4 Years Later: Painful Questions Remain

[Guest guest]

http://www.islamonline.net/English/Views/2005/09/article02.SHTML

 

M

Tue, 13 Sep 2005 04:25:14 -0400

4 Years Later: Painful Questions Remain

 

 

 

 

 

4 Years Later: Painful Questions Remain

(Personal Reflection)

 

By Khaled Mamdouh**

 

Sept. 12, 2005

 

Four long years have passed since the deadly attacks of 9/11, and the

huge consequences that followed worldwide have likely dwarfed the

attacks themselves: two bitter wars (Afghanistan and Iraq) and packs

of so-called anti-terror laws around the world in what later history

might see as another witch-hunt that saw words like Islam, Muslim,

Islamic, and Islamist mostly going hand-in-hand with other terms like

extremism, fanaticism, radicalism, and, of course, terrorism.

 

The mainstream media in the United States, Europe, and consequently

the world hardly catch their breath following the rapid changes and

endless events on all fields, and all are related—directly or

indirectly—to the 9/11 attacks. But what is surprising, to say the

least, is that the events themselves—four years after they

occurred—still raise more questions than answers.

 

An American Web site called reopen9/11.org, established by US

individuals representing almost all walks of life—media persons,

military experts, fire experts, explosives experts, researchers,

ex-officials, etc.—presents the view that the US administration's

" half-baked " investigation into the grisly events led to more

suspicions than certainties and raised more questions than answers

about the nature and scope of the attacks, but more importantly about

the criminals behind them.

 

On the Web site, the group declares " we work to unite people who are

interested in our mission regardless of political party, race, color,

sex, age, religion, political affiliation, sexual orientation,

national origin or any other differences. We are non-partisan in the

true sense of the word in that we are Republicans, Libertarians,

Objectivists, Democrats, Socialists, and Greens. "

 

Try any search engine on the Internet and you'll be amazed at the

number of American gatherings and groups believing that the Bush

administration, at the very least, facilitated the attacks to happen

for political gains.

 

What prompted such movements to emerge? What arguments do they have?

What inconsistencies in the official explanation about the attacks

made them believe there was more to them than the US administration is

saying?

 

Let's try to highlight the points that I could not find any official

clarification for after a torturous search during the past six months

since I received a documentary to translate into Arabic that prompted

the interest to " know what really happened. " Being a human who

believes in the power of the people and their ability to change once

they are aware, I think it is our right (Americans, Afghans, Iraqis,

European Muslims, and humans in general) to understand why we are

being kidnapped, killed, tortured, detained without due legal process

and, above all, why all of us have to live in fear.

 

Cheap Investigation

 

Jimmy Walter

 

The first thing that raises an eyebrow regarding this whole tragedy is

the " fact " that " the entire 9/11 Commission spent only 15 million

dollars … while all expenditures on Clinton's indiscretion exceeded 65

million " (Confronting the Evidence).

 

Former US President Bill Clinton's sex scandal investigation cost the

US taxpayers over 65 million dollars, despite the fact that the

scandal did not—as far as we know—cause the death of a single person.

 

So how could the investigation into the unprecedented attack on US

soil that caused the death of almost 3,000 people and the huge

economic losses cost only 15 million dollars?

 

The answer could be very simple: The facts were all there and the

culprits were all known, so the case was complete! But was that really

the case?

 

Building Seven

 

Ever heard of the term " building seven " ? I personally came in touch

with it a few months ago. The World Trade Center in New York comprised

seven buildings, not just the North and South towers we all watched

the planes crash into during that fateful Tuesday morning four years

ago. Buildings four, five, and six were office buildings. Building

three was a hotel. Building number one was the North Tower and number

two was the South Tower.

 

Our focus here, or rather that of US experts who found it too

difficult to swallow the official explanation of what happened on

9/11, is concentrated on " building seven. "

 

The attack on 9/11 destroyed all seven towers and damaged surrounding

buildings as well.

 

In a documentary called Painful Deceptions, Jimmy Walter put a lot of

emphasis on building seven and the 9/11 Commission's report's

explanation of how it fell down:

 

Building 7 at the World Trade Center was a 47 story building with a

steel frame. No airplane crashed into, nor did the towers fall onto

it. However, this building disintegrated on September 11th.

 

Here is a view from an airplane of the rubble of building seven. The

pile is very small. How did a 47 story steel building crumble into a

tiny pile of rubble? The Bush administration wants us to believe that

fire caused it to disintegrate.

 

Fire started in building seven at around 9:00 in the morning. A few

moments after the plane crashed into the south tower. These fires

burned slowly all day. This photo shows the fires at 3:00 PM. The

fires are not easy to see because they are small and the air is full

of dust and smoke.

 

According to Bill Manning, editor in chief of Fire Engineering—a

magazine for fire departments—fire has never destroyed a steel building.

 

" This building, Seven, was straddling an electrical substation for the

city. So it had some of the thickest steel beams of any building on

the planet. "

 

In the course of investigating how and why Building Seven was pulled

down, Manning became so disgusted by the investigation that the

January 2002 issue published an article in which he called the

investigation a " half-baked farce. "

 

In the 9/11 Commission Report, " the Federal Emergency Management

Agency lament that, the specifics of the fires in World Trade Center 7

and how they caused the building to collapse, are unknown. "

 

Unknown? Why did you wrap up the investigation then? Why did you spend

only 15 million dollars? Not 65 million, as Clinton's sex scandal cost

you?

 

Pentagon or Pentagate?

 

French researcher Thierry Meyssan

 

In 2002, French researcher Thierry Meyssan, dubbed " conspiracy

theorist " by the US State Department and other " uglier " names by US

and French mainstream media, wrote a book suggesting that a cruise

missile instead of a plane hit the Pentagon on September 11.

 

Meyssan's book, L'Effroyable Imposture [The Horrifying Fraud] was

translated into 23 languages: French, English, Spanish, German,

Russian, Italian, Greek, Turkish, Persian, Arabic, Korean, Greek,

Portuguese, Romanian, Czech, Estonian, Croatian, Albanian, Serbian,

Chinese, Slovenian, Japanese, and Dutch. The book was published in

English as 9/11: The Big Lie.

 

Despite huge attacks against Meyssan inside and outside France, the

book remained a bestseller in the French book market and sold 200,000

copies in France alone, within a couple of months from hitting the

bookshelves.

 

Reading the book (in Arabic, in this case) and also reading many

articles and reviews refuting its allegations, proved a really

interesting experience. The clearest conclusion that almost settled in

my head back then was this: Meyssan raised some very serious questions

about the nature of the thing that hit the Pentagon that fateful

morning. But still the refutations were also reasonable, except that

they hardly answered any of his serious questions.

 

Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney attacked the Bush administration over

the 9/11 attacks, and she was vilified in the press until it became

clear that many more people were believing her than the pundits imagined.

 

Anyway, back then the whole issue (Pentagon attack) seemed a duel

between French " conspiracy theorists " and US patriots.

 

Jimmy Walter, in another documentary titled Confronting the Evidence,

shows what some Americans are saying about the Pentagon attack.

 

In February of 2002, my attention was drawn to the following website

entitled Hunt The Boeing Test Your Perceptions. Now the original

website was completely in French and was released by the French, and

drew very serious questions as to what had really happened at the

Pentagon.

 

I mean, after all, we had all seen the big hole that was created by

the 757 that had slammed into the Pentagon at 9:43 on September 11th.

But some of the photographs shown on this website raised very serious

questions whether or not that's exactly what had happened.

 

Some of these photographs showed a smaller hole and in some cases,

show that there was no way that a 757 could have created this damage.

 

Walter then goes on refuting the official US version as to what really

happened to the Pentagon according to the 9/11 Commission's report,

interviewing experts, analysts, former Pentagon officials, and many

others.

 

All these interviews, in addition to many other 9/11-related

materials, are available at dozens of Web sites, along with petitions

for reopening the investigation into the 9/11 attacks.

 

Mainstream Media

 

These details and little pieces of analytical evidence can hardly be

conspiracy theories.

 

Before embarking on that long journey of trying to grasp the bloody

events of that day, I was wondering to myself: " What's done is done

and the world now is witnessing endless developments, so why waste

your time in reading conspiracy theories? " Then I realized all these

developments are directly related to what happened that day and that

maybe " knowing " what really happened may lead to some real change to

put a hold to this fateful course led by " warmongers and bloodsuckers "

in both camps! Besides, these details and little pieces of analytical

evidence can hardly be conspiracy theories.

 

But what is really mind-boggling is the position taken by the

mainstream media, especially in the United States, as to the whole

issue of the inconsistent and incoherent official theory about that

day. The basic elements of professionalism and objectivity say that

reporters should not just be postmen; that is, they should not be just

conveying official statements and ignoring criticism thereof.

 

Walter briefly touched on that point in his documentary when he was

trying to mobilize Americans against the invasion in Iraq.

 

" I was so alarmed I ran full page ads in the New York Times, USA

Today, various alternative newspapers across the country. I was

censored by the L.A. Times, I was ignored by everyone. "

 

It just makes one wonder whether the so-called mainstream media giants

are no more seeking to present the truth to their readers but rather

to make the highest profit possible for the capitalists, who now

control over 90 percent of the media worldwide.

 

Click to read the final report of the 9/11 Commission, set up by the

Bush administration, compare it with what " conspiracy theorists " claim

and come up with your own " theory " !

 

Thanks to the economic effects of globalization, mainstream TV

stations, big newspapers and magazines, in addition to radio stations,

are now controlled by nine multinational corporations. Among them are

giant corporations and heavy-weight business tycoons that also have

big investments in the field of weapons, especially nuclear arms.

General Electric and Westinghouse are just examples of the list,

according to a UNESCO report in 2000 on the effects of

globalization—in its various dimensions—on the media.

 

But does this mean giving in to the aspirations of crazy politicians

and greedy businessmen who believe that " those who own the world must

run it " ?

 

Afghanistan was attacked October 7, 2001, less than a month following

the attacks. Americans back then were still stunned by the deadly

terrorist attacks and no one was ready to ask what happened, how it

happened, or who did it. And from that day on, the Bush administration

has been playing on the element of fear to go ahead with a pre-set

agenda to control the world. Four years later, what is the world like?

 

On the other hand, millions of people—Americans, Europeans, Muslims,

Arabs, Christians, Jews, secularists, and all these names the media

generously gives to us humans—are still struggling to get out of the

trap of " blood " .

 

In Uncle Sam's land, thousands, if not millions, still insist on

finding out " what really happened that black Tuesday four years ago. "

Will they ever manage, or will the bloody and destructive day be added

to other mysterious events like the Kennedy assassination that never

seem comprehensible?

 

** Khaled Mamdouh is an editor on IslamOnline.net's News Desk. He is

also a radio announcer, and journalist and translator for several

Arabic magazines. You can reach him at khaledm69.