Simple hypothetical question: If your spouse, your doctor, or your neighbor lied to you over and over about issues that were relevant to your well being, would you ever again believe anything that person said to you? After becoming more aware of the lies surrounding the Bush regime, why would anyone in his or her right mind fully embrace the official story of what happened on 9/11 without a single question? Why would anyone in the United States of American conclude that the official account of the most important event in recent American history, as told by proven liars, is true?
Quote:
|
The point to be made is this: sometimes, the more outrageous an action, the easier it is to get away with. Sometimes, there is no way that people can connect the criminal with the crime: the very idea of guilt is so far out of the norm as to be unthinkable.
|
Very simply, it is possible to escape blame if you do something that nobody in the world believes you could do. If the deed is egregious enough, even if some proof of your culpability surfaces, you’ll be on safe ground. If people cannot imagine your involvement in an unthinkable action, they will simply not believe you could possible be complicit in its commission. Think about it.
Now I should officially state that it is not imperative for all of the evidence to stand up, given the nature of the argument. Some arguments are, as they say, are “only as strong as the weakest link”. These are deductive arguments, in which each step in the arguments depends on the the truth of the previous step. If a single premise is found to be false, the arguments fails. However, the argument for official complicity in 9/11 is a cumulative argument. This kind of argument is a argument consisting of several particular arguments that are independent from each other. As such, each particular arguments provides support for all the others.
Conspiracy Theory -- Encarta World English Dictionary
1. plan to commit illegal act together: a plan or agreement between two or more people to commit an illegal or subversive action.
2. agreement among conspirators: the making of an agreement or plot to commit an illegal or subversive action.
3. group of conspirators: a group of conspirators.
I'm under the impression that the populace thinks that those who proffer conspiracy theories are misguided, anti-Semitic, lonely, paranoid, prone to delusions and flights of fancy, and other such colorful language. Is that an accurate assessment of what you perceive a “conspiracy theorist” to be? If it is not the case, I applaud you.
In the case of 9/11 the situation is clouded by the existence of contradictory theories, only one of which is supported by the mainstream media. The phrase “conspiracy theory” is widely used to ridicule those who dispute the official explanation, but logically the official account is also a conspiracy theory.
According to Collins Sociological Dictionary, a ‘conspiracy’ theory is only to be considered suspect or reprehensible, if it is:
*Delivered in an outlandish, irrational manner.
*Delivered without decent evidence.
If something is documented, provable, and supported by verifiable evidence; it goes from “theory” to “fact.”
Conspiracy Theory (Hypothesis) + Documentation of provable and verifiable facts = Proof of a conspiracy.
For those who are still trying to maintain deniability concerning true and verifiable conspiracies; here are seven conspiracies that have been proven to involve all three clauses of the definition.
*COINTELPRO
*Operation Northwoods memo is send to the Joint Chiefs of Staff, by General Lemnitzer.
*Watergate leads to Nixon resignation.
*Dark Alliance; Gary Webb's exposé on the crack cocaine epidemic in the inner city of Los Angeles. It was proven that the origin of this cocaine was the CIA. On December 10, 2004, Gary Webb was 'suicided' by agents of the new world order.
*Jonestown mass suicide kills 900 in Guyana.
*INSLAW / PROMIS theft of intellectual property valued at $3 billion dollars, from Bill and Nancy Hamilton.
*Iran-Contra scandal.
Manipulation
I’d like to touch up on the history of manipulated public beliefs, especially the ones in matter of war. Historians are in increasing agreement that the following “facts” were manipulated:
*The explosion of the USS Maine to justify the start of the Spanish-American War in 1898.
*With respect to the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor to justify the previously unpopular entry into World War II.
*Gulf of Tonkin incident of 1964, used by the White House to justify the dramatic extension of the Vietnam War to North Vietnam.
*And the most recent was to portray Iraq as harboring a fierce arsenal of weaponry of mass destruction.
Government Scam – Impact
*The Federal Reserve System—Private control of U.S. currency
* The Warren Commission—Rise of Rogue Federal Government
* The Gulf of Tonkin Incident—Escalation of the Vietnam War
* The War on Drugs—Mass Incarcerations, "Cognitive Liberty"
* The 9/11 attacks—“Homeland” Security, Patriot Act
* War on Terror—Impending Fiscal and Military Ruin