Below is today’s brief essay in the Los Angeles Times that is part of a series called Reflections on 9/11. I was asked that day after the attacks to write a column for the newspaper, which ran on September 13, 2001. As I wrote the piece, I could still see smoke rising from the Pentagon. The plane in Washington hit just behind my car a minute or so after I passed the Pentagon on my way to work from Alexandria. On that day, my greatest concerns were two-fold: a change in the definition of war and the expanded use of assassination. Unfortunately, my worst predictions were exceeded by the Bush Administration and later the Obama Administration. It is shocking to think that this was ten years ago. The images and feelings remain so vivid. My car was forced into a curb by a careening car that morning and I had to replace my tire as the smoke bellowed from the Pentagon. The thought of all the innocent people lost in Washington, New York, and Pennsylvania remains an open wound for so many of us. The sheer savagery and inhumanity of the attacks shocked the conscience — a feeling only magnified later when Bin Laden was shown gloating over how he personally advised the terrorists on the best place to hit the buildings. The cautionary piece on September 13th was not meant to take away from the legitimate and collective anger that we felt — and still feel. However, it was already clear within two days of the attacks that Bush officials were going to seek the radical expansion of presidential powers and were already referencing our civil liberties as an impediment to our safety. My heartfelt sympathy to all who lost friends and family on that day.
In his September 13 Op Ed (“Cries of “war” stumble over the law”), Turley warned against the government seeking “greater flexibility” in responding to terrorists by treating criminal attacks “as a matter of war.” “Our system,” he wrote, “requires that legal means be used to achieve legal ends. We decide those means and ends within the general confines of the Constitution.” How has the founding document fared?
As the smoke was still rising from the Pentagon and World Trade Center, it became quickly evident that some of the greatest damage from the September 11th attacks would not come from without but from within our nation.
There was an almost immediate effort by Bush officials to change the definition of war. Rather than declare war on Afghanistan (where Bin Laden was sheltered), President George W. Bush wanted to declare war on terrorism. It was no rhetorical triviality. Bush decided to invoke the heightened constitutional powers of a wartime president by declaring war on what was a category of crime. Because there could never be a total, final defeat of terrorism, this “war” would become permanent – as would the heightened powers of the president.
Ten years later, the country remains “at war,” with President Barack Obama expanding many of the national security powers of his predecessor and, in the Libyan war, claiming his own re-definition of war: “a time-limited, scope-limited military action.”
Of course, the ominous signs in 2001 were realized in a myriad of other ways, from the establishment of the first American torture program to the widespread use of targeted assassinations, including operations killing American citizens. Ironically, I wrote then of the possibility of a new law that could govern the use of assassination, one that would deny a president unilateral authority to kill individuals and would reduce the need to invoke war powers. Instead, the Bush administration claimed full wartime authority as well as radically expanding the use of assassination as an unchecked presidential power. The claim of unilateral presidential authority to kill even United States citizens has been embraced by Obama.
What ultimately fell on that terrible day proved to be some of our most important constitutional structures. Tragically, it is a degree of damage that cannot be claimed by Al Qaeda alone.
Jonathan Turley is a law professor at George Washington University.
You have a typo in there in which you say “Obama” instead of “Osama.” Please fix. Thanks.
Thanks. Sorry for typo. I am driving back to dc after a wedding in Chicago with the kids and dog. I did not catch the typo this morning.
“The striking thing about 9/11 not how much it’s changed, but how little”
Eniobob,
Excellent point. I can remember being glued to the TV during that day and its’ aftermath listening to the blather about “How this changes everything” and cringing. Yelling back at the TV that they were forgetting Pearl Harbor, with thousands dead and the US Pacific Fleet near destroyed. Because of work location I spent a lot of time at the WTC through the years, perhaps three times weekly. I retired from that job in 1999 and so was spared the terror, but being so familiar with it and loving it, the effect of its destruction was personally quite moving. Nevertheless, it changed nothing except for the excesses and wars prosecuted without benefit of Constitutional oversight, merely because of this emotional falsehood spread by the chattering classes.
Mike S.
I caught the piece about the Massachusetts initiative on the radio and they also talked about The Project For A New American Century
http://www.newamericancentury.org/
And this also:
How 911 Really Happened
By Douglas Herman
Exclusive to Rense.com
5-7-6
http://www.rense.com/general71/d333m.htm
“Some time after the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) composed their manifesto, referring to a “New Pearl Harbor” attack on America, an ultra-secret group of powerful government insiders outlined a series of plans that would attempt to fulfill every facet of their agenda.”
The striking thing about 9/11 not how much it’s changed, but how little
Published: Sunday, September 11, 2011, 9:15 AM
By John Farmer/The Star-Ledger
“The death of the twin towers 10 years ago today “changed life in America forever.” We know that’s so because the media and their battalions of commentators keep telling us it’s so — often in just those words.
Except that it really isn’t so.
The most striking thing about the attack of 9/11 is not how much it has changed life in this country but how little.”
http://blog.nj.com/njv_john_farmer/2011/09/the_striking_thing_about_911_n.html
@Glenn
You are correct!
Jonathan Turley wrote; “a feeling only magnified later when Obama was shown gloating over how he personally advised the terrorists on the best place to hit the buildings.”
I think it is extremely important for JT to clarify that statement. I’m pretty sure he meant to say Osama.
If Professor does clarify that statement, it would be appreciated if he would tell us what grounds we would have for declaring war on Afghanistan, though we knew those involved in the terrosrist attacks on 9/11 were not government sanctioned actors.
Forgive me but I can’t keep from my mind on this day the manifesto of the
Project For The New American Century from 1997, of which two signatories were Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney.
“Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event––like a new Pearl Harbor”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_Century
Try as I might the implications of this document, in light of the events that have transpired in this last decade, can’t be pushed to the back of my mind.
Definition of complicit:
“Involved with others in an illegal activity or wrongdoing”
Obama has not ordered a new, independent investigation of 9/11 in light of overwhelming evidence that it is needed.
The definition of complicit fits Obama perfectly in the murders of 9/11.
Obama can be arrested for the his birth certificate forgery. No need for impeachment. Legally, Obama is a usurper and doesn’t have to be impeached. He can be arrested at any time just like anyone else. “No man is above the law.” Legally, he cannot be impeached. To be impeached a person must be the legal president. Obama never was. His election was illegal. Obama is not a citizen of the US and he was guilty of massive criminality before the election.
On 9/7/11 former AZ Sheriff Richard Mack stated, “My good friend and colleague, Sheriff Arpaio from AZ, is now investigating Obama re. the birth certificate. It is entirely proper. Should charges develop, then yes, he would file the charges. The President is not above the law.”
The Years of Shame
What happened after 9/11 — and I think even people on the right know this, whether they admit it or not — was deeply shameful. Te atrocity should have been a unifying event, but instead it became a wedge issue. Fake heroes like Bernie Kerik, Rudy Giuliani, and, yes, George W. Bush raced to cash in on the horror. And then the attack was used to justify an unrelated war the neocons wanted to fight, for all the wrong reasons.
Dredd….For What Its Worth…
http://jonathanturley.org/2011/09/03/for-what-its-worth/
I have been sadden very much with the events that unfolded that day…To say I am in shock…is an understatement….Nothing is ever the same once a day passes….
BVM – where ya been? Sorry to see you crawl out of the feted cesspool you inhabit to rejoin us. I guess we shouldn’t be surprised since cockroaches thrive on chaos.
This madness is part and parcel of the of the orgy of terror porn, empty, cheap manufactured emotion and pseudo patriotism that we get ‘enjoy’ this weekend.
Meanwhile we ignore the fact that an relatively minor attack that only cost a few thousand bucks generated a response costing well over $4 trillion dollars (the total is hard to judge since so much of it is buried in other crap) of money that could have done so much good in other places, caused us to invade an innocent country killing many times the original attacks death toll, remove important safeguards from our personal freedoms, become a torture State, sell our moral position in the world for an orgasm of self-righteous revenge killings and pretty much doomed us to second class status for the foreseeable future.
With all the media coverage, I have been having a rather difficult time the past few days.
Ten years ago this morning, my wife and sister were supposed to be taking the rooftop tour of the WTC. Neither she nor my sister responded to my repeated calls to their cell phones.
She finally called home about 7:00 that evening. She had not been able to get through. The two of them had decided to delay their visit for a day.
The nightmares started again a few days ago.
