An Explanation

Longtime (sometime) reader PDS commented on the previous post as follows:
Rob: I am most curious as to what swayed you to believe 9/11 was perpetrated by our executive branch and intelligence services, per your post a few days ago. I ask this literally, not rhetorically.

If your premise is true, do you not find it ironic to be making predictions about "Democrats" taking back the House, etc.? Do you really think a government responsible for 9/11 will simply resign itself to the viscissitudes of an election, or that merely electing a handful more Democrats will do the trick?

I really must add one last comment and suggestion, which I will make because (I am hoping) there must be some kind of blogging leeway accorded to the person who made the first comment ever on your blog: Since you began this project, I have seen you go from agnostic to atheist and now from a professed "independent" to enthuisiastic use of the word "we" in a number of recent posts, which I take to mean Democrats. I must say I am almost more startled by the latter change than the former.

If you having any interest in taking requests from long time readers, it would be interesting to see a post or two explaining your evolution along these lines some time.

While I appreciate most comments, I appreciate thoughtful ones most. I'm not sure you were the first to comment on my blog--that may have been Lein or my ex-girlfriend Amanda (yes, ladies, I'm available)--but you were were one of the earliest, and like Gnat, you've always been cordial or at least reasonably polite. Maybe it's my Southern upbringing, but that means a lot to me and is why I've berated one or two (ahem) readers for bad manners.

1. What swayed me about 9/11? The evidence. I came out of the 9/11 closet near the beginning of the year--and posted about it. Since then, I've posted numerous times about the administration's complicity in 9/11. If you want the quick-and-dirty version, watch Loose Change, 2nd Edition, or Steven Jones' presentation on the use of high-explosives in the WTC. If you want the most damnable reportorial evidence, read The War on Truth (which I've mentioned a couple of times on the blog). If you're too busy with all that (which I wouldn't doubt, given your job and child), just tell me where I can find the Boeing in front of the Pentagon. That's all. Just show me physical evidence of a jetliner. Don't worry, the Pentagon has yet to produce a single frame of footage showing anything resembling that.

To spur your curiosity, let me offer a few topics for your investigation:
a. Pakistan's ISI (intelligence services) were more or less built by the CIA. The ISI, in turn, created the Taliban and Al Qaeda. Do you find it odd that the head of those services not only paid Mohammed Atta through a cutout (Omar Sayeed Sheik) but also met with Tenet, Powell, Armitage, Rice, Goss and others right before and after 9/11?

b. View the photographs from Shanksbury. Then show my any physical evidence of a crashed jetliner there. Debris was scattered for miles. According to my knowledge of fifth-grade physics, that's not possible unless the plane blew apart in midair--say, as the result of a missle strike.

c. Please explain how the first three steel-framed buildings in history to collapse from fire did so, all on the same day. Remember, all three buildings were structurally redundant, had survived intense fire before and were barely smoking right before they collapsed. Again, physics is not on the government's side here. You don't have to look to kooks for evidence; physicists, fire experts and demolitions experts say that too.

d. Please account for the report of French intelligence officials that a CIA Middle-East station chief met with Bin Laden in a Dubai hospital two months before 9/11. I think, but can't remember for sure, that this was the same station chief that granted visas (over objections) to most of the alleged hijackers.

e. Please explain why the Rowley memo as well as the warnings from Israeli and Russian intelligence regarding 9/11 were ignored.

f. Please explain why 5 separate military/police exercises, some of which involved hijacking planes, were being held the morning of 9/11.

g. Please explain why the remaining 8 fighters available on 9/11 to defend American airspace were sent away from the jetliners, whose locations were known.

h. Please explain why the entire war on terror precisely matches the plans for the second rendition of The Great Game as outlined in Zbigniew Brzezinski's book and as echoed by Wolfowitz in PNAC's defining document "Rebuilding America's Defenses."

i. Please explain why we used Al Qaeda to help destabilize Bosnia (after using them to do the same to Afghanistan, which according to conservatron "logic" makes Carter the winner of the Cold War) and paid, via Zawahiri, $50M to not attack our forces there, but did not make a similar deal for them not to attack us elsewhere.

j. Please explain why at Tora Bora we didn't surround Al Qaeda but instead left a wide opening for them to flee to Pakistan through.

