The body of this Counterpunch.org article is quite good, and its appearance may portend a subtle but significant shift at a web site with very good leftish commentary but one that's been largely unreceptive to consideration of foreknowledge/complicity arguments.

I simply read past Werther’s mild jab at the “cottage industry of amateur speculation” on 9/11. He seems to be referring specifically to ‘physical evidence’ arguments, and it has to be admitted than many of them are amateurish. His attitude seems sympathetic, if superior.

The superiority does rankle a bit, though. Here’s a fellow with what may be charitably called an ‘inflated view of himself’. It takes a large amount of self-regard to arrive so late to a party and talk like you’re the guest of honor.

The leading lights of the 9/11 truth movement have made most of these arguments (and more probing ones) many times before. Contrary to Werther’s claim, it’s not that “we now know” enough to say the 9/11 Commission report was a cover-up. Please. It’s been ‘now’ for a long time now. (Anyone who read the staff statements along the way could see which way the wind was blowing)

Here’s hoping that we see some more articles at Counterpunch.org on the “basic higher-order political factors surrounding 9/11”, as well as the basic higher-order sociopolitical factors in the failure of the corporate press to both 1) identify the Commission Report as a cover-up, and 2) do its own independent investigation of 9/11.

Bryan Sacks