If Cheney & Co. Had Really Plotted the 9/11 Attacks ...
By Matt Taibbi, Spiegel & Grau, AlterNet
The following is an adapted excerpt from Matt Taibbi's new book, The Great Derangement" (Spiegel and Grau, 2008).
The 9/11 Truth movement is really distinguished by a kind of defiant unfamiliarity with the actual character of America's ruling class. In 9/11 lore the people who staff the White House, the security agencies, the Pentagon and groups like PNAC and the Council of Foreign Relations are imagined to be a monolithic, united class of dastardly, swashbuckling risk-takers with permanent hard-ons for Bourne Supremacy-style "false flag" and "black bag" operations, instead of the mundanely greedy, risk-averse, backstabbing, lawn-tending, half-clever suburban golfers they are in real life. It completely misunderstands the nature of American government -- fails to see that the old maxim about "the business of America is business" is absolutely true, that the federal government in this country is really just a lo-rent time-share property seasonally occupied by this or that clan of financial interests, each of which takes its 4-year turn at the helm tinkering with the tax laws and regulatory code and the rates at the Fed in the way it thinks will best keep the money train rolling.
The people who really run America don't send the likes of George Bush and Dick Cheney to the White House to cook up boat-rocking, maniacal world-domination plans and commit massive criminal conspiracies on live national television; they send them there to repeal PUCHA and dole out funds for the F-22 and pass energy bills with $14 billion tax breaks and slash fuel efficiency standards and do all the other shit that never makes the papers but keeps Wall Street and the country's corporate boardrooms happy. You don't elect politicians to commit crimes; you elect politicians to make your crimes legal. That is the whole purpose of the racket of government. Any other use of it would be a terrible investment, and the financial class in this country didn't get to where it is by betting on the ability of a president whose lips move when he reads to blow up two Manhattan skyscrapers in broad daylight without getting caught.
But according to 9/11 Truth lore, the financial patrons of democratic government were game for exactly that sort of gamble. According to the movement, the Powers That Be in the year 2000 spent $200 million electing George Bush and Dick Cheney because they were insufficiently impressed with the docility of the American population. What was needed, apparently, was a mass distraction, a gruesome mass murder that would whip the American population into a war frenzy. The same people who had managed in the 2000 election to sell billionaire petro-royalist George Bush as an ordinary down-to-earth ranch hand apparently so completely lacked confidence in their own propaganda skills that they resorted to ordering a mass murder on American soil as a way of cajoling America to go to war against a second-rate tyrant like Saddam Hussein. As if getting America to support going to war even against innocent countries had ever been hard before!
The truly sad thing about the 9/11 Truth movement is that it's based upon the wildly erroneous proposition that our leaders would ever be frightened enough of public opinion to feel the need to pull off this kind of stunt before acting in a place like Afghanistan or Iraq. At its heart, 9/11 Truth is a conceit, a narcissistic pipe dream for a dingbat, sheeplike population that is pleased to imagine itself dangerous and ungovernable. Rather than admit to their own powerlessness and irrelevance, or admit that they've spent the last fifty years or so electing leaders who openly handed their tax money to business cronies and golfed in Scotland while middle America's jobs were being sent overseas, the adherents to 9/11 Truth instead flatter themselves with fantasies about a ruling class obsessed with keeping the terrible truth from the watchful, exacting eye of The People.
Whereas the real conspiracy of power in America is right out in the open and always has been, only nobody cares, so long as Fear Factor and Baseball Tonight come on a the right times. A conspiracy like the one described by 9/11 Truth would only be necessary in a country where the people are a threat to actually govern themselves effectively.
But none of that even matters nearly as much as what 9/11 Truth says about the mental state of the population. The whole narrative of the movement is so completely and utterly retarded, it boggles the mind. It's like something cooked up by a bunch of teenagers raised on texting, TV and Sports Illustrated who just saw V For Vendetta for the first time and decided to write a Penguin History of the World on the strength of it. A genius on the order of a Mozart or a Shakespeare would be hard-pressed to dream up the awesome comedy that is the alleged plot from the point of view of the plotters. If there was such a conspiracy, remember, something like the following conversation would have had to have taken place:
April, 1999, World Trade Center building 7, New York, NY. A secret meeting of the Project for a New American Century. In attendance are Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith, Irv Kristol, and ... others. Cheney, standing at the head of the table and glaring downward, addresses the group:
Cheney: Gentlemen, we stand at a crossroads.
Kristol: (whispering to Feith) I love it when we stand at a crossroads!
Feith: (giggling) Me, too. But I never know what to wear.
Cheney: Do you assholes mind?
Kristol: Sorry, Dick.
Feith: Me, too.
Cheney: Okay. (Clears throat). As I was saying, gentlemen, we stand at a crossroads ...
Kristol: (in Bill Murray-esque fashion, mimicking suspense-movie soundtrack) Dunh-dunh-dunh!
Feith: Dunh-dunh-dunh! Dunh ... duh-duh-dunh!
Cheney: Oh, for fuck's sake.
Kristol: (laughing) Okay, seriously, Dick, I'm sorry.
Feith: (still laughing) Duh-duh-duh ... .
Kristol: Shhh!
Feith: Okay, okay. (to Cheney) No, it's okay, Dick, you can go on.
Cheney: You're sure? No more jokes to make? Guys want to do your goddamn Katherine Hepburn impersonations or something?
Kristol: (Channeling "On Golden Pond") Come on, Norman! Hurry up! The loons, the loons!
Feith: (whispering) Shut up, for Christ's sake! (to Cheney) Our lips are sealed, Dick. Honest.
Cheney: Okay. Jesus. As I was saying ... we, uh, stand at a crossroads. (Pauses warily, continues). As we head into the next millenium, America is the world's preeminent military and economic power, but the ground is not exactly solid beneath us. We are the inheritors of a great historical mantle, gentlemen, the rulers of the world's energy supply and therefore the rulers of world commerce. It is a mantle we inherited from the British, who rose to world power on a bed of coal, who in turn inherited it from the Dutch, who put a chokehold on Europe with their fleet of whaling ships. Our turn began when a discovery was made a little place called Oil Creek near Titusville, Pennsylvania in 1859 ...
Wolfowitz: Dick, you can skip all that stuff. We had our Standard Oil theme party just six months ago. Lynne made the squid ink risotto, don't you remember?
Cheney: Right. Well, the point is ... I think we all know about Marion King Hubbert's projections about the future of oil reserves. We all know the deal: in every oil field there comes a time when half of the field's reachable oil has been extracted. After that point, exploitation becomes more and more expensive; as time goes on, it requires more and more energy just to extract one barrel of oil. Eventually, oil extraction becomes uneconomic, which is to say it requires a barrel of oil's worth of energy to extract a barrel of oil. When that time comes, gentlemen, our oil-based empire is fucked. And the clock begins ticking in that direction once we pass that halfway point with the world's oil reserves. Once oil "peaks," America -- an empire whose power is based almost entirely upon its oil dominance -- will officially be on the decline.
Feith: Yeah. And it doesn't help that the only reason the dollar is worth more than the peso is that OPEC still trades in dollars.
Cheney: Exactly. Without oil, we're like Bangladesh with fat people. And here's the problem: that failsafe point is upon us. I think we all know the oil production in the lower 48 states peaked in 1970, that Alaskan oil production peaked in 1988, Russia around the same time. Saudi Arabia may be just years from peaking, and in any case our political situation there is tenuous at best. Our guys at Halliburton now estimate that worldwide oil and gas production from existing reserves is declining by about 4 to 6 percent every year ...
Wolfowitz: So what's your point? We're all old anyway. Who cares what happens 20 years from now?
Cheney: The point, Paul, is that the American empire as we know it will collapse within 20-30 years unless we find massive new supplies of oil and find them fast. By 2010 we're going to need to find fifty million additional barrels of oil per day. And there's only one place where we can get that much oil ...
Kristol: Sweden!
Feith: Of course. Let's invade! I hate those goddamn speed-skaters anyway.
Cheney: No, you assholes, not Sweden. Iraq. It's the only major oil-rich state whose reserves haven't been mostly exploited. There's probably seven million barrels a day minimum just sitting in those fields -- and the worst thing is, unless we get in there soon, it's all going to go to the French, the Russians and the Germans, since Saddam will sell to all of them long before he deals with us, assuming his UN sanctions get lifted at some point.
Wolfowitz: My God.
Cheney: So it's clear we've got to get in there. Are we agreed on this?
All: Agreed.
Cheney: All right. Well, I've got a plan.
Wolfowitz: We get George elected in 2000 and go in, right? Tell the public Saddam's in violation of his UN restrictions or some shit like that? He is anyway, isn't he?
Cheney: No, that would never work. The public would never stand for it.
(Everyone bursts out laughing)
Cheney: Seriously.
Wolfowitz: Oh, wait -- you're serious?
Cheney: Absolutely. No, I think the way to go is to cook up some kind of justification. Something that will really get the public behind the invasion ...
Feith: I know! We go to the UN, show bogus photos of Saddam's secret store of chemical and biological weapons, evidence of his nuclear weapons program. Tell the world he's planning to attack.
Cheney: No. Not emotional enough. I mean something really hot ...
Kristol: It could be a human-rights thing. Some emergency, like he's gassing Kurds again or something. That worked for Clinton in Kosovo. I mean, who gave a shit about Albanians, right? I wouldn't know an Albanian if I caught one in bed with my wife. But that whole rape-camp thing was good enough by a mile to start that war.
Cheney: No, no, that's not vivid enough, not Band of Brothers enough. We need the people all lathered up, their mouths full of spittle, howling for blood, like pit bulls. You guys need to think to scale, think big, think like Michael Bay.
Feith: Michael Bay, Jesus. Okay, okay, what, then?
Cheney: We bomb the World Trade Center.
Kristol: Perfect! And blame it on Saddam!
Cheney: No, we bomb the World Trade Center and blame it on Osama bin Laden.
Feith: Oh. How?
Cheney: Easy. First, we cultivate 19 suicidal Muslim patsies from a variety of Middle Eastern countries, I'd say mostly from Saudi Arabia. We bring them to the U.S., train them at U.S. flight schools. They should be high-profile terrorist suspects who are magically given free reign by the security agencies to travel back and forth to various terrorist training camps to study passenger jet piloting. Actually that process is already underway now. Our friends in the Clinton administration are seeing to it that four groups of Arab men are being brought along by the FBI and the CIA.
Wolfowitz: How is it that the Clinton administration is already helping us with this, when we haven't even planned this yet?
Cheney: They just are. Okay?
Wolfowitz: Okay, fine. And what do we do with these hijackers?
Cheney: We sit idly by while they plot to hijack a series of passenger jet planes and crash them into the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and the White House.
Wolfowitz: And how do we get them to do that?
Cheney: We just do. You see, we worked with these people back in the old mujahadeen days in Afghanistan. So naturally we're still thick as thieves with them.
Feith: Oh, of course. So we get them to fly into these buildings. And the impact from the planes will bring down the World Trade Center.
Cheney: No, Doug, dammit, you're not following me. The impact from the planes most certainly won't be sufficient to knock down the Towers. We know this because we've privately conducted studies which show that the Towers will easily be able to withstand impact by two jets loaded to the gills with jet fuel. That said, the jets will likely cause skyscraper fires hot enough to kill everyone above the point of impact; we're going to have to assume, of course, that the exits from the higher floors to the lower floors will be mostly blocked after the collisions. So assuming we crash the planes about two-thirds of the way up each of the towers early on a business day, we're looking at trapping and killing a good three, four, maybe even five thousand people on the upper floors.
Feith: Fantastic. I love killing people in the finance industry. It's too bad the people on the lower floors will get to escape.
Cheney: It is too bad -- especially since we're going to blow up the rest of the building complex anyway.
Feith: We are?
Cheney: Yes. You see, the way I see it, our best course of action is to first crash planes into each the towers, trapping and killing those thousands on the upper floors of each building. After the impact, of course, the people on the lower floors will find their way out of the building and on to the street, where they will achieve relative safety -- at which point we'll finally detonate the massive network of explosive charges we've secretly hidden in the buildings in the weeks and months prior to the attacks.
Feith: Wait, why did we do that again?
Cheney: Because the buildings wouldn't have fallen down unless we did.
Wolfowitz: But why do we need the buildings to fall down?
Cheney: Because the events of the day will be insufficiently horrifying and impactful without the building collapses.
Feith: So why don't we detonate the charges earlier, so that we can kill the people on the lower floors, too?
Cheney: That's a good question. At some point we have to sacrifice effect for believability. You see, if the planes crash into the buildings and the buildings immediately collapse, everyone will be suspicious and they'll immediately be onto the presence of the explosives. So what we have to do is let the planes crash into the building, give the jet fuel time to start fires that will "soften" the building core, and then we detonate the charges. Afterwards, we'll be able to argue that the fires coupled with the impact actually caused the buildings to collapse.
Feith: Why will we be able to argue that? Didn't our studies show that impact and fire alone wouldn't have caused the buildings to collapse?
Cheney: Those were our secret, far-more-advanced studies, done with secret, far-more-advanced military technology. The vast majority of the world's civilian structural engineers, however, can be counted on after the incident to conclude that the buildings collapsed due to a combination of fire, impact, and the knocking off of fireproofing from the building beams.
Feith: Why can they be counted on to conclude that?
Cheney: Because that's what our secret research shows their not-secret research will show! Jesus Christ, work with me on this, will you?
Wolfowitz: I think I get it. We crash the planes, kill everyone above the impact of the planes, let the people underneath the impact out to safety, then collapse the buildings about an hour or so later using the explosives that we pointlessly incurred months and weeks worth of career- and life-threatening risk to covertly plant in a building complex visited by hundreds of thousands of people every week.
Cheney: Exactly! The actual deaths will mostly be caused by the planes. But we'll incur the massive additional risk simply to destroy the building, for effect, because it will look cool and scary on television.
Feith: I'm still confused about the our-studies and their-studies thing.
Cheney: (sighing) What's the matter, Doug?
Feith: If we know the planes won't collapse the buildings, isn't it possible that other people after the accident will figure out that the planes didn't collapse the buildings?
Cheney: Yes. But those other people will be a tiny minority of mostly non-scientists who'll deduce the whole plan by researching the matter on the internet. Their groundbreaking, visionary research, however, we can count on being ignored by the mainstream scientific community, which will continue to insist the planes caused the collapses.
Feith: Why can we count on that?
Cheney: Because the mainstream science community, like the whole of the corporate media, the Congress, the Democratic Party, even the mainstream leftist political opposition will naturally be in either conscious or unconscious assent with our plan. Most scientists, you know, depend in some form or another on government funding. So they'll be highly motivated to sign off on our dastardly mass-murder plot, since they know their salaries -- some of these people make almost a hundred thousand a year, you know -- ultimately depend on our ability to secure fifty billion additional barrels of oil per day by 2010 by fooling the population into invading Saddam Hussein's secular Iraq by faking a terrorist attack against the World Trade Center at the hands of a bunch of Saudi religious radicals loyal to the Afghan-supported terrorist leader Osama bin Laden.
Wolfowitz: No, I get it, I really do. It all makes sense.
Cheney: Also, we have to knock down WTC-7, this very building, in order to get rid of the evidence. I think it goes without saying that we'll need a command center for these operations, and I can't think of a place that would be better or more appropriate than an office right next to the point of attack. From these very offices, gentlemen, we will coordinate the military war exercises that will be held in this region on that very morning, war exercises that will so thoroughly confuse our own military that they will be unable to identify and intercept the hijacked planes we will be sending at the towers like so many deadly guided missiles.
Kristol: But, Dick -- how can we be sure that the Air Force won't find a way to intercept the planes anyway?
Wolfowitz: I'll answer that, Dick. Irv, the best way we can guarantee that will be to issue stand-down orders in addition to implementing the war games.
Kristol: I see. We order the war games in order to stymie the Air Force intercepts we don't control, but just in case those fail, we'll control the Air Force intercepts.
Cheney: Now you're catching on.
Kristol: And the control center for those war games and for all our other plans (including the demolition) will be right here. These rooms are secret and utterly impenetrable to the general public at the moment, but after the attacks they will be vulnerable to forensic inspection by whichever city or federal agency goes through the wreckage of this doomed building.
Cheney: Exactly. That's one of the reasons I thought we should choose this space. If we chose some other spot as a base of operations -- a warehouse in Queens, say -- we might be able to keep it secure forever. But if we set up here, we can be sure some snooping official will end up poking around in the ruins. And we want that, it adds intrigue to the whole deal. Because it goes without saying that we won't be able to control all the cleanup agencies, except those that might be inclined to find our bomb fragments. Those we can count on 100%.
Kristol: Right, but still, we have to really be sure we destroy everything here. Especially all the papers and computer records of the conspiracy plans, which we will naturally leave behind, banking on the fact that they will be destroyed in the hellish conflagration.
Feith: Guys, I'm lost. You're saying we have to detonate this entire building in order to cover up the evidence of the crime?
All: Of course.
Feith: Why don't we just not leave the evidence behind and not blow up the building? Why should there be any evidence to leave behind at all?
Cheney: Doug, you're not being realistic. You always have to leave evidence of covert operations behind for the public to maybe find.
Wolfowitz: Well, except that we never have before.
Cheney: Right, except for that.
(a phone in the middle of the conference table rings. Kristol picks is up.)
Kristol: Hello? Who's this? Oh, hey, Larry. A gast in shetl! I'll put you on speaker! (cups phone, presses speaker button; addresses others) It's Larry Silverstein, the WTC landlord.
Silverstein: Hey guys! Vos makht ir?
Cheney: Not bad, Larry, how goes it?
Silverstein: In dr'erd afn dek! Just awful! But we get by, you know.
Cheney: What can we do you for, Larry?
Silverstein: Oh, hey, well, a little birdie told me that you guys were planning on blowing up my building complex and blaming it on Islamic terrorists!
Cheney: We all have our hobbies, Larry.
Silverstein: Well, naturally, you have my assent. Anything to grease the wheels of international capitalism. Also, as a landlord, I love seeing my tenants burned to death and jumping out of high windows on live television and that sort of thing. Plus, I'm a Jew, you know, I have horns. Paul, how's your family?
Wolfowitz: Oh, Larry, don't ask. Clare just last week popped her bursa sac building a sukkah. But does anyone live a life without troubles these days?
Silverstein: Things just keep getting worse and worse, you're right there. Listen, fellas, about that building complex ...
Cheney: Yes?
Silverstein: Do you think you could make sure that the WTC-7 building goes down, too? See, the thing is, I just signed a new insurance deal with Industrial Risk Insurers, this could all work out very nicely for me ...
Cheney: Larry, it's such an amazing coincidence, we were just talking about that. As it happens, we need to destroy the building to get rid of the evidence anyway. So say no more about that, we'll take care of it.
Wolfowitz: Well, say no more until it happens. Then you might just want to casually mention near a PBS camera that you're planning on "pulling" the building.
Silverstein: What does "pulling" mean?
Cheney: Well, it's not a demolition term, but some will say it is. We're thinking you might just want to make a little admission in that direction.
Silverstein: Before my insurance investigation is concluded? At exactly the time when such an admission would cost me my entire settlement? Consider it done!
All: Thanks, Larry.
Silverstein: You bet, fellas! See you on the links. Mazel tov! Oh, hey, Paul--
Wolfowitz: Yes?
Silverstein: Pull my finger, Paul! Pull it!
Wolfowitz: You bet I'll "pull it," you mensch!
Silverstein: Later!
(Silverstein hangs up)
Cheney: Well, that worked out well. I guess the only things left to really worry about are the other two planes. What do you guys think?
Kristol: Well, one plane. I'm thinking with the Pentagon, we send a missile or a drone into the building, then just tell everyone it's a plane. Just to fuck with people.
Feith: Is this going to be your basic take-the-real-plane-to-a-remote-military-base, kill-the-passengers, then-fake-their-cellphone-distress-calls-using-advanced-voice-recog-technology deals?
Kristol: That's what I'm thinking. Keep it simple, in other words.
Wolfowitz: Now I'm confused. We hire patsies to fly into the World Trade Center, but for the Pentagon, we don't use patsies?
Cheney: No. We use patsies, but just not to fly the plane. See, the patsies we choose for the Pentagon job won't actually have enough piloting skill to maneuver a plane into the Pentagon. So what we'll do is take a real passenger flight, hijack it and take it to a remote location -- say, Wright Patterson Airport in Ohio -- and then kill all the passengers on board, including the patsies, with poison gas. Then, instead of using that plane, we'll either shoot a missile or use one of those GlobalHawk drone planes to crash into the Pentagon. Then we tell everyone that it was actually the missing plane that crashed into the Pentagon.
Wolfowitz: Why don't we just get patsies who can fly a plane? Isn't that what we're doing in New York?
Cheney: It's so hard to find skilled patsies these days.
Kristol: Plus, Paul, it'll be simple. All we have to do is go to the crash site afterwards and deposit pieces of airplane wreckage, landing gear and so on, at the appropriate places ...
Cheney: That's perfect. I know exactly where we can get some airplane wreckage, too. There was an American Airlines jet that crashed in Colombia in 1995; we can take pieces of that plane and just sort of drop them on the lawn when no one is looking ... You know, just like in The Great Escape — drop them through a pantleg while whistling and looking off into the distance, and just sort of kick them around in the burning wreckage ...
Kristol: Or even better, we can drop them on the lawn from a circling C-130 after the crash. Just have someone leaning out the cargo bay with big pieces of fuselage, dropping them strategically in between the rescue workers. We can do the same thing with the body parts; we'll just take some of the bodies, barbecue them with jet fuel, and just sort of toss bits of them here and there around the site.
Cheney: That works for me. What I like about that is that it's so simple.
Wolfowitz: Okay, let me back up. Rather than just finding some patsies who can fly -- which is exactly what we'll be doing in New York -- we instead seize an actual passenger flight and remove the passengers to a remote location and kill them, disposing of the plane later. Then we attack the Pentagon and kill 100 or so of our own people with either a missile or a Global Hawk drone plane, banking on the probability that no one will see a plane shooting a missile in broad daylight of the nation's capital. Then, after we execute this attack on the Pentagon, we go back to the site and cleverly rearrange the evidence to make it look like a plane crashed there, including planting the samples of DNA of all the people we killed in Ohio or whatever. I'm not saying it doesn't sound like a good plan, but can I ask why we're doing this? If we can't find a patsy who can fly a plane, why not just not crash a plane into the Pentagon?
Cheney: What do you mean? But a plane crashes into the Pentagon. That's part of the plan.
Wolfowitz: Right, but since it's our plan and we can change it, why don't we just scuttle the entire Pentagon operation? We've already got the money shot with the Towers -- why do we need to go through all the trouble of finding hijackers who can't fly, nurturing them in the womb of ineffective government surveillance, getting them on a plane full of passengers, and then faking the deaths of all these people, telling the world they died in a plane crash that was actually a sinister attack using our own technology? I mean, so many things can go wrong. You've got to get people to sign off on the DNA reports, you've got eyewitnesses with weird stories, you've got inconsistent radar data, you've got to put stuff there for the dogs to find ...
Cheney: Don't worry about the dogs. We've got the dogs covered.
Wolfowitz: Oh, well, okay. But still -- why not just skip the whole thing?
Cheney: Are you suggesting that instead of executing hundreds of sinister, secretive, murderous sub-plans that all must go off flawlessly to together create a single underpublicized deception, that instead of that we just blow it off and go with the much larger and more spectacular World Trade Center event?
Wolfowitz: Right. Either that or find patsies who can fly.
Cheney: Hmm. Interesting. What do you guys think?
Feith: I don't know, Dick. It seems much easier just to go with the whole fake-the-flight, kill-the-passengers, fake-the-cell-phone-calls, pass-off-the-missile-attack-as-a-plane-crash thing. I can't think of any simpler way to do this plan than that.
Kristol: Yeah, Dick, frankly, neither can I. I like your plan better. It's so much more ... cloak n' daggerier!
Cheney: Well, it's settled, then. Paul, you cool?
Wolfowitz: Hey, I trust you guys, you know that.
(the phone rings again)
Feith: I'll get it. (grabs phone) Hello? Oh, hey, Ted, what's up! (whispering, to everyone else) It's Ted Olson. (into phone) I'll put you on speaker, okay, Ted?
Olson: 'Sup, fellas!
Cheney: 'Sup, counselor! How goes it? Talked to George much lately?
Olson: As Governor Bush's attorney, you know I can't discuss that -- even with you assholes.
(everyone laughs)
Cheney: Fair enough, What can we do you for, counselor?
Olson: Well, I don't mean to be a pest ...
Cheney: Speak up, speak up.
Olson: Well, a little birdie told me that you guys were planning on faking an airplane hijacking and shooting a drone into the Pentagon, blaming it all on Islamic terrorists!
Cheney: Sure are a lot of little birdies around these days!
Olson: I was just wondering if you could stick my wife on the plane you're thinking of hijacking.
Cheney: Barbara?
Olson: Right, Babs.
Cheney: That's no problem. Consider it done. But you've got to get her on the plane.
Olson: Shit, that won't be hard. I'll tell her I dropped a dollar in the other airport. She'll catch the first fucking flight.
Cheney: That's great. Hey, maybe, actually you could help us. After we take Babs to a military base and dispose of her fat body, can you tell the press that she called you, weeping, on her cell phone during the hijacking? It'll add verisimilitude to the whole thing.
Olson: You mean like, "Oh, my poor wife, she called me in those last dire minutes before those terrorist bastards took her life, blah blah blah," that sort of thing?
Cheney: Exactly.
Olson: Hey, I'm a lawyer, I lie for a living. Consider it done. Of course, the pain of losing Babs would be easier if ...
Cheney: You want to be Solicitor General, right?
Olson: Well, if you haven't picked one out yet.
Cheney: Ted, you can count on us.
Olson: Thanks, man. Tell your other evil plotter buddies there that I love them.
All: We love you, too, Ted.
Olson: Later!
(Olson hangs up)
Feith: Well, that worked out well.
Kristol: That only leaves the last plane, I guess.
Cheney: Right. This one -- this one I think is going to be tricky.
Feith: How so?
Cheney: Okay, bear with me on this, okay? The plane takes off. Passengers, patsies, the whole deal. The hijackers take over the plane and start steering it toward the White House. But fuck them, okay? We step in, our jets scrambled, and we blow those fuckers out of the sky.
Feith: Boom!
Cheney: Of course, we can't exactly admit that we killed American passengers, even for a good reason like this would be. So we'll dream up a story about passengers overpowering the hijackers and downing the plane themselves. "Let's roll," a wife will hear her husband say on his cell phone, as he and his brave party of vigilantes storms the cockpit ...
Wolfowitz: Oh, I see, right. Because they learned from their families, by talking with them on their cell phones, the terrible fate of the World Trade Center. So they give their lives to save the White House ...
Feith: Wow. I'm going to cry, that's so beautiful.
Cheney: In reality, though, it'll be us downing the plane with an F-16 or something. The pilots will never talk, never. Nor will the air traffic controllers ...
Kristol: Oh, I like that. It's patriotic. So why do we shoot the plane down, though?
Cheney: Well, because otherwise the hijackers will crash into the White House. But we can't admit that to the public, they'll be horrified.
Kristol: But they're not real hijackers, are they? Aren't they patsies?
Cheney: Oh, right. Shit! Man, I'm getting confused. We should probably break for lunch soon.
