Stephen Colbert and most of the rest of the commercial news/entertainment media are upset over Trump's announcement of plans to make peace with our current enemies in Afghanistan just as we're about to mark the 18th anniversary of the pretext for that conflict on September 11. So sharp was the criticism that Trump aborted the peace effort. The critics aren't saying what date might be acceptable for an agreement to end the bloodshed, but any date in September seems to be out of the question, this month being reserved for somber reflection.
As in Septembers past, media reflection does not include any discussion of what actually happened on September 11, 2001. In New York City, where the main event took place, three skyscrapers fell down because two got hit by airplanes. Over two thousand people were inside the tallest of the buildings when they were reduced to dust about an hour after the initial impacts. The third building, half a block away and not penetrated by an airplane, fell down hours later with nobody inside. If that strikes you as a reason for further investigation, you're not alone, but you wouldn't know that if you rely on the mass media for news. According to one item of unreported news, a little more than half of a polling sample watching video of the collapse of that third building thought it was intentionally demolished and not the result of fire, as our government maintains. Three thousand architects and engineers have organized to correct the government's account, but news-mongers refuse to acknowledge them.
Also absent from tomorrow's anniversary observances will be any mention of the lawsuit now pending in federal court to force the FBI to reinvestigate the events of that day. The lawsuit demands a decree requiring the FBI to comply with a legal mandate that it assess any evidence not considered by the official 9/11 inquiry, specifically, evidence that World Trade Center buildings one, two and seven were brought down by explosive demolition. Witnesses' reports of explosions in the buildings before their collapse, along with evidence of incendiaries and explosives in the dust afterwards, were never properly investigated, as the complaint explicitly charges.
Another item censored out of tomorrow's news is the release of a report by a team of scientists at the University of Alaska Fairbanks, demonstrating that the third building to fall down in New York could not have collapsed because of fire. The authors, including the chairman of the university's civil engineering department, have invited the public to comment on the report. They may be overly optimistic in their expectation that the public will ever find out that the report exists.
Don't expect any news updates on the status of a federal grand jury that was supposed to have been assembled to initiate a formal investigation of the events of September 11. The authors of a demand on the U. S. Attorney for New York City have petitioned the federal district court there to issue a writ of mandamus ordering the federal prosecutor to report whether he's actually convened a grand jury in compliance with their demand. Law buffs might like to know just how and why so much of the physical evidence of the buildings' failure could have been removed so promptly and completely from the crime scene. News-mongers seem disinclined to ask.
Instead of information on any of these events or the mysteries they address, we news-consumers will have to be content with tearful memorials, interspersed with spates of Arab-bashing, all accompanied by thoughts and prayers for the departed and their survivors.