Where we were on 9/11/2001: the "remarkable tableau" that's led to mosque-free zones & Koran-burning

[nashville_brook]

Here's a look back at the effects of September 11 on our national psyche. I originally wrote this piece in 2007, and have updated it for 2010. Enjoy -- brook
________________________________________________________________________




"Your people will support what they help to create." -- Laminated sign in airport security office


I wrote this in my journal on September 10, 2001 -- at 8:30 am according to my scrawl.

I was obtaining my security credentials for my new job in Nashville International Airport, which I could already tell was going to suck. The background check sucked. The drug test at the creepy outpatient clinic sucked. And now, this motivational poster sucked on general principles. Motivational office art already sickens me, and this one was journal-worthy because in my jaded mind the subtext clearly read: "You will now create and support something not of your choosing. Enjoy your job." Truer words could not have been imagined the day before the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center.

Because I'm a simple person with a simple sense of humor, I considered my own graphic treatment:




The next day was September 11 and we've been co-creating a reality not of our choosing ever since.

There could not be a clearer illustration of this than what took place on television the night of the attacks. On every broadcast and cable news channel we saw a ritual of reality-creation that echoed my feelings about the poster. On the Capital steps, Congressional Republicans and Democrats linked arms and sang "God Bless America." They could have sang any patriotic anthem (the Star Spangled Banner would have more sense with it's reference to battle); they could have stood in silent reflection; but they chose "GOD BLESS AMERICA." It seemed vulgar to me at the time. We're a nation of laws -- and these are lawmakers making a public statement about this attack which was already identified as originating from an Islamic country. The last thing we needed to do was call upon Christian idols in fear and anger. I worried for the Islamic community in Nashville, and everywhere else in the United States.

Predictably, the attacks sent us headlong into an identity crisis, but it took nearly 10 years to see open antipathy to the Islamic community here. Instead, as we re-thought who we are, our leaders participated in a reality-producing ritual that in hindsight seems like a shotgun wedding between Republicans and Democrats to give a name to their illegitimate child -- the Iraq War.

A cable news anchor introduced the spectacle as "a remarkable tableau" of party unity. I vomited just a little in my mouth.

Hastert took the mic:

"We will stand together to make sure that those who brought forth this evil deed will pay the price... We're not sure who this is yet. But we have our suspicons and... when those suspcions are justified we will act. We will stand with the president.

Daschle took the mic:

"Today's desipicable acts were an assault on our people and on our freedom.... And we will speak with one voice to condemn these attacks... (and)... To commit our full support to the effort to bring those responsible to justice. We... stand strongly united behind the president and will work together to ensure the full resources of the government are brought to bear in these efforts."

In normal reality, these statements would have sparked a national debate. Their difference in tone portends the assault on democracy that has brought us to mosque-free zones and Koran burnings. Hastert's geared up to "avenge evil." Daschle calls for the perpetrators to be "brought to justice." The first words spoken in our time of crisis signaled a yawning maw of a "democracy gap."

A month later Daschle's office would be attacked with "weaponized anthrax" and that "democracy gap" would scab over with Republican talking points.



No sooner had Congress began to negotiate Daschle's and Hastert's "democracy gap" that the first set of anthrax-laced letters appeared.

On September 13 "a number of anti-terrorism bills were introduced into Congress. The first anthrax letter was sent to major US media on September 18 -- just five days after the first bill was introduced. Hard-liners received an enormous boost in Congressional negotiations when the threat of biological weapons of mass destruction hit "home."

The first anti-terrorism bill was called Combating Terrorism Act of 2001, and was introduced by Republican Senators Orrin Hatch (R-UT) and Jon Kyl (R-AZ) with Democratic Senators Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and Chuck Schumer (D-NY). Among its proposed measures, it ordered a report on the readiness of the National Guard to pre-emptively disrupt domestic acts of terrorism that used weapons of mass destruction and called for long-term research and development into terrorist attacks. It also called for a review of the authority of Federal agencies to address terrorist acts, proposed a change that would have allowed the CIA to recruit terrorist informants and proposed to allow law enforcement agencies to disclose foreign intelligence that was discovered through wiretaps and other interception methods.

This first bill lays out what will be at stake in our "new reality": pre-emptive war, unitary executive, domestic spying, and the creation of an unending war economy.

The note attached to this first set of letters addressed to the media read:
09-11-01
THIS IS NEXT
TAKE PENACILIN NOW
DEATH TO AMERICA
DEATH TO ISRAEL
ALLAH IS GREAT


The note addressed to the Democratic leaders read:
09-11-01
YOU CAN NOT STOP US.
WE HAVE THIS ANTHRAX.
YOU DIE NOW.
ARE YOU AFRAID?
DEATH TO AMERICA.
DEATH TO ISRAEL.
ALLAH IS GREAT


The notes ask for nothing more than our fear.

The terrorists want the media and Democrats to know "you can not stop us." According to the terrorists, the media and the Democrats are a great threat. That's remarkable, because at the same time the Republicans were saying we were "soft on terrorism." You don't see the terrorists attacking Republicans, now do you?

And so, BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION ARE USED IN AN ATTACK ON OUR MEDIA AND DEMOCRATIC LEADERS, our dear leader, Bush mocked the media to their face at their annual dinner of the Radio and Television News Correspondents Association. HE JOKES about "not finding WMDs."




The media found WMDs in their mail, for fuck's sake.

In whose version of reality is biologic weapons of mass destruction used against high-profile Americans -- the major media and the United States Congress -- and the investigation is allowed to fester for years without explanation. In whose version of reality does this not signal at least a massive cover-up on the part of the Bush administration? "Those weapons of mass destruction have to be somewhere," said Bush. "Indeed," says my pet goat.

In 2007, Patrick Leahy commented that government officials may know more about the source of the anthrax than had been disclosed: "I think there are people within our government — certainly from the source of it — who know where it came from. And these people may not have had anything to do with it, but they certainly know where it came from."

The anthrax in Daschle's and Leahy's offices was identical in DNA to a strain originating at the US Army Medical Research Institute for Infectious Diseases at Fort Detrick, Maryland. Leahy is at least claiming the government knows the source of the anthrax and they aren't coming forward.

Years after the initial shock, with no answer as to who terrorized Congress, "anti-terrorist laws" are became more aggressive toward citizens, not "terrorists. " We were now being asked to co-create a new reality where there's no such thing as "privacy". This isn't a strategy to combat terrorism, it's page three from a business plan for security company with a no-bid contract. Get the people to accept a new reality where there is no privacy, and "security companies" will feed at the trough for evermore.



Corporate interests are enjoying MORE ability to write legislation and citizens don't even get a seat at the table -- we are ceasing to exist. Our so-called "privacy" is a burden to the security apparatus which apparently has no checks and balances, because even with Democratic control of the House and Senate and The White House, the Homeland Security apparatus and the war economy are still calling all the shots.


It's against "this remarkable tableau" that "torture" became the meme of the day. The national conversation about torture didn't make much sense to me until I realized that torture is terrorism.

Torture isn't just aimed at the individual in the interrogation cell -- it's broadcast to the whole world in order to send the message that "resistance is futile." Have you ever heard a neo-con object to the discussion of torture? No, they want our torture program to have wide exposure. When torture is employed against innocent individuals with no access to court, lawyers, family, or even the charges against them, the message is "don't get on our radar. Don't speak. Don't move. Don't piss off the wrong warlord. Secret prisons, extraordinary rendition (kidnappings), and the establishment of a surveillance state are all forms of terrorism that are aimed directly at us. "You have nothing to worry about, if you're not a terrorist" is a notion as terrifying as the existence of these forms of terror.



Naomi Klein discusses the difficulty of dealing with reality under the stress of shock treatment and relates it to economic and political policy in her book, "The Shock Doctrine." Interestingly, when she puts the two together it's under the heading "Torture As Metaphor" where she writes:

(abridged) ...Torture...is also a metaphor of the shock doctrine's underlying logic. Torture...is a set of techniques designed to put prisoners into a state of deep disorientation in order to ...create violent ruptures in their ability to make sense of the world. ...The goal is "softening-up"...prisoners are so regressed that they can no longer think rationally or protect their own interests.

The shock doctrine mimics this process precisely, attempting to achieve on a mass scale what torture does one on one in the interrogation cell. The clearest example was the shock of September 11, which, for millions of people exploded "the world that is familiar" and opened up a period of deep disorientation and regression that the Bush administration expertly exploited.

We helped create this reality. Now it's (still) our job to deconstruct it.

We figured that singing "God Bless America" on the Captal steps was no big deal. As the first words uttered after our collective shock treatment, God Bless America was the renunciation of all our former beliefs. In song we signaled our regression -- the shock treatment was a success -- our status was now a infantile "blank slate." The song blessed the new Homeland Security/military/industrial complex.

Our leaders' fecklessness in defending the Constitution can be traced back these moments, and it's this social engineering that has Congress regressed to the point of being unable to deal with prosecuting the crimes of the last administration.

"I don‘t know what genius political consultant has advised the Democratic leadership that it‘s a bad idea to spend hours of prime time on the floor of Congress reminding the country that Mr. 11% approval rating is a bad guy of whom they disprove and whom they would like to see held accountable. It‘s supposed to be Politics 101 that you associate yourself with good things and that you are seen to frequently and rabidly denounce bad things." -- Rachel Maddow on Countdown November 6, 2007

With the election of President Obama we hoped to begin the process of waking up from our long national nightmare that started on the morning of September 11. We "said no" to co-creating the Republican version of reality. But we're finding that there's still much work to be done in regaining our consciousness as a fully-functioning democracy.

There's much more at stake than winning rhetorical battles. We have to start winning some real battles that restore privacy, dignity and power to American citizens.

[DirkGently]

1. "Get the people to accept a new reality ."

Yep. That's all "this" has ever been about -- creating an atmosphere in which Constitutional freedoms are the sole possession of business interests. "The war on terror" doesn't fly so well in light of the lack of ongoing terrorist attacks, so on *this* 9/11, courtesy Gingrich, et al, we are presented with the "War on Islam."

Nothing could be better for business. Or worse for us.

Great post.

[nashville_brook]

2. i can't figure out whose interest it serves for there to be a giant anti-Islamic tantrum

now...at this point in time. does Gingrich really think he can contain these demons once they're out of the bottle?

if so, he's an even bigger fool than i've always thought.

[DirkGently]

5. Clearly Republicans think bogeymen win them votes.

And they're probably not wrong about that. The ad hominem / Identity politics button is Newt's personal specialty. He made his name by demonizing not liberal policies, but *liberals*.

He's just digging a new well, looking for more xenophobic gold for the election season.

[nashville_brook]

6. hmmm...xenophobic gold...bogeymen to win votes...NY mosque...CIA

http://www.observer.com/2010/politics/untangling-new-intrigue-behind-ground-zero-mosque

Untangling the Bizarre CIA Links to the Ground Zero Mosque

So, to recap: From 2006 to 2008, R. Leslie Deak worked as a "business consultant" to this super-secretive security contractor with ties to the CIA and counterterrorism forces, and in those same three years he also donated nearly $100,000 in seed money to the foundation now advocating the construction of the so-called Ground Zero Mosque.

Interestingly, during the same three-year period during which the Deak Family Foundation was financing the Cordoba Initiative, Deak also donated a total of $101,247 to something called the National Defense University Foundation. The National Defense University is a network of war and strategy colleges and research centers (including the National War College) funded by the Pentagon, designed to train specialists in military strategy. The organization recently announced a November 5 dinner gala in honor of Defense Secretary and former CIA chief Robert Gates. Sponsors include Northrup Grumman, Boeing, Lockheed Martin and...the Patriot Defense Group.

(snip)

After the firm went bankrupt and Leslie Deak was left on his own, the corporation was broken up and sold off in pieces. One company that traces its beginnings to the defunct Deak empire is Goldline International, a business concern well known to fans of Glenn Beck as well as California investigators. Goldline is to Glenn Beck what General Electric was to Ronald Reagan: The company sponsors Beck's TV and radio shows as well as his touring act, and Beck is its public face. The Los Angeles County District Attorney's office, along with the Santa Monica City Attorney's office, are currently investigating Goldline for defrauding customers by railroading gullible customers into buying their most debased products.

[DirkGently]

7. Wow. That's really strange. And from such a sober publication.

[nashville_brook]

8. mark ames, the author, partnered with matt taibbi on projects in the past...and he wrote

a really great book workplace killings...and, like columbine. it's really a book about institutionalized bullying. i really like his stuff...his perspective, etc.

[madrchsod]

3. osama bin laden won the war...

when the first envelope was sent....

[nashville_brook]

4. some sort of badness won at that time -- that's for sure.

[DirkGently]

9. Which speaks to your original point, or what I

perceived to be your original point, which is that society has been forcefully *shifted* for the benefit of those who'd like more wars, more corporate power, and fewer civil rights.


Obama's election has perhaps blunted, but has not reversed, that trend. Why do we still have a Patriot Act?" What is the State Secrets Doctrine still be invoked in court? Why does Gitmo still exist?

And now it's being suggested that what we need is not to continue pushing against that shift, but to fly back in the old direction, toward fear and inhumanity. A "war with Islam" would suit those purposes perfectly.