(thanks to Bob Djurdjevic of TIM for the reference)

"This could open a real war,"

Dr. Ely Karmon, senior research scholar at the International Police Institute on Counter-terrorism, near Tel Aviv, commenting on the potential effects of the U.S. reaction to the incidents at the WTC and the Pentagon

Readers will notice that we didn't begin todays's special issue on yesterday's remarkable events with "America is attacked."  America wasn't attacked.  America isn't the World Trade Center, nor is it the Pentagon.  At least those things don't represent our America, nor should they for our readers.

The media spin masters would have us think that those things represent America, only to encourage a misuse of our Patriotic sentiments...a misuse which has been going on for far too long and which is bound, unfortunately, only to continue as a result of yesterday's intentional plane crashes.

In the following Special Bulletin we intend to present some of our own views and reprint some very interesting articles from around the world. Numerous are the thoughts that come to mind as a result of incidents like these.  Let's try to take just a few in a logical order.

Some thoughts on Sanity

Ours is an age of insanity.  What's black passes for white, what's bad passes for good, and what's ugly passes for beautiful.  So what we should keep in mind as we attempt to analyze a few of the elements of today's events is that insanity is the norm, and sanity is the exception to the rule.  No possibility is too outlandish in our day and age, no silliness beyond that which can and should be expected.

The first insanity is that people should live and work in buildings that are 1500 feet high.  And an insanity that follows close on the heels of that one is that our degree of adjustment to that first insanity is such that instinctively our hearts are broken, our ire is provoked, and our sense of reality is replaced with a sensation of the surreal when we witness and then contemplate the complete destruction of a 110 story skyscraper.

If we lived in a sane world, the thought that 12 million people would choose to live and work on an 11 mile by 1 mile Island, piled on top of each other 1500 feet into the air, just to keep the world's financial fiction spinning and steaming and churning, just to keep the pockets of the relatively very few wealthy stuffed ever more and more to capacity while the rest of the world's men and women remain enslaved as wage-earners and deprived of the liberty of property ownership...that thought would be surreal.  And a visit to Manhattan by a man who was familiar with the countryside and who knew the land and who was intimately acquainted with God's creation because he received his sustenance from the land and not from a supermarket or a vending machine...that Manhattan visit would throw him into a heart-breaking, anger-producing, surreal funk from which he could recover only by an escape back to the land.

If we lived in a sane world, the thought that thousands of people stuffed into a 1500 foot tower controlled or managed or micromanaged the fictional (and yet all-too-real in the destructive and oppressive sense) financial transactions of millions upon millions of people, who never set foot on Manhattan Island let alone visit the Tower...that thought would be mystifying, mind-blowing, and dis-orienting to the common man, much as today's events were so for so many "viewers" and "listeners."

Unfortunately, in our world all these things are normal and what sends us into shock is the disruption of these silly activities and the collapse of this crazy icon of modernity.  But in a sane world, assuming the tragic issue of the loss of many innocent lives could be set aside for just a moment...in a sane world, the elimination of most of the center of the world's usurious financial system would and should bring a breath of fresh air, a sigh of relief, and a hope for a better day.

But, obviously, in this, our insane world, none of those things are to be, at least not in the immediate future.  Most certainly, none of them will come to pass if we allow ourselves to be mesmerized by the constant bleating of the spin doctors  and mind-control experts on the evening news who will sigh and sympathize with all those who are suffering emotional shock over the destruction of, as dear Peter Jennings put it several times last night, the "icon of American Capitalism."  As long as we allow our natural emotions of sympathy for the victims of the airplane crashes, a distinct and separate issue, to be mixed up with notions of defending "our way of life," we will remain unable to objectively fix what it is that is wrong with our insane world.

One thing's for sure.  What's essentially (as opposed to incidentally) wrong with our insane world is not the crashing of airplanes into the World Trade Center.  That is a symptom.  The disease is far worse.  From the perspective of the natural law, the domination of the world by money is criminal and illicit.  And the concentration of the world's real wealth (land, machines, factories and other means of production) into the hands of a few such that most are deprived of any substantial property ownership, is as criminal and as illicit.  These things are illicit not because we all have a right to satiate ourselves with material goods, but because a sufficiency of material goods is essential, for all but the saints, in the exercise of virtue, and that sufficiency of goods assumes that the goods are sufficient enough to allow a man and his family a degree of independence from the powers-that-be...such that he can dispose of his property in accord with the laws of God and not the laws of the world.

From the perspective of the Divine Law, the disease can be illustrated in the following anecdote:

When Napoleon III of France in 1856 was discussing his numerous religious initiatives with Cardinal Pie of Poitiers, the then-Bishop chided him for failing to reform the French constitution such that Catholicism was recognized as the religion of the State, instead of leaving it scandalously at the same level as the other false religions.  The Emperor replied to His Excellency, "But surely you do not believe that such a state of things is suitable for the present day, and that the time has come to establish this religious rule that you ask of me?"  The Cardinal merely replied, that from a political standpoint he was not competent to argue with such a great statesman (!) as the emperor, but as a Bishop he had simply this to say: "If the time has not yet come for Our Lord to reign, well! the time has not yet come for governments to last."

Well, if the time has not come for Our Lord to reign in this country and this world, then the time has not come for this country and this world to last.

Some thoughts about Motivation

Another aspect of the disease can be illustrated by a consideration of what may have motivated the deliberate destruction of the WTC and the attempted destruction of the Pentagon.  If we believe what we are made to believe by our media masters, then we will assume that the airplane crashes were caused by crazed Muslims attempting to strike back at the "Great Satan" or make a profound statement about the plight of the world's Arabs as illustrated in the cases of Iraq and Palestine.  Let's take this supposition for granted for a moment, and let's also leave aside for the moment the question of the morality of the actions carried out and the righteousness or lack thereof of those who carried them out.  For those questions are again questions of symptoms.  They are not questions of diseases.  The disease is, even from this perspective, far more profound.

If we lived in a sane world, and bound ourselves by our own rules of logic, we would consider very seriously the question of whether those who caused these accidents are "sane" or "insane," whether these hypothetical "crazy Muslims" are really "crazy Muslims" and not "justifiably angry Arabs."  If on the one hand we conclude that "anyone who would do such an unspeakable thing must be insane," then our sentiments should be confined to profound sadness and sympathy for those who were killed or injured.  We should not be filled with rage and demand the nuclear obliteration of several small Arab states.  After all, following the logic of the "criminally insane" thesis, the poor men didn't really know what they were doing.  By all means arrest them, even execute them in order to prevent them from doing further harm. But they really didn't "mean it" the way a sane person can "mean it," so there's no point in getting so worked up.  After all, annually we turn hundreds of criminals over to social services, or turn them loose on the streets, because, after all, they didn't really intend to do any harm. And they can be rehabilitated.   Thus should be our thought process.  But even as we label these unfortunate maniacs "insane," the establishment gears up the War Machine and begins to thirst for blood.

So there must be something else going on.  Let's look at the other perspective.  Surely it's a case of us working ourselves into a frenzy because these madmen (er, gentlemen) knew very well what they were doing, and thus will be made to account for every single life that was lost as a result of their behavior.  Because they were fully conscious, and knew exactly what they were doing, it is right and just that we bring them and their supporters to task for this unspeakable series of actions. Premeditated, intentional crimes are punished and the criminals will be brought to justice!

But this second alternative - the perpetrators knew what they were doing and were not "out of their minds" - raises a number of questions.  If those who will be held accountable (!) (and we assume that because of the cries to hold them accountable that they are therefore being given the benefit of the doubt as to sanity, forethought, intention...etc.) knew exactly what they were doing, why do we not stop to ask ourselves how it is that a sane human being or group of human beings could bring themselves to sacrifice their own lives, and hundreds of other innocent lives, merely to create a bit of havoc?  Why do we not seriously consider what it is that would drive them to orchestrate such a series of cataclysmic events if we are giving them the benefit of being considered sane, reflective, intelligent individuals?

Because the consequences of such a consideration are unacceptable.

Some thoughts on the Consequences of Objectivity

The first and most abstract consequence of such a consideration would lead us to utterly abandon Positivism in all its forms.  Anti-terrorism would not be a question of a better luggage x-ray machine, but rather a question of how to not provoke potential terrorists, or, even better, how to declare war on Islam and beat it back into Arabia and Mongolia, leaving it with a sore and painful reminder of what happens when idolaters take on the Christian West, or finally, better still, how to declare war on Islam and wage at the same time a war of independence on behalf of the U.S. government and the world financial system against international Judeo-Masonry.  But these thoughts assume that we are ready to consider human actions and human events as the outcome of intentional and deliberate thoughts, which thoughts are the outcome of considered and firmly-held beliefs.  But we are not currently capable of considering things from this standpoint.  Terrorism is simply "irrational," so we will either irrationally post National Guardsmen in the streets of Washington D.C., in anticipation of a terrorist who will drive up to the White House in a taxi, or better yet bomb someone into oblivion, regardless of how many civilians are killed and regardless of how much such an action will serve to increase the motivation, determination, and ire of the next terrorist.

No, that actions procede from thoughts which proceed from beliefs is not a doctrine that is consistent with the modern and American ideology.  And thus any attempt to discover, in a coherent and philosophically consistent creed, the principles which should guide our response, and the principles which would equip us to rationally interpret yesterday's events, will be impossible.  Any possibility of a rational response to the events of yesterday is automatically ruled out.  If we get one, it will be a coincidence, in spite of our ideology, not because of it.

Secondly, and pulling the focus in a bit more narrow, to consider that the Arabs might have something to be upset about is to give undue consideration to a group that does not deserve it.  An enraged spouse can slice her husband's appendage off and be considered "justifiably angry;" a distraught mother can drown her infant children in a bathtub and be considered "understandably traumatized;" crazed blacks can beat Reginald Denny over the head with a brick in Los Angeles in 1992 because they are experiencing "righteous anger" as a result of years of oppression;  gleeful members of the Israeli Defense Forces can drive bulldozers through Palestinians' homes because they are taking "reasonable defensive measures" and are "fairly reclaiming land given them by Yahweh;" ruthless blacks can burn, pillage, and loot Cincinnati, and in response the Mayor can call a "task force" which will redress the "legitimate grievances" of the rioters regardless of whom they might have killed or what they might have destroyed; and the ANC's Tribunal of Truth and Reconciliation can grant unconditional amnesty to four blacks who were convicted of the 1993 stabbing and stoning of Amy Biehl, an American high-school exchange student in South Africa, because their crimes were deemed "political, not criminal...under the Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act."  But when an organization "lashes out" at two of the symbols of American military and financial might in what is obviously a desperate attempt to avenge any number of injustices, peaceniks from left and right mutate into Hawks and begin crowing for retaliation against it-doesn't-matter-whom, who can be found at we-don't-know-where.

Retaliation, rather than introspection, is the order of the day, for two reasons:  1) the individuals who arranged the airliner crashes were ostensibly neither themselves, nor were they acting on behalf of groups of, homosexuals, lesbians, Jews, politically acceptable ethnic minorities, or other "victim" groups who are entitled to sympathy and understanding when years of "oppression" drive them to lash out, even in otherwise totally unacceptable, uncivilized, and completely unjustifiable ways; and, 2) the actions taken by the individuals or groups in question did not further an attack on Christian civilization, and therefore the groups and/or actions are not entitled to any special sympathy, understanding, or mitigating or extenuating thoughts or circumstances.  Rather, two of the most concentrated centers of world anti-Christian activity and ideology were destroyed or damaged - thus, there can be no question of balance, thoughtfulness, thoroughness, or, God forbid, mercy for those who orchestrated these events.

Further consequences of such an examination into the motivation of the attack, again following the thought that we should believe what we are told or what is implied thus far about who the perpetrators are (crazed Muslims or angry Arabs), would probably reveal that the United States can by no means claim to be surprised, shocked, caught off-guard, or mystified by yesterday's events.  If it was the Arabs, is it any surprise that they are begging the god they worship to reign death and destruction down upon their enemy and their enemy's much bigger and more powerful puppet state?  The killed or injured workers who occupied the office spaces in the Pentagon and the WTC, and the brave men and women who were killed or injured attempting to save some of the early victims, are indeed collateral casualties, not direct and intended victims.  The intended victims were the financial and military power of a nation that, should introspection ever become the order of the day, cannot claim ignorance nor innocence of having earned the hatred and resentment of the non-Western European world.

The sentiment in the Arab world was clear BEFORE the incidents at the WTC and the Pentagon.  The following abridged article which ran in the only English paper in Saudi Arabia (see http://www.arabnews.com/Article.asp?ID=5308) is instructive:

Quote

JEDDAH, 11 September — Frustration is growing in Saudi Arabia with Washington's blind support for Israel, and the Saudi press yesterday blasted the administration of President George Bush for failing to take action to stop the Israeli attacks against the Palestinians...

Last week Foreign Minister Prince Saud Al-Faisal said during a regional tour that Arab patience was wearing thin and urged Washington to shoulder its responsibilities to curb Israeli “aggression” against the Palestinians.

“Enough is enough,” Prince Saud told reporters in Amman after delivering a message from Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Fahd to Jordan's King Abdallah II on ways to restore calm in the region and consolidate Arab unity against Israel.

The Saudi press is unanimous in its condemnation of the American position.

“Washington does not appear to be sufficiently concerned by the deteriorating situation, which suggests that it is giving its blessing to Israel's increasingly aggressive behavior,” Al-Jazirah newspaper said in an editorial.

The paper said Washington's silence was no longer acceptable, “unless the US approves of the collective killings of Palestinians.”

Al-Riyadh daily warned the United States and the West of the negative consequences of their support for “Zionists”.

“America and the West provide material, political and military support to the Zionists, because they believe there is no threat to their interests in the Arab world,” the paper said in a front-page editorial. But it warned that “latent Arab forces observing the situation” might react in an unpredictable way if inaction persisted at the official level...

Unquote

And for a glimpse of Arab sentiment after the fact, those who have nothing to lose by speaking freely responded to yesterday's events with an equal degree of candor, which doubtless some readers will find shocking from an 11 September AFP, Cairo, wire story):

Quote

Egyptian students, taxi drivers and shopkeepers crowded round television sets stacked up in electrical store windows in downtown Cairo Tuesday evening, celebrating a string of elaborate attacks on New York and Washington.

"Bullseye," commented two taxi drivers as they watched footage of the twin towers of the World Trade Center in New York shrouded in plumes of smoke after two presumably hijacked planes slammed into them earlier in the day.

Another Egyptian man, Gawish Abdel Karim, told AFP he was pleased with the wave of violence in which another plane crashed into the Pentagon in Washington, the heart of the US defense establishment.

"Nice work," said Abdel Karim, who drives a car for an Asian embassy.

"The Americans have forgotten that God exists. They have us by the throat and now they find themselves in a science fiction film scenario, but this time Rambo's not there to save the White House."

Anti-US sentiment has mushroomed on the streets of Egypt and other Arab countries over its widely-perceived support for Israel over the Palestinians in the past 11 months of violence in the Middle East...

Abdel Karim hailed the attacks as "the best thing that's happened since the October War," referring to the October 1973 Arab-Israeli war when Egyptian forces made a surprise attack on the Israeli army across the Suez Canal... ...people on the streets do not necessarily see themselves as US allies.

"The Americans are cowards. They use other countries to hit us. They don't have the courage to meet us face to face," said Khalil Matar, 43, who works in a state-run soap factory. "The myth of the indestructible United States has gone up in smoke."

Polytechnic student Amira Ryad also vented her anger.

"We saw the tower crash down," she said, referring to one of the two towers of the World Trade Center, both of which were razed by the attack.

"I only wish (US President) George Bush and his dear little baby (Israeli Prime Minister Ariel) Sharon had been buried in there too," she added.

Unquote

Well, in response to the question posed by the Saudi paper, there's no reason to assume that the U.S. disapproves of the collective killings of the Palestinians.  In light of what has transpired in Palestine AT LEAST over the past 11 months, if not since 1967 or even since 1948, can it really be a surprise that people, who are driven to a state of desperation, act in desperate ways?  This is not to condone the act, nor is it even to analyze the act.  It is merely to point out that in the Arab-Israeli conflict we are dealing, to look for instance at the Arab side, with human nature; a human nature which first of all does have a right to existence; a human nature which furthermore does have a right to the secure possession of land, homes, food, and freedom of movement; a human nature which could understandably, even if not "justifiably," be driven to the point of total despair as a result of the inaction of the international community - in spite of that community's constant refrain of politically correct and pious platitudes about tolerance and sensitivity; this human nature furthermore that is a nature which is not pacified by the Grace of Baptism and the consequent virtue of charity and enlightening of the intellect; this human nature that is, moreover, hardened and confirmed in its baser instincts by the doctrines of a false religion which justify the taking of collateral innocent life should doing so serve a higher purpose.  So if we ever get to the point in this country where we would like to reform our foreign policy, and implement some kind of procedure which might induce us to examine the FACTS of recent history and consider the implications of those facts, rather than continue merely with the very intelligent and profound "business as usual" (which translates into "behave the way we want you to or you will be bombed"), we might arrive at a degree of political wisdom which would allow us to see yesterday's events as unfortunate, but not unexpected; saddening, but not shocking; and demanding of introspection and a just response, but not requiring mindless retaliation.

On this general head a well-done piece by Bob Djurdjevic, who runs Truth in Media out of Arizona, and is one of the world's most informed journalists on the true situation in the Balkans, makes the point that it is not just the Arabs who resent U.S. meddling in the affairs of otherwise sovereign and independent countries (excerpts from his Sept. 11th piece at www.truthinmedia.org):

Quote

...When the "world's only superpower" and its allies bombed and killed thousands of innocent civilians in Iraq and Serbia, Americans were told it was just "collateral damage."  After all, we, the "champions of democracy and the free world," were only fighting the murderous regimes of Saddam Hussein and Slobodan Milosevic.  Some civilian casualties were "regrettable, but unavoidable," the Pentagon, NATO or State Dept. spokesmen told us.

Now the tables have turned.  Terrorism begets terrorism.  Unnamed terrorists, presumed to be "Islamic fundamentalists," have now killed thousands of innocent Americans while fighting, what they think are, the murderous regimes of Bill Clinton and George W. Bush.  Now Americans know firsthand some of the terror the Baghdad or Belgrade residents felt when NATO bombers unloaded their deadly cargo on them.  The only thing missing is the terrorists' spokesmen telling us now that "it was just "collateral damage;" that "some civilian casualties were regrettable, but unavoidable."

What we did to Iraq and to Serbia was a case of state terrorism.  What unnamed terrorists did to us today was retaliation to state terrorism. "Collateral damage" has come home to roost.  "What goes around, comes around."  "He who plays with fire, gets burned by fire"...

So whenever you hear a politician or a media personality say that this attack was “unprovoked;” that this was a murder of innocent “men, women and children;” that it was a strike at the “American way of life” - and no doubt you'll see and hear much of that in the next hours and days - try a role reversal.  Imagine that you're listening to an Iraqi or a Serb politician using those words in reference to victims of American bombs.  And then you' ll get a fuller picture of what transpired today.

Meanwhile, may God have mercy upon the souls of all innocent people who died today as "collateral damage" of the Clinton/Bush arrogant foreign policy. The Washington-led New World Order has now come home to roost.  For, "all who draw the sword will die by the sword."

Unquote

Some thoughts about Our Way of Life

It's amazing to note just how fast any cataclysmic event can turn into a very impressive and polished ratings grab for the big networks.  Slick digital images, fluttering electronic Old Glories, and sharp beveled texts highlighting the "Attack on America" are produced by the mind-control mucky-mucks at Crap Broadcasting System, Nothing But Crap, and Agency Broadcasting Crap literally within minutes of the occurrence of any event - no matter how gut-wrenching - that will ensure Americans are glued to their state propaganda boxes around the clock.

Even more noteworthy, however, is that the media machine instantly - INSTANTLY - went into overdrive calling yesterday's events an "Attack on America."   It was universally declared that the entire country was under siege because three planes crashed into the WTC and the Pentagon.  There were no airborne troops descending on major cities, no tanks rolling in from Mexico, no missiles flying toward key strategic sites, no Soviet ships off the East Coast lobbing shells into the Carolinas, and no strategic bombers strafing Seattle or San Francisco.  The commandeered jet liners didn't even strike Detroit, Hollywood, Disneyland, or the Levi's or Coca Cola factories. And yet within minutes this was an attack on America and a grave threat to our way of life.

While their can be no doubt that the loss of life at both crash sites is regrettable and of particular gravity are the deaths of the brave men and women killed in action trying to rescue the early victims, the best way for most of the rest of America to preserve its way of life would be to turn off the television.  Then throw IT out the 110th flood of the nearest skyscraper.

For the television and those that control what it displays are more threatening that 100 jetliners bound for American cities.  And that on two levels.

