9/11 CNN Memorial Victims SSA Death Index Cross Reference

From Fakeopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Ersun Warncke did an exhaustive check of the list of victims provided on the CNN website. He found that of 2,970 people listed, only 446 appear in the Social Security death index and of those only 249 have a confirmed death certificate on file. Of those, not a single one has a valid “last address of record” on file.

Original data of SSA Death Index

Uploaded by Ersun Warncke on Sep 12, 2010


Article by Ersun Warncke Sep-10-2010 Part 1

Source: (as per 2018-09-17) : http://salem-news.com/articles/september102010/911-part-1-ew.php

9/11 Reflections Part 1: The Elephant and the Mosquito Ersun Warncke Salem-News.com

What the myths of the Taliban, Saddam Hussein, and Ahmadinejad have in common is that they represent a particular kind of propaganda spread by parties in the U.S. who advocate for war. 911 scene Salem-News.com

(EUGENE, Ore.) - What happens when a mosquito bites an elephant? The answer to this question lies at the intersection between myth and reality. The Big Lies, Grand Illusions, and Great Myths of our age are stories of the elephant and the mosquito. They are tales based on misdirection and deceit woven by mythmakers who think of themselves as Platonic philosopher kings and adopt the showmanship and trickery of stage magicians.

The events of September 11, 2001 are the foundation of the Big Lie. This lie encompasses the myth of Al-Qaeda, the myth of Osama Bin Laden, the myth of the Taliban, the myth of Saddam Hussein, the myth of Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruction, the myth of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and the myth of Iranian Nuclear Weapons.

The myth of Al-Qaeda is that it poses a threat to the United States. The reality is that there has never been any organization that called itself “Al-Qaeda.” “Al-Qaeda” is the name invented by Americans to describe a loose knit group of people, numbering a few hundred at most, with no centralized command and control, who have taken part in irregular military actions around the world.

The myth of Osama Bin Laden is that he created and leads this mythical group called Al-Qaeda. The documentary, The Power of Nightmares, unravels this myth completely. The reality is that Osama Bin Laden was a rich Saudi who went to Afghanistan in the early 80’s to play Jihad. In Afghanistan, he bought himself the title of “emir” (leader) of a small group of Egyptian revolutionaries lead by Ayman Zawahiri. In his early videos Osama Bin Laden paid a day rate to the militants who posed behind him holding weapons. He never had any armed following of his own.


The myth of Osama Bin Laden is that he was involved in the events of September 11, 2001. In a statement released after September 11, attributed to Osama Bin Laden, he said “I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States. Neither I had any knowledge of these attacks nor I consider the killing of innocent women, children, and other humans as an appreciable act. Islam strictly forbids causing harm to innocent women, children, and other people. Such a practice is forbidden ever in the course of a battle.”

Leon Panetta, director of the CIA, said in an ABC interview that the last “precise information” about where Osama Bin Laden might be located is from “the early 2000’s.” Numerous audio and video tapes released since September 11, purportedly of Bin Laden, are proven forgeries. These fake tapes have commonly been released to coincide with U.S. political events, making it clear that the intent of the forgers is to manipulate U.S. public opinion.



The myth of the Taliban is that they harbored and supported the terrorist Osama Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda. Firstly, Osama Bin Laden had nothing to do with the events of September 11. Secondly, the Government of Afghanistan actually did offer to turn Bin Laden over on several occasions, including after September 11, provided that the U.S. provide evidence of his involvement in the attacks. According to the official record, the U.S. had many opportunities over the course of several years to arrest or kill Bin Laden, which they never capitalized upon.





If Osama Bin Laden really was involved in bombings before September 11, this involvement was never sufficiently threatening to make capturing or killing him a priority. In fact, based on all the evidence, Osama Bin Laden was likely always a inconsequential person, who primarily served the role of a convenient name and face to put into media reports about attacks on U.S. assets where it would be uncomfortable to divulge the real identity of plotters.

Throughout the years the U.S. government stubbornly refused to provide any evidence of Osama Bin Laden’s direct involvement in military actions. The most likely reason for this refusal is that no such evidence exists.

The myth of Saddam Hussein and Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruction is closely related to the myth of Osama Bin Laden and the myth of Al-Qaeda, although these dueling myths have at time conflicted with each other.

One of the key proponents of the myth of Saddam Hussein’s involvement in the events of September 11 is Lauri Mylroie, a close associate of the congenital liars Richard Perle and Daniel Pipes. Mylroie claimed in 1995 that Hussein was responsible for the first bombing of the World Trade Center. In her piece on that bombing, she does not mention Al-Qaeda or Osama Bin Laden once.


In reality, the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center was conducted by a group of bunglers who had been penetrated by an FBI informant named Emad Salem. Emad Salem claims to have offered to sabotage their bomb, but the FBI declined to interfere with the plot. One of the bombers was arrested after the event when he tried to reclaim the deposit he had paid on the vehicle that was used in the bombing. Emad Salem is now in witness protection, living on a permanent pension provided by U.S. taxpayers.


Claims of Saddam’s links to Al-Qaeda and involvement in the events of September 11 were frequently made in editorial columns and televised appearances by everyone from Dick Cheney on down.

Condoleeza Rice famously said that “We know that he [Saddam Hussein] has the infrastructure, nuclear scientists to make a nuclear weapon … we know that when the inspectors assessed this after the Gulf War, he was far, far closer to a crude nuclear device than anybody thought -- maybe six months from a crude nuclear device.” She drove her point home by saying “The problem here is that there will always be some uncertainty about how quickly he can acquire nuclear weapons. But we don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud.”


This interview was conducted on September 8, 2002, and was timed to coincide with the first anniversary of the September 11 events. Everything Condoleeza Rice said was a blatant lie or willful misrepresentation of fact.

The myth of Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruction was spun by every member of the Bush administration. It was pushed by every leading media outlet, including the New York Times, the Washington Post, CNN, Fox News, and all of the broadcast media.

This myth was the product of calculated and willful deceit on the part of both politicians and the media who refused to report the reality, which was that inspectors on the ground consistently found that there was no evidence of any illegal weapons programs in Iraq.

The reality is that the two main stories of Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruction, one about Nigerian uranium, and another about mobile weapons labs, were complete fabrications. Both of these stories, one based on forged documents, and the other told by an Iraqi cab driver who fled to Germany after being charged with embezzlement, were known to be false when they were used to sell the invasion of Iraq to the American people and to the United Nations.



The myth of Iranian Nuclear Weapons is very similar to the myth of Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruction. The key pushers of this myth are once again the liars and con artists at The Weekly Standard, led by William Kristol, and their allies throughout the government and the media. They persist in their lies and distortions despite the CIA’s National Intelligence Estimate for 2007, which asserted that Iran halted research into nuclear weapons in 2003.



The reality, according to the CIA, is that Iran has no nuclear weapons, no capability to produce nuclear weapons, and no active programs to create a capability to create nuclear weapons.

The myth of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is that he is an insane anti-Semitic dictator who wants to exterminate the Jewish race. This myth is closely tied to the myth of Saddam Hussein. The two were joined in the so called “axis of evil” by President Bush’s speech writers, who clearly wanted to connect the two with memories of the “axis” of World War II, Nazi Germany and Adolf Hitler foremost amongst them.

The reality is that Ahmadinejad is an elected president in a constitutional republic. There may be some doubts as to the legitimacy of his election, but such doubts are common in democracies, ours included. Ahmadinejad has never called for any extermination of the Jewish people, nor is there any documentation that even shows a racist remark against Jews. The entire myth of Ahmadinejad is pure fabrication.

What the myths of the Taliban, Saddam Hussein, and Ahmadinejad have in common is that they represent a particular kind of propaganda spread by parties in the U.S. who advocate for war.

In war propaganda, the U.S. is never invading a country, or destroying a government. The U.S. didn’t topple the legitimate government of Afghanistan, we toppled something called “the Taliban.” The U.S. didn’t destroy the legitimate government of Iraq, we toppled a dictator name Saddam Hussein. The U.S. is not going to invade Iran and overthrow their constitutional republic, we are going to topple a dictator named Ahmadinejad.

This propaganda is designed to delegitimize the targets of military aggression with lies and fabrications. It has been used by the same people going all the way back to the Reagan and Bush administrations. As part of the illegal Iran Contra operations we funded terrorists fighting “the Sandanistas,” otherwise known as the legitimate government of Nicaragua. Under Bush we captured the dictator and drug kingpin Manual Noriega. What would objectively be called invading Panama, overthrowing their government, and kidnapping their President.

The propaganda of delegitimization is also common in Palestine where we refuse to negotiate with the “terrorist organization Hamas.” Otherwise known as the elected government of the Palestinian people.


Instead, we support Fatah, an organization that seized control of the West Bank in Palestine in a military coup. Fatah’s military force is made up of mercenaries trained by Dyncorp under the leadership of retired U.S. Army Lieutenant General Keith Dayton.


The mythology of “The War on Terror” was introduced to the world after the events of September 11, 2001. This mythology revolves around a larger set of myths concerning Al-Qaeda, Osama Bin Laden, the Taliban, Saddam Hussein, Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruction, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and Iranian Nuclear Weapons. These myths are closely tied to the myth of the terrorist organization Hamas, the myth of the terrorist organization Hezbollah, and the myth of Islamic Terrorism generally.

The Big Lie that all of these myths give credence to is the idea that Islamic Terrorists threaten the United States of America. This is an absurd lie, which cannot stand up to even the slightest objective inquiry.

The United States is the most industrialized nation in the world, and possesses the most advanced military machine every assembled. The U.S. government has under its control a hierarchical bureaucracy comprising millions of agents, including hundreds of thousands of trained soldiers, deployed to every corner of the globe.

