Tuesday, January 23, 2007

Conservatives Knock D'Souza on 9-11 Theory

This isn't typical 9-11 Denial, but it's tangentially related.

So let me get this straight in my non-Ivy League-educated little brain: Islamist radicals in a Wahhabist terrorist organization led by a madman who claimed he attacked America for daring to occupy Saudi soil kill 2,977 Americans, and D'Souza blames Hollywood and NPR?

Methinks the 9/11 hijackers had something more relevant in common than a loathing for porn: a religion which glorifies people who ram civilian airliners into civilian buildings while shouting the name of their god.


Exactly. One of the reasons we fight the 9-11 Deniers is that they effectively want to hijack 9-11 for their own purposes, whether it's to combat the war, repeal the Patriot Act, or to impeach President Bush.

14 Comments:

At 23 January, 2007 10:53, Blogger Manny said...

D'Souza can pretty much bite me. For one thing, his thesis is not correct in that even if the US reverted to an early 50's era morality which would make almost every social conservative in the US happy the radical Muslims would still want to kill us. Indeed, that's precisely the America which al Qaeda's spiritual father, Sayyid Qutb, saw when he visited in 1949.

More importantly, even if his thesis were completely correct it would be irrelevant, as I don't feel much like appeasing the bastards. I may be the last person in the country who still thinks this, but I want to kill the terrorists. Whether they're mad at "liberal" social policies or "conservative" foreign policies or the price of a cup of coffee only interest me to the extent it helps with targeting.

 
At 23 January, 2007 11:00, Blogger Swing Dangler said...

One of the reasons we fight the 9-11 Deniers is that they effectively want to hijack 9-11 for their own purposes, whether it's to combat the war , repeal the Patriot Act, or to impeach President Bush.

Lets examine this nefarious statment by Pat as to why he thinks promoters of alternative conspiracy theories promote their theories:

From truth911.net
The 9/11 attacks have been used to justify the War on Terror. This terror campaign legitimized the unconscionable occupation in the Middle East and the implementation of significant restrictions on fundamental civil liberties. A truly independent and open investigation is necessary to demand the release of withheld evidence and to find out the truth about 9/11.


Why Doubt 9/11?
by James H. Fetzer
As the founder of Scholars for 9/11 Truth, I would observe that our members, building on prior research by earlier students of 9/11, have established more than a dozen disproofs of the official government account, the truth of any one of which is enough to show that the government's account--in one or another of its guises--cannot possibly be correct.

About Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice

Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice (Scholars) is a non-partisan organization consisting of independent researchers and activists engaged in uncovering the true nature of the September 11, 2001 attacks. Scholars emphasizes a scholarly and civil approach to inquiry.

From Killtown:
http://killtown.911review.org/
To preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic.

From 9/11blogger.com
The Primary Goal of 911blogger.com

911blogger.com seeks to fill a void in the blogger community by providing a blog centrally focused on alternative 9/11 related news. Breaking through to the blogger community provides an excellent opportunity for 9/11 researchers to reach a wide variety of politically active individuals.

From 911proof.com


The primary author of this website is an American, a family man, and an attorney with a science background.
The whole 911Proof.com team is dedicated to presenting the facts surrounding the horrible events of 9-11 accurately and straightforwardly.
You may contact us at email @ 911Proof.com


I've just posted some information from some of the popular alternative websites, and not a dam one of them matches Pat's reasons for 'hijacking' 9/11 for combat the war , repeal the Patriot Act, or to impeach President Bush.

 
At 23 January, 2007 12:01, Anonymous Anonymous said...

As far as my priorities, I admit that I would like to see Bush impeached. (Start the process and I think they'll find grounds.)

However, Bush will be gone in two years. For me, impeachment or not, the issues worth fighting for are about the Republic and it's health moving forward.

 
At 23 January, 2007 12:06, Blogger Triterope said...

Boy SD, you sure are easy to fool. A few lines of cut-and-pasted puffery and you forget all about 9-11 Deniers Speak, Killtown's fraudulent MySpace page of a dead woman, the endless links to Holocaust denial, and the countless other times your heroes have been caught using 9/11 in a less-than-noble fashion.

 
At 23 January, 2007 13:20, Blogger Pat said...

SD, so truth911.net admits that their goal is to end the war? At least they're more honest than most.

 
At 23 January, 2007 15:23, Blogger shawn said...

The 9/11 attacks have been used to justify the War on Terror.

You do realize how that's worded right? The guy has a bone to pick. 9/11 obviously was used for "justifying" the Global War on Terrorism, it's the goddamn reason we ever started it. WE were attacked by Islamic militants. WE respond to such attacks.

Nemo me impune lacessit.

 
At 23 January, 2007 15:33, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'd also like to see Bush's ass out of office, but...

BG wrote: "(Start the process and I think they'll find grounds.)"

Wtf? Do you even realize how completely ass-backwards your thought process is?

 
At 23 January, 2007 15:35, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Swing Dangler wrote: "From truth911.net
The 9/11 attacks have been used to justify the War on Terror. This terror campaign legitimized the unconscionable occupation in the Middle East and the implementation of significant restrictions on fundamental civil liberties."


Amazing. This one actually supports Pat's statement. What the hell is wrong with you? Seriously...

 
At 23 January, 2007 18:41, Anonymous Anonymous said...

However, Bush will be gone in two years.

Gosh, you are pretty blasé about a man that supposedly offed 3,000 Americans. Do you CTers actually take your claims seriously?

 
At 24 January, 2007 06:46, Blogger Swing Dangler said...

Cl1mh4224rd said...

Pat doesn't state which war, wether it is the war on terror, war in Iraq, war in Afghanistan, etc.

Uhh did you not read my post.
A truly independent and open investigation is necessary to demand the release of withheld evidence and to find out the truth about 9/11.

That is that sites goal. Try not to get confused again that or twist words to fit your agenda. Seriously do you think the entire quote has something to do with 'combating the war'? The site stated what 9/11 did.
Seriously, you should read more.

Consdemo, I was sure but wasn't that the same President that had the EPA lie which is going to result in many many deaths? Wasn't that the same President who lied about Iraq resulting in more American casualties than 9/11?

Consdemo, do you take history seriously?

Besides, I don't ever recall saying 'Bush did 9/11'. If I did, please repost that.

 
At 24 January, 2007 08:54, Blogger Alex said...

No, see, what you're doing now? THAT is called lying. When the president relays information which, to the best of his and everyone elses knowledge is true, that's not lying. I know that you don't have a very good grasp on basic semantics, but lying about someone being a liar is pretty bad, even for you.

 
At 24 January, 2007 18:42, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don't ever recall saying 'Bush did 9/11'.

Gosh, then who did, pray tell?

 
At 27 January, 2007 15:45, Blogger Swing Dangler said...

Excuse me Alex are you aware of the backlash against the EPA and Bush for that monumental lie?

Well Bush did relay the message apparently. Lie. Tell the public the air is just fine. Now that is lying. You should recognize it as much as you do it.

 
At 22 March, 2007 16:18, Blogger Provident 360 said...

Revelation 13:5 - Are we in this 42 month period?

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home