This is a documentary commentary on 9/11 Truth and the 9/11 Debate: Jon Gold Vs. Pat Curley, which took place November 24, 2008 on the Franklin Pierce University closed circuit television show, “The Dynamic Duo”, was moderated the show’s hosts Justin Martell and Eric Jackman, and is now on youtube. 

The topics of the debate were: 

1. Are there unanswered questions?

2. Was the 9/11 Commission a legitimate investigation? 

Closing arguments of Pat Curley and Jon Gold: 

PAT CURLEY: “If there is another 9/11 investigation, and let’s say it comes down a little harder on the Bush Administration, saying that Bush was not paying sufficient enough attention to the Al Qaeda threat, and that several of the NORAD generals lied to the original Commission about when they knew about the hijacking of Flights 93 and 77, and saying that Tenet should’ve been fired for not notifying the FBI about the presence of Almhidhar and Alhazmi in the United States- if all that happens, but the new investigation also concludes nobody in the US government knew any sorts of details about the terrorist attack and let it happen intentionally, that there was no demolition at the World Trade Center, that what hit the Pentagon was Flight 77, and that Flight 93 was not shot down, would anybody in the 9/11 Truth Movement say, “Well, OK, we we’re wrong”? Would Richard Gage shut down Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth? Would Patty Casazza accept that her informant along the highway in Maryland was lying to her? Would David Ray Griffin stop talking about Voice Morph-Morphed phone calls? Would Nico Haupt give up on TV Fakery? Would Killtown stop claiming that Val McAck-McClatchy’s photo was phony? And the answer is “of course not”, so stop pretending that all you want is another investigation- you want another investigation that comes to the conclusions that you believe. Thank you for your time.” 

JON GOLD: “Well, my response is that I really don’t endorse about 99% of everything [Pat Curley] just said and I never have. As I was saying, we are living in the “Post 9/11 World”. This is a world where our civil liberties disappear- where people are murdered in other countries because we decided to fight preemptive wars- this is a world where executive power is multiplied by a thousand with absolutely no accountability whatsoever. And if the event that created the “Post 9/11 World” wasn’t what we were led to believe, then we need to know about it. And I’d like to say that this debate is dedicated to Patty Casazza and Bob McIlvaine.” 

In the post-debate comment thread at 911Blogger, Jon Gold says, 

“Pat was told specifically not to play the “guilt by association” game. He asked Justin for time for a closing argument, and that’s exactly what he used it for. I have always thought 77 hit the Pentagon. I have never endorsed voice morphing. I have never endorsed Nico Haupt. I have never endorsed Killtown (except for his 200 Smoking Gun list, but his antics since then made me steer clear). I have been one of the biggest advocates against promoting bad information, or what is considered bad information. Also, to think that we never correct ourselves, or admit mistakes after I JUST corrected something in my Facts article because he pointed it out, is absurd.” 

and 

“I think it’s funny that Pat agrees 1) there are unanswered questions 2) the 9/11 Commission wasn’t a real investigation.” 

The debate included the following subjects, and more: 

9/11 Family Steering Committee unanswered questions 

NORAD’s failure to intercept any planes on 9/11 

The role of Philip Zelikow 

Philip Shenon, author of “The Commission: The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Investigation” 

The August 6 PDB: Excerpt: “Nevertheless, FBI information since that time indicates patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York. 

The FBI is conducting approximately 70 full field investigations throughout the US that it considers Bin ladin-related. CIA and the FBI are investigating a call to our Embassy in the UAE in May saying that a group of Bin Ladin supporters was in the US planning attacks with explosives.” 

The testimony of FBI whistle blower Sibel Edmonds that the US government had been informed that Bin Laden was planning attacks on US cities with planes. 

The July 10 emergency meeting with National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice, CIA Director George Tenet and Cofer Black, which was left out of the 9/11 Commission Report: CIA Director Gives Urgent Warning to White House of Imminent, Multiple, Simultaneous Al-Qaeda Attacks, Possibly Within US 

My view: 

Pat Curley’s closing argument was an attempt to frame the 9/11 Truth Movement and “unanswered questions” in a way that fits the “conclusions [he] believe[s]”. Unless he has inside information, Curley has no way of knowing what answers do or don’t exist among the photos, video, documents, witness testimony and other 9/11 evidence still being suppressed by the Bush Administration. 

