The events of 9/11
go beyond the events to something far deeper and more important. Yes,
the deaths of a bit less than 3k people is important but the national
reaction to those events which resulted in tens of millions of
people, killed, traumatized (we underestimate the trauma of civilians
in war-zones and only focus on the soldiers trauma—lest we forget
who caused the trauma in the first place), tortured, displaced and so
on. 9/11 is the direct cause of the flood of refugees pouring into
Europe disrupting lives there (they deserve it, frankly for being
cowardly vassal states). But even that, being far more important than
the original lives lost and property destroyed pales in comparison to
what it indicates but did not cause about Western culture in general
but USA culture in particular.
Those events
represent the dramatic and final end of democracy, liberalism (in the
old sense of the word), and the enlightenment ideas of truth,
rule-of-law, reason, science and so on all mediated by 19th
and 20th century ideas of compassion and sympathy for
those who do not share our culture, religion or “race” (we are
all part of the human race). We are, indeed, at “the end of
history” at least as we knew it. 9/11 didn’t cause this but
represented its values as personified by the ruling elite’s who
were involved in the events and reacted to it in a fury of violence.
I’m not going to
go into all the facts surrounding the events of 9/11 because they are
clearly available on the internet and, if you look closely, even in
the mainstream. I wish I didn’t have to even say this but the
official story of 9/11 is beyond ludicrous—it is impossible and
based on no facts whatsoever other than airplanes hit a couple of
buildings and destroyed three of them completely into rubble and
dust. One plane crashed in a field and left virtually no debris and
the other “plane” flew into a solid wall of the Pentagon when the
White House or the Capitol were available since Cheney (who was in
charge as usual) told the missiles to “stand down.” This
information is freely available from mainstream reporting and photos.
Most of the evidence was seized whether cameras near the Pentagon,
recordings of traffic controllers, and debris from the buildings
destroyed—that was quite a feat to ship all metal which would have
shown evidence of why two buildings specifically built to withstand a
crash of the largest airliner at that time (Boeing 707) crumbled into
dust as if there was no inner steel girders to at least slow down the
collapse. There are literally, many hundreds of clear and unambiguous
facts that prove that the official story of the events could not
possibly be true. Yet, the government made no effort to investigate
those crashes—just so you know all crashes and building collapses
are meticulously investigated—but because we were “at war” no
investigations were necessary. And in the panic and trauma of the
moment the authorities got away with one simple statement on a TV
network that Osama was responsible—that’s it. No need to think,
no need to launch an investigation—WAR!
Now, culturally the
problem is simple. By simply offering inconvenient facts I am
therefore (you can see the logic) a “conspiracy theorist” which
means in the common parlance someone who is mentally ill who has
paranoid fantasies based on some misconstruction of a handful of
facts. This means, essentially, that if you dissent from ANY official
pronouncement by, say, the “paper of record” the New York Times
then one is either illogical or mentally ill. That’s what you are
saying. Now my simple proof that the official story, aside from what
I said above, is certifiably wrong is that the authorities, at any
level, to not tolerate any deviation in every detail of the official
story—the official story is more iron-clad than the Bible is for
fundamentalists. This attitude is the same in all major events
accepted by official Washington which reflects the views of what us
conspiracy theorists call the “Deep State” which I’ve explained
before and won’t go into now.
Now, if we are not
allowed to examine evidence or call for logical and scientific
explanations for events like 9/11 or Syrian gas “attacks” then
what remains of the spirit of our Founders who, for all their faults,
reflected the values of the 18th century Enlightenment?
What remains? There is now an “acceptable” field of what we can
talk about as represented by the mainstream media’s extremely
narrow field of inquiry—but this area of discussion is so narrow
that there is no way to even begin to talk about anything in what, in
another era, would have been considered intelligent conversation.
And that’s the
real problem: I see little if any intelligent conversation about
anything at this period of history that has any bearing on politics
or even economics—that is, anything of public concern. I know
people who talk about spiritual subjects, UFOs, ghosts, intuition,
prophetic dreams but I am continually warned not to mention
“politics” by my wife and others. Why? Isn’t our common public
concern about who has power important?
People often accuses
me of being a “know-it-all” because I assert what I know about
life, about culture, about politics and, worse, about history. For
some reason, history, is one subject Americans of all cultures seem
to hate because understanding origins of events puts depth into
subject matter—instead we seem to prefer fantasies about good guys
and bad guys a term universally used by the military and
law-enforcement community which shows the childishness of their view
of life. Here’s an idea—there are no good guys and bad guys as
such—if there is I’d like to see proof—because I’ve not seen
it yet. When I presented the results of my research into the events
surrounding 9/11 (I read numerous books, researched official writing
including the NIST reports on the building collapses) and put in the
time and effort and presented my findings to two people on separate
occasions one who had a Masters from Harvard, another several Masters
from University of Chicago and UC Berkeley, said the same thing to
wit, “even if what you say is true, I refuse to believe it.” Why
did they say this and why is it, in a sense, logical to say that? The
answer to this lies in social science originating with the work of
Leon Festinger with an idea called “cognitive dissonance” which
is a state of discomfort that happens when two separate ideas clash
within us and we must find a way to resolve it. That’s why people
like me are called “conspiracy theorists” (a term coined by the
CIA in response to those who questioned the Warren Commission report
on the JFK murder). When you lump us into a class of people suffering
from paranoid delusions or sheer illiteracy, you don’t have to look
at our arguments for our position—you just dismiss us. This has
happened to me time after time when my arguments were dismissed
simply because they lie outside officially recognized reality.
The explanation for
why 9/11 did happen is startlingly simple. In the late 90s a group of
what we now call “neoconservatives” came together to form “The
Project for a New American Century” (PNAC) which laid out the
following argument: the USA, without a Soviet threat, is liable to
“degrade” into a country lacking purpose and drifting into
culture wars, regionalism, and hedonism ruining causing rapid
decline. They reasoned that without a “new Pearl Harbor” event it
would be very difficult to provide a common purpose to the American
people; of course, the only worthy “common purpose” was world
conquest and a universal “Pax Americana” similar to what Rome
provided in much of the world back in the day. This dream of a “New
Rome” had been a constant in Western Civilization since the fall
Rome. A look at the cast of characters in PNAC will tell you all you
need to know about their war-like intentions. Those characters that
still are alive and their successors still survive in Washington and
continue to dominate our foreign policy to this day—though they’ve
moved from “terrorism” to “Russia/Iran/China” their aim is
the same—by whatever means necessary they have the goal of complete
domination, politically, of the world by Washington. Because they
pursue a specific and meaningful goal (rare in our society these
days) they always have recruits and supporters at all levels of power
and in both political parties.
We are now living in
a post-Constitutional time and a post-reason world. I can write this
stuff till my fingers are exhausted and I doubt I will change
anyone’s mind. But, I feel it is my duty to write what I know and
feel in my heart. I want a world ruled by love and compassion not
hate and fear. I believe this is not only possible but natural to
humans. Social science teaches us how, in fact, most people are
agreeable and naturally compassionate unless traumatized of coerced.
We live in a trauma- and fear-based culture. Before we can address
events like 9/11 or the various wars we’ve engaged in we need to
see that clearly.