Gold9472
07-25-2006, 04:55 PM
John Hamilton: Barrett's view of 9/11 complicity plausible
http://www.madison.com/tct/opinion/letters/index.php?ntid=92237&ntpid=1
7/25/2006
A letter to the editor
Dear Editor: In spite of the seriousness of the issue, I can't help being amused by all the hullabaloo about Kevin Barrett. Three politicians are trying to have him fired.
We would do much better to fire the politicians. Hoping to rein in the bounds of thinkable thought, politicians Jim Doyle, Mark Green, and Steve Nass of course also hope to gain a bit of a boost in popularity from the incitement they are generating.
For me, the issue is simple. Barrett is teaching a course on Islam. Among his assigned readings will be an alternative view of the Sept. 11 attacks. The alternative view that the Bush regime had advance knowledge and/or complicity in the attacks is plausible for several reasons.
By simple deduction, at least circumstantial evidence indicates Bush administration culpability. The negligence in advance of the attacks was criminal, active negligence. The attacks were used, along with lies, to justify the invasion of Iraq. These two instances establish that our federal government is controlled by a criminal organization.
The negligence before and after Hurricane Katrina demonstrate more than incompetence, but an actual contempt for competence. Active incompetence is criminal. The illegal detentions and torture in Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib, and elsewhere indicate a contempt for the rule of law and common decency. And the domestic spying on Americans indicate further a contempt for law and common decency, and a general disrespect for people as well.
Given all these evidences of criminality and contempt for humanity, it is no stretch of the imagination to conclude that the Bush White House and its enablers are capable of planning attacks such as those of 9/11. Whether they actually did help plan the attacks, we are not likely to find out any time soon, if at all.
It could be argued that knowing the truth about the Sept. 11 attacks would be too much for the American people to take, and that we wouldn't know what to do with the knowledge. There is much truth to this, as almost any casual conversation on any subject will reveal.
But it's worth a chance. It may be just the thing to inspire the change in consciousness the people of this country need. In order to move to the next level of human existence, beyond paranoia and addictive behavior to interdependence, respect, and moderation, we must first be able to face the truth, whatever it is. It could set us free.
http://www.madison.com/tct/opinion/letters/index.php?ntid=92237&ntpid=1
7/25/2006
A letter to the editor
Dear Editor: In spite of the seriousness of the issue, I can't help being amused by all the hullabaloo about Kevin Barrett. Three politicians are trying to have him fired.
We would do much better to fire the politicians. Hoping to rein in the bounds of thinkable thought, politicians Jim Doyle, Mark Green, and Steve Nass of course also hope to gain a bit of a boost in popularity from the incitement they are generating.
For me, the issue is simple. Barrett is teaching a course on Islam. Among his assigned readings will be an alternative view of the Sept. 11 attacks. The alternative view that the Bush regime had advance knowledge and/or complicity in the attacks is plausible for several reasons.
By simple deduction, at least circumstantial evidence indicates Bush administration culpability. The negligence in advance of the attacks was criminal, active negligence. The attacks were used, along with lies, to justify the invasion of Iraq. These two instances establish that our federal government is controlled by a criminal organization.
The negligence before and after Hurricane Katrina demonstrate more than incompetence, but an actual contempt for competence. Active incompetence is criminal. The illegal detentions and torture in Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib, and elsewhere indicate a contempt for the rule of law and common decency. And the domestic spying on Americans indicate further a contempt for law and common decency, and a general disrespect for people as well.
Given all these evidences of criminality and contempt for humanity, it is no stretch of the imagination to conclude that the Bush White House and its enablers are capable of planning attacks such as those of 9/11. Whether they actually did help plan the attacks, we are not likely to find out any time soon, if at all.
It could be argued that knowing the truth about the Sept. 11 attacks would be too much for the American people to take, and that we wouldn't know what to do with the knowledge. There is much truth to this, as almost any casual conversation on any subject will reveal.
But it's worth a chance. It may be just the thing to inspire the change in consciousness the people of this country need. In order to move to the next level of human existence, beyond paranoia and addictive behavior to interdependence, respect, and moderation, we must first be able to face the truth, whatever it is. It could set us free.