911 REVISITED

One of the reasons I started this blog was because of the so-called “911 Truth” movement. A couple of years back I was exposed to their perverted nonsense and I needed a place to vent about it. Then my neighbor Wyatt said “Dude you should start a Blog”. I had already tried and didn’t get very far so I decided to give it another shot with his help.

From time to time I revisit the topic as events warrant just to remind myself what that day meant to me and that it was the reason I started doing this. LINK

That being said there is an excellent piece posted at Little Green Footballs that exposes yet again the fraudulent nature and intellectual dishonesty of the so called “Truth” movement. It exposes them as the nuts they are and dares them to prove an ounce of their drivel. Of course they won’t go near a fact with a ten foot pole. The wack-o’s would much rather spend their time trying to turn the events of 911 into another Kennedy assassination. So here’s an excerpt. If you can, take a few minutes to remember what happened that day so that some day you can counter what some assclown teacher tells your grandchild “Really happened” that day.

It’s time to turn the tables on the truthers. Rather than accept a situation in which the nutjobs and kooks who subscribe to 9/11 conspiracies can make their accusations willy-nilly, it is high time that their critics decided that they can “just ask questions” too. This particular debunker has decided that maybe, just for once, the onus for actually demonstrating the validity of their theories on the basis of systematic and critical analysis of the evidence belongs to the truthers, not to those who wish to expose their fallacies. As someone whose academic bias is based on history, I would like to pose the following challenge to the conspiracy-mongers:

Let’s take your thesis (that 9/11 was an inside job perpetrated by the Bush administration, and covered up by a coalition of US government agencies, allied powers, big business and the media) as read. The following questions point to logical and factual gaps within that thesis. It is now up to you to answer these questions and explain why your theories are still valid. For your answers to be credible, they need to be detailed and based on verifiable evidence. No suppositions, no speculation, no unsupported assertions, just the facts. Stop “asking questions”, and provide answers. These fifteen initial questions will do for starters.

H/T to LGF. Good work.