INTRODUCTION
Do you remember how “we” got maneuvered into Afghanistan? Yes. maneuvered.
That was about 20 years ago and some readers will be too young to remember. If you were old enough, you may find these actual clips, recorded, noted and meticulously transcribed from the media of the time, tell a different story than the one you remember.
Most of the clips, especially the longer ones, have the most important parts bolded, so theoretically you can skim most of this piece by reading only the short clips and the bolded text.
Shocking as it may be, this IS the missing context — and how That Thing That Lives In Washington D.C. maneuvered us into Afghanistan — and the technique may seem strangely familiar.
There is a lot of information here. If you run out of time, search for or scroll down to the short “CONCLUSIONS:”
PREAMBLE:
To fertilize the public to accept a completely unjustified attack on the men, women, and children of Iraq – – –
Following 9/11, President Bush and seven top officials of his administration waged a carefully orchestrated campaign of misinformation about the threat posed by Saddam Hussein’s Iraq. President George W. Bush and seven of his administration’s top officials, including Vice President Dick Cheney, National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, made at least 935 false statements in the two years following September 11, 2001, about the national security threat posed by Saddam Hussein’s Iraq. –False Pretenses, By Charles Lewis and Mark Reading-Smith, Center for Public Integrity, Jan. 28, 2008
INSIDE OSAMA BIN LADEN:
A Saudi Arabian millionaire, bin Laden became a militant Islamic leader in the war to drive the Russians out of Afghanistan. He was one of the many religious fundamentalist extremists recruited, armed, and financed by the CIA and their allies in Pakistani intelligence [the “ISI”] to cause maximal harm to the Russians — quite possibly delaying their withdrawal, many analysts suspect … Bin Laden and his “Afghanis” turned against the US in 1990 when they established permanent bases in Saudi Arabia — from his point of view, a counterpart to the Russian occupation of Afghanistan, but far more significant because of Saudi Arabia’s special status as the guardian of the holiest shrines. -Noam Chomsky, interviewed by Radio B92, Belgrade, September 2001 Source: ZNet
The Saudi billionaire, Osama bin Laden, declares Jihad against the US Military and the US Government. He’s rich, has thousands of supporters, and their numbers are growing. -CNN Impact, 10 Aug, 1997
Sam Donaldson: You met bin Laden once didn’t you? Saudi Arabian Ambassador to the U.S., Bandar Bin Sultan Bin Abdul Aziz: Yes. Bin Laden came to thank me for getting aid from the USA for his mujahideen. -ABC THIS WEEK, September 30, 2001
~”I think the turning point came for bin Laden when the U.S. military stayed in Saudi Arabia after the Gulf War. [Initial agreement was that they would leave immediately after cessation of hostilities. -LRW] Bin Laden has only three demands:
+
1. U.S. troops out of Saudi Arabia. [Saudi is protector of Muslim holy of holies, Mecca, and devout Muslims, for reasons going as far back as the Crusades, [1] believe it’s a sacrilege to have the “infidel” (unfaithful) there.]
+
2. End aid to Israel. [2]
+
3. Stop bombing Iraq. [U.S. and British planes have been flying bombing sorties against Iraq several times a week since 1991 with no support for this behavior from any other country.] Though he doesn’t particularly like Saddam, bin Laden says this bombing disrupts the lives of Islamic women and children. -John Miller, ABC THIS WEEK, September 16, 2001
U.S. planes attacked military installations in Southern Iraq for the third time this month. -FOX NEWS bottom banner, October 14, 2001, 00:05:43
In 1998 in an interview in the mountains of Afghanistan overlooking Kabul, bin Laden told me, “We can no longer differentiate between civilians and those wearing military uniforms.” -John Miller, ABC NEWS, NY on ABC THIS WEEK, September 16, 2001
“It’s not only our U.S. troops who will be put in mortal danger; bin Laden has stated unequivocally that all Americans, including ‘those who pay taxes,’ are targets. -Eagle Forum Troops to Kosovo; Terror for Americans? February 24, 1999 by: Phyllis Schlafly
Bin Laden is reported to have said on video tape that those killed in the WTC attacks were not civilians, they were working for the American system. -CNBC banner, November 12, 2001, 10:32:18
AFGHANISTAN:
One of four Afghan children die before they reach the age of five. -Dr. Farshad Rastegar, CNN HLN, September 29, 2001, 14:23:16
The economy is so bad here that it is beyond many people’s ability to flee Afghanistan. Many are so poor that they can’t even flee to the outskirts of Kabul. Most Afghans just worry about how they will get food for tomorrow. The borders have been closed between Afghanistan and Iran as Iran fears a wave of Afghan refugees. These people have been through nearly 20 years of almost constant conflict since the Russians tried to install their own government in Kabul. Almost everyone here has lost a loved one or suffered property damage. They are worried about personal safety but are resigned to any attack that may come. -Nic Robertson, Live from Kabul, Afghanistan, CNN HLN, September 15, 2001, 14:44:34
If you can imagine a whole city of World Trade Towers, you can begin to appreciate the devastation that is Afghanistan. It’s reported that 900,000 Afghanis are on the move as refugees. Seven million Afghanis have left the country in the last 20 years. The Russians bombed the ancient irrigation ditches. There are some roads, big-broad black roads that the Russians planned to use as landing strips. How about bombing bin Laden? The mountains [where he’s supposedly hiding in tunnels] are rocks – – – beautiful, big rocks. But bin Laden isn’t in his tunnels anymore. They apparently gave him a horse and he went up into the mountains. It’s been said that the Americans can pinpoint a lighted cigarette. If bin Laden strikes-up and lights a cigarrette, maybe you’ve got him, but if he doesn’t smoke . . . -Judith Vidal-Hall, Censorship Index, CNN HLN, September 23, 2001, 04:49:21
“We bear no ill will to the Afghani people. They are a poor people, they are a suffering people, and that’s why they should not permit these terrorist invaders to put their society at risk.” Sec. of State Colin Powell, CNBC, September 17, 2001, 13:46:51
The Taliban expressed a desire to open a dialog with Washington to find out what kind of evidence they have implicating bin Laden. White House spokesman Ari Fleicher: This isn’t a time for dialog, it’s a time for action. -CNN HLN, September 19, 2001, 10:07:33
JUSTICE?
Not one hijacker was from Afghanistan. Maybe the search for those responsible should start elsewhere. -Ahmad Kamal, Fmr. Pakistani Amb. to UN, CNN HLN, September 22, 2001, 14:44:41
The Taliban has refused to turn-over Osama bin Laden without being presented with evidence. -Lisa Gianni, Bloomberg, September 21, 2001, 08:09:00
~~”We’re going to do this right. We’re going to gather the evidence and make it public for everyone to see.” -Sec. of State Colin Powell, CNBC, September 17, 2001, 13:46:51
Bob Pisani (relaying the question from Anchor Bill Griffith): [In a country where people are innocent until proven guilty, why would it be ]”unreasonable for the, the Taliban Government to ask for more direct proof of, ah, ah, the ah, involvement of Osama bin Laden?”
+
Sen. John McCain (R-Az): “Because they’ve been ah, assisting Osama, ah, the bin Laden terrorist organization. They know exactly what they’ve been doin’. And these people are people who are really bad, bad people. …But we all know, we all know. The evidence is clear. I don’t — There may be some discussion about some other terrorist organizations, but not about bin Laden.” –EXACT transcription from CNBC, September 21, 2001, ~13:15:48
“If Bush wants bin Laden, he should show them proof.” -CNN HLN America’s voice on cnn.com, September 23, 2001, 06:09:55
The “White Paper” claiming to prove bin Laden’s guilt was to be shared with the world, but the administration seems to be backing off on that. Will they share it with foreign governments and not the American people? -FOX NEWS, September 23, 2001, 14:09:45
“…the White House said once again that it will not negotiate with the Taliban or provide evidence about his [bin Laden’s] role in the September 11 attack.” [The White House stance was later verified to have come from an internal memo.] -Connie Mayberry, CNN HLN, September 30, 2001, 17:16:34
Taliban Ambassador to Pakistan: We don’t want war, we want justice. We want justice. We must see evidence. -CNN HLN, October 2, 2001, 11:44:40
Blair’s evidence against bin Laden and Taliban: This document does not purport to provide a prosecutable case against Osama bin Laden in a court of law. … But on the basis of all the information available HMG is confident of its conclusions as expressed in this document.
Suppose Afghanistan demanded the hand-over of Billy Graham – – without presenting any evidence to the U.S. Government or U.S Court System. Isn’t this sort of thing a regular problem for countries? Don’t they have regular procedures to handle it? Don’t they call it “extradition?” -LRW
“It’s ironic to me that we can commit a nation to war, even world war, on less evidence than it takes to convict someone for smoking a joint in downtown Manhattan.” -Ron Kuby, Criminal Defense Lawyer, FOX NEWS, October 30, 2001, 11:54:21
BLIND RETALIATION?
“Even the most noble ends do not justify the means.” -President George W. Bush, November 25, 2001
In 1994, the U.S. State Department and Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence agency [ISI] sought to install a stable regime in Afghanistan to enhance the prospects for Western oil pipelines. They financed, armed and trained the Taliban in its civil war against the Northern Alliance. -THE DEADLY PIPELINE WAR: U.S. AFGHAN POLICY DRIVEN BY OIL INTERESTS, Professor Marjorie Cohn, Thomas Jefferson School of Law, JURIST Contributing Editor, December 7, 2001
The Taliban is not the protector of most of these Afghans, not their government — at least not as we understand the word. The Taliban rulers took control largely by force and maintain it with an extreme Islamic regimen that is not in the Afghan tradition, and by most accounts appeals only to a limited minority [about 16% -LRW] of Afghans. [According to several experts — and logic — it’s also clear the Taliban doesn’t (and didn’t) have any control over large areas of Afghanistan.] Whatever You Think About Afghanistan Is Probably Wrong, By Marc Kaufman, The Washington Post ONLINE, Sunday, September 23, 2001; Page B03
Pakistan and Saudi Arabia are the only two countries in the world who recognize the Taliban as the legitimate government of Afghanistan. [United Arab Emirates broke relations with Taliban a few months ago and Saudi Arabia has now frozen relations with Afghanistan.] -CNN HLN, September 22, 2001, 16:32:57
Reporter: ~”Are you sure bin Laden is still in Afghanistan and that the Taliban can find him? U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell: “No …” Press conference, September 17, 2001, 13:46:51
Reporter: If they [Taliban] turn him [bin Laden] over, will this satisfy the administration? White House Briefer Ari Fleicher: This War on Terrorism is bigger than any one individual and we will proceed. –White House briefing, September 17, 2001, 13:35:26
THE PRESIDENT: The Taliban has been given the opportunity to surrender all the terrorists in Afghanistan and to close down their camps and operations. Full warning has been given, and time is running out. Radio Address of the President to the Nation, For Immediate Release, Office of the Press Secretary, October 6, 2001
If the United States Government were given an ultimatum by, say, Cuba’s Fidel Castro to “surrender all the terrorists in the United States,” from a practical standpoint, it simply couldn’t be done — the FBI’s still looking for them, and will be for years. How would you know who was a “terrorist” and who wasn’t? If no evidence were presented, you’d have to take Castro’s word for it. If Castro called for Billy Graham, you would have to turn him over. Would you? [3]
Bush says Taliban rebuffed Saturday’s [new] offer [to stop bombing if bin Laden & cohorts turned over]. Says their offer was identical to their previous offer. Says they need to, “without seeing proof,”…turn him over. -CNN HLN banner, October 15, 2001, 02:29:20
Afghan Clerics ask Taliban to urge bin Laden to leave Afghanistan at suitable time for the nation’s safety. Clerics urge US not to attack Afghanistan. Urge US to have patience. Kelly Wallace reports Bush not likely to approve of Cleric’s position: wants action. -CNN bottom banner, September 20, 2001, 07:05:07
It’s very unusual for Afghanistan to ask someone to leave. Many Pakistanis wonder why, after Afghanistan and Pakistan were abandoned after they helped kick Soviets out, they should help America again. –FOX NEWS, September 23, 2001, 13:37:47
Bush: “Turn him over. Turn him over, turn his cohorts over. Turn any hostages they hold over. Destroy all their terrorist camps. There’s no need to negotiate. There’s no discussions. I told them exactly what they need to do. There’s no need to discuss innocence or guilt, we know he’s guilty. And when I said no negotiations, I meant no negotiations.” -CNN HLN, October 15, 2001, 04:01:10
NNR: This document does not purport to provide a prosecutable case against Osama bin Laden in a court of law. … -evidence against bin Laden
Many Afghans [even in the part of Afghanistan not controlled by Taliban] are voting with their feet. They’re afraid of American bombs. They think the Americans are going to destroy their homes. They’re trying to get away from towns and across the border into Pakistan. -Steve [Hanson?], Islamabad, Afghanistan, CNN, September 20, 2001, 05:45:56
Reporter: Will bin Laden be enough? Colin Powell: ~~”No. We’re after his whole organization” –Press conference, September 17, 2001, 13:46:51
Defense Secretary Rumsfeld says Osama bin Laden may never be found. -CNBC, October 25, 2001, 11:51:07
We are witnessing this weekend one of the most epic events since the Second World War, certainly since Vietnam. … I am referring to the extraordinary, almost unbelievable preparations now under way for the most powerful nation ever to have existed on God’s Earth to bomb the most devastated, ravaged, starvation-haunted and tragic country in the world. Afghanistan, raped and eviscerated by the Russian army for 10 years, abandoned by its friends — us, of course — once the Russians had fled, is about to be attacked by the surviving superpower. … But B-52s don’t discriminate between men wearing turbans, or between men and women or women and children. Robert Fisk: How can the US bomb this tragic people? , Independent Digital (UK) Ltd, 27 September 2001 16:30 GMT+1 Independent
The Pentagon announced it has released 100 war planes to operate somewhere in the Mid East. This includes stealth fighters, F-16s, B-52 high-altitude bombers and B2 Bombers. They’re calling this “Operation Infinite Justice.” [4] The planes will be used if the Taliban refuses to turn bin Laden over. -Jim Mickleswski from the Penatgon, CNBC, September 19, 2001, 15:33:39
U.S. Sec. of Defense Donald Rumsfeld: “Well, ah, first let me say that, are we worried that they’ll make a last-gasp terrorist attack on the United States? Needless to say, we do worry that they will make a terrorist attack on the United States. They already did. They’ve threatened to do more. They will do more whether we do what we’re doing or whether we don’t do what we’re doing.” -November 13, 2001, 15:01:13
Day 18 of airstrikes in Afghanistan underway. -CNBC banner, November 4, 2001, 10:14:58
Day 29 of airstrikes in Afghanistan underway. –November 15, 2001, 05:07:57
OR WAS IT SOMETHING ELSE?
BERLIN, July 23 (Reuters) – Almost one in three Germans below the age of 30 believes the U.S. government may have sponsored the September 11, 2001, attacks on New York and Washington, according to a poll published on Wednesday. And about 20 percent of Germans in all age groups hold this view 23 Jul 2003 15:18:43 GMT, Poll shows many Germans see U.S. behind Sept 11
Addressing assemblies of journalism students, a respected Sage of Journalism, I.F. Stone admonished his charges: “Only two words you should know if you really want to be an honest journalist, two words: Governments Lie.” -Historian Howard Zinn, Tufts University, 2002
“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed — and thus clamorous to be led to safety — by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.” -H.L. Mencken
We must speak the truth about terror. Let us never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories concerning the attacks of September the 11th; malicious lies that attempt to shift the blame away from the terrorists, themselves, away from the guilty. President Bush Speaks to United Nations, U.N. Headquarters, New York, New York, November 10, 2001, 9:38 A.M. EST
NNR: “It’s ironic to me that we can commit a nation to war [in Afghanistan], even world war, on less evidence than it takes to convict someone for smoking a joint in downtown Manhattan.” -Ron Kuby, Criminal Defense Lawyer, FOX NEWS, October 30, 2001, 11:54:21
“In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the militaryindustrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together. –President Dwight D. Eisenhower
Decades ago, the old Nazi, Hermann Goering, leaned in to his microphone at the Nuremberg trials and held forth on war and propaganda. The Nazis, with their Reichstag fire, their humanitarian intervention into the Sudentenland, their stories of Germany under attack from within and without, were masters of propaganda.
+
“Why of course the people don’t want war,” began Goering. “That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along.”
+
The Nazi leader paused, then continued. “All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger.” Our Masters of Propaganda by Stephen Gowans, November 12, 2001
OUR FUTURE?
“All democracies turn into dictatorships — but not by coup. The people give their democracy to a dictator, whether it’s Julius Caesar or Napoleon or Adolf Hitler. Ultimately, the general population goes along with the idea … What kinds of things push people and institutions into this direction?” -Film Producer George Lucas
“Today Americans would be outraged if UN troops entered Los Angeles to restore order; tomorrow, they will be grateful. This is especially true if they were told there is an outside threat from beyond, whether real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence. It is then that all peoples of the world will [plead] with world leaders to deliver them from this evil. The one thing that every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well-being by their world government.” -former U.S. Sec. of State Henry Kissinger, June 8, 1992[5]
“The technotronic era involves the gradual appearance of a more controlled society. Such a society would be dominated by an elite, unrestrained by traditional values. Soon it will be possible to assert almost continuous surveillance over every citizen and maintain up-to-date complete files containing even the most personal information about the citizen. These files will be subject to instantaneous retrieval by the authorities. +
“In the technotronic society the trend would seem to be towards the aggregation of the individual support of millions of uncoordinated citizens, easily within the reach of magnetic and attractive personalities exploiting the latest communications techniques to manipulate emotions and control reason.” ?Zbigniew Brzezinski, Between Two Ages: America’s Role in the Technetronic Era, Published October 28th, 1976 by Penguin Books [And thanks to J. Buzz Webb]
Most police states, surprisingly, come about through the democratic process with majority support. During a crisis, the rights of individuals and the minority are more easily trampled, which is more likely to condition a nation to become a police state than a military coup. … The masses are easily led to believe that security and liberty are mutually exclusive, and demand for security far exceeds that for liberty. Is America a Police State? Congressman Ron Paul June 27, 2002
Gen. Tommy Franks says that if the United States is hit with a weapon of mass destruction that inflicts large casualties, the Constitution will likely be discarded in favor of a military form of government. Gen. Franks Doubts Constitution Will Survive WMD Attack John O. Edwards, NewsMax.com, Friday, Nov. 21, 2003
Public opinion polls show that the American people are overwhelmingly in favor of increasing police powers to fight terrorism even if it means giving up personal liberties. -FOX NEWS Bottom banner, September 30, 2001, 18:00:47
NASHVILLE, Tenn. – Support for the First Amendment has eroded significantly since Sept. 11 and nearly half of Americans now think the constitutional amendment on free speech goes too far in the rights it guarantees, …The poll found that 49 percent think the First Amendment goes too far, about 10 points higher than in 2001. “Many Americans view these fundamental freedoms as possible obstacles in the war on terrorism,” said Ken Paulson, executive director of the First Amendment Center -Citizens question limits of free speech, By Amber McDowell, The Associated Press, The Seattle Times, Friday, August 30, 2002
Sen. Hilary Rodham Clinton (D-NY): “We have to do whatever it takes to keep people safe.” Cokie Roberts: ~”Does this mean racial profiling?” Clinton: “We have to do whatever it takes. Tuesday changed everything.” -ABC THIS WEEK, September 16, 2001
“How much freedom will we have to give up in return for increased security?” -Sam Donaldson, ABC THIS WEEK, September 16, 2001
“They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” — Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania (1759)
THE FAKE PROVOCATIONS:
NEW YORK, May 1–In the early 1960s, America’s top military leaders reportedly drafted plans to kill innocent people and commit acts of terrorism in U.S. cities to create public support for a war against Cuba. Code named “Operation Northwoods”, the plans reportedly included the possible assassination of Cuban emigres, sinking boats of Cuban refugees on the high seas, hijacking planes [!!!], blowing up a U.S. ship [6], and even orchestrating violent terrorism in U.S. cities. The plans were developed as ways to trick the American public and the international community into supporting a war to oust Cuba’s then new leader, communist Fidel Castro. -David Ruppe, FRIENDLY FIRE: U.S. Military Drafted Plans to Terrorize U.S. Cities to Provoke War With Cuba, ABCNEWS.com, May 1, 2001 [and thanks to Bronco!!] Standard Operating Procedure?
With roughly 100 new stories warning of terrorism in the mainstream media just today, the possibility cannot be ignored that the American people are being pre-conditioned to accept as real a terrorist event manufactured by our own government, a terrorist event no more real than those created by powerful leaders through the ages to sell an agenda to a populace which would otherwise not accept it. Dictatorship through Deception by Michael Rivero, First posted on New Republic Forum Xmas ‘Eve 1999 [7]
NNR: AUSTIN -Thirty-eight years ago Sunday, network television was interrupted at 11:36 p.m. EDT so President Lyndon B. Johnson could tell the nation that U.S. warships in a place called the Gulf of Tonkin had been attacked by North Vietnamese PT boats. … In response to what he described as “open aggression on the open seas,” Johnson ordered U.S. airstrikes on North Vietnam. The airstrikes opened the door to a war that would kill 1 million Vietnamese and 58,000 Americans …Recently released tapes of White House phone conversations indicate the attack probably never happened. –Tonkin incident might not have occurred, By Bob Richter, Express-News Austin Bureau, Web Posted : 08/03/2002 12:00 AM
“Our judgement that [the Maddox] had been attacked that day was wrong. It didn’t happen.” –U.S. Secretary of War, Robert S. McNamara
In fact, part of the U.S. military had been engaged in secret and highly classified Operational Plan 34A, attacking North Vietnam installations, purposely trying to instigate just such an attack to justify its hoped-for major escalation. –The Secret Side of the Tonkin Gulf Incident, by Dale Andrade and Kenneth Conboy, USNI.ORG
U.S. President Lyndon Banes Johnson didn’t believe the Warren Report [on who killed President John F. Kennedy], and didn’t believe Viet Nam was worth fighting for, his memoires revealed. –CNN HLN, 10-06-97, 1:39am EST
* Three million Vietnamese and 58,000 Americans were killed in the Viet Nam War. –David Brinkley, ABC This Week, 6 Jul 1997 [The Pentagon reported it cost $110 billion 1970 dollars -lrw]
CAN YOU FIND A COMMON THREAD?
WASHINGTON (CNN) — The CIA uses anthrax in its bio-warfare program but the bacteria did not make it into tainted letters sent to two U.S. senators and several news organizations, an agency official said Sunday. Official: CIA uses anthrax …, December 16, 2001, David Ensor, CNN Washington Bureau
An Army biological and chemical warfare facility in Utah [Dugway Proving Ground] has been quietly developing a virulent, weapons-grade formulation of anthrax spores since at least 1992, and samples of the bacteria were shipped back and forth between that facility and Fort Detrick, Md. …The Utah spores …belong to the Ames strain — the same strain used in the deadly letters sent to media outlets and two senators in September and October. No other nation is known to have made weapons-grade Ames. … “The anthrax in the letters was probably made and weaponized in a U.S. government or contractor lab,” Barbara Hatch Rosenberg, a microbiologist and director of the Federation of American Scientists’ Working Group on Biological Weapons, concluded. Army Working on Weapons-Grade Anthrax By Rick Weiss and Joby Warrick, Washington Post, Thursday, December 13, 2001; Page A16
New U.S. anti-terrorist legislation is finding it’s way through Congress. The legislation makes it easier for authorities to get court permission to tap phones and extends how long terrorism suspects can be held without being charged. Attorney General Ashcroft had asked to hold them indefinitely. -CNN HLN, October 2, 2001, 11:51:40
WASHINGTON-Attorney General William French Smith recently voiced his alarm at Federal Emergency Management Agency Director Louis Guiffrida’s proposal to crown himself the nation’s “emergency czar” in the event of war or natural disaster. …It would suspend the Constitution and give the president as much arbitrary power as Hitler or Stalin ever exercised.
+
This blueprint for autocracy is in the form of “standby” legislation drafted by FEMA’s eager empire-builders. That means it won’t be submitted to Congress in advance–when its drastic provisions would certainly spark debate and draw opposition from conservatives and civil libertarians alike. Instead, it is intended to be held on “standby” until an emergency arises. Then a panicky Congress will presumably be ready to abdicate its responsibilities under the Constitution and vote for a dictatorship. Our associates Donald Goldberg and Indy Badhwar have seen the draft legislation, which would be titled disingenously the Defense Resources Act. -JACK ANDERSON: DRAFT LEGISLATION WOULD SUSPEND CONSTITUTIOIN IN AN EMERGENCY – 1984 United Feature Syndicate, Inc. weekly special [from Lassen Advocate 10/1/84 Susanville CA]
U.S.House passes new bill conferring broad new powers on law-enforcement and intelligence agencies. -FOX NEWS, October 14, 2001, 01:02:14
ACLU [American Civil Liberties Union] says Americans don’t understand the new “anti-terrorist” bill. Bill allows for imprisoning people without due process & punish[es] dissent. Allows indefinite detention of non-citizens. Expands govt. secret searches, less judicial review. Gives FBI broad access to business & citizen records. -CNN HLN banner, October 15, 2001, 02:25:10
“I like to refer to this legislation,” [dubbed the “USA PATRIOT” law] continues [ACLU head Nadine] Strossen, “as the ‘so-called antiterrorism law,’ because on its face the provisions are written to deal with any crime, and the definition of terrorism under the new law is so severely broad that it applies far beyond what most people think of as terrorism.” Police State, Kelly Patricia O’Meara, Insight Magazine, Nov. 9, 2001
Neil Cavuto: You voted against this [anti-terrorism bill], right? Why?
+
Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D-NY): “Well first of all it [the anti-terrorism bill] was a bad game of bait-and-switch. The Judiciary Committee had reported out a bill that had been worked on over a period of weeks. It came out of the Judiciary committee by unanimous vote. Then at the last minute, the leadership of the House switched that bill and produced another bill which no one had seen and only a handful of people had more than superficial knowledge of. And that was the bill that was put on the floor and we were asked to vote for it. … And I don’t think it’s a good idea for the congress to pass a bill it hasn’t seen, hasn’t read, doesn’t know the contents of and a bill that goes deeply into individual liberties and constitutional rights. … I think that we’re in a tough situation we need to proceed carefully, judiciously, cautiously. And we ought to proceed in ways in which we know what we’re doing. And the problem with the bill that came to the floor of the House is that we didn’t know what we were doing. No one knew what was in that bill. … One of the things that our enemies of the moment would like to see us do is to panic and to do things that are contrary to our own best interest and that’s the one thing that we have to resist. They could attack us from the outside and do a certain amount of damage as they did at the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, but the worst fear that we ought to be aware of is the danger to ourselves, the danger to erode from within, the danger to destroy ourselves on the basis of panic and fear.” -FOX NEWS, October 15, 2001, 16:23:41
[Rep. Ron] Paul [(R-Tx)] confirms rumors circulating in Washington that this sweeping new law, with serious implications for each and every American, was not made available to members of Congress for review before the vote. “It’s my understanding the bill wasn’t printed before the vote — at least I couldn’t get it. They played all kinds of games, kept the House in session all night, and it was a very complicated bill. Maybe a handful of staffers actually read it, but the bill definitely was not available to members before the vote.” … Meanwhile, efforts to obtain copies of the new law were stonewalled even by the committee that wrote it. Police State, Kelly Patricia O’Meara, Ibid.
There are two questions at the top of the [Pearl Harbor] foreknowledge list: (1) whether President Franklin D. Roosevelt and his top military chieftains provoked Japan into an “overt act of war” directed at Hawaii, and (2) whether Japan’s military plans were obtained in advance by the United States but concealed from the Hawaiian military commanders, Admiral Husband E. Kimmel and Lieutenant General Walter Short so they would not interfere with the overt act. The latter question was answered in the affirmative on October 30, 2000, when President Bill Clinton signed into law …the National Defense Authorization Act [which] …finds that both Kimmel and Short were denied crucial military intelligence that tracked the Japanese forces toward Hawaii and [had been] obtained by the Roosevelt Administration in the weeks before the attack.
+
… Roosevelt believed that provoking Japan into an attack on Hawaii was the only option he had in 1941 to overcome the powerful America First non-interventionist movement led by aviation hero Charles Lindbergh. These anti-war views were shared by 80 percent of the American public from 1940 to 1941. … Lieutenant Commander Arthur McCollum, a U.S. Naval officer in the Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI), saw an opportunity to counter the U.S. isolationist movement by provoking Japan into a state of war with the U.S.
+
Memorialized in McCollum’s secret memo dated October 7, 1940, and recently obtained through the Freedom of Information Act, the ONI proposal called for eight provocations aimed at Japan. Its centerpiece was keeping the might of the U.S. Fleet based in the Territory of Hawaii as a lure for a Japanese attack. President Roosevelt acted swiftly. The very next day, October 8, 1940, the Commander-in-Chief of the U.S. Fleet, Admiral James O. Richardson, was summoned to the Oval Office and told of the provocative plan by the President. In a heated argument with FDR, the admiral objected to placing his sailors and ships in harm’s way. Richardson was then fired and in his place FDR selected an obscure naval officer, Rear Admiral Husband E. Kimmel, to command the fleet in Hawaii. …
+
Throughout 1941, FDR implemented the remaining seven provocations. … On November 27 and 28, 1941, Admiral Kimmel and General Short were ordered to remain in a defensive posture for “the United States desires that Japan commit the first overt act.” The order came directly from President Roosevelt.
+
Immediately after December 7, 1941, military communications documents that disclose American foreknowledge of the Pearl Harbor disaster were locked in U.S. Navy vaults away from the prying eyes of congressional investigators, historians, and authors. December 7, 1941: A Setup from the Beginning, Robert B. Stinnett, Honolulu Advertiser, December 7, 2000 [8]
Two months before September 11 Osama bin Laden flew to Dubai for 10 days for treatment at the American hospital, where he was visited by the local CIA agent, according to the French newspaper Le Figaro. …Bin Laden is reported to have arrived in Dubai on July 4 from Quetta in Pakistan with his own personal doctor, nurse and four bodyguards, to be treated in the urology department. … The CIA chief was seen in the lift, on his way to see Bin Laden, and later, it is alleged, boasted to friends about his contact. He was recalled to Washington soon afterwards. Intelligence sources say that another CIA agent was also present; CIA agent alleged to have met Bin Laden in July, Anthony Sampson, Thursday November 1, 2001, The Guardian
According to an Oct. 7 story on MSNBC, … [there] was a meeting between senior level federal officials and Lt. Gen. Mahmud Ahmad, head of Pakistan’s intelligence service, the ISI. By treaty, the head of Pakistani intelligence must be approved by the CIA.
+
A few weeks later the general resigned, supposedly because of an organizational situation. Shortly after that, on Oct. 9, the Times of India reported that Ahmad had actually resigned because it was proven that he was responsible for a $100,000 wire transfer from Pakistan to Mohammed Atta. Atta has been named by the FBI as the leader of the 9/11 terrorists.
+
The paper reported that Ahmad instructed an associate, Ahmad Umar Sayeed Sheikh, to make the money transfer. The details of the transaction, and the individuals involved, have been confirmed by the FBI. … According to the Wall Street Journal of Feb. 22, the prime suspect in Pearl’s kidnapping, and now murder, is Ahmad Umar Sayeed Sheikh. This is the same man who has been confirmed as wiring money to the 9/11 terrorists on the instructions of the head of Pakistani intelligence. … We’re in a situation now where there is a direct, straight-line connection between the CIA-approved head of ISI, the 9/11 terrorists, and Daniel Pearl’s grisly murder. Why this is not being shouted out by every network anchor, or seen in 2-inch headlines on every newspaper, can only be explained in one of two ways: Either the media wants to hide the truth, or they’re too stupid to see the connection. FTW doesn’t think they’re that stupid. A Nonpartisan, Non-sectarian, MAP from the Here That Is, Into the Tomorrow of Our Own Making Vol. IV, No. 11, March 1, 2002, Copyright 2001, Michael C. Ruppert
“Yes we knew something was going to happen, no we didn’t know it was Manhattan.” -U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell, CNN HLN side panel, October 3, 2001, 11:37:33
US officials admitted in a meeting of Track 2 diplomats in Europe that an invasi[o]n plan for Afghanistan has been in place 7 weeks before the WTC attack. US military advisors have already prepared bases in Tajikistan for the offensive. The BBC report was attributed to a former Pakistani minister. –BBC shortwave broadcast on 12095 at 3:00pm CT., Sept. 18, 2001 [& Thanks to SLATT]
[General Tommy] Franks said that within hours of the [Sept. 11] attacks, he was given orders to prepare to root out the Taliban in Afghanistan and to capture bin Laden. Gen. Franks Doubts Constitution Will Survive WMD Attack John O. Edwards, NewsMax.com, Friday, Nov. 21, 2003
WASHINGTON (AP) – The White House acknowledged Friday it had a battle plan to topple Osama bin Laden awaiting President Bush’s approval in the days before the Sept. 11 attacks. … A senior U.S. official, speaking on condition of an anonymity, said the options memo was prepared by Bush’s foreign policy team as threats of terrorism spiked. It was dated Sept. 10 and sat on national security adviser Condoleezza Rice’s desk for Bush’s review when the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were struck. White House press secretary Ari Fleischer said the memo recommended dismantling bin Laden’s network “through what you saw put into place frankly, rather quickly in our operations in Afghanistan White House Reveals Pre-9/11 Plan, Fri May 17, 11:17 AM ET, By CHRISTOPHER NEWTON, Associated Press Writer
“It is not civilizations that promote clashes. They occur when old-fashioned leaders look for old-fashioned ways to solve problems by rousing their people to armed confrontation.” -Kenichi Ohmae, The End Of The Nation State, (New York: The Free Press 1995), p. 11.
“Stimson, Marshall, Stark and Harry Hopkins [Army & Navy commanders & Sec. of War & Sec. Navy] had spent most of the night of December 6 at the White House with the President. All were waiting for what they knew was coming: an attack on Pearl Harbor. The comedy of errors on the sixth and seventh appears incredible. It only makes sense if it was a charade, and Roosevelt and the inner circle had known about the attack [on Pearl Harbor in advance].” -1971 Pulitzer Prize winning establishmentarian historian Jonathan Toland, Infamy: Pearl Harbor and its Aftermath (1981)
Rep. Cynthia McKinney (D-Ga.) is calling for an investigation into whether President Bush and other government officials had advance notice of terrorist attacks on Sept. 11 but did nothing to prevent them. … McKinney said: “We know there were numerous warnings of the events to come on September 11th. . . . What did this administration know and when did it know it, about the events of September 11th? Who else knew, and why did they not warn the innocent people of New York who were needlessly murdered? None of McKinney’s colleagues has embraced her allegations, but a few said they are familiar with the theories. “I’ve heard a number of people say it,” said Rep. Melvin Watt (D-N.C.), who quickly added, “I can’t say that it would be a widely held view” among lawmakers. Democrat Implies Sept. 11 Administration Plot, By Juliet Eilperin, Washington Post Staff Writer, Friday, April 12, 2002, Page A16
David Schippers: Government Had Prior Knowledge of Pending Terrorist Attacks. The following interview is with David Schippers, who served as Chief Council for The United States House of Representatives Managers for the Impeachment Trial of President Clinton. Hang in there, and fasten your seat belt! “DS:” means it’s a quote from David Schippers, “AJ:” means a quote from the interviewer, Alex Jones. -LRW
DS: ….frankly, when I first heard the information, I just poo-pooed it, as did everybody else – they thought here comes another one of those crazy conspiracy theories, you know. … Have you ever heard of Ysolf Bodansky (sp)? … He is the guy that wrote the book about Bin Laden. He was hooked up with some Congressional leaders in the House – kind of an unofficial, for lack of a better word, a strike force, a task force on terrorism. They sent out a warning on February 19, 1995, saying there was going to be a massive attack by the terrorists in the heartland of the United States and it was going to be a federal facility. [The OK City Murrah building became the final target -LRW] Everybody ignored it. By the way, I have seen that warning, I have seen that warning. …there was in that warning that there was going to be a massive attack in Washington – it took them six years to do it. The targets were going to be Washington, the White House and the Capitol Building. – And that they were going to use airliners to attack them.
+
AJ: Now later you got it from FBI agents in Chicago and Minnesota that there was going to [be] an attack on lower Manhattan.
+
DS: Yea – and that’s what started me calling. …I sent them information and nobody cared. It was always, “We’ll get back to you”, “we’ll get back to you”, “we’ll get back to you.” …I used people who were personal friends of John Ashcroft to try to get him. …The next morning I got a call. It wasn’t from Ashcroft. It was from somebody in the Justice Dept.
+
AJ: One of his handlers.
