portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article commentary global

9.11 investigation

Left Denial on 9/11 Turns Irrational

Recent statements by Noam Chomsky and Ward Churchill show a turn towards the irrational amongst leftists who continue to deny obvious signs that 9/11 was an inside job.

Ever since the events of 9/11, the American Left and even ultra-Left have been downright fanatical in combating notions that the U.S. government was complicit in the attacks or at least had foreknowledge of the events. Lately, this stance has taken a turn towards the irrational.

In a recent interview, Noam Chomsky has made an incredible assertion: [There's by now a small industry on the thesis that the administration had something to do with 9-11. I've looked at some of it, and have often been asked. There's a weak thesis that is possible though extremely unlikely in my opinion, and a strong thesis that is close to inconceivable. The weak thesis is that they knew about it and didn't try to stop it. The strong thesis is that they were actually involved. The evidence for either thesis is, in my opinion, based on a failure to understand properly what evidence is. Even in controlled scientific experiments one finds all sorts of unexplained phenomena, strange coincidences, loose ends, apparent contradictions, etc. Read the letters in technical science journals and you'll find plenty of samples. In real world situations, chaos is overwhelming, and these will mount to the sky. That aside, they'd have had to be quite mad to try anything like that. It would have had to involve a large number of people, something would be very likely to leak, pretty quickly, they'd all be lined up before firing squads and the Republican Party would be dead forever. That would have happened whether the plan succeeded or not, and success was at best a long shot; it would have been extremely hard to predict what would happen. ]

More recently, Ward Churchill, under fire for his comments following the 9/11 attacks comparing the people in the WTC towers to "little Eichmanns", took a somewhat different turn to the irrational. This comes via an email from a friend. [I went to the Friday (3/25/05) night event which was organized by the so-called 'anarchist' AK Press people who in 'true anarchist spirit' only allowed written questions which they selected (i.e. censored) and handed to Churchill to read one by one. Needless to say my question as to how he reconciles the fact that his 'roosting chickens' thesis is consistent with the 'war on terror' mythology was not asked. A badly phrased 9-11 question did get through. He first said "as to what actually happened on 9-11, I'm open to different theories, I have not seen any evidence" (to which I would of course say - well look at it you idiot!) - or something to that effect - at this point there was scattered clapping - and then he added "But, the problem with the idea that it was an inside job is that it suggests that brown people are not capable of such feats and gives all the credit to the white man, another master race fantasy". Many people seemed to like this silly analysis - although a couple of people shouted loudly "that's ridiculous!". Anyway he clearly illustrated what a dolt he is, his past work notwithstanding.]

This happened in Oakland. The following day, while Churchill was speaking at the Anarchist Book Fair in San Francisco, someone yelled out to the effect that the people who are after Churchill are also the real perpetrators of 9/11. He paused for maybe two seconds, and responded to the effect that this was the same racist crap about brown people not being able to defend themselves. The audience gave him a standing ovation. Such a viewpoint parallels an article in New Left Review from Summer '04 in which a (self-styled) situationist group named Retort from the San Francisco Bay Area claimed the 9/11 attacks are evidence that outside groups can still strike at the dominant spectacle from the outside. The Reverend Chuck-O of Indymedia omnipresence, always on the prowl for anyone daring to discuss 9/11 skepticism and acting when he can to quickly end any such discussions, has also endorsed this view.

With all due regard to Chomsky and Churchill, and an absolute stance against any effort at censorship, we must not let respect for their past achievements or current efforts at repressing them stand in the way of clarity and the insistence on the truth. Chomsky condemns the actions supposedly undertaken by "Arab terrorists", driven by the injustices of U.S. foreign policy, though he also condemns the "reaction" of the US government to these attacks as opportunistic moves to legitimate imperialist expansion, a perspective widely shared in the American "Left" and even "ultra-Left". On the other hand, Churchill implicitly endorses these attacks as blows against the empire, something others like Retort are more willing to say outright. But both perspectives fully accept the official story as to who carried out the attacks.

To begin with, this shows an amazing willingness to fully accept the government story on the part of people who generally instinctively distrust anything coming from official sources, especially given the proven unprecedented tendency of this particular administration to lie, and especially given the extraordinary nature of the events of that day. And this belief comes in spite of the utter failure of the U.S government to present any real evidence to support its version of events. For example, it still uses a list of 19 alleged suicide hijackers whose ranks include several people who have come forth to say they are still alive.

But there is something even more deeply wrong. Brown people could no more accomplish what was supposedly done on 9/11, as claimed by the official story, than white people could, even super wealthy ones. The evidence from that day shows that the official account violates the laws of physics. Videos clearly show that as the WTC towers collapsed, material from the upper floors fell down through the remaining steel and concrete of the lower floors as fast as it fell through the adjoining air, requiring steel and concrete to provide no more resistance than air. Even if you can come up with some far fetched explanation how that's possible with a gravity-driven collapse created by the plane collisions and fires, you would have to explain why the upper floors meanwhile were turning to dust and small pieces, which would indicate they were facing massive resistance, assuming they were merely free-falling. Only demolition explains both phenomena simultaneously.

Indeed, the very notion that fires could have caused collapses is negated by the evidence. Testing by federal agencies found almost all columns experienced temperatures not in excess of 450 degrees F , well short of the 1022 degrees required to even weaken unprotected structural steel, let alone melt it. Videos show the fires burning fiercely for only a short period, especially in the second-hit South Tower, where the plane almost missed the building, hitting only a corner. Various photos and videos clearly show people standing in the impact zone, not something anyone could do in the midst of a steel-weakening inferno. Firefighters on audio tapes specifically talked of finding just small fires in the impact zone of the South Tower (WTC2), minutes before the collapse. Few people now realize that not only was Trade Center 2 hit less directly than building 1, but the jet-liner collision with building 2 occurred nearly 20 minutes after the day's first crash, the strike on WTC1. The simple fact that WTC2 was hit both less directly and well after WTC1, yet somehow still collapsed first just doesn't fit with official government explanations of "gravity driven structure-wide 'pancake' failures generated solely by commercial airliner impacts and the resulting fires" as the only causes. Think about it— common sense is something you don't have to get from official expert sources. Much, much more evidence exists, references are provided at the end.

Any rational discussion of the evidence would have a hard time concluding that the official explanation of the events makes any sense. But Chomsky's statement (referred to earlier) tries to write it all off as "unexplained phenomena, strange coincidences, loose ends, chaos,..." as if quantum theory trumps the laws of mechanics even in the case of bodies far larger than the sub-atomic particles this theory is pertinent to. Meanwhile, the Churchill perspective simply ignores the facts and attacks doubters as racist for implying brown people are not capable of the super-human feats that had to take place for the official account to be true, as if anyone is. To me, this shows a high degree of desire on the part of many icons of the left and even ultra left to want to believe that what happened on 9/11 was exactly what we've been told happened. Is this conscious participation in official lying? Is this an attempt to fit reality into some sort of package which conforms with an analysis which is deemed to be beyond questioning, a sacrosanct agenda? Is this conspiracy theory aversion run amuck, as if the ruling elites never meet behind closed doors and, yes, conspire to formulate policies and decide upon actions to deal with problems in the system's operation? Is this the left deciding that a niche on any ship is worth keeping, even if it is the Titanic?

Whatever the reasons are, to me they indicate a deep sickness within both the left and the ultra left. Denial of the irreconcilable contradictions inherent in the "official explanations" for the events of 9/11 works to legitimate the phony "War on Terrorism", based upon utterly false pretexts. The left cannot accept the official story for the events of 9/11 and at the same time mount an effective opposition to the war, let alone act to promote the basic social change essential to human and planetary survival. The only viable global terror organization is that of the United States. This "war that will not end in our lifetimes" is at base a thinly veiled pretext for continued expansion of US geopolitical influence. We inhabit a country whose exploitative way of life is the centerpiece of a terminal and lethal world social structure. We more than any posses the means and motivation. Terror is the tubercular blanket we proffer to the world— conceived, funded, generated, and controlled from "Global Ground Zero," The United States of America. The events of September 11 and their far reaching consequences are an assault upon human-kind and the world itself. Meanwhile, the suspension of fundamental civil liberties here in the United States is but the first step in the systematic erasure of any trappings of the world's noblest 'democratic experiment' which has been from its inception a disingenuous exercise in genocide, biocide, and self-effacing hubris.

In the past, institutions which proved themselves sclerotic in the face of historical changes were bypassed by those desiring a new world. This is what happened to the Second International after World War I, when its various national components endorsed participation in the grand imperialist slaughter. It happened again to the "Old Left" in the '60s. And maybe it's time it happened to the anarchist and libertarian socialist movements as well.

References: (no particular reason to the order, nothing and no one is perfect)


(select nerdcities/guardian Main index link, several excellent articles on the WTC collapses as well as the Pentagon)


(excellent articles on the airliners supposedly involved on 9/11, Pentagon witnesses, physics of Pentagon attack, and conspiracy theory)


(lots of good stuff on all things 9/11)


(excellent stuff on WTC demolition, including many videos)


(amazing photos of WTC. Also check out News Junkie Scott's daily list at Baltimore IMC, best daily news summary blog out there)


(very interesting stuff, on the cutting edge, good links list)


(video of appearance in Madison by David Ray Griffin, author of The New Pearl Harbor)


(articles on the history of al Qaeda as a CIA operation, especially good pieces by Michel Chossudovsky and Chaim Kupferberg)


(good articles on WTC, Pentagon)

Jack Straw, May 4, 2005

bravo 04.May.2005 11:28


This is a very well-articulated article which disputes Chomsky's and Churchill's claims without discounting totally each as a person.

There is a group which meets every week to discuss 9/11, they show very good videos, share the latest news, and have discussion:

This Thursday:
6:45 pm - 8:45 pm
Surprise video/DVD showings
Laughing Horse Books
3652 SE Division St, Portland

 link to protest.net

CRACKS 04.May.2005 11:53


this 'tude displayed in the dialogue of these two speakers may be the result of a combination of left gate keeping and the reality of having to bend to the will of main stream media just to get your voice heard at all.
but a few tiny cracks in the " official " story are starting to show in the media of mass consumption , ie: most recently in c-span2 coverage of Griffin.


glad you mentioned "retort" 04.May.2005 11:57


>Such a viewpoint parallels an article in New Left Review from Summer '04 in which a (self-styled) situationist group named Retort from the San Francisco Bay Area claimed the 9/11 attacks are evidence that outside groups can still strike at the dominant spectacle from the outside.


see our critique of retort's very non-situationist gullibility:


BigFuckingDeal 04.May.2005 12:21


...let's assume your theory is true; so what? do you think the truth would make any difference, that americans would jump up and change something? HAH! consider that roughly 16 million people have died at the hands of our ussa or proxy forces since the end of ww2 while the majority of the subjects (oops...i mean citizens)have coasted along with nary a ripple. radiation releases, biowar tests (hell, 90,000 people a year die during unnecessary medical procedures) a fabulous list of crap done to folks here in the name of science, national security, whatever, and nothing's happened. so your tacit assumption that this truth would make a difference is suspect...

Sean4489 04.May.2005 13:00

Chomsky and Churchill like their positions in Capitalist... seanrutledge4489@yahoo.com

Noam Chomsky and Ward Churchill are beneficiaries of the current government run media paradigm. While both may be considered (or at least consider themselves) radicals, or intellectuals or even revolutionaries, what they both certainly are is making lot's of money. That's right, they have made lot's of money teaching at MIT and UC Boulder and by selling books, doing tours and appearing on various radio programs, selling news shows. They each have a gimmick', a con, or a schtick if you will. Chomsky on one side, knows American foreign policy is corrupt, yet he benefits from it. Churchill on the other is a victim, like so many of us, a victim or racism. Both however have more than most.

In my opinion Chomsky knows full-well that the Neo-Con's orchestrated 9-11, he also knows full well the results of this becoming reality threaten his radical (yet oh so prosperous, even luxurious) life. Ladies and Gentlemen, let's face the facts here, if the truth about 9-11 takes hold this country will change, violently. Not only will people in the United States revolt, but let's not forget the rest of the World, whom we have lied too, bombed, murdered, stolen from, and on and on, all in the name of the War on Terror. If Bush were tried for treason no people in this country or rest of the World would ever trust another government official again. America would become a terrorist nation overnight, military commanders would seize control of the government and probably end the world. Wow, sounds just like a story from one of Chomsky's writings about US Foreig policy in Latin America. I think Chomsky realizes this fact, and as much as he values human rights he also likes the benefits he receives from the current state of affairs.

I also bet ego likely has a part to play as well. Noam enjoys sitting in his Ivory Tower, telling all of us how things really are, and when someone else beats hime to the punch, say like those people involved in 9-11 Truth, well, that means Chomsky missed something. As far as Ward Churchill goes, this is his time in the spotlight and he's not about to let some 9-11 conspiracy theory fruitcakes steal his thunder. He has always pointed out the racist policies of the USA and I think he sees some people, like Alex Jones, with their nonsensical anti-immigration policies-but great 9-11 Truth research, as part of the establishment. And in a way I do too. I would be interested to know what evidence Chomsky and Churchill have actually taken the time to look at. For myself I can say confidently, I know what the evidence is, and I know the evidence is overwhelming, 9-11 was an inside job. If you have the courage to see reality it's there, and we know it. So maybe Chomsky and Churchill are just afraid of the truth, or they became idiots and truly believe what they have been saying about 9-11, or they benefit from the official story- just like Bush, Cheney, Haliburton, etc., etc., maybe not on the same scale but for the same reasons.

Denial Buster Repeat, this Sat. 5/7, 11:30 AM, CSPAN-2 04.May.2005 13:22


If you don't get CSPAN-2 with your cable service, try to find someone willing to tape it for you, or go directly to the video online at:

This is powerful stuff.

What: David Ray Griffin—professor, theologian, and author of "The New Pearl Harbor" and "The 9/11 Commission: Omissions and Distortions"—will be re-broadcast nationally for 90 minutes on CSPAN-2 (Book TV) giving an excellent presentation + Q&A on the multi-issues of 9/11 truth. See the presentation blurb at:

When: Saturday May 7, 2005 at 11:30 AM (PST) [2:30 PM (EST)].
[See the CSPAN-2 "Book TV" schedule at:  http://www.booktv.org/schedule ]

The presentation was originally given in Wisconsin on April 18, and was given good reviews from both a 'conservative' paper (Wisconsin State Journal) and a 'liberal' one (Capitol Times):
 link to www.madison.com
 link to www.madison.com

The significance is that: (a) this is one of the best 'denial busters' one can see on the topic; (b) it is the first 9/11 truth presentation that has been given a serious, national, 'mainstream' news-media forum, a very important 'foot in the door; and (c) CSPAN-2 has decided to repeat it after its first showing one week ago.

Spread the word!

David Ray Griffin - Madison, WI - April 18, 2005
David Ray Griffin - Madison, WI - April 18, 2005

Chomsky/Churchill forgotton about the Reichstag? 04.May.2005 14:23

9/11 benefits Bush regime and Saudi Royalty

Seems like history can be molded like silly putty when certain individuals wish to push a new agenda. If the CIA/FBI etc., knew nothing about the planned attacks, this still doesn't explain Rumsfeld's immediate rush the following day to begin preps for attacking Iraq..

The Nazi's arson on the Reichstag was blamed on Kommunist Partei Deutschland (KPD) and this event led to the KPD being made illegal, ensuring the well funded (by Rockefeller/Prescott Bush/etc.) National Socialist Nazi Partei complete power in Germany. Even if certain rogue elements of the KPD somehow got suckered into the arson event, the result was demonization and scapegoating of all KPD members and their supporters..

The timeline after 9/11 didn't take long to demonize and scapegoat all Arabs and Muslims, regardless to whether they were socialist secular, Shi'ite fundamentalist, Sunni Wahhabist or Sufi mystics. Even non-Islamic Sikhs from India were targeted. The resulting anti-Arab/anti-Islamic political climate after 9/11 was perfect for the invasion of Afganistan and Iraq. Now the Bush family and the Saudi royalty are again the top dogs in the oil game..

The Bush regime couldn't have hoped for a better terrorist attack than the one that resulted in the complete collpase of the WTC. The physics of an entire building collapsing from a single airplane entering the top floors is like an episode of the Twilight Zone. We can expect Rod Serling to emerge from the rubble, dusting himself off and making a statement about the Islamic vortex effect when the laws of physics are turned upside down..

Or we could entertain the idea that some explosives were strategically placed in the corners of certain floors along the entire height of the building in preps for the incoming flights complete with their brainwashed Bin Laden/CIA trained hijackers. Right wing Islamicists and right wing Judeo-Christians appear to be in conflict when in reality their attacks on each other only strenghten the elite rulers on both sides. The mainstream people shuffle blindly along to their future choice of grave or petrocomsumer wage slavery..

Really it is difficult to understand the motivations of Chomsky/Churchill and their denial of any involvement by CIA in the Al-Queda 9/11 incident..

Most people have heard of the "conspiracy theorist" website of physics9/11. However, this site explains how the righteous anger of Muslims can actually force Allah to ignore the usual laws of physics that apply to all the rest of us infidels. Maybe our leftist luminaries should try explaining how pent up anger can alter physics..

Muslims Suspend Laws of Physics


Physics 9/11


Many leftists can recite the names of dictators in their sleep, yet their understanding of science leaves a bit to be desired. What they can't explain they simply ignore if it doesn't fit their views, racism can explain everything, que no??

If people think their government wouldn't do this to their own citizens, look at the post by Arron Apathy above. From bioweapons to radiation exposure, the US population has more in common with lab rats than any other society. Here racism/classism is a factor, from Tuskegee to NYC, people of color/low income groups are often first in line to unknowingly experience whatever new weapon the military comes up with. Today we have the emergence of nanotech/biotech weaponry..

Nanotech and military


Leftist media leaders like Chomsky/Churchill caving in to public ignorance to appear credible, distancing themselves from hokey conspiracy theorists so they can sell more books is another crime as of yet untestable. If these so called leftis leaders keep this bullshit up, my vote is they be given a seat next to Rumsfeld, Tenent, GW Bush, Cheney, etc. in the war crime trials for keeping the public uninformed..

Had enough of leftist/rightist control freaks duking it out in the public spectrum?


911 Makes Strange Bedfellows 04.May.2005 16:29


These guys may be on the payroll, or they're just scared to death of being "taken care of". Professional leftists is an oxymoron anyway. 911 makes the gods fall, doesn't it? And it won't be the end of the world either if Bush & Cheney are charged with the crime. They thought Watergate was going to induce a takeover too. America MUST deal with this problem or the consequences will be unforgiving and terminal. Our Democracy is being strangled before our eyes. Maybe these fake leftists think Osama did it. I don't get it. If the average college sophomore is able to surf the web and comprehend the validity of a wide-ranging govt conspiracy on 911, why in the hell can't the 'enlightened' opposition see the light? Pity the poor internet journalist hoping for a stray click now and then. Why isn't the 911 expose on the cover of every left-leaning magazine and newspaper in the world? The real gatekeepers need to maintain the illusion that the normal 'give and take' of American political discourse is still in play. They refuse to accept that the defining coup d'etat has already been executed. That the complete fascist undermining of the United States Constitution has been successfully carried out via the same "basement" elements that were briefly exposed during the watergate hearings. Ollie North's secret government within a government is still functioning nicely, only now it's not so secret anymore. Except to some of those who should know better I suppose.

Couldn't Have Said 04.May.2005 17:29

It Better

Rock on Spookytoof!

Chomsky & Churchill Are Not Left 04.May.2005 20:03


There are lots of socialists who know for sure that the 9/11/01 events were an inside job, a Reichstag Fire. We have read Ruppert & Grffin's books and treasure them for the outstanding research and whistleblowing that they are.

Neither Noam Chomsky nor Ward Churchill are socialists, and thus cannot claim to be part of the Left. Chomsky is opposed to the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917, and I personally find his speeches to be very irritating. He is a terrible speaker and has nothing to say. His books are not in my home; Ruppert's and Griffin's books are, and they will stay there forever. Being over age 50, I am certain they will always be relevant and quotable.

Ward Churchill is best known, prior to this latest episode, as being a supporter of the CIA's contras in Nicaragua against the Sandinsta government. His profoundly stupid and evil statements on the 9/11 Inside Job, claiming that some non-existent, unnamed radical group carried out this reactionary crime, demonstrate that either he is incapable of logical thinking or has a reactionary agenda in supporting the government's lies.

The radical agenda is to organize labor to put an end to the capitalist private profit system. The 9/11 Inside Job was carried out by the capitalist class and its spokespeople Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld & Rice, to perpetrate fascism at home and war abroad so as to maximize the profits of the capitalist class. To organize labor, one must learn the grievances of one's fellow workers, an easy task, tne build a labor organization strong enough to carry out a general strike.

There is a saying that fits all of the above named people:
He/she who knows, and knows that he/she knows, he/she is wise, follow him/her. This applies to Ruppert and Griffin.

He/she who knows not, and knows that he/she knows not, he/she is ignorant, teach him/her. I hope I have done my small part in teaching.

He/she who knows not, and knows not that he/she knows not, he/she is a fool, avoid him/her. This describes Chomsky and Churchill. Considering the age of Chomsky and Churchill, it is being polite to say that they are fools. I think they have a reactionary agenda. In either case, they are best avoided.

Most people are simply in denial about 9/11 04.May.2005 20:32


The evidence abounds for government complcity in 9/11, but most people don't want to imagine such a thing. They don't want to imagine the government is evil, even though there is plenty of evidence for that as well-- just look at the Iraq war. The 9/11 evidence is out there, it is by now easy to find, and there is no excuse for people not looking at it.

While it is not surprising that the media goes along with whatever the administration is saying about 9/11 (the media always peddles the government line after large and suspicious tragedies, e.g. the OK City bombing, TWA flight 800, American Airlines flight 587, etc), the Democratic Party has also accepted the administration's lies, much to the detriment of the country. If we had a real opposition party, 9/11 would have been exposed long ago.

Chomsky and Churchill are useful idiots for the administration. They should be ignored.

point to the anthrax 05.May.2005 08:44


The easiest way to kill off the "there's no evidence of government involvement" idea is to point to the anthrax attacks, since the anthrax used belonged to the US govt.
Anybody who says that's not evidence obviously shows themself a liar or a coward.

And the habit of using the media-term "9/11" to refer to the terrorists attacks in America is a bad mistake, at best, since it cuts off the most blatant piece of evidence.

No evidence for hijackers 05.May.2005 09:35

Jack Straw

Regarding "Chomsky/Churchill forgotton about the Reichstag?" There is zero evidence for any hijackers being involved in 9/11. The collapses were entirely due to demolition, whatever flying objects hit the buidlings were stricly for show.

.. 05.May.2005 22:22


wow, I've waited nearly 4 years for this very topic to be openly discussed and thanks to David Ray Griffin and C-SPAN, it's finally happening.

(who here suspected that 9-11 was an inside job since the day of the event? Ok, I confess...I adamently denied the possibility to myself for about a week or so)

This can build into an enormous movement if enough people are made aware of the story. There were close to a million people in the streets of NYC during the last RNC...and that took place WITHOUT the public knowledge that 9-11 was engineered by our own officials...imagine what can take place once the American public learns the Truth. C-SPAN2 will be re-broadcasting the Griffin speech, but I'm not sure when.

In the meantime, spread the word!

The disinfo effort around 9/11 06.May.2005 00:15


Lots of 9/11 disinfo on this page.

The goal of those on the right will be to paint the 9/11 movement as 'nutcases' to scare the left away (the left gatekeepers themselves are another story).

The way they paint us as nutcases is by spreading disinformation about 9/11 research and activists, like saying we support theories about pods, missiles, holograms, switched planes, 'no commercial jets,' tanker jets, etc.

Many of the sites that people are linking to on this page contain disinformation.

Learn about what sites are disinfo here:


The latest DISINFO site posing as a place to get good videos is '911blogger' - he is spreading a mixture of the worst (right-wing attack site links, links leading to sites pushing pods and missiles, DVDs pushing 'no commercial jet' etc.) and the best, in an effort to infect people with the worst. Do not download from that site. Find another way to get your info.

dear "repost" 06.May.2005 01:04

Already Published

I appreciate yr efforts to highlight the whacky theories that trolls so desperately wish us to accept on religious faith.

If you don't accept it, these pack-hunting animals will call you a troll much the way that Israelis call anyone but themselves "terrorists".

Having said that, I don't buy the unsubstantiated mantra of Peak Oil that oilempire.us is pushing, since there is a well-substantiated and experimentaly reproduced theory of abiotic origin that successfuly drives the Russian oil industry.

He Knows 06.May.2005 11:20

Jack Straw

The author of Disinfo Around 9/11 knows what he's talking about. He's been spreading 9/11 disinfo for at least 2 years. He has asserted that the planes which hit the WTC towers cut their central support columns, and the buildings simply took a while to fall, not realizing their supports were no longer up.He has repeatedly spread disinfo about the Pentagon events, saying that he knows people who pulled incinerated passengers from the seats of Flight 77, though there is no record of any remains of the passengers being recovered at the Pentagon, and continues to insist a passenger plane did hit the Pentagon, in spite of problems such as a much-too-small entrance hole (even at 90 ft across, which is way more than its actual width) to let in wings, especially at an incidence angle of 45 degrees, as well as a tail (40 ft high, vs the 20-some ft of the hole), with no wing pieces or tail outside, the lack of any evidence of *kerosene* fire, the inconvenient presence of cable spools in front of the hole, 7 ft high, which would have stood in the way of engines coming over, or would have been blown about by engine blast (see  http://gallerize.com and the nerdcities/Guardian sites i mentioned for details). He insists on believing the totally contradictory statements of "witnesses", relies heavily upon sources such as Penny Schoner, who quotes heavily from John Judge's supposed flight attendant friend, who first said she saw the plane's tail on the Pentagon lawn, though no photos showed it (Schoner tried to excuse that by saying that maybe people came and moved the tail later, though the photos taken right after impact showed no such tail), then changed the story to seeing the tail inside, though as i've pointed out the entrance hole is too short height wise to have let in a tail.
He also relies on Eric Bart's "witnesses", one of whose testimonies Bart fudged, see
This man is all about building up oilempire.us and nothing else. He's gone to various sites trying to get them to remove material he deems objectionable. Take everything he says with a 2 lb package of salt.

Jack Straw From Witchita 06.May.2005 16:08


Listen to Jack!

Hot links 06.May.2005 20:38

Jack Straw

This is the references with the links redone in hot mode


(select nerdcities/guardian Main index link, several excellent articles on the WTC collapses as well as the Pentagon)


(excellent articles on the airliners supposedly involved on 9/11, Pentagon witnesses, physics of Pentagon attack, and conspiracy theory)


(lots of good stuff on all things 9/11)


(excellent stuff on WTC demolition, including many videos)


(amazing photos of WTC. Also check out News Junkie Scott's daily list at Baltimore IMC, best daily news summary blog out there)


(very interesting stuff, on the cutting edge, good links list)


(video of appearance in Madison by David Ray Griffin, author of The New Pearl Harbor)


(articles on the history of al Qaeda as a CIA operation, especially good pieces by Michel Chossudovsky and Chaim Kupferberg)


(good articles on WTC, Pentagon)

Links on the above site are bogus and disinformation 07.May.2005 08:08


The above article contains links to a lot of sites that are BOGUS and spreading DISINFORMATION about 9/11.

Sites like the Webfairy, Serendipity, batcave . . . these are all spreading ideas like holograms, missiles, pods, 'no commercial jet hit the Pentagon OR the World Trade Center,' etc.

These are efforts to discredit the 9/11 movement, either knowingly or unknowingly. The claims have been repeatedly and thoroughly debunked.

To understand how disinformation in the 9/11 movement works, see:


Perfect example 07.May.2005 15:55

Jack Straw

Oil empire is indeed a perfect example of disinformation, good place to see how it works.

And yes, i am the Jack Straw of Wichita. Greeetings, Wharf Rat.

Fucking nuts 21.Sep.2005 09:29

Comrade Hagopian

Ah , you guys ( except for Jack Straw ) know you're fucking nuts....Right ?