Very popular on the Internet we're told, these conspiracies on 9/11. The programme on BBC2 has led me to believe that there was no conspiracy before 9/11, even if the BBC are not always taken to be fair in their investigations.
I won't get into criticism over BBC programming, but the answer to any possible conspiracy theories was easy to answer - It was terrorists under Bin Laden.
The writer of the X-Files said it best - and I would probably go any further than him to say JFK is another example that extraordinary incidents demand from the general public, extraordinary answers. The truth hurts, as the saying goes.
Likewise, extraordinary questions like the 'Existence of God' in some people's eyes (Dawkins), require 'extraordinary' answers.
That is something entirely different I'm aware, but sometimes things are not always as they should be, such as the size of craters at the Pentagon, etc. It has been shown that the evidence is accounted for.
Like the BBC says, and the director of Loose Changes says is one of the possibilities - that there is a conspiracy, AFTER 9/11 if not before. It is very plausible. Motive for the government is securing long term oil interest - opportunity was 9/11 and 'Muslim hijackers' - but yet, the consequences have gone horribly wrong in Iraq that Bush has a tainted legacy (if any).
Personally, being a Republican (UK meaning not US!) I tend to believe in the system of democracy and have faith in it. It can't be ignored that Bush decided to resort to war, in the words of Josiah Bartlet in West Wing, "by the fury of God's own thunder", especially given his widely known fundamentalist neo-conservative views. I don't think he was a partipant in the attacks, but his intelligence was certainly distorted, if not by personal motives then by typical Republican (American meaning) nationalistic feeling generated by the attacks.
Finally through watching the programme, the 'Loose Change' documentary mentioned above, is given below. Its long, an hour or so. I've not watched it yet, but it certainly is intriguing.
I won't get into criticism over BBC programming, but the answer to any possible conspiracy theories was easy to answer - It was terrorists under Bin Laden.
The writer of the X-Files said it best - and I would probably go any further than him to say JFK is another example that extraordinary incidents demand from the general public, extraordinary answers. The truth hurts, as the saying goes.
Likewise, extraordinary questions like the 'Existence of God' in some people's eyes (Dawkins), require 'extraordinary' answers.
That is something entirely different I'm aware, but sometimes things are not always as they should be, such as the size of craters at the Pentagon, etc. It has been shown that the evidence is accounted for.
Like the BBC says, and the director of Loose Changes says is one of the possibilities - that there is a conspiracy, AFTER 9/11 if not before. It is very plausible. Motive for the government is securing long term oil interest - opportunity was 9/11 and 'Muslim hijackers' - but yet, the consequences have gone horribly wrong in Iraq that Bush has a tainted legacy (if any).
Personally, being a Republican (UK meaning not US!) I tend to believe in the system of democracy and have faith in it. It can't be ignored that Bush decided to resort to war, in the words of Josiah Bartlet in West Wing, "by the fury of God's own thunder", especially given his widely known fundamentalist neo-conservative views. I don't think he was a partipant in the attacks, but his intelligence was certainly distorted, if not by personal motives then by typical Republican (American meaning) nationalistic feeling generated by the attacks.
Finally through watching the programme, the 'Loose Change' documentary mentioned above, is given below. Its long, an hour or so. I've not watched it yet, but it certainly is intriguing.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment