The River

Thursday, February 22, 2007

Crimes, and the columnists who explain them

or, excuse me while I try to distract the "real" progressives

John Doraemi at Crimes of the State has an
excellent post analyzing the below Silverstein quote while making some important points about the need for credibility for citizen journalists.

I recommend his blog, which focuses on the monstrous crime committed on 9/11. His answer to George Monbiot's UK Guardian put down of 9/11 skeptics is full of facts that should get the attention of all conscientious people.

Two points about Monbiot, and the similarly dismayed,and insulting, Alexander Cockburn: Both seem unaware of WTC 7, and both feel the need to resort to name-calling. Usually, if you are confident in your position, you don't stoop to that level.


Lots of good responses to Monbiot, but I thought this one particularly good:


February 20, 2007 10:17 AM

'Charlie Sheen is "highly credible", is he? A man whose expertise adds great weight to the 9/11 conspiracy theory.'

This is indicative - the dude lists quotes from 40 people, including numerous ex-army, intelligence analysts, politicians and structural engineers, many of them PhDs, then adds Sheen at the end and everyone ups and says 'lawl Charli sheen?!? he's just actor lol!1!' If you can't see how this makes you a fool... colour me unsurprised.

People keep likening truthers to creationists, but really; which side's argument rests more or less entirely in appeal to authority? - My holy book says it, therefore it's true. NIST says it, therefore it's true. It only takes a reasonably educated mind and a willingness to comprehend reality however ugly to dismiss both silly myths - Genesis and the OCT.

Yes, many, praps even most, of the alternative theories are wild - that's what happen when most of the evidence is withheld. But I don't think anyone with a functioning brain could look at the OCT and say 'it makes perfect sense, I can't think why anyone wouldn't believe it.' And if you accept that, what type of brain does it take to *not bother looking* at the OCT and then say 'it makes perfect sense, the telly told me so. You're dumb lol'?

And as for georgie - yes, it must be painful that so many of your pet causes fall by the wayside because people fixate on things as glamorous as 9/11. But when you bemoan the lack of response to the 'spy network feeding confidential information from an arms control campaign to Britain's biggest weapons manufacturer, BAE Systems', I feel you miss the point - it's too easy. Nobody disagrees, nobody has anything to debate. You mean the arms industry is up to no good, have their own private intelligence services and receive full support from reigning governments? Holy wow, I never would've guessed. Yawn. The whole point about 9/11 is that it's BIG; and we've got a foot in the door. All we need is for people like you to clean the dust off your eyelids and help us heave it open - then, maybe, probably by consequence even, we can tackle the petty, everyday crap you're always harping on about.

You missed the most important comment; easy to do when there are over 500:

Gee, here’s me thinking that Monibot ‘encouraged’ those loons to look into 9/11 Skeptism?

Oh he did, an article he posted on his website on the 25th of September 2001.
Oh look it seems he has deleted that article. Don’t worry we have a spare..
Nice catch on the Monbiot flip-flop, Anon.

WTC 7 is the Rosetta Stone of 9/11.
There some are weird tropes to that 9/11 as a distraction narrative. None of the left wing causes were going particularly well prior to that. There was fighting and and enormous efforts, but reactionaries were clamping down effectively and a good bit of the left had cut its own throat during the Clinton years. Hell, that's when the term "cruise missile left" was coined.

The anti-neoliberal movement was fighting hard, and still is. They don't get as much support as they used to, however, and I blame a good bit of that on the celebrity liberals who act just like people struggling for market share. Behind all this denigration of the "conspiratorial" left there appears to be some concern over careers and authority, Bruce.
Thanks for the post, Bruce. Incompetence is insufficient to explain 9/11. At the very least, this administration allowed it to happen on purpose.

Monbiot isn't the first authors I otherwise like (Matt Talibi, Matthew Rothschild) to directly insult ME by claiming that if I don't think the case is closed, I must be with the nut-jobs.

My question would be "why do otherwise intelligent columnists go blind and deaf when looking at the facts of 9/11?"
Thanks all for your comments and links.

Scruggs, what does make sense re: distraction and 9/11 is how much it has relieved the pressure from the growing anti-neoliberal movement (Seattle and Genoa being two examples of real impact from the pre 9/11 days). In a society of the spectacle, it's imperative that you produce, and thereby control, your own. I fear another production is on the way.

Michael, I too find it hard to believe these writers dismiss millions of potential readers. In my opinion, they are exhibiting a lack of character, but, jeez, haven't they seen the polls on 9/11 skepticism?
Post a Comment