Current Article

Larry Johnson, L. Paul Bremer, Talk 9-11

By Larry Johnson on January 31, 2009 at 12:25 PM in Current Affairs

(bumped up from early morning . what a glimpse at history!)

My friend, truthtelling007, has done yeoman’s work and loaded up some VHS videos of my TV punditry starting on the morning of 9-11 and continuing for the ensuring week back in 2001. When Osama Bin Laden’s crew hit America on 9-11 I was at National Airport waiting to fly to New York City. I was on air with Katie Couric and the Today Show when the plane hit the Pentagon. The attacks that morning started a media frenzy that put me in a position to comment on what had happened, what it meant and what we needed to do.

The following clip from CNN’s Crossfire features me with L. Paul aka “Jerry” Bremer. I still like and respect Jerry, although he bungled completely the job in Iraq. I find it useful to go back and look at what we were saying about terrorism and policy eight years ago.

What do you think?

http://undercoverblackman.blogspot.com Undercover Black Man

Funny how the word “Iraq” was never mentioned.

Thanks, TT007, for the upload.

oowawa

Yes, that’s exactly what I was listening for–almost 10 minutes, and no mention of Iraq, even when Bremer was counting off the states that were supporting terrorism: no mention of Saddam or Iraq. Evidently, it wasn’t even on the radar in respect to 9-11 suspects.

truthtelling007

check out the other clips as well, out of a dozen appearances…no mention of Iraq because it was a non play.

We knew who we were dealing with and they were running camps in Afghanistan and required a different tactic than the amateur hour Bush threw down in attacking Iraq.

This is not you’re daddy’s warfare anymore. This is different and yet, the Champagne division flyboy and the 5 time deferment draft dodging asshole, insisted on going to war. WHY?

Because the invasion of Iraq was written in stone before they got in office.

http://americanpumainitaly.blogspot.com/ sarainitaly

“Because the invasion of Iraq was written in stone before they got in office.”

Do you think it was that, or do you think it was, like Rahm said, “Never waste a crisis.”

But it was quite interesting that Iraq was never mentioned.

Belle Gardens

Given the PNAC maifesto coupled with Cheney and Rumsfeld’s involvement, the goal, IMO, was always to start a war.

It filled two primary needs: oil ownership and ostensible Israeli security.

They really thought they could subdue the ME, militarily, not understanding the contingencies, or warfare, whatsoever.

I would think the NSA knows for sure, though, ’cause there are no secrets.

To answer your question, though, yes, I think given public information the goal for the neocons was to go to war, even before Bush, or Cheney, grabbed the presidency.

The new Vanity Fair has an interesting article about this, sort of, a recap of Bush’s years.

truthtelling007

“Given the PNAC maifesto coupled with Cheney and Rumsfeld’s involvement”
coupled with their endorsement.

I have all of the 1997 PNAC documents and they were quite clear on their intent for overthrowing Iraq’s government and other middle east dominance.

Interesting enough Richard Armitage was a signatory as well though not often found in the literature of PNAC’s position papers.

I’m not into the whole “911 truthers” movement at all because I find most of what they say to be irrational. It is not unlike finding a murder, having a suspect, then finding tons of documents in that suspects possession or circulated that says he wants to kill someone. It is premeditated.

And now we have Cheney in the last month saying WMD was not the basis of the case for war in Iraq. We would have gone to war anyway.

http://americanpumainitaly.blogspot.com/ sarainitaly

Did you ever see this?
http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/lies/video.html
Idiocracy08

I never knew this about Tucker Carlson’s dad: (even tho it’s from wiki)

Tucker Carlson is the son of Richard Warner Carlson, who has been a member of the Project for a New American Century and the PNAC offshoot Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a former banker, a Los Angeles local news anchor, U.S. ambassador to the Seychelles, director of the U.S. Information Agency, and president of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. He also established Lewis Scooter Libby’s defense fund. Tucker Carlson’s mother is the former Patricia Caroline Swanson. She is an heir to the Swanson’s food fortune. He has one sibling, Buckley Swanson Peck Carlson. Carlson’s maternal grandmother, Roberta Fulbright Swanson, was the sister of U.S. Senator J. William Fulbright.[2]
blockquote>
Belle Gardens

I see your point, but again, we’ve never really had a full investigation.

Maybe it was a coincidence, who knows?

NoBamaNoWay

and why were dems complicit with BushCo virtually every step of the way, TT? this is NQ, where we’re supposed to be telling it like it is, not shilling for a particular interest group.

http://www.cheneywatch.org/ truthtelling007

well from first hand accounts by a few Dems who supported the Bush agenda, their motivations have been the fear of being called, “unpatriotic”. This is cowardly. It reflects a lack of a moral center that is impervious to such smears. My own representative apologized for a few votes early around 2002-4, that he now tells me were based on not wanting to be questioned about his patriotism. The nation was upset and republicans were definitely pushing an agenda that included calling Democrats traitors and unpatriotic.

But find me any of the Dems who were signatories to similar position papers as we see of the neoconservatives who were unapologetic from the start.

I don’t shill for democrats because I hold them as the al-anons to the republican aa’s. They are complicit by neglect and cowardice. Then they covered their asses by not going after Bush and Cheney with impeachment.

This isn’t new though. Don’t forget how Caligula or the others of their time had sycophantic senators and such. It doesn’t make him less of a tyrant and crook.

We’ve also had a change in congress that brought in Democrats who weren’t party to Bush’s crimes. And chairs who were subjected to threat of removal from their seats if they defied Pelosi. Conyers wasn’t threatened, but told, “don’t pursue”.

I applaud Dennis Kucinich for telling the Democrats they were wrong. He stood up for principle. Ron Paul does the same for his party. Then both get marginalized.

I have the benefit of not working in the DC circle so I don’t have to face “my distinguished colleagues across the aisle” and all that other genteel crap. Politics can be a full contact sport and sometimes it needs to be.

Belle Gardens

I understand and agree with your conclusions.

But the rubber met the road, and those cowards failed, just wimped out, selfishly, and stupidly.

We are speaking of the integrity of our country, its very survival, and not one, with the exception of those you mentioned, plus Feingold(unless his was only a token protest), stood up to Cheney, in defence of the Constitution, and the American people.

This isn’t only regarding such past legislation such as the Patriot Act, but also speaks to the misuse of our intelligence agencies, and military. I’m thinking of Hayden, for isntance, who headed BOTH the NSA, and the CIA, and, to me, anyway, appeared no more the handmaiden to Cheney. Fill the agencies up with weak and stupid “yes men,” and we are simply screwed, as a nation.

We have no more country if our Congress, military and intelligence fail to recognize or confront treason.

All of them, from the Republcians, to the Democratics, are no more than arrogant little Porsche driving kittens, less courage and brains, though, despite the big talk and big weapons.

I have no used for them whatsoever, they’re a cowardly disgrace.

Belle Gardens

republicans, and democrats. sorry.

truthtelling007

More than welcome.
It is powerful to see my friend in his portion of such historical settings.

Yes, you keenly point out that Iraq doesn’t surface because its a non-question.

Thanks to LJ for gathering these, and I look forward to surfacing more video soon.
Diana L. C.

I remember being in with my 10th grade English class when we learned of the bombings. One female student who was also in my journalism class was affected emotionally for a long time by the whole incident.

I listen to this video, and I am completely saddened that it is now 2009, and I am not really feeling that we’ve made much progress.

I’d like some detailed discussion about the progress we have made and a clear explanation about the way our invasion of Iraq has prevented progress.

I know I’ve been reading and watching the news since then; but most of us also have jobs and family commitments and we get distracted and can’t concentrate on this all the time.

Just watching this discussion made me feel that we made so little progress.
truthtelling007

I also appreciate that LJ said, during the eighth…DURING THE HEIGHT OF IT, to hold judgement about who did what. He still held out the option that this was an accident, that it was a domestic who had non-terrorist motivations, and it is that judgment that I think we are missing in our government these days.

He also was quick to point out the lack of nerve that had developed, but didn’t resort to dragging the US to the knuckle dragging torture stage. Proxy wars…thing of the past. We can’t behave like that and win in this struggle. We have to be prepared to deal with it like some grown ups again.

Now I don’t know what it would take to get LJ to drop a load in his pants, but right now he clearly appears to be concerned but focused. His dedication to his craft, his professional tact comes through, despite the crisis in the background. He’s not oblivious to it either. I can see anger in his expression, but…damn…cool under pressure.

This brings up something that gained my respect for LJ, something I think we have in common. When I read “everyone believed” in WMD, or “we were all scared”…I object to that generalization. I can be alert without being afraid. I can hear the official chatter and not buy into it. As a native of Missouri, you have to “show me”.

I’ll drop the comparison there so LJ doesn’t have to be subjected to my shortcomings. (snark).

And it is also important to see the clip we have up at http://www.youtube.com/noquarterusa of LJ on the crossfire panel with Jane Harmon and Eric Holder:
part one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=giUaVa8ZArU
and
part two: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LfzO_AQoOA
Queenie

Larry when i hear old tapes such as these, my skin crawls..my co-workers were on those planes..I myself was in the air the morning of 9/11 as a flight crew out of Newark…and when I hear Pearl Harbor said so clearly so early on..I again cry and scream all over again..and when we see it is the same media driven horse that gave us Bush..that has now seated this fraud in our White House that ignored all the truth and facts in 2000, and 2001 and 2004 and now..i want to puke my guts out..and all i can say is..we got what we desereved because the American people continue to stay ignorant in most cases and they chose to look the other way and allow the media to propagandize and they buy the bullshit hook line and sinker and do nothing!

How many people on the list below are today working with OBAMA..I can honestly say I do not know..My child got married last week so I
have been disengaged…but I can only just wonder…

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/pdf/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf

REBUILDING
AMERICA’S
DEFENSES
Strategy, Forces and Resources
For a New Century
DONALD KAGAN GARY SCHMITT
Project Co-Chairmen
THOMAS DONNELLY
Principal Author

Any serious effort at transformation
must occur within the larger framework of
U.S. national security strategy, military
missions and defense budgets. The United
States cannot
simply declare a
“strategic pause”
while
experimenting
with new
technologies and
operational
concepts. Nor
can it choose to
pursue a
transformation
strategy that
would decouple
American and
allied interests.
A transformation strategy that solely
pursued capabilities for projecting force
from the United States, for example, and
sacrificed forward basing and presence,
would be at odds with larger American
Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century
51
policy goals and would trouble American
allies.
Further, the process of transformation,
even if it brings revolutionary change, is
likely to be a long one, absent some
catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a
new Pearl Harbor. Domestic politics and
industrial policy will shape the pace and
content of transformation as much as the
requirements of current missions.

Edit and caveat to add:

Included in Rebuilding America’s defences you will see this date :

With this in mind, we began a project in
the spring of 1998 to examine the country’s
defense plans and resource requirements.

Why were these people doing this while Clinton was president and on what authority?????????????
Please see who signed this documnet and when..then ask ..why????? and on what authority?????????

Did Clinton authorize this project going forward??????? if so when and why??????????

these are the participants…………

PROJECT PARTICIPANTS
Roger Barnett
U.S. Naval War College

Alvin Bernstein
National Defense University

Stephen Cambone
National Defense University

Eliot Cohen
Nitze School of Advanced International
Studies, Johns Hopkins University

Devon Gaffney Cross
Donors’ Forum for International Affairs

Thomas Donnelly
Project for the New American Century

David Epstein
Office of Secretary of Defense,
Net Assessment

David Fautua
Lt. Col., U.S. Army

Dan Goure
Center for Strategic and International Studies

Donald Kagan
Yale University

Fred Kagan
U. S. Military Academy at West Point

Robert Kagan
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

Robert Killebrew
Col., USA (Ret.)

