Zahir Ebrahim’s Response to Chris Hedges’ amalgam of half-truths ‘A Decade After 9/11: We Are What We Loathe’

Response to Chris Hedges’ amalgam of half-truths ‘A Decade After 9/11: We Are What We Loathe’

Zahir Ebrahim | Project

September 13, 2011 | Revised September 17, 2011

Our brutality and triumphalism, the byproducts of nationalism and our infantile pride, revived the jihadist movement. We became the radical Islamist movement’s most effective recruiting tool. We descended to its barbarity. We became terrorists too. The sad legacy of 9/11 is that the assholes, on each side, won.” — Chris Hedges,, September 11, 2011, A Decade After 9/11: We Are What We Loathe

What rubbish. I have been convinced for a long time that prominent dissent-artists like Chris Hedges are part of the problem. Why? Because people like him continually lend credence to something called “Islamist movement” and its “most effective recruiting tool.”

With Chris Hedges award-winning brand-name, all websites publish him, including which incidentally has never published any submission of my original writing that I have ever submitted to them. With his brand-name, Chris Hedges has continually manufactured dissent ( ) since 9/11 while retaining the core-lies and core-axioms of empire.

Thus, while decrying “Our brutality and triumphalism”, he manages to lend credence to its counter-insurgency operations ( ) against “the jihadist movement” as something existential rather than diabolically manufactured, lamenting: “The sad legacy of 9/11 is that the assholes, on each side, won.”

One side Chris Hedges discloses as: “Our brutality and triumphalism”. That is the truth. Which is the other side? According to Chris Hedges, it is “the radical Islamist movement”! That is a full lie. Together it constitutes a half-truth for perception management. As per a Jewish proverb, a half-truth is a full lie!

The journalist par excellence, Mr. Chris Hedges, in his full lie, did not state the empirical fact that the Western oligarchy is using “Our brutality and triumphalism” to usher in one-world Government by inventing both sides of the Hegelian Dialectic. This fabrication is subsequently openly used to justify global governance – even the Financial Times ( ) is calling for it using the Hegelian Dialectic as the most natural justification, and both empiricism and the EU president coldly confirming it.

Perhaps Chris Hedges is only blind? After all, only morons, the deaf, the dumb, and the mute win prizes and accolades from empire… right?


Empire also fabricates dissent-chiefs to lead the dissentstream just as much as they fabricate pontiffs to lead psyops dissemination to the mainstream. The are both merely the contrasting tunes of the Mighty Wurlitzer ( ). It is the Mighty Wurlitzer that spins the yarn that 9/11 was an invasion from abroad reinforcing the core-axioms of the Pentagon, the White House, and the Western State Allies in the ‘War on Terror’, that there is some natural reality to “militant Islam” which attacked America. While echoing that core-lie, the dissent is the blowback mantra, and the bold admission of reactionary excesses that because of “Our brutality and triumphalism, the byproducts of nationalism and our infantile pride”, “We [have] became terrorists too”.

That show of conscience collects many conscionable people in the society around them who also object to “Our brutality and triumphalism”. It is empire which lends these collection-agents respectability and credibility.

Indeed, the reactionary excesses of the sole superpower leading to domestic police-state and international barbarism, is the foundational mantra of virtually all respectable Western dissent. I.e., dissent which is officially anointed and not dismissed outright as ‘conspiracy theory‘ ( ). In the tightly controlled Left–Right discourse space, it is deemed high-minded scholarship to challenge these reactionary excesses of the sole superpower and to lay them at the doorstep of short-sighted escalation of chauvinistic foreign policies fueled by the war-profiteering motives of its military-industrial complex.

Virtually one hundred percent of what is deemed respectable Western dissent espouses this foundational axiom. It works well because it draws upon selective empiricism couched in omissions to demonstrate its veracity. But a half-truth is still only a full lie. That full lie works like this:

The greatest triumphs of propaganda have been accomplished, not by doing something, but by refraining from doing. Great is truth, but still greater, from a practical point of view, is silence about truth. By simply not mentioning certain subjects, by lowering what Mr. Churchill calls an “iron curtain” between the masses and such facts or arguments as the local political bosses regard as undesirable, totalitarian propagandists have influenced opinion much more effectively than they could have done by the most eloquent denunciations, the most compelling of logical rebuttals. But silence is not enough. If persecution, liquidation and the other symptoms of social friction are to be avoided, the positive sides of propaganda must be made as effective as the negative.’ — Aldous Huxley, Preface (circa 1946) to Brave New World, 1931, Harper, pg. 11

Both sides of propaganda are thus put into effect. The mainstream chiefs enact the big lie and repeat it endlessly for the positive side of propaganda. The dissent-chief enact the negative side of propaganda by calculated omission of certain subjects, and by omitting to draw logical conclusions from them because they no longer have to — the facts have been omitted from the “respectable” discourse space altogether. It is wonderful how this is used to provide the illusion of the free press and free society by both the mainstream press and the so called alternate press:

The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum – even encourage the more critical and dissident views. That gives people the sense that there’s free thinking going on, while all the time the presuppositions of the system are being reinforced by the limits put on the range of the debate.” — Noam Chomsky

This is exactly the same controlled-dissent genre of lauded pontiffs of dissentstream spanning the gamut from Messrs. Ron Paul ( ) to Noam Chomsky himself ( ) et. al. on the Left-Liberal-Libertarian nexus, to Foxnews-Right-wing-Religion-Intelligence-State-worship-Patriotism nexus. I am not sure which compartment Francis Boyle ( ) falls into but it is just as systemic there as elsewhere.

I invite Truthdig to publish the examination referenced below written by a Muslim, yours truly, belonging to the ‘untermensch’ civilization bearing the full brunt of Chris Hedges’ admission that “We became terrorists too,” and “We Are What We Loathe”.

Such banal statements can perhaps win Mr. Hedges multiple Pulitzer prizes for their profundity — precisely because these neither inform nor educate to the degree necessary for unraveling the entire Hegelian Dialectic, lest it spawn a real resistance movement with teeth singularly focussed on the puppetmasters orchestrating the “clash of civilizations”. This style of dissent-lite only enables introducing and sustaining beneficial cognitive diversity for the purpose of defocussing the energies of conscionable peoples – its primary objective – until fait accompli.

This same learned journalist, and his other confreres in the news media, academe and think-tanks, will be writing all about it in the one-world government and laughing their way to more accolades for their ex post facto brilliance. This is the quid pro quo offered by history’s actors to the scribes for playing along with platitudes and inconsequential punditry:

We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality — judiciously, as you will — we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.’ — Senior Bush Advisor, The New York Times, October 17, 2004

The real sad legacy of 9/11 is the matrix which intelligent people like Chris Hedges et. al., have woven to keep the American public perpetual prisoners of the cave.

While it is true that the martial military-industrial culture created in the United States can superficially be characterized by “War Is a Force that Gives Us Meaning”, that meaning is neither accorded by its peoples, nor by the unnatural puppetshows they are forced to endure from body-bags to bankruptcies, but enforced upon America by its ruling oligarchy which profits from the mayhem enroute to accomplishing their global governance. The dissent which echoes the axioms of empire is working for the same interests.

Here is a link to my article which takes a forensic look into the Dynamics of Mantra Creation: Islamofascism, to demonstrate the villainous half-truth and outright deception embedded in Chris Hedges’ manipulative narrative:

Hijacking the word ‘Islam’ for Mantra Creation

Or more in-depth deconstruction:

Anatomy and Architecture of Modern Propaganda Techniques for Psychological Warfare

I hope that minimally at least, the same websites will publish my forensic counterpoint analysis in response to this emotional fluff piece they have put up on the tenth anniversary of 9/11 so that their vaunted pontiffs like Chris Hedges, if genuinely misled themselves, will become more informed and stop unwittingly mis-informing other people. That’s a stretch of course — for how can an award winning NYT reporter be misled on any matter? Surely the awards aren’t for “lowering what Mr. Churchill calls an “iron curtain” between the masses and such facts or arguments as the local political bosses regard as undesirable”? And the world wonders why Americans are the most ignorant peoples on earth! These prisoners of the cave can perhaps do with a little bit less protection by the guardian angels of high-morality who decide for them what’s fit to print and what isn’t. Only the New York Times admits to it openly — all else are damn liars and hypocrites who do the same under the pretense of freedom of the press. I am sure they also sleep holily in bed. (Reference to Macbeth 5:1:47-49: ‘Yet I have known those which have walked in their sleep who have died holily in their beds.’)

Finally, I hope Chris Hedges will offer a riposte other than his characteristic silence to my analysis if I am mistaken. He had previously replied with the same eloquent exuberance for this challenge: Letter to Editor: Chris Hedges omits key truths in ‘It’s Not Going to Be OK’ February 04, 2009.

Thank you.

Source URL:

Mirror URL:

Source PDF:

The author, an ordinary researcher and writer on contemporary geopolitics, a minor justice activist, grew up in Pakistan, studied EECS at MIT, engineered for a while in high-tech Silicon Valley ( ), and retired early to pursue other responsible interests. His maiden 2003 book was rejected by numerous publishers and can be read on the web at He may be reached at Verbatim reproduction license at

Last updated 09/17/2011 16:00:05 1904

Response to Chris Hedges’ amalgam of half-truths ‘A Decade After 9/11: We Are What We Loathe’ By Zahir Ebrahim