Amazon.com Widgets

« The Sunday Funnies | Main | Links With Your Coffee - Monday »

Chomsky on 9-11 Conspiracies

Noam Chomsky explains why he doesn't believe there was a conspiracy.

Required reading for the nuts
note: nuts is a term of endearment.
The author is a native New Yorker who works as a physicist at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California with a PhD Aerospace & Mechanical Engineering, from Princeton His technical interests are generally in fluid flow and energy, specifically in gas dynamics and plasma physics; and his working experience includes measurements on nuclear bomb tests, devising mathematical models of energetic physical effects, and trying to enlarge a union of weapons scientists.




Quicktime Video 11.3 MB | Duration: 07'59
Quicktime 7 required
This file is available for download here.
Ctrl-Click and 'Download Linked File' (Mac)
or Rt-Click and 'Save Target As' (PC) the link above.


 

Comments

Köszönöm, Norm.

Tökéletesen megértem.

Szia!

Thank whatever, that he holds these beliefs, I've respected him for most of my life, his pragmatism is so refreshing... yeah I know how that sounds. 9-11 conspiracy from the left is such a red herring. It seems groups are popping up everywhere disrupting hearings and the like with this topic and what does it serve? Are there unanswered questions, of course. Are there bigger fish to fry? Most definitely! I'd much rather have people question what ISN'T hidden and put our government on notice for it's foreign AND domestic policies. It reminds me of the bait and switch games of political intrigue; where you choose a topic of controversy to get people riled up which in the end has no political consequence. When all is said and done the masses have their opiate and you can continue to funnel money out of their pockets... how 'bout THAT for a conspiracy, I bet that's far more likely then Bush planning 9-11. -Chris

Get ready for a stream of nutball comments, 'cause you're probably gonna' get 'em!

yea Chomsky it DID leak.

Thousands of government officials have gone public. calling it a total inside job.

WTC7 free-fall and molten thermate residue, Chomsky.

Would you care to address that in a with your high and mighty fake academic rhetoric?

Chomsky apparently likes his nice MIT tenure more than the truth.

user-pic

I agree with the idea that such an extensive plot couldn't have been kept secret, but for all his amazing ability to attend to detail, he sure avoids them here. What, for instance, happened to building seven?

I was also disturbed by his comment, "Anyway, who cares if it happened, what does it really matter?"

He says that in the midst of his general argument that attention to the possibility of a government-planned 9-11 is a diversion from more serious matters. But, surely, if the US government had planned 9-11, evidence of that would matter. Surely it would. It would be grounds for explusion from office. Just for starters.

Definetly well put: these conspiracy theories diverge us from the more important dialogue. You can change and flip flop evidence any way you like to make it look fishy. The truth of the matter is, it happened, we're stuck in a war. Let's talk about who we need to elect to make some real change.

This is more proof Chomsky is a part of the problem as explained in this article: http://100777.com/node/1425

One nutball c'mon up:) Firstly Noam's contention that this is a left wing cause is somewhat misleading. I've been listening to the Alex Jones show on and off for the last year and he is most definitely a right wing Christian. The difference is that he and most people that follow him dogmatically recognize that corporate empire has taken over BOTH parties and we've been left to fight about which gangster is better than the other. That said I'm a lefty that has real questions about 9-11 being part of a larger plan by those same interests. Do I think this admin is behind it? Maybe. I don't know... and neither do you. I'd say there is compelling evidence to investigate further. Start by reading David Ray Griffin's book: 'The New Pearl Harbor'.

I don't agree that we shouldn't care, something about human nature craves to know the truth.

Now, didn't the Bush administration get a memo entitled "Bin Laden determined to attack within the united states" about a month before 9/11? I don't think there's a conspiracy, but i would think the people of the united states would be pretty fucking pissed at their leaders for not doing more to protect them.

Oh, Chris- grammar correction: ...far more likely THAN...

user-pic

Did Noam Chomsky really just answer the question about whether elements of the U.S government were involved in 9/11 with "even if it were true, ...who cares, it doesn't have any significance"????

Wow.

No significance? Really??

I am speachless. Is he slipping in his old age?

It was also quite funny when his first line of defense for the Bush administration is that they would have to be "insane" to do it, I'm sure we all had a little chuckle at that one.

user-pic

Anyone with half a brain can just look at the Twin Tower collapses and tell they are controlled demolitions. Noam is out of his mind. He is a linguist, not a physicist. I'm sure he has not seen the indisputable evidence, which makes me believe he has something to lose if the false flag is revealed and he does. Everything Noam has written since 9/11 assumes it was actually Arab blowback. If the truth comes out he will look like an idiot. He has an investment is keeping the truth hidden like many writers and journalists who jumped on the bandwagon prematurely. I know people are going to call me an antiSemite too but Noam is Jewish although he routinely denigrates Israel for its treatment of the Palestinians. Bill Maher is more overt in his support of Israel. Everything that Noam is saying couldn't happen in this video actualyl DID happen. He's saying it was too great of a chance. So what? So was Pearl Harbor. He says what if they missed the towers. They still would've killed thousands. The plane controls were overriden and steered remotely so they weren't going to miss anyway. The attacks themselves left all kinds of evidence. What they did do effectively, however, is get the media to start spouting the lie that the heat from the fires weakened th steel columns and frames, which it didn't because it wasn't hot enough. There is thermite in the basements. There are columns obviously cut as demolition angles and the list goes on. Come on people!!!!!!!!!! Al Qaeda couldn't have done that. They work for the CIA anyway.

