Personal attacks requires motive and intent. In my experience, personal attacks and irrelevant commentary are used to intentionally create hostility within the 9/11 truth movement, possibly with the intent of distracting attention away from facts, evidence, and legitimate debate. Personal attacks are a diversion and distraction similarly exploited by FOX propaganda specialists like Bill O'Reilly and Michelle Malkin. Likewise, the 9/11 truth "debunker" site "Screw Loose Change" strongly emphasizes personal attacks against 9/11 truth advocates instead of debate. As Jim Fetzer explains (note: see this article for my observations on Fetzer and his definitions of disinformation), Ad hominem attacks are disinformation:
As for CIT's claim that the plane flew "north of CITGO" gas station, this has long been debunked. Among the witnesses that CIT cites as "evidence" include witness accounts (5 years later) who said the plane hit the Pentagon (implicitly debunking the north flight path), appeared to show up on different location on the CITGO gas station video from where they claimed to be (CIT claiming that the perpetrators purposely altered the video), with another witness claiming that light poles were "not knocked down" where they were in fact, knocked down.
Disingenuously, CIT claims that these witnesses are somehow "smoking gun" evidence of a "military slight of hand deception" that "fooled" witnesses into somehow thinking that a plane hit the Pentagon despite the above and other glaring problems with the theory.
Kevin Barrett is a prominent 9/11 activist. While he has significantly contributed awareness for the 9/11 truth movement, he has also damaged its credibility with damaging associations, discrediting theories, and controversial statements.
Support for TV fakery, Space Beam Weapons and other debunked 9/11 theories
Barrett has supported 9/11 disinformation conferences such as The Science and the Politics of 9/11: What's Controversial, What's Not?[1]On 911blogger Barrett promoted this conference with the plea to “Join the cutting edge of the movement to save our planet.”[2] As Jim Hoffman observes, “Jim Fetzer's conference in Madison in August of 2007… included Morgan Reynolds, Judy Wood, Dave Von Kleist, Barbara Honegger, and others, and featured conclusively debunked theories, such as hologram planes and Tower-vaporizing space beam weapons.”[3]
In an interview after the conference, Barrett explained, "We can prove it's an inside job Seven Ways from Sunday--so it’s not that big a deal... how the illusions of... suicide hijackings were created."[4] Clearly, many disagree with this sentiment as Barrett complained that:
“‘Many participants lamented the phenomenon of "internet lynch mobs" comprised of angry emailers and bloggers demanding that this or that researcher be banished for heresy. Often these internet lynch mobs are made up of people who have not carefully studied the research issues that they so confidently pronounce on. Barrett urged those who find controversial research issues a distraction from 9/11 activism to eitherstudy those issues with an open mind, or ignore them and focus on activism. The worst thing to do is waste time and energy on fruitless infighting.’”[5]
In the film Ripple Effect Barrett says, “I’ve looked at various hypotheses about what might have happened with the plane hits on the World Trade Center, and frankly, I haven’t come to a firm conclusion—I do think that some of the pod images are suggestive of the possibility of a plane switch. I’m not convinced that that’s the case however… pods under the planes suggesting they might be some sort of military plane, flashes suggesting that they might be igniting large fireballs for spectacular television effect—personally I’m not convinced that that’s true, but I’m also far—I’m not convinced that we need to dismiss that hypothesis. I’ve looked at these images and some of the pod images I think… don’t just look to me like optical illusions—like the people who debunk this claim.”[8]
Barrett on “TV fakery”
In a Scholars for 9/11 Truth press release, Barrett said, “I guess I’ll have to take this possibility more seriously now… In the past, I have assumed video fakery was far-fetched and that anyone who endorsed it was probably a crackpot! Now I’m not so sure.”[9]
Barrett on “Directed Energy Weapons”
In late 2006, Barrett endorsed the study of directed energy weapons on his radio show to explain the destruction of the world trade center on 9/11:
“I would urge people to go take a look at this material… 'I think we don't really need any kind of unanimity from researchers… I don't think this is doing any permanent harm to the 9/11 movement… 'I think people who are blowing it up into something really huge are either sort of panicking or just making a tactical mistake… [the perpetrators] would have taken advantage of the most advanced technologies of deception and demolition, and in fact they would have arranged it in such a way that anyone who figured out exactly what happened and described it accurately would sound completely insane… So, I wouldn’t rule out anythingand I think we need to allow researchers to pursue their own path…”[10]
Support for Controversial 9/11 activists
Kevin Barrett forms the dynamic duo with Jim Fetzer.[11] His radio show has featured interviews with Morgan Reynolds, Judy Wood, Captain May,[12] and other controversial figures. Barrett describes Reynolds as “a provocateur in the good sense.”[13]
