- Seems I made a BIG mistake the other day. Seems I referred
to the head of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
as an accountant. Nope. Shyam Sunder, head of NIST, head of the 9-11 investigation
into Why The Towers Collapsed (Government Version) is not an accountant.
My profuse apologies to the other Sunder. Seems Professor Shyam Sunder
of Yale, prominent Marketing and Accounting whiz, is not the fellow I fingered.
- And so I offer this sincere apology and retraction to
Shyam Sunder of Yale. I was wrong.
- Five years later, however, many of us are still waiting
for a more profound, scholarly explanation for the collapse---dare I say
eruption--of the twin towers. And many of us are still waiting for a retraction
from the hundreds of government and media hypsters who pimped a war due
to those 9-11 collapses.
- Monumental Collapses of government responsibility. Monumental
collapses in media responsibility. I'm still waiting for a retraction for
those monumental abuses.
- My mistake caused a bit of embarassment and shame. Theirs
caused, oh, roughly several hundred thousand casualties, several hundred
billions in damages, several million uprooted lives.
- My hasty error sent nobody to the hospital. Their calculated
errors sent nearly three thousand to the morgue on September 11, 2001--and
many more thousands of first responders to an early, painful death.
- I'm still waiting for a retraction from "Man of
the Year," Rudy Giuliani and former EPA director Christine Todd
Whitman. Seems they assured New Yorkers the air was safe immediately after
the mysterious collapse of the WTC-1, WTC-2, and WTC-7. But, as anyone
who knows from experience, trusting the government will get you killed.
- And so I'd like an apology and a retraction from Giuliani
and Whitman--not to mention the Environmental Protection Agency. The air
was anything but safe.
- Toxic would be a better way to put it.
- By contrast, my poor research caused a bit of rancor.
Their bullshit media spin caused a couple thousand more premature deaths.
So, sure, I'd like a retraction. And an apology. And an immediate restitution
for those killed and injured.
- What? No retraction from FEMA? Nor an apology from NORAD?
None from Donald Rumdfeld? No offers of resignation from Dick Cheney or
George Bush? No retractions from all those US Senators and Congressmen
who rubber-stamped the PATRIOT Act? Who rubber-stamped the imperial wars?
Who rubber-stamped the revised Geneva provisions? Who rubber-stamped the
- I'm still waiting. There certainly is a lot to apologize
- What? No profuse apologies from the New York Times, Washington
Post or Los Angeles Times editors? No retractions or embarassed admissions
from the Atlantic Monthly--one of among dozens of magazines that pimped
for a war with Iraq? At least Mike Kelly, editor of the Atlantic Monthly,
who personally believed in the war, lost his life there in Iraq. Everybody
else who either caused 9-11 to happen or caused the wars that followed
to happen (more wars coming), has remained silent and unaplogetic and profitted
by the carnage.
- Oh, sure, a couple of pundits admitted their error. But
most have not.
- Where is the retraction from prominent scientists? Most
have yet to examine the piles of evidence that the entire 9-11 plot--and
everything that happened after that--was a controlled demolition. Sorry,
aside from Steve Jones, they are too busy with other curriculum vitae.
Where are the courageous apologies from government officials? Sure, a few
have come forth, but most have not.
- Most scientists and scholars followed the example of
Van Romero instead. Now Romero was one pragmatic fellow. A few days after
9-11, he issued a statement that declared the fallen towers looked like
a controlled demolition. Then he retracted his statement. Seems the Pentagon
may have threatened to withhold vital millions from that school of mines
and engineering where Van Romero worked.
- As for Shyam Sunder, we are still waiting. Any bets he
finds nothing suspicious?
- A noted muckraker, Ed Haas pinned down a spokeman for
NIST, headed by Shyam Sunder (not the accountant). "I don't understand
the public's fascination with World Trade Center Building Seven,"
said NIST spokesman, Michael Newman.
- A rather strange admission for a government spokesman
about a building housing sensitive and secure government offices.
- Haas replied: "More than half of all Americans now
believe the U.S. government has some complicity if not culpability regarding
9/11, with many people now believing that 9/11 is nothing more than a massive
government cover-up...a possible method to reconcile the division in the
United States between the government and its people might be for a series
of televised national debates between his (NIST's) thirty scientists assigned
to investigate how World Trade Center Buildings--1, 2, & 7 collapsed
onto their footprints on September 11, 2001."
- Haas added: "I was abruptly interrupted and told
that none of the NIST scientists would participate in any public debate...When
I pointed out that such a debate between the thirty scientists who worked
on the NIST 9/11 Investigation and thirty equally-qualified scientists
who dispute, and claim to be able to refute the NIST findings; that such
a public, televised debate might actually help answer many of the public's
questions and possibly restore some national unity, the NIST spokesman
emphatically insisted that such a debate will never occur."
- So let's not hold our breath. No retractions, no admissions,
no apologies typifies our government. No openness likely from NIST. This
from a bureau of "standards" that bold-faced, flat-out lied when
it proclaimed on its website: "Why and how World Trade Center buildings
1, 2, and 7 collapsed after the initial impact of the aircraft."
- What? You hadn't realized WTC-7 had also been hit by
aircraft? Like you, I'm still waiting for a retraction.
- Douglas Herman writes for Rense and apologizes when necessary.
- Retractions can be emailed to Douglasherman7@yahoo.com
spokesman says, "I don't understand the public's fascination ...
Government spokesman says, "I don,t understand the public's fascination
with World Trade Center Building Seven