Leo Strauss is the father of the NeoConservative movement, including many leaders of the current administration. Indeed, some of the main neocon players were students of Strauss at the University of Chicago, where he taught for many years. Strauss, born in Germany, was an admirer of Nazi philosophers and of Machiavelli.
Strauss believed that a stable political order required an external threat and that if an external threat did not exist, one should be manufactured. Specifically, Strauss thought that:
Four headlines this week make it clear that America may be the world's largest sponsor of terrorism:
Programs Which the Government Claims Are Aimed At Foreign Enemies are being Used Against American Citizens within the U.S.
The U.S. government has repeatedly claimed that it was launching aggressive programs solely at foreign enemies, and then launched them at American citizens. For example:
While many people question the government's conclusions about 9/11, rest assured that the government agencies tasked with investigating 9/11 are confident that the government's answer to the following questions is correct:
(1) How could a rag-tag bunch of hijackers penetrate the strongest military in history and disable normal defensive procedures?
(2) How could 3 super-strong, over-engineered buildings become the first modern steel-frame high-rises in history to collapse due to fire, falling at virtually free-fall speed, and exhibiting many indications normally associated with controlled demolition?
At least the government itself is confident about the answers to these questions, right?
A variety of current and former high-level officials have recently warned that the Bush administration is attempting to instill a dictatorship in America, and will itself carry out a fake terrorist attack in order to obtain one.
In response to the numerous reports of molten metal under ground zero, defenders of the official version of 9/11 have tried to argue that it was not steel, but some other kind of metal with a lower melting point.
Well, here are what top experts who eyewitnessed the molten metal say:
Bush, Cheney, Ashcroft, Powell, Tenet, Rice, and Yoo Have All Committed War Crimes Punishable by Death
Anyone who violates the Geneva Convention by engaging in murder, torture, or inhuman treatment is guilty of a crime under U.S. law.
Specifically, the War Crimes Act of 1996, a federal statute set forth at 18 U.S.C. § 2441, makes it a federal crime for any U.S. national, whether military or civilian, to violate the Geneva Convention
The statute applies not only to those who carry out the acts, but also to those who ORDER IT, know about it, or fail to take steps to stop it. The statute applies to everyone, no matter how high and mighty.
Shortly after President Bush boarded Air Force One on 9/11, he spoke with Vice President Dick Cheney for approximately ten minutes (pp.335-6). According to the 9/11 Commission, Cheney called Bush from the underground tunnel leading to the Presidential Emergency Operations Center (PEOC) below the White House. (pp. 39-40). Cheney later recalls making “one phone call [to the president] from the tunnel. And basically I called to let him know that we [at the White House] were a target and I strongly urged him not to return to Washington right away, that he delay his return until we could find out what the hell was going on.” Cheney later recalls, “What I was immediately thinking about was sort of continuity of government” (pp. 335-336).
14 Structural Engineers Now Publicly Challenge Government's Explanation for Destruction of the World Trade Center
14 structural engineers now publicly challenge the government's account of the destruction of the Trade Centers on 9/11:
A prominent engineer with 55 years experience, in charge of the design of hundreds of major building projects including high rise offices, former member of the California Seismic Safety Commission and former member of the National Institute of Sciences Building Safety Council (Marx Ayres) believes that the World Trade Centers were brought down by controlled demolition (see also this)
Before 9/11, no transponder had ever become inactive, and so the military and FAA didn't have any experience on how to track planes with their transponders off. Right?
Well, a Miami-Herald article from September 14, 2001, states:
The transponder [on Flight 77] went off about 9 a.m., the company said.
At that moment, the flight would have been under the control of the Indianapolis Air Route Traffic Control Center, one of 20 regional centers that track flights between airports.
The trouble should have been instantly noticeable, traffic controllers say.
One of the most important parts of the official story is that the government couldn't track the location of the hijacked planes because the hijackers had turned the transponders off. The official version is that, with transponders turned off, only "primary radar" was available to civilian air traffic controllers. Primary radar can track location, but not altitude.
This makes no sense, because America's air defenses need to protect our nation against foreign fighter jets and other airplanes invading our country. Is our trillion-dollar defense system set up so that a Russian or Chinese pilot can invade undetected if he just turns off his transponder? Darn! Why didn't we think of that?!
Primary radar is a red herring.
Because the military possesses incredible sensitive radar. For example, "military radar can track space debris as small as 10 centimetres across" miles up in space.
AWACS Should Have Tracked Planes
We've all seen it on television. The defense attorney argues his client was "entrapped". That is, that it wasn't the defendant's idea to commit the crime, but that the police planted the idea and urged him to do it.
Many of us have heard allegations that post-9/11 arrests of suspected Al Qaeda members were based on very thin information. Did you realize that all or virtually all of these arrests occurred due to entrapment? For example:
U.S. and Allied Intelligence Services Had Penetrated The Very HIGHEST LEVELS of Al Qaeda Prior to 9/11
No one could have anticipated 9/11, right? While the U.S. knew about Al Qaeda, the 9/11 plotters and hijackers were still somewhat unknown and unpredictable prior to 9/11. Right?
In fact, U.S. and allied intelligence services had penetrated the highest levels of Al Qaeda prior to 9/11. For example:
On 9/11, there were multiple reports by credible witnesses of ground-level fiery explosions right before the collapse of the Twin Towers:
If I've got something stuck between my teeth, I rely on my best friends to tell me, so I can fix it.
Well, leaders from our close allies in England, France, Germany, Canada, Japan, Russia and elsewhere have been trying to tell us something, but we haven't heard them. Please read what these close allies are trying to tell us about 9/11:
The former Assistant German Defense Minister and a current member of British Parliament (Andreas von Bülow and Michael Meacher)
The former Canadian Minister of Defense (Paul Hellyer)
The commander-in-chief of the Russian Navy (Anatoli Kornukov)
The former chief of staff of the Russian armed forces (General Leonid Ivashov )
American media has always been complicit in backing powerful conspirators in their coups against democracy.
Of course, the American media has always acted as a cheerleader for war, parroting false claims about enemies attacking the U.S. in the Spanish-American war, the Vietnam war, the Gulf war, and many other wars.
The following people question the government's version of 9/11, or the government's openness in providing information about the September 11 attacks. Are they credible or not?
The co-chairs of the 9/11 Commission (Thomas Keane and Lee Hamilton) said that the CIA (and likely the White House) "obstructed our investigation".
The co-chairs of the 9/11 Commission also said that the 9/11 Commissioners knew that military officials misrepresented the facts to the Commission, and the Commission considered recommending criminal charges for such false statements, yet didn't bother to tell the American people (free subscription required).
The government's version of 9/11 is that Osama Bin Laden and his 19 pals carried off the September 11 attacks all by themselves.
However, the Co-Chair of the Congressional Inquiry into 9/11 and former Head of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Bob Graham, said that at least one foreign government aided in the 9/11 attack.
The Congressional Joint Inquiry report stated:
House Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi is blocking efforts to impeach Bush and Cheney, or to take any other real steps to save America. One of the grounds for impeachment is that the government made knowingly false claims about 9/11.
Congresswoman Jane Harman chaired the hearing of the House Subcommittee on Homeland Security which pushing for the labeling 9/11 truth sites as terrorist incubators.
What do these two congresswomen have in common? They were both part of the 9/11 cover up.
Veteran reporter Robert Scheer gives the background in his opinion piece today in the San Francisco Chronicle. The first two lines of the piece set the stage:
The 9/11 Commission co-chairs don't believe the 9/11 Commission Report:
- The 9/11 Commissioners knew that military officials lied to the Commission, and considered recommending criminal charges for such false statements, yet didn't bother to tell the American people (free subscription required).
How difficult would it have been to fly a Boeing 757 into the Pentagon in the manner observed on 9/11?
Well, the head of the flight school where the supposed pilot of the planes which crashed into the Pentagon said that neither the hijacker or he himself could have performed such flying feats in a Boeing 757.
Military and aviation professionals tracking the plane on radar had a similar reaction:
Top intelligence professionals from across the political spectrum question the government's version of 9/11:
The same professional cover-up artists are brought in again and again to cover up self-inflicted terror attacks, military stand downs, and other acts acts of deception and false flag terror.
You have to know who the players are before you can pick the winning team, right?
So take a look at what the top military leaders, intelligence professionals, scientists, structural engineers, architects, members of Congress, 9/11 Commissioners, legal scholars, heroic first responders, family members of 9/11 victims and psychiatrists say before you make up your mind about who's on the winning side of the 9/11 debate:
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense under President Ronald Reagan (Col. Ronald D. Ray) said that the official story of 9/11 is "the dog that doesn't hunt" (bio)
Normally, when buildings collapse, they topple over:
The evidence is overwhelming that a small white plane was following Flight 93. And there is evidence that it was, in fact, following Flight 93 while it was still ariborne or, at least, as it crashed.
A second plane, described “as a small, white jet with rear engines and no discernible markings,” is seen by at least ten witnesses flying low and in erratic patterns, not much above treetop level, over the crash site within minutes of United Flight 93 crashing. Independent, August 13, 2002.
• Lee Purbaugh: “I didn’t get a good look but it was white and it circled the area about twice and then it flew off over the horizon.” Mirror, September 12, 2002
It is beyond dispute that our rulers are forcing government scientists to reach conclusions based on politics rather than science. For example, the editor of the prestigious Science magazine wrote in early 2003 that there is growing evidence that the Bush Administration “invades areas once immune to this kind of manipulation” (see here for further information).
Politics Trumped Science regarding Toxic Dust
What does this have to do with 9/11?
The Afghanistan war was planned before 9/11.
The decision to launch the Iraq war was made before 9/11.
The decision to launch a war against Iran was made before 9/11.
The Patriot Act was written before 9/11.
The government's spying on Americans began before 9/11.
The government knew that terrorists could use planes as weapons -- and had even run its own drills of planes being used as weapons against the World Trade Center and other U.S. high-profile buildings, using REAL airplanes -- all before 9/11.
The government heard the 9/11 plans from the hijackers' own mouths before 9/11.
Everyone who has taken a fair look at the evidence has concluded that -- at the least -- the U.S. military was intentionally stood down on 9/11. There are numerous lines of evidence that certain high-level people within the U.S. military participated in the intentional stand down.
But what of the many rank and file employees of the various defense departments who were good men and women devoted to protecting their country? Why didn't they stop the 9/11 attacks?
Part of the answer is that they were cut out of the loop by the conspirators, and didn't have the information or access to be able to take preventative action. But another part of the answer is that they were bombarded with distractions, so that they could not focus on their job.