US Indymedia Global Indymedia Publish About us
Printed from Boston IMC : http://boston.indymedia.org/
Boston.Indymedia
IVAW Winter Soldier

Winter Soldier
Testimonies
Brad Presente

Other Local News

Spare Change News
Open Media Boston
Somerville Voices
Cradle of Liberty
The Sword and Shield

Local Radio Shows

WMBR 88.1 FM
What's Left
WEDS at 8:00 pm
Local Edition
FRI (alt) at 5:30 pm

WMFO 91.5 FM
Socialist Alternative
SUN 11:00 am

WZBC 90.3 FM
Sounds of Dissent
SAT at 11:00 am
Truth and Justice Radio
SUN at 6:00 am

Create account Log in
Comment on this article | Email this article | Printer-friendly version
Commentary :: War and Militarism
The "Patriots and 9/11" Trap
15 Dec 2006
Modified: 03:09:29 PM
Morgan Reynolds and David Shayler are "former" government officials who say they believe that real planes didn't hit the WTC towers on 9/11 -- need we say anymore? People have tried to email the webmaster of the web site who promotes these people as "Patriots Question 9/11," to no avail. But how hard is this situation to figure out? Not all who describe themselves as "patriots" are really the type of patriots we think they are. The push by some in the 9/11 truth movement to spread the word via "celebs" has only been shown to tank credibility -- celebs and big names all too often function as bait for the explicit promotion of "no planes" theories. The main tool of mainstream media to trash us is "Those conspiracy nuts think a real plane didn't hit the Pentagon!" It's pretty basic -- the evidence isn't there one way or another and using "celebs" and "former" officials to push that they know a plane didn't hit only makes us all look nuts and the so-called "evidence" easily disproven in debates and articles. (this article is relevant to an upcoming 9/11 event in Boston)
shayler.jpg
The "Patriots and 9/11" Trap
The "Patriots and 9/11" Trap

Websites like "Patriots Question 9/11" function as bait to attract people who think that it's an asset to have big names in a movement and then spread "no planes" theories via the big names. Unwitting activists spread the urls without realizing that sites like this are packed with nonsense and ultimately function as a boobytrap to link us all to theories that commercial jets weren't involved on 9/11, that passengers were dissappeared or never existed, phone calls were all faked, etc -- all the stuff that makes average people see us as crazy. The most obvious examples on the list are Reynolds and Shayler, but many of the others on Patriots Question 9/11 are supporting nonsense which mainstream media has already trashed us with, like the idea that a missile hit the Pentagon.

At first I wondered, why does the website "Patriots Question 9/11" feature known hologram promoter David Shayler and known no-plane-at-the-WTC promoter Morgan Reynolds? I tried writing to the owner of the website but got no response. Pretty soon, looking at more of the names, I realized that this is just another hoax site that functions primarily to discredit us. Maybe the webmaster is sincere but he's being fed ideas or information from others, or maybe he isn't sincere. We generally can never know these things. But what we do know is that knowingly listing a HOLOGRAM advocate as a "Patriot" is absurd, and government officials who think a missile hit the Pentagon are probably still working for the givernment and will only decrease our credibility.

Ultimately, however, getting rid of Reynolds and Shayler won't help this site or these types of efforts. It's already clear what its message is - mix the nonsense with the real stuff and label and hype it as "big names" from the government who can "help" us. Well, we've got all the "help" we need. Instead, why don't we stick to the work of real activists and real researchers - grassroots - and forget about the slick loud hoax traps that everyone walks into over and over when they are trying to reach people through FOX news, cool films and big names celebrities. Even Charlie Sheen was saying he didn't think those were "real" commercial jets that hit the WTC. Did you notice that? Well he did.

http://www.patriotsquestion911.com/

ON SHAYLER:
"A recent article for the British magazine New Statesman profiled David Shayler and Annie Machon, former MI5 agents who went public with details of their service, who have since joined the growing "9/11 truth movement." Much to Machon's chagrin, Shayler outed himself as a "no-planer" who believes the airliners we saw strike the World Trade Center towers were actually cruise missiles disguised as planes using sophisticated hologram technology. "The only explanation is that they were missiles surrounded by holograms made to look like planes…I know it sounds weird, but this is what I believe," Shayler told journalist Brendan O'Neill."
http://www.enterstageright.com/archive/articles/1006/1006debunking.htm

