“Let Justice Roll” (A Reflection on 9/11/02)

by Fr Alexander F C Webster

Daylight broke over our great land today, 

A slumbering giant gently awakened,

To relive an enormity not of our making.


We arose and sighed with relief

That we were still here upon this earth,

Able to enjoy the Lord’s bounty as free men.


Our national annus horribilis in brackets

We Isaiahs offered for the Almighty

To  proclaim an “acceptable year” in His sight.


But our work is not yet done.


Dutiful brothers and sister of fallen fellow citizens,

We remembered their lives lost for no good reason

And suffered in one body, as St Paul exhorts.


Tunes of grief and hope pierced our hearts,

Unworldly bagpipe sounds from a previous autumn,

And it was mourning in America again.


From those honored dead on a September morn,

Regular mortals and Homeric heroes alike,

We took increased devotion to liberty’s sacred cause.


But our work is not yet done.


Our vision blurred perhaps with tears

Wills weakened by old political ghosts,

We still have miles to go before we sleep in peace.


We honor new false idols of Tolerance and Diversity,

With feasts in solemn assemblies despised by God,

Distracting us from the real task at hand.


“Let justice roll down like waters,” said Amos:

Justice for the victims, justice upon evil-doers,

It’s time to heed the prophecy:

America, let’s roll!


Our work is not yet done.


  1. Cynthia curran says

    People might get mad at me but hitting New York made the city popular again. In fact a lot of companies would have left overtaxed and overregulated New York if 9/11 didn’t happen. The hit of New York gave it more sympathy for a city which was losing thousands of people to places like Florida and North Carolina. In fact Wall Street might have moved to Dallas Texas since Dallas/Fort Worth/ Plano have grown 2 million people since 9/11 while New York city only grew about 400,000 people since then.

    • New York City, specially Manhattan, can’t “grow” anymore, it reached its peak of population in the 1950s.

  2. “Remember what Amalek did unto thee by the way, when ye were come forth out of Egypt; How he met thee by the way, and smote the hindmost of thee, even all that were feeble behind thee, when thou wast faint and weary; and he feared not God. Therefore it shall be, when the Lord thy God hath given thee rest from all thine enemies round about, in the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee for an inheritance to possess it, that thou shalt blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven; thou shalt not forget it.” – Deut. 25:17-19

    Islam is our Amalek. The longer we deny it, the worse it will get.

    • George Michalopulos says

      A minor quibble if you will permit me, Misha: Amalek/Islam would/could/will respect Christendom and its paladins (the US) if and when it asserts itself. I’ve seen this with Russia, all Muslim nations totally respect and fear Russia because it is a resurgent Christian civilization.

      One of the hallmarks of resurgent Christian nations (like Victor Orban’s Hungary) is that they don’t get on board with the EU/US globo-homo agenda.

      • George,

        It has gone on far too long. Fourteen hundred years as the hunted. Enough.

        Now, part of the solution is, as you suggest, to become hunters once again. I advocate that against all opposition here, friendly and otherwise. There is a reason that Muslims fear (I won’t say “respect”, for there is a shade of difference) the Russians (and the Serbs, for that matter). During the Second Chechen War, Putin waged what was sometimes characterized as genocidal warfare against the Chechen people, soldiers and civilians alike. Finally, facing extermination, a leader arose among them who brought them to heel: Ahmat Kadyrov and his son, Ramzan.

        But the Russians had to make a running start at genocide to get to that point. Moreover, they had to make it mandatory that the doctrine taught in Chechen mosques, imposed by force of arms, was that external Jihad was abolished and Sufi, internal Jihad was the only acceptable form.

        In short, they were ideologically neutered by force.

        In the Balkans, the Serbs simply waged genocidal war against the Muslims (and to a lesser extent the Catholic Croats), in the same way they were hunted by them. That only stopped when the US intervened and neither the Serbs nor the Russians have forgotten that.

        In the end, you have to either convert them or kill them. You can’t contain them indefinitely. Probably the best policy would be to expel one and all Muslims from Christian lands, send in missionaries protected by paramilitary. Just wage a relentless war of evangelism and attrition until there are no more Muslims and you have peace.

        Islam is the only religion that requires such a strategy. Not Mormonism, not Hinduism, not Buddhism, not Confucianism. It is necessary because Islam is a violent, supersessionist, satanic cult. The only comparable similarity is liberalism . . .

        And that brings us to a great distinction which will become vitally important. The way liberals deal with Islam is the way they deal with all religion. They are secular materialists who believe that the only form of any religion which should be allowed to survive is a thoroughly neutered form, devoid of anything other than religious terminology in a thin veneer over liberal ideology (much like the Episcopal Church).

        The problem is that ideologically, Islam is much stronger than liberalism. Muslims can be evangelized; they can never be liberalized. So if liberalism prevails here at home, Islam prevails on earth.

        We should not be above treating with Islam in order to eradicate liberalism. We should never treat with liberalism under any circumstances. And we need be committed to the eradication of both.

        • George Michalopulos says

          Misha, your point about the distinction between “fear” and “respect” is well-taken. I will say however that it’s easier for Muslims to “respect” Christianity which is traditionalist. They can even learn to like them. I mean this globo-homo/George Floyd cultism will only inflame them.

        • Serious question:

          Would you rather live in an Islamic-dominated society or in a militantly leftist secular atheist society? Would you take Saudi Arabia or the current New South Wales, Australia?

          I’d take Saudi Arabia. My kids wouldn’t be told to pick their sex or pronoun at age 8, internet porn is limited, the people (though Muslim) are often kind and friendly and loving, masculinity and femininity are not ridiculed, and it values the family.

          Either way you’d have to practice your faith in secret. But at least not 100% of how they conduct public life would be against you in Saudi Arabia.

          Honestly, for a traditionalist Christian, it seems no contest.

          • I agree with you 100%, FTS. Islam (especially Sufism) and Orthodoxy grew up together and have been heavily influenced by each other. If given the choice between western woke culture and traditional Muslim culture, it’s really a no-brainer which I would choose for my family. I don’t say this lightly. Abortion, transgender activism, the breakdown of the family unit, the transhumanist agenda — it’s not coming from Islam. It’s coming from woke Christian countries.

            • Sufism and Wahhabi Islam (ie: Saudi Islam)
              are considerably different…

            • Islam did not influence Christianity in any way, sorry. While I am not in disagreement with you and FTS, you can’t just make absolutely false and borderline heretical statements like that.

              • Gail Sheppard says

                They can make observations as long as they are respectful, which they were. They’re not teaching anything, this isn’t Church, and they aren’t bishops.

                Metropolitan Philip had a similar opinion. He used to say they were 95% the same. (He also used to say Mary Magdalene was a prostitute. Nobody accused him of heresy.)

              • Theologically, no. In tradition and practice, yes, I agree with Met. Phillip that they are similar in so many ways. Forgive me, Basil, if I have caused you offense by my lack of clarity.

                • Islam took much from us, but what did we take from them?

                  • Arabic numerals.

                    • You mean Indian numerals.

                    • No. We got them from the Arabs.
                      which is why we call them Arabic numerals.

                      By the same token, we call our script Latin
                      and not Greek or Phoenician.

                    • For the record, the Arabs created the concept of.zero. and also invented algebra.

                    • It was the Indian Brahmagupta
                      who first, as far as anyone knows,
                      produced rules for calculating with zero;
                      in 628 AD in his book Brāhmasphuṭasiddhānta
                      (The Correctly Established Doctrine of Brahma).
                      Algebra existed long before the Arabs took it up,
                      but it was worked out in words, not symbols.

                    • The Arabs are occasionally given credit for the use of zero as a number and for the algebraic system of solving arithmetic equations when actually they were only the transporters of these concepts, both of which were well developed in India when the Arabs arrived and conquered. The Arabs to their credit paid attention to the knowledge available in India at the time and transported ideas, concepts and methods back to the west, thus introducing them to Europe up to centuries later. At times, even the Arabs were forgotten and European names were attached, as for example in the famous and entertaining Fibonacci numbers. Fibonacci (Leonardo of Pisa) learned of the sequence 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8 … while visiting/studying with Arabs. The origin of the sequence was India where it was developed to enumerate word construction from syllables.

                      Although earlier Indian mathematician contributed to the development, the works of the astronomer and mathematician Brahmagupta were presented at the court of conquering Arabs. This included the number zero (kal) and methods for solving arithmetic equations. In early Indian mathematics, a space or upward pointing bracketed denote zero but later a dot was used. The Arabs could perhaps be given credit with leaving a space inside the dot to form the empty circle we call zero. The word “zero” has other linguistic origins.

                      Arabs can also be given credit for the works of their mathematician Al-Khwarizmi who lived and worked in the library in Baghdad. The word “algebra” is from Arabic terminology and the word “algorithm” is a shortening of Al-Khwarizmi’s name. He was a mathematician who presented his own works which were actually more primitive than those of Brahmagupta. Note that Brahmagupta was using negative numbers and Al-Khwarizmi did not.

                      Development of mathematics attributed to this Arab transport of knowledge goes further. India used the place-based system (decimal system) with only 10 symbols for numbers as well as negative numbers. Original Arabic numerals look nothing like the ones we use now. The real significance is the place-based system of 10 (0-9) symbols.

                      Of course, every culture (except maybe the Russians – joke) like to claim they were the first.

                    • George Michalopulos says

                      Conquerors get to claim a lot of credit. Justifiably so. Had it not been for the Arabs, we would never have found out about the Hindi mathematical concepts.

                      Consider: it was Alexander the Great who made the Bible possible as well as the later spread of Christian evangelism. If it wasn’t for his conquest of the Persian Empire, the Greek language wouldn’t have been the lingua franca of the known world. No Septuagint, no New Testament, and no conversion of the Roman Empire to Christianity.

                      It’s sad to say, but war makes the spread of culture possible.

                    • “Of course, every culture (except maybe
                      the Russians – joke) like to claim they were the first.”

                      We Scots like to claim we stole it from the English…

                • Christine,

                  I’m not sure what Christianity took from Islam, if anything. We preceded them. They took the form of their scripture (like David’s psalms), their method of prayer (bowing and prostrating in the Eastern style), the head covering of women, byzantine architecture and byzantine chant for the chant of the muezzin and Quran; and monotheism in general, from us. Sufism is simply the Muslim answer to hesychasm, beads and all.

                  If one is going to tolerate Islam – and I do not think that is a lasting or satisfactory solution – then emasculating it by imposing the Greater Jihad (mysticism) as the only jihad in place of the Lesser Jihad (kinetic, violent attrition in all directions against non-Muslims) is probably the least that can contain it even on a temporary basis of a few generations. That is what the Russians insisted on in Chechnya. Sufism as the only legitimate and tolerable form of jihad is the law of the Chechen Muslims under the Kadyrov regime. It was controversial when it was instituted, but the Kadyrovs did so in order to prevent an unfolding genocide.

                  That is the only thing they understand – the clear and present threat of eradication.

                  And Sufism is quite beautiful in a way, despite its origin. Sufi masters would send would be students to Christian mystics if no Sufi master were available in their area. I do not think that they can attain to theosis through it. But they may be able to make some spiritual progress toward dispassion and selflessness (al-Fanaa) while, unfortunately, still being prone to the taunts of demons due to their ignorance or rejection of Christ. In particular, the writings of Rumi are of interest and the character of al Khidr (the Green One) in their stories.

                  • Thanks everyone! Didn’t mean to derail Fr. Alexander’s excellent and moving poem contribution. We are just going to have to agree to disagree on this topic, which is fine with me. In the same way, I am happy to agree to disagree with folks who see 9/11 as led by Bin Laden instead of being an inside job meant to pave the way for the removal of all our civil liberties thru the Patriot Acts and government funded and sanctioned spying, control, and manipulation of the population through big tech. Love this blog, as to each their own!

                    • Yes, for anyone who is interested, Fr. Alexander co-authored a book called The Virtue of War after 9/11 where his views are layed out in some detail. Protestant and Catholic views of just war are also included and if anyone is interested in the debate and subject I encourage you to read his book which you can find here.

                      For what it’s worth, I think Fr. Alexander’s motives are well intentioned in that he distanced himself somewhat from a past which was more embracing of Christian pacifism.

                      I simply find the Old Testament witness, as well as passages in the New Testament, including in the Apocalypse of St. John, dispositive on the question of Christian violence in light of the later witness of the Church Fathers living at a time of Christian sovereignty.

                      It’s not a close question to me. It only seems so if you take passages in the New Testament in isolation and out of context. As I’ve said many times: It’s not that you can’t make a case for Christian pacifism based on a number of passages in the New Testament. You can. It’s the fact that there are a monumental multitude of countervailing passages and evidence in scripture to the contrary which should persuade a fair minded person to use common sense to interpret the exhortations to non-violent cooperation in light of the whole rather than as some type of higher ideal, only briefly glimpsed, repugnant to and at war with the rest of scripture and tradition.

            • “f given the choice between western woke culture and traditional Muslim culture, it’s really a no-brainer which I would choose for my family. I don’t say this lightly. Abortion, transgender activism, the breakdown of the family unit, the transhumanist agenda — it’s not coming from Islam. It’s coming from woke Christian countries.”

              You can avoid the Woke by being willingly to live with less, relocate to a rural part of free state, etc, etc, etc; far easier than one can avoid every Muslim in an Islamic country, where a Muslim can do anything to you and their word will always trump that of an infidel.

          • FTS,

            I’d rather live in someplace like Syria or Egypt where it is Muslim but not fanatically so, than in a liberal society. All things being equal, I would take Saudi Arabia over present day Australia.

