The author slams the media's resistance to examine the evidence behind the widespread 9/11 skepticism and insists that...
librarians and media professionals have both the responsibility and the ethical support of their associations to seriously question 9/11, especially if that responsibility is the public wish – and the polls indicate that it is.And further argues that...
It is urgent and essential that all professionals who convey information about 9/11 to the public be equipped with the best possible evidence, so that decision-making about our most pressing issues is based on sound knowledge.It is clear to me that there has been widespread resistance by mainstream media to keep such questioning out of their coverage; and when they do cover it, they always frame these questioners as some kind of kooks. The message they want to instill in the minds of ordinary people is that one must never question established media authorities.
In my opinion these "authorities" are merely well paid mainstream media hacks that take their orders from the ruling class. Their job is to manage consent, and if they don't do their job well, they get sacked like Peter Arnett, Phil Donahue, Helen Thomas, and Octavia Nasr.