The Mythology of 9/11

The events like the 9/11 attacks may be unjustified, but they are not unprovoked assaults against the truly innocent.

(GOLD RIVER B.C.) - The tenth anniversary of September 11, 2001 has come and gone. One could not help but notice the media was full of articles on the event, and of public officials and others holding forth on what it all meant, yadda, yadda, yadda. There was no opportunity passed up to pander to the fears and gullibility of the citizenry and feed them fantasies and half truths. A propaganda event, in other words.

Canada's Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, in his statement on the occasion classified the event as a horrific act of terrorism. Fair enough, they all got that right; it was. But he also characterizes the acts on that day as senseless and cowardly. Really. I do not think that he is ignorant enough to believe that, but it is part of the official story that he hopes the public swallows.

The attacks made a lot of sense. If the goal was to suck the US into over reacting and damaging its economy, they made a lot of sense. If one believes the conspiracy theorists that they were a false flag operation to give the US an excuse to invade the Middle East and Afghanistan, they also make sense. Of course, if the goal was to become a martyr and go to some heavenly paradise, that fantasy makes no sense, but I doubt that was much of a reason for any of those behind the attacks.

Down in the US Vice President Joe Biden said that Al Qaeda "never imagined that the 3,000 people who lost their lives that day would inspire 3 million to put on the uniform and harden the resolve of 300 million Americans. They never imagined the sleeping giant they were about to awaken." Good sound bites, but again, propaganda. Whoever was behind the attacks, it was probably exactly what they were hoping for. You can believe that the response to the attacks by the US was either that of a sucker caught in a sting, or of someone who finally got the break that they were looking for to justify what they wanted to do.

Another part of the propaganda message is the old story of defending freedom and democracy to justify the needless sacrifice of troops, the diversion of wealth from public good to private profit, and the death of countless civilians. No one out there is defending freedom and democracy any more, at least not at the level of national governments or big business. The troops might think that they are, but like the rest of the population, they are being fed fairy tales to make them feel good about getting the shaft. The fact is that, often as not they are out there denying freedom and democracy to any popular movement that might threaten the ability of the big corporations to plunder.

The question is often asked "what did the US do to provoke the hatred that many in the world have for it," a hatred that led to events like the 9/11 attacks. That is an uncomfortable question for those who wish to perpetuate the myth of an innocent, benevolent US. The response often is to characterize such question as repulsive and to denigrate any who might pose it. Of course attacking that question is an attempt to bury reality in favour of the myth.

History is a continuous thread of tribes and nations looting and plundering each other. Modern civilizations are built on the bedrock of conquest and exploitation reaching far back in time. Those who have any doubts should ask those who have been displaced and disposed of, often brutally, by conquering powers. All this was supposed to have changed with World War II. At the end of that war the United Nations was formed, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was proclaimed, and other actions have been taken to secure those rights. But when it comes to choosing between human rights and profits, it is still profit that counts.

The fact that countries like the US are immersed in hypocrisy, pretending to be one thing while following policies of domination that have caused a lot of damage and grief around the world leaves us with no wonder why there is hatred. The events like the 9/11 attacks may be unjustified, but they are not unprovoked assaults against the truly innocent. Until everyone admits their part in the problem and decides to forever put human rights ahead of profit and personal interests, events like the 9/11 attacks will continue to occur.

"Democracy must be something more than two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner."
James Bovard

"When one tugs at a single thing in nature, he finds it attached to the rest of the world." John Muir

Jerry West grew up on a farm in Fresno County, California, and served with the US Marine Corps from 1965 to 1970 including 19 months in Vietnam with the Third Marine Division, and three years at MCAS Iwakuni where he became an anti-war organizer in 1970. He earned an Honors Degree in History at the University of California, Berkeley, and did two years of graduate study there. While in university he worked seasonally in fire and law enforcement with the US Forest Service.

After university he worked for a number of years in the international tour industry in operations and management before moving to a remote village on the west coast of Vancouver Island where he is currently the editor and publisher of The Record newspaper serving the Nootka Sound region. He is a Past President of the Northern California Land Trust, and a member of Phi Beta Kappa.<

Salem-News.com Top Stories

2025: Hope for the Best, Prepare for the Worst

Two Wars with No Way Out

No One Owns the Future

The Ugly Origins of Trump's America First Policy

A One-State Solution Could Transform the World

Comments Leave a comment on this story.

All comments and messages are approved by people and self promotional links or unacceptable comments are denied.

Jerry West September 29, 2011 4:28 pm (Pacific time)

Martin, the US was intervening in Chile years before the 1973 coup. Prominent Chileans who did respect the constitution like General Schneider and past President (and runner up to Allende) Jorge Alessandri had enough respect for the constitution that they would not support plans to use extra-constitutional means to remove him. Schneider paid for his respect for law with his life at the hands of the US backed Fascists. Frei, on the other hand seems to have been in the pocket of US interests (maybe ITT?).

Allende nationalized key parts of the economy that were controlled by foreign corporations. The turmoil and hardship in Chile can be laid at the feet of these groups and their tool, the US government. Your so called legitimate rebellion installed a fascist dictatorship marked by its brutality and gross violations of human rights. Actions that are unexcusable no matter what kind of regime imposes them.

As for talking to Chileans about this, of course there will be different pictures. Different people have different reasons for supporting one view or the other. The rich and the multi-national corporations despise democracy and see human rights as a obstacle to free enterprise, it is no wonder that they would support any regime, no matter how evil, if it served their interests.

Allende may not have had majority support, but his party had more support than any other single party, and they were elected. Even some of his opponents held that view and were willing to wait out the cycle. Foreign interests and greedy Chileans were not, and therein lies the blame for the mess in Chile.

It is questionable whether Allende was violating the constitution or not. If in fact it was clear that he was, he could have been convicted of abuse of power, but there was insufficient support for that in the Senate. There is no doubt that the coup violated the constitution, and Pinochet continued to violate it for years.

Maybe the real spark that prompted the fascists to move was the fact that Allende was going to put his reforms to the public in a plebiscite. Once that happened they would probably have been in a very weak spot to do anything about him.

Worth reading:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/11/world/americas/11pinochet.html

http://www.tni.org/archives/letelier-docs_timeline

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salvador_Allende

Martin at office September 27, 2011 5:57 pm (Pacific time)

Mr. West, so much inaccuracy is being spoken about the events on Chile - 1973. Mostly the uninformed put the blame of the "coup" on CIA and U.S. - Pinochet was nothing more than an US proxy, and that is false. The real nature of that military intervention makes clear that all the movement had its roots on Chilean soil and in defending Chile's Constitution. So, since no feasible mechanism existed in the Chilean Constitution to remove a President who had lost his democratic nature, the House of Deputies, in a two third vote that included all the representatives of the Christian Democratic Party (the party of former President Eduardo Frei Montalva), made "representations" to the Armed Forces that it was up to them to "put immediate end" to these constitutional violations. It must be agreed that this was, in fact, an unequivocal call to remove by force the President who had initiated the use of force with the purpose of imposing a communist dictatorship. It is true that Salvador Allende was elected President of Chile in 1970 by means of a democratic election (although with only 36.6% of the vote). Nevertheless, it is equally true that his government lost its democratic character by repeatedly violating the Constitution. The Economist said it clearly at the time: " The temporary death of democracy in Chile will be regrettable, but the blame lies clearly with Dr. Allende and those of his followers who persistently overrode the Constitution" (September 15, 1973). In effect, President Allende became a tyrant when he broke his solemn oath to respect the Constitution and the Chilean laws. There are numerous evidences to that effect (including a clear statement of the Supreme Court), but the most important one--and widely unknown outside of Chile--is the momentous Agreement of 23 August 1973 of the Chamber of Deputies (the Lower House of the Chilean Congress), which translated and posted as "The Declaration of Breakdown of Chilean Democracy". In addition to the historic economic transformation carried out by the free market economists, the achievement which meant avoiding a war with Argentina, and the voluntary transition to a democratic government, the truth demands recognition that former President Pinochet led a legitimate rebellion against tyranny and that the origin of Chile's civil war --and its victims-- lies with former President Allende and his marxist Socialist party. Mr. West, may I suggest you travel to Chile and speak to people who actually were involved in this time period. Of course socialists/communists will paint a different picture, but that is expected behavior by them don't you think? The attack on the USS Liberty was an act of war, and LBJ dropped the ball. We should have cut all aid to Israel at that time. It's unfortunate that the general population remains uninformed about this act of war. Why do you think that has happened? Who has been the gatekeeper preventing that info from getting widespread dissemination (like a Hollywood film)?

Jerry West September 26, 2011 2:18 am (Pacific time)

Actually Martin, the 1973 reference is to Chile.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chile_coup

As for the Israelis, I remember them from 1967 when they attacked a US Navy vessel and murdered sailors and Marines without the US responding to the attack, a real military attack, not a terrorist crime.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Liberty_incident

Martin September 25, 2011 9:31 pm (Pacific time)

Mr. West, you referenced 1973. Suppose you are an Egyptian, a citizen of the country which in 1973 was 50 times more numerous than Israel( this majority is still similar today) , pumped with arms up to your nostrils by the Sovliet Union and supported by Syria and Jordan. You strike the unsuspected blow, without declaring war, and even manage to cross the Suez and capture some positions on the Israeli side. Life is good, and you already dream about how you will enter Jerusalem. But then , all of a sudden, these Israelis whom you were taught to despise as cowards all your life strike back, drive you into Sinai, then continue driving you until Cairo - and stop only 100 km from your capital without any troops capable to stop them in front of the Jewish tanks. You know that you were saved by Russians and Americans whom you hate because of this. What would you do? A normal people would analyze the reasons of the defeat and learn some lessons. Arabs chose another way. They just declared they won the Yom Kippur War. Let a child play, if it stops him from crying seems to reflect what's going on today. I pity the country, or countries, who attack Israel again. It will happen, but this time the United States can remain on the sidelines, hopefully. For if not, the domestic attacks will be rather bloody.

Jerry West September 25, 2011 5:07 pm (Pacific time)

Hi Kevin,
I'm fine, did not have a very good growing season here, too cool, but managed to get enough to have fresh vegetables all summer and put away a bunch for winter. ---

I believe Colin Powell was right when he advised to treat 9/11 as a crime rather than an act of war, but then reality would not accomplish what the Cheney group wanted to which was military expansion and ramped up profits for the defense industry. I know a number of people in the military and some of them have a point of view quite unlike the one that you express, the military seems to be divided on this issue. It may even be that some like Pat Tillman paid a price for not agreeing with the propaganda. And do not forget the considerable resistance in the National Guard about getting sucked into this mess. Whatever the troops are doing defending the American Empire and expanding its reach has nothing to do with protecting us, but probably puts us more in harms way. One might also note that Saddam was an ally, helped into power by the US, and then betrayed. He was also an enemy of Al Qaeda and the Islamic radicals, including Iran. The new US installed regime in Iraq will be an ally of Iran. Go figure. One might also consider that the Taliban, evil as they are, were willing to make a deal on Al Qaeda and Bush opted for war instead because war was what was wanted. And, the roots of the 9/11 attack and most of our problems with the Islamists are in Saudi Arabia, an ally who seems to be held exempt from any responsibility. Now if we really want to remember 9/11 the one we should never forget is the one in 1973 where US backed terrorists took down a democratically elected government and installed a reign of brutality and gross violations of human rights with US support. ----

PS: It is debatable whether the 9/11 attack was a complete surprise to the government. It was not a surprise to me. My first response was "this was bound to happen."

Anonymous September 25, 2011 12:32 pm (Pacific time)

During the day I keep pretty occupied, but when laying in bed at night, or waking in the morning, it hits me. My only fear, is not muslims/islams, I am scared to heck of these banksters who took over our government long ago. And the corrupt politicians that go along with it for their own personal agendas, not the people they are supposed to represent. Support Ron Paul. He is not perfect, but he is the only one who is consistent and tells the truth.

Kevin September 25, 2011 11:29 am (Pacific time)

HI Jerry, how have you been? Last June almost made it up to your community. I was visiting relatives north of Victoria, but was on a tight time schedule. I believe most everyone older than 20 remembers whom they were with, what they were doing and how they learned we were at war that beautiful Tuesday morning a decade ago. I recall a gorgeous late-summer morning with blue skies — "shirt-sleeve weather" — and then the horror: two of the world's tallest buildings collapsing into piles of rubble, the west wall of the Pentagon in flames and a fire-bathed crater in the soil of Somerset County, Pa. Like the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor that Sunday morning of Dec. 7, 1941, the assault on Tuesday, Sept. 11, 2001, was a complete surprise. Politicians, pundits and quasi-historians have tried to find similarities in the two events, but there are few other real parallels. The attack bin Laden carried out with just 19 radical Islamists aboard four commercial airliners killed 2,973 Americans — more than the Japanese had at Pearl Harbor. As my father stated, retired military, in strategic terms, the 9/11 attack was a nearly perfect "economy of force" operation. Though there was no declaration of war, hundreds of thousands of young Americans volunteered to take up arms against an enemy they understood but Washington has steadfastly refused to name. Every one of the soldiers, sailors, airmen, guardsmen and Marines on duty today either "joined up" or "stayed in" because of what took place on 9/11. In the decade since, more than 2 million of them — the brightest and bravest of their generation — have served in the extremely difficult and dangerous places where this long war is being fought. And they continue to do so, despite Washington's inability to define victory and despite the growing antipathy of our mainstream media. The nation that once honored its war heroes with parades and celebrations now all but ignores the extraordinary sacrifices being made on our behalf. Instead, politicians, pundits and the potentates of the press constantly seek ways to denigrate those who serve in our nation's uniform. Those who define what is "news" for the rest of us have beaten Abu Ghraib like a rented mule for more than a half- dozen years. Newsweek magazine created a totally fictional story about a Quran's being flushed down a toilet at the Guantanamo Bay detention facility, generating scores of attacks in Muslim-majority countries. Sen. Dick Durbin likened our troops to those who served Adolf Hitler, Josef Stalin and Cambodian despot Pol Pot. And a reporter for The New York Times claimed that most of those serving in harm's way are just "poor kids from Mississippi or Alabama or Texas who could not get a decent job or health insurance." Those who believe this drivel don't know the warriors of 9/11. The recent memorial services on the 10th anniversary of that devastating attack on our soil will justly focus on the first responders. The firemen, police officers, emergency medical technicians and everyday citizens who risked — and sometimes lost — their lives that day are heroes and deserve to be recognized as such. So are those who watched the events that day and decided to don a uniform and fight back at those who wrought such death and destruction on our shores. Thanks to young Americans wearing helmets, flak jackets, flight suits and combat boots, Saddam Hussein — the Butcher of Baghdad — is no more and bin Laden is dead. Al-Qaida, the vicious radical Islamist movement bin Laden spawned, is fractured and badly damaged but still alive in Pakistan, Somalia, Yemen and Chechnya and seeks to take advantage of uncertainty in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya. The ayatollahs in Iran are guiding violence in Syria and threatening stability in Iraq. While we recall those who were lost on 9/11, we would do well to also remember those who serve in our armed forces because of what happened that day. They forfeited the comforts of home, absented themselves from the affection of loved ones and went into harm's way to protect us from those who would once again visit unspeakable terror on our homeland. They, too, deserve our thanks and prayers in this decade of war, because it isn't over yet.

[Return to Top]

Quick Links

DINING

MUST SEE SALEM

AUCTIONS - APPRAISALS

CONSTRUCTION SERVICES

ONLINE SHOPPING

Advertise with Salem-News