Reply #50: You are the one [View All]

[Amused Musings]

who dismissed them as "shaggy haired strangers" who could not possibly have been capable of pulling off the attack. Yeah its true that race is a social construct, and it is indeed illogical to think in those terms, but people apparently still do. Not that your description was technically racist, but it does have certain undertones. Although I find Ward Churchill pretty vile, he makes a good point about racism and how it relates to 9/11. You also misrepresent my argument by accusing me of believing anything the government tells me about 9/11. Are they hiding things? Of course, I am not surprised by this and the government has had credibility problems since the dawn of history. But the alternative, that 9/11 was engineered by our government in whatever way, is even less credible (less credible than the government, thats a pretty funny phrase). At least the official story generally makes sense when you take a step back. The conspiracist, pardon the cliche, cannot see the forest for the trees. That is what Cockburn is arguing when he describes his experience with criminal trials.

And your attempt to throw my argument back in my face (ie that I am trying to read your mind so I must be the one engaging in god play) only reinforces my point. 9/11, to the conspiracist, can mean anything or nothing. You might believe in MIHOP or LIHOP or any other clever acronyms. It is all essentially unfalsifiable because nobody knows where the goal posts are and they change depending on the argument. Like religiona nd communism, all contradictory evidence is digested into the 9/11 conspiracy world view and viewed as cover up or plants.

Lets say there is another full investigation and it turns out that none of the alternative theories turn out to be true. It would not matter, because one can always argue that there was a cover up. And so it goes on, and on, and on...