Examples Of Prophet Muhammad’s Miracles

Source:

Examples of the Prophet’s miracles related to his effective increase in food

As related by Anas ibn Malik, Abu Talha, on seeing God’s Messenger hungry, invited him to a meal. The Messenger, upon him be peace and blessings, came with a crowd of people. Abu Talha had only one loaf of rye bread at home. Umm Sulaym, Abu Talha’s wife, spread some butter on it. The Messenger prayed for abundance, and since there was not enough space for all the people, they ate of the bread ten by ten and left satisfied. They were about seventy to eighty people.¹

As another example, ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Abi Bakr relates that they, one hundred and thirty Companions, were in the company of God’s Messenger during an expedition. The Messenger asked them whether they had something to eat. One of them had about one or two sacks of flour . Dough was prepared to make bread and a sheep was bought from a polytheist who happened to pass by with his flock. They roasted the liver of the sheep, which the Messenger divided among those present, giving each a piece of it, and put aside the share of those who were not present there then. They cooked the meat in two bowls and everyone ate of it. After they finished eating all satisfied, the meat was still as if no one had eaten of it at all.²

There are many other examples of this kind of miracle. They were all transmitted through various-sometimes as many as sixteen-channels. Most of them took place in the presence of large assemblies and were narrated by many persons of truth and good repute.

Examples of the Prophet’s miracles concerning water

The Companions were left without water in a place called Zarwa. They were going to do wudu’ (ritual ablution) but they could not find enough water. God’s Messenger, upon him be peace and blessings, ordered them to bring a bowl of water. He dipped his hands into the bowl and water began to run from his fingers like a fountain. Anas ibn Malik says that on that day they were three hundred people.³

Anas relates this incident on behalf of three hundred persons. Is it at all conceivable that those three hundred people would not have confirmed him, if they thought him to be truthful, or otherwise contradicted him?

As a second example, during the campaign of Hudaybiya, the Companions complained to God’s Messenger about the lack of water. The Messenger, upon him be peace and blessings, took an arrow out of his arrow-bag and ordered them to put it in the well of Samad. When they did that, the water of the well began to gush. During the campaign, all of the Companions drank from it and did wudu’ with it.⁴

There are many examples of the Prophet’s miracles concerning water. They were related by numerous Companions and transmitted through various reliable channels.

Examples of the miracles of the healing of ill and wounded people

Authentic books of Tradition, including primarily Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih al-Muslim, report:

During the Battle of Khaybar, God’s Messenger, upon him be peace and blessings, asked where ‘Ali was. ‘He is suffering from sore eyes’, the Companions answered. He sent for him. ‘Ali came and the Messenger applied his healing saliva to his eyes. At the same moment the pain ceased and ‘Ali’s eyes became better than before.⁵

‘Uthman ibn Hunayf relates:

A blind man came to God’s Messenger and requested him to pray to God to recover his eyes. The Messenger said: “If you desire, I’ll not pray-being blind may be better for your afterlife-or I’ll pray.” The man chose to be relieved of blindness and the Messenger told him: “Go and do an ablution. Then pray two rak‘as and say: ‘O God! Surely my appeal is to You and I turn toward You through the Prophet Muhammad, the Prophet of mercy: O Muhammad, surely I turn toward God through you, that He uncover my sight. O God, make him my intercessor.’” The man did what the Messenger told him and his sight was restored.⁶

There are many more examples concerning this kind of miracle God’s Messenger worked, all of which are recorded in books of Tradition.

The testimony of animals to Muhammad’s Prophethood

The animal kingdom recognized God’s Messenger, upon him be peace and blessings, and became the means for him to work miracles. Although there are many examples, we will mention here only a few that have become well-known and agreed on by exacting authorities.

During the Hijra, when God’s Messenger, upon him be peace and blessings, took shelter from the pursuit of unbelievers in the cave of Thawr, two pigeons stood guard at the entrance like two sentries, and a spider, like a doorkeeper, covered the entrance of the cave with a thick web. As Ubayy in Khalaf, one of the chieftains of the Quraysh, was examining the cave, his friends suggested that they should enter, but he answered: ‘There is a web here, which seems to have been spun before the birth of Muhammad.’ The others added: ‘Would those pigeons, standing there, still be there if someone were in the cave?’⁷

As another example, Jabir relates:

I was with God’s Messenger during a military campaign. When my camel became exhausted and left behind, God’s Messenger prodded it slightly. This made the camel so fast that I had to pull on the reins to make it slower so that I could listen to the Messenger, but Iwas unable to [slow it down].⁸

Anas ibn Malik reports:

After the conquest of Khaybar, a Jewish woman offered God’s Messenger a roasted sheep. God’s Messenger, upon him be peace and blessings, ate a piece of it but, according to the narration of Abu Dawud, stopped eating and said: This sheep says that it is poisonous. Then he turned to the woman and asked her why she offered him a poisonous sheep. When the woman replied that she wanted to kill him, the Messenger responded: God will not let you attack and annoy me.⁹

‘A’isha reports:

We had in our house a kind of pigeon. When God’s Messenger, upon him be peace and blessings, was at home, it would stay quiet, but as soon as he left home, it would continually pace to and fro.¹⁰

Anas ibn Malik relates:

God’s Messenger, upon him be peace and blessings, was the comeliest and the most generous and courageous of people. One night the people of Madina heard some voices and set out to investigate in fear. On their way, they saw a man coming towards them, who appeared to be God’s Messenger, upon him be peace and blessings. He said to them: There is nothing to be distressed about. He had mounted Abu Talha’s horse and himself investigated the matter before anybody else. He turned to Abu Talha and said: I found your horse fast and comfortable. Whereas, that horse had been a very slow one. After that night, no other horse could race against it. ¹¹

Examples of the Prophet’s miracles concerning inanimate objects

Jabir ibn Samura reports:

God’s Messenger, upon him be peace and blessings, once said: “Prior to my Prophethood, a rock in Makka used to offer me greetings. I still recognize it.”¹²

‘Abullah ibn Mas‘ud reports:

We could hear food glorifying God while we were eating with God’s Messenger, upon him be peace and blessings.¹³

Traditionists unanimously report from Anas, Abu Hurayra, ‘Uthman and Sa‘id ibn Zayd, who said:

God’s Messenger, upon him be peace and blessings, climbed up Mount Uhud, accompanied by Abu Bakr, ‘Umar and ‘Uthman. The Mountain, either in awe of them or because of its joy, trembled. God’s Messenger ordered it: Be still, O Uhud, for on you there is a Prophet, a truthful one, and two martyrs.¹⁴

In this saying, the Messenger predicted the martyrdom of ‘Umar and ‘Uthman.

It is established through authentic narrations from ‘Ali, Jabir and ‘A‘isha Siddiqa that rocks and mountains would say to God’s Messenger, ‘Peace be upon you, O Messenger of God!’ ‘Ali says: ’Whenever we went for a walk in the suburbs of Makka in the early times of his Prophethood, trees and rocks we encountered would say, ‘Peace be upon you, O Messenger of God!’¹⁵

The Prophet’s protection as a miracle

As related through various channels, during the military campaign of Ghatfan and Anmar, a courageous chieftain named Ghowras unexpectedly appeared at the side of God’s Messenger, who was lying under a tree. Ghowras unsheathed his sword and asked God’s Messenger, ‘Who will save you from me now?’ God will, the Messenger replied. “God!” Then he prayed: “O God, suffice me against him in any way You will.”¹⁶

At that moment, Ghowras was knocked down and his sword slipped from his hand. God’s Messenger, upon him be peace and blessings, took the sword and asked him: Now, who will save you from me?

Ghowras began to tremble and entreated God’s Messenger to spare his life. ‘You are a noble, forgiving one; only forgiveness is expected of you,’ he pleaded. God’s Messenger forgave him, and when Ghowras returned to his tribe, he said to them: ‘I have just come from the best of mankind.’

Abu Hurayra relates:

Abu Jahl once asked those near him:

'Does Muhammad still rub his face against earth [i.e. make prostration]?'

'Yes, he does', they answered.

Abu Jahl added:

'By Lat and ‘Uzza, if I see him doing that again, I will tread on his neck or bury his face with soil.'

A short while later God’s Messenger came and set out to pray. When he was in prostration, Abu Jahl approached him but suddenly turned back in fear and amazement, trying to protect himself with his hands. When asked why he had done so, he answered: ‘Truly, between him and me is a trench filled with fire, and something horrible and some wings.’

God’s Messenger commented on the event:

'If he had approached me, the angels would have torn him to pieces.'¹⁷

God promised to guard him against people:

O Messenger! Make known whatever is revealed unto you from your Lord, for if you do it not, you will not have conveyed His Message. God will protect you from people. Surely, God guides not the unbelieving folk. (5:67)

The acceptance of the Prophet’s prayers

The authorities of Hadith (Tradition) including, notably, Imam Bukhari and Imam Muslim, unanimously report that whenever God’s Messenger prayed for rain, his prayer was immediately accepted by God. There were even times when the rain unexpectedly began before he had lowered his hands while on the pulpit. As mentioned in books of Tradition and the Prophet’s biography, when his army ran out of water, clouds would appear to give them water. Even in his childhood, his grandfather ‘Abd al-Muttalib would go with him to pray for rain, and rain would come out of God’s love for him. This fact became famous through a poem of ‘Abd al-Muttalib’s. After the Prophet’s death, once ‘Umar took ‘Abbas as a means to pray for rain, saying, ‘O God, this is the uncle of Your beloved Prophet. Give us rain for his sake.’ Thereafter it rained.¹⁸

As was reported by Anas ibn Malik, while one Friday God’s Messenger was giving a sermon, a man came into the mosque and said to him: ‘O Messenger of God! There is drought. Please pray to God to send us rain.’ The Messenger prayed and it rained until the next Friday.

The rain continued for one week. The next Friday, while God’s Messenger was on the pulpit again giving sermon, a man stood up and said: ‘O Messenger of God! Please pray to God to avert rain from us.’ The Messenger prayed: “O God! Send the rain onto the places around us, not onto us.” Anas, the reporter of the event, says: “By God, I saw the clouds scatter and rain fall onto other places, the people of Madina being not under rain.”¹⁹

‘Adbullah ibn ‘Umar relates:

When the number of the Companions was about forty, God’s Messenger, upon him be peace and blessings, prayed: “O God! Give strength to Islam with which of those two, namely ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab and ‘Amr ibn al-Hisham, is more pleasing to You.” The next morning, ‘Umar came to the Messenger and accepted Islam.²⁰

‘Adbullah ibn ‘Abbas reports:

God’s Messenger was in the toilet when once I carried water to where he would do wudu’. When he came out, he asked who had put the water there. ‘I did,’ I answered. Whereupon he prayed: “O God, make him profoundly knowledgeable in religion and teach him the meaning of the Qur’an.” ²¹

It is because of this prayer of the Messenger for Ibn ‘Abbas that Ibn ‘Abbas would later be called with the titles of the ‘Profound Scholar of the Umma’ and the ‘Interpreter of the Qur’an’. When he was still a young man, ‘Umar included him in his consultative assembly which consisted of the high-ranking scholars and elders of the Companions.