William Kristol
The Weekly Standard

Mark Lagon
Senate Foreign Relations Committee

James Lasswell
GAMA Corporation

I. Lewis Libby
Dechert Price & Rhoads

Robert Martinage
Center for Strategic and Budgetary
Assessment

Phil Meilinger
U.S. Naval War College

Mackubin Owens
U.S. Naval War College

Steve Rosen
Harvard University

Gary Schmitt
Project for the New American Century

Abram Shulsky
The RAND Corporation

Michael Vickers
Center for Strategic and Budgetary
Assessment

Barry Watts
Northrop Grumman Corporation

Paul Wolfowitz
Nitze School of Advanced International
Studies, Johns Hopkins University

Dov Zakheim
System Planning Corporation

The above list of individuals participated in at least one project meeting or contributed a paper for
discussion. The report is a product solely of the Project for the New American Century and does not
necessarily represent the views of the project participants or their affiliated institutions.

Belle Gardens

I can’t help but remember Wolfowitz’s tenure at the world bank, and the non-Americans who despised him for his role in Iraq, (a conduit of terrorism, really), leaving Iraq circled world maps at his office door, that sort of thing.

His life must be a living hell. One quote had him babbling, issuing defensive threats about “having information on all of them,” (though I don’t know if it was accurate).

I mean, at this point, anyway, he doesn’t have to worry about his next meal, (maybe), but it must be pretty easy to poke him when his paranoia is in full bloom.

http://bloggingrendeck.blogspot.com The Intellectual Redneck

Lawsuit filed claiming Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is constitutionally ineligible to serve

There were serious questions about the constitutional eligibility of Hillary Clinton to serve as secretary of State.
Lawsuit filed claiming Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is constitutionally ineligible to serve. The issue arises from the Secretary of States salary having been raised during Hillary Clinton’s term in the Senate. The Constitution forbids members of the Senate from being appointed to civil office, such as the Secretary of State, if the “emoluments,” or salary and benefits, of the office were increased during the Senator’s term. This clearly occurred. Congress tried to do an end run around the Constitution by lowering the Secretary of States salary. This does not change the historical fact that the salary of the Secretary of State was raised three times during Hillary Clinton’s tenure as a Senator from New York. This case will eventually end up at the Supreme Court.

Chris Martin

Wow, I’m not a legal scholar, but I’ve read enough to know the absurdity of this claim. There are numerous books on the constitution, in addition to the document itself, that you may find useful.
mary

Intellectual Redneck

This is a bullshit lawsuit, as it has no merit whatsoever to proceed beyong the stage of Republicans’ fave obsession: HIllary-bashing!

The Democrats have already NOT given HRC a raise and there is a l969 precedent that works in her favor. This is forumulated on a very FLIMSY TECHNICALITY. For show purposes only! It’s quite a joke, really! The morons sponsoring it are only doing it for publicity. So, don’t salivate, yet, Redneck!!!
Queenie

Hey whats that constitution say about who is legal to be prez???

For little league in this country you have to show a valid Birth Certificate!!..Obama..noooooooooooo

Troll this is not about Hillary..got that???????? yet???????????

Mercedes

Daily I check the website for the 911 Truth Organization. According to the information on their website, the FBI has not issued a warrant for Osama Bin Laden for 911 because they don’t have proof that he committed the act. The US has not captured him; Obama does not think it is important to go after him. And the 911 Commission was a whitewash.

I have read, actually read, the excrutiatingly detailed critiques that Dr David Ray Griffin has done of the 911 Commission. I honestly do not see how any honest person can dismiss the issues and questions that he and others have raised. At this point focusing on Islamic terrorism seems to me to be a diversion from the extremely serious 911-related questions raised by many persons inside and outside of government.

I believe that there has been censorship in the mainstream media regarding these issues and I believe not only that Obama does not have the guts to take these issues head on, but also that he may have been inserted into the Presidency to prevent such inquiries.

One final comment..although I am generally an admirer of Bill Clinton, I was extremely puzzled during the Democratic primaries by his literally foaming-at-the-mouth reaction to 911 hecklers. It doesn’t make sense. None of what has been going on the for the last 8-9 years makes much sense.

Queenie

Mercedes said ” I believe that there has been censorship in the mainstream media regarding these issues and I believe not only that Obama does not have the guts to take these issues head on, but also that he may have been inserted into the Presidency to prevent such inquiries. ”

Queenie replies…I believe the same..100%..he is the cover guy………or whatever you want to call him!! There will never be truth..not in my lifetime..the powers who executed 9/11 will make damn sure of that!..and it was dang sure not 19 guys who couldn’t hardly fly a cessna!

Sassy

Like the majority of Americans, my knowledge of terrorism was confined to fictional novels, and barely remembered references to a “jackal” who was elusive.
Even after the dreadful attacks on our soil, I wanted to believe that “okay, we deal with it” and move on, as if there was a beginning and end to a movie.
Pitiful to admit, for we have entered an unending phase on this planet!
fiscalliberal

Larry and truthteller007

I read Dick Clarke’s “Against All Enemies”. First of all – is his portrayal factual?

If so, my reading says there are a whole lot of people (agencies) milling about, not sharing information and in the end, the executive not acting on it. One can fairly state that ideology at the executive fosters this chaos allowing them to implemtn what they want.

So – the question is – are we better today with our combined agecies. I have the distinct impression that we are not that much better.

truthtelling007

I read his book too before another radio jock borrowed it and never returned it. But two things jumped out that tell me Clarke is being honest (even if he might have facts wrong). First he lends agreement to policies I disagree with. He’s also part of the groupthink that happens in agencies.

Larry can tell you more about these things than I, because I’m coming at it from a decade of journalism not as a former director of counterterrorism, like LJ.

But when reading Clarke’s view, we dropped the ball after our proxy war in Afghanistan. We didn’t follow up on the mujahadeen forces we equipped, we didn’t rebuild Afghanistan and left them be. This seems to be the case Clarke is making. “Blowback”.

But then we also built bases in Saudi Arabia after driving Saddam out of Kuwait and…again, more foot prints in the sand.

Again what is telling to me is the assumptions made by Clarke about how good these policies were to begin with regarding our proxy war with USSR in afghanistan and other areas he discusses. I’m on the outside of those policies and have hindsight to view the outcomes.

It is my understanding that we have not in fact done very well to combine these efforts. So long as their is bureaucratic competition by agencies that don’t want to be considered irrelevant, we’re going to have more chaos in sharing relevant information.

If you need to see how far we’ve come, just take a plane trip anywhere and see if you are treated like a member of AL-Qaida.

I do recommend people read Richard Clarke’s book to get a perspective of an insider’s view. Just remember he lends agreement to policies that I think should be seen from a critical view.

Cooney

Fascinating video. My soul grieves however, for in trying to cure the cancer of terrorism we have promoted a metastasis instead.
I’m a Linda too

Well Larr, you were spot on.
Katmoon

During my son’s first tour of Iraq, his unit was assigned to protect Mr.Bremmer and the others who were in the position to make decisions about the future of Iraq. My son has never revealed anything other than it was not an easy task. I didn’t press, and can honestly state my concern was from the perspective of a mother. Perhaps one day I will be able to have conversations with my son about his time there.

Idiocracy08

Thank your son for his service for me! And thank you too.

Katmoon

Sorry, should be “Bremer”.
ritamary

Currently Obama is moving forward with his military plans for Afghanistan. There is an excellent discussion at Sic Semper Tyrannis of what a military buildup will mean in Afghanistan. The consensus is for more development and less war.

Gary McGowan

Word “development” comes up regularly in Hillary’s speeches. I find that a good sign. If someone else in the administration is saying it (without a PPP–Public Private Partnership, a la Arnie and Bloomberg)foreign or domestic, attached, I’d be interested to know.

socalannie

Thanks truthtelling. Very worthwhile glimpse back to those scary days. (as opposed to these scary days, I guess) Larry def came off as the knowlegable one of the group. Bremer sounded more like a politician. Why can’t politicians listen to the experts with judgement, like Larry, instead of their wooden-headed friends? Will O be any better about this than bush?
Idiocracy08

Great videos truthtelling & Larry!!!

