps-Howard poll of 1,010 adults last month found that 36% of Americans consider it ‘very likely’ or ‘somewhat likely’ that government officials either allowed the attacks to be carried out or carried out the attacks themselves. Thirty-six percent adds up to a lot of people. This is not a fringe phenomenon. It is a mainstream political reality.”

A 2006 Zogby International poll found that 42% of Americans more likely agree with people who believe that “the US government and its 9/11 Commission concealed or refused to investigate critical evidence that contradicts their official explanation of the September 11th attacks, saying there has been a cover-up.”

This year Zogby found that 31 perecent of likely voters do not buy the official 9/11 story [72 percent for ages 18 to 24 and nearly 60 percent for Hispanics and singles]; 51 percent still await a congressional investigation of Bush’s and Cheney’s actions before, during and after the 9/11 attacks [88 percent for ages 18 to 24 and 77 percent for Hispanics and singles]; and 67% fault the 9/11 Commission for not investigating the anomalous and still unexplained collapse of World Trade Center building 7.

So, six years later, a large fraction of Americans question the government’s official 9/11 story. Countless groups and websites sustain the 9/11 truth movement with many conferences held nationwide. There have been several best-selling books and many well known political, military, law enforcement and academic persons publicly support alternative theories of 9/11 and/or the need for a new investigation. Yet being a 9/11 truth seeker exposes one to ridicule as a conspiracy nut by those brainwashed by establishment propaganda and lies, or afraid to face the painful truth, or too lazy to think for themselves.

Writing recently in the Guardian, Peter Tatchell made important points: “The 9/11 Commission was hamstrung by official obstruction. It never managed to ascertain the whole truth of what happened on September 11 2001. …What happened on 9/11 is fundamentally important in its own right. But equally important is the way the 9/11 cover-up signifies an absence of democratic, transparent and accountable government. Establishing the truth is, in part, about restoring honesty, trust and confidence in American politics.”

In other words, the truth movement has set the stage for taking their passion to a higher political level that even more Americans can support – government reform.

Specifically, waiting is a reform mechanism as old as the Constitution itself. Few Americans realize they have a constitutional right to a national convention of state delegates that can propose constitutional amendments. Once convened, delegates can debate and propose amendments without government review, but like amendments proposed by Congress, still must meet the tough ratification requirements of Article V. Though all 50 states have applied for a convention, well in excess of the 34 required by the Constitution, Congress has refused to call one. The nonpartisan Friends of the Article V Convention at www.foavc.org seeks the nation’s first Article V convention.

The Framers of our Constitution created the convention option because they feared one dark day the public would lose confidence in the federal government. With record-low approval of Congress – just 11 percent – and so little truth about 9/11, that day has crashed our democracy. Unsurprisingly, just like a new 9/11 investigation, Congress fears what may come out of an Article V convention. The truth is not politically popular.

The nexus between the 9/11 truth movement and the Article V convention effort is this: When a sizable fraction of the population wants a more comprehensive and credible government investigation into a matter of great public concern, but Congress and the Executive Branch refuse, a new legal mechanism is needed. Considering how the Bush administration used 9/11 to start the insane Iraq war, the public has profoundly good reasons for a new option for obtaining trustworthy information. Surely there will be other events and issues in the future that raise the same need for reliable analysis and conclusions independent of the usual web of government circles and tricks.

A new constitutional amendment can establish a framework for citizens to petition and seek “redress” from their federal government without going through elected representatives adept at ignoring them. Here is a possible approach. The highly respected and independent General Accountability Office could be given constitutional responsibility for collecting citizen petitions for investigations. If a threshold number is reached, then GAO would conduct a nonpartisan investigation using its staff and any other persons deemed necessary. This would be a taste of direct democracy, akin to a national referendum. The threshold might be one million citizen requests, with at least 10,000 coming from each of at least two-thirds of the states.

The intense 9/11 truth movement has a historic opportunity to seek a permanent means to counter bipartisan government intransigence and untrustworthiness that now is the rule, not the exception.

I urge 9/11 truth seekers to join Friends of the Article V Convention, recognizing that Congress’ refusal to re-investigate 9/11 is matched by its refusal to permit an Article V convention. Our common goal is to compel the federal government to be accountable to the Constitution, federal law and the people. 9/11 truth seekers must become government reform seekers to achieve their objectives through smart political strategy.

Other political strategies also merit support, notably the current effort in New York City to obtain a ballot initiative to establish a new independent commission and investigation.

Consider what Mark Twain wisely observed: “In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot.” Our patriotic crusade for 9/11 truth and systemic government reform is still at the first stage. Courage is needed to persevere. Truth does not come easy.

Powered by

About Joel S. Hirschhorn

Formerly full professor Univ. of Wisconsin, Madison, and senior official Congressional Office of Technology Assessment and National Governors Association. Author of four nonfiction books and hundreds of articles.
  • moonraven

    The only problem with your article is not the article, but the low-quality audience here on blogcritics.

    Unfortunately, most of the folks who post on this site are unpatriotic barbarians who do not believe that it is a worthwhile plan to have democracy function.

    They would rather shop at WalMart, gobble down McDonald’s garbage, guzzle redneck beer, and then belch out their “see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil” monkey-mind Bush-supporting motto in this disgusting little corner of virtual space.

    And TRUTH–they could not possibly care less! Their fantasy that they are the biog bullies of the planet is enough for them to kick back and light farts of satisfaction.

  • http://rapturenutballs.blogspot.com Baritone

    Oh, man. I singed my hemis on that one. Woohoo!

  • Clavos

    What zingzing said.

  • STM

    Which would all be well and good Joel if it wasn’t based around the premise that a pack of deluded loonies had the power to change anything.

    I watched a show last night about a British company that demolishes high-rise buildings. What was interesting was that the 22-storey London tower they knocked down in that episode went down from the bottom, so that the last part of the building to be destroyed was the falling top (ie, bottom destroyed first). A lot different to how the twin towers fell, from the top down, the weight of the structure above pancaking through the floors and going down through each from the point where the aircraft hit them.

    It’s when I see things like that I realise just how insane the arguments of “truthers” are, and what’s even worse is that none of you will look at the evidence. It’s almost as if they want to believe that their own government had a direct role to play in this (indirect, by their blanket refusal to talk, I’d agree with to a point although talking to psychopaths never achieves much).

    So, yes, have a pack of loonies try to change how this is seen. And you are right: truth doesn’t come easy.

    The refusal of a small part of the US population to accept the truth – yes, that’s you, guys, the “truthers” – is evidence of that. The simple truth is, you own govt isn’t out to get you; the enemy is a bunch of guys with tea-towels on their heads who actually wants to bring down your government, and you aren’t helping your own cause with this nonsense.

    I wonder, too, how in the pursuit of this nonsense, how many “truthers” have ever considered how hurtful their assertions are to the memories of the real victims of 9/11 – the dead and the grieving.

    Keep the tinfoil hats handy though, guys. Never know when you’ll need them. I believe the US govt DOES have a death ray, and another that can send you bonkers. Judging by the calibre of some of this stuff written by “truthers” on these threads, perhaps they’ve been using the latter already.

    And you aren’t patriots. You are harming your own country.

  • STM

    And as I’ve pointed out before, relying on Peter Tatchell as an authoritative source is fraught – he’s regarded in the UK as part of the loony fringe. He gets a voice in The Guardian because it is committed to presenting a wide variety of views (yes, Britain is still a wonderful democracy). And of course, like you Joel, he’s perfectly entitled to his views. Still …

    So how strange, then, that “truthers” should find some affinity with his views.

  • Clavos

    This article smacks of a transparent attempt to keep this “issue” before the audience to stimulate sales of the author’s book.

    We have already discussed both topics (9/11 conspiracy theory and holding an article 5 convention) at great length on this site in past weeks.

    The author is not adding anything new that wasn’t covered in those discussions.

  • STM

    Actually Clav, he has added to the discussion: he’s added a bit more bollocks.

  • http://rapturenutballs.blogspot.com Baritone

    Yeah, what zingzing said!

    This notion about government involvement – and according to Moon in previous comments specifically Cheney’s involvement – in 9/11 pops up about every 3 or 4 weeks here and elsewhere.

    I’ve no doubt that an impressively large # of people believe some version of this 9/11 myth. A similar # still believe in one or more JFK and/or UFO conspiracy theories. Some probably think Kennedy was killed by an alien. Perhaps it was government sponsored aliens who pulled off 9/11.

    Even a larger # of people believe in god. Go figure.

    The numbers don’t make any of the above true. There are always fringe nutballs, veterans of too many X-Files reruns who feel compelled to make a case for some government conspiracy or other. I am certainly not a fan of Cheney or the current administration led by the man who put Nelson Mandella in his grave, good ole Georgie Peorgie.

    But I do agree with zingzing. Believing they could pull off an involvement in 9/11 gives them far too much credit. This administration has no idea what it’s doing in Iraq or Afghanistan. They have no idea where bin Laden might be – although my bet is on Aruba, a little beach front cabana perhaps. Bush couldn’t find his nuts if he had his scrotum splayed open in his hands. If the Bushees are attempting to make us believe they are too dumb to have carried off 9/11, all I can say is, Job well done!

    B-tone

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    They may be nuts, but you do have to give them credit for persistence.

    While the 9/11 Truth moement is scary and the Article V convention concept is truly alarming, what I find most horrific is the possibility of the two combined together.

    Imagine a new constitution written by the kind of idiots who fall for the 9/11 Truth movement garbage.

    They’re the kind of folks who are primed to support a dictator, so long as he’s their dictator and not part of the government establishment.

    Dave

  • Baronius

    These comments are generally right on the money. There’s a tendency of conspiracy-minded people to go over the same ground repeatedly, and it’s demonstrated in spades in this article. I doubt that another article is going to win any more people over to Article V or 9/11 “truth”.

    For my part, I try to raise a new objection on each 9/11 conspiracy board. So here goes: why do it? There are a hundred easier ways to get oil money or Halliburton profits or whatever. If Bush and Cheney wanted to go to war in Iraq, that would’ve been simple. Iraq was regularly shooting at American, British, and French planes. If they wanted to go to war in Afghanistan, well, where was the money or oil profit in that? And it would have been easier to blow up Kabul than NY, DC, and PA. Heck, we could have overthrown the Taliban government with natives and Rangers. (Come to think of it, we did.)

    Also, STM, thanks for the line, “And you aren’t patriots. You are harming your own country.” Brilliant summation.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    The greatest threats to the Republic often come wrapped in the flag and claiming to be patriots.

    Dave

  • ColinB

    Ok, STM so what about WTC7 that went down bottom upwards as a normal demolition.
    Anyway, I’ve done my own research and found, much to my amazement, and chagrin, that the combined IQ’s of those believing the official version of 9/11 is nearly 7. I would have said considerably lower, but, well, there you go.

  • troll

    so…here’ the thing – it’s all Bush’s fault

    when he was five his pappa bought him a set of gold inlaid mahogany blocks with which he spent many self absorbed hours…a family story developed around how baby Bush’s fav thing was to build towers out of these blocks and knock them down with his platinum toy airplanes

    years later pappa Bush shared this tale with his greased compadres at a Carlyle Group bacchanal and when pappa bin Laden went on to tell it to his son the light bulb went on

    …you see how it is

  • Clavos

    brilliant, troll! I knew those CTs had it all wrong!

  • troll

    well…that’s what I heard anyway

  • STM

    ColinB: “Ok, STM so what about WTC7 that went down bottom upwards as a normal demolition.”

    No, it didn’t. All this crap has been debunked over and over and over and over, ad infinitum.

    I might possibly have an IQ of 7, but you, mate, are a goose.

    And all this CT rubbish is an absolute disgrace to your country and makes you look like fools in the eyes of the rest of the world.

    I can’t believe any of you have the hide to call yourselves patriots.

    Years ago, you’d have had your heads chopped off. Send ‘em to The Tower, I say, and bring back the axe!

  • Clavos

    Evenin’, Mate!

    Got a bit of a bee in your bonnet, eh?

    You never answered my question about your Portugal trip; were you there to cover the McCann story?

  • troll

    Dave and STM – the concept that CTists are some kind of a threat to the nation teeters on the edge of the same logical black hole as its object

  • STM

    Nah, sorry Clav … didn’t see that buddy. No, I was there for the Red Bull Air Race. It was one of the most amazing things I’ve ever seen. I thought I’d hate it, but it was spectacular. The McCann thing hit the fan the day after I left. I was watching it unfold on TV on Frankfurt.

    If you ever get the chance to go to the air race, I strongly recommend you treat yourself.

    And yes, I do have a bee in my bonnet. I understand there is a strong history in America of questioning government (and a lot of the time, with good reason) but in this case, there’s no good reason.

    I think the US govt was totally gobsmacked by the whole episode. Any cover-up relates purely to their insability to own up to their own ineptitude in failing to identify this as a potential way of attacking the nation.

    That’s what they’re worried about. But the CTers can’t see the steel struts for the dust.

  • STM

    Troll, once again I get to disagree with you. Go figure. They ARE a threat to the nation. A grave threat to its collective IQ.

  • STM

    The title of this story should read: 9/11 Truth Movement – Next Step to Lunacy (if you’re not already there).

  • troll

    now there is an interesting question STM – does the IQ of the collective unconscious of the nation (civilization…world) remain constant over time or does it vary – ?

  • STM

    Depends on how many truthers are active at any one time :)

  • STM

    And Colin,

    That “controlled demolition” … the building fell from the point where the structure had been weakened by fire – a fire that had burned at a much lower temperature than the two main towers.

    Yes, it looks a bit like a controlled demo (but not to demolition experts!) … but the truth is, you “truthers”, the structure simply gave way at the lower floors.

    Same concept as the main towers, just happened lower to the ground and took longer to weaken because the intensity of the fire was weaker.

    No controlled demo there. Sorry. You are all just making this bollocks up as you go along, aren’t you??

  • http://rapturenutballs.blogspot.com Baritone

    I agree with Baronius who makes an excellent point. What possible advantage would anyone in the administration have for being involved in such an action? Moon has repeatedly claimed the motivation was money.

    First: Most of these guys are already loaded. While I know that for some that enough is never enough, but still. The consequences are so huge if their involvement was discovered.

    Baronius is also correct in saying that there were any number of far less risky alternatives available. Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and the rest are, in my opinion odious characters, but I would not accuse them of stupidity (excepting, of course, GW.) To have planned, executed, or otherwise aided in the 9/11 attacks would have been a huge gamble on their part. Could Cheney’s heart (doctors have assured us that he actually has one) endured the resulting stress? Seems doubtful.

    On a side note, a comment by Dave Barry on the Today show: Regarding OJ, Barry said (in jest) that OJ was now claiming that what he was looking for in that hotel room was the illusive WMDs. Ha, ha.

    B-tone

  • troll

    …the ‘why’ could have been to move this isolationist nation to accept war – and thus enable war profiteering

  • Clavos

    I agree with B-tone; still too much risk, troll. Hell, they already had us halfway there before 9/11.

    Besides, if they were willing to take (IMO) the much greater step of killing thousands of Americans, why not just order a sneak attack on Iraq and start the war without backing? Essentially, they did get into the war illegally anyway.

  • troll

    I agree that other less spectacular means could have been employed to get the machine moving

    but I don’t underestimate the power of hubris

  • REMF

    “The greatest threats to the Republic often come wrapped in the flag and claiming to be patriots.”
    – Dave Nalle

    Know thyself, Nalle … know thyself.

  • http://rapturenutballs.blogspot.com Baritone

    If such a scenario did take place – and as I’ve stated, I think it’s highly unlikely – the driving force wouldn’t have been the power of hubris, but, rather, the hubris of power, if that makes any sense. Not the power held by Cheney and the rest, but the power and hubris wielded by Ike’s “military-industrial complex” to whom the Bushees would be beholden.

    Obviously, people can be moved to violence in the name of some god, a nation, perhaps a culture. For anyone to commit such a heinous act in the name of profit would be James Bond villianish. Those people are characatures. Could Cheney and others be so jaded, so immune to human emotion, so blind to pain, suffering and death to do such a thing?

    Further, in any given scenario, how many people would have to have been in the know? Surely some functionaries within the government and the military would have necessarily been in the loop. Short of killing them off (which I suppose given the nature of the larger crime, would not be too difficult to bear,) how could they be certain that no one would blab? If they did kill off such people, who dealt with the killers? Or the killers killers, and on and on. Wouldn’t the weight of such knowledge eventually cause somebody to cave – perhaps a death bed confession, or retribution for some perceived personal injustice, or just bare naked blackmail?

    Just as with the Kennedy assassination, it’s very difficult to believe that the lid could be kept on so long. A leak would spring from somewhere. The White House can’t seem to stop such leaks concerning much lesser affairs. Something this big would require a monumental effort to keep people’s mouths shut.

    B-tone

  • http://www.morethings.com/log Al Barger

    Mr Hirschorn touts all kind of numbers to show that some fourth or so of our population are at least halfway open to believing this made-up 9/11 “truth” nonsense. This represents something of an epistemological problem, as if truth is a democratic function determined by a vote or a poll.

    The world doesn’t work like that, however. A is A, regardless of how many malicious fools talk themselves into believing otherwise. People talk themselves into believing ridiculous crap every day. But even if he convinced 51% of Americans that George Bush planned 9/11, that’s still just not true.

    He seems to regard reality as some kind magical conjuring act subject to his mere adamant belief. It’s sort of an evil version of the Biblical principle that faith can move mountains. However, that’s one where the Biblical authors just got it wrong. Brother Hirschhorn acts as if he thinks that just invoking the magic word “truth” over his misanthropic fantasies again and again, day after day, year after year will make them actually true.

    But then, actual truth having to do with actual facts in the real world seems to have very little bearing on his outlook. Leaving aside the wicked and utterly unjustified sanctimony of the 9-11 foolishness, note his assertions that all 50 states have issued calls for a new Article V constitutional convention. Really though, he just made that up wholecloth. He does that kind of thing a lot.

    And one can only laugh like one of Judge Doom’s weasels at his invocation of the Mark Twain quote at the end to puff himself up into Mr Super Patriot. See, basically everybody knows in their heart that the 9-11 truthers are right, but they’re just too timid and cowardly to allow themselves to believe The Truth. Alternate take: Loudly and repeatedly insisting on malicious and FALSE anti-American nonsense doesn’t make you a brave visionary – it just makes you a hateful tinfoil hat wearing schmuck.

  • troll

    hermano – are you with Dave and STM that these “truthists” form some kind of a threat to Mother America – ?

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Dave and STM – the concept that CTists are some kind of a threat to the nation teeters on the edge of the same logical black hole as its object

    Troll, at the heart of this movement are EXACTLY the same sorts of folks who produced Timothy McVeigh and Eric Rudolph and the slaughter at the Murrow Building. In this context they are presenting us with their best public face, but behind the scenes are the Birchers and the Aryans and people who would be proud to be the American bin Laden.

    If Joel’s claims are true and there really are a substantial number of people who believe this claptrap, that suggests that the core of really dangerous crazies is growing as well. At some point it reaches critical mass and something will tip them over the line from mere paranoia to violent reaction, and we’ll get a chance to really empathize with the citizens of Baghdad.

    I’ve said it before and I’m going to say it again, domestic terrorism poses a far greater threat to the nation than OBL and his henchmen.

    Dave

  • Clavos

    troll #34,

    Si es que me preguntas a mi:

    Only in the sense that they are undermining the public’s already precarious trust in the government (which, possibly, it deserves, but not for that reason).

    The only ones I consider truly dangerous are those who lean toward violence: the types Dave mentions, plus the tripwire Nam vets, the extreme right winger types (especially the armed ones), and last, the ones like the author, who spill over into the dream of holding an article cinco convention, which, agreeing with Dave, is fraught with danger because of the way it will be a magnet for all the above-mentioned wackos. (though Dave is more opposed than I, because I rely on the ratification by the states requirement to ameliorate the likely wackier proposals to come out of such a convention)

    Sorry for rambling, ‘mano.

  • Cindy D

    What it suggests to me is that a whole lot of people are really pissed off at and don’t trust their government.

    People failing to look at both sides of an issue even to inform their own position is nothing new. A (natural) tendency for lack of critical thinking is the norm. Combine these with an extremely emotional event like 911, a core certainty that your government is mad, and what appears to be (to the average eye) documentation by reputable scientists and engineers and you have the 911 “truth” movement.

    If people were to look at the 911 “truthers'” position first (then lock onto the dogma), the next step isn’t rethinking their position or taking in new information, it’s defending the dogma.

    This happens all the time, as a rule, it’s only visible because in this case because of the context.

  • troll

    I certainly don’t mean to imply that there is no core of craziness willing to go barbaric

    …out of control go’ment to the left – crazed revolutionary patriots to the right – holy (holier than I anyway) rollers all over the place

    what’s a troll to dooo

  • http://www.edmontonsun.com/News/World/2007/09/12/4489337-sun.html Cindy D

    This guy spent more than half (8 million dollars) of his inheritance promoting the 911 “truth” movement.

    Apparently he’s given up (not for lack of belief though) and moved to Austria. What I find interesting is that the article says he had an offer of a $1-million reward to any expert who could prove that the buildings were a result of planted explosions.

    I guess no one took him up on his offer.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Interesting article, but if it’s typical of the quality of writing in the Edmonton Sun then some BC writers ought to go over there and offer to show them how to write decently.

    Dave

  • Joel S. Hirschhorn

    For those who a small fraction of their brains still alive here is a story from the NY Megaphone:

    Mohamed Atta’s Best Friend Caught in South Pacific:
    “You can’t arrest me, I’m working for the CIA.”

    Sander Hicks

    Daniel Hopsicker is an independent journalist working in Venice, Florida, outside the decommissioned military airstrips where three pilots from the 9/11 attack were trained. Hopsicker found the secret life of 9/11 ring-leader Mohamed Atta, who lead the operation by piloting the first plane into the World Trade Centre. Hopsicker found Atta’s American girlfriend, Amanda Keller. What she said broke new ground for truth-seekers worldwide. Atta had social connections and a party-boy life that indicated there was more to his story than people had been told. The American media establishment turned a blind eye to Hopsicker’s work, however. He has been called a “conspiracy theorist” in mainstream media in Florida, when he’s paid any attention at all.

    Yet, in November, 2006, Hopsicker’s career turned a corner. Sources connected to the Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) told the Megaphone that his work began to be used to track Atta’s former associates. A researcher close to JTTF, speaking on condition of anonymity, told the Megaphone that the “JTTF relied heavily on Daniel’s research on Atta and Amanda [Keller]. I faxed them pages from [Hopsicker’s book] Welcome to Terrorland.”

    The lead paid off: on November 16, 2006, the Joint Terrorism Task Force issued a “Terror Alert” for a certain Wolfgang Bohringer, a German-born, naturalized U.S. citizen who had reportedly partied with and protected Mohamed Atta in Florida. Bohringer’s name came up often in interviews with Amanda Keller. Amanda called the two “inseparable” and described how they had been kicked out of bars together. Atta called Wolfgang “brother” a name he reserved for particular white Europeans.

    Why “Brother?” During Atta’s university years in Cairo, the engineering guild that he joined had made him a member of the group Muslim Brotherhood. (9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is also a card-carrying Muslim Brother.) The group has two wings. Their front men in Egypt are non-violent, but the sordid history of the Brotherhood is that, since 1928, its anti-Semitism and anti-Zionist ideologies have made it a partner in crime for Nazis, European fascists, American far-rightists, and their powerful counterparts, the neo-conservatives.

    The JTTF swiftly descended on Wolfgang Bohringer, outside Fanning Island, in the South Pacific, about 1000 miles south of Hawaii, on the 17th of November. Sources reported that the arresting officers said, “The first thing out of his mouth made him go from a ‘5’ to an ‘8’” (on a scale of importance). Allegedly, Bohringer had claimed, “You can’t arrest me, I’m working for the CIA.”

    It looks like Bohringer was right. The day after the arrest, The Megaphone’s JTTF sources did an about-face. With a mix of threats and attempts at persuasion, they claimed that an error had been made: Bohringer had not been arrested. It was someone else. They couldn’t say who. That identity was secret.

    Daniel Hopsicker felt betrayed. In an email to a JTTF source, he said, “perhaps y’all are unaware up there that i haven’t spent the past five years in venice bumfuck florida because i have a fetish for blue-haired widows. i’m the person who discovered that mohamed atta had a close german associate named wolfgang bohringer…if NOBODY there feels that i deserve to be briefed on this story, please pass on my cordial ‘fuck you’ to all involved.”

    The Megaphone approached other sources inside national and international security agencies. One source, a former JTTF informant and undercover operative for the anti-terrorist Operation Diamondback, phoned The Megaphone office on Dec. 11, and confirmed that Wolfgang Bohringer was arrested on Nov. 17, 2006: “The answer is yes, and he’s working—can’t talk about it.”

    The message was pithy, but the effect is devastating: This might be the closest anyone has come to “proof” that Mohamed Atta had connections to the CIA.

    If sources are correct, Bohringer was working for CIA when he befriended Atta in Florida. Bohringer was CIA when he was arrested by the Joint Terrorism Task Force on November 17th, 2006.

    And according to the Diamondback source, Mohamed Atta best friend, Wolfgang Bohringer today is still “working” for CIA.

    At this point, The New York Megaphone is out front on a story no one else has. The only thing we can say is “Qui custodiat ipso custodies?” latin for “Who watches the watchmen?”

    According to polls, national opinion is shifting towards thinking more critically about 9/11. But the only people who seem adamant these days about defending a lie are the people tasked with finding the truth.

  • JustOneMan

    Joel..

    How are your books on the Lochness Monster, Big Foot and Roswell coming? Its so obvious that Bush, Cheney and the main stream media are all behind those cover ups too!

    Keep up the good work…

    JOM
    Moveon.org

  • Baronius

    Do that many people think the government is lying to them? I don’t know. There’s a theme of frustration on a lot of the BC Politics boards, and across America. The Right and the Left are frustrated with their leaders, and the moderates don’t trust anyone.

    I think a lot of it is – darn, I wish I could remember which recent article used a Jon Stewart book as its Amazon plug. Jon Stewart is exactly what I worry about. It’s that kind of smug arrogance pretending to protect the little guy from bullies. It’s like everyone is embarrassed to be caught trusting the government because it’d make them look stupid.

    So we go out of our way to be more skeptical than thou. “I don’t believe the 2000 election hand count.” “Oh, yeah, well I don’t believe in voting machines.” “I think the government exploited 9/11.” “So what? I think the government caused 9/11.”

    Am I immune to this kind of thinking? Handyguy and I got in a recent conversation about voter fraud, and I don’t like my comments. Yes, I’ve heard things, and I have reason to believe some of them. But that doesn’t give me the right to try to persuade people of massive fraud. Pretty soon I fall into the conspiratorial way of thinking; that the political machines appoint the commissions to investigate them….

    I’m not saying that we should trust government all the time. But we shouldn’t get off on our capacity to distrust.

  • troll

    Baronius – you the right to try to convince people of anything you’d like especially if it relates to politics

  • troll

    uh – “have”

  • REMF

    “Jon Stewart is exactly what I worry about. It’s that kind of smug arrogance pretending to protect the little guy from bullies.”

    Aaaaaaaaaaannndd you’re not worried about Dick Cheney…?

  • http://www.robot-of-the-week.com Christopher Rose

    Joel, just a quick heads up:- the comments space is for people to post their own thoughts and it is not really appropriate to post in entire articles from other sources as in your #39.

    Thanks

    Christopher Rose
    Comments Editor

  • Lumpy

    What kind of fish do you wrap in the New York Megaphone? I’m guessing mermaids.

  • http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/ Cindy D

    I don’t trust the government. But, conspiracy theorists aren’t being skeptical either. What we need precisely is skepticism (the kind that looks for facts. We need a about a million of Carl Sagan’s Baloney Detection Kits.

    I am beginning to see Dave’s point though. Leave it to me to be silly enough to think the draw into the 911 “truth” movement was basically an appeal on the grounds of “reason” or “science”.

    I just came across Zeitgeist.

    I watched the entire two hours and it is certainly unsettling. This film runs a along theme of “metaconspiracy” (this should be a word). It is as if the goal is to draw, into the 9-11 “truth” movement, almost every type of conspiracy theorist out there, along with just general doubters.

    It takes bits of truth exaggerates, distorts and mixes them with misinformation and falsities while stirring emotion in such a way as to appeal to an entire spectrum of misbeliefs all at the same time. It ties together the full range of conspiracy theories and explains and accounts for them all in one grand interrelated metaconspiracy which culminates in the final conclusion that not only was 9-11 an inside job, its very explanation is all the other conspiracy theories.

    It seems designed to attract everyone from people who have simple doubts, to those with full blown delusions, from people who are against war to people who believe in astrology (it is crafted such that they can easily miss miss the part where the film actually places astrology with other religions in the myth category).

    It will tug the fear strings of (and make sense to) those with valid, reasonable doubts who may be at all inclined to any kind of magical thinking. And it does all these things in a very powerful way.

    Some people will watch it, will check some of its assertions and find them to be false. Although the grim likelihood is that for many it will become the explanation to end all questions. Apparently it is working to pull people into the 9-11 “truth” movement.

    By the way, it ends with embracing love.

  • http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/ Cindy D

    “…its very explanation is all the other conspiracy theories.”

    Sorry for the typos and the above is wrong. More like all the other theories are used to validate the 911-“truth” explanation.

  • troll

    …sounds like a Michael Moore movie…I’ll make the popcorn

  • http://rapturenutballs.blogspot.com Baritone

    Conspiracy wonks seem to always begin their assault on non-believers in the same manner as christian evangelicals.

    We are all blind. We refuse to see. It’s all as plain as the nose on Jimmy Durante’s face.

    That is all part of the hype, and it’s all crap.

    Having read all of the above comments and having written a few, I think the person who most effectively gets to the heart of all this conspiracy crap is Al Barger (#31 above.) He puts it all together articulately in a compact, incisive nut shell. Good thinking and good writing AB.

    B-tone

  • Baronius

    Yeah, Baritone, we get it. You want to pick a fight with Christians.

    Cindy’s right that conspiracy theorists explain conspiracies with more conspiracies. Most people want to get to the bottom line; CT’s don’t. For them, it’s all about making the story bigger. It provides an explanation for the annoying lack of evidence. They are behind it, and THEY are behind them.

    Yes, Jon Stewart scares me more than Dick Cheney. First of all, because Cheney doesn’t scare me at all. But even if you think Cheney is evil, you believe in the possibility of right and wrong. Stewart would help create a population that doesn’t believe anything.

  • http://rapturenutballs.blogspot.com Baritone

    Baronius,

    No, you don’t get it. It’s the same hype. The same bullshit. The names have just been changed, although it doesn’t serve to protect anybody.

    The CTs just replace satan with the government or some other, supposedly scheming, evil entity.

    For your sake, I hope Jon Stewart doesn’t haunt your dreams with his evil stare. You ought to invite the Dick man home for dinner. Just be sure to hide the shotguns.

    B-tone

  • http://rapturenutballs.blogspot.com Baritone

    Just a note.

    I have been attempting to publish a comment on Dave’s article about campaign financing without success. I hit publish, and it just doesn’t take.

    What’s happening?

    B-tone

  • REMF

    “Yes, Jon Stewart scares me more than Dick Cheney.”

    This does make sense, actually, since Cheney is responsible for sending only those who serve to their deaths.

  • troll

    …nonsense is highly underrated – the more utter the better

  • Moonraven

    Not having a good day, are we?

  • troll

    the nurse is late with my meds and the Voices are breaking through…and now I’m talking to a bird

    yeah you could say the day’s not going well

  • Moonraven

    If you were in our house you could have been shot at….

  • troll

    CIA hitmen huh…that would be about right

  • Moonraven

    No. Drunk brother-in-law.

  • troll

    geeze – I’d prefer the hitmen…domestic violence sucks

  • Joel S. Hirschhorn

    I just received this and I’m sure so many of you will also find it of considerable value:

    A 2,000 word article, Seven CIA Veterans Challenge 9/11 Commission Report — Official Account of 9/11 a “Joke” and a “Cover-up”, appeared today on OpEdNews. Link to article.

    The article details severe criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report by seven CIA veterans and their calls for a new investigation. A brief quote from each of the individuals featured in the article appears below.

    Raymond McGovern, former Chairman of the National Intelligence Council and 27-year CIA veteran, “I think at simplest terms, there’s a cover-up. The 9/11 Report is a joke.”

    William Christison, former National Intelligence Officer (NIO) and former Director of the CIA’s Office of Regional and Political, and 29-year CIA veteran, “We very seriously need an entirely new very high level and truly independent investigation of the events of 9/11. I think you almost have to look at the 9/11 Commission Report as a joke and not a serious piece of analysis at all.”

    Melvin Goodman, PhD, former Division Chief of the CIA’s Office of Soviet Affairs and Senior Analyst from 1966 – 1990, “The final report is ultimately a coverup. I don’t know how else to describe it.”

    Robert Baer, 21-year CIA veteran and specialist in the Middle East, who was awarded the Career Intelligence Medal upon his retirement in 1997, “Until we get a complete, honest, transparent investigation …, we will never know what happened on 9/11.”

    Robert David Steele has 25 years of combined service in the CIA and the U.S. Marine Corps. Second ranking civilian in U.S. Marine Corps Intelligence from 1988 – 1992. Member of the Adjunct Faculty of Marine Corps University. “I am forced to conclude that 9/11 was at a minimum allowed to happen as a pretext for war. … I have to tell anyone who cares to read this: I believe it. I believe it enough to want a full investigation that passes the smell test of the 9/11 families as well as objective outside observers.”

    Lynne Larkin, former CIA Operations Officer who served in several CIA foreign stations before being assigned to the CIA’s Counter-Intelligence Center. There, she co-chaired a multi-agency task force, which coordinated intelligence efforts among the many intelligence and law enforcement agencies. One of twenty-five signers of a letter to Congress expressing their concerns about “serious shortcomings,” “omissions,” and “major flaws” in the 9/11 Commission Report and offering their services for a new investigation.

    David MacMichael, PhD, former Senior Estimates Officer at the CIA with special responsibility for Western Hemisphere Affairs at the CIA’s National Intelligence Council. Prior to joining the CIA, he served for four years as a civilian counter-insurgency advisor to the U.S. government, and prior to that was a U.S. Marine Corps officer for ten years. One of twenty-five signers of a letter to Congress expressing their concerns about “serious shortcomings,” “omissions,” and “major flaws” in the 9/11 Commission Report and offering their services for a new investigation.

  • Lumpy

    More fine canned apam from the Hirschorn propaganda mill.

    You know there’s a museum shaped like a donut across the river from me and most of the modern art there makes about as much sense as its propagandizing namesake here on BC.

  • Lumpy

    For genaral reference, when I type ‘apam’ I mean ‘spam’.

  • http://johnmonto.com darkcloud

    To rely on the notion that 9-11 could not be a government conspiracy because the government is not able to keep secrets far too simple. I suggest coming at it from the other side. Look for the chalk outline. Without a doubt, a crime was committed. Who had a motive? What does the evidence say? when I come at it from this angle, I find everything points to a different story than the one we were told. If the government didn’t have anything to do with it, then why doesn’t it ad up? How or why the government lied and how they haven’t leaked as you say, is just another mystery.

    Actually, there is plenty of evidence that there were explosives in the building. That was never addressed in the commission’s report. Go to youtube and look at video from that day. On every news channel reporters and officials are responding to explosions in the building. A fireman said on camera to a reporter, “we have found a suspicious device. We think it is a bomb. we are evacuating our people from the building. we think the building are wired to come down.”

    A maintenance worker talked on camera of a truck that exploded in the basement before the first plane hit. You can watch this evidence from live footage taken on 9-11. why wasn’t it mentioned in the commission report?

    Something smells funny to me anyway.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    To rely on the notion that 9-11 could not be a government conspiracy because the government is not able to keep secrets far too simple.

    I agree. I prefer to stick with the complete lack of any evidence to support the conspiracy theory.

    Dave

  • STM

    Cindy B: “Apparently he’s given up (not for lack of belief though) and moved to Austria.”

    That just proves once for all that he really IS bonkers.

    Australia I could understand (who wouldn’t want to enjoy the endless summer), but Austria? Seriously, there’s more life in a mausoleum.

  • Clavos

    She keeps you busy, doesn’t she, Chris?

  • moonraven

    Without me, he would not be able to justify his job with all you sweet, reasonable, highly skilled debaters.

    Hah!

  • Ruvy in Jerusalem

    “…It’s all as plain as the nose on Jimmy Durante’s face.”

    Baritone,

    You really couldn’t see the nose on Jimmy Durante’s face? You know, I can get you glasses for free – if you ask nicely. Jimmy Durante did have one huge schnozzola. It was hard even for me to miss. And I have trouble seeing past that huge Jewish nose of mine…

    Good night, Mr. Calibash…

  • geo

    There is another view of what happened on 9/11 that differs with the official story and the one spun by the truther movement.

  • moonraven

    Wherever you are….

  • http://rapturenutballs.blogspot.com Baritone

    Ruvy,

    uhhh… I picked Durante’s nose ironically (and with two fingers.)

    B-tone

  • Lumpy

    It’s MRS Calabash.

  • Alec

    Hey, Hey, My, My,
    Conspiracy Nutjobs Never Die…

    The problem with people like this is, like creationists, alien abduction nuts, JFK theorists, etc., is that they have an internal magic reset button which causes them to shout again and again that the truth is being suppressed, no matter how often they are given a forum, and no matter how often their ramblings are debunked.

    But they never have evidence, witnesses, or even much of a grasp of reality.

    In addition to published articles and books, there are easily accessible sites on the web which objectively examine all of the 9/11 conspiracy claims, and find them wanting. And yet somehow these sites are either invisible to the 9/11 conspiracy folk, or these sites are dismissed as being controlled by the same mysterious forces behind 9/11.

    These people do not have either facts or even rationality on their side. But they do have their fears, and their desperate need to be at the center of attention. Their consistent claim: only they have acess to a deep truth which, if only everyone else believed without regard to actual evidence, would magically change their lives from one of drab impotence to … one of drab self-importance.

    Conspiracy nuts are psychologically damaged. There is nothing else to be done for them.

  • moonraven

    Lumpy: but Baritone, to whom the comment was addressed by Ruvy, is MALE. Or maybe not….

    Alec:

    Just ONCE I would like to see one of you ostriches take your head out of your ass and present sopme real EVIDENCE that Bush and Co. did NOT do 9/11.

    Good luck, buzzard bait.

  • Ruvy in Jerusalem

    Marthe,

    Thank you for pointing out that Baritone is a man – that is why I addressed my comment to Mr. Calabash – as you noted.

    As to what actually happened on my fiftieth birthday, I can tell you this for certain. It was not a conspiracy to get people to remember my birthday (on the Christian calendar).

    But it might be helpful to see who benefited from the destruction of the World Trade Center in New York:

    1. The owners of the property. They collected a huge sum of money, in the billions of dollars, that went into private bank accounts, untaxed.

    2. The Wahhabi terrorists. If they weren’t already in the public consciousness, the sight of two cigars sticking out of a skyscraper in New York, and the fall of that skyscraper sure as hell put them there.

    3. The Bush administration. Or precisely, the oil and banking establishment he represents.

    a) One of the remarks that Bush had made was that he sorta preferred to be a dictator. Not long after the fall of the WTC, he rushed through the Patriot Act through congress – a law that has emasculated the constitution of 1787, which is your only guarantee of liberty.

    b) The terrorists who attacked the Twin Towers were largely Saudi. How come no vengeance was EVER sought against the Wahhabi regime that had been helping to fund them? Your soldiers die in Iraq, but the Saudis (and their friends in the oil and banking establishment) are free to stick their grubby hands in your pockets and impoverish you with oil that cost over $80/bbl? Why?

    c) Finally,a friend of mine, Al Cuppett, uses the cover of a civil defense booklet he had as an action officer with the Joint Chiefs in his own presentations. The cover is a picture of one of the buildings of the World Trade Center with a red target drawn on it. So, in spite of all the protestations to the contrary, someone had thought of the World Trade Center as a target.

    Now, if you want to believe someone who has spent your economy into bankruptcy fighting a war in Iraq of all places, be my guest….

    It’s your wallet that gets emptied, not mine.

  • Ruvy in Jerusalem

    Oh yeah – about the cover of that civil defense booklet I mentioned. It was in use in the 1990’s…

  • moonraven

    Right, Ruvy.

    Regarding your first point: the guy that took over the management of the buildings did so IMMEDIATELY prior to 9/11.

  • moonraven

    Your intervening post makes mine looks as if it were ironic.

    It isn’t. You are corhrect in all regards to raise those issues.

    Follow the money, ALWAYS. And be aware that it buys silence.

  • JustOneMan

    Moonie and Ruvy…are you suggesting that we follow the money to the jewish bankers and jewish/israeli politicians who had deep political and finanical interest in pulling the US into a 3rd World War?

    Gee! who woulda thunk the Jews used the Muslims to do their dirty work…

    JOM

  • JustOneMan

    Oh and dont forget the jewish neocons…cant forget them!

    JOM

  • STM

    MR: “Regarding your first point: the guy that took over the management of the buildings did so IMMEDIATELY prior to 9/11.”

    Yep, his name is Frank Lowy, an Australian, and a man who made his fortune building or buying up shopping malls in Australia – among other things.

    Lowy was involved for some years in negotiations to take over the running of the buildings, and I can tell you that while insurance probably covered their losses, they were not exactly overjoyed by the whole thing, particularly given the loss of life. It also robbed them of the opportunity to have the kind of face they wanted in the US.

    While people may have a hard time feeling sorry for capitalists in that league, nevertheless, the outcome was not what they would have wanted. They got out of it OK in money terms, but a 99-year lease on the WTC is worth a lot more on your portfolio than a pile of rubble and an insurance payout.

  • Ruvy in Jerusalem

    Stan,

    I was careful not to point “conspiracy fingers” around. But it always pays to see who benefits from something happening.

    No matter how you slice the shwarma, owning (and operating and being responsible for) a series of huge buildings is a lot less fun than several billion in the bank. The ego may hurt a bit but that money in the bank is one hell of a comfort.

    I do suggest that the various parties who benefited from the destruction of the World Trade Center were involved in it to the degree that it benefited them.

    For example, Lowy and associates benefited financially. He spent several years negotiating what amounted to buying an insurance settlement. Bin Laden and associates (including the Saudi monarchy) benefited from the position in the world’s consciousness that being seen to have blown up a pair of skyscrapers in New York got them.

    The oil and banking establishment benefited from moving the United States closer to a dictatorship (the Rockefellers suggested in the early 1970’s that the United States was too democratic), and ultimately from the higher price oil fetches.

    Is Lowy a terrorist? Of course not! He is a businessman. As Nancy has pointed out elsewhere, businessmen are sometimes worse than terrorists….

    But Stan, that I, a nearly broke writer in the mountains of Samaria, should have to suggest to a professional journalist that he follow the money is nothing short of amazing.

  • STM

    Sorry Ruvy,

    I hold the traditional view here: a bunch of lunatics whose favoured headgear is the teatowel came up with a stunningly simple measure to cause as much death and destruction as they could, and no one in the US even thought about whether it could happen and thus reacted accordingly – ie, they didn’t react. That’s what they are scared of … being seen as totally incompetent.

    I don’t agree that Lowy would have preferred the outcome he got. He is a man for whom image is as important as money, and his image as an untainted international player on the property market of NYC would have meant more to him than a few billion in the bank (not like he needed the money, either, just quietly).

    As for the US being too democratic, well, perhaps there’s a grain of truth in that in the modern America if we consider the true meaning of democracy (mob rule, but who or what constitutes the mob?), rather than its modern meaning … and maybe that’s what’s leading to the nation appearing to tear itself apart from within (but is it REALLY?).

    Perhaps what it really needs is to get back to its roots, without all the navel gazing, and stand up for everything that’s right instead of standing up for who has the most money and influence.

  • JustOneMan

    Does anyone know a good doctor in israel? I think our “sage from the desert – Nostradumbsass” needs his meds adjusted…

    JOM

  • Ruvy in Jerusalem

    JOM,

    I didn’t know that we had a sage in the desert! If you tell me where he lives – Dimona, Eilat, Midbar Yehuda, Be’ersheva, S’deh Boker – and if you tell me which health insurer covers him (or is it a woman?) – I can arrange for someone to pay a visit. Did you know that doctors still make house calls in Israel?

    How kind of you to care!!!

    It’ll have to wait till Sunday, though.
    Sukkot, you know, and the Sabbath….

    Tizku l’mitzvot!

    Reuven,
    from the mountains of Samaria
    north of Jerusalem,
    the Eternal capital of the People of Israel

  • Silver Surfer

    I love a bit of sage, especially on roast lamb and baked potatoes. Mmm.

    In the desert, I suppose you could cook up a ‘roo or two and whack a bit of sage on it, although it tastes pretty damn good on its own, as long as you don’t overcook it.

    Like beef, with no fat.

    And did you guys know that Australia is the only country that puts its coat-of-arms on the BBQ: kangaroo and emu.

    Now there’s a place for a bit of sage.

  • troll

    …here in the high desert of North America we use sage in cleansing sweats – when the steam off the rocks gets too intense in the confined space of a ‘lodge’ breathing trough a handful of sage allows one to continue

    there’s another place for it

  • Silver Surfer

    But not in cooking, troll?

    It’s a fine herb, and even inspired an old English song: Scarborough Fair” (Parsley, sage, rosemary and thyme).

    I think it was covered by some American singer whose name escapes me (on purpose).

  • troll

    actually the prevalent variety here is not particularly good for cooking with – I grow my own culinary sage along with parsley and rosemary and thyme etc

  • Silver Surfer

    I hope you are not turning your green thumb to cultivating any other kind of herb, though, troll …

    Although that too can be used in cooking, I’m told. Nice in cookies. Not that I’d know personally, but that’s what I’ve heard.

    Excuse me while I get my fifth bag of chocolate pretzels.

  • Silver Surfer

    By the way, JOM, thumbs up for “nostradumbass”. One of the best internet insults I’ve seen for a while. Lucky for us Ruvy is (mostly) good-natured.

  • troll

    Surfer Dude – I learned the appropriate response to such inquiries back in my nihilist days working for DoD: “I have no knowledge of any such operations nor would I be disposed to discuss such activities were I to…..sir”

  • Silver Surfer

    Boys and girls, enough silliness. It’s 1.15am Thursday Down Under (I’m coming to you from the future). I’m off to bed to watch a British show called Location, Location, Location. I love watching pommies trying to buy real-estate.

    I’ve also decided, in my current state of late-night heightened awareness, that we really are all mad, to a man (or woman). Night dudes.

  • Dr Dreadful

    Stan, every time I’ve tried kangaroo I’ve had the impression that the meat could be put to far better use resoling my shoes.

    Same goes for croc.

    Emu, now – there’s a delicious meat. I could eat that stuff for every meal.

    And on the supposed implausibility of 9/11, I’ve said this before: Their plan was ingenious but outrageous. There was every chance that it would fail and bin Laden probably knew that. But… they GOT LUCKY.

    Simple as that.

  • Clavos

    Ever try alligator, Doc?

    Very popular down here; tastes like chicken.

    So why, you may well ask, bother?

    Marketing, Doc. Marketing.

  • Dr Dreadful

    I would imagine alligator and crocodile probably taste about the same, Clav, seeing as how they’re two closely related species.

    Crocodile does taste a bit like chicken – but like chicken with all the chickeney flavor cooked out of it by one’s culinarily challenged grandmother.

    Or like tofu with teeth.

  • moonraven

    More4 trivial moronic prattle from the peanut squad.

    B:O:R:I:N:G is too good a word for what you guys think is communication.

  • Alec

    Moonraven –

    As I have noted before, there are any number of resources that totally demolish the 9/11 conspiracy theories. For example,

    The online site of Skeptics Magazine The 9/11 Truth Movement in Perspective And a great general website for information concerning 9/11.

    Consistently, the 9/11 conspiracy crowd either pretend that their questions have not been answered or accuse those who lack faith as not being willing to “look at the facts.” But of course, it is just the opposite. The conspiracy crowd rejects the facts and pretends that they have not been given a fair hearing.

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    Thanks for those links, Alec. As I’m sure you know the conspiracy clones will never acknowledge anything on them, but it’s useful to have the info so we can post it over and over again so no one else gets sucked in by their claptrap. That Skeptic article really is devastating and very well written and researched.

    Dave

  • Zedd

    Why not look into it and squash it if it’s crazy.

    Why believe the box cutter scenario without question. I ask myself if I’d be scared of a couple of guys with box cutters on a plane that is full. Perhaps I’m missing something.

  • jetskiJ

    Why don’t u guys stop calling people that can actually think for themselves and not blindly believe what theyre told what to think derrogatory names.

    The same type of open minded attitude proved the truth that the world was round when obviously you had to be crazy if you didn’t think the world was flat.

    Now you all had better come up with any other time in history that a skyscraper collapsed straight into the ground because of a couple small fires. The Windsor Tower in Spain burned for 48 hours and had half the skyscraper on fire and still didn’t collapse.

    And oh yeah, explain to me why when you look at the top right hand side of Building 7 the second before it collapses you can see explosions running up the side. Try and debunk that shit.

  • jetskiJ

    hmm… those explosions running up the right hand side look alot like controlled demolition charges to me.

  • Gabriel

    People in the reality-based community should have no problem whatsoever in realizing that the uppermost portion of a skyscraper is not going to be able to “fall” into and THROUGH the remaining vast majority of solid building as quickly, meaning as effortlessly as falling through air without something else (i.e. explosives) reducing said majority of building to such a state of offering no more resistance than air. Can we all agree on that? Sounds pretty straightforward; solid things offer vastly more resistance than air. Anyone who graduated elementary school SHOULD be able to grasp this, and SHOULD be able to therefore grasp that the Twin Towers and WTC # 7 building had to have been controlled demolitions. It is literally COMMON SENSE.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    The ‘reality based community’ already realizes that your description of how the towers fell bears little or no relationship to observable reality.

    Dave

  • http://www.delusionaldemocracy.com Joel S. Hirschhorn

    Thanks Gabriel for trying to use solid thinking and science to inform and educate the many mental midgets that are addicted to this, one of the worst sites on the web (intellectually speaking), as the subsequent persistently idiotic, delusional and biased comment by Nalle – the hero of the brainless – demonstrates. For those few who have intelligence, go to a site like watchblog.com to read first rate articles and comments by truly intelligent people, and a structure that breaks down the whole political picture into three clear columns; try it!!

  • http://acaj1 Arthur Scheuerman

    Those WTC Tower buildings were built with long span, bar joist floor trusses which can collapse into catenaries (cables in suspension) from the expansion effects of heat on the steel truss components. The differential expansion effects between the composite steel and concrete in the floors causes separation of the concrete and steel and buckling of the diagonal struts in the trusses. This collapse of the the trusses into catenaries over several floors along with the additional ‘thermal bowing’ effect in some of the trusses, caused pull-in forces on the exterior wall columns which were shown in the photos taken by the Police helicopters to be bowing inward, on the long span sides of both buildings well before the buildings collapsed.

    Added to the untested long span trus’s weaknesses present in the Towers was, lack of diagonal bracing in the core, the weak column splices in both the perimeter and core columns, one bolt connections of the truss to core columns, missing bolts in the exterior column splices, large open areas for fire growth, weak plaster board enclosures for stairways and elevator shafts, etc., etc.

    Building 7 had all the same deficiencies present in the Towers except that the bar joist, trusses were replaced with long span ‘I’ beams. There were large growing fires on several floors as well as damage from the exterior columns of Tower 1 which pealed away during its collapse and hit the southwest corner and the middle of the south side of building 7, gouging out large sections. In addition to this damage, there were problems with water supply and the Fire Department decided not to fight these fires and ordered every one out of the building and out of the collapse zone (which was a large area including buildings around building 7) as is the procedure when discontinuing interior firefighting operations. The anticipation of collapse was a brilliant conclusion and no lives were lost when the 47 story building collapsed about an hour and a half after the evacuation order was given. The BBC somehow misheard the orders to evacuate the collapse zone and reported the building had collapsed well before it actually did.

    If you want to know how and why the WTC buildings collapsed read my book “Fire in the Skyscraper”

    Arthur Scheuerman,
    Retired Battalion Chief, FDNY

  • Arthur Scheuerman

    This is a section from my book. Reports of Controlled Demolition

    Many reports interpreted the loud sounds and debris being projected out sideways during the Tower collapses as an indication that explosives were used to demolish the buildings. Most of these ‘explosive’ sounds, heard during the collapses were heard after the collapses began. The exterior walls can be seen bending and buckling inward in the videos of both Towers long before any sounds or ground vibrations occurred. In Tower 2, the exterior columns in the east wall were photographed bowing inward up to 10 inches, 18 minutes after the plane’s impact. That’s 38 minutes before the global collapse began. To be technical, you could say that Tower 2’s collapse began slowly, with possibly some noise or impact sounds, about 38 minutes earlier than the official collapse time. The explosive sounds and expanding dust clouds occurred just after the east wall buckled inward and started the collapse, and not before the buckling, as would have happened with controlled demolition.
    When the south wall of Tower 1 was photographed it was bowing inward up to 55 inches on floors 95 to 101, about six minutes before these columns were seen buckling inward. In the North Tower “thunder” sounds were heard when floors collapsed on the south side 12 to 14 seconds before the top of the building was seen to tilt southward and begin falling as a unit starting the global collapse. Since each section of floor on the long-span side weighed about 500 tons, I would explore these sounds in Tower 1 as evidence of a floor or floors detaching and impacting the floors below on the south side which most probably accelerated south wall failure. I believe all the supposed ‘explosive’ sounds can be explained by the impacts made by the collapsing buildings after the columns were pulled in by the bowing and buckling floors and when the floors themselves began impacting the floors below. The boom, boom, boom, boom, boom repetitive ‘explosive’ sounds reported by firefighters running as Tower 2 was coming down were probably caused by the sequential collision of impacting floors. The great quantity of air on each floor being compressed in a fraction of a second by great weight and momentum would propel air, smoke, and any concrete dust and debris outward at great velocity.
    It is also clear from the computer studies that the heat from the fires caused differential expansion of the steel parts in the long span, floor trusses with the resulting thermal bowing in some floors directly exerting pull-in forces on the exterior columns or this thermal bowing could have detached a floor which would have impacted the floor below destroying composite action by separating the concrete slab from the trusses and inducing strong tensile (suspension) forces in the double weighted floor. In other floors thermal expansion of the floor against the columns compressed the trusses which along with shear forces within the trusses buckled the diagonal struts collapsing the trusses which went into suspension and helped pull-in and eventually buckle the exterior column walls. All these adverse truss effects were caused by steel expansion which begins immediately as the steel is heated. Bowing and buckling happen at low temperatures (400 C to 600 C) even before the steel would have weakened from higher temperatures. Once the exterior column buckling spread along an entire wall on one face the tower started leaning and the buckling spread around the towers exterior and into the core and the top sections of the towers began to tilt and fall. Although the North tower antenna appeared from some angles to have fallen straight down it actually tilted to the south because the south wall buckled first and the cantilevered south top building section pulled the core to the south.

    The South Tower’s top tilted to the east because its east wall buckled first. Once the core columns got out of plumb, there would have been little resistance to their buckling at the weak splices. With the incredible weight of the top of the buildings gaining momentum, like a heavy wedge or sledge all it had to do was break the welded, and single bolted connections holding the floors to the columns. This coupled with the fact that the falling building top’s momentum increases as the square of the number of floors impacted as the floors were detached and added to the weight of the descending top. There would have been little resistance to slow the top building section’s acceleration to the ground. Because this acceleration due to gravity increased the speed and momentum of the collapsing floors and building top, the impacts would have been increasingly violent as shown on the seismic graphs increasing amplitude until maximum when the masses of floors hit bedrock seven stories into the cellar.
    There have been some engineering analyses about the impacting floors slowing down the collapse so that the time to collapse should have been longer than ‘free fall’ times of an object dropped from the towers tops. I have an engineering question that may explain this. Since the Tower’s outer wall columns, especially in Tower 1, pealed out like a banana, they may have been able to break the connections to the floors ahead of the floors being impacted? In other words, with the weight of the wall columns pealing outward from the vertical along with the added horizontal forces of impacting floors projecting debris outwards onto these columns; would these columns while leaning out be able to break the wall-to-floor connections ahead of the level of impacting floors? If this is possible than I believe that the connection failures could could have traveled down the sides of the buildings at a speed faster than free fall times. This might help explain the rapid collapses especially in Tower 1. The wall-to-floor connection failures could have traveled down the building sides faster than ‘free fall’ times and in effect started the floors falling before they were impacted by the accumulating mass of impacted floors above.
    The heavy exterior wall columns in the 1500 foot high builddings while pealing off would project the column sections outwards a great distance. This distance was proposed as only being made possible by explosive forces. I disagree.
    Much has been made of the fact that NIST only analyzed the events up to the point where the Towers were poised to collapse before runaway collapse began and failed to pursue the remaining collapse. This was largely because after collapse began the chaotic impacts of the floors, walls and columns colliding could not possibly be analyzed accurately with even the strongest computers.

    In addition, the compression of air in the elevator and air-conditioning shafts by the collapsing upper building section and floors, would project air, smoke, and dust down these shafts and out of any air intake or discharge openings on the exterior walls on the lower mechanical equipment floors. This accounts for the plumes of smoke seen projecting outwards from the buildings well below the collapsing floors. There were quite extensive vertical HVAC shafts built into the building. These shafts are connected to air conditioning exhaust and intake ducts on the mechanical floors. Collapse of these shafts would force the dust and smoke out these HVAC exhaust and intake openings in the side of the building.

    The lightweight aluminum cladding’s breaking free from the buckling columns also would have been propelled outward a great distance by this expanding cloud of air and dust. This would account for huge dust clouds and pieces of aluminum seen projected outwards from the upper sections of the collapsing buildings. The light reflected off these aluminum pieces at the north wall of Tower 2 would be interpreted as flashes from explosive ‘squibs’. The flashes below the buckling east wall may have been from the aluminum cladding breaking free from the lower columns as they expanded after being unloaded of axial weight by the buckling of the wall above.

    Also explosives leave characteristic tears and fractures in steel, and such indications were not found in the debris pile.

    Much has been made of the presence of molten metal in the debris pile after the collapse. Presumably this molten metal was somehow connected to explosions or thermite charges, but there were Uninterrupted Power Supply (UPS) battery rooms on some floors of the Towers and Building 7. These battery rooms supplied continuous battery power to computers if the electricity failed for any reason. These batteries contained tons of lead which melts at 327 C or 621 F. The heat form the fires in the debris pile could easily have melted this lead which was probably what was seen flowing through the pile. NIST also reported UPS lan in the 13th floor of Building 7 and the 81st floor of Tower 2. In addition thermite reactions are rapid and don’t last the hours or days at which times the molten metal was observed. Additionally the EPA reported over 400 different chemicals in the dust and debris. These chemicals could easily be assembled conceptually to propose any type of chemical reaction imaginable including thermite reactions.

    About the concrete destruction into dust; F.R. Greening did a paper called Energy Transfer in the WTC Collapse in which he says “the energy required to crush concrete to 100 μm particles is 1.9 × 1011 J, which is well within the crushing capacity of the available energy. Hence it is theoretically possible for the WTC collapse events to have crushed more than 90 % of the floor concrete to particles well within the observed particle size range.”

    I would also investigate the possibility that the concrete was sub par due to freezing during curing or too much air or water having been added during construction.

    Arthur Scheuerman

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    Thanks for stopping in, Arthur. It’s nice to see a knowledgeable contribution from someone who knows what he’s talking about.

    If anyone is interested in getting Arthur’s book “Fire in the Skyscraper”, it’s available on Amazon.

    Dave

  • Clavos

    What a breath of fresh air, Mr. Scheuerman!

    Thank you.

  • jetskiJ

    Small explosions can be seen running up the top right hand side of Building 7 before it starts falling in the video of its collapse. Just refer back to my previous comment and you can see them. You can see them BEFORE the building begins its overall descent, meaning that there is very little chance if any chance at all of them being due to air pressure from collapsing floors. Plus, since they’re at the top floors, they can’t be from air pressure from above floors collapsing.

    If the SOUTH WEST corner of Building 7 below the 10th floor had been damaged due to the collapse of Buildings 1 and 2, then explain why WTC 7 falls COMPLETELY SYMMETRICALLY. The area of debris from its collapse literally stops at the sidewalk of the U.S. Post Office building that was directly next to Building 7.

    Why does Building 7 fall at free fall speed? The ONLY way for this to happen is for there to be no resistance whatsoever from the floors below.

    A photographer at the site of the alleged crash of Flight 93 says he saw nothing that would indicate the wreckage of an aircraft there.

    Donald Rumsfeld was caught on video as having slipped his tongue by accident and said that Flight 93 was shot down, which contradicts the “lets roll” account.

    This is a rare video from Bob Pugh who is captured video from the site of the Pentagon incident. You can see how the lawn is nice and green and unscarred.

  • jetskiJ

    It baffles me how you have a building with a couple small fires and it collapses at free fall speed, you have an airplane allegedly hitting the Pentagon and the grass is green and clean as day, and that people don’t think theres something wrong with that. It doesn’t take a genius to be like… thats whack. For all you guys say you still can’t debunk those visible explosions before the fall of Building 7, or the fact that it falls at free fall speed.

  • http://acaj1 Arthur Scheuerman

    About the “small explosions running up the right side” of Building 7, this could have been from the floors detaching upwards from the southwest corner wall. Since the core columns presumably collapsed first starting on a lower floor the ‘pull-in’ forces on the outer floor connections would begin detaching or pulling in the outer walls at this lower floor first and running up to the top. Since this southwest corner was previously damaged by the impacts from the outer columns from Tower 1, when the core collapsed in Building 7 and the floors exerted tension they would have pulled in the edges of the damaged southwest corner walls and when the floors detached sequentially upwards they would have allowed the corner walls to spring back propelling debris outwards.

    I know this is a complicated explanation but you can see my proposed hypothesis for the collapse of building 7 if you Goggle my name.

    Arthur Scheuerman

  • Joel S. Hirschhorn

    In an amazing about-face, the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) has implicitly admitted that its 10,000-page report on the destruction of the Twin Towers is a fraud, and that the buildings were destroyed by controlled demolition.

    In its recent reply to family members Bill Doyle and Bob McIlvaine, scientists Steven Jones and Kevin Ryan, architect Richard Gage and the group Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice, NIST states: “We are unable to provide a full explanation of the total collapse.”

    Thus NIST euphemistically admits that its 10,000-page report on the Towers does not even pretend to provide any explanation whatsoever for the Towers’ total collapse–and that indeed no such explanation is possible without invoking the politically-incorrect idea of controlled demolition.

    NIST’S 10,000-page report purports to explain what it calls “collapse initiation” — the loss of several floors’ vertical support. In order to dream up this exceedingly unlikely scenario, NIST had to ignore its own tests that showed that virtually none of the steel got hotter than 500 degrees f. It had to claim that somehow the planes took out many core columns, despite the fact that only a direct hit by an engine would have been likely to do so, and that the chances of this happening even once are fairly low. It had to preposterously allege that the plane that nicked the corner of the South Tower took out more core columns than the one that hit the North Tower almost dead center. It had to tweak all the parameters till they screamed bloody murder and say that the steel was far weaker than it actually was, the fire was far hotter than it actually was, the sagging was far greater than it actually was, and so on. And so NIST hallucinated a computer-generated fantasy scenario for “collapse initiation”–the failure of a few floors.

    But how do you get from the failure of a few floors to total collapse at free-fall speed of the entire structure? The short answer: You don’t. Anyone with the slightest grasp of the laws of physics understands that even if all of the vertical supports on a few floors somehow failed catastrophically at exactly the same time–a virtually impossible event, but one necessary to explain why the Towers would come straight down rather than toppling sideways–the top part of the building could not fall THROUGH the still-intact, highly robust lower part of the building, straight through the path of most resistance, just as fast as it would have fallen through thin air.

    Thus total free-fall collapse, even given NIST’s ridiculous “initiation” scenario, is utterly impossible. The probability of it happening is exactly equal to the probability of the whole building suddenly falling upward and landing on the moon.

    Compare this to a hypothetical case in which forensic evidence proves a victim was shot in the head three times at the foot of a cliff, but the body was found at the top of the cliff. The sheriff, who has the most to gain from the man’s death, brings in NIST to explain how the man shot himself in the head three times and then fell upward 200 feet to land on the top of the cliff. NIST produces a 10,000-page report claiming to explain the event. The 10,000-page report ignores all the forensic evidence that the man was murdered, offering endless pages of scientific gobbledygook distorting all the forensic evidence in such a way as to show how a suicide actually could manage to squeeze off three head-shots, and offering a scenario explaining how “upward-fall initiation” took place.

    After we read the whole 10,000 pages, it turns out that “upward-fall initiation” simply means that the man lost his footing after being shot. Okay, say Steve Jones, Kevin Ryan and friends, then after he lost his footing, how did he fall upward? NIST responds: “We are unable to provide a full explanation of falling-upward.”

    It is not surprising that NIST cannot explain a scenario that blatantly violates the basic laws of physics. What is surprising is that every newspaper in the world is not printing screaming front-page headlines reading NIST IMPLICITLY ADMITS: WTC TOWERS DESTROYED IN CONTROLLED DEMOLITION.

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    Amazing what people can read into things if they really want/need to.

    To demonstrate how absurd this whole comment is, let’s do a little substitution job on the first couple of paragraphs:

    ‘In an amazing about-face, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has implicitly admitted that its 10,000-page report on solar activity is a fraud, and that sunspots are actually caused by swarms of demons.

    ‘In its recent reply to family members Bill Boyle and Bob McIlhenny, scientists Steven James and Kevin Raine, architect Richard Gish and the group Scholars for Solar Truth and Justice, NASA states: “We are unable to provide a full explanation of sunspots.”

    ‘Thus NASA euphemistically admits that its 10,000-page report on solar activity does not even pretend to provide any explanation whatsoever for sunspots — and that indeed no such explanation is possible without invoking the politically-incorrect idea of demons.’

  • jetskiJ

    Truthers are just people who have logical and critical thinking abilities and common sense.
    They are the same people that raise the question of “why not” and “what if” that is the basis of the advance of knowledge and technology.
    To make fun of them in any way is to make fun of all those people in history that have given birth to what you rely on today through their curiosity and questions, such as electricity, flight, computers, the internet, the automobile, etcetera; and the list is endless.
    Therefore…

    All of these points relating to 9/11 truth are simply too many and too related to just be “a coincidence”.
    And they are written below:

    why did rice say no one could have ever imagined attacks of the type when the war games being done that day by the military involved hijaked aircraft
    the black color of fire in some videos means that its oxygen deprived and about to go out; firefighters said they were under control (e.g. one on high level up)
    the tower started toppling over until it was at 23 degrees of leaning; if so then the removed weight of that leaning section could not cause a pancake effect
    whyd many small lateral ejections of dust during the collapse shoot out perpendicularly when just a collapse by itself there wouldnt be such a perp. force
    smoke doesnt melt steel; cant see any major fire before collapses, looked like they were almost out and that fire was not spreading whatsoever in any way
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5amaZeL_2s…………person working at fiduciary trust actually saw physical dust inside the towers before 9/11
    why the flash bright point of light at the front cone of the planes half a second before they impact from any angle at any time; very strange
    no airplane wreckage of a 757 at the Pentagon; grass is green all the way more or less to the building
    reports by so many eye witnesses of explosions at the twin towers; including William Rodriguez and close friend
    the fact that seismic data indicated a large tremor seconds prior to the onset of the collapse and seconds prior to the first sound of the collapse
    no airplane wreckage of a 757 at Shanksville; same mining strip as in satellite photos of pre 9/11
    slip of tongue by Rumsfeld on YouTube of the aircraft that was shot down over Pennsylvania
    slip of tongue by Bush of explosives placed high enough to prevent people from escaping
    lack of video evidence of plane hitting the Pentagon; various reports of immediate FBI video confiscations
    fact that the Windsor Tower in Madrid, Spain had the majority of the tower on fire for much much longer; 24 hours; still stood standing even to support a crane
    collapse of WTC 7 was exactly like controlled demolition; in which explosives are clearly visible running up right hand side which can not be from air pressure
    fact that WTC 7 collapsed with ruins in a tidy and organized square plot with debris on video for a fact ending at the sidewalk of directly adjacent buildings
    fact that Silverstein was quoted on documentary of using the pull term when saying and we watched the building collapse; how on video “pull” said for WTC5,6
    fact that BBC reported WTC 7 had already collapsed when in fact the building itself can be seen in the background of the reporter for 20 min after the fact
    PNAC: Project for a New American Century called for catalyzing event of “new Pearl Harbor”; which was 9/11
    Jeb Bush being head of Securacom which had control of security for Twin Towers
    fact that there was insider trading on AA and UA airlines’ stocks only directly prior to 9/11
    fact that only pro government related movies as they relate to the attack such as United 93 and World Trade Center in theaters and no truth films at all
    the fact that there were numerous evacuations and power down prior to 9/11; power down for suspiciously “upgrading wires”; wires are used for CDs
    fact that there was eye witnesses to dust in towers in line with power down; aka employee of Fiduciary Trust hearing also loud dramatic banging noises
    fact that it is impossible for cell phones to call houses on the ground; my own 10 trials on a plane confirming this too; gov. talks of cell phone calls
    fact that Cleveland mayor and United Airlines at Cleveland Hopkins Intl Airport both confirmed that plane landing after 10am was identified as UA 93
    fact that the Bush Admin made a 441 day effort to stall the 9/11 Commission investigation of the attacks
    fact that Bush stayed in the classroom for around 10 minutes after being told the country is under attack when this is not secret service protocol
    fact that molten metal was found at the ruins which is indicative of heavy duty thermite explosive material; fact that WTC fires burned for record around 2, 3 mo.
    fact that all buildings fell at free fall speed; indicating no resistance at all whatsoever from below floors
    fact that there are numerous reports of hijackers being alive after 9/11 is the Middle East
    fact that Jamie McIntyre reported at Pentagon on 9/11 nothing that would indicate aircraft crashed there, then suspiciously made opposite claim years later
    fact that more or less all mainstream media attacks in hostile way all truthers that appear on their programs when media supposed to be fair and balanced

  • jetskiJ

    oh yeah. heres some more.

    FEMA terrorism drill booklet in 1997 has twin towers in crosshairs
    1945 B52 crashed into empire state bldg, flames and smoke, no collapse
    why do the towers fall not in opposite relation to time when they were hit
    Bin Laden confession tape Dec ’01: OBL eating, writing with right hand, FBI website says OBL left handed

  • Ruvy in Jerusalem

    Joel,

    “this, one of the worst sites on the web (intellectually speaking)”

    Blogcritics Magazine is primarily designed to feature performers and review books. It is not a political site by any means, which is why the political stuff gets sandwiched into the bread and butter material of the site, the news and reviews of a decadent American culture in its twilight and final days….

    If I went to the Daily Kos, for arguments sake, I’d find an equal number of mental midgets censoring me out of the site for my politically incorrect views, views that meld the religion and wisdom of OUR people, Joel, with the events that are occurring around us.

    Here, at least, I have the freedom to speak my mind and maybe spread a little wisdom before we are all forced off-line by war destroying the electronic net.

    Bear in mind that I tend to agree with those who believe that 9/11 was not entirely the work of Arab terrorists – that those who control the Bush administration had a big hand in the event, as well….

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    FEMA terrorism drill booklet in 1997 has twin towers in crosshairs

    So you think that as part of the conspiracy to take out the WTC a government agency would advertise the plan in advance like that? It’s like alice through the lookinglass in your head, isn’t it?

    As for Politics on BC, we’re an integral part of the site, as valid and as fully developed as any other. And Political articles here get better exposure than those on almost any other web magazine. But the best part is that it’s not just a partisan echo chamber like the top few sites which cater either only to the right or only to the left.

    Dave

  • jetskiJ

    i think you guys know you’re wrong but you just keep rebutting for the fun of it. because i know you guys have common sense, everyone does and anyone with common sense knows that a 47 story building doesnt just collapse all of a sudden at free fall speed when no plane hit it. i mean that just doesnt happen. its not that hard to realize its controlled demolition. so since you guys probly know you’re wrong i think imma stop coming here so much