6 ms·

> If he thinks u.s goverment is to blame for 9/11, no matter how saying it in a lecture seems childish, he will say it. By the way he doesn't believe that. Las

> If he thinks u.s goverment is to blame for 9/11, no matter how saying it in a lecture seems childish, he will say it. By the way he doesn't believe that. Last time I read about his opinion on the subject he said that proofs were lacking on both sides (truther and non-truther) but that it was probably the work of religious fundamentalists (either christians or muslims).

mbateman 16y ago
I'm not sure that agnosticism on this issue is much less crazy, but okay.
schrototo 16y ago
> ... proofs were lacking on both sides ... religious fundamentalists (either christians or muslims). These are equally ridiculous statements. We know who did it, we know how they did it, we know why they did it. People just can't accept that enormous events can have relatively simple causes.
- doki_pen 16y ago
  It's ridiculous to think that there is no possibility that there were people who could have prevented it, but choose not to.
  - jonhendry 16y ago
    To the extent this is a possibility, it's more likely they didn't know exactly what 'it' was going to be, and were expecting something comparatively minor.
  - schrototo 16y ago
    "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."
    - 5l 16y ago
      Even better, when ignorant, don't attribute it to anything.
  - rbanffy 16y ago
    While I think the intelligence agencies were just incompetent to identify the proper threat, perhaps for lack of an adequately warped imagination (911 was a game changer in the rules of plane highjacking - nobody ever used a passenger plane as a missile before), I don't think anyone allowed it to happen on purpose. However, the president and his associates certainly saw the opportunity and ran with it. The damage done will take decades to undo.
    - Joeri 16y ago
      "911 was a game changer in the rules of plane highjacking - nobody ever used a passenger plane as a missile before" True for civilian planes, but it stretches the imagination a little too far that the US military could discount planes as missiles, given the precedent of pearl harbor.
      - prodigal_erik 16y ago
        It would be startling if they overlooked a threat vividly described in a best-selling novel seven years before, Debt of Honor.
    - markokocic 16y ago
      Just google for Nikola Kavaja.
fuzzmeister 16y ago
Saying 9/11 was the work of Christian fundamentalists seems nearly as bizarre as claiming it was the work of the government. Neither has any grounding in fact.
- patrickaljord 16y ago
  What he said is that if the government was behind it it would probably be the christian fundamentalists.
  - sukuriant 16y ago
    Citation needed. You and many, many others need to start providing citations for these claims of what "he said." If you heard it, there's probably a citation somewhere about it.
singular 16y ago
To be honest, if he believes that 'proofs are lacking on both sides' then I've just lost quite a significant amount of respect for the man. If the 'truthers' are correct then many hundreds, if not thousands, of people decided to conspire to murder thousands of innocent civilians and, somehow, managed to prevent any leaking of this whatsoever. On this basis alone, the idea that 9/11 was a conspiracy is insane, before we get to the fact that, as with all other conspiracy theories, there is just no evidence whatsoever (though the 'truthers' require an unattainable standard of proof from reasonable people, despite requiring none for their own beliefs) then the idea that there is 'no proof' on either side is equally unhinged. If you can't think clearly on something so clear and obvious then it really draws into question your reliability on any subject, especially if you are 'preaching' on the subject. I'm sorry, you just have to draw the line when you're talking about the murder of thousands of innocent people. Seriously.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- rdouble 16y ago
  If you can't think clearly on something so clear and obvious then it really draws into question your reliability on any subject, especially if you are 'preaching' on the subject. I agree with your other point. However, the point I quoted is often brought up in these sorts of discussions and is totally wrong. Great minds throughout history have believed all sorts of crazy and incorrect shit at the same time they were doing great work.
- muyuu 16y ago
  That always happens with people who voice their opinions on everything. There is always going to be a deal breaker. We all have extremely conflicting opinions with others. You have to consider every issue and not the man so much. He's the way he is. I agree with him in many points. In some very impopular issues I agree with him (not the "inside job" thing though). What I wouldn't do is come out in lectures with that kind of stuff. Political correctness is sadly a need when you stamp your real name on something. Now, I think the FSF is right about basically every single point it's active on. That's what matters to me. I agree it's approach might be sometimes lacking, and I think RMS himself should step down and go back to writing software. Which is why I donate to the EFF instead, and I think it's pretty awesome.

mbateman 16y ago

I'm not sure that agnosticism on this issue is much less crazy, but okay.

schrototo 16y ago

> ... proofs were lacking on both sides ... religious fundamentalists (either christians or muslims). These are equally ridiculous statements. We know who did it, we know how they did it, we know why they did it. People just can't accept that enormous events can have relatively simple causes.

doki_pen 16y ago
It's ridiculous to think that there is no possibility that there were people who could have prevented it, but choose not to.
- jonhendry 16y ago
  To the extent this is a possibility, it's more likely they didn't know exactly what 'it' was going to be, and were expecting something comparatively minor.
- schrototo 16y ago
  "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."
  - 5l 16y ago
    Even better, when ignorant, don't attribute it to anything.
- rbanffy 16y ago
  While I think the intelligence agencies were just incompetent to identify the proper threat, perhaps for lack of an adequately warped imagination (911 was a game changer in the rules of plane highjacking - nobody ever used a passenger plane as a missile before), I don't think anyone allowed it to happen on purpose. However, the president and his associates certainly saw the opportunity and ran with it. The damage done will take decades to undo.
  - Joeri 16y ago
    "911 was a game changer in the rules of plane highjacking - nobody ever used a passenger plane as a missile before" True for civilian planes, but it stretches the imagination a little too far that the US military could discount planes as missiles, given the precedent of pearl harbor.
    - prodigal_erik 16y ago
      It would be startling if they overlooked a threat vividly described in a best-selling novel seven years before, Debt of Honor.
  - markokocic 16y ago
    Just google for Nikola Kavaja.

fuzzmeister 16y ago

Saying 9/11 was the work of Christian fundamentalists seems nearly as bizarre as claiming it was the work of the government. Neither has any grounding in fact.

patrickaljord 16y ago
What he said is that if the government was behind it it would probably be the christian fundamentalists.
- sukuriant 16y ago
  Citation needed. You and many, many others need to start providing citations for these claims of what "he said." If you heard it, there's probably a citation somewhere about it.

singular 16y ago

To be honest, if he believes that 'proofs are lacking on both sides' then I've just lost quite a significant amount of respect for the man. If the 'truthers' are correct then many hundreds, if not thousands, of people decided to conspire to murder thousands of innocent civilians and, somehow, managed to prevent any leaking of this whatsoever. On this basis alone, the idea that 9/11 was a conspiracy is insane, before we get to the fact that, as with all other conspiracy theories, there is just no evidence whatsoever (though the 'truthers' require an unattainable standard of proof from reasonable people, despite requiring none for their own beliefs) then the idea that there is 'no proof' on either side is equally unhinged. If you can't think clearly on something so clear and obvious then it really draws into question your reliability on any subject, especially if you are 'preaching' on the subject. I'm sorry, you just have to draw the line when you're talking about the murder of thousands of innocent people. Seriously.

deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
rdouble 16y ago
If you can't think clearly on something so clear and obvious then it really draws into question your reliability on any subject, especially if you are 'preaching' on the subject. I agree with your other point. However, the point I quoted is often brought up in these sorts of discussions and is totally wrong. Great minds throughout history have believed all sorts of crazy and incorrect shit at the same time they were doing great work.
muyuu 16y ago
That always happens with people who voice their opinions on everything. There is always going to be a deal breaker. We all have extremely conflicting opinions with others. You have to consider every issue and not the man so much. He's the way he is. I agree with him in many points. In some very impopular issues I agree with him (not the "inside job" thing though). What I wouldn't do is come out in lectures with that kind of stuff. Political correctness is sadly a need when you stamp your real name on something. Now, I think the FSF is right about basically every single point it's active on. That's what matters to me. I agree it's approach might be sometimes lacking, and I think RMS himself should step down and go back to writing software. Which is why I donate to the EFF instead, and I think it's pretty awesome.