Introduction

In a previous article I have discussed why the 9-11 truth Movement has clearly won the fight (Why 9-11 Truth Has Won). For a time it looked as if it would all go the way of the Kennedy Assassination; the nation afraid to know the truth and a good many powerful people happy to see it kept from them. But the 9-11 issue has implications and public interest much wider than the United States and 9-11 Truth has persisted and grown its numbers. There is still a long way to go but the way is now clear and success is now inevitable, for one very good reason; unlike the Kennedy Assassination there are solid, indisputable facts that completely expose the falsehood of the official explanation. But despite controlled demolition of the official conspiracy theory there are many sceptics who remain doubtful.

The Scepticism of William Blum

One of the most reasoning and articulate of them is William Blum, author of Killing Hope and Rogue State who expressed his doubts in a set of specific points that he felt the 9-11 Truth Movement needed to explain.

Blum is an exceptional thinker, one of those who can reason unaffected by the assumptions and intellectual climate of his cultural context (Thinking “Outside the Box” as the corporate jargon is fond of putting it). In consequence of this he abandoned a career in the state department and instead, catalogued the many interventions by his government in the affairs of other countries, undermining “freedom and democracy” around the world; a veritable “rogue state” obsessed with extinguishing a perceived “communist threat” and killing the hopes of ordinary, or even exceptional people, of finding a human-oriented social and economic order free of both capitalist exploitation and totalitarian domination.

In preparing the ground for expressing his doubts Blum acknowledges the absurdity of the official conspiracy theory and that “The Truthers have done great work”. He goes on to reason much as Ahmadinejad attempted to reason with the wailing wall of the UN – that there are three popular theories about 9-11 – the official theory (which he did not mention is now debunked on the basis of verifiable, irrefutable science), the ‘government did it’ theory and ‘the government let it happen’ theory.

Before going on, it must be said that there is a logical flaw in Blum’s reasoning. Proving controlled demolition is all that is needed to debunk the official conspiracy theory. It doesn’t commit the 9-11 Truth Movement to the assertion of an “inside job” (though obviously, most believe that is the case) and certainly not exclusively to the ‘government did it’ theory. It therefore doesn’t follow that it’s up to the 9-11 Truth Movement to prove, or even explain, “how the government pulled it off”. Debunking the official conspiracy theory provides more than reasonable grounds for demanding a new investigation. That is all that is necessary. There must be a new investigation.

But Blum goes on to make the incorrect assertion that “the government lies and the fact of these lies proves that it was an inside job”. Not only is this a flawed argument but also it is neither a generally accepted assertion of the 9-11 Truth Movement, nor should it necessarily be. This is something to be ascertained by a new investigation, which needs to determine how and by whom a clandestine, controlled demolition was achieved. The rest should follow.

Nevertheless, while acknowledging that “they are not obliged to do so” Blum further asserts that “for me, and I’m sure for many others, to accept the idea of an inside job I need to know what actually took place”, or in other words to “fully explain what actually took place”.  If that is what Blum and others want then they should put their weight behind the 9-11 Truth Movement to demand a new investigation.

While as mentioned before, Blum is one of those “outside the box” thinkers, this is nevertheless, the same kind of thinking that plagued the “inside job” argument of the Kennedy Assassination which goes something like this: “I am so reluctant to believe that my government is so criminally corrupt as to kill its own citizens that unless you can prove to me beyond doubt that there were assassins on the grassy knoll as part of a military style crossfire assault I am prepared to believe the absurd explanation of a ‘magic bullet’”. This is hard to believe from someone like Blum (which only emphasises the power of the processes of intellectual containment in the US) but it follows logically from his assertion that explaining the things he and others “need to know” is a prerequisite “to accept the idea of an inside job”, which has hitherto been the real foundation of the corporate mainstream media’s “conspiracy theory” chant.

So Blum goes on to list the questions he needs answered (discussed below).

Some Suggestions for the Sceptics

Focus on the now proven controlled definition.
In examining what logically flows from the premise of controlled demolition there is a lot to consider, all of which should serve as guide to the new investigation for the discovery of new information, alongside the work of verification of existing information to establish and of course, to analyse the facts about what happened.

For example, on the question of government involvement, the government’s behaviour in relation to the inquiry and the proffering of such an inadequate report strongly suggests a cover-up, although it does not prove it was an “inside job”. The inquiry itself needs to be investigated as part of a new investigation. But there are many other issues that imply, though not prove, some sort of government involvement and which need to be examined:

• The failure of national air security to intercept the hijacked planes,
• The alleged shutdown of a CIA investigation that had identified the hijackers and their intentions long before 9-11
• The alleged FIMA exercise at WTC on 9-10
• The alleged internal warnings not to fly that day
• The implications of the PNAC document
• The connection with the head of Pakistani Secret Services
• The connections with the Bin Laden family.
• What was on the videos taken from the Pentagon and environs?
• Why was the debris whisked away to China?
• How did 9-11 so quickly translate to a war in Afghanistan?

But there are other lines of investigation that can be pursued to establish who was involved and how, for example:

• How did the explosives get into the WTC towers and placed for demolition?
• Who was involved in the insider trading on Airline shares?
• Why was Building 7 “pulled”

The other guide to the investigation should be the obvious “Who benefits?”

At least in the case of the WTC towers there were obviously planes involved (despite lunatic fringe assertions they were holograms – what the movement has had to overcome!). Ascertaining if these were actual hijackings or remote controlled frauds should be a straightforward if arduous business of ascertaining passenger lists and following up on each passenger. This should be done for all of the flights and passengers involved.

The fact that actual planes hit the WTC buildings and a real hijacking appears to have been involved doesn’t necessitate that a hijacked plane hit the Pentagon. Evidence suggesting that this was a missile strike is not necessarily inconsistent. For example, the actual attack planned by the terrorists may have intended only to strike the WTC but their plan was both enabled and enhanced not only by ensuring collapse of the WTC towers but also by the mocking up of attacks on the Pentagon and White House.

In such circumstances the intended White House attack could have been anything between a thwarted real terrorist attack and a complete fabrication. All of the questions posed by Blum can be answered speculatively in terms of a “government let it happen” theory, which Blum seems to favour:

1. Were the planes that hit the towers hijacked?
Pilot error seems improbable. The only plausible alternative is that they were drones. Whatever hit the towers they collapsed as a result of the collision but of controlled demolition

2. Did they contain the passengers named amongst the dead?
This is something that should be easily confirmed, it’s just a matter of passenger lists, birth certificates, death certificates and verifying real people..

3. Were they piloted or were they flying via remote control?
Open – subject to investigation

4. If piloted, who were the pilots?
”The hijackers” seems the likely answer, but Blum clearly means that the hijackers should be specifically identified. Who would disagree? Presently it’s a government manufactured fiction – subject to investigation

5. Did a plane crash in Pennsylvania? If so, why? What happened to the remains of the plane and the passengers?
The alleged intended attack on the White House may have been a thwarted real hijacking or a complete fiction – passenger list verification is a good place to start investigating this and can be established conclusively

6. Did a plane crash into the Pentagon? What happened to the remains of the plane and the passengers?
There will be clear answers to this question on the video footage currently held by the government. Surely these need to be made public.

7. Why do Truthers say that some, or many, of the named Arabic hijackers have been found alive living abroad? Why couldn’t their identity have been stolen by the hijackers?
The BBC has reported that some of the alleged hijackers are alive and well and very amused – not the “Truthers”. Not all “Truthers” have drawn the same conclusions about this. Regardless of anyone’s conclusions, surely this also, needs to be investigated. It only adds to the case for asserting demands for a new investigation – the controlled demolition proves the official theory false.

A Solid Conclusion

The key task of the 9-11 Truth Movement has already reached a solid conclusion. There are now substantial grounds to demand a new investigation of 9-11 and the public demand for it both international and within the US is growing rapidly.

The key questions regarding the who and how of controlled demolition, the obvious shortcomings of the original investigation and the established body of other evidence that has been accumulated point the way for the new investigation which, in turn must also be carried to an acceptable, solid conclusion.

Based on this event an administration led by a president with a very dubious mandate, shockingly poor statesmanship and even questionable intelligence made a hasty decision to go to war. The attack on Afghanistan, displacing the government of a sovereign state in an act contrary to international law resulted in thousands of deaths on both sides, most of them innocent Afghan civilians and is ongoing with Afghans engaged in a genuine and legitimate fight for their freedom. The Afghan government allegedly refused to hand over Usama bin-Laden but in fact, they made several offers to hand him over (at least one of them on the public record) if evidence could be provided of his guilt – none was provided. To this day the FBI concedes there is no solid evidence of bin-Laden’s involvement, which in itself is an outrage. Objection to the war was worldwide and intense, even at the time and persists to the present day, even more widespread and intense. There is a widely held belief that the war was initiated for reasons of empire having nothing to do with terrorism and the evidence for this global conviction has grown significantly.

The illegal, aggressive war in Iraq has destroyed a nation and ended or ruined millions of lives. The reasons for it were an obvious fraud and the clearly unfounded association of Saddam Hussein with Usama bin-Laden only intensifies suspicions regarding the way that the US administration cynically exploited the 9-11 event for its imperialist ambitions.

We have been dragged back to the insane and barbaric religious wars of the Middle Ages as if nothing has advanced in human civilisation other than our technological capacity to kill each other. We have inflamed hatred and religious fanaticism at a time when reason, mutual trust and cooperation are essential if we are to find rational solutions to our critically urgent environmental, over-population and over-consumption problems. Far from addressing these problems we may find ourselves embroiled in a century of bitter conflict with deranged religious fanatics (such as the Pope and his direct return to centuries old insults to Islam) being used as cover for the psychopaths who own western capitalism to engage in resource plunder.

Re-examining 9-11 with integrity and a will to find the truth, and to address all that has arisen from that event in the same spirit, offers a hope that we may undo at least some of the damage, change course and bring this era of sinister Machiavellian approach to world affairs to a solid conclusion.

Humanity urgently needs a focus and resolve that is unprecedented and improbable, if we are to realise that one hope. Exposing the truth about 9-11 and applying the law to the many people involved in that event and the illegal wars and many war crimes that flowed from it is the path we need to follow.

Sceptics for 9-11 Truth like William Blum need to start “coming out”.

[ edited for readability - LW]