More Debunking From The Left
Diana Johnstone hits on an interesting argument:
The al Qaeda hypothesis: The choice of 9/11 targets contained an eloquent message that was perfectly understood in most of the world. The World Trade Center stood for America's economic power in the world, and the Pentagon its military power. Assuming the targets were chosen by bin Laden and his associates, they were meant to show that this overwhelming power was in reality vulnerable, and could be dealt a deadly blow by only a few determined men ready to sacrifice their lives.
The Bushite conspiracy hypothesis: All along, the Bush explanation for the attacks is that "the terrorists hate us because we are free, they want to destroy our freedom".
But wait a minute: this ignores entirely the symbolism of the targets.
Now, let us suppose that Bushite plotters designed the attacks so that Bush could use them to claim that "they want to destroy us because of our freedom". The choice of targets should support that claim. Suppose one of the planes had crashed into the Statue of Liberty; that would really carry the message that "they want to destroy our freedom". For ordinary Americans, it would be just as shocking as the World Trade Center, while costing a lot less to American capitalism (an old gift from France would hardly be missed). For good measure, to show that the terrorists want to kill as many people as possible, they could have crashed into a couple of packed football stadiums. That would have killed more people than in the Twin Towers and the message would have been exactly the one claimed by the Bush administration.
posted by Pat @ 9:03 AM
23 comments
23 Comments:
I do so hate the attack by the Left on Bush's claim that the terrorists "hate our freedom".
While on the face of it the claim seems childish, it is in fact true. The ultimate goal of these takfiri groups is to institute a worldwide caliphate, ergo destroying the very freedoms we hold near and dear.
But wait a minute: this ignores entirely the symbolism of the targets.
While having *some* symbolism, if we dig down inside, the World Trade Center Towers were getting obsolete and would cost billions to renovate or repair. Good thing "Lucky" Larry bought those lucrative insurance policies in the nick of time no?
While at the Pentagon the fact that no plane should have hit there and the fact that the hijacker somehow knew the best place to hit was the side that was recently reinforced shows that said 'hijacker' ether got lucky or knew exactly where to hit.
But the REAl symbolism here works a bit in reverse. Firstly it is true, these stood for America's financial and military power - or - "we wouldn't hit ourselves now would we?"
Now, let us suppose that Bushite plotters designed the attacks so that Bush could use them to claim that "they want to destroy us because of our freedom".
Did this person forget about the Anthrax attacks that actually got legislators to pass the draconian "Patriot" acts that actually destroy our freedoms?
For good measure, to show that the terrorists want to kill as many people as possible, they could have crashed into a couple of packed football stadiums.
No, I believe flight 11 flew right over Indian Point Nuclear plant. If the above were the case, they could have simply crashed there and affected the 20 million people in the area for centuries to come! The REAL financial engine of the country, heck the western world, would have shut down and a financial panic would have ensued. Strategically the targets hit that day didn't mean squat. If the these 'terrorists' would have really been clever and cunning as we are led to believe the entire western would be in a downward spiral as of the result of the strategic hit on the US.
Given the fact that the attacks happened so early in the morning also shows the 'terrorists' also wanted to inflict as little loss of life as possible. 'They' could have well hit after 9am when tens of thousands were there and the death tolls would have easily in that range as well.
This piece doesn't debunk anything and in fact shows the writer's uninformed views on the topic.
I do so hate the attack by the Left on Bush's claim that the terrorists "hate our freedom".
How's that an attack when these words are a direct quote from the stupid one?
The ultimate goal of these takfiri groups is to institute a worldwide caliphate, ergo destroying the very freedoms we hold near and dear.
Official line eaten hook, line and sinker. But what "freedoms" are you talking about? The freedom to invade other lands? The freedom to impose financial terrorism to those who stay opposed to our corporate/financial interests? And what about the domestic terrorist who HAVE destroyed the Bill of Rights? How can you simply overlook them and them and then suspiciously look at a fictional 'worldwide caliphate' that has absolutely no method to achieve what you think they want to achieve?
yawn...oh wait, I was almost asleep when I noticed NESSIE actually speaking about 9/11 issues. That woke me, but now I can see he is back to his usual crap...zzzzzz
TAM
How's that an attack when these words are a direct quote from the stupid one?
Read my whole post next time, brainless one.
How can you simply overlook them and them and then suspiciously look at a fictional 'worldwide caliphate' that has absolutely no method to achieve what you think they want to achieve?
Hitler had no hope of making his Thousand Year Reich over the planet, but that never stopped him. Fucking moron.
And what about the domestic terrorist who HAVE destroyed the Bill of Rights?
You must be talking about people on the left, like Democrats, "Progressives", and all those other people who claim the constitution is a "living, breathing" document. They have been busy shredding the constitution for 50 years. I cannot think of anything that Bush has done that comes even close.
Good thing "Lucky" Larry bought those lucrative insurance policies in the nick of time no?
Um, no. He was forced to upgrade his insurance by the port authority. Can't you get even one detail right? I guess that is too much to ask one so delusional.
Fucking moron.
Your mama! :D
Hitler had no hope of making his Thousand Year Reich over the planet, but that never stopped him.
LOL! Hitler actually HAD an army and an entire country with actual resources to back him up. The "Islamists" you fear have NADA!!! And I'm the moron? Puh--leez..
not even taking into account lost rent income from the past 5 years and the rent hes still paying to the PA for the site
face it nessie, "lucky larry" is losing money big time
No. The Trade towers were getting obsolete and the vacancy rates were on the rise. If the towers were to remain open the owners/leaseholder would have to do a multi-billion dollar asbestos abatement. How fortunate for "Lucky" Larry to have the buildings completely disintegrate so he could start anew.
Um, no. He was forced to upgrade his insurance by the port authority. Can't you get even one detail right? I guess that is too much to ask one so delusional.
So who "forced" him to buy the leases? Pathetic.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Yes, you truly are pathetic. He bought the leases on his own free will. He studied the income potential and the expenses and figured he could make money. Here in the real world that is called a business decision. Only in your moron world it is an excuse to blow up buildings.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anyone who believes the army of islam is going to invade and occupy the US (I Loooooooved that crazy broad in the ground sero vid you guys posted- "They gonna put us under sharia law!!!"- whatta loon) is beyond any degree of paranoia the jewbaiters can ever conjur up.
It doesn't matter IF they're going to do it, roger, my intelligence impaired friend, but what they want to attempt. As I pointed out already, Hitler never would've run the world, but that never stopped him from trying.
Funnny every time I listen to their lame propaganda it generally sums up at, "quit propping up corrupt dictatorships and get the fuck out of our countries".
Someone's ever heard of an "excuse" before (hell, even you called it propaganda thus it is just a lame attempt to legitimize what they are doing; much like calling suicide bombers "martyrs", when they are nothing of the sort).
Osama latches on to any pet idea he can to further his own goals. Take Palestine for example. As the Left becomes more and more "omg free Palestine", his rhetoric focuses more and more on Palestine. He wants to replace all the Arabic governments with Islamist governments.
The first step towards that is having America leave.
Much like Palestinian organizations that say they just want Palestine (the "occupied territories") freed, but then to each other say they'll just take any gain they can get until they can finally destroy Israel.
I do so hate the attack by the Left on Bush's claim that the terrorists "hate our freedom".
You really believe that they hate the US just because it's a democracy? Sounds akin to the claim that "anti-American loons are just jelaous" to me.
Ever heard of a Norwegian, Canadian, or Swedish embassy getting bombed? Ever heard of a Taiwanese embassies getting bombed by Al-Q'aida?
"They're after democracy"? B.S.
They're after the States because the States've been just a bit too imperialist in the past. I'm not saying that excuses 9/11, just that it's total nonsense.
Anyone who believes the army of islam is going to invade and occupy the US (...) is beyond any degree of paranoia the jewbaiters can ever conjur up.
That I agree with.
You must be talking about people on the left, like Democrats, "Progressives", and all those other people who claim the constitution is a "living, breathing" document.
Which it is. Do you know what "amendment" means?
They have been busy shredding the constitution for 50 years. I cannot think of anything that Bush has done that comes even close.
Read the PATRIOT ACT?
Illegal wire-tapping?
Guantanamo prisoner abuse (there's also the UN Declaration of Human Rights, too, of course)?
But sure, all the attacks on the Constitution have come from the Left. Su-u-re. The very fact that you're dodging the issue by going "OMG Look @ waht teh left progressives!!!11" speaks novels of how wrong you know you are.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
And who the fuck is "they". Saddam? The Taliban? The Palestinians? The Boogey Man?
Uh Islamists? They people we were talking about.\
If the conservatives and rightwingers of the day had their way, we would have joined the Axis early on.
There were really only two possibilities - isolationism or join the Allies.
why do you waste your life attacking people?
False premise - but I attack people because they say stupid things.
Roger:
I don't think it's that hard to believe HItler would've run the world. He had a pretty good run.
on this we agree.
If the conservatives and rightwingers of the day had their way, we would have joined the Axis early on.
your opinion. here we differ.
You never answered my question, why do you waste your life attacking people?
I asked you the same question, but since you asked first, I will answer. Please do the same.
The people who I attack (not including the little quip here and there, which is more like ignorant banter that both sides engage in), are those who promote hatred of an entire group. Now don't get me wrong, I myself have a strong stance against "Islamic Extremists", but it is because of their stance on our way of life. If they were to just leave us alone, and do their own thing, I have no issue. I attack those who paint all Jews, or any other race/group of people, with the same brush.
Now if you are calling my questioning of peoples credentials attacking, then I am guilty. If I do so, it is usually with good reason.
If you consider berrating those who try to make horrible claims against people, govt or otherwise, without solid evidence, attacking, then I am guilty as charged, and I do so because I think it is wrong to do so.
So now your turn Roger, why do you waste your time attacking the people of the USG etc...
TAM
so have you guys figured anything out yet? let me know if you do.
From the guy who believes fictions (9/11 conspiracy theory fantasies).
Which it is. Do you know what "amendment" means?
For somebody to say something that stupid you simply must not been paying attention. If they amended the constitution the proper way (two thirds vote in the Senate and ratification by two thirds of the states - a brief lesson for the mentally challenged) there would be no issue. However that is not what the left is doing. By claiming it is a "living, breathing" document, they are getting like-minded unelected judges to re-interpret the current language to bend the constitution to their will. Or perhaps you can point to me the amendment that federally legalizes abortion, provides for the welfare state, or the one that allows the government to take the property from one private citizen and give it to a big corporation.
The very fact that you're dodging the issue by going "OMG Look @ waht teh left progressives!!!11" speaks novels of how wrong you know you are.
I am not dodging the issue, I am pointing out that you have no issue. There are no illegal wiretaps. I have read the Patriot Act, and it clearly provides oversight by requiring a warrant and all invocations of the act must be reported to congress twice each year. The fact is you people are completely wrong about everything. Especially how we have “lost all our freedoms” and Bush is “shredding the constitution.
Haha...Poor Larry is losing big-time on this! LOL...that's pure gold.
...he did lose money. It cost him more to rebuild than his insurance paid out. Basic math dictates that that is losing money.
Post a Comment
<< Home