Home arrow Commentary arrow Editorial arrow 9/11 - Conspiracy or Blowback
Sep 06 2007
9/11 - Conspiracy or Blowback | Print |  E-mail
Editorial
By Rosemarie Jackowski   

Translation

9/11 - Conspiracy or Blowback
By: Rosemarie JackowskiImage

It is now time to look back and remember- well not exactly. That's what we have been doing for what seems like forever. We are a nation that is stuck in grief and frightened of the future. GWB has used the words "nine eleven" more times than he has said, "Laura, where is the remote".

Now it is time for a reality check so we can finally end the denial.  9/11 was the result of blowback.  They did it to us because of what we had been doing to them for decades. Sooner or later every school yard bully gets pay back. Serious and tragic as 9/11 was, the number of deaths does not even compare with the deaths that have resulted from U.S. interventions.

Author/historian William Blum states:

"Between 1945 and 2005 the United States has attempted to overthrow more than 40 foreign governments, and to crush more than 30 populist-nationalist movements struggling against intolerable regimes... In the process, the U.S. caused the end of life for several million people, and condemned many millions more to a life of agony and despair."

Rogue State: A Guide to the World's Only Superpower



 
"No matter how paranoid or conspiracy-minded you are, what the government is actually doing is worse than you imagine"

Rogue State: A Guide to the World's Only Superpower


Many believe the 9/11 conspiracy theories - understandable, since it is so well known that this government is not above the killing of its own. Whether the government was the cause or not, it surely has taken full advantage of the tragedy. The main challenge to the conspiracy theorists comes from Osama Bin Laden. He explained why the attack occurred.  Anybody remember his statement? He gave three reasons - the unfair treatment of the Israeli/Palestinian issue, the stationing of U.S. troops in their holy land, and the sanctions which resulted in the deaths of a half million Iraqi children. Thank you for setting the record straight, Osama.  Notice he did not say that they attacked us because of our "freedoms". He did not say that they attacked us because of religious differences.  Most of those who are informed about U.S. foreign policy knew the reasons for the attack even before Osama made his statement.

The 9/11 Commission Report leaves a lot to be desired. It has raised the art of obfuscation to new heights. I confess - I have not read all 567 pages of the Report. After the first three pages, I ran out of NoDoz. I did watch the Congressional Hearings on C-Span. In her testimony before the Congressional Committee, Kristen Breitweiser said, "...The jigs up..." (C-Span2, Aug. 17, 2004, 10:45 a.m.). It would have been a move in the right direction if she had been referring to U.S. actions around the world, but the context of her statement showed that she believes that the tragedy of 9/11 was a failure of Intelligence. The testimony of other family members of victims, Stephen Push and Mary Fetchet, indicated a greater willingness to recognize that 9/11 was a failure of U.S. foreign policy and diplomacy. In Mary Fetchet’s testimony, she stated, "...Foreign policy is the core of the threat of terrorism..."   Fetchet's statement might be the single most important comment ever made about 9/11.

The most compassionate act, that any of us can do in support of the 9/11 families, is to inform others about the government’s international policies that led to 9/11. Has any member of Congress or any member of the commission mentioned the connection between U.S. foreign policy and the 9/11 attacks?  Yes, Ron Paul  made the shocking 9/11 - foreign policy connection during a recent Republican debate. Paul's statement almost sent Giuliani into a seizure.

Ignoring the role that U.S. foreign policy played in causing the tragedy of 9/11 is like ignoring the elephant in the middle of the room. Authors have been predicting a 9/11 type of attack for many years. Chalmers Johnson wrote his book, Blowback, before the attack happened.

The CIA has been using the term "blowback" for decades because they knew that there would be a violent reaction to U.S. foreign policy. It was common knowledge. In view of this, how can it be that not one of our elected officials in Washington could foresee the event?  There are two possibilities: none of our representatives was smart enough to think in terms of cause and effect. That is hard to believe. There is a better explanation. Some members of Congress did know. They did not know the time and place of the attack, but they had to know that an attack would be the inevitable result of U.S. foreign policy. If they didn’t know it before 9/11, they surely have to know it now, and that brings us up to today and the ongoing presidential campaign season.

Dennis Kucinich says that he is opposed to the U.S. Mid-East policies and the war. Why are there no other candidates, with the possible exception of Ron Paul, suggesting that the time has come for a major change in U.S. foreign policy?  Neither Kucinich or Paul stands much chance of winning the Primary. Both share a fatal flaw. They are members of the major political parties and that indicates an acceptance of what these two Parties have done in recent years. Any candidate who is not in agreement with the Party Platform,  should run as an Independent. A vote for any Democrat or Republican signals an acceptance of the deadly policies that led to 9/11.  It is time to think outside the box and look at candidates from alternative parties.  It was during the Clinton administration that Madeleine Albright stated that the death of 500,000 children was worth it. It's a toss-up when trying to decide which Party is more dangerous.  Both Parties have betrayed the people in favor of the war profiteers who wander the halls of Congress.

The biggest flaw in the conspiracy theory is that it ignores the anger that has built up in the rest of the world - anger that is a direct result of U.S. actions.  9/11 was not acceptable but it was predictable and understandable - a simple application of the Law of Cause and Effect. Who caused 9/11 ?  Well maybe it really was the government after all. Nineteen men hi-jacked the planes, but the ultimate cause was the policies of the government of the United States. 

The provocative policies continue. The Pentagon has just released a list of 1200 targets to bomb in Iran.   Was this announcement a well-planned, deliberate act designed to provoke another attack?  A new 9/11 attack would further enrich the corporations that manufacture weapons. Just follow the money since the first 9/11.   9/11 is the goose that has laid the golden grenade. 

Is there an ongoing conspiracy  to create blowback?  Maybe the conspiracy theorists have a point.

Rosemarie Jackowski is an advocacy journalist living in the USA. She was arrested, tried, and convicted for her participation in a peaceful protest of the war. The conviction was appealed and overturned in the State Supreme Court. The government then announced plans to retry the case. Finally, after years of legal proceedings, all charges were dropped. She can be reached at: dissent[at]sover.net Articles by Rosemarie Jackowski at MWC News http://mwcnews.net/rosemarie-jackowski 

Recommend this article...




Did you enjoy this article? Please bookmark it onto:
Digg!Reddit!Del.icio.us!Newsvine!Blogmarks!Yahoo!

Quote this article on your site | Views: 3654

Comments (19)
RSS comments
1. 06-09-2007 17:33
Why Paul is running Republican
"Neither Kucinich or Paul stands much chance of winning the Primary. Both share a fatal flaw. They are members of the major political parties and that indicates an acceptance of what these two Parties have done in recent years. Any candidate who is not in agreement with the Party Platform, should run as an Independent. A vote for any Democrat or Republican signals an acceptance of the deadly policies that led to 9/11." 
 
On the contrary, Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate in agreement with the Republican Party Platform. 
 
While you engage in a recent history of foreign policy, you have somehow neglected which party for at least a century had espoused the notion of limited government and limited nation-building. It is only the neoconservative branch of the party, which has gradually expanded its influence within the Republican Party with unprecedented success through its Karl-Rove-et.al calculated reliance on the Evangelical vote, that will make any excuse to expand its power and influence across all vulnerable parts of the world. 
 
Ron Paul shouldn't have to start a new Conservative Republican Party; he's doing his best to try and fix the old one, the one through whom he's Congressionally represented Texas for 10 terms.
Guest
2. 06-09-2007 18:03
Ron Paul has already said why he is runn
One of the major reasons he is running as a Republican to get into the debates. If Paul wasn't at the debates, do you think he would be currently getting the attention he is now?
Guest
3. 06-09-2007 19:04
9/11 was the work of US government
"the elephant in the middle of the room" is not US foreign policy, however bad it is - it's that 9/11 was, quite conclusively, an inside job. There are so many inconsistencies and lies in the official report, it should be obvious the truth has been covered up. No air defense; no airplane at the Pentagon; towers spontaneously exploding; Building 7 controlled demolition; no hijackers on passenger lists; Secret Service breaks presidential protocol; airline put options that could be traced... the list is overwhelming. Spread the word - why? Because another faked "terrorist attack" is coming. Let's recognize it when it happens.
Guest
4. 06-09-2007 19:25
Agreed
I hate conspiracy theories, but the 9/11 Truth movement has a lot of solid peer-reviewed research behind it. I was a pragmatist on this issue until I read the Kuttler, Legge, and Ross. Of what possibilities exist, the official account cannot be one of them. It was either the government or corporate entities working with al-Queda, perhaps the ones now profiting from the War on Terror. These theories are not Fox Mulder, they are Steven Hawking. Crazy, but real.
Guest
5. 06-09-2007 22:33
Agreed
You forget to mention all the good that the US has done for other countries in need. We donate more money to foreign countries than any other nation in the world.
Guest
6. 06-09-2007 23:09
Absorbing.
I found this an absorbing article.  
Some things do not add up, but as Rosemarie said there is cause and effect. If there is an effect, then there is a cause, thus there is a thought. Who thought up this diabolical act. Who gained? Clearly not Osama and his peers.  
The good people of the US should asked, people of other countries, \"do you like us?\", then listen, really listen to the answers, don\'t just brush the answers aside with, \"they are just envious\".  
Right now in Australia Bush and Rice are doing all they can to give Howard a leg up, If they were smart they would keep their noses out of of local politics. But that is not the American way, they cannot stop meddling, some times in horrendous ways. Was 9/11 blow back? Maybe. But look at what has happened to America and many other countries in loss of freedoms. 
I can\'t help having a bad feeling about freedom in the near future, and I am not thinking of Islam. 
 
Mike
Registered
7. 07-09-2007 13:51
Great comments
Great comments here. Though I do not agree with Tom. Last time I checked the USA gave LESS in humanitarian aid than any other industrialized nation. It is true that the USA is largest supplier of weapons. Death is our main export.
Guest
dissent@sover.netNOSPAM! ">rosemarie jackowski
8. 07-09-2007 13:51
9/11 truth & Bush LIES
Excellent article Rosemarie. In Australia even if the murderer is witnessed by hundreds his crime remains \"alleged\" until he is convicted in a proper trial and if he hides from justice he is tracked down and extradited if necessary.  
 
This has NOT happened in relation to 9/11 - the Bush Administration has responded by lies, censorship, obstruction of justice, invasions, occupations and huge war crimes. 
 
3,000 people died on 9/11 but the excess deaths (avoidable deaths) associated with the Bush War on Terror now total about 4 MILLION - 1 million post-invasion excess deaths in Occupied Iraq, 2.4 million post-invasion excess deaths in Occupied Afghanistan (these figures as of March 2007)and 0.5 million post-2001 global opiate drug-related deaths due to US restoration of the Taliban-destroyed Afghan opium industry (see MWC News article \"World\'s #1 terrorist in Australia\" via the link below). 
 
In the case of 9/11 even what we thought we \"witnessed\" electronically (the WTC atrocity) is subject to DOUBT (e.g. the BBC and CNN broadcast LIVE that bulding WTC7 had collapsed HOURS before it actually happened)and the Pentagon and Pennsylvania \"stories\" are similarly riddled with inconsistency as identified by Scholars for 9/11 truth (for details simply Google s9/11t). 
 
I do NOT know who did 9/11 (men in caves, the US, Israel, Pakistan ISI ...?) and those who declare that they DO (the wolrd\'s politicians and media) are simply being DISHONEST.  
 
However the inconsistencies, the lies, the cover-ups, the absence of arraignment and trial, the war criminal violent responses (excess deaths in the War on Terror now total about 4 MILLION) (see the book \"Body Count\", links via the link below) and finally \"cui bono?\" (\"who benefits?\") (violent US or US surrogate global military occupations from Somalia to Afghanistan) all point to US COMPLICITY.  
 
Bush is clearly the World\'s number one terrorist - but is he the world\'s #1 terrorist against HIS OWN PEOPLE?
Guest
gpolya@optusnet.com.auNOSPAM! ">De Gideon Polya
9. 07-09-2007 14:09
Is not Bush alone
When we criticize the US administration, is not simply Bush who is the target.  
 
It is the policy and the philosophy which has been carried by US in the last fifty years or more noticibly. And it is not likely to go a way by Bush leaving the office.
Registered
10. 07-09-2007 14:17
Bush, Clinton, they are all the same.
Shahram, you make an important point. I also said the same thing in the article. There's no difference between the Democrats and Republicans. Bush is insignificant. He is controlled by the same powers and money that Clinton was.  
 
De Gideon Polya, your comments were great.
Guest
dissent@sover.netNOSPAM! ">rosemarie jackowski
11. 07-09-2007 17:14
Republicans and I agree Shahram
First of all while I do not have the actual numbers they are available at may sites questioning the validity of the lasttwo major elections. The percentages and numbers for the evangelical vote do not point to that group giving him the white house. What gavehim the white house in thefrst election was the US Supreme Court, Gore won by popular vote. Had Florida continued it very well could have went to Gore. In the second it was Ohio, and descrepancies in the vote in that state were covered up. Again the NY Times was holding back as with the wire tapping. Theyknew Bushwashaving our lines tapped illegaly 6 mos before the elections and waited 6 after to report it, (the supposed liberal media). Ohio precinct election problems were not released until after Bush was sworn in even though the descrepancies were known about in advance his acceptance speech. While the republican party professes to be in favor of small goverment while they have been in power the majority the past yrs. they have hardly been small goverment even Regan. They cut social programs as much as they can and profess tax breaks, which in reality dose not happen. Regans period they called it trickel down economics, tax breaks to teh wealthy and the wealthy pass it down. Now we see on a world scale the numbers living in poverty growing. In the US theyclaim the market is great and job growth is up. Yet since Bush they started adding in jobs like at fast food McDonalds. Again while jobs were created more numbers climbed of peole living in povety. As for taking Bush out or impeachment on next term. Another of his likeness will take his place. Since WWI capitalism and its ravenous appetite have been growing on a war time or military complex economy. With the crash and WWII it was uplifted again. It could have been quite possible the people of the US might have revolted had it not been for the new deal. The Bush family was prospering however. Letters from Eisenhour to his brother prove of his concern for the growth of the military complex. Connecting the dots Military complex and its arms, teh elite such as N.U. or Trilateral Commisson (Rockefellers who large owners in Shell oil, the major credit card companies Chase Manhaten, and Bank America. Google Trilateral commission and find the radio inter view dialog and read it. This oil grab is Capitalism and its industrial country buddies in Britton, Austrailia, Dutch (as in Dutch Schell oil), then the EU follow to lap up the oil reserves so teh developing nations do not get a free negotiating hand, thus keeping the industrial capitalist nations in control. Iraq and Iran having the largest tapped reserves, who would not recognize Israel and at times have threatened to convert to the euro made things even more dire in order for the US to stay top dog. The others do not have teh military build up, yet need the oil. All want to keep China,India and Pakistan under their control, control the oil control the world. The people of the US majority baby boomers are retiring the gov has promoted for the last 20 yrs stock investment for retirment. This war is tied to the markets with majority of population in US hitting retirement age, thus you have outrage and silence at what to do, so they buy the twist the wealthy media gurus put on the war, and with a volunteer army, they close their eyes. If it were just the military complex, its not just cant be, its the international corporatations. How else and why would they vote for every US want in the UN. So it is more than Bush. Maybe as Marx predicted on the evolution capitalism and where it has to go at some point, this is turning to fascism and a slow loss of our freedoms. China and Russia are not necessarily going along with backing the US to let the US have total hegemony. Too much said. Try to stop supporting the big conglomerates and who ownes them. They want the oil andtheydon\'t care who they have to step on to get it, they boughtth eneocon plan first and now leaning toward the sold out democrates since Rumsfield messed up, fired him didn\'t turn out so easy. For me the surge started back with NIXON and Kessinger and the terror they inflicted on Chile, Bolivia and Argentina. Evolved more to ME with Regan.
Guest
12. 07-09-2007 17:28
Conspiracies
Jury for me is still out on 9/11 beihg an iside job. However, manoging editor of PM magazine agreed to an inter view over PM as it is the major debunker of the 9/11 conspiracy, which has been played on the history channel, National Geo, and others to debunk the debunkers. Managing editor was open to the questions until he was asked, since his name was Chertoff, by any chance was he related to Michael Chertoff, he , with out answering directed teh interview to the writting editor. But they supposedly asked his mother if they were related and she was not hesitant to say why yes they were cousins. There were some major questions skirted, supposedly there is a large groupin NYC that want an independant investigation done again.
Guest
13. 07-09-2007 18:22
Complicity in 9/11, Pearl Harbor
I asked a top Japanese politics and sociology scholar recently: "Do top Japanese scholars believe that the US knew about Pearl Harbor and let it happen?" - his immediate reply; "Yes, of course". 
 
The case that the US LET 9/11 HAPPEN is VERY STRONG (the FBI, CIA bungles; US global atrocities against Muslim and Third World countries as a "provocation"; US funding of Al Qaeda and the Taliban for a dozen years; the actual FACT of failure to stop it; the extraordinary failure of NORAD to respond to the asserted hijackings; US lies over 9/11; the subsequent huge global expansion of US force and US or US surrogate occupation of a swathe of countries from Somalia to Afghanistan, all this being vital for OIL and STRATEGIC HEGEMONY). 
 
As for actual PHYSICAL US INVOLVEMENT who knows? The thing about secret conspiracies is that they are indeed SECRET. The scientific evidence for the explosive demolition of WTC7 is compelling - if that means that the US was involved destruction of a building housing a CIA installation then at least PART of the 9/11 atrocity physically involved agents of the US Government, the Bush Administration of the world's number one terrorist state led by the world's number one terrorist (see "World's #1 terrorist in Australia" on MWC News via link below). 
the US.
Guest
gpolya@optusnet.com.auNOSPAM! ">Dr Gideon Polya
14. 09-09-2007 21:47
Non sequituirs & Energy Conservation
If it's true, and it probably is, that "GWB has used the words 'nine eleven' more times than he has said, 'Laura, where is the remote'; how many times has he used the word "conservation" [he's a conservative, right?] taking maundering about our energy and environmental crises?
Guest
tracymacl@yahoo.comNOSPAM! ">Tracy McLellan
15. 11-09-2007 11:13
More hate America first BS!!!
Tell me when in the history of the world has America attacked and killed over 3000 innocent muslims??? 
 
When has America targeted innocent civilians??? 
 
NEVER!!! 
 
The Muslims on the other hand prefer to target civilians as they cannot fight back!!! 
 
Do you liberals ever get tired of hating America??? 
 
If you hate America so damn much why don't you leave???
Guest
Defective
16. 11-09-2007 13:09
More hate America first BS!!!
Dear Defective...You ask, "When has America targeted innocent civilians". Never - America has never killed anyone, but the United States has. The use of the term "America" when referring to the United States is disrespectful to all of the other countries that are part of North and South America.  
Now to answer your question. Quite obviously you have been out of touch for a very long time - maybe since 1492. That is how long the usa has been killing innocent civilians. Please look at the Robert Fisk photos of the children who have been killed by the usa. The photos are on the Robert Fisk War Photos web site. 
Now, get back to your homework or you won't be ready for school tomorrow.
Guest
dissent@sover.netNOSPAM! ">rosemarie jackowski
17. 11-09-2007 23:17
Killing.
Defective, (try being a detective). 
To put things into perspective, take this picture into account. In WW2 0.9 million British civilians were killed by German air raids, sure they had their objectives, how many German civilians were killed by British and US bombs? I do not know, but it would have been a huge number. Now what about the only atomic bomb attacks in history, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, how many civilian deaths? do you know?  
Now lets get down to Muslims, (our Earth born brothers and sisters), I sat and watched two Gulf wars on prime time television, and watched a huge and sustained missile and air attack, what do you think the US was doing, attacking salt pans? How many civilians died? In passing a saw two attacks that made my skin crawl, one was a restaurant that was hit by a US smart missile, turned the place into a crater, all were killed, the US had heard that Saddam was there, in error, the people there were families having meals, another was some neutral tribesmen they were talking on a mobile phone, and mentioned Saddam\'s name. Wham! another smart missile, wrong again, he was hiding in a hole. And what about Granada, and Panama, I have heard bad things about those events. Ever seen the Movie, Soldier Blue? Just wondered. 
One other thing, World wide the US is known to shoot first then asked question. Remember what Bush said \"Those who are not with us, are against us\". And he feels it is OK to carry out preemptive strikes against any he sees as a threat, I better not say Bin Laden on my mobile, I could end up as collateral damage. That\'s a fancy word for murder and estruction.  
 
Mike
Registered
18. 03-11-2007 20:28
3.9 million Iraqi excess deaths 1990-200
Mike, it can be estimated that the total number of excess (avoidable) violent and non-violent Iraqi excess deaths since the killings began with Sanctions in 1990 is 3.9 million of whom about 1.8 million were under-5 year old infants (for a detailed breakdown and sources see: Iraqi deaths ). There are over 4 million Iraqi refugees. 
 
All those Americans, Australians, British and others complicit in the ongoing Irasqi Genocide at a leadership level must be arraigned before the International Criminal Court as demanded by UK Nobel Laureate Harold Pinter.
Guest
gpolya@opotusnet.com.auNOSPAM! ">Dr Gideon Polya
19. 11-07-2008 13:03
la paix
dis moi rosemarie comment vous voyez la paix aux yeux du monde? et -il possible de réaliser la paix amairicaine avec des guerre? est -ce la malentendu entre les deux parts qui causent des catastrophes humaines? ou le fort mange le faible? dis moi qui est le responsable ? :? :?
Guest

Write Comment
  • Please keep the topic of messages relevant to the subject of the article.
  • Personal verbal attacks will be deleted.
  • Please don't use comments to plug your web site. Such material will be removed.
  • Just ensure to *Refresh* your browser for a new security code to be displayed prior to clicking on the 'Send' button.
  • Keep in mind that the above process only applies if you simply entered the wrong security code.
Name:
E-mail
Homepage
Title:
BBCode:Web AddressEmail AddressBold TextItalic TextUnderlined TextQuoteCodeOpen ListList ItemClose List
Comment:

Code:* Code
I wish to be contacted by email regarding additional comments

Powered by AkoComment Tweaked Special Edition v.1.4.4


Tags:  Rosemarie Jackowski William Blum 9/11 Conspiracy
 
< Prev Content   Next Content >
 

Translate

Enter Amount: