Support 911Blogger


Huffington Post: Muslims believe 9/11 to be an inside job. "How could so many Muslims be so wrong?"

link:  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/martin-varsavsky/why-the-majority-of-musli_b_748851.html

Martin Varsavsky

Posted: October 4, 2010 07:05 AM

Why Do So Many Muslims Believe 9/11 Was a Conspiracy?

This morning I read that a great number of Muslims believe that 9/11 was a conspiracy created by the US government to justify the invasion of Iraq. This worried me. How could so many Muslims be so wrong?

But then I thought that the U.S. government and some EU countries did lie to invade Iraq. They lied about the weapons of mass destruction conspiracy and the connections between Saddam Hussein and 9/11.

So if I were debating with any of those Muslims who believe that 9/11 was an excuse to invade Iraq, I would have to say "9/11 was not a US/Israeli conspiracy, there is tremendous irrefutable evidence that it was a terrorist attack perpetrated by Saudi terrorists and led by Osama bin Laden." And that part is true.

But then I would have to explain other painful truths. I would have to admit that we invaded Iraq despite knowing that neither the 9/11 terrorists nor the WMD where there. That in our countries we created the false impression that Saddam was behind 9/11 and that many believe this lie now. And this is one weak side of the debate.

If we can create conspiracies about WMD and "Muslim terrorism," as if all Muslims act together (Saddam=Osama=Ahmadinejad), attack and destroy the wrong country (Iraq), torture their citizens, post pictures of how we torture them in Abu Ghraib, take some to Guantanamo and approve their torture, share the blame in the killing of 25 times more innocent civilians than those who died in 9/11 and admit to using white phosphorous (chemical weapon) attacking Fallujah; if we can commit such atrocities, why is it so farfetched that most Muslims believe that 9/11 was perpetrated by US and Israel in order to invade Iraq and control the second largest oil reserve in the world?

Moreover, in this Wikipedia entry you will be surprised to find out that one third of Americans actually AGREE with the majority of Muslims. They also believe in 9/11 conspiracy theories even though 2% of Americans are Muslims.

Can our argument just be "yes, we do horrible things but not precisely the horrible things you believe we do"? My hope is that, during this decade, we will truly gain the high moral ground against terrorism and cooperate with moderate Muslims to eradicate Muslim extremism without violating human rights in the region. In the end, terrorism is an industry that feeds on angry young men. We have to make it much harder for Muslim terrorists to recruit. As we have been behaving over the last 10 years, it is not surprising that terrorism has greatly increased since 9/11.

Editor's Note: An earlier version of this post claimed a majority of Muslims believed 9/11 was a conspiracy. The source material linked to in this post does not substantiate that claim, and thus, that claim has been removed from the post.

 

Follow Martin Varsavsky on Twitter: www.twitter.com/martinvars

 

There is TRUTH slipping through the comments.

There is TRUTH slipping through the comments.

Why do so many people with their own brain

think 911 was an inside job?

If you read my comment in the above post...

I talk about Morgan Reynolds. Obviously, that is a comment from the weekend of the Emergency Truth Convergence in Washington D.C., and long before he exposed himself.

I do not endorse Morgan Reynolds.

Truther Advocate

Many leftists blogs, like the Huffington Post and the DailyKos, forbid the discussion(i.e. promotion) of 9/11 Truth. Jesse Ventura wrote an article for the Huffington Post addressing the controversy surrounding 9/11 and it was deleted forthwith.

Martin Varsavsky comes right out and questions how could so many Muslims be so deluded in thinking the US Government could have played a part in the 9/11 attacks. Then in the rest of the article he seems to give us the best lines.

Any writer promoting 9/11 Truth would be banned from the Huffington Post instantly. So he comes out and says he's against 9/11 Truth, then proceeds to give the best arguments to the our side.

I wonder how many secret truthers there are in the MSM who remain silent due to fear of reprisal?

p.s. "This morning I read that a great number of Muslims believe that 9/11 was a conspiracy created by the US government to justify the invasion of Iraq. This worried me."

The tone of the rest of the article makes it clear that he isn't worried a bit.

Huff Post is not leftist

"Many leftists blogs, like the Huffington Post and the DailyKos"

Those are liberal sites. As in largely supportive of the Democratic Party. Leftists don't read those sites. By leftist, I would include Z magazine, Counterpunch, and TruthDig (to some extent). True leftists are anti-capitalist, and have a class and systemic analysis of the issues. Huff post, et al, are about as opportunist as you can get when it comes to the power structure. They will never admit 9/11 was an inside job because it fundamentally clashes with their world view, one that is supportive of state power and corporations.

The challenge I have is convincing leftists that 9/11 is important to organizing a movement, not just a single issue movement, but one that is dedicated to challenging the corporate state. The key reason that leftists don't like "truthers" is that they see it as a single issue movement. It is in the interests of both the left and the 'truth' movement to work together, IMO. They need each other.

Counterpunch has been

openly hostile and insulting about the 9/11 movement. Forget them. They are controlled.

I still support CounterPunch writers

You are referring to Alexander Cockburn. Yes, he is hostile to addressing issues of 9/11. But the site as a whole has very good writers, many of whom do address 911, Paul Craig Roberts for one. Again, like I implied above, I don't throw out the analysis of a good site simply because a few writers are hostile to 9/11.

Your argument is exactly the same argument Cockburn makes about 9/11; namely, forget the 9/11 truth movement, and to paraphrase, they are narrowly focused single issue crazies. Of course I don't believe that, but that is a dangerous narrative, and one that should be countered at every possible turn.

This divisiveness is actually tearing apart KPFA in the Bay Area. It's unfortunate.

I couldn't DISagree more.

The censoring alternative press has done more damage to the 9/11 truth movement than any politician or msm outlet anywhere.
Had it done its job, the world would know the truth about 9/11 by now, much as it knows the truth about WMD, an issue the alternative media DID responsibly treat.
Counterpunch and the rest are part of a true conspiracy, one that is in my mind criminal. Those who want the wars and occupations and the Patriot Act and all the rest are using these outlets to crush the truth. It is part of their scheme...............they KNOW that there will always be opposition to their plans, and they figure, let the antiwar types have their say. They will only be preaching to the choir on websites that the general population doesn't even know about.
But they see the 9/11 truth movement as something that could take off into the general population. So they figure, ok, let the alternative media do their thing yapping about war and wiretapping and bad things Israel does, but we will NOT let them mention 9/11 truth.
How do they control these sites? Foundational support. All of these sites take money from big foundations, and if you follow the money up the scale, it reall comes from the big global corporate elites, such as the Rockefeller foundation, Ford, GE, pro Israel groups, etc.
So our beloved alternative media is tainted, and worse: criminal. They purposely defraud the American people about the most important single event in our history.

KPFA? Let it die. DO NOT SUPPORT it if it turns out the anti truthers win. They have an agenda, and that agenda, in the end, will keep the antiwar movement right where it is: moribund.

That's simple

Because everybody wants to blame a group they don't belong to for all of their problems. Think about it. It applies to Non-Muslim Americans blaming Muslims and vice versa.

Correct SnowCrash

United we stand, divided we fall. It's the old divide and conquer game. Lets not let it happen here.

..."tremendous irrefutable evidence" Martin?

...really?
I don't know where to start here. First, Martin gives scholarship a bad name. What good is all that education with a brain full of noise and hard-wired myth?
Second, Huffpo is "liberal", or whatever. I'm not concerned with the label but more with the fact that they fail the 9/11 Truth test. Liberal in the sense of Democratic Party?--sure they are--solid Corporatist and Pro-Empire all the way. That site makes me nauseous. I feel like I need to go outside and hose-off my computer after visiting Huffpo.
And…MARTIN, perhaps you would please explain to me about the 19 Arabs with box-cutters. Also…MARTIN, I have some questions about the Easter Bunny.

Clueless

'My hope is that, during this decade, we will truly gain the high moral ground against terrorism and cooperate with moderate Muslims to eradicate Muslim extremism without violating human rights in the region.'

Here is such a rich example of the kind of empty-headed twittishness on display at Huffington Post that has turned the term 'liberal' into such an epithet these days. Who the hell does he think has most benefited from Muslim extremism and has no wish to see it 'eradicated'?

Ahh, but what difference does it make how grounded in reality it is, so long as it sounds noble and righteous.

I agree with your analysis of the situation

It's more like " the hope that another decade can go by and once again the world will believe that the US is a moral country and we can continue our agenda with the continued cooperation of moderate muslims."

There are no more liberals just the lame moderates who are afraid to rock the boat and lose their place.

A true liberal option is always "off the table"!