English 
Español 
Peter Kopa, Prague, 16.9.2023
This Monday, September 11, marks the 22nd anniversary of the terrorist attack on the Twin Towers in New York.
It was on the morning of Tuesday, September 11, 2001, when four flights were hijacked by 19 Al Qaeda terrorists. They allegedly carried out the most spectacular terrorist attack in history. Two of the planes crashed into the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center in New York City, while a third hit the Pentagon and the last, destined to destroy the Capitol, went down in a field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania, thanks to passengers who courageously prevented the terrorists from destroying the White House. Twenty-two years later, it is necessary to look back at the historical background of a gradual process of usurpation of the maximum possible power in the hands of the American government.
Promulgation of ‘The Patriot Act’.
George Busch, under the title ‘Patriotic Act 2001’, on 26.10.2001, enacted an unprecedented legal regime, in order to ‘unite and strengthen the USA so that it has the appropriate means required to intercept and obstruct terrorism’. Thus President George Bush gained the power to directly control the executive and legislative branches. This power of command soon manifested itself in the Iraq war, followed by other theaters of war.
The destruction of the twin towers was immediately placed by the government under the exclusive competence of the Army, whose investigations were shrouded in secrecy. It is therefore understandable that in the USA and the world all kinds of hypotheses have arisen, revolving around the suspicion that it was an event staged by the armed forces, or by the CIA or by another world power, in order to create the necessary shock so that the government could then be given maximum power, without counting on the Congress or the Senate. Some have even seen a parallel between Pearl Harbor, the attack on the twin towers and the pandemic. The ‘Patriotic Act’, by introducing a typical wartime regime of power, is of such significance, that so far we have not gotten to the bottom of it. For example, the whole COVID 19 pandemic and the ‘lock down’ have been made possible on the basis of this law, which in reality renders a whole series of constitutional rights null and void. https://thinktanklatam.org/2022/08/10/usa-contra-su-pueblo/
The visionary speech of D. Eisenhower
Eisenhower served two full terms as president, from January 1953 to January 1961, and was the first U.S. president whose term was limited to a single re-election. He presided over a period of considerable economic expansion, even as the Cold War raged.
Eisenhower delivered his famous farewell address to his presidential office on January 17, 1961, and it lasted 15:30 minutes. His preparation was very careful, as he wrote at least 21 drafts looking for the appropriate way to warn the nation that it was necessary to seek, in the midst of the dizziness of the war victory and the incipient economic prosperity, the way to keep the constitutional guarantees high. Despite his military background and being the only general elected as president in the 20th century, he warned the nation about the corrupting influence of what he describes as the “military-industrial complex.” His speech in italics follows:
As we peer into society’s future, we – you and I, and our government – must avoid the impulse to live only for today, plundering for our own comfort and convenience, the precious resources of tomorrow. We cannot mortgage our grandchildren’s material assets without risking the loss of their political and spiritual patrimony as well. We want democracy to survive for all generations to come, not to become tomorrow’s vain phantom.
Until the last of our global conflicts, the United States lacked an arms industry. American manufacturers of plowshares could, in time and as needed, make swords as well. But we can no longer risk improvising in the face of a national defense emergency. We have been forced to create a permanent arms industry of vast proportions. In addition, three and a half million men and women work directly in defense. Annually we spend more on military security alone than the net income of all U.S. corporations.
Now, this conjunction of a huge military establishment and a large arms industry is new to the American experience. Its total influence – economic, political, even spiritual – is felt in every city, in every State House, in every office of the federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. However, we must not fail to consider its grave implications. Our jobs, our resources and our livelihoods are at stake. So is the very fabric of our society.
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for a disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never allow the weight of this combination to jeopardize our freedoms or democratic processes. We must take nothing for granted. Only an alert and well-informed citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the massive industrial and military defense machine with our peaceful methods and objectives, so that security and freedom can thrive together.
He also expressed concomitant concern about the corruption of the scientific process as part of this centralization of funding in the federal government, and vice versa. The arguments that are the warning and the prediction of what has happened in the pandemic and in the globalist attacks tending to establish their world government appear be outstanding.
The technological revolution of the last decades has been similar to and largely responsible for the radical changes in our industrial-military position.
In this revolution, research has become central, but also more formalized, complex and costly. An increasing portion is conducted for, by, or at the direction of the federal government.
…
The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by federal employment, project allocation, and money power is ever present and must be kept very much in mind.
However, if we respect scientific discovery, as we must, we must also be alert to the danger of public policy becoming captive to a scientific-technological elite. https://thinktanklatam.org/2022/12/08/la-destruccion-de-usa/
John F. Kennedy’s speeches
Like his predecessor Eisenhower, President Kennedy insisted in his great speeches on the importance of the citizen’s rights being absolutely inalienable. In this sense, he criticized secret societies in a speech after which he was killed few days later: https://twitter.com/i/status/1479450836002643969
