The Autopsies of September 11 and Afghanistan: Lessons in Safe Logic



Following the US withdrawal from Afghanistan and the 20th anniversary of the September 11, 2001 mass killings, the mainstream and alternative media were filled with articles analyzing the aftermath of September 11 that led to the US invasion. of Afghanistan and its alleged withdrawal after two decades of war.

These criticisms have ranged from mild to severe and have covered issues such as the loss of civil liberties due to the Patriot Act and government espionage through all the “counter-terrorism” wars in so many countries with their dire consequences and their battlefields. Many of these articles have highlighted how, in the wake of the Bush administration’s response to 9/11, the United States lost its foothold and resulted in the demise of the American Empire and its position in the world. Some writers celebrate this and others lament it. Most seem to take it as inevitable.

This stream of articles has been written by writers from across the political spectrum, from left to center to right. All were indignant in their own way, for such dramatic events usually manage to spill a lot of ink, informed by the various ideological positions of writers in a media world where the categories of left and right have lost their meaning.

These articles included crying over fake tears for the wrong victims (those who died in the Twin Towers, the Pentagon, and on planes), how good intelligence could have prevented 9/11, how many died in vain, how it all led to torture, how whistleblowers were ignored, how the military was right, how the collapse of the towers led to the collapse of the American empire, how bin Laden won, how the evil US war came home in the form of 9/11 evil, how the longest war was in vain, how the Pentagon received huge sums of money for decades, how the withdrawal of ‘Afghanistan was a betrayal of the victims of September 11, etc.

Many of the points raised were valid; others don’t. This outpouring of stubborn indignation was very moving and undoubtedly aroused deep feelings among readers. He fed off the widespread feeling in the country that something terrible had happened, but what it is is not exactly clear. The sense of mass confusion and continual disaster permeating the air and infecting people’s daily lives. The feeling of unreality existing everywhere.

These articles have almost run their course and a new round of autopsies can be anticipated as fear and trembling attaches to new issues, particularly the ongoing Covid-19 fear pornography minus the dire consequences of government policies. . Fear is the name of the game and lies creep through the media hidden in the grass of truth. Many of the articles I have referenced above – and you can check for yourself as I have intentionally omitted names and links – contain truths, but truths that conceal deeper untruths about which the truths are allegedly based. I’ll leave the logic lesson to you.

Since many of these articles were written by liberal writers, some of whom might naively expect to get the gist of it, and those further to the right are seen as supporters of Pax Americana, I will quote anti-war singer / songwriter Phil Ochs. , which prefaced his cutting edge 1965 song, Love me i’m a liberal, with these words on logic:

In each political community, there are different shades of political opinion. One of the most questionable of them is that of the Liberals. A frank group on many subjects. Ten degrees to the left of center in good times. Ten degrees to the right of center if it affects them personally. So here is a lesson in safe logic.

So here’s the catch about the logic. Almost without exception (there are a handful of truthful writers besides those I’m referring to here, such as Kit Knightly, Michel Chossudovsky, Pepe Escobar, et al.), Left to right and everywhere in between, the authors of all these articles on the mass murders of September 11, 2001 and Afghanistan have based their arguments on a false premise.

A false premise. This is how minds are shaped in the age of mass propaganda and slavish journalism. Assume (or make believe) that something is true despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, and build from it. Slip that premise or underlying assumption as if it’s truer than true. This is what has happened in all the media over the past two weeks. This is nothing new but deserves to be pointed out.

The false premise is this: that September 11 was a terrorist attack carried out by Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda in return for the American wars against Muslims, and this terrorist attack on the United States led to the invasion of the United States. ‘Afghanistan, Iraq, etc. .

The evidence is overwhelming that this premise is wrong. In fact, the evidence clearly shows that 9/11 was a work from within, a false flag attack, carried out by sinister forces within the United States government with a little help from some foreign junior partners to justify his subsequent war crimes across the globe. I will not explore the extensive evidence relating to 9/11 here, as it is readily available to readers who are willing to watch. Even the use of shorthand – September 11 for the events of September 11, 2001 – which I have used here for the sake of brevity, is a crucial part of the linguistic propaganda used to frighten and evoke thoughts of a national emergency. in progress, as I wrote somewhere else.

The mass murders of September 11, 2001 are not meant to be said to be a false flag attack, for they touch upon a reality so disturbing in its aftermath that all hand-wringing postmortems must deny: That nearly three a thousand innocent people in the United States was first to be murdered as a pretext to kill millions of people around the world. It is a lesson in radical evil that is very difficult to swallow, and therefore must be hidden in a vast tapestry of lies and sound logic. American innocence may survive revelations of American atrocities abroad because the death of foreigners has never meant much to Americans, but to bring it all home is anathema.

This is another example of the unspeakable, as the Trappist monk Thomas Merton and James W. Douglass referred to in his monumental book long ago, JFK and the unspeakable, to explain why John Kennedy died at the hands of the CIA and why this fact had to be suppressed. The mass murders of September 11, 2001 recapitulate this systemic evil that defies all rhetoric.

It is the void that contradicts everything that is said even before the words are said; the void which penetrates into the language of public and official declarations at the very moment they are made, and makes them ring through the hollow of the abyss. It is from the void from which Eichmann drew the punctilious exactitude of his obedience …

Real writers and journalists, we should expect something better – that they won’t repeat official statements, utter empty platitudes, and build analyzes on false premises – but these aren’t the best times, to rephrase Ochs, and safe logic retains its legitimacy. intact and protects its brand.

It’s always personal when it comes to the unspeakable.


Leave A Reply

Your email address will not be published.