What’s that got to do with 9-11? Good question.
It’s our view that the chief vulnerability of the White House-controlled juggernaut is 9-11.
This view was reified after attending the International Inquiry into 9-11 (San Francisco, March 26-28).
At his April 13 2004 press conference, George Bush again linked Iraq with 9-11: “…the lesson of September the 11th is, when this nation sees a threat, a gathering threat, we’ve got to deal with it. We can no longer hope that oceans protect us from harm. Every threat we must take seriously. Saddam Hussein was a threat…”
And again, from Bush: “…it didn’t take me long to put us on a war footing. And we’ve been on a war footing ever since. The lessons of 9-11 that I – one lesson was, we must deal with gathering threats. And that’s part of the reason I dealt with Iraq the way I did.”
They attacked us first is the mantra. Bush can spin on deliriously pathological, as long as he and his handlers can keep that first lie going: they attacked us first, Osama, al-Qaida…
They attacked us first. “We’re at war. Iraq is a part of the war on terror. It is not the war on terror; it is a theater in the war on terror. And it’s essential that we win this battle in the war on terror. By winning this battle, it will make other victories more certain in the war against the terrorist.” (Bush, April 13, 2004)
The whole ball of obfuscation and lies is predicated on sustaining the big one: they attacked us first.
No kid wants to believe their father is a criminal, observes Eric Hufschmid, trying to find an analogy to explain the nation’s denial about 9-11. Hufschmid, one of the San Francisco 9-11 speakers and author of Painful Deceptions/Painful Illusions (video and book) characterizes the USA as the “Un-informed Sheeple of America.” Another analogy: sheep are controlled by dogs; people are controlled by criticism. People accept being lied to so as not to be isolated from the crowd. Exposure of the egregious crime of 9-11 offers the potential to break the control, maybe.
Ellen Mariani, wife of 9-11 victim, with her attorney, former Pennsylvania deputy attorney general, Phil Berg (www.911forthetruth.com), both Inquiry speakers, outlined their civil RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) action against President Bush and other high level members of his administration: based upon the administration’s prior knowledge of 9-11; knowingly failing to act, prevent or warn of 9-11; and the ongoing obstruction of justice by covering up the truth of 9-11. RICO, notes Berg, “…was created to prosecute the mob. Our position is that there is a mob in the White House and we have to do something about it.”
Mike Ruppert, former LAPD narcotics investigator, whistleblower, and 9-11 Inquiry keynote speaker outlined his strategy regarding exposing and bringing the perps to justice: “…you take the statements made by the suspect, you prove them to be lies—and that becomes admissible in court and then any John Q. Citizen on the street can understand that. We have to secure the general public’s understanding that the US government lied. First.”
Bruce Gagnon who heads the Portland Maine-based Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space (12th annual conference April 23-25, 2004), was also a key speaker at the 9-11 conference. Gagnon outlined depths to which German Nazis penetrated the CIA, NASA and the weapons and space programs. See Operation Paperclip (www.space4peace.org)
Gagnon noted how easily presidential candidate Gore went down, without a fight, even though he’d clearly been cheated of the presidency, indicating his loyalty to the system rather than any obligation to the US or its people.
Texas author Jim Marrs (Inside Job) suggested that Bush in the White House was necessary if the 9-11 and post-9-11 scenario was the same (and Marrs thinks it would have been). The conservatives would have put up a bigger fuss against expansionism and “foreign entanglements.” Better to have their guy. It’s confused them. Also, says the Texan, they’re hornswoggled by religion in the Bible Belt, sanctioning “some of the most unchristian things I’ve ever seen.”
Nafeez M. Ahmed, from London, is the author of The War On Freedom (How and Why America was Attacked Sept. 11, 2001) published in 2002. In his San Francisco talk, Ahmed discussed the findings of his recent book, Behind the War on Terror. Ahmed’s work is featured prominently, along with Michel Chossudovsky’s (a keynote speaker in the upcoming Toronto inquiry) in the very important wrap-up book, The New Pearl Harbor (Disturbing Questions about the Bush Administration and 9/11) by David Ray Griffin (prof. of philosophy of religion, Claremont School of Theology).
Those following critically the 9-11 story will recognize many of the other speakers in San Francisco (Barrie Zwicker, Webster Tarpley, Ralph Schoenman, Daniel Hopsicker, Gray Brechin et al). To most, though, these people who challenge the official story are off the radar. Their speeches and/or interviews are posted on www.snowshoefilms.com
For further information on the May 25-30, 2004 Inquiry (phase two), see www.911inquiry.org and www.globalresearch.ca
The events of September 11, 2001 constitutes the greatest criminal act in US history. The attack provided the pretext to launch two “wars,” two pre-emptive nation-destroying attacks -- on Afghanistan and Iraq. Genocide upon genocide. Endless genocide…