The Big Lie 9-11 and Government Complicity in Mass Murder [PDF]

The Big Lie” 9/11 and the Government’s
Complicity in Mass Murder
71
Netanyahu claimed a benefit from the attacks as well, he was asked what the 9/11
attacks meant for US/Israeli relations. Netanyahu replied: "It's very good." Then
Netanyahu added: "Well, not very good, but it will generate immediate
sympathy." 19 These people were actually seeing a “silver lining” in the deaths of
3000 people and the massive destruction.
Zbigniew Brzezinski, (former National Security Advisor to President Carter and
also a Council of Foreign Relations member) in an amazing feat of prophesy also
wrote in his book, The Grand Chessboard that only another Pearl Harbor could
con the U.S. public into accepting an invasion of Central Asia:
The attitude of the American public toward the external projection of American
power has been much more ambivalent. The public supported America's
engagement in World War II largely because of the shock effect of the Japanese
attack on Pearl Harbor…as America becomes an increasingly multicultural
society, it may find it more difficult to fashion a consensus on foreign policy
issues, except in the circumstances of a truly massive and widely perceived direct
external threat. Such a consensus generally existed during World War II and even
during the Cold War...In the absence of a comparable external challenge,
American society may find it much more difficult to reach agreement regarding
foreign policies that cannot be directly related to central beliefs and widely
shared cultural-ethnic sympathies and that still require an enduring and some
times costly imperial engagement. 20
Brzezinski briefly exhibits a buried contempt for the American system of
government when he also writes that “The pursuit of power and especially the
economic costs and human sacrifice that the exercise of such power often
requires are not generally congenial to democratic instincts...Democracy is
inimical to imperial mobilization.” 21 To pursue this course of establishing an
American empire, he suggests the masses of “unwashed” people be controlled so
that they, WE, are unable to prevent their plans. He says in total derision and
condescending language and in the elitist hubris and philosophy of self-perceived
superiority to the common person: “To put it in a terminology that hearkens back
to the more brutal age of ancient empires, the three grand imperatives of imperial