Further, Curley’s attempt to discredit the 9/11 Truth Movement by associating the calls of 9/11 victims family members and 51% of American adults for a new investigation by associating us with people like Nico Haupt and ideas like TV Fakery, instead of addressing our own words and actions, which we are responsible for- is disingenuous and shameful. As Jon Gold noted, researchers and activists in the 9/11 Truth Movement have made mistakes, including himself; and cleaned them up- because of the commitment to establishing truth and justice.  

In my opinion, the above list of debate points made by Jon Gold justify the calls of 9/11 victims family members and 51% of Americans for a full investigation of 9/11- and there are many more issues with what we’ve been told about 9/11. The families deserve to know why and how their loved ones were murdered, and all Americans deserve to know the truth about how and why America was attacked on 9/11- whatever the truth may be. 

I support the calls of 9/11 victim’s family members for a new 9/11 investigation:

http://rawstory.com/news/2008/911_widows_call_for_new_investigation_0205.html 

I am one of the 51% of Americans, as of 2007, who think that Bush and Cheney specifically should be investigated in connection with 9/11

http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20070906103632686 

HistoryCommons.org - Complete 9/11 Timeline- Exclusively “mainstream” sources; official statements, government documents and experts, mainstream media

http://www.historycommons.org/project.jsp?project=911_project 

JournalOf911Studies.com - peer-reviewed papers; so far, a paper, letter and a response to Bazant’s article have been published in mainstream, peer-reviewed scientific journals

http://www.journalof911studies.com

Some say that 9/11 couldn’t have been an “inside job” because a coverup would be impossible; someone with inside knowledge would blow the whistle on such a horrible and criminal operation. The Tuskegee Syphilis experiment is one example of policy and decision makers in US federal, state and local governments conspiring to commit and cover up crimes against humanity; the “experiment” was in progress, and kept quiet, for 40 years. 

In the “Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the Negro Male”, the US Public Health Service (PHS) decided to use 399 Black men who had syphilis as experimental subjects in a study of racial differences in “late stage” syphilis, which can cause incredible suffering and even death. These human beings were used as research subjects without their knowledge or consent, in exchange for free medical exams, meals and burial insurance; on the condition the PHS could conduct an autopsy when they died. According to the Centers for Disease Control, “The late stages of syphilis can develop in about 15% of people who have not been treated for syphilis, and can appear 10 – 20 years after infection was first acquired.  In the late stages of syphilis, the disease may subsequently damage the internal organs, including the brain, nerves, eyes, heart, blood vessels, liver, bones, and joints. Signs and symptoms of the late stage of syphilis include difficulty coordinating muscle movements, paralysis, numbness, gradual blindness, and dementia. This damage may be serious enough to cause death.” 

It was known at the time that syphilis could cause extraordinary suffering and even death, and the disease was epidemic in Alabama, where the study took place. As the name of the study indicates, those directing it had no intention of providing treatment, despite their representations that treatment would be part of the study, and despite Alabama law requiring diagnosed “venereal” disease to be promptly treated. The PHS began to administer penicillin in 1943, but it was not given to the Tuskegee victims. According to the CDC, it was “the treatment of choice” by 1945. 

According to Tuskegee University, “Beginning in 1952, the PHS began utilizing local health departments to track study participants who had left Macon County. Until the end of the study in the 1970s, local health departments [conspired] with the PHS to keep the study subjects from receiving treatment.” Victims who questioned whether they had syphilis were lied to; those who found out they had syphilis and demanded treatment were given placebos instead, or treatment at levels thought insufficient to cure the disease. During the time the experiment was being conducted, papers were published in scientific journals which acknowledged the syphilis was being left untreated, and ignored the ethical implications. 

In 1966, after PHS researcher Peter Buxtun discovered the experiment was being conducted, he wrote a letter to the director of the Division of Venereal Diseases, William Brown, but nothing was changed. He wrote a second letter to Brown in 1968; this letter also addressed the ramifications of the study in the context of the growing civil rights movement and racial unrest. Brown showed the letter to the Centers for Disease Conrol (CDC), which convened a panel discussion of the issue; they reviewed the study and decided it should continue to the end. 

The study was intended to last 40 years, and it was continued from 1932 to 1972, when Buxtun shared what he knew with an Associated Press reporter. The story broke on the front page of the Washington Evening Star July 25, 1972, and was headline news nationwide the next day and in the following weeks. Public outrage and disgust was widespread, the study was ended and reforms were enacted. A $1.8 billion class action lawsuit was filed; it was settled out of court for $10 million without wrongdoing being admitted by the federal government, and in 1997 Bill Clinton formally apologized for the US federal government’s role. It is not known how many people were infected with syphilis by the Tuskegee victims due to the conspirators at PHS and local health departments preventing them from receiving diagnosis and treatment. 

Tuskegee shows us that people in positions of authority in US federal, state and local governments and the scientific community are capable of conspiracy and committing crimes against humanity, and that many people were aware of what was going on and did nothing about it. At least 3 papers were openly published on this “experiment” in scientific journals in the 50’s and 60’s, even while the victims were suffering and dying, and being deceived and prevented from receiving penicillin, the proven safe and effective treatment that was in widespread use. These journals were not accessible by the general public, and no medical student or professional who read these articles blew the whistle. At the time, many whites didn’t consider black people to be fully human; as shocking as it may seem now, readers of the articles may have believed it was important research, or that the lives and well-being of the “research subjects” were unimportant, regardless. Indeed, in 1976 historian James Jones interviewed PHS Director John Heller and quotes him as saying, “The men’s status did not warrant ethical debate. They were subjects, not patients; clinical material, not sick people.” Heller was director of the Venereal Diseases unit of the PHS from 1943 to 1948 and was instrumental in the experiment’s continuation. The quote appears in Jones’ book “Bad blood: The Tuskegee syphilis experiment: A tragedy of race and medicine”, considered the definitive book on the subject. No apology was offered by anyone involved in the study (an African-American doctor and nurse were part of it as well); many of them were angry that the US government did not defend their actions. 

The Tuskegee experiment gives insight to the psychology of individuals and societies. It is revealing of how cover-ups work and how they can be maintained, and also how they can be exposed, winning needed reforms, if not true justice. Given what’s known about Tuskegee, who can say with confidence that 9/11 could not have been an inside job because it would be impossible to cover up; someone involved would have “talked” already? Tuskegee did not become known because someone who was involved in the plot blew the whistle; Buxtun learned of the ongoing study from co-workers, and less than a year after he was hired in 1965 he had written his first internal letter protesting the study. 

Is there an on-going cover up of what really happened on 9/11? A number of people have already blown the whistle on corruption, “negligence”, obstruction, dereliction of duty, “incompetence”, malfeasance, “careerism” and cover up related to the “failures” to prevent 9/11. More whistleblowers may yet come forward, including actual participants. Numerous whistleblowers have already gone public with things they witnessed that seriously contradict the Official 9/11 Conspiracy Theory put out by the Bush Administration and the 9/11 Commission. However, Congress seems to be doing little or nothing with their testimony, while they continue to enable the crimes of the Bush Administration. Whistleblowers have been intimidated, harassed, fired and threatened, while “incompetents” who failed to do their job and facilitated the attacks have been given raises, bonuses and even more responsibility. 

Beginning on September 11, White House staff were put on Cipro, the Anthrax antibiotic. The first Anthrax letters were mailed to the New York Post and and Tom Brokaw at NBC a week after 9/11 happened; October 9, Senators Patrick Leahy and Tom Daschle received Anthrax letters. The Bush Administration had wanted the PATRIOT Act passed in a week, and Daschle and Leahy were blocking passage of the PATRIOT Act so it could be adequately reviewed. Also in early October Anthrax was discovered at The Sun, a newspaper in Boca Raton, FL, but the letter was reportedly never found. In the resulting climate of fear, uncertainty and hysteria about potential terror attacks, the PATRIOT Act was passed overwhelmingly. The Anthrax was discovered to be of the US military Aames strain, and highly refined and weaponized. When the FBI traced it back to Fort Detrick, MD, the remaining stockpiles were destroyed and ever since the FBI and DOJ have been stonewalling Congress and the public on the status of its investigation. July 31, 2008 it was reported that Fort Detrick/USAMRID Anthrax scientist Bruce Ivins had killed himself; he had been under investigation and made aware that he would soon be prosecuted. This is an acknowledgment from the US government that the Anthrax was from Fort Detrick, and the attacks were a “false-flag” terror attack (the letters were written to create the appearance of being from “Islamofascists”). It’s also raising a lot of new questions: see Anthrax Suspect Was Committed to a Psychiatric Hospital Shortly Before His Death and Government Tries to Bury Anthrax Story, by George Washington. 

For months after 9/11, the White House insisted there was no need to investigate 9/11- they claimed it Bin Laden and Al Qaeda were responsible and had caught the US by surprise, but offered no evidence, or valid explanations for the CIA, FBI and NORAD failures. Colin Powell promised a White Paper detailing the evidence of Bin Laden/Al Qaeda responsibility; to date, nothing has been released. The FBI even said June 2006 that it “has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11”. In 2002, after months of deflection, stonewalling and obstruction, including personal attempts by both Bush and Cheney to prevent any investigation into 9/11, the White House conceded to an investigation that would be limited to “intelligence failures”. This was the Senate-House Joint Intelligence Committee Inquiry into what the NSA, FBI, CIA and other agencies knew prior to 9/11. Click here for their declassified report with 28 redacted pages, which Senator Bob Graham says contains evidence of Saudi funding and other assistance to the alleged hijackers. During the course of their inquiry someone, reportedly in Congress, leaked that the NSA had intercepted messages in Arabic between Al Qaeda operatives on September 10 that said “tomorrow is zero hour” and “the match begins tomorrow”, that these messages weren’t translated until September 12, and that there were 30 other pre-9/11 intercepts that referred to an imminent attack. 

If true the September 10 intercepts weren’t translated until the day after 9/11, by itself it may be seen to be evidence merely of incompetence, laziness and/or information and work overload. When considered in the context of 30 other warning signs it seems more likely a case for criminal negligence could be built. When considered with other facts about 9/11, it seems more likely it’s evidence of intentional obstruction, part of a larger plan by supervisors and policy makers with undisclosed interests and extra-Constitutional loyalties. A plan to facilitate the appearance, to patriotic professionals within the various intelligence, investigative, law enforcement and defense agencies, and to Congress, the media and the general public, that the 9/11 attacks were perpetrated by “Islamofascists”. In reality, the alleged hijackers may have only been patsies in a plot by “elites” to create the appearance of a “clash of civilizations” as a pretext for launching an endless “war on terror”, subverting the Constitution and empowering secretive “unitary executive” government not accountable to the People or Congress, engaging in imperialist wars for geo-strategic resources, suppressing dissent and setting up a national security-surveillance state in the US. 

The intelligence and national security environment in which the 30 messages were intercepted has been referred to as the “summer of threat” when “the system was blinking red” and DCI George Tenet was “running around with his hair on fire”. Warnings had been received for years about Bin Laden and Al Qaeda planning attacks in the US, including using planes as missiles, and the warning signs were increasing in 2001. From January 20 to September 10, Bush was briefed on Al Qaeda over 40 times by Tenet, many of them urgently warning of an impending attack. The FAA issued 52 warnings mentioning Bin Laden or Al Qaeda between April 2001 and September 10, and the 9/11 Commission left this out of their final report; it was released the year after the book’s publication, as a separate “monograph”. The speculation about whether 9/11 was “allowed” or “made” to happen by parties other than Bin Laden and Al Qaeda, by people that are in the US government and have influence over the US government, is further fueled by such things as the fact that the CIA was aware of plans to strike in the US and was monitoring the alleged hijackers and people connected with them, as was the FBI. The results of 38+ SEC, and separate FBI investigations, into pre-9/11 insider trading and other foreknowledge have never been made public. The suspected insider trading and evidence of foreknowledge on the part of powerful people included a single purchase in early September 2001 of $5 billion in US Treasury Notes; traditionally a more secure investment during times of economic and social turmoil. 

The 9/11 Commission, composed exclusively of establishment insiders with financial, professional and/or political conflicts of interest, largely ignored the multiple war games and other exercises surrounding 9/11, some of which mimicked the 9/11 attacks and involved the insertion of false radar blips, while others had sent fighters up to Canada and Alaska, making them unavailable to respond. The Commission Report painted the standard air defense procedures as slow and laborious, requiring many phone calls and authorizations up and down a chain of command to get anything done. They ignored and the distorted the fact that standard FAA/NORAD operating procedures before 9/11 required them to scramble jet fighters within minutes, to respond to any flight that went off-course. See this March 12, 2001 Archive.org of Chapter 10 of the FAA’s manual, which dealt with “Emergency Determinations”, saying, “c. If the words “Mayday” or “Pan-Pan” are not used and you are in doubt that a situation constitutes an emergency or potential emergency, handle it as though it were an emergency.” The Commission also didn’t mention that in June of 2001, standard procedures were changed to require the authorization of the Secretary of Defense; in cases where lethal force might be required, as was certainly a possibility the morning of September 11. This was Donald Rumsfeld, and like many principals in the military and Bush Administration, he was behaving strangely in response to the emergencies that morning, and was out of the loop while people were trying to contact him. At 8:14 am, Flight 11’s radio button was repeatedly pushed, and it went off course at 8:20 am. Things escalated from there; soon 4 flights would be off course, with their transponders off and the pilots not responding to radio communications, although the alleged hijackers reportedly used the radio by “accident”, providing further evidence of hijacking. The Commission unquestioningly accepted DOD officials statements that the exercises enhanced the response of NORAD that morning, even though they listened to taped conversations between the FAA and NORAD personnel indicating confusion caused by the war games; statements such as “is this real world or exercise?” On the other hand, the 9/11 Commission ignored or distorted the testimony of these whistleblowers: 

FBI: Sibel Edmonds, Randy Glass, Coleen Rowley, Harry Samit, John O’Neill, Robert Wright

DOD: Scott Philpott, Anthony Shaffer

Underwriters Laboratory: Kevin Ryan

PTech: Indira Singh

White House: Richard Clarke

World Trade Center: William Rodriguez 

August 1, 2004 - Sibel Edmond’s Letter to Chairman Thomas Kean 

September 13, 2004- National Security Experts Speak Out: 9/11 Commission Falls Short - An open letter to Congress from 25 national security experts, including former FBI whistle-blower, Sibel Edmonds 

Both the 9/11 Commission and NIST Reports ignored evidence that World Trade Center 1, 2 & 7 were destroyed by controlled demolition. The 9/11 Commission Report falsely described the structure of the buildings as “hollow tubes” and ignores the fact that they were engineered to support many times their own weight, as well as withstand multiple crashes by 707’s, which are similar in size to the 767’s which hit the towers. The NIST Report spends thousands of pages describing and analyzing the factors which supposedly led to the “initiation” of “collapse” (plane damage, jet fuel/office fires) but does not examine the “collapse” itself, or the “mechanism” of the “collapse”. NIST admits the “collapse” happened “essentially in free fall” (Section 6.14.4 of NIST NCSTAR 1), and pretends that it’s possible that 15 and 30 stories (WTC 1 & 2, respectively) of building mass could pulverize the lower 95 and 80 stories of steel-frame and concrete building into huge dust clouds and small piles of rubble, “essentially in free fall”. From the same section: “The structure below the level of collapse initiation offered minimal resistance to the falling building mass at and above the impact zone.  The potential energy released by the downward movement of the large building mass far exceeded the capacity of the intact structure below to absorb that through energy of deformation.” NIST does not provide calculations for the “potential energy released by the downward movement of the large building mass”, or for the energy that would be required to accomplish such an incredible thing. NIST’s theory violates the laws of conservation of energy and momentum; but if explosives were removing the steel framing and concrete out of the way of the falling building mass, there is no violation of the laws of conservation of energy and momentum; just Federal and NY state and local laws- and international law. 

9-11 WTC Videos: Video Evidence of the Destruction of the World Trade Center Skyscrapers 

Fourteen Points of Agreement with Official Government Reports on the World Trade Center Destruction 

Evidence: The Destruction of the World Trade Center 

Frequently Asked Questions: Controlled Demolition 

Molten STEEL Flowed Under Ground Zero for Months After 9/11 

Back to 2002 and the Joint Intelligence Committee Inquiry; after the incredible “shock & awe” destruction of WTC 1, 2 & 7 in broad daylight and on national TV, after Congress, media and the public were attacked with Anthrax, at a time when the nation was still in shock, and angered by the story that we had been attacked by Bin Laden and “Al Qaeda”, and the Congress was under pressure from Bush and Cheney to limit the investigation so resources would not be distracted from the “war on terror”, the Chairs of the two committees, Sen. Bob Graham and Rep. Porter Goss agreed to have the FBI investigate who leaked “classified” information, instead of the Ethics Committees, in an unprecedented compromise of the separation of powers. The FBI interviewed about 100 Congressional staffers, nearly all 37 members of the Committee, and wanted them to submit to polygraphs; some did. Sen. John McCain commented, “What you have here is an organization compiling dossiers on people who are investigating the same organization.” “Caesar Andrews, president of Associated Press Managing Editors, said the request for information about press contacts ‘creates a mood of fear and dread among those people who should be helping to put the U.S. efforts in context.’” “’Obviously it’s an issue that ultimately has a chilling effect on the flow of information from official sources to the public,’ said Douglas Clifton, editor of The Plain Dealer in Cleveland and chairman of the American Society of Newspaper Editors’ Freedom of Information Committee.”  Sen. Dick Durbin said the FBI was “trying to put a damper on our activities and I think they will be successful.” 

This is not an environment that encourages people to come forward with what they know about corruption, treason and mass murder plots- even so, many did, including those named above, and their accounts were ignored. In 2008, the shock of 9/11 has begun to wear off among the public, but there is still no tolerance in the Establishment for those who question the “reality” of the Official Conspiracy Theory (OCT), i.e. that Bin Laden and Al Qaeda attacked us by surprise, no one other than them is responsible, and the long history of CIA connections to Al Qaeda and terror is just a myth (also see this timeline). People are free to speak their minds, but deviation from professing acceptance of the OCT means risking being marginalized as a kook by the mainstream media and the political establishment, bringing harm to reputation and career, and exposing oneself and family to unknown risks. Most Democrats and Republicans in Congress are more concerned about getting reelected and not alienating their wealthy campaign contributors, than upholding their Oath of Office to defend the Constitution and holding the executive branch accountable- even as the White House, Republican and Democrat hawks, neocons, AIPAC and corporate media beat the drums for war with Iran, without any evidence Iran has a nuclear weapons program or will be a threat within the next decade. 

The Tuskegee “experiment” victimized 399 black men and many suffered and died as a direct result. On 9/11, thousands of people of all colors, including white, were mass murdered, some dying horribly painful deaths. Thousands more will die as a direct result of Christie Todd Whitman and the EPA’s lies (OK’d by Condoleeza Rice) about the air being safe to breathe; if you’re white, your skin color will not save you, and neither will our “representatives”. Given that another massive terror attack- perhaps multiple dirty bombs in US cities- is a possibility and may be the pretext for instituting martial law and completely destroying the US Republic and our Constitution, is it not imperative that the 9/11 events be fully investigated, when what we’ve been told is so obviously not the truth? Given that the neocons keep threatening Americans with another attack and are lusting for war with Iran, can we afford to wait 40 years to find out if the truth about 9/11 is that it was an inside job and it’s being covered up? Should not all those responsible for the success of the attacks be exposed and held accountable? A truth and reconciliation commission may be the best way to reveal all parties who had foreknowledge of the 9/11 attacks and facilitated their success, as well as institute the reforms that will be necessary to prevent future attacks being enabled by policy makers and elite power brokers. In an environment where whistleblowers and those who turn state’s evidence are the ones who have immunity and protection, instead of corrupt “elites”, it is likely more people will come forward. According to Sibel Edmonds, who has gone on to found the National Security Whistleblowers Coalition, many of her colleagues in the field of national security want to testify, but they will not do so unless subpoenaed; if Congress cannot be counted on to be supportive of hearings, if the media cannot be counted on to publish and broadcast the unspun truth, if protection from retaliation is not offered, what incentive do they have to come forward with evidence of corruption and malfeasance by public officials and powerful private interests who can ruin their reputations and careers, even harm them and their families? The least the American People can do to show potential whistleblowers they have our support is with non-violent demands and actions, raising our voices in the streets and online, in support of public hearings, full disclosure and real accountability. 

The False Logic of Hopelessness (Why the Elephant Should Stand Up to the Mouse) by George Washington 

Tuskegee resources: 

Research Ethics: The Tuskegee Syphilis Study at Tuskegee University

Bad blood: The Tuskegee syphilis experiment: A tragedy of race and medicine by James Jones 

9/11 research: 

911Proof.com

911Research.WTC7.net

911Summary.com: “Highly-Credible People Question 9/11”

AE911Truth.org Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth

Arabesque911.blogspot.com “A Blog Devoted to Discussing 9/11 News, Research, and Disinformation”

HistoryCommons.org aka CooperativeResearch.org - Home of the Complete 9/11 Timeline

Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice “Non-partisan organization consisting of independent researchers and activists engaged in uncovering the true nature of the September 11, 2001 attacks.”  

JournalOf911Studies.com - “A peer-reviewed, open-access, electronic-only journal, covering the whole of research related to the events of 11 September, 2001”

9/11 news and truth activism resources: 

911Blogger.com – “Paying Attention to 9/11 Related Alternative News”

911Truth.org – “Investigation. Education. Accountability. Reform.”

TruthAction.org - “The Time is Now: On the Eleventh Day of Every Month We Unite in Action for Truth until Justice”

TruthMove.org - “Dedicated to personal and social change through the process of truth.”

Visibility911.com - News & Activism, Podcasts with Michael Wolsey and guests

GeorgeWashington.Blogspot.com - Information, Inspiration and Activism

Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice Rejects Association with Directed Energy Weapons and Mini-Nukes in Draft Bill by Erik Larson 

Scholars for 9-11 Truth & Justice Misrepresented in Draft Bill Sent to 8 House Members 

Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice has just issued a press release to make clear that it does not support a recent draft bill that proposes Congress investigate discredited theories, i.e. that “mini-nukes” or “Directed Energy Weapons” caused the destruction of World Trade Center 1, 2 & 7. Also, Dr. Steven Jones, known for publishing papers that address flaws in the NIST reports and present evidence of controlled demolition, has objected to the way he’s represented in the draft bill; he has never referred to thermate as an “explosive”, for instance, though the bill says so. Also, no mention is made of the papers he’s co-authored that have been published in peer-reviewed journals, a major milestone in the 9/11 Truth Movement: 

Fourteen Points of Agreement with Official Government Reports on the World Trade Center Destruction by Steven E. Jones, Frank M. Legge, Kevin R. Ryan, Anthony F. Szamboti, James R. Gourley, Open Civil Engineering Journal 

Environmental anomalies at the World Trade Center: evidence for energetic materials by Kevin R. Ryan1 , James R. Gourley2 and Steven E. Jones 3 in The Environmentalist 

In the press release for the Ellis, et al bill it says the idea originated with Joel Hirschhorn and Virginia Ross; that Barbara Ellis, Barry Ball and Warren Pease drafted the bill; that the “final draft was sent for review and changes to Hirschhorn and 22 nationally recognized experts either on the 9/11 event or renown in the scientific and technological fields about the collapses”; and following that, Ellis, Ball and Pease went to DC to lobby 8 members of Congress to adopt it. The “22 nationally recognized experts” are not named, and this statement only says it was sent to them “for review and changes”; it does not say what their response was, or that any of them actually support the draft published at opednews.com. Steering committee members of STJ911.org were sent a copy of the bill, and they decided not to support it, for the reasons outlined in the STJ press release; no endorsement was given by the organization, though Ellis refers to the bill’s four authors as “Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice”. 

The eight House members are named; according to Ellis’ press release, “Presentations were made to science and technology legislative staffers of House members Reps. Rush Holt (D-NJ-12), Jay Inslee (D-WA-1), Walter Jones (R-NC-3), Dan Lipinski (D-IL-3), Jim McGovern (D-MA-3), Ed Markey (D-MA-78), Dana Rohrabacker (R-CA-46), and John Tierney (D-MA-6). Two are members of the House Science and Technology committee: Lipinski is vice chair, and Rohrabacker is the third-ranking Republican. Only one staffer (Tierney’s) was disinterested. Another (Rohrabacker’s) asked the presenters for an additional hour of discussion.” If you support new investigations into 9/11 and are in DC, or are one of these Representative’s constituents, you may want to contact their office and find out what they were told, and what their response is- and also let them know about STJ911.org’s press release disavowing association with DEW, mini-nukes and the current version of this draft bill. You can look up your Reps at VoteSmart.org. 

The draft bill cites Judy Wood and Morgan Reynold’s NIST Request for Correction (RFC) that faults NIST for not addressing the unsupported and discredited theory that Directed Energy Weapons destroyed the WTC; however, it makes no mention of the credible RFC filed by family members and Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice. This, even though those involved in this draft bill appear to be associating themselves with Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice. Judy Wood is not a member of the organization; indeed, a number of articles and letters have been published at STJ911.org’s peer-reviewed, open access web journal, Journalof911Studies.com, that refute her work. 

This draft bill proposal for a new investigation of 9/11, although it takes space and time to detail absurd claims, also makes no mention of the fact that 70% of the victims families questions were ignored by the 9/11 Commission, and are still waiting to be addressed by an honest investigation. 

As Kevin Ryan observes in the STJ911.org press release, “asking Congress to investigate many poorly defined, and highly implausible hypotheses minimizes the chances that Congress would be willing or able to investigate the actual evidence for the demolition of three WTC buildings.” People are bound to speculate on the reasons someone would frame a bill this way, but whatever the intent of the authors, it’s true that misinformation distracts and discredits, and that using wording that associates the bill with an organization that didn’t endorse it and had no role in drafting it, is not normal, reasonable or ethical. Given that there’s no actual evidence for “mini-nuke” and DEW theories, and polls show these theories aren’t endorsed by the vast majority of people who support investigation of 9/11, including the 9/11 Family Steering Committee, it’s actually shocking that they would be included in a bill drafted and presented to members of Congress by people calling themselves “Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice”. The bill’s authors are free to speak and publish as they wish, but if their desire is for full disclosure regarding 9/11, in my opinion, they should withdraw this submission in favor of a bill that will generate support from established and reputable 9/11 Truth organizations, scholars and activists; such as Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice- and the many organizations, activists and researchers that will be reposting their press release. 

For more information on WTC controlled demolition, and debunking of DEW and mini-nukes: 

Fourteen Points of Agreement with Official Government Reports on the World Trade Center Destruction by Steven E. Jones, Frank M. Legge, Kevin R. Ryan, Anthony F. Szamboti, James R. Gourley, Open Civil Engineering Journal 

Environmental anomalies at the World Trade Center: evidence for energetic materials by Kevin R. Ryan1 , James R. Gourley2 and Steven E. Jones 3 in The Environmentalist 

Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Completely Collapse? by Dr. Steven Jones 

9/11 – Evidence for Controlled Demolition: a Short List of Observations by Dr. Frank Legge 

118 Witnesses: The Firefighters’ Testimony to Explosions in the Twin Towers by Dr. Graeme MacQueen 

The Top Ten Connections Between NIST and Nano-Thermites by Kevin R. Ryan 

Evidence: The Destruction of the World Trade Center – Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice 

A Brief Analysis of Dr. Judy Wood’s Request for Correction to NIST: the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly By Dr. Greg Jenkins Co-author: Arabesque  

Video.Google Interview with Dr. Judy Wood and Dr. Greg Jenkins – National Press Club, Jan 10, 2007 

INTERVIEW WITH DR. JUDY WOOD AND DR. GREG JENKINS: National Press Club, Washington, DC, January 10th 2007 - Transcript by Arabesque; Analysis by Dr. Greg Jenkins and Arabesque 

Hard Evidence Repudiates the Hypothesis that Mini-Nukes Were Used on the WTC Towers by Dr. Steven E. Jones 

The Overwhelming Implausibility of Using Directed Energy Beams to Demolish the World Trade Center Towers by Dr. Greg Jenkins, co-author Matt Sullivan  

Scholars and Family Members Submit Request for Correction to 9/11 NIST Report: Gaps and inconsistencies reveal fundamental flaws in NIST’s building collapse analyses – Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice