Lax U.S. government may share blame for Sept. 11 events

Zutshi is a UCLA student.

By Vikram Zutshi

Many people have compared the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks to the
attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941. It is an apt comparison, though not
for the reasons most people think.

For true students of history, it is now nearly beyond dispute
that certain high-ranking officials in Washington, D.C. knew in
advance of the Japanese intention to attack the U.S. fleet in
Hawaii, yet did nothing to prevent it.

President F.D. Roosevelt, who at the time was blatantly
curtailing the Neutrality Act, has been quoted as saying that a
Japanese attack would allow the United States to fulfill “two
of the most important requirements of our policy,” ““ to
engage America in the war despite his pledge to keep us out of
it.

Must the citizens of the United States wait another 50 years to
learn that the Sept. 11 terrorist attack was allowed to take place
just like Pearl Harbor?

Could such an appalling scenario possibly be true?

Consider the comment of Kenneth Katzman, a terrorism expert with
the Congressional Research Service, who told the Washington Post
about U.S. intelligence: “How nothing could have been picked
up is beyond me.”

Simple countermeasures against such an attack now seem apparent.
For example, if the airlines would have assigned just one armed
plainclothes security man to each flight this tragedy may have been
averted, since apparently the hijackers were only armed with knives
and other types of blades.

Lack of security also leads to other questions like: How were
the terrorists able to overpower a plane-load of people and, more
importantly, gain access to the cockpits? Who taught them to fly
jumbo jets?

Looking to the case of the assassination of President John F.
Kennedy, the key to understanding Sept. 11 lies not in who actually
committed the violence, but rather who was able to strip away the
normal security protection.

Airline officials knew immediately that planes had been hijacked
after the terrorists took command of them, yet no interceptors
appeared in the air until after the attacks were completed.

Who stripped away the normal security protection of America on
Sept. 11?

At least the government cannot blame the attack on a lone
deranged individual, some “Lee Harvey McVeigh.” They
must deal with a full-blown conspiracy, even though authorities
were quick to automatically point the finger at Osama bin
Laden.

Any investigation of bin Laden must look beyond the man to his
backers and financiers. Though the trail will be muddied with
plenty of accusations for all concerned, one thing appears quite
clear ““ the tragic events of Sept. 11 play right into the
hands of persons with an agenda aimed at eroding American liberties
and sovereignty.

After decades of bloated and misused defense budgets, there are
now calls for doubling our defense allocation. In a time of rising
recognition that the CIA is an agency which has brought so much
condemnation on this nation, there are now cries for doubling its
size and budget.

But if the chief security officer for a large company fails to
protect one of its most prized assets, is he more likely to be
fired or have his pay doubled?

As we all scramble to deal with the effects of terrorism, are we
in danger of losing our few remaining individual liberties? Watch
for more anti-terrorist legislation to further shred the U.S.
Constitution.

The media blithely reported that each of the cell phone calls
made by doomed passengers on the hijacked airliners was recorded by
the government. Doesn’t this mean that all cell phone calls
are, or can be, recorded? Whatever happened to telephone
privacy?

Where is the indignant outcry over Big Brother listening?

But the biggest threat comes from the inner elite of the
globalist societies. Within hours of the attack, the television and
radio airwaves were full of ranking Council on Foreign Relations
members, such as Henry Kissinger, Wesley Clark, Alexander Haig and
Strobe Talbot.

No matter who was speaking, their “party line” was
the same: terrible tragedy, find and punish those responsible, stop
terrorism. But, of course, since terrorists move between national
boundaries, we must join with other “freedom-loving”
nations and work with the United Nations and NATO to combat this
new menace.

This is a thinly-disguised effort to have a mourning and
emotional American public stampeding into their New World
Order.

Consider that we are distracted from a faltering economy, a
plummeting public opinion of George W. Bush and surging energy
prices.

Would leaders allow a public disaster to happen with an eye
toward advancing their agendas?

It’s happened before ““ in Nero’s burning of
Rome, with Germany’s gutted Reichstag and at Pearl
Harbor.

When the emotions of the moment run hot, we must remain cool and
thoughtful so that we can find who is truly behind this attack on
America.