"Let's Roll" / MIHOP: Sides of the same coin?

[Robb]

Poll question: "Let's Roll" / MIHOP: Sides of the same coin?

Had a really interesting discussion yesterday. We were talking about the psychology of 9/11's aftermath. He suggested one of the biggest reasons the "Let's Roll" mythology spread so strongly, and had such a profound affect on most Americans, was that it represented a possibility of control, on a day when everything seemed so out of control -- whether standing on the street in Manhattan or glued to the TV in Wyoming.

His argument was, setting aside legitimate inconsistencies, the MIHOP/LIHOP/etc. theories were another manifestation of that same need, a need to define order and the possibility of control that comes from seeking a "truth"; I was reminded of the NPR guy who made a similar comment about JFK, and that the possibility that one man could kill the President and change the world was too psychologically damaging to think about.

What say you?

[gandalf]

1. "Sides of same coin" is simplifying

There is certainly a need for everyone to form of model of how the world works. This model should be possible to deal with all observations, only then one can live in psychological peace. A part of such a model could be the "Osama and his 19 guys did it".

But to accept the notion of a government that betrays its citizens, that might even accept the murder of thousands of people only in order to reach objectives important only for a small elitist group, means an extremely uncomfortable step. Why should I resort to such an uncomfortable model of the world (even if it might explain many things) if there is a model much more agreeable (like the Osama story)? Simply put, that means switching one conspiracy theory against another, but the first one would make me happier.

[Robb]

5. Well considered.

...And I appreciate the unique (for this thread) approach you took, e.g. answering the question asked. :thumbsup:

[gandalf]

6. Thanks

I've read the argument several times "that conspiracy theories are so attractive because they can explain everything" (especially newspapers use it to explain why such books are so successcul).

[impe]

2. What say me...

NSA can land a mission on MARS and remotely control some little robotic device but yet we can't remotely control highjacked planes. I don't need to establish order in order to understand the lunacy of 9-11, I just need to keep repeating the B-movie lines of "let's roll" to take me away.

[RH]

3. I never saw much doubt

that a highjacked plane could be remote controlled

The trouble is the lack of anything to show, as a matter of fact, that either of the four planes in question was ever appropriately fitted with the hardware to facilate remote control.

I have net yet even seen a sensibly specific suggestion as to when and where the opportunity to fit any of the four planes would have arisen.

[CRK7376]

4. I've been using

Let's Roll for years and years prior to 9/11. Half the time when my kids and I are coming home from the park/Walmart/off to Scouts etc...I'll say Let's Roll....now it's incorporated or trademarked or some such nonsense....Bah Humbug!!!!!