left-gatekeepers

Look what made it into Counterpunch!

From Counterpunch, http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts08132008.html, on August 13, 2008, an article by Paul Craig Roberts where 9/11 is attributed fairly directly to the "Bush Regime".

Two Morons: Bush and Saakashvili
"President Bush, Will You Please Shut Up?"

By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS

...

No doubt the Bush Regime can con the American population, just as it did with Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, Iranian nukes, and 9/11 itself, but the rest of the world is not buying it, not even America’s bought-and-paid-for European allies.

...

With its Georgian venture, the Bush Regime is guilty of a new round of war crimes. What will be the consequence?

Many will reply that having got away with 9/11, Afghanistan, Iraq, and with its preparations for attacking Iran, the Bush Regime will get away with its Georgian venture as well.

Possibly, however, this time the Bush Regime has overreached.

Gatekeeper off taking a bio-break?

I figure that the Buzzflash Gatekeeper on Duty must have been of for a bio-break when they let this article slip in. ;-)

Submitted by BuzzFlash on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 10:27am. Steven Jonas

In BuzzFlash.com's Review (10/5/07) of The Road to 9/11: Wealth, Empire, and the Future of America by Peter Dale Scott, it is said in part that "Dale raises vital unanswered questions about the emergence of the secret state within a state in the United States, while avoiding the pitfall of descending into adamant conspiracy theories." I'm not quite sure what the term "adamant conspiracy theories" means. However, when one is accusing the present Republican Administration of engaging in one or more conspiracies, say to topple Constitutional Democracy here at home, the other invariably side responds with, "oh, that's just another conspiracy theory ["adamant" or otherwise] you lefties like to throw around."
...

Alternet Breaks silence on 9/11: Fisk contemplates non LIHOP option

You can view the full article here CLICKY

A special thanks to Real Truther for the heads up on this one.

Here's the meat and potatoes.

I am talking about scientific issues. If it is true, for example, that kerosene burns at 820C under optimum conditions, how come the steel beams of the twin towers -- whose melting point is supposed to be about 1,480C -- would snap through at the same time? (They collapsed in 8.1 and 10 seconds.)

What about the third tower -- the so-called World Trade Centre Building 7 (or the Salmon Brothers Building) -- which collapsed in 6.6 seconds in its own footprint at 5.20pm on 11 September? Why did it so neatly fall to the ground when no aircraft had hit it? The American National Institute of Standards and Technology was instructed to analyse the cause of the destruction of all three buildings. They have not yet reported on WTC 7.

"The problem lies in the unwillingness to recognize that your own terrorism is terrorism" a Q&A of Chomsky

Ex: What is the role of the intellectual when dealing with imperialism and are the intellectuals doing they job?

Ch: Unfortunately, intellectuals are doing their historic job. The historic role of intellectuals if you look, unfortunately, as far back as you go has been to support power systems and to justify their atrocities. So the article you read in the National Post for the production of vulgar Stalinist connoisseurs, that's what intellectuals usually do as far back as you go.

If you go back to the Bible, there's a category of people who were called prophets, a translation of an obscure word, they were intellectuals, they were what we would call dissident intellectuals; criticising the evil king, giving geopolitical analysis, calling for the moral treatment of orphans, decent behaviour. They were dissident intellectuals. Were they treated well? They were prisoned and driven into the dessert and so on, they were the fringe. The people who were treated well were the ones who centuries later, like in the gospel, were called false prophets. So it goes through history. The actual role of the intellectual has been supportive of power.

Should they do that? Of course not; they should be searching for truth, they should be honest, they should be supporting freedom and justice and there are some who do it. There is a fringe who do it, but they're not treated well. They are performing the task that intellectuals ought to perform.