Joel S. Hirschhorn, Ph.D.: "9/11 Mind Swell"
(Dr. Joel S. Hirschhorn is a former Senior Staff Member of the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment. He is on record calling for a new investigation of 9/11. - simuvac)
by Joel S. Hirschhorn / August 11th, 2009
As we approach the eighth anniversary of 9/11 consider this paradox. In the post 9-11 years the scientific evidence for disbelieving the official government story has mounted incredibly. And the number of highly respected and credentialed professionals challenging the official story has similarly expanded. Yet, to the considerable disappointment of the international 9/11 truth movement, the objective fact is that there are no widespread, loud demands for a new government-backed 9/11 investigation. The 9/11 truth movement is the epitome of a marginalized movement, one that never goes away despite not achieving truly meaningful results, which in this case means replacing official lies with official truth. What has gone wrong?
Akin to the definition of insanity, the hallmark of entrenched but marginalized movements is that they continue to pursue exactly the same strategy and tactics that have failed to produce solid results. They indulge themselves with self-delusion, defensive thinking and acting as if the world at large must surely and finally wake up, see the light and embrace the Truth. Years and, potentially, decades go by, but this quixotic status quo remains embedded, as if set in intellectual concrete. There is no brain tumor to blame. Nor any mass hypnosis of true believers to prove. There is just monumental disinterest among the dominant culture, political establishment and the broad public that is far more engaged with other issues, problems and movements.
The 9/11 truth movement, at best, gets meager public attention when it is derided and insulted, used as an example of persistent conspiratorial insanity.
Make no mistake; I concluded a few years back, after using my professional engineering and materials science background to study the evidence, that the official government story is a lie. As a former full professor of engineering, I firmly believe that elements of the US government were involved with contributing to (not just allowing) the 9/11 tragedy, but that does not necessarily eliminate the role of those terrorists publicly blamed for the events. Science, logic, evidence and critical thinking told me this.
Who should we blame for the failure of the 9/11 truth movement to fix the historical record and, better yet, identify those in the government who turned 9/11 into an excuse for going to war, getting them indicted, prosecuted, and punished for their murderous acts?
It is too easy to blame the mainstream media and political establishment for refusing to demand and pursue a truly comprehensive and credible independent scientific and engineering investigation. President Obama with his tenacious belief in looking forward, not backward, exemplifies a national mindset to avoid the painful search for truth and justice that could produce still more public disillusionment with government and feed the belief that American democracy is weak at best, and delusional at worst.
Marginalized movements always face competition for public attention. There are always countless national issues and problems that feed new movements and distract the public. There have been many since 9/11, not the least of which was the last presidential campaign and then the painful economic recession, and now the right wing attacks on health care reform. The 9/11 truth movement illustrates a total failure to compete successfully with other events and movements.
This can be explained in several ways. The 9/11 movement has not been able to articulate enough benefits to the public from disbelieving the official government story and pursuing a new investigation. What might ordinary Americans gain? Would proof-positive of government involvement make them feel better, more secure, and more patriotic? Apparently not. In fact, just the opposite. By its very nature, the 9/11 issue threatens many things by discovering the truth: still less confidence in the US political system, government and public officials. Still more reason to ponder the incredible loss of life and national wealth in pursuing the Iraq war. In other words, revealing 9/11 truth offers the specter of a huge national bummer. Conversely, it would show the world that American democracy has integrity.
The second explanation for failure is that the truth movement itself is greatly to blame. It has been filled with nerdish, ego-centric and self-serving activists (often most interested in pushing their pet theory) unable to pursue strategies designed to face and overcome ugly, challenging realities. The truth movement became a cottage industry providing income and meaning for many individuals and groups feeding the committed with endless websites, public talks, videos, books and paraphernalia. They habitually preach to the choir. Applause substitutes for solid results. In particular, it embraces the simplistic (and obviously ineffective) belief that by revealing technical, scientific and engineering facts and evidence the public and political establishment would be compelled to see the light. Darkness has prevailed.
Proof of this are the views expressed days ago on the truth movement by Ben Cohen on the Huffington Post: “I have done some research on the topic, but stopped fairly quickly into when it dawned on me that: 1. Any alternative to the official account of what happened is so absurd it simply cannot be true. 2. No reputable scientific journal has ever taken any of the ’science’ of the conspiracy seriously. 3. The evidence supporting the official story is overwhelming, whereas the 9/11 Truthers have yet to produce a shred of concrete evidence that members of the U.S. government planned the attacks in New York and Washington.” Similarly, in the London Times James Bone recently said a “gruesome assortment of conspiracy theorists insists that the attacks on the US of September 11, 2001 were an inside job. It is easy to mock this deluded gang of ageing hippies, anarchists and anti-Semites.” Truthers continue to face a very steep uphill battle.
A common lie about the truth movement is that there have been no credible scientific articles in peer reviewed journals supporting it. But those opposing the truth movement will and do find ways to attack whatever scientific evidence is produced and published. It takes more than good science and facts for the movement to succeed.
Besides the movement having too many genuine crackpots (possibly trying to subvert it), a larger problem is what has been missing from it: effective political strategies. Besides pushing scientific results and more credible supporters, it did nothing successful to make a new 9/11 investigation a visible issue in the last presidential campaign. It did nothing effective to put pressure on a new, Democrat controlled congress to consider legislation providing the authorization and funding for a new, credible investigation. It seems that people who want to blame the government are often unable to also see the political path forward that requires the government to fund a new investigation.
To its credit, Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth does have a petition aimed at Congress, demanding a new investigation, but has fewer than 5,000 signers. The petition effort in New York City to get a new investigation is commendable, with just under 75,000 signers, but national action is needed. Pragmatically, both efforts are unimpressive compared to other campaigns seeking political action. To get both media attention and political support the movement needs a hundred times more documented supporters, willing to do a lot more than sign a petition.
The tenth anniversary of 9/11 will come fast. The opportunity is making 9/11 an issue in the 2012 presidential campaign. The least delusional and defensive in the truth movement should think deeply and seriously on what needs to change to accomplish the prime goal: having an official investigation that compels most people and history to accept the truth, no matter how painful it is, including the possibility that it finds no compelling evidence for government involvement.
Joel S. Hirschhorn has a new book, Delusional Democracy: Fixing the Republic Without Overthrowing the Government, which supports constitutional conventions and other peaceful ways to restore American democracy. Read other articles by Joel, or visit Joel's website.
- simuvac's blog
- Login to post comments
Dr. Hirschhorn
"Make no mistake; I concluded a few years back, after using my professional engineering and materials science background to study the evidence, that the official government story is a lie. As a former full professor of engineering, I firmly believe that elements of the US government were involved with contributing to (not just allowing) the 9/11 tragedy, but that does not necessarily eliminate the role of those terrorists publicly blamed for the events. Science, logic, evidence and critical thinking told me this."
Sorry but I find this
Sorry but I find this article self-defeating, pessimistic and frankly incorrect. The 9/11 Truth Movement has made GREAT gains over the last few years and is just doing better all the time. And what the hell is a “9/11 mind swell”? This guy can take a hike.
Simply put, it seems that a
Simply put, it seems that a higher level of organization is needed.
Consider, for example, the majority of people from Alan Miller's site, "Patriots Question 9/11". What might result if they could be brought together as a cohesive political unit?.
Well-Written article by Dr. Hirschhorn.
With the articles on NORAD, all you need to know is how to read!
Hirschhorn says, "...it [9/11 Truth Movement] embraces the simplistic (and obviously ineffective) belief that by revealing technical, scientific and engineering facts and evidence the public and political establishment would be compelled to see the light. Darkness has prevailed."
Obviously Hirschhorn hasn't read the five articles on NORAD at www.DNotice.org, where one won't find technical, scientific and engineering facts, just simple sentences such as this little gem from the GAO in 1994:
"NORAD defines air sovereignty as providing surveillance and control of the territorial airspace, which includes:
1. intercepting and destroying uncontrollable air objects;
2. tracking hijacked aircraft;
3. assisting aircraft in distress;
4. escorting Communist civil aircraft; and
5. intercepting suspect aircraft, including counterdrug operations and peacetime military intercepts." -- http://archive.gao.gov/t2pbat3/151250.pdf
or this easy to understand sentence on NORAD's true monitoring capabilities from NORAD itself in 1997:
"Aircraft flying over our air space are monitored seven days a week, 24 hours a day. Much of the identifying process is done by hand." -- http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3731/is_199709/ai_n8766326
The five articles on NORAD at DNotice.org are very easy to understand. All one needs to understand them (and therefore understand that we are being lied to about 9/11 in regards to NORAD) is the capability to know how to read!
Let me also add, if the government weren't truly concerned by the existence of the 9/11 Truth Movement then we wouldn't be seeing debunking documentaries from the History Channel or the BBC. We wouldn't have had the editorial coup that took place at Popular Mechanics (PM) in the fall of 2004 [http://www.rense.com/general63/brutalpurgeofPMstaff.htm], whose new editorial management in the March 2005 issue of PM gave us the infamous and erroneous article attempting to debunk the major claims underlying the 9/11 Truth Movement. We wouldn't have had PM hiring Benjamin Chertoff, the cousin of Department of Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff.
Dean Jackson/Editor-in-Chief DNotice.org
Washington, DC
Looking out-- not in?
How did NORAD get away with telling the American people that their jurisdiction was not to monitor US air space? They were "looking outwards" only and therefore were blind to the domestic hijackings on 9/11...... yeah right. The 1997 NORAD statement counters this. I've heard this bogus claim many times by those who would like to justify the NORAD meltdown: "They were looking out-- not in."
Simultaneously, the NRO, whose job is to use satellites to monitor our skies, was running a war game on 9/11 of a plane crashing into their headquarters, so their building was empty as the attacks began.
And Andrews AFB, whose job is to protect the capital, did not apparently have fighters on alert during an attack on the capital??
Another Quote From NORAD Itself
RL McGee,
here is ANOTHER quote from NORAD in 1997. This quote by NORAD concerns the sub-category of NORAD's air sovereignty mission that monitors foreign aircraft that overfly American territorial airspace:
"The Air Operations Center (AOC) (also known as the Air Defense Operations Center – ADOC) maintains CONSTANT SURVEILLANCE OF NORTH AMERICAN AIRSPACE TO PREVENT OVERFLIGHT [emphasis mine] by hostile aircraft. It TRACKS [emphasis mine] over 2.5 million aircraft annually." --
http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/usspc-fs/cmoctrivia.htm
Dean Jackson/Editor-in-Chief DNotice.org
Washington, DC
Duplicate Comment Deleted
Duplicate Comment Deleted.
10th anniversary
"The opportunity is making 9/11 an issue in the 2012 presidential campaign. "
One great way to put political pressure on Obama is with this great new Obama brochure by the dc911 group at www.dc911truth.org ($25 for 200 brochures, email: dc911brochures@yahoo.com)
"The tenth anniversary of 9/11 will come fast"
Ok the 10th anniversary is 2 years away. If we are going to make this a big issue in 2011 we should start planning now. Just think, if everyone in this movement started planning for this big anniversary and had 2 YEARS to do it, how could we fail? Can we, as a movement, although somewhat disorganized, begin working on this now? Are there enough people still involved who aren't crackpots and/or aren't distracted by economy, health care, swine flu, ...etc?
Is this a sales pitch for his book?
After reading paragraph after paragraph about how the 9/11 Truth Movement is essentially at fault for the lack of an official investigation am I to assume that Joel S. Hirschhorn's book contains the answers?
It has been 45 years since JFK was assassinated. A poll among the American people demonstrates that the majority of Americans do not believe that Oswald acted alone and that a conspiracy was definitely involved in it although the US government and mainstream media still push the "Lone Gunman" Theory. So by applying Hirschhorn's logic, because the majority believe in a conspiracy we all should be able to bring about a new "Warren Commission" or official investigation into the JFK assassination and find out who actually murdered him? Even if it turns out "including the possibility that it finds no compelling evidence for government involvement.".
Gimme A Break!
I believe the true members of the 9/11 Truth Movement continue to try as many ideas as possible an in desperation are some times throwing it all at the wall to see if anything sticks.
This isn't some "Field of Dreams" scenario just saying "Build it and they will come".
What are your ideas for a solution Mr. Hirschhorn?
"A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves" – Edward R. Murrow
Well said Cincy911Truth
"Gimme A Break!
I believe the true members of the 9/11 Truth Movement continue to try as many ideas as possible an in desperation are some times throwing it all at the wall to see if anything sticks.
This isn't some "Field of Dreams" scenario just saying "Build it and they will come".
What are your ideas for a solution Mr. Hirschhorn?"
Ditto. "What solutions has Hirschhorn enacted?"
This article has many good points regarding the situation. However, where are the proposed solutions and the initiation of those solutions by Hirschhorn?
Any 9/11 Truth Activist (one who actually DOES disseminate) knows that we are out-gunned, under financed, and have tremendous odds against us in trying to educate the masses. However, with what little resources we have available, we have the courage and fortitude to make a stand (often at personal expense and sacrifice).
I will be damned if I am just gonna sit in my armchair and "intellectually whine" about the situation. Any dissemination to another is better than no dissemination. Any valid TruthAction is better than no action. Action starts somewhere...it starts with me. Action starts with somebody DOING something to disseminate.
Another point. Look at our stats!!!! The 9/11 Truth Movement has made tremendous strides! We have gained a lot of ground. Two years ago, there was no AE911Truth, no reams of published scientific journals, no Fire fighters for 9/11 Truth, etc etc etc...............
We have accomplished a lot! I am proud to be a part of that.
I'm with Joe and Tom
Hirschhorn is out of line with most of his criticism of the Truth movement. The Kennedy assassination example is well taken.To add to that, Howard Hunt confessed to being part of the plot on video tape and most of the doctors involved have publicly corrected the official record on the autopsy and many Americans still believe the lone assassin theory.
In recent history, an overwhelming majority of Americans are against the war in Iraq, with organizations and politicians up the wazzoo speaking out and we are still at war.
What Hirschhorn glosses over is the fact that the 911 truth movement has had an enormous impact, especially given that the information getting out, whether people want to look at it or not, has been done by a relatively small group of grassroots activists.
Surprisingly, Mr. Hirschhorn does not use his engineering and political background in any measurable way to advance deeper understanding of the details being covered up, except in the case of the "moon beam" legislation he instigated to the chagrin of many of the major players in the movement. Very suspicious.
Where Hirschhorn is correct, however, is that the real battle we face is in the minds and hearts of US citizens. We are not presenting a very happy picture, even though most of what we have to say is true. Most people, myself included, want good news and want to spend time with issues that make their life better. People don't want to be depressed. In that regard, I think it is to our advantage that we are the epitome of "grass roots," accomplishing far more than organizations 10 times our size. It is the spontaneous nature of what we do that has advanced our numbers. It is the fact that people we talk to very quickly realize that we are trying to better America, and not advance our "organization," because we don't have one big organization. And while I'm on that topic, is Hirschhorn not looking at what's going on? We have scores of groups of numerous professions and from localities all around the world. And they keep forming all the time. IMO this is and will be what makes us so resilient.
Now this is not to say that we couldn't use healthy a dose of organization. Being organized has its advantages. But as many of us know, putting all our eggs in one big basket is dangerous. And exactly what type of political machine is Hirschhorn suggesting? Show me an organization where Greens and John Birchers and everything in-between work together the way we do. There aren't any.
We are involved in a task and a paradigm shift on par with the Civil War, Women's suffrage and the civil rights movement. Nothing Hirschhorn has outlined here appears as a better approach than the way we are doing things now.
BTW Mr. Hirschhorn, our rag-tag group got YOU to rethink 9/11, now didn't we. Move out of the way, we've got other fish to fry.
Well said!
Well said!
Well said Karl.
I also noticed, while reading this article, that while Joel disbelieves the official 9/11 story, he doesn't seem to include himself among the truth movement. He clearly describes the movement as some separate entity from himself, and as such, lays back and plays armchair critic.
I, also, fundamentally disagree with his general assertion that the movement is ineffective. In the four years I've been in this, the strides have been phenomenal. And I foresee it getting even better as 2009 progresses... hint, hint. ;-)
Basically, he's right. That
Basically, he's right. That said, some of the crackpots are undoubtedly infiltrations from the "other side" trying to discredit us and provide ammo for those who do.
The biggest problem in my view is that people don't want to know. It has always been this way in America. Once inflation kicks in and the American dream starts to crumble, maybe this will change.
The further we get from 9/11, the harder to sustain interest in the truth. You can't write better arguments that David Ray Griffin has done, nor can you do so more eloquently. I see his books at Barnes and Noble, etc., all the time. It's not like we're denied shelf space. The blame lies with the ambivalent American, kept that way by the system in all of its worst ways.
Things will change when they get shaken up enough. Obviously THEY think so or we wouldn't have such a tidy set of FEMA concentration camps, would we?
"The biggest problem in my view is that people don't want to kno
"The biggest problem in my view is that people don't want to know."
The BIGGER problem is WHY people don't want to know.
THEY have done a masterful job of brainwashing and programming the populace.
Despite that, WE have done and continue to do a commendable job considering the power and magnitude of our opponent.
Comfort Myths vs Painful Truths
I totally agree that many people don't want to know the truth about 911 and that in part is due to masterful brainwashing. I also would venture to suggest that a great many Americans are easily brainwashed because they want to think of themselves as citizens of the best and most powerful country on earth. People stuck in this mind set will never replace their comfort myths for painful truths unless forced to do so by adverse conditions beyond their control.
Time will tell if Hirschhorn has new and effective ideas for moving the truth movement forward. I really hope he does. But until that is shown to be the case, I don't plan to dwell on doubt. IMO, that would just be a waste of time. And besides, the movement HAS done a commendable job thus far.
Joel Hirschorn
...was an outspoken supporter of this draft bill.
http://stj911.org/press_releases/Misrepresentation.html
But apparently he is no longer the co-director at http://911scholars.org/.
Hmm
That makes his criticism of the 9/11 truth movement all the more questionable. Thanks for the heads up.
Landmines everywhere
Apologies for putting in a good word for someone who appears to be involved with disinfo. It seems a person has to do a background check on every participant in 9/11 Truth. Frustrating as hell.
Still, I maintain that a higher level of organization is a good thing--though I wouldn't advise too many people being physically together at any one time, for concerns of safety.
Concerning organization (finding a publisher for Alan Miller)
One example of something that could be done is to find a publisher for Alan Miller, whose website is "Patriots Question 9/11". I emailed him recently, suggesting he publish a book based on the entries he has therein.
Unfortunately, Alan wrote back that he'd submitted to three of the publishers who had printed material about 9/11, and none of them expressed interest.. Such behavior from the publishers strikes me as suspicious.
Maybe there are copyright problems? Still it seems there should be a way to do this.
I also broached to him the problem of the disinformationists contained within his site, adding that they are, however, a form of evidence themselves, though I wasn't sure what was best to do concerning them.
(Hope it's okay to share this stuff, Alan. I'm just frustrated.)
Great idea, but..........
like all great ideas about 9/11 truth, it has to go up against the media conglomerates, and it all becomes quite weird once the media elites get involved.
With enough money
his book could be published. We already know the MSM would likely try to ignore it. But people would read his book. It's just too damned fascinating to see someone like Robert Bowman, and hundreds of others, stating that, that, yes, they believe 9/11 was an inside job, and that a new investigation is needed. People would read it it. People would purchase it.
The same is true of, say, a movie. People would attend. I'm talking about a large-scale dramatic movie, that really dealt with the facts as they are known. Fund it, create it, and yes, they will come.
No disrespect to you pfgetty, but, as a broader, general statement, EFF the media.
Something has to be created that circumvents all that BS. It can be done.
This is NOT a question of provability. It is a matter of mass communication.
It's a matter of making individuals in positions of power, including political power but also "Hollywood" power or film-making power, etc, interested in pursuing it.
How many citizens question 9/11? How can they be unified? If they can be unified, we've got a realistic chance. Listing out proof is good; telling people what to read is good. I'm not saying stop. But there is latent power within this movement that has not yet been tapped into.
I agree. Not sure what EFF means, though.
But I'm on board with you.
We have got to circumvent the media.
And we have to come, finally, to the realization that the alternative media is not our friend.
They ignore 9/11 not because we don't have enough proof, or because we haven't presented it properly.
They ignore us because they are pressured and threatened to ensure they do NOT, ever, lend support or present 9/11 truth information. They WILL not budge.
We have to think of the alternative media just as we do the msm. They are self serving, honesty and truth are not their goals. They work for money, whether profit or support from big foundations linked to the highest centers of elite international power. They will avoid 9/11 if they feel presenting 9/11 truth information will cause them trouble.
It is truly impossible that these media outlets have just not understood 9/11 truth, or don't realize the impact of it. They are purposely censoring 9/11.
We've got to get around that, and we may not be able to do it in a nice way.
Painfully true
He speaks the truth - we are spinning our wheels when we are thinking that everyone just needs to "wake up" and see the truth. We need a national organization going to bring this into the light on a level that cannot be ignored or laughed out of existence.
The love that you withhold is the pain that you carry
Which is why NYC CAN
and AE911truth should continue to receive our support.
background, fyi
For those not aware of Hirschhorn's previous behaviors:
Not long ago, he tried to convince STJ911 to support a bill calling for the investigation of claims like DEW (Directed Energy Weapons, or space beams, may have caused the WTC destruction). Here is just some of what he wrote in defense of DEW:
"You continue to argue the wrong issue and also to denigrate most of the scientific world that does not accept your views. Over my long career I have routinely observed how arrogance breeds self-delusion. I used to conduct studies at the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment. In that capacity I routinely interviewed very credentialed scientists and engineers who wanted to work for OTA or serve on advisory panels. Based on all your views you would never have been selected. It takes a special kind of mature, sophisticated scientist or engineer or architect to be able to critically and objectively examine all data and theories, and perform vigorous comparative analysis that supports what often are unpopular conclusions."
The Journal of 9/11 Studies has several articles debunking these claims (DEW, mini-nukes), but defenders of these theories typically ignore them and refuse to respond to them, instead preferring to have Congress investigate what has already been debunked. Jim Fetzer has used similar talking points like "these theories haven't been examined", a completely false claim, to keep hoax claims alive. In fact, they have been examined very thoroughly at the Journal and are broadly rejected.
Relevant links:
Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice Rejects Association with Directed Energy Weapons and Mini-Nukes in Draft Bill
By Erik Larson
Hirschhorn was an important force behind a bill trying to get Congress to investigate the destruction of the twin towers by DEW and other discredited claims.
Thanks Victronix!
"It is you who are the torch-bearers with respect to that truth.... ...Steel your spines. Inspire your children. Then when the moment is right, rise again...." W PEPPER
Thanks
I had no idea he was promoting DEW.
DEW and presticogitation
Something that struck me immediately about the "work" of Judy Woods is that she tries to use the same evidence we do, but attribute a different cause, while there is no cause-and-effect chain to support her hypothesis.
This works as follows: show pictures of the devastation at Ground Zero, show pictures showing the disintegration of the upper block, show pictures of the lack of pancaked floors, and then connect these to DEW by reasoning backwards. A problem then arises because the same consequences can be attributed to multiple causes. The effects of this are devastating: her leaps of logic leave the novice confused as to which cause to pick for the effect observed. To make it worse, she even does this for effects which have pretty mundane explanations, making her an easy target for debunkers, and thereby besmirching alternative (correct!) theories in general. "Be there first, close the door."
It remains to be seen if all the observations claimed to be an effect of DEW can even be established to be effects of DEW! Where are the experiments? In other words, the hypothesis fails both in forward and backward reasoning. (Correct me if I'm wrong here...) I specifically don't talk about the scientific implausibility which is well established by J.O.N.E.S., but about the tricks used by Woods, which might explain why she has some followers who were fooled by her presticogitation.
Very clever, but it didn't work. We on the other hand have proven that exothermic reactions occurred during the demise of the WTC towers involving a high-tech energetic composite only available to the military, and we have proven something had to have moved the lower structure out of the way during all three WTC destructions. We've established pretty well the presence of explosive force during "collapse".
P.S. w.r.t logic I was thinking along these lines:
Backward chaining
Causality
Van Romero never mentiond DEW, so why would Hirschhorn?
Why would Hirschhorn propose DEW when the number one authority on the effects of explosives on buildings admitted on September 12, 2001 (before he learned he shouldn't have said what he said!), "It could have been a relatively small amount of explosives placed in strategic points." -- http://911research.wtc7.net/disinfo/retractions/romero.html
Dean Jackson/Editor-in-Chief DNotice.org
Washington, DC
It is part of a coordinated disinformation campaign by the press
We are toast until we figure out just who and what are creating this lockdown of truth in the press.
Every other issue gets some exposure somewhere. Not 9/11 truth.
All of the alternative media sites have censored 9/11 information.
The worst, because they are who we would normally expect to find some truth but don't, are Alternet, DemocracyNow, Counterpunch, Common Dreams, antiwar.com, MotherJones, the Nation, and others.
What we DO get from them, if they mention 9/11 truth at all, is insults or disinformation and confusing issues. They PURPOSELY are ensuring that 9/11 truth does not get exposure as a viable issue.
Why? Who is pressuring them? What threats are journalists and editors under. Every one of us surely realizes there is some pressure, but nobody ever seems to know just what that pressure is. Are there no editors that have decided to "come out"? Does no one have a good friend who has confided in them just why they have censored 9/11 info? Are there no retiring editors or journalists who could lend some light about this without having to worry about their careers and feeding their families?
I don't see an awful lot of difference between the Rumsfelds and Cheneys who lie about 9/11 and those who purposely are keeping us from the truth...........to me it is all treason. I don't think a lot of journalists or editors would like to have that label put on them. I think it is time to do it, though, and maybe we will get some defectors from this apparently coordinated censorship system.
I've wondered about the same issues
But I think overt pressure may be a relatively small part of the problem.
I suspect that this is mostly rooted in some sort of "journalistic mindset", perhaps connected to the way in which one *becomes* a journalist. Everywhere journalists also tend to be tied in many ways to the political elite. From my experience, many of them cannot even seem to be able to think that there might be something *terribly* wrong with official explanations.
The reason journalists appear so naive to us is probably the outcome of many different causes, which together result in a profession that is surprisingly resistant to "alternative explanations".
I can think of one immediate reason
The "authority" of a source is king in journalism.
That means, that if you quote somebody with little power, your ass is on the line if your source is mistaken. Such mistakes damage your reputation. However, if you quote the government, and they turn out to mistaken, you can always point your accusatory finger outwards. It's CYA culture, folks.
If I took stuff about homeopathic medicine at face value from an adamant source, I will be chastised by the anti-quack society (and rightfully so, in my opinion). Which of those two sources has more authority? So the issue here is: how do we convince people whose worldview is built on authoritative sources, while we now all know that authoritative sources actively and massively abuse their position for propaganda purposes?
Also: what is it about YOU that would make a journalist want to take YOU seriously? Journalists, as Barry Zwicker said, do don't do their real job anymore: when confronted with contradictory information, they simply quote both sources and leave the matter unresolved. Mission accomplished! This is how Bush science flourishes.
I haven't mentioned Mockingbird infiltration yet, and while this operation is massive, it can never account for all the obstruction and cerebral lockdown. This is why DRG wrote 9/11 contradictions, I believe. I have yet to buy it. But I do understand why it would be such a great tool to approach politicians and journalists with: it's safe.
You have two or more statements, all from authoritative sources, often the same sources to begin with, which conflict or are mutually exclusive. Both politicians and journalists can then present this information to the public with very little fear of public humiliation and loss of reputation. It's not because they don't want to believe you. It's because they are trained to operate in CYA culture. That's it. Is it cowardly? Yes. But unless you find a way to completely bypass MSM, (Youtube won't do the trick) you will have to get your story into the media. (And you better make damn sure your sources check out)
Why the MSM? Because they are "the authority". Why are they the authority? Because they quote, source and have access to "authorities". Sick, isn't it?
Joel Hirschhorn
9/11 Truth has proven that there is an enormous disconnect between the MSM and reality. Mr. Hirschhorn operates under the assumption that the government and media are valid representations of the American people.
Feigned naivete, blaming the messenger
Amen, Flicker--my thoughts exactly. He would actually have readers believe that the news media is essentially fair and neutral, and that when it comes to what movements they will cover and how they will cover it, certain matters-- like, say, an entire corrupt system that needs to be maintained--don't enter into it. Likewise, he would have readers believe that if only we truthers had played our cards right, gosh, we just might have had some clout with this new Democratic administration and Congress. Yeah, right!
You didn't have to wait until the 2008 elections to observe how we'd be treated. Just look at the way McKinney was treated by the media while she was in Congress, before she was the Green presidential candidate. Do you think maybe her questioning of Rumsfeld had something do do with it?
Sometimes, people have insight into the real nature of the media and corporate-owned political system before they become aware of the truth of events like 9.11; other times, realization occurs in reverse order. But there IS a connection between the two. Hirshcjorn pretends not to see it.
Ever see a "Journalists for 9/11 truth" website?
Journalists are our enemy..............ALL of them, except the few who are in some very obscure websites and journals.
None of them will do the very least about 9/11 truth............rationally expose the pure facts and evidence that lend support to what truthers are saying.
It is truly like a national conspiracy by the press.
We need to find out just why journalists are avoiding this issue. What are the pressures or threats against them.
You don't actually need to pressure or threaten anybody
Anyone who has held a job knows there are a vast number of unspoken rules that govern both workplace behavior and how the work actually gets done. The higher ups only need to make clear what their position is on a given subject to have the underlings fall in line and conform. Surely you are aware that there is a great deal of reading between the lines; many things never need to be explictly spelled out.
For those few who venture too far outside of the box, there are any number of sanctions that will work and be noticed by others. People want to keep their jobs and very few will risk displeasing their boss, especially if it seems that their investigation into a specific topic will nver be printed or aired anyway.
Using his own words against him
The most effective disinformationists mix truth and lies. Because of that, it may be possible to use Hirschhorn's own words against him.
Consider that conservationists strive to find economic benefits as part of their strategy. What are some financial strategies that could prove most useful toward finding 9/11 Truth?
What will make people want, much more so than now, to know the truth? What might actually entice politicians to take actions? I believe there is an answer, because the truth is, ultimately, better than falsehoods.
Note: this is not a suggestion to stop what we are already doing. I just feel there is something being overlooked, which is still vague to myself as well. Money? Counter-infiltration? (meant legally and seriously). Formation of a more unified and politically influential group? (AE911Truth comes closest to what I'm speaking of).
Despite the obstacles, I believe there is a way to act from the top, or near the top, back towards the roots.
He makes a lot of good points; others not so good
I don't think it's disputable that the 911 Truth Movement (which is what I call 'high strangeness') has been marginalized, any more than the Peace Movement is basically marginalized. I don't see much political effect from either movement. The only serious threat to the status quo from the Peace Movement may come from within elites circles, who may take seriously the warning of, say, a Chalmers Johnson, of imperial exhaustion. I'm speaking hypothetically, though. I can't actually cite any individual in, say, the CFR who are championing Johnson's analysis.
A not so good point - if not awful - is "It is too easy to blame the mainstream media and political establishment for refusing to demand and pursue a truly comprehensive and credible independent scientific and engineering investigate"
To me, this is not "too" easy, at all - our media is a disgrace, and so is our political system. I don't think I really need to argue the point! We wouldn't need a 911 Truth Movement if those institutions had done their jobs.
Now, regarding his complaint of lacking an effective political strategy, I found this very interesting, because I agree with the statement, but a) Hirschhorn presents no compelling ideas about how to form an "effective strategy" b) he doesn't even try, himself, to draw any lessons from any other movement that may have had more success than the 911 Truth Movement, and suggest that those be investigated and c) has what I consider a limited goal, even if it is basically the same goal ("an official investigation") as most 911 Truthers
I think activists, in general, need to take a close look at what is not working, and why. IMO, the problems that activists face mostly boils down to their opposition's corruption by love of money and power. Power, I presume, is the strongest narcotic at the top of the elitest pyramid. For lesser players - e.g., the lobbyist who represents a selfish interest, who busily, even if subtly, corrupt our Senators and Representatives 7 days a week - it's mostly about money. They are whores, selling their souls and selling out the public, because it can make them a lot of money, and they love money.
I came to the conclusion years ago that we have systemic rot (i.e., corruption, though not typically of the overt, bribe-taking sort), and the key to fixing that system rot involves replacing gatekeepers - who are elected officials, in our system, at least to a first approximation - and bypassing and re-creating other corrupt, privately owned institutions, like the media. So, I don't hand out 911 CDs, even if I respect others who do so, and even if this represents a very limited form of bypassing the mainstream media. I also don't go to peace vigils, even though I attended a couple demonstrations before Bush's Iraq fiasco. I don't believe 911 is "the key", any more than I believe spreading knowledge of the JFK assassination is "the key".
I'm a very outside the box kind of guy, and I'm still in early stages of stuff I'm working on. For people who are looking to attack systemic rot by getting better people elected, but don't want to wait around for anything that I or other people are working on, I would recommend involvement with non-strange political movements such as Progressive Democrats of America and the Ron Paul variety of Republicans. (E.g., note that Rand Paul, Ron's son, is running for Senator).
While I believe that citizens should be looking at improving Democratic and Republican parties, and checking out 3rd parties, to make the most rapid progress in attacking systemic rot, it's only rational to form trans-partisan alliances. Right now, AFAIK, there is not a single transpartisan alliance which has an electoral strategy. (I could easily be wrong, so please correct me, if that's the case.) There's transpartisan efforts to develop solutions to particular problems, as described by Turner and Chickering in Voice of the People: TheTranspartisan Imperative in American Life. However, they apparently rely on lobbying existing Congress critters with their (hopefully) excellent, transpartisan solutions. Which means that, if their wonderful transpartisan solution is at odds with some strong lobby which has funneled a lot of contributors to the Congress critter X, then Congress critter X is not likely to give a hoot. (BTW, I have posted transpartisan references from Voice of the People here. Note, also, that a fairly recent polls showed independents at 39%, more than self-identified Republicans or Democrats.)
A web based infrastructure for facilitating the development of transpartisan voting blocs of citizens is inevitable. It's only a question of when.
When such an infrastructure becomes available, frustrated activists who can achieve a strong presence in the newly empowered electorate will find the going easier, and likely for the first time in their lives, productive. (What life or truth affirming movement that affects the fate of most of us has had stellar success in Washington? I frankly can't think of any. There's doubtless been some more limited successes, e.g. good laws mandating easy access for handicapped individuals. But I just don't see any strong successes ito peace, environment, global warming, sustainable, competitive economy, national healthcare, preventative healthcare, etc. - issues which affect either all of us, or millions upon millions of us.)
I don't think 911 Truth will be an early benefactor of an e-democracy infrastructure, because of the high-strangeness factor. However, getting rid of lots of crooks and carpetbaggers from the Federal Government will eventually lead to more transparency and accountability. The 911 Truth movement, being non-partisan in nature, could play a key role in ushering a new era, even if it has to wait it's turn to see results in terms of it's traditional goal.
I frankly can't imagine any faster route to a reformed government, nor any more effective use of 911 Truther's energy. (Please not that people needn't do one or the other. They could hand out a 911 CD, while also handing out a flyer asking individuals to join a voting bloc, e.g. Or, they could work with the Progressive Democrats of America, or try and get Rand Paul elected, and hand out some 911 CD's to their compatriots. Or vice versa, meaning they could have a table with 911 material, and also Progressive Democrat and Ron/Rand Paulista literature.) So, while I don't support trying to make 911 Truth an issue in the next Presidential election, I do support taking over Congress at the ballot box, with honorable people who might at least give a serious listen.
http://www.DemocracyABC.org
http://www.therealnews.com
http://www.pdamerica.org
the state of the 9-11 truth movement
newsfrombelow
social movements are not simple social formations to understand, much less theorize about in any
systemic manner. rather than view the 9-11 truth movement in isolation within the usa, it would be
more useful, and i believe productive going forward, to focus on its evolution since 2001, and to
focus more on charting its trajectory in a comprehensive manner, both nationally and internationally,
before coming to any conclusions about its relative success and failures.
considering that the peace and human rights movements in the usa have been, in one form or another,
working tirelessly for decades against american imperialism in general and specific wars in particular,
and that there is widely accepted empirical documentation of the mass atrocities committed by our
government and many of its allies over the course of the past several decades, not to mention the genocidal policies which "cleared" the continent for "the united states of america" back in the day, it
seems the height of arrogance to expect that we will "win" the fight for 9-11 truth and deliver the
guilty parties to justice.
but what the 9-11 truth movement can do, and is doing, is continue to grow and learn from its mistakes in extending and deepening an anti-imperial consciousness through its focus on many
of the "contradictions" that led to the events of 9-11.
many people who are part of the 9-11 truth movement did not previously understand the nature of the united states' foreign policy. through their focus on the events of 9-11, they have gone on to study
it more critically. many long time critics of us foreign policy were open to the 9-11 truth movement because they were deeply familiar with the lies and deceptions.
as a social movement evolves, a highly complex division of labor occurs, but many people in the movement do not view it as such, but instead as a series of rifts and divisions and even sects within
the broader social formation.
naturally, many people in any social movement have complex motivations for their involvement. but
it is a dangerous road to focus on separating the "good" from the "bad" activists. it can drain a tremendous amount of energy.
there is more than enough work to spread around for those interested in being involved. some people
are much more sophisticated in their analysis. some people are generating primary research discoveries, others are generalists, and help spread alternative narratives to different communities.
the most important lesson from my research on social movements in general is never assume you are the beginning, the middle, and the end of the social movement. you are just a small part, and the larger social movement for peace and social justice began before 9-11 truth, and will continue after it.
continuing to do research, to educate, and to press for independent investigations, here in the usa and internationally, is all the 9-11 truth movement can do.
pressing for the truth in the usa is a revolutionary act. revealing the truth is a revolutionary act.
never underestimate the power of both actions to change people and the world.
I don't agree.
I think that a huge percentage of Americans were ready for the truth. Oh, for them like me, it would be a shock to begin realizing that our government was involved in 9/11.
But look at what happened with the WMD issue.
For a long time, when the press was inundating us all with propaganda about WMD, with no opposing views other than on alternative media and foreign media sources, virtually all Americans believed the nonsense.
Then, too late of course, the official story began to fall apart. The press began exposing the conspiracy to spread lies about the WMD, and it didn't take long before most of the country realized they had been swindled. Not all...........there are still those who feel that there really were WMD, and many believe that Bush really didn't know the truth. Still a LOT of Americans know that there was a lot of lying going on.
The point, though, is that the vast majority of Americans simply believed what the press told them, and didn't consider it all to be a lie until the press told them it was a lie.
We have the evidence to prove 9/11 was an inside job. But as long as the press opposes our movement, suppresses the facts, avoids the issue entirely, the average or even very astute American simply feels that 9/11 truth is a fringe movement and it isn't worth their time studying and researching what we claim to be the facts. They "know" that if there was a real issue about 9/11, some news outlet would be exploiting it. If that doesn't happen, for them that is proof that there is nothing of value being said by truthers.
We have GOT to get some leverage with the media.
Even the alternative media has fully censored 9/11 truth: Alternet (Joshua Holland), DemocracyNow (Amy Goodman), antiwar.com (Justin Raimondo), Counterpunch (Alex Cockburn), Common Dreams, the Nation, MotherJones, etc etc..........................all of them have purposely and maliciously decided to censor the facts and evidence that prove or support the idea that the official story of 9/11 is a lie. What kind of pressure are they under? Are they threatened with loss of support or worse? Who really does provide a lot of support for them. I know that Alternet is supported by huge foundations, and if you follow the leads as to who really supports these foundations, you get to Bilderberg types..............international corporate elites, pro Israel groups and the like. Or is some pressure coming from intelligence agencies or other places of government control?
We will suffer the same fate as JFK assassination truth if we cannot expose our ideas in the media. Americans WILL listen. They just have to be told via organizations that they trust.
Re-Inventing Democracy
http://www.reinventingdemocracy.us/
"How U.S. Voters Can Get Control of Government
and Restore Popular Sovereignty in America"
"Breakthrough Internet inventions empower voters
to set U.S. policy priorities, build winning voting blocs
and run and elect candidates who will enact them into law"
=======
IN RE: Hirschhorn...
I had to go back to check whether J.H. was a sociologist. He sounds like one. ( ...a former Senior Staff Member of the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment? ...Congress?)
I've never been impressed with the field of sociology, which I view as essentially observing and then articulating problems -- of any kind. It's so easy to be a critic. Most of it's just opinion and/or basic common sense.
The far greater challenge is to create value from nothing. It's the difference between being an artist working from a blank canvas and being an art critic. Not everyone can paint or tries to, but anyone can have an opinion of what others do. Envisioning, implementing, and persisting through as many possible potential solutions as can be imagined takes incredible intelligence, creativity, determination, and courage.
Hirschhorn makes some points worth pondering by all the creators in 911 truth, but by their very nature creators ponder everything, continually looking for solutions and new directions to take. Creating is an imperfect journey, but those who "do," those who create, are those who put themselves on the line. THOSE are the heros. ...YOU are the heros.
To me, anyone acting in good faith on positive behalf of the movement - no matter how controversial their their beliefs/theories - is a creator, an agent of positive change, while critics will always be just critics.
Occam's Razor: It seems to me that, in this case at least, this piece is primarily the fruit of a book promotion. ...great title though; love that. Just the wrong content with it.
Prisoner's dilemma
"The 9/11 movement has not been able to articulate enough benefits to the public from disbelieving the official government story and pursuing a new investigation. What might ordinary Americans gain? Would proof-positive of government involvement make them feel better, more secure, and more patriotic?"
When given a choice, a person will always choose the option that will suit their short-term interest rather than the option that will benefit the group even if, in the short term, the second option might prove uncomfortable for them personally.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoner's_dilemma:
"In this game, as in all game theory, the only concern of each individual player (prisoner) is maximizing his or her own payoff, without any concern for the other player's payoff.
rational choice leads the two players to both play defect, even though each player's individual reward would be greater if they both played cooperatively."
OpEdNews WTF?
http://www.opednews.com/articles/9-11-Mind-Swell-by-Joel-S-Hirschhorn-09... - redirects to homepage.
Are they part of the suppression as well?
Yes but no!
Interesting but intentionally undermining?
The thing is that we the 9/11 Truth Movement are in a world of our own....uncharted waters to be sure.
For we have broad community support with very few willing to take on such a dark and dangerous task of exposing pure evil!
I am beginning to realize that we may not get an investiagtion per se any time soon, but we may have changed the world for the better in our attempt by proving to ourselves and the awake that there is hope of change!
This for me this "reality" is enough :) For I simply must resist tyranny!
Truth will prevail :)
Regards John
PS - This guy is damaged goods anyhow...
9/11 24/7 UNTIL JUSTICE!!
www.truthaction.org.au
It is all useless until some media outlets expose the truth
We have all the information we need to prove to a rational person that the 9/11 official story is BS.
I think Joel is wrong that the main reason people do not believe 9/11 truth is because they just don't want to believe something that horrible.
I think people will not believe it because they do not hear the truth from "responsible" and "respected" news outlets.
People just plain don't believe information when it comes from fringe sources. Period. And, like it or not, the 9/11 truth movement looks to the average person as very fringe.
Until we get a few big or even medium sized outlets to bring out the truth of 9/11, our movement is doomed to remain a sidelined group.
And the reason we haven't gotten the media to expose the truth of 9/11 is not because the editors and journalists do not know or understand the inconsistencies of the official story. They know.........at least many do. But they are pressured and threatened not to expose the truth. They know whoever does will suffer the consequences...................the attacks against them telling the world they are "conspiracy theorists" and whacko. Or worse.
Somehow, and I don't have any good ideas, we need to infiltrate some media venue, find out from a friend of a friend just what is going on in US journalism with the censorship of 9/11 truth. Have you noticed there are no websites, "Journalists for 9/11 truth". Obviously, if they sign up, their career is destroyed. We've got to find out just how this is working, who is pressuring, what threats are out there, who owns or supports the alternative media outlets.
It is all useless until some media outlets expose the truth
We have all the information we need to prove to a rational person that the 9/11 official story is BS.
I think Joel is wrong that the main reason people do not believe 9/11 truth is because they just don't want to believe something that horrible.
I think people will not believe it because they do not hear the truth from "responsible" and "respected" news outlets.
People just plain don't believe information when it comes from fringe sources. Period. And, like it or not, the 9/11 truth movement looks to the average person as very fringe.
Until we get a few big or even medium sized outlets to bring out the truth of 9/11, our movement is doomed to remain a sidelined group.
And the reason we haven't gotten the media to expose the truth of 9/11 is not because the editors and journalists do not know or understand the inconsistencies of the official story. They know.........at least many do. But they are pressured and threatened not to expose the truth. They know whoever does will suffer the consequences...................the attacks against them telling the world they are "conspiracy theorists" and whacko. Or worse.
Somehow, and I don't have any good ideas, we need to infiltrate some media venue, find out from a friend of a friend just what is going on in US journalism with the censorship of 9/11 truth. Have you noticed there are no websites, "Journalists for 9/11 truth". Obviously, if they sign up, their career is destroyed. We've got to find out just how this is working, who is pressuring, what threats are out there, who owns or supports the alternative media outlets.
Media censorship...many factors
My personal view at this point is that the big media sources, like the national CNN, national Fox, national NBC, etc. set the stage for affiliates and for "local media think". When local media covers stories that go beyond the boundaries set by the Big Guys, the local media can appear to be fringe (outside the status quo). The local media agenda is often set by what the Big Guys are focusing on.
Revenue from advertisers can also play an important role for local (or national media). Typically, advertisers are trying to target the mainstream audience. Also, advertisers often are trying to sell products geared for a "happy carefree airy-fairy quick-fix lifestyle". Watch who advertises on the local news channels. Many advertisers do not want to be positioned with a "radical news group", because their audience is not there.
Actually, I will become suspicious the day that big media starts to cover 9/11 in a more truthful way. Would it be an attempt to hi-jack the 9/11 Truth Movement?
One possible idea...maybe a pipedream...a possible step.
Sponsors.
Corporate sponsors. There might be a few corporate entities who would like to position themselves with the plight of the families of the vicitims of 9/11 and the forsaken First Responders. This possibly could be doable. Just like many companies like to endorse / help sponsor "cancer cures" or "environmental concerns", there might be a good marketing plan to gain corporate funding to rally behind issues which all Americans would also support.
Events First
How to break the controlled media? Since they won't cover 9/11 stories that are clearly newsworthy: 1) nanothermite discovered, 2) Bin Laden worked for US up til 9/11, 3) 750 Architects and Engineers now, 4) NYC CAN ..... and other bombshell 9/11 stories with few exceptions--
We need to create events and wage actions (maybe even disruptions) that force news coverage.............from which we inject the bombshells.
The disruption of Bill Maher's show created a news cycle......from which Building 7 was injected.
A 9/11 Truth Concert/ First Responders Benefit featuring Willie Nelson and Jesse Ventura could create a news story..... from which nanothermite could be injected. Or the now 750+ A&Es.
Getting a NYC 9/11 probe on the ballot will create a news story.
Getting Kucinich to launch a Congressional inquiry will create a story.
Getting a theater release of a 9/11 documentary could create a firestorm.
Getting celebrities to speak up will do it.
Way to get at the media
Is to make a documentary about how they are failing us...and name names. Embarrass people. Call them in their lies. This will not create a news cycle but could have lasting effects on the talking heads. It is hard to do a story on what is not being reported. I would start with Anthrax and what q's weren't asked.
Good ideas.
What about sponsoring some advertising, exposing a few of the most easily understood bits of evidence that we have?
Personally, I'd like to see some newsworthy protesting in front of some of the alternative media offices.
Would they cover it? It would be sort of funny to see how they would get around this. The hypocrisy of Amy Goodman not covering protests against Pacifica/DemocracyNow for not presenting 9/11 truth, while attacking the mainstream media for doing much the same...........not covering protests..........would be worth the trouble.
But it is possible it would force them to cover the protests and make some statements about 9/11 truth.
If this became a fairly common occurrence, maybe some of the alternative media outlets would begin to feel pressured enough to present the facts and truth of 9/11.
This is what the antiwar and other movements have been doing for decades, but it is always against corporate media. Why not against alternative media, if alternative media have sunk to the same lows?
Religious groups as sponsors and helpers
Are there any religious organizations which may help? The issues of the victims' families and the First Responders will appeal to their values of honesty and compassion.
9/11 Truth booklet PDFs: http://www.mediafire.com/?sharekey=ac1039fd00817eecd2db6fb9a8902bda
STATS & Timeline of 9/11 Truth Movement Landmarks?....
Is there an article which summates the stats and evolution of landmark events or actions within the 9/11 Truth Movement tied to a timeline?
I would like to see a 9/11 Truth Movement timeline with landmarks or milestones or actions or Press Coverage or scientific discoveries noted. Is there one available?
Examples:
September 11, 2004 in New York City. "Confronting the Evidence: 9/11 and The Search for Truth" Hosted by actor and activist Ed Begley Jr., the groundbreaking event featured David Ray Griffin, David vonKleist, Barry Zwicker, Webster Tarpley, Kristina Borjesson, Karl Schwartz, Jeff King, Paul Thompson, Jenna Orkin, Christopher Scheer, Dr Robert Bowman, Christopher Bollyn, and John Prados.
April & December 2005 - Loose Change ...internet sensation..."An August 2006 Vanity Fair article suggested that Loose Change "just might be the first Internet blockbuster" as it became the most watched video on Google Video in May 2006, being viewed at least 40 million times on that site, and with the official Loose Change website receiving over 100,000 hits a day."
June 25, 2006 - Los Angeles "The American Scholar's Symposium " CNN coverage...thermite & Steven Jones.
Jon Gold...Your highlights videos go here
An Incomplete History:
I think there is a part 2
More science needed. The
More science needed.
The 9/11 Truth Movement depends on science. Any person who has woken up to 9/11 Truth has done so because of This includes science-based conclusions using agreed-upon facts (a la Richard Gage), as well as hypothesis-driven experimentation (a la Steven Jones). Much more of such scientifically robust arguments will provide a strong engine for this movement. The engine is currently healthy in its own right but needs significantly more strength. I think that with a stronger rational framework we will be able to overcome some of the barriers in the mainstream and alternative media, the break down some of the cognitive dissonance and learned helplessness of the public.
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
Science, Common sense, and Emotion
Science is a key element for any court case, but it takes time for the flat earth to become round. Common sense is not so common (Voltaire), but it's the medium that will sway a jury, or public, away from magical thinking. Emotion is what really works to get a movement rolling- and exactly the tool used by the propaganda machine to direct policy, to keep the lid on, or to get the population to embrace war against real or perceived enemies. We must use whatever we have at hand to turn the tide towards truth. I suggest we keep our needle pointing north, no matter how many times it's turned around.
An alternative approach
might be to reveal outright fraud on the part of the 9-11 Commission and its report. There are documented instances of misinformation/"lies" in the report. Such an approach would avoid taking on issues that, without an investigation, have no definite resolution. It would also pave the way, or make the way easier, for a new investigation. Whatever HIrschhorn's background or even the credibility of his criticism, it is never too late to self-criticize and improve strategies or create new ones.
I found it odd that the "Commission" continued its existence after its public mandate expired. One wonders who funded its continuance. Also, The Commission lobbied for its list of "recommendations" as if these had to be implemented. The Commission is not supposed to lobby for a list of recommendations. It is up to Congress to consider, and then implement, what it deems important. This continuation of the Commission and its lobbying side is an anomaly that needs to be explained.
An approach attacking the commission would be less apt to be derailed through disagreements about matters such as what hit the Pentagon.
presidential campaigns...politicians
darkbeforedawn
are not the way to go. Politicians are a waste of time. We need to keep going right to the people. Joel Hischorn has given himself away with his pushing of "DEW" and by telling us we have failed in our efforts and need to enlist mainstream politicians, we need to read these suggestions backwards.
We have succeeded beyond our wildest dreams. The average man on the streets now knows the truth and now knows full well that most of what he hears on MSM is for the purposes of an agenda that is not to his own best interests. Average people have woken up and that is why there is the huge outrage at the "town meetings". People are being given no venue to voice their opinions and they are frightened that they are alone in these thoughts. Now is the time for open discussion and frank acknowledgment that we must believe what our eyes and common sense have told us all along.
This is the time not to admit failure but to strengthen our resolve....and find new and ever more lively ways to communicate the outrageous frauds perpetrated on us by media and those who guide it.
I thought the French comic who was recently featured here was a perfect example for us all. Fired his work and ridiculed and threatened, Instead of closing shop, shutting up, apologizing and admitting defeat as the elites hoped he would, he went ballistic and created a fabulous series of hilarious videos. In the last one he told us he wasn't going to swallow the obvious frauds that have been endlessly foisted upon the now no longer unsuspecting public as "true"...
And neither will we, Joel Hischorn.
presidential campaigns...politicians
darkbeforedawn
are not the way to go. Politicians are a waste of time. We need to keep going right to the people. Joel Hischorn has given himself away with his pushing of "DEW" and by telling us we have failed in our efforts and need to enlist mainstream politicians, we need to read these suggestions backwards.
We have succeeded beyond our wildest dreams. The average man on the streets now knows the truth and now knows full well that most of what he hears on MSM is for the purposes of an agenda that is not to his own best interests. Average people have woken up and that is why there is the huge outrage at the "town meetings". People are being given no venue to voice their opinions and they are frightened that they are alone in these thoughts. Now is the time for open discussion and frank acknowledgment that we must believe what our eyes and common sense have told us all along.
This is the time not to admit failure but to strengthen our resolve....and find new and ever more lively ways to communicate the outrageous frauds perpetrated on us by media and those who guide it.
I thought the French comic who was recently featured here was a perfect example for us all. Fired his work and ridiculed and threatened, Instead of closing shop, shutting up, apologizing and admitting defeat as the elites hoped he would, he went ballistic and created a fabulous series of hilarious videos. In the last one he told us he wasn't going to swallow the obvious frauds that have been endlessly foisted upon the now no longer unsuspecting public as "true"...
And neither will we, Joel Hischorn.
Since when is truth a "bummer"?
The only "bummer" was that 9/11 happened at all. Finding out who did it is the way to bring closure and move on. And there can indeed be a brighter future after we do move on. We can finally stop wasting money on unnecessary wars and fix our bridges and levees. The innovation put into military hardware could be redirected to domestic uses, such as better transportation systems.
Great momentum in summer 2006 heading towards 9/11/06....
What follows is a personal reflection on this topic (not directed to Hirschhorn)
In spring-summer 2006, I felt a great deal of momentum building in the 9/11 truth-seeking movement, with attention from the NY Times (based on the Chicago meeting) and CNN (based on the Los Angeles meeting).
In LA, I presented the strongest evidences and -- based on Sec'y of Transportation Mineta's testimony -- I called for the Constitutional procedure of IMPEACHMENT FOR DICK CHENEY. Many joined in this call for impeachment: "Impeach Cheney first," we cried. We were basically united at the time with this goal as I recall.
CNN broadcast the panel discussion for this conference in August, and re-broadcast the 9/11 panel, just as my first paper casting doubt on the official 9/11 story was formally published.
You may recall that as Sept 11th 2006 approached, we were getting MSM attention, big time.
Then something rather strange happened... During the summer 2006 I was urged by BYU Administrators to stop calling for impeachment and specifically to not discuss Dick Cheney ....
Not long after that, on Sept. 6, 2007 I was abruptly and publicly placed on Administrative Leave at BYU; my teaching duties were suspended as I was reprimanded for 9/11 research with very little in the way of explanation. Just Five days before 9/11/2006, the Fifth anniversary of 9/11. There was a well-publicized press release from BYU announcing my being placed on administrative leave, and it was published in the Deseret News... US News and World Report covered this disciplinary action along with other publications... then... silence.
I was pushed into early retirement with very little explanation to me -- and the Review that I formally requested in writing was denied (at the last, just before I accepted early retirement and signed...)
I retired in January 2007. Soon, I learned (from press reports) that Dick Cheney had called BYU and "asked" to be the commencement speaker in April. And so Dick Cheney was the commencement speaker in April 2007, just 3 months after my early retirement. Notably, BYU also accorded to Cheney an Honorary Doctorate in Public Service... citing his efforts to reign in budgetary expenditures among other accomplishments.
Something is fishy here.
In an earlier blog on 911blogger, we learned that Dick Cheney's office "leaned on" Hans Blix, the UN weapons inspector for Iraq... and got him to be silent for a time about the lack of WMD's in Iraq. This was shortly before the US -led invasion of Iraq in 2003. Later, Blix blew the whistle about the pressure he had received from Cheney's office.
I hope you understand when I say that I am questioning the influence of Cheney's office here (not criticizing BYU or Blix, per se).
We may speak out, but clearly there is opposition at very high levels. It is not that we have not tried nor that we have failed to make progress...
There is a solution, but IMO it lies outside of the United States government and perhaps outside the United States -- certainly, outside of the influence of certain high officials.
On the international option
Thanks for sharing these observations and I expect you are right. My impression has always been that it may be true that the only way to approach this on legal grounds would be from outside the US (this impression grew stronger with the utter silence from US media on the nanothermite paper). That's why I was concerned when Leuren Moret and Alfred Webre teamed up to create a fake international legal effort ( International Citizens 9/11 War Crimes Tribunal -- DEW, space weapons, nukes, etc -- to taint every viable legal avenue with nonsense).
I think that the international option is still potentially the best one. The most difficult task is steering clear of the nonsense and at the same time having good organizers with the time and awareness to conduct a viable effort. Not impossible, but not easy.
Excellent points, Vic. / typo correction
A typo in my comment above:
Not long after that, on Sept. 6, 2007 I was abruptly and publicly placed on Administrative Leave at BYU;
should be:
Not long after that, on Sept. 6, 2006 I was abruptly and publicly placed on Administrative Leave at BYU;
How may I (we) help?
Professor Jones, the idea of an international investigation is excellent. Even if US officials, media, etc, tried to ignore it, I doubt there would be any way for the results of such an investigation to be kept hush.
Do you have any suggestions as to what an average 9/11 truther can do to help an international investigation develop?
Thanks.
Perhaps a good starting point
http://world911truth.org/
I don't know where you're from, Satyakaama. I'm a European. Europeans should be contacting their local scientists, I guess. Somebody at some point did do so and we got a great present: prof. Niels Harrit!
I have no idea where an international investigation would start. I would suspect it would be a partnership between several universities. Universities have historically been slightly more predisposed to criticism of authority. Unfortunately, even educational institutions are being infiltrated as we speak. Hopefully this is less of an obstacle outside of the borders of the U.S. From what prof. Jones is saying even BYU is slowly coming around. (The department head of physics at BYU supports the Active Thermitic Materials paper)
Written Proposal for International Investigation
Scientists, such as Jones, Ryan, Harrit, Legge, etc, could write a formal proposal regarding the creation of an international investigation of 9/11.
At least one version of it could present the primary goal and outline in a straightforward and easy-to-understand manner.
Once that is done, the written proposal could be distributed...widely...and scientists interested could be communicated with.
As to all the political angles, I don't know. But the written outline to be distributed is a start. If such a proprosal exists already, it is yet another matter that has gotten past me. But if it hasn't been done, it sure seems like a way to get something going along these lines.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PS I haven't yet looked at World911truth.org, but will go there soon. Maybe they have something like what's mentioned above.
Also, my location is Seattle, Washington; and, though I work elsewhere, I spend a lot of time on the UW campus and have some access--though not much. My status is as an alum and a longtime volunteer for the UW.
Amazing...
ProfJones: "Notably, BYU also accorded to Cheney an Honorary Doctorate in Public Service... citing his efforts to reign in budgetary expenditures among other accomplishments."
Amazing coming from a guy who said, "You know, Paul[Former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill], Reagan proved deficits don't matter. We won the midterms elections. This is our due."
To be awarded an Honorary Doctorate based on his efforts to reign in government spending says a lot as the Bush/Cheney Administration was one of the most profligate in US history.
International Investigation? How about Venezuela?
I know, I know..............Chavez has turned off too many around the world to be the perfect place for an investigation.
However, it has some advantages.
Unlike any of the G8 nations, or even the many nations tightly bound to those G8 nations, Venezuela's government is not controlled and manipulated by the US government. It can do what it likes.
It has plenty of money.
It is relatively safe there.
It is not too terribly far away.
AND, I think, Chavez would love the intrigue, controversy and publicity.
Finally, he really has no respect for Bush/Cheney, but does seem to have emotional ties with the people of the US.
Not perfect, but not so bad either.
Wouldn't there be a problem with supina power?
An international investigation would not have supina power in the US.
I like the idea of an international investigation, but I see the lack of supina power a problem.
I also feel that the same power structure that has crushed any exposure of 9/11 truth in the US is also the same power structure that would crush it internationally.
Niels Harrit has said that he sees much the same censorship of 9/11 info in Denmark as in the US...............he said that to Michael Wolsey in an interview on Visibility 911 podcast.
Somehow we have to get some media venues to defect from the system.