Monday, July 25, 2005
Meanwhile, a parallel investigation is under way into who forged the Niger documents.
Second Track
Meanwhile, a parallel investigation is under way into who forged the Niger documents. They are known to have been passed to an Italian journalist by a former Italian defence intelligence officer, Rocco Martino, in October 2002, but their origins have remained a mystery. Mr Martino has insisted to the Italian press that he was "a tool used by someone for games much bigger than me", but has not specified who that might be.
A source familiar with the inquiry said investigators were examining whether former US intelligence agents may have been involved in possible collaboration with Iraqi exiles determined to prove that Saddam Hussein had a nuclear programme.
Well now. That would be something, wouldn't it?
Josh Marshall, who was once hot on the trail of this forgery story, wrote this a couple of weeks ago, the night O'Donnell revealed Rove's name on the McLaughlin report:
One other note along these lines.
I've gotten hints or suggestions from several sources over the last month that new information is bubbling to the surface, not about who leaked Valerie Plame's identity, but who was behind the underlying caper that started the whole drama afoot in the first place: those phoney Niger uranium documents.
As longtime readers of this site know, last year colleagues of mine and I were able to trace the documents back to a former Italian intelligence agent named Rocco Martino. Martino was the 'Italian businessman' who tried to sell the documents to Elizabetta Burba, the journalist who eventually brought them to the US Embassy in Rome.
We were able determine that the documents had been put into Martino's hands by a then-serving member of SISMI -- Italian military intelligence. And this SISMI colonel had done so using a women working in the Niger embassy in Rome, an Italian national, as a cut-out.
This was, as you might imagine, more than enough to make us want to know a lot more. But we were never able to develop any conclusive proof about who or what was behind the SISMI colonel or what the backstory was within SISMI.
Suspicions, we had plenty. But in terms of hard facts, we hit a wall just inside SISMI.
Just who forged the documents? And, more significantly, who put the whole process in motion? And why had SISMI or elements within it involved themselves?
This story and Plame ar running on different tracks, but they come to the same station eventually. And, once again, the spectre of Judith Miller hangs over it --- she's the Zelig of the iraq operation.
I don't have enough information to speculate about this, but I think it is significant that information is leaking out about this case as well. It's hard to know whether it's because people are fed up or because the white house is weak or some combination of both. But the veil is lifting on this administration's shenanigans, for sure. It's going to be a very interesting time.
Here's the immediate political result for Dear Leader:
Across the board, those stellar character ratings which supposedly meant Bush could weather any political storm have become mediocre to poor. And he's lost the most ground among independents, only 38 percent of whom now believe Bush is trustworthy or cares about people like them. Even more amazing, less than half (48 percent) of indepedents now think Bush is a strong leader, which is a massive 24 point decline since Pew's previous measurement.
And how about this: in February of this year, the two leading one word description of Bush were "honest" and "good", cited by 38 percent and 20 percent of the public, respectively. Today, honest has declined to 31 percent, closely followed by "incompetent" (26 percent, up from 14 percent) and "arrogant" (24 percent, up from 15 percent).
Reality bites.
Update: Just to be clear, what's new about the Guardian story isn't that the FBI suspects Iraqi exiles of being involved, it the part about retired US intelligence being involved that I was unaware of.
Seymour Hersh has speculated that it was a sort of reverse sting by appalled ex-CIA operatives, but this would indicate a less byzantine explanation. People with common interests helping each other out.
Forensic Seismology Of 911 - Update
Forensic Seismology Of 911 - Update
The seismographic analysis of WTC 911 is still undergoing research.
The seismographic analysis of WTC 911 is still undergoing research.
London Bombings - Unanswered Questions
codshit.com ::: serious nonsenseLondon Bombings - Unanswered Questions
What Tim Russert Deal Reveals
What Tim Russert Deal Reveals
What Tim Russert Deal Reveals
A deal that special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald cut last year for NBC "Meet the Press" host Tim Russert's testimony may shed light on the emerging White House defense in the Valerie Plame leak case, Newsweek magazine reports in editions this week.
What Tim Russert Deal Reveals
A deal that special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald cut last year for NBC "Meet the Press" host Tim Russert's testimony may shed light on the emerging White House defense in the Valerie Plame leak case, Newsweek magazine reports in editions this week.
Music file-sharing suits stun Kentuckians
Music file-sharing suits stun KentuckiansMusic file-sharing suits stun Kentuckians
US military caught making shit up? Heavens, no!
AMERICAblog: Because a great nation deserves the truth
US military caught making shit up? Heavens, no!
CNN: "The U.S. military on Sunday said it was looking into how virtually identical quotations ended up in two of its news releases about different insurgent attacks."
US military caught making shit up? Heavens, no!
CNN: "The U.S. military on Sunday said it was looking into how virtually identical quotations ended up in two of its news releases about different insurgent attacks."
"Silver Lining" (Instapundit makes it all better)
Instapundit.com -
Ann Althouse says: "That 'ill learn 'em":
Indeed, if anyone ever behaves like Jean Charles de Menezes again, the presumption that he is a terrorist will be so overwhelmingly strong that the police really must kill him.
Ann Althouse says: "That 'ill learn 'em":
Indeed, if anyone ever behaves like Jean Charles de Menezes again, the presumption that he is a terrorist will be so overwhelmingly strong that the police really must kill him.
[disinfo?]Abu Hafs al Masri Brigade claims responsibility for London blasts
EiTB24.comExperts have said that the group has no proven track record of attacks, and note it has claimed responsibility for events in which it was unlikely to have played any role, such as the 2003 blackouts in the United States and London that resulted from technical problems.
HOMELAND SECURITY SPELLS “P-O-R-K”
FMNN News
In March, 2003, 22 different federal agencies were combined into the new cabinet-level Department of Homeland Security - the largest single government reorganization since the creation of the Department of Defense in 1947. The tab for this enterprise has risen astronomically as well. From a budget of $13 billion devoted to homeland security in 2000, the total now approaches $50 billion. Not all of it has been well spent. Some was, for instance, used to purchase silk plants and artwork decorating offices that were involved in an agency's birthday celebration. Other dollars, large amounts, went to purchase airport scanners that - as it turns out - could not tell a nuclear bomb from a banana.
...
In March, 2003, 22 different federal agencies were combined into the new cabinet-level Department of Homeland Security - the largest single government reorganization since the creation of the Department of Defense in 1947. The tab for this enterprise has risen astronomically as well. From a budget of $13 billion devoted to homeland security in 2000, the total now approaches $50 billion. Not all of it has been well spent. Some was, for instance, used to purchase silk plants and artwork decorating offices that were involved in an agency's birthday celebration. Other dollars, large amounts, went to purchase airport scanners that - as it turns out - could not tell a nuclear bomb from a banana.
...
The Seattle Times: Nation & World: Effort here to charge London suspect was blocked
Flashing Siren
The Seattle Times: Nation & World: Effort here to charge London suspect was blocked: "The Justice Department blocked efforts by its prosecutors in Seattle in 2002 to bring criminal charges against Haroon Aswat, according to federal law-enforcement officials who were involved in the case."
The Seattle Times: Nation & World: Effort here to charge London suspect was blocked: "The Justice Department blocked efforts by its prosecutors in Seattle in 2002 to bring criminal charges against Haroon Aswat, according to federal law-enforcement officials who were involved in the case."
Victor Davis Hanson on War on National Review Online
Victor Davis Hanson on War on National Review Online
BG: In Technorati, this was ranked as the 26th most popular news story. Perhaps that should tell us what the truth is up against. :-(
BG: In Technorati, this was ranked as the 26th most popular news story. Perhaps that should tell us what the truth is up against. :-(
Lawmakers nix liability shield for gas additive - Oil & Energy - MSNBC.com
Lawmakers nix liability shield for gas additive - Oil & Energy - MSNBC.com
BG: This is good unless that do the same thing in another Bill.
BG: This is good unless that do the same thing in another Bill.
ProfessorBainbridge.com: The Face of Islamofascist Extremism
ProfessorBainbridge.com: The Face of Islamofascist Extremism
BG: Bainbridge has (we all have) a legitimate beef with this silly column in the Sunday Morning Herald, but it's not the point Bainbridge is making.
In terms of a sanctimonious tone ("tolerant, multicultural Western societies"), I think the Prof. just stole the crown from Libby Dole when she was speaking on the Senate floor about US abuse at Abu Graibe.
BG: Bainbridge has (we all have) a legitimate beef with this silly column in the Sunday Morning Herald, but it's not the point Bainbridge is making.
In terms of a sanctimonious tone ("tolerant, multicultural Western societies"), I think the Prof. just stole the crown from Libby Dole when she was speaking on the Senate floor about US abuse at Abu Graibe.
Kook Watch � Blog Archive � 9-11 Was Actually a U.S. PsyOp
Kook Watch � Blog Archive � 9-11 Was Actually a U.S. PsyOp
BG: It's a back handed compliment, I s'pose.
BG: It's a back handed compliment, I s'pose.
Link to Video: Rover (the Neocons) and his Foot (Osama bin Laden)
Short, G Rated
Link does not work with Firefox....
Watch and Understand
================
Technorati doesn't seem to see words in the Title of a Post, so repeating:
Link to Video: Rover (the Neocons) and his Foot (Osama bin Laden)
Link does not work with Firefox....
Watch and Understand
================
Technorati doesn't seem to see words in the Title of a Post, so repeating:
Link to Video: Rover (the Neocons) and his Foot (Osama bin Laden)
The London Bombs, The Rogue Network And Iran
The London Bombs, The Rogue Network And Iran
rense.com
The London Bombs, The
Rogue Network And Iran
By Webster G. Tarpley
7-12-5
WASHINGTON, DC -- Last week's London explosions carry the characteristic features of a state-sponsored, false flag, synthetic terror provocation by networks within the British intelligence services MI-5, MI-6, the Home Office, and the Metropolitan Police Special Branch who are favorable to a wider Anglo-American aggressive war in the Middle East, featuring especially an early pre-emptive attack on Iran, with a separate option on North Korea also included. With the London attacks, the Anglo-American invisible government adds another horrendous crime to its own dossier. But this time, their operations appear imperfect, especially in regard to the lack (so far) of a credible patsy group which, by virtue of its ethnicity, could direct popular anger against one of the invisible government's targets. So far, the entire attribution of the London crimes depends on what amounts to an anonymous posting in an obscure, hitherto unknown, secular Arabic-language chatrooms in the state of Maryland, USA. But, based on this wretched shred of pseudo-evidence, British Prime Minister Tony Blair who has surely heard of a group called the Irish Republican Army, which bombed London for more than a decade has not hesitated to ascribe the murders to "Islam," and seems to be flirting with total martial law under the Civil Contingencies Act. We are reminded once again of how he earned his nickname of Tony Bliar.
SCOTLAND YARD KNEW IN ADVANCE
That the British Government knew in advance that blasts would occur is not open to rational doubt. Within hours of the explosions, Israeli Army Radio was reporting that "Scotland Yard [London police headquarters] had intelligence warnings of the attacks a short time before they occurred." This report, repeated by IsraelNN.com, added that "the Israeli Embassy in London was notified in advance, resulting in Foreign Minister Binyamin Netanyahu remaining in his hotel room rather than make his way to the hotel adjacent to the site of the first explosion, a Liverpool Street train station, where he was to address an economic summit." This report is attributed to "unconfirmed reliable sources." At around the same time, the Associated Press issued a wire asserting that "British police told the Israeli Embassy in London minutes before Thursday's explosions that they had received warnings of possible terror attacks in the city," according to "a senior Israeli official." This wire specifies that "just before the blasts, Scotland Yard called the security officer at the Israeli Embassy to say that they had received warnings of possible attacks."
According to eyewitness reports from London, BBC claimed between 8:45 and some minutes after 10 AM that the incidents in the Underground were the result of an electrical power surge, or alternatively of a collision. Foreign bigwigs, presumably not just Netanyahu, were warned, while London working people continued to stream into the subway. These reports have been denied, repudiated, sanitized, and expunged from news media websites by the modern Orwellian Thought Police, but they have been archived by analysts who learned on 9/11 and other occasions that key evidence in state-sponsored terror crimes tends to filter out during the first minutes and hours, during the critical interval when the controlled media are assimilating the cover story peddled by complicit moles within the ministries. These reports are not at all damaging to Israel, but are devastating for British domestic security organs. An alternative version peddled by Stratfor.com, namely that the Israelis warned Scotland Yard, is most probably spurious but still leaves the British authorities on the hook. Which Scotland Yard official made the calls? Identify that official, and you have bagged a real live rogue network mole.
Another more general element of foreknowledge can be seen in the fact reported by Isikoff and Hosenball of Newsweek that, since about November 2004, the US FBI, but not other US agencies, has been refusing to use the London Underground.
Operations like these are generally conduited through the government bureaucracies under the cover of a drill or exercise which closely resembles the terror operation itself. So it was with Amalgam Virgo and the multiple exercises held on 9/11, as I show in my 9/11 Synthetic Terror Made in USA (Joshua Tree CA: Progressive Press, 2005). So it was with the Hinckley attempt to assassinate Ronald Reagan, when a presidential succession exercise was scheduled for the next day, as I showed in my George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography (1992; reprint by Progressive Press, 2004). An uncannily similar maneuver allows the necessary work to be done on official computers and on company time, while warding off the inquisitive glances and questions of curious co-workers at adjoining computer consoles.
THE COVER STORY TERROR DRILL
Such a parallel drill was not lacking in the London case. On the evening of July 7, BBC Five, a news and sports radio program, carried an interview with a certain former Scotland Yard official named Peter Power who related that his firm, Visor Consulting, had been doing an anti-terror-bombing drill in precisely the Underground stations and at the precise times when the real explosions went off. Peter Power and Visor had been subcontractors for the drill; Power declined to name the prime contractors. Small wonder that Blair, in his first official report to the Commons on July 11, went out of his way to rule out a board of inquiry to probe these tragic events.
Tony Blair may be eyeing the advantages of emergency rule for a discredited lame duck like himself, but the British people may have a different view. The alternative is clear: on the one hand is the American response after 9/11, marked by submissive and credulous gullibility in regard to the fantastic official story of what had happened. On the other hand is the militant and intelligent Spanish response after March 11, 2004, marked by powerful mass mobilization and righteous anger against politicians who sought to manipulate the people and sell a distorted account of events. Which way will the British people go? Straws in the wind suggest that the British response may be closer to the Spanish, although it may develop more slowly because of the lack of mass organization and related factors. If this is the case, Tony Blair, Jack Straw, and the rest of the malodorous "New Labor" crypto-Thatcherites will be out the window.
My thesis is that the London explosions represent a form of communication on the past of the transatlantic Anglo-American financier faction with Bush, Blair, and the heads of state and government assembled at Gleneagles, Scotland for the G-8 meeting on the day of the blast. The London deaths were designed to deliver an ultimatum in favor of early war with Iran. Here a word of clarification may be necessary. The demonization of Bush by his many enemies, while understandable, risks blurring the basic realities of power in the US and UK. Since the Bay of Pigs and the Kennedy assassination (to go back no further than that), we have been aware of a secret team. During the Iran-contra era, the same phenomenon was referred to as an invisible, secret or parallel government. This is still the matrix of most large-scale terrorism. The questions arises for some: do Bush and Cheney tell the invisible government what to do, or does the invisible government treat the visible office holders as puppets and expendable assets? To ask the question is to answer it: Bush, Cheney & Co. are the expendable puppets. The explanation of terror is not Bush MIHOP, as some seem to argue, but rather invisible government MIHOP, an altogether more dire proposition.
How then does the invisible faction communicate with the public mouthpieces? Given the violence of the power relations involved, we can be sure that it is not a matter of sending out engraved invitations announcing that the honor of Bush's presence is requested at the launching of an attack on Iran. Rather, the invisible and violent rogue network communicates with Bush, Blair, and others by means coherent with their aggressive nature as they did on 9/11. Bush, of course, is a weak and passive tenant of the White House whose instinct is to do virtually nothing beyond the day-to-day routine.
We therefore need to note that the London blasts come after two months of vigorous and impatient prodding of Bush by the invisible government. On May 11, a small plane almost reached the White House before it was turned away, while the Congress, the Supreme Court, and the White House (but not the Pentagon, the Treasury, etc.) were evacuated amid scenes of panic. The White House went to red alert, but Bush was not informed until it was all over, and was riding his bicycle in the woods near Greenbelt, Maryland. Flares were dropped over the Brookland district and Takoma Park, MD. The resemblance of all this to a classic coup scenario was evident. On May 18, a live hand grenade, which turned out to be a dud, landed near Bush as he spoke at a rally in Tbilisi, Georgia.
On June 29, the approach of another small plane led to an evacuation of the Congress and the Capitol, again with scenes of panic. On the afternoon of July 2, no fewer than three small planes came close to Bush's Camp David retreat in the Catoctin Mountains of Maryland; this story was suspiciously relegated to the local news page of the Washington Post. The details of these incidents are of little interest; what counts is the objective reality of a pattern. These incidents also provide background for Bush's unbalanced behavior on July 5 at Gleneagles, when he crashed into a policeman while riding on his bicycle. Then came the London blasts on July 7.
What is it that the invisible government wants Bush and Blair to do? Scott Ritter announced last January that Bush had issued an order to prepare an attack on Iran for the month of June. According to a well-informed retired CIA analyst I spoke with on July 3, this order actually told US commanders to be ready to attack Iran by the end of June. This project of war with Iran is coherent with most of what we know about the intentions of the US-UK rogue faction, and thus provides the immediate background for the London explosions. The Bush administration and the Blair cabinet have failed to deliver decisive military action, and the invisible government is exceedingly impatient.
One way to increase the pressure on Iran would be to implicate a group of Iranian fanatic patsies in the London bombings. This would not be difficult; in fact, as I show in 9/11 Synthetic Terror, the British capital, referred to during the 1990s as Londonistan, is home to the largest concentration of Arab and Islamic patsy groups in the entire world in such infamous locations as Finsbury mosque and Brixton mosque; these groups are known to have enjoyed de facto recruiting privileges in Her Majesty's Prisons. But perhaps an Iranian patsy group would be too obvious at this time. More likely may be the sinking of a US warship in the Gulf by a third country, duly attributed to Iran.
In a recent speech, Dr. Ephraim Asculai of Tel Aviv University made two main points: first, that there is no military solution to the Iranian nuclear issue, and second, that there is no such thing as a point of no return in nuclear weapons development. Dr. Asculai showed that South Africa, Sweden, and other nations had turned away from deploying A-bombs well after having acquired the ability to produce them. Dr. Asculai is evidently arguing against widespread tendencies in the US-UK-Israeli strategic community who are whipping up hysteria around the notion that Iran is now indeed approaching exactly such a point of no return.
For her part, Miss Rice of the State Department has now declared that it will no longer be sufficient for Iran to turn away from nuclear weapons production; the entire Iranian program for nuclear energy production will also have to be dismantled, in her view. Such maximalism makes a negotiated solution impossible as long as the current Washington group holds power.
SCO: US GET OUT OF CENTRAL ASIA
The US, UK and Israel have been on the brink of war with Iran for at least a year, and the rogue network is generally aware that time is not on its side. There is also an important new development which threatens the ability of the Anglo-Americans to wage war. On July 5, the summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which brings together China, Russia, Uzbekistan, Krygyzia, Kazakhstan, and Tajikistan plus new members India, Pakistan, and Iran, issued a call for the United States to vacate the bases seized in the autumn of 2001 under the cover of the 9/11 emergency and the looming invasion of Afghanistan. The parties to this call represent about half of the world's population. This demand was immediately rejected by the State Department, but veteran Russian Eurasian expert Yevgeny Primakov crowed that for the first time a formula had been agreed to by which the US would be ejected from this region. The US presence goes back to the Bush-Putin emergency hotwire talks of September 11, 2001, when Putin, seeing that the madmen had seized control in Washington, dropped Russian objections to a US intrusion into the former Soviet republics of central Asia. The US-UK can attack Iran from Iraq in the west, from Afghanistan in the east, and from Qatar in the south, but without the Uzbek and Kyrgyz bases, the Anglo-American ability to attack from the north as well will be severely limited. The SCO states are also concerned about US-backed "color revolutions" on the recent Georgian and Ukrainian models, traditionally known as CIA "people power" revolutions, being used to destabilize their governments. To make matters worse for Washington and London, Kazakhstan is a few months away from opening an oil pipeline to China, which will diminish the US-UK ability to use their Gulf presence to blackmail Beijing. Washington and London are also dismayed by the pro-Iranian overtures in various fields being made by their Shiite puppets in Baghdad.
And what of the report in the Washington Post of July 11, which claims that US and UK planners are now contemplating a sharp reduction in the US forces in Iraq? The most plausible explanation is that this is pure disinformation, similar to news blips issued by both Hitler and Stalin in May and June of 1941. It should also be noted that the British plan explicitly provides for most of the forces now at Basra to go to Afghanistan, where they would be positioned for operations against Iran, or into central Asia.
Generally, the invisible government appears dismayed by its loss of momentum and the constant erosion of the political position of its asset, Bush. 110,000 US factory workers lost their jobs in June, the worst total in a year and a half: auto and textiles are collapsing. The housing bubble may also be nearing its end, with the bankruptcy of Fannie Mae on the near-term agenda. World derivatives have officially reached $300 trillion, with JP Morgan Chase holding the largest single portfolio. The one virtuoso performance of July 7 was that of the Federal Reserve, Bank of England, and European Central Bank, which flooded equity and capital markets with liquidity through such vehicles as the Plunge Protection Team (PPT), turning a big Wall Street loss into a small gain.
During the recent Reopen 9/11 tour of 8 European cities, Jimmy Walter repeatedly forecast that the general predicament of the Bush regime and the US financier faction would lead to another large-scale terror attack before the end of 2005; this has now occurred, and there is no end in sight. The tide of US public opinion has now definitively turned against the Iraq war and to some degree against Bush, as all major polls demonstrate. Notable is the 42% affirmative response to the Zogby International question as to whether, if it could be proved that Bush lied to launch the Iraq war, he should be impeached. Larry Franklin of the Wolfowitz-Feith neocon apparatus has been indicted for divulging US secrets, and the American-Israeli Public Affairs Council has been raided twice; further indictments are expected. Karl Rove has now been revealed as the source of the Valerie Plame leak, making Rove and perhaps other White House officials fair game for federal indictment. The Niger yellowcake forgeries and the Chalabi state secrets cases are still pending to say nothing of two stolen elections and the 9/11 Septembergate itself. All these factors incline the rogue network to seek an improvement in their situation through a flight forward to a wider war in Iran. Those who stand to lose most by such an Iranian adventure must now mobilize to make Mr. Bush's second term as eventful as Nixon's second term turned out to be in 1974.
rense.com
The London Bombs, The
Rogue Network And Iran
By Webster G. Tarpley
7-12-5
WASHINGTON, DC -- Last week's London explosions carry the characteristic features of a state-sponsored, false flag, synthetic terror provocation by networks within the British intelligence services MI-5, MI-6, the Home Office, and the Metropolitan Police Special Branch who are favorable to a wider Anglo-American aggressive war in the Middle East, featuring especially an early pre-emptive attack on Iran, with a separate option on North Korea also included. With the London attacks, the Anglo-American invisible government adds another horrendous crime to its own dossier. But this time, their operations appear imperfect, especially in regard to the lack (so far) of a credible patsy group which, by virtue of its ethnicity, could direct popular anger against one of the invisible government's targets. So far, the entire attribution of the London crimes depends on what amounts to an anonymous posting in an obscure, hitherto unknown, secular Arabic-language chatrooms in the state of Maryland, USA. But, based on this wretched shred of pseudo-evidence, British Prime Minister Tony Blair who has surely heard of a group called the Irish Republican Army, which bombed London for more than a decade has not hesitated to ascribe the murders to "Islam," and seems to be flirting with total martial law under the Civil Contingencies Act. We are reminded once again of how he earned his nickname of Tony Bliar.
SCOTLAND YARD KNEW IN ADVANCE
That the British Government knew in advance that blasts would occur is not open to rational doubt. Within hours of the explosions, Israeli Army Radio was reporting that "Scotland Yard [London police headquarters] had intelligence warnings of the attacks a short time before they occurred." This report, repeated by IsraelNN.com, added that "the Israeli Embassy in London was notified in advance, resulting in Foreign Minister Binyamin Netanyahu remaining in his hotel room rather than make his way to the hotel adjacent to the site of the first explosion, a Liverpool Street train station, where he was to address an economic summit." This report is attributed to "unconfirmed reliable sources." At around the same time, the Associated Press issued a wire asserting that "British police told the Israeli Embassy in London minutes before Thursday's explosions that they had received warnings of possible terror attacks in the city," according to "a senior Israeli official." This wire specifies that "just before the blasts, Scotland Yard called the security officer at the Israeli Embassy to say that they had received warnings of possible attacks."
According to eyewitness reports from London, BBC claimed between 8:45 and some minutes after 10 AM that the incidents in the Underground were the result of an electrical power surge, or alternatively of a collision. Foreign bigwigs, presumably not just Netanyahu, were warned, while London working people continued to stream into the subway. These reports have been denied, repudiated, sanitized, and expunged from news media websites by the modern Orwellian Thought Police, but they have been archived by analysts who learned on 9/11 and other occasions that key evidence in state-sponsored terror crimes tends to filter out during the first minutes and hours, during the critical interval when the controlled media are assimilating the cover story peddled by complicit moles within the ministries. These reports are not at all damaging to Israel, but are devastating for British domestic security organs. An alternative version peddled by Stratfor.com, namely that the Israelis warned Scotland Yard, is most probably spurious but still leaves the British authorities on the hook. Which Scotland Yard official made the calls? Identify that official, and you have bagged a real live rogue network mole.
Another more general element of foreknowledge can be seen in the fact reported by Isikoff and Hosenball of Newsweek that, since about November 2004, the US FBI, but not other US agencies, has been refusing to use the London Underground.
Operations like these are generally conduited through the government bureaucracies under the cover of a drill or exercise which closely resembles the terror operation itself. So it was with Amalgam Virgo and the multiple exercises held on 9/11, as I show in my 9/11 Synthetic Terror Made in USA (Joshua Tree CA: Progressive Press, 2005). So it was with the Hinckley attempt to assassinate Ronald Reagan, when a presidential succession exercise was scheduled for the next day, as I showed in my George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography (1992; reprint by Progressive Press, 2004). An uncannily similar maneuver allows the necessary work to be done on official computers and on company time, while warding off the inquisitive glances and questions of curious co-workers at adjoining computer consoles.
THE COVER STORY TERROR DRILL
Such a parallel drill was not lacking in the London case. On the evening of July 7, BBC Five, a news and sports radio program, carried an interview with a certain former Scotland Yard official named Peter Power who related that his firm, Visor Consulting, had been doing an anti-terror-bombing drill in precisely the Underground stations and at the precise times when the real explosions went off. Peter Power and Visor had been subcontractors for the drill; Power declined to name the prime contractors. Small wonder that Blair, in his first official report to the Commons on July 11, went out of his way to rule out a board of inquiry to probe these tragic events.
Tony Blair may be eyeing the advantages of emergency rule for a discredited lame duck like himself, but the British people may have a different view. The alternative is clear: on the one hand is the American response after 9/11, marked by submissive and credulous gullibility in regard to the fantastic official story of what had happened. On the other hand is the militant and intelligent Spanish response after March 11, 2004, marked by powerful mass mobilization and righteous anger against politicians who sought to manipulate the people and sell a distorted account of events. Which way will the British people go? Straws in the wind suggest that the British response may be closer to the Spanish, although it may develop more slowly because of the lack of mass organization and related factors. If this is the case, Tony Blair, Jack Straw, and the rest of the malodorous "New Labor" crypto-Thatcherites will be out the window.
My thesis is that the London explosions represent a form of communication on the past of the transatlantic Anglo-American financier faction with Bush, Blair, and the heads of state and government assembled at Gleneagles, Scotland for the G-8 meeting on the day of the blast. The London deaths were designed to deliver an ultimatum in favor of early war with Iran. Here a word of clarification may be necessary. The demonization of Bush by his many enemies, while understandable, risks blurring the basic realities of power in the US and UK. Since the Bay of Pigs and the Kennedy assassination (to go back no further than that), we have been aware of a secret team. During the Iran-contra era, the same phenomenon was referred to as an invisible, secret or parallel government. This is still the matrix of most large-scale terrorism. The questions arises for some: do Bush and Cheney tell the invisible government what to do, or does the invisible government treat the visible office holders as puppets and expendable assets? To ask the question is to answer it: Bush, Cheney & Co. are the expendable puppets. The explanation of terror is not Bush MIHOP, as some seem to argue, but rather invisible government MIHOP, an altogether more dire proposition.
How then does the invisible faction communicate with the public mouthpieces? Given the violence of the power relations involved, we can be sure that it is not a matter of sending out engraved invitations announcing that the honor of Bush's presence is requested at the launching of an attack on Iran. Rather, the invisible and violent rogue network communicates with Bush, Blair, and others by means coherent with their aggressive nature as they did on 9/11. Bush, of course, is a weak and passive tenant of the White House whose instinct is to do virtually nothing beyond the day-to-day routine.
We therefore need to note that the London blasts come after two months of vigorous and impatient prodding of Bush by the invisible government. On May 11, a small plane almost reached the White House before it was turned away, while the Congress, the Supreme Court, and the White House (but not the Pentagon, the Treasury, etc.) were evacuated amid scenes of panic. The White House went to red alert, but Bush was not informed until it was all over, and was riding his bicycle in the woods near Greenbelt, Maryland. Flares were dropped over the Brookland district and Takoma Park, MD. The resemblance of all this to a classic coup scenario was evident. On May 18, a live hand grenade, which turned out to be a dud, landed near Bush as he spoke at a rally in Tbilisi, Georgia.
On June 29, the approach of another small plane led to an evacuation of the Congress and the Capitol, again with scenes of panic. On the afternoon of July 2, no fewer than three small planes came close to Bush's Camp David retreat in the Catoctin Mountains of Maryland; this story was suspiciously relegated to the local news page of the Washington Post. The details of these incidents are of little interest; what counts is the objective reality of a pattern. These incidents also provide background for Bush's unbalanced behavior on July 5 at Gleneagles, when he crashed into a policeman while riding on his bicycle. Then came the London blasts on July 7.
What is it that the invisible government wants Bush and Blair to do? Scott Ritter announced last January that Bush had issued an order to prepare an attack on Iran for the month of June. According to a well-informed retired CIA analyst I spoke with on July 3, this order actually told US commanders to be ready to attack Iran by the end of June. This project of war with Iran is coherent with most of what we know about the intentions of the US-UK rogue faction, and thus provides the immediate background for the London explosions. The Bush administration and the Blair cabinet have failed to deliver decisive military action, and the invisible government is exceedingly impatient.
One way to increase the pressure on Iran would be to implicate a group of Iranian fanatic patsies in the London bombings. This would not be difficult; in fact, as I show in 9/11 Synthetic Terror, the British capital, referred to during the 1990s as Londonistan, is home to the largest concentration of Arab and Islamic patsy groups in the entire world in such infamous locations as Finsbury mosque and Brixton mosque; these groups are known to have enjoyed de facto recruiting privileges in Her Majesty's Prisons. But perhaps an Iranian patsy group would be too obvious at this time. More likely may be the sinking of a US warship in the Gulf by a third country, duly attributed to Iran.
In a recent speech, Dr. Ephraim Asculai of Tel Aviv University made two main points: first, that there is no military solution to the Iranian nuclear issue, and second, that there is no such thing as a point of no return in nuclear weapons development. Dr. Asculai showed that South Africa, Sweden, and other nations had turned away from deploying A-bombs well after having acquired the ability to produce them. Dr. Asculai is evidently arguing against widespread tendencies in the US-UK-Israeli strategic community who are whipping up hysteria around the notion that Iran is now indeed approaching exactly such a point of no return.
For her part, Miss Rice of the State Department has now declared that it will no longer be sufficient for Iran to turn away from nuclear weapons production; the entire Iranian program for nuclear energy production will also have to be dismantled, in her view. Such maximalism makes a negotiated solution impossible as long as the current Washington group holds power.
SCO: US GET OUT OF CENTRAL ASIA
The US, UK and Israel have been on the brink of war with Iran for at least a year, and the rogue network is generally aware that time is not on its side. There is also an important new development which threatens the ability of the Anglo-Americans to wage war. On July 5, the summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which brings together China, Russia, Uzbekistan, Krygyzia, Kazakhstan, and Tajikistan plus new members India, Pakistan, and Iran, issued a call for the United States to vacate the bases seized in the autumn of 2001 under the cover of the 9/11 emergency and the looming invasion of Afghanistan. The parties to this call represent about half of the world's population. This demand was immediately rejected by the State Department, but veteran Russian Eurasian expert Yevgeny Primakov crowed that for the first time a formula had been agreed to by which the US would be ejected from this region. The US presence goes back to the Bush-Putin emergency hotwire talks of September 11, 2001, when Putin, seeing that the madmen had seized control in Washington, dropped Russian objections to a US intrusion into the former Soviet republics of central Asia. The US-UK can attack Iran from Iraq in the west, from Afghanistan in the east, and from Qatar in the south, but without the Uzbek and Kyrgyz bases, the Anglo-American ability to attack from the north as well will be severely limited. The SCO states are also concerned about US-backed "color revolutions" on the recent Georgian and Ukrainian models, traditionally known as CIA "people power" revolutions, being used to destabilize their governments. To make matters worse for Washington and London, Kazakhstan is a few months away from opening an oil pipeline to China, which will diminish the US-UK ability to use their Gulf presence to blackmail Beijing. Washington and London are also dismayed by the pro-Iranian overtures in various fields being made by their Shiite puppets in Baghdad.
And what of the report in the Washington Post of July 11, which claims that US and UK planners are now contemplating a sharp reduction in the US forces in Iraq? The most plausible explanation is that this is pure disinformation, similar to news blips issued by both Hitler and Stalin in May and June of 1941. It should also be noted that the British plan explicitly provides for most of the forces now at Basra to go to Afghanistan, where they would be positioned for operations against Iran, or into central Asia.
Generally, the invisible government appears dismayed by its loss of momentum and the constant erosion of the political position of its asset, Bush. 110,000 US factory workers lost their jobs in June, the worst total in a year and a half: auto and textiles are collapsing. The housing bubble may also be nearing its end, with the bankruptcy of Fannie Mae on the near-term agenda. World derivatives have officially reached $300 trillion, with JP Morgan Chase holding the largest single portfolio. The one virtuoso performance of July 7 was that of the Federal Reserve, Bank of England, and European Central Bank, which flooded equity and capital markets with liquidity through such vehicles as the Plunge Protection Team (PPT), turning a big Wall Street loss into a small gain.
During the recent Reopen 9/11 tour of 8 European cities, Jimmy Walter repeatedly forecast that the general predicament of the Bush regime and the US financier faction would lead to another large-scale terror attack before the end of 2005; this has now occurred, and there is no end in sight. The tide of US public opinion has now definitively turned against the Iraq war and to some degree against Bush, as all major polls demonstrate. Notable is the 42% affirmative response to the Zogby International question as to whether, if it could be proved that Bush lied to launch the Iraq war, he should be impeached. Larry Franklin of the Wolfowitz-Feith neocon apparatus has been indicted for divulging US secrets, and the American-Israeli Public Affairs Council has been raided twice; further indictments are expected. Karl Rove has now been revealed as the source of the Valerie Plame leak, making Rove and perhaps other White House officials fair game for federal indictment. The Niger yellowcake forgeries and the Chalabi state secrets cases are still pending to say nothing of two stolen elections and the 9/11 Septembergate itself. All these factors incline the rogue network to seek an improvement in their situation through a flight forward to a wider war in Iran. Those who stand to lose most by such an Iranian adventure must now mobilize to make Mr. Bush's second term as eventful as Nixon's second term turned out to be in 1974.
Reuters AlertNet - Pope asks God to stay hand of "assassins"
Reuters AlertNet - Pope asks God to stay hand of "assassins"
BG: OH, F.... fudge, the Pope is quoting the Neocon chapter and verse!
BG: OH, F.... fudge, the Pope is quoting the Neocon chapter and verse!
Is Bin Laden Ordering the Bombings around the World?
Informed Comment
"Evidence coming out of the London bombings in particular suggests some al-Qaeda comand-and-control is still in place"
BG: Stop drinking the kool aid.
"Evidence coming out of the London bombings in particular suggests some al-Qaeda comand-and-control is still in place"
BG: Stop drinking the kool aid.
Aggrandizement
Aggrandizement
BG: Another huge dose of the bad medicine: Bush Bad (stupid), bin Laden and Al Qaeda the larger menance. And of course people all over believe the BS.
What about Tenet, Shattuck, Krongard, Joint Cheifs of Staff, FAA personnel, 9/11 Commission, Congress, Silverstein, Guiliani, Cheney, FBI, Blackstone Group, Condi, AIG, Deutschebank?
BG: Another huge dose of the bad medicine: Bush Bad (stupid), bin Laden and Al Qaeda the larger menance. And of course people all over believe the BS.
What about Tenet, Shattuck, Krongard, Joint Cheifs of Staff, FAA personnel, 9/11 Commission, Congress, Silverstein, Guiliani, Cheney, FBI, Blackstone Group, Condi, AIG, Deutschebank?
'Iraq has been an absolute gift to al-Qaida'
'Iraq has been an absolute gift to al-Qaida'
BG: Critical of Bush, but not so subtly reinforcing that al-Qaida is the alpha / Omega of 9/11 and World Terrorism....
BG: Critical of Bush, but not so subtly reinforcing that al-Qaida is the alpha / Omega of 9/11 and World Terrorism....
After London, Tough Questions for Muslims
After London, Tough Questions for Muslims
BG: Fun for MSM and Elites. Cooperating shills from targeted populations.
BG: Fun for MSM and Elites. Cooperating shills from targeted populations.
It Can Happen Anywhere [The Elite want it to Happen]- Newsweek World News - MSNBC.com
It Can Happen Anywhere - Newsweek World News - MSNBC.com
Amazon.com: Books: 9/11 Synthetic Terror: Made in USA
9/11 Synthetic Terror: Made in USA
by Webster Griffin Tarpley
Publisher: learn how customers can search inside this book.
Share your own customer images List Price: $17.95
Price: $17.95 and eligible for FREE Super Saver Shipping on orders over $25. See details
Availability: Usually ships within 24 hours. Ships from and sold by Amazon.com.
6 used & new available from $12.02
Edition: Paperback
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Better Together
Buy this book with Crossing the Rubicon by Michael C. Ruppert, Catherine Austin Fitts (Foreword) today!
Buy Together Today: $33.56
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Customers who bought this book also bought
Crossing the Rubicon: The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil by Michael C. Ruppert
Inside Job: Unmasking the Conspiracies of 9/11 by Jim Marrs
George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography by Webster Griffin Tarpley
The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions And Distortions by David Ray Griffin
The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions About the Bush Administration and 9/11 by David Ray Griffin
The War On Truth: 9/11, Disinformation And The Anatomy Of Terrorism by Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed
Explore Similar Items: in Books, in DVD
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Editorial Reviews
Book Description
The thesis of Webster Tarpley’s 911 Synthetic Terror: Made in USA has been enthusiastically received with its working model of the 9/11 plot: a rogue network of moles, patsies, and a commando cell in the privatized intelligence services, backed by corrupt political and corporate media elites.
Buttressed by historical examples like the Baader-Meinhof Gang and the Gunpowder Plot, this model makes it clear how such a monstrous false-flag or self-terror exploit is possible even under a largely benign government. That paradox is the incredibility gap that has made most Americans reject the evidence about 9/11 as paranoid fantasy.
Tarpley brings decades of expertise to the 9/11 issue. Already in 1978 he had exposed the terrorist Red Brigades as patsies of Italy's fascist P2 shadow government, and 9/11 is on the same pattern. The forthright subtitle, Made in USA, is backed up by an analysis of key figures who behave like moles working for the rogue network or parallel government.
9/11 Synthetic Terror highlights the salient points of sheer physical impossibility of the official 9/11 conspiracy theory. It then analyzes the psychological traits which make Anglo-American society gullible to artificial enemy images and unable to grasp the truth of 9/11.
Understanding how synthetic terror works, we see the weakness of the muddled "blowback" theories of terrorism and the spurious leads to Pakistan or Saudi Arabia that have marred many critiques of 9/11. Tarpley's model makes it clear that figures like Osama bin Laden are patsies or double agents who were selected for their ethnic coloring as the basis for launching a "Clash of Civilizations," and it is absurd to imagine that such tools of US intelligence agencies could turn around and infiltrate or overwhelm US defenses unaided.
9/11 Synthetic Terror is also firmly grounded in Great Power geopolitics. It shows that the wars on the Islamic world, the Soviet-Afghan, Kosovo and Chechen conflicts, as well as US-UK-NATO synthetic terror incidents like 9/11, Beslan or 3/11 in Madrid, have been contrived to continue the Cold War, in pursuit of the centuries-long campaign for Anglo hegemony over Eurasia and the world.
For a principled refutation of the 9/11 propaganda myth in all its parts, Tarpley's work is indispensable.
About the Author
Webster Griffin Tarpley is an activist and historian best known for his George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography (1992), a masterpiece of research which is still a must read. A decades-long expert on international terrorism, he directed the study Chi ha ucciso Aldo Moro? (Who Killed Aldo Moro?), commissioned by a member of the Italian government and published in Rome in 1978, which broke open the affiliation of the Red Brigades with the neofascist lodge P2.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Product Details
Paperback: 480 pages
Publisher: Progressive Pr (March, 2005)
Language: English
ISBN: 0930852311
Product Dimensions: 0.8 x 6.0 x 8.8 inches
Shipping Weight: 1.4 pounds. (View shipping rates and policies)
Average Customer Review: based on 5 reviews. (Write a review)
Amazon.com Sales Rank: #10,808 in Books
(Publishers and authors: improve your sales)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Customers who viewed this book also viewed
Waking up from our Nightmare: The 9/11/01 Crimes in New York City by Don Paul
The Big Wedding: 9/11, The Whistle-blowers & the Cover-up by allan duncan
The Shadow Government: 9-11 and State Terror by Len Bracken
Welcome to Terrorland : Mohamed Atta & the 9-11 Cover-up in Florida by Daniel Hopsicker
American Assassination: The Strange Death Of Senator Paul Wellstone by Four Arrows
9-11 on Trial by Victor Thorn
Explore Similar Items: in Books, in DVD
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Customer Reviews
Average Customer Review:
Write an online review and share your thoughts with other customers.
6 of 6 people found the following review helpful:
A tour de force of critical analysis, June 16, 2005
Reviewer: Black Kaweah (The invisible Gulag) - See all my reviews
A remarkable look under the skin of the lurid scarecrow figure of modern terrorism to reveal the bones and sinews of a man-made monster, one with very direct genetic links to the Bader-Meinhof gang and the "strategy of tension" deployed after WW-II to justify the militarization of society and the targeting of selected groups. Once society gets used to the idea that odd little groups or demented individuals occasionally pull off spectacular attacks, the mask of any desired target group (leftists, hippies, Arabs) can be easily fitted to the patsy who will be blamed for the attack.
The National Security State needs its terrorists, and leaves nothing to chance in their care and feeding. By revealing the mundane operational details of these programs, and the continuity over time of both the strategies and the personnel involved, Tarpley brings these deliberately shadowy enterprises into the realm of normal human activities. In this view, the series of staged events leading up to 9-11 (Waco, the Murrah building and all the rest) comes into clear focus as the successive elaborations of the same schema on an ever larger scale.
The use of visible patsies to focus blame, the networks of moles that protect and manage them, the aggressive coverups with blatent destruction of evidence and violent suppression of potential whistle-blowers, the fake investigations and popular press debunking... the pattern repeats with remarkable consistency, and the growing boldness of a cabal that has tasted success and has so far crushed all those who have tried to reveal the extent of their crimes.
Tarpley's deep knowledge of the Bush family and NATO secret terror operations in Europe make him the ideal historian to put the distinctly post-WW-II phenomenon of synthetic terrorism in it's proper historical perspective, and in so doing he in effect does create a new field of historical inquiry. This is truly an important work, written with great precision and elegance.
Was this review helpful to you? (Report this)
6 of 6 people found the following review helpful:
GO FURTHER...FURTHER, June 12, 2005
Reviewer: a reader in the U.S. - See all my reviews
Tarpley does pay homage to other authors of alternative scenarios, such as David Ray Griffin - who logically dismantled the myth of lack of Government complicity in 9/11 - but he also goes much, much deeper...dismissing both Barbara Honneger's assertion that Khalid Sheikh Mohommed was the triple agent responsible for enabling the plotters to threaten Air Force One ("Angel Is Next") with codes that would show unequivocally that the plotters had access to all Gov't codes and meant business, and also dismissing Mike Ruppert's "Peak Oil" theory as too much of a rational approach (under the circumstances...) Let it be said that Tarpley is his own man, and his assertion that 9/11 was a "Neocon" putsch, aided by the still active 'Dulles-Landsdale-Lemnitzer" networks, is eerily documented piece by piece and makes perfect sense. He feels that the message sent threatening Air Force One (the "Angel Is Next" message sent in that day's specific code) is the key to unraveling who the plotters were. As a previous review stated...step up to the big leagues. This book is the World Series of alternative explanations, and by far the best book on 9/11 to date. That said, I would recommend Griffin's book first to those who are just starting to reach out for other explanations. Going from A-Z on this one can be mindnumbing and even counterproductive to a point. Get a solid grip on alternate scenarios to the "official version first, then by all means READ THIS ONE.
Was this review helpful to you? (Report this)
3 of 3 people found the following review helpful:
Acclaimed by the best of critics, June 12, 2005
Reviewer: Ana Leonard (Califusa) - See all my reviews
Here is what other 9/11 authors have had to say about this book:
"9/11 Synthetic Terror is brilliantly and most sovereignly written; one can't stop reading. Webster delivers a devastating judgment. Congratulations! I endorse it wholeheartedly."
- Andreas Von Bülow, former German Minister for Research and Technology, author of Die CIA und der 11 September
"The most profound analysis of September 11 as a new type of coup d'état. This is a book I hope many Americans will read, so they can understand how they were duped, and by whom."
- Maurizio Blondet, author of 11 Settembre: Colpo di Stato in USA, correspondent with Avvenire, the daily paper of the Italian Bishops Conference.
"Terrorism of dubious origin, used to steer and manipulate society, to abandon civil rights, to create new enemies, wage war abroad and at home against one's own citizens: a study like Webster Griffin Tarpley's 9/11 Synthetic Terror was long overdue and will hopefully open the eyes of many people."
- Gerhard Wisnewski, German TV producer, author of Operation 9/11 and Mythos 9/11
"No one else I know so fearlessly names state-sponsored false flag terrorism. Webster G. Tarpley is an investigative elder of the planet, combining an historian's sweep with the eye of an exceptionally well-informed whistle-blower on today's shadowy elites."
Barrie Zwicker, Documentary producer, VisionTV Insight MediaFile
"I was already familiar with Webster Tarpley's work from reading his unauthorized biography of Bush père, which appeared more than a dozen years ago. That is a work which I still consult regularly, even now. There are points which were made in that book which everyone repeats today. In my opinion, that biography will remain as a reference work; it is the best book on the subject.
I therefore expected that Tarpley's new book on 9/11 would have the same quality of precision. But I found that, in addition, Tarpley has created a totally new genre, a new avenue of inquiry into 9/11.
There have already been many books on 9/11. Paul Thompson has done a kind of exhaustive review on this subject. David Ray Griffin has pointed out the logical contradictions among the successive versions of the official story. Mike Ruppert has attempted to understand the context of these events.
But Tarpley has posed a new question: that of comparing the techniques used by the US intelligence agencies in creating 9/11 with the methods used by US intelligence in the past. Many people are going to copy what Tarpley has done.
That is why this book is so important. The inquiry initiated here needs to be carried further. Not everything found here will necessarily be confirmed, but Tarpley has opened up a new path. People will keep coming back to this book in order to ask new questions along this line of inquiry."
- Thierry Meyssan, Président, Réseau Voltaire, Author of 9/11: The Big Lie and Pentagate
Webster Tarpley's book is, without any doubt, the most important and best book ever about 9/11. It's an excellent combination of geo-political analysis, philosophy and 9/11 allround research, and goes even much deeper.
9/11 Synthetic Terror not only puts the tragic event of 9/11 into the clearest and so far, most detailed and best described historical context, it also combines often ignored physical and investigative evidence of a U.S.-scripted, planned, orchestrated and supervised attack.
This book deserves to be at the top of every 9/11 truth leaflet and in the editorials of mainstream media, which both often ignore the deeper picture, watering down the clear evidence of an Inside Job and misleading the audience to suggest that 9/11 was just the result of negligence or "LIHOP" (let it happen on purpose).
Nico Haupt, Globalfreepress, INN World Report
Was this review helpful to you? (Report this)
4 of 5 people found the following review helpful:
Step up to the big leagues, May 29, 2005
Reviewer: Herbert L. Smith "hdog" (NY) - See all my reviews
While Tarpley covers some of the technical aspects of 9/11 what sets him apart is his historical knowledge of state-sponsored terrorism. A must-read for any student of 9/11.
Was this review helpful to you? (Report this)
1 of 7 people found the following review helpful:
top of the line.smokeand mirrors, May 13, 2005
Reviewer: mar louis "greypacific" (Seattle) - See all my reviews
Mr.Tarpley writes a book that explains the system upon how terrorism is financed by and for governments,in other words oswald didnt kill kennedy and sept 11.was financed by the mossad with a few moles in the pentagon working in concert to achieve there goals.never believe a cover story,there were bombs going off in the world trade center.who planted them?m.b
Amazon.com: Books: 9/11 Synthetic Terror: Made in USA
9/11 Synthetic Terror: Made in USA
by Webster Griffin Tarpley
Publisher: learn how customers can search inside this book.
Share your own customer images List Price: $17.95
Price: $17.95 and eligible for FREE Super Saver Shipping on orders over $25. See details
Availability: Usually ships within 24 hours. Ships from and sold by Amazon.com.
6 used & new available from $12.02
Edition: Paperback
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Better Together
Buy this book with Crossing the Rubicon by Michael C. Ruppert, Catherine Austin Fitts (Foreword) today!
Buy Together Today: $33.56
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Customers who bought this book also bought
Crossing the Rubicon: The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil by Michael C. Ruppert
Inside Job: Unmasking the Conspiracies of 9/11 by Jim Marrs
George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography by Webster Griffin Tarpley
The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions And Distortions by David Ray Griffin
The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions About the Bush Administration and 9/11 by David Ray Griffin
The War On Truth: 9/11, Disinformation And The Anatomy Of Terrorism by Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed
Explore Similar Items: in Books, in DVD
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Editorial Reviews
Book Description
The thesis of Webster Tarpley’s 911 Synthetic Terror: Made in USA has been enthusiastically received with its working model of the 9/11 plot: a rogue network of moles, patsies, and a commando cell in the privatized intelligence services, backed by corrupt political and corporate media elites.
Buttressed by historical examples like the Baader-Meinhof Gang and the Gunpowder Plot, this model makes it clear how such a monstrous false-flag or self-terror exploit is possible even under a largely benign government. That paradox is the incredibility gap that has made most Americans reject the evidence about 9/11 as paranoid fantasy.
Tarpley brings decades of expertise to the 9/11 issue. Already in 1978 he had exposed the terrorist Red Brigades as patsies of Italy's fascist P2 shadow government, and 9/11 is on the same pattern. The forthright subtitle, Made in USA, is backed up by an analysis of key figures who behave like moles working for the rogue network or parallel government.
9/11 Synthetic Terror highlights the salient points of sheer physical impossibility of the official 9/11 conspiracy theory. It then analyzes the psychological traits which make Anglo-American society gullible to artificial enemy images and unable to grasp the truth of 9/11.
Understanding how synthetic terror works, we see the weakness of the muddled "blowback" theories of terrorism and the spurious leads to Pakistan or Saudi Arabia that have marred many critiques of 9/11. Tarpley's model makes it clear that figures like Osama bin Laden are patsies or double agents who were selected for their ethnic coloring as the basis for launching a "Clash of Civilizations," and it is absurd to imagine that such tools of US intelligence agencies could turn around and infiltrate or overwhelm US defenses unaided.
9/11 Synthetic Terror is also firmly grounded in Great Power geopolitics. It shows that the wars on the Islamic world, the Soviet-Afghan, Kosovo and Chechen conflicts, as well as US-UK-NATO synthetic terror incidents like 9/11, Beslan or 3/11 in Madrid, have been contrived to continue the Cold War, in pursuit of the centuries-long campaign for Anglo hegemony over Eurasia and the world.
For a principled refutation of the 9/11 propaganda myth in all its parts, Tarpley's work is indispensable.
About the Author
Webster Griffin Tarpley is an activist and historian best known for his George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography (1992), a masterpiece of research which is still a must read. A decades-long expert on international terrorism, he directed the study Chi ha ucciso Aldo Moro? (Who Killed Aldo Moro?), commissioned by a member of the Italian government and published in Rome in 1978, which broke open the affiliation of the Red Brigades with the neofascist lodge P2.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Product Details
Paperback: 480 pages
Publisher: Progressive Pr (March, 2005)
Language: English
ISBN: 0930852311
Product Dimensions: 0.8 x 6.0 x 8.8 inches
Shipping Weight: 1.4 pounds. (View shipping rates and policies)
Average Customer Review: based on 5 reviews. (Write a review)
Amazon.com Sales Rank: #10,808 in Books
(Publishers and authors: improve your sales)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Customers who viewed this book also viewed
Waking up from our Nightmare: The 9/11/01 Crimes in New York City by Don Paul
The Big Wedding: 9/11, The Whistle-blowers & the Cover-up by allan duncan
The Shadow Government: 9-11 and State Terror by Len Bracken
Welcome to Terrorland : Mohamed Atta & the 9-11 Cover-up in Florida by Daniel Hopsicker
American Assassination: The Strange Death Of Senator Paul Wellstone by Four Arrows
9-11 on Trial by Victor Thorn
Explore Similar Items: in Books, in DVD
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Customer Reviews
Average Customer Review:
Write an online review and share your thoughts with other customers.
6 of 6 people found the following review helpful:
A tour de force of critical analysis, June 16, 2005
Reviewer: Black Kaweah (The invisible Gulag) - See all my reviews
A remarkable look under the skin of the lurid scarecrow figure of modern terrorism to reveal the bones and sinews of a man-made monster, one with very direct genetic links to the Bader-Meinhof gang and the "strategy of tension" deployed after WW-II to justify the militarization of society and the targeting of selected groups. Once society gets used to the idea that odd little groups or demented individuals occasionally pull off spectacular attacks, the mask of any desired target group (leftists, hippies, Arabs) can be easily fitted to the patsy who will be blamed for the attack.
The National Security State needs its terrorists, and leaves nothing to chance in their care and feeding. By revealing the mundane operational details of these programs, and the continuity over time of both the strategies and the personnel involved, Tarpley brings these deliberately shadowy enterprises into the realm of normal human activities. In this view, the series of staged events leading up to 9-11 (Waco, the Murrah building and all the rest) comes into clear focus as the successive elaborations of the same schema on an ever larger scale.
The use of visible patsies to focus blame, the networks of moles that protect and manage them, the aggressive coverups with blatent destruction of evidence and violent suppression of potential whistle-blowers, the fake investigations and popular press debunking... the pattern repeats with remarkable consistency, and the growing boldness of a cabal that has tasted success and has so far crushed all those who have tried to reveal the extent of their crimes.
Tarpley's deep knowledge of the Bush family and NATO secret terror operations in Europe make him the ideal historian to put the distinctly post-WW-II phenomenon of synthetic terrorism in it's proper historical perspective, and in so doing he in effect does create a new field of historical inquiry. This is truly an important work, written with great precision and elegance.
Was this review helpful to you? (Report this)
6 of 6 people found the following review helpful:
GO FURTHER...FURTHER, June 12, 2005
Reviewer: a reader in the U.S. - See all my reviews
Tarpley does pay homage to other authors of alternative scenarios, such as David Ray Griffin - who logically dismantled the myth of lack of Government complicity in 9/11 - but he also goes much, much deeper...dismissing both Barbara Honneger's assertion that Khalid Sheikh Mohommed was the triple agent responsible for enabling the plotters to threaten Air Force One ("Angel Is Next") with codes that would show unequivocally that the plotters had access to all Gov't codes and meant business, and also dismissing Mike Ruppert's "Peak Oil" theory as too much of a rational approach (under the circumstances...) Let it be said that Tarpley is his own man, and his assertion that 9/11 was a "Neocon" putsch, aided by the still active 'Dulles-Landsdale-Lemnitzer" networks, is eerily documented piece by piece and makes perfect sense. He feels that the message sent threatening Air Force One (the "Angel Is Next" message sent in that day's specific code) is the key to unraveling who the plotters were. As a previous review stated...step up to the big leagues. This book is the World Series of alternative explanations, and by far the best book on 9/11 to date. That said, I would recommend Griffin's book first to those who are just starting to reach out for other explanations. Going from A-Z on this one can be mindnumbing and even counterproductive to a point. Get a solid grip on alternate scenarios to the "official version first, then by all means READ THIS ONE.
Was this review helpful to you? (Report this)
3 of 3 people found the following review helpful:
Acclaimed by the best of critics, June 12, 2005
Reviewer: Ana Leonard (Califusa) - See all my reviews
Here is what other 9/11 authors have had to say about this book:
"9/11 Synthetic Terror is brilliantly and most sovereignly written; one can't stop reading. Webster delivers a devastating judgment. Congratulations! I endorse it wholeheartedly."
- Andreas Von Bülow, former German Minister for Research and Technology, author of Die CIA und der 11 September
"The most profound analysis of September 11 as a new type of coup d'état. This is a book I hope many Americans will read, so they can understand how they were duped, and by whom."
- Maurizio Blondet, author of 11 Settembre: Colpo di Stato in USA, correspondent with Avvenire, the daily paper of the Italian Bishops Conference.
"Terrorism of dubious origin, used to steer and manipulate society, to abandon civil rights, to create new enemies, wage war abroad and at home against one's own citizens: a study like Webster Griffin Tarpley's 9/11 Synthetic Terror was long overdue and will hopefully open the eyes of many people."
- Gerhard Wisnewski, German TV producer, author of Operation 9/11 and Mythos 9/11
"No one else I know so fearlessly names state-sponsored false flag terrorism. Webster G. Tarpley is an investigative elder of the planet, combining an historian's sweep with the eye of an exceptionally well-informed whistle-blower on today's shadowy elites."
Barrie Zwicker, Documentary producer, VisionTV Insight MediaFile
"I was already familiar with Webster Tarpley's work from reading his unauthorized biography of Bush père, which appeared more than a dozen years ago. That is a work which I still consult regularly, even now. There are points which were made in that book which everyone repeats today. In my opinion, that biography will remain as a reference work; it is the best book on the subject.
I therefore expected that Tarpley's new book on 9/11 would have the same quality of precision. But I found that, in addition, Tarpley has created a totally new genre, a new avenue of inquiry into 9/11.
There have already been many books on 9/11. Paul Thompson has done a kind of exhaustive review on this subject. David Ray Griffin has pointed out the logical contradictions among the successive versions of the official story. Mike Ruppert has attempted to understand the context of these events.
But Tarpley has posed a new question: that of comparing the techniques used by the US intelligence agencies in creating 9/11 with the methods used by US intelligence in the past. Many people are going to copy what Tarpley has done.
That is why this book is so important. The inquiry initiated here needs to be carried further. Not everything found here will necessarily be confirmed, but Tarpley has opened up a new path. People will keep coming back to this book in order to ask new questions along this line of inquiry."
- Thierry Meyssan, Président, Réseau Voltaire, Author of 9/11: The Big Lie and Pentagate
Webster Tarpley's book is, without any doubt, the most important and best book ever about 9/11. It's an excellent combination of geo-political analysis, philosophy and 9/11 allround research, and goes even much deeper.
9/11 Synthetic Terror not only puts the tragic event of 9/11 into the clearest and so far, most detailed and best described historical context, it also combines often ignored physical and investigative evidence of a U.S.-scripted, planned, orchestrated and supervised attack.
This book deserves to be at the top of every 9/11 truth leaflet and in the editorials of mainstream media, which both often ignore the deeper picture, watering down the clear evidence of an Inside Job and misleading the audience to suggest that 9/11 was just the result of negligence or "LIHOP" (let it happen on purpose).
Nico Haupt, Globalfreepress, INN World Report
Was this review helpful to you? (Report this)
4 of 5 people found the following review helpful:
Step up to the big leagues, May 29, 2005
Reviewer: Herbert L. Smith "hdog" (NY) - See all my reviews
While Tarpley covers some of the technical aspects of 9/11 what sets him apart is his historical knowledge of state-sponsored terrorism. A must-read for any student of 9/11.
Was this review helpful to you? (Report this)
1 of 7 people found the following review helpful:
top of the line.smokeand mirrors, May 13, 2005
Reviewer: mar louis "greypacific" (Seattle) - See all my reviews
Mr.Tarpley writes a book that explains the system upon how terrorism is financed by and for governments,in other words oswald didnt kill kennedy and sept 11.was financed by the mossad with a few moles in the pentagon working in concert to achieve there goals.never believe a cover story,there were bombs going off in the world trade center.who planted them?m.b
Leak Riddle: Who's Playing Whom?
Leak Riddle: Who's Playing Whom?
washingtonpost.com
Leak Riddle: Who's Playing Whom?
By Mark Feldstein
Post
Sunday, July 24, 2005; B01
Judith Miller, the Pulitzer Prize-winning New York Times reporter who now wears a brown and green prison jumpsuit, will soon enter her third week in a jail cell just a few miles from the White House where administration officials suspected of leaking classified information to journalists -- including the president's top political strategist, Karl Rove -- are still running the government.
Despite the widespread fixation on this political scandal, there is also an important journalistic one: the conflict of interest that reporters routinely have with high-level sources who leak sensitive information. It is the dirty little secret of the Washington press corps, a kind of unspoken conspiracy in which reporters conceal not only their sources' identities but more importantly the underlying motives for the leaks. This Faustian pact can be a disservice to the public, which learns only a part of the larger truth, a version that may be accurate as far as it goes but is by definition deficient.
I know. I've been an investigative reporter and received subpoenas in both criminal and civil cases that jeopardized my pledge of confidentiality to sources; once I even brought a packed suitcase into federal court in anticipation of going to jail. In the high-profile public corruption grand jury probes that I covered in Washington, some of my best sources publicly denied providing information that they had in fact leaked to me. This kind of disinformation is common and puts journalists in the awkward position of having to choose between reporting what they know is really going on or breaking their pledge of confidentiality to their sources.
The current scandal began two years ago amid the finger-pointing that followed the U.S. invasion of Iraq, which famously failed to turn up the weapons of mass destruction that President Bush had claimed as the main reason for America's preemptive war. Joseph C. Wilson IV, a longtime diplomat and Democrat, accused the Bush administration of deliberately using intelligence that "was twisted to exaggerate the Iraqi threat." Wilson reported that he had personally conducted an investigation on behalf of the Central Intelligence Agency and found no evidence to support the president's claim that Saddam Hussein had tried to acquire African uranium to build nuclear weapons.
Administration officials responded by trying to undermine Wilson's story, telling journalists that his fact-finding trip to Africa was a boondoggle arranged by his wife who worked for the CIA. Conservative columnist Robert Novak published the charge and soon a special prosecutor was issuing subpoenas to learn whether the White House had violated federal law by outing the identity of Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame.
So why is Miller in jail, even though she never wrote a story on the subject? Surprisingly, the precise role of journalists is still shrouded in mystery. Reporters, who as a class are usually the biggest blabbermouths in town, have for the most part been uncharacteristically silent. Still, enough has come out about the behind-the-scenes maneuvering to illustrate how the system works: Administration officials reportedly first peddled their goods on Wilson to the top-tier media companies -- The Washington Post, the New York Times, and Time magazine. Only after reporters at these influential mainstream news organizations failed to publish the story did it end up in a column by Novak, whose reputation as a conservative ideologue may have made him a more obvious and therefore less credible outlet for conveying administration spin. Even with first-rung publications, high-level sources apparently laid down conditions. Time's Matt Cooper, for example, sent his editors an e-mail stating that White House adviser Rove's leak was provided only "on double super secret background . . . don't source this to rove or even WH [White House]."
Why does the press go along with this? Because government officials provide the media with their coin of the realm -- information -- a currency that can have quite literal commercial value. Although news outlets return the favor by supplying publicity, the law of supply and demand favors sources, at least in Washington, where hungry reporters far outnumber officials who are willing to leak inside information. As a result, sources with exclusive stories are in a position to take their pick of journalists and dictate terms about the coverage they receive in exchange. "White House officials and White House reporters are tight-lipped" about how this unappetizing news sausage is made, admitted President Clinton's former domestic policy adviser (and sometime leaker) Bruce Reed, "because these leaks are fake and somewhat ridiculous, like teleprompters or the congressional auto-pen."
Most leaks consist of quick telephone conversations that take place whenreporters and sources go through their Rolodexes making the rounds of their daily contacts. Note-taking is hurried and often sloppy, the terms of attribution signaled by an insider's shorthand -- on the record, off the record, background, deep background -- that is seldom defined explicitly but occasionally disputed after publication.
The problem is that by deliberately omitting the essential explanation of how the source is attempting to manipulate the agenda, the journalist often becomes a virtual accomplice hiding the ongoing but subterranean bureaucratic or ideological conflict at the heart of the story. In the Plame case, "this isn't even about Wilson," says Scott Armstrong, a former journalist and founder of the nonprofit National Security Archive. "It has to do with two institutions fighting it out, with the CIA saying we didn't [screw] up, the White House did." But little of that has been reflected in media coverage of the story.
To be sure, it is better for reporters to disclose even partial and incomplete information than none at all; and many editors now increasingly insist that stories contain at least some kind of language that attempts to characterize the motives of anonymous sources. In any case, as the late Post publisher PhilipGraham said, journalism is but the "first rough draft of history." The final chapter will be written only by historians. But reporters practice their craft in real time, influencing events while they are still happening, supplying the public with vital information to make informed decisions in a democracy. Indeed, journalism matters in part because it molds the wet and malleable clay of the present before it hardens into history.
If history is any guide, this issue won't go away anytime soon, regardless of the outcome of the current investigation. Anonymous sources have been leaking secret information to the press ever since the republic was founded. President George Washington was incensed upon discovering that verbatim accounts of his confidential treaties and Cabinet minutes were being published in the newspapers of the day, especially since his secretary of state, Thomas Jefferson, was believed to be behind the leaks. In the 19th century, journalists routinely bribed clerks to give them government documents; sometimes competing reporters even pooled their money to raise the necessary funds to pry out particularly costly information.
Moreover, reporters have been getting locked up for protecting their sources since at least 1848, when John Nugent of the New York Tribune refused to tell Congress who leaked him the draft of a secret treaty with Mexico. While in custody, the journalist continued to file stories and doubled his salary, emerging as a hero a month later.
In many ways, today's probe of the Plame leak seems to be -- like the endless Whitewater investigation of President Bill Clinton -- just the most recent criminalizing of bitter policy differences in Washington, political warfare by other means, to paraphrase the Prussian philosopher Karl von Clausewitz. Ironically, whoever leaked Plame's identity may not have broken the law at all, despite the ongoing probe. As Slate media critic Jack Shafer has pointed out, the 1982 Intelligence Identities Protection Act sets the bar very high for prosecuting this kind of disclosure, requiring that leakers first must have been "authorized" to have classified information and then disclosed it "intentionally." Even lawyers who drafted that law say that it wasn't intended for cases like that of Plame. In fact, former Justice Department deputy assistant attorney general Victoria Toensing believes it is "probable" that the prosecutors' probe would have been halted if only it had been challenged on these grounds early on in district court. Some media lawyers admit privately that they wish they had done so but say that the grand jury investigation has now taken on a life of its own by expanding to whether administration officials tried to cover up the leak.
Perjury and obstruction of justice are legal terms, of course; but at the very least, participants in the Plame Game seem to be afflicted with the kind of selective memory endemic to leak investigations. For example, Rove steadfastly denied any involvement in the Plame leak -- until that notorious e-mail outed him as Time's "double super secret" source. Then Rove admitted that he had talked to the press about Plame, but argued through his lawyer that it didn't break the law. Why? Because Rove claimed to have learned of Plame's CIA connection not from classified documents but from other reporters .
Maybe. But my experience has been that reporters seldom gossip about such classified matters as the identity of an undercover CIA operative, if only because they rarely receive such information in the first place and guard it when they do.
In my own brushes with the law over leaks, I always managed to avoid a final showdown with authorities who wanted to know the identity of my sources. Once, a polite threat to reveal incriminating information about a subject on the witness stand led to a prompt dismissal of a subpoena. Another time, I avoided having to testify in a federal grand jury about my sources by agreeing instead to let prosecutors subpoena my original copy of a diary kept by one of the cocaine dealers who supplied Marion Barry, then the mayor of Washington, who was under investigation for drug use. These arrangements weren't perfect, but they kept me out of jail while guarding the confidentiality of my sources.
Similar compromises have occurred with at least some of the journalists who were subpoenaed in the Plame case. Reporters for The Washington Post and NBC negotiated deals early on to restrict their testimony and limit the exposure of their sources. This strategy was apparently more successful than Time magazine's, which initially resisted but then ended up naming names before the grand jury as well as turning over reporting notes and e-mails. Columnist Novak won't say what deal, if any, he struck with prosecutors; most analysts believe he must have cooperated in some fashion to avoid Miller's fate of being jailed for contempt of court.
As for Rove, he's still Bush's top political strategist in the White House -- unless he, too, succumbs to the onslaught of leaking that he knows all too well.
Author's e-mail : feldy@gwu.edu
Mark Feldstein is director of the journalism program and associate professor of media and public affairs at George Washington University. His book "Poisoning the Press: Richard Nixon, Jack Anderson and the Rise of the White House Attack Machine" will be published next year by Farrar, Straus & Giroux.
washingtonpost.com
Leak Riddle: Who's Playing Whom?
By Mark Feldstein
Post
Sunday, July 24, 2005; B01
Judith Miller, the Pulitzer Prize-winning New York Times reporter who now wears a brown and green prison jumpsuit, will soon enter her third week in a jail cell just a few miles from the White House where administration officials suspected of leaking classified information to journalists -- including the president's top political strategist, Karl Rove -- are still running the government.
Despite the widespread fixation on this political scandal, there is also an important journalistic one: the conflict of interest that reporters routinely have with high-level sources who leak sensitive information. It is the dirty little secret of the Washington press corps, a kind of unspoken conspiracy in which reporters conceal not only their sources' identities but more importantly the underlying motives for the leaks. This Faustian pact can be a disservice to the public, which learns only a part of the larger truth, a version that may be accurate as far as it goes but is by definition deficient.
I know. I've been an investigative reporter and received subpoenas in both criminal and civil cases that jeopardized my pledge of confidentiality to sources; once I even brought a packed suitcase into federal court in anticipation of going to jail. In the high-profile public corruption grand jury probes that I covered in Washington, some of my best sources publicly denied providing information that they had in fact leaked to me. This kind of disinformation is common and puts journalists in the awkward position of having to choose between reporting what they know is really going on or breaking their pledge of confidentiality to their sources.
The current scandal began two years ago amid the finger-pointing that followed the U.S. invasion of Iraq, which famously failed to turn up the weapons of mass destruction that President Bush had claimed as the main reason for America's preemptive war. Joseph C. Wilson IV, a longtime diplomat and Democrat, accused the Bush administration of deliberately using intelligence that "was twisted to exaggerate the Iraqi threat." Wilson reported that he had personally conducted an investigation on behalf of the Central Intelligence Agency and found no evidence to support the president's claim that Saddam Hussein had tried to acquire African uranium to build nuclear weapons.
Administration officials responded by trying to undermine Wilson's story, telling journalists that his fact-finding trip to Africa was a boondoggle arranged by his wife who worked for the CIA. Conservative columnist Robert Novak published the charge and soon a special prosecutor was issuing subpoenas to learn whether the White House had violated federal law by outing the identity of Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame.
So why is Miller in jail, even though she never wrote a story on the subject? Surprisingly, the precise role of journalists is still shrouded in mystery. Reporters, who as a class are usually the biggest blabbermouths in town, have for the most part been uncharacteristically silent. Still, enough has come out about the behind-the-scenes maneuvering to illustrate how the system works: Administration officials reportedly first peddled their goods on Wilson to the top-tier media companies -- The Washington Post, the New York Times, and Time magazine. Only after reporters at these influential mainstream news organizations failed to publish the story did it end up in a column by Novak, whose reputation as a conservative ideologue may have made him a more obvious and therefore less credible outlet for conveying administration spin. Even with first-rung publications, high-level sources apparently laid down conditions. Time's Matt Cooper, for example, sent his editors an e-mail stating that White House adviser Rove's leak was provided only "on double super secret background . . . don't source this to rove or even WH [White House]."
Why does the press go along with this? Because government officials provide the media with their coin of the realm -- information -- a currency that can have quite literal commercial value. Although news outlets return the favor by supplying publicity, the law of supply and demand favors sources, at least in Washington, where hungry reporters far outnumber officials who are willing to leak inside information. As a result, sources with exclusive stories are in a position to take their pick of journalists and dictate terms about the coverage they receive in exchange. "White House officials and White House reporters are tight-lipped" about how this unappetizing news sausage is made, admitted President Clinton's former domestic policy adviser (and sometime leaker) Bruce Reed, "because these leaks are fake and somewhat ridiculous, like teleprompters or the congressional auto-pen."
Most leaks consist of quick telephone conversations that take place whenreporters and sources go through their Rolodexes making the rounds of their daily contacts. Note-taking is hurried and often sloppy, the terms of attribution signaled by an insider's shorthand -- on the record, off the record, background, deep background -- that is seldom defined explicitly but occasionally disputed after publication.
The problem is that by deliberately omitting the essential explanation of how the source is attempting to manipulate the agenda, the journalist often becomes a virtual accomplice hiding the ongoing but subterranean bureaucratic or ideological conflict at the heart of the story. In the Plame case, "this isn't even about Wilson," says Scott Armstrong, a former journalist and founder of the nonprofit National Security Archive. "It has to do with two institutions fighting it out, with the CIA saying we didn't [screw] up, the White House did." But little of that has been reflected in media coverage of the story.
To be sure, it is better for reporters to disclose even partial and incomplete information than none at all; and many editors now increasingly insist that stories contain at least some kind of language that attempts to characterize the motives of anonymous sources. In any case, as the late Post publisher PhilipGraham said, journalism is but the "first rough draft of history." The final chapter will be written only by historians. But reporters practice their craft in real time, influencing events while they are still happening, supplying the public with vital information to make informed decisions in a democracy. Indeed, journalism matters in part because it molds the wet and malleable clay of the present before it hardens into history.
If history is any guide, this issue won't go away anytime soon, regardless of the outcome of the current investigation. Anonymous sources have been leaking secret information to the press ever since the republic was founded. President George Washington was incensed upon discovering that verbatim accounts of his confidential treaties and Cabinet minutes were being published in the newspapers of the day, especially since his secretary of state, Thomas Jefferson, was believed to be behind the leaks. In the 19th century, journalists routinely bribed clerks to give them government documents; sometimes competing reporters even pooled their money to raise the necessary funds to pry out particularly costly information.
Moreover, reporters have been getting locked up for protecting their sources since at least 1848, when John Nugent of the New York Tribune refused to tell Congress who leaked him the draft of a secret treaty with Mexico. While in custody, the journalist continued to file stories and doubled his salary, emerging as a hero a month later.
In many ways, today's probe of the Plame leak seems to be -- like the endless Whitewater investigation of President Bill Clinton -- just the most recent criminalizing of bitter policy differences in Washington, political warfare by other means, to paraphrase the Prussian philosopher Karl von Clausewitz. Ironically, whoever leaked Plame's identity may not have broken the law at all, despite the ongoing probe. As Slate media critic Jack Shafer has pointed out, the 1982 Intelligence Identities Protection Act sets the bar very high for prosecuting this kind of disclosure, requiring that leakers first must have been "authorized" to have classified information and then disclosed it "intentionally." Even lawyers who drafted that law say that it wasn't intended for cases like that of Plame. In fact, former Justice Department deputy assistant attorney general Victoria Toensing believes it is "probable" that the prosecutors' probe would have been halted if only it had been challenged on these grounds early on in district court. Some media lawyers admit privately that they wish they had done so but say that the grand jury investigation has now taken on a life of its own by expanding to whether administration officials tried to cover up the leak.
Perjury and obstruction of justice are legal terms, of course; but at the very least, participants in the Plame Game seem to be afflicted with the kind of selective memory endemic to leak investigations. For example, Rove steadfastly denied any involvement in the Plame leak -- until that notorious e-mail outed him as Time's "double super secret" source. Then Rove admitted that he had talked to the press about Plame, but argued through his lawyer that it didn't break the law. Why? Because Rove claimed to have learned of Plame's CIA connection not from classified documents but from other reporters .
Maybe. But my experience has been that reporters seldom gossip about such classified matters as the identity of an undercover CIA operative, if only because they rarely receive such information in the first place and guard it when they do.
In my own brushes with the law over leaks, I always managed to avoid a final showdown with authorities who wanted to know the identity of my sources. Once, a polite threat to reveal incriminating information about a subject on the witness stand led to a prompt dismissal of a subpoena. Another time, I avoided having to testify in a federal grand jury about my sources by agreeing instead to let prosecutors subpoena my original copy of a diary kept by one of the cocaine dealers who supplied Marion Barry, then the mayor of Washington, who was under investigation for drug use. These arrangements weren't perfect, but they kept me out of jail while guarding the confidentiality of my sources.
Similar compromises have occurred with at least some of the journalists who were subpoenaed in the Plame case. Reporters for The Washington Post and NBC negotiated deals early on to restrict their testimony and limit the exposure of their sources. This strategy was apparently more successful than Time magazine's, which initially resisted but then ended up naming names before the grand jury as well as turning over reporting notes and e-mails. Columnist Novak won't say what deal, if any, he struck with prosecutors; most analysts believe he must have cooperated in some fashion to avoid Miller's fate of being jailed for contempt of court.
As for Rove, he's still Bush's top political strategist in the White House -- unless he, too, succumbs to the onslaught of leaking that he knows all too well.
Author's e-mail : feldy@gwu.edu
Mark Feldstein is director of the journalism program and associate professor of media and public affairs at George Washington University. His book "Poisoning the Press: Richard Nixon, Jack Anderson and the Rise of the White House Attack Machine" will be published next year by Farrar, Straus & Giroux.
Prostitution Puts U.S. and Brazil at Odds on AIDS Policy - New York Times
Prostitution Puts U.S. and Brazil at Odds on AIDS Policy - New York Times
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
July 24, 2005
Prostitution Puts U.S. and Brazil at Odds on AIDS Policy
By LARRY ROHTER
RIO DE JANEIRO, July 23 - In their baseball caps and T-shirts adorned with a rose in the shape of a heart, they are a familiar and welcome presence in the red-light district on the outskirts of downtown here. For years now, they have been distributing condoms to the prostitutes who work the streets, part of the Brazilian government's larger effort to hold AIDS in check.
Until recently, the condom campaign of the group called Fio da Alma had been partly financed through the United States Agency for International Development. But no longer: rather than comply with an American demand that all foreign recipients of AIDS assistance must explicitly condemn prostitution, Brazil has decided to forgo up to $40 million in American support.
"Our feeling was that the manner in which the Usaid funds were consigned would bring harm to our program from the point of view of its scientific credibility, its ethical values and its social commitment," Pedro Chequer, director of the Brazilian government's AIDS program, said in an interview in BrasilÃa. "We must remain faithful to the established principles of the scientific method and not allow theological beliefs and dogma to interfere."
Experts here and abroad say the disagreement over how to deal with prostitution is symptomatic of a larger conflict between Brazil and the United States over AIDS policy. Brazil, which spends more than $400 million annually on what is regarded as the most successful AIDS program in the developing world, is taking a pragmatic approach in combating the global epidemic, the experts say, while the United States, increasingly, is not.
"It's not as if you're choosing between two neutral policy programs," said Chris Beyrer of the Center for Public Health and Human Rights at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. "Brazil has good data to show that their approach works, and to ask them to change that, even if they get the additional money, to one for which there is no evidence, just because of moral squeamishness in the United States, is an extraordinary position to take."
Dr. Beyrer is one of several thousand AIDS specialists from all over the world who have gathered here for an annual conference of the International AIDS Society that begins Monday. Mark Dybul, deputy coordinator and chief medical officer for the Bush administration's global AIDS initiative, is also taking part, and says the prostitution controversy is not only overblown, but is also an example of the many misconceptions about American policy.
"On the ground, this isn't an issue," Dr. Dybul said in an interview here on Friday. "Part of a compassionate response involves meeting people where they are and working with them."
He added, "Each country has a sovereign right to make decisions for themselves, and we respect that." But in order to receive American aid, he said, "it does require an acknowledgment that prostitution is not a good thing and to be opposed to it."
One gauge of Brazil's success in confronting AIDS is to compare the situation here with that of other developing countries, many of which have sent delegations to study the Brazilian program. In 1990, for example, Brazil and South Africa had roughly the same rate of prevalence of H.I.V. among their adult populations, just over 1 percent.
Today, some studies indicate that 20 percent or more of South African adults of reproductive age are infected with H.I.V. or have AIDS, an estimated total of more than 5 million of the country's 44 million people. In Brazil, in contrast, the rate has dropped nearly by half, and the number of patients being treated has held steady, at about 600,000 out of a total population of 180 million.
"The Brazilian program very early on attempted to recognize that this is a pandemic that could travel through the population if there weren't programs to provide education and give special attention to vulnerable groups," said Mark Schneider, who was the Agency for International Development's director for Latin America in the Clinton administration and has worked at the Pan-American Health Organization.
"They attempted to take out the stigma and practice safe sex so as to prevent the epidemic from expanding, and in that way they were well ahead of other countries, particularly in the developing world."
But the Brazilian approach is anathema to many conservatives in the United States because it makes use of methods seen as morally objectionable. Brazil not only operates a needle and syringe exchange program for drug addicts but also rejects the Bush administration's emphasis on abstinence, being faithful and the controlled use of condoms, the so-called ABC approach, in favor of a pragmatism that recognizes that sexual desire can sometimes overwhelm reason.
"Obviously abstinence is the safest way to avoid AIDS," Dr. Chequer said. "But it's not viable in an operational sense unless you are proposing that mankind be castrated or genetically altered, and then you would end up with something that is not human but something else altogether."
"If we increasingly focus the prevention of AIDS along these lines, we are generating carnage, a slaughter," he said. "It's not a realistic vision, and the epidemic is going to grow larger and larger."
Brazil, of course, is not the only country to have been affected by the American policy. Senegal has one of the lowest H.I.V. prevalence rates in Africa, but has been cut off from the Bush administration initiative, public health experts said, because prostitution has been legal there since 1969. And in Central American countries like Guatemala, religious groups supported by American financing have distributed fliers to prostitutes urging them to adopt the ABC approach.
Fio da Alma, which means Thread of the Soul in Portuguese, is one of about 30 AIDS groups across Brazil that works with prostitutes in cooperation with an organization called Da Vida, or For Life. As many as one million condoms a month are distributed through that program, one of several that were initially financed in part through the American aid agency and were expected to continue as part of a grant that would last through 2008.
The United States wanted to remain involved because the White House in 2003 announced a five-year $15 billion program known as the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief. Congress has authorized financing, but also required that all groups getting American money make an explicit statement of policy opposing prostitution and sex trafficking.
Brazilian AIDS groups that work with prostitutes argue that they are not endorsing the sex trade. Because many of those involved in the Brazilian program are prostitutes themselves, they know the risks involved.
"With what we do, we are definitely not encouraging the sexual exploitation of women and girls," said Ivanilda Lima, 64, the director of Fio da Alma, who said she had been a prostitute herself since age 13. "We just want women who are already on the streets to be able to protect their health."
Brazil and the Bush administration have differed on other AIDS-related issues in the past, including what Dr. Chequer described as a recent effort to get Brazil to endorse the ABC approach. But in each case, he said, the two sides managed to find a middle ground without violating their own principles.
Over the prostitution issue, however, a compromise does not appear possible. Even if the Bush administration were willing to offend the conservative religious groups that are one of its main constituencies, its hands would be tied by the Congressional legislation.
"We follow the law," Dr. Dybul said. "The law says that groups must oppose prostitution, and we will enforce that. We believe that prostitution is a bad thing, both for H.I.V. infection and for the individual. But we are opposed to the activity, not to the person."
Brazilian AIDS workers, on the other hand, argue that even if the Ministry of Health here were willing to accept the American demand, it could not do so legally. Under Brazilian law, two people having sex in exchange for money is neither a felony nor a misdemeanor, but an infraction much like a traffic violation (although procurement is a crime).
"Prostitution in Brazil isn't legalized, but it's not illegal either," Dr. Chequer explained.
In addition, Brazilian labor law recognizes "sex worker" as a profession. That entitles prostitutes, call girls and street hustlers to contribute to the official government pension fund and to receive benefits when they retire.
"We view prostitutes as partners in this effort, partners who are efficient and competent" in getting Brazilians to give up dangerous sexual behavior, Dr. Chequer said. "Prostitution exists everywhere in the world, including the United States, and we have a commitment to work with this group and respect them."
Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company Home Privacy Policy Search Corrections XML Help Contact Us Work for Us Back to Top
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
July 24, 2005
Prostitution Puts U.S. and Brazil at Odds on AIDS Policy
By LARRY ROHTER
RIO DE JANEIRO, July 23 - In their baseball caps and T-shirts adorned with a rose in the shape of a heart, they are a familiar and welcome presence in the red-light district on the outskirts of downtown here. For years now, they have been distributing condoms to the prostitutes who work the streets, part of the Brazilian government's larger effort to hold AIDS in check.
Until recently, the condom campaign of the group called Fio da Alma had been partly financed through the United States Agency for International Development. But no longer: rather than comply with an American demand that all foreign recipients of AIDS assistance must explicitly condemn prostitution, Brazil has decided to forgo up to $40 million in American support.
"Our feeling was that the manner in which the Usaid funds were consigned would bring harm to our program from the point of view of its scientific credibility, its ethical values and its social commitment," Pedro Chequer, director of the Brazilian government's AIDS program, said in an interview in BrasilÃa. "We must remain faithful to the established principles of the scientific method and not allow theological beliefs and dogma to interfere."
Experts here and abroad say the disagreement over how to deal with prostitution is symptomatic of a larger conflict between Brazil and the United States over AIDS policy. Brazil, which spends more than $400 million annually on what is regarded as the most successful AIDS program in the developing world, is taking a pragmatic approach in combating the global epidemic, the experts say, while the United States, increasingly, is not.
"It's not as if you're choosing between two neutral policy programs," said Chris Beyrer of the Center for Public Health and Human Rights at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. "Brazil has good data to show that their approach works, and to ask them to change that, even if they get the additional money, to one for which there is no evidence, just because of moral squeamishness in the United States, is an extraordinary position to take."
Dr. Beyrer is one of several thousand AIDS specialists from all over the world who have gathered here for an annual conference of the International AIDS Society that begins Monday. Mark Dybul, deputy coordinator and chief medical officer for the Bush administration's global AIDS initiative, is also taking part, and says the prostitution controversy is not only overblown, but is also an example of the many misconceptions about American policy.
"On the ground, this isn't an issue," Dr. Dybul said in an interview here on Friday. "Part of a compassionate response involves meeting people where they are and working with them."
He added, "Each country has a sovereign right to make decisions for themselves, and we respect that." But in order to receive American aid, he said, "it does require an acknowledgment that prostitution is not a good thing and to be opposed to it."
One gauge of Brazil's success in confronting AIDS is to compare the situation here with that of other developing countries, many of which have sent delegations to study the Brazilian program. In 1990, for example, Brazil and South Africa had roughly the same rate of prevalence of H.I.V. among their adult populations, just over 1 percent.
Today, some studies indicate that 20 percent or more of South African adults of reproductive age are infected with H.I.V. or have AIDS, an estimated total of more than 5 million of the country's 44 million people. In Brazil, in contrast, the rate has dropped nearly by half, and the number of patients being treated has held steady, at about 600,000 out of a total population of 180 million.
"The Brazilian program very early on attempted to recognize that this is a pandemic that could travel through the population if there weren't programs to provide education and give special attention to vulnerable groups," said Mark Schneider, who was the Agency for International Development's director for Latin America in the Clinton administration and has worked at the Pan-American Health Organization.
"They attempted to take out the stigma and practice safe sex so as to prevent the epidemic from expanding, and in that way they were well ahead of other countries, particularly in the developing world."
But the Brazilian approach is anathema to many conservatives in the United States because it makes use of methods seen as morally objectionable. Brazil not only operates a needle and syringe exchange program for drug addicts but also rejects the Bush administration's emphasis on abstinence, being faithful and the controlled use of condoms, the so-called ABC approach, in favor of a pragmatism that recognizes that sexual desire can sometimes overwhelm reason.
"Obviously abstinence is the safest way to avoid AIDS," Dr. Chequer said. "But it's not viable in an operational sense unless you are proposing that mankind be castrated or genetically altered, and then you would end up with something that is not human but something else altogether."
"If we increasingly focus the prevention of AIDS along these lines, we are generating carnage, a slaughter," he said. "It's not a realistic vision, and the epidemic is going to grow larger and larger."
Brazil, of course, is not the only country to have been affected by the American policy. Senegal has one of the lowest H.I.V. prevalence rates in Africa, but has been cut off from the Bush administration initiative, public health experts said, because prostitution has been legal there since 1969. And in Central American countries like Guatemala, religious groups supported by American financing have distributed fliers to prostitutes urging them to adopt the ABC approach.
Fio da Alma, which means Thread of the Soul in Portuguese, is one of about 30 AIDS groups across Brazil that works with prostitutes in cooperation with an organization called Da Vida, or For Life. As many as one million condoms a month are distributed through that program, one of several that were initially financed in part through the American aid agency and were expected to continue as part of a grant that would last through 2008.
The United States wanted to remain involved because the White House in 2003 announced a five-year $15 billion program known as the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief. Congress has authorized financing, but also required that all groups getting American money make an explicit statement of policy opposing prostitution and sex trafficking.
Brazilian AIDS groups that work with prostitutes argue that they are not endorsing the sex trade. Because many of those involved in the Brazilian program are prostitutes themselves, they know the risks involved.
"With what we do, we are definitely not encouraging the sexual exploitation of women and girls," said Ivanilda Lima, 64, the director of Fio da Alma, who said she had been a prostitute herself since age 13. "We just want women who are already on the streets to be able to protect their health."
Brazil and the Bush administration have differed on other AIDS-related issues in the past, including what Dr. Chequer described as a recent effort to get Brazil to endorse the ABC approach. But in each case, he said, the two sides managed to find a middle ground without violating their own principles.
Over the prostitution issue, however, a compromise does not appear possible. Even if the Bush administration were willing to offend the conservative religious groups that are one of its main constituencies, its hands would be tied by the Congressional legislation.
"We follow the law," Dr. Dybul said. "The law says that groups must oppose prostitution, and we will enforce that. We believe that prostitution is a bad thing, both for H.I.V. infection and for the individual. But we are opposed to the activity, not to the person."
Brazilian AIDS workers, on the other hand, argue that even if the Ministry of Health here were willing to accept the American demand, it could not do so legally. Under Brazilian law, two people having sex in exchange for money is neither a felony nor a misdemeanor, but an infraction much like a traffic violation (although procurement is a crime).
"Prostitution in Brazil isn't legalized, but it's not illegal either," Dr. Chequer explained.
In addition, Brazilian labor law recognizes "sex worker" as a profession. That entitles prostitutes, call girls and street hustlers to contribute to the official government pension fund and to receive benefits when they retire.
"We view prostitutes as partners in this effort, partners who are efficient and competent" in getting Brazilians to give up dangerous sexual behavior, Dr. Chequer said. "Prostitution exists everywhere in the world, including the United States, and we have a commitment to work with this group and respect them."
Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company Home Privacy Policy Search Corrections XML Help Contact Us Work for Us Back to Top
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)