conspiracy – 9/11 Truth News

Michael Lerner on Likelihood of Official Conspiracy

Wed, 01 Dec 2010 01:26:01 +0000

“I would not be surprised to learn that some branch of our government conspired either actively to promote or passively to allow the attack on 9/11. For those who watched the reactionary political uses made of this tragedy, it’s easy to conjure up a variety of possible conspiratorial motives that would have led the president, the vice president, or some branch of the armed forces or CIA or FBI or other “security” forces to have passively or actively participated in a plot to re-credit militarism and war.”

The post Michael Lerner on Likelihood of Official Conspiracy appeared first on 9/11 Truth News.

We Need to Continue to Seek the Truth About 9/11

Sun, 08 Aug 2010 18:43:28 +0000

Over the past three years, a group of concerned Bloomington citizens has worked to raise the public consciousness about the need for 9/11 truth. These folks are sometimes called “conspiracy theorists” because they do not believe the official version of events. Once people get by their initial reactions to 9/11 questioning, however, much can be learned in the process.

To begin with, we all understand the definition of a conspiracy to be a secret plan, among two or more people, to commit a crime. Yet when faced with emotionally charged events like 9/11, many of us pretend that the definition of the word has changed.

It is certain that unless you believe these crimes were committed by one person acting alone, you believe in a 9/11 conspiracy. But people today have been trained to use the word to mean only a small subset of conspiracies enacted by powerful people, like government officials.

This guest column in the Herald Times Online is by Kevin Ryan, a member of the 9/11 Working Group of Bloomington.

Peter Phillips and Mickey Huff Respond to Chip Berlet

Tue, 27 Jul 2010 18:49:54 +0000

Outrageously, Berlet categorizes progressive intellectuals such as Peter Dale Scott, Michael Parenti, David Ray Griffin, Michel Chossudovsky, and by innuendo the two of us, as dangerous conspiracists. He uses a straw person technique by positing former LaRouche analyst Webster Tarpley, and the Church of God Evangelistic Association founder David J. Smith in the same category as the progressive intellectuals listed above. …

In his recent essay “Toxic to Democracy,” Political Research Associates Senior Analyst Chip Berlet uses the very same methods of demonization by association that he so strongly opposes. Berlet convolutes historical context, ideological differences, and progressives vis-à-vis extreme conservative, neo-con, libertarians in a diatribe of meaninglessness.

Berlet lumps valid academic research on State Crimes Against Democracy in with anti-Semitic jingoism and far right wing extremism.
He suggests that any research that even implies some sort of conspiracy is dangerous and suspect, seemingly forgetting a long list of proven US and other government conspiracies including: Operation Mockingbird, cointelpro, Gulf of Tonkin “Incident,” October Surprise, CIA-Contra Dark Alliance, Iran-Contra, WMDs and Iraq Invasion, and the overthrow of governments in Iran, Guatemala, Haiti, Chile, Greece, Indonesia, Panama, and many others.

Source.

See also:

Right Woos Left:
professional anti-conspiracist Chip Berlet defends Bush regime’s 9/11 claim of “surprise attack”
“Berlet’s page spends more energy pointing out that anti-semites believe there was a conspiracy on 9/11 than discussing the credible evidence of complicity. It’s a relatively clever smear campaign.”

The New Pearl Harbor:
A Debate On A New Book That Alleges The Bush Administration Was Behind The 9/11 Attacks
“In a new book, well known theologian David Ray Griffin, alleges the Pentagon may have been hit by a missile on Sept. 11 and that the Twin Towers collapsed from a controlled explosion. The book has been hailed by many who question the official record of what happened on Sept. 11. But Chip Berlet of the Political Research Associates, who has studied conspiracy theory movements, charges Griffin’s book doesn’t hold up because it is based on faulty premises and unreliable sources. Today we have a debate on the book and what happened on 9/11.”

The post Peter Phillips and Mickey Huff Respond to Chip Berlet appeared first on 9/11 Truth News.