in response to: 9/11 in Reverse: A Review of the Watchmen - The Indypendent

Real Truther Says:
March 30th, 2009 at 9:38 am

It’s pretty clear that “independent media” don’t necessarily make good media, or media for the people. If good people can create an alternative forum for the dissemination of information, who is to say that bad people can’t do the exact same thing? Oh sure, that sounds “conspiratorial”, but then the stories of Enron or of Worldcom or Watergate or “Iraq WMD” (need I go on?) all sound conspiratorial because the sad truth is that conspiracies happen all the time.

Indeed, the story allegedly told by Khalid Sheikh Mohammed to his CIA interrogators in Guantanamo is one long conspiracy fable that somehow made it into the 9/11 Commission Report as purported fact. This comic book tale of the evil moozlimsss(!) conspiring to attack America because of their hatred for our freedom is tellingly simplistic and yet somehow those of us who will not accept it on faith alone, who insist on seeing real evidence are the ones accused of succumbing to a knee-jerk reflexive desire for simple definitions of good and evil.

We who question are routinely told that “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence” all the while being told not to question the extraordinary events of 9/11–the unprecedented explosive disintegration of three steel framed high rise buildings even though there is lacking in the official explanations any credible evidence for this being a chance result of two plane imapcts, let alone *extraordinary* evidence of this. Indeed, the NIST admits that it did not conduct a single test on the debris from the world trade center for traces of explosives or incendiaries like thermite even though these are prescribed in fire investigation manuals as essential to rule out arson. Why on earth not? Are they so certain that “al Qaeda” itself could not have planted explosives in these buildings? Furthermore, responsible scientists and building professionals such as the over 600 members of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth HAVE provided extraordinary evidence for the use of explosives that day (see ae911truth.org) but to date the existence of this remarkable organization is ignored by both “mainstream” and “alternative” media outlets. Why?

Doesn’t the fact that over 100 first responders, i.e. police and firefighters on the scene that day, reported in the oral histories collected by the FDNY just weeks after the events that they witnessed explosions all over the towers (including far from the plane impact zones) make the NIST’s failure to test for explosive traces seem, if not suspicious, at least incompetent? Why do the mainstream and alternative media ignore the testimony of these individuals who were in the best position to witness the events? And yet in the absence of any of the abundant evidence that should exist for AA77 hitting the Pentagon–surveillance video, traceable plane parts, etc.–we are told to be satisfied of the truth of that particular claim on the say so of a handful of contradictory eyewitness accounts? Why the double standard here? Don’t extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence?

And finally, why associate all truthseekers with the likes of Alex Jones, a bombastic entertainer and profiteer responsible for “the Obama deception”, instead of with the likes of Prof. David Ray Griffin who has published over 6 critically acclaimed books (see esp. The New Pearl Harbor Revisited and Debunking 9/11 Debunking) on the subject of the deceptions surrounding 9/11? Could it be that people like Alex Jones are putting into practice Nietzsche’s dictum that “the most perfidious way to harm a cause consists of defending it deliberately with faulty arguments?” Surely not, since that sounds like a conspiracy theory, right? Nietzsche should have realized that human beings are just too good and decent to deceive each other in that manner, right?