Use my code MARS10 and link: https://bit.ly/curioBKMar22 to get 10% off (save up to $47!) your own authentic Japanese subscription box from Bokksu! Don't mis...
we are going to have a lovely discussion about this video >:3
Given where we know they really wanted to go with the war on terror, why not stock the plane full of Iraqis? More then that: why pick the ONE Muslim nationality that is basically a third rail in American politics such that the media subsequently did literally everything it could do to avoid talking about it? If you genuinely believe that 9/11 was a top to bottom inside job orchestrated by the CIA that seems like a bit of an oversight no?
So; here's the kind of question that I ask when I have to ponder these lines of inquiry. What is actually gained in making the much more ontologically/evidentiarily expensive claim that US Intelligence was actively involved in the planning/orchestration of 9/11, that cannot also be gained through knowledge which is already relatively "cheap" to find & disseminate?
Namely the reality of the United State's longstanding relationship with & support of reactionary movements in the Middle East which ultimately enabled 9/11 to happen.
The only real "gain" that can be said to result from trying to make this argument, as far as I can tell, is the cathartic release of being able to say that "The US Deep State is literally directly responsible for everything bad ever." (Which seems to be what Redbolshevik is trying to establish here). And that's not... Like I can get why it's emotionally salient, but it's not necessarily a rational, or scientific way of approaching the problem, and moreover I don't understand how it's useful in a way that simply noting the dynamics of material interest is.
Lol this is an insane argument. The benefit of uncovering what happened is knowledge of the truth and understanding how the world works. Maybe try psychologizing yourself, see why you don't want it to be true?
It's fascinating how Liberals do this thing where you jump straight past the possibility that you could be wrong into coming up with some psychological reason why the person who doesn't believe the stupid bullshit you believe has been led astray.
Again though: do you not see how you're actually creating more holes then you're filling in with these theories and speculations?
Maybe there are inconsistencies and discrepancies in the official 9/11 story. There are inconsistencies and discrepancies in the sandy hook shooting also but that doesn't mean the chuds conspiracies are right. There's a lot of self serving and cya shit going on in these things.
Given where we know they really wanted to go with the war on terror, why not stock the plane full of Iraqis? More then that: why pick the ONE Muslim nationality that is basically a third rail in American politics such that the media subsequently did literally everything it could do to avoid talking about it? If you genuinely believe that 9/11 was a top to bottom inside job orchestrated by the CIA that seems like a bit of an oversight no?
deleted by creator
So; here's the kind of question that I ask when I have to ponder these lines of inquiry. What is actually gained in making the much more ontologically/evidentiarily expensive claim that US Intelligence was actively involved in the planning/orchestration of 9/11, that cannot also be gained through knowledge which is already relatively "cheap" to find & disseminate?
Namely the reality of the United State's longstanding relationship with & support of reactionary movements in the Middle East which ultimately enabled 9/11 to happen.
The only real "gain" that can be said to result from trying to make this argument, as far as I can tell, is the cathartic release of being able to say that "The US Deep State is literally directly responsible for everything bad ever." (Which seems to be what Redbolshevik is trying to establish here). And that's not... Like I can get why it's emotionally salient, but it's not necessarily a rational, or scientific way of approaching the problem, and moreover I don't understand how it's useful in a way that simply noting the dynamics of material interest is.
Lol this is an insane argument. The benefit of uncovering what happened is knowledge of the truth and understanding how the world works. Maybe try psychologizing yourself, see why you don't want it to be true?
It's fascinating how Liberals do this thing where you jump straight past the possibility that you could be wrong into coming up with some psychological reason why the person who doesn't believe the stupid bullshit you believe has been led astray.
Not to sound like a fallacy-obsessed debate nerd but holy hell is that a strawman.
Again though: do you not see how you're actually creating more holes then you're filling in with these theories and speculations?
Maybe there are inconsistencies and discrepancies in the official 9/11 story. There are inconsistencies and discrepancies in the sandy hook shooting also but that doesn't mean the chuds conspiracies are right. There's a lot of self serving and cya shit going on in these things.