4um: A Conspiracy Against Us All

Five years after 9/11, the truth about what happened that day is more thoroughly documented and widely available than ever. And yet the crackpot conspiracy theories alleging that the Bush administration orchestrated the attacks or allowed them to happen have become more deeply entrenched and broadly accepted than at any time since that terrible day.

More than a third (36 percent) of the American public believes it is likely that the Bush administration either perpetrated the 9/11 attacks or deliberately failed to stop them “because they wanted the United States to go to war in the Middle East,” according to a Scripps Howard/Ohio University poll released last month. A Zogby poll in August 2004 found that half of New York City residents believed the Bush administration knew the attacks were coming and “consciously failed to act.” The true believers might be a tiny fringe element, but thanks to the Internet, hack academics, and a passive media, they have succeeded in planting a grain of doubt in the minds of a substantial number of Americans.

The Internet is a brilliant vehicle for the dissemination of half-truths — or what only have the appearance of half-truths. Presenting one-sided versions of the story, which usually leave out mountains of available data, and armed with a few snapshots or video clips, conspiracy theorists have crafted page after page of “proof” of their theories.

For example, photographs showing dust and smoke shooting out of the towers as they collapse are cited on website after website as proof that the towers were brought down by explosions. The theory is reasonable enough, so long as you ignore all the available evidence — which is exactly what the theorists do. Numerous engineers who’ve studied the towers, and even ones who haven’t, have concluded that the puffs of smoke and debris are the result of air being pressed outward by the force of the top floors falling. It is really rather elementary: The physical space occupied by any office building consists mostly of air; if the top floors fall, where does the air in the floors below go? Out. There is no other option. Yet the theorists claim that this perfectly expected expulsion of air is proof that bombs were used.

The most prevalent theory is that the government brought the towers down by controlled demolition. This is what Brigham Young University physics professor Steven Jones, put on leave by BYU last week, believes — once again, despite the preponderance of facts showing otherwise.

Jones and his followers believe that the government placed thermite explosives in the buildings and brought them down by detonation. Never mind that thousands of pounds of explosives would somehow have to have been planted throughout the towers — in office space, behind walls, etc. — without anyone noticing. The “proof” of this theory is that the towers came down so quickly: The resistance of the lower floors would have slowed the collapse — unless, that is, the lower floors were exploded.

The video evidence clearly refutes this claim. The towers unquestionably collapsed from the top down, not bottom up. The force of the collapsing top floors, combined with the weakened steel below, were enough to bring the towers down remarkably quickly — almost in free fall, in fact.

A good example of the flimsiness of the conspiracy theories is the claim that a video shows “molten steel” falling from one of the towers. A jet-fuel fire is not strong enough to melt steel, so the picture “proves” that thermite explosives were used. The National Institutes for Standards and Training found was that the photo really shows melted aluminum from one of the aircraft. The theorists scream that melted aluminum is white, and the metal in question is clearly yellow, case closed. In its pure state, melted aluminum is white, but of course, it wasn’t pure when coming out of the towers. It was mixed with all the other burned debris, which changed its color.

The conspiracy theories rely on just that sort of thinking. They approach 9/11 as if it were a controlled scientific experiment: In theory, things are supposed to work in a certain way; because they did not, the official story cannot be true. Conspiracy theorists have little patience for facts of life, such as bureaucratic incompetence, human error, and extreme conditions. They tend to believe that the government functions at peak, even superhuman, levels. Their regard for the government — or at least, for the competence of the government — is particularly strange. The top conspiracy theorist, David Ray Griffin, claims the official story cannot possibly be true is because “such incompetence by FAA officials is not believable.”

The support of “academics” such as Griffin has lent much credence to the conspiracy mongers, but how credible are these academics? Last Wednesday Britain’s Daily Mail published a story claiming: “The 9/11 terrorist attack on America which left almost 3,000 people dead was an ‘inside job,’ according to a group of leading academics.” But the group in question, Scholars for 9/11 Truth, of which Griffin is the most prominent member, is in no sense a “group of leading academics.” It is a collection of like-minded crackpot theorists who happen to have some connection to academia.

