An article in the journal,
Must Be a Reason":
Osama, Saddam, and Inferred Justification, Vol. 79,
No. 2. (2009), pp. 142-162. [PDF]
casts light on the effectiveness of propaganda.
Researchers examined why big lies succeed where little
lies fail. Governments can get away with mass
deceptions, but politicians cannot get away with sexual
researchers explain why so many Americans still believe
that Saddam Hussein was behind 9/11, years after it has
become obvious that Iraq had nothing to do with the
event. Americans developed elaborate rationalizations
based on Bush administration propaganda that alleged
Iraqi involvement and became deeply attached to their
beliefs. Their emotional involvement became
wrapped up in their personal identity and sense of
morality. They looked for information that
supported their beliefs and avoided information that
challenged them, regardless of the facts of the matter.
Mein Kampf, Hitler explained the believability of
the Big Lie as compared to the small lie: "In the simplicity of their minds, people more readily fall victims to
the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves
often tell small lies in little matters but would be
ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It
would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal
untruths, and they would not believe that others could
have such impudence. Even though the facts which
prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their
minds, they will still doubt and continue to think that
there may be some other explanation."
the sociologists and Hitler are telling us is that by
the time facts become clear, people are emotionally
wedded to the beliefs planted by the propaganda and find
it a wrenching experience to free themselves. It
is more comfortable, instead, to denounce the
truth-tellers than the liars whom the truth-tellers
psychology of belief retention even when those beliefs
are wrong is a pillar of social cohesion and stability.
It explains why, once change is effected, even
revolutionary governments become conservative. The
downside of belief retention is its prevention of the
recognition of facts. Belief retention in the
Soviet Union made the system unable to adjust to
economic reality, and the Soviet Union collapsed.
Today in the United States millions find it easier to
chant "USA, USA,
USA" than to accept facts that indicate the need for
staying power of the Big Lie is the barrier through
which the 9/11 Truth Movement is finding it difficult to
break. The assertion that the 9/11 Truth Movement
consists of conspiracy theorists and crackpots is
obviously untrue. The leaders of the movement are
highly qualified professionals, such as demolition
experts, physicists, structural architects, engineers,
pilots, and former high officials in the government.
Unlike their critics parroting the government’s line,
they know what they are talking about.
link to a presentation by the architect,
Richard Gage, to a Canadian university audience:
The video of the presentation is two hours long and
seems to have been edited to shorten it down to two
hours. Gage is low-key, but not a dazzling
personality or a very articulate presenter. Perhaps that
is because he is speaking to a university audience and
takes for granted their familiarity with terms and
who believe the official 9/11 story and dismiss skeptics
as kooks can test the validity of the sociologists’
findings and Hitler’s observation by watching the video
and experiencing their reaction to evidence that
challenges their beliefs. Are you able to watch the
presentation without scoffing at someone who knows far
more about it than you do? What is your response
when you find that you cannot defend your beliefs
against the evidence presented? Scoff some more?
Another problem that the 9/11 Truth Movement faces is
that few people have the education to follow the
technical and scientific aspects. The side that
they believe tells them one thing; the side that they
don’t believe tells them another. Most Americans have no
basis to judge the relative merits of the arguments.
example, consider the case of the Lockerbie bomber.
One piece of
"evidence" that was used to convict Magrahi was a
piece of circuit board from a device that allegedly
contained the Semtex that exploded the airliner.
None of the people, who have very firm beliefs in
Magrahi’s and Libya’s guilt and in the offense of the
Scottish authorities in releasing Magrahi on allegedly
humanitarian grounds, know that circuit boards of those
days have very low combustion temperatures and go up in
flames easily. Semtex produces very high
temperatures. There would be nothing whatsoever
left of a device that contained Semtex. It is
obvious to an expert that the piece of circuit board was
planted after the event.
have asked on several occasions and have never had an
answer, which does not mean that there isn’t one, how
millions of pieces of unburnt, uncharred paper can be
floating over lower Manhattan from the destruction of
the WTC towers when the official explanation of the
destruction is fires so hot and evenly distributed that
they caused the massive steel structures to weaken and
fail simultaneously so that the buildings fell in free
fall time just as they would if they had been brought
down by controlled demolition.
is the explanation of fires so hot that steel fails but
paper does not combust?
People don’t even notice the contradictions.
Recently, an international team of scientists, who
studied for 18 months dust samples produced by the twin
towers’ destruction collected from three separate
sources, reported their finding of
the dust. The US government had scientists dependent on
the US government to debunk the finding on the grounds
that the authenticity of custody of the samples could
not be verified. In other words, someone had tampered
with the samples and added the nano-thermite. This is
all it took to discredit the finding, despite the
obvious fact that access to thermite is strictly
controlled and NO ONE except the US military and
possibly Israel has access to nano-thermite.
physicist, Steven Jones, has produced overwhelming
evidence that explosives were used to bring down the
buildings. His evidence is not engaged, examined,
tested, and refuted. It is simply ignored.
Jones’ experience reminds me of that of my
the distinguished physical chemist and philosopher,
Polanyi was one of the 20th century's great scientists.
At one time every section chairman of the Royal Society
was a Polanyi student. Many of his students won
Nobel Prizes for their scientific work, such as
at Princeton and Melvin Calvin at UC, Berkeley, and his
son, John Polanyi, at the University of Toronto.
young man in the early years of the 20th century,
Michael Polanyi discovered the
explanation for chemical adsorption.
Scientific authority found the new theory too much of a
challenge to existing beliefs and dismissed it.
Even when Polanyi was one of the UK’s ranking
scientists, he was unable to teach his theory. One
half-century later his discovery was re-discovered by
scientists at UC, Berkeley. The discovery was
hailed, but then older scientists said that it was
"Polanyi’s old error." It turned out not to be
an error. Polanyi was asked to address scientists
on this half-century failure of science to recognize the
truth. How had science, which is based on
examining the evidence, gone so wrong. Polanyi’s
answer was that science is a belief system just like
everything else, and that his theory was outside the
is what we observe all around us, not just about the
perfidy of Muslims and 9/11.
economics scholar I had a very difficult time making my
points about the Soviet economy, about Karl Marx’s
theories, and about the supply-side impact of fiscal
policy. Today I experience readers who become
enraged just because I report on someone else’s work
that is outside their belief system. Some readers
think I should suppress work that is inconsistent with
their beliefs and drive the author of the work into the
ground. These readers never have any comprehension
of the subject. They are simply emotionally
I find puzzling is the people I know who do not believe
a word the government says about anything except 9/11.
For reasons that escape me, they believe that the
government that lies to them about everything else tells
them the truth about 9/11. How can this be, I ask
them. Did the government slip up once and tell the
truth? My question does not cause them to rethink
their belief in the government’s 9/11 story.
Instead, they get angry with me for doubting their
intelligence or their integrity or some such hallowed
problem faced by truth is the emotional needs of people.
With 9/11 many Americans feel that they must believe
their government so that they don’t feel like they are
being unsupportive or unpatriotic, and they are very
fearful of being called
sympathizers." Others on the left-wing have
emotional needs to believe that peoples oppressed by the
US have delivered
"blowbacks." Some leftists think that America
deserves these blowbacks and thus believe the
government’s propaganda that Muslims attacked the US.
people think that if the US government’s explanation of
9/11 was wrong, physicists and engineers would all speak
up. Some have (see above). However, for most
physicists and engineers this would be an act of
suicide. Physicists owe their careers to government
grants, and their departments are critically dependent
on government funding. A physicist who speaks up
essentially ends his university career. If he is a
tenured professor, to appease Washington the university
would buy out his tenure as BYU did in the case of the
outspoken Steven Jones.
