Comments on Pro Libertate: The Conspiracy Theorists Are Plotting Against Us!

The problem with most political conspiracy theorie...

2006-10-12T18:32:00.000-06:00

The problem with most political conspiracy theories is that they are not susceptible to falsification and the adherents of the theory will not candidly acknowledge errors or inconvenient data.

In fact, it is not uncommon for persons described as "experts" and "authorities" on the "conspiracy" to contradict each other or themselves. Example: the JBS line on the NAACP as a "subversive" or "pro-Communist" organization was explictly refuted by JBS speakers (and former FBI informants) Julia Brown and Lola Belle Holmes but their refutations (in sworn testimony) are never addressed in JBS literature.

(Attack Chronology Source: CNN)On September 11, 20...

2006-10-04T12:46:00.000-06:00

(Attack Chronology Source: CNN)

On September 11, 2001, the first hijacked jetliner crashed into the North Tower of the World Trade Center. The time was 8:45 AM.

Over eighty minutes later, the fourth hijacked jetliner, Flight 93, was still inbound toward Washington DC. The target may well have been the US Capitol Building.

Had Flight 93 struck the Capitol Building, hundreds of Congressional representatives would have been killed, virtually assassinating the entire legislative branch of the federal government. In the aftermath of that catastrophe, the President would have been able to declare martial law without political opposition, and perhaps even with public acclamation.

On September 11, 2001, at 9:16 AM, the FAA informed NORAD that Flight 93 may have been hijacked. At no time, however, did the military send any aircraft to intercept Flight 93.

At 9:45, the White House was evacuated. Congress, however, was not informed by the military or executive branch of any need to evacuate.

At 10:10, the passengers aboard Flight 93 fought with the hijackers and caused the aircraft to crash. Had it continued on course, it would have reached the Capitol Building around 10:30.

At 10:45, the order was given to evacuate all federal buildings. By then, all four hijacked aircraft had been destroyed and the danger was long past -- no thanks to the US military.

And no thanks to its Commander in Chief, who just happened to be a thousand miles away at the time the nation's capitol was under attack.

On September 11, 2001, with the US Capitol Building in flames, what would have stopped George W. Bush from declaring martial law and appointing himself President for Life? True, we do not know if this was the plan. But we know that he had a motive, and his behavior that day is suspicious.

1) In terms of actual evidence, there's nothing to...

2006-09-15T19:34:00.000-06:00

1) In terms of actual evidence, there's nothing to show anything beyond the normal range of government screw up before and after, and government propaganda in the cause of Big G. and unending war. I think if there was Bushite involvement in 9-11, a trail would have been constructed to forge (in both senses) evidence of direct Iraqi involvement and lead away from Saudi involvement--those being the Arab governments which Bush most disliked and liked.

2) The comparison with the generation of 1776 is faulty, because in that case the British aims were openly stated by the British government and supported publicly in the press and Parliament by its supporters. The whole purpose of the Navigation laws, etc. was to keep the colonies subordinate to "the mother country". There was no secrecy; everyone knew what was going on. There were simply three types of Americans: 1)the Loyalists of Thomas Hutchinson type, who thought the British schemes were a good thing; 2) the Patriots, who refused to accept any sort of British domination; 3) the middle, which originally sought compromise and moderation from England in various types, and gradually fell away into either category 1 or 2 as British government inflexibility met Patriot principle.

If history judges Bush to be a monster, history wi...

2006-09-14T18:51:00.000-06:00

If history judges Bush to be a monster, history will also assume, without conclusive evidence, that members of his Administration were involved in the 9-11 attacks. Think Nazis and the Reichstag Fire.

Need I state the obvious? Goldberg's a lightweight...

2006-09-14T16:02:00.000-06:00

Need I state the obvious? Goldberg's a lightweight. He presents no argument, only calumny. "Question the official account and you're a crazy, Jew-hating moron and need not be taken seriously."

I'm not clear on the merits of 9-11 conspiracy theories. I suppose that I believe the offiical story, but I am open to possibilities. I'd be interested to hear why you are on the fence on these theories yourself.

Good blog-- very enjoyable reading.