September 19, 2007 News+Opinion » Jack Hunter

Did "Blowback" Cause 9/11? 

Americans deserve better answers to old questions

by Jack Hunter
Jack-Hunter-IMG_8974.jpg

Latest in Jack Hunter

When Texas Congressman Ron Paul suggested in a Republican presidential debate that 9/11 was caused in part by "blowback," a CIA term used to describe the negative consequences of mostly secretive foreign actions taken by the United States, former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani replied with the following: "That's really an extraordinary statement. I don't think I've heard that before, and I've heard some pretty absurd explanations for September 11th."

And Giuliani isn't alone. There are millions of Americans, probably even a majority, who believe that 9/11 literally came out of the blue. That on September 10, 2001, we were minding our own business, then on the next day the United States was attacked for no reason. But the truth is, in the eyes of the rest of the world, we haven't been minding our own business for a very long time.

As described in a 1987 PBS documentary, when the democratically-elected prime minister of Iran, Mohammed Mossadegh, decided to nationalize his country's oil supply in 1953, the CIA secretly orchestrated his overthrow and installed the shah of Iran, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. Under the shah, U.S. oil companies took over half of Iran's production. The shah was also a ruthless dictator, who through his secret police, tortured and murdered thousands of his own people. These atrocities took place with the full support of the United States.

Chanting "death to the American Satan" in 1979, the Iranian people overthrew the shah, empowering a new dictator, the Ayatollah Khomeini. Most Americans of a certain age can remember well the Iranian hostage crisis of 1979, in which Iranians held dozens of U.S. citizens hostage for 444 days. What most probably didn't realize was that the hostage crisis was provoked by decades of U.S. intervention. It was caused by "blowback."

During the ensuing Iran-Iraq war, the United States backed the president of Iraq, Saddam Hussein, as a bulwark against Iran. From 1983 to 1990, the U.S. government approved around $200 million in arms sales to Iraq. It was during this time that Hussein committed horrible atrocities against his own people, with weapons we sold him. So between 1953 and 1983, America had sponsored two murderous dictators, living side by side.

Our relationship with Hussein changed in 1991 when Iraq invaded Kuwait. In a matter of months, the U.S. declared our former ally a world menace on par with Adolf Hitler or worse. After kicking Saddam out of Kuwait, the U.S. continued to bomb and impose economic sanctions on Iraq throughout the decade.

When Congressman Ron Paul suggested that American intervention overseas, or "blowback," contributed to 9/11, Rudy Giuliani immediately insinuated that Paul was crazy. But is the CIA crazy? The 9/11 Commission? Both cite blowback as a primary cause of 9/11.

One need not be a foreign policy expert to understand this basic concept. Imagine if Gov. Mark Sanford had to ask Russian President Vladimir Putin every time South Carolina passed a new law. Imagine if Russia had thousands of troops stationed in Charleston. Imagine your own family starving, dying, and suffering because Putin had a beef with Sanford. This has been the perceived relationship between millions of Muslims and the United States for a very long time.

With the passing of the sixth anniversary of 9/11 last week, Americans should finally be able to listen to a more sober assessment of what caused that awful day. To say that terrorists attacked us because they hate our "freedom" is an answer that could satisfy only a child or a Republican presidential contender. George W. Bush is the Johnnie Cochran of American presidents — he was able to convince a jury of patriotic Americans of his arguments, simply because they really wanted to believe him — overwhelming evidence to the contrary be damned.

Avoiding another 9/11 is not a matter of tinkering with our current foreign policy, but a radical departure from it. It's time to bring our troops home. The chaos that exists in Iraq now will continue to exist once we leave. It might even get worse. But "fighting the terrorists over there, so that we don't have to fight them here" is not sound foreign policy when such men come here, precisely because we are over there. It's time to stop the vicious cycle, as over a half century of America being "over there" should have taught us by now.

Catch Southern Avenger commentaries every Tuesday and Friday at 7:50 a.m. on the "Morning Buzz with Richard Todd" on 1250 AM WTMA.

Comments (47) RSS

Showing 1-5 of 47

Add a comment | All comments »

Well Frank it is refreshing to know that nut jobs like you are still out there with their weird ideas of how this government works; i have an idea! check into a mental ward for your own good.

Posted by patriotman on August 31, 2009 at 9:20 AM | Report this comment

Bye Frank.

Posted by DocSmith on September 23, 2007 at 5:12 PM | Report this comment

I'm going to end this here Spin Doc Smith: None of your business. I'm sure it's easier getting info with black hoods, pliers, and frothing dogs.

Posted by Frank Castle on September 23, 2007 at 2:28 PM | Report this comment

If I could just offer somthing to consider: When you are going after terrorists, try invading the country where they actually are, rather than where they are not. When you invade where they are not, but pretend to be going after them anyway, you inflame the people who already live there, and you create a resentment across the entire rest of the world, which thinks you have your head up your ass, and that helps the terrorists recruit even more folks to their side, and makes your friends embarrassed to be allied with you. First rule of holes: When you're in one, stop digging. Second rule of holes: When you're on a dead horse, dismount. Third rule of holes: When attacking terrorists, go where there are terrorists.

Posted by BlueGrits on September 23, 2007 at 1:14 PM | Report this comment

Frank, This was one of the best descriptions of what's going on I've ever read. Hats off to you. Cheers! >>>>>>>"Tacit approval doesn't equate to arming. Maybe your are too dim to detect nuance in an argument. I should be thankful for what freedom that you're providing for me in Iraq? What freedom of mine was in jeopardy that held cause for an Iraq invasion? This is the bullshit military spin-"We're fightin' for your freedom to sit around and complain". This is an utter lie. You and your mindless ilk being pumped out of a fourth-rate pseudo-military college (behind the other three major ones) are in fact diminishing my freedoms! The war in Iraq is destabilizing our nation and weakening it. The mindless drones being indoctrinated at The Citadel to follow Bush into war are a detriment to our society. The last thing America needs is more white-trash trained as killers and deranged from the effects of a useless and unjust war. I can't wait for the decades of crime that will plag our society as a result of all these mentally scarred and f-d up soldiers returning to a society that is already on the brink. The courageous ones are the ones fighting to keep America from fighting useless wars, those who have the guts to stand up to the establishment and neocon flag-waving morons. How does it feel losing yet another war? How does it feel knowing that you haven't accomplished shit? How does it know that you were sent to Iraq to get oil and contracts for the necon cabal? First it was WMD, then it was to bring the battle to the "terrah-rists", then it was for "democracy" well, for a puppet government because we won't let the Iraqi people decide, now it's for... for cleaning up a mess we made!"<<<<<<<<<

Posted by BlueGrits on September 23, 2007 at 11:31 AM | Report this comment

Add a comment

Classified Listings
Most Viewed


Powered by Foundation   © Copyright 2010, Charleston City Paper   RSS