Anas ibn Malik relates:

My mother took me to God’s Messenger and said:

'O Messenger of God! This is my son Anas. Let him serve you. Please pray for him.'

The Messenger prayed:

'O God! Give abundance to his wealth and offspring.' ²²

Anas remarked in his old age, swearing by God:

'You see the abundance of my wealth, and the children and grand-children I have number about one hundred.'

Abu Hurayra once complained to God’s Messenger about forgetfulness. The Messenger told him to spread out a piece of cloth on the ground. Then he made some movements as if he were filling his hands with some invisible things and emptying them out on the piece of cloth. After repeating this three or four times, he told Abu Hurayra to pick it up. Through the mysterious effect of these actions of the Messenger, Abu Hurayra, as he himself later stated swearing by God, never forgot anything again. This is also among the well-known events related to the Companions.²³

The Prophet met with angels and jinn and spoke to them

‘Umar reports:

We were sitting with God’s Messenger, upon him be peace and blessings, when a man appeared beside us. He had dark black hair and was wearing a white robe. There were no signs of traveling upon him. He sat before the Messenger and, touching his knees to the Messenger’s, asked him about faith, Islam, perfection of virtue (ihsan) and the Last Day. After the interview, the man left and disappeared. God’s Messenger, upon him be peace and blessings, turned to me and asked who that man was. ‘God and His Messenger know better’, I answered. The Messenger concluded: “He was Gabriel. He came to teach you your religion.”²⁴

Sa‘d ibn Abi Waqqas relates:

At the Battle of Uhud, I saw two men dressed in white at each side of God’s Messenger, fighting for his sake. I had never seen them before, nor have I seen them since. (Sa‘d meant that they were two archangels, Gabriel and Michael.)²⁵

Rifa‘a ibn Rafi‘ reports:

Gabriel asked God’s Messenger what was their opinion of the Companions who participated in the Battle of Badr. The Messenger answered like this: “We consider them among the most virtuous of Muslims.” Gabriel responded: “So do we; we consider the angels who were present there among the most virtuous of angels.”²⁶

In his Musnad, Ahmad ibn Hanbal reports from ‘Adbullah ibn Mas’ud that God’s Messenger, upon him be peace and blessings, invited jinn to accept Islam and taught them of the Qur’an. ²⁷

The appearance of invisible objects and realms to the Prophet

‘A’isha Siddiqa reports:

One day the sun was eclipsed. God’s Messenger, upon him be peace and blessings, performed the prayer of eclipse and then explained:

Surely, the sun and the moon are two of God’s signs. When you witness an eclipse, pray until it ends. By God, in this place where I have performed the prayer I have seen everything promised to me. When you saw me move forward during the prayer, I did that to take a cluster of grapes which appeared to me from Paradise. Again, by God, when you saw me move backward, I did that because I saw Hell roaring with its parts piling one upon another.²⁸

‘Adbullah ibn ‘Abbas relates:

God’s Messenger, upon him be peace and blessings, passed by two graves and said: “Heed what I will tell you: Those lying in those graves are suffering torments. They are suffering torments because of two grave sins. One of them used to backbite and slander others everywhere. The other was not careful [about guarding himself] against urine-stains.”²⁹

The testimony of trees to Muhammad’s Prophethood

Jabir ibn ‘Adbullah reports:

We were walking with God’s Messenger, upon him be peace and blessings. We went down a wide valley. The Messenger searched for a place to relieve himself. When he saw that there was not a single covered place, he went to the two trees he had caught sight of by the valley. He pulled one of them by one of its branches, next to the other tree. The tree was like an obedient camel being pulled by its reins. He addressed them: Join together over me by God’s leave! The trees joined together and formed a screen. ³⁰

‘Adbullah ibn ‘Umar reports:

God’s Messenger, upon him be peace and blessings, used to lean against a pole called the ‘date-palm trunk’ when delivering a sermon. Later a pulpit was built and when the Prophet started giving his sermons from it, the pole moaned because of its separation from him. The Messenger climbed down and stroked it. The pole stopped moaning.³¹

‘Abu Sa’id al-Khudri relates:

God’s Messenger gave Qatada ibn Nu‘man a stick on a dark night, saying: “This stick will light up your surroundings as far as seven meters. When you get home, you will see a black shadow. Without giving it respite to tell you anything, strike it with this stick. Qatada did what God’s Messenger told him to.³²

References:

1. Bukhari, Ayman, 22; Muslim, Ashriba, 142.
2. Bukhari, At‘ima, 6; Muslim, Ashriba, 175.
3. Nasa’i, 1.60; Bukhari, 4.233; Muslim, Hadith No. 2279.
4. Bukhari, Shurut, 15.
5. Bukhari, Fada’l al-Sahaba, 9; Muslim, Fada’il al-Sahaba, 34.
6. Tirmidhi, Da‘awat, 119; I. Hanbal, 4.138; I. Maja, Iqama, 189.
7. I. Hanbal, Musnad, 1.348.
8. Bukhari, Nikah, 10.22.
9. Muslim, Salam, 45; Abu Dawud, Diyat, 6.
10. I. Hanbal, Musnad, 4.112.
11. Bukhari, Adab, 39; Muslim, Fada’il, 48; I. Hanbal, 3.147.
12. Muslim, Fada’il, 2; Darimi, Muqaddima.
13. Bukhari, Manaqib, 25; I. Hanbal, Musnad, 1.460.
14. Muslim, Fada’il, 50.
15. Tirmidhi, Hadith No. 3630; Hakim, 2.607.
16. Bukhari, Maghazi, 31, 33; Muslim, Fada’il, 13.
17. Muslim, Sifat al-Munafiqin, 38.
18. Bukhari, 2.35; Bayhaqi, Sunan, 6.147.
19. Bukhari, Istisqa’, 7; Muslim, Istisqa’, 1.
20. Bukhari, Istisqa’, 7; Muslim, Istisqa’, 1.
21. Bukhari, ‘Ilm, 17; Muslim, Fada’il, 137.
22. Muslim, Fada’il, 143.
23. Muslim, Fada’il, 159.
24. Bukhari, Iman, 37.
25. Bukhari, Maghazi, 18; Muslim, Fada’il, 46-7.
26. Bukhari, Maghazi, 11.
27. Musnad, 1.455.
28. Bukhari, Abwab ‘amal fi l-Salat, 2; Muslim, Kusuf, 3.
29. Bukhari, Adab, 46; Muslim, Tahara, 3.
30. Muslim, Zuhd, 74.
31. Bukhari, Manaqib, 25; Tirmidhi, Manaqib, 6; Nasa’i, Jumu‘a, 17.
32. I. Hanbal, Musnad, 3.65

Bush : Worst President Ever

A recent article in Rolling Stone Magazine considers Bush to be the Worst President in History. Imagine that. There have been 43 Presidents so far. And some consider George to be the worst. Well, some may argue that that is merely an opinion. But here are some facts from the article:

“The monster deficits, caused by increased federal spending combined with the reduction of revenue resulting from the tax cuts, have also placed Bush's administration in a historic class of its own with respect to government borrowing. According to the Treasury Department, the forty-two presidents who held office between 1789 and 2000 borrowed a combined total of $1.01 trillion from foreign governments and financial institutions. But between 2001 and 2005 alone, the Bush White House borrowed $1.05 trillion, more than all of the previous presidencies combined. Having inherited the largest federal surplus in American history in 2001, he has turned it into the largest deficit ever - with an even higher deficit, $423 billion, forecast for fiscal year 2006. Yet Bush - sounding much like Herbert Hoover in 1930 predicting that "prosperity is just around the corner" - insists that he will cut federal deficits in half by 2009, and that the best way to guarantee this would be to make permanent his tax cuts, which helped cause the deficit in the first place!”

Pretty amazing! After receiving the largest ever budget surplus in US history from Clinton, Bush spent the whole lot and borrowed more than the previous 42 Presidents combined. And remember, that included Presidents who borrowed in order to have enough cash for 2 World Wars, recovering from the Stock market crash, the Vietnam War, the Korean War, the Cold War (including massive spending on nuclear weapons and the space race), and the first Gulf War. Wow! That certainly is a truly historical achievement! Who could ever forget Bush in the decades to come!

Gene

Scholars for 9/11 Truth

Source:

Scholars for 9/11 Truth

By:
James H. Fetzer

Founder and Co-Chair
Scholars for 9/11 Truth

SCHOLARS FOR 9/11 TRUTH

Scholars for 9/11 Truth is a group founded by James H. Fetzer and Steven E. Jones on 15 December 2005, which currently includes some 200 experts and scholars who believe that the government's theory of the September 11, 2001 attacks cannot be sustained and functions as a cover-up for its own involvement in the crime. The non-partisan society is dedicated to exposing falsehoods and revealing truths about the events of 9/11 "and letting the chips fall where they may."

The group has demonstrated that investigations by FEMA and NIST about the collapse of the World Trade Center buildings are inadequate and that the official account violates laws of physics and of structural engineering. They have observed that jet-fuel based fires do not attain temperatures above 1,800 degrees F under optimal conditions and that the melting point of steel is 1,000 degrees higher, which means that the steel did not melt.

They also observe that these fires were oxygen-depleted, as the billowing black clouds of smoke emanating from the building reveal, which means that they were generating heat at temperatures far below the optimum. UL certified the steel used in the construction for up to 2,000 degrees for six hours before it would even significantly weaken. The fires were neither hot enough nor long enough to have caused the steel to weaken.

The impacts of the aircraft also appear to have had negligible effect on the collapse of the buildings. Frank DeMartini, the project manager of the construction, observed that, given the sophisticated load-redistribution capacities built into the towers around its 47 massive core columns, the impact of an airplane would be like "sticking a pencil through mosquito netting," which suggests that neither the fires nor the planes brought the buildings down.

Indeed, WTC-2, which was hit second, fell first after less than an hour of exposure, while WTC-1, which was hit first, fell second after only about an hour and a half of exposure. A far more extensive fire occurred in WTC-1 on February 13, 1975, which burned at much higher temperatures for three hours and spread over 65% of the 11th floor, including the core, yet caused no significant damage to the steel structure and no trusses had to be replaced.

The scholars observe that, while dust clouds are expected to arise when a building hits the ground, in this case an immense cloud of fine dust envelops the Twin Towers as they fall from the top down! This involved pulverizing the concrete used as flooring material in the buildings and included steel beams being blow outward and even upward, which required an enormous source of energy and cannot be explained on the government's account.

In some footage of the buildings fall, tremendous explosions can be observed just before the dust cloud obscures them. This is consistent with the placement of demolitions, which may have occurred during the two weeks leading up to 9/11, when unusual "security lapses" took place and teams of "engineers" were allowed access to the buildings. Steven Jones believes that thermate, a sulfur-enhanced form of thermite, was probably used to bring them down and that it would have only required ten trips each by forty men to place the charges.

Beyond the dust cloud, which they consider to be a "smoking gun", the scholars also point to the collapse of WTC-7, a 47-story building that was hit by no aircraft, suffered only very modest fires, and yet collapsed at 5:20 PM, about eight hours after the towers fell. A taped interview with Larry Silverstein, who leased the World Trade Center, reveals that he suggested that the building be "pulled", which means be brought down by controlled demolition.

The fall of that building, like those of the towers, displays classic characteristics of controlled demolitions, including falling symmetrically and completely into its own footprint at the approximate speed of free fall, which is only possible if there is no resistence to upper portions collapsing on lower. Pools of molten metal were found in the subbasements of all three buildings for weeks thereafter, another indication that they were taken down.

The scholars point to features of the Pentagon hit that raise serious doubts about whether it could possibly have been hit by a plane of the size and mass of a Boeing 757, which weighs 100 tons with a 125-foot wingspan and tail that rises 44-feet above the ground, especially given that the initial hit point only appears to be far too small to accommodate such a large plane and there is a noticeable absence of aircraft debris, including no wings, fuselage, seats, luggage, bodies, tail, or even engines.

While some members are inclined to accept the government's version of the Pentagon hit, the evidence suggests that, whatever hit the Pentagon, it does not appear to have been a Boeing 757. Moreover, the government has been unwilling to provide photographs and films that would support its position, if it were true, raising further suspicions that it cannot release them because they would contradict the government's position. Indeed, the scholars are submitting a petition to Congress demanding the release of physical and photographic evidence.

The society has issued a series of press releases that reflect the positions of the society on basic aspects of the case and outline some of the major problems with the official account. In addition to the findings described here, other members, who are pilots, aeronautical engineers and computer scientists, have explained why the alleged hijackers would have been unable to fly these planes and why cell phone calls from them would have been impossible.

Scholars for 9/11 Truth maintains an extensive web site that is updated daily, which reflects the current state of knowledge of these events and recent developments related to their study. According to their website, "The members of S9/11T are encouraged to take an active role by devoting themselves to reporting the results of research on 9/11 to the nation and the world by means of lectures, articles, and other venues." While the society is dedicated to research and is not an activist organization, many of its members are committed to political change.

Members

Among those included among the members of this society are:

David Ray Griffin: Professor of Philosophy of Religion and Theology, at the Claremont School of Theology, and the author or editor of thirty books

Morgan Reynolds: A & M Professor of Economics Emeritus, former Chief Economist for the United States Department of Labor, former Director of the Criminal Justice Center

Steven E. Jones: Professor of Physics, Brigham Young University, co-chair of S9/11T and an editor of its forthcoming publication, Journal for 9/11 Studies

Robert M. Bowman: Former Director of the U.S. Advanced Space Programs Development in the Carter and Ford administrations, former Air Force Lieutenant Colonel with 101 combat missions.

James H. Fetzer: Distinguished McKnight University Professor of Philosophy at the University of Minnesota, Duluth, author or editor of more than two dozen books and co-chair of S9/11T

Andreas Von Buelow: former state-secretary in the German Defense Ministry, director of the German Secret Service, minister for research and technology, and member of Parliament for 25 years.

Wayne Madsen: investigative journalist, author, and syndicated columnist with articles in The Village Voice, CounterPunch, Online Journal, Wired, In These Times, Insider Magazine, and From The Wilderness.

John McMurtry: FRSC, moral philosopher and ethicist at the University of Guelph in Ontario, Canada and author of six books on public policy issues

Conclusions

Their conclusions are based on the results of their own scientific and political research. They contend that the official version of events on September 11, 2001 is one of the great hoaxes in world history, which has been used to manipulate the American people for political purposes and has led to undermining the Constitution, launching illegal wars, and subjecting the people to virtually unrestricted surveillance. Since terrorism involves the use of acts of violence and threats of violence to instill fear into a population in order to manipulate it for political purposes, their findings suggest, ironically, that the American government appears to be using terrorism to manipulate the American people.

Criticism of Scholars For 9/11 Truth

Although most activists and researchers in the 9/11 Truth Movement have been positive and excited about the formation of a scholars group and most would agree that it is an important step for the movement to take, some also express concern that members of the scholars group and its website are promoting debunked theories which discredit the movement, such as the idea that the commercial aircraft used on 9/11 were not actually involved in the attacks, but instead, were replaced by fake planes or military drones, as described by Morgan Reynolds and Leonard Spencer, among other members of the group.

This criticism overlooks an essential characteristic of scientific investigations, which requires considering all possible alternative hypotheses that might explain the data. In this case, there are photos and films that raise questions about the aircraft involved and the way in which they impacted the buildings, which are appropriate subjects for study by members of the society. To describe such theories as "debunked" is to take for granted conclusions that have yet to be established. As long as questions remain as to whether those planes they may have been military fuel tankers that could be flown by remote control, for example, it is important that members explore them until they are resolved. While the members support the positions of the society, the society does not therefore support the positions of its members and it would be irresponsible of the society to curtail research by its members.

Some 9/11 researchers have criticized the website, noting that it promotes one-sided views of issues which are debated within the movement (such as the idea that Flight 77 did not hit the Pentagon). Although the 'Resources' page states, "We do not necessarily endorse or concur with conclusions or opinions expressed here, but we think that they provide suggestive and stimulating resources for further contemplation," only one side of a serious and divisive debate within the 9/11 movement is presented for contemplation. Similarly, papers asserting that a plane did not hit the Pentagon are posted on the front page, but no papers asserting the opposite are posted, that a Boeing 757 did indeed hit the building as described by dozens of witnesses at the scene.

The witness testimony in this case is very much in dispute, since it is unlikely that those who were exposed to whatever flew over or hit the building were qualified to distinguish between Boeing 767s, 757s, and 737s, for example, much less other kinds of aircraft that could have been fashioned to resemble planes of those kinds. The weight of an objection like this is dependent upon the weight of the evidence, where the small impact point and large size and mass of the aircraft alleged to have hit the building create difficulties for any objective student of the case. In particular, the absence of aircraft debris of appropriated kinds and quantities — including no wings, no fuselage, no seats, no bodies, no luggage, no tail, and no engines — makes the official story very difficult to accept. Everyone knows the government's account; what requires emphasis is the powerful evidence that contradicts it. So emphasis on the data that refutes the hypothesis appears entirely appropriate.

The objection has also been raised that articles described on the web site by David Ray Griffin, Steven E. Jones, and James H. Fetzer as "peer reviewed" have not appeared in any scientific journals. These papers, however, have been extensively subjected to review by anonymous experts on these issues and are going to appear in forthcoming books. Fetzer's paper [81 KB PDF file, opens in new window], for example, was accepted for publication in a volume being edited by Griffin and Peter Dale Scott, and was subsequently also accepted in another volume being published by Elsevier, when the reorganization of the contents of the two books was being considered. He has now withdrawn it for publication in another new collection on these matters, which will include contributions from members of Scholars for 9/11 Truth.

Indeed, the absence of journals in this specific area is being addressed by the society, which is developing a new Journal for 9/11 Studies, which will be edited by Steven Jones and Judy Wood, a professor of mechanical engineering at Clemson. Fetzer will assist in managing the journal. He and Jones have extensive editorial experience, where Fetzer, for example, founded and edited Minds and Machines: Journal for Artificial Intelligence, Philosophy, and Cognitive Science for eleven years. The journal will have a distinguished Editorial Advisory Board and will provide opportunities for students and scholars to have their research processed by the procedures appropriate to academic journals, thereby formalizing what has been until now only an informal process. This should lay such concerns to rest, once and for all.

A related concern has been that the website effectively ignores the websites and original work by some of the most respected long-term researchers of the 9/11 attacks, such as CooperativeResearch.org, FromTheWilderness.com, 911Truth.org, OilEmpire.us, 911Research.WTC7.net, Ratical.org/ratville/CAH/ and WTCEO.org. These websites represent the efforts of people who have been effectively dealing with the media, victims' families, and congress members for years. The rather surprising success that Scholars for 9/11 Truth has enjoyed in reaching the American public appears to stem from the prominence of experts and scholars among its members, which establishes its credibility. But nothing that the society may achieve can ever diminish the significance of the efforts of other groups before it, to whom every student and scholar concerned with these issues is permanently indebted.

Facts and Figures about our TV Habits

A friend sent the link for these sites to me. I have often heard of many similar studies being done in the US, but many such studies are focused on specific problems, such as violence or obesity. This site gathers information from numerous sources and studies and then presents in the format given below.

If you are a parent or a teacher, then you should pay attention to the information below. There are some serious negative effects from watching too much television.

Children are just as happy, if not more happy, when playing games on the floor by themselves or with their parents. They don’t need most of what is shown on TV. They are able to play. They can have fun without watching explosions, crashes, violence, or people being murdered everyday.

Be wise. Be careful about what you allow your children to watch on TV. Just turn it off and find something else to do. Ask the children what they want to do. Sit on the floor and play. It’s more fun than watching sinetron. Guaranteed.

The information below shows the results from surveys in the USA. But here we have sinetron (soap operas), and lots of new criminal shows and “mystical” shows that are just as frightening, or even more so. America has already shown us the bad results from too much bad TV. So, why are we making the same mistakes again in Indonesia? We need to prepare children for a future where they can be creative and independent thinkers. TV has the opposite effect on them.

You may not be able to control what is shown on TV, but you can make a choice: JUST TURN IT OFF!!!

(All highlights below are mine)

Wassalamu’alaikum wr.wb.,

Gene

Source: tvturnoff.org

I. TV Undermines Family Life

1. Time per day that TV is on in an average US home: 7 hours, 40 minutes

2. Amount of television that the average American watches per day: over 4 hours

3. Time spent daily with screen media for U.S. children age six and under: about 2 hours

4. Percentage of US families with children age 0-6 with at least one television: 99

5. Percentage of US households with 3 or more TVs (2003): 50

6. Percentage of parents who say that if they have something important to do, it is likely that they will use the TV to occupy their child: 45

7. Percentage of Americans who always or often watch television while eating dinner: 40

8. Percentage of Americans who say they watch too much TV: 49

9. Time per week that parents spend in meaningful conversation with their children: 38.5 minutes

10. Percentage of 4-6 year-olds who, when asked, would rather watch TV than spend time with their fathers: 54

II. TV Harms Children and Hampers Education

1. Average number of hours per week that American one year-old children watch television: 6

2. Number of hours recommended by the American Pediatric Association for children two and under: 0

3. Average daily time American children under age two will spend in front of a screen: 2 hours, 5 minutes

4. Average time per week that the American child ages 2-17 spends watching television: 19 hours, 40 minutes

5. Hours of TV watching per week shown to negatively affect academic achievement: 10 or more

6. Hours per week that non-African-American teens (12-17) spend watching primetime TV (8-11 p.m. daily): 5:26

7. Hours per week that African-American teens spend watching primetime TV: 7:37

8. Percentage difference (African Americans vs. non-African-Americans): 40.2

9. Percentage of children ages 8-16 who have a TV in their bedroom: 56

10. Percentage of children age 6 and under who have a TV in their bedroom: 36

11. Percentage of children age 6 and under with a VCR or DVD player in their bedroom: 27

12. Percentage of those children who usually watch television in their bedroom: 30

13. Percentage of television-time that children ages 2-7 spend watching alone and unsupervised: 81

14. Percent of total television-time that children older than 7 spend without their parents: 95

15. Percentage of parents who would like to limit their children’s TV watching: 73

16. Percentage of day care centers that use TV during a typical day: 70

17. Hours per year the average American youth spends in school: 900

18. Hours per year the average American youth watches television: 1,023

19. Percentage of self-professed educational TV that has little or no educational value: 21

20. Chance that an American parent requires children to do their homework before watching TV: 1 in 12

21. Average time per day American children spend in front of a screen of some kind: 4 hours, 41 minutes

22. Percentage of young adults who admit to postponing their bedtime for the internet or TV: 55

23. Percentage of 4-6 year olds in homes where the TV is usually or always left on who can read: 34

24. Percentage of 4-6 year olds in homes where the TV is not usually or always on who can read: 56

25. Amount of time children age 4-6 and under spend daily, on average, with screen media: 2:10 hours

26. Amount of time children age 6 and under spend daily, on average, reading or being read to: 41 minutes

III. TV Promotes Obesity

1. Adults in US technically obese: 1 in 3, or 62 million

2. Percentage of American children who were seriously overweight in 1964: 5; 2003: more than 15

3. Amount of daily moderate physical activity recommended for children: 60 minutes

4. Percentage of young people who report having had no recent physical activity: 14

5. Factor by which men who watch more than 21 hours of TV a week increase their risk of Type 2 diabetes: 2

6. Percentage chance that an overweight adolescent will become an overweight or obese adult: 70%

7. Percentage higher health cost for Kaiser Permanente members with Body Mass Index of 35 or higher: 44

8. Percentage of dollars spent on clothing for men and women’s plus sizes: 23

9. Economic cost of obesity in the United States in 2000: $117 billion

IV. TV Promotes Violence

1. Number of violent acts the average American child sees on TV by age 18: 200,000

2. Number of murders witnessed by children on television by the age 18: 16,000

3. Percentage of youth violence directly attributable to TV viewing: 10

4. Percentage of Hollywood executives who believe there is a link between TV violence and real violence: 80

5. Percentage of children polled who said they felt “upset” or “scared” by violence on television: 91

6. Percent increase in network news coverage of homicide between 1993 and 1996: 721

7. Percent reduction in the American homicide rate between 1993 and 1996: 20

8. Percent increase in number of violent scenes per hour on 10 major channels from 1992 to 1994: 41

9. Percentage of programs that show the long-term consequences of violence: 16

10. Percentage of violent programs that emphasize an anti-violence theme: 4

V. TV Squelches Political Awareness

1. Money spent on ads for the major presidential candidates between June 1, 2000 and September 13: $63 million

2. Money spent on issue ads between January 1, 1999 and August 30, 2000: over $342 million

3. Percentage of those which were attack ads: 61

4. Amount of time broadcasters must provide to candidates free of charge under the 1996 Telecommunications Act: 0

5. Value of public airwaves allocated to broadcasters at no cost under the 1996 Telecommunications Act: $70 billion

6. Amount spent on lobbying by TV broadcasters and the National Association of Broadcasters in 1996: $4 million

7. Number of network news stories about the environment in 1990: 377; 1996: 113

8. Percentage of Americans who can name The Three Stooges: 59

9. Percentage of Americans who can name three Supreme Court Justices: 17

VI. TV Promotes Over-consumption

1. Number of TV commercials viewed by American children a year: 40,000

2. Age by which children can develop brand loyalty: 2

3. Number of TV commercials seen by the average American by age 65: 2 million

4. Percentage of toy advertising dollars spent on television commercials in 1997: 92

5. Amount spent on television advertisements directed at young children in 1997: $1.3 billion

6. Percentage of local TV news broadcast time devoted to advertising: 30

7. Total amount of money spent in 1999 to advertise on broadcast television: $40 billion

8. Net worth of the typical middle-class American household after accounting for debts: less than $10,000

9. Percentage of American children age six and under who have products based on characters from TV shows or movies: 97

Source Key

I. Family Life

1) Nielsen Media Research, 2000. 2) ibid. 3) “Zero to Six: Elecontronic Media in the Lives of Infants, Toddlers, and Preschoolers,” Kaiser Family Foundation, Fall 2003 4) ibid. 5) ibid. 6) ibid. 7) National Institute on Media and the Family, 1999. 8) Fahey, Valery. “TV by the Numbers.” Health. Dec/Jan, 1992: 35. 9) American Family Research Council. “Parents Fight ‘Time Famine’ as Economic Pressures Increase.” 1990. 10) Mango, Jack. “TV in America.” The Official Couch Potato Handbook. Reprinted in Wilson Quarterly. Autumn 1993: 44.

II. Children

1) Hofferth, Sandra L. “Healthy Environments, Healthy Children.” A Report on the 1997 Panel Study of Income Dynamics, Child Development Supplement. University of Michigan, 1998. 2) American Academy of Pediatrics Policy Statement, August 1999. 3) “Zero to Six,” Kaiser Family Foundation. 4) Nielsen, 2000. 5) US Dept. of Education. “Strong Families, Strong Schools, Building Community Partnerships for Learning.” 1994. 6) Nielsen Media Research, 2000. 7) ibid. 8) ibid. 9) Annenberg Public Policy Center, Media in the Home 2000. 10) “Zero to Six,” Kaiser Family Foundation. 11) ibid. 12) ibid. 13) Kaiser Family Foundation. “Kids and Media @ the New Millennium.” 1999. 14) ibid. 15) US Dept. of Ed., 1994 16) Tashman, Billy. “Sorry Ernie, TV Isn’t Teaching.” New York Times. Nov 12, 1994. 17) Barber, Benjamin. Harper’s. Nov 1993: 41. 18) Nielsen, 2000. 19) Annenberg, Public Policy Center, 2000. 20) Harper’s “Index.” Sept. 1996. 21) Annenberg Public Policy Center, 2000. 22) National Sleep Foundation, Press Release, March 28, 2000. 23) “Zero to Six,” Kaiser Family Foundation. 24) ibid. 25) ibid. 26) ibid.

III. Obesity

1) “America’s Great Big Fat Challenge,” The Washington Post, November 16, 2003 2) “A Not so Minor Risk,” The Washington Post, December 2, 2003 p. F1 3) U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, “The Surgeon General’s Call to Action to Prevent and Decrease Overweight and Obesity 2001,” 2001. 4) ibid. 5) Harvard School of Public Health. Cited by Associated Press. June 20, 1999. 6) U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. 7) “America’s Great Big Fat Challenge,” The Washington Post, November 16, 2003 8) ibid. 9)Department of Health and Human Services, 2001

IV. Violence

1) Senate Judiciary Committee Staff Report. “Children, Violence, and the Media.” 1999. 2) American Medical Association. “Physician Guide to Media Violence.” 1996. 3) Senate Judiciary Committee Staff Report. 4) US News and World Report. Apr 8, 1997. 5) MTV national survey. Chicago Tribune. Aug 15, 1993. 6) Budd, Craig, and Steinman. Consuming Environments. Rutgers University Press, 1999. 7) ibid. 8) Senate Judiciary Committee Staff Report. 9) Mediascope. National Television Violence Study. Studio City, CA, 1999. 10) ibid.

V. Overconsumption

1) American Academy of Pediatrics. Cited by National Institute on Media and the Family. “Children and Advertising Fact Sheet.” 2002. 2) McNeal, 1992. Cited by National Institute on Media and the Family, 2000. 3) Clark. “The Want Makers”: 195. Cited in Marketing Madness by Michael Jacobsen and Laurie Mazur: 45. 4) Lamay, Craig, and Newton Minow. Abandoned in the Wasteland: Children, Television and the First Amendment. 1995. 5) Rocky Mountain Media Watch, Denver, 1995. 6) “Children and Advertising Fact Sheet,” Natl. Institute on Media and the Family. 7) Advertising Age. “1999 U.S. Advertising Volume.” Prepared by Robert J. Coen, McCann-Erickson Worldwide. 8) Schor, Juliet. The Overspent American. Basic Books, 1998. 9) “Zero to Six,” Kaiser Family Foundation.

VI. Political Awareness

1) Brennan Center-Wisconsin Study. Political Television Advertising. 2000. 2) Annenberg Public Policy Institute. “Issue Ads @ APPC.” 2000. 3) ibid. 4) Common Cause. Channeling Influence. Washington, DC, 1997. 5) ibid. 6) ibid. 7) Center for Media and Public Affairs Factoids. 8) Washington Post Poll, Washington Post, October, 12 1995. 9) ibid.

RealVision, an initiative to raise awareness about television’s impact on us, is a project of TV-Turnoff Network, 1200 29th Street, NW, LL #1 Washington, DC 20007 P (202) 333-9220 F (202) 333-9221 www.tvturnoff.org