rabble

babble

podcasts

rabbletv

About

Support rabble

Advertise

Contact

Log-in

Register

browse by issue

Afghanistan

Anti-Racism

Arts &
Culture

Civil
Liberties

Coalition

Economy

Elections

Environment

Feminism

G8/G20

Gaza

Haiti

Healthcare
USA

Indigenous

Labour

LGBTI

Maker
Culture

Media
Matters

Olympics

Politics in
Canada

Technology

Who Are
U?

Receive alerts

Newsfeeds / RSS

Features

Columnists

In Cahoots

Blogs

Books

Photos

What's Up

Polls

Activist Toolkit

Issues

Home » » Campus Notes's blog

Campus Notes

Some of the most exciting thinking and doing in Canada is taking place at the
country's colleges and universities, where young people of different
backgrounds, interests and politics come together to debate and learn about our
world. At Campus Notes, we look to these bright young minds to inform the debate
on domestic and international events. Campus Notes also gives students a chance
to inform the rest of Canada about what's happening in the classrooms, dorm
rooms, and student unions of our country's higher learning institutions. The
blog includes young voices involved in social justice and activism from
universities and colleges across Canada through once weekly posts which
highlight events, activism, and topics of concern. Professors and university
staff are also invited to write for the blog. Please contact [email-masked] to contribute or for
more information about the blog.

Has the National Post declared a fatwa on 9/11 studies?

By Joshua Blakeny

| February 21, 2011

Print

Write to editor

Support rabble

Corrections

On Nov. 24, 2010 I received notification that I was to be the recipient of
the Queen Elizabeth II Graduate Scholarship after being nominated by the Faculty
of Graduate Studies at the University of Lethbridge. I was jubilated to be
awarded such a prestigious scholarship which has helped to fund my M.A. thesis
research, the working title of which is The Origins of the Global War on
Terror: Academic Debates and Interpretive Controversies. By Nov. 25, the
National Post's editor Jonathan Kay was whipping up vigilantism
against my funding calling on "the taxpayers of Alberta" to recognize this gross
injustice.

Mr. Kay also admonished my thesis supervisor Professor Antony Hall, stating:
"as long as he keeps it [9/11 Studies] out of the classroom, he's free to
believe in whatever [. . .] he likes." This was a curious decree from the
editorial offices of the National Post; if the conflicting
interpretations of the most seminal event in contemporary history are not to be
broached in the classrooms of Canadian universities, where can they be?

History departments dedicate much time and energy to analyzing the origins of
historic wars such as WWI and WWII. Why should we shy away from questioning the
origins of the Global War on Terror? Mr. Kay's article backfired. I was actually
quite pleased that Mr. Kay cited the passage from my letter of intent which
legitimizes rather than discredits the academic field of 9/11 studies.

I don't think any serious intellectual would join Mr. Kay and his co-thinkers
at Maclean's On Campus -- the latter of whom used my scholarship as a case study
to argue that universities should be fully privatized -- and designate my
research proposal unworthy of modest public funding. A key flaw in Mr. Kay's
hit-piece on 9/11 studies was his failure to distinguish between being skeptical
about the official story of 9/11 and positing speculative alternative theories
-- two wholly disparate undertakings. After quoting from my letter of
intent, Mr. Kay spread the falsehood that I had already come to the
conclusion that "the 9/11 attacks were staged by Washington."

To be sure, I could speculate about what I think might have transpired on
9/11, but I would do so outside the parameters of my rather circumscribed
graduate thesis and would not invoke "Washington" as the generalized culprit. I
think it is more constructive to identify individuals such as Richard Cheney or
Larry Silverstein who ought to be brought before a court of law and asked some
hard and probing questions.

John Farmer, senior council to the 9/11 Commission stated in his book The
Ground Truth that "At some level of the government, at some point in time
[. . .] there was a decision not to tell the truth about what happened [on
9/11]." If even the senior council to the 9/11 Commission doesn't purport that
we have an authoritative account of what happened on 9/11 one becomes anxious to
fathom exactly which narrative of 9/11 Jonathan Kay and the National
Post are the custodians of.

