Wednesday, June 20, 2007

Questions Carefully Unasked

A conspiracy is a secret plan agreed on by two or more people, focused on a hidden goal, usually for their benefit. Conspiracy implies risk, too. Conspirators are risking something, be it reputation, freedom, or life. A conspiracy starts from within, is an inside job, and tries to remain self-contained.

A conspiracy theory is the deduction of a conspiracy from various signs, hints, and implications. It starts from the outside and tries to go viral, or public.

Theories are informed guesses. The amount of information varies from zero to many libraries’ worth. Theories are by definition well-substantiated by fact and confirmable observation. They are meant to be tested.

This means that any theory of a conspiracy must have its proposals investigated. As facts are confirmed and rejected, the theory must change. Eliminating error refines a theory toward reality, just as multiplying error lets a theory slip back into hypothesis, then conjecture, then wild guess, until it is meaningless and unreal.
9/11 was an inside job. That statement announces a conspiratorial view. It hints that, because 9/11 benefitted the neo cons so much, there must be complicity. It is inarguable that the neo cons have clung to 9/11 as the excuse for all manner of excess. Extreme measures have been justified in all spheres of government, the military, and private life by intoning the mantra of 9/11. But exploiting events is not the same as causing them.

Often criminals are caught as they try to cover up their misdeeds. Was there a cover-up for 9/11?

Was the physical evidence, analysis of which would have answered many lingering questions, disposed of with undue haste? Was it done in a literally guarded manner, and under cover of night? Were investigators barred from the scene until the physical evidence was gone?

If yes, then how else but cover-up can such actions be interpreted?

If we look back to what was going on in government, business, and the military on 9/11, do we find uncomfortable facts pointing toward collusion?

Were America’s air defenses shut down and kept down until the attacks were over? Did the Vice President take charge of several military exercises and repeatedly refuse to allow interceptors to fly? Were there deals made in the hours and days leading up to 9/11 that bought and sold stock directly related to the events of that tragic day? Did huge profits result?

Was a white elephant taken off the WTC’s owner’s hands?

Were data banks full of embarrassing, incriminating, even damning evidence against government and business leaders destroyed when Building Seven, the Solomon Brothers building, fell? Was it unscathed after the attacks, yet fell anyway, hours after the twin towers had fallen?

Was it reported fallen hours before it actually fell?

Was it reportedly “pulled”, meaning demolished, hours before it fell?

Did three high rises fall almost perfectly into their footprints supposedly by three random sets of circumstances acting upon them? Has any other high rise ever fallen, even from much worse fires?

Since 9/11, has the act of asking questions been condemned and labeled unpatriotic, if not outright treachery, by the very groups who benefitted so egregiously financially and politically from the tragedy?

Have even scientists been impugned, and had their careers and reputations destroyed by vicious character assassinations and worse, simply for wondering aloud how physics could be contradicted so many times in one cluster of events?

Were there prior calls for such an event? Did the key neo con written plan include the assertion that “we need our own Pearl Harbor”? How far can coincidence be stretched in order to brush aside legitimate investigation?

Are we afraid now to even think about such things?

/// /// ///