            Though I don’t agree with Islam in its particulars, even a broken clock is right twice a day. They are anti-feminist, patriarchal, hostile to LGBT, etc. The polygamy does not bother me since it’s not obligatory. In a number of ways, and I’ve said it before in the face of criticism, they are better Christians than western Christians.

            Now, at the same time, they practice a false religion which at times descends into a death cult of sorts. They prohibit charging interest or taking insurance – plus they ban alcohol. But liberals are totally depraved and deranged when it comes to normative morality. That is why, though we might make deals with the Muslims to undermine the liberals, we should never, ever make deals with the liberals for any reason.

            Liberals are more odious to God than Muslims.

            • In the time that I’ve spent in the Middle East, without fail I have always found mostly all Arabs to be kind, welcoming, and loving of friends and family. Yes, they are tribal, but that’s how humans are in general.

              The American Left is far more viciously tribal than most Arabs are.

              As an American “white guy,” it was alarming for me to come to the realization that as I take my Orthodox Christian faith seriously, I honestly have far more in common with many “people of color” in the world & with white Orthodox Christians of Russia and Eastern Europe than I do with most white Westerners.

              White Western culture is now fully functionally atheistic and nihilistic. That’s just not me. Even though I look like them, I don’t identify with them (take that, Mr Kendi and Ms DiAngelo!!)! And I’m fine with not identifying with it.

              I work in a highly technical field and have found over the years that I connect far better and easier with the Indian- and Asian-Americans at work who love and value their families than I do with many of the other white dudes who have little foundational grounding in faith or love.

              Most cultural white Westerners have no idea where to search for foundation.
              Modern mass-market western White culture is self-hating, vapid, and empty.

              It has rejected Christ as silly, archaic, and “patriarchal,” when in reality what it’s rejected is a straw-man “Christ” who bears no resemblance to the Christ who lives in His Church. It’s beyond painful that most White Western former Christians want nothing to do with Christ based on their experiences with mainstream Protestantism and leftist Catholicism.

              These are the toughest to reach – they dismiss Christ and Christianity because they think they experienced His Church and found it lacking. But most of the time all they experienced was a sad straw man.

              It’s tragic. I miss the working class non-Protestant white cultures in America, but aside from some pockets here and there, those are mostly gone.

              I agree Misha, that “Liberals are more odious to God than Muslims.” Look at what earns top video music awards in modern America: https://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/lil-nas-x-montero-another-sign-of-the-times/

              Yeah, I’ll take Muslim culture anytime over leftist western garbage.

            • To add: Check what a culture does that loves its people, its history, and its heritage – and that wants to pass these things on to its children and grandchildren:


              I don’t care what people think about Putin. I love this. As an Orthodox Christian, I love St Alexander Nevsky, and as an American, I am incredibly envious that my country does not love its history or culture enough to honor it and pass it down to our children.

              No culture is perfect, but notice how in Russia they have rejected their terrible past as embodied in the USSR and have moved on to honoring and growing Christian Russia.

              In America, we’ve rejected the good things about our country and all we focus on are the blemishes in our past. The prevailing idea is that because of America’s past blemishes, it should not exist. That’s preposterous. Every single country on earth has blemishes, past and present.

              It’ll end up being a self-fulfilling prophecy. There’s no way that America will survive if we continue to be self-hating. Cultures like Russia – which love and honor their Christian past – will thrive.

              And please don’t degenerate this into a “well Putin is a bad man with a checkered past” post. That’s not the point, and honestly it’s totally irrelevant. Regardless, I’d happily take a leader with a dubious past who loves his country, his faith, and his heritage anytime over leaders who hate themselves and who hate their country.

          • FTS,

            Agreed. I would hope to live someplace like Syria or Egypt which is less rigid than Saudi Arabia, but, nonetheless, better under Muslims than Liberals.

        • Archpriest Alexander F. C. Webster says

          Misha, I see that you have stepped up your extreme rhetoric pertaining to so-called holy war. “Genocide” and “extermination” never were, are not now, and never will be terms of choice for any devout Orthodox Christian who affirms and supports the classic Orthodox “justifiable war” moral tradition.

          For newcomers to this ongoing conversation between Misha and yours truly, I would note that “holy war” and violent “crusades” are moral oxymorons. War may be “justifiable” as a “lesser good” than the manifest evil of surrender to or conquest by unjust aggressors, but the moral and spiritual teaching of our Lord Jesus Christ as recorded in the New Testament transcended and superseded the unrestrained killing and destruction–especially for an ostensibly religious reason–that we see often in the law and historical books of the Old Testament.

          Moreover, the literal historic meaning of “crusade” entails a war of unrestrained violence–as well as conquest, oppression, and mass slaughter–of “infidels” or “heretics” deemed unworthy of breathing the same air as “us.” The root of that word is, of course, the Latin “crux,” or “cross.” The supreme irony of inflicting such evils upon others, even a mortal enemy, in the name of the instrument of our Savior’s voluntary passion and death for the sins of all mankind somehow escapes advocates of military crusades.

          • . . . Suffice it to say that we don’t see eye to eye.

            What gets lost in the misguided bs is that Augustine was not giving Christians a way of allowing themselves to wage war. He was offering a rationale to restrain what was already being done.

            Christians had always had the Old Testament and were quite familiar with its God. When they shared the same context as Christ’s earthly life; ie, under Roman occupation, they echoed and utilized His new sword, cooperation with the enemy, even love. That was a rational adaptation to circumstances. Can’t beat em, join em.

            Later freed from pagan rule by the normalization of Christianity within the Empire, they returned to the Old Testament general standard as sovereign people. Judea and Israel were not sovereign during Christ’s life. Context is everything. God did not change, the context did.

            Augustine attempted to limit that prerogative with his artificial construction. Use it if you find it useful. It is not the Orthodox faith because it does not enjoy catholicity and cannot be traced to Apostolic teaching. Moreover, Augustine is a minor saint in Orthodoxy, venerated for his piety but not for the catholicity of his teachings, unlike in the West. . .

          • George Michalopulos says

            Fr, while I do agree with your “justifiable war” thesis (actually I do believe there is such a thing as “just war”), I question the validity of your statement that the word “crusade” implies genocide and/or total eradication of non-Christians.

            In my own study of the Crusades, I found no instance of Christian clerics ordering the wholesale destruction of infidels. (Other than the Albigensian Crusade, when during the heat of battle one French bishop when asked how to tell the difference between Catholics and Cathars said “kill them all, God will sort them out!”).

            As I understand it, the First Crusade was set in motion by Pope Urban II in service of the Byzantine emperor in order to help him get his land back. During subsequent crusades, when the Latins actually won territory, Muslims and Jews were allowed to live in said territories (just as Muslims and Jews were allowed to live in Islamic territories). Nor should we forget that the crusades were a delayed reaction to the conquest of Christian lands by the Muslims and their further expansion into Europe.

