[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
9/11 See other 9/11 Articles Title: Honest Search for the Truth or Yet Another Conspiracy Theory? 911 call on 9/11 response Honest search for the truth or yet another conspiracy theory? October 31, 2006 By Emma Vaughn At a Friday screening of the documentary “9/11: Press for Truth” at Gunn High School, Stanford grad Paul Thompson and Berkeley English Prof. Peter Dale Scott charged the Bush administration of failing to make Americans safer and pointed to a governmental cover-up at the film’s Palo Alto debut. Much of the content, which traces the events and government actions leading up to the terrorist attacks, is based on Thompson’s book, “The Complete 9/11 Timeline.” In addition to news clips and government evidence, the film uses survivor statements to raise provocative questions regarding the attacks and the role of the current administration. “In looking at what happened since 9/11, I don’t feel like this country has been secured or made safer in any way, shape or form,” Thompson said. “It is just so shocking what has not been done. This country is so open to another attack. It wouldn’t even take Al Qaeda at this point.” In a discussion session immediately proceeding the film, Thompson was joined by Scott to gauge the film’s political implications. Scott, who has penned numerous articles on terrorism and the 9/11 attacks, expressed serious doubts in the ability of any administration to secure the country against Al-Qaeda. “We have a big problem right now in which we need a more serious remedy than a Democrat in the White House,” Scott said. “There is this whole interlocking milieu of intelligence agencies and the terrorists they sponsor, and they are so clearly imbedded in each other that there is no clear decisive action to stop them. The CIA is still sponsoring terrorism, and after five years of this ‘War on Terror,’ we can say that the net result is a far more dangerous world than we had before.” Thompson said that while he based his opinions on facts only, government inaction leading up the attacks reached a criminal level. “If you follow the incompetence theory, it would be such gross criminal negligence to have so many warnings and do absolutely nothing in response that that alone should lead to the impeachment of the Bush administration,” Thompson said. “If you look at the untrue statements that we know the top officials have said under oath, that right there should be a minimum five-year prison sentence.” In addition to the administration’s role, the film focused on what it labeled as gaps and contradictions in the 9/11 Commission. It employed the “Jersey Girls,” a group of four women widowed by the attacks, to trace the steps in the investigative process. “There has been a massive cover-up from the beginning,” Scott said. “And while we hoped that the Commission might do something to end the cover-up, it actually participated in it. The odd paradox is that it’s not just the mainstream press that doesn’t want to go there. It’s people like Noam Chomsky that don’t want to go there. We have to make America go there.” While most audience members reacted enthusiastically towards the discussion and film’s content, a few felt that both stopped short of unearthing some of the more controversial questions. Dennis Galen Mitrzyk, a social activist from Los Altos, said he was disappointed that Stark and Thompson hadn’t addressed what he believed to be the administration’s active role in the attacks. “I feel that Paul and Peter are both guilty of taking a position known as the limited hang-out,” Mitrzyk said. “Paul is assuming that it is Al-Qaeda who did it. My specialty is the collapse of the towers, and the collapse was clearly controlled demolition, and if it was this, than it was clearly not Al-Qaeda. It’s a very different situation if Bush and the neo-cons planned it.” A number of people walked out in frustration during the discussion session, with one audience member loudly charging that the “destruction of Israel” was all the U.S. needed to maintain political stability. Comments on this article:
Poster Comment: Click on the link and check out the comment section for some laughs.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
|
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||