This article is so powerful because it lays bare the evidence so many here wish, as a matter of policy, to ignore. I have some threads that cannot be replied to by supporters of the illegal occupation for the sole reason that they would have to go against what they've believed in their whole lives. They can easily believe what they read about the Vietnam conflict, about the mass murder of women and babies. But that's in the past where they can evade the moral roadblock that confronts them. Ignoring is the best defence when it comes to backing the state. Some of you get a by though, like Dharma the Air Force Wife. I wouldn't expect anyone involved in the military to turn their thinking around, at least until they get discharged. There's no room for truth and reality when it involves the legal killing of other humans. But the others who have not an inkling to do with the military, like that ShadowWar who fits in this article so perfectly. When he gets confronted with evidence he can't accept he simply shuts the lines of communication down. Because it's too scary for armchair stay-at-home warhawks to read or watch direct evidence that goes against their way of thinking.
"Internet forums also provide an arena for reinforcing the validity of the two-category concept. Here is where a pack mentality finds its home. Whenever an article or news item questioning the official account of 9/11 is presented for discussion, the responses inevitably fall into one of only two groups. In the first group are those who post comments adding their own information or asking for more details or further verification.
The second group inevitably fires a predictable stream of insults. Anyone who challenges the official version of 9/11 is a crackpot or a conspiracy theorist. The answers drip with sarcasm about UFO�s or Bigfoot, and often bring up some historic �atrocity� committed under the aegis of a Democratic administration, usually that of Bill Clinton. In some collective application of skewed logic, they regularly infer that Clinton�s involvement in Bosnia is somehow related to a discussion of 9/11.
They never, ever, respond to the evidence itself. They never, ever have an explanation or a rationale for the unexplained and highly suspicious inconsistencies in the Kean report. They would rather live with the lies than take the most cursory look at the facts.
Interestingly enough, many of the people who refuse to hear out any presentation of the events of 9/11 willingly sit though sermons in which there is not a shred of evidence to back up the religious messages of they hear. For some strange reason, so many of these people approach the words from their government with the same blind faith they place in their churches, and refuse to even LISTEN to anyone with the most credible evidence of their betrayal.
They will not look; they will not listen to anything that might upset their applecart of absolute faith in the Bush administration. They simply will not."