Nine Years Later: Whitewashing 9-11

This past week our mainstream print and television media dedicated much of their programming once again to 9-11 and its aftermath, and using it in order to garner ratings and place their subjective spins on this black mark in American history.

One major news magazine has an article devoted to how America "over-reacted" to 9-11, and the threat of al-Qaeda (although originally it was the Taliban and Osama bin Laden which was the focus of those first weeks and months post 9-11, not al Qaeda at all). Another article in the same magazine written by a former President's daughter lambasts how the liberals are disappointed with the reaction of Mr. Obama to the Deepwater Horizon disaster and the weeks and months this Administration stood by while tens of thousands of barrels of oil were spewing into the Gulf, without a mention of the continuing war also whose candidate had pledged to end the war, one of their major concerns at election time.

To this American, it has been nine long years of betrayal and using 9-11 also for their agendas by both political parties which has resulted in the increased discontent of the American people with their leadership.

I would not state that the reactions of the general citizenry were "over-reactions," but that the actions of the Bush/Obama Administration have been "under-reactions."

Our borders, for the most part, and ports of entry are even less secure than they were pre-9-11. Our infrastructure and many of our vital industries and public utility companies are traded on the global exchange, and for all intents and purposes even our nuclear reactors could be "owned" through stock purchases, by foreigners.

There has also been two other attempts under even stranger circumstances, originating from Great Britain since that time used to justify then increasing security measures domestically, although the Bush Administration during his last 90 days in office expanded the Visa waiver program for foreign citizens wishing entry, requiring simply 48 hour security checks, to citizens from over 45 nations.

Our southern and northern borders still remain relatively unsecured, and there are once again even since 2006 attempts being made to "legalize" individuals who are in this country who had absolutely no security checks at all as having entered illegally, and also who have overstayed their work, student or visitor visas.

While instead, Americans are being asked to submit themselves to full body scanners, and other invasive security measures at domestic airports.

In this same magazine, an article also appeared that harkened back to how "united" the American people were post 9-11, pulling together for a "common good," due to all the donations and volunteers that did what they could in the aftermath of the tragedy. As a nation, however, I would not say that this country was "united" except for the fact that it was united in its outrage that such an event, in this modern day and era and with all the monies spent for national defense in technology during the Reagan era, especially, could occur.

We were united in our wish to have the perpetrators of this heinous act brought to justice, which has alluded this nation still even nine long years later.

We wanted our leaders to abide by our Constitution, and close our borders and our country to "foreigners" until those individuals responsible for the act were brought to justice, and order any and all here illegally out until such time.

We wanted our president not to direct us to "go shop," or this president to expand the war without having any real hard intelligence indicating that the perpetrators were within our grasp, and not send any more of our young men and women to die on foreign sand to add to the losses.

We simply wanted our leadership to abide by their oaths of office, and their duties to Americans and protect this nation and its borders and legal and lawful citizenry, rather than their commercial interests and those domestic and foreign privateers.

Attempts are now also being made in order to "whitewash" 9-11 and its impact in declaring this day a "National Day of Service," rather than a memorial day as with Pearl Harbor. And the profiteers who wish to now see a Muslim mosque built in close proximity over the objections of most of the American people, promoting such an act as a demonstration of "tolerance," rather than the real agenda - a multi-million dollar redevelopment project for the city and state coffers of New York.

There is much in this puzzle still missing as those that viewed that attack for over seven full days replayed and replayed can attest.

And attempts to marginalize the Americans who still are not satisfied with the official explanations will not change that, nor cloaking 9-11 in patriotism and the flag, or minimizing the impact this massive attack and its scars have left on this nation and a new generation of Americans who didn't live through Pearl Harbor.

Interesting this mosque and its ramifications has reared its head just a short year before the 10th anniversary, and push toward this "National Day of Service" spin focusing on those that responded (although their acts of bravery are not to be discounted by any means), rather than the victims and tragedy itself? I wonder what incentives the City of New York, since it has the support of its Mayor, is extending for this massive, expansive project in order to feed the "jobs and the economy" on the memories of that day, and of the 9-11 victims?

