Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Faiz Khan, MD

9/11 First Responder,MUJCA-NET Founding Member

The Paralysis of Discourse; The Incompetence of Academia, and The Need for an Accurate Diagnosis – by Imam Faiz Khan, M.D., 9/11 First Responder and Founding Member, MUJCA-NET

[Muslims gone Bad] + [Incompetent/overwhelmed Surveillance] = 9/11

At some point, silence before a lie becomes betrayal…


Most American Muslims, both lay, and “educated' had lost their way from the very start.  However, for a few American minds of various religious persuasions, or no religious persuasion - as of September 12th, 2001 onward, the widely displayed “good Muslim – bad Muslim” dialectic just didn't cut it as an explanation of why the attacks of 9/11 occurred and succeeded.  Their instincts served them correctly.  

The surest sign of intellectual incompetence within the mass of 9/11 discourse is blindly accepting the limits that are constructed in discussing the phenomenon, especially when this blind acceptance occurs in the face of clear and compelling evidence that the limits of discourse must be expanded if some sort of explanation of the attacks of 9/11 is to surface.  In effect, what occurred from September 12th onward was the emergence of a sustained yet unbelievably ludicrous mainstream explanation as to the factors that produced 9/11, followed by this mainstream's frantic inquiry to “American Islam” asking how could such a thing emerge from ‘the nebulously frightful geographic and ideological Islamic World' – as if the main cause of the assaults and their success on 9/11 came from this quarter. Naively, yet predictably, the American Muslim scene performed its role by reeling onto the defensive, and sucking the bait. Prominent Muslims busied themselves trying to explain “real Islam”, distracted by and then swallowing the “mainstream thesis.” Most completely neglected the grotesque inconsistencies and outright lies which suggest that the success of the attacks had less to do with “militant Islam” and more to do with the inescapable fact that 9/11 was an inside job.

The ‘9/11 Truth' thesis categorically rejects the mainstream thesis and asserts that the prime factor for the success of the criminal mission known as 9/11 did not come from the quarter known as ‘militant Islam' although the phenomenon known as ‘militant Islamic networks' may have played a partial role, or even a less than  partial role - perhaps the role of patsy and scapegoat.

Moreover, the rise and popularization of so called militant Islamic networks, from these networks' ideology to actual empowerment, and the linking of this to western corporate driven government covert operations - this relationship is one that needs to be explicitly and loudly proclaimed by Islamic voices.

Let us be clear about our opinion here, as it relates to the phenomenon of “militant Islamic networks”, just in case the infantile minds within the Islamic activist scene confuse our application of intelligence in analyzing “why 9/11” with a denial of the very real need to “clean out our own house”, or confuse a legitimate inquiry into 9/11Truth with an unwillingness to face the “ideological ills found in the Islamic world.” This kind of accusatory self-righteous indignation obstructs clear thinking. Such sentimental nonsense has no place in legitimate discourse.

We do not deny the reality of an ideological trend known as ‘militant Islamic networks' and the grave pathos that arises from this trend. Any sincere Muslim must be disgusted with the ideology that feeds this medley of “militant Islamic networks”, most of whom continue to receive tactical, logistical, and financial support from western quarters, usually by proxy.  The arms they use don't simply materialize – often times, these “counterfeit religionists” have been directly armed by US government and corporate backers. We use the term counterfeit, because 1) we are unsure of the origins of this “extremism in modern militant Islamic form” and 2) these militants openly preach and practice aggression, despite wearing the right costumes, using Arabic terms, and growing the beard to the specified length. Hence the term counterfeit, which also means counter- religious (the descriptive Islamic religious term in Arabic ‘ dajaaliyyat ' carries a meaning which reflects both counterfeit and counter-religious.)

Now, if we must use this term counterfeit, we must be fair:  The foreign policy that is referred to as “American” is counterfeit for the same reasons the policies of these militant networks are counterfeit Islamic, since the agendas and consequences of the former policy lie squarely opposed to the principles enshrined in our American Constitution, as well as our American Declaration of Independence.  We wish the term “American” would be dropped from the foreign policy that originates on Wall Street and is enacted through Washington D.C.  For the sake of completeness, let us also speak clearly about the supposed “Islamic nation states”, because it takes more than cosmesis to function in accord with Shariah. The “Islamic Republics”, in terms of their domestic and foreign policies, are no more in accord with the tenets of authentic Islam than Israel is in accord with the Sublime Way of Moses, authentic Judaism.

Getting back to 9/11 Truth, we understand that militants exist who label themselves as “Islamists” and they are generally a most vile lot. But it is more than a stretch, indeed outright false, to conclude it was this bunch alone who brought the WTC down on 9/11. The crime of 9/11 was most definitely “an inside job” far more than it was an outside one.  

Who's doing the talking anyway?

Nearly all of those within the American Islamic Community who were asked, or felt prompted to respond to the mainstream were, and are, for the most part outside their areas of competence when it comes to explaining the crime of 9/11.  As I will explain, at best their input into the mainstream discourse elucidates only a small part of an equation.  Only a holistic explanation, adhering to minimal standards of intelligent inquiry, can explain the phenomenon of 9/11.  The “religious extremism” thread is often mistaken for whole cloth, and this analytic error has disastrous consequences.

In this case, partial explanations are false explanations because they are presented to, or taken by, an audience as complete explanations. The numerous glaringly inconsistent aspects of the mainstream thesis are largely ignored by the self-appointed American Muslim leaders who use the mainstream thesis to ‘explain things' to the public—a public that is represented by media figures who turn to “American Islam” to ask “ Why did your co-religionists do these things?”  Those who respond by limiting themselves to the mainstream thesis without assessing its legitimacy feel a terrible need to speak and comment prematurely without examining the facts of the case. One thing to note is that most “explicators of Islam and 9/11” who limit themselves to responding to the mainstream 9/11 thesis are basing their response on a thesis which is in essence outright false, but it is layered with partially valid premises. Yes – Islamic militancy does exist; Yes - the third world does indeed hate American corporate driven foreign policy and American corporate state-sponsored terror; Yes – there is tremendous bureaucratic obstruction and inefficiency in our national security apparatus, mainly at non-essential levels. But to these accurate observations should be added … “ But if you think these were responsible for 9/11 – well, you got another think coming!” Hence at best, the mainstream thesis is full of accurate observations but false as an explanation of why 9/11 was successful. When American Muslims use a largely false thesis as a premise to respond, the explanations put forth are a priori “handcuffed” from digging deeper and uncovering the truth about why the 9/11 attacks occurred and succeeded.  This is also dangerous because this hasty error leaves the real explanations uncovered and hides the complicity of perpetrators.   Most individuals from the American Islamic activist and academic have utterly failed to address the issue of 9/11 Truth.

Hence, that sector of American Muslims who commented or continue to comment on 9/11 within the confines of a limited dialectic that has reduced the explanation to “angry Muslims gone bad,” adding the allowed liberal sentiment, “ well OK, these were criminal actions, but let us give some thought to the reason for their anger…”  All such commentary that does not include acknowledgements of “9/11 Truth” is either knowingly or unknowingly culpable of aiding and abetting the criminal elements responsible for the tragedy.  We emphasize the point again: to promote a partial explanation as complete is to hinder the emergence of a complete explanation.    On an intellectual level, I am afraid that these “American Islamic voices” demonstrate incompetence and irresponsibility.

Honest scholars remain silent when they are outside the limits of their competence, yet there is a terrible need to speak , or desire to speak on the part of folks who don't possess the insight, qualifications, or discipline to adequately address this topic.  

Perhaps an analogy is in order here.  What would you think of a physician who addressed your cough and fever by explaining the afferent and efferent neural pathways of the laryngeal cough reflex as it relates to mucus production, and then proceeds to give you a great cough suppressant, but all the while misses the pneumonia?  How about a physician who addressed the cough as above, and then elucidated the various interactions between your immune system and the invading microbes in the alveoli of your lungs, gave you a great cough suppressant and antibiotic for the pneumonia, but neglected to address the 30 pound weight loss accompanying your symptoms, thereby missing the cancerous lung tumor etiologically responsible for both the cough and pneumonia? Let us gloss over the question of what forces are at work in our above analogy that cause the doctor to miss these crucial diagnoses, or rather delude him into not entertaining these other diagnoses; however, what is clear is that partial explanations are dangerous, and the MD in our example is guilty of serious incompetence.  Pursuing the analogy further, if this were a primary care doctor, he ought to have deferred to an opinion of a lung specialist once he realized that his diagnoses were not adequate to explain the given symptoms, rather than maintaining his own ill-informed diagnosis.

To be intellectually honest in offering a diagnosis of “why 9/11,” what in the Good Lord's name are we doing building our explanations from professors and academics, and even lay, semi-educated or pseudo-educated scholars or commentators of Islam?  I use the term pseudo-educated because the whole host of religionists, academics and ‘policy studies majors' who have never worked in the realm of overt and covert geopolitical conflict don't really offer much and waste a lot of ink when they try to pose as authorities and analysts of geopolitical catastrophes and conflicts.

This kind of category mistake is beautifully illustrated by a scene from the 1985 Rodney Dangerfield Comedy Back to School . In this film, Rodney Dangerfield plays an elderly self-made business tycoon. He never got past high school, so he decides to enrol at the college where his son is studying, hoping to get closer to his son and complete his education.

One of the most memorable scenes has Dangerfield's character sit through a lecture on Business Economics by a prestigious “expert” professor and academic.  The topic of the class is on starting a business enterprise.  After every statement the professor makes, Dangerfield cannot but comment on its incompleteness or outright falsity given the actual world of business. During one such interruption, the class actually begins to turn around away from the prestigious professor and his chalk-board and take notes on what Dangerfield elaborates: the reality of labor cost differentials, political implications of securing raw materials, zoning laws that would need to be negotiated or circumvented, and so on.  This is too much for the  “expert academic” to handle, and the professor finally reprimands Dangerfield and states that what the lecture is about is the “legitimate business world.”  After the professor regains his composure, he asks the class to choose a name for the site of this enterprise. From the back we hear Daingerfield's classic toned response: “How 'bout Fantasy Land?”  The class cracks up.

To seek opinions from academia in the case of 9/11 is analogous to looking for a PhD of  lung physiology  for a friend stricken with cough and fever.  Rather, what is called for by proponents of 9/11 Truth are the opinions of experts in various disciplines which cover the following arenas: covert conflicts, the history of false flag operations, espionage, demolition sciences, military response protocols, aviation, journalism, immigration policy, corporate financial money flow, the emergence and real world operations of militant Islamic networks, securities trading, and finally the governing dynamics of geopolitical warfare, which recurrently show that on levels known as  “deep politics,” nominal allegiances are completely subordinate to functional allegiances .  In other words, functional allegiances may exist between nominally opposing parties due to a symbiosis based on the mutual self interest between upper strata members of both opposing groups. This self interest is aimed at maintaining:  A) conflict, and   B) any other particular type of hegemony in their respective camps— the common denominator of such hegemony being a desired distribution of some form of material wealth, be it political, fiscal, or social wealth. In other words, two groups who are nominal enemies may consciously be functionally cooperative within the upper policy making personnel of each.

It would be wonderful to assemble such a panel of experts in genuinely relevant disciplines, who could then be consulted to shed light on the reality of 9/11. Until now, the only such efforts have been pursued by the 9/11 Truth movement.  If some members of such a panel happen to be experts on Islamic theology or Qur'anic exegesis, all the better, but Islam, even militant Islam, is a very small part of the picture as to why the attacks occurred.  

I am a diagnostician, and trained to be extremely careful in arriving at a diagnosis. I cannot help this.  I cannot, and will not turn away from the ‘proverbial elephant in the living room,' when one exists; and I am aghast at the silence of the American Muslim Activist scene in its lack of support of 9/11 Truth. The first step in accurate diagnosis is always to build as thorough a data base as possible, and maintain, what in medical diagnostics is called a ‘broad differential' – which means a full range of possible diagnoses to explain a given phenomenon (symptom complex) until I can safely exclude them.  This is a matter of life and death – If you walk into my ER with a severe headache, it can be a spontaneous intracranial haemorrhage, or a simple tension headache, and until I am sure it is not the former, you are not leaving my ER.  Going to an ‘Islamic Scholar' for a diagnosis of “what happened on 9/11 and why” is quite absurd.  It is less absurd to walk into the ER with a crushing headache and ask to be seen by a Neuroscience professor instead of a trained emergency physician. The neuroscientist may be able to explain a little, and even offer some answers and potential remedies, but as an academic, this neuroscientist cannot and should not try to offer definitive diagnoses nor attempt to find what is wrong based on a theoretical expertise that covers a limited knowledge base (neuroscience) when it comes to headaches (remember, headaches can be caused by non-neurological disorder that can be just as deadly as a neurological one).

The Defective Package  

When you build on a flawed foundation, the structure is always unsound.

We begin with what is offered by our mainstream (corporate sponsored) media as to the etiology of 9/11.  All such explanations can be boiled down to the following equation…

[Muslims gone Bad]    +  [Incompetent/overwhelmed Surveillance] = 9/11

Based on the overwhelming amount of evidence, pulled from mainstream sources, investigative journalism, and foreign mainstream press, the 9/11 truth thesis maintains the following critical differences…

[Maybe Muslims gone bad, or persons posing since identities still suspect]


[ facilitation by members of our own national security apparatus]


[9/ be blamed and spun into the work of “militant Islam”]

It is amazing to see the American Islamic activist scene screaming and ranting so loudly about the consequences of 9/11, PATRIOT act and all.  The massive impact of this event in the daily life of the world cannot be overstated.  Specifically, for the American Muslim activists, its distal effects have been quite devastating and these folks work so tirelessly to alleviate the symptoms produced by 9/11.  I find it astounding that they are so silent about questioning the legitimacy of the mainstream thesis – for it is from this very thesis that all the misery for the American Muslim activists began .  

Covering the evidence is beyond the scope of this essay; however, the following general lines of inquiry will aid a truth seeker in trying to make an accurate diagnosis as to the why and what of 9/11.  In addition, sources for further reading will be listed at the end of this section.

Required Background Understanding of Topics…(none of which can be authoritatively supplied by a professor of Islam)

• Wall Street/ Corporate America/Banking industry, and the fact that all directors and highest-ranking officials of the national security apparatus (e.g. CIA) are from this sector.  The CIA is a creation of Wall Street/corporate America, designed specifically to ensure a fiscal inertia securing a one-way flow of cash, labor, and resources.  It is cosmetically presented and conceived of as looking out for national security, but functionally speaking, it behaves as described.  If you have no understanding of the difference between cosmetic and functional definitions, than don't bother with the topic of 9/11.  You may happily go on believing the mainstream thesis.  

• Agendas and utterly violent modalities used (past and present) in sustaining our US economy. The implication is that violence may be sanctioned onto US soil, as the drive for fiscal inertia cannot logically be constrained by loyalties based on citizenship; when fiscal logic dictates that livelihoods or that actual lives must be sacrificed, then they must be sacrificed, whether these livelihoods or lives be in Indonesia, Iraq, Chile, Nicaragua, or on the campus of the World Trade Center. As far as ‘betrayal of loyalty to protecting livelihoods or lives of co-citizenry goes,” ask the employees of ENRON or the thousands who have seen their pension funds disappear, or tens of thousands whose share of social security or health benefits have literally disappeared. Or ask the surviving crew of the USS Liberty, or the sufferers of Gulf War Syndrome, or the families of the victims of the USS Lusitania or Pearl Harbor.  

• The vulnerability of fiat money and sustaining “Dollar Hegemony.”

• The hydrocarbon industry and interests in the Caspian basin. The Afghans were explicitly warned in July, 2001 by US officials that by October 2001, they were either going to receive carpets of gold, or carpets of bombs.  Troops had already mobilized into Uzbekistan, and other allied military were scrambled, headed toward central Asia prior to 9/11 .  

• The geo-political implications of post peak production of oil (peak oil).

• The at least 500 billion, if not more, inflow of liquid cash dollars per year laundered through correspondent US banks by the heroin industry, whose largest proximal supplier is Afghanistan.  After the US invasion, 2002 was the biggest export year EVER.  

• The rise of militant Islamic networks, of Salafi / Wahaabi ideology, and their empowerment both financial and military, with particular emphasis on Afghanistan, the Pakistani ISI, and its liaison with US covert operations.

• The use, frequency, and utility of false flag operations.

• The petro-dollar relationship – the prototypical example being the ruling elite of Saudi  Arabia.

• The ISI (the Pakistani equivalent of CIA).  The ISI is a creature of CIA, and the head of ISI has to be approved by our security apparatus. It is well known that all of the backing for the militant Islamic networks in the 80's and 90's went from CIA to ISI, to the militants…most notably Mujahadeen and thereafter, Taliban.  

• The State of Israel – its criminal establishment, secret service, and false flag operation history and capability.

• Our American mainstream media and its egregious conflicts of interests between honest journalism and the corporate sponsored mainstream agenda.  Absence of a thesis from the mainstream media cannot be taken as a sign of its illegitimacy; if anything, absence of a thesis is probably an indication of its authenticity.  

• The Bin Laden group, and the Saudi elite relationship to our economy.  Investigations of Saudi elites are continuously thwarted from within our own security apparatus. (The Bin-Ladens lived in Falls Church, VA – next door to CIA headquarters.) Clinton's regime specifically mandated that the FBI back off from investigating anything that involved the Bin Ladens or the Saudi elite.  They were quickly flown out of the country on 9/11, while general air-flight was suspended.

• Reports in mainstream foreign press reports that Usama Bin Laden meet with CIA officials in July 2001 during his hospitalization in the American Hospital of Dubai.  This is when he was supposedly wanted dead or alive.  The press has not retracted the story to this day.

•  FBI agent complaints and accusations that some of their superiors suppressed action based on terrorist leads; many of these complaints and the persons issuing them have been silenced or gagged. (Coleen Rowley, Sibel Edmonds…etc).

• Why were the 50 or so documented warnings of terrorists' strikes scheduled for the week of 9/11 not listened to, including ones that came from intelligence services of six different nations, including Israel and Egypt?

Required Knowledge: The Disturbing Questions and Anomalies Surrounding 9/11 Proper


• Who were the hijackers, given that at least six of the “19 suicide hijackers” are still alive and had their identities stolen?  How was their continued entry into the US allowed if they were on security risk lists? How are we to explain the debaucheries  in their behavior if they were Islamists?  Why were some reported to be at two different ends of the US at the same time?  Based on cell phone conversations, why didn't the seat numbers match the names of the hijackers?  Why weren't the hijackers names on passenger lists? Who made the cell phone calls?  Why was a Mosad agent shot on board one of the planes…and why hasn't anyone mentioned the fact that there were guns on the plane?  Why isn't concrete video of the hijackers boarding the plane shown?  

• Why did different US grade school students (of foreign descent) proclaim the WTC was going to be bombed the week of the tragedy while our intelligence agencies were taken by ‘surprise?' Why did many White House and other officials stop flying commercial flights the week of 9/11?

•  Why did investigators not pursue the massive record dumping of United and American airline stock during the week before 9/11 during the activity (monitoring real time suspicious activities of Stock Trades is standard procedure), or after the event of 9/11?  Why did the SCC stop the investigation after it discovered the transaction were carried out through Deutche Bank, whose head is A.K. Krongard, ex-deputy director of the CIA. Why did Mayo Shattuck (CEO of Deutche bank) abruptly retire following 9/11?  

• What about the Israelis in the white van who were arrested in New Jersey on 9/11? They were seen celebrating and taking clown shot photographs and videos with the WTC burning in the background and reported to the police, arrested, and interrogated. They were confirmed to be Mosad agents, yet released without investigation.  And why were there forty Mosad agents literally living within hundreds of yards of some of the hijackers, in the tiny town of Hollywood, Florida? Why were all the witnesses who knew the hijackers in Florida either silenced by the FBI or made to disappear to “the island of lost witnesses” as reported in Daniel Hopsicker's Welcome to Terrorland ? Why were the “hijackers” apparently being run by a CIA-linked drug cartel that owned the “flight schools”—actually fronts for drug smugglers—where they were posing as “Muslims learning to fly”? Why the attempted cover up of the fact that the “hijackers” were brought to the US by the CIA and trained at US military facilities?

• Why is it that Odigo Inc. – an Israeli instant messaging company based in the WTC – mandated that all its employees leave two hours before the strike, and acknowledges that it received information on the strike and acted on it?  

• Why the scores of documented accounts of foreknowledge of this event from a diverse source base? To assume “we were taken by surprise” is ludicrous.  

• What hit the Pentagon? To this day, there is zero evidence it was a Boeing. The place is sprawling with video surveillance, yet no video is available. And why was there no mention of the White House fire?  

