The stated belief that the United States government murdered its own citizens and military personnel on September 11, 2001 is, if sincere, proof that an individual possesses intractable misconceptions, hatred and disrespect for America’s history, culture, and ideals. If the belief is not sincere, then the claim that the Bush administration orchestrated (or allowed) the Twin Towers and Pentagon attacks is an effort to harm our nation by destroying its reputation and honor, dragging it into the swamp of other nations to which murder and dictatorship are traditional. The First Amendment requires that we allow these individuals, be they deranged, sinister, irresponsible or merely stupid, to deny what makes the United States unique and slander its elected leaders, but it does not require that we accord them respect or tolerance.
It was entirely appropriate for the U.S. delegation to walk out on President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at the United Nations last week, as he suggested that the U.S. plotted the attacks. But Ahmadinejad at least is openly attempting to harm the United States, which is (though far too meekly) opposing his nation’s outlaw policies. He is not an American; his comments are despicable, but they are not disloyal. Americans who spout the Truther poison have no such excuse. Their contentions, intentionally or not, do great harm to America at home and abroad. If the United States were a citizen, it could sue to make the slander and libel stop, and collect considerable damages. The Constitution, however, allows citizens to slander their country.
This particular slander is as damaging as it is offensive. Not only does it fuel Middle East mythology that encourages terrorists and anti-American sentiment, it confuses our under-educated, prematurely cynical young Americans, who may begin to believe that their leaders and their country couldbe capable of such a monstrous acts. They could not, of course. Over 300 years, the American process of choosing its highest-ranking leaders has infallibly filtered out anyone who could conceivably be called uncommitted to American welfare, success, and values. Many have lacked judgment, perspective, integrity or wisdom, but the worst of our Presidents, whoever they might be, were dedicated to idea of America and its mission to ensure life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness to all of its citizens.Had they not been so, they never would have achieved the office.
In order to believe that such evil has existed at the highest levels of the U.S. government, one must accept a hateful construct that turns American history on its head, and accept that the nation has been driven by greed, imperialism and racism above all other motivations, that the illusion of freedom is just that, and that American leaders are not only capable of every atrocity but also able to recruit eager henchmen for their nefarious plans. Only those who are ignorant of the real United States culture or filled with blind hatred could believe this. Radical ideologues like Howard Zinn and Noam Chomsky exploit the ignorance, and rabid partisans exploit the hate.
It is logical that Ahmadinejad would embrace the Truther slander, because it both resembles and supports his other conspiracy theory, that the Holocaust never happened. It resembles it because both rely on a complete absence of logic and a willful disregard for history; it supports it because each have their root in Anti-semitism. Like Holocaust denial, 9-11 conspiracy claims are only given strength by efforts to disprove them by launching investigations and hearings, as some misguided commentators insist on suggesting, to “end the matter” once and for all. (Not surprisingly, this is what the president of Iran wants.) It can never be ended, because “the matter” is hate and bigotry; the conspiracy theories are just manifestations of them.
The accusations disprove themselves, even as they reveal the mindset that generates them. Anyone who believes that an insane American leader would be able to find sufficient numbers of pliant, murderous Americans to execute such a calamity without inadvertently encountering one—or a hundred—who would take action to foil and expose the plot is so polluted by hatred and lies that nothing could convince him otherwise.
How do we react to the Truthers in our midst? We must not dignify them with argument or give them the privilege of civil discourse, because they have already abused their right to free speech with the equivalent of sedition. We shun them, just as we shun those who endorse views of racial supremacy, just as we shun the Holocaust deniers, those who advocate sex with children, and the subjugation of women. Such people cannot be trusted to hold high office in this country, because they do not respect or understand this country, and harm it with their vicious rumor-mongering.
The assertion that the U.S. government killed its own citizens on 9-11 is a mass offense to America’s institutions, achievements, public, ideals, and public servants, past and present, motivated by hate and stoked by bigotry. No punishable hate crime against an individual or group threatens as much harm to our society, and no expressed opinion is more dangerous to our future. Because of the same document, the Constitution, that the conspiracy theories insult, we cannot stop the slander, but we must never tolerate it.
Ethics Alarms 
I’ve had a couple run ins with Truthers and I just laugh in their faces and tell them they are idiots. On one job site there was a guy talking about how the Towers were rigged to come down. What he didn’t know was that the guy who was erecting the steel on the building also was a demolition expert. When he heard this guys drivel he started laughing ,
told the guy he was idiot and them explained it would have taken over two years to prep the buildings to come down and that it envolved major demolition of the structure. When the truther asked him how he could explain why they came straight down the demo guys responce was “gravity you moron” lol
I think arguing the science is beside the point, though. It would never happen, even if it was easy to do.
