So I’ve been thinking about writing something like this for ages now, as much for my own benefit as for anyone out there that might read this. This issue has been bouncing around inside my head for years, and with every new discovery, the need to create some order out of it all has grown ever more pressing – that’s where my blog comes in. I think I’m going to write several parts on my blog about this (you may have already grasped a sense of my interest in this area from reading some of my previous entries). I’m not going to suggest that anyone takes any information at face value without looking for themselves. I have no interest in pushing anything other than the healthy habit of curiosity; good old-fashioned interest beyond the realms of Jordan & Peter and Paris Hilton’s New BFF. 
I suppose it has been brought to the fore by some recent interactions with colleagues and by my recently seeing a certain film, namely Zeitgeist, here on good old Swedish TV. Coming from the UK, this was a strange experience. The media in the UK just don’t show alternative media productions. The only attention they give to the so-called Truth Movement is the occasional derisive laugh or attack should they be forced into a corner. The Truth Movement is an unofficial umbrella term for those who subscribe to one or more of the array of beliefs that, one way or another, postulates that those in power really don’t have peoples’ best interests at heart; now, I’m sure that many of you would probably feel that this description fits you already…but it probably doesn’t, at least not in the sense that the Truth Movement means.
The Movement doesn’t talk with one voice, it talks with many (often contradictory) voices and about a great many things. There are alliances and cooperation with the Movement but that doesn’t mean complete agreement. This should not be surprising as I have yet to encounter a group of people who agreed about everything. What I aim to do in these entries is to tell you what I know about some of the key participants and, in the process, make more sense of the whole phenomenon for myself! What they all share, however, is the desire to expose and remedy the problems of the systems of politics, finance, media and military we currently have.
As the size of the Movement slowly increases, there has, amongst the wider population, grown a vague awareness of ‘conspiracy theories’. When this term is used, it is almost exclusively used to mock. It seemingly has become fashionable to reject a thesis without first knowing what the thesis actually is, and it is this instinctive dismissal of information without consideration which, to me, is the saddest part of all. It’s not that more people don’t agree with what the Movement has to say that is the hard part, but the almost complete absence of reasoned debate about certain subjects - it’s just forbidden territory to many. To entertain these ideas is preposterous to a lot of people, even if you aren’t really aware of the reasoning behind them. I have friends, intelligent friends, who have taken this view. I have sent them information. I have tried to explain various things. It has all been rebuffed without discussion or, at best, it has been greeted with a numbness or indifference which has never resulted in a follow-up conversation. When I recently heard Noam Chomsky state that he believed it really had no significance even if Kennedy was indeed murdered by the CIA, I became aware afresh of just how far away most people are from a sensible discussion about such things.
I don’t consider myself stupid, neither do I consider myself a genius. Like most people, I’m somewhere in the middle. I have a penchant for debate, for challenging ideas and orthodoxies, for being thorough on matters of importance and for chasing down vague answers and weeding out the bee ess. To me, it’s a human duty to think critically, to not blindly accept what one is told out of deference or plain laziness. Now most of us have the internet, we have access to channels of information that simply didn’t exist before. Even though the mainstream corporate media still enjoy the lion’s share of people’s attention, for the first time in history, anyone can make their thoughts available for public consumption. I have consumed more than my fair share of alternative media and there are a lot of interesting, intelligent and articulate people doing just that. They won’t be appearing on mainstream TV any time soon – with some notable exceptions:
The first film I ever saw was called 911 In Plane Site; I came across it quite by accident and I remember how taken aback I was by its content. It seemed audacious and even dangerous to me at that time that someone would openly state that governments and mass media of the world would openly hide the truth and actively mislead people about events such as 911. I’d just never heard anyone come out with something like that, let alone make a film about it. Of course, all the obvious questions came to mind, such as: “How could it be kept a secret?” or “why would governments lie to and harm their people?” These remain perfectly natural and rational questions to ask, but it was thinking about these questions for the first time that was the start of a significant mental journey into places that I never knew existed.
I want to say from the outset that my beliefs about such issues centre around evidence. I am just not the sort of person that will accept assertions without at least some compelling evidence that presents a puzzling contradiction or gap in the accepted history. But it was in that ‘accepted history’ that I found parallels with what many people in the Movement were saying about modern day political events. If 911 was indeed a ‘false flag’ operation (an event, usually an attack, initiated by the ‘victims’ themselves in order to achieve a larger strategic goal) then there were historical facts accepted by everyone where exactly the same thing had taken place.
The Gulf of Tonkin Incident is one such historical ‘false flag’ operation which I actually remember studying in history class when I was 17. It happened on August 2nd, 1964, when the USS Maddox was ’collecting intelligence’ stationed just off the coast of Vietnam; it sighted North Korean ships and fired ‘warning’ shots at them, shots which were answered. In a coordinated misrepresentation of the facts by the military and the Johnson administration, it was alleged that on August 4th another attack by North Vietnamese boats had taken place. Hours after the second ‘attack’ the US instigated the military action that later became the Vietnam War – all on the basis of an attack of which no one even had any evidence, even the captain of the USS Maddox. I heartily suggest you read more about this, to really understand the detail and how such a gross atrocity as the Vietnam War can be created from nothing. It really is the easiest thing to do to start a war if you hold the strings of power and have the desire.
For an even clearer demonstration of how covert government/military operations are conceived you should be aware of Operation Northwoods.
When you present evidence about events such as 911 and people say: ‘Well, surely they couldn’t have kept that secret”, I point to events such as Tonkin and Northwoods which aren’t secrets, they just aren’t widely known about – why they aren’t known about or widely discussed is another question. All it takes is the realisation in our own minds to make the connection between what we know, what has already happened and the events that are shaping our world right now. The link is there, it’s up to us to find and understand it, to think critically for ourselves and not be distracted by the modern-day obsession with popular culture or the mainstream media.
Zeitgeist is a great film to start with, as it gives a good broad understanding of the myths of modern-day life that we all live with and mostly accept. It explores how governments and media operate, how the political/public/social agendas are controlled and perpetuated and should provoke some real thought and new questions of your own. Enjoy.
November 25, 2009 at 12:23 am |
Hello ‘ActuallyEnglish’ ! Enjoyed your post.
Most people simply don’t want to know the truth. Most people, if not all, constantly construct rationalizations for unexpected or undesirable observations. The purpose of most mainstream news is to offer its readers handy pre-packaged rationalizations which are gladly accepted. Propaganda doesn’t seek to persuade. It provides reassuring excuses to those who want them.
Why do some people choose to reject a rationalization others happily accept? I don’t know. It probably has something to do with having alternative structures to rely on. If an individual’s only framework of interpretation is the one handed out by the TV news, it may be terrifying or impossible to abandon it.