Time Magazine on "Why the 9/11 Conspiracy Theories Won't Go Away"
So now Time Magazine weighs in on the so called "9/11 Conspiracy Theories" and why they won't go away.
It only took them five years to get around to a "serious" discussion. Yes I am making the little air quotation marks with my fingers as I type "serious" because this is yet another in a long recent tide of sarcastic swipes at those of us who refuse to accept the grandest "conspiracy" of them all; that being the "official version" which says that 19 arabs brought down the most powerful military the world has ever known... using little more than box cutters and some weekend "flight training".
Despite the snide criticisms throughout much of this "news story", it actually paints a pretty fair picture of the movement. Primarily by referring to us as the "9/11 Truth Movement". Let's face it, labels count. We are no longer simply being dismissed as those "conspiracy theorist". I for one think this is a huge leap forward and I commend Time for acknowledging us in this manner.
Much of the article is actually focused on the efforts of our friend Dylan Avery. Sadly Time takes more swipes at the fine work Dylan and crew have done in putting together a far more complete picture of what actually happened on 9/11 in their legendary documentary "Loose Change". Now if only Time would take a cue from Dylan and do the job of real journalists by investigating the facts of what actually transpired on 9/11. Sadly, they fall far short of this obligation. Why should they? It's much easier to knock the efforts of Loose Change than to take a hard look at the over whelming evidence. I can't help but wonder how these publications will be viewed in the not to distant future, when the truth finally does reach critical mass. How will they explain themselves? Will they even bother trying?
Time claims that much of Loose Change is based on so-called "circumstantial evidence". Let's see, you mean the "circumstantial evidence" of a 47 story steel and concrete building collapsing into it's own foot print despite the fact that no plane flew into it on 9/11? Oh but wait, they were to busy criticizing Loose Change to focus on these kinds of facts and evidence. You got it... no mention whatsoever of WTC 7 in this Time "cover story".
A link to the article is posted here, so I'll leave it to you to draw your own conclusions about who the real "conspiracy theorist" are. As for me... my fingers are getting tired.
- Chris Rose's blog
- Login to post comments
Thanks
for the blog and link Chris...
I can no longer bring myself
I can no longer bring myself to read these silly Mockingbird pieces. the lamestream media is becoming more and more irrelevent, and they know it. It's too late. They have zero credibility. They'll never get it back. Stick a fork in 'em. Corporate media is only useful for pieces burried on page 12 and to remind us of what the enemy is thinking. Viva la net.
They also include a web
They also include a web guide here.
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1531250,00.html
I think youre
I think youre underestimating the power of this aticle. The very fact that this will sit in every dentists and doctors office will mean people that dont frequent the internet and havent been exposed to the truth movement may become familiar with the real questions before dismissing it all as "theory".
Oh how I long for the good ole days when conspiracy theorists were paranoid schizos and not 36% of the nations population.
Notice that the article
Notice that the article concentrates almost exclusively on CD and Pentagon.
No War Games. No put options. No FBI informants. No Able Danger. No Dancing Israelis. No pre-911 put options. No "carpet of gold". No PNAC. No Mineta. No opium. No Abramoff. No My Pet Goat.
Just CD, Pentagon and the usual pop psych blathering about the "need" for "conspiracy theories" in a "world that makes no sense".
Starting to get it yet? We will never win on CD and Pentagon.
This is exactly what Ruppert warned us about. Too bad no one listened.
And who is to blame for what the article talks about?
Instead of criticizing the movement and endorsing Ruppert's questionable "stratagerizing" you could note the failure of the mainstream media to do their job.
Just sayin'... :)
1) forensic evidence
2) circumstancial evidence of conspiracy
that's how I rank them anyway.
then of course "means, motive, and opportunity." maybe Ruppert wasn't comfortable with the physical case but the rest of us sure think it's an important part of the case. We're surely not to blame for the decisions made by "news editors" or "censors" in covering the case fairly, let alone in the sympathetic light reserved for approved truths...
_
"Among the 'spider-man' skeptics are those who claim that no human can shoot web and stick to walls... They conveniently ignore the fact that he was bitten by a radioactive spider."
Daily Bugle editorial debunking the claims of spider-man deniers
Real Truther has it right!
Cricizing the movement is exactly what these hit pieces are designed to inspire. Think about it... when they say "Conspiracy Theories Won't Go Away" who and what do you think they are talking about? They are talking about us. They are talking about the truth of what we are saying. It is a fact that the towers were brought down by controlled demolitions. I'm not going to stop saying it. I'm never going to stop saying it until the masses wake up to the truth of the matter and finally decide to do something about it.
Some of my friends criticize me from time to time about being obsessed about 911. Just yesterday, one of my best friends told me I need to do something or shut up about it. Then I came across the Time article and realized, that's exactly what the MSM wants us to do. "SHUT UP ABOUT IT!". Clearly then, that's the WORST thing we can do. The 9/11 Truth Movement is making a difference. Never shut up about the Truth of 9/11. Speaking out IS doing something.
And with THE INTERNET, we've got a more powerful tool than they ever imagined. Between, YouTube, MySpace, 911Blogger and Google... we're more powerful than CNN, Fox, MSNBC, Time, The WSJ and all those other MSM gatekeepers combined!!!
We are having an impact. We are making a difference. And God willing, some day soon, a change is gonna come.
Vigilance!!!
"Instead of criticizing the
"Instead of criticizing the movement and endorsing Ruppert's questionable "stratagerizing" you could note the failure of the mainstream media to do their job."
I'm not really criticizing the movement, well maybe a little, but it's constructive criticism. I am after all a part of this movement.
I just find it interesting that these hit pieces invariably focus on cd and pentagon while ignoring everything else. Why is that? Because there are armies of shlils with advanced degrees in quackery lined up to argue pancake and magic bullet theories. The end result is a general muddying of the waters.
Don't get me wrong -- I don't think these subjects should be ignored -- and I do indeed believe that the WTC towers were brought down with explosives and that Hani was no where near the Pentagon on 911.
However, I think we -- as a group -- and especially are spokepersons in the media should devote more time to these other issues.
You can't (faux) debunk admitted war games simulating hijacked aircraft crashing into buildings or phone calls to Willie Brown.
Well put. I'm a regular Joe
Well put. I'm a regular Joe in the Midwest. My wife and I were in New York a few weeks ago and saw GZ for the first time. Incredible. Whatever one's expectations they pale by comparison with the real deal. Having seen it in person I got on the Internet to learn as much as I could about that day and found myself on some so-called conspiracy websites.
At first I was like anyone else saying Oh Come On but the more I read the more I started to wonder about things that just didn't make sense. Never did. Now I am convinced beyond all doubt that (1) the towers came down as a result of a controlled demolition (the thermite angle was totally ingnored in the Time article) and (2) an airliner did not hit the Pentagon. I'm still working on the who and why questions, as everyone should be because of the elusive - and potentially explosive - nature of such things.
We all have to be careful. Giving a listener too much of a dose in one sitting makes them want to inch away from you slowly. Even my wife says to me one evening, "Do you realize how crazy you sound?"
It's all in the perception, and the Time article - however perjorative - is a good first step. With luck we'll start seeing it discussed on the liberal blogs - Huffpo, Daily Kos, Crooks and Liars, Michael Moore to name a few. The genie is just about out of the bottle and maybe we can soon start getting our country back. We are entering a time of monumental proportions.