Regardless of your feelings how can you even have an opinion when you haven't seen the real evidence, just the half-baked, unscientific dreck released by FEMA and NIST. NIST still hasn't even released their lies about WTC7 because they can't come up with any good ones. Bush and everyone that knew about this and participated is going to be tried and executed eventually. You cannot escape the truth. It continually haunts you. Now we know that Pearl Harbor, the Lusitania, Oklahoma and many others were false flags. 9/11 will trump them all because we used it as a pretext for preemptive strikes on countries that had absolutely nothing to do with it. That's why those countries are mad at us. Our government killed our own citizens and blamed it on them. Now they are dying by the hundreds of thousands and Americans act like a few thousands soldiers is all that matters. America is doomed because we ingest any lie that the corporate controlled media feeds us.

"who cares" if it were true?

weird. He is saying even if it was our government, who cares? What difference does it make? So odd. Why would it not be important for the public to know our government killed our own people?

Im not siding with him or the Truthers. Its just odd that he seems to think it doesnt matter who did it. Wouldnt finding out 9/11 was a bunch of lies be one of the most important pieces of information of our time? It would get millions of zombie Americans to take notice in politics, it would revolutionize our society. People would call for radical reforms...

So odd to hear him say that. I would have never expected it, and I already knew Chomsky didn't agree with the 9/11 theories, i just wanted to see this video to see why he thought that.

To find out he just doesnt care... strange, just really really strange.

That was certainly one of the most convincing arguments against the "inside job" theories I've seen. When it gets addressed at all the "arguments" against are almost always of the "that's just ridiculous" flavor, dismissing the possibility out of hand. Clinton's "How dare you?" was useless, for example, because it was merely an accusation of irreverence, as though the hypothesis was invalid merely because of its lack of respect for government.

I think the biggest reason to consider the "inside job" in the first place is that it's difficult to imagine any event that benefited the Bush administration more, and therefore if, hypothetically, they could orchestrate 9/11 and get away with it, they probably would (this isn't evidence of course, but merely a motive that makes looking for evidence reasonable). Chomsky acknowledges this immediately, but then points out that it would be nearly impossible to get away with something that huge without leaks, and since the repercussions of being found out would be so huge, even relative to the potential gains, it's quite unlikely they would have risked it.

It seems to me this line of argument is more persuasive even than those that try to debunk the putative evidence directly, since, as Chomsky points out, the actual facts can be interpreted to support almost any hypothesis.

Chomsky also makes the excellent point that, regardless of what actually happened, there are plenty of much clearer reasons why the higher-ups in the Bush administration should be tried for treason and/or war crimes and/or any number of other things that, in a just world, would result in their being locked up forever.

Now if only ol' Noam would stick to politics and give up on defending his degenerating breed of linguistic theory.

George Carlin's answer to the same question is far more intellectually mature and insightful:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pow5_UYKaJ8

"The consensus reality is often intentionally misleading,"

"The people who are in charge do what they want and they will always do what they want, power does what it wants to and I wouldn't trust an investigation,"

"Thousands of government officials have gone public. calling it a total inside job."

when you make a statement like this, you should provide references. otherwise you look even more paranoid than the ones referencing conspiracy books (which as we all know are rather loosely based on true facts).

Anyone with half a brain can just look at the Twin Tower collapses and tell they are controlled demolitions.<<

Sorry, but the side of brain I have has some structural, physics, and demolition knowlage, and it still tells me you people are stupid. Maybe it is that you dont really understand (or maybe it's that you dont want to understand) the work that goes into a typical "controlled demolition" that you uneducated wack-jobs keep referencing. Just stop bringing this up again and again after it has been soundly debunked by various data rich heavily researched computer recreations and input by REAL working engineers (not the flake University fringe). You wonder why we call you all wack-jobs, stupid, ect. ... dont you ever think they're are more solid accusations to throw at the Bush administration that you can stand behind?

"Thousands of government officials have gone public. calling it a total inside job."

start with http://wtc7.net and read hundreds of firefighter and police eyewitness accounts.

then try http://stj911.org and read former DOE physicist stephen jones' paper on the controlled demolitions

former bush administration economist morgan reynolds

google former head of the air force's 'star wars' strategic defense initiative, and nuclear and aeronautican engineer, colonel robert bowman.

mit engineer Jeff King

these are all government 'officials'

there are many more.

YOU do some searching. the info is readily available.

"No significance? Really??"

I think the point Noam is making is that what is important is the erosion of freedom and the wars justified erroneously. The toll post 9/11 is bigger then the toll that day. Fight the destuction of our freedom instead of developing theories that will never be proven and will just make those on the side of freedom look insane, stupid and irrelevant.

He doesn't translate his remarks into PC statements. Sometimes to his detriment.

Norm, thanks for posting this again. I have spent a bunch of time looking at CT stuff since they invaded the Bill Maher show. I came to the same conclusion Noam does. This is impossible, the motivation is never well explained and evidence is amateur conjecture fueled by all the video tape of so many people dieing.

I think the issue is poison for real dialog on the left and yet some people won't look at it from a neutral or even practical stance and let it go.

Noam captures it well.

"Anyone with half a brain can just look at the Twin Tower collapses and tell they are controlled demolitions."

Why? Because puffs of smoke come out of the windows as the floors pancake? I don't find this very convincing.

qbit: "Chomsky apparently likes his nice MIT tenure more than the truth."

George Thompson: "Anyone with half a brain can just look at the Twin Tower collapses and tell they are controlled demolitions."

I'm not in any position to rule out black ops involvement in the Trade Center attacks, but these comments are so groundless and blatantly paranoid that no rational thinker would ever want to be associated with them.

Seriously guys. If you must promote this theory, at least find a way that doesn't make us all look like nutjobs.

I find it infuriating that whenever the issue of "conspiracy theories" comes up, only the most extreme and sensational ones are discussed.

Noam rightly dismissed those theories, but what about a more legitimate one, that Bush was warned of an attack (see infamous "Bin Laden Determined to Strike US" memo) and did nothing - either willfully or through incompetence.

This is just as serious and immoral as any other conspiracy theory but rarely gets discussed, because the wackos suck up all of the oxygen.

I agree with Noam, this really doesn't matter. Far worse things have happened since 9/11 and continue happening today - the wars we wage, our polluting of the environment, the thousands of children that died from preventable diseases TODAY ALONE.

But remember, you don't care, I don't care, and together we won't do anything to stop these things from happening.

Chomsky is dead.

Science doesn't lie.

Regardless of your feelings how can you even have an opinion when you haven't seen the real evidence, just the half-baked, unscientific dreck released by FEMA and NIST.

Femanists are responsible for 9/11? This explains the Pat Robertson/Jerry Falwell theory.

Oh, and George, how's about you bring evidence next time.

Thanks.

Do you have the rest of this? I'd like to see his response to the second question.

or rather the first question...

q: who killed Kennedy?

a: who cares. stop debating and deal with Vietnam.

user-pic

Can we please stop talking about controlled explosions for ten seconds and think about a much simpler conspiracy.

Let's say I take the 911 commission report to heart and terrorists flew planes into the towers and the intense heat brought them down. Seems plausible. No really, I am being serious.

What is not plausible, however, is the hijackers passport being found in the rubble. I mean come on, the intense heat and all that.

So it does seem plausible that the passport was a plant. I think the conspiracy was placing the blame on the people they did and focusing America on the Muslim world. I think it was probably some piddly terrorist organization from some country we've never heard of in a part of the world without oil. An attack like that doesn't benefit anyone.

From the point of view that if the state functioned properly, an incident like this wouldn't have been possible to misuse for the purposes it has - of course there are more important issues. Basically, nothing could be more irrelevant than whether or not the Bush- administration planned it in that sense.

But on the other hand, since it's perfectly possible to make an argument detailing very well how the interest inside of the government in just turning the page and moving on was so prevalent. To the point where it became - as it has - a point to suggest all questioning of the official story is equivalent to stating it was an inside job.. that just raises questions.

So while I agree with Chomsky on that there are more likely explanations, and more important issues to spend time proving. It can't really be disregarded that there's a fairly obvious reason why the accusations against the government turns up.

And neither is it difficult to tie Chomsky's idea about how proving the "plot" is immaterial into looking at why, at this point, it's conceivable that it would be in the interest of those involved (not in the "plot", allright) with everything from air traffic control to foreign assassinations and from the military to the civil service, to keep quiet about any unfortunate questions they might have, and continue to act, basically, as political operatives.

Simply because there is no actual political alternative to it. And that's just how useless the american political system has become. No two different ways about that..

I have to agree with the people who say thsi was to big to cover up. I recently heard another good conspiracy theory about a secret city being built to manufacture some sort of secret weapon, employing thousands of people. They claim it was a secret for years. This thing about a Manhattan Project is pure conspiracy theory. A project of that size could never been done in secret.

Holy crap. I'm just blown away by the conspiracy whack-jobs.

I mean, sure it's inevitable that for any dramatic event like 9/11 (or JFK's assassination, Jesus' execution, etc.) you're gonna have some schizophrenic, paranoid freaks going on about how some unexpected secret society or group was "really" responsible.

But c'mon. This is getting a little too mainstream for my comfort zone. Anyone who's ever worked close to the top of a big corporate organization knows it's run by a bunch of human beings and human beings could never pull of a "secret project" of this magnitude, especially when they have a track record of being so totally inept in every other area. Or is their incompetence ALSO a ruse?

Yeah, and the Illuminati brought down the towers, Harry Potter teaches witchcraft, the logo for Proctor and Gamble is Satanic, and the telletubbies are all gay.

John Stossel is an ass for the record, but... "give me a break!"

"these are all government 'officials'

there are many more.

YOU do some searching. the info is readily available."

You implied that they leaked knowledge of an "inside job."

None of them do that.

Some cop says he heard an explosion and "it looked like a demolition" is not evidence of a govt conspiracy and in no way solid evidence of controlled demolition.

And to ask my favorite question of CT's

Why in gods name would they blow the world trade centers up twice?

Once with planes and then again with demolitions?

Why not blow them up once and call it a day?

Just one bomb?

They had no motivation to do it twice and there is no solid evidence that it was done. Explosions occur in burning skyscrapers. Get over yourself wingnut.

They had no motivation to do it twice and there is no solid evidence that it was done. Explosions occur in burning skyscrapers. Get over yourself wingnut.

See, that's what I'm talking about. "Buildings blow up, it happens, so there's no need to worry, everything's fine".

Really, there are so many more important things that are not explained away - by there being just about as much evidence for, as it is against an inside plot of some sort (say, by a group working relatively close to the government, who would benefit from the entirely predictable outcome) at this point.

user-pic

While I respect Noam a great deal, he contradicts himself here. On the one hand he says that the consequences of it becoming public that 9/11 was an inside job would be the total destruction of the Republican party and Bush and co. lined up in front of a firing squad. Almost immediately afterward, he says it doesnt matter. Huh? Come again? If it doesn't matter then why should said negative consequences count as an argument against it being an inside job? If it matters so little, where is the deterrent he speaks of? Just a thought, but a government killing its own people in an elaborate set up as a pretext for war is a big fucking deal IMO.

Other than that, I agree that the CT crowd has a lot of work to do if they want to be taken seriously. Given what we have seen with this administration, incompetence is far more likely.

Not sure I followed on what you were saying about my comment

All right. So, there was no Bush- administration conspiracy to blow up the WTC to start a war. Now what?

Kudos to Reed77 for the precise explanation of Chomsky's point on "who cares?". Of COURSE that's what he meant. If anyone thinks otherwise they really are not on par with his level of discourse.

His argument on events or even science experiments having loads of unpredictable data is also one which is conveniently avoided by "nutters". In fact, they never EVER go near that argument - because it cannot be refuted - and it pulls the entire carpet from under the careful manufacturing process of the conspiracy ideas.

In fact, that is also the general tactics used in many other pseudo-scientific fields, new age religions and the like. Never admit how little you really know, just indicate that someone else is withholding evidence.

Noam makes little sense when he says it would matter nothing if the Bush administration were responsible for 9/11. With the amount of control they have over the military, they could easily execute another one to scare the country back into submission. We need to pluck out the roots from the "war on terror." The only way the average passive American will stand up to the atrocities on our liberties by our government is to be woken up through this rude awakening.

Noam speaks in complete generalities about the overwhelming amount of evidence. What we need is a debate between both sides on the specifics. People, search the evidence on the web, go on google video, read the books, get the real material specifics about the New Jersey and Pentagon plane crash and collapses of WTC 1, 2, and 7.

Stop the next war, maybe?

Organize - vote - protest - educate - repeat

Extraordinary claims require like evidence.

I haven't seen evidence compelling enough to buy into it, however I can say if there was a 9/11 black operation ("blackop"), aka inside job, there certainly wouldn't be documents sitting around entitled "How we did it" ala OJ.

Conspriracy; coindicence; its all human upon human violence ultimately.

Maybe Mr. Chomsky remembers that Bush benefited from 9/11, but completely glossed over the fact that any possible evidence was immediately removed by Bush's orders.

Sure. But how? Again, we come back to the reasons why the accusations turn up - the government secrecy, the lack of accountability, and their unnatural incompetence.

On the flipside, we have the overly high expectations from the public, the assertions of american invincibility, and the very common idea of using military power as a part of, or as a substitute for, a plan to spread peace.

And none of that goes away by "turning the page" on yet another national tragedy. (Even if the US certainly has a long tradition on that sort of thing.)

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/collapses/freefall.htmlhttp://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/collapses/freefall.html

It's fairly well-accepted that the time for the buildings to fall was too fast for any "pancaking" or "domino" theory to be credible. Super-high rise steel frame buildings don't collapse because of fire.

Whaddaya gonna do about it? I dunno. I just have my own personal issues, first. I like to have a world-view that is free of huge cognitive dissonance, as I'm sure Chomsky does too. So his attitude is, "yeah, well if they did it, it's hardly the worst thing they've done - so get over it and focus on the more worse things."

I dunno. Seems like it's pretty pivotal. I thought JFK was pretty pivotal too. Maybe he has his finger on the pulse of the ruling class power elite and knows that they'll never fess up to this and so chooses more winnable battles?

qbit, Reed77 already took up your points pretty well.

but in general, if YOU want US to believe something, its up to YOU to provide the evidence (not heckle people in public who are trying to have a debate or do a speech), not up to us to tackle anyones claims and get cracking on the research to find out if the person is a nutter or has a point. of course, funnily enough, youve exactly proved my point by only linking to conspiracy websites.

http://www.ae911truth.org/ As an Architect I laugh at what Noam has to say about these buildings (see the evidence at our website). As a taxpayer, I wince at the cost of the resulting war. As a person, I cringe at the loss of life and the liars and fools we have become. Look at the facts, photos, and use what little common sense you have left. Murder is murder Noam.

editor's note: another appeal to authority authorities disagree.

What about "Abel Danger"? I am surprised Chomsky has forgotten about this one. The question really should be change the system, yes we know these guys are criminals and if they were involved in 9-11 they won't mind bombing Iran with nuclear weapons.

Oh please. It is not fairly well accepted by anyone who HAS a brain that the time for the buildings to fall was too fast. Total nonsense made up from people who are completely unqualified to have a say in the matter. The didn't fall at free fall speed either. Just about anyone who watches the video of the collapse with an open mind can tell that. Notice the debris falling AHEAD of the tower coming down. Duh. And steel buildings DO collapse from fire. Steel doesn't have to melt. It only has to weaken. Those diagonal cuts in the steel (I saw the picture) were made by cutting torches AFTER the collapse morons. If they did supposedly plant thermite on enough steel beams to bring the buildings down, people who worked in the building would notice...because they would have to knock down walls to get to the steel beams. Steel beams in high rises aren't hidden in closets. They are walled over more often then not and the only way thermite would work correctly is if it was attached directly to the steel. How you conspiracy lunatics can have so much faith in some random website is beyond me. On topic-great answer by Chomsky.

wow, lot of crazy people posting on this personal opinion blog disguised as a political blog masquerading as a philosophy blog. I just come here for the videos. Please post more videos and less 'logical proof that religion isn't science' and other mindless banter

I'm curious. Can any of you 911 conspiracy nutters tell me why it would have been necessary to take down building 7 at all. Did it contain the records of the Illuminati, the Roswell alien cadavers, the JFK assassination proof? If so, why didn't they just fly a plane into that building too? And just to feed your paranoia: a certain Senator Truman was asking lots of oversight questions about the Manhattan Project spending until his curiosity was shut down by the Secretary of War Stimson.Surely you can find some comparable sub-committee question that you can use to turn a horseshoe into a Trojan horse. Last question: How many copies of Catcher in the Rye do you own?

Hey Peter G.-

I have a theory for this. The oporative word here is "theory." What if the plane in PA was supposed to hit wtc7? It was all wired to go and was part of the plan that went awry, so they said, what the hell - gullible people like Peter will buy a stupid fire theory, pull it anyway!

Why did they plan it's demise? It was a way of destroying a whole lot of evidence: Secret Service, CIA, NSA, the whole alphabet soup was in there. Apparently a lot of Enron data went down.

your neighborly nutter, g

I think a shredder would have been more economical. BTW I have been privately informed that building 7 also contained the outtakes and blooper reel for the fake moon landings. A shame since the blooper reel was supposed to have been spectacular.

user-pic

Just for those who are interested:

Martin Sheen has now gone public questioning the events of 9/11

http://prisonplanet.com/audio/291007sheen.mp3

I figure since we're all going to see the establishment press attach him over the next week or so you might as well hear the interview first so you know what's coming.

I'm sure Norm will have a clip up of someone ripping Sheen apart for his questions in the next couple of days. However, I have to commend Norm...6 years later he's finally getting his feet wet with the recent 9/11 clips. Long gone are the days when one couldn't speak about the issue on their favorite political blog.

editor's note: This is apparently an appeal to authority Martin Sheen an authority?

geofh - are you an engineer, or do you just regurgitate what someone tells you? I've posted before about steel design and frame analysis, the real physical truth about how buildings are designed and how they fail. The buildings WT1, 2 and 7 collapsed because the columns failed. The columns failed because they were heated and weakened by fire. Because they were loaded columns, buckling and failure was almost instantaneous. The mass of the buildings falling into the lower floors overloaded the floor below the fire, and this continued until the buildings were in the ground. But you and the dreamers are content to be angry and ignorant about this, ad nauseum.

"fairly well-accepted"

Free fall speed? I don't accept that. The building did not fall at free fall speed

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLShZOvxVe4 Count for yourself

So many assertions made without double checking for yourself.

Dear Bambino,

I sense you are psyops and I present your eyeball on a stick: ------0--

Oh, won't Poseiden have a fit!

Seriously, I am a physicist and I know whereof I speak. Regurgitation is the repetition of partially digested material. I suppose this is how you imagine the steel: partially heated and ready to spew! You may continue until you are in the ground; when Bambino meets Godzilla.

Peter G.-

Law enforcement can be dicey about shredding that kind of information. But if "terrists" demolish it, well, no fault.

Sound criticism of Chomsky from the left.

Truthmove.org

Money talks, and ethics walks.

I'm sure the govt is a bigger employer of MIT grads. Other professors who support the 9/11 truth movement have been fired. There's a good chance that MIT simply won't allow him to say what's true if he wants to keep his job.

Or else he's just an idiot.

editor's note: ad hominem

As someone who is mostly left, I'm ashamed that liberals would resort to conspiracy theories. IT HAPPENED, NO GOVERNMENT PLANNING...just move on. I really don't like this part of the left, it's as bad as people who believe in imaginary eyes up in the sky looking at you 24/7. As Noam said, people will take advantage of this tragedy...and looky it not just the neo-cons but the crazy leftist conspiracy theorists, million dollar industry in book deals I bet, and money from ads on websites too I bet.

I've entertained some of the 9/11 conspiracy theorists' arguments. My conclusion: utter nonsense based on hearsay, pseudo science, conjecture, wishful thinking, profit motive and just plain obsessiveness.

These 9/11 consipiracy theorists are pure fundamentalists. No matter how many top notch scientists debunk their ideas they remain unmoved in their beliefs. They instantly dismiss and denigrate any evidence which contradicts their faith.

Bizarre.

I witnessed the Twin Towers collapse with my naked eye from a high rise office building in Brooklyn. It happened just as reported.

Really guys -- all this 9/11 truth bullshit is getting old and tiring. Skeptic magazine published an entire issue last year to debunking these conspiracy theories, and I consider that article to be the (or one of the) definitive statements on the article. I highly suggest everyone seek it out (it's vol 4, 2006).

http://www.skeptic.com/the_magazine/archives/vol12n04.html

Seamus,

I would assume you can confirm that it was planes and not missiles?

Every time someone counters their "theories" they assume the CIA has gotten to them/

Noam Chomsky - Gotten

Popular Mechanics - Controlled

Insurance companies - complaint

Airlines -complicit

and on and on. it gets to the point where the only people not in on it are the truhers, except for the infultrators, whom propose deathrays and remote control planes and very insane ideas.

...so, congratulations to all voices of reason: fire is indeed hot, and up is not down.

Well done, geniuses. lol.

user-pic

As a 9/11 "truth" heretic myself, I sympathize with Mr Chomsky. But I may differ in one regard: I find the conspiracy movement, which looks increasing like a cult, both fascinating and instructive.

For example, observing this phenomenon may shed some light on the mechanisms through which so many were seduced by early Christianity. For every disciple thrown to the lions, there were ten potential converts telling themselves that if those folks were willing to die for their beliefs, then they must be true. Pretzel logic, of course, as the early Christians weren't being oppressed because they were right, they were being oppressed because the movement was considered spurious by the Jews and a festering political annoyance to the Romans.

Now we are seeing the same kinds of faux logic at work here. Brainwashing, persecution complexes, meme-like defenses. If you doubt the conspiracy, you are either a terminal rube, or a shameless Bush apologist, and you are told so immediately and to often with a tone of hoary righteousness. Two years ago, all this was merely tiresome. Today, it is as devastating to my hope in humanity's reason as intelligent design.

The urge to rewrite the master narrative seems to be universal. The compulsion to satisfy unanswered questions must be written deep in our DNA, since we apparently invent things willynilly whenever we are faced with the unknown. Was Freud correct when he wrote that all such master narratives are a spinal desire for a father figure? Is that what Chaney is to these people? Or is it that alternative -- that we live in a chaotic and essentially nihilistic universe -- simply too much to bear?

"Anyone with half a brain can just look at the Twin Tower collapses and tell they are controlled demolitions."

Does anyone know what is supposed to happen when a plane flies into a building? Just how is it supposed to look?? How many other examples, or control experiments, do we have for such an event? Last time I checked, very very few.

Just because things look similar doesn't mean they have the exact same cause. That seems like a shallow way to think.

The collapse of building 7 doesn't surprise me one bit. You have two gazillion ton buildings coming down next to it, all of Manhattan experiences at least a 3 on the Richter, and who knows what forces are operating in the immediate area... Plus spaces underground getting squashed and warped.

user-pic

Wherein it is transmitted 'credulity as existential threat', a live satire from the future:

SEE-TV: The Future Facts Beneath The Truth Behind The Myth

enjoy - John

user-pic

Wow, I can't believe that gibbling idiot was Noam Chomsky.

He rambled for 8 minutes and here's the sum total of all he had to offer:
(1) It's not a conspiracy because Bush would have to be crazy to cause or let 9/11 happen (2) Okay, well maybe Bush did cause or let 9/11 happen. But who cares?

Yep. That's some good scientificatin' there, Noam.

Regardless of these emotional "scientific" explanations from Right Wingnut Conspiracy Theorists, the actual truth is that no building hit by a plane has ever collapsed in a free-fall. None.

And other buildings have been hit by planes. But did they free-fall? Nope.

And physists from BYU to CalTech have explained why the government's Conspiracy Theory on 9/11 is impossible.

Doesn't anyone remember that Team Bush fought against having a 9/11 Commssion? Yep, the same folks who lie to get us into war, spy on us, etc... They didn't want any 9/11 Commission. Mm hmmm...Team Bush. We should definitely believe their Conspiracy Theory because they've been very accountable and truthful to date.

And yes, Noam. Let's just ignore 9/11 - even if Bush caused or let it happen. That's good policy. Just ignore. Relax. And maybe go shopping. Otherwise the terrorists win.

writer,

Yes it seems that when reality is explained scientifically and accepted by society, some minority group always feels compelled to break off and create their own reality. Frightening possibility, if you have been trying to imagine a future secular society where reason, science, and democracy guide us away from fear and ignorance.

Not a good sign.

yes but what about the inside job connections to: Westboro Baptist Church Jahova's Witnesses Branch Davidians Peoples Temple Nuwaubianism Scientology Greenpeace Peta

One thing's for sure- there actually was a conspiracy to attack the towers because it happened, and they succeeded. So conspiracies do occur, it's not an insane concept. Personally I don't buy the official story of who did it because the mainstream media was throwing out the hijackers pictures and names so fast it made your head spin. How could they be so surprised about the attack, yet have all that info on the same day? I'm not sold on the "inside job" theory either, but I can't rule it out. There's just not enough 100% conclusive, smoking gun evidence. 9/11 is truly a mystery. Perhaps the answer is somewhere inbetween. Bin Ladens and Bushes DO have a history of business dealings, that is a fact. But we'll probably never know what really happened.

I'm curious about how the BBC could lose footage of the WTC7 collapse...

BBC Cock up

I think it's possible a few people on the ground knew it was going to be demolished - I'm not saying who did it, if that were the case, but I think someone could have taken advantage of the disaster or maybe they were afraid to tell the truth that they demolished it to make sure it didn't fall over sideways after all the debris fell on it...

In typical Bush governemnt fashion maybe they didn't reveal the truth and maybe that time they got away with it...

I would be surprised if there were any conspiracy on a large scale, but maybe a couple of things got swept under the carpet with the debris and the chaos of the moment.

The problem with the 9/11 conspiracy theories is that they get more popular the more unpopular Bush gets. Every day it is clearer that this is perhaps the most criminal administration the country has ever seen, surpassing the Nixon administration by a long shot. This alone makes it totally convincing that 9/11 was their idea from the start.

Or does it? Point is, the Bush administration is both criminally malicious as it is criminally incompetent. I mean, if you have a docile press, a corrupt congressional majority and a loyal base that believes in creation - it is easy to steal billions of dollars, to destroy civil rights, to start wars without justification and to lose them without consequence.

But everytime the Bush administration had to get something right, everytime when actual competence and expertise mattered they royally fucked up. Even Evil Genius Rove almost lost to Gore. I mean, it is clear to me at least that they rigged the 2000 election in Florida - but it never should have been close for them. The Supreme Court had to help them out. 2002 was easy: the Dems just rolled over. 2004? They had a media environment akin to the one in 1984 - and still didn't win convincingly.

And on, and on. To think that this bunch could pull off something so stunning as 9/11 without getting caught (and no: Alex Jones didn't get them!) is just mindblowing. You mean, they literally staged the burning of the Reichstag - only to lose the Iraq war, destroy their party and forever go down as being The Worst Presidency Ever?

This is just nonsense.

(But wait, maybe that is all just part of the plan...?)

user-pic

Norm, I assure you I wasn't posting the link to Martin Sheen questioning the events of 9/11 as an authority appeal.

I only posted that here because it is related information and it is new, and I thought I would give people a heads up so they know what all the fuss is about when they see it on TV.

Martin Sheen is certainly not an authority figure on the events of 9/11, he's just another hollywood celebrity who has gone public questioning the official story.

He personally questions such anomolies as the NORAD problem on that day, and the record breaking insurance policy put on all of the WTC buildings in the weeks leading up to the attacks. He is just another human with questions who doesn't feel he's been given satisfactory answers...or as he will now be forever referred to, a crazy nut job conspiracy theorist loon.

I see the tinfoil hat brigade is out in numbers in this thread.

What do all you wackos think about fluoridated water? Is that an evil conspiracy too?

What made 9/11 so horrific was the simplicity of the plan (they hijacked four jetliners using box cutters!) and how the terrorists turned four (well, three) fully-fueled jet planes into weapons of great destruction.

The simple physics of a 757 jet, fully fueled, crashing into a building like the WTC towers pretty much explains what happened after the crash. It is both plausible not only to to a non-scientist, but also totally plausible to a well-educated and trained scientist.

You tinfoil hat troopers can believe any silly conspiracy theory your crazy hearts desire. The true nature of the attack, that 20 lightly-armed terrorists could hijack four commerical airliners and cause such horrific--and highly dramatic, like from Bruce Willis flick--damage, is much more nefarious than your stupid "da guvment did it" conspiracy theories.

Our government hasn't been able to keep a secret since WW II, so how could anyone but a stupid wacko think it could perpetrate such a vile act without at least one whistleblower involved in a conspiracy of this magnitude coming forward? This is America, you idiots, where ratting out co-conspirators is part of the game. Even mobsters cannot maintain omerta any more. Someone close to the conspiracy would have come forward and spilled the beans by now. It is our generation's way.

No doubt the neocon maniacs would love to have a secret direct action element that could do crazy acts like 9/11. But this is not the old Soviet Union or Communist China, where secrets could be kept because they were totalitarian maniacs who would kill or jail anyone even remotely related to black ops if they desired to cover them up, and of course they didn't have that pesky free press like we have.

You give our government far too much credit than it deserves about secrecy. We're completely inept at keeping secrets. And that is good thing!

http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/06-09-11.html

That's all you have to read to know that it is impossible to both make a controlled demolition and crash a "missile" or airplane at the same time. Stop it with this 9/11 was an inside job bullshit already.

Law enforcement can be dicey about shredding that kind of information. But if "terrists" demolish it, well, no fault.

Although they have some of the most secure facilities on the planet the NSA, CIA etc. use a world trade center building for storage? That is what is being suggested? Rather than move these supposedly incriminating documents or shredding (thereby committing a class c felony) they decide to destroy the WTC? Since you are a physicists Geofh I a hoping you will enlighten me on the difference between a covariant derivative and a contravariant derivative. I had some trouble with continuum mechanics.

I didn't need to read that much. just watch CT videos with a mind that is skeptical of everything and not just the Government.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gEoqBX1Z4zo

X- Files was not a documentary

I wasn't satisfied by the skeptic.com explanation of why blg 7 collapsed. If I read it right, it says there was a big hole torn into the building on the other side, where it was not caught on film. That seems like such a simple explanation that it would have been trotted out years ago. And how can you prove that? You have to trust that without evidence. Seems like someone made it up.

Peter,

'Sblood, do you think I am easier to be played on than a pipe?

Nice question. Covariant v. contravariant differntials. These have to do with analyzing the rates of change in a continuous mapping from some manifold to the reals and how a transformation of the manifold affects the rate of change. I like the Lie differential, myself; it's more canonical.

Things are fairly simple if the transformation is invertible. The transformation of WTC is an example of how non-invertible entropy towards disorder can produce just the destabilizing effect the neocons needed to impose their terror state. Use your eyeballs: the buildings didn't collapse in a hap-hazard asymmetrical manner - they freakin' blew up! Have you seen the pictures of the steel girders in the rubble showing 45 degree cuts? Kerosene fires can't do that. Thermopolymerization, maybe, but not kerosene.

Now at midnight all the agents

And the superhuman crews

Round up everyone

That knows more than they do.

Then they bring them to the factory

Where the heart attack machine

Is strapped across their shoulders

And then the kerosene

Is brought down from the castles

By insurance men that go

Check to see that nobody is escaping

To Desolation Row

"I wasn't satisfied by the skeptic.com explanation of why blg 7 collapsed. You have to trust that without evidence. Seems like someone made it up."

The building collapsed after being damaged and then burning for 5 hours. That explanation was made years ago. what sort of proof do you want?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bMZ-nkYr46w

The buiding collapsed without anyone being able to see what was going on inside. All theories about why it fell are "Made up". Some are just supported by video evidence and some aren't. Controlled demolitions are load and involve multiple explosions going off on every floor in rapid succession. Nothing of the sort happened at building 7

Well Geofh, you didn't supply the verbatim wikipedia answer I expected although I think you will find that tensor analysis is still the preferred technique for the analysis of strain, particularly in plastic deformations. As to the supposed shaped charge cuts that are used to support the controlled demolition theory, the only pictures I have seen were clearly made by cutting torches in the site clean up.The presence of slag drops in every single picture would indicate that neither shaped charges nor plasma cutters were used. My eyes and my brain both still seem to be reasonably functional.

*Documents on Worldcom and Enron were lost in building 7. *Steel melts @2700 not the 1400 that was burning. *1994 had seen three floors of the WTC building burn for over 3 hours. Why didn't it fall? *Find out who was in charge of the security for both the airport and WTC when this happened. (this will shock you) *Did people with box cutters have NORAD stand down? *Since when does fire, steel, and concrete burn? *How did the passenger airliner that hit the Pentagon fly at over 500MPH, make a 270 degree turn, and fly around 5 feet above the ground for over 200 yards without hitting lamp posts, overpasses, and leave no evidence of a plane at all?

The list goes on people. And you know who benefited? The upper 1% who make money on false agendas. How much did spending go up since 9/11?

The CIA is still pretty good at their job, regardless of how incompetent the Bush government has been...

Still, the idea of an inside job is bullshit. At most they did some last minute damage control management.

They could have also destroyed files anywhere and then claimed the only copies were in wtc7, which would be complete bullshit, but would probably hold water...

I'm looking forward to NIST's report (by the end of the year)...

http://wtc.nist.gov.

Our government took advantage of the situation, but I seriously doubt they created it..

And I think Chomsky has a good point when he says: Even if the Bushies did it - who cares?

At this point in time that's exactly right: What they made out of 9/11, what they did afterwards has been so much more destructive to both this country and the world, that their supposed responsibility for 9/11 is a moot point. They are criminals, I think we all agree on that. They killed and maimed tens of thousands of Americans and houndreds of thousands of Iraqis. They plundered this country for this and probably one or two additional generations. They brought us on the path to a dictatorship.

A supposed inside job on 9/11/2001 pales compared to that.

True story:

I was supposed to be on that Pan Am flight 103 on 12/21/1988 that crashed in Lockerbie, but I changed my flight two days before it left.

I was a soldier stationed in Germany and had just gotten out of the hospital after suffering a near-crippling knee injury. Flight 103 was super cheap, as it flew from Frankfurt, to Heathrow, to JFK, and then to Detroit. I was going home to Indiana for both convalescent and Christmas leave. A direct flight would have been much more expensive; in fact, the Lufthansa flight I eventually took cost me $600 more than my Pan Am flight because I made the change so close to the day of departure.

Here's the crazy part. I paid $600 more for a direct flight from Franfurt to Chicago on the SAME DAY as my original flight. When I changed my flight I was still in the hospital, so I had my friend Ned change the flight for me at the Landstuhl travel office on our base. He thought I was insane to pay that much more for a direct flight.

Here's why I changed my flight. Two nights before I left I had a horrible dream about crashing, and when I awoke I had a huge panic attack and convinced myself Lufthansa was the safest airline for me to use to go home. I had been suffering a little from anxiety and panic that fall after my injury and while I was in the hospital, so my friends just laughed it off and said I was making a $600 mistake born out of paranoid delusions caused by my anxious and neurotic state.

On 12/21/88 when I arived in Chicago, I was sitting at a bar having a drink while I waited for my flight to Indiana. On the bar's TV I saw the horrible news about 103's crash over Lockerbie. I was shocked beyond belief and could barely board my flight to Indiana. When I got home I was in a daze for a week.

When my friend Ned signed me out on leave with my Army unit, he wrote my fight as Pan Am 103, and wouldn't you know it my Army unit at first thought I was killed on the flight until Ned set them straight.

Suffice to say I was completely freaked out and had great difficulty flying for a couple of years afterwards.

To this day I pride myself on my creepy intuition that week in my life. I am alive because I am a neurotic freak of nature.

Over the years I have never been approached by anyone from any official capacity as to why I changed my flight. I guess because I was in the US Army I was never a suspect. Or I just fell through the cracks.

intuition, or were you in on the government plot to crash the plane?

I wonder what percentage of flights have someone change or cancel based on a bad feeling or a dream.

For f*#k's sake, what's with the hang ups about the "what does it matter" comment. Chomsky made a career of pointing out the horific crimes various US adminstrations have been involved in (directly or by proxy), so in a way 9/11 actually doesn't matter compared to them. It was a relatively small crime compared to what's been done in your country's name in the past- and regrettably the present. That's how I read the point the comment was intended to make. 9-11 CT's are so ubiquitus that perhaps they should form lobbies and movements designed to bring down this administration for the numerous crimes there is clear evidence for.

I have a hard time believing that the plane manuver that was pulled off by the airliner that hit the pentagon was accomplished by a man with only a few weeks of aviation training with no training in a commercial airliner.

lol. everything Noam Chompsky said in this video was a cop-out.

every single thing. it's to the point that it is literally impossible to respond to this video with anything other than "he's wrong". it's not that his evidence is wrong, he didn't say anything about evidence. his base reasoning is wrong, his logic is wrong. he made a classic logical fallacy with every statement.

he made a classic logical fallacy with every statement.

Okay name them.

user-pic

i just want to say firstly that whoever posted the link that suggests chomsky is 'part of the problem'.. i checked out the article an it just does not have its facts straight at all...

it's a very far fetched conspiracy theory to suggest that chomsky is part of the new world order..

he's allowed to have his own opinions.

many things in that article are incorrect.

-- but on this video...i don't know. his words are strange, but i've no idea when this was filmed perhaps it was prior to such a large quantity of evidence.

personally, i strongly believe that 9/11 was a hoax. there's no doubt in my mind that those buildings were brought down by explosives. that is certain to me.

and i think people need to know this and not stop questioning this till the truth is felt by the majority.

Navigation

Support This Site






advertise_liberally.gif

Google Ads

Advertise Liberally Blogroll

All Spin Zone
AMERICAblog
AmericanStreet
ArchPundit
BAGNewsnotes
The Bilerico Project
BlogACTIVE
BluegrassReport
Bluegrass Roots
Blue Indiana
BlueJersey
Blue Mass.Group
BlueOregon
BlueNC
Brendan Calling
BRAD Blog
Buckeye State Blog
Chris Floyd
Clay Cane
Calitics
CliffSchecter
ConfinedSpace
culturekitchen
David Corn
Dem Bloggers
Democrats.com
Deride and Conquer
Democratic Underground
Digby
DovBear
Drudge Retort
Ed Cone
ePluribis Media
Eschaton
Ezra Klein
Feministe
Firedoglake
Fired Up
First Draft
Frameshop
GreenMountain Daily
Greg Palast
Hoffmania
Horse's Ass
Hughes for America
In Search of Utopia
Is That Legal?
Jesus' General
Jon Swift
Keystone Politics
Kick! Making PoliticsFun
KnoxViews
Lawyers, Guns and Money
Left Coaster
Left in the West
Liberal Avenger
Liberal Oasis
Loaded Orygun
MaxSpeak
Media Girl
Michigan Liberal
MinnesotaCampaign Report
Minnesota Monitor
My Left Nutmeg
My Two Sense
Nathan Newman
Needlenose
Nevada Today
News Dissector
News Hounds
Nitpicker
Oliver Willis
onegoodmove
PageOneQ
Pam's House Blend
Pandagon
PinkDome
Politics1
PoliticalAnimal
Political Wire
Poor Man Institute
Prairie State Blue
Progressive Historians
Raising Kaine
Raw Story
Reno Discontent
Republic of T
Rhode Island's Future
Rochester Turning
Rocky Mountain Report
Rod 2.0
Rude Pundit
Sadly, No!
Satirical Political Report
Shakesville
SirotaBlog
SistersTalk
Slacktivist
SmirkingChimp
SquareState
Suburban Guerrilla
Swing State Project
Talking Points Memo
Tapped
Tattered Coat
The Albany Project
The Blue State
The Carpetbagger Report
The Democratic Daily
The Hollywood Liberal
The Talent Show
This Modern World
Town Called Dobson
Wampum
WashBlog
Watching the Watchers
West Virginia Blue
Young Philly Politics
Young Turks

Contact


Commenting Policy

note: non-authenticated comments are moderated, you can avoid the delay by registering.

Random Quotation

Individual Archives

Monthly Archives

scarlet_A.png

Chess Tactics Training

Powered by Movable Type Pro

Copyright © 2002-2014 Norman Jenson