by Larry Fine, Reuters News Agency
Dec. 15, 2004
NEW YORK -- Jimmy Walter has spent more than $3 million promoting a conspiracy theory the September 11, 2001, attacks on the United States were "an inside job" and he is offering more cash to anyone who proves him wrong.
The millionaire activist is so convinced of a government cover-up he is offering a $100,000 reward to any engineering student who can prove the World Trade Center buildings crashed the way the government says.
"Of course, we expect no winners," Walter, 57, heir to an $11 million fortune from his father's home building business, said in a telephone interview from California on Wednesday.
He said a panel of expert engineers would judge submissions from the students.
Next month, he also launches a nationwide contest seeking alternative theories from college and high school students about why New York's World Trade Center collapsed. The contest offers $10,000 to the best alternative theory, with 100 runner-up awards of $1,000. Winners will be chosen next June.
The World Trade Center's twin towers were destroyed after hijackers slammed two commercial airliners into them. The attack in New York killed 2,749 people.
Various official investigations give no credence to Walter's theory. A September 11 commission spokesman did not return calls seeking comment.
Walter insists there had to be explosives planted in the twin towers to cause them to fall as they did, and also rejects the official explanation for the damage done at the Pentagon.
"We have all the proof," said Walter, citing videotapes and testimony from witnesses.
"It wasn't 19 screw-ups from Saudi Arabia who couldn't pass flight school who defeated the United States with a set of box cutters," he said. He dismissed the official September 11 commission report, saying, "I don't trust any of these 'facts.'"
Walter has spent millions of dollars to bolster support for his case, running full-page ads in The New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, The New Yorker, and Newsweek, as well as alternative newspapers and 30-second TV spots.
He points to a Zogby poll he commissioned last summer that showed 66 percent of New Yorkers wanted the 9/11 investigation reopened.
Walter has spent about 30 percent of his net worth on his efforts.
"I am a patriot fighting the real traitors who are destroying our democracy. I resent it when they call me delusional," he said.
Published by
Reuters News Agency
Commentary:
Let's take a few minutes, and explain what's wrong here -- what's wrong with the so-called "investigation" of September 11, and what's wrong with this well-meaning millionaire's approach.
What's wrong with the "investigation", in a word, was everything:
The Bush administration fought the very notion of an investigation, then stacked the Commission with members chosen by the Bush administration, then stonewalled and cooperated as little as possible. Bush and Cheney appeared before the Commission to answer questions, but not under oath, and only side-by-side, and only under the condition that there be no written or taped record of what they said.
And finally, as a condition for allowing the investigation at all, the Commission's findings have to be vetted by the White House, before being released to the public.
Wouldn't you love to have an "investigation" like that, if YOU were allegedly in charge when or where something horrendous happened?
And here's what's wrong with this benevolent millionaire's approach:
Jimmy Walter thinks he has the answers, and he's offering $100,000 for a debunking. Walter thinks he knows what would or wouldn't cause the towers to collapse, when in reality that's always going to be a highly subjective question.
(Yes, I've read articles purporting that there had to have been explosives, and I flat-out don't buy it. Those buildings weren't designed to be smacked by jumbo jets at full throttle, and the reality is, when something happens that's wildly out of whack with what something (anything) is built to withstand, it's not far-fetched if it doesn't withstand it.)
And beyond having reached his own conclusions, Walter is also offering $10,000 for "the best alternative theory" to explain the buildings' collapse.
The problem with this approach is, it's nutty. It's a contest for the best "jumping to conclusions".
There are dozens of oddities about September 11, many of which are far odder than anything about the building's structural design and ability to withstand full frontal jetliner assaults. I dare anyone to give an honest reading to the unanswered questions (a few are in the sidebar on this page) and tell me there's been a serious investigation.
And until the oddities and unanswered questions have been seriously investigated, it's poppycock to pretend you know the answers, or to pretend a $10,000 prize will deliver anything but silly conspiracy theories.
Honest answers will come when the events of September 11, 2001 are honestly investigated, by an open, well-funded process with full subpoena power, wherein all serious questions are considered, and all conclusions are published, not "vetted" or censored.
Until there's a real investigation, Walter's theories are just guesses, and silly guesses at that. The winner of his "best alternative theory" contest will be just another guess. Just another shot in the dark.
Investigate first. Turn on the light, and take a look around. Then reach conclusions, based on what the investigation shows.
So long as we skip the step where we turn the lights on, we'll never know what's hidden in the dark.
... And by the way, if I was a conspiracy theorist, I'd wonder why Reuters assigned this story to Larry Fine ... one of the Three Stooges. :)
=H&HH= |
|
| This material is copyrighted by its original publisher.
It is reprinted by Unknown News without permission, solely for purposes of criticism, comment, and news reporting, in accordance with the Fair Use Guidelines of copyright material under § 107 of U.S.C. Title 17:
Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include --
(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors. |
|
|
|
Latest related reports from our archives:
Oct. 28, 2004:
"Contradicting the official account"
Ground Zero workers say they
found 9/11 'black boxes'
Oct. 19, 2004:
CIA withholds damning Sept. 11
report until after election
Sept 10, 2004:
Cheney repeats Saddam-al Qaeda lie for thousandth time
Sept. 8, 2004:
Former Senator alleges
White House 9/11 cover-up
Aug. 10, 2004:
Torture, U.S. non-cooperation
jeopardizes September 11 retrial
Aug. 10, 2004:
More holes in the official story:
The 9/11 cell phone calls
Aug. 3, 2004:
Miracles and wonders of September 11:
Jet-to-ground cell phone calls,
indestructable passports, Pentagrass
by Alan Cabal, New York Press
Aug. 1, 2004:
Dereliction of duty on September 11
... and today and tomorrow
Gagged FBI whistleblower names names
July 31, 2004:
9/11 investigation: All slam and no dunk
July 22, 2004:
Plane used often by White House
carried 13 bin Ladens out of US post-9/11
July 18, 2004:
Evidence tainted by torture?
Prosecutors ponder dropping charges
against Sept. 11 suspect
July 6, 2004:
9/11 whistleblower's lawsuit tossed by Bush-appointed Judge
# with comments by H&HH
May 20, 2004:
Whoops, you weren't supposed
to know that about Sept. 11
9/11 testimony from 2002 suddenly classified
# with comments by Barbara and H&HH
May 19, 2004:
9/11 Commission inquiry
is full of unspoken questions
May 15, 2004:
9/11 panelists bewildered by what Bush administration calls “classified information”
May 6, 2004:
FAA manager destroyed 9/11 tapes
May 2, 2004:
9/11 Commission's Presidential disaster
by Heath Honesty and H&HH, Unknown News
April 29, 2004:
Sept. 11 widow says
"I'm 100% sure that they knew"
April 29, 2004:
BushCheney non-testify
before 9/11 Commission
# with comments by Luke and Kathy Fisher
April 26, 2004:
Government tries to gag FBI worker over 9/11
April 26, 2004:
Two questions for the 9/11 Commission
by Susan Strouss, Unknown News
April 19, 2004:
September 11, 2001:
Questions that'll never be asked ...
by Tess Ellis, Unknown News
April 14, 2004:
FBI whistleblowers go unheard
9-11 Commission disregards
survivor families' interests
April 13, 2004:
Ashcroft's record of
lying to Congress about 9/11
April 9, 2004:
Why won't the U.S. cooperate
with Sept. 11 prosecutions?
# with comments by H&HH
April 9, 2004:
The pre-9/11 blunder
you’ve probably never heard of
April 2, 2004:
FBI whistleblower says Rice is lying:
Bush knew al-Qaida was planning attack
March 28, 2004:
Conflict of interest at heart
of the 9/11 'investigation'
March 25-26, 2004:
Rice contradicts CIA, Cheney, Armitage, herself
March 22, 2004:
After 2 ½ years asleep, Wall Street Journal
notices a few oddities about Sept. 11
# with comments by H&HH
March 27, 2004:
Bush administration knew about
airplanes used as weapons
March 14, 2004:
High-ranking government
officials took Sept. 11 souvenirs
# with comments by John C. and H&HH
March 4, 2004:
U.S. stonewalling may let
another terror suspect off the hook
German prosecutor calls
U.S. conduct "incomprehensible"
# with comments by John C. and H&HH
Feb. 10, 2004:
Daschle still says Bush & Cheney
asked for no 9/11 investigation at all
Jan 31, 2004:
White House seizes notes
from 9/11 investigators
# with comments by H&HH
Nov. 13, 2003:
Victims' families rip 9/11 secrecy deal
# with comments by H&HH
Oct. 26, 2003:
Bush administration obstructs
investigation into Sept. 11
Sept 17, 2003:
Two years of lies about Sept. 11
The new Warren Commission
by Helen & Harry Highwater, Unknown News
Sept 10, 2003:
Hijacked 9/11 jets flew past
several US military bases
Sept 4, 2003:
While all other planes were
grounded across the US ...
White House OK'd flight home
for Bin Ladens in Sept. 11 aftermath
Aug. 13, 2003:
Germany warned CIA about
Sept. 11 terror pilot, Stern says
Aug. 9, 2003:
White House ordered 9/11 EPA lies
July 24, 2003:
9/11 families say: Tell us the full story
July 16, 2003:
Bush blocks investigation
into September 11 attack
July 1, 2003:
60 days prior to Sept. 11, 2001|
|
"The attack will be spectacular and designed to inflict mass casualties against U.S. facilities or interests. Attack preparations have been made. Attack will occur with little or no warning." --CIA Intelligence Report for President Bush, July 2001
|
Latest related reports from our archives:
|
|
|
