A 9-11 Truth Digest

At 11 a.m. on Sept 11, 2001, our television sets told us an organization called Al Qaeda was responsible for the death and destruction that had transpired a few hours before. We were supplied with little evidence to support this claim, but we needed someone to blame and so we went along. Five years later, we have growing reasons to believe it was never true.

I could go on about the reasons, but to get to the point, what has changed recently has been mainstream media coverage of what is now called the "9-11 Truth Movement." This movement of people like you and me has grown exponentially as it endeavors tirelessly to uncover what really happened on that horrific day.

Polls now say that between a quarter and a half of Americans believe that what really happened on 9-11 was something other than the official government theory. Are these millions of Americans "Conspiracy Theorists"? In truth of course anyone who thinks in any way about 9-11 is a conspiracy theorist. A conspiracy occurred that day. The question is, Who do you believe was involved in it and in what capacity? "9-11 researchers" might be a fairer title with which to label those who, like myself, find it to be a deeply patriotic duty to uncover the truth behind this defining event in the current life of our nation and our planet. All of our wars and reshaped domestic priorities continue to revolve around our shared, but possibly very flawed, accounting of 9-11.

Not everyone has the time or willingness to look into this. In the past week, dozens of new stories have been written about the growing trend away from belief in the official story. I invite you to read one or two of them as part of commemorating and understanding 9-11 and the governmental changes it has created.

Before listing the stories, a quick note. To some extent it has sunk in among newspaper reporters that with a third or more of Americans not believing the official government story anymore, everyone knows someone who's in the 9-11 Truth movement. Thus these latest stories are more balanced than prior articles. Still, there are ways they remain sloppy or disingenuous. Some take a sarcastic or dismissive tone: "Don't worry. Don't take these people seriously. All of this is following a well-trodden path of weak-minded people believing things they want to believe: remember the JFK assassination and the Gulf of Tonkin, etc. Conspiracy Theorists are wackos." Another tactic to dismiss the widespread questions around 9-11 is, as mentioned above, using the term "Conspiracy Theorists" -- as if anyone who ascribes to a theory involving a conspiracy is a priori incapable of intelligent research or discussion.

The Disbelievers
Washington Post
Balanced. Interviews Prof. Griffin, one of the smartest of the Scholars for 9-11 Truth. But no mention of Tower 7, which was also destroyed on 9-11, nor of the military war games that distracted 99% of on-duty personnel.

Some Still Can't, or Won't, Believe
Marin Independent Journal (Marin Co., CA)
Short, to the point, utterly fair about the 9-11 Truth movement. Refreshingly little smearing of researchers.

9/11 Conspiracy Theorists Gather in N.Y.
LA Times
Uses the 'Conspiracy Theorist' smear term and is rife with sarcasm, but is a balanced and useful portrait of the thousands of people joining the movement.

Conspiracy theory gains momentum in society
Olympian (Olympia, WA)
Slanted against the 9-11 Truth movement. Uses all the techniques mentioned above. Dismissive and sarcastic.


A related story is that suddenly universities seem to be receiving political pressure to quiet professors who write or speak out on 9-11. Last Friday, BYU placed prominent physics professor Steven Jones on leave because of his scholarly paper which pokes serious holes in the 'pancake theory' about the destruction of the Twin Towers and all but proves explosives had to have been used. Coincidentally, Jones was put on leave days after President Bush had an unusual private meeting in Utah with the head of the Mormon Church, which controls BYU. Elsewhere, professors in Wisconsin and New Hampshire have barely held onto their posts amid political pressure.

BYU Statement Putting Jones on Involuntary Leave Because of His Work on 9-11

BYU's coverage of the event
"As a longtime physics professor, Jones is widely viewed as a leading academic voice for what some have termed the '9/11 truth movement.' Jones has explained and defended his conclusions in interviews with Deseret Morning News, London's The Guardian and MSNBC's Tucker Carlson. The decision to place Jones on leave with pay came after the university was contacted by reporters from Deseret Morning News interested in preparing a special report on his research."

BYU places '9/11 Truth' professor on paid leave
Deseret News (Salt Lake City, UT)
The basics of this story. Perhaps because of Professor Jones, this major Salt Lake City daily has been consistently ahead of the curve on balanced coverage of 9-11 Truth.

BYU takes on a 9/11 conspiracy professor
US News & World Report
Widely uses smear terms but remains decently balanced for a magazine with such wide circulation. Mentions other professors in Scholars for 9-11 Truth. Also mentions Bush's unusual meeting with the head of the Mormon Church.

Not filtered through the mainstream media:

Five Years On, 9/11 Truth Movement Reaches Critical Mass
Press Release from Scholars for 9-11 Truth
A valuable update on the movement and a list of new documentary books and movies.
A snippet: "National 9/11 poll analyses indicate that among citizens who know the most basic facts about September 11 anomalies (e.g., the unexplained WTC 7 collapse, the Pentagon's six coincidental aerial war games, the 23 specific advance warnings from 11 foreign governments, etc.), four out of five support an independent re-investigation. This strongly suggests that simply continuing to publicize the most elemental facts and unanswered questions could swiftly build an irresistible public outcry for a new inquiry."

Scholars for 9/11 Truth Assailed
Press Release from Scholars for 9-11 Truth
A response to the political pressure on universities.
A snippet: "According to the government, 9/11 is ‘the pivotal event of the 21st century,’ which changed everything", observed Professor James Fetzer. "So it obviously deserves to be studied. Colleges and universities are the institutions that undertake the study of significant historical events. The very idea that faculty should not be studying the events of 9/11 verges on the absurd," he remarked. "And since the official account - that the events of 9/11 involved 19 Islamic fundamentalists hijacking four commercial airliners and perpetrating terrorist acts under control of a man in a cave in Afghanistan - involves a conspiracy, it is impossible to study 9/11 without dealing with conspiracy theories."

If you'd prefer to listen rather than read, here's a short ABC radio news story (Australian).
Former Spy Raises 9/11 Conspiracy Theory
A British spy and Professor David Ray Griffin are interviewed after speaking in tandem to a gathering of 500 in London.
http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/200609/r106222_327810.mp3 [mp3]
http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/200609/r106222_327816.ram [real audio]
http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/200609/r106222_327817.asx [windows media]
http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2006/s1737980.htm [transcript]

Holes in the 9/11 Story
Robert Scheer, Syndicated Columnist
The longtime LA Times columnist writes "Five years out from the attacks, why do we still know so little about what really happened that day? What we still don’t know about 9/11 could kill us. By “we” I mean the public that has been kept in the dark for five years by a president who may know the truth but has chosen to ignore it. Instead of grappling with the thorny origins of that disaster, George Bush willfully turned the nation’s attention and resources to a totally unrelated and disastrous imperial adventure in Iraq."

Is American Democracy too Feeble to Deal with 9-11?
Paul Craig Roberts, former Wall Street Journal editor and Asst Secretary of the Treasury
Roberts finds "the facts against the official story of the buildings’ collapse more compelling than the case that has been made on behalf of the official story. I would like to see the issue debated by independent scientists and engineers, if such people exist."


More than a third (36 percent) of the American public believes it is likely that the Bush administration either perpetrated the 9/11 attacks or deliberately failed to stop them, according to a Scripps Howard/Ohio University poll released last month. A Zogby poll in August 2004 found that half of New York City residents believed the Bush administration knew the attacks were coming and “consciously failed to act.”


Read any or all of the above stories. Make up your own mind. Don't believe what any one of these authors say. And certainly don't believe what I write. Our democracy depends on citizens taking a moment to think with their own open minds about the significant events going on around them. Doing that and no more is all I would ask of anyone.
Forward this to anyone whom you think might watch the "Path to 9/11" special aired by Disney tonight, the full tab for which -- $40 million -- was footed by Disney. Normally we are told that what airs on TV is what sells, and that that's why underreported stories never make the news. So either Disney and ABC so care on this one night to offer a slanted, rewritten version of the events five years ago that lead up to September 2001, or they're far deeper in the business of propaganda than they let on.

Personally, at the risk of sounding optimistic, I believe the new coverage of the 9-11 Truth movement indicates a critical mass is building that will demand a real inquiry into what happened on 9-11. For daily updates, an excellent site I recommend is http://www.911blogger.com.

Why question 9-11? In the eloquent words of the authors of the site http://911research.wtc7.net, "If the official story was a tapestry of lies, and the attack was a meticulously engineered fraud perpetrated by officials sworn to protect us, people would naturally have a difficult time confronting that reality. To reject a story so thoroughly entrenched in consensus reality means both ridicule from others and embarrassment at having been manipulated. Nonetheless, people who have not questioned the official 9-11 story owe it to themselves to consider what kind of world is possible if the official story were to fall apart. All of the attacks on privacy, dignity, civil liberties, justice, peace, and government accountability enacted in the name of fighting terrorism since the attack would become completely indefensible. The corporate media would be thoroughly discredited for its role as propagandist for the perpetrators. A truth commission or some such body would be empowered to find the truth, and people throughout our society would distance themselves from the perpetrators and all that they represented in ruthlessness, duplicity, unaccountability, and arrogance. Truthfulness and independent thinking would be newly valued. Neglect of the people we punished for a crime they had nothing to do with would give way to contrition, sympathy, and reconstruction aid. And there would be vast resources to apply to such projects once the military budget was adjusted to fit newly perceived realities in a world no longer dominated by the merchants of deception and fear. That might not be such a bad thing."
In love and towards truth,

Excellent, thanks

Excellent, thanks tonybrasunas.