Scholars for 9/11 Truth

Commentary by Michael Bonanno.

Moderator: Michael

User avatar
Michael
Posts: 367
Joined: September 23rd, 2004, 11:12 pm
Location: California
Contact:

Scholars for 9/11 Truth

Post by Michael » February 1st, 2006, 4:44 am

Thanks to Mary Alice O'Connor of The Mount Diablo Peace Center, I have recently learned of a group which calls itself “Scholars for 9/11 Truth”.

These people appear to be what they call themselves, scholars. They’re not giving up, which is good for us.

I suggest taking a moment to visit the site.

I know many of you just don’t believe it could happen. The reasons?

The most frequently used reason is that too many people would have to be involved. Someone would surely have spoken out by now.

Well, if you’ve visited this site or visited my site or my blog, you’d know people like Siebel Edmonds have attempted to speak out under very difficult circumstances.

You’d know that there are CIA agents who have attempted to speak out, only to have their lives and the lives of their families threatened.

Think about The Holocaust. How many people inhumanely controlled the concentration camps and Americans supposedly didn’t really know about them until toward the end of WWII? How many people among all stations of life knew about what was going on and even participated in rounding up and torturing Jews? Don’t we think that at least some of them knew that what they were doing was wrong?

What these scholars have to say is interesting if not eye opening.

By the way, and I don’t remember if I included this in any of my previous essays, I did request and receive an official report from the American Society of Civil Engineers.

Although they blame the fires in WTC Buildings 1 and 2 for their collapse, not an explanation of why they fell the way they fell, they are still stumped by why WTC Building 7 fell as well. They also don’t understand why it fell the way it fell.

I know that this is way out of the box for many of you, even the most progressive of you. Under normal circumstances, we are supposedly innocent until proven guilty. Of course, under normal circumstances, if we are suspected of committing a serious crime, no matter how we are supposed to be perceived before a trial occurs, we are held in custody by law enforcement. The trial is what determines if we should be released.

It may sound as if some of us are saying that The Regime is guilty until proven innocent. We want a non partisan, totally empowered panel or commission to ask the question who, indeed, orchestrated what happened on September 11, 2001. We’re not even asking that the suspects be held in custody until that trial happens, which is what would happen to most of us. We just want an investigation that starts with the question, “Who did it?” instead of bypassing that part based upon what The Regime has decided.

Is The Regime legally suspect? Yes. There are several civil suits that have been leveled against The Regime and those suits should be treated as any suit. The accusations should go to trial and the chips should be allowed to fall where they may.

Once you arrive at the site, you may be impressed. Or you may think that these “scholars” are just more crazies.

My next essay: Who Inducted Me Into the “Blame America First Club”? I never applied for membership. If you want a response from me, please don't be so cowardly as to submit such a comment without leaving an email address behind which you can hide.

To friendship,
Michael

"Whensoever the general Government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force." - Thomas Jefferson


The Mind Of Michael
Speak Your Mind And Read Mine

User avatar
firsty
Posts: 1050
Joined: September 9th, 2004, 12:25 pm
Location: here
Contact:

Post by firsty » February 1st, 2006, 11:43 am

michael, do you browse www.buffaloreport.com? good stuff.

my direct knowledge of the lies around the wtc site is limited, but firsthand. less than one week after the disaster, we were inundated with fliers describing extensive epa testing of air quality and how it was determined to be safe. this, while we were literally choking on the fumes.

i sort of feel that if it had been just one tower involved, the fact of its falling would be more suspect. but that one fell and then the other fell, this seems to have given the collapses a sense of inevitability which may not be true.

we need to question more and more of the "facts" we have been told, as the lies build up, the previous "facts" become ever more suspect.
and knowing i'm so eager to fight cant make letting me in any easier.

[url=http://stealthiswiki.nine9pages.com]Steal This Book Vol 2[/url]

[url=http://www.dreamhost.com/r.cgi?26032]Get some hosting![/url]

mtmynd
Posts: 7324
Joined: August 15th, 2004, 8:54 pm
Location: El Paso

Post by mtmynd » February 1st, 2006, 12:24 pm

Michael - thanks for posting this information, some of which I clicked the links to some revealing things.

The word 'conspiracy' is a frightening word to the vast majority of folks... one that conjurs up a feeling of hopelessness and weakness against any such possiblity that a conspiracy is or has been conceived. This in itself, I feel, shows what power 'conspiracy' has over man... we refute its existence, we find any reason to dispute its existence and we plead ignorance in knowing anything at all about it for fear of being even remotely connected to conspiracy by association... and yet, conspiracy is a reality... a very dark reality.

[enough]

User avatar
Michael
Posts: 367
Joined: September 23rd, 2004, 11:12 pm
Location: California
Contact:

Post by Michael » February 1st, 2006, 11:03 pm

firsty, thanks for responding to this extremely important situation.

I’ve been trying for a long time to save the world. What I decided is that there are many things in the world which need saving. I’m considering narrowing my pursuits to two situations on which I may find some movement before I’m no longer above ground.

One is The Electoral College. You can read about it on my blog and well as on my site.

The other is the 9/11 deception. I’m not sure that I can see as much movement on that in the near future.

mtmynd, you’re right. “Conspiracy Theorists” is almost synonymous with “orbiting another planet”.

However, if you think about it, law enforcement uses conspiracy theories in almost all of its investigations.

A conspiracy is a plan by two or more persons to commit a crime.

The statement “innocent until proven guilty” is merely a theory. A theory is the only thing that keeps one behind bars until a trial proves one innocent or guilty. Actually, that doesn’t seem like innocent until proven guilty. It sounds more like strongly suspected as being guilty until a trial can find one innocent.

As I say in the essay, we’re not even asking the same treatment of the suspects. They can keep their jobs and not be locked up. We just want a fair trial.

I appreciate the responses.

To friendship,
Michael

War is the tool of small-minded scoundrels who worship the death of others on the altar of their greed. – John Cory


The Mind Of Michael
Speak Your Mind And Use Mine

mtmynd
Posts: 7324
Joined: August 15th, 2004, 8:54 pm
Location: El Paso

Post by mtmynd » February 1st, 2006, 11:16 pm

I agree with you, Michael, and would like some honest answers.. there are so many regarding 9-11.

I'm reminded of a saying: "there are no stupid questions, only stupid answers."

With this committee's credentials they should get smart answers. I'd like to see them.

User avatar
firsty
Posts: 1050
Joined: September 9th, 2004, 12:25 pm
Location: here
Contact:

Post by firsty » February 3rd, 2006, 12:42 pm

i just came across this article:

http://view.nowpublic.com/?src=http%3A% ... MlJVRPUCUl

i wonder how i can get in on that class action lawsuit, seriously. i returned to work on sept 17.

it was horrible to be there and we all felt so duped but trapped. the mayor wanted everyone back to work quickly and we did feel a duty to carry on.

well, i'll try to find out more details on this. if anyone hears anything about it, please let me know.

thanks.
and knowing i'm so eager to fight cant make letting me in any easier.

[url=http://stealthiswiki.nine9pages.com]Steal This Book Vol 2[/url]

[url=http://www.dreamhost.com/r.cgi?26032]Get some hosting![/url]

mtmynd
Posts: 7324
Joined: August 15th, 2004, 8:54 pm
Location: El Paso

Post by mtmynd » February 3rd, 2006, 12:54 pm

Find them and join them, firsty! It's your civic duty, man...

This line really struck me :
The EPA's internal watchdog later found that the agency, at the urging of White House officials, gave misleading assurances.
White House Officials??? The web grows wider...

User avatar
Michael
Posts: 367
Joined: September 23rd, 2004, 11:12 pm
Location: California
Contact:

Post by Michael » April 6th, 2006, 3:13 pm

firsty, today is April 6, 2006 (my birthday). You posted this on February 2, 2006. So I’m not surprised that the article is no longer where it once was. Do you have some idea of where I might find it?

If not, that’s OK. Thanks for replying with the link.

To friendship,
Michael

User avatar
stilltrucking
Posts: 19766
Joined: October 24th, 2004, 12:29 pm
Location: Oz or somepace like Kansas

Post by stilltrucking » April 7th, 2006, 3:49 pm

Here it is Michael
Paste
A class action lawsuit has been filed against the Environmental Protection Agency and its former head, Christie Whitman on behalf of people who live, work, or go to school in Lower Manhattan or nearby Brooklyn. The suit alleges that there has been "a shockingly deliberate indifference to human health" in regards to the downtown air quality. The suit claims that as a result of this indifference many New Yorkers have been exposed to hazardous substances which could lead to potentially serious long-term health effects, and they have been left with the expense of full and proper cleanup of their residences and workplaces.

According to one of the plaintiffs in the suit, "It's EPA's responsibility to protect everyone from exposure to 9/11 debris. They ought to have ensured that all buildings were professionally abated, inside and out. Instead, they provided only inadequate assistance for personal residences, and arbitrarily declared that office buildings were none of their concern. It's an outrage that EPA has been leaving landlords and employers to clean up as much or as little as they want to, without any official oversight."


Register your EPA Case see link below.If you feel you qualify for damages or remedies that might be awarded in this EPA class action please click the link below to submit your complaint.

http://www.lawyersandsettlements.com/case/911debris



Here is a story from the village voice about it

Not content with activism, she is today one of 12 plaintiffs suing the EPA in a class action lawsuit on behalf of residents, office workers, and students from Lower Manhattan and Brooklyn. Unlike so many others who've gotten sick from WTC-related pollution— including many of the plaintiffs—she hasn't experienced any symptoms. And neither has her son. What she's sick of is not being told the truth.

"We were being duped," Orkin says, leaning forward, "and I'd like to find out why."


http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0608,l ... 258,6.html

Here is another one that has nothing to do with EPA but it is interesting.
Paste
All Along the Watchtower
By William Rivers Pitt
t r u t h o u t | Opinion

Thursday, 20 June, 2002

Stanley Hilton, a San Francisco attorney and former aide to Senator Bob Dole, filed a $7 billion lawsuit in U.S. District Court on June 3rd. The class-action suit names ten defendants, among whom are George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Condoleezza Rice, Donald Rumsfeld and Norman Mineta.

Hilton's suit charges Bush and his administration with allowing the September 11th attacks to take place so as to reap political benefits from the catastrophe. Hilton alleges that Osama bin Laden is being used as a scapegoat by an administration that ignored pressing warnings of the attack and refused to round up suspected terrorists beforehand. Hilton alleges the ultimate motivation behind these acts was achieved when the Taliban were replaced by American military forces with a regime friendly to America and its oil interests in the region.

Hilton's plaintiffs in this case are the families of 14 victims of 9/11, numbering 400 people nationwide. These are the same families that rallied in Washington recently to advocate for an independent investigation into the attacks. The current 9/11 hearings are being conducted by Congress behind closed doors, a situation these families find unacceptable.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_02/06.21A. ... htower.htm

User avatar
jimboloco
Posts: 5797
Joined: November 29th, 2004, 11:48 am
Location: st pete, florita
Contact:

Post by jimboloco » July 29th, 2006, 11:40 pm

If you think 911 truth folks are nuts, you need to see this.

If you think 911 was an inside job, you need to see this.

C-Span is running a panel discussion that includes Florida Congressional candidate, Colonel in the Air Force, and all around phenomenally competent human Dr. Robert Bowman (http://www.bowman2006.com/about.htm), Ex-CIA analyst Ray McGovern, author Webster Tarley, James Fetzer from Scholars For Truth and more. They discuss threories of what happened on 911 that will open your eyes.

Saturday, July 29, 8pm and 11pm.

http://inside.c-spanarchives.org:8080/c ... =546878176

If you got this message late, they also archive select shows at http://www.cspan.org/videoarchives.asp? ... veDays=100

I have a graduate degree and have taught at 3 universities and am 100% convinced that we need to reopen the 911 investigation.

If you have a closed mind about this, I hope we can still be friends and work together to make the world a better place.

Please let me know what you think.

Mike
"M Fox" tampabaydemocracy@yahoo.com
Image
I'd like to find the archive of this show, help?

jesus why the fuck wasn't there an interceptor squadron of fighter-interceptors
ti shoot down the airliners before they crashed into the WTC towers?

all this fucking cash and training
and funny
dubya's squadron of f-102's was designed to do exactly that
now there was also an f-102 squadron in new york, Griffiths AFB,

obsolete

makes ya kinda wonder if'n fucking al quaida thought we were some kinda suckers
eh what?
[color=darkcyan]i'm on a survival mission
yo ho ho an a bottle of rum om[/color]

User avatar
stilltrucking
Posts: 19766
Joined: October 24th, 2004, 12:29 pm
Location: Oz or somepace like Kansas

Post by stilltrucking » July 30th, 2006, 1:17 pm

I am going to reserve judgment until I read the comic book due out next month
The Bold Outlines Of a Plot
Adapted as a Comic Book
, The 9/11 Commission Report Hits Home Anew
By Bravetta Hassell
Washington Post Staff Writer


Sunday, July 16, 2006; Page D01
If the mood on the plane that crashed into the side of the Pentagon, American Airlines Flight 77, could have been a color, it would have been a soft, translucent tan, according to a comic book about the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
Yes, that's right, a comic about the attacks is set for publication late next month.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 01044.html


Mike one bit that intrigues me and which is hardly ever mentioned is the large amount of money that was bet on Wall Street a couple of days before 9/11/01.
Given all of this, at a minimum the CBOE and government regulators who are conducting the secret investigations have known for some time who made the options puts on a total of 38 stocks that might reasonably be anticipated to have a sharp drop in value because of an attack similar to the 9/11 episode. The silence from the investigating camps could mean several things: Either terrorists are responsible for the puts on the listed stocks or others besides terrorists had foreknowledge of the attack and used this knowledge to reap a nice financial harvest from the tragedy.
http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2005/04/315296.shtml

User avatar
firsty
Posts: 1050
Joined: September 9th, 2004, 12:25 pm
Location: here
Contact:

Post by firsty » August 9th, 2006, 1:12 pm

michael (et al), here is a good forum:

http://conspiracycentral.info/
and knowing i'm so eager to fight cant make letting me in any easier.

[url=http://stealthiswiki.nine9pages.com]Steal This Book Vol 2[/url]

[url=http://www.dreamhost.com/r.cgi?26032]Get some hosting![/url]

User avatar
Michael
Posts: 367
Joined: September 23rd, 2004, 11:12 pm
Location: California
Contact:

Post by Michael » August 9th, 2006, 1:24 pm

firsty, I’m not aware of the rallies/demonstrations/protests that you spoke about in my latest essay (thanks for the response, by the way).

I’ll go to the link you’ve got here and maybe I’ll learn something.

The 9/11 Commission recently said that NORAD lied to them and they “just couldn’t understand why they told us what they told us because it was so far from the truth.”

So they turned it over to the DoD to investigate. I’m sure you’ve heard about this.

The “conspiracy nuts” might look just a bit less nutty today.

It’s ironic. Two people on the same side of the argument called into Thom Hartman to comment on this “breakthrough” and one said “Things are looking good” and the other said “Things are looking bad”. It depends what one’s perspective is.

It’s good that we’re making baby step progress toward catching the criminals who pulled off 9/11, but it’s obviously bad that those criminals are who they are.

To friendship,
Michael

User avatar
firsty
Posts: 1050
Joined: September 9th, 2004, 12:25 pm
Location: here
Contact:

Post by firsty » August 9th, 2006, 1:32 pm

the truthmove.org site has links to info about the demonstration on 9/11.

the other link is a conspiracy forum. good stuff, good stuff.

i have been following more of this info, including the bit about NORAD. one of the most striking things i've recently learned was the training/drills/preparation that the govt had in place on that day. too curious.
and knowing i'm so eager to fight cant make letting me in any easier.

[url=http://stealthiswiki.nine9pages.com]Steal This Book Vol 2[/url]

[url=http://www.dreamhost.com/r.cgi?26032]Get some hosting![/url]

User avatar
firsty
Posts: 1050
Joined: September 9th, 2004, 12:25 pm
Location: here
Contact:

Post by firsty » August 9th, 2006, 2:25 pm

the truth is gaining momentum:

http://www.cnn.com/2006/EDUCATION/08/06 ... index.html

9/11 conspiracy theorists energized
Five years later, purveyors claim academic momentum

(AP) -- Kevin Barrett believes the U.S. government might have destroyed the World Trade Center. Steven Jones is researching what he calls evidence that the twin towers were brought down by explosives detonated inside them, not by hijacked airliners.

These men aren't uneducated junk scientists: Barrett will teach a class on Islam at the University of Wisconsin this fall, over the protests of more than 60 state legislators. Jones is a tenured physicist at Brigham Young University whose mainstream academic job has made him a hero to conspiracy theorists.

Five years after the terrorist attacks, a community that believes widely discredited ideas about what happened on September 11, 2001, persists and even thrives. Members trade their ideas on the Internet and in self-published papers and in books. About 500 of them attended a recent conference in Chicago, Illinois.

The movement claims to be drawing fresh energy and credibility from a recently formed group called Scholars for 9/11 Truth.

The organization says publicity over Barrett's case has helped boost membership to about 75 academics. They are a tiny minority of the 1 million part- and full-time faculty nationwide, and some have no university affiliation. Most aren't experts in relevant fields.

But some are well educated, with degrees from elite universities such as Princeton and Stanford and jobs at schools including Rice, Indiana and the University of Texas.

"Things are happening," said co-founder James Fetzer, a retired philosophy professor at the University of Minnesota Duluth, who maintains, among other claims, that some of the hijackers are still alive. "We're going to continue to do this. Our role is to establish what really happened on 9/11."

What really happened, the national September 11 commission concluded after 1,200 interviews, was that hijackers crashed planes into the twin towers.

The National Institute of Standards and Technology, a government agency, filed 10,000 pages of reports that found fires caused by the crashing planes were more than sufficient to collapse the buildings.

The scholars' group rejects those conclusions. Their Web site contends the government has been dishonest.

It adds: the "World Trade Center was almost certainly brought down by controlled demolitions" and "the government not only permitted 9/11 to occur but may even have orchestrated these events to facilitate its political agenda."

The standards and technology institute, and many mainstream scientists, won't debate conspiracy theorists, saying they don't want to lend them unwarranted credibility.
'It's not really science'

But some worry the academic background of the group could do that anyway.

Members of the conspiracy community "practically worship the ground [Jones] walks on because he's seen as a scientist who is preaching to their side," said FR Greening, a Canadian chemist who has written several papers rebutting the science used by September 11 conspiracy theorists.

"It's science, but it's politically motivated. It's science with an ax to grind, and therefore it's not really science."

Faculty can express any opinion outside the classroom, said Roger Bowen, general secretary of the American Association of University Professors.

However, "with academic freedom comes academic responsibility. And that requires them to teach the truth of their discipline, and the truth does not include conspiracy theories, or flat Earth theories, or Holocaust denial theories."

Members of the group don't consider themselves extremists. They simply believe the government's investigation was inadequate, and maintain that questioning widely held assumptions has been part of the job of scholars for centuries.

"Tenure gives you a secure position where you can engage in controversial issues," Fetzer said. "That's what you should be doing."

But when asked what did happen in 2001, members often step outside the rigorous, data-based culture of the academy and defer to their own instincts.

Daniel Orr, a Princeton Ph.D. and widely published retired economics chair at the University of Illinois, said he knew instantly from watching the towers fall that they had been blown apart by explosives. He was reminded of watching an old housing project being destroyed in St. Louis, Missouri.

David Gabbard, an East Carolina education professor, acknowledges this isn't his field, but says "I'm smart enough to know ... that fire from airplanes can't melt steel."

When they do cite evidence, critics such as Greening contend it's junk science from fellow conspiracy theorists, dressed up in the language and format of real research to give it a sense of credibility.
Ex-professor doubts government

Jones focuses on the relatively narrow question of whether molten metal present at the World Trade Center site after the attacks is evidence that a high-temperature incendiary called thermite, which can be used to weld or cut metal, was involved in the towers' destruction.

He concludes thermite was present, throwing the government's entire explanation into question and suggesting someone might have used explosives to bring down the towers.

"I have not run into many who have read my paper and said it's just all hogwash," Jones said.

Judy Wood, until recently an assistant professor of mechanical engineering at Clemson University, has been cited by conspiracy theorists for her arguments the buildings could not have collapsed as quickly as they did unless explosives were used.

"If the U.S. government is lying about how the buildings came down, anything else they say cannot be believed," she said. "So why would they want to tell us an incorrect story if they weren't part of it?"

In fact, say Greening and other experts, the molten metal Jones cites was most likely aluminum from the planes, and any number of explanations are more likely than thermite.

And the National Institute of Standards and Technology's report describes how the buildings collapsed from the inside in a chain reaction once the floors began falling.

"We respect the opinions of others, but we just didn't see any evidence of what people are claiming," institute spokesman Michael Newman said.

Wisconsin officials say they do not endorse the views of Barrett, an adjunct, but after investigating concluded he would handle the material responsibly in the classroom.

That didn't mollify many state legislators.

"The general public from Maine to Oregon knows why the trade towers went down," said state Rep. Stephen Nass, a Republican. "It's not a matter of unpopular ideas; it's a matter of quality education and giving students their money's worth in the classroom."

In a July 20 letter obtained by The Associated Press in an open records request, Wisconsin Provost Patrick Farrell warned Barrett to tone down his publicity seeking, and said he would reconsider allowing Barrett to teach if he continued to identify himself with the university in his political messages.

BYU's physics department and engineering school have issued statements distancing themselves from Jones' work, but he says they have not interfered.

At Clemson, Wood did not receive tenure last year, but her former department chair, Imtiaz ul Haque, denies her accusation that it was at least partly because of her September 11 views.

"Are you blackballed for delving into this topic? Oh yes," Wood said. "And that is why there are so few who do. Most contracts have something to do with some government research lab. So what would that do to you? The consequences are too great for a career. But I made the choice that truth was more important."

"If we're in higher education to be trying to encourage critical thinking," Wood says, "why would we say 'believe this because everybody else does?'"

Copyright 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed except by Firsty.
and knowing i'm so eager to fight cant make letting me in any easier.

[url=http://stealthiswiki.nine9pages.com]Steal This Book Vol 2[/url]

[url=http://www.dreamhost.com/r.cgi?26032]Get some hosting![/url]

Post Reply

Return to “Open Mike Soundoff”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest