Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

If Cheney & Co. Had Really Plotted the 9/11 Attacks ...

By Matt Taibbi, Spiegel & Grau. Posted May 19, 2008.


Matt Taibbi's hilarious re-enactment of the secret govt. conspiracy (that never happened) to conduct the attacks.
51tvu53eefl.ss500
matt taibbi

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

In Special Coverage

Belief:
Are the "New Atheists" As Bad as Christian Fundamentalists?
Frank Schaeffer

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
How a Public Jobs Program Could Put America Back on Track
Julianne Malveaux

DrugReporter:
Pot Is More Mainstream Than Ever, So Why Is Legalization Still Taboo?
Steven Wishnia

Environment:
Why We Need Bees and More People Becoming Organic Beekeepers
Makenna Goodman

Food:
The Raw Milk Revolution: Behind America's Emerging Battle Over Food Rights
Makenna Goodman

Health and Wellness:
New York May Stop Heartless Health Insurers from Dropping Coverage When It Stops Being Profitable
William Ehart

Immigration:
NYC Marathon Raises Question of Who Is American Enough?
James E. Johnson, Jr.

Media and Technology:
Focusing on Fort Hood Killer's Beliefs Is an Easy Out to Avoid the Deeper Reasons for the Massacre
Mark Ames

Movie Mix:
The Yes Men: Pranksters Out to Fix the World
Mark Engler

Politics:
What Michelle and Barack's Marriage Has in Common with 56 Million Other Ones
Annabelle Gurwitch

Reproductive Justice and Gender:
Fetus-Shaped Potatoes? Going Undercover Inside the Weird World of Right-Wing Abortion Foes
Ann Neumann

Rights and Liberties:
"My Kids Want to Hide Their Identity; They're Scared Someone Will Attack Us": U.S. Muslims Being Targeted
Jaisal Noor

Sex and Relationships:
Instant Sex: Has the Digital Age Destroyed Relationships or Made Them Better?
Vanessa Richmond

Take Action:
G-20 Meetings: Nothing Much Happened in the Suites, and There Was Too Much Punch in the Streets
Laura Flanders

Water:
Why Natural Gas Is Not a Clean Energy Panacea
Stan Cox

World:
With Unemployment at 40 Percent, Afghan Teens Enlist in Army, Police
Lal Aqa Sherin

More stories by Matt Taibbi

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

The following is an adapted excerpt from Matt Taibbi's new book, The Great Derangement" (Spiegel and Grau, 2008).The 9/11 Truth movement is really distinguished by a kind of defiant unfamiliarity with the actual character of America's ruling class. In 9/11 lore the people who staff the White House, the security agencies, the Pentagon and groups like PNAC and the Council of Foreign Relations are imagined to be a monolithic, united class of dastardly, swashbuckling risk-takers with permanent hard-ons for Bourne Supremacy-style "false flag" and "black bag" operations, instead of the mundanely greedy, risk-averse, backstabbing, lawn-tending, half-clever suburban golfers they are in real life. It completely misunderstands the nature of American government -- fails to see that the old maxim about "the business of America is business" is absolutely true, that the federal government in this country is really just a lo-rent time-share property seasonally occupied by this or that clan of financial interests, each of which takes its 4-year turn at the helm tinkering with the tax laws and regulatory code and the rates at the Fed in the way it thinks will best keep the money train rolling.The people who really run America don't send the likes of George Bush and Dick Cheney to the White House to cook up boat-rocking, maniacal world-domination plans and commit massive criminal conspiracies on live national television; they send them there to repeal PUCHA and dole out funds for the F-22 and pass energy bills with $14 billion tax breaks and slash fuel efficiency standards and do all the other shit that never makes the papers but keeps Wall Street and the country's corporate boardrooms happy. You don't elect politicians to commit crimes; you elect politicians to make your crimes legal. That is the whole purpose of the racket of government. Another other use of it would be a terrible investment, and the financial class in this country didn't get to where it is by betting on the ability of a president whose lips move when he reads to blow up two Manhattan skyscrapers in broad daylight without getting caught.But according to 9/11 Truth lore, the financial patrons of democratic government were game for exactly that sort of gamble. According to the movement, the Powers That Be in the year 2000 spent $200 million electing George Bush and Dick Cheney because they were insufficiently impressed with the docility of the American population. What was needed, apparently, was a mass distraction, a gruesome mass murder that would whip the American population into a war frenzy. The same people who had managed in the 2000 election to sell billionaire petro-royalist George Bush as an ordinary down-to-earth ranch hand apparently so completely lacked confidence in their own propaganda skills that they resorted to ordering a mass murder on American soil as a way of cajoling America to go to war against a second-rate tyrant like Saddam Hussein. As if getting America to support going to war even against innocent countries had ever been hard before!The truly sad thing about the 9/11 Truth movement is that it's based upon the wildly erroneous proposition that our leaders would ever be frightened enough of public opinion to feel the need to pull off this kind of stunt before acting in a place like Afghanistan or Iraq. At its heart, 9/11 Truth is a conceit, a narcissistic pipe dream for a dingbat, sheeplike population that is pleased to imagine itself dangerous and ungovernable. Rather than admit to their own powerlessness and irrelevance, or admit that they've spent the last fifty years or so electing leaders who openly handed their tax money to business cronies and golfed in Scotland while middle America's jobs were being sent overseas, the adherents to 9/11 Truth instead flatter themselves with fantasies about a ruling class obsessed with keeping the terrible truth from the watchful, exacting eye of The People.Whereas the real conspiracy of power in America is right out in the open and always has been, only nobody cares, so long as Fear Factor and Baseball Tonight come on at the right times. A conspiracy like the one described by 9/11 Truth would only be necessary in a country where the people are a threat to actually govern themselves effectively.But none of that even matters nearly as much as what 9/11 Truth says about the mental state of the population. The whole narrative of the movement is so completely and utterly retarded, it boggles the mind. It's like something cooked up by a bunch of teenagers raised on texting, TV and Sports Illustrated who just saw V For Vendetta for the first time and decided to write a Penguin History of the World on the strength of it. A genius on the order of a Mozart or a Shakespeare would be hard-pressed to dream up the awesome comedy that is the alleged plot from the point of view of the plotters. If there was such a conspiracy, remember, something like the following conversation would have had to have taken place:April, 1999, World Trade Center building 7, New York, NY. A secret meeting of the Project for a New American Century. In attendance are Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith, Irv Kristol, and ... others. Cheney, standing at the head of the table and glaring downward, addresses the group:Cheney: Gentlemen, we stand at a crossroads.Kristol: (whispering to Feith) I love it when we stand at a crossroads!Feith: (giggling) Me, too. But I never know what to wear. Cheney: Do you assholes mind?Kristol: Sorry, Dick.Feith: Me, too. Cheney: Okay. (Clears throat). As I was saying, gentlemen, we stand at a crossroads ... Kristol: (in Bill Murray-esque fashion, mimicking suspense-movie soundtrack) Dunh-dunh-dunh!Feith: Dunh-dunh-dunh! Dunh ... duh-duh-dunh!Cheney: Oh, for fuck's sake.Kristol: (laughing) Okay, seriously, Dick, I'm sorry.Feith: (still laughing) Duh-duh-duh ... .Kristol: Shhh!Feith: Okay, okay. (to Cheney) No, it's okay, Dick, you can go on.Cheney: You're sure? No more jokes to make? Guys want to do your goddamn Katherine Hepburn impersonations or something?Kristol: (Channeling "On Golden Pond") Come on, Norman! Hurry up! The loons, the loons!Feith: (whispering) Shut up, for Christ's sake! (to Cheney) Our lips are sealed, Dick. Honest.Cheney: Okay. Jesus. As I was saying ... we, uh, stand at a crossroads. (Pauses warily, continues). As we head into the next millenium, America is the world's preeminent military and economic power, but the ground is not exactly solid beneath us. We are the inheritors of a great historical mantle, gentlemen, the rulers of the world's energy supply and therefore the rulers of world commerce. It is a mantle we inherited from the British, who rose to world power on a bed of coal, who in turn inherited it from the Dutch, who put a chokehold on Europe with their fleet of whaling ships. Our turn began when a discovery was made a little place called Oil Creek near Titusville, Pennsylvania in 1859 ...Wolfowitz: Dick, you can skip all that stuff. We had our Standard Oil theme party just six months ago. Lynne made the squid ink risotto, don't you remember?Cheney: Right. Well, the point is ... I think we all know about Marion King Hubbert's projections about the future of oil reserves. We all know the deal: in every oil field there comes a time when half of the field's reachable oil has been extracted. After that point, exploitation becomes more and more expensive; as time goes on, it requires more and more energy just to extract one barrel of oil. Eventually, oil extraction becomes uneconomic, which is to say it requires a barrel of oil's worth of energy to extract a barrel of oil. When that time comes, gentlemen, our oil-based empire is fucked. And the clock begins ticking in that direction once we pass that halfway point with the world's oil reserves. Once oil "peaks," America -- an empire whose power is based almost entirely upon its oil dominance -- will officially be on the decline. Feith: Yeah. And it doesn't help that the only reason the dollar is worth more than the peso is that OPEC still trades in dollars. Cheney: Exactly. Without oil, we're like Bangladesh with fat people. And here's the problem: that failsafe point is upon us. I think we all know the oil production in the lower 48 states peaked in 1970, that Alaskan oil production peaked in 1988, Russia around the same time. Saudi Arabia may be just years from peaking, and in any case our political situation there is tenuous at best. Our guys at Halliburton now estimate that worldwide oil and gas production from existing reserves is declining by about 4 to 6 percent every year ... Wolfowitz: So what's your point? We're all old anyway. Who cares what happens 20 years from now?Cheney: The point, Paul, is that the American empire as we know it will collapse within 20-30 years unless we find massive new supplies of oil and find them fast. By 2010 we're going to need to find fifty million additional barrels of oil per day. And there's only one place where we can get that much oil ... Kristol: Sweden! Feith: Of course. Let's invade! I hate those goddamn speed-skaters anyway.Cheney: No, you assholes, not Sweden. Iraq. It's the only major oil-rich state whose reserves haven't been mostly exploited. There's probably seven million barrels a day minimum just sitting in those fields -- and the worst thing is, unless we get in there soon, it's all going to go to the French, the Russians and the Germans, since Saddam will sell to all of them long before he deals with us, assuming his UN sanctions get lifted at some point.Wolfowitz: My God. Cheney: So it's clear we've got to get in there. Are we agreed on this?All: Agreed.Cheney: All right. Well, I've got a plan.Wolfowitz: We get George elected in 2000 and go in, right? Tell the public Saddam's in violation of his UN restrictions or some shit like that? He is anyway, isn't he?Cheney: No, that would never work. The public would never stand for it.(Everyone bursts out laughing)Cheney: Seriously.Wolfowitz: Oh, wait -- you're serious?Cheney: Absolutely. No, I think the way to go is to cook up some kind of justification. Something that will really get the public behind the invasion ... Feith: I know! We go to the UN, show bogus photos of Saddam's secret store of chemical and biological weapons, evidence of his nuclear weapons program. Tell the world he's planning to attack.Cheney: No. Not emotional enough. I mean something really hot ... Kristol: It could be a human-rights thing. Some emergency, like he's gassing Kurds again or something. That worked for Clinton in Kosovo. I mean, who gave a shit about Albanians, right? I wouldn't know an Albanian if I caught one in bed with my wife. But that whole rape-camp thing was good enough by a mile to start that war.Cheney: No, no, that's not vivid enough, not Band of Brothers enough. We need the people all lathered up, their mouths full of spittle, howling for blood, like pit bulls. You guys need to think to scale, think big, think like Michael Bay.Feith: Michael Bay, Jesus. Okay, okay, what, then?Cheney: We bomb the World Trade Center.Kristol: Perfect! And blame it on Saddam!Cheney: No, we bomb the World Trade Center and blame it on Osama bin Laden.Feith: Oh. How?Cheney: Easy. First, we cultivate 19 suicidal Muslim patsies from a variety of Middle Eastern countries, I'd say mostly from Saudi Arabia. We bring them to the U.S., train them at U.S. flight schools. They should be high-profile terrorist suspects who are magically given free reign by the security agencies to travel back and forth to various terrorist training camps to study passenger jet piloting. Actually that process is already underway now. Our friends in the Clinton administration are seeing to it that four groups of Arab men are being brought along by the FBI and the CIA.Wolfowitz: How is it that the Clinton administration is already helping us with this, when we haven't even planned this yet?Cheney: They just are. Okay? Wolfowitz: Okay, fine. And what do we do with these hijackers?Cheney: We sit idly by while they plot to hijack a series of passenger jet planes and crash them into the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and the White House.Wolfowitz: And how do we get them to do that?Cheney: We just do. You see, we worked with these people back in the old mujahadeen days in Afghanistan. So naturally we're still thick as thieves with them.Feith: Oh, of course. So we get them to fly into these buildings. And the impact from the planes will bring down the World Trade Center.Cheney: No, Doug, dammit, you're not following me. The impact from the planes most certainly won't be sufficient to knock down the Towers. We know this because we've privately conducted studies which show that the Towers will easily be able to withstand impact by two jets loaded to the gills with jet fuel. That said, the jets will likely cause skyscraper fires hot enough to kill everyone above the point of impact; we're going to have to assume, of course, that the exits from the higher floors to the lower floors will be mostly blocked after the collisions. So assuming we crash the planes about two-thirds of the way up each of the towers early on a business day, we're looking at trapping and killing a good three, four, maybe even five thousand people on the upper floors.Feith: Fantastic. I love killing people in the finance industry. It's too bad the people on the lower floors will get to escape. Cheney: It is too bad -- especially since we're going to blow up the rest of the building complex anyway. Feith: We are?Cheney: Yes. You see, the way I see it, our best course of action is to first crash planes into each the towers, trapping and killing those thousands on the upper floors of each building. After the impact, of course, the people on the lower floors will find their way out of the building and on to the street, where they will achieve relative safety -- at which point we'll finally detonate the massive network of explosive charges we've secretly hidden in the buildings in the weeks and months prior to the attacks. Feith: Wait, why did we do that again?Cheney: Because the buildings wouldn't have fallen down unless we did.Wolfowitz: But why do we need the buildings to fall down?Cheney: Because the events of the day will be insufficiently horrifying and impactful without the building collapses.Feith: So why don't we detonate the charges earlier, so that we can kill the people on the lower floors, too?Cheney: That's a good question. At some point we have to sacrifice effect for believability. You see, if the planes crash into the buildings and the buildings immediately collapse, everyone will be suspicious and they'll immediately be onto the presence of the explosives. So what we have to do is let the planes crash into the building, give the jet fuel time to start fires that will "soften" the building core, and then we detonate the charges. Afterwards, we'll be able to argue that the fires coupled with the impact actually caused the buildings to collapse.Feith: Why will we be able to argue that? Didn't our studies show that impact and fire alone wouldn't have caused the buildings to collapse?Cheney: Those were our secret, far-more-advanced studies, done with secret, far-more-advanced military technology. The vast majority of the world's civilian structural engineers, however, can be counted on after the incident to conclude that the buildings collapsed due to a combination of fire, impact, and the knocking off of fireproofing from the building beams. Feith: Why can they be counted on to conclude that?Cheney: Because that's what our secret research shows their not-secret research will show! Jesus Christ, work with me on this, will you?Wolfowitz: I think I get it. We crash the planes, kill everyone above the impact of the planes, let the people underneath the impact out to safety, then collapse the buildings about an hour or so later using the explosives that we pointlessly incurred months and weeks worth of career- and life-threatening risk to covertly plant in a building complex visited by hundreds of thousands of people every week.Cheney: Exactly! The actual deaths will mostly be caused by the planes. But we'll incur the massive additional risk simply to destroy the building, for effect, because it will look cool and scary on television.Feith: I'm still confused about the our-studies and their-studies thing. Cheney: (sighing) What's the matter, Doug?Feith: If we know the planes won't collapse the buildings, isn't it possible that other people after the accident will figure out that the planes didn't collapse the buildings?Cheney: Yes. But those other people will be a tiny minority of mostly non-scientists who'll deduce the whole plan by researching the matter on the internet. Their groundbreaking, visionary research, however, we can count on being ignored by the mainstream scientific community, which will continue to insist the planes caused the collapses. Feith: Why can we count on that?Cheney: Because the mainstream science community, like the whole of the corporate media, the Congress, the Democratic Party, even the mainstream leftist political opposition will naturally be in either conscious or unconscious assent with our plan. Most scientists, you know, depend in some form or another on government funding. So they'll be highly motivated to sign off on our dastardly mass-murder plot, since they know their salaries -- some of these people make almost a hundred thousand a year, you know -- ultimately depend on our ability to secure fifty billion additional barrels of oil per day by 2010 by fooling the population into invading Saddam Hussein's secular Iraq by faking a terrorist attack against the World Trade Center at the hands of a bunch of Saudi religious radicals loyal to the Afghan-supported terrorist leader Osama bin Laden. Wolfowitz: No, I get it, I really do. It all makes sense. Cheney: Also, we have to knock down WTC-7, this very building, in order to get rid of the evidence. I think it goes without saying that we'll need a command center for these operations, and I can't think of a place that would be better or more appropriate than an office right next to the point of attack. From these very offices, gentlemen, we will coordinate the military war exercises that will be held in this region on that very morning, war exercises that will so thoroughly confuse our own military that they will be unable to identify and intercept the hijacked planes we will be sending at the towers like so many deadly guided missiles. Kristol: But, Dick -- how can we be sure that the Air Force won't find a way to intercept the planes anyway?Wolfowitz: I'll answer that, Dick. Irv, the best way we can guarantee that will be to issue stand-down orders in addition to implementing the war games.Kristol: I see. We order the war games in order to stymie the Air Force intercepts we don't control, but just in case those fail, we'll control the Air Force intercepts. Cheney: Now you're catching on.Kristol: And the control center for those war games and for all our other plans (including the demolition) will be right here. These rooms are secret and utterly impenetrable to the general public at the moment, but after the attacks they will be vulnerable to forensic inspection by whichever city or federal agency goes through the wreckage of this doomed building. Cheney: Exactly. That's one of the reasons I thought we should choose this space. If we chose some other spot as a base of operations -- a warehouse in Queens, say -- we might be able to keep it secure forever. But if we set up here, we can be sure some snooping official will end up poking around in the ruins. And we want that, it adds intrigue to the whole deal. Because it goes without saying that we won't be able to control all the cleanup agencies, except those that might be inclined to find our bomb fragments. Those we can count on 100%.Kristol: Right, but still, we have to really be sure we destroy everything here. Especially all the papers and computer records of the conspiracy plans, which we will naturally leave behind, banking on the fact that they will be destroyed in the hellish conflagration. Feith: Guys, I'm lost. You're saying we have to detonate this entire building in order to cover up the evidence of the crime? All: Of course.Feith: Why don't we just not leave the evidence behind and not blow up the building? Why should there be any evidence to leave behind at all?Cheney: Doug, you're not being realistic. You always have to leave evidence of covert operations behind for the public to maybe find.Wolfowitz: Well, except that we never have before.Cheney: Right, except for that. (a phone in the middle of the conference table rings. Kristol picks is up.)Kristol: Hello? Who's this? Oh, hey, Larry. A gast in shetl! I'll put you on speaker! (cups phone, presses speaker button; addresses others) It's Larry Silverstein, the WTC landlord.Silverstein: Hey guys! Vos makht ir?Cheney: Not bad, Larry, how goes it?Silverstein: In dr'erd afn dek! Just awful! But we get by, you know.Cheney: What can we do you for, Larry?Silverstein: Oh, hey, well, a little birdie told me that you guys were planning on blowing up my building complex and blaming it on Islamic terrorists!Cheney: We all have our hobbies, Larry.Silverstein: Well, naturally, you have my assent. Anything to grease the wheels of international capitalism. Also, as a landlord, I love seeing my tenants burned to death and jumping out of high windows on live television and that sort of thing. Plus, I'm a Jew, you know, I have horns. Paul, how's your family?Wolfowitz: Oh, Larry, don't ask. Clare just last week popped her bursa sac building a sukkah. But does anyone live a life without troubles these days?Silverstein: Things just keep getting worse and worse, you're right there. Listen, fellas, about that building complex ... Cheney: Yes?Silverstein: Do you think you could make sure that the WTC-7 building goes down, too? See, the thing is, I just signed a new insurance deal with Industrial Risk Insurers, this could all work out very nicely for me ... Cheney: Larry, it's such an amazing coincidence, we were just talking about that. As it happens, we need to destroy the building to get rid of the evidence anyway. So say no more about that, we'll take care of it.Wolfowitz: Well, say no more until it happens. Then you might just want to casually mention near a PBS camera that you're planning on "pulling" the building.Silverstein: What does "pulling" mean?Cheney: Well, it's not a demolition term, but some will say it is. We're thinking you might just want to make a little admission in that direction.Silverstein: Before my insurance investigation is concluded? At exactly the time when such an admission would cost me my entire settlement? Consider it done!All: Thanks, Larry.Silverstein: You bet, fellas! See you on the links. Mazel tov! Oh, hey, Paul--Wolfowitz: Yes?Silverstein: Pull my finger, Paul! Pull it!Wolfowitz: You bet I'll "pull it," you mensch!Silverstein: Later!(Silverstein hangs up)Cheney: Well, that worked out well. I guess the only things left to really worry about are the other two planes. What do you guys think?Kristol: Well, one plane. I'm thinking with the Pentagon, we send a missile or a drone into the building, then just tell everyone it's a plane. Just to fuck with people.Feith: Is this going to be your basic take-the-real-plane-to-a-remote-military-base, kill-the-passengers, then-fake-their-cellphone-distress-calls-using-advanced-voice-recog-technology deals? Kristol: That's what I'm thinking. Keep it simple, in other words.Wolfowitz: Now I'm confused. We hire patsies to fly into the World Trade Center, but for the Pentagon, we don't use patsies?Cheney: No. We use patsies, but just not to fly the plane. See, the patsies we choose for the Pentagon job won't actually have enough piloting skill to maneuver a plane into the Pentagon. So what we'll do is take a real passenger flight, hijack it and take it to a remote location -- say, Wright Patterson Airport in Ohio -- and then kill all the passengers on board, including the patsies, with poison gas. Then, instead of using that plane, we'll either shoot a missile or use one of those GlobalHawk drone planes to crash into the Pentagon. Then we tell everyone that it was actually the missing plane that crashed into the Pentagon. Wolfowitz: Why don't we just get patsies who can fly a plane? Isn't that what we're doing in New York?Cheney: It's so hard to find skilled patsies these days.Kristol: Plus, Paul, it'll be simple. All we have to do is go to the crash site afterwards and deposit pieces of airplane wreckage, landing gear and so on, at the appropriate places ... Cheney: That's perfect. I know exactly where we can get some airplane wreckage, too. There was an American Airlines jet that crashed in Colombia in 1995; we can take pieces of that plane and just sort of drop them on the lawn when no one is looking ... You know, just like in The Great Escape — drop them through a pantleg while whistling and looking off into the distance, and just sort of kick them around in the burning wreckage ... Kristol: Or even better, we can drop them on the lawn from a circling C-130 after the crash. Just have someone leaning out the cargo bay with big pieces of fuselage, dropping them strategically in between the rescue workers. We can do the same thing with the body parts; we'll just take some of the bodies, barbecue them with jet fuel, and just sort of toss bits of them here and there around the site. Cheney: That works for me. What I like about that is that it's so simple.Wolfowitz: Okay, let me back up. Rather than just finding some patsies who can fly -- which is exactly what we'll be doing in New York -- we instead seize an actual passenger flight and remove the passengers to a remote location and kill them, disposing of the plane later. Then we attack the Pentagon and kill 100 or so of our own people with either a missile or a Global Hawk drone plane, banking on the probability that no one will see a plane shooting a missile in broad daylight of the nation's capital. Then, after we execute this attack on the Pentagon, we go back to the site and cleverly rearrange the evidence to make it look like a plane crashed there, including planting the samples of DNA of all the people we killed in Ohio or whatever. I'm not saying it doesn't sound like a good plan, but can I ask why we're doing this? If we can't find a patsy who can fly a plane, why not just not crash a plane into the Pentagon?Cheney: What do you mean? But a plane crashes into the Pentagon. That's part of the plan. Wolfowitz: Right, but since it's our plan and we can change it, why don't we just scuttle the entire Pentagon operation? We've already got the money shot with the Towers -- why do we need to go through all the trouble of finding hijackers who can't fly, nurturing them in the womb of ineffective government surveillance, getting them on a plane full of passengers, and then faking the deaths of all these people, telling the world they died in a plane crash that was actually a sinister attack using our own technology? I mean, so many things can go wrong. You've got to get people to sign off on the DNA reports, you've got eyewitnesses with weird stories, you've got inconsistent radar data, you've got to put stuff there for the dogs to find ... Cheney: Don't worry about the dogs. We've got the dogs covered. Wolfowitz: Oh, well, okay. But still -- why not just skip the whole thing?Cheney: Are you suggesting that instead of executing hundreds of sinister, secretive, murderous sub-plans that all must go off flawlessly to together create a single underpublicized deception, that instead of that we just blow it off and go with the much larger and more spectacular World Trade Center event?Wolfowitz: Right. Either that or find patsies who can fly.Cheney: Hmm. Interesting. What do you guys think?Feith: I don't know, Dick. It seems much easier just to go with the whole fake-the-flight, kill-the-passengers, fake-the-cell-phone-calls, pass-off-the-missile-attack-as-a-plane-crash thing. I can't think of any simpler way to do this plan than that.Kristol: Yeah, Dick, frankly, neither can I. I like your plan better. It's so much more ... cloak n' daggerier!Cheney: Well, it's settled, then. Paul, you cool?Wolfowitz: Hey, I trust you guys, you know that. (the phone rings again)Feith: I'll get it. (grabs phone) Hello? Oh, hey, Ted, what's up! (whispering, to everyone else) It's Ted Olson. (into phone) I'll put you on speaker, okay, Ted?Olson: 'Sup, fellas!Cheney: 'Sup, counselor! How goes it? Talked to George much lately? Olson: As Governor Bush's attorney, you know I can't discuss that -- even with you assholes.(everyone laughs)Cheney: Fair enough, What can we do you for, counselor?Olson: Well, I don't mean to be a pest ... Cheney: Speak up, speak up.Olson: Well, a little birdie told me that you guys were planning on faking an airplane hijacking and shooting a drone into the Pentagon, blaming it all on Islamic terrorists!Cheney: Sure are a lot of little birdies around these days!Olson: I was just wondering if you could stick my wife on the plane you're thinking of hijacking.Cheney: Barbara? Olson: Right, Babs. Cheney: That's no problem. Consider it done. But you've got to get her on the plane.Olson: Shit, that won't be hard. I'll tell her I dropped a dollar in the other airport. She'll catch the first fucking flight.Cheney: That's great. Hey, maybe, actually you could help us. After we take Babs to a military base and dispose of her fat body, can you tell the press that she called you, weeping, on her cell phone during the hijacking? It'll add verisimilitude to the whole thing.Olson: You mean like, "Oh, my poor wife, she called me in those last dire minutes before those terrorist bastards took her life, blah blah blah," that sort of thing?Cheney: Exactly.Olson: Hey, I'm a lawyer, I lie for a living. Consider it done. Of course, the pain of losing Babs would be easier if ... Cheney: You want to be Solicitor General, right?Olson: Well, if you haven't picked one out yet.Cheney: Ted, you can count on us. Olson: Thanks, man. Tell your other evil plotter buddies there that I love them.All: We love you, too, Ted.Olson: Later!(Olson hangs up)Feith: Well, that worked out well.Kristol: That only leaves the last plane, I guess.Cheney: Right. This one -- this one I think is going to be tricky.Feith: How so?Cheney: Okay, bear with me on this, okay? The plane takes off. Passengers, patsies, the whole deal. The hijackers take over the plane and start steering it toward the White House. But fuck them, okay? We step in, our jets scrambled, and we blow those fuckers out of the sky.Feith: Boom!Cheney: Of course, we can't exactly admit that we killed American passengers, even for a good reason like this would be. So we'll dream up a story about passengers overpowering the hijackers and downing the plane themselves. "Let's roll," a wife will hear her husband say on his cell phone, as he and his brave party of vigilantes storms the cockpit ... Wolfowitz: Oh, I see, right. Because they learned from their families, by talking with them on their cell phones, the terrible fate of the World Trade Center. So they give their lives to save the White House ... Feith: Wow. I'm going to cry, that's so beautiful. Cheney: In reality, though, it'll be us downing the plane with an F-16 or something. The pilots will never talk, never. Nor will the air traffic controllers ... Kristol: Oh, I like that. It's patriotic. So why do we shoot the plane down, though?Cheney: Well, because otherwise the hijackers will crash into the White House. But we can't admit that to the public, they'll be horrified.Kristol: But they're not real hijackers, are they? Aren't they patsies?Cheney: Oh, right. Shit! Man, I'm getting confused. We should probably break for lunch soon. Wolfowitz: No, Dick, I've got that one. You see, here's the thing. Maybe the passengers really will overpower the hijackers. If that happens, it goes without saying that we have to shoot the plane down. We can't let them land, because then the hijackers will talk, and our whole evil plan will be exposed. Cheney: Right, right, that's exactly what might happen. So it goes without saying that we have to be prepared to fake a crash site to make it look like a crash, even though it'll really be us shooting the plane down. Kristol: But how can we prepare a phony crash site in advance if we don't even know for sure right now that the passengers will overpower the hijacker-patsies? Or where or when that will happen? That shouldn't even be entering our minds at this point. Cheney: Well, um ... fuck. Right again. Paul?Wolfowitz: I don't know, man, I'm getting tired at this point. But I'm down with the general idea of shooting that plane down.Cheney: If we have to.Wolfowitz: Right, if we have to. Kristol: But, wait -- also, don't we want the plane to crash into the White House?Cheney: What, are you crazy? And kill innocent Americans?Wolfowitz: Irv, come on, now.Kristol: Guys, we've just decided to blow up the World Trade Center. Like five minutes ago.Cheney: Well, but the White House.Wolfowitz: Irv, the White House. You're talking about the White House.Kristol: Okay, whatever. You know I'm all for it, whatever we do.Cheney: Look, the point is, we do the Towers and pin it on bin Laden. That leads us to invade Afghanistan. A year and a half later, we invade Iraq.Feith: And we blame the whole WTC thing on Saddam.Cheney: Right, and ... wait, what? No! No, actually we never make that connection, because none exists. I figure we can just say he's in violation of his UN restrictions, and that will be a good enough reason to invade. He is anyway, right? In violation, I mean?Wolfowitz: I think you're right, he is!Adapted from the forthcoming book, "/www.amazon.com/Great-Derangement-Terrifying-Politics-Religion/dp/0385520344/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1209591329&sr=8-1">The Great DerangementThe Great Derangement" by Matt Taibbi. Copyright 2008 by Matt Taibbi. Published by Spiegel & Grau, a division of Random House Inc. Reprinted with permission.

Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: matt taibbi, the great derangement, 9/11 conspiracies

Matt Taibbi is a writer for Rolling Stone.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
completely and utterly retarded.
Posted by: davesilvan on May 19, 2008 1:01 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What's completely and utterly retarded is the author of this article. Instead of discussing the actual facts and inconsistencies between the 'official' account and pictures, video (of a certain helicopter attempting to hide among the smoke of the WTCs coordinating things, like directing the 2nd plane) and testimony of people who were there at the scene you do your best to wring out new verbally-talented insults.

I've wasted enough of my time belittling you.

» You're both insane. Posted by: Scientz
» Riiiiiight. Posted by: Scientz
» And the Bush family . . . Posted by: Scientz
» RE: And the Bush family . . . Posted by: channing
» Common sense is the first casualty Posted by: carbon-based
» A waste of time? Posted by: dustdevil
» RE: A waste of time? Posted by: channing
» RE: A waste of time? Posted by: CatDad
» RE: A waste of time? Posted by: carbon-based
» RE: A waste of time? Posted by: edgar_michel
» RE: A waste of time? Posted by: edgar_michel
» RE: A waste of time? Posted by: carbon-based
» Welcome to the list . . . Posted by: dustdevil
» I'm honored . . . Posted by: Scientz
» RE: I'm honored . . . Posted by: YogiBear
» Apparently. Posted by: Scientz
» RE: I'm honored . . . Posted by: carbon-based
» Rationality is the second Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: ationality is the second Posted by: YogiBear
» From Boeings website: Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: f**kin' excellent Posted by: channing
» RE: From Boeings website: Posted by: carbon-based
» 767s were used because . . . Posted by: dustdevil
» RE: 767s were used because . . . Posted by: carbon-based
» Competency is the third Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: Competency is the third Posted by: carbon-based
» Veracity is the fourth Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: Competency is the third Posted by: bornxeyed
» Let's look at an empty 767 Posted by: bornxeyed
Retarded indeed
Posted by: Rune on May 19, 2008 1:32 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
That is, the whole premise of this article is retarded. It starts off with its own idiotic misconceptions and never recovers:

"The people who really run America don't send the likes of George Bush and Dick Cheney to the White House to cook up boat-rocking, maniacal world-domination plans and commit massive criminal conspiracies on live national television; they send them there to repeal PUCHA and dole out funds for the F-22 and pass energy bills with $14 billion tax breaks and slash fuel efficiency standards and do all the other shit that never makes the papers but keeps Wall Street and the country's corporate boardrooms happy. You don't elect politicians to commit crimes; you elect politicians to make your crimes legal."

First of all, the people who were running America at the time did not pick Dick Cheney, Cheney picked himself when Bush's dad suggested he hire him search for a V.P. As we will all recall, Bush was a bumbling idiot on the swift decline in September 10, which just happens to be the day Rumsfeld revealed that his department, the DoD, could not account for over $1.2 trillion dollars in spending (and the real number turned out to be about triple that amount). Then, on September 11, Rummy's news, which was about the lead to a serious impasse regarding the biggest corporate welfare program of them all, was pushed aside and never revisited while Cheney took charge and got the most profitable hit in economic history rolling.

What, the big players behind the politicians were focusing on $14 billion projects and a little more protection from class actions lawsuits? Get a clue! Hell, lucky Larry Silverstein, new owner of some choice New York real estate, pocketed about half that amount in cash as a result of insurance payments specifically covering acts of terrorism against his WTC properties. That was chump change. The real money at stake was in the trillions of dollars and revolved around wiping out several ongoing investigations of and political resistance against major financial crimes that were already under way, as well as facilitating their expansion and, yes, a few hundred billion dollars in government seed money and expense accounts. But if you follow the link I provided, and follow the money, you will see that we are talking about many trillions of dollars that swung to the benefit of the good corporations and their owners that have done their best to keep team Bush in power and above the law since September 11.

That this article spends its time kicking butt on the strawman argument that the invasion of Iraq was primarily an effort to get its oil, when we have seen that the oil industry has been able to triple its prices and send its profits through the roof by merely having the means of controlling and/or destabilizing the long term prospects of oil supplies without ever taking possession of Iraq's oil fields is, what was that word again?, oh, yeah, "retarded." About five years retarded, to be precise, for it was about that long ago that Greg Palast explained that what the oil industry execs had in mind when they met with Cheney was having a way to exert control over oil supplies, not actually grabbing the oil and selling it off in a hurry at low, low prices. That would be "retarded."

[Continued . . .]

Still retarded . . . and then some
Posted by: Rune on May 19, 2008 1:36 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yes, it is always fun to mock the many, many theories of how this all came to be. No doubt, the government that has clearly been blocking investigations that could actually answer that question while busily pursuing "psyops on steroids" against its own people has likely planted or promoted enough nutball ideas along with the valid ones that just about everyone believes something that, upon some investigation, can be shown to be very dubious. But if the basic notion that following the money will lead you to gnomes behind the scenes who pull a few strings to make sure things work to their maximum benefit is valid, then I think it does make sense to look back into those same players involved government, financial, and public interest crimes worth trillions that went down without a hitch once two planes knocked down three buildings in New York, the third one that was not directly hit being the most important to the plot. You know, that building with all the investigators and records in it that NIST still cannot come up with even a flimsy explanation for why it fell down the way it mostly talked around the evidence and the details in implying a remotely possible means by which the twin towers could have been caused to fall down due to massive destruction from the impacts of airliners and nearly impossible heat build up due to fires that NIST's own lab analyses of steel removed from the buildings shows did not take place. (You did know about that, didn't you?)

On the other hand, maybe it was just an amazing conspiracy of a former CIA asset (bin Laden) hiding in a cave and some flunky Middle Eastern flight school students and their pals -- some of whom had been tracked for years in the U.S., even after they trained in California with assistance from he first guy who tried to bomb the WTC, who in turn was having his living expenses covered by the guy in the cave after the CIA issued him no fewer than 6 tourist visas so he could keep coming back to the U.S. despite being an escaped prisoner and well known international terrorist wanted in Egypt. Yeah, that's probably it. All that CIA involvement and the FBI being called off every related case for over a decade is probably just the result of bureaucratic inefficiency. Unless you follow the money. . . .

This whole article smacks of the same sort of preying on the ignorant and willing by pointing the finger at presumed "wackos" that is the stock and trade of Fox News and their ilk. There is always a grain of truth to such ploys, else they would not be so effective, but that does not save them from being based on idiotic oversights and misstatements of facts and leading theories, as was true of this article from its first few paragraphs.

False debate, false frame, false everything.
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on May 19, 2008 1:42 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Welcome to the puppet show, folks, regularly hosted on the left-wing press and a few of the corporate networks now and again, Our cast of characters include:

1) The 911 Truthiness Movement, represented by Alex Jones, David Ray Griffith, Dylan Avery of Loose Change fame, and a few other interesting people who refuse to be identified and flee persistent questioning... 4th Army Psychological Operations veterans working for private public relations/CIA contractors, would be my guess.

2) The "debunkers" - represented by oh, just about everyone else, who point out time and again that there were no bombs in the WTC, no missiles fired at the Pentagon, and so on.

Before going any further, allow me to refer you to the Joint Pub 3-53 - 1996 Army-Navy-Air Force-Marine-Coast Guard joint doctrine for coordinating psychological operations. Anyone (large corporations, private foundations, etc) can apply those strategies.

"The planned use of psychological actions and propaganda influences the attitudes, opinions, and behaviors of opposing or neutral groups in a manner favorable to US objectives. PSYOP techniques are used to plan and execute truth projection activities intended to inform foreign groups and populations persuasively. The purpose of PSYOP techniques is to ensure that targets receive and consider the information being disseminated.

So, there are real questions about 9/11, but those all center around two issues: whether the failure to apprehend the hijackers before 9/11 was due to gross or deliberate incompetence. Deliberate as in "we let hijackings take place because we wanted a media event for some reason", not as in "we knew they were going to fly them into buildings". Or it was gross idiotic incompetence, for which impeachment is also appropriate.

What's the other issue, you ask? Oh, I don't know - what major event happened a few weeks after 9/11, actually postmarked on 9/18 and 10/9, I believe - sourced out of a U.S. private contractor lab known as Battelle Memorial Institute, by all indications (at least that's who the wife of the Florida anthrax victim is suing, or was). U.S. biowarfare programs run by private contractors in close cahoots with the DIA and the CIA, all documented? Project Jefferson, Project Clear Vision, Project Bacchus? Say it isn't so - but it is. Wait... I can hear a pin drop...

Instead, we get big bogus debates like this one. Puppet shows that distract the public from more delicate and dangerous issues that might bring down entire governments if brought to light. Bush is definitely worse than Nixon, but he's still in power... and the left wing press has played a major role in keeping him there.

» Let me get this straight . . . Posted by: dustdevil
More straw from Taibbi and AlterNet
Posted by: LeftWright on May 19, 2008 1:47 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Once again, instead of analyzing the critical questions using physics, facts and logic; Mr. Taibbi and AlterNet just build straw mountains and employ rhetorical dodges to avoid the hard questions and uncomfortable answers regarding the events of 9/11/01.

Mr. Taibbi, try resolving just one of the 25 contradictions in Dr. David Ray Griffin's new book 9/11 Contradictions: An Open Letter to Congress and the Press for a change.

In posting garbage like this piece AlterNet once again underscores its irrelevance as a source of credible and/or useful information.

Stick to what you do best, AlterNet, shilling for Sen. Obama and selling sex in the guise of "feminism".

I could not be more disgusted with the intellectual bankruptcy of this "news" site.

The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.

» RE: More straw from Taibbi and AlterNet Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: More straw from Taibbi and AlterNet Posted by: Joshua Holland
The un-funny thing is.......
Posted by: mizipi on May 19, 2008 2:09 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
had 9-11 happened during the Clinton administration, and Rush Limpdick reported something similar to this, then every neo-nut in the world would have believed it to be true.

Kind of lopsided?
Posted by: CosmoViking on May 19, 2008 2:39 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
While trying to describe the mentality and dynamics of the so-called 9/11 Truth Movement (it's really not a movement in Europe - just a lot of people who simpy cannot swallow the many holes in the Kean-Hamilton Report) is interesting, this author appears to not have actually done the reseach into the events of September 11th, 2001.

Now I admit that after reading 4 books and many articles on the matter (especially the WTC events), I am still not sure who was ultimately behind it. What seems very sure is that the collapses of WTC 1 & 2 defied the laws of physics in the report and the NIST anaysis.
But surely it is clear who benefitted from the events - and, hint, it's not the "cave-based, world-wide terrorist organization of an exentric Saudi millionaire". Seriously, think about that model for a moment - it really makes no sense. The same kind of misleading information was released during the cold war, where the CIA used ghost writers happily identified a non-existent world-wide Communist terrorist network. It was all propaganda.

What DOES make sense is that Bin Ladens group (with its' limited reach and capability) was and still is the so-called "CIA Arab Legion" and that is why Al Qaeda (a name used in the west) has a typical intelligence agency cell structure.

Hence, the ARE muslim fanatics, but I can assure you most of them have no idea who the man behind the curtain. They believe Bin Laden is a Sheikh. He is not. He is an asset of illegal covert operations. The same appears to be true of Al-Zawahiri, who has has MI-6 connections.

Now, as for Cheney....I dont know how involved he might have been, but he, KBR/Halliburton (who are, by the way, both mentioned in depths of teh Warren Commission Report on the assassination of JFK), the neocons and others have benefitted immensly. Plus he was coordinating some of the many, highly suspicious wargame exercises of 9/11.

Having said that, I am regularly confronted with people from both sides of the debate, who simply cannopt carry an intelligent conversation of the matter because they are so entrenched. There's really no need for that - both camps seem to agree that the Administration is guilty of many things, so why not wotk together on thise issues.

What remains obvious to me is that there should be a re-investigation under the next President.

» RE: Kind of lopsided? Posted by: dcm
» RE: Kind of lopsided? Posted by: CosmoViking
» to CosmoViking Posted by: kellysgarden
» RE: to CosmoViking Posted by: CosmoViking
» RE: Kind of lopsided? Posted by: meranting
» RE: Kind of lopsided? Posted by: omniadeo
» RE: Kind of lopsided? Posted by: CosmoViking
» RE: Kind of lopsided? Posted by: CosmoViking
AIDS AND 9/11
Posted by: Purple Girl on May 19, 2008 3:34 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Rev Wright was a Sacrifical lamb.Too much was focused on the minor points of this sermons and not the historical FACTS.This was done intentionally to distract against what truely constitutes crinimla Behavior.
Where AIDS came from is IRRELEVANT. What is, IS what happened after it surfaced! HOW & WHY it moved from a spoaratic disease to a World Wide Epidemic. What isWorse inventing a Destructive force in a 'Lab' Or the releasing & proliferating of It.Historical Fact - GRID became a serious diease among the Gay and Black Communities AND REAGAN IGNORED IT! His lack of AmericaN Preidential leadership allowed thousands to suffer and die in those communities- No Research funding, No Assistance, No attempt to eradicate or even control it's spread. 'ACT UP started long before Alan White or Paul Michael Glassers contracted the disease. Not unitl the disease was found in the Blood Supply and threatend 'regular white Folks' did Anyone Do anything!Dereliciotn of Duty, Recke=less Endangerment,Genocide.
9/11 was 'chickens coming Home to Roost'. No one needs to be a 'conspiracy Theorist or paranoid' to realize WHAT was Targeted on 9/11-The MIC.Again a horrid event- but what followed was far more devastating to our Country & the World- WAR, Economic fall out, usurping of Rights & freedoms, Loss of Reputation in the World community(distrust)....Numerous acts of Treason, War Crimes & Crimes Against Humanity.But the acts which brought on this 'Balck eye' started no less then 30 yrs ago. The Hostage Crisis, The First Oil'Crisis' , Highjackings and Terrorist attacks. WE TOLD OUR GOV'T & the INCS to GET OUT OF THE M.E. THEN!!!!Their Greed,Arrogance, sociopathic meglomania and UNAMERICAN Business Practices & Policies Caused 9/11- It Was THEIR chickens!They have used our Resources to fund their enterprises, Or Flag as Camoflague and our people as Human shields
So whether or not they actually placed explosives in the Towers, at the Pentagon or on Flight 93 is a Mute point- Everything BEFORE & SINCE IS their fault.Blood is on their hands- not just victims of 9/11 but all those who have died as a Result of their lack of Moral and Ethics as related to this NATURAL RESOURCE (and all others - 'GIFTS' should never be bought & Sold for Profit,it's a slap in the Face of the 'Giver'- 'God' Or Nature, It's a Sin for Stewards to behave with such dishonor, and disrepect)
So it is not that Dr Frankenstein Created a monster in the Lab- it was the releasing of him and the aftermath which was his Mortal Crime against Humanity.
Highest of Crimes deserve the Highest of Punishments!

» RE: AIDS AND 9/11 Posted by: sirios
would work better if it was funny.
Posted by: harrydocket on May 19, 2008 3:48 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Well apart from the fact that the enormous body of 9/11 research and genuine concern over the inconsistencies of the day have been ignored-This also suffers from the major cardinal sin of comedy not being funny.
Smacks like a bit of disinformation also.

Truly pathetic
Posted by: xi_people on May 19, 2008 3:51 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So, once again AlterNet and its editors do their best to trivialize the country's most important issue. Could their agenda be any more transparent? How desperate are they that the truth behind 9/11 remain obfuscated?

The ironic thing is that asinine articles like this have the effect of reinforcing people's sense of outrage at the coverup. The readership of this site is, by and large, an educated and informed one, and insulting our collective intelligence on a regular basis is just idiotic, and doesn't bode well for the future of the site.

Look for this article to be pulled by mid-day as the negative comments continue to mount.

» RE: Truly pathetic Posted by: kellysgarden
long history of false flag ops
Posted by: Zuma on May 19, 2008 4:03 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
from the sinking of the maine to the gulf of tonkin incident, such 'false flag' incidents are a tool that has not rusted for all it's use. we already know this and know it well.

this article suffers greatly, not just from the ills previous comments have pointed out, but from the aggregate effect of thus actually serving that which it seeks to demean or otherwise undermine.

the conundrum of 9/11 turns upon established and accepted facts or the lack thereof. sites that call themselves fact-based or reality-based hardly need to defend such policy, but there are many established facts concerning 9/11 that are simply *not* accepted, such as the winglessly round 20 foot hole in the pentagon for just one.

and so on.

we have a national argument now over common sense itself.

remember giuliani's disbelief at ron paul's assertion of 'blowback'? paul dared speak without disingenuity, but plainly, frankly. this is no longer acceptable to the status quo.

9/11 'truthers' seek truth -they are truth Seekers. -and so retain their own self-respect.

to disallow discussion of such questions is as contemptible as disgenuously ignoring our false flag incident history -or the evidence of 9/11 that in my view reasonably gives ground to raise large questions.

» Agreed, a hoax Posted by: nap
» RE: Agreed, a hoax Posted by: channing
» RE: no, not kidding Posted by: channing
» RE: no, not kidding Posted by: nap
» RE: Thank you nap Posted by: channing
» RE: Thank you nap Posted by: nap
annoying article but..
Posted by: nap on May 19, 2008 4:20 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I suppose, if Cheney would have been involved in planning 9/11 he would have proposed a different shortlist of nationalities for the hijackers.

Of course, I could always come up with an explanation for that. Or for anything for that matter.

The possibility of deliberately letting one's guard down is as far as I'm willing to consider.

» Co-signed . . . Posted by: Scientz
» then again . . . Posted by: nap
» RE: Exactly right nap, Posted by: channing
» RE: xactly right nap, Posted by: nap
Rolling Stone a bastion of integrity?
Posted by: zeofredo on May 19, 2008 4:35 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Looks like this guy doesn't have enough to write about seeing that contemporary pop music is completely wallowing in its own crapulence... so VOILÁ! A riposte towards an easy target: 9/11 debunkers!

The greatest disappointment in the last 40 years of youth culture is that it has been co-opted (no conspiracy--just business) by the same social engineering that brings us useless medication and FOX hype... selling a myth of individualism and 'youthful rebellion' while at the same time narrowing the horizons of young people's world views. It has worked a charm, apparently.

Nobody seriously reads Rolling Stone anymore, anyway... not since the eighties!

» RE: Correction! Posted by: zeofredo
the truth
Posted by: tfh_962 on May 19, 2008 4:56 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So let me get this straight? because a bunch of people don't believe the "official story" they are crackpots? We are lucky that we have people that are WILLING to SPEND their time and money doing their own research and finding out the FACTS regarding 911, and not just a puppet of the government payroll like Matt Taibbi, Spiegel & Grau! Everyone should boycott Aternet for publishing this rubbish propaganda. I will not be reading rolling stone anymore --- and for the REST OF MY LIFE ON THIS PLANET I will tell everyone to boycott rolling stone as well, because they employ such a government puppet like Matt Taibbi. Frankly any magazine should be a shamed of employing such a person -- pushing this government dis-info --- everyone knows 911 was an inside job, it is the biggest issue on the table, and anyone who denys this point, needs to be rounded up and [you fill in the blank!]. 911 Truth is growing, and people like Matt Taibbi are ulgy right-wing neo-con dinosaurs that just pretend to be left-wing. People like Matt Taibbi need to arrested and tried for treason of the world! How much money are they paying you Matt? how much money did you and you take for this??? how much silver did you sell out and hung the world for? is it worth it, you should be ashamed of yourself! I hope they fire you at rolling stone --

» RE: the truth Posted by: carrie jean
» the truth != 9/11 Truth Posted by: Krotos
Sometimes I think
Posted by: Urstrly on May 19, 2008 5:03 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Cheney & Co. invented the 9/11 truth squad to distract the rest of us from the heist they've pulled off of our Constitution and economy. I'll hand it to the conspiracy clique, they sure hang together. Even on Alternet.

» RE: Sometimes I think Posted by: CosmoViking
» Ummm, it's all connected, Urstrly Posted by: LeftWright
Taibbi is simply picking a fight
Posted by: witchjug on May 19, 2008 5:11 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Wheather he truely beleives this fact free fluff of a story or not is irrelevant. He is simply trying to pick a fight. He has written several articals on this very subject with the same condecending stance. Matt, you want to give your arguement some gravity? Instead of fluff, interview the 911 truth movements most accredited and knowledgable participant. Who you ask? Well if you did anything approaching journalism you would already know.

A do-nothing conspiracy
Posted by: Last Chance on May 19, 2008 5:11 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
They simply stepped aside and let it happen, knowing it would give them carte blanche to pass emergency legislation, attack Iraq and drive the nation toward corporate fascism. So far, so bad. Now what will happen before November to prevent a Democrat from taking over the White House? Cheney knows.

» RE: A do-nothing conspiracy Posted by: Lauren
» RE: A do-nothing conspiracy Posted by: Last Chance
We have the best spy agencies money can buy....
Posted by: xvictor on May 19, 2008 5:13 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The United States government budgets literally BILLIONS of dollars annually into the various spy agencies: FBI, CIA, NSA and godknowswhatelse. They work domestically and internationally. They work closely with the spy agencies of other governments in Europe in Asia. This is true for decades. We have spy sattellites that can detect the brand names of cigarettes lying in a gutter. We have ultra sonic listening devices, etc.

For those who insist we were taken by surprise by a bunch of "ragheads" who just strolls into a couple of jets and then ram them into buildings are popping some totally strong stuff -- considering the elaborate and EXPENSIVE spy outfits we support.

And I have not one but THREE bridges I like to sell you CHEAP!!! Send me money first and we can deal!!!

Heheheh
Posted by: hotar on May 19, 2008 5:16 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Unlike the above commenters, I thought the story was funny and hit the 9/11 "truth" movement right where it hurts, smack in the middle of its glaring inconsistencies and gaping factual errors. Rock on, Mr. Taibbi!

» I disagree . . . Posted by: Scientz
» RE: I disagree . . . Posted by: Crazy H
» No . . . Posted by: Scientz
» RE: Heheheh Posted by: metryjen
» You and me both . . . Posted by: Scientz
» RE: You and me both . . . Posted by: bornxeyed
» I'll defer . . . Posted by: Scientz
» RE: I'll defer . . . Posted by: bornxeyed
» hehehehehehehe Posted by: The Big Raven
» Yes . . . Posted by: Scientz
"We're all gentlemen here"
Posted by: scheherezade on May 19, 2008 5:44 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Very often, journalists who cover the powerful get into a weird place where they're identifying with their subject matter.

A sort of "we're all gentlemen here -- just two opposing teams playing the same game."

Such journalists often like to tell themselves the feeling's mutual from the power-player's perspective -- it's OK to go out for lunch or a beer, because we're all civilized people here, just doing our jobs. He returns to his country club, I return to my 500 sq. ft. hovel, but underneath it all I think he really respects me.

Combine this with the fact that Rolling Stone's primary imperative has always been to project 'hipness' above all else (along the way sacrificing insight, complexity, diversity...and sometimes, accuracy).

Rolling Stone's rather anxious quest for hep-cred has, in fact, reduced their journalistic integrity down to about nil -- and brings us to Mr. Taibbi's poorly researched, trying-very-hard-to-be-a-cool-guy 'investigation' into the 9/11 Truth movement.

Go back to covering sluts in their underwear, Rolling Stone. It's where your best journalistic talents lie.

Long Winded
Posted by: RJW on May 19, 2008 5:45 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yes Matt, long winded and oh so short on facts. If there's anyone out there who still believes the Bush/Cheney junta regarding 9-11, please do yourself a favor and watch Architect Richard Gage's presentation. If you've got two brain cells to rub together, the truth will clobber you.

http://www.ae911truth.org/

Another Pointless Rant out of "Kid Clod" Taibbi
Posted by: Mister_PsyOps on May 19, 2008 5:46 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
“At its heart, 9/11 Truth is a conceit, a narcissistic pipe dream for a dingbat, sheeplike population that is pleased to imagine itself dangerous and ungovernable.”

For Taibbi to accuse anyone or anything of narcissism is ironic to say the least. He actually projects here (as usual) and refers to his own damaged mindset, no doubt. No surprise, either.

It gets worse, of course. The pretense that Taibbi actually has a handle on what governs the west is sadder still.


According to a laughably immature Taibbi – the Anglo-American ruling class is a mere collection of random, bumbling Wall Street chaps too greedy and self-absorbed to pull off 9/11. But 19 hung over cave boys led by CIA asset ‘Tim Osman” (a.k.a. Osama Bin Laden) could do it with WalMart tools, no problem. All right past a $40 billion a year intel establishment and 200 plus embedded 9/11 Israeli spies busted on the day, no less.

And never mind that this ruling class pulled off the Tonkin Gulf betrayal for Vietnam and CIA “Operation Gladio” as false-flag operations that resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands and more. Not to mention 20 democracies overthrown by CIA backed coups, putting Saddam into power, then baiting him to take Kuwait and betraying him for Gulf War I, “Operation Mockingbird”, a Pentagon “Information Operations Roadmap” liars nest , etc, etc.

All just random Wall Street monkey business according to Kid Clod. Nothing to see here.

For the Kid Clods of the world, a sham “war on terror” of a thousand lies may be dirty but the 9/11 event that created it is clean as a whistle and just what the government-MSM echo chamber tells us it is. What a relief.

Naturally Sibel Edmonds and the scientists, whistleblowers and 9/11 family members, military and CIA pros in the 9/11 Truth Movement all “flatter themselves with fantasies” . But not Taibbi. He's a trustee, and self-appointed authority.

Before anyone rushes out to buy Taibbi’s book I’d recommend "A CENTURY of WAR – Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order" by economist William Engdahl. According to oil ministers, practical economists, bankers, et al, it would likely be bit more relevant than the witless imaginings of say, Kid Clod or his status quo choir.

"Control energy and you control the nations, control food and you control the people".
Henry Kissinger (agent for the ruling class. Living)

» RE: Buy "IN THEIR OWN WORDS" Instead Posted by: edgar_michel
REF:It's time people woke up.It was Murder.
Posted by: mtcloud on May 19, 2008 5:49 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's time people woke up.

It's sad to see that Matt Taibbi, Spiegel & Grau, and Alternet are just bought and paid for by the same group of people that bought and paid for The 9-11 Commission Report. Yes, it is true.

I hope Matt Taibbi, Spiegel & Grau, and Alternet have great success on the blood of 3,000 people who were horrifically murdered.......yes murdered.

My brother died in the WTC, first tower, 9/11-Geoffrey Cloud. So of course since then I've been researching it thoroughly after they sent all of the families the bogus report "explaining" what happened. JFK Warren report Deja-Vu.

http://www.gpoaccess.gov/911/index.html



It's time people opened their eyes.

After years of research on 9/11? It was an inside job, with the highest levels of our "government" involved in the planning and execution.

This is just some of the information that people choose to ignore. I'm not saying that all of the information or the reasoning is "perfect", or "solid", but lot's of it is.

Listen to the experts, discern who the experts are(which is easy), who easily show how ludicrous the The 9-11 Commission Report was and still is.

Major Facts:
1.)
The inner metal, concrete structure of the towers was designed keep it's integrity(easily stay standing) in a prolonged fire of 3,000 degrees.

The planes hitting at them most had flash fires at impact of around 2,000 degrees for a couple of seconds.

2.) Fire does not change CONCRETE INTO DUST.

3.) Even if there was enough explosive material within the buildings to explode, which there was not. The detonation of this material would have been random, not controlled enough to bring the towers down into their foot prints at free fall speed. The fact that BOTH OF THE TOWERS DID THIS goes beyond probability. Yet people bought it....and still buy robots like
Matt Taibbi, Spiegel & Grau, and Alternet.

It was murder.

Stop looking to the mainstream media, government for the truth, or any real facts at all.

Use the internet(which will be shut down soon), find information, talk to REAL PEOPLE, as QUESTIONS, QUESTION THE ANSWERS(even if it is what you want to hear)look inside, trust the warmth in your heart, trust the warmth in hearts of the people in your lives, and you will discern the truth.

Use your intellectual capabilities, emotional intelligence, extraordinary abilities.


Michael Cloud

REF:It's time people woke up.It was Murder.
Posted by: mtcloud on May 19, 2008 5:49 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's time people woke up.

It's sad to see that Matt Taibbi, Spiegel & Grau, and Alternet are just bought and paid for by the same group of people that bought and paid for The 9-11 Commission Report. Yes, it is true.

I hope Matt Taibbi, Spiegel & Grau, and Alternet have great success on the blood of 3,000 people who were horrifically murdered.......yes murdered.

My brother died in the WTC, first tower, 9/11-Geoffrey Cloud. So of course since then I've been researching it thoroughly after they sent all of the families the bogus report "explaining" what happened. JFK Warren report Deja-Vu.

http://www.gpoaccess.gov/911/index.html



It's time people opened their eyes.

After years of research on 9/11? It was an inside job, with the highest levels of our "government" involved in the planning and execution.

This is just some of the information that people choose to ignore. I'm not saying that all of the information or the reasoning is "perfect", or "solid", but lot's of it is.

Listen to the experts, discern who the experts are(which is easy), who easily show how ludicrous the The 9-11 Commission Report was and still is.

Major Facts:
1.)
The inner metal, concrete structure of the towers was designed keep it's integrity(easily stay standing) in a prolonged fire of 3,000 degrees.

The planes hitting at them most had flash fires at impact of around 2,000 degrees for a couple of seconds.

2.) Fire does not change CONCRETE INTO DUST.

3.) Even if there was enough explosive material within the buildings to explode, which there was not. The detonation of this material would have been random, not controlled enough to bring the towers down into their foot prints at free fall speed. The fact that BOTH OF THE TOWERS DID THIS goes beyond probability. Yet people bought it....and still buy robots like
Matt Taibbi, Spiegel & Grau, and Alternet.

It was murder.

Stop looking to the mainstream media, government for the truth, or any real facts at all.

Use the internet(which will be shut down soon), find information, talk to REAL PEOPLE, as QUESTIONS, QUESTION THE ANSWERS(even if it is what you want to hear)look inside, trust the warmth in your heart, trust the warmth in hearts of the people in your lives, and you will discern the truth.

Use your intellectual capabilities, emotional intelligence, extraordinary abilities.


Michael Cloud

It's not 9:00 EST . . .
Posted by: Scientz on May 19, 2008 5:51 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
. . . and you crazy 9/11 "truth" people come out of the woodwork like crazy.

Look. No one is trying to convince you anymore. Your sanity is gone, and you cannot be convinced of your brainlessness.

Have fun with your paranoia. Leave the rest of us out of it.

It's getting to the point when a guy can't even read the comments section at this website anymore.

» RE: It's not 9:00 EST . . . Posted by: VannaLaRoche
» Bozo? Posted by: Scientz
» Hahahaha . . . Posted by: Scientz
» RE: Hahahaha . . . Posted by: Lauren
» RE: Hahahaha . . . Posted by: Scientz
» RE: Hahahaha . . . Posted by: Scientz
» This . . . Posted by: Scientz
» You presume so much, young man... Posted by: LeftWright
» Hilarious . . . Posted by: Scientz
» It really . . . Posted by: Scientz
» Well, LeftWright? Posted by: Scientz
» RE: Well, LeftWright? Posted by: bornxeyed
» Choosing this moment ... Posted by: Joshua Holland
» Perfect. Posted by: Scientz
» Perhaps this will help... Posted by: LeftWright
» RE: I read it Posted by: Crazy H
» RE: I read it Posted by: Scientz
» RE: I read it Posted by: Crazy H
» RE: I read it Posted by: Scientz
» RE: I read it Posted by: Crazy H
» RE: I read it Posted by: Krotos
» RE: I read it Posted by: Crazy H
» RE: I read it Posted by: Krotos
» RE: I read it Posted by: Crazy H
» RE: I read it Posted by: Krotos
» RE: I read it Posted by: Crazy H
» RE: I read it Posted by: Krotos
» RE: I read it Posted by: Crazy H
» RE: I read it Posted by: Krotos
» RE: I read it Posted by: Crazy H
» RE: I read it Posted by: Krotos
» Crazy H? Posted by: Scientz
» RE: I read it Posted by: Crazy H
ableism
Posted by: EKSwitaj on May 19, 2008 6:12 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why is using retarded as an insult acceptable on a progressive website?

» RE: ableism Posted by: davidrossi
» RE: ableism Posted by: dmak78
Crazy?
Posted by: Razst on May 19, 2008 6:18 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Can't you see that calling people names with opposing views is exactly what's wrong with this whole country man? Only when we can rise above these ploys and begin rationally discussing issues will we get our contry back.

» RE: Crazy? Posted by: Lauren
» Troll? Posted by: Scientz
» RE: Troll? Posted by: helenwheels
» In your opinion . . . Posted by: Scientz
» RE: In your opinion . . . Posted by: NWCrow
» Hmmm . . . Posted by: Scientz
This is the point
Posted by: autumnsdad on May 19, 2008 6:40 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The thing about the Truth movement is that they cling to the small picture. What about the helicopters? What about WTC 7?

The point is, not too many look at the day on the whole to see how all the things work together. So while this article is funny, it's also informative. To me, this was the best part, because it does a nice job of explaining the need for people to care about the small picture:

"At its heart, 9/11 Truth is a conceit, a narcissistic pipe dream for a dingbat, sheeplike population that is pleased to imagine itself dangerous and ungovernable. Rather than admit to their own powerlessness and irrelevance, or admit that they've spent the last fifty years or so electing leaders who openly handed their tax money to business cronies and golfed in Scotland while middle America's jobs were being sent overseas, the adherents to 9/11 Truth instead flatter themselves with fantasies about a ruling class obsessed with keeping the terrible truth from the watchful, exacting eye of The People."

» fantasies about a ruling class? Posted by: seandulac
uh....
Posted by: JoshuaLudd on May 19, 2008 6:50 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"The people who really run America don't send the likes of George Bush and Dick Cheney to the White House to cook up boat-rocking, maniacal world-domination plans and commit massive criminal conspiracies on live national television"

As the invasion of Iraq and rhetoric towards Iran most obviously prove, right?

Then, I guess we can just ignore that whole little thing Paul Wolfowitz helped cook up that calls for increased involvement of America in world affairs and a decrease in the role of all other nations.

The logic is really pretty simple: We must protect America, and to do so we must control to one degree or another the rest of the world, or as much of it as matters so that we can keep them from doing anything that would hurt America economically, politically, or even militarily.

How many other nations have 350 or so military bases outside of their own soil?

» RE: uh.... Posted by: Scientz
» RE: Yu-uh....! Posted by: Crazy H
Of Reason and Responsibilty
Posted by: Nicnic on May 19, 2008 6:53 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The saving grace of the 9/11 Truth Movement is thank god there is a group of people who are at least trying to grapple with an underlying reality that is systematically ignored by seemingly educated, patriotic, humanitarian and intelligent people.

That reality is:
1) Something incredibly terrible happened on 9/11 and more incredibly we still don't know on any scientific or proper investigative level exactly what happened except that some of us know it has changed everything
2) The investigative spirit of this nation fell absurdly and grotesquely disproportionately short of all reason and responsibility in trying to find out what happened; and
3) The American people have paid an unimaginable cost with no end in sight and have received nothing in return but the promise of bankruptcy in all its forms.

Whether the 9/11 Truth Movement folks are grasping at straws or barking up the wrong tree should be the least of concerns to anyone at this point. Ultimately, they are to be commended for reacting in some manner or fashion, if only emotionally, that befits the true American spirit. Anyone who condemns them out of hand in the wake of such faceless and transparent explanations to the greatest crime ever committed is displaying the same kind of ignorance and stupidity they are themselves accused of.

Every American should be feel proud and intellectually justified to question the events that have sent this nation into a spiral of self destruction. The single most resonating sentiment about this debate is "there must be something wrong with those that are content with the status quo", not visa versa.

Remember back to when you found out the depth of your ignorance; that boys really do like girls, etc. Now try to read through the events of 9/11. Put the horror out of your mind along with whatever pat and convenient explanations you've heard. Seek out the factual. Set your emotions aside and intellectualize the essential elements of what the so called "conspiracy theorists" are saying.

It's all there unless you choose to ignore it. There is a terrible insufficiency on all layers and sides of the debate to cast these doubts whether they are being correctly articulated or not. Who in their right mind wouldn't rather err on the side of reason and responsibility?

» RE: Of Reason and Responsibilty Posted by: kellysgarden
Great satire.
Posted by: Krotos on May 19, 2008 7:06 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Like global warming denialism or intelligent design, the 9/11 conspiracy theory is another one of those pseudo-scientific ideologies which seem plausible to people whose last science classes were in high school, but which virtually all specialists easily recognize as flawed and illogical.

That so many otherwise rational folks -- on the left, no less -- rank the opinions of talk radio hosts, left-wing activists, and cranks on what brought down the WTC higher than those of structural engineers, physicists, and other people who have advanced degrees in relevant fields and have spent their entire careers studying this kind of thing is yet another illustration of the endemic anti-intellectualism which plagues our country.

» Co-signed. Posted by: Scientz
» RE: Great satire. Posted by: CosmoViking
» RE: Great satire. Posted by: Krotos
» RE: Great satire. Posted by: CosmoViking
» Why is it . . . Posted by: Scientz
» He won't, because he can't. Posted by: Scientz
» I'm going to be honest . . . Posted by: Scientz
» RE: Why is it . . . Posted by: Crazy H
» These people . . . Posted by: Scientz
» RE: These people . . . Posted by: Krotos
» RE: These people . . . Posted by: Scientz
» RE: These people . . . Posted by: Krotos
» RE: These people . . . Posted by: helenwheels
» RE: These people . . . Posted by: Krotos
» RE: These people . . . Posted by: Crazy H
» Cum hoc ergo propter hoc! Posted by: Scientz
» RE: Christopher Bollyn ... Posted by: Joshua Holland
What is fact and what is fiction
Posted by: Alex Hidell on May 19, 2008 7:09 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I sure hope you've seen the movie Three Days Of The Condor, with Robt Redford and Faye Dunaway. It was made in 1975

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Days_of_the_Condor

but the plot is about a CIA book reader whose office is wiped out and he's the sole survivor and the intended target of that mass-murder. He read an article that predicted that the US would seize Saudi oil fields in order to maintain the world economy. That was supposedly a fictional exercise.

Please click onto the following news article :

Document reveals Nixon plan to seize Arab oil fields
'70s embargo sparked 'last resort' measure, says British memo

by Lizette Alvarez, New York Times

Friday, January 2, 2004
http://www.sfgate.com/ (go to archives)
Our military had plans to seize Saudi oil fields since 1973, and intended to keep those fields occupied for at least TEN years,

"The British (intelligence) warned in their assessment that any occupation of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Abu Dhabi might have to last as long as 10 years."

Now look at what Democrats running for the Presidency have been forced into saying about that ten year commitment our military is requiring,

Top Democratic candidates won't vow full Iraq pullout by 2013
Sept 27, 2007
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/09/27/dems.debate.ap/

and McCain won't leave definitely until after 2013,

McCain sees U.S. troops leaving Iraq by 2013
http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/05/16/america/16mccain.php

Sorry about this post to you but it sure looks like our military and war planners wanted this Iraq fiasco to happen in order to prop up oil companies for an ten year time span.

I could really go into depth regarding the similarities to the Gulf of Tonkin pretext for war in Vietnam and the Authorizations for Use of Military Force (AUMFs) that gave Bush his current 'war powers', but it all boils down to Congress abdicating their own war powers, sad to say. Right now the main one they have, as with Vietnam, is to cut funding for the operations. That is how Vietnam came to an end when you get down to it.

» I'm sorry . . . Posted by: Scientz
Our Entire Western Political System is Morally Bankrupt
Posted by: opmoc on May 19, 2008 7:12 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The failure of any mainstream politician or journalist to seriously question the completely ridiculous official government conspiracy theory of 9/11 - which defies the laws of basic physics - just shows how low we have become.

Well I've got some news. 9/11 was done by us. Human Beings did it. It may make you feel better to think that those human beings must have come from a culture even more evil than ours but it doesn't alter the truth, and it doesn't do anything to fix the problem.

Are you sure there is another culture even more evil than ours?

» But . . . Posted by: Scientz
» So let's just go Socialist! Posted by: Danny331911
willfull ignorance
Posted by: leafsong1 on May 19, 2008 7:13 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Tabibi sets up one strawman after another, knocks them down, and sets up in their place the figments of his own ignorant imaginings. He obviously has a very simplistic view of the world, and he resents any theories that might cause him think that he does not know and understand the simplistically flawed psychology and simplistically inferior mental powers and simplistically simple motivations of all the powerful people in the world. Tabibi would shave with Okham's Razor if he could. Such journalists are an assassin's best friend.

Easy isn't the question with the oil companies...
Posted by: Alex Hidell on May 19, 2008 7:39 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Results are. DoD had the planning for this pretext for war long ago; the 'war' ended in May 2003 per Bush's "Mission Accomplished" banner yet the occupation endures, as it must according to the leaked British intelligence document my original post mentioned, so we will remain mired in Iraq for the ten year time period that the British intelligence people estimated: 2013.

If the press wanted to inquire deeper you'd be hearing discussion of that document by Obama, Hillary, and McCain, and WHY 2013 is soooooo important.

Oil company profits and a 'winding down' from Peak Oil. Simple arithmetic there: since the mid '90s there's been around 10~12th power (1 trillion) barrels of oil recoverable in the world; divide that by a daily consumption of about 85 million barrels, projected to become 120 million barrels per day by 2020---we'll 'split the difference' and use 100 million or 10~8th power--and then do the final division, then divide that by 365 days in the year: the result is a bit over 27 years, so since the mid 90s we're looking at 2020 brick wall, with no product for oil companies to sell.

That scenario begs for rash action by all that the oil companies control.

Like a foolish article by Mr Taibbi, perhaps.

Your Interview with Salon
Posted by: dcm on May 19, 2008 7:44 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"The genius of the Russian system was its appeal to people's laziness. They said, "Look, get drunk, don't do any work at all, we'll give you just enough money to live, and we'll take care of everything else." That's what Soviet Russia was all about: Live in your shitty village, we'll give you cheap vodka, and we'll take care of your medical bills, and you don't have to worry about all that other stuff. They counted on the fact that Russians would rather wallow in their own shit than organize and protest anything that's actually happening in their country. It is really kind of similar to what's going on here. People bitch and moan, but basically all they really want to do is sit in front of their televisions and watch the football game." - Taibbi

You're right Matt, we should all shut up. I mean all we have is physics and facts on our side. Now you might have humor on yours if (1) you were funny or (2) this was something you can laugh about.

If We Added a Few Songs ...
Posted by: just john on May 19, 2008 7:48 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This would be great musical theater!

The first thing I thought when reading this was how to get in touch with the author to get permission to use it as the basis for a show.

And for a break in the middle, we can have actual "911 Truth"ers give their rebuttals, live! It'd be a laugh riot!

Any of you fellow commenters want first dibs on that last part?

Help Me! I Can't Stop Laughing...
Posted by: Marshalldoc on May 19, 2008 7:49 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Matt Taibbi's hysterical hypothetical, and the reader's comments that follow, are akin to throwing a smoke bomb into an old building and watching the bugs come scuttling out of the woodwork!

Too funny!!

» I say we burn em Posted by: seandulac
Very well written, Matt...
Posted by: kellysgarden on May 19, 2008 7:59 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
it's just too bad you are totally wrong.

» Says you. Posted by: Scientz
» RE: Says you. Posted by: Obijuan
» RE: Says you. Posted by: helenwheels
» No, more like just ... Posted by: LeftWright
» RE: No, more like just ... Posted by: Scientz
» RE: Says you. Posted by: Scientz
The best way to cover up a real conspiracy...
Posted by: sausage on May 19, 2008 8:09 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
the best way to cover up a real conspiracy is to gather up all the kooks, nuts and schizoids inhabiting the fringes of academia and the idle investor class. (Think Perry de Haveline, heir to the de Haveline aircraft fortune and coiner of the libertarian pejorative "barking moonbat," Wavey Gravy, guys like that: rich enough never to have had to work a real job a day in their lives but moneyed enough for the MSM to pay attention to them.)

Feed them enough real information, with a dash of misinformation and voila! a phony conspiracy theory is born, which their friends in the same social class can knock down--safe in the knowlegde that their conspiracy-theorist friend is a little off kilter but he's a fabulous tennis player and wonderful conversationalist at dinner parties.

If there is any real conspiracy surrounding the events of September 11, 2001 it is that the people in this administration did in fact know of warnings, that Osama bin Ladin and his merry band of martyrs was planning something big and failed to prevent it.

Lame, Utterly Lame
Posted by: cbrouillet on May 19, 2008 8:11 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This attempt at humor, certainly not analysis is pathetic.

So is Alternet, Z Magazine, The Progressive, The Nation's abysmal failures to look critically at the official story of 9/11, which has been so thoroughly discredited by intelligent, rational thinking people.

The argument that "Oh they are too incompetent to have pulled off 9/11" falls flat in the case that the official story is full of holes (stand-down of the military on 9/11, $100,000 sent to Atta by Pakistan's ISI, multiple exercises being conducted that day, top Al Qaeda operatives on CIA's payroll) and has only worked because of the failure of the press (including the so called "Left Press") to report on the basic facts about 9/11 which expose it as a thoroughly "botched special operation." Certainly there was never an intention to bring down the three major buildings with two airplanes. What was the original plan? I don't know, but something went seriously wrong- which is why there is a Truth Movement. Not only that, but the Movement is growing daily, as more and more people get access to the facts.

Cheney like Napoleon believe that you can't suppress the truth, they have relied on "delaying it until it no longer matters."

As long as the Left Press continues to aid the corporate press in covering up the most damning facts about 9/11 and the obvious evidence that the government has lied, destroyed evidence, covered it up, while using 9/11 to launch illegal wars, trash our Constitution, Bill of Rights, expand the National Security State into a Global Police State, I would say that the Left Press is doing us all a great disservice and losing its credibility.

Carol Brouillet
Publisher- Deception Dollar
Organizer of the San Francisco International Inquiry into 9/11
Green Party Congressional Candidate in CA District 14, on a 9/11 Truth, Impeachment, Peace platform
Host- Questioning War- Organizing Resistance radio show

» Best of luck Carol! Posted by: fsuthai
» YOU GO CAROL Posted by: edgeofnowhere
» RE: Lame, Utterly Lame Posted by: AJAXXXXX
Bye Bye Alternet!
Posted by: do on May 19, 2008 8:19 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This article is incredibly irresponsible, and is the straw that broke this camel's back in the decision to end my relationship with AlterNet.  To read intelligent discourse on the subject would be one thing, but this flagrantly insulting bullshit is the end of the email newsletter for me.  I have been questioning your integrity and your credibility for a while since I signed-up for the newsletter a few months back, but this article is just too blatantly absurd in insulting the people who are seriously trying to find the truth about the event that has ultimately turned America into Amerika in one fell swoop.  

The "new Pearl Harbor" mentioned in PNAC's letter was not made up, nor is their capability to pull off the event that has rocked this nation into allowing the powers that be to toss our Constitution right into the toilet.   Because of 9-11, they've been able to pass laws that erode our nation's very foundation of freedom.  If Mr. Taibii is legit, and not a shill for PNAC, he's incredibly naive to believe that 9-11 wasn't orchestrated by the people who have profited immensely since it happened. Let's see, the oil people came into power in 2000 and since then, oil has more than doubled in price, and the Iron Triangle and the PNAC gallery have profited in hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars. I'd say, "Mission accomplished!"

One flaw mentioned in this ludicrous diatribe is that cell phones did not have the capability to reach their intended callers back then.  They've just attained the ability to do it lately.  Another flaw in the official story is that WTC 7 fell in its own tracks in 6.5 seconds due to "fire damage."  Uh huh, sure.  No other buildings in history have fallen into their own tracks due to fire except those three that day.  The towers were built to withstand planes crashing into them without them collapsing.  Just these two inconsistencies (of many!), pose legitimate questions to the official story, and to have them shamed and ridiculed on a site like AlterNet is so irresponsible that I have no reason to read anything you guys have to post.  You simply don't deserve my time and attention anymore.  

So bye-bye FalterNet!  I hope other subscribers follow suit and stop supporting such irresponsible bullshit.  

» RE: Bye Bye Alternet! Posted by: Snowpuppy
» Why do you Hate America? Posted by: Danny331911
» RE: Why do you Hate America? Posted by: Crazy H
» RE: Why do you Hate America? Posted by: AJAXXXXX
» RE: I Feel Sorry For You Posted by: edgar_michel
» RE: Bye Bye Alternet! Posted by: AJAXXXXX
911 happenned because they made it happen.
Posted by: Ottomatic on May 19, 2008 8:22 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What Liberal Media?
It's Corpirate owned,
all of it.
Blame it on the Democrats!
Racism
Neo-slobs
Rovien, Straussian, Henry the K
Diplomates.
The Fact Remains.
What is, is.
Get over it.
Move on.
Surge
Purge
REBOOT!

What Nonsensical Trash - The Author is brainless
Posted by: Snowpuppy on May 19, 2008 8:24 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is pathetic nonsense.

Why is Alternet offering a forum to idiots like Matt Taibi?

READ THIS: 9/11 CONTRADITIONS by David Ray Griffin
Numerous key elements in the Official story that utterly contradict one another. You don't have to believe in conspiracy theories to see that this is a total cover-up.

Corporate and monied interests have wanted to convert America to fascism since the 1930's. Naomi Wolf has documented that since 9/11, the US government has implemented every step historically taken by despots to impose fascism on a free democratic society. If you don't think that's happened: you're not paying attention. The Patriot Act and the Military Commissions Act are 90% of the way there.

Get your Free Tin Hats here..
Posted by: EncinoM on May 19, 2008 8:24 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
nm

Golly Gee
Posted by: GollyGee on May 19, 2008 8:26 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There has never been a full investigation of 9/11.

Until there is one, no one can say what happened.

The longer a real investigation is postponed the more evidence is lost, more witnesses die, memories become dim and confused.

If things happened on that day according to the official story, why no investigation?

That could put all arguments to rest.

And please, no more Matt Taibbi. He's nobody. He knows nothing.

Turned Off
Posted by: tean on May 19, 2008 8:36 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Turned off to this website... If your writers have to put people down for wanting a new investigation, if they choose to fit us in tin foil hats, to push us towards the fringes of society... how could I ever come back and support this organization? Instead of pulling down the truth movement itself, how about an addressing the facts? Do you know how hard it is to look at what information is out there, and have to stand up and say... I think we need a new investigation? It takes allot to ask questions about such a sad, and unresolved topic. But to tear members down of the same progressive community is just wrong. “Truthers” as we are called are made up of every day people, good people who are willing to stand up for what’s right... the truth.. no matter what criticism comes their way. Truthers are the victims family members, victims are active and retired military, Truthers are pilots, they are scholars, they are engineers, and architects. Truthers are government officials, and firefighters. I am a "truther”

» lunatics who benefit no one Posted by: tweedster
Keep up the good work, Matt
Posted by: Markel on May 19, 2008 8:42 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A brief note to say I think this article is right on track, and I appreciate that some are still willing to "call a spade a spade", and "call a jumbo jet a jumbo jet" when it comes to the 9/11 Truth Movement.

Please, Matt, don't be discouraged by the predominance of vitriolic comments in response to your article. There are many who are thankful for your willingness to point out the implications of the 9/11 Truth movement, and how illogical and improbable it would be for the events to take place the way the Truthers proclaim. As challenging as it might be for the events to have taken place as protrayed in the "Official Story", it is way more improbable that they occured as the Truthers represent. Occam's razor comes in handy here.

Mark

» Fair enough. Posted by: Scientz
» RE: Fair enough. Posted by: MelStL
» 13 acres of runway Posted by: brunowe
» RE: 13 acres of runway Posted by: MelStL
» Let me offer the following Posted by: brunowe
» RE: Keep up the good work, Matt Posted by: Danny331911
» Misuse of Ockham's Razor Posted by: leafsong1
9/11 Truthers and those that support them Hate America
Posted by: Danny331911 on May 19, 2008 8:43 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
1) The 911 Truthiness Movement, represented by Alex Jones, David Ray Griffith, Dylan Avery of Loose Change fame, and a few other interesting people who refuse to be identified and flee persistent questioning... 4th Army Psychological Operations veterans working for private public relations/CIA contractors, would be my guess.
------------
Your guess is wrong. PSYOP personnel working for either 4th POG or any defense contractor including the CIA are expressly forbidden any targeting of US citizens period. We have for years allowed the Irhaabi-een to run-a-muck on the internet because we were so afraid that some 12 year old in Colorado might come across our counter propaganda efforts and somehow be influenced by it. It didn't matter that any messages we may put out were in the Arabic, Urdu, or Pushtu languages. Nor did it matter that the messages were specifically designed to persuade certain foreigners that were thinking of murdering as many innocent civilians (and maybe even a few soldiers) to stay home instead.

You "L"ibs out there need to get a grip and start realizing that we are a great country and with very "few" exceptions have dedicated Americans working tirelessly to protect America and our allies from a truly evil threat. Stop blaming America first.

And as far as the 9/11 Truthers go... They can take their fake patriotism, their leader Ron Paul, and anyone that supports them and jump into a cesspool. That is were their Hate America attitude belongs. And as long as Ron Paul lacks the guts to blast his 9/11 Truther supporters and rebuke them in the strongest terms possible, he does not deserve to hold "ANY" public office nor does he deserve the right to call himself an American.

» Dream on, Sunshine Posted by: leafsong1
wow!
Posted by: skydog on May 19, 2008 8:54 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The posters are funnier than the article itself! It only goes to show: the biggest sheep think it's an affliction everyone else suffers but themselves.

competency
Posted by: wefearwhatwedontunderstand on May 19, 2008 9:03 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Do you conspiracy theorists really think that our government officials were actually competent enough to pull a very very complicated job like that off? Yes, the neocons are fearmongering war profiteers, but capable of all that? It was their being so full of themselves and focusing on their evil agenda to create a fascist state when they first got into office that distracted them from all the signs that they should have been paying attention to that allowed this to happen, not their competence at secretly planting bombs in one of the world's busiest building complexes or anything like that.
Now, if one wants to look at conspiracy theories, why don't we look at the CIA drug cartel as the perpetrator of that action? That makes much more sense to me. Lord knows who oversees the CIA, and they are the ones who keep passing airplanes around so that the ownership is untracable, you know, the same ones that have been used for taking poeple to dark corners of the world for secret renditioning, and then those same airplanes have been found loaded with cocain and heroin in Mexico and South America, but the pilots somehow escape the authorities - and they are tied to a small airport in Venice, Florida, where the guys with the flight schools partied their asses off with Mohammad Atta...
Conspiracy theories to cover up the real, much more believable conspiracy - see here:
http://www.madcowprod.com/10092007.html
These guys are the real dark side of this nation's power structure, the real black-ops pros. This was all about the illegal drug and arms trades, in conjunction with their secret operations to destabilize foreign governments, which they are very good at, so good that they decided to practice a little of their craft on the homeland to drum up some good weapons sales.
The real conspiracy is that those guys went to flight schools in Florida and then hijacked planes and flew them into buildings, with the financing of our own CIA, AND GOT AWAY WITH IT.

» RE: competency Posted by: opmoc
» RE: competency Posted by: wefearwhatwedontunderstand
» RE: competency Posted by: opmoc
» RE: competency Posted by: wefearwhatwedontunderstand
same old same old
Posted by: JoshuaLudd on May 19, 2008 9:06 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Same old thing happens with this latest article as happens with all others about 911 around here.

Anyone who in any way suggests that the official story might not be entirely true, anyone who asks for a modicum of objectivity, or anyone who admits there are unanswered questions about 911 is painted as a "conspiracy nut" or "truther" or any of the numerous derogatory, dismissive terms available.

As rabid as some of the people who believe 911 was a conspiracy are... many of those who believe the opposite are as blindly dogmatic.

More drivel from the liberals
Posted by: YHShVH on May 19, 2008 9:11 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is how fascism comes to power, with the liberals rolling over, in denial of the agenda.

Calling anything related to 9/11 "hilarious" is absolutely grotesque
Posted by: JakeB on May 19, 2008 9:16 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Regardless of where one stands on this issue, you suffer from extremely bad taste and judgement for making light of what happened on 9/11.

Fact: There has been no truly independent, comprehensive investigation of what happened on 9/11.

Fact: 9/11 Commission Executive Director Philip Zelikow had close ties to the Bush Administration that represented an absolute conflict of interest.

Fact: Harper's Magazine, a mainstream publication, described the 9/11 Commission report as a "whitewash" in a cover story published in 2004: http://www.harpers.org/archive/2004/10/0080234

Since we haven't yet had a comprehensive, independent investigation of what occured on 9/11, we cannot RATIONALLY conclude that we know the truth of what happened that tragic day. To suggest otherwise, as Alertnet and Taibi do, is to engage in magical thinking.

» Ya know... Posted by: JoshuaLudd
Golly Gee
Posted by: GollyGee on May 19, 2008 9:30 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Just John: He knew enough to get a response out of you, didn't he?

Mission accomplished!


That would make Taibbi an even bigger fool.

With much less effort lots of nobody, know-nothings get responses from me everyday.

Unless one person working alone pulled off 9/11 it was a conspiracy.

And so far the least believable conspiracy theory is the official one.

So let's all get push for a real, honest investigation. Until there is one there's no use disputing anything.

» RE: Golly Gee Posted by: AJAXXXXX
Drinking Bill Maher's Kool-Aid
Posted by: davidjellison on May 19, 2008 9:38 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As a long time reader of Matt Taibbi and his excellent analysis of government graft and malfeasance, I am sad and disappointed that his critique of the 911 Truth movement is juvenile, one-sided, and uninformed.
It is surprising that a journalist of his caliber, who normally relies on facts and evidence to present his analysis, has not analyzed ANY of the evidence or facts in the 911 government cover up.
Much like fellow left-wing gatekeeper Bill Maher, he trades on a veneer of liberal cool while actually being just another tool of the corporate media.
In his next article, perhaps Taibbi could explain the collapse of WTC 7, the collapse of the entire U.S. air defense system on 911, and the collapse of his journalistic integrity.

» RE: Drinking Bill Maher's Kool-Aid Posted by: davidjellison
» RE: Drinking Bill Maher's Kool-Aid Posted by: davidjellison
Forget 9/11 (it didn't happen) and if it did it was America's fault
Posted by: Danny331911 on May 19, 2008 9:54 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This lunacy that portrays the Bush Administration as either intensionally or by incompetence allowed the 9/11 attacks to take place just needs to be thrown into the sewer pit, period.

Why is it that articles that try and give the appearance that they are so well researched omit the real reason our law enforcement and CIA (TWO DIFFERENT ANIMALS PEOPLE) were unable to stop the 9/11 (ISLAMIC FASCISTS) on September 11, 2001.

Other than the Islamic Fascists, who are to blame for the 9/11 attacks and the dozen plus attacks against either us, our embassies and our military over the last 25 plus years? We need to look no further than certain Congressional Democrats. Namely Frank Church, Otis Pike and the infamous Senator Robert Torricelli of New Jersey, who led the charge in the mid-1990s to prevent the CIA from hiring unsavory characters. If any American should be held responsible for ALLOWING the 9/11 attacks to occur it is them.

They led the way in legislating a wall making it illegal for the CIA and the FBI to talk to one another let alone share intelligence. For example; the FBI knew that there were Arab Nationals in the US learning to fly jetliners but had little interest in knowing how to land. The CIA knew that an Islamic Fascist Terrorist Group was actively planning another attack on US interests but did not know how or where. It could have been against our embassies like in Kenya and Mozambique or it could be like the 1993 truck bombing of the World Trade Center in New York. However, because it was literally illegal for the two US agencies to share info the obvious 2+2 never took place. It just could not legally happen.

So if you are looking for conspiracies then look at the Democrats like Frank Church, Otis Pike and Robert Torricelli. You can also get quite-a-bit more of the same from the appeasers currently running for the Democratic ticket.

It is so sad seeing so many
Posted by: owlbear1 on May 19, 2008 9:55 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
forcing themselves to re-live that morning.

You're all wrong.
Posted by: Knowmad on May 19, 2008 9:57 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I did it. Sorry.

» ixnay on the onfessioncay!!! Posted by: hurricane hugo
» JDFU??? Posted by: Knowmad
» RE: JDFU??? Posted by: hurricane hugo
» RE: JDFU??? Posted by: Knowmad
LOL at this thread
Posted by: hurricane hugo on May 19, 2008 9:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I didn't realize Kevin James had this much competition here.

jdfu!

no one hired you...
Posted by: bbruhwiler8 on May 19, 2008 10:09 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
no one hired you non-scientz to spew your lack of facts, but you still do it, and you do it vehemently. yet you are by far in the minority. how much longer are you going to stick to your craziness? what drives you to ignore the facts and questions? is it out of pure ego?

the 9-11 Truth movement is working. everyone around you is learning to question what the main stream media is casting our way. you are becoming more isolated with each day. must be a lonely feeling.

» And who do YOU work for? Posted by: just john
» In the minority? Posted by: Scientz
» RE: no one hired you... Posted by: EncinoM
Fuck the Doomed
Posted by: trout on May 19, 2008 10:12 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Remember when Rolling Stone used to be hip, about 30+ years ago?
Whatever happened to Hunter S.Thompson anyways ?
Oh, right.

From the Toronto Globe and Mail, 26-02-05:
'Hunter telephoned me on Feb. 19, the night before his death. He sounded scared. It wasn't always easy to understand what he said, particularly over the phone, he mumbled, yet when there was something he really wanted you to understand, you did. He'd been working on a story about the World Trade Center attacks and had stumbled across what he felt was hard evidence showing the towers had been brought down not by the airplanes that flew into them but by explosive charges set off in their foundations. Now he thought someone was out to stop him publishing it: "They're gonna make it look like suicide," he said. "I know how these bastards think . . ." '


JFK, RFK, MLK, Lennon, Reagan, 9-11.
Lone whacko, case closed, move along, no story here.
GW has taken his old man's M.O. and one-upped it in the most reckless fashion;
capping the whole stunt with the most incompetent cover-up of all time.
Only the collusion of the 'converged' media has allowed it to hold water this long.

» RE: Fuck the Doomed Posted by: EncinoM
» But . . . Posted by: Scientz
Taibbi Nailed It
Posted by: jgilb on May 19, 2008 10:16 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"At its heart, 9/11 Truth is a conceit, a narcissistic pipe dream for a dingbat, sheeplike population that is pleased to imagine itself dangerous and ungovernable."


About 3 paragraphs into this article, I started to imagine the frothing herds hammering out the TRUTH in the comment section.

Thanks for not dissapointing me.

» RE: Taibbi Nailed It Posted by: richieb
» RE: Taibbi Nailed It Posted by: bloggulator
blurider
Posted by: blurider on May 19, 2008 10:28 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So much crap flying here - beginning with a pretty crappy article by Taibi who usually writes and researches seriously if not perfectly - that i hesitate to even try to get a word in....
However, it seems quite obvious to me that Matt made up his mind long ago and has never looked back. I've never seen even a few words in any of his writing and ranting, of serious consideration of what the truth movement is actually about. He insists on portraying truthers as a monolithic group all espousing exactly the same 'conspiracy'. As usual he fails to acknowledge that the event consisted of lots of small conspiracies whomever the perps might have been and U S 'insiders' could have been nothing more than enablers. It could have been as simple as to consist of something like an insider getting information about our war games schedule to the cave dwelling, would-be terrorists and someone else cooperating by keeping law enforcement off their backs while they were here training to fly and behaving outrageously.
Perhaps 'they' intentionally pulled building #7 to cover up their cooperation and took advantage of other opportunities as they arose or perhaps Silverstien made the decision and no one minded the loss of records and evidence.. Of course bldg #7 would had to have been wired up in advance but that could be a matter quite apart from conspiracy #1 - quite a conspiracy in itself.
It could even have been all controlled by terrorists in caves in Afghanistan and favored by the laundry list of over 100 coincidences that helped these guys to succeed, then it could have been co-opted and covered up by our government or a very few conspirator/insiders and used to justify all the terrible consequences that 'they' clearly chose to burden and enslave us with.
The 9-11 investigation and published record is quite obviously a cover up and could have been as broad based or grandiose as the 'conspiracy' might have been. The cover up could also be just another layer of ad hoc conspiracy.
'W' himself need not to have been involved at all, or maybe not at the beginning. Tarpley views him as having been caught off guard on that day, then threatened while flying around scared and discombobulated. Cheney could have coordinated a couple of simple matters like I posit above or could have been the maestro of an elaborate conspiracy - no matter it's still a conspiracy and a cover-up.
'Truthers' individually could be wrong about every other detail, In fact beyond such a simple, ad hoc conspiracy even Popular Mechanics could be right about most details and we still have a 'let-it-happen', kind of conspiracy and a fairly elaborate conspiracy to cover up the truth of the day's events and it's still a conspiracy acting against the best interests of the American people and finally much of the rest of the world.
Even such a small, ad hoc, let-it-happen conspiracy and the ensuing 'investigation/cover-up' easily justify a renewed search for the truth. Even guys like 'scientz' deserve the benefits of just such an investigation, conducted in a way that satisfies the curiosity of the caring public, objectively, scientifically and without politics.

