SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Raymond Duray who wrote (258044)5/23/2002 6:15:25 PM
From: Skywatcher  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 769670
 
George W Bush, Political Terrorist
by William Rivers Pitt
t r u t h o u t | Thursday, 27 May, 2002

The earthquake began on Thursday, May 16th: The Bush administration had been warned by the CIA
months before September 11th of Al Qaida terrorists and plans to hijack airplanes. Nothing of substance
was done to address the threat – "The proper agencies were warned," we were told, but no representative of
any pertinent agency has since stepped forward to acknowledge receipt of any warnings.

In fact, the spokesman for Massport, the Massachusetts state agency responsible for security at Logan
airport, stated bluntly in the pages of the Boston Globe that his agency never heard from the Federal
government regarding any hijacking threat. The two aircraft that destroyed the World Trade Center towers
and killed thousands of Americans went wheels-up at Logan.

By Friday the news was sprayed across the headlines of virtually every newspaper on the planet: Bush
Knew.

The implications were deadly for the Bush White House. Information had been given that indicated
terrorist attacks were imminent, but little if anything was done to prevent them. Concern for the profit
margins of the airline industry, which would have been crippled had a serious terrorist warning been
disbursed in high summer, were first offered as a good reason why no true measures were taken to prevent
the hijackings.

Later, spokesmen like Ari Fleischer and Dick Cheney came forward to claim that the warnings were
"vague" and "non-specific" and therefore not worthy of notice. We were told that the hijack warnings
pertained to "traditional hijacking" scenarios, as if that forgave the lapse in security. The weekend political
talk shows became a showcase for spin, and the word went out for all to hear – the Bush administration is
blameless, and anyone who says otherwise is a traitor.

The truly interesting part came on Monday. All of a sudden, the world was coming to an end. FBI
Director Mueller claimed there was no chance that another terrorist attack could be stopped. Dick Cheney
stuck out his jaw and stated bluntly that another terrorist attack was inevitable. Don Rumsfeld said
terrorists would definitely get their hands on nuclear or biological weapons, and then use them to terrible
effect. The newswires vibrated with images of suicide bombers on New York subways, and a warning went
out to apartment building landlords – watch for suspicious characters, because the next WTC-type
catastrophe could be yours. The Statue of Liberty and the Brooklyn Bridge were draped with bullseyes by
the administration, though no one spoke of means to prevent these horrors.

The effect of these warnings was dynamic. People from coast to coast felt the clutch of fear in their guts
as images of smallpox and mushroom clouds flickered behind their eyelids. New York City, battered and
bruised, clenched its collective fist in a spasm of dread. It must be real, these threats, because the
President and his people say so. Let there be terror and meekness in equal measure on the streets of the
greatest city on earth.

And yet comes Wednesday, and an extraordinary series of revelations. An article in the May 21st
edition of the Toronto Globe and Mail reported that, "the White House quietly acknowledged that the threats
are not urgent and that they are partly motivated by political objectives" and that "the blunt warnings issued
yesterday and Sunday do not reflect a dramatic increase in threatening information but rather a desire to
fend off criticism from the Democrats."

It seems that everyone can calm down. Horrific terrorist attacks are not, in fact, imminent. Everything is
well in hand. The Bush administration is merely using the fear and horror that another September 11th-type
attack may happen again as a means to deflect legitimate criticism from the Democratic Party. Nothing to
see here. Go about your business. This is, after all, just politics.

It was bad enough that Bush had made his crass 'trifecta' joke eight different times. You know this one:
Someone reported that Bush promised not to raid social Security or dive into deficit spending unless the
nation was faced with war, recession or national emergency. After 9/11, Bush was heard to crack on eight
separate occasions, "Lucky me, I hit the trifecta." Let it be noted that the country is running a $66.5 billion
deficit seven months into the budget year, and the 9/11 death toll between America and Afghanistan stands
above 5,000 souls.. That is one hell of a trifecta, and no laughing matter.

It was bad enough that Bush and his people were selling photographs of his phone calls during the 9/11
attacks to raise political funds. Al Gore called the practice "disgraceful;" the word is not strong enough. The
English language is deficient in words required to describe those who seek to profit from a day of such
blood and horror.

Now, with leaders like Daschle and Gephardt calling for a public investigation into the obvious
intelligence failures behind 9/11, we have well-known members of the Bush administration going on national
television to terrify the American people so as to avoid any questions. It wasn't enough for Condoleeza Rice
to go on CNN's 'Late Edition' to state that the administration was against a public investigation into 9/11, as
she did on May 19th. The American people needed to feel the wrath of pure terror from this administration,
to ensure that it would get what it wanted – a continued veil of secrecy and the surety that prickly
questions would go unasked.

Why the veil of secrecy? Perhaps it is as simple as the story told by respected British journalist Gordon
Thomas, who has reported that Israel warned the American government on five separate occasions of
terrorist plots to attack prominent targets. As late as August 24, 2001, the Israeli security agency Mossad
informed the CIA that "terrorists plan to hijack commercial aircraft to use as weapons to attack important
symbols of American and Israeli culture."


There are those who believe the absolute worst – that Bush and his cronies knew of the 9/11 attacks in
advance, and allowed them to happen so they could advance nefarious personal and political goals. For the
time being, such accusations are totally unprovable and essentially irresponsible. The truth in hand,
however, is worse than the darkest conspiracy theory.

The Bush administration had specific information in hand from the CIA pointing to an airplane-based
attack on American targets. They did not warn agencies responsible for security at American airports, nor
did they beef up airline security by fiat. The FBI had specific warnings of terrorist attacks in hand earlier in
the summer of 2001, but a failure in the chain of command caused these warnings to go unheeded.

The same administration that had the 9/11 attacks happen on its watch has fought tooth and nail to
keep any investigation into the security failures that led to the attack from happening. Basically, those
security failures are still there, intact, deadly to us all. The warnings of impending catastrophe from the
likes of Cheney, Rumsfeld and Mueller may prove to be a self-fulfilling prophesy because this administration
refuses to take responsible action to address them.

In fact, the Bush administration has proven itself more than willing to go to wretched extremes to keep
any investigation from gaining steam, by frightening the public with warnings of doom that they themselves
admit have far more to do with politics than reality.

We were wide open to attack on September 11th because of these security failures. We are wide open
to attack today, because the same irresponsible leaders in charge on 9/11 are calling the shots today.
Rather than work to protect Americans, they seek to terrify Americans as a means to cow any Democratic
move towards an investigation into the causes behind the 9/11 attacks.

If we are attacked again, they will have no one but themselves to blame. The Democrats asking for an
investigation are doing so because they want to protect Americans. Bush and his people are fighting this
because they want to protect themselves. They are purposefully making people afraid to further this
agenda. They play politics on a field littered with the bones of American dead, and they peddle fear to a
nation already saturated with woe.

Such foulness is beyond contempt, and reeks of desperation. There will be a reckoning.

CC



To: Raymond Duray who wrote (258044)5/23/2002 6:16:06 PM
From: Raymond Duray  Respond to of 769670
 
THE GREAT DECEPTION - PART 6

visiontv.ca

Part 6 - Conclusion

Transcript of Mon.,Feb 25, 2002 Broadcast

"“What Really Happened on Sept. 11th?” Conclusion (What Did George Bush Know and When Did he Know it?” popularly known as “The Great Deception.”)"


Subject: Moral and spiritual challenges amidst fear and denial in a propagandized society

The editors at the New York Times made the right judgment call, in my opinion, by playing this story [“Pentagon Readies Efforts to Sway Sentiment Abroad; Debate over Credibility; New Office Proposes to Send News or Maybe False News to Even Friendly Lands,” by James Dao and Eric Schmitt] at the top of their front page recently. Because a campaign of government deception is a moral issue.

But in a way, these headlines are laughable, including as they do phrases such as “…readies efforts…?” And “…proposes to send…false news…?”

Are readers supposed to believe the Pentagon might… start lying?

Those who have seen the documentary The Panama Deception will find this assumption impossible to swallow. [VIDEO CLIP from “The Panama Deception,” Jeff Cohen of Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) of New York City, speaking]:

“The U.S. military said 250 civilians were killed. There isn’t a single credible source in Panama that believes that’s true, whether it’s ambulance drivers, human rights monitors, people – doctors who worked in hospitals, neighbours of bombed-out blocks. It’s just clearly false. That sotry would be so easy to tell for any journalist worth his or her salt. But they’re not telling it.”

Back to the Times article. The odd thing about it is that you can go over it with a divining rod and find that neither the writers, nor anyone they quote, makes so much as a passing reference to the simple wrongness of government lying. Not once are the words “moral,” “morality,” “ethics” or such, used, let alone “lies” or “lying.”

In my moral book, publishing a story with morality at its heart, without mentioning the word, is committing the sin of omission.

The story also accepts foolish statements about Saddam Hussein and prints them with a straight face, as it were. It’s claimed he “…has a charm offensive going on…’ ”

I don’t know about you, but I’ve noticed the offensive part but not the charm part.

“ ‘…and we haven’t done anything to counteract it,’ a senior military official said.”

Well, if you don’t count the U.S. government’s all-out propaganda campaign against the Iraqi leader for more than a decade, then I guess this guy’s got a point.

Readers are also misled to focus on side issues such as “public perceptions,” “strategy,” “possible illegality” and bureaucratic turf wars. This article – representing the crème de la crème of U.S. journalism – symbolizes how disconnected the U.S. media and government have become from moral questions, one might almost say, from reality.

To give credit where credit’s due the Times ran an editorial terming the Pentagon’s proposed new Office of Strategic Influence “Orwellian.” Yet the editorial fails as well to question the fundamental justness of the Pentagon.

Which brings me to my main point. The less people ask themselves questions about deceit the more it clears the way for organizations such as the CIA to continue to receive seemingly unending billions of dollars. Taxpayer money used to train terrorists, as the CIA acknowledges it has. To destabilize governments, as former CIA agent John Stockwell writes in his book In Search of Enemies. And to inject toxic grey, white and black disinformation into the world’s information systems, as William Blum spells out in Killing Hope. All with barely a whisper of dissent.

“The lie,” wrote theologian Andre Dumas, “is biblically portrayed as ‘the first and most poisonous source of injustice.’” “Truth telling,” he wrote “is…absolutely essential to the very life and health of the whole community.”

Which is at the heart of the Great Deception, about what really happened on September 11th. For the past five weeks I’ve asked questions: How could it be that no U.S. Air Force jet interceptors turned a wheel on September 11th until it was too late? Is it coincidence that the war on Afghanistan triggered by September 11th will clear the way for petroleum pipelines of huge interest to the White House? How to explain the virtual non reaction of President George Bush immediately following the planes slamming into the World Trade Center?

These marked-up passages are from my dog-eared copy of a gem of a book, The Idea of Disarmament, Rethinking the Unthinkable, by Alan Geyer. Geyer, in 1982, writes: “The nuclear arms race has become this generation’s severest test of truth. It is zealously promoted with false words, deceptive jargon, pretentious dogmatics, hateful propaganda, and arbitrary bars on access to the truth. “No realm of public policy,” he continues, “is more corrupted by untruthful speech than national security.”

Today the Big Lie of the so-called war on terrorism – itself firmly based on the linchpin of the implausible official version of what happened on September 11th -- is an even more severe test of truth, in my opinion. Under the banner of the war on terrorism George W. Bush – with the aid of the media -- zealously promotes perpetual global war in the service of resource looting and permanent popularity for himself.

There’s unprecedented militarism. The USA is spending more than half its budget on wars past, present and future, according to the Center for Defense Information.

As Christian humanist Geyer writes in words truer today, in my view, than when written: “Demythologizing has become the indispensable theological tool of peacemaking: it is the operation empowering the people of God to understand the stratagems by which inhuman speech violates the Word of God. Those stratagems include a relentless outpouring of myths about weapons, strategy, security, enemies, history, and human nature – from government bureaucracies and adjunct think tanks and co-opted media and electronic theologians.”

And in this gem of a book I find the perfect conclusion to this series about what really happened on September the eleventh, about the Great Deception, about moral and spiritual challenges amidst fear and denial.

In the 1930s there was a powerful peace movement. At that time a play by Viennese poet Stefan Zweig was produced. The play’s principal character, Jeremiah, bursts forth with these words:

Peace is not a thing of weakness.
It calls for heroism and action.
Day by day you must wrest it from the mouths of liars.
You must stand alone against the multitude, for clamor is always on the side of the many.
And the liar has ever the first word.
The meek must be strong.


Sources:

BOOKS

Blum, William: Killing Hope, U.S. Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II, Black Rose Books, 1998, 457 Pages, soft cover, ISBN 1-55164-096-1

Geyer, Alan: The Idea of Disarmament! Rethinking the Unthinkable, The Brethren Press, Elgin, Illinois and The Churches’ Center for Theology and Public Policy, Washington, D.C., 1982, 256 pages, soft cover, ISBN 0-87187-396-7

Stockwell, John: In Search of Enemies, A CIA Story, W. W. Norton & Company, 1978, 285 pages, soft cover, ISBN 0-393-00926-2

FILMS

The Panama Deception, 1992, by The Empowerment Project, in association with Channel Four, London, and Rhino Home Video. Produced by Barbara Trent, Joanne Doroshow, Nico Panigutti and David Kasper. One of the best documentaries I’ve ever seen. Greatly relevent to our future.

NEWSPAPERS

The New York Times, Tuesday, Feb. 19, 2002, pages A1 and A10.

Toronto Star, Thursday, Feb. 21, 2002, page A24

WWW SITES

Center for Defense Information
cdi.org

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

VISIONTV INSIGHT RESOURCES

© VisionTV 80 Bond Street, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5B 1X2 Telephone 416-368-3194