Disclaimer

David Ray Griffin takes a critical look at the official 9/11 Commission Report. Professor Griffin argues that "omissions and distortions" in the report amount to a cover-up by government officials and says that the available evidence suggests that the Bush administration was complicit in the 9/11 attacks. Professor Griffin covers topics he says have been either inadequately answered by the commission. These include questions surrounding the attack on the Pentagon, the way in which the World Trade Center towers collapsed, and the behavior of President Bush and his Secret Service detail following notification that a second plane had hit the WTC. The talk was hosted by the Muslim-Jewish-Christian Alliance for 9/11 Truth [a Faith based group] (www.mujca.com) and took place at the University of Wisconsin in Madison. Includes Q&A.

Watch Book TV Online http://www.booktv.org/watch/ [click here].

37,000,000, or one out of every six Americans, regularly use emotion controlling medical drugs. The users are mostly women. The pushers are doctors; the suppliers are pharmaceutical companies; the profits are stupendous. [click to continue reading]

During early March, 2005 an announcement for a college course called "911 The Road to Tyranny" by Professor Jane T. Christensen caught my eye.

"Course Description

The events of September 11, 2001, indisputably changed the course of American politics and history. This course is offered so students may examine various events and policies leading to 911. In particular, this course will focus largely on the specific destruction in lower Manhattan and the Pentagon. We will examine the official story and analyze it critically. We will consider alternative explanations of what occurred as well. 911 was a catalyst for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq as well as the attack on civil liberties in the United States. We will examine each of these with a critical eye. The goal of this course is to arrive at a solid understanding of how 911 has shaped our political future and to promote critical analysis by students of this catastrophic event and its aftermath.

This course is outside the scope of traditional "political science" in many ways. First it is "unscientific" in that it relies much on eyewitness accounts and speculation. Secondly, there is not yet a solid literature on the September 11 "attacks" or on the war on terrorism. This literature is emerging, particularly on the latter. Thirdly, is course will rely somewhat extensively on alternative news media accounts and a variety of films and videos in lieu of literature."

A few days ago, I am looking at one of my favorite information sites, 911 Truth Action [click to read] and see Jane's name mentioned.

Tom Brockman, from WNCT-TV9, "Professor's 9/11 Website Causes Controversy" [LINK MISSING] and here is Associated Press's take [LINK MISSING], as presented by a number of news carriers.

Searching a little more, I discover numerous attacks ("Professor Nutjob") directed at Ms. Christensen and the only reason is because she is questioning flawed official reports, etc.

For example, one of the few papers carrying Ms. Christensen's story was the Rocky Mount Telegram [MISSING PAGE] who titled their slant as "No science, just politics in this class" and went on to say, " Jane Christensen has every right to believe and discuss any crackpot theory she chooses, but it's hard to understand the relevance of her Web site to higher education." [Ed. Note: Perhaps one needs higher education in order to understand simple relevance?]

Here is Jane's excellent blog, "MEGALINKS in POLITICAL SCIENCE" [click to read] and if you have space, give http://faculty.ncwc.edu/Jchristensen/ a link as a tribute to her courage. - dahbud

Some things are so disturbing that they are almost impossible to believe. That is why, in the 9/11 enigma, less is more.

Until these questions are answered there is no need to establish more doubt. What we have here is solid undisputed evidence that we were never told the truth.

Before you read this article, conduct this test. Try to purchase some stock, or some futures, a mutual fund or some put options, without providing your identity. Go ahead and try it! See if you get anywhere. Find out what happens when you tell the investment firm that you want to make a huge investment anonymously. It can't be done.

Then ask yourself this question: How could someone have placed anonymous put options on American Airlines and United Airlines just prior to the attacks of 9/11? Then ask yourself why no one has investigated this suspicious deal. Ask yourself why there has been no attempt by the US government to identify the person who anticipated huge profits from a disaster that was yet to occur. Is it because the trail possibly leads to the CIA?

Then wonder about the collapse of Building 7 on the day of the attacks.  Ask yourself why the owner of the building allowed the building to be pulled down (intentionally demolished) hours after the Twin Towers fell.  Pulling down a building takes weeks of planning and preparation so that explosives can be safely positioned and wired.  Not so in this case.  Wonder why.

If you have any doubts at all about the official 9/11 story, then the answers to these questions are all the proof you need that something is very, very wrong!

Independent 9/11 researchers have worked nonstop since the events to examine the events of 9/11 and they have uncovered enough information to seriously challenge the official versions of what happened on that fateful day.  But maybe, just maybe, the very fact that massive amounts of information are available is a problem in itself. There may be far too much evidence for most Americans to face.

The challenges to the official stories may be too devastating to be processed by the average American who has spent a lifetime believing in the system. Many people can deal with the minor violations that are part of the political scene, but cannot possibly fathom a government that might be complicit in an attack on its own people. They are not unlike the parents who eventually come to terms with a child's shoplifting spree. The same parents would do anything to deny far more serious accusations.  Imagine the response of parents whose son turns out to be a Timothy McVeigh.

Some things are so disturbing that they are almost impossible to believe. That is why, in the 9/11 enigma, less is more. There is a real danger of frightening everyone off by offering too much information.  Therefore, if we think of the problem as a chess game, two strategic moves can lead to checkmate.

There are two pieces of the 9/11 puzzle that on their own expose the lies of the administration.

Two questions must be raised so that even the most diehard Bush supporters realize they have been deceived. These are issues that no one can debate or dismiss.  These are not conspiracy theories. They are fact-based questions that can lead to exposing the deceptions in the official reports. The apologists have no way to explain these away or justify them. Basically, they offer clear evidence that the official explanations of 9/11 are meaningless.

TWO MOVES TO CHECKMATE

1. THE COVER UP

Someone had foreknowledge of the attacks.  In the weeks leading up to 9/11 someone made a series of investments that would have paid off in huge profits because of the attacks. This is well documented and undisputed. This person specifically invested in the two airliners used in the attacks, anticipating windfall profits from any drop in the stock prices of these companies. This is solid evidence that at least one person in the United States had detailed information that something bad was going to happen to the specific airlines that were to be used in the attack.

We have been told that the person who made these investments never claimed the profits. We are expected to believe that this explains why his or her identity is unavailable. This is absolutely untrue. This is not an instance in which someone was waiting to pick up a package at an airport locker. This is a case of a financial institution processing an investment transaction for an individual. This CAN NOT BE PERFORMED ANONYMOUSLY! The identity of this person who had foreknowledge of the attack is known and this person's identity is being protected by our government and this is a fact! Period, end of story.

WHO MADE THE INVESTMENT? Identify this person and you have someone who very probably had detailed foreknowledge of the events. The fact that the profits were never collected is even more suspicious and incriminating. The fact that the identity of this person remains unknown is even more suspicious. The only possible conclusion is that this person is known to the government and that his or her identity is being protected.

There has been a clear and concerted cover up regarding the person who tried to profit from events he or she knew were coming.  The people who could easily clear this up, but who chose to close any further investigation into the matter are not underlings. They are officials who answer directly to the President of the United States.

Check.

2. BUILDING 7

[Picture Source: http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtc7.html]

On September 11th, Towers One and Two collapsed after suffering direct hits by airliners.  Building 7 was neither hit by an airliner nor damaged severely by flying debris, but at 5:20 p.m. it collapsed in the exact same accordion style of the other two towers. The official explanation by FEMA investigators claimed that WTC 7 fell as a result of burning for 7 hours.

Several weeks after the events of 9/11, Larry Silverstein, the new owner of the WTC was interviewed on TV. At this time he openly acknowledged the decision to pull Building 7. This was a public statement in which the owner of the WTC agreed to the destruction of the building.

