Over the past few weeks we’ve seen the topical convergence of Middle East war, Zionism, the anti-Arab species of anti-Semitism, anti-terrorism, anti-nuclear proliferation, lies about 9/11, the Holocaust. . . but I repeat myself.
The defeat of the
Dubai government-controlled port security deal is one more victory for the “New Pearl Harbor” mythology that pins the tail of responsibility for 9/11 on the wrong jackass. Deal-blocking verbiage had been slapped onto a so-called “must-pass” emergency spending bill that continues to fund the imperial misadventure in Iraq and Afghanistan, soon to spill over to Iran (thereby ensuring supply of recruits to Al-Qaeda. Here’s their
employment contract.) But we’ll never know whether “must-pass” was really “can-be-vetoed”: the United Arab Emirates’s DP World says it will
transfer its ownership of port terminals to an American-owned company.
See what a little scrutiny can do?
Meanwhile the 600-pound elephants poached by scholarly critics of the 9/11 Commission’s whitewash are a politically protected species, free to stomp all over the global landscape incognito. One wonders why that Commission’s whitewash of high crimes has yet to attract the attention of our heroic Congressional freedom-fighters.
On second thought, one doesn’t.
For the "crime" of examining certain details of the Holocaust, David Irving sits in a jail down the street from the International Atomic Energy Commission’s headquarters in Vienna, which is now reviewing Iran’s compliance with its guidelines for the peaceful use of nuclear energy. The other day Vice-President Dick Cheney, representing a country that unapologetically holocausted Japanese civilians during World War II,
preached to the Zionist choir about the need to inflict “meaningful consequences” on Iran unless it drops its pursuit of uranium enrichment. Cheney is mum, of course, about Israel’s nuclear capability and its
“Samson option” — both underwritten by the U.S. taxpayer.
Do you remember the level of detail about Cheney’s hunting accident that we were treated to a couple of weeks ago? But how many Americans know, or care, that he gave the order to shoot down Flight 93, killing 44 civilians, some of whom were trying to wrest control of it? What do we really know of that crucial timeline of who was in charge, and who was not? According to the Commission’s timeline, Cheney doesn’t get into the central command room until 10:00 A.M., but Transportation Secretary Norm Mineta’s testimony puts Cheney there a full forty minutes earlier. He allegedly gave the shoot-down order at 10:10, but Flight 93 crashed minutes earlier. I guess getting such details right is not as important as understanding the timeline of a hunting accident. (See
interview with David Ray Griffin in
Hustler, August 2005)
“Hi-jacker in spirit” Zacarias Moussaoui will be entombed or poisoned for failing to spill the beans on what he knew about the attacks. If that’s a capital offense, however, then what pleasantries should be reserved for those who those who engineered that day’s military stand-down? Professor Griffin
summarizes things handily:
“Had standard procedures between the FAA and the military been followed that morning, the airliners would have been intercepted within 15 minutes after signs they had been hijacked. Instead, they reportedly flew through US airspace for 20, 30 or even 40 minutes after such signs were present (David Ray Griffin, The New Pearl Harbor 3-11, 41-42, 170-73). Problems also plague the official story about the attack on the Pentagon, according to which it was hit by Flight 77 under the control of al-Qaeda hijackers . . .: (1) The alleged pilot, Hani Hanjour, was a terrible pilot, who could not have executed the trajectory taken by the aircraft that hit the Pentagon. (2) This aircraft struck the Pentagon’s west wing, which for many reasons would have been the least likely spot for alien terrorists to target. (3) Several factors, including photographs of the west wing taken right after the strike and the failure of the Pentagon’s anti-aircraft defense system to shoot down the attacking aircraft, suggest that it was not a Boeing 757. (4) Although videos exist that could show what really hit the Pentagon, the government refuses to release them (NPH 25-48, 174-75).”
Yes, Professor Griffin has a conspiracy theory. Only, his fits the facts better than the government’s conspiracy theory. Consider
this:
“[The government’s theory is] . . . a coincidence theory that just happened to be that on those days, everybody became terribly incompetent. Take the Federal Aviation Administration. They've got these standard procedures: If a plane goes off course, if you lose radio contact or lose the transponder, you call the military. On this day we're told these FAA officials hit the trifecta. They got all three of these things, and yet they would stand around debating, "Should we call the military? No, I don't think so." And when they finally call, the people at headquarters won't accept their calls because they were in conference or wouldn't pass the call on. They have roughly about 100 hijack warnings a year where planes have to be scrambled, but suddenly they become just all thumbs. The whole thing is just implausible. The other thing is, if you've got accidents, screw-ups, some ought to go one way and the others the other way. Here everything goes the same way. Everybody fails to do their jobs in relation to something to do with 9/11.”
Then there’s the conclusive evidence that the Twin Towers were demolished by controlled demolition, not by fire. We have touched upon this previously
here and
here. Explosives yield those cauliflower-shaped clouds of pulverized dust. Fires do not. Anticipating an objection, Griffin explains:
“The suggestion that explosives might have been used raises the question of how anyone wanting to place explosives in the towers could have gotten through the security checks. This question brings us to a possibly relevant fact about a company—now called Stratesec but then called Securacom—that was in charge of security for the World Trade Center. From 1993 to 2000, during which Securacom installed a new security system, Marvin Bush, the president’s brother, was one of the company’s directors. And from 1999 until January of 2002, their cousin Wirt Walker III was the CEO. One would think these facts should have made the evening news—or at least The 9/11 Commission Report.”
Griffin’s whole
speech repays careful study So does his
summary of his critique of the Report.
As Oscar host Jon Stewart quipped this past Sunday: “
Capote, of course, addressed similar themes to
Good Night, and Good Luck. Both films are about determined journalists defying obstacles in a relentless pursuit of truth. Needless to say, both are period pieces.” Yes, where are today’s relentless pursuers of truth? Will the
New York Times touch Griffin’s research? Will
60 Minutes?
If American security was in the hands Americans who let or made 9/11 happen, it is a small matter that an Arab government should own the company that oversees American port security.
