The Sept. 11 Commission's Unasked Question

By Joseph E. Mulligan, S.J.

Members of the Sept. 11 Commission and distinguished witnesses, including President Bush and Vice-President Cheney, generally agree that more could have been done to prevent the horrible event under scrutiny – particularly, better systemic coordination among domestic and foreign intelligence agencies. But there is a question lurking under the tables in the hearing room which begs to be asked: “Were you aware of anyone in the administration during the first eight months of 2001 speculating, or reporting on speculation, as to the effect which some major terrorist attack within the U.S. would have on American public opinion?”

Then, a necessary follow-up question could be asked, but only by a commission member or reporter with exceptional nerve and/or devotion to the pursuit of truth: “Did anyone indicate that the effect could be to rally public support for an invasion of Iraq?”

After the gasps of shock and embarrassment subsided, the intrepid interrogator could explain that the question is really not a preposterous or absurd one, but rather a logical one in light of two publicly known facts. First, that leading members of the Bush administration, even before gaining power, had proposed invading Iraq, and second, that according to testimony, the immediate reaction after Sept. 11 was to prepare a case against Iraq as the culprit.

Who will ask this “D” question – was the failure to do everything possible to prevent a major attack Deliberate? Perhaps only the American people will wonder in their hearts about this “Pearl Harbor” question as they cast their secret ballots in November.

Who will ask this “D” question – was the failure to do everything possible to prevent a major attack Deliberate? Perhaps only the American people will wonder in their hearts about this “Pearl Harbor” question as they cast their secret ballots in November. Every day they become more skeptical about the reasons given for the invasion and about the occupation authority's plans for the future.

A Historical Reminder

As the number of occupation troops killed in Iraq reached into the hundreds and the wounded into the thousands, the Times demanded to know “how much longer are valuable lives to be sacrificed in the vain endeavor to impose upon the Arab population an elaborate and expensive administration which they never asked for and do not want?”

A leading Arab political figure in Baghdad reproached an official of the occupying power: “You said . . . that you would set up a native government drawing its authority from the initiative and free choice of the people concerned, yet you proceed to draw up a scheme without consulting anyone.”

When were these statements made? The Times article appeared in London on August 7, 1920; the Arab leader's criticism was spoken that same year to the British official and writer Gertrude Bell. Britain had captured Baghdad in 1917 from the forces of the Ottoman Empire and was fighting to establish imperial control over the country it was beginning to call Iraq.

Fr. Joseph E. Mulligan, a Jesuit priest from Detroit, works in Nicaragua with Christian base communities. He is a regular contributor to “A Globe of Witnesses,” and may be reached by email at mull@ibw.com.ni .

Related Link :

“Was the Bush Administration Complicit in 9/11?” by Rosemary Radford Ruether, a review of David Ray Griffin's book, The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions about the Bush Administration and 9/11 .