Citizens for Legitimate Government, a multi-partisan activist group established to expose the Bush Coup d'Etat and oppose the Bush occupation in all of its manifestations.

 

MG's MOST CONTROVERSIAL ARTICLE YET---

WHERDY GO, II: AS NIGHTFALL COMES

"As nightfall does not come at once, neither does oppression… we all must be aware of change in the air-- however slight -- lest we become victims of the darkness."
--William O. Douglas, Supreme Court Justice 1939-1975

This article has in various forms been floating around for two years. It is time it reaches the general net public.

CHANGE IN THE AIR

The article‘s title,  (http://www.anti-state.com/gilson/gilson2.html) “Wherdy Go?” arose from a question asked by my infant son while looking at the melancholy remains of the World Trade Center--even as frustrated forensic investigators were asking the same thing of the debris, unaccountably shipped by the government to scrap dealers in China. In the article, I pointed out that as we as a people did many wrong things, many things disappeared mysteriously as even the wreckage itself.

Shortly after the 9-11 disaster, I asked questions on the strange disappearance -- or at best malleability-- of evidence, context, and statements surrounding 9-11.

Believe me, I’m no idler with nothing better to do than concoct questions that put innocent government mis-steps in a bad light, or treat 9-11 as a parlor game whodunit to write a best-seller. I used to go to an office sub-let by my partner in the World Trade Center. I have fond memories of that place. But for unusual events in my life, I might well have been sipping coffee with everyone else that morning one moment and the next is a bunch of ashes floating over New Jersey after briefly wondering what the devil happened. I knew many of the staff at the restaurant, for example, very dedicated and nice people all, and people on the building staff. Perhaps I saw them once more unaware as they first waved gaily from the windows as if to re-assure the world all was well then in minutes jump stoically to their deaths, many clutching each other in desperate hope.

But we shall never meet again. That haunts me.

The Pentagon was in a way worse. For many years my father worked right where the plane hit. I remember in the fifties and sixties my father driving right up there on Saturdays, and leaving me in the car to drop off papers before we went to Wheaton Park or Rock Creek, or even Shenandoah. The guard would salute me solemnly and I would return the salute in kind as he ambled over to the car to chit-chat and make kidding remarks. The sun shone beautifully on the walls of the building, reflecting a grave white contrasted against the green shrubbery like something from one of my books on Ancient Greece, or some futuristic building in a far-of space-faring civilization on the cover of an ACE paperback.

Sure, I understand all the arguments against the misdeeds of the US Government and how it probably generated these attacks. If so, I am well aware of them beyond most citizens. There is no question in my mind that a lot of people have plenty of reason to bomb and terrorize my often-complacent fellow citizens. But that is not the way. Meeting blood with rivers of blood and killing innocent people is immoral, the very opposite of the path towards a freer and better society. Unhappy with the US Government? I sympathize--take a number. For the correct solution is satisfy yourself of the value of Libertarianism and join those fighting to change things by peaceful means. Someone has to refuse to continue the insanity, and if you are smart enough to realize it is insane, then that is nature’s way of saying that that person …is you.

No, I was not among the citizens calling madly to bomb Afghanistan into oblivion and proposing even more monstrous measures. I am aware that incompetent American doctors snuff out--according to a pioneering consulting study I did that in the late '70's showed physician's mistakes were killing 300,000 Americans a year, a proportion  only now being admitted after many years of nudging the medical establishment-- about that many lives in a weekend as happened on 9-11... but we call for no great measures there. I don’t even assume or feel the need to call whoever was responsible a criminal. That is the job of the jury, and many insane people do dreadful things. Like all Libertarians, I wanted those responsible apprehended and those errors in the system that created the disaster ameliorated. And like most Libertarians--not all, because many also lost their heads and said singularly stupid things as the country went into panic though certainly less proportionally than in the other parties--I understood that there is a right way to handle these things, and many temptations to do it wrong--and the weak, the foolish, and the corrupt with call loudly for all the wrong ones to be enforced immediately and without question.

DEATH SPIRAL OF REPUBLICS

A recent Zogby poll (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=40257)  reveals that  one-half of New Yorkers think the government had a hand in 9/11. In general, the public is quietly arriving at asking unsettling questions I and other Libertarians have raised from the beginning.

While I pointed out some things that were new, the main value of the article was context and connecting the dots. That is something apparently at a premium on this lonely planet: my article became an Internet sensation. It was linked to or re-printed in over 100 places, and GOOGLE briefly had over 2100 links and mentions (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=%22wherdy+go%3F%22). Outfits such as Media Bypass, Dump Bush, Citizens for Legitimate Government (http://www.legitgov.org/), Democratic Underground, Global Free Press, various Church groups, Indymedia, the Free Republic, Jefferson Review, a numbing array of yahoo groups, even Pravda quoted “Wherdy Go?“ so it became a kind of by-word. I learned from a reliable source that the CIA stamped it secret, or whatever they stamp things they believe no one knows. One group of over 20,000 signatories added it in the web background page to a petition to the US Senate. I received nearly 1000 e-mails, including one even from Mongolia by someone who, from that distant and detached perspective, was asking similar questions but thought they must be missing something since surely all these bright Americans had everything figured out.

People got that I wasn’t saying this or that happened (the same as in this article). My concern was something far more disturbing: that after a lengthy period of assurances that it was this or that, we still didn’t know what happened beyond a lot of conflicting stories from Washington. And to highlight that the system is designed that way.

The responses were impressive. A journalist thanked me for providing her courage to launch an inquiry. Someone who said they were in the State Department called one evening who said I was closer than I suspected. An adviser of a Congresswoman who was being criticized for asking similar questions shared that I was closer than I thought and she was hampered by security which prevented her from addressing government derision--and that a plot to subvert the upcoming official inquiry was, as close observers have since seen, underway.  Various lone conspiracy researchers thanked me for saying reasonably what they were trying to express. People liked the reasonable tone and that someone of modest note and noted neutrality was asking what should be obvious--and that hardly any notable figure, Republican, Democrat, Socialist, Green, seemed ready to touch, and none in that way.

Quite a few pointed out that things that appeared as lapses took on a different impact when one realized they were not isolated, but nearly every major theme concealed a distraction, questionable action, or even lie. Sometimes it was as simple as comparing an official’s statement one day with his claims months later. Many were reminded that things they were now wondering if they had imagined them--such was the barrage of propaganda that people were absorbing the opposite of what they saw and heard in the initial days-- were validated as indeed not alone. A Leftist group, Bomb Shelter, leading critique of the Bush election called it “definitive” introductory reading. Canadian papers used my comparisons to the JFK murder. E-magazines in Brazil, Poland and elsewhere linked to it. A professor in Spain asked to use it for his class on official propaganda.

Not all reactions were positive.

I was accused of being a Communist, a right-wing dupe, a Jew-hater, a pawn of the Jews, a terrible Christian, a covert supporter of Islamic fanatics, and an enemy of Islam. Several people who could not spell sent long e-mails revealing to my skeptical eyes the real conspiracy and asking for money. One careful reader noted sarcastically that I misspelled “Where did it go?“ (I gravely thanked this free-lance grammarian.)

I also learned that someone must be beavering away in hope of a better future inventing search engines for Internet business that look for prospects that had reached, despite our world troubles, new frontiers.

Thus I received a sudden rush of e-mails by businessmen in China who thought I was interested in scrap metal-- and circulars from around the world promising that if I bought their product at a special low-low-low price, I would lose weight, discover the amazing secrets behind the IRS, find the assets of those who cheated me, enjoy a valuable 25-piece cookie decorating kit from Martha Stewart with her favorite recipe for royal icing, get a college degree for life experience, help the building fund of an obscure monastery and receive blessed water from the Jordan with a personal note of consolation from an elderly cleric, and conclude my busy day able to Make Love like Sampson with “natural Viagra.”

One writer remarked I was like a physician diagnosing a patient with a long, wasting disease, a long spiral that is not noticed even by those around the patient--a death spiral of republics.

My wife speculated I would probably be arrested on some trumped up charge before 2005 if I didn't shut up.

 

THE SLOW, LONG COUP

I just wake up in the morning and tell myself, 'There's been a military coup,' and then it all makes sense," said one veteran foreign service officer.--LA Times story


Understand: I think that strategically what Bush has done is scarily brilliant from the point of view of classical power play “realpolitik.” If the plan is not to make the US Elder Sister of Republics but a New Rome with goodies and some freedom for the co-operative and no rivals, this is quite a step. Talk about the sanctity of national borders, asylum, neutrality, international law, increasingly idealistic laws of war, and non-interference in other countries was OK while the US was climbing the political hill. But now at the top, people are thinking, the mask comes out and there is no border against whom we pursue, no court either, and if your country tries to make WMD’s like the US...well, as the saying goes, you silly rabbit.

As any Mexican will tell you, watch out for these supposedly dumb, sleepy eyed rich people from Texas. They’ll grab what you have while keeping slaves and call it freedom in all kinds of tricky maneuvers. Maybe that is not the answer, but looked at strategically Bush is one smart Texan General.

For he has almost overnight placed a massive military force in the soft underbelly of Eurasia poised like a spinning pointer at all of what the older parties have said are America’s traditional worry spots--Russia, China, Iran, even India and Israel--and gotten them all to like it, even pledge support. Who cares if there are terrorists there or not? They sure will lay low after this--if it can be pulled off--along with a lot of other people in the affected countries. Julius Caesar should have had it this good. The real problem is getting people to lay low at home.

Thus many people are concerned we are seeing a coup done the North American Way --not a sudden “hit” where all family business and personal accounts are settled Corleone-like and the rascals put on a plane to Monaco or simply shot as South of the Border--but the latest stage in the dismantling of the US Republic in a motion so slow, so deniable, even those close to it aren‘t sure of what they perceive, like a well-orchestrated Dynasty-style corporate takeover with wheels within wheels as alliances shift and people come and go, all taking years.

And I don’t mean people sitting over hamburgers at Denny’s debating and wondering if the country is run by crooks, kooks, or comedians.

One thing I soft pedaled in the article was a meeting with high-ranking officers who told me flatly we were in the middle of a new kind of military-political coup even they had trouble following-- and Libertarians, beware.

Why did I bother? In short order military officers risked Section Eight trials by writing open letters, poorly reported in the US but well-covered abroad, all but accusing the leaders of both older parties of 9-11 foreknowledge and the President [sic] of Treason. At a meeting of puzzled American diplomats unsure whether the government was at new levels of silliness, subtlety, or stupidity, they applauded when one stood up and said in effect: ”I woke up this morning (http://www.latimes.com/la-fg-state8may08,0,2367967.story) and realized that if you assume this is a coup --it all makes sense.” A Congresswoman from Georgia who stopped short of accusing the President [sic] of master-minding 9-11 by commission or omission was soon voted out in a massive smear campaign--though she raised substantive questions ...and lost in the hoopla was the government did not answer her.

I watched agog as sniggering reports of CIA torture were passed off as something normal on TV amid Mobius-strip assurances that the current official position is, in what must be a new masterpiece of political quadruple think, that, well, of course the spy agencies knew something, but the President [sic] is blameless since they are--pay attention, now-- unbelievable anyway …or so inefficient warnings were lost in the background noise.

In effect, we are being told that, take comfort: even if it looks like the government did it--the position is conspiracy theory nuttiness since we all know the government is inevitably, systemically, stupid.

Cold comfort, indeed.

After all, implied pundits on TV, if these intelligence agency people are to incompetent to inform the President of a foreign conspiracy, how in the world can they manage an internal one? The FBI and the rest could screw up a cup of coffee, so of course we need a new Department of Homeland Security which now employs--are you ready? --nearly 10% of Federal Employees (http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/03237/214959.stm) an open "State within the State" with its own border guards, judges, secret budgets, and police, and representatives everywhere.

Yet every time in the last century where war ensued with diminished freedom, there was--scolars discovered, or protagonists later cheerfully admitted-- a conspiracy of leaders in both major parties to a lie--however great the dangers were otherwise.

*The USS Maine was blamed on Spanish terrorism--even though the Captain himself denied the possibility and was silenced.

*Roosevelt manipulated the Japanese into attacking first--instead of helping the now forgotten, beleaguered, but then yet strong democratic forces in the Japanese bureaucracy and various interest groups stop its military, including his diplomatic policies that continued to weaken their position…as he had ( with the Bush family of that time) done with (http://www.iraqwar.ru/iraq-read_article.php?articleId=5817&lang=en) those trying to stop Hitler--or even flee.

*McNamara openly agreed on TV the entire Vietnam war was not meant to be won--and it is generally realized the enabling Gulf of Tonkin Resolution was based on a staged attack.

*The recently concluded decade-long Iraq War was based on the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait--after an apparent OK from the US Ambassador that there was no interest in Iraq’s strong territorial claims--and grisly atrocity testimony that turned out to have been by people who weren‘t there with horrifying tales of babes ripped from incubators...and in effect coached by White House officials (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&q=babies+in+incubators+%2B+iraq ).

 

THE NON-ATTACK ATTACK

Again and again there is the pattern of the "non-attack attack" inducing a wholesale stampede to further government “protections” that slice off another area of rights--whether portraying as an attack an accident, an attack by dupes, a a probable comic-opera attack of the military on itself, or an attack by third parties portrayed as something else.

Was 9-11 an airline accident, bunch of Muslim dupes, sinister Pentagon operation, or a Mafia  strike? Was it actually engineered by Muslim Communists to embroil the US in another Vietnam (the Communists in Russia are making hey of the whole 9-11 to Iraq transition to sign up new mebers worried that Russia is next)? Or as claimed an attack by Muslim fanatics with a cynical government grabbing what it can--staring with the rush of Congressmen with emergency appropriations that, if passed, far exceeded the entire budget?

Even Bush has used 9-11 to justify  (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A57456-2003Sep10.html) an astonishing array of programs dear to supporters and political cronies, while expanding government power, from Internet to numerous contracts to campaign finance.

Or is this something more planned? A disturbing document created by, among others, the Vice-president [sic] and the President[sic]'s brother and Governor of Florida, proposes the use of various wars and terrorist incidents to create an American Pax Augusta that commentators denounce as a plan of obedience abroad and conformism at home. There will be plenty of freedom...of the right kind for the right people is, they fear, one way to read the (http://cryptome.org/rad.htm) document of the group, calling itself the Project for the New American Century.

After Augustus came Nero. After the Victorian Hegemony came the British collapse.  And meanwhile, Kerry, in his statement on Homeland security, has staked out a (http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/homeland/plan.html) position so right-wing that it (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&q=kerry+%2B+homeland+security), combined with his various statements, makes Bush look like a centrist. Kerry demands more money, authority and more Gestapo-like powers for this agency...as a starter.

Idiots playing at being Machiavellis or Machiavellis playing the idiot -- and I apologize to Machiavelli, who was actually a stern advocate of Republican Democracy (http://www.wkap.nl/prod/b/0-7923-6533-X)?

You tell me. In a way, it is pointless to speculate. It is like the mystery of the OJ trial to the 5th power in the 4th dimension wrapped in the JFK riddle and hidden within the enigma of Bushian grammar. The evidence is so messed up, the lies or misstatements now so many, the obvious actions that were not taken to preserve public openness so pervasive, that many people feel now it is anybody’s guess--not just frustrated people watching there TV and wondering when unemployment will run out, but very distinguished people. Even the President claims he was misled here and there and searches for the truth. One can only take refuge in the idea that if you can’t logically tell if someone is trying to fool you--they are...and what can be believed is only what has been officially denied.

Perhaps most emblematic: Ignored in much of the US Press is that Vatican officials--and the Vatican, for obvious reasons, enjoys first-rate military and diplomatic intelligence-- now say even the ailing Pope has become convinced it’s some sort of inside job--and refused any vocal overt support of the US.

Considering that this is the Papacy that considered saying Hitler was a notable leader constituted a ringing condemnation, this is quite something.

Some Latin diplomats of my acquaintance do not consider the issue to be whether this was a con job on the American people. They debate instead whether the planes were radio controlled, or there was a hijacking by dupes--or maybe they were blackmailed. One has wondered whether Bush was killed and the man in the White House is a double, which is perhaps a fresh approach.

Relatives of victims and their attorneys are being hounded and arrested after pointing out that the evidence against the government --whether misfeasance, malfeasance, or nonfeasance--is serious… and that they of all people deserve answers.

AMERICA POST-BAGHDAD

Amid the victory celebrations, congratulations Baghdad museums and institutions were only looted a little bit, smug denunciations of the cowering French, and offers by TV stations to give you a free “Welcome Home, Troops” sign complete with a coupon for Coca-Cola if you hurry and act now, much of the country is forgetting one thing.

After nearly 2 years of national panic, soul-searching on whether to stop Muslims or kiss them, congressional investigations, military inquiries, two wars on people with tinker-toy tanks whose troops were trying to surrender or elected if fanatical governments meet the US Government‘s every demand, new troops in over 100 countries, thousands of foreign civilians who never heard of the World Trade Center dead, draconian laws making mundane acts a crime, mass “pre-arrests” of protestors and the disappearance of thousands suddenly stripped of their right to an attorney or even knowing the charge against them, the government stamping top-secret even front page news stories, and loading down even marginal government officials with laudatory speeches, medals, pay-raises or knight-hoods (even as the government stiffs civilian victim‘s at these government facilities of compensation) --we don’t know who did it, and the opportunity to openly evaluate evidence is so messed up probably Elliot Ness couldn’t figure it out.

At this late date, at every major nexus of action, something is not right, disturbing questions leap to the fore--and things are missing. Missing, from being physically disappeared, to people not being where they were said to be, to so many official versions and ‘conclusive evidence’ that turns out to be a laughable fraud are floating around “Rashomon” looks simple. When people catch on, some official announces off the record ‘the evidence is there, just secret’ to gullible and breathless reporters.

Nothing would be more agreeable than to have the government reveal its long-promised conclusive evidence that bin-Laden is indeed behind 9-11, so those responsible are captured and sent to insane asylums. But one must hold official agents to the same standards as any other agents, whether they be one’s doctor, accountant, corporate officials of a pension fund, or banker.

Something lost, this concept of official accountability, as we are hit with distracting and exaggerated attacks on the official corruption of every private figure imaginable, portraying by implication our government as Above All That.

Corporate careers are being ruined for technical violations even the government admits were based on professional advice--and demanded to now swear under pain of felony the advice that mislead them is correct; Catholic Priests are portrayed as pedophiles while sexual misconduct of government officials is excused; and even Martha Stewart, the icon of domestic responsibility and technical knowledge, is being prosecuted on the incredible theory that by proclaiming her innocence and the absurdity of the charges against her--she committed the crime of improperly influencing her stock for the better.

In the Mobius Strip world of American Law, under an allegedly free-enterprise, anti-corruption conservative who says Jesus is his favorite philosopher, we are thus confronted with the spectacle of people being forced to say their stock is good even if they d can’t know--and others prosecuted for saying their stock and reputation is good because they do know.

Is the real crime not being the good graces of our democratic rulers? Or is it no surprise that in this atmosphere, officials are genuinely hurt and surprised that anyone should ask for objective evidence? Is it not cruel to complain they misplace the truth, since they have never even met the concept?

A DISTURBING COMPARISON

If Iraq had no WMD’s and Afghanistan no Bin-Laden, why not 9-11 no attack?

I make no pretensions of expertise. I was sitting at home watching TV agog with the rest of us, don’t blame me. While I do not support the present system, and under the best interpretation government officials are not relieved of the troubling moral responsibility for post-9-11 acts, I would be relieved to learn we are looking at a period not of corruption but ineptitude--particularly since such corruption would reveal an ineptitude far worse.

We are now confronted with Republican leaders who give us conflicting versions of 9-11, ignore the strange relations and business connections between Bush and bin-Laden, monthly promote “conclusive evidence” that even the Afghanistanis won’t accept, demand more money than ever, hint they have the truth but we can’t be trusted with it for ‘national security” and accuse all critics with unrealism at best and hatred of “freedom” at worst. Democrats have no answer except to suggest we need more taxes on the rich and now timidly make some criticisms after Libertarians did the legwork--when not fingerpointing at subordinates.

But in the final analysis, this government is just a bunch of Security Guards we hired. That is the Libertarian theory of government structure in a nutshell? What does it tell us? What if we pierce the veil of patriotism and look at this affair as a business or work assignment?

Consider: A security guard is…

*…present at a sensational theft but offers conflicting versions of what happened, dumps potentially crucial evidence,

*…is buddies with the alleged thief,

*…develops evidence that turns out to be childish concoctions,

*…solicits even more money than was robbed to then investigate and chase people seemingly at random so even the village priest has nothing to do with him,

*…all while assuring you he can’t reveal the real evidence but to trust him and you’re a traitor if you don’t--that is what is happening here. The only difference between many Republicans, Democrats, Greens and Libertarians is Republicans say give him more money, Democrats say give him more training, Greens worry about the flowers he trampled and all suggest we hire more guards and never consider anything but a monopoly of that dear old guard.

Libertarians say fire the wretch. And consider a new model of security. For looked at this way, it is a marvel 9-11 did not happen sooner. And what is the guarantee they will not occur again--given the following facts:

II

BY THE RIVERS OF BABYLON, WE SAT DOWN, AND WE WEPT

At this late date, here are key still unanswered questions of 9-11--and the evidence of cover-up. Here is a few that when looked at as a whole--rather than as disconnected tidbits buried between commercials or on page z-40 of the newspaper--come into focus in a disturbing way:

The Planning…

*Why did Bush’s first statement on election threaten a war against terror when (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A35070-2000Dec6&notFound=true) his own people said no terror meriting such response was in sight?

*Why is the blaming of the attacks on Al-Qaeda not often linked to the pre-9-11 running of Al-Qaeda by the US Government --or explored except primarily by contrarian publications? (http://www.larouchepub.com/eiw/public/2003/2003_20-29/2003-20/this_wk.html)

*Why is there little interest that the CIA (http://www.nytimes.com/2001/12/30/national/30TERR.html?ex=1054008000&en=e6ecafdaf6628381&ei=5070) and unidentified government officials vetoed plans to arrest bin-Laden years before while they could, and in fact deflected Afghanistan attempts to hand him over--interestingly, on evidence for alleged crimes still kept secret from the public …and while still sending him foreign aid? (http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/05/23/1053585697381.html)

*Why has, incredibly, no terrorist or group come forth and claimed credit for what the government describes as the smoothest and most effective act of terror in recent memory? Why is this lack papered over by claims that terrorism without taking credit is a “new form” of terrorism? If the Taliban is to blame as well, why is the US Government working with Karzai to restore it--after leaving Karzai without support and little choice?

*Why are papers and media across America being cautioned to watch their step (http://www.guardian.co.uk/bush/story/0,7369,717097,00.html) creating complaints from even complaisant pro-government newsmen such as Dan Rather--who must complain to the foreign press--and journalists being called into media meetings on “guidelines”? And as is being increasingly asked…

*Why is government probative evidence sealed?

*Why is there no definitive list of hijackers?

*Why is the initial list composed of Saudis primarily under special red-carpet visas? Indeed:

*Why, amid revelations of yet another “twentieth” hijacker, are some of the alleged hijackers reported alive and in hiding--to the point that after nearly two years of unrelenting critique by Libertarians, starting with me, and Internet discussants where the media has been mostly silent, the FBI has suddenly announced that, previous statements notwithstanding, it not only has no evidence anyone hijacked anything--but therefore the hijackers must have someone else using the identities of Muslims previously identified (Who, if so, and on what basis can the claim of Islamic terrorism, let alone terrorism, be made?) as guilty? (http://www.americanfreepress.net/051302/FBI_Admits__ No_Evidence_/fbi_admits__no_evidence_.html)(1)

*Why is there no mainstream press follow through on reports of a government plan dating back decades for just such an event as 9-11 to induce a coup in the US?

The Event and Official Misconduct…

*Why in not just the initial days but well after were there government exhibits and reports so contradictory that newspaper reports and media at government briefings contradicted each other on basic facts --such as how the plane approached the (http://members.aol.com/erichuf/PainfulQuestions_2.pdf) Pentagon and how the WTC buildings collapsed?

*Why are there dilatory disconnects in the Pentagon plane crash that some witnesses say was or included a missile attack or truck bomb--including late release after a year of materials and classification of photos that led one French researcher to pen a best-seller based on doubt a plane was there at all--after he, (http://members.aol.com/erichuf/PainfulQuestions_2.pdf ) ironically almost alone among investigators, made an angular approach model based on the final “official“ story--except it is contradicted by organs such as the “Army Times“ which claim the plane hit dead on? (http://www.rense.com/general32/phot.htm)

*Why was after initial reports of 50,000 dead the matter of death discrepancies minimized: namely reports of a subway foul-up that providentially made thousands of people late for work that day?


*Why is the role of mysterious police foul-ups in the WTC deaths ignored--without which casualties might have been few?

*Why is the looting of WTC by police and an attack by police on protesting firefighters minimized?

*Why did the government threaten to prosecute the owner of the famous flag when he sought his flag back?

*Why was evidence of (http://911-strike.com/fox2.htm) rogue Israeli Government involvement deep-sixed only to be reported as evidence of fore-knowledge “proving“ bin-Laden was involved--along with a (http://911-strike.com/dea-il-spy.htm) contrasting and quite promising claim by the Mossad that 9-11 was strictly a personal vendetta by Black Septembrists outraged over CIA tortures in their home countries many years ago ( the CIA apparently had an installation rumored to be connected with torture in the WTC) , then claims they had long been infiltrated by the US--then nothing?

*Why did experts originally doubt--and some still do--that WTC could have collapsed without bombs within, and not from jet fuel, as E. Hufschmid explores in his monograph, “Painful Questions“--to the point the initial House investigation complained researchers were being “hampered“--and the Chair complained of a an “Atlas Shrugged“-style atmosphere of confusing lines of authority? (http://home.attbi.com/~jmking/Collapse_update.htm)
*Why did witnesses report bombs and no jet fuel conflagration? (http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtc_fire.htm)

*Why were remains of WTC carted away over the protests of investigators and experts? (http://members.aol.com/erichuf/PainfulQuestions_1.pdf)

*Why have news timelines of 9-11 as it happened--revealing disturbing facts such as the near-immediate denunciation of Bin-Laden even before an emergency was declared--been pulled off the Internet?

The Follow-Up…

*Why have initial statements by supervisors that the planes were being pursued later contradicted, and the initial NORAD timeline called by investigators farcical? (http://www.standdown.net/index.htm)

*Why is there still no coherent official timeline or account of the planes being scrambled, research left to private groups, and officials saying they can‘t, as the Toronto Star notes, reveal who did what? (http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?GXHC_gx_session_id_=26da92f7496fdfb6&pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1052251602426&call_pageid=968332188492&col=968793972154)

*Why does the President claim he had to give the scramble authorization, did not do so, and this is still being claimed, contrary to established procedure which makes hunt and shoot automatic without authorization?

*Why did the government claim it sent up no planes--then it did--then laments they weren’t able to fire--then denies they would fire as rumors that Flight 93 was indeed taken down by jets--and now reveals (http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=20030523-065504-6368r) they were “unarmed anyway“?(!)

*The government and media were in less than an hour identifying bin-Laden as the culprit while the buildings were still burning--so why is the government saying (http://www.cooperativeresearch.net/timeline/main/essayaninterestingday.html) the President had reached no conclusions on bin-Laden by nightfall?

*Why was reports bin- Laden was actually in US-Pakistani Custody on 9-11 deep-sixed by the media? (http://freedom.orlingrabbe.com/lfetimes/bin_laden_location.htm)

*Why was Senator Graham, who was running for the Presidency, lunching on 9-11 with the Pakistani official under whose charge Bin-Laden, if in custody, would have been? Why has he now dropped out of his Senatorial race when stories began that yours truly was being urged to run as a Libertarian Senatorial candidate in Florida against him and repeat for the public the questions I have asked in my articles? (For the record, I think the Senator an honest man who has been mixed up in something that needs further light. Senator Graham is aware of Libertarian concerns and even has said in the press Libertarians have “class.”)

*Why did the government weirdly claim box-cutters were used to over-power (http://freedom.orlingrabbe.com/lfetimes/911_boxcutter.htm) passengers--then the story dropped?

*Why were passengers reported as having made heroic cell-phone calls and engaged in deeds that simply, according to various sources, could not have easily occurred or have been (http://feralnews.com/issues/911/dewdney/project_achilles_report_2_030225.html) known, given according to some scientists the limitations of cell-phones at the altitudes in question? Why were some reported to have said strange things such as one who identified himself to his mother by his full name?

*Why is the government meeting those who ask questions with tax audits, denunciations, censorship, and threats ...and the government-regulated media with silence or ridicule?

*Why was the Patriot Act not only at the ready but, as only Libertarian-Republican Ron Paul revealed and is only now being acknowledged and acted upon by older-party dissidents, un-Constitutionally was passed unread and even unprinted?

*Why was Bush ogling plans in the months before by his subordinates suggesting a phony war to advance so-called US strategic interests and consolidate (http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/12/25/1040511092926.html) Presidential prerogatives and power, including an attack on Iraq? (http://www.sundayherald.com/28224)

*Why did--and do--high government officials make threatening remarks such as President [sic] Bush saying he thought dictatorship was a good idea?

The Investigation, at a time when openness is needed…

*Why are official investigators who are independent complaining of being thwarted and are under-reported (http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1052251546550&call_page=TS_Columnists&call_pageid=970599109774&call_pagepath=Columnists) ?

*Why were Congressional critics smeared, blocked or excluded from the (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F50E16FB3E5F0C758CDDA90994DA404482) investigation?

*Why are important-sized portions of the 900-page official investigation being censored? (http://www.suntimes.com/output/greeley/cst-edt-greel23.html)

*Why, at a time when people are being detained at random and with the least suspicious connection being detained from boarding airplanes, entering public buildings, or “pre-arrested“ before demonstrations (http://www.rense.com/general37/premt.htm), are the peculiar business and (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/events/newsnight/1645527.stm) other links of the Bush and bin-Laden families essentially taboo from scrutiny?

*Why are even the attorneys of 9-11 victim’s families who ask too many questions (http://www.counterpunch.org/hamod05162003.html) being harassed?

*Why is it virtually unreported except for interviews on e.g. appearances on Libertarian talk shows, that 400 WTC family members are now suing on the theory that the Government (http://www.libertythink.com/2003_03_11_archives.html#90555530) was the culprit, a suit led by a respected former advisor to Bob Dole?

*And why, incredibly enough, is it not more widely reported that the Government admittedly, when pressed, still has no idea who was responsible for 9-11, including (http://www.worldmessenger.20m.com/alive.html ) admission by officials (http://www.welfarestate.com/911/)  that they could not, on the evidence, make a case in court to Congressional investigators and then, by the FBI Director Mueller in a  public forum (http://www.americanfreepress.net/051302/FBI_Admits__No_Evidence_/fbi_admits__no_evidence_.html) ? Instead, there is  FBI focusing on side issues such as alleged funding of hypothetical terrorists by Saudi princes...amid admissions that the White House had forbidden investigating bin-Laden (http://www.rediff.com/us/2001/nov/07ny5.htm),  the spooky resignation of the official so encharged who then died in 9-11 (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/knew/) and even claims by high officials Al-Quaida is more a construct of convenience for investigators than an actual group ? And even more disturbing leaks of testimony lead to an outrageous (http://foi.missouri.edu/whistleblowing/probeofhill.html) FBI investigation of the Senators themselves without a peep, as if this is all quite acceptable now?

That there was a terrorizing act there can be now doubt. But that is not the same as a deliberate act of Terror by an organized group. The whole point of Terror is people know and dread whoever is doing the Terrorizing. If there is, at this late date, no proof of organized Terrorists, why a "War on Terrorism?"

Perhaps saddest of all is the segue into the Iraq war even as the disasters in (http://freedom.orlingrabbe.com/lfetimes/vietnamistan.htm) Afghanistan mount and are ignored in the press.

Libertarians would have respect for Bush if he had said Hussein was a bad hat and the new policy is we’re sending in troops to take these dictators out and do as long as it takes to establish stable democracies. Libertarians would not agree--the proper methods of trade, citizen bonds, and confederation such as we have with Puerto Rico--were understood by the Founders, who forbade all else in the Constitution…and things such as the Sister-City program point the way, not to mention several attempts by pro-Libertarians to change things in Iraq to only find that the big problem was not Hussein but US support of our then “democratic” ally. But they would respect Bush as at least coming up with a well-intended justification that was comprehensible.

But increasingly it seems that the shifting array of conflicting claims of WMD’s, broken treaties, smoking-gun studies that turn out to have been written by college kids, alleged atrocities, and unlikely terrorist connections (Hussein was a secular socialist who despised religious fanatics and there is no evidence his government had a policy of support of Bin Laden: on the contrary, Iraq was one of the first countries to offer the US help against him) was not only the sham Libertarians denounced it as being, but was a monstrous set of lies defying even bureaucratic comprehension.

And in a sort of final insult, as there are revelations that the truth was Hussein had essentially agreed to the initial US terms and was desperately seeking a solution at the last hour--now many of US officials high and low are stepping (http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp?story=461953) forward to denounce their own Administration, while retired officials with even more ability to speak out are saying the government simply made things up. Said one:

“"There was never a clear and present danger. There was never an imminent threat. Iraq - and we have very good intelligence on this - was never part of the picture of terrorism," says Mel Goodman, a veteran CIA analyst who now teaches at the National War College. “

The remaining question may be: given the lack of justification, how soon will it be before people begin looking at Iraq as a calculated political mass murder?

Many innocent people were caught in the crossfire, whether they ventured to by groceries or were bombed in their homes because the US said there was a rumor Hussein--who had been convicted of no crime, had declared no war, and was on the run--might be there.

Wherdy Go? In the end, only one melancholy fact is certain, and perhaps summarizes my concerns, and those of an uncertain public.

Of every 12 entries for "lies"(http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&q=lies)  in GOOGLE, about 1--nearly 10 %--is for "9-11 + lies" (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&q=lies). And twice that amount if one enters "Bush." (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&q=bush+%2B+lies&btnG=Search).

 

A DIFFERENT APPROACH

Energized by Libertarians, dissidents of all parties, and non-partisan “Bill of Rights Committee” groups, many Americans are not buying in with what is happening. You don’t need to see the fire to conclude you want to get rid of the smoke, and from Key West and Sarasota Florida, where a Libertarian-led coalition started a campaign, to Alaska as an entire state, now over 100 localities have passed resolutions refusing to comply with Federal (http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/West/05/18/patriot.act.ap/index.html) Patriot Act and other exactions in a defiance not seen--despite press downplays and bureaucratic dismissals as “merely symbolic”--since the Civil War. For every community, there are many more that have presented petitions and organized protests.

For all their Rambo fantasies and reputation for gruff talk, the truth is Americans have learned to combine a vast array of ideologies, religions, and ethnic groups by minimizing conflict, a degree of domestic (as opposed to wild party-boy behavior abroad) natural politeness that impresses even the Japanese, and approaching unpleasantly complex matters by indirection and denying that is what they are doing.

From the stupefying fake-outs and insulting non-insults of a Black ghetto child, to the exquisite political sense of the Britannic and Latin upper classes, to the hail-fellow-well-met buffoonery of the canny good-ol’-boy, Americans fight while denying there is any serious conflict at all as they deny, position, seek allies, and wait for rope-a-dope developments.

As in football, where the spasm of action reveals complex positioning and strategy that is where the real action really is--and yet not obvious to the observer unfamiliar with the sport--political wars are won before battle is even engaged, and slight changes of behavior signal a sea change of recognition something is not right.

Whether one wonders if there really is a reason, if this is a strange government coup, or just Texas oilmen run amuck in the Oval Office, or fears with observers such as satirist Ted Rall that each inept move the government is (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=127&ncid=742&e=7&u=%2Fucru%2F20030523%2Fcm_ucru%2Fthe_fictional_war_on_terrorism) making is creating a real terrorist disaster--the truth is this:

More and more Americans have had it, and sense the need for change --even as polls show everybody agrees with anything --not to get rid of bush, but to change the system in ways beyond politics as commonly conceived: for local control, diminished government, for non-governmental actions and alternatives…and for their rights back.

Or as one person said as they drafted a resolution later adopted against the Patriot Act, “You know, I haven’t felt this effective for a long time. I have always thought government made the decisions, we just approved them. Now I am wondering what do we need all this for. This is very liberating stuff.”

As Libertarians begin a series of (http://libertariancitizen.uni.cc) community lectures and workshops on developing local teams to evaluate and de-governmentalize public services and promote lifestyle tolerance, people see they can become a new kind of community leader concerned about human rights.

And as each community passes a resolution like a light on the map, people realize the best defense against terror is to refuse to be terrorized--and not to be terrified into handing over one’s liberty and the public affairs whether to friend or foe.

To them, a long, slow, coup is indeed happening in America. A civilian one. (2)

 

**************

(1) With the FBI now backtracking, then a claim of terrorism by foreign nationals, Islamic or not, is under these circumstances simply not obvious. Co-incidence, an organized crime plot (because of destruction of evidence kept there, many accused crime figures went free after 9-11), airplane malfunctions, a military guidance experiment that went wrong, someone with a grudge against airlines or as Mossad thought the CIA and Pentagon…all are at this point as likely explanations--along with the possibility of a ”7 Days in May” style military coup, a rogue operation with high-level acquiescence gone out of control or even a mundane security drill --especially given revelations of (http://www.boston.com/news/packages/sept11/anniversary/wire_stories/0903_plane_exercise.htm) an exercise exactly like 9-11 underway at that exact time--gone bananas, or even a self-coup or fears of a coup by an indecisive President as in “The Brethren” that aimed to take out the entire government. The last, as one examines the different statements, is not so strange, or at least no stranger than anything else the government says one day then denies the next. Consider:

* The Capitol was initially reported as a target, and the

* President became incommunicado for hours under heavy guard

*In a posture that indicated lack of complete confidence in, or at least frank communication with, the military--ominously, conflicting reports not only suggest he left unprotected by the Federal Military at record speed into the air from Florida and further was possibly avoiding Air Force One Air Force fighter escort until almost 11:30,

*But (http://www.cooperativeresearch.net/timeline/main/essayaninterestingday.html) the plane flew circuitously to meet and was escorted at last by, not Federal units of the nearby Florida bases, but the Texas Air National Guard --which State he previously governed.

*He then landed promptly at a Louisiana base, and a Congressman present, the Hon. Miller, was “amazed” with observers Bush had apparently gotten rid of normal guards and was promptly surrounded by masses of surprised but game local National Guardsmen (in the Alice in Wonderland world of American nomenclature, foreign readers should be aware that the “National Guard” is not national at all--it is actually the local State Army quite independent of the Federal military and answerable to the local Governor unless placed under direct Presidential command) armed to the teeth who were rushed to the scene, and

*In an unprecedented move, all air traffic was forbidden on shoot-to-kill orders except as expressly authorized by the President. Supposedly to stop terrorists, this act in fact left the nation defenseless against further terrorist action (plus it was later revealed the startling fact that less than two dozen US military craft were combat ready, so the US could have been hit hard by an intrepid air attack by, say, Venezuela) but also prevented military movements and

*This meant that in fact the military was forced to hold a gun to its own head--if so, a brilliant stroke of self-preservation: leave the nation defenseless, protect the President, but indirectly defend it by placing the military in an impossible position to act further since there were possibly no terrorists to begin with.

9-11, though involving terrible deeds, is not by rational pre-9-11 definitions terrorism per se, nor in this scenario involve spectacular hijackings by swarthy ne‘er-do-wells. All, however, might trigger an embarrassed cover-up by officials, isolation of the President by the military or hangers-on for perverse ends or unreal plans by the Executive, an attitude of denial spreading through the elite to the people, search for someone to blame to occupy the military and pay off supporters, or simple scope for action by opportunists waiting to twist everything around. Only Americans believe that this danger that has happened in every country does not, or if you have reflected on the JFK and Lincoln assassination or the Wilson administration, ever has, come into play here.

The matter becomes more uncertain as not only do some eyewitnesses dispute the plane crash evidence, but the government initially announced on TV there had been (by my count from the TV reports) 7 hijackings, with one in Ohio being the subject of a firefight while another was downed by fighters--and of which nothing more was heard after 12 noon as we were then told it was 3 or maybe 4 and the others were false alarms or simply not mentioned further. This is certain: in the last century, every American President was either shockingly disgraced, indicated he was being manipulated, died under odd circumstances, or was subject to an assassination attempt that saw policy changes shortly thereafter.

Thinking after this opening curtain this century should be different shows the triumph of assumptions over experience. Eisenhower warned of the ( http://courses a.matrix.msu.edu/~hst306/documents/indust.html) influence of the military-industrial complex. Perhaps, as afflicts its struggling Latin and Asian sister republics, as cursed tottering Europe, the days of influence are over--and the night of direct intimidation has begun if unopposed as the President acquires what are, frankly, increasingly dictatorial powers--with plans to barcode everyone (http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/140/science/Barcoding_humans+.shtml) and vast new Pentagon surveillance bureaucracies(http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A17121-2003May20.html) rivaling the monarchs we once deposed--yet a system where the man at the top in the final analysis finds that he is the Fool King of those he thought were the kings of fools.

(2) And in contrast the need for ideological education for freedom directly controlled by citizens on the model of independent adult education, of freedom seen not as a lifestyle of protest but tool of daily life, is more evident. One must not forget the popularity among political science elite students, as taught in the Universities, of books that practically lay out a checklist of deceit that this country seems to have been following, such as “Philip Dru, Administrator.” (http://www.philipdru.com/) and Well's "The Open Conspiracy" (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&q=%22open+conspiracy%22+%2B+wells)

Michael Gilson-De Lemos, affectionately known as MG, is active in international Libertarianism, and was an informal advisor to Ronald Reagan. His radio show is at www.theFreedomWorks.org.

Citizens For Legitimate Government
http://www.legitgov.org/

 

HOME |COUP 2004 | PRESS RELEASES | PRESS RECEIVED |IMPORTANT CALLS TO ACTION | LINKS | JOIN CLG™ | WELCOME TO CLG | CONTRIBUTE | CONTACT US

Copyright © 2004, Citizens For Legitimate Government ® All rights reserved.