The perversion of truth
Question the answers, and question the questioners
09/06/2007
In a few days, the United States will mark the sixth anniversary of the September 11th tragedy.
For many, the collapse of the World Trade Center, damage to the Pentagon, and the crash of United Flight 93 in a Pennsylvania field were each part of a coordinated terrorist attack on the country. For others — as contributor Molly Vandor describes in “Seeing is Disbelieving” on page 30 — the possibility that 19 foreign hijackers could have pulled off such a stunning feat is doubtful. Rather, this group hopes to convince the public to question the official version of events and hint at the possibility of much more sinister machinations.
Their perspective offers a simplistic, but ultimately misguided and dangerous, allure. Clear evidence of government involvement, collusion, or acceptance of the attacks makes it easier to challenge leaders’ horrible policy decisions — both foreign and domestic — without feeling like a traitor to one’s own country. If our leaders are evil, then it is okay to topple them.
But a movement that relies upon half-truths, faulty precepts and shallow research to challenge the status quo has no more merit than a presidential administration that lies about weapons of mass-destruction, moves goalposts for international occupations to suit its needs and squeezes out scientists and attorneys whose findings don’t mesh with its politics.
One of the problems with members of the so-called 9/11 truth movement is their all-encompassing zealotry. Academics, journalists, theorists, politicians and ordinary citizens who question their research methods or accuracy are quickly ostracized, attacked and characterized, at best, as ignorant tools of powerful forces and, at worst, as members of a privileged elite “in on the plot” and determined to implement a new world order.
To be sure, history is not a static force. Truth is defined by those most capable of articulating it and filtering it through the social, political, and cultural norms of the day. Historical discourse and interpretation should be encouraged to prevent dominant forces from altering the record and dismissing facts that don’t support their goals.
Were we to blindly accept the story of the current War on Terrorism as told by the administration, for example, we would discount evidence that there was no direct link between Osama Bin Laden, Al-Qaeda, and Saddam Hussein; we would not know that Pat Tillman was killed by friendly fire; and we would not know that CIA operatives kidnapped foreign citizens and held them in foreign jails, among many, many other realizations we, as a society, have had.
But we didn’t come to those realizations through sham accusations, finger pointing, and quick conclusions. We were helped by brave whistleblowers, hardworking journalists, self-sacrificing activists and persistent, thorough research.
Sadly, those efforts have not yet been enough to end our occupation of Iraq or to prevent posturing against Iran. They certainly do not bring back thousands of dead and wounded soldiers and thousands more dead and wounded Afghan and Iraqi civilians, nor do they prevent the possibility that the next president may not be much of an improvement over George Bush.
Just because we want a simple solution, though, doesn’t mean we get one.
We must have real discussions, not shouting matches and splintered dogmatic cliques.
What’s more, questioning the 9/11 truth movement means remaining committed to more fully understanding our history and avoiding the pitfalls of some parts of the 9/11 truth movement, especially the rampant anti-Semitism masked by accusations of Zionist conspiracies. It means more deeply delving into the root causes of terrorism and more fully exploring the history of U.S. involvement in the Middle East and other international arenas. It means understanding why terrorists and governments adopt the tactics they use to fight wars and it means understanding more fully why those wars are being fought.
When you hear tales of September 11 this coming Tuesday, question what you are hearing, but do not fail to also question those asking the questions.
DIGG | del.icio.us | REDDIT