Great article; And add in the Impeachment movement too!

You are correct that the Anti-War and 9/11 Truth movements should join forces. I would add to that the Impeachment movement also, as I strongly believe that it is linked to 9/11.... And that the reason we are not getting any Impeachment action from Congress is that if hearings started, there is "too great a risk" of 9/11 Truth to be exposed. This is not what Congress wants: Because if the whole truth came out, it would be obvious that over 80% of Congress (even higher in the Senate) would be implicated as co-conspirators..... But silent inaction if by nothing else. They were bought-off and scared-off to forget about it.... Sen. Paul Wellstone was murdered because he refused to; which along with the anthrax letters cowed the others. 

So in order to get Impeachment, we must first raise public awareness and outrage over 9/11 being an inside job... Otherwise it will never happen, even after the criminals have "left office"... Leaving room for more of them to come in.. As shills, dupes, or whatever you call servants of unseen forces that have no concern for the Public or the country, only for themselves and their elite group.

When this all finally breaks, we will need mass resignations in the House and Senate of most who were in office in Sept. 2001 (...Perhaps via a deal for them to escape Treason charges) and special elections for a new Congress.  And, of course, no deals for the ones in charge or the prime players. 

A way to solve all this is to form a new Coalition Reform Third Party... this year. One with only a single platform plank and rally cry:

"We must first make the nation safe to argue in, before continuing the argument!"

This way, by putting aside all the distracting, polarizing issues; Americans from all over the political spectrum can come together to take back our country from the hidden control and corruption. Freeing the propaganda-slinging, wholly-controlled and suppressing media... And ending, or at least seriously curtailing, the power of corporate lobbyists.

We can do this: All it will take is the will to. Please contact our political reform leaders and urge them to put aside personal ambitions and table the dividing issues for now... And coalese into a new third party, one we can all join, and one that could sweep all before it.

There has never been a better time for a third party to succeed in our history... And never before has one been needed more!

by jibbguy (7 articles, 0 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 123 comments) on Tuesday, April 22, 2008 at 11:53:26 AM
 

Hey, Hot Shot

Hey, Hot-Shot - GeorgeWashington's Blog at 911Blogger.com

TheMemoryHole.org Senator Graham Admits

Complete 9/11 Timeline - CooperativeResearch.org aka HistoryCommons.org

AMERICANS SLAM NEWS MEDIA ON BELIEVABILITY

The Indictment of Markos C.A. Moulitsas ZÚÑIGA by Justice and History (Updated with Additional Information and Counts)

by Better World Order (4 articles, 229 quicklinks, 12 diaries, 645 comments) on Wednesday, April 23, 2008 at 12:28:44 AM
 

Open your eyes, time to wake up!

Enough is enough is enough is enough! We have the New York Times exposing "a quiet Pentagon campaign to infiltrate the media with pro-war propaganda. According to the newspaper, top officials recruited dozens of "military analysts" to spread favorable views of the war via major news media. Many of these pundits were working from Pentagon scripts while also lobbying for major military contractors looking to cash in on the war." These funny fuckers played cartoons of planes crashing into the WTC, and Americans bought it. These treasonous bastards of Fox, Abc, Cnn, & Nbc are beyond reproach. When the American people realize that their enemy is who they let into their homes on the tv, the corporations profiting from these maniacal "wars" orchestrated by the highest Pentagon Brass, will wither and die. I recommend that we make a supreme jesture, and all dump our televisions on the Capital steps!

Tell Congress: Investigate the Propaganda Pundits

https://secure.freepress.net/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=257 

We should give thanks for a man of wisdom, so scarce in these times, who is willing to represent scientific and philosophical truth. Jim, thanks for leading us through this mess so we can get to the whole rotten truth! I suggest anyone wishing to get to the real truth to watch the videos of the Madison 9/11 Conference, and tune in to Jim's not to be missed radio show on GCN @ 5 pm est: click here You are a national treasure, Jim!

Blessings, Shallel 

by Sha Llel (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 62 comments) on Tuesday, April 22, 2008 at 12:27:08 PM
 

scientific facts can free the American people

Send a letter fax to congress urging a scientific investigation of the probable implosion of wtc 7 CLICK HERE http://www.freedomspeaks.com/letter/101038/wtc-7-not-mentioned-in-official-9-11-report

"Please carefully consider that scientific facts once officially revealed to the nation can free the American people, their Congress, and their President, from the constant "fear and terror" (think Nazis SS playbook) generated by and since 9-11".

by Gene Cappa (5 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 100 comments) on Tuesday, April 22, 2008 at 1:25:01 PM
 

Scientific facts

Petition Congress about 9-11 Truth? You're kidding, right?

by Bill Cain (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 244 comments) on Tuesday, April 22, 2008 at 5:11:46 PM
 

I would say that many of those in 9/11 for truth ....

already stand in moral harmony with those in the peace movement. But there is one comment in here I have some trouble with:

"There is a crucial link between the anti-war movement and the 9/11 truth movement, because exposing the truth about 9/11 destroys the justification for those wars."

Exposing the truth, yes! But we already know those wars were unjustified without knowing exactly how involved out government was in the 9/11 attacks. We do know how uninvolved they were concerning those attacks. Some would compare it to being asleep at the wheel. So what exactly is the truth we are planning to expose? Is it that we have to believe this administration did in fact perpetuate the attacks themselves on 9/11? If so, wouldn't this weaken the already well known facts about our entanglements abroad and how these actions have created so much turmoil and unrest to virtually millions of people across the face of this planet? One could and no doubt would argue that a self attack would cheapen(unjustify) the idea that other nations had reasons to perpetuate such an attack on us and that our nefarious actions around the world for the past century that has created so much unrest and violence might be rendered mute and swept under the table.

There is no doubt in my mind this administration has been covering up if not outright lying about the facts concerning the 9/11 attacks. Hell they lie to the fishes. But I believe my comments are relevant and we must never forget that American imperialism and unfettered capitalism around the world is the main cause of hatred toward us and that hatred is very real and in most cases well deserved.

This of course points to my own beliefs which include this administration as knowing about these coming attacks long beforehand, using it as a ploy as depicted in the PNAC playbook concerning a new Pearl Harbor. It was the needed excuse the neocons had long been looking for to enact the use of military force unilaterally for a complete and permanent takeover of all the world's natural energy resources. More importantly, by increasing defense spending, reducing domestic spending and harboring a police state of unfettered capitalism. The idea being as an end to a means in a permanent American Empire around the world and a corporate fascist government here at home. Sheer insanity of course and we can all see where it's taking us.

My hat goes off to anyone seeking the truth, regardless of what that truth may be. In fact I respect and admire several of the 9/11 truthers. Some I do not. But franky I stand by my own convictions in that as a nation, the American people must be made aware of and catch up to the already proven realities our actions abroad(and at home) have created before we can ever expect them to believe in what has thus far been unproven and may remain that way indefinitely.

The bottom line is we have plenty of dirt already to try these guys for treason, remove them from office and make them stand in front of the International Warcrimes Tribunal. We have them on torture. We have them on illegal domestic spying. We have them on extraordinary rendition, we have them for lying us into an illegal war. We have them for ripping off our treasury for their corporate cronies, we have them for undermining civil liberties and ignoring international laws. We have them for politicizing the justice department in an attempt to form a one party state. We have them for outing a CIA agent and covering it up. The only thing we don't have is a congress with enough integrity or balls to hold up their foresworn oaths to protect and defend the constitution.

by Michael Shaw (7 articles, 1 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 292 comments) on Tuesday, April 22, 2008 at 1:58:09 PM
 

not blowback

Michael,

hatred, perhaps, but no means of executing the operation...the way it occurred. It was not blowback. Also, imho, not entirely of US origin. Not entirely. Otherwise, spot on, what you've added. 

by Tony Forest (4 articles, 10 quicklinks, 116 diaries, 1008 comments) on Tuesday, April 22, 2008 at 2:31:10 PM
 

Well it might be blowback or it might not be blowback...

My point is we already have the proof to impeach and bring these guys to justice. What are we waiting for? Any other observations or discoveries at this point will be the icing on the cake. By all means investigate. Investigate the hell out of it! But let's not take our attention away from what we've already got either and let's not ever forget that American activity abroad is a major cause to much of the poverty, war, hate and social unrest for millions if not billions of people in this world(and at home).

We need to take a good hard look at a lot of things, things that are now evident, things that have existed long before 9/11 and either way you might look at it, inside job or not, it is exactly what has led to 9/11. It was inevitable! The inbred corporate corruption and the buying of the politicians by the power elite for example. That's smacking us right in the face and has been doing so for some time now. Yes we can blame Bush and company. We might even nail a pentagon official or two. We might even end up hanging them but if we don't correct the real problems behind them.. IE the MIC, we can only expect more of the same forever.

Sadly and short of a revolution, the truth is even if 9/11 can be proven as a major conspiracy, since the politicians are governed by both greed and fear, led on a leesh by the MIC, what makes anyone believe justice would be served anyway? If they won't do it now with what they've already got, how can we expect them to do it later? You would have to derail the MIC to do that. The entire military combined with the largest corporations in the world. It will never happen! That is why Bush is walking carefree now and will continue to do so into obscurity.

by Michael Shaw (7 articles, 1 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 292 comments) on Tuesday, April 22, 2008 at 6:12:04 PM
 

9/11 Truth, YES; Ron Paul, NO

I am totally committed to the 9/11 truth movement, but please do not be fooled by Ron Paul, self-professed champion of the Constitution - except for one very, very BIG problem: Ron Paul has not supported the nation's first time use of what the Constitution says we have a right to - an Article V convention.  Learn the truth about the Article V convention option the Founders placed in the Constitution because they anticipated the eventual loss of trust and confidence of Americans in the federal government: go to www.foavc.org and open your mind.

 The 9/11 truth movement is so desperate for public support by big names that it too easily attaches itself so some very questionable people.  We should be putting pressure on Obama, Clinton and McCain to support a new 9/11 investigation!!!!!!!!!!!

by Joel S. Hirschhorn (113 articles, 20 quicklinks, 46 diaries, 428 comments) on Tuesday, April 22, 2008 at 3:05:49 PM
 

Welcome Jim Fetzer

Jim Fetzer,

You have honored the community of Truth-seekers by your visit and by this outstanding masterpiece of an article which ought to be learnt by heart by any concerned citizen and also be included in history textbooks of high school and college studends for the benefit of future generations.

Your call for unity is admirable, but how to get around major obstacles? On the one side of the aisle you have AIPAC gatekeepers such as NOAM CHOMSKY, ROBERT FISK, DAVID BARSAMIAN, NORMAN SOLOMON, ROBERT SHEER, WILLIAM BOWLES, CHRIS FLOYD, JOSHUA HOLLAND, who in the cloak of intellectualism and through their publications and public appearances avert and divert and derail and sabotage any harsh criticism of this cancerous malignancy upon the body of the nation that is Zionism.

On the other side you have those sincere peace activists who denounce Bush's lies except his version of 9/11 and continue singing the song of 19 Muslim Arab hijackers armed with boxcutters who hate our freedom nonsense. Our frustration with them makes me denounce them here : Justin Raimondo, Scott Ritter, John Nichols, Alexander Cockburn, Cindy Sheehan, just to name a few.

Your accomplishments so far have been of gargantuan and Biblical proportions and we have no doubt that you will manage to overcome and remove these obstacles as before. Have you convinced Ron Paul that 9/11 was an inside job ? Let's hear about it.

