Greg Palast apologizes to Dr. Steven Jones: "An apology and hope for reasoned discourse"
Greg Palast responded to me on 9 Aug 2007: "An apology and hope for reasoned discourse " For the record, here is the exchange (in brief – several people had input to Greg and I including Peter Phillips, David Ray Griffin, Jack Blood, “Galen”, and Ron Rattner).
1. Dr. Jones email to Greg Palast (12 June 2007):
Dear Mr. Palast,
On May 10, 2007, in an INN TV interview, you made statements which were blatantly defamatory when you called me, by name, a "complete and utter fraud" and a "fruitcake." I demand either a retraction or substantiation of your accusations -- publicly.
A lawyer friend affirms that your statements, available here: http://youtube.com/watch?v=r2oFTiEpIBQ , constitute "malicious defamation."
You taunted: "Mr. Jones, come at me!"
Here I am.
I am ready to respond to your specific objections to my papers, or issues you wish to raise which support the "official story" of the Bush/Cheney administration, after you have first verified that you have actually read what I have written on the subject of controlled demolition at the World Trade Center:
http://journalof911studies.com/volume/200704/JonesWTC911SciMethod.pdf
I will respond then to your statements which support the Bush/Cheney or "official story" for 9/11 events, and I will assure that the exchange will be made public. I propose publication of our exchange in the letters section of the Journalof911Studies.com, but you may choose another venue which is open to the public. Be sure to include your explanation of the iron-aluminum-rich microspheres which I discovered in the WTC dust if your explanation differs from mine, as well as the rapid straight-down collapse of WTC 7.
Again, my lawyer friend describes your public remarks on INN on May 10, 2007, as "malicious defamation" and I think he is correct. Do you? You called me a "complete and utter fraud" and a "fruitcake." I maintain that I am of sound mind and not a fraud. However, I invite you to present your substantiation of these claims -- or retract your egregious defamations.
Sincerely,
Steven E. Jones, Ph.D.
PS -- If you do not respond by July 25, 2007, I will consider other options. Thank you. Note that there are over one hundred engineers and architects listed in the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth web site, ae911.org, along with many at the stj911.org site, so you may wish to correct your mis-statement of last month that there are "no engineers" who challenge the official story.
2. Since Greg did not respond by July 25th (as requested), I wrote another email to him on July 27th, as follows:
Dear Mr. Palast,
I found and looked at the video clip from your interview on INN -- where you refer to me by name, publicly, as a "complete and utter fraud" and a "fruitcake". You also say, to the camera and the public: "Mr. Jones, come at me!"
I wrote to you over a month ago (via INN), asking for a retraction -- or at the very least, some substantiation for your hubris and slander. I received word back that you have backed off your assertion that I, a PhD physicist, am a "fruitcake." It's a start...
I'm ready to accept your offensive and public challenge -- your unsubstantiated accusation that I am a "complete and utter fraud" -- and hopefully this discussion can bring the 9/11 truth debate before a wider public audience.
I'm raring to go! Let's discuss options, shall we?
1. A lawsuit against you for slandering me publicly. All proceeds (in excess of court and lawyer costs) would go to Iraqi war refugees = victims of the 9/11 treachery, if I win.
2. A public debate on INN (where you spoke).
3. A written exchange -- Letters to the Journal of 9/11 Studies, for example. That would be the most consistent with scientific tradition -- you write up your substantiated reasons for making your statements and I will publish my response. I don't think you can do it! But give it a go: you should refute the 13 points I raised in my first paper on 9/11, as well as the supportive data I provide in my latest paper, in order to demonstrate that I'm a complete fraud as you assert. The papers are published for your convenience in the Journal of 9/11 Studies:
A. http://journalof911studies.com/volume/200609/Why_Indeed_Did_the_WTC_Buildings_Completely_Collapse_Jones_Thermite_World_Tra...
B. http://journalof911studies.com/volume/200704/JonesWTC911SciMethod.pdf
You can pull in scientists and engineers as you wish -- and then I will do the same.
I prefer choice #3.
You should also back up your claims of "no engineers" supporting my claims regarding demolition using cutter charges) of the Towers and WTC7. Note the papers by engineers in the Journal of 9/11 Studies. You should read, as background, the seventy-plus peer-reviewed papers in this Journal. Also, count over [130] members in the ae911.org (architects and engineers for 9/11 truth.) group. I can prove that this claim of yours is complete and utter nonsense by my finding just one engineer against your 'No engineers' claim -- Here you go: Gordon Ross and Tony Szamboti both support the mentioned claims from my papers and are both mechanical engineers. I could name others, of course.
I'm ready to move on this -- in a public venue. I've come at you, accepting your challenge. Now its your move -- which choice above do you prefer? Or do you suggest an alternative?
Silence on your part in view of your affront would be most cowardly and would tend to choice # 1. This might be of most benefit to the Iraqi war refugees but would also be least scientific.
Your move.
Dr. Steven E. Jones
3. 29 July, Greg Palast to Steven Jones (based on a third-party email to us both, which Greg quotes to me and asks about):
Dr. Jones,
Do you agree with the content or sentiments of this letter copied to you, particularly paragraphs 8 and 9 which I've placed in bold below?
Greg Palast
[PARAGRAPHS 8 AND 9 from an email Greg and I both received:]
In addition to being "gatekeepers of the left", these eight people have something else in common: they all hail from a particular tribe whose name can not be spoken without inviting charges of being anti-Middle-Eastern, or, more commonly and ad nauseam, anti-Semitic. This expression, anti-Semitic, is a clever term used by people who have a zealous dedication to Israel to describe anyone who doesn't share their steadfast devotion to this particular apartheid state. The implication is that one can not be critical of Israel without being critical of Jews and if you're critical of Jews you must be ethnocentric and disparaging of all Semitic people. Ironically enough, Arabs make up the majority of the Semitic people . Because of this shrewd framing, criticism of Zionism, the fanatical fidelity to an apartheid Jewish state in the "holy land" gifted to Jews by Yahweh, is impossible.
It's pretty clear at this stage of our collective investigation into the crimes of 9-11 that the perpetrators include not only elements within the USG but also individuals aligned with Israel, be they "dual citizens" or straight up Mossad agents. Anyone wanting to protect these criminal miscreants within the USG and the "special" (master/slave) relationship between Israel and the USG is going to do everything in their power to discredit the people such as yourself and Doctor Jones who have put together so many of the pieces of the 9-11 puzzle. [name withheld -- email sent to Jones, Palast and others]
4. Dr. Jones responds to Greg Palast.
In direct answer to your question: No, I do not. Let me make this clear.
I have brought forth evidence, compelling in my opinion and that of many others, that aluminothermic cutter-charges ("thermite" charges) were used in the destruction of the WTC buildings. I have also brought out arguments regarding the time-of-fall of WTC 7 relative to the time-of-fall of building destroyed by explosive demolition -- and other arguments -- which point again to the use of cutter charges in the destruction of these buildings.
With regard to "whodunnit", this is beyond physics, and I do not claim to know. Yes, I have paraphrased/cited Webster Tarpley with regard to who MIGHT be involved, for this is his area of expertise and study.
As for myself, I am willing to say based on the evidence I have seen -- besides the hard physical evidence which is the subject of my research in this area -- that Vice President Richard Cheney should be impeached and given a fair trial. Impeachment is a peaceful and Constitutional remedy and I am exercising my rights as an American citizen in calling for this remedy. Questions regarding the beginnings of the Iraq war and 9/11 should certainly be included in those impeachment proceedings. Beyond that, I do not personally point a finger...
Now, Greg, will you address the questions I posed to you?
Best wishes,
Steven Jones
5. Greg Palast's reply (9 August 2007), subject line: "An apology and hope for reasoned discourse "
Dr. Jones,
It seems, unfortunately, that you did not receive my message sent through Peter Phillips and Jack Blood some weeks back. Peter and Jack, both of whom I know and respect, assure me that your research, even if I remain unconvinced by it, was thoughtful and your conclusions sincerely drawn.
My unfortunate characterization of you as a "fruitcake" was based on your assertion that Jesus met with Mayans after His resurrection - which, Peter explained to me, was not a scientific finding but a deeply held religious belief rooted in your Mormon faith…
Some of your admirers have accused me of more serious misdeeds: that I knowingly conspired in mass murder (though I understand you do not endorse this view). I am quite disturbed that commentary on the September 11, 2001 attack has become so poisoned; and as a result, reasoned discourse is just impossible.
Therefore, except for those reports on the attack in my published books and as I have reported on BBC or other established outlets, I withdraw my comments on the topic. I have decided to remove myself from the debate entirely - and leave the field to those more expert than me.
I wish you well.
Greg Palast
6. Steve's reply to Greg, 11 August:
Greg,
Thank you, apology accepted.
The subject line of your email carries some hope for future "reasoned discourse," which is what I seek. ("An apology and hope for reasoned discourse ")
The hard evidence supporting the use of planted cutter-charges in the destruction of WTC 7 and the Twin Towers is very strong and I hope you will retain at least an open mind about these matters. The corporatocracy described by John Perkins has tentacles that are being exposed as we research what really happened on 9/11. I am certainly not accusing you of complicity in any way. There are questions I would like to see posed to Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and a few others...
Sincerely,
Steven E. Jones
7. “Final” email sent 13 August to Greg Palast:
Dear Greg,
I would urge you to consider my published, peer-reviewed papers which I have attached for you, regarding my research on what really happened on 9/11/2001 (particularly, the evidence for intentional demolition of the Towers and WTC 7). I believe these will be mostly understandable, and I further invite you to send them to "experts" as you wish for comment on the arguments I raise.
Indeed, I invite such criticisms of CONTENT as most seem to prefer to dismiss me as a "fruitcake" without even reading my papers -- can you imagine that?
Can you imagine a scholar or serious investigator taking such an ad hominem approach -- especially considering what is at stake if society as a whole continues to swallow the "official" 9/11 myth?
Steven Jones
- ProfJones's blog
- Login to post comments
Just goes to show, when you
Just goes to show, when you have truth on your side, there is no reason to degrade yourself to namecalling and attacks.
Well done Dr. Jones! This is a good example for all of us.
Reminds of...
“First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they attack you, then you win.” ~ Mahatma Gandhi
We are getting closer. Keep pushing.
Dr. Jones continues the
Dr. Jones continues the struggle with grace and class.
I am not as charitably inclined toward Palast. He indulged in a blustery, cowardly smear of Steven Jones because he arrogantly believed his bluff would not be called. When he was called to account he used the "Zionism" email as a shield and an excuse to absent himself from "reasoned discourse". His lamenting of the "poisoned" atmosphere is breathtaking hypocrisy after his unprovoked ad hominems. He knows what he is doing.
His private apology is disingenuous and inadequate, but his retreat is an object lesson in the power of truth. Congratulations and well done, Dr. Jones!
“On the altar of God, I swear eternal hostility against all forms of tyranny over the mind of man."--Thomas Jefferson
Dear Dr Jones, I appreciate
Dear Dr Jones,
I appreciate that you feel that Greg Palast has apologized, and has lost a lot of credibility over his offensive, malicious and libellous comments. Rightly so!
His comments were ill informed and unbecoming of someone who considers that they are an investigative journalist. I also find it odd that he considers Jack Blood a supporter, and after his unprovoked attack, I would also urge Jack Blood and Alex Jones to reconsider their friendship with Greg Palast, who they have given a platform to on many occasions.
However I find there is still an element of facetiousness and sanctimony in his apology, and I question as to whether it was honest and made in the spirit of a professional who has accepted responsibility for making a mistake.
He has attempted to obfuscate the facts of the issue, and carried out poorly disguised linguistic inveiglement. It was clear from the INN interview that Palast referred to you as a ‘fruitcake’ upon the basis of your scientific work, and not upon your religious beliefs. In fact, to insult a person on the basis of their religious beliefs is ‘hate crime’ in the United States and savvy journalist such as Palast would have known this.
