Why Do Journalists Hate 9-11 Truthers? The Unz Review PHILIP KRASKE • SEPTEMBER 4, 2021
It seems that there are to be no dissenting voices on the twentieth anniversary of 9-11. Even film director Spike Lee was forced by media outcry to edit out of his documentary mini-series the half-hour dedicated to skeptics of the official version of the event. Thus the citizenry has been saved from “a bog of heinously dangerous ideas.”
This phrase comes from Slate.com columnist Jeremy Stahl, for whom the alternative theories of 9-11 are “arguments that have been debunked a thousand times.” This, of course, is nonsense. The debate rages to this day. But as with the issue of vaccination against coronavirus, the mainstream media will not brook the least opposition. Stahl puts great stock, for example, in the “three-year-long, $16 million investigation into the collapse of the World Trade Center for the National Institute of Standards and Technology,” as if these numbers and a solemn-sounding agency title could not possibly be challenged. It doesn’t seem to occur to him that the U.S. Government is itself the accused party here, and in similar circumstances has been caught fudging facts. The NIST report has actually taken heavy criticism from Architects and Engineers for 9-11 Truth, the most important group pushing alternative theories of the attack.
Why do journalists favor the government version so fiercely? The sheer vitriol of their attacks on Truthers reflects deep personal anger; clearly no Deep State maven stands over them dictating their articles. In theory, the more onerous discoveries of 9-11 investigators — the presence of explosive material in the dust that spread through Manhattan, the dubious cell-phone calls made from the hijacked aircraft, the impossibly high speeds of low-altitude flight by three of the airplanes — should be red meat to reporters. But all of it is ignored, if not ridiculed. What has happened to this “fifth column” of democracy?
More: https://www.unz.com/article/why-do-journalists-hate-9-11-truthers/
Here's when I'll believe the 'official' story.
Explain to me how a guy, who TWICE failed final exams in a single engine Cessna manages to take a full size commercial airliner from 32,000 feet to zero in under 8 minutes, somehow without losing speed, or the aircraft disintegrating due to drag / pressure, all the while managing a 272 degree turn to EXACTLY hit the one and only empty place in the entire Pentagon because it was under construction.
The details ALONE about the cell phone calls is enough to dispel the "official" narrative.
I don't know the source of this video, but I saved it to my hard drive. A helicopter circling the Pentagon captured the cruise missile. I doubt the dozens of security cameras around the Pentagon were disabled...that footage resides somewhere.
The reason the media reacts so strongly is because
No planes hit any buildings on 911
And if that ever becomes the mainstream belief, then all the mainstream media outlets are complicit, because they all aired the fake footage, with different color balances.
Do you remember the NBC reporter who had his camera in a bag and 'accidentally' got footage of a plane swallowed by a building, without the aluminum wings even breaking off?
https://files.catbox.moe/5y4a3z.png
This is horseshit.
They were all in on it.
And Donald J. Trump has been pissed off about it since. He's going to out them. Maybe not directly himself, but I think that in the end, he will make sure the media is exposed as
The Enemy of the People
Totally agree with you. I have seen evidence of the "no planes" theory over the years. However, I never thought it was a very good argument because so many people had already seen the film footage, and are so brainwashed. I honestly am scared that so many can watch that plane dissolve into a steel building, and think it is real?
Now, however, I realize how important it is because WHO made these video's of planes and used the video's to brainwash the American people? The press. I think the bbc actually did a story on tower 7 falling 20 minutes before it fell.
They did. Behind her was a live picture of Building 7 still standing tall. It was surreal.
Funny thing. The BBC keeps archives of all their footage, but unfortunately that clip was lost somehow.
Search: Jane Stanley BBC 9/11 BBC REPORTED BUILDING 7 COLLAPSE 20 MINUTES BEFORE IT FELL
The principal conclusion of our study is that fire did not cause the collapse of WTC 7 on 9/11, contrary to the conclusions of NIST and private engineering firms that studied the collapse. The secondary conclusion of our study is that the collapse of WTC 7 was a global failure involving the near-simultaneous failure of every column in the building. https://ine.uaf.edu/wtc7
Direct refutation of NIST by University of Alaska Fairbanks
https://ine.uaf.edu/wtc7