From The Seattle PI
By James Morgante

An Aug. 8 Seattle P-I editorial asked, “Where are the facts? Where is the evidence?” about government complicity in the 9/11 attacks.

The case for complicity begins with motive and benefit. In his 1997 book “The Grand Chessboard,” Zbigniew Brzezinski argues that the key to global dominance in the 21st century lies in control of Central Asian oil and gas reserves. Establishing a U.S. presence there would require the kind of military deployment that only “a direct external threat” could justify.

And in a 2000 paper titled “Rebuilding America’s Defenses,” Project for a New American Century, whose founding members were Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz, argued for vast increases in military spending to assure American global dominance. Such a process, PNAC said, would take time absent “a catastrophic and catalyzing event — like a new Pearl Harbor.” Military deployment into Central Asia followed 9/11, as well as their desired increases in military spending.

The symmetry between the 9/11 attacks and U.S. policy goals is but the backdrop to the case for government complicity. The picture becomes clearer through considering the following:

Read more Theories