URL for this article: http://emperors-clothes.com/letters/wrong.htm

Join our email list at http://emperors-clothes.com/f.htm. Receive about
one article/day.

www.tenc.net * [Emperor's Clothes]

=======================================
READER SAYS EMPEROR'S CLOTHES WRONG ON BIN LADEN, 9-11
[Posted 28 September 2001]
(The discussion refers to 'The Creation Called Osama'
http://emperors-clothes.com/analysis/creat.htm )
=======================================

To Emperor's Clothes: 

Letter from Attorney J.B. (name withheld) 

Hello! 

Contrary to the article, 'The Creation called Osama", the news media has
not hidden the true story of bin Laden. Must you guys find United States
conspiracies and lies in everything? Is there a country that does not
lie? You make it sound like the US is this evil country that gets what
it deserves. While it is true that our own actions can be traced as a
cause of the terrorist attacks, they are not THE cause, or the proximate
cause as we say at law. You guys have the "boy who cried wolf"
mentality, who find a conspiracy in everything, who read only what you
feel is "between the lines" and not the lines themselves... This shows a
tremendous bias in your reporting. 

Nonetheless, thank you for your columns and I will keep reading them. 

- Signed, Attorney J.B. (full name withheld) 

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 
Editor, Jared Israel replies: "The Creation Called Osama" Does Have an
Error, But... = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 

Dear Attorney J.B.: 

Thank you for the compliment of continuing to read Emperor's Clothes
despite disagreements. 

You say, "You make it sound like the US is this evil country that gets
what it deserves." 

We don't believe that, period. Ordinary people in this country - the
people who were killed and terrorized September 11 - are innocent. They
did not "get what they deserve." They deserve to be alive, with their
loved ones. New York did not deserve to be trashed. 

The 200 murdered firemen did not bomb Yugoslavia. The porters and
janitors and cleaning ladies and rest of the army of workers at the
Towers did not starve the children of Iraq. 

The small number of people responsible for crimes that have been
committed in America's name did not suffer on 9-11. And now these
powerful forces are using the tragic deaths for their own gain, to
create a cloud of anger to justify strategic military moves under the
guise of a phony "infinite war against terror." 

By the way, we often use 'U.S.' to mean the government, as is commonly
done in news analysis. (For example, a journalist might write, 'Today
France declared,' when obviously France is not capable of declaring
anything.)

Regarding the article, "The Creation Called Osama," you say "The news
media has not hidden the true story of bin Laden." 

Please keep in mind, the article was reprinted from "The Hindu" so we
couldn't edit it. It contains useful points. It's also partly wrong, as
you noted. Here is what I observed about media coverage of bin Laden. 

The first few days after the WTC attacks almost nothing appeared in the
media about bin Laden. Then the story came out on the Internet. Only
after that was it covered in the mass media; and this coverage was
consistently inaccurate. Worse than nothing. 

Bin Laden's public image was created in 1998, after the U.S. government
bombed a pill factory in Sudan and "terrorist training camps" in
Afghanistan. I wrote an article analyzing news coverage of those bombing
raids. I could find only one report (1) mentioning the fact that the CIA
had built the 'training camps' the U.S. bombed. (My article, called
'Credible Deception,' is at
http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/jared/sudan.html (1a)) 

Starting back in 1998, the government and media gave people the
impression bin Laden was an all-powerful evil genius, controlling terror
all over the world. This view, reminiscent of comic book villains, has
stuck. 

Starting around Sept. 13th, the CIA connection began being discussed
widely in the media, but with crucial distortions. 

Distortion #1: The CIA only supported Afghan Islamist terrorists against
Russia. (That is, Washington simply chose some bad allies.)

Reality: Does a parent ally with his child? Washington instigated the
war in Afghanistan (2) and Washington deliberately created the violent
Islamist movement, utilizing for this purpose the harsh Wahhibi version
of Islam pushed by U.S. ally Saudi Arabia. Some say this was 'just a bad
mistake,' but it involved debate in the highest circles and careful
planning and vast sums of money and the intimate participation of the
covert forces of the U.S. and junior partners. As late as this May,
President Bush promised to send the Taliban another 43 million dollars.
(2a) 

Distortion # 2: "Bin Laden's network" is the source of all terror. 

Reality: Nonsense. Bin laden couldn't exist without the Taliban which
took control of Afghanistan (and much of the drug trade) and the Taliban
could only do these things because they were supported by the
U.S.-controlled Pakistani secret police, the ISI. (3) Before you
conclude that "U.S.-controlled" is too strong, consider how fast the ISI
buckled concerning the Taliban once the U.S applied pressure. 

The Taliban fulfilled, or were supposed to fulfill, a key US strategy:
to threaten the former Soviet Republics in Central Asia. The message
was: cooperate with the US (especially, let the U.S. military take over
your defense apparatus with U.S. advisers, arms, etc.) or the Taliban
will get you. It is because the Taliban has proved inadequate for this
task that the U.S. government is now moving to take Afghanistan into
receivership. 

Distortion # 3: We are told bin Laden broke with the U.S. during the
Gulf War. 

Reality: Who knows the truth? We're dealing with covert forces here. If
he did break, why have he and, more important, a whole army of Islamist
terrorists been involved on the side of U.S.-backed (or U.S. created!)
terrorists in Bosnia, Kosovo and Macedonia? [See:
http://emperors-clothes.com/news/binl.htm ]

By pushing the comic book notion of the Evil Genius bin Laden, the
Clinton and Bush administrations have hidden the amazing fact that the
US Establishment has created a giant terrorist apparatus throughout the
Balkans and Central Asia. It has even involved the UN in creating a
front group for the terrorists in Kosovo - the Kosovo protection Corps.
(3a) Terrorists attacking Macedonia are paid members of this UN group,
this "Protection Corp". True, some of these people are Islamists who -
paradoxically - hate the U.S. 

This apparatus has been used to smash groups inclined to resist the U.S.
drive to conquer the former Soviet Union. That is why the terrorists are
especially active in the geo-strategic Balkans and Central Asia. If they
aren't planning to attack Russia, why have the U.S. elite got Russia
surrounded? 

The third region strategic for attacking Russia is the Baltic area. The
U.S. has pushed for the active active involvement of the Baltic states
of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania in NATO. Lithuania was the staging
ground for recent maneuvers by 14 countries including Germany and the
U.S. 

This is clearly meant as a military threat to Belarus, a former Soviet
state between Lithuania and Russia, whose government has disdained
Washington control. The U.S. is sponsoring some 300 organizations in
Belarus. One for every 30,000 inhabitants. If you want to know the
purpose of these organizations, the U.S. Ambassador to Belarus recently
made it perfectly clear.

Ambassador Michael Kozak announced that his government has a
'Nicaraguan"-type policy towards Belarus. The Ambassador was referring
to Washington's creation and sponsorship of the Contra drug-gangsters
(remember Iran/Contra?) whom Washington organized to terrorize Nicaragua
during the 1980s. The goal was to destroy the left-nationalist
Sandanista government. Kozak was himself a U.S. operative in that terror
campaign, so his outrageous threat should be taken seriously. (3b)

Thus, again, terror as a political weapon. 

The U.S. attack on Belarus clearly violates international law - for
instance, the Helsinki Final Act, which the U.S., by the way, signed.
Perhaps Mr. Bush is unaware that the Helsinki Final Act exists. Perhaps
his understanding of international law is: 'We do what we want and you
do what we want or we kill you.' [An excerpt from the Helsinki Final Act
is posted near the end of this discussion.]

Why is there no uproar in the U.S. Congress about the violent, illegal
attack on Belarus which risks nuclear war? Belarus is allied with Russia
and is nuclear-armed. Why is the U.S. government doing these things if
it wants peace and is uninterested in seizing control of the former
Soviet Union?

The Washington-created terrorist apparatus has been used to crush
secular and multiethnic regimes. The victims - especially Serbia and
Macedonia - are then slandered in the Western media. "Human Rights
Groups" (4) controlled by the U.S. foreign policy establishment are
dispatched to victim countries and 'discover' that these places (e.g.,
Serbia and Macedonia) are cruel and abusive in fighting the terrorists
that the same U.S. foreign policy elite has sent to attack them. It's a
nightmare. 

The American people do not support Imperial aggression. But if they feel
they are being attacked, they support extreme actions. The
powers-that-be can use Islamist terrorists to stage seeming 'outside
attacks' to whip up a war fever. Given the complex web the CIA has woven
in creating and nurturing terrorism, it is perfectly possible for the
CIA to motivate a group of these people to do something to attack
ordinary American people (whom they loathe) without the terrorists
knowing the real origin of the orders or even the full plan of the
attack. 

- Jared Israel

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 
Attorney JB responds: You're Going Too Far! 
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 

Thanks for your thoughtful reply. 

While I can see the apparent plausibility of many of your arguments, I
do not see how you make the leap to the following statement: 

"It is perfectly possible for the CIA to motivate a > group of these
people to > do something to attack ordinary American people > without
the terrorists knowing > the real origin of the orders or even the full
plan > of the attack" 

I grant that this is POSSIBLE, but you seem to be suggesting that it may
have happened. Yes, we helped to create the monster attack dog, and we
can see that the dog bit us hard; but are you suggesting that the CIA
directed these guys to conduct the 9-11-01 attacks? If so, what would
the reason be for such an outrage? You may consider this a naive view,
but I cannot consider as remotely possible the suggestion that our own
government was directly involved in actively launching these attacks. 

- Peace, JB 

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 
Jared Israel responds: You 'Underestimate' Our Exalted Leaders 
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 

I don't think you're na�ve. I think you're smart and sane. Therefore you
make the mistake of thinking those on top are like you. You have trouble
believing they are mad with lust for power. Their God is money. They
view ordinary Americans the way an agribusiness views chickens. 

The U.S. Establishment has been staging fake incidents to justify wars
for a hundred years. US operatives blew up the Maine, a second class
battleship in Havana Harbor in 1898, killing 266 U.S. sailors. Why? To
justify the War with Spain which netted the U.S. elite the control of
Cuba, Guam, Puerto Rico and the Philippines. In the process, a million
Filipinos were slaughtered. The tactics used in the Philippines were
just like those employed later in Vietnam, as described by Colin Powell:


"In his 1995 autobiography, My American Journey, Powell describes
burning [Vietnamese] peasants out of their huts in 1963, 'starting the
blaze with Ronson and Zippo lighters.' 

"'Why were we torching homes and destroying crops?' Powell asks
rhetorically. 'Ho Chi Minh had said the people were like the sea in
which his guerillas swam. We tried to solve the problem by making the
whole sea uninhabitable.'" (Quoted in "Nobody's hero," at
http://www.inthesetimes.com/web2504/edit2504.html) 

If this man could commit such war crimes as a soldier, imagine what he
is capable of as an exalted leader. 

The bombing of North Vietnm was "legalized" by the Congressional passage
of the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution. This was pushed through based on the
lie that North Vietnamese boats fired on US destroyers. (See former
Washington Post editor Ben Bradlee's comments, at the end, after
'Further Reading.')

Another example - former El Salvador death Squad organizer William
Walker staged the phony Racak incident to justify the bombing of
Serbia.(5) 

More - there could not have been massive and consistent media lies about
Yugoslavia - for a decade - without top level "conspiracy." Just check
out our article "KLA Attacks Everyone, Media Attacks...Miloshevich"
which proves the American people have been sold a mound of cow pie
concerning that Yugoslav leader. (5A)

Are we wrong? Here's a thought: We'll soon be posting a list of 50 key
articles on Emperor's Clothes. Arranged by subject. Take the Emperor's
Clothes challenge. Read any or all and show us where we're wrong. We'll
post the most convincing criticisms, with replies. 

- Jared Israel 

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 
Attorney JB Responds: How Can You Say The US Gains? 
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 

One further thought. Regarding your point about who gained, I don't see
how the USA has gained by 9-11-01: our economy has been at least
temporarily hammered; and our people have suffered and live with a new
level of fear. We will perhaps use bases in some former Soviet
republics; but I don't see how this benefits us--after all, that is an
exceedingly poor part of the world, and I do not think that we will
establish major long-term presences there because of recent events. I
think peaceful coexistence with Russia is much more in our national
interests than pissing them off by de facto surrounding them. Putin
would not put up with that. You state that money is the God of our most
powerful elements. Maybe so, but this whole venture costs a lot more
than it repays, as far as I can see. 

