TOPICS

"debunkers" #gifiles #occupywallstreet 7/7 bombings 9/11 9/11 attacks 9/11 Citizens Commission 9/11 Commission 9/11 Commission Report 9/11 Conspiracy Roadtrip 9/11 Fahrenheit 911 9/11 families 9/11 phone calls 9/11 survivor 9/11 truth 9/11 Truther 9/11 Truth Movement 9/11 victims 9/11 War 9/11 War Games 9/11 Wars 9/11 Whistleblowers 9/11 workers 9/11 Working Group of Bloomington 9/11: Press For Truth 10th Anniversary 28 pages 757 911 first responders 911 museum 911blogger 911truthnews.com 2012 Abbottabad Able Danger accountability ACLU activism activists Adam Curtis Adam Syed AE911truth ae911truth.org Afghanistan aftermath Ahmadinejad AIPAC Air Force One al-Awlaki al-Qaida Alan Colmes Alan Grayson Alec Baldwin Alec Station Alex Jones Alfreda Frances Bikowsky Alhazmi Ali Soufan Al Jazeera Almihdhar Al qae al Qaeda Amalgam Virgo American War Machine Among the Truthers Andrew Card Andrew Napolitano Andrews Air Force Base anniversary Ann Wright Anonymous Anthony Shaffer Anthony Summers Anthrax Antonio Martinez Anwar al-Alwlaki Anwar al-Awlaki Anwar Awlaki architects Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth artifacts assassination Atiyah abd al-Rahman Australia Australian Broadcasting Corporation b BAE Ban Ki-moon Barack Obama Barcelona Barnes and Noble Barrie Zwicker baseball cards BBC BCCI Behrooz Sarshar Benedict Sliney Ben Fordham Ben Sliney Bill Clinton Bill Doyle Bill Maher Bill Moyers Bill O'Reilly bin Laden Blackwater Bloomington Bob Bowman Bob Graham Bob Kerrey Bob McIlvaine books Bosnia Brett Smith Brian Kilmeade Brooklyn Bridge Bruce Ivins Building 7 Building What bureaucracy Bush Bush Administration C-SPAN Camp David cancer capitalism Cass Sunstein censorship Champion Cheney China Chip Berlet Chris Hedges Chris Mohr Christian Chuck Schumer CIA Cindy Sheehan CIT Citizen Investigation Team Civil Disobedience civil liberties Classified Woman classroom CNN Cofer Black COG Cointelpro Cold War Cole Bombing Coleen Rowley Colin Powell Colorado Colorado Public Television Condonleezza Rice Con Edison congress conspiracies conspiracy conspiracy theory Constitution consumerism contradictions Cordoba Initiative Cornell West corporate media Cosmos Counter-Terror Expo Counterpunch counterterrorism coverup cover up CPT12 cryptome.org cybersecurity Cynthia McKinney Dahlia Wasfi Daniel Ellsberg Daniel Pipes Daniel Sunjata Dave Frasca David Chandler David Long David Ray Griffin David Swanson David Weigel DC debris debunking Deep Politics Democracy Now Democratic Party demolition Demos Dennis Kucinich detainee detainees Detroit DIA Dick Cheney Dick Gregory Disconnecting the Dots disinformation documents Donald Rumsfeld donations Donna Marsh O'Connor Downing Street drones dust Dwight D. Eisenhower DynCorp Egypt Egyptian Revolution Eleanor Hill Elena Kagan Eleventh actions Emanuel Sferios Emily Louise Church empire engineers entrapment Eric Bolling Eric Holder Eric Margolis espionage act Evan Dando evidence exercises explosions extremism F-16 FAA facebook Fahrenheit 9/11 Fake Phone Calls theory FBI FDR Analysis Fealgood Foundation FEMA firefighters first responders Flight 77 flight 93 Florida FOIA foreknowledge FOX FOX News Frances Bikowsky Frank Legge Fran Townsend fraud Fred Burton fresh kills funding FX Gareth Newnham Gawker General Assemby George Bush George Tenet George W. Bush Geraldo Rivera Germany Geronimo Gladio Glenn Beck Glenn Greenwald globalization Global Jihad Unit Graeme MacQueen Green Party Gregg Roberts Ground Zero Ground Zero mosque groups Guantanamo Guantanamo Bay Gulf of Tonkin hackers Hamid Karzai Haqqani health Health Bill hearing Heather Penney Heroin hijackers hijacking Hilary Clinton Hillary Clinton History Commons historycommons.org hit piece Homeland Security Howie Hawkins HR 847 Huffington Post humor Hypothesis Image Comics immunity Indefinite Detention India infiltration inside job Inspire magazine Intelligence Advisory Board intercept International Center for 9/11 Studies investigation Iowa Iran Iran-Contra Iraq Iraq War ISI Islam Israel issues James Bamford James Gourley Jane Mayer Janet Napolitano Janette MacKinlay Jason Leopold Jay Carney Jeffery Farrar Jellyfish Jersey Girls Jesse Ventura JICI Jim Corr Jim Fetzer Joe Biden Joe Rogan John Albanese John Ashcroft John Bursill John Duffy John Feal John Gross John Judge John Lennon John Pilger John Stewart John Walker Lindh Joint Congressional Inquiry Joint Forces Intelligence Command Jonathan Barnett Jonathan Cole Jonathan Kay Jon Cole Jon Faine Jon Gold Jon Stewart Joseph Doyle journalism Journal of 9/11 Studies Joy Behar Judge Hellerstein Judy Wood Julia Gillard Julian Assange justice Justice Department KALW Katherine Bigelow kdub Keith Olbermann Kent Gibson Kevin Barrett Kevin Bracken Kevin Fenton Kevin Ryan Khalid Sheikh Mohammed Korey Rowe Kosovo Kristen Breitweiser KSM LaborTech Langley Larry Silverstein Laurie Manwell Lawrence Wilkerson lawsuit Lee Hamilton Leon Panetta Libya lies limited hangout Link TV Liz Cheney Lloyd's of London London Truth Action Loose Change Loose Change 9/11: An American Coup Lorie Van Auken Lupe Fiasco Mahmoud Ahmed mainstream mainstream media Manny Badillo Mark Basile Mark Bavis Mark Rossini Mark Ruffalo Matt Taibbi Media Matters Media Roots MEK Mexican drug cartel Michael Anne Casey Michael Canavan Michael Goodwin Michael Moore Michael Mukasey Michael Mullen Michael Ruppert Michael Scheuer Mickey Huff Mike Gravel Mike Huckabee milestone Military Tribunals Mindy Kleinberg MK-Ultra Mohamed Osman Mohamud Mohammad Atta Mohammed Junaid Babar Morocco Mosque Mother Jones motive msnbc Muburak Muhammad Hussain Mumbai attacks Murdoch Muslim Muslim Center My Pet Goat Nafeez Ahmed nano-thermite Naomi Klein Naomi Wolf National Institute of Standards and Technology National September 11 Memorial NATO NBC NDAA Netanyahu Newburgh 4 news News Corp New York New York City New York magazine New York TImes New Zealand NFL Niels Harrit NIST Noam Chomsky NORAD NORAD. FAA Norman Mineta Norway NSA NYC NYCCAN NYPD Obama Occupy Wall Street official account Official Government Version oil Oliver North Olympia Snowe onion Operation Dark Heart Operation Northwoods Opium Osama Bin Laden Oslo Ottawa OWS P2 Pakistan Palestine Panetta Pat Curley Patriot Act Patriot Defense Group Patty Casazza Paul Thompson Peace of the Action Pentagon Pentagon Papers PENTTBOM Peter Dale Scott Peter King Peter Phillips petition Philadelphia Philip Giraldi Philip Zelikow phone hacking photographs photos physical evidence Pilots for 9/11 Truth Pinochet Pipeline Pittsburgh Steelers plane crash PNAC podcast Political Prisoners political research associates Port Authority Preet Bharara press press release Press TV Prince Bandar Project Censored propaganda protest pseudo-journalism psychology Pumpitout Radio Qatar Quantico questions R. Leslie Deak rachel maddow radar Radio 2GB Ramzi bin al-Shibh Rap News Rashard Mendenhall Ray Kelly Ray McGovern Raymond Davis Ray Nowosielski redacted Rediscover911 remains Remember Building 7 Rescue Me Research Rethinking Counterterrorism RIBA Richard Blee Richard Clarke Richard Falk Richard Gage Richard Mellon Scaife foundation Richard Meyers Rich Blee Rick Veitch Rita Katz Robert Fisk Robert Foster Robert Parry Robert Scheer Rock Creek Free Press Rolling Stone Rory Albanese Roseanne Barr Rosie O'Donnell Rudy Giuliani Russ Baker Russia Today Saddam Hussein Saeed Sheikh Samir Khan Sarasota Saudi Saudi Arabia Saudis SCAD scads Scott Ford Scott Noble Screw Loose Change Sean Penn secrecykills.com self-deception Senate Senator Mike Gravel Sept. 11 September 11th September 11th Advocates September 11th attacks settlement Shadow Government Shanksville Shoestring shoot down Sibel Edmonds Sibel Emonds simulations SITE skepticism sounds South Park Spain speculation speech SPLC spying State crimes against democracy State Department State Of Emergency Stephen Cozen Steve Dusterwald Steven Hatfill Steven Jones Strategy of Tension Stratfor Supreme Court surveillance surveillance state Susan Rice Syed Shazad Taliban taped terrorism terror plot Terror Timeline The Big Lie The Corrs The Daily Show The Eleventh Day of Every Month The Facts Speak For Themselves The Hard Evidence Tour The Huffington Post The Jersey Girls The New Yorker The Pentagon The Post-9/11 World The Power of Nightmares Thermate The Third Stage Thierry Meyssan think tank Thomas Kean Tom Drake Tom Owen Tom Ridge Tom Wilshire Tony Shaffer Tony Szamboti Topps Top Secret America torture Toward Justice Toxic to Democracy Truth Truth Action truthaction.org Truth Action Ottawa Truth Be Told Comics truther Truth Movement truthout.org Truth Revolution Truth Rising TSA twin towers twitter U.S. UN underwear bomber United 93 United 175 United Airlines United Nations University of Colorado University of Virginia UN Watch US government US Military vaccines Valerie Plame Vanessa Lang Langer victims videos videotaped visa express visibility Visibility 9-11 Wall Street war war crimes war games warnings War on Terror Washington Post We Are Change Welt der Wunder Whistleblower whistleblowers White House Who Is Rich Blee Whoopi Goldberg Wikileaks William Blum Willie Nelson Will McCants wiretaps World Series World Trade Center WTC WTC7 WTC 7 Xe Yemen Zacarias Moussaoui Zadroga Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act Zelikow

William Blum Supports Basic Premises Of 9/11 Truth

William_Blum
October 2, 2010
Category: SUPPORT

The Truthers have long been pressing me to express my support for their cause. Here’s how I stand on the issue. I’m very aware of the serious contradictions and apparent lies in the Official Government Version (OGV) of what happened on that fateful day. (Before the Truthers can be dismissed as “conspiracy theorists”, it should be noted that the OGV is literally a “conspiracy theory” about the fantastic things that a certain 19 men conspired to do.) It does appear that the buildings in New York collapsed essentially because of a controlled demolition, which employed explosives as well as certain incendiary substances found in the rubble. So, for this and many other questions raised by the 9/11 Truth Movement, the OGV can clearly not be taken entirely at face value but has to be seriously examined point by point. But no matter what the discrepancies in the OGV, does it necessarily follow that the events of 9/11 were an “inside job”? Is it an either/or matter? Either a group of terrorists were fully responsible or the government planned it all down to the last detail?

What if the government, with its omnipresent eyes and ears, discovered the plotting of Mideast terrorists some time before and decided to let it happen — and even enhance the destruction — to make use of it as a justification for its “War on Terror”? The Truthers admit that they can’t fully explain what actually took place, but they argue that they are not obliged to do so; that they have exposed the government lies and that the fact of these lies proves that it was an inside job. The Truthers have done great work, but I say that for me, and I’m sure for many others, to accept the idea of an inside job I have to indeed know what actually took place, or at least a lot more than I know now. It is, after all, an incredible story, and I need to know how the government pulled it off. I need to have certain questions answered, amongst which are the following:

1. Were the planes that hit the towers hijacked?
2. Did they contain the passengers named amongst the dead?
3. Were they piloted or were they flying via remote control?
4. If piloted, who were the pilots?
5. Did a plane crash in Pennsylvania? If so, why? What happened to the remains of the plane and the passengers?
6. Did a plane crash into the Pentagon? What happened to the remains of the plane and the passengers?
7. Why do Truthers say that some, or many, of the named Arabic hijackers have been found alive living abroad? Why couldn’t their identity have been stolen by the hijackers?

If the Truthers can’t answer any or most of the above questions, are they prepared to consider the possibility of 9/11 being a “let-it-happen” government operation?

  1. Julian says:

    Despite my critical comment to his article which I hoped very much to be instructive rather than contentious, I’ve been reminded that the article represents a good deal more support for the movement that we have come to expect from more mainstream political writers.

    So I want to also express my appreciate for the bravery Blum has demonstrated here, backing very logical conclusions that are unfortunately far too widely dismissed by intelligent and informed people.

  2. Jon Gold says:

    IMO… the terms LIHOP/MIHOP shouldn’t even be posted on this site.

    • Julian says:

      I have mixed feelings about that. Regardless of whether the terms represent a false dichotomy in absolute terms, they do represent the differing views of many people. They have popular currency. We might not like that, but we can’t just ignore it. This story is a perfect example.

      Blum was stereotyping movement participants by making that distinction, suggesting that we all support MIHOP. In my comment to his post, which was directed at him and not his audience, I pointed out that LIHOP is a view held by many in the movement and that it’s a more responsible position for outreach. (Well, I meant to say more.) But I also very strongly indicated that it does not lie outside the movement. That if he supports that view that he supports 9/11 truth.

      So, sure, the terms are lame. And when they are used by others we should point out that they both represent positions within the movement. But we aren’t going to avoid using the terms when others refer to them.

      • Jon Gold says:

        Julian… I have personally worked very hard to get people to stop using those divisive terms that were created by Nico Haupt.

        http://www.yourbbsucks.com/forum/showthread.php?t=21271

        “As for LIHOP… Dr. Griffin and I recently had an exchange about this very matter. Here is exactly what I told him…

        “As for “letting it happen…” That is an impossibility. Protocols that were in place should have prevented the majority of the attacks. They had to take an active role, whatever that role may have been. I am not ashamed to say that I don’t know what happened on 9/11. I don’t know. I’ve been doing this just as long, if not longer than you, and I don’t know. I have read everything there is to read on 9/11. In some cases 10x over. I don’t know.

        9/11 was a crime. What I DO KNOW is that elements within our Government and others have EARNED the title of suspect for the crime of 9/11.”

        I also said…

        “It’s no different than the false “left/right paradigm.” It is a division among the people in the 9/11 Truth Movement. Or… that is how it is used, and has been for years. Most people who use the terms seem to FORGET that the United States Government uses people from the Middle East through proxies between the ISI, Saudi Arabia, MI5, Mossad, etc… for terrorist purposes. People who may very well be Muslim. People who may very well be Arab. That doesn’t mean you blame the entire religion or race. You blame the individuals. People like Kevin Barrett think LIHOP means you are trying to “keep the focus on the evil Muslims…” or commit a “blood-libel” against an entire race of people. Nothing can be further from the truth. As Donna Marsh O’Connor said at the United Nations on 9/11/2005, “is one Arab the same as all Arabs? How DARE that work in this country.” I don’t know what happened on 9/11, or who was involved. You blame the individuals responsible, not entire religions, races or ideologies. And in my opinion, part of the blame falls on us for allowing the system that brought us the 9/11 in the first place. Through our complacency.”

