Large Banner Ad
Small Banner Ad

September 28, 2011

9/11: Who cares about justice?

The Canadian Charger

More by this author...

Canadian journalist Barry Zwicker was recently interviewed on the CBC radio program Sunday Edition, hosted by Michael Enright.

The interview was in response to numerous letters from listeners, after listening to the previous week's show when Mr. Enright spoke to Jonathan Kay, a columnist and executive editor at the National Post, about his latest book Among The Truthers: A Journey in the Growing Conspiracist Underground of 9/11 Truthers, Birthers, Armagedonnites, Vaccine Hysterics, Hollywood Know-Nothings and Internet Addicts.

From the title of his book it is obvious that Mr. Kay, with no psychological or psychiatric training whatsoever, has no problem dismissing anyone who questions the official version of 9/11 – or numerous other issues - as mentally unsound in one way or another; and Mr. Zwicker just happens to be one of many people Mr. Kay disparages in this way in his book.

Although, it becomes evident early on in the interview with Mr. Zwicker that Mr. Enright is uncomfortable with the idea of questioning the official version of 9/11, he does tell the listening audience that he's know Mr. Zwicker for many years, having worked with him at the Globe and Mail in the 60s.

Mr. Zwicker has worked at the Toronto Star, was the media critic at Vision TV, and taught journalism at Ryerson University in Toronto. Mr. Zwicker is author of Towers of Deception: The Media Cover-up of 9/11 and host of a documentary called The Great Conspiracy: The 9/11 News Special You Never Saw.

Like many people, Mr. Zwicker has vivid memories of 9/11 as it happened, from watching it live on television.  And like many, he initially hoped the perpetrators of this massacre would be stopped in the act.

Mr. Zwicker said initially he believed the call that America was under attack; and naturally he was waiting for and hoping our neighbour and number one ally to the south would defend itself, after all if this could happen to the world's only superpower, how safe could Canada be?

“I'm saying literally, 'Come on U.S. Air Force. Let's go U.S. Air Force. Come on! '” Mr. Zwicker said.

But he added that after watching this drama in the skies unfold for two hours and not a single U.S. Jet interceptor had turned a wheel until it was too late, he became suspicious of the official story line.

“I said, 'This is impossible.' Everyone knows the U.S. Air Force is the mightiest in the world in history. It scrambles in minutes, but nothing was happening.”

Around the two-hour mark, Mr. Zwicker said he became very quiet as doubts began to set in. Subsequently, he felt that much of the official version of events simply defied logic.

“In retrospect we can see an odd group of people who claimed they knew who did it, and these people appeared the morning of the day on television. People like Jerome Hower; people like a guy - he was an unknown person - with a Harley Davidson T-shirt on in New York who said, 'Oh yeah, the planes hit. I witnessed the planes hit,' which is not the way normal people speak.

 'And then I saw the fire and of course that reduced the structural beams and it fell down.' And that was played over and over again and actually the official story was literally planted by people who had been preselected to say Osama bin Laden did it and so forth; that's a very important thing. It's not just that the public makes up its mind based on the authentic honest normal reactions. There were people planted in the media and they had the official story, so this then burned itself into people's brains.”

When Mr. Enright asked him to explain his version of events that day, Mr. Zwicker said there is far too much evidence that contradicts the official version of events to make it even remotely credible. This is something supporters of the official version conveniently ignore, while changing the subject to the mental soundness of those who insist on focusing on the evidence.

“All sorts of laws of physics would not permit the official story to be as it has been presented. The three buildings that went down that day ... do you know that each of those buildings went down in less than the time it takes a telephone to ring twice – ten something seconds?”

Illustrating why he has the right mindset to be a journalist with a mainstream media outlet, Mr. Enright replies: “All right, so what?”

Mr. Zwicker then has to spell out the “so what” for him.

“Now buildings that large with so many hundreds of thousands of tons of structural steel could not collapse at the rate of gravity because as the tops of buildings come down and hit more below, below them it gets more and more dense;  it gets slowed down.”

Missing the point entirely, Mr. Enright said: “But we saw them fall! We saw them fall!”

Mr. Zwicker explained that it's not that simple: “They didn't fall they were pulverized, we saw the gigantic clouds of dust: they were pulverized. So you see it wasn't a pancaking collapse caused by jets going in flames weakening a few members of steel. That's the official story.”

He could also have added that burning jet fuel doesn't reach a high enough temperature to melt steel and never before in history has a highrise building collapsed due to fire; but then for those with a heart-felt allegiance to the official government line, this would merely be clouding the issue with facts.

However, Mr. Zwicker did add that there is no proof that 19 crazed Muslims did it. “There not even any proof that they boarded the plane.”

Mr. Enright responded that for Mr. Zwicker's version of events to be true, would require the silence of thousands of people who were in on the conspiracy; but Mr. Zwicker said that's a fallacy.

“There have been whistleblowers. A guy named Barry Jennings who worked in building 7, and told about the explosions in that building, prior to it coming down, he's dead now, under strange circumstances, I'm sorry to say.

“There are a special group of people who have great allegiance to their bosses, like the Watergate plumbers, like Howard Hunt, people like that; and they actually think what they're doing is right... they don't have any motive to blow a whistle because they believe they've done a wonderful thing. Also, there wouldn't have to be thousands and thousands of them...It's on a need to know basis. Most of them would not know what the others are doing.”

Mr. Enright states:  “There are in this debate, this discussion cranks is there not?”

This is merely changing the subject away from an evidence-based analysis to the psychological makeup of the critics.

Mr. Zwicker said: “Absolutely there are cranks pretty well everywhere. To point at the 9/11 truth moment and say there are schisms well that just proves its normal.”

Mr. Enright ends the interview by saying he thinks it was important to get Mr. Zwicker into the studio for an interview so people can see he's not a nut.

Perhaps Mr. Enright should tell Jonathan Kay that.

  • Think green before you print
  • Respond to the editor
  • Email
  • Delicious
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • MySpace
  • StumbleUpon
Subscribe to the E-bulletin

M. Elmasry

Subscribe to our YouTube Channel