An
Overview of the War on Terrorism
It's
the oldest trick in the book, dating back to Roman times; creating
the enemies you need.
Quote by Hermann Goering concerning terrorism
"Naturally the common people don't want war: Neither in
Russia, nor in
England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But,
after all,
IT IS THE LEADERS of the country who determine the policy and it
is always a
simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a
democracy, or a
fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist
dictatorship. Voice or
no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of
the leaders. That
is easy. All you have to do is TELL THEM THEY ARE BEING
ATTACKED, and denounce
the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the
country to danger. IT
WORKS THE SAME IN ANY COUNTRY." --Goering at the
Nuremberg Trials
"Terrorism is the best political weapon for nothing drives
people harder than a fear of sudden death." -- Adolf Hitler
september the 11th, september the 11th, september the 11th,
september the 11th, war and danger, very very dangerous world,
murderous regimes, tyranny and terror, danger, weapons of mass
destructions, the deadliest of weapons, poison gas, torture
chambers, terror, terror, terror, terror, global terrorism,
global terrorism , global terrorism , global terrorism,
terrorism, terrorists, terrorists, terrorists, terrorists,
terrorists, terrorists, terrorists, terrorists.
"We must speak the truth about terror. 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. To inflame ethnic hatred is to advance the cause of terror."
- President Bush Speaks to United Nations, November 10, 2001
An Overview of the War on Terrorism
By Jim Marrs, JimMarrs. com
23rd October 2001
http://www.gulufuture.com/future/terrorover.htm
"Hate
cannot drive out hate; only love can do that." - Dr. Martin
Luther King Jr.
"Those
who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it." -
Philosopher George Santayana
"We
are not afraid to entrust the American people with unpleasant facts,
foreign ideas, alien philosophies and competitive values. For a
nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and
falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its
people." - President John F. Kennedy
Americans
are now beginning to pay the price for sleeping through history
classes, ignoring important information in the alternative media and
neglecting to participate in their own political process.
They
find themselves in a new war --- the War on Terrorism. This is a war
they never asked for and never envisioned, anesthetized as we all
are by the flickering tube of distraction. It is a war predicated on
the premise that a sneak attack was made on the United States
September 11, 2001.
Unlike
previous wars, there is no Berlin or Tokyo to capture and
hence, no victory to be won, except for those who profit from
war. The real victims of this war will be the average American
citizen, right along with the starving Afghan.
This
new war might well be compared to the failed War on Drugs and the
nearly forgotten War on Poverty. No clear victory has yet been
achieved over the misuse of drugs or the ravages of poverty within
our own nation. Our prisons are overflowing with drug
offenders with no appreciable lessening of either demand or
supply and our basic civil rights have been badly mauled.
Just like those failed campaigns, the War on Terrorism for the
foreseeable future will set us all on a costly course of
restrictions on individual freedom, ever more centralized
authority and omnipresent fear.
And
where are the voices of those who would argue the merits of this new
war? The airwaves and newspapers only ratchet the fear factor
upwards each day with little or no effort to hear the many
thoughtful Americans who are asking themselves, "Do I
really need to give up my freedoms in order to save
them?"
So
with flags flying on the antennae of our gas-guzzling vehicles
and love of country pulsing in our hearts, we march off to yet
another war for oil.
Wars
For Oil
Yes,
oil. Petroleum has been behind all recent wars, beginning in the
early 1940's, when a mostly rural and isolationist America was
suddenly thrown into a world war as a reaction to the Japanese
attack on Pearl Harbor. Americans mourned the loss of some
3,000 soldiers and civilians in Hawaii and, in righteous
indignation, allowed their country to be turned into a giant
military camp.
The
federal government, which had consolidated so much power unto
itself under the Depression-busting policies of President
Franklin Roosevelt, grew even stronger and more centralized
under the aegis of "national security". It all
seemed quite natural and necessary at the time.
But
serious students of history now know that even that "good
war" was the result of machinations by a handful of
wealthy and powerful men. By closing off Japan's oil supplies in the
summer of 1941, Roosevelt, the quintessential Wall Street insider,
ensured an eventual attack on the United States. It has now
been well established that Roosevelt and a few close advisers
knew full well that Pearl Harbor would be attacked on Dec. 7,
1941, but chose to allow it to happen to further their agenda
for launching American into war. (The details of this may be
found in my book Rule by Secrecy.)
The Vietnam War was prosecuted by men who were close to Roosevelt
and the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) who had long voiced
a desire to gain control over Indochina's oil, magnesium and
rubber assets.
Again
a provocation was created. In August, 1964, President Lyndon
Johnson whipped Congress into a frenzy claiming that North
Vietnamese gunboats had attacked the US Sixth Fleet in the
Gulf of Tonkin off the coast of Vietnam. "Our boys are floating
in the water," he cried. Congress responded by passing the Gulf
of Tonkin Resolution which bypassed the Constitution and gave
Johnson the power to wage war to stop attacks on Americans. It
was the beginning of the real shooting Vietnam War.
And
it was all a lie. No evidence has ever been brought forward that
such an attack took place. In fact, editors for US News &
World Report (July 23, 1984) called it "The 'Phantom Battle'
That Led to War."
While
America was waging war against North Vietnam, which we were told was
merely a puppet of communist Russia and China, Johnson was
encouraged by his CFR advisers to grant the Soviet Union loans at
higher levels than offered during World War II when they were
our ally. US-backed loans provided Russia with the means to
build facilities which turned out war materials that were then
sent to North Vietnam for use against American troops. This
was a good example of the duplicity of our modern wars.
The
Gulf War was all about oil, from the wells in Kuwait slant drilling
into Iraq's southern reserves to the destruction of the oil
fields at its finish. Here we found a new Hitler in Saddam Hussein,
an enemy armed and financed by the CIA, an agency whose top
officials have long been connected to
oil men CFR members and other globalists (See Rule by Secrecy).
Saddam Hussein, strapped for cash due to his eight-year war
against Iran on behalf of the US, decided to regain Kuwait as
a means of increasing his income. Kuwait had been carved out of
southern Iraqi by British troops. When asked her thoughts on
this move, US Ambassador April Glaspie replied that the US
government had "no opinion" on the matter and that
the matter of Kuwait was not associated with America. But when he
moved his troops into Kuwait, Bush mobilized a United Nations
force against him, backed by a $4 billion secret fund provided by
his business associates in Saudi Arabia.
Yet, as those patriotic soldiers closed in on Saddam, the
whole war stopped and George H. W. Bush's old business partner
is still in power. It appears to have been yet another provocation.
And as in Vietnam, even as we prepared to fight against
Saddam, the American taxpayers backed $500 million in loans
that he used to purchase arms for use against our forces.
Caspian
Sea Oil Coveted
Today
the real issue is the rich oil reserves of the Caspian Sea region,
the prize sought by Hitler whose drive to that area was
stopped only by the tenacious Russian defense of the Volga
River city of Stalingrad.
In
the late 1970's, with the Soviet discovery of vast untapped oil in
Chechnya, the region was ripe for exploitation but control over
Afghanistan was needed to ensure the safety of a pipeline to bring
the oil to world markets. But after almost 10 years of brutal,
no-quarter fighting against Afghans and Arab mercenaries backed by
the United States, including Osama bin Laden, the Soviets were
forced to withdraw. The economic stress of this Russo-Afghan
War was enough to topple communism in the early 1990's.
Now
the international bankers and oilmen have a foothold in
cash-strapped Russia and the estimated $40 billion in Caspian
Sea oil is again attracting serious attention. In 1997, six
international companies and the Government of Turkmenistan formed
Central Asian Gas Pipeline, Ltd. (CentGas) to build a
790-mile-long pipeline to Pakistan and perhaps on to the New
Delhi area of India.
Leading
this consortium was Unocal Corporation, whose president, John F.
Imle, Jr., said the project would be "the foundation for
a new commerce corridor for the region - often referred to as
the Silk Road for the 21st Century."
But
problems developed with the fundamentalist Muslim government
in Afghanistan, not the least of which was the Taliban
government's treatment of women which prompted feminist
demonstrations against firms seeking to do business there.
Additionally, the Taliban regime was creating chaotic conditions by
pitting the various Islamic sects against each other in order to
maintain control. In the mid-1999, Unacol withdrew from the pipeline
consortium, citing the hazardous political situation and the project
languished.
Notice
that in President Bush's declaration of war on terrorism, he
never mentioned terrorists in Northern Ireland or the
Palestinian suicide bombers. Attention was only focused on
Afghanistan, the one nation necessary to complete the
lucrative pipeline. It should also be noted that Vice President Dick
Cheney headed Halliburton, a giant oil industry service company and
is generally thought to be more powerful than the president.
Today
it can be demonstrated that military action against Afghanistan has
been in the works long before the Sept. 11 attacks.
AFGHAN
ACTION PLANNED LONG AGO
As
reported by BBC's George Arney, former Pakistani Foreign Secretary
Niaz Naik was alerted by American officials in mid-July that
military action against Afghanistan would be launched by
mid-October. At a UN-sponsored meeting concerning Afghanistan
in Berlin, Naik was informed that unless bin Laden was handed
over, America would take military action to either kill or capture
both him and Taliban leader Mullah Omar as the initial step in
installing a new government there.
It
should be noted, however, that American intervention in Afghanistan
began years ago, at least six months prior to the Soviet invasion in
December, 1979.
In
a 1998 interview with former National Security Adviser
Zbigniew Brzezinski in the French publication Le Nouvel
Observateur, the significant portions of which never made it
to the United States, he admitted that American activities in
Afghanistan actually began six months prior to the
Soviet action.
Brzezinski
said the Jimmy Carter administration began secretly funding
opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul in July of 1979
with the full knowledge such action might provoke a Soviet
invasion. Soviet leaders at the time argued the invasion was
necessary to thwart American aggression in Afghanistan. The
former national security advisor, who helped found the
globalist Trilateral Commission, expressed no regret at this
provocation, stating, "That secret operation was an excellent
idea. It. brought about the demoralization and finally the breakup
of the Soviet empire." It also produced the Taliban
regime which we are fighting today, as well as Osama bin
Laden.
By
1984, with Vice President George H. W. Bush overseeing the Afghan
situation, bin Laden was in charge of the Maktab al-Khidamir (MAK)
which funneled money, arms and manpower from the outside world into
the war against the Soviets. He soon helped form a polyglot
formation of Arabic troops from Egypt, Pakistan, Lebanon,
Syria and Palestinian refugee camps, whom the CIA found easier
to deal with than the Muslim fundamentalists in Afghanistan.
There
should be considerable soul-searching about America's role in arming
and training an international group of Muslim extremists in
Afghanistan long after their comrades destroyed the Marine barracks
in Beruit and hijacked numerous airliners.
Little
noticed in the aftermath of the 9-11 attacks were reports that
China had signed a pact with the Afghans and was quietly
inducted into the controversial World Trade Organization,
action which under normal circumstances would have drawn
widespread protest. Although such a pact is unconfirmed at this
time, Pakistani General Pervez Musharraf, chairman of their joint
chiefs and chief of the Pakistani Army Staff, this years visited
China at their request and discussed matters of mutual
interest.
Although,
it is claimed that Pakistan is aiding the US in the current War
Against Terrorism, the State Department's coordinator for
counterterrorism, Michael Sheehan, told a Senate Foreign
Relations subcommittee that Pakistan supports and trains
terrorist groups in Afghanistan
This raises the specter of Chinese intervention should US
forces become bogged down in mountainous Afghanistan. This
prospect is particularly unsettling as back in 1555, the French
prophet Nostradamus, who has been proven correct in so many of
his prophecies, predicted that America and Russia would go to
war against a coalition made up of Arab nations and China.
Until
just recently, such a notion seemed absurd.
WOULD
AMERICANS ATTACK AMERICANS?
The
WTC/Pentagon attacks provided a convenient excuse to launch the
pre-laid plans for military action against Afghanistan. But were
they simply allowed to happen or were they contrived? The question
becomes: Would any American allow an attack on fellow
Americans just to further his own business or political
agenda?
The
answer, unfortunately, appears to be "Yes."
Incredibly,
40-year-old government documents thought to have been destroyed long
ago recently were made public show the US military in the early
1960's proposed making terrorist attacks in the United States and
blaming them on Fidel Castro.
These
documents are discussed in a recent book on the National
Security Agency (NSA) entitled Body of Secrets: Anatomy of the
Ultra-Secret National Security Agency by James Bamford.
These
documents were produced beginning in late 1961 following the
ill-fated Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba that spring. President
John F. Kennedy, angered by the inept actions of the CIA, had
shifted responsibility for Cuba from that agency to the
Department of Defense. Here, military strategists considered plans
to create terrorist actions which would alarm the American
population and stampede them into supporting a military attack
on Cuba.
Under
consideration in "Operation Northwoods" were plans:
-
to
create "a series of well-coordinated incidents" in
or around the US Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to
include inciting riots, blowing up ammunition stores, aircraft
and ships.
-
to
"develop a Communist Cuba terror campaign in the Miami
area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington."
-
to
"sink a boatload of Cubans en route to Florida (real or
simulated).. foster attempts on the lives of Cuban
refugees in the United States."
-
to
explode bombs in carefully chosen locations along with the
release of "prepared documents" pointing to
Cuban complicity.
-
to
use fake Russian aircraft to harass civilian airliners.
-
to
make "Hijacking attempts against civil air and surface
craft" even to simulating the shooting down of a
civilian airliner.
Kennedy
rejected Operation Northwoods and senior military officers ordered
the documents destroyed. But someone slipped up and the papers
were discovered by the Assassination Records Review Board and
recently released by the National Archives.
More
recently, according to The New York Times (October 28, 1993),
an informant named Emad Salem early in 1993 was involved with Middle
Eastern terrorists connected to Osama bin Laden to develop a bomb
for use against New York's World Trade Center. Salem, a former
Egyptian Army
officer, wanted to substitute a harmless powder for the explosive
but his plan to thwart the attack was blocked by an FBI official who
apparently did not want to expose the inside informant. The attack
was allowed to proceed.
The
February 26 explosion in the WTC resulted in six deaths, more than
1,000 casualties and damage in excess of half billion dollars.
We
now see that creating crises to further political goals is a
methodology well understood and utilized in the 20th century. Is
this the game today?
Let's
examine the Sept. 11 attack.
QUESTIONS
OVER 9-11
Superficially,
it all seemed straightforward enough. According to the official
story, about 19 suicidal Middle Eastern terrorists, their
hearts full of hatred for American freedom and democracy,
hijacked four airliners, crashing two into the twin towers of New
York City's World Trade Center and a third into the Pentagon.
The fourth reportedly crashed in western Pennsylvania after
passengers attempted to fight the terrorists.
But
a series of disturbing questions have arisen. Among them:
Why
was the US military preparing war plans against Afghanistan months
before the Sept. 11 attacks? Were they just looking for some event
to propel the normally disinterested American public into a war as
in the past?
How
could paper documents incriminating bin Laden be found intact
at the WTC but the plane's black recording boxes designed to
withstand crashes were damaged beyond use?
Even
days and weeks after the WTC attack, why were news cameramen
prevented from photographing the ruins from certain angles, as
complained about by CBS Correspondent Lou Young, who asked,
"What are they afraid we're going to see?"
Why
has the NYPD liaison to the FBI been sent packing as a
"security risk" as reported in the Oct. 16 New York
Times? Whose security is at risk? The FBI? What is it that the
bureau does not want NYPD to know?
How
could an obviously sophisticated terrorist plan involving
perhaps as many as 100 persons and in the works for five years
escape the notice of our intelligence services, especially the
FBI and CIA? And why, instead of cashiering those responsible
for this intelligence failure and totally restructuring these
agencies, are we doubling their budgets? Will we now get twice as
much failure as before?
Why
did the South Tower collapse first when it was not as
extensively damaged as the North Tower which burned for almost
an hour and a half before collapsing?
Why
did many witnesses claim to hear further explosions within the
buildings? And why did the destruction of the WTC towers
appear more like a controlled implosion than a tragic
accident?
Why
did FBI Director Robert Mueller acknowledge that the list of
named hijackers might not contain their real names? Doesn't
everyone have to show a photo ID to claim a boarding pass?
Where was the normal security?
Why
was there a discrepancy of 35 names between the published passenger
lists and the official death toll on all four of the ill-fated
flights? Internet Columnist Gary North reported, "the
published names in no instance match the total listed for the number
of people on board." Why the discrepancy?
As
none of these listed passengers had an Arabic-sounding names, how
did the government know which were the hijackers?
Why
did the seat numbers of the hijackers given by a cell phone call
from Flight Attendant Madeline Amy Sweeney to Boston air
traffic control not match the seats occupied by the men the
FBI claimed were responsible?
Since
Saudi Arabia's foreign minister claimed five of the proclaimed
hijackers were not aboard the death planes and in fact are still
alive and a sixth man on that list was reported to be alive and well
in Tunisia, why are these names still on the FBI list?
Why
were none of the named hijacker's names on any of the passenger
list? If they all used aliases, how did the FBI identify them
so quickly?
Why
did one of the named hijackers take luggage on a suicide flight,
then leave it along with an incriminating note in his car at the
airport?
As
for the overall investigation into the September attacks, by late
October U. S. authorities conceded that most of their promising
leads for finding accomplices and some of their long-held suspicions
about several suspects have unraveled, according to The New York
Times. Since more than 800 people have been arrested and more
than 365,000 tips have been received from the public, why has
nothing substantial has been forthcoming in the largest U. S.
criminal investigation in history?
Why
are none of the nearly 100 people still being sought by the Federal
Bureau of Investigation seen as a major suspect?
Why
are we bombing Afghanistan when apparently none of the listed
hijackers were Afghans, but instead Arabs from various Middle
Eastern nations?
Since
Iraq was implicated in the 1993 WTC attack, why are we not
bombing that "rogue" nation?
Why
does the heavy drinking and searching for hookers by some of the
hijackers in Boston, as reported by Reuters New Service, sound
more like mercenaries carousing before a mission than pious
religious fundamentalists about to meet their maker?
How
did the terrorists obtain top-secret White House and Air Force One
codes and signals, the excuse for hustling President Bush
all across the country on Sept. 11? Was this evidence of an
inside job or was it, as reported by Fox News, evidence that
former FBI employee and double agent Robert Hanssen delivered an
updated version of the purloined computer software Promis to his
Russian handlers who passed it along to bin Laden? Does this
software, which was stolen from a US company during the Reagan
Administration by Justice Department officials under Attorney
General Ed Meese, allow outsiders carte blanch entrée to
our top security computers? (Hanssen's last job before being
arrested as a spy was to upgrade the FBI's intelligence computer
systems.)
If
United Flight 93 crashed as the result of a struggle between
heroic passengers and the hijackers, why did witnesses tell
of a second plane which followed it down, falling burning debris,
no deep crater and crash wreckage spread over a six-mile
area indicative of an aerial explosion?
Why
did news outlets describe the throat-cutting and mutilation
of passengers on Flight 93 with box cutters when Time
magazine on Sept. 24 reported that one of the passengers
called home on a cell phone to report, "We have been
hijacked. They are being kind."?
As
Internet pundit Gary North stated, "We need a theory of the
coordinated hijackings that rests on a plausible
cause-and-effect sequence that does not assume the complete
failure of both check-in procedures and the on-board seating
procedures on four separate flights on two separate airlines. I
don't see how anyone can make an accurate judgment about who
was behind the attacks until he has a plausible explanation
of how hijackers got onto the planes and were not removed."
But
the federal government aided by a sycophantic mass media did not
allow such rational thinking to interfere with a rush to
judgment that Osama bin Laden was the culprit behind the
attacks.
BIN
LADEN AND HIS FRIENDS
As
in the JFK assassination, authorities had a suspect even before
anyone knew for certain what had happened. He was the son of
a wealthy Middle Eastern oil family, Osama bin Laden, who during
the Russo-Afghan War of the 1980s, received arms and
financing from the US Government.
Despite
the fact that bin Laden has denied any knowledge of the attack,
he was presumed guilty by both the government and the press. No
other interpretation of the attack was allowed in the
corporate mass media.
Bin
Laden is a made-to-order enemy, the man reportedly behind the 1993
WTC attack and a fugitive from United States justice for
more than a decade. It has been noted that the government
apparently has spent more time and money chasing Microsoft's Bill
Gates than in capturing bin Laden.
This
may be due to the business connections between our new terrorist
enemy and wealthy American companies.
According
to several reports, including Jonathan Beaty and S. C. Gwynne's
book The Outlaw Bank: A Wild Ride into the Secret Heart of
the BCCI (New York: Random House, 1993) and American Free
Press (October 15, 2001), the reincarnation of the Washington
newspaper The Spotlight, Bush family friend James R. Bath
used money from Osama bin Laden's brother, Salem, to open a
partnership with George W. Bush in Arbusto Energy, a West
Texas drilling company. Bush believed the word "arbusto"
to mean Bush in Spanish, although it generally refers to a
"shrub".
According
to The Houston Chronicle, Salem bin Laden named Bath his business
representative in Texas shortly after the senior Bush was named
CIA director by appointed President Gerald Ford in 1975.
It
was the Bush family, particularly Jeb and Neil, who were involved
in the savings and loan debacle from 1989 to 1993 that cost
taxpayers more than $500 billion.
Through
a tangled web of Texas oilmen, wealthy Saudi sheiks and
unscrupulous bankers connected to BCCI, the younger Bush
eventually gained a sizable interest in a new oil company
called Harken Energy. Two months before Saddam Hussein sent
Iraqi troops into Kuwait, Bush sold two-thirds of his Harken
stock, netting himself nearly a one million dollar profit.
The stock dropped when the Iraqi invasion began.
It
should be noted that during the Persian Gulf War, it was
Binladen Brothers Construction (now the Binladen Group) that
helped build airfields for US aircraft. The bin Laden
brothers were then described as "a good friend of the US
government".
Later
the bin Laden firm continued to be hired to construct an
American air base in Saudi Arabia despite the fact that Osama had
already been blamed for terrorist acts such as the truck
bombing of the Khobar Towers at the Dhahran base which killed
19 Americans. A WorldNetDaily writer commented, "So let's get
this straight. Osama blows up our facilities, and his family
gets the contract for rebuilding them. Do you get the feeling
there is more going on than meets the eye?"
Osama's
older brother, Salem, was killed in the strange crash of an
ultralight aircraft in 1988. The single-passenger craft
suddenly and inexplicably veered into high-voltage electric
power lines near San Antonio, Texas. The BCCI bank was
closed by federal investigators in 1991 after suffering some $10
billion in losses. BCCI was a Pakistani-run institution with
front companies in the Cayman Islands that used secret
accounts for global money-laundering and was used by U. S.
intelligence to funnel money to bin-Laden and the Mujahideen
in Afghanistan fighting against the Soviet-backed
government.
Another
close connection between bin Laden and the Bush family is a
$12-billion private international investment firm known as
the Carlyle Group.
Although
it has removed its web site since the Sept. 11 attacks, it is
know that Carlyle directors include former Reagan Secretary of
Defense Frank Carlucci, former Bush Secretary of State James
Baker and former Reagan aide and GOP operative Richard
Darman. The New York Times reported that former President
Bush was allowed to buy into Carlyle's investments which
involve at least 164 companies around the world.
According
to the Wall Street Journal (Sept. 28, 2001), "George H. W.
Bush, the father of President Bush, works for the bin Laden
family business in Saudi Arabia through the Carlyle Group,
an international consulting firm." It has been
confirmed by the senior Bush's chief of staff that Bush sent
a thank you note to the bin Laden family after a social visit
in early 2001.
With
such connections and his son as a sitting President of the United
States, the senior Bush's Carlyle involvement was questioned
by Larry Klayman, chairman and general counsel of Judicial
Watch, who said, "Any foreign government or foreign
investor trying to curry favor with the current
Bush Administration is sure to throw business to the Carlyle
Group. And with the former President Bush promoting the
firm's investments abroad, foreign nationals could understandably
confuse the Carlyle Group's interests with the interests of
the United States government."
After
detailing some of the Carlyle/bin Laden investments in several
businesses, including aerospace industries, writer Michael C.
