portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article

9.11 investigation

Pursue the Truth about September 11

Of course it was a coincidence. But still, there are mysteries about what's been happening and most of the big media are not wasting any energy on them. They're much too busy ensuring we're all well informed on what Winona Ryder boosted from Saks or Harry Potter's latest adventures.
Nov. 17, 2002. 01:00 AM

Pursue the truth about Sept. 11


So on Friday, the American Congress voted to create an independent commission to investigate why the United States could/did/would not prevent the Sept. 11 attacks. Finally.

Now let's see if President George Bush signs off on this, as he indicated he would. And, if he does, how far will the commission go, how many stones will it overturn and how many worms will it unearth?

The White House sure was stalling on this one, citing concerns about possible leaks that could compromise ongoing intelligence work. An investigation, it claimed, would distract authorities from the fight against terrorism.

Isn't that just a touch convenient, not to mention suspicious? Or am I just being paranoid? I mean, there were the relatives of the victims, pleading and protesting and pressing for an investigation. But did anyone pay much attention? Nah. Once the networks had their way with the widows and orphans for the big one-year-after mourn-athon, there was nothing left to discuss.

Even some families' intent to sue Saudi mucky-mucks for their alleged part in financing Al Qaeda has received little ink. But then, the administration would like to avoid that lawsuit because according to The Washington Post, officials "believe it could damage relations with Riyadh." Heaven forbid you should wreck relations with the folks who spawned 15 of the 19 hijackers. So why publicize a lawsuit that could be such a pain in America's backside?

Which is why I almost fell off the sofa Thursday when I caught Julia Sweeney on MSNBC's left-lib Donahue. Her husband Brian died on one of the planes that struck the World Trade Center. But, rather than accepting the tax-free $1.7 million (U.S.) "government buyout," she's suing.

"(T)his is the only way that I can get answers that I want," she said. "There have been many things swept under the carpet. And I think it's a shame in a government that you trust I think it's a shame, the things that they choose to tell you and the things they choose not to tell you."

Getting the truth about 9/11 has seemed impossible. The evasions, the obfuscations, the contradictions and, let's not put too fine a point on it, the lies have been overwhelming.

Just the other day, the Associated Press reported that, contrary to what was circulated at the time, box-cutters, which the hijackers were alleged to have used to take over the planes, had been forbidden on planes since 1994. Airport screeners were to call supervisors if such items were found. But they didn't on Sept. 11, even though, as we now know, there had been "chatter" about hijacking for weeks. Why not?

The questions are endless. But most are not being asked still by most of the media most of the time.

All of which to say, there are many people, and more by the minute, persuaded that, if the Bushies didn't cause 9/11, they did nothing to stop it. Even if you don't buy that, it's hard to deny that the administration has exploited the massacres, using them to advance its agenda while avoiding such issues as corporate corruption.

The dearth of public accountability explains why it took only a couple of hours after Democratic Senator Paul Wellstone's plane crashed last month for the conspiracy theorists to crank up the "was-he-murdered?" e-mails. His death sure seemed odd, especially since he was such a staunch anti-Bushite. Could it have been a coincidence that his wife was also killed, so she couldn't step in for him? Or that the markets jumped after the news, in a turnaround dubbed the "Wellstone Rally?"

Of course it was a coincidence. But still, there are mysteries about what's been happening and most of the big media are not wasting any energy on them. They're much too busy ensuring we're all well informed on what Winona Ryder boosted from Saks or Harry Potter's latest adventures.

Is it not weird, for example, how we can hear so much about regime change, weapons of mass destruction and hi-tech helicopters but never the O-word, oil? Or how the administration simply makes stuff up about Iraq?

If the big media aren't connecting the dots, then no wonder the Internet is loaded with Web sites asking what really happened on, around and since Sept. 11.

True, some sites are kind of wacky. But others are carefully considered, well crafted and very compelling.

Among them:  http://www.whatreallyhappened.com, "The Complete 9/11 Timeline" at  http://www.cooperativeresearch.org and the particularly evocative Canadian-designed site at  http://www.globalhowler.com. It contains an unforgettable (and totally worth the long download) video showing how Bush read to kids about pet goats as the planes were being hijacked. There's also a throrough point-by-point synthesis of the research, discrepancies and conspiracy theories out there.

But designer Jim Macdonald insists "that it would be wrong to call us conspiracy theorists, and that if you did, you would be saying the magic words that would allow people to go back to sleep without worrying about the answers to any of these questions."

He's right. Fact is, there are holes in the story as big as Ground Zero. But few media are filling them.

Yet, when dedicated citizens without the mega resources needed attempt to fill some holes, they're shot down by the right-wing anchors and the vitriolic pundits who wave the stars-and-stripes and cry how everyone is "blaming the victims." Why? Can't they handle the truth?

P.S. Have I mentioned how there's significant Saudi investment in AOL Time Warner, which owns CNN? Not that that has anything to do with anything. Just thought you ought to know.


address: address: Toronto Star