Asinine Assertions From The 9/11 Debunkers

To counter Charlie Sheen's appearance on CNN to call out Bush and the neocons on 9/11 complicity, FOX has trotted out...Betsy Hart. Make no mistake about it, she's speaking to those with a less-than-stellar mental landscape here, and her sophomoric rhetoric is made-to-order for the SUV and cellphone crowd. Let's see what Dumbed-Down Betsy had to say:

I'm the first one to suggest that we in a democracy should have a healthy dose of skepticism when it comes to our government. I would sure like to know how the United States ever became vulnerable to such attacks in the first place! But our skepticism has to be based on thoughtfulness, knowledge and right principles. (Have other conservatives, and liberals _ have I? _ gone so far, too far, in trying to question a legitimate government that this is what we get?)

In any event, what the conspiracy theorists won't answer is why our government would do such a thing as 9/11 _ and more to the point, if it committed this terrible crime and then, essentially, got away with it, why hasn't it "finished" the job? Conspiracy theorists repeatedly claim that no one can answer why there are so MANY conspiracy theorists, so that alone gives their theories credence.

That's a circular argument to say the least, but here's at least one reason for the conspiracy theories that I find compelling: the threat of Islamic terrorism is so frightening, so unpredictable, so unknowable that in some ways it's easier and more manageable for some folks to think that our government is behind it all. Exposing the terrorists for who they are resolves little _ evil must still be fought, and the endgame in some minds is uncertain. But if the administration could be exposed for "initiating these attacks," it would provide final, "easy" resolution _ and it would end the administration and any influence its adherents have, forever.

Heavens to Betsy. I'm supposed to be so frightened by Islamic terrorism that I comfort myself in denying it and blaming it on Bush instead. How could I have known? Leave it to Betsy Hart's remarkable perception to shine a light into the depths of my subconcious mind. It's "easier and more manageable" to believe that my country is ruled by sociopaths with blood on their hands than to accept that bad guys in turbans really exist, and, of course, hate us for our freedom. How could I have been so misguided?

Betsy also said that we won't answer why the neocons would do such a thing. That lie is especially for the benefit of the aforementioned low-IQ drones who have never read a thing that counters the official line on 9/11. They didn't hear Bush say, "I won the trifecta". They don't see Halliburton's profit margin. They don't know that the war has taken much of Iraq's oil off of the market, thus driving oil prices to record heights. They don't realize that 9/11 has conveniently turned the Bush administration into a defacto dictatorship. See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil. And, Homemaker Betsy is here to hold their hands through all this awful conspiracy theory stuff now cropping up in the mainstream media. Imagine Kathy Lee Gifford combined with Rush Limbaugh, and you have the heinous Betsy Hart.

Over on the left side of the fence, we have Doug Thompson, a previously respected blogger and editor of Capitol Hill Blue. Given Mr. Thompson's usually unassailable work, one wonders if a gun is not pointed at his head for suddenly spewing such mindless drivel in defense of the official line on 9/11. Much of what he said is just plain lies, and flies in the face of solid, rational research, and he suggests that 9/11 researchers just have their own agendas.

Of course, Mr. Thompson cannot and will not respond to the question of why Building 7 fell, as it was not hit by a plane. He and the other debunkers will just go on hurling invectives at researchers and the celebrities who back them up, and insist that it's case closed. There will be no point-by-point debates with these people, as they can only lose in resounding fashion. The great Noam Chomsky has dismissed the whole thing out of hand, and refuses to discuss it. How the mighty have fallen.

That these debunkers are there at all, much less painting themselves into corners, indicates an urgency to roll back the recent wave of 9/11 exposure. That is guilt by association, and it only serves to point up the truth of what 9/11 researchers are saying, and to throw more fuel on the fire. They can paint stripes on the horse all they want, but it is still no zebra. Given the growing climate of mistrust in the Bush administration, and the turning away from the mainstream media, it is certainly within the realm of possibility that the cover-up unravels before the term is up. Good luck, debunkers. I wouldn't want to be in your shoes.