The Truth will prevail, but only if we demand it from Congress! 9-11 Inside Job and Neocons Hacked 2004 SCROLL DOWN
|
|
"9/11 FIVE YEARS LATER: WHAT HAVE WE ACCOMPLISHED?"An Assessment of the 9/11 Truth MovementBy Emanuel SferiosSeptember 11, 2006CG note This article could also be titled "You Can't Fight Fire With Fire")Five years ago - on my birthday - the shadow government of the United Statesmurdered over 3,000 of its own citizens (and hundreds of others) in a "falseflag" operation designed to galvanize public support behind a war forcontrol of the world's last remaining energy reserves. Many of us quicklysaw through the "big lie" of 9/11 and began a movement to expose it, toreveal the truth, in the hopes that this would bring an end to the War onTerror, a war destined - if it continues - to turn nuclear.And now, five years later, what have we accomplished?In short, everything and nothing. We began this movement to convince theAmerican public and the world that the official story of 9/11 was a lie, andthat ruling factions within our own government were the real perpetrators.This we accomplished. Opinion polls conducted over the last two years showthat the majority of Americans believe the US government was complicit. Webombarded every mainstream and alternative medium available withinformation, from Air America to internet blogs. We handed out leaflets incities and towns across the country, held signs on street corners, wroteletters to everyone we could think of. And you know what? It worked. Todayit is rare that I talk to a person who doesn't believe the US government wasinvolved in the attacks in some way. Compared to just two years ago, whenpeople would look at us like we were crazy for suggesting such a thing, thisis an amazing success.Or so it seems. For at the same time, not a single perpetrator of 9/11 hasbeen prosecuted, and the War on Terror continues unabated, as does theendless stream of lies and propaganda designed to keep us fearful andcompliant. Why this discrepancy? What accounts for the 9/11 Truth Movement'sseeming victory in shattering the American public's blind acceptance of theofficial story, and the stark reality that nothing has changed politically?In other words, why, in the midst of total success, have we failed?This is the question I have been asking myself over the last few years. Asco-founder of the first national activist organization for 9/11 truth, the9/11 Visibility Project (http://www.septembereleventh.org), I devoted twofull years of my life to building this movement. And to see it grow from ahandful of struggling yet dedicated individuals into the enormous yetultimately ineffective movement it is today, saddens me to no end. Thus forme this is not merely an academic question. I mean it honestly: why, in themidst of a seeming total success, have we failed?The answer to this question, many have concluded, involves the lack ofpolitical will of the people of the United States. It is one thing to knowthe truth, and quite another to act upon that truth. Democracy Now is a casein point. A great many of us have had conversations with Amy Goodman and theother producers of Democracy Now, and they all know the official story of9/11 is a lie. Yet except for a few segments we forced them to air as aresult of our public pressure campaign (where they for the most partridiculed us), they have chosen not only to ignore 9/11 truth, but to affirmthe official story again and again in their programming.Many other examples can be given, not only from the left media, but fromsenators, congressmen, Eliot Spitzer, etc. How many of these people know thetruth, yet do nothing? (Cynthia McKinney may be the one notable exception).Where is the political will?But to blame the American people alone for their lack of courage in opposingUS imperialism fails to ultimately answer the question, for we must also askwhy such a lack of courage exists in the first place. Certainly it isn't alack of courage in general. The American population regularly demonstratesgreat courage and political will when it comes to social and domesticissues. And neither do I believe, as some cynical observers claim, that themajority of Americans secretly support US imperialism, that given the choicethey would rather see millions of innocent foreigners die than reduce theirown oil consumption and powerdown. If such was the case, there would havebeen no need for a 9/11, and there would be no need for the ongoing lies anddeceptions. Simply citing the lack of political will among the Americanpublic thus begs the question, for the answer we seek is exactly that whichaccounts for this lack of courage when facing the truth of 9/11.Here is my assessment. The reason for the discrepancy between what peopleknow about 9/11 and what they are willing to do to stop the War on Terror;the reason we have ultimately failed, in other words, has to do with thescope and sophistication of the political and social control mechanisms usedagainst us; namely, disruption and disinformation. I have been an activistfor 20 years, and I have seen and experienced COINTELPRO-style disruptionmany times in the past. Yet never before have I witnessed it used on such ascale and with such precision as I have within the 9/11 Truth Movement.There are thousands of examples, but let me give you just a few.1. When we launched our Democracy Now campaign, we asked activists and thegeneral public to send them emails requesting they have David Ray Griffin ontheir show. We provided a sample letter, but encouraged people to writetheir own, and we asked them always to be polite. We also provided them theemail addresses to send their letters, and we included our own email addressin the mix, so we could see what kinds of letters Democracy Now wasreceiving. What happened was very telling. For every two or three emailsthey received that were respectful and well-written, they received one thatwas either highly insulting, vehemently anti-semitic, or down-rightludicrous. The timing and repetitive use of specific phrases among many ofthese emails revealed a coordinated effort to disrupt our campaign andconvince Democracy Now not to associate with us.2. When we launched our campaign to get the attorney General of New YorkState, Eliot Spitzer, to open a new investigation into 9/11, we began anonline petition drive and received thousands of signatures. Shortly afterour campaign website went up, another website was launched duplicating ourcampaign and promoting preposterous claims designed to make the 9/11 TruthMovement appear ridiculous. Thus a clear message was sent to Eliot Spitzerthat opening a new investigation into 9/11 could easily destroy hisreputation by associating with people who believe, among other nonsense,that the planes on 9/11 were merely holograms inserted onto TV screens.And these are just examples of reactive disruption efforts (in response tothings we do), which aren't even the primary methods they use against us.Controlling Your Opposition by Becoming ItOne lesson the shadow government has learned over the last 40 years is thatthe best way to defeat your opposition is to become your opposition, andlike many of those phony socialist and anti-war groups on college campusesthat suck rebellious student energy and dissipate it ineffectively,preventing the formation of a legitimate, effective opposition, so have theytaken over a large part of the 9/11 Truth Movement itself, channeling newskeptics (and old) into endless debates around physical evidence and otherineffective actions. During my entire time within the movement, I never oncenamed publicly any individuals or websites I thought were intentionallypromoting disinformation, or leading us down useless avenues, nor will Inow. (This is to protect myself from reprisals, to avoid the furtherdisruption caused by the endless cycle of "snitch jacketing," and becauseyou can never really prove who is an agent and who is simply duped by thedisinfo itself, much of which is easily believable on the surface.) But toprove that agents are among us, and that they have succeeded in taking overthe bulk of the movement, one needs to go no further than compare the numberof people who believe no plane hit the Pentagon with the number of peoplewho know about the simultaneous wargames that were taking place on themorning of 9/11, and that prevented NORAD from intercepting the planesbefore they hit their targets.The former claim, widely believed, is perhaps the most successful andsophisticated disinformation campaign injected into the 9/11 Truth Movement.Supported by doctored video footage released by the Pentagon itself, it hasalmost single-handedly made the movement the laughing stock of Washington DCresidents, hundreds of whom saw the plane hit the building, and thousands ofwhom have relatives or friends who did. And this was likely its intention,for it has successfully alienated from the movement precisely those DCprofessionals (senators, congressmen, federal judges, prosecutors, etc.) whohold enough power to effectively investigate and prosecute the crime. It hasalso been the primary wedge used to divide the movement from itself. Whilethere is no space here to delve into the details of the "no plane at thePentagon" hoax, I am forever indebted to Mark Robinowitz for having thestubborn persistency to keep challenging me back when I, too, believed thehoax. I am also immensely grateful to Jim Hoffman for his unparalleledanalysis of the Pentagon physical evidence(http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon).On the other hand, the wargames comprise the very heart of the operation. Onthe morning of 9/11 itself, the FAA and NORAD were occupied in air defensedrills simulating none other than multiple airline hijackings. These drillsincluded fake blips inserted onto their radar screens, as well as remotelycontrolled aircraft in the air posing as passenger jets. Thus theperpetrators of 9/11 (those overseeing the wargames) were able toincapacitate the US air defense system without having to order a stand-down,allowing the operation to succeed. Because of the wargames, NORAD personneldid not know where to send the fighter jets when the supposedly "real"hijackings took place (likely also being flown by remote control). Theyacknowledged this during the 9/11 Commission hearings, with no follow-upquestioning of course.How many people have heard of the wargames compared to the "no plane at thePentagon" theory? How many 9/11 Truth websites make reference to thewargames compared with the Pentagon hoax? And how many 9/11 truth activistorganizations do you know emphasizing the wargames as opposed to all thevarious physical evidence arguments? The answer to these questions will tellyou a lot about the state of the movement, and who really controls it.(Incidentally, the world should be forever indebted to Mike Ruppert, who putthe pieces together about the wargames and presented them in their properlight, first on stage to a small audience in Toronto, which included myself,and then in full detail in his book, Crossing the Rubicon.)So we shouldn't place all the blame upon those individuals who willfullyignore the truth of 9/11. Certainly there is an element of cowardiceinvolved, a lack of integrity, and a selling out. We know, for example, thatDemocracy Now received hundreds of thousands of dollars from the FordFoundation specifically to report on 9/11. But what would happen toDemocracy Now if Amy Goodman chose integrity over money? The same thing,perhaps, that happened to Mike Ruppert?(http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/081606_burning_bridge.shtml)This is not to excuse Goodman's willful ignorance, her selling out to thevery government she professes to oppose. (I don't listen to her showanymore, but I read From The Wilderness every day.) I simply want torecognize the immense power of that government, a power that can murder3,000 people and get away with it, a power that can induce good activists tosell out, and better ones to flee the country. (Living to fight another dayis not so condemnable, after all.) Herein lies an important factor in ourfailure.More About DisinformationOne of the characteristics of 9/11 disinformation a lot of people have ahard time grasping is that much of it is designed specifically to convincepeople of US government complicity in 9/11. This might seem like acontradiction, until one understands that 9/11 disinfo is part of a broadersystem of mass manipulation where the opposing perspective plays anessential role. The basic idea is to control both sides of the debate, andframe it in a way that makes the opposing side ineffective (not necessarilyunbelievable). In the end it doesn't matter whether even a majority of thepeople believe the US government was complicit in 9/11 (this is already thecase). What matters is only that the perpetrators can never successfully beprosecuted. Thus they pollute the body of evidence with red herrings andfalse lines of inquiry. If, in the process, they happen to cause some peopleto disbelieve the official story (as in the case with the "no plane at thePentagon" hoax), all the better, because the end result is a weakening ofany legal case that might be brought against them.There is an important quote by E. Martin Schotz from his book, History WillNot Absolve Us: Orwellian Control, Public Denial, and the Murder of |