ANother 911 thread -- jeez...

[Nono]

I've always striven to view with circumspection both the Official Version of 911 and the hardline conspiracy explanations. There has been a great deal of futile debate on this board between the representatives of the two camps.

It seems to me that the wilder shores of 911 conspiratism might actually represent paid-up Bushevik conspirators whose outlandish efforts only infect any serious inquiry into the events by tempting people to think "Oh Christ, another wack-job conspiracy theory!"

Am therefore grateful to George Monbiot for lashing out at them in this two-month-old article that has only today worked its way through my pile.

(...) The 9/11 truthers remind me of nothing so much as the climate change deniers, cherry-picking their evidence, seizing any excuse for ignoring the arguments of their opponents. (...)

9/11 Fantasists Pose a Mortal Danger to Popular Oppositional Campaigns

I urge the bitter-enders to take a deep breath and read the text through to the end and ask themselves if they aren't a little bit like those guys in Life of Brian -- the "Judean Liberation Front" was it? Or the "Front for the Liberation of Judea"?

[bishop]

good article.. i liked this one:

Quote by: article To qualify as a true opponent of the Bush regime, you must also now believe that it is capable of magic. It could blast the Pentagon with a cruise missile while persuading hundreds of onlookers that they saw a plane. It could wire every floor of the twin towers with explosives without attracting attention and prime the charges (though planes had ploughed through the middle of the sequence) to drop each tower in a perfectly timed collapse. It could make Flight 93 disappear into thin air, and somehow ensure that the relatives of the passengers collaborated with the deception. It could recruit tens of thousands of conspirators to participate in these great crimes and induce them all to have kept their mouths shut, for ever.

i agree with the author's sentiment.. the conspiracy theorists tend to come off as loonies, especially in the case of 9/11 - and people tend to treat perceived loonies as if they were radioactive. i'm not sure if they necessarily hurt their cause soley because i don't think they even have a cause to begin with. but if they did have one, it would certainly suffer.

in a sense, that's also why many people here refuse to vote for third parties, because it's perceived that their base is chock full of loonies...


one of our favorite loudmouthed celebrities over here, rosie o'donnell, recently added her support to the conspiracy theorists' camp - and in the process helped further it's fringe characteristics.. some of her claims were refuted by professional engineers here.

Rosie O'Donnell 9/11 Conspiracy Comments: Popular Mechanics Responds - Popular Mechanics

some of the reader comments there speak volumes for people involved in the "truth" movement..

Rosie is a hero! We need more Rosies! What happened to your freedom? Osama B L is a fake. 9/11 an inside job. Al of you, use your brains. Your Hitler type gov is screwing you. Stop the fascists before they stop you.

[PatrickHenry]

Hmmpf!

[The Decider]

Quote by: Nono I've always striven to view with circumspection both the Official Version of 911 and the hardline conspiracy explanations. There has been a great deal of futile debate on this board between the representatives of the two camps. It seems to me that the wilder shores of 911 conspiratism might actually represent paid-up Bushevik conspirators whose outlandish efforts only infect any serious inquiry into the events by tempting people to think "Oh Christ, another wack-job conspiracy theory!" Am therefore grateful to George Monbiot for lashing out at them in this two-month-old article that has only today worked its way through my pile. 9/11 Fantasists Pose a Mortal Danger to Popular Oppositional Campaigns I urge the bitter-enders to take a deep breath and read the text through to the end and ask themselves if they aren't a little bit like those guys in Life of Brian -- the "Judean Liberation Front" was it? Or the "Front for the Liberation of Judea"?

I read Monbiot's piece to the end and frankly it was one of the worst editorials I have read in the Guardian in some time. I'm not one of the "bitter enders." I believe the essential elements of the "official story." But Monbiot's contention that such conspiracy theories "pose a mortal danger" to the anti-war movement or any movement critical of the status quo is unsubstantiated hogwash. Look at Monbiot's ONLY example to prove this "mortal danger":

Let me give you an example. The column I wrote about Loose Change two weeks ago generated 777 posts on the Guardian Comment is Free website, which is almost a record. Most of them were furious. The response from a producer of the film, published last week, attracted 467. On the same day the Guardian published my article about a genuine, demonstrable conspiracy: a spy network feeding confidential information from an arms control campaign to Britain's biggest weapons manufacturer, BAE Systems. It drew 60 responses. The members of the 9/11 cult weren't interested. If they had been, they might have had to do something. The great virtue of a fake conspiracy is that it calls on you to do nothing.

Monbiot wrote a harsh review of a conspiracy media piece and got slammed for it--almost 800 comments. He wrote another about an allegedly "demonstrable" conspiracy only received a few online comments, 60 in all. There you have it. Monbiot bases the future of all "Popular Oppositional Campaigns" on a ratio of 800:60 online comments to his editorials. That's it! No polls. No interviews. No year long studies. No corroborating data of any kind; just his declining fan mail.

What an pathetic git. He makes the conspiracy nuts look almost rational.

[Technosoul]

I would propose a new conspiracy theory that "they" planted loonie conspiracy stories for the very purpose of making real investigative reporting of non-effect.

[Nono]

Quote by: Decider What an pathetic git.

Calm down, Decider. He was merely giving an example (I mean, what do you want, massive footnoting?) of how pure garbage arouses peoples passions and diverts their attention from REAL ISSUES.

[InTheFlesh?]

Why would any one come up with such ridiculous conspiracy theories?

If you wanted to find a way to blame the government for 9/11 surely you would be a lot less far fetched. Maybe twisting the 'Official View' some way saying the actual suicide bombers were in the pay of the Americans or make something like that up.

[Nono]

Well, that's one point that can be inferred from Monbiot's article and which has been raised by a lot of people.

That is, suppose there was a degree of involvement -- active or just passive -- by the Bush people (we know that they had a definite motive and that they definitely lack any scruples). What's the best way of diverting people's attention from their involvement? By putting up a smokescreen of truly wacky conspiracy theories -- missiles, etc. -- that will make people choke and cause their eyes to water: These damn conspiracy theorists -- what a load of crap!!

Then any and all conspiracy theories get lumped together with whacky ones and discredited. So the issue is settled in the public mind: Osama acted alone.

It's like the JFK assassination -- people have now let too much time pass not daring to look where you'd have to look. So we'll now never know for sure.

[gr8fuldaniel]

Its the hundreds of coincidences. Add em up.

Heres another bit to chew on... War games starting tomorrow... Brace yourselves, Virginia
(found on WRH)

Noble Resolve 07: Four days of “simulated” nuclear terrorist scenarios in the US & Europe Posted Apr 21, 2007 12:09 PM PST Category: CURRENT EVENTS On September 11th, 2001, drills that simulated a hijacked aircraft attack on the US were underway when hijacked aircraft were used to attack America. In London, on July 7th, 2005, there was a drill simulating multiple bombings on the underground railway that was eerily interrupted by multiple bombings on the underground railway. So, I can understand why these drills for a nuclear terror attack have some people worried.

Dont act all shocked if your own government attacks civilians. Again and again.

While many drills are run every month, Nobel Resolve 07, with it’s “realistic” scenarios, comes at a time of increased geopolitical tension. It is reminiscent of the drills in 2005, where a ten-kiloton nuclear weapon was “simulated” to explode in South Carolina. Some speculated that four-star Gen. Kevin Byrnes, of the Fort Meade TRADOC command, was fired due to his exposure of the drill. We should not live in a constant state of panic and fear, or make any irresponsible predictions about Noble Resolve 07. But in the coming days, we can email this information to blogs, media outlets, friends and family. Congressmen, and others to help inoculate against any possibility that rogue “red teams” inside the drills may be activated. source

[The Decider]

Quote by: Nono Calm down, Decider. He was merely giving an example (I mean, what do you want, massive footnoting?) of how pure garbage arouses peoples passions and diverts their attention from REAL ISSUES.

Nono, I addressed the OP's claim that 911 conspiracy theories "pose a mortal danger" to the anti-war movement. Mortal danger. That sounds serious. I read those words with great concern. Was the British anti-war movement in danger? Were the Conservatives about to bounce Labor from power?

And then I read further for details---and found none. Only a complaint about the author's declining fan-mail for an article he wrote about a more plausible conspiracy theory that didn't attract enough 911 conspiracy theorists' attention.

The author never established that any "real issues" suffered because of 911 conspiracy theories. Only one obscure editorial didn't get enough attention, as if 911 conspiracy advocates will make or break any issue. He gives them far more credit than their paltry numbers and nominal influence deserve. He therefore didn't support his claim of "mortal danger" to the anti-war movement. An article that fails to support its thesis is generally considered a failure--at least on this side of the Atlantic.

[Nono]

There was an article recently in the New Statesman about 911 conspiracists in Britain, including an ex-MI5 fruit-loop and his wife who show just how fully you can take leave of your senses if you don't watch it (he claimed that the aircraft filmed colliding the the WTC was a hologramme -- dig it).

I think Monbiot's point is that we need all available skepticism focused on Real Issues, and that this kind of thing dissipates it. Forgive the dude the odd hyperbolic lapse.

[The Decider]

Quote by: Nono Well, that's one point that can be inferred from Monbiot's article and which has been raised by a lot of people. That is, suppose there was a degree of involvement -- active or just passive -- by the Bush people (we know that they had a definite motive and that they definitely lack any scruples). What's the best way of diverting people's attention from their involvement? By putting up a smokescreen of truly wacky conspiracy theories -- missiles, etc. -- that will make people choke and cause their eyes to water: These damn conspiracy theorists -- what a load of crap!! Then any and all conspiracy theories get lumped together with whacky ones and discredited. So the issue is settled in the public mind: Osama acted alone.

What do we call this conspiracy--The Conspiracy to Conspire Against Real 911 Conspiracies with Wacky 911 Conspiracy Smokescreens? I never heard of that one before. Do you have a link that connects the leaders of Britain's whacky 911 conspiracy theorists to the Bush White House?

Or maybe the Bush White House is using the Real 911 Conspiracy theorists to discredit the wacky 911 Conspiracies in an effort to clog the anti-war movement with endless debates over whose conspiracy theory best explains Bush's (or Israel's) 911 conspiracy?

Bush may be smarter than any of us thought.

[gr8fuldaniel]

Quote by: The Decider Bush may be smarter than any of us thought.

Prove It!

[The Decider]

Quote by: gr8fuldaniel Prove It!

It's a conspiracy, gr8! All the documents are classified!

[Nono]

I sent this article to a friend in NY whose views I always value. His response:

I don't really mind the paranoid fringe, since the right wing has had theirs entrenched in the public psyche for so long and deserve an equally passionate, obsessed counterweight. Also everyone else (like us normal, rational folk) seems so reasonable by comparison. Kucinich submitted his Cheney impeachment bill today. Three articles -- two for intentionally misleading Congress about Saddam's nonexistent WMDS and his al-Qaeda ties, and one for threatening Iran for no freakin' reason, all of which are high crimes or misdemeanors due to intention. Now doesn't that sound reasonable compared to the conspiracy nuts? Almost middle-of-the-road, if you ask me.

[gr8fuldaniel]

Speaking of Kucinichs' HR 333;
this is pretty funny:

Poll I won't call my congressman to tell them to support HR 333 - Kucinich's bill to impeach Cheney - because: View Answers I'm not smart enough to go to United States House of Representatives, 110th Congress, 1st Session to look up the phone number. I'm barely smart enough to scratch my own ass. It's a minor miracle that I got to THIS site. 0 (0.0%) I don't have a phone. I can't borrow a phone. I don't even know how to use a phone. I'm just utterly useless. 1 (14.3%) I can't call during M-F normal business hours. I'm too busy... sorting my socks... and folding laundry... and sharpening pencils... and other important stuff... 0 (0.0%) I don't believe in a democratically elected representative government. This slide towards authoritarianism is just fine with me. 0 (0.0%) My congressman wouldn't listen to me anyways. 2 (28.6%) Bush would just pardon Cheney so what's the point? I just don't believe in doing the right thing on principle.... 0 (0.0%) We should do it the hard way and impeach Bush first 1 (14.3%) I actually like Cheney, in a evil puppetmaster kind of way. I take comfort that behind the vapid moron we have in the Oval Office is a monster pulling the strings. Goebbels would be proud. 1 (14.3%) Congress should instead work on important things, like declaring that next Wednesday is National Wombat Day or some such nonsense. Hey - where's Terry Schaivo when you need her? 1 (14.3%) Cheney would never lie to us, not even to make millions of dollars for Halliburton and the Military Industrial Complex and consolidate power in the Executive branch of government. Now stop bothering me so I can go watch me some more FOX News. 0 (0.0%) Wishing for justice while doing nothing is more effective than actually contacting my rep in DC 1 (14.3%) I wouldn't trust anyone else to work so hard to make America synonymous with torture. Torture is so cool and it works so well - just like on 24! 0 (0.0%) Cheney is up there with Hitler and Mussolini - waging unprovoked aggressive war against a country that posed no threat to us! I never dreamed that it could happen in MY lifetime. How could you possibly impeach him for that? He should be President! 0 (0.0%) Alright - I'll call this week. I promise. 0 (0.0%) Piss off. I ALREADY called/emailed/lobbied congress. 0 (0.0%)

[gr8fuldaniel]

George Tenets new book exposes his own perjury to the 911 Commission.
He testified that he hadnt met with bush in 811.
In his book he says he did.

If everything is on the up and up....theres no need to lie.

The crime is worse than the cover-up.

[gr8fuldaniel]

Both sides of the debate will be represented on "The View".
Prof. Stephen Jones will be there with his forensic proof of Thermate pooled (molten for over a month after 911) in the footprint of all three WTC towers.

Confirmed: 9/11 Truthers To Appear On The View Yesterday's report validated by Rosie's blog entry Paul Joseph Watson Prison Planet Tuesday, May 15, 2007 Confirming our report yesterday, Rosie O'Donnell has validated via her blog that prominent 9/11 truthers are set to appear on The View and educate an audience of around 30 million on the controlled demolition of the twin towers and WTC 7. We reported weeks ago that 9/11 film makers as well as experts on the controlled demolition hypothesis would feature on the ABC show and those tapings are now imminent. Host Rosie O'Donnell was asked by a fan on her website, "I would love to see a show with experts on both sides to discuss WTC 7. Silly to always talk about it but never really pursue the truth once and for all, don’t you think? Please?" - to which O'Donnell responded, "the show has been booked." Professor Steven Jones was sounded out for an appearance shortly after O'Donnell first started discussing 9/11 truth on the show and he is expected to be making an appearance very soon. We are confirming who else is set to appear and will have that news in the next day or two.

[Mozart1220]

For a long time, those who claimed conspiricy in the JFK assasination were considered "loonies".

Now about 75 % of Americans believe there was at least one more gunman, and besides, film doesn't lie, Kennedy WAS shot from the front.

I'm sure that in the not too distant future, evidence will surface proving what I've always said, that the government, whil probably not directly responsible for 9-11, DID lie about who was and why.

[PatrickHenry]

They obviously decided not to interview the Saudi elite and especially the Bin Ladens...

Snopes denies it, but the evidence is available to indicate that both FBI and FAA were involved in assisting Arabs who may have had value as witnesses to leave the US in the days after 9/11. Among them dozens of Bin Ladens.
September 11, 2001: Evacuation of Saudi Nationals - SourceWatch