Either explosives were used in a preplanned attack or not. In which case everything we saw after the plane impacts were natural events. If explosives were used it was an inside job and we can assume most likely involved at least some high level officials. What is the big stretch for Matt with this??

I’m going to address this on the off chance that some other person may happen across it online.
Someone actually interested in 911Truth.

What I would’ve said to this:

Matt Taibbi: The entire concept of 9/11 Truth is ridiculous and people like you are being hoodwinked by third-rate con-artists like Griffin, who do this for a living. I wonder that none of you seem to notice that all of the country’s best reporters and best investigators equally think that 9/11 Truth is a joke — people like Seymour Hersh and Wayne Barrett and Lawrence Wright — while the leading writers in your movement all have histories writing, commercially, about other conspiracy theories. If it wasn’t 9/11, it’d be Oklahoma City or the moon landing or JFK. You’re being had, don’t you get it?

Albert: That you do not respect the exercise of free speech is ironic in light of your profession, though we all know that “journalism” as it exists in today’s corporate press is really a shell of it’s former proper self. Perhaps 911 Truth seems so ‘ridiculous’ to you because it wasn’t your wife or child blown to bits that day. ? This movement is made up of all kinds of people.

The nearly 3000 people slaughtered that day and their loved ones deserve their due. These attacks directly enabled two continuing wars that have so far caused the deaths of over one million people, led to massive increases in military spending and disturbing erosion of our civil liberties and rights to privacy. This doesn’t mean there have not been even more terrible crimes but those sure as hell do not preclude the need for 911 truth & justice/ There’s no statute of limitations on treason and mass murder. Obviously none of that matters to you and think such efforts worthy of stupid names. (how can anyone take yous seriously?)

I’ve not even heard of the people you mention above but the fact is effective arguments that 9/11 could only have been an inside job can be constructed from a variety of perspectives. We have: foreknowledge -wall st trades; odigo warnings, etc. The ‘response’ of the administration, investigations in name only, disposal of structural steel despite public outcry. Academia/corporate media and NIST’s shameful actions, and the most obviously, demolition.

It is the manner of destruction of bldg’s 1,2, & 7 and resulting underground fires and debris fields, the many photos, and videos, the testimony of first-hand accounts and of government scientists documented: “Evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel, including oxidation and sulfication with subsequent intragranular melting, was readily visible in the near-surface microstructure. A liquid eutectic mixture containing primarily iron, oxygen, and sulfur formed during this hot corrosion attack on the steel. This sulfur-rich liquid penetrated preferentially down grain boundaries of the steel, severely weakening the beam and making it susceptible to erosion.”” http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/metallurgy/WTC_apndxC.htm

All these things and many more all go to make this conclusion so certain. and I cannot believe that you would not reach the same conclusion. How do you dismiss:

– WTC7’s freefall implosion.
Something clearly impossible and unprecedented barring the use of explosives. We know what is occurring inside because we can see how the building is behaving. Even a single intact vertical column would have caused an asymmetrical collapse. How can such a building exhibit every characteristic of a controlled demolition and not be one? when the only time those features have ever been present were during controlled demolitions? Yet on this occasion we are asked to believe that gravity and fire caused the same extremely complex effects.
And you say?? yes. and ask for evidence of a conspiracy. The burden of proof lies with anyone claiming WTC7 was not a controlled demolition.

– The speed, (15 sec each. each standing only 56 & 102 minutes after plane impacts), the symmetry, and explosiveness of 1&2. The squibs (clearly not ‘compressed air from pancaking floors above‘ as ‘debunkers’ suggest), disassembled superstructures, hundreds of tons of pulverized concrete. Explosions so powerful they sent multi-ton wall assemblies flying into neighboring buildings and broke windows hundreds of feet away and pulverized most of the concrete and building contents. The people inside were blown into tens of thousands of pieces with many having body parts found blocks away from where they died. 200 DNA tests match a single victim. Despite 2 years of looking for small bits of bodies through the small debris (as it ran along conveyor belts) medical examiners were still unable to account for 1100 individuals. Where could such degradation have come from? http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/gzheli1.html
You’re saying gravity is the culprit.

