Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Welcome to the New and Improved Police State

Expand Messages
  • robalini@aol.com
    Please send as far and wide as possible. Thanks, Robert Sterling Editor, The Konformist http://www.konformist.com dave@davesweb.cnchost.com Welcome to the New
    Message 1 of 2 , Sep 14, 2001
      Please send as far and wide as possible.

      Thanks,

      Robert Sterling
      Editor, The Konformist
      http://www.konformist.com

      dave@...

      Welcome to the New and Improved Police State:
      Commentary on the WTC Attacks


      David McGowan
      www.davesweb.cnchost.com
      September 12, 2001

      "We are going to see a great number of articles in the future from so-
      called experts and public officials. They will warn about more
      violence, more kidnappings, and more terrorists. Mass media, the
      armed forces, and intelligence agencies will saturate our lives with
      fascist scare tactics and 'predictions' that have already been
      planned to come true."
      'Conspiracy theorist' Mae Brussell, 1974

      I have a friend with whom I frequently disagree on matters of
      politics. He thinks that I am a crazed conspiracy theorist and I
      think that he is a reactionary fascist. There was one thing that we
      agreed on though. A few weeks ago, I told him that our fearless
      leaders seemed to be veering dangerously close to
      unleashing 'tactical' nuclear weapons upon the world.

      Although he seriously doubted that that was in fact the case, he
      readily agreed that such an action would be reckless and
      unconscionable. He stated that he couldn't envision any scenario
      under which such a strike would be justified and that we should avoid
      at all costs crossing that threshold. Opening that door, he believed,
      could only serve to escalate tensions and make this a much more
      dangerous world in which to live.

      He was one of several people who called me yesterday to discuss the
      alleged terrorist attacks on America. During the course of that call,
      he stated flatly that when the perpetrators were identified, they and
      their backers should be nuked. When I reminded him of our
      conversation of just a few weeks before, he said that things have
      changed now. I asked him if he had considered whether that wasn't
      perhaps precisely the point of the attacks. Unfazed, he reiterated
      his belief that I am a crazed conspiracy theorist.

      Excuse my cynicism, but have we Americans completely lost our ability
      to think? Are we now so thoroughly brain-dead that we are completely
      reliant on our media resources, with their endless supply
      of 'experts,' to make sense of events in the world? Are we really
      that stupid or do our leaders just think that we are?

      The actions taken on the morning of September 11 were crimes –
      horrendous crimes against humanity, to be sure, but in the final
      analysis not so very different from any other crimes. The first step
      in solving any crime is to look at who had a motive and who had the
      means and opportunity to commit the crime.

      As for motive, we are to believe that a band of Islamic terrorists
      are the most likely suspects. But is that the case? Was it a state-
      sponsored terrorist group that had the most to gain by launching such
      an assault, or was it our own political, corporate and military
      leaders?
      While the people of the Palestinian territories may well be dancing
      in the streets today in celebration of the blow struck against the
      United States, they certainly won't emerge as the winners in this
      national tragedy. When the bombs begin to rain down upon them, as
      they certainly will, the loss of life, property and hope will be far
      more profound for them than it will be for the people of New York.
      Their short-term 'victory' will be a hollow one indeed.

      This is certainly not to suggest that there are no governments,
      groups, or organizations around the world, or within these borders,
      that have legitimate grudges against the United States government.
      The numbers of such entities are legion. Two hundred years of
      imperialistic covert and overt military ventures have created a lot
      of enemies of the American ship of state and a tremendous amount of
      residual bitterness. Yet none of these groups stood to gain by
      launching such an attack.

      The United States, on the other hand, has much to gain in the
      aftermath of this chapter of American history. I am not talking here,
      of course, about the people of this country, who will pay a steep
      price for the carnage of September 11. Big Brother has assured us
      that we will be protected from future acts of this sort, and we will
      welcome with open arms the repressive, overtly fascistic 'reforms'
      that will be enacted.

      The people, of this country and of the world, are always the ones to
      pick up the tab for acts of gross governmental malfeasance. The
      people of some hapless country (or countries) that is identified as
      the culprit will pay with their lives and the lives of their
      children. The people of America and much of the Western world will
      pay with the wholesale stripping away of their remaining human, civil
      and privacy rights.

      Such a scenario only serves to benefit those who sit at the top of
      the food chain. Our elected leaders - who are elected only in the
      sense that every couple of years we are given a choice between two
      interchangeable candidates - will revel in the free reign they will
      be given to ram through legislation so appallingly reactionary that
      it would have been unthinkable just days ago.
      Military spending and the militarization of the country will escalate
      to a fever pitch. Welcome to the new and improved police state – the
      largest, most powerful, and most technologically advanced the world
      has ever seen. With the much-lauded U.S. economy tanking and
      unemployment figures hitting their highest levels in years, this will
      come in very handy for the 'powers that be.'

      The ugly truth is that all 'anti-terrorist' measures are designed not
      to protect the American people from attack or to protect
      our 'freedoms,' but to protect wealth and power - specifically the
      unprecedented levels of wealth currently held by corporate America -
      and to restrict those very freedoms that threaten their hold on that
      wealth.

      This American tragedy, in other words, plays directly into the hands
      of the corporate and military elite of this nation, who have for
      years been propagandizing for a more belligerent and imperialistic
      foreign policy and for more repressive legislation here on the home
      front. Having been presented with a pretext to enact such measures,
      it is our leaders - elected or otherwise - who stand to gain the most
      from yesterday's bloodshed.

      As for the question of who had the means and opportunity to commit
      these crimes, the official story holds that they were the work of a
      well-organized foreign terrorist organization. Officials have
      acknowledged that the operation was an exceptionally well-planned and
      well-coordinated series of attacks that required months of planning
      and a large network of co-conspirators to pull off.

      So well-organized was the operation that government spokesmen and
      television talking heads (which are really the same thing) have been
      at a loss to explain some of the day's events. Many questions have
      been left unanswered and some haven't been asked at all. Some of the
      answers that have been offered have strained credibility far past the
      breaking point.

      One question that has gone unanswered is how a plane was able to
      penetrate so deeply into the Pentagon's airspace – after two other
      planes had already plowed into the World Trade Center towers, no
      less. Despite the ridiculous current claims, the airspace surrounding
      the Pentagon is perhaps the most tightly controlled, militarily
      secure airspace in the world. This would be all the more true in the
      immediate aftermath of a large-scale 'terrorist' attack on New York
      City.
      Claims have been made that even if the approach of the aircraft had
      sounded an alarm, it would not have been targeted due to the fact
      that it was a commercial aircraft with many innocent lives on-board.
      Nonsense. Anyone who thinks that U.S. military/intelligence personnel
      would hesitate to target a commercial airliner is living in a media-
      induced fantasy world, particularly in light of the fact that two
      such aircraft had already been used in suicide attacks.

      The question then of how this plane was able to 'elude' the
      Pentagon's formidable defenses is one that should receive close
      scrutiny from America's 'free' and 'independent' press. There is
      virtually no chance that that will happen. Another question that begs
      for an answer is how teams of presumably armed hijackers were able to
      breach the security measures of no less than three major airports and
      successfully hijack four separate flights.

      Contrary to the claims now being made, security precautions currently
      in place in U.S. airports are anything but "lax." That fact was being
      implicitly acknowledged by this morning as reports began to come in
      claiming that the hijackers had improvised weapons from razor blades
      and other items carried in their shaving kits. These reports were
      actually carried by the network news broadcasters with a straight
      face.

      This scenario would be laughable were this story not such a tragic
      one. According to the latest official stories, three to five
      terrorists boarded each of the hijacked aircraft. All of these
      terrorists, of course, were such religious fanatics that they had
      agreed to give their lives for the cause they believed in, and none
      of them presumably had second thoughts about that decision once the
      operation was underway.

      Does anyone really believe that a few guys wielding toothbrush
      handles embedded with razor blades could quickly and efficiently gain
      control of a commercial airliner? I would think that such a group
      would have their hands full trying to hold-up a liquor store. How
      could, as has been reported, such a 'terrorist cell' possibly
      simultaneously overpower the flight crews and corral all of the
      flights' passengers into the rear of the planes?

      I don't consider myself to be a particularly brave or heroic sort of
      guy, but I would not hesitate for a second to take on a couple of
      guys wielding toothbrushes, particularly if my life, or the life of
      my family, was on the line and if I knew that I had some sixty people
      (the average number of passengers on the flights) behind me who would
      back me up. Maybe that's just me, but somehow I think most Americans
      would rise to the occasion.

      Nevertheless, these terrorist teams reportedly succeeded where so
      many other better armed terrorists have failed. The majority of
      hijacking attempts, as officials have acknowledged, end in failure.
      There hasn't been one to succeed in this country for a decade. And
      yet these teams succeeded, and on a spectacular scale, in four-out-of-
      four attempts and with only the most primitive of 'weapons.' To what
      are we to attribute that fact? Don't look to the media for answers.

      Perhaps the most obvious question raised by the attacks, and one that
      officials have feebly attempted to answer, is how the planning for
      such an operation could have escaped the attention of the country's
      intelligence services. Whenever such an event occurs, the
      intelligence agencies rather predictably hang their heads, slump
      their shoulders and sheepishly grin as they explain their
      powerlessness to predict such things.

      We did the best we could, they explain, but our resources are
      limited, our adversaries formidable, and our sources not infallible.
      Give me a break. The CIA - along with the FBI, ONI, DIA, NSC, NSA,
      DEA, and virtually every other three-letter acronym you could think
      of - constitutes the largest and most insidious intelligence network
      the world has ever seen.
      Its agents have fully infiltrated every foreign government on the
      planet, as well as every 'terrorist' group and every domestic
      resistance movement that has ever posed even a remote threat to the
      goals of the architects of the American ship of state. It is simply
      inconceivable that such an ambitious attack could have been planned,
      coordinated and launched without the knowledge of numerous elements
      of the national security state.

      That is the inescapable reality that no amount of media and
      government spin can erase, though politicians and their media puppets
      will work overtime to do exactly that. One need only to turn their
      television off and their brain on though to see how preposterous are
      the claims that these attacks took the intelligence community by
      surprise.

      Perhaps the most disturbing question raised by the attacks is what
      exactly caused the twin towers of the WTC to collapse? The impact of
      the planes affected only the upper floors of the towers; their
      foundations were unaffected. The UK's Guardian acknowledged that the
      initial impact of the aircraft would result in less stress on the
      building than is normally caused by high winds. The buildings were
      specifically designed to handle such horizontal movement.

      The Guardian and its expert consultants conclude that the collapse of
      the buildings was the result of secondary explosions, attributed to
      the delayed release of the large supply of jet fuel carried by the
      aircraft. How though could the ignition of the jet fuel have occurred
      as a delayed, secondary explosion? As the endlessly played videotapes
      of the attack graphically illustrate, the initial impact resulted in
      enormous fireballs and the immediate engulfing of a portion of the
      buildings in flames.

      It is inconceivable that the aircraft's fuel tanks would not have
      burst upon impact and their contents immediately have been ignited.
      Indeed, if that wasn't in fact the case, then how are we to explain
      the initial explosions and fireballs that were witnessed by the
      world? What exactly was it that created the spectacular initial
      blasts if it wasn't the jet fuel?

      But if that was the case, what was it then that created the secondary
      explosions that appear to have occurred? These secondary blasts were
      acknowledged early in the day by an NBC newsman. The correspondent
      stated on the air that he had just talked with the fire department's
      public safety commissioner who verified that large secondary
      explosions precipitated the collapse of the towers.

      A radio broadcaster on WLS in Chicago (according to a correspondent),
      whose wife is a CBS journalist who was on the scene at the towers,
      said on the air that his wife had witnessed an enormous fireball
      emanating from beneath one of the towers immediately before it came
      crashing down. What are we to make of these types of scattered
      reports, none of which received any follow-up coverage amidst the non-
      stop blizzard of media attention?

      To be sure, the collapse of the towers, captured on tape for all the
      world to see, had the decided appearance of controlled implosions,
      facilitated by the precise placement of technologically advanced
      explosives. The world has never before witnessed such complete and
      utter destruction of a targeted building by an act of war or
      a 'terrorist' assault.

      We have seen the United States target many a building for
      destruction. In the most recent military venture, we saw an embassy
      building and a television studio, among many others, take direct and
      multiple hits from state-of-the-art bombs and guided missiles. The
      buildings were devastated, to be sure, but the damage didn't come
      close to matching the pile of rubble that the twin towers were
      reduced to.

      We saw a highrise Israeli apartment building take a direct hit from
      an Iraqi Scud missile during the Gulf war. Actually, most of us
      probably didn't see that, unless you happened to be tuned in to CNN
      for the brief few moments when the footage was aired. As it turns
      out, that Scud missile was actually safely intercepted by a trusty
      Patriot missile, or so it was claimed – just as if the footage had
      never aired.

      The point though is that the building was hit and did suffer
      extensive damage, and undoubtedly at the cost of many lives. But
      again, the building - though sheared nearly in half - was in
      considerably better shape than the World Trade Center. It occurs to
      me then that perhaps America has invested entirely too much time and
      money in pursuit of creating ever more powerful and efficient weapons
      systems.

      Who would have ever thought that the best weapon with which to reduce
      an entire tower to rubble was the plane itself. It doesn't even have
      to be a military plane – any old commercial aircraft will do. Someone
      obviously should have followed up on the early work done in this area
      by the Japanese during World War II.

      In the final analysis, we must ask ourselves the following questions:
      Who had the means to get highly trained commando teams onto four
      aircraft flying out of three separate airports? Who had the ability
      to violate the Pentagon's airspace unmolested? What weapons were
      really used to commandeer those aircraft and who had the means to get
      them on the planes? Who had the ability to plan and execute such an
      ambitious, multi-pronged attack without the interference of the U.S.
      intelligence services? Who had the means to staff each of the four
      teams with at least one well-trained, and suicidal, pilot? Who had
      the means and opportunity to plant secondary explosive charges, if in
      fact these were used?
      Finally, perhaps the most important question to be asked is: who
      stands to gain the most in the bleak aftermath? It is certainly not
      the American people, or any resistance movement within these borders.
      It's definitely not the still-to-be identified target(s) of the
      nation's wrath (which will likely include Iraq). That would seem to
      sort of limit the choices.

      It is quite possible, indeed quite likely, that members of
      some 'extremist' group served as the foot soldiers of these attacks.
      But it is just as likely that they were used as pawns in the global
      chess game that serves as our collective reality. It is also likely
      that these 'terrorists' were motivated by legitimately perceived
      grievances with the U.S. government.

      Those motivations weren't likely shared with their puppeteers,
      however, who cynically manipulated those belief systems to serve
      their own ends. Most of the participants probably did not know that
      they were embarking on suicide missions. Quite likely only the pilots
      knew that, and they may very well have received a little
      more 'training' than your average pilot.

      All of this is, by necessity, just speculation at this point. The
      true facts of the case will emerge over time in bits and pieces,
      mixed in with a healthy dose of disinformation. It matters little
      though in which direction those facts point. The official story has
      already been written.


      If you are interested in a free subscription to The
      Konformist Newswire, please visit:

      http://www.eGroups.com/list/konformist

      Or, e-mail konformist-subscribe@egroups.com with the
      subject: "I NEED 2 KONFORM!!!"

      (Okay, you can use something else, but it's a kool
      catch phrase.)