First, it is unnatural for all of us, this writer included, to be so intrigued by tragedy, death, disaster and mayhem.  Or perhaps it is too natural...the way drinking and whoring are in a sense "natural" to men.  If society exists to help man better himself (granting a true standard of betterment), as Aristotle and St. Thomas have it, then its purpose is not served if one of the pillars of American family life - the TV - serves only to enhance and encourage a tendency latent in the deep recesses of human nature which is less than commendable.

Turn off the TV and go outside.  Unless you live in Manhattan, the sky is clear, the birds are chirping, there is a nice breeze, and God is still Good and life is still sane.  Being glued to the TV, as unhealthy as it is in routine circumstances, is positively psychologically disturbing and damaging during events like these.  God has built into human nature a certain ability to adapt to circumstances and accept His Designs, no matter how distasteful they seem in the abstract.  Those poor souls who were trapped in the upper floors of the WTC before the collapse of its towers went through a doubtless horrifying few moments, but it's over, Deo Gratias, and those whom Providence took to their Eternal rest or torment are there now.  Can there be anything at all positive about forcing 250 million Americans to contemplate the thought of, "How would I manage jumping from the 110th floor if I were in that circumstance?"  Can there be any value in having that horrific possibility ever before you, in both waking and sleeping moments, as a result of the constant, in-your-face barrage of coverage provided by CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, MSNBC, CNBC, and more (as if one isn't enough)?  That, truly, is a thought better answered with "I'll cross that bridge when I come to it."  Ever notice how cutting your finger is far less psychologically troubling when it happens than when you contemplate the thought of it?  The same applies, only to a far greater degree, to these catastrophic incidents. There is something warped about 24hr coverage of these disasters.  Something that gives people with a shred of conscience a tinge of guilt - like being a little too interested in the carnage on the roadside when driving by an auto accident.  Victims are entitled to a degree of Privacy, and the TV makes catastrophe into a spectator sport.  No one who is honest can deny feeling a tingle of "excitement" when watching the real-life version of a cross between Towering Inferno and Earthquake - even if that excitement is a fearful and negative one.  But that excitement is best kept in check, not exploited.  Unless there's an alterior motive.

Which beings us to the second and more important threat that comes from the TV.  It's the spin. There's something essential about convincing Americans that these events are attacks on their way of life, and how better to do that than to broadcast, audibly and visually, the incessant message that "America is under attack," taking full advantage of the captive audience which is riveted to the TV screen throughout the day and into the night for probably less-than-pure motives.

It is entirely possible that an objective witness of all that transpired yesterday would conclude that someone or some group of people is very resentful and very angry about American power and might, financial and military.  As we noted, no real population centers were attacked.  A stadium full of innocent people was not incinerated, and there was no move to sink a cruise liner just for the fun of it.  Yet within minutes, this was an "Attack on America" and "our way of life."  Well let's consider for a moment what the World Trade Center has to do with the majority of Americans' way of life.  Working in a skyscraper?  A fraction of the population.  Working in Manhattan?  Another fraction.  The questions could go on - always with the same answer.  How many people didn't even know what the World Trade Center was or where it was until yesterday?  How many even now have no idea what went on in the World Trade Center on a day to day basis?

And just what is it about our way of life that stands to be eliminated in the event that the "attacks" continue?  Imagine that the Fed, its subordinate banks, the White House, the Congress, the State Dept., and the OEOB go up in flames tomorrow or next week.  Barring again the unfortunate loss of life that would accompany such events, what impact would all of it have, aside from causing a panic in America because of the impact which everyone expects but would never come barring the panic in the first place? Anyone remember when the U.S. Govt. shut down a few years back because it couldn't pay the bills?  Didn't make an ounce of difference to anyone, expect for those who were lucky enough to get a day off out of it.

No, the "threat to our way of life" is either a threat to Capitalism or a complete - but emotionally convincing and well-fabricated - farce.  Granted, if there were reason to believe that the "mystery" terrorists were interested in murdering every American, we'd be worried here too as well. But there is nothing to suggest that.  But there is everything to suggest that whoever is behind this attack wanted to bring down the psychological seats of America's power or benefit from the results of the attempt.  And either way the response, "The Attack on America!" is the perfect slogan to rally the American public around the cause of "the American Way of Life," which, regardless of which specific, distasteful element of the New World Order to which the phrase might refer, we can be sure, is not a reference to our traditional qualities of honesty, fairness, hard work, and the making of good Martinis.

For Catholics the glory of a nation is in its virtue, and, objectively considering the ostensible purpose and routine activities which took place or take place at the WTC and the Pentagon, there's no need to worry about an elimination of the centers of American virtue and morality.  Even for "real Americans" the strength of the nation is in its spirit, its rugged individualism, its enterprising citizens.  So what, after all, does the WTC and the Pentagon have to do with "Our Way of Life" unless it be thought by the netwrok spin doctors that, either 1) there really is a threat to global capitalism or the U.S.'s global enforcement of the NWO, which they genuinely if unintentionally want to protect or, 2) there is a need to whip Americans into a frenzy over these events in order to accomplish with them whatever those who caused them desire to accomplish.

Possibility 1.  If there really was an attempted attack on global capitalism and/or the American habit of bombing small nations into submission, then that is an attack which we as Americans should take seriously.  If you are punched in the face as a result of a comment you make to a passer-by, the reaction of the rational man is BOTH to defend himself and meanwhile to examine what he might have done to provoke the blow in the first place.  Can it be that global capitalism and U.S. imperialism is something which is resented by a good portion of the people who are directly or indirectly harmed by it?  If so, there is nothing MORE patriotic we could do than to examine our nation's economic and political conscience and make changes as necessary.  But we can be certain that an examination of conscience is the last thing that will occur to those who govern us by sound bytes and Executive Orders.  Rather, the principles will remain taken for granted and our natural instinct to defend the status quo will work to reinforce the nation's commitment to financial and political domination of the world.

Possibility 2.  It would be a mistake for intelligent men to rule out the possibility that things are not what they seem.  Things are rarely what they seem even in normal times, and these are not normal times.  At this point in history, as Catholics who are on the blackest page of the New World Order's blackest of black lists, we have no reason to believe that we are being told the truth and that things are always on the up and up.  We who are traditional in the Faith take this spirit for granted when dealing with the Vatican.  Are Wall Street and Washington more to be trusted?  Do literally centuries of usury and at least one century (and two World Wars) worth of godless and conscience-less Empire conspire to create a scrupulous conscience?  We merely offer, then, this possibility, which in the days months and weeks ahead should not be ruled out by thoughtful persons: whatever the official story becomes, there remains the possibility that that official story will be a cover for something else, and that there are individuals who benefit from the results or the effects of the alleged "attack on our way of life" who are other than the hypothetical crazy Arabs. Or the "crazy Arabs" themselves may have, as a result of blind, if understandable, rage played right into the hands of those who stand to gain from whatever comes of these catastrophic events.  We once had a President who profited politically and geopolitically from the destruction of a fleet of American ships in Hawaii, and he profited so much that he didn't stop the fleet's destruction because the supposed gains from the fleet's destruction outweighed the loss of American lives aboard those ships.  Have our current learders leared the lesson they should have learned from that tragedy?  Have they matured and grown wiser since the first day of infamy?  Are they less capable than he was of treason?  It is notable that yesterday is already being called another "day of infamy," and we may be allowed to hope that the political scheming and wheeling and dealing which surrounded, preceded and followed the first day of infamy does not follow, and did not precede, this one.  We may be allowed to hope, but it would be naieve to assume.

On this head here are a few useful points of reference from that master of secret history, Michal A. Hoffman, II:

Quote

Lest We Forget: A Brief History of US Government Directed and Fomented Terror

World Trade Center Bombing 1993:

"One of the largest acts of domestic terrorism in U.S. history was the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center in New York. As it turned out, the FBI was fully aware of the bomb plot before the attack took place. The Muslim group involved had been infiltrated by Emad Salem, a former Egyptian intelligence agent who was hired by the FBI and ultimately paid $1 million. The FBI even provided the Egyptian with a timer for the bomb, prompting the Chicago Tribune to publish a report headlined, "FBI Tipster Said He Built NY Bomb" (Tribune, Dec. 15, 1993).

Source: Michael A. Hoffman II, Secret Societies and Psychological Warfare 2001. The Maine Bombing, 1898:

February 15, 1898, an explosion destroyed the American battleship Maine in Havana Harbor and helped propel the United States into a war with Spain. The USS Maine that sultry Tuesday night contained 350 crew and officers. At 9:40 p.m. the ship's forward end abruptly lifted itself from the water. Along the pier, passersby could hear a rumbling explosion. Within seconds, another eruption--this one deafening and massive--splintered the bow, sending anything that wasn't battened down, and most that was, flying more than 200 feet into the air.... In all, 266 of the 350 men aboard the Maine were killed.

The American press was quick to point to an external explosion--a mine or torpedo--as the cause of the tragedy. An official U.S. investigation agreed. On April 25, 1898, Congress formally declared war on Spain. By summer's end, Spain had ceded Cuba, along with the Philippines, Puerto Rico and Guam, to the United States. In 1976, Adm. Hyman Rickover of the U.S. Navy mounted yet another investigation into the cause of the Maine disaster. His team of experts found that the ship's demise was self- inflicted.

The Lusitania, 1915:

The Lusitania was a British cargo and passenger ship that was torpedoed and sank due to German submarine activity in May of 1915, just shy of ten years after she began her trans-Atlantic journeying. She was used to ferry goods and people between England and the United States. The Lusitania was very popular because of her speed and luxurious accommodations. She was considered "the acme of comfort," and deemed a "floating palace" by her passengers (Simpson 7).

As World War I escalated and German submarines took a prevalent role in the seas; Lusitania set out from New York on May 1, 1915, with the intent of delivering material to England in spite of threats of sinking by German authorities.

Six days later, on May 7, 1915, the Lusitania took a solid hit whose sound was described by passengers as a "peal of thunder," a "dull thud-like sound," or "like a million-ton hammer hitting a steel boiler a hundred feet high and a hundred feet long" (Hickey and Smith 184-185). Though they did not explode, water rushed into the first and second boiler rooms and caused the boat to shake from side to side. She then rose a little before a second massive explosion took her down into the sea.

The exact cause of the second explosion is a point of contention. The
Lusitania shows evidence that she may have been torpedoed a second or even a third time - but the second, most destructive, explosion may not have been caused by a German torpedo, but rather may have come from inside the ship. The reason behind this speculation is that the Lusitania's cargo can be called into question. She had originally said she would take, along with her passengers, platinum, bullion, diamonds and various other precious stones, but these things were never found and port records do not list them either. She is believed to have instead carried, under the guise of bales of fur and cheese boxes, 3-inch shells and millions of rounds of rifle ammunition. If true, these materials comprised "a contraband and explosive cargo which was forbidden by American law and...should never have been placed on a passenger liner" (Simpson 157-158).

The torpedoes completed the destruction of the ship by their own power or they were aided by internal ammunition explosions. The ship sank within twenty minutes of when she was hit and took with her 1,201 people - and left only 764 to be saved by those who responded to her SOS (Simpson 9). Many American lives were lost as a result of the sinking, and because the Lusitania was never officially in government service, the United States believed the attack on her "was contrary to international law and the conventions of all civilized nations" (Simpson 8-9). The sinking of the Lusitania caused serious tension between the United States and Germany and led to America's declaration of war against Germany.

Pearl Harbor, 1941:

In the summer of 1940 Roosevelt ordered the Pacific to relocate from the West Coast to Hawaii. When its commander, Admiral Richardson, protested that Pearl Harbor offered inadequate protection from air and torpedo attack he was replaced. On October 7 1940 Navy IQ analyst McCollum wrote an eight-point memo for Roosevelt on how to force Japan into war with U.S., including an American oil embargo against Japan. All of them were eventually accomplished.

On 23 June 1941 one day after Hitler's attack on Russia Secretary of the Interior and FDR's Advisor Harold Ickes wrote a memo for the President in which he pointed out that "there might develop from the embargoing of oil to Japan such a situation as would make it not only possible but easy to get into this war in an effective way. And if we should thus indirectly be brought in, we would avoid the criticism that we had gone in as an ally of communistic Russia."

On 18 October Ickes noted in his diary: "For a long time I have believed that our best entrance into the war would be by way of Japan."

The U.S. had cracked key Japanese codes before the attack. FDR received "raw" translations of all key messages. On 24 September 1941 Washington deciphered a message from the Naval Intelligence HQ in Tokyo to Japan's consul-general in Honolulu, requesting grid of exact locations of U.S. Navy ships in the harbor. Commanders in Hawaii were not warned.

Sixty years later the U.S. Government still refuses to identify or declassify many pre-attack decrypts on the grounds of "national security."

On November 25 Secretary of War Stimson wrote in his diary that FDR said an attack was likely within days, and asked "how we should maneuver them into the position of firing the first shot without too much danger to ourselves. In spite of the risk involved, however, in letting the Japanese fire the first shot, we realized that in order to have the full support of the American people it was desirable to make sure that the Japanese be the ones to do this so that there should remain no doubt in anyone's mind as to who were the aggressors."

On November 25 FDR received a "positive war warning" from Churchill that the Japanese would strike against America at the end of the first week in December. This warning caused the President to do an abrupt about-face on plans for a time-buying modus vivendi with Japan and it resulted in Secretary of State Hull's deliberately provocative ultimatum of 26 November 1941 that guaranteed war.

On November 26 Washington ordered both US aircraft carriers, the Enterprise and the Lexington, out of Pearl Harbor "as soon as possible". This order included stripping Pearl of 50 planes or 40 percent of its already inadequate fighter protection. On the same day Cordell Hull issued his ultimatum demanding full Japanese withdrawal from Indochina and all China. U.S. Ambassador to Japan called this "The document that touched the button that started the war."

On November 29 Hull told United Press reporter Joe Leib that Pearl Harbor would be attacked on December 7. The New York Times reported on December 8 ("Attack Was Expected," p. 13) that the U.S. knew of the attack a week earlier. On December 1 Office of Naval Intelligence, ONI, 12th Naval District in San Francisco found the missing Japanese fleet by correlating reports from the four wireless news services and several shipping companies that they were getting signals west of Hawaii.

On 5 December, 1941 FDR wrote to the Australian Prime Minister, "There is always the Japanese to consider. Perhaps the next four or five days will decide the matters."

Oklahoma City, 1995

Both the Federal government and the ADL were "tracking" Timothy McVeigh long before the Oklahoma City Bombing of 1995. McVeigh and at least a half-dozen other men planned the bombing while encamped at "Elohim City," a heavily-infiltrated "Christian Patriot" community in rural Oklahoma. ATF informant Carol Howe infiltrated Elohim City before the Oklahoma bombing. ATF internal documents prove Howe was an informant who overheard McVeigh and his accomplices plotting to blow up the Alfred E. Murrah building. Howe sent over 70 reports to her superior, ATF Special Agent Angela Finley, warning that a number of people at Elohim City were planning to bomb a federal office building in Oklahoma City.

Howe was not the only government agent privy to the Oklahoma bombing however. The shadowy Aryan Republican Army (ARA) gang of bank robbers were also complicit. Aryan Nations "East Coast Ambassador" and FBI informant Mark Thomas assisted ARA leader Peter Langan, an asset of the US Secret Service. Langan, the son of a US Marine Intelligence officer, was arrested for a robbery in 1992. The U.S. Secret Service intervened, however, arranging for Langan to be released on merely a signature bond. Langan subsequently formed the ARA, which was, from its inception, a government black op. For example, the ARA never encountered any bank guards or other police during any of their twenty successful bank robberies. Langan and his lieutenant were only arrested in connection with the robberies after independent investigators began to publicize Elohim City's ties to McVeigh. It was at Elohim where the ARA leaders, among whom was "John Doe No. 2" (Michael Brescia), held three meetings to plan bank robberies and other activities. (Langan's lieutenant conveniently "committed suicide" while in custody).

Many government black ops use Halloween Satanists as a cover for their crimes. In Oklahoma City it was "white supremacists" and "neo-Nazi" patsies. The orchestration was finite and detailed, right down to the appointment of District Attorney Robert Macy -- the prosecutor who allegedly stymied all efforts to get to the bottom of the Oklahoma City conspiracy --to head the special Grand Jury proceedings to investigate a conspiracy. This is the same Robert Macy who, when asked by Oklahoma state Rep. Charles Key why Macy didn't proceed with an investigation, allegedly replied, "They won't let me."

Macy's Grand Jury delivered no indictments of ATF agents or of shadowy right wing, neo-Nazi "useful idiots" like Chevie Kehoe. No, the only one indicted was the investigative journalist David Hoffman (no relation to this writer), author of the seminal book, The Oklahoma City Bombing and the Politics of Terror (Feral House, 1998). Rare book collectors take note: the entire remaining stock of David Hoffman's book was pulped and destroyed under legal threat from lawyers for agents of the FBI. Chevie Kehoe murdered gun dealer William Mueller and his entire family in Arkansas in 1996 because Mueller had inside information on Timothy McVeigh and the OK City bombing conspiracy.

As part of the "Revelation of the Method," recall that Aryan Nations member and L.A. daycare center shooter Buford Furrow "miraculously" eluded the largest police dragnet in the history of the LAPD, to report directly to his FBI handlers in Las Vegas in full view of the television cameras.

By the same process, Chevie Kehoe of Yaak, Montana and his partner, Danny Lee of Yukon, Oklahoma, killed the Mueller family while "dressed in FBI raid outfits" (Spokesman-Review, [Spokane, Wash.] April 8, 1999, p. B-3). In both these cases a symbolic hint was being intentionally sent to the public concerning who Kehoe and Furrow's real handlers are. At the time of the Mueller murders Kehoe was a resident of the Shadows Motel in Spokane, Washington, where he had been staying on and off since 1994. Kehoe was often visited at the motel by a child rapist and Aryan Nations activist who was also a master gunsmith and machinist.

"Witnesses also believe McCrea and Kehoe met Timothy McVeigh at the Shadows Motel shortly before the April, 1995 Oklahoma City bombing...A former manager of the motel has reported seeing McVeigh visiting Kehoe there a few weeks before the Oklahoma City bombing.

"...But the possible link between the Shadows Motel, Kehoe and McVeigh has been given little, if any, attention by the FBI...With McVeigh and his friend Terry Nichols convicted of the Oklahoma City bombing, there is reluctance to reopen the investigation, federal officials say."

(Spokesman-Review, April 11, 1999, pp. B-1 and B-6).

Here is a frank admission of the government's refusal to apprehend other guilty parties in connection with the Oklahoma City bombing. The conviction of the scapegoats satisfies the Federal police. Why? Because any further indictments would tend to risk losing control over perpetrators who might reveal embarrassing details and unaccounted for facts that point to orchestration of the bombing by the Federal government itself.

Elohim City was presided over by Robert Millar, himself an informant who reported to FBI Senior Agent Peter Rickel, according to June, 1997 court testimony. Millar's son-in-law, Jim Ellison, was also a Federal informant. The "chief of security" at Elohim City was Andreas Strassmeier, a German intelligence officer who was in direct contact with McVeigh in the weeks preceding the bombing and who Carol Howe implicated as a co-conspirator.

Federal Judge Richard Matsch prohibited Howe from testifying at McVeigh's trial, saying her testimony might "confuse" the jurors. After Howe went to the media with her evidence, the government indicted her on a trumped up charge of explosives possession. She was put on trial in August, 1997. Her attorney showed that Howe possessed the explosives at the direction of the ATF and Howe was acquitted of all charges by a jury.

End quote from: Michael A. Hoffman II, Secret Societies and Psychological Warfare 2001.

Unquote

Some sobering thoughts

What then is the purpose behind these incidents, if indeed Possibility 2 is even to be contemplated?  God knows.  In PART II we'll look at some of the probable consequences of the WTC and Pentagon attacks and readers can draw their own conclusions as to just to what lengths the Establishment might be willing to go to provide the scenario for implementation of those various effects.

It should be borne in mind, meanwhile, that what we are given to consume by our media and political masters is just that:  food for consumption.  Not that's it is therefore false.  But it is definitely made for the public, and we can be sure that those who determine what it is we will and will not be told do not make that determination in a vacuum.  Whether the constant blaring of "America's way of life" and the "Attack on America" is an honest attempt by the establishment to defend capitalism and America's foreign policy, or it is the convenient result of a catastrophic (and therefore very useful, politically, emotionally and psychologically) series of more or less intentional events, which provide our fearless leaders with the opportunity to excite us into a panic over defending our way of life, is not really the point.  The point is that the public dis-information services have turned the collapse of the World Trade Center and an airline crash at the Pentagon into an assault on all that Americans are supposed to hold dear.  And you may be sure that in the process of all of this we are being instructed regarding just what it is we should hold dear.  Given who is doing the instructing, be very, very very skeptical.

Mr. John Sharp is the Editor of The Legion of St. Louis.

Source: