Reclaiming our Heritage
March 14, 2006
Lynn M. Stuter
“Let us never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories concerning the attacks
of September 11.” ~President George W. Bush
For once President Bush and I agree. The question is — what is conspiracy
theory and what is truth? Is the truth what has been boldly put in print
by those given “statutory authority” to investigate the incidents of September
11, 2001, and report their findings, in full, to the American people,
the so-called 911 Commission?
If so, why are there, as David Ray Griffin has so eloquently pointed out in his
book, The 9/11 Commission Report; Omissions and Distortions, so
many omissions and distortions in the report written and proudly published
by the 911 Commission? In a CNN interview with Lee Hamilton, vice-chair
of the 9/11 Commission, Hamilton attempted to discredit Griffin’s work
by claiming the 9/11 Commission report was the “definitive story of 9/11.”
When asked, however, if he had read Griffin’s book, Hamilton admitted
that he had not; claiming that the commission would not have achieved
its goal had it read everything written by the critics. David Ray Griffin’s
book, of course, was written after the work of the 9/11 Commission was
published.
After having read Griffin’s book, mentioned above, I have to wonder how Hamilton
could sit there, in front of the cameras, and lie so easily and with such
a straight face to the American people. Maybe his ability to do that has
something to do with his having been part of the government bureaucracy
for too long.
The 9/11 Commission Report; Omissions and Distortions not only points
out a multitude of discrepancies, omissions, distortions, and inaccuracies
in the report published by the 9/11 Commission, but in doing so, leaves
standing in the void a picture, drawn without words, of something so horrific
that it should send chills of fear up the spine of any thinking, reasoning
American.
That picture has to do with a man we call President, an agenda, and the ability
to kill thousands of people without remorse to achieve that agenda.
In 1997 the Project for a New American Century (PNAC) was formed. The Statement
of Principles is as revealing as it is frightening, making it very
clear that the purpose of the group is the promotion of American imperialist
policies in foreign lands in the name of maintaining American expansionist
policies, stating as its operating premises:
- we need to increase
defense spending significantly if we are to carry out our global responsibilities
today and modernize our armed forces for the future;
- we need to strengthen
our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our
interests and values;
- we need to promote
the cause of political and economic freedom abroad;
- we need to accept
responsibility for America's unique role in preserving and extending
an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and
our principles.
But like so many others, isn’t PNAC just other non-governmental organization
(NGO) established to influence some aspect of governmental policy or practice?
Not in this instance. Many of the original signing members of the Statement
of Principles for this organization have found their way into the
current Bush Administration. Others are names most will recognize from
the Reagan Administration and G H W Bush Administration:
Elliott Abrams, Gary Bauer, William J. Bennett, Jeb Bush, Dick Cheney, Eliot A.
Cohen, Midge Decter, Paula Dobriansky, Steve Forbes, Aaron Friedberg,
Francis Fukuyama, Frank Gaffney, Fred C. Ikle, Donald Kagan, Zalmay Khalilzad,
I. Lewis (Scooter) Libby, Norman Podhoretz, Dan Quayle, Peter W. Rodman,
Stephen P. Rosen, Henry S. Rowen, Donald Rumsfeld, Vin Weber, George Weigel,
and Paul Wolfowitz.
In 2000, PNAC published a document entitled Rebuilding America’s Defenses.
This document makes apparent the systems philosophy of its author and
signatories, although in its Statement of Principles the organization
claims to be conservative in nature. Neo-conservative — yes; conservative
— not by a long shot.
On page 51 of Rebuilding America’s Defenses is this little gem:
Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely
to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like
a new Pearl Harbor.
One short year later, a “new Pearl Harbor” manifested itself on American soil
when two planes hit the World Trade Towers in the WTC complex in New York;
the Pentagon was struck in Washington, DC; and Flight 93, supposedly heading
for the U.S. Capitol, was reduced to smoldering rubble in a reclaimed
strip mine in Pennsylvania. In all, four commercial jets — United Airlines
flights 93 and 175, and American Airlines flights 11 and 77, passengers
and crews were lost. An estimated 2,742 people lost their lives when the
planes struck the twin towers of the World Trade Center and the towers
ultimately disintegrated into their footprints in a pile of pulverized
concrete, blanketing lower Manhattan with a layer of dust containing fire
retarding asbestos fibers.
The official report of the 911 Commission points the finger of blame at an
“incompetent” Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for why military jets
were not scrambled to bring down the hi-jacked planes before those planes
reached their targets. In its zeal to place blame, rather than get at
the truth, the Commission drew up its own timeline of when the FAA supposedly
realized the planes were hi-jacked and when the FAA notified the appropriate
military officials, not based upon testimony from either the FAA or military
officials, but based on times which would serve best to exonerate military
officials of wrong-doing. As a supposedly independent commission established
to get at the truth of the events of September 11, 2001, such does not
speak to the veracity or efficacy of the Commission, especially when those
timelines are anything but accurate.
That the work of the 911 Commission contains so many omissions and distortions
leads, obviously, to the question of how truly independent the commission
was. As Griffin points out in his book, the commission was replete with
Bushites. Of the commission members and staff, the following have direct
ties to the Bush Administration: Philip Zelikow, Executive Director; Thomas
Kean, Chair; Lee Hamilton, Vice-Chair; Chris Kojm, Executive Deputy Director;
Daniel Marcus, General Counsel; Jamie Gorelick, Fred Fielding, John Lehman
and Timothy Roemer, members. This constitutes nine of the thirteen members
and staff.
The conflicts of interest here are obvious; the inability of the 911 Commission
to act as an independent body representing the interests of the American
people equally obvious. The distortions and obvious omissions of the final
report of the 9/11 Commission leads one to the obvious question of what
was the involvement of the Bush Administration in the events of 9/11?
Video tapes that would have shown whether Flight 77 actually hit the Pentagon
were confiscated by the FBI immediately following the supposed crash.
Judicial Watch has now filed suit in hopes of forcing the release of one
of those tapes. If the government has nothing to hide, why not let the
American people see the video, just as they saw the video of the plane
slamming into the south tower of the World Trade Center? Why the secrecy?
Could it maybe have something to do with the anti-aircraft batteries protecting
the Pentagon and White House that automatically shoot down any plane that
gets too close that doesn’t have a transponder emitting friendly military
signals? Controllers at the tower at Dulles International Airport reported
that the tight turn of the aircraft before plowing into the Pentagon appeared
to them to be a military aircraft with an experienced pilot at the helm.
Was there more truth to their comment than they realized?
Then, as reported by Griffin in his book, there is the fact that our President,
having been told that a plane had hit the north tower at the World Trade
Center, that there could be up to 11 hi-jacked planes, remained at the
school in Florida where he was reading to the children for another 30
minutes, whereupon he returned to Air Force One, lifted off, and was in
the air for an hour before acquiring a fighter escort. With a national
emergency obviously in the making, not knowing where those 11 hi-jacked
planes might be, Bush remained visible at the school, en route to the
airport, and in the air on Air Force One. Protocol to remove the President
to an undisclosed location was not followed. Did Bush know he wasn’t a
target? Did his security team know Bush wasn’t a target?
Another glaring discrepancy concerns Flight 93. Most Americans have seen a crash
sight of a big commercial jet. The crash sight of Flight 93 consisted
of a smoldering crater in the ground. The crash scene, itself, covered
some eight miles with debris scattered the course of that eight miles.
One engine was found “a considerable distance” from the reported crash
sight. It is very obvious that Flight 93 came apart in flight, whether
from a bomb on board or from being shot down by military aircraft. People
outside in the area on that fateful day, said they saw another plane,
white, that left the scene as Flight 93 rained down on the landscape below.
Some said this plane went straight up. Such a maneuver would not be a-typical
for some military aircraft. Such an aircraft could also carry hardware
sufficient to blow a commercial jet out of the sky, reducing it to pieces
the size of a suitcase — as was reported by locals.
Seismic activity in the area of the crash places the time of the crash at three
to four minutes after that reported by the 911 Commission. One of the
flight recorders, retrieved from the smoldering crater, seems to be missing
three to four minutes of tape. What was recorded in that three to four
minutes that the government does not want the American people to hear?
If military aircraft did shoot down Flight 93, why not just come right out and say,
“Yes, we shot it down; it was what was indicated; we didn’t know the passengers
had regained control of the plane?” Why lie about it?
And what about the high-ranking government officials who suddenly decided
that taking to the airways over America was something to be avoided in
the days leading up to September 11, 2001? What about the bin Laden family
members who were allowed to leave the United States in the days following
September 11, 2001, some on private jets during the time when private
aircraft were grounded, some on commercial flights when commercial traffic
resumed? Who allowed these bin Laden family members to leave and how could
they have left without clearance coming from the Bush Administration?
The obvious implications of all this is that even if the events of 9/11 weren’t
the work of the Bush Administration, the Bush Administration is most certainly
complicit, even if only in knowing that it was going to happen and doing
nothing to stop it. This is a hard pill to swallow for Americans who want
to believe their leaders have moral values which preclude taking innocent
lives in pursuit of a political agenda.
Considering what has transpired since 9/11 with the severe erosion of the rights of
the American people, and the Bush Administration pursuing a policy of
“challeng[ing] regimes hostile to our interests and values,” the American
people would do well to not simply pass the omissions and distortions
of the 9/11 Commission report off as simple “oversight” or “misunderstanding.”
It is time the American people found out the truth. It is long past time for
a truly independent commission of the people, with the power and authority
to subpoena and prosecute, to investigate what really happened on September
11, 2001, to get at the truth.
If the Bush Administration is complicit, then those complicit should pay the
price just as any other American would be made to pay the price. What
makes it doubly true if the Bush Administration is complicit, is the subsequent
erosion of the rights of the American people, the invasion of Afghanistan
and Iraq, now the growing threat against Iran, all in the name of the
“War on Terror.”
In 1939, Hitler quipped, “It gives me great pleasure that the people do not know
what is happening to them.” Are we willing to go the route of the German
people in the off-chance that what looks to be happening might not happen?
If we do, we deserve what we get.
Yes, President Bush, we shouldn’t tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories —
especially when those outrageous conspiracy theories point to your administration.
And no, President Bush, it isn’t unpatriotic or disloyal to our Constitution and Bill of Rights to question your motives in the “War on Terror”, especially in light of the implications resulting from the events of September 11, 2001.
© 2003 Lynn M. Stuter - All Rights Reserved
Mother and wife, Stuter has spent the past ten years researching systemstheory with a particular emphasis on education. She home schooled twodaughters, now grown and on their own. She has worked with legislators,both state and federal, on issues pertaining to systems governance and education reform.
She networks nation-wide with other researchers andcitizens concerned with the transformation of our nation. She has
traveled the United States and lived overseas. Web site: http://www.learn-usa.com/
E-Mail: lmstuter@mail.icehouse.net
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For further information please refer to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
|