I appreciate that you have attempted to raise the level of debate above pointless back and forth arguments with Palast on this issue. However I am unclear as to the meaning of this statement made by Palast
[b][i]“except for those reports on the attack in my published books and as I have reported on BBC or other established outlets,”[/b][/i]
Does this mean that Palast will not issue a retrospective apology and withdrawal of his statements, upon your beliefs &/or your scientific work?
Sir, could I humbly ask you to review this, and ask for clarification of his statement above concerning a full retrospective withdrawal of malicious comments about you and the work of scientists concerning 9/11 in any prior work. Issues upon which he now has realized, that for reasons known only to him, he is unable to actually comment upon.
Also the following statement to me appears disingenuous to say the least,
[b][i]‘Some of your admirers have accused me of more serious misdeeds: that I knowingly conspired in mass murder (though I understand you do not endorse this view). I am quite disturbed that commentary on the September 11, 2001 attack has become so poisoned; and as a result, reasoned discourse is just impossible’[/b][/i]
In particular that you do not have admirers, or court admirers, or encourage them to now or at any time in the past contact Palast and make any accusations concerning his ‘misdeeds’. The fact of the matter revolves solely on your scientific research and his total and utter contempt for you, when he defamed your character. Also state categorically that reasoned discourse is possible and you are more than happy to engage in such based on the science, which he as an investigative reporter has persistently ignored, ridiculed, attacked and dismissed with an utter arrogance that doesn’t befit someone who presents themselves to the world as an investigative reporter. It also needs to be clearly pointed out to Palast that he with his ill conceived comments, has contributed to why debate on September 11th 2001 has become so poisoned. It is an illogical statement indeed, when Palast complains about the level of debate, after he has lambasted those engaged in serious research as 'fruitcakes' and such like.
I know that standards have slipped at the BBC, below even the levels at which we now find in Washington; however this is no excuse for poor journalistic professionalism and facetious half hearted apologies.
Many Thanks,
Excellent insights, Sherlock...
You have read carefully and I agree with your observations:
"reasoned discourse is possible and you are more than happy to engage in such based on the science, which he as an investigative reporter has persistently ignored, ridiculed, attacked and dismissed with an utter arrogance that doesn’t befit someone who presents themselves to the world as an investigative reporter. It also needs to be clearly pointed out to Palast that he with his ill conceived comments, has contributed to why debate on September 11th 2001 has become so poisoned. It is an illogical statement indeed, when Palast complains about the level of debate, after he has lambasted those engaged in serious research as 'fruitcakes' and such like."
Yes.
The approach now that there is SOME dialog with Greg is to help him see the inconsistencies in his statements (which Sherlock has done) and to encourage him (and others in investigative reporting) to consider 9/11 issues from an investigative-reporter point of view. That is his expertise, I understand...
Think -- how do we do this?
Palast on the hook...
Doctor Jones, i want to say "thank you" once again for not letting Palast defame you without a strong challenge from you. That said, i must say that i find Palast's 'apology' to you insulting. Does he think we're not clever enough to see right through his ploy? Everything he has said here supports the original contention that he's a gatekeeper but i can't summarize it any better than Sherlock said it above.
Personally, with all due respect, i don't think you/we should let Palast off the hook quite so easily. In my opinion, since his attack on you was recorded on video, i think it would be reasonable to request that his full and unequivocal retraction should also be recorded on video so it can be shown to the entire 9-11 Truth Movement.
Would you be willing to continue with this exchange just a little longer? You/we have Palast right where we want him. It seems like it might be a big lost opportunity to accept his mealy-mouthed, disingenuous, and insulting ‘apology’ as is.
Best regards -- galen
9/11 Truth and the Media
Although many may have taken great offense to Greg Palast's comments about Steven Jones--Dr. Jones was not one of them. Dr. Jones' actions show class, and they should be emulated by far more people in this movement. Just the other day a prominent member of the 9/11 truth movement was calling for "scaffolds" in response to a journalist's piece that far more fair than most.
That makes us look bad.
Those who are pretending to sleep will never be awoken it is true--but we can not assume that everyone is pretending to sleep.
If we want justice, we can't simply attack people who disagree with our views--we have to convince them and ultimately convert them. We need the movement to grow, and attacking people who disagree is never going to help and will only contribute to the impression that we are not committed to "reasoned discourse ".
The press may or may not be controlled, but attacking them will never convince them that we are right. We need to show them that they are wrong without insults, accusations, or threats--exactly as Dr. Jones has done.
“We're an empire now, and when we act we create our own reality."
oh please, dont play into
oh please, dont play into Palast's bullshit, he got backed into a corner and NEVER intended to debate anything in the first place. he knows all about 9/11 and how bad it is for your career to talk 9/11 truth. Palast gets paid well by the BBC. hes a coward and he doesnt want to jeopordize that. as an "investigative reporter" and quite a "poisonous" guy who insults people pretty regularly himself i find it hilarious that this same man who called Steven Jones a fruitcake(and told him to "come at me" no less) is saying the debate is simply too "poisonous" for him and hes done with the whole thing. you dont really buy that do you? no, theres no need to attack all the time but we should call bullshit and shills where we see it/them and not give them a pass. and Palast didnt just disagree, he attacked. Palast is not honest, he was threatened with a lawsuit and caved as expected. its ridiculous to think a grown man like this wont look at 9/11 evidence because some people are less than polite with him. in fact its kind of absurd to think that about anybody but particularly Palast or any media types who call themselves investigative reporters(and again, Palast attacks people personally all the time, ive read a lot of his work. Palast playing the victim is a joke and a cop-out.). and "the press" isnt there to be convinced, that isnt possible and it wont happen. they are there to stop us and movements like ours. who owns "the press"? do you think "they" can be convinced, even if they wanted to be(G.E.,Murdoch,Redstone,Disney etc.)? we cant always be polite(like in the case of "investigative reporter" and slanderer Greg Palast for instance) and play by the MSM's rules, they will crush us. and sorry for my ignorance, but what is "scaffolds"?
"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Former Director, CIA
Consider David Ray Griffin's note to me...
in which he said:
Steven,
I was glad to see this exchange. Greg really is a good guy, dedicated to the truth, who simply went way beyond his expertise and now knows it. I have hope that he still may be pulled in to support the movement. I would suggest that, by way of promoting reasoned discourse, you send him your paper, which he might now be moved to read.
David
Note that I sent Greg both of my major papers (Sept 2006 and May 2007 in the Journal of 9/11 Studies) as attachments.
No response yet to those...
Don't let him off the hook so easily
Dear Dr. Jones,
In your original e-mail to Mr. Palast you rightfully demanded a public retraction or substantiation. From what I can tell, sending you a private apology does not qualify. It was nice of him to apologize, but in seems to me that you are letting him off the hook for his malicious defamation of your character. Mr. Griffin may feel that Palast can be brought into the fold, but I would not hold my breath.
If I were you, I would file suit for malicious defamation of character. You have the law on your side. To earn a verdict of not guilty, Mr. Palast would have to prove that his statements about you were true. That would possibly allow your papers to be admitted as evidence in a court of law, which, it seems to me, would be a great thing for the truth movement.
Thanks for all you do,
SD
i must respectfully disagree
i must respectfully disagree with David Ray Griffin on this one, and i say this as somebody who has bought Palast's books before and still gets e-mail alerts from him regularly. Palast is a smart guy, he has no doubt seen much of the alternative 9/11 information before, im guessing he has likely seen some of your work as well if he hasnt yet read your papers in full. Palast is so smart that he knows all too well what would happen to his career if he started to seriously question the official story of 9/11 and make a real issue out of it. so he doesnt and hopes that it will go away. this makes him a coward in my book. thank you Professor Jones for helping to expose Palast for the greedy self promoter that he is. i think you went about this perfectly and made him back himself into a corner. his excuse for not wanting to debate is clearly a cop-out. hes only angry at you because you make him look bad. as more time goes by and more people wake up to 9/11 being an inside job you look better while people like Palast and other gatekeepers look increasingly worse. this was why he attacked you in my opinion. keep up the great work Professor. you obviously care more about this country than Greg Palast does.
"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Former Director, CIA
scaffolds
I am assuming that the mention of scaffolds refers to structures used to hang criminals.
Or other forms of public execution,
like the guillotine.
Well said, Arabesque.
It is exactly this kind of intelligent, respectful yet determined approach to discourse that helps this movement to grow.
Insulting, blaming, or dismissing "our opponents" – even characterizing them as opponents – really hurts our cause. Much the same as violent actions which end up tainting otherwise peaceful protests. It might on the surface seem like hurling insults at the badguys will help, but that is a trap.
Truth itself holds the power, and we have it on our side. It is advanced through civilty (love, even), patient diligence, and commitment to its steady pursuit. It actually weakens our position when we attack, dismiss and divide.
Regardless of whether or not Palast is being genuine in his contrition here (seems to me he is not), Dr Jones has provided us with a great example of how to skillfully respond to a challenge or attack.
Thanks, Professor! (And I hope it can be pursued further.)
Buzz
First Rove, then Pallast = ++
Good for You Prof Jones: Your work is paying off ! This is an inspiration to us all not to back away when patience and conviction are needed.
Well Done Prof. Jones
Im pleased to have you represent us with a response like that, it shows alot of class.
Finally. I was waiting for
Finally. I was waiting for the apology and was baffled as to why Greg Palast would say such a thing.
Good for you Prof. Jones!
I saw that clip before and was wondering if you were aware of this slander. You are I see and I must say you acted with dignity and character. You are an insperation! Thank-you.
Professor Jones
Great work!
I Don't Understand Palast
So much of his work suggests 'Inside Job' yet he brands those who declare 'Inside Job' as out of step.
Sorry you have had to take so much 'heat' Steve for signing on for 'the cause'.
Aidan Monaghan
From the paragraphs Palst cites it would seem
that his main goal is to squash any Israeli connection. Prof. Jones was pure class as always, with the whole "Richard" cheney. We can catch more bees with honey and should not barge into rooms shouting, "INSIDE JOB!!" But the point made about when attacked we cannot roll over is crucial. The forces against us are formidable. We must be prepared to fight on any and every battlefield and if the gloves come off, well, let's get it on. Having the truth on your side is like doing a tag team match with Superman.
Thermite, molten metal and fall speeds are the good professors forte. Dancing employees of a "moving company" who are then secrectly whisked out of the country even though they had explosives in the van are someone else's. Like a championship team, if we all play our position flawlessly victory will follow.
Somewhat OT.......hope you all are hounding your Rep. to demand he/she sign on to House Resolution 333 to impeach Cheney. Talk about a COMPLETE MEDIA BLACKOUT! It may even be more urgent than 9/11 truth if only because it could well be a first step to that goal. 18 Reps on board so far!!
It may also cancel our planned "Gulf of Tonkin" moment for Iran.
Palast must be too wrapped
Palast must be too wrapped up in his own image and ego to think that anybody else but him could figure a thing or two out. Shame on Palast for tainting the good name of noble patriot Steven Jones. May instant karma settle up with him.
Re Palast's 'apology'
I add my voice to those admiring Professor Jones's class act in being sincere and polite yet firm. I have been an admirer of Greg Palast, but his words fail to meet my standards as an apology. Making fun of someone's religion is not an apology.
He has committed actionable slander (or defamation, if that's a separate thing) and the only acceptable remedy is a public apology, ideally in the location of the original offense, but if that is unavailable, a easily found page on his website. I subscribe to his emails, and they are not infrequent, and if he can't bear to eat a bit of humble pie by sending the apology out to his mailing list, I think he should be again threatened with legal action. It's just not that much to ask. It's up to Dr. Jones, of course, and there is something to be said for trying to encourage reasoned debate, but I find it hard to imagine that Palast would be lured to our side if he isn't already on it.
Well Reasoned Argument
Dr. Jones: Your points were concise and thorough enough to get the message across to Mr. Palast that he was off base and about to get picked off...
So, he got picked off..., returned to his dugout, thought up a response..., then threw some powder-puff pillow fight your way, then retreated back to his hole.
it's not called a truth movement for nothing...!
Greg Palast
Bravo Dr. Jones for holding Palast's feet to the fire of Truth!
I do agree with others that Palast was not sincere in his apology; he had to apologize. Its unfortunate that Palast said he will withdraw himself from all 9/11 commentary, (given that its impossible to have "reasoned discourse." Hah! That's a hoot.) . Just avoiding, avoiding. And he says he doesn't have the expertise.
While Palast may not be able to argue physics with Dr. Jones, its quite possible and doable to have reasoned discourse, as Dr Jones and many others have demonstrated, and to become expert on the subject of 9/11. I hope he reconsiders. He has very sharp investigative skills that the 9/11 Truth Movement could use.
But I think its futile to spend time trying to persuade or convince him - he is a very bright guy, savvy about conspiracy and corporate and government corruption, and I suspect well knows that 9/11 was an inside job. I don't know where his allegiances lie, but its not to the truth of 9/11.
Prof avoids the trap
of Mr. Palast's first paragraph which included this statement:
"...Because of this shrewd framing, criticism of Zionism, the fanatical fidelity to an apartheid Jewish state in the "holy land" gifted to Jews by Yahweh, is impossible...."
Avoided by just saying "no, I do not".
Wonder what would have happened had Professor Jones agreed with that statement.
those who cherish truth - no matter what their faith background or religious or national affiliation - need to not fear the self examination that is now essential to bringing justice to the victims of 9/11. We need to drop alignments and fierce loyalties to ethnic groups and nation states and join together as one moral movement for justice. this is the great test.
RE: Prof avoids the trap
kate of the kiosk sez:
He would have been consigned to Eric Hufschmid hell.
Yes, Professor Jones did well to give a wide berth to the trap Palast so clumsily laid out for him. Once you start discussing Zionism, you're automatically painted with the antisemitism brush, and once that's happened, you can spend the rest of your life trying to wash off the ink.
As for Greg, how disappointing and shameful.
If he'd answered differently
To reply 'yes' to Palast's 'do you agree with this statement?' would have been construed as agreeing with the statement in its entirety, including the reference, with derogatory overtones, of Palast as belonging to a 'tribe'. Professor Jones was correct to answer as he did.
Greg Palast is an Idiot
Based on his stupid and asinine comments and beliefs and such in that video interview and his email to Jones ("commentary on the September 11, 2001 attack has become so poisoned; and as a result, reasoned discourse is just impossible. .... I have decided to remove myself from the debate entirely"), I can only surmise and suppose that his book is equally worthless as any real and valid information source. (it would be like reading a fiction book based on fact — which parts can you believe as real)
----
Senior 9/11 Bureau Chief, Analyst, Correspondent, Principle Investigator, Forensic 9/11ologist
http://www.chico911truth.org/
Secrecy is the beginning of tyranny. — Robert Heinlein
I have often thought Dr. Jones among the very best of us.
And I appreciate his hard work and sacrifice. We must support those in and out of the movement that speak in reasoned and calm voices on this issue. It might not hurt to send Greg Palast a few helpful emails thanking him for responding at all, with support for Dr. Jones' hypothesis.
www.v911truth.org
About bloody time!
Palast is too smart not to know better.
_________________________________
Impeachment. Accountability. A better world.
Surely you know by now
That it has very little to do with intelligence. (and/or "smarts")
People's (so-called) "intelligence" often gets in the way as much as their "emotions". (sometimes more so)
And I apologize for calling you Shirley.
----
Senior 9/11 Bureau Chief, Analyst, Correspondent, Principle Investigator, Forensic 9/11ologist
http://www.chico911truth.org/
Secrecy is the beginning of tyranny. — Robert Heinlein