Skip to main content

View Diary: Pat Buchanan 9-11 truther. Oh Geez. (151 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  There is a difference (0+ / 0-)

    in investigation and throwing everything including the kitchen sink up in the air just to see what floats.

    Usually the theorists themselves have an agenda, I start at the point: who is theorising, and where do they stand, before I listen.

    There are however some serious questions that need answering.

    Just stay away from my body and my rights, and everything will be just fine. ~LaFeminista Mon May 17, 2010

    by LaFeminista on Sun May 30, 2010 at 06:48:05 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  I quite agree (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      koNko, LaFeminista, mojada

      And that is what people like Pat Buchanan (along with Creationists, proponents of ID, HIV deniers, etc. and  tend to do).

      I think it is fair to ask what a person's perspective or frame on an issue is and to examine how that frame may block or bias inquiry. That said, in general, I think we should at least make an effort to evaluate the argument (rather than the person). I'll make exceptions for some demonstrated occasions when the motives really do matter (e.g. the tobacco Institute arguing that there is a new study that says tobacco is really good for you...). I don't like the idea of reducing everything to partisan politics.

      But for the record:

      I am a political economist whose basic approach to issues draws largely on world systems theory and even sometimes on the better aspects of realists like Paul Kenneddy.

      I think there are actually very sound social science/International Political Economy reasons to broaden the frame around which the 9-11 events occurred.

      Yes-AQ did it (planned, carried out, executed) etc. But they did not do it "because they hate us for our freedom". And it was the U.S., including the CIA that first ginned up the "holy warrior", Salafist revivalist tendency within Islam.

      The idea that some person or persons within the security structure of the U.S. "looked the other way" is not documented. It should not be rejected out of hand either. The question would be how to determine who did know what?

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site