Ann Althouse Refuses Debate Proposal, Hurls More Insults

University of Wisconsin law professor Ann Althouse has upped the ante. Now she says 9/11 truth is not just "truly nutty," it's "despicable," and 9/11 truth-seekers are like "Nazis or Klansmen."

If it's that nutty and despicable, it ought to be easy for a law professor to shoot down in a debate. But once again, Ann has taken the cowardly route of hurling vicious insults while refusing a polite offer for a debate based on logic and evidence. Below is my recent correspondence with her.

On Feb 2, 2008, at 2:44 PM, Kevin Barrett wrote:


Dear Ann Althouse,

I am writing to request that you back up your characterization of 9/11 skepticism as "nutty," and your many public attacks on me, by stepping forward to defend the official story, using logic and evidence, in a free and fair debate.

As you may know, last year the UW-Madison History Club attempted to sponsor a debate or panel discussion pitting critics of the government's version of 9/11 against its defenders. After thoroughly canvassing the UW faculty, especially the History and Political Science departments, they were unable to find any defenders.

A similar effort was made at the University of Michigan-Ann Arbor. Thousands of faculty members received DVDs and invitations to defend the official story in a debate with Kevin Ryan and me. The only response was from a couple of engineers who said (off the record) that it was obvious that we were right that the World Trade Center was destroyed by controlled demolition, but that saying so in public would put their careers at risk.

I have been subjected to public ad hominem attacks by three UW-Madison professors: Donald Downs, M.F. Onellian, and yourself. It is interesting, and telling, that those willing to launch ad hominem attacks have not yet been willing to defend their positions.

I am sure you will agree that if there were even a 5% chance that 9/11 was an inside job, the gravity of such a possibility would dictate that trained critical thinkers carefully sift and winnow the evidence, if only to remove all reasonable doubt and reassure our fellow citizens. Given scientific polls showing that only 16% of Americans believe the government is telling the truth about 9/11, while 36% think 9/11 was an inside job designed to trigger pre-planned wars, anyone who supports the official version, as you do, ought to make it a priority to help set the record straight.

To that end, I propose that you and I debate the issue in a public forum. I am sure that UW-Madison Students for 9/11 Truth, and probably many other organizations, would love to sponsor the event.

Please let me know that you have accepted this proposal so we can work out the details. I would be happy to schedule the debate for April or early May, which will give you plenty of time to get up to speed on the issue. David Griffin's books, and, are good places to learn about the arguments you will be attempting to refute.

Thank you for helping bring this important issue to public awareness, and I look forward to hearing from you.

Kevin Barrett


On Feb 3, 2008, at 5:31 PM, Ann Althouse wrote:

Please stop emailing me. I think your theory is despicable and have no intention of helping you promote it.

Ann Althouse


On Feb 3, 2008, at 6:41 PM, Kevin Barrett wrote:

I'm asking you to refute it, not promote it.

Kevin Barrett


On Feb 3, 2008, at 5:59 PM, Ann Althouse wrote:

You are using my name to promote something that I find despicable. I would no more debate you than I would Nazis or Klansman. So stop contacting me.

Ann Althouse


Me, using your name? Ann, you have been using MY name by repeatedly publishing insults and ad-hominem attacks directed at me for more than a year and a half. I have ignored the vast majority of your insults. Today is the third time in that year-and-a-half that I have politely requested that you defend your views using logic and evidence in a public debate. How can that possibly be construed as "promoting" anything other than fearless sifting and winnowing in search of truth?

If you continue with the truly despicable "I'll insult you but I won't debate you" approach you may rest assured that I, and hundreds of supporters, will continue to contact you, by email, phone, and perhaps in-person requests, until you find the courage to stand behind your beliefs, and subject them to the scrutiny of logic and evidence.

Kevin Barrett

ANN ALTHOUSE, 5110 Law Building, 975 Bascom Mall, Madison, WI 53706-1399 (608) 262-2444,

KENNETH B DAVIS Jr., Dean of U.W.-Madison Law School 5110 Law Building, 975 Bascom Mall, Madison, WI 53706-1399 (608) 262-0618, (608) 262-0962,
Provost Patrick Farrell,
Capital Times
Wisconsin State Journal

email: Ann Althouse

Great Observation, Kevin!

It's amazing how one-sided the establishment can be in their views! They are so used to the tactic of simply dismissing, ridiculing and attacking. They fail to recognize the tactic no longer works and the citzenry finally balks, when they transgress a boundary--such as treason--as on 9//11--and a growing threat of fascism.

You were only too appropriate, in your point, you suffered direct attacks with the use of your name over a long period and Altman chaffs at the use of her name!

It reminds me of the late sixties and early seventies, but I believe, it's a much more serious and desperate struggle, this time around!

I e-mailed the text below:

Ms. Althouse,

You could if you're unwilling to do more than simply disparage 9/11 Truth, at the least, please omit your personal references to Kevin Barrett!

Mr. Barrett should be able to confront and defend himself if you're willing to attack him in such a direct and personal manner as some of your comments reflect!



Personally, I feel, it's time to push back--well past time!

Ms. Altman is a one-sided narrow-minded hippocrit.

...and don't believe her!


Well said

err Ann Althouse not Altman

err, excuse the error. It's Ann Althouse, which I managed to get correct in my e-mail. Please forgive.

...don't believe them!

MP3 Audio Clip - Kevin Barrett & Lynn Margulis

Sunday January 27, 2008
Lynn Margulis, Distinguished University Professor in the Department of Geosciences at the University of Massachusett, Amherst, Talks To Kevin Barrett About Meeting David Ray Griffin And Watching The Japanese Congress Debate 9/11 And The "War On Terror" (15 Min Clip Of 2 Hour Interview - 6 Meg)

* source =

More MP3 Audio Clips >

Here's the email I just sent them

Here's the email I just sent to:,,,,,,,

It appears that Ann Althouse is deranged. How can UW employee her? She insults Kevin Barrett's position on 9/11, but refuses to debate him. This is not rational behavior.

If she so believes that she holds truth, and Kevin Barrett's position in untenable, then she should be eager to debate him regarding 9/11, and what is obviously a cover up by this administration.

Why does UW continue to employee the increasingly incoherent Ann Althouse? She obviously has some type of mental disorder. The evidence of 9/11 as an inside job by people high in this administration is overwhelming. It only takes a modicum of research to understand that.

Ms. Althouse obviously is willfully ignorant on this issue. It is okay for her to have blind faith in an official 9/11 story that defies physics, logic, and Air Force protocal . . . BUT, it is not alright for her to defame the good name of Kevin Barrett. UW MUST take action.

Anyone as incoherent as Ann Althouse has no business teaching at a state university.


William E. Douglas, Jr.

I tried a much softer approach. Hope one of us gets through.

Posted on her blog, 2/3/08
An open letter to Ann Althouse:

I'm an attorney (JD, Georgetown Law Center, 1975) who had heard the claims of the "conspiracy theorists" two years ago and dismissed them as ludicrous and delusional. I've since re-examined the official story and carefully analyzed the evidence that I had accepted as factual--both circumstantial and scientific. To me, it’s been established beyond a reasonable doubt that the official story is false.

That's a very difficult fact to accept because the implications are earth-shattering, literally. It makes you question your own faculties and shakes to the core your belief system about our media and our government. I refused to believe it myself for weeks, until I could come to no other conclusion.

I don't have an explanation of what really happened, or who was really responsible. All I can tell you is, the official narrative cannot be true.

I'm not asking you or anyone else to accept this on my say-so or Kevin Barrett's or any number of patriots, architects, engineers, or other "truthers." But please beware of accepting something as true simply because it was the first explanation you heard in the news, or because it was repeated thousands of times by thousands of people. That doesn't make it true either.

And please don't dismiss the message by disparaging the messenger. Someone who graduated first in her class in law school shouldn’t stoop to such rhetorical bullying.

If nothing else, the fact that the 9/11 Commission report is now unraveling as a criminal cover-up of the Bush administration should give you pause regarding its premises and conclusions.

You recently wrote in Legal Times (7/9/07), "once I've written a post, I stand by it: This is what I thought then. . . . If I think it's wrong now, then it's time for a new post. There’s always a new post in blogging."

I sincerely hope you'll write a new post soon--even if it's only to say you've re-examined the evidence, fully, honestly, and without prejudice. It may take some courage, but I trust you won't shrink from it.

Great Post USAPatriot

I just skimmed through the muck at her blog. "Barrett is a deluded publicity seeker". Barrett is an honest man who lost his job because he dared to say that the emperor was naked!

Thanks, alexjonesfan.

I guess I shouldn’t be surprised by the level of "discourse" in her blog. I thought maybe they were her law students or fellow faculty members. I suspect many are shills or trolls, especially Tibore.

For what it’s worth, I just posted a rebuttal. We’ll see what kind of flak it draws.

Thanks to Dwightvw, too. I considered using my own name but decided against it in that forum. I’m not trying to remain anonymous… The people in my local 9/11 group know me, and I’ll gladly identify myself to anyone who asks, though I prefer to do it in a one-on-one communication. Write me at if you want.

Thanks again to both.

And best of luck to Kevin Barrett in keeping up the good fight!

Please consider using your own name

We have nothing to be ashamed of, and if it's fear that keeps us anonymous then we are defeating ourselves. It is more effective to use your own name.

Great letter. I agree that a soft approach is best. "You're the one that's a nut!" is not effective, which is why Althouse put Bill's email front and center on her blog. Of course she's cherry-picking, but why give her cherries to pick?

I can see a problem with using your name there: you have to use a Blogger ID which you might wish to keep separate.

Guess I better go put my money where my mouth is. I'll have to do it later. Somebody made a stupid joke that your evidence prof called and wants you to return your JD. That's some low-hanging fruit if you want to go grab it first.


Dwight Van Winkle

Kevin and Professor Althouse

After reading what was posted on this subject, I immediately sent an email to this woman, cc'ing her boss.

As a Wisconsite who is proud of our tradition of fair playing regarding all points of view, I questioned her conduct and told her I thought we had left Joe McCarthy's way in the world in our past.

I invited her to consider moving to another state where this kind of conduct in someone in her position would be seen as appropriate.

Maybe if she...and her boss...get a few more of these from those who pay their salaries, they will think twice about this.

If you're from Wisconsin and believe in 9/11 truth, time to join me in sending her your views on the matter.


I sent her some mail.....

And I didn't hold back either. Everybody, let the UW know how you feel. The more mail the better. We need to stand up to these people.

A phony and her supporters

I read Ann's comments and the others in support of her on her blog and find them utterly false. Ann cannot possibly believe anything she writes or she would be too dumb to teach law. Anyone who knows alums at the University should encourage them not to donate next time they are asked and explain why.

I sent her this email...

Header/subject on the email:
? Question? --Science student from Texas A & M

Dear Dr. Althouse,

I am a science student (who also enjoys history) at Texas A & M.

? What is the deal?

If you are convinced that points made by the 911 Truth movement are invalid, then please do not be a coward. Do not be a "weenie".

Let the world know exactly what aspects are invalid through an open forum and debate.

If you are unwilling to do so, then I think that your approach is a weenie way to state your contention, and it also supports the fact that your allegations and insults are weenie also.

Do you really want to be called a "weenie" by other students?

Please debate Kevin Barret in an open forum...or forever be called a "weenie".

Tom T

````````later responses placed first below - the first email is at the bottom `````````````````````````

Dr Althouse,

Well...that "weenie word" has kind of gone around with other students. I didn't actually come up with the term.

That is okay.
Do not defend your allegations in an open forum. It does not really bother me.

But do not blame me if other students joke about it.

Thanks for all the communication.


In a message dated 2/4/2008 10:24:55 A.M. Central Standard Time, writes:
No, it is that I respect science and expertise and know when something is a political stunt.

You cite your "feelings" and insult me. Not impressive, Tom.



On Feb 4, 2008, at 11:16 AM, TomT wrote: then...That is your choice to avoid bringing up documented evidence in an open forum. I have a feeling that you have absolutely no basis for your contentions, whereas Barrett confidently does have a proven and documented basis.

It will probably be called a "woman's weenie way out" among students.

That is your choice.

Thanks for the response.

Tom T


In a message dated 2/4/2008 10:09:36 A.M. Central Standard Time, writes:
Why should there be a debate between me and Barrett? He's not an engineer or scientist with any relevant expertise and neither am I. Nor is a debate the right format for testing scientific theories even if there were 2 experts. The proposal is a political stunt to promote what I consider to be a despicable theory. I refuse to participate in such promotion, just as I would refuse to help a Nazi or a Klansman increase his profile in the world.

Ann Althouse


On Feb 4, 2008, at 10:55 AM, Tom wrote:

Dear Dr. Althouse,

I am a science student (who also enjoys history) at Texas A & M.

? What is the deal?

If you are convinced that points made by the 911 Truth movement are invalid, then please do not be a coward. Do not be a "weenie".

Let the world know exactly what aspects are invalid through an open forum and debate.

If you are unwilling to do so, then I think that your approach is a weenie way to state your contention, and it also supports the fact that your allegations and insults are weenie also.

Do you really want to be called a "weenie" by other students?

Please debate Kevin Barret in an open forum...or forever be called a "weenie".

Tom T

If one does not thoroughly LOOK, the TRUTH is not visible.

well here's my contrib!

Dear Ann Althouse

I read your claim that debating the Official Version of 911 would be the equivalent of debating with Nazis or Klansmen.

I am not a Nazi. In fact, quite the opposite.

I am not American, I am British and my father fought the Nazis. The propaganda of the German State at that time was powerful and convincing and the German people believed it. I do not hold it against them: it was years before the truth came out. Hitler blamed a terrorist but it was a lie. Many people died in WW2. Many people died in the Twin Towers. I believe for their sakes we should be interested in history and seek the truth. It is citizen responsibility or civic duty, not a “disgusting” pursuit.

It was the Reichstag Fire in 1933 and the Enabling Act that performed exactly the same role in setting up Hitler as the attack on the Twin Towers and the Patriot Act has subsequently done for Civil Liberties in America. These acts were all highly significant and it may be a historical coincidence, but further investigation has proved otherwise for me.

German people were later blamed for “not knowing” what was happening in the concentration camps. They were busy minding their own business, though ignorance is perhaps not a saving grace. They surely would have considered mass murder a disgusting accusation against their Fuhrer. Years later they suffered for their civic irresponsibility.

My hair stood on end when I first asked myself if the news media was being forthright about the strange contradictions I was apparently seeing and hearing with my own eyes and ears on 911. It took a deep breath and a certain courage to look where I did not want to see.

Please take a moment to step back from your revulsion and ask yourself if your reply to Kevin Barrett, and the so-called 911 movement, is fair.

Very kind regards,


I emailed her and all ccs

Subject: You are right Dr. Althouse the Theory is "despicable"

Dear Dr Althouse,

Let me introduce myself. I served in the military for over 10 years. I served as both enlisted and as an officer in the U.S. Army and was actually promoted 12 different times. 5 years of my military career was in "Special Ops," as a detachment operative. I was honorably discharged in 1995. I have a B.S. w/ Honors from the University of Oklahoma. Up until a few months after the 9/11 mass murder, I was a very "conservative, republican" who campaigned on behalf of and voted for our current president in the 2000 election.

However after 9/11 because of my experience, and because of my knowledge of NORAD, my knowledge of other false flag operations conducted by the CIA, my awareness of "Able Danger," and my contacts it became regrettably obvious to me what had happened. I did research because I knew where to look to find the answers. The "science" which proves that the official story is false, is out there and there are lots of engineers and architects who are demonstrating on their websites and going around to lecture about that aspect and give evidence "beyond a shadow of a doubt." That is not really my expertise either although I was in the honors program for engineering at WVU for a couple of years before transferring and finishing at OU so I do understand the basic fundamentals which makes it obvious that the towers did not collapse as a result of "fires" or plane impacts.

I could go on and on about the intelligence and political evidence. I will just give you a little taste and all of this you can find yourself online with some Google searches. For instance, did you know that Marvin Bush who is the president's brother was head of security for the Towers for 4 years up to 2000? Did you know that WTC7 which was a 47 story building not hit by a plane also collapsed that day in under 10 seconds, and did you know that that building housed the FBI and CIA? Did you know that hundreds of eyewitnesses heard the explosions that were the demolitions to bring down the buildings? Did you know that prior to 9/11 when any commercial or private airplane strayed from its flight plan Military Interceptor aircraft were automatically scrambled by NORAD, and that 90 to 100 sorties of this type happened every year. But not on 9/11- 4 hijacked planes flew around some of the most controlled airspace in the world for over 2 hours and not one fighter was scrambled. Norm Minetta testified that Dick Cheney gave a direct order not to launch fighters to intercept the aircraft headed to the Pentagon when it was 50 miles out. Did you know that a BBC reporter with the WTC Building 7 in the camera shot behind her reported that the building collapsed 30 minutes before it actually did. Did you know that you can find writings by Rumsfeld and Cheney from from 1997 thru 1999 as part of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) outlining the scenario for a "9/11" type attack...Believe me I can keep going till my fingers wear out on this keyboard and you completely turn lets move on to why I bothered to contact you in the first place...

One more aside, there is no debate on the 935 lies that the Bush Administration told to the congress and american people to get support to attack Afghanastan and Iraq...many senators and congressman have spoken on the floor and outlined all this...there were no WMD, and there was no Al Queda fact, the formation of Al Queda was CIA organized, funded, and is their tool to get people like you to "buy in," to the "war on terror." The sad truth is that this war is about oil, and power, and global domination - a "New World Order," -there words, not mine. There is also no denying where we are headed as a nation. The government of the U. S. now directs its military and operatives to abduct and torture foreign nationals. As a nation, we have repeatedly violated the Geneva Convention and International Law and Treaties. We have abandoned the prinicple of Habeas Corpus- no society can call themselves democratic or free without this principle as a mandate for all. (I will stop that train of thought and will instead attach my recent letter to Senator Durbin, majority whip of the U.S. Senate).

Anyway, what I really wanted to let you know is this: You are right. The theory points to the "despicable" and I know it is hard to comprehend and face what the reality is, but that doesn't make it not true. As George Orwell said, "To see what is in front of one's nose requires a constant struggle." I can see your need to lash out at Mr Barrett, because it is kind of like being told there is undeniable truth that your loved one has committed murder or some other heinous crime. I encourage you however, not to attack the messenger.

It may interest you to know that by most independent polling that only 1/3 of the U.S. population believe the government's account of what happened on 9/11. More striking is that nearly 1/3 of the population are convinced that many in the executive branch and administration were either directly responsible in some fashion or complicit outright in the attacks. Some of these are congressmen who have wrote Op Eds (e.g. those who served on the 9/11 commission) and one prominent member of the commission resigned because he realized the Administration was obstructing justice.

I have some suggested websites for you to visit if you want to look the terrible and despicable truth in the face: (Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth) (lists of prominent and distinguished citizens from the government, military and all walks of life who question the government's version of 911) (scroll down and watch the video of the BBC reporter...

When you have time (it is 90 minutes long) watch this video (made by a conservative Republican like me): (looks "hoakie' at first with TV changing channels but within about thirty seconds the documentary maker does the intro:

I would also recommend an alternative news source: to see how the world views us and what the mainstream media in this country isn't telling you.

I love this country and the principles it was founded on. I hope the best for it, but now I fear the worst. Only if, the overwhelming majority of americans are exposed to what is really going on and rise up to demand accountability will she be saved.

Warmest regards (scroll down to see my letter to Senator Durbin),

Cameron O'Connor
419 York St
Gulf Breeze, FL 32561

The Honorable Richard Durbin
United States Senate
309 Hart Senate Bldg.
Washington , DC 20510
(202) 224-2152 – ph
(202) 228-0400 – fx
January 29, 2008
Dear Senator Durbin,

I am contacting you in your official capacity as the Majority Whip of the U.S. Senate.

I am a military veteran and served over 10 years, half the time in Special Operations, and served as both enlisted and an officer prior to being honorably discharged. I have a B.S. with Honors from the University of Oklahoma . I currently hold an upper middle income job and faithfully pay my taxes and I am a law abiding citizen. (I mention these accomplishments because I want you to have some degree of comfort that I am not some "crackpot.")

Let me preface my remarks with a couple of quotes that appear to me to be timely:

"Naturally the common people don't want war, but after all, it is the leaders of a country that determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag people along whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. This is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of Patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in every country."
-- Hermann Goering, Hitler's Reich-Marshall at the Nuremberg trials after WWII

"They that can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."- quote attributed to Benjamin Franklin

"Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master." - George Washington

Now let me try to put my reason for contacting you as succinctly as possible, which I fear may be difficult.

I fear for Americans and the democracy that was created to be the United States of America .

We "average" Americans find ourselves in the same predicament as the "average" German in pre-WWII Germany . Hitler and the Nazis carried out a false flag operation and burned the Reichstag to the ground and then lied to their citizenry saying that they were under attack. This led to the disbandment of their parliament. This led to unjust
Page 2 of 3

invasions of other countries. This led to a fascist police state, and unspeakable war crimes. This led to a severe toll on the world in the form of mass death and destruction.

There is overwhelming evidence that 9/11 was a false flag operation. (If you just did a Google search "9/11 truth" you would find a number of websites which give overwhelming scientific and concrete evidence to this fact.

There is documentary evidence that this was preplanned by the current Neo-Con "think tank," prior to taking office. You can review papers by Cheney and Rumsfeld that were put out prior to 2001 thru the PNAC and CFR organizations.

What cannot be disputed is that the current Administration and Executive Branch have lied to the Congress and the American people. They have falsified Intel as a pre-text to unjustly invade other sovereign nations for oil, power, and ultimately global domination.

By all accounts from independent sources (e.g. the British Medical Journal- The Lancet) over 1 million Iraqi civilians have been killed, and over 2 million more have fled the country. Thousands of American Servicemen have lost their lives in an unjust and unlawful war.

The Bush Administration has caused military servicemen and government contract employees to commit War Crimes. They have illegally abducted foreign civilians and tortured them, thus violating International Law, Treaties, and the Geneva Convention. They have thwarted a basic right of “Habeas Corpus” which is an unalterable characteristic of any government who wants to claim itself as a democracy and free society.

They have illegally spied on Americans thru warrantless wiretaps and surveillance, thus committing a felony offense according to U.S. Federal Law, as well as violating the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution.

They currently are positioning themselves to do another false flag operation for justification for the invasion of Iran . There is also good Intel that they are planning events to have an excuse to declare "Martial Law," and do away with any form of constitutional government altogether. They have written directives and signing papers as a preface to this effect.

They have usurped the checks and balances of the Constitution and snubbed their nose at the U.S. Congress.

If someone does not rise up and stop this Administration right now then when all is said and done what this government will have accomplished will make Hitler and the Nazis look like "Cub Scouts."

Page 3 of 3

My question is 'when is enough, enough?" Will all the people who serve in a capacity in the Legislative Branch who swore an oath to protect us from this...will they all turn a "blind eye?" Is there no one left on Capitol Hill who has the power, caucus, spirit, and determination of our founding fathers to stand up against this tyranny and prevent the collapse of our republic? If not, then shame on you all for you will have been complicit in the demise of this great country.

Bring these "domestic enemies" to full account for their terrible "High Crimes and Misdemeanors."

Now is the time and there can be no higher calling for a U.S. Senator, or any greater accomplishment in his term of service to this country.


Cameron O'Connor
419 York St
Gulf Breeze , FL 32561