First time here?

The Film of the Day

The Latest Radio Broadcast

The Latest KarmaCritique

  • stuck.jpg
    stuck.jpg
    Year Released:
    2007

    STUCK (2007) Story and Directed by Stuart Gordon.

    Opening titles say “Inspired by a true story.”

    Average: 10 (1 vote)

The Latest Comments

POLITICS: Truthers In Our Midst

videowilliams's picture

WTC911kaboom 

If you go to KarmaCritic's latest Radio Broadcast blog (http://www.karmacritic.com/node/2339), you'll see a heck of a debate brewing down in the comments. It's one of the most politically charged questions of our time: "September 11th- Attack or Conspiracy?" Dawn and I could keep on going blow for blow on the subject there, but I'm going to lay my cards on the table here, because my answer just outgrew the comment box. 

I really believe that all you 9/11 "truthers" have it wrong. It's not a question of what conspiracy theory you believe, but of WHY you feel the need to believe in a conspiracy at all. Do you really find it easier to believe that your own government perpetrated this atrocity than a bunch of hate-filled terrorists? If so, why? I'm trying to get my head around it. 

September 11th shook up many people's world views- certainly mine. And one of the commonest questions going around America in the traumatised days afterwards was a plaintive "Why do they hate us so much?" Yet many people- particularly those on the left of politics- don't want to believe in hate as a force. They want to believe in a world where all of humanity can talk it through, embrace our differences and go wandering into the sunset holding hands and singing kum-ba-ya. The idea of fundamentalist Muslims who hate the West and all we stand for, who want to see us destroyed for no better reason than because their religion says so, just doesn't fit. Hence, 9/11 must have been an inside job. 

Appropriately enough, this whole debate grew out of a thread concerning Nazis. There, a similar thinking comes up. Why did so many Jews (including several of the branches of my mother's family tree) allow themselves to be herded up like so much cattle and carted off to the concentration camps to be killed? Why weren't there more uprisings in the ghettoes? Why did so many intelligent people buy the transparent cover story that they were being "resettled" in the east? Well, for many Jews in Europe, the very idea that they were going to be exterminated as a people was preposterous. They couldn't believe they were hated that much- it simply didn't fit their world view. There must have been something else going on... 

Oh, there are none so blind as those who will not see. 

One commentator I've seen has likened those on the left who claim "America did this to itself" to a guy who's always bitching about his wife. He's always complaining, but you figure that deep down he really loves her. One day you're having coffee in a restaurant with this guy, when suddenly outside the window you see a gang of thugs grabbing his wife and beating her up. You jump up and say "They're beating the shit out of your wife! Aren't you going to help her?" And he says "Naaah, she probably deserves it" and continues with his coffee. At that moment you realise "Wow, you really do hate your wife." Substitute "truthers" for "guy" and "America" for "wife" and you get the analogy. You guys really do hate your own country. 

Certainly I agree with EvilDirector that the Bush administration used this attack in later years to justify their own nefarious neocon agenda, spy on people, suspend legal protections, torture prisoners, re-invade Iraq, and various other creepy stuff. But they were hardly smart enough- or evil enough- to plot the death of over 3,000 of their own people in advance, then cover it up and make it look like terrorism, just to get America fearful and compliant. This is fantasy. The attack itself was just that- an attack.   

Like Dan Gadberry, I believe what happened that day is basically what we've been told happened. A highly organised group of fanatical Muslim terrorists, backed and trained by Al Qaeda, took control of four aircraft on September 11th, 2001- the anniversary, correct me if I'm wrong, of some particularly hated Middle Eastern peace agreement that had been brokered at Camp David years before. Two of them slammed into the World Trade Center towers, whose resulting collapse caused destruction beyond even Osama Bin Laden's wildest dreams. Another plane went into the Pentagon, then word got out through mobile phones about what was happening, and the passengers on United Flight 93 retook the controls of their hijacked plane and turned it away from the White House or Camp David where it was headed, bringing it down instead in a Pennsylvania field. There were no government agents on those planes, no controlled demolition of the towers, no secret white house master plan.  

It should be noted that conspiracy theories about September 11th are more popular in the Muslim world than anywhere else on earth. Typically, they feel a need to evade responsibility and paint themselves as victims rather than aggressors. "It's America's own fault." I'm sorry- that doesn't wash with me. 

I don't watch Fox. I don't like Bush. Heck, I don't even live in America. But you truthers are kidding yourselves.  

The terrorists did it.

Average: 7.8 (4 votes)
FableForge's picture

Zeitgeist

 
You gotta watch this man:

http://zeitgeistmovie.com/

Lemme know, then we'll talk :) 

DawnAkemi's picture

more on the Federal Reserve

Marco... I've seen Zeitgeist and it is very thought provoking.

If you want to read more about the Federal Reserve, check out

http://www.themoneymasters.com/

Their movie used to be on google video but was taken down... it is a fascinating historical perspective.

videowilliams's picture

An Awesome Frankenedit

Marco, that's an amazing piece of filmmaking- truly hypnotic in its use of concepts, imagery and music- but it's hardly journalism: more a big creative essay. It uses only those sound bytes which suit its purpose, using many of the "brainwashing" techniques it accuses the mass media of employing, and contradicting its own thesis at several points. I did enjoy it, don't get me wrong- and as Dawn says, it's thought provoking- but I admire it as artistry rather than fact.

FableForge's picture

Alright. Now we talk :)

Now we can talk!!

videowilliams wrote:

I really believe that all you 9/11 "truthers" have it wrong.

said dave to the air (certainly not Dawn nor me!) :)

videowilliams wrote:

It's
not a question of what conspiracy theory you believe, but of WHY you
feel the need to believe in a conspiracy at all. Do you really find it
easier to believe that your own government perpetrated this atrocity
than a bunch of hate-filled terrorists? If so, why? I'm trying to get
my head around it.

Well, I'm not saying I believe the truthers 100%. But yes, now that you mention it, yes, it -is- actually easier for me to believe that an event of HUGE magnitude was created by a force of HUGE power, rather than 19 guys "who hate our values".

Regardless, how easy or hard to believe something is, should really not have anything to do with how much I believe in it. Rather, it should be about how much it approximates the truth, easy or hard as it may be. Problem is truth is pretty hard to establish, although it helps to keep an open mind. Taking options off the table either because they're "preposterous" or because they "offend the memory of the dead" or because of WHATEVER reason other than "because they're not true", would be silly.


videowilliams wrote:

September 11th shook up many people's world views- certainly
mine. And one of the commonest questions going around America in the
traumatised days afterwards was a plaintive "Why do they hate us so
much?" Yet many people- particularly those on the left of politics-
don't want to believe in hate as a force. They want to believe in a
world where all of humanity can talk it through, embrace our
differences and go wandering into the sunset holding hands and singing
kum-ba-ya. The idea of fundamentalist Muslims who hate the West and all
we stand for, who want to see us destroyed for no better reason than
because their religion says so, just doesn't fit. Hence, 9/11 must have
been an inside job.

Lets break it into digestible chunks:

  1. A lot of people hate "us". No argument there.
  2. The world could, maybe, talk its problems through, embrace our differences and wander in the sunset singing kumbaya. It could happen, just like the sun could have a flare and burn earth to a crisp, that could happen too.

Now here: neither 1 nor 2 connects in any logical way with "Hence 9/11 must have been an inside job". There's no silogism here Dave :)

No ammount of hate can make jet fuel burn at 1500 degrees, heck, not even 600 degrees which is what it takes to just -weaken- steel.

There arent enough hate verses in the Koran to hit one building and topple another (WTC7).

The culture war cannot make a plane turn into a state "closer to a liquid than a solid mass" from "just" crashing.

Etc. My questions are not whether muslim extremists hate "us"; I take that for granted. My questions are more about the physics of rather unique events: the only plane crashes in history that leave no planes behind, and the only skyscrappers in history who have been downed by fire. Not to mention the mind boggling coincidence of the authorities conducting war-games or drill-exercises of the exact same kind at the exact same time, in both 9/11 and 7/7. Lots of trivia here.


videowilliams wrote:


Appropriately enough, this whole debate grew out of a thread
concerning Nazis. There, a similar thinking comes up. Why did so many
Jews (including several of the branches of my mother's family tree)
allow themselves to be herded up like so much cattle and carted off to
the concentration camps to be killed? Why weren't there more uprisings
in the ghettoes? Why did so many intelligent people buy the transparent
cover story that they were being "resettled" in the east?

I dunno, they found it hard to believe the state could be capable of murdering its own citizens?


videowilliams wrote:

Well, for
many Jews in Europe, the very idea that they were going to be
exterminated as a people was preposterous. They couldn't believe they
were hated that much- it simply didn't fit their world view. There must
have been something else going on...

Boy, were they right.


videowilliams wrote:

Oh, there are none so blind as those who will not see.

One commentator I've seen has likened those on the left who claim
"America did this to itself" to a guy who's always bitching about his
wife. He's always complaining, but you figure that deep down he really
loves her. One day you're having coffee in a restaurant with this guy,
when suddenly outside the window you see a gang of thugs grabbing his
wife and beating her up. You jump up and say "They're beating the shit
out of your wife! Aren't you going to help her?" And he says "Naaah,
she probably deserves it" and continues with his coffee. At that moment
you realise "Wow, you really do hate your wife." Substitute
"truthers" for "guy" and "America" for "wife" and you get the analogy.
You guys really do hate your own country.

I almost... almost stumbled here. I came close to getting angry :) but nah, like a trained acrobat, I recover and do a tumble flip! Zhazha! So instead of a ranting paragraph about how much do I love America when I have to -earn- every single day what all americans are simply -born- with, let me rather say this: I love America so much, that I worry about threats in and and out of her. Not just out.


videowilliams wrote:

Certainly I agree with EvilDirector that the Bush administration
used this attack in later years to justify their own nefarious neocon
agenda, spy on people, suspend legal protections, torture prisoners,
re-invade Iraq, and various other creepy stuff.

I agree too, and probably so does 99% of people, I believe. After all, evidence has mounted up way past most people's threshold of obviousness. At some point in the past, whether tobacco was bad for you or not was also a "controversial" issue that some people believed to be true and some didnt. Global Warming is another. Eventually evidence piles up to the point where its embarrasing to believe otherwise. So yeah, the concensus today is that Bush did a power-grab. Holding this view in 2002 would have been mildly visionary. Today it just means we watch Jon Stewart. Meh.


videowilliams wrote:

But they were hardly
smart enough- or evil enough- to plot the death of over 3,000 of their
own people in advance, then cover it up and make it look like
terrorism, just to get America fearful and compliant.

I dont know. Were they?

Do -you- know?

Wait. Of course you do:


videowillams wrote:

This is fantasy.
The attack itself was just that- an attack.

Ah, okay. Well, that's that then :)


videowilliams wrote:


Like Dan Gadberry, I believe what happened that day is basically what
we've been told happened.

Oh, you seditious silver-tongued rogue, you; please proceed :)


videowilliams wrote:

A highly organised group of fanatical Muslim
terrorists, backed and trained by Al Qaeda, took control of four
aircraft on September 11th, 2001- the anniversary, correct me if I'm
wrong, of some particularly hated Middle Eastern peace agreement that
had been brokered at Camp David years before. Two of them slammed into
the World Trade Center towers, whose resulting collapse caused
destruction beyond even Osama Bin Laden's wildest dreams. Another plane
went into the Pentagon, then word got out through mobile phones about
what was happening, and the passengers on United Flight 93 retook the
controls of their hijacked plane and turned it away from the White
House or Camp David where it was headed, bringing it down instead in a
Pennsylvania field. There were no government agents on those planes, no
controlled demolition of the towers, no secret white house master plan.

And you know this for a fact...


videowilliams wrote:


It should be noted that conspiracy theories about September 11th
are more popular in the Muslim world than anywhere else on earth.

So? What exactly is discrediting there?


videowilliams wrote:


Typically, they feel a need to evade responsibility and paint
themselves as victims rather than aggressors.

Okay, and -that- proves the conspiracies must be wrong? Is it a "The Muslims like'em, so they must be wrong?" kind of argment?


videowilliams wrote:

"It's America's own
fault." I'm sorry- that doesn't wash with me.

Me neither. The "truther's" dont think its America's own fault either (unless you count Jerry Fallwell, -may his soul rest at the right of the Lord right now-). I dont think anyone is blaming america, some people like myself and Dawn arent sure who is to blame, the truthers blame a cabal of bankers, others blame a cabal of terrorists, and the bottom of humanity's racist barrel blames the muslim world as a whole. But, once again, save the Holy Reverend Fallwell, and maybe another couple Holy Men, like Mr. Phelps of the "First Congregational God-Hates-Fags Confederate States Church", no one else thinks its America's fault.

I admire the American people. They are hard working, they dream big, they can fight, and when given the option, they choose what is noble, what is right. Their fault (I'll soon be able to type "our" once I get my citizenship) is a dependency on higher people giving them options. It wasnt always like that. But now the option-givers bear part of the responsability, and part of the blame, that should be on us. Anyway, I digress.


videowilliams wrote:

I don't watch Fox. I don't like Bush. Heck, I don't even live in America. But you truthers are kidding yourselves.

The terrorists did it.

Amen!

But... who are the terrorists?

videowilliams's picture

Occam's Razor

Marco, have you heard of Occam's Razor? It's a credibility test, attributed to William of Occam, which holds that the simplest solution is more likely when all other things are equal. For example, if you see size-9 footprints, you might guess they are from a human with size-9 feet, while someone who does not know about Occam's razor might suppose they are from a dwarf Bigfoot.  In medicine, the usual statement is "if you hear hoof beats, think horses, not zebras".

I still find the conspiracy theories way more clunky than the concept of an attack, but can see that this won't be an easy win.

One thing's for sure: in two weeks' time, you're going to have one hell of a radio debate!

FableForge's picture

Alright! The Guy in the Cave did it!

That's really simple!

19 foreigners with bad english who according to flight schools couldnt fly a cessna out of a paper bag, subdued hundreds of passengers and crew with 2-inch box cutters, then comandeered the very machines that made the word "complexity" synonym with "airplane control panel", evaded NORAD (wouldnt cold war Russia be proud?) due to a coincidental war game exercise that Cheney by coincidence just happened to be running that same day, bullseyed 75% of their targets, and without any explosives, reduced 3 buildings to rubble (with just 2 hits!) in perfect demolition-like verticality at a rate of 10 floors per second, because the 10 minutes of jet fuel fire was twice as hot as the hours it takes at a foundry to actually melt that kind of metal. ALL planes VAPORIZED with no trace left, and yet one of the hijackers passports made it unscathed to be found later neatly on top of the rubble, and be declared a smoking gun. Nevermind that 6 of the 19 gave confused interviews to The Guardian among others, on the strange fact that, well, they're actually alive. Bin Laden's brother having breakfast with officials that morning is a coincidence too, and so are the ties between Bush senior and the Bin Laden family from the 90s, nothing to do with the fact they were all flown out of the country before they could be investigated. By coincidence too the pentagon was hit on the one area with no people in it, and revanping the ground, around it, confiscating all security cam videos had nothing to do with removing evidence. All of the hijackers were Saudis, and yet we invaded Afghanistan and Iraq.

Well, when you put it that way, yeah, its really pretty simple, Occam's Razor totally corroborates the official version :)

DawnAkemi's picture

Simplicity isn't always so obvious

Especially when political subjectivity is involved... hmmmmm....

videowilliams's picture

The Awful Truth

Marco, I hate to sound like a schoolteacher (it's always more fun to invent conspiracy theories than to debunk them) but I fear it's time to spoil your fun and answer that excited troofers' rant ("Alright! The guy in the cave did it!") point by point:

 

(1) The Guy In The Cave

In September of 2001, Osama Bin Laden had millions of dollars, a network of training camps, and a number of other successful attacks under his belt: most notably the US embassies in East Africa and the USS Cole in Yemen. He only ended up in a cave- duh- after allied operations began in Afghanistan.

(2) The Terrorists were Capable 

Your assumption that 19 trained terrorists couldn't have possibly succeeded against an unprepared American airline system is a little reminiscent of the attitude Americans (and Australians) held toward the Viet Cong during the Vietnam war: "We're modern people, they're just primitives- they couldn't possibly hurt us!" Oops...

My younger brother, who's as lefty as they come, has a different take, and calls it "American arrogance" to think that backward Muslims couldn't have possibly pulled this off. In any case, I think your reasoning is flawed. Attacking's easy if your opponent is asleep.

(3) They Flew The Planes:

The kind of security now taken for granted in airliners was non-existent then. Slashing the throats of the unprepared hostesses, storming the cockpit, locking the door, and pacifying the stupefied passengers by saying something like "stay calm, don't make any false moves and we'll soon be landing safely in [some fictional destination]" is perfectly plausible. This is how hijackings had always gone up to that point. 

Yes, modern aircraft are complex to fly, but mainly on take-off and landing. (Didn't an airline captain ever take you up to the cockpit as a boy and let you fly the plane for a bit? You can turn it left or right with a single knob when the auto-pilot's handling everything else.) One of the most damning things those flying teachers remembered about the terrorists was the fact that all they wanted to do was fly- they didn't want to learn about taking off or landing.

(4) Nobody Saw It Coming

NORAD was set up to monitor incoming military threats, not domestic jetliners being piloted as missiles. Such terrorism had never been tried before, so is it really such a surprise that the authorities weren't ready?

(5) The Engineering

The jet fuel in those buildings needed only to burn long enough and hot enough to weaken and bend the metal of the roof trusses, not melt it. (And where do you get "10 minutes" from? The fire burned for an hour.) Given the weakening of the structure caused by the impact, once those floors began to fall, a catastrophic progressive collapse became inevitable. Basic engineering principles bear this out. (See my videos in your Radio Broadcast blog.)  

Must take time out here to mention an obvious distortion in "Zeitgeist". The man in charge of engineering for the World Trade Center was shown saying "it was designed to withstand an aircraft impact..." So they must have been destroyed by other means, right? OMG!! Um- actually, no. His full explanation (which I've seen) adds the words "...up to the size of a 707, flying low and slow, lost in the fog... But the conditions on September 11th were outside of those for which the building was designed." (i.e. a larger and heavier 767, loaded with fuel and going full-speed.) "Zeitgeist" cleverly reversed his meaning entirely. (As I've said, it's one big frankenedit, dude.)

(6) Planes Can Vaporize

Or more accurately, atomize. Here's a video of an F4 Phantom Jet meeting a concrete wall at 500 mph. As you'll see, it turns to dust. (Amazing to watch.)  

 

Even so, there were some near-unrecognizable aiircraft pieces left in the Pentagon, which you'll find on the following website, which debunks another favourite film for troofers: "Loose Change". 

http://usinfo.state.gov/xarchives/display.html?p=pubs-english&y=2007&m=March&x=20070330134723abretnuh0.9919245 

 

(7) The Terrorists's Passport

I thought those papers that belonged to the suicide pilots were located in their motel rooms and such. What's your source that it was found among the rubble? Another- ahem- troofer website?

(8) Al Guardian

The Guardian newspaper published an interview with six of the terrorists proving they were still alive? Don't make me laugh. That rag of a paper, referred to by many as "Al Guardian", for its relentless anti-American anti-Israeli anti-establishment pro-Muslim bias, probably published a retraction the next day... in the small print on page 90.

(9) The Bin Laden Family

I agree it's very suspect the Bin Ladens were allowed to leave the country. It's become clear, time and again, that oil interests come above the national interest in the thinking of the Bush administration. But if 9/11 were a Bush conspiracy, why frame a relative of a family he does business with for the crime?

(10) The Confiscated Videos

Just a wild guess here... but do you think maybe the FBI collected everyone's security videos so they could analyse them closely? Wouldn't that be an intelligent thing to do?

(11) Invading Iraq & Afghanistan

If 9/11 had been staged to soften up the American public for invading Iraq and Afghanistan, then you tell me: why did they pin the blame on a bunch of Saudi Arabians? I agree: it doesn't make sense... 

 ...So shall we strike the conspiracy, then, and go with the truth?

FableForge's picture

Half a Reply, plus the other Half

videowilliams wrote:

Marco, I hate to sound like a schoolteacher

Dont worry, you do not :)

 

videowilliams wrote:

(it's always more fun to invent conspiracy theories than to debunk them) but I fear it's time to spoil your fun and answer that excited troofers' rant ("Alright! The guy in the cave did it!") point by point:

You make it sound like I was hoping you wouldnt! :)

 

videowilliams wrote:

(1) The Guy In The Cave

In September of 2001, Osama Bin Laden had millions of dollars, a network of training camps, and a number of other successful attacks under his belt: most notably the US embassies in East Africa and the USS Cole in Yemen. He only ended up in a cave- duh- after allied operations began in Afghanistan.

Yeah, and the US was the only remaining superpower in the world. This is a moot point to argue. Much more interesting are things like this: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_ea... and the possibility that the video confession was also fake.

 

videowilliams wrote:

(2) The Terrorists were Capable

Your assumption that 19 trained terrorists couldn't have possibly succeeded against an unprepared American airline system is a little reminiscent of the attitude Americans (and Australians) held toward the Viet Cong during the Vietnam war: "We're modern people, they're just primitives- they couldn't possibly hurt us!" Oops...

My younger brother, who's as lefty as they come, has a different take, and calls it "American arrogance" to think that backward Muslims couldn't have possibly pulled this off. In any case, I think your reasoning is flawed. Attacking's easy if your opponent is asleep.

Once again I resist the temptation to get angry, this time at the racist tone that you assume behind my words. Its ridiculous, if nothing else simply because -I- am a "foreigner with bad english" too, dave. And I wouldnt presume myself capable of even getting in the wrong flight, and that has nothing to do with my ethnicity. The words "primitive" and "backwards" did NOT cross my mind in reference to a whole ethnic group. Watch out Dave, they crossed yours, and its not the first time.

videowilliams wrote:

(3) They Flew The Planes:

The kind of security now taken for granted in airliners was non-existent then. Slashing the throats of the unprepared hostesses, storming the cockpit, locking the door, and pacifying the stupefied passengers by saying something like "stay calm, don't make any false moves and we'll soon be landing safely in [some fictional destination]" is perfectly plausible. This is how hijackings had always gone up to that point.

Yes, modern aircraft are complex to fly, but mainly on take-off and landing. (Didn't an airline captain ever take you up to the cockpit as a boy and let you fly the plane for a bit? You can turn it left or right with a single knob when the auto-pilot's handling everything else.) One of the most damning things those flying teachers remembered about the terrorists was the fact that all they wanted to do was fly- they didn't want to learn about taking off or landing.

Dont take it from me, take it from the flight school people where Mr. Hanjour trained. Meet the man who did a pinpoint 270 degree stunt to hit the Pentagon bullseye:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...

New York Times wrote:

Staff members characterized Mr. Hanjour as polite, meek and very
quiet. But most of all, the former employee said, they considered him a
very bad pilot.

''I'm still to this day amazed that he could
have flown into the Pentagon,'' the former employee said. ''He could
not fly at all.''

videowilliams wrote:

(4) Nobody Saw It Coming

NORAD was set up to monitor incoming military threats, not domestic jetliners being piloted as missiles. Such terrorism had never been tried before, so is it really such a surprise that the authorities weren't ready?

Triple whammy:

  1. NORAD actually -drilled- for planes-as-weapons exercises two years before 9/11: http://www.usatoday.com/news/washing...
  2. Up to and including the Pentagon: http://www.mdw.army.mil/content/anmv... (broken images? strange... but dont worry, they've been mirrored: http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/...)
  3. In fact, THE VERY DAY it happened, there was a drill precisely about it: http://www.boston.com/news/packages/... what a bloody coincidence.

BTW, the commander in chief at the time was Cheney: http://archives.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLI...

videowilliams wrote:

(5) The Engineering

The jet fuel in those buildings needed only to burn long enough and hot enough to weaken and bend the metal of the roof trusses, not melt it. (And where do you get "10 minutes" from? The fire burned for an hour.) Given the weakening of the structure caused by the impact, once those floors began to fall, a catastrophic progressive collapse became inevitable. Basic engineering principles bear this out. (See my videos in your Radio Broadcast blog.)

Here's the math:

http://guardian.150m.com/wtc/how-hot...

I recommend anyone interested to follow the whole math in that article, which generously assumes that all 3500 gallons of fuel were all evenly confined to just one floor, that the oxygen allowed for perfect burning efficiency, that no heat was lost due to conduction, that no gases escaped, that the steel and concrete had an unlimited ammount of time to absorb the heat, heck, even that that floor has waay less metal than the average, all of that put togeter, and if you follow the math, it gives you a figure of 495 degrees F. Nowhere near the 600 it takes to merely -weaken- the steel.

Follow the math, it took me a while, it felt like high school, but I did.

videowilliams wrote:

Must take time out here to mention an obvious distortion in
"Zeitgeist". The man in charge of engineering for the World Trade
Center was shown saying "it was designed to withstand an aircraft
impact..." So they must have been destroyed by other means, right?
OMG!! Um- actually, no. His full explanation (which I've seen) adds the
words "...up to the size of a 707, flying low and slow, lost in the
fog... But the conditions on September 11th were outside of those for
which the building was designed." (i.e. a larger and heavier 767,
loaded with fuel and going full-speed.) "Zeitgeist" cleverly reversed
his meaning entirely. (As I've said, it's one big frankenedit, dude.)

Fact is no other skyscrapper has ever been downed by fire, in history. Including the Empire State which had a bomber plane crash into it: http://www.damninteresting.com/?p=17... . If you're going by the official story, it was the jet fuel fire, not the speed nor the size of the planes what brought the towers down. That would render the rest of the quote unnecessary. But most important of all: -why- did WTC 7 fall? What's the official story there? The 9/11 Commision Report doesnt even mention it!

videowilliams wrote:

 

(6) Planes Can Vaporize

Or more accurately, atomize. Here's a video of an F4 Phantom Jet
meeting a concrete wall at 500 mph. As you'll see, it turns to dust.
(Amazing to watch.) 
 

Even so, there were some near-unrecognizable aiircraft pieces
left in the Pentagon, which you'll find on the following website, which
debunks another favourite film for troofers: "Loose Change".
 

http://usinfo.state.gov/xarchives/display.html?p=pubs-english&y=2007&m=March&x=20070330134723abretnuh0.9919245 

Dave, the link you pointed to, says: "The plane disintegrated due to its impact with the Pentagon at 853
kilometers per hour (530 miles per hour), but it did not “vaporize.” 

That's -your- link man. Planes -cant- vaporize. The youtube video shows a much smaller craft flying much faster and facing a perfect perpendicular angle. I dont believe the pentagon was hit by a missile, but I have to wonder: where are the remains of the plane, and where are the remains of flight 93, and why arent they public?

videowilliams wrote:

 

(7) The Terrorists's Passport

I thought those papers that belonged to the suicide pilots were
located in their motel rooms and such. What's your source that it was
found among the rubble? Another- ahem- troofer website?

You've gone from "conspiracy theorist", to "truther", to "troofer"... Anyway, no. The answer to your question is: lead counsel Susan Ginsburg before the 9/11 comission. I hope thats enough credentials. Her words:

Susan Ginsburg wrote:

Beginning with passports. Four of the hijackers
passports have survived in whole or in part. Two were recovered from
the crash site of United Airlines flight 93 in Pennsylvania. These are
the passports of Ziad Jarrah and Saeed al Ghamdi. One belonged to a
hijacker on American Airlines flight 11. This is the passport of Satam
al Suqami. A passerby picked it up and gave it to a NYPD detective
shortly before the World Trade Center towers collapsed. A fourth
passport was recovered from luggage that did not make it from a
Portland flight to Boston on to the connecting flight which was
American Airlines flight 11. This is the passport of Abdul Aziz al
Omari.

videowilliams wrote:

(8) Al Guardian

The Guardian newspaper published an interview with six of the
terrorists proving they were still alive? Don't make me laugh. That rag
of a paper, referred to by many as "Al Guardian", for its relentless
anti-American anti-Israeli anti-establishment pro-Muslim bias, probably
published a retraction the next day... in the small print on page 90.

Alright, try the telegraph:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...

Scarier even is that the FBI had an informant living with at least two of them:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/09/09/attack/main521223.shtml 

videowilliams wrote:

 

(9) The Bin Laden Family

I agree it's very suspect the Bin Ladens were allowed to leave
the country. It's become clear, time and again, that oil interests come
above the national interest in the thinking of the Bush administration.
But if 9/11 were a Bush conspiracy, why frame a relative of a family he
does business with for the crime?

I dunno. I dont think 9/11 was a Bush conspiracy, but neither does Zeitgeist. Thanks for agreeing its suspicious.

videowilliams wrote:

 

(10) The Confiscated Videos

Just a wild guess here... but do you think maybe the FBI
collected everyone's security videos so they could analyse them
closely? Wouldn't that be an intelligent thing to do?

Yes, and why havent they been released? Dont they care to disprove the silly claim Loose Change makes about the pentagon hit being a missile?

videowilliams wrote:

 

(11) Invading Iraq & Afghanistan

If 9/11 had been staged to soften up the American public for
invading Iraq and Afghanistan, then you tell me: why did they pin the
blame on a bunch of Saudi Arabians? I agree: it doesn't make sense... 

Maybe because it didnt matter? What does the Lusitania, Pearl Harbor, Gulf of Tonkin and 9/11 have in common?

videowilliams wrote:

 

 ...So shall we strike the conspiracy, then, and go with the truth?

 

Truth is not always easy to find. I havent found truth, and I'm humble enough to admit it. In another post, Eric asked whats the use of finding it anyway, since its in the past and the potential perpretators have nearly unlimited power by now. Well, I'll just say this worries me: there might not be elections in 2008:

http://www.slate.com/id/2176185/

Say hello to National Security Presidential Directive 51, which gives the White House dictator-like powers in the event of a "Catastrophic Emergency" which is very vaguely defined.

Anyway, I hope my concerns are entirely unwarranted. Not like there's anything we can do.... unless... we could elect someone crazy like Ron Paul to defy the status quo. We'll see. 

MelioraEric's picture

The Connection of Marco to 9/11

Uh oh. Marco made this post at 9:11am. I smell a conspiracy here!!! Tongue out

I'M KIDDING, MARCO!! 

DawnAkemi's picture

Money Masters video

I found the video:

target="_blank"> 

Again, very thought provoking!

Disclaimer to Dave: please don't think I've unthinkingly absorbed the ideas in this video and blindly put faith into their point of view. I'm just disseminating information and ideas.

Wink

 

DawnAkemi's picture

Truthers and Other Simplistic Ideals

Dave, I hope you are not lumping me into the "you Truthers" group... I did not say I held fast to the beliefs of "Truthers". I do not "feel the need" to believe anything at all, but let my beliefs unfold as new information is presented to me.

Please do not pretend to know my point of view... that being an ever evolving process.  I keep asking questions, keep looking at the wide variety of information. I do this with all things, not just politics.

Nor do I "hate my country"... the implication being offensive to me.

I find your wife beating anology simplistic in the extreme.

I can't be sure there is a small group of people pulling the strings of our world politics and economy. I can't be sure that the events of 9/11 unfolded as reported by mainstream media. How can you be so sure?

It is hard for me to believe in a "cabal" of powerful families (in fact, I hate the idea), but I don't dismiss it out of hand.
Careful... didn't say I embrace it either.

It certainly is possible that the Muslims hate us enough to attack us... hate is a gigantic force.

Turning your Jew/Nazi analogy back towards you, it is possible that our govenments' presentation of events is a "cover story" for darker motives... there could be "something else going on". Why is that not possible to you? "Oh, there are none so blind as those who will not see."

One thing I am sure about: the world is immensely more complicated than I ever could have imagined as a child growing up believing that the American Government was beyond corruption. Careful... I am not saying for certain that my government is corrupt enough to make 9/11 an inside job. I am saying that there is possiblity of corruption.

It's interesting to me that you seem to "know" and have the answers here: When did you become omniscient? Or perhaps you have some religious-like faith.

Again, let me be 100% clear: I do not know what to believe.

videowilliams's picture

Keeping An Open Mind

Dawn says: "I used to be indecisive, but now I'm not so sure..." 

OK, so that's my smartass answer. I hear you, of course. And you're entitled to your opinion, even if that opinion is no opinion at all. There is wisdom in the concept: "a conclusion is something that's reached when a person gets tired of thinking." 

But in order to make policy and act, we do eventually have to make judgements one way or the other. Moral equivalence- the idea that there's no absolute right or wrong, there is no good side or bad side, all opinions are equally valid- isn't one that appeals to me much. I think there's a danger you can be so open-minded that your brains fall out.

Nevertheless I'm glad you're willing to argue about it!

DawnAkemi's picture

When in doubt, throw out an ad hominim...

I do have "of the moment" opinions when decision making is required, with the best information I have at the time. These opinions are subject to ongoing review when new information comes my way.

I don't see any point to holding fast to an opinion throughout one's life simply to feel safe and secure in my ideals. Has that worked for you, Dave? I believe that more adaptability is required in life.

There is no fear on my part that my brains will fall out.

videowilliams's picture

It's A Guy Thing

I enjoy making you mad, Dawn.

And I think you'll find it's spelled "ad hominem."

DawnAkemi's picture

It's a Small Penis Thing

Enjoy your superior spelling (and perverse nature), Dave, and I will enjoy my superior intellect!

Okay... now we're even on the ad hominems...

Wink

BTW... you didn't address what I say at all or my questions. You just side-stepped it with an inaccurate categorization of my point of view as "moral equivalence".

And then side stepped it again by correcting my spelling.

Way to avoid deeper, more penetrating, thinking and analysis.

videowilliams's picture

Analyse This

Okay, here's my deep and penetrating analysis:

YOU'RE WRONG!

DawnAkemi's picture

Still avoiding the issues...

You are even avoiding the issues with Marco.
 
I am trying very hard to have a nice discussion here about critical thinking (never mind the specifics of 9/11 and conspiracy thinking) and all you can do is hide behind your labeling and insults.  

If you need to box me (and him) into being "wrong"... well, that's fine.  I don't need to bash my head against a wall.

 

 

Ezequiel's picture

CHECK THIS OUT

 Was it a conspiracy? I don't know. Does occam's razor apply? Certainly, and one of them is, don't wear rainbow ties. If a joker wants to be colorful, it could only mean one thing--he's a clown! haha 

Smile Williams, it's a joke!

I don't want to get into this. I just thought I'd come in here to make a stupid remark and see what all the noise is about! ;)

Hope everyone is doing well. Fart if you have to.

haha

 

EZEQUIEL

videowilliams's picture

A Monkey On My Back

Hi EZ-

Sorry about the rainbow tie- the costume shop was out of pirate outfits. I like the monkey on your shoulder... is he the one who does your typing?

Ezequiel's picture

haha

I love picking on guys like you! And yes, that monkey makes me money!  All I need is that tie now! money in the bank at the local circus!

Don't get mad dude. They're just jokes!

You get all mad too easy. Do you need a hug? Alright everyone, group hug, just don't wrinkle his tie!

EZEQUIEL

videowilliams's picture

The Truth Is Out There

Dawn, I hate to think of you bashing that pretty (and highly intelligent) head against a wall. I'm just not sure what you're driving at, which is the reason that my answers have been glib. Are you saying we should be "open to the possibility" 9/11 was an inside job? My only serious answer can be: go search the evidence for yourself. Seems unambiguous to me.

The events of 9/11 aren't some deep unknowable mystery, as much as some would like to try and make them so. The truth IS out there. It's just not pretty or comfortable. 

The world has changed since the Cold War, and we who live in the western world need to face the fact we do have enemies out there. It's not always the Devil You Know- the corrupt government, the rapacious corporation- it includes some, like Al Qaeda, who are difficult to even understand, let alone track down. But they can't be wished away by any amount of critical thinking. They need to be faced. And farting around with frivolous, false conspiracy theories is at best a waste of time, at worst a copout.

If you want to talk Big Picture, here's the Pentagon's New Map, dividing the world into the Functioning Core and the Non-Integrated Gap. (Yes, they do need to come up with catchier names!) If you want to know where the trouble is going to be in years to come, just watch the dividing line between. (Those clusters of dots show US military responses since 1990.)

PentagonMap

...That's my best effort at an intelligent response. Enough for you, Dawn?

DawnAkemi's picture

Critical Thinking

First off, I'd like to say that if you are not sure what I am saying, then it helps to ask for clarification rather than tossing out glib remarks which serve to (possibly) deepen misunderstanding: What do you mean by this or that, Dawn? Could you expand further on what you are saying? etc.

Second, I agree that the "truth" is not pretty or comfortable, whether one believes in conspiracy theories or is towing the company line.

Dave says: "The world has changed since the Cold War, and we who live in the western world need to face the fact we do have enemies out there."

I agree, sorta... things have changed in the sense that the world is shrinking because of technological advances. But, we (Americans) have always had enemies throughout our short history (they were once the Native Americans, the British, the Spanish, the Mexicans, etc.)... war and fighting for resources, power, and control are indelible to the history of mankind. Wish it were different.

"Critical thinking" wishes away nothing... I'm not even sure what you mean by that statement: Can you elaborate?

I am gonna let you and Marco duel it out with the 9/11 "facts" because they don't interest me as much as the discernment of what is underneath why you believe what you believe. Afterall, both of you will be able to find evidence to support what you believe is factual, all of it coming to you through filters and third party (or fourth or fifth party) sources. Nobody here at KarmaCritic can prove factually with incontrovertible evidence, one way or the other, what went down with 9/11. "Truth" is relative and ultimately one will believe what one wants to believe is the "truth".

So... Why do we believe what we believe? I think there are a number of factors: education, cultural bias, religious maxims, personal experiences, emotional intelligence, I could go on... these factors color personal world view. The point being that our belief structures do not exist in a vacuum. Belief structures are not divinely imparted. Nor are they sacrosanct. As one learns and grows, hopefully one's world view and belief systems adjust accordingly.

I think it's interesting that you buy into the official story so wholeheartedly. It presents a belief structure that does not question the dogma presented by the circumstances in which you exist. This kind of unquestioning belief system is what led the Jews to follow the Nazis in your blogged example above. You have told me you adapt slowly... I am wondering if this is true with how you think and believe.

This is the kind of "truth" that I believe needs to be faced:  Holding onto one's conditioned beliefs, come hell or high water, is one of the reasons there is war in the world.

dan-gadberry's picture

Critical

Critical, but Stable! ;)

DawnAkemi's picture

Dan's Sound Bites

Is that a statement on American politics, Dan?

Wink

MelioraEric's picture

WHAT THE -- ???

So, let me get this straight. There are people out there who believe no one flew a plane in to the WTC?

The passengers of flight 93 told us what happened on their flight via cell phones.  This stuff is recorded.

I could maybe buy someone theorizing that our Government turned the situation around to their advantage, but that they planned it? And that we had Federal workers hijack the planes, blow up our own buildings and kill our own people? That I have a hard time believing, in light of the evidence.

Not to say our Government isn't corrupt. It's been corrupt for many years before 2001. Personally, I think our government did one of two things. Either 1) It knew the terrorists were going to attack, let it happen to justify a war and disavow any knowledge that it was going to happen. Or 2) It had no idea this was going to happen, or ignored the warnings because they didn't believe it could happen -- and therefore the Government is inept and weak.

Either way, the Government needs a good weeding of the chaff. But, for anyone to think the entire event was pre-planned by Bush and the rest of the Government. Not a chance. The only way for something like that to be "true" is for those who believe in things like the Illuminati.

I'm not one to disavow the existence of conspiracies, but it does bother me about all of the people who look for a conspiracy behind every tradgedy, just becuase they don't like the idea of personal responsibility. These people are paranoid and fearful of everything.

Oh no, I heard a loud bang outside my house. Everyone says it was a car backfiring, but I just can't believe that. Someone had to be assassinated.

A hurricane ripped though New Orleans, that had to be pre-planned by our Government too. Didn't you know? They have a weather making machine and conjured up that hurricane. They sent it to New Orleans!!!

There are fires in Southern California. We must blame our Government for that too. I bet they sent the CIA in to secretly set that entire area ablaze.

Two planes flew in to the World Trade Center. But those videos were doctored. They weren't really planes. The buildings had bombs in them and those were blown. There was never a plane in that area that day.

They didn't really kill Saddam. That video was doctored too. The US now employs Saddam to help them create a sequel to 9/11. They're going to call it 9/12 and this time, they are going to drop 29 nuclear bombs on 29 different major US cities, just like the TV show, "Jericho" is trying to warn us about. Man, TV and movies...they've always got it right. You want proof that there is a conspiracy. Watch this movie. Watch that TV show. Because all the accounts of people who were there, inside the building, and other people who were effected by the actual hijackings...their stories don't count. They were all in on it. 3,000 people died, but we think it's all a smokescreen.

______________________________________________________________________ 

How we dishonor the dead. Truthfully, this is no way to live.  Some things happen, the way they happen.

Hollywood isn't some secret organization trying to eliminate Christians.

Hurricane Katrina was not planned by the US Government.

9/11 may have been manipulated by the Government, but certainly not planned. Too many eyewitness accounts that can attest to terrorism, that actually died that day.

And, Jimmy Hoffa. He's dead.

Elvis is dead.

Andy Kauffman is dead.

JFK -- now that may have been a coverup.

Pearl Harbor -- that has finally been proven that our President let it happen, to be able to enter WWII.

The earth is really round, not flat. Even though the Flat Earth Society thinks we've been told a lie.

Bobby Kennedy. He really did die in a plane crash, that he was piloting. No one shot him down.

Ted Kennedy....well, some wish their might be a conspiracy happen in his life.

The Oklahoma Bombings...that really was Ted that did those.

Waco, Texas...those people really were nuts, even though our FBI had bad tactical movement there.

Heaven's Gate -- hmmm...no! Hale Bop really didn't whisk them away to the great beyond.

Anyway, I think I've made my point. I won't be watching Zeitgeist, as some things I just don't grace with my attention. I'm certainly no supporter of Bush in anything he has done, but I won't dishonor those who died that day by even entertaining the idea that their deaths were a joke.

FableForge's picture

Weather :)

MelioraEric wrote:

There are people out there who believe no one flew a plane in to the WTC?

No...

Heh.

:)

Oh man. [shaking head]

MelioraEric wrote:

I won't be watching Zeitgeist, as some things I just don't grace with my attention.

Well, thats the end of the conversation then, isnt it :) Lets chat about the weather sometime, or about the RedSox, or Paris Hilton.

MelioraEric wrote:

...but I won't dishonor those who died that day by even entertaining the idea that their deaths were a joke.

E pur si muove!

MelioraEric's picture

High of 45. Low of 25. Chance of snow - 40%.

It's cold here. But, partly sunny, with a chance of snow.

I'd take Miami over here, any day. :-P

"And, yet it may move", but I still think those people deserve the right to rest in peace, instead of turning their deaths in to collateral for political gain, by anyone - albeit Bush, Kerry, Obama, Clinton or any Johnny Q. Public.

If anyone should be held accountable for 9/11, it'd be Bin Laden...but I guess no one seems to care about him anymore. Since, we don't have Bin Laden on a plate, we'd rather go after our own, so that we can at least hold someone up as a scapegoat.
FableForge's picture

Definition of Faith

MelioraEric wrote:

If anyone should be held accountable for 9/11, it'd be Bin Laden...but
I guess no one seems to care about him anymore. Since, we don't have
Bin Laden on a plate, we'd rather go after our own, so that we can at
least hold someone up as a scapegoat

Eric, this is right on point on what Zeitgeist talks about, you've made a relevant, precise and well-aimed critique at the very bullseye, nay, at the heart of