| |
|
I am honestly past the point of patience with the lunatic fringe that jumps up & down and attempts to point to all kinds of selective evidence and quote pillaging as if it were resolute proof of what they want to put forward (planted plane wreckage outside the Pentagon?! All the passengers of Flight 93 evacuated to a NASA center?).
Yeah...I know what you mean. It's just that this film doesn't really do that. It continues to question the events of that day, because the questions which remain...well, they remain. The holes in the official story are large enough to drive the entire armoured and airborne divisions of the entire US military straight through without clipping the sides. Which is more than can be said for the hole in the side of the Pentagon caused by a 757 that 'vaporized completely' on impact, leaving 184 of the 189 passengers on board able to be identified by dental and DNA records.
There are questions which any intelligent, rational person listening to the official, canonical explanations of the events of that day simply have to ask, and they are not answered to the satisfaction of most people with brains and intelligence. Hence, in spite of your impatience, it seems only reaonable, if not essential, that some people continue to ask them.
And I feel like proponents of said theories impugn and ridicule the dead of that day in nearly the same capacity the President does everytime he invokes 9/11 in his policies. Which is to say, shit on them by using them to serve their own demagoguery and agendas. And it makes me fucking furious that these are people I tend to agree with politically, more often than not. Because I expect this kind of wild speculation from Dominionists and invincibly ignorant conservatives. But not from folks who believe in logic and empirical evidence. Maybe I'm mistaken in that assumption, I dunno.
Again, I know exactly what you mean. But if you watch the film, well...'wild speculation'? No, just the reports of the firefighters who were in the building, describing series of explosions which sound, to them, like munitions, a demolition job. Do you think a firefighter, particularly one who is at the scene, is qualified to speculate this way? If not, then who? The writers of 'Practical Mechanic', years after the event?
But I've seen the original version and the facts are rarely tackled on their merits, if not outright ignored as being 'part of the conspiracy', the evidence often excised out of context.
Perhaps you could watch the version under discussion here and comment on that, with relation to this comment. What merits? What facts? What evidence, out of what context?
And I'm tired of engaging with people on the street or in chatrooms who swear up and down that they have a cousin who's brother's mother knows how 9/11 really happened. It involves the Illuminati, see, and....
No one here is doing that...we are trying to establish the credibility of much of the (extremely shocking) footage and speculation presented, probably to many people for the first time in this film. Because, tbh, if 10% of it is credible and based in fact, then it is the single most disturbing, mind shattering, politically enormous event to have ever taken place in the history of humanity. So kind of worth getting to the bottom of, if at all possible.
Those who subscribe to these theories clearly run on the belief that the government isn't stupid and isn't fallible (the same people who have so egregiously blundered in Iraq are the same people who, with a cast of silent thousands, orchestrated this?)
Well, is it so simple? I'm not so sure that many of the conclusions the producers are aiming to establish are credible, but much of the evidence is extremely compelling that far more was afoot that day, and that prior knowledge, at the very least, was available to a privvy few. That alone is fucking shocking. The put options on airlines, the dodgy trading, the 'security alerts' warning senators not to fly, the fact that 9 of the 19 'hijackers' are alive and well and computer programming in Kuwait, or building contracting in South America, or whatever. That the black box recorders couldn't be found, or were useless, but the passports of the hijackers were discovered in the rubble on the day itself!! I mean, Kerr-rist, who writes this shit?
and that somehow armchair viewing of TV footage will suss out all the answers they'll ever need to know, facts or opposing opinion especially be damned.
Well, we agree here - anything but a giant question mark, an admittance that neither you, nor I, nor anyone without extreme security clearance in the highest echelons of power in the US administration can possibly have a fucking clue what went on that day. Since the administration is determined to be as opaque and ambiguous and downright fallacious and ridiculous as is humanly possible, it is hardly surprising that all manner of crazed theories abound to make sense of such a horror. To claim to have anything but a completely open mind about it is to base a decision and opinion on a totally insufficient grasp of the facts.
There are 'experts' lining up to contradict each other...how can you possibly ascribe credence to to one set over another? The chief of one NYFD was on the 78th floor and radio'd back a plan for how to put out the fires and rescue the building. He clearly did not believe its structural integrity was about to collapse, 12 minutes later. He was on the 78th floor, very near where the second plane struck the tower. You can't be much more 'expert' than him, surely? But the consultant writing for 'Practical Mechanic', from his lawn two years later or whatever, has no problem suggesting that kerosene fires could melt the structure in 56 minutes flat. He is also an 'expert', and there is no reason to suspect he doesn't know his oats very well also. Who to believe? I don't know. Neither do you.
It's not something I can buy into, myself. Your mileage may vary.
Why do you feel you have to 'buy into' either this or that? You'd be buying sight unseen, that's for sure. Caveat emptor, and all that. For all versions of those events. |
|
|
