London 9/11 truthers rely on the Daily Mail as a 'source'
by Martin Belam, 12 October 2010
Whether it was designed to coincide with the opening of the inquests into the deaths of those killed in London's July 7th bombings or not I don't know, but we had some '9/11 truthers' demonstrating all day outside The Guardian and Observer offices yesterday. I can't help but think that if you are trying to convince me of the existence of a worldwide conspiracy, you are going to have find some more authoritative sources than relying on what the Daily Mail says about Muslims. Or MUSLIMS as they sometimes have it...
Until now I have not found strong evidence of who the actual perpetrators of the bomb. because there is no airline that claimed the plane that crashed into the building.
Its pity regarding the daily raise in crime,including july 7th bombing and hyderbad's gokulchat bombing killing many innocent people in the name sake of religion.No god Asks to kill anyone.These Dirty people in the name of God Creating Hell on this heavenly Earth.Hope Writings like this will Help to reduce Crimes..good luck my brother..
Conspiracy theories after tragedies are like mushrooms after rainfall. They crop up with almost mechanical regularity, and the bigger the event the more enthusiastic the proponents. In general it’s pointless engaging with them on the basis of their arguments because it’s impossible to reason someone out of an opinion they haven’t reasoned themselves into.
What is interesting is the psychological and social reasons behind the emergence of conspiracy theories. What is it about them that makes them attractive to a particular kind of mind? Why do they always crop up sharing the same basic structures, even if the details change?
I guess you’re suggesting that the fact is in some way Islamaphobic because it’s sourced from a right-wing newspaper?
Perhaps you are unaware that Islam prohibits drinking alcohol, eating pork or frequenting strip clubs? This means there is great relevance to reports (in 3 mainstream media sources, including the Daily Mail) that men who were supposedly so extreme in their Muslim values that they carried out the 9/11 attacks, were witnessed partaking in activities which most moderate Muslims would not condone.
I fear I may have to spell out even further for you why that is relevant – because it suggests that the alleged hijackers were not religious fanatics, their motives were not borne out of a hatred of western culture and that 9/11 in no way symbolised an attack on the 'West' by Islam.
Unfortunately because this information has not been further investigated by such well-resourced news outlets as the Guardian or the Observer, the Islamaphobia created in the wake of 9/11 still persists to this day, in both people's personal attitudes and in the implementation of state legislation.
If you took some time to go and talk with some members of Britain's Muslim community, you would find not only a large amount of scepticism about the official narratives of 9/11 and 7/7, but also a far clearer understanding of the deep-political motives for the war in Afghanistan than that which is currently being shown by journalists writing for the supposed 'quality' broadsheets. Regrettably these voices of dissent are not often openly heard for the very real fear within the Muslim community of being prosecuted for the thought-crime of criticising the government, a dangerous thing to do in the era of anti-terror legislation.
You think it’s just the Daily Mail that espouses anti-Muslim attitudes? Think again. Islamaphobia is running through the very fabric of our society because since 9/11 it has become a state-sanctioned prejudice.
Separating the myths from the facts of 9/11 is one way of challenging that prejudice. If I may recommend the writings of Dr Nafeez Ahmed, you may find them enlightening, balanced and academic.
No, LA, I'm suggesting that the paper is regularly caught out lying about Muslims and being deceptive in the way it presents stories about Muslims. I wouldn't regard the Daily Mail as a reliable source for anything remotely approaching facts when it comes to reporting on Islam.
Everyone is always going to have their own theory about the way something happened. For example, if you go to Conspiracy Con in Sacremento, California in the United States the big convention where people share their stories, it's really crazy how many differing theories about why any event happens. Everyone has their story and believes it passionately. As long as truthers don't cause too much real trouble though, I don't see the harm
Typical ad hominem.
Perhaps try engaging with the facts Martin Belam...
'9/11: The Facts Speak For Themselves' by Jon Gold
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts - Daniel Patrick Moynihan