Conspiracy World
I often get so wrapped up in trying to figure just exactly what DID happen on 9/11, that I forget how far my mind-set is from someone who believes the government had nothing to do with 9/11. It's kind of funny.
My basic response to someone who doesn't "get it" about 9/11 is that they just don't know all the facts.
But I suppose there is more to it than that-- there must be some predisposition towards 9/11 sketpicism, towards "conspiracy mongering".
Unlike many 9/11 skeptics, I was not much of a "conspiracy theorist" before 9/11. Sure, I saw Oliver Stone's "JFK" and found it believable, and like most people, I found the JFK story a little fishy. In terms of UFOs, I thought from a scietnific standpoint it was possible but I never believed the government was covering anything up (and this is a type of conspiracy I haven ever gotten into). In general, before Clinton I was too young to be concerned about conspiracy stuff and during Clinton's presidency I was a partisan Democrat and not very interested in weirdness with flight 800, and the Oklahoma City bombing.
To be sure, as I've explained before, my 9/11 skepticism definitely evolved over time-- although even on the day of 9/11/01, I knew that something very strange had happened. The whole story was just too shocking to try to really start doubting it at that time, however. The anthrax attacks really started my skepticism alarm going, and then it was off to the races as I saw the vast parade of lies coming from the Bush amdinistration before the Iraq war.
So, to be a 9/11 skeptic, here has to be some fertile ground for the seeds of knowledeg to be planted. My fertile ground was knowing how devious this administration was.
I think the reason more Democrats don't become 9/11 skeptics is that you have to give up some idealism regarding the Democrats.
I have done this to be sure-- I have a much more jaundiced eye now looking at Clinton and Gore and Kerry, and the rest of them, than I did just one year back. The fact is, they disgust me in the way they maintain the official 9/11 mythology and refuse to quesiton it. They are part of the problem. And I think they are too smart and too connected not to know there is more to 9/11 than the official story.
In any case, I wonder what else it takes to think like a "conspiracy theorist"? Certainly one must have a curiosity, a thirst for the truth and a general distrust of government.
That could exist in a lot of people-- so there must be room for growth in 9/11 skepticism. The main problem of course is getting the message out about the strange oddities of 9/11. The mainstream media simply won't allow this, and most people aren't going to believe something they see from a "wacko" website like this-- they need some stamp of authority.
So I guess the last thing one must need to be a 9/11 skeptic is a distrust of the mainstream media.
Believe, I am very distrustful of the mainstream media now.
My basic response to someone who doesn't "get it" about 9/11 is that they just don't know all the facts.
But I suppose there is more to it than that-- there must be some predisposition towards 9/11 sketpicism, towards "conspiracy mongering".
Unlike many 9/11 skeptics, I was not much of a "conspiracy theorist" before 9/11. Sure, I saw Oliver Stone's "JFK" and found it believable, and like most people, I found the JFK story a little fishy. In terms of UFOs, I thought from a scietnific standpoint it was possible but I never believed the government was covering anything up (and this is a type of conspiracy I haven ever gotten into). In general, before Clinton I was too young to be concerned about conspiracy stuff and during Clinton's presidency I was a partisan Democrat and not very interested in weirdness with flight 800, and the Oklahoma City bombing.
To be sure, as I've explained before, my 9/11 skepticism definitely evolved over time-- although even on the day of 9/11/01, I knew that something very strange had happened. The whole story was just too shocking to try to really start doubting it at that time, however. The anthrax attacks really started my skepticism alarm going, and then it was off to the races as I saw the vast parade of lies coming from the Bush amdinistration before the Iraq war.
So, to be a 9/11 skeptic, here has to be some fertile ground for the seeds of knowledeg to be planted. My fertile ground was knowing how devious this administration was.
I think the reason more Democrats don't become 9/11 skeptics is that you have to give up some idealism regarding the Democrats.
I have done this to be sure-- I have a much more jaundiced eye now looking at Clinton and Gore and Kerry, and the rest of them, than I did just one year back. The fact is, they disgust me in the way they maintain the official 9/11 mythology and refuse to quesiton it. They are part of the problem. And I think they are too smart and too connected not to know there is more to 9/11 than the official story.
In any case, I wonder what else it takes to think like a "conspiracy theorist"? Certainly one must have a curiosity, a thirst for the truth and a general distrust of government.
That could exist in a lot of people-- so there must be room for growth in 9/11 skepticism. The main problem of course is getting the message out about the strange oddities of 9/11. The mainstream media simply won't allow this, and most people aren't going to believe something they see from a "wacko" website like this-- they need some stamp of authority.
So I guess the last thing one must need to be a 9/11 skeptic is a distrust of the mainstream media.
Believe, I am very distrustful of the mainstream media now.
posted by spooked at 8:53 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home