The Theory of Dialog and Social Interaction…
"The way I study [social interaction] is through dialog... I think we could use a little more conviviality within the Truth movement... one reason for that is that we want people to join us... by reaching out to them in a conviviality way... people will come on board... I think we need to enjoy dialog including with people that we don't agree with... [especially] non-9/11 truth people... I want dialog with [people who support the official story]—dialog is good... this is the key to the politics that we need to practice..."[14]
…Versus Practice
Barrett wasn’t joking when he said “I am not a hardcore nonviolence activist".[15] In response to a journalist who covered the disinformation conference The Science and the Politics of 9/11: What's Controversial, What's Not?Barrett wrote, "As the example of Nuremburg suggests, journalists who act as propagandists for war crimes may one day find themselves on the scaffold. You would be well advised to strive for more balanced and accurate coverage in the future."[16]
Similar comments include:
"Amy [Goodman], you will one day find yourself on the scaffold, condemned to hang alongside the other Goebbels-style traitors and mass-murder-coverup-conspirators from the corporate media you pretend to criticize… I stand by the opinion that the support Amy Goodman has given to the worst blood libel in human history, and her ensuing participation in the murder of over a million people in Iraq, Afghanistan and the USA, constitutes complicity in high treason, mass murder, war crimes, and other crimes against humanity. "[17]
"The State Department doesn’t know what it is talking about, but what else is new? Frankly I wonder who wrote this for the State Department. We need to find out because they are going to have to go up there on the scaffold with the other people who planned the attacks and more importantly the people who covered them up. The people complicit in the attacks need to be tried, condemned and sentenced."[18]
James B. of Screwloosechange observed that, "First Kevin Barrett said that Fox News employees should be hung. Then he said that the producers of United 93 should be tried for inciting war crimes, now he is expanding his list of those on death row to include just about every journalist in the world, while discussing an e-mail exchange he had with a journalist for Harper’s Magazine: 'My response to that was, you know, I think that anybody who has drawn a paycheck from the major mainstream journalistic outlets in the past should be up on the scaffold for the crimes of high treason and crimes against humanity.'"[19]
"If you are not aware that you're covering up for that traitor and mass murderer and yes insurance fraudster Silverstein, you'll figure it out when you're beside him on the scaffold. I'll be saving this email as evidence for your trial."[20]
"The Capital Times ownership and editorial decision-makers, like those of other mainstream U.S. news outlets, are setting themselves up to be prosecuted as war criminals. By publishing the endless stream of lies that brought us into the Iraqi and Afghan quagmires, without exercising duly diligent skepticism, journalistic decision-makers are following in the footsteps of Joseph Goebbels -- a path that ends at the scaffold."[21]
"Kevin Barrett contacted me after he heard that Kevin Ryan backed out of a debate opportunity with me. Barrett wanted to know if I was interested in debating him on his radio show, or perhaps in a live debate when he is in New York. In his email to me, he copied a response he had sent to a listener, in which he said that I was complicit in mass murder and a candidate for a war crimes tribunal, with the gallows perhaps in my future. I guess that's his idea of an inducement to debate."[22]
"As I understand it, the usual penalty for treason is hanging, not death by firing squad. In that case, it is likely that Mr. Bush will be hanged, not shot, for treason. By making this prediction, am I running the risk of having my clothesline confiscated? I also think that there is a real possibility that Mr. Bush will be electrocuted for the mass murder of 2,500 Americans in the World Trade Center. By stating this, am I risking a court order shutting off my electricity? I also foresee a small but very real possibility that Mr. Bush will die in the gas chamber. Does raising this possibility mean that my gas could be cut off?"[23]
"By blinding people to the need to take the only effective action, [Noam Chomsky] is bringing on disaster. If he convinces even one person to do something other than work for 9/11 truth, he may as well have personally murdered all 6 billion people on earth."[24]
Kevin Barrett on the Holocaust
Barrett is a founder of MUJCA,[25] “a group of scholars, religious leaders and activists dedicated to uniting members of the Jewish, Christian and Islamic faiths in pursuit of 9/11 truth.”[26]
Despite being a founder of an alliance of diverse religions, Stephen Lemons observed that “Barrett said he could not dismiss the propaganda of Holocaust deniers like David Irving and Ernst Zundel, the latter of whom's currently doing five years in a German clink for anti-Semitic agitating.”[27] The evidence for this statement was an email sent by Barrett in late 2005:
