9/11 Six Years Later

Six years on...SF Bay Area event demands a real independent investigation for the crime of the century.

Got Truth?

Shine some light on the issues for a broader spectrum of ideas...

911 Research

Environmental Fallout

There are many unanswered questions about 9/11 as was pointed out by Project Censored a couple years back.

And recall that 9/11 is what launched the so-called "War on Terror." How's that going over in Iraq? And Iraq had what do do with 9/11? Hmmm. Nothing.

But public opinion has been consistently manipulated to connect the two. See Retropoll's work here and here.

See the link below for the critical thinking resources that challenge the official narrative of 9/11. Absent the ususal ad hominems, red herrings, straw persons, false dilemmas, appeals to emotion, and other fallacious attacks, the following alternatives may hold up better than you think.

Think for yourself and be as critical of the official views as you are of the alternatives. Also, recall my past interviews with the We the People Radio Network in previous entries (August 13th and September 4th of this year) for more history of false flags and propaganda in U.S. history. The common response to 9/11 discussions about U.S. Government complicity is usually a dismissive, "They would never do that kind of thing." But "they" have before. So we should consider what happens to us now in light of any possibility based upon reason and where the facts lead us, not blind obedience, jingoistic patriotism, or lemming-like follies.

In fact, many in the progressive community are among the loudest of the dismissive voices. However, it is interesting to note that these are the same people that say, and often prove, that the Bush administration has stolen elections (Greg Palast), lied about WMD's and security threats (Terry Allen), started illegal wars of aggression (Alexander Cockburn), chose countries to invade on the basis of their resources (James Ridgeway), used tragedy and hysteria to further their ends with relentless propaganda (Norman Soloman), suspended constitutional rights (Matthew Rothchild), and so on.

Yet on 9/11, the administration and government as a whole are to be trusted and believed as these same progressives suspend their judgement for that one issue and claim these "independent investigations" are fool proof. Even the commissions themselves, like FEMA and NIST, have stated their studies were inconclusive or yielded improbable results. NIST will not engage in public debate as they stated there would be no winning such things. These progressives also will not engage in public debate over the official dubious findings on 9/11 issues. These otherwise skeptical progressives say on 9/11, the administration and the governement at large are somehow credible, even though they are not at all credible in their behavior patterns on almost every other front.

Seems a bit peculiar to the thinking mind. That's some fine fantasy and wishful thinking at work. If 9/11 alternative thoeries are so ridiculous, why not have a debate and prove once and for all how silly anyone that challenges the offical view really is? The reality is we need more debate and open discussion on this critical issue, not more dismissiveness, avoidance, and ignorance. We need to choose truth as a process of being detatched from outcomes and find where the facts lead, regardless of what they end up telling us. We owe it to ourselves and our future as a nation so we can be prepared to answer to history for our complicit silence.