Guardian UK: Who knows what happened on 9/11?

Who knows what happened on 9/11?

Wide-ranging conspiracies do take place, whether you or I, or Charlie Brooker, are inclined to believe it or not

Dan Hind - - Thursday July 17, 2008

Earlier this week Charlie Brooker generated the largest number of online responses to an article in the history of Comment is free. His theme was conspiracy theory in general and the 9/11 conspiracy theories in particular – and it collected more than 1,700 comments. Brooker thinks conspiracy theories console those who find reality too dull and complicated without the garnish of a hidden agenda: "Embrace a conspiracy theory and suddenly you're part of a gang sharing privileged information; your sense of power and dignity rises a smidgeon and this troublesome world makes more sense, for a time."

Brooker's line belongs to a mini-genre of attempts to explain the public's willingness to entertain conspiracy theories in psychological terms. Indeed he is very close to that stern rationalist Melanie Phillips, who has decided that, in the absence of religion, conspiracy theories satisfy "our desperate need to make order out of chaos".

But this is beside the point. Wide-ranging conspiracies do take place, whether we are inclined to believe that they do or not. It might well be consoling to believe that the CIA plots the overthrow of unhelpful foreign regimes. But it is also true. To insist that, say, the CIA had nothing to do with the fall of Guatemalan leader Jacobo Árbenz in 1954, or the overthrow of Chile's Salvador Allende in 1973 might feel terrifically sensible and sane – we can't always be seeing the hidden hand of the CIA, there's no call for reductionism. It is also, you know, wrong...


A Huge Step Forward...

YUP...this is a HUGE step forward...

...this gives cover and liscense for other media "to ramp up" some other good stuff...

...all our efforts captured and presented in "Griffin's Ripples"...

...and CERTAINLY...within other's summations-lessons-explanations...

...are all having a BIG affect...

...and we are only about 10% of the way home...

...lets keep on truckin!...

YAY Truthers!!!!!

Robin Hordon

We shall overcome.

Ya gotta love his last line;
"And while elements in the American state angle for another war in the Middle East, Melanie Phillips and Charlie Brooker will doubtless continue to heap scorn on an irrational public. Which seems a little, well, paranoid, under the circumstances."
This really is a sign that some in the media are ready to be reasonable.
Think maybe the 1700 comments may have influenced him?
Think maybe Brooker is wishing he could take back his words?
Think maybe people are starting to line up on the right side of history?
I think maybe we will win this battle.

The Rules of the Game

The MSM will disparage any conspiracy theories, except the ones they put forth themselves, as "conspiracy theories," which the public is led to understand are symptomatic of delusional thinking.

When the MSM puts forth conspiracy theories, these are never described as "conspiracy theories," lest they be associated in the public's mind with the other "conspiracy theories" the MSM seeks to discount. The MSM's favored conspiracy theories are instead and at worst characterized as the relatively innocuous-sounding "deceit" or the equivalent.

MSM-rejected conspiracy theories are almost never spelled out, much less supplied with evidentiary support, in the MSM. This is important, because many people, if exposed to alternative ideas, might actually entertain them. Instead, MSM-consumers are selectively told of the motivations why some people believe MSM-rejected conspiracy theories, but never told of other motivations for disbelieving those same theories.

Dan Hind cites Charly

Dan Hind cites Charly Brooker's article
which he claims is very close to the view of
rationalist Melanie Phillips who says that
conspiracy theories satisfy our desperate
needs to make order out of chaos.

Well, this is rather a compliment and at the same time a contradiction; not ever
claeaning your house or washing your car
would be regarded as inferior behavior.

Besides it is an insult to religious people
who are considered to think that all events
are created by God (which is not truly what
many believe - people may act independently
on earth but are later judged by God)

So according to the article we have three
groups of people:

1-people who think all world events are
just chaos

2-people who think all world events are
created by God

3-people who think all world events are the
result of man

Call me stupid, but I believe the least
intelligent group is clearly number 1.
They would not even try to bring order to
chaos, nor investigate it, look for patterns...
No, they just assume it exists, forever!
The article itself is a step forward towards 911 sceptisism, though the author claims to have "no knowledge" about what happened. Go out and look Dan!

The article does seem to suggest hope....

..1700 times! It demonstrates many are reading and reacting! I hope this trend continues!

I like your analysis Fred Hendrk. CCM (Corporate Controlled Media) types employ such specious arguments, I guess, they assume we're pretty dumbed down at this point?

Dan Hind...
...don't believe him!