Question from a 9/11 fence sitter

offchops

New Blood
O
Joined
Jan 24, 2007
Messages
20
Hi Guys,

My position on 9/11 remains somewhere on the fence. I have spent alot of time reading through this site and have seen some excellent work. If anything, i lean towards LIHOP, mainly for my distrust in Bush and the fact that politicians are professional liars. I believe LIHOP is not something that can be "debunked", more of a case of what you are prepared to believe and matter of opinion.
The few issues that keep me sitting on the fence in regards to MIHOP, would be issues that you guys probably have claimed to have "debunked", but in reality, are issues that the best debunking is only a strong opinion.

Example..
India Times runs Pakistan ISI funded Atta story.
Counter...
The article gives no sources, India is hardly unbiased.

To me that isn't "debunked", that's just one example, their are many others that i could go into, but that was not the point of my post.

My question is..
We all know politicians want to win elections, and win support. We have seen some politicians stoop to disgusting tactics, to do just that. In America particularly, politicians spend huge amounts of money on such campaigns to win support.
If recent polls are correct, and their is a significant number of people with distrust in the Govt over 9/11. Why aren't the Govt running big campaigns to combat this distrust? Why aren't their official Govt "debunkers"?
Why aren't we seeing Govt scientists debating these alternate theories in public domain? If nothing to hide, and if it would help boost his admin, why not be an open book to 9/11 concerns?

Of course, none of the above proves anything, but as someone who observes how far politicians will go for support, and watching the Bush admin approval rating plumit, i do wonder. Bush seems to be the type who would do anything for public support, i think he needs it.


It's late here in AU, so will check back for comments tomorrow.
Night all.
 
Why give any credence whatsoever to the truthers with government scientists? If the politicians start parading out scientists, the truth movement will use quote mining techniques to "prove" their theories or blow them off as government agents.

To expound on your question, why would a Democrat be waving the flag of truth if something really happened? Why would they not expose the Republicans? They could single-handedly crush the Republican party with proof.

Finally, if you are on the fence, why are you not curious about the lack of scientists/engineers who support the truth movement? Do you ever read the LCF? If they are looking for the truth, why do they quash anyone who asks objective questions?
 
offchops said:
Hi Guys,

My position on 9/11 remains somewhere on the fence. I have spent alot of time reading through this site and have seen some excellent work. If anything, i lean towards LIHOP, mainly for my distrust in Bush and the fact that politicians are professional liars. I believe LIHOP is not something that can be "debunked", more of a case of what you are prepared to believe and matter of opinion.
The few issues that keep me sitting on the fence in regards to MIHOP, would be issues that you guys probably have claimed to have "debunked", but in reality, are issues that the best debunking is only a strong opinion.

Example..
India Times runs Pakistan ISI funded Atta story.
Counter...
The article gives no sources, India is hardly unbiased.

To me that isn't "debunked", that's just one example, their are many others that i could go into, but that was not the point of my post.

My question is..
We all know politicians want to win elections, and win support. We have seen some politicians stoop to disgusting tactics, to do just that. In America particularly, politicians spend huge amounts of money on such campaigns to win support.
If recent polls are correct, and their is a significant number of people with distrust in the Govt over 9/11. Why aren't the Govt running big campaigns to combat this distrust? Why aren't their official Govt "debunkers"?
Why aren't we seeing Govt scientists debating these alternate theories in public domain? If nothing to hide, and if it would help boost his admin, why not be an open book to 9/11 concerns?

Of course, none of the above proves anything, but as someone who observes how far politicians will go for support, and watching the Bush admin approval rating plumit, i do wonder. Bush seems to be the type who would do anything for public support, i think he needs it.


It's late here in AU, so will check back for comments tomorrow.
Night all.
Click to expand...


Offchops:

some honest questions...here are my comments (FWIW):

1. The ISI/Atta Funding question is more of an LIHOP angle, unless you are insinuating that the Pakistani Intellegence in question was advised to do what they did by American sources.

2. I would take a different angle on your "politicans debunking" theme. I would say, if there was something to hide, something to leak out, than why allow things to go unchecked. Why allow this "truth" movement to continue. If they have the money and the power to pull off 9/11, than putting the axe to a small movement like the truth movement shouldnt be a problem. I think they allow it, because they know in the end, there is nothing being hidden.

You are talking about an administration that couldnt keep secret all of the scandals we have seen in the last 4 years, yet they can miraculously keep quiet the biggest, most horrific act of evil committed by a govt in the last 30 years...just doesnt seem plausible. If they were, as the truthers would have us believe, the evil genius cabal, than they had one "blip" of genius, committed 9/11, then went back to being stupid...they couldnt plant some fake WMDs and some fake lab equipment to back it up somewhere within a nation (Iraq) that they are for all intensive purposes, controlling? Think of how that simple act would have done for keeping them popular and in power, compared to the quagmire they are now in.

TAM:)
 
Hi Guys,

As i have mentioned before, i am somewhat of a fence sitter. I have spent alot of time reading through this site and have seen some excellent work. If anything, i lean towards LIHOP, mainly for my distrust in Bush and the fact that politicians are professional liars. I believe LIHOP is not something that can be "debunked", more of a case of what you are prepared to believe and a matter of opinion. If some evidence was found that proved beyond doubt, LIHOP, i would not be surprised one bit.
The few issues that keep me sitting on the fence in regards to MIHOP, would be issues that you guys probably have claimed to have "debunked", but in reality, are issues that the best debunking is only an opinion.

Example...
India Times runs Pakistan ISI funded Atta story.
Counter...
The article gives no sources, India is hardly unbiased.
Debunker conclusion...
It's unlikely that the article had substance. (opinion)

To me that isn't "debunked", that's just one example, their are many others that i could go into, but that was not the point of my post.

My question is..
We all know politicians want to win elections, and win support. We have seen some politicians stoop to disgusting tactics, to do just that. In America particularly, politicians spend huge amounts of money on such campaigns to win support.
If recent polls are correct, and their is a significant number of people with distrust in the Govt over 9/11. Why aren't the Govt running big campaigns to combat this distrust? Why aren't their official Govt "debunkers"?
Why aren't we seeing Govt scientists debating these alternate theories in public domain? If nothing to hide, and if it would help boost his rating, why not be an open book to 9/11 concerns?

Of course, none of the above proves anything, but as someone who observes how far politicians will go for support, and watching the Bush admin approval rating plumit, i do wonder. Bush seems to be the type who would do anything for public support, i think he needs it.


It's late here in AU, so will check back for comments tomorrow.
Night all.
 
LIHOP vs MIHOP? Why are those the only two positions you are considering?

"If recent polls are correct, and their is a significant number of people with distrust in the Govt over 9/11. Why aren't the Govt running big campaigns to combat this distrust? Why aren't their official Govt "debunkers"?"

Which polls? I haven't seen any evidence that a significant number of people distrust the explanations of 9/11.

C'mon, are you really a fence sitter? If the fence is between LIHOP and MIHOP, either way you fall you have a good chance of missing reality.
 
offchops said:
If recent polls are correct, and their is a significant number of people with distrust in the Govt over 9/11. Why aren't the Govt running big campaigns to combat this distrust? Why aren't their official Govt "debunkers"?
Click to expand...

I'll let others who are better informed answer your other questions but I think I can take a stab at this one.

The "reason" is because it's a non-issue. Polls can be easily manipulated. "Distrust in the Govt" in regards to 9-11 means nothing. The (U.S.) Govt is distrusted on almost every topic. People are naturally skeptical.

From where I sit, the vast, vast majority of Americans do NOT think the Govt had anything to do with 9-11 BEFORE the incident. Some may question the investigations afterward and wonder if there was the typical Govt CYA in regards to any incompetance or negligence. But, that ALWAYS happens after a disaster. Look at the finger pointing already going on after the Virgina Tech tradgedy yesterday.

So, there are no "Govt. debunkers" because there doesn't need to be. There is no groundswell of opposition to the official report. The fringe CT'ers aren't even a blip on the radar...they are that insignificant.
 
The Pakistani ISI allegation is meaningless, even assuming it is true.

It is a well known fact that a high number of ISI staff are supportive of Al Qaeda and other radical Islamic Terrorist groups. However it is a large jump to move from the individual backing of individuals to any sort of official backing with approval of the Pakistani government.

Of course moving from official ISI sanctioned funding to US involvement is simply illogical. The ISI is not an American organisation, and is not answerable to the US Government. Nor is it directed by the US Government.

Were there evidence that the ISI officially backed the 9/11 attacks this would in no way indicate US government involvement, be it LIHOP or MIHOP.

-Gumboot
 
offchops said:
Hi Guys,
Click to expand...

Hi Offchops

My position on 9/11 remains somewhere on the fence.
Click to expand...
Painful
I have spent alot of time reading through this site and have seen some excellent work. If anything, i lean towards LIHOP, mainly for my distrust in Bush and the fact that politicians are professional liars. I believe LIHOP is not something that can be "debunked", more of a case of what you are prepared to believe and matter of opinion.
Click to expand...
Sometimes it's good to believe something which is logical and backed up with the weight of evidence
The few issues that keep me sitting on the fence in regards to MIHOP, would be issues that you guys probably have claimed to have "debunked", but in reality, are issues that the best debunking is only a strong opinion.

Example..
India Times runs Pakistan ISI funded Atta story.
Counter...
The article gives no sources, India is hardly unbiased.
Click to expand...

That's right. It's one story in one newspaper (did they ever do a follow up?) which can be considered biased. Would you believe a story on Fox news that claimed Hugo Chavez murdered an opposition politician, if that story was not corroborated in any other news outlet?

Maybe if you think of the India Times as a version of Fox News, you get a sense of why that story is considered.....unsafe.

Also, why would money from the Pakistan Intelligence mean 9/11 was an inside job?

To me that isn't "debunked", that's just one example, their are many others that i could go into, but that was not the point of my post.

My question is..
We all know politicians want to win elections, and win support. We have seen some politicians stoop to disgusting tactics, to do just that. In America particularly, politicians spend huge amounts of money on such campaigns to win support.
Click to expand...

Yep, they want your vote. It's called democracy. The alternative is dictatorship.

If recent polls are correct, and their is a significant number of people with distrust in the Govt over 9/11. Why aren't the Govt running big campaigns to combat this distrust? Why aren't their official Govt "debunkers"?
Why aren't we seeing Govt scientists debating these alternate theories in public domain? If nothing to hide, and if it would help boost his admin, why not be an open book to 9/11 concerns?
Click to expand...

Because there isn't a significant number of people who believe in the 911 conspiracy. Your questions should be directed at the conspiracy theorists themselves.

If I ask you "Has the US government been completely truthful about fluoride in water?" what are you going to say?

If you say yes, then you run the risk of being accused of being a mindless drone who believes everything the government tells you, without question. Also if the government is then found to have been economical with the truth about some fairly insignificant feature of this issue, you are immediately proved to be wrong in your absolute faith in their truthfulness.

So, you reply 'no', because you have nothing to lose by saying that, and you show the questioner that you're healthily cynical about politicians and government.

BUT, if you REALLY believed that your government was actually lying about something which could have an affect on your health, you'd do more than just give a 'yes/no' answer to some stupid pollster, you'd get off your arse and actually do something, right?

So, what is this supposedly significant number of people who supposedly believe their government has not told the whole truth about 9/11, doing?

Of course, none of the above proves anything, but as someone who observes how far politicians will go for support, and watching the Bush admin approval rating plumit, i do wonder. Bush seems to be the type who would do anything for public support, i think he needs it.
Click to expand...

If you mean hewould do anything NOW that his popularity is plummeting, well, he would have to consider why he is so unpopular and whether some kind of false flag attack on his own people is really the best thing to do to win back their support.

They could just as easily say "Hey we hated this guy before (insert terrorist outrage here) and now (insert terrorist outrage here) has happened, so let's get rid of this bozo and get someone who can actually protect us"

Would he take that risk? Would anyone?
It's late here in AU, so will check back for comments tomorrow.
Night all.
Click to expand...

Night night
 
offchops said:
Hi Guys,

My position on 9/11 remains somewhere on the fence. I have spent alot of time reading through this site and have seen some excellent work. If anything, i lean towards LIHOP, mainly for my distrust in Bush and the fact that politicians are professional liars. I believe LIHOP is not something that can be "debunked", more of a case of what you are prepared to believe and matter of opinion.
The few issues that keep me sitting on the fence in regards to MIHOP, would be issues that you guys probably have claimed to have "debunked", but in reality, are issues that the best debunking is only a strong opinion.

Example..
India Times runs Pakistan ISI funded Atta story.
Counter...
The article gives no sources, India is hardly unbiased.

To me that isn't "debunked", that's just one example, their are many others that i could go into, but that was not the point of my post.
Click to expand...
There is no corroborating evidence for the ISI-Atta connection claim. The reporter used an anonymous second-hand source. It debunks itself. Those who find it suspicious are obligated to seek further information before using the claim as evidence of US involvement (although how the claim suggests US involvement would also have to be clearly established.) They should go directly to the source of the claim (the reporter for The India Times) and get as much information as possible about the original source of the story. They should find out if any subsequent journalistic investigation was done. They should, in short, find out if the story has merit. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

offchops said:
My question is..
We all know politicians want to win elections, and win support. We have seen some politicians stoop to disgusting tactics, to do just that. In America particularly, politicians spend huge amounts of money on such campaigns to win support.
If recent polls are correct, and their is a significant number of people with distrust in the Govt over 9/11. Why aren't the Govt running big campaigns to combat this distrust? Why aren't their official Govt "debunkers"?
Why aren't we seeing Govt scientists debating these alternate theories in public domain? If nothing to hide, and if it would help boost his admin, why not be an open book to 9/11 concerns?
Click to expand...
The answer is, the interpretation of recent polls is not correct. Read the actual poll questions and the actual responses.

offchops said:
Of course, none of the above proves anything, but as someone who observes how far politicians will go for support, and watching the Bush admin approval rating plumit, i do wonder. Bush seems to be the type who would do anything for public support, i think he needs it.
Click to expand...
The people with major 9/11 concerns are an insignificant minority who wouldn't trust anything coming from the Bush camp anyway. There are plenty of other legitimate concerns about the Bush admin that they are overwhelmed with (Iraq, most notably). Do you think that the administration's addressing 9/11 conspiracy theorists' concerns would be viewed as anything other than an intentional distraction from real problems? The last thing he needs is for something else to backfire on him.
 
Even assuming the interpretation of the polls is correct (which it does not appear to be), and that the polls are representative and properly conducted (ditto), I doubt very much the current administration would care.

As the current administration cannot possibly seek re-election under current US law, and they have larger issues to worry about (current war in Iraq, diplomatic situation with Iran), there is basically no incentive for the Bush administration to try and appease some people that distrust the government about one particular issue.

So, even in the Truth best-case scenario (lots of people support their position), there's really no reason why the government would bother with "government debunkers," as it would simply be a waste of time and resources. Basically, let the next guys deal with it.

But, as the polls do not actually appear to show that a significant chunk of Americans believe 9/11 was either allowed to happen or made happen by the US government1, then this is basically a non-issue. Even an administration facing a re-election campaign isn't going to tackle an issue that is only significant for a tiny fraction of citizens.

1This has been done to death here. I suggest you read R. Mackey's excellent thread "On the Nature and Scope of the Truth Movement," including the links to Zogby explaining the poll process.

ETA: I would add, the most critical thing is the wording of the Zogby polls. It conveys only the idea that people believe that 9/11 should be investigated further, or that the 9/11 commission was covering something up, not the idea of 9/11 being an "inside job." Nowhere does the poll, for example, ask "do you believe that the Bush administration deliberately staged the 9/11 attacks?" or similar questions.
 
Last edited:
This idea that the ISI is somehow under the direct control of the CIA is laughable to anyone with any knowledge of the area. Hell, the ISI is barely under the direct control of the Pakistani government. There are parts of Pakistan where even the Army is not allowed to go. If they were, we would probably have Osama in custody already.
 
offchops said:
Example...
India Times runs Pakistan ISI funded Atta story.
Counter...
The article gives no sources, India is hardly unbiased.
Debunker conclusion...
It's unlikely that the article had substance. (opinion)

To me that isn't "debunked"
Click to expand...

Isn't it the only paper that reported it?
Why wasn't it reported elsewhere?
- if you believe that Govt controls certain media/some papers are too scared or are bush lovers - why didn't Anti-Bush papers latch onto it?

I believe its debunkable. It has never been confirmed or followed it.
 
offchops said:
Example...
India Times runs Pakistan ISI funded Atta story.
Counter...
The article gives no sources, India is hardly unbiased.
Debunker conclusion...
It's unlikely that the article had substance. (opinion)

To me that isn't "debunked", that's just one example, their are many others that i could go into, but that was not the point of my post.
Click to expand...

You are correct that this does not debunk the ISI connection. However, you are placing the burden of proof on the wrong side. In order to build a solid conspiracy theory, the theorist has to use solid building blocks. It is apparent that this is a wobbly block at best.
 
I merged the two identical threads together.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Lisa Simpson
 
aggle-rithm said:
Has this ever been done?
Click to expand...

That actually gives me a good idea for a contest. We should see which truther can actually come up with the best narrative. They have to describe exactly how they think it was done and who was involved. It should be entertaining at least.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom