A Most Remarkable Document: Letter Signed by Many Former National Security Officials and Flag Officers – Full of Lies

Profile Photo


A few days ago, a letter was sent by a group of former “security officials” and military officers, decrying the “January 6” “riot” at the Capitol, which it termed a “lethal breach of the Capitol Complex by armed extremists” and deeming it an “exigent and growing threat” to the survival of the Republic.

What makes it so remarkable to me is its assumption, studied and chronicled years ago by Dr. Sowell in his masterful book, “The Vision of the Anointed”, that we are all too stupid to inform ourselves of what actually happened that night at the Capitol, allowing them to lie at will.

First, the letter, after which a brief discussion of how outrageous these misrepresentations are, especially to anyone with any military at all in their background as many of the signatories are Flag Officers of the United States Armed Forces. They are a disgrace to the military.

Here’s the letter:

Dear Members of Congress,
We are former senior national security, military, and elected officials who have represented or served Democrats, Republicans, or administrations of both parties. We write to encourage this Congress to establish an independent and bipartisan national commission to investigate the January 6th assault of the U.S. Capitol Complex and its direct causes, and to make recommendations to prevent future assaults and strengthen the resilience of our democratic institutions.
We also write to you with great urgency in light of what we collectively see as an exigent and growing threat. The events of January 6th exposed severe vulnerabilities in the nation’s preparedness for preventing and responding to domestic terrorist attacks. The immediate security failings that permitted a lethal breach of the Capitol Complex by armed extremists raise serious questions and demand immediate solutions.
But January 6th was also the result of complex national security threats. These include coordinated disinformation campaigns, nontransparent financing of extremist networks, potential foreign influences, and white supremacist violent extremism, which the Department of Homeland Security identified in an October 2020 report as among “the most persistent and lethal threat[s] in the Homeland.” As FBI Director Christopher Wray testified to you recently, “January 6th was not an isolated event. The problem of domestic terrorism has been metastasizing across the country for a long time now and it’s not going away anytime soon.” Understanding how these forces culminated in an attack on the infrastructure of our democracy is critical to preventing future attacks.
In the wake of September 11th, the administration and Congress jointly acknowledged that the attack’s causes were complex and that an independent and well-equipped national commission was an essential tool to aid the federal government. Congressional inquiries, law enforcement activities, and a national commission not only worked in parallel, but critically complemented each other’s necessary work. An independent commission should not supplant the ongoing work by the legislative and executive branches, but it can uniquely support them by providing comprehensive and expert recommendations for Congress to act upon.
Commissions — properly empowered, resourced, and led — can establish a full picture of events and an analysis of their causes, from which nonpartisan recommendations can authoritatively flow. With dedicated time, resources, and expert staffing, they can also exclusively focus on the matter at hand over an appropriate time horizon. Given the gravity of January 6th as a national security matter — the violent disruption to the transition of power and the continuing threat of future attacks — a national commission examining the lead up to the January 6th assault, and the attendant security lapses, is not only appropriate, but a critical component of the national response.
A failure to deploy the full suite of tools available to fully understand January 6th and address its causes will leave the Capitol, and the nation, vulnerable to future attacks. In bipartisan fashion, we have successfully marshaled these tools before, and we implore you to do so once again.
(Note: All titles are former positions or military ranks held prior to retirement.)

It has become more and more apparent with each passing day that the only way to get the actual, reality-based news of current events is to read and study the report of any given occurrence, speech, incident, bill, etc., and then go to the source document to learn what was actually said. Nothing illustrates that better than this “obscene and atrocious letter”, from which the following fabrications jump off the page they are so obvious.

  1. “lethal breach of the Capitol”: anyone who has seen the recent report of the Medical Examiner of the District of Columbia knows that of the people who died that day, only Trump supporter–and military veteran of 13 years in the United States Air Force- Ashli Babbitt (who was unarmed) was shot, by a still unidentified Capitol Police officer who will, in all likelihood, remain unidentified for all time. Two died of hypertensive atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, another of acute amphetamine intoxication. The death of Officer Sicknick remains an amazingly well kept secret, made even more amazing when one considers that Washington is the leakiest town in the world.
  2. “armed extremists”: after 3 months of exhaustive investigation by about 7 Congressional Committees and an untold number of officials from the FBI and other agencies, not one single firearm has been retrieved from the scene of this “insurrection”, making it the first “armed insurrection” in history devoid of “arms.”
  3. “white supremacist violent extremism”: an aging window installer from Alabama put his feet on the desk of one of Her Most Esteemed Speaker Pelosi’s assistants– not in the Chambers of Her Majesty herself– and a man with Viking headdress made loud noises. Also, one of these “violent” white persons –did I mention he was white?–picked up a bunch of plastic retainers from a supply area. And for this we need a 9/11 Commission, the most complete militarization of the Nation’s Capital City since the Civil War, and over one hundred highly compensated retired officers get, as the Brits might describe it, their knickers all knotted up. 
  4. “the most persistent and lethal (they like “lethal” a lot!) threats to the Homeland”: this one is almost literally breathtaking  in its sheer, in-your-face dishonesty, coming, as it does, at the same time thousands of illegal –that word bears repeating: illegal–aliens from all over the world are pouring through the now newly porous border thanks to the dismantling of President Trump’s excellent work in re-building border security by the Harris “Administration” unchecked, many of whom are carriers of COVID 19 and many of whom are members of murderous criminal gangs such as MS-1. In other words, as to the last group, real violent terrorists! No mention of those real terrorists, just the “white” variety who are, of course, so much more “lethal.”
  5. Speaking of which, where was this group of worthies last summer (remember “The Summer of Love”?) when “armed extremists”, some heavily armed, ranged across the country, destroying small businesses, inflicting huge property losses, injuring scores of innocent bystanders and killing many American citizens in the wake of their “domestic terrorism”. If I missed it I am sure that omission will be brought to my attention, but I do not recall this group of stalwarts, or any like them, calling for a “Portland/Seattle/Minneapolis/Kenosha/Chicago/St. Louis Commission” to investigate what was, under any definition, excepting only those disordered enough to urge them on as did our current Vice-President, real, lethally armed dangerous terrorists. Do you?  
  6. Where were these dignitaries, now so concerned about the “violent disruption to the transition of power” when a real, sometimes violent (mostly peaceful?) disruption of the transition of power was taking place in early 2017–and for months (years?) thereafter?

Have my characterizations of this [C of C] letter been too harsh? Too triggering (except for the NT’ers as I know their answer)? Most importantly, inaccurate? If so, I invite your thoughts regarding same. 

I close with the way one online site characterized the letter, as food for thought:

This dishonest and error-ridden letter isn’t a call for an “investigation.” It is a call for an anti-MAGA Patriot Act. It’s a demand for a new War on Terror, this time aimed at the American people.

As noted above, to anyone with any military in their background, this letter, signed by some of the highest ranking Officers in the military, is just one more attack on the edifice which was once the proudest and strongest fighting force in the history of warfare.

No longer.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s