Ruppert commented, "In other words, Osama bin Laden's attacks
on the WTC and Pentagon, with the resulting massive increase
in the US defense budget, have just made his family a great
big pile of money."
What
makes these business dealings that entangle former and current
American political leaders with Middle Easterners even more
suspect was the announcement that several US firms were being
investigated for short selling stocks just prior to the Sept. 11
attacks.
SELLING
STOCKS SHORT INDICATES FOREKNOWLEDGE
Short
selling of stocks involves the opportunity to gain large profits
by passing shares to a friendly third party, then buying them back
when the price falls. Historically, if this precedes a traumatic
event, it is an indication of foreknowledge. It is widely known
that the CIA uses the Promis software to routinely monitor stock
trades as a possible warning sign of a terrorist attack or
suspicious economic behavior.
A
week after the Sept. 11 attacks, the London Times reported that
the CIA had asked regulators for the Financial Services
Authority in London to investigate the suspicious sales of
millions of shares of stock just prior to the terrorist
acts. It was hoped the business paper trail might lead to
the terrorists. The Times said market regulators in Germany,
Japan and the US all had received information concerning the short
selling of insurance, airlines and arms companies stock , all of
which fell sharply in the wake of the attacks.
City
of London broker and analyst Richard Crossley noted that someone
sold shares in unusually large quantities beginning three
weeks before the assault on the WTC and Pentagon. He said he took
this as evidence that someone had insider foreknowledge of the
attacks.
"What
is more awful than he should aim a stiletto blow at the heart of
Western financial markets?," he added. "But to profit
from it. Words fail me."
The
US Government also admitted it was investigating short selling,
which evinced a foreknowledge of the tragedy. There was unusually
heavy trading in airline and insurance stocks several days
before Sept. 11 which essentially bet on a drop in the worth
of the stocks.
It
was reported by the Interdisciplinary Center, a counter-terrorism
think tank involving former Israeli intelligence officers,
that insiders made nearly $16 million profit by short
selling shares in American and United Airlines, the two
airlines that suffered hijacking, and the investment firm of
Morgan Stanley, which occupied 22 floors of the WTC.
Apparently
none of the suspicious transactions could be traced to bin Laden
because this news item quietly dropped from sight, leaving many
people wondering if it tracked back to American firms or
intelligence agencies.
According
to web writer and former LA policeman Michael C. Ruppert, these
transactions were handled primarily by Deutsche Bank-A. B. Brown,
a firm which until 1998 was chaired by A. B. "Buzzy"
Krongard, who today is executive director of the CIA.
Besides
Krongard, other prominent Americans connected to both the CIA and
Wall Street power include Clark Clifford (who was a key
player in gaining legitimacy for the BCCI), John Foster and
Allen Dulles (Allen oversaw the failed Bay of Pigs Invasion and
sat on the Warren Commission), Bill Casey, David Doherty,
George Herbert Walker Bush, John Deutch, Nora Slatkin and
Hank Greenburg.
As
detailed in Rule by Secrecy, the CIA historically has been top
heavy with members of the Wall Street elite who desire to advance
their globalist agenda. It also operates a number of front
companies which themselves deal in stocks and bonds. I am
absolutely convinced that the Central Intelligence Agency
had complete and perfect foreknowledge of the attacks, down to the
date, time, place and location," Ruppert told OnLine
Journal on Oct. 12.
There
were other indications of foreknowledge. San Francisco Mayor
Willie Brown stated on that on Sept. 10 he was warned by his
personal "airport security" not to fly the next day.,
according to radio station KSFO.
More
ominous was a piece in the Sept. 28 edition of the Washington Post
stating that officials with the instant messaging firm of Odigo in
New York confirmed that two employees in Israel received text
messages warning of an attack on the WTC two hours before
the planes crashed into the buildings. The firm's vice
president of sales and marketing, Alex Diamandis said it was
possible that the warning was sent to other Odigo members, but
they had not received any reports of such.
Military
forces had been on a heightened state of alert for several days
before the attack and several psychics claimed to have had a
premonition that something was afoot.
Even
the Russians got in on the act. Dr. Tatyana Koragina, a
senior research fellow at the Institute of Macroeconomic
Researches which is a part of the Russian Ministry of
Economic Development, gained credibility due to her July
prediction that an unusual catastrophe would strike America in
late August ruining the economy.
In
a Pravda interview, she stated, "The US has been chosen
as the object of financial attack because the financial
center of the planet is located there. The effect will be
maximal. The strike waves of economic crisis will spread over the
planet."
Following
the Sept. 11 attacks, Dr. Koragina was reinterviewed and asserted
the "powerful group" behind the attacks will make
new strikes. "When [Americans] understand after the
upcoming, new strikes, that their government can guarantee
them nothing, they will panic - causing a collapse of their
financial system."
Asked
who was really behind this odious plan, she replied it is
not the 19 terrorists identified by the FBI but rather a larger
group seeking to reshape the world. She said this group of
extremely powerful private persons hold total assets of
about $300 trillion and intend to legitimize their power under a
new global government.
Some
took Dr. Koragina's eerily correct predictions as evidence
that Russia itself may be behind some of the current events.
It is a fact that Russia has backed several state sponsors
of terrorists, including Iraq, Iran, Syria, Libya, North
Korea and Cuba.
ISRAELI
FOREKNOWLEDGE?
But
let us not forget the indications that someone in Israel had
foreknowledge of the attacks. And there were questions concerning
the number of Israeli citizens killed in the attacks. The
day after, the Jerusalem Post claimed two Israelis died on
the hijacked airplanes and that 4,000 were missing at
the WTC. A week later, a Beirut television station reported
that 4,000 Israeli employees of the WTC were absent the day of the
attack. This information spread across the Internet but was
quickly branded a hoax. On Sept. 19, the Washington Post
reported about 113 Israelis were missing at the WTC and the next
day, President Bush noted more than 130 Israelis were victims.
Finally, on Sept. 22, the New York Times stated "There
were, in fact, only three Israelis who had been confirmed as
dead: two on the planes and another who had been visiting
the towers on business and who was identified and
buried."
Of
all the nations of the world, Israel probably profited the most
from the events of Sept. 11.
A
permanent American military force in the Middle East is now
assured, offering an umbrella of protection to that small
nation despite the anger engendered in Arab states. After Ariel
Sharon's provocative visit to the Muslim mosque in Jerusalem
resulted in widespread violence by Palestinians, world opinion
began to shift away from uncritical support of Israel. It
has been reported that the Bush Administration was beginning
to seriously consider support for a separate Palestinian state.
Israel's
powerful and effective intelligence agency, the Mossad, is
not beyond suspicion, according to the US Army's School of
Advanced Military Studies. The Washington Times on Sept. 10,
just 24 hours before the attacks, ran an article quoting
officers of the school as describing the Mossad as "Wildcard.
Ruthless and cunning. Has capability to target US forces and
make it look like a Palestinian/Arab act."
It
is generally known that the Mossad has penetrated every Arab
and Muslim organization and would have had little problem in
finding any number of fanatics to carry out a suicide
mission in the belief they were serving Allah.
Indeed,
recent news reports contended that not all of the hijackers knew
their mission would end in death.
REMOTE
CONTROLLED AIRCRAFT A REALITY
Thanks
to newly revealed technology, it is now possible to theorize that
none of the hijackers intended to die.
Global
Hawk is the name of the latest version of a high-altitude,
long-endurance unmanned air vehicle (UAV), in other words, a
unmanned drone plane that can take off, conduct missions
such as photographing battlefields and land by remote
electronic control. This Buck Rogers equipment made its
first operational flight Oct. 7 when it was used for
reconnaissance over Afghanistan in preparation for US air and
missile strikes against the Taliban regime.
But
this remote-controlled plane, similar to a Boeing 737 commercial
airliner, was successfully tested earlier this year, first at
Edwards Air Force Base and later at Edinburgh Air Force Base
in southern Australia.
Prior
to leaving Australia, Parliamentary Secretary to the
Minister for Defense Dr. Brendan Nelson said, "Global
Hawk will create aviation history again during its return
journey to become the first unmanned aircraft to fly non-stop from
Australia to the United States west coast."
When
news of Global Hawk was first released, there was speculation that
the UAV technology might be used to thwart airline
hijackings. Once a hijacking took place, the Global Hawk
technology would be triggered and the captured plane flown to a
landing at a safe location regardless of the actions of the
flight crew or the hijackers.
In
fact, following the attacks, the New York Times on Sept. 28 in an
article on increasing air safety, mentioned "new technology,
probably far in the future, allowing air traffic controllers
to land distressed planes by remote control". This made
it seem such technology is not yet available, yet earlier
this year, a former chief of British Airways suggested that
such technology could be used to commandeer an aircraft from
the ground and controlled remotely in the event of a
hijacking.
Needless
to say, there are those today who question if Global Hawk's true
first operational use might have been conducted on Sept. 11.
After all, as all experienced aviation and military persons
well know, if a technology such as Global Hawk is publicly
revealed, it most probably has been in secret use for several
years.
But
regardless of how the planes with the terrorists were controlled,
it is clear that their managers had information, if not
help, from inside the government.
INSIDER
KNOWLEDGE
Early
on, the Bush White House issued a statement stating that
"credible evidence" showed that the hijackers had
access to the top secret codes of Air Force One, in which
the President fled from Florida to Louisiana and on to Nebraska.
This statement made the President's zig-zag journey of 9-11
more like that of a careful and prudent commander than a
fleeing coward.
White
House officials later said this information was untrue,
leaving the public with the question of what else has the
Bush people told us that is untrue, or that the their first
statements were true, raising the possibility that there may have
been inside help in obtaining the codes.
It
is certainly true that various agencies knew for some time
that suspected terrorists were operating in the United
States.
As
early as 1995, it was known within police and military circles and
reported in VFW and American Legion publications that some 5,000
former Iraqi prisoners of war had been allowed in this country by
the Clinton Administration beginning in 1993. Most had worked with
the CIA at one time or another and were allowed in this
country to avoid death at the hands of a vengeful Saddam
Hussein.
Many
of these men had been with the Iraqi Republican Guard which
blew up the Kuwaiti oil fields at the end of the Gulf War,
so they obviously were trained in explosives. They were
"resettled" in various US cities and where they
formed cells. These cities included New York City, Boston,
Washington, D. C., Miami, New Orleans, Chicago, Los Angeles,
San Francisco, Seattle, Dallas-Fort Worth, Houston, Oklahoma
City, Tulsa, Kansas City and more.
These
men participated in fundraising activities for the HAMAS and
Hezballah terrorist chains.
They
have been connected to Osama bin Laden through a Cebu City
connection in the Philippines, the location that convicted bomber
Terry Nichols visited with his Philippine wife. At least 12 of
these former POWs are believed to have been involved in the
Oklahoma City bombing.
Although
this may seem a strange and unreported connection, there is a
wealth of information linking Iraqi operatives to Timothy
McVeigh. In fact the Oct. 29 edition of U. S. News &
World Report revealed that "top Defense officials"
believe McVeigh was acting as an agent for Iraq, an astounding
development in light of the extent the government continued
to deny any conspiracy other than aid from Terry Nichols.
These
same trained soldiers reportedly created a number of clandestine
laboratories to produce biological warfare germs, including
anthrax, bubonic plague, various hemorrhagic fevers and
other deadly combinations.
FBI
MOVES SLOWLY AND IN WRONG DIRECTION
In
1996, The FBI finally was moved to action concerning the
biological threat. Ohio microbiologist Larry Wayne Harris
had tried to alert the public to the danger of anthrax being
smuggled into the United States by Muslim extremists but was
demonized by the mass media as a conspiracy buff. In 1998,
Harris, along with Nevada microbiologist William Leavitt,
was arrested by the FBI in Las Vegas for possessing anthrax
cultures.
The
mass media broadcast this news widely, repeating the
government's charge that the men were testing the deadly
toxins in preparation for an attack on New York. These
allegations were quietly dropped only a few days later when it
was found that the men possessed a harmless veterinary
anti-anthrax vaccine. They were attempting to find their own
antidote to anthrax, a dangerous disease the government
continued to dismiss in the mid-1990s. (US News & World
Report, March 2, 1998 and March 9.)
It
is interesting that at that same time, several people were warning
that an anthrax vaccine ordered for all US military
personnel was actually going to be used to spread the
disease and provoke a United Nations takeover once enough US
soldiers were incapacitated. It was claimed that this plan
would be set in motion by an emergency blamed on foreigners
which would hasten the use of the vaccine. Several military
persons were brought before a court martial for refusing to take
the vaccine.
And
what of Osama bin Laden? What did he have to say about all this?
Don't
look to the corporate mass media to inform you as they have all
agreed not to broadcast anything that might detract from the
official government story, even though it is acknowledged that
Bush's media denunciations of bin Laden have been more filled with
adjectives like "evil" and "evildoer"
than specific evidence.
Fairness
& Accuracy in Reporting (FAR) noted that on Oct. 10, network
executives representing ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox and CNN were involved
in a conference call with National Security Adviser and Council on
Foreign Relations heavyweight Condoleeza Rice. The execs
apparently agreed to limit how and what they broadcast
regarding bin Laden or his Al Qaeda group. Bush people even
tried unsuccessfully to have al Jazeera, called the
"CNN of the Mideast," broadcasting from Qatar tone down
its coverage of bin Laden. They were more successful with
members of our Congress, when they threatened to cut off
intelligence reports if they spoke offhand to the media.
The
next day, White House spokesman Ari Fleischer, already on
the record saying Americans "need to watch what they
say," extended this constraint by contacting major
newspapers asking that they not print full transcripts of bin
Laden's interviews.
According
to a FAR news release, "The point is not that bin Laden
or Al Qaeda deserve 'equal time' on US news broadcasts, but
that it is troubling for government to shape or influence
news content. Withholding information from the public is
hardly patriotic. When the White House insists that it's
dangerous to report a news event "in its entirety",
alarm bells should go off for journalists and the American
public alike."
OSAMA
BIN LADEN REPLIES
Here's
what bin Laden did say in an interview on Sept. 28, according to
the Pakistani newspaper Ummat, "I have already said
that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the
United States. As a Muslim, I try my best to avoid telling a
lie. I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider
the killing of innocent women, children and other humans as an
appreciable act. Islam strictly forbids causing harm to innocent
women, children and other people. Such a practice is forbidden
even in the course of battle. It is the United States, which
is perpetrating every maltreatment on women, children and
common people."
In
this interview, apparently suppressed in the United States, bin
Laden unsurprisingly blamed the attacks on Israel, claiming,
"All that is going on in Palestine for the last 11 months is
sufficient to call the wrath of God upon the United States
and Israel..(and) what had earlier been done to the innocent
people of Iraq, Chechnya and Bosnia. (A full text of this
interview may be found at http://www.khilafah.com/1421/category.php?DocumentID=2392&TagID=2)
Bin
Laden went on to state, "we are not hostile to the United
States. We are against the [US Government] system which
makes other nations slaves to the United States or forces
them to mortgage their political and economic freedom."
One
cannot, of course, take bin Laden at face value, but then
the same could be said for the US Government which has been
caught in so many lies and deceit in the past that it is
surprising that anyone pays any attention to official
pronouncements.
What
should be thoughtfully considered is the dismal record of United
States foreign policy since World War II. This policy, as
confirmed by the New York Times years ago, has been in the
hands of the Council on Foreign Relations elite since at least
1939. This elite and its associates includes former
Presidents Bush and Bill Clinton, Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter
and Richard Nixon, virtually every CIA director as well as a
considerable number of familiar past and present government
officials such as Dick Cheney, Henry Kissinger, Wesley
Clark, Strobe Talbott, Alexander Haig, Alan Greenspan, Bruce
Babbitt, James A. Baker III, Sandy Berger, Colin Powell,
Harold Brown, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Frank C. Carlucci,
Richard Darman, John Deutch, Lawrence Eagleburger, Robert
McFarlane, Brent Snowcroft, Condoleeza Rice and Casper Weinberger.
This
policy has been one of neo-colonialism, that is the subjugation
and control of other nations through military dictators or
wealthy families supported by, and often placed in power, by
the US military or intelligence services.
The
results of this neo-colonial policy has been dismal at best
and catastrophic at worst. Never mind the historical
aggression displayed by American foreign policy in the
Mexican War of 1848 and the Spanish-American War of 1898.
Consider this policy since World War II.
In
1951, when Iran's Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh
nationalized the oil industry in that Mideast nation, he was
deposed by a coup instigated by the CIA and the Shah came to
power, assuming complete control in 1963.
Thousands
of Iranians, perhaps millions died during the repressive rule of
the Shah and his SAVAK secret police. The Shah was finally forced
out in 1979 by the Ayatollah Khomeini, who became the US's
latest foreign enemy despite the fact that he had been on
the CIA payroll while living in Paris. The Shah was granted
asylum in the United States.
In
Guatemala in 1954, again the CIA toppled the popularly elected
government of Jacobo Arbenz, which had nationalized United Fruit
property. Prominent American government officials such as former
CIA Director Walter Bedell Smith, then CIA Director Allen
Dulles, Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs John
Moors Cabot and Secretary of State John Foster Dulles were
all closely connected to United Fruit. An estimated 120,000
Guatemalan peasants died in the resulting military
dictatorships.
Fidel
Castro, with covert aid from the CIA, overthrew the military
dictatorship of Fulgencio Batista and instituted sweeping
land, industrial and educational reforms as well as
nationalizing American businesses. Swifty labeled a communist, the
CIA then organized anti-Castro Cubans resulting in numerous
attacks on Cuba and the failed Bay of Pigs Invasion in 1961.
The island nation has been the object of US economic
sanctions since that time.
More
than 3,000 persons died in the wake of an invasion of the
Dominican Republic by US Marines in 1965. The troops
ostensibly were sent to prevent a communist takeover, although
later it was admitted that there had been no proof of such a
takeover.
Also
in 1965, the US began the bombing of North Vietnam after
President Johnson proclaimed the civil war there an
"aggression" by the north. Two years later,
American troop strength in Vietnam had grown to 380,000. US dead
by the end of that Asian war totaled some 58,000 with casualties
to the Vietnamese, both north and south, running more into the
millions.
In
1973, the elected government of Salvador Allende in Chile was
overthrown by a military coup aided by the CIA. Allende was killed
and some 30,000 persons died in subsequent violence and
repression, including some Americans.
In
1968, General Sukarno, the dictator of Indonesia, was
overthrown by the General Suharto, again with aid from the
CIA. Suharto proved even more dictatorial and corrupt than his
predecessor. A reported 800,000 people died during his
regime.
Another
250,000 persons died in 1975 during the brutal invasion of
East Timor by the Suharto regime aided by the US Government
and Henry Kissinger.
In
1979, the powerful Somoza family, which had ruled Nicaragua since
1937, was finally overthrown and Daniel Ortega was elected
president. CIA-backed Contra insurgents operating from Honduras
fought a protracted war to oust the Ortega government in
which an estimated 30,000 people died. The ensuing struggle
came to include such shady dealing in arms and drugs that it
created a scandal in the United States called Iran-Contra,
which involved selling arms to Iran and using the profits to
support the Contras.
US
Marines landed in Lebanon in 1982 in an attempt to preventing
further bloodshed between occupying Israeli troops and the
Palestine Liberation Organization. Thousands died in the
resulting civil war, including several hundred Palestinians
massacred in refugee camps by Christian forces. Despite the
battleship shelling of Beirut, American forces were
withdrawn in 1984 after a series of bloody attacks on them.
In
1983, US troops invaded the tiny Caribbean island nation of
Grenada after a leftist government was installed. The
official explanation was to rescue a handful of American
students who initially said they didn't need rescuing.
For
nearly 20 years, during the 1970s and 1980s, the US
Government gave aid and arms to the right- wing government
of the Republic of El Salvador for use against it leftist
enemies. By 1988, some 70,000 Salvadorans had died.
More
than one million persons died in the 15-year battle in Angola
between the Marxist government aided by Cuban troops and the
National Union for the Total Independence of Angola,
supported by South Africa and the US Government.
When
Muammur al-Qaddafi tried to socialize the oil-rich North
African nation of Libya beginning with his takeover in 1969,
he drew the wrath of the US Government. In 1981, it was
claimed that Qaddafi had sent hit teams to the United States to
assassinate President Reagan and in 1986, following the withdrawal
of U. S. oil companies from Libya, an air attack was
launched which missed Qaddafi but killed several people
including his infant daughter.
In
1987, an Iraqi missile attack on the US frigate Stark resulted in
37 deaths. Shortly afterward, the Iraqi president apologized
for the incident. In 1988, a US Navy ship shot down an Iranian
airliner over the Persian Gulf resulting in 290 deaths. The
Reagan Administration simply called it a mistake.
Thousands
of freedom seeking Chinese were killed in Beijing's
Tiananmen Square in 1989 after hardliners conferred with
former President Richard Nixon on how to deal with the
dissidents. Nixon, of course, was the only US president to
resign under threat of criminal indictment.
About
8,000 Panamanians died over Christmas, 1989, when President George
H. W. Bush sent US troops to invade that Central American
nation to arrest his former business partner, Manuel Noriega.
The excuse was that Noriega was involved in the importation of
drugs to the United States. U. S. News & World Report
noted that in 1990, the amount of drugs moving through
Panama had doubled.
Iraqi
casualties, both military and civilian, totaled more than 300,000
during the short Persian Gulf War of 1991. It has been estimated
that more than one million Iraqis, including women and children,
have died as a result of the continued missile and air
attacks over the past decade as well as economic sanctions
against that nation.
Also
in 1991, the United States suspended assistance to Haiti after the
election of a liberal priest sparked military action. Eventually,
US troops were deployed.
The
names of nations that have felt the brunt of US CIA and/or
military activity as a result of foreign policy include
Somalia, Afghanistan, Serbia, Kosovo, Bosnia, Brazil, Chad,
Sudan and many others. As Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. stated
during the Vietnam War, "My government is the world's leading
purveyor of violence." He did not say "my
country" or "my people," it is the government, or
rather those who control it, that are responsible. Although
we the distracted and unaware citizens who claim to live in
a democracy must take our fair share of the blame.
HISTORICAL
PRECEDENTS
Is
there precedence in history for what is happening to America
today? So much so that there is not enough space to present
it all. Nero burned Rome, blamed it on his enemies and took
dictatorial power.
But
consider what happened just last century. On February 27, 1933,
the German Reichstag or Parliament was destroyed by fire.
Hitler and his Nazis blamed the destruction on communist
terrorists. They even caught one, a retarded Dutch youth
named Marinus van der Lubbe who carried a Communist Party
card. After some time in custody, the youth confessed to
being the arsonist. However, later investigation found that one
person could not have started the mammoth blaze and that
incendiaries had been carried into the building through a
tunnel which led to the offices of Hitler's closest partner,
Hermann Goering.
Less
than a month later, on March 24, 1933, at Hitler's urging, a
panicky German Parliament voted 441 to 94 to pass an
"Enabling Act" which was the starting point for Hitler's
dictatorship. As a result of this act, Germans soon saw gun
confiscation, national identity cards, racial profiling, a
national security chief (Heinrich Himmler) and later, mass
murders and incarcerations in concentration camps.
One
of the western leaders who supported Hitler and his policies was
Prescott Bush, grandfather of President George W. Bush. He must
have taken notice of Hitler's method for gaining unwarranted
power.
Since
the Reichstag fire, the Bush family and their associates in the
Council on Foreign Relations, Trilateral Commission and
Bilderbergers have often mimicked Hitler's tactics of
creating a problem, offering a draconian solution and
advancing their agenda through any resulting compromise.
The
real enemy is whoever is behind the Sept. 11 terror attack.
Osama bin Laden, so closely connected to the financial
interests of the Bush family and the CIA, may be the
mastermind or he may be a convenient scapegoat, yet another
provocation to stampeded Americans into another war for
oil.
We
must thoughtfully consider where the real source of terror lies
--- with one bearded fanatic in an impoverished Middle
Eastern country or with those who would profit while shredding the
US Constitution in the name of defending freedom.