Krauthammer names his enemies...

[Brian4Liberty]

...And Truthers and Birchers are on Krauthammer's list.

He also says that he doesn't care about communists (and we can assume he is even less concerned about socialism). Apparently he doesn't really care about a whole lot other than foreign policy and the Fed. Thus his concern about Truthers and Birchers is completely and solely based upon how they might effect foreign policy or the Fed.


Van Jones and the 'Truthers'
By Charles Krauthammer

WASHINGTON -- So Van Jones, the defenestrated White House green-jobs czar, once called Republicans "a--holes." Big deal. I've said worse about Democrats. I've said worse about Republicans. I've said worse about members of my family (you know who you are).

How prissy have we become? Are we allowed no salt in our linguistic diets?

Having once written a column praising Vice President Cheney's pithy deployment of the F-word -- on the floor of the Senate, no less -- I rise in defense of Jones. True, Jones' particular choice of epithet had none of the one-syllable concision, the onomatopoeic suggestiveness, the explosive charm of Cheney's. But you don't fire a guy for style.

Another charge was that Jones was a self-proclaimed communist. I can't get too excited about this either. In today's America, to be a communist is a pose, not a conviction. After the Soviet collapse, Marxism is a relic, a pathetic anachronism reduced to its last redoubts: North Korea, Cuba and the English departments of the more expensive American universities.

In any case, every administration is allowed a couple of wing nuts among its 8,000 appointees. As long as they're not in charge of foreign policy or the Fed, who cares?

Other critics are scandalized that Jones once accused "white environmentalists" of "essentially steering poison into the people of colored communities."

In fact, from a global perspective, Jones is right. Environmentalists -- overwhelmingly white and middle/upper class -- have blocked drilling offshore and in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. From where do you think the world gets the missing oil? From the poor, exploited, poisoned people of the Niger Delta, the Amazon Basin and other infinitely less-regulated and infinitely dirtier regions of the Third World.

Affluent enviros are all for wind farms, until one is proposed that might mar the serenity of a sail from the crew-necked precincts near Nantucket Sound. Then it's clean energy for thee, not for me.

Jones' genius as an ideological entrepreneur was to mine white liberal anxiety -- they are quite aware of their own NIMBY hypocrisy -- by selling them the "green jobs" shtick to reconcile class/racial guilt with environmental enthusiasm, thus making them feel better about themselves.

That's why Jones rose so far. That's why he was such a "progressive" star. That's why, as top Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett put it, "we've been watching him" and were so eager to recruit him to the White House.

In the White House no more. Why? He's gone for one reason and one reason only. You can't sign a petition demanding not one but four investigations of the charge that the Bush administration deliberately allowed 9/11 -- i.e., collaborated in the worst massacre ever perpetrated on American soil -- and be permitted in polite society, let alone have a high-level job in the White House.

Unlike the other stuff (see above), this is no trivial matter. It's beyond radicalism, beyond partisanship. It takes us into the realm of political psychosis, a malignant paranoia that, unlike the Marxist posturing, is not amusing. It's dangerous. In America, movements and parties are required to police their extremes. Bill Buckley did that with Birchers. Liberals need to do that with "truthers."

You can no more have a truther in the White House than you can have a Holocaust denier -- a person who creates a hallucinatory alternative reality in the service of a fathomless malice.

But reality doesn't daunt Jones' defenders. One Obama administration source told ABC that Jones hadn't read the 2004 petition carefully enough, an excuse echoed by Howard Dean.

Carefully enough? It demanded the investigation of charges "that people within the current (Bush) administration may indeed have deliberately allowed 9/11 to happen, perhaps as a pretext for war."

Where is the confusing fine print? Where is the syntactical complexity? Where is the perplexing ambiguity? An eighth-grader could tell you exactly what it means. A Yale Law School graduate could not?

No need to worry about Jones, however. Great career move. He's gone from marginal loon to liberal martyr. His speaking fees have just doubled. It's only a matter of time before he gets his own show on MSNBC.

But on the eighth anniversary of 9/11 -- a day when there were no truthers among us, just Americans struck dumb by the savagery of what had been perpetrated on their innocent fellow citizens -- a decent respect for the memory of that day requires that truthers, who derangedly desecrate it, be asked politely to leave. By everyone.

[Liberty Star]

RP libertarian movement has to be on the list of a neoconservative, tax payer funded foreign freedom spreader like him.

[Brian4Liberty]

RP libertarian movement has to be on the list of a neoconservative, tax payer funded foreign freedom spreader like him.

Since his only topics of interest are foreign intervention and the Fed (both expensive to the average US citizen), he will always have a hidden agenda against anyone who is fiscally conservative or responsible. He needs people who are loose and ignorant about money.

[tonesforjonesbones]

Now THAT is a neo con...just terrible...terrible influence on the grassroots republicans. tones

[TinCanToNA]

He might be a neocon, but he's a very, very intelligent neocon with quite a bit of clout.

He's right about one thing though. The "Truthers" are a cancer on the marketplace of ideas.

[tonesforjonesbones]

well...that guy is dangerous...and not good for liberty. He only cares that our blood and treasure continues to be spent for Israel. tones

[Dionysus]

Does he hammer krauts?

[moostraks]

He might be a neocon, but he's a very, very intelligent neocon with quite a bit of clout.

He's right about one thing though. The "Truthers" are a cancer on the marketplace of ideas.

:rolleyes:

Clout with the like-minded surprise, surprise...

The only cancer on the marketplace of ideas are 'official' stories put forth by the government and embraced with loving affection by the msm.

[TinCanToNA]

:rolleyes:

Clout with the like-minded surprise, surprise...

The only cancer on the marketplace of ideas are 'official' stories put forth by the government and embraced with loving affection by the msm.

If you don't realize how much influence he has, you haven't been paying attention. He's a driving ideological force for the neocons.


The definition I was using of cancer was meant as a growth of dead-brained ideology that only ever grows and poisons minds.

I'd love to hear one unified "Truther" theory, but the fact is that they don't use facts or theories, they simply try to use a general ignorance of thermodynamics and bandy them around as facts in addition to "past is prologue" rhetorical fallacies as long as you choose to listen to them trip over their own words.

If you have one unified "Truther" theory, please send it to me via PM to avoid further derailing this thread. I rather expect that no two will be the same.

[Brian4Liberty]

He might be a neocon, but he's a very, very intelligent neocon with quite a bit of clout.

He's right about one thing though. The "Truthers" are a cancer on the marketplace of ideas.

He's pro-war, pro-big government, and doesn't care how socialist/communist we become. I don't see how he can be considered a Republican with that stance on socialism/communism.

Yes, some "truthers" are terribly misguided. But there are a million shades of "truthers" out there, and they have managed to paint anyone who questions anything related to 9/11 with the exact same brush. That is the subtle propaganda war that Krauthammer is conducting here.

Can you even question what was going on at the FBI and CIA when all of the puzzle pieces were in their laps, and they ignored them? It was probably shear incompetence, politics and political correctness, but can you even ask that simple question anymore?

I don't know a lot about Van Jones or what his 9/11 positions were/are. But we know that anyone who remotely asks a question can now be run out of town. Krauthammer is trying to enforce and expand that idea. Set the precedent and apply the label broadly and liberally.

[Brian4Liberty]

If you have one unified "Truther" theory, please send it to me via PM to avoid further derailing this thread. I rather expect that no two will be the same.

Exactly what I was saying. A million variations of opinions and questions, a single defamatory label.

[TinCanToNA]

Yes, some "truthers" are terribly misguided. But there are a million shades of "truthers" out there, and they have managed to paint anyone who questions anything related to 9/11 with the exact same brush. That is the subtle propaganda war that Krauthammer is conducting here.

Can you even question what was going on at the FBI and CIA when all of the puzzle pieces were in their laps, and they ignored them? It was probably shear incompetence, politics and political correctness, but can you even ask that simple question anymore?


Well you're certainly right about that. The brush is very broad, and even my views on 9/11 (which are essentially the same as Ron Paul's views, that it was one of a serious of blowbacks) could be painted by so broad a brush. In light of that, I will check my hostility towards anyone labeled a "Truther," although all the "Inside Job" nutcases will still meet my utter disdain.

[Cowlesy]

Unfortunately, my mainstream moderate republican friends send me Krauthammer articles all the time. Interesting the two things he names are "The Fed" and "Foreign Policy" as the two most important.

[catdd]

"Gee, bldg 7 went down at the speed of gravity from a little fallout debris and some office fires?"

"That's it for you pal; 30 days in the hole!"

I think that's what it's coming to.

[Anti Federalist]

Well, let's see here...

First, why should I care what a dinosaur media asshat has to say about anything?

Second, if Buckley was right, according to Krauthammer, in "purging the Birchers" on the right, then is it safe to assume that Birchers and Truthers, in his mind, equal the same "cancerous" influence. Between "truthers" and "Birchers" I'd say 90 percent of this board is a cancer, according to Krauthammer.

Third, where does he get the idea that "truther = liberal". In the circle of people I know, the "truthers" are "rightist", more than anything else.

Fourth, does he, Krauthammer, think that people should start going to jail for "trutherism"?

Fifth, I'm happy to be a "cancer", an uncontrolled "free radical" that, along with my fellow "cancers" spread and take over the host's cells, reprogramming them to reject the orders of the host.

Of course, in the end, the host dies.

And in this analogy, the "host" is the leviathan state all around us.

It's rapid and timely death is to be celebrated.

[moostraks]

He's pro-war, pro-big government, and doesn't care how socialist/communist we become. I don't see how he can be considered a Republican with that stance on socialism/communism.

Yes, some "truthers" are terribly misguided. But there are a million shades of "truthers" out there, and they have managed to paint anyone who questions anything related to 9/11 with the exact same brush. That is the subtle propaganda war that Krauthammer is conducting here.

Can you even question what was going on at the FBI and CIA when all of the puzzle pieces were in their laps, and they ignored them? It was probably shear incompetence, politics and political correctness, but can you even ask that simple question anymore?

I don't know a lot about Van Jones or what his 9/11 positions were/are. But we know that anyone who remotely asks a question can now be run out of town. Krauthammer is trying to enforce and expand that idea. Set the precedent and apply the label broadly and liberally.

Thank you couldn't have said it better myself!!

[ghengis86]

i want a new comprehensive investigation regarding 9/11, but i don't go as far as to say it was an inside job; does that make me a truther?

whatever, krauthammer can get fucked for all i care. he and his old neocon buddies will all be dead soon enough.

[Brian4Liberty]

Did some quick research, and here is what Van Jones signed. In all of the mainstream media coverage, I have not seen the specifics (Easier to create a broad brush and demonize that way?). Is it grounds for running him out of Washington? It really doesn't go into any detailed "theories". Seems pretty innocent on the surface.

Personally, I think that #4 and #5 are good questions. I suppose I could answer #4 myself though. It's the same reason no one at the SEC was fired when Bernie Madoff's Ponzi scheme was dropped in their laps years before Bernie confessed: no accountability at all, even when it is their specific job that they failed to perform.



The Statement

We Want Real Answers About 9/11

On August 31, 2004, Zogby International, the official North American political polling agency for Reuters, released a poll that found nearly half (49.3%) of New York City residents and 41% of those in New York state believe US leaders had foreknowledge of impending 9/11 attacks and "consciously failed" to act. Of the New York City residents, 66% called for a new probe of unanswered questions by Congress or the New York Attorney General.

In connection with this news, we have assembled 100 notable Americans and 40 family members of those who died to sign this 9/11 Statement, which calls for immediate public attention to unanswered questions that suggest that people within the current administration may indeed have deliberately allowed 9/11 to happen, perhaps as a pretext for war.

We want truthful answers to questions such as:

1. Why were standard operating procedures for dealing with hijacked airliners not followed that day?
2. Why were the extensive missile batteries and air defenses reportedly deployed around the Pentagon not activated during the attack?
3. Why did the Secret Service allow Bush to complete his elementary school visit, apparently unconcerned about his safety or that of the schoolchildren?
4. Why hasn't a single person been fired, penalized, or reprimanded for the gross incompetence we witnessed that day?
5. Why haven't authorities in the U.S. and abroad published the results of multiple investigations into trading that strongly suggested foreknowledge of specific details of the 9/11 attacks, resulting in tens of millions of dollars of traceable gains?
6. Why has Sibel Edmonds, a former FBI translator who claims to have knowledge of advance warnings, been publicly silenced with a gag order requested by Attorney General Ashcroft and granted by a Bush-appointed judge?
7. How could Flight 77, which reportedly hit the Pentagon, have flown back towards Washington D.C. for 40 minutes without being detected by the FAA's radar or the even superior radar possessed by the US military?
8. How were the FBI and CIA able to release the names and photos of the alleged hijackers within hours, as well as to visit houses, restaurants, and flight schools they were known to frequent?
9. What happened to the over 20 documented warnings given our government by 14 foreign intelligence agencies or heads of state?
10. Why did the Bush administration cover up the fact that the head of the Pakistani intelligence agency was in Washington the week of 9/11 and reportedly had $100,000 wired to Mohamed Atta, considered the ringleader of the hijackers?
11. Why did the 911 Commission fail to address most of the questions posed by the families of the victims, in addition to almost all of the questions posed here?
12. Why was Philip Zelikow chosen to be the Executive Director of the ostensibly independent 911 Commission although he had co-authored a book with Condoleezza Rice?

Those who are demanding deeper inquiry now number in the hundreds of thousands, including a former member of the first Bush administration, a retired Air Force colonel, a European parliamentarian, families of the victims, highly respected authors, investigative journalists, peace and justice leaders, former Pentagon staff, and the National Green Party.

As Americans of conscience, we ask for four things:

1. An immediate investigation by New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer
2. Immediate investigation in Congressional Hearings.
3. Media attention to scrutinize and investigate the evidence.
4. The formation of a truly independent citizens-based inquiry.

Given the importance of the coming election, we feel it is imperative that these questions be addressed publicly, honestly, and rigorously so that Americans may exercise their democratic rights with full awareness.

In closing, we pray and hope for the strength to approach this subject with wisdom and compassion so that we may heal from the wounds inflicted on that terrible day.

http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20041026093059633

[max]

If you don't realize how much influence he has, you haven't been paying attention. He's a driving ideological force for the neocons.


The definition I was using of cancer was meant as a growth of dead-brained ideology that only ever grows and poisons minds.

I'd love to hear one unified "Truther" theory, but the fact is that they don't use facts or theories, they simply try to use a general ignorance of thermodynamics and bandy them around as facts in addition to "past is prologue" rhetorical fallacies as long as you choose to listen to them trip over their own words.

If you have one unified "Truther" theory, please send it to me via PM to avoid further derailing this thread. I rather expect that no two will be the same.

GOOGLE: STRANGER THAN FICTION By Dr. Albert D Pastore...best work I've read on the subject

[RevolutionSD]

He might be a neocon, but he's a very, very intelligent neocon with quite a bit of clout.

He's right about one thing though. The "Truthers" are a cancer on the marketplace of ideas.

I'm curious why you would think that finding the truth about a huge event like 9/11 would be equivalent to cancer? Certainly, you don't believe the government's story?

[amy31416]

Third, where does he get the idea that "truther = liberal". In the circle of people I know, the "truthers" are "rightist", more than anything else.


I was wondering the same thing myself, and it's not the first time I've heard it. I'm sure that there are some leftists who distrust the government and think Bush/Cheney admin was evil enough to play a hand in it, but I haven't met any that I know of. Also, I think that questioning 9/11 might have had a hand in turning more people toward small, transparent government ideas. . .so, just thinking out loud here. I don't know.

[angelatc]

i want a new comprehensive investigation regarding 9/11, but i don't go as far as to say it was an inside job; does that make me a truther?




Yes. Ask Ron Paul if you don't believe me. He even went as far as to repeat several times that he does not believe it was a government plot. He does think that perhaps it might be nice if somebody, somewhere was held accountable for something that happened that day.

Pariah.

[angelatc]

I was wondering the same thing myself, and it's not the first time I've heard it. I'm sure that there are some leftists who distrust the government and think Bush/Cheney admin was evil enough to play a hand in it, but I haven't met any that I know of. Also, I think that questioning 9/11 might have had a hand in turning more people toward small, transparent government ideas. . .so, just thinking out loud here. I don't know.

I don't know either, unless it stemmed from the original association with the anti-war movement?

I just read that a lot of Democrats blame Hillary for starting the birther rumors, too!

[Brian4Liberty]

I was wondering the same thing myself, and it's not the first time I've heard it. I'm sure that there are some leftists who distrust the government and think Bush/Cheney admin was evil enough to play a hand in it, but I haven't met any that I know of.

You always have the Kucinich wing of the Truthers. And Van Jones probably comes from a different leftist Truther grouping...

Since Krauthammer portrays himself as a person of the right, he is catering to his audience by trying to make it a leftist issue. He has to be careful about openly attacking people on the right.

[Chieftain1776]

Seems pretty innocent on the surface.

This part is the issue:


calls for immediate public attention to unanswered questions that suggest that people within the current administration may indeed have deliberately allowed 9/11 to happen, perhaps as a pretext for war.

The only credible case I've come across is the Fox News report that suggests Israeli intelligence may have known about the hijackers before hand. Even then they could have been in the same position as our NSA (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=209280&highlight=spy+factory) in that they didn't know the hijackers were going to commit a terrorist act. And/or--in their case-- didn't want to compromise their illegal espionage. Krauthammer & Co can't smear the messenger on that one because it's Fox News itself and he's on everyday on Special Report.

YouTube - Israel spies on the USA part 1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWpWc_suPWo)

[Brian4Liberty]

This part is the issue:


calls for immediate public attention to unanswered questions that suggest that people within the current administration may indeed have deliberately allowed 9/11 to happen, perhaps as a pretext for war.



I guess I glazed over the "deliberately allowed" part. That probably gets them riled up in Washington. At least that is a "passive" accusation, as opposed to those who say that George Bush actively planned and executed the whole thing.

I had forgotten about that buried Fox News Report on Israeli intelligence tracking the hijackers. They will do anything in Washington and the media to prevent that type of investigation. The end result would be a bunch of pardons anyway. :rolleyes:

[Brian4Liberty]

You always have the Kucinich wing of the Truthers. And Van Jones probably comes from a different leftist Truther grouping...


And of course there is also Nader, who is considered a leftie...