Send a Tweet
- Advertisement -
Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Printer Friendly Page More Sharing
Diary    H2'ed 3/25/10

The Alchemy of Antisemitism

Author 12887
Follow Me on Twitter     Message Michael Morrissey
Become a Fan
  (15 fans)
- Advertisement -
Alan Sabrosky's recent and much-trumpeted statement that "Israel did 9/11" (e.g., here) is highly irrational and fuels, I suspect on purpose, the antisemitism that already plagues and undermines the "truth movement."

His "argument," such as it is, is easily debunked. It combines sense with nonsense, and it is very easy to distinguish the two, unless you are antisemitic, but that is precisely the problem.

Sensibly, Sabrovsky says:

Several things are very clear to me from a careful assessment of both official and critical evaluations of the 9/11 attacks. First, the striking aircraft alone simply could not have brought down either of the two buildings in the manner in which they fell, much less a third building which was not hit by a plane (I expect the one intended to do that as a "cover" had ended up in that Pennsylvania field), given the available physical evidence and a wealth of expert testimony. This means the attackers had assistance on the ground, and it had to have been active before the attacks occurred: preparing buildings for controlled demolition is not something done haphazardly in the midst of chaos.

Few people who have looked at the evidence closely would disagree with this. He continues:

- Advertisement -
Second, only two intelligence agencies had the expertise, assets, access and political protection to execute 9/11 in the air and on the ground: our CIA...

Many would also readily agree about the CIA, and it is
indeed significant when a man with his military credentials confirms the obvious, but this is only the bait. Now comes the switch:

... and Israel's Mossad. Only one had the incentive, using the "who benefits" principle: Mossad. And that incentive dovetailed perfectly with the neo-con's agenda and explicitly expressed need for a catalytic event to mobilize the American public for their wars, using American military power to destroy Israel's enemies. Only the unexpected strength of the Iraqi resistance kept Syria and Iran from being attacked in the second Bush Administration. Thus, the evidential trail for 9/11 and the wars in Afghanistan & Iraq run from PNAC, AIPAC and their cohorts; through the mostly Jewish neo-cons in the Bush Administration; and back to the Israeli government. None of the denials and political machinations can alter that essential reality. Terms such as treason, betrayal and deceit do not overstate the case against them.

This is utter nonsense. Sabrosky
, like a good Marine, is telling us that the CIA had no incentive to implement "the neo-con's [neo-cons'] agenda and explicitly expressed need for a catalytic event to mobilize the American public for their wars," because -- according to Sabrosky -- the purpose of these wars is "to destroy Israel's enemies." The U.S. has no interest in oil or gas or in military dominance of the Middle East! We're just there to help out the Israelis!

I believe this is what the CIA would call a limited hang-out. You admit a relatively (and somewhat defensible) truth, that we are Israel's friend, and then you blame everything else on Israel, which is a lie. They can take it. They are used to being blamed, and probably know this is the price they have to pay for our friendship. They're the bad guys anyway -- for other, legitimate reasons -- and in the end, blaming them for the wrong thing (9/11) is an excellent way to get them off the hook on all counts.

- Advertisement -
1) It distracts attention away from the real crimes of the Israeli government (the siege of Palestine).

2) It distracts attention from the "other" -- and in fact ONLY -- intelligence agency that could have done 9/11.

3) It feeds antisemitism, which in turn can be forcefully denounced and used to reinforce 1) and 2).

It should be clear that Sabrosky, with his intimate military connections, would never have been allowed to make the statements he has made without these strategic goals having been carefully considered. Consider what the effect would be if, in contrast, he had followed through with the much more logical argument that since the CIA is more powerful than the Mossad it would be foolish to assert that the Mossad tells the CIA what to do rather than vice versa. Suppose Sabrosky had used his military expertise and inside knowledge to explain to us in more detail his statement that the CIA has "the expertise, assets, access and political protection to execute 9/11 in the air and on the ground." Surely he has more knowledge of that than he does about the Mossad.

Needless to say, this won't happen. Sabrosky has accomplished his mission. The antisemites, along with the deniers -- are already frothing with delight at having their faith restored in Uncle Sam. I suspect he will receive a military commendation.


- Advertisement -

Rate It | View Ratings

Michael Morrissey Social Media Pages: Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in       Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in       Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Former teacher, born in the US but longtime resident of Germany. Author of "Looking for the Enemy," "The Transparent Conspiracy," et al.

Related Topic(s): , Add Tags
Add to My Group(s)
Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Writers Guidelines
Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Support OpEdNews

OpEdNews depends upon can't survive without your help.

If you value this article and the work of OpEdNews, please either Donate or Purchase a premium membership.

If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Daily Weekly     OpEdNews Newsletter
   (Opens new browser window)