Home     Writers     Op/Ed     Book Reviews     News     Bookstore     Photoshops     Submit     Search     Contact Us     Advertise  
  You are here: 

Fri

01

Oct

2010

David Ray Griffin v. Cass Sunstein
Friday, 01 October 2010 03:44
by Stephen Lendman

Griffin is Professor of Philosophy of Religion and Theology, Emeritus, Claremont School of Theology and Claremont Graduate University, Claremont, CA where he's still co-director of the Center for Process Studies.

He's authored and/or edited three dozen books, mainly in his field, but notably and heroically on 9/11 truth, Osama bin Laden, and his newest titled, "Cognitive Infiltration: An Obama Appointee's Plan to Undermine the 9/11 Conspiracy Theory." More on it below.

Cass Sunstein is a well-known University of Chicago and Harvard Law School Professor before being appointed Obama's Administrator of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, in charge of "overseeing policies relating to privacy, information quality, and statistical programs," among other duties.

Distinguished Law Professor, activist, and international law and human rights expert Francis Boyle said this about both law schools and the University of Chicago's political science department, steeped in neo-con Straussianism:

"Do not send your children to the University of Chicago where they will grow up to become warmongers like (Paul) Wolfowitz and (John) Ashcroft. The University of Chicago is an intellectual and moral cesspool," referring to its political science department and law school. Its extremist economics department is much the same, indoctrinating students with predatory capitalist ideology.

Boyle's "Harvard's Gitmo Kangaroo Law School: The School for Torturers" article advised:

"Do not send your children or students to Harvard Law School where they will grow up to become racist war criminals! Harvard Law School is a Neo-Con cesspool."

"Harvard is to Law School as Torture is to Law."
 

Commenting on Sunstein when he was mentioned as a possible Supreme Court nominee, Boyle, calling him a "Neo-Con," said he'd be a "lethal" choice.

Professor Emeritus James Fetzer, Founder, Scholars for 9/11 Truth, took sharp issue with Sunstein's attempt to discredit its proponents, saying his "Conspiracy Theories" report (discussed below) is a "corrosive approach" and "massive blunder" to believe they're "obviously false!" In fact, "No one can know which theories are true or false without investigating them." That a Harvard Law professor would suggest it "is simply stunning," yet unsurprising given the source. 

Sunstein is a notorious neo-con, abhorrent of First Amendment and other democratic freedoms, believing the rule of law is best served by subverting it.

Glen Greenwald's "The Horrible Prospect of Supreme Court Justice Cass Sunstein" article said:

"From the beginning of the War on Terror, Cass Sunstein turned himself into the most reliable Democratic cheerleader for Bush/Cheney radicalism and their assault on the Constitution and the rule of law." He also supports military commissions, illegal surveillance, and "mock(ed) the notion that Bush had committed crimes while in office."

One of his former students added:

"I think (he's) an extremely ambitious man (who'd) run over his grandmother for a seat on the Supreme Court."

Apparently over the country as well, trashing it and the public interest for power, clearly the aim of his "Cognitive Infiltration" proposal.

In January 2008, he and Adrian Vermeule published a controversial report titled, "Conspiracy Theories," they define as "an attempt to explain an event or practice by reference to the machinations of powerful people, who have also managed to conceal their role."

"Many millions of people hold (them); they believe that powerful people have worked together in order to withhold the truth about some important practice or some terrible event." 

Citing 9/11 truth, the reason for their report, they say believers "may create serious risks, including risks of violence....rais(ing) significant challenges for policy and law....The existence of both domestic and foreign conspiracy theories, we suggest, is no trivial matter, posing real risks to the government's antiterrorism policies, whatever the latter may be."

His solution - debunk and undermine them by "cognitive infiltration of extremist groups," his modern-day version of COINTELPRO, the FBI's infamous 1960s and 1970s counterintelligence program to neutralize political dissidents, including the American Indian Movement, Black Panthers, and communists, as well as anti-war, human and civil rights activists, among others.

Rebranded, COINTELPRO flourishes more than ever against new targets, including Muslims and others in the "war on terror;" environmental and animal rights activists, and supporters of democratic freedoms over despotism and imperial wars, among others.

Sunstein wants conspiracy advocates neutralized, using "independent groups to supply rebuttals, and by cognitive infiltration designed to break up the crippled epistemology of conspiracy-minded groups and informationally isolated social networks." In other words, destroy them by conspiring against them from within, using illegal and extralegal tactics. 

"Government agents (and their allies) might enter chat rooms, online social networks, or even real-space groups and attempt to undermine percolating conspiracy theories by raising doubts about their factual premises, causal logic or implications for political action."

In June 2009, Sunstein and Vermeule updated their scheme in The Journal of Political Philosophy titled, "Conspiracy Theories: Causes and Cures." The cause - psychological conditions. The cure - elimination by cognitive infiltration, including with "independent experts with information and perhaps prod(ding) from behind the scenes....(but not) too close (to avoid being) self-defeating" if exposed.

In fact, what Sunstein proposed is illegal under statutes prohibiting internal government propaganda, aimed at the public, though legal technicalities have never before been a deterrent. 

Nonetheless, according to a March 21, 2005 Congressional Research Service report, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) defines "publicity or propaganda" as either official self-aggrandizing, partisan activity, or "covert propaganda," the latter government-originated, disguised to appear otherwise, including by enlisted journalists, corrupting their profession by accepting cash to cooperate, a practice used by the Bush and earlier administrations as well as the CIA and perhaps FBI.

Griffin's New Book - A Powerful Truth Antidote

His new book is an invaluable analysis of Sunstein's proposal to undermine democratic freedoms, airbrush truth, impose censorship, and criminalize individuals who challenge official versions of patent lies, specifically 9/11, the seminal one of our time.

Critics agree, including Professor Peter Phillips, President of the Media Freedom Foundation and Project Censored saying:

Griffin's book should be "entitled 'the Courage of David Ray Griffin' (for) His continuing efforts to speak truth to power regarding issues" as vital as 9/11. Project Censored strongly recommends it at a time our democratic freedoms are at risk, including dissent, what Howard Zinn called "the highest form of patriotism."

Professor Emeritus Peter Dale Scott called Griffin our "preeminent (9/11) expert....his research....consistently careful, thorough, and objective." His new book provides "a patient, point-by-point and much needed refutation" of Sunstein's dangerous proposal. "He relentlessly shows how (he's) guilty of the very mentality he warns against: close-mindedness and refusal to debate. Those who seek to prevent 2010 from becoming 1984" must read this invaluable book.

Professor Emeritus Richard Falk said Griffin wrote "a devastating critique, (using) his formidable philosophical and theological skills."

Cyril H. Wecht, past President, American Academy of Forensic Sciences and the American College of Legal Medicine called the book "brilliantly written....a scholarly dissection of (Sunstein's) sociopolitical proposal....," one essential to expose and oppose.

Discussing Sunstein's 10 theses, Griffin deconstructs their flaws, contradictions, and dangers to a free society.  He also explains the legitimacy of 9/11 truth, and Sunstein's inability to refute it by disinformation, lies, suppression of facts, stifling debate, and attacking proponents. 

What Obama did on September 23, calling Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's 9/11 truth comments to UN General Assembly: 

"hateful (and) inexcusable, particularly for him to make the statement here in Manhattan, just a little north of Ground Zero, where families lost their loved ones, people of all faiths, all ethnicities who see this as the seminal tragedy of this generation...."

Others attacked the comments as "abhorrent and delusional," no matter that millions around the world share them (including Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth), calling the event a crime, debunking the official account as deceitful, untrue, and destructive to democratic freedoms.

Ahmadinejad, in fact, suggested "three (possible) viewpoints:"

1. "That a very powerful and complex terrorist group" successfully circumvented US intelligence, Washington's position.

2. "That some segments within the US government orchestrated the attack to reverse the declining American economy and its grips on the Middle East in order to save the Zionist regime."

He said most Americans "as well as other nations and politicians agree with this view." European polls suggest it. US ones vary and have largely ducked the issue by not asking precise questions.

3. "It was carried out by a terrorist group but the American government supported and took advantage of the situation."

