The Shotgun Blog
Monday, October 29, 2007
The Man Who Gets It
Mark Steyn nails the entire idiocy of the 9-11 "Truth" movement in a single sentence:
There’s a kind of decadence about all this: If 9/11 was really an inside job, you wouldn’t be driving around with a bumper sticker bragging that you were on to it.
Exactly. If George W. Bush and Dick Cheney were as evil and ruthless as the nutroots often claim, there wouldn't be any nutroots - because their leaders would have long ago had then names jotted down on a list and then dissappeared or, alternatively, been placed on a list nailed to the door of the Capitol and proscribed.
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The Man Who Gets It:
Your post (and Steyn's comments) show just how easy it is to be right about the underlying issue (the 911 truthers are nuts) and then go flying off the rails with idiotic logic. It does not follow at all that just because people in positions of high power do something terrible that they can keep all people suspicious of what they did from talking about it. In fact, given that these "truth" tellers are already marginalized as the nutters they are, rounding them up and doing away with them would be the most suspicious thing one could do.
People who think GWB or Cheney or anyone else in the US government were behind the destruction of the WTC and the attack o the Pentagon are complete lunatics. People who think Steyn makes a good point are merely stupid.
Posted by: Fact Check | 2007-10-29 7:47:42 AM
Well, if you buy in to the JFK asassination theory
there were a lot of potential witnesses that died under mysterious circumstances.Hmmm.....
I agree with Steyn. If there was a consipracy, someone, somewhere,sometime is going to talk, in spite of the consequences.
These conspiricy theories have been going on for years. Lindburgh baby kidnapping, JFK asassination, 9/11, Elvis' faked death, Roswell "UFO", just to name a few.
Posted by: atric | 2007-10-29 8:21:37 AM
"Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country."
- Hermann Goering
Of course the 9-11 "Truth" movement is a joke but the Bush administration is one as well.
One have to be careful after electing incompetents who tell you you're at war against Ben Laden and then forget about it to turn 180 degre to fight an "Axis of Evil". Wasent he Evil enough ?
A lot of strategies and no real results.
They say they are now facing Al-Qaida in Irak but went to Irak because they might harbour terorists and WMD (WMD?). The connections between Halliburton, the oil industries and the White House. And so on...
If dosent raise some questions in your mind, you're the idiot.
Posted by: Marc | 2007-10-29 8:36:15 AM
I guess I'm an idiot then.
Posted by: atric | 2007-10-29 10:16:17 AM
You have no questions whatsoever about the quality of this administration atric ?
70% of Americans does.
The Dems now hold the house.
I know you're not an idiot - I'm sure you do have done some thinking about this.
Posted by: Marc | 2007-10-29 10:38:52 AM
Frightened and paranoid conspiracy theorists need a 'big bad white man' to blame for 9/11. It's a comfort for them since the steady hand of the white guy in a suit is something they're used to, even if they don't appear to appreciate it. The idea that these strange middle eastern fanatics simply want to kill them because they're them - well, that's just too scary for conspirazoids.
Posted by: philanthropist | 2007-10-29 10:42:27 AM
Yes Marc I have thought about the quality of the Bush administration.Not being an expert in foreign or domestic affairs, nor having the foresight to predict events before they happen, my conclusions can only be based on what I see.
While the administration is far from perfect, I do believe that they have taken the correct action on both the foreign and domestic fronts, based on the information available at the time.
As for the old canard that it's all about oil, well that's just childish. It's all about the reaction to the innocent civilans slaughtered in New York and the further danger of it happening again, and again, and again.
Posted by: atric | 2007-10-29 11:13:48 AM
"It's all about the reaction to the innocent civilans slaughtered in New York and the further danger of it happening again, and again, and again."
That's your personal justification for the 180 degre turn to Irak ?
C'mon, dont treat me as an idiot neither.
Posted by: Marc | 2007-10-29 11:36:42 AM
If your criticism was legitimate, then there would be obvious contribution.
Since there is no obvious contribution, your criticism is not legitimate.
I think the job of America in Iraq is to help the terrorists meet their 72 virgins in Paradise.
Some people say that the reason why there are terrorists willing to commit suicide, to kill others, and support the terrorist regimes, has nothing to do with the moral position of the terrorist regime, and everything to do with the fact that under their regimes, 50% of their men are reproductive losers. How so? Because the very wealthy marry many more women--cause they can afford them--while the poor men get to spend their lives praying to allah, with no hope for anything but the rewards promised them by their mullah leadership.
The women are relegated to being either women who have no support at all, and live off of charity or work that is considered beneath humans, or women who are kept and their minds are placed into limbo--no matter how intelligent they say they are and no matter how much they are supposedly respected.
This, btw, is legitimate criticism.
The thing about morality is that most nations of peoples around the world have some sense in their origins of what that constitutes--such as no murder, no adultry, honouring your mother and father. The thing about the terrorist actions, is it is all about murder and not sticking around to honour your mother or your father--so it goes against pretty much all of humanity.
This, btw, is legitimate criticism.
And those who simply pick up an Email on conspiracy theories, and read no further, and cannot for the life of them, see past the lies, are idiots who hypnotise themselves into pure--unadulterated--idiocracy.
I, for one, like PGWB. I would love to meet him--it would be an honour, really. I don't object to him making a few errors, when he speaks, because his heart is in the right place. Anyone who is either a gentleman or Lady would be understanding and generous of spirit--and would not pick on someone in a moment of weakness.
My mother used to say that if a guest spilt their wine, the most politie thing to do, was to spill yours, so they would not feel embarrased. Imagine, having the heart to spill wine on beautiful carpets, just so your guest did not feel like a heal for the rest of the evening?
The right thing, is either as simple as that--or is as great as enduring so that the world can be a better place for everyone. Freedom, liberty and democracy are not things to spit on, as the alternative is unpleasant at best.
Posted by: Lady | 2007-10-29 11:44:50 AM
Irak was a safer place for America while Hussein was their master. Don't get all emotional over this, it's just my personal perception and it's shared by 3/4 of Americans and many experts.
Posted by: Marc | 2007-10-29 12:03:23 PM
Minus the troll-like insults, I agree with Fact Check on this one. Steyn's normally sound logic is weak if for no other reason that one would need a totally compliant MSM to be able to pull off that kind of cover-up, something the Bush administration certainly lacks. In contrast, take for example the "coincidental" deaths surrounding the Clinton's a decade or so back. Even if only 10% of the body count were worth investigating further, it would make Watergate look like a non-event. While it may be just another whacko conspiracy theory, it certainly doesn't lack for investigation potential.
Posted by: John Chittick | 2007-10-29 12:05:17 PM
Ah, conspiracy theories.
Living proof of the human mind's fertile imagination.
I see it in my dementia-stricken elderly mother all the time.
Take a couple of unrelated occurences, string them all together and you have a pretty interesting story.
Not necessarily true, since time is the final arbiter of truth, but interesting nonetheless.
Like the assertion that Iraq was better under Saddam.
Guess it was, if you just look the other way at the 30,000 people who mysteriously disappeared every year.
But, since the western media was not there to record those fact, I'm sure they never happened.
Posted by: set you free | 2007-10-29 12:12:26 PM
The reasons for entry were many--and no doubt things would have changed had the terrorists not decided that now was the opportunity to create a situation where they could get rid of so many people who were reproductive failures.
America would have been long gone by now, had the resurgents not gone ahead with what they have done.
And the only thing that was safe about Irak was that Joe Bats Arm could keep getting oil. You forget--there were hundreds of thousands of Irakis who were begging the world to do something about that horrible man and his horrible monster sons. The world was working very hard to get medicine and aid to the Irakis, while udi and his ugly brother--who apparently liked to watch his brother rape women who he then killed--treated an entire nation of people and minorities like they were personal posessions. Seeing his dead face on the newspaper was one of the best pieces of news ever!
I don't blame America for this situation. I blame the two entities who are responsible for this situation--and that being said the UN & Al qaeda. More specifically, it was the white flag of France, that vetoed going in and doing something. Look who are the cowards now!
No matter what--PGWB is a man who I, and many others, will remember, who had the courage to decide to do the right thing, when others were grasping at adult depends for shelter.
America is no an Empire. America has been in many wars. And the only land that America has ever asked for, at the end of these wars, has been the land to beary the dead--those who could not come home.
God Bless America!
Posted by: Lady | 2007-10-29 12:22:02 PM
An administration that planned and executed 9/11 would certainly have arranged to "find" WMD and do a few other things like stop Michael Moore, Loose Change etc etc.
Posted by: greenmamba | 2007-10-29 12:25:33 PM
Iraq may have been better for the supporters of Hussein, and those who got to do the dead women after udi was finnished with them.
Same as per Pakistan. The terrorists don't want freedom--not for everyone--they want to have the power to be perverted mosters, to hurt women and children, and live in constant imbalance--and they want the right to kill people just because a nasty thought goes through their minds and they think it is from their gd.
Posted by: Lady | 2007-10-29 12:25:36 PM
Michael Moore--well, the craziest thing about Michael Moore, is that he gets to earn millions off of exploiting people's soft spots for leftist ideology. His stuff is the Micky-dees of the brain, political crack--from a professional crack-pot!
Posted by: Lady | 2007-10-29 12:28:25 PM
I find it highly entertaining to read comments from people that apparently have no rational basis for their comments so they denigrate to name calling.
"People who think Steyn makes a good point are merely stupid." - Fact Check
"you're the idiot." - Marc
Reading these comments takes me back to the days of elementary school where "stupid" and "idiot" were used by those that had nothing intelligent to say. It appears that Fact Check and Marc haven't moved past an elemtary level of debating.
Thanks for the laughs!
Posted by: Always Right | 2007-10-29 12:57:12 PM
I said, safer for: Amercica. Some really needs glasses.
If the Bush admistration is SO offended by bad treatments to people in other countries...how come they don't invade half of the Planet ?
Again, if you never ask questions you're an idiot.
You know, the only worst thing than calling others idiot is surely telling others you're always right. You certainly are a woman (no offence).
Posted by: Marc | 2007-10-29 1:49:31 PM
OK Marc, I'll still disagree. How is America less safe from Iraq now? Remember how he sponsored suicide bombers? ME watchers also remember that his ambition was to be the leader of the Arab world, hence his pursuit of WMD. If anything his death has made the world (and arguably America) more safe.
Lady, I agree with you re GWB. Liberals, being the shallow types they are, are always impressed by a no-action, slick talker like Clinton. Bush has the ba**s to take action but not the smooth veneer so he makes them uncomfortable.
Posted by: Larry | 2007-10-29 2:27:49 PM
They who do not learn how to think in the first place, cannot do analysis--even if their lives depend on it.
Fact remains, getting rid of despots is not the responsibility of a single country--but many countries. Some know what a despot is, and have guts, courage (the ability to overcome fear) intellect, and knowledge, whereas others prefer to keep their heads in the dark--like ostriches--hoping that the despots will simply go away.
If you have not noticed yet--because you are too stoned to think at all (no doubt)--some despots are ground down by other nations or their own people.
When this does not happen, someone who has the power to do so, has to take responsibility.
In the case of Irak--the US and her allies have taken responsibility. And, it is the total fault of others, who skirted the issue, that this matter was not buried back when it came to a head, and the only ones and her allies, actually had the balls to face what is the biggest threat to world peace--this present day and in the near future.
And, if you don't know that--you are NOT a man--you are NOT a woman--you are a gropecunt.
Posted by: Lady | 2007-10-29 2:37:37 PM
"How is America less safe from Iraq now?"
Wanna go for a walk in Irak with your american t-shirt, Larry ?
Have you ever saw that amount of hate towards Americans in M-E previous to their 180 degre turn to attack Irak, Larry ?
You think the world is a safer place now, Larry ?
You think the American people have confidence in this administration now that it's question of invading Iran for weapons of mass destructions, Larry ?
Posted by: Marc | 2007-10-29 2:44:28 PM
Agreed. And I prefer to call him President GWB, or PGWB, as he earned the right to the title.
I won't forget the fact that Khadre was bailed out by the Liberals--specifically Chretan.
They bail out islamofacists for two reasons.
One, they fear their own political correctness more than anyone else.
And two, they fear islamofacism, and are weak spineless, fools, whose sole aim was their own gain in the long run.
Why did they side with France? Because France, Germany and Canada (under the gliberals) were all in the Irak oil food and medicine for oil program. And the money made it either into the pockets of that baffoon of a dead president and his louts of heals of dead rapist and murdering scum sons--as if what is done over there has nothing to do with what is done over here.
I'll say, the Irak war has not gone as well as could have been--but the responsibility for that and the way it has gone since then, rests with those who were and still are chamberlands--cowards and thieves.
Posted by: Lady | 2007-10-29 2:45:19 PM
Saying there is no manipulation in USA now is kind of closing one's eyes.
Please see Aaron Russo's movie:
America From Freedom To Facism.
Posted by: Rémi Houle | 2007-10-29 3:02:26 PM
"You certainly are a woman (no offence). " Is that insult supposed to be equal to the insult of being called an idiot? In your mind does woman = idiot?
FYI I am a male don't insult woman by comparing me to them.
Marc, do you honestly believe that hate for America has increased since America entered Iraq? If so, please explain why the attacks of Sept. 11 occured BEFORE America entered Iraq. Please explain the previous attempt to blow-up the WTC while Clinton was in power if the attacks are motivated by hate for PGWB.
The reality is that part of the world hates America and part of the world loves America. This is nothing new and has nothing to do with President Bush or Iraq. Was the bombing of Pearl Harbor an attack based on dislike for PGWB? Were the Soviets motivated by hate for PGWB in the Cold War? Of course not, they were motivated by hate for freedom; and the US is the symbol of freedom to the world.
Posted by: Always Right | 2007-10-29 3:14:37 PM
Marc, this is what you said:
"Irak was a safer place for America while Hussein was their master."
I took this as a statement describing the safety of Americans FROM Iraq, and I still say that America is safe from Iraq, and the world is safer without Saddam.
Did you mean "Irak was a safer place for Americans to be?" If so, I guess you have more information on what it was like for Americans there before and after. In any case, I still think your point is moot because no ordinary American is going to go there.
Americans' lack of confidence in the Iraq mission is due to ceaseless repetition of the lie that Bush somehow ran roughshod over both US houses and went in on his own. Every Democrat you can name agreed that Saddam had to go.
Posted by: Larry | 2007-10-29 3:17:17 PM
This whole debate is getting tiresome. The United States has a history of vigorous debate when it comes to getting involved militarily in other countries. WW1, WW11, Korea, Viet Nam, Gulf War,
etc. are prime examples
This open debate is an exmplification of the freedoms enjoyed by the citizens and should be respected, no matter what side you put your bet on.
History will judge whether or not GWB was right or not. Unless any of you have the ear of Condi Rice or the Joint Chiefs of Staff, your comments are mere speculation.
Posted by: atric | 2007-10-29 4:10:12 PM
*FYI I am a male don't insult woman by comparing me to them.*
*In your mind does woman = idiot?*
No silly - it means that *I'm always right* is more a feminine quote, as you can see presently on this tread. In general, I do believe Women to be way more intelligent than men.
The Americans were attacked by a small (smaller then) group of people called Al Qaeda. They've put that hunt on hold for invading Irak and since then, the good reputation of America have drop dramaticly. Jusr like the confidence of it's own people in this administration. The whole ME now hates America like never before. What makes me think that ? Do you have a tv ? Can you access internet ?
America should never have gone in Irak. Because of that, the Republican party will go on holidays for a while.
All this is a very sad story.
Posted by: Marc | 2007-10-29 4:12:22 PM
"The whole ME now hates America like never before. What makes me think that ? Do you have a tv ? Can you access internet ?"
Thank you for confirming my assumption. You get all of your information from TV and the internet. Let me guess, Katie Couric told you the world hates America so you believe it. I suppose that Rosie Odonnells (sp?) blog is your trusted source for current events information.
Just because the mainstream media says so doesn't make it true.
You still haven't explained how hate for America has gotten worse under PGWB. As I said before, hate for America exists. It always has and always will. It hasn't grown worse under PGWB. If so then show me your source for that claim. ("The View" does not count as a source, sorry to shoot down your main source)
Posted by: Always Right | 2007-10-29 4:41:36 PM
"If the Bush admistration is SO offended by bad treatments to people in other countries...how come they don't invade half of the Planet ?"
I take this statement as acknowledging, on your part, that the United States, in general, and President Bush, in particular, do not simply go to war to solve all their foreign policy problems as they have left so many of them still unresolved by not invading.
I realize this may be considered a strawman argument where you are concerned, but you would be surprised how many people will make exactly that kind of statement with a straight face.
"The whole ME now hates America like never before."
The WHOLE ME? Are you sure?
Like never before? And you have evidence of this?
So based on your exaggerations, I hope you now understand why I put forth the strawman rebuttal. Your original statement was a strawman's argument in its own right.
Posted by: h2o273kk9 | 2007-10-29 4:49:58 PM
"People who think GWB or Cheney or anyone else in the US government were behind the destruction of the WTC and the attack o the Pentagon are complete lunatics. People who think Steyn makes a good point are merely stupid."
But just a few weeks ago, we had Snowrunner here who was complaining that our gov'ts (the US and Canada) were the ones terrorizing us. I believe he was sincere and I doubt he believes in the 911 conspiracies.
I don't think Steyn's point is all that far off but you have to change perspectives to get it.
Think of it from the nuts' point of view.
They believe they have the truth about the gov't. If they really did and the gov't was ruthless enough to do 911, wouldn't it be all too easy to disappear these nut jobs.
Hence, they suffer a kind of cognitive dissonance in that it hasn't happened.
Either the gov't isn't that bad OR they don't have the truth.
Posted by: h2o273kk9 | 2007-10-29 5:12:03 PM
"Either the gov't isn't that bad OR they don't have the truth."
BINGO! We have a winner!
Posted by: obc | 2007-10-29 5:25:27 PM
"World owes Israel"
Surgical air strike against Syria might have averted nuclear war
By PETER WORTHINGTON
The most intriguing and least publicized international story of the moment is Israel's air strike on Syria last Sept. 6.
It took a month before details began seeping out -- virtually unprecedented for that "leaky"-with -rumours region. Britain's respected Spectator magazine eventually quoted a senior British ministerial source: "If people had known how close we came to world war three ... there'd have been mass panic."
Reports that Israel had launched a "surgical" air strike on an intended Syrian nuclear site at Dayr-as-Zawr in the northeast, near the Turkish border, was first confirmed by Israel's Opposition party leader (and former PM) Benjamin Netanyahu on Israeli TV, two weeks after the strike. Netanyahu was blasted for being a blabber-mouth.
Apparently Syria had received a shipment by sea of nuclear material from North Korea. The secrecy was unusual. None of the usual informed sources would comment. Speculation raged as to what could provoke such an attack -- with the theories varying from nuclear weapon technology to sophisticated missile or bacteriological weaponry.
At first, only two countries protested the Israeli attack: Syria and North Korea.
Of course, Leftoids will never acknowledge the debt, just as they ignored Israel's taking out of Saddam's nuclear facility in 1981 under Menachem Begin's wise administration. And when Iran's nuclear capabilty is removed within a year, their silence will continue.
Posted by: obc | 2007-10-29 5:37:35 PM
...hey Marc. What do you do for a living? I see you posting all over the time frame here.
Oh, glad to see you have 3/4 of American's thinking and experts with you.
I know only about a dozen of them personally.
Oh you mean you are stating this as a fact from 3/4 of Americans. Where or what do you base your numbers from? National Inquirer?
Posted by: tomax7 | 2007-10-29 8:48:59 PM
one post after obc,
bringing not much,
with cheap lines from the 70s.
Adressing me like I've just said his wife is ugly.
Obc posting the opinion of others.
The others twisting my posts like pirahnas onna young bird - forgeting to post their own opinions.
What a giant vicious circle of no balls. it's way easier to critisize than to expressing an opinion.
I gave you mine and don't really care you didnt like it. I don't know much about English News since I'm mostly listening to locals I grew up listening to and understand where their jugement is right or wrong. I don't hate TV5 once inna while and even some intervenants from Radio-Canada - a very federally twisted chanel.
I can see what's wrong and bad or from the Right or Left and believe my judgement to be good.
Enjoy the rest of this spiral leading nowhere in the dark.
Posted by: Marc | 2007-10-29 9:40:31 PM
Silly me, asked you a straight forward question and expected a straight forward answer.
Should have known better than look down the dark well you inhabit.
Posted by: tomax7 | 2007-10-29 10:32:39 PM
"The others twisting my posts like pirahnas onna young bird - forgeting to post their own opinions."
Meanwhile, back on planet Earth/Shotgun blog, others will recognize that I openly twisted your words intentionally (even announcing it, proudly) to make a point that your original post was already twisted. Thereby, also posting an opinion at the same time.
I can walk and chew gum while dismantling your nonsense.
Posted by: h2o273kk9 | 2007-10-30 5:36:41 AM
Try dismantling this gum chewing Einstein:
If the hat fits you...
Posted by: Marc | 2007-10-30 7:55:54 AM
"If the hat fits you..."
What part of "yes" don't you understand? I openly claimed ownership to twisting your words. Three times now!
Although technically,I was untwisting your already twisted words.
Don't you see the exaggerations you were posting?
Posted by: h2o273kk9 | 2007-10-30 4:24:17 PM
Marc: "You have no questions whatsoever about the quality of this administration atric ?
70% of Americans does.
The Dems now hold the house."
The latest popularity poll puts our Congress at lower than Bush's.
Now since we both agree that the hose is mostly Democratic, it logically follows that if the Democrats had a 100% rating and the Republicans 0%, the average would be around 50%. But it is not. It's around 22%. anything for them to cheer about, but the Democratic Congress is far from pleasing everybody.
And since they figure they've been doing such a fine job, they'll be taking Fridays off from now on. There's a sneaky way to give yourself a pay raise.
Posted by: ZZMike | 2007-10-30 5:32:38 PM
i have a policy.
when someone tells me 9/11 is an inside job, or,
men didn't really land on the moon, or,
the planet is run by Jews, or,
the Illuminati, Masons, or Papacy are making a conscious, concerted effort to rule the world, or,
JFK was killed by a commie, Jesuits, or -insert conspiracy here-, i automatically give this person the benefit of the doubt.
but i don't want to hang with him. who wants to hang with a wingnut?
Posted by: shel | 2007-10-30 6:03:52 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.