This decision was never explained and was never questioned by the Kean Commission. The conflicting report of the FEMA investigators was also never explained. Pulling a building requires weeks, if not months of preparation. Explosives have to be carefully and strategically placed and wired. How was it possible to pull a building without first preparing for its demolition?

Larry Silverstein invested $386 million in WTC 7.  On 9/11, by his own admission, Larry Silverstein ordered the demolition of his building.  In February of 2002, his company won a settlement of $861 million from Industrial Risk Insurers.  Do the math. No one investigated. This is a confession to the demolition of Building 7. Let me repeat that, THIS IS A CONFESSION!

Checkmate.

Until these questions are answered there is no need to establish more doubt. What we have here is solid undisputed evidence that we were never told the truth.  We have solid evidence that the official investigation stopped short of delving into questions that could have supplied answers. We have solid proof that something is very, very wrong.

There is a mountain of unanswered questions concerning the events surrounding the 9/11 attacks. Anyone willing to listen or look at the inconsistencies would have to draw an obvious conclusion:  the official explanation of the events of 9/11 is nothing more than a desperate attempt to distract the American people from investigating the truth.  There can be no denying that there are a number of strange and puzzling occurrences that have never been, and seemingly cannot be explained.

Perhaps the abundance of startling and damning information is too incredible to be accepted easily by the millions of Americans who have bought into the corporate media's version of the events. So many people in this country can not deal with, or accept any real challenge to the official explanation that allows for no foreknowledge or cover up by their government. Even if most Americans were to be presented with clearly corroborated facts or cold evidence, they would probably refuse to even consider the involvement of their elected leaders in a tragedy of such huge proportions.

The official story, however, collapses after an examination of the two questions just raised. Very simply put, case closed. We do not need to pull an OJ here and bury the obvious under more evidence than the jury can handle. Show the Bronco chase and the blood evidence, and rest the prosecution.  Otherwise we risk badly confusing a jury of the uninformed.

It is vital that the evidence based community encourage the American public to question the events for themselves.   Two questions of this magnitude are enough to raise reasonable doubt. Two such questions that have gone uninvestigated and unexplained are enough to arouse curiosity,

We're in a very dangerous game, here, and all of us are players. Much of what happened on September 11th remains at best unclear, and at worst terribly suspicious. The reality that the President of the United States spent more than 18 months resisting an official investigation into the most devastating tragedy in our history is in itself an outrage.  But the reality that there is no official body still seeking answers to vital questions is an even greater outrage.

And if that remains the case, we all will have been checkmated, en masse.

Editor's NOTE: People might comment on this article by calling it a conspiracy theory. This is their usual way of dismissing the facts. I ask you, where exactly is there "theory" on this page? What elements of this article are in dispute? This is not a theory, this article poses questions that have not been answered and the people who call the results of the independent 9/11 research community "conspiracy theories" have yet to qualify their assertion. You can not simply call something a "theory" just because you have not looked closely enough to see the facts that have been presented. If you call this a theory you are in denial. Very simply put, you can not debate this issue. Many people will dismiss this, as they do all evidence that goes against what they want to believe, yet when asked what their criteria is for discerning between theory and fact, they will not have a logical answer. This is not theory and neither are the facts that have been brought to light by the many people involved in the legitimate independent 9/11 research community.

• WHY AMERICANS REFUSE TO BELIEVE THE 9/11 EVIDENCE!!! - The attacks of 9/11 were so unthinkable that most Americans would refuse to believe the complicity of their own government, even if presented with a mountain of evidence. - Very simply, it is possible to escape blame if you do something that nobody in the world believes you could do.
• Before you call this a "Conspiracy Theory" read this! Learn the difference between theory and fact!
• Professional Demolition of World Trade Center Building 7 - On-line videos and in depth analysis.
• 9/11 Video Selection
• How Building Implosions Work