GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum - View Single Post - If 9/11 was an "inside job" was the 1993 bombing of the WTC one, as well?

u-Bob · 03-21-2012, 08:21 AM

pt 2:

Quote:

I want to emphasize, again, that I am not even suggesting that persons other than Al Qaeda operatives were responsible for the 9/11 attacks. I know of no evidence sufficient to sustain such an accusation. I am, however, suggesting that a number of critics of the ?official? explanation have offered enough thoughtful evidence and factual analysis to warrant a thorough investigation of these events. The inquiry should be conducted by competent men and women with no preconceived agenda ? whether as defenders or critics of governmental behavior ? and without fear of asking any and all empirically related questions. Were he not a fictional character, I would insist that Inspector Morse ? with his ?cui bono?? disposition ? be made chairman of the investigatory group.

For such an inquiry to have meaning, it must be accompanied by a widespread change in current attitudes that make most Americans unwilling to consider the possibility of ?conspiracies? directing events. Such a naïve mindset reflects an ignorance of so much of human history as to be embarrassing. The role of the ?agent provocateur? ? which found expression in the Operation Northwoods plan ? is much better known to Europeans, whose political histories are replete with well-established in-house scheming.

To help my American neighbors get beyond this anti-conspiratorial brain-lock, I proclaim that the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon were, indeed, brought about by a conspiracy. Any who deny this are invited to explain why the World Trade Center buildings no longer appear on the New York City skyline! Unless one is to offer the state's favorite ?one-lone-nut-with-two-commandeered-airplanes? as the causal explanation, it seems quite evident that these attacks were brought about by at least two persons, thus constituting a ?conspiracy.? The next question is whether the conspirators were of Al Qaeda or other as-yet undisclosed origins or, perhaps, a combination thereof. One could contend that these occurrences were the products of nothing more than random accidents; a bad day for airline pilots who could not keep from plowing their planes into buildings. But even such a far-fetched explanation implicates a conspiracy, as many persons in both the government and the media went to great lengths to inform us that these were planned attacks.

What forces were responsible for the crimes of 9/11? Admittedly, I do not know, nor am I prepared to transform my skepticisms into accusations. Perhaps it is the lawyer in me that has this strange attraction to evidence as the basis for my empirical judgments. In employing the ?cui bono?? test as a point of departure, I find only two groups which, in Inspector Morse's question, seem to have benefited from these attacks: (1) Al Qaeda, and (2) the United States government. Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden have become a major political force in the world, in large part due to the Bush administration's violent reaction to 9/11. But the American government ? with its expanded police and military powers, increased military spending and the creation of new weapons, and the popular acceptance of the idea that people can be held, indefinitely, without trial ? has benefited from this event by greatly expanding its powers. 9/11 was the product of a conspiracy, the only question being: who were the conspirators?

But as with a murder investigation, that one has benefited from a crime does not prove one's causal role in it. It is important that this critical distinction continue to be made. Suspicion and guilt are not synonymous words. At the same time, however, intellectually respectable thinking demands a willingness to pursue any inquiry wherever it may lead. There is far too much at stake in our world for any of us to take comfort in our institutionally-certified ignorance by pulling the blankets up over our heads so that we not see the bogeyman.

But there is another factor ? what I call ?existential courage? ? that must remain at the forefront of our efforts to live as human beings, rather than as servo-mechanisms to the institutional order. What kind of people are we that we should lay our liberties, property, and lives ? including the lives of our children ? at the feet of rulers, to be disposed of in any manner that suits their momentary temperaments? What have we become that we regard any questioning of this arrangement as the products of ?irresponsible? or ?paranoid? minds? Why should free and energized minds be fearful of asking any questions, particularly those we have been told it is improper to ask?