Posted on 09/11/2009 8:57:00 AM PDT by Kaslin
Herewith, two scenarios.
Scenario A: The supposedly inept president of the United States carefully planned and orchestrated the worst terrorist attack on American soil in our history. Though "only" 3,000 people died, the plan was to kill many more by simultaneously attacking the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and either the U.S. Capitol or the White House itself on Sept. 11, 2001.
Hundreds of people, including personnel from myriad agencies, participated. According to some versions of Scenario A, explosives were placed at the World Trade Center to ensure success. In other versions, all of "the Jews" working there were tipped off by some phone bank run by the Mossad. In every version, however, the U.S. government was in on it, and everyone involved kept the biggest secret in American history.
Then, there's Scenario B: An ambitious and extremely clever politician, who has at best been selectively forthcoming about large chunks of his youth, lied about his place of birth so he could be eligible for the presidency.
To further this scheme, he has arranged for the full and/or original version of his birth certificate to remain under lock and key. At most, a handful of supporters and lawyers are in on the whole thing.
Now, which one is more believable? For the record, I don't believe either. But it seems to me the "birther" hypothesis is vastly more plausible than the "truther" hypothesis. Politicians lie to advance their careers. You can look it up. Whole governments rarely orchestrate incredibly complex acts of physics, logistics and mass murder all the while pinning guilt on others (who boast that they acted alone).
Just for clarification: "Truthers" believe scenario A. "Birthers" believe scenario B.
The question of which scenario is more plausible is neither academic nor trivial. This summer, a host of columnists, commentators and activists, seemingly taking their cues from a White House and DNC public-relations offensive, declared that the rise of the "birthers" was a fatal indictment of modern conservatism and the Republican Party. The refusal of the birthers to give up their cockamamie theory was proof that the GOP had succumbed to the "paranoid style." Indeed, according to some liberal commentators the birthers were the potential wellspring for a nascent Nazi movement in America. Never mind that the vast majority of leading Republicans and conservatives -- from Newt Gingrich to Ann Coulter -- rejected the birthers categorically.
Fast-forward to the last week or so. Van Jones, an avowed "communist" and passionate supporter of convicted cop killer Mumia Abu-Jamal, was a truther par excellence. Contrary to many reports, he didn't merely sign 911truth.org's petition in 2004, he helped organize one of the first truther groups as early as 2002.
When these and other revelations came to light, Jones resigned from his White House job as "green jobs czar."
The reaction from much of the liberal establishment has been fascinating, hypocritical and deeply creepy. For starters, the same White House that fueled the anti-birther boom has refused to offer a single critical word about Jones' past positions (some of which he recanted as his job security grew more threatened; we'll see how long that lasts).
In July, the popular left-wing Web site FiredogLake couldn't let go of the birther bit. One post -- titled "The Republican Party is the Birther Party, and it's dragging them down" -- made much of the fact that 28 percent of Republicans, according to one poll, do not believe that Obama is a natural-born citizen. This week, the site's founder, Jane Hamsher, was disgusted that Jones was "thrown under the bus," even though he subscribed to trutherism, a view that "35 (percent) of Democrats believed as of 2007."
Got that? Belief in an implausible conspiracy is a cancer on the GOP. Even greater belief in an even more implausible conspiracy is proof that it's mainstream.
Apologies for Jones and trutherism appeared instantly on the sites of the left-wing flagship magazines The Nation, The New Republic and elsewhere. The New York Times and Newsweek deliberately distorted what the truthers believe in order to make Jones look more reasonable and his critics more unreasonable. The Financial Times actually reported that Jones resigned for criticizing how the GOP majority had run Congress.
But mostly, the mainstream press changed the subject to how the right is paranoid and vaguely unpatriotic for opposing Obama's speech to schools Tuesday, despite the fact that most conservatives and Republicans didn't protest the speech once the Department of Education's controversially politicized lesson plans were withdrawn.
One last question is worth asking. Forget which is more plausible.
Which scenario is more unpatriotic, more malicious, more corrosive to civic life? In short: which is more evil? Again, I think the answer is obvious. Alas, it seems I'm in a minority.
Now, which one is more believable? For the record, I don't believe either. But it seems to me the "birther" hypothesis is vastly more plausible than the "truther" hypothesis. Politicians lie to advance their careers. You can look it up. Whole governments rarely orchestrate incredibly complex acts of physics, logistics and mass murder all the while pinning guilt on others (who boast that they acted alone).
The government didn’t have to plan 9/11. Its general incompetence left the door wide open for the imminent attack.
I tend to agree.
For me, “truthers” can’t over come (1) that our government would kill 3,000+ people to create a cause and (2) that the workers in the towers didn’t see or notice the controlled demolitions being set.
“Birthers”, do have one salient fact on their side. This could be removed with him presenting his real and true birth certificate. All of us have one and I have had to provide mine (certified copy from State department that controls them) often over the years. Yet he and his advisor decline to do so.
Makes one feel that he seems superior and his word is not to be questioned.
“...taking their cues from a White House and DNC public-relations offensive, declared that the rise of the “birthers” was a fatal indictment of modern conservatism “
I am a birther. If the left warns that I am indictment on conservatism, I rest my case.
Shame on those on the right who won’t associate with our suspicions and demand to see the Kenyan’s vital records.
Not just the birth certificate, but also his records, from Yale, Harvard and Columbia universities
If this is false, then why are they all acting as if it were true?
It doesn't even have to go that far. All it takes is a mother who realizes that life is a lot easier if her son is a US citizen based on birth location rather than through the citizenship of one parent. That, by itself, could convince her to claim his birth location was Honolulu if she can get away with it even if it really was somewhere else. There's no need to claim a 40+ year master plan to get Obama to be president.
Are there any Hawaiian "birthers" who were born back in the early 1960s who have requested a long form birth certificate just to show how easy it is to get and what a real one looks like?
That would be nice. But I’d settle for the birth certificate right now.
1. Different birth name. Maybe his original name is Barry Dunham with no known father listed.
2. Different birth name version 2. Maybe another man is listed as his father.
3. Various revisions due to adoption by Soetoro. I don't know what happens in the birth certificate records with name changes due to adoption. I know some of my nephews and nieces are adopted, and I know they got BCs with their new names, but I don't know what the county's internal records are in that case.
4. Just because it bothers us. Never put it beneath a Democrat to set up a red herring for us to chase. If it does get real traction in the general public, it will all go away instantly if he does produce a real long form BC.
Scenario C: Every opposition to leftist ideology is based in racism. White people, of course, are the only "race" that can be racist. Everyone else is always the victim of racism, unless they're Asian.
Just for clarification: "Racers" believe scenario C.
Birthers also have another salient fact on their side, "The Liar" said he would be "transparent." The fact that he witholds his birth document from the public makes him a liar in the first degree.
Exactly what I am saying. Sorry I was not speaking in English.
Transparancy covers a multitude of issues. The birth certificate covers one and only one issue.
His legitimacy.
The really amazing part of troofer psychosis is that they believe someone would set det cord around thirty floors of three crowded office buildings, then fly jets into the buildings to make it look like something else was responsible.
The mosque where the first WTC bomb attack was planned is right across the Hudson River in Jersey City. So why not bomb the WTC and then blame them for it - you can even raid the mosque and whoever dies in the shootout must be responsible for the attack.
Instead we get allegations of hidden airfields in Ohio and camouflaged defense department jets and passengers who secretly landed in the midwest and were done away with while black ops seabees planted broken airplane parts inside The Pentagon and Delta Force operators fired a missile at the outer wall.
It’s a totally ridiculous scenario. It wouldn’t fly in The X-Files.
Totally agree. As I said I do not think it could be hidden, the cord let alone the folks tramping around placing the charges and all. Employees would see this.
And what employee, seeing this or knowing the building is coming down, would go to work as if nothing is happening.
It is too far out their for me to even be remotely in the realm of possibility.
Sounds more like the Twilight Zone or the USSR in their hey-day.
“The government” meaning the Clinton Administration.
Gorelick Wall, Janet Reno and of course the ‘Panderer in Chief’ himself. I know I’ve only scratched the surface.
Not that this video actually deserves such a response, but is there a fact-by-fact debunking of the following video, “Zero: An Investigation of 9-11”?:
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.