LUMPENPROLETARIAT—On this week’s edition of Guns and Butter, host Bonnie Faulkner presented excerpts of an interview she conducted with Dr. Graeme MacQueen, author of The 2001 Anthrax Deception: The Case for a Domestic Conspiracy.

Earlier surveys of research into the crimes of 9/11, such as the 9/11 Coincidence Theory, a podcast by MediaRoots.org, have documented how the official conspiracy theory (or explanation) of the crimes of 9/11, like that of the 2001 anthrax attacks, does not hold up to scrutiny.  Intent aside, the anthrax attacks served to galvanise the synthetic terrorism threat catalysed by the crimes of 9/11, and just as the national sense of trauma after 9/11 was calming down from emotional hysteria (or detachment) to more critical reason.

The crimes of 9/11, followed by the 2001 anthrax attacks, were a “one-two punch” to the national psyche, as Dr. Graeme MacQueen describes it, which solidified fear of terrorism in the American public, despite the fact that death from falling down the stairs was probably a much bigger safety hazard.  This all resulted in making the American people (not to mention Canadians and others prone to follow an American lead) more vulnerable to reactionary, antidemocratic policies, such as the U.S.A. P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act.

Saliently, as Dr. MacQueen has revealed, the anthrax attacks were targeted at the two members of congress, who were questioning and stalling the rush to pass the P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act.  They were cautioning against fear-based decision-making, which was sacrificing democratic principles in the name of security.  Then, they received anthrax-laden letters.  Soon afterward, they went along with the post-9/11 shock doctrine.  This week’s Guns and Butter discussion is an important one, which the dominant corporate media and others would rather suppress and censor.  Listen (and/or download) here. [1]

UPDATE—[15 FEB 2017]  Guns and Butter has rebroadcast the interview with Dr. Graeme MacQueen (sans interruptions), which was previously broadcast on Wednesday, 7 SEP 2016, during a fund drive period, which necessitated interruptions of the interview to appeal for listener donations to (and sponsorship for, and membership in) free speech radio KPFA.  Listen (and/or download) here. [2]

Messina

***

[Working draft transcript of actual radio broadcast by Messina for Lumpenproletariat and Guns and Butter.]

GUNS AND BUTTER—[7 SEP 2016]  “This is Guns and Butter.  [theme music]

DR. GRAEME MACQUEEN:  “So, here’s the thing.  A little bit before October 5th [2001], Dick Cheney, the Vice President [of the United States] met with a bunch of Republican senators and said:  I don’t like the fact that this P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act is taking so long to go through Congress.  He said:  It’s going too slowly.  I want it passed.  Let’s try to get it through by October 5th.  This is October 5th, 2001.  So, that’s Cheney’s deadline. [3]

“Well, guess what.  It wasn’t passed by October 5th.  And the two guys most responsible for holding it up were Daschle and Leahy.  So, then, guess what.  Somewhere between October 6th, the day after that deadline, and October 9th—somewhere between those three days—two anthrax letters are sent to—guess who?—Daschle and Leahy.”

BONNIE FAULKNER:  “I’m Bonnie Faulkner.  Today on Guns and Butter:  Graeme MacQueen.  Today’s show:  ‘The War On Terror: Targeting Elected Officials’.

“Graeme MacQueen taught in the religious studies department of McMaster University in Ontario for 30 years.  In 1989, he became founding director at the Center for Peace Studies at McMaster and oversaw the development of peace-building projects in Sri Lanka, Gaza, Croatia, and Afghanistan.  He is a co-editor of the Journal for 9/11 Studies, a member of the 9/11 Consensus Panel, and was on the organising committee of the Toronto Hearings on 9/11.  He’s the author of The 2001 Anthrax Deception: The Case for a Domestic Conspiracy.

“Today, we discuss the intimidation of elected representatives in, both, the United States and Canada as a core feature of the War On Terror.

“Graeme MacQueen, welcome.”  (c. 2:32)

DR. GRAEME MACQUEEN:  “Thank you.  It’s great to be here, Bonnie.”

BONNIE FAULKNER:  “How would you describe the initial reactions of the United States Congress to explosions in the Twin Towers on September 11th [2001]?”

DR. GRAEME MACQUEEN:  “Well, as far as I know, members of Congress, specifically, didn’t talk about explosions in the Towers, although, in my opinion, that’s what brought them down.  But, certainly, members of Congress reacted to the destruction of the Towers and to the fact that someone rushed in to their rooms, where they were watching all this stuff unfold on TV, and said:  You’ve gotta evacuate the capitol!  You’ve gotta evacuate the whole building because it looks like there’s a plane headed our way!

“And, according to Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, it was the first time in history that the entire capitol had been evacuated in that way.  And there didn’t seem to have been any protocol as to how to do it.  He says it was, quote, ‘total chaos’ with, you know, senators and house members scattering in all directions in fear.

“So, that’s why this was a major act of terror or, if you like, deliberate intimidation of Congress.  Imagine having to flee the building, in which they meet.  It’s symbolic of the representatives of the United States population meeting together to deliberate and make laws.

“So, regardless of whether it was explosions or something else, that destroyed the Towers—and we could talk about that later—this, um, 9/11 incident certainly caused intimidation of Congress.”  (c. 4:19)

BONNIE FAULKNER:  “What is the pattern, that is common in societies experiencing danger?”

DR. GRAEME MACQUEEN:  “Well, one of the patterns that I’m drawing attention to these days—and I’m certainly not the inventor of this idea; it’s been around for a long while.  I used the acronym T-U-R, TUR, to symbolise threat, unity, and response, or as sometimes I say, reaction.  But let’s say response.  Threat, unity, and response.

“So, in other words, some threat appears on the scene.  The group, or society, in question is intimidated.  They are frightened.  And they, therefore, draw together.  That’s what unity is about.  They pull together like a herd threatened by a predator.  And, indeed, we see this in communities of non-humans, not just humans.  They draw together.  There are a lot of implications there.  Civil liberties often go out the window.  Dissent is often repressed.  And, in fact, this unity is usually a hierarchical unity, not an egalitarian unity.  It’s hard to distinguish from obedience.  (c. 5:33)

“So, normally, the executive branch of the government or the military—whoever, at that point, is claiming to be the leader—gets to do what they want.  And everyone else huddles behind them, grateful for their protection, grateful to have security.  That’s what I mean by unity.

“And, then, response can be of various kinds.  But I’m especially interested in two kinds.  One is the repression of dissent, which I just talked about.  Oh, let’s pass a new law making it more difficult for people to maintain their traditional civil liberties.  Let’s give more power to intelligence agencies, the police, and the executive branch.  That would be a response, that concentrates on the domestic scene, the inside of the society.

“The other kind of response is external or international.  And that’s when the society says:  Somebody did this to us, some foreign agency or power or entity.  So, now, having drawn together as a herd, you know, and we’re now strong and united; and we will hurl ourselves at this external enemy.  And that’s usually what we mean by war as an act of aggression, that’s armed force usually, which we, then, direct toward the person, that we think is the enemy, or that we imagine is the enemy, whether they are or aren’t.

“So, in other words, the threat comes first, then a powerful unity, a herd sense, which leads to a two-fold response, both, domestic and international.  That’s the pattern I’m interested in right now.  And I’m especially interested in, when it’s done, to the elected representatives of people: congress, parliament, that sort of thing.”  (c. 7:16)

BONNIE FAULKNER:  ”  [SNIP]

DR. GRAEME MACQUEEN:  ” [SNIP]  (c. 12:00)

BONNIE FAULKNER:  ”  [SNIP]

DR. GRAEME MACQUEEN:  ” [SNIP]

[The ‘Daschle Hug‘ represents a dangerous form of national unity because it represents uncritical, emotionally-led, decision-making, as all critical reason is eradicated from Congress once the last two holdouts against the P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act are intimidated into toeing the toe the line of uncritical militarism.]  (c. 14:50)

BONNIE FAULKNER:  “I’m speaking with researcher and author, Dr. Graeme MacQueen.  Today’s show:  ‘The War On Terror: Targeting Elected Officials’.  I’m Bonnie Faulkner.  This is Guns and Butter.

“During times of perceived danger, how are populations and their elected representatives vulnerable to manipulation?  You have written that a strong social taboo has been constructed, that has hampered awareness of this deception and manipulation.  What is this taboo?”

DR. GRAEME MACQUEEN:  ” Well, first of all, the business about how populations are vulnerable at the exact moment of the attack—I’m giving a very informal account of it.  I’m not a psychologist.  And I’m not a neurologist.  I’m not trying to give a sophisticated account.  But, basically, we get frightened by threats.  And we go into a certain part of our minds, where we seek reassurance; we seek unity.  And the critical mind is not functioning very well.  And, as I’ve said, that’s very dangerous.

“Now, the thing is that that usually doesn’t last too long.  So, for example, after 9/11, the polls showed that many Americans were willing to suspend their civil liberties.  And they were willing to hurl themselves at the enemy.  However, we know that that doesn’t last too long.  And there was a lot of sign that resistance in the U.S., both, in Congress and in the general population was starting to grow to the P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act, for example, saying: Wait a minute.  Are we giving away our civil liberties?  And it was very broad-based.  It wasn’t just the left.  It was people on the left, people on the right, people all over the place were wondering about this—and also some rumblings of anti-war sentiment.

“So, what happens in that case?  Well, what happens is that, if the executive branch is determined, as I believe it was in the fall of 9/11, to get its war, to get its civil liberties restrictions, it will do its best to maintain the sense of fear, maintain the threat, both, against congress and the general population.  And I think that’s, quite clearly, what it did.

“In the case of the fall of 9/11, there were all kinds of reports of threats.  The FBI was comin’ up with stuff.  Oh, we’re 100% sure that Al Qaeda’s gonna strike again.”  (c. 17:00)

BONNIE FAULKNER:  “You have reported that members of the U.S. Congress were told by the FBI not to wear their congressional pins publicly or to use their congressional license plates.  They were told they must hide their identities as elected representatives.  Now, I hadn’t heard that before.”

DR. GRAEME MACQUEEN:  “Yes.  This is very clear.  It was reported in mainstream media.  And, so, this was what I’m calling one method of keeping Congress intimidated.  You can’t go out in public and tell people—right?—that you’re a Congressional member.  You might be attacked.  And there’s barricades around the capitol and police tape and all kinds of additional restrictions and rerouting of traffic.  All this is going on after 9/11.  Then, to cap it off, the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security and all kinds of people start warning that there’s gonna be more attacks, that there’s a very strong likelihood that there’ll be more attacks.  And they could be attacks on Congress.  And, oh, my gosh!  They start saying:  We could even get a biological attack or a chemical attack.  And guess what.  They did.  You know?  Then the anthrax attacks begin.  And, then, we have anthrax attacks on two U.S. senators.

“And, so, what I’m saying is that I think it’s very clear.  My own research indicates it’s quite clear that 9/11 was the big shock, that created the threat, the unity, and so on.  But you have to maintain that.  And, so, the anthrax attacks were like the second punch, a one-two punch.  And they kept up the momentum.  They kept up the fear.  They kept up the threats.  You know.  The senators in the Hart Senate Building had to abandon the whole building.  It was contaminated with anthrax.  And they were trying to get the P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act passed by, you know, using various offices in Washington and didn’t have access to their own equipment.

“So, under an extreme sense of threat and danger, they passed that act.  And this is what I’m talking about by keeping up the pressure and keeping up this sense of threat and fear, which continually disables people’s critical mind, puts them in this emotional state, in which they’re vulnerable. [4]

[(c. 14:50)  break]

[SNIP]  (c. 17:00)

BONNIE FAULKNER:  ” [SNIP]  ”

[The crimes of 9/11 being followed by the anthrax attacks were a “one-two punch” to the national psyche, as Dr. Graeme MacQueen describes it, which solidified fear of terrorism in the American public, such that the P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act was signed by Congress under duress and with most members of Congress not even having read the text of the legislation.]

[SNIP]  (c. 19:50)

BONNIE FAULKNER:  ”

[Yes, members of the media also received anthrax-laden letters.  But those who were killed by anthrax seemed random, reflecting additional intent to terrorise, or intimidate, the general public as well.]   (c. 21:30)

BONNIE FAULKNER:  ”

[SNIP]

[(c. 25:40)  As this broadcast is occurring during a fund drive period for listener-sponsored, non-corporate, free speech radio KPFA, Bonnie Faulkner appeals to listeners to donate funds to KPFA to prevent the station from going off the air.  Like most of the working class, KPFA lives paycheck to paycheck, as it were, or fund drive to fund drive.]  [5]

[SNIP]  (c. 27:50)

[On the military drill known as Dark Winter.]

[SNIP]  (c. 30:20)

[On 9/11 FF]

[SNIP]  (c. 36:25)

[Back to the pre-recorded interview by Bonnie Faulkner with Dr. Graeme MacQueen]

[SNIP]

BONNIE FAULKNER:  ”

[SNIP] (c. 38:39)

BONNIE FAULKNER:  “I’m speaking with researcher and author, Dr. Graeme MacQueen.  Today’s show:  ‘The War On Terror: Targeting Elected Officials’.  I’m Bonnie Faulkner.  This is Guns and Butter.

“You have spoken about the physical intimidation of elected representatives as a core feature of the War On Terror.  You cite the U.S. Congress in September of 2001 and also two different incidents in Canada in 2013 and 2014.  I’d like you to talk about these incidents in Canada and their striking resemblance to what went on in September of 2001 in the United States.  Let’s start with the incident in Canada in 2013, what happened there?”

DR. GRAEME MACQUEEN:  “Okay.  Well, if we want to look at the pattern of what happened here, we have to realise that, both, the federal police, if you want to call them that, in the U.S. and Canada are both playing a game, a game, which is clearly intended to keep the War On Terror, which is a fraudulent construction, to keep it going.

“And one of the ways they do this is by encouraging people, usually marginal, poverty-stricken people, sometimes with drug addiction, sometimes minor prison records, sometimes mentally retarded, any number of—they target them and draw them into terrorism plots, encourage them, give them money, weapons, self-esteem, and ideas. [6]  And, then, they nab them and say:  Oh, look.  We’ve caught a terrorist.  And:  Put them away for years and years.

“So, this pattern, in the U.S., has been described very well by Trevor Aaronson in his book, The Terror Factory: Inside the FBI’s Manufactured War On Terror. [7]  And I really encourage people to get that book:  Trevor Aaronson.  It’s a good piece of reseach ‘cos he looked at every court case from 9/11 until—I think it was—2013, when he finished his research, every court case where someone was on trial for terrorism, and read them, and came to the conclusion that the FBI was, in fact, setting these people up again and again and again in order to keep this War On Terror going.

“Well, the thing is that my [Canadian] federal police, the RCMP, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, are into the same thing.  Possibly, they’re copying the FBI.  Maybe, they think they’re doing it on their own.

“So, the case you are asking me about in 2013 is a classic case of this.  We have a couple, living together:  John Nuttall and Amanda Korody.  (c. 41:43)  [SNIP]

[The story of Canadian fantasist Mr. John Nuttall, an example of entrapment by the Canadian state, similar to American cases of entrapment, in order to manufacture consent to justify the so-called War On Terror, which appears to be an excuse to strengthen a police state apparatus against popular tendencies toward democratisation.  A judge, ultimately, concluded that there are enough real terrorists to worry about without making up fake ones.]  (c. 47:10)

BONNIE FAULKNER:  “Well, I can’t help but be struck by the fact that Canada Day, July 1st, 2013, when this incident, that you’ve just been describing took place with these pressure cooker bombs, the so-called Boston Bombings took place April 15th of that same year.  And the claim is that they were pressure cooker bombs.  Now, this is just too big of a coincidence.”

DR. GRAEME MACQUEEN:  “Well, it isn’t a coincidence.  There are a couple things worth noting here.  First of all, the police agents, who were trying to entrap John Nuttall said very clearly:  You are not capable of hijacking a train.  Okay?  Let’s get real.  Here’s what you can do.  You can, with our help, build a pressure cooker bomb just as they did in the Boston Marathon Bombing. 

“So, the Canadian federal police are building upon this American case, which also, in my view, looks like another, you know, intelligence operation, by the way, the Boston Marathon Bombing.

“So, the intelligence agencies are working together.  And, by the way, we know they do that.  We know the FBI and the RCMP work together often in these cases.  That’s the first thing to note.

“The other thing to note is that the Boston Marathon Bombings didn’t just have a big effect.  They also had a big effect in Canada.  And they were used as a pretext to pass legislation in Canada restricting our rights.

“So, again, the effect of these things across borders is very important to think about.”  (c. 48:48)

[end of interview excerpt; cut to Bonnie Faulkner via telephone]

BONNIE FAULKNER:  “That’s the voice of Graeme MacQueen.  Today’s show:  ‘The War On Terror: Targeting Elected Officials’.  This is a new interview with Dr. Graeme MacQueen.  I have done an hour-long interview with him, specifically, on the Anthrax Attacks.  And, as a matter of fact, I’m gonna have copies of that blockbuster show, along with this one and many others, tomorrow at the 9/11 Film Festival at the Grand Lake Theater in Oakland.

“I’m Bonnie Faulkner.  This is Guns and Butter.  We’re breaking in here because we are raising funds for KPFA, our incredible local radio station here in Berkeley, California.  We need to raise money for our station.  We need to keep on the air.  We have incredible expenses to keep the station going.  We need your support.  We need your help.  You’ve always stepped up to the plate on Guns and Butter and helped out the station.  Give them those viable, tax-deductible dollars.  You can give us a call at 1.800.439-5732.

“We’re offering today Graeme MacQueen’s new book, The 2001 Anthrax Deception: The Case for a Domestic Conspiracy.  Incredible book; highly recommended.  There are details about the Anthrax Attacks in this book, that, not only, have you never heard of, but you couldn’t even imagine.  It’s unbelievable stuff.

“1.800.439-5732.  (c. 50:30)  [SNIP]”

[SNIP] 

BONNIE FAULKNER:  “Yes.  I have that audio of FBI informant Randy Glass talking about having dinner with Pakistani ISI agent Raja Ghulam Abbas.”

[SNIP]  (c. 59:59)

Learn more at GUNS AND BUTTER.

[This transcript will be expanded as time constraints, and/or demand or resources, allow.]

***

Also see this relevant Lumpenproletariat article on 9/11, featuring a transcript of Media Roots Radio, which your author originally transcribed for Media Roots in 2012:

• Historical Archive: “MR Radio Transcript: 9/11 Coincidence Theory”, 25 OCT 2015.

And this:

• NoLiesRadio.org.

***

[1]  Terrestrial radio broadcast, 94.1 FM (KPFA, Berkeley, CA) with online simulcast and digital archiving:  Guns and Butter, this one-hour broadcast hosted by Bonnie Faulkner, Wednesday, 7 SEP 2016, 13:00 PDT.

[2]  Terrestrial radio broadcast, 94.1 FM (KPFA, Berkeley, CA) with online simulcast and digital archiving:  Guns and Butter, this one-hour broadcast hosted by Bonnie Faulkner, Wednesday, 15 FEB 2017, 13:00 PST.

[3]  We recall, of course, that Dick Cheney had been the CEO of Halliburton, which soon after the P.A.T.R.I.O.T Act was passed and the neocons in power got their blank check to wage a forever war everywhere against, essentially, an emotion (namely, ‘terror’, which is not any one organisation).  The so-called War On Terror (a phrase further reduced from the slightly less inaccurate War On Terrorism), as Dr. Graeme MacQueen argues, is a fallacious construct.  But it’s a construct, which, flowing from the state’s response to the crimes of 9/11, has enabled war profiteers, such as Dick Cheney’s Halliburton to get loads of no-bid contracts of post-9/11 business.

For more on post-9/11 no-bid contracts, see:

• “U.S. Wasting Billions While Tripling No-Bid Contracts After Decade of War in Iraq, Afghanistan”, by Democracy Now!, 2 SEP 2011.
• “EXCLUSIVE: Fired Army Whistleblower Receives $970K for Exposing Halliburton No-Bid Contract in Iraq” by Democracy Now!, 26 JUL 2011.

[4]  We recall the fact that Congress member Barbara Lee was the sole person in Congress with enough courage to resist the herd mentality of fear-based decision-making.  For example, see:

• “Barbara Lee’s Lone Vote on Sep. 14, 2001, Was as Prescient as It Was Heroic” by Glenn Greenwald, The Intercept, 11 SEP 2016.

[5]  Sometimes, KPFA broadcasters describe financial shortfalls during KPFA fund drives.  But during this fund drive, even prior to it, KPFA management and broadcasters have been urging all listeners to donate as much as possible because KPFA has lost its Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) funds, which previously accounted for about 15% of KPFA’s budget.  KPFA Local Station Board members have reported to the listeners that KPFA lost its CPB funding during the recent past when the SaveKPFA slate was in charge of KPFA’s board.  There has been an internal struggle for the soul of KPFA, basically, since 1999, when listeners fought back against a lockout of all KPFA staff and unilateral takeover of the station by Pacifica executives.  One side of KPFA’s board of directors has never wanted a democratic form of governance for KPFA, in which the listeners may take an ownership role and prevent corporate-types from compromising KPFA’s journalistic integrity.  This is why SaveKPFA partisans, such as Brian Edwards-Tiekert, have contemplated working to dismantle the democratically-elected Local Station Board.

[6]  Those who have followed the more honest news outlets will have heard of this issue of entrapment perpetrated by local police agencies in collusion with intelligence agencies.  For example, see:

• Democracy Now! topic:  NYPD Muslim Spy Program.
• “Historic Settlement over NYPD’s Anti-Muslim Spying Imposes Oversight & Bars Ethnic-Based Targeting” by Democracy Now!, 11 JAN 2016.
• “New York Drops Police Unit that Spied on Muslims, But Will It End Broader Profiling & Surveillance?” by Democracy Now!, 16 APR 2014.
• “From Mosques to Soccer Leagues: Inside the NYPD’s Secret Spy Unit Targeting Muslims, Activists” by Democracy Now!, 17 SEP 2013.
• “AP Wins Pulitzer for Exposing NYPD’s CIA-Linked Intel Program, Leading Widespread Spying on Muslims” by Democracy Now!, 17 APR 2012.
• “NYPD Muslim Spy Scandal Grows with Newly Revealed Plan to Target Shiite Mosques” by Democracy Now!, 3 FEB 2012.
• “With CIA Help, New York Police Secretly Monitored Mosques, Muslim Communities Post-9/11” by Democracy Now!, 25 AUG 2011.
• “Entrapment or Foiling Terror? FBI’s Reliance on Paid Informants Raises Questions about Validity of Terrorism Cases” by Democracy Now!, 6 OCT 2010.

“‘Mosque Crawlers’, ‘Rakers’ Monitoring U.S. Muslims for NYPD” by PBS News Hour (28 FEB 2012)

[7]  Regarding Trevor Aaronson’s book, Inside the Terror Factory, also see:

• “Inside the Terror Factory: Award-winning journalist digs deep into the FBI’s massive efforts to create fake terrorist plots” by Trevor Aaronson, Mother Jones, 11 JAN 2013.
• “The Informants: The FBI has built a massive network of spies to prevent another domestic attack. But are they busting terrorist plots—or leading them?” by Trevor Aaronson, Mother Jones, SEP/OCT 2011.

“Trevor Aaronson – TERROR FACTORY” by Civil Freedoms NCPCF

***

[16 SEP 2016]

[Last modified at 15:36 PST on 16 FEB 2017]

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save