Author Archives: WD

National Myths

1 Reply

What really happened on September 11th, 2001?

Well, let’s just say this. The number of oddities and inconsistencies that occurred on that day are hard to chalk up as coincidence.

For those of you who have serious questions about the official story, you need to see:

Loose Change – 2nd Edition

This video documentary, available for free from Google Video, looks at the events of September 11th in a critical light. Although many of the assertions contained therein are agreed to be hoaxes, this effort to summarize the tragedy reads like a good first (or second) draft.

See it for yourself and then decide – what really happened?

Addendum: I have received a few emails regarding this post, most of which ask me to remove it because it is seen as an endorsement of a conspiracy theory. This post does not wholly endorse the film, but promotes it as worthy to be watched and contemplated. While the film itself does not offer a cut and dry answer to the official version of events, it does, in my opinion, raise some serious and important issues with that version. As is the case with any group of individuals attempting to prove a point, events and unknowns will be portrayed in a light suitable to achieve those ends. Just as Fahrenheit 9/11 can not be understood as an objective film, that does not completely discount its merit as an important piece of the record regarding the events of September 11th.

Therefore I offer this link to you with the question, “how do you feel about this?” If you wish to call it blatant propaganda, I see no issue with that whatsoever. And if, on the other hand, you find some of it compelling, then by all means continue the investigation as you see fit. To remove this post would be to silence an opinion that may indeed contain some clue to uncovering the sum of events which occurred up to and on that day. As a concerned citizen, it is my duty to question the official story, however that questioning may be turned against me. We live in very dangerous times, and if we continue to accept “the story,” we may find ourselves in a very ugly place very soon. So I again offer you, loyal reader, the chance to view this film and draw some conclusions. If you have any comments, please make them here – anonymous comments are of course welcome.

p.s. for an example of a more prosaic approach to this investigation, see David Ray Griffin’s article regarding the WTC senario. This work is available on other sites as well, and the entire 911review.com site deserves a through look through, espeically in regards to a critical reading of the above video! FYI, the site notes about the video that: “Loose Change… includes so many red herrings and transparently flawed arguments that it is unlikely to persuade anyone of its conclusions who is not already inclined to accept them. Because Loose Change is a mixture of true, false, and unverifiable claims, it suggests an exercise: read the film’s transcript and guess which claims are valid.” A point by point analysis of the film can be found here… So, as I again stress, understand this video as such and let the comments rip!

Departures

1 Reply

Now that it is spring, while I’m sitting in front of my computer planning lessons for school, I keep the door to the balcony open. Today I returned from a short trip to see a friend for her birthday. So, I’ve been doing a bit of train travel. To see how the weather is coming and going from my balcony, I usually judge by the emissions from the factory on the outskirts of town. Romanian train station announcements are preceded by a bit of a computer generated sound (you know, like in airports.) Tonight I’m sitting here listening to Mike Malloy talking about fake Democrats and I hear something… its not so loud that I immediately recognize it but my brain does register it. So I pause Mike, wait half a minute, and then, wafting over from the train station, a 15 minute walk from my apartment, is the sound. I’ve never heard it here before. It must be a good sign.

One Of Us…

3 Replies

Romanians have this strange clapping habit. Once a performance is over, there will be the usual clapping. Then, after about 10 seconds of standard clapping, somebody will always start a beat. As soon as one or two people get it going, everybody immediately joins in. Suddenly everyone is clapping in unison, faster, faster, faster, and then back to slow. This continues for a few cycles. Some of my sitemates were analyzing this behavior. Certainly it was not something we recognized from back home (though if anyone has experiences to the contrary, please pipe in here.) We decided it was a holdover from the Communist times, joking that back then there was even a proper way to clap. Although we kind of laughed it off, tonight I turn on the TV at about 1 AM and TV1, the state run TV channel, is doing a 50th anniversary special by showing old clips.

So I sit for a while watching the Brasov International Music Festival of 1968. A very classy Communist affair, funky set, long silver microphone with chord, and plenty of shots panning the crowd, most of whom appear dressed in the same suit. Glamorous because not only are the acts introduced in Romanian but also French. So, the young man singing finishes his number and low and behold, the Romanian clapping! The camera pans to the audience, the resplendent people in black and white, row upon row, hands clapping as one. And the reverberating beat from years past reaches my ears.

One Year Ago Today

Leave a reply

One year ago today, a series of events went down in Andijon, Uzbekistan. The details of the story vary widely depending on who you ask, but things boil down to two versions. The first is offered by the Uzbek Government: A group of radical Islamic militants, wishing to overthrow the Uzbek regime and establish a caliphate, took police and governmental officials hostage. During this protest, many people, including innocent civilians, were killed. The second version, offered by human rights organizations and most journalistic outfits, speaks of a popular protest against the government lead by a group of businessmen who had been singled out for spurious prosecution by the Uzbek state. In this scenario, it is claimed that the Uzbek authorities (police and military,) were guilty of killing hundreds of civilians in order to regain authority.

Recently, the Uzbek Embassy in Belgium released a video regarding these events. View the video by clicking here. What you will see is the first point articulated. My opinion of this video is that what you are seeing is the false confessions of otherwise innocent civilians garnered under duress (read, torture.) It is chilling. Also, near the end of the video, the logic of the “Western Expert Uzbek” is so flawed, it could be considered laughable were the situation not so grave. To see the other side of the story, the one which I am more inclined to believe, please view the BBC News article here.

This video must be understood within context. The Uzbek regime is a closed Soviet style system. Public dissent, though not non-existent, is rare. The few protests that have occurred within the country in recent years are related to economic grievances. Therefore, the unofficial version, in which the violent chain of events began with peaceful protests against unfair crackdowns on businessmen by the state, is believable. Since the Uzbek government is unwilling to entertain such protests, it is therefore given the task of spinning any such events in its favor. And, taking a cue from our dear leader (see top right of this website,) it uses the specter of terrorism. That is, any individuals with complaints against the state are accused of being radical Islamic terrorists, therefore justifying severe retribution by the government.

This position is troublesome for a number of reasons. The first is that the Uzbek government is able to take a fear which has some basis of truth and exaggerate it for its own means. From all accounts there are some movements which would like to establish an Islamic state in the region; such theocrats would view the secular (and morally corrupt) Karimov regime as a target. So to dismiss the fact that there exist some terrorists is naïve. The same is true regarding those who would wish to destroy the United States, and so on… Like he who shall not be named, Karimov has taken this fear, which is grounded in some measure of truth, and used it to his political advantage. Therefore, while claiming to protect the Uzbeks from Islamic terrorists, he is also stifling any form of protest directed against the state. However, with Andijon, things got out of hand, and the damage control has been extensive: expulsion of international civil society NGOs, expulsion of US forces from the Karshi-Khanabad air force base in the south of the country, an anti-Western media blitz in state run media, and the strengthening of ties with Russia and China.

And this brings me to my second point which is that Karimov’s playbook was, until this boiling point, supported by the US government. Although his regime was guilty of gross violations of basic human rights, the US provided Uzbekistan with economic and humanitarian aid. Since we needed the Karshi base for operations in the region post 9/11, we were willing to look the other way. Karimov understandably took this and ran with it; as long as we had our base he would be able to maintain, indeed intensify his crackdown against all dissent.

Such was the situation when I, and over 60 other volunteers, touched down in Tashkent one cold morning in January 2005. My time in Uzbekistan revealed that these troubles were far from the daily worries of average citizens. Although they all knew that something was not right, and lamented that their formerly eminent culture had become a mere shadow of what it once was, their main concerns were providing for their families and getting by. The tragedy of this drama is poignant, representing yet another failure of moral leadership by our government with far reaching consequences. And although Andijon may be out of mind for most Americans, as Uzbeks in the area today mourn in silence, it couldn’t be closer to home.

“Are you now or have you ever been…”

1 Reply

Every Romanian 12th grader engaged in the bilingual English program must prepare a final project/presentation before graduation. The topic can be anything relating to American/British history or culture. Today, I was invited to view the presentation aspect. Let me share some of my notes:

Popular Themes:

  • Famous Sites of ________
  • The Life of ________
  • History of ________

Re-think Question to prevent plagiarism.

“Air of an inquisition”

Presentation Skills

  • weak
  • no visual aids
  • taking charge > set the tone (vs. just answering questions)
  • long silence in response to questions

Technology (available at school)

  • laptop/projector – make available – encourage use
  • PowerPoint skills

Proper source citing

  • not just domains!

Authenticity

Starting with “… was born on…”

New: immersion – presentation/show/food – max 10x/day

I am glad that I went (even though I would like those two hours back at some point.) What I saw today was well intentioned teachers following the same tired old line, with lazy/robotic behaving students spewing back hastily memorized facts taken from the internet. In short, the entire exercise was a joke. What makes it a shame is that American/British culture is such an interesting topic! The written component of this project, for most of the students, consisted of a slick bound volume replete with color photographs. Of course, 95% of the information was simply copied and pasted from the internet (the other 5% brief introductions and conclusions.) What struck me was how blatant it all was. First you have this shaky, one paragraph introduction, full of odd verb tenses and a preponderance of “the” in front of any object (“I would like to talk about the Henry Ford…) and then, bang, perfectly nuanced writing. One of the teachers confided to me, during a short break, that the lowest grade they could give was a 7 (out of 10.) All in all, on display today was a massive failure of effort – both by the teachers and the students. Although I do not doubt that most students had some interest in the topic they chose, their presentation (or shall we say testimony,) did not reflect that. The teachers, depending on whether or not they liked the student, either gave them a pass with softballs or ridiculed them by pressing on with questions which they could not answer. When the students were able to talk, mostly it was a rote reading of the script they had prepared on note cards.

As part of a project I am doing with 11th graders now, we are working to produce a tangible visible presentation. To begin, I brought in my laptop to school and showed them a real PowerPoint presentation about a similar topic to the one we are studying. We talked about how this basic tool raised the attractiveness of the presentation through the use of photographs, graphs and video clips. Since students here tend to be computer literate (that is, regarding games and pirated movies,) I am sure they can figure out PowerPoint. The problem is that these skills – basic to any successful presentation – are not being integrated into the classroom. Yes, I know that most teachers can’t afford a laptop, but unfortunately technology seems to be viewed as something for computer class only. With these 11th graders, I hope to come up with a presentation that not only reflects genuine research methods, but also utilizes modern, if simple, interest generating devices.

I am considering suggesting my findings to the other English teachers, but I want to first get their reacton to today’s events… so it is.