Was 911 an inside job?

[djbcrawford]

I voted no, but I think I would have preferred a don't know or a partially to blame option. I don't think the Government planned it, but i think it was a lot more responsible than we'll ever know.

The points about how the planes could have been so easily captured was well made. It's easy to be gung-ho with hindsight, but when it's your ass on the line, bravery is harder to come by. Every "how to survive a hostage situation" article I have come across advises passive submission, as highjackers normally want something other than their deaths, so unless you think you will be killed anyway and have nothing to lose, you are supposed to sit tight.

Could the towers have collapsed from the plane strikes? Yeah, I think so. You can stand next to your new building, slap the side and say this baby will survive a plane strike, but you don't expect it to have to. I mean they said the Titanic was unsinkable.

Shooting the planes down. This is a harder one. I don't know why this wasn't done. Perhaps they thought the first was just a fluke or they decided not to. Bush doesn't stike me as having the brains to handle that sort of decision. I have seen an article in the british press that there is a theory that the last plane was actually shot down.

What were the benefits to the Bush administration. Well a guaranteed second term in office after winning by the skin of his teeth the first time. Legislation passed through Congress that would never have got through otherwise. Control of oil and oil pipelines. Military and construction contracts.

The problem is that pro-conspiracy theorists will defend every theory and anti-conspiracy theorists will attack every theory. Just because something is a conspiracy theory doesn't make it automatically right or wrong. I think the truth lies somewhere in the middle, but we should not be afraid or be penalised for looking, because it is our taxes that buy the bombs and bullets.

While I don't think the Government planned 9/11 (but accept that it is possible), they certainly milked it for all it was worth. I am more concerned at the actions of the USA and UK after 9/11. The attacks on Afganistan and Iraq resulting in the deaths of thousands of civilians and soldiers on both sides. The widespread destruction of the infastructure of both countries. War crimes and Human Rights abuses in Guantanimo Bay. The importance placed on securing oil refineries over hospitals and water supllies. How American contractors automatically got the job of re-building Iraq (in this I am reminded of an old Charlie Chaplain film where he sends a kid ahead of him to break windows before he comes along and gets paid to fix them).

 

[inhisdebt]

Not even remotely convinced on building 7 .

Then dream what whatever you want there will be plenty of peaple around to buy into whatever crazy conspiracies you can dream up, but remember as mature christians we are expected to show some discearnment.

 

[Driver]

Shooting the planes down. This is a harder one. I don't know why this wasn't done. Perhaps they thought the first was just a fluke or they decided not to. Bush doesn't stike me as having the brains to handle that sort of decision. I have seen an article in the british press that there is a theory that the last plane was actually shot down.

In an apparent slip-up by Rumsfeld, he mentions here the "shooting down" of the "plane over Pennsylvania":



You Tube

"I think all of us have a sense if we imagine the kind of world we would face if the people who bombed the mess hall in Mosul, or the people who did the bombing in Spain, or the people who attacked the United States in New York, shot down the plane over Pennsylvania and attacked the Pentagon..." - Rumsfeld


​

You just wonder who "the people" Rumsfled was referring to. The shooting down of Flight 93 is confirmed by the research that has been done:

http://911research.wtc7.net/planes/analysis/flight93/index.html


And why was the plane heading toward the Pentagon not shot down? Did Cheney give a standdown order? How was Cheney so confident that Flight 77 would not hit the Capitol, White House, but the newly renovated section of the Pentagon?

 

[NumberOneSon]

<double post>

 

[NumberOneSon]

The part could be from the Auxillary Power Unit used in a Boeing 757 with a Rolls Royce RB211 engine.

Indeed, it could. And probably is.

The mystery of what hit the Pentagon could be easily cleared up if they were to release more video footage.

Maybe the simple answer is that the engine issue is only a &#8220;mystery&#8221; in the mind of the conspiracy community, and that neither the government nor the rest of the world outside of conspiracy circles see it as a mystery, and so there is nothing to address.

Many believe that the "plane/no plane" contoversy is part of a campaign of "disinformation" that Rumsfeld started (Rumsfeld had said in an October 2001 interview with Parade magazine that a "missile" had hit the Pentagon).

Which tells me people are trying way too hard to find issues to be critical about.

Just four days before Rumsfeld&#8217;s Parade interview, he was interviewed by Dan Rather when he said &#8220;plastic knivesand the use of a U.S. airliner filled with American people AS A missile [were used] to destroy a World Trade Center."(emphasis mine)

Then one month later, on November 7th, Rumsfeld told Jim Lehrer on PBS, &#8220;One of our planes is used AS A missile to fly into our building and into the World Trade Center. It was beyond one's imagination that plastic knives and our own commercial aircraft filled with our own people would be used as the implement of war."(emphasis mine)

Now compare that with what Rumsfeld said during his parade interview:

&#8220;Here we're talking about plastic knives and using an American Airlines flight filed with our citizens, and the missile to damage this building&#8221;

Driver are you at least open to the very real possibility that the missile Rumsfield was talking about in Parade was the &#8220;commercial aircraft filled with our own people&#8221;, the one &#8220;used as the implement of war&#8221;? Sure, it&#8217;s possible Rumsfeld was creating a conspiracy within a conspiracy with the intention of throwing off a community of conspiracy theorists that hadn&#8217;t materialized yet by October &#8217;01, or he could have simply meant the airliner used as a missile, like he had previously done. The planes have been described as missiles in the media; even Press Secretary (at the time) Ari Fleischer, during a White House press conference, described the use of an airplane in such an attack &#8220;as a missile&#8221;.

So again, I truly believe this whole thing is overly critical and way overblown.

Any web site that offers an honest challenge is welcome by those that are trying to get to the truth.

I agree

Do you think the "Myths" guy will join "Scholars for 911 Truth"?

That would be like asking, do you think the &#8220;Scholars&#8221; guys will join the movement to debunk 9/11 conspiracy theories? The &#8220;Myth&#8221; guy is interested in upholding the truth of 9/11, especially by exposing the falsehoods he&#8217;s found in the conspiracy community.

That refutation of "Myths" comes from a student member of that group, and I'm sure it's just a work-in-progress.

Which is why I responded the way I did. Responding to entire articles with a sentence or two isn&#8217;t a refutation. If he truly wants to present a refutation of 911Myths he should probably wait until he has compiled something a little more substantive. Seems like he jumped the gun a little, and was too eager to get his viewpoints out into the public eye.

I believe it's great that some of the claims of Loose Change are being critically reviewed within the community, such as:

Sifting Through Loose Change

That's good to know.

In Christ,

Acts6:5

 

[gwynedd1]

Then dream what whatever you want there will be plenty of peaple around to buy into whatever crazy conspiracies you can dream up, but remember as mature christians we are expected to show some discearnment.

What utter nonsense to just believe what you are told. These scams are quite common. Reichstag fire? What kind of discernment is it to go on the war path right after 9/11? Stick with the facts and stop using Ad Hominin nonsense like "crazy".

 

[Driver]

Driver are you at least open to the very real possibility that the missile Rumsfield was talking about in Parade was the &#8220;commercial aircraft filled with our own people&#8221;, the one &#8220;used as the implement of war&#8221;? Sure, it&#8217;s possible Rumsfeld was creating a conspiracy within a conspiracy with the intention of throwing off a community of conspiracy theorists that hadn&#8217;t materialized yet by October &#8217;01, or he could have simply meant the airliner used as a missile, like he had previously done. The planes have been described as missiles in the media; even Press Secretary (at the time) Ari Fleischer, during a White House press conference, described the use of an airplane in such an attack &#8220;as a missile&#8221;.

After researching it, I believe it was probably a 757 that struck the Pentagon (Rumsfield releasing more video footage would answer some legitimate questions that have been raised), but it is not as important as the apparent stand-down of the military and who ordered and arragned it.

Rumsfeld apparent slip-up in saying Flight 93 was shot down could be a sign of the daily pressure he is under from the military. Several Generals have called for Rumsfeld's resignation. Col. Grand-Pre says that 70% of the military is against the administration.

And Bush seems really "out of it" lately, especially in his disregard of the courts and the US Constitution, such as in this video clip:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=20060822&articleId=3039

.

 

[icedtea]

The more I read threads like this, the more I think the "government" didn't do it. No conspiracy. Too many loose ends, somebody would've talked.

 

[NumberOneSon]

After researching it, I believe it was probably a 757 that struck the Pentagon (Rumsfield releasing more video footage would answer some legitimate questions that have been raised), but it is not as important as the apparent stand-down of the military and who ordered and arragned it.

Rumsfeld apparent slip-up in saying Flight 93 was shot down could be a sign of the daily pressure he is under from the military. Several Generals have called for Rumsfeld's resignation. Col. Grand-Pre says that 70% of the military is against the administration.

And Bush seems really "out of it" lately, especially in his disregard of the courts and the US Constitution, such as in this video clip:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=20060822&articleId=3039

.

LOL. That video was hilarious. The poor guy just can't talk his way out of a paper bag. I would agree with you that the slipups and verbal gaffs from the administration members were probably the result of daily pressure and stress.

Did you ever see the clip where Bush was reading a speech about America and he said he wants to put food on our families? It's a classic.

In Christ,

Acts6:5

 

[NumberOneSon]

The more I read threads like this, the more I think the "government" didn't do it. No conspiracy. Too many loose ends, somebody would've talked.

Exactly.

 

[gwynedd1]

LOL. That video was hilarious. The poor guy just can't talk his way out of a paper bag. I would agree with you that the slipups and verbal gaffs from the administration members were probably the result of daily pressure and stress.

Did you ever see the clip where Bush was reading a speech about America and he said he wants to put food on our families? It's a classic.

In Christ,

Acts6:5

We have had our differences yes but I cannot deny you this.


http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7555672470096923506&q=bush+obgyn

 

[NumberOneSon]

We have had our differences yes but I cannot deny you this.


http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7555672470096923506&q=bush+obgyn

LOL. The best part is hearing the soundcrew laughing in the background. You know it's bad when the cameraman can't keep quiet.

Here's one of the best Bush impressionists, hands down. I love this guy: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4969888536868165027&q=President+Bush

The "food on your family" line is on this clip: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3088605151190792370&q=President+Bush

 

[Driver]

http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=20060822&articleId=3039

LOL. That video was hilarious. The poor guy just can't talk his way out of a paper bag. I would agree with you that the slipups and verbal gaffs from the administration members were probably the result of daily pressure and stress.

That looks like Cheney who was walking off with Bush at Camp David, and some other people. You wonder what was Bush hearing in his earpiece and who was speaking. I guess that's why they decided to keep the president away from Washington on 9/11, so he wouldn't mess things up!

If it were an inside job (and I believe it was), it looks like Cheney and Rumsfeld were at the heart of it, along with the people who put them into power in the first place, including Bush's father....you can see the linkage of Bush (GHWB), Rumsfeld, and Cheney, and all the rest of them in this brief PBS piece:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-OWjLAKBRk0

 

[Micahyah]

Can Anything Be Done?
By Paul Craig Roberts
http://informationclearinghouse.info/article14718.htm

08/27/06 "Information Clearing House" -- -- Many readers have praised me for my courage in broaching taboo subjects and stating obvious truths. Others denounce me for “being unpatriotic and distrusting our government.” One reader, Susan Hartman, wrote to me that I was obviously in the pay of Islamic Jihadists and that she had reported me to the FBI.

Despite the lack of evidence to support their belief, a number of readers remain confident that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and that America narrowly missed being annihilated. These readers know for a fact that Hussein had WMD, because “the President would know, and he wouldn’t lie.”

In other words, whatever Bush says is true, and all who doubt him are unpatriotic. “You are with us or against us.” The facts be damned. There are a large number of Susan Hartmans in the body politic.

A group of scientists, engineers, and university professors are trying to start a debate about the collapse of the three World Trade Center buildings. I reported one of their findings: There is an inconsistency between the speed with which the buildings collapsed and the “pancaking theory” used to explain the collapse. Another way of putting the problem is that there seems to be a massive energy deficit in the explanation that the buildings fell as a result of gravitational energy. There simply was not sufficient gravitational energy to produce the results.

For reporting a scientific finding, I was called a “conspiracy theorist.” Only in America is scientific analysis seen as conspiracy theory and government lies as truth.

Applications of the laws of physics and scientific calculations can be reviewed and checked by other scientists. Scientists, like the rest of us, can make mistakes. However, questions raised about the collapse of the WTC buildings are not engaged but ignored.

The 9/11 scholars findings seem to be in sync with public opinion. Polls show that more than one-third and as much as one-half of the American public does not believe the government’s 9/11 story.

The public doesn’t believe the John F. Kennedy assassination story either. Nevertheless, experts who point out problems in the official story are still called “conspiracy theorists” even though a large percentage of the people share their doubts.

I think the reason so many Americans do not believe the Kennedy story told by the Warren Commission and the 9/11 story told by the 9/11 Commission is not because Americans are knowledgeable about ballistics or physics, or know how to do energy calculations, but because the stories contain too many unusual happenings, too many oddities.

In the Kennedy case doubts are raised by such things as an improbable bullet trajectory, the against-all-procedures absence of Secret Service agents from the rear and sides of Kennedy’s limo, the inexplicable access of an unauthorized armed civilian, Jack Ruby, who was able to assassinate Oswald inside the jail before Oswald could be questioned. Online at http://www.insidebayarea.com/timesstar/localnews/ci_4213295 there is a report that two scientists, Pat Grant and Erik Randich, at the Forensic Science Center of the Lawrence Livermore Laboratory have discredited the reliability of the “neutron activation” analysis, which was used to “prove” that all the recovered bullet fragments came from Oswald’s shots. Courts no longer accept as evidence and the FBI no longer uses the analysis that was used to close the Oswald case.

Any one of these things would be an oddity. The combination of oddities becomes inexplicable, a statistical impossibility.

The same with the explanation of 9/11. Powerfully constructed buildings collapse when there is no source of the required energy to do the job. A large 757 hits the Pentagon but leaves a small hole, and there is no sign of wings, engines, tail or fuselage. Every air control and military procedure fails, and hijacked airliners are not intercepted by jet fighters. The alleged hijackers’ names apparently are not on the passenger lists, and some of the alleged hijackers have been found alive and well in Saudi Arabia. Dr. Thomas R. Olmstead used the Freedom of Information Act to get a copy of the autopsy list of American Airlines flight 77, and he reports that there are no Arabic names on the list.

My point is a simple one. Attentive people, even if they are not scientifically literate, can sense when there are too many oddities for an explanation to be believable.

If deception is sensed, there is a receptive audience when experts or film makers speak. Denouncing inconvenient facts as “conspiracy theories” is a way of suppressing debate and investigation.

This itself is telling. If the official explanations are safe, their proponents should welcome the opportunity to show again and again that the explanations can stand all challenges. Instead, the second a challenge shows its head, it is branded a “conspiracy theory.” That tells me that the official explanations can stand no challenge.

Don’t ask me who killed Kennedy and why, and don’t ask me who was behind the 9/11 attack or what brought the three WTC buildings down. My position is a simple one. The official accounts are too improbable to be believable.

I won’t believe them until the government can explain where the energy came from to bring down the three WTC buildings. With the demise of the “single bullet” theory, there seems to be no verification of Oswald’s magical shooting.

It seems to me that the real conspiracy theories are the explanations that are overweighted with improbabilities.

Readers ask me what can we do? We can do very little as we have lost control over our government. Elections, even if not stolen, change very little. Government got free of our control when we forgot the teaching of our Founding Fathers that government is always the greatest threat to our liberty.

Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal editorial page and Contributing Editor of National Review. He is coauthor of The Tyranny of Good Intentions.

 

[WayWord]

The possibility that the leaders of the United States of America are not serving the best interests of its people is just to much for some to bear. The idea that the government is capable of murder, deception, and betrayal is just too unpleasant.

Main Entry: de·ni·al
Pronunciation: di-'nI(-&)l, dE-
Function: noun
1 : refusal to satisfy a request or desire
2 a (1) : refusal to admit the truth or reality (as of a statement or charge) (2) : assertion that an allegation is false
6 : a psychological defense mechanism in which confrontation with a personal problem or with reality is avoided by denying the existence of the problem or reality
- in denial : refusing to admit the truth or reality of something unpleasant <a patient in denial about his health problems>

from http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/denial

I'm sorry brothers and sisters, but, despite what you learned in school, the United States are not the ultimate source of good in the world. Never have been and never will be.

Here's a brief list of nations, groups, and individuals funded by the American government, American corporations, or American banks.

1. Germany during WWI (research Samuel Bush and the Nye Committee)
2. The Nazis (research Brown Brothers Harriman and Prescott Bush)
3. The Soviet Union
4. Afghanistan, Osama bin Laden
5. Iraq, Sadam Hussein
6. Iran, the Shah (Iran Contra)

 

[Micahyah]

9/11 and American Empire: Intellectuals Speak Out
Edited by David Ray Griffin and Peter Dale Scott
Olive Branch Press (Interlink Books)

Quote:"The Most Important Book of Our Time" - Paul Craig Roberts

Truth activists can celebrate Thanksgiving astonishingly early this year given the precocious wealth of resources now hitting theaters and book shops across the land. Each new work seems to open another frontier and spread truth to a fresh audience. The relentless Dr. Griffin deserves great credit for many of these sallies, and now he has teamed with eminent diplomat/scholar Dr. Peter Dale Scott to catalyze and edit this latest tour de force. This anthology addresses the crimes of 9/11 from a rare altitude of intelligence in ten authoritative voices, and examines their premeditation and abuse as an empire ordaining event. Whenever you encounter 9/11 truth resistance in bright but wingnut-traumatized friends, this book is the antidote to offer. - Ed.

Pre-pub Review
"This is the most important book of our time. Distinguished national and international scientists and scholars present massive evidence that The 9/11 Commission Report is a hoax and that the 9/11 "terrorist attack" has been manipulated to serve a hegemonic agenda in the Middle East. The book's call for a truly independent panel of experts to be empowered to bring out the true facts must be heeded or Americans will never again live under accountable government." — Paul Craig Roberts, Assistant Secretary of the US Treasury during the Reagan administration

CONTENTS
1. 9/11, the American Empire, and Common Moral Norms
David Ray Griffin

2. Assessing the Official 9/11 Conspiracy Theory
Karen Kwiatkowski

3. Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Collapse?
Steven E. Jones

4. Propping Up the War on Terror: Lies about the WTC by NIST and Underwriters Laboratories
Kevin Ryan

5. The Background of 9/11: Drugs, Oil, and US Covert Operations
Peter Dale Scott

6. What We Have Learned about the "Strategy of Tension": Historical Data from the Cold War Period
Daniele Ganser

7. 9/11, Texas A&M University, and Heresy
Morgan Reynolds

8. Global Ambitions and Geopolitical Wars: The Domestic Challenge
Richard Falk

9. 9/11 and the 9/11 Wars: Understanding the Supreme Crimes
John McMurtry

9. The War on Terror and Pax Americana
Ola Tunander

10. Parameters of Power in the Global Dominance Group: 9/11 and Election Irregularities in Context
Peter Phillips with Bridget Thornton and Celeste Vogler

"It has long been clear that the Bush-Cheney administration cynically exploited the attacks of 9/11 to promote its imperial designs. But the present volume confronts us with evidence for an even more disturbing conclusion: that the 9/11 attacks were themselves orchestrated by this administration precisely so they could be thus exploited. If this is true, it is not merely the case, as the Downing Street memos show, that the stated reason for attacking Iraq was a lie. It is also the case that the whole "war on terror" was based on a prior deception. This book hence confronts the American people---indeed the people of the world as a whole---with an issue second to none in importance and urgency. I give this book, which in no way can be dismissed as the ravings of 'paranoid conspiracy theorists,' my highest possible recommendation."---Ray McGovern, former CIA analyst and founder of VIPS (Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity)

"Read this. Read this now. And then tell someone else what it told you. If you wondered where morality, intellectual rigor, common sense and historical perspective went when they disappeared from public discourse, be reassured—the authors of these essays were keeping them safe for you, along with a surprisingly functional sense of humor. This is a massively important book about events that are still changing our world. Forget the internet wingnuts, forget the blurry thinking and the blurry photographs, forget the government gibberish. If you want to know about 9/11, read this book. Read it. Read it now. And then tell someone else what it told you."-—A. L. Kennedy, author of Paradise and Indelible Acts

"Official versions of historical events should always be questioned. This book, dealing with 9/11 and much more, does just that, and from various points of view. It will provoke argument and that's a good thing."-—Howard Zinn, A People's History of the United States

"In 9/11 and American Empire: Intellectuals Speak Out, David Ray Griffin and Peter Dale Scott point out that the book's publication "signals the beginning of a new phase of the 9/11 Truth Movement, one in which scholars will play an increasingly larger role." Griffin and Scott have assembled academics, scientists, and other intellectuals with fine minds and courageous hearts to deliver the bitter pill: the official explanation of the events of 9/11 is false and the evidence indicating an inside job is significant. In doing so, they have returned scholarship to its rightful place of leading us back to excellence."-—Catherine Austin Fitts, Assistant Secretary of Housing, George H. W. Bush administration

"For far too long, the very reasonable questions raised by 9/11 have been ignored and even ridiculed by America's press and politicians, who treat the subject with the sort of willful blindness that suggests a wish not to find out unpleasant truths. We, the people, therefore owe the editors of this important new collection our warm thanks for their intelligent and unrelenting work."---Mark Crispin Miller, Professor of Culture and Communications, New York University, and author of Cruel and Unusual: Bush/Cheney's New World Order and Fooled Again: How the Right Stole the 2004 Election and Why They'll Steal the Next One Too (Unless We Stop Them)

"All Americans who love their country enough to dig into the facts of these critical times will be well rewarded by examining David Griffin's books. 9/11 truth is a very important issue—-with the power to bring lasting change to our country."-—The Reverend William Sloane Coffin Jr., former pastor, Riverside Church, New York, and author of The Passion for the Possible: A Message to U.S. Churches

 

[Driver]

According to the latest CNN online poll, 70% believe "alternative theories are credible". That leaves only 30% who believe the official "19-Arab" theory about 9/11. The results are not scientific.

Will impeachment proceedings begin against Bush, soon? This is a good possibility, especially if the Democrats take control of Congress in November. And a growing number of conservatives are also calling for Bush's impeachment, as well:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Movement_to_impeach_George_W._Bush

The American Bar Association has unanimousely voted to investigate Bush's use of "signing statements" that he uses to nullify certain parts of a bill when he signs a bill into law and whether they violate the US Constitution and the Separation of Powers. Source

This would add to the long list of constitutional violations that have already been enumerated
here, against Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, and Gonzales.

And a chief prosecutor of Nazi war crimes at Nuremberg, Benjamin Ferenccz, says that George W. Bush should be tried for war crimes along with Saddam Hussein. I believe if such a trial got underway, the scope should include 9/11 as well, and I hope that they just don't scapegoat George W. Bush and whitewash everyone else who was involved.

 

[Micahyah]

Filmmaker: ‘Sergeant Buswell Is A True Patriot’
The Lone Star Iconoclast, August 28, 2006


Last week, The Lone Star Iconoclast broke news about an Army Intelligence Analyst stationed at Ft. Sam Houston outside of San Antonio, Texas. Sergeant First Class Donald Buswell, a loyal soldier of 19 years and recipient of a Purple Heart for injuries sustained in Iraq, offered a dissenting opinion of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks in response to a mass email. For this, his security clearance was revoked and he is currently facing an investigation as to whether he violated certain Army rules regarding use of government networks for unauthorized purposes.

His commanding officer, Colonel Luke S. Green, reportedly wrote that Buswell is to be investigated for making statements disloyal to the United States.

Since the story was published, thousands have rallied to Buswell’s side. The story was published on TheRawStory.com, LookingGlassNews.org, 911Truth.org, and 911blogger.com, among others. Iconoclast editor W. Leon Smith has given numerous radio interviews, and this reporter is scheduled for a live call-in show on Air America Radio’s Eugene, Oregon affiliate, KOPT (www.kopt.com), at 9:30 a.m. (CST) on August 30.

