Most people consider themselves reasonable, thoughtful individuals that don't believe in crazy conspiracy theories, but the Official story of 9/11 " that 19 radical terrorists conspired for several years to hijack airplanes and fly them into buildings " is, in fact, a conspiracy theory. It just happens that this theory has the official endorsement of the U.S. government. So, believe our conspiracy theory, not theirs, Mr. Bush asks us. Don't look at the facts. Don't investigate for yourself. Just believe what you're told.
This is, in effect, what the government and the mainstream media is asking us when it labels any idea a "conspiracy theory, and we can see how incredibly effective this tool has been in stunting rational debate.
Over the decades, the term "conspiracy theory has gained an increasingly negative stigma. People associate conspiracy theorists with kooks and wackos, paranoid rabble-rousers and self-proclaimed prophets with delusions of grandeur.
Because of this, the term has become an incredibly effective propaganda tool for those who would prefer to silence dissenting opinions rather than debate them. After all, if you can't win an argument with evidence and reason, dismissing the topic by negative association is your next best bet.
9/11, of course, has been the most recent casualty of the "crazy conspiracy theory propaganda tactic.
You can almost hear the sirens going off and the bright flashing warning lights that turn on when someone brings up alternative ideas about 9/11. "Whoa, people cry, "don't go there!
Our mainstream media got the hint early on. The political climate around the issue has been inhospitable, to say the least. Quickly after the official narrative became dominant in the headlines, reporting on any conflicting evidence or investigating alternative theories would have been career suicide.
Because of this, we have seen a virtual blackout of serious investigation from the mainstream media. Even most of the liberal alternative media has steered clear of the issue most likely because it would be deemed too costly to their credibility.
All the while, serious evidence that has been dug up and compiled by patriotic independent researchers remains largely obscured from mainstream public view. Eight years since the September 11th attacks, a deluge of information has come out that contradicts the official narrative in many ways.
You wouldn't know this from the mainstream media, but since the 9/11 Commission released their official report in 2004, over one hundred professors and over fifty senior government officials have been quoted raising serious questions about the integrity and accuracy of the report. Let me give just four examples.
Senator Max Cleland, a former member of the 9/11 Commission, who resigned in December 2003 and who has been a U.S. Senator from Georgia from 1996 to 2002 is on the record saying:
"If this decision stands [to limit 9/11 Commission access to White House documents], I, as a member of the commission, cannot look any American in the eye, especially family members of victims, and say the commission had full access. This investigation is now compromised."
Next is a quote from Raymond L. McGovern, a 27-year CIA veteran, and former U.S. Army Intelligence Officer:
"I think at simplest terms, there's a cover-up. The 9/11 report is a joke. The question is: What's being covered up? Is it gross malfeasance, gross negligence? Now there are a whole bunch of unanswered questions. And the reason they're unanswered is because this administration will not answer the questions."
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
