Thursday, July 14, 2011

Stupid Truthers

Nano-Thermite at the WTC (image source).
Reuters report.   

Leaders in a democracy must be perpetually at work to maintain their credibility.

The effort takes many forms. There are legitimate appeals to reason and interest through the media, in the legislature or on the campaign trail.

In addition, there can be many other more or less illegitimate forms of persuasion.

Public relations activities that skew the news.

Sheer propaganda: fireworks, flags, fliers and government indoctrination by advertising or perversion of the educational system.

Destruction of opponents by entrapment or assassination.

And now, cognitive infiltration, the invention of Cass Sunstein, who heads President Obama's White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs.

Cognitive infiltration is a proposed government response to the spread of theories that question the integrity of the government, i.e., conspiracy theories. To these, Sunstein believes
the best response is cognitive infiltration by Government agents of groups (and their allies) attached to such ideas. [Such agents] might enter chat rooms, online social networks, or even real-space groups and attempt to undermine percolating conspiracy theories by raising doubts about their factual premises, causal logic or implications for political action.
Of particular concern to Sunstein, apparently, is the need to undermine groups who question the official 9/11 conspiracy theory whereby 19 Arabs with box cutters are said to have outwitted America's multi-trillion-dollar air defense system, blown-up part of the Pentagon -- conveniently killing dozens of government accountants trying to figure out where several $trillion in unaccounted Defense Department funds had gone -- destroyed the CIA's New York offices in Building 7 of the World Trade Center, which was not hit by a hijacked aircraft, and conveniently demolished WTC 1 and 2, obsolete asbestos-filled office towers, extremely well insured against terrorist attack only weeks before their destruction.

Actually, there's nothing really new in Sunstein's approach. Democratic governments have rarely felt constrained in the means they employ to control public opinion, and they have never felt constrained in time of war.

Thus, for example, during WW1, President Wilson established the Committee for Public information under the direction of former journalist, George Creel. The Creel "Commission" was:
... created to influence U.S. public opinion regarding American participation in World War I. Over just 28 months, from April 13, 1917, to August 21, 1919, it used every medium available to create enthusiasm for the war effort ...
The committee used newsprint, posters, radio, telegraph, cable and movies to broadcast its message. It recruited about 75,000 "Four Minute Men," volunteers who spoke about the war at social events for an ideal length of four minutes, considering that the average human attention span was judged at the time to be four minutes. They covered the draft, rationing, war bond drives, victory gardens and why America was fighting. It was estimated that by the end of the war, they had made more than 7.5 million speeches to 314 million people ... (Wikipedia)
It is not known publicly to what extent, if at all, Cass Sunstein has implemented an electronic-age version of such a propaganda exercise, but it is hard to believe that an equivalent of the Creel Commission is not in operation, infiltrating discussion in countless thousands of Internet forums, at public meetings and in the editorial offices of newspapers and magazines.

An obvious strategy to follow in this kind campaign to subvert the democratic process is to create and promote stupid conspiracy theorists who point only to bogus evidence, employ dopey arguments and encourage those who are dopey by natural inclination to overwhelm the debate with false leads, looney ideas, illogical arguments and utter nonsense, thus discouraging participation in the debate by all sensible people.

Likely Sunstein Commission conspiracy theorists constantly raise their heads, from those who attribute the destruction of the Twin Towers to space-based lasers, or micro-nukes, to the "Israel did it crowd" and those who believe the world is ruled by shape-shifting alien reptiles.

Fortunately, there remains a group of dedicated conspiraloons, committed to the application of logic and the pursuit of real evidence who take the time to deconstruct some of the obviously intellectually incompetent, if not entirely fake, 9/11 conspiracy theorists.

Here Stefz tackles one, by the name of Charles Veitch, whoever he may be, while Gyges takes on a nutter who seems to have made his conspiracy theorist debut onboard a space ship.

So long as such genuine, passionate and intelligent conspiraloonacy thrives, democracy will live.


More here about ex-police intelligence analyst Tony Farrell conversion to 7/7 Truthdom from Conspiraloonacy Central, and Stefz: 7/7 ‘was a plot by the Govt’ Bizarre cop expert claim.

This must be true. Britain's other big daily tab takes up the story.


  1. So, Israel didn't do it? Is that because the huge over-representation of Jews and dual US-Israeli citizens throughout the entire conspiracy is totally irrelevant, or because there really is no distinction between the US and it's corporate and intelligence bodies and Israel these days? Either way, it'll be good to know your opinion.

  2. sloppy AND reactionary!

    are you actually reading the things you link to?

    "while Gyges takes on a nutter who seems to have made his conspiracy theorist debut onboard a space ship.
    deary me.


    aaang what the heck are you doing here?

  3. Re: Anonymous 1 said:

    My position is that without tacit or explicit approval from the people in Washington the people in Tel Aviv would never launch a false flag attack on the United States.

    However, there is substantial overlap between the ruling elites of Israel and of the US. Moreover, that part of the US elite that is not part of, or closely connected with, Israel's elite can be greatly influenced by Israeli interests through AIPAC funding, fears of AIPAC reprisals, the reactions of a largely pro-Israeli US media, etc.

    So the US and Israeli elites are closely interrelated. The shots are called in Washington, but those decisions are always made with Israel's interest in mind.

    Deference to Israeli interests reflects not only the Zionism of much of the US elite and the power of the Israel lobby, but also the fact that Israel is America's only ally, and a very important one, in a region that America intends to dominate, at least until the oil runs out.

    Israel may also serve American interests many ways other than as a ME military base, listening post and ally. Perhaps as a place to offshore illegal and unconstitutional US Government activities, for example.

  4. As for Anonymous 2 (does no one have an identity?), sloppy, well maybe, but how so?

    And reactionary, in what way?

    Or are you too sloppy to be explicit about anything?

  5. "My position is that without tacit or explicit approval from the people in Washington the people in Tel Aviv would never launch a false flag attack on the United States."

    I've heard the USA stood down when the USS Liberty was attacked, but I have never seen anything written on the fact that it was approved by anybody on the USA.

    Perhaps you could provide some insight as to what the USA knew about the USS Liberty attack and whom was involved in the USA in the planning or approval of this false flag operation?

    I am neither of the other 2 anonymous, but I try always let you know who I am.

    "Low Plains Perspective"

  6. LPP,

    Here's one detailed assertion of US complicity in Israel's attempt to sink the USS Liberty. But I have not researched the evidence, so I offer neither endorsement nor refutation.

  7. Comic Infiltration:

    Stefz has a fine analysis of the credibility of ex police intelligence analyst turned Truther, Tony Farrell.

  8. Thanks, that will take me a little while to read, including scanning the end notes.

    But I've got some time as we are Burning In A Heatwave in the Low Plains.

    "Low Plains Perspective"

  9. According to the above Wikispooks link:

    "there are just two organisations on the entire planet with the expertise, assets, access and political protection necessary to have both executed 9/11 and effected its cover-up... Both are Intelligence Agencies - the CIA and Israel's Mossad - but only one had a compelling motive - Mossad. That motive dovetailed perfectly with the Neocon PNAC agenda, with it's explicitly stated need for "...a catastrophic and catalyzing event - like a new Pearl Harbor" [1] in order to mobilise US public opinion for already planned wars, the effects of which would be to destroy Israel's enemies."

    The claim that [Mossad's] motive "dovetailed perfectly with the Neocon PNAC agenda," entirely negates the "Israel did it" claim, since PNAC was intimately related to the Bush Administration (see signatories of PNAC's Statement of Principles, which included, Jeb Bush, Dick Cheney, and Donald Rumsfeld).

    As I indicated in a comment above, Israeli agents may well have had a role in 9/11, but only subject to US direction and oversight.

    So, no more Israel did it nonsense here. please.

  10. How about "Zionists" did it then?

    Since that has The Israeli State plus the US based people and capabilities necessary to pull it off well covered.

    And far from negating the revised proposition, "dovetailing with the PNAC Agenda", it lends weight to it since PNAC backers are Zionist to a man.

    Most appear in that Wikispooks article too

  11. Did Zionists do it?

    That seems a reasonable question, but I don't know the answer to it.

    You may be correct in stating that all PNAC members were Zionists, although I don't recall either Jeb Bush or Donald Rumsfeld saying anything that clearly tagged them as Zionists.

    But to answer the question, one must know who is calling the shots and what are their motives in particular decisions.

    Was George Bush really in charge on 9/11, or was he then and always little more than a puppet announcing decisions conveyed to him by greater minds than his own: Henry Kissinger's for example.

    The Bush's, it seems to me, are more likely anti-Semitic by inclination than Zionist, although they are first and foremost climbers willing to do "anything" to climb the greasy pole, as Bush I admitted when asked what he would do to win the presidency.

    But on the whole it seems very doubtful that US geopolitical strategy would be based on a treasonous deference to Israel, although it may well be that, given the enormous influence of the Israel lobby, American leaders have often been misled as to the degree to which Israel's interests correspond with those of America.

    More generally, I think you cannot discount the widely held belief/delusion that America can and should lead the World. Such delusions afflict all great powers and usually result in their eventual self-destruction, as we seem to be witnessing in the case of the US today.