I am a fan of Thom Hartmann. I think he is the most intelligence voice on the radio. He endorsed one of my books years ago because I also honored his writing. So what I want this blog to be about is not a critique of Thom but an encouragement for him to change a policy he seems to have in which he ignores, dismisses, avoids or refutes any opportunity to dialogue about the overwhelming facts about 9/11 and the absurd conclusions about it from the official commission.

In addition to numerous university professors who have published criticism of the official story (see http://patriotsquestion911.com/professors.html), many firefighters, engineers, pilots, military personnel, and others have written extensively about how the official story cannot be true. Documentaries, books, book chapters, articles of all sorts bring facts to bear that reveal the absurdity and fraud of the official commission report. Considering that just today Thom talked about the cost of post-9/11 reactions (the two wars, etc.) and that Obama refers to "what happened on 9/11" continually to rationalize policy, and that Bush laws like the Patriot Act, all based on the lies of 9/11, affect virtually everything Thom talks about, I want to say that this policy of avoidance should no longer be tolerated by his loyal fans. I know that once Ed Shultz said, "Conspiracy theories are the death knoll of talk radio" and this may be a clue as to why none of the left wing hosts give an authentic audience (including Amy Goodman) to this topic, to buy into how the right wing has appropriate a bonafide legal concept to scare people from talking about this topic is far below Thom's courage level.

Until we can truly face the ultimate corruption of the Bush administration and talk about the most horrible aspects that continue to impact us today, all the other conversations are ultimately little more than ventilation exercises. If we dismiss the facts of the Pat Tillman case, the assassinations of Martin Luther King or Paul Wellstone (See my own book on the latter entitled, American Assassination) because we cannot prove it may be a legitimate position (although I do not think it is), but the evidence that the 9/11 Commission Report is a fraud CAN and HAS been proven. We now only need the will to do something about it, like the NYCCAN.org folks are trying to do.

Please use this blog to show Thom that you agree. It is time for Thom to start interviewing the many people who have devoted their lives to this topic, not the cranks or the misinformation specialists, but the legitimate scholars. It is time for us all to wake up to the deceptions that rule us before it is too late.

Thanks for listening.

Four Arrows, aka Don Trent Jacobs, Ph.D., Ed.D.

www.teachingvirtues.net

Comments

Sanford Russell's picture
Sanford Russell 4 years 23 weeks ago
#1

Although the 9/11 Commission failed miserably in many, many respects I'm convinced that two aircraft struck the twin towers resulting in their subsequent collapse. To believe otherwise seems to me sheer lunacy.

reed9's picture
reed9 4 years 23 weeks ago
#2
Quote Sanford Russell:

Although the 9/11 Commission failed miserably in many, many respects I'm convinced that two aircraft struck the twin towers resulting in their subsequent collapse. To believe otherwise seems to me sheer lunacy.

You mean not being able to explain every single bit of minutiae surrounding 9/11 doesn't mean there was a vast government conspiracy? Shocking, I say.

Sadly, we will never be able to convince the 9/11 Truthers they haven't a leg to stand on anymore than we can convince holocaust deniers, AIDS "skeptics", or Obama birthers of their error.

The 9/11 Truth Movement in Perspective

Rebutting (Again!) the 9/11 Truthers

Eric Anderson 4 years 23 weeks ago
#3

Is 4 arrows going to rant every day of the week? As before, you cannot selectively believe only what you want from the same witness. And, someone said it best, could the owner of building seven secretly plant explosives to implode the building before the planes hit? Or, would the owner have time to plant explosives and implode the building shortly after the planes hit? To me, this is not plausible.

GreenMule's picture
GreenMule 4 years 23 weeks ago
#4

Dr. Four Arrows, are you...? The 9/11 Incident turned the USA, Iraq, Afghanistan, and others upside down. Trillions of dollars for War, torture, economic ruin, infrastructure dating back to President Calvin Coolidge, and people dying for lack of medical insurance. I believe the results are obvious to those living the last 10 years on the world. This has been an open book test. You fail = F.

hb091666's picture
hb091666 4 years 23 weeks ago
#5

I'm in complete agreement with you fourarrows. The substantial evidence, that supports the idea that the three towers were brought down by controlled demolitions, is actually similar to the evidence that shows that the Holocaust did happen, as well as, the evidence that Obama was born in Hawaii. Everyone believes 9/11 was a conspiracy: the 9/11 Commission put forth the official conspiracy theory that most people believe. I believed that too, until I saw a lecture by Dr. Stephen Jones--a physics professor emeritus with a Ph.D. at Brigham Young--in which he explained in a very detailed, scientific way why it's impossible that the fires and/or impacts from the planes caused the three buildings to collapse into their own footprints at freefall speed. AIA architect, Richard Gage, also gives a very sober and detailed analysis that corroborates the conclusions of Dr. Jones and other academics. He started a movement called Architects and Engineers for 9/11 truth that has a petition, which is asking for a new investigation, that now has been signed by 1208 architectural and engineering professionals. The following website does a far better job explaining the events that took place during 9/11 at the World Trade Center than I can in this post: http://cms.ae911truth.org/

For me, at this point in time, 9/11 truth is more a matter of whatdunnit than whodunnit. There are some curiosities and anomalies, but nothing I would call ironclad evidence linking the Bush Administration or anyone else to the controlled demolitions. Maybe Al Queda or other terrorist organizations working in concert with Al Queda had operatives who somehow gained access and planted explosives in the buildings. People tend to assume that if explosives were used, it automatically means 9/11 was an inside job, but it isn't necessarily so. Whodunnit is much more speculative than whatdunnit. I'm not a conspiracy theorist because I haven't come up with any conspiracy theories of my own. And of the numerous conspiracy theories out there (and some are really out there) this is the only one I find convincing and true. It seems to me many people reject the controlled demolition theories because the implications are too shocking to be absorbed into their world view. For me, the Holocaust is even more shocking, but I won't deny that it happened.

I hope, despite the risks, Thom Hartmann and others will consider interviewing individuals like Richard Gage, Dr. Stephen E. Jones and Dr. James Fetzer. By the way, Gage and Jones are both Republicans.

hb091666's picture
hb091666 4 years 23 weeks ago
#6

As a sort of footnote here is the Twin Towers controlled demolition argument in a nutshell (from http://cms.ae911truth.org/):

As seen in this revealing photo, the Twin Towers' destruction exhibited all of the characteristics of destruction by explosives:

  1. Destruction proceeds through the path of greatest resistance at nearly free-fall acceleration
  2. Improbable symmetry of debris distribution
  3. Extremely rapid onset of destruction
  4. Over 100 first responders reported explosions and flashes
  5. Multi-ton steel sections ejected laterally
  6. Mid-air pulverization of 90,000 tons of concrete & metal decking
  7. Massive volume of expanding pyroclastic-like clouds
  8. 1200-foot-dia. debris field: no "pancaked" floors found
  9. Isolated explosive ejections 20 – 40 stories below demolition front
  10. Total building destruction: dismemberment of steel frame
  11. Several tons of molten metal found under all 3 high-rises
  12. Evidence of thermite incendiaries found by FEMA in steel samples
  13. Evidence of explosives found in dust samples
  14. No precedent for steel-framed high-rise collapse due to fire

And exhibited none of the characteristics of destruction by fire, i.e.

  1. Slow onset with large visible deformations
  2. Asymmetrical collapse which follows the path of least resistance (laws of conservation of momentum would cause a falling, intact, from the point of plane impact, to the side most damaged by the fires)
  3. Evidence of fire temperatures capable of softening steel
  4. High-rise buildings with much larger, hotter, and longer lasting fires have never “collapsed”

You're still reading, so here is the WTC7 controlled demolition argument in a nutshell:

WTC Building #7, a 47-story high-rise not hit by an airplane, exhibited all the characteristics of classic controlled demolition with explosives:

1. Rapid onset of "collapse"
2. Sounds of explosions at ground floor - a second before the building's destruction
3. Symmetrical "structural failure" -- through the path of greatest resistance -- at free-fall acceleration
4. Imploded, collapsing completely, and landed in its own footprint
5. Massive volume of expanding pyroclastic dust clouds
6. Several tons of molten metal reported by numerous highly-qualified witnesses
7. Chemical signature of thermite (high tech incendiary) found in solidified molten metal, and dust samples
8. FEMA finds rapid oxidation and intergranular melting on structural steel samples
9. Expert corroboration from the top European Controlled Demolition professional
10. Fore-knowledge of "collapse" by media, NYPD, FDNY

And exhibited none of the characteristics of destruction by fire, i.e.

1. Slow onset with large visible deformations
2. Asymmetrical collapse which follows the path of least resistance (laws of conservation of momentum would cause a falling, to the side most damaged by the fires)
3. Evidence of fire temperatures capable of softening steel
4. High-rise buildings with much larger, hotter, and longer lasting fires have never "collapsed".

Zenzoe 4 years 23 weeks ago
#7

I SO agree with fourarrows. Is it Free Speech TV, or not?

Progressives do tend to be cowed by the label conspiracy theorist. I prefer not to be manipulated by such fallacious attempts to discredit critical thinking. As I like to remind people, the opposite side of the coin of paranoia is naiveté.

VanceGreen38's picture
VanceGreen38 4 years 9 weeks ago
#8

I suggest that fourarrows and other skeptics take a refresher course in basic physics, perhaps buy a Physics for Dummies book. Simultaneous and symetrical column failure throughout all three buildings [towers 1, 2 and 7] in ten seconds is impossible. Those who say fire felled the towers need to visit a federal depository library to secure a copy of page 41 of the February 14, 1975 wherein the details a 6 floor fire that raged for hours in the North tower did not pulverize that tower to dust in ten seconds. A plane did not hit Building 7, yet it too fell in less than 30 seconds [time it for yourself, much less than 30 seconds] Page A4 of The Record (one of Bergen County NJ's local papers) reported on Wednesday Ocotber 26, 2005 that a tower which "burned for days" dubbed "the miracle building" was reopened as a 410 unit apartment. The 90 West Street structure did not collapse! Burned for days, yet did not collapse.

hb091666's picture
hb091666 4 years 9 weeks ago
#9

Fourarrows is in agreement with you, as am I.

fourarrows's picture
fourarrows 3 years 29 weeks ago
#10

And now we continue with the ever changing story about the "new" death of bin Laden. You remember him of course. And Thom asks yesterday, "Now that we have killed bin Laden, should we stop the war?" Does this presume that all the death and other costs can be rationalized by the search to kill bin Laden, whether he was already dead or not?

fourarrows's picture
fourarrows 3 years 29 weeks ago
#11

Note that Thom quoted Obama as saying, "After a brief firefight" in reference to the commando raid that supposedly killed bin Laden as "it can't get much more simple." Yet NOW the white house is saying, as well as Pakistan officials, that there was no firefight, no weapons. So Thom, how simple is THAT?

fourarrows's picture
fourarrows 3 years 29 weeks ago
#12

In the last two days I've heard Thom dismiss or hang up on three people who wanted to make an intelligent connection between 9/11, the evidence that bin Laden died of a disease years ago, and the current rationale for needing to resurrect him for a killing. What happened to "anything goes?" And I've not been able to get on after numerous attempts. I understand that it would be "game over" if our great progressive talk show hosts had to admit 9/11 needs a new investigation. But at least Ed Schults was honest when he said "conspiracy theories are the death knoll of talk radio."

Problem is that our world is based on the lie of 9/11 and THIS is the death knowll.

fourarrows's picture
fourarrows 3 years 29 weeks ago
#13

I agree the event turned our world upside down and continues to do so. Yes the results are obvious. This is why basing all of this on a lie is so terrible. So what is the test I failed.

fourarrows's picture
fourarrows 3 years 29 weeks ago
#14

I wish I had time to rant every day or perhaps to offer one piece of evidence every day to counter the constant reference to "the tragedy of 9/11" to support a new violation of human rights, cival rights or to rationalize an invasion. And to answer the last question, "NO, the owner would NOT have had time to plant the explosives after the plans hit. I don't know what you mean by "same witness" and in fact have trouble making sense of your meaning in general.

fourarrows's picture
fourarrows 3 years 29 weeks ago
#15

Here is the main point of all this: we KNOW top officials lies got us into illegal, unethical wars, and the "acceptance" of such lies continues to support financial gain for a select few while many others dies because of the lies. As long as we do not put the energy into a serious, new investigation, then the lies will continue until it is too late for all of us. Whether you believe JFK, MLK, Jr. , Paul Wellstone were assassinated or not; whether you believe the current bin Laden hit is somehow fabricated, none of it matters unless an authentic effort at truth-seeking, with ALL the facts on the table, can be discussed. THIS is what I expect of the ANYTHING goes segment. Truth, according to Parker Palmer, is "an eternal conversation about things that matter conducted with passion and discipline." Primary source documentation and listening is part of the discipline as his accountability for lies and deceptions that have become the American way of life for WEIRD people (white, Educated, Industrialized, Rich and Democratic).

mtdon's picture
mtdon 3 years 29 weeks ago
#16

Fact finding and a desire for the absolute truth is ONLY allowed when it's the republicans at the helm - otherwise simply bury your head in the sand, HOPE and BELEIVE that it's the truth.......

And can anyone refute that NO BUILDINGS in the history of the world simply collapsed at basically free fall speed from anything besides controlled demolition EXCEPT the 3 times it happened on 9-11?

Unfortunately Thom has been completely captured by democratic party politics that NO Questioning is Allowed as it may hurt Obama's reelection hopes......

And anything is allowed if it helps Obama's reelection - the ends justify the means to get Obama reelected......

THAT is exactly WHY I will never vote for a democrat again and am going to vote for the GREEN PARTY whenever I can -

and I know - my argument is kicking a dead horse on this site - the vast majority here are unquestioning democrats first - truth down the line ONLY when it's convienient loyal party members.

fourarrows's picture
fourarrows 3 years 29 weeks ago
#17

You are not kicking a dead horse. Truth-seeking and speaking truth are required no matter how repetitive. One never knows when someone is ready to truly hear. This is why Parker Palmer says truth is "an eternal conversation about things that matter" (from his book, The Courage to Teach). None of us can ever know exactly the truth of anything, but we can know when we are closer to it and farther away IF we do not self deceive ourselves. Our early childhood fears, our ego defenses relating to materialistic needs and recognition, and many other psychological dynamics have made us hypersuggestible to cultural and educational hegemony. We have become the crowd in the Emperor's New Clothes story. As our world systems crumble, Mother Earth and the spiritual forces may determine that it is time to re-create all and those like yourselves who have the courage to speak the truth over and over will survive to hopefully reconstruct a more balanced way of living that remembers that we are all one.

I know neither of us intend any disrespect to Thom Hartmann, or Amy Goodman, or any of the progressives who are helping keep us partially aware of and thinking about government scams. However, until we can shake completely the hegemony that keeps them in business, the powers that continue to believe in the religious fantasies of free market capitalism will also continue to tell the biggest lies to keep us from upsetting our "safe" lives, no matter that the water is slowly boiling us.

fourarrows's picture
fourarrows 3 years 29 weeks ago
#18

Please have a look at my latest book and first novel, Last Song of the Whales. All proceeds go to the Algalita Marine Research Foundation for its work with the plastic pollution in the oceans.

DonaldFG 3 years 29 weeks ago
#19

Fourarrows, thanks so much for bringing this up! I am in complete agreement with you. The lies of 9/11 are so obvious to me that I just do not understand how American citizens can accept them so easily.

It is not a conspiracy theory to present facts that refute obvious misrepresentations of physics. This is what Professor Jones and Richard Gage do - and do well. Supporters of the government "theory" step all over themselves in attempts to refute Jones and Gage. But the sources of such support is mind-boggling to me - PBS NOVA, Scientific American Magazine, etc. How can these "experts" ignore physics just to support government propaganda?

Polls have shown most Americans do support a new and proper investigation of 9/11/2001. By the way, folks in California are working on an initiative to create and fund a new investigative commission for 9/11. It's planned for November 2012. And it is written in such a way that other initiative states could signon also for their ballots. This could be an opening -finally- for a national initiative process.

fourarrows's picture
fourarrows 2 years 36 weeks ago
#20

The Journal of Critical Inquiry out of NUML in Pakistan has published our article:

Classroom Silence About “9/11:” A Failure of Education?

Four Arrows, aka Don Trent Jacobs

And

Rafiq Robert Lewis

The consequences of uncritical belief in the official story about what happened on September 11, 2001, in light of the many substantiated contradictions to it, makes education’s silence about 9/11 one of its greatest failings for future generations. Educators are responsible to help students do independent research and dialogue about the validity the official account across many academic disciplines. Instead, most have become complicit in entrenching assumptions that allow for oppressive domestic and international policies to continue. This silence does not stem from direct attacks on academic freedom but relates more to a perceived need for self-censorship. This paper is perhaps the first published appeal for more courageous engagement with this important topic in schools, especially in higher education. This purpose reflects a concern for the state-of-the-world and for future generations and should not be interpreted as being “political” beyond the fact that any study of this topic would naturally include an analysis of governments and their affairs and motives.

Key words: critical pedagogy, 9/11, educational hegemony, state-of-the world

kodowdus's picture
kodowdus 2 years 36 weeks ago
#21
Quote fourarrows:

Educators are responsible to help students do independent research and dialogue about the validity the official account across many academic disciplines. Instead, most have become complicit in entrenching assumptions that allow for oppressive domestic and international policies to continue. This silence does not stem from direct attacks on academic freedom but relates more to a perceived need for self-censorship. This paper is perhaps the first published appeal for more courageous engagement with this important topic in schools, especially in higher education.

Thanks for attempting to raise awareness of this critical issue even in the face of unrelenting fundamentalism on the part of most progressives regarding the "official" narrative of 9/11. Some related possibly good news is that at least some academic institutions seem to be taking the notion of "critical inquiry" seriously when it comes to dealing with this narrative. On the other hand, I'm not at all sure that the current status quo is simply a matter of "a perceived need for self-censorship". The press release for a course introduced at Rutgers University this year that supposedly "examines 9/11 from a scholarly perspective", for example, includes the following "snapshot":

"Who built and who owned the Twin Towers?" Gillespie asked the class at the beginning on his lecture. After a few moments, a student shouted out the right answer: the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey.
That sounds to me more like an active attempt at disinformation, given the nature of "lucky" Larry Silverstein's involvement with the World Trade Center shortly before the three towers "collapsed".

kodowdus's picture
kodowdus 2 years 34 weeks ago
#22
Quote fourarrows:

In the last two days I've heard Thom dismiss or hang up on three people who wanted to make an intelligent connection between 9/11, the evidence that bin Laden died of a disease years ago, and the current rationale for needing to resurrect him for a killing. What happened to "anything goes?" And I've not been able to get on after numerous attempts. I understand that it would be "game over" if our great progressive talk show hosts had to admit 9/11 needs a new investigation. But at least Ed Schults was honest when he said "conspiracy theories are the death [knell] of talk radio."

Moreover, if and when the dam bursts on "9/11 Truth", the progressive agenda itself is likely to suffer because of the knee-jerk fundamentalist attitudes of most leading progressives.

Quote DonaldFG:

Supporters of the government "theory" step all over themselves in attempts to refute Jones and Gage. But the sources of such support is mind-boggling to me - PBS NOVA, Scientific American Magazine, etc. How can these "experts" ignore physics just to support government propaganda?

Here's some back story on a number of these attempts at promoting "expert opinion":

Add comment

Login or register to post comments

Currently Chatting

Community Archive

The other way we're subsidizing Walmart...

Most of us know how taxpayers subsidize Walmart's low wages with billions of dollars in Medicaid, food stamps, and other financial assistance for workers. But, did you know that we're also subsidizing the retail giant by paying the cost of their environmental destruction.