Comment on this article |
Email this article |
by Jared Israel
Email: emperors1000 (nospam) aol.com
Address: PO Box 610-321, Newton, MA 02461-0321
26 Jul 2002
The 9-11 Fraud - "Left" vs "Right" = Divide & Conquer.
The 9-11 Fraud - "Left" vs "Right" = Divide & Conquer.
READER SAYS THE 'IT'S-FOR-OIL' ARGUMENT SEEMS LIKE 'MANUFACTURED DISSENT'
[Posted 25 July 2002]
[Note: I was shown Mr. Oram's letter, posted below, while editing a review of Brisard and Dasquié's book. 'FORBIDDEN TRUTH.' I read his comment that "If the interview [i.e., Mr. Brisard's interview with Salon (1)] is any indication of the quality of the book then the book will be sloppy and easily discredited. Perhaps this is not by accident. The folks on top need to control the alternative narrative and keep people distracted."
"To control the alternative narrative"! This apt phrase awakened my tired brain and I thought, "If the 'it's-about-oil' people are being set up as the loyal opposition, it's got to be done right in the beginning." So I re-read the first (of five) introductions to the book and sure enough, there it was. Right on the first page of the first introduction, written by one Mr. Trento, described as an intelligence expert. He outright endorses the mainstream media line that the US *blundered* by allying with the Islamic fundamentalists who then turned against their creator, etc., etc.
- Jared Israel]
DEAR EMPEROR'S CLOTHES,
I've been reading your arguments vs. the "they're-in-it-for-the-oil" theory and I find them very convincing. Having read salon.com's interview with Brisard and Dasquié it seems to me very likely that they have been deliberately planting misinformation or what I sometimes call "manufactured dissent", stuff that appears to be critical of the status quo but in its own way supports the elite by repeating some of their arguments and keeping us distracted from the real issues.
After having read the letters you guys posted on Brisard I'm positive that this is the case. (2)
If Brisard and Dasquié are the characters on whom the "they're-in-it-for-the-oil" folks base their theory, that theory is in big trouble.
Brisard's last statement to Salon destroys (at least in my eyes) what little credibility he had left. He states that:
"There have been a lot of books about Sept. 11 and what happened and bios of Bin Laden, but its the first time that two investigators put facts on the table, documents, interviews, and nothing else. WE DON'T SAY IT COULD HAVE BEEN STOPPED. IF ANY GOVERNMENT HAD KNOWN WHAT WAS GOING TO HAPPEN IT WOULDN'T HAVE HAPPENED. But we point out the role
of the western countries that led to Sept. 11-- back to 50 years ago, WHEN WE AGREED TO MAKE AN ALLIANCE WITH SAUDI ARABIA, and then by CLOSING OUR EYES TO THE SUPPORT THEY WERE GIVING FUNDAMENTALISTS AROUND THE WORLD FOR THE LAST 20 YEARS."
(Emphasis added - please pardon my caps!)
When we really look at the story being put forth by Brisard and Dasquié there's nothing particularly new or challenging in it. Nothing much that would seriously trouble the U.S. elite. First of all, B & D seem to accept (as do sadly many voices critical of U.S. policy) that no government knew what was going to happen (and this despite numerous warnings from other governments and intelligence agencies).
But even *if* no government knew what was going to happen, how does that explain the bizarre behavior of the Bush administration, the complete violation of standard and routine procedure on Sept. 11? (3)
Having safely skipped over the troubling details of what actually happened on Sept. 11 and accepted as fact the presentation of the U.S. as either a 'bumbling bear' or a 'helpless giant' Brisard makes a standard mainstream argument: "We screwed up because we allied with the bad old Saudis".
Jeez, we "screwed up" by allying with these fundamentalists who "tricked us". How "embarrassing", what "incompetence"! It would certainly be comforting to think that the folks in charge of U.S. policy are decent folks who just didn't know whom they were using and dealing with and that now they will try to correct the mistakes of the past. But unfortunately this theory is documentably false.
WITH THEIR EYES WIDE SHUT?
Brisard states that the in the U.S. we were simply "closing our eyes to the support they [Saudi Arabia's rulers] were giving fundamentalists around the world for the last 20 years".
*Only* for the last 20 years or so? Hasn't Saudi Arabia always been a fundamentalist country (at least since it became a state?) Hasn't it backed fundamentalists around the world for more than 20 years? And how could the U.S. be "closing its eyes" when it knowingly trained and funded those very same fundamentalists at least since 1979 in
Afghanistan and elsewhere?
How is it that the U.S. could deliberately (as admitted by former national security advisor Brzezinski) try to push the USSR into a draining war by accident?
How did the U.S. "screw up" by having the University of Nebraska design and USAID ship *millions* of fundamentalist propaganda textbooks to Afghanistan over the decades? And why is it continuing to do so even today?
Why is it that the U.S. backed the same sides as Saudi Arabia (and the dread Bin Laden!) in the Balkans throughout the 1990's if it is so opposed to Islamic fundamentalism?
Why did high-ranking U.S. intelligence officials continually override Michael Springman, the former US Visa Bureau chief in Saudi Arabia, when he wouldn't give visas out to suspicious characters who had no evident reason for wanting to enter the US?
Brisard's statement implies that Saudi Arabia not the U.S. was the lead force - as if the world's leading superpower was nothing more than the unwitting tool of a third world country. Isn't Brisard's criticism really just a whitewash of U.S. foreign policy? If the interview is any indication of the quality of the book then the book will be sloppy and easily discredited. Perhaps this is not by accident. The folks on top need to control the alternative narrative and keep people distracted.
I never could quite believe the top dogs of the U.S. elite would go through the whole 9-11 tragedy *soley* or even primarily for the purpose of building a pipeline through Afghanistan. On the other hand your "they're in it to break Russia and crush any counterbalancing power" seems pretty plausible although in many ways much worse. Moreover, it is *not* a new policy. It goes back a lot farther than the 1980's use of Mujahideen extremists to crush the Soviets in a nasty "Bear Trap" or even the ill-fated covert "Operation Rollback" invasions of the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe using various largely fascist native exile groups during the 1950's.
The Emperor's Clothes theory is very troubling. People (worldwide, not only in the U.S.) don't like to believe that elements within the U.S. government deliberately caused the deaths of thousands of Americans on Sept. 11. They look for a way out of that conclusion. In a way the "all about oil" theory provides it. Consider how the argument goes:
Ordinary Person Asks: "Why would Bush & Co. do something like that?"
Critic Answers: "Why, it's all about oil. The Republicans are in bed with big oil and they wanted to build a pipeline through Afghanistan."
Ordinary Person Asks: "You mean they went through all that trouble just to build an oil pipeline? That would be ridiculous!"
I assume the "oil theory" appears far-fetched not only to me but to many others. More importantly it is easily discreditable. Unfortunately, many people who question the official version of Sep. 11 accept it. When they repeat this theory they weaken their case on Sep. 11 as well as drawing attention away from the larger danger.
Material from Emperor's Clothes relating to 9-11 has been reposted widely all over the net. Emperor's Clothes and various so-called "conspiracy theorists" (those who question the official version of events for Sept. 11) have also come under attack from a variety of sources. I find it interesting that among the bigger Websites I have seen, both the ones that have featured your work and those that attacked "conspiracy theorists" (including Emperor's on at least one occasion) - they all failed to mention the key part of your argument, that *The Empire is not in it for the oil; the Empire is in it for world domination*.
That [world] domination comes from *crushing resistant populations, crushing potential rival powers*, and more particularly, *launching covert warfare against Russia and the remnants of the former Soviet Union*.
Perhaps I should look harder for other sites carrying your work or perhaps the "oil theory" is simply dominant.
