Re: my own 9/11 conspiracy theory

From: Joe Dees (joedees@addall.com)
Date: Tue Jan 08 2002 - 16:46:25 MST

('binary' encoding is not supported, stored as-is) >Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2002 10:33:34 -0800
> extropians@extropy.org "E. Shaun Russell" <e_shaun@extropy.org> Re: my own 9/11 conspiracy theoryReply-To: extropians@extropy.org
>
>Dossy wrote:
>
>>You know, many called what I presented "ludicrous" or "sick" or
>>"wildly irrational" ... yet nobody's been able to really give
>>reasons why other than lots of poo-pooing.
>>
>>I say that while unattractive and however improbable my conspiracy theory
>>is, it coincides with the recorded history and track record of the
>>United States government.
>
>Believe it or not, I actually tend to agree with the basic premise (but not
>the accompanying specifics) of Dossy's posts. While I do very highly doubt
>that the WTC/Pentagon attacks were carried out by the US government, I also
>maintain no illusions that the public knows the majority of what the
>government is doing, or the reasons behind them. All that we hear is
>filtered through the kaleidoscopic lens of the media...which means that we
>have some judiciously selected information from the government passed
>through biased reports. Critical thinking dictates that we are not going
>to get the full story in any purely objective fashion, now, or perhaps ever.
>
>Having said this, beyond the premise of keeping our minds and eyes open
>enough to read between the lines of what we are told, I fail to see how any
>far-fetched speculation is all that productive, given that there is no hard
>proof on any conspiracy theory...probably much less evidence of such than
>other large events in the last half-century (e.g. Vietnam, Watergate etc.).
>
>Back in 1996, when the TWA jet went down, Ian Goddard spent years on
>fashioning his conspiracy theory (largely on this list, unfortunately) that
>the plane was shot down by a US Navy missile. Perhaps there was merit to
>the theory, perhaps (probably) not. The point is that idly speculating on
>ulterior motives is unproductive to say the least, and does neither the
>list nor the public in general any good. So long as we have large
>democratic governmental institutions, we have no choice, really, but to
>accept what they do. Discouraging? Yes. True? Definitely.
>
Howzabout this for a 9/11 theory? Sarah Brady arranged it all, so that progun extremists would be confronted with the picture of Afghanistan, and what actually happens (rather than the law-abiding utopia they propose) in a country where the continuous possession of high powered weapons (as status symbol trinkets) by the vast majority of the male population is as ubiquitous as the wearing of jewelry by female DYNASTY characters.
>________________________________________________________
>E. Shaun Russell Operations Officer, Extropy Institute
>e_shaun@extropy.org http://www.extropy.org
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Hear my music at: http://www.mp3.com/eshaunrussell
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ~K i n e t i c i z e Y o u r P o t e n t i a l~

------------------------------------------------------------
Looking for a book? Want a deal? No problem AddALL!
http://www.addall.com compares book price at 41 online stores.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 13:37:33 MST