I kmow that I am making some eyebrows raise here but, please, before dismissing this post and conspiracy theories alltogether, read Stef at Famous for 15 Megapixels.
I think the problem with the dismissal of conspiracy theories on the events related to 7/7 and 9/11 is that they are dismissed in favour of an official narrative which has all the ingredients of conspiracy theories. So, why adopt one set of conspiracy theories and dismiss the other ?
''My people decide the truth in sixty countries every morning. And in every one it's different.''
Since March 29th 2006
8 comments:
Sophia,
I think that when one challenges existing "wisdom" or theories in the absence of hard evidence, a lot of energy is wasted .
One can always easily argue that there were policies developed by elites that were waiting for an opportunity to be implemented, i.e. The Project for the New American Century .
The opportunity is sometimes manufactured like the Gulf of Tonkin incident or WMD in Iraq. It would be naive to not expect that politicians would allow and direct events to happen to further their political agenda .
Then, there are , without a doubt, those programmed Manchurian candidates ready to act.
We should not let our paranoia influence our thoughts and arguments. It is counterproductive and a distraction. One needs to have an articulate counter political program to confront his opponents. A conspiracy theory is not enough. It is political masturbation. It is wise to avoid this pitfall regarless of one's suspicion and stiock to the facts as Chomsky always does.
There will always be events that political opportunists will use to further their agenda but the policy is usually firmly in place before the event. Hitler may have been a necessary but not a sufficient condition for the rearmament of Germany
The war in Lebanon last year is a clear example. The war was planned months in advance with the Americans and others and the IDF was only waiting for an excuse. The capture of the soldiers by HA was only the spark. The war would have taken place regardless of this incident.
Issam
Issam, without being paranoid, i think we should not dismiss anything that may make our leaders accountable. Conspiracy theories are not about persecution, they are about accountablitiy.
The operative word for any conspiracy and cloak and dagger operation is "plausible deniability". Without hard evidence or a whistleblower, one should avoid such theories in their arguements.
I too believe in conspiracies, but not conspiacy thoeries.
We sometimes have to wait decades to find out the truth. In the present we should limit ourselves to the known facts on which to base our actions.
On another note I want to mention that I ejoyed reading your posts on Cuba. Welcome back.
Issam
Issam,
I still have to recount my week in Havana. I loved Havana. It is a stunning city.
Do you know how they call Jews in Cuba ? 'Los Arabes'. Because they all came, as other Arabs, from the Ottoman empire.
I find it extremely difficult to swallow so many 'coincidence' theories as we're so often (and increasingly), expected to.
The real issue is who gets to decide what is or isn't described (and therefore discounted) as a conspiracy theory
Personally speaking, I didn't vote for or in any other way endorse the people who own and run our newspapers, television channels or even who run our governments.
And from what little I am permitted to see of their behaviour, the influences they are subject to and their motivations I have absolutely zero reason to trust their claims or assertions.
This is an intriguing subject which I have been meaning to write a post about for some time as it touches on many philosophical themes.
A conspiracy can take many forms and the so-called conspirators can be tightly-coupled or loosely-coupled but what is a common misconception is that they may be more or less mere opportunists.
Lets be honest here, this so-called "war on terror" is fertile ground for nothing more than your common-all-garden opportunist.
Maybe sometime soon...
Stef, Wolfie,
I think we pretty much agree. Aren't totalitarian regimes a conspiracy against their people by essence ? And aren't we governed by crooks and criminals taking our security as a cover? And aren't we made to espouse irrational justifications for the mess that sends our army women and men to the killing fields and slaughter civilians. Doesn't Tony Blair spend his time in the company of shallow people instead of people who can give him some wisdom ? Didn't Tony blair just stop an inquiry into corrution allegations involving a UK arms firm and Saudi officilas under the cover of national security concerns ? A cover that MI5 and MI6 aren't willing to give him now I read this morning in the Guardian.
So why on earth can't we think of conspiracies when everything around us is irrational ?
I believe that giving irrational people the credit of rationality, and that,s what opponents of conspiracy theories for 7/7 and 9/11 are doing, is an irrational act. I think we are living a paradigm shift where conspiracy theories will be more and more on the rational side because official narratives very very suspicious...
Post a Comment