A friend writes in about my dismissal of the 9/11 conspiracy film “Loose Change 9/11.” His comments deserve a reply:
…the fact that your piece begins with “I haven’t seen either edition but…” takes some of the sting out of the argument that follows. Check out the video first and then let us know where you think the filmakers went wrong.
Here’s the thing: These theories about the U.S. gov’t plotting 9/11 have been circulating for years. I am well acquainted with those theories, as well as the rebuttals from Popular Mechanics and elsewhere. In short, one doesn’t need to see this propaganda film to know that the “9/11 Truth” movement is full of people with political axes to grind, despite all their talk of objectivity, critical thinking and the rest. And no, I’m not attacking the left here — the fact is that lots of the 9/11 conspiracist stuff emanates from the far right.
I have no idea what the truth is about 9/11 but one thing’s for sure — the government’s official explanation of the events is chock full of holes. I think it’s all worth picking apart and discussing to the fullest extent possible, don’t you?
I don’t. There are holes in the govt’s explanation, but these concern intelligence, communications and security failure. This epic and historic failure has already been picked apart, extensively. The Bush administration has shown us many times over that it is not competent to plan lunch, much less an elaborate mass murder/media hoax.
The conspiracists have seized upon proven gov’t failure in order to concoct an “alternative” explanation — one that happens to shore up their already existing view that Bush is a terrorist, that the U.S. is demonically evil, and that no one else in the world could do something so horrible. As much as conspiracists tell us not to take anything at face value, they’ve clearly made up their minds and they seek to convert us.
Now, there’s nothing inherently wrong with the art of public persuasion, of course, but we shouldn’t ignore that this film is the work of a lobby, in essence, and that the film’s “evidence” has been ginned up over time by self-interested parties. They’re not dispassionate, objective and critical, as they claim. They’re invested in a cause—and one that simply isn’t credible, I would argue.
Again, what’s the logic here? The administration staged a terrorist crisis to justify foreign wars? It’s absurd on its face. The 9/11 attacks revealed America to be weak and extremely vulnerable — what strategic purpose does that serve? What gov’t would willingly create such an image of itself? And right before going to war? Here’s where common sense proves a more reliable guide than the supposed expertise of the physicists and engineers who’ve lent their energies to the 9/11 Truth campaign.
Conspiracy theories are a cottage industry, and also part of an unseemly history. Serb nationalists used to claim that the Bosnian Muslims were shelling their own towns. It was politically expedient for them to say this, and I’m sure many convinced themselves it was true.
On a practical political level, this matters because the Democrats have a realistic chance of regaining control of the House and Senate this November. I think there’s an excellent case for the impeachment of President Bush, although the Democrats should probably take the high road and not risk such a major disruption. (They don’t have the guts anyway — they just rolled over on the confirmation of Michael Hayden as DCI.) If the Dems do retake Congress, they should start handing out subpoenas and investigating this White House for all manner of wrongdoing. They should make this a long campaign for 2008, drumming the “culture of corruption” theme into the national consciousness. Any talk of investigating supposed 9/11 coverups (from, say, Cynthia McKinney) will help to discredit the Democrats at a time when they could actually succeed, and maybe even do some good.
In short, conspiracy theories masquerade as politics but are in fact a distraction from politics.
Comments are closed.