Reading list
What I’m reading now:
Debunking 9/11 Myths: Why Conspiracy Theories Can’t Stand Up to the Facts
It’s become rather common to hear otherwise sane people spouting Barking Moonbat theories about 9/11 and the destruction of the World Trade Center towers – theories that give way too much credit to the government, as they are certainly not that competent.
Review soon, but so far it is very good.
Going along with that is this article discussing this rather sad phenomena.
September 25th, 2006 at 7:58 am
Don’t tell me no one is going to respond to this. Are you people awake out there or what? So there are screwball theories about everything. All us open-minded people are obligated to do is not to come up with a theory, but ask legitimate questions and expect an answer. Many serious questions have been asked, by the people who take this issue to heart.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1016720641536424083&q=911+Press+for+Truth&hl=en
The whole 911 thing has been exploited irresponsible politicians it is nice to hear an alternative view.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8372366181300641663&q=Everybody%27s+Gotta+Learn+Sometime&hl=en
September 27th, 2006 at 6:24 pm
True, but the alternative view has to actually be sane and based on facts.
The video that you link to appears to be gone; perhaps it is now at:
http://tinyurl.com/m9466
(Let me know if this isn’t the right one)
From the Wikipedia entry on this documentary:
The film focuses particularly on the early efforts by the George W. Bush administration following the attacks to prevent the establishment of an independent investigation, and traces the efforts of the 9/11 family members whose pressure finally helped to convince the administration to create the 9/11 Commission.1 It further explores the many questions about the events of 9/11 and the government’s handling of the situation, and makes the point that 70 percent of the detailed questions developed by and presented to the 9/11 Commission remain unanswered.
The Debunking 9/11 Myths book doesn’t actually touch on topics such as these – it deals with only the hard science behind the collapse of the towers, the Pentagon strike and Flight 93.
The myths it goes after are myths like “It was a military aircraft that hit the towers” or “a cruise missile hit the Pentagon” or – one of the most laughable – “they used explosives to bring down the towers and WTC 7”. These are the sort of myths being propagated by http://www.prisonplanet.com/ and http://www.911truth.org/. The “facts” that these sites are propagating are demonstrably false, and repeating them does not help their cause. In fact, it makes them look like this decades version of the “Black UN Helicopter” conspiracy nuts from the 90s.
In fact, Popular Mechanics has purposefully stayed far, far away from the political angles like “why did they resist having a 9/11 commission” and “why didn’t the commission answer most of the questions put before it”, etc. It’s Popular Mechanics, not Popular Politics.
From a personal standpoint, the documentary looks interesting but the promo gives very few details of the content. I can’t comment on it until I’ve seen it, and I am unfamiliar with the producer. The fact that it is being advertised on 9/11truth.org does not give me high hopes for it…
If you don’t want to buy the book you can find the smaller, online version of the Popular Mechanics article here:
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html
October 6th, 2006 at 4:36 am
I haven’t read the Popular Mechanics book, but I have heard two debates between the writers and 911 alternative theory supporters. Frankly PM didn’t do as well as I expected. They seemed to dodge issues like the heat of fires in the towers and about additional photos of the pentagon strike that only Popular Mechanics is allowed to look at.
Whatever the truth about 911 I hope we will have more than a Popular Mechanics investigation to examine the most important event in 60 years. Since the 911 Commission has practically discredited itself we will have to start looking at other avenues.
Based on what I have read, heard and seen I believe there is, at this point, a 50% probability that elements of the government/military/intelligence had some direct role in deliberately making 911 happen. The purpose was to make the government (which represents transnational corporations) more powerful, and it has done just than. From Nafeez Ahmed’s book The War on Freedom:
1. The well published planning and advocation for wars in Iraq and Afghanistan years before 911 took place, for reasons other than terrorism.
2. The blocking of investigations of Saudi Royals by the U.S. gov’t.
3. US Gov’t allowing suspected terrorsts to train at U.S. military facilities and U.S. flight schools.
4. Numerous warnings, from multiple credible sources, of terrorist attacked clearly ignored.
5. The total collaps of Air Force emergency response in violation of stated rules.
6. The behavior of Bush and the military during the attacks, virtually doing nothing when their own lives could very well have been in danger.
7. Mahmoud Ahmed, Pakistani General, channeling funding to lead hijacker and the subsequent U.S. Gov’t protection of him by asking him to resign.
Some of the more unlikely 911 theories may be well funded disinformation to prevent a call for a real investigation.
October 21st, 2006 at 4:05 pm
I’ve attempted to come up with a critique of Mr. Ahmed’s book but find that I cannot write a better one that this one:
http://tinyurl.com/u5ytv
It has an impressive number of citations and references, but the logic – I use that term advisedly – he uses to “connect the dots” is more than a little lacking.
Correlation is not causation. “17% of the people who have carpet in their home will develop cancer.” (So will 17% of those who do not have carpet in their homes, but we’ll just leave that part out…)
It is not enough to gather a metric buttload of facts, loosely correlate them by saying “Suspicious!” in spooky tones, and call that a theory. There is no theory here, there is no correlation. It’s just a bunch of cherry picked factoids.
Here’s my theory: They serious underestimated the danger, did nothing about the warnings they received from sources, didn’t believe it when it was happening and are now very, very busy in a game of Cover Your Ass and Look Over Here Instead.
THAT is a theory that fits Occam’s Razor (the simplest explanation is usually right) and doesn’t say that thousands (or hundreds) of people were involved in some massive conspiracy.
October 25th, 2006 at 7:03 pm
From that review: “But who is a more reliable source regarding US policy, the US House Minority Leader, or a British admiral?” Probably the British Admiral. I guess we will just rely on the 911 Omission Report and not dig too deeply into this. If all else fails one can have a sense of humor about all this.
http://www.911blogger.com/node/3641