You are here

Space for Peace and September 11 by Jonathan Mark

Jonathan Mark is one of our best 9/11 truth activists. Below is his latest essay describing his perspective as a peace-in-space activist turned 9/11 truth-seeker. Jonathan will be my guest on Fair and Balanced this Tuesday, August 11th, noon-1 pm Eastern on, to be archived shortly thereafter here.

Many 9/11 truth-seekers aren’t aware of the evidence that one of the primary motives of 9/11 may have been to accelerate the militarization of space–evidence explored in the section entitled “Missile Defense and a Space Pearl Harbor” of David Ray Griffin’s The New Pearl Harbor (p.96-101). Top space-war hawks Donald Rumsfeld, Gen. Richard Myers, and Gen. Ralph Eberhart are all near the top of the list of 9/11 suspects, and the Rumsfeld Commission had earlier called for a “Space Pearl Harbor” to galvanize the nation into supporting the militarization of space.

-Kevin Barrett

Space for Peace and September 11
A flyby perspective
By Jonathan Mark

One of the stranger events that happened near the end of the 20th Century was when NASA conducted two “flybys” around Venus on a journey towards Saturn. A flyby is a maneuver in frictionless space using gravity from a planet for a slingshot-acceleration effect. The strange part regarding “Cassini” was that it had 72.3 pounds of radioactive plutonium on board, and was scheduled for an Earth-flyby on August 17/18, 1999, while traveling at around 10 miles per second. (1) Fortunately there was no inadvertent collision with Earth’s atmosphere, but why would NASA risk life on Earth while exploring the solar system?

Karl Grossman, author of “The Wrong Stuff: The US Space Program’s Nuclear Threat To Our Planet,” answered my question. He pointed to the U.S. Air Force report, “New World Vistas: Air and Space Power for The 2lst Century,” where it stated “In the next two decades, new technologies will allow the fielding of space-based weapons of devastating effectiveness to be used to deliver energy and mass as force projection in tactical and strategic conflict. These advances will enable lasers with reasonable mass and cost to effect very many kills.” However, the report notes, “power limitations impose restrictions” on such weapons systems, making them “relatively unfeasible. A natural technology to enable high power is nuclear power in space.” (2)

In response to the insanity of a NASA-plutonium Earth-flyby, I asked Professor Grossman if he could help me find an activist-webmaster. Jo McIntire who had helped those protesting Cassini’s launch at Cape Canaveral was the perfect partner. By December 1997 we launched the Action Site to Stop Cassini Earth Flyby (NoFlyby). We had more than a year and a half to accomplish our mission, to stop and/or expose the dangerous Earth-flyby.

Following the flyby in 1999, Michael Muller graciously helped me set up where I could operate it independently for “news in the post Cassini flyby era.” (3) In the last ten years FN has covered US election fraud, global warming, uranium munitions, low frequency active sonar (harming whales and dolphins), new energy technologies in development (and being delayed), Middle East information and peace initiatives, human rights violations such as in the case of Leonard Peltier, Lori Berenson, Mumia Abu-Jamal, and others. However the initial crucial campaign was to maintain the authority of the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty to stop the arms race from entering outer space.

September 11, 2001 suddenly put everything into jeopardy. The patriotic fervor, the fear, the anger, a neurosis fueled by media betrayal, enabled George W. Bush to override sensibilities in Congress. The Anthrax letters sent to Democrat Party leaders and to major media networks obviously contained a threatening message. Yet, when it became known that the Anthrax originated from a US military base, publicity died down. Within months after 9/11 crimes, with Congress in his palm, Bush terminated the ABM Treaty.

The Neoconservative think-tank group, “The Project for a New American Century,” (4) planned for such an event like 9/11. In its document, “Rebuilding America’s Defenses,” it stated that “Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event–like a new Pearl Harbor.”

On November 11, 2001 at the United Nations, George Bush, Jr. said almost threateningly, “Let us never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories concerning the attacks of September the 11th; malicious lies that attempt to shift the blame away from the terrorists, themselves, away from the guilty.” Could George Orwell have said it better, “War Is Peace?” One lie led to another, and WMDs became the big one to justify an attack on Iraq.

President Dwight D. Eisenhower might have warned us about the dangers of the military-industrial complex, but he couldn’t have imagined the scope of betrayal and deceit following the crimes of September 11, 2001. In 1953 when being encouraged to engage in a preventive war against the Soviet Union, President Eisenhower flatly denounced it, saying, “All of us have heard this term `preventive war’ since the earliest days of Hitler.” He added, “I don’t believe there is such a thing, and, frankly, I wouldn’t even listen to anyone seriously that came in and talked about such a thing.” Yet 9/11 was used for two ‘preemptive’ undeclared wars while covering up the truth of what really happened. The dark forces seemed content in increasing global destabilization, crimes against humanity, environmental destruction, and financial fraudulent policies. The path for a Neocon global dominant military agenda, and loss of citizen civil rights proceeded on all fronts, including US terrorism-torture policies.

With so many dire issues, uniting a justice and peace movement is no easy task. The mind-control impact of 9/11 is more than many peace activists can handle. The consequences of such a cover-up is simply frightening for most anyone. Yet, integrity, freedom, truth, science, and civilization hang in the balance.

The most hopeful campaign for exposing truth to awaken the critical mass public is with the New York City Coalition for Accountability Now ( Fifty-two thousand petitions have been delivered to the NY City Council to place a referendum question on the NYC ballot on November 3, 2009. A majority YES vote would authorize a subpoena-powered real investigation into the events of September 11, 2001.

Of course in an election as significant as this we expect foul play, but is resistance futile or fertile? I rather think the latter. NYC CAN proves the Emperor has no clothes on. No one stands above truth, and its relationship with science, and the responsibility to investigate unanswered questions. As Online Journal contributing writer, Kevin Quirk, entitled one of his articles, “More than a movement – the search for 9/11 truth is an awakening.” (5)

Such an awakening can have dire consequences, which is why FN supports a truth and reconciliation pathway toward a nonviolent future. But the truth should disclose more than just about recent years. Citizens need to know about the truth of assassinations, the falsehood of corporate human rights, the dissolution of the US national banking system for an international crooked one, and other policies of betrayal to the US Constitution. Truth and Reconciliation was successful in South Africa for its political transformation. Of course there is potential for violence from the truth coming out, but also for reclaiming a lost USA Republic, and for a commitment to peace and honor that could lead our world to abolishing all weapons of mass destruction. Where others have failed to crack the nut, the citizens of NYC CAN – vote for peace!

(1) Action Site to Stop Cassini Earth Flyby
(2) “New World Vistas: Air and Space Power for The 2lst Century”
(3) Flyby News – www.
(4) “The Project for a New American Century,”
(5) “More than a movement – the search for 9/11 truth is an awakening”

2 Thoughts to “Space for Peace and September 11 by Jonathan Mark”

  1. Dr. Barrett, when you published Noam Chomsky's confidential emails, you published one of your own in which you claimed that you had lost a tenure track position. In fact, that was your opening statement in your email to Chomsky.

    What tenure track position did you lose? My understanding is that you were not offered a tenure track position, and that they left it unfilled rather than offer it to you. Isn't that the case? Did you misrepresent yourself to Chomsky?

    Why won't you debate me about your dumbassness at the sf911truth googlegroup? Is it because you're a gutless wonder, hiding behind a woman's skirts?

  2. Do you get what I'm saying? It's like claiming I lost my marriage to Angelina Jolie because of my political opinions when really she just refused to go out with me. You and Willie Rodriguez have a lot in common.

Leave a Comment