Why do so many non-Americans weigh in about 9/11 here?

[Drudgewire]

Last Child has achieved the vitually impossible, as I find myself in hearty and perfect agreement with both Drudgewire and Quad456 (sorry, can't remember the actual numbers).
Regardless of what happens outside of here, in the CT forum we're pretty much brethren. :alc:

[PhantomWolf]

Good point. LastChild, if you claim that I argue against 9/11 nonsense because I'm British and HATE AMERICA!!! --- then why do also I argue against 7/7 fantasies?

LastChild is attempting to set up an Ad Hominem dismissal here so he can write off all debunkers based on where they are from rather than what their argument is.

From the beginning the Truthers' claim has always been that the Debunkers stood against them for the opposite reason that the Truthers themselves became Truthers, ie, that the Debunkers were US Government lovers and accepted everything the US Government said without question.

The issue with this argument is that many Debunkers (about half here) are not from the US. This issue causes the traditional "You're only against me because you're a Government supporter" argument useless because obviously those of us that are not from the US obviously have no reason to care about the US Government.

Rather than taking the standard route of denying the nationality of the Non-US posters (rather a dumb thing to try really) what LC is attempting to do is resolve this contradiction by painting all Non-US Debunkers as US Haters so that he can say that we only stand against the Truthers because we want to see the US humiliated. Thus he can write off US based Debunkers as Government lovers/stooges and non-US Debunkers as US-Haters. Having done that there is no need to pay attention to that arguments because anything that is said can be ignored based on the perceived bias of the speaker, thus turning it into an Ad Hominem.

[Rolfe]

Western Civilisation can survive Global Warming, that isn't going to take away our democracy or rights to free speak, choice of religion and many, many other things.


This is a derail, so let's not pursue it in this thread, but while I'd like to agree with you here, I'm not so confident. Unless we manage to do something pretty fundamental, and frankly with the current behaviour of China, India and the people who run the Christmas lights in George Square I'm not sure we can, civilisation just might be in real trouble.

Who was it who said that a dog is just two meals away from being a wolf? If the massive infrastructure supporting our huge urban populations were to give way, there would be a lot of wolves around rather quickly.

Human beings have been fighting the infidel and indulging in sectarian strife since the beginning of recorded history. Civilisation managed in spite of that. How it will hold up to a metre or two increase in sea level or the cessation of the North Atlantic Conveyor could be quite another story.

Rolfe.

[gtc]

It was America that was attacked on 9/11. The attackers didn't care that day who else was in the buildings or on the planes except for the Americans.

Do you have evidence for this assertion?

[gumboot]

Note that I didn't say Humanity. Western Civilisation can survive Global Warming, that isn't going to take away our democracy or rights to free speak, choice of religion and many, many other things. Extremeist Islam is a direct threat to those things that make our civilisation what it is. Western Civilisation and the Islamists form of Islam are direct compeditors, only one can survive with the other having to be destroyed to allow any possiblity of peace to occur. Global Warming simply isn't that sort of threat to our way of life, it merely means we have to think about how we change the methods of luxary we ejoy with that way of life.

This is a derail, so let's not pursue it in this thread, but while I'd like to agree with you here, I'm not so confident. Unless we manage to do something pretty fundamental, and frankly with the current behaviour of China, India and the people who run the Christmas lights in George Square I'm not sure we can, civilisation just might be in real trouble.

Who was it who said that a dog is just two meals away from being a wolf? If the massive infrastructure supporting our huge urban populations were to give way, there would be a lot of wolves around rather quickly.

Human beings have been fighting the infidel and indulging in sectarian strife since the beginning of recorded history. Civilisation managed in spite of that. How it will hold up to a metre or two increase in sea level or the cessation of the North Atlantic Conveyor could be quite another story.

Rolfe.


For me personally the really alarming thing is the combination.

I don't know if you're familiar with Jared Diamond's Collapse but he looked at societies where social collapse occured, and analysed why, concluding several independent factors, affected by a final factor which was how said society responded to those other factors.

I think both are you are right in that I think Western Civilisation is quite capable of either surviving Climate Change or Radical Islam (and add into that, "Or Chinese Expansion"). But all at once? Now that's when things get very, very hairy.

I don't think one of these alone is a serious threat to our future. I think all at once is a potential recipe for disaster.

[Bobert]

Good answer. "Ur mom" would also have been acceptable.

LOL!
:D

[Travis]

I'm curious of just how many non-Americans thought 9/11 made the USA look either foolish or weak. I would speculate that the number is rather few outside of the Middle East. The lack of the non-Middle East international view of the event portraying the USA as foolish/weak combined with the one international area, the Middle East, that did view it that way as the international hot zone of 9/11 conspiracy theories really puts the nail in the coffin of this entire deluded idea.

[Corsair 115]

As an aside you may note that Chrétien does not mention God or the Almighty once.I'd say that's a Canadian character thing. We generally feel that a person's religious beliefs are a private matter and we generally don't like it when politicians start mixing religion with politics. We tend to feel uncomfortable when that happens, which explains some of the resistance to the current prime minister.

[Mobyseven]

Why do so many non-Americans weigh in about 9/11 here?

T = 204 post/rev

[Dave Rogers]

Rather than taking the standard route of denying the nationality of the Non-US posters (rather a dumb thing to try really) what LC is attempting to do is resolve this contradiction by painting all Non-US Debunkers as US Haters so that he can say that we only stand against the Truthers because we want to see the US humiliated. Thus he can write off US based Debunkers as Government lovers/stooges and non-US Debunkers as US-Haters. Having done that there is no need to pay attention to that arguments because anything that is said can be ignored based on the perceived bias of the speaker, thus turning it into an Ad Hominem.

There are two other categories you've left out, though. First of all there are the non-US posters who are nevertheless Bush-loving stooges of the Republican party, because we all know there are loads of those. And then there are the US-haters within the US who believe that a bunch of cave-dwelling Arabs could easily have defeated the most sophisticated defence system in the world; clearly, only a US-hater could believe something like that. Therefore, everyone in the world has a perceived bias against 9-11 truth, and can be ignored.

Dave

[8den]

whatever.

What a well reasoned and erudite point. A true credit to the truth movement.

[Architect]

whatever.


Whit haver, mair like



[/scots]

[stateofgrace]

What a well reasoned and erudite point. A true credit to the truth movement.

It's because they are special and one of the reasons why everybody takes them so seriously :rolleyes:.