9/11 Studies as Austro-Libertarian Opportunity By Ace Baker

9/11 Studies as Austro-Libertarian Opportunity
By Ace Baker – May 8, 2007

An open letter to the faculty and students of
the Ludwig von Mises Institute, and to libertarians in general

Dear Austro-libertarians:
You are my heroes. I am a music writer and producer by profession. In my spare time, I’m a devoted student and advocate of Austrian economics, thanks largely to the incomparable Mises.org, with its treasure trove of online books, articles and lectures.
I urge Austro-libertarian scholars to research the events of September 11th 2001. I believe this is the most important issue of our time, and also the best opportunity ever to convince great numbers of people that big government is a fundamental mistake.
In case you were unaware, there is a large and growing literature of scientific and historical material that strongly suggests 9/11 was “an inside job”, a “false-flag” terror event orchestrated by individuals within the Bush administration as a pretext for endless war abroad and destruction of liberty at home. Such a scenario is exactly consistent with Hans Hoppe’s model, is it not? If 9/11 truth won’t convince people that the leviathan nation-state is a “fateful error” as Hoppe puts it, what will?
A few among you have begun to speak out. Morgan Reynolds, of course, is currently at the forefront of 9/11 research, and I applaud Lew Rockwell for publishing Reynolds’ first 9/11 article. Paul Craig Roberts has indicated his incredulity at the official story. And Butler Shaffer has asked of 9/11, “cui bono?”
I realize you are economists and historians, not physicists and engineers. But one does not need to be a physical scientist to appreciate the obvious. The twin towers were blown to kingdom come. They systematically turned to dust from the top down, pulverizing all of the concrete, throwing steel beams outward as far as 509 feet. It all happened in around 10-12 seconds, which is about the same time as free-fall with wind resistance.

CNN live broadcast, Aaron Brown reporting.
After WTC1 was blown up, a mushroom cloud towered, and a bright afterglow shrouded the scene. When it was over, nothing remained of any floors, or any building contents. Fine dust blanketed lower Manhattan inches deep. Planes or no planes, fires or no fires, a gravity-driven collapse could not possibly produce these results.

Ground Zero Sequence. The animated gif picture above was created from two widely available aerial photographs. It is meant to accurately convey the discrepancy between the size of the towers and that of the rubble. The individual pictures were taken from different locations – intact towers from the southwest, ground zero from the south. Size is what is important. While the viewing angle changes, the scale of the superimposed twin towers is correct compared to ground zero. Credit: Ace Baker
Are you aware that WTC7, a 47-story skyscraper that was never hit by any jetliner, suddenly fell to the ground at virtual free-fall speed, straight down into its own footprint at 5:20 in the afternoon? WTC7 looked like the most perfect controlled demolition in history.

“9/11 WTC Building 7 Montage” Credit: briancwri17
Are you aware that hundreds of FEMA agents just “happened” to already be in lower Manhattan on 9/11, ready to cordon off ground zero, because they were in town for a bio-terrorism drill scheduled for the next day? Are you aware that the volume of “put options” placed on American and United airlines stock spiked to over 20 times the usual level in the days immediately prior to 9/11?
Evidence supporting the official story is virtually non-existent. The studies of the building “collapses” published by government agencies, while voluminous, are full of naked assertions, assumptions, and omissions amidst mountains of irrelevant details. The $20 million NIST report admits, in plain English, that they did not even study the “collapses” at all, only the events leading up to them. The UL fire tests on actual models indicated that the fires would not have caused structural collapse, so NIST ignored those and concocted a secret computer model instead.
Please see this article on Kevin Ryan’s deconstruction of the government reports. Among many other devastating points, it notes that the same small group of government engineers was responsible for the official reports on Oklahoma City, the Pentagon event, and the WTC; and that these individuals also have strong ties to armaments manufacturers and oil companies. I can’t help but think that this is something that would have interested Murray Rothbard.
The “smoking gun” confession video in which Osama bin Laden takes credit for 9/11 is surely a fake. The guy in the video looks nothing like all the other pictures of bin Laden.
Osama Confession tape guy

There is almost no aircraft debris at any of the 4 supposed crash sites. 9/11 anomalies go on and on, one jaw-dropper after another.
Proving the official 9/11 story false is one thing, proving an alternative theory true is quite another. About the latter, there is controversy within the 9/11 truth movement. For instance, we don’t know exactly what types of explosives or weapons were used on the twin towers. The obliteration of the World Trade Center was so complete, it is difficult to understand how even conventional explosives could have been responsible. Please see this thesis by Morgan Reynolds and mechanical engineer Judy Wood. You will be astounded by the evidence they present, including video of solid steel disintegrating into dust.

“The Spire” Adapted from CNN live footage of the WTC1 event.
Mind-boggling as it may seem at first, Drs. Reynolds and Wood have concluded that only some type of directed energy weapon (DEW), possibly in conjunction with some type of explosives, can account for all of the observations.
The issue of planes is quite controversial within truth movement as well. There is considerable evidence that no commercial aircraft actually crashed as we were told, and that the various jet-impact videos were fabricated. Consider the phenomenon which has come to be known as “Pinocchio’s Nose”. Only one live broadcast captured the plane crash into the south tower, and it briefly showed the nose of the aircraft exiting out the opposite side of the building!
Oops.
The video feed then abruptly went black. Subsequently, other videos surfaced which appeared to show the same thing. But there is no exit hole in the building where the nosecone supposedly came out, nor was any nosecone recovered from the streets, nor would it be possible for a nosecone to remain intact crashing through the structure anyway.

“The Hole That Wasn’t There” Credit: StillDiggin
Commercial passenger aircraft are mostly lightweight aluminum, while the side of a twin tower was a dense grid of thick steel box columns, and steel-reinforced concrete floors. Yet the 9/11 videos show a jet gliding effortlessly into the tower with no slowing, bending or breaking.

“Ghostplane” Credit: The Webfairy
The tower appears undamaged after the wings of the plane are already inside. The airplane-shaped gash in the wall only appeared after the explosion, which only occurred after the plane was inside. Strange, no?

For those receptive to the inside job theory, yet still hostile towards “no planes”, I would suggest this essay by pioneer 9/11 researcher Gerard Holmgren.
What was the role of newscasters in 9/11? Where do the money trails lead? How are the current “court intellectuals” being controlled? How does 9/11 figure in the continuing march toward global government and one-world fiat currency? Who profited from the 9/11 put options when the airline stocks plummeted? The executive branch isn’t going to investigate itself, ever. Couldn’t a private, competitive system of jurisdiction do a better job of investigation than any territorial monopoly? These are some areas where contributions by Austro-libertarian scholars should prove invaluable.
I never met Murray Rothbard; many of you knew him well. But I don’t believe for one minute that Rothbard would have fallen for the one about the 19 party-animal kamikazee fundamentalist hijackers who hate our freedom. I know he didn’t buy the official story of the Kennedy assassination. I recall a Robert Higgs lecture where Higgs was reminiscing about how Rothbard used to say, “Who killed Kennedy? A lone nut, right? A lone nut!??”.
It’s wake-up time. I’m doing what I can, including my work-in-progress 9/11 musical historiography. Please, be my heroes. Rothbardian revisionist history is urgently needed on 9/11. You will add visibility and credibility to the 9/11 Truth Movement. In the process you will find a fascinating subject, and a genuine opportunity to introduce many new minds to Austro-libertarianism via this gigantic real-world “see I told you so”.
Sincerely,
Alexander “Ace” Baker
http://www.acebaker.com

This entry was posted in 911. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s