Ahmadinejad "proposed that the United Nations set up an independent fact-finding group...." He also criticized Washington for using the attack as a pretext for war against Iraq and Afghanistan. These views are verboten in the West, those expressing them pilloried as unpatriotic or worse.

Griffin is one, the preeminent 9/11 truth proponent and consummate scholar. Using his masterful skills, he demolishes Sunstein's arguments, ones based on disinformation, deceit, and bad analysis, not up to the standards of an accomplished liar, and no match for Griffin.

Thomas Fletcher summed it up saying:

Griffin's book "is a lucid and compelling exposure of the contempt held by the official (9/11 myth) defenders for dissenters who have seen through their Big Lie." They also fear truth that reveals their ugly agenda. "These officials expect that no one will be able to penetrate the murk of Sunstein's latest defense of the pretext for the US wars of aggression in Afghanistan and Iraq, now covertly expanding" globally. Truth is a powerful disinfectant, what government conspiracists most fear.

Some Final Comments

On September 12, Professor Denis Rancourt titled an article, "Why we love to hate conspiracy theories: 911 Truth as threat to the intelligentsia," saying:

Many on the left share guilt with the right by "vehemently attack(ing) and ridicul(ing) 'conspiracy theories' such as the present 911 Truth movement."

Why, he asks? "Is that not the modus operandi of power? Is it so difficult to believe that (the 911 attack) was not orchestrated by....religious zealot(s)? Or that those who measurably benefitted" had everything to gain? "What ever happened to 'war is a racket' and 'follow the money?' "

At issue is that "power owns the media, (and) more importantly....our jobs" and lives in other respects. Even more important than truth is how it's used - to "rebel, actually rebel and individually take back power over (our) lives." Instead, too many of "the intelligentsia" protect themselves and "the system" by being "a visceral opponent of 911 Truth....in order for power to save face." 

Let others fight the good fight they may feel, but unless enough do, putting a lot on the line, wrong will prevail over right and squeeze harder for even more of what they want. 

Perhaps the next "9/11" will be a mushroom-shaped cloud or other comparable state-sponsored "disaster," again blamed on foreign adversaries as a pretext for more war. Why not, given America's permanent war agenda, a topic addressed in an earlier article, accessed through the following link:

http://sjlendman.blogspot.com/ 2010/03/americas-permanent- war-agenda.html

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.

http://www. progressiveradionetwork.com/ the-progressive-news-hour/.



More from this author:
James Petras' New Book: The Power of Israel in the United States - Book Review by Stephen Lendman (24324 Hits)
by Stephen Lendman James Petras is Professor Emeritus of Sociology at Binghamton University, New York. He's a noted academic figure on the US...
Threats to Hugo Chavez As Venezuela's December Presidential Election Approaches (11190 Hits)
by Stephen Lendman On December 3, 2006 voters in Venezuela will again get to choose who'll lead them as President for the next six...
Agitprop Capital of the World (the USA) Exports Its Poison to Venezuela (11182 Hits)
by Stephen Lendman Agitprop, electoral fraud and dirty tricks may not have been invented in the US, but they certainly were perfected in...
A Trial Giving Kangaroos A Bad Name (9849 Hits)
by Stephen Lendman As the dominant corporate media in the US made sure everyone in the country would know just ahead of the mid-term...
New Faces, Same Agenda (11008 Hits)
by Stephen Lendman The political firmament shook briefly post-November 7 raising hopes change would follow the Republican's drubbing at the...
Related Articles:
More “Culture Wars” Gibberish from nutcase David Brooks (11758 Hits)
Most of us know David Brooks as the balding goofball on “The Jim Lehrer News Hour” who shrugs his shoulders and giggles gleefully whenever...
Tomgram: David Swanson, Will Iraq Become the Democrats' War? (6149 Hits)
by Tom Engelhardt Nothing reminds us more of how much the American constitutional system has been transformed, of just how extreme the...
What's Wrong With David Obey (4269 Hits)
by David Swanson The reason I sent the media a video of House Appropriations Chair David Obey (Dem., Wisc.) throwing a bit of a fit was not...
On David Sirota, David Obey, and "Idiot Liberals," Never Mind Ending the War (4578 Hits)
by David Swanson David Sirota's article is headlined "On Dave Obey, 'idiot liberals' and ending the war" It begins...
Letter from Nagasaki - David Rovics (4891 Hits)
by David Rovics Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution: “Aspiring sincerely to an international peace based on justice and order, the...


Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites
Trackback(0)
Comments (4)add comment

Researcher said:

0
Lendman is keeping moles alive, and unfortunately, so is Griffin
>>Professor Emeritus James Fetzer, Founder, Scholars for 9/11 Truth

As it turns out, the evidence is overwhelming that Fetzer is either mentally ill or a paid mole having infiltrated both the JFK and 9/11 movements to spew ridiculous theories and threaten lawsuits. Fetzer defended and promoted such causes for the WTC demolition as nukes, space weapons, TV Fakery, cartoon planes, etc. He was quickly rejected across the board by the 9/11 movement.

What part of this does Lendman not understand? And what part of it does David Ray Griffin not understand?

Griffin has written a book on infiltration, yet continues to cite and quote in his books one of the people whom almost EVERYONE agrees is a mole or insane. Take a look for yourself, and you too might ask, what right do Lendman and Griffin have to criticize infiltrators when they are promoting them themselves as being credible to the public?

Fetzer didn't just disrupt and spout garbage, he sent the garbage to NIST, likely to try to drown out the real complaints and convince those viewing the complaints and corrections to the official reports that the "Truthers" are nuts, and not bother looking at any more of them.

-------------------

Jim Fetzer is the primary force behind publicity and press releases for the claims of Judy Wood and Morgan Reynolds, advocating endless investigation into every possible scenario imaginable.
" . . . once [Fetzer] had become convinced that thermite/thermate could not explain the extent and character of the destruction, he began encouraging investigation of alternative hypotheses, including lasers, masers, and plasmoids."
CBS PULLS "HATCHET JOB" ON SCHOLARS FOR 9/11 TRUTH; February 1, 2007;
http://twilightpines.com//index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=35&Itemid=67

-------------------

Jim Fetzer: "I must say I think we're finding out Judy, what happened on 9/11. I'm just blown away by your work. This is the most fascinating development in the history of the study of 9/11 ... I'm going to make a wild guess Judy; I'm going to presume that these [directed energy] beams had to be located in Building 7?"

Judy Wood: "Nope. I don't think so."

Fetzer: "Planes?"

Judy Wood: "No ... I think it's very likely it's in orbit."

Fetzer: "Oh Really?? Oh ho ho ho ho! Oh Judy. Oh my oh my oh my oh my. This is huge ... this is huge Judy."
Non-Random Thoughts on RBN Live: Jim Fetzer interviews Judy Wood; November 11, 2006
http://truthaction.org/media/Judy_Wood_and_Jim_Fetzer_discuss_DEW.mp3

-------------------

in August of 2007, about a month before the 6th anniversary, Fetzer organized a conference of nonsense advocates and has published a press release which shows that both he and Kevin Barrett now support the idea of TV fakery, or that the videos of the events on 9/11 should be considered to have been "faked."
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/patriots_question/index.html#fetzer

-------------------

Fetzer's Support for Morgan Reynolds:

"'The second complaint, which has been filed by Morgan Reynolds, disputes NIST's explanations of the jetliner-shaped holes in the Twin Towers. . . . The complaint contends that real jetliners would have been dramatically slowed by the impact, which implies that the NIST report is not only factually wrong but also physically impossible in violating physical laws. Morgan poses a substantial number of anomalies that NIST will be hard pressed to explain,' Fetzer said."
Scholars file challenges to 9/11 NIST reports
http://twilightpines.com//index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=35&Itemid=67

-------------------

Fetzer's Support for Judy Wood

"[The complaint] filed by Wood runs forty-three pages, including photographs and other supporting evidence. 'It is a powerful critique that demonstrates the government has completely and utterly failed to explain what happened to the World Trade Center on that tragic and fateful day,' ... Wood goes further and points out that the huge quantity of dust resulting from the visible process of steel disintegration, some of which was captured on film, combined with these other effects suggest the probable use of high-tech, directed energy weapons."
Scholars file challenges to 9/11 NIST reports
http://twilightpines.com//index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=35&Itemid=67

-------------------

And for info on Kevin Barrett, see:
http://truthaction.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1887
 
October 01, 2010
Votes: +0

Jim said:

0
...
I thought this was an article about Cass Sunstein and David Ray Griffin, but the above comment seems to be for some other article.

Researcher wrote, "Fetzer didn't just disrupt and spout garbage, he sent the garbage to NIST..."

Really? Can you provide a link to your source? I can't find any submission to NIST by someone named "Fetzer." Perhaps it was a private communication? But then how would you know "Fetzer" communicated with NIST unless you were he?

If you believe Fetzer is disinfo, why are you promoting him -- unless of course your goal is to promote disinformation? It appears you are obsessed with this character. Do you have a crush on him? Perhaps he dumped you for someone else?

Perhaps you are jealous of Dr. Wood or Dr. Reynolds because they actually filed federal cases against those who participated in the cover up of the biggest crime of the century. It is revealing to see how much energy is spent on trying to undermine the efforts of these American heros.

Careful. Your agenda is showing.
 
October 02, 2010
Votes: +0

Abraham Hafiz Rodriguez said:

0
Medical Student
I'm amazed by how much distraction from the physical evidence there is, by discussions about who is an op, who is an infiltrator, who claimed to be credible, who has done what to whom when, who has an ego, who has written and rewritten a "compelling" book, who said what to whom, and then the obvious motivation to misquote a conversation that took place 4 years ago in a last-ditch attempt to appear to discredit someone... and on and on and on and on....

A lawyer once told me something that I've found very helpful in sorting through a pile of distracting nonsense:

* If the law is on your side, you talk about the law.
* If the facts are on your side, you talk about the facts.
* If neither the law or the facts are on your side, you talk about ...something else.

Perhaps Stephen Lendman's next article will be about the facts and the law. The federal qui tam case submitted by Dr. Judy Wood was all about the facts and about the law, proving beyond a reasonable doubt what happened to the WTC buildings on 9/11 and who covered it up. Sadly, the judges decion was not about the law and not about the facts. The judge did not address these issues but instead said that he was not going to hear a case on who shot JFK and what landed on the moon, which had nothing to do with the case. The court of appeals judges stated in their decision that they acknowledge that the law applied to Dr. Wood's case, but were ignoring the law so that they could dismiss the case.

* If the law is on your side, you talk about the law.
* If the facts are on your side, you talk about the facts.
* If neither the law or the facts are on your side, you talk about ...something else.

Dr. Wood does not talk about "something else." Dr. Wood talks about the facts and the law.

The law:
http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/NIST/Qui_Tam_Wood.shtml

A "Cliff Notes" of the facts:
http://drjudywood.com/wtc

Thanks for your time,

-Abe

Abraham Hafiz Rodriguez
M2 Medical Student
B.S. Biology / Neurobiology
 
October 02, 2010
Votes: +0

Project Humanbeingsfirst.org said:

0
Did David Ray Griffin and Steve Lendman miss the real purpose of Cass Sunstein's “Conspiracy Theories”?
Thanks to Stephen Lendman for reviewing David Ray Griffin's new book on Cass Sunstein's craftsmanship. I haven't read the book but I have studied the Sunstein paper very carefully. The most significant thing about Sunstein's “cognitive infiltration” for “beneficial cognitive diversity” is that like Brzezinski's “hegemony”, it is “as old as mankind”. There is absolutely nothing new in Sunstein's advocacy that hasn't been ongoing covertly, continuously, since time immemorial, for as long as state-power has ruled over plebes. [1] To wit:

'First, responding to more rather than fewer conspiracy theories has a kind of synergy benefit: it reduces the legitimating effect of responding to any one of them, because it dilutes the contrast with unrebutted theories. Second, we suggest a distinctive tactic for breaking up the hard core of extremists who supply conspiracy theories: cognitive infiltration of extremist groups, whereby government agents or their allies (acting either virtually or in real space, and either openly or anonymously) will undermine the crippled epistemology of those who subscribe to such theories. They do so by planting doubts about the theories and stylized facts that circulate within such groups, thereby introducing beneficial cognitive diversity.'

Apart from fancy pedantic jargon, what's new in it? For instance, the following is a very clear, and far finer exposition of the topic than either Sunstein's academic gibberish, or others' erudite prose on Sunstein critiquing the scholar's pedantry. This is from a 007 vintage movie clip 'License to Kill', where James Bond exactly implements Sunstein's proposal of gaining trust through “cognitive infiltration” and to muddy up the waters with “cognitive diversity”, and then it goes a lot further by having the antagonists turn on each other directly as a result of planting doubt. So that, ultimately, the target of James Bond's clever deception remains none the wiser of what really happened. Please fast-forward to time 8:50 in the clip to witness the craftsmanship attributed to Sunstein being superbly implemented by Hollywood a decade earlier – and which has remained the staple of B-grade gangster/FBI movies ever since Hollywood came into being: [2]

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_RlWTZ3Olc]

So, if I may tepidly ask, what is all this supercilious excitement among lauded dissent-chiefs for some disinfo article written by an establishment insider as a “Limited Hangout” for age-old techniques of subversion already in practice – whether the good guys apply them or the bad guys apply them the techniques of deception are still the same – and which have been standard operating practice of Machiavellian statecraft forever?

Lendman mentions something about “legality”! This valued opinion, and of those who are quoted, is directly undermined by both a US Supreme Court Justice, and also by empiricism du jour:

'Nothing is more certain in modern society than the principle that there are no absolutes, that a name, a phrases, a standard has meaning only when associated with the considerations which give birth to nomenclature. To those who would paralyze our Government in the face of impending threat by encasing it in a semantic strait-jacket, we must reply that all concepts are relative.' -- Justice Vinson, U.S. Supreme Court, 1951 AD

All the tactics that the learned law professor from Harvard/Chicago – President Obama's key pointman on wielding information as the modern weapon for instrumenting hegemony when “democracy is inimical to imperial mobilization” – has advocated are already in play, have been in play, and were even formally recognized as being in play during cointelpro. Lendman too rightly noted its former prevalence in the review. But I believe both he and David Griffin missed on its political science significance, parroting the chapter and verse and not its underlying reality which determines it entirely. “Legality”, in practice, and as is self-evident, only means until one is not caught in “victor's justice” as was amply demonstrated at Nuremberg.

There is no Nuremberg today, when, as Zbigniew Brzezinski gleefully noted in the grotesque pages of The Grand Chessboard: “The collapse of its rival left the United States in a unique position. It became simultaneously the first and the only truly global power.” So, the super king decides what is legal and illegal, as has always been the case, and regardless of what's on the king's own dusty old law books which is largely for applying to others. Evidently, as quoted above, the kingdom's own Supreme Court Justice concurs. And unremarkably, so do the 'untermensch' worldwide who also acknowledge by way of direct experience, as opposed to the theoreticians of dissent who have never felt a napalm fall on their home as they spew theories and platitudes, that “America decide what is right what is wrong”: [2a]

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FcMJZP_BLvY]

The roots of domestic subversion as a formal tool for exuding hegemony internationally by the Government of the United States (i.e., with a presidential signature on it) are traced directly to NSC 10/2 which President Truman signed in 1948 to give cover to the newly formed CIA's covert-ops and the requirement for creating “plausible deniability” for the President if the public gets wind of it prematurely. And, as a key part of preparing the multiple lies and deception, euphemistically called “cover stories”, ahead of time, the capability to deny the public any cohesive way to get wind of it in the first place, is an obvious part of it. That led to cointelpro, which, becoming too unpopular when exposed and having its mandate revoked, just went fully covert. Ergo, “cognitive infiltration”, “beneficial cognitive diversity”. That is sum total of Sunstein's academic pedantry in a nutshell.

