For many Americans, there is a deep psychological desire for the 9/11
tragedy to be over. The shock of the day is well remembered and
terrorist alerts from Homeland Security serve to maintain lasting
tensions and fears. The 9/11 Commission report gave many a sense of
partial healing and completion - especially given the corporate
media's high praise of the report. There is a natural resistance to
naysayers who continue to question the US government's version of
what happened on September 11, 2001. This resistance is rooted in our
tendency towards the inability to conceive of people we know as evil;
instead evil ones must be others, very unlike ourselves.
We all remember, as young children, scary locations that created deep
fears. We might imagine monsters in the closet, dangers in a
nighttime backyard, and creepy people in some abandoned house down
the street. As we get older we build up the courage to open the
closet, or walk out into the backyard to smell the night air. As
adults there are still dark closets in our socio-cultural
consciousness that make it impossible to even consider the
possibility of the truthfulness of certain ideas. These fearful ideas
might be described as threshold concepts in that they may be on the
borders of discoverability, yet we deny even the potentiality of
implied veracity - something is so evil it is completely unimaginable.
A threshold concept facing Americans is the possibility that the 9/11
Commission Report was on many levels a cover-up for the failure of
the US government to prevent the tragedy. Deeper past the threshold
is the idea that the report failed to address sources of external
assistance to the terrorists. Investigations into this area might
have lead to a conclusion that elements of various governments -
including our own - not only knew about the attacks in advance, but
also may have helped facilitate their implementation. The idea that
someone in the Government of the United States contributed support to
such a horrific attack is inconceivable to many. It is a threshold
concept that is so frightening that it brings up a state of mind akin
to complete unbelievability.
Philosophy/Religion professor David Ray Griffin has recently
published his findings on the omissions and distortions of the 9/11
Commission report. Griffin's book brings into question the
completeness and authenticity of the 9/11 Commission's work. Griffin
questions why extensive advanced warnings from several countries were
not acted upon by the administration, how a major institutional
investor knew to buy put-options on American and United Airlines
before the attack, and why photos of the Pentagon immediately after
the attack show damage inconsistent with a crash of a 757 airliner.
Additionally, Griffin notes questions remain on why the 9/11
Commission failed to address the reports that $100,000 was wired to
Mohamed Atta from Saeed Sheikh, an agent for Pakistan's Inter-Service
Intelligence (ISI), under the direction of the head of ISI General
Mahmud Ahmed. General Ahmed resigned his position less than one month
later. The Times of India reported that Indian intelligence had given
US officials evidence of the money transfer ordered by Ahmad and he
was dismissed after the "US authorities sought his removal."
Also, the 9/11 Commission report failed to address the reasons for
the collapse of World Trade Center (WTC) building 7 more than six
hours after the attack. WTC-7 was a 47-story steel frame building
that had only small fires on a few floors. WTC buildings 5 & 6 had
much larger fires and did not collapse. This has led a number of
critics to speculate that WTC 7 was a planned demolition.
Overall concerns with the official version of 9/11 have been
published and discussed by scholars and writers around the world
including: Jim Mars, Nafeez Ahmed, Michael Ruppert, Cynthia McKinney,
Barrie Zwicker, Webster Tarpley, Michel Chossudovsky and many others.
The response to most has been to label these discussions as
conspiracy theories unworthy of media coverage or further review.
Pursuit of a critical analysis of these questions is undermined by
the psychological barrier about 9/11 issues as threshold concepts -
too awful to even consider.
We may be on the borders of discovery regarding the possibility of a
great evil within our own government, and perhaps others outside as
well. We must step past the threshold and have the courage to ask the
questions, demand answers, and support research into all aspects of
this American tragedy. Perhaps the closet isn't as dark and as
fearful as we envision. If we don't courageously look and search into
the deepest regions of our fears how can we assure our children and
ourselves a safe and honest future?
Peter Phillips is a Professor of Sociology at Sonoma State University
and Director of Project Censored a media research organization. David Ray Griffin's book "The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and
Distortions" is available from Olive Branch Press.
###