Scholars for 9/11 Truth claims about 300 total members, 76 of whom have “academic affiliations,” according to its founder, retired University of Minnesota-Duluth philosophy professor James H. Fetzer. He told this to my newspaper, the New Hampshire Union Leader, last month when one of our reporters discovered that a University of New Hampshire professor was a member and wanted to teach a class on 9/11. The UNH professor, William Woodward, teaches psychology — not engineering or physics — is a Quaker pacifist previously arrested for demonstrating at the office of U.S. Senator Judd Gregg, and has a long history of left-wing activism. When asked by a reporter to explain his theory that the planes were not hijacked airliners, Woodward admitted that he could not account for the missing passengers who boarded their flights and never returned. Nonetheless, he was convinced that he was right — because the official 9/11 report left too much unexplained, he said.

That is how it usually is in the world of conspiracy theorists. It seems that they all claim the official story cannot be true because it has too many holes, yet goes on to posit a theory with holes large enough to, well, fly a jumbo jet through.

Some members of Scholars for 9/11 Truth are or were legitimate academics of good standing at reputable institutions. Yet, of the 76 Fetzer identifies as having “academic affiliations,” there are many with questionable credentials. A partial list includes a “visiting professor of English” at Kyungpook National University in Daegu, South Korea; an assistant professor of English literature at Dogus University in Istanbul; someone whose qualifications are listed only as “Radiology, Medical hypnosis”; another whose qualifications are “French language and culture”; someone who teaches at Tunxis Community College in Farmington, Conn.; another listed as “architect, communicator”; one professor of “English and theater” at the University of Guelph (that’s in Ontario); and one listed as “author, researcher 9/11, JFK, more.” These are some of the “leading academics” promoting the view that the government did 9/11. One author with an article posted on the Scholars for 9/11 Truth website goes by the name “Scooby Doo.”

Of the 76 full members of Scholars for 9/11 Truth, only four are listed as having backgrounds in physics, three in engineering; the other 69 “scholars” are mostly in the humanities and social sciences. Not quite what you’d expect when you hear that a group of “leading academics” supports the theory that the government was behind the attack.

What do the vast majority of actual engineers and investigators who’ve studied the attacks conclude? Not unexpectedly, that the towers and the Pentagon were attacked by airliners hijacked by radical Islamic extremists, and the towers collapsed as a result of the aircraft collisions and fires. Every major investigation, from the 9/11 Commission to a panel of experts assembled by Popular Mechanics magazine to the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST), has come to the same conclusion. And yet more and more people continue to believe the handful of conspiracy nuts. Why?

The Internet bears some responsibility, of course. But the amateur speculation so prevalent there can be cancelled out to a large degree by top-notch investigative reporting, which is what the big media are supposed to do. In this, however, the media have been less than thorough, and, to a large extent, the 9/11 conspiracy theories have spread because the mainstream media have failed in their duty to get to the truth of the matter.

Popular Mechanics did an excellent job refuting the conspiracy theorists, as has the NIST. But their work has been little explored by the mainstream press. On top of that, media outlets have tended to do puff pieces on the conspiracy theorists rather than expose their shoddy research. Too many reports on the conspiracy nuts treat them as if their ideas are to be given the same consideration as the facts. The conspiracy theorists are given the standard J-school “fairness treatment.” Get a quote from Person A and another from Person B, present both sides evenly, and leave it at that. The Washington Post did exactly that in its piece on the conspiracy theorists last Friday. What ever the merits of that approach, it doesn’t work in this case.

None of the conspiracy theories can stand up to scrutiny; that they have stood up at all is mostly because the mainstream press has not given them any real scrutiny. The academics tend to be treated with the respect any other academic would get, and because they are professors the stories are made to read just like any other dispute between professors. But in reality, the scholars peddling the 9/11 theories are practicing almost entirely outside of their realm of expertise (e.g., Griffin, the theologian) and are an ultra-tiny minority dismissed as crackpots by the vast majority of the academic world, not to mention the world of engineering.

As a result, five years after nearly 3,000 innocent people were slaughtered by radical Islamic terrorists, and just as the War on Terror enters an important new phase in which President Bush has vowed to take on both al Qaeda and its allies, and Iran and its puppets, a third of the American people reportedly think the enemy is not the jihadists, who are trying to destroy us, but our own government, which is trying to defend us against the real threat.

This is a serious development. If people don’t understand who the real enemy is, if they doubt the very basis upon which our response to 9/11 was initiated, they are not going to support our necessary war against those who are trying to destroy us. One may have his doubts about the Iraq war; and the Bush administration, in its justification and execution, has earned a great deal of the skepticism about that conflict. But the War on Terror is another matter entirely. The skepticism about that has not been earned; it has been manufactured.

We cannot allow the truth of what happened on 9/11 to be clouded by the conspiracy nuts. America cannot afford to lose the will to fight this war.

Silverstein to be reimbursed $98M of WTC investment.(Larry Silverstein )

Larry Silverstein reportedly will be reimbursed much of his reserve funds he invested six weeks before terrorist slammed jets into the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center. The New York Times reported Nov. 22 that Silverstein and his co-investors would receive $98 million, about 80 percent of the $125 million they invested in equity in 2001. The 99-year lease with the Port Authority was valued at $3.2 billion. The investors along with the Port Authority, who owned the buildings, are using insurance proceeds to pay off GMAC Commercial Mortgage Corporation, Silverstein's lender, a reported sum of $563 million.

Silverstein and his partners will retain their 99-year lease and play a large part in the redesigning of the area. A new collaborative design for the Freedom Tower, the brainchild of architects David Childs and Daniel Libeskind, is scheduled for release next month.

Howard Rubenstein, a spokesman for Silverstein, released a statement the day the Times article appeared, saying that Silverstein was rightfully entitled to the funds he used as collateral for a loan to make a down payment on his lease.

"The GMAC reserves that are being returned to his companies were established to secure the GMAC mortgage loan," Rubenstein said. "Now that the mortgage loan has been satisfied, there is no reason for the security for that loan to remain tied up in escrow accounts earning minimal interest."

According to Rubenstein, the days of Silverstein seeing a return on his Ground Zero investment are a long time in the future.

"When it comes time to refinance the project, Mr. Silverstein's companies likely will have to put up the same or more amounts of security for those new loans," Rubenstein said. "In the interim, as part of his agreement with the Port Authority, Mr. Silverstein is committing 100 percent of all future business interruption proceeds to the project. As a result of this commitment, Mr. Silverstein and his investors likely will not see any return for a decade."

Following the Times article, a state judge issued a gag order on all participants in the anticipated deal. PA spokesman Greg Trevor declined to comment, citing the gag order. Silverstein has been deadlocked in a battle with the trade center insurers since the attacks. The leaseholder claims the two planes striking the towers constituted two separate disasters and should result accordingly in a $7 billion insurance payout. The insurers claim the strikes were one disaster and are offering $3.5 million.

The insurers have paid out about $1.9 billion to date.

The Times also reported the Port Authority has reached an agreement to buy out Westfield America, which operated the retail mall at the trade center, for $140 million.

His own equity already insured by private investors. And he is not worthy of 80% about the capital loss? WOW. Where do you realize the difference between reality and fantasy; but then again, you may not be able to differentiate between the two.

This money represents his downpayment on the lease. Why should a nickle have been returned?

You just love that retirement entitlement that you earned performing nothing more than a desk cop fielding questions from the public supporting the government edict as professional servant. You are a god damned Fabian socialist.

Explain your health problems as you play upon the Internet all day. Oh sure, you are God's gift to humanity as you squirt off a few rhetorical posts towards me. Yet, whom is paying your medical costs keeping you alive from your listless lifestyle? Oh, you are a great party member, comrade.

Oh sure, you are God's gift to humanity as you squirt off a few rhetorical posts towards me.

Yet, whom is paying your medical costs keeping you alive from your listless lifestyle?

Looks to me, that you are acting defensive about yourself. Why is that, JT? Are you also pissing on yourself as you attempt to defend yourself while knowing you can not? What happened to you JT? Are you just a minor player not capable of addressing anything more than your own silly web-chat and then when confronting me, tremble upon your own knees, in public?

Bucky...I've seen a pic of you. There is no question in my mind that I could one-punch you into complete submission. Now, you know who I am, where I live and if you have the balls, you'll agree to meet me. I'd love the opportunity to explain to you in person my income stream, my past career(s) and my future.

Hey dickless wonder ex-cop, even you had the capability to beat my ass behind my back, I have the capability to rape you in public as I am right now in public. Can you stop me? No. Why is that? Because you are attracted to me you liar. You can't get off your knees to see the world around yourself.

It is my intention to kill Jethro Tull this evening. He needs a gravestone. And I am going to give it to him.

Right through JT's own staggering concepts of fucking around with me. JT is nothing more than another government grubber begging for more taxation to support his believe as an armed guard for the desperate political parties. He is a cameleon; another POS, unworthy of personal freedoms and consideration about our US Constitution as he enacts the LAW based upon buying into government retirement programs.

as opposed to what, being a Centurion for the putrid empire of the Grotesquely Obese Pigs?

unworthy of what, buck? are you under the erroneous presumption that the constitution grants you something? A persons views change, buck, when they read and learn and grow out of the constraints that megalomaniacal political parties like to use to retain power over a persons most base instincts.

