Why Did It Happen?

LewRockwell.com ^ | Rob Moody

[sendtoscott]

Why Did It Happen?

by Rob Moody

Crisis is the rallying cry of a tyrant. ~ James Madison

As I followed the coverage of the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on Tuesday, a number of thoughts occurred to me. I have seen very little, if any, coverage of these items by the mainstream media:

The intelligence failure by the federal government was total and complete. The primary raison d’etre given for the State is that it protects us from those who would do us harm. But in this case, it couldn’t even protect the headquarters of its own protection agency.

The security failure by the government was total and complete. The government operates and provides security for virtually every major airport in America. How could four airplanes be hijacked in one morning? How much time, money and energy does the government spend searching passengers and luggage for drugs, cash and other harmless contraband when it should be looking for guns and knives?

President Bush said the federal government would find the perpetrators and punish them (the focus is always on retribution instead of trying to understand why it happened in the first place). But it seems that many, if not most, of those people are now dead. Bush said that freedom had been attacked and that freedom would be defended. I cringed when I heard those words, because they sounded like Newspeak. No, it was hegemony that was attacked, and freedom will be sacrificed to defend hegemony.

Hawks such as Senators John McCain and Chuck Hagel have already started beating the war drum, calling the attacks "an act of war" and "a second Pearl Harbor." Of course they’re an act of war; our government has been at war with other countries and peoples since the beginning of the 20^th century. Only after a battle takes place on American soil do we realize this. "Hey, tonight’s baseball game has been canceled. What’s going on?" Of course, politicians love war since it always results in the expansion of state power. As Randolph Bourne said, "War is the health of the State."

I’m sure the neocon warmongers at National Review and The Weekly Standard are berserk with rage right now, and will call on Bush to nuke some Third World country, lest America be "humiliated" again like it was with China. Meanwhile, the unindicted war criminals Henry Kissinger, Sandy Berger and Richard Holbrooke called on the U.S. to "respond" by committing the same crimes they have committed.

September 11 was a black day for Liberty. I am extremely concerned that politicians will use these attacks as Hitler used the Reichstag fire to suspend civil liberties and consolidate his power. I can only imagine what kind of legislation New York’s senators – who happen to be two of the most tyrannical members of Congress (if Hillary were President, she would have already suspended the Constitution and imposed martial law) – will propose "to prevent something like this from happening again." As Claire Wolfe wrote on Tuesday, "They--Rudman, Hart, Gingrich, FEMA, the military, and all the creepy corporations who sell them their spy cameras, their bio-war supplies, their retina scanners, their metal detectors, and the other gear of the crushing Big Brother state--have been waiting for something like this to happen." Whatever Schumer & Co. propose – war, more police power, censorship of the Internet, gun registration – Congress will approve it so they can be seen as "doing something," and the American sheeple will gladly surrender what few rights they have left in return for their newfound "security."

Doesn’t this make the idea of spending $100 billion or more on a missile defense shield seem awfully foolish? It seems that individuals armed with knives and box cutters pose a more immediate threat. But the politicians will point to these attacks as proof that we need a missile defense shield more than ever.

What surprised me the most about the attacks was not that they were carried out, but that they were conventional in nature. For the last several years, I have been expecting a nuclear, biological or chemical attack on a large American city. If you thought there was panic on Tuesday (911 operators were flooded with calls, there was fear of a bank run, the price of gas shot up to $5 a gallon in some places, etc.), wait until they attack a city with Sarin or anthrax.

It seems to me that the vast majority of Americans reflexively want to "respond," presumably militarily, instead of trying to understand why this happened in the first place. As long as they can strike back with a few hundred cruise missiles, they’re not really interested in why they were attacked.

I was disturbed by the almost mindless jingoism I heard on Tuesday, which I last saw after the Gulf War. One veteran said this made him want to "re-up" (re-enlist in the military). Why? So he could be sent overseas by politicians to kill people he didn’t know, and perpetuate the cycle of violence? It is one thing to love your country. It is quite another to want to kill people who have never done you any harm. I now see how FDR could manipulate a populace that was much less educated and informed into wanting to go to war. One caller to a radio show described how a woman was standing on the side of the road, waving an American flag (Why?), and reiterated that this was "one country, indivisible." The talk show host responded by saying that everyone should fly an American flag every day anyway, and implied that a lack of patriotism contributed to the attacks. I submit that the truth is just the opposite. It is our unthinking, unquestioning patriotism that causes us to mindlessly support the politicians every time they want to bomb another country. The more patriotic we are, the more the politicians bomb, and the more the rest of the world despises us.

I have heard virtually no discussion about the motive of the attackers. It seems to me that it would be the key to understanding why this happened and preventing something like this from happening again. I don’t know which group is responsible, but given the way Palestinians were celebrating in the streets, I would not be surprised if it was a Middle Eastern group that was violently opposed to the state of Israel. Assuming that’s the case, why did they come halfway around the world to attack America? They attacked America because America has been attacking them on almost a weekly basis since at least the 1970s. From Libya to Afghanistan, we have bombed, shelled, invaded, occupied, sanctioned, embargoed, spied on, inspected and otherwise meddled in the affairs of virtually every country in the Middle East. The U.S. government has two basic policies for countries in the Middle East: either it’s giving them billions of dollars in aid each year or it’s bombing them; there is no in-between, no neutrality. They also attacked America because the U.S. government has been giving billions of dollars of economic and military aid to the Israeli government, which has used that aid to repress and kill Palestinians.

When will we learn to have, as Jefferson said, "Peace, commerce and honest friendship with all nations; entangling alliances with none"? You reap what you sow, and on September 11, America finally reaped its bitter harvest.

September 13, 2001

Rob Moody [send him mail] is a financial planner in Atlanta and lives in Kennesaw, where every household is required to own a gun. He also edits Strike The Root.

[Frumanchu]

There was once a time when America chose to stay out of most conflicts outside our borders. We stepped into WWI when our friends needed us. We tried to stay out of further conflict, but the Japanese made that impossible. It was a whole different world after that. We realized that we could no longer stand back and only step in at the last minute. There was too much of a threat to our way of life. Russia rose from WWII to become a giant and quite obviously had expansionist goals. We had no choice but to follow suit in expanding our influence to prevent a political (and eventually, a military) empire from rising out of the ashes of the Third Reich. Much of what we've done since has been to make sure we never face another Nazi Germany. We have most certainly made some mistakes, but the intention has almost always been to protect the freedom of Americans and anyone else who calls on us to protect that same freedom in their nation.

These people want to destroy our way of life. It's my government's job to make sure that never happens. That this attack was predictible and expected does not mean we deserved it or were asking for it. There have been and always will be people who loathe the United States of America, no matter what our foreign policy.

[matrix_dweller]

Texan,

I completely agree that radical Islam is part of the mix. I am not a fan of Islam, at all, having seen first hand the results in Bosnia and Kosovo. It's interesting that Serbs, Columbians and Macedonians are not now, nor were they ever on the "short list" of suspects put out by the media. They're Christians, or agnostic / aetheists, like much of the west. Either way, the suicide bomber is a foreign concept outside of Islam, or Japan. Although now that they've been westernized, I don't see to many kamakazi's protesting our bases in Okinawa or Japan. So, yes, Islam, at least in the radical form found in poorer Islamic countries, is part of the problem. There is something else in the mix, and we have a good "control" to validate our thought experiment.

None of the "stan" former Soviet Islamic countries have given us any problems. They are poor, largley Muslim, and have suicide bombers (viz. - Chechnya). Could it be that since we never dared bomb them during their time in the Soviet Union, they have no motivation to suicide bomb us? Agree or not, I appreciate you taking the time to make a fact based argument.

[Proud_texan]

Matrix - I would only offer that perhaps one of the reason those factions aren't in the mix is that 1) they're occupied with more immediate, local issues and they 2) don't have the capacity/organization/finances at present but again, I'm in the area of pure speculation and conjecture.

A good discussion and I thank you for it but I'll remain convinced that it is motivated more or as much about who we are rather than what we've done. But that brings up another question. At this point do we cut our support of our allies in the region?

[matrix_dweller]

...snipped history lesson..

These people want to destroy our way of life.
Agree. Why?

It's my government's job to make sure that never happens.
Agree again, confer Declaration of Independance, purpose of government.

That this attack was predictible and expected does not mean we deserved it or were asking for it.

Completely agree again, and glad to see that you appear to be taking my point (and Mr. Moody's): US intervention in Islamic countries abroad has lead sadly and predictably to retaliation.

There have been and always will be people who loathe the United States of America, no matter what our foreign policy.
Here is where you and I break ranks. The Swiss have no problem with foreign terrorists, although they are democratic, have a satanic/almighty dollar economy (swiss bank account, anyone?), western, Christian, and a h*ll of a lot closer to the middle east. Why? They're neutral, and have mostly stayed that way since founding in 1291. Yes, I know they're socialist. No, I don't want to move there. The US followed that foreign policy for the first 80 years, which were remarkably peaceful after we sent the King packing twice in a row.

[littlehammer]

Times change, principles do not. I beg to differ about our "friends" and I am sure you mean the Brits and French. I would be more apt to say they used us. The Brits have the singular ability of propaganda and intrigue and they used it well in WWI and WWII. WWI was a European War and would have ended like the endless European Wars of the past without our "assistance". With our "assistance" we allowed a vindictive England and France to dictate horrendous terms upon the Germans for a war these 'friends' were also responsible for. The Versaille Peace agreed to by the internationalist Wilson and our 'friends'lead to the rise of Hitler. So dear FDR, another internationalist, wants us in the next European War but the Germans won't accomodate despite his numerous provocations. Beloved FDR manuevers the Japanese into attacking us and we get into the war by the backdoor. The only real victors in WWII were the Soviets and do not tell me freedom won out in Europe when we allowed the Soviets to occupy East and Central Europe. Then began a series of our 'police actions', CIA involvements around the world, vast amounts of American tax money spent around the world and American lives lost on crusades for democracy. Have we achieved anything by this? Yes! We are hated more around the world and we have more enemies. If we follow the policies planned for this war by this government we will need to overthrow various governments and install new ones. These new ones will be known by the populace for what they are: puppet governments. They will need to be supported by American soldiers and American money. They will be prime targets for attack. Our American servicemen have, for almost 100 years, been the pawns of internationalists and though any American blood spilled is never in vain (we must honor them for their sacrifices)we must realize that the policies and lies of the internationalists and NWO types have not succeeded. They have only brought on new wars and new enemies. Punish the terrorists but correct the policies that brought this about.

[matrix_dweller]

bold off. Bump. That is one of the best summaries of the last 100 years of US foreign policy I've seen.

[ak47fred]

truth bump

[KO5A]

"You sound a little stressed. Maybe you could use a vacation. Take a few weeks off and go overseas for awhile...get away to an exotic destination. I hear Afghanistan is lovely this time of year...

Will you perhaps be over there any time soon with your M-16 tough guy?

Or, do you prefer to talk tough, but send others off to do your dying for you?

[KO5A]

"Yes, American foreign policy neds to be changed. We need to be even more proactive. We need to kill terrorists wherever we find them. We need to inform our allies that if they continue to support terrorist states, then they will become our enemies. We need to be prepared for real war, rather than the video-game variety we've been playing at for the last quarter-century. What we must not do is surrender to the terrorists.

I assume you've got your combat boots on, your orders in hand, and your one way ticket to Afganistan waiting for you at the airport soldier?

[WIMom]

As many of you know, I help with the FreeRepublic fundraisers. It is not always easy or fun sitting at a computer for hours and hours monitoring those threads. Everyone who work the threads VOLUNTEERS to do so. We spend days and weeks helping to keep FreeRepublic running.

Ask yourself these questions:

Where is the first place I go to get my news?
Am I getting any benefit from FreeRepublic?
Am I learning from FreeRepublic?

FreeRepublic is not free. It costs Jim Robinson tens of thousands of dollars to keep this forum running. There are over 60,000 registered users on FreeRepublic and only 1,000 help keep this forum running. Those who do not have the ability to donate money could help by bumping the threads once in a while. Those who who do should be ashamed of yourselves. You are a FReeploader.

Go ahead, flame me. I don't care. I contribute to FreeRepublic, and I for one do not want to see this forum dead.

If everyone who registered donated one measly dollar a month, we would never have to have a fundraiser again.

FreeRepublic Fundraiser --WE WILL STAND UNITED!!!-- We NEED YOUR HELP AND PATRIOTIC POSTS! Thread 67

Donate Here by Secure Server

Or Mail your check to:

FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794


To donate By Paypal:

Send PayPal direct to JimRob@psnw.com

[KO5A]

"Oh no, didn't you know that all third world nations are honored to be bombed by our military for some superficial reason?.

The fact is that American's would rather not be bothered to ask the government the "Why's" until such time as it is too late, such as now.

I myself am surprised at our warmongers all in a huff.
I recall just a few years ago, these same jingo-babies cheering on when the bombs fell, and their generals smugly 'commentating' the smart-bomb camera film. Why each death was Hillaryous then, what happened?

[KO5A]

"Try sticking up for the United States once in a while...it sticks up for you all the time. "

???????
Please explain to me how inaugurating global Jihad, after waging a decade-long war to exterminate Christendom in the former Yugoslavia, so as to Islamicise same, is ~sticking up for me?~

[Liberal Classic]

I am a libertarian, and I am a veteran who is contemplating re-enlistment. All comments of my so-called treasonous nature aside, I have to admit that I am torn.

[Fester Chugabrew]

"Our freedom is a threat to those that wish to control and nothing inflames them more than our model. It was bad enough when it was limited to the US but now millions and millions see us as the shining city on the hill."

Excellent.

Under the circumstances, however, we should closely examine the manner and degree of our zeal for liberty. If we are going to be hated simply for what we believe in civil affairs, then we ought not meddle in world affairs without the utmost caution, discretion, and even respect for the fact that some people would rather be slaves than free; some would rather be uncivilized altogether.

I beg to differ with those who immediately brand the above words of Moody as treasonous. When all is said and done, our foreign policy will require more than a little examination and tweaking. We would do ourselves and our country a disservice by acting out of pure emotion.

[ihatemyalarmclock]

"Rob Moody is correct. This is not the time for knee-perk jingoism (I purposefully do not use the word patriotism). Why is it now we trust our President, our Congress and the Government?"

I don't extend trust easily. But this is really not a matter of trust. The firepower that the government can bring to bear is now our only hope to preserve what freedoms we have left.

On that basis, I don't think that Rob Moody has much of a point, and I expressed that view to Lew Rockwell himself several days ago, before this thread appeared. Here was our e-mail exchange:

To Mr. Rockwell:

I'm ashamed to call myself a "small l" libertarian this week.

Yes, I know the U.S. has long poked its nose into situations where it had no business, but nothing justified what happened on September 11th.

The string of subsequent articles on your site collectively accusing the United States of "deserving it" are an abomination.

Is it coincidence that when libertarians act this way, they can be rightfully referred to as a "collective?"

Sir, rightly or wrongly, our nation is AT WAR. Our way of life is at stake, which would include the First Amendment that allows LRC to exist in the first place. What the hell are you and your columnists trying to do?

His Reply:

Sorry, Mr. xxxxxxx, but it is at times of war that telling the truth against the State and its media is most important.

Look at Lincoln's war, Wilson's, and FDR's. This is the one time when a few Americans need to be able to think outside of the State-media approved boundaries, and speak outside of them.

As to owing free speech to the government, that's nonsense. It wants us to have no freedoms, except to agree.

Freepers, I'll give Rockwell credit for some sound ideas in the past, but he's twisting his own philosophy here. None of us OWES free speech to the government, nor did I make that statement as you can read above. Freedom of expression is a natural (God-given, if you'd rather) right that others (such as fanatical Islamists) would love to obliterate.

Only a strong government (such as ours) has a chance of preserving such rights, and stopping such madmen in their tracks. And as annoyed, frustrated and enraged as I've become over the U.S. government chipping away at our individual freedoms, I'll support to the bitter end its right to kick some serious Islamic ass, and hang the collateral damage.

This pacifistic alternative of self-flagellation is too horrible to contemplate.

[karlamayne]

Best reply in a week! Thank you so much. More people would know this, but they studied history in government schools. Clearly, we're paying for Clinton's legacy. One wonders why some just can't admit that, unless, of course, they voted for him in 1992 (or, worse, Perot).

The gray cells seem to be returning.

[KO5A]

Help me with this clock: My sense of logic is going haywire.

"Yes, I know the U.S. has long poked its nose into situations where it had no business, but nothing justified what happened on September 11th."

I'm trying to get this straight: Us bombing them (ten years going in Iraq) does NOT justify them bombing us. But them bombing us (WTC, Pentagon) DOES justify us bombing them?

[KO5A]

Huh?

"More people would know this, but they studied history in government schools. Clearly, we're paying for Clinton's legacy. One wonders why some just can't admit that, unless, of course, they voted for him in 1992

Note to those who need help with History: George HW Bush began bombing Iraq. Clinton merely "kept it up", as we are also doing under W.

WTC and Pentagon are "Payback".

[Frumanchu]

Will you perhaps be over there any time soon with your M-16 tough guy? Or, do you prefer to talk tough, but send others off to do your dying for you?

Actually, I'm a USAF veteran, and if called upon I would be out there in whatever capacity I'm needed.

What have you done for your country lately?

[KO5A]

I'm doing what I can to stop us on the course you have set, which led us here to begin with.

Just out of curiosity, was killing Iraqis in my name one of the things you did to "help your country?"

If so- thanks, I guess 5,200 people in NY should thank you, you really "taught those Iraqis a lesson".