BBC1 Television, near 9/11/2001, interviewed 9/11 author and theologian, David Ray Griffin. What caught my attention was another guest (a writer for a prominent British newspaper) who scoffed at considering challenges to the official story of 9/11, because US media is so vast and free that if there were problems with the official story, he'd have heard about it via US media.
There is a 9/11 cover up occurring. It appears to be intentional. When the truth about 9/11 comes out, that it was an inside job involving members of the Bush Administration, there will be a massive international investigation. The media that helped with this cover up will be held accountable, if there is any hope for the future of democracy.
How do I know there is a cover up? Popular Mechanics' Editor recently appeared on Amy Goodman's Democracy Now with the producers of "Loose Change," the documentary exposing evidence of 9/11 as an inside job. As is Popular Mechanics' habit they quickly descended into name-calling and innuendo that was meant to character assassinate rather than debate facts. Words like "holocaust deniers," "JFK conspiricists," were used to charge the producers of Loose Change with the old tin foil hat smear.
This has not been unique to Popular Mechanics. Other major media have suddenly become professional psychoanalysts, suggesting that anyone questioning the flawed physics of the official 9/11 story is in need of therapy. This is in the grand and proud tradition of media in the former KGB run Soviet Union press. Strangely, the US media has never suggested that the tens of millions of Americans who still believe that Iraq engineered the attacks of 9/11, need therapy. Nor have they forcefully and en masse suggested that govt. members who believe that global warming is a myth need therapy.
When Popular Mechanics did actually attempt to argue facts rather than psychoanalyze anyone who questions 9/11 with a critical eye, Popular Mechanics, as do most who cling to the Bush Administration lies about 9/11, leaned heavily on the thousands of pages report that the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) provided as a tool to all who wish to help in this cover up. NIST is the ring-leader in this cover up. When the international investigation begins, people at NIST too will be held accountable.
I'm not saying everyone at NIST was part of a cover up. But, someone in leadership steered it away from doing its job, and it was too blatant to be ineptitude. Just as no one believes the entire 9/11 Commission was corrupt, but the Director, Philip Zelikow, who'd worked in the Bush Administration and was a close confidant to Condoleeza Rice prior to the Bush Admin. was guilty of steering the 9/11 Commission away from MANY of the hard questions about 9/11, and deleted crucial testimony like Norm Minetta's account of how Cheney's "orders" still stood. Orders that could only have been a stand down order to allow the Pentagon to be attacked.
How do I know that NIST is part of a 9/11 cover up?
Why did the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) which "supposedly" investigated the WTCs collapses not test for explosives in the debris? Any "normal professional" forensics would have included those tests, given that the WTCs were the first three steel reinforced skyscrapers in engineering history to completely collapse due to fire and/or external damage. WTC 7 wasn't even hit by a plane. Also given the spectacular Mount St. Helens explosions of the buildings coming down with steel beams being projected hundreds of feet out and away from the buildings. Not to mention the molten metal steaming in the rubble for nearly two months after 9/11. If NIST is not part of a cover up, then I highly recommend that whoever controlled the NIST investigations and did not see a need to test for explosives . . . should consider intensive psychotherapy, or at least another career.
At the point NIST investigated the WTC collapses, logical testing of explosives wouldn't even have been a "conspiracy theory." At that point one would have thought that perhaps the terrorists planted bombs, or had a truck near, or had explosives on the planes. It would have been normal professional forensic procedures to look for explosives traces, given the spectacular explosion of the three buildings on 9/11. Those collapses due to fire meant that every person worldwide who worked in a steel reinforced skyscraper may be working in a death trap. It would be imperative to understand how and why this happened, and an office of "Standards" and "Technology" would be the one to provide the answers. Their job isn't to hear a White House story of what happened and then set about to prove it. Their job is to find out if other buildings were vulnerable. Fire, at that point, was not known to be the "only" explanation. We'd seen buildings in Oklahoma City brought down by explosives. At that point there was no reason to think that the WTCs did not involve explosives as well, and in addition to the other factors of the plane crashes.
The fact that NIST "DID NOT EVEN TEST FOR EXPLOSIVES" is very telling. Coupled with years of watching the Bush Administration trying to stop the 9/11 investigations, and the disrespectful and combative way some Republicans in Congress treated the 9/11 widows. The same Republicans who tried to stop the widows' eventual creation of the 9/11 Commission. Then the way Bush tried to get master conspirator, Henry Kissinger, to run the Commission investigation, and then Philip Zelikow (Bush Admin and Rice confidant) ran it at the Bush Admins' insistence. The 9/11 widows demanded Zelikow step down and not head the Commission when they learned of his role in the Bush Admin. The Jersey Girls were ignored, and Zelikow steered the 9/11 Commission away from any of the hard questions. Of course, even the Democratic head of the Commission, Lee Hamilton, is not pristine. He presided over the Iran Contra hearings years ago, which methodically steered away from many damning facts about pre-election meetings between Reagan Admin. representatives and the Iranian revolutionaries. Meetings that likely cut a deal so that the US hostages would be held until "after" Carter's defeat, in return for eventual shipments of weapons. This was known then as the "October Surprise," which became books and a film. Of course little of this important behind the scenes information was covered, let alone explored, in any real way by US media.
Yes, the role of US media must become part of the larger 9/11 investigation. Other media in other nations as well. The issue of media ownership must be looked at worldwide. In the US a half dozen companies controls a vast majority of what Americans see, hear, and read in their media. Many media personalities have also worked as hard as Popular Mechanics to smear and character assassinate anyone who looks at the cold hard facts of 9/11, and questions the "official version".
This media machine which covered up this massive hoax and enabled the illegal wars . . . must be investigated. The media monopolies must be broken down. The leftist media, like David Corn of the Nation, and others who've systematically defamed 9/11 skeptics must be investigated. Through ignorance or intent, we don't know. We'd have to ask him. We must learn what motivated these people to avoid looking at the facts of 9/11 like cool clear journalists, and why they rather descended into childish character assassination of 9/11 skeptics immediately.
We are not talking about the entire media establishment being corrupted, for there are many in the media who know that 9/11 was an inside job, but also know that if they came out on it, their career would be over. Not only American journalists but others outside the US as well. I spoke to a writer at a major Canadian newspaper who informed me early on of Canadian journalists who'd been fired in the months after 9/11, for probing into the discrepancies between the official 9/11 story and reality. Also, it would only take one key person at editorial meetings, or television, or radio production meetings to chime in anytime anyone questioned 9/11 and steer them away from the issue by simply saying, "Oh my God, we're not going to consider that lunatic crap are we?"
This would have effectively shut down any discussion, because only recently and only thru the dogged determination of independent researchers, whistle blowers, and web publishers, does the average media person now have access to physics and other facts about 9/11 that challenge the official story. The US media completely ignored the issue until recently, so there would have been no way anyone in a newsroom could have challenged a systematic shut down of discussion on the issue without looking like a fool. Even though on the face of it, the bizarre collapse of the three towers, and the mysterious absence of the US Air Force on 9/11 didn't sit well in many people's guts. Is it outlandish to think that plants could be working in major American media? Not at all, it is historical fact that this has been done in the past.
Before the CIA illegally overthrew the elected democratic leader of Iran, Mohammed Mossedeq, in 1952, over 50% of Iran's media had been infiltrated by US govt. hired agents according to historical record. Their job was to plant stories at that critical moment and steer the Iranian and world public's minds away from the crime US covert ops had committed against Iranian democracy. To think that the forces behind 9/11 would not prepare a similar situation in the US prior to pulling off the crime of the century would be naïve, dangerously naïve. Of course the destruction of independent media in America began in earnest in the 1980s when Reagan and Republicans in Congress assaulted PBS and NPR, beginning raids on their funding, and forcing them to increasingly suck at the tit of corporate funding. Any critical listener saw their coverage change over these years, becoming a mere shadow of their former independent media selves.
Another blatant crime much of the media committed is pretending to be unaware of, or barely mentioning if at all, that one of Bush's main references for proving Hussein had WMD was a lie. Hussein Kamel was an Iraqi defector, and a son-in-law of Saddam Hussein. Bush referred to his testimony about Iraq's WMD over and over and over again to convince Americans we may be facing a "mushroom cloud" of destruction if we didn't illegally and preemptively attack Iraq. What Bush DIDN'T tell us was that in that same testimony transcript, Kamel says bluntly: "All weapons-- biological, chemical, missile, nuclear, were destroyed."
The American media had to have known this. I know for a fact that the Kansas City Star had this information, and it is unbelievable that other major media didn't have it. But, did this bombshell get exhaustively covered by corporate media television news, or radio news, or splashed across headlines of US newspapers? No, it did not. And the negligence of the US media for not doing this is nauseating, and highly suspicious.
I personally wrote every person who works at the Kansas City Star some time after the Iraq war began, because I had previously provided them with this information about Kamel's testimony "before" the Iraq war started, which was largely ignored by the Star. So after the war began and Kansan and Missourian blood had begun to spill in Iraq, I informed the Kansas City Star employees of the obvious, that everyone at the Kansas City Star had the blood of American soldiers and Iraqi civilians on their hands for participating in a shell game to deceive the American people. They had reported the part of Kamel's testimony that Bush had given them, that Iraq had WMD, but barely if at all mentioned that in that same testimony he also said they had destroyed those WMD stocks. I asked the Star to personally apologize to every Kansas and Missouri family who'd lost a son or daughter in Iraq for their complicity in the deception that fooled their child into this illegal war.
When the truth about 9/11 comes out, the media of this country must be examined. The media monopolies must be exhaustively examined, and they must be ended. Independent media must become the rule of the day. Corporate media must be separated from the entertainment departments of television corporations, and must be independent of corporate business interests. PBS and NPR must become fully funded and NEVER AGAIN DEPEND ON CORPORATE FUNDS FOR THEIR COVERAGE.
The media's corruption is the grandest lesson we will learn of as the truth of 9/11 is exposed, and without a full investigation, leading ultimately to the end of corporate monopolies of media, not only in America, but in other nations as well . . . it will only be a matter of time until crimes like 9/11, and the illegal wars we were lied into will happen again, and again, and again.
The truth shall set you free. I think most of us almost expect corruption in business and government. What makes a democracy a democracy is an independent "watchdog" media. What we have currently is a corporate "lap dog" media, at the least, and in some cases we may have something much more disturbing and sinister than that. One need look no further than the Thomas Kean/ABC "Path to 9/11" docu-drama . . .
By William E. Douglas, Jr., is author of “The Amateur Parent – A Book on Life, Death, War & Peace, and Everything Else in the Universe.” Bill has been a guest columnist for the Kansas City Star, The Business Journal, and other media worldwide. His past essays include, “Exposing the 9/11 Conspiracy Wingnuts,” “The Explosion of the 9-11 Truth Movement -- US Media's Dirty Little Secret,” and “Why the Jewish Community Should Demand 9/11 Truth.”
You may contact Mr. Douglas at firstname.lastname@example.org
Reprint permission for this article is granted. You may publish it anywhere and everywhere.