What we know and don’t know about 9/11
Paul Craig Roberts | August 17 2006
I received a number of intelligent responses from readers of my
August 14 column, “Gullible Americans,” The letters deserve a
reply. Moreover, some contain important points that should be
shared with a wider audience. Pundits such as myself are not the
only people who have interesting things to say. Considering the
number of letters and the time it would require to respond
individually, I am replying instead in this column.
Most readers from whom I heard understand the difference between
loyalty to country and loyalty to a government. They understand
that to support a political party or a government that is
destroying the US Constitution and America’s reputation in the
world is, in fact, an act of treason. Therefore, I did not have
to read the usual drivel about how doubting “our government” is
un-American.
Among the issues raised are:
How could the complicity of the US government, or some part of
it, in the events of 9/11 be kept a secret? For the most part,
this question comes from Americans who believe the government
must have been, to some extent, complicit in the attacks on the
WTC and the Pentagon.
How can we differentiate between the real facts, the 9/11
Commission’s reporting of the facts, and “conspiracy theories”?
What about the role of suicide flyers led by M. Atta?
What about the Popular Mechanics article and the TV documentary
that debunk the skeptics and support the official explanation of
9/11?
What about the role of the US media in propagandizing Americans
with the official explanation instead of examining the
explanation, especially with regard to such truncated
hatchet-job interviews with 9/11 skeptics such as the hatchet
jobs presided over by Donny Deutsch on CNBC and by neocon Tucker
Carlson on MSNBC?
Why are so many Americans hostile to holding the Bush regime
accountable for its obvious and documented lies, lies that have
misled America to war and gratuitously slaughtered and maimed
tens of thousands of people, including our own troops?
I will begin by stating what we know to be a solid
incontrovertible scientific fact.
We know that it is strictly impossible for any building, much
less steel columned buildings, to “pancake” at free fall speed.
Therefore, it is a non-controversial fact that the official
explanation of the collapse of the WTC buildings is false.
We also know for a fact that the Air Force somehow inexplicably
failed to intercept the alleged hijacked airliners despite the
fact that the Air Force can launch jet fighters to 29,000 feet
in 2.5 minutes. We also know that the two co-chairmen of the
9/11 Commission have just written a book that reveals that the
US military lied to the Commission about its failure to
intercept the hijacked airliners.
There are various explanations for this second fact. The
military could have lied to cover up complicity or to cover-up
its incompetence. However, no investigation has been made to
ascertain the true explanation for the failure.
This leaves us with the incontrovertible fact that buildings
cannot “pancake” at free fall speeds.
The only explanation known to science for the free fall collapse
of a building, especially into its own footprint, is engineered
demolition, which removes the supports for each floor of the
building at split second intervals so that the debris from above
meets no resistance on its fall. To call this explanation a
“conspiracy theory” is to display the utmost total ignorance.
Any physicist or engineer who maintains that buildings can
“pancake” at free fall speed has obviously been bought and paid
for or is a total incompetent fool.
The WTC buildings are known to have collapsed at free fall speed
into their own footprints.
This fact does not tell us who is responsible or what purpose
was served.
Since the damning incontrovertible fact has not been
investigated, speculation and “conspiracy theories” have filled
the void. Some of the speculation is based on circumstantial
evidence and is plausible. Other of the speculation is
untenable, and it is used to protect the official explanation by
branding all skeptics “conspiracy theorists.” I would not be
surprised if some of the most far-out “conspiracy theories”
consist, in fact, of disinformation put out by elements in the
government to discredit all skeptics. But I do not know this to
be the case.
How could government complicity be kept a secret? It can be kept
a secret, because so many Americans are scientifically ignorant
and emotionally weak. They are incapable of realizing the
contradiction in the government’s claim that the WTC buildings
“pancaked” at free fall speed, and they are emotionally
incapable of confronting the evil of the Bush regime. Many
Christians think that Bush is “a man of God” who is protecting
American morality from homosexuals and abortionists. Others who
wear their patriotism on their sleeves think Bush is standing up
for America and innocent Israel, and that they must not let
anti-American anti-war protesters cause America to lose another
war and repeat the Vietnam experience. Americans are both
ignorant and full of resentments against the left. This makes
them easily manipulated by the neoconservatives who dominate the
Bush regime and the media.
Also, many anti-war and anti-Bush online sites are scared of
being called “crazy conspiracy kooks.” They protect their sites
by staying away from the 9/11 issue, just as so many Americans
are scared to death of being called “anti-semitic” and thereby
do not dare criticize Israel no matter the heinous war crimes
that state routinely commits. Of all the online subscribers to
my column, only vdare.com and NewsMax had the courage to post my
column. Realizing that even antiwar sites would serve as de
facto gatekeepers for the neocons, I offered the column to ICH,
whose editor cannot be intimidated.
The Popular Mechanics article and the TV documentary are
obviously false since they both endorse the official explanation
that the WTC buildings “pancaked” at free fall speed, an obvious
scientific impossibility. Whether the false reporting by Popular
Mechanics and television are due to incompetence or to
complicity in a government cover-up, I do not know.
We know nothing about alleged suicide flyers led by M. Atta
except what the government has told us, a government that has
lied to us about everything else, such as Iraq’s alleged WMD and
alleged links to Osama bin Laden, and Iran’s alleged nuclear
weapons program, a program for which the International Atomic
Energy Agency inspectors cannot find evidence.
According to reports, the BBC has found 6 of the alleged suicide
hijackers alive and well in their home countries. I do not know
if the report is true, but I do know that the report has been
ignored and there has been no investigation. Both the US
government and the US media have turned a blind eye. We have no
way of knowing if Atta and his named accomplices hijacked the
planes, or, if they did, whether they were dupes of intelligent
services that pretended to be a terrorist cell and organized the
cover for the engineered demolition.
The fact that we do not know any of these things, and the fact
that the 9/11 Commission co-chairmen now tell us that their
report is flawed, are good indications that we have no
documented information of who was behind the plot, why it
occurred, or how it operated.
With regard to the role of the US media, if it is indeed a media
rather than a propaganda ministry, one reader cited remarks by
the distinguished investigative reporter, John Pilger, made in
an address at Columbia University on 14 April 2006:
“During the Cold War, a group of Russian journalists toured the
United States. On the final day of their visit, they were asked
by their hosts for their impressions. ‘I have to tell you,’ said
their spokesman, ‘that we were astonished to find after reading
all the newspapers and watching TV, that all the opinions on all
the vital issues were by and large, the same. To get that result
in our country, we imprison people, we tear out their
fingernails. Here, you don’t have that. What’s the secret? How
do you do it?’”
This quote is probably apocryphal, but it is well used to make a
valid point. The answer to the Russian’s question is that during
the cold war the American public viewed the Soviet Union as a
dangerous adversary and were amenable to reports to that effect.
The fact that the Soviets were a potentially dangerous adversary
made Americans blind to the roles of the US military-industrial
complex, which benefitted financially from cultivating the
adversary relationship, and the US government, which benefitted
politically from cultivating the adversary relationship, in
keeping the adversarial relationship alive.
The uniformity of the US media has become much more complete
since the days of the cold war. During the 1990s, the US
government permitted an unconscionable concentration of print
and broadcast media that terminated the independence of the
media. Today the US media is owned by 5 giant companies in which
pro-Zionist Jews have disproportionate influence. More
importantly, the values of the conglomerates reside in the
broadcast licenses, which are granted by the government, and the
corporations are run by corporate executives--not by
journalists--whose eyes are on advertising revenues and the
avoidance of controversy that might produce boycotts or upset
advertisers and subscribers. Americans who rely on the totally
corrupt corporate media have no idea what is happening anywhere
on earth, much less at home.
Despite the dark days in which we live, some readers find
optimism in recent polls that show more than one-third of the US
public now disbelieve the official account of 9/11 despite the
Bush regime’s propaganda faithfully trumpeted by the US media.
Bush’s own rock-bottom polls show that Americans, like the
Russians of the Soviet era, can read between the lines of the
propagandistic US media. Many Americans can still spot a liar
and a cheat when they see one.
Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in
the Reagan administration. He was Associate Editor of the Wall
Street Journal editorial page and Contributing Editor of
National Review. He is coauthor of The Tyranny of Good
Intentions.
----------------
APFN 9/11 INFO AND LINKS:
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/wtc.htm