9/11, Left-Wing apathy, and the Shock Jock Doctrine

[Free Truth]

Here is an enjoyable read on a few of the left, controlled opposition personalities from a site called Fad Smashers.
The writer is witty with attitude.

(Some errors... I tried to clean up some of them...)

Check out the Fad Smashers site for more like this:
http://www.fadsmashers.com/index.html


9/11, Left-Wing apathy, and the Shock Jock Doctrine

The following article seeks to demonstrate in plain terms, why few prominent left wing activists support another fake independent 9/11 investigation and why this ignorance borders on criminal neglect. If you would like information regarding the evidence about 9/11, please see the small collection of links at the end of this smash.

Asides from  its utility in defending against rhetorical liberal excuses for 9/11 apathy, what I am about to say for many will be old news, but it is mainly for anyone still in limbo over whether or not they should actually USE their brain and real-eyes how much of a sham politics really is.  You may have just coincidentally stumbled on to this traumatizing webpage or perhaps were directed here by one of your seemingly nutty friends only to be infected and consumed by SHIT THAT MAKES YOU THINK. Perhaps its a rude awakening to the fact that ignorance is insanity... Or perhaps you'll just bounce and say WTF, fair enough.

For an in depth elaboration of the cult-ure of politics click here. Or skip through my preamble ramble and dine on the main course, about half way down!

*This is in no way intended to be an attack against the left, and most certainly shouldn't (but likely will) be used as a defense of the 'right-wing'. if you are planning on doing this then please self-terminate now. We don't align ourselves with any political parties nor bullshit televised revolutions that get sold to us and play on our insecurities.

Moral monopoly and post-imperative liberalism

We have what are called liberal 'talking points', which have the effect of focusing peoples moral resources on peripheral issues. They drag us into discourse over issues that should not be our primary concern, as they are typically the consequence of some greater more centralized injustice. For instance: big names such as Naomi Klein, Noam Chomsky, and Howard Zinn are typically perceived as speaking on behalf of the debt ridden wage slaves, but not without being marketable, fashionably tame, and fitting to the latest oppressive beats off the rerun streets.... But by and large their profoundly insightful works, tend to convolute the situation, having the effect of channeling our attention away from the base crimes that set the premise for every other abstraction they (phony socialists/ liberals) feel IS relevant enough to speak about.

911 revelations

When I began educating myself about the 9/11 scam I was coming from this socialist background. I enjoyed sporting the Che Guevera T-shirts, smoking lots of dope, and rebelling by simply existing whimsically in freeform, while partaking in 'cool fads' to resist (if only symbolically) 'the mans' matrix of mediocrity. I read a book called the rebel sell (<<<<COSTS MONEY!!!) which in spite of being disinformative on numerous levels, really shook my political foundations, and made me question those subjective truths I held so dear.

'The man' was a concept that for the longest time sufficed as a symbol of the oppressive weight of collective greed for the better part of my conscious life. Without understanding the nuances and sophistication of modern propaganda and disinformation, nor the details of this web of lies, I simply bought in to the first ideology that appeared less selfish, and in many ways still is... in theory. (i.e. socialism) but when I learned about the 9/11 farce, it had the effect of rewiring everything I knew about the proverbial 'man'. I started to ask things like... who is this 'man'... was 'he' a logo? A corporation? A mere flaw in the system? But most importantly where were my comrades on this matter, which intuitively struck me as being so profoundly significant? Was I overexaggerating its importance like my comrades had suggested? Chasing a lost cause?

Or was it them who were all just artists of delusion, marketing prepackaged rebellion and over the counter-cultural resistance?

After thoroughly researching the issue of 9/11, paddling through thickets of doubt, I came to the absolute conclusion that there was in fact some immense cover-up that had taken place, which entailed a corruption so pervasive yet subtle and silent, so damning to ones faith in big brother, that it became a disease; an addiction. It suddenly hit me that for the longest time, I was exercising blind faith in leftist talking heads, simply buying into what appeared to be a viable means of resistance. Then I thought about hollywood... and how easily the make believe can seem real...

Meanwhile these socialist gurus wouldn't so much as address the issue, while becoming rich in marketing their fashionable rebellion.

9/11 revelations changed everything, because (from a psychological perspective) it created a knowledge void, which slowly begins to inhale ones entire worldview. If this was the extent of corruption I thought, the next rational question then was what else was a lie? How is this relevant NOW? What's more, why were these liberal icons (to whom I allowed to fashion my ethics for so long) displaying such blatant ignorance towards such an essential piece of the puzzle? Were they afraid? Oblivious? Or at worst... complicit?

There once was a time (I believe) when a person could confidently affirm their morality (regard for "the greater good") by politically aligning themselves with the so called progressive parties. The Left has prided itself as the people's wing, one that by default is assumed to advocate a more economically justified and thus freer society, by way of the highly anticipated, yet seldom (if ever) actualized, virtuous regulatory government. In some respects the left has had its moments of glory, be it in the wave of resistance that came to define the 1960's and its attention towards women, gay, environmental and minority rights movements. They even have earned props for their widely publicized, yet largely inconsequential criticisms of the bush administrations torture and war policies which were easily appeased by throwing up a black version of the same person, that can actually read a teleprompter...

So the whole leftist spiel became conventionally synonymous with "the good".  I say conveniently because the emphasis on community and economic equality are inherently more moral then the self-preservation fixation of the right, but what if these internecine (intra-slave) resolutions achieved by the socialist movement came at a cost of veiling greater injustices which were outside these divisive issues (sex roles, race, gender etc.)? What if the people who were selling you those books, also (directly or indirectly) helped propagate the notion that the small handful of people who owned everything, would not in some way directly "conspire" to sustain their best interests, but rather, that this was a  mere symptom of a diseased global monetary system, something for which no one was directly to blame... What if they also lead you to believe that "conspiracy" was a taboo term... one which was to be feared and ridiculed... and only uttered on freakishly open-minded websites that claim to offer extra-dimensional streaming video from the reptilian mother ship... What the fuck if?

They protest Bush, but what has that amounted to? He has after all gotten away with everything...

Compartmentalization

What if these people told you that the same system of centralized command, which utilizes compartmentalization (each member of a group having exclusive knowledge that when combined creates an agenda not known by any member) and secrecy to perform covert military research projects and operations the world over, could not be used against their own domestic populations?

The United States nuclear program during WW2 and to this day, requires the confidentiality of thousands of people; and each day hundreds of workers take flights to area 51 and are sworn to secrecy as to what goes on there. So why then is it so incomprehensible that through a sophisticated chain of command (Need to know basis) and media control, that such a crime could be committed against a society that is too damn busy trying to outdo one another and SCARED of their own DEMOCRATIC GOVERNMENTS to do anything about it?

In light of the mountain of evidence implicating Mossad and the CIA (as summarized in links below) do you think its odd that the 'peoples party' (and its most prized representatives) completely disregard the issue of 9/11 as the mere paranoid fantasy of hundreds of scientists, scholars, politicians, aviation specialists, military personal; as an issue they "believe" is less relevant then torture? That is, the same torture practices used to gain the confession for the official conspiracy fantasy put forth by the US government that they have settled on?

Why does the questioning stop at interrogation malpractice, and not put more weight on the consequences this may have had for the 9/11 investigation which has also been debunked as being completely rubbish. Perhaps most importantly ... Why allow the christian right to commandeer the movement?

The following smash is a break down of 3 outspoken and popular 'progressives' who seem to think that every issue tied to Neo conservative corruption is relevant, except of course for the most fundamental controversy; 9/11 (i.e. the point around which all their other talking points revolve).

THE FREEDUMB FIGHTERS

Naomi Klein

Naomi claims that governments need catastrophe in order to capitalize on the shock that ensues thereafter for the sake of securing their own greedy ambitions on the not so free market. However, in spite of how necessary she feels this is, she for some reason doesn't think it's so necessary (in the face of all the evidence) that governments would do it themselves. I'll repeat that... Government (the interests that run it) NEED disaster (hence disaster capitalism)  to sustain the fake economy, but not so much that it would ever consider engineering threats when none naturally presented themselves. Right. They just simply wait for things to happen, and then their endless sociopathy, thirst for power and greed kicks in... OkEE!!! DO YOU REALLY THINK SHE COULD BELIEVE THAT KNOWING WHAT SHE DOES?!! GET REAL SON!!!

Naomi is the master of conspiratorial pragmatism; no one knows how to dance around the minefield quite like this silver tongued beauty. If she thinks its suspicious then why not investigate it? MAYBE ITS BECAUSE THE CULTURE AND MARKET SURROUNDING IT ISN'T BIG ENOUGH!!! (LOL!!!<<<I ROFL) She is going to ride the Obama show and market the half informed delusions of its billions of subscribers until the next great hope is put there for her to criticize. How honorable. Her and her comrads are part of the one percent they criticize, they are multi-millionaire talking heads leveraged some freedumb so to thwart a real revolution.

Don't get me wrong, I am not saying Naomi is bad or at one with this network of criminals, that would be completely unfounded and naive. Its more likely she knows but has reasons to not let you know... you know?

It should be noted that after I asked this question to Naomi directly I was removed from her friends list on facebook, and I was being as cordial as could be!!!

Here's her take on 9/11... all you need to watch is the first 2 minutes, as the rest is sensationalist 'twoofer' shit... I was too lazy to cut it out and repost...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZ-R-6k48qc&feature=

Excerpt from the Shock doctrine
"Believers in the shock doctrine are convinced that only great rupture-a flood, a war, a terrorist attack-can generate the kind of vast, clean canvases they crave."
-N.K The Shock Doctrine p26

Translation
"So its likely those believers would orchestrate these events if they felt it was "the only" way, and it may be worth investigating if we were actually serious about what we talk about! But instead I will continue to ramble on about Milton Friedman, and executive bonuses while never addressing the underlying crime of private banking!! In fact I will encourage the oppressive system by advocating that these banks start lending more debt to you from their fiat coffers, and then get mad at them when they dont and seem revolutionary. I wont out the criminal network orchastrating the fascade in investigating 9/11 because that would prompt a real public reaction, that we are not prepared to capitalize on. This is the part of my book I didnt talk about, its called Shock jock capitalism!"

Noam Chomsky

Apart from promptly replying to emails, being 90% right most of the time and doing a fair bit to divert the rebellious youths attention away from the human element of corruption while focusing on intangible abstracts such as "the machine" or "the wealthy" unaccountable corporations, insignificant somebodies, peaceful protest and other easily tamed neo-Marxist babble, Chomsky has achieved a FAILing grade in his analysis of 9/11.

Chomsky's premature conclusion is that US elements had no hands in the attack, because the idea (to him the idealist) is just absurd. The same guy who has spent his life documenting corruption and imperialism thinks the idea is implausible, OKEE!!! No inconsistency there whatsoever!!! On the basis of this subjective absolution the 'professor' has concluded that investigating any other narratives or investigating period is a complete and utter waste of time. To add to this poorly thought out and reactive statement Chomsky adds that the issue itself is entirely irrelevant; that even if rogue elements within the government were complicit if not entirely responsible, that its no big deal, (!) and clearly wouldn't provide any valuable leads that were in anyway significant in the present day, or have any ramifications on anything else in our society. GOTCHA!

The Blowback Throwback

He claims that the facts implicating US/ Israeli special interest involvement, may distort the concept of blowback. That is, if we were to assume it was not terrorists, it would imply that there is no resistance to American foreign policy, and undermine the message that is attempting to be communicated in such events. There is no doubt legitimate acts of terrorism performed everyday, which are a desperate attempt to resist globalization, this is not to say such acts are justified. They are about as unjust as the acts that provoked them. That said, this in itself (the 'professors' only real point with merit), this paranoia of compromising our worldview, is hardly scientific and sufficient to not at least want another fake independent investigation... no?

Governments have been proven to commit false flag operations in the past to push forth agendas (like the incident which precipitated the Vietnam war in which Israeli/ Americans fired on their own ships!!), it is documented, declassified, it shoudlnt among any rational populous be viewed as a "far-fetched idea". To incriminate special interests should not necessarily have the effect of downplaying the concept of blowback and the impacts of globalization, this is simply fucking stupid, and it would appear does more to preserve Chomsky's worldview and theories then it does truth.

Lastly, he believes that because the issue is past, it is thus not worth exploring, yet its ok for him to ramble on citing instances of government corruption from as far back as required to validate his own 'ism' when he feels the urge to do so.

This has to be the most pathetically, long-winded, insincere, uninformed explanation ever offered by a so called rebel. You sir disappoint me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzGd0t8v-d4&feature=

Howard Zinn

Howard Zinn, as with all of these individuals, has been an activist connoisseur, from WW2 hero, to anti-segregationist, to American anti-war spokesman, he has certainly made his contributions to the social justice movement. Being Jewish (like the majority of prominent American left wing spokespeople) and having a personal history with Nazism why would he not capitalize on this opportunity to incriminate the Bush nazi for this crime?

He criticizes 9/11 truth as being an irreconcilable issue, yet somewhere in his mind believes a socialist utopia can manifest out of a society in which the media (and indy media) is either monopolized or being represented by pussies who dont want to ask hard questions... right O then old boy!!!

If you and your bestselling cohorts would invest so much as 5 minutes in exploring, and generating awareness about the issue, this may have been resolved 7 years ago. Instead you'll spend twice the amount of time trying to rationalize why the situation isn't worth pursuing, and just let the other insecure nutjobs capitalize on it instead, until its too fucking late, and all you can do is sell us more fucking ebooks so we can arrogantly walk around and think we have the faintest idea as to how manipulated we are!!!

Seeing as the Iraq war is "over" I guess we can stop exploring that now too as it can never be reconciled! In fact investigating anything that happened more then 5 seconds ago is a waste of time, so disregard the first part of this sentence...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NxSRGgJ5gjY&feature=
*This interview is so multilayered in its deception, not only do they appear as if they are very bad actors, Howard Zinns hypnotic programming with his repetition that "its a distraction" and the (FAKE "real news"<<< SHILLS... THEY SPEND HALF THE VIDEO ASKING FOR YOUR MONEY TO WEAVE THEIR PHONY-LIBERAL webSHITE), the interviewer programs the viewer that the MIHOP (government made it happen on purpose) argument is wildly extreme, whereas the LIHOP (government let it happen on purpose) is more accepted and thus... sane. The "real news" and their pathetically lame attempt at tackling this issue in a marketable way is 100% bullshit. Props for the disinfo though guys

Keith Olbermann

There isnt much to say about this guys angle on 9/11, other then that its the bottom feeder of this morally moronic bunch. Like Michael Moore, Bill Maher and John Stewart he doesnt go beyond critiquing the Bush administrations incompetency (i.e dignifying the idea that this cokehead cowboy actually did anything other then look dumb), shocking his viewers with his pretentious diatribes against Bushs IQ, protecting the Obama hope delusion as shit hits the fan in slow motion, and ashes ashes we all bow down... But its mainly the fact he buys into the Osama ordeal, that's what's naive. Anyways, all of the aforementioned people have conceded that something is fishy about 9/11 in the event itself or in its effect, (more or less) but also add:

1) THE "WE ARE TOO DUMB TO INVESTIGATE ARGUMENT"
Basically that all these intelligently, outspoken and popular people (and anybody for that matter) are completely incompetent in investigating this issue, because they are simply braindead dunces who actually cheated on their university exams and slept with their professors to get in the highest ranking academic positions they fill today. We couldn't figure it out even if we were smart enough because I guess we would be gagged or killed and they would have to blame that on the right to fuel the phony left/ right delusion. That's not required quite yet. If it's because they don't want the stigma of "conspiracy theorist" tagged to their image, then how fucking renegade are they anyway? Come on, I mean... at least attack the neocons... they are only the tip of the iceberg, at least give us a show!!! FAAAAAAAAAACK SMIGGENS!!!

2) THE "THAT'S OLD NEWS ARGUMENT"
That the issue is itself a red herring not worth pursuing, and takes us away from things happening right now which we will apply this SAME REASONING TO IN THE NEXT 5 YEARS??? Come again? That is in a few years, the Iraq war and torture will be non-issues, both of which began immediately post 9/11... (which since 2003, when Chomsky published a book regurgitating the official narrative on the topic, has been a non-issue).

All these people contend that the issue of 9/11 is a red herring, and a distraction away from things occurring right now.

Let's assess the logic: 1) Things that happened in the past are less relevant then things happening now 2) Even though this is how all criminal cases work! 3) Therefore we should focus on more relevant things happening only now, because the future has no relationship with the past.

We cannot research the past and the present concurrently because we cant chew gum and walk at the same time. If there were criminal elements then, its likely there are still criminal elements now, unless we are naive idiots that is!

How the fuck is that even a person with a 3rd grade intellect can comprehend the significance of 9/11, yet these refined academics need the causal relationship explained as if they were in special ed...

3) THE "CONSPIRACY THEORIES ARE A LIABILITY ARGUMENT"
Translates into I enjoy my career and am content not overstepping my bounds and saying what needs to be said, and will gladly delegate this activity to some other group we will deem as a liability. If it is such a liability... then WHY is it such a liability!!!

These people have a lot invested in the left/right polarity. What people don't understand is that no matter where you find a rebel, you will find ego. The notion that the rebel is somehow selfless, and utilitarian rarely hits the mark, although this quality may be something that is aspired to. The ego is in the persona; 'the hero', sent there to slay the fire breathing corporate interests who's incinerating the slaves. The nature of the rebel is to strive for perfection, if ones viewpoint comes under threat, they have to acknowledge an imperfection, and invalidate their righteous self-image. It comes down to not wanting to be proved wrong.

4) THE "ITS LIKE JFK ARGUMENT"
When someone compares the incident of JFK to 9/11, tell them that you don't want to be their friend anymore. I'm kidding... but really... One guy, who was paid to lie to the people (politician/ JFK) being killed, doesn't approach the scale and importance of the events of 9/11, other then instating the left as morally superior. I believe that this is a subversive tactic as most view the JFK thing as no more then a American legend, or at best a nifty motion picture. When we relate 9/11 to JFK, we presume that the two are at par for their mysteriousness. BUMP THAT SHIT FROM YOUR MIND!!! The amount of evidence surrounding the 9/11 attacks is so overwhelming you can see it from fucking space!

The fundamental difference is that JFK's assassination didn't aid in the fulfillment of some agenda, and was likely and inconvenience for the powers that be, if not to provide an example to JFK's successors as to who was really in charge.

5) THE "THEY ARE TOO DUMB TOO PULL IT OFF ARGUMENT"
They made atomic bombs, private banking, vaccines, laser weapons, and facebook. They are not stupid.

Summary
What are these people hiding from? Why would they allow the right-wing groups to commandeer the 9/11 truth movement, and risk being criticized for not doing so? Whose interest is being served by these people (whether directly or indirectly)? Is it because they see it as a threat to their prized notion of government intervention, in that if government proved to be so easily corrupted, that this would compromise the leftist ideologies? It wouldn't, because if anything it would be special interests (criminals) within the government, and not the institution itself which bore the blame. People of such intellectual sophistication should know that... If they don't then WTF smiggens!!! HEY I KNOW!!! LETS JUST DEMAND MORE SHITTY JOBS, TO SAVE UP TO BUY DUMB SHIT AND TWEET WITH ONE ANOTHER ON HUGE FUCK YOU LCD SCREENS!!!! WOULDNT THAT BE NEAT!!!

Is it because they risked being blackballed by the media, like anyone else who has expressed similar concerns (with the exception of all the so called truther shills you are going to see a lot more off soon, preaching less indicting truths, making TV shows about the 9/11 conspiracy and trying to sell you more T-shirts while they prepare to give you 9/11 commission report 2.0). what has been the consequence of their works in social justice, asides from whatever little crumb the establishment would have given us anyway? What's relevant though is that these outspoken, highly acclaimed, academic powerhouses won't touch the issue with a ten foot pole. Instead they insist we must focus solely on the future and remain completely ignorant to the socio-historical progression of events that shaped the world we live in right now.  This scientific negligence could not be more profound!!! They are exhibiting the same attitude and depth of analysis as their arch rivals (the Washington generals) in the manner with which they address this issue. This can not be emphasized enough!!! What's more, and perhaps the most fundamental contradiction, is that if they felt this issue was fishy (like they admit), why not use their socio-political superstardom to bring much needed attention to the issue, so it could be resolved more quickly, freeing up more time to gab on endlessly about the morality of torture,  and other New York Times  bestsellers...

A Chomskyite talking to a CIA operative:

LEFTY- "IF IT WASN'T OSAMA WHO WAS IT THEN??"

OPERATIVE-"Oh... was some other patsy we tortured for 5 years, and convicted in a kangaroo court in another country, and oh yeah no press coverage... sorry... our bad"

LEFTY-"Oh phew, I'm glad! For a second there I actually thought that criminal elements of the government that rules us all with ease were the ones who told the military not to intervene and blow up skyscrapers, which among many others housed the central intelligence agency! Nope, these schizotypal fantasies were but figments of our own imagination, planted their by our own righteous indignation and unconscious envy of elitist power!"

OPERATIVE- "Hey its no problem, we've been doing this for many years!"

LEFTY- "Thanks bro... I mean... big bro!!! I am content that no further explanation or investigation is required and I can now continue rambling on about Blackwater, republicans, banker bonuses and anything else that will steer attention away from the actual criminal elements orchestrating this facade, while selling lots of books and gaining worldwide acclaim!!!"



THIS IS TO BE ACCEPTED AS OUR SOCIETIES HIGHPOINT OF INDEPENDENT THOUGHT... THESE ARE THE PEOPLE WE HAVE PASSIVELY PERCEIVED AS THE FRONTLINE CRITICS AND PROTECTORS OF OUR FREEDUMB, IT IS THEIR CRITICISM THAT SETS THE STANDARD FOR  MAINSTREAM INDEPENDENT THOUGHT, AND IF THEY REFUSE TO ADDRESS ONE OF THE MOST SIGNIFICANT SCAMS OF THE 21st CENTURY THEN THAT IS (IN A RATIONAL WORLD) IN ITSELF SOMETHING WORTHY OF INVESTIGATION. WHY DONT THEY JUST HELP PEOPLE BLOW THE CASE WIDE OPEN AND GET TO THE SOURCE OF THE PROBLEM ALREADY??? BECAUSE THEY COULD!!!

Everyone on the left is dodging an attempt to strike a  REAL blow to their nemesis Neocons that they have for so long worked to vilify? Why? Maybe, (just maybe) its because this whole thing is a fking I L L  U    S    I    O    N....

http://www.fadsmashers.com/7/post/2009/ ... pathy.html

[WATCHER.1]

Well done with 1 exception. The same people who murdered Kennedy did 9/11. When they got away with JFK, Vietnam was possible. And then RFK, MLK, S.E. Asia drugs and Oil; Allende, Contras, S.American drugs and Oil; First Gulf war, Bosnia, Eurasion drug transport hub and Oil; 9/11, Afghanistan, Iraq, Central Asian drugs and Oil. Add strategic minerals everywhere.
The list is much longer but the point is while the murder of one man can not be compared to the brutal carnage and blatant
theft that followed, the murder of JFK made it all possible. Do not forget that beside Vietnam, Kennedy had taken steps to remove the Fed, deny Israel nuclear weapons, take away the under the radar tax gravytrain of big Oil, and take the CIA apart.
Watcher.1