Story Time with E 11.01.07: 9/11 Truthers – Are These People Self-Aware?

Posted by Enrique on 11.01.2007

There’s a certain segment of opinion that believes 9/11 was an “inside job,” and they’re popping up on the campaign trail with increasing frequency. What exactly do these people believe?

Sure, it was cute when Rosie O'Donnell would occasionally use "The View" as her soapbox for lame 9/11 conspiracy theories. It seems like only yesterday she was tussling with plucky Elisabeth Hasselbeck over the collapse of WTC 7, suggesting there was more than met the eye. Actually, it wasn't yesterday, it was May 14, 2007, but who's keeping track? It used to get under my skin that Rosie would push this 9/11 tripe on the air and no one other than Hasselbeck would play the role of responsible adult and take her on. But Rosie eventually left "The View" in ignominy, and I figured that the 9/11 Truth movement would quietly die without one of their own in the public eye.

And as usual, I was completely wrong. God, I'm stupid. Over the last few months, these 9/11 Truth yahoos have been turning out on the campaign trail. Usually they relegate themselves to John Edwards and Ron Paul events, but sometimes they slip their leash.

The story so far…

At a fundraiser for his wife last week, Bill Clinton of all people finally heaped a little well-earned contempt on the 9/11 Truth brigade.

Clinton's 50-minute speech, which started about an hour behind schedule, was derailed briefly by several hecklers in the audience who shouted that the 2001 terrorist attacks were a fraud. Rather than ignoring them, Clinton seemed to relish a direct confrontation.

"A fraud? No, it wasn't a fraud," Clinton said, as the crowd cheered him on. "I'll be glad to talk to you if you shut up and let me talk."

When another heckler shouted that the attacks were an "inside job," Clinton took even greater umbrage.

"An inside job? How dare you. How dare you. It was not an inside job," Clinton said. "You guys have got to be careful, you're going to give Minnesota a bad reputation."

Oh, talk dirty to me some more, Bill. If you want to hear the dulcet tone of Clinton's voice, I suggest watching the video. When Bill says "how dare you" he's sooooo delightfully stern. It gives me a tingly feeling that I've never quite experienced before, at least not in relation to Bill Clinton. It's the tingly feeling of…grudging respect.

In any case, it's nice to see somebody treating these yahoos like yahoos. Usually when they turn up on the campaign trail, the 9/11 Truthers are treated as a relatively minor nuisance. No one says anything until they start interrupting stump speeches. For example, the 9/11 Truthers caught up to Rudy Giuliani a few months ago (watch the video). As you may be aware, Giuliani was mayor of NYC during the 9/11 attacks. (He should probably mention that during his campaign, I would think it's his main selling point.) But as you can see in the video, Giuliani's smile is his umbrella, he's totally unfazed as this dopey chick asks him, "How do you sleep at night?" He doesn't even try to yank his hand away as she over-shakes it. Instead, Giuliani answers her question as magnanimously as possible, as if she was concerned about a legitimate issue. Giuliani handled this preposterous woman with extraordinary decorum…but what good has decorum ever done for anyone?

As another example, let's take a look at how another presidential candidate, one Barack Obama, handled his encounter with the 9/11 Truthers (watch the video, the encounter happens at the very end). Obama's not as smiley about it as Rudy, and he almost scolds the little 9/11 Truther by saying, "I have to admit that some of the issues I understand you guys have raised I'm not entirely confident in." Jeez, Barack, way to take a stand. There's more wiggle room in that sentence than in Britney Spears' vagina. (*rim shot*) I understand that Obama has to be more delicate than Republicans when handling 9/11 Truthers, since they make up a significant chunk of his primary electorate, but still – would it have killed him to be a little less dignified with this 9/11 Truther twerp? "Look dude, as a U.S. Senator I investigate everything under the sun, but if you're hoping that one of these inquiries is going to prove Dubya brought down the WTC, then you need to get off the paint thinner, douchenozzle." Okay, maybe expecting Obama to say "douchenozzle" is too much, but you get my drift.

If you watch those two videos, you'll notice that these 9/11 Truthers have a tidy little racket. Like Rosie O'Donnell, they present themselves as "just asking questions." The "just asking questions" line lends them the veneer of legitimacy just enough to keep decent people from outright blowing them off. But obviously they're not just asking questions – they know in their hearts that Bush and the Neocon Cabal™ brought down the WTC, and they're not going to be stonewalled by any highly coordinated conspiracy between both houses of Congress, the Executive Branch, and the MSM.

But maybe I'm misjudging the 9/11 Truthers. Perhaps they really do believe that they're asking important questions founded on facts and evidence. So in order to give the 9/11 Truthers a fair shake, I'm actually going to check out a 9/11 Truth web site to see what these people believe. All right, I'm Googling "9/11 Truth" right now…whoa, the first thing that pops up is a link to "Countdown with Keith Olbermann." Strange…

I kid my Olby-fan readers, of course. The first result is – wait for it – 911truth.org. Notice how the ".org" makes it seem instantly more authoritative than if it had been ".com." Crazy, but not stupid. 911truth.org's slogan is "Investigation. Education. Accountability. Reform." It might as well be "Just Asking Questions." Oooh, but they have the Statue of Liberty in their masthead, so maybe they're actually patriotic Americans. Puttering around for a moment…ah, here's a link called Top 40 Reasons to Doubt the Official Story. Let's cherry pick a few…

1) AWOL Chain of Command
a. It is well documented that the officials topping the chain of command for response to a domestic attack - George W. Bush, Donald Rumsfeld, Richard Myers, Montague Winfield - all found reason to do something else during the actual attacks, other than assuming their duties as decision-makers.

Montague Winfield? Oh c'mon, they just made that name up. I don't mean to be picky, but this 911truth.org seems to assume that the federal government generally operates with a high degree of competence. I don't share that assumption, so it seems natural to me that Bush, Rumsfeld, et al, didn't respond with Swiss-watch-caliber finesse when faced with something they hadn't encountered before. I assume they were in Holy Shit Mode for the first few hours. Right off the bat, I think 911truth.org expects a wee bit much from its elected officials.

5) Flight 93
Did the Shanksville crash occur at 10:06 (according to a seismic report) or 10:03 (according to the 9/11 Commission)? Does the Commission wish to hide what happened in the last three minutes of the flight, and if so, why? Was Flight 93 shot down, as indicated by the scattering of debris over a trail of several miles?

Okay, if one report says 10:06 and another report says 10:03, then one or both of the reports must be wrong. Maybe it was the seismic report, but that doesn't lend itself as well to inane speculation. Or maybe real time of impact was 10:05. Christ, I've never seen two clocks set exactly the same in my life, maybe both reports are right in a metaphysical sense. (My legal department is insisting that I point out I'm not licensed to practice seismology in any of the 43 states or the Virgin Islands.)

7) Demolition Hypothesis
What caused the collapse of a third skyscraper, WTC 7, which was not hit by a plane? Were the Twin Towers and WTC 7 brought down by explosives?

Yeah, maybe WTC 7 was a controlled demolition, or maybe it collapsed because the two bigass skyscrapers next door had MOTHERFUCKING PLANES flown into them earlier that day. That just might have had some effect on the structural integrity of WTC 7. (My legal department is insisting that I point out I'm not licensed to practice physics or architecture in any of the 47 states, Manitoba, or Baja California.)

35) Did 9/11 prevent a stock market crash?
Did anyone benefit from the destruction of the Securities and Exchange Commission offices at WTC 7, and the resultant crippling of hundreds of fraud investigations?

Prevent a stock market crash? Are these 911truth.org folks even trying? I don't seem to recall that 9/11 had a positive effect on the stock market. Even if 911truth.org is claiming that the stock market would have tanked even worse if not for 9/11, they have a fairly heavy burden of proof to live up to. But 911truth.org isn't concerned with the burden of proof – they're just asking questions.

I'll spare you the rest of the psychodrama, but I think we have a good idea where these 9/11 Truthers are coming from. But you don't have to take my word for it. I encourage you to check out any and all of the 9/11 Truth sites/blogs on the web. And once you've done that, read the infamous 2005 Popular Mechanics debunking of 9/11 myths. And then surf the internet for some really deviant porn. You know, to cleanse the palate after reading all that 9/11 Truther stuff.