|
HOME INDEX OF SEPT 11 ARTICLES DISINFO INDEX Page 1 of 3 SCHOLARS FOR 9/11 PLAGIARISM AND DISINFORMATION Copyright. Gerard Holmgren Feb 6 2006. This material may be freely circulated on the following conditions. It is not for commercial use. The Authors name, date of publication and the web address where you found it are cited. Any editing is acknowledged as such. The copyright notice is included. Distribution without meeting these conditions is an infringement of copyright. Recently, a group calling itself “Scholars for 9/11 truth” was formed around the publicity generated by newcomer to the Sept 11 scepticism scene, Professor Steven Jones. This article exposes how truth is the last thing on the mind of Jones and his group. On the surface, Jones appears to making a positive contribution, endorsing some of the Sept 11 evidence, in particular the demolition of the WTC, and getting some publicity in the mainstream media-something which has generally been elusive for Sept 11 sceptics. If something appears too good to be true, then it often is. The following article shows that Jones and his group are simply repackaging the disinformation and plagiarism campaign originated by the discredited Jim Hoffman. Hoffman’s reputation is now in tatters, so the same spin is simply having a fresh face and new names put to it. An understanding of Hoffman’s record is important to the understanding the methods and motivation of the Scholars group. The article about Hoffman linked below Jim Hoffman Trashes the Sept 11stand down evidence should be read first, because it just as effectively describes what the Scholars are up to in the article linked below. The following excerpts and analysis will not make sense unless you have read the article about Hoffman. Let us consider some claims from 9/11: Have we been lied to ? by the scholars. (Scroll to point 3 in the article). [[We find that the procedure for scrambling military jets was significantly changed due to a military order issued June 1, 2001 – just three months and ten days before the hijackings on September 11, 2001. The order stated: c. Military Escort Aircraft (1) When notified that military escort aircraft are needed in conjunction with an aircraft piracy (hijacking) emergency, the DDO, NMCC, will notify the appropriate unified command or USELEMNORAD to determine if suitable aircraft are available and forward the request to the Secretary of Defense for approval in accordance with DODD 3025.15]] Does this sound familiar ? If not then you haven’t read the article about Hoffman, linked above.. The scholars group repeats the same lie in a press statement. [[The group's charges include:...The procedure for issuing orders for scrambling was changed in June 2001, requiring that approval could only come from the Secretary of Defense, but Donald Rumsfeld was not alerted soon enough on 9/11, according to Scholars group.]] Just like Hoffman, the scholars group supports the official story of which planes crashed where, but at the same time, trashes the stand down evidence. The scholars also don’t mind resorting to disinformation in order to support the official story of the plane crashes. Consider this press statement. [[He [Jones] ...asked why the government had not acknowledged finding three of four black boxes from the hijacked airplanes.]] The reason that Jones provides no documentation for this claim is because there isn’t any—unless internet rumour counts as documentation. Returning to the issue of plagiarism. In my deconstruction of Hoffman’s campaign of disinformation against the stand down evidence which he pretended to support, we saw that wresting popularly perceived “ownership” of the research from the original authors was an indispensable precursor to the disinformation campaign. By comparing extracts from the Scholars article 9/11: Have we been lied to ? with excerpts from the original TENC article, we’ll see that the scholars have plagiarized even more aggressively than Hoffman. Here is an extract of what TENC published on Nov 14 2001. Guilty for 9/11. Bush, Rumseld, Myers Pt 1 by Illarion Bykov and Jared Israel [[On one day it [USA today] published two contradictory stories to explain the failure to scramble jets from Andrews prior to the Pentagon crash: FIRST 'USA TODAY' STORY: "Andrews Air Force Base, home to Air Force One, is only 15 miles [sic!] away from the Pentagon, but it had no fighters assigned to it. Defense officials won't say whether that has changed." --'USA TODAY,' 17 September 2001 (4) SECOND 'USA TODAY' STORY: "The District of Columbia National Guard maintained fighter planes at Andrews Air Force Base, only about 15 miles [sic!] from the Pentagon, but those planes were not on alert and not deployed." --'USA TODAY' September 17, 2001 (5) Both stories are false. Only one newspaper told the truth. That was the 'San Diego Union-Tribune': "Air defense around Washington is provided mainly by fighter planes from Andrews Air Force Base in Maryland near the District of Columbia border. The D.C. Air National Guard is also based there and equipped with F-16 fighter planes, a National Guard spokesman said. "But the fighters took to the skies over Washington only after the devastating attack on the Pentagon..." --'San Diego Union-Tribune' 12 September 2001. (6)… ..."It was after the attack on the Pentagon that the Air Force then decided to scramble F-16s out of the DC National Guard Andrews Air Force Base to fly cover, a--a protective cover over Washington, DC." --NBC Nightly News, (6:30 PM ET) 11 September 11 2001 (10) The media should have demanded to know the truth about why fighter jets assigned to protect Washington didn't scramble an hour BEFORE the Pentagon was hit. ]] More than 4 years later, belatedly lamenting the lack of response from the air force ,the Scholars for 9/11 plagiarism wrote in Jan 2006 [[News reports dutifully described what did NOT happen: The District of Columbia National Guard maintained fighter planes at Andrews Air Force Base, only about 15 miles from the Pentagon, but those planes were not on alert and not deployed. -- 'USA TODAY,' September 17, 2001 Monday, FINAL EDITION, Pg. 5A, "Shoot-down order issued on morning of chaos," by Jonathan Weisman, Washington How could a hijacked airliner fly through Washington airspace and crash into the Pentagon, the five-sided symbol of American military might? … Air defense around Washington is provided mainly by fighter planes from Andrews Air Force Base in Maryland near the District of Columbia border. The D.C. Air National Guard is also based there and equipped with F-16 fighter planes, a National Guard spokesman said.But the fighters took to the skies over Washington only after the devastating attack on the Pentagon... -- SECURITY CRACKS EXPOSED,” The San Diego Union - Tribune; San Diego, Calif.; Sep 12, 2001; Steve Goldstein ] It was after the attack on the Pentagon that the Air Force then decided to scramble F-16s out of the DC National Guard Andrews Air Force Base to fly cover, a protective cover over Washington, DC. --NBC Nightly News, (6:30 PM ET) 11 September 11 2001, Jim Miklaszewski reporting.]] The scholars make their presence in the media felt not through original research (they haven't done any), nor through quality of presentation (they make frequent factual errors—if indeed they are “errors”). They make their presence felt purely by swagger in parading that Jones and number of his associates are professors. Qualifications of this sort are supposed to indicate an exceptional ability for research and documentation. Jones and his group seem to be under the impression that the title actually confers an exemption from any acceptable standards of research or academic behaviour. “Scholars” they call themselves. Scholars are supposed to know what plagiarism is and to avoid it. Not only do the scholars plagiarize their “research” articles, but their press statements are calculated to reinforce the false notion that their work is original, that the revelations are new, and also to play the hero card by claiming personal risk in unveiling these shocking new revelations. Consider this press statement from another founding member, Professor Jim Fetzer. [[In his original message to potential members last month, Fetzer warned that joining the group might make them the subject of government surveillance and might get them on various lists of "potential terrorists." The group's charges include: • Members of the Bush administration knew in advance that the 9/11 attacks would happen but did nothing to stop them.]] [[After a standing ovation, Jones took questions from the audience. Jerry Owens of Midway, who heads a group called 9/11 Truth Seekers, called Jones a true American hero. "He's putting his life on the line," Owens said. "It's time for all of us to be patriots. We have to put our lives on the line, and now is the time." ]] Direct cut and paste without attribution from the research of others who actually did put their lives on the line more than four years ago, but as it turns out, are still alive, is not the stuff of which heroes are made. The hero pose of the scholars depends entirely upon pretending that their work is original and new. Hero worship, even when deserved, is a dangerous distraction from focusing on facts , documentation and good analysis. Nevertheless, if we are to enthuse over people putting their lives on their line, let’s look at some extracts of what TENC published just four days after the Sept 11 attacks, when dissenters had no way of knowing how the govt might react to anybody suggesting govt complicity. |