I don't know that you really agree with Churchill. Churchill said on Friday that he is open to the idea that it was an inside job but he has not reviewed any evidence. He then offered his fantasy race viewpoint.
as to 'liberal conspiracy theories' there is no such thing. Liberals in fact have been the most vociferous critics of 9-11 dissident views.
Any interpretation of 9-11 must revolve around an examination of the evidence, not presuppostions about the races of the people involved.
I am reminded of a line from the movie 'A Soldier's Story' directed by Norman Jewison. In the movie, Howard Rollins, a black officer is charged with investigating a murder of a black officer at a military base circa 1944. The presumption is that they were killed by the Klan - a not uncommon occurance in those days. At one point, the black officer, who is determined not to allow his investigation to be influenced by the racial tensions but to stick with the facts, is in conversation with the liberal white base commander. The black officer asks whether any of the black soldiers had been questioned, the white officer replies, "No. We know it is the Klan. Besides, black people just aren't that devious." In the end, it turned out that black soldiers had killed the black officer because he was a Clarence Thomas type and had tormented another black soldier to committ suicide.
To inject the issue of race as determinant to the 9-11 question is as racist as it is to invoke the trope of the 'evil Arab' which has fueled racist US foreign policy for some time. All people are equally devious or capable of incredible technlogical feats. That is not the question: the question is who had the motive, means and opportunity - and this should be determined by a fair adjuducation of the facts, not race theory.
Joe W.
>From: chuck at mutualaid.org
>Reply-To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
>To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
>Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] Ward Churchill & 9-11
>Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 12:01:48 -0800 (PST)
>
> A badly phrased 9-11 question did get through. He
> > first said "as to what actually happened on 9-11, I'm open to different
> > theories, I have not seen any evidence" (to which I would of course say
>-
> > well why don't you at least examine it!) - or something to that effect.
>At
> > this point there was scattered clapping. Then he added "But, the problem
> > with the idea that it was an inside job is that it suggests that brown
> > people are not capable of such feats and gives all the credit to the
>white
> > man, another master race fantasy". Many people seemed impressed by this
> > facile analysis - although a couple of people shouted loudly "that's
> > ridiculous!".
>
>Some 9-11 conspiracy nut shouted the same thing at Ward's appearance at
>the bookfair on Saturday. Ward responded the same way to the heckler and
>effectively shut the nutcase up.
>
>I totally agree with Churchill about the liberal 9-11 conspiracy theories
>being a load of racist nonsense. It's a shame that some folks on the left
>adhere to this fantasy that the U.S. state is all powerful and watching
>our every move. They ignore the more radical and profound interpretation
>of 9-11 as showing that the U.S. government is very vulnerable, even to a
>small conspiracy armed with weapons, a good plan, and plenty of zeal.
>
>This was my immediate take on 9-11 as I watched it unfold in DC at the
>time. I still stick by that conclusion.
>
>Chucko
>___________________________________
>http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk