The issue of
the 911 attacks is often framed up by many as if there are only two
choices; either you are a paranoid conspiracy theorist crackpot
or you accept the official story, a mentality strangely reminiscent of
the "either with us or against us" mentality. The problem with
this mentality is that most people fall somewhere in the middle.
Most people are neither crackpots, nor do they always toe the line
and believe the mass media. Most people are not extremists.
There
are some extreme viewpoints regarding the 911 attacks, theories
involving claims that cannot be substantiated. However, many who
have questions about the 911 attacks are taking a different
approach - a much more rational one. Rather than speculating
about what happened on 911 they are focussing on the shortcomings of
the 911 Commission investigation (which are many) and calling for
a new, independent investigation. Who could deny that there
were some huge -
bordering upon unbelievable - blunders in the investigation? Who
would be willing to overlook this? Why?
A thorough
investigation would surely be able to explain the following six
questions: (and others ...)
1-
What were the
"explosive devices" that the
NYPD reported finding? (The Fire Department Chief of Safety
also said he believed there were bombs "planted" in
the buildings)
2- What were the
many explosions heard by many eyewitnesses in the
basement and mezzannine areas? (and New
York City firemen also
reported explosions in the towers that sounded just like a
controlled demolition)
3- Where are the
black boxes that were recovered at ground zero? The official
story is that none of the 4
black boxes (2 per plane) were ever found at ground zero, and yet New
York City firefighter Nicholas
DeMasi (Engine Co. 261) and Mike Bellone (Ladder
20) both recall recovering three
of the four boxes. This story got precious little media
coverage, which comes as no surprise, given the burden of
reporting more important things like Tomkat,
Brangelina, and American Idol.
4- How
can we explain the Flight 93
crash site in Pennsylvania? Just where did that plane go?
Did it tunnel into the center of the earth?
Just
another wacky, inexplicable occurence that day? Just another
crazy
coinkeedink? When it rains, it pours? (Here are some
pictures of real plane crashes)
5- Why did the towers at
ground zero (especially WTC 7 which was not struck by a plane)
all come
down perfectly in their own footprint?
6- Where was
the radar/high tech surveillance (N.O.R.A.D
/ F.A.A...)
of the most powerful nation on the planet as three planes - all
connected by a common cause - collectively receiving
zero resistance - struck their
targets in some of the most sensitive areas in the country?
(Another incredibly fortunate twist of fate for the "evildoers"?)
We have
been conditioned to scoff at conspiracies. Gee, I wonder
why? And just like when JFK was assassinated,
we have a five star "commission" whose job is to put
together an official story so that everyone can lay it to rest and get
on with their lives. And just like the Warren Commission,
everyone senses that the 911 Commission's story is fishy, but it
doesn't matter because there is something at stake here which is even
more important than the truth. It's vital that we cultivate the
status quo ... the social order, safety and security which concensus
provides. It's the glue that holds us together. There is power in
numbers. Our story doesn't need to be true, as long as we have
one, and as long as it works. And once a story is offered up,
questioning it becomes inherently abhorant because it
makes the questioner stand out, lose their camouflage, separating them
from the security of the group. Nobody wants to be looked at as
the weird one or the odd man out. Social status and fitting in
are paramount for us humans. No one wants to put strain on their
important relationships. This is programmed into us
through evolution.
It's easy to see then why
many people remain in denial about this issue. Like the assasignation
of JFK, those "lone gunman" who were "acting
alone" are ever tidy and make
getting on with life so very easy. On the other hand, having
different people and/or factions of government acting together, or "conspiring" is taboo. Heaven
forbid we should have a conspiracy! Yet it happens all the
time. History is riddled with conspiracies. Everyone
can name a few. Still they refuse to look here, just as they
continue dangling from the belief that JFK was
killed by a single bullet which struck him in the back of the head,
even though we have incontravertible
video evidence demonstrating that this is pure
nonsense. It's so much easier and more convenient to
embrace the twaddle we were spoon fed.
How long will it
take the herd to demand a new investigation? Being in
denial will not prove to be a productive course of action.
Ask any psychiatrist about the concept of denial and they'll tell
you it is a defense mechanism by which human beings protect
themselves from things which threaten them by blocking out this
information - refusing to even consider it. But being in
denial doesn't make the reality any less real. It just puts
off having to deal with it, usually making the end results much
worse. We have too many citizens with relevant and
credible insight coming forward to shed light on this
story. There's no
excuse to remain in denial. There's too much at stake.
The cui bono question and geopolitical implications of the attacks,
though circumstantial and non-definitive, nonetheless point us in a
more likely direction, except for folks given to mind bending
coincidence. These folks will undoubted continue dangling from
the belief that a geek squad of 150lb morons with box cutters pulled
this off, with the aid of their rich, cave-squatting mastermind.
What are your answers to the 6 questions above?