The Sunday Times - Comment
The Sunday Times September 10, 2006
Rebel MI5 agent says 9/11 planes were holograms
David Shayler, the former MI5 officer turned whistleblower, has joined the 9/11 deniers. "We know for certain that the official story of 9/11 isn't true," he tells the New Statesman. "The twin towers did not collapse because of planes and fire. They were brought down in a controlled demolition. The Pentagon was most likely hit by an American missile, not an aeroplane." Not that he thinks planes hit the towers. "I believe no planes were involved in 9/11. The only explanation is that they were missiles surrounded by holograms made to look like planes." Hard to believe, isn't it? Come to think of it, are we sure this isn't an MI5 agent posing as Shayler in an attempt to discredit him? Is there indeed such a person as Shayler, or was he — as some now think — invented by the CIA?
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2088-2350584,00.html

"got the chance to chat with David Shayler afterwards, who was drawing quite a crowd around him. I was a little surprised to hear him talk about holograms, and it seems Shayler may be a 'no-planer'."
http://jultra.blogspot.com/2006/09/911-david-ray-griffin-david-shayler.h

ON REYNOLDS:
The papers of Reynolds and Woods grab at anything they can to try to discredit Physics Prof. Steven Jones, which functions to deflect attention from any sincere address of the content of the debate -- they make stabs at Jones' character, his previous work in cold fusion, the timing of his responses to their papers, and call him names like "retarded," of all things. Just looking at the papers briefly, the character attacks and efforts to deflect away from content are everywhere.
http://seattle.indymedia.org/en/2006/10/255413.shtml

From " A Critical Review of Morgan Reynolds' 'Why Did the Trade Center Skyscrapers Collapse'?" -

"Reynolds provides an excellent summary of evidence for the controlled demolition of the WTC skyscrapers. However, he also devotes about a third of his article to supporting the dubious idea that neither the Twin Towers, the Pentagon, nor the field in Shanksville, PA were the sites of the crashes of the jetliners commandeered on 9/11/01. His article thus weds the thesis of controlled demolition of the skyscrapers with the denial that Flights 11, 175, 77, and 93 crashed where reported. This is unfortunate because it functions to discredit the case for demolition by associating it with ideas that lack scientific merit, are easily debunked, and are inherently offensive to the victims of the attack -- especially the survivors of the passengers and crews of the crashed flights.

The role of disinformation in undermining the exposure of the facts of the 9/11 attack -- the subject of the information warfare section of 911Review.com -- is appreciated by few in the 911 Truth Movement itself. Indeed most sincere researchers of the attack have been fooled, at least temporarily, by some of the many hoaxes that have been promoted under the guise of truth exposure. Reynolds, a relative newcomer to the skepticism of the basic tenets of the official story, is likely no exception. I can imagine several reasons he might give the no-jetliners theories so much credence."
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/reynolds/

Other references on Reynolds:

A response to Reynolds and Wood (Word Document)
Frank Legge
http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/Response_to_Reynolds_and_Wood2.doc

Boulder Weekly Trots Out Morgan Reynolds' Trojan Horse
by Jim Hoffman and Gregg Roberts
http://911review.com/boulderweekly/markup/coverstory.html

Reply to Reynolds and Wood--Part I (Word Document)
Steven E. Jones
http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/JonesReplytoReynolds-Wood.doc

No Planes Theory: R.I.P.
12 September 2006, georgewashington.blogspot
http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2006/09/no-planes-theory-rip.html

A Critical Review of WTC "No Plane" Theories
by Eric Salter
28 September 2005
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/salter/review.html
updated version: http://journalof911studies.com/volume/200610/Salter.pdf (PDF)

A Critical Review of Morgan Reynolds' "Why Did the Trade Center Skyscrapers Collapse?"
by Jim Hoffman
Version 1.1, June 26, 2005
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/reynolds/

This work is in the public domain
Add a quick comment
Title
Your name Your email

Comment

Text Format
Anti-spam Enter the following number into the box:
To add more detailed comments, or to upload files, see the full comment form.