Last Thursday, Rudy Giuliani's talk about leadership was led astray when a man had some questions about the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
The man stood up and demanded, "What happened with Building 7, Rudolph?"
The man had a good question, even though he asked it in the wrong way by interrupting Giuliani's talk.
His behavior was unseemly in the context of Giuliani's speech and probably didn't do much to help his worthy cause.
But what needs to be addressed is Giuliani's attitude toward the questions themselves.
To another audience member, Giuliani responded, "Oh, get lost. It seems like I'm in New York. This could be Times Square. Any more clowns?"
The man was then harassed by other audience members, and something tells me that it was for more than interrupting Giuliani's speech: boos started pouring in as soon as "Building 7" came out of the man's mouth.
The attitude Giuliani and the crowd exhibited is what someone might expect from antagonistic children.
Giuliani's response, "May I suggest a barber?" to a sincere question about 9/11 is the standard misdirection faced by those seeking truth about 9/11.
First, may I suggest Rogaine to you, Mr. Giuliani? (Do you see the pointlessness of ad hominem?)
Second, may I suggest not mocking a fellow American who is asking a sincere question regarding a day of such great tragedy as 9/11?
Third, to anyone convinced our government is incapable of lying to its constituency, may I suggest an education?
Or perhaps you can simply make a Google search on the Gulf of Tonkin incident or Operation Northwoods?
Uncertainty regarding the 9/11 Commission Report's veracity is nothing to scoff at.
In 2006, Scripps Howard News Service and Ohio University conducted a poll of 1,010 adults and found that 36 percent of respondents thought it "very likely" or "somewhat likely" that federal officials took part in, or took no action to stop the 9/11 attacks" because they wanted the United States to go to war in the Middle East."
So, you say you want a new investigation opened on 9/11 - an investigation not designed to protect the ineptitude of the federal government like the 9/11 Commission Report?
Well, according to Giuliani, rudeness is apparently a sufficient reason to deny people answers about 9/11.
So, don't be rude, or your questions, like those of countless other reasonable Americans, will fall into limbo.
And don't take the middle route of a firm, resolute investigation that most "truthers" take either, or you will be made irrelevant and derided by a massive herd of childlike people.
As you might have noticed, there is no right way to question the 9/11 Commission Report.
Every approach will lead to oblivion or derision by those who possess an attitude of arrogant confidence in the government.
And that attitude is shamefully accompanied by the misguided idea that questioning the 9/11 Commission Report is somehow un-American.
That is, of course, just another duplicitous, illogical attempt to shift attention from the questions to the questionnaires.
Was 9/11 an "inside job" as asserted by the most extreme truthers?
Probably not.
Is the public's knowledge about the circumstances preceding and following 9/11 complete?
Probably not.
But neither of these questions is certain to any reasonable degree.
Because these are difficult questions - questions that make the federal government vulnerable — they are left in limbo or snubbed entirely.
But, make no mistake: A polled 36 percent of Americans have doubts about the 9/11 Commission Report.
And as long as our troops are in war as a direct result of that day, the questions need to remain alive.
Meanwhile, the investigation into 9/11 is not complete.
Abdul Zalikha is a biology and English junior at UF. His column appears on Wednesdays.
