Debunking 9/11 conspiracy theorists
An interesting article "debunking conspiracy theorists' paranoid fantasies about Sept. 11" (read mainstream media aka official version) from balsamic vinigga @ Kuro5hin.
Few excerpts:
Astute observers of history are aware that for every notable event there will usually be at least one ,often several wild conspiracy theories which spring up around it.
So its hardly surprising that the events of Sept 11 2001 have spawned their fair share of these ludicrous fairy tales. And as always, there is - sadly - a small but gullible percentage of the population eager to lap up these tall tales, regardless of facts or rational analysis.
One of the wilder stories circulating about Sept 11, and one that has attracted something of a cult following amongst conspiracy buffs is that it was carried out by 19 fanatical Arab hijackers, masterminded by an evil genius named Osama bin Laden, with no apparent motivation other than that they "hate our freedoms."
The suspension of disbelief required for this outrageous concoction is only for the hard core conspiracy theorist. For a start, they conveniently skip over the awkward fact that there weren't any Arabs on the planes. If there were, one must speculate that they somehow got on board without being filmed by any of the security cameras and without being registered on the passenger lists.
Explaining how the Arab pepetrator's got into the plane -
"Excuse me sir, why do you have a boxcutter, a gun, a container of gas, a gas mask and an electronic guidance unit in your luggage?"
"A present for your grandmother? Very well sir, on you get."
Gleefully, they claim that a few thousand gallons of kerosine is enough to
:completely vapourize a 65 ton aircraft
:have enough left over to burn ferociously enough for over an hour at the impact point to melt steel ( melting point about double the maximum combustion temperature of the fuel )
:still have enough left over to pour down the elevator shafts and start similarly destructive fires all through the building.
It is an interesting read for Monday morning. What is most interesting is how an official (or sounding like one) version of a story can be used to hide up inconsistencies of facts easily.
Filed under Headline News, Politics, USA | 
| 
RSS 2.0 |
Trackback this Article
| 
Email this Article
You may also like to read |
May 3rd, 2005 at 11:39 am
I read the article you linked, and then i read this: http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html?page=1&c=y, an article linked from the comments.
I leave it to the reader to decide which one sounds more credible.
It should be no secret that the neoconservatives were calling for the occupation of Iraq as much as 3 years before the Iraq (http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqclintonletter.htm). But it’s one thing to claim that our politicians descended on the tragedy of 9/11 like vultures and bent it to their own purposes, and quite another to claim that they orchestrated it.
In my opinion, radical claims like the one presented above, provided without corroborative evidence, citation, or actual scientific reference only divert the discussion from the true crime: the vast mis-education of the American public that excused the Iraq war as a moral necessity and made objection an act of treason.
May 3rd, 2005 at 2:06 pm
@Squeg You are taking this far too seriously.
The article is a interesting read. It highlights how an official sounding version (which this article is) can apparently refute claims to the contrary, at least to the common public. In fact the popular mechanics article also falls somewhat in the same category. What I expected from Popular Mechanics was more scientific explanations and actual simulations to corroborate their refutations. Interestingly they didn’t address the passeger list issue mentioned in the Kuro5hin article.
Both of these articles do not follow the rigorous scientific procedures, to the extent possible. Claims by “experts” are meaningless as even the greatest of experts can be biased or plain wrong. Hard evidence is different.
My only interest in this investigation debacle is how it was so rapidly recognized as the work of bin laden’s group. I have never found much evidence on this issue. May be you can point me in the right direction. For the same reason I find the passenger list issue interesting.
I am not doubting islamic fundamentalist’s capability as they have demonstrated their destructive capability in city-wide Mumbai blasts earlier, causing enormous damage to life and property. They also have been demonstrating their destructive mind-set in kasmir for years. What I am trying to understand is how they were implicated in this crime. What are the hard evidences?
> the vast mis-education of the American public that excused the Iraq war as a moral necessity and made objection an act of treason.
It is actually very sad when people try to justify the Iraq war. So much destruction of life and property for no good reason. If this is the price of democracy then I am happy to live without. The unfortunate fact is that the war was conducted for far lesser reason. Now Bush and Blair can say they are mistaken, all forgotten and forgiven!
Tell that to hundreds of thousands of people who died and were left without a family in Iraq. Will they ever forgive Bush and Blair?
It just looks to me like trigger-happy-wild-west is being exported globally.
May 4th, 2005 at 7:52 am
I have to agree, the Pop Mechanics article didn’t cover the who or the why aspects of the event at all. It may have had other shortcomings, but it to my mind, it was definitely the more credible.
I was also intrigued, on first read, by the Kuro5hin and its discussion of how we determined who was involved. But as I read on, it made stated so many other rather easilly discretable facts as truth, that I began to believe they were just making the whole thing up.
Now, I’m not a regular Kuro5hin reader and I really wasn’t certain whether the author as trying to be funny or serious. Sometimes, sarcasm walks a fine line and it takes a pretty good idea of the context to really understand it.
Judging from the comments at the bottom of the article, others were similarly unsure.
I’d like to look further into the why’s and how’s of 9/11, but I think I’m going to have to find some better sources.
March 5th, 2006 at 11:49 pm
read the counter article to the popular mechanics article. just google popular mechanics–as of thtis posting, link #4 is the refutation: 911research.wtc7.net/essays/pm/ Like Kuro5hin, they missed the point (strawman)
- eran ( http://invisitruth.blogspot.com )
March 6th, 2006 at 1:14 am
i was wondering why no one has tatlked about regardless of a motive, a valid moral justification for killing 2,700+ innocent people in the towers (not to mention the absence of significant inside-job whistle-blowers. Here are some ideas I had–
http://invisitruth.blogspot.com
September 3rd, 2006 at 1:55 pm
You can conclude from much of the research, propaganda, blogs and reports on the 911 conspiracy that there are inconsistencies across the board with respect to eye witness accounts and official statements. Eye witness accounts, quoted officials and recorded statements are often flawed with inconsistencies and inaccuracies for what are historically normative phenomena called “human error.” Under duress, fatigued individuals (humans) stressed from highly emotional and traumatic events, will misstate and even propagate misinformation. How many times have you misstated something, gave the wrong impression, or flat-out mislead someone (unintentionally) by repeating incomplete or inaccurate information? Some of the basis for the conspiracy has to do with statements of this nature; information or statements that are taken out of context and considered with a pre-disposed bias that inevitably leads one to conclude or conjecture an outcome that supports one’s bias. By and large, there are sufficient explanations that are supported by reputable organizations (Popular Mechanics, Scientific America to name a few) that provide alternative and viable explanations to support the official findings and statements made regarding most of the conspiracy claims about the 911 attacks.
It seems to me that although there is a lot of emotion surrounding the 911 conspiracy, there is very little substance, or compelling evidence and motive cited by these so called conspiracy proponents to persuade me to consider this anything more than politically motivated, hyperbolic propaganda, that is spewed by individuals who believe that they (the enlightened few) can see the true nature of our evil government; and that it is there patriotic duty to uncover for the sheeple (people) of this country, and for the benefit of the world, this plot to enslave the 3rd world and steal all its natural resources. Okay so that was a bit of hyperbolly on my part. But I hope you get my point.
I would like to emphasize that I believe that there is a certain level of mistrust for our government that is healthy and that defines, culturally, what America is about. However, so long as proponents of this theory are willing to reveal their political motives and irrationality by either literally or effectively communicating a contradictory notion like the following:
“George Bush is so stupid that he can’t string a complete sentence together…and…He’s organized the greatest conspiracy of all time; one that involves the cooperation of many government and private entities; and one that has deceived the majority of the American people,”
it is difficult for me to take at face value the 911 conspiracy, regardless of how sincere and thoughtful the pundits of this propaganda may feel about it. And, from my observation, it is politically motivated by the blame America first crowd.