|
i’d like to take this opportunity to plunge even further into the rabbit hole and offer the opinion that the “cruise missile hit the pentagon” theory is deliberate information designed to readily discredit anyone who questions the official narrative of 9/11. there’s plenty of reason to doubt the bush administration’s story about 9/11 without getting bogged down in technical engineering questions like what happens when a jet engine slams against a several-foot-thick concrete wall (the only honest answer anyone other than a certified structural engineer can give is, ‘i have no idea’) or what the melting point of reinforced steel is (ditto). i think it’s much more apropos to wonder what the hell the hijackers were doing training at US military bases, why the (still unsolved) anthrax attacks were traced to another military base, what was with that story about a bunch of the 9/11 hijackers turning up alive in various parts of the world, how they were able to find one of the hijackers’ passports after it had been through a fireball and fallen into 1.6 million tons of rubble...
the whole story about 9/11 has stunk to high heaven from day one but i think the cruise missile thing is a distraction. it reminds me a little of the abu ghraib thing -- i argue with conservative friends and they are able to present the abu ghraib fiasco as a “fraternity prank”. why? because of that one photo where they put panties on someone’s head. if you want to support what went on in abu ghraib (and i’m frankly shocked how many people do), you bring up the panty thing with a chuckle and suddenly everyone who brings up the waterboarding, stress positions, mock executions, sleep deprivation and psychological torture looks out of touch. THAT’s diversionary misinformation and it’s quite sickly clever. i think the cruise missile thing is similar. the second anyone questions 9/11 an administration supporter can just go, ‘oh, you’re one of those cruise missle hit the pentagon nutjobs?’ and thereby foreclose on the discussion.
|