Journalists would be thrilled to break 9/11 'inside job' story, if there was one: Kay

Jonathan Kay would suggest that this man is delusional and has too much time on his hands.

By Craig McKee
Jonathan Kay lives in a truly wonderful world.
In this world, journalists are just dying to break any story that would show that 9/11 is an inside job. And any who did would surely be rewarded with wealth, fame, and maybe a Pulitzer Prize.
Too bad for them there isn’t a shred of evidence for this ridiculous “conspiracy theory.” If there were, we’d have hundreds of ambitious scribes fighting and scratching to find out who could get that April Gallop interview first. Somebody heard bombs going off in the towers before the planes hit? 60 Minutes would have been there. A big plane got sucked into an impossibly tiny hole at the Pentagon? The Times wouldn’t have missed that one.
And if there were any evidence at all that 9/11 was an inside job, poor David Ray Griffin would have to beat the network anchor people off with a stick. There are only so many hours in the day!
Kay, the author of the anti-Truth movement hit-piece Among the Truthers, believes in a world where freedom reigns, journalists are encouraged to write whatever they want, and the common person knows as much about what major world events are coming down the pike as the bumbling political elite does.
In Kay’s world, secrets are virtually impossible to keep. As soon as more than one person knows about something, the cat’s as good as out of the bag. It kind of makes you wonder why governments ever bother with covert operations. After all, they can’t stay covert for long with all those chatterbox CIA agents just bursting to run to a receptive media with all the secrets of state.
Does Kay really believe this rubbish? You be the judge. You can read his book (please borrow a copy; we don’t want to encourage him any more than necessary) or read the interview I did with him last week.
Here are some of the things Kay has to believe for his official “theory” to be true:

  • It is possible for the rules of physics to be suspended on any given day
  • It is possible to destroy seven buildings with two planes
  • It is possible for traces of nano-thermite to naturally occur in pulverized concrete dust
  • It is possible for isolated fires to bring down a major skyscraper, causing all supporting columns to give way simultaneously
  • It is possible for more than 150 firefighters to think they heard bombs when they didn’t
  • It is possible to crash four planes on a given day without being able to retrieve even one airplane part that can be positively connected to any of the planes
  • It’s possible for 19 suicide hijackers to succeed in their missions but for about one-third of them to turn up alive in other countries after the fact
  • It is possible for an airliner to bury itself in a field and for the dirt to then cover the plane over by itself
  • It is possible for someone who can’t learn how to fly a Cessna to pilot a 757, managing manoeuvres that even experienced pilots say are impossible
  • It is possible for the government not to imagine a scenario that involved planes being flown into buildings on the same morning they were running multiple exercises that featured planes flying into buildings

Okay, that’s enough. But believe me, I could go on.
In Kay’s world, David Rockefeller and his friends from the ultra-secretive Bilderberg Group are bumbling old men who haven’t got a clue what’s going on in the world. They didn’t see many major events – such as the Iraq War – coming. In fact, the rest of us are more on the ball than these old has-beens are, Kay suggests.
Doesn’t that make you feel a lot better about the whole New World Order thing? How could a bunch of rich old guys think they could pull strings behind the scenes? Did you know Rockefeller is over 90?
In Kay’s world, journalists can find evidence unpersuasive without even looking at it. They’re allowed to get tired of Kennedy assassination evidence because the event happened almost 50 years ago. So what if E. Howard Hunt admitted (on tape) that the CIA killed Kennedy, and that he was a part of the plot?
Sorry, the journalistic statute of limitations for giving a damn has long since run out; we have new conspiracies to ignore now.
The fact that Hunt devoted his career to fighting commies and trying to get rid of Fidel Castro doesn’t make his about-face even worth considering. Kay compares Hunt’s confession to a fictitious deathbed confession from Oswald’s “long lost stepmom.” Gee, I haven’t heard that tape.
What I can’t figure out is whether Kay is that clued-out or that disingenuous.
Either way, he dismisses those he disagrees with sweeping generalizations and condescending psychological profiling. Facts are absent as is any concept of how the world works.
Unfortunately, it’s his book that gets reviewed by his mainstream journalistic buddies. The quality work of David Ray Griffin, Barrie Zwicker, Paul Zarembka and numerous other truthers don’t get a look.


  1. Well said, and I completely agree, Craig. I just think there is absolutely no way that Kay is that clued-out. He is much too smart for that. His job is to be as vocal as possible in defending the official conspiracy theory. It can only be disingenuous – there is no other possibility.

  2. Good summary Craig. As I said in the title of my Amazon review: “Reading in the store cafe with no intent to line the author’s pockets.” And yes, it would be a wonderful world if 60 Minutes and Piers Morgan had to fight tooth and nail over that William Rodriguez or April Gallop interview. What’s sad is that even though Kay is a paid propagandist and knows the points he’s putting forth are BS, there are people out there, like my own parents, who seriously do think our media (still!) has that kind of First Amendment integrity and that they really WOULD be on the case.

    1. I even have friends who have been opposed to American imperialism their whole adult lives, and who have demonstrated against U.S. foreign policy (Canadian, too), but they still think extremists Muslims perpetrated 9/11. I also was fooled for a while, but the difference is that when evidence was pointed out to me that I’d been wrong, I changed my view completely. It’s the people who already know all about the systematic and covert undermining of democracy – but who still swallow the 9/11 official story – that really disappoint me.

    2. Willie Rodrigues was interviewed on the mainstream media ,on TV, on 9/11. He spoke about what happened, on the day, and it differs a bit from — EXPLOSION!!!!! — what he says today as — EXPLOSION!!!! — he goes around giving presentations about — BIG EXPLOSION!!!!! — how brave and heroic he was. If he acted courageously on the day he deserves to be commended for it but heros shouldn’t go around say ‘I’m a hero’. Of course there aren’t many ‘official story’ conferences to go to so he goes to Truth conferences where I think he knows by now what they want to hear.
      There was a lot of controversy with the Toronto hearings about whether April Gallop would be invited as a witness and I thought , the organisers could go to the US and find dozens of witnesses who were outside the building and who could say ‘I saw the plane crash into the building’ , but the only witness they could think to invite was someone who was inside the building and couldn’t see a plane crash into the building. Someone who was struggling to get out , in the smoke and darkness, with her child, and said she didn’t see pieces of a plane * she was not looking for- a plane that she sued American Airlines for allowing to be hijacked and crashed into the Pentagon.
      * I think this might be why they wanted to invite her to the hearings.

    3. My parents are too old to be concerned with stuff like this. Too bad my sibs are not concerned. I’ll wear my black sheep wool, nonetheless…

  3. Dear Mr. McKee,
    Quite well done, sir.

    Unfortunately, it’s his book that gets reviewed by his mainstream journalistic buddies. The quality work of David Ray Griffin, Barrie Zwicker, Paul Zarembka and numerous other truthers don’t get a look.

    This is a major clue for all people, and particularly for all fringe corners of the 9/11 Truth Movement, to get into focus. Namely, we need to turn our gaze on corporate media.
    How many Michael Jackson media circuses have we endured? Brittney Speers? O.J. Simpson? Pick your celebrity. Pick your politician. Pick your hyped (sexual) act.
    When mainstream journalists smell blood, they go into a feeding frenzy. Because the advertizing stakes are so high and the rewards so great, they are also not unknown to prick their own fingers to smear a “kick me” on the back of their target for the requisite 15 minutes of infamy to get the circus started.
    But not on the subject of 9/11… except to marginalize anyone deviating from the established bedtime story of what happened. Ask yourself, who established the fairy tale? The corporate media who wants nothing more than for everyone to believe that when the backdrop is a “news desk” and the talent are good-looking and authoritive sounding “news readers”, then we can trust that the material they read is objective, impartial, fair and balance.
    Because nearly everyone has a weakness for the guilty pleasure of enjoying some form of (allegedly) harmless entertainment served up in movie theaters, in home theaters, on DVDs, on cable, on broadcast television, on radio… few of us have the ability to condemn with conviction such manipulation of our emotions, our perceptions, and our understanding, because we think we can judiciously choose when to turn on and off the clearly fictitious fair.
    With the media’s response to 9/11 this past decade, we all should learn that we cannot pick and choose, that we cannot selectively turn on and off, and that the spin to get us turned around and dizzy not only has been ongoing, but was evident and participant in major aspects of those very same 9/11 events.
    Corporate media was involved. And this is why Mr. Kay gets promoted and others don’t. They need to cover their ass and keep the illusion going.

    1. I agree. The fact that Kay’s book gets the full publicity treatment tells us all we need to know about where it’s coming from. And where the mainstream media is coming from.

    2. Mr “cover his ass” is going to eventually get his lying ass KICKED – BIG TIME.
      This smirking molecule of a [decent] human being wouldn’t be let out of the room w/o a death-stare from myself, if I were in attendance of his evil, lying soul.

  4. Kay’s basic charge against the movement to discover the truth about 9-11 is that we cannot accept any parts of the official story as being accurate. If challenged, each and every one of us adds an additional layer of complexity to our conspiracy interpretation. We are driven by our conclusion, not by evidence. We are all the same, in this respect, says Kay.
    Kay knows this charge well: Kay practices it himself defending the official story. Each and every evidence produced against the official story he ignores, or occasionally explains away somehow or other.
    We can learn not to be taken in by such a ‘you are with us or you are against us’ mentality. In our search, we can fearlessly demand that our best work be evidence driven. When debunkers find something important (yes, it happens), we can face it squarely. When work on 9-11 seems to move away from this standard, we can struggle to correct the path.
    The highest of methodological standards must be on our side, as so much is at stake. Kay has helped me understand this.

    1. I agree that we in the movement should face head on evidence that doesn’t support our view. This is why I always rejected the idea I kept hearing from the anti-CIT people that we have to reject even evaluating any evidence that might later be debunked and used to make us look foolish. We should be able to consider all evidence, but we should be careful not to depend on just one thing.
      By systematically showing where the official story can be proven wrong, we avoid putting all our eggs in one basket. Having said this, I agree with you that we also have to be open to the fact that there might be grains of truth mixed with the lies. This is why I completely agree that an evidence-based approach that adheres to the highest standards is the way to go.

  5. I would have to add that anything “found” 10 years after 9/11 by “debunkers” that isn’t independently verified should be taken with a very large pinch of salt.
    If they couldn’t get their story straight for the bs 9/11 Commission Report, why should we accept anything that suddenly “sprouts up” years after the event?
    It’s like certain individuals putting total faith in the “Flight 77 FDR” and the FBI’s “word” that the alleged plane parts’ identification as valid because they had “assumed” that the identity of those parts “weren’t in question”. Or that the FBI just happened to know exactly where to go and collect all surrounding footage of the Pentagon that morning. And manipulate the scant “footage” that was released. Or meekly ignoring the sequestered 911 calls in Arlington (to this day).
    There’s much more get my point.

  6. Good work Craig. I think the fearlessness of the media is already well undermined in recent times and they are well and truly under control. You just have to look at how the media has fearlessly refused to expose the lies of the events in Libya and are now towing the line on Iran and the mythical nuclear weapons (hey I know they lied about Iraq and WMD but this time they really are being honest).
    Let’s face it, if the 9/11 story really stood up to scrutiny they wouldn’t have to ridicule those who question it.
    Oh hold on I almost forgot, I believe these conspiracy theories because somehow they comfort me. Kay should be ashamed of himself but I suspect shame is one emotion he doesn’t feel.

    1. Yes, believing in conspiracy theories is the only way we wackos can make sense of the random cruelty of the world. Thank you, Jonathan Kay, for pointing out our flight from reality. By the way, Jon, is the National Post hiring?

      1. Actually, I was just following the commander-in-thief’s ultimatum (although it took me about 4-5 years after 11 Sep.). I simply don’t tolerate OUTRAGEOUS conspiracy theories (about Afghani-no wait-Iraqi [well- actually Saudi] ) hijackers, about Al-CIA-duh, and about underwear and shoe bombers, and about Saddam’s “weapons of mass destruction” and UN-council “mushroom clouds.”
        I’m just following PNAC’s simple directions [to the letter- which i don’t think was their actual intent].
        Can someone remind me again who the ACTUAL “conspiracy theorists” are though? There seems to be a disconnect…

    2. Yes, but he will get to KNOW shame – of himself, whether he likes it or not.
      He claims to be a metallurgy schooled subject – that’s why n part why they ‘picked’ this paid-off slime-ball. Supposed credibility. A nuance in absolute nonsense.

  7. “Jonathan Kay would suggest that this man is delusional and has too much time on his hands.”
    Well, if the Lt. Col. thought the facts didn’t add up, but still went ahead with the illegal immoral wars of aggression in Iraq and Afghanistan, resulting in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent men woman and children….there’s still some names for people like that.
    I guess you don’t need to be brave though to drop bombs on people from 10,000 feet.
    His efforts now, a little too little and a little too late, would have been more courageous and heroic and of more value in 2001, when Blind Freddy was able to see through the lies. Perhaps it’s all the guilt he needs to assuage, that he’s finally speaking out, might be helped along if he also returns any military medals and citations as well, for starters… then he can start speaking out against impeding wars, not waiting for the next million innocents to die.
    American Military, America’s worst enemy.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *