Which leads back to the interviews of guests on the three television news programs. The main theme of all three of the guests on these programs appeared to be concern of the physical evidence of 9/11/2001, mentioned above and particularly regarding the collapse of three of the World Trade Center buildings on that day.
The main themes of the interviewers on these programs appeared to be two-fold:
1) The guests were representing a fringe movement, and most Americans do not dispute the official 9/11 explanation of the 19 hijackers defeating US military and intelligence forces on 9/11/2001.
2) The guests and those they speak for, who question the official 9/11/2001 account, are of questionable sanity.
This motivated me to do some research. First I looked at the fringe movement issue that the majority of Americans disagreed with the programs guests and accept the official explanation, and secondly, the sanity and expertise of people like their guests who question the official story of 9/11/2001.
First, regarding the fringe issue, asserting that the guests questioning the events of 9/11 reflected a small minority of American opinion. I looked at the only polls I could find on these questions, and the results were surprising. A CNN viewers poll, which is not scientific, held Wednesday, November 10th, 2005, asked, "Do you believe there is a U.S. government cover-up surrounding 9/11?" 89% replied "Yes," they did believe there was a cover-up by the U.S. Government (9,441 votes), while only 12% felt there was no cover-up.
In a national Zogby poll, of May 2006, found that 45%, of the American public felt a new 9/11 investigation should be launched because "so many unanswered questions about 9/11 remain that Congress or an International Tribunal should re-investigate the attacks, including whether any US government officials consciously allowed or helped facilitate their success." An earlier Zogby poll of New York City residents, from August of 2004, found that Half (49.3%) of New Yorkers felt that U.S. government officials "knew in advance that attacks were planned on or around September 11, 2001, and that they consciously failed to act." While 66% of New Yorkers called for a new probe of Unanswered Questions by Congress or New York’s Attorney General.
Now to the second issue the television media interviewers were most concerned with, which was the expertise and sanity of the people demanding a new 9/11 investigation, and some even suggesting possible U.S. government complicity in the attacks of 9/11/2001. Again, a simple google "video 9/11" search, provided a wealth of information.
This too yielded some surprising results.
One of the loudest advocates of the most damning charge that "members of the U.S. government actually orchestrated the events of 9/11 to fool the nation into unpopular wars", was not a tree-hugging Green Party activist, but rather a prominent Republican, in fact a Former Chief Economist under George Bush, and professor at Texas A&M, Morgan Reynolds. http://www.lewrockwell.com/reynolds/reynolds12.html
Google research of the growing list of other 9/11 skeptics of the official story, some "convinced of U.S. government involvement," while others not going that far, but pointing out that"the official story is highly questionable and demands further investigation," yielded surprising results. Including a host of high level Republican administration officials, defense experts, intelligence experts, and respected scholars, as well as well known celebrities who are now adding the spotlight of their names to the issue of 9/11.
Among them were:
Former Director of Advanced Space Programs Development for the U.S. Air Force, under President Reagan, and combat fighter pilot Col. Robert Bowman (Caltech Phd in aeronautics and nuclear engineering).
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6900065571556128674
Former CIA Intelligence Advisor to Reagan and George HW Bush and founder of the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, Ray McGovern
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Researchers_questioning_the_official_account_of_9/11
Kevin Ryan, former department head at UL (Underwriter Laboratories) the company which certified the steel which went into the WTCs upon their construction, and inspected it after the WTC collapses in 2001.
http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20041112144051451
Former assistant secretary of the U.S. Treasury Senior Research Fellow at the Hoover Institution, Research Fellow at Stanford's Independent Institute, and former associate editor of the Wall Street Journal, Paul Craig Roberts
http://www.wanttoknow.info/050908insidejob911#roberts
Canadian National Defense Minister, the Honourable Paul Hellyer
http://www.septembereleventh.org/kc/multimedia/movies/Hellyer.mov
Minister for the Environment, and Member of Parliament (United Kingdom) Michael Meacher
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8274552561914055825
National Minister of Defense (Germany). Also, served as Minister of Technology Andreas Von Bulow
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8274552561914055825
Former Chief of Staff of the Russian armed forces, and chief of the department for General affairs in the Soviet Union 's ministry of Defense, General Leonid Ivashov
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=NIM20060123&articleId=1788
Former MI6 British Counter Intelligence Officer, David Shayler
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5403286136814574974
Distinguished McKnight University Professor of Philosophy at the University of Minnesota, former Marine Corps officer, author or editor of more than 20 books, and co-chair of Scholars For 9/11 Truth, James Fetzer
http://www.911podcasts.com/display.php?vid=122
Professor of Physics, Brigham Young University, and co-chair of Scholars For 9/11 Truth, Steven Jones
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=964034652002408586
Emeritus Professor of Philosophy of Religion & Theology, Claremont Graduate University, and author or editor of some 30 books, including "The New Pearl Harbor" and "The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions" David Ray Griffin
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6837001821567284154
Professor of mathematics, University of Western Ontario, and founder of the Scientific Panel Investigating Nine-Eleven (SPINE), A.K Dewdney
http://www.serendipity.li/wot/operation_pearl.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A._K._Dewdney
Aircraft crash investigation authority, USAF Col. (Ret) George Nelson
http://www.physics911.net/georgenelson.htm
Former chief Pentagon arms negotiator for the Middle East, USAF Col. (Ret) Don de Grand-Pre
http://www.prisonplanet.com/022904degrand.html
Actor Charlie Sheen (Platoon, Wall Street, etc.)
http://prisonplanet.com/articles/june2006/280606juggernautoftruth.htm
Actor, Ed Asner
http://www.911blimp.net/videos/EdAsner-UnityIsTheKey.mov
Actor, Ed Begley, Jr
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7140359934129245752
So, now that we've examined the two main issues of concern for the television news interviewers, which was the "fringe" aspect of the questioners, and the "sanity/expertise" issue, it appears those arguments are very weak arguments, really with no merit at all.
Obviously tens of millions of Americans, according to polls, want a new investigation into 9/11/2001 and have a strong suspicion of U.S. government involvement at some level. Obviously not all of the national defense, intelligence, aeronautics, physics and engineering experts questioning the official story of 9/11 are insane or unqualified to comment.
This begs the question, in the face of such obvious facts, why do our media personalities continue to attempt to throw out accusations that are patently untrue regarding those who question the official story?
When a television news interviewer continues to ask questions and make assertions that he or she knows to be untrue, this would challenge the expertise and sanity, not of their guests, but of the television news interviewer.
The 9/11 truth movement appears to be growing rapidly, and involving people of substantial credentials and expertise. As television and some radio personalities continue to behave in what obviously is an insane behavior, what do we do? Can we get our national media any psychological help? If not, it would be wise to relieve them of their positions at least. I feel increasingly uneasy about millions of young minds being exposed night after night to comments and opinions by people who increasingly appear to be insane, yet in positions of authority.
Of course the concern here is larger. If there is any possibility or doubt about whether the events of 9/11/2001 were participated in by members of our own government, then our entire democracy and world peace would be strengthened by getting to the bottom of the true facts of this pinnacle event of our time. It would be unhealthy to leave a cloud of doubt hanging over such assertions. There should be a full fledged national debate, experts from all sides should be interviewed on national media to get to the bottom of this once and for all. Our Congress should launch investigations into the physics questions that are causing so many to doubt the official story. No matter where anyone stands on this issue, this is obviously the only path to national healing and trust.
However, this debate on national media cannot occur if the interviewers hired by national media continue to behave in an insane irrational behavior, like "conspiracy theory wing-nuts." You see, too many of our media spokespersons on television and radio adhere to a wild conspiracy theory. Their theory is that anyone who looks into the facts of the events of one of the most important issues in history is alone, and insane, but yet somehow organized in some united conspiratorial effort. Of course, the facts fly in the face of this conspiracy theory, but these media personalities appear unable to grasp reality even when it is pointed out to them.
For media reading this article, time will tell whether you are an insane conspiracy theorist or not. If you too, are among the insane in our media, the public will likely eventually demand your resignation. As one who writes sometimes on parental issues, I believe it is unhealthy to have insane people in charge of the national information highways our children are taught to watch. We need sane media people who look at facts regarding issues, not ones who launch into insane screeds of paranoia to avoid reality.
Also, you may recall that when I contacted State Representative, Stephen Nass' office, his aide stated that they were aware of but not interested in and would not look at the physics facts provided by the website Scholars for 9/11 Truth, www.st911.org. However, they did want to fire a university teacher for presenting facts, many of which were available on that site. To fire someone for presenting facts, facts that you dispute, yet have no idea what those facts are, and are unwilling to look at them to find out what they are . . . is also insane. Again, as someone who writes on parenting issues, as a concerned parent as well, America should also consider retiring our insane government officials who fire people for facts they aren't aware of and are unwilling to look at. These politicians apparently assert some wild conspiracy theory that millions of Americans are questioning the events of 9/11 because they are "Bush haters" according to the aide at Nass' office. This kind of delusional paranoia by our elected officials is of particular concern. Such wild-eyed conspiratorialists should not be allowed in government.
"My hope is that everyone will forward this essay on to every media establishment and reporter worldwide, and will ask everyone they know to do the same."
Essay author - Bill Douglas
[Proofreader's note: this article was edited for spelling and typos on July 31, 2006]
Note: www.st911.org
http://www.lewrockwell....
http://video.google.com...
http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://www.911truth.org...
http://www.wanttoknow.i...
http://www.septemberele...
http://video.google.com...
http://video.google.com...
http://www.globalresear...
http://video.google.com...
http://www.911podcasts....
http://video.google.com...
http://video.google.com...
http://www.serendipity....
http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://www.physics911.n...
http://www.prisonplanet...
http://prisonplanet.com...
http://www.911blimp.net...
http://video.google.com...
www.st911.org

Excellent article, thanks.
---
Michael
- Justice Louis Brandeis
But we all digress........the media, if not in the employ of the White House, have owners whose hands are wrapped firmly in the hands of those in the White House......
---
"We can have a democracy or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of the few. We cannot have both."
- Justice Louis Brandeis
<br />
The theory behind 9/11 is it was concocted not only to "justify" American military agression throughout the world, it also served as a springboard for eroding individual civil liberties and attacking the US Constitution. You know...that crap they feed you about giving up your privacy so you can be safer.<br />
<br />
How else do you explain the bend over and be a "Patriot Act" being passed by a bunch of legislators who did not even bother to read it? And these are the people who are trusted to represent the people?<br />
<br />
Governments have pulled off this sort of stunt on an unsuspecting public previously. In 1933, the Nazis used the burning down of the Reichstag to impose their form of civil order<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.weyrich.com/political_issues/reichstag_fire.html">http://www.weyrich.com/political_issues/reichstag_fire.html</a><br />
<br />
Since most Americans are ignorant and have no significant knowledge about history, they were obviously seen as an easy target.
This is the only conspiracy theory that has any plausibility to it. The rest is nonsense and should be discarded; not because of any morality or conscience of the present US administration stopping them from directly carrying 9/11 out but simply because of the surety of getting caught doing it. There is abundant evidence that the Bush administration dismantled successful antiterrorist measures of the Clinton admin or simply ignored warnings that resulted from those left in place. For example, the FBI had full knowledge that some of these terrorists were training to fly in the US before 9/11 and had informed the Bush admin. This sort of thing would be a calculated risk since they would have known that it would have been very difficult to prove anything beyond incompetence was at play.
As far as motive, one only has to look to the Project For a New American Century whose authors include the key players in the Bush admin, ie. Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz. One could also consider the fact that before 9/11 Bush's presidency was in serious trouble as being the most do nothing lacklustre presidency on record.
The fact that thermate residue has been found on pieces of steel that were not shipped to foriegn steel mills to be melted down tells what really caused the collapse. The fact that building 7 collapsed after Silverstein said that he and fire officials had decided to pull it tells what really happened. See <a href="http://www.vivelecanada.ca/article.php/20060615051404516">http://www.vivelecanada.ca/article.php/20060615051404516</a> <br />
The fact that these three steel frame buildings were the only steel frame buildings in history to supposedly collapse from fires and it all happened on the same day should make you very suspicious. See <a href="http://www.vivelecanada.ca/article.php/20060630113835394">http://www.vivelecanada.ca/article.php/20060630113835394</a> <br />
The fact that Mayor Guiliani says that he was told that the tower was going to collapse should set off warning bells in your head.<br />
Yet you imply that the facts should be ignored so that the official conspiracy theory will hold up? You think the fact that criminals might get caught deters them from crime?<p>---<br><br />
"Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth."<br />
(Albert Einstein)
<br />
<p>---<br>We have met the enemy and he is us<br />
Pogo<br />
A mind is a fire to be kindled, not a vessel to be filled.<br />
Plutarch
One of my favorites:
"Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger."
And his buddy, Adolf Hitler, had this to say:
"The great masses of the people will more easily fall victims to a big lie than to a small one."
And I say:
"Never underestimate your own government's capacity for evil"
---
“The war is not meant to be won, it is meant to be continuous, the essential act of warfare is the destruction of the produce of human labour”
It would have been a simple matter for a small group to coordinate a series of events to sow enough background clutter into the situation to deliberately comprimise their response, knowing the equipment, the people, and how it all worked.
For example, the fact that there was a simulated hijacking drill planned to start that very day at nearly the same time as the real hijackings is dismissed by the author of this article as a coincidence. Right. That's one interpretation.
The many false leads introduced, with multiple reports of other, false hijackings going on, is not properly explained.
The coverup at NORAD, I believe, is limited to the decision to shoot down one of the airliners.
That would have been a very small part of the tapes, easily withheld, or re-written. The decision to shoot down a US civilian airliner is horrendous, but perfectly understandable given the circumstances, that two other planes had already hit the world trade centre and this plane was apparently heading for Washington. The subsequent decision to cover this up and not reveal this to the public is also perfectly understandable. Why cause more grief in the nation than already has occured? Why point any blame at this point to the the government?
I really don't know if those passengers did successfully take the plane back from the terrorists before an air-to-air missile struck their plane and took them out. I'm not sure or not if those cell phone calls could actually have been made. But something is not right about it all, and I doubt we will ever know the real truth.
---
“The war is not meant to be won, it is meant to be continuous, the essential act of warfare is the destruction of the produce of human labour”