Posted on 02/15/2016 5:36:10 PM PST by jessduntno
Given their small numbers, occasional libertarian pandering to the “inside job†morons yields no theoretical benefit greater than a few additional comments on a YouTube video.
Worse, they’ve actually made intelligent discussion more difficult. Questions about the government’s lack of readiness for 9/11, for example, now carry the unmistakable whiff of fringe kookiness.
So do demands for basic government transparency, like calling for more of the 9/11 Commission report to be declassified. Mention this idea and some people will move away before you start ranting about the moon landing being fake.
That’s too bad, because some accountability has been lost in the inside job nonsense. Before we gave the federal government new powers in the aftermath of the attacks, it would have been helpful to know how many of their existing powers weren’t used properly.
We do know a bit about dots that weren’t connected, threats that might not have been taken seriously enough, visa applications that should have been rejected. But undoubtedly there is more.
Far from exposing the truth, the 9/11 truthers’ nuttiness has made political and bureaucratic ass-covering easier. By making the issue government malevolence, they distracted from an important discussion of government competence.
No one this side of Donte Stallworth has ever changed their mind about 9/11 trutherism.
Finally, people occasionally make the following argument: Yes, the cheese has slipped off the 9/11 truthers’ crackers, but has their impact really been as destructive as, say, some of the overblown theories about Saddam Hussein leading up to the Iraq war?
My response: might the Iraq war debate have been less one-sided a dozen years ago if the people who were arguing with the accredited intelligence agencies asserting the existence of weapons of mass destruction had been less associated with ANSWER commies and 9/11 deniers?
Whatever their claims are, this essay hasn't made them appear less likely.
If we had had a thorough open discussion about 9/11 and the public had been made known of more information earlier, then there is a small chance we wouldn't have gone on to create the abomination referred to as the DHS.
To the extent that Truthers caused the DHS to happen, they are a deplorable lot, but their arguments are as valid (or invalid) today as they were yesterday.
I’m not a mainline 9/11 truther but there are things that would be worth investigating further.
However, this article actually reveals something totally unintended, namely the complete lack of ability of liberals to reason.
Once again, we see a tedious collection of non-sequiturs dressed up as logic. “If you are a 9/11 truther, then you will no doubt believe the moon landings were a hoax ... and that Paul McCartney died.”
Really? Why, how many people think the moon landings were a hoax, maybe one in a thousand? And that Paul McCartney died ... does anyone believe that?
But what is the logical connection? There is none. Many people who like to pooh-pooh the 9/11 truthers and birthers might then turn around and say that they know for a fact that the Bush administration knew there were no WMD’s in Iraq, or that Christian militias are the biggest threat to American freedom ... their conspiracy theories are just as bad if not worse than anything Alex Jones could dream up.
Also rather glaring was the statement that it might prompt people to demand greater clarity from government as in declassification of more of the 9/11 reports. Why is any of it being withheld? At this point in time, who could possibly benefit from this information, other than the voters and the citizens?
>>This will fix those weird characters:
http://dan.hersam.com/tools/smart-quotes.html<<
I tried it and the conspiracy nuts are still there!
9/11 was not an inside job. But Bin Laden had lots of help from the House of Saud. (Or the argument goes. An easy one to make, btw.)
Huh.
They couldn’t possibly any dumber than I think they are. I also think they are vile.
They couldn’t possibly any dumber than I think they are. I also think they are vile.
I listened to a podcast last week that had a flat earth guy on it. It was kind of funny. He had answers for everything.
Truthers are nutty. Governments never lie to their citizens about anything. Especially about major incidents that lead to military action.
We were told that the jet fuel was the major cause of bringing down the two World Trade Center towers. In your opinion, is this plausible? Building Seven also fell despite not being struck. Why?
I know one thing for sure in this world.
The American government lies 100% of the time about every, single thing.
If you are saying that Trump is a nut who sounds like Rosie O’Donnell with his goofy conspiracy theories, who can disagree?
Which 9/11 truther theory is the author trying to criticize - not clear to me. There are at least 6 main strains of 9/11 “truthers”.
Lost in the crazy talk are some folks asking very good questions - especially about the Pentagon crash.
When you meet up with 911 truthers, I find that ridicule works best. They simply cannot conceive that 1500 degree flames sill reduce the strength of steel by 80%.
“Lost in the crazy talk are some folks asking very good questions - especially about the Pentagon crash.”
I would not speak for him, but pretty sure that one would qualify as pretty nty. Unless you could demonstrate how an awful lot of people could be involved in such an elaborate scam for so long...but, well...welcome to the new main topic of the campaign!
Send Rosie an email she will explain it to you.
How fun.
I was just kidding, it’s funny to say that to someone in person, they usually do a lot of stammering totally discombobulated by the statement.
:-))))
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.