Who said that? JT believes as a retired cop, he deserves cum stains from the public.

He is taking a JT? He has always performed that effort even from before 2000 ... something about Y2K phenomena.

And here I beat that bastard down, tonite. And he wants me to beat him down some more? Is JT a fucking bullshiter?

You have performed your perspective playing mind fucking games. Are you saying that JT is a fucking liability to you?

But JT is a federal retiree. What are you saying? Aren't you giving to this fine upstanding American that maintained a government desk job eating donuts and sucking free coffee?

No i'm not. The NYC police pension is privately funded. Stick that up your Asshat.

Thanks a lot for waking up Liberace. I guess a peaceful Sunday morning is too much to ask for.

Your avatar? You ripped it off from someone that took the time to create it. Why not confess to the fact you have plagiarized others?

I don't have a scanner so I had no choice. If you would send the $300 like you are supposed to I could buy a scanner.

So you admit to the fact, that you are a liar and a thief ... two of the worst human qualities that mankind possesses. And yet, you think you are fair-minded and a "patriot" and a good little munchkin, 'eh?

You created your own avatar? You did all that work, yourself? WOW ... how creative you must really be.

I never said that. I said I was forced to use a link to another because you didn't follow though on your obligations. It's actually your fault.

Well of course, a common liar and a thief shall take the time to blame others for their own misdeeds. That's a part of your own squirmy, truth, right?

why do you come over here and attack minerva for no reason? she hasn't done anything to you.

you obviously have anger issues. do you want me to try to help you through them?

Look, I have been on the Inet longer than you can imagine. You are just a little, "peep-squeak" to me, Morgana ... LOL

We can imagine. We think you are really old and that you smell like vicks vaporub.

Isn't that a sweet odor? Nothing like your lies or theft or commission of vulgarity.

You could get a life. She is JT's protector. She is a whinny little, do- nothing poster that has too much time on her hands. She has no concept of reality or the ability to differentiate fact from fiction. Minerva is just a little old lady that has a disgusting life of her own.

You don't don't know that for sure. This is the Internet where everyone can lie, steal and rape while professing to be the finest thing since sliced bread. I am surprised you defend her.

I don't think that is the point. You don't have a resume requirement upon 4um to participate, do you? And do you also validate those same resumes? And since when have you created this requirement to vouch for the background of anyone?

Just now? Why is that? Because you sense a weakness in her/his postings when I confront her based upon "pings"? Look, you can validate anyone you want. It doesn't subtract from their own postings. And you knew it, too.

buuuuck..i tell you to look and see that Minerva's not an old lady and now i'm vouching for member's backgrounds? hey, i vouched for you too then when i said you were kinda cute after you showed me your picture in your cowboy hat. :P

Look, I understand that Christine wants some of us to be as pretty as television stars so that when I post, I cast a possible image of appeal. Her heart is in the right place as she works to strengthen the communications capability of the forum. And I applaud her. Her work has showed significant gain about the forum for the same.

But, I am afraid to publicly post my own image. I am afraid, as it could perform great harm to not just myself but to the members of this fine website. I am impressed that anyone cares about my physical appearance anyways. It really doesn't matter what I look like.

JT says you read Maureen Dowd editorials all the time. Do you like her or do you just read them because she is good looking?

Well, for you, I put up my 4um homepage. And no the data you have about Maureen Dowd is incorrect. I don't like any gossip columnist.

I've seen the picture on your home page before. That's not really you. That probably means the one I got on the PM and posted above is correct.

You see, that's him. He is a whinny, little, torn up old skinny retard, whom thinks he understands concepts like, "freedom", "liberty" and "rights." Truthfully, all he has is a mouth that suggests he knows but he really doesn't. But you have to give him credit. He tried real hard to make it in life. Even as a failure within himself.

Are you claiming "make-believe" persons? You don't see "dead-people" too, do you?

We will quit teasing you so much if you help us beat up Mr. Butt Cootie tomorrow. He will be back bright and early for his ration of abuse. He is addicted to it and can't stay away.

First, are you speaking for others? Are you the leader, then? And, if so whom is Butt Cootie? Is this some hand cream that JT uses to relax himself while wearing his old cop uniform while listening to some old songs from his pals, the Village People?

I am worried about your bribe, however. As a newbie to the Internet, you realize you have performed sacrilege, don't you?

There is no leader, it is an unorganized effort to provide a Bush propagandist with the abuse he craves.