Roberts, Paul Craig

Subscribe to Roberts, Paul Craig feed
Institute for Political Economy
Updated: 54 min 3 sec ago

Will Moscow Fall for The Macron Deception?

5 hours 11 min ago

Will Moscow Fall for The Macron Deception?

Paul Craig Roberts

French president Emmanuel Macron is an American puppet.  He was put in office by Washington.  His current assignment is to deceive Russian president Putin by taking advantage of Russia’s longing to join the Western world.  In a series of statements— “Russia is deeply European”  (Aug. 20), “We need partnership with Russia to build a new architecture of trust and security in Europe” (Aug. 27), “It’s time for Europe to reach out to Russia” (Aug. 27), “Pushing Russia further into isolation would be a profound error by Europe” (Aug. 29), “Time has come to ease tensions with Russia” (Sept. 9), and so on.

What’s going on here?  Milder statements by President Trump brought him charges that he was a “Putin agent” and a multi-year “Russiagate” investigation that aimed at Trump’s impeachment. Yet here is Washington’s vassal brown-nosing up to Putin.  What is the point of this if not to soften up Putin for Russian concessions to Washington’s foreign policy as the price of being accepted by the West or to put Putin off guard for a coming attack on Iran?

I regard Putin as the only leader the world has, but I am sometimes puzzled by him.  Iran, an ally of Russia, is being set up by Israel, Washington and Saudi Arabia for military attack, and Putin offers to sell Saudi Arabia the Russian S-300 and S-400 air defense system!  Does Putin wish to arm Saudi Arabia, Israel, and the US against Iranian retaliation?  The minute Saudi Arabia acquires one of these unique systems, it will go straight to Washington where experts will figure out how to defeat it.  Thus, Iran’s defense would be compromised, and so would Syria’s and Russia’s.  

I sometimes wonder just how realistic the Russian and Chinese governments are.  The Chinese government tolerates American NGOs that sow discord in China and have Hong Kong in revolt.  The Russian government tolerates American and German NGOs that organized the recent protests in Moscow that hurt the Russian government’s showing in the Moscow municipal elections.  The United States would never tolerate Russian or Chinese financed NGOs operating in America sowing discord.  Why did the Russian government permit Washington to embarrass it in the Moscow elections?  Why does the Chinese government permit Washington to embarrass it in Hong Kong?

Perhaps both governments are trying to demonstrate that they are more tolerant of free speech and protest than are Western countries, and they do seem to be more tolerant.  But it does not register with anyone, because the Western media controlls the explanation, and the explanation is that Putin’s support with Russians is falling and China is abusing innocent protesters who just want a bit of freedom.  

Iran is being set up for attack.  Americans and Europeans are being told that Iranian weapons were used in the Saudi oil plant attack.  In Washington, this makes Iran guilty even if it was done by some Yemeni group at war with Saudi Arabia, just as the excuse for the invasion of Afghanistan was Osama bin Laden’s presence in the country. In truth, the attack on Saudi Arabia was most likely done by Israel or by the CIA in order to create more propaganda against Iran so that the insouciant Western people will support a military attack. The Russian and Chinese governments are evidently blinded by the myth of democracy in the West.  The Western peoples are not sufficiently intelligent and perceptive to comprehend what is happening.  They are not a restraint on the ruling agendas.

Where are the voices of Russia and China?  Is China happy to lose its energy supply and investments in Iran?  Is Russia happy to have jihadist chaos on its border?  Both countries could stop the attack on Iran that is brewing simply by announcing that they won’t tolerate it.

If Iran is attacked, it will be as much Russia and China’s fault as Israel’s and Washington’s.

The West is collapsing morally, spiritually, economically, politically.  Why in the world does Russia want to join the West?

The post Will Moscow Fall for The Macron Deception? appeared first on PaulCraigRoberts.org.

Thank You for Your Strong Support

21 hours 25 min ago

Thank You for Your Strong Support

Dear Supporters:  Thank you for the many encouraging emails and for your encouraging financial support.  This was the strongest September in the website’s history.

Let me tell you something about the website.  At this moment as I write it is being read by people in 97 countries.  In the first 8 and one-half months of 2019 there have been 3,128,097 visits to this website.  The readership of my columns is many times larger as they are posted on a large number of other websites in English and in foreign language translation, and many are published in Russian in Russian newspapers.  So far this year one-third of donations come from abroad.

Thanks to you, my columns have become an international phenomenon.

Although the readership is large, the donations mostly come from a small number of core supporters who have proven to be ever faithful.

The website has Jewish readers and donors who understand that it is not anti-semitic to criticize Israel any more than it is anti-American to criticize Washington.  The website has black readers who understand that racial division is debilitating for our country.  The website has many female readers who understand that gender division destroys families and the institution of marriage.  The race and gender hatred fomented by Identity Politics is a cancer eating away at the heart of the country.

There are still enough people who, if they could find a political leader, could put our country back together again.  Unfortunately, neither political party seems capable of producing leaders.

The post Thank You for Your Strong Support appeared first on PaulCraigRoberts.org.

Armageddon on the Horizon?

Mon, 2019-09-16 02:07

Armageddon on the Horizon?

Paul Craig Roberts

Trump supporters should let Trump hear from them as he is about to commit the United States to a war of Israel’s choosing.  A mutual defense treaty between the US and Israel would give Israel the ability to commit the US to a war in Israel’s behalf.  

Remember history.  It was British prime minister Chamberlain’s guarantee to Poland that started World War II.  The idiot British lost control over their own policy and gave it to a crazed and irresponsible Polish military dictatorship.  

The attack on the Saudi oil fields that Trump and Israel are blaming on Iran is almost certainly an  attack by Israel.  The attack is being used to start a war with Iran.

Putin needs to speak up now before the war starts, because it is impossible that Russia will be able to avoid involvement.  The chances are substantial that Armageddon is about to unfold while the world sits stupidly.

The post Armageddon on the Horizon? appeared first on PaulCraigRoberts.org.

Tom Woods on Hate-Monger Paul Krugman’s Claim that Donald Trump is trying to establish an “authoritarian, white nationalist regime.”

Sun, 2019-09-15 04:28

Tom Woods on Hate-Monger Paul Krugman’s Claim that Donald Trump is trying to establish an “authoritarian, white nationalist regime.”

We are supposed to believe that “white supremacy” is on the rise. I’m scanning the headlines, and cannot actually seem to find anyone advocating legal racial subordination, or separate facilities by race, or special benefits available only to whites and not to nonwhites.

The existence of affirmative action would appear to suggest something like the opposite. I don’t recall affirmative action in apartheid South Africa. The Donald Trump phenomenon is supposed to prove the existence of “white supremacy,” but Columbia University’s Musa al-Gharbi ran the numbers, and as he explained on episode #1159 of the Tom Woods Show. “racists” and “white supremacists” did not get Trump elected.

If “white supremacy” were truly gaining traction, the very accusation of being in favor of it wouldn’t destroy people’s careers and social standing, would it?

https://contrakrugman.com/ep-201-the-white-nationalist-hoax/ 

The post Tom Woods on Hate-Monger Paul Krugman’s Claim that Donald Trump is trying to establish an “authoritarian, white nationalist regime.” appeared first on PaulCraigRoberts.org.

Identity Politics At Work

Sun, 2019-09-15 04:23

Identity Politics At Work

The headline below is incorrect.  The white people are not drunk, just outnumbered and have things worth stealing. 

White people are so brainwashed by multiculturalism and diversity that they don’t have enough sense to stay out of black areas.  

https://www.infowars.com/insane-footage-drunk-whites-assaulted-robbed-by-young-black-gang-members/

https://youtu.be/TepT0Ttwz7M

The post Identity Politics At Work appeared first on PaulCraigRoberts.org.

Is This America’s Future?

Sat, 2019-09-14 19:39

Is This America’s Future?

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/09/no_matter_who_wins_in_2020_there_will_be_blood.html 

According to readers’ reports of the Democrats’ “debates,” which are not debates and I never watch them, Cory Booker called for the creation of a “race force” to combat “white supremacy” and said he would create one if elected.  Beto O’Rourke called for forcible seizure of so-called “assault weapons” and said that the gestapo would be sent to your house to confiscate them. 

If these reports are correct, William Gensert’s article is not a fantasy.

In America Identity Politics has unleashed racial hatred against white people who are now demonized as a race that must be eradicated, and Identity Politics together with feminism has damaged the relations between white men and white women, which weakens the ability of white people to resist their demonization.  

Identity Politics has divided the country against itself, and a house divided against itself cannot stand.

The post Is This America’s Future? appeared first on PaulCraigRoberts.org.

US & UK Governments Have Degenerated Into Criminal Organizations

Sat, 2019-09-14 18:59

US & UK Governments Have Degenerated Into Criminal Organizations

In the “Great Democracies” Patriotism Now Supports Rule By Criminals

Why is Julian Assange Being Tortured to Death?

By Karen Kwiatkowski

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2019/09/karen-kwiatkowski/why-is-julian-assange-being-tortured-to-death/ 

Stephen Lendman provides further evidence that the US and UK governments are utterly criminal organizations.

https://stephenlendman.org/2019/09/assange-to-remain-in-uk-prison-beyond-release-date/ 

The post US & UK Governments Have Degenerated Into Criminal Organizations appeared first on PaulCraigRoberts.org.

The 9/11 Deception Remains In Control Of America’s Destiny

Sat, 2019-09-14 02:59

The 9/11 Deception Remains In Control Of America’s Destiny

Paul Craig Roberts

The 18th anniversary of 9/11 is over, but 9/11 isn’t.  September 11, 2001, is the defining event of America’s 21st century.  The neoconservatives used their false flag event to destroy the Bill of Rights and turn the American people over to a police state, and they used the New Pearl Harbor that they orchestrated to launch their wars of aggression in the Middle East for the purpose of reconstructing the Middle East in Israel’s interest.  The new American police state will become more oppressive as time goes by, and now that Israel has the bit in its teeth the United States will likely be forced into a war that will result in nuclear Armageddon.  

The evil inherent in Washington’s attacks on Islamic countries has resulted in the intervention by other powerful countries who are threatened by the chaos that Washington has sowed for two decades in the Middle East. Russia for one intervened in Syria and stopped the neoconservative orchestrated overthrow of the Syrian government, thereby making the world aware that American unilateralism was over.  This realization together with the constant stream of lies and threats issuing from Washington has undermined America’s influence in the world and will lead to the breakup of Washington’s empire.

Edward Curtin explains how the insouciant American people were set up in advance through a form of linguistic mind control to accept the utterly implausible official explanation of 9/11.  Indeed, the term 9/11 is itself part of the mind control.  Curtain disavows its use.  I agree with him. We need a different way of naming the event. I am open to suggestions.

I found convincing Curtin’s explanation of how language was used to set up the American people in advance to accept the official explanation of the defining event of 21st century America.  I recommend it to you:

Why I Don’t Speak of the Fake News of “9/11” Anymore

Edward Curtin 

September 11, 2019 

This article was posted last year but is still pertinent, so I am re-posting it.

Tuesday, September 11, 2001, was a non-teaching day for me.  I was home when the phone rang at 9 A.M.  It was my daughter, who was on a week’s vacation with her future husband.  “Turn on the TV,” she said.  “Why?” I asked.  “Haven’t you heard?  A plane hit the World Trade Tower.”

I turned the TV on and watched a plane crash into the Tower.  I said, “They just showed a replay.”  She quickly corrected me, “No, that’s another plane.”  And we talked as we watched in horror, learning that it was the South Tower this time.  Sitting next to my daughter was my future son-in-law; he had not had a day off from work in a year.  He had finally taken a week’s vacation so they could go to Cape Cod.  He worked on the 100th floor of the South Tower.  By chance, he had escaped the death that claimed 176 of his co-workers.

That was my introduction to the attacks.  Seventeen years have disappeared behind us, yet it seems like yesterday.  And yet again, it seems like long, long ago.

Over the next few days, as the government and the media accused Osama bin Laden and 19 Arabs of being responsible for the attacks, I told a friend that what I was hearing wasn’t believable; the official story was full of holes. I am a born and bred New Yorker with a long family history rooted in the NYC Fire and Police Departments, one grandfather having been the Deputy Chief of the Fire Department, the highest ranking uniformed firefighter, and the other a NYPD cop; a niece and her husband were NYPD detectives deeply involved in the response to that day’s attacks. Hearing the absurd official explanations and the deaths of so many innocent people, including many hundreds of firefighters, cops, and emergency workers, I felt a suspicious rage. It was a reaction that I couldn’t fully explain, but it set me on a search for the truth.  I proceeded in fits and starts, but by the fall of 2004, with the help of the extraordinary work of David Ray Griffin, Michael Ruppert, and other early skeptics, I could articulate the reasons for my initial intuition.  I set about creating and teaching a college course on what had come to be called 9/11.