Wolfowitz: No, Dick, I've got that one. You see, here's the thing. Maybe the passengers really will overpower the hijackers. If that happens, it goes without saying that we have to shoot the plane down. We can't let them land, because then the hijackers will talk, and our whole evil plan will be exposed.
Cheney: Right, right, that's exactly what might happen. So it goes without saying that we have to be prepared to fake a crash site to make it look like a crash, even though it'll really be us shooting the plane down.
Kristol: But how can we prepare a phony crash site in advance if we don't even know for sure right now that the passengers will overpower the hijacker-patsies? Or where or when that will happen? That shouldn't even be entering our minds at this point.
Cheney: Well, um ... fuck. Right again. Paul?
Wolfowitz: I don't know, man, I'm getting tired at this point. But I'm down with the general idea of shooting that plane down.
Cheney: If we have to.
Wolfowitz: Right, if we have to.
Kristol: But, wait -- also, don't we want the plane to crash into the White House?
Cheney: What, are you crazy? And kill innocent Americans?
Wolfowitz: Irv, come on, now.
Kristol: Guys, we've just decided to blow up the World Trade Center. Like five minutes ago.
Cheney: Well, but the White House.
Wolfowitz: Irv, the White House. You're talking about the White House.
Kristol: Okay, whatever. You know I'm all for it, whatever we do.
Cheney: Look, the point is, we do the Towers and pin it on bin Laden. That leads us to invade Afghanistan. A year and a half later, we invade Iraq.
Feith: And we blame the whole WTC thing on Saddam.
Cheney: Right, and ... wait, what? No! No, actually we never make that connection, because none exists. I figure we can just say he's in violation of his UN restrictions, and that will be a good enough reason to invade. He is anyway, right? In violation, I mean?
Wolfowitz: I think you're right, he is!
Adapted from the forthcoming book, "The Great DerangementThe Great Derangement" by Matt Taibbi. Copyright 2008 by Matt Taibbi. Published by Spiegel & Grau, a division of Random House Inc. Reprinted with permission.
Matt Taibbi is a writer for Rolling Stone.
© 2008 Spiegel & Grau All rights reserved.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/story/85723/



The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder
The Federal Impeachment Process: A Constitutional and Historical Analysis
Cowboy Republic: Six Ways the Bush Gang Has Defied the Law
United States v. George W. Bush et al.
The Genius of Impeachment: The Founders' Cure for Royalism
Articles of Impeachment Against George W. Bush
The Impeachment of George W. Bush: A Practical Guide for Concerned Citizens
The Case for Impeachment
Impeach the President: The Case Against Bush and Cheney
George W. Bush versus the U.S. Constitution: The Downing Street Memos and Deception, Manipulation, Torture, Retribution, and Cover-ups in the Iraq War and Illegal Domestic Spying
Verdict and Findings of Fact
Impeach Bush: A Funny Li'l Graphical Novel About the Worstest Pres'dent in the History of Forevar
Pretensions to Empire: Notes on the Criminal Folly of the Bush Admin- istration
The Twilight of Democracy: The Bush Plan for America




































Why Post this idiotic drivel David?
It's a complete waste of time, but you know damn well I can't let this idiots claims go unchecked...
First of all his gross generalization of "the truth movement" is a classic oversimplified straw-man. He suggests that all thruthers believe one certain way about "the ruling class" in this country. Which is obsurd.
There are elements within the government that wanted a reason to rebuild amreicas defenses (hence "Rebuilding Americas Defenses" written by PNAC) and there are elements in the elite class that profit from endless war (defense industry, intel industry, ect, et.). If you author would like to deny those facts he is welcome to.
He goes on to say that the people who run this country don't send the likes of Cheney and Bush to the White House to run risky attacks "in broad daylight" but rather they send them there to make their criminal endevours legal.
(Has this guy been high for the last 6 years?)
Let me explain something; try reading "The Shock Doctrine: the Rise of Disaster Capitalism". It might give you a bit of insight into what has been going on and exactly why the wanted to blow up the towers in broad daylight. (I'll give you a hint: it has something to do with "shock" (like "shock and awe", do you see a pattern developing?)).
And in case you haven't noticed, this aqdministration has gotton everything it has wanted since 9/11; not before.
In fact, this administration has subverted the constitution numbers of times, spread hundreds of billions of dollars out to their buddies and favorite comapnies, and they have clamped down on our freedoms with impunity... all because of 9/11.
And guess where the evidence for Eron and several other corporate investigations was kept on 9/11? Got it yet? Building 7, the one that fell down, without being hit by a plane.
Look, I could go off on this joker all day long, but let me just say this;
this guy needs to do alot more research before coming out against those who are calling for a new investigation into 9/11.
His oversimplifications and strawman arguments are obvious to anyone with half a brain.
I am not so curious as to why he wrote this silly piece because right now, the call for a new investigation into the events of 9/11 are getting louder and more attention.
Forensic studies are being done, and even the New York Times calls certain aspects of the Commision Report very suspicious.
So I understand why this guys editors want him to put out a silly piece of yellow journalism...
what I would like to know is why David put it up on here? You need someone to recomend some places to start some research David, you let me know. Ok?
try architects and engineers for 9/11 truth or david ray griffin or steven jones.
Try reseaching iron rich spheres in 9/11 dust or melting tempatures of a-36 steel.
try looking into the plane that crashed into the empire state building in the 40s or the fact that NIST just admitted that they...
CANT EXPLAIN WHY THE BUILDINGS COLLAPSED. (that's the NIST report people, David)
and ask yourself why they have pictures of steel from Sept 11 with holes burned clean thru that even FEMA and NIST couldn't exlpain because jet fuel doesn't burn nearly hot enough to do that (NYT says it's the biggest mystery yet of 9/11).
Have a look at this stuff David. Get some perspective.
Ask yourself why in 2000 NORAD and the FAA were able to intercept 100% of the flights that went off course in the required timeframs, but just as it happened (with Cheney in charge) they missed all 4 on Sept. 11th.
You ask yourself those questions... and if you are really interested in regime change here in the states, maybe you will rethink posting uneducated drivel like this guy, huh?
I got work to do. Seeing unresearched yellow journalism like this on ADS is very diappointing.
Right ON
For sure that guy had little or no knowledge of 9-11 and as written above it is a bummer to even read it. The truth movement is as spoken..truth..or a search for the truth.
Thanks
Dynamic
Excellent response...this is drivel/yellow journalism indeed
You summed up my postition exactly. I want explainations as to why WTC 1, 2 and 7 fell that agree with the laws of physics not some 3rd rate yellow-journalism non-fiction article. Efforts to direct attentions away from hard facts into the false reality of fantasy is a primary tactic used by the NeoCons to get and stay in office. Dont provide an avenue to spread such propaganda.
What an Offensive Pile of Crap
Mr. Tabbei article is a terribly offensive pile of crap that attempts to ridicule the intelligence of a large segment of people who read AfterDowning.
You know what holds up the notion of 9-11 being assisted, if not planned entirely by rogue elements in the US government? Hard scientific, obvious breeches in standard NORAD air defense measures and the blatant coverup that followed.
Matt Tabbei is a fool who has absolutely no insite as to why Physicists, Architects, Pilots, Former Intelligence Officials, and victims family members are pushing for a new investigation. To imply that these events could not have taken place because Bush is a village idiot and incapable of such an involved plot is ridiculous. Who the hell ever said he ncecessarily planned it? What Mr. Tabbei must explain is why Bush did such a poor job acting out his role, pretending to read the pet goat book with the kids well after the 2nd tower was hit by a plane. No - he had to wait 'til the Pentagon got hit as well (an hour and a half after the first plane was hijacked), before giving his rehearsed "America is under attack" statements.
After analyzing tons of evidence tied into the 9-11 attacks, I am convinced, beyond a shadow of a doubt, it was in fact, a "false flag" attack perpetrated by rogue elements in the US government. For starters, I challenge Mr. Tabbei to analyze the alleged Bin Laden confession (from Dec. 2001), compare the man in that video to an actual photo of Bin Laden and determine whether they are the same person. It becomes quickly obvious that the person in the video confession has been made to look like the real Bin Laden. Now if anyone can tell the obvious fact that these are two different people, the next question arises: how did US intelligence and the Bush Administration not notice that as well, and released it to the public as authentic? That seems to be the only time this government disclose any evidence to the public: when it is doctored evidence that supports their cover-up.
Mr. Tabbei also needs to explain away the Norman Mineta testimony where he clearly states to the 9-11 commission that Dick Cheney gave a stand-down order in his presence: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDfdOwt2v3Y This order was given before the plane hit the Pentagon.
There's also plenty of evidence supporting controlled demolition of the WTC: www.AE911truth.org (Architects & Engineers for 9-11 Truth). What caused the molten steel that continued to burn for more than two months after the attacks? If the fires caused by jet fuel were hot enough to melt steel and collapse 110 floors symmetrically at nearly freefall speed, why do we see people near the sight of impact, waving for help? Shouldn't they have been incinerated? Why was there an unprecedented complete power-down at WTC, two days before the attacks? Was it just coincidence that Marvin Bush and Wirt Walker (President's brother and cousin) were in charge of the company that controlled security at the WTC, Dulles Airport and United Airlines?
There's the suspicious insider put options on United and American Airlines stock that were bought prior to the attack. Even though the investor would have made huge profits had they sold them the days after the attack, this suspect never cashed them in. According to the Government, they don't need to disclose the identity of the purchaser because they had no connections to Al Quaida.
Why did Bush and Cheney have to appear together before the 9-11 Commission and not have to answer any question under oath or with a transcript for public disclosure? What the hell are they hiding? Why are we not entitled to have full public disclosure of the evidence?
There is just so much more. If jerks like Mr. Tabbei are provided a forum on your website, while strong evidence presented by David Ray Griffin, Richard Gage, Barry Zweiker, and Michael Ruppert are not, then I'm through with this website, and your futile impeachment attempts lousy pseudo-Liberals.
You'll never get your stinkin' impeachment, because you can't disclose the larger underlying catalyst for all these high crimes: the 9-11 attacks. Just like the Impeachment movement, the 9-11 Truth movement is not provided a forum in the corporate-controlled media, so you should show sympathy and respect, yet you choose to go on the offensive over a topic that obviously you and certain contributors are hopelessly uninformed on. What's wrong with you guys?
So dissappointed in this kind of slanted journalism.
Bitterly,
Scott
Livermore, CA
David, I have enormous respect for you
and spread many of ADS' stories all over the web.
You are also doing more than just about anyone in working for peace, justice, and impeachment (topics which I also support and write about).
However, please read this rebuttal to Alternet's article:
http://georgewashington2.blogspot.com/2008/05/new-rules-dont-talk-about-...
Thank you.
What a waste of bytes
Matt Taibi is an idiot, the article is fiction, drivel and does not counter any of the legitimate questions raised- such as those in 9/11 Press for Truth- which ADS has promoted.
If you haven't seen the September 11 archives at Democrats.com, they're great- this is just one 9/11 related database:
http://archive.democrats.com/preview.cfm?term=September%2011%20Investiga...
9/11 Victims' Families' Review of 9/11 Commission Report
http://www.911truth.org/downloads/Family%20Steering%20Cmte%20review%20of...
Complete 9/11 Timeline- over 5000 articles, exclusively from mainstream sources
http://cooperativeresearch.org/project.jsp?project=911_project
Sad that ADS would post this BS from Mark Taibbi
Someone who knows the TRUTH but endeavors to make some money by trying to keep it suppressed.
The truth of 9/11 is coming out no matter what you do to stop it
911 Truth Movement
This long drawn out article appears to be an attempt at disinformation and yet I almost believe the writers are serious. As an architect and supporter of the architects and engineers for 911 truth, I believe that the three towers were brought down by prepositioned charges strategically placed prior to the planes hitting the towers.
Tower no. 7 was never hit by a plane but imploded perfectly
into its own footprint. A complex well planned operation,
arab patsies, cheering mossad across the river, put options,
insurance payouts, etc. etc. The truth could set us free!
9/11:The Case For Controlled Demolition
Noted attorney and retired public defender William Veale presents a Summation for the Prosecution to a Citizens Grand Jury Link CLICK HERE http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4biSy4-mxs evidence of mass murder-a concise summary of some legal evidence behind the controlled demolitions of WTC 1,2,7.
guilty until proven innocent
It is beyond any reasonable doubt the people behind the current Bush administration are as evil and deceptive as can be imagined. The fact they wanted and started their Iraq war shows they have no compunction about literally unleashing hell on earth.
We need all understand that unlike a common citizen, a government (which has the power to suppress evidence, invoke secrecy, and even use deadly force) should ALWAYS be considered guilty until proven innocent. It's called "eternal vigilance".
Why folks at Democracy Now! and Alternet continually go out of their way to make excuses for these Nazi like bastards who had means, opportunity, and above all "motive" for creating the 9/11 attacks is one of the most disappointing facets of this modern day fascist nightmare.
"As long as the Matrix exists, the world will never be free." - Morpheus, from The Matrix
Mr. Anderson...
"It is natural for man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts ... For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth, to know the worst, and to provide for it."
-- Patrick Henry
amy goodman agrees 9/11 should be reinvestigated
google
i would not compare alternet to DN!...
speaking of alternet though, when they ran this same piece by matt taibbi, the responses were numerous to say the least and overwhelmingly decried the piece. that they ran it at all surprised me and deterioated my respect for them somewhat (and hugely i must add). i say somewhat because they at least have not completely censored any raising of the subject of 9/11 at all, and thus allowed such responses be heard.
after a whole spate of replies, i'd found no one yet had mentioned kucinich's own concern with yet another facet of the whole sordid horror; insider stock trading related to the tragedy.
and i must add i was surprised to find taibbi's piece published here as well... surprised i say? sickened.
Nice try, but...
All of the attempts to smear 9/11 truthers are along the lines that they start with a predetermined notion then build whatever kind of case they can scrap together, or they think the government is guilty until proven innocent, etc.
The fact is, it's not so. People who think the usg is behind 9/11 are the only ones doing reaearch on the subject. They are not necessarily all doing research. Some are certianly more like a Trojan Hourse or false opposition.
Mr. Taibei Insults Our Intelligence
I can't believe after over 6 years of obvious facts that have surfaced regarding 9-11 you would allow Matt Taibei to throw out ridiculous straw man statements attempting to ridicule the idea that 9-11 was a government staged terror attack against its own citizens. This event served as the pretext for the Oil war(s) in the Middle East and has reaped unimaginable fortunes for those who were complicit. No one has ever been publicly tried for this attack and really all we've been provided is a weak government account of what supposedly happened. Manufactured evidence and an obvious coverup should permit any semi-critical thinking person to question the official account.
Matt questions the logic in the need to place controlled demolitions in the building, implying that the planes crashing would provide enough shock and outrage; however, what he fails to understand is that in the world of organized crime/state sponsered terrorism, the need to destroy and dispose of key evidence is crucial. If Mr. Taibei doesn't find it slightly suspicious "Lucky Larry" Silverstein happened to purchase a $7 billion terrorism policy, with the expressed rights to rebuild if the buildings were completely destroyed, then he fails to understand the concept of insurance fraud with malicious intent. As a matter of fact, Silverstein is currently sueing for an additional $12 billion against the airline companies and security companies that failed to screen the passengers for the alleged boxcutters.
Although we have been told, we have absolutely no evidence as to who was in the cockpit of the planes that hit. The "evidence" was a piece of luggage that contained Attah's last will (strange to carry that along on a one way journey to martyrdom), the list of suspects (none of whom appear on any of the flight manifests), and the magical passport that survived the intense explosion and fire, identifying one of the suspects. Here's an interesting bit of trivia for Mr. Taibei: the Boeing 767 and 757's were designed with the capability of being flown remotely from another location. Hmmmm.... no black boxes, no fireproof titanium engines, and a three steel framed buildings virtually atomized, defying all recorded history re: airplane crashes and steel structured fires. Physicist Steven Jones conducted tests on debrit from the site and found high traces of Thermate, a military grade incendiary used to melt through steel which cannot be achieved by hydrocarbon fires. Many prominant architects are coming forward to make the case for controlled demolitions proving that the freefall collapse of the three buildings could not possibly have occurred without use of controlled demolitions unless the laws of physics and theramal dynamics were somehow strangely altered on that fateful day. Please take a look at www.AE911Truth.org for friggin' sake! Have yet to find ANYONE who can refute Architect Richard Gage's analysis of the collapses.
Then Taibei throws out the alleged Barbara Olsen phone call to her Solicitor General husband Ted which was, according to the FBI, never successfully transmitted. As a matter of fact, NO CALLS FROM FLIGHT 77 TRANSMITTED. But, hey the government told us they did, so I guess we can assume they wouldn't lie. The Shanksville flight calls were more than a little suspicious as well: "Hi Mom this is Mark Bingham... You do believe me don't you?" Oh, and don't forget the call to the Verizon operator: "Sir would you like me to connect you to your wife?"... "Uh, no she's pregnant and I don't want to stress her out".
Don't forget the Bin Laden confession where an individual who looks a hell of a lot less like the real Bin Laden than Frank Zappa would've takes full credit for the attacks. Just direct your search to YouTube so you see for yourself the complete disimilarity. Somehow intelligence officials couldn't spot the discrepancy before they televised it to the world. Given that the Bush's and Bin Ladens have such close ties (George H.W. was hanging out with one at the Carlyle Group convention), strange the Bush's couldn't tell the difference either.
Someone also please explain the strange deviation from standard NORAD protocal that occurred that morning. An hour and a half after the first plane was "hijacked", Andrew's Air Force Base (just a few miles a way) could not scramble up an F-16 to intercept. How about Norman Mineta's testimony re: Cheney's standown order before the Pentagon was struck? Eighty-five cameras filmed the attack but only 5 grainy frames from one could be released.
C'mon Mr. Taibei and AfterDowning, get updated on these facts. There are so many more, yet you prescribe to the official fairytale that was concocted by the same war criminals you want impeached. Maybe you'll finally understand why Pelosi, Hoyer and other are too frightened to remove these deranged maniacs.
You guys usually deliver intelligent in-depth journalism (not so sure about that phoney Hunter S. Thompson wannabee, Matt Taibei), but for some reason your just totally oblivious to the 9-11 Truth.
This reads just like any other crap from the msm!
Obviously, the "9/11 Truth" movement is now being sabotaged from 2 different angles. There are the fake 9/11 truth seekers who setup straw man arguements which are easy if not effortless to knock down, then there are the idiotic, nonthinking diatribes such as this, which claim to reason out the whole 9/11 truth movement, but which only knock down movements and leaders which were meant to be knocked down.
You need to do some more research.
Read "Oklahoma City Day One," Michele Marie Moore. You'll see, not only could the kleptocrats in the us and britan be responsible for 9/11. It wouldn't be the first time.
That only means, do more homework. After you read a piece like this, don't allow it to put you at ease.
911 truthers
too, too many coincidences and probable cause to not believe that Dick Cheney, The neocons, PNAC, Silverstein, Israeli Mossad demolition team, Radio controlled jets, Guiliani, Spitzer(walked away from his responsibility to investigate this catastrophic criminal act), Saudi patsies, Saudi money, military industrialists and many others have conspired to commit the crime of the last century. Someday the truth will be known and may the peacemakers prevail. Sundog
I wonder how Taibbi would do with Cheney's ACTUAL words
What a worthless piece of garbage.
Anybody can go to You Tube, search "Mineta testimony" and find the clip of former Transporation Secretary Norman Mineta testifying before the "9/11 Omission," telling them how he stood in the same room with Cheney as the plane (or whatever it was) approached the Pentagon, and watched as the same person would come in every few minutes saying "the plane is 50 miles out"..."The plane is 30 miles out"..."The plane is 10 miles out. Does the order still stand?"
Mineta then watched Cheney whip around and say "Of course the order still stands!"
Why would the commission NOT be interested in PRECISELY what the "order" was and why it was given?
Why would they not be interested in clearing up the glaring discrepancy (about 30 minutes) between when Mineta says he witnessed the exchange and Cheney's claim that he did not get to the emergency operations center until after the Pentagon was struck?
And why was Mineta's stunning testimony not even mentioned in the final commission report?
Dismissing such legitimate, very relevant questions as "conspiracy theory" only indicates a desire to avoid the definitive truth.
Anyone who would like the speculation to stop needs to stand up and join the call for a REAL 9/11 investigation.
Your TV is not your friend.
Video Commentary:
"CONYERS: From Cowardice to Complicity"
DEMAND IMPEACHMENT HEARINGS NOW:
johnconyersjr@gmail.com / john.conyers@mail.house.gov
You still haven't answered my question, David...
You are too good of a writer and researcher not to see the glaring problems with Taibbi's arguments.
You ever notice how people like Taibbi here can only attack "truthers" personally, and not on facts alone? There's a reason for that David; because the facts just don't add up.
Let's put it this way:
Someone kills your family (or a neighbors. whomever) and the Sheriff refuses to launch an investigation for 400+ days until the family members go to the press and get so much attention, that sheriff is forced to investigate.
But at first he puts a detective in charge who has already been accused and tried (Kissinger) of lying and manipulating evidence in other cases (Chile Sept. 11 1973) and he has business ties to one of the suspects (bin Laden family, who, by the way, the sheriff also has business ties to).
As the investigation goes on, they don't look at key evidence (NIST and FEMA BOTH never tested for explosive residue, even though that is STANDARD in fire/arson investigations), evidence was removed from the scene without being tested (structural steel removed under guard by city and federal authorities to be melted down), and even the investigators themselves say that the investigation was tainted from the start and that key testimony was falsified, under oath.
Then, After all of this, you find out that the leading forensic team in the investigation (NIST) admits they can't explain (with the common theory of what happened) why the events happened the way they did which lead to the deaths of the family members (NIST admitted recently that they can't explain why the buildings collapsed. Most of the 3000 victims of 9/11 died when those buildings came down.).
Now, David, you play all of that in your head, and then pretend that well intentioned people in the community are taking up your cause and doing legitimate forensic research into what happened. All with the intention of helping YOU put this to rest...
...and along comes Taibbi who attacks these people with nonsensical strawman arguments (because he can't dispute the facts intelligently) and a bunch of websites like this one give Taibbi's BS a forum.
I lived in New York for 5 years. I worked on Gansevoort street for 2 of those years, which is very close to the towers. I have friends who ran down and helped for hours with the wounded. I even have a friend who worked in the towers and I thank God she got out.
By putting up this drivel David, it makes me think you agree with it. Do you think I am an idiot David? Do I sound like an idiot? Because that is the root of Taibbi's argument; in fact he says it several times.
Would you appreciate someone calling you an idiot for trying to find out what happened to your neighbors family? Especially when you yourself clearly know the lengths that the sheriff will go to get what he wants?
You don't put up Steven Jones research, or Jim Hoffmans analysis of collapse time or David Ray Griffins or Richard Gage's structural evaluation of the collapse...
Instead you choose to put up Taibbi's rant about how stupid "truthers" are based on ...Taibbi's impression ...of what he thinks a conversation would be like? And truthers are stupid?
I have been supportive of the impeachment process for a long while, and I will continue to do so. By the same token, I have been supportive of this site, linking it several times from my own.
But this insult to the good solid work of the people that I have mentioned as well as thousands of others, this is a deal-breaker, David. This insult will not be forgotton even if you choose to continue to ignore these comments.
In time, the truth of these crimes will finally be uncovered when the MSM can no longer ignore the obvious facts, and at that time David, this post will remain as your legacy to the call for real justice for the vicitms of 9/11.
Just a New Investigation David!
Part I
David:
This article said the 911 truth movement it’s a bunch of NUT kids. I want to show you they are NOT:
Dr. Steven Jones
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uRiv5tjV3C8
Paul Craig Roberts:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article14566.htm
Ray McGovern
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YL2w_v0PV4A
Ray McGovern – Scott Ritter
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uwu0bNaUcOU
TO BE CONTINUE
Not a Good one David!
David:
This article said the 911 truth movement it’s a bunch of NUT kids. I want to show you they are NOT:
Dr. Steven Jones
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uRiv5tjV3C8
Paul Craig Roberts:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article14566.htm
To be continue
TOO MANY NUTS?
David:
This article said the 911 truth movement it’s a bunch of NUT kids. I want to show you they are NOT:
You can find videos on YOUTUBE of these brave americans:
Paul Craig Roberts
Ray McGovern
Dr. Steven Jones
Scott Ritter
Dennis Kucinich
Jesse Ventura
Michael Ruppert
Cynthia McKinney
David Ray Griffin
AIA Architect Richard Gage
Morgan Reynolds
Kevin Barrett
Film Maker Aaron Russo
Michael Moore
And hundreds more….
Please:
Do your own research before posting any joke about the 911
“Believers”
Many of these people have been fired and humiliated.
They are not a bunch of nut KIDS they just want a NEW INVESTIGATION!
They are true AMERICAN PATRIOTS!
Don't you believe that we are to many to be wrong?
Wow. So many admirable and thought provoking responces, David.
They have taken the time to put up informative links and written heartfelt comments about this issue. Not a one, a "raving idiot" like Taibbi's article suggest we are.
makes you think, doesn't it David?
I hope it does. I hope you take the time to read these comments and to check the links. These are good people David, who just happen to know a little more about the issue than you and Taibbi combined.
I really hope you are open minded enough to see that and curious enough to look into it.
These people David, these people make me proud to be a "truther".
a comic book defense plea - 00:10 we have the truth
wow, i agree it does insult the reader
folks, buildings don't fall down in 00:10 sec flat for nobody
no buildings fall down in 10 seconds flat unless they are assisted by explosives and a lot of them
the fact that the third building fell down in less than 10 seconds is but one thing only
re-investigate 911
911 is so OVER due for a re-investigation
comic defense won't help ANYMORE
hey it took me more than 10 seconds to right this and 3 buildings came down already on 911
!!
Highly-credible
Highly-credible people question the government's version of 9/11:
http://www.911Summary.com
"...dingbat, sheeplike
"...dingbat, sheeplike population that is pleased to imagine itself dangerous and ungovernable. Rather than admit to their own powerlessness and irrelevance..."
What kind of a "progressive" promotes the profoundly anti-democratic myth that the American People are "powerless and irrelevant"?
Some of us dogs are not resigned to crouch in the corner of our cage and piss ourselves in "learned helplessness", Mr. Swanson, no matter how many times they shock us.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learned_helplessness
AND HUNDREDS MORE...
PART II
Dennis Kucinich
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kALg2VptE-g
Jesse Ventura
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nI8hfgad5Sc
David Ray Griffin
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCHN-1Yk5LI&feature=related
AIA Architect Richard Gage
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bxhGFJaLvEc&feature=related
Morgan Reynolds and Kevin Barrett
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mp98T8rOcPs
Film Maker Aaron Russo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rd9McZFN6bg&feature=related
And hundreds more….
Are all of them wrong?
Was William Rodriguez Lying?
I notice you have a picture of William Rodriguez on the website. "Willy", the custodian in the North Tower, was a hero who saved fifteen lives at the WTC and was one of the last to leave the buildings before they "collapsed". He reported that a large explosion went off in the basement before the first plane hit. He refused to change his statements to the 9-11 commission and speaks out publicly about explosives having been planted in the building. He filed a lawsuit against Bush, Cheney and those he felt were complicit in the attacks: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Rodriguez
If Mr. Taibbi's statements reflect the opinion of AfterDowningStreet, then you should remove his picture as you give no credence to any of his firsthand testimony.
nuff said...