• Why did Mr. Bush behave so oddly that day? Why had the President apparently been removed from the chain of command, and the Vice-President put in his place, that day? Why have the Vice President and the 9/11 Commission apparently lied about evidence reflecting this unconstitutional and deeply damning shift in the chain of command? Specifically, why have they apparently lied in inventing a nonexistent phone call between Bush and Cheney, and by making up a false story about Cheney's whereabouts—lies whose apparent purpose is to conceal the fact that Cheney was in command throughout the 9/11 operation?

• Why does the wreckage from Pennsylvania (Flight 93) indicate that the “fourth plane” was indeed shot down, or suffered a mid-air explosion? Why did Mr. Rumsfeld recently say that Flight 93 was shot down, and then quickly correct himself?

• Why did WTC building 7 collapse? This happened long after the strikes, and in a manner that suggested it was demolished.  Why did its owner, on TV, say, “they told me they had to ‘pull the building'” – which is an expression for demolishing a building?  Who were “they?”  Why did the fire rescue personnel also state that WTC-7 was demolished?    If this happened, when were the explosives planted?

• Why have so many civil engineers, including one that worked for the steel company that built the WTC, stated there was no way a crash like 9/11 could have caused the whole structure to fall?  Why was the steel whisked away without a forensic analysis (the one conducted was called “a half-baked farce” by the editor of Fire Prevention Engineering)? What of the credible reports that the black boxes had been found—not unlikely, since black boxes almost always survive crashes, and a “hijacker's passport” of paper and plastic supposedly survived the crash and fire!

• What of the complete contradictory official versions of what transpired in the sky around Washington—and why hasn't anyone inquired why the air-defense response took so long, seeing that Mr. Cheney revealed that the Secret Service, FAA, and NORAD keep open lines of communication 24/7?

• How do we explain the complete incapacitation and overt stand-down of standard Air Space defense protocols, (which functioned effectively over 50 times the last year) and the lies and contradictions between NORAD, the FAA, Secret Service, and the Air force?  How is it that there were “war game” scenarios based on hijacked Boeings going on as the real events were taking place?  When asked about these issues, General Eberhardt's response was simply “no comment.”

• Why has the current regime obstructed any serious attempt to investigate the circumstances that led to 9/11?  Why was known war criminal and cover-up specialist Henry Kissinger Bush's first choice to lead the investigation?  Why was the Kean commission comprised of members who had egregious conflicts of interest by their presence on such a panel?  Why did one member, Max Cleland, resign from the commission after accusing it of incompetence and lack of dedication, saying “The Warren Commission blew it...I will not be part of that”?  

• Why have all pressing enquiries been completely ignored, and enquirers gagged?  Sibel Edmonds (FBI and gagged) posited relations between illicit drug profiteering, the flight schools, and the “terrorists” themselves, as indicated by the fact that 43 pounds of heroin were found at one “flight school” – and records of operations of that school were moved out of the country, as per orders of governor Jeb Bush. The 9/11 family steering committee has explicitly stated their dismay of the incompetence and inability of the Kean Commission to even address the serious questions.  

• Why was an FAA supervisor found destroying evidence of flight patterns and other data that was crucially relevant to any investigations?

These are just a few leads that I can think of off the top of my head; there are so many more, any one of which causes serious doubts or completely disproves the mainstream 9/11 thesis. It is the job of authentic journalism to chase these leads, and these are quite simply the tips of many, many icebergs.  The mainstream (corporate press) has not just “dropped,” but also literally “hid the ball.”   The only arena where these leads are pursued is by intrepid independent media outlets and journalists – who often don't have the training or funding to produce analyses that would reach and penetrate the public mind.

9/11 Truth seekers are, from the global perspective, in the majority.  Most reports indicate that citizens of other nations believe that 9/11 was an inside job. Domestically, a recent Zogby poll demonstrates 49% of New York City residents and 41 % of NY state residents overall believe that members of the federal government were complicitous in the 9/11 attacks, and more than 56% of New York State Residents (66% of NYC residents) believe an independent investigation should be re-opened. As they are right. For there is no doubt that the official version of why the 9/11 attacks were successful is a lie.

Now, we turn to an analysis as to why the “American Muslim academic/activist scene” has been  grossly negligent in their lack of support for 9/11 truth.  Before we do this, let me cite a list of required reading for anyone who wishes to pursue further information on the subject of 9/11 truth.

• Books: The New Pearl Harbor and The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions (David Ray Griffin), Crossing The Rubicon (Mike Ruppert), The Complete 9/11 Timeline (Paul Thompson), The Big Lie and Pentagate (Thierry Messan), Welcome to Terrorland (Daniel Hopsicker).

• Websites –, 9/, unanswered,,,

• Video – The Truth and Lies of 9/11 (Mike Ruppert), The Great Deception (Barry Zwicker)

Why The Silence ?

Incompetence. Mediocre analysis.  By definition, these are more common than excellent, high intelligence and penetrating analysis.  When the former dominate the discourse, you are going to have an impotent response that falls prey to underlying agendas.  The forms of mediocrity and incompetence come in the following guises:

• Not accumulating data before arriving at a conclusion.

This is synonymous with getting the story from FOX or CNN, or the New York Times, and then assuming one is ready to effectively respond and discuss 9/11.


• Confining dialectics to allegiances based on nation states.

When it comes to geopolitics, the concept of nation states is largely superfluous.  The governing dynamics of geopolitical conflict transcends allegiances based on the idea of nation states.  Indeed, the concept of nation state is more of a public relations tool at this level than anything else. Simply looking at fiscal flow, how else can you explain the unbelievable sums of taxpayer money (and now jobs) that flow to other lands and peoples, while the “citizens of this country” live quite often in poor conditions, especially in rural and inner city areas?  From this perspective alone, the nation state based on geographical borders has very little meaning.  Wars and conflicts do not ensue for the sake of ‘nation state.'  

The reason why the meaninglessness of nation state needs to be emphasized is that some who are critical of the 9/11 Truth thesis ask,

“Do you really believe that America attacked itself?”

To this question, which suffers from the delusional error of misapplying the notion of  ‘nation state' in to an arena where it has no meaning, we can only respond, “can you please define America?”  Or, we can say that we, “Part of America” is blaming “another part of America” for allowing harm to come to yet “another part of America.”  So to those who cannot see past this idea of nation state, we say “America attacked itself, and America is looking for that cancerous part of itself that was complicit.”  Assuming the 9/11 Truth thesis is correct, we may ask – “which party is America? The complicit ones or the truth seekers? “

• Rejection of the 9/11 Truth thesis: The etiologies

The 9/11 Truth Thesis often meets with a priori disbelief. Yet this disbelief is irrational at best. Such irrational disbelief has the following etiologies….

Disbelief etiology A)

“You don't expect me to believe in this conspiracy theory, do you?”

As one of the prime investigators of 9/11 truth once wrote, “I don't deal in conspiracy theory, I deal in conspiracy facts.”  The data documented in the suggested works above are facts – which any 12 year-old with sufficient mental capabilities can put together in an effort to formulate a diagnosis of what happened, or at least realize that the mainstream thesis is utterly false.  The term “conspiracy theory” is often used to discredit valid lines of inquiry – and the uninformed usually are dissuaded from using their intelligence in evaluating data they believe relates to “conspiracy.”  But conspiracies are all around us. Any time more than one party act in concert and without publicity for a given agenda it is conspiracy. And if the actions or agenda involve any activities that are against the law, the behavior fits the legal definition of criminal conspiracy. To belief that such behavior is not ubiquitous is the height of naivete.

Conspiracy is actually one of the most common criminal legal terms used in this country: “conspiracy to commit murder,”  “conspiracy to fraud,”  “conspiracy to racketeer”, “conspiracy to embezzle,” “conspiracy to libel,” ...etc.  Along the same lines of naïve a priori rejectionism, we hear: “How can this be so hidden, I mean – wouldn't it take so many people to pull this thing off?” The short answer is no.  For an explanation of why, again, I refer all to the above works, and add: Bureaucracy and hierarchies are structured in such a way that there are key “nodal” positions, which are akin to a narrow part of a funnel.  If you imagine a funnel upside down, narrow side up, there is a “gatekeeper,” usually the superior, that sits at this nodal position, and all activity/information goes through this node upward to the next layer.  It was severe criticism of people in such positions that characterized the complaints by the FBI field officers for examples– who used adjectives like “obstruct,” and “sabotage,” and “undermine” to describe the behavior of certain personnel involved in concealing terrorist activities.   FAA, NORAD, NSA, CIA, and other organizations are structured in the same manner.

Disbelief Etiology B)

How can a group of people actually do this to others?

This is sheer sentimental naïveté.  Anyone who asks this question has been distracted by the spectacular and horrifying drama of the attacks.  In essence, this was a murder of almost 3000 people, and destruction of infrastructure closely related to US covert operations. (The WTC possessed many departments related to such activities – including building 7, which was nowhere near the attacks, and whose collapse cannot be rationally explained except as a controlled demolition with explosives.)  In order to overcome this sentimental and naïve question, a question that poses as an obstruction in so many minds to arriving at an “accurate diagnosis” – one must understand that we are speaking about a criminal mentality that operates when necessary.  Take away the faces that you would be forced to associate as criminals, and just think only of a faceless mentality – perverted, and criminal – which takes possession of collectivities devoted to maintaining financial-political hegemony.

Now that the culprit is an abstract entity in your mind – try to understand that this same faceless mentality promoted the nuclear incineration of hundreds of thousands of human beings, sponsored the genocide of literally millions of people in Asia as well as hundreds of thousands in Europe and on this continent. This mentality has been around for millennia – and has expressed itself through people of all skin colors, ethnicities, times, climes, and colors.   Moreover when it comes to our times, it is a faceles s mentality that by definition cannot be constrained by allegiances based on nation state .  It's like asking a criminal rogue to adhere to rules of some sort.   Loyalties and allegiances are not in the ‘mindset' of this faceless mentality .   In other words, if need be, it will express itself on US soil.  It does so all the time in the form of looting taxpayers and honest citizens who are victimized by financial scams and deceptive accounting practices that ruin  livelihoods and destroy lives.  Third-world nations are impoverished because of these practices, which lead to loss of life in so many other ways.  If maintaining hegemony for this mentality means absorbing losses of life on US soil – so be it; Pearl Harbor was an excellent example.

One of the driving forces of the mentality that we are describing is the desire for sustained material wealth – securing a one-way flow of cash, resources, or labor.  We may term this drive “fiscal inertia,” – and this inertia is a compulsion of such weight and might, all of the world's prophets, saints, and scriptures have warned about it over, and over, and over again.  There is a reason for such dire warning of what happens to the human psyche when pursuit of material wealth is at hand. Unguarded, the human psyche, collective or individual, falls prey to the criminal mentality of which we speak.  And this is what is behind events of mass killing and destruction.  Make no mistake by pointing fingers…it lurks in most of us, and expresses itself often in different forms. Put another way – if we found ourselves in the same position as the perpetrators, we too might well succumb to this mentality. Humans do remarkably dishonorable things when getting or staying ahead financially is at stake.

Ironically, it is fiscal inertia that was a great peacekeeper in many traditional civilizations.  Such “fiscal inertia,” used for honorable ends, was the basis of the “blood penalty” that kept the peace in traditional societies.  In many tribal societies, if a member of one clan was slain wrongfully (manslaughter or murder) the aggrieved clan had the right to forego instituting punitive measures and demand hefty financial compensation.  This option was often taken, and since the desire to stay fiscally sound was powerful, manslaughter and murder were extremely rare in such societies, as would-be perpetrators knew that acting on their impulses would bring their families great hardship – and often cost the perpetrator a falling out with his clan, a social connection which provided critical support for individuals.

Fiscal inertia is terribly real.  I witness the aforementioned mentality succumb to it day in and day out, harming and betraying the people of this nation, through increasing morbidity and mortality in a field that I know intimately– health care.  Parasitic folks with a corporate mentality have assaulted what was once a sacred relationship between healers and healed – and because of the “worship” of “fiscal inertia”, this mentality wreaks havoc by consciously forcing decisions by handcuffed and cowardly policy makers that result in sustaining sickness, and even loss of life – be this through hospital policies which prioritize profits over patient care, or through stamping out medical progress that would threaten profits for industries that have entrenched themselves in health care,  or through promoting the  pharmaceuticals industry based on flimsy or even fraudulent data. This is one of the reasons why the 9/11 truth thesis was not too surprising for me to grasp.  Health care is ridden by forces promoting sickness and slow loss of life and suffering for the sake of fiscal inertia; 9/11 exemplified the same process in acute form.

Messages In This Thread
RE: SEPTEMBER 11 2001 : THE CRIMES OF WAR COMMITTED IN THE NAME OF 9/11 - by globalvision2000administrator - 01-06-2023, 08:54 PM

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 5 Guest(s)