Most significantly, Mr. Kay failed to disclose in his attack on my 9/11
studies that he himself is being externally-funded to pursue 9/11 research and
recently published a book entitled Among
the Truthers. One can surmise that Mr. Kay is getting paid more than
$7,714 to pursue his 9/11 research. If Mr. Kay was a sincere 9/11 researcher,
interested in the triumph of fact over fiction, he would relish the prospect of
academics playing devil's advocate by attempting to confute the U.S.
government's claims which he, unlike the senior council to the 9/11 Commission,
so vociferously defends.

Advertising

Instead, he propounds that 9/11 skepticism be kept out of the classroom and
suggests that public money should not be channeled towards such research. Mr.
Kay's attempt to delegitimate 9/11 studies, sending the message to Canadian
academics that they will be chastised in the public square if they dare to
participate in such research, could be conceived of as a kind of fatwa. Where
are the Salman Rushdie supporters now? Or do such individuals only endorse free
speech when it is used to indict rather than exculpate Muslims?

Interestingly, Mr. Kay is associated with the Foundation
for the Defense of Democracies which was described by journalist Jeffrey
Blankfort as "One of the most influential and powerful of the Zionist
lobbies which changed its name and sprung into action immediately after 9/11."
Furthermore, Among the Truthers is published by HarperCollins, which is
a subsidiary of Rupert Murdoch's empire.

Is Mr. Kay being sponsored to attempt to discredit and diminish the findings
of the ballooning groups of citizen and professional investigators who are aware
that the official story of 9/11 doesn't stand up to evidence-based scrutiny? How
will Mr. Kay reconcile the implausible official story with the scientific
evidence brought forth by the more than 1,200 architects and engineers who have
been drawing attention particularly to the collapse of WTC Building seven which
collapsed at near freefall speed having been hit by no plane on 9/11? Is the
peer-reviewed scholarship contained for example in the Journal of 9/11 Studies
to be dismissed merely as the crazed postulations of "conspiracy theorists" who
need to be put in their place by Mr. Kay and his colleagues at the National
Post -- the personifications of impartiality, reason and empiricism?

In Mr. Kay's other book The Volunteer: A Canadian's Secret Life in the
Mossad we are offered the following psychobabble in which Westerners'
"instinct," rather than their subjection to propaganda and psyops, is invoked to
explain their support for the unlawful 9/11 wars:

"The worldwide awakening of militant Islam [. . .] explains the intense
devotion exhibited by many Westerners [. . .] to Israel's cause: they
instinctively see in the state a microcosm of the civilized world's struggle
against a murderous ideology and the men who embrace it [. . . such] nihilistic
killers struck the United States on 9/11."

If it is the case that "militant Islam [. . .] struck the United States on
9/11," the burden of proof rests with Mr. Kay who owes it to his readership to
provide evidence that the 19 alleged hijackers were fuelled by a devotion to the
tenets of the holy Quran and that they actually boarded the planes on 9/11.

As many involved in genuine 9/11 studies have noted, there were many reliable
reports of the alleged hijackers engaging in un-Islamic activities prior to
9/11. Moreover, when the flight manifests were released indicating the names of
the passengers on the four hijacked planes, none of the alleged hijackers' names
were listed. Moreover, a number of the alleged hijackers turned up alive. The
U.K.'s Telegraph
made contact with two of the alleged hijackers and published interviews with
them post-9/11.

If Mr. Kay wishes to propagate a theory about 19 conspiratorial adherents to
"militant Islam" striking the United States he should demonstrate that such
individuals were indeed Islamist militants and that they boarded the planes on
9/11. In his tenth 9/11-related book Cognitive Infiltration Professor
David Ray Griffin opines: "Besides not being devout Muslims, the "hijackers"
were evidently not even on the airliners [. . .] if the alleged hijackers had
purchased tickets and boarded the flights, as the official story has it, their
names would have been on the manifests."

Albert Einstein once said "condemnation without investigation is the height
of ignorance." Just as it took supporters of truth and justice to defend Jennifer Peto's acclaimed thesis
on hegemonic Nazi holocaust education and Zionist racism from those who
besmirched her as an anti-Semite without investigating her claims first, so it
will take such supporters of evidence-based research to push back against the
inevitable disinformation and smear campaign my thesis will command once it is
published.

Although the Faculty of Graduate Studies at the University of Lethbridge
seems to be supportive of my thesis -- as it was them who nominated me for the
Queen Elizabeth II Graduate Scholarship -- it is undoubtedly the case that some,
maybe a majority, condemn without investigation skepticism about the official
story of 9/11. In this vein, one professor at my university implied I was an
"asshole" when I asked a critical question at a lecture delivered by
pseudo-skeptic Michael Shermer who had spuriously compared 9/11 skeptics to Nazi
holocaust deniers and UFO spotters. Having said this, I am fortunate enough to
have allies within the University of Lethbridge who do not condemn without
investigation and who are themselves highly indisposed to believe the
state-sponsored version of history vis-à-vis 9/11.

Professor Anthony Hall, my graduate studies supervisor has recently written
an encyclopedic peer-reviewed text entitled Earth into Property in
which he examines the intellectual debates surrounding 9/11, situating them
within the broader context of global history. Professor Hall's and the other
9/11 scholars' formidable and principled research is resilient enough to weather
Mr. Kay's Fox-news style evangelism against those heretics who display
skepticism towards the 9/11 sacred myth.

I suspect Mr. Kay's angst with the vast 9/11 scholarship stems from its
potential to demystify the propaganda encouraging Canadians to risk their lives
and limbs for what Mr. Kay calls "Israel's cause" as microcosm of the supposed
"civilized world's struggle" against the largely imagined threat posed by
"militant Islam."

Mr. Kay proselytizes for a kind of modern day "white man's burden" based as
much on mythology and fantastic claims as that advocated by Rudyard Kipling
towards the end of the 19th century. I hope my forthcoming M.A. thesis will
contribute to countering this nefarious project.

Joshua Blakeney is a freelance journalist and activist originally from
Surrey, U.K. living in Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada. Joshua was the Media
Coordinator of Globalization Studies at the University of Lethbridge from
September 2009 to October 2010. Joshua earned a B.A. in Sociology from the
University of Lethbridge, graduating with distinction in April 2010. He is
currently studying for a M.A. at the University of Lethbridge.

embedded_video

Print

Write to editor

Support rabble

Corrections

Tags:
university thesis
attacks The National
Post students Jonathan Kay
jenny peto academic freedom 9/11 studies

Comments

Submitted by DJBALL604 on February 21, 2011 - 2:43pm.

i will be sharing your article, well done.I was disgusted by the hit piece
against you by the (former?) MOSSAD Fairy Tale teller. This is what i wrote him,
never got a response for some reason as he has responded to me in the past.

Dear Jonathan,

On Nov 25, 2010 you wrote another one of your
diatribe's against the University of Lethbridge, Professor Anthony Hall , Grad
Student Josh Blakeney and the millions of citizens around the planet that no
longer believe Dick Cheney and Philip Zelikows 911 Conspiracy Theory.
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2010/11/25/university-of-lethbridge-pays-student-7714-to-puruse-911-conspiracy-theories
Using
such words as "conspiracy theorists, truthers and Trutherdom" you smugly implied
that anyone who questions the Bush White House version of the 911 attacks is
insane, and that basically , the University of Lethbridge should ban Prof . Hall
and Joshua Blakeny from taking up further academic studies of the controversial
issue.
Well Jonathan, this issue is not going away anytime soon, the calls
for a new investigation growing stronger by the day. Too many people have died
and continue to die to "just move on".

Only after 7 years was NIST able
to explain the mysterious collapse of WTC 7,  via a new phenomena they
discovered which has failed to appear ever since.
This is important to those
of us familiar with the subsquent blazing infernos in Madrid,Venuezuela and
China that burnt steel structured buildings down to their cores and still
remained standing.

I'm not suppose to believe my own eyes Jonathan ?

Why didnt this building fall into it's footprint or collapse ?

Jonathan,
Even the 911 Commissioners themselves doubt their own
commission results and are now stating that they were underfunded and
stonewalled, " insane"  is not wanting to find out exactly what happened on
911
Who else remembers that Sen. Max Cleland quit the 911 Commission because
he said it was a scam and that the Bush White House was playing coverup ? This
is fact.
To some of us it appeared that you , Jonathan Kay, a "journalist"
had just declared a fatwa against sanity, reason and truth on a national media
outlet.
Anyone watching the WTC 7 collapse has sane and reasonable questions
, as do over 1400 Architects and Engineers who have looked at that
collapse.
Reading such unsophisticated spin and lazy words from a paid
journalist/propagandist was disappointing but not surprising, many people now
think you're a farce, facebook and the web anyway.

