On the shores of the Conspiracy River

Right now the world is divided along the Conspiracy River: a fantasy narrative on one side; reality on the other. Each person today believes he or she stands on the shores of reality while the crazies mill around uselessly on the other side, but of course, some of them must be wrong. There is only one reality. There is only one truth.

Who is wrong? Is it the vast majority of Americans and their good friends the Israelis, all of whom have the powerful fantasy narrative corporate media machine projecting their righteousness 24x7 in high def hasbara tv? Or is it the other vast but invisible majority: all those who live outside the US/Israeli bubble -- whether geographically or intellectually?

There must be people moving within the establishment (government, intelligence, military, media, academia, think tanks, etc.) who chafe under the fantasy narrative. What do they do about that? Become a whistleblower? Think about becoming a whistleblower?

It would seem to me that a charismatic whistleblower would be very well received by people living on reality shores. A military person would be ideal, but it would not have to be a military person. And yet a military person could instantly appeal to the values of patriotism, which would theoretically be recognized by those on the fantasy narrative shore, as they believe they're also patriots, because they diligently support the fantasy narrative that tells them so. And they would say, "Hey, man? What the hell are you doing over there?!?"

But then, we have the example of Scott Ritter. He has charisma. He has experience. He has command of the facts. But his timing was off, and now some people will never consider him because he was waaaaay ahead of his time. For that they had to trash him on fantasy narrative shores (visit the way back machine, 2002).

First CNN had on its own news chief, Eason Jordan, who had just returned from Baghdad where he was bagging the rights to cover the war. (Imagine the ratings!) He dismissed Ritter with a "Well, Scott Ritter's chameleon-like behaviour has really bewildered a lot of people..." and a "Well, U.S. officials no longer give Scott Ritter much credibility..." The network followed up with more interviews vilifying Ritter, neither of which cut to the heart of the matter: Why declare war? On what grounds? At what cost? Ritter was characterized as "misguided," "disloyal" and "an apologist for and a defender of Saddam Hussein." By Monday, professional hairdo Paula Zahn told viewers Ritter had "drunk Saddam Hussein's Kool-Aid." Over on MSNBC, Curtis & Kuby co-host Curtis Sliwa compared him to "a sock puppet" who "oughta turn in his passport for an Iraqi one." But the nadir came later on CNN when makeup job Kyra Phillips interrogated him, implying that he was being paid by Iraq —and all but calling him a quisling.

As if people like Scott Ritter grow on trees, which they certainly do not. Can you imagine what the world might be like today if CNN and all the other paid shills didn't get away with the hatchet job on Scott Ritter? How many millions of people would be alive today? How many families would be happy today? What would our economy be like today if we had believed Scott Ritter instead of Eason Jordon, Paula Zahn, Curtis Sliwa and Kyra Phillips?

This is what people need to think about, because somebody is going to come forward again, and when the hatchets come out, who are you going to believe this time?