k. Please explain why a highly irregular number of put options were put on United and American airlines shortly before 9/11. Also explain the coincidence that a high-ranking CIA official was a former head of the bank the options were bought through.

l. Please explain why president Bush waited for a while after Andrew Card told him that the U.S. was "under attack." Explain also why Bush was reading at a school after he was told that an airliner had hit the WTC.

m. Please explain the coincidence that WTC 7 was brought down, even though its fires were minimal, especially considering that one or two floors had been hardened for use by Giuliani's EOC. Explain also why the CIA and other gov't agencies were using the building. And explain what happened to the billions of dollars in gold stored beneath the WTC.

n. Explain why the Joint Chiefs of Staff cancelled flights the day before (or close to it) 9/11.

o. Explain why John Ashcroft stopped flying on commercial planes the summer before 9/11.

p. Explain why, under Bush, Reich Marshall Rumsfeld was designated as the sole arbiter of military flights intercepting civilian jets.

q. Explain Operation North Woods.

r. Explain why we evacuated a number of Al Qaeda and Taliban fighters "by accident" at Tora Bora.

s. Explain why president Eisenhower thought the USSR wasn't much of a threat and why he stridently warned the populace against the military-industrial complex.

t. Explain why we fought in Vietnam and why we conquered Hawaii, the Phillippines and Cuba, why we forced China and Japan to trade with us and why we started a war with Mexico.

u. Explain the 40+ interventions we started and/or funded after WWII, all under the pretext of the Cold War, which nearly no one in a position of power believed was real.

v. Explain why we offered the Taliban either a "carpet of gold" or a "carpet of bombs...before the snows fall in October" shortly before 9/11, why we had a plan for war with Afghanistan, according to Brzezinski's geostrategy, and why we attacked that nation in October, 2001.

w. Explain why several hijackers were quartered near US military bases.

x. Explain why a significant number of the alleged hijackers are still alive.

y. Explain why we invaded Iraq over WMD, given that we sold Saddam the precursors for that WMD and turned a blind eye as he slaughtered his own subjects and thousands of Iranians.

z. Explain why we bombed Afghanistan after the Taliban told us they'd hand over Bin Laden for house arrest and an international criminal tribunal.

For fun, look into why a former member of the UK Parliament and the former head of German intelligence both think, along with 100+ US scholars, that 9/11 was an inside job.

3. Your second paragraph contains by far the most penetrating question you've ever asked me, the equal of which probably no reader has asked. As you may have guessed, I can't answer it, except to say, all I have left is hope. If "we" lose in November, I may well flee the country ahead of the totalitarian state you refuse to see coming (why the denial, PDS?).

4. The last two presidential elections were almost certainly stolen. The evidence is overwhelming, if you choose to look at it. So no, I'm not so confident in 2006 or 2008.

5. I haven't changed a whit since you started reading, except that I've become massively more informed. For years, I have technically been an agnostic. I still am. But I live as an atheist. I do not understand why people have a problem with this. Unlike Bush, I do not flip flop. I know what I think and why (he doesn't even think). I have no reason to believe there is a god; if there is one, he is nothing like the god most religions describe; that's what evidence and logic indicates. Since I can't prove a negative, I can't say for certain that there is no god. Therefore, I am an agnostic. But I live without doubt, when it comes to the divine. I live without guilt or morality--though not without empathy, which the GOP rejects. I don't think there's a god. If there is a god, I don't care and reserve a small bit of contempt for him--whatever's left over from what I feel for most Republican congressmen, the Bush family, Reagan and Ayn Rand. As I wrote in one of my unpublished novels, "If god wasn't dead, he should be executed."

So, no, you haven't seen anything except a greater willingness for me to forthrightly state what I think.

6. Yes, I am independent. That hasn't changed. Most progressives would say the same. But as our corrupt system of government makes it all but impossible to have a third party, I vote for Democrats. I hope never to vote for a Republican again. They disgust me beyond description. Unfortunately, I live in Louisiana, so it's in our interest to vote for slimy, scum-sucking conservatives. Until those despicable asswipes are kicked out of orifice, we have no choice. Happily, most New Orleanians, including conservatives, hate Republicans as much, if not more, than I do. I wonder why.

No comments: