Muslim-Jewish-Christian Alliance for 9/11 Truth Who We Are - MUJCA

[CrackSmokeRepublican]

NeoConned!  A (Very) Partial Book Review,
with A Detailed Discussion of Luttwak's Coup d'Etat: A Practical Handbook
(the how-to guide used by the 9/11 perpetrators)

Neoconned: Just War Principles: A Condemnation of the War in Iraq. IHIS Press: Vienna, VA 2005
NeoConned Again: Hypocrisy, Lawlessness, and the Rape of Iraq. IHIS Press: Vienna, VA 2005

By Kevin Barrett, http://mujca.com

Is Catholicism a living force of morality and truth? American culture has long harbored a virulent anti-Catholic strain of Protestant extremism that considers the church and its faithful to be terminally corrupt—a prejudice less widely noted, but just as deplorable, as anti-Semitism and Islamophobia. Sometimes events seem to confirm that view: priestly pederasty, Jesuitical intrigues, mafia connections and papal poisonings seem to paint a picture of a decadent institution. Yet voices of truth and justice continue to speak out from within the church, from the grassroots to the papacy, showing that a real Catholic moral-spiritual tradition lives on.

The two-book series Neoconned! offers an eloquent, almost overwhelming chorus of such brave voices. Published by IHS press, "the only publisher dedicated exclusively to the Social Teachings of the Catholic Church," Neoconned! and Neoconned Again exposes the Iraq blitzkrieg as a war crime of the first magnitude. Together, the two volumes include a grand total of 62 essays, plus forwards and appendices, by an impressive array of academics, theologians, church officials, writers, and political and media figures spanning the political spectrum from Noam Chomsky to Pat Buchanan, and traversing the church hierarchy from Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviania and Bishops Hilarion Capucci and John Michael Botean to ex-prisoner of conscience Staff Sgt. Camilo Mejia. About half the contributors have Ph.D.s, and many of the others are household names. If you have an intelligent friend who still isn't sure that the Iraq war marks America's descent into pure evil, please lend him or her these books.

Best of all, the second volume, Neoconned Again, includes two brilliant, hard-hitting 9/11 truth essays, as well as a great many oblique references to the neocon "New Pearl Harbor" coup d'etat. Unfortunately, it also includes essays that refer to the official "19 Arabs" Big Lie in such a way as to imply that the author believes it. Just for fun, I went back through the book counting the 9/11 references. According to my quick survey, Neoconned Again includes 14 references (in ten essays) that take the official story for granted; ten that cast doubt upon it indirectly or through innuendo; and three clear statements that the official story of 9/11 is a lie. I would guess that this is an accurate reflection of the sentiment within the US antiwar movement: About half of those who oppose the war still believe the official 9/11 myth; about 40% have doubts and lean toward LIHOP (let it happen on purpose); and perhaps 10% or so have done their homework and know that it was an inside job, or MIHOP (made it happen on purpose). The trend, of course, is toward 9/11 truth and toward MIHOP. A long and growing 9/11 truth honor roll, whose members are moving ineluctably toward MIHOP, testifies to the fact that everybody is changing their minds in only one direction: toward stronger and stronger versions of 9/11 truth.

With all due respect to the powerful antiwar essays in this volume, the ten that accept the official story of 9/11 are going to have a very short shelf-life. A few years from now, writings that speak forcefully against the Iraq war, but accept today's official version of 9/11, are going to look like dodos: dumb, extinct, and irrelevant. The few who courageously say today what will seem obvious tomorrow will be hailed by posterity.

Let us pass over the dodos and go straight to the heroes: Francis Boyle, Maurizio Blondet, and Col. Donn de Grand-Pre. Francis Boyle, a Harvard-educated international law specialist who teaches at the University of Illinois, drops the following three-sentence bombshell: "It is clear that bin Laden was a pretext, and 9/11 was a pretext. They needed a pretext to go to war against Afghanistan and Iraq, and they created the conditions to make it possible. It also seems to me that they knew the 9/11 attacks were going to happen, but that's another story." The interviewer responds: "Indeed. There's a lot about the mainstream story of 9/11 that doesn't make sense, but that is, as you say, another story" (373).

Dismissing a war-triggering act of high treason and conspiracy to commit mass murder as "but that's another story" seems incongruous to say the least. The remarks are symptomatic of the self-imposed repression that surrounds the topic of 9/11. But Professor Boyle is a brave and intelligent man, and he will undoubtedly be speaking even more forcefully about this "other story" in the not-too-distant future.

Aside from Professor Boyle's aside, there are only two other essays in Neo-Conned Again that speak clearly and forcefully about 9/11. But those two essays alone are worth the price of the book. The first is Col. Donn de Grand-Pre's blistering indictment of the neocons, the Iraq-war, and the 9/11 war-trigger coup. Col. de Grand Pre led a group of high ranking military officers who, in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, met to share their view that a coup had taken place, and decide what, if anything, to do about it. He has spoken out a few times since then, but his essay "Nemesis and Name-Calling" seems to be his major statement to date. (Note: Col. de Grand-Pre should be invited to contribute to 9/11 truth publications and conferences.) In "Nemesis and Name-Calling," he lucidly rips the folly of the war, offers qualified praise of CIA defector Michael Scheuer's criticisms of "war on terror" policy, but then unleashes this zinger:

"The second main criticism of Scheuer's thesis is related to the first: his book seems to take at face value the official version of the event that launched the GWOT, the 9/11 terrorist attacks. It isn't necessary to enter into speculation or conspiracy theory to understand that there is a huge gap between the facts and the 'official story.' It is clearly problematic when people are said to make cellular phone calls on a plane from an altitude where it is technologically impossible to do so, or when steel girders are said to melt due to a fire that never reached the temperature required for them to do so. These and so many others are questions of fact, and not interpretation. It is all reminiscent of the Warren Commission, which concluded that there was no 'conspiracy' in the murder of President Kennedy. Few believed that then, and even fewer believe it now" (700).

De Grand-Pre goes on to cite former UK Environment Minister Michael Meacher's 9/11 truth essay "The War on Terrorism is Bogus" (The Guardian 9/6/03). Then, in a darkly hilarious passage, he ridicules the al-CIA-duh myth of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the "Scarlet Pimpernel of terror" who hops all over Iraq on his one leg, setting off massive explosions designed to split the Iraqi resistance into factions. How this one-legged legend could wreak such anti-Resistance havoc, without ever being seen by anyone, including the Iraqi Resistance itself, remains a mystery...to someone, somewhere. The rest of us figured it out a long time ago.

The second and most important 9/11 truth piece in Neoconned Again is by Maurizio Blondet, a leading Italian journalist and author of September 11th: A Coup d'Etat (Effedieffe, Milan, 2002), Who Really Governs America? (Effedieffe, Milan, 2002), and Osama Bin Mossad (Effedieffe, Milan, 2003). Neo-Conned Again's editors are to be commended for including Blondet's "On Luttwak's Coup d'Etat: A Practical Handbook" – an absolutely essential five pages of 9/11 truth analysis that every 9/11 activist should Xerox and pass around as a masterpiece of samizdat.

Everybody knows that the neocons publicly proclaimed their wish for a "New Pearl Harbor" in September, 2000, in Rebuilding America's Defenses—and got their wish exactly one year later. But few 9/11 truth activists realize that leading neocon military theorist Edward Luttwak wrote a step-by-step how-to manual for 9/11 and published it back in 1968! Luttwak's Coup d'Etat: A Practical Handbook is exactly what its name implies: a recipe for a neocon coup d'etat. As Stanley Hilton has remarked, the neoconservatives began planning for a 9/11-style coup d'etat in the 1960s, when many of them were emerging from the University of Chicago and the malign tutelage of crypto-nazi professor Leo Strauss. Classroom discussions were held, late-night bull sessions attended, and dissertations defended on the topic of how to overthrow Constitutional governance in the United States. The long-term project that emerged from this meeting-of-the-sick-minds culminated on September 11th, 2001.

Those who wish to understand how it happened need to come to terms with Luttwak's recipe for a secret coup d'etat. I hereby offer a few sample passages from Luttwak, including Blondet's comments in brackets, and my own in parentheses.

Coup d'Etat: A Practical Handbook by Edward Luttwak (Harvard University Press, 1968)

Chapter 1: What is a Coup d'Etat?
A coup d'etat is not necessarily assisted by either the intervention of the masses, or, to any significant degree, by military-type force...A coup consists of the infiltration of a small but critical segment of the State apparatus, which is then used to displace the government from its control of the remainder [JINSA infiltrated the Pentagon in exactly this manner].

Chapter 2: When is a Coup d'Etat Possible?
The social and economic conditions of the target country must be such as to confine political participation to a small fraction of the population [this is the case in America where non-voters are the majority].
...An illegal seizure of power must take the form of a "Palace Revolution," and it essentially concerns the manipulation of the person of the ruler. He can be forced to accept policies or advisers, he can be killed or held captive, but whatever happens inside the Palace Revolution can only be conducted from the "inside" by "insiders" (see Webster Tarpley's discussion of the Air Force One anomalies and threats on 9/11 in Synthetic Terror, p. 272-310) ...if a piece of information, or a given order, is followed up in a stereotyped manner, and if the order comes from the appropriate source, it is carried out...A coup operates by taking advantage of this machine-like behaviour; during the coup, because it uses part of the State apparatus to seize the controlling levers; afterwards because the value of the "levers" depends on the fact that the State is a machine.

Chapter 3. The Strategy of a Coup d'Etat
We want to seize power within the present system (rather than by changing the system) and we shall only stay in power if we embody some new status quo...This is perhaps a more efficient method, and certainly a less painful one, that that of a classic revolution [this is a perfect description of the neoconservative coup d'etat].
Though we will try to avoid all conflict with the "political" forces, some of them will almost certainly oppose a coup. But this opposition will largely subside when we have substituted our new status quo for the old one, and can enforce it by our control of the State bureaucracy and security forces. We shall then be carrying out the dual task of imposing our control on the machinery of State while at the same time using it to impose our control on the country at large.

As long as the execution of the coup is rapid, and we are cloaked in anonymity, no particular political faction will have either a motive, or opportunity, to oppose us.

Chapter 4: The Planning of the Coup d'Etat
The major political parties in developed and democratic countries will not present a direct threat to the coup. Though such parties have mass support at election time, neither they nor their followers are well versed in the techniques of mass agitation. The comparative stability of political life has deprived them of the experience required to employ direct methods... (This partially explains the difficulty of getting 9/11 truth off the internet and into the street, and the lame response of the Democrats.) Though some form of confrontation may be inevitable, it is essential to avoid bloodshed, because this may well have crucial negative repercussions amongst the personnel of the armed forces and the police.

Chapter 5: The Execution of the Coup d'Etat
With detailed planning, there will be no need for any sort of headquarters structure...In fact, having a headquarters would be a serious disadvantage: it would constitute a concrete target for the opposition and one which would be both vulnerable and easily identified...The leaders of the coup will be scattered among the various teams. [As we can see Luttwak is theoretically discussing an invisible coup d'etat: the infiltrated coup participants speak with the voice of the legitimate government, which they have seized. On September 11th, let's remember, the immediate entourage of President Bush were not thinking of an Arab attack, but of a military coup d'etat. It is for this reason that the President was taken to a secure location for 10 hours.] (Again, see Tarpley, p. 272-310.)

We should establish direct communications with as many of the more senior officers and officials as possible to convey one principal idea in a forceful and convincing manner: that the coup will not threaten their positions in the hierarchy and the aims of the coup do not include a reshaping of the existing military or administrative structures [this appears to be exactly the task of JINSA].

Our immediate aim will be to enforce public order, but our long-term objective is to gain the acceptance of the masses so that physical coercion will no longer be needed...Our far more flexible instrument will be our control over the means of mass communication...In broadcasting over the radio and television services our purpose is not to provide information about the situation, but rather to affect its development by exploiting our monopoly over these media. [This is exactly what the American mass media has been doing since September 11th.]
[The action of the media] will be achieved by conveying the reality and strength of the coup instead of trying to justify it [the emotional blow of the collapse of the World Trade Center was presented with plenty of "reality" and "force" by CNN]. We will have fragmented the opposition so that each individual opponent would have to operate in isolation. In these circumstances, the news of any further resistance against us would act as a powerful stimulant to further resistance by breaking down this feeling of isolation. We must, therefore, make every effort to withhold such news. If there is in fact some resistance...we should strongly emphasize that it is isolated, the product of the obstinacy of a few misguided or dishonest individuals who are not affiliated to any party or group of significant membership. The constant working of the motif of isolation, and the emphasis on the fact that law and order have been reestablished, should have the effect of making resistance appear dangerous and useless.
The inevitable suspicion (of "conspiracy theorists" that the CIA is involved)...can only be dispelled by making violent attacks on it...and the attacks should be all the more violent if these suspicions are in fact justified...We shall make use of a suitable selection of unlovely phrases [for example, anti-Americanism? Anti-Semitism?]. Even if their meanings have been obscured by constant and deliberate misuse, they will be useful indicators of our impeccable nationalism."

[It seems to this author that these paragraphs describe, with shocking precision, all that has taken place in America since September 11.]

Luttwak's recipe for 9/11, by laying bare the mechanism of the coup, can help us formulate a successful 9/11 truth strategy. Take this and run with it to 911truth's Citizen's Counter-Coup: http://www.3c.911truth.org/

1. We need to break down our isolation from other 9/11 truth activists—and the internet, supplemented by conferences, has given us a head start. Solidarity is everything. Luttwak's plan was drafted before there was an internet—and that's their Achilles heel. But the net alone still feels isolating. Let's make the next conference (late April/early May, in Chicago) the biggest and best yet! And please, let's STOP dissing our 9/11 truth comrades. Anybody who's brave enough to speak out should be embraced and lionized, even if they get a few technical details of the collapse of the WTC wrong. Morgan Reynolds, I salute you! Come back into the fold, brother!

2. Stop being afraid. Fifty to a hundred neocons seized power in a coup d'etat, and though they hold the levers of State power, the last thing they want to do is order non-complicit agents to come after us. The cops and spooks might start asking questions about why these peaceful, pro-Constitution activists are being targeted—and there goes the "machine-like behavior" of the State. From what I hear, the cops and spooks and soldiers are just about ready to turn their guns on the 50 neocons. The more noise we make, the safer we are—and the higher and faster the neocons get hoisted on their own petard.

3. We can't let the neocon coup plotters remain "cloaked in anonymity." PNAC headquarters, and JINSA headquarters, are two big, juicy targets, and we know exactly where they are. We need to say "neocon" and "JINSA" and "New Pearl Harbor" and "Luttwak's Coup d'Etat" over and over. We need to name names. We need to put the fear of God in these criminals. We need to follow Sibel Edmunds, who has indirectly confirmed (via Vanity Fair) that she learned, while translating FBI intercepts, that two of the "American names" who financed 9/11 were Richard Pearl and Douglas Feith. Shadow these guys! Hound them! Find out where they live! Harass them! Name their names from here to high heaven, on every talk show in the land, and then name them again! Last fall I planted a story that PNAC head Gary Schmitt was going to be pelted with rotten fruit and hit with a citizen's arrest for 9/11 when he showed up to give a talk at UW-Milwaukee. Unfortunately, or maybe fortunately, I didn't have time to successfully organize an actual fruit-pelting and arrest. But I did call in and indirectly threaten him on a Wisconsin Public Radio talk show just hours before his appearance. I tell you, the sonofabitch was quaking in his loafers—his voice quavered as he kept insisting that he and his PeeNack posse were SO surprised when their "New Pearl Harbor" prayer was oh-so-miraculously answered. He kept trying to distance himself and PNAC from the Bush Administration and its policies...basically he was squealing "it was the CIA! It was Cheney and Rumsfeld! Those guys are just names on our board—they have nothing to do with us! I hate Rumsfeld, really I do! We want him fired! Pee-Nack is just a bunch of poor innocent eggheads! Please, don't arrest me and pelt me with rotten fruit!" Gary, your guilty conscience doth protest too much.

4. Don't waste time on the "major political parties" as parties—but get prominent people, like Barbara Boxer, to speak out, and then publicize their words. The Green Party has officially endorsed 9/11 truth, and the Libertarians are on the verge. Let's take over these second-tier parties and use them as platforms for 9/11 truth. Go, Carol Brouillet! (Green, HR, CA). Go, Sander Hicks! (NY Governor). Go, Craig Hill! (Green, Vermont, Senate) Go, Clyde Morgan! (HR, NC). And let's quickly learn the techniques of "agitation" Luttwak rightly fears. Street theater, rabble-rousing speeches, media stunts and events, and so on are our logical next step for taking 9/11 truth out of the internet and into the street.

5. Smash the media blackout by any means necessary. I'm about ready to break the Unabomber out of jail so he can write a 9/11 manifesto and use the "publish me before I kill again" plan to get it into the New York Times. Maybe it hasn't quite come to that yet—but we need to find ways of putting on 9/11 truth stunts that the media HAS TO COVER. If it takes getting arrested, so be it. The more cautious among us should plan for such actions at a level, and in jurisdictions, where no jury will convict. Remember, Luttwak and the 50 neocons are desperate to suppress any kind of 9/11 truth news. They have key media owners and CEOs on their side—but the media, like the state, is a machine, and coverage of certain kinds of events is automatic. If a 9/11 truth activist gets prosecuted for something fairly minor and free-speechish, we can turn the trial into a circus and a cause celebre. Anybody out there ready for 15 minutes of fame?

6. We should not be afraid of the "unlovely phrase" "anti-Americanism"—instead, we should pick it up and hurl it back against those who have overthrown our Constitution, like demonstrators throwing back a tear gas grenade. Even those of us who are not raving nationalists should make it clear that we are 9/11 truth activists because it is our patriotic duty to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign AND DOMESTIC. The police, intelligence operators, soldiers, and politicians have all sworn that same oath. When crunch time comes, most of them will be on our side. Likewise we should not be cowed by the unlovely phrase "anti-Semitism." It does seem to be the case that the majority of the coup plotters, like Luttwak himself, are Jews—it has been said that about 80% of the neocons are Jewish—and that the 9/11 coup was at least partly aimed at triggering JINSA's bloody, harebrained scheme to clean up the Middle East on behalf of Israel. (Don't even get me started on 6-billion-in-two-months WTC insurance-fraudster and Ariel Sharon buddy Larry Silverstein!) Worse, there is obviously a connection between the corporate media's support of the neocon coup and the Zionist commitments of its owners and operators. There is nothing anti-Semitic about facing unlovely facts. But 9/11 activists should take pains to emphasize, over and over, that the vast majority of American Jews are liberals who are congenitally opposed to the sick neocon philosophy. They are, or should be, our allies in the cause of 9/11 truth. Indeed, many American Jews, like Russ Feingold and Paul Wellstone, have bravely opposed the coup in one way or another; while others, including Barbara Boxer, Jamie Hecht, and several MUJCA-NET endorsers have risked speaking out for 9/11 truth. Other American Jews who should be 9/11 truth allies, perhaps including such luminaries as Noam Chomsky, Amy Goodman, and Norman Finkelstein, are covering up 9/11 out of a conscious or unconscious fear of the anti-Jewish backlash that could develop if the truth were exposed. (It's hard to blame them—Luttwak and the all-too-real neocons make the fictitious Elders of Zion look like kids plotting a takeover at "king of the hill.") In short, we should speak the unvarnished truth as forthrightly as possible—including the truth that 99% of American Jews are innocent of involvement in 9/11 and should not be punished for the evil deeds of their atheist neocon "co-religionists"—and watch the "unlovely phrases" lose their potency when they are exposed to the pure, disinfecting light of reality.

So let's get to work and UNDO THE COUP! Go to Citizen's Counter-Coup: http://www.3c.911truth.org/

Kevin Barrett
Coordinator, MUJCA-NET: http://mujca.com