Always a fan of both of you.
http://undercoverblackman.blogspot.com Undercover Black Man

Hey… anybody notice how Tucker Carlson’s career turned to crap when he quit wearing bow ties?

Idiocracy08

Tucker Carlson had a career?

http://undercoverblackman.blogspot.com Undercover Black Man

^ Snap!
truthtelling007

He can’t even get a stringer job on MSNBC now.

mary

I wonder how prophetic those remarks of Larry re Pakistan really are for TODAY!…

Thanks for a remarkable interview. I watched it twice….How little things change.
mary

Tucker Carlson is the guy who insulted Hillary at the primary. He said:

“Every time I seee Hillary, I involuntarily cross my legs”….pathetic, ain’t he?

http://undercoverblackman.blogspot.com Undercover Black Man

Hillary Clinton took so much shit. I cannot deny that.

Maybe her destiny was to take all those slings and arrows, so as to make the way easier for the woman who eventually will be elected president.

memi

INTELLECTUAL REDNECK, the oxymoronic individual above, hasn’t done his legal briefing.

This casse will be LAUGHED out of court. It certainly will NOT even see the door of the Supreme Court. This post gave me a good laugh. Will the Rednecks ever reconcile their vehemently anti-progressive proclivities with the realities of today?
Hot Librarian

Undercober bm – what crap. -Plenty of nations -including muslim ones have had female pms & presidents.

It is not necessary to have a fatwa against femle political candidates to make way for a woman leadrer.

Idiocracy08

It is not necessary to have a fatwa against femle political candidates to make way for a woman leadrer.

it isn’t necessary, it’s just a sport in this country.

Helen with a T.

The Bill Moyers program last night had an excellent discussion on Afghanistan which began with them both deploring an air attack by a drone four days into the Obama administration. They then talked about the futility of bombing of civilians and how it ultimately hardens the population rather than destroying their morale. If I read them correctly they seem to feel the surge proposed fot that country will do in the Obama administration in the same way the war in Vietnam destroyed the Johnson administration. Both looked sad, the man had no hope and the woman wants to hope these events don”t come to this. There was a follow-up interview with Gregorian who used to be the librarian at the New York library. The subject was educatiion in our country, very illuminating.

Gary McGowan

At Sic Semper Tyrannis, there is an excellent short essay, “[Afghanistan] Obama’s Vietnam Plus?”.

http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2009/01/obamas-vietnam-plus-fb-ali.html

CHI-TOWN

By about noon-time on that day , I came to the realization that the world as we knew it was over.

That there will be war.. and it will involve Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Iraq.

I supported the Iraq War and I still do. My support is completely independent of any of the Government’s rationale, and independent of the government’s competence in executing it.

CHI-TOWN

[The filter was interfering I had to break this into segments]

I believe there are situations in the world that require action and that it’s just too bad if we’re not sufficiently insulated from risk.

What is completely absent from the public discourse from the very beginning is the question: What world do we live in?

Do we live in the world of Post-WW-II? Of Nation-States, Multi-National Organizations, Power Bi-polarity, Absence of Global-significant Religion

or do we live in the world where a significant century-long religious revival is dissolving the nation state. is destabilizing previous civilized cities and countries, is colonizing the Western World, in Europe that is out-breeding native Europeans, (Just yesterday UK announced that its Muslim population is growing 10x faster than Non-Muslim)

On Sept 11 I recognized instantly that it’s the later world that we live. We don’t live in the world we all grew up in. That world is over.

We live in a world that is being steadily conquered in the name of Islam for the sake of Allah.

Because of the utter failure of Empire, of Monarchy, of Arab Nationalist Tyranny and Socialist Tyranny in the Muslim Middle East, and the lack of anything else other than the only alternative being the Constitution , Government and Military Code that the Koran/Hadith/Sirah proscribe (we call it Islam) , we had no choice but to provide one last alternative to the Caliphate and that was some sort of Western-influenced Democracy.

We are facing a Caliphate in the future.. the only question is.. do we try to prevent it and perhaps die on our feet.. or do we wait for it to be reestablished and die on our knees.

I choose for the United States to be on its feet.

It’s a shame the President failed to persuade others to do the same.

CHI-TOWN

[The filter was interfering I had to break this into segments]

I believe there are situations in the world that require action and that it’s just too bad if we’re not sufficiently insulated from risk.

What is completely absent from the public discourse from the very beginning is the question: What world do we live in?

Do we live in the world of Post-WW-II? Of Nation-States, Multi-National Organizations, Power Bi-polarity, Absence of Global-significant Religion

or do we live in the world where a significant century-long religious revival is dissolving the nation state. is destabilizing previous civilized cities and countries, is colonizing the Western World, in Europe that is out-breeding native Europeans, (Just yesterday UK announced that its Muslim population is growing 10x faster than Non-Muslim)

CHI-TOWN

On Sept 11 I recognized instantly that it’s the later world that we live. We don’t live in the world we all grew up in. That world is over.

We live in a world that is being steadily conquered in the name of Islam for the sake of Allah.

Because of the utter failure of Empire, of Monarchy, of Arab Nationalist Tyranny and Socialist Tyranny in the Muslim Middle East, and the lack of anything else other than the only alternative being the Constitution , Government and Military Code that the Koran-Hadith-Sirah proscribe (we call it Islam) , we had no choice but to provide one last alternative to the Caliphate and that was some sort of Western-influenced Democracy.

We are facing a Caliphate in the future.. the only question is.. do we try to prevent it and perhaps die on our feet.. or do we wait for it to be reestablished and die on our knees.

I choose for the United States to be on its feet.

It’s a shame the President failed to persuade others to do the same.
CHI-TOWN

On Sept 11 I recognized instantly that it’s the later world that we live. We don’t live in the world we all grew up in. That world is over.

We live in a world that is being steadily conquered in the name of Islam for the sake of Allah.

Because of the utter failure of Empire, of Monarchy, of Arab Nationalist Tyranny and Socialist Tyranny in the Muslim Middle East, and the lack of anything else other than the only alternative being the Constitution , Government and Military Code that the Koran/Hadith/Sirah proscribe (we call it Islam) , we had no choice but to provide one last alternative to the Caliphate and that was some sort of Western-influenced Democracy.
CHI-TOWN

On Sept 11 I recognized instantly that it’s the later world that we live. We don’t live in the world we all grew up in. That world is over.

We live in a world that is being steadily conquered in the name of Islam for the sake of Allah.

[I have like 3 paragraphs left]

CHI-TOWN

We are facing a Caliphate in the future.. the only question is.. do we try to prevent it and perhaps die on our feet.. or do we wait for it to be reestablished and die on our knees.

I choose for the United States to be on its feet.

It’s a shame the President failed to persuade others to do the same.
.the end.

Gary McGowan

Transcript from a live radio interview Lyndon H. LaRouche Jr. on Tuesday morning, September 11, 2001, from 9:15-11:00 AM EDT. It seems the audio is no longer available, though I’ve heard it and probably have it archived somewhere.

http://www.larouchepub.com/pr_lar/2001/010911stockwell.html

Very sensible comments by Mr. LaRouche who happened to be on the air live as the attack was occurring. He had also warned of a probable Reichstag-type event, should Ashcroft be confirmed, during the Ashcroft confirmation hearings before Bush was inaugurated (can be found with a search.) That is not mentioned during the radio interview.

I also recall lots of sensible comments from the residents of New York City at the time. It wasn’t like the whole citizenry was itching to charge off on a revenge mission.

None of which takes anything away from Larry’s good work and commentary at the time: I’m just frustrated with the “marginalization” of the voices of many, many capable patriots.
Pingback: Lewis