Thursday, February 10, 2011

Why They're 9-11 Deniers

Terrific post by Neighborhood Rationalist:

Organizations like al Qaeda leave their indelible mark wherever they go. 9/11 deniers are required to pretend that those marks are just Western operatives covering their own tracks – an obvious delusion to everyone who has seen it in action, knows its members, and knows those who are tempted by it and any other extremist organization. To me, this is the key – 9/11 deniers flatly deny virtually every relevant event in the lead-up to 9/11. They deny that centuries of geopolitical events ever occurred. To them, history begins at the Balfour Declaration, crescendos when Ronald Reagan begins supplying anti-Communist rebels in Afghanistan, and ends when George Bush plants bombs in the North Tower and scampers off in a black helicopter. Between these pockmarks on the historical landscape there are thousands of religious ideologues, millions of oppressed victims of colonialism, and countless strategic opportunists struggling to guide human affairs to their own ends. 9/11 denier history is the shallowest history of all, one that requires them to reject the needs, desires, machinations and schemes of billions of people across centuries. 9/11 denial is reality denial.


I would just add that his emailer said this:
As I'm sure you are aware, Holocaust Denial is the belief that the Holocaust simply did not take place, that the event did not occur.

Actually Nizkor notes that there are three main elements of Holocaust Denial:

1. Deny the number (five to six million Jews exterminated).
2. Deny the plan (Nazi attempt to destroy the Jews)
3. Deny the method (many by gassing, although plenty were shot or died of starvation/privation).

Now, impose that template on 9-11. Some Truthers deny the number (for example, David L. Griscom with his "all the passengers survived" hypothesis). Almost all of them deny the method (collapse of the buildings caused by fire and structural damage), and the plan (Al Qaeda and 19 hijackers).

Labels:

6 Comments:

At 11 February, 2011 08:35, Blogger J said...

Thanks for the mention, Pat!

 
At 12 February, 2011 06:23, Blogger Garry said...

This is spot on.

 
At 12 February, 2011 10:51, Blogger snug.bug said...

Wow, what a grand sweeping scoop J wields! "Pockmarks on the historical landscape", wow! I bet he even uses a thesaurus!

So history ends on 9/11, eh? No Afghanistan war, so PATRIOT Act, no Iraq war. No creeping neofascism.

So pray tell, what great historic Islamist strategy was served by crashing planes into the twin towers? Surely a man of your vision can define it! I don't see the point. Certainly it served the ambitions--expressed ambitions--of the neocons. But what did it do for al Qaeda?

 
At 12 February, 2011 10:58, Blogger Ian G. said...

Wow, what a grand sweeping scoop J wields! "Pockmarks on the historical landscape", wow! I bet he even uses a thesaurus!

Wow, Brian babbling about other people's use of big words is funny. Brian, the difference between J and you is that he uses the big words correctly.

So pray tell, what great historic Islamist strategy was served by crashing planes into the twin towers?

Ask Osama bin Laden. He's the one who had the idea to attack the US, although I doubt he's very happy with the events in Egypt because it probably hurts his jihad to have people overthrow a dictator with a secular mass demonstration.

I don't see the point.

That's because your an ignorant moron, Brian. You can't understand this stuff because your mind is ill-equipped to do so.

Certainly it served the ambitions--expressed ambitions--of the neocons. But what did it do for al Qaeda?

See what I mean?

 
At 13 February, 2011 12:16, Blogger snug.bug said...

Ian thinks "pockmark" is a big word and tha "butch" is a compliment.

What great historic Islamist strategy was served by crashing planes into the twin towers? That seems to be central to J's thesis. Can none of his admirers explain?

 
At 13 February, 2011 12:41, Blogger Ian G. said...

What great historic Islamist strategy was served by crashing planes into the twin towers? That seems to be central to J's thesis. Can none of his admirers explain?

We can, but we'd prefer you to remain an ignorant buffoon. You're far more entertaining that way.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home