September 11, 2001 : an alibi to break up the ABM treaty

Monday 8 December 2008

All the versions of this article:

In 2000, future advisers of the Bush II administration, and also members of the think-tank “Project for a New American Century”, made a report entitled “Rebuilding America’s Defenses”1

This project describes the strategy of the US armed forces needed for the “Pax Americana”.2 Their ambition is to create a space army and to carry on the development of the anti-missile shield in order to establish the hegemony of the United States.

Albert Wohlstetter3 was a professor at the University of Chicago and adviser of the Rand corporation. He was (one of) the instigator of Neo-conservatism4. In 1958, he advocates The Delicate Balance of Terror5, the use of tactical nuclear weapons together with other high-precision remote-controlled weapons in order to avoid collatéral damage on civilian population.

In doing so, he was an opponent of the nuclear disarmament treaty signed between the Soviet Union and the U.S. government, which according to him restricted the technological creativity of the United States while maintaining an artificial balance with the USSR.

The ABM treaty6, concluded in 1972 between Nixon and Brejnev, forced the Americans to officially stop the space weapon race. On March 8th, 1983, right in the middle of the “cold war”, Reagan called the Soviet Union “Evil empire”.7

His defense policy was built around the doctrine of “Peace through strength”. The “Star War” was born, describing the US anti-missile defense program, named ? Strategic Defense Initiative? (SDI)8. Its launch occured on 23 March 1983. The project consisted of a network of satellites capable of detecting and destroying ballistic missiles targeted against the United States.

Seventeen years later, in 2000, the neo-conservatives of PNAC9 claimed the control of space and realized that their program, requiring a huge increase on the Pentagon’s defense budget, can be achieved only through to an event of extreme gravity, such as a new Pearl Harbor. Donald Rumsfeld, while still director of the Rand Corporation and just before he became Secretary of Defense, had theorized the space weapon10. His ambition was to create a new kind of army, and the notorious anti-missile shield. Rumsfeld had wondered if the only event capable of galvanizing the energies of the Nation and to force the government to act would be a devastating attack on the country: a “Spatial Pearl Harbor”11.

Delmart Vreeland, a secret services agent of the Navy12, described this program in a interview with Mike Ruppert.

On August 2001, Vreeland sent a letter to the Canadian authorities, in which he gave details surrounding the attacks of Septembre 11.

Mike Ruppert : “Why were you in Moscou and in Russia in late 2000 ?”
Vreeland: “ I have been sent out over there by the US Government and the ONI. I took my orders between September, 4 and September, 7 2000. It was for working at the Canadian embassy on diagrams and projects about a weapon defense system. The name of this system is SSST [Stealh Satellite System Terminator]. The only part I talked in public is an element relative to some satellites already in orbit, which are not at that day the property of US Government. On advice of my lawyer, I can’t tell more about the other components”

Vreeland gave a description of the American ABM system and mentioned that the satellites used are civil ones. He has provided these informations to give credit to his revelations about September 11. What he wanted to tell us is : “Check out what I have said about the ABM and that nobody before me has never told, and you will see that I’m telling the truth about the 9/11 case.”

The attacks of September 11 were the ticket out for the 1972 ABM treaty.

On June 2001 occurred a military simulation exercise called Amalgam Virgo13. The face of Bin Laden already appeared on the staff’s document14. This exercise involved the hypothetic scenario of a cruise missile strike on the Pentagon, and looked like in all aspects the actual attack on the Pentagon. This fact was cited during the National Commission on the 9/11 attacks in 2004 but no investigations have been led.15 Other coincidence, during the day of the attacks an exercise simulating a nuclear war took place, called “Global Guardian”16. The Marine was part of this operation and had the capability to strike a missile on the Pentagon via the AEGIS17 system. Undergoing an unprecedented terrorist aggression on their soil and considering themselves at war, the United States claimed the use of self-defense.18

The announcement of the withdrawal from the ABM treaty is made public as soon as December 13th , 2001. On Tuesday 12th June 2002 in Madrid, George W. Bush states that it is now a “relic of the past”.19 The next day, the United States are officially withdrawn from this treaty.

This unilateral withdrawal unleashed the development of the space shield. On top of the fact that this program came back to life, the US Navy got a key central position in what has succeeded the previous Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) program : the “National Missile Defense”20 implemented by the Missile Defense Agency (MDA).

This attack from the sky is a true windfall for Neoconservative warmongers. By having the American congress to vote the largest military defense budget21, the war on terrorism can start in Afghanistan, stronghold of Ben Laden’s Talibans and Al Qaeda. The Ben Laden hunt was ineffective for more than 7 years and curiously, he is still not indicted by the FBI for the crime of the attacks of September 11.22


On May 2008, the PNAC stopped the broadcast of its website. The Neoconservative doctrine is taken back by the “American Committee for a Strong Europe”23, which plans to rebuild the European armed forces through NATO and the adoption of the mutual defense policy as enacted in the mini-treaty of Nicolas Sarkozy. The project of an anti-missile shield who was a defensive weapon is now becoming an offensive one and reminds us of the terrible times of the missile crisis in Cuba.24

As Noam Chomsky quoted :25

“By insulating the homeland [the USA] from reprisal, missile defense will underwrite the capacity and willingness of the United States to shape the environment elsewhere. [...] missile defense isn’t really meant to protect America. It’s a tool for global dominance. [...] The installation of an anti-missile defense system in Eastern Europe is virtually a declaration of war”.


























—  0 commentaires  —

© Geopolintel 2009-2015 - site réalisé avec SPIP, optimisé pour Firefox - l'actualité Geopolintel avec RSS Follow site activity