Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [OT] the poetry of donald rumsfeld

[Tom Lord]

    > From: Robin Farine <address@hidden>

    > Speaking about 9/11, I find the whole thing a good illustration of

    >    1. something happens
    >    2. some people interpret (i.e. abstract, transform) what they
    >       "observed", facts related to what happened, and produce a theory
    >    3. other people mix there own "observations" with what people in 2
    >       said about what happened and arrange bits of the whole thing to
    >       produce a "plausible" theory
    >    4. the rest of us makes no direct observation but we build our own
    >       theory based on what we hear and we happily ignore/hide any
    >       contradiction or suspicious deduction
    >    5. one of the theory emerging at 4 becomes the official explanation
    >       of 1 and it also becomes the truth (since one could see it on
    >       every TV channel and in every newspaper).

    > As an illustration, here is an alternate theory about 9/11 that does not 
    > look less plausible than the official theory 
    > "http://newsmine.org/archive/9-11/questions/ghost-riders-in-the-sky.txt";. 
    > Let us guess why it did not become officially recognized as the truth.

Cause it's so highly implausible?

Yes, the social dynamic you're talking about re "the construction of
truth" is interesting.   Yes, the 9/11 events deserve skepticism from
the "who had motive and opportunity" perspective.

But the thesis put forth in that web link?  I dunno.  My recollection
is that you could _see_ the micro-course-corrections in the seconds
before impact, implying a human driver.  And, while airplanes can
pretty much land themselves, doesn't that rely on the transponders
around runways?  I have to ask whether or not automated navigation is
really _that_ precise over manhatten at low altitude.  Finally, the
suggestion of _that_much_ manufactured evidence -- well, it would take
a lot of people to be in on the loop.  Not impossible, I suppose, but
wouldn't you expect some leaks along the way?

My (sad) hunch is that, while 9/11 turned into a politically useful
tool -- it didn't need to be specially constructed.  The law of
averages made something along those lines probable.  

-t