Draft of pamphlet, part 2

I posted Part 1 earlier. Here is Part 2:

To Tom: Michael C. Ruppert vs. “COINTELPRO Tool” on Afghanistan

In this comment, Tom, a.k.a. “Representative Press,” called our attention to an attempted debunking of Michael C. Ruppert’s timeline by someone with the moniker “COINTELPRO Tool.”

I don’t have time to respond to every part of this. For now, I’ll focus just on the parts about Afghanistan. I’ll respond regarding other issues later.

Common a priori objections by “debunkers,” including arguments from authority and the “someone would have talked” and “too many people” arguments

Every now and then I get a wave of “debunkers” visiting this blog. They’re welcome to post here; I’ve learned a lot from them. But, in the future, I would like to try to avoid certain repetitious arguments, or at least confine those particular arguments to relevant threads such as this one.

There are some a priori arguments they almost always bring up in an effort to prove that there could not have been any government complicity in the attacks of 9/11. In recent debates here, those arguments got jumbled together with other, meatier issues in comment threads.

To avoid such jumbling in the future, I’ve decided to devote this post to the more common a priori arguments. I’ll then add a rule to my comment policy requiring that, in the future, these and similar a priori arguments be discussed only in comments below this post (or other posts on these same topics), rather than jumbled together with other, more substantive discussions.

In this post I’ll also provide a brief review of my debates with “debunkers” in general, for the benefit of “debunkers” visiting this blog for the first time. Some of the discussions we’ve had here have been very worthwhile.

My main reasons for being suspicious about 9/11

Below is a summary of the things I personally find strangest about 9/11, and which lead me to suspect complicity by high officials in the U.S. government.

• Bush’s under-reaction
• The lack of air defense
• WTC 7
• The war in Afghanistan
• Credible allegations of U.S. government complicity in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing
• Other issues
• The most important issue: A truly independent investigation is needed

Richard W. Behan’s “War on Terror” article, Mikkelina’s blog, and income tax

Thanks to Mikkeluna’s thoughts for calling attention to The Mega-Lie Called the “War on Terror”: A Masterpiece of Propaganda by Richard W. Behan, AlterNet, September 27, 2007. This article contains a concise history of Bush’s and Cheney’s pre-9/11 plans to invade both Afghanistan and Iraq, for which 9/11 then provided a convenient excuse.

“Mikkelina’s thoughts” is a blog here on WordPress which contains posts in support of the 9/11 Truth movement. I was glad to see that it also contains posts that appear to be somewhat left-leaning, including When will the American people yell: ENOUGH!, in which Mikkelina endorses Michael Moore’s call for universal healthcare, and Governor Schwarzenegger: Sie sollten sich schämen!