9/11: the graphic novel

Yeah, ok.... I'm a huge fan of graphic novels, comic books, or whatever label you want to apply, and I can't believe that more than 20 years after Maus was first published we are STILL hearing that 'gee whiz' stuff about comics. And speaking of Art Spiegelman, has everyone forgotten that he took on 9/11 with his "In the Shadow of No Towers"? Thing is, though, I couldn't bring myself to pick up "Towers" when it was published in '04, I'm not ready for "United 93" (not even the trailer), and I doubt I'll be able to take the upcoming graphic novel. Because the images of 9/11 - be they artistic expressions or footage of the actual events - still gives me a horrific sick feeling in my stomach, I still choke up, it's all still horrible. I was there, in Manhattan, when my home town was attacked. I remember every single thing about that day and all of it is visual. My experience is far from unique, and I'm sure there are a lot of people who just can't, well, look anymore... at least not yet.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8260059923762628848&q=loose+change&pl=true Watch this video.

The link auraeus posted is to the documentary *Loose Change,* which I highly recommend -- it's about how the "offical" 9/11 story has a lot of suspicious holes in it, and it's got the undeniable ring of truth. *Maus* won a Pulitzer in 1992, which you would think would have finally laid to rest the "comic books are for kids" thing, but clearly it has not. I'll see *United 93* because I feel like I need to, as film critic, but I've got a copy of Spiegelman's 9/11 book that I haven't been able to look at yet...

Yeah, Loose Change has the same ring of truth that the "We didn't really land on the moon" conspiracy nuts have too. And then when you actually investigate what they're claiming, you realize they're ridiculous. For example: they're real big on saying that the jet fuel wouldn't burn hot enough to melt steel. Ok, that's great, but no one ever said the steel had to MELT. It just had to be weakened, and it burned hot enough to do that. Another example: they talk about not finding enough plane parts at the Pentagon site. All right, well here's a video: http://files.foundrymusic.com/WMV/f4phantom_vs_concretewall.zip of a plane crashing into a concrete wall as a test of what kind of impact a nuclear facility could stand. Watch as the plane is completely vaporized. Now note the thick, concrete walls of the Pentagon. The guys responsible for that video have been making the rounds on talk shows lately. They're complete and utter lunatics. Yeah, Bush did resist the 9/11 commission report, but he resists giving out ANY information on ANYTHING he's doing, because that's just how he operates. He should be able to know every little thing you do, but you don't need to know anything about what he's doing. And I don't doubt that they may have held back some information about what went on on 9/11, and I know for damn sure that they've exploited the crap out of it, but that "documentary" is just batshit insane.

I'd suggest a reality check is *seriously* needed for anybody who thinks "Loose Change" is something to be taken remotely seriously. It really is in the same category as "fake moon landing" paranoia, and uses the same highly selective presentation of facts which, while (sometimes) literally true in and of themselves, omit all context or facts suggestive of a contrary interpretation. A good starting point for debunking is here: http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html

I'm very glad to see that MaryAnn is open to the truth, and won't let herself be lied to, ahh philosophers! So, for all you opposed, I understand that when you hear the word 'conspiracy' you get all jittery and discredit everything that is said. In reality a conspiracy is nothing more than several parties getting together to perform an illegal act. Therefore, a 'conspiracy theory' is just a theory based on evidence about this illegal act. So as you can plainly see, every detective in the known world makes 'conspiracy theories' about crimes. One of these theories is the 'official 9/11 story', as given to us by our government. 19 hijackers flew 3 planes into buildings and crashed one into the ground. The great mastermind was Usama Bin Laden. This, is only a conspiracy theory. There are many other conspiracy theories regarding this fateful day. Some include no planes, or drone planes, or missles, etc etc etc. There is always a certain amount of evidence for each theory. I am not promoting any theory, simply because I have no place to make theories, granted I have my own. I prefer to look at facts, and the facts about 9/11 do not add up to the 'official conspiracy theory'. Therefore, we must research the events on that day and leading up to that day, and decide if the facts match what we are being told. Here I will leave you all with some facts, and places to begin research: Building 7 collapsed around 5pm after two small fires started mysteriously, this building had no plane impact, nor was it undercut with debris. Yet, it collapsed, and the commission has yet to explain why. http://www.wtc7.net/ Debunk the Pop Mech Debunk: http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pm/ http://www.serendipity.li/wot/pop_mech/reply_to_popular_mechanics.htm http://www.reopen911.org/ericreubt.htm http://www.thewebfairy.com/killtown/flight77/debunking/popularmechanics.html http://www.oilempire.us/popular-mechanics.html http://ubersite.com/m/85963 http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/gopm/index.html My site for research: http://groups.myspace.com/911truth Other various links to look at: http://fe.pennnet.com/Articles/Article_Display.cfm?Section=OnlineArticles&SubSe%20ction=Display&PUBLICATION_ID=25&ARTICLE_ID=131225 http://www.serendipity.li/wot/other_fires/other_fires.htm Bin Laden was, and probably still is CIA http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3340101/ Look, all I am saying is, research this for yourself, don't depend on Popular Mechanics to tell you how it happened. Find out for yourself, there are plenty of resources besides Loose Change, it isn't the best, but a good start, even though it has it's own theories. -Taylor

I'm very glad to see that MaryAnn is open to the truth, and won't let herself be lied to, ahh philosophers! === I *am* open to the truth, and I'm not saying that *Loose Change* IS the truth -- I'm saying I don't think we have the truth yet. I am most definitely of the mindset not to attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity, but one or the other MUST be at work to explain some of what happened on 9/11. And I'm not sure which is worse: malicious leaders, or merely stupid ones?

I'm not saying Loose Change is the truth either. In fact, out of all of the 9/11 documentaries, I'm not sure I could point to one of them and say that is the truth. The truth is that the official story is false and incomplete, the only way we will ever know the real truth is by having more and more people be open to researching 9/11 and eventually get a new independent investigation.