Ann Althouse has the scoop about the University of Wisconsin – Madison teaching 9/11 denial as an Introduction to Islam class.
Here are some comments about the class from Kevin Barrett, founder of the Muslim Jewish Christian Alliance for 9/11 truth, who will be teaching it:
“The physics of those collapses clearly could not have resulted from plane crashes and jet fuel fires with office materials.” Barrett says jet fuel does not burn hot enough to melt steel, and says recent tests on melted steel from the building prove his theory that it was wired to collapse, by the Government.
Barrett says the Bush Administration is fooling the American public with the Adolf Hitler ‘Big Lie Technique’… ”Tell them a little lie and they’ll wonder about it – weapons of mass destruction in iraq was a relatively little lie – and people are getting called on it.” Barrett says. ”Tell em a big lie like 9/11 and they have a huge resistance to questioning it.”
Ann links to Jessica McBride’s blog (the radio show host who, I think, broke the story) with all the detail including the class syllabus.
There are a lot of 9/11 conspiracy theorists on the left, but to give their nutty views legitimacy by allowing Barrett to espouse them in a universtiy classroom setting beyond disgusting. The university is providing Barrett cover by claiming he has academic freedom, which is another sham since, as Ann points out, the university gave him that freedom by making him an academic in the first place.
(Jay Tea adds: the persistent commenter known as “.” has repeatedly posted copyrighted materials in their entirety in the comments, despite a warning not to do so. For that reason, I have taken the extremely rare (for me) step of deleting the offending comments and banning his IP from posting any further. Disagreeing with us is not only allowed, but welcomed; opening us up for legal liability on copyright-infringement matters will not be tolerated.
In other words: BLOOD FOR ODIN!)
Henry
THANK YOU! I’ve been trying to remember where I saw that show (PBS!)…
.:
That’s your proof? Pathetic. 3 people out of 3,000. That’s .001%. Which, ironically enough, is also representative of the amount of active grey matter in your brain.
Oh dear, someone’s been rattled enough to mass-post long screeds of claims without any backups.
Tom
My snarky rejoinder to Sean wasn’t a strict analogy..I was making reference to something designed to easily carry load X then suddenly having load 10.X dumped on it.
Go the Nova link Henry posted. It really is a straight forward explanation of why the floor at the point of impact failed:
Tom,
I think Peter has done a great job showing you how controlled demolition explosives would require. And we have no evidence supporting that conjecture. We had evidence that 2 planes flying into the WTC. The details of the physics were given by the links provided by Peter already.
The bottom line is that if you can believe in the controlled demolition explosives, you shouldn’t have any problem in believing the fact that the crashing of the planes caused the towers to collapse. The official story is much easier to believe with real external evidences to back it up. The conspiracy has no external evidence to back it up whatsoever.
We engineers know better about computer simulation. Ask NASA about the explosion of their shuttles. When you expounded a kooky theory, it is emcumbened upon you to show real experiments. So far, you have no evidence whatsoever to back up the controlled demolition explosives.
Lee –
No liar moi. I simply linked your assertions within this thread to the same theories espoused by those who claim so fancifully that the WTC towers had to have been destroyed by demolitions instead of airplane-caused damage. Since there are thousands of eyewitnesses and video evidence that the planes did strike, it sure seems to me that the burden of proof is on those theorists. Hand-waving stuff like the WTV buildings simply could not have fallen as fast as they did because, you know, they have concrete in them and, you know, steel beams and stuff — not quite a direct quote, I admit — just is not convincing to this engineer.
If you have still a different conspiracy theory, I’d be delighted to look at it. Post a url, why doncha’! The other engineers I work with also really enjoy the humor such theories provide.
Hi Peter,
The NOVA and Eagar stuff is also behind me. The NIST report actually says that these early theories were wrong. I.e., the official account does not endorse them.
Given the state of the discussion (and my curiosity) I’m not satisfied with “yes, like porcelain”. I’ll grant “immense weight”, but I still say: onto an “imposing structure”.
Like I said to Darleen, if the top of the building is an anvil then so is the bottom of it. Until, I get a closer description of what was going on in the building, say, 10 seconds into the collapse, I’m not going to believe that initial impact (i.e., the first moment of the collpase) totally destroyed all load-bearing structures in the building, leaving the top to fall unimpeded to the bottom.
It simply doesn’t jibe with the many other things I find it useful to believe.
Best,
T.
LoveAmerica,
I guess I sort of walked into that one. I was really just talking about the relationship between words like “some”, “all”, “none”, “any”, and “no”. I don’t want to suggest I have any evidence, my point was that *some* of the details are consistent with controlled demolition and that I can’t get gravity-driven collapse to make sense.
No one (who is serious about this) denies that two planes hit and severely damaged the WTC. It’s just that after thinking about it for a while (and getting over the shock and awe of it) the collapses — the THAT of them but especially the HOW of them — seem odd.
It’s a puzzle. I’m not an engineer, but like engineers I enjoy a good puzzle. So I’m puzzling it out. Still puzzled though.
What’s going on in the building, say, 4 seconds into the collapse on, say, the 20th floor. Is the floor already falling (because it has no structual support under it because all supports were shattered like pieces of fine china)? What would you see if you looked at the steel frame?
That sort of thing.
Best,
T.
You’re welcome darleen, I have no idea if that website is the website of the case study video that was shown to us in class, but it looked similar.
For those who have a background in engineering, wacko theories don’t hold water.
Oh dear, someone’s been rattled enough to mass-post long screeds of claims without any backups.
Posted by: Patrick Chester at July 5, 2006 07:02 PM
click the link. most of whats said in there has links to original sources. and the ones that dont are easy to find with Google. wake up moron.
http://rigorousintuition.blogspot.com/2004/08/coincidence-theorists-guide-to-911.html
Tom
Do you cook?
Last night we grilled some awesome ribeye steaks and as a side, I did a quick stir-fry of Napa cabbage. The whole thing raw and chopped filled a two quart bowl. Stirfried it suddenly shrunk to about 1 1/2 C.
Conspiracy? No, because the cabbage was mostly air and water which was released by the heat.
As big and heavy as the WTC was, it was still mostly air. 1 acre large concrete floors supported by lightweight trusses anchored ONLY at the core and at the perimeter with (relatively small)anchor clips.
Tom:
No, the NIST report does NOT say the fire theories are wrong. It says (and you Wiki this one easily):
In 2005, NIST issued a series of reports[2] documenting emergency response efforts and events leading up to the collapse. NIST concluded “the buildings would likely not have collapsed under the combined effects of aircraft impact and the subsequent jet-fuel ignited multi-floor fires, if the fireproofing had not been dislodged or had been only minimally dislodged by aircraft impact.” NIST also found the towers’ stairwell design lacked adequate reinforcement.
What Eager points out is that the fire wasn’t hot enough to melt steel. True enough. However, again, what the NIST states is that the fireproofing/retardant was blown off after impact. The NIST takes into account Eager’s focus on the joints failing between the floors. In the NIST report, “The primary role of the floors in the collapse of the towers was to provide inward pull forces that induced inward bowing of perimeter columns”. These perimeter columns buckled and failed, which shifted tremendous weight-bearing load onto the core columns. This was too much for the core columns to handle, so they also buckled and failed. (source: Wikipedia).
Still, an overwhelming majority of engineers agree that the heat of the fires greatly compromised the structural integrity of the steel columns, and was a contributing factor in the collapses.
“.”
Why don’t you take your link and go find the Holocaust deniers and visit the Arizona Memorial in Hawaii and jabber about how THAT was a conspiracy by FDR.
Then take a flying leap into the ocean.
Fuckwit.
Henry
I’m not an engineer, but my father-in-law is and when you read the sheer hysterical ooga-booga from the Conspiracy trolls here you realize why criminal defense attorneys do NOT want logical thinking engineers on juries!
poor guy. i know reading hurts feeble minds, your kind is only used to having opinions thrown at you, but seriously, take a read. many of the links go directly to mainstream sources. unless of course, you are a proud coincidence theorist.in that case, you already believe all of that stuff was just one big friggin coincidence.
om im sorry, i meant poor girl. Darleen is such an ugly name. im betting the owner fits the name. most rightwing girls are angry fatties anyway.
Yes “.”, leave it to the usual Left cultists to be crashing hypocrits … now with the misogynist ad homenims.
I’m surprised you didn’t work a little homophobic smear in there, too.
Your cultist brethren will have to “correct” you later.
most rightwing girls are angry fatties anyway
Yeah, Janet Reno, Ruth bader Ginsberg, Hilary “Cankles” Clinton, Diane Feinstein, Barbara Boxer and Cindy Sheehan are real lookers, eh, period boy? LOL
WTF? I second Darleen’s “fuckwit” comment.
Darleen,
You’re right about the cabbage.
Just keep in mind that whatever you say about the lower 90 floors (like: mostly full of air) you have to say about the 20 floors that are falling as well. So the image of the anvil is no longer going to work. (Anvils aren’t full of air.)
Like I say, I’m familiar with the basic design of the building, i.e., mostly air. Suppose you stacked about 10 empty cardboard boxes on top of each other and dropped another on top of that from a height of 12 feet….
I know, I know, it’s nothing like that with structural steel…
But cabbage?
Best,
T.
PS. I’m not arguing that there was a conspiracy. In the months after 9/11 a number of theories were suggested by engineers to explain the collapses. The links to NOVA and Eagar that Peter and others have provided explain some of those ideas. But the latest and most detailed study, i.e., the NIST report, determined them to be wrong. That is, if you believed the pancake theory you were wrong about the “collapse mechanism”. That means that, for us ordinary mortals who didn’t have the new NIST findings beamed directly into our brains when they came out, there are all kinds of interesting questions and disagreements within the mainstream engineering discussion of this issue long before we get to any conspiracies. It’s all in the spirit of trying to understand the event. It doesn’t always have to be done in the spirit of defending or attacking the powers that be.
Peter,
I’ve granted the fire theory for the sake of argument. We are talking about (or I at least am only interested in) the mechanics of the collapse. Truss failure theory (pancake) vs. column failure theory (pile driver). NIST says Eagar and NOVA were wrong about the trusses.
In fact, Eagar’s idea is diametrically opposed to the NIST proposal. If the joints were failing between the floors then they could hardly provide the “inward pull forces that induced inward bowing of perimeter columns”.
I have also granted, for the sake of argument, that the columns “buckled and failed” around the 90th floor (in the one case).
What I don’t understand is how that “induced” the whole building to come down in under 20 seconds.
Best,
T.
to which the rightwing, gullible, feeble minded coincidence theorists say-“but my trusted corporate media didnt tell me about these people, so they MUST all be crazy!”
And the most pertinent question of all?
Why are you people “feeding” these idiots? Leave them alone and they will migrate back over to Loose Change where they belong.
Darleen, you said:
“But it was not designed to sustain the extraordinary circumstance of commerical jet liner bigger than the jets that existed at the time…”
Actually, as I understand it, the trade centers were built to withstand the impact of a Boeing 707 – which was a quad-engine jumbo jet capable of flying from New York to paris non-stop.
Go to Wiki and look up the specs, they were big planes!
Engineers intimate with the WTC designs have talked about their belief of the buildings being capable of withstanding “multiple” impacts of 707’s.
I see many are still believing the Fairy Tale!
http://tyrannyalert.com/9-11%20fairy%20tale.pdf
Read that PDF and then tell me that we should accept the “Official Theory” of events.
The same Prf who thinks Jesus went to South America and is working on Cold Fusion. LOL!
And Patrick Chester! quite so – 9.8m/s/s is the acceleration of gravity. Thank you for the correction. If only these loons were having trouble with the units! They don’t understand physics, but they are more than happy to disagree with all but one physics professor and he thinks Jesus went to South America.
Another error I made was in saying F=ma is Newton’s third law of motion, it’s the second.
And also to the person supplying substantiation for AQ’s engineers, kudos. and thx.
And as to the appearance of conservative women, you mean like Ann Coulter, Peggy Noonan, Laura Ingraham, Lorie Dhu, Condi Rice, the late Nancy Olson, Laura Bush….
Remember it’s the liberal women who murder their babies – that’s a form of self loathing that starts in the mirror.
who cares what prominent conservatives and liberals look like? my comment was about the average conservative woman, not Condi Rice and Ann Coulter(who looks like a man, very disgusting) Laura Bush looks horrible.Laura Ingaraham looks like an ugly dyke. etc. etc.
Kathy wrote:
Well, don’t base your objections solely on that sort of belief, though I suppose it’s useful for making the loons in question get angry. Focus on whatever proof this professor uses and see if there are holes in it.
Of course dotboy is trying the “spew several books worth of claims and demand every one of them be proven wrong or they’re all right” tactic. It’s a time-honored troll strategy in trying to drown out the opposition.
