Left Media Icons Still Promoting
9/11 "Modified Limited Hangout" Legend

By Shiu M. Hung

Two years have passed since the 9/11 infamy, and where does the US Left Media stand on this issue as far as "Who’s guilty?" Are they even asking hard questions considering recent revelations coming forward from the so-called 9/11 Independent Investigative Commission? The mythical legend of the 19 Saudi Arabian hijackers and Osama Bin Ladin – the USG official narrative – is still being repeated as gospel throughout the left press as well as on Pacifica Network Radio airwaves. Meanwhile, a few courageous journalists bravely veer from the "politically correct" path, raise the question of USG complicity. As far as i am concerned, all the accusations coming from the left gatekeepers portraying 9/11 alternative analysis as "conspiracy theory" -- is a function of the same forked tongue duplicity they display on every issue. They posture the idea that they are the ‘alternative’ voice to the Clear Channel dominant paradigm -- mainstream media controlled by Rupert Murdock, et al.- yet they repeat the same standards of marginalization tactics and censorship practices that they vehemently opposed of the mainstream media. Issues such as Foundation funding and left media critiques are hardly received with open arms. The left media never go wrong is the general consensus throughout the broad progressive political sector inside the US.

Not long ago, Pacifica Radio’s National Political Correspondent, Larry Bensky smugly labeled 9/11 alternative analysis as "recreational speculation". On the same show, he interviewed an alleged expert on Chinese Fung Sui to educate Pacifica Radio listeners on how to cope with 9/11 tragedies with Fung Sui, in keeping with KPFA's New-Age escapist culture. The message Bensky is sending is that there’s plenty of time to pontificate on issues such as: how to take care of one’s emotional state, but constructive alternative analysis of 9/11 is off limits. Of course, Bensky will continue to shovel out his lineup of so-called experts to further marginalise the 9/11 skeptic position and needlessly continue to prop up the official story as the gospel truth. His show, Sunday Salon has recently featured Gerald Posner with his new book: Why America Slept? And Chip "John Foster" Berlet’s ridiculous comments concerning US air defense’s stand down on 9/11. According to Berlet the Stand down was because the Pentagon didn’t want to bother the East Coast Corridor suburbanite’s with loud jet noises. Practically, every expert guest Bensky had on since 9/11 repeats the official lies and disinformation, and analysis from Amy Goodman of Pacifica Radio’s "flagship" political affairs program – Democracy Now Inc.! – promote the same message. Furthermore, instead of promoting a radical message to the left of the Democratic Party, Amy Goodman lend plenty of airtime to promote the latter, and with joint appearances at a recent town hall gathering in Berkeley, California, MoveOn.org and DN’s, Amy Goodman are evidently working together to promote the Democratic Party. Even their websites are listed together on the Internet – how quaint and tactical. Run of the mill “Neo-liberal-progressives” can now go information shopping on the Internet for Democratic Party solutions via “Moveon.org and DN Inc.”Mall.

According to Bob Feldman, Researcher of Foundation funding to left media institutions – Leftgatekeepers.com -- the Plutocratic Left's MoveOn.org’s PAC Democratic Party funding group, on March 11, 1999 Laurance Rockefeller made a campaign contribution of $5,000 to the MoveOn PAC and Wendy Rockefeller made a $5,000 campaign contribution to the MoveOn PAC. Another $1,000 in campaign contributions were given to the MoveOn PAC group in 2000 by Laurance Rockefeller. So Billionaire Speculator George Soros is not the only plutocrat who has apparently been giving money to the MoveOn PAC group in recent years. Worth noting: Soros have contributed millions to this Democratic Party political action organization.

In the 2000 presidential campaign year, the MoveOn PAC collected $2.29 million in campaign contributions for Democratic Party candidates and distributed $2.2 million to various Democratic Party candidate campaigns. During the 2002 congressional campaign year, the MoveOn Pac collected $1,250,767 in campaign contributions and distributed $1,014,440 to various Democratic Party congressional candidates.

MoveOn.org is now promoting the Democratic Party agenda by exploiting the recent 9/11 ‘incompetence/foreknowledge’ revelation by the so-called 9/11 bipartisan Commission that the attack could have been avoided. The long term result will be "business as usual". Minimally, the US intelligence agencies will no doubt receive increases in funding because of the alleged intelligence failure on 9/11, but the emphasis from the commission findings will direct the blame on the Bush administration which will only provide a false sense of justice, and perpetuate the endless war based on a phony pretext – The legend of Islamic terrorists. One sure way to tame the anti-war left on the western front is to insist on Bush knew but allowed 9/11 to happen, which will only perpetuate the "Blowback" myth and the Al Qaeda legend. The blame will still be directed to "foreign" terrorists, while the terrorists running our country will survive unscathed. The outcome of this, if they succeed in ousting Bush based on 9/11 incompetence/foreknowledge, will be to replace a Republican with a Democrat to continue the war of conquest; based on the phony "war on terror" pretext – regime change: more of the same, but without the opposition from the left. Thereupon, the left gatekeepers will be obedient; similar in ways they had behaved during the last Democrat’s reign at the White House under Clinton. While American casualties were nearly nil during Clinton’s ordered bombing over Iraq throughout his tenure, thousands and thousands of Iraqi civilians were murdered by US instigated economic sanctions. All this talk "anybody but Bush" is misdirected. The Democratic Party won’t do anything different than what the Republican Party is currently doing, only they will do it better – according to Wesley Clark and John Kerry. Most of the current Democratic Party Primary contestants have attested to doing the "war on terror" better than Bush. Obviously, "War on Terror" is the main excuse behind all these military invasions and occupations of foreign lands post-9/11, and it has become the "mantra" espoused by the mainstream, as well as the alternative press/media – except for a small handful of investigative researchers brave enough to veer off this ‘popular’ path. To put it bluntly, exposing USG complicity of 9/11 should be the main issue on the Democratic Party’s Primary platform, considering that billions of taxpayer money is allocated towards the US’s war machine. One would assume that they – the party of the working class – would oppose more spending for the military machine, instead, allocate more spending on the domestic front to take care of years of infrastructure neglect, such as education; health care, etc. Perhaps the Democrats, themselves, have something to hide with regards to 9/11, or that they would rather the American people not find out the truth about 9/11. To do so may prompt American people to finally examine and rectify problems of the criminality of their political system.

On January 18th, 2004, KPFA’s Sunday Salon program had on a guest Kevin Phillips – author of the new book; American Dynasty: Aristocracy, Fortune, and the Politics of Deceit in the House of Bush – interviewed by Larry Bensky about the Bush family. During the listener’s call-in period, a nationally known and widely respected 9/11 skeptic movement activist, Carol Brouillet phoned in to the show to announce her upcoming 9/11 informational events in the San Francisco Bay Region. After her announcement, Bensky asked his guest what he thought about the information given by Carol, and his overall perspective on 9/11. Kevin Phillips’ response was disingenuous at best but misinformation at worse – mirroring the entrenched censorship habits and tactics by the left media icons and their counterpart guests -- to whom these people really work for remains a mystery? Kevin Phillips insinuated that the current 9/11 alternative analysis movement is nothing more than a "Halloween Mask" and "conspiratorial", and it’s a detriment to the advancement of the 9/11 discovery by the 9/11 independent investigation commission. He further went on to imply that the current commission is doing its best to seek unanswered questions about 9/11, and any research work done outside of the purview of the commission is a waste of time and a detriment to the commission’s effort to seek the truth, and that these ‘conspiracies mongering’ will only discredit any real effort on the part of the US government. Is this just wishful thinking on Kevin Phillip’s part, or is he some political operative for the Democratic Party’s attempt to persuade the progressive electorate into remaining ignorant on the issue of 9/11?

Can we trust the commission’s intent at this point? Weren’t Senator Robert Graham and Representative Porter Goss the two politicians who met with Parkistani ISI Chief Lt. Gen. Mahmoud Ahmed at the nation’s capital on the morning of 9/11 – while the nation was under attack? http://globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO308C.html This same ISI Chief also met with Bush’s State Department high officials during the week of 9/11. According to Professor Michel Chossudovsky, this same Parkistani ISI Chief also approved a wire transfer of $100,000 to Mohammed Atta – the original legendary ringleader: http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/KUP310A.html -- weeks before 9/11? Is there a conflict of interest taking place here? Are we to trust that the commission won’t merely "whitewash" the investigation that which will serve the agenda of the USG eventually to hide the most likely possibility that they themselves were complicit in 9/11? Even if Bush were found to have foreknowledge prior to 9/11 from the commission findings, wouldn’t the democrats take advantage of the discovery and use it to their advantage to oust Bush? At best, the election outcome will perpetuate the myth of US democracy? At worse, it will allow the Democratic Party to operate at the helm at the White House to continue their “war of conquest”. Is 9/11 complicity a bipartisan criminal activity, not just the work of Bush and his so-called PNAC Neo-cons?

Again, Pacifica listeners are trusted to accept the word of someone whose credentials to appear on Sunday Salon was his new book about the Bush family, and this somehow lends him credibility to assume a position of authority on a topic which he appears to have no credentials, nor respectability to opined on. Furthermore, the fact that this person who used to operate inside the Republican Party political apparatus go unchallenged and welcomed with open arms, at the same time, serious researcher such as Michael Ruppert is labeled as “right winger” trying to infiltrate the left with his “conspiracy” nonsense violates fairness and defies logic. Meanwhile, prominent researchers such as Professor Michel Chossudovsky of University of Ottawa http://www.globalresearch.ca and Michael Ruppert of http://www.copvcia.com and notable 9/11 "physical evidence" researchers Jim Hoffman of http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/pentagon never gets invited to share information on Bensky’s program, nor on Democracy Now, Inc. The fact that Amy Goodman’s censorship of 9/11 alternative analysis goes against her own motto” in my investigative work, I go where the silence is”, doesn’t seemed to bother anyone who continues to prop her up on the pedestal as some “left media goddess”.

The two long years of dedicated research and discovery by skeptic researchers are, according to Kevin Phillips, conspiracy theories. Isn’t Phillips’ book about the Bush family conspiratorial in nature? Or did he gather the information for his book by way of "Structural analysis?" Better yet, Bush’s family long tradition of political malfeasance and machination has been ignored for over two decades and only now coming into light on Pacifica Airwaves at the opportune time when this exposure will benefit the Democratic Party. When callers broached the subject of Bush family/Nazi connection back in the early 90’s on his Sunday morning talk show, Bensky consigned these as "conspiracy theories". How pitiful, a decade later, he encounters this same topic by promoting someone who wrote a book on the Bush family -- when it’s safe to do so -- because now the Bush family/Nazi connection is exposed in the mainstream media, and it’s a ‘popular’ topic. How trite that he now seeks expert opinion from this author, with Republican Party background, of a subject which a decade earlier, he described as “conspiracy theories.” Furthermore, based on this author’s comments about 9/11, he hardly knows anything about the topic, and if he did, he certainly didn’t show it. More importantly, his negative criticism certainly did not do much to contribute to advance the discovery established by the 9/11 grassroots researchers. Regardless, these types of practices are a ‘norm’ on Larry Bensky’s program as well as throughout majority of the left press/media, and as long as he remains the National political correspondent on Pacifica Radio, and left pundits such as Norman Soloman; David Corn; Michael Albert; Noam Chomsky, et al continues to rule the mindsets of the left, majority on the left will remain ignorant about 9/11, and it will only perpetuate business as usual – vote Bush out and everything will be fine again. Only Lord Bensky can determine when a political subject is considered legitimate to pass his “conspiracy theory/recreational speculation” smell test.