Raw Story's Stephen C. Webster on 9/11: "I have no answers. All I have is doubt. My only conclusion is to question."

A comment on Van Jones and the 9/11 Truth 'movement'
The Webster Retort
Sunday, September 6, 2009

Following several days of relentless assault by the right-wing media, Obama's Green Jobs "czar" has called it quits. After right-wing blogs uncovered his signature on a 9/11 Truth statement, Fox News went into overdrive, and boy, did it ever get ugly.

Here's a brief sample, aired Saturday, Sept. 5, 2009:

It all started when he made an overly-generalizing statement -- calling all Republicans assholes. Then the 9/11 shoe dropped and the heat was on. Van Jones almost immediately recanted his minor inclusion in the Truth movement ... Although, I'm not even sure you can call it a movement anymore.

For a man who could have become at once the greatest advocate of the legitimate, lingering questions surrounding the 9/11 attacks -- and the greatest distraction to the Obama administration -- to recant the statement is cowardly, but to quit is divine.

He did the right thing.

However, it was not his toe in the waters of dissent that knocked him ... It was his very poor-taste comment on the Columbine massacre, in my opinion. I would not be surprised to learn that Obama himself pulled the trigger on this resignation. And he's probably quite agitated with whomever was responsible for vetting Jones in the first place.

Regardless ...

Van Jones now has the ear of any media outlet he wishes to speak with. Anywhere he goes, I'm willing to wager the 9/11 statement comes up.

If this man is not a coward, we'll see an interview sometime soon where he is forced to defend the very reasonable action of Questioning Authority, or scurry away like a cockroach. Will he make a political calculation? Or stand up for what he really believes?

(How funny. I've been wondering the same about Obama and public health insurance for some time now.)

Inasmuch as the whole 9/11 topic could soon become radioactive in mainline politics, with the GOP appearing eager to wield it like a blunt propaganda weapon, I see it as the responsibility of those who still preach the gospel of doubt to moderate their message and get out in the media and public now, or risk seeing the matter effectively buried in the public mind.

Those 9/11 petitions are going to become a political goldmine for Republicans, who are sure to begin hunting for other mainline politicos, journalists and others who found the 9/11 Commission Report hard to swallow.

I am a 9/11 Truth'er, though I would not portend any theory.

I have no answers. All I have is doubt. My only conclusion is to question.

Were this the attitude and public message put forward by others of like-mind, their arguments, headlined and concluding with questions, not theories, would have a better chance at really penetrating the mainstream discussion.

With the sacrifice of Van Jones' career in public life, remnants of the 9/11 Truth movement are in serious jeopardy of never being taken seriously again.

Now is their time. The discussion has been given an opening to mainstream thought once again. Will they be pummeled for it?

Let's see how they react.

Meanwhile, I've republished my Fort Worth Weekly cover story on former Army Intelligence Analyst Donald Buswell, who was fired, demoted, ordered to undergo a mental health exam and accused of "making statements disloyal to the United States" when he sent an e-mail doubting the 9/11 Commission Report.

I'd love to watch Fox News try and grill Him.




Your news archive is amazing.

Part of my...

"Contribution" to this cause. Thanks.

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?


I saw this piece by Webster. Have to say I was pretty surprised by it. Good on him for writing it.

What makes the topic 'radioactive' in the first place?

'Inasmuch as the whole 9/11 topic could soon become radioactive in mainline politics, with the GOP appearing eager to wield it like a blunt propaganda weapon, I see it as the responsibility of those who still preach the gospel of doubt to moderate their message and get out in the media and public now, or risk seeing the matter effectively buried in the public mind.'

'moderate their message...'? Did Webster see the statement that Van Jones signed? The questions to which it demanded answers were eminently reasonable. Nothing 'immoderate' about it that I could see.

Webster means well, but is another example of failing to see what gives bullies their power in the first place; and that is, people's fear of them. The only thing that will ever make a bully back off and run is standing one's ground, and getting right back in their face. And in this case, that means, demanding the end to all the coverups surrounding 9/11 and sticking the official conspiracy theory right back in their face, making plain that it as not been proven--that if it had been, they wouldn't need to resort to such bullying tactics in order to defend it.

Just as when Bush and Cheney were in office, the defenders of the OCT capitalize on the fear of being perceived as crazy or 'unpatriotic'. The only antidote for fear is courage--it's as simple as that. But even a generally sympathetic alternative media voice like Webster's seems to have a hard time understanding that.

Raw Story is Truth friendly...aka...rational.

I think Sibel Edmonds' poison well story illustrates the reality that we face. It is as if all the mainstream media, all the government officials, and many of the citizens have drunk from the poison well. I believe many in the media and in government actually know that the official story is bogus, but they are compelled to play along. Look at what happens when someone doesn't play along. Van Jones is a great example.

If the truth message were as preposterous as they imply, then why would they react with such severity? Their overreaction to the expression of even a hint of doubt, fits into the category "thou doest protest too much." (Shakespeare)

Their overreaction proves the validity of the doubt.

Many citizens don't deal with 9/11 because...

...they just do not know what to do about it IF its true.

They feel powerless even WITHOUT such world shattering malfeasances executed by their own government.

I argue that 80% [or more] of the folks know that the US government had something to do with offing JFK...BUT...that the same citizens would not take actions to do something about it.

Same with 9/11...and THIS is why...

You see me signing off with voting reform.

Becoming...more well informed...more consistent in voting attendance...and demanding more verifiable voting records that can be recounted...are EACH something that the average citizen can "handle".

Truthers often forget what special and strong people we actually are.

We are NOT the average citizen...we got some HUGE shoulders baby!

We really need to give the average citizen SOMETHING THAT THEY CAN ACCOMPLISH IN THEIR DAILY LIVES...something that they can do with the truth about 9/11...and the truth about TONS of other stuff!

Remember the 9/11 RABBIT HOLE...its pretty damned deep...quicksand to some folks...

BTW...the idea expressed in "9/11 TRUTH for World PEACE" is also designed to suggest to long time peace activists that there is "something different to do" with their deep feelings regarding peace...and...

...their brainwashing against the 9/11TM...brought to them by cointelpro without them even knowing it.

Placing the word "World" in this concept MAY also allow peace activists to break out of their crystalized "mindsets" formed 40 years ago...you know...IN THE LAST CENTURY!

Anyway, we need to develop a "taking action primer" for folks that we are bringing on board with 9/11 Truth.

Love, Peace and Progress with:


...just for starters as we collectivize to throw all the political criminals out...

Robin Hordon
Kingston, WA

News Windup

Fox like the other media that handled this story only had a small line about Jones and his apology about the 9/11 petition he signed and the majority of the story here was about Columbine where he actually spoke the truth as well - the "white kids" have access to psychotropic phamaceuticals for depression, etc., although he doesn't say that, the mass school shootings featured phamaceuticals. About 9/11, all the media gave a one sentence description so as not to get involved in any question in the publics' mind. Actually, Fox using brain washing about the petition.

"9/11 TRUTH for World PEACE"

I especially like:

"9/11 TRUTH ENDS 9/11 WARS"

Fred W

The moderator at AH seems to

The moderator at AH seems to be OK with truth. Last night I could not get anything through. This morning I've gotten two messages through. Keep it simple and you may get to make a point.


There's something happening here

and what it is ain't exactly clear. On the front page, a post featuring a video about Robert Gates somehow got grafted onto this post about Webster of Raw Story. At the same time, about ten or so posts that were on the news page just a few hourse ago--posted later than the Webster post and earlier than the Gates post--now appear only on the blogs page. Any explanation?