Matt, you're 'smart' (in a Rolling Stone kinda way) and your article would be cute if it weren't a distraction from a serious matter but you're dead wrong in your conclusions. I call them 'conclusions' generously since I've never seen any evidence of any thought process or argument leading up to said conclusions. I strongly suggest that you use your journalism skills to investigate the movement AND, most importantly the details of all the irregularities that occurred on that day. Then, eliminate 99.9% including all the theories and details you don't like and you'll still be left with a nagging curiosity - maybe even be tempted to join the movement and the campaign for a new investigation.

Bombs did not bring the WTC down.
Posted by: douglashoyt on May 19, 2008 10:38 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
An "earthquake" machine developed by N. Tesla and demostrated in NYC by Tesla was the mechanizism which destroyed the WTC's.

I think this is the best solution to the quandry of explosives v. other methods.

nikgreen
Posted by: bloggulator on May 19, 2008 10:45 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Matt Taibbi should be utterly ashamed of himself. Furthermore, why the hell is Alternet promoting this kind of infantile weaseldom on their site? Nearly 3000 people were killed on that day and this jumped-up Taibbi character, in effect, is using 6th grade schoolboy "humor" wrapped up in a pathetic strawman argument to poke fun of the dead. What kind of a perverted sicko is this guy?

Taibbi, what is so wrong with asking question of our officials who are promoting a story with more holes than a Koran after US Army target practise?

When it comes down to the wire, Taibbi is either doing none other than appeasing global terrorism. Or he's living in cowardly denial.

Flying at 500+ mph is easy...
Posted by: richieb on May 19, 2008 10:47 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm a private pilot, who lives in NYC area. I was downtown Manhattan on 9/11 and I witnessed the second plane go in (I was on Water St, on 48th fl, less than a mile away).

September is one one best flying months as far as the weather is concerned. That morning was crystal clear, with hardly any wind. At 9:000 AM there would be hardly any turbulence, even down low at 1000ft. Furthermore heavier airplanes are less affected by turbulence.

Second, airplanes are in fact easier to fly at higher speeds. The controls are more sensitive and there is a large margin over wing stall speed. Flying slowly is hard (like when you try to land).

Hitting a target like a large building would be rather simple. Just aim the airplane at the structure....

But, I'm guessing you are not interested in physics....

» Shhhhhhh . . . Posted by: Scientz
» geeze! Posted by: wefearwhatwedontunderstand
» RE: geeze! Posted by: richieb
» RE: geeze! Posted by: Crazy H
» RE: geeze! Posted by: richieb
» RE: geeze! Posted by: Crazy H
» RE: geeze! Posted by: wefearwhatwedontunderstand
» RE: geeze! Posted by: Crazy H
Hale Aloha
Posted by: HaleAloha on May 19, 2008 10:48 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The “Truth” that is too scary to believe…
When I was a kid and had seen a movie that gave me nightmares that woke me up in the middle of the night where the shadows in my bedroom cloaked monsters that might tear into my flesh; I would hide under the covers and repeat to myself, “they’re not really there, they’re not really there” until I fell asleep again.
To the folks that don’t even want to consider the ever widening body of evidence that contradicts the official report on the events of “9/11”: as scary as it might be, it’s time to wake up and poke your head out from under the covers.
“9/11” happened in the light of day. A careful and objective review of the actual news footage taken during that day reveals dramatic inconsistencies between what you can see with your own eyes and what a bunch of talking heads and authors of the official report on the events would have you believe. You don’t need to be a “liberal conspiracy nut” or even an architect to see those inconsistencies. All you have to do is suspend what you think you know for just a few moments; long enough to understand that real monsters are alive and well and walk the earth every day in plain sight, smiling, shaking hands and kissing babies. Hiding under the covers won’t help and won’t make them go away.
To the history students: remember that the history of the “civilized” world contains a continuous stream of conspiracies created by those with enough power and money to enact them; elite, powerful, insecure bullies so afraid of not having enough that they sustain themselves by sacrificing the lives, health and happiness of those beneath them on the food chain so that they might hold on to or regain their wealth, power and security.
Don’t believe me, look it up… if you have the courage.

» RE: Hale Aloha Posted by: luzmejor
rn
Posted by: mnatra on May 19, 2008 11:37 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is unfortunate how such a serious event in our history should be written about in such sophomoric fashion.
The US has never needed a big excuse to go to war
Bush could have started a war just based on the bombing of the US navy ship in 1999.
What this is really about is the quest for more control of the Mideast oil fields, because the oilmen in Washington know that the world is running out of cheap oil.So why not grab it?
What I don't understand is why it took the new administration so long to start the attack?

Your Attitude
Posted by: Nicnic on May 19, 2008 12:29 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I was addressing your self professed knowledge of physics. While what you say may be true in a microcosmic way, in so far as you limit the discussion it seems bent on obfuscating the totality, and to what purpose?

The day of 9/11 presented the world with the single greatest collection of anomalous circumstantial happenstance and absolute bungling on all professional levels. It has cast this country into weakness and despair, and has proved only to be a misguided impetus with which to spread such calamity, death and destruction around the globe. The sums of money that have been spent and the lives that have been lost in the name of "whatever it is you insist upon" is incapable of being accurately tallied. We have perpetrated the beginning of our own undoing in the name of something that has never received any kind of independent formal investigative or scientific inquiry. The number of trusted civilians, government and corporate employees, and military personnel that committed individual acts of non-performance, sheer stupidity, reckless endangerment and outright incompetence is exceeded in its staggering proportion only by the mind blowing fact that not a single one of them was ever even reprimanded.

Now I don't know what you expect from your government and for your two cents at tax time, but most Americans expect and deserve a lot more than your blather about insignificant physical observations concerning airplanes.

AHHHHHHHHHHHH! 9/11 Truth Movement has Failed Yet Again!!
Posted by: dmak78 on May 19, 2008 12:44 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Look, this is an excerpt from a book with a larger theme which is basically that the American people let themselves be so distracted by the wrong ideas that we eventually we become so deranged that we loose sight of the real task of doing something to change the course of our history for the better.

With that said the article is simply a satirical play on what would have to have occurred in order to draw the current conclusions of the 9/11 Truth Movement that the Bush/Cheney junta orchestrated the whole thing. It reflects back the sheer absurdity of such a simplistic explanation. The scope of the article is dedicated ONLY to that conclusion and nothing else.

He is criticizing the 9/11 Truth Movement for that conclusion exclusively.

He doesn't say there was absolutely no conspiracy, nor does he say anything about ther not being a cover-up, nor does he claim that the legitimate pursuit of truth around 9/11 is a crazy project.

There is no disputing that they didn't benefit from 9/11, there is no disputing that they may have known about it in advance. The only thing directly disputed is the idea that they were the masterminds, which despite all the questions we may have about 9/11, there is still no direct evidence of that.

Listen everyone, there are legitimate questions, but they mainly surround issues around a cover-up of negligence or advanced knowledge, both of which are crimes against humanity.

The 9/11 Truthies always fall back to who benefited, well damn, a lot of people benefitted, especially the unorganized group we now call al Qaeda and bin Laden.

ALSO, and this is the most important of my points, is that the 9/11 Truthies always bring up that issue about a controlled demolition, which in light of they always seem to conclude that it was a false flag operation perpetrated by none other than Bush/Cheney and the neo-con gang. If one were to use their faculties of rational thought, instead of using their own eagerness to add even more evil on to evil people, they might just stick to the idea that we have questions, not answers.

The question is legitimate, could those jets bring down the buildings the way they did? This is hotly debated amongst scientists, but it goes without saying that even in the event of a controlled demolition, it still does not implicate Bush/Cheney and the crew. It simply raises the question of who set up the building to be demolished in advance. If it were a group of Islamic terrorists, well that would need to be covered up because it highlights an even larger degree of negligence on the part of the intelligence and security agencies given that they would have had to infiltrate even more than they did. Another explanation could be that the buildings have been pre-wired for demolition, secretly, for whatever reason (for example needing to demolition a building that would have just burned and burned and burned in the event of something like a jet flying into it).

I could go on but the point here is that the only thing that holds the grand conclusion together is a controlled demolition of the buildings, which could very well have happened, but does not necessarily implicate the known neo-cons in and around the White House. It ONLY raises the question of a cover-up of negligence and/or foreknowledge.

The bigger point here is in line with the theme of Matt's book, which was stated above and I believe the point is clear. We have questions, many many many questions about 9/11, but if we allow ourselves to be swept up in grand conspiracy theories that make no logical sense whatsoever, then we will miss opportunities to do progressive work in politics and society. The current conclusions of 9/11 Truth are counter-productive to getting some answers, because now anyone with a question can be labelled a nut.

» logical conclusion Posted by: dmak78
A poor attempt at COUNTER-INTELLIGENCE!!!
Posted by: Idunno on May 19, 2008 1:02 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Again Alternet shows it's true colors and throws propaganda at us to make the American voters believe that it is absurd to think that Cheney is blatently evil and a foot soldier in the attempt to secure a ONE WORLD ORDER. ABSURD.... right? I look at other counter-intelligence stories in the media every day.... Like ANY political story... All propaganda to make us think that there are two political parties out there to choose from, and that these politicians work for us, and are totally looking out for our interests... the American people. To think otherwise would be ABSURD.... right? The best propaganda comes from the most trusted sources... Believe it.

» how dare you Posted by: wefearwhatwedontunderstand
My deeply meaningful post
Posted by: sunnywater on May 19, 2008 1:09 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
First, I am a total nutjob.

Second, Taibbi, I am convinced, doesn't put stock into the Official 9/11 Commission Report. He's got a product to sell, and a good job to keep. I understand. Keep cashing the checks Matthew.

Third, Taibbi worships HST.

Fourth, Anyone who takes Alternet, Taibbi, or myself seriously, is too dumb for help.

Fifth, I worship my girlfriend.

That's all amigos..have a super-bitchin' day!

» RE: My deeply meaningful post Posted by: sunnywater
Fourteen Points
Posted by: progressiveview on May 19, 2008 1:14 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Check out this article for some information and analysis on the official government reports;

http://www.bentham-open.org/pages/
content.php?TOCIEJ/2008/00000002/
00000001/35TOCIEJ.SGM

Please note you will need to copy and paste this link into your browser, as Alternet would not allow it to be sent as one line.

» RE: Fourteen Points Posted by: Joshua Holland
Cute! Now try the same treatment on Watergate and Iran/Contra!
Posted by: eroded47095 on May 19, 2008 1:20 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm so TIRED of all these fake conspiracy theories that never turn out to be true!

American Idol, GTA III, Janet Jackson's tittie...
Posted by: Iconoclast421 on May 19, 2008 1:53 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
They all "came out" after 9/11.

So when Matt says

"A conspiracy like the one described by 9/11 Truth would only be necessary in a country where the people are a threat to actually govern themselves effectively"

he ignores the possibility that americans might have been able to govern themselves effectively if it were not for the constant mindnumbing crap called "entertainment" shoveled into everyone's brains by the very same companies who profit every time the public is stampeded by events like 9/11.

To me, it makes perfect sense that a country this decadent would be having inside jobs and false flag events pulled against it all the time. This is what happens when you let a bunch of drug companies and defense contractors "conspire" to control your favorite means of entertainment. And it certainly does not help to deny even the motive for such control.

What I dont understand is... if the American Empire really is truly at its twilight, and Matt acknowledges that, then what in blazes makes him think our proverbial Emperor wouldnt do some pretty crazy things in his final hour of power???

maybe Mr. Taibbi will look into the facts,
Posted by: conspiraseer on May 19, 2008 2:07 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
instead of choosing to distance himself from it by trusting what has been proven to be lies all along.

I hadn't taken him to be the run-of-the-Pentagon Hearst/Operation Mockingbird yellow journalism type, before now.

Maybe he'll actually listen to what engineers, architects, pilots, CIA agents like Robert Baer, ex-presidents, ex-governers, and yes: co-chairs of the 9/11 commission, have come to understand: that seeking a real investigation is not kooky, but ULTRA-URGENT!

Does he also think Operation Northwoods is our imagination?
the bombing of the U.S.S. Liberty not proven to be led by Johnson?
and the Gulf of Tonkin NOT a scam?

Maybe he's going to come around look into the facts, not the proven-false official conspiracy story.

Another edition of the 'tedious argument, of insidious intent.'
Posted by: rockpicker on May 19, 2008 2:39 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is not news. This article is a contrived distraction.

The news of the day can be found on rense.com.

Look up "Rumsfeld: "Why Not Another 911"

Alternet is sawing off the limb it's sitting on.

Dick Cheney planned 9/11?
Posted by: Sam C on May 19, 2008 2:50 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Is this the same Dick Cheney that mistook a hunting companion for a quail?

Thanks For the Warning!
Posted by: D. Shenary on May 19, 2008 3:01 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
After reading this excerpt from your new book, The Great Derangement, I will certainly not purchase an expansion of such drek. I clearly failed to see the humor or irony of this excerpt. The foolish concept that the neocons are too incompetent for such an undertaking is ludicrous and false. I can only speculate that the title "The Great Derangement" is self referential.

No one questions 9/11 was a conspiracy...
Posted by: ceraiteri on May 19, 2008 3:05 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
so why question people who question just how deep this conspiracy goes? And why would Tabbi feel the need to create a more unbelievable scenario than the one that we all witnessed? Just imagine being the bug-eyed fly on the wall who absorbed the actual dialogue of the actual conspirators (whomever they might have been). Lord what a bunch of loonies they must have sounded like.

» How is this for Lunacy: Posted by: dmak78
Alternet is funded by the bad guys
Posted by: EmmanuelGoldstein on May 19, 2008 3:12 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I remember when this site was a decent place for a free-thinking individual hang out. Now it is filled with factually devoid articles that poo-poo real research and offer nothing but ad hominem attacks.

One would guess that Alternet does not know its audience, as comments on 9/11 stories are always overwhelmingly supportive of the 9/11 Truth movement, but sadly it is more likely that they know their audience quite well - and so do their shady paymasters. Alternet, and several other "left-wing" publications get much of their funding from CIA-connected organisms like the Ford Foundation - and if you don't believe that the CIA funds left-wing media, read The Cultural Cold War by Frances Stonor Saunders.

Unfortunately for useful idiots/disinformation agents like Matt Tabbi and publications like Alternet, nobody is buying this crap anymore. The internet has allowed people to find the facts about 9/11 for themselves and completely circumvent the Emmanuel Goldsteins of the major left-wing publications.

Please read this honest and fascinating article published by In These Times about how progressive publications get their funding
The New Funding Heresies: What everyone knows (but no one will say) about funding the left - http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/2697/

This is a good place to start about The Ford Foundation The Ford Foundation and the CIA: A documented case of philanthropic collaboration with the Secret Police - http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/FordFandCIA.html

» Connect the dots, dude Posted by: Joshua Holland
Mr Taibbi ignores legitimate scientific questions
Posted by: regans on May 19, 2008 3:17 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yes, like most Americans across the political spectrum who aren't emotionally equipped to handle the harsh realities they know will eventually be exposed, Matt is ignoring the scientific and logistical impossibility of the official conspiracy theory on 9/11. I agree it's unfortunate when 9/11 Truthers muddy the waters with their personal suspicions and speculations about who did what and why. At this point, we don't have to prove what did happen on 9/11, we need only prove what did not happen (i.e. the official conspiracy theory). That has already been accomplished and now needs only to be publicized through grassroots action. While these kinds of thoughtless articles are common in right-wing circles, I think it's interesting how many more of them are popping up in progressive media lately. Perhaps they sense the number of Americans who question the official conspiracy theory is approaching critical mass, and they're getting scared. Anyway, it's always good for 9/11 Truth to make it into print, even if it's to be ridiculed. As Leonard Cohen says, on some level at least, "Everybody Knows," and article's like Taibbi's get people squirming.

Sad
Posted by: carolus on May 19, 2008 3:27 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's a sad day for Alternet and another sad day for the US. Take care.

6,000 rule 6,000,000,000
Posted by: seandulac on May 19, 2008 3:31 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"fantasies about a ruling class"

In his new book, "Superclass: The Global Power Elite and the World They are Making", David Rothkopf clearly describes the math and reality of the consolidated power. I watched as he told a group at Stanford that some 6,000 people in the 'Superclass' rule the rest of the people on the planet.

He make little snickering jokes and said that it is good and right that 6,000 should rule the other 6,000,000,000. His conclusion was, hey if the 6,000 own it all then we should all strive to work for the 6,000.

As an American and an entrepreneur that sort of elitism gets under my skin. I do not respect the Queen or any monarchy, nor do I find anything good or right about such disproportionate wealth distribution.

I see them killing our dollar, and killing freedom in the US. I see our way of life in the middle class in the US under threat from those Rothkopf seemingly worships.

Maybe the author of this hit piece against freedom of thought in the US wants to lick the boots of Rothkopf's rulers, but I for one do not. I would rather live with bravery against ridicule from those in power, and those that enjoy mocking from the kings court.

The author of this story is really a kings jester, here to cast insult and cheap attacks to anyone that would dare speak ill of the ruling families.

Disgusting.

9/11 was a wake up call to those that are brave enough to live in the land of the free. Of course the WTC building were blown up, and of course it was done in order to change the direction the US was on. Remember that direction anyone? Breaking new ground of innovation every day. Massive wealth moving into the hands of the silicon valley middle class? Remember the since of hope and achievement for the betterment of man.

And what road is the author of this silly nannying mud slinging story proposing? He is saying, "don't look at any evidence from 9/11". "Take my conclusions and don't think for yourselves." "If you try and actually look at any evidence and think for yourself you will be attacked and ridiculed."

So much for that prediction
Posted by: brunowe on May 19, 2008 3:34 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Look for this article to be pulled by mid-day as the negative comments continue to mount.

» RE: So much for that prediction Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: So much for that prediction Posted by: Joshua Holland
APPEASING TERRORISM IS NOT AN AMERICAN VALUE.
Posted by: bloggulator on May 19, 2008 3:36 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A vitally important smoking gun re. the 9/11 attacks is as follows. Unfortunately for us all, the corporate "weasel-media" are too cowardly and chicken to address the absurdities:

The reaction(s) of the Bush Administration and top Pentagon etc. officials in the wake of the attacks are 100% inappropriate and out of character with what one would have rationally expected, had the attacks bee truly what they claimed, namely an unexpected, out-of-the-blue operation by foreign nationals.

WHY????


Out of the lengthy list of incredibly incongruous reactions by our most senior officials, is the deliberate evasion, refusal, and balking re. any investigation into America's worst crime, for 411 DAYS after it happened. When BushCorp finally gave its reluctant mealy-mouthed go-ahead, the resulting "inquiry" was directed by a former senior White House official (Philip Zelikow) in one of the most flagrant conflicts-of-interest imaginable. Then it was grossly underfunded. Then they imposed impossible time limits on the inquiry. Then Bush and Cheney invoked "executive privilege"and refused to testify under oath, and transcripts and records of their "testimony" was denied. The Commission's co-Chairs (Kean and Hamilton) both complained bitterly of the White House' and Pentagon's hostile and uncooperative behavior towards the "Commission" on every level. 90% of the evidence submitted before the "Commission" was disallowed, even vitally important first hand accounts from FDNY and NYPD members. Then NORAD changed their story 3 times (lying at least twice). Then the Commission used circular reasoning throughout and even LIED about the architectural design and structure of the Twin Towers in a pathetically bland attempt to "explain" how the buildings failed. And when material that was presented to the Commission didn't jive with their preordained conclusion, they simply ignored it (!), en masse. Kean and Hamilton have both since claimed that the Commission was "set up to fail". That is damning enough in itself.

The nature of the 9/11 "Commission" is just one reaction of the Bush Administration that is so bizarre under the circumstances, that fails so massively to be in accordance with what any sane and rational person would have expected in the wake of such a ghastly event. Is this the type of "investigation" that an innocent administration would invoke? HA!! Is this the way an administration would behave if they were committed to solve the crimes of that day, especially on THEIR watch? Not in this universe !

The inappropriate conduct of the 9/11 Commission and all their baffling obfuscations is but one of hundreds of weird, "inexplicable-under-the-circumstances" reactions by top officials. There are hundreds of others, equally incongruous, and the more stones one overturns, the more grotesque it gets.

The intellectual cowardice and pathological denial by the likes of Taibbi and the so-called "left" in the US is shameful and repugnant beyond all belief. They are the equivalent of Lord HawHaw, Tokyo Rose, Baghdad Bob, and Adam Gahahn; traitors and propagandists in our midst. It seems as if the well-heeled "left-gatekeepers" not only have their tongues firmly lodged up the backsides of corporate America, but are also simultaneously supporting and protecting serial criminals.

Matt Taibbi's stance is the equivalent to yelling at the bereaved: "9/11 happened, there's nothing you can do about it, so shut up, put up, pipe down and and live with it"... aka "na-na-na-naaaaah-na".

Matt: stop trying to be King Canute: the tide always wins in the end.

Author's reaoning points are strong indicator he shills for the conspiracy
Posted by: lynnwalker on May 19, 2008 4:06 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The author does make a few notable points, but the way this author discusses his objections to the 911 truth movement, such as overly imaginative and belittling remarks that lack logical or evidential support, suggest that the author is nothing more than a whore for the conspirtors. As you read his article (if you do), consider the possibility that the author is a disinformation officer. An intelligent analysis of the 911 truth movement would be based on verifiable facts, falsifiable premises, and logic based conclusions. Each of these elements are wholly lacking in this piece. This is nothing more than a play on your emotions. For shame, to those who fall for this intellectual fraud.

Looking Elsewhere
Posted by: 0005 on May 19, 2008 4:57 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As a person who has spent the last 5 years seeking every bit of evidence I could find about the 9/11 attacks, I feel deeply insulted by this sham of an article. Without doubt, Alternet knows of the cover up, so I ask: what is their motivation for this atrocity of an "article"?!

Thanks, but not really. Alternet has exposed themselves as unfactual, shill even. Seems they are desperately aiding the cover-up of 9/11. Pathetic and disgusting.

I'm looking elsewhere for real news.

Sorry, I don't agree
Posted by: radagast_23 on May 19, 2008 5:26 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
While it is very nice for people to continue to believe that people "never" would do things like a grand conspiracy -- I don't agree. I am friends (genuine friends actually, though courtesy of my hobby -- and ONLY courtesy of my hobby - I would never have known them otherwise) with several liberal elites -- I've heard all of this reasoning before -- but I don't buy it.

Valerie Plame was thrown overboard -- and yet, no one but Scooter Libby was convicted -- no one seriously thinks that Scooter Libby acted alone or made a decision-- but there you are. That is one of several major examples of why I think in this case - the elites are wrong and this particular group of loonies is capable of a conspiracy. That, and of course the inconvenient Operation Northwoods from the 60s.

I have small claims to fame politically on a local level -- but one of them may be worth mentioning. We donated the computers that formed the network for the Albany HQ of Gore and Hillary's campaigns in 2000. Working on networking them, and listening to strategists talking who had "dropped by," I stood up, thoughtlessly, from running wire, and corrected their analysis -- telling them that Hillary would win NY by somewhere between 10 and 13% and Gore would win the state with less but would win narrowly, nationally and lose in the electoral college. The strategists politely thanked me for my views and went back to exactly the convo they were having before (Hillary would win or lose narrowly, Gore would win the state handily -- and we would win the electoral college but lose the popular vote by 3%). The day after the election, one of those strategists got my number from someone at the HQ that was packing up and asked me how I had been more accurate than they -- since whether Gore won or not -- he certainly had more votes.

I told them very simply -- I know everyone. By that I meant -- yeah, I have a few elites in my games and among my friends -- but whether the home game, or gaming by Skype or at conventions, I have a lot more common people -- and my partner and I are well loved among them. It isn't every gay couple that has every guy who gets booted out by his wife show up on their doorstep -- it isn't every gay couple that is well known for caring and always being there. I will never forget answering the door at 10 pm to find a young friend, with his 3 year old son and tears on his face after he went home and found... well that isn't anyone's business. They love us, and they talk to us and we listen. Those are the voices that are right. They haven't failed since I got old enough to care back in the late 80s.

I'm still listening, and what I hear October 15 or thereabouts tends to happen in the election -- and -- what they think is generally right -- they have gut -- I have a terminal degree, I dropped my gut at about the 2nd bachelor's level -- but they have gut -- and gut is usually right - on everything.

So, I listen. And let me tell you something -- Democrat, independent and Republican -- most of those people believe, whether with admiration or disgust or horror -- that there was a conspiracy, and that the very least Bush knew it.

Their track record outdoes any other one I know, so, I do too.

Kind thoughts,

Reyn

The 9/11 conspiracies truly are absurd.
Posted by: Father Time on May 19, 2008 5:31 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Look up popular mechanics and their version of the supposed facts that 'prove' the 9/11 story is a myth. Look up skeptic magazine and their criticism of the conspiracy theories.

The way I see it is that if the government was truly as organized and evil as the conspiracy guys claim they are/were they wouldn't need to pull off 9/11 for any reason. If they wanted to convince us of terrorist attacks there are much more cheaper and easier ways than to collapse two skyscrapers. (Oh and don't tell me this was done for money because we're talking about the guys who run the mint, the IRS and fort knox).

The Form of the Argument
Posted by: omniadeo on May 19, 2008 5:46 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
1) I know how power really works in America. 2) Any suggestion that 911 was an inside job runs counter to what I know. 3) Therefore: I don't need to engage in any debate over facts and their interpretation.

The link between 9-11 Deniers and Holocaust Deniers
Posted by: ad_kay on May 19, 2008 5:53 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Matt hinted at the original source of these absurd 9-11 claims--nearly all can be traced back to a couple of Holocaust deniers, Eric Hufschmid and Christopher Bollyn. Why do you think they keep trying to smear the owner of WTC-7? Because he's Jewish. Gullible dupes like Griffin and that Brigham Young physicist Dr. Steve Jones are being conned by asswipes who want to implicate teh Jooooooz.

Explain this please
Posted by: Vic on May 19, 2008 6:29 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ok, if you believe the two main towers were dropped by planted explosives, please explain how the "conspiracy" actually worked.

Firstly, for anyone who has seen the towers falling, obviously the point of failure, therefore, the point where the "explosives" were placed, was at or near the point of impact for the planes.

That being accepted, then the planes' pilots MUST have been given specific instructions as to which floor to hit. Explosives set off above or below the point of impact would have been obvious and therefore the use of explosives would have been exposed.

If the pilots succeeded in hitting their target (which severely stretches my credulity right there) then there are further problems. Surely, some of the "explosives" would have been destroyed or damaged by the impact of the planes. Surely the probablility existed that some of those explosives might have been blasted out of the building and discovered later on.

Don't talk to me about temperatures and physics and free fall. Talk about a probable conspiracy that actually planned on doing it this way. How likely is this? Not very.

» RE: xplain this please Posted by: bloggulator
» RE: xplain this please Posted by: Krotos
» RE: xplain this please Posted by: Crazy H
» RE: xplain this please Posted by: Krotos
» RE: xplain this please Posted by: Crazy H
» RE: xplain this please Posted by: Vic
» RE: xplain this please Posted by: omniadeo
» RE: xplain this please Posted by: Vic
» RE: xplain this please Posted by: Crazy H
» RE: xplain this please Posted by: ad_kay
» RE: xplain this please Posted by: leafsong1
disinformation and social psychology by the usual suspects
Posted by: ian_lama on May 19, 2008 7:05 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
the piece, due to its obvious lack of rationality and common sense logic, has a (not-so) hidden agenda, ie it is designed to get a strong response, as a type of consumer survey. same goes for the site as a whole.

American for liberty, truth, and justice
Posted by: Michael_D on May 19, 2008 7:22 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them. Ephesians 5:11

google video:
clinton chronicles
coke bush
iraq for sale
no end in sight

bodyofwar c om

patriotsquestion911 c om
pilotsfor911truth o rg
911pressfortruth c om
911 Mysteries Part 1 - Demolitions (Full - 1ed.)

revolutionmarch c om

Taibbi must be a shill.
Posted by: bloggulator on May 19, 2008 7:51 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is where Taibbi's article is so utterly misleading, weasly and shill like: he equates "inside job" and "9/11 truth" with the notion that Bush and Cheney personally planned the attacks, which is NOT, REPEAT NOT what any serious student of 9/11 thinks.

More than likely, those who stood to benefit from a major event like 9/11 might have quietly requested some rogue element within the US military/defense community to "pull off something drastic"... such people do exist, and due to their mental makeup, they are usually found in positions of authority; there are well-placed/high ranking people with the access and mindset to be able to pull something like 9/11. Furthermore, such an operation would have most likely been pulled off by less than 25 people in key positions. Anybody else would have been so compartmentalized that they wouldn't know enough about the overall scheme to be able to say anything incriminating, or effectively blow the whistle. It has nothing to do with "government incompetence", which we are all familiar with, or the need for 100s or 1000s to be involved. Cheney for sure knew that something, unspecified but drastic, was going to happen in the weeks prior to the attacks; he was personally in charge of the war games going on that morning, as well as the operations in the PEOC under the White House. Bush, on the other hand, was "hung out to dry" by the Secret Service at the school in Florida... he reacted like a frightened little boy, a deer in the headlamps...

If the military had been allowed to follow standard procedure that morning, all 4 flights would have been challenged by the best, the most ready, and most highly trained F-15 and F-16 scramble crews on the planet. The Twin Towers would still be standing today, and 3000 people would still be alive. These first response pilots can reach 29,000 ft in a few minutes from the scramble order, and the fighter jets stationed at Andrews AFB, just a few minutes flying time from New York and DC would have intercepted those AA and UA flights well before they hit their targets. Why, one asks, didn't they? (By the way, the fact that the transponders were switched off did not disable the ability of military radar to track the commandeered flights).

Heres something to ruminate:
Why is it that some people cannot reconcile the ability of a rogue and highly wellplaced/skilled/psychopathic element within the military to be able to pull something like 9/11...... yet those same folk willingly swallow the notion that a group of 19 coke snorting losers whose best "pilot" couldn't even handle a Cessna in level flight could have single-handedly rendered the most powerful and well financed military/intelligence apparatus in human history powerless. Not only that, but for nearly an hour and a half in the most heavily-monitored and well-guarded airspace on the entire planet, these losers owned our skies.

Is smell a shill, and I smell a very phoney official explanation.

Lets investigate. The whole thing. NOW.

Ignorance is the downfall of all cultures and we are about to hit bottom.
Posted by: TFYQA on May 19, 2008 7:55 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"America will always be filled with half-clever hucksters who look for ways to live the fat life off the ignorance and loneliness of country rubes." – Matt Taibbi

EXECUTIVE RESUME

Alternet: Disinformation
Posted by: EmmanuelGoldstein on May 19, 2008 10:47 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm so happy to see all these great comments putting Alternet and Matt Taibbi in their places. Every time the editors of this foundation-funded disinfo site post a 9/11 Truth hit-piece they get bitchslapped hard by readers in the comments. It is hilarious to see hacks like Taibbi loose their credibly in real-time as the comments pile up. It must be embarrassing.

I Think it Time to Find Another Source for Information
Posted by: edgar_michel on May 19, 2008 11:40 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Alternet doen't want to dig for truth, their content to see business as usual continue as long as the money spigot fills their tub adequately just like the majors.

Debnunked... yeah sure.
Posted by: Father Time on May 19, 2008 11:57 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm not talking about just a lone article I'm also talking about a book too (and popular mechancics have addressed the articles saying they've been 'debunked')

Although it's funny you should call it junk science when there seems to be a shortage of real scientists who back up the 9/11 conspiracy theorists.

» No Shortage of Scientists Posted by: thornwolf
Crossing The Rubicon
Posted by: manderson on May 20, 2008 12:25 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Read "Crossing The Rubicon-the decline of the American Empire at the end of the age of oil", by Michael C. Ruppert, if you want a well-written, extensively footnoted and investigated look at 9/11.

Also, Tiabbi must not have bothered to read the Project For a New American Century documents, either, written in 1999, which state the need for a Pearl-Harbor type of event.

Also, check the EIA oil production figures since 2005...the EIA is hardly a liberal bastion. YES, the oil companies are jacking up the price, but that's because they're going to make money on the way up AND the way down---we're on the way down, as of Feb. 2006, and the oil that's left is going to be expensive to get out. Exxon WON'T be paying that tab---we will. I have to disagree with Greg Palast on that one.

Please, Matt...just write about Rev. Haggee...I DID enjoy that, since I think the Christian zombies will be the gun-toting tools (fools) of the Corporatists anyway.

Hilarious
Posted by: Eat Politicians on May 20, 2008 2:02 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Nice...the first part was a little slow but was sold a couple pages into it.

The comments page is like a performance art addition. I'm crying over here...

I swear 9/11 truth movement has to be CIA funded or something. But maybe this country is too weird for words, I can actually imagine that a group of die-hard OCD people that got bored with football or girls gone wild or whatever and decided to become "political."

Who knows? They sure are intense. Like a Una bomber club. I thought people like this were supposed to buy shacks in Montana and mailbomb people?

What a distraction...

dennis
Posted by: Zuma on May 20, 2008 2:11 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
kucinich 9/11 stocks investigation

in case it hasn't been mentioned...

Funny but naive
Posted by: saltoafronteira on May 20, 2008 3:38 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Besides being funny, this article is utterly naive.
I dont know if 9/11 was, or not, a false flag attack. But that is not the issue here.
The issue is that, unlike the author's assumption, an american administration effectively CAN (has the means) to make such a false flag attack without being caught or, at least, with very few chances of being caught.
Your CIA, along with MI 5 and Mossad (the usual suspects), are doing manipulation for decades.
If such a false flag attack was to be executed, of course it would be by a third, or fourth partie, probably oblivious of the real means and clearly manipulated.
it has been done for years, only not in the USA itself !

It's the Laws of Physics, Stupid!
Posted by: thornwolf on May 20, 2008 3:52 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The author of this slanted piece can attempt to distract attention from the facts by babbling on about the psychology of the so-called "Truth Movement" but nothing can obscure the laws of physics.

The WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition. That's the reality of the physics. You can argue about people all you want, but physics is physics. Steel melts at a certain temperature, and flaming jet fuel (which is nothing more than kerosene) is a good thousand degrees (F) too cool to do the job.

Something else melted the steel. Something sliced those huge steel beams into neat equal-length pieces. That same thing was powerful enough to cause some of the steel to remain molten(!) under the rubble for months(!) following the event. Kerosene could never do that. You can't srgue with physics.

I don't know who conspired to bring about that horrific event, but clearly some powerful global entities must have, not some rag-tag band of malcontents who didn't even really know how to fly airliners.

I don't know how the actual conspirators, whomever they are, got the explosives into the building, but clearly somehow they did. It is reasonable to suggest that some kind of high-level assistance or other sort of complicity would be necessary to accomplish that. I don't know what that high-level assistance consisted of, but it must have been a factor.

The apologist who wrote the idiotic intro to the comedy piece isn't fooling anyone here -- except other right-wingers with blinders on, I suppose. Alternet ought to take a hard look at exercising some editorial oversight. I mean, can any wacko get published here? Or only right-wing wackos?

» "Physics is physics" Posted by: fanny666
Truthers responses far outweigh the Matrix Dwellers
Posted by: H.R. Chuckn'stuff on May 20, 2008 8:04 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Just look at the detailed, sourced, rational arguments all the truthers are offering, versus the pejorative, ad hominem, reductionist generalizations that the Matrix Dwellers are offering as their rationales.

Clearly this favors the Truthers. Their sheer amount of contradictory information, alone, should compel everyone who cares to look into the issue.

Anyway, this is one of those once-in-a-generation issues where, no matter how much you know, you will never be able to convince anyone else. Everyone must convince themselves. Everyone must come to this truth alone. Because it's not just about the external truth of the attacks but the internal truth of all the history and mythology that we have built our lives upon. It is about, if you'll pardon the trite metaphor, truly unplugging from the Matrix.

It's like Da Mayor said in "Do The Right Thing":

"Those who know, won't tell. And those who'll tell, don't know."

Ponder.

Seek.

Love.

It is absolutely bloody AMAZING
Posted by: Squarehead on May 20, 2008 8:57 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is absolutely bloody AMAZING; that stories on 911 after 24 hours can have 507 comments, while stories on e.g. the environment, or energy, or starvation and economic RUIN attract 20 to 40 comments.

Wise up folks.

» Have you considered . . . Posted by: dustdevil
Silly nonsense
Posted by: ibolyap on May 20, 2008 10:02 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Come on people, that is total bull. Stop wasting your time and pay attention to the election. Help get someone elected who will be good for america. Grow up.

From the author
Posted by: Smogg on May 20, 2008 10:23 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So I just woke up this morning and read the comments, with amusement naturally. Most amusing is the notion that there are no "facts" in the dialogue, while the endlessly linking Truthers are full of them. Well, let's debate that, one fact at a time.

It's a FACT that if you believe that Larry Silverstein really was talking about pulling the buildings down via his "pull it" comment, that Larry Silverstein, therefore, would have had foreknowledge of this whole insane scam.

It's a FACT that if he had foreknowledge of this scam, that he would therefore been an accomplice to both the largest mass-murder in American history, and the greatest insurance fraud in American history.

It is therefore a FACT that if he were such an accomplice, and "pull it" referred to a controlled demolition, he would, via his "pull it" comment, be spontaneously confessing his involvement in two of the greatest crimes in the history of the free world in front of a reporter openly broadcasting his statements over the radio.

Now explain to me the physics of that. Explain to me why a conspirator would confess such a thing -- particularly when so much trouble was apparently taken to keep things a secret. I'm really interested to hear this.

» RE: From the author Posted by: EncinoM
» RE: From the author Posted by: dustdevil
» RE: From the author Posted by: Smogg
» Sacrificial Lambs Posted by: dustdevil
» RE: Sacrificial Lambs Posted by: Smogg
» RE: Sacrificial Lambs Posted by: witchjug
» RE: Sacrificial Lambs Posted by: EncinoM
» RE: Sacrificial Lambs Posted by: Smogg
» RE: Sacrificial Lambs Posted by: witchjug
» RE: Sacrificial Lambs Posted by: Smogg
» RE: Sacrificial Lambs Posted by: witchjug
» RE: Sacrificial Lambs Posted by: dustdevil
» RE: Sacrificial Lambs Posted by: Smogg
» A Fallacy Posted by: EmmanuelGoldstein
» RE: Sacrificial Lambs Posted by: maturin42
» RE: From the author Posted by: H.R. Chuckn'stuff
» RE: From the author Posted by: Smogg
» RE: From the author Posted by: H.R. Chuckn'stuff
» RE: Your logic Posted by: dcm
my own short summary of arguments dismissing a conspiracy
Posted by: counterpoint on May 20, 2008 10:28 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Motives, conception, and execution are nonsensical:
If this had been planned as an excuse to attack Iraq, why not manufacture evidence putting Saddam Hussein's fingerprints all over it? Why four planes and several targets if less had sufficed? Why allow what amounts to an execution order against some of Bush's biggest donors headquartered in the WTC towers? Why make plans that necessarily involved having hundreds if not thousands of willing collaborators to mass murder of all ranks in agencies ranging from the FAA to Norad to engineers to fire departments, rescuers, and police if simpler plans would have provided as good or better an excuse for attack? Why did none of them ever confess? It makes no sense whatsoever.

The key theories are positively false:
Theologian David Ray Griffin peddles his widely believed notion that the WTC towers were brought down by 'controlled demolition'. Yet he fails to provide any workable scenario by which such a monumental feat could have been executed. More importantly, there is absolute proof that explosives played no part: Several independent seismic measurements conclusively show that explosions did not occur. No tremors, no explosions, it really is that simple. In some physical cases, evidence of absence is proof positive. You cannot hide shock waves, period. And we're not even talking about total TBTs like 'space beam weapons' or 'no planes' and such. (TBT is a technical term, spelled out as total bullshit theory).



None of the 9/11 conspiracy notions have stood up to scientific scrutiny:
Again, there's a simple way to check: if people have good evidence and testable theories to explain events they will submit them to peer reviewed science and engineering journals for publication. However, six years after the disaster none of the conspiracy scenarios has showed up in a science journal anywhere on this planet. Zero. Nothing. (But one activist wrote me, that's because the CIA infiltrated the editorial boards - I'm fearing for her mental health). It's proof that this stuff is without foundation as it fails to pass simple tests of validity.

The interesting question here is why the conspiracy lunacy still appeals to people.

From what I can tell that is has a lot to do with a basic propaganda mechanism employed here: the movement digs up loads of 'facts' that seemingly can only be explained in the context of a conspiracy. Logicians call it "anomaly hunting". Yes, those lists look quite alarming at first. But there are two things wrong with those lists.

First, these factoids make one forget the bigger picture (the mismatch of motives, conception, and execution, see above) which makes any scheme nonsensical to begin with, given what occurred.

Second, those who take the time to investigate each of those 'facts' will find that all of them are either false, misinterpreted, irrelevant, or even contradict what they are purportedly demonstrating.

Third, very few people have the time, the critical thinking skills, and the technical knowledge to evaluate the validity of those 'facts' presented and instead take them at face value and accept the false interpretation of the movement's prophets as gospel.

» what are your credentials . . . Posted by: dustdevil
» RE: what are your credentials . . . Posted by: counterpoint
» new investigation? Posted by: counterpoint
» RE: new investigation? Posted by: witchjug
» RE: new investigation? Posted by: counterpoint
» That is so not true... Posted by: brunowe
» RE: That is so not true... Posted by: counterpoint
» RE: That is so not true... Posted by: leafsong1
» RE: That is so not true... Posted by: counterpoint
from the author, again
Posted by: Smogg on May 20, 2008 12:52 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Matt Taibbi here. Predictably have been deluged with angry letters today. And as usual I can't get any of these correspondents to answer the simple questions posed in this article. So I'm going to repeat them one a time, slowly, and see what answers I might get here. There's one at the bottom of this page about Larry Silverstein. Here's another:

This excerpt didn't contain this part of the dialogue, but originally there was a section in which Ted Olsen calls and asks the conspirators to put his wife on one of the planes. Now, given that you all think my version of reality is absurd, can some of you please speculate on how you think it happened that Ted Olsen was convinced to sacrifice his wife to a horrifying, fiery death and then moments later coolly report the details of a fake phone call? Did someone call and say, “Hey, Ted… would you mind if we killed your wife and then subsequently asked you to cop to a phone call in which she pins her death on a bunch of Arabs with boxcutters?” How do YOU think that conversation went? Because if you think the phone calls were fake, it follows naturally that some version of such a conversation had to have happened. You don't like my version, give me yours! Tell me your plausible version of a world in which people participate in elaborate mass conspiracies after their loved ones have been murdered by the conspirators!

» RE: from the author, again Posted by: dustdevil
» There you go again . . . Posted by: dustdevil
» Frothing Posted by: EmmanuelGoldstein
» RE: Frothing Posted by: Whiskey
» playing intellectual whack-a-mole Posted by: counterpoint
» RE: from the author, again Posted by: maturin42
» RE: from the author, again Posted by: maturin42
This comment has been removed from the site due to non-compliance with AlterNet's community policies.
» Talk about poor logic! Posted by: fanny666
» Talk about straw man! Posted by: EmmanuelGoldstein
» Talk about bad Projection! Posted by: PointMan
» RE: Talk about bad Projection! Posted by: PointMan
» RE: You should be ashamed Posted by: counterpoint
» Huh? Posted by: EmmanuelGoldstein
here's one
Posted by: Father Time on May 20, 2008 4:58 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Name a way that would be cheaper and easier and equally effective."

Well for starters terrorists 'capturing' (and perhaps 'killing') former president Ronald Reagan, who was still alive at the time. And perhaps blowing up a random school (or three) along with it.

» RE: here's one Posted by: Father Time
An insider's view
Posted by: dukeofhazzard77 on May 20, 2008 9:12 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As someone who worked in the World Trade Center and was close by on the ground on the morning of 9/11 -- unlike, I would guess, most people commenting here and most 9/11 conspiracy theorists -- I can speak with authority on some things that have become subjects of outlandish speculation and accusations.

Let me say first that in the past 8 years I have been amazed by the complete lack of ethics or any moral compass of the Republican leadership, notably Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rove. The fact that they have cavalierly ruined Democratic politicians' reputations and lives by putting them in jail unjustly for political purposes, not to mention the many thousands of deaths they've caused in Iraq, which seem not to bother their consciences at all, I have to think it possible and even likely that they have been willing to do absolutely anything to gain and maintain power, up to and including murdering people. In the absence of clear evidence, all I have to go on is my gut, and my gut tells me first that the plane accidents of Mel Carnahan and Paul Wellstone--which both conveniently happened right before elections those men were favored to win--may very well have not been accidents at all. My gut also tells me to be very suspicious when I see how 9/11 allowed these men to take such absolute control of the reins of our government and what they did with that control -- push their hard-right ideological agenda down the country's throat and demonize anyone who criticized them.

All that said, many of the claims and suppositions of the 9/11 Truth movement that I've heard are just plain silly. I worked in 2 World Trade, and many times would go in on weekends to work. If people were bringing explosives into the towers with some kind of plan to detonate them, workers would have noticed that something was up. Trust me on that. This whole demolition fantasy is absurd. You're looking for crazy plots where there is no chance they existed. People only say the collapse of the buildings defied the laws of physics because they don't have another collapse of this nature to compare it to, understandably given the unique profile of these buildings and how they were attacked. Where exactly were these explosives supposed to have been hidden? That whole line of argument is ridiculous.

Another absurd allegation is that the planes were drones. One of my co-workers, as he was running out of the building, being evacuated after the first plane had hit, looked up to see the second plane hit our building. He clearly saw "United" on the side. So did many other people.

Here are the things that make me suspicious:

1. Bush's team would not listen to Richard Clarke's warnings about Al Qaeda.
2. Bush received a memo titled "Bin Laden Determined to Strike Inside US" and did nothing.
3. Colleen Rowley was shot down when she tried to do something about Zacarias Moussaoui.
4. Bush did not look surprised in that classroom when told that planes had crashed into the two World Trade Center towers. He simply looked nervous. If you were told that news and you were the president, can you imagine sitting there for 7 minutes, not seeking to find out more information or do anything about it?
5. The government flew Bin Laden's relatives out of the country ASAP, the president let Bin Laden get away at Tora Bora, and he remains hand-holdingly close to the Saudi elite, whose country supplied most of the hijackers and a lot of funding for the operation.

These things make me suspect that administration figures may have had foreknowledge of an attack. But the so-called 9/11 Truth people distract from all these legitimate questions with their ridiculous theories about explosives and drone planes, focusing all this attention on World Trade 7 etc. The circus they represent will not get anyone closer to the real truth, whatever that may be.

» RE: An insider's view Posted by: ATH
Taibbi arguments are fallacies
Posted by: EmmanuelGoldstein on May 20, 2008 9:38 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Since Alternet erased my above comment "due to non-compliance with AlterNet's community policies" I thought I would re-iterate my point.

Commenter claiming to be Taibbi: Your arguments about Larry Silverstein and the Olsens are fallacious distractions. Your offering is a stale technique used repeatedly by "debunkers". You would have been laughed off the podium in my high-school debate class. The ol' fallacy goes something like this:

9/11 Truther: What about the obvious demolition of WTC7?

Official Story Defender: If 9/11 really was an inside job, why didn't the conspirators [fill in the blank] instead?

9/11 Truther: What about the war games that were being carried out that mimicked the attacks?

Official Story Defender: If 9/11 really was an inside job, why didn't the conspirators [fill in the blank] instead?

9/11 Truther: What about the molten steel under all three towers?

Official Story Defender: If 9/11 really was an inside job, why didn't the conspirators [fill in the blank] instead?

etc ...

"If 9/11 really was an inside job, why didn't the conspirators [fill in the blank] instead?" is not an valid argument, it is a diversionary red herring used by poor debaters. We must stick to the facts we know, (like the war-games, molten steel, Building 7 collapse) instead of engaging in pointless speculation about how the conspirators could have done it better.

Like I said before, I'm really disappointed in Rolling Stone. This guy is obviously a poor journalist and doesn't deserve to have his byline appear under the same banner as the great Hunter S. Thompson, who thought the official story was a pile of crap.

Do you think Hunter S. Thompson was a conspiracy nut, Matt? I want you to answer that. Should Thompson have been ashamed of himself for questioning the official story?

funny like a bomb in the building
Posted by: remo on May 20, 2008 9:58 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
hilarious. to imagine conversation between those orchestrating an illegal war of aggression killing a million people in the land of oil., a war riding on the back of the conspired fires of 9/11 . But no belly laughs here. Belly ache. Belly scream at the atrocities under play. grist to the mill of justice unrequited. Of justice abused by the disgusting zelikow commission and nist reports and the floating bubbles of intrigue around chertof and belger and all these other shadow-humans involved in the greatest war crime of all.

» RE: funny logic Posted by: dcm
Taibbi, alternet... WTF?
Posted by: voicecoil on May 20, 2008 10:43 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Regardless of one's opinion of how it happened, we are still are talking about one of the most horrific events in history... and Taibbi is compelled to turn the debate into a Saturday Night Live skit? It's beyond insulting. The world is going to hell, we are deep in an illegal war that is creating victims by the millions and could spiral into the worst thing in human history, and Taibbi wants to get cute about the whole thing? What a precocious little class clown. Unbelievable! not to mention the fact that his overall gist seems to be... what... that the Tinfoil Hat League (plus the other zillion of us who think something was fishy about 911) are giving him a pain in the ass? I am getting so sick of reading Taibbi... The thing that always comes through in his writing is that he is thoroughly impressed with himself and his precious style. As a writer, and possibly as a human, he is an utter narcissist.

Why does Alternet run this piece? What the f*ck is so funny about this? It is just so beyond bad taste. The better writers found on this site should be ashamed to be remotely associated with this.

Anyone can be a wise-ass. No great skill required. So we'd all like to know, what is Taibbi's take, in some detail, on the 9/11 commission report? Does he think it is all 100% true? No? Well, OK, smart-ass, then what did happen? And not just your overall general sense of how global politics work, but point by point. Because those who benefit from this stuff count on people growing weary of sorting through details and reverting to generalization.

For that matter, what is Taibbi's take on the JFK whack job? Lone gunman? I suppose the mob, spooks, oilmen, military types and defense contractors were just too stupid, suburban, and listless to ever have been involved?

God, to reduce this whole episode and its debate to adolescent caricature... if it belongs on this site, than I don't belong here. If Alternet stands behind this article than I am through with Alternet, and I will write personal emails to as many of the other contributing writers as I can. I urge all of you to do the same.

» RE: Taibbi, alternet... WTF? Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: Taibbi, alternet... WTF? Posted by: PointMan
» RE: Taibbi, alternet... WTF? Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: Taibbi, alternet... WTF? Posted by: PointMan
WHY IS MATT TAIBBI GIVING THIS ADMINISTRATION 3000 MILES OF SLACK????
Posted by: bloggulator on May 20, 2008 11:16 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
.....WHEN ONE FREAKIN' MILLIMETER IS TOO GENEROUS?



Matt, A question for you: Can you answer it satisfactorily without weaseling out?

Since the attacks, according to the official story, were meticulously planned, the hijackers would have known the standard FAA/NORAD/USAF scramble and intercept protocol, which has worked perfectly, as far as we are aware, for many years. Pilots at numerous bases throughout the Eastern half of the US are suited-up and ready to fly at a moment's notice. An F-15 can reach Mach 2 and 29,000 feet altitude in a matter of a few minutes.

The alleged hijackers would have thus known they had no time left to reach their targets (post hijack), before being swarmed by military jets from bases in the most heavily guarded and monitored skies on the planet. (Switching off the transponders only removed the planes' identities from FAA radar screens; their blips were still visible on civilian and military radar at numerous locations).

The following air bases are but minutes scramble time from the routes of any of the 4 hijacked planes, some being almost below the flight paths (!): Syracuse A.N.G., Westfield A.N.G., Hartford A.N.G., Otis A.F.B., McGuire A.F.B., Atlantic City A.F.B., Willow Grove A.R.S., Bolling A.F.B., Andrews A.F.B., Langley A.F.B., Rickenbacker A.F.B., Yeager Airport, Newark A.F.B., Youngstown A.G.S., and others.... The alleged hijackers must have seen the historically prompt response by the world's top aviators as the major stumbling block against their scheme.

So, on 9/11, what happened? Flight 93 flew to Central Ohio (!) before heading back towards the East Coast. Flight 77 flew to the Kentucky border (!!) before heading back to the same city it took off from (!!!). The two planes that hit the World Trade Center also took indirect, but less circuitous routes, but even these two planes were in the air plenty long enough to have been intercepted by air defenses, according to the standard, well-practiced and often-executed procedures (averaging some 70 occasions annually).

OBVIOUS QUESTION:
Why did the hijackers elect to choose such inappropriately indirect routes between takeoff and target, knowing that US air defense procedures would have ensured that each plane would have thus failed to reach its target, and so rendering the entire mission a total failure? (Even if the planes had taken the most direct routes, they would have been intercepted if S.O.P was in place that morning)

GLARING INFERENCE:
Since the mission was 75% "successful", the only viable conclusion is that the hijackers had prior, intimate knowledge that the scramble procedures would be inactive to the point of ineffectual that morning. Otherwise, why would they even have bothered attempting such an otherwise unlikely-to-succeed scheme? The other inference, is that the entire "hijacker" story is either bogus or incomplete. Lets not go there here.

*

My other question, Mr. Taibbi, is "why are you firing your angst at the people who are asking the questions", rather than those who have haven't provided satisfactory answers to them? Name-calling those who are not satisfied with what they have been told is easy, lazy, requires no thought, and displays nothing but intellectual (and every other other form of) cowardice.

BTW, as an apparent "lefty", why have you effectively taken the side of the hardline right, represented by the Neoconservative movement and Bush Administration?

Just curious.

Rube Goldberg Rules!
Posted by: PeaceGecko on May 21, 2008 10:03 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Well, I'm a little late in the game here, but after reading nearly a hundred of the comments to Matt Taibbi's article for Alternet, I'm starting to be convinced that the vast majority of my fellow Americans (I no longer live in the U.S. but I still have retained my nationality, so far) are not only scientifically illiterate, but simply lack the most elementary ability to reason, and then some. I am utterly ashamed to be an American after reading the majority of these posts. If this characterizes the thinking ability of most Americans -- and to think that Alternet is supposed to be a "progressive" alternative news and opinion site, such that one would hardly want to even begin to imagine what nonsense would be found on a comment page for a mainstream media publication... -- then I think it would be better for me to renounce my U.S. citizenship and to switch my allegiance to a European Union country, just so that I will not have to "keep company" with so many demented, insane people on the other side of the Atlantic from me!
Now, I don't want to be rude, but this is simply beyond belief. To start, Matt Taibbi simply is doing what everyone should do when confronted with the numerous and complicated claims of the 9-11 conspiracy theorists, and that is to simply try the mental exercise of “putting oneself in the terrorists/conspirators shoes”. Clearly, the best way to say whether a conspiracy theory is at all plausible is to see whether, at the very least, the theory would make sense from the perspective of the would be terrorists/conspirators themselves. Such a thought experiment (along with a judicious application of Occam’s Razor) can very easily show whether a given conspiracy would even be workable at all (Think of it as an attempt to “reverse engineer” the conspiracy!).
Let me digress first. A great number of the commentators on this site keep claiming that Taibbi was using “straw man arguments”, but completely fail to specify what these straw man arguments are, or what the real) arguments presumably would be. All one has to do is to list the most common components of the most salient 9-11 conspiracy theories, the ones that are all over the internet, and then check them off one-by-one to see whether Mr. Taibbi does indeed address them in his humorous satire, or whether he is addressing some other claims that “9-11 truthers” don’t actually make: To start, you either believe that

• The twin towers and building 7 were brought down by a controlled demolition, or you don’t.
• People who claimed to have received cell phone calls from their loved ones on board the doomed planes were deceived by computer-generated faked calls of their loved ones, or you don’t.
• (Variation of above): People who claimed to have received cell phone calls from their loved ones on board the doomed planes are all liars who are actually part of the 9-11 conspiracy, or you don’t.
• The Pentagon was hit with a missile instead of an airplane, or you don’t.
• The plane that was supposed to have hit the Pentagon, but never did, was somehow diverted, and the entire plane (along with its passengers) was completely disposed of so that not a trace of them remains -- or they are now in a secret location, etc., etc., or you don’t.
• The majority of eye witnesses who claim to have seen a plane hit the pentagon rather than a missile were in reality all “plants” or “shills” who were actually part of the conspiracy, or you don’t.
• The 4th plane, the one that might have been headed for the White House, was actually brought down by a missile, or you don’t.
...to be continued.

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement