The 9/11 Faith Movement

[nomo]

<!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>It's chain vs. pile now. Which would you rather wear...</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--><br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.inthesetimes.com/site/main/article/2702/">www.inthesetimes.com/site...icle/2702/</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br>The 9/11 Faith Movement<br>By Terry J. Allen<br><br>Americans love a conspiracy. According to a May 17 Zogby poll, 42 percent believe the U.S. government and the 9/11 Commission are covering up what really happened on Sept. 11, 2001.<br><br>There is something comforting about a world where someone is in charge—either for good (think gods) or evil (think Bush insiders plotting 9/11). Many people prefer to believe a Procrustean conspiracy rather than accept the alternative: Life can be random, viciously unjust and meaningless; tragedy and joy alike flow from complex combinations of good and bad intentions, careful plotting, random happenstance and bumbling incompetence.<br><br>Conspiracy hypotheses often consist of a vast <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>pile of circumstantial evidence</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> shaped into a seemingly coherent whole with the strong glue of faith. Debunk one or even many allegations and the pile still stands, impressive in its bulk and ideological coherence. If size were all, it would convince Pyrrho himself.<br><br>Scientific theories, on the other hand, depend on <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>interlocking chains of evidence</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->: The integrity of the whole relies on the soundness of each link. Break any one and the theory founders.<br><br>The 9/11 conspiracy is a classic example of a faith-based pile hypothesis. Its proponents cite a mountain of evidence to conclude that the U.S. government perpetrated the 9/11 attacks for its own traitorous ends, chiefly staging “a new Pearl Harbor” to rally support for an invasion of Iraq.<br><br>I spent months as a researcher conducting a fact-by-fact dissection of a few key aspects of this hypothesis. I approached the project knowing that U.S. cabals had previously concocted casus belli to drive public support for war: the Gulf of Tonkin for Vietnam, incubator babies for the first Gulf War. And clearly from its early days, the Bush administration had lusted for war with Iraq.<br><br>But the hypothesis that it planned and executed the 9/11 attacks is just not supported by a chain of evidence, nor do the facts support the conspiracists’ key charge that World Trade Center buildings were destroyed by pre-positioned explosives.<br><br>Structural engineers found the destruction consistent with fires caused by the jet liner strike; that temperatures need not actually melt the steel but that expansion and other fire-related stresses would account for compromised architectural integrity.<br><br>When David Ray Griffin, a theologian by trade, said it was “physically impossible by laws of physics” for the planes alone to have brought down the towers, I asked what engineers had confirmed that. “I haven’t talked to any because they would be too afraid to tell the truth,” he said. “How would you be able to protect your family if you were to accuse the government?” he asked, accusing the government.<br><br>Many conspiracists offer the collapse of WTC Building 7 as the strongest evidence for the kind of controlled demolition that would prove a plot. Although not hit by planes, it was damaged by debris, and suffered fires eventually fueled by up to 42,000 gallons of diesel fuel stored near ground level. Griffin cited as evidence of government complicity that the building’s sprinkler system should have, but didn’t, put out the fires. But the theologian did not know and had not considered that the collapse of the towers had broken the area’s water main.<br><br>Another conspiracist, Alex Jones, writes on his Web site, “Larry Silverstein, the owner of the WTC complex, admitted … that he and the NYFD decided to ‘pull’ WTC 7.” (Leave aside how unlikely it would be for the government to include Silverstein in a treasonous conspiracy, or that the NYFD was in on it, too.)<br><br>Silverstein’s actual quote: “I remember getting a call from the fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were going to be able to contain the fire, and I said, ‘We’ve had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.’ And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse.”<br><br>Jones continues: “The word ‘pull’ is industry jargon for taking a building down with explosives.” In fact, a Lexis Nexis search for a three-year period fails to find one American reference to “pull a building” without the preposition “down” when referring to intentional destruction. An alternative explanation would be that given the lack of water and the number of injured and missing firefighters, the NYFD decided to pull workers from Building 7 to concentrate on search and rescue at the fallen towers.<br><br>In the end, this kind of undermining of individual “facts,” although relatively easy, is irrelevant for those who base their beliefs on piles rather than chains of evidence.<br><br>But the work should be done. Pile conspiracies can be dangerous. Those who deny that HIV is responsible for AIDS, for example, have contributed to unnecessary infections and deaths.<br><br>And the 9/11 conspiracy hypotheses distract from the growing chain of evidence documenting how the Bush administration actually manipulated this country to war on a train of lies riding tracks of fear—cynically using the bodies of the 9/11 victims as fuel.<br><br> <p></p><i></i>

[yathrib]

...that the official 9/11 story is *also* a classic conspiracy theory in pretty much the same way the author of this piece says the opposing narratives are? Piles of "evidence," much of which has been decisively disproven, yet leaving the edifice as a whole still standing as the One True Faith for those who would be patriotically correct. <p></p><i></i>

[sunny]

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>There is something comforting about a world where someone is in charge—either for good (think gods) or evil (think Bush insiders plotting 9/11). Many people prefer to believe a Procrustean conspiracy rather than accept the alternative: Life can be random, viciously unjust and meaningless; tragedy and joy alike flow from complex combinations of good and bad intentions, careful plotting, random happenstance and bumbling incompetence.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>Ah jeebus, here we go again with the "comforting" conspiracies. I'd like to ask all you tin-foil hat wearers- Do <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>you</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> find comfort in believing a bunch of murderous thugs get together over Brandy and Cuban cigars to discuss and plan how they can better exploit, kill, maim, and deceive people for fun and profit? I know I feel better believing the future of the planet rests in their competent, but evil, hands. At least I know they <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>have</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> a plan, albeit one that will eventually destroy me and my progeny. I mean, globalization may be evil, it may exploit and kill, but at least I know, or believe I know, what they are up to. There is a design, a plan, a blueprint-that is soooo comforting. I mean, at least we know they are getting together in their clubs, their obscenely opulent mansions, their boardrooms, their yachts, and their summer "cottages" to discuss, and snicker, and guffaw about how they are pulling one over on us. I don't know about you, but it does my heart good to know what they are up to.<br><br>Shit. <p></p><i></i>

[jingofever]

" ...that the official 9/11 story is *also* a classic conspiracy theory ..."<br><br>Exactly what I say. Which is why I maintain that the only sane explanation of 9/11 is that it was perpetrated by some lone nut. Possibly a member of the Michigan militia. <p></p><i></i>

[orz]

Yeah 'comforting' is becoming a pretty cringeworthy meme... <!--EZCODE EMOTICON START :rolleyes --><img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/eyes.gif ALT=":rolleyes"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> <br><br>He has some kind of good points otherwise...<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>...that the official 9/11 story is *also* a classic conspiracy theory in pretty much the same way the author of this piece says the opposing narratives are?<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br>Yep.... talk about rock and a hard place.... <!--EZCODE EMOTICON START :x --><img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/sick.gif ALT=":x"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> <!--EZCODE EMOTICON START :x --><img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/sick.gif ALT=":x"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> <!--EZCODE EMOTICON START :x --><img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/sick.gif ALT=":x"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> <p></p><i></i>

[Rigorous Intuition]

Funny, I just posted <!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://rigint.blogspot.com/2006/07/i-want-to-disbelieve.html">something</a><!--EZCODE LINK END--> that could be a commentary on this, but I hadn't seen it yet. <br><br><!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>Who</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> is taking <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>what</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> on faith? <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=rigorousintuition>Rigorous Intuition</A> at: 7/12/06 3:18 pm<br></i>

[LBloom]

Jez ez board is the biggest pain in the ass!!<br><br>Anyway, I could no longer lurk idly by and let this woman of science with her extensive background (see below) in all things scientific go without comment.<br><br>FREELANCE WORK <br> Reporting Write for local, national, and international media including Boston Globe, Harper's, The Nation online, American Prospect, New Scientist (London), and Salon.com. Have covered a broad range of topics of domestic and international affairs including from Iraq in 2003, and written in-depth investigative analyses as a consultant or for publication on topics including development, the environment, war, drug policy, women, emerging diseases, courts, media, and politics. 1988-present <br>Editing Edit newspapers, magazines, books, and reports for commercial, non-profits, and academic institutions including Amnesty International, Institute for Policy Studies and Georgetown University. Contributing editor, In These Times. 1998-present <br><br>Graphics Design and run production of magazines, newsletters, academic and non-profit reports, and museum catalogs, as well as books for commercial and academic presses. 1995-present <br><br>Research, fact checking, copy editing Deliver accurate, deadline-oriented research for photos, facts, in-depth reporting for films, books, speeches, and magazines. Proofread books, scripts, newspapers, and magazines. <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Research consultant on Michael Moore projects including films Fahrenheit 911</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> and book Dude, Where's My Country. 1989-present <br><br>Photojournalism Staring in the war in El salvador and continuing though the build-up to the war in Iraq, have documented people and events. Photos widely exhibited and published in New York Times, Newsday, and used in the U.S. Senate. 1989-present <br><br>Guest lecturer in journalism at American University, Cairo; designed and taught courses on production and on editing for the Institute for Policy Studies. 1995-present <br><br> <br> <br> FORMAL EDUCATION <br> University of Vermont, B.A., summa cum laude, Phi Beta Kappa, special honors major; University of Chicago; intensive Japanese language program, Harvard University.<br> <br> <br> TRAVEL & LANGUAGES <br> Have traveled and/or worked in Western Europe, Latin America, Asia, and the Middle East, including recently in Iraq. Speak and read some French and Spanish and have good verbal fluency in Japanese <br><br><br>Interestingly enough was despite her months of work with Michael Moore she was just as unsuccessful in coming up with a direct quote from a structural engineer while taking Griffin to task... <p></p><i></i>

[NewKid]

This is almost a parody of bad left gatekeeper stuff. In These Times has done 9-11 stuff before. Do they really think their readers are this stupid? <p></p><i></i>

[NewKid]

The comforting conspiracy theory meme has got to be in some kind of old memo to media assets from the JFK assassination coverup days in the 70s or something. It is in virtually every piece that criticizes 9-11 stuff or any kind of conspiracy theory. <p></p><i></i>

[stickdog99]

Because Satanism is so much more comforting to its victims than randomness, of course ...<br><br>I mean, just think how disturbing the ending of <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>1984</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> would be if the bullet to Winston's head was <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>random</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END-->.<br><br>I shudder at the very thought. Randomness is so much more disturbing than inevitable, purposeful evil. The horror, the horror ... <p></p><i></i>

[NewKid]

Some of the marginal left publications like In These Times may just put stuff like this out to get a rise out of their readers. Their readership has probably taken a hit since blogs and the internet has expanded so much and this kind of stuff could be a good shot in the arm to boost sagging numbers. <br><br>See, e.g., the comments . . .<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>What a load of garbage. What’s this ITT, getting in the goodbooks with the GOP again are we? Just puching in on the propaganda circuit? Earning your pay? Or maybe someone is being blackmailed? With reportage like this I can see why nobody is worried about domestic surveillance. You guys suck long and hard on the teat of propaganda and are certainly no threat to this war mongering incompetant junta. <hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--> <p></p><i></i>

[yesferatu]

I have not heard the "comforting" meme as much as I have heard the "you just want the world to be exciting - and it's not!" meme thrown around when discussing 9/11.<br><br>Yeah. I want the world to be exciting. But doggone it, it's not. I need to be less excitable and see that we live in a Newtonian mechanistic universe where the pinnacles of Victorian-era science and Episcopalian human understanding in the affairs of man smooth out my over-active imagination.<br><br> <p></p><i></i>