Close-Mindedness Is Not Only a Conservative Weakness
Posted by: Welfl on Jul 12, 2006 9:47 AM    [Report this comment]

You know, if so many supposed liberals are this incredibly blind to the overwhelming evidence that 9/11 was -- to a greater or lesser degree -- an inside job by an administration they all despise and consider evil, or, at the very, very, very least, that it is painfully obvious that 9/11 did not happen the way Philip Zelikow's 9/11 Commission Report says it did (not even close), then I can assure you that there is absolutely no hope of EVER enlightening conservatives on any issue regarding the Bush Administration's criminal/dictatorial behavior (and we need to enlighten some of them, or else nothing will ever change).

Let me rephrase that: If certain mainstream liberals refuse to have an open mind (even for a brief time) on the blatant flaws, lies and inconsistencies in Philip Zelikow's 9/11 Commission Report, regardless of who really engineered the 9/11 attacks, then the vast majority of mainstream conservatives will never heed the warnings of sites like Alternet on such issues as Iraq, Iran, immigration (no, wait, lots of liberals naively, foolishly trust the evil Bush Administration on immigration), environment, oil, Halliburton, the Carlyle Group, the NSA spying scandals, Social Security, pharmaceutical companies, reproductive rights, privacy rights, internment camps in the U.S., the Constitution, global warming, prisoner torture, violating the Geneva Convention, and two stolen elections (soon to be three and four because so many democrats and liberals refuse to see it, and because so many liberal web sites give it zero coverage). The list could go on and on.

If certain liberals are this stubborn in the face of overwhelming evidence that the official story of 9/11 is a joke (once again, regardless of who the perpetrators were), then Alternet writers and editors are wasting their very valuable time and our internet bandwidth trying to enlighten the generally uninformed, lazy populace (not all of whom are conservatives, obviously) about the Bush Administration.

In the interest of 1.) a free press, 2.) the truly free exchange of ideas in a democracy and 3.) equal time, concepts that I'm sure Alternet believes in (basically, it's what they preach every day), they should play fair and give at least one 9/11 Scholar (by that, I mean a respected professor and/or author, not some amateur who couldn't argue his way out of a set of monkey bars) an opportunity to present the 9/11 Truth Movement's side of the story here at Alternet. There is no shortage of such people. You can even preface it with a disclaimer that his or her beliefs do not necessarily represent your own. So far, on this one issue, you have conducted yourselves just like the neocon mainstream media. You have been blatantly one-sided on this issue without presenting any cogent arguments as to why your beliefs are accurate and provable. If the 9/11 Scholar's editorial is weak, it will be obvious to one and all. What is there to be afraid of, Alternet?