9/11 and Orwellian Redefinition of 'Conspiracy Theory'

[Winston]

Excellent but disturbing article.

http://empirestrikesblack.com/2011/07/9 ... %E2%80%9D/

9/11 and the Orwellian Redefinition of “Conspiracy Theoryâ€￾

Let’s take a minute to re-acquaint ourselves with the 9/11 official explanation, which is not regarded as a conspiracy theory despite the fact that it comprises an amazing conspiracy.

by Paul Craig Roberts.

While we were not watching, conspiracy theory has undergone Orwellian redefinition.
A “conspiracy theoryâ€￾ no longer means an event explained by a conspiracy. Instead, it now means any explanation, or even a fact, that is out of step with the government’s explanation and that of its media pimps.

For example, online news broadcasts of RT have been equated with conspiracy theories by the New York Times simply because RT reports news and opinions that the New York Timesdoes not report and the US government does not endorse.

In other words, as truth becomes uncomfortable for government and its Ministry of Propaganda, truth is redefined as conspiracy theory, by which is meant an absurd and laughable explanation that we should ignore.

When piles of carefully researched books, released government documents, and testimony of eye witnesses made it clear that Lee Harvey Oswald was not President John F. Kennedy’s assassin, the voluminous research, government documents, and verified testimony was dismissed as “conspiracy theory.â€￾

In other words, the truth of the event was unacceptable to the authorities and to the Ministry of Propaganda that represents the interests of authorities.

The purest example of how Americans are shielded from truth is the media’s (including many Internet sites’) response to the large number of professionals who find the official explanation of September 11, 2001 inconsistent with everything they, as experts, know about physics, chemistry, structural engineering, architecture, fires, structural damage, the piloting of airplanes, the security procedures of the United States, NORAD’s capabilities, air traffic control, airport security, and other matters. These experts, numbering in the thousands, have been shouted down by know-nothings in the media who brand the experts as “conspiracy theorists.â€￾

This, despite the fact that the official explanation endorsed by the official media is the most extravagant conspiracy theory in human history.

Let’s take a minute to re-acquaint ourselves with the official explanation, which is not regarded as a conspiracy theory despite the fact that it comprises an amazing conspiracy. The official truth is that a handful of young Muslim Arabs who could not fly airplanes, mainly Saudi Arabians who came neither from Iraq nor from Afghanistan, outwitted not only the CIA and the FBI, but also all 16 US intelligence agencies and all intelligence agencies of US allies including Israel’s Mossad, which is believed to have penetrated every terrorist organization and which carries out assassinations of those whom Mossad marks as terrorists.

In addition to outwitting every intelligence agency of the United States and its allies, the handful of young Saudi Arabians outwitted the National Security Council, the State Department, NORAD, airport security four times in the same hour on the same morning, air traffic control, caused the US Air Force to be unable to launch interceptor aircraft, and caused three well-built steel-structured buildings, including one not hit by an airplane, to fail suddenly in a few seconds as a result of limited structural damage and small, short-lived, low-temperature fires that burned on a few floors.

The Saudi terrorists were even able to confound the laws of physics and cause WTC building seven to collapse at free-fall speed for several seconds, a physical impossibility in the absence of explosives used in controlled demolition.

The story that the government and the media have told us amounts to a gigantic conspiracy; really a script for a James Bond film. Yet, anyone who doubts this improbable conspiracy theory is defined into irrelevance by the obedient media.

Anyone who believes an architect, structural engineer, or demolition expert who says that the videos show that the buildings are blowing up, not falling down, anyone who believes a Ph.D. physicist who says that the official explanation is inconsistent with known laws of physics, anyone who believes expert pilots who testify that non-pilots or poorly-qualified pilots cannot fly airplanes in such maneuvers, anyone who believes the 100 or more first-responders who testify that they not only heard explosions in the towers but personally experienced explosions, anyone who believes University of Copenhagen nano-chemist Niels Harrit who reports finding unreacted nano-thermite in dust samples from the WTC towers, anyone who is convinced by experts instead of by propaganda is dismissed as a kook.

In America today, and increasingly throughout the Western world, actual facts and true explanations have been relegated to the realm of kookiness. Only people who believe lies are socially approved and accepted as patriotic citizens.

Indeed, a writer or newscaster is not even permitted to report the findings of 9/11 skeptics. In other words, simply to report Professor Harrit’s findings now means that you endorse them or agree with them. Everyone in the US print and TV media knows that he/she will be instantly fired if they report Harrit’s findings, even with a laugh. Thus, although Harrit has reported his findings on European television and has lectured widely on his findings in Canadian universities, the fact that he and the international scientific research team that he led found unreacted nano-thermite in the WTC dust and have offered samples to other scientists to examine has to my knowledge never been reported in the American media.

Even Internet sites on which I am among the readers’ favorites will not allow me to report on Harrit’s findings.

As I reported earlier, I myself had experience with a Huffington Post reporter who was keen to interview a Reagan presidential appointee who was in disagreement with the Republican wars in the Middle East. After he published the interview that I provided at his request, he was terrified to learn that I had reported findings of 9/11 investigators. To protect his career, he quickly inserted on the online interview that my views on the Iraq and Afghanistan invasions could be dismissed as I had reported unacceptable findings about 9/11.

The unwillingness or inability to entertain any view of 9/11 different from the official view dooms to impotence many Internet sites that are opposed to the wars and to the rise of the domestic US police state. These sites, for whatever the reasons, accept the government’s explanation of 9/11; yet, they try to oppose the â€￾war on terrorâ€￾ and the police state which are the consequences of accepting the government’s explanation. Trying to oppose the consequences of an event whose explanation you accept is an impossible task.

If you believe that America was attacked by Muslim terrorists and is susceptible to future attacks, then a “war on terrorâ€￾ and a domestic police state to root out terrorists become necessary to make Americans safe. The idea that a domestic police state and open-ended war might be more dangerous threats to Americans than terrorists is an impermissible thought.

A country whose population has been trained to accept the government’s word and to shun those who question it is a country without liberty in its future.

PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS has had careers in scholarship and academia, public service, and journalism. He served as Congressional staff and as Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan Administration.

[Voice of Reason]

Winston,

There is one thing I don't understand about this whole 9/11 "conspiracy" saga, and this is in regards to the planes actually flying into the building.

It has been well established that the planes can not have been hi-jacked, taken off course and flown into the buildings without being intercepted.

So what is the story with the planes?

Did someone ELSE fly them into the buildings?

Or did no plane hit the building at all, and the whole footage is faked?

[Winston]

Winston,

There is one thing I don't understand about this whole 9/11 "conspiracy" saga, and this is in regards to the planes actually flying into the building.

It has been well established that the planes can not have been hi-jacked, taken off course and flown into the buildings without being intercepted.

So what is the story with the planes?

Did someone ELSE fly them into the buildings?

Or did no plane hit the building at all, and the whole footage is faked?

Well we know for sure that NORAD was told to stand down. That much is obvious. They were also confused by wargames exercises at the time too.

The planes could have been remote controlled drones. Or they were hijacked by gassing the passengers and pilots and remote flown into the buildings. Or they could have been holograms. No one knows what those planes were. Only one of the planes that flew into the WTC is visible on video. The others are not.

Another thing to remember is that aluminum planes cannot penetrate steel frames like a knife through butter. So they were likely not normal planes.

If you want to hear the arguments for the no plane theory, watch "September Clues" on YouTube or see their website:

http://septemberclues.info/

A great site about all the 9/11 mysteries and explanations is:

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com

[Voice of Reason]

Winston,

There is one thing I don't understand about this whole 9/11 "conspiracy" saga, and this is in regards to the planes actually flying into the building.

It has been well established that the planes can not have been hi-jacked, taken off course and flown into the buildings without being intercepted.

So what is the story with the planes?

Did someone ELSE fly them into the buildings?

Or did no plane hit the building at all, and the whole footage is faked?

Well we know for sure that NORAD was told to stand down. That much is obvious. They were also confused by wargames exercises at the time too.

The planes could have been remote controlled drones. Or they were hijacked by gassing the passengers and pilots and remote flown into the buildings. Or they could have been holograms. No one knows what those planes were. Only one of the planes that flew into the WTC is visible on video. The others are not.

Another thing to remember is that aluminum planes cannot penetrate steel frames like a knife through butter. So they were likely not normal planes.

If you want to hear the arguments for the no plane theory, watch "September Clues" on YouTube or see their website:

http://septemberclues.info/

A great site about all the 9/11 mysteries and explanations is:

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com

That's an interesting point.

This brings back a memory. Some time after the 9/11 "attacks" a copycat Muslim in Australia flew a plane into a building. This was smaller plane, but it would be good to examine the damage done by this plane and compare it to 9/11. Unfortunately I can't find the newspiece anywhere on the internet.

[Voice of Reason]

Sorry...my mistake. That was the Bank of America Tower in Florida.

You have probably seen all this before, but here is a page I find interesting:

http://aa-1177.blogspot.com/2008/03/rev ... lanes.html

It gives examples of building that were on fire and didn't collapse. I especially took notice of the first two buildings...they were burnt out way more then those of 9/11, yet they didn't collapse.

[Spicoli]

I think you guys have your tinfoil hats on too tight.

The problem is you conspiracy nutjobs continue to repeat the same misinformation even when presented with facts or your theories are debunked.

Do you realize how ridiculously impossible it would be to have a conspiracy of this magnitude and not have someone talk? And what was the end goal of this vast conspiracy?

Holograms? Really? Wow. So why were engine parts recovered at the Pentagon if it was a hologram and where did all the passengers go?

In most cases, the simplest explanation makes sense.

[Winston]

I think you guys have your tinfoil hats on too tight.

The problem is you conspiracy nutjobs continue to repeat the same misinformation even when presented with facts or your theories are debunked.

Do you realize how ridiculously impossible it would be to have a conspiracy of this magnitude and not have someone talk? And what was the end goal of this vast conspiracy?

Holograms? Really? Wow. So why were engine parts recovered at the Pentagon if it was a hologram and where did all the passengers go?

In most cases, the simplest explanation makes sense.

Sorry you are 100 percent wrong and sound like a disinfo shill, not an honest rational person. The end goal was to get us into a war to increase the American empire, as outlined in the PNAC document.

Engine parts were ALLEGED to have been recovered at the Pentagon. But all initial photos showed no debris. The main fuselage and landing gear and wings vanished.

The passengers were either killed off, fictional, or replaced.

All of this is fully documented, if you did some research. The simplest explanation is that this event was a fraud. Simple explanations do not say that the laws of physics and aerodynamics were violated multiple times on the same day.

Nothing has been debunked here. NOT one conspiracy debunking site has explained how fire can cause two 500,000 ton structures (WTC) to turn to dust and become weightless and collapse at free fall velocity. NOT ONE has explained this. Fire cannot do that. Simple as that.

Please see my Conspiracy Trilogy Report here so you can educate yourself:

http://www.debunkingskeptics.com/Conspiracies.htm

People can keep secrets. You are making a fallacy.

For example, the Manhattan Project that developed the Atomic Bomb involved over 100,000 people who all kept it a secret before it was publicized. And the Secret Soviet Space program, which has now been declassified, involved thousands of people who all kept it a secret as well. And as you might know, the CIA and NSA consist of thousands of operatives and staff who all keep their agency's activities a secret. Large numbers of people can be controlled by fear of imprisonment, death, and guilt for betraying their associates. History has proven this, so it is possible.

Even groups of civilians have been known to lie in collusion. For example, in 1957 Time Magazine had on its cover "The Smartest Man in America", who was the latest winner of the most popular TV trivia game show at that time. It was later uncovered that the contestant had been receiving the answers in advance from the show's producers because he was widely loved by the viewers. In fact, during a grand jury investigation, 120 contestants and staff even swore on the Bible that the show was not rigged. Most later recanted, and it is now known that they all lied. So, if all these people were willing to lie to cover up something as simple as a game show, then it is plausible that people would do the same under government orders, alleged interests of national security, threat of punishment, helping to cover for their associates, or in the interests of their career and income.

A rule of thumb says that to find out who the perpetrators are, you simply "follow the money" and ask: "Who benefitted the most? And who had the means, motive and opportunity to commit the crime and cover it up?"

If you do that, you find out that Osama Bin Laden and any terrorist groups gained nothing after 9/11, but became hunted down, destroyed and made into the world's number one villain. But on the other hand, the Neo Cons, their military industrial complex and its contractors (Halliburton), and their oil cartel gained a lot, gaining power, control of oil, and conquest of territory as a result. Larry Silverstein also gained over 4 billion dollars from it through his insurance scam (as mentioned earlier). In contrast, Bin Laden or any terrorist group did not have the means to plant bombs or thermite in the WTC, shut down its security system, or order a power down during the weekend prior to 9/11.

Most importantly, Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda did not have the power or authority to cover up the crime. They did not have the authority to haul off the WTC debris at Ground Zero before it could be examined for cause of collapse. Nor did they have the authority to order NORAD to stand down. They did not have the ability to penetrate through the most heavily guarded airspace in the world, or thwart a real investigation by controlling the 9/11 Commission. And they did not have the ability to script the event beforehand (as the BBC's Jane Standley accidentally leaked out). Nor did they have the power to control the 9/11 commission and withhold information from it. But on the other hand, people at the highest levels of government, military, banking, oil, US intelligence, and CIA definitely did. They had the means, motive and opportunity to orchestrate 9/11 and cover it up afterward.