9/11 DEBUNKERS
Why 'Debunkers' Help The 911 Truth Movement
By Douglas Herman
Exclusive to www.Rense.com
10-11-6
Two kinds of 9-11 truth deniers (debunkers) exist today: Those who deny our
government has the expertise to carry out the 9-11 attack, and those who deny
our government is diabolical enough to do it. Both are sadly mistaken.
If you present them with the many suspicious anomalies of 9-11, they demand
your proof. If you present them with proof, they deny it with scarcely a glance.
If you mention the scientific laws that were broken on 9-11, they claim you are
no authority. If you quote an authority, they claim he is no expert in that
particular field.
All truths passes through three stages, said the philosopher Schopenauer.
First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is
accepted as being self-evident.
Debunkers, those people who adamantly deny government involvement
in the 9-11 conspiracy, who adamantly deny such a conspiracy could even
occur, are stuck in the first and second stages.
At first it may seem we are battling an insurgency here. The debunkers
are strong, well-organized and well-funded. They are smart. They have
strength and numbers; cunning and clever intelligence. They use persuasive
power and intimidation, propaganda and a network of allies.
Their strongest attribute is their sincere belief that to "debunk" your
every argument--no matter how sound--is the purest form of patriotism.
Indeed, Saul of Tarsus believed he was a pure, patriotic warrior for God,
persecuting the early Christian believers. That is, until he reportedly got
knocked off his horse and changed his name to Paul and became a
believer himself.
The saddest part of our struggle with this insurgency is that many of
these debunkers appear to be honest but misguided patriots. They
range from diehard conservatives, believers in the US government's
version of 9-11 events, to the so-called, "Left Gatekeepers," the strident
liberal critics of an increasingly dictatorial state who nonetheless
believe every key component of the 9-11 attack as told to them by their
government. The exact same government they loudly criticize for lying
to them in every other facet.
Debunkers, not content in their core beliefs, slam those of us who
question any facet of 9-11. They deride us as conspiracy nuts and
loonies. Or worse, desecraters and traitors.
We in the 9-11 Truth Movement are battling a desperate insurgency.
Desperation is the key word; time is not on their side. They recognize
the rising danger of a well-informed American citizenry. From Leftists
Alexander Cockburn and Noam Chomsky to Neocon apologists and
9-11 debunkers Tucker Carlson, Hannity & Colmes and Condi Rice,
they have shouldered the government's propaganda burden to suppress
the rising tide of information and clarion calls that clamor for a true
investigation of 9-11 events.
Recently a new columnist at Counterpunch.com attempted to
debunk and defuse the many 9-11 inconsistencies in a feature, In
Defense of Conspiracy: 9/11, in Theory and in Fact. Diana Johnstone
wrote, "Who profits from the crime?"---but without really
acknowledging any of those rich and powerful people who profitted
immensely. I emailed her and she responded about a week later.
"Dear readers and critics, Thank you for your comments on my 9/11
piece...Please understand that I have been snowed under by
responses -- over 50,000 words, plus attachments and web
site references, still coming."
Ouch. The surging tidal wave of the 9-11 truth movement had
engulfed another debunker.
But just why are debunkers good for the 9-11 truth movement?
Because they serve a great purpose. And as mentioned, many
of them are true patriots, good, conscientious citizens. They want
what we want. Good honest government.
Perhaps the greatest benefit of so-called debunkers is that they
prod, goad, ridicule and agitate. They challenge us--and who
doesn't like a good challenge?---to get our 9-11 facts straight. Prodding
us to dig deeper and sift the truth from the fiction. Goading us to
devise more convincing arguments. Ridiculing us for embracing
whatever rumor we may have heard as scientific fact. Agitating us to
such a degree we stubbornly redouble our efforts.
I have one such agitator. His name is Jan Burton. I had considered
spamming Jan but what he writes refreshes me, challenges me. And
much of what he writes has a great deal of hard truth based on facts.
Jan is no troll, intent on simple provocation. He dares me to call those
involved. He prods me. He agitates and exasperates me. If every one of
us in the so-called Truth Movenment did as much prodding and goading
of our local newspaper editor, US Representative or local structural
engineer, would we or would we not eventually wear them down?
As Paul wore down his critics.
I believe--and I may be wrong--that behind most 9-11 deniers, most
debunkers are good and decent people. Should half of them ever became
convinced 9-11 was an inside job, they would become as forceful as Paul.
A more powerful force for change than most of us have been.
Footnote: In my last column, "OKC & WTC: The Case For Controlled
Demolition," I noted the many suspicious fires that ignited in WTC-7
(but did not ignite in the other two buildings alongside WTC-7). The
FEMA report at www.WTC7.net is an interesting read. The report
emphasizes the fires on floors 11-13, the Security & Exchange offices.
Directly beneath the SEC were two floors of Secret Service offices
(also on fire). FEMA deduces: "It is likely that fires started as a result
of debris from the collapse of WTC 1." Yet no fires were reported below
the seventh floor and NIST reported no debris had struck the roof. To
conclude that the fires may have been purposely set--ARSON-- does
not appear to dawn on these government detectives. NIST also notes
that one of the first fires reported occured---where else---at mayor
Giuliani's command post on the 23rd floor, the OEM, Office of Emergency
Management. I suspect certain operatives were torching the building--as
any GOOD detective or insurance investigater would have concluded.
By Douglas Herman
Exclusive to www.Rense.com
10-11-6
Two kinds of 9-11 truth deniers (debunkers) exist today: Those who deny our
government has the expertise to carry out the 9-11 attack, and those who deny
our government is diabolical enough to do it. Both are sadly mistaken.
If you present them with the many suspicious anomalies of 9-11, they demand
your proof. If you present them with proof, they deny it with scarcely a glance.
If you mention the scientific laws that were broken on 9-11, they claim you are
no authority. If you quote an authority, they claim he is no expert in that
particular field.
All truths passes through three stages, said the philosopher Schopenauer.
First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is
accepted as being self-evident.
Debunkers, those people who adamantly deny government involvement
in the 9-11 conspiracy, who adamantly deny such a conspiracy could even
occur, are stuck in the first and second stages.
At first it may seem we are battling an insurgency here. The debunkers
are strong, well-organized and well-funded. They are smart. They have
strength and numbers; cunning and clever intelligence. They use persuasive
power and intimidation, propaganda and a network of allies.
Their strongest attribute is their sincere belief that to "debunk" your
every argument--no matter how sound--is the purest form of patriotism.
Indeed, Saul of Tarsus believed he was a pure, patriotic warrior for God,
persecuting the early Christian believers. That is, until he reportedly got
knocked off his horse and changed his name to Paul and became a
believer himself.
The saddest part of our struggle with this insurgency is that many of
these debunkers appear to be honest but misguided patriots. They
range from diehard conservatives, believers in the US government's
version of 9-11 events, to the so-called, "Left Gatekeepers," the strident
liberal critics of an increasingly dictatorial state who nonetheless
believe every key component of the 9-11 attack as told to them by their
government. The exact same government they loudly criticize for lying
to them in every other facet.
Debunkers, not content in their core beliefs, slam those of us who
question any facet of 9-11. They deride us as conspiracy nuts and
loonies. Or worse, desecraters and traitors.
We in the 9-11 Truth Movement are battling a desperate insurgency.
Desperation is the key word; time is not on their side. They recognize
the rising danger of a well-informed American citizenry. From Leftists
Alexander Cockburn and Noam Chomsky to Neocon apologists and
9-11 debunkers Tucker Carlson, Hannity & Colmes and Condi Rice,
they have shouldered the government's propaganda burden to suppress
the rising tide of information and clarion calls that clamor for a true
investigation of 9-11 events.
Recently a new columnist at Counterpunch.com attempted to
debunk and defuse the many 9-11 inconsistencies in a feature, In
Defense of Conspiracy: 9/11, in Theory and in Fact. Diana Johnstone
wrote, "Who profits from the crime?"---but without really
acknowledging any of those rich and powerful people who profitted
immensely. I emailed her and she responded about a week later.
"Dear readers and critics, Thank you for your comments on my 9/11
piece...Please understand that I have been snowed under by
responses -- over 50,000 words, plus attachments and web
site references, still coming."
Ouch. The surging tidal wave of the 9-11 truth movement had
engulfed another debunker.
But just why are debunkers good for the 9-11 truth movement?
Because they serve a great purpose. And as mentioned, many
of them are true patriots, good, conscientious citizens. They want
what we want. Good honest government.
Perhaps the greatest benefit of so-called debunkers is that they
prod, goad, ridicule and agitate. They challenge us--and who
doesn't like a good challenge?---to get our 9-11 facts straight. Prodding
us to dig deeper and sift the truth from the fiction. Goading us to
devise more convincing arguments. Ridiculing us for embracing
whatever rumor we may have heard as scientific fact. Agitating us to
such a degree we stubbornly redouble our efforts.
I have one such agitator. His name is Jan Burton. I had considered
spamming Jan but what he writes refreshes me, challenges me. And
much of what he writes has a great deal of hard truth based on facts.
Jan is no troll, intent on simple provocation. He dares me to call those
involved. He prods me. He agitates and exasperates me. If every one of
us in the so-called Truth Movenment did as much prodding and goading
of our local newspaper editor, US Representative or local structural
engineer, would we or would we not eventually wear them down?
As Paul wore down his critics.
I believe--and I may be wrong--that behind most 9-11 deniers, most
debunkers are good and decent people. Should half of them ever became
convinced 9-11 was an inside job, they would become as forceful as Paul.
A more powerful force for change than most of us have been.
Footnote: In my last column, "OKC & WTC: The Case For Controlled
Demolition," I noted the many suspicious fires that ignited in WTC-7
(but did not ignite in the other two buildings alongside WTC-7). The
FEMA report at www.WTC7.net is an interesting read. The report
emphasizes the fires on floors 11-13, the Security & Exchange offices.
Directly beneath the SEC were two floors of Secret Service offices
(also on fire). FEMA deduces: "It is likely that fires started as a result
of debris from the collapse of WTC 1." Yet no fires were reported below
the seventh floor and NIST reported no debris had struck the roof. To
conclude that the fires may have been purposely set--ARSON-- does
not appear to dawn on these government detectives. NIST also notes
that one of the first fires reported occured---where else---at mayor
Giuliani's command post on the 23rd floor, the OEM, Office of Emergency
Management. I suspect certain operatives were torching the building--as
any GOOD detective or insurance investigater would have concluded.
posted by BLAIR2BE at 1:34 PM
1 Comments:
One simple thing I'd like to point out to you. When all those people of good conscience raise these concerns about 9/11, looking for clues and signs that the President or whoever was actually behind the disaster it seriously distracts the media and everyone else for the much more likely and plausible explanation. It gives Bush and company a target to point to and ridicule meanwhile avoiding the most obvious questions. If you don't know what I mean, stop and ask yourself, when did the US Air Force ever allow a commercial jet or any jet to fly so close to Manhattan? And not only one jet but two within about twenty minutes of each other. And if that doesn't convince Americans that the president and his goons need to be seriously grilled then ask when has any threat been allowed to even approach the Pentagon? Of course, the answer is never and the real question is why then? You may want to check out:
http://aseasonofrain.blogspot.com/2006/10/autumn-in-america.html
Post a Comment
<< Home