Bcc: colleagues ============================================================================ From: "Makere Stewart-Harawira (FOA EDU)" <•••@••.•••> To: "'Richard K. Moore '" <•••@••.•••> Subject: RE: The 9-11 cover-up - Reichstag 2001 Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2002 14:59:45 +1300 Kia ora Richard Like many many of us, I have been bombarded with every possible piece of evidence that has come to light since the day when, beginning at what was 1.30am here in New Zealand, I sat and watched the coverage on CNN News. I don't remember now at what point it was that I watched the US president, or should it be, pseudo-President, sitting in the classroom after being told that planes had hit the World trade Centre but I clearly remember my comment right then that clearly, he already knew and that something was very, very, badly wrong. I very much appreciate your introductory remarks to the Bulletin that you just sent. Like everything else that comes my way on this matter, it will be forwarded to all of my contacts that I know are not already on similar lists. As we say in Maori, kua tae te wa, the time has come indeed. The greatest moment of choice perhaps that humankind has collectively ever had to make. It has come to the point that the survival of the planet itself depends upon our willingness, our commitment, to speaking the truth at every venue and in every forum, to refusing to allow this mockery to proceed unchecked, and to making necessary sacrifices. If there is a global war, this is it. This is the global war against terrorism in which we are all, must all, be participants. The war against humanity, the war against truth and justice, the war against what can only be understood as utter evil. Thank you again Richard for your work. Makere ============================================================================ Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2002 21:19:12 -0500 Sender: "Kevin A. Carson" <•••@••.•••> From: "Kevin A. Carson" <•••@••.•••> To: •••@••.••• Subject: RE: What next for rkm?? Richard, I would love to see a print collection of your articles (maybe the ones catalogued at New Dawn), with "Escaping the Matrix" as an introduction. Or maybe you could take the material in those articles and integrate it into the framework of _Globalization and the Revolutionary Imperative_. I've seen several things that tie in with your basic theme in the last-named work. One is a chapter in Harry Boyte's _The Backyard Revolution_, which is documented with dozens of articles from the business press in the early-mid 70s on the impending capital shortage and the need for drastic policy changes to shift resources from consumption to investment. I think one thing that sheds light on the shift in elite thinking in the 1970s is Thomas Ferguson's _Golden Rule_. He argues for two competing elite factions in the 1930s: labor-intensive, domestic oriented industry (for which the NAM was a good proxy); and capital-intensive, export-oriented industry. The latter was the dominant faction until the 1970s, and was the base of support for the New Deal and the Bretton Woods system. They supported the Wagner Act because labor costs were a minor part of their total costs, and they were willing to pay higher wages in return for an agreement by which the union bureaucrats would enforce labor discipline and let the managers manage. What had been going on with the auto sit-downs and the West Coast dockworkers' strikes, etc., had been a genuine revolution. The Wagner Act tamed this revolution and brought workers under the control of people like George Meany. This kind of dovetails with the Domhoff analysis of the New Deal (in _The Power Elite and the State_, I think). But by the 1970s, the faction of the elite that had backed the New Deal had become institutionally tied to TNCs, and ceased to think of themselves as American capital operating overseas. And ironically, it was the old NAM union-busting reactionaries who appealed to an ersatz populism in fighting the globalist assault on their protected domestic industry--e.g. the textile industry's support for Pat Buchanan. Regarding your exchange with Bill Blum on conspiracy: what you said about conspiracy being more likely because this is a crisis time sounds a lot like Immanuel Wallerstein's thesis about the rise of capitalism (it was imposed by pre-capitalist elites to maintain their position as the old manorial class system threatened to evolve into something more egalitarian). I don't know if you've read it, but Hilaire Belloc's _Servile State_ arrives at a similar conclusion from a distributist perspective. (I am forwarding, under separate cover, a chapter in a pamphlet of mine that deals with these themes). I would mention also that the concentration of power in centralized, hierarchical organizations, with circulating and interlocking leadership (as described by elite theory sociologists) makes conspiracy more feasible. I admit I am skeptical about active conspiracies to organize events on a large scale, because they involve too much complexity and too many participants--even with the corporate press, there is just too much danger of discovery. But negative conspiracies are another matter. As with the _Day of Deceit_ scenario of Pearl Harbor, what happened on 9-11 didn't require large-scale organization of events. All it required was a few gatekeepers to keep the national security community from responding effectively to an expected attack (in much the same way that FDR needed only Admiral McCollum and a few other hand-picked gatekeepers in the high command to degrade the armed forces' ability to forestall Pearl Harbor). For the most part, though, I think the elite acts as it does because, given its conventional wisdom, it can't imagine doing anything else. Well, this is getting kind of long. But your work has really been helpful to me, and I wish you the best of luck in getting it to a wider audience. ============================================================================