By the way be careful when walking around in OEN territory. This is a minefield infested with trolls of all kinds that we have to to ignore or to expel. But for a newcomer there are surprises that you will discover for yourself. 

by ramsheyi (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 346 comments) on Tuesday, April 22, 2008 at 6:24:42 PM
 

hey jim

we spoke on the phone a few years ago, and then i was at the 9/11 conference at the sheridan in l.a. with alex jones. i suggested a constitutional convention as a way to get our foot in the door, and you and jones and the old navy flier all denounced the idea. your fear is that the ptb would take over the convention. but you fail to think critically. if we coerce the call out of congress, the convention will have just as many people like yourself there too. and you will be heard, and the truth will come out.

we are taught that the declaration of independence and the u.s. constitution are our two most important founding documents. but what we are not taught is that the former was actually written into the latter in the form of the convention clause of article v.

it's there for a reason jim. it's time to put the constitution to work for us.

 http://www.articlev.org

http://www.foavc.org

by john de herrera (32 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 119 comments) on Tuesday, April 22, 2008 at 8:33:34 PM
 

Constitutional Convention

You all need to pressure Dennis Kucinich into making good on his proposed Constitutional Convention initiative.

http://www.kucinichtv.com

by Ty Shlackman (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 534 comments) on Tuesday, April 22, 2008 at 9:42:22 PM
 

Noam Chomsky and Cindy Sheehan

Noam Chomsky is not an AIPAC gatekeeper. Noam Chomsky is a critic of Israel. Cindy Sheehan knows 911 was in inside job and supports 911 truth.

by Ty Shlackman (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 534 comments) on Tuesday, April 22, 2008 at 9:47:28 PM
 

False claim

"Anyone who wants to appreciate one of the real reasons for 9/11 should think about a clip of cheering Palestinians that played as the towers were being destroyed.

I asked myself, "Is there an enormous large-screen, outdoor television in the West Bank that would enable Palestinians to view these events as they are happening?"

It turns out to be archival footage from 1993 of rejoicing after some students had given an olive branch to the Israeli soldiers and thought that peace was "just around the corner", which just happened to be introduced at the point of maximum revulsion about what we were seeing on the screen."

This claim is false.

Palestinians did indeed celebrate the attacks of 9/11/2001.  I don't think they necessarily celebrated "as the towers were being destroyed", or "as [the events] are happening", but after they heard the news in their media. Then, they took to the streets, reportedly several thousand strong.

In addition, Saddam Hussein's regime also celebrated the attacks, although not necessarily by dancing in the streets.  

by Alan Williams (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 433 comments) on Tuesday, April 22, 2008 at 11:03:15 PM
 

Actually, it is authentic . . .

I believe that more than one archival tape may have

been run,  but here are some supporting reports: 

Palestinians Cheering (video) 

http:// www.youtube.com/watch?v=hyC1pD3NLv4

Footage of Palestinian's Celebrating is Fake (video)

http:// www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuvscDkrs3U&feature=related 

by Jim Fetzer (16 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 19 comments) on Wednesday, April 23, 2008 at 12:43:43 AM
 

Missing the point

First of all I'll never support Ron Paul. While I agree with his antiwar stance and his desire to end the central banking system it is only because he is a laissez-faire lunatic. He wants government out of corporations so they are free to rack up profits without intervention or overseeing. That will lead us right back to where we are now. There is no government intervention currently because corporations control our government under fascist corporatism. Besides that, I'm black and Ron Paul is no friend to black people from things he has said, even though he tried to back his way out of them.

Secondly, the 9/11 coverup and official lie is all about making the bulk of white Americans comfortable. They know the government did something shady but most people still blindly cling to race loyalty. They know old white men are still running things and hope that one day this will all work out in their favor. It won't of course and many will continue voting and acting against their own interests until it's too late. In fact I believe it's too late already to save this ill-gotten country from becoming Third World. 

Yes I am suggesting that many people tacitly support the government killing 3000 American citizens, if that means we get to kill some black and brown people are steal their oil to secure our own future and prosperity. Americans are notorious exceptionalists and nativists. People of all races here will support slaughter of foreigners if it means we can maintain our lifestyle. Bush and company should've been impeached and thrown in the gulag years ago. The reason they haven't is because white Americans allow their own personal insecurities and fears to be used against them to garner support for illegal wars via false flag terrorism. Then the government makes its ties to Christianity, which is just another form of white nationalism. Put it all together and you have a white mass that neither can change or is willing to do so. In other words, game, set, match folks. Ironically the very thing that created this nation, white supremacy, is the very thing that also destroyed it.

by Nfamous (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 30 comments) on Wednesday, April 23, 2008 at 10:45:24 AM
 

...And Steal Their Oil "

Nfamous,

 Nfamous said :

"Yes I am suggesting that many people tacitly support the government killing 3000 Americans if that means we get to kill some black and brown people and steal their oil..."

This is true and there certainly exists  some sort of silent complicity in action on which the gangster government relies in committing obvious crimes,  otherwise truth would have come to light sooner and accepted more easily. However and fortunately,  the majority abhor this brand of sickening justification, especially the young and well educated.

By the way Ron Paul is part of the Establishment and not totally free to  respond to our wishes and dreams, otherwise he would be small-plane crashed or JFKed immediately.

by ramsheyi (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 346 comments) on Wednesday, April 23, 2008 at 1:27:58 PM
 

Two recommendations for a 9/11 Truther

While nothing "new" or revealing is presented in the article (aside from the obvious linking of the 9/11 Truth Movement to the Anti-war Movement), I'm left with the impression that this is Professor Fetzer's quid pro quo for the recently-published letter in an obscure journal by another group of "esteemed" Truthers - "Fourteen Points of Agreement with Official Government Reports on the World Trade Center Destruction" - click here .

Conspicuously missing from the letter's authors is Professor Fetzer's name, as well as the good Drs. Wood and Reynolds, but... I digress. The article (much like the linked letter) sheds nothing new on the now years-old claims made by Truthers. Instead, the letter and article serve only as summations (yet again) of previously-debunked issues that Truther's feel compelled to defend like a junkyard dog with its bone. The difference here, though, is that the Truther's bone is nothing more than an old shoe that's been covered in a brown sugar glaze (i.e., professionals that lend their names to the lie of the shoe).

"We are told not to discuss conspiracy theories..."

WHO has ever told you, Mr. Fetzer, that you may not discuss a 9/11 conspiracy theory? Was it your high school teacher, other Truthers, or President Bush himself? Perhaps, you have examples where you have personally been told (because "you" are part of the "we") not to discuss conspiracy theorie? But... from where I've been reading, you've been permitted to sing like a canary when it comes to 9/11. This claim, then, is nothing more than rhetoric that condemns the nameless "they" because they are... nameless.

At the risk of boring the typical cast of Truther corbies that I've communicated with over these past several months, I'll avoid discussing the now well-aired laundry list of Truther allegations that have been reasserted anew by Professor Fetzer. Anyone is more than welcome to look at my past comments on these issues, as they see fit... or not.

But I DO take exception to this self-proclaimed "parting reflection" - "The Commander-in-Chief is marching our troops off a cliff!"

Why do you even include it within the article, Professor Fetzer? Is it because you uttered similar sounding words on April 18, 2008 and thought it'd be a "swell reference" in an article that portrays itself as a paper? The ONLY time you reference a concern for American service members (SMs) in your article is at its end and as a parting reflection. This is a prima fascie example of the arrogance the Left maintains for the military and its continued use of the military as a means to their political ends. The token notice of the SMs representing your nation and the accompanying appeal to the humanism of the Left is plainly evident.

"I call upon the officers of our armed forces to take into custody those who would direct the commission of further war crimes."

As an officer in the United States Army Reserve, I reject wholeheartedly YOUR "call" to do YOUR bidding. If your expectations associated with the attacks of 9/11 remain unmet, I recommend that you either work on your acceptance of the issues (i.e., focus honestly on what actually transpired that day, as opposed to what continues to be imagined) OR revise your expectations accordingly such that they will be met.

These recommendations are solely under your purview, Professor Fetzer. There success or failure at implementing them rests solely upon you and your actions and not some nameless "they".

by Tom Murphy (2 articles, 3 quicklinks, 8 diaries, 1280 comments) on Wednesday, April 23, 2008 at 12:24:23 PM
 

I reiterate my call to take these men into custody . . .

Perhaps you missed it, but at the National Cathedral when the "official account" was sanctified Bush condemned "outrageous conspiracy theories", no doubt anticipating that some citizens would be bright enough and diligent enough to start sorting things out.  It turns out, of course, that the most "outrageous" of them all is the government's own account.  If you want proof, go to 911scholars.org and study, "Why doubt 9/11?", which can be found on the top-left of its menu bar.  Take a look and get back to me about what we have wrong. The administration has been lying about every aspect of 9/11.

The whole idea, of course, is to take 9/11 "off the table" of public discussion. Perhaps I am more aware of it than you would be, but there has been great pressure placed on institutions of higher learning to suppress discussion of this subject.  Faculty at several colleges and universities have lost their positions or been denied tenure for their interest in studying "the most important event of the 21st C."  I don't think it is much of a leap of logic to appreciate that the administration's lack of desire to investigate and the extreme control it exercised over the 9/11 commission's inquiry via Philip Zelikow was highly revealing.

Those of us who have taken the time and made the effort to study 9/11 have found massive resistance from the media and from the Bush administration.  If you are unaware of their extreme reluctance to discuss these issues, then you are very uninformed.  When I have been featured on "Hannity & Colmes" or "The O'Reilly Factor", for example, it has been because the hosts wanted to have an example to pillory for "hating his country", as they put it.  But there is a huge difference between devotion to your country and having contempt for an administration that has betrayed the principles for which it is supposed to stand.

I would like to think you can appreciate the difference.  As a former Marine Corps officer (USMC, 1962-66).  I served in the Far East but not in Vietnam and resigned my commission as a Captain to enter graduate school and pursue the study of the history and philosophy of science.  Since I can only speak for myself, I don't understand why it is inappropriate for me to call for the resignation from the government of those with dual citizenship, from his military service for the Director of the CIA, and for the arrest of those who issue orders that entail the further commission of war crimes.  I was speaking for myself, as indeed my language made self-evident. I reiterate those calls.

by Jim Fetzer (16 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 19 comments) on Wednesday, April 23, 2008 at 5:06:47 PM
 

Be, Know, and Do

"...[A]t the National Cathedral when the "official account" was sanctified Bush condemned 'outrageous conspiracy theories', no doubt anticipating that some citizens would be bright enough and diligent enough to start sorting things out."

So, is this the same as being told not to discuss conspiracy theories? Or is this President Bush expressing a national resolve to other nations that were continuing to tolerate the presence of terrorists (e.g., Afghanistan)? Professor Fetzer, you have incorrectly referenced the phrase "outrageous conspiracy theories". Here is a portion of the paragraph detailing the phrase, which was made during a radio address by President Bush in November 2001 and from the Oval Office:

"There is no such thing as a good terrorist. Any government that tries to pick and choose its terrorist friends will be regarded by us as a supporter of terrorism. We expect nations to speak the truth about terror. They shouldn't encourage malicious lies and outrageous conspiracy theories concerning the attacks of September the 11th. No government should promote the propaganda of terrorists... " - click here .

Where is the President singling out people (e.g., Truthers) because they are a group that discusses (at length even) 9/11 conspiracy theories? His focus is on other nations and not the self-proclaimed Truthers.

"It turns out, of course, that the most 'outrageous' of them all is the government's own account."

In light of the first few paragraphs of my comment here, I think your ability to assert such bold statements, Professor Fetzer, has been impacted adversely. It's quite probable that if one side "lies", the so too will the other.

"If you want proof, go to 911scholars.org and study, 'Why doubt 9/11?', which can be found on the top-left of its menu bar. Take a look and get back to me about what we have wrong. The administration has been lying about every aspect of 9/11."

