Friday, August 04, 2006

More People Think the Government Was Behind 9/11

I'm not making this up. A new survey:
More than a third of the American public suspects that federal officials assisted in the 9/11 terrorist attacks or took no action to stop them so the United States could go to war in the Middle East, according to a new Scripps Howard/Ohio University poll. Was 9/11 an 'inside job'?

I remember a couple of years ago arguing with a French friend about this. You know they've thought it all along, and it really made me mad that he was taking the theory seriously, that the Bush administration was behind the 9/11 attacks. It was crazy, malicious, impossible.

But now, after seeing how it's all played out, more than a third of Americans -- not Frenchmen, but Americans -- think that's probably how it happened. Imagine: we live in a time when a good proportion of the population actually believes that our national leaders would slaughter thousands of innocent American citizens, in order to gain power for themselves.

Well, look at yesterday's Washington Post, telling us that the 9/11 commission almost called for an investigation of the Pentagon's lies:
Some staff members and commissioners of the Sept. 11 panel concluded that the Pentagon's initial story of how it reacted to the 2001 terrorist attacks may have been part of a deliberate effort to mislead the commission and the public rather than a reflection of the fog of events on that day, according to sources involved in the debate.

You've got to wonder: why would they lie to the commission that was investigating the terrorist attacks, unless they had something to hide?

Look at the new Vanity Fair report, going through the NORAD audiotapes, catching the Vice President lying to the press about giving the order to shoot down Flight 93. Caught him with his pants down.
Cheney echoed, "The significance of saying to a pilot that you are authorized to shoot down a plane full of Americans is, a, you know, it's an order that had never been given before." And it wasn't on 9/11, either.

Why would he lie?

I'm not saying that 9/11 was a Bush administration job, don't get me wrong. But there's no doubt that they lied about it, and you wonder why. It is mind-boggling to see that more than a third of Americans suspect that our own government might have committed an act of terrorism on American soil. Not just that it would do something horrible to its own people under some vague hypothetical conditions, but that it did.

From the news story about the survey:
Widespread resentment and alienation toward the national government appear to be fueling a growing acceptance of conspiracy theories about the 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.
Seventy percent of people who give credence to these theories also say they've become angrier with the federal government than they used to be.

Thirty-six percent of respondents overall said it is "very likely" or "somewhat likely" that federal officials either participated in the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon or took no action to stop them "because they wanted the United States to go to war in the Middle East."

I'm sorry, but I don't think America has ever been like this before.
University of Florida law professor Mark Fenster, author of the book "Conspiracy Theories: Secrecy and Power in American Culture," said the poll's findings reflect public anger at the unpopular Iraq war, realization that Saddam Hussein did not have weapons of mass destruction and growing doubts of the veracity of the Bush administration.

"What has amazed me is not that there are conspiracy theories, but that they didn't seem to be getting any purchase among the American public until the last year or so," Fenster said. "Although the Iraq war was not directly related to the 9/11 attacks, people are now looking back at 9/11 with much more skepticism than they used to."

The current administration has shown enormous expertise in persuasion, getting people to believe one thing after another that was just not true. Often, they don't even really pretend they're telling the truth, they just say something over and over until people forget it's wrong. They have found just the right combination of hypocritical self-righteousness and unfocused fear -- the American people now jump anytime they're told there's a shadow. Don't even have to actually see it.

Like, did you see the survey last week that found that half of Americans still think Saddam had weapons of mass destruction? Tell me how that happens -- you can say it proves people are stupid, I think it proves how skillful the administration is at manipulating the public.

Those "terror alerts" before the election: a masterpiece, unbelievable. These guys are tops in their craft.

But they've pulled the same tricks too many times now, and some people are starting to doubt everything. That's not necessarily any better, or at least any more accurate. We don't know if the Bush administration was behind 9/11 or not. And that, in itself, is terrible.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

and you think the right is full of nuts. look who is backing you.

August 04, 2006 12:36 PM  
Blogger Theresa said...

News flash - Jim.

They did find them. Didn't you hear ?

No probably not, because the major liberal biased media didn't report it.

Just FOX.

Amazing this country we live in.

"After spending more than a year attacking the Bush administration daily for their supposed failure to produce the WMDs that everyone -- including the United Nations, as well as most leading Democrats -- believed Saddam had hidden, the Left has suddenly gone strangely silent on the subject. The "mainstream" media has been tiptoeing around the discovery of a 155-mm mortar shell containing Sarin gas in Iraq, the contents of which have been confirmed. The shell was used as part of an improvised explosive device (IED) on a road near the Baghdad International Airport, and exploded as it was being disarmed"

August 05, 2006 11:37 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"the discovery of a 155-mm mortar shell containing Sarin gas in Iraq"

One shell? Come on, can't FOX do better than that?

August 05, 2006 11:51 PM  
Anonymous PasserBy said...

can't FOX do better than that?

It's not even Fox. It's a 2004 Men's News Daily story.

Whatever that is.


August 06, 2006 12:09 AM  
Blogger Theresa said...

Sorry, wrong link :

August 06, 2006 9:32 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh really, Theresa?

"Fox News’ Jim Angle contacted the Defense Department who quickly disavowed Santorum and Hoekstra’s claims. A Defense Department official told Angle flatly that the munitions hyped by Santorum and Hoekstra are “not the WMD’s for which this country went to war.” "


"Transcript: Bush Responds to WMD Report

FDCH E-Media
Thursday, October 7, 2004; 2:02 PM

President Bush gives a statement to reporters on the findings issued yesterday by the Iraq Survey Group led by Charles A. Duelfer. Here is a transcript of Bush’s comments.

BUSH: The chief weapons inspector, Charles Duelfer, has now issued a comprehensive report that confirms the earlier conclusion of David Kay that Iraq did not have the weapons that our intelligence believed were there."


August 06, 2006 11:01 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Theresa said...
Sorry, wrong link :"

From MRC's mission statement:

"The mission of the Media Research Center is to bring balance to the news media. Leaders of America's conservative movement have long believed that within the national news media a strident liberal bias existed that influenced the public's understanding of critical issues. On October 1, 1987, a group of young determined conservatives set out to not only prove — through sound scientific research — that liberal bias in the media does exist and undermines traditional American values, but also to neutralize its impact on the American political scene....

The result of the MRC’s work is a mountain of evidence to use in combating the undeniable bias. The key to the MRC’s effectiveness is the ability to prove bias by using scientific studies and word-for-word quotes from the media."

Now if that article Theresa linked us to at the MRC website is supposed to be an indication of their scientific abilities, well, thanks for the laugh Theresa, but there's a huge difference between "sound scientific research" and the anecdotal evidence presented. It's also quite apparent that MRC President and founder L. Brett Bozwell, III, has never heard of Experimenter Bias.

"Experimenter Bias: Errors in a research study due to the predisposed notions or beliefs of the experimenter."

August 06, 2006 5:02 PM  
Blogger andrear said...

I think the lack of education and the lack of interest in education while in and beyond leaving school is increasing in this country. I guess when TV is full of "reality" shows- and people think that it is real- the line between fact and fiction dissolves. People get their "news" from soundbites delivered by spokesmodels(male and female- no sexism here)or short bites on the internet.

August 08, 2006 11:03 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Munitions Found in Iraq Meet WMD Criteria, Official Says
By Samantha L. Quigley
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, June 29, 2006 – The 500 munitions discovered throughout Iraq since 2003 and discussed in a National Ground Intelligence Center report meet the criteria of weapons of mass destruction, the center's commander said here today.
"These are chemical weapons as defined under the Chemical Weapons Convention, and yes ... they do constitute weapons of mass destruction," Army Col. John Chu told the House Armed Services Committee.

The Chemical Weapons Convention is an arms control agreement which outlaws the production, stockpiling and use of chemical weapons. It was signed in 1993 and entered into force in 1997.

The munitions found contain sarin and mustard gases, Army Lt. Gen. Michael D. Maples, director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, said. Sarin attacks the neurological system and is potentially lethal.

"Mustard is a blister agent (that) actually produces burning of any area (where) an individual may come in contact with the agent," he said. It also is potentially fatal if it gets into a person's lungs.

The munitions addressed in the report were produced in the 1980s, Maples said. Badly corroded, they could not currently be used as originally intended, Chu added.

While that's reassuring, the agent remaining in the weapons would be very valuable to terrorists and insurgents, Maples said. "We're talking chemical agents here that could be packaged in a different format and have a great effect," he said, referencing the sarin-gas attack on a Japanese subway in the mid-1990s.

This is true even considering any degradation of the chemical agents that may have occurred, Chu said. It's not known exactly how sarin breaks down, but no matter how degraded the agent is, it's still toxic.

"Regardless of (how much material in the weapon is actually chemical agent), any remaining agent is toxic," he said. "Anything above zero (percent agent) would prove to be toxic, and if you were exposed to it long enough, lethal."

Though about 500 chemical weapons - the exact number has not been released publicly - have been found, Maples said he doesn't believe Iraq is a "WMD-free zone."

"I do believe the former regime did a very poor job of accountability of munitions, and certainly did not document the destruction of munitions," he said. "The recovery program goes on, and I do not believe we have found all the weapons."

The Defense Intelligence Agency director said locating and disposing of chemical weapons in Iraq is one of the most important tasks servicemembers in the country perform.

Maples added searches are ongoing for chemical weapons beyond those being conducted solely for force protection.

There has been a call for a complete declassification of the National Ground Intelligence Center's report on WMD in Iraq. Maples said he believes the director of national intelligence is still considering this option, and has asked Maples to look into producing an unclassified paper addressing the subject matter in the center's report.

Much of the classified matter was slated for discussion in a closed forum after the open hearings this morning.

August 08, 2006 6:45 PM  
Anonymous PasserBy said...

Right, Anon. From the 1980s. Corroded, leaky, unusable. These were a big threat to the USA.

These were "weapons of mass destruction" in the same sense that a can of bug spray is a weapon of mass destruction, or a big sheet of plastic that many people could suffocate in.

Saddam didn't even know where these things were.


August 08, 2006 6:54 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

wepons found, world saved, we win. go cry sour grapes i don't care. huge stock pile of WMD's
also found
About 1.8 metric tons of "yellow cake" and 500 tons of unrefined uranium
another huge stock pile of WMD's found yea Bush yea Bush fore more years!!
this time jeb and florida all over again. yea yea...

August 08, 2006 7:21 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home