Where are we on 9/11?

It goes without saying that 9/11 was one of the most significant tragedies in all of American history, certainly even more so for anyone living in New York City or who has lived in New York City. For me it was colossal, --a life-changing event, even though I was not in NYC at the time.

There are a multitude of different views on 9/11. I have read and find the most truth in the accounts of David Ray Griffin, Peter Lance, John W. Dean, III; Former White House Counterterrorism Security Chief Richard A. Clarke, and Professor Francis A. Boyle. I am open to discussion and/or questions about any of these authors' renditions.

The truth will emerge. The question is, how long will it take? And a related question is, how much longer will the suffering be prolonged? I believe it is incumbent upon everyone who wants the truth to be known to continue the discussion. Let's not forget that "the September 11 attacks" was the main event that precipitated the invasion of Iraq. On June 9, 2008, U. S. Congressman Dennis Kucinich alleged in his "Articles of Impeachment of President George W. Bush" that the invasion of Iraq was a War Crime. Congressman Kucinich alleged that the American people and the United States Congress were deceived "with criminal intent" into falsely believing that there was a connection between 9/11 and Iraq. This was used as a fraudulent justification for the illegal invasion of Iraq. This charge is all the more serious because Congressman Kucinich also stated three times in his "Articles of Impeachment of President George W. Bush" that President Bush's dishonesty "set the stage for the loss of more than 1,000,000 innocent Iraqi citizens since the United States invasion." This is now not only a matter of public record --it is a matter of Congressional Record. Kucinich supplies supporting evidence for his allegations in the "Articles of Impeachment." http://kucinich.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=93581

The deliberate taking of more than 1,000,000 innocent Iraqi lives by the Bush administration is not only a War Crime, it is genocide. It is a policy of annihilation, of eradication, of extermination. It is racial and ethnic cleansing. Richard A. Clarke has stated in Against All Enemies that the Bush administration initiated a war against Islam in invading Iraq. It actually strengthened al Qaeda and its spin-offs.

From a humanitarian point of view, this is the central issue: "More than 1,000,000 innocent Iraqi citizens" have lost their lives as a result of this illegal invasion. The administration of George W. Bush has made worthless the value of human life, in violation of the U.S. Constitution and international law, and has taken more than one million human lives. There is no justification on earth for this --not by anyone. In the process of accomplishing this genocide, George W. bush has also robbed the American citizens of a democratic form of government.

Congressman Kucinich provides evidence that the purpose of the 9/11 attacks was to facilitate the annihilation of Iraqi Arab Muslims, by invading Iraq. Congressman Kucinich also provides evidence to support the allegation that the 9/11 attacks were orchestrated by agents of the Bush administration. Some of this evidence was already a matter of public record prior to Kucinich announcing his Articles of Impeachment of George W. Bush on the floor of the United States House of Representatives.

For example, Scott Ritter, the former U.N. weapons inspector, who was scorned for saying there were no WMD in Iraq, spoke with Robert Scheer about American ignorance and the lies that led us to war. Ritter said on Truthdig, posted on March 20, 2007, (http://www.truthdig.com/interview/page2/20070320_scott_ritter_robert_scheer/)

'It was under Bill Clinton's tenure that the CIA undermined the weapons inspectors, creating the perception of a noncompliant Iraq when the facts spoke other.

'Never forget that the CIA today commits to the reality that Iraq was disarmed in the summer of 1991. The CIA today says, "Yes, this was true." As a weapons inspector, we were reporting these facts to the CIA in the fall of 1993, right in the beginning of Bill Clinton's tenure.

'...I think it's only fair to note that the initiator of regime-change policy in regards to American-Iraqi relations was George Herbert Walker Bush. And the reason George Herbert Walker Bush chose to eliminate Saddam Hussein from power was that Saddam Hussein had become a political embarrassment to the first Bush administration. Because Saddam Hussein's existence reminded everybody of the reality of the Reagan administration and the George Herbert Walker Bush administration's very close ties with Saddam Hussein.

'...Saddam Hussein-the two crimes he was being tried for before he was executed, were crimes that took place prior to Donald Rumsfeld's visit, when Donald Rumsfeld embraced Saddam, passed on a message that said, "You are a friend of the American people." George Herbert Walker Bush sent Senator Bob Dole to Iraq in March of 1990 with the same message: "You are a true friend of the American people." It's only in August 1990, when Saddam invades Kuwait, that he suddenly becomes the personification of evil. And it's the requirement to get the American public from going from viewing Saddam as a true friend to the personification of evil worthy of military intervention that we had to change the mind-set. Saddam Hussein became the Middle East equivalent-and this is where Bush made his fatal mistake-the Middle East equivalent of Adolf Hitler, requiring Nuremberg-like retribution. These are direct quotes from a speech made by George Herbert Walker Bush in October of 1990. Now, when you call someone the Middle East equivalent of Adolf Hitler, requiring Nuremberg-like retribution, that means at the end of the day he has to be gone, in prison, held to account.

'At the end of the Gulf War in 1999, Saddam Hussein was still in power. We didn't go into Baghdad. We were never supposed to go into Baghdad; we were supposed to simply liberate Kuwait, which we did. Now Saddam Hussein is still in power and George Herbert Walker Bush has a political problem. And this is the point that I've made from day one. Why is regime change so important? It's not about national security. Saddam Hussein never posed a threat to the national security of the United States that warranted American military intervention, whether it be in 1991 or 2003 or any time in between.

'...And here we are talking about Saddam.... How easily we, the people of the United States of America-and I use that term because it is derived from the preamble of the Constitution, a document which defines who we are and what we are as a nation-how easily we, the people, are deceived. How easily we, the people, are manipulated. How easily we are pushed in one direction or the other. How quickly we bought into Saddam Hussein being the personification of evil. And while we were calling him the Middle East equivalent of Adolf Hitler, how little we knew of Iraq.

'...Saddam Hussein was a product of Iraq's modern history. Saddam Hussein was a product of a nationalist movement that had its roots with Nasser in Egypt, that recognized that in modern Arab society you have tendencies to rip this society apart, called religion, that schism between Shia and Sunni. So you better damn well know the difference between those two if you want to talk about coming up with a solution, Mr. [Silvestre] Reyes, congressman from Texas, head of the House Intelligence Committee! But we might want to remind Nancy Pelosi, speaker of the House, who appointed this man. I bet you she couldn't pass the pop quiz, either. None of them can. You better know that there's not just the difference between Sunni and Shia, but a difference between Kurd and Arab, a difference between a Turkmen and a Kurd. You better know the difference between Wahhabism and those who embrace the following of Saddam Hussein. You better know the different religious holidays. You better know all of this. Saddam Hussein did. You better know that tribes have a tendency to rip society apart, too. That's why Baathism, modern Baathism-and I'm not here condoning Baathism, I'm just stating reality-rejected tribalism, rejected ethnicity, rejected religion, and spoke of a unified secular Iraqi state. In order to achieve that vision, Saddam Hussein had to suppress the very tendencies that rise up and tear modern Iraq apart. And we condemned him for this? We called him a war criminal for this? Yet now we're in Iraq, we took away the glue that held together, and we're doing the same damn thing, but even worse. We've accused Saddam Hussein over the course of 30 years of killing 400,000 Iraqi people. Hell, it's taken us four years and we've killed 600,000.

Scheer: 'Your story, your analysis, has held up splendidly. The analysis of the people that you are disagreeing with has fallen apart. Whatever one thinks, history has vindicated you....

 1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5  |  6  |  7  |  8  |  9  |  10  |  11  |  12  |  13  |  14  |  15  |  16  |  17  |  18  |  19  |  20  |  21  |  22  |  23  |  24  |  25  |  26  |  27  |  28  |  29  |  30  |  31  |  32  |  33  |  34  |  35  |  36  |  37  |  38  |  39  |  40  |  41  |  42  |  43  |  44  |  45