What if....would there be a truth movement?
So today as I was sitting down, reading elements of the 9/11 commission report again (5th time for some areas of the report), I was doing some pondering, and this is the question that went through my mind...
If there was no invasion of Iraq, if the response for 9/11 was simply the invasion of Afghanistan, and nothing more (and some would say this is the case, that Iraq had nothing to do with Iraq), would there be a 9/11 truth movement now?
I think there might, but it would be a small group of paranoid zealots, as opposed to the present day larger group of paranoid zealots, wacky leftists professors, rebellious teens and college students, and many, many misled people.
So take it a step further. What if the towers remained standing that day, and subsequently WTC7 did not collapse, would there be a "truth" movement? I doubt it. I think the impetus, the catalyst if you will, for the entire movement, relies on the magnitude of the event, the horror of those skyscrapers coming down. The attacks still would have been devistating, and a response would have come...yes, but would it have been an invasion versus a surgical strike...who knows. The entire post here, of course, is speculation.
The subject is fascinating. For instance, what if the USA had won quickly in Iraq, set-up a govt, and there was no insurgency, would there have been a 9/11 movement? If so, would it have been as proliferative as it has now become (relatively speaking of course). What if only the towers were hit, no Pentagon or UA93 elements? Of course, one can only guess, only ponder, as we will never know...
If there was no invasion of Iraq, if the response for 9/11 was simply the invasion of Afghanistan, and nothing more (and some would say this is the case, that Iraq had nothing to do with Iraq), would there be a 9/11 truth movement now?
I think there might, but it would be a small group of paranoid zealots, as opposed to the present day larger group of paranoid zealots, wacky leftists professors, rebellious teens and college students, and many, many misled people.
So take it a step further. What if the towers remained standing that day, and subsequently WTC7 did not collapse, would there be a "truth" movement? I doubt it. I think the impetus, the catalyst if you will, for the entire movement, relies on the magnitude of the event, the horror of those skyscrapers coming down. The attacks still would have been devistating, and a response would have come...yes, but would it have been an invasion versus a surgical strike...who knows. The entire post here, of course, is speculation.
The subject is fascinating. For instance, what if the USA had won quickly in Iraq, set-up a govt, and there was no insurgency, would there have been a 9/11 movement? If so, would it have been as proliferative as it has now become (relatively speaking of course). What if only the towers were hit, no Pentagon or UA93 elements? Of course, one can only guess, only ponder, as we will never know...
posted by The Artistic Macrophage at 9:59 AM
25 Comments:
The point is, my friend, is that those 'what ifs' are exactly that; "what ifs". Because NONE of those 'what ifs' are present, the Truth Movement exists.
And actually, it's way beyond that. It has to do with cold hard facts and support from far smarter, more experience people than you and I put together.
This is real D. You've been mislead and your fighting on the wrong side... and I think deep down, you know that.
Regardless, as always, you are free to believe what you will. It is freedom we're all fighting for afterall.
lol.
Stephen;
Thanks for the reply. We'll have to agree to disagree. We both feel the other has been misled, so lets leave it at that.
TAM:)
He's not misled. He knows what he's doing and who he's helping.
He just doesn't care.
apollo;
I am not sure who you are referring to, as both Stephen and I have called each other misled.
If you are referring to me, I am not helping anyone intentionally. I am not a shill, or a govt agent, or any of that stupid shit. I am a person who has read a lot on the subject, and my conclusions are that the official story, for the most part is true. The parts that may or may not be accurate, from what I can see, are irrelevent to who carried out 9/11 and why.
You are entitled to your opinion, and thanks for posting.
TAM:)
As for the BS over at your Blog, you can twist my words anyway you wish. My comments to Pat stand. Blogs are an open forum, and yes you can censor what others put on your blog in the comments section.
However, you cannot be responsible for what some other guy says about someone else, on some other forum or medium. Just as I am not responsible for what you say about Pat over at your blog, nor do I feel obligated to condemn or praise your pov, nor is Pat obligated to make comment on what Nico said about Mr. Gage on some other forum...are you really trying to convince me of different?? really?
TAM:)
However, you cannot be responsible for what some other guy says about someone else, on some other forum or medium.
Good to hear it. It will be quoted the next time Patty smears 911Truth with Holocaust denial because of a couple fringe nuts he chooses to focus on.
BTW: I'm exercising great restraint in not posting links to my better half's blog.
Look Apollo:
I am far from a homophobe. I believe in Gay Marriage. I have friends who are gay. My comments that you have quoted had nothing to do with the topic. My comments were about the ridiculous notion that somehow Pat had some obligation to make comment denouncing someone else's comments on some other forum or medium. If it was about holocaust denial I would have said the same thing. I would defend you similarly to how I have defended Pat. If you were told you had to make a comment about one debunker slamming another over at the JREF forum, I would certainly say that you had NO OBLIGATION to make comment on it, if you did not want to.
Why does Pat HAVE to say something about it? Nico is not Pat's partner. Pat has no responsibility for what Nico says or does.
I think the comments made by Nico were deplorable but I felt no pressure or NEED to say this. Noone forced me to, nor would I feel compelled to make comment simply because someone said I should.
That is what I was saying, nothing more, nothing less.
Back a while ago, someone made a blog post about me, claiming various things that were untrue and hurtful. I did not ask for, nor expect, others in the truth movement, or debunking movement to make comment on it. I approached the person myself, and a resolution was had.
Do you get what I am saying?
TAM:)
I don't want to get into your little battle about silly stuff, but I do want to take this opportunity to promote this petition:
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/canada911truth
Those who choose to believe the official story are just not using the brains. It's as simple as that. Buildings do not fall in at a near free fall speed directly in the path of most resistance without explosives being involved. It just does not happen. You need not go any further than that.
All this other nonsense of who said what about who is exactly that, nonsense.
I try to stay out of your debates and discussions D, but I just can't understand your position. It truly boggles me.
Stephen:
Thanks for the comments. I wasn't really having any battle with this guy. He came here and made accusations. I really do not even know who he is.
Thanks for the comments.
TAM:)
FACT: When Pat finds a Holocaust denier who happens to think 911 was an inside job, Pat blogs about it as if 911Truth is full of and /or is pushing Holocaust denial
FACT: We'll be there to hold your side to the same standards they dump on Truth activists, whether they're reasonable or not.
Bundle up and enjoy the snow this weekend.
okie dokie.
TAM:)
Sorry for posting on topic here... :D
Just read your post and I have to admit we're both thinking along the same lines.
Something as massive and traumatic as 9/11 then jumping from that to a war with Iraq makes no sense.
Times like that people look for *ANYTHING* to reconciliate the two and find some conclusion that makes sense.
Kinda like when Elvis died. People couldn't wrap their minds around that so they looked for little things like his name misspelled on his headstone and cooked up conspiracies.
Thanks for posting Godofmischief.
Your Elvis comparison is dead on.
TAM:)
The answer to your question is pretty simple. In any of your hypothetical scenarios, simply ask yourself, "did any of the key observables violate the laws of physics?" -- if not, the truth movement (as we know it) would not exist.
if it only were so easy...lol
TAM:)
So... im sitting here reading TAM pull apart every detail of those who are speaking out publicly questioning 9/11, using their real names. And then, people like TAM also wonder why more arent speaking out. TAM claims to be in his late 30's, yet acts like he is in his late teens by poking a prodding anyone and everyone who questions 9/11 exposing any skeleton he can find. Why isnt there a site called "Debunkerswhoquestion911patriots.com"? I think i know why. They do not want to put their names/faces to their claims because they dont want anyone exposing their skeletons.
TAM, poor form and cowardice. But im sure most would not expect anything more.
They have chosen to use their real names, that is there choice. You make that decision, you live with what comes with it. If you publicly, with your own name, accuse people of the murder of 3000 people with no real evidence to back it up, you should be taken to task for it.
I have chosen not to go public with my identity to protect my friends, family, and medical practice from the truth movement psychos. You have also chosen to remain anonymous, and I respect that...you should also.
If they did not want their names made available, they could have remained anonymous...lots of people online on both sides do so, and I respect their right to do so. When they chose to go public, they knew that meant being held up to scrutiny.
You do not see me trying to "Out" anyone who wishes to remain anonymous, do you???
If you are referring to my work on JREF concerning the Patriots Question 9/11 Website, I am merely doing a little google searching to make sure those on that site have said what the site claims, and that it is put into context for those who wish to know.
Thanks for posting.
TAM:)
The truth is that all most any movement is a pile of crap. It doesn't take a movement to reveal the truth; it exists and stands on a firmament that cannot be ignored by those who understand it. One thing about it is that it does not change and another thing about it is that exists beyond our reality. Truth is indeed what I seek, and it has nothing to do with 911 or the Iraq war, although questioning authority is the first thing that comes to mind when I see something like what happened on that day in NY, and observe the desperate attempts to cover up what really happened. The truth that remains is buried in the dump, or is now part of a new car from China. Just remember when someone swears to you that 1+1=3 and shows you 10,000 pages of documentation on how the concept is probably true, that you should definately question it and stick to the simple truth...1+1 does indeed=2 and that part of it is not going to change... here, in another galaxy, or in the future. Stick to the simple truths and your concepts will not be questionable, by a truther that is...G:
Thanks for the comments geezer.
TAM:)
It's really nice to see skeptical, critical analysis regarding any subject, most especially issues with a controversial edge or those with a political agenda attached. Genuine, real skepticism, however, is a two edged Occam's Razor, which cuts equally effectively both ways. The commentary here however represents mostly a *one-sided*, or "cherry-picked" version of "skepticism", carefully selected to favor a particular set of viewpoints, in this case those with the most media repetition, those most easily sold for public digestion, those ones we prefer to hear, and those with the most money to back them. That, of course, is an unscientific approach.
9/11 is one of these controversial subjects; seldom has any issue in human history divided society to such an extent, or generated such an ongoing fracas and war of words. Proponents of the official side of the argument have agendæ at stake: that is why one has to be so careful regarding which material to select than can be trusted as authentic. If the "official conspiracy theory" is factually flawless, and presented in a manner congruent within a free and open society, there would be no such thing as a "9/11 Truth Movement". Unfortunately for all, the story was not delivered in any way remotely resembling openness and transparency. There can be no denying that.
It is fact that the Bush Administration and various government agencies changed their timelines and stories on multiple times; they obfuscated, vital evidence was kept arbitrarily secret or even destroyed, they refused to testify under oath, they tampered with the crime scenes, and yes, they did lie, and on multiple occasions. They even deliberately hid the evidence that the air in Manhattan was toxic and dangerous. Why on Earth did they adopt such a bizarre and self-destructive set of responses, when a clear, open and honest inquiry right from the outset could have won them every "brownie point" in the book, and assured this Administration the best possible ratings in the history books, especially in a time of worldwide empathy and sympathy for America in the wake of the attacks?
We now know from a recent study that the Bush Administration has been proven to have lied no less than on 935 times regarding the Iraq war, yet regarding 9/11, we prefer to assume they are telling the whole truth and nothing but the truth? This is ridiculous at best. In court, if a witness lies on the stand, even regarding material unrelated to the case being tried, a judge will tend to dismiss that person, and his remaining testimony, as "unreliable". Cases are often thrown out of court when evidence from the leading witnesses is proven untrue, or if they have lied or changed their stories. Why, in the presence of so much serial dishonesty, do we keep cutting the Bush Administration (and government agencies) "3000 miles" of slack, when "1 millimeter or less" would be appropriate, concerning the worst failure of national security on US history? Why is it considered "inappropriate" to ask the tough questions, especially considering the continuing roaring silence issuing from the highest levels of government, law enforcement and the military?
To illustrate just one of many contradictions: In the case of Osama bin Laden's alleged involvement, US marines found a videotape with Osama's taped "confession" in a house in Jalalabad, Afghanistan. This was a prime reason given by the Bush Administration to justify the "war on terrorism". Videotaped evidence, especially in sting operations, is routinely used to indict (and convict) criminals, most especially drug dealers, yet regarding OBL's "confession", the Justice Dept. and FBI has not issued any indictment against him, 6.5 years since the release of this "smoking gun confession" trumpeted by the Bush Administration. There is also no mention of 9/11 in the FBI's charge sheet against OBL, and according to FBI spokesman Rex Tomb, this is "because we have no hard evidence linking OBL with 9/11". What's up with the tape, and why does the FBI not consider it "hard evidence" when the Bush Administration clearly has said otherwise, and gone to war against two sovereign nations based upon such? Go figure.
It would be a breath of fresh air for American and the rest of the world, if rational and skeptical dialog could be enacted under the microscope of the national mainstream media, rather than manifesting itself as a barrage of puerile epithets and "ad hominem" 8th grade type responses on websites that allege to profess real "skepticism", reason and rationality. Members of the movement dedicated to finding out everything about 9/11 are clamoring for a fair showing on the national media, in, for example, a panel format in front of a live audience, with either side being given equal time to present its case, with an open, unscreened hardball Q&A session afterwards: such a forum would make fantastic, ratings-winning television! If the official story is so flawless and easily defendable, then its proponents rise to the challenge; this would be the perfect opporrtunity to refute, or even demolish the "Truthers'" arguments for the entire world to witness. If so, then such an open forum could be what the country so needs in order to help heal the still raw and gaping wound of 9/11, and thus remove all the doubts and recriminations. One would have thought that such an opportunity would be an irresistible carrot for the supporters of the "official" or 9/11 Commission version, but the mainstream media, 6.5 years later, absolutely refuses to entertain such freedom of expression, and those promoting the official story won't take part either. Go figure again....
*Real* "Truth Movement" members and organizations are concerned with extracting the answers to questions that the Government refuses to supply; putting forward alternative theories is merely speculative and doesn't solve anything, and people can speculate till the proverbial cows come home. Real "Truthers" are throwing down the gauntlet, trying to clear up the legion of material that makes no sense, or is contradictory, or even untrue. The ball is clearly in the "Official" side of the court: the real "Truth Movement" has nothing to defend or prove. It is up the Bush White House and US Government agencies to take up the challenge and answer the questions in an honest and open fashion, even if it means retracting parts of their story, thus losing some face, or even the possibility of heads rolling or criminal charges being filed. Perhaps there was incompetence at the topmost levels, and this was the real reason behind the failure, but because not a single solitary official has been been reprimanded, suspended, demoted, fired, charged, fined, courtmartialed or jailed as a result of such incompetence or negligence, such an allegation remains merely speculation. Only in the presence of openness from our officials will Americans regain a degree of respect and confidence in our system. America now needs its own version of the USSR's "Glasnost" under Gorbachev in the mid-late 1980s, or the fires will keep on raging, and nobody will win. Considering that both co-chairs of the 9/11 Commission (Kean and Hamilton) have publicly trashed their own Commission, a new full and independent inquiry should be the very least that America deserves. And when it comes down to "Cui Bono" or the "who benefits" factor, one of first considerations in crime solving... oh my, lets not even go there!
And as a post script, resorting to name-calling when addressing or referring to people within the 9/11 Truth movement solves nothing, and is reminiscent of the standard of "debate" prevalent on the playground of the local junior high school.
For help in free internet calls and mobile phone calls please visit this website. a lot many information in one place
http://fonecalls.blogspot.com/
Would it be too much trouble for you to occasionally delete the spam that has gradually accumulated in the comment sections?
your blog is better then others and have more information about the article.i am florima an delhi escorts companion and I love your opinion on the post
Aerocity Call Girls
Indian Escorts Call Girls in Delhi
Cheap Rate Delhi Escorts
Russian Delhi Escorts
Housewife Delhi Escorts
VIP Model Delhi Escorts
High Class Female Delhi Escorts
Model Delhi Escorts
Connaught Place Call Girls
Air Reservations in Mumbai
Plane Ticket booking in Bangalore
Plane Ticket Reservation in chennai
Cheap Air Airfare in Jaipur
online Air Airfare in Shimla
Flight Airfare in Manali
Air Airfare in Delhi
Nice post dude. I have one question. On most of the blogs I have noticed people instead of commenting with their name, they use blog name.
Delhi Independent Escort
Aerocity Escorts
Gurgaon Escorts
Connaught Place Escorts
Greater Kailash Escorts
Dwarka Escorts
_____$$$$_________$$$$
___$$$$$$$$_____$$$$$$$$
_$$$$$$$$$$$$_$$$$$$$$$$$$
___$Independent Escorts Delhi$
___$$Cheap Rate Delhi Escorts$
___$$$$$$Delhi Escorts Photos$
_$$$$$$$Delhi Escorts$$$$$$$$
__$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
__$$Call Girls in Delhi$$$$$$
____$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
_______$$$$$$$$$$$$$
__________$$$$$$$
____________$$$
Post a Comment
<< Home