Monday, June 22, 2009

Paul Craig Roberts suggests Europeans do not believe US gov't account of 9/11

Writes Paul Craig Roberts, who knows the official 9/11 account to be false but whose omniscience unfortunately does not extend to what actually transpired:
No one abroad believes the US government’s story. Europeans have produced
documentary films that laugh at the official explanation.
George Noory scoffs at a lot of official explanations, a response that is not terribly unusual for those of Middle Eastern descent. So what? Most Europeans do not find the narrative of 19 Muslims hijacking four planes to be as risible as Roberts would have his readers believe they do.

In September of last year, WorldPublicOpinion.com, a left-leaning organization affiliated with the University of Maryland, released what appears to be the most expansive international survey of opinion on the attacks to date. Those surveyed were asked to volunteer, without offered responses, who they believed to be behind the attacks:


In all of the European nations surveyed except for Ukraine, absolute majorities answered with al Qaeda, bin Laden, or Islamic extremists. If the "don't know" responses are excluded, majorities in Indonesia and every non-Muslim country save Mexico feel this way. In contrast, by a 3 to 1 margin, Eygptians and Jordanians think Israel was behind the attacks rather than al Qaeda, bin Laden, or Islamic extremists. Outside the Muslim world, the US government's story is seen as the most credible on offer.

When making such serious charges, sloppiness is a killer. Roberts would better serve the skeptical cause if he were not so messy (and he'd better serve VDare readers if he actually wrote about immigration).

19 comments:

Razib said...

frankly, i've stopped deconstructing columnists because it's just too easy. think about how many pet theories you'd have to think of to produce a column every week if you *actually bothered to check the data on the theory*.

Black Sea said...

I very occassionally read one of PCR's columns, just to see how "out there" he happens to be on any particular day. In some weird way, it brings me back down to reality (or what I think of as reality) in the same way as when you stand up too quickly, you suddenly feel a little dizzy, and instinct tells you to sit your ass down.

Re: 9/11 and theories as to who was ultimately responsible, people believe want they want to believe and what --from a psychological standpoint--they NEED to believe, at that's at least as true in the Islamic world as it is everywhere else.

Black Sea said...

Don't know if your interested, but I ran across this article, "Racism's Hidden Toll," cited at a blog site operated by a sociologist.

http://www.miller-mccune.com/health/racisms-hidden-toll-1268

I commented that this article seemed to me to be more about politics than science, or rather, was an example of politics masquerading as science, which of course didn't rub all the sociologists the right way.

I was ultimately accused, I think, of "right-wing Hegelianism," and was left to wonder if one can actually be a Hegelian without ever having read Hegel.

Blode0322 said...

I wonder if the 30+% of Turks who think Americans made those planes fly into those buildings have any clever theories on what happened to those Armenian folks in 1914-1918....

Sometimes I think NATO is like a family gathering with too many in-laws.

I was ultimately accused, I think, of "right-wing Hegelianism," and was left to wonder if one can actually be a Hegelian without ever having read Hegel.

Aw, they probably meant to call you a "right-wing historicist". A fairly sophisticated critique of a rightist, really.

I could never read Hegel myself, because I like to have my head upright when I'm reading.

Black Sea said...

I think most of the Turkish theories you depend upon "fog of war" scenarios.

You might find interesting the widespread Turkish belief that the US and/or Israel secretly deploy an "Earthquake Weapon" in order to keep Turkey down. This weapon of mass disruption was also responsible for the mega-tsunmai of a few years ago. I'm not clear on why we're holding down the Indonesians as well, but I'm sure we have our reasons.

And then there's the well-known fact that the bird flu of a few years past was actually the US military, testing its latest chemical weapons on hapless Turkish peasants. This theory was endorsed by no less than a retired Turkish general.

And then there's . . . oh well, I better quit. Who knows which of my comments might be monitored by the forces that be. Next thing I know, I'll be implicated in Ergenekon.

Black Sea said...

Sorry:

I think most of the Turkish theories you refer to depend upon "fog of war" scenarios.

Lazy proofreading . . .

Blode0322 said...

Lazy proofreading . . .

Now who's being naive?

Blode0322 said...

... In all seriousness, though, do you have a post or two up about what it's like being in Istanbul? I mean, like how long did you live there before the "Istanbul not Constantinople" song wasn't stuck in your head all the time?

Anonymous said...

"And then there's . . . oh well, I better quit. Who knows which of my comments might be monitored by the forces that be. Next thing I know, I'll be implicated in Ergenekon."

The Armenians weren't killed by any Turks. They fought among themselves and killed each other. I don't know why that isn't clear to you! Obviously, the US holds the Indonesians down in order to keep their batik from hurting US batik industry. The Batik Lobby is behind the whole thing, duh.
And I bet you're the guy who grafittied up the statue of Ataturk in Kusadasi, as you're a well known hater and critic of Turkey! I'm on to you! And you're a racist too, Hegelian historicist critiques of right wingerism be damned!

Black Sea said...

The following isn't a post about what it's like to be in Istanbul; it's more about what it's like not to have freedom of speech in Istanbul. Or what it's like to get shot dead in the street for airing your opinions in Istanbul:

http://buyukliman.blogspot.com/2007/01/article-301.html

No, I've never really written much about what it's like to live here. Actually, we lived for three years in Ankara before coming to Istanbul, so that was really my introduction to Turkey. It's OK, not bad. The bosphorus is beautiful. The weather's good. We have a nice place to live. I bought a motor scooter this spring. I'm not sure how to work all of that up into a blog post.

Blode0322 said...

And I bet you're the guy who grafittied up the statue of Ataturk in Kusadasi, as you're a well known hater and critic of Turkey!

Oh snap! How'd ya find me!

Must have been all the Aqua Turquouise spraypaint stashed in my garage. I knew I shoulda ditched it.

Audacious Epigone said...

Razib,

Yes, there are more constructive undertakings for a polyhistor like yourself to engage in. Still, if an assertion is so clearly refuted by available data, it feels like a dereliction of duty to let it pass unmolested.

BS,

I read through that Miller-McCune feature while working out this morning. It is illustrative of how artificial the major media treatment of racial disparities still is: The heroine is a Jew who went to school with the children of the ignorant WASP elite (there is no Jewish elite in the Northeast, of course) and now faces death threats and academic ostracization. I'll be eagerly awaiting the similarly sympathetic portrayal of Arthur Jensen or Philippe Rushton that is surely just going through the editor's final touches. She argues that white structural racism causes "minorities" (not East Asians, presumably, as they are never mentioned) to suffer all sorts of health problems earlier than whites do. Consequently it is, relative to whites, less harmful (or even beneficial) for minorities to have children in their teens. Never mind that the blacks who, according to the article, break down the fastest are from places with large black populations like Harlem, not from lily-white states in the upper Midwest. And the 'data' pointing to racialist discrimination is apparently just deduced from the fact that racial disparities in health outcomes widen as people become older.

Nick said...

Gotta love those Mexico numbers. Those people are obviously just dying to pledge heartfelt fealty to America. I also like the 18% who say "other". What are the other options? The Reptillians? The Quebecois?

Yes, let's let more of these morons into our country. . .

Nick said...

Ahh, I see that 5 of that 18 percent in Mexico suggest that it's some sort of Islamic/Arabic/middle eastern group. Still, 13% saying some other response is still too much, particularly on top of the other numbers. . .

teacher.paris said...

The vast majority of humans parrot the nonsense generated by the mainstream American media. What else is new?

Audacious Epigone said...

Nick,

It would be enjoyable to present the WSJ op/ed board with the Mexican numbers, as well as the ADL report released a few years ago on anti-semitism among Hispanic settlers in the US.

Anonymous said...

Given the Mexican numbers, I think it's safe to say that our grandchildren will be taught in school that 9/11 was a false flag attack engineered by US Government and George W. Goldstein.

I would love to know the ethnic/socioeconomic breakdown by category.

popularsymbolism said...

I think a big problem in the matter is that the average American would rather not believe their government was capable of doing such a thing.

David Lynch made a similar observation on the subject.

And yet, false-flag attacks are a fact of life. Gulf of Tonkin was a definite false flag operation, and that got the US into the Vietnam war.

During the Cold War, the CIA had every known liberal and anti-establishment figure on the payroll - this included authors like George Orwell, Arthur Koestler, Bertrand Russell, and so on.

You can read about this in the book 'CIA And The Cultural Cold War'.

http://www.amazon.com/Cultural-Cold-War-World-Letters/dp/156584596X
http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/CIAcultCW.html

Contained within the book is declassified information that proves without a shadow of a doubt the CIA was involved in a process called 'culture creation' - not only in the US, but abroad in Europe as well. Far from being an organic process, the idea of an intelligence service 'moulding' culture/society, buying off artists, painters and authors and have them put out politically convenient material, should be abhorrent to the average libertarian/conservative American proclaiming to believe in the free-market.

Whatever your stance on 9/11, therefore, there should be a middle ground where people can agree to one thing - that the US government is out of control and can no longer claim to serve its citizens in a straightforward manner. Ron Paul makes a good point when he says the US military should get out of nation building, policing the world, staging and rigging elections in other countries, political assassinations (as they did in Ecuador and Iran, for instance) and so on.

There are hundreds of military bases in Japan alone - yet Obama tries to convince a gullible American public into believing he's going to pull out of Iraq. That's just a mere example of how politicians and non-governmental interests are taking advantage of an under-educated public to push through policies - even with nonsensical arguments to support their cause. One of the few admirable things about Bush as this frontman/presidential figure was that he made few bones about being a war monger - Obama is the slicker equivalent that on the one hand panders to anti-war supporters but then does a total volte face, hoping his broad radiant smile will prevent people from noticing he just did the total opposite to what he espoused.

popularsymbolism said...

For more information on Gulf of Tonkin, see this article:

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5hzFIeNFkO1z6p7PHHwx5k_ig11-Q

The most illuminating revelations are as follows:

[quote]
North Vietnamese made hoax calls to get the US military to bomb its own units during the Vietnam War, according to declassified information that also confirmed US officials faked an incident to escalate the war.
[/quote]

[quote]
But he said that probably the "most historically significant feature" of the declassified report was the retelling of the 1964 Gulf of Tonkin incident.

That was a reported North Vietnamese attack on American destroyers that helped lead to president Lyndon Johnson's sharp escalation of American forces in Vietnam.

...


"What this study demonstrated is that the available intelligence shows that there was no attack. It's a dramatic reversal of the historical record," Aftergood said.
[/quote]

So it took until at least 2008/2009 to be able to say that the Gulf of Tonkin was a definite confirmed false flag operation without running the risk of being labelled a 'kook' or 'conspiracy theorist' (though this still happens no doubt, even though the evidence is there now). And it also goes to show that the historical record is not always correct or infallible either. Given that, everything's possible - and people should rely more on their own judgment and less on the explanations of their government or affiliated organizations with regards to these events (Gulf of Tonkin, 9/11, USS Liberty)