Sau khi vụ "đảo chính, ám sát JFK" (1963)-xảy ra và được cơ quan an ninh chính phủ chính thức đúc kết toàn bộ sự kiện trong vòng 48 giờ với bản Tường Trình Warren đầy nghịch lý và quá nhiều lỗ hổng, đã khiến nhiều công dân, nhà báo, đạo diễn phim ảnh chất vấn tính chính xác và chân thật của sự vụ này. Thí dụ như phim JFK nổi tiếng của đạo diễn Oliver Stone năm 1991, do Kevin Costner thủ vai chính. Để bịt miệng và ngăn chặn hữu hiệu những ai chất vấn thông tin giải thích thiếu vững chắc từ chính phủ nhà nước, CIA đã được chỉ thị thông báo đề nghị đến các cơ quan an ninh báo chí chính qui nên dùng cụm từ "THUYẾT ÂM MƯU" (Conspiracy theory) để chụp mũ tấn công mỉa mai bất cứ ai thắc mắc chất vấn bản tường trình chính qui của chính phủ. Từ đó cụm từ "Thuyết âm mưu" đã thành một vũ khí hữu hiệu không chỉ để bịt miệng và còn ngăn ngừa bất cứ sinh viên, giáo sư, hay nhà báo nào có ý hướng thách thức chất vấn bước ra khỏi lề lối chinh qui chính sử đã "qui định" trong báo giới và học đường. Hay nói cách khác là những ai chất vấn phanh phui những tội phạm, tội ác nhà nước và những mảng "lịch sử đã bị tác tạo" đều phải bị loại bỏ với nhãn hiệu "thuyết âm mưu".
Dù như vậy, trong hơn 4 thập niên qua, những nhóm người có nỗ lực vận động và phanh phui tội phạm và tội ác chính phủ nhà nước đã không bị khuất phục quị ngã, họ vẫn không chùn chân. Họ làm việc chặt chẽ, cẩn trọng, và can đảm hơn. Trong hàng ngũ của nhóm người chất vấn đối kháng thông tin chính qui và tội phạm bí mật của thế lực chính phủ càng ngày càng tăng với sự tham gia không chỉ của nhũng công dân bình thường mà bắt đầu có thêm nhiều khoa bảng danh tiếng, cựu viên chức cao cấp chính phủ, như chúng ta thấy trong số gần 2000 học giả khoa bảng, cựu quan chức cựu thủ tướng đã tham dự trong đại hội chất vấn 911 tại Torronto 2011.
Chính tiến trình lặng lẽ nhưng bền bỉ với khả năng thấu bật đang chiến thắng này đã buộc chính phủ và nhóm quyền lực thành lập ra thêm một đội ngũ "chuyên gia" trong mục tiêu xâm nhập lũng đoạn để triệt hạ uy tín giới chất vấn âm mưu được gọi tắt là COINTELPRO.(Vụ Phản Gián) Nhóm "đặc nhiệm" phản gián này có nhiều thủ đoạn, một trong những thủ đoạn là giả trang lấy tên là những nhóm "tìm sự thật" và tung những loại tin trời ơi như Người Hành Tinh, Ma Quỉ, Thánh Kinh (anti Christ), hoặc Máy bay 911 Tàng hình v.v nỗ lực hề hóa và đồng hóa những câu chuyện bài viết của nhóm người chất vấn có khoa học sở cứ thành hình ảnh của những nguời "ăn không ngồi rồi và vớ vẩn, kỳ thị, cực đoan loạn trí"...
Nhưng nỗ lực xâm nhập này cũng đã thất bại trong hơn 10 năm qua. Những trang "trời ơi đất hỡi" cũng nhân danh "truy tìm sự thật" và "tố cáo nhà nước" này bị lật tẩy, một số có gốc từ Tình báo Do Thái (Israel) và của FBI hoặc CIA,- - và bị chính những nhóm người đối chất chân chính lật tẩy và chối bỏ không liên hệ. Những tên tuổi lớn như cựu phụ tá đặc trách soạn thảo chính sách kinh tế của Reagan, tiến sĩ Paul Craig Roberts; cựu dân biểu, ứng viên tổng thống Cynthia McKinney-; cựu thủ tướng Mã Lai Dr. Mahathir Mohamad, cựu thống đốc Minesota Jessy Ventura, giáo sư David Ray Griffins v.v tham gia vào trong nhóm "thuyết âm mưu" với những tác phẩm, diễn thuyết mạnh mẽ bằng chứng, đã khiến thủ đoạn bôi nhọ tạo hình ảnh "chủ thuyết âm mưu" là những người "dốt nát hoang tưởng, bệnh hoạn tâm trí" thất bại nặng nề. Con số những khoa bảng cựu viên chức cao cấp, nhà báo danh tiếng v.v nhập cuộc "vạch mặt âm mưu" càng ngày càng tăng và không còn úy kỵ hay hãi sợ bị coi là "những thuyết gia âm mưu" (conspiracy theorist) nữa.
