Ron Paul: "So, this whole idea that the whole Muslim world is responsible for this and they're attacking us because we're free and prosperous, that is just not true. Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda have been explicit. They have been explicit, and they wrote and said that we attacked - we attacked America because you had bases on our holy land in Saudi Arabia, you do not give Palestinians a fair treatment, and you have been bombing Iraq."
Portrait, Noam Chomsky, 06/15/09. (photo: Sam Lahoz)
Noam Chomsky: "Ron Paul Was Right
About 9/11 Motive"
13 September 11
ARON MATÉ: Well, Noam, you mentioned the changes in discourse between 10 years ago and today. And actually, this issue of the reasons behind 9/11 came up last night at the Republican presidential debate. Congress Member Ron Paul of Texas drew boos from the crowd and a rebuke from other candidates on the podium when he criticized US foreign policy in discussing the roots of 9/11.
REP. RON PAUL: We're under great threat because we occupy so many countries. We're in 130 countries. We have 900 bases around the world. We're going broke. The purpose of al-Qaeda was to attack us, invite us over there, where they can target us. And they have been doing it. They have more attacks against us and the American interests per month than occurred in all the years before 9/11. But we're there, occupying their land. And if we think that we can do that and not have retaliation, we're kidding ourselves. We have to be honest with ourselves. What would we do if another country, say China, did to us what we do to all those countries over there?
So, this whole idea that the whole Muslim world is responsible for this and they're attacking us because we're free and prosperous, that is just not true. Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda have been explicit. They have been explicit, and they wrote and said that we attacked - we attacked America because you had bases on our holy land in Saudi Arabia, you do not give Palestinians a fair treatment, and you have been bombing - I didn't say that, I'm trying to get you to understand what the motive was behind the bombing. At the same time, we had been bombing and killing hundreds of thousands of Iraqis for 10 years. Would you be annoyed? If you're not annoyed, then there's some problem.
AARON MATÉ: That was Republican Congress Member Ron Paul of Texas speaking last night at the Republican presidential debate. Noam Chomsky, your response?
NOAM CHOMSKY: I think what he said is completely uncontroversial. You can read it in government documents. You can find it in polls. Maybe people don't like to hear it, but, as I mentioned before, it goes back to the 1950s. Actually, right after 9/11, the Wall Street Journal, to its credit, did a study of privileged Muslims, sometimes called "monied Muslims," people in the Muslim world who are deeply embedded in the US global project - lawyers, directors of multinational corporations and so on, not the general population. And it was very much like what Eisenhower had - was concerned about, and the National Security Council, in the 1950s. There was a lot of antagonism to - a lot of antagonism to US policy in the region, partly support of dictators blocking democracy and development, just as the National Security Council concluded in 1958.
Also, by then, by 2001, there were much more specific things: very much a lot of anger about the US backing for the way - Israeli occupation of the Occupied Territories, settlements, the bitter oppression of the Palestinians, and also, something that isn't discussed much here but meant a lot there - and remember, these are privileged Muslims, leaders of - those who kind of carry out, implement the general US economic and social policies in the region. The other thing, besides the Israeli - support of Israeli crimes, was the sanctions against Iraq. This was 2001, remember. The sanctions against Iraq were brutal and destructive. They killed hundreds of thousands of people. Both of the international diplomats who administered the Oil-for-Food program, distinguished international diplomats - Denis Halliday, Hans von Sponeck, in sequence - both of them resigned in protest because they regarded the sanctions as genocidal. They were carrying out a kind of a mass slaughter of Iraqis. They were strengthening Saddam Hussein. They were compelling the population to rely on him just for survival. And these were major crimes of the 1990s. And privileged Muslims, monied Muslims, in the Saudi Arabia, elsewhere, were bitterly opposed to this, not because they hate our freedoms, because they don't like murderous and brutal policies.
|
THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community. |
 19 May 2012
|
 18 May 2012
|
 18 May 2012
|
 19 May 2012
|
 20 May 2012
|
 19 May 2012
|
 19 May 2012
|
 20 May 2012
|
|
21 May 2012
|
Comments
We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.
General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.
Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.
- The RSN Team
How ironic that these people only listen to common sense when spoken by one of their own.
Which is worse, that they had never before heard that information, or that they had heard it but were 'playing stupid' to appeal to the Teabagger-base?
There was some debate in a prior election, and Ron Paul made the same point, and Rudy Giulani replied something like "I've never heard that before". (He might have said "I've never heard that theory" or "I've never heard of blow back", but it was along those lines.)
So these guys are being palpably dishonest.
They have heard this line before.
But they can't even bring themselves to admit it.
And our pathetic news media won't hold them accountable.
They don't have to agree. They can say that Moslems and Arabs hate us because of our freedom, or our intact bridges, or whatever.
But they should at least agree that they have heard that our wanton destruction has made some people hate us so much they are willing to die just to attack us.
I just wish there was some way that the intentionally ignorant people could go off and form their own country and fight their own imperialist wars and the rest of us could put up some gigantic sign that says "Don't attack us, attack the war mongers over there."
If you want the intentionally ignorant to form their own country let the South succeed, along with Texas.
We could do it easily by just making a referendum:
"Do you believe we are responsible for the common good?"
If the state answers, "yes", they get the benefits of belonging to "the UNION". If not, they can defend their own bran new country and deal with the consequences of its "rugged individualism".
The U.S. would still have the 35 most productive states, and that ain't bad
Unfortunately it does not fit the narrative and mythology that was created to leverage the piublic behind the Neo-Con desire to take Iraq. The taking has not really happened yet b/c Iraqi nationalism will probably prevail.
I think that the only reason that US foreign policy has been against nationalism is the greed factor. Nationalists usually want a share for their people and development, but multi-nationals prefer to take more. Interesting that Saudi Arabia and the organization of ARAMCO has kept a much greater share than other coutries - there must be a story there.
And all the yakking heads and newspapers know it.
Either they hate our way of life or they hate how we treat them.
The way of life crowd believes that America is so good and wonderful that even when we do something bad it is far better than what anyone else would do.
Te other group essentially believes that by acting as if we are the masters of the world, and benevolent masters at that, are deaf and blind to how our 'subjects' see us.
Ron Paul and Noam Chomsky are obviously in the latter group as am I. Our hubris has sowed the seeds of dissent against America's power. To paraphrase the words of the Rev. Wright, America's chickens have come home to roost.
Again, if there is a third way, share it. Please.
I'm asking this respectfully just to get some first-hand information and really would like to know. What were you doing in "That part of the World"? When were you there (during or post-Saddam) and in what capacity? Did you get around a bit? What did you learn about the country and in what regions?
Y'see, I've lived, worked and traveled in many parts of the world and have never lost my sense of wonder at the patchwork we all make up globally.
But some of my fellow expats or travelers have remained as ignorant on leaving as they did on their day of arrival, socialized only with other expats, were there for the tax-free $ (or in a military role supporting the US or other Imperialist capitalist incursions) never went out into the different areas and many diverse cultures, traditions and history, listened to their music, literature, arts, crafts, or ate their foods.
One conservative who posts occasionally on RSN, cites experience in other places only to declaim from on high but never offers anything to illuminate us, nor ever makes a point other than disapproving remarks.
Please share on what you base y'r opinion, so that we may be enriched by your experiences.
Also, if you bother to look at a map, you might notice the convenient placement of both Iraq and Afghanistan. We know the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and thousands of young Americans killed there died, and are dying, for a treasonous fraud. Applying sui bono to Afghanistan, we have good reason to believe that this is a fraud as well.
As far as airplanes being responsible, the large majority of architects and engineers who construct such structures as the WTC would like to have a word with you. Layers within layers within layers is how any good propagandist builds a Big Lie. Just sayin'... and asking...
Supposedly a CIA agent did admit to hoaxing the bin Laden confession video - but there is scant evidence of this.
As far as why Muslims would want to attack us - well - when a nation becomes a sprawling empire - that nation is bound to be attacked from time to time. This does not justify the horrid events/attack of 9/11 - it just is what it is. The ancient Roman Empire was always being challenged by the countries it occupied. Rome , itself, was attacked from time to time. It just goes with the territory (no-pun-intended).
Chomsky seems to believe the government's official version of 9/11 but where he gets the idea that Osama gave a reason for the attack is a mystery to me since Osama denied involvement. Perhaps Chomsky got this info from the obviously hoaxed bin Laden confession video.
I began an explan but there is no room here. Suffice it to say that setting up a red flag terrorist cell would be easy because everyone expects to not know the people above them or even next to them.
A while back, a really excellent psychologist named Eric Byrne wrote a book (Games People Play) describing strategies that individuals use in various contexts. One of these was "Let's you and him fight" where the 'operator' arranges for two others with whom he is in competition to become antagonistic toward each other weakening their own positions and aiding his. I'm sure it will be easy to fill in the details on such a strategy would work.
There is also the legal concept of sui bono, who benefits. Iraq and Afghanistan essentially surround Iran. Subduing either would allow a secure staging base to be built for an extended campaign against Iran. America has absolutely nothing to gain from this. Someone else does, the Khazari zionists. They have a lot to gain if we spend our young blood and treasure subduing THEIR competition. As far as their love for us, please look up the U.S.S. Liberty. They have total confidence that they OWN us.
This would not be the first time a straw enemy attack was used to draw Americans into supporting a war against a foe that we could defeat without warfare. But that is a totally different discussion!
Control of territory and resources is the biggest reason the U.S. government made preparations for attack and then attacked the Middle East - once again. And continues those attacks.
The heinous actions of the U.S. government is reason enough to research the layers, including listening to "architects and engineers who construct such structures as the WTC". They KNOW nobody builds something that tall without construction to withstand a hit by an airplane.
The other half is that other Republicans and the corporate-controlled media consider him immensely annoying and try to pretend he doesn't exist or doesn't really represent any defensible point of view. People that are tired of media manipulation and being directed toward slick or glamorous celebrity candidates find this very refreshing, myself included. To aging boomers he also represents the possibility of staying physically fit and active in the community as the years go by.
During WWII the British people complained about the U.S. military being stationed in the UK. They said our troops were "oversexed, overfed, and over here." And these were our staunch allies!
The Tea Party itself originated as a group of self-identified conservatives who believed they had been betrayed by the Cheney/Bush neo-cons. They opposed the incursions into Constitutional liberties in the name of security and the exploding federal debt to support undeclared warfare in the Middle East. Somehow this position was transmogrified when Sarah Palin was invited to address the Tea Party convention a couple of years ago. I was appalled. It was as if the pope had been invited to address a convention of the American Atheists. The media immediately picked it up and somehow began identifying the Tea Party with the neo-cons. That's when Rush Limbaugh stopped calling Tea Partiers "traitors".
I get your point, and it has some validity; but....
As you said we are not really in a right/left world anymore. We are trying to establish the direction of all mankind. That is a concept that is too broad to fit into a 5 second sound bite where context is not defined by content. It is defined by whatever reality the presenter wishes to give the sound bite.
However the labels do serve a purpose. We can gather around them and hash out the small differences around the meaning of the label. The problem comes as you hint at when a person or idea associated with an opposing label is immediately rejected.
I would submit that acceptance of a right wing idea by a lefty is way more likely than the opposite.
The world is currently going through a massive change, perhaps on the scale of the change from hunter/gatherer to agricultural. It is at least on the scale of the industrial revolution. And it is about time we as an agricultural, industrial planet decide what is our organizing framework. After that, the labels will remain, but the rancor will not be as fierce.
(Damn, I cannot believe I am that optimistic!)
Soon education will only be for the super-rich the rest of us will be annuities or cannon fodder, take your pick.
One question for the people here older than i am. How long did it take for people to start questioning the "Magic Bullet" theory after Kennedy was murdered? To me the governments 9/11 report was even more preposterous than the magic bullet theory..
Another piece of magical attribution of events in this country! Not the sharpest knife in the drawer, I didn't catch on to that until I heard Mark Lane in '73! OTOH, I read an article by some German on the volume of dust cloud-size of dust too and the energy it would take to produce such a thing-not present in the kerosene or even the kinetic energy of the buildings and I was convinced of the falsity of the Official History by 2003-getting a bit quicker in my old age!
Our military were all over town dressed in full uniform. It really did look like an occupation of Saudi Arabia. To make things worse, most had their families there who were also all too visible. The American women, especially teenage girls, seemed to go out of their way not to wear the burka or cover their hair and face. (Yes, a bad religious rule, BUT, it is THEIR rule.) I wish I made a big deal of it to my Senators, etc. at the time.
Today, is American Military presence in the many countries we “advise” also too in their faces? Is it angering their citizens and working against our interests? What if 10,000 uniformed Chinese military were walking around Washington DC and other US cities as advisors? Would any American be angered?
To put it bluntly our lifestyle costs others severely, but our media does not point out just how we negatively impact the world for our benefit.
However, the media is quick to sensationalize with great bias the ill will many have towards the US without explaining why. To put it blatantly we would not tolerate the things we do to others, and we have been successfully "conditioned" not to ask why?
We have been so successfully indoctrinated in the "it's all about me" perspective that we are grossly guilty of not really caring how we get ours: as long as we get ours!
Same methodology was used for 9/11. The towers come down, public demands a response and now we got war on terrorism and the orwelian one world government is that much closer to manifesting. Enjoy the ride!
If he truly was comtted to the atrocity of what happened than why not bring a better situation into the open of Bush, Cheney etc being War Criminals? Or Perhaps asking his peer group what they would do if they found out that We did the attacks to our own?
When push comes to shove, Mr Paul like the others running are all content in swallowing the guilt of too many conspiracies in this Country, doing nothing about it.
Another Interview to give GOP/TP free advertising and proves nothing except they know how to manipulate the Public.
Listen to Parsley, Sage, Rosemary, thyme album esp Silent Night. I listen to these on occassion as I love the Music, words...but this could have been reworded by Simon & Garfunkel for the 9/11 Anniversary and the kids today would have listened perhaps like we did.
Lost opportunity
Do you really think they'd shrink from killing Americans (other than our soldiers, that is) in addition to hundreds of thousands of foreigners? I mean, Cheney just admitted to having ordered the shoot-down of flight 93 (too late, he claims - though he's been known to be chronologically challenged...).
As others above have suggested, there's plenty of evidence of deliberate manipulation of the facts of what went down on 9/11, chief among them the criminal destruction and feigned ignorance of evidence of controlled demolition at WTC - just look up what happened at WTC#7 to get the picture.
And you can't pin that on Bin Laden - heck, they couldn't even pin the "official" story of 9/11 on him, as the FBI now admits. It's a shame too that Noam seems to have been taken in by that clearly fake video. If they do anything right, they can create fake news. Question is, how long are we going to play the suckers...
And didn't we later learn that the members of the Carlyle Group met on the morning of 9/11/01 and watched the spectacle from their hotel balcony?
-OR-
History repeats itself.
In this interview segment former Hitler Youth, Hilmar Von Campe,
describes what life was like under Hitler and the National
Socialists (Nazi's). Eerily similar to modern day America.
Video:
http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/4997.html
- Brasscheck
P.S. Please share Brasscheck TV e-mails and
videos with friends and colleagues.
That's how we grow. Thanks.
Whether they are beating this invisible horse out of ignorance, cowardice, or collusion is the only remaining question I have of them.
First, he called us to embrace the foundational elements of his faith; sincerity, righteousness, mercy, honor, purity, and piety.
That couldn't hurt.
The second thing requested of us is to stop the oppression, lies, immorality and debauchery that have spread among us.
He's got a point there. Check Wall Street and Reality television.
Thirdly, we are urged to take an honest stance with ourselves and admit that we are functionally a nation without principles or manners.
Ditto.
Fourth, we are called to stop supporting Israel to the exclusion of the Palestinians, the Russians against the Chechens, the Indians against the Kashmiris, the Chinese against the Tibetans and Uighurs and so forth. Seems only fair.
Fifth, U.S, troops have no business in the holy land of Arabia.
Well, we certainly not getting value for dollar spent by keeping them there.
Sixth, we should end our support for corrupt leaders in Moslem countries.
And wherever else they are to be found.
Seventh, we are called to deal with Islam on the basis of mutual interests and benefits.
No argument on that score..
RSS feed for comments to this post.