Daniel Hopsicker, of madcowprod.com, who actually does original research of the gumshoe/investigative reporting type into 911, spoke recently at the New England Truth 9/11 Truth Symposium
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-513678522664580570&hl=en
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3089193736577617980
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4092037229001509820
Amen to that. IMO, it's one of the great failings of the 911 Truth Movement not to have corroborated and/or disconfirmed Hopsicker's findings.
Of course, if we had a properly functioning media, it would have covered all the ground covered by Hopsicker many times over. Furthermore, if we had a non-corrupt FBI, it would have covered much of the ground covered by Hopsicker. Instead, we're told that the FBI visited Mohammed Atta's neighbors weekly over a period of months following 911, trying to intimidate them into not saying anything to anybody, and in some cases, telling people "what they saw".
This appears to present no problem for the debunker community, who are content to point to Hopsicker's errors and say, essentially, "nothing more to see here'. Nor, of course, does it seem to be a problem for the masses of the American public, who mostly never heard of Hopsicker.
The question is, where is the 911 Truth Movement on this? I've noted previously that a lot (certainly seems like most) of activists' efforts get wasted, and not just 911 activists. While the problem of funding citizen investigative journalists is still being worked on (see, e.g., http://newassignment.net/ ), one would have hoped that, due to the extraordinary nature of 911, the 911 Truth Movement would have at least gotten it's act together sufficiently to fund 2 or 3 investigative journalists. Not to mention Hopsicker, himself, who, if his information checks out, deserves a medal.
So, for those 911 Truthers out there who are looking for some positive ways to express their citizenship, and are willing to make an honest appraisal regarding what is likely to make a difference, and what is not, I will second Daniel Hopsicker's statement that I quoted above, with the twist that it's neither necessary nor optimal for everybody to figure out how to get to Florida or Germany, and start knocking on doors. In fact, that's a really stupid idea - we live in a complex society that relies on division of labor. What we need is some investigative reporters doing the work that our government and media consistently fail to do and many more people supporting them. The beauty of crowd-funding is that it doesn't require huge sums of money by any contributor. A large crowd of funders need only fork over extremely modest amounts. The current Presidential campaign in the US makes crystal clear that crowd-funding works.
I've expressed many thoughts re a replacement media, which calls for built-in crowd-funding in that subscribers can "vote with their hands", by pro-actively directing a portion of their subscription fees towards topics of their own choosing, in a proposal called "Putting the NY Times Out of Business". Unfortunately, the forum that was on has gone kaput, and I haven't gotten around to putting the information up anywhere else.
Nevertheless, I recommend that all activists not just whine about the media, and try and figure out how to beg it to do it's duty (good luck with that one - talk about a waste of time!), but instead look to bypass it with something better, that is nevertheless accessible and desirable to John Q. Public. In terms of TV, broadband access makes exactly this possible, but it's surprisingly slow in coming. In the meantime, crowd-funding is just about here (see also http://www.spot.us/ ). Let's not wait another 7 YEARS to fact check Hopsicker.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-513678522664580570&hl=en
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3089193736577617980
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4092037229001509820
Amen to that. IMO, it's one of the great failings of the 911 Truth Movement not to have corroborated and/or disconfirmed Hopsicker's findings.
Of course, if we had a properly functioning media, it would have covered all the ground covered by Hopsicker many times over. Furthermore, if we had a non-corrupt FBI, it would have covered much of the ground covered by Hopsicker. Instead, we're told that the FBI visited Mohammed Atta's neighbors weekly over a period of months following 911, trying to intimidate them into not saying anything to anybody, and in some cases, telling people "what they saw".
This appears to present no problem for the debunker community, who are content to point to Hopsicker's errors and say, essentially, "nothing more to see here'. Nor, of course, does it seem to be a problem for the masses of the American public, who mostly never heard of Hopsicker.
The question is, where is the 911 Truth Movement on this? I've noted previously that a lot (certainly seems like most) of activists' efforts get wasted, and not just 911 activists. While the problem of funding citizen investigative journalists is still being worked on (see, e.g., http://newassignment.net/ ), one would have hoped that, due to the extraordinary nature of 911, the 911 Truth Movement would have at least gotten it's act together sufficiently to fund 2 or 3 investigative journalists. Not to mention Hopsicker, himself, who, if his information checks out, deserves a medal.
So, for those 911 Truthers out there who are looking for some positive ways to express their citizenship, and are willing to make an honest appraisal regarding what is likely to make a difference, and what is not, I will second Daniel Hopsicker's statement that I quoted above, with the twist that it's neither necessary nor optimal for everybody to figure out how to get to Florida or Germany, and start knocking on doors. In fact, that's a really stupid idea - we live in a complex society that relies on division of labor. What we need is some investigative reporters doing the work that our government and media consistently fail to do and many more people supporting them. The beauty of crowd-funding is that it doesn't require huge sums of money by any contributor. A large crowd of funders need only fork over extremely modest amounts. The current Presidential campaign in the US makes crystal clear that crowd-funding works.
I've expressed many thoughts re a replacement media, which calls for built-in crowd-funding in that subscribers can "vote with their hands", by pro-actively directing a portion of their subscription fees towards topics of their own choosing, in a proposal called "Putting the NY Times Out of Business". Unfortunately, the forum that was on has gone kaput, and I haven't gotten around to putting the information up anywhere else.
Nevertheless, I recommend that all activists not just whine about the media, and try and figure out how to beg it to do it's duty (good luck with that one - talk about a waste of time!), but instead look to bypass it with something better, that is nevertheless accessible and desirable to John Q. Public. In terms of TV, broadband access makes exactly this possible, but it's surprisingly slow in coming. In the meantime, crowd-funding is just about here (see also http://www.spot.us/ ). Let's not wait another 7 YEARS to fact check Hopsicker.
whether Keller and Atta were invisible or not. If you've got smokin' hot evidence that verifies her stories about dating Atta, don't be shy. Produce.
