- An organic reconsideration of US history and major "conspiracy
theories" of the past 40 years, including those pertaining to the
9-11 attack, and how they shed light on America's present drift into fascism.
- What makes you think you actually KNOW what happened
on those planes? All four were obliterated, along with everyone on board,
remember? No crime scene, no direct evidence, no recognizable remains,
no witnesses whatsoever -- it's a blank canvas. How convenient for any
party intent on launching a new era of global imperialism, and willing
to spin this tragedy into a viable excuse. Indeed, all of the attack's
consequences are far better explained by this agenda than by Bin Laden's
purported death wish. Those presuming to examine this matter, i.e. ALL
OF US, need to recognize that such trickery is a timeless specialty of
- And yet from that very day we have allowed the government-media
complex to focus all attention on one rather thin explanation: Crazy Arabs
did it! George W. Bush and his cabinet have made it known to us, in the
most arrogant terms, that they will brook no discussion of other possibilities
-- an edict most Americans, in their desperation to believe in this man,
seem to have embraced. The Bush Administration even withholds its "proof"
of Al Qa'eda's guilt; clearly, it considers mere citizens too unimportant
to require full explanations, and once again, we're just rolling over and
- The phrases 'spiritually broken' and 'morally adrift'
come to mind...
- Until the full case against Al Qa'eda is made available
for public review, we have absolutely no assurance that this "proof"
isn't exactly like the "proof" of Iraq's weapons programs --
i.e., a big fat lie from top to bottom. On these terms, wholesale acceptance
of the hijacker scenario will continue to be what it has always been: a
pathetic display of blind faith in this administration's utterances, and
in those of its media accomplices. At present, it is astonishing that anyone
places faith of any kind in either party: by means of the "WMD"
debacle, both have proven themselves amoral, duplicitous, and utterly devoid
of humanity. Indeed, why do we give them so much as a moment of our attention?
No one with a lick of sense would do this.
- A rigorous civilian investigation of 9-11 would help
resolve such doubts. If Bush and the rest were standing on firm ground,
they would fully support such a thing. Instead, they have worked to thwart
both its formation and its progress, using every resource within their
reach. Some time last year, they seem to have realized they were only fueling
suspicions this way, so Bush grudgingly approved an "independent"
investigation. The arrogance of this bunch is so disabling, however, that
they actually damaged their credibility even further by naming Henry Kissinger
to lead it. This is a man whose dedication to "US interests"
verges on homicidal psychosis (see his treatment of Cambodians 1970, Chileans
1973, East Timorese and Kurds 1975, MUCH more). He could only be expected
to skew this investigation accordingly, i. e., to omit and cover up any
issue not conducive to empire building. Ironically, even Henry had the
sense to admit he was an inappropriate choice, thus resigning from this
duty, whereupon Bush immediately returned to his original tactic of stonewalling
(1). Could the man possibly have something to hide?
- To appreciate the ugliest possibilities of the 9-11 attack,
one must first become aware of the continuous practice of such manipulations
by the entire progression of American politicians. The need to cultivate
this awareness is itself an enigma: if you have the honesty to see this
pattern at all, its full enormity, emerging over time, will at some point
cause your previous ignorance to amaze you. Imagine living your entire
life with an 800-pound gorilla, then realizing one day it's not a sofa,
after all. At the same time, finding this enlightenment is challenging,
because the relevant facts are usually withheld from the public for decades,
seldom appearing in mainstream discourse even after they become common
knowledge -- not because of some grand conspiracy, but because legions
of 'America Firsters,' including most of the famous and powerful, simply
don't want to hear it. The telling of these facts is an affront to their
most cherished political assumptions. Invariably, they respond with hostile
apologetics, ranging from simple denial and ridicule to the claim that
such incidents are random and unrelated "mistakes." That they
can sincerely believe this 'unrelated' claim is remarkable, given the way
it crushes into dust under any burden of historical proof: America's state
crimes have been ethically monstrous, vast in both scale and number, unilateral
in their aggression, virtually uninterrupted in their chronology, and very
coherent in both motive and method. Certain themes just keep popping up:
- 1) Greed, particularly for territory;
- 2) Supremacism, driven only partly by race, perhaps more
so by delusions of national grandeur allowed to ramify without limit;
- 3) An enthusiasm for "total war" -- i. e.,
the indiscriminate butchery of entire populations. This seems most likely
to happen when "strategic" territories, resources, or victories
are at stake. That is, when those in authority feel they "must win,"
and so discard principle to whatever extent is necessary;
- 4) The systemic corruption and antidemocratic functioning
of every level of American government, made abundantly clear by its relations
with sworn enemies of the public interest, namely corporations;
- 5) The bid for global empire that has all but defined
the American agenda since W.W.II, in flagrant violation of democratic principle.
- This last "US interest," discussed openly by
flacks and shills only since 9-11 suspended all moral judgment on such
matters, actually represents the driving passion of our ruling elite, going
all the way back to the Revolution. Indeed, grasping the means of power,
beginning with sovereign domain, was their main motive for pursuing revolution
at all. Starting then and continuing ever since, they have whipped the
people up to support their warped appetites, even as they have misrepresented
them spectacularly. EVERY SINGLE TIME we as a people have committed to
a war of expansion, we have been duped into doing so by their twin handservants,
American politics and American media:
- 1776 to 1890 - Innumerable 'Indian Wars'
- In which the western frontier was pushed through the
territories of one Indian confederation after another, all the way to the
Pacific. An early and definitive example is George Washington's post-revolutionary
conquest of the Ohio Valley, where the Washington Family held deeds to
immense tracts of prime real estate never actually ceded by the Indians.
The lore that George was a "surveyor" is a populist distortion;
he was no blue collar grunt, laying out property lines to earn a living.
He was in fact the most ambitious of an elite family of 'land speculators'
-- the colonial equivalent of venture capitalists -- and his toils were
in the service of his own family fortune. Already one of the richest people
in post-revolutionary America, he was determined to get even richer through
the sale of his Ohio holdings, and wasn't about to be stopped by 'two-legged
vermin' like the Shawnees and Miamis. To this end, he abused his dominance
of the early federal government, arranging for Revolutionary War veterans
(a battle-hardened militia) to be compensated with "land warrants"
deep in Ohio's wilderness, far beyond his own holdings. He also encouraged
the issuance of large bounties, equivalent to several months' income, for
Indian scalps along the upper Ohio River. These were essentially open murder
contracts that targeted ALL Indians, regardless of age, gender, or tribal
affiliation. By this means, genocide was openly subsidized for decades
wherever intact Indian cultures presented an obstacle to "progress."
Primitive as media was, its role in all this was crude but sufficient:
posting the bounties while inflaming the settlers' hatred with tales of
Indian atrocities, real and imagined. In the Ohio Territory, these tactics
rapidly progressed to open war, orchestrated by Washington against Tecumseh's
Shawnee Confederation, and then to the total extermination and westward
displacement of the Ohio tribes (2).
- 1846 to 1848 - The Mexican War
- Beginning in 1818, when the Oregon Territory was acquired,
American imperialists developed an intense interest in California. Simply
adding it piecemeal to their territorial inventory wouldn't have worked,
however: it was too isolated, too defensible by the Mexicans. To take California,
all of northern Mexico -- what is now California, Nevada, Utah, Arizona,
New Mexico, Texas, and portions of Oklahoma, Kansas, and Colorado -- would
have to be taken, requiring the invention of some PRETEXT for doing so.
In 1836, American "adventurers" (freelance political operatives)
instigated a regional coup in the Mexican province of Texas, splitting
it off to form an independent country, the Republic of Texas. Nine years
later, this nation was annexed as the 28th state. Immediately afterward,
President Polk made the predictable move of sending belligerent military
incursions into disputed lands along the new border with Mexico. The Mexicans
replied with patrols of their own, and then clashes developed, leading
to the "spilling of American blood on American soil." Or so the
press told it (their bias could be summed up in a phrase they coined around
this time: "Manifest Destiny"). In fact, the soil in question
was situated between the Nueces and Rio Grande rivers, an area both governments
held equal claim to. But no matter -- the people eagerly accepted this
distortion, Polk got his dirty little war, and then proceeded to steal
something like 650,000 square miles of territory from our next-door neighbor.
Add to this the previous criminal acquisition of territory from Mexico,
i.e. the "Lone Star State," and the area usurped approaches one-third
of the contiguous 48 states, or HALF of what was originally Mexico (3).
- Some years later, a fantastic mineral strike in this
stolen territory -- the Comstock Lode -- would provide the Hearst Family
with an immense fortune, soon parlayed by William Randolph into an infamous
- 1898 to 1899 - The Spanish-American War/Philippine Campaign
- Though still a colonial client of Spain during the 1880s
and '90s, Cuba was also a hotbed of insurrection, thanks to the efforts
of Jose Marti and others. By 1898, the Cuban independence movement had
Spain's colonial government on the ropes. The prominence of blacks among
the rebels made this situation alarming for fin de siecle American royalists,
among whom "Darwinist" (i.e. proto-Nazi) political thought was
at the height of its popularity. Also, having just recently subdued the
last free-roaming Indian tribes back home, their passion for grabbing other
people's land could now be expanded into the Caribbean, Central America,
and Pacific, via expanded activities of that handy agency, the US military.
So in the fall and winter of 1897-98, the Hearst syndicate and other news
organizations were blasting Americans with "yellow journalism"
on the subject of Cuba -- sensational and often ludicrous accounts, custom
made to induce support of US military intervention. The public thus primed,
the sinking of the battleship USS Maine in Havana Harbor gave McKinley
all the excuse needed to commence grabbing up not only Cuba, but also Puerto
Rico, Guam, and the Philippines. It was in the Philippines that the US
military took "total war" beyond North America for the first
time. Encouraged by the Filipino's uncanny resemblance to Native Americans,
US troops mass-murdered something like 25% of the civilian population.
As imperial outrages go, this was the equal of anything that's happened
- A 1975 investigation led by Admiral Rickover determined
that the Maine's hull was breached by an explosion originating INSIDE the
ship. This could have been a spontaneous "coal-bin explosion,"
or it could have been a bomb placed by an imperialist traitor. As with
9-11, this catastrophe neatly erased any inconvenient witnesses to its
- 1917 to 1918 - World War I
- Three years into the "Great War," it looked
as though Germany would defeat Britain and France, our primary capitalist
hosts in Europe. Big financiers like J. P. Morgan and John D. Rockefeller,
who between them had billions invested "over there," weren't
about to just sit back and watch this happen. They barked orders to their
underling, Woodrow Wilson, who then declared war, using German interference
with US shipping activities as a feeble pretext. Leading up to this, the
media minions whipped the public into a war frenzy, basing their wildly
manipulative propaganda on incidents such as the sinking of the Lusitania,
two years earlier. Funny thing about the Lusitania: it's hold contained
a secret, illegal, and massive cargo of ammunition and other materiel bound
for Liverpool, and its passengers were used as unwitting human shields
for this cargo by the US government, which is why they died. Neither Wilson
nor the media of the day ever admitted any of this (5).
- The dynamics behind America's entry into World War II
were virtually identical. Over 500,000 Americans died in these two wars,
with 875,000 more wounded, and an additional and unknown number emotionally
shattered, all of which brought untold misery to their families and communities.
Given the choice between destroying all those lives or allowing the likes
of Morgan and Rockefeller to suffer the tragedy of somewhat less obscene
wealth, our "representatives" chose the former as the lesser
- 1941 to 1945 - World War II
- France already lying crushed beneath Hitler's war machine,
and Britain under a devastating siege, the White House was once again compelled
to intervene on behalf of its capitalist masters, whose European investments
had grown two magnitudes since the close of W.W.I. Unlike Wilson, however,
FDR did a truly brilliant job of constructing a pretext. in September of
1940, Germany, Italy, and Japan signed the Tripartite Pact, a treaty committing
all three countries to counterattack against new foes faced by any one
of them. This gave Roosevelt a back door into Europe via the Pacific. Beginning
one month later, and fourteen months prior to the Pearl Harbor attack,
he launched secret military and economic operations against the Japanese
Empire, obstructing its only access to oil, rubber, and other strategic
resources. The Japanese response to this blockade -- open hostilities against
the United States, beginning with a crippling preemptive attack on the
Pacific Fleet -- was entirely predictable. In fact, it was Roosevelt's
whole purpose in setting up the blockade: Nearly unanimous "isolationist"
sentiment at home was his first military target, and precipitating a "vicious
sneak attack on US soil" was his deliberate design for destroying
that sentiment. For this reason, he concentrated the Pacific Fleet in Hawaii
as never before, where it would be seen as an imminent threat by Japanese
generals. He then withheld intelligence of Japan's attack preparations
from Pearl's top officers, continuing to exclude them even when radio intercepts
revealed the movement of a Japanese carrier group toward Hawaii (6).
- From 1941 to '46, and again in 1995, Congress investigated
"the intelligence lapses that made this sneak attack possible"
no less than NINE TIMES. On all of these occasions, officials of the Roosevelt
Administration and the Office of Naval Intelligence perjured themselves
and concealed vast amounts of evidence to preserve the historical fictions
surrounding the Pearl Harbor attack. To this day, the NSA claims "national
security" as its basis for withholding relevant material from the
public. "National security" stands revealed, then, as a euphemism
for this government's ruthless grip on power -- a thing that certainly
would be threatened, were we to become fully aware of the treacheries it
spawns. This context radically transforms "national security"
rhetoric into an ideal excuse for all sorts of betrayals and deceits, and
this seems to be it's actual interpretation among those who "safeguard"
- The agonies of Jews, Slavs, Gypsies, etc. under Hitler,
not to mention those of the Chinese and Koreans under the Japanese Empire,
were incidental at best to US motives for pursuing W.W.II, both before
and during. It was only afterward that the camps were seized upon as a
full-blown "pretext in retrospect" to maximize America's apparent
heroism. With each year that has passed since, this myth has been more
shamelessly advanced, so that now some stunning percentage of Americans
believe that "halting genocide" was their government's main motive
for waging war at all.
- 1945 to 1989 - The Cold War (aka WWIII)
- was launched by the closing episode of W.W.II, i. e.
the atomic bombing of Japan. President Truman's official rationalization
for the bombing, trumpeted ad nauseum by the media of the day, was that
it was the only way to end the war quickly, thus avoiding a horrific house-by-house
assault of the entire Japanese Archipelago. In fact, the Japanese were
already making conditional surrender overtures. Accepting their terms,
however, would have made Truman's victory conditional as well, and he was
determined to humiliate them. Even the total surrender he insisted on was
only a few months away, by all signs. Meanwhile, the war in Europe having
ended in May, the Russians were now free to join the allied fight against
this old enemy of theirs, and were preparing to do exactly that. Given
enough time to enter the Pacific War, they would have claimed a portion
of Japan upon its surrender, just as they had recently claimed the eastern
half of Europe. To keep the Soviets from horning in on this pending crown
jewel of America's Pacific Empire, Truman needed his total victory immediately,
and The Bomb gave him an irresistible means by which to secure it. As an
early devotee of anti-Communist paranoia, he was also confronting the Russians
with a demonstration of America's 'invincible technological prowess.' Finally,
his decision to vaporize 200,000 Japanese civilians was made easier by
his avowed hatred of the entire race (7).
- The cover provided by the Cold War enabled the United
States to pursue its largest campaign of expansion by far, extending its
economic and strategic tentacles into every corner of the planet and even
into space by means of literally hundreds of "anti-Communist"
initiatives, interventions, and proxy wars. Our present "global hegemony,"
a source of endless glee for Bush and other miscreants, didn't "just
happen" -- it was the overarching and unspoken goal of US Cold War
- Another important thing to understand about the Cold
War: the "War on Terrorism" is directly adapted from it, just
as the Cold War itself developed directly from W.W.II, which was in turn
a direct consequence of W.W.I, which was Germany and Britain vying with
one another for world domination -- a contest America ended up winning.
What an epic of greed-crazed murderous lunacy! One that the present regime
seeks only to perpetuate, and for the same reasons as always: expansion
and consolidation of empire.
- 1950 to 1953 - The Korean War
- To coerce public support for this war, the press and
the Truman Administration whipped up public hysteria about the "Red
Menace!" that was then "swallowing up" obscure Far Eastern
precincts. No mention, of course, that the mounting anti-US sentiment in
those precincts resulted entirely from collaboration between US occupation
forces and the Japanese fascists they were supposedly there to remove.
This collaboration ranks as one of the most arrogant foreign policy blunders
in US history. For people throughout the Far East, it was an unbearable
betrayal, as it effectively prolonged what had already been one of the
most gruesome and protracted military occupations EVER. Similar dynamics
had already developed in mainland China, a hornet's nest so immense that
withdrawal quickly resolved as our only sane option. And also in the Philippines,
where US troops and Huk rebels started out fighting side by side to expel
the Japanese. Indigenous sovereignty being the Huk's ultimate goal, the
Americans began killing them, too, as the Japanese were subdued. Two thousand
miles from all these places, in French Indochina, the exact tensions seen
in Korea arose AGAIN in response to brutal French/Japanese collaboration
-- abetted by American field agents, naturally (8).
