[lbo-talk] 'bogus' WTC Collapse story

paul childs npchilds at shaw.ca
Thu Jun 16 09:56:24 PDT 2005



>troubling that left-winger, who seem to question Bush on almost everything
>else, refuse to take a sober, independent minded look at 9-11 and fiercely
>support the official story even when so many aspects of it are incredible.

I got nailed for my views on this months back so I'm reluctant to wade into this, but.......

'Incredible'? Yeah there are incredible things in the 'official' 911 stories but the alternatives involving; missiles flying into the Pentagon, fuel pod carrying military transports flying into the WTC, no planes at all flying into the WTC, pre planted explosives that the entire FDNY seems to have known about (except the several hundred dumb enough to get killed by those same explosives), 'small and manageable' fires in the two towers and middling academic economists with vague suggestions of 'inside jobs' suggest that credulity flew out the window holding hands with sobriety in that neighborhood a long time ago.

As others have said accepting large parts of the 'official' story does not mean your brain has atrophied or that you're a Bush acolyte. And suggesting or accepting explanations that cannot be reasonably reconciled with evidence and direct experience of that day does not make you a member of some hyper-insightful vanguard.

I've said it before and I'll say it again; could the people who brought you the ongoing and seemingly endless carnage in Iraq and Afghanistan pull off a conspiracy as complex as what has been suggested?

Occam's razor, it’s not just for shaving anymore.

PC

N P Childs

'I'm Mister Bad Example, the stranger in the dirt, I like to have a good time and I don't care who gets hurt'.

-Mr. Bad Example, W Zevon



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list