The Flip Flopping Of George Monbiot

Icon of the ineffective left slams 9/11 skeptics when he was one of the first

Steve Watson
Wednesday, February 21, 2007

After incurring the wrath of 9/11 skeptics the world over two weeks ago, George Mobiot has returned for more with the publication of a scathing attack in the London Guardian that is tantamount to a toddler's over the top tantrum that perfectly highlights the problem with the ineffectual left.

"Why do I bother with these morons? Because they are destroying the movements some of us have spent a long time trying to build. Those of us who believe that the crucial global issues... are insufficiently debated in parliament or congress, that corporate power stands too heavily on democracy, that war criminals, cheats and liars are not being held to account, have invested our efforts in movements outside the mainstream political process. These, we are now discovering, are peculiarly susceptible to this epidemic of gibberish."

Monbiot's ranting here highlights a great problem with modern day political activism, division.

As an iconic figurehead of lefty thought in the vain of Chomsky and Vidal, Monbiot underscores the problem with the ineffectual left in his commentary. That is they simplify world politics to the point where their actions only serve to aid those that are really ruining our planet behind the scenes by encouraging a focus on the puppets out front.

Monbiot states:

"you must believe that Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and their pals are all-knowing, all-seeing and all-powerful, despite the fact that they were incapable of faking either weapons of mass destruction or any evidence at Ground Zero that Saddam Hussein was responsible. You must believe that the impression of cackhandedness and incompetence they have managed to project since taking office is a front. Otherwise you are a traitor and a spy."

As part of their debunking critics such as Monbiot routinely use this tactic, asking "do you really think an administration as incompetent as the Bush regime could pull off such a sophisticated operation as 9/11?"

We answer "do you really believe that George Bush runs anything?" The ineffectual left loves to snicker on and on about how dumb and incompetent he is but still do not have the wherewithal to realise that the man is not in charge of anything. He takes three naps per day and cannot structure sentences, no of course we do not believe George Bush was the mastermind behind 9/11, no more so than we believe a man dying of kidney failure in a cave in Afghanistan masterminded it.

The ineffectual left is more confused and misguided than it says the "conspiracy loons" are. They know that the US government is run by the heads of the top corporations who make up the think tanks and non-elected globalist policy makers such as the Council on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral commission, yet they stay obsessed with attacking the figurehead Bush and the right who, only in their minds, are the root of all that is wrong. It's a displacement activity, something you do because you feel incapable of doing what you ought to do.

Many within the ineffectual left focus their attention on America as the evil empire, while ignoring the fact that American foreign policy is dictated by international cartels, foreign bankers and the heads of corporate global institutions.

Monbiot directly attacks the 9/11 truth movement as cowards:

"The obvious corollorary to the belief that the Bush administration is all-powerful is that the rest of us are completely powerless. In fact it seems to me that the purpose of the "9/11 truth movement" is to be powerless. The omnipotence of the Bush regime is the coward's fantasy, an excuse for inaction used by those who don't have the stomach to engage in real political fights."

The ineffectual left does not understand our movement because they cannot neatly fit us into the political categories they so dearly love to associate with on the one hand, and oppose on the other. Not caring enough to attempt to understand our outlook in a mature way, they label us as "loons" "idiots" and "morons". In this sense they play directly into the hands of the elite who wish to keep the underclasses at each others throats so as not to be faced with one central oppositional movement - The People.

When Mr Monbiot raves on about how we are a "mortal danger" to popular oppositional campaigns, he fails to take this into account. His assertion that he is a part of a REAL political fight and we are somehow admitting powerlessness, and are thus cowards, smacks of immaturity and sounds like self important snobbery.

Monbiot declares that "9/11 conspiracy theories are a displacement activity. A displacement activity is something you do because you feel incapable of doing what you ought to do." I have already presented how Monbiot himself can just as validly be shown to be guilty of the same label. What is it exactly that we ought to be doing according to the great activist George Monbiot?

Monbiot has a comfortable weekly column in a fashionable establishment lefty newspaper and spends his time jumbo jetting around the world complaining about how we're destroying it with carbon emissions.

As Kurt Nimmo so succinctly puts it:

For all his effort and that of his pals, Monbiot has managed to make the machine of progress, as he gauges it, turn in reverse. It is not the 9/11 “morons” destroying Mr. Monbiot’s “movements,” but his own enervated struggle, his own inability to understand reality and deal with it, even as he has made a career out of complaint minus substantial result.

In fact, Mr. Monbiot and his ilk are part and parcel of the “mainstream political process,” especially considering the degree of foundation funding and support his cherished “movements” receive, from the likes of the Ford, Schumann, Rockefeller, and MacArthur foundations, to name but a handful.

Monbiot’s “progressive” left was long ago sold down the river. In effect, the foundation oiled “movements” so dear to Monbiot’s heart are completely and utterly ineffectual, having accomplished dreadfully little over the decades, and instead serve as a facile target of convenience for Rush Limbaugh, Bill O’Reilly, Michael “Savage” Weiner, Sean Hannity and the neocon fascists dominating the corporate media.

Monbiot's rants, the BBC hit pieces, the labeling of truthers as "idiots" - this all shows that 9/11 is the core issue in modern society. 9/11 questions are the key to unlocking understanding of the ongoing usurpation of the free democratic Western world by the old school elite and the way in which they use theatrical political divisions to achieve their own aims at the expense of everyone else on the planet.

As a matter of fact, it wasn't so long ago that George Monbiot was asking a great deal of his own 9/11 questions.

In a piece written for the London Guardian on September 25th 2001, just after the attacks, he raised many questions regarding the real perpetrators, analysed evidence and wrote:

"When presented with material like this, I can't help suspecting that intelligence agents have assembled the theory first, then sought the facts required to fit it...For these reasons and many others (such as the initial false certainties about the Oklahoma bombing and the Sudanese medicine factory, and the identification of live innocents as dead terrorists), I think we have some cause to regard the new evidence against Bin Laden with a measure of scepticism."

Has Monbiot forgotten that he asked us to question the events of 9/11? Seemingly he has and has also attempted to memory hole any evidence of this fact.

Here is a screenshot from Monbiot's website. Note that he writes one article per week. (Also note that he calls us do-nothing cowards when we write multiple articles per day compared to his one per week). Also note that there is two week gap where the above mentioned article should be. Why has this one been removed when all his other weekly ones are intact? Methinks Mr Monbiot has done a little flip flop here and tried to cover his tracks huh? but then again I would say that because I am a "conspiracy moron".

Why is it that Monbiot now accepts the official conspiracy theory? Has he seen some evidence that we haven't? Maybe the fat nosed Bin Laden confession that multiple experts have denounced as a fake was evidence enough for Monbiot to remove his earlier article that highlighted similar questions he now so bitterly fears are ruining "real political fights".

Monbiot needs to have a long hard think about what he is doing by decrying our movement and those like it as a mortal danger to those he associates himself with. It is time for all the popular oppositional movements to wake up and stop the bickering, it is time to start respecting each other and rationally debating each other's opinions and outlooks. Only this way can we ever hope to achieve a defeat of the "new world order", the "corporate elite", the "new empire".

Whatever you and your movement wish to call it, it is the same thing, it is very REAL, and we are fighting the same fight. George Monbiot's flip flopping bears this out, and highlights the fact that if we all stick to the same course we will prevail in the end, if we deviate, divide, bicker and rant we may fail.

Mr Monbiot ends his attack piece by stating "If I were Bush or Blair, nothing would please me more than to see my opponents making idiots of themselves, while devoting their lives to chasing a phantom."

Exactly Mr Monbiot, exactly.

I'm sure Monbiot would say

that the available evidence has changed since he wrote his initial expression of skepticism.

Indeed, the evidence has changed since September 25, 2001.

Since that day, it took the Bush administration over a year to allow for an investigation of 9/11, and then only after the 9/11 families fought for it. The Commission formed was stacked with White House insiders and toadies such as Philip Zelikow and Lee Hamilton. Their investigation was inhibited because they were underfunded, and crucial evidence was destroyed.

Since that day, NORAD has produced no fewer than three different timelines, forcing the 9/11 Commission chairs themselves to acknowledge that the military lied to the commission.

Since that day, FEMA and NIST have investigated the collapses of WTC 1, 2, and 7.

FEMA concluded: "The specifics of the fires in WTC 7 and how they caused the building to collapse remain unknown at this time. Although the total diesel fuel on the premises contained massive potential energy, the best hypothesis has only a low probability of occurrence. Further research, investigation, and analyses are needed to resolve this issue."

NIST couldn't replicate the collapses of WTC 1 and 2, so it resorted to a black box computer simulation. Even then, NIST wasn't interested in the collapses: "For brevity in this report, this sequence is referred to as the 'probable collapse sequence,' although it does not actually include the structural behavior of the tower after the conditions for collapse initiation were reached and collapse became inevitable."

Since that day, the government has revealed powerful evidence from the plane crashes.

Since that day, the FBI director has proclaimed: "The hijackers also left no paper trail. In our investigation, we have not uncovered a single piece of paper either here in the U.S. or in the treasure trove of information that has turned up in Afghanistan and elsewhere that mentioned any aspect of the September 11th plot."

Since that day, the FBI has declared it has "no hard evidence" connecting Osama Bin Laden to 9/11.

Indeed, the available evidence has changed since 9/11.

i think the 9/11 commission

i think the 9/11 commission caused a LOT of people on the left to go back to sleep.

it scapegoated the administration and made them appear incompetent. I think this felt good for the left to believe, that the republican president and white house in charge fucked up so bad and didn't take the warnings seriously., I think it creates an easy out for people on the left to just finger point at people for making mistakes. , it essentially made the cia, norad and the whitehouse look very stupid and that felt good for the left.

my thoughts are the that the left opposition were very much taken into account as a serious force to contend with post 9/11. This needed to be quelled and i think the 9/11 comission is the perfect thing to achieve this opposition. It at least gives the illusion that they are doing an investigation into the facts.

George, the guardian writer probably got brainwashed by this as well. At first like many people on the left (including michael moore's statements on the day of 9/11) the reactions were very confused and questioning but as time went on they were manipulated into accepting the 9./11 commission report , including george. because remember it was non partisan (lol) ?

the Iraq study group had a similar effect. It was done under the cover of a non partisan investigatiopn of the war. In reality bush's dad and bush himself were in control the entire time. The iraq war study group concluded with a new agenda that included troop surges and other things. Now the left took this as a "criticism" of the administration and started parroting the iraq study groups recommendations as if they were truely in opposition to Bush's policy. Its such a simple trick that they do over and over again

Where has it gone... hmmmmm




Who the hell is Monbiot anyway??? I surf most leftist sites, but I'll be damned if I ever read anything by him. Sounds like someone put a lot of cash into his savings account, or something equally sinister. These people know better, and it's imperative to know the motivations behind such pronouncements from ":the Left", which appears to be pretty thoroughly infiltrated anyway. Is Cockburn a CIA agent? Could be. When asked about Dallas, his reply is that "Oswald did it all alone". The "Effete" wing of the Left like Cockburn is hard to tell from the oh-so--cultured swells at Langley. Same types.