- In all four places, revolutionary leaders greatly admired
America's political tradition of anti-colonialism and self-determination,
and sought to claim these values for their own countries. They even made
earnest attempts to form friendships with the US; they thought colonialism
was a 'european thing,' so that we must therefore be 'the good guys.' For
strategic planners back in Washington, all this was at odds with their
grand design for the Far East: now being vacated by its previous colonial
tenants, it was seen as a "power vacuum," fairly begging for
RE-colonization according to America's obfuscated formula of puppet politics
and corporate infiltration.
- American society has yet to recover from the "Red
Menace!" propaganda barrage, which soon became a constant theme of
international news coverage, and remained so for the next 40 years. As
a means of inducing mass paranoia and public consent to limitless militarization,
the "Red Menace" lost its punch following the collapse of the
Soviet Union, necessitating its replacement with a more robust methodology
-- the "Terrorist Menace!" Nazi Germany and Israel being the
great innovators of this second method, America owes a great debt to both
- 1965 to 1973 - The Vietnam War
- By way of manipulating Congress into granting him war
powers, LBJ reprised the "vicious sneak attack" gambit with his
brazen lies regarding such action by the North Vietnamese against US Navy
vessels in the Gulf of Tonkin. Beginning in 1969, Nixon and Kissinger expanded
on this crime enormously, adding Laos and Cambodia to North Vietnam as
targets of a redoubled 'total war' initiative. Several million tons of
cluster bombs were then used to totally destroy vast civilian districts
in all three countries (districts simply crawling, mind you, with subsistence
farmers bent on global domination). All of which exactly repeated the pattern
of the Korean War -- right down to America not winning (9).
- As huge as the American effort against Vietnam was, it
was just one element of a yet more enormous strategy of military encirclement
(a.k.a. "containment") directed against mainland China. Other
elements were: the permanent and massive US military presence in Japan;
a similar presence in Thailand; unlimited military and economic support
to Chiang Kai-Shek's exile government on Formosa (Taiwan); the Korean War
and subsequent permanent US military presence in Korea; a strong strategic
interest in India, including covert support of an otherwise preposterous
nuclear weapons program; also, a US-equipped and -trained covert army of
Chinese "nationalists" in eastern Burma, within what became known
as the "Golden Triangle." It was here that the CIA first learned
of the marvels of the international heroin trade.
- To advance its "interests," the US government
has manipulated the affairs of every region of the planet on this same
incredible scale, and continues to do so. Other hotspots include Europe,
the Middle East, Central Africa, and all of Latin America and the Pacific.
- 1991 to 2003 - The Gulf War / 'No-fly Zones'/ Sanctions
- To con Americans into backing this outrage, Daddy Bush
and his media bed-buddies told a couple real whoppers. First there was
the one about the satellite photographs of a massive Iraqi invasion force
assembling on the northern border of Saudi Arabia (10). Then there was
the Kuwait Incubator Hoax, an inventive revival of the childish "babies
on bayonets" propaganda of World War I -- as told by a child, no less
(11). As it turned out, Operation "Desert Storm" was merely the
opening episode of a ruthless destabilization program, aimed primarily
at hapless civilians, that would continue for over a decade, killing no
less than 500,000 Iraqis in a fairly obvious attempt to turn them against
their head of state. This fulfills any sane definition of terrorism, and
is probably the most grandiose recent example of the state-sponsored variety.
It was maintained with enthusiasm by the Clinton Administration.
- 2001 to present - The "War on Terror" (aka
- Pretexts include: 1) the 9-11 attack; 2) this Administration's
single-minded incrimination of Al Qa'eda (a CIA proxy), backed up with
such things as; 3) an obviously fraudulent videotape of Osama "confessing;"
4) the conceit that Al Qa'eda's guilt justified a full-scale invasion of
Afghanistan (the combined strike force for which began building up at least
six months prior to 9-11, disguised as a "war game"); 5) an implied
equation between Al Qa'eda and Iraq's Ba'athite regime, and; 6) the absurd
fantasy that Iraq, a country left all but helpless by the previous campaign,
might pose a real threat to the world's deadliest strategic power.
- By rights, I should have included the Civil War in this
run-down: all the ingredients are there, with antidemocratic preservation
of domain being equivalent to expansion. Also, the fable that 'freeing
the slaves' was its entire purpose has to rank among the wildest disinformation
campaigns ever perpetrated upon Americans by our "free press."
- Though they never precipitated the full-scale wars their
authors had in mind, a few other nasty episodes are especially relevant
- Operation "Northwoods"
- A Pentagon plan for a massive "false flag"
terror campaign against American citizens, the purpose being to provide
pretext for a full-scale invasion of Cuba. If approved, it would have entailed
such things as sniper attacks on random US citizens (a la the DC sniper),
terrorist bombings, and a bogus missile attack on an unmanned, remote-controlled
US airliner in the Caribbean, the plane's fictitious passengers to be reported
as "entirely lost." All of this was to be carried out by US intelligence
agents posing as Cuban operatives, whose dirty work would translate directly
into the sort of massive public manipulation campaign this government always
launches when it sees profit in war. The Northwoods plan was called off
by Robert McNamara only when it was submitted for executive approval, having
already been approved by every member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (12).
- Northwoods would never amount to anything more than a
glimmer in some agency psychopath's eye. In Europe, however, the CIA's
most deranged anti-leftist terror tactics were actually implemented ...
- Operation "Stay Behind"; Operation "Gladio"
- As part of a larger US withdrawal strategy following
W.W.II, the CIA created underground right-wing militias throughout Western
Europe, to be activated as guerilla armies in the event of invasion by
the Soviets. These were known as "Stay Behind" forces; they were
a rogue's gallery of mercenary scum, dominated by devout ex-Nazis recruited
by SS-cum-CIA agent Reinhard Gehlen. As the years passed and the Soviets
failed to provide the anticipated invasion, the Stay Behinds resorted to
other means of justifying their CIA paychecks. All across Europe, beginning
in the 1950s, they morphed into right-wing hit squads and terrorist groups.
They participated in massive CIA-NATO destabilization efforts against the
Soviet Bloc countries, assassinating Soviet officials, sabotaging industrial
plants and public infrastructure, and generally terrorizing civilian populations.
The pattern should be familiar from similar terror campaigns against Cuba
and Nicaragua. In East Berlin, the activities of Stay Behind units were
the primary reason for the construction of the Berlin Wall. The Stay Behinds
did not limit their mayhem to the Soviet Bloc, however; as time passed,
their attention turned more and more to equivalent activities within their
NATO home countries. Throughout Western Europe, particularly in Italy,
leftist politics had a stronger following than it has seen in the US since
the 1930s, and the Stay Behinds were the CIA's primary footsoldiers in
its "dirty tricks" campaign against this percieved enemy. In
a psy-war effort to alienate the public from the political left, they launched
bogus left-wing terror outfits (the "Baader-Meinhof Gang") or
framed real leftist undergrounds (the "Red Brigades") for atrocities
they committed themselves. In Italy, where the Stay Behind operation was
code-named "Gladio," agents posing as left-wing extremists perpetrated
many public bombings during the '70s, killing at least 300 people. These
culminated in the August 1980 Bologna Train Station Bombing, which killed
86. The 1978 kidnapping and murder of Aldo Moro was another Gladio exploit.
These activities had one purpose: to portray the political left as public
enemy number one, thus isolating it domestically while building consent
for military escalation and NATO aggression against the Soviets (13).
- * * * * * * * * *
- So, what's it all about, anyway, all this intrigue and
stomping of jackboots on distant shores? Thanks to its unrivaled military
strength and exceptional geographic isolation (oceans make bitchin' moats),
this country is all but perfectly invulnerable to invasion, and repelling
invaders would seem to be the only defensible function of armies. No one's
invaded this country since the War of 1812, when British expeditions came
out of Canada, Florida, and the Gulf of Mexico. Don't expect a repeat anytime
soon. Although a massive one, the Pearl Harbor Attack was still just a
raid, on what at the time was this country's farthest-flung primary military
- To keep the entire planet under its thumb, our government
burdens us with the gargantuan cost of the world's largest military, which
it mostly uses to crush pitiful rebellions in the remotest and poorest
corners of the world, places we truly have no business being in. This is
exactly like a bully swaggering around a school yard, shaking down all
the little kids. Is that really how you want your government representing
you to the rest of the world? Shouldn't DOMESTIC policy take priority instead?
Things like adequate health care and effective primary education -- programs
that would serve the wants and needs of YOU, their citizen, whom they claim
to be their master. But this is not their priority, and never has been.
The geometric growth of this economy, by various forms of conquest, is
their abiding passion, with domestic policy being attended to almost as
an afterthought. To force our consent, they hypnotize us with lurid visions
of one boogeyman after another, maintaining childish fear as our primary
political sensibility, keeping us dependent, trusting, stupid, distracting
us from our own self-interests...
- Why is that?
- WHO BENEFITS??
- The average American, who spends his or her life chained
to the machinery of wealth production, watching their share of its output
dwindle steadily, sure as hell doesn't. The stratum of society that truly
gains from all this just happens to be the same one that finds employment
in high-level intelligence positions: big-time spooks like Kermit Roosevelt,
the Dulles brothers, Nelson Rockefeller, George H. W. Bush -- i. e. America's
ruling families. In their parlance, "US Interests" is just doublespeak
for global empire and corporate colonialism, and these have always been
the real purposes behind their warmongering.
- All told, these wars killed over a million US soldiers,
along with many times this number of civilians and combatants in the lands
invaded, and this isn't even touching on the dozens of proxy wars that
have been the American Empire's main battle front for going on sixty years.
All of these millions of people, American and foreign alike, were MURDERED
by a government intent on advancing the interests of a tiny minority while
betraying the rest of humanity; a government willing to wield its power
in their service in any manner, including technological and economic terror
campaigns waged against
- entire national populations. And yet this government
has the audacity
- to call itself a "beacon of hope to the world!"
And the majority BELIEVE THEM!! It simply amazes.
- America's shadowy patricians were already too powerful
before the Cold War. And then decades of public hysteria borne of imminent
nuclear annihilation delivered them into the fabled realm of "absolute
power." This has been pretty obvious. Americans have avoided realizing
it only by actively pursuing a mental state of utter denial on this subject,
sort of like the three monkey icons of Shinto. Thanks to this determined
ignorance, keeping the rest of us in the dark has been childishly easy
for people like the Bushes. They can even be incredibly brazen and sloppy
and get caught red-handed, as with Watergate. No biggy: just tell all the
boobs it was Nixon acting alone, assisted by his best buddies, who just
happened to be, um, CIA agents. Yah. They'll never notice this story's
unbelievable stench; they'll be too relieved at having any sort of excuse
to NOT think about it. You know, just like when the Warren Commission's
whitewash came out.
- One hypothesis is particularly good for sending 'America
Firsters' into an apoplexy of denial: that the political culture now emerging
in Washington is actually a product of 40 years of covert penetration into
the Executive Branch. To substantiate this, one need look no further than
the lineage of our present "leader." His grandfather, Prescott
Bush, was a military spy during W.W.I, a key financial collaborator with
the Nazis, and a US Senator. His father, George H. W. Bush, was heir to
the CIA realm under our most infamous presidential regime, a fixture in
presidential politics for 20 years, and all in all one of the creepiest
figures ever to darken the American political stage. The 'quiet coup' that
brought this man to power traces back to the Eisenhower Administration,
when the utterly creepy "National Security" underworld first
became a secret and malevolent force in national politics -- a force whose
power is still nearly impossible to measure. There are ominous glimpses,
though: in 1960, Eisenhower's VP and political heir, Richard M. Nixon,
was shouldered aside by John F. Kennedy, who over the next three years
developed grave misgivings about this underworld and its power. Then he
ended up dead, and yes, his assassination DID stink of black ops, as did
the similar jobs on Malcolm X, Martin Luther King, and his kid brother
"Bobby," who would have been the SECOND Kennedy to sour Nixon's
presidential hopes, had he lived to see the 1968 election...