The North Tower http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSApOavkHg8 (in case you dont know) was hit just ten floors from the roof line. How can we even imagine with gravity as its only driver that this lightest one tenth of the structure at the top could somehow account for the level of utter devastation which resulted? All of this in 15 seconds, in buildings built to withstand 150mph+ winds and plane impacts as well? http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/arch/index.html

– How do we explain away the excessive heat? Fires that could not be put out for over 3 months! (Youre a ‘journalist’? obviously not really) Despite heavy rains rain and constant stream of NYFD water lines the intensely hot fires at ground zero burned for 99 days and reached temps of up to 2800f at the surface (Bechtel). 99 DAYS MATT!! What hydrocarbon fire behaves that way? None. There were “pools of molten metal” documented beneath all three buildings by a number of reliable sources. Here’s firefighters telling us what they SAW with their own eyes/ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCdRA09pztM

Then we have the microspheres. the results of the (actually peer-reviewed and published) Harrit paper: http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/thermite/thermitics_made_simple.html

Matt Taibbi: Again, I would be completely on board with calls for more investigation into the official story, if the movement would only stop with these childish insinuations that Bush and Cheney were somehow behind 9/11. It’s asinine and an incredible distraction.

Albert: Wow. what a profound point! And that enables you to ignore and dismiss the shitstorm of evidence?
What is ‘asinine’ is throwing the baby away with the bathwater. How you fail to connect 9/11 with the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq is beyond me.

Matt Taibbi: Exactly how are they suspects in this crime? Again, show me the evidence linking anyone in the US government to this crime. There is none; you admitted this yourself.
On the other hand, there is overwhelming evidence showing that bin Laden and al-Qaeda committed this crime. …”

Albert: They are not suspects because we have not had any subpoena powered investigation. Instead we got Bremer telling us it must’ve been Bin Laden, just hours after the attack// phony Bin Laden videos. We got — $9 Billion in Iraq Reconstruction Funds Missing US Auditor Says Pentagon Cannot Account For 96 Percent Of The Money Spent – http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/iraq-billion-reconstruction-funds-missing/story?id=11306849)

please watch:

NIST Finally Admits Freefall:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDvNS9iMjzA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXTlaqXsm4k

WTC 7: Sound Evidence for Explosions:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ERhoNYj9_fg&rel=0

Read
http://911research.wtc7.net/index

I’d hate to think that Julian is correct about you.

Well said. Having some appreciation for his work in other areas, I’ve been very disappointed seeing him act in such an immature manner around this issue. But I haven’t been surprised.

Amy Goodman. Keith Olbermann. John Stewart. Bill Maher. All of them have created for themselves a public contradiction between their expressed values and their behavior around 9/11 truth. They all end up looking totally hypocritical.

Here’s why.

There are few cultural boundary lines that are more firmly reinforced that the left edge of the progressive movement. Mainstream progressives live by that line. Without the line they believe they will be cast in with all the crazies. Specifically at the edge of the line, for people like Amy Goodman, there is increased risk of being totally dismissed and losing mainstream credibility.

So it is, in fact, those furthest to the left that are most ardent in their support for that boundary line. And practically speaking, you can’t blame them. If Taibbi came out for 9/11 truth it would kill his career. And what would that do?

It would be a blow to the progressive movement. And I think that would be a bad thing. Sure, I still wish he’d put his principles on the line. But I also don’t want the progressive movement to be swallowed up by association with the 9/11 truth swamp. There are certainly valid reason to keep your distance.

I think we, as a movement, shouldn’t dismiss these people. They are very close to us is many ways. Instead we should keep reaching out to them, as Jon has done here, and continue to demand that they address the contradictions in their own behavior.

What is considered mainstream CAN change.