Coincidence theorists descend into self-parody

by **NewKid** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 10:06 am

From the Betsy Hart school of psychology . . . <a href="http://observer.guardian.co.uk/review/story/0,,1749799,00.html" target="top">observer.guardian.co.uk/review/story/0,,1749799,00.html</a> Attention PR hacks and psywar operatives -- you need some new material.

by **Rigorous Intuition** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 10:38 am

They need some new straw men. Oh yes, conspiracies are so comforting. Never felt better.

by **friend catcher** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 11:21 am

Kermode is a strange man. He works for the bbc as a film reviewer so I used to see him when I had a tv. Often on the radio aswell.He has a big thing about horror movies and an obsession with the Exorcist and will bring it into any review given even a sniff of a chance. Anyone who works at the bbc or Guardian that gave credence 911 theories would lose their job. not instantly but soon. The BBC actually has?had a room 101 where MI5 vetted all the applicants for jobs. i think that Orwell nicked the name after a short wartime stint at the bbc. Guardian columnist<a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/Columnists/Column/0,,1739254,00.html">www.guardian.co.uk/Column...54,00.html</a> recently did a debunking of Charlie Sheen and received a huge amount of negative email <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/Columnists/Column/0,,1744446,00.html-">www.guardian.co.uk/Column...6,00.html-</a> so much that her next column was all about the abuse she got. Clearly rattled her.

by **chiggerbit** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 11:35 am

But you have to ask why a document as exhaustive and accountable as the 9/11 Commission report has failed to dispel these myths. OMG, what a JOKE!

by **NewKid** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 5:38 pm

I suppose the hyperventilating we're seeing about people questioning the official story is to be expected. Though you would think they'd at least pretend to be serious in their 'debunking' endeavors. What seems interesting to me about the British press is that you get the official story silliness in these entertainment pieces, but at the same time you get stuff like the power of nightmares as well. <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/3970901.stm" target="top">news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/3970901.stm</a> Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=newkid@rigorousintuition>NewKid</A> at: 4/10/06 3:40 pm

by **StarmanSkye** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 6:13 pm

What a commentary on our made-to-fail times, that such moronic idjits have prominent pride of place in our 'free press': "'Conspiracy theorists are not to be sneered at,' says Paul Greengrass. 'They're interesting, thoroughly engaged and they're responding to a profound unease. But they do tend to simplify very complex situations.'" Uhm, like "They hate us for our freedoms"? Or, "There's absolutely no doubt in my mind they have WMD." Or, That Greengrass's film is a, "thoroughly researched, fact-based docudrama." Or that Flight 800 exploded due to a center fuel-tank short-circuit spark -- and not a missile that over 100 people witnessed. I'm beginning to replace some of my unease, contempt and disgust at how incredibly deluded and irresponsibly misruled American society is with profound curiosity over how long it can avoid inevitable meltdown when reality finally intrudes. The 911 Commission Report described as 'exhaustive and accountable' -- Oh that IS precious! But after all, what can you expect of a society that didn't demand immediate impeachment for the self-professed war-president who claimed God told him to attack Iraq? Starman

by **Hugh Manatee Wins** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 6:27 pm

HTML Comments are not allowed Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=hughmanateewins>Hugh Manatee Wins</A> at: 4/10/06 4:38 pm

by **Hugh Manatee Wins** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 6:44 pm

(Ezboard does not let one edit more than once a minute and then locks out the original posting. Hm. A few 'bold' changes...) <blockquote>Quote:<hr>The film (Loosechange) argued that the World Trade Centre was blown up from inside, that the Pentagon was struck by a cruise missile <!and that United Airlines Flight 93, in which terrorists were officially reported to have been overpowered by passengers, did not crash in Shanksville, Pennsylvania, but landed safely in This all sounded like baloney to me. But just to be sure, I contacted respected British film-maker Paul Greengrass, who's putting the finishing touches on his thoroughly researched, fact-based docudrama, United 93. Greengrass's film made headlines last week when trailers were reportedly pulled from New York cinemas. But controversy surrounding the movie was first sparked by conspiracy theorists who insist that flight 93 was actually shot down by the US air force and who dismiss the 'official version' of events as a lie. '9/11 has replaced the Kennedy assassination as the epicentre of this great upsurge of conspiracy theories,' concedes Greengrass, 'and flight 93 is right at the heart of it.<hr></blockquote> Hm. I wasn't aware that flight 93 was "at the heart of it." <blockquote>Quote:<hr>Conspiracy theories do provide great plots for movies - and vice versa. John Frankenheimer's 1962 film The Manchurian Candidate may have been based on a potboiler by Richard Condon, but among conspiracy theorists, its central brainwashing premise is taken as barely disguised fact. Similarly, most of what the public knows about the Kennedy assassination is based on a string of excitably dramatic movies, from David Miller's Executive Action (1973) to Oliver Stone's JFK (1991), which viewers have mistaken for verifiable truth. The real reason people believe in such wild conspiracies is simple - it's more reassuring. <hr></blockquote> I'm not sure which is a more reassuring explanation, that this writer is completely ignorant or that he's a disinfo artist pulling attention away from the Three Collapsed Buildings. Ah, I see. This is in the Arts section of the Guardian so he's underscoring the 'artists are unreliable kooks' meme through his unresearched and dismissively twisted statements.  So he's merely trying to amuse while promoting Pixar and the Greengrass film about Flight 93 to the kiddies, not inform anyone at all. Now I am reassured.

by **NewKid** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 9:56 pm

Flight 93 may indeed be at the heart of 9-11 conspiracy, but not for any of the reasons this guy thinks. People talk of 93 as though the debate is whether it was shot down or crashed. But in fact, even if it were conceded that the plane was shot down, that would do very little, if any, damage to the official story. The govt can always take the fallback position that it had every right to shoot flight 93 down if those crazy terr'sts were on aboard and headed for Washington. 'So sure, it was shot down, so what, wink wink, let them believe "let's roll" and the story of heros. But c'mon, what'd you expect us to do once we got our fighters out there. They're islamofascists after all!'