What's wrong is "legion". I have been to the http://www.911scholars.org web site countless times, along with its sister site and countless other Truther web sites. Regarding what you as the group's founder and co-chair have "wrong", my articles, diary entries, and comments here at OpEdNews.com that discuss 9/11 address all 15 issues with the exception of Item 14. I have not been asked to provide an explanation for the ground turbulence with AA Flight 77 as it approached the Pentagon, but I have researched this issue and believe you're incorrect in asserting the absolute of "physically impossible", as detailed in Item 14.

"Perhaps I am more aware of it than you would be, but there has been great pressure placed on institutions of higher learning to suppress discussion of this subject."

That may very well be because I don't interface with the academic field often – other than to hire a co-op or two. Could it not be possible, though, that an institution's administration regards the issue of 9/11 conspiracy theories and their apparent faculty-based aggrandizement... embarrassing? Professor Fetzer, contrary to what your and a great many other Truther web sites claim, most Americans accept the Official Government Conspiracy Theory (63.6%) and the great majority of Americans do NOT believe that 9/11 was an inside job and planned as a MIHOP (95.4%) - http://www.911truth.org/images/ZogbyPoll2007.pdf . This being the case, an institution of higher education that's supports such a minority position runs (I would presume) a serious credibility risk that must be weighed appropriately and err in favor of the school, as opposed to the faculty.

"I don't think it is much of a leap of logic to appreciate that the administration's lack of desire to investigate and the extreme control it exercised over the 9/11 commission's inquiry via Philip Zelikow was highly revealing."

Certainly, this "leap" is in the range of possibility, but is it plausible? Where you have displayed no evidence to support the hypothesis and its conclusion, I'd have to argue that (for now) your conclusion does not represent the reasonable, most likely outcome. Therefore, linking Mr. Zelikow, the Administration, the attacks of 9/11, and conspiracy theories to censured professors and/or a subdued media is... unsubstantiated.

"Those of us who have taken the time and made the effort to study 9/11 have found massive resistance from the media and from the Bush administration... But there is a huge difference between devotion to your country and having contempt for an administration that has betrayed the principles for which it is supposed to stand."

Is it truly "massive resistance" or a reluctance to address an issue that's regarded by (again) the great majority of Americans as speaking for itself - res ipsa loquitur. I think it the later and not the former. The only "story" in a non-issue like the 9/11Truther Movement is the one about conspiracy theorists attempting to make an issue out of... a non-issue, if this makes sense.

You have every right to question your government and its role before, during, and after the attacks of 9/11. But you have asserted political claims under the guise of scientific research that employs the scientific method. However, you (and others) have consistently hand-picked information from the total population of available evidence and discarded those items that fail to support your apparently pre-determined conclusions. These actions are disingenuous and render invalid many of your conclusions and/or assertions in your published works.

"I don't understand why it is inappropriate for me to call for the resignation from the government of those with dual citizenship, from his military service for the Director of the CIA, and for the arrest of those who issue orders that entail the further commission of war crimes."

Who has ruled that war crimes have been committed - the court of Truther and anti-war opinion or the almighty Zogby poll? Isn't this type of "justice" akin to that of the Salem Witch Trials in early American history? I like to think we've progressed a bit farther than this process in the last several centuries.

As a former military officer, you should be keenly aware of the responsibility of leadership. One must represent the model of Be, Know, and Do when it comes to leadership. This model necessitates acting in a manner that supports the Constitution above your personal likes and dislikes. 9/11 and its aftermath left a deep scar on the American conscience and because it stirred people's passions (right, wrong, or indifferent), thorough analysis in light of frequently changing risk analyses is often supplanted by emotional reactions.

I think it inappropriate for you to ask of me or another military officer that I arrest those that have accepted the responsibility of defending the Constitution and American people simultaneously. From a formal perspective, Professor Fetzer, you're not in the chain of command. From a practical perspective, the Truther and Anti-war Movements have not presented a compelling case (yet) that warrants m