PDA

View Full Version : Doug Thompson Says: 9/11 conspiracy theories don't pass the smell test



beltman713
03-31-2006, 03:15 PM
http://www.capitolhillblue.com/blog/2006/03/911_conspiracy_theories_dont_p.html

9/11 conspiracy theories don't pass the smell test

(Beltman713: He is taking a lot of heat from this story in his comments section.)

March 31, 2006 08:02 AM

By DOUG THOMPSON

Like many Americans, I don't believe Lee Harvey Oswald killed President John F. Kennedy on Nov. 22, 1963. Too many things about the Warren Commission report just don't add up and the dinner conversation my wife and I had with former Gov. John B. Connally in 1982 confirms those suspicions.

I also don't believe James Earl Ray acted alone in the assassination of civil rights leader Martin Luther King. I lived and worked in Ray's hometown of Alton, Illinois, for 11 years and interviewed many who knew him. He just wasn't smart enough to pull off such a well-planned execution.

However, I cannot - and will not - join the chorus of those who claim the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon on September 11, 2001, were an inside job staged by the Bush administration, the Central Intelligence Agency or anyone else connected with our government. I cannot - and will not - be a party to those who claim the buildings were destroyed not by hijacked airliners but by explosives planted inside the structures.

The conspiracy claims by those who say Osama bin Laden and is rabid band of followers could not possibly have planned and executed the attacks that killed more than 3,000 Americans on that fateful day are, in my opinion, just plain wrong.

I was at the Pentagon the day the plane hit, taking pictures and interviewing witnesses. I talked to the cab driver who saw the plane swoop low over Columbia Pike, knocking down a light pole that fell on his cab. I talked to the driver of the car behind him, an Arlington businessman still haunted by the nightmares of what he saw. I interviewed dozens of others who saw the plane hit. I smelled the burning jet fuel.

Months later, I stood in a lab at the National Institute of Standards and Technology in Maryland as an engineer I've known for 25 years ran the computer simulation that shows how the unique construction of the World Trade Center towers contributed to the inevitable collapse after the planes hit.

In July and August of 2003, I watched hours and hours of video and film footage shot by news crews, film students and private citizens in New York on September 11 and edited it into a short documentary for the second anniversary of the attacks. As part of that project, I talked to firemen, police officers and first responders in New York City and then with friends who have worked in the American and foreign intelligence communities for many, many years.

Everything that I've learned from these folks - those who were there and those whose judgment I trust - support the facts that Al Qaeda planned and executed the attacks.

Some say there are no way novice pilots with only a few hours of simulator training could have guided three modern jetliners into the World Trade Center and Pentagon. I'm a pilot and have flown Boeing 757, 767 and 777 simulators as part of research on stories. The maneuvers made by the hijackers on September 11 were relatively simple course corrections that are not that difficult in planes equipped with modern navigational computers. Some evidence uncovered during the investigations say the hijackers originally wanted to hit the Potomac River side of the Pentagon where Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld's office is located but that would have required more difficult navigation to miss the Washington Monument.

Others base their beliefs of a conspiracy on the collapse of Building 7 in New York, which did not appear to be seriously damaged. They say video of the collapse suggests it was imploded by an internal explosion. I asked demolition experts and structural engineers to watch video footage from several angles. Thye concluded the collapse was not consistent with a detonated implosion. First responders at the scene also reported large chunks of steel and concrete striking the building. The NIST study, conducted by a Democratic member of their staff, concluded the building was damaged internally.

I'm usually the first to suspect my government of malfeasance. I love a good conspiracy theory as much as Oliver Stone but I cannot buy into this one.

Reasonable doubts about the Kennedy and King deaths exists to this day because of striking conflicts of reports from witnesses on the scene and the existence of credible evidence from experts that refute the "offiical" versions. But the many theories surrounding 9/11 come mostly from conspiracy buffs. I have yet to get a report from a structural engineer or demolitions expert that support the theories of internal explosions and too many witnesses saw the planes. If an engineer or expert with credentials that could be verified came forward I might be willing to take another look at this but in the absence of such, I'll go with the conclusions of experts I trust.

My 40-plus years as a journalist, coupled with too many years working inside the government, tell me that the scenarios laid out by the 9/11 conspiracy buffs just don't pass the smell test.

The 9/11 attacks succeeded because of the incredible improbability that such a ragtag group could pull it off and our lackluster intelligence agencies failed to act on credible reports of terrorist activity. I know my government. They're just not good enough to pull off something like this.

© Copyright 2006 by Capitol Hill Blue

Gold9472
03-31-2006, 03:43 PM
For those who follow Doug Thompson's Capitol Hill Blue writings...

In November 2005, an article was released by Capitol Hill Blue entitled, "GOP memo touts new terror attack as way to reverse party's decline (http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_7639.shtml)".

I wrote Doug, and asked him either to send me a copy of this memo, or to post it online so people could download it. I never heard from him.

Today, he reports (http://www.capitolhillblue.com/blog/2006/03/911_conspiracy_theories_dont_p.html) that, "I know my government. They're just not good enough to pull off something like this."

Which is it Doug?

beltman713
03-31-2006, 04:06 PM
I think Doug just shot himself in the foot. That site has slowed to a crawl from people leaving negative comments about his story.

Gold9472
03-31-2006, 04:09 PM
I've never followed him. You're the only one I know of that posts his info...

Gold9472
03-31-2006, 04:11 PM
When he reported that Bush referred to the Constitution as a "God damn piece of paper", he had no audio, and no one else confirmed that story. That's why, I've never promoted that tidbit. However, everyone else has. As a matter of fact, last night at Dr. Griffin's lecture, one of the presenters mentioned it. I wonder if they would have mentioned it after reading Doug's latest. Incidentally, it's not that I don't think Bush would say something like that. I just need verification.

beltman713
03-31-2006, 04:16 PM
He got it from his "sources".

Gold9472
03-31-2006, 04:19 PM
Exactly.

Gold9472
03-31-2006, 04:21 PM
Here's what I wrote at the time of the GOP Memo....

"I wrote this guy an email asking for the memo to be posted, and which office it originated from. I have yet to hear from him. Without the memo, this story is fluff..."

beltman713
03-31-2006, 04:22 PM
He did a story the other day in which he said he met John Connally a few years ago. He said John Connally told him he didn't believe that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone in killing JFK, but he wouldn't say so in public because he felt it would tear the country apart.

I left a comment saying how I thought that whole story about Connally was just a setup for today's story. You know, "I usually don't trust my government, but I think they are right on this one."

Gold9472
03-31-2006, 04:24 PM
The sad part is... people like Randi Rhodes promote his work.

Gold9472
03-31-2006, 09:31 PM
I think I just took out Doug Thompson's credibility. Go look at the comments.

beltman713
03-31-2006, 09:39 PM
Yeah, I read them. He shut down the comments section.

Gold9472
03-31-2006, 09:41 PM
yup

Gold9472
04-02-2006, 12:02 PM
"After 303 comments this debate has become repetitive and has reached the point where the load time for this page is prohibitive. This topic is currently being debated in our discussion forum, ReaderRant, and those who wish to continue arguing the point can continue it there. I'm closing this thread and thank everyone for their comments.

I have checked the links that have been provided here. However, nothing on these links gives me any reason to reconsider my position. In most cases, the claims have discounted elsewhere or were matters which I have investigated previously and discarded because they did not check out.

I'm afraid on this issue we will just have to agree to disagree.

Doug"

Gold9472
04-02-2006, 02:04 PM
Here's the last thing I wrote before he closed it down.

"This isn't rocket science people.

Bush asked Tom Daschle to limit the scope of the Senate investigations. He fought against the family members for 441 days against the creation of the so called, "9/11 Commission". He first appointed Henry Kissinger to lead the charge, and when the family members questioned Kissinger about his business dealings, he opted out. Then, Bush appoints Tom Kean, a known oil man, to head the Commission. He then puts a members of the Bush Administration in charge of the 9/11 Commissions' investigations, Philip Zelikow. The family members fought for Philip Zelikow's resignation because of the obvious conflicts of interest, and were denied. The Commission's mandate was to provide a “full and complete accounting” of the attacks of September 11, 2001 and to give recommendations as to how to prevent such attacks in the future. Do you think they gave a "full and complete accounting"? Where is mention of Building 7? Where is mention of the Wargames taking place? Where is Norman Mineta's testimony? Where is Sibel Edmonds' testimony? Why did the President refuse to testify publicly, under oath, and not without his trusty sidekick Dick Cheney at his side?

You know what... I'm glad they sold so many copies of the 9/11 Report. It has now become a piece of evidence in the case of the People of the United States vs. The Bush Administration & Friends."

Gold9472
04-02-2006, 02:04 PM
Admittedly, they didn't fight the family members for 441 days. It took them that long to create a commission, and during that time, they fought against the family members.