engineering firm that spoke out would never again be
awarded a government contract. In addition, its
patriotic, flag-waving customers would regard the firm
as a terrorist apologist and cease to do business with
New York today there is an enormous push by 9/11
families for a real and independent investigation of the
9/11 events. Tens of thousands of New Yorkers have
provided the necessary signatures on petitions that
require the state to put the proposal for an independent
commission up to vote. However, the state, so far, is
not obeying the law.
are the tens of thousands of New Yorkers who are
demanding a real investigation dismissed as conspiracy
theorists? The 9/11 skeptics know far more about
the events of that day than do the uninformed people who
call them names. Most of the people I know who are
content with the government’s official explanation have
never examined the evidence. Yet, these
no-nothings shout down those who have studied the matter
are, of course, some kooks. I have often wondered
if these kooks are intentionally ridiculous in order to
discredit knowledgeable skeptics.
Another problem that the 9/11 Truth Movement faces is
that their natural allies, those who oppose the
Bush/Obama wars and the internet sites that the antiwar
movement maintains, are fearful of being branded
traitorous and anti-American. It is hard enough to
oppose a war against those the US government has
successfully demonized. Antiwar sites believe that if
they permit 9/11 to be questioned, it would brand them
sympathizers" and discredit their opposition to the
war. An exception is Information Clearing House.
Antiwar sites do not realize that, by accepting the 9/11
explanation, they have undermined their own opposition
to the war. Once you accept that Muslim terrorists did
it, it is difficult to oppose punishing them for the
event. In recent months, important antiwar sites, such
as antiwar.com, have had difficulty with their
fundraising, with their fundraising campaigns going on
far longer than previously. They do not understand that
if you grant the government its premise for war, it is
impossible to oppose the war.
far as I can tell, most Americans have far greater
confidence in the government than they do in the truth.
During the Great Depression the liberals with their New
Deal succeeded in teaching Americans to trust the
government as their protector. This took with the left
and the right. Neither end of the political spectrum is
capable of fundamental questioning of the government.
This explains the ease with which our government
routinely deceives the people.
Democracy is based on the assumption that people are
rational beings who factually examine arguments and are
not easily manipulated. Studies are not finding this to
be the case. In my own experience in scholarship,
public policy, and journalism, I have learned that
everyone from professors to high school dropouts has
difficulty with facts and analyses that do not fit with
what they already believe. The notion that
"we are not
afraid to follow the truth wherever it may lead" is
an extremely romantic and idealistic notion. I have
seldom experienced open minds even in academic discourse
or in the highest levels of government. Among the
public at large, the ability to follow the truth
wherever it may lead is almost non-existent.
US government's response to 9/11, regardless of who is
responsible, has altered our country forever. Our civil
liberties will never again be as safe as they were.
America's financial capability and living standards are
forever lower. Our country's prestige and world
leadership are forever damaged. The first decade of the
21st century has been squandered in pointless wars, and
it appears the second decade will also be squandered in
the same pointless and bankrupting pursuit.
most disturbing fact of all remains: The 9/11 event
responsible for these adverse happenings has not been
UN Calls for the Creation of Global Reserve Currency
(Bloomberg) -- The dollars role in international trade should be reduced by establishing a new currency to protect emerging markets from the confidence game of financial speculation, the United Nations said.
UN countries should agree on the creation of a global reserve bank to issue the currency and to monitor the national exchange rates of its members, the Geneva-based UN Conference on Trade and Development said
Just how many marched on D.C.? Estimates start at 60,000, rise to as high as 2 million
Just how many people turned out at the Sept. 12 march on Washington?
Politifact reported that Pete Piringer, public affairs officer for the Washington, D.C., Fire and Emergency Department "unofficially" estimated that between 60,000 and 75,000 people attended the march.
Officers with the Washington, D.C. Metropolitan Police Department told WND the department does not provide crowd estimates. Capitol police declined to comment.
However, Wizbang estimated between 500,000 and 1 million. The blog displays the following time-lapse image of the march:
The London Daily Mail originally estimated a turnout of "up to 2 million," but that estimate now reads "as many as one million people."
WASHINGTON - The Sensor Fuzed Weapon is a marvel of military technology, says its maker, Textron Defense Systems. An advanced "cluster bomb,'' it is designed to spray 40 individual projectiles of molten copper, destroying enemy tanks across a 30-acre swath of battlefield.
But the bomb - which is made at a Textron facility in the Boston suburb of Wilmington - violates terms of a landmark international treaty limiting cluster bombs to 10 bomblets or less. The pending treaty, signed by 98 nations last year in Oslo, has been sought for decades by human rights groups, which say that cluster bombs kill indiscriminately and leave behind duds that kill or maim unsuspecting civilians.
Now Textron, with the support of the Pentagon and the State Department, is mounting a campaign to derail the cluster-bomb treaty and write a new set of rules under the United Nations that would make it easier to sell its weapon around the world.
Textron's primary argument for scrapping the treaty is that 99 percent of the bomblets released by the Sensor Fuzed Weapon will explode in combat, leaving only a tiny amount of unexploded ordinance that could be picked up by a child or hit by a farmer's plow. Textron calls this capability "clean battlefield operation.''
"It really is an extremely sophisticated weapon,'' said Mark D. Rafferty, vice president of business development for Textron Defense Systems, which employs about 1,000 people at its Wilmington plant. Rafferty stood in front of a full-scale mock-up of the bomb, a 6-foot-long cylinder with tail fins, at an arms show in Washington, D.C., last week.
"Knowing that we are in no way, shape or form contributing to [civilian suffering] is really a very satisfying place to be,'' he said.
The United States is among several major powers including Russia, China, and Israel that have refused to sign the Oslo treaty.
The US Air Force has purchased 4,600 of the new weapons, at a cost of several billion dollars. Textron has also sold them to Turkey, Oman, and the United Arab Emirates. And it is in the final stages of reaching a deal with India for 510 of the weapons at an estimated cost of $375 million.
Textron wants the international community to rewrite the treaty to allow weapons with large numbers of bomblets, if they can be shown to avoid the potential for civilian casualties from unexploded components.
The initiative has outraged many arms control advocates, however, who secured signatures from Britain, France, and 96 other countries at last year's Oslo negotiations. The treaty needs to be ratified by 30 countries to take effect; so far, 17 of them have done so.
"It's a disgraceful attempt to throw mud at the most important achievement in humanitarian affairs and disarmament in the last decade,'' said Thomas Nash, coordinator of the London-based Cluster Munition Coalition, a network of 400 nongovernmental organizations from about 90 countries.
Textron Defense Systems is a division of the Providence-based conglomerate Textron Inc., which makes products as diverse as helicopters and passenger planes and defense and intelligence systems. It had annual revenue of more than $14 billion in 2008. The Wilmington facility makes a variety of air-launched munitions, as well as both air and ground surveillance systems.
As part of its public relations push, Textron has established a new website, dontbanthesolution.com, replete with expert testimony and computer-generated battle scenes to demonstrate its weapon's pinpoint accuracy and fail-safe design. Textron Systems chief executive Frank Tempesta, has penned an oped in a leading international trade magazine contending that the proposed treaty, the Convention on Cluster Munitions, will do more harm than good by leading militaries to use more powerful, and less accurate, weapons to achieve the same effect. And the company has dispatched officials to foreign capitals and the conference rooms of skeptical human rights groups to make their case.
Dropped from a high-flying aircraft, the Textron weapon releases 10 canisters that parachute downward, scanning for the enemy with a built-in sensor. When they reach an optimum altitude, the canisters, spinning at high speed, release four separate bomblets, or "skeets,'' each with its own rocket motor and targeting system.
Each skeet has a 2.2-kilogram warhead, sufficient to pierce and disable a 70-ton tank, and weighs a little less than 4 kilograms including its motor and electronics.
Just two of the weapons, released from a B-52 bomber, destroyed 24 Iraqi tanks in 2003.
If they don't find a target, the company says, the 40 bomblets are designed to self-destruct. For example, if the skeet reaches a height of 50 feet without homing in on the heat from a tank or armored vehicle, it will explode in midair. And once armed, the projectile is only capable of exploding for eight seconds before it disarms. As a third safety mechanism, any unexploded skeets lying on the ground will disarm after two minutes.
The Pentagon has certified in testing that the Sensor Fuzed Weapon leaves unexploded bomblets only 1 percent of the time or less. That is a standard that Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates has stipulated all cluster munitions must meet by 2018.
Arms control advocates remain unconvinced, however.
"They think technology is the answer,'' said Nash, the Cluster Munition Coalition coordinator. His group contends that Textron's claims of accuracy and reliability have historically been overstated.
"It is not reasonable to base your policy on the continued failure of weapons manufacturers to make reliable weapons,'' he said. "They make money from selling weapons, and I think that compromises to a certain extent the credibility of their humanitarian analysis.''
Other experts, including supporters of the Oslo treaty, acknowledge that Textron has made significant breakthroughs to minimize harm to civilians. Ove Dullum, chief scientist at the Norwegian Defense Research Establishment, said in an interview that based on tests he considers the Sensor Fuzed Weapon a minimal risk to civilians.
Still, he says that may not hold true under battle conditions.
"My experience . . . is that even if carefully conducted tests of ammunition show a very low dud rate, that will not represent the dud rate in war,'' he said, citing the aging of munitions, environmental impact, and the handling of the weapons in a real war environment.
Moreover, even if the weapon can achieve the level of reliability advertised, it is still highly dangerous for civilians on the battlefield, said Jeff Abramson, deputy director of the Arms Control Association, a nonpartisan Washington think tank. He said that, depending on how many are used in a future conflict, a 1 percent dud rate could still affect many innocent bystanders.
"If you have 1 percent of 10,000 submunitions, that is 100 left that could possibly explode in the future,'' he said.
Textron and the US military say that, without the ability to use cluster bombs with 40 bomblets, military forces will inevitably use greater numbers of traditional bombs. That, Gates concluded in a policy memorandum last year, "could result, in some cases, in unacceptable collateral damage and explosive remnants of war.''
Nations that do not sign the treaty could have trouble selling their weapons. Cluster bombs made by Diehl and Rheinmetall in Germany and by Bofors Defence and GIAT Industries in France meet the requirements of the treaty, with two bomblets contained in each. They would be expected to pick up market share at Textron's expense if the treaty is ratified as written.
Also, nations that ratify the treaty may place restrictions on cooperating with any military that doesn't abide by it.
UN negotiations to craft a new agreement are at a standstill. "There is still a wide divergence,'' said a US defense official involved in the talks who declined to be identified because he was not authorized to do so. Another meeting is scheduled in Geneva in November.
But a State Department spokesman, Jason Greer, argued that a new treaty that takes into account the potential to reduce civilian casualties would be an improvement over the Oslo pact, which merely sets standards for bomblets and their size.
The US government also argues that the current treaty will have little effect if the holdouts - which have the largest militaries and explosive stockpiles - refuse to participate. A new treaty, said Greer, would probably include "more of the countries that actually produce cluster munitions.''
Last week, many of the aboriginal people in the remote west coast village of Ahousaht were innoculated with the tamiflu vaccine. Today, over a hundred of them are sick, and the sickness is spreading.
In the same week, body bags were sent to similarly remote native reserves in northern Manitoba that have also received the tamiflu vaccine.
On the face of things, it appears that flu vaccinations are causing a sickness that is being deliberately aimed at aboriginal people across Canada, and this sickness will be fatal: a fact acknowledged by the Canadian government by their “routine” sending of body bags to these Indian villages.
Before you express your shock and denial at the idea that people are being racially targeted and killed, remember that murdering Indians with vaccinations is not a new or abnormal thing in Canada. Indeed, it’s how we Europeans “won the land”, and it’s one of the ways we keep it.
In 1862, Anglican church missionaries Rev. John Sheepshanks and Robert Brown inoculated interior Salish Indians in B.C. with a live smallpox virus that wiped out entire native communities within a month, just prior to the settlement of this native land by gold prospectors associated with these missionaries and government officials.
In 1909, Dr. Peter Bryce of the Indian Affairs department in Ottawa claimed that Catholic and Protestant churches were deliberately exposing native children to smallpox and tuberculosis in residential schools across Canada, and letting them die untreated. Thousands of children died as a result. (Globe and Mail, April 24, 2007)
In 1932, B.C. provincial police attempted to lay charges against Catholic missionaries who had sent smallpox-laden Indian children back among their families along the Fraser river near Mission, BC. The RCMP intervened and protected the church, even though whole villages were wiped out as a result of the church’s actions.
In 1969, native children who escaped from the Nanaimo Indian Hospital on Vancouver Island described being inoculated with shots that caused many of them to die “with bloated up bodies and scabs all over”, to quote one survivor.
Knowing this history, it’s not surprising when Indians on isolated Canadian reserves start sickening and dying en masse from sudden illnesses, after receiving flu shots. After all, it’s still the law in Canada, under the apartheid Indian Act, that no on-reserve Indian can refuse medical treatments or experimentation. So it’s small wonder that these reserves are the places being targeted first to be injected with untested, unsafe and potentially lethal flu vaccines.
As an entire race of involuntary test subjects, Indians in Canada are a weather vane for what will befall all of us, and very soon. For the very techniques and weapons of genocide perfected against aboriginal people are now being deployed against “mainstream” Canadians.
Under Bill C-6, which is about to pass third reading in Parliament and become the law, no Canadian will be allowed to refuse inoculations for the swine flu, despite the fact that it is relatively benign and mild, and has killed only people who are already immune-compromised. Indeed, it is astounding that such coercion and dictatorial laws are being employed to deal with what the chief Canadian Health Officer has called a “mild seasonal flu”.
Clearly, another agenda is at work; but the time to ascertain and challenge that agenda has all but run out. This coming month, forced inoculations and imprisonment of those who refuse them may be a reality across Canada. And for what reason? Clearly, not for public health, considering the sickness and death caused by previous swine flu vaccines.
I believe that the real pandemic is about to be unleashed through the very vaccines being pushed by governments and pharmaceutical giants like Novartis and Glaxo Smith Kline. The shots will be the cause, not the cure, of the pandemic. Of course, those in power can disprove this by simply being the first people to take the swine flu shot: an event about as likely as these companies forgoing the multi-billion dollar profits they will reap from the mass vaccinations.
It’s indeed ironic that, very soon, many “white” Canadians may be suffering the same fate that aboriginal people have for centuries. Perhaps it’s fitting. For if we are indeed being targeted for extermination, or at the least martial law and dictatorship, we finally can have the chance to shed our complicity in the genocide of other people, and get on the right side of humanity - simply by having to fight the system that is causing mass murder.
“Kevin is more deserving of the Nobel Peace Prize than many who have received it in the past.”
- Dr. Noam Chomsky
Institute Professor Emeritus
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
“A courageous and inspiring man.” (referring to Kevin Annett)
- Mairead Corrigan-Maguire
Nobel Peace Prize Laureate
Belfast , Northern Ireland
“As a long time front line worker with the Elders’ Council at the Downtown Eastside Women’s Centre, I stand behind what Kevin Annett is trying to do for our people. The genocide that continues today and which stemmed from the residential schools needs
to be exposed. Kevin Annett helps break the silence, and brings the voice of our people all over the world.”
Carol Muree Martin - Spirit Tree Woman
“I gave Kevin Annett his Indian name, Eagle Strong Voice, in 2004 when I adopted him into our Anishinabe Nation. He carries that name proudly because he is doing the job he was sent to do, to tell his people of their wrongs. He speaks strongly and with truth. He speaks for our stolen and murdered children. I ask everyone to listen to him and welcome him.”
Chief Louis Daniels - Whispers Wind
Elder, Turtle Clan, Anishinabe Nation