The following is a response to a comment made about the earlier article, "The Government Perpetrated 9/11 Attacks? BS". My inability to edit comments has led me to creating a separate post regarding the issue.
The pages provided to support my claims comes from the site of the magazine Popular Mechanics. This is a magazine owned by the privately owned Hearst Corporation, and thus has no ostensible connections to the U.S. government.
In addition, a look at the sources used by the magazine shows that the government was indeed rarely asked for explanations--thus issues of whether or not the government can be trusted are not really appropriate to use when trying to argue with this site. For example, issues such as the manner of the collapse of the Twin Towers and the question of what hit the Pentagon were not resolved by the article through the government, but rather independent organizations.
There is plenty of other arguments countering conspiracies ignored by the still overwhelming information provided in the article: if indeed there was a massive cover-up, it's almost ridiculous to believe that every one of thousands of people would cooperate and not say a word. Someone's conscience would have been activated by now. But the article uses evidence, not conjecture, and thus still overwhelms any conspiracy theorist's ideas.
And again, personal insults against those who may be sympathetic to conspiracy theorists, or may be such theorists themselves, were driven by those who expressed obvious ignorance on an Internet forum. These were people who merely posted a link to someone else's reasoning and then insulted those who disagreed.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
First, you have to understand that not all conspiracy theorists are on the same page. One sect may express one view but another sect may not necessarily agree with them. Thus, to say all the conspiracy theories are nixed simply because one of the theories was debunked is just incorrect. Popular Mechanics may be correct, but it still does not explain the behavior of the government as well as the inconsistencies in their stories.
I had an incredible amount of opposition to your statement below and many others will as well:
"There is plenty of other arguments countering conspiracies ignored by the still overwhelming information provided in the article: if indeed there was a massive cover-up, it's almost ridiculous to believe that every one of thousands of people would cooperate and not say a word. Someone's conscience would have been activated by now. But the article uses evidence, not conjecture, and thus still overwhelms any conspiracy theorist's ideas."
What you just stated is, as you even said, conjecture, not validated by any evidence whatsoever. First off, to make the statement above, you would have to assume that the nature of the U.S. government's involvement in the 9/11 attacks was direct. However, as I stated earlier, there are various theories not all of which exist together on the same plane. And not all the theories state that the government's involvement was direct, much of it says it was indirect. Therefore, if the involvement was indirect, there is no reason to expect anybody's conscience to kick in.
Now, had the involvement been direct, it is also conjecture to ever assume that someone's conscience would've been activated. Remember, we are all part of the same species that produced people like Charles Manson, Osama bin Laden, Scott Peterson, etc. Therefore, it is not at all irrational to assume that consciences would not arise. This becomes even more likely should those involved have a major stake in the events, whether its threat to their life or family, or anything else.
That paragraph did nothing to prove my point and I admit it was rather pointless and should not have been included.
I think the beef we have here is that this post and the one about "BS" pertain to a specific viewpoint, that the government was directly implicated in the attacks. You have in mind other theories that indicate indirect involvement, and thus the article I provided does not answer the concerns you mention.
Post a Comment