sibel’s chivalrous defender steps forward, more in sorrow than in anger, to slay the dragon, webster tarpley esq

Response to Webster Tarpley
Eric Draitser, Boiling Frogs Post, Apr 29 2013

It is sad that, despite all the news about Boston and Central Asia, the continued collapse of the US economy, the further mobilization of the police state apparatus, and so much more, that I have to write something in response to Webster Tarpley. However, that is precisely the situation I find myself in, having to respond to spurious charges and baseless demonization by someone who should spend more time in self-examination and less time attacking people out of pitiful jealousy. Let me first explain the connection I have had with Tarpley and the likely reasons for this attack. I first met Tarpley back in 2011 at an event here in New York City in commemoration of the 10th anniversary of 9/11. Though I had been following his work for a few years, this was the first time I had ever met him. He was impressed by my knowledge of a number of critical issues beyond simply 9/11 and false flag terror, so much so that I spent the rest of the event and the evening with him and another colleague of mine, having dinner and discussing political issues. At the time, this was a thrill for me as I had read Tarpley’s books, in particular his book “9/11: Synthetic Terror”. For me, I felt like I was forming a relationship with someone who I had only known through appearances on Infowars and his own radio show. However, due to circumstances, our working relationship took on an additional dimension within weeks as, no more than a few days after meeting Tarpley, Zuccotti Park was occupied by a bunch of kids, and the phenomenon of Occupy began in earnest. The historical significance of this moment was immediately apparent to me, and I rushed down to the park within days of the occupation. It was my first-hand knowledge with, and experience in, Occupy that prompted Tarpley to put me on his radio show, my first actual radio appearance. I was on his program a number of times in the weeks to come, providing detailed accounts of Occupy, the sabotage of the movement, and the continued efforts to push it in a positive direction. I realize now the fundamental flaw in such a strategy. These weekly appearances on Tarpley’s program, along with my teach-ins at Occupy and working relationship with other independent media, encouraged me to consider beginning my own show and website. Hence, StopImperialism.com and the Stop Imperialism podcast were born. It would be dishonest to say that my connection with Tarpley wasn’t at least part of my motivation.

As weeks became months, and I began to develop my own unique style and voice, Stop Imperialism took shape. It allowed me to explore issues that I felt no one was sufficiently covering, not the least of which being the true alternative media. In so doing, I began to realize just how much the likes of Tarpley refused to address, including issues of the environment, big agribusiness, pharmaceutical companies, and countless other issues. More on that later. I felt myself drifting further and further from the quasi-Larouchian polemics of Tarpley and toward a more nuanced understanding of critical issues. However, it was in attempting to work with Tarpley that his true colors were revealed and, simultaneously, my connection to him was permanently and inexorably severed. The kernel of the idea to develop an anti-austerity organization came from Dan A, a mutual friend of mine and Webster’s. However, for a number of reasons, Dan could not actually be part of building such an organization. So the responsibility passed on to me and I began to run with it. I thought and still do think it was a great idea and one whose time had come. In the midst of a farcical presidential election, with both parties preparing to ravage the sick, the elderly, minorities, and countless others who depend on vital social programs, I thought an anti-austerity coalition would be essential to building an effective resistance movement in the US. Frankly, it seems less of an idea and more of a mandate, as if history had left me no choice. Naturally, because the idea had originated in a conversation that included Webster, he was the first person I approached about this idea. I had only about 6 weeks between having the idea to put on an anti-austerity event in NYC and the event itself. In that time, I managed to secure a number of notable speakers/guests, secure the space in which to hold the event, and organize the efforts of a handful of others to accomplish all the small tasks that had to be done in order to pull off the event. In the meantime, Webster was busy preparing his plans for what I thought would be an anti-austerity movement, but which turned out to be little more than a Webster Tarpley movement, one that sought not to work with others and build a coalition, as I had planned, but that instead promoted little more than Tarpley’s political and economic program. In other words, a movement that I had never regarded as mine was now most certainly becoming his. Though the event went off without a hitch and was undoubtedly a success, I immediately withdrew membership in the organization I had created. There were a number of reasons for this, the most important being that I had no interest in being the grand marshal of the Tarpley parade. A few people asked me why I didn’t try to just reclaim control of the group. The only answer I can give is that when it comes to people like Tarpley, the less adversarial contact, the better. He and people like him thrive on that sort of thing and frankly speaking, I was too busy trying to build my own site and show to tie myself to that sinking ship.

So, I have not had any direct contact with Tarpley since the event last fall, nor do I plan on it in the near future. Now, I would here like to say that I do not write this article because I want to engage in a tit-for-tat about the issue with Tarpley or anyone else. Nor do I think Sibel or James needs me to defend them, as they can fight their own battles. I write this to explain what is undoubtedly one of the main motivating factors for Tarpley to attack Boiling Frogs. It’s his way of getting back at me for abandoning my own organization, which in his egomaniacal mind is an abandonment of him. The writers that BFP has “bought off” is a reference to me. Pity is all I feel when I read such nonsense. Now, since I’ve gone this far, I might as well lay it all out there. There are a number of topics about which I learned a great deal from Tarpley’s analysis over the years: the nature of false flag terror and how it’s carried out, speculation and derivatives and their impact on the global economy, as well as a handful of other key issues. However, his analysis is always partial at best, as he refuses to address any issues pertaining to the environment, which he regards as “anti-progress” Malthusianism. He never discusses the criminality of Monsanto and big Agribusiness or the pharmaceutical industry, for fear of being labeled “anti-science”. He devotes his undying love and affection for nuclear power, and in the wake of Fukushima, his only analysis was that the world needs more nuclear power. These are just a few of the countless examples that could be provided to illustrate his severely limited understanding of the real world.

Of course, no critical analysis of Tarpley would be complete without a very real questioning of his past. Tarpley spent more than 30 years in the movement of Lyndon Larouche. Anyone who knows anything about that organization should know that they are a proto-fascist, political personality cult that did little more than intimidate, attack, and otherwise subvert organizations and movements on the “Left” since at least the early 1970s. It should be said that to his credit, Tarpley claims to have left that organization in the late 1990s. However, an analysis of his political views as mentioned above demonstrates quite clearly that though he may have left that organization in name, he certainly has not in spirit. I have never had less fun writing an article than I have this one. I find it an utterly odious task to write something solely for the purposes of attacking someone else. However in these circumstances I think it is unavoidable, as I cannot sit idly by while someone verbally attacks people like Sibel and James, whom I love and have tremendous respect for. I make no secret about my own views, and particularly in terms of economic issues, I know that I stand in direct opposition to the “free market” ideology espoused by some of the contributors and subscribers to Boiling Frogs. Frankly, I am happy that this is the case, because just as I said when forming the anti-austerity group, the only way to win in this fight is to work together, build our alliances and mutual understanding, develop a common language and key principles, and fight the transnational imperial-corporate system. I am proud to stand with people like Sibel and James. I am sorry that Tarpley has chosen irrelevancy, but so be it. The struggle is only just starting.