Are we to believe that a few hundred people, loosely affiliated in a group we call Al-Qaeda, possessing no centralized command and control, could possibly pose a threat to the juggernaut that is the U.S. military? How exactly do a few hundred men with AK-47’s, driving around in a remote corner of the world in pickup trucks, or even riding on horseback, pose a threat to an army of hundreds of thousands, equipped with trillions of dollars worth of advanced weaponry?

If any such threat ever could exist, it could only be the result of the worst kind of strategic and tactical blundering imaginable. If Al-Qaeda or Islamic Terrorism is a threat to the United States, then the whole of our political and military command should resign tomorrow, because even a monkey equipped with our military capacity could successfully defend our country against the threat posed by the myth of Islamic Terrorism.

This won’t happen though, because Islamic Terrorism is a myth, and those who propagate this myth for public consumption have very different military objectives in mind.

In the Quadrennial Defense Review Report of February 2010, signed by Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, the military leadership spells out very clearly their true agenda, and the true objectives of the use of military force around the world.

“As a global power, the strength and influence of the United States are deeply intertwined with the fate of the broader international system—a system of alliances, partnerships, and multinational institutions that our country has helped build and sustain for more than sixty years.”

“America’s interests and role in the world require armed forces with unmatched capabilities and a willingness on the part of the nation to employ them in defense of our interests and the common good. The United States remains the only nation able to project and sustain large-scale operations over extended distances. This unique position generates an obligation to be responsible stewards of the power and influence that history, determination, and circumstance have provided.”


What the QDR makes clear is that the top military leadership believes that it is their duty and the duty of the United States to act as the foot soldiers for a globalist imperial order, described as the “broader international system.” In this globalist imperial order the interests of the U.S. are subordinate to something referred to as “the common good.”

If anyone has made a more open admission of treason while serving in the highest positions of power, I am not aware of it. The juxtaposition of “our interests and the common good” clearly implies that the “common good” is contrary to U.S. interests, and that U.S. interests are inferior to this “common good.” Truly a stunning statement for anyone serving as the head of any nation’s armed forces.

That the Secretary of Defense of the United States places his allegiance to the “broader international system” and “the common good” above his allegiance to his own Country and Constitution, and states so openly, publicly, and shamelessly, reveals a great deal about the underlying causes of many of the problems that bedevil our nation.

To understand why President Bush appointed Robert Gates to be Secretary of Defense it must be remembered that Gates was Deputy Director of Intelligence for the CIA from 1982 to 1986, and was deeply involved with the illegal Iran Contra activities. Even though he was caught in several lies relating to his involvement with these crimes, the Independent Council for Iran/Contra Matters declined to indict him.


The legacy of many of the key players in the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq stretches back to the Reagan administration and even earlier. These individuals are euphemistically referred to as “neoconservatives,” and much has been written about them under that rubric.

The creators of our modern big lie and the myths about Islamic Terrorism and evil dictators in the middle east were, thirty years ago, busy creating myths and spreading lies about the threat of the Soviet military. Interestingly, they were also proponents of U.S. military action in Afghanistan then, although with a different causus belli at the time.

In 1976, George H.W. Bush, then Director of the CIA, authorized the creation of an “independent” group called “Team B” that would analyze raw intelligence on the Soviet Union. Team B was headed by Richard Pipes and its advisors included Paul Wolfowitz. Team B made a variety of wild claims about Soviet military capabilities, some lifted from optimistic Soviet propaganda, and others that were pure fabrication.


Dr. Anne Cahn, who served at the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency from 1977-1981, appears in The Power of Nightmares, stating that “if you go through most of Team B's specific allegations about weapons systems ... they were all wrong.” She continues, saying “I don’t believe anything in Team B was really true.”

In the journal article, Team B Intelligence Coups, Gordon Mitchell outlines how the “Team B” formula was recycled in 1998 by the Donald Rumsfeld led and Paul Wolfowitz staffed Commission to Assess the Ballistic Missile Threat to the United States. This commission was formed to overturn a CIA National Intelligence Assessment that correctly concluded that no country outside of the major nuclear powers was capable of producing Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles. The Rumsfeld/Wolfowitz team concluded, incorrectly, that Iran and North Korea would be able to produce ICBM’s within five years. We are still waiting.

Interestingly, this was the second attempt by extremist factions to override the CIA, and hype up a non-existent threat of nuclear weapons. The first “independent” commission to reassess the CIA’s conclusions was chaired by Robert Gates, but ultimately concluded that the CIA’s assessment was correct.



After September 11, 2001, Donald Rumsfeld, now Secretary of Defense again, along with his lieutenant and long time partner in crime Paul Wolfowitz set up the Policy Counter Terrorism Evaluation Group (PCTEG) to reassess raw intelligence sources in order to overturn the CIA’s conclusion that there was no relationship between Iraq and Al-Qaeda.

Douglas Feith, a Rumsfeld cohort and Undersecretary of Defense, staffed PCTEG with Michael Maloof and David Wurmser. Feith, along with Richard Perle, had worked previously with Wurmser and Maloof on a policy document titled “A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm.”

The “Clean Break” report was commissioned by Benjamin Netanyahu, then (and now) Prime Minister of Israel, and called for the invasion of Iraq and the ouster of Saddam Hussein in order to improve Israel’s security.


Based on the “evidence” of the PCTEG, Vice President Cheney went on Meet the Press on September 14, 2003, once again to celebrate the anniversary of September 11, and claimed that “there was a relationship between Iraq and al-Qaeda that stretched back through most of the decade.” By this time, the lies manufactured by PCTEG were an important part of spinning the non-existence of Weapons of Mass Destruction, which was becoming increasingly apparent.

In the same interview, Cheney claimed that the 1993 World Trade Center bombing was “directed” by Al-Qaeda, and repeated the Mylroie claims that “in connection with the original World Trade Center bombing in ’93 that one of the bombers was Iraqi, returned to Iraq after the attack of ’93. And we’ve learned subsequent to that, since we went into Baghdad and got into the intelligence files, that this individual probably also received financing from the Iraqi government.”

Cheney of course conveniently forgot that Mylroie never mentioned Al-Qaeda or Bin Laden in her writings about the 1993 bombings, because when she was writing, the myth of Al-Qaeda and the myth of Bin Laden had not yet been created. Cheney did not mention that a key player in the 1993 bombings was an FBI informant, whose offers to stop the bombing were rejected by the FBI.

Cheney also neglected to mention that the documents recovered in Iraq included an audio tape in which Saddam Hussein speculated that the 1993 World Trade Center bombing “could be the work of either Israel or American intelligence, or perhaps a Saudi or Egyptian faction.”


In Team B Intelligence Coups James Bamford, an author, journalist, and former Navy intelligence analyst, is quoted as saying “the Wurmser intelligence unit would pluck selective bits and pieces of a thread from a giant ball of yarn and weave them together in a frightening tapestry.” The paper concludes that “their [PCTEG] work products were about as sophisticated as 'a high school biology student’s reading of a CAT scan.’”

Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Robert Gates, Douglas Feith, Daniel Pipes, and other characters mentioned here have a record of participation in intelligence frauds, criminal activity, and the creation of Big Lies to serve militarist agendas that stretches back over three decades.

What is it that holds this cabal of top level government officials, sometimes referred to as “neoconservatives,” together and gives them their motivation to continually spread lies and falsehoods designed to instigate foreign wars? What is the connection between these government officials and civilian propagandists like Irving and William Kristol, Charles Krauthammer, and Christopher Hitchens, who align themselves with the “neoconservative” movement, and whistle their particular war-mongering tune?

Who are these neoconservatives, and what are the fundamental principles of their political movement?

For the answers to these questions, it is instructive to turn first to Russell Kirk, an old guard intellectual of prominence in American conservative thought. In a lecture titled “The Neoconservatives: an endangered species,” given on December 15, 1988, Kirk deconstructed the neoconservative movement with unmatched alacrity, and somewhat prematurely predicted their demise.


Kirk quotes an unnamed “distinguished historian” as writing that neoconservatives “are selfish and uninstructed radicals and progressives, wishing to pour cement all over the country and make the world safe for democracy, well beyond the dreams of Wilson." He continues, quoting "A feeling for the land, for its conservation, and for the strong modesty of a traditional patriotism (as distinct from nationalism) none of them has."

Kirk concludes that the neoconservatives are "Deficient in historical understanding as in familiarity with humane letters, most of the Neoconservatives lack those long views and that apprehension of the human condition which forms a basis for successful statecraft. Often clever, these Neoconservatives; seldom wise."

Kirk relates that “He [Irving Kristol] and various of his colleagues wish to persuade us to adopt an ideology of our own to set against Marxist and other totalist ideologies. Ideology, I venture to remind you, is political fanaticism: at best it is the substitution of slogans for real political thought. Ideology animates, in George Orwell's phrase, ‘the streamlined men who think in slogans and talk in bullets.’”

The totalitarian ideology that the neoconservatives wanted to set up against Marxism was “democratic capitalism.” Kirk points out that “the phrase is a contradiction in terms; for capitalism is not democratic, nor should it be, nor can it be.”

Kirk goes on to point out the fallacy inherent in totalitarian ideologies and their conflict with the Christian religion central to real conservatism: "All modem ideologies have the same irrational root: the permeation of politics with millenarian ideas of pseudo-religious character. The result is a dream world. … All these presume that man could create himself, implying that he is not a creature, dependent on God, but the master of his own soul and destiny."

In regards to the neoconservative agenda of “spreading democratic capitalism,” Kirk retorts that "the Constitution of the United States is not for export," as Dr. Daniel Boorstin puts it. To expect that all the world should, and must, adopt the peculiar political institutions of the United States - which often do not work very well even at home - is to indulge the most unrealistic of visions.”

He summarizes the dream of global democratic capitalism pursued by the neoconservatives, saying that "they aspire to bring about a world of uniformity and dull standardization, Americanized, industrialized, democratized, logicalized, boring. They are cultural and economic imperialists."

As to the specific roots of the neoconservatives, Kirk says that "This fresh horde of dissenters from Holy liberalism were men and women of Manhattan, for the most part, and of Jewish stock chiefly - although they recruited some Protestant and Catholic auxiliaries. At one time or another, nearly all of them had professed to be radicals or ritualistic liberals."

Kirk muses that "not seldom it has seemed as if some eminent Neoconservatives mistook Tel Aviv for the capital of the United States."

Many neoconservatives claim as their source of philosophical inspiration the fascist political philosopher Leo Strauss. Leo Strauss was a friend and colleague of Carl Schmidt, who was called “The Crown Jurist of the Third Reich.” Schmidt was an avid Nazi who joined the NSDAP (Nazi party) in 1933. As a professor who focused on philosophy, religion, and law, Carl Schmidt wrote many academic works that supported and guided the Nazi movement.


Schmitt helped Strauss obtain a fellowship from the Rockefeller Foundation, after which Strauss moved to Paris.

The history of American fascism is beyond the scope of this article, but as an aside, the Rockefellers maintained close relationships with German fascist industrialists. They were major funders of “The American Liberty League,” a group involved in plotting a coup against Franklin Roosevelt with the goal of installing a fascist dictatorship in the U.S. Today the focus of the Rockefeller Foundation is “globalism” – just like Robert Gates and the U.S. military.





After Paris, Strauss moved to England, where he was befriended by the Marxist Harold Laski. Strauss was unable to find work in England, and so in 1937 he came to America. With recommendations from both Marxists and Fascists in his pocket, Strauss first found a home at Columbia University, followed by The New School in New York, and the University of Chicago.


Strauss’s philosophical views can be summed up in his own words: “Because mankind is intrinsically wicked he has to be governed: Such governance can only be established, however, when men are united—and they can only be united against other people.”

This philosophy is predicated on racism, because the unstated assumption is that the writer is not one of these intrinsically wicked members of mankind. The writer is part of some other group that is separate from the rest of humanity and to whom the same rules do not apply.

It is for this elite that philosophers like Strauss write, and it is with this group of elitists that the absurd ideas of philosophers like Strauss find adherents. Strauss is revered by the “neoconservatives,” apparently because they seriously believe in his theories about them being a elite who have the duty to rule over the masses of common men by creating myths and illusions with which they can control society.

Like Strauss, with his ties to both Marxism and Fascism, other leading neoconservatives are former communists of one branch or another. Irving Kristol and Christopher Hitchens openly assert their history as Trotskyite communists. Other claims of neoconservative/communist connections are the subject of some debate.


The use of the term neoconservative itself has been criticized by Barry Rubin, of the Interdisciplinary Center in Israel, who says that “'neo-conservative' is a codeword for Jewish. As anti-Semites did with big business moguls in the nineteenth century and Communist leaders in the twentieth, the trick here is to take all those involved in some aspect of public life and single out those who are Jewish. The implication made is that this is a Jewish-led movement conducted not in the interests of all the, in this case, American people, but to the benefit of Jews, and in this case Israel.”

He goes on to say: “In this case, there is not even any Rothschild or Trotsky, Jews who actually did play a big role in big business and the Russian revolution. In the top dozen of [sic] so policymakers involved in the war, the only Jewish person must be Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, neither a neoconservative nor anyone with particular ties to Israel.”

Rubin conveniently ignores the roles of Douglas Feith, Michael Maloof, and David Wurmser in creating and spreading lies about Iraq and Al-Qaeda. Lies that were used to push the same agenda of invading Iraq and overthrowing Saddam Hussein that they also proposed when employed by Benjamin Netanyahu and the Israeli government.

Neoconservative is not, as Rubin would have it, a codeword for Jews. If anything, it is a codeword for fascists. If some of the intellectuals labeled as neoconservatives happen to be Jewish, it is certainly not their self-ascribed racial identity that is at issue.

The issue with neoconservatives is that they promote fascist ideologies. In the place of racism or communism as the binding force of the fascist State, they have substituted a vicious and warped form of Christianity along with the absurd and self-contradictory ideology of democratic capitalism. For an external enemy, to unite our society for war, they have created the myth of Islamic Terrorism.

The very same people propagated the myth of a dark and sinister international communism, a supposedly atheist menace, as America’s external enemy before the collapse of the Soviet Union. This despite the fact that some prominent neoconservatives were themselves communists. When the Soviet Union collapsed the neoconservatives simply replaced one mythical enemy with another.

These myths need not be credible or intellectually consistent. They are not sold to the American people on the basis of reason. They are given currency through mass repetition, willful deceit, and purposeful abuse of emotionally powerful images and symbolism, such as the events of September 11, 2001, and the smoking gun in the form of a mushroom cloud.

Some of these neoconservatives may actually believe in the theories of Leo Strauss; that they are an elite group of philosopher kings charged with the duty of directing the mass of intrinsically wicked mankind. Such a belief might explain their lying, murder, torture, subversion, and treason. Hermann Göring made similar arguments, based on similar philosophical sources, at his trial at Nuremberg.

Göring was sentenced to hang for his crimes, but committed suicide before he could be executed.

Göring is quoted as having said: “Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along … voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.”

The fascist playbook has not changed. The Nazis themselves learned their techniques from more ancient sources, which they slavishly imitated. Then, as now, Big Lies, Grand Illusions, and Great Myths are used for the purpose of uniting society against imaginary enemies in order to wage aggressive expansionist wars for the purpose of enriching the war mongers at the expense of the useful idiots.

The mythology of the War on Terror is the Big Lie of our age. These myths are nothing more than the tricks of a stage magician. The events of September 11, and all of the lies about the threat of Islamic Terrorism, are a bit of clever misdirection designed to hide the mechanism by which our civil liberties, our dignity and honor as a nation, and our wealth has been made to disappear from before our eyes.

This misdirection was certainly grand. It relied on the best shock and awe that modern weapons and a pervasive mass media could provide.

This misdirection has for a time made people forget the truth about what happens when a mosquito bites an elephant. Nothing.

Even if all of the lies and myths about Al-Qaeda, Osama Bin Laden, and Islamic Terrorists were true, they would never pose a credible threat to the United States for a single instant. A few hundred guys with AK-47’s cannot threaten an institutionalized industrial military with hundreds of thousands of soldiers, and literally tens of millions of civilians involved in administering, supplying, and supporting it.

What does pose a threat to the United States is the insane ideology of globalist democratic capitalism. This ideology was created by former communists as an intellectual counterpoint to communism, and in the end, it is no different than communism. It is just another b.s. ideology designed to trick people into fighting other people’s wars, for other people’s profits, with their own lives and their own money. Such ideologies are a dime-a-dozen, and can be created at will using whatever buzzwords and symbols are found to resonate with people of a particular culture.

As Smedley Butler, the Marine General who exposed the Rockefeller plot to overthrow FDR, said: War is a Racket. As with every racket, if you’re smart, you get out while you still can.

Article by Ersun Warncke Sep-10-2010 Part 2

Source: (as per 2018-09-17) : http://www.salem-news.com/articles/september122010/911-reflections-ew.php

9/11 Reflections Part 2: Interview with Simon Shack of September Clues Ersun Warncke Salem-News.com

Out of 2,970 9/11 victims listed, only 446 appear in the Social Security death index. Of those only 249 have a confirmed death certificate on file. Maybe Simon Shack is not as crazy as it would seem at first glance. September Clues Watch Online: September Clues

(EUGENE, ORE.) - Simon Shack is emphatic: “nobody died on September eleventh.” I am talking to him in Rome, via Skype. He has recently asked me if I believe that the moon landing was real, laughing derisively.

To put this in context, Simon Shack is not talking in general about any given September 11. 300,000 people around the world die every single day. Simon Shack is referring, in particular, to the media event known as 9/11. The World Trade Center. All of that. These 3,000 people, who died on television in the United States, occupy a sanctified position not enjoyed by the other 99% of the people who died on September 11, 2001.

They are the casus belli for the longest and most disastrous wars in the history of the United States. Simon Shack is convinced that these 3,000 odd people never existed.

Simon Shack will tell you that nobody actually died on television. There is almost no evidence of any fatalities whatsoever. Only a few bone fragments and rumors that thousands of bodies were “vaporized.”

Simon Shack believes, sincerely and based on serious evidence, that nobody died in the events known as the “9/11 terrorist attacks.” He believes that the entire event was a hoax propagated by means of the modern mass media. The evidence that Simon Shack has compiled to support this theory rests in a documentary film series “September Clues” and at the website septemberclues.info.

The September Clues series is a compilation of evidence of lies, deceit, the use of green screens, computer generated imagery (CGI), and fake video and audio in the live network broadcasts from September 11, 2001, and in supposed amateur recordings of the events of that day.

The proofs of fakery that Simon presents include: Strong evidence of the use of a CGI plane in the “live” Fox broadcast.

The “live” Fox broadcast has been replaced, in the “official archive” on the internet, with a re-edited fake version compiled from the broadcasts from other stations.

Strong evidence that NBC replaced their “live” shot of the second airplane hitting the tower with a CGI version of the same shot, which was shown on the evening news on September 11.

Irrefutable evidence that the evening news shot on NBC of the plane hitting the tower was accompanied by a fake studio soundtrack.

Irrefutable evidence that the fake soundtrack from the NBC nightly news contained audio samples identical to the ones found in two supposedly amateur videos of planes hitting the World Trade Center Tower.

Irrefutable evidence that background scenery - such as birds, helicopters, and bridges – were inserted into “live” broadcasts using CGI, and could not possibly be real.

It is on the strength of this kind of evidence that Simon Shack makes, what appear to be, some very outlandish claims about what actually occurred in New York on September 11.

The logic is: if the live broadcasts were faked, and the amateur videos were faked, and there is conclusive evidence of the same fake material being used in both the live broadcasts and the amateur videos, then there must be a single source that produced most, if not all, of the faked media material that purports to depict planes flying into the World Trade Center towers in New York.

How this was all accomplished is unknown. What Simon Shack presents is simply evidence of the video fakery. He is an investigator looking at the remnants of a crime scene that has not only been manipulated and disturbed, but in his opinion, faked entirely.

Simon’s thinking goes like this: if the video from September 11 was faked, then the only plausible reason to fake it would be to conceal the fact that no commercial airliners hit the WTC towers.

This reasoning jibes with numerous strong proofs that the destruction of the WTC buildings resulted from the use of pre-planted explosives and a controlled demolition. It also fits well with strong proofs that a commercial airliner did not hit the Pentagon.

If you break down these theories, it makes no sense that commercial airliners would hit the WTC, but not the Pentagon. It makes no sense that you would have both a controlled demolition at the WTC complex and commercial airliners hitting the buildings.

If a person was going to take down the WTC with a controlled demolition, they would not use hijacked commercial airliners as part of this plot. This would be redundant, and it would introduce unacceptable levels of risk, because if the hijackings failed there would be no viable explanation for why the buildings had collapsed. Thus, either there were no airplanes, or there was no controlled demolition.

Once you see September Clues, the evidence of airplanes looks very weak. The evidence for controlled demolition has always been strong, but it has been counterbalanced by the video of planes hitting the buildings, which renders the idea of controlled demolition nonsensical.

Over the past decade a great deal of attention has been paid to the events of September 11, 2001.

In the first part of this series, The Elephant and the Mosquito, I showed how political leaders and the media used the events of September 11 as part of a concerted propaganda plan to promote the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, along with an increase in the militarization of Asia and the Middle-East generally. This propaganda was based on the myths of Al-Qaeda, Osama Bin Laden, the Taliban, and Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, which the media bought and sold willingly and with full knowledge of their falsehood.

The purpose of The Elephant and the Mosquito was to show how the simple magic trick of misdirection works on the massive stage provided by modern mass media.

Simon Shack’s work goes a step further by showing just how easy it is to broadcast fake video and audio and pretend that it is real, even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

The brave new world of “news,” where the same company (News Corp) that produces films that convincingly depict the White House and Empire State Building being blown to bits by alien death rays (Independence Day) also produces your nightly news cast, is truly one where the phrase caveat emptor applies.

Talking with Simon, we discussed the fact that television is fundamentally a technology designed to mass produce illusions. The perfection of this technology of illusion to the point that entirely simulated realities can be created raises serious questions for a society that depends on media to maintain social order.

These are not new questions, but they are raised under new circumstances. False pretenses for war have been manufactured by politicians and generals since the beginning of recorded history.

The “Golf of Tonkin incident,” one of the pretexts for the Vietnam War, is a good recent example. The entire “Cold War,” in retrospect, appears to be primarily an adventure in lies, deception, paranoia, and propaganda.

What is different now is that the media stage has changed, society has changed, and the sophistication of the population has changed. It is no longer good enough for the President to go on TV and denounce the enemy. People have learned to treat politicians like used car salesmen and ask for the proof.

If a politician or a general wants to start a war under false pretenses today, just as politicians and generals have done for millennia, then they have to work with the toolkit that is available to them. The assassination of an unwanted official, and the production of an agent from the enemy camp who willingly confesses to the crime, simply will not cut it anymore.

To manufacture a pretext for war in the modern era you need to connect with the entire population, which means that you must use television, and you must create a televised spectacle with suitable dramatic impact to galvanize the public for the costs of war.

In the first Iraq war, the one in 1993, both politicians and the media engaged in hoaxes and frauds to sell that war to the public. Foremost amongst these was the lie about Iraqi soldiers throwing Kuwaiti babies out of their incubators and onto the floor of a Kuwaiti hospital’s maternity ward[1].

This lie was told by the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador to the United States. A fact conveniently overlooked by the media.

It goes without question that the President, intelligence agencies, and any congress person who cared would have known exactly who this girl was, and that her claims were an absurd fantasy. The media certainly should have known, and if they did not, it would be another case of the willfully ignorant bliss that seems to be so common with them.

Throwing babies out of incubators is some absurdly evil stuff, but some of the absurdities spun around the events of September 11 are equally audacious. Simon Shack draws attention to the story of the “missing persons” fliers in New York as a prime example of absurd manufactured propaganda. The story is that thousands of people put up tens of thousands of fliers in New York to try and locate lost love ones.

Simon’s response to this is that “people put up fliers when they lose a dog.” His point is that in a civilized society people call the police when they are missing family members. He concludes that the fliers in New York must be a hoax, simply because they are so absurd.

Watch Wag the Dog. The part where they throw old shoes on telephone lines. It might ring a bell. I asked Simon how he got into producing September Clues, a video series that clearly took an enormous amount of work and time to compile. He described sensing an “aura” in people, regarding the topic of the September 11 events. He observed that people felt that something was not right, and that “many expected that it was a hoax, but didn’t know how it was done.”

