Bush Admin. Briefed on Able Danger After Attacks
Thursday, Aug. 18, 2005 10:12 a.m. EDT
Bush Admin. Briefed on Able Danger After Attacks
Two weeks after the 9/11 the attacks, the Bush administration was told that a special military intelligence unit code named Able Danger had developed actionable intelligence two years earlier that could have foiled the 9/11 plot, a member of the Able Danger team revealed on Wednesday.Among the Able Danger evidence shared with the Bush National Security Council: a chart put together before 9/11 featuring a picture of lead hijacker Mohamed Atta.
Asked why he didn't go public before this week with the news that his group had been tracking Atta during the Clinton administration, Able Danger team member Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer told ABC radio host Sean Hannity:
"Within two weeks of the attack, this colleague of mine ... she took that very poster [with Mohamed Atta] to Congressman [Curt] Weldon," Shaffer said. "And I have to say he took it right to Michael Hadley, I believe, over at the NSC."
"It's my understanding that he gave him that chart and Hadley had a great deal of interest in it," he added.
Once the Bush administration had been briefed, Shaffer said, he thought the information would be handled properly. "[I felt] that we were good to go - that everything was going to be solved," he told Hannity.
The military intelligence sleuth stressed, however, "I'm not criticizing the Bush administration here. They're doing everything in their power to prevent this now. I think they're fully behind what we're doing. I think the Pentagon right now is fully behind me trying to get the word out and trying to get to the bottom of this."
Shaffer credited his still unidentified Able Danger colleague with managing the technical side of the program.
"The doctor who put this all together is brilliant. I mean, I cannot speak high enough of her and her brilliance in being able to break the code on this. She was able, through the technology used, to somehow pull out of all this amorphous data usable, actionable information."
"And that's where things kind of got off track," Shaffer explained. "Because at the same time she pulled that out, we then were trying to look at how we could exploit that information. And that's where the lawyers got involved."
Shaffer said that immediately after the 9/11 attacks, this same colleague alerted him to the fact that the Able Danger team had developed intelligence on the hijack team, a detail he hadn't noticed.
"My colleague called me in and said, 'Look, we knew these guys.' And I was shocked. It was like, in the pit of my stomach there was just this sinking feeling, like - we knew. We knew this!"
Congressman Weldon has previously described three attempts by Able Danger to brief the FBI on the Atta intelligence, before being blocked by lawyers at the Clinton Pentagon.
Those lawyers have yet to be identified.
Saturday, August 20, 2005
glowing wheel
My favorite fair shot (tho I didn't take many). While the wheel spun, it also raised up to nearly vertical. I was annoyed that they turned off all the lights but the center strobe, but it allowed for a really long exposure (20 secs) and captured the fading light in a cloudy sky and these lovely subtle swirly smooth colors.
Further into the Iraqi quagmire: US intensifies repression
Further into the Iraqi quagmire: US intensifies repression
To use the term “democracy” in relation to the situation in Iraq makes a mockery of the word. The reality of life for the Iraqi masses is a social and economic catastrophe, alongside ever-more brutal colonial rule at the hands of the American military and its local Iraqi security forces. As tensions increase, the Bush administration and the Iraqi government are presiding over a stepped-up campaign of repression against the population.
On Thursday, hundreds of people demonstrated against the US occupation through the streets of the Baghdad suburb of Amiriya, carrying the coffins of three more men gunned down in their house during an American raid and search.
Khalil Hussein, a middle-aged man whose wounds in the Iran-Iraq war of the 1980s had left him crippled and confined to a wheelchair, was shot dead in his bathroom and left lying on the floor. His two brothers, Khalid and Jamal, were also killed. His sister-in-law was wounded in the arm and foot.
A US military statement labelled them a “kidnapping cell” and “terrorists”. Their family and friends have accused American troops of indiscriminate killings. Khalil Hussein’s “crime” may well have been being unable to stand up when ordered to by American troops. A friend of the brothers told Reuters: “They call everybody ‘terrorists’ but they just commit terrorist acts whenever they want.”
Every week in Iraq, hundreds of people are killed, wounded, detained or intimidated during searches or at roadblocks. The US military is enforcing a reign of terror, particularly in Baghdad and the predominantly Sunni Arab regions where support is greatest for the anti-occupation resistance organisations.
The suspicion and hostility toward the occupation forces has reached such levels that a common belief on Iraqi streets is that the indiscriminate bombings of civilians—including suicide bombings—are being orchestrated by the police and the US military to foster sectarian divisions among the Iraqi people and create a climate of fear. Stories have circulated of people discovering explosives in their cars after they were detained by police for several hours and then ordered to drive through particular suburbs.
Another wave of bombings that deliberately targeted Shiite Muslim civilians was unleashed in the capital on Wednesday, killing over 43 people and wounding at least 88. The Iraqi government immediately blamed Sunni Islamic extremist insurgent groups.
The daily death toll in Iraq is escalating. The central Baghdad morgue alone received 1,100 corpses in July—676 of whom had been shot. The morgue director, Faed Bakr, told the Los Angeles Times: “In the days of Saddam we had maybe 16 shootings a month. Now we have more than that every day.”
The fatalities include people killed by US troops, private contractors or Iraqi security forces; Iraqi police and government officials killed by insurgents; and numerous casualties of the country’s unchecked criminal violence. They also include the victims of extra-judicial killings by police commando units of the Iraqi interior ministry. The horrifically tortured bodies of dozens of people who were detained by the police have been found in rubbish dumps, rivers and abandoned buildings.
The first judicial murders since the US invasion are likely to take place over the next week. The Iraqi government has authorised the hanging of three men convicted of a number of rapes and killings. The men’s nationally-televised trial was a total travesty. According to the New York Times, at least three witnesses identified the men as murderers because they saw some of them confess to the crime before the trial on a widely condemned television program operated by the police commandos. Terrified men who have clearly been beaten and tortured have appeared on the show admitting to horrific crimes.
State executions are part of preparations to escalate the level of violence against the Iraqi people. Far from there being a reduction in the number of US troops in Iraq, as many as 20,000 extra troops are likely to be deployed by the end of the year. The boost will facilitate a series of counter-insurgency operations and provide additional security during the referendum on a constitution, planned for October 15, and elections scheduled for December 15.
In a telling indication that the Pentagon is planning a major crackdown over the coming months, the US military announced on Wednesday that it is sending 700 extra troops to garrison its fourth prison in Iraq, which is expected to be functioning by October. American forces are detaining at least 10,800 Iraqis, many of whom have never been charged. The new facility is intended to allow prisoner numbers to increase to around 16,000.
Underlying the preparations are the growing signs of a social and political upheaval against the occupation and the US-backed government. US atrocities since the invasion have produced deep-seated opposition while the conditions of life for millions of people are unbearable.
Households are getting just four to six hours of electricity per day. Almost half of Baghdad’s population has lost access to running water. There are chronic shortages of fuel. Unemployment is between 50 and 60 percent. One quarter of all children are suffering malnutrition.
The August 9 editorial in Azzaman, an Iraqi journal, articulated popular anger. The piece declared: “It seems it is not in the interest of our rulers to have things under control. Prosperity, stability and security, once achieved, will be a blow to their ends. Because if the bombs stop, food is made available, electricity returns, crime is checked and the country is back on its feet, all the Iraqi people will then turn their attention to the most pressing issue—how to drive the occupation troops out of the country. It does not take a genius to understand that both the government and the occupation need each other and both thrive on our miseries.”
The anger erupted on August 7 in the southern city of Samawa, where Japanese and Australian troops represent the occupation. Over 1,000 people marched on the governor’s office, demanding his resignation, jobs, electricity and water. The demonstration was led by supporters of Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, whose movement, which is based among the urban poor of the major cities, took up arms last year against US forces. The governor and most of the local police are members of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI)—one of the main factions in the Iraqi government.
After police fired on the crowd, killing two people, Sadrist militiamen fought a running battle with the SCIRI police. The area is reportedly still extremely volatile.
The Bush administration and its puppet regime in Baghdad have only one answer to the growing demands of the Iraqi people for their social and democratic rights—more repression. A factor in the urgency with which Washington is demanding that the parliament in Baghdad agree on a new constitution and hold fresh elections is to provide a façade of legitimacy. Mass killings will be justified as defending a “democratic” government against “terrorists” and “extremists,” just as they were last year in Fallujah.
Barry Rubin, the director of an Israeli-based strategic thinktank, spelt out the implications of the deteriorating situation in Iraq in the Spring edition of the Washington Quarterly. In blunt terms, he argued for the consolidation of an Iraqi regime based on Shia factions such as SCIRI and, with US backing, the use of their militias to carry out a bloodbath against both the Sunni and Shiite opposition to the occupation.
Rubin wrote: “Defeating insurgent forces consisting of Saddam loyalists, Al Qaeda terrorists and Shia extremists with mild methods is impossible... It is impossible, however, for any US or US-led force effectively to employ the methods necessary to defeat the Iraq insurgency. Every time a US marine kills an Iraqi civilian or fires on a mosque, tens of millions of Arabs and many Iraqis will take it as proof that the United States has an evil anti-Arab and anti-Muslim agenda... Nothing other than an Iraqi force willing to use the necessary methods and have them accepted as ‘pro-Muslim’ and patriotic will successfully crush the insurgency.”
What George Bush and Dick Cheney have taken to calling the “noble cause” in Iraq consists of unspeakable crimes against the Iraqi people, and preparations for even greater ones.
To use the term “democracy” in relation to the situation in Iraq makes a mockery of the word. The reality of life for the Iraqi masses is a social and economic catastrophe, alongside ever-more brutal colonial rule at the hands of the American military and its local Iraqi security forces. As tensions increase, the Bush administration and the Iraqi government are presiding over a stepped-up campaign of repression against the population.
On Thursday, hundreds of people demonstrated against the US occupation through the streets of the Baghdad suburb of Amiriya, carrying the coffins of three more men gunned down in their house during an American raid and search.
Khalil Hussein, a middle-aged man whose wounds in the Iran-Iraq war of the 1980s had left him crippled and confined to a wheelchair, was shot dead in his bathroom and left lying on the floor. His two brothers, Khalid and Jamal, were also killed. His sister-in-law was wounded in the arm and foot.
A US military statement labelled them a “kidnapping cell” and “terrorists”. Their family and friends have accused American troops of indiscriminate killings. Khalil Hussein’s “crime” may well have been being unable to stand up when ordered to by American troops. A friend of the brothers told Reuters: “They call everybody ‘terrorists’ but they just commit terrorist acts whenever they want.”
Every week in Iraq, hundreds of people are killed, wounded, detained or intimidated during searches or at roadblocks. The US military is enforcing a reign of terror, particularly in Baghdad and the predominantly Sunni Arab regions where support is greatest for the anti-occupation resistance organisations.
The suspicion and hostility toward the occupation forces has reached such levels that a common belief on Iraqi streets is that the indiscriminate bombings of civilians—including suicide bombings—are being orchestrated by the police and the US military to foster sectarian divisions among the Iraqi people and create a climate of fear. Stories have circulated of people discovering explosives in their cars after they were detained by police for several hours and then ordered to drive through particular suburbs.
Another wave of bombings that deliberately targeted Shiite Muslim civilians was unleashed in the capital on Wednesday, killing over 43 people and wounding at least 88. The Iraqi government immediately blamed Sunni Islamic extremist insurgent groups.
The daily death toll in Iraq is escalating. The central Baghdad morgue alone received 1,100 corpses in July—676 of whom had been shot. The morgue director, Faed Bakr, told the Los Angeles Times: “In the days of Saddam we had maybe 16 shootings a month. Now we have more than that every day.”
The fatalities include people killed by US troops, private contractors or Iraqi security forces; Iraqi police and government officials killed by insurgents; and numerous casualties of the country’s unchecked criminal violence. They also include the victims of extra-judicial killings by police commando units of the Iraqi interior ministry. The horrifically tortured bodies of dozens of people who were detained by the police have been found in rubbish dumps, rivers and abandoned buildings.
The first judicial murders since the US invasion are likely to take place over the next week. The Iraqi government has authorised the hanging of three men convicted of a number of rapes and killings. The men’s nationally-televised trial was a total travesty. According to the New York Times, at least three witnesses identified the men as murderers because they saw some of them confess to the crime before the trial on a widely condemned television program operated by the police commandos. Terrified men who have clearly been beaten and tortured have appeared on the show admitting to horrific crimes.
State executions are part of preparations to escalate the level of violence against the Iraqi people. Far from there being a reduction in the number of US troops in Iraq, as many as 20,000 extra troops are likely to be deployed by the end of the year. The boost will facilitate a series of counter-insurgency operations and provide additional security during the referendum on a constitution, planned for October 15, and elections scheduled for December 15.
In a telling indication that the Pentagon is planning a major crackdown over the coming months, the US military announced on Wednesday that it is sending 700 extra troops to garrison its fourth prison in Iraq, which is expected to be functioning by October. American forces are detaining at least 10,800 Iraqis, many of whom have never been charged. The new facility is intended to allow prisoner numbers to increase to around 16,000.
Underlying the preparations are the growing signs of a social and political upheaval against the occupation and the US-backed government. US atrocities since the invasion have produced deep-seated opposition while the conditions of life for millions of people are unbearable.
Households are getting just four to six hours of electricity per day. Almost half of Baghdad’s population has lost access to running water. There are chronic shortages of fuel. Unemployment is between 50 and 60 percent. One quarter of all children are suffering malnutrition.
The August 9 editorial in Azzaman, an Iraqi journal, articulated popular anger. The piece declared: “It seems it is not in the interest of our rulers to have things under control. Prosperity, stability and security, once achieved, will be a blow to their ends. Because if the bombs stop, food is made available, electricity returns, crime is checked and the country is back on its feet, all the Iraqi people will then turn their attention to the most pressing issue—how to drive the occupation troops out of the country. It does not take a genius to understand that both the government and the occupation need each other and both thrive on our miseries.”
The anger erupted on August 7 in the southern city of Samawa, where Japanese and Australian troops represent the occupation. Over 1,000 people marched on the governor’s office, demanding his resignation, jobs, electricity and water. The demonstration was led by supporters of Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, whose movement, which is based among the urban poor of the major cities, took up arms last year against US forces. The governor and most of the local police are members of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI)—one of the main factions in the Iraqi government.
After police fired on the crowd, killing two people, Sadrist militiamen fought a running battle with the SCIRI police. The area is reportedly still extremely volatile.
The Bush administration and its puppet regime in Baghdad have only one answer to the growing demands of the Iraqi people for their social and democratic rights—more repression. A factor in the urgency with which Washington is demanding that the parliament in Baghdad agree on a new constitution and hold fresh elections is to provide a façade of legitimacy. Mass killings will be justified as defending a “democratic” government against “terrorists” and “extremists,” just as they were last year in Fallujah.
Barry Rubin, the director of an Israeli-based strategic thinktank, spelt out the implications of the deteriorating situation in Iraq in the Spring edition of the Washington Quarterly. In blunt terms, he argued for the consolidation of an Iraqi regime based on Shia factions such as SCIRI and, with US backing, the use of their militias to carry out a bloodbath against both the Sunni and Shiite opposition to the occupation.
Rubin wrote: “Defeating insurgent forces consisting of Saddam loyalists, Al Qaeda terrorists and Shia extremists with mild methods is impossible... It is impossible, however, for any US or US-led force effectively to employ the methods necessary to defeat the Iraq insurgency. Every time a US marine kills an Iraqi civilian or fires on a mosque, tens of millions of Arabs and many Iraqis will take it as proof that the United States has an evil anti-Arab and anti-Muslim agenda... Nothing other than an Iraqi force willing to use the necessary methods and have them accepted as ‘pro-Muslim’ and patriotic will successfully crush the insurgency.”
What George Bush and Dick Cheney have taken to calling the “noble cause” in Iraq consists of unspeakable crimes against the Iraqi people, and preparations for even greater ones.
Shot Brazilian's family 'offered US$1million' - UK News Headlines - Life Style Extra
Shot Brazilian's family 'offered US$1million' - UK News Headlines - Life Style Extra
UK News Showbiz News
Shot Brazilian's family 'offered US$1million'
Friday, 19th August 2005, 13:18
Category: Crime and Punishment
LIFE STYLE EXTRA (UK) - Scotland Yard offered the family of the Brazilian electrician mistakenly shot dead at Stockwell tube station US$1 million compensation, it emerged today.The offer was confirmed as relatives of Jean Charles De Menezes called for under-fire Met chief Sir Ian Blair to resign.Speaking outside the tube station today Yasmin Khan, of the Jean Charles De Menezes Family Campaign, said: "The Met sent over a delegation to Brazil to offer money to the family which we found surprising at this stage. "A money offer of around US$1 million was bandied about in Brazil. It shows that no-one with the police could relate to the family. The money was not accepted."Ms Khan also slammed the IPCC investigation currently underway into the death of Mr De Menezes.He said: "The IPCC investigation seems to lasting about six months. They started their investigation six days too late. Witnesses could have been found during this time. We still don't know if CCTV footage exists or not. We want a full public enquiry. The family believe Sir Ian Blair is responsible."Asked if the family blamed the officers directly responsible for the shooting, she said: "Its a policy decision that's to blame. The impact of that policy was his death, the officer's higher up gave an order that's how the police operate."Her comments follow a press conference at which the cousin of Mr De Menezes called for the resignation of Sir Ian Blair.Alessandro Pereira, 25, said: "I want the people of London to imagine hearing that your son your brother or father had been killed on the tube, shot dead."I then want you to think how we felt when we were told he was a suspected terrorist, that he looked like a suicide bomber, that he was wearing a big jacket, that he ran from the police."I want Ian Blair to think how it is to ring Jean's mother and father, our family in Brazil, and tell them that their son was dead, that he was killed in such a way. "We had to answer my families questions about how and why he died."I want Ian Blair to imagine how we felt having to listen to the lies about how and why he died."I want Ian Blair to imagine how we felt having to listen to the lies about Jean, about why he died, to see Ian Blair on Television telling those lies."The police knew Jean was innocent yet they let my family suffer. Ian Blair let us suffer."For three weeks we have had to listen to lie after lie about Jean and why he was killed."The police even went to Brazil. They met my family. Yet they still didn't tell us the truth."Did they think because we are poor Brazilians we do not deserve the truth? If that was Ian Blair's son would he not want the truth."We want to know why there was no independent investigation if there was nothing to hide."We want to know what evidence has bee lost or damaged."If there was nothing to hide, why did the police tell my family not to have a second post mortem? Why did they lie in their own post mortem report?"In Jean's name, I say that those responsible should resign. Ian Blair should resign."We want to see all those responsible brought to justice. We want to see them prosecuted."Now the campaigners are to hold a vigil outside Downing Street on Monday.Ms Khan said: "We will be encouraging all the people of London to come and show solidarity to Jean."What the family campaign has seen in the few weeks is a Laurel and Hardy police operation."There is shoot to kill policy and no-one knows where it came from."Then there is the incompetence of the police on the day."Then there is the cover up by Ian Blair and the Metropolitan Police."I spoke to members of the family this week - they were obviously devastated by what was own in the leaked documents. But they feel absolutely vindicated by what they knew already."They knew Jean didn't have a bulky jacket on. They knew he didn't have a bag. They knew he didn't run."Asad Rehman, also of the family campaign, said: "Ian Blair says his office has not been brought into question."Facts that he knew were wrong, statements that he shouldn't have made, and facts that for three weeks were in the public domain were not corrected."
UK News Showbiz News
Shot Brazilian's family 'offered US$1million'
Friday, 19th August 2005, 13:18
Category: Crime and Punishment
LIFE STYLE EXTRA (UK) - Scotland Yard offered the family of the Brazilian electrician mistakenly shot dead at Stockwell tube station US$1 million compensation, it emerged today.The offer was confirmed as relatives of Jean Charles De Menezes called for under-fire Met chief Sir Ian Blair to resign.Speaking outside the tube station today Yasmin Khan, of the Jean Charles De Menezes Family Campaign, said: "The Met sent over a delegation to Brazil to offer money to the family which we found surprising at this stage. "A money offer of around US$1 million was bandied about in Brazil. It shows that no-one with the police could relate to the family. The money was not accepted."Ms Khan also slammed the IPCC investigation currently underway into the death of Mr De Menezes.He said: "The IPCC investigation seems to lasting about six months. They started their investigation six days too late. Witnesses could have been found during this time. We still don't know if CCTV footage exists or not. We want a full public enquiry. The family believe Sir Ian Blair is responsible."Asked if the family blamed the officers directly responsible for the shooting, she said: "Its a policy decision that's to blame. The impact of that policy was his death, the officer's higher up gave an order that's how the police operate."Her comments follow a press conference at which the cousin of Mr De Menezes called for the resignation of Sir Ian Blair.Alessandro Pereira, 25, said: "I want the people of London to imagine hearing that your son your brother or father had been killed on the tube, shot dead."I then want you to think how we felt when we were told he was a suspected terrorist, that he looked like a suicide bomber, that he was wearing a big jacket, that he ran from the police."I want Ian Blair to think how it is to ring Jean's mother and father, our family in Brazil, and tell them that their son was dead, that he was killed in such a way. "We had to answer my families questions about how and why he died."I want Ian Blair to imagine how we felt having to listen to the lies about how and why he died."I want Ian Blair to imagine how we felt having to listen to the lies about Jean, about why he died, to see Ian Blair on Television telling those lies."The police knew Jean was innocent yet they let my family suffer. Ian Blair let us suffer."For three weeks we have had to listen to lie after lie about Jean and why he was killed."The police even went to Brazil. They met my family. Yet they still didn't tell us the truth."Did they think because we are poor Brazilians we do not deserve the truth? If that was Ian Blair's son would he not want the truth."We want to know why there was no independent investigation if there was nothing to hide."We want to know what evidence has bee lost or damaged."If there was nothing to hide, why did the police tell my family not to have a second post mortem? Why did they lie in their own post mortem report?"In Jean's name, I say that those responsible should resign. Ian Blair should resign."We want to see all those responsible brought to justice. We want to see them prosecuted."Now the campaigners are to hold a vigil outside Downing Street on Monday.Ms Khan said: "We will be encouraging all the people of London to come and show solidarity to Jean."What the family campaign has seen in the few weeks is a Laurel and Hardy police operation."There is shoot to kill policy and no-one knows where it came from."Then there is the incompetence of the police on the day."Then there is the cover up by Ian Blair and the Metropolitan Police."I spoke to members of the family this week - they were obviously devastated by what was own in the leaked documents. But they feel absolutely vindicated by what they knew already."They knew Jean didn't have a bulky jacket on. They knew he didn't have a bag. They knew he didn't run."Asad Rehman, also of the family campaign, said: "Ian Blair says his office has not been brought into question."Facts that he knew were wrong, statements that he shouldn't have made, and facts that for three weeks were in the public domain were not corrected."
The Metropolitan Police Authority, 'an independent authority that scrutinises the work of the London police force', has issued a bold indictment of the Met's conduct after the extrajudicial execution of Jean Charles de Menezes:
Authority member Jenny Jones said it should have been "an immediate priority" for police to clarify the information after the 22 July shooting.One suspects Authority member Jenny Sparks might have had something a bit more trenchant to say on the subject, followed by the summary electrocution of Sir Ian Blair and sundry other criminal elements.Meanwhile, the death-defying mendacity continues apace, Sir Ian (an anagram, btw, for 'raisin'; coincidence? I think not) taking the bit firmly in the teeth he so relishes lying through, after several days of bitchslapping by the media:
'The thing that I would want to say is that of all the allegations made in the last couple of days, the matter I would most want to reject is the concept of a cover-up.'Well yes, I don't doubt you would very much want to reject that allegation. I don't think anyone's asking if you want to reject it so much as whether or not you have a hope in hell of getting away with rejecting it. Which, sadly, it looks increasingly likely he will; as the Beeb noted yesterday, nobody important is calling for his resignation. Only, you know, the people whose son his boys butchered.I do love when they lie about the lying. It all takes on a kind of psychedelic hall-of-mirrors effect, like if they nest enough lies around each other, eventually the outermost lie will in fact be a truth, because it double-triple-quadruple-negates the lies inside it. That's just a theory though; I've never seen it pulled off in practice.Not content with building his personal Mighty Ziggurat of Lies, Sir Ian is shamelessly exploiting the July 7th bombing victims for a classic Look Over There gambit, exhorting people 'not to let the shooting overshadow the deaths of 52 victims of the London bombers.'
'Tragic as the death of Mr Menezes is, and we have apologised for it and we take responsibility for it, it is one death out of 57."The context here is the largest criminal inquiry in English history with 52 innocent victims dead, still double figures of people whose lives have been wrecked, four dead bombers and we can't let that one tragic death outweigh all others.'Leaving aside the fact that he appears to have taken the curious step of including the dead bombers in his sympathy-tally purely for the purpose of boosting his Deaths Which Outweigh Menezes's Death count, he fails to acknowledge the salient differentiating factor. To wit, while the other 56 deaths are all being vigorously pursued in 'the largest criminal inquiry in English history', Lucky 57's death, at the hands of those very inquirers, is the object of a criminal cover-up by same.It's a detail, but I think it's relevant.
You Tell 'Em, Jenny
Humint Events Online: Stll Having Trouble with the Flight 93 Crash
Humint Events Online: Stll Having Trouble with the Flight 93 Crash
See here and here for more about the crash.
Profile from this Blog (Source of Entry):
Stll Having Trouble with the Flight 93 Crash
I have to say that of all the odd things about 9/11, the thing that perplexes me most and makes the least amount of sense is the flight 93 crash.
See here and here for more about the crash.
Profile from this Blog (Source of Entry):
About Me
- Name:Spooked
- Location:Midwest, United States
I am dedicated to finding out the truth about 9/11. What Everyone Needs to Know About 9/11.// This is Currently My Working Model for the Events of 9/11. // Why LIHOP Equals MIHOP.// My 9/11 Rant.
Blog Header:
The 9/11 hijacking attacks were very likely facilitated by a rogue group within the US government that created an Islamic terrorist "Pearl Harbor" event as a catalyst for the military invasion of Middle Eastern countries. This weblog will explore the incredibly strange events of 9/11/01, and other issues of US government responsibility.
the beginning of a new love
seed vessel of love-in-a-mist (nigella/Jungfer im Grünen), for my flowers on white set. (our son wanted to see the seeds, that's why I opened it)
Envoy Urged Osama's Expulsion Before 9/11
Envoy Urged Osama's Expulsion Before 9/11
By ANNE GEARAN
The Associated Press
Friday, August 19, 2005; 10:40 AM
By ANNE GEARAN
The Associated Press
Friday, August 19, 2005; 10:40 AM
WASHINGTON -- A year before the Sept. 11 attacks, a U.S. diplomat assured a top official of Afghanistan's ruling Taliban regime that international sanctions on that country would be lifted if it expelled Osama bin Laden, newly declassified documents show.
A State Department memo dated September 2000 also said the United States did not seek to topple the Taliban despite its record of human rights abuses.
The memo was among documents obtained by the National Security Archive, a private research group based at George Washington University, under a Freedom of Information Act request. The group posted the documents on its Web site Thursday.
"The ambassador added that the U.S. was not against the Taliban, per se," and "was not out to destroy the Taliban," Ambassador William B. Milam wrote in the secret cable to Washington. Milam told the Taliban official, whose name is excised from the declassified document, that bin Laden was the main impediment to better relations between the Taliban and the United States.
"If the U.S. and the Taliban could get past bin Laden, we would have a different kind of relationship," Milam said he told the official.
At the time, Washington had no formal diplomatic relations with Afghanistan because concerns over human rights and other abuses by the militant Islamist Taliban regime.
State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said the Bush administration has no comment on the meeting, which took place before President Bush took office.
In his 2000 diplomatic cable, Milam told his bosses that the Taliban official had adopted a "far less obstreperous" tone than usually heard from the Taliban and suggested that the United States do some small favor for Afghanistan to show good will.
The meeting at the U.S. Embassy in Islamabad, Pakistan, produced no promise from the Taliban to turn over bin Laden, and it is not clear from the material released Thursday what the Clinton administration did next.
Other documents released by the National Security Archive on Thursday chart several years of unsuccessful U.S. attempts to drive bin Laden out of Afghanistan.
At the time of Milam's cable, the United States knew that bin Laden was living under Taliban protection along the Afghan-Pakistani border and running his al-Qaida terror network from Afghanistan. U.S. diplomats had periodic contact with the Taliban to urge his ouster.
The United States had accused bin Laden of orchestrating two embassy bombings that killed Americans in East Africa, but neither he nor his terror network were the household names they became after the jetliner attacks on New York and Washington on Sept. 11, 2001.
Shortly after the attacks, U.S. forces helped the Afghan opposition Northern Alliance overthrow the Taliban government and hunt down its leaders. The Bush administration's goal was twofold: Rout bin Laden's protectors and capture bin Laden himself.
Nearly four years after the invasion, a 21,000-member U.S.-led coalition force remains to fight Taliban remnants and keep order despite the emergence of a new U.S.-allied government. Bin Laden is still presumed to be hiding in the same border region.
A surge of violence since winter has killed about 1,000 people _ 59 American soldiers among them. Militants have stepped up assaults in the south and east trying to sabotage the country's U.S.-backed recovery.
___
On the Net:
National Security Archive: http://www.nsarchive.org/
-THE CUNNING REALIST-: Priorities
-THE CUNNING REALIST-: Priorities
Priorities
I couldn't possibly say it any better than Greg Djerejian, so I'll simply link to his post here. Read especially the first part about the press gaggle with Rumsfeld and Myers, along with Greg's comments about it.
Priorities
I couldn't possibly say it any better than Greg Djerejian, so I'll simply link to his post here. Read especially the first part about the press gaggle with Rumsfeld and Myers, along with Greg's comments about it.
Hey, What's That Sound? - New York Times
Hey, What's That Sound? - New York Times: "Hey, What's That Sound?
By MAUREEN DOWD
Published: August 20, 2005
Richard Nixon once gave me a lesson in the politics of war.
Howell Raines, then the Washington bureau chief for The Times, took some reporters to meet Mr. Nixon right before the 1992 New Hampshire primary. The deposed president had requested that Howell bring along only reporters who were too young to have covered Watergate, so we tried to express an excess of Juvenalia spirit.
Skip to next paragraph
Fred R. Conrad/The New York Times
Related More Columns by Maureen Dowd
Readers
Forum: Maureen Dowd's Columns
Before the first vote of '92 was cast, Mr. Nixon laid out, state by state, how Bill Clinton, who was not even a sure bet for the Democratic nomination at that point, was going to defeat George Bush.
If, Mr. Nixon said, Bill could keep a lid on Hillary (who had worked on the House Judiciary Committee looking into the Nixon impeachment), he'd have it made.
'If the wife comes through as being too strong and too intelligent, it makes the husband look like a wimp,' he said.
In his jaundiced view, the first President Bush had squandered his best re-election card: if the Persian Gulf war had still been going on, Mr. Bush could have been benefiting from that.
'We had a lot of success with that in 1972,' Mr. Nixon told us, with that famously uneasy baring of teeth that passed for a smile.
Was he actually admitting what all the paranoid liberals had been yelping about 20 years earlier - that he had prolonged the Vietnam War so he could get re-elected?
Bush Senior made some Republicans worry that he left Iraq too soon. Bush Junior is making some Republicans worry that he is staying in Iraq too long.
'Any effort to explain Iraq as 'We are on track and making progress' is nonsense,' Newt Gingrich told Adam Nagourney and "
By MAUREEN DOWD
Published: August 20, 2005
Richard Nixon once gave me a lesson in the politics of war.
Howell Raines, then the Washington bureau chief for The Times, took some reporters to meet Mr. Nixon right before the 1992 New Hampshire primary. The deposed president had requested that Howell bring along only reporters who were too young to have covered Watergate, so we tried to express an excess of Juvenalia spirit.
Skip to next paragraph
Fred R. Conrad/The New York Times
Related More Columns by Maureen Dowd
Readers
Forum: Maureen Dowd's Columns
Before the first vote of '92 was cast, Mr. Nixon laid out, state by state, how Bill Clinton, who was not even a sure bet for the Democratic nomination at that point, was going to defeat George Bush.
If, Mr. Nixon said, Bill could keep a lid on Hillary (who had worked on the House Judiciary Committee looking into the Nixon impeachment), he'd have it made.
'If the wife comes through as being too strong and too intelligent, it makes the husband look like a wimp,' he said.
In his jaundiced view, the first President Bush had squandered his best re-election card: if the Persian Gulf war had still been going on, Mr. Bush could have been benefiting from that.
'We had a lot of success with that in 1972,' Mr. Nixon told us, with that famously uneasy baring of teeth that passed for a smile.
Was he actually admitting what all the paranoid liberals had been yelping about 20 years earlier - that he had prolonged the Vietnam War so he could get re-elected?
Bush Senior made some Republicans worry that he left Iraq too soon. Bush Junior is making some Republicans worry that he is staying in Iraq too long.
'Any effort to explain Iraq as 'We are on track and making progress' is nonsense,' Newt Gingrich told Adam Nagourney and "
CONTEXT - This Week in Arts and Ideas from The Moscow Times
CONTEXT - This Week in Arts and Ideas from The Moscow Times: "Now is the summer of discontent for President George W. Bush, a man beset on every side"
`Water is the mother of the vine ~`!
Water is the mother of the vine,
The nurse and fountain of fecundity,
The adorner and refresher of the world.
~ Charles Mackay,
The nurse and fountain of fecundity,
The adorner and refresher of the world.
~ Charles Mackay,
Panorama Eastinda ship
like this ship so much that I have to post one more of her. She is great, isn't she?
Remember Him?
I just couldn't help wonder. Usually in Dubai, its very rare find homeless. Morever this gentleman is from Pakistan.
Bush Administration and 'Democracratic Process' In Iraq: The Dark Details Revealed
Informed Comment: "Bush Administration and 'Democracratic Process' In Iraq: The Dark Details Revealed "
THE BRAD BLOG: "Atta's Big Gamble. Plus: Jack Abramoff's Link To A Mysterious Saudi -- And Perhaps To Al Qaeda"
THE BRAD BLOG: "Atta's Big Gamble. Plus: Jack Abramoff's Link To A Mysterious Saudi -- And Perhaps To Al Qaeda"
One of Kamel's companies, Dallah Avco, made extensive payments (according to a Los Angeles Ties story) to al-Bayoumi, the Saudi who paid rent for the 9/11 hijackers lodging in San Diego. (For more, see here.)
Kamel has denied any connection to Al Qaeda.
All of which brings a couple of questions to mind -- questions which may or may not be related.
Why did Kamel go to Jack Abramoff for help?
And just who was the wealthy Saudi who showed up at Makram Cham's humble pad?
Atta's Big Gamble. Plus: Jack Abramoff's Link To A Mysterious Saudi -- And Perhaps To Al Qaeda
The Mysteries of 9/11 Run Deep
Guest blogged by Joseph Cannon
You have probably never heard of Makram Chams. It's time you met him.
Actually, you can't physically meet him -- he disappeared on September 11, 2001. I bring him to your attention for two reasons:
1. He knew, and apparently aided, Mohammed Atta and the other 9/11 terrorists.
2. He owned a casino ship in Florida.
Yes, a casino ship -- just like the SunCruz ships owned by Jack Abramoff, the recently-indicted Republican money-man and wheeler-dealer. According to Associated Press, the terrorists took a mysterious trip on a SunCruz ship on September 5, 2001. And that trip is of great interest for three reasons:
1. SunCruz ships were under investigation for involvement in money laundering and other unsavory activities.
2. Al Qaeda operatives made a number of mysterious casino jaunts in that era; few believe that they were hard-core gamblers.
