▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄ ⟶
Almost immediately after the 9/11 attack, while bodies were still buried in the rubble, George W. Bush demanded from Congress the legal authorization to use military force against those responsible for the attack, which everyone understood would start with an invasion of Afghanistan. The resulting resolution that was immediately cooked up was both vague and broad, providing that “the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons.”
Despite this broadness, or because of it, the House of Representatives on September 14 approved the resolution by a vote of 420-1. The Senate approved it the same day by a vote of 98-0. The lone dissenting vote was Democratic Rep. Barbara Lee of California, who — three days after the 9/11 attack, in a climate of virtually full-scale homogeneity — not only voted “no” but stood up on the House floor to deliver this eloquent, unflinching and, as it turns out, extremely prescient explanation for her opposition:
In an op-ed she published in the San Francisco Chronicle nine days later, she explained her vote by pointing out that the resolution “was a blank check to the president to attack anyone involved in the Sept. 11 events — anywhere, in any country, without regard to our nation’s long-term foreign policy, economic and national security interests, and without time limit.” She added: “A rush to launch precipitous military counterattacks runs too great a risk that more innocent men, women, children will be killed.”
For her lone stance, Lee was deluged with rancid insults and death threats to the point where she needed around-the-clock bodyguards. She was vilified as “anti-American” by numerous outlets including the Wall Street Journal. The Washington Times editorialized on September 18 that “Ms. Lee is a long-practicing supporter of America’s enemies — from Fidel Castro on down” and that “while most of the left-wing Democrats spent the week praising President Bush and trying to sound as moderate as possible, Barbara Lee continued to sail under her true colors.” Since then, she has been repeatedly rejected in her bids to join the House Democratic leadership, typically losing to candidates close to Wall Street and in support of militarism. I documented numerous other ugly attacks when I wrote about her for The Guardian in 2013.But beyond the obvious bravery needed to take the stand she took, she has been completely vindicated on the merits. Close to a majority of Americans now believes that the first war the AUMF was invoked to launch — the one in Afghanistan — was a mistake. Fifteen years later, the very same AUMF continues to be used by the Obama administration for all sorts of wars that plainly have nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks — including its newfound bombing partnership with Russia in Syria. Under this resolution, Obama has bombed seven predominantly Muslim countries in seven years; a 2013 memo from the Congressional Research Service, requested by Lee, listed all the military actions and related abuses undertaken purportedly under its authority:
It’s impossible to overstate how correct Lee was when she warned that this resolution would constitute “a blank check” to wage war “anywhere, in any country,” and “without time limit.” Fifteen years later, this “war” is raging as destructively as ever, with no end in sight. Indeed, as my Intercept colleague Alex Emmons documented today, “Fifteen years after the September 11 attacks, it looks like the war on terror is still in its opening act.” Either one of the two leading presidential candidates is certain to use this resolution for all new expressions of this war.
Lee has never given up on this cause, repeatedly attempting to lead a repeal of the AUMF, though — in the face of opposition from two successive administrations, one from each party — she has never been able to convince her colleagues to do so. While her “blank check” warning turned out to be incredibly prescient, the other warning she issued, from the House floor on September 14, was even more profound: “Let us not become the evil we deplore.”
The 9/11 attack killed close to 3,000 innocent people, but the 15 years of wars, bombings, invasions, occupations, and other abuses it spawned — the bulk of which are still raging — have killed many, many more than that. Americans love to memorialize the victims of the 9/11 attacks, though the abundant victims of their own government’s actions (both leading up to 9/11 and in response to it) are typically ignored. Whatever else 9/11 is used to commemorate, Barbara Lee’s visionary warnings and solitary courage should always be near the top of that list.
Top Photo: Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA) accepts the Elizabeth Taylor Legislative Leadership Award at the AIDSWatch 2016 Positive Leadership Award Reception at the Rayburn House Office Building on Feb. 29, 2016 in Washington.
Taking the negative position is always the easiest, especially if you wield little to no power. And even more so when you don’t have the obligation to present viable alternatives.
I have full understanding for the intellectual reasoning behind Lee’s position, that granting a single person such tremendous powers entails potentially devastating risks.
“Just look at how everything went wrong” is a common theme, and fortunately for those who take such a position there is no way of knowing, what a different outcome might have been.
It could be that quick, specific and targeted actions combined with some skillful diplomacy would have solved the terrorism problem. But who in power is allowed to take such a risk, if another potential outcome would have been, say, a nuclear attack on a major metropolitan area.
How big a disaster would Lee have allowed for before voting yes? Or would she have voted no also if the number of American casualties had been in the hundreds of thousands?
Hypothetical hype you say? Well, no more than imagining that you could have handled the situation much better yourself I would reply.
too bad Glenn didn’t have the courage to stand up for Ms. Lee when all his republican friends were calling her un-american and more.
Thank you so much for your work and your article about Barbara Lee bravely speaking out against this ongoing war.
Craigsummers,
‘The rise of Islamic fundamentalism can be attributed…….’
Without going into the details of the arguments or counter arguments, just wanted to check what you meant by ‘Islamic fundamentalism’? Sounds like you meant there is something wrong or violent with Islam at the ‘fundamental’ level? Do correct me as I would hate to get anyone wrong!
Thanks for writing this, Mr. Greenwald. I’m 34 and sadly had no real knowledge of Rep. Lee’s sacrifice. When will the people of America open their eyes and see that they hold the power to repeal the act? Support for the repeal of AUMF should be a make-or-break deal for politicians. We need to allow ourselves to admit failure and a learn from it.
Great reporting Glenn, as always!
Clever…the day you chose to publish this article. Strangely, several times when I tried clicking the link to open this article, it rerouted me back to the top of The Intercept home page. Then I wasn’t able to access the comments section and now I can’t respond to other peoples comments in this thread, even though I have the ability to do so in other threads? Its probably a coincident and I’m not going to mull over it much.
Glenn you stuck a note, a reminder of sorts, that the major developments that Americans are experiencing: the loss of civil liberties, perpetual war in the middle east, Wall Streets take over main street, expansion of clandestine programs, the war on terror, looting of the treasury, the fundamental shift in the way that Americans interact with their government, ect. are rooted in those attacks on Sept. 11 2001.
This was nothing more than a way for the spineless congress to take their responsibilities off the table
Thank you, Glenn, for your unending efforts to shine a light on such gravely important matters! And thank you Barbara Lee for your lone dissent! Unfortunately the odds are stacked against her. There are two kinds of problems… 1) Those that everyone complains about and 2) Those that courageous people do something about. What kind of problem do we have here? It is BIG NO DOUBT, but can we do something about it? These courageous folks already are… http://www.conventionofstates.com
Brilliant quote:
“Accept the irrational when you fear, but not when you hope—this has been the sales pitch of the 2016 election.” — Jessa Crispin
http://thebaffler.com/salvos/madam-prescient-jessa-crispin
The “war on terror” like the war on drugs or the war on poverty isn’t a real war.
These metaphorical wars are designed to empower the institutions which profit from the target of the so-called war.
The metaphor of “war” means the institution can break or bend any rules or laws — as if WW II — because the outcome (never in doubt because always in doubt) supercedes all common sense restraints: torture, mass imprisonment, section 8 housing all plausibly serve the respective goals of stopping terror, ending drug use, or remediating extreme poverty.
When such good intentions justify or require bad acts — when the ends justify the means — then those ends themselves turn corrupt or rotten. The institutions “fighting” these metaphoric wars profit because these wars cannot be “won.” Those methods which emerge — e.g., firebombing Dresden, spying on Americans, zero tolerance policies, warehousing of human beings — are necessarily approved because the institutional values (X at any cost) trump human values.
Institutionalized, political goals will always trample human rights because these political institutions — e.g., Congress, the Pentagon, DEA, HHS — ignore what their policies do to actual human beings. The people operating under aegis of the institution must fulfill these institutional goals. The more aggressive the policy, the greater the political zeal and the greater the willingness to condone and enforce immoral and inhumane policies.
Here, almost any individual within the institution of “Congress” must uphold the institutional goal MORE stridently than those outside the institution — this is the nature of the institutional structure.
It excuses and rewards the most pious while punishing the heretic.
excellent comment Milton
I disagree with your definition of real war. The “war on drugs” (WOD) and “the war on terror” are both real wars when it comes to the use of violence by one or more states, the massive disobedience by the US government of its own Constitution and ratified treaties, and the body count. (The war on poverty was different, and abandoned in favor of killing millions in SE Asia.)
And, I don’t don’t think good intentions are involved in the top level decisions to initiate the WOD and WOT. USA already had experience in a previous WOD, and knew it would result in a significant increase in crime, especially organized crime. USA also had considerable in wars like the WOT, albeit not on such a large scale, and knew the results were negative overall and for almost everybody involved, except for a few corrupt lucky winners. Some of the dumb recruits that followed along may have had good intentions, but failed to seriously investigate whether or not their decision to participate in mass murder would produce positive or negative results overall, so I will not accuse them of having sincerely good intentions.
I note the professed institutional values are not what you and I seem to agree are the actual values of those institutions. When I was in the corporate world, we called it empire building: building up one’s own part of a company to obtain more resources, including promotion for the boss, without regard to goals of the larger organization. In this case, the larger organization is USA (the nation, not just its government), and the internal organizations being built up are parts of the government and its contractors.
I feel like Obama could take literally anything and dip it into a nice sauce and call it dinner for his leagues of devotees.
Can’t wait to see what stand-in people are going to follow next in substitution for their own observation of events and particulars.
Glad this woman was focused.
Obama – ….OK, I call this meeting to order….Item one….how do we make the American government look more like a pack of deranged criminals than it already does….Any ideas????
North Dakota – I’ve got an idea….Why don’t we destroy sacred burial grounds,…..followed by releasing vicious dogs on protesters,…and we can top it off by prosecuting a world renowned journalist!!!
1980:
– in 1980, a federal court said, of the whole sad story, “a more ripe and rank case of dishonorable dealings will never, in all probability, be found in our history.”
Fast forward to 2016….
– Hey Judge…can we have permission to destroy their sacred burial grounds over the weekend????
– Yeah…OK.
“Of course the people don’t want war. But after all, it’s the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it’s always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it’s a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger.”
— Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials
I believe this statement has always been taken out of context. Reichsmarshall Goering gave one of the most eloquent speeches in the entirety of the Nuremberg trails stunning everyone in attendance.
The context for this statement is an interview (one of a series) with Leon Goldensohn, a US Army psychiatrist who was assigned to monitor the “mental health” of the Nuremberg defendants.
The Nuremberg Interviews: An American Psychiatrist’s Conversations with the Defendants and Witnesses
Enlighten me: what is the proper context and how does that change its basic premise. Not trying to be a smart ass because context is very important and is the first victim of what passes for journalism these days.
All I can say is that regardless, the statement has been true of every single conflict we the USA have been a part of in my 65 years on this planet.
If Goering didn’t say it I would be glad to take credit for something that remains true today as it did when it was or wasn’t said in whatever context one chooses.
Steve,
I see now what the problem may be in my copy and paste.
This: “Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials” could be perceived to mean, he said this during the trial. Doug Salzmann is correct in providing the context which I still say would be accurate even if it were made up out of whole cloth.
“We got around to the subject of war again and I said that, contrary to his attitude, I did not think that the common people are very thankful for leaders who bring them war and destruction.
“Why, of course, the people don’t want war,” Goering shrugged. “Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece. Naturally, the common people don’t want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship.”
“There is one difference,” I pointed out. “In a democracy the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars.”
“Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.” Gustave Gilbert
Patriotism. Representative Barbara Lee is a Patriot.
I was able to post it on Facebook by copying and pasting the link. If I just clicked on the Facebook button it wouldn’t let me post it.
Yes Facebook is blocking the sharing of this article.
It is blocked! I shared it early this morning but now it says “blocked for security purposes.”
I get this when I try;
“This message contains content that has been blocked by our security systems.
If you think you’re seeing this by mistake, please let us know.”
But if I just paste the link it works.
See Greenwald’s Twitter chain here. Seems people can post it directly at FB, just not from here.
I’ve tried to block FB … to no avail.
Dieser Artikel ist eine Perle !
Glenn – I tried to post your article on my Facebook page, and it was blocked. Has anyone else reported this to you? I am incredulous.
Same thing here.
I blocks my posting too. I did post the YouTube video of Lee’s speech. I always thought that those “conspiracy” theorist were wacko… Maybe Not. I left a stinging message for Facebook. .
I am getting tired of 911 media stories that do not even consider the possibility that it was a false flag event that has purposely led to a police state and endless war. This kind of common sense is dismissed out of hand by our deliberately blind “free” press as crackpot theory or enemy propaganda.
The public is led to believe that the idea that such a massive government conspiracy could remain secret is incredulous.
Ever wonder how Israel got to be a nuclear power? Ever read anything about it in our free press? Seventy years of silence.
https://consortiumnews.com/2016/09/11/how-israel-stole-the-bomb/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyman_G._Rickover
wait, you’re the guy worried about pot affecting the brain?
“Ever wonder how Israel got to be a nuclear power? Ever read anything about it in our free press?”
Does The New York Times count as mainstream press? This article is 9 years old:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/29/world/middleeast/29nixon.html?_r=0
Attorneys Are Told: “Possibility of WTC 7 Collapsing Due to Fire is ZERO”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxG4lYyitsI
Well. I had never heard of the “intercept”, Glenn Greenwald or Barbara Lees before this article. Now that I have I can’t say I am better off for having found them.
I suppose Ms Lees believed back then that if we just leave the islamic terrorists alone they would leave us alone too. Or was she thinking that money should be spent in her community. Well, what she was thinking?
I am sure she was right: that if we just left the middle east alone all of those innocent middle eastern lives would have been saved. A “hero!”
Instead her people now have allowed Iran to get nuclear weapons, (I’m sure all the people who will die in Israel will think Ms Lees is a “hero”), North Korea to become a nuclear power, (I’m sure all the people of South Korea and the Northwest USA who will die from N. Korea’s nuke attacks will think Ms Lees is a “hero”) and virtually all of Europe who is today struggling with terrorist immigrant communities think Ms Lees is a “hero.”
The USA has seen cowards like Mr. Greenwald since we began as a nation: like those who said “King George III loves us!” Like those who said: “The Kaiser is Europe’s problem!” Just like those who said: “Hitler is 3000 miles away from here!” Cowards are cowards. For a man to be a coward means that there is a problem with his genetics…. mankind today exists because men have for millenniums been willing to die for their family, their clan, their community. Die: give their life willingly so that those who come after them can be free, live in peace. Not the women: the men.
But cowards? They hide, shaking in fear. They would rather be alive in chains then die free. And their family in chains too. Who cares, right Mr Greenwald?
The best part of these people is that they author their own demise. Always. The democrats have long since decided the winning political strategy is to pander to the population demographic that is having the most babies…great long term strategy. Pay them to have babies. And: its working! Next baby-making machine after already pandering to latinos: middle eastern muslims.
So who is the democratic high office opening the door to? Their own demise. You think Sharia law will tolerate homosexuals? Welfare? Women’s rights? Abortion? Legal drugs? Well, that one they may ignore: it keeps a part of the population sedated and worthless.
The moronic thinking, that has never worked, is that those who are different will become just like you if they see/live your wonderful life.
Well: its 150 years since the Civil War: go walk down the streets of Harlem Mr Greenwald: live the experience of “melding” your party has crafted. Black America is more enslaved today then it was 150 years ago. You could run away from steel chains but looks like no one can run away from ignorance and the dependence on the dole.
Ms Lees? Think her a “hero?” Every dole-dollar she puts into her community does one thing and one thing only: keeps her living in wealth and power. Keeps her & hers off the same welfare-horror she helps fund. Keeps her being worshiped and elected. All the progress of melding the black community did into the 60s was undone, in a stroke, with “Aid the Dependent Children.” Thanks Lyndon. Great strategy democrats.
You know the funny part: slavery was abolished by a republican president and a republican congress and the men, mostly white men, of the Union who died, willingly, to free them.
Well: the answer to save humanity is Armageddon.
But I am making my forecast today:
Trump/Clinton get elected. Our nation becomes even more divided along race/economic/political lines. The evil of the world fills in yet another vacuum left when moral men become women. The “Greatest Nation in History” becomes history. Just like they all did before.
And the planet sees yet another mass-extinction of the dominate species.
Thanks, in part, to Ms Lees….. a true “american hero.”
Wow. No wonder many of us can’t wait for America’s turn as Senior Slaughterhouse Assistant to be over. Love the “moral men become woman” comment – real 18th Century stuff. And as for “Black America is more enslaved today then it was 150 years ago” – amazing. Is this real, or is it what I believe my young friends call “click-bait”?
I have tried to share this article on Facebook, and I was prevented from doing so by Facebook’s security system! Has anyone else experienced this?
We all have the power of Choice. It is important to stand up for what you believe. Great article.
Bravo! Eloquently and well written.
OH MY GOD. FACEBOOK HAS BLOCKED LINKING TO THIS ENTIRE SITE.
GOD HELP US.
A real hero who saw her duty with a clear eye and spoke the truth.
“Let us not become the evil we deplore.”
I’ve always thought that “fighting fire w/ fire” meant exactly that: becoming the evil you set out to destroy.
Beyond that, and slightly off topic: Americans generally have become so patriotic that they are actually unbecoming American.
PS Thanks for writing this piece; I was unaware of her contribution.
” Americans generally have become so patriotic…”
Let us not confuse patriotism with jingoism. Barbara Lee is a patriot, “unbecoming Americans” are jingoistic. The latter is the problem.
It truly is “unbecoming” to be an “american.”
Of course, it is also unbecoming to claim any nationalistic identity.
All nationalistic identities, like religious identities, are about
separating oneself from the rest of the planet and those identities
are usually VERY profitable for the elite members of those identities
who are usually there to reinforce the delusional belief in
the superiority of their preferred limitations.
The human family dysfunction is the most prominent reality
ad its degradation of itself is the stuff of legends.
“ad” should be “and”
My apologies (again).
Here is a related and little known fact,
The ground breaking for building the pentagon was on
September 11, 1941.
That is
exactly 60 years before the attack which provided the pentagon
with its un-ending and continuously escalating source of revenue.
What a coincidence!?
Mr. Greenwald
In retrospect, the Bush administration with the overwhelming support of Congress made the correct decision by passing AUMF which allows unilateral military action against violent non-state actors (principally Islamic terrorist organizations) operating throughout the world using Special Forces, drones and manned aircraft. The “war on terror” was not created by the US, but resulted directly from the attack by al-Qaeda terrorists on 9-11. Since 9-11, Islamic terrorists have significantly widened their attacks to innocent (primarily Muslim) civilians seeking power to impose an anti-democratic, authoritarian rule on Muslims world-wide. The rise of Islamic fundamentalism can be attributed to forces of anti-globalization, political oppression, cultural dysfunction and religious intolerance. This has little to do with AUMF or US foreign policy – or our support for Israel.
Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda declared war on the US in 1998. Few people took the declaration seriously. How could a rag tag loosely knit organization of terrorists harm the world’s sole super power? As a result, on September 11, 2001, al-Qaeda carried out a plan to attack the twin towers of the World Trade Center murdering 3000 innocent people and causing tens (or hundreds) of millions of dollars of damage to the US economy. Islamic terrorists threaten western democracies (for example, Charlie Hebdo), economic stability and western interests.
There is no doubt that Barbara Lee believes her vote against AUMF was right. Her sole vote of opposition just indicates her naivety about the goals of al-Qaeda and the rise of Islamic fundamentalism world-wide. France – alone – has identified 15,000 radicalized Muslims with the potential for violence. Additionally, over 5000 Muslims have traveled from Europe to join ISIS. Many Muslims have not assimilated into European culture. For example, polls conducted in Britain indicate a majority of British Muslims prefer sharia law. In Gaza, Hamas terrorists were elected to govern while Hamas’s parent organization (Muslim Brotherhood) was elected to rule Egypt. The seventh century Taliban continues their assault on women and minorities in Afghanistan while accounting for 70% of the civilian casualties in their war to retake power.
Innocent people continue to be the primary target for Muslim extremists – world-wide. The US with the cooperation of regional governments in North Africa and the Middle East has targeted brutal terrorist organizations like Boko Haram, ISIS, al-Shabaab, al-Qaeda (etc.) which seek power to subjugate Muslims under their strict interpretation of sharia law. They target and commit atrocities usually directed at innocent civilians – mostly Muslims – with the goal of reestablishing the caliphate.
Hook, line, and sinker.
A well organized compendium of the collective positions of the major US news outlets for the past 15 years. I like that you left out the introductory paragraph and cut to the chase. And indeed, each of your four support paragraphs serves as a leg to prop up your misguided thesis
“The “war on terror” was not created by the US, but resulted directly from the attack by al-Qaeda terrorists on 9-11. ”
Your understanding of what transpired seems to have begun, in your mind, on 11Sep01. Convenient for the rest of your remarks, but inaccurate in the extreme.
The “war on terror™” is a construct justifying actions that only results in more terror, and, more war.
Americans seem unable to grasp the well-known concept, surviving from ancient times, that you cannot kill an idea. You can modify or mollify it, but it will survive, no matter how many dead people your efforts result.
Non-violent dissent is a feature of a democracy. Perhaps were you not so cloistered (wrapped in the rag some call an American flag) you would see the errors in your comments.
It’s up to you, of course, but I highly recommend ignoring Craig Summers. I do 95% of the time, and so do many others.
He’s been spewing authoritarian, rightwing bullshit in Greenwald’s comments for 3-4 years.He’s pro-torture, opposes the American 4th Amendment to our Constitution, and says he’s voting for Donald Trump.
Engaging him causes him to vomit out massive walls of tendentious text that pollute the board. So, please consider the option of not doing so.
Bardi
“…….The “war on terror™” is a construct justifying actions that only results in more terror, and, more war……Non-violent dissent is a feature of a democracy………”
First of all, the “war on terror” did officially begin after 911 because the severity of the attack – indicating the dangers of ignoring the threat. Of course, the US opposed and fought terrorism well before that date. Second of all, what does non-violent dissent have to do with fighting terrorism? While non violent dissent is an important feature of democracy, it has nothing to do with terrorism. Third, would an isolationist policy by the US result in the disbanding of ISIS, al-Qaeda, Boko Haram, al-Shabaab etc.? Emphatically NO. In fact, altering our foreign policy toward a more isolationist position is the goal of the terrorists. They have political goals and gaining power is at the top of the list.
You fundamentally misunderstand the causes for the “extreme” interpretation of Islam which I touched on in my first post (much like the author of the article and Barbara Lee). The Intercept focuses on blaming the US for the rise of Islamic terrorism. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Finally, Mona’s response is typical. She opposes alternative viewpoints. In fact, no one post more on this thread than she does. She is the former law partner of Greenwald (author of this article) and serves as a moderator on this site. She is outwardly and proudly an anti-Jewish bigot. She is lying when she says she ignores me 95% of the time. She responds regularly to my posts although much of the time it’s through a third party.
Thanks.
why would bin laden or al qaeda or isis or any muslim want to harm america? why isn’t their wrath directed at costa rica?
if the question is over your head, please respond and i will explain it to you in grade school language.
“Third, would an isolationist policy by the US result in the disbanding of ISIS, al-Qaeda, Boko Haram, al-Shabaab etc.? Emphatically NO. In fact, altering our foreign policy toward a more isolationist position is the goal of the terrorists. They have political goals and gaining power is at the top of the list.”
They do in fact need our engagement in the middle east to support their fundamentalist propaganda, it’s neccesary for their recruitment and fostering division between muslims and christians. Ironically that is true here in the US as well, apparently it’s working.
“……They do in fact need our engagement in the middle east to support their fundamentalist propaganda……”
I agree. They are good propagandists. How else could you recruit Muslims to kill mainly Muslims?
“How else could you recruit Muslims to kill mainly Muslims?”
Myriad ways, many likely the same as those used by white people to recruit white people to kill white people for centuries. (Insert “black”, “Muslim”, “Christian”, or multiple other groups. Humans as a whole are pretty good at that.)
The phrasing of your question is the smoking gun of your ignorance. A cursory study and/or understanding of the Shia/Sunni divide alone would negate your point.
US military intervention and de-Baathification of the Iraqi government, not to mention disbanding the Iraqi military leaving thousands of soldiers with no job or anything to fight for, directly led to the creation of ISIS. The US support of mujahedin in the 80’s against the Soviets created the Taliban who gave Al-Qa’ida resources and land to grow their operation.
The US can’t keep creating their enemies with military intervention and then fighting them military intervention. To say 9/11 was the start of anything other than another in a long line of misguided wars waged by men who would have flunked Poli Sci 101, betrays only your own limited understanding of the last hundred years of history.
Craig Summer’s is the kind of Amurican that has allowed the the crimes of the uS (intentional!) to occur. They are so poorly educated and excellently brainwashed into thinking they are exceptional, special, heroic Etc Etc. Except for the few you find on here who openly rebel against their evil rulers.
Shame on the uS!
Remember the millions who have died from amurican evil!
Rayray
“…….Except for the few you find on here who openly rebel against their evil rulers…….”
Few on here “who openly rebel against their evil rulers”? Are you joking? Anti-Americanism is rampant on this site – above and below the line.
@ Craig
Please explain to everyone how “non-state actors” can “declare war” against a “state”.
And by “explanation”, I mean please provide a legal explanation that arises from international law.
We’ll wait.
rrheard
“……Please explain to everyone how “non-state actors” can “declare war” against a “state”…..”
It’s fairly simple. Al-Qaeda actually declared war on the US twice issuing two fatwas (Heritage Foundation):
“…….In August of 1996, Osama bin Laden issued his first fatwa, a 30-page polemic entitled “Declaration of War Against the Americans Occupying the Land of the Two Holy Places,” against the United States and Israel, and it was published in a London newspaper called Al Quds al Arabi……”
“……The second fatwa was published on February 23, 1998, in Al Quds al Arabi. Unlike the first fatwa, which was issued by Osama bin Laden alone, this fatwa was signed by Osama bin Laden; Ayman al-Zawahiri, leader of Jihad group in Egypt and al Qaeda second-in-command; Abu-Yasir Rafa’l Ahmad Taha, leader of the Islamic Group; Sheikh Mir Hamzah, secretary of the Jumiat-ut-Ulema-e-Pakistan; and Fazlul Rahman, leader of the Jihad Movement in Bangladesh……”
Of course, no one took al-Qaeda seriously. Indeed, probably some joked about it, and even you are are wondering how a non-state actor can declare war against the US – even as 3000 people were murdered. I personally have no idea what international law says about al-Qaeda’s Declaration of War against the US, but do you think al-Qaeda cared one fucking iota about international law?
Thanks
How so? Destabilization brought about by American intervention is the only thing that can explain post-Iraq trends in violence.
Jose
“…….Destabilization brought about by American intervention is the only thing that can explain post-Iraq trends in violence…….”
You are partially right, but you are missing the point. First of all, destabilization in Iraq was also brought about by the alienation of the Sunni minority by the Shia majority after the US was kicked out of Iraq. Secondly, the US invasion does help explain the power vacuum and violence in post invasion Iraq, but it does not explain the rise of Islamic fundamentalism, endemic religious bigotry in the Middle East and North Africa, opposition to western values or the Shia-Sunni divide which underpins the geopolitics of the Middle East. These are all centuries old problems which have nothing to do with the US. The same fundamentalists who traveled from various countries in the Middle East and helped defeat the Soviets in Afghanistan in the 1980s are also present in Iraq, Syria and Libya. There is nothing new except the invasion of Iraq, the regime change in Libya and the Arab Spring helped provide a power vacuum filled by the Islamists (who have been present for 1500 years).
Islamic fundamentalism began in the seventh century. The US did not create the Islamic empire (which conquered much of Europe) or Islamic Holy Land. Today, the fundamentalist are a part of the oppressed class in Muslim majority countries (like the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt). Indeed, they oppose western values including democracy. Like many westerners, they fear and oppose globalization. The ethnic and religious bigotry in the Middle East underpins their culture(s). The US did not create any of this.
There is no doubt that Barbara Lee believes her vote against AUMF was right. Her sole vote of opposition just indicates her naivety about the goals of al-Qaeda and the rise of Islamic fundamentalism world-wide.
I think you might be mistaking naivety for seeing the bigger picture.
It was not the attack, but rather its success that brought about the response. The first attack on the WTC in 1993 killed only six. There was no irrational response because it did not bring down the towers killing 100,000 or so as intended.
The “war on terror” was created by the US as a response to the killing in NY. There simply is no question about that. Look at the response to the first attack: perpetrators were apprehended and went to jail, but life went on as normal.
The response to 9/11 was mass hysteria in the congress and throughout the country. It was not a rational response to a powerful enemy, but rather an irrational response to a weak enemy, one that brought more support to that enemy and similar groups, enabling the current situation.
“……The response to 9/11 was mass hysteria in the congress and throughout the country. It was not a rational response to a powerful enemy, but rather an irrational response to a weak enemy, one that brought more support to that enemy and similar groups, enabling the current situation……”
First of all, the US did politely ask the Taliban turn over Bin Laden. The Taliban placed conditions on his extradition to the US. The US government (not so) politely invaded eventually killing Bin Laden in Pakistan.
Second of all, there is a whole lot of difference between killing six people and murdering 3000. Are you saying that the US should have treated both attacks the same as if there was no difference? Sorry if I don’t buy that argument.
If by ‘correct decision’ you mean an “unconstitutional abrogation of congressional responsibility,” then sure.
Perhaps some day the statues of genociders and war mongers, that fill the public spaces of America, will be torn down and replaced by America’s real heroes…..Edward Snowden, Chelsea Manning, Barbara Lee, etc…
Well said! If you’re an American I’m proud of you!
It’s so sick what they are doing and have done well before 9-11 too.
Thank you for the reminder Glenn. It strikes me that fifteen years later, even after all the ceaseless war, it is the militaristic view that prevails as the dominant force within the U.S. power structure.
It’s inspiring to see someone have the strength of character to support the moral course regardless of political consequence. Barbara Lee is the type of citizen this country should be seeking to lead it. Instead we are left with… I don’t even know what to call these candidates.
-j
Spot on, Will be the first time in 45 years of voting and working my ass off for Dem Presidential candidates that I will vote for a third party. Jill Stein, Can not vote for a proven and deadly war hawk like Clinton (Iraq, Libya,Syria) with massive ties to Wall Street, Comey findings, for TPP and Keystone before she was against, Totally and dangerously predictable, Donald dangerously unpredictable,
Can not vote for Clinton just because she is a woman,
Voting my conscience….would have been Bernie….now Jill Steiin
I’m looking closely at Jill Stein. The Donald’s economic plan is off-putting especially the repeal of the Death Tax.
We are coming up on the greatest inter-generational transfer of wealth in history. If the .001 percent are allowed to transfer their wealth tax-free, we will see the emergence of a hereditary aristocracy.
Jill is the obvious choice. The only choice, really. The other two buffoons are media-driven circus sideshows.
We have had an hereditary aristocracy for over a hundred years. Its emergence and evil effects are only beginning to be recognized.
We have a concentration of wealth that is more pronounced than any time in history.
Well said Kathleen. It’s just unbelievable how many women who are intoxicated by Killary.
She’s just as scary as trump if not more. Unbelievable!
911 was a false flag war provocation designed to bring about a war of civilizations and increase arms sales.
There were bombs in the buildings. WTC7 was a controlled demolition as were WTC1 and WTC2.
The Pentagon was hit by an airplane, possibly under computer control, in spite of the air defenses surrounding Washington DC.
We don’t know exactly what happened. We do know that the US Government is lying.
The whole world knows.
Conspiracy theories are just silly and add no useful dialogue
In my opinion, her’s is the only voice worth listening to on 9/11.
When will we have had enough of this jingoistic bullshit?
History will record there was not universal acquiescence to the assumption of absolute power by the Executive. Congress may have voted itself into irrelevance when it gave away its constitutional power to declare war, but it did not do so unanimously.
Was Ms. Lee simply an irredeemable obstructionist by nature, or did she secretly believe the Constitution was still relevant? Perhaps she still subscribes to the discredited theory of a balance of powers. Or perhaps George Bush had slighted her in some way. If asked, I’m sure she will declare she voted on principle. But if so, that would be a first for any member of the Legislature.
In any case, her vote was noteworthy and she deserves recognition for it. Still, I don’t understand why she hasn’t yet been expelled from the Democratic Party. She is campaigning for Mrs. Clinton, so perhaps she has privately apologized for her act of defiance and has received forgiveness.
You would bring up Ms Lee’s lackluster endorsement of Mrs Clinton.
*Like Sanders, not exactly a ringing endorsement [of Clinton].
Clearly, you (& I) don’t understand the abject fear and terror Mr. Trump strikes in the heart of the progressive liberal. Ms Lee is black, female, liberal and progressive … if she was a little Mexican and wore a ‘burkini’, Trump would have his own personal voodoo doll.
The only LOTE we have to fear is LOTE itself.
Take heart, Your Excellency. Congressional trouble makers of today may have modeled themselves on the heroic trouble makers of yesterday, but a high-order fascist state will eventually isolate and ruin them for their betrayals. They are tracked down and eliminated in the same way polio is about to be eradicated worldwide.
A few decades ago there were two congressional legislators, both men, who voted against the war in Vietnam, a war in which so many gave their all; today, there is only one person voting against our wars against intolerance, Barbara Lee.
Lest we forget the back story, the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution (1964) was an ur-AUMF that allowed Johnson and Nixon/Kissinger to wage war at will in Southeast Asia. Only two senators voted against that resolution: Republican/Independent/Democrat (in that order) Wayne Morse (Oregon) and Democrat/Independent (yes, another maverick) Ernest Gruening (Alaska).
Gruening, who had worked as a journalist (cough, cough) before he went into politics in support of the New Deal, wrote this for an issue of the “Nation” in May 1969:
“It is, and for some time has been, obvious that the most important issue facing our nation is to get out of the war in Southeast Asia. All our other issues and problems are slighted, impaired and unresolved until we halt the fighting, stop the… continuing drain of blood and treasure, and turn to the long-neglected and pressing needs at home.”
The many who hunt down the unpatriotic today are not distracted by the words of the few who stand apart. In the hallowed halls of Congress, we are approaching unanimity for defending the homeland. There are no longer male dissenters, white or otherwise. It’s down to one woman, and she from a minority. This is progress.
How about we pencil her name in for president!
13,000 US soldiers lost their lives in Afghanistan and Iraq, another 40,000 injured and more than 800,000 US veterans from those two wars have been medically treated in the US since returning home…$2 trillion and counting, global insecurity and chaos, bombings, retributions, on and on it goes…US at war 223 out of 240 years since 1776!
The 420 who voted YES for AUMF…also aided in the deaths of more than 1,000,000 innocent Iraqis and Afghanis
Jeanette Rankin of Montana voted against WW1 and WW2 – the only person in Congress to do so after Pearl Harbor.
Oh my, watching that clip gave me chills. She nailed it. She actually read the resolution and completely understood it.
I had no idea there was a descent?
Thank you Glenn for that.
It starts with one. The second though is most important to the cause of the one. Thanks Glenn for being the second, at least from my perspective.
#420-1
Now that’s called leadership. Let’s pencil her in for the next president.
The mainstream media’s treatment of Barbara Lee was just more evidence that Operation Mockingbird is still operating under a different name and most of what Americans know simply ain’t so. Castro was not a real enemy of America: much like the recent Fast & Furious program, the CIA sold weapons to both sides in the Cuban revolution and Castro’s stranglehold on Cuba was financed through annual bribes from the US government in the form of rent cheques for the lease of land at Guantanamo. Castro was a fraud who railed against US imperialism to conceal his own complicity & corruption from the Cuban public. As manufactured enemies go, Castro and Bin Laden were just the tip of a very large iceberg. The islamic jihadis which are secretly funded with US tax dollars will provide a justification for the hundred years war envisioned by PNAC when they planned 9/11. Dwight Eisenhower and Smedley Butler tried to warn the American people about the corporate sponsorship of corrupt politicians who support perpetual war for profit, but nobody took them seriously. All wars are bankers wars and that includes the war on truth being waged by the major media conglomerates. The world is run by crime families and corporate crime syndicates; taking it back will not be easy but not impossible. Can we break free of dependence on government and stop funding that which enslaves us — this is the real challenge of the new century.
Was unaware of Barbara Lee’s lone vote Glenn. Thanks.
Right. The Sister showed a lot of “vision”, with her vote (and voice), against that particular declaration. As usual, the powers that be ” wound up looking stupid in the long run”. On another thread, why aren’t the Saudis being prosecuted (or attacked) for their obvious participation in this catastrophe! ?
Thanks Glenn. The day Hillary Clinton includes Congresswoman Lee in her vast circle of advisors and tosses Kissinger is the day I will believe she can learn from her 24 years near the heart of government.
Now there is a Woman who should be President. Intelligent, reflective, measured and incredibly brave. Compare her to the inarticulate buffoon who was POTUS at the time or any before or since.
Good article, a reminder that there are still some people in this country who are brave enough to speak out for reason and human dignity.
I’m pretty disappointed in the non-existence of any coverage of Native American issues here at TI (unless I’ve missed it). Particularly bothersome is the lack of coverage of the DAPL (Dakota Access Pipeline) stand off. Jill Stein has risked arrest by standing with the Standing Rock Sioux people. Jill is another very heroic woman.
Agreed, I’m surprised TI hasn’t covered it yet given the insane pushback by the N. Dakota state government and local sheriff’s office. Also agreed that Jill is heroic; I had the honor to help gather signatures to get her on the ballot here in Illinois.
“I had the honor to help gather signatures to get her on the ballot here in Illinois.”
You are a hero too! Thanks!
I agree. They should absolutely cover it.
“persons he [the President] determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided”
So the AUMF covers the Anwar and Abdulrahman al-Awlaki assassinations. Whew, it’s a relief that the nation isn’t totally lawless.
Susan Sontag’s thoughts on the retaliatory issues behind the 9/11 attacks and the senselessness of thoughtlessly letting the Bush administration run rampant should also be remembered.
She ended her statement in The New Yorker saying…
“Let’s by all means grieve together. But let’s not be stupid together. A few shreds of historical awareness might help us to understand what has just happened, and what may continue to happen. “Our country is strong”, we are told again and again. I for one don’t find this entirely consoling. Who doubts that America is strong? But that’s not all America has to be.”
http://groups.colgate.edu/aarislam/susan.htm
The reaction from our government to the 9/11 attacks was all too predictable in that the leaders in the Washington-New York axis of power felt personally threatened by the attacks in a way that they would not have had the attacks been against, say, a Denver.
” Lee’s visionary warnings and solitary courage should always be commemorated on 9/11″.
I second that and when they get around to building the ‘Museum of Man’s Inhumanity to Man’ she should be honored with a bright and shining light, the glow of hope amidst its darkness and despair.
It is absolutely heartbreaking that people like Barbara Lee are among our American citizenry eligible to run for the highest office, and we only really have the likes of Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton for a choice.
It’s like God is saying “They are all you deserve since you let your society turn into a modern day Sodom and Gomorrah, destroying nation after nation for the profits of war, and allowing the abuse of your own people for the greed of so very few.
Not true. Jill Stein is on 45 state ballots. If people so wanted, they could try to vote her into office (try, because the corrupt Establishment might very well attempt to cheat her out of a victory if the people voted for her).
i will vote for her the only reason i even registered in many years of not doing so was to vote for sanders, but jill stein has about as much chance to win as the woman in the above video has to be heard. i love her for it though money is so in comtrol of the world and our citizens its horrible. i have watched comments on a facebook page devoted to the company i worked for when 9/11 happened, and people have no concept of the travesty only their emotions and how important the US is.
To: Joshua H thank you for your thoughts.
I said “and we only really have the likes of”
You said “Not True”…Jill Stein
I will look for one of you posts after Election Day and if she wins I will say you were so right I was “Not True”.
As much as I respect Jill if Eugene Debs and Ralph Nader could not win, unfortunately it does not look good for her…”so we only really have the likes of”…and I write it with a heavy heart.
And, sadly, I’m not sure how long Barbara Lee will last, given the Democratic efforts to purge peacemakers from their ranks. (See the “U-S-A!” chanting to counter “No more war!” at the convention, as well as the primary targeting of Kucinich, Grayson and McKinney.)
An examination of the events and public response immediately after 9/11 shows that 9/11 alone would likely have not been enough to create widespread public support for an Iraq War, and possibly not even for the passage of the Patriot Act, HR 3162 on Oct 24, 2001 (on a 357-66 vote, with Barbara Lee also voting No). Without the anthax letters, it would have been far more difficult.
The Patriot Act vote took place about 9 days after the anthrax attacks on the Senate took place (mailed on 10/9, opened on 10/15); the previous anthrax attacks (mailed on 9/18 to media outlets) did not raise a public alarm, as their one victim, Bob Stevens, was assumed to have naturally contracted anthrax. In the wake of the panic caused by the anthrax attacks, the Senate was shut down for decontamination and the Patriot Act was passed with little debate (indeed, debate was suspended; and so the 2/3 majority rule was implemented to pass it).
The Patriot Act, like the Iraq War agenda, represented a long-standing wish to increase domestic secret police powers, and was written well before 9/11:
http://www.globalissues.org/article/342/the-usa-patriot-act-was-planned-before-911
Finally, Judicial Watch revealed that members of Cheney’s staff had been given anthrax antibiotics a few days after 9/11, which would have protected anyone loading letters with dangerous anthrax spores from infection. Scooter Libby might have gotten his nickname, “Germ Boy,” at this time. (Libby is also notorious for leaking CIA agent Valerie Plame’s name to the press, for which GW Bush pardoned him).
Obviously, that looks like an effort to enhance the public panic levels after 9/11 by targeting the American public with anthrax spores (a high-tech weaponized preparation, designed to form an aerosol, a likely product of the CIA’s Clear Vision program of the late 1990s to replicate a Soviet era anthrax bomb, undertaken by military-industrial biowarfare contractor Battelle Memorial Institute) – and it was highly effective. The nationwide panic those letters sparked was certainly greater than that caused by 9/11.
The Bush Administration immediately attempted to link those letters to Saddam’s program, but here we see how bumbling plots break down, since the agencies tasked with the immediate investigation (USAMRIID) were clearly not in the loop; they were concerned that the anthrax might be laced with smallpox and conducted a detailed investigation that revealed 1) the anthrax strain was the Ames strain, used in the U.S. anthrax vaccine program as the “challenge” strain, and 2) it was a high-tech spore preparation, made with nano-particle techniques that coated the spores with a silica blend that assisted in aerosolization (accounting for their contamination of the entire postal mail route) Ever hear of a BattellePharma Electrospray Nebulizer? No longer on the market. Try Googling it. . . if you want some attention from the FBI, that is. The AMRIID workers were immediately slapped with a gag order by the FBI, but not before the story got out to Hot Zone author Richard Preston, who made it a chapter in his book, The Demon in the Freezer.
This necessitated a massive FBI coverup, the false targeting of first Steven Hatfill and then Bruce Ivins, and the sham closing of the case in 2008 by the FBI; probably the most blatant government coverup of the decade. An attempt to reopen the case in 2009 by Congress was squashed by an Obama veto threat; Obama actually expanded domestic Patriot Act surveillance from 2009 onwards as well.
It all comes down to creating a causus belli for war with Iraq; coordination with Tony Blair and the recruitment of Chalabi to the effort began within a month of 9/11, with ex-CIA Director James Woolsey playing a go-between role, and then you had the “trusted” Colin Powell waving his little tube of anthrax simulant around at the UN meeting.
The desire to overthrow Saddam and replace him with a US-friendly client regime was a long-standing PNAC (Project for a New American Century) goal dating back to the 1990s, but amplified by the Cheney Energy Task Force meetings of March 2001 (including the detailed maps of Iraqi oilfields and the list of foreign suitors for those oilfields, which notably excluded U.S. and British oil majors, as well as Cheney’s company, Halliburton.)
As far as Afghanistan, it would have been far more justified to slap Saudi Arabia with sanctions and freeze all their assets in the United States than to invade Afghanistan. On the other hand, a six-month military action in Afghanistan to seize Osama bin Laden would have been justified, somewhat; but, the real agenda in Afghanistan was to install a client regime that would support the trans-Afghanistan pipeline that would allow Cental Asian oil and gas to be exported to Indian Ocean ports.
I doubt Bush & Cheney wanted to capture Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan in 2001-2002, in any case, as that might have sucked the wind out of their invade Iraq project. To them, Afghanistan was clearly a sideshow.
I think you are dead wrong about that.
good. You know a few things. Considerin EVERYTHING you say as true, i would like for you to speculate on Building 7, the what’fers.
Please, indulge me.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
As far as pre-knowledge, I really believe that Team Bush were aware that hijackings were going to take place, they just thought that it would be some hostage situation at an airport, something they could use for political advantage. If you want my summary of events as I see it:
1) By early July 2001, enough warnings had reached the heads of the FBI and CIA to cause them to try to filter these warnings up to Team Bush (Rice-Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld, say) in the form of personal meetings (July 21 Tenet-Black with Rice) and the August 6th Presidential Daily Briefing, on “preparations consistent with hijackings”.
2) After the August 6th PDB, Team Bush took zero action to warn the airlines to be on high alert or to hold a security conference with the NSA/CIA/FBI, actions which likely would have prevented the 9/11 hijackers from getting on planes; instead, Team Bush took an extended vacation. So, that’s VERY suspicious to me, like they wanted plausible deniability for whatever might happen.
3) On 9/11, my belief is they didn’t expect the planes to fly into WTC and Pentagon, they issued shoot-down orders, which probably accounts for “the crash” of Flight 93 in PA, but this is rather a minor issue, though it reveals their state of panic and unpreparedness; they didn’t realize “hijacking” meant “suicide hijacking”, is my view. I do believe Team Bush expected hijackings to take place. As far as WTC building 7, that was where Giuliani had set up his Emergency Command Center, including thousands of gallons of diesel fuel for emergency generators, which is why it caught fire, burned, then collapsed. Dumb place to put such a center, really.
4) Immediately, Team Bush tries to spin the attacks into a causus belli for invading Iraq, and they (again, in my opinion) settle on using anthrax mailings to press outlets to help sell this story. They somehow get their hands on weaponized anthrax spores produced by the CIA’s Clear Vision program in the late 1990s. Their first attempt, on 9/18, basically fails to cause the desired nationwide panic; so they send another set of letters, on 10/9, to the Senate (Leahy/Daschle), which when opened make headliines around the nation on 10/16 (and kill four more people). Panic ensues, and the Patriot Act is pushed through about a week later without debate, on 10/24.
5) Due to poor information control, it gets out that the anthrax material could not have come from Iraq; Iraq had a different strain (*supplied by the U.S. in the early 1980s for Saddam’s bioweapon program, the Vollum strain) and different additives (Saddam’s 1980s-era program used bentonite, not the silica coating found in the letters). It soon becomes clear this has been sourced out of the U.S. bioweapons “defense” program. Major problem for Team Bush.
6) Enter the massive 8-year FBI coverup campaign to hide the true source of the anthrax letters – a good video (30 min) about this is “American Anthrax.” Rather unfortunately, the technical knowledge of how to prepare such bioweapons is now in the public domain, and although it would require a very well-equipped lab with biocontainment, it is easier than nuclear weapons. Here is a case where targeted investigations and high-tech warrant-based surveillance of anyone suspected to be doing this is entirely justified, by the way. “Assassinate all the bastards with drone stikes” is one approach, of course, but not a very wise, considered, rational one. This is what courts are for, after all.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zT7ATynE8_0
7) Enter the 9/11 Truth Movement c.2002, which spreads all the bogus conspiracy theories about bombs in the WTC, missiles hitting the Pentagon, a rather large PR program that’s been thoroughly debunked as a deliberate distraction and misinformation program, including all the WTC7 claims, which seems to have been pushed by PR firms with links to the Saudis and Team Bush. Notably, they steer clear of discussing anthrax, the Saudi ties of the 9/11 hijackers, etc. Pretty obviously a covert ‘black propaganda’ PR outfit, as Douglas Rushkoff details in Conspiracy of Dunces.
In any case, this is generally a speculative picture, lacking in hard evidence, falling into the “most probable series of events” as I can make them out. I advise those who doubt this to look into the details in Richard Preston’s “The Demon in the Freezer”, as well as the above linked video; more detailed analysis would require a fairly large budget, extensive FOIA requests from the CIA and FBI and DOE, ultimately with the goal of reopening the bogus FBI anthrax investigation, exonerating the falsely charged Bruce Ivins, and exposing the operations of covert biological weapons programs run by the CIA in the late 1990s, in violation of international agreements (the BWC) signed by the U.S.; obviously a new more enforceable inspections-based international bioweapons treaty agreement is needed.
Good luck, right? Like getting Putin to publicly admit to the scale of the Soviet biowarfare program in the 1980s, this ain’t likely. But it sure causes alarm in certain government circles; these cockroaches hate having bright lights shined on them, they scurry off into their little corners, where they try to regroup, breed and multiply again – that’s cockroaches for you. Cut off their food supply, that’s the best bet.
@photosymbiosis
Thank you for indulging… excellent as usual. thoro.
But please understand. Again i will beg your indulgence-
Building 7 did come down. It was not from tremors of the other 2. It’s not like some guys ran in and wired it up real quick and boomski.
I very much respect your analysis and resources and thinking.
What i see in this jigsaw puzzle are some missing pieces regarding building 7.
I see a wallstreet media made square piece trying to fit into a spot looking like a 4 leaf clover.
i will bookmark this spot.
The WTC 7 claims are nothing but dirty propaganda put out by the bogus 9/11 Truth Movement, which by all indications is a black propaganda operation run by the Bush Team and the Saudis to draw attention away from real issues like the August 6th PDB and the role prominent Saudi government officials and businessmen played in the financing of the attackers. That should be eminently clear to anyone not trying to cloud the issue with false claims.
This report soon after 9/11 and how it was forced off Fox News website on Israeli surveillance (espionage) of potential terrorism …data mining etc was interesting, Watch the four part report
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8k43_NKYs50
That’s covered in the excellent Al Jazeera documentary In Plain Sight:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nbsr0jWuwZ8
37:00 coverage of how the 9/11 hijackers had been tailed and surveilled before 9/11, by the FBI. “They actually had been following a group of these people and had lost touch with them for whatever reason. . .”
“The FBI may not have been the only ones tracking the hijackers. Some media reports claimed an Israeli spy ring operating across America had been following at least four members of the hijack gang, including its leader, Mohammed Atta. These reports remain unverified. But according to a former intelligence official, it is an open secret that Israeli agents pay close attention to Islamists in the USA.”
Vince Cannestrano: “Did the Israelis have a large intelligence operation in the United States, particularly in the New York and New Jersey areas? The answer is yes, they did. They have operations they conduct against radical Islamists in the United States. But they did not, and there has been no evidence shown, that they had advance knowledge of 9/11.”
See also, at 32:40:
coverage of Condi Rice in hearings responding to questions on why the Bush Administration took no action in response to the August 6th PDB or July 21 meeting.
The contrast is clear: Team Bush had several clear warnings, with the smoking gun being the August 6th PDB – yet took no action. There is no similar evidence that Israel had any advance warning of 9/11.
@photosymbiosis
But they did not, and there has been no evidence shown, that they had advance knowledge of 9/11.” UNLESS THEY PLANNED IT.
They were here in big numbers, extraordinary, expensive, and co-ordinated. Pardon me but that is more an indication of planning than shadowing. Recall the hit on _Mahmoud_Al-Mabhouh in Dubai – a smaller operation yet with a whole bunch of people.
At that time, wallstreet needed a big econ boost. This was before the housing fraud. Before high frequency trading. Before the bankster round-robbins in the markets. Wallstreet needed a war. Their friends in israel despise the US/Americans anyway (8 june 67) imo. So perhaps…. perhaps….. they developed a plan and passed it off to UBL or whoever, with their blessings, have at it, and also provided a little re-assurance.
After all, what can go wrong will go wrong – so what went wrong?
counter terrorism expert Richard Clarke who served I believe in four Presidential administrations said he could not get a meeting with Condi Rice and Stephen Hadley early on to give more details about the threat that Bin Laden etc posed, The chatter about using commercial airline planes as weapons against the U.S.
On “pre-knowledge” have never bought that, However do believe there was an environment of chosen negligence.
Just linked that four part report that Carl Cameron did on Israeli intelligence agents in the U.S. tracking potential terrorist etc, Fox News was forced to take the report down off of their website, Information clearing house and you tube have all four parts combined into one clip, Just tried to post it but moderator not allowing up, Has happened a few times for me here at this site, You can google, Worth watching,
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Watching this scenario unfold at the time was like watching a terrible train wrecking again and again and again.
I have noting but admiration and respect for Lee.
Echoes of MLK’s Beyond Vietnam
hear hear – 100% correct. thanks glenn for this helpful reminder.
In the sad pattern of American history, she will probably be hailed as a hero once another 25 years have gone by. 35, 40 years later everybody loved Mohammad Ali for his principled courage in the 1960s; I have no doubt around the time the spirit of Barbara Lee is celebrated on 9/11 that Snowden and Manning will be invoked as sober elders in the way Daniel Ellsberg is now. It never comes on time.
The flip side of this pattern is that those who engage in stupid conspiracy theories, (the towers were brought down by a wired system of explosives!!!) are never remembered as anything but a collection of cranks and loonies. But they have their function: they drive people away from what BL and others say, and in the long run do a huge disservice to humanity.
by God’s will, it shall be sooner.
9/14 is Barbara Lee day!
I learned of this extraordinary lady, and her courage to stand alone, against a bunch of war mongering profiteers, a few days ago on NPR.
Rarely will the government controlled mainstream media publish anything that attempts to expose what is really going on; which no matter what way its sliced, the fact is, our now nearly authoritian government is close to achieving military and economic dominance of all nations.
The election of either Trump or Hillary is a sophisticated operation, run by government and its media mouthpieces, solely as a diversionary tactic, while the business of war continues, and escalates.
We are a nation of mindless drones, herded and driven as our masters decide the direction.
Sorry can’t give props to NPR. Just another arm of the MSM.
Thanks for remembering Barbara Lee – she is a true example of the word “stateswoman” and everything the term implies. Unfortunately those among us who are truly great are often vilified and usually left unsung.
“The 9/11 attack killed close to 3,000 innocent people, but the 15 years of wars, bombings, invasions, occupations, and other abuses it spawned – the bulk of which is still raging – have killed many, many more than that. Americans love to memorialize the victims of the 9/11 attacks, though the abundant victims of their own government’s actions (both leading up to 9/11 and in response to it) are typically ignored. Whatever else 9/11 is used to commemorate, Barbara Lee’s visionary warnings and solitary courage should always be near the top of that list.”
Indeed. And somehow at a time when a person operating a drone can zoom in on a fly on a camel’s ass the people killed as a direct consequence of the Bush administration’s invasion, Obama’s interventions in Libya and Syria can not be counted. There is no need to wonder why people in that part of the world fear and hate the U.S.
Talking about what some people do is just that, what they do, not who they are, that’s a no brainer, right????? So what some Jews do in the name of evil is not an indictment on every jew that exist, so why keep bringing up anti semetism,,,believe it or not there are some Jews who have done some despicable things and at the same time there are some Jews who hate what other Jews do
Was well aware of her brave vote at the time. So honorable, She is an intelligent and brave person. So appreciate her leadership.
A share a story about two friends of mine who lost their daughter on that day on the United flight… What they did with their heart breaking and understandable grief. Glenn you would love John and Bev and how they turned their grief to working for peace.
Friends Bev and John Titus lost their beloved daughter Alicia Titus on 9/11. Alicia was a flight attendant on United Airlines Flight 175 when it was used as a deadly weapon on 9/11. They are two of the most honorable souls I know. They turned their devastating grief into a channel for peace,
I had the great honor to march with them in one of the many anti invasion of Iraq protest in early Feb of 2003 in New York City, Along with other 9/11 families against the invasion. They led that protest with WWII, Vietnam and Desert Storm Vets against the invasion, That day I had the great privilege of pushing a 90 year old WWII Vet in that protest march.
The tens of thousands strong anti invasion of Iraq march included people of all ages and economic backgrounds, I talked with many that day, They were teachers, plumbers, lawyers, students, People pushing elders in wheelchairs and children in strollers even though it was an extremely cold day. Of course the mainstream media did not show those at home who was really there. In fact there was very little media coverage that day,
Bev and John Titus have honored their daughter Alicia in the most remarkable way, “Creating Peace” They continue to do so…..
http://www.urbana.edu/about-us/community/alicia-titus-memorial-peace-fund
http://peacefultomorrows.org/members/john-titus/
The executive branch and its clients have has also waged war on the american people. The war has been aggressive and damaging through the plunder of the US Treasury, spying on innocent americans, and retaliation against those who call out misconduct.
Excellent article and amazing person.
On behalf of the fallen on both sides..the millions of civilians who never asked for these wars .or to lose their privacy.Thank you for making it the best 9/11 ever as one of the principles who profited and supported an cheered during Libya collapsed during the WTC ceremony. The same press that cheered throughout these wars were no less shocked and in every way abandoned and naked as their champion, whose name I will not utter, buckled like the proverbial house of cards, and just how weak she was .
A metaphor for the establishment…as it were..and it was captured on video and went viral before it could be stopped. It wasn’t Trump.It wasn’t Putin, it wasn’t global warming.
If her pharmaceuticals are failing..then her people should call an exorcist perhaps.
One person can make a difference, like Ms Lee and Mr. Snowden..The journalists..
I would call what happened a small miracle..little consolation to the carnage and.the wreckage left in hes and their wake over the last decades but
Its welcome start.
one more thing…
For the insanity to have persisted this long against the face of common sense might lead one to believe there is a pilot flame keeping it going. There is.
ECOMMCON.
and then there is this flame –
http://911justiceinfocus.org/
ECOMCON? That’s a cool plot point in a cool novel (and movie), but it’s not real.
(For those of you who do not know what he’s referencing, go read “Seven Days in May” or see the film version. A later work by the same authors, “Night of Camp David” is also cool.)
Now, if you were to bring up the Report From Iron Mountain, it’s also not real…but it’s no longer a work of satire. Too many people think that way, as the introduction reminded us on its republication in 1996. (Read the original version or the 1996 official reprint, not any of the bootlegs.)
Barbara Lee – a Real American and Real Hero.
420 to 1. In a real America of thinking and reasoning people, this would be the opposite. 1. not 200 or 50 or 10 or even 2. This is how despicable WDC has become – a cat house of pimped out whores for wars.
“Almost immediately after the 9/11 attack, while bodies were still buried in the rubble, George W. Bush demanded from Congress the legal authorization to use military force against those responsible for the attack, which everyone understood would start with an invasion of Afghanistan.”
Bush was merely the ‘spokesman’ for the PNAC machine. More likely Cheney & Co. issued the ‘demands’.
“Bush was merely the ‘spokesman’ for the PNAC machine. More likely Cheney & Co. issued the ‘demands’.”
Notice Bush didn’t pardon Libby fully; he is still a felon.
Bush has made a couple of comments to say how little power the president really has.
Cheney is our Heydrich.
Barbara Lee may have stood alone in Congress, but there were a number of people within the defense [sic] establishment who advocated an entirely different path from the beginning. They are epitomized by Chuck Spinney and John Boyd, whose foresight has been proven right repeatedly but whose ideas remain outside the mainstream of US government thinking.
As I stay away from the TV and radio on this the 15th anniversary of 9/11, I cannot help but reflect as to what a sorry bunch of spoiled, whining cowards most of us in the US have become. On and since that date, fewer people have died at terrorist hands on US soil than from falls from ladders, but the public imagination seems incapable of moving on. I suppose we can blame our political leaders for their stoking the fires of fear and insecurity, instead of quieting them, for pursuing a course of international terrorism exceeding that of the so-called Islamists, a course that only exacerbates the problem, instead of dealing with the criminals within the established law enforcement system. Almost all Americans cheered when Osama bin Laden was assassinated on orders from the Commander in Chief; only a few of us apparently thought he should have been put on trial at the scene of his greatest crime, so that we could all hear how he came to become such an evil person, and learn how his activities were facilitated (and by whom). Be cheering when someone is murdered, those cheering show themselves to be murderers too, and richly deserving of another cycle of violence.
What do you mean “we” have become? Speak for yourself. If you continue to support the two capitalist parties, then you can include yourself. But I do not support them. And by the way, Osama din Laden was not killed by Obama. He died in 2002 from kidney failure. The show in Pakistan was just that — a show. You should know better.
Barbara Lee was/is a brave women, her courage and integrity match her convictions. Makes it so much worse to know that so many Government officials and members of Congress and others fearfully and silently opposed but publicly approved and still do nothing to acknowledge truth and seek justice but hide behind ” we didn’t know” aka “I was saving MY job and I’m still doing that”. I remember the vilification, the hatred spewed at anyone who as much whispered opposition, even asked a question! The disgusting treatment of ElBaradei and the IAEA, the arm-twisting, threats and bribes to build a “coalition of the willing”. I am not an expert by any means but it was clear as day to me. I lost a job by responding to a belligerent client that it would be a catastrophic failure and set the Middle-East and beyond ablaze for decades, as well as being criminal, revenge/greed driven and would destroy positive societal and cultural values that had been built up over decades. Anyone with a passing knowledge of the Middle-East and a basic understanding of history and politics in that region knew better. No excuses – they knew.
I also remember I was watching something on TV and it was suddenly interrupted by an ‘Important Announcement’ – it was President Obama saying “we’ve killed him”. I was horrified to see the leader of a nation that is built on the rule of law and prides itself on civilization and humanity reveling in an extrajudicial killing and that the killing of a human being was presented as an important announcement! It turned my stomach. As it did when he said “we tortured some folks”. But it had become all too commonplace in Bush’s rule, even acceptable and expected to hear phrases like “we’ll hunt them down and kill them” along with the minimizing the gravity of torture. Now we have a ready acceptance of assassination, kill-lists, torture and society’s ever growing tolerance for the suffering, death and destruction of what is now more than 65 million people. +Sixty-five million! A cultural tolerance that would have been severely castigated, unimaginable, primitive, only 15 plus years ago.
Ostensibly bin Laden was given a chance to surrender. Even an ordinary person who fails to stop at a stop sign who comes out of his car to greet the cops with a gun pointed in their direction is going to get a hard time. So in theory there was no untoward bloodlust in that operation.
In truth though, I am highly suspicious of the story. In my imagination bin Laden is stowed away someplace hundreds of feet below the coral sands of Diego Garcia, still enduring whatever the counterpart term of art is for “enhanced interrogation” when the spies no longer actually are interested in what somebody has to say. And I would have to say that was wrong and immoral, I really would, but there are so many other things in the world to care about and so little attention to pay to each one…
Thanks for the Spinney and Boyd references…more reading to do.
Economic growth! The Amway system of profiteering requires maximized markets and AUMF is the means of enforcement of this system. Submit or suffer the consequences.
In the 2013 article in the Guardian, Glenn also wrote:
“This is a common tactic in Washington political and media circles: whenever they do something destructive and wrong, they exonerate themselves with this “nobody-could-have-known” formulation: yes, we turned out to be horribly wrong, but nobody could have known at the time that this would happen. But almost always, not only could someone have known, and not only should someone have known, but someone – usually many people – did know. They just weren’t the kind of people that those making this claim believe are worth listening to.”
It is important to reemphasize how this common (and cowardly) refrain has come to be abused by the elites and their surrogates. As George Orwell put it best, in our Orwellian time now, “… politics itself is a mass of lies, evasions, folly, hatred and schizophrenia”. The utility of using “who could have known” in order to evade responsibility for lies is difficult to overstate.
they did know
ECOMMCON
Another factor to consider is that even if the mission or goal is well-meaning, American style bureaucracies are not designed to carry out those types of goals.
The most efficient bureaucracies are found in “dictatorships” not a “constitutional democratic republic” form of government – and that’s a good thing. America is not designed to be an imperial force.
It should be noted that throughout world history, even the most efficient form of government – a dictatorship – makes huge blunders also.
One thing that could improve national security and minimize mission-creep is “financial incentives/disincentives” for bureaucrats at the federal, state and local levels.
For example: if a veteran that fought in these wars becomes homeless, due to not receiving benefits from the VA Administration, why not financially reward VA employees for timely payments and penalize those same employees for allowing veterans to sleep on the street. Seems less cruel that a hero sleeping on the street. Today we have voters wanting to completely dismantle entire agencies due to mission-creep and dysfunction – wouldn’t it be better to make them function properly?
Every person in the US has a God given right to food and habitat.
Every person in the US has a natural right to earn comfort and hold it for posterity.
Every person in the US has a right to inherit that comfort and to the efficiencies of living this compiled.
Wallstreet’s fear is Free and Clear.
Thank you for this essay and for honoring Barbara Lee. I have few hero’s. Both of you are among them.
Here is an article that looks at how quickly the decision was made to attack Iraq after the events of 9/11:
http://viableopposition.blogspot.ca/2016/09/americas-destiny-with-iraq.html
America’s destiny in Iraq was set in stone during the Clinton I Administration.
It is great to see somebody else here making this argument!
Yes, the ultimate disaster in Iraq was in the making for ages, and a completely bipartisan effort.
Here’s the Amazon page for an excellent academic book that complements your take, Sally. It’s a book that deserves to be much better known than it is:
https://www.amazon.com/Explaining-Iraq-War-Counterfactual-Evidence/dp/1107676584
In Ron Susskind’s book “The Price of Loyalty” Bush 43’s Secretary of the Treasury Paul O’Neil states that at the very first cabinet meetings in 2001 Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and Cheney were focused on how to attack Iraq, What excuse to use etc,
The war fixers uppers Douglas Feith, Rhode, Ledeen, Cheney, Libby had control of the intelligence creation, cherry picking, dissemination early on out of the Office of Special Plans within the Pentagon, Eliminating those who were objectionable,
http://www.salon.com/2004/03/10/osp_moveon/
Jason Vet of the Nation at the time, Explained the run up thoroughly before the invasion
? The Men From JINSA and CSP
They want not just a US invasion of Iraq but “total war” against Arab regimes.
By Jason Vest
August 15, 2002
https://www.thenation.com/article/men-jinsa-and-csp/
” ? On no issue is the JINSA/CSP hard line more evident than in its relentless campaign for war–not just with Iraq, but “total war,” as Michael Ledeen, one of the most influential JINSAns in Washington, put it last year. For this crew, “regime change” by any means necessary in Iraq, Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia and the Palestinian Authority is an urgent imperative. Anyone who dissents–be it Colin Powell’s State Department, the CIA or career military officers–is committing heresy against articles of faith that effectively hold there is no difference between US and Israeli national security interests, and that the only way to assure continued safety and prosperity for both countries is through hegemony in the Middle East–a hegemony achieved with the traditional cold war recipe of feints, force, clientism and covert action.
For example, the Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board–chaired by JINSA/CSP adviser and former Reagan Administration Defense Department official Richard Perle, and stacked with advisers from both groups–recently made news by listening to a briefing that cast Saudi Arabia as an enemy to be brought to heel through a number of potential mechanisms, many of which mirror JINSA’s recommendations, and which reflect the JINSA/CSP crowd’s preoccupation with Egypt. (The final slide of the Defense Policy Board presentation proposed that “Grand Strategy for the Middle East” should concentrate on “Iraq as the tactical pivot, Saudi Arabia as the strategic pivot [and] Egypt as the prize.”) Ledeen has been leading the charge for regime change in Iran, while old comrades like Andrew Marshall and Harold Rhode in the Pentagon’s Office of Net Assessment actively tinker with ways to re-engineer both the Iranian and Saudi governments. JINSA is also cheering the US military on as it tries to secure basing rights in the strategic Red Sea country of Eritrea, happily failing to mention that the once-promising secular regime of President Isaiais Afewerki continues to slide into the kind of repressive authoritarianism practiced by the “axis of evil” and its adjuncts.
https://www.thenation.com/article/men-jinsa-and-csp/
The new Pentagon papers
A high-ranking military officer reveals how Defense Department extremists suppressed information and twisted the truth to drive the country to war.
‘In July of last year, after just over 20 years of service, I retired as a lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Air Force. I had served as a communications officer in the field and in acquisition programs, as a speechwriter for the National Security Agency director, and on the Headquarters Air Force and the office of the secretary of defense staffs covering African affairs. I had completed Air Command and Staff College and Navy War College seminar programs, two master’s degrees, and everything but my Ph.D. dissertation in world politics at Catholic University. I regarded my military vocation as interesting, rewarding and apolitical. My career started in 1978 with the smooth seduction of a full four-year ROTC scholarship. It ended with 10 months of duty in a strange new country, observing up close and personal a process of decision making for war not sanctioned by the Constitution we had all sworn to uphold. Ben Franklin’s comment that the Constitutional Convention of 1787 in Philadelphia had delivered “a republic, madam, if you can keep it” would come to have special meaning.
In the spring of 2002, I was a cynical but willing staff officer, almost two years into my three-year tour at the office of the secretary of defense, undersecretary for policy, sub-Saharan Africa. In April, a call for volunteers went out for the Near East South Asia directorate (NESA). None materialized. By May, the call transmogrified into a posthaste demand for any staff officer, and I was “volunteered” to enter what would be a well-appointed den of iniquity.
The education I would receive there was like an M. Night Shyamalan movie — intense, fascinating and frightening. While the people were very much alive, I saw a dead philosophy — Cold War anti-communism and neo-imperialism — walking the corridors of the Pentagon. It wore the clothing of counterterrorism and spoke the language of a holy war between good and evil. The evil was recognized by the leadership to be resident mainly in the Middle East and articulated by Islamic clerics and radicals. But there were other enemies within, anyone who dared voice any skepticism about their grand plans, including Secretary of State Colin Powell and Gen. Anthony Zinni.
From May 2002 until February 2003, I observed firsthand the formation of the Pentagon’s Office of Special Plans and watched the latter stages of the neoconservative capture of the policy-intelligence nexus in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq. This seizure of the reins of U.S. Middle East policy was directly visible to many of us working in the Near East South Asia policy office, and yet there seemed to be little any of us could do about it. ”
=============================================
Hell the whole blueprint for destabilizing the middle east was at the Project for a New American Century’s website that has since been taken down by Bill Kristol and his war team, Read most of everything at that website in 2000. Can still access some of their plans and agenda on line,
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/pdf/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf
I was on active duty on 11 Sep 01. Among the many thoughts I had while watching the video footage there were three that stand out:
1. What took them so long to strike on American soil?
2. We will become a nation of assholes for a very, very long time.
3. [2.] is what the planners/executors of this event WANT.
Hunter S. Thompson, September 12, 2001:
Like most of the rest of the country, at the time I couldn’t hear voice’s like Barbara Lee or Thompson. To the extent their words registered at all, I was happy to observe the vilification to which they were subjected.
My political trajectory since 9/11 has been amazing. On that day, I was not a “leftist.” Socially liberal, yes, but I identified as a “libertarian.” In no way was I anti-war vis-a-vis Afghanistan and I was open to the idea of invading Iraq (Colin Powell’s bullshit UN speech was the deciding factor there for me).
Since that time, and having had a great deal of time to read and analyze domestic and world events, I’ve seen how corporatism — including the Military Industrial Complex, the National-Security/Intelligence Industrial Complex and the Prison Industrial Complex — have all been driving policy in the United States. (I also encountered the Israel Lobby and the truth about Zionism and it’s history.)
My values have not changed since 9/11, but my grasp of the facts and reality have. Barbara Lee was already there on that day, and for that I honor her.
Wow,a mea culpa from Mona;And quoting drug abusers as prescient!
Will wonders never cease?
And anyone who knew history and reality knew every stupid action by US was a disaster in the making,and all for Zion.
They just roll called all the dead from 9-11,and not one mention of the reason we were attacked;Israel.
A colossal cluster f*ck of biblical proportion,Old Testament style.
dahoit is an unhinged idiot, racist, antisemite and pro-Trump fanatic. Among his myriad inanities is the claim that “zionism” has been hatching nefarious plots since the 7th century. He straightforwardly hates Jews.
He’s representative of the minority of actual antisemites among Israel critics.
8 june 1967
>”Like most of the rest of the country, at the time I couldn’t hear voice’s like Barbara Lee or Thompson.”
Well, I damn sure ain’t bragging Mona, but I thought the invasion of Afgahnistan, as well as the AUMF that ‘authorized’ it (and everything else as a response to, and since AD 9/11) … absolutely world-shaking bat-shit crazy. Then … and now.
*in fact, I did a rare piece of art-work – a political ‘cartoon’ if you will – that depicted two (2) blue earths floating in the blackness of space after 9/11 … as viewed from the perspective of the moon… I still think is ‘prescient’. PI would be proud.
A few years later, listening to Billy Joels’ ‘angry young man’, I ran across
Glenn Greenwald.
*speaking of the Guardian, i trust Glenn has been following the particularly refreshingly hard-hitting reporting by the Guardian, Glenn’s old stomping grounds, on the CIA ‘torture report’? *Spencer Ackerman … top knot, imo.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/sep/11/cia-torture-report-aftermath-daniel-jones-senate-investigation
He began blogging in the last months of ’05. That was confluent with my growing horror and disgust with Republicans, sealed by the Terry Schiavo madness.
Participating in Glenn’s comments exposed me to people like you and many others, people with facts and analysis I had to confront notwithstanding my biases. My understanding of “the left” changed somewhat.
I’d always known the American left was generally more intelligent than the right, both in terms of smart people represented in each sector, and in the quality of their arguments — especially quality of and reliance on evidence. That was certainly reinforced as I participated in Glenn’s comment space, and by observing reactions to his work at various blogs.
So thanks, bah, for helping me reach a state of greater truth.
Thanks, Mona, and Glenn, and all the other people who have been brave and reflective enough to read, listen, reconsider and change. That’s hard. Really hard.
And critically important.
I can’t tell you how lonely, and slightly scary, it was to be an open critic of, e.g., the invasion of Afghanistan in the fall of 2001. There weren’t many of us — or at least it didn’t feel as if there were. For Barbara Lee to stand before the House and deliver that speech, and to cast that vote, made her a hero to all of us, forever.
Doug this Intercept is really a kind of Sherwood Forest band of bloggers with Glenn and the very fine staff being a fine group of Robin Hoods. Many are still just opening up to what we now more clearly feel and understand. A life time of far reaching and deeply penetrating propaganda is a lot to overcome. I was a little lucky as I found it a little hard to stomach those John Wayne movies, or maybe I just appreciated better acting.
likewise and seconded
Mona, you’ve come a long way. Congratulations! We’re waiting on you to get to the conclusion, “War on Terrorism = Continuing Crusades.” Then, we’ll take you further [back].
Er, ok.
So then, you bought the official lies concerning the attacks of 911 which were used the justify the invasion of Afghanistan in spite of the fact that the US government had a long, unremitting history of engaging in, and lying about, illegal activity?
1. Project Paperclip – Came to light in the 1960s
2. Operation Gladio – Came to light in the 1990s
3. Project MKUtra – Partially exposed in the 1970s
4. Project Mockingbird – Came to light in the 1960s
5. US Government sanctioned political assassinations (e.g. Castro) – Partially exposed in the 1970s
6. Phoenix Program (targeted assassinations and torture of civilians) – Came to light in the 1970s
7. The USS Liberty Affair – Partially exposed in the 1970s (ongoing debate)
8. Gulf of Tonkin False flag – Came to light in 1967
9. The 1932 Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment – Came to light in the 1970s
10. See Wiki: Unethical human experimentation in the United States
11. Operation Menu: Secret bombing of Cambodia and Laos
13. Political abandonment of Korean held POWs by US Government
14. Operation Black Eagle – (Oliver North) Arms for drugs
15. Iran-contra operation – (Illegal shipment of Arms to Contras)
16. Waco – Intentional violation of the posse comitatus act under the rubric of domestic counter-terrorism
17. Ruby Ridge – Targeted killing of white separatists by the FBI under the rubric of domestic counter-terrorism
18. 1993 WTC bombing – FBI facilitated domestic terror attack
19. Saving and Loan scandal – Bush family, CIA, and organized crime connection
20. Government role in JFK, RFK, MLK, and Malcolm X Assassinations
21. Franklin Coverup Scandal
22. American Eugenics – How the views of Margaret Sanger, Prescott Bush, Allen and John Dulles, Averell Harriman, Andrew Carnegie, JD Rockefeller, J.H. Kellogg etc. translated into Anti-miscegenation laws, US immigration policy, forced sterilization laws, and American foreign policy wherein German conquest of the European continent was facilitated by sympathetic law firms like Brown Brothers, Harriman throughout the 1930s .
23. Numerous CIA sponsored coups including: Iran, 1953; Guatemala, 1954; Congo, 1960; Dominican Republic, 1961; South Vietnam, 1963; Brazil, 1964; Chile, 1973
24. Etc., etc., etc.
Tell us all-knowing-one, who was actually responsible for the WTC attacks of 911? Those who have been consistently challenging the glaring inconsistencies in the 911 Commission report have been routinely marginalized as “tin foil hat conspiracists” by people like yourself who can’t even define technical terms like “torsion”, “compression”, “sheer force”, or “tension” without looking them up. C’mon Mona dazzle us with your retroactive synopsis of the WTC attacks of 911.
You are a rightwing nut and I have very little to say to you. There’s some evidence-supported stuff on your list, but much of it is bullshit. You aren’t raising anything about Margaret Sanger et al. that I haven’t been insisting upon myself for many decades, but a lot of the rest of that is crap.
Bye.
Lol! Ka-ching, another surrender. Every insult is a feather in my bonnet.
Uh-huh. Except to alert other readers as to what you are (which is my purpose, not to insult you), I’m seldom gonna waste my time replying to you any longer.
You forgot COINTELPRO: exposed in 1971.
Yes, that is a good catch. However, Mona will deny the existence of that as well unless her Guru says that it was real.
Ah, a good example to show what a fuckwit you are. I’ll be bookmarking this for future use.
Sometime in the last 6-12 months, I published this about “Targeted Individuals”:
Moreover, I’ve directly referenced COINTELPRO innumerable times in many venues, including this one. Especially when praising the FBI Burglars who allowed it to come to light.
Well done, Karl.
This will be handy to simply show readers what you are without having to engage your every stupidity.
Clarification: The HAARP point was added by another.
Enough of the diversionary bullshit Mona! Who was actually responsible for the WTC attacks of 9/11? Inquiring minds want to know? This should be an easy question for someone whose self-proclaimed “political trajectory since 9/11 has been amazing.” We are all waiting for your answer… Tick tock!
So, you now speak for all readers, eh? pfffft
But thanks again for another useful example of you being idiotic with that COINTELPRO inanity.
Glenn Greenwald was writing about cointelpro long before that!
too true Karl. High rise buildings don ‘t explode into a cloud of dust no matter how much jet fuel you pour on. explosives are the only way to achieve that.
Real courage is rare.
There is courage in the midst of battle or response to an emergency like the first respondents to the 9/11 attack in NYC. But at other times, it takes courage to stand up against the tide.
She was the only legislator who stood up against the tide of rush to war.
There was an article in Rolling Stone a few months ago about the failed 1 trillion dollar war on drugs. On the RS web page there is a short video of President Nixon declaring that the war on drugs is the major issue threatening the US. We know for sure now that he started that war to go after blacks and peace activists. We also know from the excellent book “Kissinger’s Shadow” that Nixon and Kissinger expanded the Vietnam war abroad to win the presidential election here at home.
After all the decades of “war” to solve social and cultural problems, and having been on a war footing since the end of the “cold war,” 9/11 was the long sought opportunity to rally the “citizens” to embark on the “war on terror”
Like the millions of people over the years that have had secret clearance, only a few whistle blowers have stood up to the surveillance state and exposed what has been done in secret.
If our country can pull out of the slow motion coup d’etat which has already happened, people like Barbara Lee will be remembered as the heroes they were.
Amen.
Real courage requires real people to function as individuals, not groupies. America has lost it’s sacred care for the individual person. As common as it is for people to exist in groups, the emphasis of human development must always cast focus on each and every ONE. And the American Moniker betrayed and abandoned, “E PLUIBUS UNUM”.