Personally speaking ,
i don't think you're a joke at all, i think you're a guy that has a big soapbox
and with that comes responsibility. A big responsibility to your country, it is
Canada right ?

Once in a while you write some reasonable things but
lately you've been a little off .
Your career as a journalist is going to
suffer if you keep writing 911 hit pieces and marketing cancer scanners to a
public that is in the middle of a mass awakening.
Maybe one day you will
return to writing stories like your last novel.
The Volunteer: A Canadian's
Secret Life in the Mossad
( Amazon Bestsellers Rank: #51,888 in Books)
http://www.amazon.ca/Volunteer-Canadians-Secret-Life-Mossad/dp/0771077777/ref=sr_1_5?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1291669085&sr=1-5

I
should read this book of yours, sounds interesting....a Canadian secretly
working for the Mossad.....the reviews say it was authentic, like the writer's
knew of the inner workings of the MOSSAD.
Very interesting stuff Mr Kay, a
treasonous Canadian working in secret for the best interests of a foreign
country. Very interesting.

Anyway enough of 911 for now, your upcoming
book on "truthers" will provide more than enough opportunity to continue that
discussion,

I am writing you today to inform you that a great opportunity
is in front of you,

An opportunity to prove to the people calling you a
joke across Canada that you're a good person and a real journalist, not a
soul-less media whore, not a hypocritical Pentagon/Mossad
Parrot.

Recently University of Calgary Professor (and former advisor to
Steven Harper) Tom Flanagan broke Canadian Law as well as all sense of decency
and disgraced our country ,
By now i am sure you're well aware that Mr
Flanagan,a tenured Professor  went on television calling for the
assassination of WikiLeaks whistleblower Julian Assange.
The complicit
mainstream corporate media is now spending more time on Assange's broken condom
than anything that these leaks have revealed. Not surprising. Jonathan, you
should prove that your better than the average media shill and focus on what the
documents are revealing, besides Assange is merely filling the the horrendous
void left by the current media whores who are unable to tell any real truths as
they survive on advertising dollars, or in some cases, are merely Cass Sunstein
~ Operation Mockingbird types.

This man should not be poisoning
young minds with the idea that assassinations of whistleblowers is acceptable in
Canada.

This is your opportunity to take a stand against another
Canadian Professor, unfortunately for you and your base, this one is
conservative one but who cares, your Jonathan Kay, a real journalist, not a
hypocritical establishment bootlicker.

Does Jonathan Kay support
the murder of journalists ? or will Jonathan Kay do the right thing and go at
Tom Flanagan ever harder than he went at Prof Tony Hall. or is Jonathan Kay
going to remain silent on Tom Flanigan and expose himself as a one sided
hypocrite ?

One Albertan University is facilitating whistleblowers
while another one is facilitating the assassination of whistleblowers.

Surely there is a story there.

In other words, the University of
Calgary — and, through the province of Alberta’s funding arrangements, the
taxpayers of Alberta — are paying a US Draft dodger (Flanagan)  to spew his
vile, chickenhawk opinions on our national airwaves disgracing our country and
going against everything Canadians stand for

Does anyone else see a
problem with that ?

DJ BALL
Vancouver BC

»

link

Submitted by bloated fish on February 21, 2011 -
3:15pm.

"As many involved in genuine 9/11 studies have noted, there were many
reliable

reports of the alleged hijackers engaging in un-Islamic activities prior to
9/11.

Moreover, when the flight manifests were released indicating the names of
the

passengers on the four hijacked planes, none of the alleged hijackers' names
were

listed."

This is why Mr. Kay succeeds where you fail. It is common among Jihadist
apologizers to say that anyone doing anything that makes Islam look bad in the
face of Westerners (in this case) was in fact perpetrated by fake Muslims, or
Muslim poseurs.

The typical M.O. is always the same: no one anywhere is Muslim enough to be a
real Muslim.  Saudi Arabia?  No, that's not a Muslim nation.
Iran?  No, that's not a Muslim nation.  Libya?  Heck no!
This strategy was taken straight out of a holocaust denier's playbook.  To
Muslims, the Arab League is a nacent caliphate, but to everyone else, these
nations are un-islamic in one way or another.

Sorry, Mr. Kay does not have to identify the hijackers, it is clear that the
hijackers were motivated by Islam's adherents.  Exactly who all of them
were or what they precisely believed is not relevent.  9/11 was not an
inside job, and it wasn't brought about some other democratic nation.  Your
criticism serves merely as distraction from the obvious motivation.

I believe that Albertans have the right to decide what they fund and what
they don't, and clearly your viewpoint of 9/11 is politically associated.
If made aware of what you are asking them to fund, and empowering them to voice
their opinion to government, you know very well what the conclusion would
be.

»

link

Submitted by Pope Teddywang on February 22, 2011 -
3:24am.

Kudos to Rabble for not continuing to shut down debate on the central
political reality of our times;

WTF exactly did happen on that day ?

Who attacked us ?

Are the calls coming from inside the house ?

»

link

Submitted by Neoconvict on February 22, 2011 -
5:47am.

Bravo. Thanks for speaking up. Seriously, this issue is The Issue. It all
comes back to 9-11--the excuse for endless war, the PATRIOT Act, spying on
Americans and bankrupting the USA. Yet you see Bill Maher on TV, who seems to be
otherwise very sane and politically astute, assaulting 9-11 Truth on his show.
Perhaps Maher should watch this 30-second video featuring Ed Asner:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmmHoa_CLW8

Seriously, after you see the side by side comparison of WTC building 7 and a
controlled demolition, that's it, it's all over. That's why they never show the
Building 7 collapse on TV. Personally, I think it's just too hard for a lot of
people to even conceive. They just cannot wrap their heads around the sheer
magnitude and evilness of the deception.

Anyway, great story, and keep up the great work. Reposting on FB.

»

link

Submitted by Leesavee on February 22, 2011 - 6:46am.

BRAVO to YOU Josh Blakeney

I was pleasanty surprised to read your article about 9/11. I personally feel
that issues (and there are many) that cause the most controversy are the ones
that should be required for a student to disseminate. In the course I developed
(a work always in progress) I had to present issues in such a way that I would
not influence students through MY opinions. My course, called Foundations of
Critical Thinking has the student picking a topic within a list of several
"controversial" subjects. The student is required to investigate no less than 5
sources, documented of course, then present their findings in front of the
class. Then they take questions from myself and any of their peers in class.
This puts the owness on that student to draw their own conclusion. This is also
a fantastic method of getting other students to continue their own
investigations on any topic of interest heard from the other student
presentations.

I really look forward to reading more about 9/11 issues as you represent the
minority in jouralistic integrity as evidence speaks loud and clear.  Thank
you Josh!!!

»

link

Submitted by gravity32 on February 22, 2011 - 7:35am.

Well done Josh. It is not often a student manages to get support for analysis
of this topic. There is of course no doubt the topic is of vital importance - if
the official narrative is wrong, it must have led to many wrong decisons being
made with grave consequences.

Of course you will encounter opposition. Some of this comes from people who
have not looked at the evidence and will not look, because they are sure that
"they couldn't have done it". Some comes from people who know perfectly well
that there are flaws in the official story but think they will fit in better
with colleagues and employers if they don't mention it. Jonathan Kay must be in
that class.

This is not the place to go into a lengthy discussion of evidence that leads
one to suspect that the official reports have short-changed the public. There
are good places where you can find the evidence clearly set out. Here is one
very easy to understand site dealing with the Science of 9/11. The discussion
is clear and all assertions are backed up by peer reviewed papers.

»

link

Submitted by LipsMalloy on February 22, 2011 -
8:27am.

Thank you, Joshua.  I find it incredible that anyone would not support
studies of the most important event to occur, worldwide, in the last
decade, much less in the recent history of the US.  There is so much
evidence we were not told the truth about events that, despite occurring a
decade ago, have changed the entire world forever. Shame on anyone claiming to
be an intellectual for questioning your right to question.  Just ask the
Family Members Steering Committee, how many of their questions were asked but
not answered.  They have a right to know, as does the world.  People
are dying by the hundreds of thousands and even millions, and basic human rights
and constitutional rights have been trampled in the name of the global war on
terror.

The 9/11 Commission itself admits they were not told the truth and that their
mission was set up to fail.  The world clearly needs a new
investigation.  We owe that to ourselves and future generations, and most
of all to the victims, both from the day of and ongoing.

Shame on this supposed journalist for his censorship of seekers of the
truth.  He shall not prevail.

»

link

Submitted by whole2th on February 24, 2011 - 12:35am.

Like the Mafia is a subset of Italians, there seems to be a Jewish crime
network who have primary responsibilities for designing, committing and covering
up 9-11 with the Jewish domination of media and Hollywood.

This "Zionist Elephant In The Room" is, heretofore, a taboo topic.  Yet,
many are becoming emboldened to speak the obvious of Zionist neocon and Israeli
involvement in perpetrating 9-11.

Our ReDiscover911.com Development Group are among the
courageous pioneers who proclaim boldly and clearly the Zionist deceivers'
connections to 9-11.  A handful of names give the clues to WHO DID 911 and
continue the cover-up:  Zakheim, Zelikow, Wolfowitz, Silverstein, Judge
Hellerstein, Judge Lehner, Chertoff, McKasey, Tenet, Mueller, Kristol--the list
is very long.

9-11 largely sealed a coup de etat in the U.S.   The success of these
lies of Biblical proportions is realized by watching the documentary
911MISSINGLINKS.com

RICO (racketeering) statutes should be brought to bear
against this Jewish network.  The connections are easily researched.
Start with the above names and the complicit media moguls.

We will succeed to the degree that we are willing to confront pure
evil--peacefully.

All together now...

»

link

Submitted by DavidDiamond on February 22, 2011 -
10:29am.

The function of scholarship is to discover truth. When there is, furthermore,
the opportunity of discovering significant truth, then that is valuable
scholarship. There are enough unanswered questions about the incidents of
9-11-01 to justify thousands of scholarly studies, not to mention a new, real
official investigation with subpoena powers. The government and mainstream media
story of 9-11 has been used to justify two major wars, countless acts of
government-sponsored terrorism, torture, and losses or abridgements of civil
liberties. Studies of the events of 9-11 need to be strongly encouraged, not
villified. The future of this planet, quite literally, depends on this.

»

link

Submitted by bloated fish on February 22, 2011 -
1:29pm.

This is why Kay is right to kill the hydra as soon as possible.  There
is no evidence that Israel was in any way involved.  It is also highly
illogical.  Israel benefits from stability, and 9/11 was the exact opposite
of that.  The amount of risk associated with such an operation is so
unbelievably unpredictable that no one could properly reason that it would be a
worthwhile endeavour.

On the flip side, if you command a small group of crazies and want to make a
name for your Islamofascist terrorist group, 9/11 is a guaranteed win.

Now, for those who argue that 9/11 was an inside (ie, U.S.) job, that's even
less likely.  The US does not need to plan such an event.  All they
need to do is to antagonize its enemies and destroy all the precautionary
infrastructure by placing cronies at their helms.  (Which is sort of what
Bush did -- although I think he was just incompetent and greedy.)

Long story short:  You don't need to plan fake terrorist attacks when
you are actively thwarting them on a weekly basis.  You simply have to
become apathetic to them and one will succeed.  THAT IS THE KEY
POINT YOU ARE MISSING.  This is why conspiracy theorists make no
sense here.

»

link

Submitted by Somervillein on February 22, 2011 -
5:04pm.

Bravo, Blakeney!  Elegante riposte to the National Post,
rabble.ca!  This introduction to both of you has made me a fan.
Surely university scholars should be free of "fatwas" and immune from
taboos.  May Rabble's "news for the rest of us" become the news for
MOST of us.  Best wishes from south of the border!

»

link

Submitted by DJBALL604 on February 22, 2011 - 8:07pm.

@ bloated fish

your post is wrong on so many levels its almost comical. i think you've been
watching too much 24. History is filled with false flag terrorism, it starts
every war. The War on Terror is no different.

The guy that confessed to masterminding 911 looks retarded and was tortured
183 times in a month before he "confessed", a textbook patsy.

The anthrax attacks we're an "inside job" and part of the 911 fascist coup.
The Patriot Act ? written before as they knew it would be needed post 911.

The War on Terror is the wet dream for the military industrial complex. I
guess whatever it takes to believe the Bush Fairy Tale. Even though the 911
Commissioners themselves are now on record saying they never got to the bottom
of what really happened. Let's not ruffle any feathers and ask any questions, ie
How did WTC 7 drop at free fall speed  ? how did all the structural support
fail at the exact same time ?

Many of the neo cons that drafted the PNAC document we're dual Israeli
citizens, they openly talked about what needed to happen to Keep America Strong
and Rebuilding its defences, ie.. Keep a dominate US in the middle east to be a
big stiick for Israei ,......a massive attack like Pearl Harbor was mentioned as
being necessary to swing public opinion, BEFORE 911,

Netanyahu is on record stating how 911 was good for israel

http://www.haaretz.com/news/report-netanyahu-says-9-11-terror-attacks-good-for-israel-1.244044

Cheney's Haliburton and friends made obscene profits, it was a win win. they
needed something massive as laid out in the PNAC roadmap, a car bomb wasnt going
to justify hundreds of thousands of US troops occupying and building bases
across Eurasia.

911 gave them that justification, they had the means. the motive and provided
the cover up.

»

link

Submitted by bloated fish on February 23, 2011 -
12:57am.

First off, building seven contained significant intelligence materiel and it
would not surprise me (even though I do not believe this) that in the event of
an emergency evacuation, building 7 was configured to be destroyed.  Also,
anyone who knows anything of complex systems knows that you cannot predict what
the consequence of an input would be (ie, modern planes loaded with fuel) unless
you've already tried it out a few times (which no one did.)

I also could go as far as debating the possibility that Republicans engaged
in willful ignorance in an effort to hastily encourage an enemy attack on US
soil -- maybe even solely for the nefarious purpose of self-enrichment.
But to say it was planned and performed as in inside job, likening it to what --
the reichstag? I don't think this is the same class.  A single idiot can
burn down a wooden building.  The number of accessories who would have to
have been tagged after an "inside-job 9/11" would be enormous, and
ridiculous.

I also can easily believe that misnaming hijackers could be due to ignorance,
haste, or even just antogonization.  Who really knows?  Not I, and I
really don't care.

Also, Netanyahu can say what he wants in retrospect.  It's easy to spin
things afterward even if it's untrue, but more so when dominos happen to fall in
your favour.  It doesn't counter the fact that it would be incredibly risky
for Isreal to put so many eggs in such a crazy basket and hope that they
wouldn't get caught.  It's JUST INSANE.

The patriot act was written before 9/11, so what?  Newton/Leibniz both
invented calculus as soon as it become topical.  It doesn't surprise me
that neo-cons wanted to float a patriot act starting in the mid or early 90s
even.

And a string of very likely coincidences does not, in totality, prove an
unlikely circumstance that can be used to justify a faith in the otherwise
unproven.

What is surprising, or rather, not so much surprising as it is annoying, is
that this inanity paints socialist minded individuals into the crazy corner,
where I assure you, they don't want to be.  I'd like to be in the corner
with critically thinking individuals.  You are looking at the problem from
the wrong end: you are trying to connect the dots to a puzzle you think you've
already solved, but in so doing, fail to look at the dots you are intentionally
neglecting to connect.

»

link

Submitted by hybridrogue1 on February 23, 2011 -
5:25pm.

It is obvious to me that our bloated fish is a shill from the Cass Sustien
cognative dis team.

Arguing with him/her/it will only lead down the tunnel to Wonderland.

As a long time researcher into 9/11 I have crossed swords with many of the
verbose individuals, and find it nothing more than fencing with the
Jabberwacky.

http://\\ll//

»

link

Submitted by bloated fish on February 23, 2011 -
5:30pm.

hybridrogue: Sorry, I'm just a dude.  The only political affiliation I
have is with the GPC.

»

link

Submitted by hybridrogue1 on February 23, 2011 -
5:44pm.

That's what they all say...Dude.

»

link

Submitted by borisdespidre on February 23, 2011 -
7:05pm.

Before going to law school , mr. Kay earned himself a Bachelor's and Master's
degree. The focus of both is conveniently left out of his wikipedia info.
According to this site (linked below), both of the aforementioned degrees are in
Metallurgical Engineering. Writing a book with uncanny knowledge of Mossad, with
a nice backround in metallurgy? The slings and arrows of the accuser only serve
to hide the skeletons in the closet.

http://www.defenddemocracy.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=11785475&Itemid=326

»

link

Submitted by hybridrogue1 on February 23, 2011 -
8:35pm.

"You are looking at the problem from the wrong end: you are trying to connect
the dots to a puzzle you think you've already solved, but in so doing, fail to
look at the dots you are intentionally neglecting to connect."~bloated
fish
Now this is, along with the rest of your post allegorical chatter
blended with dodging and distraction. Why is that? If you cannot address
specifics with other than brushing them of with theoretical banter then what is
your object here?   In debate there are very elementary rules in 101. One
of the base/foundational rules is;   It is not a mistake to have a
strong opinion. The mistake is in having nothing else. ww

»

link

Submitted by Kevin Barrett on February 23, 2011 -
10:49pm.

Terrific article, Josh!  As a university instructor and expert on the
Arab and Islamic worlds who has been blacklisted from teaching due to my
interpretation of 9/11 http://www.truthjihad.com/wikisources.htm
I applaud you for risking your career in this critically important fight for
truth.

»

link

Submitted by Pope Teddywang on February 24, 2011 -
5:58pm.

Scanning the list of comments, I have an observation.

Letting a page of supportive comments degenerate into mudslinging and
name-calling involving 'Zionists' and 'slomos', not only does the discussion of
controlled demolition and culpability no good whatsoever, it smacks of
Cointelpro tactics and 'planting troublemakers'.

Is 'bloated fish' arguing with himself or a compatriot in an effort to
make the discussion appear ridiculous ?

Interesting times, indeed.

»

link

Login or register to post comments

Similar entries

Alex
Neve, Secretary General of Amnesty International Canada, Lecture at University
of Lethbridge

Women's
studies: Path of a progressive discipline

When
neo-con politicians, media attack academics: Interview with Sheryl Nestel

Dr.
Sarah Ahmed "Happiness, Race and Empire" March 19: York University

Dr.
Emma LaRocque: When the Other is Me

Top Picks on rabble

Harper's
party of thugs, liars, cheats, crooks -- and Christians

by

Murray
Dobbin

Video:
Libyan Solidarity Rally in Toronto

by

John
Bonnar

I
read banned books (and so should you)

by

Jessica
Rose

In
case you missed it: It was public employees that caused the fall of Rome!

by

David J.
Climenhaga

more

Active babble Discussions

Layton-led
NDP Will Become the Official Opposition (Part 6)

|

NorthReport

posted

2
min 33 sec ago

Should
write-in space be required on all Canadian ballots?

|

bagkitty

posted

3
min 3 sec ago

Imperialist
hands off Libya!

|

M. Spector

posted

17
min 45 sec ago

Chavez,
Ortega, back Gaddafi oppression

|

West Coast Greeny

posted

26
min 29 sec ago

more

The rabble blogs

Video:
Libyan Solidarity Rally in Toronto

February 28, 2011

| By

John
Bonnar

The
CanLit onesy: You've got the look, now get the book

February 28, 2011

| By

Nathaniel G. Moore

I
read banned books (and so should you)

February 28, 2011

| By

Jessica
Rose

more

Advertising

xhtml /
ginger ninja! / Ported by Jason Swaby

Support rabble | Advertise with us | Contact our staff | About rabble | Log-in or Register for a new account | Corrections | Privacy policy | Newsfeeds | Mailing lists

rabble: Features | Columnists | In Cahoots | Blogs | Books | Photos | What's Up | Polls

babble: Forum Topics | Active Topics

The rpn: Become a
Podcaster | Find a Show

rabbleTV: Program
Guide | Features | Indie Inside
| Best of
the net

Copyright © 2001-2011 the authors

Syndicate