Đặc biệt,sau những cựu viên chức cao cấp tình báo an ninh NSA đi trước nhưng thiếu bằng cứng cụ thể như Thomas Drake, William Binney, sự xuất hiện đột ngột của Wikileaks và nhất là Edward Snowden với đầy đủ chứng cớ văn bản cụ thể về một âm mưu (conspiracy facts) những tội phạm, tội ác, và những mưu đồ gian trá của chính phủ nhà nước, đã phá sập hoàn toàn lập luận bôi nhọ và mỉa mai của đám chính phủ nhà nước và các cơ quan báo chí khoa bảng chính qui về những "chủ thuyết âm mưu" là "võ đoán tưởng tượng không bằng chứng cụ thể". Bàng hoàng cho bọn quyền lực nhà nước chính qui hơn nữa, đó là vừa qua, lại có thêm nhà báo điều tra danh tiếng thế giới Seymour Hersh, người phanh phui vụ thảm sát Mỹ Lai (1969-1971) đã nhập cuộc bằng một cái tát tai nảy lửa vào mặt nhà nước Mỹ và báo giới chính qui -với quyển sách dành hẳn một chương trình bày đầy đủ bằng chứng lật tẩy sự vụ "đặc nhiệm Seal đột kích giết Bin Laden tại Pakistan" là hoàn toàn là trò bịa đặt! Những biến chuyển này đã xác định đầy đủ cái vũ khí gọi là "thuyết âm mưu" của chính phủ và đám báo chí, chuyên gia chính qui dùng để bịt miệng mỉa mai người khác đã hoàn toàn mất tác dụng.
Dĩ nhiên đám chính phủ nhà nước và tập đoản quyền lực không ngồi yên chịu trận. Chính những bền bỉ và chiến thắng của nhóm "thuyết âm mưu" thách thức, đối kháng, và vạch mặt tội phạm, tội ác chính phủ bằng những SỰ KIỆN ÂM MƯU (conspiracy FACTS) của chính tội phạm chính phủ đã buộc bọn nhà nước chính phủ phải tung ra một thủ đoạn mới. Hiện nay nhà nước Âu Mỹ và đám báo chí tay sai chính qui đang tiến hành một chiến dịch mới, mạnh mẽ và rộng lớn hơn sau những thất bại và bị đòn chí tử từ Snowden, Greenwald và Seymour Hersh vạch mặt nhãn tiền: đó là nỗ lực đồng hóa và cáo buộc những nhóm chất vấn thông tin chính qui, chính sử là MỐI ĐE DỌA AN NINH và ĐE DỌA NỀN DÂN CHỦ (Conspiracy Theorists Are the Greatest Challenge to Democracy) Nói cách khác, bọn chính phũ và đám tay sai báo chí, khoa bảng chính qui đã nâng cấp "chủ thuyết âm mưu" lên một bậc cao hơn: từ sự mỉa mai đơn thuần "một bọn dư giờ hoang tưởng võ đoán không bằng chứng" lên thành mối "khủng bố đe dọa an ninh và nền dân chủ". Nghĩa là từ một "quyền tự do ngôn luận hợp pháp" trở thành "kẻ thù tội phạm của quốc gia xã hội"!
BBC, cơ quan chính qui tay sai nổi tiếng của chính phủ Anh Mỹ đã khai mào chiến dịch này với tập "tài liệu "Phải chăng Những thuyết gia âm mưu đang phá hoại nền dân chủ" (Are conspiracy theories destroying democracy? lên án và nối kết những ai thách thức chất vấn những phi lý của chính phủ là ĐE DỌA và PHÁ HOẠI DÂN CHỦ!
Vài ngày sau khi "tập tài liệu BBC"này trình chiếu, thì tại Mỹ, một vụ bắn giết các nhân viên anh ninh chính phủ tại phi trường LAX (Los Angeles) xảy ra. Kết quả sau khi "điều tra" sau 48 giờ, "nguồn an ninh" đã cho biết thủ phạm "có đem theo trong người những sách vở thuyết âm mưu, lên án nhà nước chính phủ-" và gián tiếp kết luận rằng vì có tư tưởng "thuyết âm mưu" nên đã có hành động khủng bố tàn sát nhân viên nhà nước!!!" Quả thật, bọn quyền lực không còn cần "kiên nhẫn" chờ đợi thời gian đóng kịch cho sự hợp lý nữa. BBC vừa "tiên đoán", thì có ngay một "kẻ xấu thuộc thuyết âm mưu" đáp ứng nhãn tiền để CHỨNG MINH BBC...ĐÚNG 100%!!!
Câu hỏi "bình dân" đầu tiên cần đặt ra là từ khi 911, an ninh phi trường đã ngốn hàng chục, hàng trăm tỉ Mỹ kim, với hàng ngàn nhân viên an ninh được LUẬT PHÁP cho PHÉP thi hành những biện pháp gắt gao ngay cả được quyền xúc phạm dân quyền và nhân quyền mọi người, nhưng ...cũng không ngăn chặn được một thanh niên "bất bình thường!!!". Khả năng và tính hữu hiệu của an ninh như thế làm sao ngăn chặn KHỦNG BỐ? Nghĩa là trong hơn 10 năm qua KHỦNG BỐ KHÔNG HOẠT ĐỘNG, hoặc KHÔNG CÓ KHỦNG BỐ GÌ HẾT... Vì nếu có KHỦNG BỐ ĐÃ LÀM ĐƯỢC như hoặc hơn gã thanh niên "bất bình thường này"!
Câu hỏi thứ hai là thời điểm thuận tiện của sự vụ xảy ra: NGAY SAU KHI đài BBC mở màn liên kết và tố cáo "thuyết âm mưu" đe dọa "an ninh và nền dân chủ!" thì có ngay một sự kiện và các báo chí chính qui và an ninh nhà nước đồng loạt nhấn mạnh chi tiết nghi can có đọc, tham khảo những trang bài viết về "thuyết âm mưu"!
Một điều thú vị là CHỦ TRƯƠNG CỦA các NHÓM THÁCH THỨC và TỐ CÁO CHÍNH PHỦ chính là nói lên một sự thật rằng CÁI GỌI LÀ NỀN DÂN CHỦ GIÁN TIẾP HIỆN TẠI là PHI DÂN CHỦ. Hay nói cách khác chính xác hơn, hệ thống chính trị hiện nay tại Mỹ chính là một nền TÂN PHONG KIẾN (neo-feudalism) của ĐẠI BẢN TẬP QUYỀN (corporatism-plutocracy- hay kleptocracy)
Nói một cách nôm na theo chữ nghĩa Việt Nam, thì hiện nay nhà nước chính phủ và đám tập đoàn lũng đoạn nền kinh tế tài chính, gây chiến tranh đang thực hiện hành động "GÁI ĐĨ GIÀ MỒM" và CẢ VÚ LẤP MIỆNG EM" và "VỪA ĂN CƯỚP vừa LA LÀNG"! Chúng đang cố gắng ĐỒNG HÓA NHÀ NƯỚC CHÍNH PHỦ và NỀN DÂN CHỦ LÀ MỘT. Như vậy tố cáo, thách thức, chỉ trích Nhà nước chính phủ... tức là chống phá dân chủ!!! Luận điệu này nghe quen quen và từng lập đi lập lại cả hàng triệu lần từ hang Pắc Pó, Ba Đình và từ cửa miệng đám ngụy ngục, và từ Bắc Kinh Thiên An Môn!
Với sự kiện Wikileaks, Edward Snowden- Sarah Harrison, với những chứng cớ do Glenn Greenwald trình bày, và với tình hình phản ứng của quần chúng khắp thế giới, thì cái trò cả vú lấp miệng em này sẽ thất bại nhanh hơn. Nó chỉ có tác dụng cho đám tín đồ các giáo hội và đám thờ nhà nước chính phủ mà thôi. Nó quá thô thiển không còn đủ lực lôi cuốn như vài thập niên trước đây nữa! Nỗ lực NGĂN CHẶN SỰ THẬT, NGĂN CHẶN NGƯỜI DÂN BIẾT SỰ THẬT bằng các thủ đoạn bội nhọ mỉa mai đã thất bại; và giờ đây ngay cả thủ đoạn dùng BẠO LỰC PHÁP LUẬT để ĐE DỌA cũng sẽ thất bại. Vì quần chúng đang thức tỉnh trước những gian dối và tội phạm trắng trợn của chính phủ và tập đoàn quyền lực.
Giáo sư Butler Shaffer quả ý nhị khi ví von hành động tuyệt vọng của quyền lực trong bài "Con Kỳ Đà Long đã chết" rằng nó sẽ hung hăng điên loạn phá hủy tàn hại tất cả những gì chung quanh nó. Giai đoạn hiện nay, chính là thời điểm tuyệt vọng điên cuồng của giới quyền lực: Chúng tàn bạo trắng trợn và dối trá trơ trẽn hơn bao giờ hết! Chúng quyết tâm bảo tồn vị thế quyền lực độc tôn bằng mọi giá, nhất là khi ÂM MƯU DỐI TRÁ và TỘI PHẠM, TỘI ÁC của tập đoàn Nhà Nước và Quyền Lực Đại Bản đã bị vạch mặt với đầy đủ chứng cớ, cụ thể và chỉ dấu nhận thức của quần chúng tại Âu Mỹ và khắp thế giới đã rõ ràng không còn dập tắt được nữa như hiện nay cho thấy từ sau sự kiện Snowden.
Sự hiểu biết của quần chúng, hay dân trí, chính là mối đe dọa lớn nhất với thế lực cầm quyền và bọn chủ chiến. Hai thế lực tồn tại nắm quyền khống trị bằng dối trá, lừa đảo, và bạo lực. Vì vậy, chúng phải tìm mọi cách để ngăn chặn và ngăn ngừa quần chúng hiểu biết sự thật. Lịch sử đã chứng minh và đang chứng minh nỗ lực này sẽ thất bại và đang thất bại!
NKPTC
Tham Khảo và Nguồn Dẫn:
UK Politics
26 October 2013 Last updated at 23:10 GMT
But, for some, that scenario - a journalist working for a mainstream media organisation being manipulated by shadowy forces to keep vital information from the public - would seem entirely plausible, or even likely.
We live in a golden age for conspiracy theories. There is a growing assumption that everything we are told by the authorities is wrong, or not quite as it seems. That the truth is being manipulated or obscured by powerful vested interests.
And, in some cases, it is.
'Inside job' "The reason we have conspiracy theories is that sometimes governments and organisations do conspire," says Observer columnist and academic John Naughton.
It would be wrong to write off all conspiracy theorists as "swivel-eyed loons," with "poor personal hygiene and halitosis," he told a Cambridge University Festival of Ideas debate.
They are not all "crazy". The difficult part, for those of us trying to make sense of a complex world, is working out which parts of the conspiracy theory to keep and which to throw away.
He plans to compare internet theories on 9/11 with pre-internet theories about John F Kennedy's assassination.
Like the other researchers, he is wary, or perhaps that should be weary, of delving into the darker recesses of the conspiracy world.
"The minute you get into the JFK stuff, and the minute you sniff at the 9/11 stuff, you begin to lose the will to live," he told the audience in Cambridge.
Like Sir Richard Evans, who heads the five-year Conspiracy and Democracy project, he is at pains to stress that the aim is not to prove or disprove particular theories, simply to study their impact on culture and society.
Why are we so fascinated by them? Are they undermining trust in democratic institutions?
David Runciman, professor of politics at Cambridge University, the third principal investigator, is keen to explode the idea that most conspiracies are actually "cock-ups".
"The line between cock-up, conspiracy and conspiracy theory are much more blurred than the conventional view that you have got to choose between them," he told the Festival of Ideas.
"There's a conventional view that you get these conspirators, who are these kind of sinister, malign people who know what they are doing, and the conspiracy theorists, who occasionally stumble upon the truth but who are on the whole paranoid and crazy.
"Actually the conspirators are often the paranoid and crazy conspiracy theorists, because in their attempt to cover up the cock-up they get drawn into a web in which their self-justification posits some giant conspiracy trying to expose their conspiracy.
"And I think that's consistently true through a lot of political scandals, Watergate included."
'Curry house plot' It may also be true, he argues, of the "vicious" in-fighting and plotting that characterised New Labour's years in power, as recently exposed in the memoirs of Gordon Brown's former spin doctor Damian McBride.
The Brownite conspiracies to remove Tony Blair were "pathetically ineffectual" - with the exception of the 2006 "curry house" plot that forced Blair to name a departure date - but the picture painted by Mr McBride of a "paranoid" and "chaotic" inner circle has the ring of truth about it, he claims.
And Mr Brown - said to be a keen student of the JFK assassination - knew a conspiracy when he saw one.
"You feel he sees conspiracies out there because he has a mindset that is not dissimilar to the conspiracy theorists," said Prof Runciman.
He is also examining whether the push for greater openness and transparency in public life will fuel, rather than kill off, conspiracy theories.
"It may be that one of the things conspiracy theories feed on as well as silence, is a surfeit of information. And when there is a mass of information out there, it becomes easier for people to find their way through to come to the conclusion they want to come to.
"Plus, you don't have to be an especial cynic to believe that, in the age of open government, governments will be even more careful to keep secret the things they want to keep secret.
"The demand for openness always produces, as well as more openness, more secrecy."
Which brings us back to the moon landings. I should state, for the avoidance of any doubt, and to kill off any internet speculation, that I am not in possession of any classified information about whether they were faked or not. My contacts at Nasa are not that good.
But then I would say that wouldn't I?
Are conspiracy theories destroying democracy?
The more information we have about what governments and corporations are up to the less we seem to trust them. Will conspiracy theories eventually destroy democracy?
What if I told you I had conclusive proof that the moon landings were faked, but I had been told to keep it under wraps by my BBC bosses acting under orders from the CIA, NSA and MI6. Most of you would think I had finally lost my mind. But, for some, that scenario - a journalist working for a mainstream media organisation being manipulated by shadowy forces to keep vital information from the public - would seem entirely plausible, or even likely.
We live in a golden age for conspiracy theories. There is a growing assumption that everything we are told by the authorities is wrong, or not quite as it seems. That the truth is being manipulated or obscured by powerful vested interests.
And, in some cases, it is.
'Inside job' "The reason we have conspiracy theories is that sometimes governments and organisations do conspire," says Observer columnist and academic John Naughton.
It would be wrong to write off all conspiracy theorists as "swivel-eyed loons," with "poor personal hygiene and halitosis," he told a Cambridge University Festival of Ideas debate.
They are not all "crazy". The difficult part, for those of us trying to make sense of a complex world, is working out which parts of the conspiracy theory to keep and which to throw away.
Mr Naughton is one of three lead investigators in a major new Cambridge University project to investigate the impact of conspiracy theories on democracy.
The internet is generally assumed to be the main driving force behind the growth in conspiracy theories but, says Mr Naughton, there has been little research into whether that is really the case.He plans to compare internet theories on 9/11 with pre-internet theories about John F Kennedy's assassination.
Like the other researchers, he is wary, or perhaps that should be weary, of delving into the darker recesses of the conspiracy world.
"The minute you get into the JFK stuff, and the minute you sniff at the 9/11 stuff, you begin to lose the will to live," he told the audience in Cambridge.
Like Sir Richard Evans, who heads the five-year Conspiracy and Democracy project, he is at pains to stress that the aim is not to prove or disprove particular theories, simply to study their impact on culture and society.
Why are we so fascinated by them? Are they undermining trust in democratic institutions?
David Runciman, professor of politics at Cambridge University, the third principal investigator, is keen to explode the idea that most conspiracies are actually "cock-ups".
"The line between cock-up, conspiracy and conspiracy theory are much more blurred than the conventional view that you have got to choose between them," he told the Festival of Ideas.
"There's a conventional view that you get these conspirators, who are these kind of sinister, malign people who know what they are doing, and the conspiracy theorists, who occasionally stumble upon the truth but who are on the whole paranoid and crazy.
"Actually the conspirators are often the paranoid and crazy conspiracy theorists, because in their attempt to cover up the cock-up they get drawn into a web in which their self-justification posits some giant conspiracy trying to expose their conspiracy.
"And I think that's consistently true through a lot of political scandals, Watergate included."
'Curry house plot' It may also be true, he argues, of the "vicious" in-fighting and plotting that characterised New Labour's years in power, as recently exposed in the memoirs of Gordon Brown's former spin doctor Damian McBride.
The Brownite conspiracies to remove Tony Blair were "pathetically ineffectual" - with the exception of the 2006 "curry house" plot that forced Blair to name a departure date - but the picture painted by Mr McBride of a "paranoid" and "chaotic" inner circle has the ring of truth about it, he claims.
And Mr Brown - said to be a keen student of the JFK assassination - knew a conspiracy when he saw one.
"You feel he sees conspiracies out there because he has a mindset that is not dissimilar to the conspiracy theorists," said Prof Runciman.
He is also examining whether the push for greater openness and transparency in public life will fuel, rather than kill off, conspiracy theories.
"It may be that one of the things conspiracy theories feed on as well as silence, is a surfeit of information. And when there is a mass of information out there, it becomes easier for people to find their way through to come to the conclusion they want to come to.
"Plus, you don't have to be an especial cynic to believe that, in the age of open government, governments will be even more careful to keep secret the things they want to keep secret.
"The demand for openness always produces, as well as more openness, more secrecy."
Which brings us back to the moon landings. I should state, for the avoidance of any doubt, and to kill off any internet speculation, that I am not in possession of any classified information about whether they were faked or not. My contacts at Nasa are not that good.
But then I would say that wouldn't I?
---
============================
Sources: Alleged LAX gunman had 'new world order' conspiracy theory tract
NBC News
Paul Anthony Ciancia, 23, is shown in a driver's license photo.By Pete Williams and Andrew Blankstein, NBC News
The man who allegedly killed a TSA worker and wounded three others at Los Angeles International Airport on Friday had anti-government literature in his possession outlining an alleged conspiracy to create a single global government, law enforcement sources tell NBC News.The sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the material recovered from Paul Anthony Ciancia, 23, after the shootout at LAX appeared to have been prepared by a group called “New World Order.” One source said it also expressed animus toward racial minorities.
There is no record of a radical group by that name and the term “New World Order” is often used by conspiracy-minded groups and individuals to describe an alleged secret plot to establish an autonomous world government that would replace sovereign nations and put an end to international power struggles.
On Saturday, Mark Potok, an expert on hate groups with the Southern Poverty Law Center, published additional details on the literature, citing "a knowledgeable source with ranking law enforcement contacts." Potok said the one-page “manifesto” in Ciacia's possession included references to the Federal Reserve and “fiat currency” -- terms borrowed from the antigovernment “Patriot” movement.
Very little was known about Cianci, who had lived in the Philadelphia area before moving to California.
His brother told police in New Jersey he had received a text message from the suspect Friday morning saying he was thinking about taking his life.
Ciancia’s father, also named Paul, told NBC station KNBC that he last spoke to his son a week ago, when the son said the economy was depressed. The senior Ciancia said he didn’t know if his son had a job or if he owned any weapons, but confirmed that he was in California.
Ciancia was shot by law enforcement and taken into custody after he allegedly began shooting at Transportation Security Administration workers with an assault rifle at about 9:20 a.m. local time.
Passengers at LAX describe the moments after the shooting started.
Federal officials said it was unclear whether the gunman was targeting TSA workers or was trying to shoot his way through to gain greater access to the airport. But one witness said the shooter, while walking through the terminal with his weapon, approached him with a one-word question.
"All he said was, 'TSA?' Just like that," Leon Saryan told MSNBC.
The shooting started in Terminal 3, which serves Virgin America and other airlines. Ciancia allegedly took a 223-caliber AR-15 style, semiautomatic rifle out of a duffle bag and fired on TSA officers at a screening checkpoint, authorities said. He then went farther into the terminal, where he exchanged fire with law enforcement and was shot multiple times in the chest, they said.
He was hospitalized in critical condition, authorities said.
Police said quick action by airport officers averted a worse tragedy.
Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti said at a news conference later Friday that the gunman had with him at least 100 more rounds of ammunition that “literally would have killed everyone in that terminal.”
NBC's Ted Greenberg and Nyree Arabian contributed to this report.
http://investigations.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/11/01/21279788-sources-alleged-lax-gunman-had-new-world-order-conspiracy-theory-tract?lite
About those crazy NSA/FBI/CIA conspiracy theorists…
----------------------
Infiltration, Misinformation, Disruption
The 9/11 truth movement is a prime target for disinformation, infiltration, and other forms of sabotage by forces who do not want the public asking difficult questions about 9/11. Believers of the official story may see the discussion of disinformation as further evidence of “paranoia,” but objective observers and researchers recognize the clear evidence of disinformation. Disinformation and counterintelligence sabotage have long been used by government authorities in subverting progressive groups and causes (see Cointelpro).Agents of disinformation may not “play their hand” until the right moment and much disinformation is carefully crafted to appear legitimate. Misleading evidence is often delivered alongside accurate information. On the other hand, some disinformation promotes ridiculous claims and behavior in order to sow confusion and undermine credibility.
Disinformation requires intentionality while misinformation does not. In the 9/11 truth movement, you will come across both—evidence, materials, researchers, and groups that either consciously or unconsciously promote false or misleading information. Much incorrect information within the 9/11 truth community likely began as disinformation but has been perpetuated as unintentional misinformation.
Resources
Links
- Trojan Horses 911review.com
- Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation 911Truth.org
- Disinformation Wikipedia
- Eric D. Williams: 9/11 Accountability Conference Director and Holocaust Revisionist!?
- “No Planes” Theory Oilempire.us
- “Mini-Nukes” 911review.com
- “Pentagon Missile Hoax” Oilempire.us
- The Pentagon Attack: What the Physical Evidence Shows 911research.wtc7.net
- Arabesque’s Blog Covering Disinfo
- Personal Attacks Against Jim Hoffman wtc7.net
- Plane Pods Oilempire.us
- The 9/11truth vs. 9/11speculation movements
- Rick Siegel’s 9/11 Eyewitness: Sensationalism and Pseudo-Science by Jim Hoffman
Dis/Misinfo Links
• Morgan Reynolds, David Shayler - No Planes• 9/11 Eyewitness - Rick Siegel
• Team8plus/911bloglines/TV Fakery - Nico Haupt
• WingTV
• Scholars for 9/11 Truth - Jim Fetzer
• 9/11 In Plane Site - Dave vonKleist - Plane Pods
• Judy Wood - Star Wars Beam Weapons
• Daryl Bradford Smith - “9/11 Was A Zionist Job”
Books
• The War on Truth 9/11, Disinformation and the Anatomy of Terrorism by Nafeez Mosaddeq AhmedAudio/VIdeo
• Visibility 9/11 COINTELPRO Special - Michael Wolsey interviews Jim Hoffman, William Pepper, and John Albanese• WMD at the WTC on Google Video - From Rick Siegel and the makers of “9/11 Eyewitness”
• 9/11: In Plane Site on Google VIdeo
This is a very sensitive topic. Some may see it as “divisive” or inflammatory to name suspected examples and outlets of disinformation. We think it is a necessary part of democratic debate and any sort of movement dedicated to truth. Nothing is ever 100% sure, but we can confidently say that the resources named on this page are spreading information that is unsupported by factual evidence and is highly damaging to the movement.
The issue of disinformation/infiltration can easily lead to paranoia. It is essential to maintain a clear head, whether delving into this subject academically or dealing with it directly.
The objectives and methods of disinformation are quite sophisticated. Here are a few of the main strategies:
The issue of disinformation/infiltration can easily lead to paranoia. It is essential to maintain a clear head, whether delving into this subject academically or dealing with it directly.
The objectives and methods of disinformation are quite sophisticated. Here are a few of the main strategies:
- The Straw Man Argument/Sensationalism - by promoting speculative, sensational, and false evidence, opponents can setup easily debunkable or dismissable points that can be used to lend credence to their position. The opposition prefers dealing with topics that can be easily countered, or that simply make 9/11 skeptics look like kooks. Controlled demolition and no plane at the Pentagon are some of the most incredible theories in the movement. Whether or not there is prevalent evidence to support these theories almost doesn’t matter if the public is likely to be incredulous and quickly dismiss them. At TruthMove, we find controlled demolition to be a compelling hypothesis but not theories of a missile or military plane at the Pentagon. Sensational issues such as these also have a way of overshadowing the drier, more documentary evidence. If, for example, controlled demolition captures your imagination, you may not be so interested in the hundreds of other details that together make a watertight case for government complicity.
- Muddying the Waters - making it harder to discern the real evidence/researchers/websites from the fake ones. This approach both frustrates efforts at understanding the subject and makes the project less focused and more frustrating to be a part of. For example, when a newcomer visits the Scholars for 9/11 Truth site, and sees that there are two exclusive, competing groups (that are each essentially calling the other “disinfo”), they might become frustrated or dismissive with the whole movement. While one may be interested in researching and “getting to the bottom of 9/11,” distinguishing between honest information and disinformation, between trustworthy and suspect sources becomes another time-consuming, distracting layer of investigation.
- Bad Jacketing/Death by Association/Smear Campaign - by including the target idea/individual/movement along with another topic or personality that is disliked or discredited (UFOs, anti-semitism, nazis, etc.), the original subject can be smeared and dismissed. These smear campaigns can be extremely effective, as most people are very concerned with the image of a group or subject that they might get involved with. While not entirely due to disinformation, you can see this dynamic at work in the generalized image of “conspiracy theories.” For some reason, many diverse topics—UFOs, 9/11, JFK, Illuminati, Satanism, New World Order, Shapeshifting Aliens—are commonly conflated with each other in people’s minds.
- Paranoia/Divide and Conquer - one of the most effective ways to destroy a group is to sow distrust among members. COINTELPRO is known to have supplied false information in order create suspicion between authentic progressive activists. Seemingly paradoxically, disinformation agents may actually promote discussion of disinformation/infiltration in order to increase paranoia. Such efforts may be targeted at creating suspicion around real and effective evidence/materials/activists.
Examples of Suspected Disinformation/Infiltration
- Several high-profile “researchers” and supposed 9/11 skeptics have come out promoting theories that no planes actually hit the WTC towers, instead holograms and/or “TV fakery” was supposedly used to simulate the planes. Many of these same individuals also promote theories about “mini-nukes” or “space-beam” weapons being used to demolish the towers. 5 6 (Also, see this TM forum post, I HEARD AND SAW THE FIRST PLANE)
- The “no plane at the Pentagon” theory has been one of the most prominent and effective pieces of disinformation within the movement. At TruthMove, we believe that all of the strongest “points” behind the “no plane theory” have been effectively countered by honest critical thinkers. If you have come to accept this theory through exposure to videos or websites, it’s an excellent exercise to read the skeptical sources and scrutinize your beliefs.7 8 9
- “Criminal Politics” magazine mixes 9/11 truth with anti-semitism and other right-wing, hateful ideas. It features a mugshot-looking picture of David Ray Griffin on the cover, with the sarcastic headline, “Can This Retired Theologian Save the United States?” It seems to be a smear campaign against Griffin and the 9/11 truth movement as a whole. A direct quote: “[Michael S.] Rose - - like Professor David Ray Griffin has the courage that many Catholics have lacked to give the clear answers: - - the Jewish Masonic order was infiltrated into this church…to approve only those who tested out psychologically as having a predilection to homosexuality.”(See TM forum post)
- Eric D. Williams was the webmaster and director of the “9/11 Accountability Conference.” He had written books on 9/11, fascism, the matrix, and the London bombings, yet just before the conference he released a new work of Holocaust revisionism, “The Puzzle of Auschwitz.” The association of the 9/11 truth movement to such a topic is possibly disastrous. And just the week before CNN did a piece conflating 9/11 skepticism with anti-semitism. 4 CNN
- The “Plane Pod” theory appeared out of nowhere in 2004 and was widely promoted in the professionally produced “9/11: In Plane Site.” This film covers almost none of the concrete evidence for government complicity and instead makes up new “evidence” out thin air or blurry video footage. The main thesis of the film is that there were “pods” on the undersides of the planes which fired “missiles” at the buildings before impact. This is conceivably possible, but the evidence presented is simply blurry images of “flashes” as the planes enter the buildings, making this a ludicrous, damaging claim—probably a case of deliberate propaganda by someone involved in the production or promotion of this movie. 11
- Recently a trailer for a new movie, “WMD at the WTC,” was released on the web. The producers have a prior track record of shoddy, flimsy “evidence” which we will not go into here. “WMD at the WTC” actually asserts that “directed energy hydrogen fusion” weapons were used to fell the towers. The trailers cites no compelling evidence, instead referring to such points as, “Decontamination procedure seen at WTC with hi-pressure water spraying…Rooftop 200,000 gallon water tanks for sprinkler system but no water in ruins.” The film asks us, “Is this Nuclear Winter at the WTC?” (Watch WMD at the WTC on Google VIdeo)
- There are certain suspect web sites and individuals who almost exclusively link to and associate with one other. The consistency of those who are promoting speculative and ludicrous “evidence” to only refer to others of the same ilk is very suspicious. A good exercise is to compare 911review.org vs. 911review.com - at this point, it should be clear to you which one is genuine and which one is promoting far-out theories. (See this TM forum post: Two movements: The 9/11truth vs. 9/11speculation movements)
Conspiracy Theorists Are the Greatest Challenge to Democracy … According to … Here’s who …
Tuesday, 29. October 2013
British establishment mouthpiece BBC leads the way again. This time it is about the biggest threat to democracy today. No, it is not terrorists. No, it is not Islamism. And, no, it is not the Western-Installed Dictator Regimes around the world. No, no, no, no, no. The new enemy is the conspiracy theorists. It is those who question their governments. It is those who find facts and confront the mainstream lies and liars such as BBC. Basically, it is you … and me.Allow me to wade through all the fillers and present you with a few telling excerpts from this BBC report:
Are conspiracy theories destroying democracy?
The more information we have about what governments and corporations are up to the less we seem to trust them. Will conspiracy theories eventually destroy democracy?
…
Mr. Naughton is one of three lead investigators in a major new Cambridge University project to investigate the impact of conspiracy theories on democracy.
…
David Runciman, professor of politics at Cambridge University, the third principal investigator, is keen to explode the idea that most conspiracies are actually “cock-ups”.
…
“Actually the conspirators are often the paranoid and crazy conspiracy theorists, because in their attempt to cover up the cock-up they get drawn into a web in which their self-justification posits some giant conspiracy trying to expose their conspiracy. “And I think that’s consistently true through a lot of political scandals, Watergate included.”
…
He is also examining whether the push for greater openness and transparency in public life will fuel, rather than kill off, conspiracy theories… “It may be that one of the things conspiracy theories feed on as well as silence, is a surfeit of information. And when there is a mass of information out there, it becomes easier for people to find their way through to come to the conclusion they want to come to.
…
What are they really talking about? What are they really presenting? A few things.
1- Challenging official stories, no matter how the record and history proves them to be false or exaggerated, lowers trust in government and government officials. This is a threat to the establishment and their operations through states. Thus, this is a threat to democracy. That is, if you believe that the state, the government, represents democracy. It means government equals democracy, thus, you are challenging democracy every time you challenge your government and what your government is telling you.Wow. Oh, wow. I am not going to even bother with the logical fallacies imbedded in the points made by these distinguished professors. Of course I won’t bother with BBC and its reputation and consistency when it comes to representing the establishment. Instead, I am going to get down and check out the source of funding for these academic hit-men.
2- These guys, these credible Cambridge professors, claim that openness, the internet, and greater information accessibility creates more conspiracies and conspiracy theorists.
3- Now, if you add item 2 to item 1, you get this: Openness and greater information accessibility leads to more conspiracies and increases the number of conspiracy theorists, and that my friend presents the greatest threat to our democracy today.
Now, that was easy. I checked out Cambridge and this conspiracy theorist oriented research program, and I found the source of its funding right away:
Professor David Runciman is part of a new Leverhulme-funded interdisciplinary, collaborative project on conspiracy theories at the University of Cambridge.Here is a short canned background on Leverhulme Trust:
The Leverhulme Trust was established in 1925 under the will of the First Viscount Leverhulme, William Hesketh Lever, with the instruction that its resources should be used to support “scholarships for the purposes of research and education.” Since that time, the Trust has provided funding for research projects, fellowships, studentships, bursaries and prizes; it operates across all the academic disciplines, the intention being to support talented individuals as they realize their personal vision in research and professional training. With annual funding of some £50 million, the Trust is amongst the largest all-subject providers of research funding in the UK.From the canned background I moved to the fund’s founder, William Lever, and a few noteworthy points got my attention:
…
He began manufacturing Sunlight Soap and built a business empire with many well-known brands. He was an advocate for expansion of the British Empire, particularly in Africa and Asia, which supplied palm oil, a key ingredient in Lever’s product line.You see, when you read about William Lever and Leverhulme Trust’s background things start making more sense. Don’t they?
…
Lever was involved with freemasonry and by 1902 was first initiate to a lodge bearing his name, William Hesketh Lever Lodge No. 2916, he later formed Leverhulme Lodge 4438. He saw freemasonry as a tool to reinforce the hierarchy within Lever Brothers…
…
In the early 1900s Lever was using palm oil produced in the British West African colonies. When he encountered difficulties in obtaining more palm plantation concessions, he started looking elsewhere in other colonies. In 1911, Lever visited the Belgian Congo to take advantage of cheap labour and palm oil concessions in that country. Lever’s attitudes towards the Congolese were paternalistic and by today’s standards, racist, and his negotiations with the Belgian coloniser to enforce the system known as travail forcé (forced labour) are well documented in the book ‘Lord Leverhulme’s Ghosts,’ in which the author states: “Leverhulme set up a private kingdom reliant on the horrific Belgian system of forced labour, a program that reduced the population of Congo by half and accounted for more deaths than the Nazi holocaust.” As such, he participated in this system of formalised labour…
…
William Lever was a high-level Freemason and very committed to the secret society. The kind of commitment Freemasonry demanded:
Regular Freemasonry has in its core ritual a formal obligation: to be quiet and peaceable citizens, true to the lawful government of the country in which they live, and not to countenance disloyalty or rebellion.[12] A Freemason makes a further obligation, before being made Master of his Lodge, to pay a proper respect to the civil magistratesYou see, those who challenge the establishment are also challenging the core of Freemasonry. No?
Lever was an avid advocate for expansion of the British Empire, particularly in Africa and Asia. Have you ever come across an imperialist who was keen on activists challenging the establishment, aka conspiracy theorists who challenge establishment-packaged information (propaganda)? I haven’t. Not one.
Lever was an enforcer of a system known as travail forcé, forced labour, in colonies where his business ripped the resources (Labor and agriculture). Back then, as it is today, moguls like Lever thrived based on their close partnerships with their imperial governments: colonization. What does that mean? It means, for imperialist business moguls like Lever, any challenge to the empires, challenging and questioning the imperial propaganda, equals a challenge to the empire’s business partners such as Lever.
Now, with all the above, do you see how a handful of Leverhulme funded pea-brain academics spend millions of dollars to paint those who challenge imperial governments’ misinformation as conspiracy theorists who present a great threat to democracy? Do you see how these conspirators easily grab spots under the spotlights of the imperial media machine-such as BBC?
Please take notice of another highly important fact about this entire operation: They, the establishment, must be getting extremely nervous and threatened to put on such a goofy show with even goofier players via the ultimately goofy outlet BBC. That, my friends, is really good news for the conspiracy theorists … you … and me.