As a person with experience in video editing and production, Simon noticed some obvious problems in the September 11 broadcast footage, and began to systematically break it down and review it. Simon released the first version of September Clues on the internet in 2007.

Contrarian viewpoints on September 11 have found fertile ground on the internet. Simon dismisses much of the “9/11 Truth” material, particularly Loose Change and Alex Jones, as “candy for the conspiracy theorists.”

What is true about most of the “9/11 Truth” material is that while it criticizes the story told in the mainstream media on specific points, it largely serves to maintain the key myths of the mainstream story. The role of the September 11 events in creating fear that can be channeled into aggressive military action is unchanged.

Conspiracy theorists, whether on Fox News talking about Osama Bin Laden, or on Alex Jones’ radio show talking about the new world order, are doing the exact same thing. They are selling people the illusion of imaginary enemies, in order to make them afraid, and make them malleable by means of their fear.

Conspiracy theorist used to be a dirty word in American political discourse. At this point, faith in political and corporate institutions has collapsed to the point that people only argue over the relevant merits of various “brands” or “flavors” of popular conspiracy theories.

There is the one conspiracy theory about a few dozen Arabs, commanded from a cave in Afghanistan, who hijacked four planes on September 11.

Somebody else points out that the leader of these Arabs is a former CIA asset and that his family are major business partners with the Bush family who own shares in many leading American defense companies. At this point, absurdity has already fallen by the wayside, and any intellectual discourse enters the twilight zone. Conspiracy theories are excellent propaganda tools for stifling legitimate debate.

The mass repetition of absurdity in public discourse drives away honest participants and creates a grossly obese body of lies that must be dug through before any truth can be extracted from the mess.

Conspiracy theories are hardly the province of lone gunman nuts these days. The “Global Warming Hoax” conspiracy theory has been funded and propagated by Exxon and other major oil companies for decades. Fox News has been more than happy to report on conspiracy theories about a “socialist,” “Marxist,” “fascist” takeover of America by “Obama.” The conspiracy theory about “death panels” as a part of Federal health care reform got plenty of traction.

When the producers of mass media abandon the idea that there is a true objective reality, that it is their duty to report on, then their product becomes worthless. At that point, you are reduced to selling lies, and your dubious accomplishments are measured only by the money you have made and the audacity of the lies you have sold.

In the industry of professional liars, actors, stage magicians, petty hustlers, and con artists the product is a lie, and the profit is in selling an illusion. Honor and dignity must be checked at the door. It is by no accident that the Romans ranked actors as the social equals of prostitutes. One sells their body, the other sells their soul. The two things are not so different.

Every news program is a theatrical production, staged, scripted, and delivered by professional actors. The actors who perform in these productions are no different than the actors who perform in a Hollywood movie. They are even employed by the same companies. Should it come as a surprise that they rely on the same special effects techniques to create their props?

If the companies, such as Cantor Fitzgerald and Morgan Stanley, that lost so many employees on September 11, should happen to be involved in massive financial frauds involving hundreds of billions of dollars, should that come as any surprise?

Is it any surprise that all of the stock market frauds, bubbles, and collapses have been happily cheered on by the entirety of the mass media? And if those media companies happen to be owned by the same banks and industrial conglomerates that profit from this activity, who should be surprised?

Is it any surprise that nobody in the media bothered to report on the lies about Bin Laden, the Taliban, and Iraqi weapons of mass destruction? Is it any surprise that they blithely repeat every manor of proven lie and falsehood about Iran?

The media is full of lies. That is easy to point out. But what is the truth? How could Simon Shack prove that people who never existed didn’t really die? You can’t prove a negative.

Simon Shack’s challenge is simple: “show me real proof that somebody died in the WTC towers on September 11.”

Simon boldly declares that “nobody died on September 11” because he wants to be challenged. He actually wants to get to truth. He is hoping to stimulate a reaction that will result in the revelation of new facts that will flesh out the details of a real history of our modern era that will stand in contrast to the fake history created by the Platonic mythmakers in politics and the media.

So far, Simon Shack’s call has gone unheeded. September Clues has been seen by a million people or more, but it languishes in obscurity by contrast to the “candy for conspiracy theorists” such as Loose Change, and Alex Jones. So, what about the official victims?

I did an exhaustive check of the list of victims provided on the CNN website. What I found is that out of 2,970 people listed, only 446 appear in the Social Security death index. Of those only 249 have a confirmed death certificate on file. Of those, not a single one has a valid “last address of record” on file. That is a lot of clerical error, or maybe Simon Shack is not as crazy as it would seem at first glance[2].

Part one in this special series:

Sep-10-2010" 9/11 Reflections Part 1: The Elephant and the Mosquito - Ersun Warncke Salem-News.com

[1] http://www.prwatch.org/books/tsigfy10.html

[2] http://www.scribd.com/doc/37270708/CNN-9-11-Memorial-Victims-SSA-Death-Index-Cross-Reference

See also





Mainstream links