David Rovics: The Real Truth About The 9/11 Truth Movement

[Bolo Boffin]

http://www.rabble.ca/news_full_story.shtml?x=69564

Goodman, Chomsky, Solomon and others are now regularly heckled at speaking events, and denounced on websites as "gatekeepers." They are seen, it seems, as being even worse than the corporate media, because while reasonable people know not to trust Fox or CNN, they have faith in the integrity of people like Amy Goodman.

You don't have to know Amy Goodman or her producers personally to see what nonsense this "gatekeeper" stuff is. You needn't ever have met Amy to know that she has risked her life, and very nearly lost her life, in her decades-long efforts to report the truth. You needn't know her producers personally to recognize that these are all earnest young progressives working long hours to create a daily news program they deeply believe in. The notion that all of her producers are somehow maintaining a code of silence in exchange for the privilege of having their names mentioned at the end of the broadcast, or in exchange for their nominally middle-class salaries, is preposterous.

As is so often the case, there are little grains of truth in here that can fester in the minds of people who are not looking at the information critically. For the cops among the Truthers (of course it's a matter of the public record that the FBI and other such agencies regularly write "newspaper articles" – propaganda or disinformation of whatever sort they deem useful), undermining the legitimacy of the progressive media is exactly their goal, because they don't want the population to know the truth or to trust those who are reporting it.

For the more earnest elements among the Truthers, undermining the progressive media is also their goal, because they don't see it as being distinct from the corporate media anyway - so whether earnest or insidious, the effect is the same.

[mrgerbik]

1. its too bad things have come to this

The truth (as fragmented and convoluted as much of it has been fed to us is) truly isn't allowed to flourish and properly take root in the 'real world'. Thus this may well be part of the result - a few uninformed people making rash and un-researched conclusions without the careful foresight and weighted reason needed for a properly balanced view of what really is the truth. Why? Because they are dissatisfied and tired of the shit they are force fed everyday.

This new networked thought experiment we are a part of (aka the internet), if viewed as a whole, will surely go through its ups and downs during its existence. But as people become more enlightened and aware, so the ideas expressed and held among the user base (who I believe are expressing genuine concern) will become more refined and focused over time (in every field).

The fact is (and you'll never hear this much) that most of the OCTers here conform to the exact same standards. The difference being that their information stems generally from more mainstream sources.

What scares me is that the 'average' person would rather instantly chastise these kooky, wild and crazy ideas instead of stopping for a moment to THINK about it. In the end, I think we may end up eating our own tail instead of just chasing it .

[SDuderstadt]

16. I'd love to see you prove this

"The fact is (and you'll never hear this much) that most of the OCTers here conform to the exact same standards. The difference being that their information stems generally from more mainstream sources."

This is your opinion, masquerading as a statement of fact. You have zero idea where we get our info.

[JackRiddler]

2. You mean this David Rovics?

Reichstag Fire - David Rovics
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G31NFlPFE_c

[Bolo Boffin]

4. Yes, indeedy, the very same! Oh, he had something to say about that song...

Sometime in 2002 I wrote a song called "Reichstag Fire," in which I asked many of the questions the Truthers were asking. The point of the song was primarily to say that 9/11 has been used as an excuse for the U.S. to carry out a genocidal crusade on much of the Muslim world, and to further the U.S. government's bipartisan agenda of world domination and control of valuable resources in other countries, such as oil. (This is something Truthers and most other people in the world can generally agree on.) In the song I also posed questions which I now feel have been adequately explained.

Were there really Arab terrorists on board the planes? Yes. Did the CIA know an attack was imminent? Yes. I don't regret writing the song, or becoming a very minor celebrity within the 9/11 Truth Movement, because I think these questions needed to be asked, and answered.

But while some questions can only remain unanswered until certain people within the U.S. government become whistleblowers, other questions have been answered, and my answers (and those of most people who have looked into these things) and those of what now constitutes the Truth Movement differ wildly. Particularly because I have been seen by some as part of this movement, I felt compelled to write this essay.

The truth is, in fact, out there. Much of it is certainly still there to be discovered, but many fundamental, essential truths are already known.

Poor Jack. Still stuck in 2002.

[JackRiddler]

5. Your sympathies are irrelevant... everyone should check out the song...

and read the article, and decide what each means on their own.

[Bolo Boffin]

6. The author of the song says he has a lot of answers now

and specifically implies he is NOT a part of the 9/11 Truth movement.

How utterly lost in your belief structure you are, Jack.

[JackRiddler]

9. Your insults are sheer projection, response to them is superfluous...

As for Rovics, the only thing interesting about his article is that it doesn't endeavor to "answer" the questions from his own song. In fact, he fails to "answer" the questions he poses in the article itself, except with dismissive one-word affirmatives. Yes. No. Yes. Did the CIA know in advance? Yes. What exactly, and how? Never mind.

The song wins as the superior work, both as art and argument. And if he's got a problem with the LC/AJ/WAC scream faction, well so do I. His whining about it does little to favor any concrete theses, let alone justify or support your own body of denialist work (still stuck in a fantasy land where a million dead Arabs through the actions of an American government isn't genocide).

[Bolo Boffin]

12. LOL! n/t

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mhatrw]

3. Yes, some people associated with the "9/11 truth" are obnoxious, unhinged assholes who

think that their personal assessment of the "truth" is the only possible assessment and who belittle and berate anyone considers the evidence and comes to any other conclusion. However, this describes about 98% of the "debunkers", as well. Guilt-by-anecdotal-association tactics are less than persuasive.

[victordrazen]

7. How strange.

The song clearly goes beyond the suggestion that the Bush Adm. used 911 to go after Muslims. Something about this guy does not add up. He comes across as a free thinker and yet he labels people who question the official story as "Truthers", lumping them all together and distancing himself. I did find a quote from Amy Goodman where she said he is the "Democracy Now" of music or something like that.
I think the deal with Goodman is that she is Ford Foundation funded and Ford Foundation is reputed to be CIA influenced. However, a lot of journalists, public figures, etc...probably stay away from 911 just because they don't want their career to be ruined, I'm not putting them down for it, but I think that is behind a lot of the "gatekeeper" phenomena.

[Bolo Boffin]

8. What is strange here?

The song was written in 2002.

The article was written in 2008.

What happened in between? Most of the questions he found answers for! And most of the answers the Truth Movement doesn't like!

Nothing "strange" about that at all.

Amy Goodman almost died trying to get the truth of a story. That's not make-believe. She was literally beaten by Indonesian soldiers.

http://www.democracynow.org/2006/11/13/amy_goodman_recounts_the_east_timor

She is not keeping the truth out of the media, for God's sake.

[mhatrw]

13. There is nothing strange about the article, either.

It is your typical run-of-the-mill "Can you believe the gall of that incessant 9/11 truther to question an old school lefty like me?" tripe.

The guy probably means well, but his suggestion that all questions about 9/11 were answered by Popular Mechanics demonstrates that he needs to spend a few days reading this: http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/project.jsp?project=911_project

[Bolo Boffin]

15. That isn't what he suggested at all.

In fact, if you take time to read the article instead of scanning for bits to twist out of context, he says that some questions won't be answered until we get whistleblowers who know the details.

[mhatrw]

20. How about answering these questions?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G31NFlPFE_c

[petgoat]

21. Rovics's article reveals profound ignorance about the facts of 9/11.

If you don't know that, bolo, you're revealing your own ignorance.

[Bolo Boffin]

22. No, Rovics' song reveals profound ignorance of the facts of 9/11.

His article shows that he has discovered many of them.

[mhatrw]

23. I prefer the song to the song and dance. n/t

[Bolo Boffin]

24. Poor mhatrw. Stuck in 2002. n/t

[mhatrw]

25. Poor boloboffin. Stuck in 9/11/2001.

Your only national holiday.

[Bolo Boffin]

26. What odd beliefs you cherish about me.

Perhaps you shouldn't display your ignorance about me so willingly.

[CrawlingChaos]

10. beyond lame, and more than a little pathetic

I've never heard of this guy, but he's a blatant fool, clearly toadying up to the gatekeepers in hopes of gaining their favor. I love how he congratulates himself on his critical thinking skills, and then points to the utterly ridiculous Popular Mechanics article as a good place to look for answers (and sees no irony in sending people to a Hearst publication for guidance, the very antithesis of his supposedly progressive values). He might want to be careful who he looks to for validation though. He mentions Robert Fisk, who has very clearly and decisively come down on the side of 9/11 skepticism (see his article: "Even I Question the Truth About 9/11"). I think David Barsamian, too, might be doing a bit of an about-face (seems to me I heard something in passing on INN World Report). Amy Goodman deserves to be called to the carpet on this (obviously DN is hitting the bigtime these days and she's very protective of it), but I think she's getting there (slowly). Cynthia McKinney made 9/11 Truth statements on DN, unchallenged by Amy. Willie Nelson did the same thing -- again, no argument or rebuttal from Amy or Juan (in fact, Juan asked him about it). Jason Bermas said in an interview that everyone behind the scenes at DN is supportive of 9/11 Truth, as he witnessed himself when he appeared on the show. The day will come when Rovics will try hard to pretend he never made these remarks, but I hope people won't let him.

If I were a crusading OCT defender, I wouldn't be pointing to this person for validation and support of my beliefs. He clearly can't back up his position with anything meaningful or substantive (and in fact, seems to be a tragically weak-minded individual). He sounds like the kind of guy who would tell you WTC 7 fell down because the ground was destabilized, and then frantically try to change the subject.

[Bolo Boffin]

11. You keep dreaming, CC. n/t

[wildbilln864]

19. spot on CC imho. nt

:hi:

[Twist_U_Up]

17. I wonder if he wrote this song? bolo, I dont think you will like this one,sorry

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jX9YgAlmugk

[Bolo Boffin]

18. Read the thread (and the article) before you embarrass yourself again. n/t