The Silly Stuff Deniers Latch Onto
Here's Donald Rumsfeld making a point, poorly:
Obviously he goofed by saying "the people who... shot down the plane over Pennsylvania." But of course to 9-11 Deniers this constitutes evidence. Evidence of what? If the government had shot down the plane, why would they lie about it? Nobody would have blamed them for shooting down Flight 93; it would have been understood by all but the nuttiest that it was making the best of a bad situation.
More important, how does the supposed shooting down of Flight 93 fit with the rest of the conspiracy theory? Answer: It doesn't, which I suspect is why Dylan Avery didn't make that claim in his video. Think about it for a second. Why would the government shoot down the plane? Because there were hijackers on board determined to crash it into the Capitol Building? But of course the Deniers don't believe in the hijackers at all. To add 45 or so more dead people to the body count, because the other 2940 or so weren't enough to justify the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq?
posted by Pat @ 9:47 AM
7 comments
7 Comments:
The Troothers would like to say that we shot down all the planes, except it kills the 40% of their fellow nutters who don't believe there were any planes.
So, according to a good chunk of the Troothers, we shot down nothing.
Speaking as a Democrat, I felt the over/under for "bodycount number high enough to give George Bush a blank check for the next 3 years" was at like 2949.5
So when you think of it that way, it does make sense to shoot down Flight 93.
I can just picture Rummy and Cheney with one of those old school adding machines saying "This isn't enough....we need at least 20 more people or we can't be sure everyone will let us do what they want", followed by taking an inventory of the rest of the planes still in the air and their location and just picking the one that just puts em above the the needed number.
Anyone wanting comic relief is invited to view one of the ineffable Jon Gold's greatest hits, now playing at 9/11 Conspiracy Smasher. It's the first topic on the list and contains some of his finest work to date.
Well that is like the reasons for blowing up WTC7. After the twin towers collapsed I found myself sitting there on the couch consoling myself, "Well at least WTC7 is still standing, or I would be really upset."
Has the Truth movement even bothered to followup on the WTC-7 claims of SEC investigations that were being "erased" by destroying the building?
They allude to it often when you point out the astonishing lack of motive for that building and shoot through the insurance fraud angle, but I have yet to hear of one corporate criminal or insider trading case that was dropped because the physical evidence was only housed at WTC-7 and got lost in the collapse.
I have seem a claim that they were destroying documents related to Enron.
Yeah, those Enron guys got off scott free as a result.
On the bright side, once you mature a little, many of you could make a good living in the comedy business.
Post a Comment
<< Home