in response to: 9/11 in Reverse: A Review of the Watchmen - The Indypendent
 in response to: 9/11 in Reverse: A Review of the Watchmen - The Indypendent
Real Truther Says:
March 30th, 2009 at 9:38 am
It’s pretty clear that “independent media†don’t necessarily make good media, or media for the people. If good people can create an alternative forum for the dissemination of information, who is to say that bad people can’t do the exact same thing? Oh sure, that sounds “conspiratorialâ€, but then the stories of Enron or of Worldcom or Watergate or “Iraq WMD†(need I go on?) all sound conspiratorial because the sad truth is that conspiracies happen all the time.
Indeed, the story allegedly told by Khalid Sheikh Mohammed to his CIA interrogators in Guantanamo is one long conspiracy fable that somehow made it into the 9/11 Commission Report as purported fact. This comic book tale of the evil moozlimsss(!) conspiring to attack America because of their hatred for our freedom is tellingly simplistic and yet somehow those of us who will not accept it on faith alone, who insist on seeing real evidence are the ones accused of succumbing to a knee-jerk reflexive desire for simple definitions of good and evil.
We who question are routinely told that “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence†all the while being told not to question the extraordinary events of 9/11–the unprecedented explosive disintegration of three steel framed high rise buildings even though there is lacking in the official explanations any credible evidence for this being a chance result of two plane imapcts, let alone *extraordinary* evidence of this. Indeed, the NIST admits that it did not conduct a single test on the debris from the world trade center for traces of explosives or incendiaries like thermite even though these are prescribed in fire investigation manuals as essential to rule out arson. Why on earth not? Are they so certain that “al Qaeda†itself could not have planted explosives in these buildings? Furthermore, responsible scientists and building professionals such as the over 600 members of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth HAVE provided extraordinary evidence for the use of explosives that day (see ae911truth.org) but to date the existence of this remarkable organization is ignored by both “mainstream†and “alternative†media outlets. Why?
Doesn’t the fact that over 100 first responders, i.e. police and firefighters on the scene that day, reported in the oral histories collected by the FDNY just weeks after the events that they witnessed explosions all over the towers (including far from the plane impact zones) make the NIST’s failure to test for explosive traces seem, if not suspicious, at least incompetent? Why do the mainstream and alternative media ignore the testimony of these individuals who were in the best position to witness the events? And yet in the absence of any of the abundant evidence that should exist for AA77 hitting the Pentagon–surveillance video, traceable plane parts, etc.–we are told to be satisfied of the truth of that particular claim on the say so of a handful of contradictory eyewitness accounts? Why the double standard here? Don’t extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence?
And finally, why associate all truthseekers with the likes of Alex Jones, a bombastic entertainer and profiteer responsible for “the Obama deceptionâ€, instead of with the likes of Prof. David Ray Griffin who has published over 6 critically acclaimed books (see esp. The New Pearl Harbor Revisited and Debunking 9/11 Debunking) on the subject of the deceptions surrounding 9/11? Could it be that people like Alex Jones are putting into practice Nietzsche’s dictum that “the most perfidious way to harm a cause consists of defending it deliberately with faulty arguments?†Surely not, since that sounds like a conspiracy theory, right? Nietzsche should have realized that human beings are just too good and decent to deceive each other in that manner, right?
- gretavo's blog
- Login to post comments
The comments seem spot on.
The comments seem spot on. I added my own.
I know huh?
It's a great sign--we really are gaining strength in numbers!
Powers couldn't take the heat
He deleted all the comments except for the "you're an idiot" one. I saw last night that he responded to juan's with a "You're right. The CIA paid me to write this article. My bad." Now, all vanished. Kind of like when you try to comment on Jon Gold's shit videos on youtube.
now now, L-horse
Just because they've put all the comments in the moderation queue making them visible only to those who posted them (back a couple of days when there WAS no moderation queue,) *except* for the one that makes people who disagree with Powers look like nimrods, doesn't make it all a conspiracy. I mean, you almost make it sound like somehow the heroes of independent grassroots media are, like, worse than the mainstream media which actually often allow unmoderated comments and only delete inappropriate content. Why DO you hate America and its grassroots so much?
One Response to “9/11 in Reverse: A Review of the Watchmenâ€
YouSuck Says:
March 30th, 2009 at 1:02 am
You are an idiot.
Real Truther Says: Your comment is awaiting moderation.
March 30th, 2009 at 9:38 am
It’s pretty clear that “independent media†don’t necessarily make good media, or media for the people. If good people can create an alternative forum for the dissemination of information, who is to say that bad people can’t do the exact same thing? Oh sure, that sounds “conspiratorialâ€, but then the stories of Enron or of Worldcom or Watergate or “Iraq WMD†(need I go on?) all sound conspiratorial because the sad truth is that conspiracies happen all the time.
Indeed, the story allegedly told by Khalid Sheikh Mohammed to his CIA interrogators in Guantanamo is one long conspiracy fable that somehow made it into the 9/11 Commission Report as purported fact. This comic book tale of the evil moozlimsss(!) conspiring to attack America because of their hatred for our freedom is tellingly simplistic and yet somehow those of us who will not accept it on faith alone, who insist on seeing real evidence are the ones accused of succumbing to a knee-jerk reflexive desire for simple definitions of good and evil.
We who question are routinely told that “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence†all the while being told not to question the extraordinary events of 9/11–the unprecedented explosive disintegration of three steel framed high rise buildings even though there is lacking in the official explanations any credible evidence for this being a chance result of two plane imapcts, let alone *extraordinary* evidence of this. Indeed, the NIST admits that it did not conduct a single test on the debris from the world trade center for traces of explosives or incendiaries like thermite even though these are prescribed in fire investigation manuals as essential to rule out arson. Why on earth not? Are they so certain that “al Qaeda†itself could not have planted explosives in these buildings? Furthermore, responsible scientists and building professionals such as the over 600 members of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth HAVE provided extraordinary evidence for the use of explosives that day (see ae911truth.org) but to date the existence of this remarkable organization is ignored by both “mainstream†and “alternative†media outlets. Why?
Doesn’t the fact that over 100 first responders, i.e. police and firefighters on the scene that day, reported in the oral histories collected by the FDNY just weeks after the events that they witnessed explosions all over the towers (including far from the plane impact zones) make the NIST’s failure to test for explosive traces seem, if not suspicious, at least incompetent? Why do the mainstream and alternative media ignore the testimony of these individuals who were in the best position to witness the events? And yet in the absence of any of the abundant evidence that should exist for AA77 hitting the Pentagon–surveillance video, traceable plane parts, etc.–we are told to be satisfied of the truth of that particular claim on the say so of a handful of contradictory eyewitness accounts? Why the double standard here? Don’t extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence?
And finally, why associate all truthseekers with the likes of Alex Jones, a bombastic entertainer and profiteer responsible for “the Obama deceptionâ€, instead of with the likes of Prof. David Ray Griffin who has published over 6 critically acclaimed books (see esp. The New Pearl Harbor Revisited and Debunking 9/11 Debunking) on the subject of the deceptions surrounding 9/11? Could it be that people like Alex Jones are putting into practice Nietzsche’s dictum that “the most perfidious way to harm a cause consists of defending it deliberately with faulty arguments?†Surely not, since that sounds like a conspiracy theory, right? Nietzsche should have realized that human beings are just too good and decent to deceive each other in that manner, right?
LOL, this should happen all
LOL, this should happen all the time so the MSM and indy media enablers would stop peddling their ignorant opinions (and at times outright disinfo) on 9-11.
and now my comment is back...
and the "you're an idiot" comment is gone. Hmmmm...
typical psychobabble
here he takes the standard and tired line that-"conspiracy theorists are weak minded and need to find order out of chaos blah blah blah blah". This guy isnt trying very hard:
oh fuck, im using mozilla and it says i cant drop a link here. anyway, just scroll through Powers' older articles, you'll see which one im talking about.
speaking of LOL psychobabble
Huffington Post allows demand for 9-11 reinvestigation
That left gatekeeping website is finally softening up. Even though Arianna Huffington had previously said that they censor posts on 9-11 truth as a policy, this short blog demanding a reinvestigation was allowed to be posted recently. Maybe they are starting to get a conscience. Maybe they realize the consequences of being on the wrong team when the truth reaches everyone. Most comments are a-ok except for some lihop stuff.Â
Obama: Reopen the 9/11 Investigation -- Part 1
ok, looks pretty good, but let's see where they go with it...
