References

2008-11-24 07:55:00

Susan writes:

"What I do find disheartening is acting like we are looking at it in depth when we are not. JJ, you have not directly spoken anything about any of the points Steven Jones makes. That is fine if you don't want to, but I find it doesn't help your online presence as one trying to put out a savvy political book. It is just my opinion put out there 'for what it's worth.'"

JJ:

A number of people have addressed these points so it would be wasting my time to duplicate what has already been done. As I said in my last post a good site that refutes most of conspiracy theory's points is:

http://www.debunking911.com/

In the past I have made reference to others.

I have made no pretense to an in depth presentation of conspiracy theory around 911. I have only given enough for readers to get the big picture and see the illogic of the whole thing. It makes no sense at all to think a bunch of bureaucrats could plan and pull off something so complicated without being caught when they cannot even keep a simple embarrassment like Abu Ghraib a secret.

As it was Osama bin Laden and his group did fit the description of a plausible conspiracy. Their plan was simple. Highjack planes, crash them into buildings and do maximum damage. The real plan did not involve magical and unbelievable feats of planning, execution, cover-up, cooperation, new technology, etc.

Susan:

"I have not read anyone who refuted all thirteen points nor anyone who has really seriously addressed them. At least point somewhere where this has occurred instead of making a blanket statement with no references."

JJ:

References are easy to find with a simple Google search. Check out the one I just gave out.

To do an in depth coverage of 911 conspiracy theory is not something I wish to do and is against the wishes of many readers. The points I have made present the illogic of this conspiracy theory and this bugger picture would stand of Jones comes up with a hundred more points.

In the bigger picture we see that the bumble bee does fly so what good does it do to dwell on 10, 100 or 1000 points of refutation?

Susan:

"The conversations always turns to way out theories that he doesn't promote and sound like "straw man" arguments. (Consider this more of an editorial comment than anything. If you are going to make a statement, back it up with a footnote to keep your credibility. I do not believe a political book without footnotes is going to be taken seriously.)"

JJ:

I do back up everything that is not common or easily accessible knowledge. There are very few things I have ever written, and not referenced, that do not draw from knowledge that is already accepted beyond dispute. I think you would be hard pressed to find three such things in my whole body of work. When I do present a point that relies on data that may not be readily accessible or believable then I do reference it.

The day of the need of excessive footnotes is passing as many readers are relying more on Googling for fact verification than checking footnotes. We are entering an age where the only really usable footnotes will be those that contain data that cannot be easily Googled.

Most of my writings require very few footnotes because my attempts at proof is not by data but by the logic behind principles and the vision of the bigger picture. In my political writings I am not attempting to present a scholarly work, but new ideas backed by sound reason and argument with only the necessary research to back up my points.

Bil writes:

"What if there is a hidden agenda from another force that is bent on creating one world economy and one world government. By attacking the world trade center being the first step to current times and what we are experiencing today in our world economy. What if there is a connection."

JJ:

There is a connection. The real one authoritarian world conspiracy is composed of workers of darkness dwelling in the unseen world. They work wherever they can find a response and the centers of response shifts over time. This is why the conspiracy is blamed on so many different groups -- bankers, Jews, terrorists, CFR, shadow government, Rockerfellers, Bilderbergs, communism, oil companies, large corporations, The Mormons, current president, etc. Conspiracy theory has never been able to agree on who is behind or in charge of things.

When one sees that the true conspirators move their attention from place to place it all makes sense. That which is a tool of light at one time may be a tool of the Dark Brotherhood in another time -- when corruption sets in. The true spiritual conspiracy was behind 911 and have used it to further their ends. They have furthered their ends even more by blaming the conspiracy on those who are being used by the Brotherhood of Light to fight the conspiracy.