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

["tony black" <tal@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Chris,

..It's been a while since I was last treated to a helping of Grok's
delicious scorn....Always brings a smile..

As for the Counterpunch review, it (though perhaps not the book) failed to
mention the conspicuously abrupt cessation of all investigation of the
suspicious stock market transactions that were purported to have taken place
just prior to the attacks (investigations that apparently were beginning to
implicate several high placed personnel in the US intelligence
establishment)...Just remember how fervent was the press coverage of just
this one 'lead' alone in the first follow-up weeks...Then..poof!...a little
magic.. and it's all gone. No more questions. No reasons given. None
expected.

The same goes for the subsequent anthrax scare...the anthrax, of course,
that was later proven to have come from government labs. Once again, the
vast implications all just sloughed off by the media...Three cheers for the
free press!...

Tony


----- Original Message -----
From: "Christopher Black" <bar@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <a-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; <indict-nato@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "David
Jacobs" <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "David Gespass" <thepasss@xxxxxxx>; "Eric
Sirotkin" <sirotkin@xxxxxxx>; "Erlinder, Peter" <perlinder@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>;
"Ian Head" <accounting@xxxxxxx>; "Juan Jose Landinez Landinez"
<jilanda@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "Marjorie Cohn" <libertad48@xxxxxxxxxx>; "Sam
Boskey" <sboskey@xxxxxxxxx>; "Steven Goldberg"
<goldberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "Ted Dooley" <614grand@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>;
"Thomas H. Nelson" <nelson@xxxxxxxxx>; <minja@xxxxxxxx>; "Mick Collins"
<cirqueminime@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2004 12:22 PM
Subject: [A-List] Fw: Counterpunch: A Review of "The New Pearl Harbor"


>
> ----- 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!]                                       *
> >
> >
>
>
>
>