Likewise, SFC Buswell and his father, Winthrop, have been overwhelmed with phone calls of supporters and well-wishers. Among them was Kyle Hence, the Executive Producer and co-writer of the new documentary 9/11: Press for Truth. Hence is also the Executive Director of 9/11 Citizen’s Watch, an independent watchdog group formed in mid-2003 with the intent of placing intense scrutiny upon the actions and conclusions made by the administration-appointed 9/11 Commission.

The film, Press for Truth, follows the now-famous Jersey Girls: four women who lost their husbands in the destruction of the World Trade Center towers. The Jersey Girls went public with their grief and questions, and are credited as the driving force behind the formation of the 9/11 Commission a full 14 months after the attacks; a commission that members of the Bush administration adamantly resisted. But for Hence and the Jersey Girls, questions still remain. Now, with the retaliation against SFC Buswell, Hence is springing into action once again.

"What’s happening now, and how the Army has reacted to this email sent by Sergeant Buswell, has nothing to do with National Security or Buswell’s loyalty to the country," said Hence during an interview on Aug. 27. "Sergeant Buswell is a true patriot. This move by the Army is about stifling dissent in this country regarding the most devastating attack on our soil in this country’s history and censorship of those who want to know the truth."

After reading the story in The Iconoclast, Hence contacted Winthrop Buswell and asked him to come to Washington D.C. on Sept. 11, 2006. At press time, Winthrop is on the fence about attending, but will update The Iconoclast when his decision is made. Should he attend, said Hence, 9/11 Citizen’s Watch will ask him to speak to the crowd.

"I’m not saying definitely no [to going to Washington D.C.], I’m just considering my son’s position," said Winthrop Buswell. "He doesn’t want this whole issue to become too politicized. But when he gets out [of the Army], he will be very much in favor of continuing the questions he has and the belief that he has, that it certainly was a cover-up and now there’s a conspiracy to cover-up the cover-up. That is his belief."

"Donald is a wonderful ally," continued Winthrop. "He is an asset to all of us. And he’ll be even more of an asset when he is out of the Army. But for now he cannot speak on the issue because that could get him in trouble. I would like to speak on behalf of my son [in Washington D.C.], but I don’t know. That might put my son in jeopardy because he is still in the Army."

Kyle Hence has a different view of the situation. "Basically, here is yet another American whose voice is being ignored by the mainstream media," he said. "This is a story that, you would think, every network would want to report on. This man just said ‘We want a new investigation,’ and as a result, he’s under investigation. I think that if Buswell is becoming an icon, it is because most Americans, or at least half according to recent polls, now believe there has been a cover-up."

"Here’s a Purple Heart recipient that is saying, ‘We don’t know the whole story,’ who is suspicious of the government’s story and thinks we need a new investigation," continued Hence. "And that they’re trying to shut them down and silence him is very reminiscent of what they do to whistleblowers who have real information they tried to bring to the [9/11] Commission. They were gagged."

"Take the case of the FAA flight controllers," he said. "[On tape] they recounted their memories of what exactly happened the morning of Sept. 11, and then a higher level official destroyed those tapes. Here you have someone who destroyed information to keep it from the American people. Now you have the U.S. military trying to destroy the life of a Purple Heart recipient who simply said there needs to be a new investigation and doesn’t believe the account offered to us by a now discredited 9/11 Commission."

From Sept. 11-18, Camp Casey and Camp Crawford will be moving to Washington D.C. for an event they have dubbed "Camp Democracy." On the morning of Sept. 11, at 8 a.m., between First Street and Third Street in front of the Reflecting Pond, Camp Democracy will begin its roll call. Various speakers are confirmed for the week-long event, including Dr. Morgan Reynolds, and several documentary films will be screened, including America: Freedom to Fascism, and WMD at the WTC.

 

[icedtea]

More and more people are starting to belive everything they are told. It starts to fall apart, then what?

 

[Carey]

Is that what you are referring to?