If you like this blog

Don't miss Kevin Barrett's radio shows! And visit TruthJihad.com for more...

Monday, May 3, 2010

Game-changers: Why "conspiracy" issues matter most

by Kevin Barrett, truthjihad.com

In his lecture "Is the War in Afghanistan Justified by 9/11," David Ray Griffin quickly proves that the war is both illegal and unjustified by 9/11, regardless of whether or not 9/11 was an inside job. He then spends the majority of his lecture demonstrating that 9/11 was in fact an inside job. Why?

Griffin explains that the dominant public perception of the war in Afghanistan, which excuses or overlooks that war's illegality, depends on the Official Conspiracy Theory (OCT) of 9/11. President Obama knows this. As Jason Leopold wrote of Obama's escalation speech: "The commander-in-chief repeatedly invoked 9/11, attempting to justify his plan to escalate the eight-year-old war, which calls for the rapid deployment of 30,000 additional US troops to the region by next summer."

As Obama himself put it: "We did not ask for this fight. On September 11, 2001, nineteen men hijacked four airplanes and used them to murder nearly 3,000 people. They struck at our military and economic nerve centers. They took the lives of innocent men, women and children without regard to their faith or race or station. Were it not for the heroic actions of the passengers on board one of those flights, they could have also struck at one of the great symbols of our democracy in Washington, and killed many more."

Despite 9/11 being the only thing keeping us in Afghanistan, Noam Chomsky argues in so many words that it doesn't really matter whether or not 9/11 was an inside job, and that those who focus on this issue are undermining the antiwar movement. He uses the same "doesn't really matter" argument about political assassinations, such as those of JFK, RFK, MLK, Malcolm X, and Paul Wellstone.

Chomsky is wrong, and Griffin is right. It does matter. Here's why.

The really BIG issues, the ones that get tarred with the dreaded "conspiracy" label, are the game-changers. They're the crimes the ruling elite will never be able to explain away...the crimes that, if they are exposed, will destroy that elite's stranglehold on power.

Chomsky may be right in his claim that the murder of millions of Vietnamese, Iraqis, Indonesians, and so on are vastly greater crimes than the murder of almost 3,000 Americans on 9/11...or of one American president on 11/22/63. But the former crimes are relatively easy for the criminals to explain away to the satisfaction of most of the American public. Vietnam? Sure it was awful, but we had to stop Communism...or at least we thought we did. Same with Indonesia. And even though there were no WMDs in Iraq, and things have gone very wrong there, well, Saddam really WAS a bad guy. The Taliban violates women's rights. In any case, we're just killing foreigners, as one always does in war. It's the way of the world. C'est la vie.

But once the American public knows that CIA-Mossad (or is it Mossad-CIA) killed Kennedy and the others, blew up the World Trade Center, bombed the Pentagon, and so on...the jig is up.  As George H. W. Bush said to journalist Sarah McClendon in December,  1992,  "If the American people knew what we had done,  they would chase us down the street and lynch us."

"Conspiracy" issues--the real ones, the ones that are demonstrably true--are the game-changers. That's why they are suppressed in the first place, by psychological warfare operatives brandishing the "conspiracy" label.

Is Chomsky one such psychological warfare operative? That's what Barry Zwicker suggests in his book chapter "The Shame of Noam Chomsky and the Gatekeepers of the Left."  Besides leading THE critical segment of the American public -- the educated left -- away from the game-changers discussed above, Chomsky also works overtime against all potential game-changers in the Israeli-Palestine conflict: Exposure of the treasonous Zionist fifth column that owns Congress and the media, showing that Israel is not and never has been a legitimate state, using the term apartheid to refer to Israel (a comparison that is unfair to South African apartheid), calling for an end to the Jewish regime in Palestine, and demanding  boycotts, divestments and sanctions (BDS) are some of the key game-changers that Chomsky seems to want to suppress.

Based on my own correspondence with him, I am convinced that Chomsky is either a psychological warfare operative or a madman. Last week's radio guest Jeff Blankfort also seems to lean in that direction. Tomorrow's guest, Four Arrows, disagrees. Tune in tomorrow, Tuesday, May 4th, 11 a.m. Central, NoLiesRadio.org to find out why.

19 comments:

  1. Damn straight Chomsky is a left gatekeeper. How much does he have to dismiss before people see it? Shows how blind people have been cultivated to be. And it's very instructive about who else in sheep's clothing has to be making nice while sabotaging people's awareness. Trust no one.

    ReplyDelete
  2. There does seem to be a contradiction with Chomsky over the mentioned issues and his leftist politics. He believes we should focus on eliminating nuclear weapons and also global warming because these are imminent and graver threats to mankind. Personally I think he is a front man for the powers that be and people should treat his opinions with great circumspection. These days something seems very out of character with the Chomsky we thought we knew. Although I respect Chomsky's great knowledge, I don't trust his political opinions anymore. They seem tainted by the blue and white.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Chomsky is a wholly-owned and controlled asset of the NWO.

    And as for that asshole Osama Blackbush, he knows fucking good and well that 9/11 was an inside job. Anybody who could still believe the "official" conspiracy theory at this point should be pinned to the ground and sterilized with a soldering iron. Or maybe a chainsaw.

    ReplyDelete
  4. The only thing that doesn't matter is what that sellout Noam Chomsky says.

    ReplyDelete
  5. It is a common mistake to think that if a person is wrong about some things then he or she is wrong about everything, or if they are right about some things then they are right about everything. Finding the truth is not that simple.

    In defense of Chomsky, I would say that for him to weigh in on the issues you mention would be career, if not literal, suicide. He's a high-profile person who is tolerated because he's the intellectual elite. He happily reveals a lot of US shenanigans (aka mass murder) of the past but he stays away from certain big cases of today. I've learned a lot from him over the years but I don't consult his writings on everything. "What Uncle Sam Really Wants" is one of his most illuminating articles, btw.

    Truth is a smorgasbord of sorts and no one serves up the whole thing, even if they know it. And anyone who indulges in unrestrained public whistle-blowing is likely to have their lives ruined. The examples are countless.

    "Those who expose the corporatocracy can expect to be assassinated - financially and by reputation, if not with a bullet." - John Perkins, New Confessions and Revelations from the World of Economic Hit Men 2007

    ReplyDelete
  6. So you're saying that Richard Falk, Jesse Ventura, David Ray Griffin, Lynn Margulis, Bob Bowman, Paul Craig Roberts etc. etc. (all the way down to the lowly Kevin Barrett) can get away with speaking the truth about 9/11, but that if Chomsky did he'd be assassinated?! I don't buy that excuse for a minute. For one thing, it doesn't explain Chomsky's very active attempts to disparage and discourage 9/11 truth-seekers, and to keep his followers from looking into the subject.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I heard Chomsky speak at the U of MN in 1991 -
    I was impressed by his books, but NOT by his speech. He said revolution was outdated and would never be be possible against the "overwhelming power" of the US state. I had to shout "Tell it to Mandela".

    Yes, Chomsky is either a tool or a sell-out. Compare Chomsky's pablum to the analysis of a REAL political scientist like Dr. Michael Parenti... Chomsky couldn't mow Parenti's lawn!

    Self-proclaimed "Progressive Intellectuals"
    use Chomsky-style pablum to PRETEND to be informed and engaged. The revolution this country needs will not be fought in Birkenstocks over a nice chablis. Screw Chomsky and his poseur fans!
    PS- Just found your site via WRH. I like it!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Jct: I loved Noam Chomsky's books detailing the military, media, money of the rich nations oppress the poor ones but I was always shocked that he never got into why. Why do governments act this way. "Greed" isn't an answer.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Griffin is NOT right. Please Google: "Griffin is simply wrong" and read my representativepress blog about this. Griffin writes, "in fire-induced collapses---if we had any examples of such---the onset would be gradual. Horizontal beams and trusses would begin to sag; vertical columns, if subjected to strong forces, would begin to bend. But as videos of the towers show, there were no signs of bending or sagging, even on the floors just above the damage caused by the impact of the planes." But contrary to what Griffin claims, there were indeed signs of bending or sagging. Witnesses reported it and photos document it. Griffin is simply wrong.

    Did you see my video "Facts "9/11 Skeptics" don't want you to see: REAL 911 Truth"? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGAoRrBoPRM

    ReplyDelete
  10. One of the reasons hacks like Limbaugh are saying the Greenies sabotaged the oil rig - is because men like Limbaugh KNOW what the elites are capable of.

    Every administration uses false flag operations to manipulate public opinion.

    I don't trust any of the bastards. The method has become so threadbare that nobody know who does anything anymore.

    ReplyDelete
  11. One thing you can always count on with the left in Melbourne Australia is for them to immediately apply the term `conspiracy theory` to any discussion of 911, which proves that they are on the same page as Chomsky, the corporate media, public media, western govts, and the bankster's NWO designs.

    That is to say, as 911 is a closed matter, sealed in the tomb of official truth, there is nothing new to say, and so further discussion in the present day invariably implies the introduction of unapproved material threatening to exhume for autopsy the official truth.

    Were the left to embrace 911 truth there would be no point in it continuing to exist, irrespective of other time fillers they call `issues` they may engage in, as their only real reason for being is to deflect discussion away from the elite's interventions in the stream of life which effect the desired `game changes` to its direction.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Tom Murphy seems to be the odd man out here.

    Tom, while there may have been some minuscule, virtually-invisible-to-the-naked-eye sagging, that is obviously NOT what Griffin is talking about! Any situation in which a tall building lost vertical support by natural causes would sag visibly to one side, slowly buckle, and then the portion above the loss of support would topple sideways to earth, leaving the bottom portion intact. Google "earthquake building collapse" to see buildings where this has happened. The only way a tall steel-framed building can come straight down through the path of most resistance is if all vertical support is removed by precisely timed explosions. Absent a controlled demolition, the building will lose vertical support on one side first, and it will topple to that side. The same thing will happen in a controlled demolition if the explosions are mis-timed even by a very small increment.

    ReplyDelete
  13. If someone has any actual proof - one piece of scientifically proven piece of evidence - they have not to date produced anything. Theories that have more holes than Swiss cheese being proffered by weak minds like democrats - there is more physical artefacts to prove Jesus was god or that UFOs are landing i.e. ZERO!

    Get jobs people - Pray that we can defeat the evil of terror like we are destroying drugs!


    let us not quibble over details and some discrepancies with the Executive office - these things happen in War. Let us rather huddle together and pray that if we join and increase our efforts the War on Terror will become even half as successful as our War on Drugs.

    Move on folks .....

    Let us move on from these mean spirited attacks against what historians will no doubt call a hero of the state. Mr. Rove and the Presidents need our Support in these trying times. Huddling together in prayer will go a long way to healing Amerika.

    ReplyDelete
  14. MashaAllah, Brother Kevin. May Allah grant you strength to continue telling the truth.

    http://www.iamthewitness.com/books/Albert.D.Pastore/Stranger.than.fiction.htm

    ReplyDelete
  15. 9/11 was a Mossad job.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Lively discussions of Chomsky with Jeff Blankfort (last week) and Four Arrows (this week): http://noliesradio.org/archives/category/archived-shows/kevin-barrett-show

    ReplyDelete
  17. The very first blog entry sizes it up well. Chomsky almost has to be an operative as much a propagandist as our controlled media. Chomsky's statements are simply, too often, incongruent with any reality check when it comes to 9-11 or criticism of our govenment!

    ReplyDelete
  18. > Despite 9/11 being the only thing keeping us in Afghanistan,

    That is absolutely not true. The main reason why wars are going on today is because of the failure to develop a political alternative. Huge numbers of people voted for Obama in 2008 as an antiwar statement. If you examine the percentage of blacks in the US armed forces you'll find that they join the army at a higher rate than whites. At the same time, people who have gone through black neighborhoods have told me that almost right from the first day it was taken for granted in such areas that 911 had been some kind of inside-job. For the first couple years after 911 there was a surge among the white populace of belief in the Muslim menace. By 2006 most of that had fizzled out. The war is just going on because people haven't been able to decide what to put in the place of Democrats and Republicans. Most people who are joining the army are just doing so because they can't find a job.

    There's a lot of naivete in the way that many truthers have sought to reduce general political questions to a simplistic form by making it sound as if it all just boils down to 911. But most of the people who cast votes for Obama were already expressing disillusionment with 8 years of Bush. It's not so clear how some further discovery about 911, even if it were to be made and substantiated, would really alter very much.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Left,right, up or down-irrelevant. It comes down to fact vs fiction concerning wrong and right then the proof you have to back them up. The M/O of the united states policy( and any other empire) at home and abroad is virtually the same since day one;consume without care or thought, regardless of ownership and then wrap it up as a God blessed glorious, holier than thou crusade from the city on the hill. The Iroquois or the Iraq's, it doesn't matter, it's the same encounter,slaughter and robbery. The ugly means justify the gift-wrapped ends and rah rah spin it on a rotting flag. Personally i love the; "Yes, it was horrible and we make some mistakes, but it's so much better now." BS, it's manifest destiny,narcissism and if your white your in the club, if not be prepared to be harrassed in Hebron,Chicago, Johansburg, or Rome. The lighter the skin the more 'rights' you have and the darker you are,it's not so pretty for you. Just ask a kid named HANTHALA he could write you a book on it...Now if your agree with the gnostics this conception of birth and creating us and this planet is a 'conspiricy' by a fool and a blood-thirsty rebel for their personal enjoyment. i think it's a mental institution, a school, a hell to be broken free of per the teachings of buddha...of course i could be wrong. We're all nuts because it's a nutty place because it's the bottem of the barrel....

    ReplyDelete