Glenn, don’t waste time with the resident conspiracy theorist. BVM does not let facts, science, photographic evidence, or common sense get in the way of the delusions. Most of the rest of us just ignore and do not respond. BVM never responds directly but just adds more copy and paste material from other conspiracy theorist web sites.
Dr. Alan Sabrosky: Mossad, Jewish neo-cons, and Israelis orchestrated 9/11 attack
Treason, Betrayal and Deceit: 9/11 and Beyond
By Dr. Alan Sabrosky, former director of studies at the US Army War College
“Dr. Alan Sabrosky says that the military brass now know that Israel and traitors within our nation committed the 911 attack.”
“Only two intelligence agencies had the expertise, assets, access and political protection to execute 9/11 in the air and on the ground: our CIA and Israel’s Mossad. Only one had the incentive, using the “who benefits” principle: Mossad. And that incentive dovetailed perfectly with the neo-con’s agenda and explicitly expressed need for a catalytic event to mobilize the American public for their wars, using American military power to destroy Israel’s enemies. Only the unexpected strength of the Iraqi resistance kept Syria and Iran from being attacked in the second Bush Administration. Thus, the evidential trail for 9/11 and the wars in Afghanistan & Iraq run from PNAC, AIPAC and their cohorts; through the mostly Jewish neo-cons in the Bush Administration; and back to the Israeli government. None of the denials and political machinations can alter that essential reality. Terms such as treason, betrayal and deceit do not overstate the case against them.”
“Zionism Unmasked” – Dr. Alan Sabrosky 07-13-2011
http://youtu.be/u_Ffz0koJbI
“a feeling only magnified later when Obama was shown gloating over how he personally advised the terrorists on the best place to hit the buildings.”
Would you like to clarify this?
The US Government will not allow a truthful investigation of 9/11
The US Government is complicit in the murders of 9/11
Architects & Engineers – Solving the Mystery of WTC 7 – AE911Truth.org
NIST, the National Institute of Standards and Technology LIED in final government report! WTC 7 did NOT come down from office furnishings fires.
“The following documentary includes several of the dozens of technical and building experts that were interviewed and that appear in our forthcoming full length documentary – 9/11: Explosive Evidence – Experts Speak Out. Altogether of course there are more than 1,500 Architects & Engineers that have signed the AE911Truth petition calling for a new investigation of the destruction of all 3 high-rises at the World Trade Center on 9/11.”
http://youtu.be/hZEvA8BCoBw
Dredd:
Toronto and Massachusetts
Kinda reminds me of this:
“Buffalo Springfield – Stop, hey what’s that sound”
The Toronto Hearings begin the final day with a moment of silence to honor and remember those harmed by the 9/11 catastrophe.
‘Tragically, it is a degree of damage that cannot be claimed by Al Qaeda alone.”
Massachusetts Initiative Campaign Launch!
Posted on August 18, 2011 by Byron Belitsos
Unprecedented effort for new investigation to be launched on 9/11 anniversary
U.S. SENATOR LEADS MASSACHUSETTS
INITIATIVE CAMPAIGN FOR A NEW 9/11 COMMISSION
(Boston, MA) Senator Mike Gravel announced today the inauguration of a citizens’ campaign to authorize a new investigation of the events of September 11, 2001 after his proposed ballot measure was certified today by the Attorney General of Massachusetts, Martha Coakley. [The text of the initiative is posted below or is available as a PDF: Initiative Petition for a Massachesetts Law.] If adopted by the voters, the new law would create an independent, citizen-led investigatory commission that would be seated in
Massachusetts and be vested with subpoena power and the power to take testimony under oath. “I personally initiated this effort to create a new 9/11 commission,” stated Gravel, “in response to the outpouring of calls for a new investigation—in the light of new evidence—from Americans across the political spectrum. Because our gridlocked Congress is obviously incapable of taking up this issue, I believe that state initiatives are our best alternative approach. Massachusetts is an optimal state in which to begin this work.”
Gravel is a former two-term Senator from Alaska and a 2008 presidential candidate who is also considering a run for the presidency in 2012 at the urging of grassroots groups. The Senator is currently chair and founder of the Citizens 9/11 Commission Campaign (911cc.org), a California-based citizen’s group that is filing similar ballot measures in other states, notably Oregon and Alaska.
http://9-11cc.org/index.php/2011/08/18/press-room/