Skip to comments.AP Describes Controlled-Demolition Wacko as 'Scholar' and 'Sept. 11 Theorist'
Posted on 10/23/2006 12:30:27 PM PDT by governsleastgovernsbest
Ah, the refined sensibilities of the Associated Press. Far be it from that paragon of journalistic impartiality to insert itself in the controversy over whether George Bush & Co. intentionally murdered thousands of Americans on 9-11 via the controlled demolition of the World Trade Center.
And so it is that AP entitled its article about the decision of 9-11 conspiracy nut Steven Jones to retire from his BYU professor's post:
"BYU Scholar, Sept. 11 Theorist, Resigns".
A "scholar" and a "theorist." Impressive! Might that be some kind of hybrid between a 'gentleman and a scholar' and a theoretical physicist, perhaps? Now, in fairness, I wouldn't expect the AP to adopt my "conspiracy whack job" nomenclature in its headline - although it would be entirely accurate. But the utter neutrality of "theorist" coupled with the honorary title of "scholar" seems excessive. Would the AP describe David Duke as a "racial theorist," for example?
I think AP could and should have found a way to communicate in its headline the extreme controversiality of Jones' views. Something, perhaps, along the lines "9-11 Controversialist Retires From BYU Post".
Those wanting to see for themselves just how "out there" the good ex-professor is can check the web site of "Scholars for 9/11 Truth," the organization he founded to promote his lunacy.
I edited and expanded my original NewsBusters item so much that I asked the Admin Mod to delete the original thread, and thus am re-pinging the 'new and improved' version.
Theoretically speaking, that is ;-)
Yes of course. It's still in it's formative stages. I need a grant to continue my work...
At a department seminar held on September 22, 2005, Jones presented the substance of the paper that would become "Why Indeed did the WTC Buildings Collapse?". His hypothesis is that on September 11, 2001 the World Trade Center towers and Seven World Trade Center collapsed as a result of controlled demolition, not the impact of the airplanes that hit them or the fires that followed. The paper does not claim to prove this hypothesis, but calls for further scientific investigation to test it along with the release of all relevant data by the government. Shortly after the seminar Jones made the paper available on the website of the physics department of Brigham Young University and it would eventually be published in a book of essays critical of the official version of the September 11, 2001 attacks, 9/11 and American Empire: Intellectuals Speak Out, edited by David Ray Griffin and Peter Dale Scott.
Jones has been interviewed by mainstream news sources and has made a number of public appearances, including the 9/11 + The Neo-Con Agenda Symposium, which was held in Los Angeles on June 24-25, 2006. While Jones has urged caution in drawing conclusions, his public comments have suggested a considerable degree of certainty about both the controlled demolition of the World Trade Center and the culpability of agents working within the U.S. government. In an article published on September 5, 2006, Jones told The Guardian that the attacks were an "inside job". His name is often mentioned in reporting about 9/11 conspiracy theories.
I have some really great investment opportunities in cold fusion, if you are the person I think you are.
"Never in the history of the world has *any* steel framed building failed due to fire, but on 9/11, a total of *three* buildings did exactly this."
Never in History have two Airline Jets slammed into buildings, either....WHAT'S YOUR POINT?
Somethin' smells fishy here.......
How many times in history have buildings been rammed at 550 mph by fully fueled 757s?
Since Mar 6, 2006
Welcome to FR
So you are a "conservative" who believes Pres. Bush murdered thousands of Americans on 9-11?
Perhaps the screen name "Hooey4You" would be more fitting.
Perhaps you could provide us with data from other 110 story skyscrapers that were hit by fuel-laded passenger airliners.
We'll wait patiently.
Ushering in a new standard in scholarship in America. You must assimilate - no fair knowing that buildings don't fall down.
You're correct - using the phrase "Airline Jets" is extremely fishy.
The steel did not have to melt, only be weakened by higher temperatures than it was ever meant to take under load, coupled with the structural damage done by the impact of a fully loaded airliner.
Perjoratives aside, how exactly did that happen?
I will refrain from using perjoratives. I will, however exercise my right to use a pejorative and say, "What other idiotic theories do you believe, and how did you ever make it to adulthood listening to a bunch of crackpots and social outcasts?"
Fake but accurate?
We'll be sitting around for some time waiting for a response.
Sleeper Troll Alert!
This kook is seen as a hero over on Liberty Post.
What irony... everyone responding to a comment #7 that was zotted..judging from the excerpts, glad I missed it.
This account has been banned or suspended.
Sweet. Another Troll Bites the dust.
I believe this statement is a lie.
"I believe this statement is a lie."
You are correct. The person who made that comment got nuked.
The definitive investigation in which all the 9-11 Truth theories hit the dust for good...The Popular Mechanics article. Read this for the debunking.
good site for debunking......
anyone who thinks this was a controlled demo should have their wooden heads examined......