September 11, 2001, the US was attacked by someone for some reason.
Never ask why.
Last Thursday On the Point with Tom Ashbrook (WBUR, with Jane Clayson filling in for Ashbrook) claimed they wanted to explore "Conspiracy Theories and the September 11th Terrorist Attacks." That should have made for a lively hour. It did not. James Megis, whose scientific background is in question (he has none and he was a moody little bitch who pissed off many writers for Premiere magazine when he was briefly in charge there -- and he knew nothing about movies when he was in charge at Premiere), was allowed to pontificate endlessly as was Jonathan Kay so you knew they were in attack mode. Kevin Ryan was granted little time (approximately 6 minutes) and attacked before and after his brief appearance.
Jane Clayson isn't a scientist, Jonathan Kay isn't a scientist, James Megis isn't a scientist. But all three worked to tear apart the only scientist brought on the program.
We have no idea the who and why of 9-11 and haven't made it a point to research it. Our position is that the 9-11 Truth Movement deserves credit for focusing on a serious issue and for the drive and determination behind the research as well as what the research will unearth.
And it seems to us that if you're going to do a program on the issue and to do it fairly, you don't attack a guest and you don't pretend that you or your guests are more knowledgable on science than a scientist. It also seems to us that you don't stack the guests to one side if you're trying to provide a fair look.
But that is how it goes. It's how it went on WBUR, it's how it went on Democracy Now! when Amy Goodman brought on the turncoat Chip Berlet (a pig who feeds at a trough and then turns on the trough is also an ass and Berlet showed his ass when he joined in on the right-wing attacks on the Christic Institute he once worked for) and allowed him to attack Dr. David Ray Griffin. Griffin gets challenged and mocked but a whore like Chip Berlet is treated with respect? A dirty whore who took money from Christic, made his name via Christic and as soon as the push-back on Iran-Contra targeted Christic, cheap whore Chip Berlet attacks Christic with a ridiculous article and that little whore is treated as a trusted source?
In a functioning world, that CIA puppet used to discredit the realities of Iran-Contra would be forever banished by the left.
We honestly don't believe any program has to do a broadcast on 9-11. But if you do and you say you're going to explore it, you explore it. You do not stack the deck. You do not whore. You play it fair or you find another topic to cover.
Instead, it's ridicule, ridicule, ridicule.
The search for truth is a natural human response to any incident. Someone dies, someone wants to know why. Stocks go up, someone wants to know why.
Sadness is also a natural human response to some incidents such as death and loss.
The media is determined to steer the American people on a pity trip using the 9-11 annivesary as their pretext.
Wallow in grief.
And the tacked on messages of (a) powerlessness and (b) unity will be sold as subtle undercurrents.
Powerlessness?
Well that certainly keeps the downtrodden down, doesn't it?
If we're all powerless, then 9-11 had to happen and, just as surely, everything else had to happen and we are all victims of what Gore Vidal calls "a sky god" and whatever he decrees. We lack free will or the ability to influence or, to be sure, the ability to rebel and cause real change.
Unity we deal with elsewhere this edition.
But the search for truth is not to be scoffed at. It has a long, historical tradition. Those who scoff at the pursuit of truth are either so anal that they believe they themselves are never wrong or they've got something to hide.
Whenver anyone tells you not to ask questions, make a point to ignore them. Without questioning, the entire American experience never would have happened.
