Around the time of September 11, we routinely get a rash of articles that attempt to mock people who do not accept the official version of the tragic events of that day in 2001.
Gwynne Dyer’s column in the Nelson Star of September 2 is a deliberate, rather ponderous, parody of a “conspiracy theory,” meant by association to mock all genuine alternative explanations to official stories.
Dyer sarcastically suggests that former US President George W. Bush was a “sleeper” agent for Iran and probably born in a Muslim country, because his invasion of Iraq indirectly benefited Iran. He thus sets up a straw man, an implausible fiction, for the reader to see through and snigger at.
Though Dyer does not even mention 9/11 or alternative theories about what happened that day. His clumsy parody will have disingenuously influenced some of his readers to regard 9/11 “truthers” as rather silly, paranoid people.
In another column elsewhere, Dyer tells us that the NATO bombing of Libya was done purely out of love, and it’s just cynical to suggest that Libya’s oil had anything to do with it. He supports this by saying the US didn’t get cheaper oil from Iraq after its invasion and occupation of that country, and so presumably didn‘t benefit as regards oil at all. Really? That simple, huh? The US and NATO are just a set of hopelessly philanthropic do-gooders, often sadly misunderstood, spreading happiness (by bombing) wherever they go with no thought of self-gain.
From all of the above, Dyer is clearly either clinically naïve or a military-industrial complex shill. As he has a string of degrees earned whilst in the military, I’d lean towards the latter explanation.
Keith Newberry
Slocan