Why Be Skeptical?
Quick links, added as issues are mentioned during the debate and by callers:
Norman Minetta’s Testimony to the 9/11 Commission re. Cheney’s actions on 9/11/01: click here
9/11 widow, Patty Casazza, talking about whistleblowers who tried to talk to the 9/11 Commission (video here). (Related, MLK Family attorney, William Pepper, talking about importance of 9/11 investigation, danger of government infiltration to destroy the efforts: Video here). Also, related article, “The War on Whistleblowers.”
Physical evidence issues, as mentioned by callers:
Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth — AE911Truth.org
Steven Jones, Thermite and molten metal — Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice
Activism: WeAreChangeLA, details of march scheduled for November 11
Bill Maher show: Article and Press release and article about dissent in USA 2007.
Dear Thom Hartmann listeners.
We applaud your skepticism! And we’re glad you’ve come to this site for more information about 9/11 Truth. Just a few links here to some basic information to briefly introduce what we’re asking, why we’re asking, and why it matters. This is not a matter of “belief,” it’s an issue of facts vs. deceptions. Due diligence is required–we ask people to simply consider the questions, review the documentation, and come to conclusions based on what you learn.
» Kevin Ryan makes the case: You can choose to not look at this information, to choose denial, but ultimately, it’s a personal decision.
“To me, the report in question represents a decision point, not just for the US, but for humanity as a whole. We’re at a point where we must decide if we will live consciously, or literally give up our entire reality for a thin veneer of lies. In the US these lies include cheap propaganda that passes for journalism, police-state measures that promise security, and mountains of debt that paint a picture of wealth.”
» When the widows of 9/11 victims, based on their own limited investigation, believe there’s got to be a limit to (Kleinberg’s testimony) how much “luck” the hijackers could possibly have had, shouldn’t the 9/11 Commission have thoroughly investigated?
» But we’re safer now, and the sacrifices we’ve made have been necessary … right? “The terrorist wins when he or she manages to alter the behavior of a people, or infringes on the way of life in a country, that the country, a democratic country particularly, alters its way of life, because that’s a step up for the terrorist in question, because it raises the whole question of civil liberties and access and freedom of movement.” Had Mr. Jennings recently reviewed the 14 Steps of Fascism, to have made such a prescient statement on 9/11? (More on American fascism here.)
» Why can’t Sibel Edmonds speak? Fired from the FBI translation unit for pointing out dangerous problems, she’s still “the most gagged woman in history.”
Former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds has made a number of disturbing claims about the 911 attacks, but perhaps the most disconcerting is her oft-repeated statement that the US authorities have covered up an entire organizational layer within al-Qaeda. … it’s time we learnt:
1) Who are these mid and high-level al-Qaida operatives?
2) What role did they play in planning 911?
3) What operational support did they provide?
4) Why they are still roaming free today?
5) Why did the US authorities continually exclude key participants from the official narrative?
And Sibel is certainly not the only whistleblower silenced by the 9/11 Commission.
» Want to see what Building 7’s collapse actually looked like, now that you’ve heard about it? Dan Rather describes the collapse of WTC7 here, and another view of 7 is here. And really, after six years, why hasn’t the National Institute of Standards and Technology ever completed a definitive report telling us how this building collapsed, and why we don’t need to worry that other skyscrapers will utterly disintegrate if they catch on fire. We’re still asking for that.