            • From 2 Kings 13: “Open the east window,” said Elisha. So he opened it and Elisha said, “Shoot!” So he shot. And Elisha declared: “This is the LORD’s arrow of victory, the arrow of victory over Aram, for you shall strike the Arameans in Aphek until you have put an end to them.” Then Elisha said, “Take the arrows!” So he took them, and Elisha said to the king of Israel, “Strike the ground!” So he struck the ground three times and stopped. But the man of God was angry with him and said, “You should have struck the ground five or six times. Then you would have struck down Aram until you had put an end to it. But now you will strike down Aram only three times.”

              The problem is restraint.

              If a group of people states consistently for almost 1400 years that they have the God given right to conquer you by violence and dominate you, you should take them at their word. These same people have the belief/conviction that if a person is not a monotheist (“People of the Book”) they have the duty to force them to convert or execute them.

              You should also note that these beliefs, whether in the abstract or manifested in action, are unacceptable – monstrous, even. And if you are not stupid or foolish or otherwise mentally challenged, you should understand that if the concept of self defense has any validity at all, then you must wipe out this conviction as a matter of self preservation. Because, whether it is manifest or merely latent, it is still there and can be aroused at any time, as both Christian-Muslim history and Hindu-Muslim history demonstrate.

              Augustine is a minor saint and not a Church Father. His musings may be interesting, but they are mostly irrelevant.

              Search though you might for the phrase “justifiable war” in the Church Fathers, you will search in vain. For it is not there. What is there is how the Fathers addressed warfare when they found themselves in sovereign Christian states:

              “For in other matters also which go to make up life, we shall find differences according to circumstances. For example, it is not right to kill, yet in war it is lawful and praiseworthy to destroy the enemy; accordingly not only are they who have distinguished themselves in the field held worthy of great honors, but monuments are put up proclaiming their achievements. So that the same act is at one time and under some circumstances unlawful, while under others, and at the right time, it is lawful and permissible.” – St. Athanasios, letter 48, to Amun


              And so St. Basil had this in mind when he issued an advisory canon:

              Our Fathers did not consider murders committed in the course of wars to be classifiable as murders at all, on the score, it seems to me, of allowing a pardon to men fighting in defense of sobriety and piety. Perhaps, though, it might be advisable to refuse them communion for three years, on the ground that they are not clean-handed.”

              And why a penance, though not mandatory?

              The same reason the Lord ordered His men in the time of Moses to be sequestered for seven days after executing His orders to make war and kill – ritual purification for those who have come into contact with the dead. Numbers 31:19 Yet by St. Basil’s own testimony, we know that the Fathers required no penance and that the acceptability of killing in war found a catholic consensus.

              But that is about the only catholic consensus regarding warfare that you will find. Certainly, there is no ubiquitous and systematic teaching from the earliest days and throughout the Christian world that limits conduct in warfare, other than the example provided in the Old Testament.

              The would be followers of “St. Marcion” have no ground upon which to stand.

              That is how violence in war has been understood in Orthodox Christendom since the time of Constantine. Do not let any academic constructs created by those who lack the courage of their convictions fool you. Jim Forest/OPF Orthodoxy is not real Orthodoxy. Never has been. Never will be.

          • I should also say a word or two about the concept of “crusade” and the crusaders.

            The Crusades were an attempt by mostly Western Christians to displace Muslim conquerors of the Holy Land and establish Christian kingdoms there, usually owned and operated by Western Christians at the expense of Eastern Christians. It was a belated answer to the misguided entreaties of Byzantine emperors. Be careful what you wish for . . . asking help from heretics was a fool’s errand. You will recall that St. Alexander Nevsky rather treated with the Mongols than ask in the Teutonic Knights.

            I am not a crusader nor do I advocate a new Crusade.

            You may say, “You’re as bad as they are!”

            I assure you, in a sense, I am far, far worse.

            We do not need some cleansing of the Levant of Muslim rule. I’m not concerned about the Holy Land or the Levant. I’m concerned about the fate of Christendom.

            We should not hunt them out of the Holy Land. We should hunt them from the earth, either by conversion or attrition – even, most especially even, into the Arabian peninsula.

            We need a Подвиг, a great exploit; not against all other religions but only Islam in particular, on the pattern of Israel’s God commanded treatment of the sons of Amalek, an application of The Ban, a physical/kinetic anathema. We have a paradigm from the Old Testament whose God Christ claimed to be. We should take Him at His word. The Hebrews called it “herem”, the ban. Total extermination of the tribe. Leave the metal implements, burn everything else.

            We need not take it quite that far. God desires not the death of a sinner but that he repent and live. Conversion must be the first line of defense and offense against these heathen. They are created in the image of God, just like we are, just as Amalek and Moab were also. Conversion at that time was not conceivable or feasible. Now it is conceivable, feasible but unlikely to yield satisfactory results on any acceptable time frame. However, that must be one of our strategies. But not the only one.

            While any Muslims live, no Christian is safe – period. They are Amalek. I would prefer to convert them and we should convert as many as possible, even by force if it comes to that. But regardless, we cannot allow the idea of Islam to persist as an object of faith in the heart of anyone. That is the evil to be overcome. That is the lesson of 9/11 and most of the history of our experience with them in the Middle Ages.

            Islam is evil because not only does it deny Christ as God, but claims the right to supersede Christianity by violence. Thus it can have no other source but the devil himself. Arising chronologically after Christianity, Islam is the only religion which makes this claim. In doing so, they are saying that planet Earth is not big enough for the both of us.

            And on that narrow question, they are right.

  3. George Michalopulos says

    Sage words from Pat Buchanan, the man who we sounded the alarm bell of civilization back in 1992:


  4. George Michalopulos says

    Some inconsistencies from the official narrative courtesy of Eric Margolis:


    • Margolis needs to read more history. Islam has been at war with Christendom practically since its inception, and by design. It is absolutely indefensible and all attempts to defend it should be shunned and ridiculed.

      Margolis uses Marxian dubiousness to attack the Man. That is the nature of vermin.

      But 15 of the 19 Arabs who did the hijacking of the loaded planes which we saw slam into the twin towers (believe me rather than your lying eyes) were Saudis. Saudis tend to be devout Muslims who take the concept of jihad quite seriously, if they’re not aligned with the government.

      Were they al-Qaida? I’m not sure it matters. Who else but Muslims routinely engage in suicide attacks? Why do they strike at the targets they do? Because they see us as Christian Crusaders and Jewish Zionists. Why does that matter? Because they are Muslims and believe their faith supersedes ours. There is no disputing the fact that Islam has bloody borders. You recall that the Taliban even saw ancient Buddhist statues as a threat and destroyed them. Read about what they did in Northern India.

      Satanic cult.

      Margolis is a liberal and therefore beneath contempt. Were he to be captured and receive the Daniel Pearl treatment, that would be just desserts. A liberal is somebody who refuses to take their own side in a fight. Thus you have Biden excoriating Islamophobes on the twentieth anniversary of 9/11.

      We need to take care of our own tribes and religion. The threats are clear. And liberalism is just another enemy. It is the worst enemy at all because it causes internal enfeeblement which sabotages us from within.

      • George Michalopulos says

        Misha, just so you know, Margolis is not my cup of tea. However I tend to give greater leeway to paleocons. Probably to atone for my earlier flirtation with neoconservatism.

        Ultimately, you are right about Islam/Amelek. I’m particularly appalled by their “shame” culture (as opposed to an “honor” culture, what we used to have in the West). This manifests itself especially in their inability for the males to take responsibility for their own libido. This results in the necessary degradation of women, to the point where they cannot be seen by a man. In Christendom, women were traditionally dressed modestly but never to the ridiculous extremes we see in Islam, generally speaking. (By this I mean the hijab, niqab, burka and ultimately the harem.)

        This likewise absolves men from engaging in paedophilia, even though homosexuality itself is expressly condemned by Islam. (As is the taking of multiple slave women/concubines as a mechanism to avoid the four-wife maximum legally prescribed by Mohammed himself.)

        I believe it was you who wrote earlier that this inability to control their passions will cause Islamic supremacy to peter out. You gave me a lot to think about when you said that.

        In the final analysis, my assessment is that until we can reignite authentic, traditional Christianity in the West, the best we can do is take the path of George Kennan, who writing as “Mr X” back in 1948{?) wrote an article in which he advised the policy of containment vis-a-vis the Soviet Union. As for what includes “authentic, traditional Christianity” I think we can safely say that anything associated with the West, especially Protestantism, will not make the cut. And given what Pope Francis is doing to Catholicism, I’d say they’re down for the count as well.

        That leaves us Orthodoxy. Which means that we’ve got to make sure that the insipid, phanariote expression of it fails completely.

        • George: “And given what Pope Francis is doing
          to Catholicism, I’d say they’re down for the count as well.”

          And what is he doing? Well…

          Pope Francis approves appointment of Communist bishop to Wuhan

          ‘ WUHAN, China (LifeSiteNews) – The Vatican has given its approval to ordain a new bishop to the long-vacant see of Wuhan, accepting a well-known Chinese Communist Party (CCP) insider, the only candidate put forward by the CCP for Vatican consideration. … ‘

          I suppose this People’s Liberation Theology in action…

          • Here is Mel’s take on it:

            Mel Gibson: “A very deep sickness afflicts the church”

            [Video: 05:29]

            ‘ Hollywood legend actor Mel Gibson released a 5-minute video on Friday September 10, 2021 in support of the ‘Coalition for Canceled Priests,’ ( canceledpriests.org ) who were holding a rally in Chicago with Fr. James Altman.

            Gibson remarked that “a very deep sickness afflicts the church” and that it’s “a grave injustice” and a “form of white martyrdom” when a priest is cancelled, which Gibson points out “is nothing new.”

            “Who’s persecuting them? Well their own bishops,” he said.

            “If one of their priests utters something that resembles Orthodoxy, then they spring into action, reprimand him, bully him, and they do their best to cancel him. And succeed. They drum him out of the service, ya know. Off he goes. I’m really sorry about that. Its a grave injustice and a kind of white martyrdom.”

            Gibson noted that he is a sinful man, “I’m as venal as any other man,” but that he can recognize the difference between a shepherd and a hireling.

            Gibson noted that these bishops are “an insipid bunch” and asked “And my question is like, who’s hiring them? I don’t think it’s Jesus. Is it Francis? Who’s hiring Francis? Is it, is it pachamama? I mean I think you need to look at the whole institution.”

            He then goes on to discuss His Excellency Cardinal Vigano, Vatican II, and the Latin Mass, which he noted “can not be abrogated.”

            Gibson added “I remember when I directed the passion I went to the USCCB to get support for the film and those those men couldn’t get away from me fast enough. And all but a few of them turned their back on me. It was pretty telling about who they were.”

            Gibson concluded that he will financially support the Coalition for Canceled Priests and that “The gates of hell will not prevail against” the church. ‘

  5. Though she is off the chain regarding Trump and so, sadly, I’ve consigned her to the dustbin of history, Ann Coulter’s 9/11 columns stand the test of time. You will recall she was fired from the National Review by Jonah Goldberg for her “This is war” column:


  6. George Michalopulos says

    I do recall that indeed. That’s when I knew that NRO was on its way to being another cultural Marxist journal.

    The irony is that it was NR’s publisher, William F Buckley, Jr, who said that “any institution that is not right-wing at the outset will invariably become liberal in due course”. (Paraphrase.) Today, NR is eager to send American forces overseas to conserve gay marriage and create murals of George Floyd.

  7. The whole thing strikes me as completely hollow. I’m working on a piece over at substack called Two Dragons about the enemies we face.

    However, we do not even agree on who “we” are and though “we” have fantastic weapons, without the will to define the enemy and pull the trigger, they are useless and we are sheep being led to the slaughter. When you see these people come up to the mike at the memorials in NY and DC, especially military people, and take off their masks in order to speak, you realize that Homo Americanus has lost the strength to survive in the wild.

  8. Bombshell: Government Special Ops Demo Expert
    Confesses To Planting Explosives In WTCs Before 9/11


    Whether or not this is true, I do not know;
    but I would not be surprised if it is…

  9. AUSTRALIA – Historic Supreme Court
    Lawsuit Filed, Attorney Speaks Out


    [Video -16:23]

    ‘ Matthew Hopkins is an Australian attorney who has filed an historic lawsuit in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The lawsuit targets the tyrants responsible for implementing the New World Order down under, the prototype for the West! ‘

  10. https://www.whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/eyewitness.html
    While I do not disagree with your critiques of Islam, the more dangerous enemy has long been closer at hand. Those who did 9/11 are the ones behind the current scamdemic.

    • Gail Sheppard says

      And, Father, had we challenged this then, instead of believing what we could see with our own eyes was blatantly untrue, in spite of what the architects were trying to tell us was impossible, in spite of what the people on the street were saying when they insisted the second plane was grey and not a commercial plane, in spite of what the NYFD said were explosions going off in the lobby, in spite of 7 Tower falling to the ground, well, “just because” . . . in spite of everything, we wouldn’t be in the mess we are in now.

      We thought it must have happened the way they said it did because the media told us so.

      It started with JFK for most of us. Then 9/11. Then this craziness now. And in between, there are probably thousands of other episodes we won’t find out about until way down the road, if ever.

      If I am a conspiracist then that makes those who do not think like me ignorant. “Conspiracist” now means “critical thinker.”

    • I’ve never had much patience with 9/11 conspiracy theorists. We saw the commercial jet airliners fly into the buildings and everything else from that point forward makes perfect sense according to the laws of physics regardless of what anyone tells you.

      Fifteen of the nineteen hijackers were Saudis. We have footage of them going through customs and can trace their movements backward for a period of time. If you don’t believe that there are many Saudis who wish to wage jihad on the US, then you do not understand the nature of the kingdom. It is Wahhabi clerics and the royal family raking in oil money and sitting on a hornet’s nest of Islamic fundamentalist rebelliousness against the idea of kings in general and the West in its presence on “holy Muslim territory”.

      I dare say it had nothing to do with Israel/Palestine but rather with Aramco and US military presence on the peninsula. They have a concept of holy ground which really extends throughout the kingdom and peninsula but is most acute at Mecca and Medina. Non-Muslims are absolutely forbidden from travelling there.

      The planes were aimed exactly where they needed to be. The attack was planned by an engineer, probably one trained at an American university. You don’t want to just hit the top of the building because it could survive that. Any number of floors below the top might be damaged, but the edifice itself would be unlikely to collapse. However, if you hit it low enough to isolate a large enough section of the building above the level of the strike, then when the jet fuel burns through enough of the building supports at that level you will have the top section collapse on what is below. The only question is how much of a top section you need to collapse on the bottom to take out the rest.

      If you look at the contemporaneous news accounts, it is not until the second plane hits that they are even prepared to believe that it’s an attack and they keep talking about “explosions”. From certain perspectives, even the second plane hitting looked like an “explosion”. Moreover, as jet fuel burned through steel, etc. the tremendous weight that was gradually losing support would not necessarily do so all at once. This and that “straw” would collapse until the final one doomed the edifice. What some people claim they heard was probably these minor collapses before the big one. Either that or pockets of jet fuel igniting other masses of flammable materials.

      Alternatively, we’re supposed to believe little green men with C4 ran up into the buildings at the same time the firefighters and police were trying to get people out to detonate the building and then did not tell anyone what they were doing on the way out. There’s an Occam’s Razor issue here.

      Now, I do not suggest that it is beyond the pale that the Bush/Cheney Administration was not capable of such a thing. But the larger question would be why they allowed 15 Saudis to be framed for the attack when they expended every effort to protect Saudis after the fact. I mean, the logical place to go to war would be Saudi Arabia, not Afghanistan.

      I do not assume people are that clever for some unknown reason. There is a bit of paranoia in that. Do not overestimate the intelligence of your adversaries to the point of irrationality.

      • 20th Anniversary Edition of This Classic –
        9/11: A Conspiracy Theory:
        Charles Burris


        [Video – 04:55]

        ‘ Everything you ever wanted to know about the 9/11 conspiracy theory in under 5 minutes.

        TRANSCRIPT: On the morning of September 11, 2001, 19 men armed with boxcutters directed by a man on dialysis in a cave fortress halfway around the world using a satellite phone and a laptop directed the most sophisticated penetration of the most heavily-defended airspace in the world, overpowering the passengers and the military combat-trained pilots on 4 commercial aircraft before flying those planes wildly off course for over an hour without being molested by a single fighter interceptor.

        These 19 hijackers, devout religious fundamentalists who liked to drink alcohol, snort cocaine, and live with pink-haired strippers, managed to knock down 3 buildings with 2 planes in New York, while in Washington a pilot who couldn’t handle a single engine Cessna was able to fly a 757 in an 8,000 foot descending 270 degree corskscrew turn to come exactly level with the ground, hitting the Pentagon in the budget analyst office where DoD staffers were working on the mystery of the 2.3 trillion dollars that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld had announced “missing” from the Pentagon’s coffers in a press conference the day before, on September 10, 2001.

        Luckily, the news anchors knew who did it within minutes, the pundits knew within hours, the Administration knew within the day, and the evidence literally fell into the FBI’s lap. But for some reason a bunch of crazy conspiracy theorists demanded an investigation into the greatest attack on American soil in history.

        The investigation was delayed, underfunded, set up to fail, a conflict of interest and a cover up from start to finish. It was based on testimony extracted through torture, the records of which were destroyed. It failed to mention the existence of WTC7, Able Danger, Ptech, Sibel Edmonds, OBL and the CIA, and the drills of hijacked aircraft being flown into buildings that were being simulated at the precise same time that those events were actually happening. It was lied to by the Pentagon, the CIA, the Bush Administration and as for Bush and Cheney…well, no one knows what they told it because they testified in secret, off the record, not under oath and behind closed doors. It didn’t bother to look at who funded the attacks because that question is of “little practical significance“. Still, the 9/11 Commission did brilliantly, answering all of the questions the public had (except most of the victims’ family members’ questions) and pinned blame on all the people responsible (although no one so much as lost their job), determining the attacks were “a failure of imagination” because “I don’t think anyone could envision flying airplanes into buildings ” except the Pentagon and FEMA and NORAD and the NRO.

        The DIA destroyed 2.5 TB of data on Able Danger, but that’s OK because it probably wasn’t important.

        The SEC destroyed their records on the investigation into the insider trading before the attacks, but that’s OK because destroying the records of the largest investigation in SEC history is just part of routine record keeping.

        NIST has classified the data that they used for their model of WTC7’s collapse, but that’s OK because knowing how they made their model of that collapse would “jeopardize public safety“.

        The FBI has argued that all material related to their investigation of 9/11 should be kept secret from the public, but that’s OK because the FBI probably has nothing to hide.

        This man never existed, nor is anything he had to say worthy of your attention, and if you say otherwise you are a paranoid conspiracy theorist and deserve to be shunned by all of humanity. Likewise him, him, him, and her. (and her and her and him).

        Osama Bin Laden lived in a cave fortress in the hills of Afghanistan, but somehow got away. Then he was hiding out in Tora Bora but somehow got away. Then he lived in Abottabad for years, taunting the most comprehensive intelligence dragnet employing the most sophisticated technology in the history of the world for 10 years, releasing video after video with complete impunity (and getting younger and younger as he did so), before finally being found in a daring SEAL team raid which wasn’t recorded on video, in which he didn’t resist or use his wife as a human shield, and in which these crack special forces operatives panicked and killed this unarmed man, supposedly the best source of intelligence about those dastardly terrorists on the planet. Then they dumped his body in the ocean before telling anyone about it. Then a couple dozen of that team’s members died in a helicopter crash in Afghanistan.

        This is the story of 9/11, brought to you by the media which told you the hard truths about JFK and incubator babies and mobile production facilities and the rescue of Jessica Lynch.

        If you have any questions about this story…you are a batshit, paranoid, tinfoil, dog-abusing baby-hater and will be reviled by everyone. If you love your country and/or freedom, happiness, rainbows, rock and roll, puppy dogs, apple pie and your grandma, you will never ever express doubts about any part of this story to anyone. Ever.

        This has been a public service announcement by: the Friends of the FBI, CIA, NSA, DIA, SEC, MSM, White House, NIST, and the 9/11 Commission. Because Ignorance is Strength. ‘

        • I have love this video clip for years. It’s a great way to start peoples’ questioning of the narrative.

      • Christopher McAvoy says

        “I know that the attack on 9/11 was real. The people charged with the first attack on the World Trade Center drew the Twin Towers on their cell wall in MCC with planes going into it a year before the attack. Was it planned by the terrorists — absolutely. I cannot speak to whether it was actually bin Laden who ordered the attack. That is what the government claims, but they also swore there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

        NONETHELESS, that does NOT mean it was simply a terrorist attack. The Deep State knew it was going to take place and they not only allowed it to unfold, but they also planned the event and used it to destroy WTC7 and the Pentagon to hide critical evidence that would have exposed (1) the corrupt bankers in New York City, and (2) the missing money from the Pentagon budget.

        So the true answer is it was 50% real and 50% a false flag to get tremendous power under the Patriot Act, which lowered transactions to be reported from $10,000 to $3,000. They expanded the money launder scope to include virtually anything that could be resold. We can no longer hop on even a domestic flight with a roll of $20 gold coins or even cash. They confiscated $181,000 in cash from a man on a domestic flight. It was used to start the Iraqi war and even invade Afghanistan. They could have easily stopped the attack but saw it as a golden opportunity to expand their power.

        The Deep State proposed Operation Northwoods to justify an invasion of Cuba whereby they would kill Americans and call it a terrorist attack. This was later rejected by President Kennedy. They have no problem killing those among us who they regard the Great Unwashed to further their own power. I cannot see how people blindly walk around with masks thinking those in power really care.

        Recently, a new tape has emerged from a private camera that filmed the collapse of World Trade Center #7 from a different angle – the only one that no plane ever hit. I have stated that the coincidence with the WTC7 collapse was a wipeout of evidence, as was the Pentagon, which conveniently hit the room with all the evidence about the missing $2.3 trillion from the defense budget.

        These two very convenient buildings that were attacked were most likely a major cover-up. That is where they took our computer system, and when I asked for my legal discovery, the SEC responded that everything was destroyed on 9/11. No government employees were in the WTC7 building when it collapsed. They were evacuated. The motto seems to be — do not kill your own, only civilians. I am sure one day, before someone involved dies, they will clear their conscience and come clean about who ordered this event. Like Deep Throat, they always tell the truth when death is at their door.

        What people do not realize is that BECAUSE of 9/11 hitting the very room where all the documents were concerning the Pentagon budget, the audit never took place. Worse still, it seems to have endorsed a continual problem of missing money from the Pentagon. That $2.3 trillion in 2001 has grown now to $35 trillion. Clearly, the benefit of 9/11 has been the ability to hide missing money that nobody seems to care about.

        The collapse of WTC7 was clearly a demolition to hide evidence. The government’s claim was it collapsed from fire. The problem was the fire would have to have been 800 degrees celsius to do that, and the building would not have collapsed straight down. There was also no source of fuel to burn that hot.

        In another report, they tried to simulate how to bring that building down in the manner it did, and the only way was to cut the columns on the first eight floors. This was an office building, not a chemical facility. There was no source of fuel, and the photos of the collapse fail to show a raging fire.”


        • Christopher,

          I believe my lying eyes. And I don’t think anyone had a contingency plan to go in and demolish the buildings, or that that was done on the fly. It’s a bridge too far for me.

          However, allowing it to happen is entirely possible. Preparing for the expansion of the security state before the “terrorists” gave us cause was probably always in the mix. And Bush/Cheney always wanted to go after Iraq and Saddam Hussein for the oil and as revenge for the plot to kill his father. The neo-cons were always looking for reasons to drag us into the sandbox, civilize the heathen, make the world safe for Israel and Haliburton and do a series of Muslim countries transforming them into democracies through nation building.

          All that blood and treasure wasted on people who hate us as infidels. Not a penny for conversion/evangelism. All because we are in political/ideological denial about who they are and who we are.

  11. Furthermore,

    There is some considerable evidence that the 9/11 attackers had connections with the Saudi government or some faction within it, at the least. The situation may have been analogous to that in Pakistan, where we have relations with the government but certain sectors of the government, the military in particular, are marching to the beat of a different drum.


    In 1941, we did not demand that the Japanese turn over Adm. Isoroku Yamamoto. We declared war on the main body who attacked us – Japan.

  12. Misha, I’m sorry but you have failed to examine the evidence, too much to get into all of it. Planes have hit sky scrapers before and they remained standing. Jet fuel is not hot enough to melt steal. I can go on and on and there is much more — architects and engineers, pilots, and hundreds of eye witnesses – including especially firefighters – have all come forward with key bits of evidence. Many documentaries, many books have been made and written. How is it the patriot act had been already prepared before this event — in use against us ever since and especially today.

  13. NYT Confirms Biden Murdered Innocent
    Family In Kabul Drone Strike


    ‘ President Joe Biden murdered an innocent family when the US military conducted a “righteous strike” on Aug. 29 against a vehicle that American officials thought was an ISIS bomb that posed an imminent threat to thousands of people at the Kabul airport.

    In a late Friday afternoon report, the New York Times reveals that “Military officials said they did not know the identity of the car’s driver when the drone fired, but deemed him suspicious because of how they interpreted his activities that day, saying that he possibly visited an ISIS safe house and, at one point, loaded what they thought could be explosives into the car.”

    In reality, they were filling water bottles. …

    More via the New York Times:

    ” Times reporting has identified the driver as Zemari Ahmadi, a longtime worker for a U.S. aid group. The evidence, including extensive interviews with family members, co-workers and witnesses, suggests that his travels that day actually involved transporting colleagues to and from work. And an analysis of video feeds showed that what the military may have seen was Mr. Ahmadi and a colleague loading canisters of water into his trunk to bring home to his family.

    While the U.S. military said the drone strike might have killed three civilians, Times reporting shows that it killed 10, including seven children, in a dense residential block. … ”

    “They were 10 civilians,” said Emal Ahmadi, whose 2-year-old toddler, Malika
    was among those killed. “My daughter … she was 2 years old,” he said. …

    More via NBC News:

    ” That day, Ahmadi’s cousin, Zemari Ahmadi, 38, had just pulled up at home from work, with his 13-year-old son, Farzad, his youngest of three, racing to greet him. (Other reports have said Farzad was 12, but both Ahmadi and another relative told NBC News he was 13.)

    Farzad, who had just learned to drive, wanted to park his father’s car, a wish Zemari was happy to oblige as other family members gathered around.

    It was in that moment that Ahmadi said an explosion tore through the vehicle, killing Zemari, Farzad and eight other family members, as was first reported by The New York Times and The Washington Post. ”

    According to Pentagon spokesman John Kirby, Washington is “not in a position” to dispute reports that the Sunday drone strike killed civilians, however he claimed that one of the family members belonged to radical Islamic group, ISIS-K.

    Malika and two other toddlers were the youngest family members killed, along with Ahmadi’s nephews Arwin, 7, and Benyamin, 6, and Zemari’s two other sons, Zamir, 20, and Faisal, 16, Ahmadi said.

    Zemari was a technical engineer for Nutrition and Education International, a nonprofit working to address malnutrition based in Pasadena, California.

    Just a day before his death, he had been helping to prepare and deliver soy-based meals to women and children at refugee camps in Kabul, Steven Kwon, president of NEI, told NBC News in an email.

    One colleague and friend of six years to Zemari said he was devastated, while also describing Ahmadi as a “good man with good ethics.” …

    According to an evidence-free statement by US Central Command, however, there “were substantial and powerful subsequent explosions resulting from the destruction of the vehicle,” suggesting that there was a “large amount of explosive material inside that may have caused additional casualties.”

    * * *

    We now know that was utter bullshit. … ”

    That the NYT and NBC are publishing this atrocity suggests
    that the Deep State are done with the Biden Administration,
    though “Biden Administration” appears to be an oxymoron…

  14. Antiochene Son says

    My thoughts on 9/11:

    I remember it well. I can play back the whole day in my mind like a movie. I was a young adult and the events were a real formative moment for my generation.

    In retrospect, the entire thing seems TV-made to enact everything that came after it. It was pulled off so flawlessly I have a hard time believing it wasn’t designed to be that way. The cheesy country songs like “Where Were You”, “Courtesy of the Red, White and Blue”, and the Iraq-themed sequel “Have You Forgotten” were the worst part, in my opinion. It’s like they turned the movie “Wag the Dog” into real life.

    The legislative and police response — Patriot Act, surveillance, heavy scrutiny of Muslims — were all cheered by conservatives. Today those same powers are being used to squash conservatives. 9/11 was a wrapped gift for the Deep State and those seeking to destroy Heritage America. 9/11 made the January 6 witch hunt possible, and that was just a dry run.

    Meanwhile, Muslims are pouring into the country at rates never seen before. So we destroy countries and then take the populations whose homes we destroyed into our country. What could go wrong? But that’s the point, isn’t it? To ruin this country and dilute the heritage population. They’ve really pulled it off.

    Finally, the kind of (fake) unity we saw after 9/11 will never happen again. Whether it’s terrorism, nukes, or perhaps even a full-fledged foreign invasion, any future attack that befalls America will be shrugged at (if not celebrated) by up to half the population. The glue that holds this society together has permanently dissolved, and the only thing keeping it together now is inertia and the barrels of federal guns.

    Aside from the sorrow for the actual loss of life, would I particularly care if 9/11 happened today? Would I see it as a personal assault on me and mine? Not really, to be honest. It would be a spectacle, sure — just like big natural disasters that happen on the other side of the planet —, but a personal affront that I’d die for? Nah.

    And never forget the dancing Israelis.

    • Nothing about 9/11/2001 ever made sense to me, since it seemed too scripted, like another pearl harbor, in both of which cases I postulate that the ruling authorities allowed such an attack for the express purpose of assuming the role of innocent victim and acquire the consent of the population to do whatever they wanted.

      • Antiochene Son says

        That seems most likely to me. I believe 9/11 was most likely a joint Saudi-Israeli operation and the CIA/Deep State was in on it, and let it happen.

      • Yes, so much of the official 9/11 story makes no sense. But just like potential alternate COVID treatments and prevention, our toxic American culture dominated by the high-school-cafteria-twitter-mainstream media-FB clique, we have no mechanism to talk about it publicly. It’s my firm opinion that our public culture must collapse first before it will be healthy again.

        This is an interesting, thoughtful piece on so much of the official 9/11 story that doesn’t make sense:


        What I’ve always found fascinating is the story of WTC-7. It “went straight down into its own footprint in seconds without any visible catastrophic external trauma, which means only some catastrophic internal trauma could have brought it down.” (i.e., controlled demolition)

        The fact that we can’t debate and talk about some of this stuff publicly without one side screaming “Shame on You, You’re So Stupid and Such a Bad American For Bringing That Up!” — well, it’s as they say, if you want to figure out who controls you, figure out who regulates what you can and cannot discuss. That’s who controls you.

  15. 9/11 and the Politics of Fear and Self-Preservation

    Whitney Webb: ‘ Though the failure to consider explanations for 9/11 that deviate from the official story can be called cowardice, the most enduring lesson 20 years on from 9/11 is perhaps that fear was and remains the most powerful tool that has been consistently used to whittle down our freedom and civil liberties. While the divide-and-conquer strategies have raged on from 9/11 to the present, the largest wealth transfers in history have occurred, creating an unaccountable and ultra-wealthy super-elite that dominates an ever-growing underclass.

    The march towards this de facto neo-feudalism certainly didn’t begin on or after 9/11, but our collective failure to grapple with the narrative orthodoxies of that day have prevented us from fully understanding the big picture of that event as well as many subsequent and similarly consequential events. For too long, the desire to preserve our self-image, our reputation, and the worldview we are taught in school has all too often made hard, difficult truths a casualty.

    In order to truly understand the War on Terror, the domestic surveillance state and our current reality, we must accept that we were lied to about 9/11. We must ask the hard questions and accept hard truths. We must put an end to the 20-plus-year-long pandemic of fear over “invisible enemies,” fear that has pushed us to surrender the very freedoms that we are told we are protecting.

    The United States, and much of the world, is quickly becoming an unrecognizable and authoritarian dystopia. We cannot wait another two decades to grapple with the difficult questions and realities that arose after 9/11 and persist into the present. We will either be remembered as a country that took freedom and liberty for all seriously or we will be remembered as a nation of cowards who, driven by fear, were willing to deprive this group, then that group, of their freedom — before losing that freedom entirely. ‘

    What Klaus said: “You will own nothing and be happy.”
    What he means: “You have nothing to gain but your chains.”

  16. Jets, fully loaded with fuel, crashed into each building. Jet fuel burns from 800-1500 degrees (see article above and here). The Jets took out a considerable amount of the supports when they crashed into the building. That, in itself, may have been enough to result in the collapse of the rest. However, there were fires raging from those crashes, fueled by jet fuel, which were causing people to jump in considerable numbers from higher floors. Steel is reduced to half its strength at such temperatures and that did the rest of the work. Steel doesn’t have to melt to be made dramatically “softer” by such heat.

    That’s what happened. I’m just not open to the little green men hypothesis. Believe it if you will but there is certainly no lack of logical cause and effect in the obvious explanation despite anyone’s “learned” observations about the melting point of steel.

  17. Pack of Australian Police Arrest Woman with Child.

    G W Bush: “They hate our freedoms — our freedom of religion,
    our freedom of speech, our freedom to vote and assemble
    and disagree with each other. …”