Are the seams cracking in the DU 9/11 gate-keeping programme?

[StrictlyRockers]

I am pretty happy with DU in general. But I am not all that happy that 9/11 discussions are kept in a separate forum which does not allow recommendations or any integration with the rest of DU.

Now, I will continue to discuss whatever I find to be credible here on DU. And the credible evidence is mounting. I don't post things that are not proven to my satisfaction, preferably with multiple sourcing.

I understand that many, many people are not ready to accept that some of these theories may have substance behind them. I have no problem with that. I am a loyal American, and I love this country, too. These subjects are not pleasant to study. But SOMEONE needs to. As a patriot, I feel that it is my duty to question my government. I honestly believe that there is something to all of the 9/11 theories, and I wish that DU provided a more open environment to discuss these theories.

I am comfortable with people awakening to the new dawn at their own pace. I see the relegation to the "basement" as another example of how the mainstream is not ready to wrap themselves around the implications which these important truths hold. It is extremely disturbing and disquieting. But it is the truth, and we need to get to the bottom of it...together...truthers and skeptics. Mutual honest debate is the way to find the truth. DU makes it less easy for us to engage in an honest, respectful debate by assigning second-class status to these issues. It is a terrible disservice to those who are interested in uncovering the truth in this matter.

Thanks!

:endrant:

SR

[CJCRANE]

1. Maybe.

It seems like both BBC News 24 and BBC World reported the collapse of WTC7 before it happened.

See the fourth post down (for the new revelation about BBC News 24):

http://www.911blogger.com/node/6501#comment

[salvorhardin]

2. "I honestly believe that there is something to all of the 9/11 theories"

I honestly believe that there is something to all of the 9/11 theories...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=144476&mesg_id=144476

All of them? Really? Wow. That's very brave of you.

Even the theory that the right wing is using the believers in the most whackadoodle conspiracy theories to paint all liberals as loons and marginalize any serious questions of conspiracy after the fact?

Do you believe there's something to that 9/11 theory too?

[HCE SuiGeneris]

3. It is an intended result manufactured by the government

and actively managed through the media to label persons whose ideas are inconsistent with the party line, as "wackos". The "communist" banner, and now the "conspirator" banner, demean and debase real people. Forward thinking is definitely NOT a desirable trait in the eyes of those who chose to maintain the status quo. Tout the party line, or, suffer the consequences.

[AZCat]

4. So what do we call those whose ideas are inconsistent with reality?

Are we allowed to call them "wackos"?

[CJCRANE]

6. "Neocons". n/t

[AZCat]

7. Ba-dum!

Nice - I should've seen that one coming.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

8. Define reality.

My point is that tolerance for ideas that do not mirror a political party view, has become increasingly sparse. This attitude is dangerous.

[AZCat]

11. Sparse compared to when?

Are we going to look at this historically, because it might be interesting to compare today to previous times in America's history when similar problems arose.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

12. Sparse in regards to the events of a catastrophe.

The inuring effect of 9/11, or any comparable event, clouds reason because a patriotic fervor obscures the correct dissemination of data. My use of sparse was meant to refer to the dissolution of clearer thought in more tumultuous times.

[AZCat]

14. Am I correct to interpret your use of the term "party line"...

to mean the consensus (or "official") narrative, versus a political party line?

Because the run-up to the Iraq War is IMO an excellent example of obscuring dissenting views by the media. Whether this is caused by 9/11-related fervor or just the typical "going to war" fervor, I cannot say.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

16. The party/official line and political line

are one and the same regarding the events of 9/11. The support for the war is predicated on accepting the party/official line of the events of 9/11. I am positing that the pieces of information that are available to us do not support the party/official explanation for the events that occurred that day. It is this position that has some here ridiculing persons that hold views un-conforming to their own. This intolerance reeks of authoritarianism. This is the reason for my first post.

[CJCRANE]

5. However

the MSM can easily drown out the blogs.

The number of people who watch only mainstream news is probably 10 times greater than the number of bloggers.

[AZCat]

9. That's an interesting question.

I wonder how reliable the data is on either population - that would be a fascinating comparison. I suspect that your estimate is maybe a little low - we are most definitely a television nation.

[CJCRANE]

13. You're right -

10 times is best-case scenario. I really don't know the actual figure, somewhere 10 and 100 times more.

And Bushco know this. That's why they can say any old bullsh*t knowing their soundbytes will get on TV news shows with an audience of millions while the bloggers who debunk it only have a few thousand readers.

[AZCat]

15. More importantly...

whenever they "roll out a new product" they can use the same system (the "Mighty Wurlitzer") to redefine the message if it didn't quite get the response they intended - who will ever remember what the original theme was when the new version is repeated several thousand times a day?

[seemslikeadream]

10. There are a few big clues here in the dungeon

if you've been here long enough you'll figure out the unspeakable, some of us are very aware what's going on.

[Lithos]

17. Locking

Please contact DU Administration if you have any issues about DU Policy.

Lithos
DU Moderator