BBC Newsnight Blog References 9/11 'Conspiracy Theories'

On internet conspiracy theories -

Journalists usually take government facts in good faith, albeit they're somewhat spun and edited. No-one ever got sacked for printing the OV, and, let's face it, challenging it takes a lot of graft for a busy reporter. So when they 're told that Iraq has chemical weapons, journalists tend to publish it . But for a reader or viewer, rule one is 'Don't believe the OV until you see proof. But assume it is true if you do see decent proof.' The September 11 CT that said 'Flight 93 was brought down by the airforce not the passengers' was once a widely held internet CT, but then decent taped evidence came along and undermined it among all but the most cynical.
Who has the better background narrative - the CT or the OV? In other words who sets the more convincing dramatic backdrop to the events in question? The Diana CTs sold well because they had this enthralling background plot and cast that everyone was already familiar with, but the OV was also a credible story, just painfully prosaic. On the other hand the CT that the Iraq evidence was faked had a really consistent hinterland of elegantly intermeshing revelation and gossip, whereas the OV narrative always seemed to be changing or unravelling. But the background to the World Trade Centre attacks had an utterly compelling received wisdom, whereas the CTs just never remotely fitted with how any sensible person expects the world to behave.

So which CTs should you buy into? Well you'll just have to make your own minds up. I've got a mortgage to pay.

But we're talking about the Neo Con/PNAC/Bush administration

"whereas the CTs just never remotely fitted with how any sensible person expects the world to behave."

Yes, but we're talking about the Neo Con/PNAC/Bush administration's agenda. 'Sensible persons' do not enter into this equation in any shape or form.

For examples: "free speech zones", the spying on US citizens, the "sneak and peek" provisions, the CIA secret prisons, "extraordinary renditioning", the prisoner abuse scandals of Abu Ghraib, Bagram Air Force Base and Guantanamo Bay, the circumvention of laws such as the Geneva Convention, habeas corpus and use of the FISA courts, "signing statements", "pre-emptive" war, the blatant war profiteering taking place in Iraq and Afghanistan, the shamelessly obvious lies coming from the President, Vice President, Secretary of Defense, Secretary of State, and National Security Advisor that are too just numerous to mention in a single post, the Unitary Executive Power theory, rampant corruption in our legislative, judicial and executive branches of government, the "documented facts" regarding election fraud in the 2000, 2002 and 2004 elections and the loss of respect and dignity that these actions have caused us as it relates to our international standing.

See what I mean? I rest my case!

I hope more people learn to

I hope more people learn to settle down with this NeoCon/Bush rubbish. His fall will be mighty, and everyone will be treated to a dazzling circus. Some of the "neocons" have direct involvement, but these are likely the same that are in contact with UN/G8. Please read any book by ZBIGNEW BRZEZINSKI. A brutally honest member of the "new world order".

"Moreover, as America becomes an
increasingly multi-cultural society, it may find
it more difficult to fashion a consensus on foreign
policy issues, except in the circumstance of a
truly massive and widely perceived direct
external threat." -ZB

For all we know, 911 is staged to be revealed to the public later. This may be a way to create a distusting for or shock-induced order out of chaos. Heck, even blame Bush and let everyone have a wack.


Agreed, Brain:

The problem/reaction/solution business, be it by design or just common human nature, warns that America the uniformed populous it is.... stands a possibility of asking outside interests to come and save the day. I have already seen this occasional tendency, even from committed thruth-ers.

The reminder, no matter ones love or distaste of national identity, is that most all people properly enjoy cultural tradition and local ritual. If The State is failing in its duty to protect and defend the locals paying its bill (or co-signing its debt), it's the local which must turn introspective and reevaluate the terms and personal it sent forward as its defenders. Failures (problems), do not simply demand action (reaction) from an outside hero (solution).

Would seem that lasting security always demands a local answer. Problem (derelict Department of Defense), Reaction (introspection to consider the current terms of the defensive arrangement), Solution (rearrange the agreement with the local means available).

Sticks and stones if need be.... I promise.

The term "conspiracy theory"

The term "conspiracy theory" sure is useful to criminals.It somehow manages to lable the people who realize a crime has taken place as being "whacked out" as if conspiracies don't take place all the time.With a crime rate as high as the one in this country,why do people have so much trouble believing that 911 was just a big crime.The Official Version idiots have taken up the banner so well for the criminals with this "conspiracy theorists are crazy" meme.

It is even more useful when

It is even more useful when all of your manufactured spokespeople are whacked out or up to no good. Call me a shill. In all honesty, I try to bring the movement together when I say we should move very far way from everyone at the "front" of this thing. I am dissapointed that this movement is allowing all these people to speak for us in public in Septemeber. I will be there to pay my respects, and will say a prayer for those of you are latching on to these actors.

BTW, anyone know is there will be a Q&A with Prof. Jones? Also, how close will the 9/11 protest be to ground zero? I imagine the news reports now, a hired screaming loony truther juxtaposed with a crying, confused family member.


The September 11 CT that said 'Flight 93 was brought down by the airforce not the passengers' was once a widely held internet CT, but then decent taped evidence came along and undermined it among all but the most cynical.

Wait...Did I miss something? Or am I the most cynical? Did the reporter mean the staged CVR? Or the staged phone calls? What about the three minutes time lag? What about no plane debris?


If there was a change it was the myth about the passengers uproar "Let's roll" brought down the plane to the hijackers brought it down...