Conspiracy

[Racoon]

OK,

This is a pretty long article; and you may not have the patience ;)

I find it interesting nevertheless:)

:lightbulb :cup:

 

edit: feel free to post a response on any of it. Do you think it's all just BS?

 

 

“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 that 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, not do I consider the killing of innocent women, children and other humans as an appreciable act. Isla

 

back to views list

[hallenrm]

Good post, A must read for an open mind, not because it tells some solemn truths, but because it may prompt you to think and explore before you blindly believe in the feed of the mass media!!

 

I feel vindicated, because I have always believed that power currupts and US Govt. today is the ultimate power in the world today. :) ;) :) :)

[Wondering]

 

 

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.

 

 

 

I haven't read the whole article yet, but skimming over it I found the above quote. I just want to point out that on a website that is based on facts and evidence, maybe more people should be looking at what the government actually has for facts (which they are hiding) and evidence (which they don't have).

[Qfwfq]

Interesting, but could you not have supplied a link with a brief quote?

 

Did you check about copyright before repeating it here?

[Racoon]

Interesting, but could you not have supplied a link with a brief quote?

 

Did you check about copyright before repeating it here?

 

Yes and No.

Its from Jim Marrs's official website..

I am not profiting from this, so no need to worry about copyright...Its up on his site for anyone to access

along with more...But I wanted people to read this one.

 

I think its a great article. True or Not, it raises some good points.

:eek_big:

[niviene]

The article is good.... However - you may not be profiting from it, but you didn't even say where you got it from or who wrote it. I agree with Q here... it would have been better to post a link.

[Racoon]

it would have been better to post a link.

well, if I posted the link, people may have missed this particular article..

But to satisfy ya'll

 

http://www.jimmarrs.com/

 

click to right, a view from Marrs, an overview on the war on terror. aug 2004.

It is a condensed from his book "Rule By Secrecy"

 

Happy Now! :P

[Qfwfq]

Well, even if it were still on the list, it still wouldn't be the best way to persuade people to take the bother to read it. Posting this link instead might have been better. ;)

 

In any case that post is far too tall to scroll through and it takes up too much space needlessly and is against our rules.

[Racoon]

Well, even if it were still on the list, it still wouldn't be the best way to persuade people to take the bother to read it. :)

 

In any case that post is far too tall to scroll through and it takes up too much space needlessly and is against our rules.

 

Thanks for the clarification Qfwfq. :esheriff:

I wouldn't say its "needless'..;) Not compared to some of the stuff that gets posted. (long, Yes, but it needs that much space.)

I normally don't post such a long topic. Only this, and my Paper on Tesla.

 

Persuade people? I presented an article here. I qualified this in the beginning...:steering:

 

What is your opinion on the matter?

Is there a conspiracy occuring on this planet??

[hallenrm]

Now that a point has been made about the length of the post, can we now talk about the contents of the post?

 

For me, it substantiated my belief that by an large people are gullible, and like to believe what has been fed to them en masse!

 

Any thing different is treated with indifference, maybe bacause of fear of the authority, or just because it demands a little thought too!!!:evil:

[Qfwfq]

Is there a conspiracy occuring on this planet??

Et tu Brutus?

:D