|
|
– Conspiracy theories: George W. Bush a terrorist? |
|
|
|
 9/11 and conspiracy theories
Why do doubts surround the official investigations into the events of 9/11? For one thing, several major questions in the past have only revealed partial truths. Beyond this, major historic events always provide scope for speculation. President John F. Kennedy, assassinated by a lone gunman? Impossible! There must be more to it. The 9/11 attacks on the United States? Allegedly perpetrated by a bunch of Arabs with box cutters and rudimentary flight training. According to this logic, President Bush and Vice President Cheney exposed America to attack in order to justify the war plans they were hatching. They had missiles fired at the Pentagon, arranged for the World Trade Center to be dynamited, and ordered UA 93 to be shot down. Beyond the fact that most conspiracy theories aren’t backed up by the evidence, simple logic can also be used to debunk them. To pull off such a staggering operation, an army of the complicity would be required: pilots, demolition experts, soldiers and air traffic controllers. With so many co-conspirators, one of them surely would have talked by now. (Source: Der Spiegel Online 2006)
Whatever the validity of these conspiracy theories according to which the White House itself sponsored the attacks of September 11, 2001, they highlight the immensity of the crisis of confidence which is affecting political institutions.
It is the complete inversion of the official discourse, a radical doubt which strikes their credibility at its root. Far from being associated with the common good, these institutions are now associated with the play of obscure interests and the hidden pressures of groups that are no longer just corrupt, but criminal.
However, trust in institutions is a fundamental aspect of social capital, measured by civic engagement. The more conspiracy theories we see flourishing, the more we can be sure that social capital is being eroded.
|
|
|
