• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

9/11 and the Academic Community

scott.in.taiwan said:
I quite like this term "fantasy dissident".
Click to expand...

Thanks! I think I made it myself. It's possible I heard it somewhere else though but the term came to me when I was watching some You Tube clip featuring David Ray Griffin. He was asked why the hard left have such as Chomsky and Cockburn have shunned the 9/11 Truth Movement and his response was that they were fearful! Perhaps they were too afraid of what horrible things their governments were capable of.

That of course makes David Ray Griffin a truly brave individual by comparison to so fearlessly take on the evil government. Then again, it could mean that he's not railing against anything at all except in his own fantasies.

It would be a bit like claiming that the Houses of Parliament have a secret chamber in which the MPs keep dragons and feed fresh virgins to every Tuesday afternoon. I could say that anyone who wasn't prepared to take on this monstrous crime was a coward and then take pleasure in the idea that I alone am radical enough to fight the system.

When I think about Dr. Steve and what drew him into this dark world, I can only think that back in 2006, these guys and gals were thinking that the really Lefties, like Chomsky, would be rushing to supoprt them. And when the Dems got back in power, there would be just rewards handed out to the faithful. This never happened, and Chomsky and rest just laughed at them, too. It's sad. It's true that Jones and Wood really no longer merit a job. Even without this stigma attached, they were unemployable. Now, there is no chance for them.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I also think there's some desire for an easy fix when it comes to Truthers. In 2006 the situation in Iraq was at its most disastrous and Bush was supremely unpopular. I think that at times like that some people thought if only 9/11 hadn't happened the world would be all fluffy and nice. If Bush is such an unmitigated source of all evil then it must have been him responsible for 9/11. If we can only find the Truth, the spell will be broken, the witch will be dead and it'll be rainbows and unicorns again just as it always was.

Now that Israel is more unpopular they are more often accused of being behind 9/11. I'm surprised there haven't been any rumours of BP being behind it.
 
angrysoba said:
Thanks! I think I made it myself. It's possible I heard it somewhere else though but the term came to me when I was watching some You Tube clip featuring David Ray Griffin. He was asked why the hard left have such as Chomsky and Cockburn have shunned the 9/11 Truth Movement and his response was that they were fearful! Perhaps they were too afraid of what horrible things their governments were capable of.

That of course makes David Ray Griffin a truly brave individual by comparison to so fearlessly take on the evil government. Then again, it could mean that he's not railing against anything at all except in his own fantasies.

It would be a bit like claiming that the Houses of Parliament have a secret chamber in which the MPs keep dragons and feed fresh virgins to every Tuesday afternoon. I could say that anyone who wasn't prepared to take on this monstrous crime was a coward and then take pleasure in the idea that I alone am radical enough to fight the system.



Yeah, I also think there's some desire for an easy fix when it comes to Truthers. In 2006 the situation in Iraq was at its most disastrous and Bush was supremely unpopular. I think that at times like that some people thought if only 9/11 hadn't happened the world would be all fluffy and nice. If Bush is such an unmitigated source of all evil then it must have been him responsible for 9/11. If we can only find the Truth, the spell will be broken, the witch will be dead and it'll be rainbows and unicorns again just as it always was.

Now that Israel is more unpopular they are more often accused of being behind 9/11. I'm surprised there haven't been any rumours of BP being behind it.
Click to expand...

The really strange thing to me is that almost all the Truthers I know oppose the mosque. So the Arabs didn't really blow up the WTC, but they still can't have their mosque. It's bizarre. It makes me think that 911 Truth really doesn't matter to them and is meant just as a symbol to identify members of their already stigmatized group - whacko right-wingers.

This is one place where the few leftie Truthers I know differ from the right-wing Truthers. Tracy Postert, whose guru is Judy Wood, is trying to make this argument. She's so in need of medication, though, that even when she makes sense, no one wants to listen.

The funny thing about this threat-to-the-academic-community thing is that it makes being a professor sound like a terribly dangerous job. Shadowy forces lurk around the corner ready to terrify even someone like Noam Chomsky. Who would want to do this kind of work when it comes at such a price? And the fact that others aren't speaking out about the terror that our community lives with on a daily basis makes us either silenced victims or perpetrators. But then Tim LeHaye has me beat on this one. I am a dark priest of the New World Order.

But that's sure better than being a fantasy dissident.
 
Last edited:
RedIbis said:
The other issue is whether or not professors can responsibly pursue and publish even radical ideas, and on the whole, the answer is yes.
Click to expand...
I suppose that what I'm saying is that not all incentives to avoid radical ideas has roots in the loss of grant money or employment, but rather to keep gross incompetence out of academia; those ideas which directly, and negatively impact the education of students - not just being radical - shouldn't be tolerated frankly, especially when they are so visibly wrong.
 
Last edited:
Isn't it obvious? Now he's retired and doesn't have to fear the black hand of the New World Order and their university lackeys, he can speak the truth that even Noam Chomsky fears.

It sure must be scary teaching and doing research in an American university with such terrifying forces all around you. And for such low salaries too.
 
scott.in.taiwan said:
Isn't it obvious? Now he's retired and doesn't have to fear the black hand of the New World Order and their university lackeys, he can speak the truth that even Noam Chomsky fears.

It sure must be scary teaching and doing research in an American university with such terrifying forces all around you. And for such low salaries too.
Click to expand...

Ooh yes, as Institute Professor emeritus at MIT, Noam Chomsky always makes sure to carefully toe the politically correct line, never speaking out against the powers that be - that little coward :p
 
Oystein said:
Ooh yes, as Institute Professor emeritus at MIT, Noam Chomsky always makes sure to carefully toe the politically correct line, never speaking out against the powers that be - that little coward :p
Click to expand...

Chomsky is well-known for his unwillingness to say what he really thinks. But there are so many others who are worse than him. American academics are all such a bunch of skinny-assed wimps unwilling to really say anything threatening. Isn't that what David Horowitz was getting at when he wrote The 101 Most Dangerous Academics in America?

But Horowitz is a Jewish name. Maybe he's part of the New World Order?
 
I think you missed my point Scott. My point was that there is no excuse for not getting published in a real forum. We know that there are those who will stand up to special interest and even those with govt connections. I was also looking for other examples like the ones I provided. Unless I am misreading you. I am tired and hungry. That maybe the case.
 
There are loads of examples of research findings that resulting in regulations resulting in huge cost to commercial companies or embarrassment to agencies or branches of government.
The banning of cyclamtes in the USA because of FDA lab tests.
The banning of saccharin because of its link with cancer.
The recent regulation of transfat was baseed on a long history of research.
Drugs are regularly recalled based on research findings from individual researchers or government run labs.

If this is what you want, it's endless. Tobacco only stands out so much because the industry fought it. If the tobacco industry was in its infancy with the regulations now, I doubt the industry would be able sustain the pressure. Companies now routinely roll over to claims made from research findings and just start over again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom