Introducing...the Donspiracist!
Digg It!
Ladies and gentlemen, I am very excited to bring to you the latest member of the jonnygoodtimes.com staff, the Donspiracist. The Donspiracist is going to be looking a little closer at some things that deserve a 2nd look. He begins with this column, on 9/11.
In his very entertaining book of essays Sex, Drugs, and Cocoa Puffs, Chuck Klosterman writes about a pre-9/11 email he sent his friends asking them to make a choice. Would they rather go on blind date with someone they knew was attractive and successful? Or would they prefer to go on a blind date with someone who was attractive, successful, and "very patriotic"? Almost immediately, all his friends responded that they would date the first person. Klosterman claims he wasn't surprised, nor am I. A quick poll of my friends and co-workers returns similar results.
Why is it that so many of us think of patriotic people as undateable? Even in this post-9/11 age where one's willingness to express love for America is a kind of litmus test, I secretly believe patriotic people are lousy in bed and would make dull significant others.
Why?
The answer to that question lies in imagination. Being patriotic really doesn't take much thought or creativity. In fact, it takes none. It's a stance, a reflex, a script, a cage. It cannot be compared to other types of loyalty because it doesn't involve the same kind of love as say love of a woman, a parent, or even a local football team. Patriotism is rote. It comes from the part of us that likes to deliver the expected behavior. In fact, it has a lot in common with going to church on Sunday. Most of us who do so are motivated not by intense deep belief but by obligation that emanates vaguely from somewhere in our childhood, but whose precise location we cannot locate. All we know is we get defensive if we stop going and someone in a social situation points that out. Faux pas in the making. Patriotism is that old pair of jeans we refuse to throw out even though they stopped looking good on us years before.
Which brings us to the 9/11 Truth movement, a burgeoning internet community that makes the patriotic types spit with rage. 9/11, they say, is settled. The 9/11 commission has published its findings. The names of the terrorists have been discovered. The victims have been mourned. The rubble has been cleared…
But has it? 911truth.org is a leader in the movement to question the official line that our government and our media have settled on.
If you look at the "top 40 reasons to doubt the official story of what happened on September 11th, 2001" on 911truth.org, you might not feel so certain. Number 3 is one of the most thought provoking: How was it possible the Pentagon was hit 1 hour and 20 minutes after the attacks began? Why was there no response from Andrews Air Force Base, just 10 miles away and home to Air National Guard units charged with defending the skies above the nation''s capital? How did Hani Hanjour, a man who failed as a Cessna pilot on his first flight in a Boeing, execute a difficult aerobatic maneuver to strike the Pentagon?
Or if you checked out Alex Jones's two websites, prisonplanet.com and infowars.com, you'd see links between 9/11 and events that are still unfolding. His favorite piece of evidence is about WTC 7, which was not hit by a plane but did collapse anyway, for no apparent engineering reason.
Or if you read David Icke's Alice in Wonderland and the World Trade Center Disaster , you'd see research that the 9/11 commission blatantly ignored, especially linkes between the Bush and Bin Laden families that would make Michael Moore speechless.
Or if you read George Washington's Blog, you would see an explication of false flag terror and how it has played a role in the history of many nations. In a recent entry, he writes: Many timid writers and commentators are finally waking up to the fact that the powers-that-be are whipping up fear of the enemy in order to justify their imperial wars of aggression and a consolidation of power at home .
Or if you went to NY 9/11 Truth, you would see how people are organizing seminars and establishing ballot initiatives to inform the public that the official line is wrong.
To ignore all this as the ranting of lunatics, as mass self-deception, shows a rigid acceptance of what we are told is true. And you know what? Most of us still have enough kid in us to resist that. Most of us have enough imagination and creativity to wonder if maybe, just maybe, history is more fable than it is fact.
Well, that answers the question "What will Stephen Smith do now that he's been canned by the Inky?"
A- He'll join Johnny Goodtimes under an alias.
I love a good conspiracy theory. But they should be taken as For Entertainment Purposes Only, like TV psychics or Gallagher. He's hilarious!
I've read Behold A Pale Horse like 20 times and I enjoy Jim Marrs' stuff. But I also think it's all just entertaining BS, kind of like the Bible.
I'm going to let the experts handle the 9/11 debunking here- http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html
Then again, maybe the entire staff of Popular Mechanics is on the government payroll. I've read stories claiming as such.
David Icke believes royal families and the Bush's are lizard people. (I've read his books too, they're pretty good.)
Alex Jones takes Cynthia McKinney seriously.
Extraordinary claims do require extraordinary proof. There is none that points to a massive government conspiracy being the root of 9/11. If you are going to charge the government with creating a disaster like this, you had better be able to back up your facts really, really, really well. Not just with anecdotal evidence and misinterpretations of imagery.
I love a good conspiracy theory. But they should be taken as For Entertainment Purposes Only, like TV psychics or Gallagher. He's hilarious!
I've read Behold A Pale Horse like 20 times and I enjoy Jim Marrs' stuff. But I also think it's all just entertaining BS, kind of like the Bible.
Do a google search for "popular mechanics 9/11". They'll let you in on some truth.
Then again, maybe the entire staff of Popular Mechanics is on the government payroll. I've read stories claiming as such.
David Icke believes royal families and the Bush's are lizard people. (I've read his books too, they're pretty good.)
Alex Jones takes Cynthia McKinney seriously.
Extraordinary claims do require extraordinary proof. There is none that points to a massive government conspiracy being the root of 9/11. If you are going to charge the government with creating a disaster like this, you had better be able to back up your facts really, really, really well. Not just with anecdotal evidence and misinterpretations of imagery.
The other thing that drives me nuts is that all this 9/11 conspiracy garbage draws attention away from the fact that there was a massive lapse in national security which allowed this to happen. It could happen again since very little has been fixed over the past 6 years.
It would be impossible for this administration to have pulled off a 9/11 coverup. they are simply too imcompetent to even come close to pulling off somthing this complex.
Well, that's settled then. "Patriotic" people are uncreative and unimaginative. And they're lousy in bed too.
JGT conducts "a quick poll of his friends and co-workers." Guess what? They all seem to think just like him. It doesn't seem to occur to the creative and imaginative Mr. Goodtimes that maybe in his political opinions he might, just might, be exhibiting the same lemming-like behavior he deplores in the unfashionable "patriotic" types.
I'm not the Donspiracist.
My mistake.
You only think like the Donspiracist and approve of the Donspiracist and endorse the Donspiracist and echo the Donspiracist, but you're not the Donspiracist. You're your own man, and think for yourself. Glad to hear it.
All I do is give the Donspiracist a platform to espouse his views. Johnnygoodtimes.com is not responsible for and does not necessarily endorse the things the DOnspiracist writes.
I'll be with Darth Dick, Darth Karl, and Rush all next week for Operation EMPIRE STRIKES BACK!
Everybody have a good holiday. See you in September!
I suppose I'm not being very fair to you, JGT, and I apologize. You're not the Donspiricist, and I shouldn't hold you accountable for his lemming-like opinions.
So I revise my first comment above to read "Donspiricist" in lieu of "JGT" and "Mr. Goodtimes."
I am the Donspiracist and I am definitely not JGT. I present my information as an alternative to the mainstream. You can call me a lemming, if you wish, but I'm not the one watching Anderson Cooper and FoxNews and nodding in agreement. I love how people dismiss conspiracy theory as merely entertaining BS. If you've read David Icke's books (more than one of them) and you still think it's crap, then you obviously like to waste your time.
David Icke has some crazy theories, but are they really more insane than the world we live in? And as for requiring me to provide more solid evidence, where's yours, party-line boy? Why DID WTC 7 collapse? Why did the towers collapse when there is clear proof that steel does NOT melt at the temperature at which jet fuel burns?
The burden of proof is not only on my side, it's on yours. So unless you don't have your own proof, shut up. :-)
Oh, and by the way, I have yet to meet a seriously patriotic person I would want to go to bed with. Who's with me?
And as for entertaining BS, have you watched FoxNews lately?
Well, Don, I've met quite a few over the years, and have actually gone to bed with a few.
And I've yet to meet a seriously left-wing conspiracy type or anti-American type I'd like to go to bed with. Or, maybe I should qualify that and say I'd have been happy to go to bed with them provided I could just leave afterwards or just roll over and go to sleep and not have to listen to any of their left-wing conspiracy type or anti-American type bullshit. As for any sort of involvement, forget it. Why waste my time? Why listen to their simplistic nonsnse?
A matter of personal taste, I suppose.
Without getting into the question of whether various groups-- lefties or righties, Democrats or Republicans, "patriotic" or "unpatriotic" (Non-patriotic? Apathetic?)-- are more or less fuckable, I'll just point out that a person who dismisses entire, not particularly homogenous groups as sexually undesirable probably has what we could call a major stereotype problem. Hell, let's go a bit further and posit that maybe he's a simplistic, mindless moron. With that sort of fertile soil to grow in, should we be suprised that conspiracy theories take root and flourish? History is not a complex play of interacting forces, but can be explained by dark (and easily understood) conspiracies of various groups of bad guys.
It's good to come back from vacation to a typical highbrow JGT discussion. Gee, would I rather get laid by someone when I am told that she has a personality trait I might find annoying (once out of bed) as opposed to not being told anything about her? Fine question.
When Bob T. becomes the voice of reason, it is time to move on to another topic. Like the Mets and Phillies tonight!
Well, PalestraJon, welcome back. Great website, what? A real slice of life.
And I have always been, and will strive to continue to be, the voice of reason on this website.
And how about your own personal preferences? Are you only sexually attracted to liberal Democrats, or do you occasionally unleash your libido and fantasies on less ideologically pure partners?
Wow, Johnny, this crew does lack a sense of humor.
Anti-American, ee? Where do you get your material? Sean Hannity?
Last time I checked, the crew that wrote the Declaration was a band of "extremists", "radicals" and "liberal free thinkers" who went against what their society taught as right and proper. I don't mind running with that crowd.
And as for the crack about sleeping with patriotic types, it comes from Chuck Klosterman. It's a joke. You know what those are, don't you?
History is a fable, boys. It's not much more true than Harry Potter.
"I love how people dismiss conspiracy theory as merely entertaining BS."
Because it is. That's why they dismiss it.
"If you've read David Icke's books (more than one of them) and you still think it's crap, then you obviously like to waste your time."
Is reading Asimov or Twain a waste of time because they also wrote fiction?
"David Icke has some crazy theories, but are they really more insane than the world we live in?"
Yes, they are. He believes in lizard people.
"Why DID WTC 7 collapse?"
Because of structural damage. The intitial FEMA report on it was found to be completely wrong, as is expected of FEMA.
"Why did the towers collapse when there is clear proof that steel does NOT melt at the temperature at which jet fuel burns?"
Jet fuel can burn to about 1500 degrees; combined with the combustibles in the buildings, the fires may have reached 1800 degrees. This is not enough to "melt" steel. But it is more than enough to weaken steel by well over 50%.
"The burden of proof is not only on my side"
This is wrong.
I re-read your whole post, Donspiracist, and if you were joking about "patriotic" types being lousy dates and lousy lovers because of their lack of imagination and creativity, then I have to confess your humor was too subtle for me. Since you use this spiel about "patriotic" types as a lead-in to your 9/11 conspiracy remarks, does that mean those remarks are part of the joke also.
I also agree with JG no T that any burden of proof is definitely not on my side. If you choose to believe and promulgate wild theories, I'm under no obligation to construct proofs to disprove them.
As for my use of "anti-American," perhaps that's a bit strong. But what's the opposite of "patriotic," a word which seems to irritate you? "Unpatriotic" perhaps? "Anti-patriotic"?
It sure didn't read like a "joke" to me either. But lame humor is what this site is all about.
Still, there is a point to be made about patriotism and the abduction of that term for political purposes. Americans always have had an individualistic streak uncommon in the world. Patriotism was generally accepted as the response we make when under attack. Foreign "adventures" were ALWAYS subject to strenuous criticism...just read Washington's farewell address, Lincoln's strident attack against the Mexican War, and the criticism of our involvement in late 19th century colonialism in Cuba and the Phillipines. Even Eisenhower in 1960 warned us against blindly submitting to the whims of the military-industrial complex, which he, as a general, believed had gotten out of hand for the national interest. However, Nixon, with his "silent majority" crap, convinced people that it was OK to accuse others of being non-patriotic for being critical of our government, and EVERY Republican administration since that time has used the term "patriotism" as a partisan code word. Karl Rove took this to the next level, accusing (on behalf of an entire administration of draft dodgers in Vietnam) first John McCain and then John Kerry of being anti-patriotic for their criticisms of Bush administration policy. Patriotism now means doing whatever our President says is in our interest, no matter how wrong headed and contrary to the national interest. I fault the Democrats in a way, for cowardly caving to this strategy, rather than put the spotlight on Bush and Cheney for their responses when called upon to serve and their willingness to put others in harm's way in Iraq (especially Cheney, who repeatedly stated in Gulf War I that Saddam was not worth a single US life). Patriotism no longer has any meaning except supportive of this administration, and as such, I am not surprised that many people now associate the term with a kind of Limbaugh type attitude that I would not want to wake up to either.
True patriotism is responding to the call when the nation is under attack. Imperial wars of empire such as we now are engaged in do not implicate the term and the use of the mantle of patriotism and the flag in the Iraq war is disgusting.
Here's a nice attribution for my statement about the Spanish American War:
Carl Schurz, former Civil War officer and Secretary of the Interior denounced American Imperialism in 1899 after we had taken over the Philippines and Puerto Rico as a result of the Spanish-American War. “Certainly,” he said addressing an audience at the University of Chicago, “every patriotic citizen will always be ready, if need be, to fight and to die under his flag wherever it may wave in justice and for the best interests of the country. But…woe to the republic if it should ever be without citizens patriotic and brave enough to defy the demagogues’ cry and to haul down the flag wherever it may be raised not in justice and not for the best interests of the country. Such a republic would not last long….”
Theodore Roosevelt, a man who called the Spanish American War a "lovely little war," strenuously criticised Wilson for taking us into World War I, arguing that patriotism requires that we allow dissenters the ability to criticize.
So it's the definition of patriotism that is the real issue here....does it mean "America, love it or leave it?" Or are we talking about real patriotism?
It is obvious whose theories on patriotism this administration subscribes to: "Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger."
-Hermann Goering
Actually, the entire quote in context is this. It was given by Goering to a psychologist while he was on trial-
"Why, of course, the people don't want war," Goering shrugged. "Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece. Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship."
"There is one difference," I pointed out. "In a democracy the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars."
"Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."
Of course, this means the spineless Congress is as much at fault as the Bush administration.
Also, conscription makes a huge difference in the prevailing attitude about war, which I think Goering was alluding to. A draft changes public opinion. That's why you never see massive protests on the level of the Vietnam-era today; there's no selfish motivation (like the chance you're going to be sent to war) to make more people into activists.
PalestraJon, well stated. The patriotism I was attacking (and that which Klosterman is ridiculing) is of the "America, love it or leave it" type. The kind that wraps itself in the flag, listens to Toby Keith, and cannot possibly accept any criticisms of its position. That's what I was driving at; I'm sorry if it was too subtle for some.
True patriotism can be and should be critical of the government and its policies if those policies veer from what concerned citizens think is best for the country.
And as for JG no T, we will have to agree to disagree on the madness of this world. Accepting the way the world is can be very dangerous. If you took the time to read the evidence that is out there, you might begin to see that the "official line" has some pretty significant holes in it.
And no, as someone who has an MA in literature, I would never read Icke in the same spirit as Twain. Icke may believe in lizard people, but I find that no more bizarre than the millons of Americans who believe in a thing called the Rapture. Yet, because they are "christian", they are somehow acceptable and Icke is not. Hmm, I find that logic specious. Granted, Icke is far out, but no more far out than Galileo and Copernicus were considered at one time.
I refuse to take this world at face value. And I will continue, with JGT's grace, to present alternative ideas here for people to think about and judge for themselves. If you don't agree with my view of 9/11, that doesn't make me lose sleep at night. But many things about that day don't make any sense, and frankly, I don't trust the government or the media to tell me the truth. If you do, that's your right.
Well I re-read the Donspiracist's post again, hopefully for the last time, and I see no discussion or even hint that what he is attacking is patriotism of the "America, love it or leave it type." What he writes-- but, again, maybe I'm not sophisticated enough to read between the lines-- appears to me to be a pretty straightforward attack on "patriotism" as a really dorky and rather stupid attribute of really dorky and stupid people, the kind of people that nobody who aspires to any degree of coolness or hipness would ever want to spend any time with, and certainly would never ever want to fuck. (So here's a Cosmopolitan dating tip for you women-- if you want to drive your man wild with desire, don't say anything that could be construed as patriotic.)
But I'm glad we all agree that patriotism of the mindless variety is a bad thing and can often be manipulated by unscrupulous politicians, who are generally Republicans. And it was nice that JGT trotted out the Goering quote. I haven't seen that one in at least a week or two.
"America, love it or leave it" is, of course, a rather blunt way of stating one's displeasure with critics of one's country. Perhaps, it should be expanded a bit, maybe something like "America, if you find me and my fellow countrymen to be such offensive and unsophisticated boobs and morons, and the system of government of my country to be so oppressive and totalitarian, then wouldn't you probably be happier if you moved someplace else, say some cool country like France or Sweden." Admittedly, this would be difficult to fit on a bumper sticker.
I will end my participation in this thread thusly-
Donspiracist, I look forward to your future posts here. Like I said, I love conspiracy theories, and even though I am a skeptic I don't disbelieve 100% of them. Actually, to me the 9/11 conspiracies are probably the ones which contain the least truth, so don't be surprised if I actually support you every once in a while.
Yeah, ee, I'm kind of sick of that Goering quote myself. (In fact, if you google "Goering quote," you'll get tens of thousands of hits. Quite a number of these lead you sooner or later to Snopes.com.) It's one of those urban legends that the "rational" party, i.e. the Democrats, love so much.
Goering, leaving aside the question of whether the whole business is aprocryful, seems to be telling us that our leaders manipulate us into war. Actually, what we have here is a Nazi war criminal on trial for his life basically saying, "Oh yeah. Well, you western democracies do the same thing. You're no better than we are." We conservatives call this the moral equivalency argument. The quote seems to have a great deal of appeal to what Lenin referred to as "the useful idiots." I suspect that that particular quote, "useful idiots," may indeed be another urban legend, but, hell, it does seem to ring true. Any way, I have to ask why the left is willing to let a Nazi genocidal maniac get to have the last word on the Iraqi war.
Sorry, lads, I misspelled "apocryphal."
Actually, if you want real, heavy-duty, industrial strength anti-Bush conspiracy, I refer you to the Smirkingchimp.com website. The Donspiracist is really ladling out pretty thin gruel here. Smirkingchimp has it all: Saudi- U.S. oil company plots, Diebold conspiracies to manipulate the vote and subvert the will of the people, Cheney- Halliburton back room deals, CIA- engineered plots, military-industrial complex shenanigans, whatever. It's all there on Smirkingchimp. Why settle for less?
The right wing just can't seem to understand irony, no matter how many of their leaders oppress homosexuals while doling out restroom BJs. I find it hilarious that Bob T. put down the left for using a Nazi leader quote by using a Lenin quote! Awesome!
Ah, here's your Larry Craig comment. It does indeed belong in the conspiracy category anyway. The guy now says his guilty plea was a mistake caused by the pressure of an Idaho Statesman investigation. Except the Idaho Statesman did not believe it had enough to print any story until this came out....and he hid it for 4 months from everyone. Meanwhile, the guy flew into Minneapolis en route to Idaho, WENT THROUGH SECURITY to go to the bathroom....a bathroom written up in gay sex sites as a prime spot for anonymous sex. Then he claims to have looked through a stall for a few minutes and bent down under the stall to "pick up a piece of paper". Yeah, except for the paper.
This guy is gay and should just come out and admit it---challenge the voters of Idaho to accept him and, by the way, maybe be more accepting of gay people generally. Instead, he is headed for destruction with his head down. And, of course, the GOP is condemning his conduct, not his duplicity. Funny how all the closeted gays seem to be Republican.
Please explain irony to me, Mr. JGT.
Actually, my remarks on the Goering quote are rather confused, reflecting a certain amount of inebriation. Goering did actually make the oft quoted statement, so we're not dealing with an urban myth. The quote is often truncated, however, leaving out the words of the man Goering was speaking to, which substantially alters the meaning. The context is also seldom explained. Goering was speaking after being convicted of war crimes and sentenced to hang. Without that context, there is no suggestion that Goering was offering excuses, and making the argument that the allies were no better his country.
I don't know whether Lenin actually used the "useful idiots" line or not. I probably should google it, but I'm feeling kind of lazy. It's the kind of thing that if he didn't say it, he should have, because it's just too perfect.
I hate to spoil JGT's mirth, but if I happened to be aware of the irony of using a trite and dubious Lenin quote while discussing a trite and overworked Goering quote, well then that sort of ruins your joke and pushes the irony thing in another direction, nicht wahr?
I'm not sure what a cruising, closeted gay Republican Senator has to do with a discussion about patriotism, or whatever we were arguing about. It is presented by JGT as if it's some kind of knockout punch, when it strikes me that it falls into the apples and oranges category. (And yes, JGT, I'm aware that I'm scrambling and mixing my metaphors, but thanks anyway.) At any rate, I feel no desire or necessity to defend Senator Craig or the Republican party, beyond pointing out that his actions are no more an indictment of my political beliefs than Michael Vicks' actions are an indictment of football players or blacks or black football players.
But have a ball with the Craig thing, guys. You lefties live for these kind of scandals, and when you don't have very good facts and arguments on your side, it's always good to change the subject. It reminds me a bit of the Goering quote, actually, "Well, hey, I might be a fascist and a war criminal, but you guys aren't any better. You do things like cruise for gay sex."
Thanks for the tip about smirkingchimp.com. I checked it out, and although it seems pretty interesting, it doesn't seem very conspiracy focused to me.
Besides, 9/11 truth was a first column. JGT and I have plenty of ideas lined up that are much more out there. We might even be talking about lizard people...