New film: National Security Alert

[dendro]

...............

[Amomynous]

I'm sure your intentions are good and honorable is posting this link, but this kind of thing really bugs me.

On one hand (from the personal perspective), I knew someone who was in the Pentagon and who was killed, and emotionally it tears me up to think of her children and see people trying to use her death to promote their own political agenda, as all such filmmakers do.

On the other hand (from the objective perspective) this makes absolutely no sense.  If someone (like the government) wanted to fuck with us, would they:

1) Cause an airliner to crash into the Pentagon, making it look like some enemy did it? Or

2) Take an airplane, divert it, kill all those aboard, purge and data from the air transportation system related to the diversion, bring hundreds of people into the conspiracy that wouldn't otherwise need to be in it, and then to fake an airplane crash into the Pentagon?  

Keep in mind that there were many visible people on that flight, including a well-known CEO of a publicly-traded company.

Seriously, option 2 doesn't make any sense, even if the crash was nefarious in a way that conflicts with the official explanation.

And no, I haven't watched what you linked. I can't.

[dendro]

Yes Amom. I am aware that this topic is a non-starter for you. And this is exactly the reason why I haven't posted anything about 9/11 for many years on this forum. 9/11 truth is just not popular here, at least among those who post regularly.

However, this film is a major effort, and reasonably well made. I thot that it deserved at least a mention on this site, for the possible interest and benefit of other people that might drop by and follow the link.

I'm sorry if this offends you, and that you still feel such personal pain from that tragic day. I'm sure many people feel the same way.

But some of us feel that 9/11 truth is an important topic. I don't know if you keep up with such things, but polls show a steady increase in the numbers of Americans who find reason to doubt the "official" conspiracy story of the events of that day. 9/11 truth is gaining traction. I think this is a good thing.

My hope would be that Americans educate themselves about the false pretexts concocted by warmongers throughout US history to whip up war hysteria, so that they would not choose to passively accept conscription etc., as the American electorate did during Vietnam. My grandchildren will thank me if I can help in this process.

I don't pretend to know everything that happened on 9/11, but I feel strongly that flight 93 did not go down the way the pentagon claimed, nor did the towers go down the way they claimed. I have seen nothing in the official story that gives me confidence that flight 77 went down the way they claim, either.

The film doesn't focus on explaining the events, or putting forth theories about who did what to whom, where or when. It deals with witnesses and the physics of plane flight. It shows that the official story cannot be true.

So please, Amom, don't watch it!  :smoke:3

[Amomynous]

Don't get me wrong, I'm not offended that you posted this, and I'm not trying to imply that you shouldn't have or did anything wrong in doing so. I just felt moved to offer my perspective.

I have visited many "truth" websites and seen the occasional video. Perhaps this one is different, but what I've seen have been very unconvincing. In general (actually, without exception from what I've seen, but I haven't seen all of them, admittedly), these sites and videos do two things that more-or-less invalidate their points from the perspective of rational analysis:

1) Employ the rhetorical device of asking leading question after leading question without actually addressing the questions themselves. I.e.:

"How could a commercial airliner...."

"Where would the wreckage...."

"Why would the pentagon...."

The literally ask hundreds of these question in order to sow seeds of doubt, but never really address any of them.

2) Employ experts to comment on things, but the things they comment on are not in their domain of expertise. For example, an appropriate person to comment on the wreckage, distribution of wreckage, or lack thereof would be someone from the NTSB who has investigated many commercial airliner crashes. But I've never seen that happen. Instead, for example, they have some mechanical engineer speak, and while such a person may know a lot about airplanes, he or she really knows little about airplane crashes.

But like I said, I haven't seen this film, so it could be better than all the others.

I don't know if you keep up with such things, but polls show a steady increase in the numbers of Americans who find reason to doubt the "official" conspiracy story of the events of that day. 9/11 truth is gaining traction. I think this is a good thing.

Not to sound too cynical, but I think that's the most damning evidence of all when it comes to the movement. I may be a bit of a contrarian, but I think one can do well by betting against the trends as exposed by opinion polls. Not only do I find "the intelligence of crowds" unconvincing, I actually find the opposite to be true

But some of us feel that 9/11 truth is an important topic.

At the risk of offending everyone--from those who believe the official story entirely to those who think there is no truth in it--I actually don't.

Personally (and I don't expect anyone to agree with me), I don't think it is important. I think the whole thing is just a distraction, a distraction from our real problems. And real problems only exist in the present, not 10 years in the past or 10 years in the future. That's all just memory and projection. Illusion.

[dendro]

"Not to sound too cynical, but I think that's the most damning evidence of all when it comes to the movement. I may be a bit of a contrarian, but I think one can do well by betting against the trends as exposed by opinion polls. Not only do I find "the intelligence of crowds" unconvincing, I actually find the opposite to be true "

I think contrarianism is generally a good thing too. But in this case, the trend is perhaps unexpected, and it is dynamic. It's not just the fixed in time opinion of the masses on a given day. After 9/11, very few people in US disbelieved the official scenario trumpeted in the media. Today, almost nine years later, polls indicate that over half of Americans no longer accept the official story as the best description of the day's events. This change has come about through education.

Contrarianism for its own sake breaks down when the majority opinion moves. You may be right to be contrary at first, but then you may be wrong when the pendulum swings, and now you must swing to the opposite to maintain your contrary position.

Better I think to be open-minded, and to judge each case on its merit.

"But some of us feel that 9/11 truth is an important topic.


At the risk of offending everyone--from those who believe the official story entirely to those who think there is no truth in it--I actually don't.

Personally (and I don't expect anyone to agree with me), I don't think it is important. I think the whole thing is just a distraction, a distraction from our real problems. And real problems only exist in the present, not 10 years in the past or 10 years in the future. That's all just memory and projection. Illusion."

Everything exists in the present IMO, including all past and future events. And a case can be made that all sensory perception is memory, projection and illusion, including the present. Some people use this philosophy to deny the reality of today's problems, and to justify solipsistic isolationism.

But for those of us who will try to address today's problems, to enhance the quality of life for our dear ones and manking at large, the problems will be accepted as real when we verify the gross matter events involved as real.

But the roots of today's problems lie in the past. They don't appear instantly and magically with no prior context. We can't even clearly see what today's problems actually are, without understanding the way the problems came about thru the time stream.

We may even misunderstand the true nature of today's  problems if we neglect the mechanisms which brought them about. To paraphrase the old proverb, he who fails to understand history is doomed to repeat it.

Perhaps I am misunderstanding you. Do you mean to say that the study of history has no value?  :tea: