19 ARABS WITH BOXCUTTERS

Why are there so many flaws, anomalies, and impossibilities in the 9/11 OS ?   **************************   If your answer to this question is, “Well, obviously because it just doesn’t hold together, since it isn’t true,” then you are both understanding and missing the point at the same time. For the perplexing aspect of this issue is in fact inherent in the very sloppiness with which it was performed .   Simply put, given the massive resources at their disposal, why couldn’t the 9/11 plotters and deceivers make it seem as if their story were airtight ? Why, instead, are there so many ultra-conspicuous loose ends? Why, in fact, is the 9/11 OS not merely difficult to swallow, but finally impossible to believe , when one begins to scrutinize it with anything resembling logic, reason, and discernment?  

  But now that we are at it, let us consider relatively briefly what many other researchers have spent a great deal of time explicating: the numerous and manifold problems (in addition to what was mentioned above) with the 9/11 OS.   It should be emphasized that my aim here isn’t to render an exhaustive or comprehensive enumeration of every credible objection to what has been asserted to be the “truth” of the events which took place on September 11, 2001. Instead, the following list will simply be a brief sketch of well-recorded anomalies, all of which many other writers, bloggers, podcasters, and vloggers have addressed in far greater detail elsewhere.  

Of course, my primary aim is not to critique the corporate news media industry in all of their feculent, fraudulent, flatulent splendor, but as the “official story” of 9/11 has been actively and avidly disseminated by these outlets, their credibility must be the first domino to fall in our push towards the truth… Yet when I say “truth” here, what do I mean and to what precisely am I referring?   My goal in this extended essay is NOT to argue for an alternative explanation—that which invariably gets called a “conspiracy theory”—but rather 1) to give a sketch rendering of how numerous aspects of the 9/11 OS (“official story”) simply don't make sense, and more crucially, 2) to draw attention to the fact that the impossibility of the OS is so conspicuous that its manifold contradictions call attention to anyone who is even halfway paying attention, before finally, 3) asking why, when it comes to the 9/11 OS, the gulf between what is asserted and what can be credibly believed is so...

If I could sum up in one sentence what I have learned over the last twenty years, since that fateful few hours when the events of what history has titled “9/11” unfolded,   it would be this: Very little of what is proffered as “news” corresponds with the veracity of actual events.  (By “news” I mean anything from any medium that advertises itself as such, or any venue which arrogates to itself such a designation.)  ******************************** I have thus grown not merely avoidant, but positively antipathic, towards “news” outlets. To clarify, it may be that FACTS can be gleaned from a “news” account (though at the same time, maybe not), but IF such an admission can be allowed, it is only with this crucial caveat in mind: even actual facts are suspect when presented in the context of a general effort to obfuscate or propagandize , rather than tell the plain, unvarnished, unvanquished truth.