Conspiracy or Coincidence? Michel Chossudovsky: "Revealing the Lies" on 9/11 Perpetuates the "Big Lie"

Revealing a lie does not necessarily lead to establishing the truth. In fact the experience of the 9/11 Commission  which has a mandate to investigate the September 11 attacks has proved exactly the opposite.
We know that the Bush administration had numerous "intelligence warnings". We know they had "intelligence" which confirmed that terrorists had the capacity of hijacking aircrafts and using them to target buildings. Attorney General John Ashcroft had apparently been warned in August 2001 by the FBI to avoid commercial airlines, but this information was not made public. The Pentagon had conducted a full fledged exercise on an airplane crashing into the Pentagon. We also know that senior Bush officials including Donald Rumsfeld and Condoleezza Rice lied under oath to the 9/11 commission, when they stated that they had no information or forewarning of impending terrorist attacks. But we also know, from carefully documented research, that:

There were stand-down orders on 9/11. The US Air force did not intervene.
There was a cover-up of the WTC and Pentagon investigation. The WTC rubble was confiscated.
The plane debris at the Pentagon disappeared.
Massive financial gains were made as a result of 9/11, from insider trading leading up to 9/11.
There is an ongoing financial scam underlying the 7.1 billion dollar insurance claim by the WTC leaseholder, following the collapse of the twin towers.
Mystery surrounds WTC building 7, which collapsed (or was "pulled" down in the afternoon of 9/11, mysteriously).

The White House is being accused by the critics of  "criminal negligence", for having casually disregarded the intelligence presented to president Bush and his national security team, and for not having acted to prevent the 9/11 terrorist attack.
The unfolding consensus is: "They knew but failed to act." This line of reasoning is appealing to many 9/11 critics and  "Bush bashers" because it clearly places the blame on the Bush administration. Yet in a bitter irony, the very process of revealing these lies and expressing public outrage has contributed to reinforcing the 9/11 cover-up.
"Revealing the lies" serves to present Al Qaeda as the genuine threat, as an "outside enemy", which threatens the security of America, when in fact Al Qaeda is a creation of the US intelligence apparatus. The presumption is that these forewarnings and intelligence briefs emanating from the intelligence establishment constitute a true and unbiased representation of the terrorist threat. 
Meanwhile, the history of Al Qaeda and the CIA has been shoved to the background. The fact that successive US governments since the Soviet-Afghan war have supported and abetted the Islamic terror network is no longer mentioned, for obvious reasons. It would break the consensus regarding Al Qaeda as the outside enemy of America, which is a crucial building block of the entire National Security doctrine. 
This central proposition that Islamic terrorists were responsible for 9/11 serves to justify everything else including the Patriot Act, the wars on Afghanistan and Iraq, the spiraling defense and homeland security budgets, the detention of thousands of people of Muslim faith on trumped up charges, the arrest and deportation to Guantanamo of alleged "enemy combatants", etc.
(con't @ globalresearch.ca)