An Example of Straw Man Propaganda Attack

With 84 percent of the CNN viewing audience agreeing with Charlie Sheen, that 9/11 was an inside job, the enemies of truth have to resort to STRAW MAN ARGUMENTS and AD HOMINEM ATTACKS. They have no choice BUT to do this, because the FACTS are clearly on our side!


STRAW MAN USED AGAINST ALEX JONES AND THE TRUTH
by Kentroversy

In a move that smells to high heaven of desperation and panic, the globalists have begun to unleash their pitiful attack puppies upon ALEX JONES, simply for Alex having hosted the Charlie Sheen interview of last week on his talk-radio show, which is broadcast out of Austin, Texas USA. A "journalist" by the name of Betsy Hart published a piece through Scripps Howard News Service, that can in NO WAY be regarded as anything other than LIBEL, and it is my hope that Mr. Jones sues this woman.

NOTE: Since the first posting of this hit-piece, is that it was changed to say that the above e-mail did NOT come from Alex Jones, or anyone representing him.


Her piece, entitled 'Conspiracy Theories Flourish Regarding 9/11,' is an example of the use of the STRAW MAN ARGUMENT. In fact, I will reprint her entire column below, with my own comments inserted at the appropriate places in BOLDFACE. What better way to show this, than by using a real-life example of this technique. Hopefully, the reader will then be able to spot this on their own, when it is seen in the future.

Before we get to the article and my comments, allow me a moment to give the definition of STRAW MAN ARGUMENT for those readers who do not know its' meaning.

A STRAW MAN ARGUMENT is defined as:

"In terms of rhetoric, the straw man describes a point of view or creates a bogus claim that can be easily defeated in an argument. The Straw Man technique does not debate the facts head on, but rather, detours around them in order to make the opposing view sound unbelievable."

The purpose of this fallacy is to ultimately attempt to discredit the argument, by deflecting away from factual matters, and talking about other peripheral matters, matters that ultimately have NOTHING to do with the facts being discussed.

The careful reader will notice that very type of rhetoric being discussed in the Betsy Hart article below. I will also add my own comments where it is appropriate to do so.

Let's begin with the Betsy Hart hit-piece in its' entirety:


Conspiracy Theories Flourish Regarding 9/11
by Betsy Hart
Scripps Howard News Service
March 30, 2006

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

So it was when I went on the Fox News Channel's "Hannity and Colmes" show last week to talk about actor Charlie Sheen's comments implicating our government in the "plot" to carry out the destruction of 3,000 lives along with the Twin Towers and Pentagon on 9/11.

It's probably no surprise that all of us discussing the issue from different perspectives still believed the attacks had, in fact, been carried about by determined Islamic terrorists, not our government.

KENTROVERSY COMMENT: This is factually incorrect. 84% of Americans polled by CNN itself after the Charlie Sheen interview, believe that 9/11 was an inside job. The reason was to provide the necessary pretext to create a global fascist police state, after the wholesale loss of nearly every freedom and liberty we once had.


Ahh, but later ... I started getting inundated with e-mails. They implored _ or demanded _ that I consider Sheen's "evidence" of a government conspiracy. Many were along the lines of this one: You are "obviously a Neo-con slave unable to think for yourself and it was made blatantly clear with your appearance on FOX ... "

KENTROVERSY COMMENT: Robert Greenwald in his documentary entitled OutFOXed proved with prima facie evidence that the FOX NEWS channel is a propaganda arm of the Republican party. Their slant is 80% neo-con, and those talking-head guests that they favor, are those who profess party propaganda. One example of such propaganda is the GOP continually attempting to link 9/11 to IRAQ, when there is no such evidence. If there was, we would have heard about it long before now.


Here's another:

"Maybe your (sic) just another media whore that is looking for ways to make herself richer."

That was from someone pretending to represent the Alex Jones radio show, which originally hosted Sheen. Whoever sent the e-mail did not represent the show.

KENTROVERSY COMMENT Just by her mentioning this, it creates a subconscious link to Alex Jones calling a potential guest he was trying to invite on his show by rude names. If neither the e-mail, nor the sender had anything to do with Alex Jones, then why mention it at all?

But, as I stated, it was mentioned in an attempt to sully Alex Jones' gentlemanly reputation. By my own account, it failed miserably.


My new Web blog was similarly inundated. Many cited a recent CNN poll that said more than 80 percent of Americans agreed with Sheen. Of course, it was one of those "what do you think/e-mail us now" type polls that mean nothing.

Still, it's clear a LOT of folks, including many kind and well-meaning people, really believe this conspiracy stuff.

KENTROVERSY COMMENT So now, FACTS have been reduced to the level of conspiracy stuff? What a clear indication of two things; first, the neo-cons are on the run and desperate, and secondly, their ammunition via this Betsy Hart person is pretty lame and very weak. Her own ridiculous arguments kill her own credibility.

WHY would someone knowingly want to DESTROY their own credibility?!


Several great sources answer the conspiracy theorists, including a definitive cover story in Popular Mechanics magazine in March of last year. (The story notes that even then the ranks of the conspiracy theorists were growing.) From the accusations that Building 7 collapsed for "no known reason" to "the Twin Towers fell at a speed that makes no sense" _ and therefore the government planted bombs in them _ Popular Mechanics uses many non-government sources to answer point by point how and what really happened that awful day. Pretty fascinating.

KENTROVERSY COMMENT Here we go with the old CONSPIRACY THEORIST canard, which I am usually able to dismiss fairly quickly in face-to-face debates, as most people do not know the definition of what a CONSPIRACY is. If they do not know the definitions of the very words they try to label others with, I do not see such people as viable threats. They are usually self-immolating.

Every single one of my news or research pieces here on TKP contains source notes. Most contain many references, and wherever possible, I provide webpage links. I also use ESTABLISHMENT MEDIA SOURCES, and this is done to bolster the credibility of my journalistic skills. This is FACTUAL information, and not theory.

Here, Ms. Hart refers to the infamous POPULAR MECHANICS propaganda-piece, and calls it DEFINITIVE. However, this DEFINITIVE piece of journalism was prepared under the auspices of a cousin of the Homeland Security Secretary. But, I suppose that the FACT that Benjamin and Michael Chertoff being cousins is just another conspiracy theory, right?

Can we HONESTLY expect anything truthful coming from a family member of the Secretary of Homeland Security?

If they did carry out the attacks, controling the flow of information would be high on the list of requisites that need to be addressed.


Interestingly, my blog also started receiving comments that the Popular Mechanics report shouldn't be believed, at least in part because the magazine had some relationship with William Randolph Hearst.

KENTROVERSY COMMENT: Yes, Ms. Hart, what those crazy conspiracy theorists were trying to tell you was that your publication was part of the Hearst dynasty. The global elite have been caught many, many times killing off stories that they see as a liability.

What about that Charlie Sheen story? It disappearaed pretty damn quick, and your editor would tell you it was due to a lack of public interest. But, with 84% in complete agreement that 9/11 was an inside job, THAT doesn't exactly make much sense, does it?


I'm the first one to suggest that we in a democracy should have a healthy dose of skepticism when it comes to our government. I would sure like to know how the United States ever became vulnerable to such attacks in the first place! But our skepticism has to be based on thoughtfulness, knowledge and right principles. (Have other conservatives, and liberals _ have I? _ gone so far, too far, in trying to question a legitimate government that this is what we get?)

KENTROVERSY COMMENT: Okay, first of all, the United States is NOT a democracy, and it has NEVER been one, either. The reader can look this up for themselves to verify what I am about to say. The United States of America (aka USA) is a CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC. This is what it has ALWAYS BEEN, and it is no real surprise that it is always being mistaken as being a democracy, and this is because these matters are no longer taught in any public school in this country.


In any event, what the conspiracy theorists won't answer is why our government would do such a thing as 9/11 _ and more to the point, if it committed this terrible crime and then, essentially, got away with it, why hasn't it "finished" the job? Conspiracy theorists repeatedly claim that no one can answer why there are so MANY conspiracy theorists, so that alone gives their theories credence.

KENTROVERSY COMMENT: More disinformation and nonsense to cloud the waters. Ms. Hart claims that those of us who do factual research on true government crimes refuse to answer WHY the government would do such a thing as 9/11. This is complete nonsense, as I will answer this right here and now, for Ms. Hart, who apparently did not spend any time looking for the answer to this question, and there are thousands of websites online that have commented on such matters.

WHY WOULD OUR OWN GOVERNMENT DO 9/11?

Just like the following incidents of domestic terrorism, 9/11 was done to provide the pretext to set-up a global police state, which they are doing as I write these words. Already, through the use of the PATRIOT ACT, domestic dissidents are being arrested and tortured, even though Bush Jr. stated it would only be used against terrorism suspects from the Middle East.

All of the following incidents have been PROVEN to be false-flag domestic terrorist acts:

• Nero (Burned Rome - July 18, 64 AD)


• Diocletian (Persecuted Catholic Church - February 303 AD)


• Hitler (Reichstag Fire - February 27, 1933)


• Roosevelt (Pearl Harbor - December 7, 1941)


• Kennedy (Operation Northwoods - March 13, 1962)


• Johnson (Gulf of Tonkin - August 2, 1964)

Additionally, there are hundreds of thousands of pages of prima facie evidence pointing to 9/11 as an inside job, which at the very end of this analysis, I will print the ONE SINGLE QUESTION that I ask people, of which I have never gotten an answer, that disproves 9/11 was NOT an inside job.

Just one single question is all I need to ask; and it has NOTHING to do with physics, controlled demolition, airplane cell phone calls, or anything else that has been discussed for the past four years.


That's a circular argument to say the least, but here's at least one reason for the conspiracy theories that I find compelling: 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. Exposing the terrorists for who they are resolves little _ evil must still be fought, and the endgame in some minds is uncertain. But if the administration could be exposed for "initiating these attacks," it would provide final, "easy" resolution _ and it would end the administration and any influence its adherents have, forever.

Could it be that the latter endgame is a little more comforting to some people?

KENTROVERSY COMMENT: Why on God's earth would it be more comforting to ANYONE to know that the threat is coming from within, instead of the apocryphal and mythical Islamic terrorist?! This makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

Once again, these are FACTS, and not theories. On TKP, there are aproximately 190 news and research articles that I posted. Of these 190 postings, there are more than a combined 1,500 total source notes here, most of which reference mainstream media news reports.


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.

KENTROVERSY COMMENT: Ms. Hart, could you answer HOW Osama Bin Laden admitted he carried out the 9/11 attacks, when there is no independent verification that he is even ALIVE at this time?

And, how can the USA not be able to find Osama Bin Laden, when they possess the most-advanced surveillance system on the planet?

My sources have told me that Osama Bin Laden is dead, and had been dead many years previous to 9/11. Until he is brought in by the TERRORISM POLICE, I will consider him dead.

On November 24, 2002, Andy Rooney of 60 MINUTES fame, wrote a column entitled THERE IS NO OSAMA BIN LADEN. In this column, he stated the following:

"Osama Bin Laden is dead [ ... ] I don't like being suspicious of my own government, but this is the most secretive government the United States has ever had. You have to consider what reason our leaders might have for perpetuating the idea that Bin Laden is alive. I suppose our war on terror would lose some of its' urgency if the main object of our search were proved to be dead. That would be one reason for our government to continue saying Bin Laden is alive."

--- Andy Rooney; There Is No Osama Bin Laden, November 24, 2002


Millions of people watch Andy Rooney each Sunday night on 60 MINUTES, just as they have most every Sunday since 1978, when Rooney took over for Harry Reasonser, who had retired from television. Rooney has credibility with this massive audience, and this is one reason why this column CANNOT be found online.

It has been sanitized out of existence --- but don't worry --- I still have a copy, which I will be posting in the next few days.


What may be the growing prevalence of the conspiracy theorists concerns me in this: not only is it an insult to those who died on 9/11, it does make me question _ if just for a moment _ whether we in the United States really have the will to fight and win the war against terror.

KENTROVERSY COMMENT: Okay, so Ms. Hart's logic has failed rather miserably, so now, for one last shot before she ties things up, she accuses those of us who demand TRUTH to be an insult to the victims of 9/11.

However, it is the TRUTH that the survivors of those lost on 9/11 demand, for as it says in that good book:

"You shall know THE TRUTH, and the truth shall make you free." --- John 8:32



KENTROVERSY COMMENT: Here is the ONE QUESTION about 9/11 that stops them dead in their tracks:

How could the nineteen Arab terrorists, fifteen of whom were Saudis, in a cave in Afghanistan with nothing more than a laptop computer, pass through US MILITARY SECURITY CLEARANCES and PASSWORDS, to pull off 9/11? The US military has a level of encryption NOT available to the public, and these passwords are changed daily.

How could they get through THAT without inside help?

Coming soon . . . THE KENTROVERSY PAPERS $10,000 9/11 CHALLENGE!


© 2006 Kentroversy Papers
All rights reserved. Used with permission.


Sources:

The following sources were used in the creation of this Kentroversy Paper . . .

"Journalist" Straw Man Attack of Alex Jones, 9/11 Truth Movement - Infowars.com (March 31, 2006)

Conspiracy Theories Flourish Regarding 9/11 - Betsy Hart Scripps Howard News Service (March 30, 2006)

Rooney, Andy - There Is No Osama Bin Laden; Buffalo News, November 24, 2002 pg. H-3.