      Visit the Klub Konformist at Yahoo!:
      http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/klubkonformist
    • robalini@aol.com
      Please send as far and wide as possible. Thanks, Robert Sterling Editor, The Konformist http://www.konformist.com http://www.konformist.com/911/911.htm
      Message 2 of 2 , Sep 15, 2001
        Please send as far and wide as possible.

        Thanks,

        Robert Sterling
        Editor, The Konformist
        http://www.konformist.com
        http://www.konformist.com/911/911.htm

        http://www.konformist.com/911/davidmcgowan.htm

        dave@...

        Welcome to the New and Improved Police State:
        Commentary on the WTC Attacks


        David McGowan
        www.davesweb.cnchost.com
        September 12, 2001

        "We are going to see a great number of articles in the future from so-
        called experts and public officials. They will warn about more
        violence, more kidnappings, and more terrorists. Mass media, the
        armed forces, and intelligence agencies will saturate our lives with
        fascist scare tactics and 'predictions' that have already been
        planned to come true."
        'Conspiracy theorist' Mae Brussell, 1974

        I have a friend with whom I frequently disagree on matters of
        politics. He thinks that I am a crazed conspiracy theorist and I
        think that he is a reactionary fascist. There was one thing that we
        agreed on though. A few weeks ago, I told him that our fearless
        leaders seemed to be veering dangerously close to
        unleashing 'tactical' nuclear weapons upon the world.

        Although he seriously doubted that that was in fact the case, he
        readily agreed that such an action would be reckless and
        unconscionable. He stated that he couldn't envision any scenario
        under which such a strike would be justified and that we should avoid
        at all costs crossing that threshold. Opening that door, he believed,
        could only serve to escalate tensions and make this a much more
        dangerous world in which to live.

        He was one of several people who called me yesterday to discuss the
        alleged terrorist attacks on America. During the course of that call,
        he stated flatly that when the perpetrators were identified, they and
        their backers should be nuked. When I reminded him of our
        conversation of just a few weeks before, he said that things have
        changed now. I asked him if he had considered whether that wasn't
        perhaps precisely the point of the attacks. Unfazed, he reiterated
        his belief that I am a crazed conspiracy theorist.

        Excuse my cynicism, but have we Americans completely lost our ability
        to think? Are we now so thoroughly brain-dead that we are completely
        reliant on our media resources, with their endless supply
        of 'experts,' to make sense of events in the world? Are we really
        that stupid or do our leaders just think that we are?

        The actions taken on the morning of September 11 were crimes –
        horrendous crimes against humanity, to be sure, but in the final
        analysis not so very different from any other crimes. The first step
        in solving any crime is to look at who had a motive and who had the
        means and opportunity to commit the crime.

        As for motive, we are to believe that a band of Islamic terrorists
        are the most likely suspects. But is that the case? Was it a state-
        sponsored terrorist group that had the most to gain by launching such
        an assault, or was it our own political, corporate and military
        leaders?
        While the people of the Palestinian territories may well be dancing
        in the streets today in celebration of the blow struck against the
        United States, they certainly won't emerge as the winners in this
        national tragedy. When the bombs begin to rain down upon them, as
        they certainly will, the loss of life, property and hope will be far
        more profound for them than it will be for the people of New York.
        Their short-term 'victory' will be a hollow one indeed.

        This is certainly not to suggest that there are no governments,
        groups, or organizations around the world, or within these borders,
        that have legitimate grudges against the United States government.
        The numbers of such entities are legion. Two hundred years of
        imperialistic covert and overt military ventures have created a lot
        of enemies of the American ship of state and a tremendous amount of
        residual bitterness. Yet none of these groups stood to gain by
        launching such an attack.

        The United States, on the other hand, has much to gain in the
        aftermath of this chapter of American history. I am not talking here,
        of course, about the people of this country, who will pay a steep
        price for the carnage of September 11. Big Brother has assured us
        that we will be protected from future acts of this sort, and we will
        welcome with open arms the repressive, overtly fascistic 'reforms'
        that will be enacted.

        The people, of this country and of the world, are always the ones to
        pick up the tab for acts of gross governmental malfeasance. The
        people of some hapless country (or countries) that is identified as
        the culprit will pay with their lives and the lives of their
        children. The people of America and much of the Western world will
        pay with the wholesale stripping away of their remaining human, civil
        and privacy rights.

        Such a scenario only serves to benefit those who sit at the top of
        the food chain. Our elected leaders - who are elected only in the
        sense that every couple of years we are given a choice between two
        interchangeable candidates - will revel in the free reign they will
        be given to ram through legislation so appallingly reactionary that
        it would have been unthinkable just days ago.
        Military spending and the militarization of the country will escalate
        to a fever pitch. Welcome to the new and improved police state – the
        largest, most powerful, and most technologically advanced the world
        has ever seen. With the much-lauded U.S. economy tanking and
        unemployment figures hitting their highest levels in years, this will
        come in very handy for the 'powers that be.'

        The ugly truth is that all 'anti-terrorist' measures are designed not
        to protect the American people from attack or to protect
        our 'freedoms,' but to protect wealth and power - specifically the
        unprecedented levels of wealth currently held by corporate America -
        and to restrict those very freedoms that threaten their hold on that
        wealth.

        This American tragedy, in other words, plays directly into the hands
        of the corporate and military elite of this nation, who have for
        years been propagandizing for a more belligerent and imperialistic
        foreign policy and for more repressive legislation here on the home
        front. Having been presented with a pretext to enact such measures,
        it is our leaders - elected or otherwise - who stand to gain the most
        from yesterday's bloodshed.

        As for the question of who had the means and opportunity to commit
        these crimes, the official story holds that they were the work of a
        well-organized foreign terrorist organization. Officials have
        acknowledged that the operation was an exceptionally well-planned and
        well-coordinated series of attacks that required months of planning
        and a large network of co-conspirators to pull off.

        So well-organized was the operation that government spokesmen and
        television talking heads (which are really the same thing) have been
        at a loss to explain some of the day's events. Many questions have
        been left unanswered and some haven't been asked at all. Some of the
        answers that have been offered have strained credibility far past the
        breaking point.

        One question that has gone unanswered is how a plane was able to
        penetrate so deeply into the Pentagon's airspace – after two other
        planes had already plowed into the World Trade Center towers, no
        less. Despite the ridiculous current claims, the airspace surrounding
        the Pentagon is perhaps the most tightly controlled, militarily
        secure airspace in the world. This would be all the more true in the
        immediate aftermath of a large-scale 'terrorist' attack on New York
        City.
        Claims have been made that even if the approach of the aircraft had
        sounded an alarm, it would not have been targeted due to the fact
        that it was a commercial aircraft with many innocent lives on-board.
        Nonsense. Anyone who thinks that U.S. military/intelligence personnel
        would hesitate to target a commercial airliner is living in a media-
        induced fantasy world, particularly in light of the fact that two
        such aircraft had already been used in suicide attacks.

        The question then of how this plane was able to 'elude' the
        Pentagon's formidable defenses is one that should receive close
        scrutiny from America's 'free' and 'independent' press. There is
        virtually no chance that that will happen. Another question that begs
        for an answer is how teams of presumably armed hijackers were able to
        breach the security measures of no less than three major airports and
        successfully hijack four separate flights.

        Contrary to the claims now being made, security precautions currently
        in place in U.S. airports are anything but "lax." That fact was being
        implicitly acknowledged by this morning as reports began to come in
        claiming that the hijackers had improvised weapons from razor blades
        and other items carried in their shaving kits. These reports were
        actually carried by the network news broadcasters with a straight
        face.

        This scenario would be laughable were this story not such a tragic
        one. According to the latest official stories, three to five
        terrorists boarded each of the hijacked aircraft. All of these
        terrorists, of course, were such religious fanatics that they had
        agreed to give their lives for the cause they believed in, and none
        of them presumably had second thoughts about that decision once the
        operation was underway.

        Does anyone really believe that a few guys wielding toothbrush
        handles embedded with razor blades could quickly and efficiently gain
        control of a commercial airliner? I would think that such a group
        would have their hands full trying to hold-up a liquor store. How
        could, as has been reported, such a 'terrorist cell' possibly
        simultaneously overpower the flight crews and corral all of the
        flights' passengers into the rear of the planes?

        I don't consider myself to be a particularly brave or heroic sort of
        guy, but I would not hesitate for a second to take on a couple of
        guys wielding toothbrushes, particularly if my life, or the life of
        my family, was on the line and if I knew that I had some sixty people
        (the average number of passengers on the flights) behind me who would
        back me up. Maybe that's just me, but somehow I think most Americans
        would rise to the occasion.

        Nevertheless, these terrorist teams reportedly succeeded where so
        many other better armed terrorists have failed. The majority of
        hijacking attempts, as officials have acknowledged, end in failure.
        There hasn't been one to succeed in this country for a decade. And
        yet these teams succeeded, and on a spectacular scale, in four-out-of-
        four attempts and with only the most primitive of 'weapons.' To what
        are we to attribute that fact? Don't look to the media for answers.

        Perhaps the most obvious question raised by the attacks, and one that
        officials have feebly attempted to answer, is how the planning for
        such an operation could have escaped the attention of the country's
        intelligence services. Whenever such an event occurs, the
        intelligence agencies rather predictably hang their heads, slump
        their shoulders and sheepishly grin as they explain their
        powerlessness to predict such things.

        We did the best we could, they explain, but our resources are
        limited, our adversaries formidable, and our sources not infallible.
        Give me a break. The CIA - along with the FBI, ONI, DIA, NSC, NSA,
        DEA, and virtually every other three-letter acronym you could think
        of - constitutes the largest and most insidious intelligence network
        the world has ever seen.
        Its agents have fully infiltrated every foreign government on the
        planet, as well as every 'terrorist' group and every domestic
        resistance movement that has ever posed even a remote threat to the
        goals of the architects of the American ship of state. It is simply
        inconceivable that such an ambitious attack could have been planned,
        coordinated and launched without the knowledge of numerous elements
        of the national security state.

        That is the inescapable reality that no amount of media and
        government spin can erase, though politicians and their media puppets
        will work overtime to do exactly that. One need only to turn their
        television off and their brain on though to see how preposterous are
        the claims that these attacks took the intelligence community by
        surprise.

        Perhaps the most disturbing question raised by the attacks is what
        exactly caused the twin towers of the WTC to collapse? The impact of
        the planes affected only the upper floors of the towers; their
        foundations were unaffected. The UK's Guardian acknowledged that the
        initial impact of the aircraft would result in less stress on the
        building than is normally caused by high winds. The buildings were
        specifically designed to handle such horizontal movement.

        The Guardian and its expert consultants conclude that the collapse of
        the buildings was the result of secondary explosions, attributed to
        the delayed release of the large supply of jet fuel carried by the
        aircraft. How though could the ignition of the jet fuel have occurred
        as a delayed, secondary explosion? As the endlessly played videotapes
        of the attack graphically illustrate, the initial impact resulted in
        enormous fireballs and the immediate engulfing of a portion of the
        buildings in flames.

        It is inconceivable that the aircraft's fuel tanks would not have
        burst upon impact and their contents immediately have been ignited.
        Indeed, if that wasn't in fact the case, then how are we to explain
        the initial explosions and fireballs that were witnessed by the
        world? What exactly was it that created the spectacular initial
        blasts if it wasn't the jet fuel?

        But if that was the case, what was it then that created the secondary
        explosions that appear to have occurred? These secondary blasts were
        acknowledged early in the day by an NBC newsman. The correspondent
        stated on the air that he had just talked with the fire department's
        public safety commissioner who verified that large secondary
        explosions precipitated the collapse of the towers.

        A radio broadcaster on WLS in Chicago (according to a correspondent),
        whose wife is a CBS journalist who was on the scene at the towers,
        said on the air that his wife had witnessed an enormous fireball
        emanating from beneath one of the towers immediately before it came
        crashing down. What are we to make of these types of scattered
        reports, none of which received any follow-up coverage amidst the non-
        stop blizzard of media attention?

        To be sure, the collapse of the towers, captured on tape for all the
        world to see, had the decided appearance of controlled implosions,
        facilitated by the precise placement of technologically advanced
        explosives. The world has never before witnessed such complete and
        utter destruction of a targeted building by an act of war or
        a 'terrorist' assault.

        We have seen the United States target many a building for
        destruction. In the most recent military venture, we saw an embassy
        building and a television studio, among many others, take direct and
        multiple hits from state-of-the-art bombs and guided missiles. The
        buildings were devastated, to be sure, but the damage didn't come
        close to matching the pile of rubble that the twin towers were
        reduced to.

        We saw a highrise Israeli apartment building take a direct hit from
        an Iraqi Scud missile during the Gulf war. Actually, most of us
        probably didn't see that, unless you happened to be tuned in to CNN
        for the brief few moments when the footage was aired. As it turns
        out, that Scud missile was actually safely intercepted by a trusty
        Patriot missile, or so it was claimed – just as if the footage had
        never aired.

        The point though is that the building was hit and did suffer
        extensive damage, and undoubtedly at the cost of many lives. But
        again, the building - though sheared nearly in half - was in
        considerably better shape than the World Trade Center. It occurs to
        me then that perhaps America has invested entirely too much time and
        money in pursuit of creating ever more powerful and efficient weapons
        systems.

        Who would have ever thought that the best weapon with which to reduce
        an entire tower to rubble was the plane itself. It doesn't even have
        to be a military plane – any old commercial aircraft will do. Someone
        obviously should have followed up on the early work done in this area
        by the Japanese during World War II.

        In the final analysis, we must ask ourselves the following questions:
        Who had the means to get highly trained commando teams onto four
        aircraft flying out of three separate airports? Who had the ability
        to violate the Pentagon's airspace unmolested? What weapons were
        really used to commandeer those aircraft and who had the means to get
        them on the planes? Who had the ability to plan and execute such an
        ambitious, multi-pronged attack without the interference of the U.S.
        intelligence services? Who had the means to staff each of the four
        teams with at least one well-trained, and suicidal, pilot? Who had
        the means and opportunity to plant secondary explosive charges, if in
        fact these were used?

        Finally, perhaps the most important question to be asked is: who
        stands to gain the most in the bleak aftermath? It is certainly not
        the American people, or any resistance movement within these borders.
        It's definitely not the still-to-be identified target(s) of the
        nation's wrath (which will likely include Iraq). That would seem to
        sort of limit the choices.

        It is quite possible, indeed quite likely, that members of
        some 'extremist' group served as the foot soldiers of these attacks.
        But it is just as likely that they were used as pawns in the global
        chess game that serves as our collective reality. It is also likely
        that these 'terrorists' were motivated by legitimately perceived
        grievances with the U.S. government.

        Those motivations weren't likely shared with their puppeteers,
        however, who cynically manipulated those belief systems to serve
        their own ends. Most of the participants probably did not know that
        they were embarking on suicide missions. Quite likely only the pilots
        knew that, and they may very well have received a little
        more 'training' than your average pilot.

        All of this is, by necessity, just speculation at this point. The
        true facts of the case will emerge over time in bits and pieces,
        mixed in with a healthy dose of disinformation. It matters little
        though in which direction those facts point. The official story has
        already been written.


        If you are interested in a free subscription to The
        Konformist Newswire, please visit:

        http://www.eGroups.com/list/konformist

        Or, e-mail konformist-subscribe@egroups.com with the
        subject: "I NEED 2 KONFORM!!!"

        (Okay, you can use something else, but it's a kool
        catch phrase.)

        Visit the Klub Konformist at Yahoo!:
        http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/klubkonformist
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.