Home

Excellent Analysis of 9/11 Questions

Comment by Larry Ross, September 5, 2007

“…for the last forty years, our thought has been trapped in hollow structures of language, a stale, dead but immensely successful rhetoric. This has represented, in my view, a defeat of the intelligence and of the will.” — Harold Pinter

Fisk does an excellent analysis of 9/11 questions, but like so many prominent analysts stops short of drawing logical conclusions. There are many reasons and evidence why one can reasonably conclude that Bush and his associates planned and executed 9/11 to give themselves excuses to blame the Arabs and other Moslem states and initiate the 'war on terror'.

See: 9/11 & London Bombing and Evidence

It worked like clockwork for them so they are proceeding with their plan for a war on Iran with almost the full approval of the US Congress and many calling for the US to use nuclear weapons. on Iran .. They conclude that the American people are so propagandised and brainwashed and gullible that enough of them will believe any new lies Bush cares to offer. Fisk makes the unusual and questionable mistake or labelling all doubters and questioners as "ravers” as if such people were the only ones raising questions or stating their conclusions about the 9/11 mysteries. Bush and his associates can tolerate, even welcome people like Fisk, who raise questions, but shrink from suggesting obvious conclusions, and debunk those who do. Although Fisk may expose some of the lies and consequences of Bush's war plans, they refrain from drawing the obvious conclusions that might help impede these plans.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Even I question the 'truth' about 9/11

by Robert Fisk, August 25, 2007
 

Each time I lecture abroad on the Middle East, there is always someone in the audience – just one – whom I call the "raver". Apologies here to all the men and women who come to my talks with bright and pertinent questions – often quite humbling ones for me as a journalist – and which show that they understand the Middle East tragedy a lot better than the journalists who report it. But the "raver" is real. He has turned up in corporeal form in Stockholm and in Oxford, in Sao Paulo and in Yerevan, in Cairo, in Los Angeles and, in female form, in Barcelona. No matter the country, there will always be a "raver".

His – or her – question goes like this. Why, if you believe you're a free journalist, don't you report what you really know about 9/11? Why don't you tell the truth – that the Bush administration (or the CIA or Mossad, you name it) blew up the twin towers? Why don't you reveal the secrets behind 9/11? The assumption in each case is that Fisk knows – that Fisk has an absolute concrete, copper-bottomed fact-filled desk containing final proof of what "all the world knows" (that usually is the phrase) – who destroyed the twin towers. Sometimes the "raver" is clearly distressed. One man in Cork screamed his question at me, and then – the moment I suggested that his version of the plot was a bit odd – left the hall, shouting abuse and kicking over chairs.

Usually, I have tried to tell the "truth"; that while there are unanswered questions about 9/11, I am the Middle East correspondent of The Independent, not the conspiracy correspondent; that I have quite enough real plots on my hands in Lebanon, Iraq, Syria, Iran, the Gulf, etc, to worry about imaginary ones in Manhattan. My final argument – a clincher, in my view – is that the Bush administration has screwed up everything – militarily, politically diplomatically – it has tried to do in the Middle East; so how on earth could it successfully bring off the international crimes against humanity in the United States on 11 September 2001?

Continue.....

4 Responses to “Fisk on September 11” worth reading, especially freeborn (to find, scoll down to end of article)