Dear Democracy Now:

It is programs like the one you aired today (9/23/03)
that make many people question your commitment to
progressive ideals. Today you have on two guests,
Peter Lance and Richard Miniter, ostensibly to
" debate" each other. Both Lance and Miniter believe
that the US has had an adversarial relationship with
Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda going back since the
early 1990s. Both believe that OBL and Al Qaeda were
responsible for September 11, 2001. Both reiterate
the Official Story in claiming that intelligence
failures resulted the 911 attacks. Their only
differences are the extent that blame should be cast
on the current President-select and his predecessors.

When you limit debate to such a narrow spectrum of
thought on such a vital issue you are doing your
audience a tremendous disservice. Democracy Now is
actually promoting most of the key elements of the
propaganda campaign concerning September 11th despite
the innumerable logical problems with it. DN's
failure to ask even elementary questions about what
happened that day makes it more difficult for
progressive news media sources to reach activists to
get them to think independently and critically about
this subject.

Professor Michel Chossudovsky's reporting on the real
links between the US and OBL/Al Qaeda is far more
credible than what Lance and Miniter are offering. I
recommend Chossudovsky's book, "War and
Globalization". It documents the ties between the US
and OBL/Al Qaeda. He argues convincingly that OBL/Al
Qaeda both function as intelligence assets for US
governmental elites. He also argues what many of us
private 911 investigators believe is obvious; namely
that September 11th was both a hoax and a con
sponsored by the US government, with horrific results.
To order his book visit:

http://globalresearch.ca/globaloutlook/truth911.html

A related article:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO109C.html

To close, Democracy Now's audience is being harmed by
your refusal to air the viewpoints of any 911 skeptic
(like Professor Chossudovsky) so far. Instead, you
air two mouthpieces for the lunatic story of a man in
a cave armed with a cell phone, a dialysis machine and
boxcutter-wielding, suicidal hijackers who can't fly
Cessnas and don't show up in any airport security
video but nevertheless successfully commit the most
infamous acts of terrorism in human history. Your
audience deserves much more than to be exposed to this
shallow propaganda.

Scott Loughrey

p.s.

The Improbable Collapse:
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/LOU308A.html