The Political Logic of 9/11 Truth Activism

Z of Projecthumanbeingsfirst asked, What is the analysis underlying 9/11 truth activism?

I answered:

The reasoning is fairly straightforward: Public opinion matters--waging war effectively requires a lot of public support, and the bigger the war, the more public support is required. The current wars cannot be waged effectively without the high level of public support that 9/11 initially provided. That support has now waned. Polls showing that support for the war and for Bush is less than 30%, while 36% of Americans say 9/11 was high treason, and only 16% of Americans believe the government is telling the truth about 9/11. Given these numbers, the neocon leadership is caught between a rock and a hard place: Their only hope of recovering enough public support to avoid war crimes prosecutions, much less continue and expand the war, is another 9/11. But given the poll numbers above, it is likely that only a small minority of the public will buy into the pseudo-patriotic fervor generated by another 9/11--and as soon as it realizes that it is a minority, it too will lose the fervor, and a backlash may start, as happened in Spain after the Madrid bombings. Despite this forecast, it is possible that they might gamble desperately and try another 9/11 anyway. Thus we must deter them by spreading the 9/11 truth message--and commitments to proclaim INSIDE JOB in the aftermath of another 9/11--even further. The more widespread the knowledge and/or suspicion about 9/11, the more impossible another 9/11 and the more inevitable the final outcome: peace for the planet, war crimes trials for the war criminals. Every small effort we make now has a multiplier effect due to the fact that we are at a crucial historic moment. You can have more positive effect on the future of humanity simply by obtaining an INSIDE JOB sign and putting it in your closet, than your grandparents could have had in a whole lifetime of activism. If you devote a significant amount of time and energy to 9/11 activism, you'll be having the effect of tens of thousands of activist-lifetimes at less crucial historical moments.

Kevin

Background email exchange:

On Aug 24, 2007, at 3:11 PM, Project Humanbeingsfirst wrote:

How do you
prevent the dreaded catastrophes and the subsequent barbasism on other
civilizations by focussing on 911 truth as you are doing?

Kevin Barrett answered:

It's the only way! The perps screwed up, left lots of smoking guns
lying around, let public opinion get out of control...this is our
last chance to turn it around.
Bob Bowman, who knows the top military and foreign policy folks, says
the 9/11 truth movement is preventing the next one, by making them
fear they might not get away with it.
Here's my recent post quoting David Griffin to the same effect:

http://www.911blogger.com/node/10213

I emailed David Griffin about the INSIDE JOB plastic roll banner
project:
http://www.911blogger.com/node/10077
He wrote back:

There are ominous signs that the Bush-Cheney administration is
planning another false-flag attack---the warnings that al-Qaeda has
regained its strength and is determined to strike America again,
Chertoff's "gut feeling" that another strike is coming, and National
Security Presidential Directive 51, according to which President Bush
will assume virtually dictatorial powers if if the United States, in
his judgment, has suffered a "catastrophic emergency." The best way
to prevent this eventuality is is getting the idea that 9/11 was an
inside job into the public sphere, thereby making them fear they will
not get away with another one

Dr. Kevin Barrett

Coordinator, MUJCA-NET: http://mujca.com
Muslim-Jewish-Christian Alliance for 9/11 Truth

Author,
Truth Jihad: My Epic Struggle Against the 9/11 Big Lie

Editor,
9/11 & American Empire: Christians, Jews, and Muslims Speak Out

Please look at
http://patriotsquestion911.com

I kinda wonder

what it is in the forgoing comments that led some to give this a '0' (as is obvious from the rating). I truly believe that if someone is going to give it a '0' they ought to have the courage to state why they are doing so; i.e., what they found so offensive.

==================================================================
"There are none so hoplessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free." (Goethe)

I didn't vote on this blog but I bet I know why it's downrated

There's a growing lack of tolerance for those who choose to help keep this movement infested with the likes of Jim Fetzer, Judy Wood and Morgan Reynolds. Kevin Barrett (who is one half of The Dynamic Duo along with Fetzer and who has recently spoken out in favor of TV fakery theories) is almost single-handedly keeping these thoroughly debunked individuals on board by giving them airtime, attending their conferences, backing up their disinfo in the name of 'open-mindedness', etc. I'm guessing that a growing number of people feel that a vote for Barrett is a vote for Fetzer, Wood, and Reynolds and frankly, I would have to agree.

Please don't censor this post as it being proffered in response to a request for information.

Thank you.

Fair enough. My reasoning

Fair enough.

My reasoning for giving this article a '1' is that meditations on "political logic" should be disregarded if the author throws his weight behind the James Fetzer crowd which, to paraphrase imgstacke, keeps people in a divergent thinking mode (continuously thinking up explanations) rather than convergent thinking (ruling out implausible ideas and narrowing down the possibilities).

Barrett was correct on one point: public opinion matters. Destroying the credibility of this movement by continuing to promote implausible theories violates every tenet of political logic I can think of.

__________________________
http://www.maryland911truth.org
http://www.truthaction.org