Maybe I have a bit too much of a “my Uncle Napoleon complex”, but I think tge UK’s decision to dismantle the Ottoman Empire and issue the Balfor Decleration did far more to negatively impact the ME than anything the US ever did.
How can you say the poor man is a truther? He say’s he’s not a conspiracy theorist, demonstrates his centrist position by not believing David “Lizard people from the Draco constellation and Jews secretly run the world” Icke’s take on 9/11, and he’s Just Asking Questions after all.
Because most of those questions in regards to the engineering aspect of the beams and temperature whatnot, have already been repudiated by example, popular mechanics and various documentaries talking about 9/11.
His book The Great War for Civilisation: The Conquest of the Middle East is superb IMO.
The truther thing doesn’t sit well at all but I’ve read his stuff about the middle east for years now and always found it very interesting and nuanced.
He also seems to piss off the right people IMO.
That 9/11 stuff though WTF?
Whooooooosh 
Ok, good. We then agree that there is a US interference and in the age of post-WWII and Cold War, Fisk can argue with certainty that US interference is most significant.
What is up for debate is the usefulness of that interference to both US interests and interests of involved nations.
He is not.
I’ve read the article (link, again: http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/fisk/robert-fisk-even-i-question-the-truth-about-911-462904.html) and I’m at a loss at how anyone can be so disingenuous to flat out brand him as truther. The article is much nuanced, it clearly designates a truther (his term is raver) and he separates himself from that (which also he suggests maybe due to some psychological issue) and points out certain parts of the narrative that just simply does not make any sense.
I understand that it is always easier to go along to get along so if that’s your thing fine. But if you can swallow that fiery explosion and burning kerosene destroys steel beams but terrorist passports survive in the debris then I want what you’re on. If you can swallow naming the terrorists only for several of them to show up in various places well and alive, again, great for you. If you can swallow that witnesses saw Mossad agents high-fiving each other on top of the van at the sight of burning Twin Towers and they go free, again, great, I admire your rectitude. But please don’t go around and preach because common sense is not your thing.
Anyways, for those reading along, already cited and quoted bits that show how Fisk is a Truther
-He is not a conspiracy theorist, he tells us, he is Just Asking Questions.
-He is in increasingly troubled at the “inconsistencies” in the “official narrative” of 9/11. And not just the “obvious non sequiturs”, either.
-He claims that the “aircraft parts (engines, etc) from the attack on the Pentagon” have vanished, or perhaps never existed.
-He claims that “the officials involved in the United 93 flight (which crashed in Pennsylvania) been muzzled”
-He implies foul play (e.g. the “A missile did it!”) conspiracy nonsense as to “[why flight] 93’s debris spread over miles when it was supposed to have crashed in one piece in a field”
-He uses the traditional Truther bullshit about melting steel in the WTC.
-He implies some sort of wrong-doing on the part of others, not AQ agents, as he suggests that it is very odd that beams “would snap through at the same time”.
-He uses the traditional Truther bullshit about how WTC 7 was somehow also a case of wrong-doing on someone’s part other than AQ, reiterating the Truther nonsense about it collapsing into its own footprint, taking only 6.6 seconds to come down (controlled demolitions?) and using the Truther nonsense about how it shouldn’t have, since it wasn’t directly hit by any aircraft.
-Then he cites some nonsense about how the NIST’s report is “fraudulent or deceptive”.
-He also goes on to babble some, implying that maybe the FBI fabricated the names/confessions/etc… of the terrorists who carried it out.
And so on.
The man’s a Truther.
Wow. With bonus “disingenuous!!!” nonsense thrown in for extra points. (Redeemable for valuable prizes after the show)
Yes, as already pointed out and mocked, he claims not to be a Truther because he makes fun of the truly insane Jews-are-lizard-people conspiracy theorizing. But if you think his claims are about things that “do not make any sense”, then you are ignorant of what you’re talking about.
I see, you’re defending Fisk because your argument has more than a bit of Truth in it, itself. Do tell, how do we know that the “dancing Israelis” were agents of the Mossad and what, in your view, does it mean that we let them go?
Sorry, dude, but you don’t have a leg to stand on when it comes to reasoned discussion. You`re not interested in facts, logic or any of that – your primary goal is to redirect, to confuse and obfuscate. You are not interested in discussion but rather about a potential discussion that might have happened if one would only agree with you.
For example, if I found a cite where it is said that they are (ex, of course) Mossad agents you would come back with something along the lines “it was not a van it was a cargo van” and on and on and on until, as is often a pattern, discussion is about tire threads and people just get tired. It is always the most innocuous thing, the irrelevant one for the argument being argued that gets picked and thrown into whirlwind of cites, quotes and responses until whole point is exhausted to the level of non-existence.
I think phrase make a mountain out of a molehill suffered enough.
Find someone else to bother, please.
In other words, you have absolutely no cite or proof for your claim that the “dancing Israelis” were agents of the Mossad, and won’t point out what, if anything, you think they would have to do with 9/11 even if these hypothetical Mossad agents were high fiving each other. But surely, something sinister was going on, and the Mossad was involved because, well, just look, there were some dancing Israelis!
Give proof or retract.
Heh, I never knew Fisk was a Truther.
Not that this alone totally discredits his other reporting, mind; but it certainly indicates he’s prone to baseless conspiracy thinking, which doesn’t bode well for his perspicacity in dealing with the intricacies of mid-east politics, which is rife with that sort of thing.
If it walks like a Truther and quacks like a Truther, then it’s probably a Truther. The mating cry of the Truther of either the Let it Happen or Made it Happen variety is I’m Just Asking Questions(all rights reserved).
What’s in a name? A Truther by any other name smells as sweet…
-XT
It sounds like you are a truther yourself.
Anyway, don’t tell me you’re one of those idiots who actually thinks the Mossad had something to do with it.
I would if that would solve anything. But nothing can solve what you spread around.
Anyone, and I mean anyone who has a passing interest in this can find an instance of 20/20 show dedicated exactly to this issue in which it is explicitly said that Jewish magazine The Forward reported that FBI determined at least two of those on the van to be Mossad operatives.
But, again, it is such a fruitless discussion in which one asks for cite on such an easy issue and again, you prove everything I and others said about you. There should be a rule about people like that.
I said nothing of the sorts.
My only point is appeal to common sense with couple of examples. If those examples do not tickle your curiosity bone, then I certainly am opposite of you. Even if that means being called “idiot”.
Ibn Warraq and newcomer, please dial down your remarks in regard to each other.
Also:
Please don’t alter text in quote boxes like this. Paraphrasing is fine, but do it without the sarcastic asides.
Would you please point me to an offending post in regard to Ibn Warraq?
You should really start an ATMB thread if you have a question about a mod or a non-warning and suggestion you back off. I don’t know if Marley will respond to that in this thread, since it would be further hijacking the thread which is about Robert Fisk after all…not you.
-XT
What is a “my Uncle Napoleon complex” ???
…you had a cite and could explain how it would even matter if a couple of “the dancing Isrealis” had been in the Mossad. You are, naturally, Just Asking Questions. It would be nice if you could actually provide a cite and then actually explain your logic rather than relying on ominous innuendo.
Gasp!
Not a Jewish magazine. Here I thought we were talking about 9/11 and your innuendo about some sort of Israeli conspiracy, and not anything having to do with Jews or Judaism.
Sure would help if you’d cite and lay out your argument rather than refusing and relying in personal insults to avoid supporting your own argument.