Reply #30: Impressive list, ...

[CRH]

It must be nice to be near a good book store where many of the above listed books are easily available. An impressive reading list. I'll book mark and put many on my wish list.

I do have a comment, probably not a popular one, on one of the authors, and one of his past books. That being Chalmers Johnson. And, I will make one assumption from your abbreviated review, that Nemesis is just an extension of 'The Sorrows of Empire', and that Chalmers Johnson still presents 911, as a genuine unassisted surprise attack by 19 Muslim fundamentalist hijackers. The attack masterminded by one, Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda, from within the terrorists' camps in Afghanistan.

If as in the past, Johnson still presents this myth as historical fact, he then perpetrates a false history that others will quote and site. After Oswald and magic bullets, it is personally hard for me to accept 'politically correct' versions of events, that later turn into revisionist gospel taught to the children as a basis of foundation upon which future generations form their perceptions of their country and culture.

That Chalmers Johnson presents well researched facts as a plausible accounting of history, then wraps the 911 farce with this apparent accountability, he thereby creates a danger of legitimizing the false flag operation as truth. He buries the revelation that elements within the government and large portions of both political parties, aided and/or abetted, while helping to cover up the truth. Therefore, the entire federal political system lent itself to the deception used to embark on the war crimes of unprovoked preemptive war in all its morally bankrupt nastiness.

How does one account for the neo-con document 'Rebuilding America's Defenses' (the blueprint of the actions of the post 911 Bush administration), being written in September of 2000, before Bush entered office. The stated intention of hegemonic domination of Eurasian resources and wealth, the stated intention of unilateral preemptive warfare when needed, the stated intention of considering international treaties irrelevant, the stated intention of pursuing smaller tactical nuclear weapons, the stated intention of rendering the United Nations ineffectual if the security council did not sanction desired interventions. The stated intention to rebuild the US military to accomplish the stated hegemonic foreign policy, with a 3.8% allotment of our GDP, later matched exactly in the funding in the 2003 budget. With a document so precisely written, how is one to view a statement that accomplishing all of this would be much easier and happen much faster, if the country were to experience a 'new Pearl Harbor' event.

How does one account for all the unheeded warnings from other nation states of an imminent attack, the diversion of our entire domestic protection into simultaneous multiple military war games, the total failure of a long effective Air Traffic Control system that in the past has quickly intercepted errant aircraft. How does one account for the collapse of WTC7, the initial small hole in the Pentagon void of identifiable airplane parts, identifying all the hijackers in less than 48 hours when their names were not on the manifest, the destruction of the crime scenes before forensic investigations could happen, or the unsolved anthrax terrorism further discouraging a timely investigation.

One can only come to the conclusion we have been presented with no where near the truth of that day, and the actions and deceptions that have followed have had overwhelming bipartisan support.

Yet Mr. Johnson seems content to allow all that entailed 911, to be accepted hook line and sinker, as written, in the politically correct official version. To say that the Bush administration wasted the goodwill and cooperation of the world at large in our hunt for terrorists following the 911 attack, without ever questioning the legitimacy of an obvious false flag operation presaging preemptive war, for me travels beyond genuine. It leads the people away from the very corruption, they need to confront.

edit: added an article and conjunction I forgot.