|
|
The Truth About 9/11 Making the Case for Our Government's Involvement (Part III of III) One of the hardest parts of my job is to connect Iraq to the war on terror. – George W. Bush (183) THE CASE FOR COMPLICITY When one examines the physical evidence from the four jetliner crashes on 9/11 (Part I) and studies the posture and response of the Bush administration and the intelligence community, as well as the ownership and condition of the World Trade Center prior to 9/11 (Part II), one experiences a breakdown of the “Official Explanation” for the attacks of September 11, 2001. Moreover, a pattern emerges suggesting an alternate, even more sinister explanation (or several) for those events. For a swiftly growing community of “9/11 Truthers” this is sufficient to pin the blame squarely on President Bush, Vice President Cheney, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, and other officials for “causing” those events. But what precisely defines “complicity?” Did George and Dick plot the whole thing on a cocktail napkin over a couple of single-malt scotches late one night? Or did some ambitious cabal of administration “middle management” types take advantage of inside knowledge and facilitate the attacks under the noses of their unsuspecting superiors? Dr. David Ray Griffin, in his book, The New Pearl Harbor, (184) defines 9/11 complicity as a series of eight possible levels of involvement. They are, in order of seriousness: 1) Constructing a False Account. 2) Something Expected by Intelligence Agencies. 3) Specific Events Expected by Intelligence Agencies. 4) Intelligence Agencies Involved in Planning. 5) Pentagon Involved in Planning. 6) Something Expected by White House. 7) Specific Advance Knowledge by White House. 8) White House Involved in Planning. What all of this means, essentially, is that anything from “the administration altered the facts to cover its collective ass” to “George Bush himself pushed the button that activated the WTC demolition charges” falls under the definition of complicity. And conversely, for complicity not to apply all failures would have to have been incompetence. It should be noted that no member of the Bush administration has ever been fired for incompetence. Many, however, were rewarded. (185) But while many accept without hesitation that President Bush and members of his administration could have been complicit in the 9/11 attacks, many more have great difficulty accepting that the President of the United States could have knowingly caused or allowed the slaughter of thousands of innocent Americans, or even that he could be involved in or aware of such a secret, covert, underhanded operation as the attacks on 9/11. Perhaps these people confuse the Office of the President with its occupant, or perhaps they are blinded by such rhetoric as “anyone who disagrees with the President or his policies is unpatriotic and with the terrorists.” The fact is, in the history of the United States a number of Presidents and administrations have been willing to cause or allow the slaughter of innocent Americans to further their agendas. FALSE FLAG OPERATIONS “False flag” operations are defined as “covert operations conducted by governments, corporations, or other organizations, which are designed to appear as if they are being carried out by other entities.” (186) In its earliest form, wooden sailing ships literally flew false flags so that their illicit actions would be attributed to other countries. In many cases these were privateers – essentially pirates hired by sovereign nations to carry out covert attacks, after which the hiring government could disavow any knowledge of the pirates’ actions. False flag operations are still carried out today all over the world, except of course modern governments have become better at covering their tracks and hiding their involvement. Here is a short list of highly-suspicious incidents in America’s past which might and in several cases clearly do qualify as U.S. false flag operations: USS Maine, 1898: To this day it is not definitively known what caused the explosion in the forward ammunition magazines of the battleship Maine as she sat quietly in Havana Harbor on the evening of February 15, 1898. By the time the official inquiry was concluded on March 28, public opinion (fueled by inflammatory reports by newspaperman William Randolf Hearst and others) had already hardened against Spain and Cuba. (187) This despite the fact that Spanish officials quickly assisted in the rescue and care of the wounded, and Havana hosted a funeral procession for the 260 dead. (188) Nevertheless, President McKinley wasted no time taking advantage of the fresh outrage and starting the Spanish-American War, which ultimately gave the U.S. control of all the Spanish colonies in the Caribbean and the Pacific. Experts disagreed with the inquiry’s conclusion that a mine had exploded under the Maine’s bow, and more recent forensic analysis suggests that a spontaneous coal dust fire ignited the magazines – purely by accident. Pearl Harbor, 1941: Records show (although it is not widely publicized) that Franklin Delano Roosevelt knew well in advance of the impending Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941. (189) While FDR stated publicly and even campaigned with the promise of keeping American boys out of the war in Europe, his military and State Department privately urged a call to action. The problem was that 80 to 90% of Americans wanted nothing to do with the war. So Roosevelt moved the Pacific Fleet from California to Hawaii, created crippling economic sanctions against Japan, and quietly listened to intercepted and decoded messages. Yes, I said decoded. Since 1940, American cryptographers had been decoding Japan’s diplomatic and military communications and delivering them to the President. (190) Meanwhile Roosevelt’s FBI kept a quiet tail on a Japanese spy who was relaying the precise location of the ships in the harbor on an attack grid. The attack came, exactly as expected (and confirmed by intercepted Japanese timetables) killing 2,403 innocent Americans (191) and turning the tide of public opinion. FDR barely kept his campaign promise; he’d said he would not send our boys to fight in foreign lands “except in case of attack.” (192) Operation Northwoods, 1962: Thanks to the efforts of John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Review Board and a Freedom of Information Act filing, the public now has access to a formerly classified top secret report titled “Justification for US Military Intervention in Cuba,” code named “Operation Northwoods.” (193) This report, prepared by then-Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General L.L. Lemnitzer, stated, “World opinion, and the United Nations forum should be favorably affected by developing the international image of the Cuban government as rash and irresponsible, and as an alarming and unpredictable threat to the peace of the Western Hemisphere,” and “… the ultimate objective is overt military intervention ….” To this end, Lemnitzer proposed “A series of well coordinated incidents … to take place in and around Guantanamo to give the genuine appearance of being done by hostile Cuban forces.” Such “incidents” included (as quoted from the unclassified document): Land friendly Cubans in uniform “over-the-fence” to stage attack on base. Capture Cuban (friendly) saboteurs inside the base. Blow up ammunition inside the base; start fires. Sink ship near harbor entrance. Conduct funerals for mock-victims. We could develop a Communist Cuban terror campaign. … create an incident which will demonstrate convincingly that a Cuban aircraft has attacked and shot down a chartered civilian airliner enroute from the United States …. the duplicate would be substituted for the actual civil aircraft and would be loaded with the selected passengers, all boarded under carefully prepared aliases. The actual registered aircraft would be converted to a drone. … create an incident which will make it appear that Communist Cuban MIGs have destroyed a USAF aircraft over international waters in an unprovoked attack. At precisely the same time that the aircraft was presumably shot down a submarine or small surface craft would disburse F-101 parts, parachute, etc., at approximately 15 to 20 miles off the Cuban coast and depart. President John F. Kennedy rejected the proposal and fired Lemnitzer, (194) however the “Operation Northwoods” document remained on file for 40 years and available to anyone with the sufficient curiosity and clearance. USS Liberty, 1967: During the Six-Day War between Israel and the Arab states of Egypt, Jordan and Syria in June of 1967, the U.S. Navy Intelligence ship, USS Liberty was fired upon by unmarked Israeli fighter planes and torpedo boats. The Liberty was cruising international (neutral) waters with full flags flying, and suffered the greatest single loss of life by the U.S. Intelligence Community. (195) Both Israel and the U.S. launched immediate investigations and came to the same conclusion, that despite hours of reconnaissance by Israeli planes prior to the 75-minute attack, the Israelis somehow failed to see the American flag flying and the name USS Liberty stenciled prominently on her stern – mistaking her for an out-of-service Egyptian cargo ship. (196) Many dispute these conclusions, most notably the Liberty survivors themselves. They cite the following notable facts: When the defenseless Liberty radioed for help, two nearby aircraft carriers launched fighters. These were recalled by the White House. Survivors were ordered not to discuss the incident with anyone under penalty of court-martial. (197) There has never been a congressional investigation. In his book, Operation Cyanide: Why the Bombing of the USS Liberty Nearly Caused World War III, (198) Peter Hounam cites evidence that the attack on the Liberty was planned in advance as a pretext for the U.S. to enter the war; the Liberty was to sink with all hands, and in retaliation of an apparent Egyptian attack, President Johnson would launch nuclear-armed fighters to Cairo. The fighters were launched, but recalled at the last minute when it became obvious that the Liberty wasn’t going to sink and that witnesses had identified Israel as the attacker. (199) Iraqgate, 1980-90: When a popular uprising in Iran threatened to overthrow the pro-American Shah, the US saw its imperialistic domination of Middle East oil threatened. While seeking a way to overthrow the Iranian revolution, Saddam Hussein of Iraq volunteered. Thus began a bloody eight-year war during which time Washington (including George Bush senior) backed the Hussein regime by: (200) funneling huge supplies of arms to Iraq through Middle East allies, removing Iraq from the State Department’s list of countries that supported terrorism, sending Donald Rumsfeld to Baghdad to resume previously-severed diplomatic relations, providing economic and advanced military aide, shipping to Iraq biological and chemical materials, including anthrax and botulism toxins, awarding a contract to the Bechtel corporation to build a huge petrochemical plant in Iraq which would give Hussein the capacity to generate chemical weapons MIHOP VS. LIHOP Perhaps you have observed – as most people will – that some of the examples above could have been the case of our leaders simply taking advantage of a “convenient” occurrence to further an existing agenda. That certainly may have been the case in the sinking of the Maine. As for the attacks on Pearl Harbor and the Liberty, it is possible that if our government did not actually participate in the planning and execution of the attacks it certainly allowed the attacks to take place by suppressing advanced knowledge. This is what is known in conspiracy parlance as Let It Happen On Purpose (LIHOP) – as opposed to Made It Happen On Purpose (MIHOP), which is clearly the case in Operation Northwoods and Iraqgate. As for the attacks on September 11, 2001, the 9/11 Truth Movement is divided on whether they were a case of MIHOP or LIHOP – although the vast majority appear to embrace MIHOP. If after examining the data and considering implications you favor the theory that our government merely let the attacks occur but were not directly responsible for them, you are certainly not alone. However this hardly exonerates our leaders in this matter. If you review the eight possible levels of government complicity, above, you will see several instances where simply knowing something was coming and doing nothing about it falls squarely within the definition of complicity. And this exposé has demonstrated that our leader had ample warning and advance specific intelligence and did little or nothing to prevent it even when opportunities presented themselves. The case for complicity has been made. However there is one element missing from this argument which was present in all five examples of false flags presented above: the agenda. Also known as the “motive” In September of 2000, an independent group called The Project for the New American Century (PNAC) issued a report titled, “Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century.” (201) In this report, the contributors outlined a series steps or “missions” to be undertaken to ensure global military and economic dominance, including: fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars modernize current U.S. forces develop and deploy global missile defenses … to provide a secure basis for U.S. power projection around the world control the new “international commons” of space and “cyberspace,” and pave the way for the creation of a new military service – U.S. Space Forces – with the mission of space control increase defense spending … adding $15 billion to $20 billion to total defense spending annually The report concluded that, “the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor.” It should be noted that among the neo-conservative members and contributors to PNAC many became policy-makers involved directly with America’s military and foreign relations when the Supreme Court awarded the Presidency to George W. Bush in 2000. In particular, Elliott Abrams (Deputy National Security Advisor), Jeb Bush (brother to the President), Dick Cheney (Vice President), Eliot A. Cohen (Defense Policy Board Advisory Committee, Committee for the Liberation of Iraq), Steve Forbes (fourth most important political contributor in America (202)), Aaron Friedberg (Deputy Assistant for National Security Affairs and Director of Policy Planning), Frank Gaffney (president of the Center for Security Policy), Zalmay Khalilzad (U.S. Ambassador to Iraq), I. Lewis Libby (Chief of Staff and assistant for National Security Affairs to the Vice President; indicted by the Grand Jury), Norman Podhoretz (Council on Foreign Relations), Dan Quayle (Vice President to George Bush, Sr.), Peter W. Rodman (Assistant Secretary of Defense), Donald Rumsfeld (Secretary of Defense), and Paul Wolfowitz (Deputy Secretary of Defense, architect of the “Bush Doctrine”) are all founding members of PNAC, formed in 1997. (203) It seems unlikely that coincidence is the sole factor behind this cabal of neo-conservative men gaining such widespread power and influence over our nation’s defense and foreign relations. A careful examination of President Bush’s advisors and cabinet will clearly show that an inordinate number of them were recruited from the ranks of PNAC or had strong ties to the oil industry – or both. (204) The significance of the oil industry ties is that Afghanistan and Iraq have significant oil reserves or ties to oil. Afghanistan: Geographically, Afghanistan lies directly between Central Asian, where the oil is, and the Arabian Sea where tankers can load it. (205) Unocal has long tried to negotiate a pipeline through Afghanistan, but the radical Taliban has resisted. As early as July, 2001 the Bush Administration had plans to invade Afghanistan due to failing oil pipeline negotiations “by the middle of October at the latest,” before the snow started falling. (206) The U.S. began bombing Afghanistan right on schedule, on October 7. (207) Iraq: As Vice President Cheney has stated, “Iraq sits on top of 10 percent of the world's oil reserves. A very significant reserve, second only to Saudi Arabia.” (208) In fact, removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq has always been PNAC’s goal. (209) Even though it was known, or at least widely reported, that Osama bin Laden – the alleged mastermind of 9/11 – was hiding in Afghanistan, President Bush soon turned his full attention to Iraq, citing ties to bin Laden as the reason … then harboring terrorists … then weapons of mass destruction. But as Paul Wolfowitz of PNAC is quoted as saying, “For bureaucratic reasons we settled on one issue, weapons of mass destruction, because it was the one reason everyone could agree on.” (210) The current reason? According to President Bush, oil. (211) Did the Bush administration use 9/11 as a convenient excuse for their years of planning? Or did they manufacture their very own “new Pearl Harbor” to make those plans a reality? On the face of it such a distinction is difficult to make objectively. Sure, there is a lot of circumstantial evidence supporting the speculation that Bush and his oil/PNAC buddies cooked up 9/11 to jump-start their ambitious agenda, but isn’t their just as much evidence in support of the alleged real attackers – Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda? Let’s take a look. OSAMA BIN LADEN: DEAD OR ALIVE? In just over three hours from the time the first plane struck the North tower, CNN was already reporting that Washington had pinned the deed on Osama bin Laden. (212) But based on what possible intelligence, since it has been demonstrated Washington had shown not the slightest interest in bin Laden? Whatever evidence there might have been, our government never bothered to share it with the public, despite their promise to do so (see Part I). To be sure, bin Laden was #1 on the FBI’s Most Wanted list. But however much the FBI may have wanted him, the CIA was apparently not on the same page. According to reports, Osama bin Laden met with a CIA agent in July of 2001, while undergoing clandestine kidney treatment at the American Hospital in Dubai, United Arab Emirates. (213) Bin Laden checked into a military hospital in Pakistan for further treatments on September 10, 2001. By January, 2002, CNN’s medical correspondent, Dr. Sanjay Gupta, stated that bin Laden appeared to be in the final stages of renal failure, and would unlikely live a week if separated from his dialysis machine – which requires clean water, electricity and a sterile environment – and a team of specialists. (214) At the same time, Pakistan’s President, Pervez Musharraf opined that bin Laden was already dead, (215) and the Egyptian newspaper, al-Wafd reported on bin Laden’s funeral. (216) This last, of course, was never reported in the United States – despite the fact that it would have been perhaps the single most important story of the day, if not of the year. Something else not reported by the U.S. press was bin Laden’s immediate response to the terror attacks on 9/11 (from an interview conducted in Pakistan and published on September 28, 2001): I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States. As a Muslim, I try my best to avoid telling a lie. I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the killing of innocent women, children and other humans as an appreciable act. Islam strictly forbids causing harm to innocent women, children and other people. Whoever committed the act of 11 September are not the friends of the American people. I have already said that we are against the American system, not against its people, whereas in these attacks, the common American people have been killed. The United States should try to trace the perpetrators of these attacks within itself; the people who are a part of the U.S. system, but are dissenting against it. Or those who are working for some other system; persons who want to make the present century as a century of conflict between Islam and Christianity so that their own civilization, nation, country, or ideology could survive. (217) What the press did broadcast (on December 13) was the infamous bin Laden confession tape – allegedly recorded on November 9 and discovered in a house in Jalalabad, Afghanistan. (218) Why would such a recording be in a private home and not in the hands of the local press? And what do you imagine are the odds of accidentally (and conveniently) finding this quintessential piece of state’s evidence in a city with a population of over 100,000? Moreover, even a cursory examination of the man in the tape will reveal that it is not Osama bin Laden – the man on this tape is heavier, darker, and clearly in good health. Also, the man on this tape writes with his right hand, while bin Laden is known to be left-handed. (219) And the man on this tape wears a gold ring on his right hand, which is forbidden by Islamic law. (220) It is most interesting to note that when to weeks later al Jazeera television in Qatar broadcast an authentic videotape of Osama bin Laden – gaunt, pale, and partially paralyzed – which both contradicted the “confession tape” and reasserted what bin Laden said in his September, 2001 interview, the Bush administration responded by calling it “sick propaganda possibly designed to mask the fact the al-Qa'eda leader was already dead.” (221) And yet bin Laden tapes (audio only) continue to pop up just when the administration’s poll numbers need a boost or an important election looms. But America’s foremost bin Laden translator, Bruce Lawrence of Duke University, thinks all of the supposed bin Laden recordings since 9/11 are fake, based on careful comparison of dozens of authenticated pre-9/11 bin Laden speeches. (222) In Switzerland, the world’s leading experts in voice identification at Dalle Molle Institute for Perceptual Artificial Intelligence, IDIAP, claim a 95% certainty that voice on the bin Laden recording they analyzed was not Osama bin Laden. (223) Add to this the following facts: In 2005 the CIA officially closed “Alec Station,” the unit formed to hunt for bin Laden. (224) In fact President Bush himself has stated, “I don't know where [Osama bin Laden] is and I really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority.” (225) At least seven of the 19 alleged hijackers have been found to be still alive and well. (226) Aviations experts, such as former Air Force combat and commercial pilot, Russ Wittenberg, point out that no human pilot – and especially not a poorly-trained one – could possibly have maneuvered a Boeing 757 through a two-minute 7,000 foot descent and a 270° banked turn such as Flight 77 is alleged to have done. (227) Taken all together these facts (along with those presented in Parts I and II of this report) suggest quite forcefully that the “official” perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks were not the “actual” perpetrators. Which in turn reinforces the evidence that 9/11 was a false flag operation perpetrated by our own government or key members within our government. CALL TO ACTION What, then, is to be done with this evidence? Obviously, one cannot call up the White House and ask them to initiate a full investigation – even if they took your call they would tell you several have already been done. Arguing that those official investigations were somehow corrupt or woefully incomplete will at best fall on deaf ears and at worst label you a “conspiracy nut.” If a truly independent and thorough investigation is ever to be undertaken, it will most likely be the result of a public outcry. Already as many as one third of Americans polled say they believe our government was involved in the 9/11 attacks, but this number must grow to a majority. More people need to be shown the evidence and given the opportunity to develop an informed opinion. If you believe – as I do – that our government and its officials must be held accountable for their actions, spread the word. Share this article freely and widely. Conduct your own research and encourage others to do the same. The endnotes presented here make a good starting point; I encourage you to explore them yourself and draw your own conclusions from the evidence presented therein. Sites of interest include: Complete 9/11 Timeline By Paul Thompson – http://cooperativeresearch.org/project.jsp?project=911_project Journal of 9/11 Studies – http://journalof911studies.com/ 9/11 Wikipedia – http://911review.org/Wiki/index.html Physics 9/11 – http://www.physics911.net The 9/11 Comission Report – http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/index.htm 911 Review.org – http://911review.org Let's Roll 9/11 – http://www.letsroll911.org Questioning the 9/11 Attacks – http://killtown.911review.org/ 9/11 Truth Movement Source Watch – http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=9-11_Truth_Movement Comments to and requests of the author can be posted at his website, The Truth About 9/11 Research and Debate Center – groups.yahoo.com/group/truthabout911/
Thank you for reading.
For your reading pleasure you may download this PDF and pass it around. To get it go
hereTruth About 9/11 PDF
Notes: (183) http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/09/06/eveningnews/main1979106.shtml (184) http://www.interlinkbooks.com/BooksN/New_Pearl_Harbor.html (185) http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A63623-2004Dec14.html (186) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_flag (187) http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq71-1.htm (188) http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/events/spanam/events/maineskg.htm (189) http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=408 (190) http://www.thenewamerican.com/tna/2001/06-04-2001/vo17no12_facts.htm (191) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearl_harbor#December_7.2C_1941 (192) http://www.geocities.com/mark_willey/FDR_1940_Democratic_Convention.wav (193) http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/doc1.pdf (194) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods (195) http://home.cfl.rr.com/gidusko/liberty/ (196) http://www.ussliberty.org/ (197) http://home.cfl.rr.com/gidusko/liberty/ (198) http://home.cfl.rr.com/gidusko/texts/ocreview.txt (199) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Liberty_incident (200) http://www.greenleft.org.au/2002/506/27605 (201) http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf (202) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Forbes (203) http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm (204) http://archive.salon.com/tech/feature/2001/11/19/bush_oil/ (205) http://www.newhumanist.com/oil.html (206) http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/entity.jsp?entity=tom_simons (207) http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/context.jsp?item=a100701bombingbegins#a100701bombingbegins (208) http://www.911injured.org/Media/News/washpost091503.htm (209) http://zfacts.com/p/775.html (210) http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2003-05-30-wolfowitz-iraq_x.htm (211) http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/04/AR2006110401025.html (212) http://archive.salon.com/politics/feature/2001/09/11/bush/ (213) http://uniorb.com/RCHECK/deadbinladen.htm (214) http://archives.cnn.com/2002/HEALTH/01/21/gupta.otsc/index.html (215) http://archives.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiapcf/south/01/19/gen.musharraf.binladen.1.19/index.html (216) http://www.welfarestate.com/binladen/funeral/ (217) http://www.public-action.com/911/oblintrv.html (218) http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/osamatape.html (219) http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/terrorists/terbinladen.htm (220) http://www.islamonline.com/cgi-bin/news_service/fatwah_story.asp?service_id=297 (221) http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/12/28/wbin28.xml (222) http://www.physics911.net/kevinbarrett.htm (223) http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/2526309.stm (224) http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/CIA_closes_down_unit_that_was_0703.html (225) http://www.pbs.org/weta/washingtonweek/voices/200304/0428span.html (226) http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/hijackers.html (227) http://www.lewisnews.com/article.asp?ID=106623
John Berkowitz is a Publications Director, graphic designer, writer, and independent
|
|
