The Washington Post Attacks 911Truth.org

9/11 Truth? I Don't Think So

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/early..._think_so.html

(Gold9472: Take note... not ONE... got that... not ONE rebuttal to ANY of the facts that the 9/11 Truth Movement has discovered. Just a long winded attack against the messenger.)

William Arkin
5/27/2006

Every day, I receive a half dozen Emails and a score or more comments from 9/11 rejectionists. The 9/11 cover-up, according to these correspondents, is that the U.S. government was complicit, even responsible for the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

Like those who often write to tell me that the Pentagon, the FBI and/or the intelligence agencies are following them, that they are mind control victims whose lives have been ruined by directed energy weapons in space or the transmitters implanted in their teeth, I have a special place for this mass of correspondence. It is called delete.

So when the headline crossed my desktop on Monday that "Over 70 million American Adults Support New 9/11 Investigation," I admit that I fell for it and clicked on the link.

The tale is depressing. The 9/11 truth seekers, that self-declared movement who now count in their membership a number of high profile celebrities, turn out to be exactly what I thought they were: predatory and devious, seekers of polarization and not light, abusive of the political system, contemptuous of anything that even resembles the "truth."

There was a moment in December 2004 after President Bush nominated Bernard Kerik to be Secretary of Homeland Security that I thought the national security paradigm had finally changed in America.

Kerik, to refresh flagging memories, led the New York City Police Department through 9/11.

I always interpreted the White House's selection of Kerik as a need and a desire to neutralize the 9/11 families. I don’t mean a specific organization, nor a specific cause. I mean the mass of civilians who had become a powerful political force. Lives torn apart by a diabolical terrorist attack, they demanded action, accountability and investigation, speaking out despite the "men working" signs guarding national security making.

Normal citizens found themselves compelled by loss and shock. These were not anti-war activists, nor a partisan special interest working on behalf of a single agenda. In the aftermath of 9/11, they were instantly conferred with respect and given voice: their very presence insured that the events of that day remained specific and devastating, that 9/11 would not become some political football or reality show for the administration or its opponents to abuse.

But national security is men's work, and by the end of 2004, the men in charge had had enough. By appointing Kerik, I thought the President was specifically someone who could represent a sanctioned view of 9/11. Kerik would turn the citizen's movement into just another constituency, a special interest that needed to be dealt with but one marginalized rather than revered.

Fast forward to 911Truth.org's press release Monday. "Although the Bush administration continues to exploit September 11 to justify domestic spying, unprecedented spending and a permanent state of war," it said, "a new Zogby poll reveals that less than half of the American public trusts the official 9/11 story or believes the attacks were adequately investigated."

The poll, conducted from Friday, May 12 through Tuesday, May 16, shows, according to 911truth.org, that:

42% of Americans believe there has indeed been a cover up,
45% think "Congress or an International Tribunal should re-investigate the attacks, including whether any US government officials consciously allowed or helped facilitate their success"

Janice Matthews, executive director of 911truth.org said that there was "mounting evidence for U.S. government involvement in 9/11."

911truth.org went on to quote poll co-author W. David Kubiak as saying that the 9/11 "myth" is "the administration's primary source of political and war-making power."

The organization then offered the view that if more Americans were exposed to "independent 9/11 research," that is, the mass of conspiracy theories that is being exploited by this Star Wars bar of "justice" activists, "about 90 percent would support a new investigation of the events of that fateful day."

Zogby then put out its own press release warning that 911truth.org was offering its opinions, and not Zogby's as to the "meaning of the poll results." It pointed out that Mr. Kubiak was not a "poll co-author" but a member of the organization. "Zogby International had no role in interpreting the survey results for the sponsor or in producing the news release," Zogby warned.

Zogby then gave its own narrative summary of the poll:

In the question, "Some people believe that the US government and its 9/11 Commission concealed or refused to investigate critical evidence that contradicts their official explanation of the September 11th attacks, saying there has been a cover-up. Others say that the 9/11 Commission was a bi-partisan group of honest and well-respected people and that there is no reason they would want to cover-up anything. Who are you more likely to agree with?"

US government and 9/11 Commission are NOT covering up (48%)
US government and 9/11 Commission are covering up (42%)
No sure (10%)

People are "completely divided" on whether they believe President Bush exploited the 9/11 attacks (44%).

People are "closely divided" on whether there should be another investigation, with a slight plurality (47%) saying the attacks were thoroughly investigated, while 45% feel the attacks should be reinvestigated.

9/11truth.org refers to 9/11 "crimes," of "motives" involved in the attacks, it asks "who profited."

Isn't the answer self-evident? The organization itself exploits the 9/11 families and the American public's confusion.

For a moment, the 9/11 families -- and again I don't mean a specific set of families or any organization -- recognized that 9/11 was the largest governmental failure in history, that if "we" the people were going to have security we were going to have to involve ourselves. 911truth.org might pretend that this is their goal as well, but in fact there is no amount of investigation, no amount of fact, no amount of government action, no amount of intelligence information, no amount of war, in fact no amount of security that is ever going to change anyone's mind here.

These are not typical Americans who just want better security and government and pray for successful prosecution of the war on terrorism. This is a purely partisan political and cynical anti-everything group looking to exploit 9/11, just as they accuse the administration of doing.

Though 9/11truth.org and the blogosphere continues to rail against the mainstream media for ignoring their issue and their cause, the only gratifying element of the story is the restraint so far shown by the media in ignoring the thinly masked craziness and the Internet hype.

Oh, I know I'm giving them air time, and surely the "news" will cover the "growing" 9/11 rejectionist movement as we get closer to election time, but what is really interesting here is not some cover-up but the enormous disillusionment that exists not just with the war in Iraq but also the fight against terrorism.

They seem to make it too easy for me to be a 9-11truther. This right here adds fuel to my fire, and confirms to me that 9-11 was an inside job, and that I can not trust my own government or media. We will win this fight. We are 70 million strong, and growning. Damn that feels good to say!

People who become this vehemently opposed to the issues are in some ways (as others have said) validating the 9/11 truth movement. Call me crazy, but I think some of these articles are created by design to serve this very function.



I remember when I was first approached with some of the 9/11 questions, and I'll admit I dismissed it immediately, but I wasn't pushed any further, and I didn't call anybody names for trying to show it to me, and the person providing their evidence simply let me be. No name calling, no blanket statements from either side. There wasn't any negativity expressed from either side on the matter because it was understood that exploring the subject didn't leave me with anything to lose, just something to gain.

This is the problem with people who express hostility towards those addressing the importance of these questions. They feel they have everything to lose when they consider the answers to these questions and the impact it will have on reshaping their belief system. They don't understand that pursuit of this matter will help them regain their freedom, and that the use of terror psychologically conditions Americans to be fearful of freedom.



These people need to understand that their belief system won’t necessarily have to be reshaped, only the belief in those people who’ve had control of that system. See, the system can be restored to empower the people again, and acknowledging the importance of these questions and seeking answers to them is the first step in this transition. But the people have to want it back. If they don’t, then things will continue as they are, and get worse.

:gay1:

I wrote this in response to his article, but it won't let me post it... I didn't want it to go to waste.

Every day, I receive a half dozen Emails and a score or more comments from 9/11 rejectionists.^ The 9/11 cover-up, according to these correspondents, is that the U.S. government was complicit, even responsible for the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

DO YOU THINK THERE'S A REASON FOR THAT WILLIAM? COULD IT BE THERE'S SOMETHING TO WHAT SOME OF THESE PEOPLE WHO TAKE IT UPON THEMSELVES TO SEND YOU "A HALF DOZEN EMAILS AND A SCORE OR MORE COMMENTS" EVERY DAY? MAYBE AS A JOURNALIST, YOU MIGHT THINK IT IMPORTANT TO LOOK INTO IT FOR YOURSELF. I KNOW IF I WAS A JOURNALIST, I MIGHT THINK THE WORST ATTACKS ON AMERICAN SOIL IN HISTORY MIGHT BE WORTH LOOKING INTO, BUT WHAT DO I, A SIMPLE AMERICAN, KNOW?

Like those who often write to tell me that the Pentagon, the FBI and/or the intelligence agencies are following them, that they are mind control victims whose lives have been ruined by directed energy weapons in space or the transmitters implanted in their teeth, I have a special place for this mass of correspondence.^ It is called delete.

OBVIOUSLY YOU'RE NOT A HISTORY BUFF WILLIAM. IF YOU WERE, YOU WOULD KNOW THAT THE CIA TOOK PART IN A PROGRAM CALLED, "MKULTRA". THAT PROGRAM WAS SPECIFICALLY CREATED TO TEST UNWILLING PARTICIPANTS TO SEE IF THEY WOULD BE SUSCEPTIBLE TO MIND CONTROL.

