As some will recall, the 1% Doctrine was the decision making heuristic that if there was any doubt–a 1% doubt, to be exact–there was no doubt. If someone MIGHT get nukes, they had to be treated as if it were a certainty. This in no small measure is why we invaded Iraq. He was clearly going to get them at some point.
But can we wonder, given all this fear about nuclear attack, why we spent $2 trillion or more on wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and elsewhere, but have not spent $2 billion to harden our energy grid?
Be that as it may, can we not posit that if there is a 1% chance the Bush Administration in some form was involved in 9/11, that we must launch an investigation?
Two things stand out to me as obvious: 1) explosives were used, beyond any doubt. Literal and unmistakable fragments are everywhere. 2) this fact was covered up by the investigation: intentionally or not can be debated. I prefer what I call the cowardice hypothesis, but it may not be the best one.
Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth is doing really good work. Their three main board members are all AIA registered architects, two of them with a good amount of experience in high rises. They have rented a large and I think prominent booth at the upcoming national AIA convention, where an initiative to take an official stand on 9/11 will be voted on. They will presumably fail this go-round, but I think simply seeing fellow architects in suits, who are plainly not crazy, and who are committed to the cause, is going to have an effect over time, since the facts are plainly on their side. This is in my view undisputable. Anyone who argues otherwise is arguing from what they ASSUME the facts are. Assumptions make everyone dumb, sooner or later.
I give them $25/month. It’s not much, but this battle will go on over the long haul. I would encourage you to support them as well.