Editor@jfkfacts.org: ‘How come you won’t publish my 9/11 theory?’

If you’re so open-minded, one correspondent asks, why don’t you run my comment about 9/11 conspiracy theories?

Answer:

Because this is a site about facts, not theories; about JFK’s  assassination, not other national catastrophes. I do think 9/11 was a conspiracy organized by Khalid Sheikh Muhammed and funded by Osama bin Laden but if you think differently, that’s fine. I don’t have the time to argue about it. JFK is a big enough topic to take on.

IMO the reporters doing the best 9/11 investigation are Dan Christiansen and Anthony Summers. They’ve done a series of interesting stories about a Saudi family in Florida and the events of 9/11. Former senator Bob Graham is trying to force some transparency in an area where the national security agencies seem loathe to go.

Check out their reporting in the Broward Bulldog.

16 comments

  1. William Kame says:

    Fair enough. This site is JFK orientated, however, I do have doubts about your theory regarding 9/11. Wake up everyone!

    • Gerry Simone says:

      I’ve been apprised about the collapse of the buildings, which closely approached the rate of free fall, despite obstructing floors below (ergo, a controlled-demolition).

      However, there are websites devoted to 9/11 that would be a better forum for that sort of debate.

      Let’s not dilute the discussion of complex issues with multiple subjects or topics.

  2. Gerry Simone says:

    Agreed.

    I can only handle one conspiracy theory, even though there are others worthy of further investigation (i.e., RFK Assassination).

  3. Ronnie Wayne says:

    Diversions.
    FREETHEFILES.

  4. Jg says:

    This site is about theories and pin the tail on the donkey.

  5. Jonathan says:

    Since 1960, there have been a handful of domestic events that have affected the course of U.S. history:

    – JFK’s assassination

    – MLK’s assassination

    – RFK’s assassination

    – Chappaquiddick

    – Watergate

    – 9/11

    On paper these are discrete events. But they have something in common: the full facts of each event have been withheld from the American people. Just an observation.

    • Gerry Simone says:

      Irangate

      • Jonathan says:

        Even here there is hesitation. Hesitation to make the leap.

        I left out Iran-Contra. It’s a dark, murky subject. Involving CIA-sanctioned drug trafficking in L.A. Yes, stuff commenters here don’t want to touch.

        My advice to JFK skeptics: You’re either all in or all out.

        • JSA says:

          I try to go “all in but with my eyes open” and not duty bound to just accept every piltdown man theory, even though I accept the overall idea of evolution, if you get my drift.

          Just because I accept that there are serious problems with the Warren Commission and that there is corruption in our government doesn’t mean I accept that 9/11 was an “inside job”. I prefer to use my own brain, thank you very much.

          • D. Olmens says:

            “Just because I accept that there are serious problems with the Warren Commission and that there is corruption in our government doesn’t mean I accept that 9/11 was an “inside job”. I prefer to use my own brain, thank you very much.”

            Well said. That’s a far more balanced and nuanced perspective.

        • Gerry Simone says:

          Iraq-gate if I can use that term.

        • D. Olmens says:

          “My advice to JFK skeptics: You’re either all in or all out.”

          Entirely the wrong approach. Examine everything on it’s merits, explore all sides of each argument, understand how your own beliefs impact your interpretations, seek clarification and verification at every turn, resist the natural human tendency to see patterns for which concrete evidence does not exist, and above all, don’t lump things together in this simplistic kind of manner.

          “I left out Iran-Contra. It’s a dark, murky subject. Involving CIA-sanctioned drug trafficking in L.A. Yes, stuff commenters here don’t want to touch.”

          This is JFK Facts, not Iran-Contra facts. Unless you can provide some kind of tangible, provable and concrete link between the two events it’s simply not relevant.

          • mball says:

            I would say that the link between Iran-Contra and the JFK assassination (as well as the other named events) would be the government’s tendency to engage in highly questionable activities, then cover up when the operations blow. In every instance there is skulduggery that, if fully exposed, would make whichever administration that’s involved look very bad. It’s their way of doing business, and the failure to come clean, and get away with it, enables them to do it again.

          • D. Olmens says:

            That’s not a link between the events unless you believe the government was involved in all of them. What you describe is an consistent approach. However, I’d beg to differ that it could be applied to all these events. That’s a varied list. When it comes to Watergate and Iran-Contra, you’re on solid ground. But Chappquiddick, 9-11, etc.? I don’t think so.

          • mball says:

            I don’t count Chappaquidick among the subjects. I don’t for a second believe in a 9/11 conspiracy. The rest, the government was involved in all of them. Cover up, lie, scapegoat, etc. And some of the same names keep popping up in all of them.

    • D. Olmens says:

      Chappaquiddick? The only aspect of that tragic event that is in any way puzzling is how Edward Kennedy managed to avoid ending up in jail. Disgraceful.

      “On paper these are discrete events. But they have something in common: the full facts of each event have been withheld from the American people. Just an observation.”

      Yes and no. No doubt there are various documents, as is the case with the JFK assassination, that are still being withheld for some of these events. The real question is whether the release of any of those documents would significantly alter the historical record. That’s debatable.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

In seeking to expand the range of informed debate about the events of 1963 and its aftermath, JFKFacts.org welcomes comments that are factual, engaging, and civil. more