YOU CAN WATCH AN ENTIRE ABCNEWS SPECIAL ON IT HERE:

http://www.xenutv.com/cults/himindcontrol1.ram
http://www.xenutv.com/cults/himindcontrol2.ram
http://www.xenutv.com/cults/himindcontrol3.ram

SO, IF THERE ARE PEOPLE OUT THERE WHO BELIEVE THAT THEY ARE VICTIMS OF MIND CONTROL, THERE MIGHT BE LEGITIMACY BEHIND THEIR CLAIMS. I, HOWEVER, DO NOT SUBSCRIBE TO IT. I PREFER TO FOCUS ON 9/11 TRUTH THAN THOSE OTHER THINGS YOU DESCRIBED. WHY YOU FEEL THE NEED TO ASSOCIATE PEOPLE FIGHTING FOR THIS COUNTRY WITH THOSE PEOPLE YOU DESCRIBED, IS AN ENIGMA TO ME.

So when the headline crossed my desktop on Monday that "Over 70 million American Adults Support New 9/11 Investigation," I admit that I fell for it and clicked on the link.

AS ANY GOOD JOURNALIST SHOULD. ARE YOU A GOOD JOURNALIST WILLIAM OR JUST A MOUTHPIECE FOR THE ADMINISTRATION?

The tale is depressing.^ The 9/11 truth seekers, that self-declared movement who now count in their membership a number of high profile celebrities, turn out to be exactly what I thought they were: predatory and devious, seekers of polarization and not light, abusive of the political system, contemptuous of anything that even resembles the "truth."

I ACTUALLY LIKE THE TRUTH WILLIAM. I HAVE NO CONTEMPT FOR IT AT ALL. IT'S CERTAINLY BETTER THAN BEING LIED TO. WHY DON'T YOU TRY TELLING IT TO US SOMETIME.

There was a moment in December 2004 after President Bush nominated Bernard Kerik to be Secretary of Homeland Security that I thought the national security paradigm had finally changed in America.

Kerik, to refresh flagging memories, led the New York City Police Department through 9/11.

I always interpreted the White House's selection of Kerik as a need and a desire to neutralize the 9/11 families.^ I don’t mean a specific organization, nor a specific cause.^ I mean the mass of civilians who had become a powerful political force.^ Lives torn apart by a diabolical terrorist attack, they demanded action, accountability and investigation, speaking out despite the "men working" signs guarding national security making.

Normal citizens found themselves compelled by loss and shock.^ These were not anti-war activists, nor a partisan special interest working on behalf of a single agenda.^ In the aftermath of 9/11, they were instantly conferred with respect and given voice: their very presence insured that the events of that day remained specific and devastating, that 9/11 would not become some political football or reality show for the administration or its opponents to abuse.

But national security is men's work, and by the end of 2004, the men in charge had had enough.^ By appointing Kerik, I thought the President was specifically someone who could represent a sanctioned view of 9/11.^ Kerik would turn the citizen's movement into just another constituency, a special interest that needed to be dealt with but one marginalized rather than revered.

SO IN OTHER WORDS, RATHER THAN ALLOW A REAL INVESTIGATION, A "POLITICAL FOOTBALL" AS IT WERE, YOU ARE HAPPY WITH LETTING THESE FAMILY MEMBERS NOT KNOW HOW THEIR LOVED ONES DIED? IN CASE YOU HAVEN'T NOTICED, THE ADMINISTRATION HAS BEEN MORE THAN HAPPY TO INVOKE 9/11 AS THEIR "POLITICAL FOOTBALL", AND THEY MOST CERTAINLY HAVE ABUSED IT. AT EVERY OPPORTUNITY. YOU MIGHT REMEMBER THEY USED IT TO SELL THE AFGHANISTAN AND IRAQ WAR. IF IT WAS 19 HIJACKERS THAT PERFORMED THOSE ATROCITIES, IT WAS 19 HIJACKERS. NOT THE COUNTRY OF AFGHANISTAN. IF OSAMA WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR THOSE ATROCITIES, THEN HE SHOULD HAVE BECOME OUR PRIORITY. INSTEAD, WE SUPPOSEDLY LET HIM ESCAPE IN TORA BORA. WHY DID WE DO THAT WILLIAM? WHY DID WE INVADE IRAQ BECAUSE OF 9/11? IRAQ HAD ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH IT. INVADING IRAQ AFTER 9/11 WOULD BE LIKE THE UNITED STATES INVADING MEXICO AFTER PEARL HARBOR.

Fast forward to 911Truth.org's press release Monday.^ "Although the Bush administration continues to exploit September 11 to justify domestic spying, unprecedented spending and a permanent state of war," it said, "a new Zogby poll reveals that less than half of the American public trusts the official 9/11 story or believes the attacks were adequately investigated."

The poll, conducted from Friday, May 12 through Tuesday, May 16, shows, according to 911truth.org, that:

42% of Americans believe there has indeed been a cover up,
45% think "Congress or an International Tribunal should re-investigate the attacks, including whether any US government officials consciously allowed or helped facilitate their success"

Janice Matthews, executive director of 911truth.org said that there was "mounting evidence for U.S. government involvement in 9/11."

911truth.org went on to quote poll co-author W. David Kubiak as saying that the 9/11 "myth" is "the administration's primary source of political and war-making power."

AS I SAID, THEY HAVE ABUSED IT WHILE PLAYING, "POLITICAL FOOTBALL". AS RAY MCGOVERN RECENTLY SAID TO DONALD RUMSFELD, "WE ARE NOT IDIOTS".

The organization then offered the view that if more Americans were exposed to "independent 9/11 research," that is, the mass of conspiracy theories that is being exploited by this Star Wars bar of "justice" activists, "about 90 percent would support a new investigation of the events of that fateful day."

ACTUALLY WILLIAM, RESEARCH DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CONSPIRACY THEORY. I'M GUESSING YOU'VE NEVER LOOKED INTO IT, BUT THEY ARE TWO COMPLETELY DIFFERENT THINGS. IS A SCIENTIST WHO RESEARCHES CURES FOR CANCER A CONSPIRACY THEORIST? I DON'T THINK SO. THE RESEARCH YOU SPEAK OF WAS PROMPTED BECAUSE WE WEREN'T BEING TOLD ANYTHING, AND OUR QUESTIONS WEREN'T BEING ANSWERED. THEREFORE, WE TOOK IT UPON OURSELVES TO FIND THE ANSWERS TO OUR QUESTIONS, AND GUESS WHAT? WE'VE DISCOVERED THAT THE ONLY WAY 9/11 COULD HAVE TAKEN PLACE WAS IF PEOPLE WITHIN THE ADMINISTRATION TOOK PART IN IT. IMAGINE THAT.

Zogby then put out its own press release warning that 911truth.org was offering its opinions, and not Zogby's as to the "meaning of the poll results."^ It pointed out that Mr. Kubiak was not a "poll co-author" but a member of the organization.^ "Zogby International had no role in interpreting the survey results for the sponsor or in producing the news release," Zogby warned.

Zogby then gave its own narrative summary of the poll:

In the question, "Some people believe that the US government and its 9/11 Commission concealed or refused to investigate critical evidence that contradicts their official explanation of the September 11th attacks, saying there has been a cover-up. Others say that the 9/11 Commission was a bi-partisan group of honest and well-respected people and that there is no reason they would want to cover-up anything. Who are you more likely to agree with?"

US government and 9/11 Commission are NOT covering up (48%)
US government and 9/11 Commission are covering up (42%)
No sure (10%)

People are "completely divided" on whether they believe President Bush exploited the 9/11 attacks (44%).

People are "closely divided" on whether there should be another investigation, with a slight plurality (47%) saying the attacks were thoroughly investigated, while 45% feel the attacks should be reinvestigated.

9/11truth.org refers to 9/11 "crimes," of "motives" involved in the attacks, it asks "who profited."

Isn't the answer self-evident?^ The organization itself exploits the 9/11 families and the American public's confusion.

THEY DO? REALLY? I'VE NEVER SEEN ONE BAD WORD SAID ABOUT 911TRUTH.ORG BY ANY OF THE 9/11 FAMILY MEMBERS. IN FACT, SOME OF THEM HAVE WORKED WITH 911TRUTH.ORG IN THE PAST. DOES THAT SOUND LIKE AN ORGANIZATION THAT "EXPLOITS" THE 9/11 FAMILIES AND THE AMERICAN PUBLIC'S CONFUSION? IT SEEMS TO ME THAT WHEN PRESIDENT BUSH TOLD US TO GO SHOPPING AFTER 9/11, WHEN WE WERE ALL WONDERING WHAT WE COULD DO TO HELP, CONFUSED US A HELLUVA LOT MORE THAN ANYTHING 911TRUTH.ORG HAS DONE. AND THEN TO LIE TO US ABOUT 9/11, AND COVER-UP THE VAST MAJORITY OF INFORMATION PERTAINING TO IT, WELL, THAT WAS CERTAINLY CONFUSING FOR ME.

For a moment, the 9/11 families -- and again I don't mean a specific set of families or any organization -- recognized that 9/11 was the largest governmental failure in history, that if "we" the people were going to have security we were going to have to involve ourselves.^ 911truth.org might pretend that this is their goal as well, but in fact there is no amount of investigation, no amount of fact, no amount of government action, no amount of intelligence information, no amount of war, in fact no amount of security that is ever going to change anyone's mind here.

WATCH WHAT FAMILY MEMBER BOB MCILVAINE HAD TO SAY ABOUT "THE LARGEST GOVERNMENTAL FAILURE IN HISTORY".

http://www.yourbbsucks.com/forum/showthread.php?t=8668

THEN WATCH WHAT FAMILY MEMBER DONNA MARSH O'CONNOR HAD TO SAY ABOUT "THE LARGEST GOVERNMENTAL FAILURE IN HISTORY"

http://www.yourbbsucks.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4692

These are not typical Americans who just want better security and government and pray for successful prosecution of the war on terrorism.^ This is a purely partisan political and cynical anti-everything group looking to exploit 9/11, just as they accuse the administration of doing.

I DO NOT PRAY FOR THE SUCCESSFUL PROSECUTION OF THE WAR ON TERRORISM. I WOULD HOPE THAT "WORLD WAR III", AS IT IS DESCRIBED BY BUSH, WOULD END AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE. PHONY WARS ON TERRORISM IRK ME. AS FAR AS YOUR CLAIM OF US BEING "PURELY PARTISAN", I THINK BILL CLINTON IS A SC_MBAG. I THINK THE DEMOCRATS ARE COWARDS. I THINK THEY ARE ACTING IN A TREASONOUS WAY IN ALLOWING THIS ADMINISTRATION DO WHATEVER THE H_LL THEY WANT. AS FAR AS EXPLOITING 9/11, PLEASE SEE ABOVE, AND IF YOU NEED MORE EXAMPLES, HOW ABOUT THE PATRIOT ACT, NSA WIRETAPS, DOING AWAY WITH THE CONSTITUTION, AND ON AND ON AND ON...

Though 9/11truth.org and the blogosphere continues to rail against the mainstream media for ignoring their issue and their cause, the only gratifying element of the story is the restraint so far shown by the media in ignoring the thinly masked craziness and the Internet hype.^

IF YOU THINK IGNORING THE 9/11 TRUTH MOVEMENT IS GRATIFYING, THEN YOU ARE A TRAITOR TO YOUR COUNTRY.

Oh, I know I'm giving them air time, and surely the "news" will cover the "growing" 9/11 rejectionist movement as we get closer to election time, but what is really interesting here is not some cover-up but the enormous disillusionment that exists not just with the war in Iraq but also the fight against terrorism.

WOW, GOOD FOR YOU WILLIAM. YOU GAVE HALF THE COUNTRY SOME "AIR TIME". WOW, YOU REALLY ARE AN AMAZING JOURNALIST. KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK.

Great rebuttal.

Using 9/11...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_zK-K1UBc3c&search=rnc

I was reading some of the chatter that followed the washingtonpost blog and I saw this one that I copied. Hopefully the contributer doesn't mind, but I thought his response was very well put and really resonated with me. Here it is:

Dear Mr. Arkin,

I am appalled by your recent judgment regarding the 911Truth Movement. Am I right to understand that a journalist's task is to be objective, examine evidence, and reach conclusions that best fit the evidence? I admit the conclusions reached by the 9/11Truth Movement seem unbelievable when considered without examining what we know happened. I know many will question why I took the time to write to someone who wrote such an insensitive and hateful article. I have no idea if you will quickly dismiss this message because you disapprove of the messenger.

I believe the best chance of being heard is to honestly share with you the reasons for my involvement in the 9/11 Truth Movement. I want you to understand why I am calling for a new independent investigation and why every effort must be made to select impartial commission members who care nothing about political affiliations. Rather, this new commission's objective should be the examination of every ounce of evidence so the truth of what happened on 9/11 can be understood. It is how one would want their lawyer to act on their behalf if their children had been murdered.

To begin, let's assume that the "official" account of 9/11 is, for the most part, true. Nineteen radical Islamic fundamentalist with the assistance of Al Qaeda were solely responsible for the attacks on our country. Given this, the evidence can be examined on how our government responded to pre-9/11 threats and how it failed to protect our country on 9/11. This information is readily available from legitimate news sources. Given the internet's capability of distributing unlimited information to the public, anyone can easily determine the accuracy of this information.

First, our government was forewarned from eleven foreign countries in the months before 9/11 of pending terrorist attacks on US soil against significant American interests and landmarks. As of today, the American people do not know any government response to these warnings. "Wanted" terrorist moved freely about our country in the months prior to 9/11. There is no record of any terrorist ever being detained despite two terrorists who lived with an FBI informant in San Diego. Many "wanted" terrorists, who took no steps to hide their identity, received flying lessons in the United States in the year prior to 9/11. They accomplished this task despite an Arizona FBI Agent's repeated effort to alert his superiors of suspicious activity which only fell on deaf ears. Does it concern you that "wanted" terrorists were able to do this in our country?

Then there is the day of 9/11. On this day, our defense system failed to stop three hijacked airplanes from hitting their targets which resulted in thousands of deaths. As a military analyst, you must know firsthand that our military has a system in place to quickly intercept planes which stray off-course. In most instances, interception can occur within ten minutes and this would be particularly true for the airspace of Washington DC and New York. The following is a timeline taken from Paul Thompson's well-researched timeline for the morning of 9/11 (The following information can easily be verified from mainstream news reports):

• FLT 11 failed to respond to FAA at 8:13AM. At 8:20, FLT 11 stopped transmitting its IFF beacon which confirmed a hijacking. So, the clock begins at 8:20AM when FAA knows a hijack has occurred. At this time, do you agree that NORAD would be contacted and fighter jets would be ordered to intercept the hijacked planes? (For some reason, NORAD was not contacted until another 18 minutes at 8:43AM.)

• At 8:46AM, FLT 11 hits the World Trade Center. At this moment, our government knows without a doubt that a plane has struck the WTC and a second is hijacked. At this point, scramble order are issued at Otis AFB despite there being closer bases such as Atlantic City. Twenty-six minutes have now past. As a military analyst, do you find this acceptable? What if local emergency services took twenty-six minutes to call an ambulance to respond to your desperate call that your child was bleeding to death?

• At 8:52 AM, Otis Air National Guard pilots take off, 12 minutes after receiving notification to respond.

• At 8:54 AM, FL 77 goes off course over Ohio and heads east indicating a target in Washington, DC. At this point, our government knows the North WTC tower has been hit; another plane is hijacked in the skies of New York; and a third plane is heading toward our Capitol. At the same moment, President Bush's motorcade arrives at the school knowing a plane has struck the WTC. Our President chose to enter the classroom instead of responding to the crisis. Do you agree with his decision to continue to with his planned schedule?

• At 8:46AM, NMCC officials at the Pentagon are talking to law enforcement officials about possible responses. This is forty-five minutes before the Pentagon is hit. Do you think it is reasonable to believe our military is capable of responding to this crisis within 45 minutes, particularly given the resources available around our nation's Capitol?

• At 9:03AM, FLT 175 hits the South Tower, WTC. The F-15s from Otis AFB are still 71 miles away. Simple math shows an average speed of less than 700MPH based on when the planes departed and the number of miles traveled. As a military analyst, I assume you know that F-15s are capable of speeds up to 1875 mph with a supersonic cruise of 1600 mph.

• Between 9:03AM and 9:06AM, Chief of Staff Andrew Card informs President Bush of the second impact in the WTC South Tower. President Bush remains in his seat for another 13 minutes and does not leave the school for another 26 minutes. At the same time, secret service agents are quickly escorting the Vice-President to an emergency bunker in the White House. Does it seem reasonable to expect that the President of the United States would receive the same treatment from the secret service as the Vice-President? Instead, our President remained in a known location, with children, for another 26 minutes while our nation was under attack?

These facts, and many others, clearly indicate that our government failed miserably to respond to the crisis of 9/11. As a military analyst, do you find it odd that our military inexplicably failed in its inability to intercept three hijacked planes despite having 78 minutes to do so? We know our military is capable of responding in 26 minutes which would have stopped the first plane from hitting the North WTC. Our military had another 17 minutes to stop the second plane. Imagine the lives that could have been saved had our military performed to its abilities on this day. What is more confusing is that our military was well-practiced in performing flight interceptions. A total of 67 flight interceptions in the year prior to 9/11. Most of us remember how quickly our military responded to intercept Payne Stewart's fatal flight ten minutes after the plane erred off course.

As a military analyst, how you do rate the government's performance in responding to 9/11? The American people are unaware of a single person who has been reprimanded for their actions regarding 9/11. In some instances, key government personnel related to 9/11 have been promoted.

As of yet, I have not discussed any evidence that suggest government complicity and I have only assumed incompetence versus complicity. Is it correct to assume that your acceptance of the "official" account of 9/11 indicates that you also accept the gross incompetence of our government? Have you forgiven those who failures to protect thousands of American lives? Are you giving our government a break because, hell, who could of knew something of this magnitude would happen (even though they did know it was coming)? Even though you know that the United States military was more than equipped to respond to this crisis? I would be surprised if an accomplished journalist and military analyst would be so forgiving.

I, for one, am not ready to forgive and move on. I ask, for a moment, that you imagine what it might be like to be part of the 42% of Americans who question the government's role in 9/11. You have reviewed the evidence and found convincing support that the World Trade Center Towers and WTC7 fell in a controlled demolition (Are you part of the 52% of Americans who are unaware that World Trade Center-7, a 47 story steel-framed building, fell into itself, in the exact manner of a controlled demolition on 9/11? This happened despite WTC7 not being hit by a plane and the fact that no known steel-framed building has ever collapsed, let alone at free-fall speed). You learn that there was highly unusual number of "put" options placed on American and United Airlines in the week prior to 9/11. You see pictures of the hole in Pentagon before the roof collapsed and reason that a 757 could never create such little damage. You learn that much of evidence at Ground Zero was shipped immediately away to China without an appropriate investigation. You learn that a mere 3 million dollars was first appropriated to investigate 9/11 (another 11 million dollars would be added) compared to the 50 million to investigate President Clinton's relationship with Monica Lewinsky.

After reviewing the evidence, you are aware that there is high likelihood that the "official" account is much more than mistakes and miscommunications, but rather, a series of calculated deceptions and lies. You realize a faction within your own government may have acted with the intent to kill thousands of American lives. You are left with the knowledge that an evil presence still exists in your government and continues to influence US policy.

If there were even the slightest possibility that people existed within our own government who would purposefully kill thousands of American lives to further their own agenda, wouldn't you want to know? Would you not want America to use everything in its power to ensure that all of our intelligence and technology were implemented to rule out this possibility? (Hell, wouldn't you demand this type of investigation given the scope and implications of this event, regardless of whether the government was complicit or not?) Yet like our government on 9/11, the 9/11 Commission failed to do their job.

As a distinguished journalist whose has devoted his career to protecting of our nation, I am at a lost to understand how you overlook this evidence and accept the status quo. I am outraged at your insults directed at the people of the 9/11Truth Movement. How dare you judge their actions and make malicious claims that their intentions are to exploit the families of 9/11? I can speak for myself and say that I hope the 9/11 families' inconsolable losses are somewhat redeemed by America doing everything in its power to reveal the truth and hold those who committed these unspeakable crimes accountable. Ultimately, I hope for a peaceful future where world leaders resolve conflict without sacrificing our children's lives.

I assume that your willingness to write the article indicates a certain amount of interest in this matter. Since you have thrown your cheap two-cents into the pot, I ask that you to take the time to carefully examine the available evidence. Read everything you can and then reach your own conclusions. That is the what journalist do, is it not? The irony of your scathing commentary of the 9/11 Truth Movement is that this movement would not exist if you, the press, had done their job. For many of us who have looked at the evidence, we feel more than justified to raise our voices and demand justice. Regardless of your disturbing and uninformed comments, I am steadfastly committed to using my rights as an American citizen to hold our government accountable and to protect our threatened democracy.

Jake O'Neill
Portland, Oregon

Nice.