Others have already hastened to declare the demise of 9/11 as an issue. Yet the US war party at least keeps it very much alive. 9/11 remains their trump and panacea, the rationale for an era of open-ended warfare, and reflexive alibi for every failing – foundation stone of their Project for a New American Century.
By the same token, they cannot be stopped without challenging the 9/11 myth. As long as only a minority see the official story of 9/11 as a myth, a coverup, the most monstrous false- flag operation in history, the orthodox narrative will stand not one, but many centuries.
Autumn 2005 marks not the fourth, but the four-hundredth great anniversary of synthetic terror in the English-speaking world: Guy Fawkes Day, or the Gunpowder Plot of November 5th, 1605. Even today, only a small minority understand the plot: Fawkes was a patsy, a dupe, ensnared by none other than the King’s chief minister into a mad scheme to blow up King and Parliament. The real plot was a royally successful one: to create a pretext for war with Spain. It proved to be nothing less than the foundation of the British empire and Anglo-American world dominance.
Here some of Webster Tarpley’s many great merits: shaking us from the slumber of the “mainstream” account of this most famous “Fall Guy” in history; pointing out that “mainstream” is no criterion; and asking, how do you know what you think you know, about 9/11?
The authoritative work on the Gunpowder Plot, as shown in the bibliography, dates from 1897, nearly 300 years after the events. The fancied blowing up of the USS Maine in 1898 by a Spanish mine in Havana harbor was the false-flag pretext for war with Spain; 88 years later, Admiral Rickover made his key finding that the explosion occurred inside the ship. The book on FDR’s maneuvers to manipulate Japan into her 1941 attack on Pearl Harbor – so that he could bring the US into the war on fascism – was not written until 58 years afterwards.
And then – there was the Internet.
The first book challenging the 9/11 myth, Thierry Meyssan’s L'effroyable imposture (The Big Lie) appeared in France only six months after the event. A few months later, in July 2002, I published the first book exposing 9/11 in English, The War on Freedom. Three more years of frenetic world-wide activity by hundreds of independent researchers, loosely linked by Internet and e-mail, have produced an amazingly extensive and damning picture of the devilishly complex psychological warfare operation that was 9/11, infinitely more detailed than what is known about earlier incidents such as, say, the Gulf of Tonkin hoax. For once, lovers of humanity can dare to hope that Truth might score its inevitable victory in real time, to end wars and save lives, and not merely to decide an obscure academic fracas.
Proof per se is no longer the problem. That 9/11 could only be a state-sponsored inside job has now been proven many times over. It is still a challenge to coherently present this enormous and constantly evolving dossier to an unprepared reader. Or more accurately, prepared not to believe it.
By far the greatest challenge facing us is Denial, the predisposition to flat incredulity. When a thousand blandishments of fact and reason have as little sway as a gentle wind against a wall, it helps not at all to keep piling on more details. We need to look at motivations – at cognitive dissonance, at prejudices, corrupted and self-deceptive thinking, all the vested interests of the mind. In this review I essay a few faltering steps to open wider this avenue of our inquiry.
For many of us, 9/11 activism has been an education not only in politics, but in human psychology. We have been stunned by the widespread resistance to what we rightly felt was the scoop of the century, falling on deaf ears. Comes the deep realization that human beings are not as rational as they flatter themselves to be – not by a long shot. We greatly overrate our independent force of logical thinking. The metaphor of a motorcar comes to mind. A car functions marvelously when proceeding on paved roads – as does our reasoning power under smooth sailing conditions of status quo consensus – but bogs down immediately if steered onto the unbeaten track. We’ve all seen people we respect as intelligent thinkers completely seize up when faced with a dose of 9/11 truth.
Of course, the universal human instinct is to pretend and then to believe what is flattering, to have faith in one’s own moral supremacy, to want to be one of the good guys. The normal human ego shields itself from information that would lessen the sense of self-esteem. Yet normally there is a reality check on this from outside, which protects our vain selves from the dangers of excessive self-delusion. In 9/11 Synthetic Terror we see how the 9/11 Myth and agenda of a Clash of Civilizations are shielded from this reality principle, and how extreme that danger is.
The past century showed dictators ever eager to shade the light of reality, and alert to exploit human vanity for their ends. Nationalism is human vanity in the political sphere, when individual identities are bound to the idea of nationhood, and this is still the norm everywhere. This might be less true of anyone with strong social bonds transcending the nation state. The famous Zogby poll in New York City found nearly 50% were 9/11 skeptics, but the figure for racial minorities was 67%. Their real historical memory overrides the synthetic legends of TV and accurately predisposes them to believe the worst about 9/11. Put another way, love of country is as natural as love of family, but the psychological manipulators know how to twist this. Patriotism is the Othello to the Iago of propaganda experts.
In Where would we be without our wars, the Afterword to The War on Freedom, I appealed to historical memory to show that the US has a recidivist record so unbroken that one is obliged to upend the rules of jurisprudence and postulate US guilt of war provocation until her innocence is proven. Every last time the US has gone to war abroad – with Mexico, Spain, Germany, Japan, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan – not counting 200-odd “conflicts” and “interventions” – her leaders used deceit to start the fight and get the naturally isolationist American people to support the war adventure. The rest of the world has always had good reason to be even more eager to leave the US in splendid isolation, militarily.
The only weakness in my argument was that people can’t remember this history, since they were never taught it, so why would they believe me? Even if they do look it up for themselves, they will still have to wade through the views of establishment “experts,” the apologists of empire, who muddy the waters.
Victor Thorn asked what I thought of a man who said he’d kill himself if the dissident version of 9/11 were true. I said it was the tragic result of an authoritarian system that drills the young to salute its icon, rather than reserving allegiance for the transcendent values which it ought to represent. Fon one who thinks of himself as an American first, a human being second, the truth of 9/11 will be an extraordinarily rude shock. Nonetheless, the great majority of 9/11 Truth activists are American patriots who survived that shock and who fight on for the ideals they identify as American: freedom, humanity, justice and the rest.
The 9/11 Myth’s next great line of defense is the Big Lie principle. Lies on the cosmic scale of 9/11 are believed because it’s simply incredible that anyone would commit such a huge crime. This is the most fundamental fact in criminology: the criminal attempts to commit his crime in such a way that his guilt will appear implausible. Indeed, the attack on the Pentagon was executed in such a bizarre way that it almost seems to be a trap set for 9/11 researchers to make them come up with crazy-sounding theories, although other motives may have been involved, such as testing a bunker-buster missile against a reinforced structure. Pentagate certainly has diverted attention from the clear-cut case of the unprovoked collapse of WTC 7, where it is not just implausible, but absolutely impossible to suspect al Qaeda.
People judge the doings on Olympus by themselves and by their everyday lives, where things work normally, where corruption does not work, where even small lies will out. Clean business and government at the walk-in level have made America a powerhouse. 9/11 as inside job, as state self-terror, is wildly out of fit with this picture.
Yet a cruel paradox lurks in Eden: this idyllic condition actually facilitates corruption at the top. First, America’s prowess at producing “surplus” wealth makes the rewards available for looting truly astronomical. The huge size of the American federal budget makes oversight virtually impossible.
Second, since one can live a mundane existence in most parts of the USA without encountering bribery, people don’t know the smell of corruption.
Many European countries have several political parties, each with their own newspaper. This may be why political corruption scandals periodically hit the headlines there, creating the impression that Europe is more corrupt than America. In fact, America’s two-in-one party system and “independent” media seem unable to make a proper scandal even of enormous debacles like Enron.
O Rose, thou art sick.
The invisible worm
That flies in the night
In the
howling storm:
Has found out thy bed
Of crimson joy;
And his dark secret love
Does thy
life destroy.
- William Blake, Songs of Experience (1794)
In 9/11 Synthetic Terror, Tarpley analyzes the psychology of autistic 9/11 denial in Chapter XIII on The 9/11 Myth: Collective Schizophrenia, and the diagnosis is very suggestive. The schizophrenic substitutes space for time: historical memory is lacking; instead of causation, calamities are experienced as events irrupting from the space outside the autist’s own perfect system, like the attacks out of a blue sky on 9/11. Actors belong to an infantile scheme of good guy-bad guy stereoptypes.
Bush the Manichean declares death to evildoers – and on all who harbor them. This is not a mature, travelled and seasoned man, who knows there are good and bad people in every country. This is American autism, with a Plato’s Cave in every living room, consuming fictions flickering on a screen for its picture of the world. In this void, World Net Daily can call for the pre-emptive nuking of the 100 largest Muslim cities, only because a handful of Arabs were alleged to have hijacked the planes of 9/11.
When ignorance is bliss, ‘tis folly to be wise, and the American people love a humbug – yet ignorance here is surely amiss. So are Anglo-Americans constitutionally disposed to support synthetic terror? Can a habit of 400 years standing be broken? Why would they pour cold water on Bonfire Day, and exchange the bright side of Britain for dark doubts about all she has done in her domains? Will the descendants of homesteaders want to remember the West was won by treachery, baiting noble natives with firewater, a dirty war against Mexico, a covert coup against California?
Let us stand by the formula that serves so well against hasty conclusions: there are good and bad people everywhere. Individuals do bear the responsibility of free will for complying with a criminal system, yet its architects bear the full burden of guilt. Even then, the cause is not to be found in personae of race, class or nation, but in the human vices of pride and greed. Intriguingly enough, despite the medieval abuse of the “seven deadly sins” as moral blackmail, these direct, palpable concepts retain more explanatory power than a full course of modern psychology. The reason is doubtless that pride and greed are pillars of materialism, what its slaves and masters live for. The plutocracy, Tarpley’s oligarchy, have openly gilded these two vices as shining virtues of Americanism.
The pitfalls of manicheism, absolutism, black and white thinking, are much older than England, America or even the churches. They are part of the habit of mythical or magical thinking that goes back to the dawn of human consciousness.
For historical purposes in the Western world, the great divide is the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD. At the risk of rushing in where angels fear to tread, and compounding political provocation with religious revisionism, let us inspect the myth of two millenia, taking refuge in the axiom that one cannot always be both truthful and polite.
In the battle for the mind of Christendom, Nicaea was the sweeping triumph of Roman pagan mythology over Semitic religious teaching. Blind faith defeated Gnosticism, the teaching of salvation by knowledge. Jesus became a mere son of God, like the Caesars, rather than a great teacher in a continuous line of enlightened teachers. Instead of infinite gradations of the perfectability of man there was the schizoid scheme of good and evil. Some of Jesus’ values were retained, like the emphasis on charity, as were a few of his words. While this strengthened the new amalgam, it still operated primarily as a pagan vehicle, with symbols, methods and ideology suited to empire, to the mass conversion of conquered peoples. The Gnostic and even the Jewish dispensations were never mass movements for the simple reason that gifted teachers and students were rare, and learning took a lifetime. By contrast the new Church’s methods were like modern multi-level marketing of a simple panacea.
Such was the autistic legacy passed down from the ancient world of tyrants to the settlers who felled the forests of the Mississippi Valley with only a Bible and a gun. Their descendants, today’s Armageddonites, dispense with broad knowledge and common sense to take the Bible as a magical text and brew a creed of the End of the World, so lethal it makes the Nazis with their 1000-year Reich pale to boy scouts in comparison. Christian charity has boiled off from the mix, what is left is the basis: wars of conquest.
We are way overdue to return to salvation by knowledge, and leave behind faith in myths. Knowledge necessarily includes scientific and historical knowledge, yet the key to its use is the knowledge of man, self-knowledge. Like our materialistic culture in general, the 9/11 Truth Movement is nearing hypertrophy in the development of factual material, while remaining scantily underdeveloped in the area of human psychology.
Beyond diagnosis to prescription and therapy, I see our hope in the directions of sociology and the psychology of conditioning rather than the classical, clinical psychological verbarium. 9/11 Denial is very much a group behavior. That’s why 9/11 Truth activists rejoice whenever an authority figure like Howard Zinn comes aboard. But aside from catch-all terms like “conformism,” most of us don’t know much about group dynamics.
A valuable book on conditioning is Battle for the Mind – for God’s sake not the one by Armageddon-nut and psy-war criminal Tim LaHaye, but by William Sargant, an army psychiatrist and chaplain who drew on the work of Pavlov, his own experiences with shell- shocked soldiers, and an analysis of religious conversion and preaching methods, from Wesley back to Greek times: thus the subtitle, A Physiology of Conversion and Brainwashing. Pavlov had identified two quite different types of conditioning. The classical type relies heavily on repetition, alternating tension and relaxation, fear and hope, and authority figures. Much less well-known is traumatic conditioning. Rapid and powerful, it throws the mind so dangerously off balance that desperately trying anything to right itself, it adopts the contraries of its earlier personality characteristics. Curiously, strong personalities are more deeply affected and stay more strongly bonded to the new, paradoxical self. Sargant draws a lesson: if ever put to torture or interrogation, adopt a calm and passive stance, conserving energy for bending, rather than fighting or arguing with one’s tormentors, which will lead to the breakdown and reversal.
This may explain the meekness of the Jews under the Nazi persecution, seen as a fault by modern Jews: the Holocaust was so traumatic that it switched the Jewish personality. Yet passive resistance was a time-tested strategy to survive centuries of pogroms; after all, the Jews were the only non-Christian minority to survive in Europe for an entire millenium, outside of Spain. For all we know, even more might have died if they had tried to fight back against the Nazis.
9/11 was America’s trauma treatment by television. The nation wasn’t budged from its easy- going apathy by impacts on the lesser scale of the USS Cole bombing, but 9/11 was true trauma. The US was galvanized into a personality switch along a whole line of traits: from religious tolerance to Islamophobia, from distaste for government snooping to the embrace of police state measures. Next the mind manipulators applied frequent episodes of repetitive conditioning, boosters to the new war-footing mentality: the snipers and anthrax scares, tensions induced by orange alerts, and invocations by Bush the authority figure.
Tarpley points out the hypnotic effect of television which trains viewers to react to immediate sense perception, without the luxury of reflection afforded by reading. The video propaganda trick of montage, or juxtaposition in time, exploits magical thinking, which confuses the coincidence of two things happening at the same time with cause and effect. The WTC towers were demolished after they were hit by airplanes, creating the impression that the airplanes caused the collapse.
One 20th century gnostic sage saw that modern mass methods of immersion in constant conditioning make it imperative for human survival that we understand how these methods work: one reason why it is so easy to indoctrinate people is that thoughts are like substances, so we see offered ideas as gifts, and ratify the transaction ourselves. By implication, if a new thought contradicts and spoils a huge stock of familiar ideas in working inventory, the transaction will likely be refused, to avoid “loss” – even if the new idea is logical. The human mind is not a digital computer program which comes to a screeching halt at the first logic fault or discrepant data. It is an analog device which “weighs” evidence and simply rejects data that does not fit the mass of received ideas.
That may be why the simplicity of Manicheism is so attractive – faced with alternatives, we generally assume the choice of Either-Or, not Both – when we even see there is an alternative, that is. An example: the 9/11 Truth Movement is split between the orthodox who believe a Boeing hit the Pentagon, because of the eyewitness statements, and the minority who became a majority, who conclude it had to be something else, like a cruise missile, because of the physical evidence at the crash scene. Yet very few seem to think there may have been two aircraft, that is, a large jet that flew over just as a small projectile was launched on the Pentagon. This is felt to be too complicated, too conspiratorial, although in fact it’s the simplest sort of sleight-of-hand, the first trick an apprentice magician masters – and is by far the simplest explanation that fits both sets of facts. The timidity to embrace daring hypotheses may be natural. As a corrective, Andreas von Bülow made a very revealing comment about the covert operations methods of the CIA: Everything is organized in such a complicated way that anyone suspecting or describing the true connections can be declared insane (in an interview in Broecker’s Conspiracies, Conspiracy Theories and the Secrets of 9/11).
The Gnostic world view went beyond duality to multiplicity. Phenomena were not monochrome or even two-sided; each was a rainbow spectrum, a yarn of many threads. A major conspiracy, like a great chess move, is also a manifold action. So many subprojects seem to have hinged on 9/11 that it resembled the launch of a new space probe, with a diverse shopping list of chores for various customers.
This does seem to break the rule that a conspiracy should be limited to the smallest possible number of witting participants. I believe what overrides this is the widespread prevalence of moral corruption: of “end justifies the means” thinking, from “white lies” on up to nuclear warfare. In wartime, secrets were kept by millions of people. There is also the length of time that corrupt elites have had to build their networks: the US has not had a change in its system of government for over 200 years. While still a young country in many, many ways, in one sense it is the oldest continuing form of government on earth. France was a monarchy in 1776, now it’s the Fifth Republic and member of the European Community. Germany wasn’t yet a state then. Even England changed from a real monarchy to a parliamentary one.
There is also, of course, the “I don’t want to know how you do it, just get me the results” syndrome. In this, a quarter-billion Americans may become unwitting co-conspirators in monstrosities carried out in the name of the state.
In the 9/11 conspiracy spectrum, there may be several main bands, of course with partly overlapping memberships, which we might nickname the Cold Warriors; Reichwingnuts; Likudniks; Gamblers and Profiteers. They may be usefully thought of as factions in Tarpley’s overarching concept of oligarchy, who are ultimately controlled by its most powerful figures.
The Cold Warriors would be the capos, the permanent network going back to Gen. Lyman Lemnitzer, Operation Northwoods, the Bay of Pigs and the JFK assassination, all the way back to WWII and the ratlines, the conduit of Gestapo assets to the US to establish the new CIA. (Another of Tarpley’s great merits was his seminal work with Anton Chaitkin, exposing the Bush-Nazi-Dulles connections: George Bush: the Unauthorized Biography. Progressive Press has reprinted this work, and is planning a new book on the subject of America’s persistent plutocratic fascism, The Nazi Hydra in America.) With the Cold Warriors, the geopolitics was clear and the goal was accomplished: to occupy the Central Asian stans, the ex-Soviet Republics on the Russian flank.
Reichwingnuts applies to all of these fascistic factions, really, but is left over as a category for those who have no primary and tangible commercial or geopolitical motive. They are ideologically committed; their symbol is Ashcroft; and their false flag op would be the anthrax scare, which was tailored to ram the Patriot Act through Congress. For them, 9/11 synthetic terror was the last chance to stem the loss of control over mass opinion which is increasingly leaking to the Internet. Synthetic terror enabled the clamp-down on freedom on the Net.
The term Likudniks is shorthand for Israel-firsters among the Washington neocons along with their right-wing cousins in Tel Aviv. Their geopolitical concerns, like “neutralizing” Iraq, Iran, and Syria, were not addressed by 9/11 central casting, oddly enough: since 9/11 was such a huge project for the spook community, Mossad apparently supplied temps in the mole department (e.g. the Jersey movers), and the payoff was an unusually free hand in Palestine. Tarpley relates some of the main add-on Mossad incidents; in Where would we be without our wars I mentioned a couple more bungled false-flag actions, prompting one to ask, Does Mossad only stand ten feet tall when matched with the hapless Palestinians? Or were the operations intended to fail by falling afoul of the police, as a means of telegraphing to the US: take out Iraq and Iran, or we will do it for you? Or did Mossad obligingly create a false trail to itself, in order to spike the punch with an “anti-semitic” flavor? Such might also be the publication by an army source on Sept. 10 that Mossad was skilled in carrying out atrocities and pinning them on the Arabs.
Yet no one even bothered to get Arab names on the passenger lists of the “hijacked” planes. In the light of Tarpley’s analysis of the events on the day of 9/11 – the phone call between Bush and Putin, the coded threats to Air Force One – the surprising but logical explanation is that the plotters left their options open as to who they were going to pin 9/11 on in real time.
The Gamblers played to profit from the disruptions caused by 9/11. The short sales and put options on airline stocks, linked to a Brown Bros. Harriman bank and the CIA, have been well publicized. The attempted credit card heist much less so: an abnormal volume of over $100 million was processed on 9/11, to be erased along with the computer disks that recorded them. What the longfingers did not count on was that the data could be recovered. Yet there was no criminal investigation or prosecution in the attempted embezzlement, instead, the data recovery company Convar was sold to Kroll Security, a CIA firm.
Moreover, hard disks are damaged by temperatures over 70 C. So much for the wild scenarios purporting to explain how structural steel collapsed from fire – essentially from the heat of burning carpets, since the jet fuel burned off in the first few minutes. Steel melts at 1535 C, or 22 times hotter...
An even bigger gambler is Silverstein Properties, owner of WTC 7 and leaseholder of the Twin Towers, who will rake in at least a billion in insurance profits. We need to go after the re-insurance companies and shame them into standing up to history’s biggest arson fraud.
Even that gamble may be eclipsed by operations in the oil price and forex markets. Gasoline prices hit a record low in the months after 9/11, only to soar to record highs thereafter. The dollar is also going through one of its periodic gyrations, in the midst of US mega-deficits. One can only guess whether some very big players have an ace up their sleeve in this market chaos, or if the empire is really fighting its last battle on legs of clay.
By Profiteers I mean the Bush-Harriman-Cheney clique and their cronies, social climbers who use corruption, politics and war profiteering to try and keep up with the original oil barons, the Rockefellers. They were very interested in the prospects of looting Iraq; but why were there no Iraqi hijackers? One factor could have been the iron hand of Saddam Hussein’s secret police, which prevented any patsy-panky; it was much easier to get Saudi passports – although most of those were stolen. Bush 41 had shown an attack on Iraq was doable by deception; the anthrax episode seems to have been devised to inculpate Iraq.
Saudi Arabia was prima facie the prime target on 9/11, yet the boom has yet to drop. The next ploy of the oil bandits may be pressure to privatize Aramco and open up the Saudi oil wealth to plunder, and to “secure the realm” – the Saudi oil lake is also of geopolitical significance for the Cold Warriors. Pretexts would be found to topple the too-independent regimes of the Taliban and Saddam Hussein. The Saudis are the suitable type of vassal rulers for the oligarchs – but had shown signs of impatience with the imperative of subservience. The wars on Afghanistan and Iraq as well as the fake ID’s of the Saudi “hijackers” are damoclean swords of blackmail over the heads of the Saudi royals, a reminder that they can be “taken out” any time.
The Saudis do not seem to be excessively saddled with friends among 9/11 skeptics, either. Survivors of 9/11 families tried to sue them for $119 trillion! The most famous US “skeptic” of them all, Michael Moore, royally skewered the Saudis on the same spit as Bush in Fahrenheit 911 (without mentioning Mossad even once). Recently, major 9/11 skeptics fixture Michael Ruppert featured articles on Ptech, a “Saudi-financed” software firm in Boston that allegedly infiltrated FAA and NORAD computer systems. Ruppert’s 9/11 book advances the theory that US air defenses failed on 9/11 because of fake radar blips on screens. The cunning conclusion: yes, the Saudis overwhelmed US with hackers on the ground and hijackers in the air! If this is what 9/11 skeptics are writing, heaven help Riyadh.... Ptech’s Saudi investor, Yasin Kadi, is involved in drug running in Albania and other things that CIA assets generally do. Superficially Ptech seems to answer to Tarpley’s model of a privatized military firm as the 9/11 workshop, but common sense dictates that it was only a CIA front, and that the real sharp-end high technology is in the safe hands of the inscrutable American spooks, and not accidentally farmed out to some little upstart Muslim- owned firm. Saudi-baiting by real or pretended 9/11 activists within the 9/11 Truth movement is so common that there is a shorthand name for it, Saudi spin.
Ruppert had already surmised on Oct. 26, 2001: “Bin Laden’s reported possession of Promis [software] may also explain the alleged threatening messages that were received by President Bush while aboard Air Force One on September 11th.” This is on a par with what Tarpley calls the CIA’s enthusiastic mythography of bin Laden. Of course, Osama bin Laden is a Saudi – and a witting or unwitting CIA asset, too. Promis is a trojan horse that is shared by the CIA with its partners in order to spy on them. Finally, the entire narrative of aircraft and the air defenses is a red herring, as we will see; the demolition of the WTC was carried out by explosive charges, and had nothing to do with anything airborne at all.
Three and a half years after, the 9/11 plot is still unfolding. With the world’s largest oil reserves, and most of the nineteen alleged hijackers putatively from Saudi Arabia, that is, with false identities pointing there, you don’t need to be a seismic geologist to figure out that retaining control of Saudi oil is a big part of the story behind 9/11. But why weren’t the Arab names ever on the passenger lists? Were the putschists leaving their options open, to see how well the blackmail went down with Russia? Certain is that 9/11 was a chess combination, a carefully prepared blitz of moves that would rearrange the entire board.
It may be too much to ask for 9/11 Truth activists to agree on a common platform covering all 9/11-related issues from Afghanistan to Zionism. But the experience of the LA Citizen’s Grand Jury, which I and Webster Tarpley were both fortunate to attend, showed that an essential consensus is possible. After hearing the evidence, the jury approved almost all of Webster Tarpley’s brief for an Independent International Truth Commission (IITC). The IITC proposal is another of his great merits, that the entire 9/11 Truth movement should agree on in order to dispel the 9/11 myth far and wide.
Perhaps the greatest utility of Tarpley’s work is its framework of a rogue network ensconced within the government. This is a huge advance beyond pointillism, ad hoc connecting dots. And it is an essential one to winning the case for 9/11 truth.
Meanwhile 9/11 remains the trump and panacea of the neocon regime, their prop of empire, rationale for an era of open-ended warfare, and reflexive alibi for every shortcoming – the foundation stone of their mythical Project for a New American Century.
For us, the human race, seeing through the 9/11 myth is the test we must not fail. Perhaps we can convey some of that urgency to people by reminding them:
If we are wrong, it matters little if you hear us out. But if we are right – there is far too much at stake to risk ignoring it.
John Leonard,
Editor and publisher,
Progressive Press,
Joshua Tree, Calif.
Feb. 11, 2005,
revised Dec. 2, 2005.