September 24, 2010

Thought-control 9-11 and Racist Manipulations

by Diane V. McLoughlin, main website:

September 20, 2010:  Turning on my television a week ago, the Imam of the much-maligned future New York City-based Islamic cultural center, Feisal Abdul Rauf, was speaking into a bank of microphones. There was a 'Council on Foreign Relations' logo (CFR) on the wall behind him. (1)

I was impressed with how generous the BBC was with the time given over to transmit the Imam's speech, at least a good thirty minutes of it, before they went back to their regular programming. It is important to try to defuse what appears to be a rising anti-Muslim hysteria. Clearly, some people get this. The Imam had an opportunity to reach out to Americans in his own way, in his own time.  CNN...FOX...MSNBC... CBC...not one station in North America ran with it, so far as I could see.  The CFR, an American foreign affairs think tank, had to go overseas to get Imam Rauf's speech picked up, apparently.

While it is true that CNN had had Rauf  on* in a one-on-one with Soledad O'Brien days before, O'Brien was as combative as her bias was obvious. Her aggressive attempts to get the Imam to say that the cultural center was a mistake, an offense, and that it should be moved - with a swift wave of her hand dismissively sweeping away his point that there are other things such as a strip club in the immediate vicinity but nobody was protesting that - was a very depressing journalistic low even by 9/11 standards. Coming from O'Brien, who earlier in the year was highly praised for her series, 'Black in America', it was just stunning to observe her as she stoked the fires of anti-Muslim bigotry like a cannibal hooting it up in anticipation around a fresh pot put to the boil.

Ms. O'Brien certainly wasn't alone. The bias against the proposed Muslim cultural center reeked thoughout that evening's broadcast, both during the O'Brien/Rauf interview, and during a post interview discussion that had all the elements of a cartoon:

There was the 9/11 firefighter scrapping for a match with a Muslim, so riled up that he completely misinterpreted Rauf's words on the center as being some kind of 'threat' - which the firefighter ominously describes as a 'gift'.   [***Given the government cover-up and lies, understandable. Update, Sept. 27, 2010, below.]   

The piece de resistance though, is the only female on the CNN post-interview roundup panel of six; a fragile and, dare I say blindingly white beauty, whose brother was one of the murdered on 9/11 - which, obviously, is a terrible tragedy, should never have happened, and any criminals involved still alive should face the full wrath of the law.  But that is not what she is there to discuss.  She is there to diss the cultural center.  Her performance is impressive.  It begged for a hooped skirt, crocheted shawl and fringed parasol.  If she had fiddle-dee-deed something like, 'Ohh, Anderson Cooper!, I just don't know what ah'll DO if that nasty ol' Muslim community center goes up...'; frankly, my dear, I'm not sure anyone would have noticed any difference between that and what she actually said; pretty much, it came out to the same racist thing.

Americans have been led to believe that 9/11 was perpetrated by Muslims - because they were Muslims - who 'hate us for our freedoms'. So it is hardly surprising to witness. It's a lot of other things - wrong, shocking - but surprising? Nor is it at all surprising the discriminatory fallout being experienced by Muslims nation-wide, as a result. (1a)

Many, if not most, American journalists adhere to the view that those victimized by 9/11 are 'sensitive' to the truth. In polite society as well as in the nation's newsrooms, we must watch what we say.  Personally, I just cannot think of anything that could, would, or should offend Americans more.  

Because the truth of it is that the fireman, 'Scarlett', all of us, are victims, not once, but over and over again:  by what happened, and subsequently, by the lies of the government and media; over what happened, who exactly was involved, and precisely why they did what they did. In these times, anything mocked excessively by the powers-that-be, as in the case of 9/11, should cause us all to think twice. (2) (3)

...So, that's interesting - U.S. Congressman Ron Paul:

'Amazingly, Ledeen calls Pearl Harbor a "lucky" event. The Project for a New American Century, as recently as September 2000, likewise, foresaw the need for "a Pearl Harbor event"; that would galvanize the American people to support their ambitious plans to ensure political and economic domination of the world, while strangling any potential "rival"...; ' (4)

There is no time when Americans should be too sensitive to be exposed to full debate on the truth.   In times of crisis in particular, that is exactly the time when Americans should demand it most. 

But denial is a powerful force. I am reminded of a pivotal scene (in clip at 6:30 secs.) in the movie, 'Born on the Fourth of July'. Cruise's character, weeping, yells at his mother, 'We went to Vietnam to stop 'Communism'...we shot women and children!' She yells back, 'You didn't shoot women and children! What are you saying?!' (5)

Lives depend on our getting things right. That the Imam's speech seemed only to be picked up overseas, holds all the earmarks of a closed society. The question is: Who's guarding the doors?


***Important. Added to complete the picture:

Updated Sept. 27, 2010: A staggering 343 of some
of the bravest firefighters who ever lived charged
into the burning twin towers,
risking themselves to save others.

The firefighters raced up the stairs carrying
heavy rescue equipment while everyone who
could, raced past them
going down. They perished that fateful day, when one
and then the other of the towers inexplicably fell and
crumpled to the ground in shocking ruin.

Muslims didn't do it. 9/11 was not a religious act.
9/11 was retaliation for, amongst other things, the
utter devastation wrought against the innocent people
of Iraq before September 11th, 2001. We occupied
and bombed Iraq, we starved Iraq and spread lethal
disease in Iraq for eight years prior to 9/11.

What the U.S. government did to Iraq is a war
crime of the highest magnitude - a crime against humanity.
U.S. Presidents Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, Tony Blair
and others should be indicted in the International Criminal Court.

The 9/11 perpetrators were men who happened to be Muslim. Muslims
died in the twin towers. Some of the first-responders were Muslim.


*Actually, I seem to recall that Larry King also had Imam Rauf on in recent days.  I do not recall how that interview went, beyond King asking Rauf the same loaded-for-bear question, 'in hindsight...;'.

(1)  A Conversation with Feisal Abdul Rauf; Council on Foreign Relations; September 13, 2010;

(1a) 'Muslims say they face more discrimination at work'; Steven Greenhouse; NYT; Sept. 23, 2010; ;

(2)  'Letter to America'; Osama bin Laden; as published in, November 24th, 2002;

(3)  The 9/11 Truth Movement;

(4)  Brilliant: 'We've Been Neo-Conned'; Ron Paul; Lew Rockwell; July 10,2003;

(5)  Youtube:  'Born on the Fourth of July'; Part 10; directed by Oliver Stone; channel Gunner21101;

Youtube:  The Human Herding Process;


  1. " the lies told by the government and media; lies over who exactly was involved, and
    precisely why they did what they did"

    That caught my attention but I saw nothing about who they were and why they did. Where do I find that? My view is that 9/11 was the Arabs turn. It was preceded by bombing of caves in Afghanistan, an attack on a US naval vessel and back to the US supporting Palestinian Jews while the Arab League supported Palestinian Arabs.

    Art Campbell Ottawa Canada

  2. Hi Art, I am delighted you shared a comment. I have read your comments in other venues over the years. To your question: Please note the two reference numbers' (2) and (3) that were positioned at the end of the paragraph you refer to. (2) is Osama bin Laden's Letter to America that outlines precisely his rationalization for 9/11; (3) of course, speaks to all the other questions around 9/11, to whit who else may have been involved.

    In my view, there had to be two camps involved. Yes, to the fact that it was retaliation from people who were extremely pissed at what we were doing to people overseas. And it was for a hell of a lot more than for what you cite above.

    The U.S. and its partners in crime were responsible for the murders of over 500,000 Iraqi children - that figure does not include adults - just children, during the 10-year illegal bombardment and siege of Iraq that preceded 9/11. Bin Laden cites this fact directly in his Letter.

    But building 7 wasn't hit by anything. So this automatically means that something else was also going on that day that could not possibly have had anything to do with the operations involving the planes.

    I do mention some of the above more directly in some of my other recent essays. Thanks again for your comments and hope this is helpful,


  3. Funny thing, there is only one authenticated tape made by Bin Ladin several days after 9/11, and in that tape he denies any connection to the events of that day. Furthermore, and also intentionally marginalized by our msm, is the fact that the Taliban offered to turn Bin Ladin over to the Bush/Cheney regime if and only if the US administration produced the evidence implicating Bin Ladin's complicity in the attack. As usual, the only response from Bush/Cheney cabal was more verbal bluster, accusations and threats of military retaliation. The manifesto of the 'Project for the New American Century' is the smoking gun; one need only look around at what has transpired since 9/11 to see who's agenda the attacks furthered

  4. Hi Diane,

    I've seen your posts around the traps for several years often agree and always respect your view. I was drawn to your website and to watch the 4 min. youtube.. What motivated the 9/11 hijackers? See testimony most didn't

    So I went searching for an article/post to raise issue with you.. and found this...

    I think you should read this article from ICH and the comment stream that follows..

    I just want to concentrate on the 9/11 event for the moment.. for me there are two ways of looking at it.. one by accepting largely the official version.. 19 Islamists with box cutters and the loose ends in the 9/11 Commission report don't really matter..

    or alternately there was an event of a terrorist nature elaborately staged to appear as though 19 Islamists with box cutters done it.. in the meantime the perpetrators are still at large.

    I'm not claiming any absolute knowledge on the 9/11 issue, however I feel we can safely discount the first option, as the planning and necessary work to pull three New York Skyscrapers is beyond the capacity of the gang of 19..

    the mix of unanswered questions of all 4 alleged flights and the circumstances that were reported to the World's Peoples make it clear the perpetrators were playing the bigot's card, and as a result folks in the Muslim world pay the price. Your role in portraying the hijackers as Muslim and linking their attack to USA Foreign Policy is shallow and playing the cards Big Brother wants you to play.. blame the attack on US favouritism of Israel.. that gets the real terrorists off the hook..

    If you accept the 2nd scenario about 9/11.. that it was staged to look like the gang of 19... the issue becomes one of rooting out the traitors who murderously slaughtered 3000 and caused all the destruction.. and gave pretext for the decade's wars..

    And there will be many guilty of actioning the event.. i.e. Cheney stood down Norad.. George Bush the president claimed to have seen the first plane of TV.. there was no TV footage of the first plane available on the 9/11/2001.. what did he see.. or did he lie?

    No one is happy with USA policy and the Israel question, however to proffer a false story to make a political point is not an honest political act. It doesn't need 9/11 to highlight blowback. We must rip into 9/11 in order to identify the corruption and self serving that constitutes the people's government of the USA.

  5. Hi there Gregfullmoon,

    I would have to say that my own theories on 9/11 lean toward those of writer William Blum. That is, that there were the hijackers, and then there were government insiders who took advantage of the situation to further their own political aims.

    I am wondering if it would be useful for you to go back and re-read what I wrote, above. The piece is not intended to be a full discussion of 9/11. Rather, the intention and scope of the piece is to defend Muslims from the accusation that Islam was a driving force behind 9/11 - I do not believe that it was.

    Although the article is not intended to be a discussion about who did do 9/11 rather than who didn't, I do include the quote from neocon Ledeen on the need for a new Pearl Harbor event, as well as the link to the 9/11 truth website.

    I have to say that I take issue with your categorization of my article as a 'false story...not an honest political act.'

    I also reject your simplistic either/or theory of 9/11, i.e. that either it was 19 terrorists with boxcutters, or it was a government conspiracy.

    My own theory is that 9/11 is probably a blend of both - two entirely separate camps acting toward their own ends.

  6. Hi Diane, I read your piece carefully and acknowledge what you say about your piece being primarily about Muslims being singled out...

    also in my comment I state I was only using it as a means to raise the points I do...

    so it's down to the view one takes of the event...

    if you accept that the event was a blend of the Gang of 19 enabled by folks within the establishment, then you are rejecting the first option... because the first option does not allow collusion or assistance toward the Gang of 19...

    now did you have a look at the ICH article I mentioned? It would have taken months to rig the WTC buildings for controlled demo.

    the perpetrators needed patsies.. perhaps to illustrate further.. JFK assassination; either the lone gunman Lee Harvey Oswald (who may or may not thought he was lone) or the conspiracy to murder the president.. there is two pictures and both include the lone gunman as a subset as he is critical to both..

    9/11 either the Gang of 19 or the conspiracy however the patsies are critical to both..

    I'll leave it there..

    and I'm concerned not to give personal offense but if the conspiracy is fact in the case of 9/11, then our thinking and how we position things from there ought reflect that..

    cheers gregfullmoon