|
"What Did Bush Know?"
:: Reply to ZNet Commentary of May 22, 2002 ::
by John McMurtry
This article
is a response to Michael Albert’s ZNet Commentary ‘What Did
Bush Know, When?’ at
http://www.zmag.org/content/TerrorWar/albertbushknow.cfm
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Michael Albert joins the
corporate media, the Republican Party and most of the
Washington establishment in his blanket abuse of forensic
questions on 9-11. The argument that relevant decision
setters in the Bush Jr. executive covertly allowed the
pathway of 9-11 to go ahead to serve this regime's massive
interests in its occurrence is not seriously considered. It
is to denounced by "the left" as well as the right.
So far this group-think campaign to stop
unpatriotic questions on 9-11 has broadly succeeded. The most telling
documented evidence has been altogether ignored, and not a jot of
counter-evidence has been thought necessary to disconfirm the
foreknowledge hypothesis. Instead we are once more treated to name-calling
with no refutive substance. But we should at least pause on the documented
facts which have been repressed before shouting them down. They include
the prior resignation and subsequent death of the F.B.I. Director of
Anti-Terrorism, John O'Neill, who was prevented from investigation of
Saudi involvement prior to 9-11. They also include the September 4-11
visit to Washington of C.I.A.-allied Pakistan's chief of national
intelligence, Lt. General Mahmoud Ahmad of the I.S.I., who helped to
organize Al Qaeda and who wired $100,000 to the leader of the 9-11
hijackers, Mohammed Atta, a few weeks earlier. Then there is the final
tell-tale fact of a stand-down of standard intercept routines on the
hijacked jumbo jets which flew around the U.S. airforce's backyard for up
to two hours with no attempt to intervene until after the World Trade
Centre buildings and the Pentagon had been dive-bombed.
Shocking attacks on symbols of American power
as a pretext for aggressive war is, in fact, an old and familiar pattern
of the American corporate state. Even the sacrifice of thousands of
ordinary Americans is not new, although so many people have never died so
very fast. This scale of the 9-11 massacre is what makes most people doubt
that even the ilk of Cheney, Rumsfield and Bush Jr. could be complicit in
such a crime. There is a point to be made here. It is indeed likely that
the deaths were not anticipated because of the unexpected tidal downsweep
of igniting jet fuel through the Twin Tower elevator shafts. Even the most
experienced New York firefighters were astonished by the building
collapses that thus occurred.
Yet the nearly 3000 deaths, including many
foreign citizens, was far fewer than the number of stand-by civilians
killed by the war criminal U.S. carpet-bombing of Afghanistan afterwards,
none of which touched bin Laden. But that was not really the point. Bin
Laden has been running around untouched under U.S. security surveillance
for years with reported face-to-face meetings with U.S. intelligence
operatives prior to 9-11. The basic point is that the U.S. "secret
government" (Bill Moyers' phrase) has a very long record of contriving
attacks on its symbols of power as a pretext for the declaration of wars,
with an attendant corporate media frenzy focussing all public attention on
the Enemy to justify the next transnational mass murder. This pattern is
as old as the U.S. corporate state - from the sinking of the battleship
Maine to start the Spanish-American War in 1898, through the fabricated
attack on the U.S. battleship Maddox in the Gulf of Tonkin in August 1964
along with the fabricated attack by Egypt on the client-state Israel in
1967, to a reiteration of the same general pattern in setting up the War
Against Iraq from 1991 on - a war that has murdered by bombing and embargo
intent an average of 5000 Iraqui children every month since. This
executive branch war is still in motion. It started and it continues by
the same overall pattern as 9-11. In the case of Iraq, the war was
precipitated by the green light given by the U.S. Ambassador, April
Glaspie, who said that the U.S. was "neutral" regarding the climaxing
dispute over oilfields between Iraq and Kuwait just before Saddam ordered
troops into Kuwait. "Saddam fell into the trap" were the insider words of
Jordan's foreign minister after the event.
Throughout there is one constant to this long
record of hoodwinking the American public into bankrolling ever rising
military expenditures and periodic wars for corporate treasure. This
decision structure ruled before and through 9-11, and has escalated after
it - to fabricate or construct shocking attacks on U.S. symbols of power
to provide the pretext and the public rage to launch wars of aggression
against convenient and weaker enemies by which very major and many-levelled
gains are achieved for the U.S. corporate-military complex.
Since 9-11, everything has become possible.
First of all, the world-wide movement against U.S. corporate state
globalization can be and has been squashed by calling everything that
moves out of line a "terrorist threat", especially the increasing hundreds
of thousands of demonstrators on the streets before 9-11. At the same
time, Bush Jr.'s fraudulent election and presidential incapacity can be
mythically transformed into the noble cause of "The U.S. President at
War" of whom no criticism is acceptable.
What, we might ask, would have happened with
the Florida recount without 9-11? Now everything is vindicated in the
past as well as the future. Any corporate-state action anywhere in the
world is justifiable. The "war without end" has no limit. And so the
Cheney-Rumsfield wet dream has been on automatic pilot for almost a year,
with a unilateral war on Iraq promised as soon as Afghanistan is finished,
perhaps before. What is next?
Consider this earlier Republican version of
9-11. "Operation Northlands" was a unanimous Joint Chiefs of Staff plan to
"contrive" the occurrence of an atrocity against U.S. citizens by Castro's
Cuba to justify a full-out U.S. invasion. Its scenarios included planting
bombs and shooting down a U.S. passenger plane.
There are many variations on this structure of
geostrategic thinking. I analyse this regulating pattern in my new book,
Value Wars, from Pluto Press. As Nazi state minister, Herman Goering,
explained the master logos of pretext. "It is easy. All you have to do is
tell the people they are being attacked, and denounce the opposition for
lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger." Above all,
denounce those who recognize this pattern itself.
Unfortunately, Michael Albert's article, "What
Did Bush Know?" conforms to the very geo-strategic pattern. He attacks
those who ask questions about the Bush administration's foreknowledge of
9-11, and he ignores all the vast gains of the event for the Bush faction
- a justifying pretext for draconian curtailment of civil rights in
America, a war on the widely starving people of Afghanistan to control
Central Asian oil routes and geostrategic sites, a new zero tolerance for
"terror threatening" street demonstrations against the corporate
globalization agenda which had attained uncontrollable international
dimensions prior to 9-11, vast new pork-barrel handouts to the
military-corporate apparatus at all levels, and a public relations
field-day to juice up a corporate president who was a public joke before
9-11's turning point of global power direction.
Interestingly, much the same lid as we have
seen since 9-11 was put on inquiries and suspicions of who was behind "the
Reichstag fire" of February 27, 1933 in Germany , a dramatic destruction
of the symbolic federal parliament which gave Hitler's Nazis their pretext
for sweeping new powers and transnational military aggression which
eventually led to the Second World War. German leftists, however, were too
busy scrambling to avoid the blame falling on them and displacing
political fault onto the Social Democrats for ignoring "the real
issues".The Social Democrats and the rest of the left, meanwhile, remained
silenced enough for the fabricated "mortal strike against the German
people" to succeed in mobilizing the enraged public into acceptance of a
fascist state. The rest is history.
Although the gains of 9-11 are greater for the
axes of U.S. corporate and executive power than was won by the Reichstag
Fire for the Nazis, Albert and others astonishingly decouple the issue of
foreknowledge of 9-11 from the interests it served and the terrible
violations of innocent peoples' lives it has justified. Instead, he
inverts these very consequences into the reason to stop the questions! The
effects of bombing Afghanistan, Bush's "globalization policies", and his
"repressive civil legislation"are disconnected from their enabling
antecedent of 9-11, and then turned against investigating those who alone
benefited from its occurrence.
Here the hallmark of any rule by ignorance and
fear - the delinkage of effects from causes - is internalized by "the
left" itself. Its public voices too demand, as Albert, Solomon and others
do, that "the left" ignore the decision sequence preceding the linchpin
event itself!
In Albert's case, the reasoning is especially
bizarre. He implies we should not ask hard questions about the
self-serving negligence of the Bush executive for the 9-11 attack because
liberals are "hypocrites" and liberals are asking these questions. The
argument is as stunningly sectarian as it is illogical, but endemic to the
post-9-11 American culture.
The group-think complicity in the connected
and documented web of decisions leading through 9-11 to our sorry state
today may eventually unravel, but not as long as the deep questions and
the repressed facts are not discussed.
Read Michael Albert’s reply
to John McMurtry ‘Reply to John McMurtry, PhD, FRSC’, at
http://www.zmag.org/content/TerrorWar/albertmcmurty.cfm
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Read Nafeez Mosaddeq
Ahmed’s comprehensive rebuttal of ZNet’s entire new section ‘Conspiracy
Theory?’ at ‘9/11 “Conspiracies” and the Defactualisation of Analysis’,
http://www.mediamonitors.net/mosaddeq37.html
John McMurtry is Professor of
Philosophy at the University of Guelph, Ontario and a Fellow
at the Royal Society of Canada. He was also Chair of
Jurists, War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity Tribunal at
the Alternative World Summit in Toronto, 1989. McMurtry's
professional work has been published in over 150 books and
journals, ranging from Inquiry, the Monist, the Canadian
Journal of Philosophy, Praxis International, and the
Encyclopedia of Ethics to the Atlantic Monthly, the Guardian
Weekly and the Norton Anthology of Prose.
This article, "Decoding 9-11" is adapted from the Preface of
John McMurtry’s forthcoming book "VALUE WARS: THE GLOBAL
MARKET VERSUS THE LIFE ECONOMY" to be released this August
(London: Pluto Press, 2002).
McMurtry reads from this article with some additional
commentary in an online video by Snowshoe Documentary Films,
at
http://www.snowshoefilms.com/index.html.
Buy
the related book (s) now:
- Source:
-
by the same author:
-
|