http://www.ae911truth.org/info/179
Mar 3, 2010
Entire February 2010 Issue of the American Behavioral Scientist Devoted to State Crimes Against Democracy: The Case of September 11, 2001
— Elizabeth Woodworth, Professional Librarian
Ah... the same author of this essay that red tried to pass off as an "article" is making these claims on this journal. Of course we could see that she is out of her depth about her "analysis" of 9/11. Again cherry picking certain articles but ignoring the rest, a failure to do a meta analysis, and looking at her previous essays (which aren't publications) shows a fully truther slant. I also find it very intresting how they leave out what her full position was. A RETIRED health librarian. Yes her focus was on HEALTH. But hey she does write an interesting synopsis of this journal article.
What I find particularly interesting is that Ebscohost considers the American Behavioral Scientist pre 2007 to be peer reviwed. But after 2007, they don't.
hmmm... sounds rather interesting. I wonder why...
Don't worry, when I go into the office on sunday I'll see if I can access it through work.
Another interesting point is that this is a "soft science" journal. You know, psychology, political science, public policy, behavioral sciences, sociology... not a "hard science" journal which would cover the engineering sciences of 9/11.
But after reading these abstracts, it doesn't inspire too much confidence in Miss Woodworths scholarly abilities, nor her ability to read for comprehension.
Here are the abstracts. Which I am posting here under the Fair Use guidelines.
Sense Making Under 'Holographic' Conditions: Framing SCAD Research. said:
The ellipses of due diligence riddling the official account of the 9/11 incidents continue being ignored by scholars of policy and public administration. This article introduces intellectual context for examining the policy heuristic "State Crimes Against Democracy" (SCAD) (deHaven-Smith, 2006) and its usefulness for better understanding patterns of state criminality of which no extant policy analytic model gives adequate account.This article then introduces papers included in this symposium examining the chimerical presence and perfidious legacy of state criminality against democracy.
http://abs.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/53/6/783
That isn't a ringing endorsement of 9/11 twoof. It appears to be examining policy which was created after 9/11.
Beyond Conspiracy Theory: Patterns of High Crime in American Government said:
This article explores the conceptual, methodological, and practical implications of research on state crimes against democracy (SCADs). In contrast to conspiracy theories, which speculate about each suspicious event in isolation, the SCAD construct delineates a general category of criminality and calls for crimes that fit this category to be examined comparatively. Using this approach, an analysis of post—World War II SCADs and suspected SCADs highlights a number of commonalities in SCAD targets, timing, and policy consequences. SCADs often appear where presidential politics and foreign policy intersect. SCADs differ from earlier forms of political corruption in that they frequently involve political, military, and/or economic elites at the very highest levels of the social and political order.The article concludes by suggesting statutory and constitutional reforms to improve SCAD prevention and detection.
http://abs.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/53/6/795
Again it appears to be a policy paper discussing SCADS, which doesn't seem (on the face of it) to be a ringing endorsement of trutherisms.
(on an aside, I find this very interesting)
Beyond Conspiracy Theory: Patterns of High Crime in American Government said:
This article has been cited by other articles:
K. Thorne and A. Kouzmin
The USA PATRIOT Acts (et al.): Convergent Legislation and Oligarchic Isomorphism in the "Politics of Fear" and State Crime(s) Against Democracy (SCADs)
American Behavioral Scientist, February 1, 2010; 53(6): 885 - 920.
How do you manage to quote a NEW article, in another article IN THE SAME FREAKING JOURNAL which is published at the same time? Hmmmm....
But lets move on to the third abstract
Negative Information Action: Danger for Democracy said:
This article explores evidence of, and provides insight into, secrecy-related information actions that are sometimes used to circumvent established government policy and law. These information actions may also be used to cover up such circumventions after the fact. To better understand secrecy as a negative information action and its impact on democracy, secrecy-related information actions are described according to methods, information technologies, and knowledge support. Negative information actions are willful and deliberate acts designed to keep government information from those in government and the public entitled to it. Negative information actions subvert the rule of law and the constitutional checks and balances. Negative information actions used by government officials to violate policies and laws during the IranContra Affair are identified, analyzed, and categorized by type. The relative impact of negative information actions on enlightened citizen understanding is demonstrated using a Negative Information Action Model by assigning a location according to type on a continuum of enlightened citizen understanding. Findings are compared with democratic theory and conspiracy doctrine
http://abs.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/53/6/826
Hmm.... that doesn't sound 9/11 truthie either... in fact that discusses the Irancontra affair...
In Denial of Democracy: Social Psychological Implications for Public Discourse on State Crimes Against Democracy Post-9/11 said:
Protecting democracy requires that the general public be educated on how people can be manipulated by government and media into forfeiting their civil liberties and duties. This article reviews research on cognitive constructs that can prevent people from processing information that challenges preexisting assumptions about government, dissent, and public discourse in democratic societies. Terror management theory and system justification theory are used to explain how preexisting beliefs can interfere with people’s examination of evidence for state crimes against democracy (SCADs), specifically in relation to the events of September 11, 2001, and the war on terror in Afghanistan and Iraq. Reform strategies are proposed to motivate citizens toward increased social responsibility in a post-9/11 culture of propagandized fear, imperialism, and war.
http://abs.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/53/6/848
Ok. Again, nothing truthie there. It is talking about how the fear of what happened on 9/11 was used to form policy and set the war on terror in motion.
At best, that would be a possible LIHOP idea....
and like with the others it too is cited by an article in this same journal.
This article has been cited by other articles:
L. deHaven-Smith
Beyond Conspiracy Theory: Patterns of High Crime in American Government
American Behavioral Scientist, February 1, 2010; 53(6): 795 - 825.
how do you manage to take a new paper in a new edition of the journal and use it to support your other articles?
next
The USA PATRIOT Acts (et al.): Convergent Legislation and Oligarchic Isomorphism in the "Politics of Fear" and State Crime(s) Against Democracy (SCADs) said:
The irrelevance of habeas corpus and the abolition of "double jeopardy," secret and protracted outsourcing of detention and torture, and increasing geographic prevalence of surveillance technologies across Anglo-American "democracies" have many citizens concerned about the rapidly convergent, authoritarian behavior of political oligarchs and the actual destruction of sovereignty and democratic values under the onslaught of antiterrorism hubris, propaganda, and fear. This article examines synchronic legislative isomorphism in responses to 9/11 in the United States, the United Kingdom and European Union, and Australia in terms of enacted terrorism legislation and, also, diachronic, oligarchic isomorphism in the manufacture of fear within a convergent world by comparing the "Politics of Fear" being practiced today to Stalinist—Russian and McCarthyist—U.S. abuse of "fear." The immediate future of Anglo-American democratic hubris, threats to civil society, and oligarchic threats to democratic praxis are canvassed. This article also raises the question as to whether The USA PATRIOT Acts of 2001/2006, sanctioned by the U.S. Congress, are examples, themselves, of state crimes against democracy. In the very least, any democratically inclined White House occupant in 2009 would need to commit to repealing these repressive, and counterproductive, acts.
http://abs.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/53/6/885
So again, this focuses on the abuses of power which have occured AFTER 9/11 but doesn't support any truthie agenda.
This article opens with an inventory of how popular culture passion plays are homologous to the stampeding disenfranchisement everywhere of working classes and the emasculation of professional codes of ethics under siege by neoliberal initiatives and gambits.The article then examines a recent example of contemporary,"deconstructive" scholarly analysis and inventory of presidential "Orwellian doublespeak." The preoccupation among contemporary critical scholarship with "discourse analysis" and language gambits is criticized for displacing interrogation of real-event anomalies, as with the porous account given by the 9/11 Commission for what happened that fateful day. The article concludes by explaining how critical scholarship consistently falls short of unmasking Master Signifiers.
http://abs.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/53/6/921
Ah ha. So we have one journal article which seems to ...be looking at the double talk of politicans and issues with displacing the interroation of real event anomalies" but doesn't seem to be supporting any truther agenda (except that the 9/11 cR wasn't indepth enough)
Wowswers... stop the presses.
a quick, cursory examination of the abstracts completely destroys the claims of the 9/11 twoof movement.
And that isn't an indepth analysis of the articles (which from the abstracts do not support truthers).
I'll get back to you on sunday (when I go back to work) after I have read these articles...
but this feels like the truth fail of the verinage technique crush down thread....
ETA: I have written to each of the authors about how the 9/11 truth movement is using their paper (which they haven't read) to try to push the idea that 9/11 was an inside job and are trying to cite these papers as being peer reviewed which supports the position of an inside job. I'll post any and all replies I get from the authors verbatim (except for editing out my name and email)