3. Al Qaeda was funded by drug money. Drug money must needs be laundered. Casinos have been known to be used for that purpose. Casino ships are unregulated.
Perhaps we should tentatively add a fourth reason for concern: Intelligence agents who had identified Atta in the United States and who knew of his ties to Osama Bin Laden were told to steer clear of him. They literally covered up his picture on their charts of Al Qaeda agents. (See my latest piece on Able Danger.)
So with that background in mind, let's learn more about the mysterious Makram Chams (whose first name is sometimes transliterated as Meekram).
My information was kindly provided by the estimable Daniel Hopsicker, of Mad Cow Morning News. I'm trying to double check the Makram Chams story (which is mentioned on one of his documentary videos, but is not on his website) to the limited extent that I can.
Hopsicker learned from eyewitnesses -- including a cab driver who drove Atta on a number of occasions, and who told this story to the FBI -- that Atta frequently visited Makram Chams, a Lebanese who lived above a convenience store that he owned.
At one point, Chams asked the cab driver to take him to the Orlando Executive Airport. There, Chams picked up an Armani-suited Saudi businessman and his wife, who wore traditional Arab attire. The driver then took this party back to Chams' apartment. (After 9/11, the FBI reviewed surveillance tapes of this pick-up, which is how they learned of the driver.)
Weeks later, the same driver was asked to take the Saudi's wife back the airport. But now they were carrying extra luggage -- extremely heavy luggage. It was a chest so heavy that two men had to transport it.
An intelligence source contacted by Hopsicker felt certain that this chest contained gold.
Chams was no mere convenience store operator. He co-owned (along with one other investor) a casino ship called Vegas-in-Venice. This ship attracted a fair amount of attention because it had been left illegally in the harbor for over a year.
We have no word as to what happened to this ship, or how Chams paid for it. Was he a front man? Was the ship purchased by SunCruz?
After 9/11, Makram Chams disappeared, and his store remains shuttered.
Such is the gist Hopsicker's story -- or rather, as much of it as he has chosen to relay to me at this time. (His book "Welcome to Terrorland" may contain further details.)
The FBI does not include any mention of Chams in their publicly-released material on Atta. Of course, we now know (from the Able Danger story and other sources) that Atta did far more in this country than the Authorized Version would have us believe.
Casino ship owner Cham and his disturbing dealings with wealthy Saudis find an echo in the career of Jack Abramoff. Not only was he in the same business, he also has a Saudi connection many will consider unsettling.
As Kate Camborat the TPM Cafe notes, Abramoff did PR work for a Saudi billionaire named Saleh Abdullah Kamel, chairman of the General Council for Islamic Banks.
Kamel sure needed a good PR person. According to a number of published accounts report (which I cannot independently confirm), he has another good buddy -- a fellow named Osama Bin Laden.
Kamel is also the chairman of Dallah al Baraka Group (DBG), which is suspected of having ties to al Qaeda and other extremist groups, and he was also the co-founder and large shareholder of Al Shamal Bank in Sudan, Osama bin Laden's bank of choice from 1983 onward. He was listed as being one of the seven "main individual sponsors of terrorism" in this report by French researcher Jean-Charles Brisard submitted to the UN Security Council in December 2002. (You might remember that Omar al-Bayoumi, who befriended and provided money to two of the 9/11 hijackers, was once an assistant to the Director of Finance for Dallah Avco, a DBG company that works with the Saudi aviation authority. And the WSJ has reported that the United States believes the Dallah al-Baraka Bank, another DBG company, was also used by al-Qaeda.)
Kamel's name also appeared in the "Golden Chain," a roster seized by Bosnian authorities in Sarajevo in March 2002 listing Saudi donors to bin Laden and his associates; and he was named as a defendant in two Sept. 11th related lawsuits: one filed by the victims' families in 2003 and another filed by Cantor Fitzgerald in September 2004 (Although claims of two plaintiffs from the first suit were dismissed, the same claims from other plaintiffs have yet to be.)
Kamel's name also appeared in the "Golden Chain," a roster seized by Bosnian authorities in Sarajevo in March 2002 listing Saudi donors to bin Laden and his associates; and he was named as a defendant in two Sept. 11th related lawsuits: one filed by the victims' families in 2003 and another filed by Cantor Fitzgerald in September 2004 (Although claims of two plaintiffs from the first suit were dismissed, the same claims from other plaintiffs have yet to be.)
One of Kamel's companies, Dallah Avco, made extensive payments (according to a Los Angeles Ties story) to al-Bayoumi, the Saudi who paid rent for the 9/11 hijackers lodging in San Diego. (For more, see here.)
Kamel has denied any connection to Al Qaeda.
All of which brings a couple of questions to mind -- questions which may or may not be related.
Why did Kamel go to Jack Abramoff for help?
And just who was the wealthy Saudi who showed up at Makram Cham's humble pad?
"BOB KOEHLER: 'Hiding from Cindy'" NEXT »
| MAIN INDEX |
« PREVIOUS "NY Times Tells The Truth! -- Three Times In Three Days!!"
| MAIN INDEX |
« PREVIOUS "NY Times Tells The Truth! -- Three Times In Three Days!!"
READER COMMENTS ON
"Atta's Big Gamble. Plus: Jack Abramoff's Link To A Mysterious Saudi -- And Perhaps To Al Qaeda"
(9 comments so far...)
COMMENT #1 [link]
...cHARLIE said on 8/19/2005 @ 9:04am PT...
Nice piece!!!!
When you say this Chams guy dissapeared on Sept 11th.... did he die on one of the planes? or was he escorted by our govenment after Sept 11?
Isn't Sibel Edmunds under a gag order because of evidence also linking Turkish drug money?
Isn't this all just a little to coincidental??
I mean the lead perpatrator for 9/11 was on the SunCruz ship owned by Abromff, the most powerful lobyist for republicans in washington. The republicans don't want any real investigation into 9/11 and are stonewalling the investigaiton by not providing all related materials "able danger". Bush stonewalled any investigation for 441 days. The republican lawyers are protecting Atta's identity.
Is there not enough CIRCUMSTANTIAL evidence for any Sherlock Holmes wanna be to say that this administration COULD have been involved directly in 9/11, and that there should be an investigation into these potentially treasoness allegations by people that are not involved.
COMMENT #2 [link]
...Savantster said on 8/19/2005 @ 9:30am PT...
Problem is, no one is getting on TV and showing all the lines between all the people who are involved.. And, no one will... not while they're in bed with Shrubman .. /sigh
The media (read: corperate america and global conglomerates) is complicit in all of this. They want their profits up and Republicans are good for that.. free money from the gov, laxed laws, deregulation.. though, now with the gas crunch on, they might start getting pissy and let Shrubman swing.. that's our only hope (as a nation).. kida sick and sad, isn't it?
COMMENT #3 [link]
...Charlie said on 8/19/2005 @ 12:51pm PT...
Who is shrubman??
Neocons 'More Israeli Than American'
Neocons 'More Israeli Than American'
Neocons 'More Israeli Than American'The recent uproar over Israeli lobbyists passing classified U.S. information to Israel is just the tip of the iceberg. According to this article from Lebanon's Dar Al-Hayat newspaper, high-level U.S. officials have been doing it for years, and continue to do so today.
By Jihad el-KhazenAugust 18, 2005 Dar Al-Hayat - Original Article (English)
If after being accused of spying for Israel, Larry Franklin’s name is now on everyone’s lips, he is certainly not the last of the spies, or the last to be accused of leaking secrets to Israel through its diplomats in Washington.
Larry Franklin: Israeli Agent or American Patriot?
[Editor’s Note: Lawrence Franklin is a colonel in the U.S. Air Force Reserve, charged with passing information about U.S. policy toward Iran to Israel. He is charged with doing so through the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the largest pro-Israel lobbying group in America, while he worked for the Defense Department. Two other employees of that organization face charges that they assisted him in the scandal].
Since 1969, Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, Michael Ledeen, Douglas Feith, Stephen Bryen and others have been accused (only Jonathan Pollard was imprisoned; he was an idiot and proud of spying for Israel. He kept highly classified documents in briefcases at his home).
[Editor’s Note: Jonathan Pollard is a former United States Navy intelligence officer convicted of spying for Israel. In 1986 he received a life sentence].
All of these men entered government, left government and returned again to serve Israel at the expense of American and other interests.
Such talk inevitably invites opposition; so today I’ll confine myself to mentioning the documented comments of Paul Wolfowitz, the king of Israeli apologists.
From Saudi Arabia's Arab News
Wolfowitz was among those who signed a letter to President Bill Clinton in 1998, arguing that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and demanding military action to disarm Iraq and depose him.
It is obvious that such a position only served Israel and had nothing to do with subsequent terrorism. The day after the horrible terror of September 11, 2001, the National Security Council met and Wolfowitz called for war against Iraq. It was clear that al-Qaeda was behind the terror, but Wolfowitz was unconcerned about the blood of thousands of Americans; he had found in their killing an opportunity to destroy Iraq.
The military strike against Iran that is now being demanded by the neo-conservative mafia is again designed to serve Israel. Israel is behind the war against Iraq, and petroleum is “greasing” the war machine.
Wolfowitz has always been concerned with the Gulf’s oil, particularly Iraqi oil. On March 27, 2003, he said that “the oil revenues of that country could bring between $50 and $100 billion over the course of the next two or three years. Now, there are a lot of claims on that money, but we are dealing with a country that can really finance its own reconstruction and relatively soon.”
Has there ever been a bigger miscalculation? All of the U.S. assistance ($87 billion for Iraq and Afghanistan) fell into a bottomless pit, along with Iraq’s oil revenue.
On the eve of the war, Wolfowitz was wrong again. On February 27, 2003, he said about Iraq that “these are Arabs, 23 million of the most educated people in the Arab world, who are going to welcome us as liberators … The notion that we're going to earn more enemies by going in and getting rid of what every Arab knows is one of the worst tyrants, and they have many governing them, is just nonsense.”
Wolfowitz is too smart to have miscalculated or to have been deceived about Iraq; his mafia’s greed for Arab oil is long-standing. In the Defense Planning Guidance document, as published by the Washington Post on February 13, 1990, and as published by the New York Times on February 18, 1992, there is the following:
•“In the Middle East and Southwest Asia, our overall objective is to remain the predominant outside power in the region and preserve U.S. and Western access to the region's oil.”
'Zionist World System Whips Arabs in the Name of Reform and Democracy' (Palestine's Al-Ayam)
Wolfowitz’s concern with Iraqi oil continued, and in testimony before the House’s National Security Committee on September 16, 1998, he said:
•“The fabulous - and they are fabulous - oil resources of Iraq are probably greater ultimately than Saudi Arabia, will be ultimately in the control of a government of Free Iraq.
•“Saddam Hussein’s main supporters in the Security Council, France and Russia, I think could be expected to follow their commercial noses when they saw - forgive the mixed metaphors - which way the oil wind was blowing.”
•“If these efforts fail to bring an agreement from Saddam Hussein, then we escalate by striking the infrastructure to include roads, bridges, forts, and other choke points, the electrical grid, their oil refining capability (and) then start taking out their oil wells …”
I think the above is sufficient to try to convict Wolfowitz; the entire mafia has been convicted in my own personal court. Readers should not have missed how talk of oil preceded our present period of terrorism by several years, and was used along with WMD and Saddam’s alleged ties to al-Qaeda to occupy Iraq and steal its oil.
Wolfowitz accuses France and Russia of being concerned with oil, acknowledging that these concerns are openly expressed. Readers should look for the names of Iraqi officials now responsible for oil and issuing contracts, in order to learn of the Iraqi neo-conservatives that are part of this conspiracy, people that came riding American tanks to plunder their own country.
This gang has also destroyed Iraq’s infrastructure, just as Wolfowitz described it in 1998; all except the petroleum infrastructure, which along with Israel was one of the biggest reasons for the war. On March 28, 2003, he boasted that “we were able to get substantial control over the southern oil fields before Saddam Hussein was able to create the kind of environmental disaster that he was planning to do.”
But the biggest disaster is what happened to Iraq after liberation. I never in my life imagined, and I opposed Saddam Hussein from the beginning to the end, that Iraq would experience a situation worse than under the ignorant dictator’s rule.
The situation in Iraq today is worse and the only people who deny this are those who returned from exile with the ‘liberation,’ which turned into occupation. Israel’s neo-conservative mafia should be tried by the International Court of Justice for their war crimes. This is more important than trying them for spying for or leaking documents to Israel. The strange thing is that they’re only now being “discovered,” because they were always Israeli before they were Americans.
VIDEO FROM THE MUSLIM WORLD: SADDAM'S JUDGE— Al-Arabiya TV (Dubai): Presiding Judge in the Saddam Hussein Trial Reveals Details of Charges, Discusses the Danger of His Job, Aug. 8, 00:04:07, MEMRI
"I do not fear my fate, but if they assassinate me, they should have a reason first. In any case, life is in the hands of Allah."
Neocons 'More Israeli Than American'The recent uproar over Israeli lobbyists passing classified U.S. information to Israel is just the tip of the iceberg. According to this article from Lebanon's Dar Al-Hayat newspaper, high-level U.S. officials have been doing it for years, and continue to do so today.
By Jihad el-KhazenAugust 18, 2005 Dar Al-Hayat - Original Article (English)
If after being accused of spying for Israel, Larry Franklin’s name is now on everyone’s lips, he is certainly not the last of the spies, or the last to be accused of leaking secrets to Israel through its diplomats in Washington.
Larry Franklin: Israeli Agent or American Patriot?
[Editor’s Note: Lawrence Franklin is a colonel in the U.S. Air Force Reserve, charged with passing information about U.S. policy toward Iran to Israel. He is charged with doing so through the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the largest pro-Israel lobbying group in America, while he worked for the Defense Department. Two other employees of that organization face charges that they assisted him in the scandal].
Since 1969, Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, Michael Ledeen, Douglas Feith, Stephen Bryen and others have been accused (only Jonathan Pollard was imprisoned; he was an idiot and proud of spying for Israel. He kept highly classified documents in briefcases at his home).
[Editor’s Note: Jonathan Pollard is a former United States Navy intelligence officer convicted of spying for Israel. In 1986 he received a life sentence].
All of these men entered government, left government and returned again to serve Israel at the expense of American and other interests.
Such talk inevitably invites opposition; so today I’ll confine myself to mentioning the documented comments of Paul Wolfowitz, the king of Israeli apologists.
From Saudi Arabia's Arab News
Wolfowitz was among those who signed a letter to President Bill Clinton in 1998, arguing that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and demanding military action to disarm Iraq and depose him.
It is obvious that such a position only served Israel and had nothing to do with subsequent terrorism. The day after the horrible terror of September 11, 2001, the National Security Council met and Wolfowitz called for war against Iraq. It was clear that al-Qaeda was behind the terror, but Wolfowitz was unconcerned about the blood of thousands of Americans; he had found in their killing an opportunity to destroy Iraq.
The military strike against Iran that is now being demanded by the neo-conservative mafia is again designed to serve Israel. Israel is behind the war against Iraq, and petroleum is “greasing” the war machine.
Wolfowitz has always been concerned with the Gulf’s oil, particularly Iraqi oil. On March 27, 2003, he said that “the oil revenues of that country could bring between $50 and $100 billion over the course of the next two or three years. Now, there are a lot of claims on that money, but we are dealing with a country that can really finance its own reconstruction and relatively soon.”
Has there ever been a bigger miscalculation? All of the U.S. assistance ($87 billion for Iraq and Afghanistan) fell into a bottomless pit, along with Iraq’s oil revenue.
On the eve of the war, Wolfowitz was wrong again. On February 27, 2003, he said about Iraq that “these are Arabs, 23 million of the most educated people in the Arab world, who are going to welcome us as liberators … The notion that we're going to earn more enemies by going in and getting rid of what every Arab knows is one of the worst tyrants, and they have many governing them, is just nonsense.”
Wolfowitz is too smart to have miscalculated or to have been deceived about Iraq; his mafia’s greed for Arab oil is long-standing. In the Defense Planning Guidance document, as published by the Washington Post on February 13, 1990, and as published by the New York Times on February 18, 1992, there is the following:
•“In the Middle East and Southwest Asia, our overall objective is to remain the predominant outside power in the region and preserve U.S. and Western access to the region's oil.”
'Zionist World System Whips Arabs in the Name of Reform and Democracy' (Palestine's Al-Ayam)
Wolfowitz’s concern with Iraqi oil continued, and in testimony before the House’s National Security Committee on September 16, 1998, he said:
•“The fabulous - and they are fabulous - oil resources of Iraq are probably greater ultimately than Saudi Arabia, will be ultimately in the control of a government of Free Iraq.
•“Saddam Hussein’s main supporters in the Security Council, France and Russia, I think could be expected to follow their commercial noses when they saw - forgive the mixed metaphors - which way the oil wind was blowing.”
•“If these efforts fail to bring an agreement from Saddam Hussein, then we escalate by striking the infrastructure to include roads, bridges, forts, and other choke points, the electrical grid, their oil refining capability (and) then start taking out their oil wells …”
I think the above is sufficient to try to convict Wolfowitz; the entire mafia has been convicted in my own personal court. Readers should not have missed how talk of oil preceded our present period of terrorism by several years, and was used along with WMD and Saddam’s alleged ties to al-Qaeda to occupy Iraq and steal its oil.
Wolfowitz accuses France and Russia of being concerned with oil, acknowledging that these concerns are openly expressed. Readers should look for the names of Iraqi officials now responsible for oil and issuing contracts, in order to learn of the Iraqi neo-conservatives that are part of this conspiracy, people that came riding American tanks to plunder their own country.
This gang has also destroyed Iraq’s infrastructure, just as Wolfowitz described it in 1998; all except the petroleum infrastructure, which along with Israel was one of the biggest reasons for the war. On March 28, 2003, he boasted that “we were able to get substantial control over the southern oil fields before Saddam Hussein was able to create the kind of environmental disaster that he was planning to do.”
But the biggest disaster is what happened to Iraq after liberation. I never in my life imagined, and I opposed Saddam Hussein from the beginning to the end, that Iraq would experience a situation worse than under the ignorant dictator’s rule.
The situation in Iraq today is worse and the only people who deny this are those who returned from exile with the ‘liberation,’ which turned into occupation. Israel’s neo-conservative mafia should be tried by the International Court of Justice for their war crimes. This is more important than trying them for spying for or leaking documents to Israel. The strange thing is that they’re only now being “discovered,” because they were always Israeli before they were Americans.
VIDEO FROM THE MUSLIM WORLD: SADDAM'S JUDGE— Al-Arabiya TV (Dubai): Presiding Judge in the Saddam Hussein Trial Reveals Details of Charges, Discusses the Danger of His Job, Aug. 8, 00:04:07, MEMRI
"I do not fear my fate, but if they assassinate me, they should have a reason first. In any case, life is in the hands of Allah."
Friday, August 19, 2005
CBS News | July 7 Bombers Tied To Al Qaeda | August 18, 2005 21:30:14
CBS News | July 7 Bombers Tied To Al Qaeda | August 18, 2005 21:30:14
Blogger Comment: Hey, wait a sec! The London Police said they were wrong when they said Khan was the rightleader.
Blogger Comment: Hey, wait a sec! The London Police said they were wrong when they said Khan was the rightleader.
Why God hates terrorists more than gamblers - Los Angeles Times
Why God hates terrorists more than gamblers - Los Angeles Times
Blogger Thoughts: I'll assume the the LA Times was responsible for the headline, and thereby give Mr. Prager a pass on such an inane headline.
Now, let's go into the meat of his "Faith Front" article... what wisdom is to be bestowed?
[It is particularly sad when religious people depict God in a way that renders him less intelligent than his creations: "Sure, we humans think that murdering a family is worse than taking a stapler home from the office, but God doesn't!"]
I wonder if Prager listens in on a "party line" and hears from God and his ways at the same time "W" does. How much does God abhor the citizens of a nation who stand by and allow their illegitimate government carry out unspeakable aggression in a foreign land and call it spreading democracy?
Maybe Prager isn't hearing this from God directily. Would Prager's viewpoint be borne out in scripture? Try reading the Book of Job, and see whether you can find out that God has a scoring system for evil and righteousness.
How evil is raping Iraqi child POWs. How evil is lying to the public with the the full cooperation of major news outlets to keep down the anti-war riots? How evil is it conducing a non-stop controlled event Presidency, managing to hide the truth of the public, complete with fake Secret Secret (aka Local Repub. Thugs) to toss the less than reverent out of any of your little rigged get togethers?
How evil is the shooting at point blank range of the innocent man in London, while you have him restrained?
How evil is it to arrange for 9/11 and the death of thousands, simply to have the excuse to ramp up your War Machine?
Mr. Prager, I don't think you are evil. Rather, I don't think you have a clue about who God is, and you certainly don't have a clue about what has been done in Democracy's name, in the US Citizen's name, and in God's name.
Blogger Thoughts: I'll assume the the LA Times was responsible for the headline, and thereby give Mr. Prager a pass on such an inane headline.
Now, let's go into the meat of his "Faith Front" article... what wisdom is to be bestowed?
[It is particularly sad when religious people depict God in a way that renders him less intelligent than his creations: "Sure, we humans think that murdering a family is worse than taking a stapler home from the office, but God doesn't!"]
I wonder if Prager listens in on a "party line" and hears from God and his ways at the same time "W" does. How much does God abhor the citizens of a nation who stand by and allow their illegitimate government carry out unspeakable aggression in a foreign land and call it spreading democracy?
Maybe Prager isn't hearing this from God directily. Would Prager's viewpoint be borne out in scripture? Try reading the Book of Job, and see whether you can find out that God has a scoring system for evil and righteousness.
How evil is raping Iraqi child POWs. How evil is lying to the public with the the full cooperation of major news outlets to keep down the anti-war riots? How evil is it conducing a non-stop controlled event Presidency, managing to hide the truth of the public, complete with fake Secret Secret (aka Local Repub. Thugs) to toss the less than reverent out of any of your little rigged get togethers?
How evil is the shooting at point blank range of the innocent man in London, while you have him restrained?
How evil is it to arrange for 9/11 and the death of thousands, simply to have the excuse to ramp up your War Machine?
Mr. Prager, I don't think you are evil. Rather, I don't think you have a clue about who God is, and you certainly don't have a clue about what has been done in Democracy's name, in the US Citizen's name, and in God's name.
FOXNews.com - Views - Heritage Foundation - Keeping Our Military Strong Through Free Markets
FOXNews.com - Views - Heritage Foundation - Keeping Our Military Strong Through Free Markets
Blogger Comments: Thank you, Heritage Foundation (Not)
Blogger Comments: Thank you, Heritage Foundation (Not)
No I do not work for the National Geographic.
No I do not work for the National Geographic.
Nor the Conde Naste Traveler. Nor the surfing O’Neill’s.
Nor do I hang around, loitering the sets of Playboy.
It's a hard choice not to.
Besides the money, fame and the perks those big guys throw around,
it's as much a wish as a need, for any aspiring photographer.
What I despise, though, is the attitude.
The bigger the name, the worse it becomes.
Maldives is small. It's impossible not cross each others paths.
Especially when those paths are queued with egos, sneers and
trucks.
Trucks of photo equipment the big-namers carry around, to, perhaps exaggerate the bigness of the game.
Oh!
Photography has become a game?
I thought it was all about moments, creativity and hard work.
I have seen Smarties being exchanged for smiles.
I have seen photographers bargaining with greenbacks.
I have seen magic. The special disappearing act performed by many hasty pros in search for the next, award-winning shot.
I am just being jealous. I know.
I am cheap.
I never, ever, offer anything in return for my photos.
Except love.
My people love me, just as I love them.
I also know that I belong. In Maldives, it’s difficult to navigate
the terrain, nor, dodge the beaurocracy that arises in the rush of the moment.
Talking of trucks of photo equipment,
I wish I could land up a decent job, so I can ditch this throw-away pocket camera and invest in a DSLR.
Posted by _az
17_08_05
Nor the Conde Naste Traveler. Nor the surfing O’Neill’s.
Nor do I hang around, loitering the sets of Playboy.
It's a hard choice not to.
Besides the money, fame and the perks those big guys throw around,
it's as much a wish as a need, for any aspiring photographer.
What I despise, though, is the attitude.
The bigger the name, the worse it becomes.
Maldives is small. It's impossible not cross each others paths.
Especially when those paths are queued with egos, sneers and
trucks.
Trucks of photo equipment the big-namers carry around, to, perhaps exaggerate the bigness of the game.
Oh!
Photography has become a game?
I thought it was all about moments, creativity and hard work.
I have seen Smarties being exchanged for smiles.
I have seen photographers bargaining with greenbacks.
I have seen magic. The special disappearing act performed by many hasty pros in search for the next, award-winning shot.
I am just being jealous. I know.
I am cheap.
I never, ever, offer anything in return for my photos.
Except love.
My people love me, just as I love them.
I also know that I belong. In Maldives, it’s difficult to navigate
the terrain, nor, dodge the beaurocracy that arises in the rush of the moment.
Talking of trucks of photo equipment,
I wish I could land up a decent job, so I can ditch this throw-away pocket camera and invest in a DSLR.
Posted by _az
17_08_05
ABLE DANGER INFO SUPPRESSED BECAUSE OF PROTECTED HEROIN TRAFFICKING RING
ABLE DANGER INFO SUPPRESSED BECAUSE OF PROTECTED HEROIN TRAFFICKING RING
August 17,2005-Venice, FL. by Daniel Hopsicker
Mohamed Atta was protected from official scrutiny as part of an officially-protected cocaine and heroin trafficking network with ties to top political figures, including Republican officials Jeb Bush and Katherine Harris, and it was this fact—and not the “terrible lapses” of “weak on terror” Clinton Administration officials cited by Republican Congressman Curt Weldon—which shielded him from being apprehended before the 9.11 attack.
Weldon alleges that Pentagon lawyers rejected the military intelligence unit’s recommendation to apprehend Atta because he was in the country legally, and therefore information on him could not be shared with law enforcement.
But the “terrible lapses” cited by Weldon do not stem from the nonsensical assertion that Atta had a green card (he did not) which rendered him immune from military investigation but were the result of an officially-protected heroin trafficking operation being conducted on planes like those of Wally Hilliard, whose Lear jet flew"
Moreover the secret military intelligence operation which identified Mohamed Atta and three other hijackers as a threat a year before the 9.11 attack, called Able Danger, was by no means the first military intelligence investigation into the activities of the Hamburg cadre.
Watching the river (of heroin) flow
As far back as 1991, military investigators had been detailed to Hamburg Germany, tracking what one military investigator who was there told us were “Al Qaeda heroin flows” from Afghanistan to the West.
A two-year investigation in Venice, Fl. into the flight school attended by Atta and his bodyguard Marwan Al-Shehhi and which provided them with their “cover” while in the U.S. unearthed the amazing fact that during the same month the two men began flying lessons at Huffman Aviation, July of 2000, the flight school’s owner’s Lear jet was seized on the runway of Orlando Executive Airport by Federal Agents who found 43-pounds of heroin onboard.
43 pounds of heroin is known in the drug trade as “heavy weight.”
In a story in the August 2, 2000 Orlando Sentinel authorities called the bust “the biggest drug seizure in central Florida history.”
“It confirms the sad fact that a massive amount of heroin is coming through Central Florida,” U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration special agent Brent Eaton told the paper. “It’s very disturbing to the DEA that more and more high quality heroin is coming from Colombia and at a cheaper price.”
The DEA was “very disturbed” enough to look more closely at Wally Hilliard’s jet charter operation. The result was their firm opposition to returning the Lear to Hilliard, even though no one from Hilliard’s company, Plane 1 Leasing, had been charged with any crime.
(continued below)
DO JEB AND KATHERINE SHARE 'A FEELING FOR THE LITTLE GUY?'
And even while his companies were being used to train terrorists to fly and smuggling heroin into the U.S., prominent Florida politicians Governor Jeb Bush and Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris publicly endorsed Hilliard’s operation.
Governor Jeb Bush honored Hilliard's operation (called at various times Florida Air, Sunrise Airlines and Discover Air) with a personal visit, posing for photos with the "Discover Air family."
Katherine Harris' endorsement of Hilliard’s operation was splashed across the pages of her beloved hometown Sarasota Herald Tribune. "As one of Florida's top politicians, Katherine Harris doesn't have much time to do a lot of personal traveling," the paper reported.
"But twice in the past month or so, the secretary of state... has taken the 75-minute plane ride from her current home in Tallahassee to her old stomping grounds in Sarasota. Her choice of airline? Florida Air, a start-up commuter airline based here, grasping to be an air-taxi for the entire state."
The Herald Tribune quoted Harris spokesman Ben McKay saying, “She appreciates the convenience that Florida Air offers.”
Ms. Harris' reputation as a stickler for the letter of the law from the contested 2000 Presidential election was apparently put ‘on hold’ on Wally Hilliard’s behalf: While she was "appreciating their convenience," the operation was flying passengers without holding an air carrier certificate.
The juxtaposition of the discovery of a huge cache of heroin on a Lear jet belonging to Wallace J. Hilliard, 70, of Naples, Fl, Huffman Aviation’s owner, at the exact same time terrorist and Osama bin Laden associate Mohamed Atta arrived to attend his flight school from Afghanistan, a country producing well more than half of the world’s heroin, would normally have had U.S. Attorneys looking up the sentencing guidelines appropriate to major RICO narcotics trafficking cases, and getting ready to throw the book at him.
In fact, they did nothing of the sort, which strongly indicates that the Army’s secret military intelligence unit Able Danger’s inability to prod federal authorities to move on Atta and other terrorists known to be in the U.S. encountered the same obstacles, and for the same reason.
In fact, the only effort made at holding financier Wallace J. Hilliard, 70, of Naples, Florida accountable was the weak one of confiscating his plane. When Hilliard sued to get the DEA to return the Lear jet inn forfeiture hearings, attempting to show himself to have been an “innocent owner,” his motion was opposed by the Government and roundly rejected in court.
The U.S. Attorney’s office opposed the plane’s return. Their motion said, “because the property was used or acquired as a result of a violation of the Controlled Substances Act.”
Court documents revealed that Hilliard’s leasing company, Plane 1 Leasing, had been paid in cash for each charter by the two Latin passengers, which aviation experts in South Florida said strains credulity.
“DEA would not return it, they auctioned it off, they told Wally they had ‘reasons,’” said an aviation source in Naples. “It was the first seizure in history for a so-called ‘innocent person’ where they took and kept the plane.”
The court concluded Hilliard’s company knew what was going on. Affidavits later filed by the machine-gun toting DEA agents who had surrounded the Lear jet indicated Hilliard’s company’s involvement went much deeper than anyone was willing to acknowledge publicly.
Red Flags, Red Faces, Red Blood Everywhere
“It was just blatant,” said a manager who worked there at the time. “That same plane flew that same run thirty or forty times, ferrying the same people. And they always paid cash for the rental! The red flags could not have been raised any higher.”
Hilliard lost his Lear jet. America lost (almost) 3000 lives.
And something else as well. The fact that this story was first broken exclusively (and only) by the MadCowMorningNews, and not “papers of record” like the New York Times and Washington Post amply demonstrates the massive 9.11 cover-up led by the FBI which is still in place, a cover-up which has contemptuously mocked the very concept of American democracy, of a “free press,” and of the “people’s right to know.”
Nor were we alone in our discovery of the officially-protected drug trafficking network. FBI whistle-blower Sibel Edmonds, in the months after the attack, bumped into the arms for drugs deals. Edmonds alleged that the US State Department blocked investigations showing links between criminal drug trafficking networks and the terror attacks on 9/11.
"Certain investigations were being quashed, let's say per State Department's request, because it would have affected certain foreign relations [or] affected certain business relations with foreign organizations," she stated.
Even if military intelligence unit Able Danger had been allowed to notify the FBI, the information which fingered Mohamed Atta and others of the hijackers was already well-known to the Bureau.
“FBI Knew Terrorists Were Using Flight Schools” the Washington Post reported on Sept 23, 2001. “Federal authorities have been aware for years that suspected terrorists with ties to Osama bin Laden were receiving flight training at schools in the United States and abroad, according to interviews and court testimony.”
Indications of the FBI's "guilty knowledge" were widespread in the aftermath of the attack included the widely-reported fact that the FBI was at Huffman Aviation with search warrants at 2.30 a.m. the night after the attack. An executive of Huffman Aviation told us that FBI agents were on the scene even earlier than that.
"They moved pretty fast for guys in black Florsheims"
"How do you think the FBI got here (Huffman Aviation) so fast after the attack?" asked the executive. "They knew what was going on here. Hell, they were parked in a white van outside my house less than four hours after the buildings collapsed."
"We heard that 16 of the 19 terrorists had been on Interpol's Most Wanted list," this aviation executive continued. "But early on I gleaned that these guys had Government protection. They were let into this country for a specific purpose. It was a business deal."
Amazingly, the smuggling operation being protected continues to this day.
The pilot of Hilliard’s busted Lear, Venezuelan Diego Levine Texar, was not taken into custody. “The pilot was not arrested, according to a DEA spokesman, because of a lack of evidence,” reported the Orlando Sentinel. He has since been identified as also being the chief pilot on Venezuela’s “Air Force One,” which provides a bit of context for last week’s news that the State Department was revoking the visas of three Venezuelan military officers suspected of involvement in drug trafficking.
When we first published the DEA’s official report to the court about the Orlando heroin bust (read it here) on our website and in the appendix to “Welcome to TerrorLand,” we received a very credible death threat... even though the report is a public document available to anyone.
And Rudi Dekkers just told his favorite newspaper, (of course, the Sarasota Herald Tribune) that he was out of work.
Poor man. We guess the trips to Colombia don’t count.
August 17,2005-Venice, FL. by Daniel Hopsicker
Mohamed Atta was protected from official scrutiny as part of an officially-protected cocaine and heroin trafficking network with ties to top political figures, including Republican officials Jeb Bush and Katherine Harris, and it was this fact—and not the “terrible lapses” of “weak on terror” Clinton Administration officials cited by Republican Congressman Curt Weldon—which shielded him from being apprehended before the 9.11 attack.
Weldon alleges that Pentagon lawyers rejected the military intelligence unit’s recommendation to apprehend Atta because he was in the country legally, and therefore information on him could not be shared with law enforcement.
But the “terrible lapses” cited by Weldon do not stem from the nonsensical assertion that Atta had a green card (he did not) which rendered him immune from military investigation but were the result of an officially-protected heroin trafficking operation being conducted on planes like those of Wally Hilliard, whose Lear jet flew"
Moreover the secret military intelligence operation which identified Mohamed Atta and three other hijackers as a threat a year before the 9.11 attack, called Able Danger, was by no means the first military intelligence investigation into the activities of the Hamburg cadre.
Watching the river (of heroin) flow
As far back as 1991, military investigators had been detailed to Hamburg Germany, tracking what one military investigator who was there told us were “Al Qaeda heroin flows” from Afghanistan to the West.
A two-year investigation in Venice, Fl. into the flight school attended by Atta and his bodyguard Marwan Al-Shehhi and which provided them with their “cover” while in the U.S. unearthed the amazing fact that during the same month the two men began flying lessons at Huffman Aviation, July of 2000, the flight school’s owner’s Lear jet was seized on the runway of Orlando Executive Airport by Federal Agents who found 43-pounds of heroin onboard.
43 pounds of heroin is known in the drug trade as “heavy weight.”
In a story in the August 2, 2000 Orlando Sentinel authorities called the bust “the biggest drug seizure in central Florida history.”
“It confirms the sad fact that a massive amount of heroin is coming through Central Florida,” U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration special agent Brent Eaton told the paper. “It’s very disturbing to the DEA that more and more high quality heroin is coming from Colombia and at a cheaper price.”
The DEA was “very disturbed” enough to look more closely at Wally Hilliard’s jet charter operation. The result was their firm opposition to returning the Lear to Hilliard, even though no one from Hilliard’s company, Plane 1 Leasing, had been charged with any crime.
(continued below)
DO JEB AND KATHERINE SHARE 'A FEELING FOR THE LITTLE GUY?'
And even while his companies were being used to train terrorists to fly and smuggling heroin into the U.S., prominent Florida politicians Governor Jeb Bush and Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris publicly endorsed Hilliard’s operation.
Governor Jeb Bush honored Hilliard's operation (called at various times Florida Air, Sunrise Airlines and Discover Air) with a personal visit, posing for photos with the "Discover Air family."
Katherine Harris' endorsement of Hilliard’s operation was splashed across the pages of her beloved hometown Sarasota Herald Tribune. "As one of Florida's top politicians, Katherine Harris doesn't have much time to do a lot of personal traveling," the paper reported.
"But twice in the past month or so, the secretary of state... has taken the 75-minute plane ride from her current home in Tallahassee to her old stomping grounds in Sarasota. Her choice of airline? Florida Air, a start-up commuter airline based here, grasping to be an air-taxi for the entire state."
The Herald Tribune quoted Harris spokesman Ben McKay saying, “She appreciates the convenience that Florida Air offers.”
Ms. Harris' reputation as a stickler for the letter of the law from the contested 2000 Presidential election was apparently put ‘on hold’ on Wally Hilliard’s behalf: While she was "appreciating their convenience," the operation was flying passengers without holding an air carrier certificate.
The juxtaposition of the discovery of a huge cache of heroin on a Lear jet belonging to Wallace J. Hilliard, 70, of Naples, Fl, Huffman Aviation’s owner, at the exact same time terrorist and Osama bin Laden associate Mohamed Atta arrived to attend his flight school from Afghanistan, a country producing well more than half of the world’s heroin, would normally have had U.S. Attorneys looking up the sentencing guidelines appropriate to major RICO narcotics trafficking cases, and getting ready to throw the book at him.
In fact, they did nothing of the sort, which strongly indicates that the Army’s secret military intelligence unit Able Danger’s inability to prod federal authorities to move on Atta and other terrorists known to be in the U.S. encountered the same obstacles, and for the same reason.
In fact, the only effort made at holding financier Wallace J. Hilliard, 70, of Naples, Florida accountable was the weak one of confiscating his plane. When Hilliard sued to get the DEA to return the Lear jet inn forfeiture hearings, attempting to show himself to have been an “innocent owner,” his motion was opposed by the Government and roundly rejected in court.
The U.S. Attorney’s office opposed the plane’s return. Their motion said, “because the property was used or acquired as a result of a violation of the Controlled Substances Act.”
Court documents revealed that Hilliard’s leasing company, Plane 1 Leasing, had been paid in cash for each charter by the two Latin passengers, which aviation experts in South Florida said strains credulity.
“DEA would not return it, they auctioned it off, they told Wally they had ‘reasons,’” said an aviation source in Naples. “It was the first seizure in history for a so-called ‘innocent person’ where they took and kept the plane.”
The court concluded Hilliard’s company knew what was going on. Affidavits later filed by the machine-gun toting DEA agents who had surrounded the Lear jet indicated Hilliard’s company’s involvement went much deeper than anyone was willing to acknowledge publicly.
Red Flags, Red Faces, Red Blood Everywhere
“It was just blatant,” said a manager who worked there at the time. “That same plane flew that same run thirty or forty times, ferrying the same people. And they always paid cash for the rental! The red flags could not have been raised any higher.”
Hilliard lost his Lear jet. America lost (almost) 3000 lives.
And something else as well. The fact that this story was first broken exclusively (and only) by the MadCowMorningNews, and not “papers of record” like the New York Times and Washington Post amply demonstrates the massive 9.11 cover-up led by the FBI which is still in place, a cover-up which has contemptuously mocked the very concept of American democracy, of a “free press,” and of the “people’s right to know.”
Nor were we alone in our discovery of the officially-protected drug trafficking network. FBI whistle-blower Sibel Edmonds, in the months after the attack, bumped into the arms for drugs deals. Edmonds alleged that the US State Department blocked investigations showing links between criminal drug trafficking networks and the terror attacks on 9/11.
"Certain investigations were being quashed, let's say per State Department's request, because it would have affected certain foreign relations [or] affected certain business relations with foreign organizations," she stated.
Even if military intelligence unit Able Danger had been allowed to notify the FBI, the information which fingered Mohamed Atta and others of the hijackers was already well-known to the Bureau.
“FBI Knew Terrorists Were Using Flight Schools” the Washington Post reported on Sept 23, 2001. “Federal authorities have been aware for years that suspected terrorists with ties to Osama bin Laden were receiving flight training at schools in the United States and abroad, according to interviews and court testimony.”
Indications of the FBI's "guilty knowledge" were widespread in the aftermath of the attack included the widely-reported fact that the FBI was at Huffman Aviation with search warrants at 2.30 a.m. the night after the attack. An executive of Huffman Aviation told us that FBI agents were on the scene even earlier than that.
"They moved pretty fast for guys in black Florsheims"
"How do you think the FBI got here (Huffman Aviation) so fast after the attack?" asked the executive. "They knew what was going on here. Hell, they were parked in a white van outside my house less than four hours after the buildings collapsed."
"We heard that 16 of the 19 terrorists had been on Interpol's Most Wanted list," this aviation executive continued. "But early on I gleaned that these guys had Government protection. They were let into this country for a specific purpose. It was a business deal."
Amazingly, the smuggling operation being protected continues to this day.
The pilot of Hilliard’s busted Lear, Venezuelan Diego Levine Texar, was not taken into custody. “The pilot was not arrested, according to a DEA spokesman, because of a lack of evidence,” reported the Orlando Sentinel. He has since been identified as also being the chief pilot on Venezuela’s “Air Force One,” which provides a bit of context for last week’s news that the State Department was revoking the visas of three Venezuelan military officers suspected of involvement in drug trafficking.
When we first published the DEA’s official report to the court about the Orlando heroin bust (read it here) on our website and in the appendix to “Welcome to TerrorLand,” we received a very credible death threat... even though the report is a public document available to anyone.
And Rudi Dekkers just told his favorite newspaper, (of course, the Sarasota Herald Tribune) that he was out of work.
Poor man. We guess the trips to Colombia don’t count.
Alternative Media Censorship:
Bob Feldman and Brian Salter reply to a reader
Hello,
I saw and appreciated your essay on the foundational support for Left orgs and writers that dismiss anything that smacks of "conspiracism".
However, while I share with you the idea that such orgs and writers should be critically evaluated, I do not think your evidence, specifically, against Noam Chomsky is all that weighty. You don't really present any evidence that Chomsky is a controlled person. You cite the Inamori award from the "Japanese Establishment", but that award was for his achievements in the area of linguistics and cognitive science, not his political writings. So what does the Inamori award have to do with anything? The award is somewhat akin to the various Nobel prizes.
Also, you mentioned that Z magazine was perhaps named after the Costa-Gavras film "Z". My recollection is that Z magazine was originally named Zeta magazine, billing itself the last word, as it were, in political writing. When Sargent and Albert found out the name Zeta was already used by someone else, they opted for the abbreviated form, 'Z'.
In any event, I fail to see how your charts, in general, necessarily predict control of the sort you claim. However, I am eager to examine more evidence of such if it exists.
Thanks, WiseSerpent
Bob Feldman replies:
Thank you for considering some of the possible institutional/political reasons for censorship of 9/11 conspiracy journalists and researchers by the foundation-sponsored alternative media gatekeepers.
Although MIT Professssor Chomsky has been on the payroll of the 12th-largest recipient of US Air Force war contracts in recent years, the article isn't asserting "that Chomsky is a controlled person." But there is evidence that Z magazine was unwilling to print an article about MIT's links to the U.S. Air Force's space warfare preparations and to the Pentagon's think-tank, the Institute for Defense Analyses, a few years ago.
Regarding the $350,000 award from the Inamori Foundation that was set up by the chairman emeritus/founder of one of Japan's leading telecommunications companies, DDI Corporation, that was given to ALTERNATIVE RADIO's frequently featured guest: Generally, recipients of such large grants from Establishment foundations are reluctant to scrutinize or criticize a foundation world from which they've obtained such a large sums of money. And, like the Nobel prize money (that was initially obtained from Nobel's invention and marketing of dynamite weapons), some of the Inamori Foundation money was originally obtained from DDI's ownership of 75% of the AVX Coroporation--which is an electronic company that (like MIT) is a key contractor in the U.S. aerospace/military industry.
Regarding evidence that the alternative media gatekeepers are reluctant to either air or publish criticism of the Soros/Open Society Institute, the Ford Foundation, Bill Moyers' Schumann Foundation or the MacArthur Foundation or encourage much fair of discussion of 9/11 conspiracy evidence in their media: I don't think much evidence exists of any foundation-sponsored gatekeeper eagerness to either scrutinize the Establishment foundations or welcome 9/11 conspiracy discussion. Yet as G. William Domhoff wrote long ago in his book Who Rules America?: "The foundation boards have the power to accept or reject various scientific, educational, and culture ventures. They therefore have the power to exert considerable influence over the noneconomic aspects of American life." Refusing to acknowledge that the multi-billion or multi-million dollar foundations possess great power to influence alternative media editorial priorities through their funding policies, seems like an illogical interpretation of current U.S. political/social reality.
Brian Salter replies:
To clarify, Mike Ruppert is of the opinion that the Left "gatekeepers" phenomenon to which we are drawing attention is the result of a classic COINTELPRO-style infiltration. Given his expertise and personal experience in this area, he is more than justified in voicing that opinion. In certain cases, the egregious and unconscionable behavior of some "Left" media figures literally begs the question -- but again, one should note that we have not made this type of claim, and the title of Feldman's article itself says "Sponsored by the Ford Foundation," not "Controlled by the Ford Foundation."
The burden of proof is not on us to verify the existence of a formalized arrangement or quid pro quo in order to raise the issue of foundation funding of Left media as a crucial concern. Instead, the burden of proof is on those who receive foundation funding to demonstrate (against all historical precedents and common sense) that they are capable of providing unbiased and unfettered coverage on the most sensitive issues involving the US ruling establishment. The most logical starting point is not to ask, "are these media figures being controlled and censored by an outside agency?" but instead to ask "are these media figures controlling and censoring themselves?" John Moyers of TomPaine.com could not have said it better:
"If they don't like what we're doing, we don't get paid next year."
Even more fundamentally, one of the most damning points of all is already made by the prima facie evidence itself. As Feldman notes above, with an informed and responsible understanding of political and social realities, it would be very naieve to adopt the default assumption that "philanthropic" foundation funding is neutral and benign until proven otherwise. Elite foundations do not throw their money around without looking for a return on their investment, and the rapidly broadening and expanding foundation funding of establishment Left media indicates that they have been getting the return they desire. The elites are paying to promote the type of opposition which they believe is most compatible with their interests; they are paying to promote the type of "dissidence" which will do them the least harm.
Even giving the most generous benefit of the doubt, assuming that the establishment Left media orgainizations and individuals in question are all completely sincere and unhesitant in their pursuits and clear of any conflicts of interest, one still cannot avoid this basic question: if they (and their general school of thought) have found such positive favor with the Ford Foundation and other well-known elite instruments of mass control and social engineering, are they really doing the job that needs to be done? And how can one find any continuing credibility in their rigidly controlled ideological positions as a genuinely effective and viable basis for "dissent"?
As the threat of a new war in the Persian Gulf builds day by day, it becomes increasingly important to ask these kinds of questions. Those who have fully studied the issues and facts concerning 9/11 and the Bush administration's inexplicable coverup and lies understand rationally that this is not a topic of "conspiracy theory" but instead a true scandal of serious proportions. This can no longer be denied. It is a scandal which, if aggressively pursued by the media, should have helped hamstring and sideline the Bush administration months ago, which would have made it politically impossible for them to push ahead with their war plans in the first place. Thus, for those who have been striving to uncover the underlying truths behind 9/11 and the "War on Terror," the imminent possibility of this terrifying new war is a double tragedy. For this reason, we feel there is an urgent imperative to expose and scrutinize the institutional factors which have steered the establishment Left media toward their current gatekeeping / censorship agendas.
original article:
ALTERNATIVE MEDIA CENSORSHIP: SPONSORED BY CIA's FORD FOUNDATION?
Hello,
I saw and appreciated your essay on the foundational support for Left orgs and writers that dismiss anything that smacks of "conspiracism".
However, while I share with you the idea that such orgs and writers should be critically evaluated, I do not think your evidence, specifically, against Noam Chomsky is all that weighty. You don't really present any evidence that Chomsky is a controlled person. You cite the Inamori award from the "Japanese Establishment", but that award was for his achievements in the area of linguistics and cognitive science, not his political writings. So what does the Inamori award have to do with anything? The award is somewhat akin to the various Nobel prizes.
Also, you mentioned that Z magazine was perhaps named after the Costa-Gavras film "Z". My recollection is that Z magazine was originally named Zeta magazine, billing itself the last word, as it were, in political writing. When Sargent and Albert found out the name Zeta was already used by someone else, they opted for the abbreviated form, 'Z'.
In any event, I fail to see how your charts, in general, necessarily predict control of the sort you claim. However, I am eager to examine more evidence of such if it exists.
Thanks, WiseSerpent
Bob Feldman replies:
Thank you for considering some of the possible institutional/political reasons for censorship of 9/11 conspiracy journalists and researchers by the foundation-sponsored alternative media gatekeepers.
Although MIT Professssor Chomsky has been on the payroll of the 12th-largest recipient of US Air Force war contracts in recent years, the article isn't asserting "that Chomsky is a controlled person." But there is evidence that Z magazine was unwilling to print an article about MIT's links to the U.S. Air Force's space warfare preparations and to the Pentagon's think-tank, the Institute for Defense Analyses, a few years ago.
Regarding the $350,000 award from the Inamori Foundation that was set up by the chairman emeritus/founder of one of Japan's leading telecommunications companies, DDI Corporation, that was given to ALTERNATIVE RADIO's frequently featured guest: Generally, recipients of such large grants from Establishment foundations are reluctant to scrutinize or criticize a foundation world from which they've obtained such a large sums of money. And, like the Nobel prize money (that was initially obtained from Nobel's invention and marketing of dynamite weapons), some of the Inamori Foundation money was originally obtained from DDI's ownership of 75% of the AVX Coroporation--which is an electronic company that (like MIT) is a key contractor in the U.S. aerospace/military industry.
Regarding evidence that the alternative media gatekeepers are reluctant to either air or publish criticism of the Soros/Open Society Institute, the Ford Foundation, Bill Moyers' Schumann Foundation or the MacArthur Foundation or encourage much fair of discussion of 9/11 conspiracy evidence in their media: I don't think much evidence exists of any foundation-sponsored gatekeeper eagerness to either scrutinize the Establishment foundations or welcome 9/11 conspiracy discussion. Yet as G. William Domhoff wrote long ago in his book Who Rules America?: "The foundation boards have the power to accept or reject various scientific, educational, and culture ventures. They therefore have the power to exert considerable influence over the noneconomic aspects of American life." Refusing to acknowledge that the multi-billion or multi-million dollar foundations possess great power to influence alternative media editorial priorities through their funding policies, seems like an illogical interpretation of current U.S. political/social reality.
Brian Salter replies:
To clarify, Mike Ruppert is of the opinion that the Left "gatekeepers" phenomenon to which we are drawing attention is the result of a classic COINTELPRO-style infiltration. Given his expertise and personal experience in this area, he is more than justified in voicing that opinion. In certain cases, the egregious and unconscionable behavior of some "Left" media figures literally begs the question -- but again, one should note that we have not made this type of claim, and the title of Feldman's article itself says "Sponsored by the Ford Foundation," not "Controlled by the Ford Foundation."
The burden of proof is not on us to verify the existence of a formalized arrangement or quid pro quo in order to raise the issue of foundation funding of Left media as a crucial concern. Instead, the burden of proof is on those who receive foundation funding to demonstrate (against all historical precedents and common sense) that they are capable of providing unbiased and unfettered coverage on the most sensitive issues involving the US ruling establishment. The most logical starting point is not to ask, "are these media figures being controlled and censored by an outside agency?" but instead to ask "are these media figures controlling and censoring themselves?" John Moyers of TomPaine.com could not have said it better:
"If they don't like what we're doing, we don't get paid next year."
Even more fundamentally, one of the most damning points of all is already made by the prima facie evidence itself. As Feldman notes above, with an informed and responsible understanding of political and social realities, it would be very naieve to adopt the default assumption that "philanthropic" foundation funding is neutral and benign until proven otherwise. Elite foundations do not throw their money around without looking for a return on their investment, and the rapidly broadening and expanding foundation funding of establishment Left media indicates that they have been getting the return they desire. The elites are paying to promote the type of opposition which they believe is most compatible with their interests; they are paying to promote the type of "dissidence" which will do them the least harm.
Even giving the most generous benefit of the doubt, assuming that the establishment Left media orgainizations and individuals in question are all completely sincere and unhesitant in their pursuits and clear of any conflicts of interest, one still cannot avoid this basic question: if they (and their general school of thought) have found such positive favor with the Ford Foundation and other well-known elite instruments of mass control and social engineering, are they really doing the job that needs to be done? And how can one find any continuing credibility in their rigidly controlled ideological positions as a genuinely effective and viable basis for "dissent"?
As the threat of a new war in the Persian Gulf builds day by day, it becomes increasingly important to ask these kinds of questions. Those who have fully studied the issues and facts concerning 9/11 and the Bush administration's inexplicable coverup and lies understand rationally that this is not a topic of "conspiracy theory" but instead a true scandal of serious proportions. This can no longer be denied. It is a scandal which, if aggressively pursued by the media, should have helped hamstring and sideline the Bush administration months ago, which would have made it politically impossible for them to push ahead with their war plans in the first place. Thus, for those who have been striving to uncover the underlying truths behind 9/11 and the "War on Terror," the imminent possibility of this terrifying new war is a double tragedy. For this reason, we feel there is an urgent imperative to expose and scrutinize the institutional factors which have steered the establishment Left media toward their current gatekeeping / censorship agendas.
original article:
ALTERNATIVE MEDIA CENSORSHIP: SPONSORED BY CIA's FORD FOUNDATION?
Hanauma Bay
Check the individual snorklers swimming in coral when you GO HUGE --
First shot posted taken in RAW, but converted to JPEG for processing since I don't have Adobe RAW or NikonCapture. Looks much sharper and more vivid than my full-sized JPEG shots at the same resolution. Any image processing buffs know if RAWs generally perform like this over shots taken in JPEG, even if they're converted to JPEGs after the fact? Thought it might be b/c all compression was done by software and not the camera itself...?
This is the view from slightly above what is, to my best knowledge, the most popular snorkeling site on the Hawaiin Islands. We went and tried it out for the first time. I never realized how difficult it is to breathe only through one's mouth, but enjoyed it nonetheless.
First shot posted taken in RAW, but converted to JPEG for processing since I don't have Adobe RAW or NikonCapture. Looks much sharper and more vivid than my full-sized JPEG shots at the same resolution. Any image processing buffs know if RAWs generally perform like this over shots taken in JPEG, even if they're converted to JPEGs after the fact? Thought it might be b/c all compression was done by software and not the camera itself...?
This is the view from slightly above what is, to my best knowledge, the most popular snorkeling site on the Hawaiin Islands. We went and tried it out for the first time. I never realized how difficult it is to breathe only through one's mouth, but enjoyed it nonetheless.
Roberts ripped anti-sex discrimination efforts - The Changing Court - MSNBC.com
Roberts ripped anti-sex discrimination efforts - The Changing Court - MSNBC.com
Blogger Comments: This seems to show him as a candidate I wouldn't vote for.
Blogger Comments: This seems to show him as a candidate I wouldn't vote for.
Do Kentucky Repubs have "a lick of sense"?
Courier-Journal.com
Judge slams cabinet for withholding from investigators
FRANKFORT, Ky. (AP) -- The judge presiding over the special grand jury investigation of Fletcher administration personnel practices blistered attorneys for the Transportation Cabinet for withholding subpoenaed e-mails that anyone "with a lick of sense" would know were important.
Franklin County Circuit Judge William Graham on Thursday said he would give the attorney general's office, which has been conducting the investigation, virtually unfettered access to all Transportation Cabinet documents. Previously, the cabinet had hired lawyers to review the materials before they were turned over to the investigation.
Graham said he has been cautious and indulgent of state agencies as they have examined stacks of documents and computer records to determine if they were responsive to subpoenas from the grand jury.
But the judge's patience apparently wore out when a newspaper published e-mail exchanges between Transportation Cabinet officials that Deputy Attorney General Pierce Whites said had not been included in documents subpoenaed by the grand jury.
M. Stephen Pitt, one of what Graham called the "host of lawyers" hired by the state to review subpoenaed records, said the exchange between Dick Murgatroyd and Otis Reed was not responsive to the subpoena. The subpoena asked for records of numerous individuals and hiring, including Murgatroyd, who was then deputy secretary of the cabinet, and Reed, who was then the agency's chief personnel officer.
"I don't think anyone with a lick of sense can read those e-mails, regardless of whether or not they had legal training, and not understand that those e-mails are pertinent to the investigation," Graham said.
Gov. Ernie Fletcher's office declined comment and referred questions about the judge's decision to Pitt and the Transportation Cabinet. A cabinet spokesman referred questions to Pitt.
Graham was clearly exasperated at a hearing called at the attorney general's request that the Transportation Cabinet be held in contempt.
"I just don't see any excuse for these not being provided," Graham said. "These are precisely the kinds of e-mails the attorney general, the grand jury, would be interested in."
In the e-mails on Feb. 26, Reed wrote Murgatroyd during a discussion of state hiring: "I don't know if they don't know the law or if they just don't care and that is the scary part."
Murgatroyd replied: "They believe they are above it."
The exchange was reported by The Courier-Journal newspaper after it obtained the records through a request under the Kentucky Open Records Act.
Pitt said there was nothing in the e-mail to reflect the exchange related to hiring, though Whites said the lawyers left out much of the context.
"I no longer can say that I have confidence in the lawyers to go through these fairly and squarely and ferret out the information," Graham said.
Graham said the lawyers were hired by the cabinet to find materials summoned by the grand jury. "You all represent the Transportation Cabinet. You don't represent individuals faced with the possibility of criminal charges being lodged," Graham said.
Pitt said after the ruling he did not feel like Graham was being critical of the work of the dozens of lawyers hired by the cabinet to review the items that had been subpoenaed. "We did attempt to do it in good faith," he said.
But he added that his own opinion of the investigation had hardened since it began in late May.
"I do think it's bogus," Pitt said. "I think it is a political, very political, investigation."
Pitt said that perspective did not cloud his work in reviewing items sought under subpoena.
Whites declined to say if he believes the documents were intentionally withheld, or whether other agencies are taking a similarly loose view of documents that should be provided.
"This was a particularly egregious case," Whites said. "I certainly hope no other agencies or cabinets have committed similar acts."
© 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Learn more about our Privacy Policy.
Risking Their Health - Newsweek Health Beat - MSNBC.com
Risking Their Health - Newsweek Health Beat - MSNBC.com
Blogger Comment: Just a link to get the traffic.
Blogger Comment: Just a link to get the traffic.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)