Hey, Wizbang site owners! We have a troll drooling all ovr this thread! Cleanup on isle 5!
Well, looks like “.” got the latest Kos missive and DID toss the homophobia in …
It has some severe issues.
I’d say it was well past time someone called out a 5150 on it.
Patrick Chester – fine – you want to assume that someone who is researching Cold Fusion and that Jesus went to South America is playing with a full deck, go ahead. I leave it open for you.
I’m just pointing out that there are a great many physicists out there who don’t espouse such foolishness, and correlation of correlations – they don’t go off a cliff over conspiracy theories…
I think you have to start at the source, you disagree. You want to start at the end of the argument, and my point is why? His credentials of ‘Physics Professor’ go right down the drain under any reasonable inspection, yet he’s trading on it.
And as to the ‘abundance’ of information – people see those long posts and skip them.
If DOT could make a point she wouldn’t need cut and paste.
Darleen, your wish is my command… see my update at the end of Kim’s posting.
J.
The MSM shares some of the blame for these stupid “inside job” theories because they confuse people by playing along with the lie that we were attacked “because of our freedoms.”
Mainstream media certainly has not made it easy to understand what motivated the terrorists who attacked us on 9/11.
Tom,
The fundamental point is that you can come up with about a few points that seem to be consistent with the controlled demolition explosives (CDE) theory. Just like a broken clock can be right twice a day you know. My theory seems to fit 0.1% of the facts. The other version has plenty of external evidences to back it up and explain about 99% of all the facts we know.
So if your standard is so low that you can believe in sth like CDE, you should have no problem with the fact that two planes smashed into the towers.
Simple logic and respect for the facts would require at least that much intellectual honesty.
Best to you and hope the objectivity may have a plcce here.
Newton’s third law is F=ma? Just how high is very high? Is alchemy used to turn steel into rubber bands? What does amalgam mean?
Nothing about the collapses “violate scientific laws” Scientists investigating the Sept. 11, 2001 collapse of the twin towers said, “the World Trade Center towers showed telltale signs they were about to collapse several minutes before each crumbled to the ground.” There would not be telltale signs if it was explosives (Controlled Demolition) that caused the buildings to collapse. Indications of the Imminent Collapse of the World Trade Center Buildings Disprove Explosives Theory
By the way, and Jones simply ignores this evidence, this is the way people keep pushing thier lies, they ignore the evidence that exposes their lies.
Educate yourself people!
http://www.st911.com
http://www.911truth.org
http://www.911blogger.com
Actually, the Towers DID withstand the impact of the planes. Quite well in fact. I remember reading quotes from people in the towers and they all felt the buildings sway a bit then settle. The problem was the jet fuel. I know people claim jet fuel doesn’t burn hot enough to melt steel.
Does lighter fluid burn hot enough to cook meat? Oh wait, the lighter fluid doesn’t cook the meat, the charcoal does? HOLY SHIT! THE OFFICE FIRE STARTED BY THE JET FUEL “cooked” the steel. Think about this. The pieces from the planes DID blow off the fireproofing material sprayed on the support beams (of which only about half the material that should have been installed WAS installed…hence one of the reasons we used it as an ethics case study), then the jet fuel was blow EVERYWHERE ACROSS THE FLOORS instantly!, a spark ignited the jet fuel and the heat from that lit off all the office furniture, etc…
THAT Fire was hot enough for the steel to at least lose structural strength, enough that the horizontal support members “fell” off their support bolts and no longer supported the floors horizontally, allowing the upper floors to literally “collapse”, the outside columns (those vertical ones on the outside of the building) were just “bowed” out. The differing crash points resulted in differing collapses for each building. The one collapsed inward first, then the outside fell, while the other one fell in a different way (remember one of the planes hit the outside, the other hit straight through the center).
Once again, engineers have no tolerance for wacko theories.
LoveAmerica,
The controlled demolition theory does not set any sort of standard for me. Let me repeat that I’m not trying to argue for the controlled demolition theory; I’m trying to understand the column collapse theory as presented in the NIST report.
It would be easier to understand if the behaviour of the columns and the rest of the structure during the collapse had actually been described or modelled by NIST.
I think there is a difference in approach here. You assume that in order to be interested in 9/11 you have to believe one thing or another about it. So you assume that I believe a conspiracy theory (or at least the demolitions aspect of it).
But I just have my doubts about the official story. That’s a perfectly honourable (and even honest) position. (We are not obliged to believe everything a government agency says.) The more you look at that story, the more holes appear. I’ve been focusing on a 16 second hole in the NIST report, and one that it is completely open about: it explains the events up to the onset of the collapse and no further.
It is possible to recognize a hole without immediately knowing how to fill it in.
Best,
T.
Henry,
Do engineers have any tolerance for curious questions from non-experts?
Granting the structural effects of the fire for the sake of argument, your collapse sequence goes:
1. “the horizontal support members “fell” off their support bolts and no longer supported the floors horizontally,”
2. “allowing the upper floors to literally “collapse”, the outside columns (those vertical ones on the outside of the building) were just “bowed” out.”
But NIST says that 1. didn’t happen. On the contrary, the support bolts held on so well that when the floors bowed downwards (due to intense heating), they excerted a horizontal force on the perimeter walls, causing them to
2. bow in.
It suprises me that defenders of the official story don’t distinguish between these two theories. They can’t be equally plausible. Just as it must make a difference whether the collapse took 10 or 16 or 40 seconds. That last bit is something that engineers should immediately have called attention to — in the 9/11 commission report, for example. 10 seconds is not nearly enough time.
They then need to tell us what difference those 6 seconds make.
They should do this not to disabuse me or anyone else of a conspiracy theory, but to satisfy our curiosity (and I would hope their own) about how buildings like that can and do collapse.
To teach and perhaps to please.
Best,
T.
Wow, the bats are out in force on this one.
Truthfully, you can cry “conspiracy” for just about anything you wish.
A word of advice to our reality-challenged friends:
–Linking to thoroughly debunked theories does not improve your case.
–Adding “go do your own research” when by “research” you mean to read the aforementioned debunked theories weakens your credibility (if it’s at all possible to weaken it further).
–The conspiracy lunatics do have a very strong argument in that Charlie Sheen is on their side. He has been known, of course, to be a bastion of common sense, so we kinda lose there.
In re “reality-challenged”, here’s a bit from the BBC that came out shortly after the attacks.
He said: “There is going to be a debate about whether or not the World Trade Center Towers should have collapsed in the way that they did.”
The post-mortem on the twin towers will not be swift and will rely on the plans of the buildings, records of its construction, the testimonies of survivors, video of the collapse and forensic examination of the wreckage.
“We are operating well beyond realistic experience,” said Halvorson.
When I first read that it reminded me immediately of that famous remark from deep inside the Bush administration about the poor deluded members of the “reality based community”: “We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality.”
It’s not so much that some people are reality-challenged (we all have our limits), it’s that imperial reality is itself very challenging. That America is an empire now is not a fringe theory but an (increasingly) well-entrenched, if sometimes controversial, position in political science. How an empire (and especially this empire) works and how it deals with “reality”, is something we’re learning these days.
We are operating well beyond realistic experience.
Sorry about the formatting on that comment. It didn’t work out like I planned (the blockquote should go all the way down to quote in bold).
Also: here are the links to the BBC and “reality based community”.
Fascism: An American reality
Larry Pinkney | July 6 2006
The American Heritage Dictionary defines the word fascism as “a philosophy or system of government that is marked by stringent social and economic control, a strong centralized government usually headed by a dictator, and often a policy of belligerent nationalism.” Moreover, and most importantly, it also defines fascism clearly and succinctly as “oppressive or dictatorial control.” There are those who will sarcastically say that the political/social situation in and with America is not “that bad,” when in fact things are far, far worse.
Whether or not one chooses to define this increasingly all-encompassing suppression of people in America as authoritarian, totalitarian or fascist is a ridiculously moot point for the overwhelming majority of people who have lost or are losing their already limited freedoms, their livelihoods and their very lives to the organized repression of this hypocritical, cynically racist and genocidal American state apparatus. The organized and sustained political, economic, social and cultural repression being waged by the American state against its own citizens and persons globally is nothing short of fascism.
At this precarious period in history, with repression intensifying on all levels, quibbling about whether or not America is technically fascist amounts to intellectual masturbation. The fact is that the internal and external repressive policies of the United States of America have already destroyed — and continue to decimate — millions of people inside America and throughout the world. Especially is this true with respect to the vast majority of people of color in the ghettos, reservations and barrios of the U.S., as well as in Africa, Asia, Central and South America, the Caribbean and elsewhere.
Contrary to the well perpetuated myth, fascism is not limited to storm troopers blatantly goose-stepping down streets and alleyways, engaging in bloody search and destroy missions. Germany’s fascism under Adolf Hitler differed from Italy’s fascism under Benito Mussolini, but they were both fascist nation states. Fascism has different forms, all of which are equally deadly, all of which must be identified, seriously resisted and stopped.
Complacently insisting that the organized state repressive apparatus of, in and by the United States must not be defined as fascism is incredibly dangerous, especially at this point in history. It’s a bit like quibbling with a person who is in the death throes of drowning that he is not actually drowning but merely suffocating! No matter how it is defined, the person is dying, and immediate action is needed to save his or her life!
Whether it is defined as blatant fascism, benign fascism or so-called creeping fascism, it is still fascism; and if left unchecked, the end result is precisely the same: total and utter disenfranchisement under an authoritarian, repressive state apparatus. The urgency of this reality in America cannot be overstated.
The enormous internal and external destruction of peoples and cultures around the world caused by the fascistic policies of the United States — cloaked in a mythical democracy — have wreaked more havoc, misery and destruction upon peoples nationally and around the world than the blatantly fascist regimes of World War II Germany and Italy combined. Notwithstanding the over 100 million Black people who had previously been murdered as victims of Europe and America’s African “legalized” slave trafficking, it should be remembered that many years subsequent, Adolf Hitler, in his published book “Mein Kampf,” made it quite clear that the idea for waging the horrible genocide against Jews and other so-called “undesirables” had been borrowed from none other than the earlier genocide waged by the United States against the indigenous — so called “Indian” — peoples of America.
Ironically, many pundits of that 1930s era confidently and incorrectly argued that due to Germany’s achievements in culture, politics, the arts and technology of that period, the unthinkable could never happen there. Obviously, they were wrong. Nevertheless, the enormous horrors inflicted by fascist Germany and Italy upon the world pale by comparison to those carried out by the much larger, deadlier and far more sophisticated United States of America, whose internal and external “news” and information propaganda machine would make the former fascist German and Italian propaganda machines green with envy.
Thus, to compare the contemporary United States, or any of its leaders, to the former fascist leaders Adolf Hitler or Benito Mussolini is utterly missing the point, as the U.S. is much, much worse, and its global power is far more encompassing and devastating.
It is important not to be fooled by the feigned surprise on the part of some at the limited, tip-of-the-iceberg revelations about U.S. torture, internal spying by the U.S. government and corporations, the militarization of the judicial process, massive national voter disenfranchisement and the demonstrated de facto contempt by the U.S. government and corporations for the Black victims of Hurricane Katrina, etc. Substantively, virtually none of these systemic practices are new but now are integrally part and parcel of an increasingly blatant form of American fascism.
No matter what individual may be the nominal “leader” of the United States, or what political party — Republican or Democratic — is in power, fascism has undeniably become an American reality. No matter what name or under what guise America cloaks its fascist policies, the undeniable fact is: America’s own style of fascism is a reality here and now.
It is no wonder that Austrian born Arnold Schwarzenegger demonstrated no compunction or inhibition whatsoever in repeatedly and openly expressing his “admiration” for German fascist leader Adolf Hitler before going on later to become the Republican Party’s governor of the state of California (see “Events Related to Schwarzenegger.”)
Moreover, there is no sustained and overwhelming outrage and incensed repudiation of Schwarzenegger from the leadership of either the Democratic or Republican parties regarding his arrogant and chilling admiration for a fascist leader who was directly responsible for the dehumanization and murder of millions of people. A distinctly American version of fascism has taken root in this nation, and has created a political climate wherein politicians can openly embrace with admiration past fascist leaders without seriously jeopardizing their own political careers.
Furthermore, other than as an increasingly obvious propaganda tool to further its global hegemonic objectives, America’s cynical racism and hypocrisy has made a meaningless mockery of words and phrases such as democracy, legality, freedom, fair judicial process and justice. This is a reality which most of the peoples of the world outside of the United States have already acknowledged.
Attempting to minimize the precariousness of the political situation in this nation by denying the reality of fascism in America does not change or stop it. Maintaining, like ostriches, the denial of fascism’s active, significant existence and role in the American body politic, actually strengthens its stranglehold on the people of this nation and world. Only by removing our heads from the sand, facing up to, organizing against, resisting and struggling for systemic change here and now is there the real hope, for ourselves and for people around the world, of stopping and dismantling this fascist onslaught. Indeed, we can ill afford to do otherwise.
Tom
It’s not so much that some people are reality-challenged (we all have our limits), it’s that imperial reality is itself very challenging. That America is an empire now is not a fringe theory but an (increasingly) well-entrenched, if sometimes controversial, position in political science. How an empire (and especially this empire) works and how it deals with “reality”, is something we’re learning these days.
—————————————————
Thank you for voicing your real belief here. The free world just finished dealing with a real evil empire, the Soviet Union and communist China. And we witness how this evil empire treated the poor/oppressed. THis evil communist empire slaughterd hundreds of millions of people and subjected billions of people to oppression. The remnant of this evil empire and ideology is still around the globe today in NOrth Korea, Cuba, Venezuela. They are in league with the current jihadist ideology. Just look at the alliance between communist Chavez and Iran mullahs for example.
To say that the US is an empire is the territory of kooks like Cindy Sheehan. She announced that she would rather live under Chavez. I hope she would move there asap. Truly, the left is operating in a fantasy land these days, beyond realistic experience.
the left, the right, its all the same you fools. are you really that gullible? do you really think that dems and republicans are that different in the end? how much power do you think your respective congresspeople and senators have? wake up you fucking fools. they got you playing off of each other with this phony left/right bullshit. the partisan hacks on both sides are whats wrong with this country. you fall for the left/right parlor game way too easily.
Thus, to compare the contemporary United States, or any of its leaders, to the former fascist leaders Adolf Hitler or Benito Mussolini is utterly missing the point, as the U.S. is much, much worse, and its global power is far more encompassing and devastating.
—————————————————
This is beyond contempt and it is despicable. It tries to minimize the evils of communism and fascism. It tried to excuse the evil of jihadist terrorism. It slanderd the only country that has brought the greatest good to the most number of people on earth.
Whoever wrote this piece is truly despicable. This writer is nothing more than a propagandist for evils.
but please, by all means, keep being afraid like they want you to be. gullible sheep.
im still waiting for one of you typical sheeple to use the term “islamofascism”, HAHAHAHAHAHAHA, that term is perfect for ramping up scared little gullible fools like yourselves. do i have to remind you that your boy Reagan and also Carter are laregly responsible for funding the islamic forces in Afghanistan, including Bin Laden? you people are dense as hell, everything is seen through the left/right paradigm. stop falling for it you friggin sheep.
I was completley skeptical of 9/11 “conspiracy theorists” but now, after hours upon hours of research, I must say that there is no way that jet fuel was responsible for the collapses of the Twin Towers. The physics don’t work, and you don’t have to be a physicist to know that. All you have to know is that if you had dropped a rock from where they started to collapse it would have hit the ground at (about) the same time. But that is only one small piece of the puzzle. There are at least a THOUSAND facts that on their own are enough to have a “conspiracy theory”. If everyone knew, we could take our country back from these globalist scumbags. Anyone of you who choose republican over democrat, or democrat over republican, are just playing into another one of their schemes. Both parties are controlled by these guys. I mean, George Bush and John Kerry are cousins! And they are both members of an elite secret society that only has 800 living members, and 11 were in Bush’s first term! And dont say “dont talk about that, imagine what the families of victims would say” because the families are the ones who started 9/11 truth, and couldnt get any real evidence put in the commision report. I’m glad lots of people are looking at this information now, I hope you all realize that George Bush’s grandfather helped bring Nazis to power, that Karl Rove’s family was Nazis, Arnold’s dad was a Nazi, and now they’ve built over 700 concentration camps in America, and 9/11 was obviously our reichstag. Hitler used the same tactics that the Bush administration is using. Next time you see a ten story building, imagine it fall in one second. [email protected] please email me if you disagree
Nick,
You gave yourself away when you expoused this slander against George Bush using his grandfather and 700 concentration camps in AMerica.
You are not honest enough to admit that you a kooky conspiracy theorists.
WHoever is willing to compare George Bush is intellectually ignorant or dishonest. It is worse if this is an attempt to use moral equivalency to minimize the evils of jihadist terrorism against America. This is beyond contempt.