Reclaiming our heritage

Reclaiming our heritage

March 7, 2006

“Let us never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories concerning the attacks of September 11.” ~President George W. Bush

For once President Bush and I agree. The question is — what is conspiracy theory and what is truth? Is the truth what has been boldly put in print by those given “statutory authority” to investigate the incidents of September 11, 2001, and report their findings, in full, to the American people, the so-called 911 Commission?

If so, why are there, as David Ray Griffin has so eloquently pointed out in his book, The 9/11 Commission Report; Omissions and Distortions, so many omissions and distortions in the report written and proudly published by the 911 Commission? In a CNN interview with Lee Hamilton, vice-chair of the 9/11 Commission, Hamilton attempted to discredit Griffin’s work by claiming the 9/11 Commission report was the “definitive story of 9/11.” When asked, however, if he had read Griffin’s book, Hamilton admitted that he had not; claiming that the commission would not have achieved its goal had it read everything written by the critics. David Ray Griffin’s book, of course, was written after the work of the 9/11 Commission was published.

After having read Griffin’s book, mentioned above, I have to wonder how Hamilton could sit there, in front of the cameras, and lie so easily and with such a straight face to the American people. Maybe his ability to do that has something to do with his having been part of the government bureaucracy for too long.

The 9/11 Commission Report; Omissions and Distortions not only points out a multitude of discrepancies, omissions, distortions, and inaccuracies in the report published by the 9/11 Commission, but in doing so, leaves standing in the void a picture, drawn without words, of something so horrific that it should send chills of fear up the spine of any thinking, reasoning American.

That picture has to do with a man we call President, an agenda, and the ability to kill thousands of people without remorse to achieve that agenda.

In 1997 the Project for a New American Century (PNAC) was formed. The Statement of Principles is as revealing as it is frightening, making it very clear that the purpose of the group is the promotion of American imperialist policies in foreign lands in the name of maintaining American expansionist policies, stating as its operating premises:

we need to increase defense spending significantly if we are to carry out our global responsibilities today and modernize our armed forces for the future;
we need to strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values;
we need to promote the cause of political and economic freedom abroad;
we need to accept responsibility for America's unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles.

But like so many others, isn’t PNAC just other non-governmental organization (NGO) established to influence some aspect of governmental policy or practice? Not in this instance. Many of the original signing members of the Statement of Principles for this organization have found their way into the current Bush Administration. Others are names most will recognize from the Reagan Administration and G H W Bush Administration:

Elliott Abrams, Gary Bauer, William J. Bennett, Jeb Bush, Dick Cheney, Eliot A. Cohen, Midge Decter, Paula Dobriansky, Steve Forbes, Aaron Friedberg, Francis Fukuyama, Frank Gaffney, Fred C. Ikle, Donald Kagan, Zalmay Khalilzad, I. Lewis (Scooter) Libby, Norman Podhoretz, Dan Quayle, Peter W. Rodman, Stephen P. Rosen, Henry S. Rowen, Donald Rumsfeld, Vin Weber, George Weigel, and Paul Wolfowitz.

In 2000, PNAC published a document entitled Rebuilding America’s Defenses. This document makes apparent the systems philosophy of its author and signatories, although in its Statement of Principles the organization claims to be conservative in nature. Neo-conservative — yes; conservative — not by a long shot.

On page 51 of Rebuilding America’s Defenses is this little gem:

Further, 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.

One short year later, a “new Pearl Harbor” manifested itself on American soil when two planes hit the World Trade Towers in the WTC complex in New York; the Pentagon was struck in Washington, DC; and Flight 93, supposedly heading for the U.S. Capitol, was reduced to smoldering rubble in a reclaimed strip mine in Pennsylvania. In all, four commercial jets — United Airlines flights 93 and 175, and American Airlines flights 11 and 77, passengers and crews were lost. An estimated 2,742 people lost their lives when the planes struck the twin towers of the World Trade Center and the towers ultimately disintegrated into their footprints in a pile of pulverized concrete, blanketing lower Manhattan with a layer of dust containing fire retarding asbestos fibers.

The official report of the 911 Commission points the finger of blame at an “incompetent” Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for why military jets were not scrambled to bring down the hi-jacked planes before those planes reached their targets. In its zeal to place blame, rather than get at the truth, the Commission drew up its own timeline of when the FAA supposedly realized the planes were hi-jacked and when the FAA notified the appropriate military officials, not based upon testimony from either the FAA or military officials, but based on times which would serve best to exonerate military officials of wrong-doing. As a supposedly independent commission established to get at the truth of the events of September 11, 2001, such does not speak to the veracity or efficacy of the Commission, especially when those timelines are anything but accurate.

That the work of the 911 Commission contains so many omissions and distortions leads, obviously, to the question of how truly independent the commission was. As Griffin points out in his book, the commission was replete with Bushites. Of the commission members and staff, the following have direct ties to the Bush Administration: Philip Zelikow, Executive Director; Thomas Kean, Chair; Lee Hamilton, Vice-Chair; Chris Kojm, Executive Deputy Director; Daniel Marcus, General Counsel; Jamie Gorelick, Fred Fielding, John Lehman and Timothy Roemer, members. This constitutes nine of the thirteen members and staff.

The conflicts of interest here are obvious; the inability of the 911 Commission to act as an independent body representing the interests of the American people equally obvious. The distortions and obvious omissions of the final report of the 9/11 Commission leads one to the obvious question of what was the involvement of the Bush Administration in the events of 9/11?

Video tapes that would have shown whether Flight 77 actually hit the Pentagon were confiscated by the FBI immediately following the supposed crash. Judicial Watch has now filed suit in hopes of forcing the release of one of those tapes. If the government has nothing to hide, why not let the American people see the video, just as they saw the video of the plane slamming into the south tower of the World Trade Center? Why the secrecy? Could it maybe have something to do with the anti-aircraft batteries protecting the Pentagon and White House that automatically shoot down any plane that gets too close that doesn’t have a transponder emitting friendly military signals? Controllers at the tower at Dulles International Airport reported that the tight turn of the aircraft before plowing into the Pentagon appeared to them to be a military aircraft with an experienced pilot at the helm. Was there more truth to their comment than they realized?

Then, as reported by Griffin in his book, there is the fact that our President, having been told that a plane had hit the north tower at the World Trade Center, that there could be up to 11 hi-jacked planes, remained at the school in Florida where he was reading to the children for another 30 minutes, whereupon he returned to Air Force One, lifted off, and was in the air for an hour before acquiring a fighter escort. With a national emergency obviously in the making, not knowing where those 11 hi-jacked planes might be, Bush remained visible at the school, en route to the airport, and in the air on Air Force One. Protocol to remove the President to an undisclosed location was not followed. Did Bush know he wasn’t a target? Did his security team know Bush wasn’t a target?

Another glaring discrepancy concerns Flight 93. Most Americans have seen a crash sight of a big commercial jet. The crash sight of Flight 93 consisted of a smoldering crater in the ground. The crash scene, itself, covered some eight miles with debris scattered the course of that eight miles. One engine was found “a considerable distance” from the reported crash sight. It is very obvious that Flight 93 came apart in flight, whether from a bomb on board or from being shot down by military aircraft. People outside in the area on that fateful day, said they saw another plane, white, that left the scene as Flight 93 rained down on the landscape below. Some said this plane went straight up. Such a maneuver would not be a-typical for some military aircraft. Such an aircraft could also carry hardware sufficient to blow a commercial jet out of the sky, reducing it to pieces the size of a suitcase — as was reported by locals.

Seismic activity in the area of the crash places the time of the crash at three to four minutes before that reported by the 9/11 Commission. One of the flight recorders, retrieved from the smoldering crater, seems to be missing three to four minutes of tape. What was recorded in that three to four minutes that the government does not want the American people to hear?

If military aircraft did shoot down Flight 93, why not just come right out and say, “Yes, we shot it down; it was what was indicated; we didn’t know the passengers had regained control of the plane?” Why lie about it?

And what about the high-ranking government officials who suddenly decided that taking to the airways over America was something to be avoided in the days leading up to September 11, 2001? What about the bin Laden family members who were allowed to leave the United States in the days following September 11, 2001, some on private jets during the time when private aircraft were grounded, some on commercial flights when commercial traffic resumed? Who allowed these bin Laden family members to leave and how could they have left without clearance coming from the Bush Administration?

The obvious implications of all this is that even if the events of 9/11 weren’t the work of the Bush Administration, the Bush Administration is most certainly complicit, even if only in knowing that it was going to happen and doing nothing to stop it. This is a hard pill to swallow for Americans who want to believe their leaders have moral values which preclude taking innocent lives in pursuit of a political agenda.

Considering what has transpired since 9/11 with the severe erosion of the rights of the American people, and the Bush Administration pursuing a policy of “challeng[ing] regimes hostile to our interests and values,” the American people would do well to not simply pass the omissions and distortions of the 9/11 Commission report off as simple “oversight” or “misunderstanding.”

It is time the American people found out the truth. It is long past time for a truly independent commission of the people, with the power and authority to subpoena and prosecute, to investigate what really happened on September 11, 2001, to get at the truth.

If the Bush Administration is complicit, then those complicit should pay the price just as any other American would be made to pay the price. What makes it doubly true if the Bush Administration is complicit, is the subsequent erosion of the rights of the American people, the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq, now the growing threat against Iran, all in the name of the “War on Terror.”

In 1939, Hitler quipped, “It gives me great pleasure that the people do not know what is happening to them.” Are we willing to go the route of the German people in the off-chance that what looks to be happening might not happen? If we do, we deserve what we get.

Yes, President Bush, we shouldn’t tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories — especially when those outrageous conspiracy theories point to your administration.

And no, President Bush, it isn’t unpatriotic or disloyal to our Constitution and Bill of Rights to question your motives in the “War on Terror”, especially in light of the implications resulting from the events of September 11, 2001.