Print Contact Articles by Subject 9-11 Archive 2012 9-11 and the Politics of War

9-11 and the Politics of War

August 30, 2012

Carl Cameron asks Ron Paul to reject '9-11 truthers'

“Congressman Paul, many of your supporters call themselves ‘9-11 truthers.’ They believe that the U.S. government was in some way complicit with the 9-11 attacks or covered it up. Are you tonight prepared to either embrace that rhetoric or ask those supporters to abandon it, or divorce themselves from your candidacy?”
- Carl Cameron to Ron Paul during Republican debate hosted by Fox News, January 10, 2008

"New York Times Motto," a cartoon by R.J. Matson, makes fun of Judith Miller's false propaganda stories about Iraq's supposed weapons of mass destruction.  Miller's articles were instrumental in pushing the U.S. into war with Iraq in 2003.  As it turned out, there were no Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.  Roll Call, October 19, 2005

“In the three years since 9-11, we've begun to understand that it's possible to know what happened without knowing what happened.”
New York Times"The Public Knowledge of 9/11", September 11, 2004

Charles Lindbergh speaking at an America First rally, 1941

"National polls showed that when England and France declared war on Germany, in 1939, less than 10 percent of our population favored a similar course for America. But there were various groups of people, here and abroad, whose interests and beliefs necessitated the involvement of the United States in the war… The three most important groups who have been pressing this country toward war are the British, the Jewish, and the Roosevelt administration…  

"When hostilities commenced in Europe, in 1939, it was realized by these groups that the American people had no intention of entering the war. They knew it would be worse than useless to ask us for a declaration of war at that time. But they believed that this country could be enticed into the war in very much the same way we were enticed into the last one.

"They planned:  first, to prepare the United States for foreign war under the guise of American defense; second, to involve us in the war, step by step, without our realization; third, to create a series of incidents which would force us into the actual conflict. These plans were of course, to be covered and assisted by the full power of their propaganda."
- Charles Lindbergh, “Who Are the War Agitators?” from a speech given in Des Moines, Iowa, September 11, 1941


By a ratio of about 5 to 1, Americans want the U.S. military out of Afghanistan, according to a Fox News poll from April 2012.  In a similar poll by ABC News and the Washington Post, two-thirds of the population said the war in Afghanistan “has not been worth fighting.”  While public opinion is strongly opposed to the continued U.S. military intervention in the Middle East, when the American people go to the polls in November they will only have a choice between two pro-war candidates for president. Although this situation defies the logic of a democratic system of government, this is exactly what happened in 2004 and 2008. If a strong anti-war candidate, like Dr. Ron Paul, were on the ballot he would probably win in a fair election against a pro-war candidate. Since the war in Afghanistan began in 2001, the two major political parties have yet to offer the American people an anti-war candidate. For the voters in the United States of America peace is simply not an option.

In spite of the fact that the war in Afghanistan is so very unpopular, the political establishment and the mainstream media in the United States promote only pro-war candidates. Anti-war candidates like Ron Paul are ignored and ridiculed by the mainstream media. These are the same media networks that promoted the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and who are now supporting U.S. intervention in Syria and Iran. The same media outlets have propagated an unproven explanation about 9-11 while treating skeptics with complete contempt.

During a 2008 Republican presidential debate, Carl Cameron of Fox News put Ron Paul on the spot by asking him to either embrace or reject the “9-11 truthers” who supported his candidacy. The debate was hosted by Rupert Murdoch’s Fox News and Murdoch’s employees asked all the questions. Cameron’s question, which clearly conveyed the bias of his employer, was meant to ridicule the 9-11 truth movement and humiliate Ron Paul. But ask yourself, why is the subject of 9-11 truth taboo with the mainstream media?


The major news networks in the United States have deliberately ignored the unanswered questions about 9-11 and been openly hostile to those who demand answers about the terror attacks that led to the deaths of nearly three thousand people. Because of the media’s failure to investigate 9-11, the public has been left with a very incomplete understanding of what happened. Three years after the most devastating terror attacks in American history, the New York Times summed up its attitude of willful ignorance saying “…we've begun to understand that it's possible to know what happened without knowing what happened.”

In a democratic society with a truly free press, one would expect that every aspect of such a terror atrocity would be investigated by newspapers like the New York Times, but that has not been the case with 9-11. Evidently, the owners and editors of the news networks prevented their employees from investigating the crime of the century. This left the public with an inadequate and unproven version of events that fails to explain what really happened. The scientific evidence clearly disproves the notion that Osama Bin Laden and 19 Arab terrorists destroyed the World Trade Center, so who did?

If the terror attacks were not the work of Al Qaida then they must be a manifestation of a secret powerful organization that remains hidden yet which controls the mass media and the U.S. government from behind the scenes. To identify the real perpetrators of 9-11 we should start by asking why our political leaders and news media avoid any discussion of the realities of 9-11. We need to think very clearly about these observations and find a diagnosis that explains them. 

The terror attacks of September 11, 2001, changed the world as they were surely meant to do. The attacks of 9-11 were designed to create a spectacle of terror that would facilitate radical political changes in the United States under the imperative of waging the “War on Terror.” The terror atrocity itself, however, was only the beginning. What was of the utmost importance for those behind the terrorism was that the desired interpretation be propagated immediately by the mass media. For the perpetrators of the terror atrocity, world-wide acceptance of their interpretation of 9-11 was essential to putting their war plan into effect.

What is most peculiar about the government version of 9-11 is that it was propagated by the mass media before the crime itself had even been investigated. A prepared explanation that Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaida were behind the attacks and that the United States should respond with a military invasion of Afghanistan was first presented to the global public on BBC World television by the Israeli Ehud Barak only minutes after the explosive demolitions of the Twin Towers. Despite the discovery of an abundance of evidence proving that the World Trade Center was demolished with sophisticated explosives including nano-thermite, the political establishment has never deviated from the initial interpretation first put forth by Ehud Barak and others on 9-11. 

With the passage of time we can see that this was all written into the script. The interpretation blaming Bin Laden had been prepared before the terror attacks had been carried out.   Despite the fact that nearly three thousand people were murdered on 9-11, there was never any intention of carrying out a proper criminal investigation. Rather than investigating the evidence from the crime scene, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (F.B.I.), an agency of the U.S. Department of Justice under the control of the president, allowed the steel from the World Trade Center to be destroyed before it could be examined. President George W. Bush, who quickly initiated the war in Afghanistan based on wholly unproven allegations, refused to authorize a full-fledged investigation of the crime. More than a year passed before the politically-appointed 9-11 commission was established in November 2002. By that time nearly all of the evidence from the crime scenes had been destroyed.

The failure to properly investigate 9-11 was not the result of incompetence in high places; it was the plan from the beginning. 9-11 is a crime that was not meant to be solved. A criminal investigation would have exposed the lies of the government version and revealed the true perpetrators. Had there been a proper criminal investigation of 9-11 there would not have been a “War on Terror” or the illegal wars in Afghanistan or Iraq. The real villains would have been exposed and removed from their positions of power.  

Unfortunately, such a proper criminal investigation of 9-11 has yet to happen. As a result, the American people have been deceived into two disastrous and costly wars and seen their civil liberties severely curtailed based on a pack of lies spun around an unsolved crime. For the real perpetrators of 9-11 – and their war agenda – the cover-up must continue, which means they need to control who becomes president of the United States. This is the real reason why 9-11 truth is a taboo subject within the American political establishment and the controlled media. This is also why they do not embrace Ron Paul’s common sense anti-war position. Although Dr. Paul is not an outspoken skeptic of the official version of 9-11, he is staunchly opposed to the subsequent U.S. military intervention in the Middle East and the corrupt financial and monetary system that profits from the war-mongering.

One needs to take all of these observations into consideration in order to make a logical diagnosis to determine the true cause of the 9-11 disease that afflicts the American body politic. The diagnosis would find that the same faction is responsible for all of the aforementioned symptoms: the terror attacks, the cover-up, and the false interpretation of the 9-11 crimes, as well as the subsequent “War on Terror” and the illegal wars of aggression in Afghanistan and Iraq. The same cabal controls the major media networks and the political establishment in the United States, which is why 9-11 truth is a taboo subject with the media and politicians. This means that the criminal masterminds behind the 9-11 terror attacks belong to the same secret cabal that controls our political parties and fraudulent elections in the United States. This is what is meant by those who say 9-11 was an “inside job.” While this may be difficult to accept, this is the only logical diagnosis that explains all of the symptoms of the 9-11 condition that has so sorely affected the United States.


Afghanistan,, August 29, 2012

Republican Debate Transcript, Myrtle Beach, South Carolina,, January 10, 2008 (Note that in the CFR transcript the text reads "9/11 Troofers" although Cameron clearly said "truthers".)

“Who Are the War Agitators?” speech by Charles Lindbergh, September 11, 1941

©2021 Christopher Bollyn | Sitemap | christopher at bollyn dot com