“…it seems tragic that systematic Zionist Big Lies… have cast legitimate doubt upon ANYTHING Jews say about Jews and their recent history, including the Holocaust… I cannot possibly dismiss the arguments of people like Green, Irving, and even Zundel. And even if the 6-million-deliberately-murdered-for-purely-ethnic-reasons figure is correct—which it very well may be; I have grown agnostic on that after studying the Big Lies of Zionism—I would still have to characterize the Holocaust as it is taught in the US as a hideously destructive myth. (A myth is a sacred, worldview-inaugurating story its users believe to be true.) The upshot: nobody in the debate should be boycotted or vilified; nobody should be arrested for expressing honestly-held opinions; all voices should be heard; and the destructive myths and mind-numbing censorship imposed by Zionism must be swept clean so an honest assessment of history can emerge—at which point the Holocaust revisionists may very well be proven incorrect. And even if they are, they obviously should not be harassed or vilified, much less jailed!! In the meantime, voices like Green and AFPN should be heard and subjected to rational criticism, not vilified or silenced. And the use of state power to enforce Holocaust Fundamentalism must end!”[28]
Mark Rabinowitz from Oilempire.us questions why Captain May is promoted by websites like NY911Truth and Barrett’s MUJCA, supposedly a part Jewish alliance:
"Why does both MUJCA and NY911Truth feature a blatant anti-semite on their sites?... [Captain May] sounds reasonable enough on these pages, but apparently no one has read a single other thing the supposed ‘former’ intelligence Captain speculating about numerology has written. One would imagine that the Jewish members of the Muslim Christian Jewish Alliance might take offense, but apparently they haven't noticed either."[29]
“Without a method to distinguish true from false theories, investigations of the crime will remain mired in ambiguities. The scientific method is the proven method of distinguishing between true and false theories. The scientific method depends on critique (peer review). A culture hostile to critique is antagonistic to science and to the development of a persuasive, actionable case for investigation of the crimes of 9/11/01. Such a culture supports stereotypes of challenges to the official story as irrational and faith-based.” Critique of 9/11 Mysteries: The Necessity of Critique
7-24-07 Capt May on Dr. Kevin Barrett's show talking about his article last week on The Price Of Liberty, "Next 9/11, Summer 2007?"
7-3-07 Capt May on Dr. Kevin Barrett's 9/11 Empire show addressed the prospects and probabilities of a July false flag attack on U.S. soil, and of a consequent escalation of the Mideast War (Iraq and Afghanistan) to World War Three (Syria and Iran, et al.).
In an editorial entitled "War on Terrorism is Bogus" Michael Meacher, a former Member of UK parliament wrote:
[The] "global war on terrorism" has the hallmarks of a political myth propagated to pave the way for a wholly different agenda - the US goal of world hegemony, built around securing by force command over the oil supplies required to drive the whole project.
Who is Al Qaeda? As noted by Michel Chossudovsky:
Ironically, Al Qaeda --the 'outside enemy of America' as well as the alleged architect of the 9/11 attacks-- is a creation of the CIA. From the outset of the Soviet-Afghan war in the early 1980s, the US intelligence apparatus has supported the formation of the 'Islamic brigades'.
As former National Security Adviser to President Jimmy Carter, Zbigniew Brzezinski explained:
According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahideen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, [on] 24 December 1979. But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise. Indeed, it was July 3, 1979, that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul.
"President George W Bush has given the CIA approval to launch covert "black" operations to achieve regime change in Iran, intelligence sources have revealed. Mr Bush has signed an official document endorsing CIA plans for a propaganda and disinformation campaign intended to destabilise, and eventually topple, the theocratic rule of the mullahs."
"The CIA is giving arms-length support, supplying money and weapons, to an Iranian militant group, Jundullah, which has conducted raids into Iran from bases in Pakistan."
If Shenon's book was your introduction to the simple fact that the 9/11 Commission failed in its mandate on several levels, then you are probably unaware that serious criticism of the 9/11 Commission was entered into the Congressional Record of the 109th Congress. This criticism was the result of a Congressional Briefing conducted by former Congressional Representative, Cynthia McKinney of Georgia. (McKinney is currently seeking the Presidential nomination for the Green Party of the United States.)
The briefing was held on July 22nd, 2005, subsequently broadcast by C-SPAN, and studiously ignored by the corporate press. A comprehensive collation of the briefing has not been made available online, but thanks to the magic of YouTube, I have chopped the most pertinent testimonies from that day into neat 10 minute segments that are easily digestible for the busy internet surfer. You may have seen some of the footage from the briefing in the documentary, "Press for Truth", where Lorie Van Auken talked about her husband's fate on 9/11. Beyond that, not much of this footage has been circulating on the net.
The cartoon asks the question "can fire melt steel" and gives a misleading answer.
