Nunc Scio reconsiders: 9/11 conspiracies

Hamlet got it right when he said, "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy". Good advice. My name isn't Horatio, but he might as well be talking to me.

Last week, I blogged on a new study suggesting the 'pancaking' collapse of the WTC towers was possible without the assistance of missiles or explosives or other conspiracy theorist staples. I think the study is legit, and important, but I used it to dismiss the 9/11 truthers out-of-hand. I don't think that was correct.

Truth is, a lot of legitimate questions remain of the events of September 11, 2007.  My good friend AF, who tends to be a lot more open-minded about these things, sent me a recent Guardian Op-ed that opened my eyes to a few things. The article- and the Washington Post piece it takes as a starting point- details the near-universal feeling among 9/11 Commission members that they were not given adequate resources to complete their task, and that the government was lying to them. A lot. So much so, they considered turning the matter over to the Justice Department for investigation.

For me, the slow starvation of the commission and the lie campaign wasn't to keep a nefarious conspiracy from coming to light. Rather, it was desiged to obscure the American security establishment's incompetence both leading up to, and during, the events of 9/11. This would invariably reflect badly on the man ultimately responsible for the security of the United States- George W. Bush- and compromise his status as a war-time president tough on security.

But the sillborn nature of the 9/11 Commission only feeds the conspiracy theorists, who do best in the information-dark. The controversey over WTC 7 is a classic example. This conspiracy wonks point to the collapse of WTC 7 as evidence of 'controlled demolition' thesis. It seems pretty clear that the building came down as a result of structural damage from the twin tower collapse and the resulting fires that raged throughout the day. But because the commission never addressed the WTC 7 collapse, the theories swirl.

The United States needs an open, honest accounting of September 11. The 9/11 commission couldn't do it, and no effort has been made since. People are unwilling to accept an official version plagued with inconsistencies and partial investigations. And more to the point, if 9/11 was the result of official bungling, the citizens of the United States have a right to know.

I'm not a conspiracy theorist. I like evidence. But I am more than willing to admit that, as it stands, no one, except the Pentagon, has all the evidence needed to determine what happened, why it happened, and how to stop it from happening ever again.