But I no longer refer to the events of that day by those numbers.  Let me explain why.

By 2004 I had enough solid evidence to convince me that the U.S. government’s claims (and The 9/11 Commission Report) were fictitious.  They seemed so blatantly false that I concluded the attacks were a deep-state intelligence operation whose purpose was to initiate a national state of emergency to justify wars of aggression, known euphemistically as “the war on terror.”  The sophistication of the attacks, and the lack of any proffered evidence for the government’s claims, suggested that a great deal of planning had been involved.

Yet I was chagrined and amazed by so many people’s insouciant lack of interest in questioning and researching the most important world event since the assassination of President Kennedy.  I understood the various psychological dimensions of this denial, the fear, cognitive dissonance, etc., but I sensed something else as well.  For so many people their minds seemed to have been “made up” from the start.  I found that many young people were the exceptions, while most of their elders dared not question the official narrative.  These included many prominent leftist critics of American foreign policy, such as Noam Chomsky, Howard Zinn, Alexander Cockburn, and others, whose defenses of the official government and media explanations (when they even made such defenses; often they just trashed skeptics as “9/11 conspiracy nuts,” to quote Cockburn) totally lacked any scientific or logical rigor or even knowledge of the facts.  Now that seventeen years have elapsed, this seems truer than ever.  There is a long list of leftists who refuse to examine matter to this very day.  And most interestingly, they also do the same with the assassination of JFK, the other key seminal event of recent American history.

I kept thinking of the ongoing language and logic used to describe what had happened that terrible day in 2001 and in the weeks to follow.  It all seemed so clichéd and surreal, as if set phrases had it been extracted from some secret manual, phrases that rung with an historical resonance that cast a spell on the public, as if mass hypnosis were involved.  People seemed mesmerized as they spoke of the events in the official language that had been presented to them.

So with the promptings of people like Graeme MacQueen, Lance deHaven-Smith, T.H. Meyer, et al., and much study and research, I have concluded that my initial intuitive skepticism was correct and that a process of linguistic mind-control was in place before, during, and after the attacks.  As with all good propaganda, the language had to be insinuated over time and introduced through intermediaries.  It had to seem “natural” and to flow out of events, not to precede them.  And it had to be repeated over and over again.

In summary form, I will list the language I believe “made up the minds” of those who have refused to examine the government’s claims about the September 11 attacks and the subsequent anthrax attacks.

  1. Pearl Harbor.  As pointed out by David Ray Griffin and others, this term was used in September 2000 in The Project for the New American Century’s (PNAC) report, “Rebuilding America’s Defenses” (p.51).  Its neo-con authors argued that the U.S. wouldn’t be able to attack Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, etc. “absent some catastrophic event – like a new Pearl Harbor.”  Then on January 11, 2001, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld’s “Space Commission” warned that the U.S. could face a “space Pearl Harbor” if it weren’t careful and didn’t increase space security.  Rumsfeld urged support for the proposed U.S. national missile defense system opposed by Russia and China and massive funding for the increased weaponization of space.  At the same time he went around handing out and recommending Pearl Harbor: Warning and Decision (1962) by Roberta Wohlstetter, who had spent almost two decades working for The Rand Corporation and who claimed that Pearl Harbor was a surprise attack that shocked U.S. leaders. Pearl Harbor, Pearl Harbor, Pearl Harbor – those words and images dominated public consciousness for many months before 11 September 2001, and of course after.  The film Pearl Harbor, made with Pentagon assistance and a massive budget, was released on May 25, 2001 and was a box office hit.   It was in the theatres throughout the summer.  The thought of the attack on Pearl Harbor (not a surprise to the U.S. government, but presented as such) was in the news all summer despite the fact that the 60th anniversary of that attack was not until December 7, 2001, a more likely release date. So why was it released so early?  Once the September 11 attacks occurred, the Pearl Harbor analogy was “plucked out” of the social atmosphere and used constantly, beginning immediately. Another “Day of Infamy,” another surprise attack blared the media and government officials.  A New Pearl Harbor!  George W.  Bush was widely reported to have had the time that night, after a busy day of flying hither and yon to avoid the terrorists who for some reason had forgotten he was in a classroom in Florida, to allegedly use it in his diary, writing that “the Pearl Harbor of the twenty-first century took place today.  We think it is Osama bin Laden.”  Shortly after the 50th anniversary of Pearl Harbor on December 7th, Bush then formerly announced, referencing the attacks of September 11, that the U. S. would withdraw from the ABM Treaty. The examples of this Pearl Harbor/ September 11 analogy are manifold, but I am summarizing, so I will skip giving them.  Any casual researcher can confirm this.

2. Homeland.  This strange un-American term, another WW II word associated with another enemy – Nazi Germany – was also used many times by the neo-con authors of “Rebuilding America’s Defenses.”  I doubt any average American referred to this country by that term before.  Of course it became the moniker for The Department of Homeland Security, marrying home with security to form a comforting name that simultaneously and unconsciously suggests a defense against Hitler-like evil coming from the outside.  Not coincidentally, Hitler introduced it into the Nazi propaganda vernacular at the 1934 Nuremberg rally. Both usages conjured up images of a home besieged by alien forces intent on its destruction; thus preemptive action was in order.  Now the Department of Homeland Security with its massive budget is lodged permanently in popular consciousness.

3. Ground Zero.  This is a third WWII (“the Good War”) term first used at 11:55 A.M. on September 11 by Mark Walsh (aka “the Harley Guy” because he was wearing a Harley-Davidson tee shirt) in an interview on the street by a Fox News reporter, Rick Leventhal. Identified as a Fox free-lancer, Walsh also explained the Twin Towers collapse in a precise, well-rehearsed manner that would be the same illogical and anti-scientific explanation later given by the government: “mostly due to structural failure because the fire was too intense.” Ground zero – a nuclear bomb term first used by U.S. scientists to refer to the spot where they exploded the first nuclear bomb in New Mexico in 1945 – became another meme adopted by the media that suggested a nuclear attack had occurred or might in the future if the U.S. didn’t act. The nuclear scare was raised again and again by George W. Bush and U.S. officials in the days and months following the attacks, although nuclear weapons were beside the point in terms of the 11 September attacks, but surely not as a scare tactic and as part of the plan to withdraw from the ABM treaty that would be announced in December.  But the conjoining of “nuclear” with “ground zero” served to raise the fear factor dramatically.  Ironically, the project to develop the nuclear bomb was called the Manhattan Project and was headquartered at 270 Broadway, NYC, a few short blocks north of the World Trade Center.

4. The Unthinkable.  This is another nuclear term whose usage as linguistic mind control and propaganda is brilliantly analyzed by Graeme MacQueen in the penultimate chapter of his very important book, The 2001 Anthrax Deception.  He notes the patterned use of this term before and after September 11, while saying “the pattern may not signify a grand plan …. It deserves investigation and contemplation.”  He then presents a convincing case that the use of this term couldn’t be accidental.  He notes how George W. Bush, in a major foreign policy speech on May 1, 2001, “gave informal public notice that the United States intended to withdraw unilaterally from the ABM Treaty”; Bush said the U.S. must be willing to “rethink the unthinkable.”  This was necessary because of terrorism and rogue states with “weapons of mass destruction.”  PNAC also argued that the U.S. should withdraw from the treaty.  A signatory to the treaty could only withdraw after giving six months notice and because of “extraordinary events” that “jeopardized its supreme interests.” Once the September 11 attacks occurred, Bush rethought the unthinkable and officially gave formal notice on December 13 to withdraw the U.S. from the ABM Treaty, as previously noted.  MacQueen specifies the many times different media used the term “unthinkable” in October 2001 in reference to the anthrax attacks.  He explicates its usage in one of the anthrax letters – “The Unthinkabel” [sic].  He explains how the media that used the term so often were at the time unaware of its usage in the anthrax letter since that letter’s content had not yet been revealed, and how the letter writer had mailed the letter before the media started using the word.  He makes a rock solid case showing the U.S. government’s complicity in the anthrax attacks and therefore in the Sept 11 attacks.  While calling the use of the term “unthinkable” in all its iterations “problematic,” he writes, “The truth is that the employment of ‘the unthinkable’ in this letter, when weight is given both to the meaning of this term in U.S. strategic circles and to the other relevant uses of the term in 2001, points us in the direction of the U.S. military and intelligence communities.”  I am reminded of Orwell’s point in 1984: “a heretical thought – that is, a thought diverging from the principles of Ingsoc – should be literally unthinkable, at least as far as thought is dependent on words.”  Thus the government and media’s use of “unthinkable” becomes a classic case of “doublethink.”  The unthinkable is unthinkable.

5.  9/11.  This is the key usage that has reverberated down the years around which the others revolve. It is an anomalous numerical designation applied to an historical event, and obviously also the emergency telephone number.  Try to think of another numerical appellation for an important event in American history.  It’s impossible.  But if you have a good historical sense, you will remember that the cornerstone for the Pentagon was lain on September 11, 1941, three months before the attack on Pearl Harbor, and that the CIA engineered a coup against the Allende government in Chile on Sept 11, 1973.  Just strange coincidences?  The future editor of The New York Times and Iraq war promoter, Bill Keller, introduced the emergency phone connection on the morning of September 12th in a NY Times op-ed piece, “America’s Emergency Line: 911.”  The linkage of the attacks to a permanent national emergency was thus subliminally introduced, as Keller mentioned Israel nine times and seven times compared the U.S. situation to that of Israel as a target for terrorists.  His first sentence reads: “An Israeli response to America’s aptly dated wake-up call might well be, ‘Now you know.’”  By referring to September 11 as 9/11, an endless national emergency fear became wedded to an endless war on terror aimed at preventing Hitler-like terrorists from obliterating us with nuclear weapons that could create another ground zero or holocaust.  Mentioning Israel (“America is proud to be Israel’s closest ally and best friend in the world,” George W. Bush would tell the Israeli Knesset) so many times, Keller was not very subtly performing an act of legerdemain with multiple meanings.  By comparing the victims of the 11 September attacks to Israeli “victims,” he was implying, among other things, that the Israelis are innocent victims who are not involved in terrorism, but are terrorized by Palestinians, as Americans are terrorized by fanatical Muslims.  Palestinians/Al-Qaeda.  Israel/U.S.  Explicit and implicit parallels of the guilty and the innocent.  Keller tells us who the real killers are.  His use of the term 9/11 is a term that pushes all the right buttons, evoking unending social fear and anxiety.  It is language as sorcery. It is propaganda at its best. Even well-respected critics of the U.S. government’s explanation use the term that has become a fixture of public consciousness through endless repetition.   As George W. Bush would later put it, as he connected Saddam Hussein to “9/11” and pushed for the Iraq war, “We don’t want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud.”  All the ingredients for a linguistic mind-control smoothie had been blended.

I have concluded – and this is impossible to prove definitively because of the nature of such propagandistic techniques – that the use of all these words/numbers is part of a highly sophisticated linguistic mind-control campaign waged to create a narrative that has lodged in the minds of hundreds of millions of people and is very hard to dislodge.

It is why I don’t speak of “9/11” any more. I refer to those events as the attacks of September 11, 2001, which is a mouth-full and not easily digested in the age of Twitter and texting.  But I am not sure how to be more succinct or how to undo the damage, except by writing what I have written here.

Lance deHaven-Smith puts it well in Conspiracy Theory in America. The rapidity with which the new language of the war on terror appeared and took hold; the synergy between terms and their mutual connections to WW II nomenclatures; and above all the connections between many terms and the emergency motif of “9/11” and “9-1-1” – any one of these factors alone, but certainly all of them together – raise the possibility that work on this linguistic construct began long before 9/11….It turns out that elite political crime, even treason, may actually be official policy.

Needless to say, his use of the words “possibility” and “may” are in order when one sticks to strict empiricism.  However, when one reads his full text, it is apparent to me that he considers these “coincidences” part of a conspiracy.  I have also reached that conclusion.  As Thoreau put in his underappreciated humorous way, “Some circumstantial evidence is very strong, as when you find a trout in the milk.”

The evidence for linguistic mind control, while the subject of this essay, does not stand alone, of course.  It underpins the actual attacks of September 11 and the subsequent anthrax attacks that are linked.  The official explanations for these events by themselves do not stand up to elementary logic and are patently false, as proven by thousands of well-respected professional researchers from all walks of life – i.e. engineers, pilots, scientists, architects, and scholars from many disciplines (see the upcoming 9/11 Unmasked: An International Review Panel Investigation by David Ray Griffin and Elizabeth Woodworth, to be released September 11, 2018).  To paraphrase the prescient Vince Salandria, who said it long ago concerning the government’s assassination of President Kennedy, the attacks of 2001 are “a false mystery concealing state crimes.”  If one objectively studies the 2001 attacks together with the language adopted to explain and preserve them in social memory, the “mystery” emerges from the realm of the unthinkable and becomes utterable. “There is no mystery.” The truth becomes obvious.

How to communicate this when the corporate mainstream media serve the function of the government’s mockingbird (as in Operation Mockingbird), repeating and repeating and repeating the same narrative in the same language; that is the difficult task we are faced with, but there are signs today that breakthroughs are occurring, as growing numbers of international academic scholars are pushing to incorporate the analysis of the official propaganda surrounding 11 September 2001 into their work within the academy, a turnabout from years of general silence.  And more and more people are coming to realize that the official lies about 11 September are the biggest example of fake news in this century.  Fake news used to justify endless wars and the slaughter of so many innocents around the world.

Words have a power to enchant and mesmerize.  Linguistic mind-control, especially when linked to traumatic events such as the September 11 and the anthrax attacks, can strike people dumb and blind.  It often makes some subjects “unthinkable” and “unspeakable” (to quote Jim Douglass quoting Thomas Merton in JFK and the Unspeakable: the unspeakable “is the void that contradicts everything that is spoken even before the words are said.”).

We need a new vocabulary to speak of these terrible things.  Let us learn, as Chief Joseph said, to speak with a straight tongue, and in language that doesn’t do the enemies work of mind control, but snaps the world awake to the truth of the mass murders of September 11, 2001 that have been used to massacre millions across the world.

 

http://edwardcurtin.com/why-i-dont-speak-of-the-fake-news-of-9-11-anymore/ 

 

The post The 9/11 Deception Remains In Control Of America’s Destiny appeared first on PaulCraigRoberts.org.

Some of the Many Things Most Americans Never Heard About 9/11

Thu, 2019-09-12 04:06

Support your website

Some of the Many Things Most Americans Never Heard About 9/11

Paul Craig Roberts

The “Dancing Israelis” who turned out to be Israeli Mossad agents caught filming and celebrating the destruction of the twin towers. Arrested by police and released without investigation, they were not mentioned in the 911 Commission Report.  Later on Israeli TV they said they were sent to New York to film the destruction of the twin towers.  Allegedly, there was no advance warning of the event, but obviously the Israelis knew.  

The alleged fundamentalist orthodox fanatical Muslims who were prepared to die to be martyrs, but who drank, drugged, and lived with strippers and prostitutes in Florida. They were the patsies paraded through flight schools and left a highly visible public record.  They all flunked out and could not even fly small planes, but performed miraculous flight feats in their attacks on the WTC towers and Pentagon that military and civilian airline pilots say are beyond their own skills.  These Saudi Arabians were being operated by US or Israeli intelligence to create a record to serve as a parallel patsy operation that could be used to cover up the false flag attack.

Numerous video cameras recorded whatever exploded at the Pentagon, but the FBI has refused to release them for 18 years. Clearly, the videos do not support the official story.

About half of the alleged hijackers have been found alive and well and deny that they had ever left their countries.  

In 2001 no cell phone calls were possible from aircraft at the altitudes from which calls were reported. 

The airliners that allegedly hit the twin towers were flimsly compared to the steel and concrete of the towers.  The airliners would have smashed against the structure and fallen to the street below.

Pre-knowledge of 9/11 was widespread.  The stocks of the two allegedly hijacked airlines were sold short prior to the event, resulting in large profits when the stocks fell in response to the hijackings. The short-sellers were swept under the carpet and not investigated.

FBI director Robert Mueller was instrumental in covering up for the false official story of 9/11, a story that has zero evidence in its behalf.

If a handful of young men with no intelligence service or government support can defeat the entire national security state of the United States and all of its NATO and Israeli allies and successfully attack with devastating results both New York and the Pentagon itself—the very symbol of American military supremacy—the Soviet Union could have wiped out the US and all of Europe without detection.  Don’t you wonder how we survived the Soviet Union when the “Great American Superpower” was so easily defeated by a handful of young Saudi Arabians?

Four hijacked airliners are alleged hijacked, all at airports served by an Israeli security company. All four airliners allegedly crash.  Two into the WTC towers, one into a field in Pennsylvania, and one into the Pentagon.  Yet no airliner debris exists.  The Pentagon’s lawn is not even scratched.

The President of the United States refuses to testify before the 9/11 Commission unless he is accompanied by his handler, Vice President Cheney.  Both refuse to testify under oath. The 9/11 Commission is oh-so-respectful to the distinguished president and vice president.

One member of the 9/11 Commission, a US Senator, resigned from the Commission, saying that “the fix is in.”  After the Commission report was issued, the Commission chairman, vice chairman, and legal counsel wrote books in which they said that information was withheld from the Commission, that the Commission was lied to and considered refering the false testimony to the Justice (sic) Department for prosecution, and that “the Commission was set up to fail.”  And not a peep from the controlled pressitute media whose only function is to deliver the controled explanations that the ruling oligarchs want planted into Americans’ minds.

Tennants of the WTC buildings reported constant noises, floors sealed off, service disruptions and that the excuse was the installation of fiber optic cable. If the buildings faced condemnation as reported because of asbestos fireproofing, who would go to the expense of installing fiber optic cable to upgrade the Internet capability of condemned buildings?

Scientists have found reacted and unreacted nano-thermite and other elements used in controlled demolition.  They have proved the existence of these elements.  They have samples from the WTC dust left which they have offered to scientists and governments for testing in order to prove or disprove their own findings.  No takers.

Instead, we have the appearance of nonsensical claims that the WTC buildings were brought down by a directed energy weapon and by nuclear bombs.  These are preposterous allegations, the purpose of which is the deliberate creation of disinformation in order to focus attention away from the false official story and bury it in disagreements about what caused the buildings to fail.

I have checked with weapons specialists who are critics of US government foreign policy and who monitor every development in weapon systems in the US and Russia. This is what they tell me:  “I can confidently state that no direct energy weapon, capable of demolishing such a structure at the Twin Towers, existed in 2001, nor does it exist today.”

Another reported that there are lab tests of directed energy in Russia but no deployed weapon. He suggested that people who believe in this fantasy story should explain the safe source of high energy that the alleged weapon used, and how it was moved on site and removed without detection.  Moreover, a directed energy burst would show on detectors which monitor the electromagnetic spectrum.  No such evidence exists. Since no such weapon has ever been tested to bring down skyscrapers, why would the government take the risk of using such a weapon for the first time in a public scenario where who knows what could go wrong and explanations would have to be given?  And why reveal to foreign powers the existence of such a weapon?  Controlled demolition is an old and familiar technology that works.  And it did.

I could go on and on.  

As I wrote in a previous column, when Americans fell for the 9/11 deception, they lost their country, and peoples in seven counries lost their lives, limbs, and families.

The post Some of the Many Things Most Americans Never Heard About 9/11 appeared first on PaulCraigRoberts.org.

When Americans Fell for the 9/11 Deception They Lost Their Country

Wed, 2019-09-11 18:07

Support your website

When Americans Fell for the 9/11 Deception They Lost Their Country

Paul Craig Roberts

Today is the 18 anniversary of 9/11, an event that has turned a once free America into a domestic police state and an international warmonger during the 21st century.  America’s reputation has been shattered along with the Constitution, international law, and seven nations in whole or part.  The massive crimes against the Bill of Rights and the population of seven nations are the direct consequence of 9/11.

Global Research has assembled some articles that indicate that not only Americans but the people of the world have been massively deceived about that event.  https://www.globalresearch.ca/where-was-osama-bin-laden-on-september-10-2001-one-day-before-911-he-was-in-a-pakistani-military-hospital/5607143 

Over the years I have reported the findings of scientists, engineers, and architects that indicate that the official story is false.  I had an open mind for two reasons.  One is that having been an engineering student, I could tell the difference from a building falling down from asymmetrical structural damage and a building blowing up.  The other is that having been involved in policy issues in Washington for a quarter century I knew that such a humiliating defeat suffered by the world’s only superpower at the hands of a few Muslim terrorists would have brought instant demands from the White House, Congress, and media for investigation into how every aspect of the American national security state failed simultaneously on one morning.  Instead the White House resisted the 9/11 families demands for an investigation for one year and never delivered a forensic investigation.  Instead, the country was given a 9/11 Commission Report that was merely the government’s official story of what happened.  No heads rolled.  No one was fired or even reprimanded.  To hold no one accountable for such a massive failure and humiliating defeat is not a believable response if the official 9/11 story is true.

It is much easier for government to deceive people in a democracy where people assume everything is above board than in a dictatorship where they know it is not.  

The post When Americans Fell for the 9/11 Deception They Lost Their Country appeared first on PaulCraigRoberts.org.

Pages