Yes, fire can melt steel, but only in special conditions as Dr. Thomas Eagar explains:
“The fire is the most misunderstood part of the WTC collapse. Even today, the media report (and many scientists believe) that the steel melted. It is argued that the jet fuel burns very hot, especially with so much fuel present. This is not true.... The temperature of the fire at the WTC was not unusual, and it was most definitely not capable of melting steel. In combustion science, there are three basic types of flames, namely, a jet burner, a premixed flame, and a diffuse flame.... In a diffuse flame, the fuel and the oxidant are not mixed before ignition, but flow together in an uncontrolled manner and combust when the fuel/oxidant ratios reach values within the flammable range. A fireplace is a diffuse flame burning in air, as was the WTC fire. Diffuse flames generate the lowest heat intensities of the three flame types... The maximum flame temperature increase for burning hydrocarbons (jet fuel) in air is, thus, about 1000 °C -- hardly sufficient to melt steel at 1500 °C.” Eagar, T. W. and Musso, C. (2001). “Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse? Science, Engineering, and Speculation”, Journal of the Minerals, Metals and Materials Society, 53/12:8-11 (2001).
Ironically, this cartoon found underneath the blogger's tagline, "The miscellaneous ramblings of a surgeon/scientist on medicine, quackery, science, pseudoscience" is actually a double straw-man. First of all the NIST report denies molten steel (likely because acknowledging molten steel would be very problematic for the official story--in contrast to what this cartoon would have us believe). Secondly, molten steel can only occur with the conditions described above by Eagar.
Did the steel melt at the WTC as denied by NIST? According to eyewitness testimony of "pools of molten metal", analysis, and other evidence; yes it did. With very unusual temperatures.
"The temperatures required for the observed spherule-formation and evaporation of materials observed in the WTC dust (table 1) are significantly higher than temperatures reachable by the burning of jet fuel and office materials in the WTC buildings (table 2). The temperatures required to melt iron (1,538 °C) and molybdenum (2,623 °C), and to vaporize lead (1,740 °C) and aluminosilicates (~2,760°C), are completely out of reach of the fires in the WTC buildings (maximum 1,100 °C). We wish to call attention to this discrepancy: the official view implicating fires as the main cause for the ultimate collapses of the WTC Towers and WTC 7 (FEMA [13], NIST [15] ) is inadequate to explain this temperature gap and is therefore incomplete at best. The formation of numerous metal-rich spherules is also remarkable, for it implies formation of high-temperature droplets of the molten metals, dispersed in the air where they cool to form spherules." Extremely high temperatures during the World Trade Center destruction, Steven E. Jones, Jeffrey Farrer, Gregory S. Jenkins, Frank Legge, James Gourley, Kevin Ryan, Daniel Farnsworth, and Crockett Grabbe.
Is this the only evidence of molten steel? Hardly. In fact, "a fire protection engineer and two science professors" published a brief report about steel taken from Building 7, revealing:
"a phenomenon never before observed in building fires: eutectic reactions, which caused "intergranular melting capable of turning a solid steel girder into Swiss cheese." The New York Times described this as "perhaps the deepest mystery uncovered in the investigation."
What does it all mean? The NIST report denies this evidence even though some of it made its way into the previous FEMA report. This is exemplified by John Gross, who denied the existence of molten steel:
There is compelling evidence that the steel melted, and no official explanation has been given. Instead, official reports have been forced to deny the existence of molten steel to support the official story that fires caused the Towers and Building 7 to collapse.
1. When did the conspiracy theories start to come around?
The 9/11 official story is a "conspiracy" of 19 hijackers and Osama Bin Laden. In response to the attacks, 9/11 Family members demanded an investigation. Mindy Kleinberg, in an opening address to the 9/11 Commission:
“It has been said that the intelligence agencies have to be right 100% of the time. And the terrorists only have to get lucky once. This explanation for the devastating attacks of September 11th, simple on its face, is wrong in its value, because the 9-11 terrorists were not just lucky once. They were lucky over and over again. When you have this repeated pattern of broken protocols, broken laws, broken communication, one cannot still call it luck. If at some point, we don’t look to hold the individuals accountable for not doing their jobs, properly, then how can we ever expect for terrorists to not get lucky again?”
The 9/11 family members demanded accountability for the 9/11 attacks. Who was held responsible for the attacks? Instead of reprimand, key officials were promoted:
Former Senator Gary Hart observes that, “in terms of accountability, I think this is one of the great mysteries of the last three or four years. Three thousand Americans died three years ago, and no one lost his or her job over it. A president who says that he is a strong president, and those around him say he is, did not fire anyone. Either he was misled, in which case, somebody should have been fired. Or he misled us, in which case he should be fired.”[4] Senator Charles Grassley similarly noted that “I can’t think of a single person being held accountable anywhere in government for what went on and what went wrong prior to Sept. 11. It seems that nobody in government makes any mistakes anymore.” According to testimony given to Congress these statements are accurate; not one single individual within the CIA, FBI, and NSA has been reprimanded, punished, or fired for the events of 9/11.
2. Do you think we will ever find out the "truth"? Explain.
It depends. Key facts will remain unknown unless another investigation takes place. Will the truth ever be known? Former CIA analyst Ray McGovern explains that, "The whole mystique of intelligence is that you acquire this… very valuable information covertly… if truth be told, about 80%—eight, zero—of any of the information that one needs is available in open source materials.” In other words, while the entire truth may or may not be known, a great deal of the facts are available to us. Only another investigation could get answers to some key questions.
3. What do you think happened to the Pentagon on 9/11?
A commercial 757 airliner impact as explained in an excellent analysis by Jim Hoffman. There is significant controversy over this among skeptics of the official story. A significant reason for this is that physical evidence can be ambiguous in real life situations. However, the overwhelming eyewitness testimony reports of an impact, plane parts, light poles, and other evidence points to a plane impact. The key question here is why was there no interception of the incoming plane 80 minutes after the first off course plane? As Norman Mineta said in testimony to the 9/11 commission (but omitted from the final report):
"[Does] not actually include the structural behavior of the tower after the conditions for collapse initiation were reached." NIST, 2005, p. 80, fn. 12
In other words, the 20 million dollar report does not explain or even offer a theory to explain how the towers collapsed completely to the ground. The pancake theory was discarded and abandoned by NIST and the report only attempts to show that fires initiated the collapse. For these and other reasons, many have offered alternative explanations for the collapse of the towers. I believe that a controlled demolition was responsible for the destruction of the towers, but we need an investigation to determine how this was accomplished and who exactly was responsible.
5. What do you think happened to Flight 93 on 9/11?
“Consider that an aircraft emergency exists ... when: ...There is unexpected loss of radar contact and radio communications with any ...aircraft.”[13] —FAA Order 7110.65M 10-2-5 (6) “If ... you are in doubt that a situation constitutes an emergency or potential emergency, handle it as though it were an emergency.”[14] —FAA Order 7110.65M 10-1-1-c (7)
In fact, Laura Brown of the FAA testified to the 9/11 commission that:
6. Were you in any of the areas where the attacks occurred at the time? If so, did you think any mischievous activity was going on?
No, I was not directly impacted by the attacks. I saw them on the news later in the day. I was surprised that hijackers were identified so quickly, the collapse of building 7 which looked like a perfect controlled demolition, and the Pentagon scene, which I found it surprising that a plane was supposed to have crashed there. The collapse of the World Trade Center looked shocking, and I waited to hear the official explanation, which I now reject.
7. What do you think about the 9/11 commission report?
The 9/11 commission report omitted key pieces of evidence and testimony that was even reported to them directly, some of which was listed here (see Norman Mineta and Laura Brown testimony). Other key facts and questions were not addressed, such as the War Games and their impact on the attacks. Some officials gave contradictory and even false statements that were not seriously addressed or questioned by the commissioners.
8. Why did you start believing in these conspiracy theories?
Not all "conspiracy theories" are true. Not all theories account for all of the facts or offer the best explanation. There are many theories about 9/11 that are spread deliberately to discredit legitimate questions about the attack through guilt by association. The phrase "conspiracy theory" has been used by the Mainstream media to silence and intimidate discussion about serious questions about the attacks that many family members have had since the beginning. For example, only 30% of their 400 questions were ever addressed by the 9/11 commission. This is a "conspiracy fact", not a "theory".
As well, the media has reported extremely damaging facts about 9/11 only to never follow up on their own facts or put them together.
Furthermore, "Conspiracy theory" is a term often used in a misleading and biased way. The 9/11 official story is a conspiracy theory of outlandish incompetence. It alleges that terrorists successfully evaded a multi-billion-dollar defense establishment including NORAD, standard FAA intercept procedures, US airbases, the FBI, the CIA, the NSA, international intelligence agencies and more, without any significant or effective resistance. To believe the official story, you have to dismiss countless contradictory facts left out of the 9/11 commission report and believe that it is acceptable that instead of reprimand, those most responsible for preventing the attacks were promoted. The head of NORAD--responsible for air defenses on 9/11 was promoted three days after the attack.
9. What are some good books, articles, websites, etc. on 9/11 conspiracy theories?
There has been great research into 9/11, but there has also been misleading information spread by even the most careful and credible researchers and authors (disinformation and misinformation). Some present accurate information mixed with inaccurate information. I recommend, 9/11 Truth: Essential Reading
10. Can you tell me any information that I have not thought of?
In a revelation bound to cast a pall over the 9/11 Commission, Philip Shenon will report in a forthcoming book that the panel’s executive director, Philip Zelikow, engaged in “surreptitious” communications with presidential adviser Karl Rove and other Bush administration officials during the commission’s 20-month investigation into the 9/11 attacks... Karen Heitkotter, the commission’s executive secretary, was taken aback on June 23, 2003 when she answered the telephone for Zelikow at 4:40 PM and heard a voice intone, “This is Karl Rove. I’m looking for Philip.” Heitkotter knew that Zelikow had promised the commissioners he would cut off all contact with senior officials in the Bush administration. Nonetheless, she gave Zelikow’s cell phone number to Rove. The next day there was another call from Rove at 11:35 AM. Subsequently, Zelikow would claim that these calls pertained to his “old job” at the University of Virginia’s Miller Center.
