Support 911Blogger

'Solving the Mystery of WTC 7' surpasses One Million Views

'Architects & Engineers: Solving the Mystery of WTC 7,' the 15-minute documentary by AE911Truth, has reached the 1 million views milestone on YouTube. Narrated by actor, Ed Asner, the video decimates the official account of Building 7's destruction on 9/11.

More than 6 Million total views!

2.7 million views on PBS as part of the "Spotlight On" series. Plus it remained in rotation for another 2 million views estimated. Plus 1 million Youtube views. PBS + Youtube = 6 Million

Lets put those numbers in perspective......

As a film buff, I make sure that I have access to as much product that I can get my hands on; that, and the fact that I have ADHD one of the benchmarks of which is a pathological fear of boredom.
Often, I get down to the point that, having seen everything (over 1500 films on Netflix alone) that all I have left are documentaries. Some documentaries turn out to be the best of the films I have seen but often they are like well, homework. I am sure I am not alone in this characterization so for people to take the chance to watch this thing, despite the limitations of this genre, is simply amazing. Of the limitations of the genre, what makes them seem like "homework," is the limited range these things seem to fall into. One could be a panoramic view of Genghis Khan sweeping across the Steppes, while another, on the same topic could be a claustrophobic look at Mongolian recipes for Yak fat. So,yes, these viewer levels are quite amazing.


Having studied the events of 9/11 since 2004, the most profound thing I've learned is that people in general put personal interest before truth and justice.

People in General...

Lawrence Kohlberg's stages of moral development

Kohlberg's six stages can be more generally grouped into three levels of two stages each: pre-conventional, conventional and post-conventional.[7][8][9] Following Piaget's constructivist requirements for a stage model, as described in his theory of cognitive development, it is extremely rare to regress in stages—to lose the use of higher stage abilities.[14][15] Stages cannot be skipped; each provides a new and necessary perspective, more comprehensive and differentiated than its predecessors but integrated with them.[14][15]

Level 1 (Pre-Conventional)

1. Obedience and punishment orientation

(How can I avoid punishment?)

2. Self-interest orientation

(What's in it for me?)
(Paying for a benefit)

Level 2 (Conventional)

3. Interpersonal accord and conformity

(Social norms)
(The good boy/good girl attitude)

4. Authority and social-order maintaining orientation

(Law and order morality)

Level 3 (Post-Conventional)

5. Social contract orientation
6. Universal ethical principles

(Principled conscience)

In Stage six (universal ethical principles driven), moral reasoning is based on abstract reasoning using universal ethical principles. Laws are valid only insofar as they are grounded in justice, and a commitment to justice carries with it an obligation to disobey unjust laws. Legal rights are unnecessary, as social contracts are not essential for deontic moral action. Decisions are not reached hypothetically in a conditional way but rather categorically in an absolute way, as in the philosophy of Immanuel Kant.[18] This involves an individual imagining what they would do in another’s shoes, if they believed what that other person imagines to be true.[19] The resulting consensus is the action taken. In this way action is never a means but always an end in itself; the individual acts because it is right, and not because it is instrumental, expected, legal, or previously agreed upon. Although Kohlberg insisted that stage six exists, he found it difficult to identify individuals who consistently operated at that level.[15]

Wouldn't deign to read this as...........

Wouldn't deign to read this; I said that but I did read it as after all I am not a cretin. A young female protégé of mine was worried about starting her course in psychology. "Will I do well," she asked seeking blessed reassurance as she was guarding her GPA quite closely. My response was a query: "do you know your times tables, and are you remembering your dates in your history classes?" "I don't understand," she said, "I don't see how that is pertinent." "Well, I said, psychology is merely a study of lists and if you can manage your groceries you will do well." She was incensed as I think a lot of young people look forward to the subject in hopes for some kind of understanding of personal problems they might have or some kind of psychic healing. "Well, I will have to ask my professor, she said," as she always did in these cases as if she was going to consult a sibyl on Olympus. The next day she came back with her bulky textbook opened to a page which she had heavily annotated with a yellow highlighter with the words: "Show Peter!!!!" The passage that she had chosen, and a matter I was well aware of, was the statement that: "once a group of psychologists had constructed a list that was so detailed, lengthy and unwieldy, that it was impossible to manipulate or put to any practical use."

Why is this even worth commenting on? Because lists, and the manipulation of them is so entrenched in psychology that it obviates in many cases the ability to even begin to understand the La Condition humaine, to borrow a phrase from Malraux as the following manipulation of two lists should show quite clearly. In a course entitled Biologic Basis for Human Behavior the following tautology is held forth as dictum: Freudianism is a biologic science because like biology with its stage theory of development of egg, larva, pupae, and adult, Freudianism concomitantly embraces a stage theory of development of an organism comprised in the Oral,Anal,Phallic,Latency, and Genital stages and this suffices to engender a biologic basis for Freudian pronouncements. Yah, they actually said that.

So, I hate to be hypercritical, but congratulations: you have made a great advancement in science, the discovery of yet another list in psychology and this is all the more unfortunate when one considers the studies of George A. Miller on memory and specifically what he called "chunking" wherein he described the limits on the exigencies of the brain to deal with quantities of information. Ah, to many lists and so little time.

Peter O'Rourke
B.A. Psychology

Anti-Torture Psychologists Respond

So, there are pro-torture psychologists? I guess they didn't get your list:

Mark Basile

Here is a recent radio interview with Mark Basile who is pictured on the frame from the film above.


We all know this video's view count has been suppressed, in the first few weeks alone it was seen by 700,000+, a year later, only 300,000 more? Do not be fooled, I'm betting at least 10 million have actually watched this. Keep a positive attitude, youtube prevents videos from going viral.

This is my opinion.