CRISIS UPDATE: September 11 and U.S. Policy - The Necessity of an Independent Inquiry
INSTITUTE FOR POLICY RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT
"Independent Analysis for the Promotion
of Human Rights, Justice and Peace"
26th June 2002
SEPTEMBER 11th AND U.S. POLICY
THE NECESSITY OF AN INDEPENDENT INQUIRY
Acceptance of the official narrative of what happened on September 11, 2001 has become widespread on both ends of the political spectrum, right and left. But is the official version of those unprecedented events tenable? Mainstream right-wing commentators, of course, support the stance of the Bush administration and insist that any attempt to question or doubt the official version is tantamount to "conspiracy mongering". Recently, many respected progressive commentators have come to essentially the same conclusion. All of them are united in the view that questioning the U.S government-endorsed narrative of 9/11 is illegitimate.
In a thoroughly documented paper, Institute Executive Director Nafeez M. Ahmed suggests otherwise, confronting the writings of several leading commentators who forcefully argue firstly that acceptance of the official version of 9/11 is justified, and secondly that an independent inquiry into anomalies and inconsistencies in the official version is unnecessary. The paper is a comprehensive rebuttal of the irrational assumptions and arguments underlying such commentary, focusing specifically on writings available online at the social justice website, ZNet (www.zmag.org).
In reviewing the work of these commentators on 9/11, Ahmed also analyses in detail the failure of the U.S. intelligence community in preventing the Al-Qaeda terrorist attacks; the casual repression and/or misrepresentation of facts related to 9/11; the failure of U.S. defence measures on 9/11; the historic and institutional basis for skepticism about the official narrative; and some salient facts which illustrate the need for proper research into the linkages between U.S. government, military, intelligence, and corporate policy, and the ease with which the September 11 terrorist attacks went ahead.
On this basis, this IPRD paper concludes that the documented facts pose a considerable challenge to the conventional wisdom about the 9/11 attacks, exposing glaring anomalies that need to be addressed. These anomalies in the mainstream version of events suggest a much wider picture of long-standing institutional corruption, involving the intertwined relationship between the interests of the U.S. military-corporate complex and the operation of international terrorism
This paper has been endorsed by "UnAnswered Questions" (http://www.UnAnsweredQuestions.org), the coalition of concerned American citizens and families calling for an independent inquiry into the 9/11 attacks.
See "9/11 'CONSPIRACIES' AND THE DEFACTUALISATION OF ANALYSIS: HOW IDEOLOGUES ON THE LEFT AND RIGHT THEORISE VACUOUSLY TO SUPPORT BASELESS SUPPOSITION - A Reply to ZNet",
Information in this paper is based on Ahmed's extensive research on the 9/11 attacks from his internationally acclaimed new 400-page study, "THE WAR ON FREEDOM: HOW AND WHY AMERICA WAS ATTACKED, SEPTEMBER 11, 2001", http://www.TheWaronFreedom.com
Please use this information as best you can in the struggle against injustice worldwide. We would appreciate it if you forwarded this material to your friends, family and colleagues, in an effort to generate public awareness.
Institute for Policy Research & Development
Suite 414, 91 Western Road, Brighton,
East Sussex, BN1 2NW, United Kingdom.
Tel: +44(0)1273 32 95 30
Fax: +44(0)1273 70 60 30