But if you take their argument and destroy it with logic and fact you make them look like fools and you know how I feel about fools.
There was a time where I believed in, at least, the chance that JFK was killed by the mob or whatever, and in a way, I still think it’s theoretically possible. I also have to maintain that it’s not IMpossible that the government was complicit in a separate organization’s terrorist plot for murky reasons (I don’t believe this, but I just won’t say it’s impossible, in the same way I won’t say that God COULDN’T exist).
But the notion that the buildings couldn’t have collapsed the way they did because of physical reasons is just appalling nonsense, and it’s the easiest way to disarm these goons. I would LOVE for the Mythbusters to take these dopes to school on this one (you know, if they KNEW they were getting cancelled…)
My brother recently said that he thinks, since the Bill of Rights is one of the few things that allows you the freedom to say that it’s useless, that freedom of speech may lead to its destruction. I certainly hope not.
Freedom of speech will always be America’s salvation and most noble experiment, as well as a potential threat. If anything that can happen will happen, then it is certain FOS will do us in eventually, if something else doesn’t first.
And that’s OK. It’s still worth it.
I have a deadline I’m dealing with do not have the time or energy to answer your post to the best of my ability at this time. So I’m going to try it from a different angle and see if I can make a point that opens your brain to the possibility that you are currently and have been completely bamboozled by the ‘powers that be’.
To their credit, These ‘hidden powers and agendas’ are very accomplished at being evil, and have been probably since this particular reality has existed. And ‘they’ depend upon the duping of true patriotic Americans such as ourselves to buy what they are selling.
I’ll begin with the preface that I enjoy your posts a great deal, and you bring up great topics which I agree with most of the time. Your perspectives are usually insightful, and you make quite a bit of sense.
Next I will state the research into the nature of reality itself – I site the film ‘Thunderbolts of the Gods’ ( google it ) and the scientists and factual data that is covered in the film… we live in an electric omniverse™, ( Einstein never accounted for electricity in any of his relativity theory equations ) which is the path to what has been dubbed a ‘unifying theory,’ which explains, or at least gives credence to, a myriad of previously unexplained phenomena, such as ESP, the existence of different dimensions, the soul, the afterlife in general, consciousness and the reality of dreams etc. etc. – their existence itself, that they do indeed exist.
Building upon the brief summary above, I now site the fact that civilizations have forced their particular ‘brand of reality’ upon other existing peoples since the Dawn of Time. Two cases: the Spanish upon the Aztecs and the English Colonists upon the Native American Indian ( specifically the smallpox blanket plan of action ). Face the fact: culture through the barrel of a gun has been the MO of how Civilizations have treated each other throughout recorded history.
And we as human beings ‘Create our own Realities’. The Aztecs and Native Americans version of Reality had its faults, but at the time they encountered the ‘more civilized’ Western Europeans, their reality was shattered and they were subjected, pure and simple, to a different ‘state of being.’
This procedure is being born out today, nothing has changed. 9-11 is the smallpox blanket that has been handed to us – which I believe is a very spot-on analogy.
Plus, if you can explain the ‘collapse’ of Building 7 I’ll bake you a cake… if you even know what Building 7 is. Google that too.
I urge you and your readers to watch the series of films by the British documentarian Adam Curtis called ‘The Power of Nightmares’ and to a lesser degree, but just as influential ‘The Century of Self’ which explains my point of view way better than I can do here.
Woodrow Wilson’s post-presidential quote about the Fed. Eisenhower’s ‘Military Industrial Complex’ speech. Kennedy’s ‘Secret Societies’ speech. The existence of Skull and Bones, the Bohemian Club, the Trilateral Commission, the CFR, Bilderberg Group – on and on. These organizations Exist, and they have a particular Reality in Mind that they are implementing upon us… feeding it to us like a baby in a high chair.
I site the WashPo article ‘Top Secret America’ – we are becoming a Black Ops culture with hidden agendas abounding everywhere. With ‘compartmentalized, need to know’ stratification within these myriad of organizations, only a very few people could truly change our reality for the worse, a la 9-11. With the diabolical, totally unAmerican powerhungry evil people that sit in the very few seats of true power, I do not doubt or believe they would do ANYTHING to hold onto and strengthen their chokehold upon the masses, or ‘cattle’ as they refer to us as. They care not for anything but their own selfish means and ends, regardless of the collateral damage.
In conclusion, what gives me not only hope but the confidence to speak my mind here with conviction and purpose is, in fact, the Electric Omniverse™.
All things exist at once forever, and every secret meeting, every diabolical plan, every evil act, thought or deed these particular souls implemented upon the rest of humanity – it’s there forever within this wonderful, eternal, benevolent and compassionate Mind of Creation of which all of us, even the most ignorant or insignificant, are a part.
They will be called to Atone for their choices, and I pity and feel compassion for even them, for they are a part of all that is as well, which makes them a part of me.
That’s all the news that fits for now – I look forward to your conversation in regards to this matter – thank you for the Topic…!
Dear Blake—-I don’t deny that there are puzzling aspects of the 9-11 event; nor do I question the existence of various clandestine movements and societies. I am confident that the effect of these on actual events is much exaggerated, Dan Brown-like, and that the idea is more compelling than the reality. The various materials you cite are completely beside the point for me. If there are two aspects of American history I really know a great deal about through serious scholarship, it is American conspiracy theories (Lincoln, Kennedy, Pearl Harbor, etc.) and the kind of people who become President. The latter has been a lifetime study, and was the topic of my honors thesis in American government at Harvard. My study of conspiracies tells me with certainty that no massive conspiracy involving unspeakable acts by high-ranking officials and involving the cooperation of many individuals can ever, ever remain secret for one year, much less nine, unless the Bond super-villain in charge kills off everyone but himself. At least the Kennedy and Lincoln conspiracies, both false, had a trail of bodies connected with them. There isn’t even that with 9-11. The culture and the realities of commerce are undeniable and irresistible: whistleblowers, turncoats, undercover patriots, family members, cellmates or friends told about the plot and those seeking celebrity and fame from books, interviews and National Enquirer stories are 100% guaranteed with something as earth-shattering as a government conspiracy to kill Americans. The only question is when they surface…but it could never take long. With that certainty in mind, the various arguments about Building 7 and the rest are only of academic interest. How do I explain them? I don’t: I just know for certain that the explanation can’t possibly be a government-led conspiracy. Since it’s impossible, as Sherlock taught us, we have to look elsewhere.
My other passion, the Presidency, along with my understanding of the American culture, gives my absolute confidence that the only way anyone could believe that George Bush or Dick Cheney or Donald Rumsfeld would participate in such a dastardly and treasonous crime is a near-pathological ideological bias that leads one to ascribe differences of philosophy to evil. There really is a public service/ leadership class in America, and governmental service is often a family business…certainly it is in the Bush family.
Even the most morally corrupt of these families—the Kennedys come to mind—are relentlessly and sincerely patriotic, and regard the nation’s ideals with reverence. My research showed that with the exception of a couple of accidents, U.S. Presidents are consistently within a predictable range of experience, character and aspirations (and Bush was not one of the accidents.) While I believe it is certain that no man who ever became president would ever consider something like the 9-11 conspirators suggest, Bush is one of the worst candidates for the unimaginable, because of his high regard for his family’s legacy and because of his genuine religious faith. Jefferson, Jackson, Polk, Teddy, Wilson, FDR, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Reagan and Clinton were all ruthless and capable of amoral acts; Bush much less so. As for Cheney: his Svengali-like control over Bush is a convenient and silly myth, and Cheney himself is not the cartoon monster the Truthers imagine. He has been a dedicated public servant most of his life, and is as devoted to America, or more so, than anyone you know. So is his entire family.
In short, the hypothetical conspiracy couldn’t have occurred, and if it had, we would know about it by now. America does not generate and elevate leaders who would attack America, and huge conspiracies reveal themselves–always. To maintain otherwise requires a distrust of the nation that is unjustified, a belief in secrecy that is unsupportable, and a willingness to weaken the U.S. at home and abroad that is irresponsible at best, and sinister at worst.
Building 7? It took a hit when one of the towers collapsed that caused major sturctural damage. thats what happened.
what do you think happened?
Sam Giancana’s son wrote a book explaining that his father ordered a hit on Kennedy, because the mob helped elect JFK and then Bobby promptly began hearings to unmask and prosecute the Mafia… Jimmy Carter, during his campaign for President, promised that if elected, he would investigate Area 51 and report to the American people; after he became President, he never mentioned it again… A multitude of books have been written about “the Lincoln Conspiracy,” and there is general agreement that John Wilkes Booth and his cronies had help from others — in the North — with the assassination of Abraham Lincoln.
So conspiracy theories abound. Americans love mystery. Americans love crime stories, conspiracy theories, the paranormal. Why has Steven King had such a great career? Why are there three CSI television shows, two NCIS shows, four Law and Orders, two ghost hunting shows, etc., etc. It’s entertainment.
And if you can take a current event and turn it into a conspiracy, all the better. Then the supposed reality of it, and its currency, make it even more fun. You may not admit it’s entertainment, but for many, I think it is.
This is not to say that I don’t believe that there probably are groups (not just American) who hold insupportable power and influence over governments, and that that should not be so. Unclear is the level of influence they really have. That is worth some investigation, and I know that some are conducting same.
But I think you are right. To attach conspiracy theory to 9-11 is simply unthinkable. Your list of American Presidents, and description of George Bush, should put to rest the basic idea of complicity of any American president in the kind of destruction wrought on 9/11. And by the way, to what end? No one seems to posit that.
The level of secrecy and black ops and undercover “control” of the American people has increased exponentially because of 9/11. Does anyone really think that this was the purpose of it? What else was to be gained? I can think of no other purpose. And I can think of no President who would wish this on his free citizens, or who would participate in such a horrific crime against his own people.
I do think there are those who, even though they have grown up in America and have enjoyed her freedoms and the benefits bestowed on her citizens, have somehow taken all this for granted and have somehow through liberal cant come to dislike the very country that has allowed them to live the lives they have. They are quick to blame America for its success; and they somehow feel America has only found success at great cost to others.
I know these people exist because one of my own sisters said, on 9/11: “I think we need to focus on what we have done to make these people hate us so much.”
Enough said. “Truthers” should be ignored. They are misguided. They do not deserve our attention, or respect. Giving them either is tacit acceptance of their totally invalid opinions.
Hey. Eventful past few days. Here’s responses to each of you:
Bill – check this link:
I will state for the record that I am anti-evangelistic in nature, Bill – collect your knowledge and make up your own mind. But that link gives a ton of info and instances that make you question motivations of the cast of characters, especially R. Giuliani.
While you’re at it, take a listen to this link as well.
Elizabeth – I enjoyed your unique perspective. I agree with about 70% of what you had to say.
What I disagree with you about is to a bigger degree what I disagree with Jack about, which I will answer with a reply later.
First, please don’t doubt my ‘patriotism,’ nor anyone else who doesn’t just buy into what we are told by the ‘official stories’ hook line and sinker. I would like to hold the leaders, our government and the people who work for it to a bit of a higher standard that the boot-licking toadies that currently are the norm, and forced into acting into such a manner, or are ostracized if they do not.
We’ve pushed the bar down so low, and these people act like such jackasses, the government, in the media, in the corporate environment – the world is a sick place. Don’t you agree?
People believe what they want to believe, they are in giant states of denial. And again I do not blame the human race in general. We are at the infancy on the path to enlightenment. They only know what their narrow acute knowledge base & access allows them to know… by design.
There is so much knowledge that has been suppressed by the Churches, by the Victors, by the ruling class – all for the pursuit of maintaining a grip on power, it’s really that simple.
Your paragraph ‘But I think you are right. To attach conspiracy theory to 9-11 is simply unthinkable. Your list of American Presidents, and description of George Bush, should put to rest the basic idea of complicity of any American president in the kind of destruction wrought on 9/11. And by the way, to what end? No one seems to posit that.’
That is a giant leap of faith there, a whitewash contribution of Jack’s party line defense of the flaming ruins of the ‘Moral Majority’ Republican party whatever. If you do any research of the upstanding Bush family, Omniverse™ love’em, there’s a myriad examples of nefarious activity. Just a simple google search of ‘Prescot Bush’ turns up tons of examples of a very checkered past. All you have to do is do a little digging.
Occam’s razor aside, if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, smells like a duck, tastes like a duck, it’s probably a duck. No amount of self-delusional ‘family values’ smoke and mirrors a la the Fox channel can change that. And I guess I’m challenging Jack’s initial response to my first reply here – Dismiss all my opinions and sourced material – fine. I’ll do the same to your ‘accepted as fact’ Bush & Cheney best interest of this country defense. You can say that all you want Jack – there’s plenty of evidence that exists that I have seen, studied and fact-checked that denotes otherwise.
Personally I really don’t think GWB had any 9-11 inside information per se – plausible deniablilty. His “Clearin’ Brush” demeanor was a Divine Comedy playacting gem – he was the puppet show buffoon that distracted everyone away from the real hidden agenda rolled out in plain sight.
Sorry to be a bit harsh – I gave you solid examples you can actually watch to draw your own conclusions about where I am coming from with my perspective. Jack, you on the other hand not only ‘beside the point’ – which the are not, they are ‘behind the point’, helping reinforce the ‘point of view’…
…this paragraph, ‘With that certainty in mind, the various arguments about Building 7 and the rest are only of academic interest. How do I explain them? I don’t: I just know for certain that the explanation can’t possibly be a government-led conspiracy. Since it’s impossible, as Sherlock taught us, we have to look elsewhere.’
Government Led is one thing, but a small, powerful Kabal Within the ‘community’ is another. It’s not only possible, but completely conceivable, the rule rather than the exception. The Exception is Ethical, Moral, Compassionate, Empathetic Leaders who govern on behalf of the best interest of all rather than the selfish motivations of a priveledged, pampered, diabolical few.
Sooo… as Descartes laments, ‘I may disagree with everything you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.’
I hope you feel the same about me and my fellow ‘Truthiness-ers…’ This isn’t about winning or losing an argument, either. If I’m wrong, well, I apologize, and throw me a tin-foil hat. If you’re wrong, or duped, really – well, serious problems exist, for all of us.
Let’s hope I’m the one who is wrong. Like I said, I’ll bake you a cake.
I can tell you from having over 20 years experience in the construction industry and haveing worked with EOD na dordnace Marines for the 10 years I was in the Marines that there is no way that building could be rigged to collapse wiothout someone seeing it being done or in the short period of time they had that day. To rig a building that size to come down takes months of work and the expertise of a aselect few people.
If you want to beleive that is what happened fine but if you want me to beleive it you need to produce solid evidence showing that the buidling had been rigged to collapes. Not just one man using the word pull in a interview.
I used to temp in Bldg 7. Have any of you who wonder why it came down ever been inside it? It was NOT FAR from the towers. In fact, the linkages underground alone could probably have brought it down after the other buildings, but I’m pretty sure that the two FORMERLY-TALLEST-BUILDINGS-IN-THE-WORLD coming down at least partially on top of it would have done it.
Proselytizing suspicion and paranoia is a protected right, but we have no obligation to believe you. Or think you’re anything but paranoid, if we so desire.
I still sometimes think of the people I used to know who may be dead. I didn’t know them well enough to ever track them down and find out- it had been too many years and too many miles to figure it out. There’s just too much that points to Al Qaida, etc. to ever convince me anything in our own government could have ever conceived, much less carried out, such an attack.
Becky, from what I have seen it was columns from the tower that hit it, combined with fire,that brought it down.
I am very sorry that you may have lost people you knew.
Becky – I’m sorry too. I’ve been to NYC only once for one day… I can’t imagine seeing something so familiar to you destroyed in such a mechanical fashion.
Where did you temp there, and for how long? The roster of businesses there was very exclusive.
I believe the casualties in building 7 were minimal at best – the building was vacant, reported by the 2 eyewitnesses who are interviewed in the links provided, by about 10:30am, and they were trapped in the building and needed to be rescued.
Check it out and feel free to share your opinions.
peace to you
All I have to say, is watch the links provided, and really check out the Adam Curtis documentaries, ‘the Power of Nightmares’ and to a lesser degree ‘the Century of Self’… then you will be able to connect the dots so to speak, which seems impossible for all of you to grasp.
the only thing I grasp is that you still haven’t answered s single question or offered any proof. All you do is reference some video clips instead of making a statement that says this is what I believe and this is the evidence.
Bill, the evidence is presented in the video.
Like most truthers, you can’t argue your position y;ou just point to links and say “see”.
Bill, I can ‘argues’ my position just fine – but the work has been done by others, posted in a way better than I can articulate to you here – that is the beauty of the intratubes. It is the linking of Knowledge.
The so-called experts completely ignore the FACT that there is atomized, Nano Thermite sampled in many of the debris from the site, and this research has been verified by Brigham Young University physicist Professor Steven Jones.
This has nothing to do with Jet fuel, and a link exploring this, with Video Examples, can be found here:
http://bit.ly/bKAI8I
If you don’t explore the links yourself and draw your own conclusions, that is your problem.
But – here are 3 more links to sites that have information that I agree with that supports what actually happened on 9-11.
Thermite in the debris:
http://www.rense.com/general75/thrm.htm
Fused concrete into iron from the ‘collapse’:
http://bit.ly/c1Jl0I
Here’s a journalist who seems to have an even keel about the whole ordeal, even tho he is pretty controversial.
http://www.bollyn.com/home
Bill, best of luck to you. Peace!
Blake: 1) Ridiculing typos is below the belt. I make them myself.
2) Stephen Jones is a wacko. One scientist does not an argument make.
Jack, acknowledged. Bill, I apologize.
But the typo in context actually made Bill sound a bit daft in his perception. What I like to do is type my replies, then re-read them for edits before I press submit comment. I know tempers and passions run high – I just hope we’re all on a level playing field here, political leanings aside.
And since you’re monitoring, how is Stephen Jones a Wacko? I’m just supposed to take that statement as ‘Fact’ from you? And while you’re at it, maybe you can shed some light on the physical presence of ‘weaponized’ thermite found in the debris? I’ll admit I’m wrong if you can explain it. I have a very open mind.
No, I think he’s a wacko, because he’s single handedly given scholarly weight to a theory that is impossiible and absurd on its face. That’s evidence enough for me, just as the handful of scientists who accept the Fundamentalist impossibility that the earth is 10,000 years old are self-evidently wackos. The alternative is taht he’s a shameless fraud, filling a profitable niche. I’m giving him the benefit of the doubt.
And speaking of which, what about the Anthrax attacks post 9-11? who was behind that..? who had the resources, the technology, the time and energy?
Who were the targets, and how did the public react?
Who was taking taking the antidote to anthrax before 9-11? That’s a hallway I have very limited time in exploring, however it’s ripe with speculation and doublespeak. It’s meant to muddy the waters.
Man, the Silence is DEAFening..!
In all your responses and replies in this thread Jack, you address the character of the people who are actually putting forth evidence, but not the evidence itself. You address the theories and evidence submitted that support your opposition as mere impossibilities that could Never have taken place, because, well, they just couldn’t have.
I know you’re busy pumping out content for your site, but you are at least obliged, IMHO, to acknowledge when someone makes a point that you can’t easily refute.
Especially on a Topic that you initiated… and one that directs your readers to ‘Not Tolerate’ and ‘Shun’ those who have the gall to not accept as fact the events reported by our ‘completely unbiased’ MSM.
So Party Line marching orders aside, ignoring and refusing to address any of the issues brought up by Patriotic Americans like myself and others who you and your ilk label as ‘Wacko’ because it is ‘Absurd’ that something like this didn’t just unfold exactly as we have been led like sheeple to believe… I’d argue that the earth itself, life in general and this reality existing at all is ‘Absurd’… because it IS absurd that existence does exist in and of itself.
Explain this: ‘The following sentence is true. The previous sentence is false.’ There are things that exist that are true, however – explaining the unexplainable is… pretty hard for mere Spiritual Beings experiencing a Physical Reality to comprehend in this particular realm.
With all the sources I have sited, from the documentary ‘Thunderbolts of the Gods’ to the myriad of other films, papers, organizations and movements that think otherwise… I put it to you. Explain traces of Nano-ized Thermite in the pulverized dust from the Twin Towers. Good luck with that.
Howard Zinn, among others, stated “Dissent is the highest form of patriotism.” I myself want what is best for all beings, all Earthings. I expect my Country, in which I was lucky enough to incarnate, to aspire to a higher standard… that is what makes the United States, in theory, the greatest experiment embarked upon by Human Beings in the ‘known’ history of Modern Man. And the manipulation of this reality solely for the benefit of the ruling elite – it’s CRAP.
And I think you know that, Jack.
And guess what – as George Carlin states so eloquently – ‘You ( Jack ) are NOT in the Big Club!’
Check out Carlin, in many ways a modern day philosopher and prophet in action:
http://bit.ly/9URY1i
Enjoy the link. Looking forward to your reply.
It is a tribute to your civility and articulateness that I even allow your comments on the site, and ai mean that in a very nice way. But I do not consider the topic worthy of debate; in fact, I do not believe there is a topic at all. Before the details are worth debating or even looking at, one has to accept that the kind of conspiracy you posit is possible in this county, in this culture, with the leaders Americans sift through and elect, at this time. I don’t accept that, and nobody who has studied, lived in and followed American history can without being hostage to serious distortions. I won’t debate the existence of the Holocaust or the fact of evolution either. Nor will I argue with people who say that Barack Obama is an Islamic spy; or that Nostradamus knew the future, or the Astrology works, or that Elvis is alive, for that matter. The acceptance that such a things are possible is itself a toxic state of mind that leads in other terrible directions. An open mind is a fine thing, but we also have to be able to make sense out of the universe.
You can bash it out with those who enjoy debating whether were really in a Matrix -like false existance, or are characters in the dreams of a madman. I’m a lawyer—I know how very persuasive arguments can be constructed of misleading data and rogue opinions. The evidence I’ve seen doesn’t impress me, but I’m really not interested. Impressive evidence that we are really living under the sea, for example, would be interesting, but wouldn’t convince me that I was a fish. I know I’m not a fish, and I know that evidence saying otherwise must be false. I spend more time answering comments personally than 95% of all blogs, because I want to keep this personal. I certainly don’t have an obligation to debate what I don’t think is debatable. Most of what I write here is debatable, but not that.
I KNEW Howard Zinn was rattling around in your head, though. George Carlin too—a brilliant man in many ways, at heart nice guy, a surprisingly good actor, often very funny, but essentially a government-hating, authority-opposing, libertarian, anarchistic and paranoid cynic, who, like most comedians, should never have been taken too seriously. Of course, he was a Zinn fan too.
Funny, I thought that first amendment rights are protected unless you are yelling “fire” in a crowded theater. Are “Truthers” yelling “fire” in a crowded theater? I read a lot about what “I think”, “I don’t believe”, “the evidence I’ve seen doesn’t impress me”, “I don’t have an obligation to debate…”. It appears to me that you believe it’s up to you to make judgments about others’ “worthiness” to be permitted to join the bar, appear in court, and what not. And now, their first amendment rights.
You haven’t answered the most basic of Blakeart’s issues: explanation of “inconvenient facts.” As a scientist by training (at least undergraduate), I have to accept conclusions I don’t like if based on reliable underlying evidence, and elimination of all other mechanisms of explanation. If scientists had been as dismissive of such things, as you suggest, because they are “unthinkable,” penicillin would never have been discovered, X-rays, quantum theory and thousands of other things we now take as gospel truth. As the philosopher said, more or less, (can’t recall), “universal truths move through the stages of being thought preposterous, then spirited debate, grudging acceptance, and then recognition that it was always known to be.”
Who is talking about First Amendment rights? Not me! If someone wants to claim the Holocaust didn’t happen, or that the moon walk was faked, or that Travis was really working undercover for Santa Anna at the Alamo, or that Obama was born on Mars, they can, and they can also accept the consequences, which is a deserved loss of credibility.
Cherry-picked facts that are puzzling, which every complex event has in spades, do not constitute a theory or an argument. We know that gigantic conspiracies are impossible to hide, harder now than ever. We know, or at least I do, that certifiably insane people to not reach the highest level of government in this country (as opposed to, for example, North Korea or the Soviet Union.) We know, or I do, that rational public officials in the US do not do incredibly risky, evil, illegal acts for objectives that are speculative at best and for likely results that will make their own jobs harder while harming the nation they are pledged to serve. So we have 1) an impossible theory that 2) runs counter to what is known about human nature, probability and logic, for which there is 3) no rational motive,
that 4) is discounted by the vast majority of objective historians and scientists as absolute nonsense and paranoia, that 5) was substantially spawne by anti-Jewish bigotry (as the “birther” movement was spawned by incipient racism) and 6)requires a pathological distrust and hatred of the United States, its tradition, culture and values to even consider. Your argument is that a few “inconvenient facts” should outbalance all that.
You’re welcome to it. It’s a colossal waste of time that insults every American in the pursuit.
Jack – first, thanks for the compliment… I have my shrill moments in my beliefs, but I do very much so try to adhere to Descartes in regards to tolerance and coexistence, Liberalism with a capital L and that the Omniverse(s) are infinite enough for any and all Structures of Thought™, even ones like yours in which I disagree.
Peter raises great points (thanks Peter) – and I must empathize again that I do not hate the United States, which you imply in your latest comment – but in your six points, I could go through and document 3 examples to counter each and every one of your Assumptions, which is what they are. The Cavalier way you dismiss ‘Reality’ — in the sense of the actions and choices of others, not in the sense of what makes up this ‘Physical Realm’ in which we seem to be co-existing — is very disturbing to me.
I can draw two conclusions: that you purposely refuse to delve into what really happened on that day for fear of what it will do to your own personal belief system, Or you are schilling for the powers that be as some sort of imp on the dole. And to say it’s UnPatriotic to raise simple questions is as unEthical as any Philosophical Argument made throughout any age of man. I think Twain said that Patriotism is the last refuge of Scoundrels.
I don’t think you’re a scoundrel… but it takes a great leap of faith to wall yourself up inside the point of view in which you now preside. And I am on the road less traveled on this for sure – but I am at peace with myself on this – and I will be grateful if I am proven wrong.
Interesting, that the last line in blakeart’s reply is “… and I will be grateful if I am proven wrong.” Humility. It’s the essential element for one who truly wants to know truth.
There are two types of people in the world (in the current context): those who already know everything, and those who know that they will never know enough. Jack, which group do you want to be in?
One doesn’t have to be in the first category to know that there are some things we do know enough about. The conspiracy mindset, which both you and Blake have been sucked into on this issue, is very seductive, because, of course, anything is theoretically possible, and because it is nearly impossible to prove a negative. It is clearly seductive because people who are rational on other issues (and a lot of people who aren’t) fall hostage to it.
