Thoughts about September 11, 2006

Wow, five years since the largest terrorist attack on U.S. soil. I remember it like it was yesterday. I was at work in Newport News, and Dave exclaimed that an airplane had hit a building in new york. Then 45 minutes or so later, he said that another airplane hit a building in new york, and [ I'm getting goose bumps just remembering this ] I thought that couldn't be error, and it had to be the beginning of something big. The pentagon was also hit by an airplane, and for the rest of the day, I was waiting for the proverbial other shoe to drop. Luckily, there was only the one giant shoe.

Something is wrong here. This past week, I've been reading quite a bit about so much evidence of trickery, deceit, and [ sorry ] conspiracy theories about that day, and the many days that followed. Please don't judge unless you do some research, but much of the data and articles I've read and photographs I've examined, that there might just be something wrong with much of the official story. Official photographs seem to be staged and altered in both new york and around the pentagon. Timelines do not make sense regarding the third building that was detonated in New York on September 11, 2006 (World Trade Center Building 7 – WTC7) which most people I talk to don't even remember. Isn't it strange that a 47 story building was brought down by fire in a manner consistent with a controlled detonation which normally takes days to engineer and plan? This building had a giant plume of smoke coming from it before the second airplane hit the second tower, and the WTC7 building was not struck by debris. The fire only lasted for a few hours and was imploded by means unknown. Something is very wrong here.

It struck me very dramatically how much has changed since September 11, 2001. The Patriot Act, a 150 page document that severely eroded many civil rights for most Americans, was almost unanimously passed by congress within days of its proposal. This is the same body that takes longer to approve their own raises or pass emergency resolutions to continue government operations in time of budget crises. Secret courts deny only 0.1% of the warrants applied for to spy on Americans according to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) but our executive branch kept secret the fact that it bypassed that secret court to spy on anyone it wanted, claiming the broad umbrella of national security. On this issue, a federal court held that the broad surveillance of Americans without due cause was illegal, citing that the President was created by the U.S. Constitution and could not circumvent its laws.

Our government advocates the use of torture. Our government was widely chastised as having employed wide use of torture in the pursuit of justice in the war on terror, further holding hundreds of people on a military base offshore of the United States to keep its prisoners from being able to seek any form of legal redress. Our government has been holding these prisoners for over four years, many of them are not even allowed to know the charges or evidence against them due to national security. When petitioned by the U.S. Senate to abstain from the use of torture and pass legislation to that effect, the U.S. Attorney general, at the behest of the President and Vice President, sought to shield the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) from any law banning or outlawing the use of torture. To reiterate, the U.S. Attorney General argued to preserve the right of the U.S. Government to torture prisoners and suspects in its war on terror.

The U.S. CIA has, this week, admitted the existence of a secret prison system to perpetuate the controversial practices described above. These prisons are located outside the United States, as to shield them from U.S. laws. Torture is routinely employed on prisoners and suspects by foreign nationals with the knowledge and consent of U.S. agents. If these people walk away, they are testaments to the lack of democracy that our government purports to be protecting.

In admonishing the executive branch’s actions in the global wiretapping case above (ACLU v. NSA), the judge wrote, “As Justice Warren wrote in U.S. v. Robel, 389 U.S. 258 (1967): Implicit in the term ‘national defense’ is the notion of defending those values and ideas which set this Nation apart. . . . It would indeed be ironic if, in the name of national defense, we would sanction the subversion of . . . those liberties . . . which makes the defense of the Nation worthwhile. Id. at 264.”

I love my country. I fought a war for it, and would gladly do it again. Secret courts, torture, globally unaccepted practices of spying on citizens, invading countries, and occupying nations is not my ideal goal of spreading democracy and showing the world how great our country can be. Perhaps we can make the next five years a better example to the world of how great America is, how other countries should strive to be like us, and how we, as Americans, can hold our heads high, knowing that our country did what was right and stuck to the moral high-ground of humanity. This is what I hope for.