15 Years since 9/11

Via the media there have been coming various reminders that it is today 15 years since that September 11th, 2001 which most of us still remember somehow. Undeniably it was a dramatic day, and of course we would wish that it had not happened. And then there is of course also reason to remember that we after all these years still do not have an official account which would be compatible with the laws of physics. Several thousand architects and engineers are trying to get a new investigation of the matter going, but so far in vain. Nor will the recent report of one Senator Bob Graham that he had the very clear impression that Bush & Cheney simply did not want to accept warning reports of the CIA result in any new (and better, more careful) investigation.

Altogether, somebody is lying, and all those journalists, most of whom would already from school times know enough physics to see that the official report cannot be true, are helping the liar – e.g., in a case known to me, obviously for fear of not getting a visa to the USA. And other journalists will have other reasons … . And undeniably we are, so far, living rather well and conveniently with the lie. Thus, why still bother about it?

Well, of course the matter is an example of what the US system was capable of already 15 years ago. Since then Obama got the Nobel Peace Price (presumably mostly because of the world wide immense relief that G. W. Bush was finally out of office), which, though, did not hinder the Republican party from doing its worst to obstruct his policies every step of the way. And now we are witnessing what type of presidential candidates the US system has, again, been producing for the now-upcoming elections. Should we call it “not much of an improvement in 15 years” … .

One could see this and take it as a reason to avoid giving the US system too much influence on European or Scandinavian affairs (be it via TTIP, NATO or still other channels). But no! In Sweden the borgerliga parties of Alliansen are demanding that the government should take steps towards NATO membership, and in Finland it is Kokoomus and SFP who want into NATO (seemingly blind to the fact that a Finnish NATO membership, if used to build up Finland as a basis for threatening Russia, might provoke Russia into occupying Finland in order to shorten that hostile border). And every now and then representatives of business and industry are publicly regretting that the TTIP negotiations seem not to get forward (seemingly believing that they would have no difficulties whatsoever to handle the inflow of US competition, and anyway not caring a bit about the possible consequences for democracy in general).

One can wonder about this glaring selective blindness and also wonder what term to put on this phenomenon. And as it has become clear that concern about democracy is obviously not involved, and as there are already several academic publications which arrive at the conclusion that the USA are not any more a democracy, but instead a financial oligarchy (a state which seems to appeal to our borgerliga parties), so it seems to me that the best-fitting term for the phenomenon would be “class struggle from above”, i.e. a better-up class trying to secure its rule/control over a “lower” class of “subjects” (possibly because of fears of, perhaps, having to give up some money for common purposes).

This entry was posted in Bloggar, Ernst. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to 15 Years since 9/11

  1. Bengt Svensson says:

    Efter många års kampanj från offrens sida håller kongressen på att rösta igenom en lag, som skulle tillåta dem att processa mot Saudiarabiens regering, som på goda grunder misstänks för inblandning i terrordådet. Dock har Obama lovat lägga in sitt veto för att skydda halshuggargänget i Riyad, som är USA:s bäste vapenkund.

    • Ernst Mecke says:

      In fact I was aware of this campaign to sue the Saudi government, but I was not (am still not) aware of any “goda grunder” for this move. Instead, I thought that this campaign had not been blocked (up to now) just because there was not any larger danger of embarrassing results. Because, the already available evidence points to a quite different direction:

      – It was the Mossad who kept the hijackers-to-be under close observation while they took their flying-lessons in the USA.
      – It was a group of Mossad members who were, in Manhattan, observed to be celebrating while the events of 9/11 were going on. Later in the day they were running into a police check, arrested, but let go after a while (reportedly on orders “from above”). One of them was later saying in Israeli TV that they had been in Manhattan “to document the event” (google also “dancing Israelis”).
      – It was Larry Silverstein, a Jew, who was little less than 8 weeks before 9/11 renting the whole WTC and soon after taking out a very generous insurance “against terrorist attack”. He was also the architect who had designed building WTC-7.
      – It was a Jewish firm which was giving its employees “strict orders not to enter the building” (i.e. one of the WTC buildings where the branch of the firm was situated) on September 11th. Nor were Larry Silverstein and two members of his family appearing on their working places in the WTC on that day.
      – But it was US authorities who were organizing a military exercise which was EXTREMELY fitting to confuse and delay any possible defense against the 9/11 attacks just for September 11th.
      – And it was also US authorities who after 9/11 were ignoring and blocking all and any evidence which might have been any embarrassment to the US government or Israel.
      About the practical details how to bring down buildings like WTC-7 I was myself writing an article which appeared in Ny Tid in (if I remember correctly) October 2006. And in Swedish we have (aside of rather many books in English and German) “SAMMANSVÄRJNING – om konspirationsteori och sanningssökande” by Mikael Böök (Into 2011), who, though, does not go very deep into the question
      who exactly might have arranged the events of 9/11 and for what purposes (about these points I can gladly write more if there should be any wish for it).

  2. Ernst Mecke says:

    Since my contribution of 13 September it has happened several times that 9/11 was coming up as a topic, to which I was then also contributing my view (not very strongly, but anyway). And every single time the answer to this my contribution was that the other person did “not feel comfortable with conspiracy theories”. Which, as regular as this reaction occurs, perhaps deserves an answer:

    According to my memory and experience conspiracy theories have become a “dirty word” exactly since 2001. Before that time they were considered quite acceptable – e.g. I remember that in a political circular for entrepreneurs and other conservatives the suspicion was spread that Ayatollah Chomeini’s Islamic revolution in Iran was organized by and for the Communist party, which also was suspected to afterwards occupy the real positions of power in the country (i.e. one of those “Communist plots” which were then a standard in discussions in the USA). And in fact we had, and do have still, any number of conspiracies in the world: the secret services of countries are just official conspiracies, whereas Mafia, Camorra, Ndrangheta, drug cartels, Chinese triads, organizations for the poaching and smuggling of ivory and rhinoceros horn, etc., etc. are just unofficial conspiracies. Thus, certainly there are conspiracies, and any criminal investigator who would exclude the possibility that there might be a conspiracy behind some crime would be a pretty bad investigator. But of course we have with every single crime the problem to find out who or what was now really behind it (or whether it was just an accident), and for that job one needs witnesses (which may be very few and perhaps unreliable, especially if one has to deal with a conspiracy) and/or circumstantial evidence and/or forensic evidence. And in the case of 9/11 we do have at least circumstantial and also forensic evidence, all pointing in the direction which I was indicating. What is lacking, so far, is an official confirmation – which certainly would make people feel better about my suggestions. But I do not really think that there will very soon come an official confirmation … .


E-postadressen publiceras inte. Obligatoriska fält är märkta *

Denna webbplats använder Akismet för att minska skräppost. Lär dig hur din kommentardata bearbetas.