By Jerry Alatalo
“The man who wishes to remain faithful to justice must make himself continually unfaithful to inexhaustibly triumphant injustice.”
– CHARLES PEGUY (1873-1914) French writer
any have come to accept the theory that overthrowing Bashar al-Assad in Syria was one of the objectives of those who planned, facilitated and destroyed World Trade Center Buildings 1 and 2, along with the lesser-known Building 7, on September 11, 2001. Now that Congress has overturned President Barack Obama’s veto of the JASTA bill allowing legal action by surviving family members of those who perished on 9/11 against Saudi Arabia, there has been a renewal of hope and optimism – a sense that a crack in the dam of coverup has developed – among those who believe the perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks have never become identified and prosecuted.
Immediately after the Twin Towers were hit by airplanes, before the Towers fell or any semblance of investigation had begun, news reports went out over the airwaves reflecting commentary by politicians and terrorism experts asserting Osama Bin Laden was behind and guilty of the attacks. Instead of sending a small force of special operations personnel to Afghanistan to capture Bin Laden, the Bush-Cheney administration carried out a war against the entire Afghan nation – learned later so to control highly valuable energy pipelines and mineral resources in the region, as well as overseeing massive re-cultivation of poppy fields and Afghanistan’s lucrative heroin trade.
Americans were then subjected to an organized (unfortunately, successful) propaganda campaign by the Bush-Cheney administration that resulted in 70% holding the false perception that Iraq’s Saddam Hussein was somehow connected to the 9/11 attacks, that Hussein had weapons of mass destruction threatening American cities with mushroom clouds, and leading to Washington’s lawmakers voting for the 2003 invasion of Iraq. The Bush-Cheney administration, Tony Blair in the United Kingdom, and other European nation heads went along with the lies, estimates are that over 1,000,000 Iraqis perished, and Iraq after being bombed to rubble has never recovered.
Barack Obama became president in 2008 and the next nation targeted for overthrow was Libya under Muammar Gaddafi. The Obama-Biden administration, in a “successful” manner similar to its predecessor Bush-Cheney group with Iraq, convinced the United Nations Security Council to establish a no-fly zone over Libya with the argument that Gaddafi’s slaughter of his own citizens was “imminent”, and only a matter of hours away. The claims that Gaddafi was on the verge of slaughtering the Libyan people were proven to be lies, thousands of Libyans perished under NATO bombing in 2011, the nation’s infrastructure became destroyed, and Libya is now commonly described as a “basket case”.
Later, released emails of the U.S. Secretary of State in 2011 Hillary Clinton revealed the real reasons for Libya’s destruction and Gaddafi’s murder. One of the factors was control of Libya’s energy resources and another was Gaddafi’s plan to establish a new currency for the African continent. Understanding that oil was one of the prime motivators for those who engineered the bombing of Libya is easy enough; it’s safe to say the majority of wars in mankind’s history have been about natural resources and/or land/territory. Getting one’s head around the implications of an African currency and new, competitive monetary system involves higher level complexity of thought to grasp and/or imagine the powerful persons and groups involved in the direct decision-making that led to Libya’s military destruction.
Next after Libya in the line of military fire of the powerful persons and groups at the control of geopolitical decision-making came Syria. Some hold the theory that the main reason for attacks on Syria since 2011 until today has to do with natural gas pipelines delivering massive quantities of energy supply to European markets. The nations of Qatar and Iran share an immensely large natural gas field between them, and both proposed running a multi-billion dollar pipeline across Syria to Europe to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Assad rejected the Qatar offer and accepted the Iranian, plans were drafted, contracts written and signed on an Iran-Iraq-Syria project, then the violence in Syria began to dramatically escalate.
Other observers believe the Qatar-Iran natural gas pipeline competition is a real and significant factor for explaining the warring in Syria, but that broader regional factors having to do with national political structures in Middle East-North Africa are also necessary to consider. Maintaining the monarchies in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, etc. and holding off serious democratic reform that transforms the region politically is also an important factor, among many others in a range from less to more influential, for persons engaged in analysis.
Suffice to say Bashar al-Assad, like Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gaddafi before him, has experienced the same “demonization” coming from the Obama administration, European governments, and Western corporate media since 2011. An unbalanced, concentrated, organized strategy of attack which portrays Assad as a “ruthless dictator… killing his own people.. barrel-bombing” became developed then implemented to sway public opinion into favoring major military actions leading to his removal/overthrow from power. The main, important-to-consider aspect of the strategy is the intentional repeated focusing on the Syrian government and Assad, while minimizing or even excluding any focus on the estimated 350,000 paid mercenary terrorists who’ve entered Syria since 2011.
