Starting this as a data-dump for the best arguments against commonly-raised objections to "9/11 truth".
http://www.democraticunderground.com/di ... _id=175914
JackRiddler (1000+ posts) Sun Sep-23-07 02:51 PM
Edited on Sun Sep-23-07 03:49 PM by JackRiddler
1) There is a 9/11 cover-up. The official investigations have systematically excluded and distorted known evidence that is relevant and salient to an understanding of the events, origins, context and aftermath of September 11th. The 9/11 Commission was obviously compromised in its personnel with outrageous conflicts of interest. It openly adopted a mission of whitewash. Its investigation revealed an agenda through the final report’s exclusion of facts and witness testimonies heard by the Commission. The Report text itself can be shown to be deliberately false on enough key points that it fails to merit trust, and as a whole earns rejection as a serious or truthful account of September 11th.
1a) Point 1 in itself is sufficient cause for citizens to demand new, uncompromised investigation and full truth disclosure around the September 11th events, given the overarching importance of these events as a trigger and justification for policies and actions in the United States and around the world. Furthermore, the known conduct of the official investigations constitutes probable cause for criminal investigation of fraud and obstruction of justice after the fact.
2) The Islamist terror networks associated with the figure of Bin Ladin do exist, although their reach and power has been wildly exaggerated by “War on Terror” propagandists; but they are largely the intended product of U.S. covert policies stretching back for decades. The cases of Ali Mohamed and Emad Salem are not exceptional but paradigmatic of the link. Those names and this thesis were unspeakable in The 9/11 Commission Report, which also systematically ignored the sponsorship and financing of Al Qaeda, the Taliban and, in fact, the alleged hijackers through the Pakistani ISI, a CIA proxy.
2a) As it has been conducted and presented, the “War on Terror” is a fear scam.
3) The cumulative evidence excluded from serious reporting and consideration in the official investigations and the U.S. corporate media points to actionable, specific foreknowledge of Sept. 11 event details on the part of U.S. and foreign-ally officials; systematic suppression of law enforcement efforts to expose the alleged hijackers or otherwise prevent the attacks; participation in and orchestration of the attacks by elements within the U.S. covert policy and military apparatus; and direct facilitation of the attacks by officials in the U.S. administration in the form of a strategic group failure to act as events unfolded that in its cumulative nature suggests deliberation. (This is what I mean by the idea that 9/11 was an inside job.)
4) There exists probable cause for a criminal investigation by grand jury to issue subpoenas and explore indictments relating to point 3. All demands for a complete rendering of what happened on September 11th are ludicrous insofar as they precede such an investigation and are thus based on insufficient knowledge.
5) If point 3 is true, it would not be an unprecedented event in the history of the United States or of other states and imperial powers. False-flag attacks; false casus-belli provocations; covert operations and psychological operations of the intelligence services directed against own nationals; mass murder and the acceptance of mass casualties at home as well as (in even greater numbers) abroad; and ambitious and seemingly reckless plans for imperial venture and global domination are all longstanding and systemic elements of the U.S. political, deep-political and parapolitical environments, stretching back through more than a century.
6) In American culture, “conspiracy theory” is a term of attack employed selectively against ideas that contradict official stories of the government or establishment, designed to produce a conditioned response of rejection and association of persons so labeled with madness, delusion, and personal wretchedness. Use of this term does not constitute an argument and usually indicates prejudice on the speaker’s part.
7) The 9/11 truth movement is the subject of organized disruption by a number of its professed exponents. A closely linked network of actors have cooperated for years, regardless of their respective motivations, in
a) advocating a changing series of conflicting and increasingly outlandish, patently false and highly specific ideas regarding peripheral details of 9/11 that specifically create psychological disgust, especially in key groups like New Yorkers, DC residents, or the families of September 11th victims; and
b) well-poisoning, insults, hectoring and preemptive “snitch-jacketing” (e.g., accusations of COINTELPRO) directed at movement exponents who do not immediately adopt and promote these outlandish and patently false ideas.
8 ) The primary exponents of “debunking 9/11 conspiracy theories”
a) systematically ignore or trivialize the importance of point 1;
b) focus primarily on attacking the outlandish ideas referred to in point 7, often identifying their exponents as the true and only leaders of the “9/11 truth movement”;
c) engage in smear-by-association by identifying all other 9/11 truth advocates with the outlandish ideas, often engaging in false attributions and insinuations;
d) exist in a largely symbiotic relationship with the exponents of internal disruption specified in 7;
e) tend to prefer to reduce 9/11 skepticism entirely to the question of whether the Twin Towers and Building 7 were brought down by explosives, or else to whether the Pentagon was hit by something other than a Boeing 757.
9) The question of whether the Twin Towers and Building 7 were brought down by explosives remains interesting but unresolved. This a legitimate subject for debate and should also be considered by an unhindered investigation; but the argument is not a prerequisite for 9/11 skepticism. Proof of demolition would tend to demonstrate 9/11 was an inside job, but 9/11 can be an inside job without demolition.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/di ... _id=175914