If you overheard someone advocating the vital need for a terror strike on American soil (to spark a global war), would you report them to the authorities? What if they were the authorities?
You've heard that "Liberals" and "Antiwar activists" "want America to lose" or "want Al-Qaeda to win".US foreign policy Elites, government officials and quasi-government reps, during the months and years before Sept 11, stated in writing how LUCKY and GREAT it would be if a "CATASTROPHIC EVENT" hit America. They stated that random civilians needed to suffer a horrific attack, and that this was of vital importance to their plans and goals.
Did you know ...
The innocent slain at Ground Zero were described in terms of sacrificial "props" for selling govt-corporate war policies -- long before the event.
There's a phrase to describe people who discuss a major crime or disaster, before it happens: primary suspects. Another term: possible conspirators. (Or clairvoyants.)
This was not written on a napkin or whispered in a men's room. These assertions were published through various Public Relations outfits and Lobby groups in Washington DC. How secret was that?
How did our patriotic media like Fox and CNN miss that? What about that brazen critic, Keith Olbermann? What about Limbaugh? What about O'Reilly? What about any of them?
What does that mean that our entire media system is oblivious to un-secret public statements advocating for terror attacks on the United States?
I WISH I HAD A LOUDER WAY TO ASK THAT QUESTION.
Some stated that their plans for war were vital to American hegemony and to global "stability", i.e. elite control over other "rogue" populations and states. They wanted the USA to launch massive military operations, quickly. They stated that the window of opportunity was brief and closing. Their plans might never be implemented unless innocent American people (we, the Vulgar Many) were struck with a massive Shock and Awe terror event. They needed a frightened, cowering populace for their plans, so they needed many random innocent Americans needed to die on a sunny Tuesday morning, in a fierce display of pyrotechnics.
(Well .. to be fair, they were merely 'hoping' that happened. Do 'winners' rely on 'luck' or 'create their luck'?)
Stunned. Terrified. Helpless. Rage and Anger. Grief-stricken. Compliant. Obedient. Passive dependence on government protection from the "bad guys" and "evil ones", whoever they might be. They wanted approval and unquestioning support, total patriotism, for both our government leaders and our military leaders. You might remember when Ashcroft @ DoJ or was that Ari Fleischer warned us on TV against asking wrong questions or making rash statements -- people "need to watch what they say."
This was to be a very long war, so they needed to 'engineer' the American citizens into the right mood to consent to mass murder, vast spending, and willing "human sacrifice". Dissent needed to be silenced, as much as feasible, or broadly condemnned.
A more blatant recent example, from 2009. (updated: July 18, 2009)
More recent examples: www.youtube.com/user/dilbertgeg
At least seven well-known interrelated groups were represented by these views back in 1999 - 2000:
This amounts to a rough total of a few thousand people, over 150 in PNAC alone. One cannot prove that each and every member of these groups approved of these pro-terror statements, but these 'official statements' represent the groups.
None has publicly denounced these views.
Their strong assertions were published mostly in scholarly journals and books that few ordinary people read.
Some of these spokesmen also worked "inside" the Pentagon, acting as political functionaries who direct the Pentagon.
They do not work in remote mountain caves, if you get my drift.
They mostly work in the Belly of the Beast, in Washington DC.
One or more were on the Defense Policy Board, one or more served periodically as National Security consultant, one was a former National Security Advisor who addressed the US Senate for 20 minutes on Feb 1, 2007. Some worked in the Defense Dept for Nixon, Reagan, Bush, Carter. Many formed the core of the 2nd Bush administration.
They claim to be protecting us.
War for USA or Western or G-20 hegemony, imperial mobilization, intimidation, "faster, please" military aggression, global REVOLUTION ... for corporations & military, and many say "for Israel" as well.
public disinterest or apathy or revulsion, as the main obstacle to waging aggressive war. Opposition to murder, death, sacrifice, waste, a.k.a. 200 million+ human Americans (and allies). Our disgusting ideology of Democracy and Self-Rule, independence, compassion, a desire for nice and easy and prosperous "vulgar" lives. (See what Straussians really believe about us.)
Solutions to their problems include:
Does that sound like a PARTY that you'd want to attend???
Did YOU experience any of that on September 11?
That's three "Pearl Harbors" cited, a vision of a bloodbath, an orgy of death.
I mean isn't that GROTESQUELY UNPATRIOTIC and TREASONOUS to say that you wish to see thousands or millions of fellow Americans burn, shredded, killed, even if the reason is to achieve an orgasm of political unity?
Which city should be sacrificed? Which people should die?
Many of the complete quotes are lengthy and convuluted verbiage, and above 8th grade reading level
Interesting, to say the least, that our Media shows NO INTEREST WHATSOEVER.
Support for Radical Islam, both military and financial, had been an explicit policy of successive administrations of both major parties.
This continues, as radical violence in Islamic nations is financed/provoked/pruned, as needed.
Both 'liberal' Trilateralists like Brzezinski, and neo-con groups like PNAC and AEI, all cited the need for a "LUCKY" security disaster.
Rumsfeld even predicted an attack that morning. Of course, none of that proves anything.
Cops and courts would need far less to issue indictments.
Secret Service harasses 14-year old girl over My Space threats
XVID-AVI VIDEO DOWNLOAD
WOW! Julia Wilson. Now she's a real theat ... maybe to lonesome teenage boys.
What about officials INSIDE the Pentagon threatening mass killing?
Why aren't these guys being tortured until they tell what they know? ;-)
Bush filled his cabinet positions with genuine terrorist sympathizers and supporters, by his own definition. How come John Kerry never said that in 2004?
None of this absolutely proves beyond a shadow of a doubt they were involved.
That's for the detectives and prosecutors.
On the other hand, sometimes the absence of evidence IS the evidence, to paraphrase Rumsfeld.
The "absense of evidence" IS: Why has the media NEVER mentioned this, not EVER?!!
Not scandalous enough??
A few fringe types also cheered on blogs on 9-11 because "Jew York City" got hit, but you'd expect that from them.
Some Israeli spies were apparently also cheering and filming in NY that day, per Fox News. Israelis also lived across the street from or next door to various of the alleged hijackers. I wonder why Fox, an avid cheerleader for Israel, would be the only TV station to do a series which slams Israel. For various detailed reasons, I disbelieve that Israel was the primary actor that operated against the interests of American elites. Israeli Intell and CIA have been working on various murder projects for decades. Anything's possible, but many facts contradict that view, including imperialist plans and actions in America that preceded Israeli or Jewish influence by many decades. Ever heard of the Baghdad Pact a.k.a. CENTO in the 1950s?
Here's some of the key pro-terror spokesmen:Notice the numerous front groups they represent, how they seem to be stating the same points. Secondly, recognize them as a single unified ruling class voice, because they are often beneficiaries of the same grants from private tax-free Foundations. These shocking ideas and quotes are just the tip of a very dirty iceberg.
James M. Lindsay (bio below) - fmr Council on Foreign Relations, fmr Brookings Institute, now professor at U of Texas
Michael Ledeen (below, longer bio, page) - Heritage Foundation, "adjunct Scholar" at American Enterprise Institute (AEI)
Richard Perle, William Kristol, and other members of the Project for a New American Century (below)
others related to them, a political-military-corporate elite that rides on corporate foundation grants, most with less visibility.
Zbignew Brzezinski (bio below, page) - Tri-Lateral Commission (membership), Council on Foreign Relations, fmr Nat Security Advisor, wrote book Grand Chessboard commissioned by "Foreign Affairs" magazine of the CFR.
Fox News, Jon Gibson, Bill O'Reilly, and others who might say their words were 'misconstrued'.
Here's a couple clips of Fox News talking all "patriotic" about a helpful attack on America.
Al-Qaeda is our enemy -- except in Bosnia-Kosovo-Macedonia in the late 1990s and beyond, according to the Republican Senate.
Seymour Hersh on US support for Al-Qaeda AGAIN. YouTube.
Hersh on US Support for Terror groups in Lebanon - CNN (local) (wmv)
One thing he's wrong about: The USA actually backed the Muj in 1979 not late 80's, to 'encourage' the Soviets to invade.
Hersh: US is funding Al-Qaeda to counter Iran - DemoNow! (local) (wmv)
In 2000, PNAC (Bush advisors) wrote their Agenda,
In particular, we need to:Read that. This was not a case that "we must be prepared to win, if a war somehow becomes inevitable." It was "we need to go get ourselves into a war."
• fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars
List of 156 PNAC Signatories and Contributing Writers
Here's a sample of longer quotes by various persons with POWER in the USA, if not officially "in office". These statements might sound like offhand intellectual musings but at least one was attached to a specific, official Defense Policy statement of Objectives, which the Bush admin later adopted almost verbatim. These were and are HUGE plans, many Trillions of Dollars in transfers to private military contractors, and whatever is left over to enlistees. Trillions in new contracts for themselves and/or colleagues. The most important and larger goal was for ongoing Western hegemony led by the US, both economic and military hegemony, regardless of the domestic sacrifice. They lamented that their pre-planned war strategies were on [Pause] until some "MAJOR CATASTROPHIC EVENT" would permit them to press [Play], to release the funding and kick-start the action.
Statements before 9-11Michael Ledeen of American Enterprise (AEI) and Heritage, 1999: “…of course, we can always get LUCKY. Stunning events from outside can providentially awaken the enterprise from its growing torpor (laziness), and demonstrate the need for reversal (from peace), as the devastating Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941 so effectively aroused the U.S. from its soothing dreams of permanent neutrality.”
Translation: A hypothetical future event (9-11) would be "lucky" and "a blessing from God" ... "a miracle".
Was Pearl Harbor a "lucky day" for America?
Everyone "knows" that Osama Bin Laden issued a "fatwa" calling for an attack on the United States, echoed by his cronies, like Zawahiri.
Few people know that Michael "Bin" Ledeen issued a similar "fatwa" echoed by many of his cronies. Nor do people realize that Heritage Foundation, which is the sister org of Ledeen's American Enterprise Institute (same office building, AEI was source of Kagan's "surge" theory for Iraq), also housed three Lobby groups for the Afghani Islamic mujahideen operation, run by Gullbidin Hekmatyar and Osama Bin Laden.
In short, Ledeen's people were financing and promoting Al-Qaeda a few decades ago, though it was technically not yet called Al-Qaeda. It was under Carter that the CIA gave birth to the Islamic Radical project, as part of a Cold War strategy, but it was the Reagan-Bush admin that raised the image of Islamic Radical guerilla terrorists to the level of AMERICAN HEROES, even giving them a national holiday of recognition, dedicating the Space Shuttle to them, and other honors.
Michael Ledeen has aptly described the principles of AEI as 'universal fascism': a revival, in principle, of the goals of the Nazi Waffen-SS.
"Creative destruction is our middle name. We do it automatically." (we do?)
"Peace increases our peril ... Peace . . . is a dream . . . and would undermine the power of the state." Fascism means everything for the State, individuals must sacrifice for the State. How conservative is that? No, it's NEO-conservatism. [wink]
"Lying is central to the survival of nations..." (lying to whom??)
James M. Lindsay (click for full quote) formerly of CFR and Brookings, 2000: "But how to raise the political stakes in foreign policy? A renewed threat to American security would clearly do the trick." (do the trick?) (to overcome "apathetic internationalism")
"Absent a clear and present danger, the temptation to dismiss foreign policy as a trifle will remain powerful." (echoes the neo-cons' "Committee on the Present Danger" hype)
WaPo, James Fallows, 1991: "I am beginning to think that the only way the national government can do anything worthwhile is to "invent a security threat" and turn the job over to the military." (He wants let the military take over America and have an 'efficient' military police state, like fascist Italy or Germany, Fallows also worked for Nader's Public Citizen and was Carter's speechwriter.)
PNAC, 2000: their ambitious military and foreign policy plans ('process of transformation') will be interminably delayed, "absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor."
('process of transformation' refers to over 70 pages of detailed planning for massive military expansion, spending, and pre-planned wars, combined with four or five years of documents and articles pressuring Clinton to invade Iraq)
Brzezinski, 1997 and earlier: "The pursuit of power is not a goal that commands popular passion, except in conditions of a sudden threat or challenge to the public's sense of domestic well-being."
"... that America is too democratic ... this limits the use of America's power, especially its capacity for military intimidation"
"... we may find it more difficult to fashion a consensus on foreign policy issues, except in the circumstance of a truly massive and widely perceived direct external threat."
"The public supported America's engagement in World War II largely because of the shock effect of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.” (in context of the problem of generating that kind of support)
"... aggregation of the individual support of millions of uncoordinated citizens, easily within the reach of magnetic and attractive personalities effectively exploiting the latest communications techniques to manipulate emotions and control reason." "... to return to a measure of 'passivity and defeatism'. (public defeatism is great for illegitimate authority - their vision of democracy)
Brzezinski acknowledges the fact (echoed in "On Killing" by Col. Dave Grossman) that most normal people don't like to die or be injured nor to sacrifice their well-being. Besides that, most people also have a strong innate moral aversion to killing other humans or to even tolerate murder (except real sociopaths), but people can be manipulated into doing those things, under certain circumstances, including fear, rage, self-defense, and through high-tech training methods that Grossman developed.
Throughout history, rulers have always called their wars 'defense' against a threat.
Zbignew Brzezinski, National Security Advisor to President Jimmy Carter and other presidents, political rep for Rockefellers and Wall Street, top Cold Warrior, and unofficial advisor to Barack Obama:
"This regionalization is in keeping with the Tri-Lateral Plan which calls for a gradual convergence of East and West, ultimately leading toward the goal of one world government. National sovereignty is no longer a viable concept."
"All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order."
-- David Rockefeller, speaking at the United Nations (This is an NWO of "security" for corporate rule.)
Samuel Huntington recommended that democracy and economic development be discarded as outdated ideas.
"We have come to recognize that there are potential desirable limits to economic growth. There are also potentially desirable limits to the indefinite extension of political democracy."
"A government which lacks authority will have little ability short of cataclysmic crisis to impose on its people the sacrifices which may be necessary." (or unnecessary sacrifices?)
William Casey, CIA Director,1981: "We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false."
In Israeli Prime Minister Moshe Sharatt’s personal diaries, there is an excerpt from May of 1955 in which he quotes Moshe Dayan as follows:
“[Israel] must see the sword as the main, if not the only, instrument with which to keep its morale high and to retain its moral tension. Toward this end it may, no — it must — invent dangers, and to do this it must adopt the method of provocation-and-revenge...And above all — let us hope for a new war with the Arab countries, so that we may finally get rid of our troubles and acquire our space.”
Another of Sharett’s Diary entries for June 1955: ‘Ben Gurion himself said it would be worthwhile to pay an Arab a million pounds to start a war. What a slip of the tongue!’
So were the comments that preceded Sept 11 mere coincidence? Luck? Premonition? Parasitic Opportunitism? Disaster Capitalism?
Serendipity: The faculty of making fortunate discoveries of things you were not looking for.
Or evidence of Pre-Planned staged events? Well, maybe that's just me being paranoid. However, it certainly warrants a discussion in our media and some investigation .... like this one, or deeper. But there are ZERO television specials on this.
Hey Matt Taibbi: You did a fantastic job pulling back the curtain on Goldman-Sachs. Why were you unwilling to look this hard at Sept 11?
After 9-11Ruth Wedgwood, PNAC: "9/11 attacks were an unfortunate but necessary event to awaken the United States to the need for more intrusive law enforcement."
Gen. Tommy Franks was obliquely alluding to a "Second 9/11" terrorist attack, which could be used to galvanize US public opinion in support of a military government and police state.
Let bin Laden stay free, says ex-No. 3 CIA man (A. B. "Buzzy" Krongard) (pdf - Acrobat) (copy - Firefox needs MHTML add-on)
Al Qaeda and the "War on Terrorism" - Global Research
a NEW 9-11?Stu Bykofsky | To save America, we need another 9/11
Jon Gibson, Fox News: "I think it's gonna take a lot of dead people to wake America up."
"We NEED another 9-11." more + video below
Rumsfeld says a new 9-11 would help the Republican Party and their goals. Global Research. Rumsfeld's Mind
Rummy also says that Iraq could use a Syngman Rhee-type dictator (because that's what democracy smells like!). For those who don't know, Syngman Rhee was about 10x more brutal and dictatorial than Saddam.
Newt Gingrich recently said:
"the better they've done at making sure there isn't an attack, the easier it is to say, 'Well, there never was going to be an attack anyway.' And it's almost like they should every once in a while have allowed an attack to get through, just to remind us."The head of the Arkansas Republican party said:
"At the end of the day, I believe fully the president is doing the right thing, and I think all we need is some attacks on American soil like we had on [Sept. 11, 2001]" so people appreciate Bush.Lt.-Col. Doug Delaney, chair of the war studies program at the Royal Military College in Kingston, Ontario, told the Toronto Star that
"The key to bolstering Western resolve is another terrorist attack like 9/11 or the London transit bombings of two years ago."
And an allegedly-leaked GOP memo touts a new terror attack as a way to reverse the party's decline.
Is that All just Hot Air?
Catastrophic Emergency www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=CHO20070624&articleId=6134
"Another [9/11 type terrorist] attack could create both a justification and an opportunity that is lacking today to retaliate against some known targets" (Statement by Pentagon official, leaked to the Washington Post, 23 April 2006)
"Against this kind of enemy, there is only one effective response: We must go on the offense, stay on the offense, and take the fight to them." (President George W. Bush, CENTCOM Coalition Conference, May 1, 2007)
The sheer absurdity that Al Qaeda might have advanced capabilities to wage a nuclear attack on America is, nonetheless, pervasive in US media reports. Moreover, numerous drills and exercises, simulating a terrorist attack using nuclear devices, have been conducted in recent years, creating the illusion that "the threat is real":
"What we do know is that our enemies want to inflict massive casualties and that terrorists have the expertise to invent a wide range of attacks, including those involving the use of chemical, biological, radiological and even nuclear weapons. ... [E]xploding a small nuclear weapon in a major city could do incalculable harm to hundreds of thousands of people, as well as to businesses and the economy,...(US Congress, House Financial Services Committee, June 21, 2007).
Consistently since 911, the Bush administration has repeatedly reminded Americans of the danger of a "Second 9/11"
It's now the Height of Patriotism to DEMAND a BLOODBATH, the mass murder of innocent Americans.
Most statements were published openly, but in books and journals that "nobody" reads. More clarification below.
The former Assistant Secretary of Treasury in the Reagan administration, called the "Father of Reaganomics", who is a former editor and columnist for the Wall Street Journal, Business Week, and Scripps Howard News Service, and, said:
"Ask yourself: Would a government that has lied us into two wars and is working to lie us into an attack on Iran shrink from staging "terrorist" attacks in order to remove opposition to its agenda?"Paul Craig Roberts goes on to say:
If the Bush administration wants to continue its wars in the Middle East and to entrench the "unitary executive" at home, it will have to conduct some false flag operations that will both frighten and anger the American people and make them accept Bush's declaration of "national emergency" and the return of the draft. Alternatively, the administration could simply allow any real terrorist plot to proceed without hindrance.
A series of staged or permitted attacks would be spun by the captive media as a vindication of the neoconsevatives' Islamophobic policy, the intention of which is to destroy all Middle Eastern governments that are not American puppet states. Success would give the US control over oil, but the main purpose is to eliminate any resistance to Israel's complete absorption of Palestine into Greater Israel.
Think about it. If another 9/11-type "security failure" were not in the works, why would Homeland Security czar Chertoff go to the trouble of convincing the Chicago Tribune that Americans have become complacent about terrorist threats and that he has "a gut feeling" that America will soon be hit hard?
yet: Secret Service harasses 14-year old girl over My Space threats
California 14-year-old girl quizzed over threats to Bush she posted on MySpace page
... texting back her mom: “Are you serious!?!? omg. Am I in a lot of trouble?”
“I wasn’t dangerous. I mean, look at what’s (stenciled) on my backpack — it’s a heart. I’m a very peace-loving person,” said Wilson, an honor student who describes herself as politically passionate. “I’m against the war in Iraq. I’m not going to kill the president.”
Moments later, Kirstie Wilson received another text message from her daughter saying agents had pulled her out of class.
Julia Wilson said the agents threatened her by saying she could be sent to juvenile hall for making the threat.
“They yelled at me a lot,” she said. “They were unnecessarily mean.”
My point is, if they think a 14-year-old girl is a threat, what about officials INSIDE the Pentagon threatening terrorism?
What does this tell you about our media that this "odd coincidence" is not even mentioned, let alone a scandal that everyone knows about? Why has no Congressman or Senator or even "The Decider" mentioned this?
(Well, most of these people are part of Bush's war team, and anyhow positioning the public mind for the Iraq War started way back in 1991, with plans to seize Middle East oil going back decades. Bush Sr. authorized the CIA to hire the Rendon Group for $360k per month to begin anti-Iraq propaganda in 1991. Rendon Group launched the Iraqi National Congress headed by Chalabi.)
September 11 was NOT a Secret ConspiracySeptember 11 was a conspiracy -- even if you believe Al-Qaeda attacked us, then at least Al-Qaeda conspired.
On the other hand, even if seen as an "inside job", Sept 11 should not really be called a secret conspiracy, per se, because the plans for it were published fairly openly, prior to the event.
Staging Sept 11 was a component of National Policy decided amongst the Ruling Class, particularly the Neo-Conservative faction. But I have since verified that at least some top Neo-cons worked for the Trilateralists, the Liberal Establishment.
In particular, Dick Cheney worked for David Rockefeller as President of the CFR. Search on YouTube. Richard Perle was a member of that liberal clique too, the Trilateral Commission.
Neo-Conservatives had a blueprint for urgent and imperative War in the Middle East and the overthrow of Saddam, as quickly as possible. Many people now know that this National Policy and Wolfowitz Doctrine was the written into Bush National Security policy,
long before Iraq was given a chance to prove they had disarmed (afterdowningstreet.com),
long before Sept 11.
It was official policy on the day Bush took office,
solidified before Bush was elected,
germinating since 1996 (and before) when PNAC was formed and started badgering Clinton on Iraq,
even going back to 1991 when Bush Sr. enlisted the CIA in creating an "oust Saddam" propaganda in London via the Rendon Group and Chalabi, or
even going back to the contrived Gulf War (April Glaspie, Santa Fe Drilling was sold to Kuwait to steal Iraq's oil), or
even back to the "Seizing Arab Oil" article in Harper's in 1975 (that plan favored hitting the Saudis), or
even back to George Kennan circa 1945 "The Middle East is one of the greatest material prizes in world history".
The moment Bush was picked as the leading Republican candidate and the "liberal" media started fawning over him and complaining about Gore's suits and Gore's lying, the PNAC policy was fully operative.
As a matter of fact, PNAC and other Neo-cons went to Texas and recruited Bush to be their front man.
Anyone bothering to read the PNAC blueprint (now on www.archive.org under www.newamericancentury.org) would know that PNAC members published hundreds of articles pressing for war on Iraq in the form of letters to Clinton and editorials in top newspapers.
Sept 11 was every bit as much a part of the core National Policy as the "War on Terror", because an attack on America was claimed by them to be a necessary pre-cursor event for the rest of National Policy (wars) to commence.
They said they needed one for the other.
I do concede to one conscious secret conspiracy: the role of the media to avoid reporting this.
The "Iraqi National Congress" opposition party was created by an 'ad agency', like "Ronald McDonald" was created to represent a hamburger chain.
May 1991: President Bush Authorizes CIA to Create Conditions for Removal of Saddam Hussein
President George H. W. Bush signs a covert “lethal finding” authorizing the CIA to spend a hundred million dollars to “create the conditions for removal of Saddam Hussein from power". The CIA forms the Iraqi Opposition Group within its Directorate of Operations to implement this policy. Awash in cash, the agency hires the Rendon Group to influence global political opinion on matters related to Iraq.
According to Francis Brooke, an employee of the company who’s paid $22,000 per month, the Rendon Group’s contract with the CIA provides it with a ten percent “management fee” on top of whatever money it spends. “We tried to burn through $40 million a year,” Brooke will tell the New Yorker. “It was a very nice job.”
The work involves planting false stories in the foreign press. The company begins supplying British journalists with misinformation which then shows up in the London press. In some cases, these stories are later picked up by the American press, in violation of laws prohibiting domestic propaganda. “It was amazing how well it worked. It was like magic,” Brooke later recalls.
Another one of the company’s tasks is to help the CIA create a viable and unified opposition movement against Saddam Hussein (see June 1992). This brings the Rendon Group and Francis Brooke into contact with Iraqi exile Ahmed Chalabi. Later, Brooks and his family moves into a Georgetown townhouse with Chalabi and lives there for free. Brooks advocates removing Saddam "even if it means killing every Iraqi", because his Christian beliefs tell him that Saddam is "evil".
2001 Judith Miller, same crap.
So: "Al-Qaeda" is not the only group that says terrorism is a good political tool.
Jane's Intelligence Review:
Don't forget that Al-Qaeda began as a clandestine/covert US intell asset, beginning before the Soviet invasion.
Chossudovsky cites evidence this continued throughout the 90's under Clinton, and into Bush's term, including July and even October 2001.) Also note, this is a global phenomenon, not just Bush, not just America. All major and minor countries are on the same page, with their pre-planned "domestic security" measures. It's a global "war on terror", much bigger than Mr. Bush or Mr. Cheney.
Even the Pat Buchanan-linked Antiwar.com says:
Today there is ample evidence that, when it comes to the freedom of women, education levels, governmental services, relations among different ethnic groups, and quality of life – all were infinitely better under the Afghan communists than under the Taliban or the present government of President Hamid Karzai, which evidently controls little beyond the country's capital, Kabul. [...] Simply put, "Charlie Wilson's War" is imperialist propaganda, and the tragedy is that four-and-a-half years after we invaded Iraq and destroyed it, such dangerously misleading nonsense is still being offered to a gullible public. [...] "Charlie Wilson's War isn't just bad history; it feels even more malign, like a conscious attempt to induce amnesia."
Forgotten Coverage of Afghan "Freedom Fighters"
Villains of today's news were heroes in the '80s
If you pulled names out of Rolodex of Neo-Cons, PNAC, Bush, Clinton, CIA, etc, *ALL* were at least 6 billion times more integral to aiding Al-Qaeda than John Walker Lyndh or those sheep-herders and taxi drivers in Guantanimo. Why are we not torturing THOSE CULPRITS to tell us Osama's location?
These experts and others wrote of their long-standing agenda to reverse "Vietnam Syndrome" (a social "sickness" characterized by distrust of authority, aversion to war, death, murder, maiming), to repress democratic institutions and reduce prosperity, to create economic crises, to sideline actual democracy locally and globally in gradual steps, to build more internal "security" and militarization, to implement a more effective Class War (gap btw wealth and poverty expected to widen dramatically, chaos and drugs going epidemic), and to roll out Imperial Global Warfare. In other words, to turn the world into more of a global prison labor camp like much of the Third World, under corp state-capitalist control. (Selectively dehumanizing of "the enemy" - including domestic populations - is a key propaganda tactic.)
But a democratic society would never willingly accept such sacrifices -- so wrote Brzezinski -- at least not without plausible justification and distraction.
Pimpin' for TerrorismZbig Brz had bragged in 1998 about setting up "Al-Qaeda" back in 1979, before the Soviet invasion.
What if some house-liberal like Michael Moore had a pro-terrorism movie or quote?
What if Cindy Sheehan, God Bless her, really promoted Al-Qaeda? Would you hear about it?
Some current Republicans stated that a terror attack in 2006 would help them win votes. Even Rumsfeld cited a new attack, to turn the public around. RUMSFELD ON TAPE: TERROR ATTACK COULD RESTORE NEO-CON AGENDA
Top Dems are 'with' them: Dem House Officials Lied and Broke Rules by Recruiting Wealthy Conservatives to crush popular Antiwar Candidates
Some of them also want the option to preemptively destroy China and Russia with our nuclear 'primacy'.
Thomas P.M. Barnett stated that China was one miltary target in meetings that came before Sept 11. Now it's more a matter of playing chess with China over oil.
This is the ruthless Straussian-Neocon agenda, and Tri-Lateralist-CIA agenda of global business.
popup-> Hermann Goering once stated it this clearly.
Brzezinski, Ledeen, Lindsay, and the PNAC group each made these assertions. Many later pretended shock and outrage at the "surprise attack" which was their "dream-come-true". also here here here here here here here here
Why is nobody upset, concerned, or even aware of this "coincidence" of a convergence of experts on the need for terrorism on US soil?
Why has the MEDIA NEVER reported this oddity? How could they not know about all these statements?!! These are not classified documents like the Pentagon Papers. These are published openly. These persons-of-interest often appear on Fox, CNN, and other media-news channels as "experts".
It took me years to discover the bits and pieces, but I'm Nobody. Washington policies and players was not my specialty.
The CIA-controlled military-industrial-intelligence-security-entertainment-corporate-finance complex media certainly knows. If I know, key Media personalities must also know. It's just nunna your bizness.
One might argue that these people are merely guilty of 'tasteless' musings. That would be bad enough.
Please understand: These advisors do more than merely 'advise'. They collectively design, craft, and sculpt policy -- and publish plans on "how to manage the herd". They are DO-ers, executives who execute, who occupy big offices, who control big money, and who MAKE THINGS HAPPEN. They don't passively wait for "luck". (George Carlin on ruling class.)
These pro-terrorism anti-terrorism experts were aggressive in the push for a Middle East War since the mid 1990's and before, and they are architects of our foreign policy now. Neo-Con policy proposals were copied-and-pasted into U.S. National Security Doctrine. How lucky could they get?
"Winners" create their own luck --- that's the aphorism or "saying". (They had been heavily hyping the "Islamic threat" since the mid '70's and 80's, the need to create a bogeyman in the Middle East. Movies and TV helped this process.)
www.youtube.com/v/02FAf_j6lo4 Category of Terror
WHO is really "anti-American"? People with left-liberal political antiwar views?? Or people who STATED that a bloodbath in America would be GREAT?
Secondly, consider that these American pro-terrorists do not reside in a remote mountain cave or secret camp, unless it's one designed by FEMA (which was discussed during Iran-Contra hearings by Sen. Jack Brooks .. almost).
Oliver North Questioned - Rex 84 Exposed During Iran Contra Ollie North covering War in Iraq
Thirdly, consider what it could possibly mean that the deepest dreams of these 'thinkers' and policy makers just happened to dovetail perfectly with those of Osama bin Laden, former CIA-Military Cold War asset.
Maybe there's a perfectly Reason-able explanation why the media has not mentioned this serendipity.
This is despicable and outrageous, to DEMAND a BLOODBATH on Americans and then to accuse DECENT people of "hating America". Fox News Corporation authorized or even advised their 'journalist' to say that, twice. What's even more frightning, Fox News in general, and Jon Gibson in particular, are a mouthpiece for the Military and for the Republican Party, which now holds all Power. In light of this, these people are literally making terrorist threats on TV, like Al-Qaeda broadcasts, not only against innocent civilians worldwide, but against random American civilians as well.
In months following Sept 11, Cheney and others around him promised new terrorist attacks if ALL their legislative demands were not met. One congresswoman complained "they won't take 'yes' for an answer", i.e., they want more power. (They even threatened more attacks with Anthrax, which scientists said came from inside the USA. Operation Artichoke.)
They are holding ALL of us hostage, both wishy-washy complacent Democrats and our general population.
Were these statements merely a weird way of stating a valid observation?
Wasn't Cheney and team merely stating warnings? Wishful thinking?
That's in the eye of the beholder --- YOU --- but both these relationships of power PLUS the phyical evidence provide AMPLE evidence that we were all terrorized by the WH and some branch of Intelligence, Covert Operations.
Nowadays, Patriotism means it's OK to openly promote a terrorist attack against Americans, for political reasons. This is sickening enough, and brutally honest that they'd be so blatant about it.
The co-opted "antiwar movement" is crippled, because too many Americans still accept the major September 11 premise about Al-Qaeda and Osama and 19 hijackers at face value.
If you accept this paradigm, the military answer is at least reasonable, except maybe to pacifists and 'nitwit liberals'. On a positive note, these ruthless serial killers have completely exposed who they really are, and can no longer hide their rottenness behind piety and patriotism.
Coincidentally, Sept 11, 1973 was the date the CIA, Kissinger, Nixon, and Pinochet violently destroyed democracy in Chile, to impose "free trade" policies. Before the coup, right wing fascists were intimidating progressive Chileans, "Watch out, Jakarta is coming!". Jakarta, Indonesia, was where the CIA helped a Whabbi Muslim dictatorship stage a coup, killing between 1 to 3 million Leftists, in a few months. Smell the freedom.
Stu Bykofsky | To save America, we need another 9/11 2007
Bykofsky says his editor wrote that title. Here's what he wrote: (local copy)
"One month from The Anniversary, I'm thinking another 9/11 would help America.(OMG, another "New Pearl Harbor" quote, just like PNAC and Ledeen below, now in a mainstream paper.)
Remember the community of outrage and national resolve?
America had not been so united since the first Day of Infamy - 12/7/41."
(I thought 12/7 was a terrible day for America! I guess I was wrong.)
(Of course, by "united", he means "united in war-hysteria", not "united in sanity and peace".)
That's a threat. These guys are TERRORISTS, threatening us. They want to create 'more victims', they want more attacks against -- US -- 'the enemy' -- because they recognize that Bush and the foreign policy elites need more anger and a resurgence in jingoism and war fever, and any critics need to be SHUT UP forcefully! So 3 thousand, 10 thousand, maybe a million American victims would accomplish this goal.
Gibson brings on Stu Bykofsky to defend column, Jon Gibson pines for another 9/11
Gibson - "I think it's gonna take a lot of dead people to wake America up."
Gibson disses Jon Stewart - (last 10 seconds) "We NEED another 9-11."
Gibson_Fox_mocks_Jon_Stewart_911.avi (last 10 seconds) "We NEED another 9-11."
Gibson and Bykofsky plus dissing Jon Stewart.avi (last 10 seconds) "We NEED another 9-11."
Both Fox News and Osama Bin Laden helped Republicans immensely. If Bin Laden didn't exist, they would have had to create him. Wait a minute ... they DID create him!! Republicans like Reagan and Bush funded Al-Qaeda! (Dems first secretly funded the Mujahideen in 1978, it goes both ways, soft cop, hard cop, like on tv shows.)
re: Freedom's Watch: Justin Raimondo of the popular, libertarian website AntiWar.com wrote: "In a disgusting display of mendacity not seen since the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, a pro-war advertising campaign spearheaded by former White House spokesman Ari Fleischer is buying $15 million worth of 30-second television spots that repeat the lies linking 9/11 to Iraq—and explicitly threatening another terrorist attack in the United States if we 'surrender.' It's the first storm in a season of fear."
Nothing new, by the way. People like this were planning to instigate a "winnable" nuclear war with the USSR in the 1960's, even if it took staged terrorist attacks. Millions of Americans would die and many U.S. cities would be destroyed, but we would be 'victorious'.
The details about Katrina, FEMA pointing guns at bootstrapping volunteer doctors and rescuers to make them stop helping, as well as short-changing needed repairs beforehand, shows this disaster to have been intentional too.
Likewise, the "debacle" in Iraq closely matches an Israeli plan formed with Neo-Con consultants called "Clean Break". This term refered to making a clean break from diplomacy, to total war. The plan included expectations of civil war in Iraq, the desire to break up Middle East countries, confirmed by Cheney's assistant David Wurmser. If they did not plan it this way, this must the stupidest bunch of multi-millionaire war profiteers and corporate criminals in world history. They managed to run up a $2T tab for themselves and their friends, and stick us with the bill. How dumb they are!
Did you know Al-Qaeda had office space at Heritage Foundation? see below
Regarding Iran and Amadinejad:
I will offer a source I consider reliable -- former Mossad Agt named Ari Ben Menashe -- who was exonerated in US Federal Court for selling weapons to Iran, during the Hostage Crisis. He was able to provide documentation proving he was working in official capacity for Mossad when he sold those weapons, though by then they had dumped him and denied knowing who he was.
In his book, Profits of War, he describes taking a suitcase filled with $56 million of the CIA's money, from the Saudi Ambassador in Guatemala, to a Swiss bank, for Iranians to buy weapons. Current Defense Secretary Robert Gates (former Deputy Dir CIA under Bush Sr.) met him at the Miami Airport.
This was one of MANY similar operations he ran to procure overpriced used weapons for Iran, from Poland, North Korea, Uganda, and other locations. The Mossad plan was to use Iranian soldiers in place of Jewish soldiers, as a proxy response to Iraq, at the same time as the US was arming Iraq and goading them to attack Iran. The profits were used for a Mossad "slush fund".
(So in one sense, Israel was secretly working against the US, and when Carter was tipped off, he was reportedly outraged with Begin. On the other hand, Israel was cooperating with Republicans. Kissinger suggested that it be best that both Iran and Iraq "bleed each other white", making each country weaker due to millions of deaths. That's some real ruthless realpolitik.)
Ben Menashe also describes personally watching Casey and Bush Senior exit different elevators in a European Hotel, walk into a conference room with the Iranian Mullahs, and shut the door. This closing act occurred after a long dragged-out delay in concluding pending weapons deals, a short time before Reagan was inaugurated. (Obviously, this was LONG before Iran-Contra. Ollie North got exposed in the press trying to open up his own "back-channel" for selling overpriced weapons to Iran, years before the Hasenfus plane crashed in Nicaragua, officially blowing the operation. Why is North held in esteem as a patriot, if Amadinejad is damned? North was committing treason, not Iranians.)
During the repeated delays, Ben Menashe's moderate Iranian counterpart expressed extreme frustration at being forced to KEEP the hostages beyond their sell date. They wanted weapons, not humans, not hungry and needy prisoners which they needed to at least feed and watch. The prisoners had become a burden, but the Republicans were offering them a better deal. And these Iranian colleagues understood American politics well enough to grasp WHY the delays from Bush and company.
Robert Parry in the US covered the same info on Consortium News, and he uncovered documents about the coverup of arming Iran during the Hostage Crisis, but the Democrats and Liberal Media squashed him in defense of the Republicans.
More on Amadinejad and the Holocaust
Feeling insufficiently patriotic lately? Defensive?
There's been a lot of talk about the "Blame America First" crowd. But were you aware that "blame America first" is a reverse-pun on the original 'patriotic' "America First Committee" which had strong crossover with the pro-Hitler movement in America and with the American Nazi Party and "Christian" right? The American Liberty League really wanted America to LOSE ... and thereby win ... by becoming a military dictatorship, run by a hero like Hitler. ('Heroes' is a big PR theme, especially World War 2 heroes, even though a wing of the Ruling Class supported the Nazis before, during, and even after the War. When Germans were killing US soldiers, American elites were funding their progress.)
ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH (PBS): Qadi met Osama bin Laden in Jeddha in the 1980s, and then again in Afghanistan.
YASIN QADI: My uncle took me, at that time, for so-called... To help the warlords to get together. So I was young; he took me with me... with him, and I think I saw Osama at one meeting in that. But that's... You know, how many American officials saw Osama?How many people from Europe saw Osama? How many politicians saw Osama?
SITE Institute, host of the 2007 Bin Laden tape, was formed by Rita Katz, who previously worked to expose alleged terror financers in the US linked to Islamic Middle East groups. Ironically, she and her investigators were tailed and harassed by CIA or FBI, and blocked by members of the Bush DoJ like Michael Chertoff, while one of their targets Ptech got private meetings with Robert Mueller at FBI. I cannot reconcile what this means, because Katz seems to be too much of a team player to be harrassed by the US govt, but it sure stinks.
Senator John McCain lauded Pat Tillman: "I don't think there will be any doubts about [Private Tillman's] capabilities as a soldier, but also as a recruiting tool." "He'll motivate other young Americans to serve as well." (Thanks to idealistic chaps like Tillman, America can continue to pick up its warriors on the cheap.)
Not anymore, McCain. Sorry to Tillman's mom and bro and fam and friends, no disrespect intended.
And what's this about? Army doctors say it looks like Tillman was assassinated. Because he openly opposed the Iraq war and was planning to meet with antiwar activists like Chomsky? That would have been a PR disaster for the Pgon.
Homeland Security Michael Chertoff: Another 911 coming, unless REAL ID is accepted
Chertoff tries scare tactics on Congress
Chertoff's real role in the War on Terror (my local compilation)
Cheney plays politics with Terrorism
Rove admits GOP will play politics with 'war on terror'
political advisors pray for a new terrorist attack to justify the paranoia
Rudy Giuliani 12 Step Program
Add Samuel Huntington to this list. Also SAIC officials, like David Kay who apologized for being 'wrong' about WMDs.
Thomas P.M. Barnett of the Pentagon lectures at the Army War College promoting a new "global multi-national Army", with allusions to Karl Marx's vision of Global Communism - but for corporations, not for any 'proletariat' workers.
This Christian Patriot website Liberty Gun Rights about Executive Order 13286 and the transformation of America's military to a global military force unanswerable to the American people.
Ruth Wedgwood (of PNAC) argued that the 9/11 attacks were an unfortunate but necessary event to awaken the United States to the need for more intrusive law enforcement. Wedgwood served on UN Human Rights Council. With irony?)
Huntington Beach Congressman Dana Rohrabacher helped arm the terrorists accused of attacking New York and Washington, D.C. Now hes got a new plan to save the world
Published on October 04, 2001
February 27, 2003Mr. Taliban
December 25, 2003Daddy Rohrabacher Says He Knows Best In Afghanistan, Again
March 4, 2009Rogue Statesman - Dana Rohrabacher
A veteran U.S. foreign-policy expert told the Weekly, "If Dana's right-wing fans knew the truth about his actual, working relationship with the Taliban and its representatives in the Middle East and in the United States, they wouldn't be so happy."
After I left the White House and was elected to Congress, but before I was sworn into Congress, I knew I had that two months between November and January to do things that I could never do once I was elected to Congress. I chose to hike into Afghanistan as part of a small Mujahedin unit and to engage in a battle against the Russian and communist forces near and around the city of Jalalabad.
During the summer of 2001, Rohrabacher took a trip to Qatar that was paid for by the Islamic Institute and the Government of Qatar, according to Rohrabacher’s financial disclosure forms. While in Qatar, Rohrabacher, Grover Norquist, and Khaled Saffuri met with Taliban Foreign Minister Mullah Wakil Ahmed Muttawakil. Wakil reportedly asked for help in increasing the amount of foreign aid sent by the United States to Afghanistan, apparently in exchange for U.S. oil company UNOCAL being allowed to construct of an oil pipeline through Afghanistan. If Rohrabacher was conducting diplomacy, he was in violation of the Logan Act, which prohibits citizens from doing so if not in an official capacity. Rohrabacher told wire service reporters who were present in Doha, Qatar at the time that he had discussed a “peace plan” with the Taliban. But Norquist, a close associate of Rohrabacher, said that the meeting happened accidentally and that it included Rohrabacher yelling at them about blowing up the Buddhist statues in Afghanistan.
After the September 11, 2001 attacks, Rohrabacher claimed that the attacks were caused by incompetence on the part of the Clinton administration.
In fact, Rohrabacher's post-Sept. 11 finger-pointing was a fraud designed to distract attention from his own ongoing meddling in the foreign-policy nightmare. Federal documents reviewed by the Weekly show that Rohrabacher maintained a cordial, behind-the-scenes relationship with Osama bin Laden's associates in the Middle East—even while he mouthed his most severe anti-Taliban comments at public forums across the U.S.
There's worse: despite the federal Logan Act ban on unauthorized individual attempts to conduct American foreign policy, the congressman dangerously acted as a self-appointed secretary of state, constructing what foreign-affairs experts call a "dual tract" policy with the Taliban. (oil deals) What they won't mention is that Rohrabacher also once lobbied shamelessly for the Taliban.
Evidence of Rohrabacher's attempts to conduct his own foreign policy became public on April 10, 2001, not in the U.S., but in the Middle East. On that day, ignoring his own lack of official authority, Rohrabacher opened negotiations with the Taliban at the Sheraton Hotel in Doha, Qatar, ostensibly for a "Free Markets and Democracy" conference. There, Rohrabacher secretly met with Taliban Foreign Minister Mullah Wakil Ahmed Muttawakil, an advisor to Mullah Omar. Diplomatic sources claim Muttawakil sought the congressman's assistance in increasing U.S. aid—already more than $100 million annually—to Afghanistan and indicated that the Taliban would not hand over bin Laden, wanted by the Clinton administration for the fatal bombings of two American embassies in Africa and the USS Cole. For his part, Rohrabacher handed Muttawakil his unsolicited plans for war-torn Afghanistan. "We examined a peace plan," he laconically told reporters in Qatar.
Rohrabacher's statement to the House
Julie Sirrs: I guess I would disagree with that not only because just the fact that it happened indicates that it was a failure, unless it was something that we wanted, which I certainly don't believe. (Julie raises the issue of the possibility that our "failure" on Sept 11 was intentional, while denying that she actually thinks that. Cool by me, Julie [wink!].) (Julie Sirrs was fired from DIA for exposing Osama links to the Taliban before Sept 11.)
"if no external threat exists, then one has to be manufactured" - Leo Strauss, neocon philospher
Committee on the Present Danger (CPD), the Cold War-era anti-communist group was revived in 2004. Advocate of nuclear superiority, the CPD helped to create the myth of U.S. nuclear inferiority and the concept of "windows of vulnerability." The goal? More military spending, eliminate any possible rivals or independence.
John Bolton even threatened Great Britain to tow the line, or else become a future enemy.
These "pragmatists" think of "America" and "terrorism" in the most abstract, political, utilitarian, and "symbolic" terms. To them, 3000-7000+ actual dead American human beings and their loved ones are mere PROPS and symbols (and a MILLION dead Iraqis and Afghanis are completely inconsequent.) The dead and maimed Soldiers are mere mascots for marketing corporate/media/intelligence and the military-industrial-security complex. Their bottom line
"Security" is a euphemism for "social control", and that's in their own words, particularly Brzezinski's words. (Brzezinski has since publicly 'rebelled IS the bottom line, cash-money. ' against Bush Doctrine. American 'dupes' are beginning to wise up. Maybe that's too risky.)
James Fallows of the Washington Post (a CIA front, exposed in 1975) was REALLY thinking ahead. He spoke of this in 1991, saying maybe we need to "invent a security threat" so the Military can take over America. "Military Efficiency," Atlantic, Aug 1991 (from an Army War College "future retrospective" on the Origins of the coup of 2012)
About a decade before Fallows' article appeared, Congress initiated the use of "national defense" as a rationale to boost military participation in an activity historically the exclusive domain of civilian government: law enforcement. Congress concluded that the "rising tide of drugs being smuggled into the United States . . . presented a grave threat to all Americans." Finding the performance of civilian law enforcement agencies in counteracting that threat unsatisfactory, Congress passed the Military Cooperation with Civilian Law Enforcement Agencies Act of 1981. In doing so Congress specifically intended to force reluctant military commanders to actively collaborate in police work.
"According to our economic and political theories, most agencies of the government have no special standing to speak about the general national welfare. Each represents a certain constituency; the interest groups fight it out. The military, strangely (?), is the one government institution that has been assigned legitimacy to act on its notion of the collective good. "National defense" can make us do things--train engineers, build highways--that long-term good of the nation or common sense cannot."
"I am beginning to think that the only way the national government can do anything worthwhile is to invent a security threat and turn the job over to the military."
"National Defense" was how Eisenhower sold the national highway system, a free gift to automakers and oil companies. The Internet was created for National Defense. Anything America spends money on must have a military angle. Militarised Technology.
As confirmed by a former Italian Prime Minister, an Italian judge, and the former head of Italian counterintelligence, NATO, with the help of the Pentagon and CIA, carried out terror bombings in Italy and blamed the communists, in order to rally people’s support for their governments in Europe in their fight against communism. It was called the Strategy of Tension.
As one participant in this formerly-secret program stated: "You had to attack civilians, people, women, children, innocent people, unknown people far removed from any political game. The reason was quite simple. They were supposed to force these people, the Italian public, to turn to the state to ask for greater security."
FORMER ITALIAN PRESIDENT SAYS 9-11 INSIDE JOB, AND ALL GLOBAL INTELLIGENCE KNOWS IT. (context of remarks may be disputed)
Jonah Goldberg of the far right National Review also wrote an article about paraphrased "Dems need to win in '08 so they can get slapped with their own 9-11." Inherit the Wind: What if it takes a Democrat?
In other words, just maybe, thousands of Americans NEED to be murdered to convince the rest of us to SHUT UP and obey the foreign policy dictates of our rulers. What is the definition of a terrorist threat?
Goldberg says terrorist attacks are necessary to dissuade liberals from focusing on bothersome issues like jobs and poverty and a possible economic crash tied to housing. This is from the Third Reich SS how-to manual.
By the way, if the past is any consideration, when future attacks are blamed on Shiite groups, who will Washington hire and arm and train to counter them? Right, Al-Qaeda-related Sunni groups.
According to Seymour Hersh and his ex-CIA contacts, hiring Sunni terrorists IS the current U.S. policy in Shiite locations.
Hersh on US Support for Terror groups in Lebanon - CNN (local) (wmv)
One thing he's wrong about: The USA actually backed the Muj in 1979 not late 80's, to 'encourage' the Soviets to invade, according to the guy responsible for that, Brzezinski.
Hersh took a long car ride while blindfolded to meet with Nasrallah of Hezbollah. Ballsy old man.
Hersh: US is funding Al-Qaeda to counter Iran - DemoNow! (local) (wmv)
Osama & Al 'Qaeda's Afghanistan escape local AVI, lo-fi WMV
Seymour Hersh's recent report that Iran-Contra veterans working out of Dick Cheney's office are using stolen funds from Iraq to arm al Qaeda-linked groups and foment a larger Sunni-Shia war --- this is a very big deal.
The U.S. has also taken part in clandestine operations aimed at Iran and its ally Syria. A by-product of these activities has been the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam and are hostile to America and sympathetic to Al Qaeda. Rice has been deeply involved in shaping the public policy, former and current officials said that the clandestine side has been guided by Cheney. The Mahdi Army may be openly hostile to American interests, but other Shiite militias are counted as U.S. allies. Both Moqtada al-Sadr and the White House back Maliki.
“The Saudis have considerable financial means, and have deep relations with the Muslim Brotherhood and the Salafis”
Iran-Contra was the subject of an informal “lessons learned” discussion two years ago among veterans of the scandal. Eliot Abrams led the discussion. One conclusion was that even though the program was eventually exposed, it had been possible to execute it without telling Congress.
As to what the experience taught them, in terms of future covert operations, the participants found:
“One, you can’t trust our friends. Two, the C.I.A. has got to be totally out of it. Three, you can’t trust the uniformed military, and four, it’s got to be run out of the Vice-President’s office”.
According to ace Neocon Max Boot, it's good policy to hire the terroristic Stalinist political cult MEK in the War on Terror. We need to work with terrorists MORE! Quit worrying about namby-pamby ethical concerns!
This is a recipe for Endless War, lasting 100 or more years. Bush and Cheney do LIE, but not about that plan!
see below: Guns and Butter - Ground Zero 911, Blueprint For Terror
interview with a JP Morgan software security architect about Ptech links to Sept. 11 at the highest levels of govt. FoxNews once showed how Israelis -- like Saudi-owned Ptech -- had "infiltrated" FBI, CIA, and DEA, but I don't take Fox's exposé at face value, because Fox is neo-con central. Must be some other agenda going on.
See below LOOTING
In the immediate wake of the invasion of Iraq (April 2003), various national security procedures were put in place which focused on the eventuality of a "Second 911". These initiatives in the area of Homeland Security outlined the precise circumstances under which martial law could be declared in the case of a second major terrorist attack on America.
Under martial law, the military would take over several functions of civilian government including justice and law enforcement. [...] Gen. Tommy Franks was obliquely alluding to a "Second 9/11" terrorist attack, which could be used to galvanize US public opinion in support of a military government and police state.
It is important to understand that General Franks was not giving a personal opinion on the role of a "massive casuality producing event". This concept is part of the tools of US intelligence, implemented through covert operations. Franks' statement very much reflects the dominant viewpoint both in the Pentagon and the Department of Homeland Security, on the concept and application of a "massive casualty producing event" as well as onhow events might unfold in the case of a "Catastrophic Emergency".
Magazine: Foreign Affairs (CFR publication)
Issue: September/October 2000 (Volume 79, Number 5)
Title: The New Apathy: How an Uninterested Public Is Reshaping Foreign Policy
Author: James M. Lindsay
Here's the originalfull article in the web archive.
Hey, now Google finds the original again.
My copy of full article if it's 404'd.
James Lindsay left the Brookings Institute in 2003 to become vice president and director of studies at the CFR or Council on Foreign Relations. Lindsay is the director of the Robert S. Strauss Center and is the inaugural Tom Slick Chair for International Affairs at the LBJ School of Public Affairs at The University of Texas at Austin.
This should not be TOO much of a surprise ...
Four Bushes profiting from wars, four Bushes arming both sides.
Scholarly journals and books.
For one example, The American Journal of Medicine is a scholarly publication, and the name of a group which compiles it. The average person does not read the American Journal of Medicine. The fact that it's not widely read by the public, and that it's filled with dense technical jargon and info, does not mean the AJM does not exist, nor that AJM is a "conspiracy theory".
There are dozens of elite scholarly organizations dealing with foreign and domestic policy, often interlinked, as if each org is a separate "project" or "front". Most publish reports and articles, and some arrange TV appearances. They get massive corporate or private funding, and they have addresses and phone numbers and websites. Some hire 'experts' and 'scientists' as TV spokespersons.
There are many (rightwing) conspiracy theories about the Council on Foreign Relations as a communist New World Order scheme. In a definition of "communism" which means favoritism to private money and multi -national corporations, maybe this is a plausible view. CFR will not be leading a proletariat uprising anytime soon (though they could engineer a fake prole uprising, I suppose).
CFR was founded by wealthy and powerful elites in the early 1900's to "advise" the US govt. CFR is an international "Chamber of Commerce". It has ties to British elites, etc. hence "one world government". (One of it's founders named, Col. House, wrote a book about world domination, with himself as the leader. Col. House was Pres. Wilson's top advisor and alter-ego, like a Karl Rove.)
David Rockefeller, the oil and banking billionaire, later served as president. You can go to the CFR website or phone them up and order a subscription to their pub, Foreign Affairs. (see below)
Poli-Sci students and professors have doubtlessly studied some of CFR's reports and know of them.
Most US Presidents and many Cabinet members and CIA directors are also CFR members. CFR is one more of many public relations and political arms of Wall Street, finance, and industry, probably the biggest. A lot of this is like "One Degree of Separation", not six.
Despite CFR having so much apparent power and influence, it is nearly anonymous to the gen. public, hidden in plain view. It's meetings are not totally secret, it's conclusions are not secret, but much of the who's who and what they discuss IS very secret, like a private company, even though they are nearly an office of govt. Major media personalities are also members.
The first rule of Fight Club is "you don't talk about Fight Club". Kinda true for CFR too. Ever heard Tom Brokaw talk about being on CFR's Board of Dir? Or Dan Rather, or Brinkley, or Diane Sawyer, or Jim Lehrer talk about their membership?
A CFR spinoff, founded by Rockefeller and Brzezinski in 1973, is the Tri-Lateral Commission. That's not a conspiracy theory. TLC has a website, street address, phone, and publishes many reports and studies on how the world should be run. TLC involves the interests of the wealthy in three economic regions, Asia (Japan), North America, and Europe (the EU). Most US Presidents are also members of the TLC. Reagan was not, but his cabinet was. Jimmy Carter 'studied' a few years with Brzezinski, and became the first "TLC-groomed President" in 1976.
Not "secret" but also low profile, esp for a group with SO much influence. There are estimated 300 TLC core members, 1200 CFR members.
Fake "Christian" leaders also stated that "America" deserved terrorist attacks (mass murder, collective punishment) for being "sinful". Well, Falwell and Robertson are just fringe whackos ... or are they?
Jonah Goldberg Democrats should win 2008. The reason is that so "if" there are also published an article in 2007 which suggests that new (hoped for) terrorist attacks on America, then "liberal" Dems will be "punished" by that crisis, and such a disaster will vindicate the neo-Conservative agenda ... and Bush supporters. These are top national experts, highly respected in their circles, reporting on Fox and CNN.
What if a "liberal" hate symbol like Michael Moore or Pelosi or John Kerry ruthlessly suggested that a new successful Al-Qaeda attackwelcome event, because it would demonstrate Republicans' incompetence and help Dems win? Would you hear about that?
Of course the DLC, the Hegelian "loyal opposition", is just as dishonest about the "War on Terror", and not truly against the main Bush agendas. They just are re-defining it based on their own nuanced script, to signal political turnover without any actual change.
The allegation that this is a key tenet of the wealthy elites who truly own Washington comes from right wing conspiracy theories at least partly makes sense. I think it's obviously true, regardless who else is promoting it for whatever agenda.
The Secret Government MUST SEE 22 min (longer movie BELOW is worth it)
It aired on PBS in 1987 and is as good as anything on the tape (must see). Moyers is a very respected TV journalist who also worked for Lyndon B. Johnson and has a very professional approach. He interviews many different people involved with the CIA and other government agencies. His documentary gives quite an overview of what has actually happened in the last 50 years regarding the CIA and the cold war (including Iran, Guatamala, Cuba, Viet Nam and Chile). He features such people as Ralph McGeehee and Phil Retinger (both former CIA agents), Rear Admiral Gene La Rocque (Ret. U.S.N.), Theodore Bissell (active in the CIA at the time), Sen. Frank Church and many others. - this segment is edited by Frank Dorrel to 20 minutes.
The Secret Government MUST SEE full 90 min: The Constitution in Crisis, by Bill Moyers
This is the full length 90 min. version of Bill Moyer's 1987 scathing critique of the criminal subterfuge carried out by the Executive ... all Branch of the United States Government to carry out operations which are clearly contrary to the wishes and values of the American people. The ability to exercise this power with impunity is facilitated by the National Security Act of 1947. The thrust of the exposé is the Iran-Contra arms and drug-running operations which flooded the streets of our nation with crack cocaine. The significance of the documentary is probably greater today in 2007 than it was when it was made. We now have a situation in which these same forces have committed the most egregious terrorist attack on US soil and have declared a fraudulent so-called "War on Terror". The ruling regime in the US who have conducted the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, are now banging the war drum against Iran. We have the PATRIOT act which has stripped us of many of our basic civil rights justified by the terror of 9/11 which is their own doing.
Home (start) Page 1
Home Page 1-A (extension)
Home Page 1-B (extension)
INDEX2 9-11 & Fourth Reich, Nazi history
INDEX3 blackbox voting, peak oil, other issues
KEY issues covered up by DISINFO
a website dedicated to the convergence of real conservative and real Leftist thought and action
BACK to End Game? Global Conquest