That exclusion and/or minimization of terrorism and terrorists operating in Syria since 2011 was verified in the first presidential debate between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. Anyone who watched and listened to that debate looking for the candidates’ positions on the situation in Syria became completely disappointed – Syria was never brought up for discussion, at any point, during the entire course of their exchange. What has developed in Syria is of major historic significance and could hardly become explained away as “not of sufficient importance for discussion in presidential debate(s)”. Most shocking and disturbing are increasing revelations that the terrorists who’ve attacked Syria and its people for 5 1/2 years have received their entire support from Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, Israel, the United States, United Kingdom, France and other governments. That describes in the mind of any sane and reasonable man or woman war crimes – state-sponsored terrorism.
In the video that follows attorney Daniel Sheehan describes crimes of an entirely different, higher magnitude and nature – in this talk referring specifically to 9/11 – reaching a level of consequence that “shakes the very legal foundation itself”. The accumulated crimes of state-sponsored terrorism committed against Syria – its people, military, government, property and infrastructure – are arguably in that category, but different from 9/11 in that the crimes have become identified, revealed, and acknowledged long before 15 years have elapsed. Events on 9/11 and in Syria could be described or visualized as two ends of a continuum of major historic, illegal and deceptive events on Earth.
When referring to 9/11, Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and other crime scenes which originated from the events of September 11, 2001, one finds a period of (15) fifteen years where humanity has experienced crimes of such size that international law’s foundation itself has become shaken, at risk, under attack, and in urgent need of defense. How the human collective deals with these profoundly worrying circumstances and comes to an agreement on moving forward with a firm foundation of truth is possibly the greatest challenge of this generation.
9/11: The origin of war in the 21st century
While many people are still unaware that a third skyscraper – Building 7 – collapsed on 9/11, those who’ve seen videos of its collapse nearly unanimously describe it as a “controlled demolition”. It is worth noting that Building 7 is commonly referred to in the 9/11 truth community (those who’ve done any research to speak of on 9/11) as “the smoking gun”, but that the official 9/11 Commission Report didn’t even mention Building 7.
The collapse of the South Tower has some similarity to Building 7 when observed in that one notices at the initial phase of collapse a physical event which seems to make impossible the tower’s total collapse. That event is the top 1/4 to 1/5 (estimated) of the structure seemingly “breaking off” and moving sideways. While not having any expertise or training in engineering, simple observation leads one to offer the suggestion that the top section, which clearly starts falling away from the rest of the structure, at some point in its ongoing out-and-away momentum would have ceased having any further weight-bearing effect on the collapse of floors below. In other words, it seems the South Tower’s collapse should have become ultimately partial – with perhaps 1/3 to 1/2 of the structure still standing – as opposed to collapsing completely down to the 1st floor.
Certainly the over 2,000 architects and engineers belonging to the group Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth have taken great pains in studying every aspect of the South Tower’s collapse, and “scientifically presumptuous” would entail the correct term for describing this layperson’s simple observation. Details on the collapse of the Twin Towers and Building 7 are only a few of the thousands any legal team determined to bring charges against defendants will need to comb through in preparation for their case.
(Thank you to Nathan Flach at YouTube)
Veteran attorney involved in many of America’s most important legal cases Daniel Sheehan talked to those attending the Justice In Focus symposium September 11, 2016 in New York City about 9/11 legal options and strategies. In the highly informative, insightful and historically revealing keynote address, Mr. Sheehan provided valuable descriptions of facts surrounding the cases he’s fought, in particular the difficulties, roadblocks and opposition attorneys face when engaging in highly politicized complex court battles.
Among the many astonishing points made by Mr. Sheehan was his mention that during the Karen Silkwood case the smuggling of 40 pounds of plutonium from the Kerr-McGee plant in Oklahoma to Israel became revealed, and that the plutonium was to become divided with portions going to the Shah of Iran and apartheid South Africa. That astounding set of facts became suppressed by the presiding judge, therefore concealed from the American public – because Sheehan failed to prove that Karen Silkwood was a member of the black race.
In a real sense, the world has traveled a circle that started on 9/11 and effectively ends in Syria. Humanity now has no other alternative but to face inescapable truths.
(Thank you to AE911Truth at YouTube)
Anyone interested can watch the entire 16 hours of proceedings in the “Justice In Focus” video archive by visiting: