State Crimes Against Democracy

Email Print
FacebookTwitterShare

 

 
 

New research
in the journal American Behavioral Scientist (Sage publications,
February 2010) addresses the concept of “State Crimes Against
Democracy” (SCAD). Professor Lance deHaven-Smith from Florida
State University writes that SCADs involve high-level government
officials, often in combination with private interests, that engage
in covert activities for political advantages and power. Proven
SCADs since World War II include McCarthyism (fabrication of evidence
of a communist infiltration), Gulf of Tonkin Resolution (President
Johnson and Robert McNamara falsely claimed North Vietnam attacked
a US ship), burglary of the office of Daniel Ellsberg’s psychiatrist
in effort to discredit Ellsberg, the Watergate break-in, Iran-Contra,
Florida’s 2000 Election (felon disenfranchisement program),
and fixed intelligence on WMDs to justify the Iraq War.1

Other suspected
SCADs include the assassination of Lee Harvey Oswald, the shooting
of George Wallace, the October Surprise near the end of the Carter
presidency, military grade anthrax mailed to Senators Tom Daschle
and Patrick Leahy, Martin Luther King’s assassination, and
the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 on September 11, 2001.
The proven SCADs have a long trail of congressional hearings, public
records, and academic research establishing the truth of the activities.
The suspected SCADs listed above have substantial evidence of covert
actions with countervailing deniability that tend to leave the facts
in dispute.2

The term “conspiracy
theory” is often used to denigrate and discredit inquiry into
the veracity of suspected SCADs. Labeling SCAD research as “conspiracy
theory” is an effective method of preventing ongoing investigations
from being reported in the corporate media and keep them outside
of broader public scrutiny. Psychologist Laurie Manwell, University
of Guelph, addresses the psychological advantage that SCAD actors
hold in the public sphere. Manwell, writing in American Behavioral
Scientist (Sage 2010) states, “research shows that people are
far less willing to examine information that disputes, rather than
confirms, their beliefs . . . pre-existing beliefs can interfere
with SCADs inquiry, especially in regards to September 11, 2001.”3

Professor Steven
Hoffman, visiting scholar at the University of Buffalo, recently
acknowledged this phenomenon in a study “There Must Be a Reason:
Osama, Saddam and Inferred Justification.” Hoffman concluded,
“Our data shows substantial support for a cognitive theory
known as ‘motivated reasoning,’ which suggests that rather
than search rationally for information that either confirms or disconfirms
a particular belief, people actually seek out information that confirms
what they already believe. In fact, for the most part people completely
ignore contrary information.”4

Sometimes even
new academic research goes largely unreported when the work contradicts
prevailing understandings of recent historical events. A specific
case of unreported academic research is the peer-reviewed journal
article from Open Chemical Physics Journal (Volume 2, 2009), entitled
“Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust for the 9/11
World Trade Center Catastrophe.” In the abstract the authors
write, “We have discovered distinctive red/gray chips in all
the samples. These red/gray chips show marked similarities in all
four samples. The properties of these chips were analyzed using
optical microscopy, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), X-ray energy
dispersive spectroscopy (XEDS), and differential scanning calorimetry
(DSC). The red portion of these chips is found to be an unreacted
thermitic material and highly energetic.” Thermite is a pyrotechnic
composition of a metal powder and a metal oxide which produces an
aluminothermic reaction known as a thermite reaction and is used
in controlled demolitions of buildings.5

National Medal
of Science recipient (1999) Professor Lynn Margulis from the Department
of Geosciences at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst is
one of many academics who supports further open investigative research
in the collapse of the World Trade Center towers. Margulis recently
wrote in Rock Creek Free Press, “all three buildings were destroyed
by carefully planned, orchestrated and executed controlled demolition.”6
Richard Gage, AIA, architect and founder of the non-profit Architects
& Engineers for 9/11 Truth, Inc. (AE911Truth), announced
a decisive milestone February 19, 2010 at a press conference in
San Francisco, CA. More than 1,000 architects and engineers worldwide
now support the call for a new investigation into the destruction
of the Twin Towers and Building 7 at the World Trade Center complex
on September 11, 2001.7

Credible scientific
evidence brings into question the possibility that some aspects
of the events of 9/11 involved State Crimes Against Democracy. Psychologically
this is a very hard concept for Americans to even consider. However,
ignoring the issue in the context of multiple proven SCADs since
World War II seems far more dangerous for democracy than the consequences
of future scientific inquiry and transparent, fact-based investigative
reporting. Anything short of complete, open discourse based on all
the evidence about these critical issues in our society relating
to the possible continuation of SCADs is simply a matter of censorship.8

Notes

  1. Lance deHaven-Smith,
    Beyond
    Conspiracy Theory: Patterns of High Crime in American Government
    ,”
    American Behavioral Scientist, Vol. 53, No. 6, (February, 2010):
    pp. 795–825. For more studies on SCADs and related issues see
    all articles for American Behavioral Scientist, Sage publications,
    Vol. 53, No. 6, (February, 2010).

    For more
    background reading on this subject with specifics on the controversial
    cases mentioned in this paragraph, see the following scholarly
    works: Robert Abele, The Anatomy of a Deception: A Reconstruction
    and Analysis of the Decision to Invade Iraq (New York: University
    Press of America, 2010); Bob Coen and Eric Nadler, Dead Silence:
    Fear and Terror on the Anthrax Trail (Berkeley, CA: Counterpoint,
    2009); Daniel Ellsberg, Secrets: A Memoir of Vietnam and
    the Pentagon Papers (New York: Viking Adult, 2002); Steve
    Freeman and Joel Bleifuss, Was the 2004 Election Stolen?
    Exit Polls, Election Fraud, and the Official Count (New
    York: Seven Stories Press, 2006); Robert Griffith, The Politics
    of Fear: Joseph R. McCarthy and the Senate (Amherst, MA:
    University of Massachusetts Press, 1987); David Ray Griffin,
    The Mysterious Collapse of World Trade Center 7: Why the
    Final Official Report About 9/11 Is Unscientific and False
    (New York: Olive Branch press, 2008); Mark Crispin Miller, Loser
    Take All: Election Fraud and the Subversion of Democracy, 2000–2008
    (New York: Ig Publishing, 2008); Kenneth O’Reilly, Hoover
    and the Un-Americans: The FBI, HUAC, and the Red Menace
    (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1983); Robert Parry,
    Trick or Treason: The October Surprise Mystery (New York:
    Sheridan Square Press, 1993); William Pepper, An Act of State:
    The Execution of Marin Luther King (Updated) (New York:
    Verso, 2008); Sheldon Rampton and John Stauber, Weapons of
    Mass Deception: The Uses of Propaganda in Bush’s War on Iraq
    (New York: Tarcher and Penguin, 2003); selected works of Peter
    Dale Scott, including Deep Politics and the Death of JFK
    (1993, 1996), Drugs Oil and War (Lanham, MD: Rowman and
    Littlefield, March 2003), The Road to 9/11 (Berkeley:
    University of California Press, 2007), and The War Conspiracy:
    JFK, 9/11, and the Deep Politics of War (Ipswich, MA: Mary
    Ferrell Foundation Press, 2008); Norman Solomon, War Made
    Easy: How Presidents and Pundits Keep Spinning Us to Death
    (New Jersey: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 2005); Lawrence Walsh,
    Firewall: The Iran-Contra Conspiracy and Cover-up (New
    York: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc., 1997); Gary Webb, Dark
    Alliance: The CIA, The Contras, and the Crack Cocaine Explosion
    (New York: Seven Stories Press, 2nd Edition, 2003);

  2. Ibid.

  3. American
    Behavioral Scientist, Sage publications, February, 2010,
    Vol. 53, No. 6. Specifically, see Laurie A. Manwell, “In
    Denial of Democracy: Social Psychological Implications for Public
    Discourse on State Crimes Against Democracy Post-9/11
    ,”
    American Behavioral Scientist, Vol. 53, No. 6, (February,
    2010): pp. 848–884.

  4. How
    We Support Our False Beliefs
    ,” Science Daily
    (Aug. 23, 2009). For the full study see Steven Hoffman, Ph.D.,
    et al., "There Must Be a Reason: Osama, Saddam and Inferred
    Justification," Sociological Inquiry, Volume 79
    Issue 2, (2009): pp. 142–162.

  5. Niels H.
    Harrit, Jeffrey Farrer, Steven E. Jones, Kevin R. Ryan, Frank
    M. Legge, Daniel Farnsworth, Gregg Roberts, James R. Gourley,
    Bradley R. Larsen, "Active
    Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade
    Center Catastrophe
    ," Open Chemical Physics Journal,
    Vol. 2 (April 3, 2009): 7–31.

  6. Lynn Margulis,
    Two
    Hit, Three Down, the Biggest Lie
    ,” Rock Creek Press,
    February 2010, Vol. 4, No. 2, p. 6.

  7. Richard
    Gage, AIA, Architects
    and Engineers for 911 Truth, Press Conference
    , February
    19th, 2010, SF, CA. See the Conference
    announcement video.

  8. For more
    on issues of media censorship see Peter Phillips and Mickey
    Huff, eds., Censored 2010 (New York: Seven Stories Press,
    2009).

This originally
appeared on Global Research.

March
8, 2010

Peter Phillips
is professor of sociology at Sonoma State University, President
of Media Freedom Foundation/Project Censored, former director of
Project Censored,
and coeditor of Censored 2010. Mickey Huff is associate professor
of history at Diablo Valley College, Director of Project Censored/Media
Freedom Foundation, and co-editor of Censored 2010.

Email Print
FacebookTwitterShare
  • LRC Blog

  • Podcasts