Rolling Stone article

[Shrinker]

The Loosers helpfully posted a link to this...(In their glum little Is the Truth Movement Dying? thread.)

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/11818067/the_low_post_the_hopeless_stupidity_of_911_conspir acies/1

It's worth a read for some entertaining Truther Bashing.

BUSH: You guys are brilliant! Because if there's one thing about Americans -- they won't let a president go to war without a damn good reason. How could we ever get the media, the corporate world and our military to endorse an invasion of a secular Iraqi state unless we faked an attack against New York at the hands of a bunch of Saudi religious radicals? Why, they'd never buy it. Look at how hard it was to get us into Vietnam, Iraq the last time, Kosovo?
CHENEY: Like pulling teeth!
RUMSFELD: Well, I'm sold on the idea. Let's call the Joint Chiefs, the FAA, the New York and Washington, D.C., fire departments, Rudy Giuliani, all three networks, the families of a thousand fictional airline victims, MI5, the FBI, FEMA, the NYPD, Larry Eagleburger, Osama bin Laden, Noam Chomsky and the fifty thousand other people we'll need to pull this off. There isn't a moment to lose!

Source thread at LC: http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=15275&st=0&#entry7446096

[NickUK]

What a fantastic article, hats off to them.

To me, the 9/11 Truth movement is, itself, a classic example of the pathology of George Bush's America. Bush has presided over a country that has become hopelessly divided into insoluble, paranoid tribes, one of which happens to be Bush's own government. All of these tribes have things in common; they're insular movements that construct their own reality by cherry-picking the evidence they like from the vast information marketplace, violently disbelieve in the humanity of those outside their ranks, and lavishly praise their own movement mediocrities as great thinkers and achievers. There are as many Thomas Paines in the 9/11 Truth movement as there are Isaac Newtons among the Intelligent Design crowd.

Great stuff.

[Oliver]

I love the theoretical conversation between Rummie, Bush and Wolfie - it´s exactly the same way i thought about it. :D

But one thing confuses me within the article:

Apparently every third person in the United States thinks George Bush was behind the 9/11 attacks.

Was this a joke of the author? Are there any statistical studies about how many people believe in an inside job? :confused:

[Shrinker]

I love the theoretical conversation between Rummie, Bush and Wolfie - it´s exactly the same way i thought about it. :D

But one thing confuses me within the article:



Was this a joke of the author? Are there any statistical studies about how many people believe in an inside job? :confused:

He may be referring to the claims of the Loosers, but actually yes, there are surveys that show a third of US citizens somehow blame the government for the attacks. However the surverys are worded such that anyone with a grudge could easily tick the 'yes' box. It certainly doesn't mean a third of people believe the CD nonsense or the voice morphing lunacy. Nobody seems brave enough to ask those questions in a proper survey.

[Oliver]

He may be referring to the claims of the Loosers, but actually yes, there are surveys that show a third of US citizens somehow blame the government for the attacks. However the surverys are worded such that anyone with a grudge could easily tick the 'yes' box. It certainly doesn't mean a third of people believe the CD nonsense or the voice morphing lunacy. Nobody seems brave enough to ask those questions in a proper survey.

Thank you for your explanation, Shrinker. :)

It would be scary if the american people do distrust their own government that much. What about the non-troofers you mentioned who tend to vote for "yes"? What are their reason for their distrust if it´s not the 9/11-MI-LIHOP-legend?

[qarnos]

He may be referring to the claims of the Loosers, but actually yes, there are surveys that show a third of US citizens somehow blame the government for the attacks. However the surverys are worded such that anyone with a grudge could easily tick the 'yes' box. It certainly doesn't mean a third of people believe the CD nonsense or the voice morphing lunacy. Nobody seems brave enough to ask those questions in a proper survey.

I think the wording of the question (going off the top of my head here, I may be wrong) was "do you think the goverment was complicit in the attacks". This, of course, gives a wide latitude to answering "yes".

Recently (around 9/11 this year) I saw on the LC forums that someone had linked to an online poll regarding this question. I forget the exact source and couldn't be bothered digging through the LC forums to find it, but the poll was showing a large majority responding "no".

This particular looser posted to the forums to "rally the troops" and soon every looser was on there voting "yes" (probably multiple times). After a few hours the poll had completely swung to show some rediculous percentage (like, 80%) responding "yes" and the loosers were all patting themselves on the back for a job well done.

To this day I have no idea what they think this achieved but they seemed to be pretty proud of themselves.

[Shrinker]

The pollsters also like to ask "Do you think the governement is withholding information on _________?". Absolutely anything in the blank will get you a very positive answer.

Also, "Do you think the government orchestrated the 9/11 attacks or was somehow complacent in preventing them?". Many (most?) hardened JREFers would have no choice but to vote yes.

These are poll questions I've actually seen the truthers use as 'evidence'.

[qarnos]

The pollsters also like to ask "Do you think the governement is withholding information on _________?". Absolutely anything in the blank will get you a very positive answer.

Also, "Do you think the government orchestrated the 9/11 attacks or was somehow complacent in preventing them?". Many (most?) hardened JREFers would have no choice but to vote yes.

These are poll questions I've actually seen the truthers use as 'evidence'.

Truth, lies and damned statistics!

I've never been a fan of polls, especially when they are used to support a particular point of view.

Usually the advocate will state "x percent of people believe y".

My first problem with this is that what other people believe is completely irrelevant. Unless, perhaps, you are talking about one specific person who is an expert in the relevant field, but in those cases I'd like to think that the experts don't "believe" but rather "accept".

The second is, the above statement should be reworded to "x percent of people who respond to internet polls about y and who also were aware of this poll and had the time to respond, believe y" or something along those lines.

[jhunter1163]

I have it on good authority that a JREF spy posted that link there...:whistling

[G-K-4]

Did Dylan Avery just admit that "we can't offer an explanation as to what really happened" on 9/11?

His wording is a little muddy, and he can't even spell his Taibbi's name right. But considering the ease with which Avery reads what he wants to into people's statements, it's tempting to use his own medicine on him here.

http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=15437&st=0&#entry7474500

By the way, did you all notice that there is a feedback page for Taibbi's column?
http://www.rollingstone.com/nationalaffairs/?p=548

[DavidJames]

Did Dylan Avery just admit that "we can't offer an explanation as to what really happened" on 9/11?

His wording is a little muddy, and he can't even spell his Taibbi's name right. But considering the ease with which Avery reads what he wants to into people's statements, it's tempting to use his own medicine on him here.

http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=15437&st=0&#entry7474500

By the way, did you all notice that there is a feedback page for Taibbi's column?
http://www.rollingstone.com/nationalaffairs/?p=548

Dylan takes offense at being called a dickwad and gets his panties all in a bunch. Then he has the unbelievable gall to say: he has no evidence whatsoever, he just calls us "dickwads" and puts words in our mouthThis is the guy that made a movie full of lies and without a shred of evidence.

Hey Dylan The Dickwad - That's about the nicest thing I can think of calling you. The rest would be really insulting.

[R.Mackey]

Thank you for your explanation, Shrinker. :)

It would be scary if the american people do distrust their own government that much. What about the non-troofers you mentioned who tend to vote for "yes"? What are their reason for their distrust if it´s not the 9/11-MI-LIHOP-legend?

Americans have never trusted their own government.

Neither, for that matter, do many people here.

However, there is a world of difference between distrust in government -- meaning one must keep an eye on it, fight for a free press, vote, demonstrate once in a while, etc. -- and honestly believing that the government is conspiring, leveraging incredible technology, thousands of awesomely competent shadowy people, and decades of planning, just to subjugate us, leaving no evidence. The former is healthy democracy in action. The latter is clinical paranoia.

[dirtywick]

Dylan takes offense at being called a dickwad and gets his panties all in a bunch. Then he has the unbelievable gall to say: This is the guy that made a movie full of lies and without a shred of evidence.

Hey Dylan The Dickwad - That's about the nicest thing I can think of calling you. The rest would be really insulting.

I especially enjoy how he'd love for the guy to call him that to his face, you know, because Dylan is really scary and stuff. I mean, what, he's gonna get Bermas to yell rhetoric at him?

[T.A.M.]

Oliver:

The statistic is largely based on a recent poll which showed that 36% of americans polled believed it Very Likely or Somewhat likely that the USG either caused 9/11 or let it happen.

If you break down the numbers, only 16% believed it Very likely that they caused it or let it happen. The poll didnt distinguish between caused or let it happen, as the question asked if you thought either was "very likely" or "somewhat likely".

Here is a link to the poll question and results.

Scripps/Ohio Poll Question and Results (http://newspolls.org/question.php?question_id=716)

TAM

[MarkyX]

1/3 of Americans think 9/11 was an inside job, but probably no more then 1000 showed up at GZ.

:D

[DavidJames]

I especially enjoy how he'd love for the guy to call him that to his face, you know, because Dylan is really scary and stuff. I mean, what, he's gonna get Bermas to yell rhetoric at him?Yeah and if Dylan really gets angry, he'll get right up in his face and quote him out of context.

[dirtywick]

And Korey can film it! It'll be marvelous.

[LashL]

And Korey can film it! It'll be marvelous.

And they will claim that they don't know each other even while they're filming it, of course.

:rolleyes:

[Dog Town]

How sad... the most popular Left Wing, "not that there's any thing wrong with that" mag. Hip, of the O.G. Hip! Hell ...Jann W. speaks for itself, nudge, nudge...wink...wink! What mags can these guys read ? Teen, or Tiger Beat? I'm sure "gaptoof bermas" is working on those now! How insular are they?

DT

ETA: Just asking questions????

[G-K-4]

I especially enjoy how he'd love for the guy to call him that to his face, you know, because Dylan is really scary and stuff. I mean, what, he's gonna get Bermas to yell rhetoric at him?
No. He'll whip out his big cardboard box and a ruler to show who is more of a man.

:rolleyes:

[delphi_ote]

CHENEY: And the Pentagon crash -- we'll have to do it in broad daylight and say it was a plane, even though it'll really be a cruise missile.
:dl:

[JLam]

From the article:
There's not a whole lot of difference, psychologically, between Sean Hannity's followers believing liberals to be the same as terrorists, and 9/11 Truthers believing even the lowest soldier or rank-and-file FAA or NORAD official to be a cold-blooded mass murderer. In both cases you have to be far gone enough into your private world of silly tribal bull**** that the concept of "your fellow citizen" has ceased to have any meaning whatsoever. It may be that America has become too big and complicated for most people to deal with being part of. People are longing for a smaller, stupider reality. Some, like Bush, sell a prepackaged version. Others just make theirs up out of thin air. God help us.Amen...'cept for the God part. ;)

[Dog Town]

Bwahahaha!

BUSH: Wait, why do we have to use a missile?

CHENEY: Because it's much easier to shoot a missile and say it was a plane. It's not easy to steer a real passenger plane into the Pentagon. Planes are hard to come by.

BUSH: But aren't we using two planes for the Twin Towers?

CHENEY: Mr. President, you're missing the point. With the Pentagon, we use a missile, and say it was a plane.

BUSH: Right, but I'm saying, why don't we just use a plane and say it was a plane? We'll be doing that with the Twin Towers, right?

CHENEY: Right, but in this case, we use a missile. (Throws hands up in frustration) Don, can you help me out here?

RUMSFELD: Mr. President, in Washington, we use a missile because it's sneakier that way. Using an actual plane would be too obvious, even though we'll be doing just that in New York.

BUSH: Oh, OK.

[Foolmewunz]

Oliver - TAM beat me to point 1, but it should be re-emphasized. By lumping MIHOP and LIHOP together you get a whole lot of possibilities under LIHOP. Many people, reading through all the information/disinformation pick up on their own bugbear. If, for instance, they just plain don't like Bush, would they be willing to surmise that he should've read the intelligence reports, and should've known that something bad would happen, and could've done something to prevent it. Add that to the question, and "uh, yeah, I can say that he let it happen so as to have an excuse to get even with Saddam for embarassing his daddy", so I'll check the box that says, "Somewhat likely".

Point 2. Not applicable on this poll, but in case you get confusing claims from various sources, you have to not only seek out the wording of the question, but also learn to simply not trust certain polling organizations. Scripps is usually safe, but someone like Zogby lets people sponsor polls and the wording of the question can guarantee the results. One group wants to impeach Bush, so they posited the question: If he did not tell the truth about his reasons for going to war with Iraq, should he be impeached?

The organization in question downplays the "if he did not tell the truth" part, but trumpets the fact that 53% of the country supports impeachment. I think if they just asked the public if they support their own organizational goal and worded it accordingly, they might get a decidedly different result. Zogby also ran a poll for one of the troofer groups sometime back, and the wording came out with something like 80% of the country not believing in the gov't version of the story (or something like that).

[Bell]

How about such a poll?

Did 19 Moslim extremists, sponsored by OBL, hijack 4 planes and crash them into buildings and into the ground?

[ ] Yes
[ ] No