This is typical empire-building scholarship of Harvard/Chicago, and if I might say so, of most if not all of America's top imperial schools. In fact, of all previous empire's schools as well. The British always have been, and still are, the masters of it. Academe has always been in the service of empire – one way or another, ever since Francis Bacon defined Western academe's funding practices at the dawn of the industrial age, directly putting Science in the Service of Empire. I can speak of this personally too, having attended MIT – almost its entire budget is from the military-industrial complex of America. Harvard's and Chicago's also comes from globalists like Rockefellers et. al. The plebes know that the learned also know which side their bread is buttered in scholarship. I just wish all scholars of empire would drop their pretenses at piety. This is why Sunstein to me is still refreshing. He is un-apologetic, like Zbigniew Brzezinski – just like Hitler and his craftsman were at the peak of their own hubris. I know where they stand.

Deception, of which deniability and domestic subversion are merely components, is an inherent tool of all modern statecraft. As James Jesus Angleton, the former director for CIA's counter-intelligence ops in the United States during the 1960s, and under whose watch all the major assassination of United States leaders transpired, had noted: “Deception is a state of mind, and the mind of State”. But it is also an art as old as Machiavelli. A science as old as governing the plebes by an oligarchy in ancient Greek's democracy. And certainly a craft as old as the controllers in Plato's “myth of the cave” – 2500 years old – and for which, mechanisms as old as Machiavelli, including those re-hashed by Sunstein, have forever been in foreplay.

Just thought I'd add a dose of reality-check to when pundits “come running into town with their news after all the barbers in town already know it.” (That's an Eastern saying).

But I will acquire David Griffin's book, not because it contains anything new (since Sunstein reveals nothing new), but because it makes a good resource to cite for convincing others who are trying to come out of the 'matrix'. In fact, Sunstein's only real virtue, in my opinion, is that he has given me a good citation source to lend credibility to my own analyses. Witness it for instance in my little deconstruction of the very concept of conspiracy theory and its utility to statecraft. [3]

If only Mr. Sunstein would bother reading it and show me how crippled is my “crippled epistemology”! But it would be far far easier to apply DSM-IV revision to “delusional” people like us, as suffering from “emotional or mental illness”, an “oppositional defiant disorder” exhibiting a pattern of “negativistic, defiant, disobedient and hostile behavior toward authority figures” and therefore a threat to society. I.e., a terrorist. I had sent Sunstein my paper on one of his publicly available email addresses – haven't had any knock on my door yet. But that's what all genuine “conspiracy theorists” who are on the forensic path to accurately unraveling deception, and genuinely resisting the onslaught du jour of full spectrum enslavement both as a matter of conscience and as an existential imperative, should be looking forward to.

And that very real threat of the looney-bin to passive activists – those who don't madly riot in the streets but shrewdly wield the weapon of their own intellect, the third type of people in Hitler's profound classification of a national population who can think for themselves – I suspect, is the key motivation for Sunstein's paper. It is to lay the groundwork for extending state-hospitably to the “defiant, disobedient and [those showing] hostile behavior toward authority figures”. Something David Ray Griffin evidently missed, or the excellent reviews of his book would have mentioned it.

It is useful to remember that brilliant hectoring hegemons are not being stupid when they apparently do idiotic things – for, if this was really an endeavor that Sunstein was advocating as something new to the government on how to screw its own public, and that was its core purpose, why would he let the public know about it by publishing it in a journal to spawn the predictable public debate on it?

No, the label of “denier” as a mental illness is cleverly being prepared, as was recently applied to the President of Iran for his UN speech: “So you can now say President Ahmadinejad is both a 9/11 denier and a Holocaust denier”. [4]

That same label, “denier” – with all its emotional and legal baggage of “Holocaust denial” as the backdrop which I accurately unraveled [5] – was applied to me and some others by none other than dissent-chief extraordinaire, Israel Shamir, a whole month before Iran's President Dr. Ahmadinejad was honored with it, for our independently arrived at suspicions of Wikileaks' 'Afghanistan Papers': [6]

'What a pity that some of our friends in the blogosphere joined in the chorus of detractors. Theirs are familiar and respected names of the free web: F. William Engdahl, Gordon Duff, Zahir Ebrahim. They are not to be accused of collaboration with Pentagon and the CIA.'

Specifically, I had it pegged as nothing but a “Limited Hangout” to re-justify the core-axioms of “imperial mobilization” of empire [7]:

'The core-lies retained in the Wikileaks' disclosure – which I call 'the Afghanistan Papers' – is to once again reaffirm that there is a real nemesis called “Osama Bin Laden”, that the “war on terror” is real, that it is being inflicted upon the West from Pakistan-Iran nexus, and to re-substantiate the handoff of former President George W. Bush's clairvoyance to the Obama Administration that “If another September 11 style attack is being planned, it probably is being plotted in Pakistan, and not Afghanistan”! That, when such a “planned” attack transpires, it “will make Sept. 11 pale by comparison”.'

Looks pretty bad don't it – to share the same honor with the most “totally outrageous” of all enemies of mankind for whom, no less than 800 people were gathered outside the UN to chant: “Ahmadinejad is a terrorist”! While they won't put President Ahmadinejad in the looney bin for he is admirably serving their purpose of providing a real enemy to fight the lifetime of World IV against, they will be coming for the “domestic terrorists!”

That, in my view, is the real gift of Cass Sunstein, and it cannot be gleaned in its isolated context where it reveals nothing. But coupled with the revised handbook of Psychiatry, it becomes an imposing legal proposition to consign incorrigible dissidents to mental institutions – like Ezra Pound was. The United States government has an official dot gov website devoted to this matter where it is coldly stated in unsurpassed Newspeak: [8]

'Conspiracy theories exist in the realm of myth, where imaginations run wild, fears trump facts, and evidence is ignored. As a superpower, the United States is often cast as a villain in these dramas.'

The Sunstein paper is evidently part of a bigger conspiracy by the United States Government which spans the gamut of social engineering, and of which not only political theory and Psychiatry are very visible, but also the concentration camps. And this aspect is missing in Steve Lendman's review. I hope it was not missed by David Ray Griffin – for, when viewed forensically, this is rather obvious stuff.

In conclusion, I am willing to wager, extending Stephen Lendman's own fearful conclusion wherein he notes: “Perhaps the next "9/11" will be a mushroom-shaped cloud or other comparable state-sponsored "disaster," again blamed on foreign adversaries as a pretext for more war.”, that on the DAY AFTER, among the first things that will transpire domestically is the number of dissidents – the passive activists – in psychiatric wards throughout the Western hemisphere will rise exponentially. It is my hope that in writing exposes like these and by exactly anticipating the future acts of the hectoring hegemons, courageous people like David Ray Griffin and Stephen Lendman might actually help in preempting that fate.

Thank you.

Zahir Ebrahim

Project Humanbeingsfirst.org

October 02, 2010



Footnotes:

[1] Cass Sunstein, Conspiracy Theories, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/pa...abs=199668

[2] James Bond: Licence to Kill 9/13, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_RlWTZ3Olc

[2a] American War Paar Da http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FcMJZP_BLvY

[3] Zahir Ebrahim, Anatomy of Conspiracy Theory, http://print-humanbeingsfirst....heory.html

[4] Al Jazeera: UN walkout over Ahmadinejad speech, 24 Sep 2010 http://english.aljazeera.net/n...32707.html

[5] Zahir Ebrahim, http://print-humanbeingsfirst....hamir.html

[6] Israel Shamir, Wikileaks: The Real Stuff, Sat Aug 21, 2010 4:29 am http://groups.yahoo.com/group/...ssage/1878

[7] Zahir Ebrahim, Wikileaks and the Mighty Wurlitzer, http://print-humanbeingsfirst....itzer.html

[8] http://america.gov/conspiracy_theories.html



Comment submitted for: David Ray Griffin v. Cass Sunstein By Stephen Lendman

Title: Did David Ray Griffin and Steve Lendman miss the real purpose of Cass Sunstein's “Conspiracy Theories”?



Source URL: http://bloghumanbeingsfirst.wo...-sunstein/

Source PDF: http://humanbeingsfirst.files....022010.pdf



Zahir's response to Stephen Lendman's 'David Ray Griffin v. Cass Sunstein' October 02, 2010

 
October 03, 2010
Votes: +0

Write comment
smaller | bigger

busy
 

adsense

Top