Guatemala News

Saturday
May 25th
Text size
  • Increase font size
  • Default font size
  • Decrease font size
Home Opinion Syndicated The Next Wave A Conspiracy So Immense

A Conspiracy So Immense

E-mail Print PDF

national_park_service_9-11NEW YORK - Is this the Age of the Conspiracy Theory? Plenty of evidence suggests that we are in something of a golden age for citizen speculation, documentation, and inference that takes shape - usually on the Internet - and spreads virally around the globe. In the process, conspiracy theories are pulled from the margins of public discourse, where they were generally consigned in the past, and sometimes into the very heart of politics.

I learned this by accident. Having written a book about the hijacking of executive power in the United States in the Bush years, I found myself, in researching new developments, stumbling upon conversations online that embrace narratives of behind-the-scenes manipulation.

There are some major themes. A frequent one in the US is that global elites are plotting - via the Bilderberg Group and the Council on Foreign Relations, among others - to establish a "One World Government" dominated by themselves rather than national governments. Sometimes, more folkloric details come into play, broadening the members of this cabal to include the Illuminati, the Freemasons, Rhodes Scholars, or, as always, the Jews.

Naomi Wolf

 naomi wolf Naomi Wolf, the author, most recently, of The End of America: Letter of Warning to a Young Patriot and the forthcoming Give me Liberty: How to Become an American Revolutionary, is co-founder of the American Freedom Campaign, a US democracy movement.
The hallmarks of this narrative are familiar to anyone who has studied the transmission of certain story categories in times of crisis. In literary terms, this conspiracy theory closely resembles The Protocols of the Elders of Zion , featuring secretive global elite with great power and wicked aims. Historically, there tends to be the same set of themes: fearsome, uncontrolled transformative change led by educated, urbanized cosmopolitans.

Students of Weimar Germany know that sudden dislocations and shocks - rapid urbanization, disruption of traditional family and social ties, loosening of sexual restrictions, and economic collapse - primed many Germans to become receptive to simplistic theories that seemed to address their confusion and offer a larger meaning to their suffering.

Similarly, the "9/11 Truth Movement" asserts that al-Qaeda's attack on the Twin Towers was an "inside job." In the Muslim world, there is a widespread conspiracy theory that the Israelis were behind those attacks, and that all Jews who worked in the buildings stayed home that day.

Usually, conspiracy theories surface where people are poorly educated and a rigorous independent press is lacking. So why are such theories gaining adherents in the US and other affluent democracies nowadays?

Today's explosion of conspiracy theories has been stoked by the same conditions that drove their acceptance in the past: rapid social change and profound economic uncertainty. A clearly designated "enemy" with an unmistakable "plan" is psychologically more comforting than the chaotic evolution of social norms and the workings - or failures - of unfettered capitalism. And, while conspiracy theories are often patently irrational, the questions they address are often healthy, even if the answers are frequently unsourced or just plain wrong.

In seeking answers, these citizens are reacting rationally to irrational realities. Many citizens believe, rightly, that their mass media are failing to investigate and document abuses. Newspapers in most advanced countries are struggling or folding, and investigative reporting is often the first thing they cut. Concentration of media ownership and control further fuels popular mistrust, setting the stage for citizen investigation to enter the vacuum.

Likewise, in an age when corporate lobbyists have a free hand in shaping - if not drafting - public policies, many people believe, again rightly, that their elected officials no longer represent them. Hence their impulse to believe in unseen forces.

Finally, even rational people have become more receptive to certain conspiracy theories because, in the last eight years, we actually have seen some sophisticated conspiracies. The Bush administration conspired to lead Americans and others into an illegal war, using fabricated evidence to do so. Is it any wonder, then, that so many rational people are trying to make sense of a political reality that really has become unusually opaque? When even the 9/11 commissioners renounce their own conclusions (because they were based on evidence derived from torture), is it surprising that many want a second investigation?

Frequently enough, it is citizens digging at the margins of the discourse - pursuing such theories - who report on news that the mainstream media ignores. For example, it took a "conspiracy theorist," Alex Jones, to turn up documentation of microwave technologies to be used by police forces on US citizens. The New Yorker confirmed the story much later - without crediting the original source.

The mainstream media's tendency to avoid checking out or reporting what is actually newsworthy in Internet conspiracy theories partly reflects class bias. Conspiracy theories are seen as vulgar and lowbrow. So even good, critical questions or well-sourced data unearthed by citizen investigators tend to be regarded as radioactive to highly educated formal journalists.

