General gripe thread – about the 9/11 Truth movement

The comment area below this post will be the proper place, here on this blog, for general gripes about about the 9/11 Truth movement, to avoid having such comments clutter up threads below posts on more specific topics.

Note that there are already other posts dealing with common a priori objections by opponents of the 9/11 Truth movement. Please post your comment there if directly relevant to one of those posts. Otherwise, you may post it here.

I’ll be adding a link to this thread from my comment policy page, where the first rule is that comments should be posted below those posts to which they are most relevant.

I’ll be using P.S.’s to this post to reply to misplaced comments that belong here on this page. The misplaced comments will be deleted from their original positions and quoted here on this page. (Note that this effectively buries a comment, in the sense that it will not be visible in the list of “Recent Comments” on the sidebar. So, if you want your comment to be listed under “Recent Comments,” please put it in the right place to begin with.)

Below is my reply to a misplaced comment that was posted earlier today:

Comment by 56jki23 — March 5, 2008

The following comment was originally posted underneath my post My main reasons for being suspicious about 9/11:

I’ve been working for Obama so I’m no conservative, but you conspiricy nuts are as dumb as Rush Limbaugh. You resort to name calling and don’t answer any of the real critics of 9-11. You set up straw men to knock down. Among the many problems: this isn’t a courtroom case so reasonable doubt isn’t an issue. It’s either 19 Muslim fanatics or the entire US government at fault–whoever has the most evidence against them is guilty. All conspiracy theorists have done is spread small amounts of doubt about a few of the pillars of the case against Osama. Nothing of any substance–find a well known structural engineer to support your position that “steel can’t melt” and that the towers couldn’t have collapsed. Steel looses 90% of its strength at half the temperature that jet fuel gets up to, more than enough to account for the collapse of the towers. Another problem is this presumption of innocence of terrorist organizations–that those few things they do bad are because of Israel or the US. WHAT ABOUT THE THOUSANDS OF HINDUS THEY HAVE BUTCHERED IN INDIA OVER THE LAST 20 YEARS? What that a CIA conspiracy? As an Indian man, I have never heard of even the most nationalist, anti-American Desi blame Americans instead of Muslims. I have an aunt who was killed by Muslim terrorists and I resent the blanket whitewash that 1,400 years of Muslim terrorism has gotten.

Comment by 56jki23 — March 5, 2008 @ 8:18 am

My reply to 56jki23 — March 5, 2008

56jki23 wrote:

I’ve been working for Obama so I’m no conservative, but you conspiricy nuts are as dumb as Rush Limbaugh. You resort to name calling and don’t answer any of the real critics of 9-11. You set up straw men to knock down.

Hello? Hello? Have you bothered to read this blog at all? What specific straw men have I set up to knock down? And since when have I resorted to name-calling? If you feel that I do, please point out specifics rather than just making a general accusation. And what “real critics,” specifically, do you feel that I should answer but have not answered?

Yes there are people in the 9/11 Truth movement who do resort to straw-man arguments and name-calling. Plenty of opponents of the 9/11 Truth movement resort to straw-man arguments and name-calling too — including you, apparently. In the very same breath as your complaint about name-calling, you resort to it yourself (“conspiracy nuts”). And we will soon come to a straw-man argument of yours, too.

Please look around on this blog before you answer. Also, if you post here again, please read my comment policy first. Among other things, please refrain from any and all further name-calling. If you continue to ignore my comment policy, subsequent comments of yours will be deleted.

Nothing of any substance–find a well known structural engineer to support your position that “steel can’t melt” and that the towers couldn’t have collapsed.

Straw man. Read my blog before you claim to know what my position is, about the towers or anything else.

Steel looses 90% of its strength at half the temperature that jet fuel gets up to, more than enough to account for the collapse of the towers.

What, exactly, is the temperature that you think “jet fuel gets up to,” or would get up to when spilled around on an office floor? And how long do you think the jet fuel would continue to burn?

Yes, there are plenty of folks in the 9/11 Truth movement who overstate their case on such matters, but it appears that you may be overstating your case too.

I have an aunt who was killed by Muslim terrorists and I resent the blanket whitewash that 1,400 years of Muslim terrorism has gotten.

I’m sorry to hear about what happened to your aunt. Not everyone in the 9/11 Truth movement gives “Muslim terrorism” a “blanket whitewash.” You may be confusing the 9/11 Truth movement in general with the pure-MIHOP faction. Dangerous religious fanatics (of various religions, including Islam among others) certainly do exist.

However, with your phrase “1,400 years of Muslim terrorism,” you seem to have gone beyond merely objecting to those who give a “blanket whitewash” to the very existence of terrorism-in-the-name-of-Islam. You seem to be equating “Muslim terrorism” with Islam in general and the entire history of Islam. Is that what you intended? If so, that to me seems like a vast overgeneralization, to say the least. Please keep in mind this blog’s policy against hate speech.

Anyhow, I would suggest that you take a look at Paul Thompson’s Complete 9/11 Timeline.