This is a good piece, worth sending to friends who are still dubbing around trying to be "balanced," or whatever the excuse. Alvin
___________________

(original: http://americanjourney.blogspot.com/)

June 09, 2007

I just came across this article 'debunking' the 911 Truth movement- amazingly dimissive, uninformed, and evident of conclusions written inside the bubble of the United States propaganda machine.

Mr Hawkins says none of the sources in first paragraph concluded there is any sort of "grand conspiracy going on." May I remind him that there are other credible sources on record stating that the official story doesn't explain the evidence from that day See Patriots Questioin 911 where many, many credible and proven Americans put themselves on record stating we've not got the whole story - which is what the 911 Truth movement is all about. What about the collapse of WTC7? - None of the agencies listed in the first paragraph during his illogical appeal to authority have an explanation for that. The 911 comission omitted it entirely. What should we do - forget about it? Then Mr Hawkins starts about conspiracy theorists claiming that a truck bomb blasted the Pentagon. I thought the conspiracy theorists said it was hit with a cruise missile, at least that's what the Hearst Publications Popular Mechanics investigators gather from 'Loose Change" - check out the debate on YouTube
He needs to understand that there are hypotheses that will either be supported by the evidence or not. By the way, since when has a supermarket rag like Popular Mechanics been good for anything? I don't read that piece of sh*t unless I'm in the dentist's office and the other choices are Good Housekeeping, Highlight, and whatever else is stacked up on the "I was gonna' throw it away so let's put it in the waiting room" pile. Who is saying Bush is a "puppet of the Freemasons?" This is a Straw Man - another logical fallacy. Attribute some ridiculous claim to the opposition then knock it down. Mr Hawkins hasn't studied the 911 Truth movement so simply repeats generalizations aimed at making those posing questions look foolish. As more facts reveal the truth we will see who looks foolish.

Mr Hawkins should realize that questions and theories precede answers - if he doesn't believe me he can research the Scientific Method and Socratic Method. He cites 'countless mainstream newspapers" - I would remind the reader these very newspapers and other mainstream media completely failed the American public when it came to another life and death issue: The Iraq war. The lack of performance of these Corporate Media and government agencies is part of the reason a grass roots movement has risen seeking truth behind the 911 attacks. "Eternal vigilance is the price of freedom" said Thomas Jefferson - he sees conspiracy theorists - I see eternally vigilant American citizens - patriots - petitioning their government.

He later uses the term 'kooky conspiracy theories': Namecalling, a sign of propaganda, is mandatory when shouting down fellow citizens whose questions to their government go unanswered. I suppose when the U.S. government, which lately has proven itself to be practically useless, fails the 911 investigation too, we should quietly accept the conclusion like good Americans. Trust your government - Thomas Jefferson must have been wrong - John Hawkins says so. He then has a conspiracy moment of his own when he makes the claim that it would take "tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands" of 'conspirators' to do whatever it is he thinks conspiracy theorists think happened on 911. He doesn't explain these numbers - perhaps he made them up - don't know. He then smears critics of the official story with a 'bandwagon' logical fallacy. You see, they have questions that are unpopular so they are 'fruit loops.' I would remind him that a hypothesis to be tested, like controlled demolition of WTC7, still must be tested whether he likes it or not. In fact, it was not tested by government investigators even though the evidence, video, eyewitness, and physical, point in that direction. So are we to ignore the evidence because he, oh great one, says not to eat from that tree of knowledge? What might happen? Well perhaps that is the problem. Go to http://ae911truth.org/ if you want to hear some facts from qualified people - as opposed to the gentleman who wrote this weak article. There is a list of architects and others on that website who have questions that I cannot so easily dismiss because I cannot ignore evidence.

He brings up the X-Files - I cannot comment on that television show because I've not watched it. Perhaps he should spend more time reading and less time in front of the television - it would do his writing some good. Later he says "That's what people need to remember about 9/11: it's been investigated..." He mentions Hearst Publications Popular Mechanics as one of the highly qualified investigators - see above paragraph. I repeat - why is Popular Mechanics raised to this level of credibility? From Wikipedia: "In the 1890s, while using yellow journalism to compete for newspaper readership, New York City newspaper barons William Randolph Hearst and Joseph Pulitzer swayed American public opinion against the Spaniards and Cuba with a steady stream of invective." (See Spanish American War). Heart owns Popular Mechanics - history doesn't speak highly of the moral fiber of newspapers during the era of the Spanish American war - perhaps they've found God since then? I doubt it. I would add that at the beginning of his presidency Bush looked to Teddy Roosevelt, hero of that very war, for inspiration.

Another point Mr. Hawkins makes: "That's why the only people who buy into them (conspiracy theories) are the uninformed, the mentally unstable, and fools who don't understant that believing nothing that the govt. says is ..." Where to start here? First of all the official government story is a conspiracy theory so his conclusion about those believing in conspiracy theories I'll leave to the reader. He forwards another straw man - with the comment about those believing "nothing the government says" - who believes nothing the government says? Please Mr. Hawkins - who?

This article shows a dearth of knowledge on the part of Mr. Hawkinhs regarding the questions forwarded by the 911 Truth Movement- exemplifying one of the hurdles the movement faces in uncovering facts - simply getting people to look at the evidence. This author certainly has not.