Wake Up, American People In Support Of Decency And Honour.

Over on messageboards like the Straightdope and the James Randi Educational Forum, if you want to comment on 9/11, you are immediately referred to a 10,000 page NIST Bible and other important works that you are meant to have read, in order for your opinions to even begin to be accepted as relevant.

I'm not going to ask you to do anything so daunting, so don't worry. I've tried getting people to read books myself, and it's hard work.

What I am going to do is present a 10 minute Youtube clip - "OH NOES! NOT A YOUTUBE CLIP?" - featuring a man called Robert Bowman calmly and seemingly rationally discussing the events of 9/11.

At around the 1min. mark, he describes how he got time with Obama's chief of staff before he was elected, to show him the clip of building 7 coming down, and he says the c.o.s was totally unaware it had even happened.

Anybody want to comment on this, and the rest of what Robert Bowman has to say?

He's a Republican, fwiw, but he certainly comes across as one of the good guys to me.

Now you can tell me all about how he is screwing the dead in his spare time, or has some other deviant vice.

Anyhoo, after that tantalising build-up, here goes. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xo_OQ...eature=related

In the meantime, here is a commercial:- The Revolution Will Not Be Televised

What's the debate?

Well, it could center around the opinions of Mr Robert Bowman, and why a man as smart as he seems to be is fighting for attention on such a serious topic.


Unless you are totally familiar with what he has to say and dismiss it entirely, in which case, tell us what you have to back up your opinions?

Had you heard of him, prior to this thread?

No, I hadn't, partly because I don't obsess over the events of September 11th, 2001.

It's not obsessing. It's called paying attention when people are making a lot of sense, and not just buying the bullshit you've been spoon-fed. Way to poison the well, AG. I expected better from you.

Ivan, what do you think actually happened that day?

Questioning sources has its limits by the way. I know newspapers, and especially television news contains a high bullshit quotient, but I don't have the resources to personally verify every single fact in existence.

Let's not go there. This isn't about me, or my theories. Try ripping apart the thoughts of someone who is prepared to put his head on the chopping block in public, and not on a backwater messageboard.

ps. To do that, you'll actually have to listen to some of them. Done any of that yet?

Got no speakers right now...can I get a synopsis?

He had very little to say in regards to 9/11 and not having watched the video that he's referring to his commentary on Building 7 was completely nonsensical to me. He was preaching to the choir and so had no need to explain anything. Not being a member of the choir, I come away with no new information, insight, or understanding.

Everything else he said--the majority of the video--was about corruption in government, particularly that resulting directly from the GWB administration and Obama's failure in giving up the extra powers that the previous administration gave the government. His commentary seemed intelligent, but largely based off of appeals to emotion rather than reason.

Ivan, plenty of people who aren't "into" 911 would not have heard of WTC7. I hadn't heard of the 9/11 hotel until I saw the Channel 4 documentary. There are plenty of things I have a deep interest in and have read a lot about that lots of people, even higher up political types would have scant knowledge of. That is neither here not there. If the COS had claimed to be a 9/11 expert hitherto, his ignorance would be remarkable.

OK, I don't get it then, ivan...what's your point again?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Sarahfeena

Got no speakers right now...can I get a synopsis?

---

Hmmm... 8 minutes of speech, an imaginary inaugural address which deserves to be heard in full... probably, but it'd take me a while and I'm not going to start on it now.

That's ok, Zuul's synopsis was sufficient, I think. So...what's your point? What's your opinion about it?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Zuul

He had very little to say in regards to 9/11 and not having watched the video that he's referring to his commentary on Building 7 was completely nonsensical to me. He was preaching to the choir and so had no need to explain anything. Not being a member of the choir, I come away with no new information, insight, or understanding.

---

You weren't expected to come away with any new insight. The impression you were meant to come away with was that an intelligent person with no ulterior motive except the pursuit of honesty and integrity from his government, has grave doubts about the "official account" of the most important event in recent US history.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Zuul

Everything else he said--the majority of the video--was about corruption in government, particularly that resulting directly from the GWB administration and Obama's failure in giving up the extra powers that the previous administration gave the government. His commentary seemed intelligent, but largely based off of appeals to emotion rather than reason.

---

No, he actually said it didn't matter who was in power, the system was rotten at the core.

You mean appeals to emotion like "Think about the 3,000 dead whose memories you are shitting on!"?

ps. Mr Bowman is a man of deep religious faith, so I'm not sure if that is a plus or a negative for you.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by ivan astikov

You weren't expected to come away with any new insight. The impression you were meant to come away with was that an intelligent person with no ulterior motive except the pursuit of honesty and integrity from his government, has grave doubts about the "official account" of the most important event in recent US history.

---

That's the impression he gives, however intelligence does not make a person immune to paranoid fantasies. Just because he lacks an ulterior motive and is a well-educated man doesn't automatically mean everything he says is correct. People are fallible.

Quote:

---

You mean appeals to emotion like "Think about the 3,000 dead whose memories you are shitting on!"?

---

Yes. Exactly like that.

"People are fallible."? Do you think Robert Bowman would accept that as a rebuttal of his beliefs/opinions?

Oh, and the voice of authority isn't necessarily immune from telling lies. In fact, it kind of goes with the territory when they want to hide unpleasant facts.

It must be, ivan, because if he genuinely believes that those buildings came down due to some US government conspiracy, he's mistaken.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by ivan astikov

"People are fallible."? Do you think Robert Bowman would accept that as a rebuttal of his beliefs/opinions?

---

I do not care what he would accept. Beliefs and opinions are not facts. 9/11 is a fact. To make me question the official story of how it happened also requires facts.

So, let us ask you what facts you would accept, and who you would accept them from, for starters.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Sarahfeena

It must be, ivan, because if he genuinely believes that those buildings came down due to some US government conspiracy, he's mistaken.

---

You only believe that. You don't know it.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by ivan astikov

not just buying the bullshit you've been spoon-fed.

---

I can't even begin to describe the irony of this statement.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by ivan astikov

You only believe that. You don't know it.

---

No, I suppose I don't know anything for 100% certain. However, there are situations that are so cut and dried that it's really not worth investigating spurious bits of data that don't help add up to an alternate explanation. What happened on 9/11 is one such situation.

Don't bother then. Tell me instead about how you've read the NIST report in full, accept every page of it, have balanced it all against every objection to it, and put the issue to bed. Nothing to see here move along, and that.

I haven't read the NIST report. However, I have seen that pretty much every question raised by, say, the Loose Change people has been thoroughly debunked, so I'm not particularly concerned that there's something more to the story that I don't know.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Sarahfeena

No, I suppose I don't know anything for 100% certain. However, there are situations that are so cut and dried that it's really not worth investigating spurious bits of data that don't help add up to an alternate explanation. What happened on 9/11 is one such situation.

---

"Cut and dried"? Next you'll be telling me every single person who disagrees with the official conspiracy theory is either a lunatic, hates the USA, or supports teh terrorists. Why don't you throw in a few mentions of holograms and rays from space, while you are trying to casually dismiss the thoughts of a lot of intelligent people.

Look at it rationally. What are the chances of everyone on your side being right, and everyone who disagrees with you being wrong?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Sarahfeena

I haven't read the NIST report. However, I have seen that pretty much every question raised by, say, the Loose Change people has been thoroughly debunked, so I'm not particularly concerned that there's something more to the story that I don't know.

---

Loose Change isn't the be all and end all of the investigation for real truth.

Try reading "Debunking 9/11 Debunking".

ivan, I hate to say it, but I've read all the threads on this subject that you've participated in at the SDMB, and haven't yet been convinced. I don't think there's anything else you can say or any other resource you could cite that could possibly change my mind.

Lunatic or supporting terrorists? No. I'll tell you exactly why they believe these things.

Third of Americans suspect 9-11 government conspiracy

Quote:

---

The national survey of 1,010 adults also found that anger against the federal government is at record levels, with 54 percent saying they "personally are more angry" at the government than they used to be.

---

Quote:

---

Widespread resentment and alienation toward the national government appears to be fueling a growing acceptance of conspiracy theories about the 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

---

Quote:

---

Seventy percent of people who give credence to these theories also say they've become angrier with the federal government than they used to be.

---

Quote:

---

University of Florida law professor Mark Fenster, author of the book "Conspiracy Theories: Secrecy and Power in American Culture," said the poll's findings reflect public anger at the unpopular Iraq war, realization that Saddam Hussein did not have weapons of mass destruction and growing doubts of the veracity of the Bush administration.

---

These are tough times, economically and socially. People want to be angry at something, and some dickhead in the desert doesn't make the best target. Especially not when people are dissatisfied with wars dragging on and on and feel like the government hasn't done enough about the troubles at home.

When people are angry and feel helpless, they need an outlet. The government is the perfect target for those feelings.

My posts on the Dope were mostly for entertainment purposes and the lurkers. I intend to treat the matter far more seriously here.

Well, have at it. Explain your whole theory of what happened. You know what I think happened (terrorists flew planes into buildings; buildings fell down), what's your grand theory?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Zuul

Lunatic or supporting terrorists? No. I'll tell you exactly why they believe these things.

Third of Americans suspect 9-11 government conspiracy
These are tough times, economically and socially. People want to be angry at something, and some dickhead in the desert doesn't make the best target. Especially not when people are dissatisfied with wars dragging on and on and feel like the government hasn't done enough about the troubles at home.

When people are angry and feel helpless, they need an outlet. The government is the perfect target for those feelings.

---

Go on, I bet there's a similar explanation for the belief in UFO's, Bigfoot, the JFK conspiracy, the moon landing being faked...erm, what else was there?

Total fail as an explanation, Zuul. If anything, people are just getting sick of being fed lies and false promises by those elected to look after their long-term well-being.

He kind of answers his own question, doesn't he?

First he says that, unlike the grassy knoll, almost no American has heard about Building 7. Then he says that Obama's Senate chief of staff (whom he doesn't name, but presumably Pete Rouse at the time Obama was campaigning) had never heard about Building 7.

As I understand him, the guy isn't complaining that Obama's chief of staff was lying. He's complaining that people, including Rouse, aren't aware of the conspiracy.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by ivan astikov

Go on, I bet there's a similar explanation for the belief in UFO's, Bigfoot, the JFK conspiracy, the moon landing being faked...erm, what else was there?

---

So you believe in UFOs, Bigfoot, JFK's assassination being a conspiracy, and the moon landing being faked?

::Yawn!:: No.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Sarahfeena

Well, have at it. Explain your whole theory of what happened. You know what I think happened (terrorists flew planes into buildings; buildings fell down), what's your grand theory?

---

I've already stated quite clearly that I will not be drawn into giving my theories and will only be passing on the thoughts of others who I feel have something worthwhile to add to the public debate here. Asking for my opinions - which leads to the stupid questions of "Where's your evidence?", as if I, or any other humble poster have access to such revelatory details! - is just a distraction or diversionary technique to avoid the actual issues.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by ivan astikov

stupid questions of "Where's your evidence?"

---

Quote:

---

a distraction or diversionary technique to avoid the actual issues.

---

Not that there's anyone that takes anything he says seriously, but wow, this is a great summation of the conspiracy theorist's mind.

Got any opinions on the notable conspiracy theorist, Dr Robert Bowman's mental state that you'd like to declare for posterity, clever clogs?

Well, without bothering to waste my own time on the video, even you seem to have acknowledged that it provides no evidence. Why would I care about the opinion of someone who's making a claim he can't back?

Well, you could listen to what he has to say. He's far more eloquent, and much less confrontational and obnoxious than I am, and you may ask yourself what he expects to happen from his continuous banging away on this drum. His motivation seems far more important than mine.

Anyhoo u lot, my pillow beckons, so toodle pips. Tidy up when you've finished in here, if you don't mind. I don't want to come back tomorrow to threadshit everywhere. :D

Pleasant dreams in support of decency and honour.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by ivan astikov

::Yawn!:: No.


I've already stated quite clearly that I will not be drawn into giving my theories and will only be passing on the thoughts of others who I feel have something worthwhile to add to the public debate here. Asking for my opinions - which leads to the stupid questions of "Where's your evidence?", as if I, or any other humble poster have access to such revelatory details! - is just a distraction or diversionary technique to avoid the actual issues.

---

OK, I'll bite...what ARE the actual issues that you'd like to discuss?

The fact that you think I am trying to hook people in against their better judgement, and that you are asking what issues are of interest here, makes me wonder if perhaps you are not best-suited for a thread of this nature, but hey, I'll bite too, and that makes everything fair, eh?

How about "the slightly-more important than global warming, trade deficits, Sarah Palin's underwear" issue of Honesty And Integrity In Our Elected Governmental Leaders? Does R.Bowman have a valid concern regarding this matter, or do you have evidence that he is speaking strictly from a paranoiac's pov, and that he is in serious need of mental assistance and should be ignored at all costs by the general public?

Remember, my opinions on the subject are not being discussed here, before anyone jumps in with the crack about the underlined bit being a reference to myself.

ps. A genuine truth-seeker, as opposed to someone who is just looking for an opportunity to stick their head back in the sand, would have watched the whole series that clip was taken from, if only to find ammunition to take his words apart, and expose them for the lies or misunderstandings they obviously are. How many of you have done that yet?

Ivan - I want my 10 minutes back.

The guy is a Republican and yet he is blaming Obama for Afghanistan, The Patriot Act etc, etc. Those were done by George Bush and yet his name doesn't get mentioned.

He just wants the usual Libertarian USA ideals, power to the people etc and WTC7 and Obama are just his schtick to get his point across.

Now go and see if you can dig his video up showing WTC7 standing. Then come back for another round.

You mean this one?

Wow. Maybe the BBC should have applied to the JREF for the $1 million dollar challenge, with such a talent for premonitions?

Malice or incompetence? This and "facts" like the "indestructible passport"( Did we ever find out who handed that in?) are suspicious signs of a possible "False Flag" operation, but if we let the disinterested likes of yourself decide, we'll probably never know.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by CatInASuit

Ivan - I want my 10 minutes back.

The guy is a Republican and yet he is blaming Obama for Afghanistan, The Patriot Act etc, etc. Those were done by George Bush and yet his name doesn't get mentioned.

---

Try listening more carefully. He is criticising Obama for not turning those decisions around. He also makes the important point that it doesn't matter who is in the hot seat. They all work for the same people, and it's not the American citizens.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Zuul

Everything else he said--the majority of the video--was about corruption in government, particularly that resulting directly from the GWB administration and Obama's failure in giving up the extra powers that the previous administration gave the government.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by CatInASuit

Ivan - I want my 10 minutes back.

The guy is a Republican and yet he is blaming Obama for Afghanistan, The Patriot Act etc, etc. Those were done by George Bush and yet his name doesn't get mentioned.

---

Funny that. You both watched the same video and came to starkly different conclusions about the content, despite it seeming less than ambiguous to myself. I wonder what that's all about?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by ivan astikov

Remember, my opinions on the subject are not being discussed here, before anyone jumps in with the crack about the underlined bit being a reference to myself.

---

Well if your opinion isn't up for discussion why start the thread in the first place?

The fact is, unlike probably every single other poster on this tiny board, you hold a highly unorthodox perception of what exactly happened on that day and the onus is on you to prove to us that there is any truth in it. Saying watch the youtube clip without providing any context just isn't up to it. YOU have to prove YOUR point or coherently argue it at least.

Anyway, what is the purpose of a thread like this? It's not likely you're going to lift the veil of "ignorance" and apathy from across our eyes.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by The Original An Gadaí

Well if your opinion isn't up for discussion why start the thread in the first place?

---

Just to prove I can start such a thread with a rational and logical perspective, and carry it through to the end. A lot of you seem to want to dismiss my thought processes as being on a par with the guy with the placard screaming "The End Is Nigh", and I want to dispel this slander on my good name.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by The Original An Gadaí

The fact is, unlike probably every single other poster on this tiny board, you hold a highly unorthodox perception of what exactly happened on that day

---

Again, my opinion of what happened "that day" is not the topic of discussion in this thread.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by The Original An Gadaí

and the onus is on you to prove to us that there is any truth in it. Saying watch the youtube clip without providing any context just isn't up to it. YOU have to prove YOUR point or coherently argue it at least.

---

I'd like one of the topics of discussion to be who exactly you WILL believe if they come out with opinions - not rock-solid "evidence", because that won't ever be available unless a fully authorised, acceptably independent inquiry has been taken up - that are contrary to what you want to believe? Any suggestions as to whose word you'd trust enough? It's obviously not mine.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by The Original An Gadaí

Anyway, what is the purpose of a thread like this? It's not likely you're going to lift the veil of "ignorance" and apathy from across our eyes.

---

You asked this upthread. I refer you to my previous answer.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by ivan astikov

Just to prove I can start such a thread with a rational and logical perspective, and carry it through to the end.

---

You are not doing a good job of this Ivan, I'm sorry.

Quote:

---

The topic of discussion is who exactly you WILL believe if they come out with opinions - not rock-solid "evidence", because that won't ever be available unless a fully authorised, acceptably independent inquiry has been taken up - that are contrary to what you want to believe? Any suggestions as to whose word you'd trust enough? It's obviously not mine.

---

Well you could have written the OP better then if this is the topic you'd like to debate. I mean "What authorities do you trust and why?" would be a fascinating OP and you're welcome to start another thread with just such an OP. You said your opinion wasn't up for discussion so I shan't comment on whether I trust your word.