-- Attorney J.B.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 
To which editor Jared Israel responds: Not the whole U.S. Just a few. 
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 

The US as a whole did not gain. Part of the US - a very small part -
gained. Most people lost. The difference between you and me is you see
one America; I see two. One part, very small, unbelievably rich, very
powerful, along with their untouchable flunkies in the covert and
semi-covert apparatus that dominates U.S. foreign adventures - that part
is using 9-11 to carry forward their very dangerous plans. 

You say "I think peaceful coexistence with Russia is much more in our
national interests than pissing them off by de facto surrounding them." 

For you, and for millions of other decent Americans, yes. But not for
the rulers of this land. 

If you say we are wrong about this then you must explain: why HAS the US
government pushed NATO - a military machine - right to Russia's borders?
For fun? 

Why is U.S. Ambassador to Belarus saying the U.S. is using terror to
break that independent country? (6) 

Why the devastation of Yugoslavia? Why the assault on Macedonia? Why the
declaration, just a few days ago, by the U.S. Ambassador to England,
that the Balkans will be a "prominent theater of operations and
training" for NATO. Operations against whom? Why all this aggressive
action when there is no enemy? Unless the goal is the penetration and
conquest of Russia. (7)

You say the former Soviet Union is poor. This is half-true. It has been
impoverished by the aggressive policies of the International Monetary
fund which, if applied in the US, would wipe out the economy.
Nevertheless it is one of the richest storehouses of natural wealth in
the world. In addition, it has the capacity, if reunited, to resist U.S.
expansion. 

If this explanation is wrong, what does explain the actions summarized
above? How can the U.S. engage in coordinated and aggressive
international action by accident? 

Further Reading:

1) ''Taliban Camps U.S. bombed in Afghanistan Were Built by NATO' Can be
read at http://emperors-clothes.com/docs/camps.htm 

1a) 'Credible Deception' Can be read at
http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/jared/sudan.html 

2) 'Why Washington Wants Afghanistan,' at
http://emperors-clothes.com/analysis/afghan.htm#8 

2a) On involvement of CIA: 'Washington's Backing of Afghan Terrorists:
Deliberate Policy'. This includes an article from the "Washington Post'
with an introductory note from 'Emperor's Clothes'. Can be read at
http://emperors-clothes.com/docs/anatomy.htm 

On $43 million aid: "The Bush administration has not been deterred [by
talk of Taliban atrocities]. Last week it pledged another $ 43 million
in assistance to Afghanistan, raising total aid this year to $ 124
million and making the United States the largest humanitarian donor to
the country." ('The Washington Post,' 25 May 2001)

3) 'Washington's Pakistani Allies: Drug Dealers, Killers' Can be read at

http://emperors-clothes.com/analysis/allies.htm 

3a) 'How will you plead at the trial, Mr.Annan? 'Can be read at
http://emperors-clothes.com/news/howwill.htm 

3b) 'For Nicaragua, Read Belarus' Can be read at
http://emperors-clothes.com/letters/alm.htm 

4) 'WHY 'HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH' IS GUNNING FOR MACEDONIA' Can be read at
http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/treanor/hrw.htm 

5) 'The Racak Incident' Can be read at
http://emperors-clothes.com/news/racak.htm 

5a) 'KLA Attacks Everyone. Media Attacks...Miloshevich?' Can be read at
http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/jared/expan.htm 

6) 'Tough Measures Needed in Belarus!' Can be read at
http://emperors-clothes.com/news/tough.htm 

7) On Macedonia see: "SORRY, VIRGINIA, BUT THEY ARE NATO TROOPS, NOT
'REBELS'" at http://emperors-clothes.com/mac/times.htm 

Regarding the U.S. making the Balkans a "Prominent theater of
operations" see 'NATO Buildup in the Balkans: Part of a Deadly Game ' at
http://emperors-clothes.com/news/farish.htm 

Former 'Washington Post' Executive Editor Ben Bradlee on the Gulf of
Tonkin Incident

"Now let me ask you to jump ahead some eight months to August 1964,
still more than 20 years ago, to an issue of Time magazine. 

'Through the darkness, from the West and South, the intruders boldly
sped. There were at least six of them, Russian-designed Swatow gunboats
armed with 37-mm and 28-mm guns, and P-4's. At 9.52 they opened fire on
the destroyers with automatic weapons, and this time from as close as
2,000 yards. The night glowed earily with the nightmarish glare of air
dropped flares and boat's searchlights. Two of the enemy boats went
down. ' 

"That's the kind of vivid detail that the news magazines have made
famous. I don't mean to single out Time. On the same date Life said
almost the same thing and that week's issue of Newsweek had torpedoes
whipping by, US ships blazing out salvo after salvo of shells. It had a
PT boat bursting into flames. 

"There was only one trouble. There was no battle. There was not a single
intruder, never mind six of them. Never mind Russian designed Swatow
gunboats armed with 37mm and 28mm guns. They never opened fire. They
never sank. They never fired torpedoes. They never were. 

"It has really taken 20 years for this truth to emerge. My authority is
Admiral Jim Stockdale, who has written a fascinating book. In Love and
War. Jim Stockdale was shot down over Vietnam a few days later and was a
prisoner of the Vietnamese for more than seven years. 

"But on the night in question he was in a Sabre jet fighter flying cover
over the Maddox and the Turner Joy, and he scoured the seas for more
than two hours; and he is as sure as man can be that they were fighting
phantom blips on a radar screen. 

"In case the Vietnam years have blurred in your minds, or even
disappeared from your screens, may I remind you that this so-called
Battle of Tonkin Gulf was the sole basis of the Tonkin Gulf Resolution,
which was the entire justification for the United States' war against
Vietnam. This non-event happened on August 4, 1964. President Johnson
went on television that very night to ask the country to support a
Congressional resolution. The resolution went to Congress the next day.
Two days later it was approved unanimously by the House and 88-2 by the
Senate. 

"The 'facts' behind this critically important resolution were quite
simply wrong. Misinformation? Disinformation? Deceit? Whatever! Lies.
[This is an excerpt from the speech by Ben Bradlee, former Executive
Editor, 'Washington Post.' It was delivered as the first James Cameron
Memorial Lecture and is quoted in full in 'The Guardian' (London) April
29, 1987. If anyone would like to read the full text of his talk let us
know and we will post it on tenc.net.]

Excerpt from Helsinki Final Act 

The following is from the Helsinki Final Act, considered a centerpiece
of modern International Law, and which the U.S. signed:

"The participating States will refrain in their mutual relations, as
well as in their international relations in general, from the threat or
use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence
of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of
the United Nations and with the present Declaration. No consideration
may be invoked to serve to warrant resort to the threat or use of force
in contravention of this principle.

"Accordingly, the participating States will refrain from any acts
constituting a threat of force or direct or indirect use of force
against another participating State. Likewise they will refrain from any
manifestation of force for the purpose of inducing another participating
State to renounce the full exercise of its sovereign rights. Likewise
they will also refrain in their mutual relations from any act of
reprisal by force."

All citizens of the U.S. can benefit from reading the Final Act for it
gives a perspective from which to view the U.S. government's actions. It
can be read in full at http://www.hri.org/docs/Helsinki75.html - JI

Join our email list at http://emperors-clothes.com/f.htm. Receive about
one article/day.

[Note to readers: If we publish a letter you send to Emperor's Clothes
we will not include your name or identifying information without getting
your approval. If we cannot reach you, we will assume you wish your name
withheld. - Jared Israel, editor.]

=======================================
Emperor's Clothes Needs Your Help!
=======================================

On 18 September about 100,000 readers transferred more than 1.7
gigabytes of data from Emperor's Clothes. That's the equivalent of
around 1.5 million pages in printed books.

As you may know, the Website was "down" for about four hours that day.
Because of the current crisis, we are strained beyond capacity. 

We recently hired a full time computer person. He has partly finished
remodeling the Website so it loads more quickly and is easier to use. We
hope you find these changes useful. Now we need to complete the makeover
and improve our technical facilities to meet the huge increase in demand
for bandwidth.

Emperor's Clothes does not charge money for articles. We rely on
donations. 

Many of our readers have contributed in the past. This has allowed us to
function. Now we need contributions from everyone who finds Emperor's
Clothes useful so we can pay our (overworked, underpaid) computer helper

 




                                   Serbian News Network - SNN

                                        [EMAIL PROTECTED]

                                    http://www.antic.org/

Reply via email to