According to Wikipedia, Philip Zelikow
worked with Ernest May and Richard Neustadt on the use, and misuse, of history in policymaking. They observed, as Zelikow noted in his own words, that "contemporary" history is "defined functionally by those critical people and events that go into forming the public's presumptions about its immediate past. The idea of 'public presumption'," he explained, "is akin to William McNeill's notion of 'public myth' but without the negative implication sometimes invoked by the word 'myth.' Such presumptions are beliefs (1) thought to be true (although not necessarily known to be true with certainty), and (2) shared in common within the relevant political community."
The creation of public myths? Interestingly, Mr. Rove is alleged to share this specialty and was believed to have said this in 2002, just before the opening of the 9/11 commission:
“The aide said that guys like me were ‘in what we call the reality-based community,' which he defined as people who ‘believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.’ I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. ‘That's not the way the world really works anymore… We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors… and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.’”
Steve Alten's Perceptive Criticism of the 9/11 Truth Movement
By Arabesque
In an interview with Michael Wolsey, Shell Game author Steve Alten supplied a relevant and important criticism of the 9/11 truth movement. Wolsey's asked, "Do you personally believe that the attacks were allowed to succeed... or do you believe that there was participation... 'inside job'... and if the latter is the case, did you intentionally tone that down to invite other people in who might be hostile to that idea?" Alten criticized the 9/11 truth movement while supplying his answer:
Steve Alten: "...My take on this is that if a real investigation were to happen--a real one, that the trail of evidence would lead directly back to the white house... they would be found guilty of treason. For me to say "let it happen" versus "made it happen"... my objective is to stay above the fray of the 9/11 truth movement.... the 9/11 truth movement, for the terrific work it has done is fragmented. That doesn't help anybody... We need to spread this information out to the masses... let's put it this way. A crime happened. The biggest crime in the history of the world. The perpetrators got away with it so far. The trap has been placed within the movement... I've had people email me and... I've been attacked on blogs... 'Alten doesn't believe in this and Alten doesn't believe in that, so how could we possibly support his book?'... That's a trap.
Michael Wolsey: If you don't agree with everything I say, you must be bad... I've been attacked ruthlessly for that, so I can relate.
The 9/11 truth "it must be bad because you don't agree 100% with what I believe, therefore you are a shill" syndrome is very apparent in some quarters. Ultimately, if the book can get people asking questions and doing research (along with presenting credible facts of its own), I think that would make it successful for what it is. Ultimately, we need many types of media getting people to look at the facts for themselves and get educated.
Clearly, the 9/11 attacks were both ‘made’ and ‘allowed’ to happen in a carefully planned, complex, psychological operation—they would have been impossible without the use of both of these components. The misleading and false LIHOP/ MIHOP paradigm avoids the obvious and meaningful subtleties of reality. As Blogger Jeff Wells comments, “Binary thinking is a mind cancer that retards insight, and unfortunately flourishes in conspiracy culture. ‘The beginning of wisdom,’ said Terrence McKenna, ‘is our ability to accept an inherent messiness in our explanation of what's going on.’”
Mr. Ruppert's opinion is respected by many and I know that he does not give praise easily. According to Alten, Mr. Ruppert met with him after reading his book to advise him on the dark aspects of the 9/11 truth movement and the dangers of speaking out for 9/11 truth. Not too long after the announcement of his book, Alten was attacked by dubious "members" of the 9/11 truth movement. Ruppert's praise was enough to encourage me to get a copy and I will write a review of Alten's Shell Game after I get a chance to read it.
We neither endorse nor espouse any theories or conclusions other than those that will grow out of a responsible, thoughtful, judicious, and comprehensive examination of the facts. We welcome and encourage the support of all Americans, as well as concerned citizens around the world.
We do so because we firmly believe that the victims of the 9/11 attacks have yet to receive proper justice. We firmly believe as Americans we have a moral obligation to take the necessary steps to obtain that justice.
We assert as fact that no authorized, sanctioned body at any level of government has properly investigated the crimes of 9/11, nor the environmental aftermath of the World Trade Center collapses. The extent to which these environmental consequences have negatively affected the health of first responders and others exposed is well known. The fact that almost none of the more than $1.5 billion allocated for the healthcare of our nation’s heroes has been utilized for its intended purpose is a national disgrace. Our heroes deserve better than this. They need medication, not litigation; respect, not neglect.
We believe that Congress and our politicians have forsaken us. Now is the time for all patriotic Americans to unite-in-action in order to secure justice for our fallen, justice for our heroes, and justice for our country and the world.
And we can.
New York State Home Rule Law #37 allows for the citizens, through ballot referendum, to vote directly on whether or not a new investigation will take place. In doing so, it allows for the creation of a Citizen’s Commission to Re-Investigate 9/11.
We, of the NYC 9/11 Ballot Initiative, have initiated a petition drive in order to secure the required number of signatures of registered voters necessary to get the referendum on the November 2008 New York City ballot. We have until May 1, 2008 to do so.
The quest for truth and justice is our sole agenda. We neither endorse nor espouse any a priori theories or conclusions other than those that will grow out of a responsible, thoughtful, judicious, and comprehensive examination of the facts. We welcome and encourage the support of all Americans, as well as concerned citizens throughout the world.
Yes. Up to 70% of First Responders and others afflicted have become ill or died, or will likely become ill in the future. There are also reports of birth defects in children of the afflicted workers. The illnesses that have been reported in workers include cancers of the lung, throat, tongue, testicles, breasts, bladder, kidney, colon, intestine, and rare blood cancers, as well as other cancers such as lymphoma, leukemia, Hodgkin's disease and myeloma. The government has yet to allocate the necessary funds to deal with this health crisis, consistently refusing to acknowledge that any of these people are sick because of 9/11. Congress allocated $1 billion to a fund for First Responders and other injured parties, under the name World Trade Center Captive Insurance Company, but so far, none of the over 8,000 sick and injured workers claims filed toward this fund have been granted. To make matters worse, many have suffering terrible financial losses from medical expenses and inability to work.
The Petition:
THE FOLLOWING IS HEREBY DESIRED AND APPROVED AS AN INITIATIVE FOR ADOPTION OF A LOCAL LAW TO AMEND THE NEW YORK CITY CHARTER, TO BE PRESENTED TO VOTERS OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK AT A GENERAL ELECTION OF VOTERS:
1. The title of this local law is “Act to Create a Temporary Independent Commission to Investigate 9/11”. 2. An independent, temporary NYC commission (the “Commission”) is hereby created to conduct a comprehensive, fact-driven investigation into the events that took place on 9/11, as well as to thoroughly examine related events before and after the attacks, including any activities attempting to hide, cover up, impede or obstruct any investigation into these 9/11 events, following wherever the facts may lead. The Commission shall publish one or more reports of their findings. 3. The Commission shall consist of up to 15 Commissioners including Dr. William Pepper (international attorney), Ralph Schoenman (historian), Dr. Edgar Mitchell (Apollo 14 astronaut), Lincoln Chafee (former Senator), Splitting-the-Sky (Mohawk tribal member), Lorie Van Auken (9/11 widow), Ed Asner (actor/activist), Bishop Thomas Gumbleton (Roman Catholic) and others to be appointed by majority vote of the Commission members to bring the Commission up to as many as 15 members and to fill any vacancies thereafter from nominees proposed by any member of the Commission. The Commission shall have a duty to maintain the number of Commissioners at no less than nine and to fill vacancies promptly. 4. The Commission shall act by majority vote, adopt its own Rules of Procedure and shall choose its Chairman, Vice Chairman, Treasurer and Secretary. 5.The Commission shall have the power to issue subpoenas for documents and testimony, take and record testimony, and to apply to the appropriate federal, state, out-of-state or foreign courts for the issuance of subpoenas, Letters Rogatory, or Applications for Mutual Assistance, for service upon persons, corporations, agencies or other entities beyond the subpoena power granted to the Commission. 6. The Commission shall have no authority to act beyond 3 years from the date of their creation by the voters of NYC, except by extension of term and financing through NYC legislation enacted by the City Council or Mayor, or by vote of the electorate at a general election, pursuant to appropriate statute such as Section 37 of the Municipal Home Rule Law or Section 40 of the New York City Charter or other law. 7. The Commission shall have a budget of $10,000,000 per year, for the conduct of its investigation and related activities. Financing shall be entirely drawn from private contributions. No public funds shall be requested or accepted. Pledges and/or promissory notes of specific contributions from wealthy private individuals are being obtained with payment subject to enactment of the Initiative by the voters of New York City. A substantial five figure seed money fund has been established as of January 2008, and a world wide internet fund raising campaign has been launched. In addition, four prominent citizens have pledged substantial matching fund contributions. Celebrity parties, concerts and other fund raising gatherings and activities are also being planned to take place throughout the months of the Petition drive. Cumulatively, these sources will provide for the funding of the investigation. 8. Commission disbursements shall require the signatures of at least two Commissioners serving under the Treasurer on the Commission’s Finance Committee which shall consist of a total of three Commissioners appointed by the Commission. The Commission’s finances and accounts shall be audited each year by an independent public accounting firm appointed by the Commission. 9. The Commission will also endeavor to consider the effects of the 9/11 attacks on the health and well being of police, firefighters, the enormous numbers of other first responders, local residents and others affected, and examine ways and means of alleviating the health care crisis which afflicts many of the above through the enforcement of their the right to health care services and compensation. 10. As a law-enforcement agency, the Commission shall have the right not to publicly disclose activities of a secret or confidential nature and shall have the duty of recording the taking of testimony by film or video, and the duty of providing an opportunity for CSpan and other television networks, stations and programs to broadcast Commission proceedings on a live or other basis. 11. Each Commissioner shall be paid a base annual salary of $112,500 (or such other base salary as is then being paid to members of the New York City Council) and the same benefits received by such members, plus reimbursement of out-of-pocket expenses actually incurred on behalf of the Commission, economy air and train fares to and from a Commissioner’s residence outside of New York City. 12. Commissioners may come from any part of the world and shall not be required to maintain a residence in New York City or New York State. 13. The Commissioners are not required to devote 100% or substantially all of their time to the work of the Commission and it is expected that Commissioners will be able to continue with non-conflicting activities. 14. The Commission by a majority vote shall have the right, to seek indictments in any relevant Court located in the City of New York, or elsewhere and, at its discretion, to work with existing prosecutorial agencies or to seek the appointment of a special prosecutor under Section 701 of the New York County Law. 15. Accordingly, the Commission shall have the power to seek the appointment of a special prosecutoranywhere within New York State or in any other State, country or jurisdiction. 16. The Commission as a temporary investigative office of New York City shall, during its lifetime, enjoy the same immunities, privileges and prosecutorial discretion granted under law to elected prosecutors. 17.No New York City employee, past or present, shall have the right to avoid testifying before the Commission based on any prior agreements not to disclose or testify with any officials or agencies of New York City or other governmental agency; the Commission has the power to maintain secrecy and confidentiality of testimony or other disclosures where appropriate. 18. The Commission shall have the power to hire and fire clerical and other employees, attorneys, accountants, paralegals, experts, consultants and others in performance of their respective duties. 19. The Commission shall have the power to enter into contracts; and to create and enforce its rules. 20. This law shall be construed liberally to enable the Commission to conduct an independent investigation into 9/11, and issue one or more reports on the Commission’s investigation, and create one or more websites to provide public information about the work of the Commission. 21 If any provision of this law is held to be unconstitutional or invalid for any reason, the remaining provisions shall be in no manner affected thereby but shall remain in full force and effect.
A Blog Devoted to Discussing 9/11 News, Research, and Disinformation
"When we act, we create our own reality"
“The aide said that guys like me were ‘in what we call the reality-based community,' which he defined as people who ‘believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.’ I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. ‘That's not the way the world really works anymore… We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality.'"
“Arabesque is the best writer in the movement, bar none. Arabesque writes with great clarity on all areas of the 9-11 cover-up, meticulously documenting each point through the use of extensive endnotes. Arabesque has also proven that he isn’t afraid to take on the disinformation specialists who would serve to discredit legitimate questions, research, and evidence which would directly contradict the 'official conspiracy theory' about the events of September 11th, 2001. This, I believe, is one of the most important issues facing the 9-11 movement today.” — Michael Wolsey, Visibility 9-11
"Arabesque, I found a photo of you at a 9/11 conference... Oh yeah...by the way[...] the plane approached on the north side of the Citgo." 
Barrett has supported 9/11 disinformation conferences such as 
“…it seems tragic that systematic Zionist Big Lies… have cast legitimate doubt upon ANYTHING Jews say about Jews and their recent history, including the Holocaust… I cannot possibly dismiss the arguments of people like Green, Irving, and even Zundel. And even if the 6-million-deliberately-murdered-for-purely-ethnic-reasons figure is correct—which it very well may be; I have grown agnostic on that after studying the Big Lies of Zionism—I would still have to characterize the Holocaust as it is taught in the US as a hideously destructive myth. (A myth is a sacred, worldview-inaugurating story its users believe to be true.) The upshot: nobody in the debate should be boycotted or vilified; nobody should be arrested for expressing honestly-held opinions; all voices should be heard; and the destructive myths and mind-numbing censorship imposed by Zionism must be swept clean so an honest assessment of history can emerge—at which point the Holocaust revisionists may very well be proven incorrect. And even if they are, they obviously should not be harassed or vilified, much less jailed!! In the meantime, voices like Green and AFPN should be heard and subjected to rational criticism, not vilified or silenced. And the use of state power to enforce Holocaust Fundamentalism must end!”