        So Kevin, the terms LIHOP and MIHOP are “irrelevant and extinct” yes, but not because of Controlled Demolition, but because they have outlived their usefulness (if they ever had any), and are divisive.”

        • Jon Gold says:

          Things Not To Come Across As…

          by Jon Gold on Sunday, July 25, 2010 at 10:30pm

          The “media” and “debunkers” like to portray people who are demanding justice and accountability for the 9/11 attacks in a certain light. Here is what a “9/11 Truther” is according to them.

          1) Someone that lives in their mother’s basement.
          2) Someone who believes everything they see and hear.
          3) Someone who is paranoid.
          4) Someone who relies solely on “crazy internet sites” for information.
          5) Someone who hates Jews, and believes in EVERY “Conspiracy Theory” known to man.
          6) Someone who hates America.
          7) Someone who is limited to two arguments concerning the 9/11 attacks. Controlled Demolition, and Flight 77 not hitting the Pentagon. It’s easier for them to deal with us if we’re only about one or two issues.
          8) Someone who uses weird secret words that only a “9/11 Truther” would know like LIHOP and MIHOP.
          9) Someone who dishonors the family members.
          10) Someone who is a “terrorist sympathizer.”
          11) Someone who murders people.

          My advice is to say… do your best not to fit within their “definition” of a person demanding justice and accountability for the 9/11 attacks, and do your best.

  3. Jon Gold says:

    My comment which is still awaiting approval is as follows:

    1. Were the planes that hit the towers hijacked?

    There is information that suggests it.

    2. Did they contain the passengers named amongst the dead?

    It certainly seems so.

    3. Were they piloted or were they flying via remote control?

    Useless speculation.

    4. If piloted, who were the pilots?

    See #1.

    5. Did a plane crash in Pennsylvania? If so, why? What happened to the remains of the plane and the passengers?

    There are many unanswered questions about Flight 93. It seems a plane did crash, but as a result of a mid air explosion based on the debris field.

    6. Did a plane crash into the Pentagon? What happened to the remains of the plane and the passengers?

    I think so.

    7. Why do Truthers say that some, or many, of the named Arabic hijackers have been found alive living abroad? Why couldn’t their identity have been stolen by the hijackers?

    I don’t know why some people do that William.

    Here is the 9/11 Report. I suggest you read it, and ask others to read it to understand the “official account.”

    http://www.gpoaccess.gov/911/index.html

    After that, I suggest you ask people to watch “9/11: Press For Truth”…

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3979568779414136481#

    Then I suggest you ask people to watch the companion DVD “In Their Own Words: The Untold Stories Of The 9/11 Families”…

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4399917864007973679#

    Then I suggest you recommend the “Complete 9/11 Timeline” to get people started…

    http://www.historycommons.org/project.jsp?project=911_project

    Then I suggest you recommend this series of movies I made called “What’s Being Covered Up?”…

    http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20080326132655798

    Then I suggest you recommend the report on the inadequacies of the 9/11 Commission’s Report compiled by 9/11 Family Members Lorie Van Auken and Mindy Kleinberg…

    http://911truth.org/downloads/Family_Steering_Cmte_review_of_Report.pdf

    Then I suggest you show people this list of unanswered questions compiled by the 9/11 Family Steering Committee…

    http://www.911independentcommission.org/questions.html

    Then I suggest you ask people to read the different letters sent out over the years by the September Eleventh Advocates…

    http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20090720125107330

    Here is an archive I made a few years ago called the “Who Is? Archives”…

    http://visibility911.com/jongold/?p=157

    Then, if all of that fails to motivate people to fight for justice, you can show them my article, “The Facts Speak For Themselves”…

    http://911truthnews.com/the-facts-speak-for-themselves/

    Good luck!

  4. Victoria says:

    >>Despite my critical comment to his article which I hoped very much to be instructive rather than contentious, I’ve been reminded that the article represents a good deal more support for the movement that we have come to expect from more mainstream political writers.

    Yes, I had the same automatic response and I think it was because the essay is internally contradictory in a few different ways, and waves the worst claims out in front in the numbered list.

    It doesn’t make much sense to agree with demolition, but then say,

    “But no matter what the discrepancies in the OGV, does it necessarily follow that the events of 9/11 were an “inside job”? Is it an either/or matter?”
    and
    “to accept the idea of an inside job I have to indeed know what actually took place, or at least a lot more than I know now.”

    How else does military grade nanothermite get thoroughly spread into two skyscrapers if there were no insiders? Was it the lone “rogue” scientist who did it all? I suppose he then somehow got Arab men to penetrate security at WTC and distribute the weapons grade material, and no one noticed? Or was it the lone rogue security person who let them in? Or did the Arabs pretend to be an elevator company in NYC . . . ?

    The more one considers it, the more ridiculous it becomes to claim that the results cannot involve insiders.

    This was also Barbara Honegger’s position — that Arab men piggy-backed the attack on existing events.

    Interesting that they are/were both government officials. To some extent, perhaps there is a level of denial that exists for some in the positions they’ve been in (although for Honegger I just don’t know), the Navy and the State Dept. These are not average government jobs, but involve a level of commitment that being an IRS worker or a HUD employee does not.

  5. dmsutton53 says:

    Mr. Blum asks seven really good questions. If we could answer them, we’d be ready to walk into a courtroom and start proceedings. These questions should have been addressed by the 911 Commission instead of being left in the hands of private citizens, researchers and “truthers”. Had there been an honest investigation we’d have some answers. Speculation is the result of not having the answers.

    The questions each need thorough examination and until that happens, we are left to speculate. What do the experts say ? Dr. Bob Bowman says UA Flight 93 was shot down. That’s what the evidence shows. Bowman also says it’s possible that AA 11 and UA 175 were directed by remote control. No one is more qualified to comment on those questions than a former combat pilot and rocket scientist.

    Regardless of any theories or speculations, the “let it happen on purpose” and “made it happen on purpose” explanations are just different levels of treasonous behavior. If the attacks were allowed to happen, those who deliberately failed to stop them are accessories after the fact, just as guilty as if they had planned it.

    In the void left by the silent complicity of the media, the “truthers” continue to research and expose evidence, ask new questions and find more reasons to consider the “inside job” scenario.

  6. waitew says:

    The standard of evidence in this country is ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’. Mr Blum seems to admit that that threshold has been met. Then he moves the goal post demanding we explain in minute details exactly what happened. If that standard were applied to our Criminal Justice system then our prisons would be empty. No prosecutor in this country is expected to explain in minute details exactly how a crime was committed with the ‘stipulation’ that if any small little detail can not be fully explained with certainty then it means the suspect is completely innocent! But that seems to be what is expected of the truth Movement. That is complacence. It is my opinion that Mr. Blum knows full well 911 was an inside job. However lacking the moral courage to take the next step,he demands more and more evidence. If his lists of questions were answered fully and completely and fully implicated the US Government,he’d would NOT then admit 911 was an inside job,he’d come up with another list of questions. It’s a form of running away from the Truth.

    • Julian says:

      I think we should acknowledge that there are two things going on here that seem to be confusing people in the movement a bit.

      First, Blum’s comments basically indicate support for further inquiry. That kind of endorsement comes at a high price for someone with any interest in maintaining mainstream credibility. In that sense, his statement is brave as he will certainly be ridiculed for it. And I think we should be supportive to some degree.

      Second, as I said in my comment on his article, he has demonstrated no significant degree of interest in the details. He did little research into the issue and yet has acted like his opinion should hold weight. As you point out, he’s holding the movement to an unreasonable standard of proof and simply must know that he’s off base. In that sense his comments aren’t genuine and indicate a willingness to dodge the truth in the interest of maintaining his credibility.

      Unfortunately, he seems a bit confused. He already stepped over the line and so there’s little need to keep us at arms distance. He seems to be saying, ‘yeah they are right, but I’m not one of them.’ That’s the reason for the title. He’s not supporting the movement but only it’s premise. And that just doesn’t hold up.

      I glad for the endorsement, but confused at people’s willingness to accept such a high degree of cognitive dissonance.

You must be logged in to post a comment.