197

Why Does Chris Hedges Hedge His Bets?

Edward Curtin

Revelations about the machinations of the so-called “deep state’s” conspiracies often conceal deeper truths that go unmentioned. This is quite common, whether it is done intentionally or not.

Sometimes it is intentional and is directed by the intelligence agencies themselves or their accomplices in the media, who operate a vast propaganda network. In that case, it is because the secret rulers have been caught doing some evil deed, and, not being able to fully deny it, they admit to part of it while concealing deeper secrets.

This is termed “a limited hangout.”

It is described by ex-CIA Deputy Director Victor Marchetti, author of The CIA and the Cult of Intelligence, as follows:

Spy jargon for a favorite and frequently used gimmick of the clandestine professionals. When their veil of secrecy is shredded and they can no longer rely on a phony cover story to misinform the public, they resort to admitting—sometimes even volunteering—some of the truth while still managing to withhold the key and damaging facts in the case. The public, however, is usually so intrigued by the new information that it never thinks to pursue the matter further.

For the average person, it is very hard to read between the lines and smell a skunk. The subterfuge is often very subtle and appeals to readers’ sense of outrage at what happened in the past. After the Church Hearings in the 1970s, and then Carl Bernstein’s limited hangout article in Rolling Stone in 1977, where he named the names and “outed” many major media and individuals for having worked with the CIA, many people breathed deeply and consigned these evil and propagandistic activities to the bad old days.

But these “limited hangouts” have been going on ever since, allowing people to express outrage and feel some sort of redemption is at hand in the naïve belief that the system is reformable.

It is a pipe dream induced by the smallest puff on the media’s latest recreational drug, for which no prescription is needed. The media that more openly and proudly than ever reveal their jobs as stenographers for the intelligence agencies (see my article here).

In The Iceman Cometh, the playwright Eugene O’Neill puts the delusional nature of so much public consciousness thus:

To hell with the truth! As the history of the world proves, the truth has no bearing on anything. It’s irrelevant and immaterial, as the lawyers say. The lie of a pipe dream is what gives life to the whole misbegotten mad lot of us, drunk or sober.

Truth may never have been popular, but if one studies the history of propaganda techniques as they have developed in tandem with technological changes, it becomes apparent that today’s incredibly sophisticated digital technology and the growth of screen culture that has resulted in what Guy Debord has called “the society of the spectacle” has made the manipulation of truth increasingly easier and far trickier.

News in today’s world appears as a pointillistic canvas of thousands of disconnected dots impossible to connect unless one has the desire, time, determination, and ability to connect the points through research, which most people do not have. “As a result,” writes Jacques Ellul in his classic study, Propaganda, “he finds himself in a kind of kaleidoscope in which thousands of unconnected images follow each other rapidly” and “his attention is continually diverted to new matters, new centers of interest, and is dissipated on a thousand things, which disappear from one day to the next.”

This technology is a boon to government propagandists that make sure to be on the cutting edge of new technology and the means to control the flow of its content, often finding that the medium is the message, one that is especially confounding since seemingly liberating – e.g. cell phones and their easy and instantaneous ability to access information and “breaking news.”

Then there are writers, artists, and communicators of all types, whether consciously or not, who contribute to the obfuscating of essential truths even while informing the public of important matters. These people come from across the political spectrum. To know their intentions is impossible, unless they spell them out in public to let their audiences evaluate them, which rarely happens, otherwise one is left to guess, which is a fool’s game. One can, however, point out what they say and what they don’t and wonder why.

A recent article, Our Invisible Government, by the well-known journalist, Chris Hedges, is a typical case in point. As is his habit, he sheds light on much that is avoided by the mainstream press. Very important matters. In this piece, he writes in his passionate style that

The most powerful and important organs in the invisible government are the nation’s bloated and unaccountable intelligence agencies. They are the vanguard of the invisible government. They oversee a vast “black world,” tasked with maintaining the invisible government’s lock on power.

This, of course, is true.

He then goes on to catalogue ways these intelligence agencies, led by the CIA, have overthrown foreign governments and assassinated their leaders, persecuted and besmirched the names of those – Edward Snowden, Julian Assange, et al. – who have opposed government policies, and used propaganda to conceal the real reasons for their evil deeds, such as the wars against Vietnam, Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya.

He condemns such actions.

He spends much of his article referencing Stephen Kinzer’s new book, Poisoner in Chief: Sydney Gottlieb and the CIA Search for Mind Control and Gottlieb’s heinous exploits during his long CIA career.

Sidney Gottleib

Known as “Dr. Death,” this Bronx born son of Jewish immigrants, ran the CIA’s mind control programs and its depraved medical experiments on unknowing victims, known as MK-ULTRA and Artichoke. He oversaw the development of various poisons and bizarre methods to kill foreign leaders such as Fidel Castro and Patrice Lumumba.

He worked closely with Nazi scientists who had been brought to the United States by Allen Dulles in an operation called Operation Paperclip. Gottlieb was responsible for so many deaths and so much human anguish and suffering that it is hard to believe, but believe it we must because it is true. His work on torture and mind control led to Abu Ghraib, CIA black sites, and assorted U.S. atrocities of recent history.

Hedges tells us all this and rightly condemns it as “the moral squalor” and “criminality” that it is. Only a sick or evil person could disagree with his account of Gottlieb via Kinzer’s book. I suspect many good people who have or will read his piece will agree with his denunciations of this evil CIA history. Additionally, he correctly adds:

It would be naive to relegate the behavior of Gottlieb and the CIA to the past, especially since the invisible government has once again shrouded the activities of intelligence agencies from congressional oversight or public scrutiny and installed a proponent of torture, Gina Haspel, as the head of the agency.

This also is very true. All these truths can make you forget what’s not true and what’s missing in his article.

But something is missing, and some wording is quite odd and factually false. It is easy to miss this as one’s indignation rises as one reads Hedges’ cataloguing of Gottlieb’s and the CIA’s obscenities.

He omits mentioning the Clinton administration’s dismantling wars against Yugoslavia, including 78 days of non-stop bombing of Serbia in 1999 that killed thousands of innocent people in the name of “humanitarian intervention,” wars he covered for the New York Times, the paper he has come to castigate and the paper that has a long history of doing the CIA’s bidding.

He claims that Gottlieb and the CIA’s scientists failed in their “vain quest” for mind control drugs or electronic implants that might, among other things, get victims to act against their wills, such as acting as a Manchurian candidate, and as a result, “abandoned” their efforts.

That they failed is not true, and that they abandoned their efforts is unknowable, unless you wish to take the CIA at its word, which is a hilarious thought.

How could Hedges possibly know they abandoned such work? A logical person would assume they would say that and continue their work more secretly.

On one hand, Hedges says, “It would be naive to relegate the behavior of Gottlieb and the CIA to the past,” but then he does just that. Which is it, Chris? By definition, the “invisible” government, the CIA, never reveals their operations, and lying is their modus operandi, especially with their brazen in-your-face biblical motto: “And ye shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free.”

He says the invisible deep state “failed to foresee…the 9/11 attacks or the absence of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.”

This is factually wrong and quite absurd, as is well documented. They simply lied about these matters ex post facto. He suggests such failures were due to “ineptitude,” a coy word used by numerous other writers who find reasons to deny intentionality to the “deep state.”

He therefore is implying that the attacks of September 11, 2001, a subject that he has consistently failed to address over the years even while he has written in detail about so much else, did not involve America’s “invisible government forces.”

The ineptitude explanation fails elementary logical analysis.

Does he think it was intelligence ineptitude that allowed operatives to wire the highly-secure Twin Towers and Building 7 for controlled demolition that brought those buildings down, as the testimony of one’s eyes and that of hundreds of NYC firefighters who reported explosions throughout the buildings affirm?

Ineptitude is another word for avoidance of evidence, gathered over the years by careful scholars and researchers. Ineptitude is another word for the belief “in miracles,” as David Ray Griffin has phrased it.

What does he think Colin Powell was doing at the United Nations on February 5, 2003 with CIA Director George Tenet sitting behind him when he lied repeatedly and fabricated evidence for Iraq having weapons of mass destruction to promote and justify the U.S. war against Iraq? Ineptitude? A failure of intelligence?

Chris Hedges is a very intelligent man, so why does he write such things?

Most importantly, why, when he writes about the past evil deeds of the intelligence operatives – Gottlieb and the CIA’s overseas coups and assassination of foreign leaders, etc. – does he fail to say one word about the CIA’s assassination of domestic leaders, including President John Kennedy in 1963, the foundational event in the invisible government’s takeover of the United States.

Can an act be more evil and in need of moral condemnation?

And how about the assassinations of Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy in 1968, or Malcolm X in 1965?

Why does Hedges elide these assassinations as if they are not worthy of attention, but Gottlieb’s sick work for the CIA is? Like the attacks of September 11, 2001, he has avoided these assassinations throughout the years.

I don’t know why. Only he can say. He is a very well-read man, who is constantly quoting from scholars about various important issues. His books are chock full of such quotations and references. But you will look in vain for references to the brilliant, scholarly work of such writers on these assassinations, the attacks of September 11, 2001, and the CIA’s criminal and morally repugnant activities as James Douglass, David Talbot, David Ray Griffin, William Pepper, Graeme MacQueen, Lisa Pease, and so many others.

Is it possible that he has never read their books when he has read so much else? If so, why?

As I said before, Chris Hedges, who has a passionate but mild-mannered style, is not alone in his disregard of these key matters.

Other celebrity names on the left have been especially guilty of the same approach: Noam Chomsky, Howard Zinn, and Alexander Cockburn, to name just a few (Zinn and Cockburn are dead). They have avoided these issues as if they were toxic. Nor would they logically explain why.

The few times they did respond to those who criticized them for this, it was usually through a dismissive wave of the hand or name calling, a tactic such as the CIA developed with the term “conspiracy theory.”

Cockburn was particularly nasty in this regard, priding himself on dismissing others with words such as kooks, lunatics, and idiots, even when his logic was deplorable. He liked to use ineptitude’s synonym, “incompetence,” to explain away what he considered intelligence agency failures. “Why,” he wrote in one piece attacking September 11 critics while upholding the government’s version, “does the obvious have to be proved?”

“Brillig!” as Humpty Dumpty would say. Absolutely brillig!

The CIA’s mind control operations need to be exposed, as Hedges does to a degree in this latest article. But revealing while concealing is unworthy of one who condemns “creeps who revel in human degradation, dirty tricks, and murder.” It itself is a form of mind control.
Perhaps he will see fit to publicly explain why he has done this.

Edward Curtin writes, and his writing on varied topics has appeared widely over many years. He writes as a public intellectual for the general public, not as a specialist for a narrow readership. He believes a non-committal sociology is an impossibility and therefore sees all his work as an effort to enhance human freedom through understanding. His website is edwardcurtin.com

Filed under: 9/11, latest, Other Media

by

Edward Curtin writes, and his writing on varied topics has appeared widely over many years. He writes as a public intellectual for the general public, not as a specialist for a narrow readership. He believes a non-committal sociology is an impossibility and therefore sees all his work as an effort to enhance human freedom through understanding. His website is edwardcurtin.com

avatar
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
pauleaston34
pauleaston34

No one is perfect including Edward Curtin I am sure. Before you decry the mote in the eye of another, take a look at the beam in your own.

Cesca
Cesca

I don’t accept Chris and Noam are gate keepers, they both tell too much truth to be such, just are imperfect humans, or just too savvy, to be pushed to the fringe.

Pilger/Hersh types are called conspiracy theorists now, serious journalism like Vanessa, Eva, Whitney are desperately needed, as are ppl who can speak in the msm.

Cesca
Cesca

Sorry Edward, this is just the very occasional article of yours i disagree with, we can’t agree all the time.

All that’s good to you and yours for now =)

Edward Curtin
Edward Curtin

Thanks, Cesca. Of course we can’t. Obviously I don’t agree with Chris Hedges on the issues I addressed, as you don’t agree with me, although I agree with him on many other matters. My hope is that he will respond to my critique, and explain himself. That might clear up a lot. Pax.

FrankSpeaker
FrankSpeaker

To write a whole article attempting to destroy a journalist’s reputation, especially by criticising what they HAVEN’T written about speaks huge volumes about Curtin and OffG.

Seamus Padraig
Seamus Padraig

Excuse me, Off-Graun: did I get modded for posting a comment here about Julian Assange? Two days later, it still has yet to appear. What’s going on? Should I post it again? Thanks …

Seamus Padraig
Seamus Padraig

Hmmm. Now, suddenly, I see the missing the comment above this one! I’m not sure what happened there–probably just a technical glitch. Whatever it was, thanks for your help, Off-Graun.

Seamus Padraig
Seamus Padraig

Whoa! Now that I’ve logged out and logged back in, it’s gone again. What gives?

Deschutes
Deschutes

YES! This is one of the best articles I’ve read in a long time. Hedges is a lefty gatekeeper, just like Chomsky as the article points out. I get tired of his hackneyed lectures from the podium. Always the same schtick. He has that the lame-ass ‘ineptitude’ explanation of how 9-11 happened, that Chomsky, St Clair, Cockburn and so many other gatekeeper of the left pundits recite, of course safely within the official 9-11 government narrative. The best quote from this article is near the end:

“Ineptitude is another word for avoidance of evidence, gathered over the years by careful scholars and researchers. Ineptitude is another word for the belief “in miracles,” as David Ray Griffin has phrased it.”

Jerry Alatalo

After unarguable evidence has become revealed in over 18 years since that day and PROVEN 9/11 the greatest false flag deception in world history, any men or women on Earth still supporting/publicly asserting the “Official Whitewash and Coverup” – unless having a legitimate excuse such as terminal idiocy, being born without a brain, etc. – MUST be viewed as suspect.

#911Justice – NOW!

Petra Liverani

It is not in the least proven that 9/11 was a false flag. It was not a psyop of the false flag type but just a straight-out psyop. There is no default carryover of any kind of the alleged crimes to the committed crimes.

The alleged crimes have nothing to do with the committed crimes.

Alleged crimes
Hijacking terrorists took planes into buildings.
Result: incidental collapses of the twin towers and WTC-7, damage to Pentagon and death to 3,000.

Committed crimes
Faking crime story and bringing down WTC buildings or damaging them as well as damaging Pentagon using controlled means.

There is NO carryover of the “murder” crime by default.

There were no planes which means right off the bat that 265 deaths were faked.

So, they lied about the terrorists, the buildings, the planes and the 265 deaths on the planes.

You’re going to believe that they killed the 2,735, that they, the PERPS, SAID were killed. You’re going to believe that?

It is utterly preposterous and ludicrous that the power elite would carry out a psyop where they killed 3,000 people for real they had no desire to kill, whose loved ones would massively fuck up their control of the story and which they could so very easily fake. And who had to be involved here? The power elite didn’t do it themselves. They had agency staff, media and regular people involved. These people would be AOK with the murder of 3,000 of their fellow citizens? I am so tired of being treated like a lunatic when the lunacy is in the idea that the perps would conduct a PSYOP – the term is PSYOP – by killing 3,000 of their citizens when controlled demolition is so obvious just for starters. It is insanity.

Editor
Admin
Editor

You repeat post the almost identical screed on every remotely applicable thread. Of course people treat you as being somewhat irrational when you do that.

You appear increasingly obsessive and emotionally upset. We strongly suggest you step away from this subject for a while and spend time with friends or family in a real world setting.

Oliver
Oliver

The British Secret Intelligence Service had huge input into the creation of the forerunner of the CIA, the Office of Strategic Services.
Anyone interested should examine the attachment of Commander Ian Fleming, PA to the Director of (Royal) Naval Intelligence to the US Office of Naval Intelligence in the 1940s. That what became the Manhattan Project (Tube Alloys in UK) was a Royal Navy Project c. 1936 should also be examined.

    the pair
    the pair

    oh my god AGAIN with this “look at me, ma! imma going after a sacred cow!” nonsense. more nitpicking, more “perfectionism” expected from people who only agree with you 99.999%

    HOW DARE THEY!!!

    i’m sure hedges regrets that he only reported from yugoslavia on the ground and only got shot at by snipers and only has PTSD from the dozens of actual corpses he saw during his career. i’m sure he wishes he spent 20 hours a day going down the inane rabbit hole of 9/11 theories instead of giving well written lectures and producing a weekly column that blows away even the most refined ivy league yuppies of the MSM without breaking a sweat.

    i’m going to do everyone a favor on the 9/11 thing – a reverse intervention where one person tells a few hundred thousand they’re not helping themselves. chomsky (sacred cow alert!) tried to do it and you all soiled your collective diapers so i’m not going to be as polite and “linguistic” about it.

    you will ALL be long dead before ANY of the actual facts of 9/11 come out. DEAD. gone. worm food. anyone who knows (or knew) anything pertinent – any “smoking gun” evidence – is either dead or enjoying their immunity by obscurity. think serial killers. think how long the green river killer got to relax. think about how the zodiac killer – who admitted what he did and taunted the police with forensic gold mines in the form of written letters – who lived out his years with the confidence he would never see the inside of a cell. and these were just dumb doughy losers with a taste for dead hookers. not a clandestine agency with billions of dollars and decades of history.

    here’s a tl;dr version: people are still debating the damn KENNEDY ASSASSINATIONS. in 2019.

    hedges and anyone else with a brain knows 1. we’ll never know and 2. why waste the time and energy when there are plenty of things out in the open. i’d add 3. no one will care. a few people who read sites like this, sure. but the vast majority of westerners who love bending over and grabbing their ankles for any authority figure? HA. good luck with that.

    Deschutes
    Deschutes

    Maybe you can get a job as Bill Maher’s intern, or secretary on Real Time? Just a suggestion. You sound just like Bill does. Doubt you’ve done jack shit to look into any of the massive amount of research done by David Ray Griffin, for example. Go read about the Univ. Alaska paper just published about Bldg 7. But on second thought no, you’d better not. You need to stay safely within the confines of media propriety bubble.

    Justin
    Justin

    September 11 attacks are so big and the official story so embedded that you cannot say the opposite for fear of being labelled and thus having your speaking platform destroyed. Alex Jones found a way but became a cartoon and eventually was censored. As someone who makes their living as a cultural critic or what have you begins to tow the line, their career starts to take off. They are thinking the correct way. 2+2=5.

    Steve Hayes

    The collapse of WTC building 7 was reported by the BBC before it happened. One could see the building over the reporter’s shoulder. https://youtu.be/9GcjP9KVR7E

    Petra Liverani

    They always give us the clues, Steve. They had the nose cone pop out the other side of the South tower, the terrorists pop up alive and these interesting scripted snippets. You’ll find them in these two songs done by AE9/11Truth:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71fwKA9Udso

    Dan Rather, CBS News Anchor asks Jerome Hauer, WTC Security Contractor about the cause of collapse of the twin towers:
    “Is it possible that just a plane crash could have collapsed these buildings? Or would it have required the prior positioning of other explosives in the building? What do you think?”
    “No my sense is just the velocity of the plane and the fact that you have a plane filled with fuel hitting that building and I think it was simply the planes hitting the buildings and causing the collapse.”

    Conversation between Brian Williams, MSNBC News Anchor and David Restuccio, FDNY EMS Lieutenant about WTC-7, the third building to collapse at the WTC on 9/11, after its collapse:
    “Can you confirm that it was No 7 that just went in?” [“Went in” is a term used in controlled demolition that comes from the fact that the buildings fall in on themselves.]
    “Yes, sir.”
    “And you guys knew this was comin’ all day.”
    “We had heard reports that the building was unstable and that eventually it would either come down on its own or it would be taken down.”

    Dan Rather reporting on the collapse of WTC-7:
    “For the third time today, it’s reminiscent of those pictures we’ve all seen too much of on television, where a building was deliberately destroyed by well-placed dynamite to knock it down.”

    For more on their clear signals: https://occamsrazorterrorevents.weebly.com/they-tell-us-clearly.html

    Robbobbobin
    Robbobbobin
    andyoldlabour
    andyoldlabour

    If we start to criticise people such as Hedges, Pilger, Chomsky etc. who I consider to be very good, balanced journalists/writers then when and where do we stop?
    I would add that around 500 people, not thousands were killed in the NATO air strikes on Serbia, too many to be sure, but on a scale of things, loooking at what is happening in Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria it is just a tiny ripple in a huge ocean of death and destruction.

    Harry Stotle
    Harry Stotle

    Sorry, I disagree – those on the left should not be defended from constructive criticism if they fail on key issues (in the way Hedges and Chomsky do on 9/11).

    Additinally criticism of NATOs actions must not be reduced to a simple body count – their involvement in the former Yugoslavia proved;
    Spurious claims about protecting human rights because the level of human rights abuses escalated significantly after the bombing began (as vengeful factions laid into each other in Kosovo and elsewhere) – in other words NATO made a bad situation much worse.
    A covert campaign to create markets in central-eastern Europe that would be under the sphere of western control rather than ceding to Russia.
    A campaign by the media to report selectively and in line with the phoney narrative developed by western military powers rationalising the terrible harms they had inflicted.
    That NATO could claim the moral high ground while ignoring even more serious abuses that were occuring around the same period in countries like Indonesia and Rwanda.

    the pair
    the pair

    i love this mental disorder – i call it “Joe Roganophenia” – where people who disagree with your 100% personal and subjective view of things in the slightest and most microscopic way have “failed”. especially when chomsky has pointed out for literally decades the exact lies about yugoslavia you mention. with footnotes. and details.

    but hey, better to attack people who differ marginally than those who are diametrically opposed and psychotic and have actual power). i’m sure the neera tandens and ben shapiros of the world don’t love that AT ALL.

    vexarb
    vexarb

    A quick google&wiki with “Serbian Death Toll” reveals more than a tiny ripple:
    NATZO open warfare with air strikes on civilian targets, 2500. NATZO proxy warfare with destabilization along ethnic lines a la Syria, at least 130,000 dead with 2.4 million refugees and 2 million IDP (Internally Displaced Persons). NATZO can be satisfied that the scale of their trial run in Yugoslavia compares favourably with their later campaigns in Libya and in Syria ( 1 million dead, 7 million refugees and 3 million IDP. True NATZO killed fewer people in Yugoslavia, but in compensation they accomplished NATZO’s mission: a Euro-pipeline was built through Albania (shares: BP 20%, Sna Milan 20%, Fluxys Belgium 19%, Enagas Spain 16%, Axpo Baden 5%).

    FrankSpeaker
    FrankSpeaker

    Have you also done a body count on all the other innocent Yugoslavs who died courtesy of ethnic Serbian murderers?

    vexarb
    vexarb

    No. Has anyone?

    We only have NATZO’s word — the Loaded Word “genocide” as a pretext for armed invasion and civil destabilization that killed more than a hundred thousand Yugoslavs — Serbs, Croats and other ethnicity all engulfed in the general slaughter; like Colin Powell waving a little vial of talcum powder labelled “Iraqi bioweapon” at the UN; like Charlie MaCarthy holding up a briefcase and shouting ‘Communist list’ in U$ Congre$$; like NATZO using the loaded word “gassing” as a pretext to invade Syria and accomplish even more multi-ethnic slaughter than NATZO accomplished in Yugoslavia. “We don’t do body counts” — a U$ general; no, we just tell the sheeple what will make them stampede in the direction we want them to move.

    FrankSpeaker
    FrankSpeaker

    Well said Andy

    Ken
    Ken

    This is why one’s position on 9/11 is the litmus test of our time — mostly of rationality, moral courage, and emotional fortitude. I’m leaving it out as a test of intelligence because of the overwhelming preponderance of concordant evidence that is such that an average high school kid could get it in an afternoon. That is, as long as that high school kid has the required rationality, moral courage and emotional fortitude required to dig into that mountain of evidence. Croy’s recent article here, “Existential Stupidity, The Moron Meme” addresses this.

    Antonym
    Antonym

    High school kids like Greta Thunberg? No thanks. Some of these will swallow like you the lack of motive for an internal 9/11 conspiracy plus the non discovery of it before or after.
    To attack Irak (again) some fake WMD stories were needed, 9/11 didn’t suffice.

    Blowing up the WTC just for insurance money doesn’t cut adult mustard.

    milosevic
    milosevic

    Apparently, you failed the litmus test.

    Any moderately perceptive person can see that the 9/11 event is the essential pretext for the entire ruling-class program, not the least of which is the destruction of Iraq as an independent country.

    Antonym
    Antonym

    In 2001, two years after the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 US Deep state was at its apex; that event trumped anything – even a WTC attack.
    Motive – fail.

    Antonym
    Antonym

    two =a few. in 1991 both the USSR and the Warsaw pact dissolved.

    Antonym
    Antonym

    Don’t declare the CIA un-failable: as much as they can’t defy the law of Gravity they can’t avoid Murphy’s law.
    I believe 9/11 was one of their failures and many should have been sacked for that one.

    Ken
    Ken

    @Antonym so you appear to believe the Twin Towers and Building 7 defied the laws of physics, for that is surely what they did if they collapsed the way they did from fire. And just why do you think no one was sacked for this purported collection of massive failures? On the contrary, many were promoted for this stunning success. For God’s sake, don’t be so daft; watch videos of Building 7 collapsing and see the study by Hulsey of UAF. It’s on their website. For the Twins, watch a short video on YouTube called “ North Tower Exploding” by David Chandler. Will you believe what you can see with your own eyes or will you believe what you’re told?

    Antonym
    Antonym

    Even building 7 fell downwards, so that law was not violated. Do you agree that US defense heads should have rolled for the 9/11 debacle?

    George Mc
    George Mc

    “Even building 7 fell downwards”?????

    Well, everything falls downwards. The question is: Why did it not remain upright?

    And the fact that no “heads rolled” for the 9/11 “debacle” suggests that it wasn’t a “debacle”.

    milosevic
    milosevic

    Antonym
    Antonym

    Chomsky says a US government conspiracy would have leaked: 9/11 would have been prevented.
    He also point out he one of a few on the left to disbelieve a 9/11 set up.

    Harry Stotle
    Harry Stotle

    Which only proves not even intellectuals are exempt from the occasional logic fail.

    In other words Chomsky is asking the wrong question.

    Look, its very simple – 9/11, the Pentagon and Shansville are all crime scenes that have never been properly investigated.
    Is it too much to expect basic investigative work to be required after mass murder?

    If these events were to be properly investigated it may well unearth a network of collaborators but trying to identify them without any investigation seems to be a daft argument to put forward (because assertions are based on belief rather than evidence).
    It seems astonishing that clever-cloggs like Hedges and Chomsky don’t understand this rudimentary principle.

    Here’s an interesting fact: the US authorities spent >$60 million trying to establish if Bill spunked on Monica’s skirt – while the budget for the Commission to investigate the most significant ‘terrorist attack’ in recent history was only a quarter of that (i.e.$15 million).

    In other words from an official point of view it might be argued that the US authorities viewed the mating habits of the lesser-spotted Clinton as four times more important than the deaths of 3,000+ citizens and counting if we include those murdered on the day or suffering from subsequent health complications.

    Antonym
    Antonym

    Why would US deep state seriously investigate or publish their own failings? Four airlines hijacked and some torpedoed into landmarks is a colossal security laps for fortress America. Better shush it up plus divert.
    Also the dollar floats on Saudi oil, so the Feds presses can only print unlimited as long as the Gulf Sheiks are kept out of the lime light.

    Editor
    Admin
    Editor

    Don’t forget the additional security lapse required to allow those 19 Saudi hijackers to spend at least a month rigging three WTCs for demolition.

    The data is such now that anyone still trying to pretend the discredited official conspiracy theory about 9/11 is the first option for critical thinkers is either a moral coward or a shill

    Antonym
    Antonym

    *What was the motive for controlled demolition of most of the WTC on 9/11?
    *Did any planes hit the towers or not?

    George Mc
    George Mc

    “What was the motive for controlled demolition of most of the WTC on 9/11?”

    To create the spectacle of a catastrophic attack.

    “Did any planes hit the towers or not?”

    Ah – that is the question!

    ThomPrentice
    ThomPrentice

    This is the sort of stupid statement that finally betrays triumph of faith-based belief in wild conspiracy over reason, logic, evidence and fact.

    Of COURSE the planes flew into the two towers for crissakes. Of COURSE!

    Denial of such a self-evident TRUTH is the recourse of one who wishes to swift boat the clear and convincing evidence of planes crashing into the towers (film, anybody? anybody? Anybody?!) through Merchants of Doubt (book, film) strategeries to try to make people believe the opposite of what is clearly seen.

    PLUS it DISTRACTS from the issue of whether the towers were INDEED wired with explosive devices that would do to the buildings what the aircraft had and their too cool to melt steel girders jet fuel had not done: Demolition.

    So who benefits? Follow the money so to speak.

    The only nation to benefit from the Kennedy Assassination ***AND*** 9/11 was … wait for it … ISRAEL! Kennedy spent his entire three years trying to keep nuclear weapons out of the hands of the Israeli government because he considered that it would be DESTABILKIING for Israel to have them.

    Then LBJ turned a blind eye to the gift to Israel fissionable material and voila we have the massive Nazi holocaust today in Gaza and the West Bank.

    The CARTER stupidly either outright permitted the Israelis actually TEST a nuclear weapon in the South Atlantic on September 22, 1979 to totally destabilise the Levant from then on. Carter was in on the deal with his big pal Menachem Begin or he and the CIA heard no evil and saw no evil and they spoke no evil, right?

    And 9/11, how did IT benefit Israel.

    So read Deuteronomy. Not even very far. To Chp. 10 or so. EVERYTHING FUNDAMENTAL to ISRAELI foreign and domestic policy RIGHT THIS MINUTE is in Deuteronomy. READ IT for crissakes!

    The Chosen People were Promise Land by their God between the Nile and the Euphrates. So why did the US lay down the lived of 5000 soldiers in Iraq, subvert Syria and destabilize Lebanon and make Jordan a client of Israel. THEIR LAND IS WHAT WAS PROMISED TO THE CHOSEN PEOPLE BY THEIR GOD! And SYRIA is RIGHT IN THE FUCKING WAY!

    So 9/11 got the US to shed American blood for Israeli purposes outlined in Deuteronomy. Plus Israel wants that oil in the Golan and the water from the headwaters of the Jordan.

    WHO BENEFITS from the Kennedy assassination and from 9/11?

    ISRAEL.

    And the military surveillance security banking deep state profiteering industrial and extractio industry conspiracy. I mean COMPLEX. Not conspiracy, right? Complex.

    God night and God Bless.

    George Mc
    George Mc

    Well I would have thought all that no-plane stuff was rubbish. And then I saw this:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2c5_g7UTuGM

    The true scientific approach is that, on finding we have been lied to about almost everything, to take and extremely sceptical view about “established facts”. The no-plane theory actually makes a lot of sense. And may I add that to scream “OF COURSE” sounds a bit like an Old Testament prophet. And I see you are exhorting me to read The Bible? For Christssakes!

    ThomPrentice
    ThomPrentice

    Friend, there is tape from dozens of different angles of aircraft crashing into the towers. Wake up.

    The aircraft could have been a distraction to coverup what clearly seems to be explosive bursts of a building demolition type that would surely collapse the buildings faster than jet fuel which by def cannot melt steel girders. Maybe. Maybe not.

    Whether there were aircraft crashed in Pennsylvania or at the Pentagon seems an open question. The Pentagon damage looks more like a missile in my view. However, raising doubt about aircraft in PA and the Pentagon THEN puts the BURDEN OF PROOF ON YOU, friend, to show us where the fuck those two aircraft are along with their passengers. Area 51 maybe?

    Your lack of scientific credibility is evident in your leap from the towers to your fear of being proselytized about the Bible. Take it to a shrink.

    It is people like you who make conspiracy hypothesizing based on evidence turn into wacko nut job conspiracy theorists, falling right into the trap of the CIA 1967 memo which created the term in the first place to discredit criticism of the Warren Commission coverup of the assassination of John F. Kennedy.

    George Mc
    George Mc

    “Maybe. Maybe not.”

    Well – thank God for a bit of modesty.

    “… raising doubt about aircraft in PA and the Pentagon THEN puts the BURDEN OF PROOF ON YOU, friend, to show us where the fuck those two aircraft are along with their passengers. Area 51 maybe?”

    Seriously? I have seen not one iota of proof of a plane in either case and yet it is up to me to provide proof that they DIDN’T crash?

    “your fear of being proselytized about the Bible.”

    Yes I’m so terrified of people talking about the Bible. Can’t get a wink of sleep!

    And to talk about “wacko nut job conspiracy theorists” at all falls right into the hands of the conspiracy-phobic media.

    Brion
    Brion

    Real planes could not cause a collapse! Your right, a spectacle, trauma, 9/11 forever lodged in the psyche. Us Brits got the 7/7 red buses and underground stations- even tho the terrorist train to arrive in London was cancelled. I’ve seen the photoshop theory but think more likely a new technology displaying a plane, then explosive from inside. If you listen to some of the witnesses on the ground- no plane! Just an explosion!

    Oliver
    Oliver

    Ah yes. “Outright Terror, Bold and Brilliant” on the side of the bus which somehow detached its roof in Tavistock Square 7 July 2005. The film/TV business (the quote was in an advertisement for a horror film about being trapped underground) is very much involved in what’s going on. Britain’s celebration of being awarded the 2012 Olympics in Beijing 2008 involved a red London bus suddenly detaching its roof; this at the Paralympic closing ceremony. Stratford, Olympic site, in East London seems to celebrate the 9/11 event. Curious buildings and memorial there.

    Brion
    Brion

    The whole ceremony seems to be what Hoffman calls a mass ritual- Pheonix from the flames, strange all seeing eyes looking down and 33.3 miles from the centre of London!

    Oliver
    Oliver

    Westfield in Stratford formerly owned by recently knighted Sir Frank Lowy, co-lessor of the WTC with Larry Silverstein. I bet that insurance money came in handy for building an enormous shopping centre in London. Manhattan Loft Gardens building in Stratford built by same (SOM) contractor/architects that built the replacement for the twin towers. 9/11 memorial made from 9/11 steel moved from Battersea Park to Stratford.

    Ken
    Ken

    Israelis, IMO, are the most plausible culprits in the rigging of the towers for demolition. I think the Saudis were mostly complicit in loaning themselves out as the patsies.

    George Mc
    George Mc

    Patsies do not “loan themselves out”. Patsies are the unwitting fall guys.

    Ken
    Ken

    George, I meant in a symbolic way by those Saudis whose pay grade is far above that of the, yes, quite likely unwitting, failed Cessna pilots who supposedly so expertly guided those planes into their targets.

    Brion
    Brion

    Do you think they might best serve the left and remain relevant by playing dumb? Most academics get the shove! I know Curtain and Griffin remain in posts. I guess i’m Hoping they’re not gatekeepers after enjoying so much of their work.

    Gary Weglarz
    Gary Weglarz

    “Chomsky says a US government conspiracy would have leaked: 9/11 would have been prevented.” – thus proving the author’s point rather nicely.

    Ken
    Ken

    How someone can see this video and still believe those towers fell without the help of explosives is testament to the human being’s immense capacity for self deception.

    vexarb
    vexarb

    Can anybody point to a Link with soundtrack? I want to listen for something that a distinguished U$ MI general said you always hear at a controlled demolition: the pop! pop! pop! of a chain or wave of explosive charges being set off, one floor after another.

    Ken
    Ken

    The progression of explosions as they raced down the faces of the buildings was so rapid that the sound, as described by many witnesses, was more of a constant roar than discreet “pops.” That notwithstanding, the explosions are quite obvious to the sense of sight.

    vexarb
    vexarb

    Thanks for that info, Ken. If those explosions were heard as a continuous roar rather than a series of pops then they were much bigger than in usual military demolition.

    Any estimates of how many tons of military grade thermite are must be requisitioned for such a high tower? I ask because this is not only a criminal case of Follow the Money but also a case of Follow the Thermite.

    Editor
    Admin
    Editor

    The nanothermite allegedly used is – according to the Harrit et al (2009) paper – of a highly sophisticated type with potentially much greater energy release than conventional thermite. How much was used and whether it was in conjunction with other conventional or more sophisticated explosives is left open in the paper pending more discovery.

    Antonym
    Antonym

    Calling WTC aluminum / iron dust “micro thermite” is petty loaded: sky scrapers are made of those materials.

    vexarb
    vexarb

    Ed, thanks for reminding me of the Harrit paper on OffG
    https://off-guardian.org/2016/09/25/jones-harrit-mohr-millette-the-red-gray-chips/

    From it I read measured samples from 1.5 to 7.5 kJ/gm with an average about the accepted value for Bog Standard TNT (4.2 kJ/g). So my figures above stand: 2000-3000 tons of Nano Thermite to be traced on their way from Lawrence Livermore Labs to WTC. The path leads through the US Army, probably the most highly documented army on Earth. Shouldn’t be hard to work out a few leads: for instance who requisitioned a couple of kilotons in toto but gave no documented report on their final use? Which foreign armies did the USA supply with such a big lot of NanoThermite? Could those armies account for its final use?

    Antonym
    Antonym

    Comedy gold: 2 to 3 metric ton of thermite was supposingly smuggled and installed into 3 WTC buildings without anybody getting suspicious. Next “they” kill a few thousand Americans and wound thousands more but are not found out even after ~20 years. Airliners were torpedoed as distraction. What next?

    EditorAccording to a peer-reviewed study that has not yet been rebutted (Harrit et al 2009) nanothermite, reacted and unreacted, WAS present in the WTC dust. Arguments from incredulity therefore are meaningless. It was there, therefore it was placed there, regardless of how hard you find that to believe

    Oliver
    Oliver

    The usual explosive energy metric is tons of TNT (trinitrotoluene) equivalent. So the official Chinese line on the largest explosion in Tianjin on August 12 2015 was 22 tons of TNT equivalent (hint : it was hundreds of times more powerful than this, in reality a 3 – 5 kiloton blast).

    The energies witnessed at Manhattan 11/9/01 suggest around a kiloton for each tower. That is 1000 tons of TNT equivalent energy.

    vexarb
    vexarb

    Oliver, many thanks for quantitative info: 1,000 tons of TNT to bring down a 500,000 ton tower. Assuming the energy in 1 gram of NanoThermite is roughly equivalent to 1 gram of TNT (4 kJ/g) then 1,000 tons of TNT translates into roughly 1 kiloton of NanoThermite. To bring down 3 towers would need roughly 3,000 tons of explosive to be installed. That’s a lot of tons.

    Follow the Thermite. Three clues off the top of my head:

    1. A Bush family firm was working for months, day and night, on the towers under armed guard. OffG has testimony BTL from a couple who saw men carrying sacks into a part of the building which had never been shut off from visitors before.

    2. The Mossad agents who were caught dancing and cheering when the buildings came down drove an unregistered van which carried explosives: what sort of explosives?

    3. NanoThermite is manufactured by Lawrence Livermore in the U$A and passed to the U$ Army. How would 3,000 tons of NanoThermite be requisitioned from either organization for a civilian demolition job? Where did that 3kilotons of highly specialized explosive come from?

    Oliver
    Oliver

    Lawrence Livermore primarily a nuclear research facility. Pyroclastic clouds exist in nature; in vulcanism. Volcanoes are powered by non-chemical means, known for centuries, pre nuclear or electrical discoveries. No chemical reaction I am aware of can take steel above its boiling point, thermite or whatever other chemical methodology suggested. The concept of nanothermite is only finely minced thermite, aluminum and ferrous oxide – rust -the reaction energy remains the same. Niels Bohr was at Copenhagen.

    vexarb
    vexarb

    Oliver, to which post was your own post (above) replying? re pyroclastic clouds, volcanoes, boiling steel and Niels Bohr?

    Oliver
    Oliver

    Vexarb: I was replying to your post specifically but with a general readership in mind. Chemical energies alone cannot possibly explain physical phenomena observed WTC 2001 and 1993. Look to the Manhattan Project and its (murky) history.

    vexarb
    vexarb

    Oliver, thermite was found in the dust; so, Follow the Thermite, it’s a solid fact a leads along a narrow trail with a good chance of tracking the quarry. Other explosives may well have been used but they have not been found (so far). According to Wikipedia thermite is a specialty explosive not manufactured in great quantity so a couple of thousand tons are more easily traced than regular Army munitions.

    Oliver
    Oliver

    Wikipedia? Thermite? There may be an -ite on the end, like dynamite but it’s news to me that thermite is even an explosive. It is just ferrous oxide and aluminum powder. There’s a vigorous and hot reaction when it’s ignited which reaches temperatures that can melt steel, but not take it above its boiling point. WTC dust contained condensed iron vapour. Also the entire spectrum of the decay elements one would expect to see from the fission of Uranium 235, in the exact proportions one would expect to see from the fission of Uranium 235.

    Editor: According to the study ‘Extremely High Temperatures During WTC Destruction’ (Jones et al 2008) the spheres of molten iron in the dust are entirely consistent with a thermitic reaction. Other studies have ruled out fission bombs or fission/fusion bombs due to absence of residues.

    vexarb
    vexarb

    Oliver, what Harrit et al observed in their microscopes and measured with their calorimeter was _nano_ thermite ie, a mixture so _very_ finely divided that it explodes and can be used as a Shaped Charge (aka Directed Energy Weapon) in controlled demolition.

    If isotopes from a mini-nuclear DEW have been documented with the same experimental detail as Harrit et al, I should very much like to see that Link added to OffG’s valuable archive on 911 Truth.

    But let me add, the thermite evidence alone is sufficient to send a Criminal Justice Department sniffing out suspects and tracing clues. The fact that, 18 years after the greatest terrorist atrocity in history, no such criminal case has been set in motion — that suspicious fact is itself a criminal case!

    Oliver
    Oliver

    Any explosive can be formed into a shaped charge. Solid fuel rocket motors are an example; fireworks if you like. The main event that destroyed the twin towers in 2001 was fired upwards through them. What happened to the WTC can be deduced using mathematics, physics, chemistry, logic and, most importantly, psychology. This involved, and still involves, heads of state.

    vexarb
    vexarb

    @Oliver: “What happened to the WTC can be deduced using mathematics, physics, chemistry, logic and, most importantly, psychology. ”

    Even more important than psychology, it can be deduced from the _fact_ that 3 scientists _found_ and confirmed in a peer reviewed paper the _actual_ presence of Nano-Thermite in dust from the explosion. Which is why I am looking forward to your adding here in the archives of OffG, a Link to a peer-review paper on the discovery of nuclear explosive residues, of similar depth to the paper by Harrit et al which confirms the discovery of chemical explosive residues.

    Re psychology as a Sherlock Holmes “significant event”: the dismissal of Prof Harrit from his academic University post is “the significant event” which suggests that Harrit’s discovery of Nano-Thermite explosive was true.

    Oliver
    Oliver

    I don’t set a great deal of store by peer-reviewed papers; we can work it out for ourselves. My own induction into all this was the 2008 banking collapse, which must have been engineered, as it was mathematically certain to happen, no risk at all.

    So I suggest you look at the USGS WTC dust sample analysis and ponder where the uranium, strontium, barium, yttrium and so on came from.

    The university of Copenhagen, with physicist Niels Bohr, was heavily involved in initial work on the Manhattan Project. Harritt must know this. Carlsberg were sponsors of Bohr, and still, of CERN.

    Editor: You’re playing word games & hoping your audience hasn’t read the USGS report and doesn’t know NONE of the elements you name were present in unusual amounts & nothing found in the dust indicated a nuclear bomb had been detonated or any form of nuclear reaction had taken place.

    This flagrant dishonesty entirely destroys any credibility you may have retained after admitting you reject peer reviewed analysis in favour if your own untutored ‘judgment’ in these matters.

    Your asinine attempt to link Niels Harrit with the Manhattan project (that took place before he was born) based simply on the fact he taught at Copenhagen is unworthy of further remark.

    Ken
    Ken

    @vexarb, Here is a video that offers at least some idea of how the rigging and demolition of the Twins might have been done. It also shows how fast the sequential explosions can be triggered with some mining explosion footage (think Twin Towers horizontally). Harrit once answered the question, “How would you get tons of thermite into the buildings?” with, “On pallets NOT marked ‘explosives'”

    Ken
    Ken

    Sorry, here is the link.
    https://youtu.be/E3EQV223Y-M

    vexarb
    vexarb

    Ken, your video Link is a “gem of purest ray serene”. I have copied it into my diary so that people might view it when I am long gone. Make it viral.

    Re quantitation: the video estimates about 250-550 “toolboxes” per tower (5-10 boxes placed on every second floor). Suppose each toolbox contains 10-20 kg of explosive (with WiFi trigger) that makes about 250-1,000 tons of explosive per tower — and an easy way for Mossad “performance artists” to assist the Bush company install their “performance art”.

    Garl

    MKULTRA really was a failure though, drugs aren’t any good for mind control except as an adjunct to traditional techniques; ideology and violence are far more effective tools of mind control. Too bad they tortured and broke people’s brains to figure that out

    Hugh Turley

    Thomas Merton wrote, “The greatest need of our time is to clean out the enormous mass of mental and emotional rubbish that clutters our minds and makes all political and social life a mass illness. Without this house cleaning we cannot begin to see. Unless we see, we cannot think. The purification must begin with the mass media. How?” Merton was another victim of assassination in 1968.

    Robbobbobin
    Robbobbobin

    Merton may or may not have been assaassinated, but his ‘cleaning out of the mind’ was akin to the content of one of BigB’s more yogic sermons rather than to any of the ruminations of the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth.

    Hugh Turley

    There is no longer any “may not have been” about the murder of Thomas Merton, who was wise to our war promoting press when he wrote, “The hardest people to propagandize are those who are not interested in the news…”
    https://www.irishamericannews.com/irishamericannews/arts/books/7576-the-martyrdom-of-thomas-merton-an-investigation-reviewed-by-sabina-clarke

    Robbobbobin
    Robbobbobin

    ‘There is no longer any “may not have been” about the murder of Thomas Merton…”

    I chose my words specifically to facilitate or ignore any interpretation anyone wants to put on Merton’s death, as it is of no relevance to the value of his spiritual insight and the life and work that that guided, which you had chosen to omit and which omission I chose to mention by way of briefly rebalancing the account. Do you have a problem with that?

    Bob Taylor
    Bob Taylor

    I am so sick of the nuttery which manifests itself in statements such as his don’t – we – all – know – this? assertion that the C.I.A killed JFK. It’s not to late to learn something: read “Reclaiming History,” by Vincent Bugliosi. Or, continue as an idiot.

    Wazdo
    Wazdo

    “Reclaiming History” has been comprehensively debunked by Dr James Fetzer. He found one page with 10 lies and mistakes on it.

    Bob Taylor
    Bob Taylor

    Okay, well, a cursory Amazon check shows me he’s one of the nuts, or perhaps charlatans, who thinks 9/11 was an inside job. I lose interest, always, when I find that out about someone. I must admire the person’s ability to make a buck, of course, but then, this is a nation filled with people who think the moon landings were a hoax. It’s a nation filled with people who can’t figure out that 2/3 of a pound of hamburger would equal .66. Bugliosi, on the other hand, prosecuted the Manson family case, and Alan Dershowitz called him the best prosecutor in the United States. I’m surprised you didn’t cite Jim Marrs, King of All Charlatans.

    Wazdo
    Wazdo

    With regard to 911: may I respectfully suggest that you aquaint yourself with Newton’s laws of motion and then look at the collaps of building 7. Of course, most people now no longer believe in Newton’s laws and so it would seem that the re-medievelisation of the world is almost complete. Mr Bugliosi may indeed have been a first class prosecuter; that does not mean that he was a great investigator.

    Robbobbobin
    Robbobbobin

    Of course, most people now no longer believe in Newton’s laws…”

    As far as they go, Einstein certainly did, and approximately 157 billion post-Einsteinian quantum physicists continue to do so at the ‘macro’ level so, given that that exceeds the population of the planet multifold (get it?), who and where are these “most people” of whom you speak?

    Wazdo
    Wazdo

    The “Newton” thing was meant to say that anyone, I think we can agree that’s most people, who believe in the Official Conspiracy Theory concerning 911 cannot, at the same time, assert that Newtons law is correct, because one contradicts the other.

    Robbobbobin
    Robbobbobin

    Fetzer will be learning next month just how much he has to cough up for defaming one of the Sandy Hook families with his assertion that the nobody died in the mass shooting there.

    Wazdo
    Wazdo

    Have you looked at all the evidence?

    Robbobbobin
    Robbobbobin

    Are you stupid enough to direct that question to me rather than to the court who found for the plaintiffs against Fetzer, or are you just too lazy to look up the judge’s email address and expect me to find the same and foward it for you?

    Wazdo
    Wazdo

    Have you read “Nobody Died at Sandy Hook”?

    Dimly Glimpsed
    Dimly Glimpsed

    The left eating their own. I had thought it rather odd when Jeffrey St. Clair, Joshua Frank, Eric Draitser, Yoav Livin were so zealous in attacking Catlin Johnstone for daring to violate leftist dogma. As I do here, reading Mr. Curtin’s suggestion that Chris Hedges lack of encyclopedic completeness implies a lack of sincerity or candor. Among the pure left, there are no grey areas.

    crank
    crank

    encyclopedic completeness

    Yeah, 9/11 is just a side issue, no real impact on development of 21st century politics, no big effect on societal psyche, truth irrelevant, nothing to see here /s

    Ken
    Ken

    @crank Excellent point. Indeed, it’s only the watershed event of the 21st century, so far. Silly us, for wanting those whose voices carry to pipe up about it.

    Robbobbobin
    Robbobbobin

    “Silly us, for wanting those whose voices carry to pipe up about [the alleged WTC big lie].”

    Oh, poor little sicky wicky nobodies us. Please Chrissyissy, please JulyWuly, please NoamyWoamy, please drop whatever irrelevancies you were pursuing before 9/11 to speak out the truth to our nasty big oppressors and their zombified millions on our behalf about all our shocked and awed PTSDness, exactly as we would if we could and we were you but we’re not so we can’t.

    Dimly Glimpsed
    Dimly Glimpsed

    I once had a very short email discussion with Robert Parry, asking why Consortium News ignored 9/11 and the mountain of evidence surrounding 9/11 which pointed to an “inside job” along with Israel and Saudi Arabia. As I recall, he wrote something like, “that’s a subject I don’t want to touch”. Perhaps Hedges holds a similar view. Chomsky certainly does. Yet they all agree that 9/11 was used to sharpen the talons of the police state and justify permanwar. It is a mystery to me why these writers studiously ignore the obvious reality that official 9/11 narrative is a lie. Yet I admire and respect their work. No one is perfect. Not even Ed Curtin.

    Robbobbobin
    Robbobbobin

    “[ignoring 9/11]’s a subject [the late Robert Parry of Consortium News][did]n’t want to touch”.

    Too short an email discussion to say why?

    “Perhaps Hedges holds a similar view. Chomsky certainly does. Yet they all agree that 9/11 was used to sharpen the talons of the police state and justify permanwar. It is a mystery to me why these writers studiously ignore the obvious reality that official 9/11 narrative is a lie.”

    Both Chomsky and Assange have explicitly stated that it’s not a central feature of the bases of their dissent and Hedges implicitly said the same thing when, in an Amy Goodman interview on the 10th (?) anniversary of the WTC event, he almost completely ignored both Goodman’s WTC-explicit segment introduction and her WTC-explicit opening question to move the entire discussion onto the societal depredations of the ‘resultant’ War on Terror’.

    I suspect that 9/11 as a catalyst for an awareness of the depravity of ruling classes in general, and in that case the US political and economic ‘elite’ in particular, is far more likely to be a “litmus test” or other such binary divider for those who were until then (not very self-flatteringly) unaware of the underlying nature of the ‘American Dream’ than it was for those long-term dissenters who were more likely to see it as just another manifestation–if significantly more extreme than most–of the conduct of civilized society in general, as usual. A kind of ‘ressentiment’ on the part of the newly disabused, as Kierkegaard and many others since him might say.

    Seamus Padraig
    Seamus Padraig

    Caity Johnstone was actually totally deplatformed from CounterPurge for her ‘heresy’. Tell me: who’s calling for a deplatforming Chris Hedges here?

    Dimly Glimpsed
    Dimly Glimpsed

    Johhnstone had never written for Counterpunch.

    Seamus Padraig
    Seamus Padraig

    Had her confused with Diana Johnstone there for a minute. Sorry for the error.

    Fair dinkum
    Fair dinkum

    Conspiracies heaped upon conspiracies, or distractions heaped upon distractions?
    What are the major problems facing the majority of the human race?
    1.Malnutrition (hunger, obesity and ill health).
    2. Climate change.
    3. Income equality.
    4. The disease of rabid consumerism.
    5. The spiritual void (depression).
    6. Overworking.
    7. The exploitation of billions of animals.
    8. Corrupt politicians and corporations.
    9. Access to affordable healthcare.
    10. Inter family violence.

    These are the some of the things Chris Hedges write about.
    FFS, isn’t that enough?

    Willem
    Willem

    They also write about that in the MSM. But they do it with a bias. Chris Hedges also writes about these issues with bias (always ending up that you should fight the unidentifiable deep state and get yourself peppersprayed when clashing with the police) and that is what this article from Curtin is about

    Fair dinkum
    Fair dinkum

    Difference being Chris walks the talk.

    nomad
    nomad

    in a word, no. if he avoids the single most critical event of the 21st century, no.

    Igor
    Igor

    Chomsky is controlled opposition.