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.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - 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.
2 - Baritone
Oh, man. I singed my hemis on that one. Woohoo!
3 - Clavos
What zingzing said.
4 - 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.
5 - 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.
6 - 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.
7 - STM
Actually Clav, he has added to the discussion: he's added a bit more bollocks.
8 - 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
9 - 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
10 - 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.
11 - Dave Nalle
The greatest threats to the Republic often come wrapped in the flag and claiming to be patriots.
Dave
12 - 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.
13 - 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
14 - Clavos
brilliant, troll! I knew those CTs had it all wrong!
15 - troll
well...that's what I heard anyway
16 - 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!
17 - 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?
18 - 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
19 - 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.
20 - 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.
21 - STM
The title of this story should read: 9/11 Truth Movement - Next Step to Lunacy (if you're not already there).
22 - 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 - ?
23 - STM
Depends on how many truthers are active at any one time :)
24 - 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??
25 - 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