I have seen "conspiracy theorists" attacked repeatedly in much of the supposedly "alternative" media but only as regards the oil theory or the "Israeli-agents-did-it-theory" but never in regards to the Emperor's Clothes theory. Emperor's Clothes' argument is rarely mentioned, I believe, because it is not so easy to argue against. (4)
Keep up the good work, you are one of the few *truly* critical voices out there.
Warmest regards and best wishes,
1) Brisard Dasquié's interview is analyzed and linked-to in "A READER ASKS: 'WHAT ABOUT BUSH'S CARPET-OF-BOMBS THREAT?' What standards of evidence should we demand?" which can be read at
2) Dimitri Oram refers to 'WHO IS JEAN-CHARLES BRISARD?,' at
3) For Emperor's Clothes "ARTICLES ON 9-11" go to
These include articles refuting the claim made by leading
"it's-for-the-oil" people, that Osama bin Laden turned on his masters.
For more on the "it's-all-about-oil" argument, see "Waiting for gold... IS BRISARD AND DASQUIÉ'S BOOK THEATER OF THE ABSURD?" at
4) For an overview of the Afghan war, see 'Washington Plots, Moscow Crawls, Kabul Burns' by Jared Israel at
Also check 'Further Reading' at the end of 'THE EMPIRE ISN'T IN AFGHANISTAN FOR THE OIL!,' by Jared Israel at
Here are some articles helpful for understanding what's been done to Afghanistan:
A) 'Washington's Backing of Afghan Terrorists: Deliberate Policy' Article from "Washington Post' with introductory note from 'Emperor's Clothes'. Can be read at http://emperors-clothes.com/docs/anatomy.htm
B) 'Bush & the Media Cover up the Jihad Schoolbook Scandal,'
by Jared Israel can be read at
C) 'Taliban Camps U.S. bombed in Afghanistan Were Built by NATO' Documentation from the 'N.Y. Times'. Combined U.S. and Saudi aid to Afghan-based terrorism totaled $6 billion or more. Can be read at
D) 'Osama bin Laden: Made In USA'
Excerpt from article on U.S. bombing of a pill factory in Sudan in August 1998. Argues that bin Laden was and still may be a CIA asset. Can be read at
Join our email list at http://emperors-clothes.com/f.htm. Receive about one article/day.
Click here to email a link to this article to a friend. Or copy and paste following url into your browser:
mailto:ENTER FRIEND'S EMAIL ADDRESS HERE?subject=Here's an
interesting article from emperors-clothes.com&body=I just read an article which I thought you would find interesting. Here's the address:
Emperor's Clothes Urgently Needs Your Help!
In order for Emperor's Clothes to continue publishing we urgently need your help. We rely entirely on contributions. Not only are we (again!) behind on all our usual bills (such as rent, paying our computer guru and phone bills) but we also need to pay for the plane fare which allowed Editor Nico Varkevisser to attend a most interesting meeting in Moscow, about which you will be reading shortly.
Please help! We do not charge for articles and we do not accept advertising because it's irritating to readers. We're as frugal as possible, but we do have to pay bills. In order to continue publishing, we urgently need the help of our friends.
Please send whatever contributions you can! $20, $50, $100, or more. More would be very helpful, but every penny will be used to get articles to more people. (And if you can't contribute, please keep reading anyway!)
You can make a donation using at
You can make a credit card donation by going to our secure server at
Or Mail a check to Emperor's Clothes, P.O. Box 610-321, Newton, MA 02461-0321. (USA)
Or make a donation by phone at the donation line, (U.S.) 617-916-1705.
Note: If you mail a donation or make one by secure server, please let us know by email at emperors1000 (at) aol.com to make sure we receive it. Thanks!
Thank you for reading Emperor's Clothes.
www.tenc.net * [Emperor's Clothes]
This Website is mirrored at http://emperor.vwh.net/ and at
To subscribe, click or send an email to
subscribe (at) emperor.vwh.net