Update: Cal State "Daily Forty-Niner" publishes rebuttal to "idiocy" hit-piece.

UPDATE - 7.9.2009 - Mr. Edmund's reply is now posted online, and there is a comments area;

http://www.daily49er.com/opinion/new-9-11-investigation-needed-to-prove-science-doesn-t-lie-1.1772818

Original entry 2009-07-03:
Long Beach resident Matt Edmund has had his rebuttal published in the print edition of the Daily Forty-Niner -- in response to last week's hit-piece. The online version of the article should be up next week. In the meantime, you can download or view the PDF here.

Excellent

Nice job Matt.

Good job...


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?

Nice article Matt. Kudos to

Nice article Matt. Kudos to the Daily Forty-Niner... for publishing this rebuttal; they could have ignored Matt's response, in the fashion of so many mainstream media publications which go "the way of the weasel" and follow the standard, cowardly taboo.

Author replies???

I sighned up for e-mails from that website...each time someone posted. I received one this evening that claims to be the author, though it sounds suspicious, and there are least two incidents of forgery in the entire thread. The e-mail reads:

GerryWachovsky wrote:

Wow, this has gotten much more replies than I ever thought it would. Here are a few responses/comments:

I particularly enjoyed the comments made by "Frank". Your level of intelligence is just so much higher than anyone's, I can't believe that you're not the leader of the free world...I mean you are that fucking smart!

Gary - You debated these 9/11 truthers perfectly over and over but they will clearly never stop with their illogical arguments. And how dare they say that us believing in science and what REALLY happened (i.e., pissed off Muslims hijacking planes and flying said planes into buildings) is a sleight to the victims of 9/11. Just another logically fallacious argument by them. Yeah, WE'RE the bad ones here.

A lot of you people don't seem to understand that I have limited space in my articles and simply cannot address every single conspiracy theory in one article. So instead, I do what any good journalist would do - I broadcast to people, leaving out the "exceptions to the rule" because they are irrelevant. In other words, a conspiracy theory is a conspiracy theory, and they are all addressed as one in my article.

In closing, I'd like to quote the great LIBERAL comic Bill Maher on 9/11 truthers: "And while we're on the subject, New Rule: Crazy people who still think the government brought down the Twin Towers in a controlled explosion have to stop pretending that I'm the one who's being naïve. How big a lunatic do you have to be to watch two giant airliners packed with jet fuel slam into buildings on live TV, igniting a massive inferno that burned for two hours, and then think, 'well, if you believe that was the cause...' Stop asking me to raise this ridiculous topic on the show and start asking your doctor if Paxil is right for you."

Link to comment: http://www.daily49er.com/opinion/some-conspiracy-theorists-sept-11-skept...

Copied from link above ~ Thursday, July 2nd, 2009

New 9-11 investigation needed to prove science does not lie
~ by Matt Edmund

Imagine a crime is committed and the lead investigator
names an individual as being responsible for
the crime without having any hard evidence. Would
the case hold up in a court of law? Anyone with any
common sense knows that in order to prosecute
someone for a crime, you
must have some hard evidence
against the defendant.

Would you believe me if
I said the FBI admits they
have no hard evidence connecting Osama bin
Laden to the attacks of Sept. 11? Not one mention
of Sept. 11 can be found on bin Laden’s
most wanted poster.

This is only one piece of a massive puzzle that
has a worldwide community searching for answers
and researching the facts. The 9/11 Truth
Movement is comprised of people from all walks
of life with a common goal — a new independent
investigation into the events of Sept. 11.

Many involved in the Truth Movement are family
members of those who died on that fateful day.
Bob McIlvaine lost his son Bobby on Sept. 11
and is searching for answers.

“[A]nd this is the legacy of my son. If I were to
have died in those towers, he’d be doing the same
thing. He wants to know the truth, I want to know
the truth,” said an emotional Mcllvaine at the 9/11
Commission hearings in New York City in 2004.

When looking at all the evidence, nothing
produces a “smoking gun” more than the collapse
of both World Trade Center towers and
World Trade Center Building 7.

All three buildings fell symmetrically at near freefall
speed into the path of most resistance. The National
Institute for Standards and Technology investigated
the collapse of both towers for the 9/11
Commission. They claimed that the collapse of both
towers were due to the impact damage of the aircraft
and the fires that weakened the steel columns,
which in turn caused the floors to sag and collapse
inward — bringing the upper floors down.

NIST can’t explain what
caused the “global collapse” of
both towers. Why didn’t the
unaffected and undamaged
floors below slow down or stop
the collapse? How can 400,000 yards of concrete
be pulverized into dust due to a gravitational collapse?
NIST has no answers for these questions.

Steven Jones, a former BYU physics professor,
has found active thermitic material in WTC dust
samples. Thermite is an incendiary that can cut
through steel like a hot knife through butter.

WTC 7, a 47-story building collapsed at freefall
acceleration into its own footprint at 5:20
p.m. This structure was not hit by a plane and,
according to NIST, collapsed primarily due to fire
— a first in the history of steel-framed buildings.
Only small pockets of fire in isolated areas of the
building occurred, somehow allowing it to collapse
symmetrically. Oddly enough, its collapse
was omitted from the 9/11 Commission Report.

In addition, BBC News reported that WTC 7
collapsed 20 minutes before it actually did.

Considering the implications the events of
Sept. 11 had on the world around us, these questions
are important and need to be answered.
Those who ask questions should not be considered
“nut jobs,” but rather concerned citizens
looking for answers and demanding accountability.

It’s the least we can do for the victims who
were murdered that day. Science doesn’t lie.

Matt Edmund is a Long Beach resident.

Consise

Kudos to you Matt, and kudos to the Forty-Niner for publishing. At least there is a rational rebuttal to the retardation that preceded it.

The love that you withhold is the pain that you carry

Good job

Your article is clear, succinct and well argued. Our friend's piece was an illogical rant. For example, he criticizes Cotillard's support for controlled demolition on the grounds that she does not have the expertise to make a judgment, but then how do people have the expertise to support the official version, which also involves an engineering problem?