Posted on 09/11/2007 9:57:00 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Several years ago, the Fox News Channel ran a special that purported to expose the Apollo moon landings as a publicity stunt cooked up to scare the Soviet Union. The special included testimony from several "experts" who came up with numerous reasons why the famous footage we've all seen was filmed in New Mexico.
With its gloss of respectability and suitably grim, dramatic music, the special was one of the creepiest things I've ever seen - because it was so convincing. I came away thinking that it seemed possible to "prove" anything by making a reasonably impressive video. Thank God Hitler didn't have television to play with.
I can't help but think of that special today, when the UA Mall is sure to feature at least one group representing the "9/11 Truth" movement - that is, a movement dedicated to exposing the complicity of the U.S. government in the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
They won't be alone. A poll taken last year found that one out of three Americans believe either that the attacks were "an inside job" - that is, that the attacks were orchestrated not by al-Qaeda terrorists but by the federal government - or that the Bush administration knew about the attacks in advance. That's an astonishing testament to how thoroughly the Bush administration has failed.
It is hard to know where to begin to debunk the claims, because the ideologues have piled up such a seeming preponderance of evidence - much of it clad in the guise of "expert" analysis - that it is nearly impossible to counter. Conspiracy theory is meant to be believed, not argued with.
It's painful to watch so many well-meaning people waste their time on a theory that amounts to calling George W. Bush the most clever man who ever lived. Only a bonafide genius could pull off the greatest crime in American history, somehow contrive to keep it covered up, and spend seven years pretending to be an inarticulate sap. If he's that smart, maybe he should be president.
Conspiracy theorists will no doubt back off from this claim; sure, Bush was asleep at the wheel, but he's just a figurehead. Someone else gave the actual order. Cheney. Rumsfeld. The CIA. Big corporations. The "military-industrial complex." Anyone and everyone was responsible for Sept. 11 except the terrorist leader who openly proclaimed he had done it.
What of the contention that the Bush administration merely knew about the Sept. 11 attacks before they happened? This message has some appeal for conservatives as well as liberals, since it mirrors the old right-wing belief that Franklin Roosevelt let Pearl Harbor happen just so he could drag us into a needless war.
But the evidence suggests that Bush was simply careless and unconcerned about the possibility of a terrorist attack. That is damning enough, but it is not enough for some people.
Don't get me wrong; It's not enough for George W. Bush to be a bad president who failed to catch Osama bin Laden. He's got to be bin Laden. It's not enough that Bush lied about Saddam Hussein. He's got to be worse than Saddam.
The 9/11 Truth ideologues may well respond that they are simply trying to start a "dialogue" about Sept. 11. The trouble is that they've already decided how the dialogue is supposed to go. No dissenting voices are welcome at this particular party.
I'm sure the official explanation of Sept. 11 was riddled with inaccuracies. But I don't think the 9/11 Truth movement is driven primarily by an interest in finding out the truth. It is driven, instead, by a dangerous and unsettling fear of government. It infects the antiwar movement, which is essentially right and honorable, with the ugly spirit of the mob.
It's worth recalling that a good number of the people now braying for the "truth" to be told about Sept. 11 were fairly unbothered by the event when it happened. Many of them followed Noam Chomsky when he declared that the terrorist attacks weren't nearly as terrible as Bill Clinton's 1998 bombing of a pharmaceuticals factory in Sudan (a failed attempt to get bin Laden that killed one or two people).
Chomsky has been a valuable critic of U.S. foreign policy for many years. But his cold and unfeeling comment said more about him than it did about Sept. 11. After years of (rightly) condemning American crimes against other nations, Chomsky simply could not bring himself to acknowledge a genuine crime committed against Americans. No matter that thousands of ordinary people had been brutally murdered; it simply wasn't in the same realm as the theoretical deaths of non-Americans. This same weakness lies behind the 9/11 Truth movement.
What distinguishes the 9/11 Truth movement from those videos about Bill Clinton that people like Jerry Falwell used to sell in the '90s? Their theme was simple: Bill Clinton is a murderer, a rapist, a crook. No real evidence was offered. Why bother with evidence when your audience is people who hate Clinton anyway?
For that matter, little separates the movement from the tactics of Sen. Joseph McCarthy, who also exploited ordinary people's fear of their government by telling them that it was stocked with Communist traitors. Merely hating the government is no guarantee of righteousness, or even of being right. Timothy McVeigh thought himself a freedom fighter standing up to an evil regime. So did John Wilkes Booth.
"Having ever regarded Government as their deadliest bane," said Abraham Lincoln of the lynch mobs of the South, "they make a jubilee of the suspension of its operations, and pray for nothing so much, as its total annihilation." That is the spirit behind much of the anti-government rhetoric that parades itself as radical thinking, and it is a frightening one indeed.
It is painful to behold so many intelligent young people wasting their time on the 9/11 "Truth" movement. It is a fake issue that serves only to distract us from our real troubles. Enough already.
I usually have to explain to moobats convinced that 911 was an inside job that...
How could someone be so smart to create a conspiracy (911) that had to involve hundreds of people....
and yet couldn’t bury some WMD in the vast empty desert of Iraq to be found by a small cadre of (loyal Bushies) carrying Keith Olbermann directly to the scene so that he would be lauded as a hero for stopping Saddam Hussein from killing us all...
Always fight liberals with logic and fact they can’t handle it.
I'm sure the official explanation of Sept. 11 was riddled with inaccuracies
Why? What makes him SURE that the "official explanation" is "riddled with inaccuracies"?
For that statement to be true, you HAVE to believe that the people putting together the "official explanation" are TRYING to hide the truth. After all, if they are well-meaning people doing the best they can to get the truth right, how could it possibly be "obvious" that their explanation is riddled with errors? Wouldn't each error be corrected if they wanted to get it right?
No, he denounces the belief in conspiracies, but he credits the same hypothesis as those who believe in conspiracies, the idea that there is some "official explanation" concocted by the "powers that be" that is always looking to hide the truth and instead provide the "appropriate" message.
It's the message of 1984. Once you believe it is in force today, you'd be crazy NOT to believe in the conspiracy, because you've already bought it lock, stock, and barrel.
More of a testament, I think, to how the moonbat left and their media enablers have succeeded!
Ummm, yes, he is. He parrots nearly every cherished leftist myth he can possibly squeeze into 1000 words. Nice to see our gub'mint schools and his hippie parents have indoctrinated him well.
But I'll cut him some slack in the empathy dept. While his argument is specious and hollow, his motivation seems sound - at least he recognizes that there is evil out there in the world besides GWB and these United States. So I guess there's some hope left for the next generation.
“While this kid is a liberal, he isn’t a moonbat.”
No, but he is a “liberal”, educated by liberals and unable to have a real independent and rational analysis, as he cannot get away from the liberal template as in:
“I’m sure the official explanation of Sept. 11 was riddled with inaccuracies.”
So, as a true liberal, it is only the liberal template (the administration lied in SOME way) that he is left with and not any rational position. As a true liberal, it is not any facts he can point to, from which he derives his position; only the liberal template of disbelief of a conservative administration. He is less than six degrees away from the “moonbats”.
If one lets lie the statement "...the official explanation of Sept. 11 was riddled with inaccuracies..." it opens up all kinds of possibilities.
And that is just the way they operate.
IIRC it was Fox but not Fox News. I talked with someone in their 20's who had seen this show and totally bought the story.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
Agreed. He’s got a ways to go, but I’ve got hope for him.
‘What distinguishes the 9/11 Truth movement from those videos about Bill Clinton that people like Jerry Falwell used to sell in the ‘90s? Their theme was simple: Bill Clinton is a murderer, a rapist, a crook. No real evidence was offered.’
Unfortunately, he makes a good point with the above.
ABLE DANGER?
I'm sure the official explanation of Sept. 11 was riddled with inaccuracies
If LIttle Moonbat is so sure that the official explanation is false, then nothing anyone can say will change his little X-files Lone Gunmen mentality.
Waste of bandwidth.
My belief is that all this is being promoted by CAIR and the liberals are just so anxious to hate Bush that they jump on board. I remember within days (no make that hours) of the attack 6 years ago, they began circulating rumors that all Jews stayed home from work in the towers that day and that Israel did it. It is just more of the same. Nevermind that OBL keeps issuing videos taking credit.
I guess that makes Clinton even more careless as he had 8 years of carelessness before Bush's 8 months in office.
I’d ask some of you to read that statement again, in context, and see if you don’t agree with that analysis.
In short- he’s saying that the truthers can nitpick the report all they want on the details but the report is still true..
Let me know what you think after rereading it, please.
What’s striking is how they, clearly not experts in the fields, flippantly look at some tiny thing they don’t understand and make it into something malicious ... without considering that flying a plane into a building really isn’t that hard, and that a plane that big hitting a building that tall is going to result in ________________ [fill in the blank, exercise left to reader, yes it will be graded, no it’s not hard].
On another thread, someone posted a picture from the Civil War with railroad ties bent using fire. Does anyone know the thread? I’d like to get the picture
Agreed. The very notion of writing down a summary of what happened will inevitably leave something out, and may expose natural human confusion.
What part of
BIG PLANE + TALL BUILDING = BIG MESS + MANY DEAD
do people not understand?
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.