The 'Fear Of Muslims' Conspiracy Theory

[pisshead]

The 'Fear Of Muslims' Conspiracy Theory
Betsy Hart's catch-all explanation for 9/11 questions
Paul Joseph Watson/Prison Planet.com | March 31 2006

Betsy Hart has formulated a catchy and convenient conspiracy theory for why so many people are asking serious questions about what happened on 9/11. We're all scared! Unfortunately, this lethargic leap of logic fails to address the requisition laid forth by Charlie Sheen last week - challenge us on the facts.

Hart was a guest on last week's Hannity and Colmes spot which highlighted Sheen's comments to The Alex Jones Show in which he outlined his serious doubts about the official story of 9/11.

"The threat of Islamic terrorism is so frightening, so unpredictable, so unknowable that in some ways it's easier and more manageable for some folks to think that our government is behind it all," writes Hart in a piece for Scripps Howard News Service.

Well, that explains it all for me! How convenient, now I can restore my unbridled trust in the all-loving government, watch American Idol and go back to sleep!

Perhaps Ms. Hart can explain to us how her theory, as it is presented with no supporting evidence whatsoever, answers the following questions.

- Does fear of Islamic terrorism answer why NORAD completely reversed its standard operating procedure on the day of 9/11?

- Does fear of Islamic terrorism answer why three steel buildings, one that was not hit by a plane, collapsed from fire damage for the first and only time in history?

- Does fear of Islamic terrorism answer why firefighters and WTC workers reported bombs going off inside the towers?

- Does fear of Islamic terrorism answer why several of the named 9/11 hijackers are still alive?

- Does fear of Islamic terrorism answer why Pakistan ISI Director General Mahmud Ahmad instructed Ahmad Umar Sheikh to hotwire $100,000 to the alleged 9/11 lead hijacker, Mohammad Atta and why Mahmud Ahmad on the morning of 9/11 was meeting with former clandestine CIA officer and CFR member Rep. Porter Goss and Skull and Bones/CFR member Senator Bob Graham. Does it answer why since September 4th, he had met with top brass at the CIA, the Pentagon and the White House, including Colin Powell, Richard Armitage, Joseph Biden and George Tenet?

- Does fear of Islamic terrorism answer why on September 10th 2001 according to Newsweek, "a group of top Pentagon officials suddenly cancelled travel plans for the next morning, apparently because of security concerns."

- Does fear of Islamic terrorism answer why a record number of 'put' options, speculation that the stock of a company will fall, were placed on American and United Airlines in the days preceding September 11th. This despite a September 10th Reuters report stating 'airline stocks set to fly.'

- Does fear of Islamic terrorism answer why a leaked FBI document, 199I WF213589, outlined disgust at a Bush administration directive that succeeded in blocking anti-terrorism investigations related to the bin Laden family and Saudi charities that were front groups for Al-Qaeda?

- Does fear of Islamic terrorism answer why the secret service allowed President Bush to remain in a known and completely unsecured location amongst hundreds of school children when he could have been a target?
- Does fear of Islamic terrorism answer the thousands of other physical, circumstantial and eyewitness evidence that directly contradicts the official fable of 9/11?

Perhaps Ms. Hart can tell us just where all these fearful Islamic terrorists are? Would we have caught some in the net at Guantanamo Bay? Turns out not to be the case, unless you think delivery drivers, chicken farmers, sack makers and taxi drivers are hell-bent on blowing up stuff.

Would we have caught some from Pakistani street gangs rounding up innocent people and selling them to us for $25,000? Turns out not to be the case unless you think that peasants and farmers who don't even know what or where America is hate us enough to carry out mass murder.

Charlie Sheen invited his detractors to challenge him on the facts. Charlie Sheen challenged his detractors to put the time into researching the facts. Betsy Hart's research consisted of reading Popular Mechanic's 9/11 hit piece, which was a straw man set-up that attributed claims to the 9/11 truth movement that were clearly absurd.

Hart's article has already been subject to one retraction, in which she claimed the Alex Jones Show had e mailed her and stated, ""Maybe your (sic) just another media whore that is looking for ways to make herself richer." Nobody associated with Alex Jones or his show ever sent this e mail.

Scripps Howard News Service carries the retraction at the top of the article. Hart's research is so sloppy that she doesn't even know how to find out who is sending her e mails.

"But reality intervenes, and reality is that Muslim terrorists carried out the fateful assaults of 9/11 thank you, Osama Bin Laden, for admitting exactly that," snarls Hart.

Hart's standard for accepting evidence as credible is the fact that it's released by and is approved of by the government. The same government that lied to us about weapons of mass destruction and a war that has killed thousands of Americans and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis.

The so-called bin Laden confession tape, a tape mysteriously 'discovered' in a house in Jalalabad, a lucky find for a city with a population of 150,000 people, is very believable....if you also believe that Forrest Gump shook hands with President Kennedy. The fat bin Laden lookalike wears a gold ring, forbidden to Islam, and makes statements totally inconsistent with his other public comments.

Bin Laden's first public statements after 9/11 were carried in an interview with the Pakistani based Ummat newspaper.

"I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States. As a Muslim, I try my best to avoid telling a lie. I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the killing of innocent women, children and other humans as an appreciable act. Islam strictly forbids causing harm to innocent women, children and other people. Such a practice is forbidden even in the course of a battle."

Does that sound like a confession to you?

Hart's desperation to cling onto her perch on the establishment lackey media peanut gallery is plain to see and she thinks she can do it by upholding with blind obedience the sneering elitist cultural media zeitgeist.

However, newspaper readership is plummeting and the mainstream media is dying because it has become synonymous with spin and deception. People are turning to alternative news blogs and websites for the truth.

Hart's fear of Islamic terrorism is only matched by her fear of sinking with the rest of the rats on SSS Lamestream BS - but unlike this vessel Hart's conspiracy theories just don't hold water.

----------------------------------
E mail Betsy Hart and politely advise her to brush up on her research techniques. Make sure you make it clear who the e mail is from otherwise you might confuse her! Better yet - make a comment on her blog by clicking here (go to bottom of page).
----------------------------------
COMMENTS

[align=left]She claims: "The threat of Islamic terrorism is so frightening, so [/align]
unpredictable - it's easier and more manageable for some folks to think that our government is behind it all."

-Well, couldn't the same thing be said (more convincingly) of her ilk? -that
the FEAR of her own government facilitating such an attack is too much to handle, and because so she'll latch on to any hair-brained conspiracy theory

that spares her the pain of accepting the obvious...

Or, put another way: Which is scarier?

1. A rogue group of maniac terrorists on the other side of the globe that
are willing to kill American Citizens to achieve a political end

OR

2. A powerful, secretive and utterly corrupt government right here at home that is willing to do the same

----------------------------------

As ironic as this sounds, I was much, much happier when I thought that Al Qaeda were behind 9/11. Ms. Hart's theory is the mirror opposite of the reality. The thought that our governments are killing us off is much more frightening than to think that terrorists are responding to our governments' foreign policies with the only means they have at their disposal - guerrilla warfare. When I believed that terrorists were responsible, my "world view" made sense. Now, everything is upside down, and it's difficult to know who to trust. I am much more frightened now than I was on the day of 9/11, and indeed the London bombings. Almost every aspect of my life has changed after learning of the truth of 9/11, and sometimes I wish I didn't know what I know now. When you learn of something like that, you have no choice but to face the many other elements that are related to it, such as the grander agenda of the New World Order, the Illuminati, PNAC, etc. You can't "unsee" these facts, and you are forever changed.

Ms. Hart is either an idiot, or is very clever. If you convey a lie strongly enough it may just sound feasible, especially for the mindless cattle who are really just looking for a further reassurance that Alex, Mr. Sheen, and the countless others, are just crazy.

Thanks for your time and efforts,
Paddy.

----------------------------------
[align=left]What ticked me off more than anything is the faux femme intro which is supposed to disarm the reader, or put them in "chuckle" mode before the hitpiece commences.[/align]

"There are times when a girl is a little, um, surprised at the overwhelming response she gets."

Give me a break!!! The gal looks so homely she could stop a clock! The femme has been verbally abused by the big Texas radio host! It riles me when feminists use their 'femininity' as a ploy to soften their targets!

pisshead Reviewed by pisshead on 04-01-2006. The 'Fear Of Muslims' Conspiracy Theory The 'Fear Of Muslims' Conspiracy Theory Betsy Hart's catch-all explanation for 9/11 questions Paul Joseph Watson/Prison Planet.com | March 31 2006 Betsy Hart has formulated a catchy and convenient conspiracy theory for why so many people are asking serious questions about what happened on 9/11. We're all scared! Unfortunately, this lethargic leap of logic fails to address the requisition laid forth by Charlie Sheen last week - challenge us on the facts. Hart was a guest on last week's Rating: 5

[pisshead]

Sheen 9/11 Archive...

http://prisonplanet.com/archives/sheen/index.htm

[Breukelen advocaat]

I donâ??t' care what Charlie Sheen, or Bishop Sheen, for that matter, thinks. I was there (downtown NYC on 9/11), and an architect told me that the buildings would collapse straight down - which they did.

People can say it was just a lucky guess, that he was part of the "conspiracy", or other denials, but there must be other professionals that also predicted the collapse of the twin towers - sans â??bombsâ?�.

[Breukelen advocaat]

Bombing Our Illusions
Sam Harris 10/2005

Open the newspaper todayâ??or tomorrow, or almost any day for many years to comeâ??and you will discover that some pious Muslim has deliberately blown himself to bits for the purpose of killing â??infidelsâ?� or â??apostates.â?� It is likely that the bomber was male, middle class, and comparatively well educated. It is especially likely that he was guided by the sincere expectation of spending eternity in Paradise.

In fact, suicide bombing is now so commonplace in our world that most of us have lost sight of just how unimaginable it should be. It is, perhaps, the least likely thing human beings could ever be inclined to do. What, after all, is less likely than large numbers of middle class, educated, psychologically healthy people intentionally blowing themselves upâ??in crowds of children, in front of the offices of the Red Cross, at weddingsâ??and having their mothers sing their praises for it? Can we even conceive of a more profligate misuse of human life? As a cultural phenomenon, suicide bombing should be impossible. But here it is.

Anyone familiar with my work knows that I am extremely critical of all religious faiths. I have argued elsewhere that the ascendancy of Christian conservatism in American politics should terrify and embarrass us. And yet, there are gradations to the evil that is done in name of God, and these gradations must be honestly observed. So let us now make sense of the impossible by acknowledging the obvious: there is a direct link between the doctrine of Islam and Muslim terrorism. Acknowledging this link remains especially taboo among political liberals. While liberals are leery of religious fundamentalism in general, they consistently imagine that all religions at their core teach the same thing and teach it equally well. This is one of the many delusions borne of political correctness. Rather than continue to squander precious time, energy, and good will by denying the role that Islam now plays in perpetuating Muslim violence, we should urge Muslim communities in the West to reform the ideology of their religion. This will not be easy, as the Koran and hadith offer precious little basis for a Muslim Enlightenment, but it is necessary.

Anyone who imagines that terrestrial concerns account for Muslim terrorism must answer questions of the following sort: Where are the Tibetan Buddhist suicide bombers? The Tibetans have suffered an occupation far more brutal, and far more cynical, than any that Britain, the United States, or Israel have ever imposed upon the Muslim world. Where are the throngs of Tibetans ready to perpetrate suicidal atrocities against Chinese noncombatants? They do not exist. What is the difference that makes the difference? The difference lies in the specific tenets of Islam. This is not to say that Buddhism could not help inspire suicidal violence. It can, and it has (Japan, World War II). But this concedes absolutely nothing to the apologists for Islam. As a Buddhist, one has to work extremely hard to justify such barbarism. One need not work nearly so hard as a Muslim. The truth that we must finally confront is that Islam contains specific notions of martyrdom and jihad that fully explain the character of Muslim violence. Unless the worldâ??s Muslims can find some way of expunging the metaphysics that is fast turning their religion into a cult of death, we will ultimately face the same perversely destructive behavior throughout much of the world.


While the other major world religions have been fertile sources of intolerance, it is clear that the doctrine of Islam poses unique problems for the emergence of a global civilization. The world, from the point of view of Islam, is divided into the â??House of Islamâ?� and the â??House of War,â?� and this latter designation should indicate how Muslims believe their differences with those who do not share their faith will be ultimately resolved. While there are undoubtedly some moderate Muslims who have decided to overlook the irrescindable militancy of their religion, Islam is undeniably a religion of conquest. The only future devout Muslims can envisageâ??as Muslimsâ??is one in which all infidels have been converted to Islam, politically subjugated, or killed. The tenets of Islam simply do not admit of anything but a temporary sharing of power with the â??enemies of God.â?� Devout Muslims can have no doubt about the reality of Paradise or about the efficacy of martyrdom as a means of getting there. Nor can they question the wisdom and reasonableness of killing people for what amount to theological grievances. In Islam, it is the moderate who is left to split hairs, because the basic thrust of the doctrine is undeniable: convert, subjugate, or kill unbelievers; kill apostates; and conquer the world.

We are now mired in a religious war in Iraq and elsewhere. Our enemies--as witnessed by their astonishing willingness to slaughter themselves--are not principally motivated by political or economic grievances. How many more architects and electrical engineers must fly planes into buildings before we realize that the problem of Muslim extremism is not merely a matter of education? How many more middle-class British citizens must blow themselves up along with scores of noncombatants before we acknowledge that Muslim terrorism is not matter of poverty or political oppression?

It is not enough for moderate Muslims to say â??not in our name.â?� They must now police their own communities. They must offer unreserved assistance to western governments in locating the extremists in their midst. They must tolerate, advocate, and even practice ethnic profiling. It is simply a fact that the greatest predictor of terrorist behavior anywhere in the world (with the exception of the island Sri Lanka) is whether or not a person believes that Allah is the only god and Muhammad is his prophet. Moderate Muslims themselves must acknowledge this fact without equivocation. The time for political correctness and multi-cultural shibboleths has long passed. Moderate Muslims must accept and practice open criticism of their religion. We are now in the 21st century: all books, including the Koran, should be fair game for flushing down the toilet without fear of violent reprisal. If you disagree, you are not a religious moderate, and you are on a collision course with modernity.

The war in Iraq, while it may be exacerbating the conflict between Islam and the West, is a red herring. However mixed or misguided American intentions were in launching this war, civilized human beings are now attempting, at considerable cost to themselves, to improve life for the Iraqi people. The terrible truth about our predicament in Iraq is that even if we had invaded with no other purpose than to remove Saddam Hussein from power and make Iraq a paradise on earth, we could still expect tomorrowâ??s paper to reveal that another jihadi has blown himself up for the sake of killing scores of innocent men, women, and children. The outrage that Muslims feel over U.S. and British foreign policy is primarily the product of theological concerns. Devout Muslims consider it a sacrilege for infidels to depose a Muslim tyrant and occupy Muslim landsâ??no matter how well intentioned the infidels or malevolent the tyrant. Because of what they believe about God and the afterlife and the divine provenance of the Koran, devout Muslims tend to reflexively side with other Muslims, no matter how sociopathic their behavior. This is solidarity born of religious delusion, and it must endâ??or a genuine clash of civilizations will be unavoidable.

Muslims in Iraq and elsewhere have been traumatized by war and by decades of repression. But this does not explain the type of violence they wage against us on a daily basis. War and repression do not account for suicidal violence directed against the Red Cross, the U.N., foreign workers, and Iraqi innocents. War and repression do not account for the influx of foreign fighters willing to sacrifice their lives merely to sow chaos. Abu Musab al-Zarqawi is not George Washington with a hood. Sawing the heads off of civilian contractors, humanitarian workers, and journalists is not â??resistanceâ?� to oppression. It is the work of men who left their hearts in the 7th century. Civilization really does have its enemies, and we have met -- and, perhaps, made â?? many of them in Iraq.

It is time we admitted that we are not at war with â??terrorismâ?�; we are at war with precisely the vision of life that is prescribed to all Muslims in the Koran. This is not to say that we are at war with all Muslims, but we are absolutely at war with millions more than have any direct affiliation with Al Qaeda. Every person living in a western democracy should read the Koran and discover the relentlessness with which non-Muslims are vilified in its pages. The idea that Islam is a â??peaceful religion hijacked by extremistsâ?� is a dangerous fantasyâ??and it is now a particularly dangerous fantasy for moderate Muslims to indulge.

It should be of particular concern to us that the beliefs of devout Muslims pose a special problem for nuclear deterrence. There is, after all, little possibility of our having a cold war with an Islamist regime armed with long-range nuclear weapons. A cold war requires that the parties be mutually deterred by the threat of death. Notions of martyrdom and jihad run roughshod over the logic that allowed the United States and the Soviet Union to pass half a century perched, more or less stably, on the brink of Armageddon. We must come to terms with the possibility that men who are every bit as zealous to die as the September 11th hijackers may one day get their hands on nuclear weaponry. As Martin Rees has pointed out, there is no reason to expect that we will be any more successful at stopping nuclear proliferation, in small quantities, than we have been with respect to illegal drugs. If this is true, weapons of mass destruction will eventually be available to anyone who wants them. It seems a truism to say that there is no possible future in which aspiring martyrs will make good neighbors for us.

It is not at all clear how we should proceed in our dialogue with the Muslim world. But deluding ourselves with euphemisms and pandering to the religious sensitivities of Muslims is not the answer. There is much about Islamic culture that should appall us. The treatment of women in Muslim communities throughout the world is unconscionable. All civilized nations must unite in condemnation of a theology that now threatens to destabilize much of the earth. Muslim moderates, wherever they are, must be given every tool necessary to win a war of ideas with their coreligionists. Otherwise, we will have to win some very terrible wars in the future.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sam-ha...ns_b_8615.html