I'm no "conspiracy" nut or theorist, but I still wonder how the mainstream media was able to get full camera crews to the site of the Trade Center within 20 minutes of the first crash since the financial district of New York is quite a distance away from where most of those media centers are located, and this was rush hour at that....even the date selected, an emergency code used throughout the U.S. and not the Middle East, bears scrutiny. If this was a religious attack as has been claimed of jihadists, just why wasn't a Muslim holy day selected, which would certainly make more sense if extremism within the Muslim faith was the origins of this heinous attack on our civilian population primarily and nation's economy and military headquarters.

And I have seen enough controlled demolitions during my years in Phoenix, Arizona when tearing down old buildings in order to redevelop and put in new was an ongoing annual process, since Phoenix and its metro area has exploded in the last two decades, to its detriment also, as a former longer term "almost native" Arizonan. I've been to New York, and it's population and traffic are well-known. Although after the events which occurred, such a decision could be understandable given the extent of the damage and "collateral" damage which also was an eminent threat, but this entire scenario cannot be dismissed by the mere "scientific" theories and explanations which were then subsequently published in an auto mechanics magazine.

To even use such a source by many in our leadershp and print and television media goes to show the utter contempt it does appear that some of those that survived have for their fellow countrymen and victims, in one manner or another all Americans have been progressively impacted, since that horrendous day.

And the ramifications and impact on the American people post 9-11 has been far greater in having their continued rights violated and victimized nine years later, while instead our leadership in the name of "commerce" above true national security, continues to open our doors and shores to all comers.

Obama Defends Ground Zero Mosque on Religious Grounds?

It was reported in the mainstream media that Barack Obama has come out of the closet with respect to the ongoing controversy over the building of a Muslim mosque near the Ground Zero site of the 9-11 attacks on this nation nine years ago.

While we are still in an expanded war under Mr. Obama in Afghanistan and Iraq purported still seeking those directly responsible for those planned attacks, with no end really in sight after pledging to end this war as "responsibly" and quickly as possible.

It does appear that if any true movement in this direction will occur, it will occur next year during the uptick for the presidential run for the roses once again either toward the end of this year or beginning of 2011.

What has been lost in this debate is the fact that we ARE still in this war, and in using the "freedom of religion" provisions of our Constitution, it appears that Mr. Obama is tone deaf to the objections of the general citizenry who just might feel that such an enterprise so near the site of the death of over 2,000 American civilians whose religious beliefs might also be violated by such a venture are being ignored for what can only be characterized as a "political" move not a "religious" one.

This is a prime piece of real estate, and in the financial district in New York, so just why would this site be chosen by those in the Muslim community to begin with rather than a site nearer to their flock in a residential or less commercial area?

To those who lost relatives or close family members with religious beliefs, that site has created controversy ever since the debris from Ground Zero was eventually cleared away. Most would like a memorial to the victims constructed there permanently, and it would not appear that any Muslims were killed in that disaster other than the perpetrators, although still rather unclear to the general public just who was ultimately involved, and just who was truly behind that vicious attack on primarily the civilian population, after all.

The bulk of those lost lives were those working within the financial industry, and not government or public sector employees.

Mr. Obama's stance is quite incredible given the fact that this site does have religious meaning to many across the nation and the actual "zoning" that was in effect for this particular site as a commercial district, without asking the fundamental question.

Of all the sites in New York that might be available for such a venture, in areas in which there are far more Muslims residing in residential communities rather than the business district, just what is the ultimate aim here?

Creating a house of worship for the Muslim community, or making a "political" statement?

And just who in the New York state government is also so totally wacked to entertain such an idea while this war is continuing?

To me and most other Americans, a Muslim mosque would be blasphemy on all those lives lost at the hands of Middle Easterners, Muslim or not, since it is quite possible that unnaturalized Middle Easterner's without any fealty or loyalty to this country just might be worshipping there.

Mayor Bloomberg, Mr. Obama, just what ARE you thinking?

A memorial, or another commercial building in a commercial area is what is called for here.

No Christian, Jewish or Muslim church if freedom of religion is the basic precept behind our First Amendment, since this was an attack that involved the loss of life of believers and non-believers alike, and also was directed at our economy most of all.

No Christian Church or Jewish Synagogue were the targets, so it wasn't religion based fundamentally as has continued to be portrayed by the mainstream media.

It was the financial industry and our economy and apparently those working within the global banking industries who were targeted, and our military secondarily.

Maybe reviewing just how and why those particular buildings were targeted for those attacks is what is called for here and what the ultimate agenda actually was an just who would benefit from such an attack since it does appear even with the 9-11 report much has been kept from the general public surrounding what led to those attacks, and it is not simply "conspiracy theorists" that are speaking up in light of this ongoing war - and the detrimental effects of merging our economies with the rest of the world that has placed the lives of the general citizenry and civilians in peril PROGRESSIVELY, while giving away through "free trade" agreements our own oil reserves to the British also PROGRESSIVELY.

And this support in this name of "freedom of religion" is not PROGRESSIVE, nor is it an act that would facilitate greater healing of the wounds of this nation post 9-11.

This is rather "in your face," not a healing gesture at all - nor in any manner with any basis in "freedom of religion" in a country that already has many, many Mosques built in far more suitable residential communities in New York and elsewhere.

Not in a lower Manhattan financial and business district, which makes the true intent of such a proposal abundantly clear.

Politicos and their financial "global" backers love war, whether civil, commercial or foreign. It makes no difference ultimately.

Maybe what is truly called for here is a monument and memorial to Wall Street, the true profiteers post 9-11 that are still cleaning up post 9-11 over the bodies of those innocent victims who it appears clear now nine long years after 9-11 were sacrificed ultimately for the "greater global good," of the "global economy" since our presence in that region and focus has fundamentally changed since that tragic day those many years ago.

While the foreign bankers more so than even the domestic ones continue to profit PROGRESSIVELY.

Correction: Of the over 3,000 lives lost in the 9-11 attacks not counting those which have been publicly announced as the perpetrators and members of the Taliban (since bin Laden as the "mastermind" was portrayed as a Taliban leader, not al Qaida), according to published but unconfirmed sources, approximately 60 people were identified as followers of the Muslim faith which were killed - most of which were either on the planes, or working as police cadets or in the hospitality fields, so less than 2% of the total victims.

http://islam.about.com/blvictims.htm

Al Qaeda Now Blamed For Christmas Incident?

It appears now the "top story" that has gained media attention once again in order to deflect the Christmas Eve passage of the Senate of the largest unconstitutional tax on the American people during a time of economic recession that has ever come down the pike (the Health Care Deform Bill), is the story of the attempted bombing of a U.S. bound airline on Christmas Day by a citizen of Nigeria now connected by the Obama Administration to Al Qaeda, with a Yemen connection to a sect of this terrorist group operating there apparently.

It has amazed me and many other Americans how conveniently some of these terrorism attacks are planned and announced to the U.S. public. A public that has become increasingly disturbed at the turn this "War on Terror" has taken now for nine long years, and in which Mr. Obama was actually voted into office based on his positions that he would be the "alternate" candidate to the Bush Administrations "pro-interventionist" agendas with respect to the Middle East and the continuing war in Iraq, as opposed to the actual original Congressional authorization addressing directly those that claimed responsibility for the civilian and military attack on the U.S. in New York those many years ago.

The excuses now and rhetoric coming out of this Administration parallels once again those of the last. And it appears an agenda more so in order to ratchet up the terms of the Patriot Act and those "science based technology" and gadgetry measures that have been initiated by the new huge and ever-increasing Department of Homeland Security.

Which Department, by the way, was the biggest job stimulus and also tax increase also on the American people for both the government and its budgetary needs, and also Silicon Valley in addition to the ongoing war and profits they are making in the war and military industrial sector.

Ms. Napolitano, of course, is pointing fingers along with Mr. Obama at "security failures" that lead to the attempt. Which was carried out in Amsterdam, apparently, on a flight bound for the U.S.

Of course, this country also has afforded VISA waivers post 9-11 during the last 100 days of the Bush Administration for citizens of over 34 different countries to enter here merely upon a 48 hour security check over the internet.

And also has afforded most of the U.S. national and international airlines to afford foreign governments and individuals to invest in a great deal of America's infrastructure.

Including its airlines.

So if foreigners and foreign governments are allowed to become major shareholders in the U.S. airline industry itself, just how is Homeland Security going to deal with the fact that many and most of those foreign governments, if they own major stock in many of those airlines, also have access to intel on much of the security measures that are now in effect throughout the U.S. due to their ownership itself?

How convenient that this attack also was planned on Christmas Day, as the attacks of 9-11 using a U.S. emergency code in order to carry out the plan - a code that is unique really to this country, and holiday that is celebrated by Christians throughout the world.

If it was al Qaeda, don't you think these terrorists would be using their own religious holidays in order to facilitate this "holy war" and attacks on the U.S,, rather than Western holidays and cultural practices? I mean, this is suppose to be a "holy war" as portrayed by the media by this group of extremists that the U.S. just so happen to train during the Clinton Administration and wars with the Soviets in Afghanistan, right?

Even though those which claimed responsibility for the attacks of 9-11 were actually Saudi citizens, by and large, and not from Afghanistan at all.

Mr. Obama and Ms. Napolitano could be exchanged quite easily on those podiums for George W. Bush and Michael Chertoff, the rhetoric now so eerily familiar to most Americans.

And so, apparently, is the timetable for this continuing "war," and apparently the methods and madness of using "terrorism" threats and attacks, and patriotism, in order to continue to justify a war that appears to be expanding under this Administration, rather than being effectively ended as "unjust" (and clearly unconstitional, under America's "legal" form of government) at this point, to begin with.

And now merely the main job stimulus for the media, the ever increasing government security departments and divisions, public/private governmental contractors, and Silicon Valley and its "science based technology" fields.

And also strange that this "attack" would originate in the Netherlands, the home of the international and world government "courts" that also have been questioning the U.S. continued agendas in the Middle East in expanding also this "redress" now for over nine years, isn't it?

Is this rather small terrorist group being portrayed as engaged in merely a "holy war" for their Muslim extremist beliefs, really that politically savvy and adept in both choosing their targets, and their dates of attacks using Western "holidays" and cultural customs as their strike dates and focus?

Most of them do not even speak much English at all, and doesn't appear that in the areas in which most live, get much in the way of Western broadcasting or information to begin with, except with the satellites that the West (British - not truly American citizen owned corporate entities mostly) has placed there.

Which foundation actually is due to a British accord signed prior to World War I creating the nation of Israel, which also really is the primary "religous" basis for this continuing war - the U.S. continued alliances under that accord and the Israli government with the British government most of all now even sixty years after World War II - with Israel one of the richest countries now in the world, with a military on par to that of the West (since the U.S. did train many of their pilots and military personnel, as it did those terrorists also).

Terrorism comes in all forms. And appears the terrorism on the American people isn't restricted to Middle Eastern religious sects, with those now "have a plan" ads that taxpayer's are paying to the national media through another public/private partnership while this war continues.

With Hillary Clinton recently promoting U.S. corporate investment in Iraq as now as the Chamber of Commerce and Marketing Director and Ambassador for Iraq in recent months in media reports in order to stabilize the Iraqi economy now - while the U.S. economy continues to tank and promoting "outsourcing" U.S. goods to Iraq apparently rather contrary to the messages and rhetoric of the 2008 elections and dissatisfaction of the American people of this federally backed and sponsored "global" economic agenda at their expense - our continued presence in this region is clear has both mainstream political parties unconditional support and backing.

Capitalizing on such an incident such as this for now over a week, with the recent blame now once again on al Qaeda for a Nigerian citizens claimed "intent" is beginning to sound more like another "spin" in order to continue to use these segregated incidents to appear to be doing something in order to end this war, but really doing absolutely nothing at all other than to redemonstrate the "threat" of external attacks - yet while opening the gates, and increasing the "approved" countries for facilitated entry more and more thus increasing the risk of outside attacks such as these once again.

These "official" positions and stories really are getting truly incredible at this point, and the spins and excuses hollow and exercises in public relations manipulations for once again providing that although the face may change, in our now one party "global socialist" Congress and Administration, the "change" is merely the faces before the cameras and pay grades.