Electric Politics
 
Donate to Electric Politics
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Green Party USA
Blank
Socialist Worker
Blank
CoffeeGeek.com
Blank
Grist
Blank
Whole Foods
Blank
Whole Foods
Blank
Ben & Jerry's
Blank
Al Jazeera English
Blank
911Truth.org
Blank
Sierra Trading Post
Blank
Black Commentator
Blank
Black Commentator
Blank
Pluto Press
Blank
In These Times
Blank
USNI
Blank
In These Times
Blank
CASMII
Blank
CounterPunch
Blank
CounterPunch
Blank
News For Real
Blank
News For Real
Blank
If Charlie Parker Was a Gunslinger
Blank
News For Real
Blank
The Agonist
Blank
The Anomalist
Blank
Duluth Trading
Blank
Digital Photography Review
Blank
New Egg
Blank
Free Link

EP PODCASTSXML

September 29, 2006

The Case For Intellectual Integrity

crop from Frederick Remington's Moonlight, WolfIt would be refreshing to find somebody who doesn't agree with 9/11 conspiracy theories (so-called) who was willing to debate them in a civil way. And I don't mean the editors of Popular Mechanics, either. Perhaps the civil ones are changing their minds? One such is Bill Christison, the distinguished former CIA analyst and popular author of progressive political essays. Within the past year Bill has changed his mind about 9/11, from rejecting conspiracy theories outright to thinking that the standard story is not what it seems. In this conversation we talk a lot about what happens when one rethinks something like 9/11, less about the facts in question. I'm very grateful to Bill for talking with me and I hope this conversation helps those who are still sorting things out. Runtime of about an hour and nineteen minutes.

Listen

« A Progressive Economist | Main | Back in the USSR »



Comments

Happy 50th George another fine interview keep up the good work.

Craig

For a self-admitted lone-wolf 911 truth newbie, Bill is doing a darn good job at thinking his way out of the many paper bags of 9/11.

The only major recognized disinfo campaign to which he seems to have fallen prey is worrying more about Pentagon video evidence we don't have than the govt-lie-breaking evidence we already do have: quantitative analysis of the 1st of the 5 video frames released March 7, 2002 reveals that the barely-visible aircraft is too small to be a 757 and thus could not possibly be Flight 77.

It only takes 1 counter-example to disprove a theory, and the government's "Flight 77 hit the Pentagon" theory is already 0-for-1. So put a fork in it, it's done. (This inescapable conclusion is reinforced by the fact that the 9-11 Commission Report omitted all mention of this, the govt's own, video evidence from the final report. Much of the government's false-flag "911truth movement" also gatekeeps this same evidence, BTW.)

The government's official collapse theory is already 0-for-2: tall buildings fell too fast and pyroclastic flows reveal huge energy surplus

How many times in how many ways must we disprove the ludicrous Official Government Conspiracy Theory of 9/11 before rejecting it?

What a fantastic interview......having just confronted Juan Gonzales and Amy Goodman of Democracy Now about their weak coverage of 911 question......I thank you for your intelligent, and balanced investigation of these very same questions. I'll send you my video interviews with them when I get them postable...Thank you.

Thank you very much, George, for the excellent interview with Bill Christison. I'm disappointed to say that my attempt to have Democracy Now! interview Bill regarding his Dissident Voice article on alternative theories about 9/11 has met with no response.

I initially had a lot of ambivalence about posting Bill's article. I too had until the last few months outright rejected alternative theories about 9/11 as worthy of serious consideration, and had never published articles supporting any such theories in DV. I began to approach these theories with an open mind only weeks before Bill submitted his article to us. To be honest, I've since waffled back and forth over whether I accept the plausibility of the alternative theories. That the US government under both Republican and Democratic leadership has committed great acts of evil in the past and is capable of anything is hardly a novel concept to me. That said, I don't currently feel like I can really embrace the alternative theories either. However, I am certainly convinced that the explantion by the government and the 9/11 Commission for the events on that dreadful day are an utter crock of horseshit.

I simply don't know.

Bill Christison's conservative and well-thought out article nevertheless deserves the widest airing possible, and the important questions he and others raise with regards to 9/11 need to be debated vigorously and on their merits, rather than simply be dismissed as the wild speculations of randy "conspiracy nuts."

Best Regards,

-- Sunil K. Sharma
Dissident Voice Editor and Publiser
Santa Rosa, CA

I started sending out emails to friends on Sept 11, sometime after reading about Afghanistan and reading Chomsky's logs of past cases of mass murder carried out by the CIA.

When I first discovered people arguing that the USG pulled off Sept 11, and that Osama Bin Oswald was a patsy, I was necessarily skeptical, but it all fit a pattern. In the process, I also learned about the JFK assassination strong anomalies, and about the Operation Northwoods plan.

Eventually I built a webpage trying to wrap my head around the details, trying to make sense out of what I was reading and characterize it. I put a lot of weight on the points raised by Prof. Chossudovsky about the US and Al-Qaeda, but I tend veer from hero worship in that many have flaws exposed by others.

So much of 9-11Truth is proveable crap -- or ambiguous crap posing as certainty -- or part truth mixed in with part crap, that it was a breath of relief to stumble across Fintan Dunne talking about "CIA Fakes" in terms of such websites and researchers. Did the same disinfo specialists who got the networks to lie about JFK, also seed the Internet with false theories on purpose? Robert Parry described such a leaker of the Iran-Contra/"Oct. Surprise" situation, who intentionally added garbage to his 'revelations', so as to sabotage that line of questioning in the media.

Dunne might be casting his net a little wide in accusing some people of faking it. On the other hand, it was admitted by past CIA directors that the Agency has had HUGE direct influence over the media.
(links on my Media page)

Personally, I try to stick with a few political proofs which clearly DIScredit the Official Sept 11 Conspiracy Theory (no one official theory exists, actually, just fragments and ambiguous assertions), and show that the War on Terror has to be 100% bogus. I stick with this more than trying to prove or theorize specifically what DID happen.

I'm more trying to focus on ruling out what did not happen, what could not have happened, and Break for News forum seems to follow the same concept. The Why of it, more than How.

I cite elements of govt complicity with Al-Qaeda, or "Al-Qaeda", but ultimately I believe it is UNlikely that the 19 "hijackers" were other than a complex decoy operation. That's too complex to explain why here, but for one, Hani Hanjour attacking the Pgon in the manner he was said to have done so, is nonsense.

As a group, we've discussed and debated the "No Plane" theories on the Break for News forum. I've argued with others and I've even argued with myself about the viability of such Pgon theories. The consensus we've mostly come to on breakfornews forum is that it is ultimately impossible to prove, since the evidence is so limited and hidden. In other words, it's not 100% clear if Am 77 DID or DID NOT hit the Pgon, but what's clear is that Hani didn't fly that path, and NOTHING should have hit the Pgon at all.

I believe there are much stronger and better common sense points, more along lines of politics and complicity, like the book Grand Chessboard and varous court cases in support of terrorists. I do not dismiss the quite obvious EXPLOSIONS of the WTC Towers and spontaneous collapse of WTC7. It's just harder to argue physics without forensics experts and PhD physicists, and I hear that they can be bought at discount pricing.

you may want to stop at my site (click name) for a clearinghouse of sorts, and links to some historical articles about Fascism and US elites too.
Much more, many angles.

It's well beyond "conspiracy theory" actually. There's overwheming evidence this was planned and executed over the course of a decade, see WTC1993 for more. (BTW, a lot of strong factual mainstream info for conspiracy on earlier events, WTC and OKC, is posted on far-right Free Republic, but that well seemed to go dry after Bush was elected. I think they booted the outspoken Libertarian Conservatives.)
Good luck!

Leave a comment