The real problem with this frantic conspiracy theorizing is that it leaves citizens emotionally agitated but without a solid ground of evidence upon which to base their worldview, and without constructive directions in which to turn their emotions. This is why so many threads of discussion turn from potentially interesting citizen speculation to hate speech and paranoia. In a fevered environment, without good editorial validation or tools for sourcing, citizens can be preyed upon and whipped up by demagogues, as we saw in recent weeks at Sarah Palin's rallies after Internet theories painted Barack Obama as a terrorist or in league with terrorists.

We need to change the flow of information in the Internet age. Citizens should be able more easily to leak information, pitch stories, and send leads to mainstream investigative reporters. They should organize new online entities in which they pay a fee for direct investigative reporting, unmediated by corporate pressures. And citizen investigators should be trained in basic journalism: finding good data, confirming stories with two independent sources, using quotes responsibly, and eschewing anonymity - that is, standing by their own bylines, as conventional reporters do.

This is how citizens can be taken - and take themselves - seriously as documenters and investigators of our common situation. In a time of official lies, healthy investigative energy should shed light, not just generate heat.

Naomi Wolf, the author of The End of America: Letter of Warning to a Young Patriot and Give Me Liberty: A Handbook for American Revolutionaries, is co-founder of the American Freedom Campaign, a US democracy movement.


© Project Syndicate 1995-2008


Trackback(0)

TrackBack URI for this entry

Comments (13)

Subscribe to this comment's feed
"Naomi"
Thanks for your comments. Not sure how much was light and how much was heat, but undoubtedly you have been under fire since the folks at We Are Change cornered you in the bookstore and got your unfiltered opinion on tape.

Opinions are not worth much these days. For that reason, I suggest you check out the Journal of 9/11 Studies, and other research sites like 911research.com or historycommons.org. Also, for more undeniable and irrational realities, look up the undisputed facts about Operations Northwoods, the Gulk of Tonkin, and Opertaion Gladio.

Please don't try to have all the answers - nobody can do that. We need to work together, and your contributions have been greatly appreciated.

Thanks. Kevin Ryan
Kevin Ryan , October 30, 2008
Connect your own dots
Overall, thank you for bringing up some very important and timely subjects to ponder. You present a lot of good insight and advice. But I'm baffled by some of your reasoning. You've acknowledged on videotape that the Bush administration is capable of harming its own citizens, citing Christie Whitman's declaration that the NYC air was safe to breathe days after 9/11, and you've acknowledged, here, that the same administration conspired and lied us into war. But by challenging those who think 9/11 may have inside culprits, indirectly you are saying that you don't think it possible that Bush may have conspired AND harmed US citizens to get us into war or some other nefarious activity. You provide a litany of sociological dynamics which explain away the "conspiracy" phenomena, when by your own reasoning, it's safe to conclude that an "inside job" is very plausible.

"The real problem with this frantic conspiracy theorizing is that it leaves citizens emotionally agitated but without a solid ground of evidence upon which to base their worldview, and without constructive directions in which to turn their emotions."

This is very, very, very true. As someone who is active in the 911truth movement, I am very concerned about this. It's our achilles heel in some respects, but at no fault of our own. People who believe that the reality of 9/11 is vastly different than what we have been told find themselves in this quandary of needing to supply people with an alternative worldview, and more precisely, a solution. This is an unfair and heavy burden for those who simply want to get at the truth. And further, creating a new worldview can only have meaning once we understand the truth -- particularly about 9/11. I think this is why many "911 truthers" relate to so much of what you and others (like Ron Paul) have to say. You provide the other half of the equation.

BTW, IMO, the best way to dis-empower the "radioactive" connotations to the term "conspiracy theorist" is to stop using it and replace it with terms that are more accurate and relevant. You seem to have a marvelous command of the English language, I'm sure you can come up with some.

Thanks, again, for your important work.
Mark McKertich , October 31, 2008
http://www.ae911truth.org/
Here's a presentation of some "hard facts" regarding the 9/11 conspiracy theory from Richard Gage, AIA (http://www.ae911truth.org/).

(521) architectural and engineering professionals and (2693) other supporters including A&E students
have signed the petition demanding of Congress a truly independent investigation.

Study of a particular subject can cause one to believe (just like Naomi Wolf believes in her own material). Many people have no idea about the 9/11 truth movement because they haven't studied this subject and won't consider the issue seriously from a scientific point of view. Please educate yourself.
David , November 01, 2008
Dear Naomi,
Hi Naomi,

I read The End Of America almost a year ago. I may have recommened it to two-dozen people since. Your work is powerful because you have studied the material and based it on evidence. Is the thesis behind your book evidence of a conspiracy theory to close down and open society? Yes. But as the comment above states, those words only serve to make an issue seem foolish and baseless. We have a system that we are taught to trust from a young age. There is an official view on everything. This is the mainstream zeitgeist which many assume to be the truth. Anything outside of this narrative is considered conspiracy. I'm surprised that you so casually refer to the Truth movement as a group seeking psychological comfort in the "inside job" narrative, when this alternative theory is many times worse than a straight-forward terrorist strike.
How do we know things? We can study an issue and base our worldview on evidence that is verifiable. That is always closer to the truth than accepting an official narrative - provided you have the time and skill to do it. Naomi, please remember that the official story of 9/11 is itself a conspiracy theory. 19 hijackers, under the control of Bin Laden, conspired to commit a crime of historic proportion. So, everyone is a 'conspiracy theorist'. Pick one. Why is the official story not referred to as a conspiracy theory - because it can't afford to be cheapened with that label.

I would expect you to research the facts on this issue - not just explain it away as a "conspiracy" like so many mainstream journalists. Naomi, if 9/11 was assisted by the highest offices in the land, would you want to know? Please ask yourself this question and then begin your journey. You will not be alone.

Thanks for your intellect,

Your Canadian Friend
W. , November 01, 2008
Regarding citizen journalism
Dear Naomi,

Us in the Ron Paul Revolution HAVE been doing citizen journalism and giving stories to the mainstream media IN MASS. But they never pick up on it. We email bombed everyone at all the news corporations about the Iraq veteran who was trampled by the police and denied his rights. They didn't care. It seems to be completely hopeless.

-Shannon
Shannon , November 01, 2008
The evidence that calumniated Jews!!
Israeli citizens identified as Mossad operatives were arrested after they were seen filming the attacks from New Jersey, eventually as many as sixty two Israelis were said to have been taken into custody then released, the fact that there has been no further updates on this is one more nail in the coffin of Jew credibility…

It was via the buddy system on Odigo software, which allows one to communicate to a large group of people that share a trait, such as the Hebrew language, that thousands of Israelis were warned not to go to the twin towers on 9/11.

American Securities and Exchange Commission says Israeli citizens, sold short a list of 38 stocks that could reasonably be expected to fall in value as a result of the pending attacks. These speculators operated out of the Toronto, Canada and Frankfurt, Germany, stock exchanges and their profits were specifically stated to be in the hundreds of millions of dollars. Christopher Bollyn

We talked to their private security staff, we talked to people who were there with Larry Silverstein on 9/11… they said he got a phone call telling him not to show up to work, and he called his daughter and she never showed up either. Rudowski Prison Planet

The Readers Digest ran a story during the WTC construction stating explosives would be built into the buildings to facilitate their eventual demolition. Update… Paul Laffoley worked in the 1960's for Emery Roth and Sons, a New York City architectural firm. On Radio Orbit on February 21 2007, he said he helped to design the WTC with explosive charges built into the towers, in order to take them down neatly at any time.

The President said he witnessed the first strike at 8.46 AM, while he was in the hallway of the school waiting for the cue that would televise his visit across America…

THE PRESIDENT: I was sitting outside the classroom waiting to go in, and I saw an airplane hit the tower -- the TV was obviously on. And I used to fly, myself, and I said, well, there's one terrible pilot. I said, it must have been a horrible accident. But I was whisked off there, I didn't have much time to think about it. And I was sitting in the classroom, and Andy Card, my Chief of Staff, who is sitting over here, walked in and said, "A second plane has hit the tower, America is under attack." …Obviously there was a link from New York right into the schoolhouse, which could only have been set up by his own people.

The mainstream make no mention of the tremendous damage to WTC’s 4, 5 & 6, or the missile like object seen streaking toward impact simultaneous with the air strike in the South tower, visible at 5 min 50 sec in, 911 The Explosive Reality… the best 911 docco. Or that the, “…smoking gun” evidence justifying war on Afghanistan was the one hundred thousand dollars wired to Mohammed Attar prior to the 911 attacks, the stooge who sent the money got it from Pakistan Military Intelligence who received it from the CIA.

The Alex Jones connection… forty eight days before the 911 attacks on July 25 2001, he said in his weekly radio broadcast that Osama Bin Laden might be thinking of attacking the WTC… Surely that is just too cute. No sign of a plane at the Pentagon, else where is the wreckage, nor in Pennsylvania, a cruise missile appears to have struck the Pentagon.
Martin Timothy , November 01, 2008
Fallacies about conspiracies
Naomi,

While I appreciate your critique on the fascist tendencies of the Bush regime, your analysis of conspiracy theories is stereotypical and simplistic. I have addressed them here, including the fallacies surrounding the alleged psychological motivations that you attribute to conspiracy theorists:

http://www.gatecreepers.com/entries/exclusive-debunking-myths-on-conspiracy-theorie/

For example, your claim that 'A clearly designated "enemy" with an unmistakable "plan" is psychologically more comforting than the chaotic evolution of social norms and the workings - or failures - of unfettered capitalism' is unfounded for several reasons:

1) The fact that so many people are in denial about 9/11 being an inside job despite widespread evidence illustrates that they fear more the implications of their own government murdering its own people than 'unfettered capitalism'.

2) It can be argued that blaming a group of 18 hijackers for 9/11 is equally psychologically comforting, in fact probably more so because the easy apparent solution for it is to cheer on the government to go after them.

3) Many 'conspiracy theorists', including Alex Jones, are free market capitalists who believe in gun ownership; surely that doesn't square with your theory of fear of social chaos.

4) The 'plan' that you allege is believed by conspiracy theorists, at least regarding 9/11, is prone to error and contradictory statements by the elitists who are trying to cover it up. As far as elitist groups, with the help of propagandists (and unwitting commentators), 'unfettered capitalism' becomes a convenient smokescreen for top-down control. Elitist methods can be predictable (for example their problem-reaction-solution paradigm), but their 'plan' is not easy to predict unless you know the details.

The fact that it takes so much effort to uncover them offsets makes the 'plan' in practice no more easy to predict than an 'unfettered capitalism' controlled by the laws of the market (which is actually a source of comfort for capitalists who want a society that they can predict according to the 'science' of economics.

The Bilderberg Group and the Concil on Foreign Relations are not 'unseen' forces as independent researchers have been infiltrating the Bilderbergers and leaking their discussions; whilst there are publicly available quotes from CFR documents that call for abolishing national sovereignty, They are only 'unseen' because the US does not have a 'rigorous independent press' as you well know.
Gatecreepers , November 02, 2008
ae911truth.org
There is hard evidence, there are architectural and engineering professionals questioning the established theory. Watch the Blueprint for 9/11 Truth presentation or check out the evidence section at www.ae911truth.org,
Jonathan T , November 03, 2008
Forget about the Bildberg Group and the Council on Foreign Relations
I am sorry to have to announce very respectfully to Ms. Wolf, for whom I harbor nothing but admiration, that the above group and think tank, and the majority of the considerations contained in the above article of hers are entirely irrelevant to the controversy over what happened physically to buildings 1, 2 and 7 of the World Trade Center on the eleventh of September, 2001.

Did WTC 1, 2, and 7 explode or merely collapse? THAT IS THE QUESTION with which one must begin, not speculations about Bildberg activities, Jewish folks, this group or that group. Such ideological ruminations are merely a diversion. Worse, they are an excuse for not dealing with the sheerly physical aspects of the undoing of the three buildings that were brought down in New York City on the eleventh.

I thus invite Naomi Wolf to visist the Web site of Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth in order to watch the 2008 digital video of architect Richard Gage's account of the destruction of the buildings in question.
Also relevant in this respect is the excellent documentary film by Sophia Smallstorm, 9/11 Mysteries, Part I: Demolitions, which can be seen at any number of Web sites.


Pierre Stone , November 03, 2008
Not so fast
>>> Did WTC 1, 2, and 7 explode or merely collapse? THAT IS THE QUESTION with which one must begin, not speculations about Bildberg activities, Jewish folks, this group or that group.
-----------------------------------
I certainly respect Richard Gage and all the work he has done to boost the credibility of 9-11 Research.

On the other hand, I do not believe that the answers about the Buildings --- ultimately speculations which will be disputed by other experts, ad infinitum --- truly help explain anything, except to prove what we already know: a lot of people have been lying, and some of them must have pulled it off. That sounds like a victory, but IMO it's pretty much "nowhere".

The next obvious bone-headed skeptics' question is "WHY?" "Are you saying the US govt killed American citizens simply to launch a war? Isn't that loony?"

To which I would say, anyone who possessed a modicum of intellect and concern about America to actually lead them to READ books and papers on American Foreign and Domestic Policies and Visions, written by high US officials in positions of power and authority, would already have solid and definitive answers to these questions.

(Guatemalans certainly know about US-backed right wing "Christian" regimes who "kill their own people". How many tens of thousands of Guatemalans were slaughtered? Many times more than Sept 11. Sept 11 was not even a new event! Not unique. It was new to many of us, but not to those outside the US on the hard end of America's and CIA's beating stick and other torture and killing weapons.)

A number of people representing anywhere from a dozen to a few hundred or a thousand top elites published statements in black-and-white which described how it was VITAL and IMPERATIVE that the US wage multiple foreign wars to maintain and expand U.S. global hegemony.

And since launching those wars without restrictions would be politically untenable in the US, because "democracies don't support imperialistic adventures" [paraphrased] and the public would reject it, the ONLY way the above VITAL and IMPERATIVE plans could unfold (they said in black-and-white) is with a (likewise vital and imperative) BLOODBATH on U.S. soil. Sometimes termed "a major catastrophic threat", an event "like Pearl Harbor" that "wakes us from our soothing dreams", etc.

Check it: They said this MUST happen. Not maybe. MUST. If not, their vital plans would be nullified.

http://www.Takeoverworld.info/

MY GOD!

This was not a "conspiracy", per se. This was POLICY!!!!!

This was well-planned US policy by policy planners who enjoyed access to classified Pentagon documents as they served as Pentagon advisors and National Security Advisors. Bush appointed some of them to key positions.

One of my questions is that since these people WANTED to see many of us killed, horrible disaster, why we are trusting and relying on the very same people to protect us from terrorism? We might as well hire a murderer or rapist for a bodyguard, or hire some Al-Qaeda members to provide security.

As a matter of fact, some of these warmonger "protectors" are actually from a pool of past Al-Qaeda supporters, not members, who helped support three Mujahideen lobby groups, and who advocated for Islamic Radicals, despite some hailing from the Christian Right and some from Jewish Neo-con circles, and some from neoliberal "free market" circles.

This turns on it's head every O'Reilly/Hannity accusation about "terrorist supporters" amonst critics, since Fox (and CNN) put these actual "terrorist supporters" on their shows!
Gary Goodman , November 30, 2008
True Patriots Keep the Government in Check
My thanks to you Naomi, for revealing so much truth to the American people thus far.
Now, I wish to offer my heart-felt plea to you that you listen to the comments above. Explaining away the 9/11 truth movement as a mere conspiracy based primarily on your opinion has little positive effect on both your own message and credibility.
As another source for you to consider, please review: http://patriotsquestion911.com/
It will take some time, but I believe you will see the evidence surrounding the 9/11 truth movement, instead of the "warm blanket" theory you are suggesting in this article.
Personally, I deeply wish the 9/11 truth movement was just a fantasy, as I wish Gitmo and FISA were. But that's just not the case. Truth must prevail over all.
Steven , December 01, 2008
...
The individuals who believe the "official" story of 9/11 (planes impacting- fires- weakened steel- collapse) don't seem to realize that there is mathematical proof, (as undeniable and almost as simple as 1 + 1 = 2) that explosives were used to bring WTC 1, 2, and 7 down. This fact is not "debunkable" any more than 1 + 1 = 2! A simple analysis of the implosions based on the conservation of linear momentum proves without a doubt that the WTC buildings were destroyed by explosives. THERE IS NO OTHER PLAUSIBLE EXPLANATION!.
Tom Gentilo , March 28, 2009
Distribution of Mass in Skyscrapers
The conservation of momentum is about mass hitting mass. The collapse of the north tower is supposedly the top 10% progressively hitting the lower stationary portion. So talking about the conservation of momentum without talking about the distribution of steel and concrete in the towers is complete nonsense.

http://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=21925.0

So why can’t the NIST tell us the total amount of concrete in the towers. What is so difficult about providing a table specifying the TONS of STEEL and TONS of CONCRETE on every level?
psikeyhackr , June 19, 2009 | url

Write comment

smaller | bigger

busy
 

Pelicans by Ignacio de Wit

Help us with a Donation

Advanced Search