Tag Archives: 9/11

Five Lessons from 9/11, by Laurence M. Vance

The first lesson is never trust the government, and it only gets better. From Laurence M. Vance at lewrockwell.com:

The sixteenth anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks has brought forth the expected conservative “never forget” nonsense in defense of a perpetual war on terror.

Typical is Ben Shapiro, editor of The Daily Wire and host of the Ben Shapiro Show. On September 11, he wrote an article, “NEVER FORGET: The 5 Lessons We Should Have Learned From 9/11,” and spoke in a videoabout the five lessons America should have learned from the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

He insists that the lessons of 9/11 “have been largely forgotten.” Here are his five “lessons we should have learned,” each with quotes from his article and video.

1. Global Retreat Is Not A Strategy.

“The Clinton Administration foreign policy of quasi-isolationism, combined with occasional human rights-driven interventionism, was a formula for failure.”

“Unless we are willing to consider measures to stamp out terrorist groups across the planet, we are setting ourselves up for a fall.”

2. Money Doesn’t Buy Off Islamists. Neither Does Friendliness.

“Friendliness toward the Muslim world does not matter to Islamists, who seek only the domination of a religious caliphate.”

“There’s this weird idea from both the Ron Paul right and from the Barack Obama left that if we just give enough money, if we just show the Muslim world that we are caring and wonderful and we’ll be left alone by terrorists.”

3. Immigration Matters.

“The government ought to be deeply concerned about those who enter the country from Islamist-rich regions.”

“We also should be careful about people who are already here. We should be checking up on them.”

4. Major Terrorist Attacks Require Sponsor States.

“Major attacks require planning, coordination and resources that demand a home base.”

“Major terrorist attacks were forestalled because we were fighting terrorists over there [Iraq] and we weren’t fighting them over here.”

5. America Has Real Enemies.

“When it comes to threats to American citizens, the first duty of the government is to prevent those threats and stop those who would perpetrate them.”

“It’s not just the government’s job to protect you from existential threats, it is also the government’s job to protect you from being murdered in your bed.”

That’s it? This is what we are supposed to learn from 9/11?

To continue reading: Five Lessons from 9/11

Advertisements

Why one US Marine renounced war after 9/11, by Brad Hoff

A marine breaks free from the military: asking questions, conducting his own investigations, and thinking for himself. From Brad Hoff at thecanary.com:

Why one US Marine renounced war after 9/11 [OPINION]

The fires which began with the 9/11 attacks were never extinguished. They continue to burn fiercely from Afghanistan to Iraq to Syria to Yemen to North Africa, as the region and its regimes came unglued in the wake of George W. Bush’s ‘war on terror’.

The 15th anniversary of 9/11 was marked in America with the usual sombre memorials and directives to ‘never forget‘.

But this definitive 9/11 slogan always takes me back to the overwhelming tide of pro-war fervour that swept the US and stifled any deeper reflection or debate in the years after 11 September 2001. Sadly, I was part of that fervour – and this too I will never forget.

The militarism of my youth

I joined the US Marine Corps as an idealistic 18-year-old in 2000, with a firm resolve – as I enthusiastically told my military recruiter shortly before leaving for boot camp – to “fight evil in the world”. This resolve was rooted more deeply in my veins after the 9/11 attacks. As a relatively new marine, I had temporarily worked at the Pentagon while attached to a headquarters computer programming unit in the two months just prior to that tragic day, and was fortunate not to be there when it was attacked.

After the smoke cleared in New York, Pennsylvania, and at the Pentagon, I and many others wanted ‘justice’ at all costs against an enemy we were told was present in multiple Middle Eastern countries. Slogans such as ‘let’s roll!’ echoed in my ears, and my fervour for ‘the mission’ influenced others to follow my path of military service.

While stationed in Quantico, outside of Washington DC, I became close friends with a local civilian nearing his high school graduation, and I encouraged him to join the Marine Corps. This occurred just as the Bush administration was making the case for war in Iraq.

To continue reading: Why one US Marine renounced war after 9/11

Why Did Robert Mueller Obstruct Congress’s 9/11 Probe? by Justin Raimondo

A lawsuit may unearth at least some information the government is keeping from the public about 9/11. It may also reveal important information about Special Counsel Robert Mueller. From Justin Raimondo at antiwar.com:

The 9/11 families’ lawsuit against the Saudis could prove revealing

Sixteen years after the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, we still don’t know what happened. How did a ragtag bunch of hijackers, armed only with box cutters, manage to gain control of those airliners? How did they get into the United States to begin with? Who supported them while they were here? Why didn’t law enforcement – which had plenty of clues as to what they were up to – stop them? Prior to the attacks, our government spent billions on “anti-terrorist” programs designed to prevent precisely what occurred on September 11, 2001 – yet Mohammed Atta and his accomplices managed to slip through the cracks. How?

While some in our government may have at least partial knowledge, the American public doesn’t know the answers to these questions.

What we do know, however, is that our lives were changed forever: propelled into a war without end, the United States launched attacks on Afghanistan, Iraq, and elsewhere that are still ongoing. Thousands of Americans and an untold number of Afghans, Iraqis, and others – hundreds of thousands – have so far perished in what our generals tell us will be a “generational” conflict with no discernible end in sight.

We also know, thanks to public agitation around this question, that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia had substantial involvement in the 9/11 attacks. The campaign to reveal the redacted portions of the Joint Congressional Inquiry into Intelligence Community Activities Before and After the Terrorist Attacks of September 11 was partially successful, although there is still much the government is keeping from the American people. What we learned from the pages that were revealed is that Saudi government employees aided and directed at least two of the hijackers – and that Prince Bandar al Sultan, then Saudi ambassador to the United States, was at the center of the spider web that ensnared the nation on 9/11.

Now a lawsuit brought by some of the 9/11 families reveals that, a full two years before 9/11, the Saudi government funded a “dry run” designed to test airline security. As Paul Sperry reports in the New York Post:

“Two years before the airliner attacks, the Saudi Embassy paid for two Saudi nationals, living undercover in the US as students, to fly from Phoenix to Washington ‘in a dry run for the 9/11 attacks,” alleges the amended complaint filed on behalf of the families of some 1,400 victims who died in the terrorist attacks 16 years ago.”

To continue reading: Why Did Robert Mueller Obstruct Congress’s 9/11 Probe?

A Bipartisan Vote To Put the Brakes on War, by Peter Certo

After 9/11, congressional gave the president a war authorization to track the perpetrators of the attacks. Since then, that authorization has justified military action 37 times, in 14 countries. Now there’s a movement in congress to revoke the authorization. From Peter Certo at antiwar.com:

By putting such a sinister face on it, Trump might have finally inspired lawmakers to rein in America’s post-9/11 war machine

One of the few things I recall fondly about the Trump campaign – a short list, I’ll admit – was the candidate’s apparent glee in ridiculing the warmongering of his rivals and predecessors.

In early 2016, Trump (correctly) summed up George W. Bush’s legacy this way: “We’ve been in the Middle East for 15 years, and we haven’t won anything.”

He ridiculed Hillary Clinton for being “trigger happy” – no standard-issue gibe from a guy who also promised to bring torture back – even while echoing progressive complaints that the $5 trillion pricetag from Bush’s wars would’ve been better spent at home.

And though Trump’s relationship with the Russians has since acquired an unseemly cast, he once offered quite sensibly that “it’s better to get along” with the world’s other nuclear-armed superpower than not to.

Compared to his rivals, Politico magazine once mused, Trump was “going Code Pink” on foreign policy. But what a rose-colored lie that turned out to be.

Since taking office, Trump’s turned virtually all use of force decisions over to his generals. With the president’s backing, they’ve ordered 4,000 new American troops back into Afghanistan, sent thousands more to Iraq and Syria, and nearly quadrupled the rate of drone strikes from the Obama administration, which was already quite prolific.

Everywhere they go, they’re escalating the brutality – and we still haven’t won anything.

They cratered Afghanistan with the largest non-nuclear bomb ever dropped. They’ve stepped up support for the brutal Saudi-led bombing of Yemen, where 11,000 have died and thousands more are at risk of dying of hunger and cholera. Meanwhile they’ve brought civilian casualties from our bombings in Iraq and Syria to record levels, inflicting what the UN calls a “staggering loss of civilian life.”

Things are about to get even more dangerous in Syria, as the Islamic State falters and armed factions turn on each other to claim the remains of its caliphate.

To continue reading: A Bipartisan Vote To Put the Brakes on War

Does Bush Have Afterthoughts? by Paul Craig Roberts

Paul Craig Roberts asks an interesting question, one for which we’ll probably never know the answer. From Roberts at paulcraigroberts.com:

Recently I learned from a feature article in a print magazine that George W. Bush, as Jimmy Carter and Winston Churchill did, has taken up painting. Among Bush’s subjects are 98 war veterans from Bush’s wars in Afghanistan and Iraq who suffered traumatic injuries. Some of the portraits were reproduced in the magazine, and they are good. Three months ago 98 portraits were published in a coffee table book, Portraits of Courage, the proceeds from which are donated to the Bush Center.

I have wondered if Bush feels responsibility and remorse for the deaths and injuries of so many people. I have wondered if he knew at the time or even now that he was fighting wars for Israel.

Israel’s efforts to annex southern Lebanon have been blocked by Hezbollah, a militia supplied by Syria, Iran, and Saddam Hussein’s Iraq. This is why these countries were on the list of countries to be invaded prepared by the Zionist neoconservatives who controlled George W. Bush’s administration.

It is certainly conceivable that Bush was manipulated by his neocon National Security Council, neocon Department of Defense, neocon State Department, and his vice president. Presidents only know what their advisors tell them. I have wondered if afterward when Bush admitted that there were no weapons of mass destruction he thought he had been manipulated.

I have also wondered if Bush was part of what many believe to be the 9/11 inside job pulled off by Dick Cheney, Israel, and the neoconservatives occupying the government’s high offices. I don’t think he was for these reasons: (1) his expression when told by the Secret Service of the attack does not show any pre-awareness, (2) he had been moved far out of the way on 9/11 to a distant children’s school and was not present on the scene to issue orders inconsistent with the plan, (3) had he been part of the plot, he would have been present to show presidential leadership during the crisis, and (4) he was not allowed to testify alone or under oath before the 9/11 Commission. He had to be chaperoned by Dick Cheney.

To continue reading: Does Bush Have Afterthoughts?

9/11 Destroyed America, by Paul Craig Roberts

The Kennedy assassination and 9/11 are the most prominent tragedies in which reality does not comport with the official narrative. From Paul Craig Roberts at paulcraigroberts.org:

The events on September 11, 2001, changed the world. It was the excuse for the US government to launch military attacks on seven Middle Eastern countries, causing civilian casualties in the millions and sending waves of Muslim refugees into the Western world. The US government wasted trillions of dollars destroying countries and murdering women and children, while public infrastructure in the US deteriorated, Americans’ homes were foreclosed, and American health needs went unattended. 9/11 was also the excuse for the destruction of the protection that the US Constitution provided to ensure the liberty of the American citizen. Today no American has the protection of the civil liberty that the Constitution guarantees. http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2017/04/20/freedom-democracy-tyranny/

On September 11, 2001, when a neighbor called and told me to turn on the TV, I stopped what I was doing and turned on the TV. What I saw was the two World Trade Center Towers blowing up. I had often enjoyed lunch in the rooftop restaurant in one of the towers across the street from my Wall Street Journal office.

A miniscule by comparison frail aluminum airliner hit one massive steel tower and then another aluminum airliner hit the other. There were some plumes of orange outside the buildings. Then approximately after one hour, less in one case, more in the other, the two towers exploded floor by floor as they fell into their own footprint.

This was precisely the way the news anchors described what I was seeing. “It looks exactly like a controlled demolition,” the news anchors reported. And indeed it did. As a Georgia Tech student I had witnessed a controlled demolition, and that is what I saw on television, just as that was what the news anchors saw.

To continue reading: 9/11 Destroyed America

 

U.S. Insurers Sue Saudis for $4.2 Billion Over 9/11, by Jason Ditz

It’s almost a 100 percent probability this suit gets settled before even the discovery phase. For the Saudis, $4.2 billion is a small price to pay to prevent potentially devestating disclosures. From Jason Ditz at antimedia.org:

Last year’s Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (JASTA), a bill which allowed Americans to sue Saudi Arabia in US court over their involvement in 9/11, has yielded another major lawsuit yesterday, a $4.2 billion suit filed by over two dozen US insurers related to losses sustained because of the 2001 attack.

The lawsuit is targeting a pair of Saudi banks, and a number of Saudi companies with ties to the bin Laden family, accusing them of various activities in support of al-Qaeda in the years ahead of 9/11, and subsequently having “aided and abetted” the attack.

The biggest target is the Saudi National Commercial Bank, which is majority state-owned. The Saudi government heavily pressured the Obama Administration to block the JASTA last year, threatening to crash the US treasury market if it led to lawsuits, but overwhelming Congressional support still got it passed into law.

While there were more than a few lawsuits already filed in the past several weeks related to JASTA, this is by far the biggest, and most previous lawsuits are still in limbo as the court and lawyers try to combine them into various class action groups.

Historically, US sovereign immunity laws have prevented suits against the Saudi government related to overseas terrorism. With the release of the Saudi-related portions of the 9/11 Report last year, however, such suits were inevitable, and the federal government could no longer protect the Saudis from litigation.

To continue reading: U.S. Insurers Sue Saudis for $4.2 Billion Over 9/11