Jesse Ventura article censored by HuffPo: Why the rush to condemn conspiracy theorists?

Jesse wrote an article about how some want another investigation into 9/11 and what caused the Twin Towers and “Building 7” to crash.  The shit heads at HuffPo banned it.  You can see the article here

Hell, for years America had a cottage industry out of the JFK assassination.  It was interesting, entertaining, and good people could be on either side of the debate and not have their political careers tainted by being called “a Truther” or “a Birther.”  Before my time, but there was debate over whether Marilyn Monroe was murdered, and whether FDR deliberately allowed the surprise attack on Pearl Harbor in order to shock America into WWII. Many claim that the U.S. government has/had the bodies of space aliens in “Area 51.”  I’m sure I’m missing some more even important “conspiracy theories.” 

Idiots such as “Below the Beltway’s” Doug Mataconis go to great lengths to silence any dissent to popular wisdom.  Like the little internet thought Nazi that he is, he runs around screaming “NO CONSPIRACY THEORIES FOR YOU!”  And certainly no looking into the issue of Obama’s birth certificate!

I love to hear alternative theories.  I’m not afraid of the truth winning out when kooks are exposed. And we all know that there are some “theories” that really are the truth.  We already have the government keeping secrets from us, we don’t need to preemptively silence what may or may not be the truth because it is contrary to prevailing opinion.  I want to hear what “the kooks” have to say, not shut them up. 

Who hasn’t wondered whether something strange happened in “Building 7” to bring it down, hours later, far from the Twin Towers? I looked into the claims that The Pentagon was hit by a cruise missile, and found them not persuasive.  But I did not believe that they were kooks behind the theory, just misguided.

And remember while G.W. Bush was President? There was not universal condemnation of “9/11 truthers.”  Polls show that many do not believe that the first 9/11 commission got to the bottom of things and supported another commission.  Another poll found: “Thirty-six percent of respondents overall said it is “very likely” or “somewhat likely” that federal officials either participated in the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon or took no action to stop them “because they wanted the United States to go to war in the Middle East.” 

So why now?  Why this rush to silence conspiracy theories?  I have two theories, and no proof of either.  Either Political Correctness run amok, or silence all conspiracy theories to keep “the birthers” silent.  (He he.  A conspiracy theory to explain the attacks on conspiracy theorists!)

I seriously cannot think of any other possibilities.  What, are we all children who must be sheltered from ideas that might well be wrong, even down right kooky?  Do we need the grown ups to decide for us what is and what isn’t worthy of reading for ourselves and making up our own minds? I want the truth! 

Jesse dear, you may post your articles here on Smash Mouth Politics.  We. Don’t.  Censor.

Photo from here.

9 responses to “Jesse Ventura article censored by HuffPo: Why the rush to condemn conspiracy theorists?

  1. The problem with generically dismissing conspiracy theories is that some of them turn out to be true. Just recently, (getchyer tin foil hat on) it was proven through FOIA documents that FDR did have prior knowledge of the Pearl Harbor attack and could have stopped it … Sometimes the truth is too scary to know.

    At the same time, some conspiracy theorists are nuts! But their ideas can simply be dismissed without the blanket dismissal of ALL conspiracies in general.

    I mean, seriously … Are we to believe politicians and unelected bureaucrats are endowed with special DNA rendering them without sin?

    Like Dan Riehl … It’s the purgers who ultimately hurt the conservative movement, allowing progressivism to grow and grow and grow.

  2. tCL, I’ve been meaning to gather the courage to axe you, what’s the meaning of the name of your blog, “The Classic Liberal?” I’ve heard generally through the years that today’s liberals are no where near what liberals were in years past. Is that what you are getting at? You and I seem to have many common areas of agreement.

  3. Prior to the progressive movement of the early 20th century, liberals were the limited government advocates who prescribed to the Jeffersonian ideals our country was founded on. Progressives literally stole the word attempting to “re-brand” their movement (as always). Thus, conservatives were born to conserve that tradition.

    So today’s traditional conservative/libertarian (old right) is really a classical liberal – natural rights, limited government, strict plain language constitutionalist, etc. The American Creed (our declaration) provides the single best definition of what a classical liberal is.

    It’s hard to rectify with the modern conservative movement … maybe I should start demanding a PURGE! (jk)

  4. You are fighting against the tide. It’s similar to the stock traders’ maxim–“Don’t fight the Fed.” I almost didn’t bother reading your good stuff the first time because it contained the word “LIBRUL” 😉

    By the way, I tried leaving a comment on your blog, and when I began to type in the box it started closing from the right and eventually closed all the way so I couldn’t even type. What up wid dat? Seemed like a bug or glitch.

  5. I don’t know. I know the text box shows up blank (it works on my test site, so I can’t figure out what’s wrong), but closing? I’ll have to look into that one. Thanks for letting me know.

    Yeah, I know the name throws people off, but I like fighting against the tide. It’s in my blood.

  6. The basic problem with conspiracy theories is that they usually exist to promote theorist rather than the truth.

    If we want the truth out of our government, there is only one alternative. We have to be careful to elect people who fear God more than they fear us or love power.

  7. Pingback: Right-Wing Links (March 13, 2010)

  8. Webster Tarpley had a good line; he says we should call the site that censored the governor “PuffHo” from now on. Works for me.

  9. I like it!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s