Bad Memories

Made in response to Naomi Wolf, and Dave Lindorff's recent statements.

The video isn't working.

The video isn't working.

Please...

Spread this around, and vote it up...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Qk3JaqhQu4&e

Thanks.


Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? Do we deserve to know how and why 9/11 happened?

Great one Jon Let's find

Great one Jon

Let's find Peace

Awesome.

This is what its going to take. This type of fighting will prove invaluable in our time of victory.

The trance continues to hold up.....one day through people like

Jon it may be broken!

Thanks and regards John

9/11 24/7 UNTIL JUSTICE!!

Excuse me, who said we are the conspiracy theorists?

The term conspiracy theory is a rationale for denial.
The one-sided use of the term «conspiracy theory» is a way of begging the question: conspiracy theory means crackpot theory. «We don’t have to look at this, because we have labeled it a conspiracy theory.»
I think we should take a closer look at this term because it is the only spiritual tool the deniers use against us.
By labeling the obvious - that 9/11 was an inside job - a conspiracy theory, Wolf and Lindorff don’t have to consider the evidence. They stick to a priori assumptions, “before the evidence”, whereas we are arguing a posteriori, “after the evidence”. They are rather the theorists in this case, we are more like empiricists. (In the philosophy of science, empiricism emphasizes those aspects of scientific knowledge that are closely related to evidence, rather than resting solely on a priori reasoning, intuition, or revelation.)

FIRST:
What does the term «conspiracy theory» really mean? In the JFK-case, the conspiracy theory was opposed to the lone nut theory. In that case «conspiracy» didn’t mean more than a plot.
However, the term «conspiracy theory» has a more sinister historical origin, it means a paranoid theory that secret societies are undermining society. First it was the Templar Knights, then the Rosicrucians, then the Jesuits, then the Illuminati, then the Jews, then the communists and so on. Those phantom conspiracies were all subversive. The conspiracy theory was about subversive forces.
It was not considered conspiracy theory that the people in charge were conspiring against the people, i.e. nobody labeled the communists «conspiracy theorists» although they believed there was no such thing as a western democracy. Being in charge, possessing the power, using it, was not considered conspiracy.

SECOND:
Let me point out that conspiracy thinking can be denial in itself. I think Michael Morrissey has a point here: «It is absolutely absurd to entertain this idea that "dark forces" are manipulating the government. This is a preposterous logical error (read my "Deep State Doublethink" in my blog), but it will not go away because of the denial and/or complicity factor. I'll sum it up again in one sentence: Even if the "deep state" (to use Peter Scott's term for the various characterizations of the oh-so-complicated and ever shifting mysterious evil forces) could have pulled off 9/11, if there WERE another, "public state" (as Scott and presumably this Russian and others believe), this "public state" would have long since done what it was supposed to do and would have solved the crime.»
It is a kind of denial to suppose that we are living in democracies. The government is a government for Wall Street and Pentagon/CIA, which is more or less the same, or as Mike Ruppert said it: The CIA is Wall Street.
There is only one party, the money party.
Power abuse or conspiracy? We know that Noam Chomsky, who never will go near a ”conspiracy theory” in the USA, has written the preface of December 13 : Terror Over Democracy by Nirmalangshu Mukherji; according to Chomsky it is obviously very good to promote ”conspiracy theory” as long as it is in far away India. Or should I say, it doesn’t occur to him that it is a conspiracy theory, as long as it is about India, because then it is only about power abuse. Does Chomsky believe that India is a lesser democracy than the USA?

THIRD:
We should not deny that there is a conspiracy craze going on and that not all of it can be attributed to COINTELPRO and disinformation efforts. Dan Brown’s The Da Vinci Code is a bestselling book! In the amusing ourselves to death era, the entertaining lies are often more popular than the boring truths. And that is my point: Conspriacy theories are entertaining lies, the opposite of boring truths. We see promoted theories about androids from outer space who are cooperating with the government, all kind of X-files-bullshit, all kind of paranoid fantasy, all kind of mystical shit.
Even among truthers we sometimes find people who believe in the rightwing extremist Illuminati-theory. I will therefore stress that this phantom culprit was used to cover up the Robert F. Kennedy assassination by people from John Birch society. (See William Turner & Jonn Christian The Assassination of Robert F. Kennedy.) (And see James W. Douglass JFK and the Unspeakable p. 202-203 about Thomas Arthur Valle and John Birch Society.)
Dark forces are mere TOOLS, not "the power behind the power".

THEORY OR PROOF?
To a conspiracy theory we would expect a certain degree of theory. But please observe that in the debate David Ray Griffin vs. George Monbiot, it is the latter, defending the official theory, who insists on discussing theory, whereas Griffin insists on discussing evidence; Monbiot wants to debate a priori, Griffin a posteriori, or as Kevin Ryan exclaimed in debate with the so called 'skeptic' Michael Shermer, we need less speculation here and more facts!
In The War on Truth, Nafeez M. Ahmed writes that he will not discuss any theory, just give the facts, «I deliberately avoid indulging in too much theoretical speculation of any kind, preferring instead to focus on the collation and documentation of relevant facts and credible reports, while highlighting their obvious implications» (Preface p. XIII-XIV).

CONSPIRACY OR EXERCISING POWER?
To a conspiracy theory we would expect a high degree of conspiracy.
But is ours a conspiracy theory, or a power abuse theory?
Is it a conspiracy theory, or a compartmentalization theory?
Loyalty is not conspiracy, obedience is not conspiracy, division of labor (compartmentalization) is not conspiracy, a command structure is not conspiracy, security agreement is not conspiracy, cowardice is not conspiracy, mass hysteria is not conspiracy, conformity pressure is not conspiracy, parrot repetition of the common opinion is not conspiracy. It is not conspiracy that TV-moderators and newspaper editors don’t have the audacity to insult high offices with crimes incompatible to democracy. Endemic corruption is not conspiracy.

THE OFFICIAL CONSPIRACY THEORY IS A ‘CLASSICAL’ ONE
Hitler believed in a Jewish conspiracy against Germany.
The confession video of Osama bin Laden from December 2001 is as authentic as The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Both were made by secret services, the Osama-confession probably by some secret services of the Pentagon or the CIA, the Zion-confession by the czarist Okhrana.
When it comes to cosmo political conspiracy, the official conspiracy theory is about a Muslim conspiracy to take over the world, and certain terrorist acts are seen as the impatient, activist, violent utterances of a long term strategy, "they hate our freedoms", a long term strategy just like the one Hitler attributed to the Jews.
The paranoid aspect of conspiracy thinking applies perfectly to the official one. Even breastfeeding mothers face problems taking breast milk on board on airplanes, because of some paranoid security rules. Public paranoia, there you got the pathological official conspiracy theory.
The conspiracy theory is that Osama and the muslims are conspiring against the West.
Calling attention to the use of agents provocateurs (like al-Qaeda), however, is not and has never been a conspiracy theory.

Great video Jon

"In his prime-time press conference last week, which focused almost solely on Iraq, President Bush mentioned Sept. 11 eight times. He referred to Saddam Hussein many more times than that, often in the same breath with Sept. 11."

http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0314/p02s01-woiq.html

Thanks everyone...


Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? Do we deserve to know how and why 9/11 happened?