Today, the issue of whether or not Bush planned 9/11 came up because the Iranian Imam Mahmoud Ahmedinijad said it at the United Nations. I heard comments that we shouldn't allow such an obvious American hater on our soil. I'm all for moving the UN out of the city I live in but his commets aren't that controversial because 25% of people living in America believe this so why is it so surprising that leaders of countries who hate us believe it too? This is what people don't realize, anti-American Americans ae listened to intently internationally. I see this in Greece and they're our allies. Michael Moore's books have been translated into Greek and random Greek people I meet in Greece will quote them to me moreso than any American here. The world hates us simply because we're the best so when Americans attack us too, they hang on every word they say and take it as gospel. This is why I don't really blame the Imam for saying this. Pretty much everything else from his mouth is offensive to me and I would celebrate his death but that's another discussion. Since the 9/11 believers (25% of the country) normally spat out obviously ridiculous things, I'll just point out quasi-intellectual points about this retarded belief before giving a pure logical rebuttal and using the same argument of the Truth commission and others against them.
When someone brought this up I was in a cafeteria with four other people besides myself. I said, "25% of people living in America believe that so it doesn't bother me the Iranian leader does too" I looked around and continued "statistically, someone in this room believes Bush planned 9/11" to which a man from Montenegro turned around and proved my point both that yes, one person in the room did believe it and yes citizens of other countries take the word of Anti-Americans as gospel.
First fact pointed out: The fire at the World Trade Center did not get hot enough to melt steal. This is a true statement. What though, makes people believe that steel has to melt in order to not be able to contain the weight of a 111 story building? Is there another reason that the steel support beams would not be able to contain the weight besides melting? How about if it just got hot enough to bend easily? After all, the middle ages they would cook steel to shape swords, armor, shields etc. What if you packed on 20 stories (because as everyone knows, the planes didn't hit the bottom of the WTC.) The fire at the WTC was hot enough to make steel bendable quite easily, so the pressure of the building shoved the steel downward by the use of gravity, the steel bent easily, the floor crashed down onto another floor causing the domino effect as displayed on the PBS special "Why the Towers Fell."
Second fact: The windows of the Pentagon didn't break. For those of you who don't know about how the Pentagon was built. One: most of it is underground. Two: the windows that are above ground are designed to be explosion proof. See, when they built it, they thought someone would bomb the center of our defense. A ground attack is unlikely because we have the greatest standing army in the world, so rather than defend it against hammers or pinpoint jacknives used in cars in case you drive into a body of water, they defended it against explosions and shockwaves. So, the explosion-proof windows didn't shatter when there was an explosion near by....hmmmm so good job engineers? Firefighters and rescue workers report seeing body parts, luggage and seat fragments on the ground around the Pentagon so the "missle"theory is debunked. Yes, We didn't see it, but we also didn't see footage of people jumping out of the towers because they thought it would be a little graphic for Americans....Greece not so much (This is why I know about this footage) It was also seen on BBC. So, when people say, "They never showed the workers picking up body parts at the Pentagon so it wasn't really a plane" I say, "Well, finally the news actually had a shred of humanity and sensitivity for a change." That may be the most shocking development. The evidence suggests that a plane didn't hit the Pentagon, it actually hit in front of the Pentagon, broke a wing and then exploded against it. Fine, I still call that a plane into the Pentagon and the windows not breaking doesn't shock me because they were designed to do precisely that. It is true the World Trade Center was designed to handle a plane crash into it, but they prepared it for a plane smaller than the ones that hit. The Pentagon windows were designed to withstand explosions from bombs, missles and other things that explode...yay architects and designers.
Another theory is to point at Tower 7, which caught on fire then collapsed. They showed other building being in bigger fires and not collapsing. What didn't happen in these other buiildings was two 111 story building collapsing shooting debris everywhere. If a building is already weak from fire and shockwaves, debris, etc. go flying into it, it may just collapse.
The other point. "you honestly believe that flying debris can remove fire insulation from steel beams?" Simple answer, yes, I think flying steel, fire, seats, body parts and all sorts of shit that must have been flying through those towers could have scratched away fire insulation. You can call that naive but I think if you spray shreds of steel at 600 miles an hour, it could potenially scratch something, weaken beams, or just destroy them. I'm not sure why people see this as far-fetched.
From a logical point of view. Do you remember George Bush? He's kind of a moron. You really think that guy is capable of the greatest and most elaborate hoax in American history? You think Bush, the man who told us that ticket counters can fly, could figure out that if you blow up the center and symbol of the American economy the WORLD TRADE CENTER, think about what that means, you think that he could figure out that if you blow that up, the economy will take a hit for a week or two, then rebound right away and net effect is not too big a blow on the economy? The finance experts couldn't figure this out. The stock market closed for two days after the event. All the financial geniuses said this was the end of the boom in America and they were all wrong. You're telling me that George Bush and his advisors were smarter than all the finance experts about an issue of finance? I'm sorry, I just really don't think he's that bright.
Now to use the argument against themselves. I think that the Truth commission, the people that got this conspiracy theory started, was created by the government. Machiavelli said, "It is better to be feared than loved." It scares people to think that our President was so ruthless he was willing to kill 5,000 innocent people, so he could blame it on Afghanistan and then generalize it to Iraq to avenge his father. In the eight years since the war in Iraq started, fewer American soldiers have died in the war than did on 9/11/2001. Bush didn't want to make it seem like he didn't have control of the country, so he created an organization that would put the blame on him. This way, Americans would feel safe from foreign enemies and they would instead fear him, just as Machiavelli said should happen. Leaders need to be feared and his approval ratings were getting too high. Love was never a necessity to the Machiavellian prince so another reason he created the truth commission was to lose that love and voila, his approval ratings dropped to 48%. The government created 9/11 commission worked beautifully This paragraph was blatantly and unabashedly stolen from a Southpark episode. If you believe it, well at least your consistent in believing retarded conspiracy theories because again you think Bush is capable of all this?
No comments:
Post a Comment