F*ck the gatekeepers!

http://www.fadsmashers.com/war-of-terror.html
Snapshots from Abu Graib

How you get someone to confess to blowing up the WTC.http://www.smh.com.au/ftimages/2006/02/15/1139890772777.html

From the Telegraph

Article from Fadsmashers.com
http://www.fadsmashers.com/war-of-terror.html
THE FREEDUMB FIGHTERS

Naomi Klein
Naomi claims that governments need catastrophe in order to capitalize on the shock that ensues thereafter for the sake of securing their own greedy ambitions on the not so free market. However, in spite of how necessary she feels this is, she for some reason doesn’t think it’s so necessary (in the face of all the evidence) that governments would do it themselves. I'll repeat that... Government (the interests that run it) NEED disaster (hence disaster capitalism) to sustain the fake economy, but not so much that it would ever consider engineering threats when none naturally presented themselves. Right. They just simply wait for things to happen, and then their endless sociopathy, thirst for power and greed kicks in… OkEE!!! DO YOU REALLY THINK SHE COULD BELIEVE THAT KNOWING WHAT SHE DOES?!! GET REAL SON!!!

Naomi is the master of conspiratorial pragmatism; no one knows how to dance around the minefield quite like this silver tongued beauty. If she thinks its suspicious then why not investigate it? MAYBE ITS BECAUSE THE CULTURE AND MARKET SURROUNDING IT ISN'T BIG ENOUGH!!! (LOL!!!<<
Excerpt from the Shock doctrine
"Believers in the shock doctrine are convinced that only great rupture-a flood, a war, a terrorist attack-can generate the kind of vast, clean canvases they crave."
-N.K The Shock Doctrine p26

Translation
"So its likely those believers would orchastrate these events if they felt it was "the only" way, and it may be worth investigating if we were actually serious about what we talk about! But instead I will continue to ramble on about Milton Friedman, and executive bonuses while never addressing the underlying crime of private banking!! In fact I will encourage the oppressive system by advocating that these banks start lending more debt to you from their fiat coffers, and then get mad at them when they dont and seem revolutionary. I wont out the criminal network orchastrating the fascade in investigating 9/11 because that would prompt a real public reaction, that we are not prepared to capitalize on. This is the part of my book I didnt talk about, its called Shock jock capitalism!"



Noam Chomsky
Apart from promptly replying to emails, being 90% right most of the time and doing a fair bit to divert the rebellious youths attention away from the human element of corruption while focusing on intangible abstracts such as “the machine” or “the wealthy” unaccountable corporations, insignificant somebodies, peaceful protest and other easily tamed neo-Marxist babble, Chomsky has achieved a FAILing grade in his analysis of 9/11.

Chomsky’s premature conclusion is that US elements had no hands in the attack, because the idea (to him the idealist) is just absurd. The same guy who has spent his life documenting corruption and imperialism thinks the idea is implausible, OKEE!!! No inconsistency there whatsoever!!! On the basis of this subjective absolution the ‘professor’ has concluded that investigating any other narratives or investigating period is a complete and utter waste of time. To add to this poorly thought out and reactive statement Chomsky adds that the issue itself is entirely irrelevant; that even if rogue elements within the government were complicit if not entirely responsible, that its no big deal, (!) and clearly wouldn’t provide any valuable leads that were in anyway significant in the present day, or have any ramifications on anything else in our society. GOTCHA!




The Blowback Throwback
He claims that the facts implicating US/ Israeli special interest involvement, may distort the concept of blowback. That is, if we were to assume it was not terrorists, it would imply that there is no resistance to American foreign policy, and undermine the message that is attempting to be communicated in such events. There is no doubt legitimate acts of terrorism performed everyday, which are a desperate attempt to resist globalization, this is not to say such acts are justified. They are about as unjust as the acts that provoked them. That said, this in itself (the ‘professors’ only real point with merit), this paranoia of compromising our worldview, is hardly scientific and sufficient to not at least want another fake independent investigation... no?

Governments have been proven to commit false flag operations in the past to push forth agendas (like the incident which precipitated the Vietnam war in which Israeli/ Americans fired on their own ships!!), it is documented, declassified, it shoudlnt among any rational populous be viewed as a "far-fetched idea". To incriminate special interests should not necessarily have the effect of downplaying the concept of blowback and the impacts of globalization, this is simply fucking stupid, and it would appear does more to preserve Chomsky’s worldview and theories then it does truth.

Lastly, he believes that because the issue is past, it is thus not worth exploring, yet its ok for him to ramble on citing instances of government corruption from as far back as required to validate his own 'ism' when he feels the urge to do so.

This has to be the most pathetically, long-winded, insincere, uninformed explanation ever offered by a so called rebel. You sir disappoint me.


Howard Zinn
Howard Zinn, as with all of these individuals, has been an activist connoisseur, from WW2 hero, to anti-segregationist, to American anti-war spokesman, he has certainly made his contributions to the social justice movement. Being Jewish (like the majority of prominent American left wing spokespeople) and having a personal history with Nazism why would he not capitalize on this opportunity to incriminate the Bush nazi for this crime?

He criticizes 9/11 truth as being an irreconcilable issue, yet somewhere in his mind believes a socialist utopia can manifest out of a society in which the media (and indy media) is either monopolized or being represented by pussies who dont want to ask hard questions… right O then old boy!!!


*This interview is so multilayered in its deception, not only do they appear as if they are very bad actors, Howard Zinns hypnotic programming with his repetition that "its a distraction" and the (FAKE "real news"<<<>If you and your bestselling cohorts would invest so much as 5 minutes in exploring, and generating awareness about the issue, this may have been resolved 7 years ago. Instead you’ll spend twice the amount of time trying to rationalize why the situation isn’t worth pursuing, and just let the other insecure nutjobs capitalize on it instead, until its too fucking late, and all you can do is sell us more fucking ebooks so we can arrogantly walk around and think we have the faintest idea as to how manipulated we are!!!

Seeing as the Iraq war is “over” I guess we can stop exploring that now too as it can never be reconciled! In fact investigating anything that happened more then 5 seconds ago is a waste of time, so disregard the first part of this sentence…


*This interview is so multilayered in its deception, not only do they appear as if they are very bad actors, Howard Zinns hypnotic programming with his repetition that "its a distraction" and the (FAKE "real news"<<<>


Keith Olbermann

There isnt much to say about this guys angle on 9/11, other then that its the bottom feeder of this morally moronic bunch. Like Michael Moore, Bill Maher and John Stewart he doesnt go beyond critiquing the Bush administrations incompetency (i.e dignififying the idea that this cokehead cowboy actually did anything other then look dumb), shocking his viewers with his pretentious diatribes against Bushs IQ, protecting the Obama hope delusion as shit hits the fan in slow motion, and ashes ashes we all bow down... But its mainly the fact he buys into the Osama ordeal, thats whats naive. Anyways, all of the aforementioned people have conceded that something is fishy about 9/11 in the event itself or in its effect, (more or less) but also add:

1) THE “WE ARE TOO DUMB TO INVESTIGATE ARGUMENT”
Basically that all these intelligently, outspoken and popular people (and anybody for that matter) are completley incompetent in investigating this issue, because they are simply braindead dunces who actually cheated on their university exams and slept with thier professors to get in the highest ranking academic positions they fill today. We couldnt figure it out even if we were smart enough because I guess we would be gagged or killed and they would have to blame that on the right to fuel the phony left/ right delusion. Thats not required quite yet. If it’s because they don’t want the stigma of “conspiracy theorist” tagged to their image, then how fucking renegade are they anyway? Come on, I mean… at least attack the neocons… they are only the tip of the iceberg, at least give us a show!!! FAAAAAAAAAACK SMIGGENS!!!

2) THE “THAT’S OLD NEWS ARGUMENT”
That the issue is itself a red herring not worth pursuing, and takes us away from things happening right now which we will apply this SAME REASONING TO IN THE NEXT 5 YEARS??? Come again? That is in a few years, the Iraq war and torture will be non-issues, both of which began immediately post 9/11… (which since 2003, when Chomsky published a book regurgitating the official narrative on the topic, has been a non-issue).

All these people contend that the issue of 9/11 is a red herring, and a distraction away from things occurring right now.

Let’s assess the logic: 1) Things that happened in the past are less relevant then things happening now 2) Even though this is how all criminal cases work! 3) Therefore we should focus on more relevant things happening only now, because the future has no relationship with the past.

We cannot research the past and the present concurrently because we cant chew gum and walk at the same time. If there were criminal elements then, its likely there are still criminal elements now, unless we are naïve idiots that is!

How the fuck is that even a person with a 3rd grade intellect can comprehend the significance of 9/11, yet these refined academics need the causal relationship explained as if they were in special ed…

3) THE “CONSPIRACY THEORIES ARE A LIABILITY ARGUMENT”
Translates into I enjoy my career and am content not overstepping my bounds and saying what needs to be said, and will gladly delegate this activity to some other group we will deem as a liability. If it is such a liability... then WHY is it such a liability!!!

These people have a lot invested in the left/right polarity. What people don’t understand is that no matter where you find a rebel, you will find ego. The notion that the rebel is somehow selfless, and utilitarian rarely hits the mark, although this quality may be something that is aspired to. The ego is in the persona; ‘the hero’, sent there to slay the fire breathing corporate interests who’s incinerating the slaves. The nature of the rebel is to strive for perfection, if ones viewpoint comes under threat, they have to acknowledge an imperfection, and invalidate their righteous self-image. It comes down to not wanting to be proved wrong.

4) THE “ITS LIKE JFK ARGUMENT”
When someone compares the incident of JFK to 9/11, tell them that you dont want to be their friend anymore. Im kidding... but really... One guy, who was paid to lie to the people (politician/ JFK) being killed, doesn’t approach the scale and importance of the events of 9/11, other then instating the left as morally superior. I believe that this is a subversive tactic as most view the JFK thing as no more then a American legend, or at best a nifty motion picture. When we relate 9/11 to JFK, we presume that the two are at par for their mysteriousness. BUMP THAT SHIT FROM YOUR MIND!!! The amount of evidence surrounding the 9/11 attacks is so overwhelming you can see it from fucking space!

The fundamental difference is that JFK's assassination didn't aid in the fulfillment of some agenda, and was likely and inconvenience for the powers that be, if not to provide an example to JFK's successors as to who was really in charge.

5) THE "THEY ARE TOO DUMB TOO PULL IT OFF ARGUMENT"
The made atomic bombs, private banking, vaccines, laser weapons, and facebook. They are not stupid.

Summary
What are these people hiding from? Why would they allow the right-wing groups to commandeer the 9/11 truth movement, and risk being criticized for not doing so? Whose interest is being served by these people (whether directly or indirectly)? Is it because they see it as a threat to their prized notion of government intervention, in that if government proved to be so easily corrupted, that this would compromise the leftist ideologies? It wouldn’t, because if anything it would be special interests (criminals) within the government, and not the institution itself which bore the blame. People of such intellectual sophistication should know that... If they don’t then WTF smiggens!!! HEY I KNOW!!! LETS JUST DEMAND MORE SHITTY JOBS, TO SAVE UP TO BUY DUMB SHIT AND TWEET WITH ONE ANOTHER ON HUGE FUCK YOU LCD SCREENS!!!! WOULDNT THAT BE NEAT!!!

Is it because they risked being blackballed by the media, like anyone else who has expressed similar concerns (with the exception of all the so called truther shills you are going to see a lot more off soon, preaching less indicting truths, making TV shows about the 9/11 conspiracy and trying to sell you more T-shirts while they prepare to give you 9/11 commission report 2.0). what has been the consequence of their works in social justice, asides from whatever little crumb the establishment would have given us anyway? What’s relevant though is that these outspoken, highly acclaimed, academic powerhouses won’t touch the issue with a ten foot pole. Instead they insist we must focus solely on the future and remain completely ignorant to the socio-historical progression of events that shaped the world we live in right now. This scientific negligence could not be more profound!!! They are exhibiting the same attitude and depth of analyis as their arch rivals (the washington generals) in the manner with which they address this issue. This can not be emphasized enough!!! What’s more, and perhaps the most fundamental contradiction, is that if they felt this issue was fishy (like they admi), why not use their socio-political superstardom to bring much needed attention to the issue, so it could be resolved more quickly, freeing up more time to gab on endlessly about the morality of torture, and other New York Times bestsellers…

A Chomskyite talking to a CIA operative
LEFTY- “IF IT WASN'T OSAMA WHO WAS IT THEN??”

OPERATIVE-“Oh... was some other patsy we tortured for 5 years, and convicted in a kangaroo court in another country, and oh yeah no press coverage… sorry… our bad”

LEFTY-“Oh phew, I'm glad! For a second there I actually thought that criminal elements of the government that rules us all with ease were the ones who told the military not to intervene and blow up skyscrapers, which among many others housed the central intelligence agency! Nope, these schizotypal fantasies were but figments of our own imagination, planted their by our own righteous indignation and unconscious envy of elitist power!”

OPERATIVE- “Hey its no problem, we’ve been doing this for many years!”

LEFTY- “Thanks bro… I mean… big bro!!! I am content that no further explanation or investigation is required and I can now continue rambling on about Blackwater, republicans, banker bonuses and anything else that will steer attention away from the actual criminal elements orchestrating this facade, while selling lots of books and gaining worldwide acclaim!!!”



THIS IS TO BE ACCEPTED AS OUR SOCIETIES HIGHPOINT OF INDEPENDENT THOUGHT... THESE ARE THE PEOPLE WE HAVE PASSIVELY PERCEIVED AS THE FRONTLINE CRITICS AND PROTECTORS OF OUR FREEDUMB, IT IS THEIR CRITICISM THAT SETS THE STANDARD FOR MAINSTREAM INDEPENDENT THOUGHT, AND IF THEY REFUSE TO ADDRESS ONE OF THE MOST SIGNIFICANT SCAMS OF THE 21st CENTURY THEN THAT IS (IN A RATIONAL WORLD) in IN ITSELF SOMETHING WORTHY OF INVESTIGATION. WHY DONT THEY JUST HELP PEOPLE BLOW THE CASE WIDE OPEN AND GET TO THE SOURCE OF THE PROBLEM ALREADY??? BECAUSE THEY COULD!!!

Everyone on the left is dodging an attempt to strike a REAL blow to their nemesis Neocons that they have for so long worked to villify? Why? Maybe, (just maybe) its because this whole thing is a fking I L L U S I O N….