OPEN LETTER - October 12, 2004
Proper analysis of the relationship between the Bush administration and 9/11 demands historical perspective on the track record of the president's family, like the fact that George H.W. Bush secretly and illegally armed Iraq.
Perhaps the most ironic of all the hypocritical hype at the Republic National Convention this year was the hand held posters with a huge “W” - dumbed-down shorthand for the dude dubbed "Dubya", underneath which was “is for women”. The “W” in George W. Bush, stands for Walker, the other major family name in the reigning dynasty. The Bush/Walker clan has focused on fortunes from increasingly intense and insidious interests and influence in Defense, Intelligence and Energy. Based upon a comprehensive historical perspective, if anything, “W” is for “War”.
To paraphrase Kevin Phillips in his recent book American Dynasty - Aristocracy, Fortune, and the Politics of Deceit in the House of Bush, warmongering is a Bush/Walker Family tradition. And they have steadily honed their craft, modernized mastery of the game for the 21st century. Bush family network patterns of steadfast adherence to plausible deniability doctrines, brazen abuse of power and blatant deceptions are well documented and all but forgotten in the current campaign. All of which it puts into an intriguing light, the vast unresolved intrigue surrounding something that could not have worked out better for them if they planned it: 9/11.
Examination of the track record of "Team Bush" reveals deep and dark involvement in the business of war and related government policy, over four Bush/Walker generations. The president’s Great Grandfather, Samuel P. Bush, was so involved in the “War Industry” that during World War I, he headed the small arms, ordnance and ammunition section of the U.S. War Industries Board, while his firm did business with the U.S. military. This sort of approach to wealth and power accumulation would likely not dissipate over time, but rather intensify through the generations.
Another Great Grandfather and namesake, George Herbert Walker demonstrated a comparable passion for the profits that can be made from War. The families merged to form a force whose focus was on what is essentially warmongering. The family was intent on quietly cultivating connections and contriving conditions over the decades, culminating in 2000, when they would ultimately thrust themselves back into the most powerful office in the world. There was still unfinished Bush business. All they needed was "a catalyzing and cataclysmic event...like a new Pearl Harbor."
George H.W. Bush had spent the eighties building up Saddam Hussein's might, then baited him into Kuwait, which Iraq did invade, giving Bush justification to base U.S. military next door in Saudi Arabia. This is the primary motivation behind Osama bin Laden's "fatwa" against America: U.S. military presence in Muslim Holy Lands. He declared "war" on America's "war", which makes the "War on Terror": The War on War on War...which makes the Bush family network wealthier and more powerful.
This is relevant, significant fact that must be factored into any fulsome analysis of the relationship between George W. Bush and 9/11. The fact that this “March to War” that continues in Iraq today, actually started back in World War I is something that must be acknowledged, in order to put Bush's 9/11 "trifecta" into proper perspective. The convenient context that 9/11 bestowed upon Bush, was either 1. colossal coincidence or 2. contrived conspiracy to configure conditions conducive to constant, continuous covert conflict from which they now profit. The only thing about their actual agenda that changed after 9/11, is that it was suddenly justified. The Bush-built CIA could all-too-conceivably have played down threats before 9/11, just as it knew it could push the envelope with threat exaggeration after 9/11.This shocking explanation for all the bizarre breakdowns under such a defense-driven cabinet is quite plausible, yet still relegated to the realm of the hypothetical. The potentiality, although substantiated, has yet to be acknowledged by the press, and thus remains unresolved. The official "Story" about the pet goat named Osama, who had always been known in defense and intelligence circles as (Usa)ma, must no longer be allowed to prevail in precluding debate about the dire need for 9/11 Truth. The specter of Bush foreknowledge of, and therefore culpability in, 9/11 is too probable and problematic to not conclusively confirm as false or confront as true.
Label it a "Conspiracy Theory", but acknowledge that not all theories are false. President Dwight D. Eisenhower's farewell speech to the nation in 1961 warned of the dangers posed to the nation by unchecked influence of the "military-industrial complex" on U.S. government policy. It may be a vague one, but it is "Conspiracy Theory" about the 'community' which had blossomed after World War II, under the stewardship of the likes of Ike's golf pal, Prescott Bush. His son, George H.W. Bush was in Texas in November 1963, and was most likely involved with the CIA that his dad helped create, when the very next president - who had tried to stand up to that military-industrial complex - was gunned down with much shock and awe.
The Bush family was right in the thick of the development of this unprecedented entity, as it practically evolved from 'organization' into 'organism'. CIA headquarters probable wasn't named the George Bush Center for Intelligence because of his one year stint as director, but details of his deeper involvement are classified. As Bush and associates cultivated the culture of "The Company" and its service to "Clients", they may well have been imbuing the beast with an institutional instinct to not only survive, but thrive. Intelligence community manipulation of ideas and even culture, to justify bigger defense budgets is a consist ant pattern that spans its history, and might just be culminating in today's atmosphere of fear and loathing in America.
After three years of enduring George W. Bush engaging in maximum exploitation, but minimum explanation of 9/11, and before the U.S. holds its Presidential Election, the time has come to end the moratorium on historical perspective in examination of the constellation of circumstances around Bush's justification for everything: 9/11. The glaringly imbalanced ratio of truth to consequences is reflected in the disproportionate detail in the 9/11 Commission Report. After declaring that it was "mindful of the unfair perspective of hindsight", the report goes into 30-plus pages of detail about the "102 minutes" of actions by first responders in New York and Washington. But nowhere near that degree of explanation is offered for the reaction of the Commander-in-Chief during that time.
For instance, disclosure of the reason why the Commander-in-Chief, who had heard 40 briefings mentioning al Qaeda threats, while “the system was blinking red”, and was supposedly “tired of swatting at flies”, proceeded with a meaningless press event (redundant to one 16 hours earlier in Jacksonville), knowing that a commercial aircraft had hit the World Trade Center, a previously attacked target of terrorists. Recent focus on the lack of reaction by Bush after he was told that the second plane hit, misses the point, because the real issue is why he was even in the class at all.
Bush, in his address to the nation that night, stated as fact, “Immediately after the first attack, I implemented our federal emergency response plan.” That statement was mirrored earlier that day in a briefing by top Bush advisor Karen Hughes, who added that U.S. Secret Service had secured the President, “immediately after the first attack.” Even the 9/11 Commission Report points out that Bush's National Security Advisor informed him it was a commercial flight before he entered the classroom. That makes the fact that Bush insisted on proceeding with the insignificant ‘photo-op’ questionable enough in and of itself. But the notion that the entire U.S. national security infrastructure did not instantly recognize the significance of black smoke pouring out of a Twin Tower, and immediately contact the Commander-in-Chief's staff to abort his visit is a completely preposterous, utterly unacceptable assertion.
The Secret Service had an open line with the Federal Aviation Administration. Even a tower supervisor at Reagan International Airport had a hotline to the Secret Service. Why was terrorist-target-number-one allowed to pose for cameras in a school full of students and teachers for however many minutes, while the nation was under attack? The Secret Service web site tells about a standard operating procedure for post-event reporting, “After the visit, agents analyze every step of the protective operation, record unusual incidents, and suggest improvements for the future.”
Bush granting a Freedom of Information Act request for the report about the 9/11 visit would certainly generate insights as to how the operation that day compares to typical protocol. Otherwise, observers will have no choice but to conclude that there is something more at play in this situation, like that the reason Bush remained was to stage a performance to promote the perception that he was as surprised as everyone else. That was the story that was actively being sold at first and which lingers on by a thread as the flimsy excuse for Bush's flagrant failure to engage the enemy.It is impossible to refute the fact that 9/11 was the best possible thing that could have happened for the Bush administration, but most cannot seem to see the rest of the cause-effect potentiality in that situation. Indeed, relatively few people are even aware of the Bush inner circle's prediction of profiting from a "new Pearl Harbor”. Just add to that, another model from that era - the "Kamikaze Pilot", and it is easy to shoot holes in their untenable alibi citing of "lack of imagination".
The American public’s traditional lack of political will to wage war is well known. Even with the license that 9/11 gave it, the Bush administration had to resort to lies to get the nation to reluctantly invade Iraq. But Bush’s former Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill states that the administration was planning an Iraq invasion from the start, which means it must have had a reason to be confident that it would become feasible.
When there is this much reason to suspect that the Truth is trouble for Bush, then it is illogical to allow it to be concealed any longer. Conclusive resolution is priority one. Initiating this process is the purpose of proposition911.org, which recommends the "Team" model as a tool around which to organize efforts and evaluate performance. Please read Proposition 911. Even if you cannot accept the entire argument, but approve the principal of the Right to Truth, then please participate in propagating it. If it turns out to be false, then it's no big deal. But if it's true, then there is much to do.
Truth, in the legal, governmental sense of the word - referring to matters of fact relevant to performance of duties in public office - is something that citizens have not only a right, but also a responsibility, to access, when deemed vital to national interest. Unjustified denial of access to Truth from public officials is not only unacceptable, but also suspect because of implications of incrimination, and should be immediately challenged as such, with demands for full and immediate disclosure of the facts in question.
As a matter of principle, logic, reason and respect to the memory of the lives lost on September 11, 2001, as well as those lost due to U.S. military response to 9/11, it is imperative that the American people are able learn the Truth, whole Truth and nothing but the Truth about how and why 9/11 happened. Failure by Bush to promptly comply with this reasonable exercise of the public Right to Truth, leaves no choice other than drawing the conclusion that the 9/11 Truth is indeed incriminating.
Home | TV Spot | Open Letter | Proposition 911 | Contact | Vote/E-Lists | Response