Threedonians, I need your help!
Your Wankette is teaching a college course in writing. One of my students — a young man with a troubled past — has shown great promise. He’s got an eloquence and originality that is rare in anyone, let alone a 17-year-old.
But.
He submitted an essay (subject: “Explain a theory”) that was…ughhhhhh… delineating the reasons he thought 9/11 was an inside job (the Bush family is friends with the bin Ladens, what happened to the plane that “supposedly” hit the Pentagon …ad nauseum).
Part of me thinks, Just grade according to the assignment, not the belief! but he’s a good boy, and the other part of me grieves that he thinks this way, and would like to beat some sense into him. Because he’s worth it.
Help me out here! What would you say to Anthony? I’ll print off your answers and give them to him tomorrow, after he takes his final exam.
edited to add: Thanks for all your good words! and I should add here, because it came up in the thread: the potential I saw in his prose was nowhere in this essay (interestingly enough!!) — proof, I thought, that these weren’t Anthony’s words; that he was parroting other people; funny how “wacky” sounds the same across the board! And he decided not to submit this for a grade, so the grading part doesn’t factor in. I just think he’s worth saving, and I knew I could count on you guys to help me do it
Here’s excerpts from the essay:
…I was personally intrigued in this subject for many reasons. I was informed and aware of how our government was running things during those years. In my honest opinion, I felt that we were slowly heading towards a country of utter chaos….I watched a documentary about 9/11…called Loose Change[;] the narrator provided me with shocking facts and…evidence to conclude [sic] his answers….I researched many sites [on this issue].
First, in truth regarding Osama bin Laden, there is no official evidence to tie him to any of the acts that occurred during 9/11. So why is it that we, America, put our emphasis of [sic] hate and discrimination around [sic] a man who hasn’t committed these acts? The sole answer is pride. Americans…retaliate…as if they were always right.
Print
Digg
StumbleUpon
del.icio.us
Facebook
Yahoo! Buzz
Twitter
Google Bookmarks
Google Buzz
LinkedIn
MSN Reporter
MySpace
Orkut
Ping.fm
Reddit
RSS
Slashdot
Technorati
Tumblr
Webnews.de
Wow. That is a pickle and a tragic one at that. Will you get any trouble for talking to him about this sort of thing? Ideally you could just get him to come over here and we could have dialogue with him.
Popular Mechanics did a story on it and pretty much debunked every theory on how and why the buildings came down the way they did.
Although I don’t think they addressed the aspect of Bush’s so called connections with the Saudis…
I dunno, “good boy” or not, I’d be awfully tempted to go the “beat some sense into him” route…
“Ideally”, but wouldn’t work.
I’m not going to force it on him. I’m going to tell him what it is, and give him the option of reading it or not. The essay itself was not one he submitted to be graded, so he knows it has no effect on that.
I just put excerpts from his essay in the post. Obviously this “Loose Change” bullshit really convinced him.
voz, I did remember the Popular Mechanics article — anyone have a link?
Here:
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html
And, it’s a good thing he’s taking a writing class. Now I want to beat some grammar into him as well.
Since he is a cool, disconnected teenager facts might not help, so use this:
There is not 9/11 conspiracy you morons
By Maddox and the Greatest Page in the Universe. It even has the link posted by Jake and some others. Its also snarky, cynical and vulgar. Probably the perfect tone for a 17 year old.
Oh, I should also note it addresses Loose Change directly.
Tell him it is an absolutely fabulous work of fiction.
Wankette, you ask one simple question: Why?
Asking “why?” is a powerful tool. Most conspiracy theories breakdown, as they never secure one pillar of the trifecta of investigation: motive. They may make vague suppositions and innuendo, but they never provide details.
What was Bush’s motivation?
What was the motivation of the Bin Laden family, allowing a member to be hunted and receive blame?
What was the motivation of those members of the armed forces or intelligence community who participated in the hoax, sworn this country?
What were the motivations of those other parties who supposedly participated?
What, precisely, was this conspiracy suppose to achieve?
How, precisely, was it supposed to achieve it?
Has it achieved it and if it hasn’t, why? How does this compare with the supposed success of the conspiracy?
What is his personal estimation of Bush? If he believes to be incompetent or generally not bright, how does he reconcile that with a role in orchestrating a conspiracy? How does he reconcile later embarrassments, leaks and incompetence laid at the feet of the administration?
If there is enough evidence to so clearly assert a conspiracy, why is there not enough evidence to conclusively expose it? Is the evidence clear, or is it too circumstantial and fragmentary? Have you used evidence from both sides of the argument? Has he attempted to work this argument from the other side?
Has he thought of the moral implications of accusing large groups of people and considered who they are or what they do (such as the armed forces)? Has he explored the legal and political ramifications of instigating such acts? Does he know how power structures might have stopped the president from doing what he’s been accused of?
All excellent questions, but in case none of those register, Brooke will be heading to your neck of the woods a few days before I follow for Christmas. I’m sure she, with friends who died in the Towers and other first responder firefighter friends who lost their lives, would looooooove to be a guest lecturer and/or ass-whuppin’ administrator/sense beater.
Oi. After reading that I’m with the beat some sense into him route. Sounds like it may take a lot of beating too.
I agree with David. Why is the ultimate question on conspiracy theories especially given that we know this was being planned more than 4 years before Bush was in office.
Also since we are dealing with a 17 year old might I suggest sending him to http://www.southparkstudios.com/guide/1009/ and having him watch the Southpark episode on “truthers” called “Mystery of the Urinal Deuce”. It does a really good job poking holes in the conspiracy.
I put a clip of the episode in down below. Get a clue, a raging clue.
Also, point him to this book. Hell, buy a copy for him and give it as a Christmas gift.
Wanks, what I would tell him is that while you appreciate his intellectual curiosity, if he’s really interested in the truth, then he should be seeking the truth without any political or idealogical bias.
Point him to the Popular Mechanics link Jake provided, and/or this link from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) website, both of which do an excellent job of debunking the truthers point-by-point.
You’ve got your hands full … the trick is to lead him to figure things out for himself. Start with how information can be manipulated (see Michael Moore for some good evidence here). Then discuss how the government, so full of leaks it couldn’t float on a good day, could keep all of these major revelations silent …
Oh, heck. I have no idea how to help. This, to quote The One, is above my pay grade.
I have nothing to add but if anyone has the title of a
decent book on the history of Al Qaeda and radical Islam it might help.
Wanks help him be critical in his thinking. Explain Occams Razor
to him as well. But David has a good start for you.
Steph,
Occam’s Razor was created by George Bush, Karl Rove, and Haliburton as a way to try and deny their culbability in the 911 attacks.
YOU ARE A TOOL!
Stephanie,
I’m jes’ messin’ with ya!
I’m not being serious.
Or am I . . .
Nah, I’m joking.
Or am I serious . . .
Excuse me?
It’s a joke, Steph.
Breathe in, breathe out…
He’s got an eloquence and originality that is rare in anyone, let alone a 17-year-old.
Wanks, the above example from his essay does not encourage me to believe that statement. He has clear prose, but eloquence is lacking when he’s using intellectual crutch-words picked from a PC grab bag…
Also, this statement:
In essence, he’s saying that Americans choose to believe, despite clear facts demonstrating otherwise, that an otherwise random person committed acts of terrible violence against the United States? Or is he saying that Americans choose to hate this person without any valid reason, randomly ascribing the terrorist acts to him after picking his name out of a hat? Would it be possible to point out to him that most of the American population would be wearing helmets and needing drool cups if that were the case?
So why is it that we, [Progressive] America, put our emphasis of hate and discrimination around [Bush] who hasn’t committed these acts? The sole answer is pride.
You’d think that if Bush were willing to kill 3,000 Americans for a ploy to get (what? oil again?) he’d have been willing to plant weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, too.
Steven Dutch, a professor of natural and applied sciences at the University of Wisconsin (Green Bay) has a couple of essays addressing some of the more technical aspects of 9/11 truthers’ claims:
Nutty 9-11 Physics, and Really Nutty 9-11 Physics.
Those are great sites, my new favorite line to tell a 9-11 conspiracy screwhead:
“Apparently, the melting of steel signifies the use of explosives or thermite cutting charges. But the purpose of either is to cut steel, not melt it. A controlled demolition simply does not produce large amounts of molten steel. You might as well argue that all the concrete dust shows the buildings were taken down by an army of gnomes armed with grinding wheels.”
Mike,
You are right, Dutch knocks the “Bush Caused 911″ theory out of the ball park:
“But if Dubya orchestrated a massive conspiracy to bring down the World Trade Center as a pretext for launching a Mideast War, why didn’t he pull off the far simpler trick of faking the discovery of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq? Think of it – his biggest political liability could have been avoided with a piddling investment in special effects, Bush would be seen as America’s savior, his strategy would be completely vindicated, and he’d be politically unassailable. All it would take would be spritzing an empty factory with the ingredients for nerve gas, with just enough cross-contamination to create a whiff of the real thing. Yet for some strange reason he didn’t do it.”
Oh and Kit, you weren’t supposed to quote that part from his site. That’s where I got that point.
The second one, “Really Nutty 9-11 Physics” is funny.
Few things are more enjoyable than an intelligent person with a smart-aleck attitude. Why else would I come HERE?
I just want to make it clear that Dutch’s (biting) humor is directed at truthers, not any of the events themselves.
Wanks –
A few more questions to ask him, in addition to the excellent list posted by David:
Re the bin Ladens:
1) How large is the bin Laden family in Saudi Arabia?
2) Does every member of the bin Laden family share Osama’s radical views?
3) If the answer to #1 is “huge” (which it is) and to #2 is “no” (also true), why does he assume that a connection between Bush and a member of the bin Laden’s necessitates a conspiracy?
4) What other American politicians have had dealings with members of the bin Ladens?
5) Are these additional American politicians part of the conspiracy? Why or why not?
Re the “cover up”:
1) Please explain the following terms used in metallurgy: melting point, temper and anneal.
2) What happens to steel when it is detempered? That is, how does steel’s structural properties change when detempered?
3) Can he locate any pictures showing pieces of the airliner that crashed into the Pentagon?
4) Can he find any examples – say Air Force testing – where they slammed a fighter – say, an F-4 Phantom maybe – into a solid structure at high speeds and, if so, what was left of the airframe after this test?
There are more, of course, and the Popular Mechanics piece is an excellent guide. But, I always like asking these sorts of people the pointed questions, making them find the answers and then waiting to see if the light bulb goes off.
Wanks… I would grade his paper on its writing quality… If it’s well-written — at an A level give him a B or B+ — deducting it for critical thinking and then sit him down and explain why you don’t buy his thesis. If he were a senior student I might give him a C/C+ unless he used only one source. Yes the topic is daffy…, but he is 17 — if he looks up allegedly legitimate sources and they — the so-called experts — tell him this is plausible then it’s not surprising that this bullshit argument springs forth. Help him separate the wheat from the chaff.
The kid’s 17 — many of our readers here at Threedonia might not have been quite off that deep end, but they are recovering liberals who have lost their empathy for a politically lost soul. If you squash him you lose him ideologically forever perhaps.
I know these truthers get everyone all steamed up—and rightly so—but don’t you think Wankette’s due a little faith in her judgment regarding this kid? She says he’s worth the effort, that’s good enough for me.
And it’s not fair to judge someone’s writing ability based on a couple of paragraphs of an essay that was not even submitted for a grade. She’s seen what he writes and she’s in a position to judge. Cracking on his prose is a roundabout way of insulting his teacher.
A title does spring to mind by a guy I know sort of..Richard Minitier wrote a book called Losing Bin Laden, and he had some impeccable sources. The kid just needs to expand his thinking and understand that he knows very little about the whole issue he is writing on here. But one doesn’t have to be harsh…..the teacher/student relationship and being a mentor helps. Do a reverse Zinn on him. The Popular Mechanics article is a start, and then build. Also building an appreciation for the US would help. Maybe introduce him to a veteran or two? (another good way to help mentor a kid is introducing him to a guy who has seen history up close)…..just another thought.
I haven’t read it myself, but “The Looming Towers” is the book that the long-lost ABC miniseries “The Path to 9/11″ was based on. Author’s name is (Lawrence?) Wright.
It’s the “book-club-book” that’s been selected over at Commentarama. They’ll be discussing it at the end of January.
Looming Tower may be the single most important book written in the last decade.
That and MAD magazine’s parody of 24.
Daniel Pipes has some fascinating titles that could be suggested:
The Path to God, Islam and Political Power,
Minatures
and
Greater Syria
Introduce him to David McCullough’s books, Paul Johnson,and for more on Islam Robert Spencer.
I would suggest: “Faith, reason, and the War Against Jihadism: A Call to Action by George Weigel. To mind the clearest expression of why this fight of anyone out there — and it’s only about 200 pages (though it’s a dense 200.)
Love me some Robert Spencer. Required reading!
Wanks, nothing I can add to these great comments…they’ve got it covered. Just want to add my good wishes that the kid might be turned around. You can do it!
I gotta get me Robert Spencer’s stuff. Id like to read his Jihad for Dummies (Crusades included).
My favorite of his was his biography of Mohamed.
Thats on my list..for Christmas.
Thanks everyone for contributing, and thanks Mike! you’re right — the potential I saw in his prose was nowhere in this essay (interestingly enough!!) — proof, I thought, that these weren’t Anthony’s words; that he was parroting other people; funny how “wacky” sounds the same across the board!
Yeah, this pretty much sums it up…
I’m late to this, but what about the 9/11 Commission Report? Or is that considered part of the “cover-up”? When I taught public school, I remember kids saying Bush was behind 9/11. They said a lot of crap. They thought Jay Z was a great rapper and wearing your waistband below your butt was a good idea. Kids think a lot of things. They think they know everything (Crap, did I just say that!?). We’d talk about it, but generally they just wanted to see what I would say, try to get a reaction out of me. He might be wanting to start a dialogue with you because he looks up to you. He might have submitted something incendiary to get your attention or provoke you. He might have a crush on you. I would ask why he chose this topic and go from there.
Ohhhhhh Karen: they all have a crush on me.