CAMPOS: Very serious 9/11 untruths
By Paul Campos, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)
Published June 18, 2008 at 12:05 a.m.
Every month I get a few e-mails from people who want to reveal to me the real truth about the 9/11 terrorist attacks. The truth, according to my correspondents, always involves some incredibly elaborate conspiracy theory in which the U.S. government staged the attacks to justify the so-called war on terror and the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq.
These theories are invariably absurd on their face (for one thing, they assume a genuinely superhuman level of malevolent competence on the part of the Bush administration). Yet despite all their superficial absurdity, the claims of the 9/11 Truthers touch on a deeper truth, which is as ironic as it is disturbing.
That deeper truth is contained in their claims that the real meaning of 9/11 has very little to do with the standard account given by our government and media. While the 9/11 Truth movement is easy to dismiss as a product of various paranoid delusions, the irony is that the respectable version of what happened on 9/11 is itself a reflection of strikingly similar patterns of thought.
The respectable version - the version that was more or less accepted by all Very Serious People at the time of the invasion of Iraq - goes like this: The 9/11 attacks were merely an early strike in a war against the United States. This war is being carried out by something called Radical Islam, of which the al-Qaida terrorist network is only one small branch.
Radical Islam is a global conspiracy, made up of a significant minority of the world's more than 1 billion Muslims. It includes the governments of nations like Iran and Syria, and one of its key supporters was Saddam Hussein's Iraqi regime.
The goal of Radical Islam is world domination through the creation of a global caliphate, which requires, among other things, the complete destruction of the United States and the conversion of our surviving population to the most extreme form of Islamic fundamentalism, as practiced in nations such as Saudi Arabia.
Iraq had to be invaded because Saddam Hussein was trying to build atomic weapons - weapons that he might well give to terrorist groups that were his allies in Radical Islam's quest to destroy America.
This, I repeat, was (and to a significant extent still is), the respectable interpretation of the meaning of 9/11. When anyone questioned the evidence for this view, Very Serious Politicians like Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice would say things like "we don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud."
Meanwhile, Very Serious Opinion Makers like Charles Krauthammer of The Washington Post argued (and continue to argue) that America must also go to war against Iran because we could wake up one day to the news that nuclear weapons have been detonated in several American cities, by order of suicidal mullahs who turned over their soon-to-be- acquired nuclear arsenal to the vast shadowy global jihadist network.
That the respectable interpretation of 9/11 remains respectable in so many important places should not obscure the fact that it is a paranoid fantasy of the first order - one as utterly unhinged from reality as the most extravagant imaginings of the 9/11 Truthers.
It's easy to lose sight of this because while the 9/11 Truthers remain quarantined on obscure Web sites, the paranoid conspiracy theorists currently in charge of American foreign policy continue to appear regularly on network television and on the opinion pages of our leading newspapers.
There, they make crazy arguments, such as that denying the president the right to throw people in prison for the rest of their lives without ever having to explain why exposes our nation to the risk of annihilation by terrorists. Meanwhile, almost nobody ever points out that these arguments are actually insane.
And that's the real truth about 9/11.
Paul Campos is a professor of law at the University of Colorado. He can be reached at paul.campos@colorado.edu.
Post your comment
Registration is required. Click here to create your free user account, or login below.
Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.
Featured
-
Rocky Multimedia
The news comes alive in our videos and slide shows. Catch up on what's happening today.
-
Holiday Lights
Is your house the jolliest on the block? Submit your holiday lights display.
-
Holiday Gift Guide
Looking to get a jump-start on the holiday shopping season?
-
Mount Crushmore
Which four Broncos greats should be immortalized on Mount Crushmore? Vote here.
-
Bronco Dean's rant
Listen to Bronco Dean's midweek rant on the Chiefs.
-
Broncos Video
Get the latest from Dove Valley as the Broncos prepare for Sunday's matchup.
-
Calendar wallpaper
Download this month's desktop wallpaper calendar
-
Sam Adams' Open Mic
Open Mic: Stirrin' the Soup with Matt Iseman
-
The Rocky @ 150 Years
Read the Rocky's coverage of Colorado's cannibal, Alfred Packer, in 1886.
June 18, 2008
5:39 a.m.
Suggest removal
rpmcmurphy writes:
Paul, I just wish someone would show me indesputable photos of the 757 that allegedly hit the Pentagon.
I have never seen any. Do you at the DNA have any you could share, to shut up the lunatic truthers?
June 18, 2008
6:26 a.m.
Suggest removal
yaakovwatkins writes:
Campos,
Assault is when a person makes a credible threat to inflict serious bodily injury. That gives the victim the right to take preventive and protective measures. If you don't believe that the Islamists have made credible threats then you don't read the newspapers.
June 18, 2008
6:27 a.m.
Suggest removal
spencerr writes:
And Iran is really enriching uranium to weapons-quality using thousands of centrifuges merely for energy production!!!
Hey, Israel will do what it has to, and by the time they are done with Iran, with or without our help, it will be nothing more than a lifeless desert. It's no coincidence that we see recent reports about the greatness of Israel's Air Force...if it decides to use it...
June 18, 2008
7:14 a.m.
Suggest removal
taoistblockhead writes:
Paul Campos - Excellent article and analysis; one of the best short summations of the dynamics at work in this country post 9/11.
June 18, 2008
7:26 a.m.
Suggest removal
AngelontheSidelines writes:
Ahh, the battlefield canard.
How logical is it to assume any jihadi warrior will go to the teeth and claws of America in Iraq, while the soft underbelly remains unprotected at our border?
Why go and fight skirmishes in Iraq with our best fighters when the American beast is most vulnerable in their homes? If this global caliphate is beyond fantasy, then where are the attacks? The recent "foiled" attacks were entirely facilitated by FBI undercover agents.
Now Sassy wants to kill all prisoners on the "battlefield", justice for those dead on 911. But how many of these Gitmo prisoners were actually enemy combatants?
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/259/story/...
June 18, 2008
7:30 a.m.
Suggest removal
AngelontheSidelines writes:
Thanks Paul,
Your pointer of one truly outrageous conspiracy theory taking precedence over the other poo poohed conspiracy theory certainly puts the current spin under unflattering light.
June 18, 2008
8:35 a.m.
Suggest removal
masonp77 writes:
the prisoners at gitmo are another example of this administration's inability for transparency. even the supreme court thinks so.
if the prisoners at gitmo are guilty. try them in public, in a military court of law. let them be able to at least know the charges the government is laying out against them, let only be able to defend themselves.
June 18, 2008
8:46 a.m.
Suggest removal
HolierThanThou writes:
Observe how well "global" Islam works in Iraq with the Shiites and Sunnis bombing and shooting each other. If there were such a thing, you'd expect them to have no difficulty dividing up the oil wealth of their nation and living in peace with each other.
Observe how well this nonsense worked for us. Mr. Campos is right. Bush has eliminated Saddam Hussein at tremendous cost while failing to provide America with any strategic value. Saddam was an enemy of Al Qaeda and Iran. As nasty as he was to his own people, he was useful and now proven to be of no threat to us whatsoever.
Add another expense to the trillions of dollars and thousands of lives wasted in Iraq: the Afghan people welcomed us in their country hoping that we would help them with reconstruction. While bribing warlords may have had tactical value, only a fool would reckon it to have any long-term strategic value. The warlords that we installed to run the country are allies of the Taliban and Al Qaeda while being bitter opponents and oppressors of the Afghan public. The main cash crop of Afghanistan is now opium, which in addition to petro-dollars from the oil royals, is a primary source of financing for the Taliban.
Bush's failure to secure Afghanistan has provided the Taliban an opportunity to literally conquer the Waziristan region of Pakistan which did not exist prior to our invasion of neighboring Afghanistan. Waziristan is now a protected staging area for Taliban attacks in Afghanistan and is also a training ground for Al Qaeda terrorists.
Bribe money or not, the Afghan warlords will side with the new and improved Taliban providing cover and support. To do otherwise for them is tantamount to professional suicide.
Intelligence is what America desperately needs to become a secure and respected nation again. Conservative mythologizing about threats to America certainly deserve no more credibility than crackpot nonsense from the conspiracy theorists. By giving them a pass to peddle nonsense by palming it off as "fair and balanced" our own media has contributed to the decline of our country and Bush's failure to accomplish anything productive in the so-called "war on terror".
June 18, 2008
8:47 a.m.
Suggest removal
irisman writes:
The so-called orthodox view of 9/11 that Campos describes is only held by some Bush Administration true believers. Very few people think that Iraq was ever part of an Islamist conspiracy. However Campos seems to dismiss the threat from Islamic extremism in general. He needs to read the biography of Sayyed Qutb, the patron saint of militant Islam. Qutb's philosophy includes hatred of all secular institutions, everything associated with Western culture, and the United States in particular. It dreams of gathering all Muslims into an empire ruled strictly by Islamic Law. What we don't know is how many people are followers of militant Islam. The moderate Muslims have largely remained silent, so it's very hard to gauge the actual number of militants, because they're the ones making the most noise. Maybe the CIA knows, or maybe not.
June 18, 2008
9:09 a.m.
Suggest removal
bira44 writes:
Ephraim Karsh of King's College University of London says in his book, "Islamic Imperialism" that, "Indeed, Muhammad devised the concept of jihad, "exertion in the path of Allah," as he called his god, as a means to entice his local followers to raid Meccan caravans, instantaneously transforming a common tribal practice into a supreme religious duty and the primary vehicle for the spread of Islam throughout the ages.
"He developed and amplified this concept with the expansion of his political ambitions until it became a rallying call for world domination, and he established the community of believers, or the umma, as the political framework for the practice of this religion in all territories it conquered." (Karsh, p. 5)
Islam is not, nor ever was, a great "peaceful" religion. Its imperialistic nature was manifested on 9/11. Given the chance, jihadists would try it again and again. The reason they do not is because of our vigilance.
Karsh, E. (2007) Islamic Imperialism, A History. New Haven and London. Yale University Press.
June 18, 2008
9:53 a.m.
Suggest removal
anarchist writes:
bira44, " Given the chance, jihadists would try it again and again.",February 26th,1993, Ramzi Yousef. Ramzi Yousef arrived in America on an Iraqi passport, and is considered to be the mastermind behind the World Trade Center bombing of '93. I agree, if at first they don't succeed, try, try again.
http://www.fas.org/irp/world/iraq/956...
June 18, 2008
11:05 a.m.
Suggest removal
MrPeabody writes:
Just when I thought somebody had kidnapped Campos (his last column was actually a good one!) the real Campos surfaced again. To compare those who are actually concerned about global jihad operations with the 911 truthers is absurd.
Asymetric warfare is a concept that some can't get their brains around. In many western countries, including ours, radical Imams are spreading their message of intolerance and hate and kill the infidels. Saudi Wahabis are financing and setting up more and more mosques and Islamic schools here in the U.S. and are providing "educational curricula" to secondary schools, colleges and Universities (for their Middle East studies departments) and helping transform school textbooks in this country into Islam advocacy, rather than a level headed discussion of comparative religions. Islamist propaganda is being pushed as educational material for our school children.
All of this is a method of using our freedoms and our cultural norms, our court systems for grievances and our general acceptance of tolerance against us. Stealth infiltration spearheaded by organizations such as CAIR. All brought in under the guise of multiculturalism, the absurd notion that all cultures are equal and that we can't judge them because we are biased.
Is the sky falling? No, but we must remain vigilant and root out these things and keep an eye on them. If Campos truly is unaware of these developments, he shouldn't venture to comment on the issue. Equating those who are alarmed about this to 911 truthers shows that once again, he has no clue or if he does, he is not intellectually honest.
This kind of thinking is on a par with the absurd notion of granting enemies on the battlefield U.S. Constitutional rights, trying to make the treatment of terror suspects captured on a battlefield across the world a law enforcement action to be handled in our civilian courts.
Unfortunately, far too many folks on the left agree with his line of reasoning, that radical Islam poses no real threat. Too bad for us that the proof won't be evident until another truly horrific attack on this country here at home has already happened. Then I expect the same lefties to loudly cry out - "why couldn't we have prevented this?" Especially if one of the victims is a family member or close friend.
Oh well, let's just keep on shaking down grandmothers at airports instead of "profiling" passengers, because we can't be politically incorrect. Not all Muslims are terrorists, but all the 911 terrorists were Muslims - radical ones at that.
June 18, 2008
11:18 a.m.
Suggest removal
rpmcmurphy writes:
What Michael Reagan, son of former President Reagan has to say:
“Excuse me folks, I'm going to say this. We ought to find the people who are doing this, take them out and shoot them. Really. You take them out, they are traitors to this country, and shoot them. You have a problem with that? Deal with it. You shoot them. You call them traitors, that's what they are, and you shoot them dead. I’ll pay for the bullets. ”
And Mr Peabody, nice post. Well put.
June 18, 2008
11:57 a.m.
Suggest removal
FreeToChoose writes:
As usual, when someone claims to be telling you the 'real truth,' it rarely is!
And to undermine your argument further, Mr Campos, you resort to the most common Bush bashing and name calling of the lowest blogging order. What happened to just having a difference of opinion? What is wrong with respecting the opinion of your opponent and making your case on the merits of your argument? Instead you resort to calling those opinions that differ from yours a 'paranoid fantasy of the first order.' Nice.
Someone disagrees with you? Call them 'insane!' Yes... that's a very classy approach. You should hold more respect for your position as an op/ed columnist and not lower yourself into the modern moshpit of blogger-speak.
Instead, you provided us all with yet another perfect representation of how the dialogue drops to the lowest common denominator in modern political rhetoric. Is this the ethical approach to debate you teach your law students?
The so-called 'facts' of 9/11 are sooooooo obscured by political turf, political rhetoric and political ambition these days that it will be decades before we can evaluate, with any surety, the 'real truth' of 9/11 and its aftermath. Your claims of omniscience, therefore, reek of AT LEAST as much hubris as you accuse this administration of harboring!
June 18, 2008
noon
Suggest removal
geedzinakg writes:
Those emails you get- do they actually accuse the Bush Administration
of staging 9/11, or do they generally ask questions about the many
lies, distortions, contradictions and omissions that make up the
Official Conspiracy Theory?
People i've talked to generally support a new and public investigation into legitimate questions,
like those raised by the Family Steering Committee, 70% of which were
ignored by the 9/11 Commission- including all those that might have
revealed or disproved criminal negligence or complicity on the part of
officials.
http://www.911truth.org/downloads/Fam...
9/11 was too over the top and this is the network age; it's over- the People's minds are expanded, no getting the genie back in the bottle- 51% now want a new investigation and the number who think Bush is lying keeps rising. We need a new investigation to find out who knew and did what when, and what the appropriate consequences will be. I personally favor a Truth and Reconciliation Commission, and these elites who were shorting as many or more than 38 stocks and preparing for financial and economic disaster- like making a single $5 billion
dollar investment in US Treasuries in September 01 right before the attacks
http://cooperativeresearch.org/timeli...
it's over, 9/11 was too over the top, eventually no one will believe it- anyone who actually examines 9/11, or even thinks about it, realizes it's BS- the 9/11 Truth Movement is international and is making waves with people in government and business.
140 of the world's most influential power brokers and opinion/policy makers meet in
Chantilly, VA but the ciaorporate media don't think it's news; that's
why less than 20% can say they believe all or most of what they say.
Bilderberg meeting attracts prominent politicians, businessmen
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Bilderb...
AMERICANS SLAM NEWS MEDIA ON BELIEVABILITY; less than 20% believe "all or "most" reporting
http://www.sacredheart.edu/pages/2078...
June 18, 2008
12:06 p.m.
Suggest removal
geedzinakg writes:
Pass this on to those elites you're certainly less than 6 degrees away from, being a University Professor- i don't know if idiot trollspooks can be counted on to pass stuff along to their masters, so maybe at the next hobnob you get invited to?
9/11 & Public Opinion
According to an October 2006 NY Times/CBS poll 81% of Americans believe the Bush Administration is “hiding something” or “mostly lying” about what they knew prior to 9/11; up from 73%, according to the same poll in 2002. Only 16% can say they believe the Bush Administration is “telling the truth”.
http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/view/...
A November 2007 Scripps News Poll revealed that 62% of Americans think it “somewhat likely” or “very likely” some people in the federal government had specific warnings of the 9/11 attacks in New York and Washington, but chose to ignore those warnings.
http://www.scrippsnews.com/node/28534
A September 2007 Zogby poll found 67% of Americans think the 9/11 Commission should have investigated the collapse of World Trade Center 7 (the 47-story steel-framed skyscraper that completely collapsed at 5:20 pm on 9/11), 50.7% think Congress should investigate the Executive Branch’s conduct before, during and after the attacks.
http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.db...
A 2006 Scripps poll asked a similar question about US parties intending 9/11 to succeed:
‘Thirty-six percent of respondents overall said it is "very likely" or "somewhat likely" that federal officials either participated in the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon or took no action to stop them "because they wanted the United States to go to war in the Middle East."’
http://www.scrippsnews.com/911poll
Hundreds of highly credible people, including members of Congress, military leaders, intelligence professionals, scientists, structural engineers & architects, legal scholars, 9/11 family members and first responders, health professionals and even the 9/11 Commissioners themselves have publicly questioned the completeness, accuracy and even the integrity of the 9/11 Commission investigation and report. Chairman Thomas Kean and Co-Chair Lee Hamilton admitted large parts of their narrative were based on the testimony of detainees who they didn’t interview directly and had been tortured; they said the CIA obstructed their investigation.
Credible or Not? By George Washington (prominent people who question the 9/11 Commission Report; including the 9/11 Commissioners)
http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/...
Criticism of US Government and 9/11 Timeline
http://cooperativeresearch.org/timeli...
June 18, 2008
12:49 p.m.
Suggest removal
FreeToChoose writes:
Hey, geedzinakg, time to let 9/11 stand on its own.
9/11 is quite simple.
Terrorists hijacked four planes.
Terrorists crashed three of those planes into planned targets killing thousands of American citizens.
Americans in the fourth plane couragously sacrificed themselves so the terrorists could not complete the fourth attack.
As far as the 'facts' of 9/11 go, that's really all we need to know. It was terrible. It was sad. It was transformative.
It's the aftermath of 9/11 that gets murky. But again, trying to figure out EXACTLY who knew what and when is a futile exercise that will likely lead to still more doubt and division. The 9/11 Commission was sufficient to point out some of our mistakes and to help us plan for the future. Of more importance NOW is asking the question, "Did we learn ENOUGH about what happened to address the threats CURRENTLY facing our nation so we can ensure the safety and security of our citizens?"
I suppose many will answer "No! We need to know everything! We need to know exactly what happened!"
Do we? Some events can never be completely explained with absolute surety. Who killed JFK? Precisely what events, conditions and policies led us into and out of the Great Depression? What led to the demise of the Soviet Union? We can never be 100% sure of the answers to these questions, but we can try to learn from these events and apply some of those lessons to today's changing dynamics. The threats we will face as a nation, economically and militarily, continue to change and we could not possibly anticipate 100% of those threats even if we had a perfect knowledge of the past. 9/11 was a transformative event and some of it's smaller lessons will likely reveal thenselves over time, but it is really is not worth dwelling over for another seven years. I'm sure that some who suffered personal loss on 9/11 will not feel there will ever be an adequate explanation, but as a nation, it is probably time to move on.
And so we'll do what we must always do, make the best decisions we can with our imperfect knowledge and understanding. That is life my friend. Please... time to move on...
June 18, 2008
2:48 p.m.
Suggest removal
gnukid writes:
Paul
I just read your essay on common dreams titled, "Very Serious 911 Untruths". I appreciate the idea that in light of one untruth another may be graver, but that is among the most specious forms of logic. In fact your point has no basis for argument whatsoever. Now, I read the article twice which may not be enough time to understand your point or nuance however, you fail to offer substantial evidence to back up your point which makes it an opinion piece more than a factual revealing essay. So, if I may ask you to return to the points of fact, where is there any evidence whatsoever of the attack, the cause and results for the destruction of the towers or building 7. Where are the facts and prosecutions for anyone or anything? There are none. No completed trials, no perpetrators, nothing but a series of conspiracy theories by the Whitehouse. Where is the evidence of a plane that hit the Pentagon, or the evidence of plane that crashed in the field?
For these reasons alone, we are skeptical of conspiracy theories of the Whitehouse. Now we do have some evidence to go on. We know a great deal about forewarnings, prior trading, we know there is no evidence to support the Whitehouse conspiracy theory or it would be presented. We know, Bush lied at the School when he said he saw the plane hit tower 1 on TV while at the school. We know Cheney lied about the timing of his arrival in the bunker according Norm Mineta. We know the phone calls don't make sense or were possible. We know that NORAD did not protect our nation. Each of these are significant enough to be reasons enough to further pursue these treasonous lies, follow the lies. The number of official lies have been documented in excess of 900.
So, I am writing because I am offended by your lack of evidence to your sub-point that Truthers are spreading lies. Pony up, which Truthers are spreading which lies? Do I understand you?
Basically, after a quick read, your essay comes off as hypocritical in that it perpetuates lies itself about the events. So, it wasn't very helpful except to further confuse and spread disinformation.
June 18, 2008
4:03 p.m.
Suggest removal
an_artist writes:
we are obviously by nature a society that immediately gravitates to conspiracies. to accept something at face value is not possible for some reason. pearl harbor, jfk, mlk, the oklahoma city bombing and now 9/11. apparently this is how we deal with trauma. we irrationally blame ourselves, our government and each other instead of looking at the event logically. why is that?
June 19, 2008
9:50 a.m.
Suggest removal
fatheromalley writes:
Wow.. such discussion about 9/11. Who gives a f*** about what Campos thinks of 9/11.. we've got the "world wide climate" to change! We must protect all animals, all plants from the destruction done by man!
We can't drill because it might hurt a polar bear or two, although the population has doubled.. but but.. it's global warming!
Now we argue about whether a plane hit the pentagon? Errr.. what happened to all the people on the flight, especially the wife of a government official that died that day?? Where is the flight if not at the pentagon? Where did it land if it didn't "land" there?
Are the passengers in Costa Rica enjoying the sun and waves,hidden from public view?
And the left has always maintained the we should be more frightened of Bush because he has agreed with 200 years of legal precedent that non citizens that have yet to set foot on American soil are NOT entitled to the same rights as our own citizens.
This seems reasonable to me, but ahh, our illustrious Supreme Court in it's infinite wisdom has overturned this while also declaring CO2 a pollutant.
Don't breathe anyone.. you are polluting my space. There's nothing worse than "second hand" CO2..
Insanity.. you betcha, and Campos and the rest of socialists around here are a primary example.. Grow up, quit whining about nothing and do something constructive Paul! How about an article about the 9000 PHD's that signed the Petition that says there is no scientific evidence that current levels of CO2 are optimum and cannot change? How about even if we could control it, if we decrease it, we are actually browning the world that will starve millions. We are ALL made of carbons.. errrr.. really?
So there is great danger to the American public if foreign combatants don't have access to the same rights as our citizens.. so much for sovereignty... ever feel like you've been "devalued".. does that ever cross your mind? It does mine, from the invasion of civilians from Mexico (15-30 million), to everyone getting the same rights and "entitlements" as we, even if they've never set foot in America.. wow.. that is sanity?
Go to www.fatheromalley.com for some straight talk for once..
May God Bless,
Father O'Malley
June 19, 2008
3:24 p.m.
Suggest removal
rpmcmurphy writes:
And still nobody can point me towards verifiable photos of the American Airlines 757 that supposedly hit the Pentagon.
And of course all the people who were on the planes are dead.
The ones on AA77 didn't die in the Pentagon though. No bags, no seats, no engines, no landing gear, nothing to prove what hit that building was indeed a 100 ton, wide-body aircraft.
Someone please show me proof so that I will not go insane.
June 19, 2008
3:58 p.m.
Suggest removal
AngelontheSidelines writes:
No proof necessary rpmc, in fact demanding evidence is unpatriotic and traitorous.
That airplane magically vaporized upon impact, a feat undone in all of the history of aviation. Just as the three WTC towers fell from fire weakening the steel is another first in the entire history of structural fires, 911 changed everything, including the laws of physics.
And to make things worse, people now, are complete nutballs if they even question the official fairy tale. Now the nutballs hate America, and deserve a traitor's death by Michael Reagan.
June 19, 2008
8:28 p.m.
Suggest removal
fatheromalley writes:
Message (automated spell check word recognition?)from Moderator:
"Watch your mouth! The word "s---" is not allowed here."
___________________________________________________________________
No where in my response was "s---"
scat? seat? sees? shut? What.. ??
Message to "moderator".. you might want to watch your paranoia. Maybe go to a doctor and get meds. I see that you are really "customer oriented" and most likely a liberal who always thinks the worst of fellow Americans.. maybe an Obama supporter too? bwahahaahhhah..
Is not "s---" a proper description of what a lot goes on here?
I find few that really wish to give any thought to what they write.. it's as if they wish to actually disrupt good communication. Little "hackers" of forums like this.. being "cute"..
Lighten up, most are adults here.. I'm sure they've read, seen and heard worse..
May God Bless,
June 20, 2008
2:54 p.m.
Suggest removal
LFC writes:
AngelontheSidelines-
Just because something has not happened before doesn't mean it can't. If a plane hits a building and there is an explosion like the ones on 911, it will blow off the fireproof material that is sprayed on the structural beams. Then if you have a fire that is out of control, that firefighters can't put enough fire on and you got the whole inside of the building on fire, that is plenty of heat to make the structure fail at the impact points causing the floors above it to come crashing down on the rest of the building. Sounds really feasible to me. MUCH more than our inefficient, over spending, can't run anything right gov't.
June 22, 2008
7:33 a.m.
Suggest removal
noliesradio writes:
We do not need the author to tell us how to think. I recommend that the reader study up on the events of 9/11 and he or she will be greatly surprised. A good place to start would be to listen to the daily 9/11 teach-in on NO LIES RADIO. http://noliesradio.org
June 25, 2008
2:22 a.m.
Suggest removal
smpcalgt writes:
Outstanding essay by Mr. Campos. Here are some pertinent quotes made almost 100 years ago, but sadly still true:
The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary. - H.L. Mencken
Every nation has its war party. It is not the party of democracy.
It is the party of autocracy. It seeks to dominate absolutely.
– Senator Robert M. La Follette
The politician would never have us believe it was his love of office that drives him on. No, the thing that drives him is his pure devotion to the common weal, his selfless and highminded statemanship... So, too the soldier. It is never love of glory that inspires him to his profession. It is never love of battle, love of war, love of all the resounding titles and the proud emoluments of the heroic conqueror. Oh no, it is the devotion to duty that makes him a soldier. There is no personal motive in it...All these people lie, of course. They know they lie and everyone who hears them also knows they lie. The lie, however, has become part of the convention of American life.
-Thomas Wolfe, "You Can't Go Home Again"
June 25, 2008
2:26 a.m.
Suggest removal
Archangel writes:
Wow Michael Regan was quoted as saying the following: “Excuse me folks, I'm going to say this. We ought to find the people who are doing this, take them out and shoot them. Really. You take them out, they are traitors to this country, and shoot them. You have a problem with that? Deal with it. You shoot them. You call them traitors, that's what they are, and you shoot them dead. I’ll pay for the bullets. ”
It reads like something that Hitler or Stalin would say!
Particularly Stalin who believed in backing up any unpopular policies with the barrel of a gun.
Here's the straight dope if you have the public fomenting dissent, it means that the Government's actions have become intolerable, just like it says in the Declaration of Independence.
June 25, 2008
9:55 a.m.
Suggest removal
saveferris writes:
Angel says : "That airplane magically vaporized upon impact, a feat undone in all of the history of aviation. "
And somehow there is DNA evidence of the passengers? And Building 7 collapses after fires on a few floors but other buildings that had more fires and were hit by the falling towers survived.
Right on! It all stinks!
June 25, 2008
10:24 a.m.
Suggest removal
lencho_elias writes:
9-11 needs to be discussed exactly because the official story provided to the people left more questions then it provided answers. Obviously there are parts of this story that have, for some reason, been hidden and maybe even lied about. The results of 9-11, such as trillion dollar war budgets, illegal invasion or "pre-emptive strikes" on other soverign nations, thousands of civilian deaths, torture, and the continued dissapearance of civil liberties have all been negative and destructive to our nation and our world.
Actions speak louder then words, and its obvious to me from our gov't's actions since 9-11 that the good of the people of this nation and this world has never been the primary concern. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$, War lobbyists, $$$$$$$$, big oil's back in IRAQ, $$$$$$$$$$, Billion dollar Haliburton no bid contracts, $$$$$$$$$$$
$$$$$$$$$$$$$WAR IS A GLOBAL ECONOMIC PHENOMENA$$$$$$$$$
June 25, 2008
11:20 a.m.
Suggest removal
thefirestillburns writes:
This is an excellent article and the points made couldnt be more correct.its funny how many paranoid ego manical fools like to come and read these articles knowing full well they are going to disagree with everything in it, and then post there ranting macho responses to the writer and those with any sense of intellect telling us how the terrorists are going to kill us all unless we kill them all.shut up america.
June 25, 2008
12:27 p.m.
Suggest removal
CSactionORG writes:
Campos,
you don't know your @ss from a hole in the ground.
Do some research. Find some facts. You can do better than neocon talking points to hide the truth about 9/11.
CSaction.org
June 25, 2008
12:51 p.m.
Suggest removal
Lesh writes:
What an fool. I didn't hear any government source saying Iraq had nukes when we were debating war. Of course Iraq had WMD's. They used them on the Kurds. We still dont know what happened to them.
June 25, 2008
1:09 p.m.
Suggest removal
lencho_elias writes:
Lesh: WTF are you talkin bout?? The Iraqi's used chemical weapons on the Curds not WMD's. Why??? Because the whole WMD story was a lie used to justify a "pre-emptive strike" aka invasion of IRAQ. Guess what- the same WMD story is now being used as justification to provoke IRAN. Will you back the neocons and Israel when they "pre-emptively strike" IRAN and pull our country and our world further down the path to world conflict over power, oil and $$$$$$$$$
June 25, 2008
2:35 p.m.
Suggest removal
nonayerbsns writes:
YO, CAMPOS: how do you KNOW they are 'untruths'? Seriously. How do you KNOW????? You don't. It's what you choose to believe, bud. Same as the others.
June 25, 2008
3:49 p.m.
Suggest removal
nicktaste writes:
thermite?
cut beams, explosions before impact, the pools of MOLTEN STEEL under the towers that lasted for WEEKS
WTC #7?
if u dont realize the official story is BS then..
June 25, 2008
6:55 p.m.
Suggest removal
Madmax writes:
Links to the 5 articles listed below available at home page of www.patriotsquestion911.com :
Twenty-five U.S. Military Officers Challenge Official Account of 9/11 – Official Account of 9/11 “Impossible”, “A Bunch of Hogwash”, “Total B.S.”, “Ludicrous”, “A Well-Organized Cover-up”, “A White-Washed Farce”
Jan. 14, 2008
Eight U.S. State Department Veterans Challenge the Official Account of 9/11 – Official Account of 9/11 "Flawed", "Absurd", "Totally Inadequate", "a Cover-up"
Jan. 5, 2008
Seven Senior Federal Engineers and Scientists Call for New 9/11 Investigation – Official Account of 9/11 "Impossible", "Hogwash", "Fatally Flawed"
Dec. 13, 2007
Eight Senior Republican Administration Appointees Challenge Official Account of 9/11 – "Not Possible", "a Whitewash", "False"
Dec. 4, 2007
Seven CIA Veterans Challenge 9/11 Commission Report – Official Account of 9/11 a "Joke" and a "Cover-up"
Sep. 23, 2007
www.patriotsquestion911.com
June 26, 2008
1:43 a.m.
Suggest removal
rdamurphy writes:
That article is the most sterling example of a straw man argument that I have ever witnessed! It couldn't have been any better if the scarecrow from the Wizard of Oz had used his Doctorate of Thinkology to write it! Or any less fantasy...
June 29, 2008
7:42 p.m.
Suggest removal
paulsnjfriend writes:
Paul Campos again authors a confusing and illogical op-ed piece on June 16 in which he accuses the Administration of using "insane" arguments to "throw people in prison for the rest of their lives" without explanation.
The logic of his argument is that our Government along with the media have nurtured a "paranoid fantasy of the first order" in order to put people in fear that terrorists will use nuclear weapons from Iran or elsewhere to again attack us. He compares this paranoia with those who charge that our own government authored 9/11 and accuses both sides of being "unhinged from reality." Of course he offers no basis for this conclusion.
How, Mr. Campos, do you explain the following attacks: the Cole, the African U.S. embassys, the British subways, the Spanish train, 9/11, the Bali bombing, and the numerous other world wide attacks? Whether or not they are part of a massive conspiracy, they show a common theme and, perhaps, instill feelings of paranoia in many people. But how does this relate to Guantanamo?
Undoubtedly we should not imprison people for life without reason. Our Supreme Court has said so. But these people have been captured on the battlefield and it is not "insane," as you charge, to hold them as prisoners and to charge them with crimes. More than 30 of those already released have returned to the terrorist ranks or to Afghanistan where the battle continues.
One would expect, perhaps, a little better thought process than exhibited by your op-ed piece----but, then, they may not have read your other works.