Did He Really Say That? By Cindy Sheehan Sept 26th OpEdNews


September 26, 2010 at 12:55:09

Did He Really Say That?
OpEdNews: Cindy Sheehan - Writer

By Cindy Sheehan (about the author) Page 1 of 2 page(s

"We can absorb a terrorist attack. We'll do everything we can to prevent it, but even a 9/11, even the biggest attack ever...we absorbed it and we are stronger." (Barack Obama in "Obama's Wars" by Bob Woodward)

Again, the arrogance of U.S. Robber Class politicians is astonishing!

I know I just have a modest internet talk show and a blog that only reaches thousands, but I am going to put in a request to interview Barack Obama, because I doubt, with the resignation of the only tough-ish person in the White House Press Corps, Helen Thomas, that any other so-called journalist has the guts to go against the Emperor and ask just one simple question -- "Mr. President, who or what do you mean by "us'?" Is it another case of: "It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is." (Bill Clinton).

Maybe Obama was suffering from the delusion of "What doesn't kill us makes us stronger," but looking from the perspective of someone who was greatly weakened in so many ways by the attacks of 9/11, and from all of my other experiences since then, I can say what and who has not been made "stronger."

Many families here in the US have had members killed, maimed or emotionally wounded starting on 9/11 and continuing every day since then. By this past week, 2010 was already the deadliest year for our military in Afghanistan. It is just September, and 2010 has been only surpassed in carnage by the other year in the Obama regime -- 2009. And the other "crazy" thing is, troops keep dying in Iraq, even though that "war is over."

I can also say that the millions of people who have been killed, maimed or displaced in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan (which Obama thinks is the "real threat") have not been strengthened in the short-term or long-term. But, hey -- they don't really count, now, do they?

Since 9/11, I have been arrested many times for just exercising my civil rights to free speech and freedom of expression, and I am just one of thousands. I don't think our civil liberties are "stronger" since 9/11. In fact, just last week, antiwar and social justice activists had their homes raided in all parts of this country by the FBI. I resent having to, for all intents and purposes, walk nude throughout airport security and I resent the entire police state mentality of airport personnel who, but for the "grace" of 9/11 could just as likely be saying: "would you like that super-sized," as "I'm going to have to search you." Even their lives aren't better being wage slaves for the Police State.

Speaking of that, everyone I know in my wide circle of concern is either unemployed or underemployed. For example, my son, a new father, is working three jobs just to provide for his small family and hasn't worked in his trade as a land surveyor for a year and a half. Andy's story is not an unusual or special one. The job market has certainly not been made "stronger." The housing market has not been made "stronger" and OUR economy is as weak as my newborn grandson. It has no muscle tone or control and can only whine and scream because that's the only way it can express itself now. At least my grandbaby is adorable.

I can name a few institutions that have been made "stronger" since 9/11: The Police State and all its apparatus; the Military Industrial Complex and its tentacles: the Pentagon, the State Department, war profiteers, corporate media; Wall Street; the surviving banks; and especially the government. The rich are literally getting richer, and the poor are growing poorer. The income gap is wider than it ever has been since 1929!

Tragically, the numbers of people falling into poverty and into homelessness have been strengthened, as have the numbers of people who are losing their health insurance.

Whether Osama bin Laden perpetrated 9/11 from a cave in northern Afghanistan -- or Dick Cheney planned it from his cave in Mordor -- OBL's stated goal of total destruction of the U.S. Empire is proceeding apace and I can't fully comprehend what another "terrorist" attack would do to this nation. The institutions, people, and societal norms that were weakened by 9/11 will be furthered weakened and the ones that were made "stronger" will be further strengthened. I can foresee only a bleak future under Obama's Absorption Theory -- complete tyranny in the U.S because of complete economic breakdown that will probably lead to isolated incidences of internal rebellion that will be violently suppressed in the name of "National Security and Stability."

I have read some Obamapologists saying that he was "correct" and that our nation was made "stronger." This line of thinking goes: We were afraid at first, but eventually when WE were not attacked (by the terr'ists) again -- we went about our daily lives as if nothing ever happened. Well, I say: that's exactly what is wrong with this nation. Three-thousand Americans were killed that day, which was bad enough -- but almost 6,000 (official count) Americans have been killed in the Middle East/Asia since then. And, as the mother of one of those, I can attest to the fact that not many people feel as connected to this tragic figure as they are to the ones murdered on 9/11. Our soldiers have been misused in this phony war of terror began by Bush and perpetuated by Obama.

After 9/11, instead of becoming self-reflective, we mostly allowed our government to steal our flesh and blood, kill and torture millions of others and descend into this Police State that is protected from accountability, because we the people are still afraid of our own shadows. We (as a whole) haven't "absorbed" crap -- we have deflected it as far away from us as possible. Most of us are still afraid, but most of those who are still afraid are fearful of the wrong things. The real terrorists reside at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue and other posh residences in the beltway.

We are speedily careening to November 2, when many of us will be going to the polls to vote for the "Party of No." Do you think I mean the Republicans? No, I mean the other "Party of No," the Democrats.

One thing the Obama regime has shown me is that the Democrats are also the Party of No: NO peace, NO justice, NO relevant healthcare reform, NO improvement in education, NO civil liberties, NO economic justice, NO environmental sustainability, NO jobs, NO anything that is positive for those who were made weaker after 9/11.

Just want to say...........

saw Cindy in NYC for the 9th anniversary at ground zero. She gave a talk at a panel discussion.
I did not realize how awesome she can be.
She gave such a great talk. She had us standing up all through it.
She sacrificed a lot to become a 9/11 truther. The press used to follow her around and report all she said, and that is what she needed to get her antiwar message out.
Once she came out as a truther, the press dropped her completely.
But......................she is now part of our family! And it is a great family. And we will succeed in our message.

Keep it up, Cindy!

The sequence

I think the sequence in her evolution went more like this: At some point, she realized that the antiwar movement was simply being used as vehicle for the pro-war Democratic Party. When she refused to go along with that and criticized Democrats and Republicans alike--I think that's when she began to lose support from the organizations that had hoped to use her, and that's when the press stopped giving her attention. In short, the shunning by the press had already begun before she became closer to the 9/11 truth movement. But meanwhile, that eye-opening experience made her more receptive to other kinds of information shunned by the 'antiwar' establishment. It took time--and encounters with some less-than-tactful members of the 9/11 truth movement apparently didn't help matters--but she did come out in support of a real investigation back in 2007, and now has stated in public that she thinks 9/11 was indeed an inside job (she just 'isn't sure how far inside,' she has said).

isn't sure how far inside?

LIHOP is dead. MIHOP is the only way to look at what happened on 9/11. No If's ands or buts. It was an inside job period. Given the proven facts a two year old can figure that out. Still it's great to see Cindy on our side. No time for any more politics. The future of our planet hangs on 9/11 truth.


I don't have a problem with LIHOP vs. MIHOP. If you work for the government, they are the same thing. If I can get people to see LIHOP, it's one BIG step closer for them. The rest they can work out on their own.

as David Ray Griffin has noted


as DRG has noted, LIHOP is impossible because you cannot 'let' nanothermite be in the equation.


I get your point, but:

1) was it placed in the towers by the US military?
2) was the technology stolen from an Army lab?
3) was the technology and/or material sold on the black market years ago as Sibel Edmonds intimates?
4) did a traitor-scientist help develop the technology for another nation, cabal?

etc. etc.

Unless and until we have evidence of any of these scenarios that is admissible in a court, LIHOP is not off the table, especially in public discourse.

And to repeat myself, LIHOP "IS" MIHOP, especially if you've taken an oath of office. It's semantics. So I say to those who's first admission is that the government might have let it happen: "Welcome to the rabbit hole."

False dilemma fallacy

DRG was wrong by omission. When there are two main variables (Al Qaeda, USG) there are four main possibilities. As you'll note: LIHOP/MIHOP is a false dilemma, like Republican/Democrat.

Disjunctive Syllogism:

Either p or q.
Therefore, q.

Saying 'inside' is big

I always understand 'inside' to mean 'made it happen.'

9/11 was clearly a false flag operation of some kind,

the question remains, however, as to exactly who planned and perpetrated it.

We have a pretty good idea about who is maintaining the cover-up though.

It is conceivable, some might even argue plausible, that most of the Americans in government (including the military) who helped facilitate the 9/11 false flag operation had no idea what they were a part of until it was all over (some may still be trying to figure it out, as are we) and they are under orders and/or being coerced to remain silent.

I have talked to Cindy a few times and she is great. My understanding is that when she finally saw how corrupt and cowardly the Democratic Party elites and members of Congress were, she turned to the only people who oppose the war as forcefully as she does, the growing global 9/11 truth movement. It was her realization of the false left-right paradigm and how the mainstream anti-war movement fits into it and her fearlessness in stating these obvious truths that finally forced the msm and left gatekeepers to drop Cindy from the carefully controlled narrative which supports the existing pathological paradigm put forward by their paymasters.

We are closing in on the tipping point, brothers and sisters, let's recommit ourselves to educating the American people, and everyone else, about this most critical issue and how it empowers us to take back our sovereignty and create the world we want to live in.

The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.


Webster Tarpley referred to her as a "wretched individual," I sent her an email apologizing to her, and made her aware that Tarpley does not speak for the 9/11 Truth Movement. Since that time, we have developed a very close relationship, and I have helped her to want to participate in the cause of 9/11 Justice.

She has ALWAYS been on our side, and has said so repeatedly.

Thanks Jon

I had no idea Tarpley would say something like that. I just hope he was man enough to say he was sorry.

He may have...

To Cindy, but he certainly did not to me for calling me COINTELPRO for daring to question him referring to Cindy as a "wretched individual." He did not to Michael Wolsey, Cosmos, Arabesque, or Col. Jenny Sparks either.