Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
This article was about how our biases color our perception of various bits of evidence.
If that were so then why pick such a deadly serious subject which has so many unanswered questions surrounding it?
Farhad deliberately chose a very controversial subject, knowing full well that it would attract the sort of attention it has..
If he didn't then he damn well has no business being an online columnist because the reaction to this sort of post is as predictable as the results of dropping an anvil on your foot.
I note that the "Coincidence theorists" have nothing to say about the utterly astounding number and quality of "coincidences" surrounding 9/11/2001.
What people left unsaid is often far more revealing than what they say.
Maybe the questions on your list don't get asked because people like you call people names when they do? Nitwits? By what measure? Yours?
You can't even get your facts straight, there were no "people standing on buildings" cheering, they were Israelis' and and they were on top of a van. They worked for a company called Urban Moving, and after their agents were arrested, the entire operation closed up and moved, leaving cell phones and laptops behind. The "movers" themselves some of whom we now know, were in fact Mossad agents, were released, and we were told, "Nothing to see here, move along please."
If you ask about them, you are an "anti-semite". If you point to the videos and the pictures, people like Farhad do this post-modern deconstructionist bullshit. And if you ask too many questions you support the terrorists. The system works.
You have your questions and I have mine. And if you had spent any time researching this issue (as you obviously have not) your questions about the Israelis have been asked in dozens of books, web sites, youtube videos, seminars, and in the press and on TV.
The problem is people who know nothing about the issues, and who smugly, smugly, believe they "know the truth" will smack any question down, every time, by spouting exactly the same kind of insults as you just did.
Oh, and when you say "outrageous theories" you are quoting Bush. Good job! Good German!
"We must speak the truth about terror. Let us never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories concerning the attacks of September the 11th, malicious lies that attempt to shift the blame away from the terrorists themselves, away from the guilty."
G.W. Bush speaking before the UN General Assembly 11/10/2001
Maybe you should ask those "tough hard questions" yourself a little more often.
If you really believe the Twin Towers couldn't have collapsed without pre-planted demolitions/missiles/whatever, go ahead and google "how the twin towers collapsed", and educate yourself.
You are ignoring the obvious fact there are a great many "conspiracists" who make no mention of the collapse of the towers at all.
It is not necessary to believe that the towers were demolished in order to think that the government version of events is purest bilgewater.
That you will not address the myriad other points made here by myself and others is clear evidence that you do not wish to think about possible alternate explanations for the events of 9/11/2001.
Now that Farhad has positively absolutely solved the 911 problem by his brilliant and scathing analysis of the weakest conspiracy theory in the book, and his amazing insights on cognition, perhaps he could talk about the 100 videos from the Pentagon surveillance cameras that all clearly show a plane crashing into the building. As a bonus he could talk about the gas station video and the one from the hotel that the FBI confiscated.
Oh wait. We can't see those. It's a secret. National Security!!!!
"I've filmed there before down at the Pentagon-- before 9/11-- there's got to be at least 100 cameras, ringing that building, in the trees, everywhere. They've got that plane coming in with 100 angles. How come with haven't seen the straight-- I'm not talking about stop-action photos, I'm talking about the video. I want to see the video; I want to see 100 videos that exist of this,"
Michael Moore
Tell me I did not see what I saw. Then tell me I don't know what I know.
story of 9/11 and not because of pictures. I asked myself from the beginning why was there no airforce intervention within in minutes as there should have been. That question has never been adequately addressed, until it is, I will have doubts. That is all.
No one, no one has answered that question. I can remember when there was that rash of highjackings in the sixties and seventies and fighters were scrambled and up in the air within a few minutes at most and for this there was up to 30 minutes delay? Please, answer, why?
That is the basic question however much the field is cluttered and obscured by questions of "flashes" and photographs and the melting point of steel.
As a physicist (MS), in a world dominated by people who believe in Oprah's "The Secret", Raki energy massages, crystal energy, pyramid energy, aromatherapy, energy from chimes and the like, magnet healing, and, the "power of prayer" -- I have been asked several times for some kind of physics justification for these beliefs more often than I am comfortable with.
How do you tell these people, without appearing the sociopath, that they are gullible, that they don't have the mental powers, and especially, the mathematical skills, to discern truth from myth. How can I be honest with them, when, logically, a myth can never be disproven -- yet holding it as truth is completely irrational. To the mentally weak, there is no distinction between proof, and something that can't be disproven.
Conspiracy theories? As has been posted in at least one response in this thread, one can prove mathematically, from an estimate of the number of people required to actually carry out such a thing, that a 9/11 conspiracy would be impossible to carry out. Of course, it's not even worth doing the calculation since it would never assuage it's intended audience, or worse, prove the person doing the calculation is actually part of the conspiracy.
Is there room for myth in ones life? Yes, there is. Joseph Campbell said it eloquently when he talked about "faith". I do not remember exactly what he said, but if we accept faith as an integral part of the human condition (as we do love, greed, envy, and other irrationals), and as long as we don't confuse it with "truth", it's not a bad thing, it can define us but won't necessarily impede us.
...Dan
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
