Ebb Tide III: Use The Force, Jim!

In previous installments of "Ebb Tide" (here and here) we've been talking about manure disguised as reporting, and dodging the obvious questions that keep coming up: How low can it go? and Are we there yet?

Here's an undated press release from Newswire featuring quotes from James H. Fetzer [photo], which may go a long way toward answering both questions:

Internet Access to Iran Severed: Expert fear [sic] a Super Bowl attack

Multiple reports that internet cables connecting Iran to the rest of the world have been “cut” are raising suspicions in the minds of experts on 9/11 that something serious may be in the works. According to James H. Fetzer, founder of Scholars for 9/11 Truth, “Prior to 9/11, the FBI—our own FBI—shut down Arab Muslim web sites (whatreallyhappened.com/fbishsut) [sic]. Some of us fear that internet access may have been deliberately severed to isolate Iran and make it difficult to communicate in response to a ‘false flag’ attack in the United States, possibly during the Super Bowl, an attack upon Iran, or both.”

Did I miss a false flag attack during the Super Bowl? Must have happened during a commercial. I always mute them. Surprising not to see anything about it on the news, though. Damned liberal media!

That's not a link embedded in the text, so don't bother clicking it. And it's not a functional URL either, so don't paste it into your browser either. As a decoration, it is very attractive, though.

But I want to know: Who -- other than James H. Fetzer -- is (or was) worrying about an attack during the Super Bowl?

“False flag” attacks are conducted by a government against targets, including its own citizens, in order to blame an enemy and justify taking action against it. The BBC is among the sources reporting these cables have been cut (“New Cable Cut Compounds Net Woes,” http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7222536.stm), but others are easily accessible via google [sic]. One of these cables is near Alexandria, Egypt. Another is near Dubai. “That cables in the Mediterranean Sea and the Persial [sic] Gulf should happen to be severed in close proximity without a common cause defies belief,” observed Fetzer, a philosoper [sic] of science. “That there now appear to be four interruptions cannot be just a matter of chance. This has to be deliberate. The ominous question is, ‘Why?’”

The embedded URL in this paragraph worked as a link in the original. I couldn't bring myself to correct the spelling errors, though. And ominous questions abound, like: Who wrote this? and Can't he quote anybody but James H. Fetzer?

The thought did cross my mind -- briefly -- that perhaps there really is a Gulf called the Persial Gulf somewhere, so secret that only philosopers know about it. But what's a philosoper? Again, it could be a secret. How am I to know? I'm better off with easier questions, like "What's a Gulf?"

Happily, one of my questions is answered in the next paragraph, as the author finally quotes somebody other than Jim Fetzer. So who cares if it's a Star Wars character?

An analysis now making its way across the internet is being attributed to Sio Bibble [see photo -- WP], who concludes, “A communications disruption can mean only one thing—invasion.” On his scenario, American military radio chatter during the game could provide cover for other communications taking place. “03:00 and the troops are up, file into the mess to get a cup of coffee, sandwich and watch the game,” Bibble writes. “Meanwhile, an Israeli sub in the Gulf goes to Battle Station alert. The game starts, the troops go wild, they get pumped with adrenalin and into combative psychic. 10 minutes into the game, a micro-nuke goes off in the stadium. The aforementioned sub commander gets the signal and launches his surface to surface missiles at various Iranian sites and several American ships.”

“The sailors on the ships are stunned by what they see on the TV screen,” he continues, “then the Claxton horn goes off as American ships start taking hits. The ships go live, the Iranians go live. American sources declare a surprise Iranian attack as three American ships sink in the Gulf. The smoldering Super Bowl is blamed on Iran, Mom and Apple Pie need to be defended.”

The smoldering Super Bowl?? Ten minutes into the game? To cover an invasion of Iran?

This Sio Bibble doesn't sound very credible, even for a Star Wars character, does he?

It's time for a second opinion, and Guess who comes to the rescue?

According to Fetzer, no matter how fantastic this might sound to those who have never studied 9/11, it is an appealing alternative for an administration that has run out of options and whose leader is widely regarded by the American public as the worst president in history. It could reverse his standing at a single masterstroke.

“To most Americans, this is going to sound far-fetched,” said James H. Fetzer, founder of Scholars for 9/11 Truth (911scholars.org) and co-host of “The Dynamic Duo,” an internet talk show he shares with Kevin Barrett, a noted 9/11 activist. “Those of us who study 9/11 on the basis of the objective principles of scientific reasoning have found powerful proof that virtually everything we have been told about 9/11 by the administration is not true. The question has to be asked, ‘Who benefits?’ The result has been the loss of civil liberties, wars of aggression in violation of international law, the UN Charter, and the US Constitution. Bush signs statements to circumvent Congress and governs like a dictator.”

Billions upon billions has gone in the form of no-bid contracts to favored companies like Halliburton and Blackwater. “There are many studies that support the conclusion that 9/11 was ‘an inside job’,” Fetzer said. These include The New Pearl Harbor (2004), The 9/11 Commission Report (2005), and Debunking 9/11 Debunking (2007) by David Ray Griffin, Inside Job (2004) and The Terror Conspiracy (2006), by Jim Marrs, and 9/11 Synthetic Terror: Made in the USA (2005) by Webster Griffin Tarpley. “But if 9/11 was an inside job, as more and more evidence suggests,” Fetzer said, “it would be very naïve to ignore the very serious prospect of having a reprise to reverse the sagging fortunes of the Bush administration and to enhance support for hawkish candidates for president.”

... and so on.

Screw Loose Change says this is "beyond bizarre" and I certainly agree about that -- I'd agree even if I hadn't read all the way to the end of the piece, and found the name of the author: one James. H. Fetzer.

It couldn't be the same guy, could it?

I don't know what to say. I don't know what anyone could say.

What can you say about a former philosophy professor who can't spell "philosopher", a student of geopolitics who can't spell "Persian"? Where does this Fetzer character live? and do they not have spell checkers there yet?

What can you say about a writer of "news releases" who quotes -- without any hint of deliberate irony -- an internet poster using a name from Hollywood fiction; a self-described scholar who makes wild speculation while referring to himself and unnamed others as experts; an alleged student of the art of rhetoric who quotes himself extensively -- in the third person?

At least he has the good sense to quote somebody else once in a while.

I'm tempted to present The Stupidest or Most Deceitful Political Analysis of the Year Award right now and get it over with ... but there are other candidates who deserve to be recognized. And maybe one of them might win!! Sure is hard to imagine, though...