[A-List] Fw: Counterpunch: A Review of "The New Pearl Harbor"

["Christopher Black" <bar@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "grok" <grok@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <llo@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; <labor-l@xxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 6:46 PM
Subject: Counterpunch: A Review of "The New Pearl Harbor"


>
>
> [ Right on cue today:
>
> The U.S.' practically-openly-fascist regime has trotted-out its "clear
> and present danger" terrorist threat ace-card yet again. Clearly, the
> masses are being prepared for yet further assaults on their freedoms and
> civil rights. One could almost think that al-Qaeda have been U.S. assets
> all along...
>
> Many people have been predicting that the 2000 U.S. election semi-coup
> has been only a dry-run for a REAL latin-american-style political /
> military coup in the good ol' U.S.A. They've taken to calling the
> yet-to-happen event the "October Surprise" -- in part because of its
> functional relation to Ronald Reagan's earlier little treason with Iran
> (required to fully discredit President Carter and lock-down the 1980
> election); and also because October 2004 seems coming a fine month for
> spooks to scare us all one more time into stampeding the Republicrats
> right back into office (or maybe even allowing them to "call off" a
> losing election -- it being a time of crisis, etc., yadda).
> These people have the time and the resources to spin any number of
> plausible scenaria; so the eventual ploy they use doesn't necessarily
> have to be one mentioned above. Hell, the preferred plan, logically, is
> to have George II ride a patriotic wave right back into the
> Whitehouse...  Ace-up-the-sleeve is more like it.
>
> The beauty of all this fearmongering is that, thanx to the U.S.
> hegemons' building-up of anti-communist/anti-West islamic revanchists
> (just as their grandfathers built-up that *first* set of
> anti-communists: Mussolini, Hitler and Tojo -- with much the same sad
> results for the world), any REAL terrorist act CAN be practically
> made-to-order! What geniuses. (Someone's gods save us all.)
> Frankly, I'm still waiting on a plausible explanation about what really
> happened on that grassy knoll in November 1963 -- the day I apparently
> began my lifelong interest in politix...
>
> My pocket analysis: U.S. Republicans are -- and always have been -- a
> "clear and present danger" to the people of the world (Democrats being
> Republicans without chutzpah).
>
> JUST SAY NO! To voting bourgeois.
>
>
> (sidenote: And what are the issues in the canadian election so far? Why,
> whatever the U.S. regime-friendly millionaire CDN prime minister's
> spindoktors SAY they are (so far). Such a liar he/they is/are.
> Certainly the issue is NOT the "clear-and-present danger" to Canada from
> south of the border -- and the clear and present East German-style police
> state many of us are already living in.)
>
>
> -- grok ]
>
>
>
>
>                               May 25, 2004
>
> September Song
>
> A Review of "The New Pearl Harbor"
>
> By MARC ESTRIN
>
>   The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions
>   about the Bush Administration and 9/11
>   David Ray Griffin
>   Olive Branch Press, 2004
>   Paper, 214 pp, $15.00
>
> The official story goes something like this:
>
> With no actionable warning from intelligence
> agencies, four planes were hijacked by
> terrorists on the morning of September 11, 2001.
> Two crashed into the Word Trade Center, which
> then collapsed, and shortly thereafter, the
> third into the Pentagon. The last plane went
> down in Pennsylvania after a struggle between
> passengers and hijackers. Air defense arrived
> too late to stop the catastrophes. Responding to
> this attack on the homeland, the president
> declared a global war on terror which may last
> for generations until evil is finally
> eradicated, the security of America firmly
> established, and the world made safe for freedom
> and democracy.
>
> In The New Pearl Harbor, David Ray Griffin
> compiles the evidence that every single
> assertion in the official story is implausible
> or impossible, and that something other must
> explain the inconsistencies and contra-factual
> assertions.
>
> The implications of the accumulated evidence is
> that the Bush administration was complicit in
> the events of September 11th, and not merely a
> victim of structural problems or incompetence on
> the part of the intelligence establishment. In a
> nuanced discussion of "complicity", Griffin
> distinguishes eight possible levels, from the
> lying about events to maximize political ends,
> through intentionally allowing expected attacks,
> to actual involvement in the planning of them.
>
> Griffin does not make specific accusations, nor
> does he hypothesize a "true" version of what
> happened. But he does demand unflinching
> investigations of all the contradictions, clear
> reporting of the results, and most difficult, a
> courageous drawing of conclusions, no matter how
> "unthinkable" or outrageous they may appear.
>
> In the months since the book was published, we
> have been swamped with news from the 9/11
> Commission concerning both domestic and foreign
> intelligence which indicated a large and
> imminent attack on the United States. But the
> Commission, its members appointed by President
> Bush, is focussing on the future. According to
> Vice-Chair Lee Hamilton, "We're not interested
> in trying to assess blame..." Their goal is to
> understand what happened so as to restructure
> intelligence so that such "a breakdown" may not
> happen again. Given this limited mandate, almost
> none of the contradictions Griffin raises is
> likely to be discussed, or its ramifications
> analyzed before the case is closed.
>
> The first part of The New Pearl Harbor looks in
> detail at the timeline and events of 9/11
> itself. How is it, Griffin asks, that even the
> first airplane was not intercepted -- given
> standard procedures, operating normally many
> times a year, for off-course or otherwise
> anomalous aircraft? The FAA, NORAD, and the NMCC
> (National Military Command Center at the
> Pentagon) have a clear and working set of
> standard operating procedures which on September
> 11th, and on that day only, failed to operate.
> Griffin lays them out, along with the strange,
> and changing official excuses for their
> "failure".
>
> The story becomes even more bizarre for the
> second plane to hit the WTC. By that time, it
> was known that three planes had been hijacked,
> and were heading back eastward (the fourth plane
> was 41 minutes late in taking off, so at this
> point was not part of the story). Still there
> was no normal scrambling of protective aircraft.
> By the time of the Pentagon incident, the
> details become grotesque. It was clear to
> the entire nation, fixed to the TV, that America
> was under a coordinated attack, and that a third
> plane was headed towards Washington. Yet though
> Cheney and Rice were evacuated to the White
> House bunker, still, no protection aircraft
> scrambled, and when it finally did, was sent
> from a base far from DC, travelling at
> half-maximum speed or less, arriving too late to
> prevent the attack.
>
> With official statements compared to a detailed
> timeline of events, the most likely conclusion
> is that on that day, the air defense system was
> ordered to stand down from its normal protective
> procedures -- even after it was clear to all
> what was happening. Who could have ordered such
> a stand down?
>
> Much of the material Griffin cites has been long
> circulated on the internet. What is less
> commonly understood are the strange details of
> the WTC collapse, implausibly explained as
> "jet-fuel fire melting structural steel." The
> pattern of destruction and fall is more
> consistent with the air attacks plus controlled
> demolitions. Griffin parses the material, with
> many notes from firefighting and architectural
> sources. Times, temperatures, visual and seismic
> evidence simply do not support the melting of
> steel as the sole cause of the observed
> failures. Further, what but explosions can
> account for reports of same from survivors, and
> for powdered concrete and building parts being
> ejected horizontally three times the width of
> the buildings? Steel in both towers was broken
> at the joints, and molten steel found at
> sub-basement levels -- inconsistent with melting
> from top floor fires whose debris crushed the
> floors below. The WTC wreckage was spirited away
> as quickly as possible and no forensics
> permitted.
>
> Even more curious was the collapse of WTC
> Building 7 -- 355 feet away from the north
> tower, and further still from the south -- which
> was never hit by a plane or any significant
> amount of debris ,and sustained only small
> fires. It went down at 5:20PM, collapsing from
> the bottom (as in a typical controlled
> demolition), with none of the "official"
> explanations in play. The steel was removed
> quickly from this site as well, although having
> been evacuated, there were no survivors to be
> searched for. Relegated to a footnote is the
> fact that Marvin P. Bush, the president's
> younger brother, was a director for a security
> company involved in three of the four attacks.
> Securacom covered the WTC, United Airlines, --
> whose flights hit the WTC and crashed in
> Pennsylvania -- and Dulles Airport -- from which
> the Pentagon flight took off. What are we to
> make of testimony from WTC personnel that five
> days before 9/11, heightened security requiring
> 12-hour days and bomb-sniffing dogs was abruptly
> called off? What committee will chase that down?
>
> Griffin turns next to the strange story of the
> flight that struck the Pentagon. The physical
> evidence is simply inconsistent with the claim
> that the building was struck by a Boeing 757
> travelling at 300+ mph. The hole in the fac,ade
> is far too small to accommodate the wings and
> tail -- which were supposed to have disappeared
> within the hole. The penetration is far too
> shallow for the mass and momentum involved. Yet
> there is no scorching of the grass on the lawn
> outside. There is not the slightest sign of a
> burnt-out wreck in any photograph, nor were
> there any fuselage fragments recovered within
> the building. In the initial story, other then a
> beacon and the two black boxes -- these
> "discovered" at four the next morning -- every
> part of the plane, including the stainless steel
> engines, were melted, and vaporized.
> Nevertheless, in one version of the original
> tale, authorities were able to identify victims
> from their fingerprints. But six months later
> the story had changed and enough of the plane
> had been recovered to make possible "an almost
> complete reconstitution." The parts are
> supposedly stocked in a warehouse.
>
> According to experienced pilots, the complex
> final maneuver of the huge aircraft could not
> have been accomplished by an amateur. The choice
> of a difficult low flying attack on a side wall,
> rather than crashing more easily into the roof
> -- for maximum damage -- was most curious. The
> plane's being "lost" from all radar contact for
> 29 minutes, while flying toward Washington is
> most improbable, given the network of radar and
> other resources covering the area. These
> contradictions, along with the failure to
> scramble in the most protected area of the
> world, make the official story of the Pentagon
> attack profoundly suspicious. And though Cheney
> and Rice were safely stowed in the White House
> bunker, and a plane was known to be heading in
> its direction, the Pentagon was never evacuated.
>
> The last of the airplanes to go down was UA
> Flight 93, scene of the now famous passenger
> revolt: "Let's roll!" Here, the question is no
> longer "Why were the planes not shot down?" but
> rather "Why might it be the case that this one
> was?" CBS reported two F16s tailing the flight.
> Phone calls made from the plane during its last
> minutes reported possible success in overcoming
> the hijackers. One call reported, "I think
> they're going to do it. They're forcing their
> way into the cockpit...They're doing it! They're
> doing it! They're doing it!" Next, screaming in
> the background, followed by a "whooshing sound,
> a sound like wind." Then contact lost. The
> scenario is consistent with a plane being shot
> down. A half-ton piece of engine was found over
> a mile from the fuselage -- a likely target for
> a heat-seeking missile. Burning debris and human
> body parts were reported eight miles away, and
> confetti-like debris rained down minutes
> afterwards. One theory that would explain these
> departures from the official story is that
> Flight 93, unexpectedly late for departure, and
> unexpectedly rescued by its passengers, was
> destroyed by a competent military, in this case
> ordered to complete a bungled task. The risk of
> people left alive to be questioned may have been
> too great.
>
> Griffin goes on to examine material that has
> been more generally covered -- at least in the
> left press and on many websites: the President's
> odd behavior on 9/11 given the timeline, and the
> evolving stories from the White House Press
> Office. He looks at the larger context of the
> event: the probable knowledge of possible
> attacks; the obstruction of investigations
> before and afterwards; the "anti-hunt" for bin
> Laden and al-Queda; the connections between Bush
> and the Saudi royal family; the flying of bin
> Ladens out of the country when no other aircraft
> was allowed to fly. We are familiar with much of
> this, though the details and citations are
> helpful. By now we are familiar, too, with the
> neo-con plans, pre-9/11, for projecting US power
> across the middle east and throughout central
> Asia. Asking the normal forensic question "Who
> benefits?", we can see that the Project For A
> New American Century" (2000) was well served by
> the "new Pearl Harbor" it called for.
>
> After all the suspicious incongruities
> collected, we are left with two huge problems.
> Griffin leads us through them in a chapter
> entitled "Is Complicity by US Officials the Best
> Explanation for 9/11?":
>
> 1.Beyond showing that official explanations are
> implausible or impossible, how shall we
> construct a meaningful, alternative narrative
> which will contain and explain the known facts?
> For example, if it was not a Boeing 757 which
> crashed into the Pentagon, but a smaller
> military missile, where did the 757 go, and what
> happened to its passengers?
>
> 2. Most difficult of all, perhaps, is the
> question of how the administration -- if indeed
> it was complicit in 9/11 at some or several
> levels -- could be so incompetent at scripting a
> plausible story. Why not punish a few scapegoats
> in the intelligence community, instead of
> promoting those responsible for "lapses"? Why
> the needless, obvious lies, and continuingly
> changing statements? Why such massiveness to the
> conspiracy, requiring silence from many
> individuals in the White House, Justice
> Department, FBI, CIA, NSA, and the Pentagon, as
> well as in civilian security operations? Why
> risk demolition of buildings beyond the flight
> attacks? Why bring down WTC 7? Why order
> interceptor planes to stand down, and deny SOP
> readiness? Why have the president play unconcern
> for half an hour? So as not to upset
> second-graders? Why claim that human flesh could
> withstand temperatures which would vaporize
> stainless steel? There are better minds than
> Bush's who have been concocting covert
> operations for many years. Where were they? Or
> was it just this confounding of critics that was
> intended?
>
> My one quibble with Griffin's most valuable
> compendium of unanswered questions is that the
> author nowhere examines and brings his judgement
> to bear on the many stories concerning Israeli
> and Mossad participation in the 9/11 events. But
> the book is a work-in-progress, necessarily
> incomplete.
>
> Griffin can't put the pieces together. In this,
> he is honest, and calls on us to be the same.
> All he can do is call for more authentic
> investigations -- not the cover-ups currently
> underway -- to confront these crucial issues.
> And this, too, we must do.
>
> Marc Estrin can be reached at:
> mestrin1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> Weekend Edition Features for May 22 / 23, 2004
>
>
>
>
> --
> *** FULL-SPECTRUM FIGHTBACK! *********************************
> *  No Pasaran!   Support the:                                *
> *     Venezuelan, Cuban, Colombian (& other) Revolutions:    *
> *  For a Federation of Socialist Republics of the Americas!  *
> *  U.N.O.:  Abolish the Security Council;                    *
> *              \\\ All Power to the General Assembly!///     *
> *  Smash the IMF, World Bank, WTO, Wall St. & City of London!*
> *  Defeat U.S./NATO Imperialism:                             *
> *                    Support national liberation struggles;  *
> *                    in the Mid-East, Africa & elsewhere!    *
> *   World-Wide General & Rotating National Strikes.          *
> *   Rotating Student & Worker Walkouts.                      *
> *   [Your Ideas Here!]                                       *
>
>