- Though the CIA denies it, several independent sources
identify George H. W. Bush as a high-ranking agent during the Kennedy Administration,
commanding covert operations against Cuba. The ships used in Operation
"Zapata" (the "Bay of Pigs" invasion) were named by
him, it is said, after members of his family. Those names indeed correspond
with those of his wife and children. Among the most conclusive sources
is an official memorandum from J. Edgar Hoover, dated November 29, 1963,
which refers to a "Mr. George Bush of the Central Intelligence Agency"
(14). The memo refers to Bush's evaluation of emotional reactions to Kennedy's
assassination among Cuban exiles under his watch.
- From here, Bush the Elder went on to become a protege
of Richard Nixon's, was a mid-echelon member of his cabinet beginning in
1971, had very interesting connections to CREEP, and somehow eluded Congress's
- Watergate and a few other incidents proved that Nixon
had a most unwholesome relationship with the CIA. Once this scandal had
hemorrhaged to the point that Congress could no longer avoid taking action,
containing the damage could be seen as the main theme of its response --
a hallmark of Congressional investigations. There was far too much eagerness
to examine this matter only in terms narrowly relating to impeachment,
thus leaving larger questions wholly unexplored: did the Watergate break-in
really happen on Nixon's orders, or was the intelligence underworld acting
on its own, using 'dirty tricks' to prop up their man in the White House,
exactly as it has on countless occasions for entire puppet governments
all over the world? In the latter case, letting Nixon take the fall would
have been an extreme measure, but possibly the only sure way to divert
attention from an abhorrent and illegal power structure, thus preserving
it. Nixon himself would have been a likely author of this tactic, as it
was he who trumped Congress' investigation by resigning, whence the entire
matter was eagerly dropped.
- Bone-tired of Watergate in any case, the public was predisposed
to accept Nixon's implied guilt as the final answer: "responsibility
can't go any higher than the President, right? Harry 'the buck stops here'
Truman said so." In reaching this conclusion, we were assisted by
major media organs, which immediately began spinning this as Watergate's
"final resolution." In fact, this conclusion resolved nothing
-- it left the most crucial questions hanging in mid-air, soon to be shrouded
in rhetoric by professional apologists from all quarters. Its only definite
outcome was the softening of a renewed public spirit of scrutiny and resistance,
which in turn allowed a deadly authoritarian cancer to resume its march
throughout our body politic. After going underground for seven years, this
cancer emerged in full force as the Reagan Administration.
- Dubya's announcement last April of another bogus 'conclusion'
-- that of his Hitlerian conquest of Iraq -- had a strikingly similar effect.
Once again, mounting vigilance was undone by a well-timed lie, universally
- Following Nixon's resignation, Poppy finally hit the
big-time when Gerald Ford named him Director of the CIA. After toppling
Carter, he became VP himself, and for the next twelve years was at the
center of the Reagan era's continuous parade of treasonous covert operations.
A few highlights: 1) the campaign to prevent an "October Surprise,"
in which Bush & Co. induced the Iranians to delay release of the American
embassy hostages, thus undermining Carter's re-election bid; 2) an inhuman
terror campaign against the people and government of Nicaragua, even after
Congress declared it illegal, at which point the CIA was forced to devise
covert funding arrangements such as 3) "Iran-Contra" and 4) operation
"Watchtower." This last episode, which was going on around the
time of Bush Senior's succession, is easily the most incredible: the CIA
was a major domestic smuggler and distributor of "Crack" cocaine
during the late '80s, when this drug became an inner-city plague (15).
- At this point, the CIA was contemptuously wiping its
ass with the Constitution, and got completely away with it. If this were
truly the America the Boy Scouts taught you to believe in, the exposure
of operation "Watchtower" would have destroyed the CIA.
- Late in Reagan's second term, 60 minutes was granted
a horrifying personal interview with Ronnie and Nancy in the Oval Office.
Horrifying because, even though Reagan's Alzheimer's wasn't disclosed for
several more years, it was perfectly obvious the man was totally gone.
Faced with a steady stream of unscripted questions from Mike Wallace, Reagan's
usual patter rapidly degenerated into stark senile mumblings. Desperate
to conceal her husband's incoherence, Nancy kept practically thrusting
her face into the cameras. This is consistent with puzzled accounts of
writers and artists of the time, who, as dinner guests of the Reagans,
were mystified as to how such an oaf could present himself so effectively
- All of which implies a striking parallel between the
Reagan Presidency and that of Bush II: in both cases, Bush Senior can be
discerned as the man behind the curtain, while the "president"
is a mere speech reader, whose real job is to keep the public distracted
with his amiable, vacuous, universally televised performances. Dubya's
main puppeteers -- Cheney, Rumsfeld, Ashcroft, Powell -- are all Poppy's
cronies, going all the way back to the Nixon Administration. The five Supreme
Court Justices who put Junior in power are also Nixon/Reagan/Bush cronies,
and their cancellation of democratic process was a classic "installation,"
reminiscent of the CIA's long-running antidemocratic escapades throughout
- It has Poppy's paw prints all over it.
- If not for daddy's influence, Silver Coke-spoon Boy would
be lucky to find work fishing golf balls out of water hazards at the local
country club. This is obvious, and widely acknowledged. Most Americans,
however, aren't willing to examine the enormously sinister ramifications,
given Poppy's background, of the Bush Family's dynastic grip on American
politics. Most Americans, after all, are a weak-minded lot -- though harassed
by apparitions of unprecedented corruption, they lack the courage needed
to fix their gaze upon them.
- Which Brings Us To 9-11...
- The most venerable means of transmitting control inputs
from a plane's cockpit to its various aerodynamic control surfaces (rudder,
ailerons, etc.) is via a system of cables, i.e. "aircraft cables."
With the introduction of huge planes during and after W.W.II, unassisted
human arms could no longer provide the force needed to actuate proportionately
huge control surfaces, and so hydraulic assist devices and fully hydraulic
control systems were developed. The introduction of autopilots and landing
guidance systems over the next three decades layered yet another 'control
system' over this one, an electronic layer capable of manipulating the
hydraulics directly and thus flying the plane on its own. In the 757- and
767-series planes boarded by "the hijackers," Boeing expanded
this layer enormously, making it much more sophisticated and integral to
the continuous operation of these planes. For one thing, it continuously
monitors such things as attitude, acceleration, turn rates, etc., and if
necessary can assert exclusive control of the hydraulics at any time, modifying
or even overriding pilot decisions that would otherwise result in drastic
maneuvers, inappropriate for passenger service. Though meant to provide
an added margin of safety in the event of gross pilot error, this arrangement
introduces an ominous new dimension: in a very real sense, the humans on
the flight deck have only tenuous control of flaps, rudder, etc.; the computer,
the arbiter between the two, allows them direct control only on it's own
immutable terms. If the computer can override the pilot some of the time,
a potential exists for it to override the pilot ALL of the time. This is
a vulnerable arrangement, as anyone who has dealt with a virus should know.
In other words, the advancing dependency on avionic interfaces has brought
with it an advancing potential for the total electronic co-optation of
those interfaces. As they have grown exponentially in complexity, so too
has the number of entry points by which such co-optation might be effected.
All that was needed was for technologists to devise a "back door"...
- Enter the US government and its defense contractors,
who began joint development of remote flight control and flight circumvention
technology at least two decades ago, using the full force of their virtually
infinite R&D resources. The existence of these programs, and of the
resulting technology, was verified soon after 9-11 by a panel of commercial
and military pilots participating in an independent inquiry (16).
- The existence of such technology IN ANY FORM raises intriguing
questions/possibilities about 9-11: 1) could the planes have been hijacked
via this technology alone? 2) Were they? 3) Remote hijacking and on-board
hijacking are not mutually exclusive scenarios; if there were actual human
hijackers on those planes, their plot may have been remotely co-opted by
another party they knew nothing about, leaving them as horrified as anyone
when the planes took control of themselves and banked straight into buildings.
- Photographic evidence and eye-witness accounts support
the idea that the override functionality of the planes' computers was somehow
defeated, allowing "the hijackers" to make prohibited maneuvers.
For example, there are multiple photographs and video clips showing AA
Flight 175 making an outrageously hard turn into the second tower. According
to official information, the plane that hit the Pentagon also made aerobatic
descent maneuvers worthy of a fighter pilot. To have flown the planes in
this manner, Atta and the rest would have needed 1) advanced large plane
skills, and 2) a way to defeat the planes' avionic systems. Since that
flight school they attended in Venice, Fla. probably didn't offer a course
titled "Hot-dog Maneuvers with Airliners 101," they must have
possessed these abilities already, so why would they have bothered with
flight lessons at all? Any benefit they realized in terms of understanding
new control layouts would have been at the cost of increased exposure,
thus endangering their mission. On the other hand, if they were as inexperienced
as the presstitutes tell us ("I just want to learn how to steer"),
they couldn't possibly have flown the planes this way at all, which means
someone else must have.
- However distasteful, there is a real possibility that
remote circumvention occurred on those planes, a possibility that any credible
investigation would hardly ignore. All the more so because the necessary
hardware isn't just a cockamamie theory: a fully developed, totally programmable
remote flight control platform actually exists. Suggestively named the
"Flight Termination System," it is manufactured by Systems Planning
Corporation of Rosslyn, Virginia, which maintains web pages devoted to
the FTS and various subsystems:
- A system overview:
- The transmitter hardware:
- Related software:
- The CEO of Systems Planning's international division,
Dov Zakheim, is a long-time DoD and Republican Party insider, and a founding
member of the Neoconservative cult. While Bush was still Governor of Texas,
Zakheim became one of his closest advisers, counseling him on defense technology
and strategic aspects of Middle Eastern affairs. After the 2000 "election,"
Rummy rewarded Zakheim with a low-profile but strategically important position
-- Comptroller, i.e. head money man, of the Defense Department.
- Zakheim also co-authored the Heritage Foundation's infamous
tract, "Rebuilding America's Defenses," in which the Bush Administration's
entire design for renewed global conquest was laid down a full year prior
to 9-11. On page 63, the authors note that timely implementation of their
ideas would require "some catastrophic and catalyzing event -- like
a new Pearl Harbor."
- see for yourself:
- To identify the expansionist motive behind the "9-11
Wars," one need look no further than this document. Echoing Ziggy
Brzezinski's thoughts in "The Grand Chessboard," the authors
identify the Persian Gulf / Central Asian region as the world's greatest
geopolitical prize, and recommend that decisive control of this region
be made a top strategic priority.
- The remote control scenario also neatly punctures the
'yada-yada objection' always employed by conspiracy theory critics: "It
couldn't have happened that way, because too many people would have known,
and someone would blab..." In fact, the most sensitive part of this
plot would be that of anticipating or enabling nineteen flesh-and-blood
"hijackers," and yet this part of the scenario is all but universally
accepted. Nineteen men backed by a larger organization schemed to get on
those planes and take control of them, and then they did; everyone knows
they did because CNN has stated this "fact" about ten thousand
times and counting. As for exactly WHICH organization did the backing,
well, there's a saying about 'dead men' ...
- Once the patsies were in position, the rest of this scenario
-- the "really unbelievable part" -- could have been carried
off in its entirety by a tiny team wielding extravagant technical skills
and multimillion-dollar equipment. No larger conspiracy is necessary. As
for the apparent complicity of the entire government and media, this is
mostly just cynical opportunism and jello-brained obedience rising to the
occasion -- a response easily anticipated by the real conspirators, for
whom history provides a never-ending parade of examples on which to base
- Mind you, this is not to say that remote circumvention
is definitely what happened. On its face, this scenario is wildly improbable.
Speaking of improbable, what about four airliners being taken over simultaneously
and used as missiles? Since this actually happened, we have no choice but
to consider fantastic scenarios, and since the official scenario is itself
an unsubstantiated "conspiracy theory," competing scenarios should
also receive serious attention. Our reluctance to question official doctrine
on this matter is a symptom of the societal role most of us have been bred
and trained for: to be ever-faithful hounds, tails thumping the floor as
we contentedly slorp the hand of class authority. Such credulity also becomes
inevitable when the alternative is so unbearable: if someone in Bush's
position is capable of lying to us about something as huge, as gut-wrenchingly
horrible as 9-11, then everything we believe about this country -- about
the nature of civilization itself -- might just be childish nonsense...
- Most people simply don't have the guts to go there.
- Given a desperate enough need to sustain the childish
belief in government-as-benevolent-father, a person will adapt that belief
to any circumstance. The behavioral end result can resemble courage; indeed,
we are taught to regard it as the DEFINITION of courage. Actually, it's
one of cowardice's darkest moments. Even a casual examination of Nazi Germany,
where this phenomenon was rampant, will drive this point home.
- It's almost funny, the way people readily see the threat
of technological circumvention presented by Diebold's electronic voting
machines, yet when the subject switches to the "Flight Termination
System," which is every bit as real, and to the exactly parallel possibilities
it represents vis-a-vis 9-11, they suddenly retreat into profound and combative
denial. It's as if a threshold has been crossed into a realm of possibilities
too vile to entertain, so they simply don't. Never mind that this country's
operatives have been traveling the world, perpetrating similar horrors,
for all of the past century. Rather than acknowledge the possibility of
a unifying pattern, Joe Average would much rather 'shoot the messenger.'
- Every so often, such people establish a new high-water
mark for cowardice and facultative stupidity, and the present is definitely
one of those times. After all, the official 9-11 scenario they cling to
with such desperate faith comes from only one source: the Western "intelligence
community" -- the most brazen, systematic, resourceful, and interlocked
association of habitual liars this world has ever seen. As should have
been made clear by the 'British dossier' scandal of last winter, the credibility
of this bunch goes past zero into the negative: pending airtight proof,
anything they say should be reflexively deemed a lie. You may remember
that MI5 also provided the identities of "the 19 hijackers" --
information that soon also became quite suspect. At least six of the hijackers,
possibly as many as nine, are still alive in the Middle East -- a pretty
good alibi, considering. Several of these ex-suspects had their passports
or other IDs stolen from them over the years, and it's entirely possible
that all 19 hijackers had stolen identities, meaning they could have come
from anywhere, or been absent altogether. The US media was pretty slack
about acknowledging this at the time, and since then has dropped this ball
- Rather than allow the "intelligence community"
to render every detail of our comprehension on this matter, we would be
much wiser to carefully identify and discard every assumption they hand
- Far from being a source of independent corroboration,
our "free press" is more like a public relations contractor for
the spooks. This is because the entire fourth estate AND the governments
of the West, including their intelligence services, are essentially employees
of a single entity: the US-dominated coalition of international corporations
-- by several magnitudes the largest concentration of wealth in human history.
- The subjugation of governments by such an entity is hardly
unprecedented. The Twentieth Century saw several extremely unsavory examples.
It's called Fascism. You don't need to take my word for this -- just peruse
the opinions of acknowledged experts:
- Benito Mussolini:
- "Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism
- because it is a merger of State and corporate power."
- Franklin D. Roosevelt:
- "The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people
- the growth of private power to the point where it becomes
- stronger than the democratic state itself. That in its
- is fascism - ownership of government by an individual,
- group or any controlling private power. Among us today
- a concentration of private power without equal in history
- For many Americans, the word 'fascist' instantly evokes
jackbooted Germans wearing Swastikas and stuffing Jews into ovens. In fact,
that representation is a cardboard diorama, empty of nuance and historically
specific almost to the point of meaninglessness, which is why the closet
fascists who own the media keep force-feeding it to you.
- Fascism is certainly a violation of every noble and enlightened
political impulse. To advance their agenda, fascists must bring about a
mass rejection of egalitarian and democratic ideals, and seem to get the
best results by inflaming and feeding upon common fears and popular bigotries
-- racist, nationalist, classist, religious, political, etc. ANY set of
bigotries, suitably stimulated, will provide fertile soil for fascism,
and the incurably ignorant, always a majority, are easily swayed by such
methods -- fascism is a dictator's fantasy formula for subverting democracy.
Bigotry, however, isn't fascism's whole essence; it's simply an expedient
means by which fascism's agents, classic political pragmatists, consolidate
the monolithic pattern of government corruption that is their true calling
-- a syndrome America has been sliding into deeper and deeper throughout
its history. Just look at the consistent warnings from all the presidents
who noticed this trajectory and tried to alert a nation of groveling candy-asses:
- Thomas Jefferson:
- "I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy
- moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge
- our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance
- the laws of our country."
- Abraham Lincoln:
- "The money powers prey upon the nation in times
- and conspire against it in times of adversity. It is
- despotic than a monarchy, more insolent than autocracy
- and more selfish than a bureaucracy. It denounces,
- as public enemies, all who question its methods or throw
- light upon its crimes. I have two great enemies, the
- Army in front of me and the bankers in the rear. Of the
- the one at the rear is my greatest foe.