NY21: Is Green candidate Matt Funiciello a 9/11 “Truther”?
Green Party candidate Matt Funiciello has confirmed that he believes that the truth about the 9/11 terror attacks in 2001 has been concealed from the public, despite numerous investigations and probes.
“I’m definitely as an American in no way satisfied with the official story that we’ve been told over and over again about the three towers that came down and the subsequent damage on 9/11,” Funiciello said in an interview with NCPR.
He described himself as a “questioner” of the official narrative: “The story does not make sense and it is not just from me.”
Check out WWNY TV’s coverage of Funiciello’s 9/11 views here.
The issue arose during a hotly contested House race in which Funiciello is polling at 10%, trailing Democrat Aaron Woolf and Republican Elise Stefanik.
In comments posted on-line, Funiciello said that he doesn’t “believe the horrific and nonsensical fairy tale our government has sold us concerning 9/11.”
As evidence that the destruction of the Twin Towers in New York City and the Pentagon in Washington DC was part of a more complex conspiracy, Funiciello asserted that one of the structures that fell, known as World Trade Center 7, collapsed under mysterious circumstances.
In fact, a report produced by the National Institute of Standards and Technology found that the WTC 7 collapsed when fires inside the building weakened its structural integrity. “Our take-home message today is that the reason for the collapse of World Trade Center 7 is no longer a mystery,” NIST lead investigator Shyam Sunder said at the time.
Asked about that report, Funiciello replied, “I guess you have a source that you believe is correct and I have what I saw with my own eyes.” He added that he has friends, family members and acquaintances “who don’t agree” with the official findings.
A growing issue in on-line discussions
The last couple of weeks, anonymous comments about Funiciello’s 9/11 beliefs have been popping up in various on-line discussions. Here’s an example from this blog. “Phil” writes, “Don’t you think it’s only right that the media reveal to voters that Matt Funiciello is an outspoken 9/11 Truther?”
Similar accusations have popped up on the blog of Watertown Mayor Jeff Graham and the comment section of the Watertown Daily Times. In past writings, Funiciello has appeared convinced that we don’t yet know the true story about the causes of and main conspirators behind the destruction of the Twin Towers in New York City and the Pentagon in Washington DC.
Funiciello’s 2010 article suggests that Wall Street Traders knew in advance about attack
In an essay posted on the Albany Times Union website in 2010, Funiciello wrote the following:
Some of the questions we should ask ourselves about 9/11 are pretty simple. Why doesn’t our so-called “free media” report on WTC 7 at all? You know, the third tower that fell for no reason and that only 5% of Americans are even aware of?
Why were no scramble orders issued to shoot down hijacked planes flying over two of our major cities? Why were the “put options” [a reference to an investment tool used by Wall Street traders] that clearly show foreknowledge not important enough for the 9/11 Commission to explore (a.k.a. the “Nouveau Warren Commission”)?
How did the cockpit of the “plane” that hit the Pentagon make a hole smaller than it actually was and then spontaneously combust without leaving any evidence of the crash? Why were there massive amounts of thermite (a highly flammable accelerant) found in independent samples of the dust taken?
It turns out the issue also surfaced on the campaign trail this year. During a candidate panel in June in Old Forge, while talking about the NSA spying scandal, Funiciello argued that Americans “still don’t really know why a third tower came down on 9/11. Why don’t we spy about that?”
In recent days, Funiciello has defended his views in numerous posts made in the comment section of the Watertown Daily Times.
Conspiracy theories about 9/11 have been widely debunked
A large number of journalists and government agencies have probed these questions and reached a general, though not universally held, consensus that 9/11 conspiracy theories don’t hold up under scrutiny. The magazine Popular Mechanics conducted one of the most exhaustive probes a few years ago. Here’s what they concluded:
Sadly, the noble search for truth is now being hijacked by a growing army of conspiracy theorists. A few of these skeptics make a responsible effort to sift through the mountain of information, but most ignore all but a few stray details they think support their theories.In fact, many conspiracy advocates demonstrate a maddening double standard. They distrust every bit of the mainstream account of 9/11, yet happily embrace the flimsiest evidence to promote their wildest notions: that Osama bin Laden attacked the United States with help from the CIA; that the hijacked planes weren’t commercial jets, but military aircraft, cruise missiles or remote-control drones; that the World Trade Center buildings were professionally demolished.
This discussion about Funiciello’s views on 9/11 and the causes of the terror attacks come as the Green Party candidate is polling at 10 percent, and as he prepares to take part in three debates with Democrat Aaron Woolf and Republican Elise Stefanik this fall. He’s argued that Woolf should drop out of the race to clear the way for his candidacy.
But that kind of clout in the race is sure to come with more scrutiny and a closer look at Funiciello’s ideas and arguments. It’s also likely to draw attacks from his political opponents. What do you think? Does it matter to you that Funiciello holds views about the 9/11 attacks that are generally discounted?
Tags: election14, funiciello, ny21, vote14
myown, he does not simply have questions about what happened on 9-11. He thinks that the truth of what has been found by the commission is bogus. That is a big difference.
He appears to believe what he claims to have “seen” not the facts. Very scary.
So basically anyone who questions the authority of government and government propaganda or really our cultural propaganda machine; is a conspiracy nut?
Instead of worrying about 9/11 ideas, our discussion should be why not one upstate NY city made this list? Why are we becoming such a bad place to work and live?
“Why are we becoming such a bad place to work and live?”
Taxes are among the highest in the US. Government is among the most corrupt. Should I go on?
Well those are large issues Larry, but those are the issues I would like to hear these candidates talk about. I do find it depressing that we have these two outsiders and the Green guy who is local, but none of them are really talking about how to realistically help our situation.
This SHOULD be a great place to live and work and in many ways for some it is, I really like it. But I also know that I don’t want my kids in general to stay here as I want them to have real opportunities.
Mervel write: “…our discussion should be why not one upstate NY city made this list…”
Forget upstate NY, Mervel, there isn’t a single city from the north-east on that list; in fact, they’re nearly all from the south. This all has to do with the decline in manufacturing in the north east.
I know we are not going to have a city on that list as we don’t have any cities, but my point was more about; hey these are the issues for us, not 9/11 conspiracy, not Occupy Wall Street or income inequality etc. I notice that Wolf is now talking about income inequality, this is an important topic, but not really relevant to our area; due to the lack of very wealthy people; with the EXCEPTION of the likes of him and his second home people from NYS. The highest paid people in most villages in the North Country are teachers or county employees I am not knocking them or their salaries either, point being its not a relevant topic for this area. We need to see realistic solutions to our basic issues of economic growth, poverty, access to health care and crushing property taxes. I don’t know the answers and both sides of the political spectrum will have different answers but lets at least talk about it.
“So basically anyone who questions the authority of government and government propaganda or really our cultural propaganda machine; is a conspiracy nut?”
Of course not. These are all good things to do that is the whole reason for the commission and its findings. Questioning the findings that is fine also. Brian gave this guy the opportunity to do that and explain – he could not because – he can’t. He is just wrong.
“Brian, you should be ashamed. This is nothing more than an attempt to cast aspersions against the character of the man. Furthermore, if you think all of the questions have been answered, then YOU haven’t been doing your homework.”
You can’t be serious! Brian is just doing his job as a journalist. Exposing the fact that this man has some serious issues. These are not character issues, these are issues of how the man views the world. In my opinion, in a very troubling way.
Come on he’s a Green, look at their party what they stand for. I mean yes I am a little surprised about his views on 9/11, but within those circles the view he holds is not way out of line. Also he is the “normal” Green candidate in the area. I totally agree it was a good interview and Brian was doing his job, I don’t find his beliefs shocking though, he is not mainstream, that is the point of the Green Party.
NY State NOT one of most unfair in terms of tax burden.
KHL, I’d like to get some of what you’re smoking!
The truth or not of the official government story regarding 9/11 is not something I’ve spent much time thinking about, to be honest. The crimes of the post-9/11 era, enabled by BIPARTISAN support, is far more concerning to me. That said, a few things puzzle me.
One lot says that Bush and his cronies LIED (their phrase) about the pretexts for aggressing Iraq. But the idea that the same group of people would lie about the real causes of 9/11 is just plain loony.
The other lot says that government is the root of all evil, that it’s power hungry and actively malicious to good, Constitution-loving citizens. But the idea that the same evil government be involved in 9/11 is unhinged.
Some even claim that mass shootings like Sandy Hook are just a “false flag operation” to enable gun control. But the idea that 9/11 might be a similar false flag operation is crazy talk.
The mental gymnastics involved here are incredible. Funiciello’s critics are far more guilty of this than the candidate himself.
OL I would be so, SO happy to hook you up. You’d feel much better. Unfortunately I don’t do that anymore, but try a trip to Colorado!
On 9/11/’01 I witnessed a controlled demolition. Black smoke is caused by a relatively cold fire. Most aviation fuel burned outside the building, it can only achieve 1500*. Steel melts at 2800*. The vertical I beams were covered with asbestos. On 9/12/’01 a construction company began removing steel beams from building #7. This was destroying evidence and a crime. A commission of politicians are not trained criminal investigators. See topdocumentaries/ category 9/11
Apparently NCPR finds it necessary to delete comments not in line with their position or complimentary to Brian Mann and links by which the general public might be informed of the facts of 9/11. This obviously distorts public opinion and misleads people as to what the genuine public sentiment actually is. Although I expect this comment will either not post or be expunged, shame on you anyway. This does make you part of the conspiracy to mislead the American public.
@ Stephen Ruzbacki. One of the 67 comments on this post was deleted. That was for violating our offensive language guidelines.
Dale Hobson, NCPR comment moderator
I thought I had left two comments and had read a couple of dozen others. If I am mistaken I apologize to the staff at NCPR and to Brian Mann. I thought I clearly remembered 82 comments including two previous comments of mine. Were there not a number of links to the evidence ignored or suppressed by the NIST report posted by a guy named Bob? Remember the NIST report is classified, and is what Brian Mann relies on while unfairly trying to paint Matt Funiciello’s views as extreme, while insinuating that questioning the official story is somehow newsworthy or illogical.
My sincere apologies, I had this post confused with that of September 16, I wanted to check out some of what Bob had posted and did not find it. I promise to never comment before my morning coffee and to make as generous a donation as possible to NCPR because I enjoy PRI, Radio Bob, Barbara and even usually Brian Mann’s reporting. Please forgive me, this subject is so badly misrepresented or ignored by the mainstream media while war and militarization are so thoroughly promoted, along with the fact that “Public” radio is largely funded by corporate or covert public funds under the guise of various foundations which do not in any way shape or form represent the public interest, that a lot of my disgust with what has happened to public radio and television since 9/11 came spilling over inappropriately.