Sunday, December 03, 2006

911 truth movement amorphous blob of decentralized intelligence gatherers

How does the saying go: “Truth goes through three stages first it is ridiculed, then violently opposed, and finally accepted”.
I guess we are still in the first stage of truth for the atrocities that happened on 9/11/01, but I believe we are in a transitory phase in to the second step. My most convincing evidence is the new Zogby poll .Although those 40% may not self-indentify as members of the “9/11 truth movement”, they are “members”. Anyone who wants the truth about what happened on 9/11 is part of the 9/11 truth movement. One does not have to have a workable theory on what happened, one can know jack shit about 9/11 as long as they desire to know more: they are part of the 9/11 truth movement.
Well if that is true, shouldn’t there be a name for people who do not want more information to be ascertained regarding 9/11/01?
Lets see if I can come up with a workable phrase by the end of this blog.
An article goes up somewhere in a mainstream news outlet: “9/11 truth movement are the same as holocaust deniers” from the Chicago Sun-Times or “9/11 truth movement is ”...Like those who often write to tell me that the Pentagon, the FBI and/or the intelligence agencies are following them, that they are mind control victims whose lives have been ruined by directed energy weapons in space or the transmitters implanted in their teeth…” from the Washington Post.When a pseudo-journalist working for a corporate “legal person” espousing the political and worldview of that “legal person” puts up pieces labeling 40% of the United States as “holocaust deniers” or schizophrenics with delusions of persecution, they are making a dumb mistake. Well they are either making a dumb mistake or for some reason using libel to hurt the movement. Do they really want to call 40% of their readers paranoid schizophrenics?
Wait a second though, the two articles I mentioned…are…not…even…articles. In fact they are op-ed opinion pieces. These individuals weren’t asked to cover this, they were forced to by having their email box filled to the the brim with links from “loose change dittoheads” and others. Probably sent there by somewhere close to 40% of the population.
What happens after such an op-ed goes up?What happens after a corporate legal person conditions the populace with a “9/11 truth movement”=holocaust deniers meme? Or creates a new term “9/11 rejectionists”(much like the label “Eco-Terrorism”, because it can be used both ways)?
Well I’ll tell you how it doesn’t go:The “rejectionists”(fuck I can’t even use the word, because it applies far more aptly to the Arkins of the world). OK the 9/11 truth movement/holocaust deniers don’t roll over and take it. They are nutcases and crazy, so there should be so few of them. The comments board on these articles light up and 30 or so comments go up. The author smiles to himself and lets out a sigh of triumph.
He has done what few others could do, he displayed the courage to say that “journalists’” willful ignorance of a story gives him gratification.Now if someone on the street told me it gave him/her gratification that no one covered stories pertaining to 9/11, I would sock that motherfucker in the face and begin stomping on their ribs before their body even hit the pavement. The more articles the better. The more information the better. There is no reason to oppose knowledge, (gonna get paranoid for a second here[but also logical]) unless the person opposing has a vested interest in the truth not coming to light. There is really no other reason a person would take their valuable time to try to stop people from learning about 9/11 and/or teaching others about 9/11.
So William Arkin signs back on to his internet, hes gonna go look at the comments on his blog over his coffee. Oh looks like a “holocaust denier” took the first comment posted by an individual named ‘no’:
“what research have you done?
it is so easy to target a group, single them out, paint them as some evil enemy with some sort of unknown motive, and defile them without providing any substance whatsoever – so much easier than doing any real research or providing any real information to your reader base.
perhaps in the least you should recognize that over half of new yorkers want a new investigation, and that the jersey girls who faught for the original investigation called the 911 commission a ‘hallow failure’.
so lets see, bush and cheney wanted to limit the scope of the investigation, waited 400+ days to allow an independent investigation, refused to testify in public or under oath, had to testify together, and on the morning of 911 the secret service didn’t move a finger after the 2nd plane hit -well after the secret service was on the call bridge aware of multiple hijackings – oh, and the commission was a lame whitewash..
yeah, those that question 911 are so stupid – give me a break.
so i ask, what research have you done?”
hmmm, Arkin thinks to himself “god damn it, stop being so reasonable. You’re supposed to be talking about aliens and mind control”Moving along to the next comment Arkin reads:
“If 9/11 is an open and shut case, why does one of the official reports say:
The specifics of the fires in WTC 7 and how they caused the building to collapse remain unknown at this time. Although the total diesel fuel on the premises contained massive potential energy, the best hypothesis [fire/debris-damage-caused collapse] has only a low probability of occurrence. Further research, investigation, and analyses are needed to resolve this issue.
(FEMA, 2002, chapter 5; emphasis added.)”
“shit” arkin says to himself “the comment has a cite! I don’t even have a cite in my entire op-ed! Thats not crazy thats just a citation, this next comment better not be a ‘conspiracy theorist’. Or at least if it is I hope they’re writing an opinion like me, because op-ed is the highest form of journalism and citations make me look bad!”
So arkin gets through 7 comments not a single one supporting him when he gets to this piece of gold written by Jon Gold:“It’s obviously a sad day in America when the people have to tell the Press what’s going on in this country.”
Sooo Arkin reads through some 24 comments before he reaches one that seems to be on his side.
”...First, I would like to thank each of you for your contributions to aiding the psychological well-being of the citizens of the United States. Second, I pray that each of you take an interest in this topic so as to lay to rest the 9/11 truth movement as merely conspiratorial nonsense, or, “bridge the threshold” and reveal, though terribly disturbing, a truth that can become the bedrock of necessary knowledge so as to truly allow for the healing of our collective psyche and secure a more prosperous humanity. ”
“Wait” arkin says “Hes not really agreeing with me, he is saying everyone should take interest and research 9/11 so we can expose it as a conspiracy theory if thats what it is.”So Arkin again begins to read, looking for one comment which agrees with him.
Bam! Got one! after almost 30 comments here is a dittohead who will repeat his phrase of “rejectionist” and say this:
”...It is time that you in the media start doing your job and point out the idiocy of this notion as well as the lunacy of those who think 9-11 was some government plot”
THere are over a hundred comments, but there are single digit comments in suport of Arkin, which brings me to my point:
This amoebaesque monolith of people with only one unifying central motivation: “Give me information on 9/11” is a juggernaut so unstoppable it could send the immovable blob) flying.
The truth movement suffers from internal struggles 24/7. Face it, they hate eachother, they’re always arguing amongst eachother this guy says planes were holograms, this lady says there were demolition charges, and this lady says there was only foreknowledge. Put those three in a room together and they’ll tear eachother apart. But give them(in the words of the PNAC) a “catalyzing” event, a common enemy. For example: Arkin, and watch the show. Much like throwing a cow in a pool of pirahnas. They are proud of the research they’ve done and what they know. They are proud that they have the courage to stand up to bullies who receive “gratification” from willful “ignorance” of 9/11.
I just wanted to write something about how proud I am of this “movement” which basically doesn’t exist. It is the most decentralized group of people that has ever been referred to as a “movement”. There are hundreds of 9/11 truth sites out there, within each one of those cites are hundreds of differing opinions on what the truth of 9/11 is.
The only thing that identifies us is that we each did our time. We each dedicated pieces of our lives to absorbing and analyzing information regarding 9/11. After a certain amount of information it becomes quite obvious that there was official foreknowledge in the white house, pentagon, and various other places.
We rush to defend eachother and Arkin’s piece is a great example.
As official foreknowledge becomes “violently opposed” rather than “ridiculed”, it will also signify a larger sea change. We are the heralds of the MSM’s(mainstream medias) collapse. We are the next generation of information consumers who have been burned out on bullshit. We will no longer pay money to buy a vehicle for advertisements(newspaper) in order to hear a corporate entity trumpet its’ worldview, through a hundred different names of “journalists”(see Lapdog ).
Instead we will report the news and we will share information with eachother. If it works it will bring democracy back to the United States. Without a few major corporations having a stranglehold on information, people may somehow start hearing THE TRUTH. Which means they will be able to hold their representatives accountable, which is a good thing no matter how you stand on 9/11.
There are 2 schools of thought on 9/11.
(1) I want a new investigation and more information from my government which refused to declassify important information the public should know.
(2) I do not want an investigation and I do not want more information on 9/11.
What do we call the people who refuse to look at the piles of shoes or piles of gold teeth what do we call them? I think the phrase is “holocaust deniers”.
So what should we call the people who refuse to look at the aug. 6th pdb, the phoenix memo, coleen rowley, vreeland, randy glass, ISI, mahmood ahmed, umar saed sheikh, Delta Oil, khalid bin mahfouz, insider trading, war games, mujahidin, etc. etc. ?Although Arkin wanted to label category (1) people as “9/11 rejectionists” and Neil Steinberg wanted to label category (1) people as “9/11 deniers”.
My only question is: Why would category (1) people be more “rejectionists” or “deniers” than category (2)?
If you don’t have the balls to investigate 9/11 then at least don’t try to libel us for desring information.
Don’t ever, EVER think you have the moral high ground, because you ignore information.Look at those pictures of the piles of baby shoes, burn that image in to your fucking retinas, never forget.
Absorb information about how it happened, how that pile of baby shoes ended up there, how the melted down jewelry found its way to swiss banks. How a madman got emergency powers and how the people didn’t stop it.
Study 9/11, absorb information about how it happened and why.How a madman got emergency warmaking powers and people didn’t stop it.
I’d like to end with William Arkin’s quote:
“Though 9/ and the blogosphere continues to rail against the mainstream media for ignoring their issue and their cause, the only gratifying element of the story is the restraint so far shown by the media in ignoring the thinly masked craziness and the Internet hype.”
”...the only gratifying element of the story is the restraint so far shown by the media in ignoring the thinly masked craziness and the Internet hype.”
Thats right my freinds, Arkin is gratified that 9/11 doesn’t receive media.
As much as that angers you, go to his article and see how he got pwned by 9/11 truthers. The movement is real and not internet hype. We have no newsletter, no fund raising, and no talking points. The truth is obvious and that is why there are so many of us. The lies of the 9/11 commission report were so blatant that 40% of United Statesians want a new investigation. We are so decentralized we don’t even know eachother’s real names, but the funny thing is we’re going to win despite the fact we have ABSOLUTELY NO FORMAL organization.
“ridiculed, violently opposed, accepted”

No comments: