Support Independent Journalism!
9/11 Blogger receives no foundational or corporate support other than from the ads below. We depend on your support. Help us cover the news and improve the site by becoming a monthly donor.
Abby breaks down how impunity for US war crimes leads to cultural decay.
LIKE Breaking The Set @ http://fb.me/BreakingTheSet
FOLLOW Abby Martin @ http://twitter.com/AbbyMartin
I am hoping that this kind of brave journalism (i.e. truth) is going to go more mainstream. It is really what we need instead of media propaganda.
Certainly Obama is guilty of war crimes as is Bush and his PNAC tribe.
Surprise Surprise - Obama wins right to indefinitely detain Americans under NDAA — RT
Court restores Obama’s indefinite detention power
Does anyone know any radicals, I mean really? I knew a commie once; he was in a cell with a couple of people but I thought he was a dreamer. Once, in a coffee house at Yale I overheard someone say: "of course the Soviet Union is replete with corruption and contradictions but its the only model we have !" His tone was strident like a true believer and while I wasn't a student there, I think he was and I wondered if that was the level of discourse this great institution was promulgating 'cause I thought he sounded rather silly. So bottom line: who are they planning on rounding up? Me: "What did I do? I overpaid my taxes in 2004!"
Haven't you heard? 'In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.'
Like it or not, in their eyes, you and all the rest of us ARE radicals.
Maybe it was a poor attempt at irony but all the "radicals" that I know are radically decent and that is about it. I know a lot of people from about every social strata and from what I have seen most would think that reform was something out of reach, even Utopian but that decency was something attainable. I had a long talk with an old friend the other day. His father, a Southern share cropper, was in the Big Red One in WWII. Those guys had it rough, moving from one major engagement to another. My friend stylized his dad as the Archie Bunker type but when it came to his son going to Vietnam his father said: "you'll not go, if we have to move to Canada then we will." The reason that the father gave for his son not going was that "no one should see the level of depravity that war causes or be provoked to act in such a manner and see that depravity arise within themselves. Pretty radical for a share cropper, I think. That is why those old timers didn't speak much about the war, not that they wanted to forget but because it just wasn't decent. So if striving for a modicum of decency, and believe me I am no saint, makes me a radical then I accept. And if hungering for a little truth in a sea of lies makes me one then so be it. But what puzzles me is why such resistance to the truth? I know about cognitive dissonance I studied psych ad nauseam in college. But people pay out the nose to be entertained; that is why entertainers make such disproportionate salaries. People also, if my Netflix selection can be trusted, like to have the crap scared out of them. I have to swat the horror movies away like flies. So, having read about our war heroes coming back from Vietnam eviscerated and stuffed with drugs, seeing Senator Daniel Inouye a street tough afraid to talk about Continuity of Government, hearing about the Susurluk scandal, learning that what Ollie North was shredding in the White House basement was the Constitution, and on and on; all I can say is that the truth,sadly, is entertaining and is a much better story and will scare the crap out of you. So come along for the ride!
Back in 1976, Rumsfeld, Cheney, and Wolfowitz tried the "weapons of mass destruction" ploy, but firstly on Russia. They were found to have been lying about Russia amassing WMD's, just as surely as they were lying about Iraq amassing WMD's.
Fast forward to the 1990's:
* A Bush brother was governor of Florida, the most high-contested state of the 2000 elections.
* Another Bush brother was on the board of directors of the electronic security company used for the WTC and elsewhere.
* A Bush family member was CEO of the same electronic security company.
* All three planes that hit buildings on 9/11, i.e. the Pentagon and the WTC, all struck areas that were "upgraded" in one form or another.
I don't think it's a coincidence that Bush family members were in key locations before 9/11. I also don't think it's a coincidence that Bush selected key people for his administration such as Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, etc. It's also not too coincidental for three planes to hit three buildings in three places that had some sort of upgrades.
Keep up the great work, Abby.