I just had the chance to ask Howard Zinn on a call-in show to say what he thought about the possibility that a part of the US government did 9/11. His response was that he didn't really know, he didn't trust anything the government says, but he thinks getting bogged down in endless discussion is a distraction from focusing on important work that needs to be done. The next caller seconded that opinion, and for the rest of the show the host and Zinn found occasion to use the word "conspiracy" several times with acompanying chuckles.

Howard Zinn and Philip Maldari, the host of KPFA's "Morning Show," deserve respect. Because of all the important work they do, on most issues they are part of the "solution" rather than part of the "problem." For example, the show I called in to was about Zinn's work in getting the US out of Iraq, which is considerable and long-standing. If they avoid coming to terms with the truth about 9/11, it would be silly to think it is because they fear losing funding, are being politically blackmailed in some way, are secret tools of disinformation, or something like that. I don't think they are that kind. On the other hand, like everyone, they are probably hesitant to stick their necks out over something that may come back to bite them if they are wrong. But I don't think that's the main problem.

Rather, they are sincere much in the same way that people are sincere who say it's a distraction to focus on the stolen elections or getting Bush impeached. There is certainly a logic in that kind of thinking, because one must always decide what to focus energy on, keep one's eye on the main goal, not get waylaid with distractions, and so forth. We all have to do this, and I and the people reading this have to make decisions about that all the time, too. The problem for anyone is how to decide on what is important and what is not, what supports our agenda and what does not.

I, like most of us who visit this site, think that the likelyhood that the government caused "9/11" is the pivotal, key issue of our time. Certainly for Bush and Cheney, "9/11" is the key issue. For the phony "war on terror", the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, and the coming attack on Iran, it's the key issue. Not only those reasons, but learning the truth about 9/11 is a perfect access to understanding how the "secret government" works, how it worked in the past (Kennedy assassination, etc.) and what it has in store for us in the future. Most of us know that, but somehow, Zinn, Maldari, Amy Goodman, Greg Pallast, Norman Solomon, and many others don't see it. Certainly, it would be a great advantage to "9/11 truth" if these people could be brought up to speed and on board.

We need to spend as much time showing the importance of "9/11 truth" as we do showing the truth of it. For many people, learning the "truth" of 9/11 is enough to instill outrage and a desire to convince others. Many others, and especially seasoned political types who tend to be interested mostly in what supports their established agendas, need to be convinced not only of the truth of "9/11", but of how it will contribute to what they think is important. We need to learn how to present 9/11 to journalists and others in the public eye in a way that gets their attention.