Jump to content

Conspiracy of Conspiracy

John Simkin

Recommended Posts

I'm continually amazed by that Loose Change crowd; they turn on one another at the drop of a hat. Apparently they now think that Jim Fetzer is a disinfo agent!


Now, I don't see eye-to-eye with Mr Fetzer on most matters, but a disinfo agent?! Oh, puh-leeze!

It’s amazing how the Loose Change crowd will treat someone like Fetzer. I also don’t agree with his views, some of them seem pretty aberrant to me, but then so do most of the Loose Change statements and theories, anyway. Their video appears to be largely flash over substance. It’s hard to believe that these ‘kids’ produced it.

But talking about Jim Fetzer so rude and abusively is very bad form. He is one of their own, after all. They speak about him like he’s a neophyte to the 9/11 movement:

“ ***Treat him like an immature child that needs to be taught TABLE MANNERS****. “

“ Whenever I see or hear him speak, I can't help thinking of that descending scale tuba bit they used to do on the Flintstones whenever Fred was flabbergasted. He is a very hard person to listen to. Phlegmatic is a term I'd use (incorrectly) but the word sounds like he does - phlegmy. “

“If you want to really kick him in the balls - ask him and then turn his volume down and play some elevator music for a minute or two, he's going to deny it and waffle anyway.”

“But thats how it works, you (meaning Fetzer) can't turn up dressed as a pink elephant and infiltrate a movement to destroy it - you need to do some legwork first to prove yourself and work your way into the group - then at the crucial moment, you do your thing.”

Granted that he can appear “out there” but to suggest that he is a neophyte, that he hasn’t paid his dues, and is a disinformation-agent is absurd. Jim Fetzer certainly has put serious effort in conspiracy theories. These kids (the loose change bunch) are definitely showing their age and their colors. Like a pack of rabid hyenas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 48
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I quite agree. Mr Fetzer is nothing if not sincere in his beliefs.

I'm wondering if there is something a little different about the 9/11 conspiracy; some believers in it seem to eager to turn on each other. I haven't noticed this behaviour regarding other conspiracy theories.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I quite agree. Mr Fetzer is nothing if not sincere in his beliefs.

I'm wondering if there is something a little different about the 9/11 conspiracy; some believers in it seem to eager to turn on each other. I haven't noticed this behaviour regarding other conspiracy theories.

Many of them appear to be very young.

John Dolva has an excellent post on "Groupthink" in the JFK Assasination thread.

It seems some (or several) of these 9/11 forums are practicing textbook "Groupthink" as John's post defines it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 9 months later...
'You did this hit piece because your corporate masters instructed you to. You are a controlled asset of the new world order ... bought and paid for." "Everyone has some skeleton in the cupboard. How else would MI5 and special branch recruit agents?" "Shill, traitor, sleeper", "leftwing gatekeeper", "accessory after the fact", "political whore of the biggest conspiracy of them all".

These are a few of the measured responses to my article, a fortnight ago, about the film Loose Change, which maintains that the United States government destroyed the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon. Having spent years building up my leftwing credibility on behalf of my paymasters in MI5, I've blown it. I overplayed my hand, and have been exposed, like Bush and Cheney, by a bunch of kids with laptops. My handlers are furious.

I believe that George Bush is surrounded by some of the most scheming, devious, ruthless men to have found their way into government since the days of the Borgias. I believe that they were criminally negligent in failing to respond to intelligence about a potential attack by al-Qaida, and that they have sought to disguise their incompetence by classifying crucial documents.

I believe, too, that the Bush government seized the opportunity provided by the attacks to pursue a longstanding plan to invade Iraq and reshape the Middle East, knowing full well that Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with 9/11. Bush deliberately misled the American people about the links between 9/11 and Iraq and about Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction. He is responsible for the murder of many tens of thousands of Iraqis.

But none of this is sufficient. To qualify as a true opponent of the Bush regime, you must also now believe that it is capable of magic. It could blast the Pentagon with a cruise missile while persuading hundreds of onlookers that they saw a plane. It could wire every floor of the twin towers with explosives without attracting attention and prime the charges (though planes had ploughed through the middle of the sequence) to drop each tower in a perfectly timed collapse. It could make Flight 93 disappear into thin air, and somehow ensure that the relatives of the passengers collaborated with the deception. It could recruit tens of thousands of conspirators to participate in these great crimes and induce them all to have kept their mouths shut, for ever.

In other words, you must believe that Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and their pals are all-knowing, all-seeing and all-powerful, despite the fact that they were incapable of faking either weapons of mass destruction or any evidence at Ground Zero that Saddam Hussein was responsible. You must believe that the impression of cackhandedness and incompetence they have managed to project since taking office is a front. Otherwise you are a traitor and a spy.

Why do I bother with these morons? Because they are destroying the movements some of us have spent a long time trying to build. Those of us who believe that the crucial global issues - climate change, the Iraq war, nuclear proliferation, inequality - are insufficiently debated in parliament or congress, that corporate power stands too heavily on democracy, that war criminals, cheats and liars are not being held to account, have invested our efforts in movements outside the mainstream political process. These, we are now discovering, are peculiarly susceptible to this epidemic of gibberish.

The obvious corollorary to the belief that the Bush administration is all-powerful is that the rest of us are completely powerless. In fact it seems to me that the purpose of the "9/11 truth movement" is to be powerless. The omnipotence of the Bush regime is the coward's fantasy, an excuse for inaction used by those who don't have the stomach to engage in real political fights.

Let me give you an example. The column I wrote about Loose Change two weeks ago generated 777 posts on the Guardian Comment is Free website, which is almost a record. Most of them were furious. The response from a producer of the film, published last week, attracted 467. On the same day the Guardian published my article about a genuine, demonstrable conspiracy: a spy network feeding confidential information from an arms control campaign to Britain's biggest weapons manufacturer, BAE Systems. It drew 60 responses. The members of the 9/11 cult weren't interested. If they had been, they might have had to do something. The great virtue of a fake conspiracy is that it calls on you to do nothing.

The 9/11 conspiracy theories are a displacement activity. A displacement activity is something you do because you feel incapable of doing what you ought to do. A squirrel sees a larger squirrel stealing its horde of nuts. Instead of attacking its rival, it sinks its teeth into a tree and starts ripping it to pieces. Faced with the mountainous challenge of the real issues we must confront, the chickens in the "truth" movement focus instead on a fairytale, knowing that nothing they do or say will count, knowing that because the perpetrators don't exist, they can't fight back. They demonstrate their courage by repeatedly bayoneting a scarecrow.

Many of those who posted responses on Comment is Free contend that Loose Change (which was neatly demolished in the BBC's film The Conspiracy Files on Sunday night) is a poor representation of the conspiracists' case. They urge us instead to visit websites like 911truth.org, physics911.net and 911scholars.org, and to read articles by the theology professor David Ray Griffin and the physicist Steven E Jones.

Concerned that I might have missed something, I have now done all those things, and have come across exactly the same concatenation of ill-attested nonsense as I saw in Loose Change. In all these cases you will find wild supposition raised to the status of incontrovertible fact, rumour and confusion transformed into evidence, selective editing, the citation of fake experts, the dismissal of real ones. Doubtless I will now be told that these are not the true believers: I will need to dive into another vat of tripe to get to the heart of the conspiracy.

The 9/11 truthers remind me of nothing so much as the climate change deniers, cherry-picking their evidence, seizing any excuse for ignoring the arguments of their opponents. Witness the respondents to my Loose Change column who maintain that the magazine Popular Mechanics, which has ripped the demolition theories apart, is a government front. They know this because one of its editors, Benjamin Chertoff, is the brother/nephew/first cousin of the US homeland security secretary Michael Chertoff. (They are, as far as Benjamin can discover, unrelated, but what does he know?)

Like the millenarian fantasies which helped to destroy the Levellers as a political force in the mid-17th century, this crazy distraction presents a mortal danger to popular oppositional movements. If I were Bush or Blair, nothing would please me more than to see my opponents making idiots of themselves, while devoting their lives to chasing a phantom. But as a controlled asset of the new world order, I would say that, wouldn't I? It's all part of the plot.



Subsequent to the third edition of Loose Change and your James Whale interview, a couple of questions....

Whale inferred that Tim Sparks has been made wealthy. Is that from the Loose Change franchise (if you know)?

As you seem to be an advocate of real truth as opposed to the manufactured "truth" some subscribe to for their own agenda, has the 9/11 "truth" movement been a windfall for some in terms of capitalizing on publications, internet advertising, and/or paid speaking engagements?

Sorry to pose this to you, I am not implying anything with respect to you, but as you're a journalist, and you may have some insight here. I have asked a few about this and have never really received a tangible answer. I do have a problem when people capitalize on the gross misfortune of others, except where it is done to survive while dedicating their time to altruistic efforts. Some so-called "truthers" do seem to be eeking out a meager living only to support their research (not that I agree with them, but I don't think they're scamming the public to get rich, playing on the public outrage and carnage of 9/11), someone like maybe, Fetzer.

If some out there are pandering to the public's outrage and capitalizing off the dead while making themselves wealthy in the bargain, I'd sure like to see those exposed.

Any comments? You see I wonder about the "noble" intentions of many of these people. I have read that there are likely over a million people dabbling in the "truth" movement now. Seems like a cult.

Thanks in advance....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in

Sign In Now

  • Create New...