Information Clearinghouse  [Printer-friendly version]
July 13, 2006


By Bill Douglas

I began researching the mainstream media coverage of the controversy
regarding the attacks of 9/11/2001, when reading an article in the
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel Newspaper, dated June 29th, 2006. It was
titled, "Sept. 11 claim stirs UW probe -- Instructor says U.S. planned
the attacks to provoke war." This led to my discovery of some wild
conspiracy theorists that endanger our government and media
establishments, with quite frankly insane assertions. I'll address
this in full in the final paragraph.

Then by using a "google video 9/11" search, I recently viewed a FOX
News interview on Hannity and Colmes with an Arab Studies teacher from
the University of Wisconsin named Kevin Barrett. I had earlier seen
an interview with another, a professor named James Fetzer, University
of Minnesota Duluth. A few weeks earlier, I had seen an interview on
MSNBC Scarborough country interviewing a Mike Berger representing

Some of these guests referred to an organization called "Scholars for
9/11 Truth" with a website, which offered a physics
research paper questioning the official explanation of the events of
9/11/2001. While visiting this site, I read that they pointed to the
temperatures of the fires in the WTC buildings, and construction of
the buildings, and the speed they fell, as evidence they claimed
proved that what we saw on 9/11/2001, when the towers fell had to have
been the result of a controlled demolition. Like the ones we've seen
with Las Vegas hotels being brought down. Their claim was that the
WTC buildings could not have been caused solely by the aircraft
hitting the WTC buildings that day.

Then, I contacted the office of a Wisconsin State Legislator, Rep.
Stephen Nass (R-Whitewater), and asked to speak to someone in the
office who could speak on this issue. I asked if he was familiar with
the Scholars for 9/11 Truth website, and he replied they had learned
of it this week. I asked him if he and the Representative could
comment on the charge that the fires on 9/11/2001 in the WTC buildings
did not burn hot enough to bring down the buildings, and if he'd read
the scholars organization's charge that thermate traces had been found
on debris from the fallen towers (thermate [sic] indicating demolition
type explosives were involved). The gentleman responded that no, they
had not looked at this information, and this would not be something
they would look at, further indicating that anyone who made such
charges was blinded by their hatred of President Bush.

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 U.S. military and intelligence forces on

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 U.S. 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

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); h

Former C.I.A. Intelligence Advisor to Reagan and George H.W. Bush and
founder of the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, Ray

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;

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;

Canadian National Defense Minister, the Honourable Paul Hellyer; h

Minister for the Environment, and Member of Parliament (United
Kingdom) Michael Meacher;

National Minister of Defense (Germany), also served as Minister of
Technology, Andreas Von Bulow;

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;

Former MI6 British Counter Intelligence Officer, David Shayler; ht

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

Professor of Physics, Brigham Young University, and co-chair of
Scholars For 9/11 Truth, Steven Jones;

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;

Professor of mathematics, University of Western Ontario, and founder
of the Scientific Panel Investigating Nine-Eleven (SPINE), A.K
Dewdney; and ht

Aircraft crash investigation authority, USAF Col. (Ret) George Nelson;

Former chief Pentagon arms negotiator for the Middle East, USAF Col.
(Ret) Don de Grand-Pre;

Actor Charlie Sheen ("Platoon," "Wall Street," etc.); http://priso

Actor, Ed Asner

Actor, Ed Begley, Jr.

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

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

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, 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.


Bill Douglas is the author of "The Amateur Parent -- A Book on Life,
Death, War & Peace, and Everything Else in the Universe."