-- Astonishing as it sounds, a conference featuring the 9/11 Scholars for Truth was aired on C-SPAN.
-- In his Washington Post article, "9/11 Panel Suspected Deception by Pentagon," Dan Eggen reported, "Some staff members and commissioners of the Sept. 11 panel concluded that the Pentagon's initial story of how it reacted to the 2001 terrorist attacks may have been part of a deliberate effort to mislead the commission and the public. . ."
"We to this day don't know why NORAD told us what they told us," Commission Chair Thomas H. Kean said. "It was just so far from the truth."
-- According to a new Scripps Howard/Ohio University poll, "More than a third of the American public suspects that federal officials assisted in the 9/11 terrorist attacks or took no action to stop them so the United States could go to war in the Middle East."
Still more surprising, 16 percent think the collapse of the World Trade Towers was expedited by controlled demolition while 12 percent suspect the Pentagon was struck by a missile, not Flight 77.
Eye-opening as these results are, they're not unprecedented. According to Scripps/Howard, "The level of suspicion of U.S. official involvement in a 9/11 conspiracy was only slightly behind the 40 percent who suspect 'officials in the federal government were directly responsible for the assassination of President Kennedy.'"
Kean's colleague, 9/11 Commisssion vice chair Lee Hamilton, conceded the results of the poll. "A lot of people I've encountered believe the U.S. government was involved." But he remains unmoved. "Of course, we don't think the evidence leads that way at all."
What Hamilton doesn't get is that he's only contributing to this monumental lack of faith in our own government. Just as when the commission blocked testimony about explosions by the likes of White House-honored 9/11 hero William Rodriguez.
Three decades before, when President Kennedy was killed, it was bad that enough the exuberant national mood he personified (one of his few accomplishments) was punctured. But the Warren Commission, no doubts in the interest of that our sainted "national unity," took the easy way out and refused to face the complexities of the case and their implications. Feeding the public facile explanations credible only to those with a vested interest in blocking the truth seeded our national disaffection with the government. It's since grown like a weed.
In the long run, the Warren Commission and 9/11 Commission have proven as injurious to the country as the crimes they were appointed to investigate. Sure, we'd be traumatized if we discovered that government figures colluded with the Mob to kill Kennedy. Or that some element of the government, whether sanctioned or rogue, facilitated fanatical Islamist's machinations by means of controlled detonations.
But if parties were indicted and tried, it would go a long way toward restoring the public's faith in the government. Also, note to the powers that be: If conspirators were RICO'd to smithereens, it would strip conspiracists of their theories. Once proven, a theory morphs into a crime, and the theorist is back at square one looking for a new one to champion.
Oh, for the halcyon days of yore, when conspiracy theorists were paranoid-schizophrenics, not respectable citizens like today.
Russ Wellen is the nuclear deproliferation editor for OpEdNews. He's also on the staffs of Freezerbox and Scholars & Rogues.
"It's hard to tell people not to smoke when you have a cigarette dangling from your mouth." -- Mohamed El Baradei, Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency
that 9/11 was staged at least partly. This proof is in treating that act as act of war instead of a felony. That was done only here and for the first time. If it was treated as a felony, the criminal ivestigation was in order and a Trial was to happen (I do not even want to mention the Mussaoui trial- a mockery of justice). The necessity of the Trial would preclude Bush and his cabal not only from naming the perpetrators openly but from waging wars. That is why it was bypassed and that is why the 9/11 was staged. Que Bono?
And now we all can eat our checkers because what was not easy to do in the Y2003 is very easy to do now. Incidentally Paul Wellstone conveniently perished right after that. And no one looked into it. More, even the Columbia disaster right in 2003 did not stop Bush. Now do you understand what was the push what the stakes were and are? That's why I hate Clinton who knowingly and delierately sold the country to Bush in the Y2000. He knew what he was doing and he knew the consequences. He is responsible and once stepping on that road he follows it, traitor to the core.
by
Mark Sashine (42 articles, 19 quicklinks, 227 diaries, 3219 comments)
on Thursday, August 3, 2006 at 7:25:52 AM
". . . that act as act of war instead of a felony"
I never thought of it that way, Mark. Thus necessitating military action instead of police action. You always have original insights. Write more articles.
by
Russ Wellen (58 articles, 1029 quicklinks, 66 diaries, 335 comments)
on Thursday, August 3, 2006 at 7:32:41 AM
I try to write fiction. Tougher though. I also try to promote some energy concepts.
Incidentally, there was a precedent. In 1918 after the Brest Accord between Germany and communist Russia on the peace (very tough for Russians) the super-leftists in Moscow deliberately killed the first German ambassador. The killer was a member of the new VCHK Blumkin and the idea was that such act was to instigate war hostilities again. The Germans did interpret it that way and put new conditions among them installing a German battallion in Moscow to protect the embassy ( see, close to Lebanon situation, right?). But the Russians stood adamant that it was act of terror- felony. The short leftist uprising in Moscow was crushed in no time. The Russians did produce a criminal investigation and arrested the killer. They did not allow the German batallion to come and through extremely effective negotiations peace held.
Thus the provocation was disclosed and avoided and in about 4 years the German Veimar republic signed a Rapallo treaty with Russia.
In all fairness Blumkin was not tried openly. He was used further on and only in the 30s he perished in the purges with his superiors too.
But the precedent is a precedent. It shows how such situations can be used.
by
Mark Sashine (42 articles, 19 quicklinks, 227 diaries, 3219 comments)
on Thursday, August 3, 2006 at 11:03:27 AM
Yes, I like your fiction, Mark. It still seems to me, though, that not much has been written about dealing with terrorism through the judicial system rather than with military "solutions." If you pursued it, you could fill a need. Meanwhile, it would be a dream to see the likes of bin Laden or Zawahiri tried at the Hague. Check out this picture of another dream trial (for best effect, click to enlarge.)
by
Russ Wellen (58 articles, 1029 quicklinks, 66 diaries, 335 comments)
on Thursday, August 3, 2006 at 12:24:46 PM
The mechanism of the criminal trial is not devised only for for the actual sentencing at the end- it is devised so that the society cannot bypass it on its way to violence and revenge. Law thus works as a universal cooler as well as a universal energy transformer. Negative energy is transformed to the good use. The process is most vital. Actually through years terrorists were tried as felons. I can name even people who wanted to kill emperors and tzars. Closer to us- rRed Brigade in Germany were tried. By the way, Timothy Mcvey was tried. We did not bomb Iowa or Idaho because of him, right? The 9/11 govt people sometimes say that trial was impossible because all the perpetrators died. But didn't we accuse an organization? It did not die! And how do we know those are the perpetrators? The evidence we were presented was tainted to say the least. It was tainted because it was obtained illegally, out of the due procedure of law. The trial procedure, lasting maybe for years would let the society know what is going on and in no way would prevent from the defenisve actions, such as border patrol or other things. But it would have pulled the rug out from the warmongers. The whole reason that the trial was not even mentioned is the original deliberate agenda to find a way and go to war. But if that is so, it is only logical to consider that the actual reason for war could be staged. So was Gleivitz, So was Reichstag burning or Tonkine incident.
In fact, the first thing which is destroyed on the way to total fascism is the effectiveness of the existing mechanism of the judiciary and you would agree with me that the judiciary is nearly paralysed in this country. Another sign of it- the LA attorney-general opens the case against a mercy -killing doctor but there is no case against FEMA people and Bush who certainly negiligibly and deliberately destroyed the New Orleans. Go figure.
by
Mark Sashine (42 articles, 19 quicklinks, 227 diaries, 3219 comments)
on Thursday, August 3, 2006 at 1:49:09 PM
"Still more surprising, 16 percent think the collapse of the World Trade Towers was expedited by controlled demolition while 12 percent suspect the Pentagon was struck by a missile, not Flight 77." ?
What's so surprising is that only 16% and 12% can recognize the truth.
What's wrong with the other 88%? Are they blind or something?
by
amazin (30 articles, 0 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 359 comments)
on Saturday, August 5, 2006 at 8:04:21 AM
It struck me as odd, that the two agencies that took the most blame for 9/11, were CIA (Tenet) and FAA (of Transportation, headed by Minetta), the only two Clinton appointees kept on by the anti-Clinton Bushites.
My, my....this tale has more coincidences that a B-grade horror movie. Ask a homcide detective how he/she feels about coincidences.
by
wintefire6 (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 86 comments)
on Saturday, August 5, 2006 at 2:34:09 PM
9/11 ACTION: Respond to AP/ABC slap at 9/11 truth
mvmt. ASAP, AND FORWARD ON !!! URGE ALL YOU KNOW
TO:
A) Email the below message to ABC, AP, and other media
(emails below). It is good to cc some CC or other
media when you email AP and ABC, so they know that
other media see what they are up to.
B) After emailing the below message to the Media Email
Addresses at the bottom, then forward this ENTIRE 9/11
Action Email on to all you know.
WE ARE WINNING. WE CAN DO THIS. PUSH !! PUSH !!
PUSH !!
THE MESSAGE TO SEND OUT ( to media emails at bottom):
1) -------------------------------------------
For example, in the 3rd paragraph you state:
PROBLEM: the term "widely discredited" is a laughable
slap at the 9/11 truth movement given the breaking
news of:
-- Wednesday, August 2, 2006 WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A
member of the 9/11 commission said Wednesday that
panel members so distrusted testimony from Pentagon
officials that they referred their concerns to the
Pentagon's inspector general. "We were extremely
frustrated with the false statements we were getting,"
Roemer told CNN. "We were not sure of the intent,
whether it was to deceive the commission or merely
part of the fumbling bureaucracy."
THE 9/11 TRUTH MOVEMENT was raising hell when
testimony to the 9/11 Commission by the FAA and DOD
conflicted, and the 9/11 truth community demanded
answers THEN. Where was the media, who should have
been demanding answers THEN?
-- On C-SPAN's "Theories of 9/11", Steven Jones of BYU
Physics Dept. announced that THERMATE traces were
found on WTC debris in analysis of the debris. Two
independantly obtained samples BOTH contained
thermate. As your article states, thermate is a
patented explosive used for controlled demolition.
HAS AP OR ABC OR ANY MEDIA HAD ANY TRACES ANALYZED?
IF NOT, WHY NOT?
IF SO, AND YOU FOUND THERMATE, WHY ISN'T THIS A 6 INCH
HEADLINE, AND NIGHTLY NEWS HEADLINE?
2) -------------------------------------------
In the 6th paragraph you state:
PROBLEM:
Your statement leaves readers to believe that ONLY
Fetzer believes this.
See BBC's article of Sunday, 23 September, 2001, 12:30
GMT 13:30 UK
click here
"Hijack 'suspects' alive and well
Another of the men named by the FBI as a hijacker in
the suicide attacks on Washington and New York has
turned up alive and well.
The identities of four of the 19 suspects accused of
having carried out the attacks are now in doubt.
click here
WHY HAVE ABC AND AP NOT LOOKED INTO THIS HUGELY
IMPORTANT STORY, AND DONE THEIR DUTY TO INFORM THEIR
READERS AND VIEWERS, AND ALSO TO DIG DEEPER INTO WHAT
THIS MASSIVE DISCREPANCY IN THE OFFICIAL VERSION OF
9/11 PORTENDS FOR ALL THE REST OF THEIR "THEORY" ??
3) -------------------------------------------
In your article's 9th paragraph you state:
PROBLEM:
The "official story" that 19 ragtag hijackers who
could barely fly Cessnas, flying commercial jet liners
with expert precision many experienced pilots say they
couldn't accomplish, and fooling the US Air Force,
NORAD, and the FAA so that in one and a half hours of
flying these hijacked planes over some of the world's
most protected airspace . . . with not one, not one .
. . Air Force interceptor jet arriving until too late,
and completely obliterating the first three steel
reinforced skyscrapers in building engineering history
with jet fuel (which doesn't approach the temperature
required to melt steel) . . . IS A CONSPIRACY THEORY.
IT'S AN OFFICIAL CONSPIRACY THEORY.
By the way, one of those buildings was not hit by a
plane, so when your article says the buildings were
brought down by jet fuel, while ignoring building 7's
fall . . . is shoddy journalism at best, and a cover
up at worst.
As the truth continues to unfold, media should and
must be held accountable for the horrid job they've
done reporting on 9/11, but worse for their obvious
attempts to obstruct public knowledge of crucial
facts.
Warm regards, and FOR GODSAKE, DO YOUR HOMEWORK in the
future. You are supposed to be a professional media.
9/11 truth seeker, and faithful citizen
=======================================
MEDIA EMAILS TO SEND ABOVE MESSAGE TO:
=======================================
ABC NEWS CONTACTS:
support@abcnews.go.com
click here
ASSOCIATED PRESS CONTACT:
info@ap.org
OTHER MEDIA, VILLAGE VOICE,
editor@villagevoice.com, thecity@nytimes.com,
letters@newsday.com
