|LSMFT: Lucky Strike Metastasizes into Financial Turmoil|
In my rush to praise Mike Ruppert's book, "Crossing the Rubicon", yesterday, it didn't really occur to me that it would read as an indication that I ascribe to his belief that the WTC bombing was done, even orchestrated by, the Federal government. I mean how can one not, if you praise his book written to prove just that? Talk about cognitive dissonance!
Well, one reason, for me, is that having shared his view of what the Bush family was really like and what they were really up to, in which they were so assured the arrogant son wore his true colors on his sleeve, was that Mike Ruppert was exposing so many of the fallacies in their claims for future US economic prospects, all of which were believed by a childishly naive middle class, that my brother, since I'd been explaining the real future they were preparing for the middle class to him, would call me occasionally and ask what my crystal ball was saying that week, because, as the bankruptcies of GM, Bear Stearns, the GSE's, all fell like dominoes, and all were predicted by Mr. Ruppert, as well as the housing bubble that started imploding, not in 2008, like most people believe to this day, but years before that in 2006, when prices peaked (yet Bernanke was still raising interest rates, insuring that all those ARMS taken out with the encouragement of his predecessor, who maintained that people stuck in fixed rate mortgages were losing tens of thousands of dollars in interest costs (never mind that those costs are deductible, so it was the US Treasury, of which the Fed is an ARM, that was losing) When you lower interest rates, then the price of the housing itself rises, (that is the whole justification for ZIRP: to push "asset prices", that asset being Your home, higher, to its 'true" (ie pre-financial crash) value)).
This pours additional funds into government coffers on ALL levels: State, Federal, and, via rising property value assessments, Municipal, and is a policy being followed to this very day, as less of the cost of 'owning' property is deductible from your State and Federal taxes and the value therefore rises, increasing your property tax bills as well: win-win-win; but not for the owner, escalating the true costs even as healthcare, energy and food costs increase simultaneously.
This was not something that occurred by accident, there are, believe it or not, actually not only economists, but people who work with real-world numbers, called accountants, also working for the Federal government, and conspiring with the Bush administration to connive a way to pay for the tremendous costs associated with the rampage in Iraq (Exposed by Lawrence Lindsey to be underestimated by a factor of 10 of what the administration was claiming, a transgression for which he was summarily fired), to keep its true costs hidden from the American public so they wouldn't question too rigidly the f*cking reason we were there in the first place.
All this was completely obvious to anyone who cared to look, because, as I said, Bush wasn't too cagey about hiding what he was up to. Why should he be? The Republicans thought themselves in such a vaunted position of ascendancy that they believed that nothing could knock them down again, having forgotten that they thought the same thing in 1992 when that other Bush, having ridden in in '88 on the fumes of his puppet, Trickle-down Reagan, and having won that first shameful war in Iraq, thereby buttressingg his families many interests in the middle east, and, determined to showoff the ascendancy of American techno-power, then fumbled badly and committed the unforgivable sin of allowing Clinton to "take" the White House (many Republicans have still not gotten over their outrage over this theft of what was rightfully theirs), they assumed that their ascendancy was unstoppable.
And it is for this reason that the idea of this same administration being responsible for the planning and execution of a caper that would result in the destruction of 3000 American lives didn't seem that controversial or inconceivable to me. Because the reason that hey did so, as outlined by Mr. Ruppert and detailed to an outstanding degree, were much more convincing than any of the reasons that were given for our second invasion of Iraq, which resulted in the destruction of a full 25% MORE American lives than the bombing of the WTC did, and yet had no justification, and for which none of the instigators of this criminal aggression have ever been held accountable. To this day, every single reason for going to War in Iraq has been proven absurd, if not simply an outright lie, like the flimsy, easily seen-through WMD excuse.
But Bush knew he didn't have to justify it, that any reason would satisfy Americans who are besotted with "A Terrible Love of War" (James Hillman), and, despite the denials by the CEO's of companies that stood to gain enormous profits from it, all wars are undertaken for the acquisition of wealth, and in this case, also for the plundering of the files at the Iraqi Oil Ministry wherein lay the proof that Bush needed to destroy: documents that detailed the complicity of Cheney, (while serving as the first Bush's Secretary of Defense), Halliburton, and his father in the cross-border theft, using Halliburton-engineered horizontal drilling techniques that had been tried and proven in the Bakken region of North Dakota in 1987, to drill into Iraqi oil fields in order to keep declining production in Kuwait's Burgen oilfield from causing a cascading failure in their leveraged debt, as it was collateralized on the assumption of rising revenues that were instead falling.
Because, although oil is fungible on the world market, it is easily chemically analyzed to tell its source, and the Oil Ministry had the proof, via such chemical analysis, of the fact that much of Kuwaiti oil was not the same oil as that from the Burgen field.
The only difference is that Americans didn't give a damn about invading Iraq. They could care less about the complete destruction of another country, what the reasons were nor how many would die, even of their own country men. Why I feel so convinced on this latter point was that in August of 2002, while taking a statistics course, I designed and conducted a survey in the Boston area of people's attitudes about the coming war with Iraq. After being taken aback a bit, as there was no indication, to those more intent on shopping than world politics, that another War was already being planned, they answered with close to 70% agreement that, as many as 50,000 American soldiers was an acceptable cost, even though the reasons for going to war were somewhat vague. The idea of an enemy was enough, seeing the aim of war as being nothing more than its continuation, as we were as a matter of fact, already bombing Iraq on a pretty regular basis.
But, as Heraclitus said, "The true nature of things loves to hide, and to stay hidden", which is why conspiracy abounds undetected, and those who try to bring it to the surface are ridiculed, because it's so hard to prove, because no one cares to, even given what they learn afterwards, reassess their opinion held at the time it was being actively shaped by forces of which they were unaware and for reasons other than those put forth.
So, whereas I believe that the Iraq wars were waged, not with the best interests of the US, neither the nation itself, nor its constituent members, but for the benefit of a rather small club of elites, who all are today far richer and powerful than they would be had it not been waged, the attack on the WTC is a far more dangerous operation for the Government to be directly involved in. They undoubtedly knew both the means and the timing of the attack. After all, the month before Bush gave full control of the defense of the country to Cheney in May 2004, he had given $45 million dollars to the Taliban, and the very next day after the attack he was whisking members of the Bin Laden family out of the country while all actual citizens were grounded. The President of the United States couldn't assure the citizens of his own country safe passage int he air, but he could certainly do so for the family of the accused perpetrator of the most heinous crime ever committed on US soil, and he could do so without a whisper of protest from those who had put him into office.
Less obvious a connection, but one I think is important, is that both the president and the vice president conspired to run on the same ticket, even though they were both from the State of Texas, despite a Constitutional ban on exactly that, which they knew, and so set up a false residency for the soon-to-be VP in another state (this is conspiracy, btw, as it was done for the explicit purpose of evading the law, as Cheney was first the "scout" for a VP candidate for GW, while he changed his legal residency, and then Voila!, he, as it turned out, was the best candidate!), and they then ran the country not as a country, but as a proxy for the state of Texas, which is still reaping the benefits as the price of oil remains north of $100/bbl., which, sans Peak Oil, which they vociferously deny is a reality, is therefore a result of their own policy "failures"). Yet the rest of my countrymen, still preposterously labor under the delusion that energy isn't at the very core of their economy and government's Power and geopolitical strategy.
This still baffles me fully as much as the question of the WTC attacks, because the three, as Mike Ruppert understood better than anyone else, are inextricably entwined.