If it's some kind of LIHOP limited hangout that will suck.
Check out the comments--great stuff, lots of demolition people, links to Architects and Engineers, etc. This is a very positive development! Thanks for catching this Juan!
linky to more comments
if you click on the link that says to be continued, you end up on an extension of the comments including a response by the author to one of her detractors.
boloboffin: An examination of the events that led up to 9/11 would indeed be welcome, and always will. I am saddened, however, to see the reasons that Ms. Rossi uses to call for the investigation. The comments show that this is quickly becoming the haven of many 9/11 conspiracy theorists, eagerly promoting their own websites full of silliness and deception.
I ask my fellow Democrats and progressives to look more closely at the kind of investigations that have already been done into many of these questions. Plenty has already been revealed, things the conspiracy theorists would not have you know.
For example, the identities of the hijackers are beyond question, Ms. Rossi. They left such a clear and unambiguous trail before boarding the planes, it's a scandal that they weren't discovered before then. Investigate why that was, but we know who the hijackers were.
The FDR information from 93 has been released and all systems were normal when the plane crashed. The only thing unusual about the plane was its speed, orientation, and trajectory.
The wargames were standard ones regularly scheduled for the time of year, and they contributed to the response time of the military (for what that was worth). In fact, the only major violations of procedure was to increase response time. Investigate why they came up with different stories before the NORAD tapes were used to find the truth, but why those planes couldn't be intercepted is beyond question.
Melissa Rossi - Huffpost Blogger: Hi,
To clarify: I'm not saying -- at all -- that the issues (or nonissues as the case may be) about flight 93, black boxes, etc are the best or only or most solid reasons to reopen the investigation on 9/11.
What I'm saying is the earlier investigation wasn't at all complete, a lot of questions weren't and still aren't answered, and that there were some apparent conflicts of interest via the committee itself -- ie executive director Philip Zelikow angling for a job before, and getting one afterwards. When the co-chairs say they were hampered and the commission was set up to fail -- as I note in part one -- I'm likely to think the investigation was indeed stymied. That alone is reason to reopen an investigation, being as this was the single most important event in recent American history. There are plenty of others, including simply set the record straight. Debunk the false information, and take a fresh look at what was presented before.
Very conservative, lihop friendly comment.
Actually Melissa Rossi doesn't have a great track record on 9/11
I actually got her book What Every American Should Know About Who's Really Running America a few years back and to the extent that it discussed 9/11 it was about blowback and foreknowledge, including the "explanation" of the Israeli spy ring as having been "tracking al Qaeda in the U.S."
The big question as our mounting pressure forces places like HuffPost to scramble to keep up in order to retain their credibility is whether what we are seeing is 1) an act of conscience driven by newfound courage or a calculation that exposing the truth is now safe or 2) the latest attempt at a limited hangout tp preserve the Islamofascist myth.
Knowing for certain whether it is 1) or 2) is not nearly as important as what many of the commenters on HuffPost are doing which is to use the opportunity to immediately, carefully, and consistently bring to light the kinds of evidence like the demolition of the WTC and the lack of credible evidence of genuine "hijackings by arab muslim terrorists" that are at odds with a LIHOP scenario. And yes, we should put the term LIHOP front and center because what worked in the movement will work in the mainstream--marginalizing as out of touch with the facts those who persist in assigning responsibility for 9/11 to "Bush/Cheney and al Qaeda" as a unit, since this is precisely the kind of framing that would seem to appeal most to the powers that be who are now "on Obama's side against terrorism".
All our work as real truthers has been with this goal in mind--to prevent the inevitable exposure of the truth from being taken off the rails into some bogus LIHOP-land of limited hangout and fresh new myths. *Our* time, in other other words, is coming!