I am certainly not afraid to find out “the truth” when it is unpleasent. I’m not thrilled that Lincoln and Grant intentionally condemned Union prisoners at Andersonville and elsewhere to slow death by starvation in order to keep Confederate soldiers off the battlefield (and then hanged the Andersonville Commandant who had to take the responsibility for the result they ordained); I’m not reluctant to explore why we dropped a second H bomb on Japanese civilians when the first one was more than enough. But large, monstrous acts leave big footprints, (and fingerprints). I’m sorry: the conspiracy you two seem to want to find would involve thousands upon thousands of government and military and private individuals working in concert for a lunatic purpose. We would know about it by now, unless a meticulous assassination plan had been carried out to eliminate possible leaks, and THAT, in turn, would have been its own huge conspiracy. There are not signs of a spate of mysterious deaths connected to this incident, however. I have worked in criminal investigations and prosecutions, and we need a motive: the motive you prescribe for the elaborate murder of 3,000 citizens is gossamer: how, exactly, is there a connection between a terrorist attack and increasing political power? There simply is no logical motive that could possibly induce the act, and until someone produces one (“Cheney wants to get work for Halliburton”—Uh-uh. Bush wants to stimulate the economy—by destroying the domestic air industry and tourism—right. The GOP wants to imbed its power—by launching intense criticism of it security performance and guaranteeing massive deficits while pushing a tax cut–are you kidding? I’m willing to go on any journey, but first you have to prove to me you can get there from here…and you can’t. Or if you can, you are being infuriatingly coy about explaining how. Plausible motive , first; proof that such a thing could ever be engineered and not be revealed for almost ten years, second. Then I’ll give you the benefit of a doubt (that does not exist, in my view) that the leaders of the U.S., then or ever, could, theoretically, bring themselves to commit such an atrocity, and be willing look seriously at the stray puzzle pieces that fascinate you so. Until then, it is a silly excercise that, whatever you say, implies a deeper distrust of US character and institutions than is warranted or healthy.
Samuel Johnson called patriotism “the last refuge of scoundrels”. Oscar Wilde [may have] called patriotism “the virtue of the vicious”. Tolstoy described it as “the principle that will justify the training of wholesale murderers”. Twain said that a patriot is “one who can holler the loudest and not know what he is hollering about.” Furthermore, says Twain, Jesus prescribed forgiveness in the amount of 70 x 7, meaning that one must always forgive everything no matter what, and therefore, you can’t be a Christian and a patriot (i.e., if you claim to be both then you are either a liar or a RE-tard or probably both a liar and a RE-tard).
There is so much evidence that’s available if you know where to look. But first of all, you have to entertain the possibility that those governmental officials we supposedly elect are in fact carrying out some representation of the electorate’s wishes. You have to believe that the conventional media, texts, historical references commonly accepted are reliable (and not owned by global corporate interests), and that historical episodes of pure evil (Hitler, Stalin, Mao) are exceptions rather than the rule. You have to believe that you, as intelligent as you are, cannot be duped into believing a huge and elaborate web of lies which are manufactured by a silent cabal of elitists who have perfected it over centuries. You have to believe that, given the possibility of power over others, government will take it to its extremes.
All these things are “unthinkable,” so you’ll never be open to a world view which challenges the one you have held for all of your life. You cannot contemplate a paradigm shift in your thinking. It’s unfortunate that, as much of a platform as you have, particularly on the topic of ethical behavior, that you do not turn your attention to the reality of the new world order, and the evil that they propagate in this world.
You believe that “1984” was some story, instead of a prediction of a world to come by an insider, that “Brave New World” was some story, instead of a product of an insider who knew what the elite were planning. You believe that the world of “alternative media” is entirely full of invective-spewing bigots, whose first amendment rights must be curtailed, without having investigated it sufficiently to know you are wrong. You believe that you know more than so many others you have never heard of, whose experiences you have no idea of.
You have an explanation for the bill passed as the Patriot Act, over 1000 pages of it, the biggest grab of American freedoms to date, being presented in full less than 48 hrs after 9/11? You have another explanation for removal of habeus corpus, retraction of the posse comitatus act, the only protection we have against the militarization of our domestic police enforcement that is now so obviously taking place? Let’s hear it.
Hubris. Defined.
I’m fine with the Patriot Act. I’ve actually read it. It requires trusting the government, and the government, while making some mistakes, has not abused it as the civil libertarian alarmists feared.
I know Gore Vidal believes we are headed for a dictatorship, and I know Gore is now nuts. I know that Stalin, Hitler et. al. cannot be produced by this culture, popular and otherwise, and that 1984 et al are useful for diagnosis and prevention but also parables that do not describe a real shift. Insanity is also a paradigm shift, and fearful distrust is a crappy way to live. There are plenty of watchdogs, and Americans are neither sheep, nor fools, nor dupes—and they genuinely care about core values. The Zinns and the rest, who are clever but deluded, do real harm to individuals and the country, and the 9-11 conspiracy theory proves it. I would not live in any country that I thought was capable of the atrocity you define, and I’m not planning on moving.
Peter, 20 years from now you and Blake can buy me dinner as we laugh over these fears, long disproven. Unfortunately, I won’t be able to buy you dinner, because it you’re right, we’ll all be skulls in one of President Pol Pot McNamara’s execution pits. I’m not worried.
(I will want fried clams, by the way…)
Enjoy!
http://bit.ly/2nnf0I
Pingback: Agreeing to Disagree « The Structure of Thought™: this is the way it has always been