Who Gained the Most from 9/11? (8/19/07)

By Dean Hartwell

Do you believe in the official theory of 9/11 that Osama bin Laden directed al-Qaeda members to board airplanes, hijack them and then run a murder-suicide mission into famous United States buildings?  I have written before about the parts of the official story I disagree with; this time, I will direct your attention to the extent to which certain leaders of our nation benefited from this heinous crime which took the lives of 3,000 people.

• The Pentagon had mysteriously lost $2.3 trillion dollars by early September 2001.[i]  The attacks took this politically embarrassing story right out of the news.
• The Pentagon had plans to invade Afghanistan before September 11, 2001.[ii]  The attacks allowed the White House to blame Afghanistan for allegedly harboring lead suspect Osama bin Laden.  Not surprisingly, the public went from knowing little about Afghanistan on September 10 to almost total support for our invasion less than a month later.
• When the war in Afghanistan quieted down, the Bush Administration proposed a second war against Iraq, saying they had acted in collusion with al-Qaeda.  This war also gained enough popular support to get it started.
• Millions of dollars worth of allegedly phony Brady Bonds, socked away in the North Tower of the World Trade Center, were conveniently destroyed that day in the attacks.[iii]  They were to become due (and thus incriminate their creators) on September 12, 2001.
• A New York Mayor, soon to be out of office because of term limits and no doubt concerned about his future in politics after revelation of scandals involving him, became a hero for being at the right place at the right time.  While in the World Trade Center area on 9/11 after the attacks, he received a phone call advising him the North tower was about to fall.  At that point, nothing had fallen and it is unlikely anyone could have predicted the steel tower would fall.  In any event, Rudy Giuliani has never revealed who called him.  Now “America’s Mayor” is running for President, touting 9/11 as part of his foreign policy credentials.
• The government, already successful for years in weakening the Bill of Rights thanks to the War on Drugs, found it easy to weaken it further with the Patriot Act after the attacks.  Of course, this Act had already been written beforehand, but now Congress was willing to pass it without even reading it!  The government can now peek at a person’s files or records without notice or warrant.  This act paved the way for the public’s acquiescence to the news that the National Security Administration listens to our phone conversations and reads our emails.
• Military spending was down under President Clinton.  Now, thanks to 9/11, Bush just says “War on Terror” to get the spending he wants.
• The public, manipulated by our leaders in the “War on Drugs” and the “War on Communism,” has accepted the new war and compliantly opposes any enemy named, like Osama bin Laden.  Funny thing, the FBI has never accused bin Laden of participating in 9/11 on its official “wanted” notices.  We also seem to keep missing bin Laden when we try to catch him.  Is he really an enemy?

Did anybody other than crooks, war mongers and those who want a reduction in civil liberties benefit from the attacks?  We are now more vigilant against the possibility of terrorism than before.  Is this the result terrorists would have wanted?

How many times in United States history have we benefited from a fluke or something otherwise unplanned by us?  Even with Pearl Harbor, word has trickled out over the years about our foreknowledge of the attacks.  Are we going to wait sixty years to conclude that we’ve been had by our government in 9/11 or will we call these suspects now to account for how they benefit?

Notes:

Home Page