Air America brings in Richard Ben-Veniste to push back against 9/11 Truth

Some time ago I signed up for Air America (I can't remember why now) and I receive their email spam called THE WIRE which I generally glance at briefly before putting in my hacks/shills folder.

This is what was at the top of the email for today, Thursday, June 11th:

Richard Ben-Veniste Addresses The 9-11 Truth Movement (VIDEO)

He was part of the commission charged with finding out the truth about 9-11. So what does Richard Ben-Veniste think about accusations that 9-11 was an inside job? Also, what's his take on Dick Cheney's latest media blitz?

(I hope I get the embed right!)

Given all the media attention of the last month we are clearly witnessing an across-the-board effort by the msm and the PTB to push back against the increasing penetration of 9/11 truth into the American political and cultural psyche.

We are being taken very seriously and our adversaries are struggling to find ways to counter 9/11 truth.

It's time to take it to the next level, brothers and sisters, let's get busier!

The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.

A little behind the times isn't he???

In this interview, Richard Ben-Veniste makes reference to Popular Mechanics which, in his mind, has "debunked" all the outrageous claims of the 9/11 conspirators. The Popular Mechanics website still states this regarding the collapse of the towers,

"Unable to absorb the massive energy, that floor would fail, transmitting the forces to the floor below, allowing the collapse to progress downward through the building in a chain reaction. Engineers call the process "pancaking," and it does not require an explosion to begin..."

However, NIST has disavowed the pancake collapse hypothesis since at least 2006,

"NIST’s findings do not support the “pancake theory” of collapse, which is premised on a progressive failure of the floor systems in the WTC towers...Thus, the floors did not fail progressively to cause a pancaking phenomenon."
NIST: Answers to Frequently Asked Questions (August 30, 2006)

The official 9/11 story thrives off ignorance.

He does a little better towards the end of the interview when he discusses the lies that got us into Iraq and the fact that the 9/11 Commission found no evidence between Iraq and 9/11. So he can accept the fact that the Administration lied us into a war that caused the deaths of thousands of Americans and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis. But for some reason he can't accept that the Bush/Cheney Administration lied about 9/11 on a grand scale.

Rush Limbaugh jumps on the 9/11 truth smear bus with both insane

feet. Here's what he said on his Thursday show, talking about James von Brunn:

"Who did he hate? He hated both Bushes. He hated neo-cons. He hated John McCain. He hated Republicans. He hated Jews, as well. He believed in an inside job conspiracy of 9/11.

"This guy is a leftist, if anything. This guy's belief's, this guy's hate, stems from influence that you find on the left, not on the right."

I find this particularly insane because for the past 2+ years I've been arguing the case for 9/11 truth at Alternet where the resident denialists try to frame 9/11 truth as a right-wing conspiracy issue.

During my time in the 9/11 truth movement, I have worked with people from across the political spectrum, from all different ethnicities and who practice a variety of religions (and no religion). Generally speaking, 9/11 truth is the most non-partisan truly democratic issue I have ever been involved with or even heard of.

The best way to counter this hateful insanity is with loving rationality and compassion.

We need to get as many people, young, old and every size, shape and color out into the public eye, standing peaceful and proud with our signs and banners.

We need to show the media and our country who the real patriots are.

I think it's time we take the gloves off and hold a press conference in NYC in support of the NYC CAN, get some big names like Daniel Sunjata, Jesse Ventura, William Rodriguez, Ed Asner, the Jersey Girls, Sheri Belafonte, Willie Nelson and whoever else we can get to come and call this nonsense the BS that it is.

We need to look the media in the eye, smile and tell them just who we are and what we are about.

Dagnabbit, this ticks me off!

We need to work harder AND smarter, brothers and sisters, the clock is running!

The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.

Leftright, it is so


it is so ridiculous. On left leaning websites such as Kos, or Crooks & Liars, 9/11 Truth is viewed as right-wing conspiracy. On the other side, LGF, and FR, as well as by their heros Limpdick and Scammity, it is portrayed as a left-wing conspiracy.

anything that doesn't agree with their world-view they cast as being on the side of the "enemy."

so childish, such an unsophisticated and infantile response.


"Dagnabbit, this ticks me off!"

OK, then send Gage $100 or find 3 more engineers for ae911t. And then send another $100 to NYC CAN. Buy a box of DRG books and donate them to your local libraries. BUT DON'T GET PISSED. That is the end result they are looking for from this recent Psy-Op they are playing.

I know full well that this issue is hot under everyone's collar. So I feel a need to remind everyone that OUR EFFORTS have brought the 9/11 issue to a critical mass in many respects. Be grateful.

What's happening right now is slander, and a mature person walks away from slander with confidence and dignity and without needing to strike back. Since sports metaphors seem to be popular here, I'll say "the best defense is a good offense." Our best offense has been our commitment to facts and truth. Let's just stay with the game plan, OK? It's the bottom of the fifth and we just went ahead, even though I'm not quite sure who forced the go-ahead run. I'm a long-time Red Sox fan. In the old days when we played the Yankees and they went ahead in a game, all of a sudden you would hear, "Yankees Suck, Yankees Suck" from the stands. Well, in this analogy, we are the Yankees and Beck, Ben-Veniste et. al. are nervous Red Sox fans (thank god this is only an analogy).

We can get P OFFED with the NP at the WTC though, as we hear..

it once again!

We see time and time again why Morgan Reynolds, Jim Fetzer, John Lear et al. keep pushing the No Planes at the weaken our arguments and distract from the hard evidence of CD!

Please write to Rob Balsamo and ask him to clarify what is meant by his statement "that he leans towards planes" at the WTC and please ask him to make a statement that "Pilots for 9/11 Truth" accept that PLANES hit the WTC!

We must get this sorted out because I can hear the question being asked of one of us in an interview; "why is it the your affiliated group Pilots for 9/11 Truth are unsure if planes hit the WTC?" and "do you think they are insane?"!

Please tell me I am paranoid...

Regards John

9/11 24/7 UNTIL JUSTICE!!

Petrochemical fire do not have significant effects on steel

Watch this refinery fire. The fire has clearly engulf structural steel pipes.

Here's a video of the same refinery fire the next day.

The fire burn until the next day. Do you see any steel pipes that have melted away? Nope. On fire a whole day, and there's only burnt paint.

If structural steel could be possibly be affected by a petrochemical fire, buildings would not be allowed to be built from structural steel.

How much of...

This is covered by Popular Mechanics?


Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? Do we deserve to know how and why 9/11 happened?

>>Richard Ben-Veniste makes

>>Richard Ben-Veniste makes reference to Popular Mechanics which, in his mind, has "debunked" all the outrageous claims of the 9/11 conspirators.

That's why "Air America" is hosting him.

They were also pushing PentaCon not long ago.

"Richard Greene's show "Clout" on Air America will begin at 9:00pm EST on Thursday the 15th. It will feature CIT and PfT on the truth movement side" . . .

These both work the same way -- to undermine legitimate investigation.

Anyway, Ben-Veniste is on his book tour. Maybe someone should show up to challenge him on his claims

Thursday, June 18, 2009 7:00 p.m.
RICHARD BEN VENISTE at Books Inc. in Opera Plaza
Location: Books Inc. in Opera Plaza, 601 Van Ness,
San Francisco, CA 94102
Phone: 415-776-1111
Description: RICHARD BEN VENISTE will read from his insightful memoir, The Emperor's New Clothes, a dramatic acco...

I just made this comment in another thread...

...and I'll do it again here.

I've studied CIT and PfT extensively, including the counterarguments put forth by Arabesque and one or two others. My conclusion after having seen all sides is that the work of CIT/PfT has NOT been debunked and still stands.

I'm not posting this to derail and start a debate. But I feel the need to take a very clear stand. CIT and PfT are NOT deliberate disinfo like Fetzer, Wood, and Reynolds.


The entire LLoyde England - lampost through the windshield without a scratch on the hood story - is so unlikely - as to rival WTC7 coming down by fire and the magic passport.

EVERYTHING about the official story is COMPLETELY NUTS !!!! (and yet - apparently "sane" people believe it).

"Tis a tale, told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing" W. Shakespeare

(I still have faith in the Inherent Wisdom and Love of the Universe - in spite of it all)

Ben-Veniste Behavior

Ben Veniste's arrogance is such that the doesn't care if his arguments make any sense about 9/11. He has total disdain for the public and is willing to string together things that don't carry any logic. Remember, he heard Rodriguez behind closed doors, so it's well to ask him, "Why did you make William Rodriguez testify behind closed doors? He claims there were explosions in the sub-basements before the planes hit - did you hear that in his 9/11 commish testimony? - and so on......"

Richard Ben-Veniste

Richard Ben-Veniste represents Boeing and United Airlines. [CBS News, 3/5/2003] Ben-Veniste also has other curious connections, according to a 2001 book on CIA ties to drug running written by Daniel Hopsicker, which has an entire chapter called “Who is Richard Ben-Veniste?” Lawyer Ben-Veniste, Hopsicker says, “has made a career of defending political crooks, specializing in cases that involve drugs and politics.” Ben-Veniste has been referred to in print as a “Mob lawyer,” and was a long-time lawyer for Barry Seal, one of the most famous drug dealers in US history who also is alleged to have had CIA connections. [Hopsicker, 2001, pp. 325-30]

However, on October 3, 2006, a transcript of Tenet’s private testimony to the 9/11 Commission is leaked to reporters and clearly shows that Tenet did warn Rice of an imminent al-Qaeda threat on July 10, 2001. Ben-Veniste, who attended the meeting along with Zelikow and other staff members, now confirms the meeting did take place and claims to recall details of it, even though he, Zelikow, and other 9/11 Commissioners had denied the existence of the meeting as recently as the day before.

The ultimate shill

I don't use the word "shill" very often, it's a hard one to prove. But if there is a person who exemplifies the definition, IMO it's Ben Veniste. But what I find even more amazing is the very recent flurry of trying to debunk 9/11 conspiracists, Ben-Veniste now included. Damn, we must be gaining some important turf to bring out "credible" debunkers. I'm feeling mighty proud right now of the Truth Movement's tenacity for the last eight years.

Bring it on.

Terms of debate

Agreed!--but could I please urge that we not employ terms like 'conspiracists' unless we put quotation marks around them? Otherwise, we effectively let THEM define the terms of debate. It's easy to forget this point sometimes in the midst of debate, but is important to remember at all times even so--that when it comes to 9/11, we're ALL 'conspiracists'. Those who accept the conspiracy theory peddled by the government and media should understand that this term fully applies to them as well as those who have quite a different take on those events.

I know, you may well have had tongue in cheek when you typed '9/11 conspiracists,' but quotation marks would be much appreciated all the same.

A transcription

I have to assume that you are aware, as I am, as does everybody that runs in these circles, of the 9/11 Truth movement.

I am aware of many people who have written, and they're on the lecture circuit, who say that the planes did not strike the buildings, these were not commercial airliners, these were missiles, ...this was a demolition job...

All I can say is.. I've not seen any credible support for that. I think people who have an intention to look objectively at the truth, and we did not dane to go into those facts as a commission, but there are websites.... (and I can get the to you), most notably from Popular Mechanics, which did a number of issues on the myths of 9/11.... so the notion that airplane fuel cannot melt steel.... OK well that's true... that kind of a fire doesn't melt steel. But it bends it, it weakens it. And so the support that was necessary to hold up the World Trade Center wasn't there. It was degraded and the building collapsed.

Anybody suggesting that.... who was there to plant these charges? Was it Al Qaeda? Or this blood libel it was Cheney and Bush. Now, I do not believe it, I cannot believe it, I will not believe it!


How did CNN and BBC have foreknowledge of the WTC7 collapse, yet six years later, the government explains it SO poorly?

Not only that, but

Not only that, but Ben-Veniste draws attention to some of the more "fringe" theories about 9-11 in order to poison the well of other legitimate inquiry.

The reason he hasn't seen any credible support is because the Commission was herded into the foregone political conclusion, and any evidence that didn't agree with this assumption was excluded.

And if he is basing his debunking credentials on Popular Mechanics? well that has been roundly debunked by others and even the NIST debunks Popular Mechanics. Ben-Veniste comments are clearly damage control, and they are clearly a mix of willful ignorance and as a shill reinforcing the official story.

I've not seen any credible support for that.

That's lawsuit speaking.

If the official story is debunked, he still can insist he never saw anything. As some other members of the comission reiterated that line, it could be no accident.

Like Hamilton:

Well, of course, we did deal with it. The charge that dynamite, or whatever, brought down the World Trade Towers, we of course looked at very carefully - we find no evidence of that.
Lee Hamilton, CBS 2006

"the Commission had found zero evidence that our government planned that attack."
Lee Hamilton, Washington Journal, C-SPAN, 2005

The interviewer is Marc Maron.

He is actually a funny comic, and aside from being blind to 911 Truth he is a witty guy with what appears to be a good heart.

On his website are some quotes that he is apparently proud enough of to put them at the top of the front page.

Here are a couple that caught my eye which I believe apropos:

"In the American South there is an ignorance that runs so deep it actually has integrity."

I think there is a willful ignorance about 911 that runs so deep it actually has integrity. But this willful ignorance is in the mainstream media including Air America. (which is not in the American south, by the way)

The other Marc Maron quote which stuck out to me was this one:

"The great philosophical question once was - What is the meaning of life? Now I think the great philosophical question is -
How am I being used today and am I ok with that?"

Good question Marc.


I apologize for the inadvertent double post.

How about this analogy

Imagine you were at a baseball game between two teams. Lets call one team the Truthers and the other team the Defenders. The guy commenting on the game from the broadcast booth is obviously a big Defender fan and his commentary is clearly one sided and very pro-Defender while at the same time he continually denigrates the players on the Truther side and makes a point of telling the spectators that the Truthers are playing out of their league and are no match for their opponents on the well-honed Defender team..

However, as the game wears on the spectators in the stand notice that while the Truthers' score is mounting up, the Defenders seem to have a problem with faulty equipment. Their bats break as they hit at the ball, they trip over their shoelaces when running between bases, the batters' helmets are way to big and loose and keep falling over their eyes as they go to hit the ball leading to more strikeouts.. Pretty soon it becomes very obvious to the spectators at the game that the game announcer is full of beans and the Defenders are losing the game, partly at least, because they didn't come to the ball park with the proper equipment with which to play the game in the first place.

I think that's the situation we are in today where the mainstream media and gatekeepers in the alternate media (for the most part) play the role of the announcer in the broadcast booth, playing up the credentials and knowledge of the usual shills and toadies that they trot out to defend the OCT while denigrating and mocking the crazy conspiracy theorists who dare question the received 9/11 wisdom that has been handed down from on high to us mortals. However, like in my baseball analogy, the OCT defenders are forced to play this game with faulty equipment, i.e. the bogus explanations, tall stories and conflicting accounts that have been put forward by official sources as to what occurred on 9/11. This is what the spokespersons for the OCT now have to defend and promote. Those spectators with a modicum of intelligence and not blinded by some super-patriotic, mind stupor and who have a chance to observe or hear the evidence put forth by the 9/11 Truth movement, like the spectators at the ball game, will soon spot which side in this game is playing with the faulty and defective equipment.

I am betting when it all comes out in the wash, the more publicity the 9/11 Truth movement gets, even if it is apparently negative publicity from the debunkers and gatekeepers, the more it will grow as more minds are awakened to the glaring deficiencies in the OCT. The OCT supporters are between a rock and a hard place on this. If they ignore us, we just continue plugging away and it becomes more and more evident that they aren't countering the truth movement and the presumption will be because they know they can't. If they take us on in a head to head clash, more people than ever will hear about the 9/11 Truth movement and wonder what the fuss is all about and come to see the deficiencies in the arguments of the OCT supporters.

I am sure there will be those who, thanks to this new media supplied publicity, will be thinking along the lines, "Hmm, I did wonder a bit about the way those towers came straight down on 9/11, and all that debris blowing off from the buildings sure did look at first like an explosion. Something about it just didn't seem quite right. That's interesting. I never knew before that there is actually an organization of almost 1000 architects and engineers who are researching this issue and think it was a massive controlled demolition job. Well they're probably not right about that. I mean Joe Slickhair, the anchor at WLIE News, assures his viewers that anyone who questions the government explanation and the 9/11 Commission report has to be a few cards short of a full deck. But, you know what, I think I'll just checkout their web site for the hell of it anyway."

So, in other words, we should all be saying, "Bring it on! Let's play ball!"

Excellent analogy. They are

Excellent analogy.

They are between a rock and a hard place. During the major movement explosion around the 5th anniversary, they decided to stop ignoring us and take us on in the form of PM, SLC and JREF. For awhile, these pseudo-debunking resources did impress through appearance.

For example: to the uninitiated, JREF might look impressive. Someone who hasn't truly studied the movement's claims might stumble onto JREF and think "ah, a forum of self-described critical thinkers. A place where baseless speculation is ignored and all claims and sources are checked. Architects and scientists post here, and there seems to be this unanimous agreement that the truth movement's claims hold no water, so they must be right."

However, for those willing to do more than just skim or speed read either side of the argument, it becomes so painfully obvious how transparent JREF is. Their 15 minutes came and went in 2006. Same with SLC.

At first, Popular Mechanics' book received positive reviews and ratings on Amazon. Because, to the truly uninitiated, and to those who ONLY looked at PM's book for their entire truth research, the book did *look* impressive.

But, as with the 9/11 Commission Report, as time went on, the customer reviews on Amazon became increasingly negative, one-star reviews. With both the 911CR and PM, the negative reviews especially started piling on after DRG had released "Omissions and Distortions" and "Debunking 911 Debunking," respectively.

It all goes to show how when free and open inquiry are not verboten, and the "cold light of reason" is cast upon them, the defenders of the OCT have nothing but faulty bats.

I agree 100%.

I like your illustration using baseball. Our big bat is that we have the truth on our side, and we have great minds like yours and many others' who see things clearly and communicate what they see effectively.

Thanks stewball.

Maybe more like this

I like the analogy--and love the 'Joe Slickhair anchor at WLIE News'!--but in this case, it's more like the Truthers have their players on the field, ready to play ball, while the Defenders think they can win without ever actually taking the field--staying in the dugout, going up to the broadcaster's booth, heck, maybe even just hanging out in the parking lot outside the stadium. In their version of baseball, knowing they have these 'play-by-play announcers' all on their side, they think they can win just by convincing the listening audience just how bad the Truthers are, so that there's no need to play an actual game. And knowing that if they were to actually play, then their defective abilities and equipment would be exposed for all to see.

Imagine if competitive sports were played in this way, and you have a stark picture of the state of the news media in this 'free' society.

The challenge we face is that we need to score a few runs

in the first inning or the audience buys the announcers take on the game and switches to basketball.

(Or at least get a hit or two in the first inning to keep them watching)

Our solution is to get out on the field as often as possible and keep playing, so even if they only catch an inning here and and inning there, they will begin to realize that the other team doesn't really have any game at all (and the announcers are paid off).

So get out there and bunt (put options), hit solid singles (NORAD stand down) or hit a lead off home run (WTC 7), just keep playing...

[Sorry, I love analogies]


The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.

Where are the 9/11 Commission report records?

Has Ben-Veniste explained why NARA won't release key records (i.e. MFR's with intel agents involved in al-Hazmi/al-Mihdhdar withholding)? Has he explained why the 9/11 Commission instructed NARA to keep all transferred records classified until 1/09? Is this the conduct of a honest commission?

These guys keep writing books claiming whatever they want, taking advantage of the fact that the public remains ignorant due to abuse of national security classification procedures.