+
DS: Yea, …He said, “We don’t start our investigations at the top. Let me look into this and I will get back to you.” As I sit here today, I have never heard from him. …
+
AJ: You’re calling up. You’ve got these FBI agents and others feeding you this information. They’re being pulled off the cases, they’re angry. That’s even been in the news now, from Minnesota and Florida and Illinois. They know what’s going to happen. The Sudanese in ’96 and ’98 tried to arrest Bin Laden for Clinton, tried to give us the names of Al Qaeda [“al Qaeda translates as “The Base” -LRW], Clinton wouldn’t take it.
+
DS: Didn’t want any part of it.
+
AJ: Wouldn’t touch it. So we’ve got all this developing. We’ve got police officers and FBI on the ground who know who bombed Oklahoma City. They’ve got them in custody with blue jogging suits and bomb-making components. They are ordered to release them. All of this is unfolding – 3500 to 5000 Iraqi Republican Guard (living near OKC), [9] we know there is a Saddam/Iraqi connection here – I mean they knew this. Why in the world, David Schippers, did they allow this to take place?
+
DS: I’ll tell you something. This one of the things that, to me, it is almost inconceivable, inconceivable that with the knowledge they had that they would turn their back.
+
… AJ: I’m sure you are aware that on the History Channel, they are reporting that we had prior knowledge of the Japanese attack [on Pearl Harbor] and they allowed that to take place.
+
DS: Sure.
+
AJ: And now you see the UN empowered, the World Court empowered. … The face scanning cameras – now they are on the fast track. This has sure brought the police state into a lot more focus.
+
DS: It sure has. I’ve been saying for years that once you have license, the next step is tyranny. It really is scary. The whole thing is scary. Remember the Palmer raids when they had the Reds scare in the early twentieth century and they just went out and rounded up everybody and threw them in jails and deported them. Our freedoms took a real hit. I hope to God that we don’t run into the same thing this time. The people are saying, “I want to be safe.” Who was it, Ben Franklin said if you give up your liberties for security, you will eventually lose both your liberties and your security. [10]…The whole thing is unbelievable. You know, I talk to people who are in the media, people who are well aware of what is going on and they cannot believe that this is happening. Alex Jones Interviews David Schippers: Government Had Prior Knowledge of Pending Terrorist Attacks www.infowars.com, From The Alex Jones Show interview with David Schippers, Chief Council for The United States House of Representatives Managers for the Impeachment Trial of President Clinton 10/10/01
An active agent with the Federal Bureau of Investigation has filed a complaint with a public-interest law firm alleging that Justice Department and FBI supervisory personnel have either mishandled or interfered with anti-terrorism investigations in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks. According to officials with Judicial Watch, a Washington, D.C.-based firm that investigates alleged government corruption, the special agent — who asked not to be identified — claims he was retaliated against when he continued to push for and pursue certain terrorist investigations over the objections of his FBI and Justice Department supervisors. The agent alleges that had certain investigations been allowed to run their courses, wanted Saudi terrorist Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaida network may have been prevented from carrying out the Sept. 11 attacks that have left nearly 5,000 people dead. DAY OF INFAMY 2001: Obstruction in terror investigations? FBI agent alleges feds stopped probes that may have prevented 9-11, Jon Dougherty, WorldNetDaily.com, THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 15, 2001
CONCLUSIONS:
War is just a racket. A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of people. Only a small inside group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few at the expense of the masses. — Excerpt from a speech delivered in 1933, by Major General Smedley Butler, USMC
“Between September 6 and 7, the Chicago Board Options Exchange saw purchases of 4,744 put options [betting UAL stock would drop -lrw] on United Airlines, but only 396 call options… Assuming that 4,000 of the options were bought by people with advance knowledge of the imminent attacks, these “insiders” would have profited by almost $5 million. On September 10, 4,516 put options on American Airlines were bought on the Chicago exchange, compared to only 748 calls.” … [The levels of put options purchased above were more than six times higher than normal.]” -Suppressed Details of Criminal Insider Trading lead directly into the CIA`s Highest Ranks — CIA Executive Director “Buzzy” Krongard managed Firm that handled “put” Options on UAL, Michael C. Ruppert FTW Publications, 9 October 2001
“Now, as nearly as I can make out, those fellows in the CIA don’t just report on wars and the like, they go out and make their own, and there’s nobody to keep track of what they’re up to. They spend billions of dollars on stirring up trouble so they’ll have something to report on. They’ve become … it’s become a government all of its own and all secret. They don’t have to account to anybody.” –U.S. President Harry Truman, who created the C.I.A.
Sadly, it’s not just Vietnam, Iraq, Afganistan, etc., They Lied Us Into War, All of Them – Antiwar.com.
And what’s worse – – –
The United States (Government) hasn’t been legally at war since September 12, 1945, when the Japanese forces in Southeast Asia surrendered to Allied Commander Louis Mountbatten in Singapore, ending World War II.
+
That’s right, the Korean “War,” the Vietnam “War,” the first Iraq “War,” the second Iraq “War” (deceptively named Operation Iraqi Freedom), Libya, Syria, and the Afghanistan “War” aren’t wars. At least not according to the U.S. Constitution – which document explains the only way U.S. wars are supposed to happen. Maybe this time the law DOES matter – « Antiwar.com
“I am not a ‘democrat’ only because ‘humility’ and equality are spiritual principles corrupted by the attempt to mechanize and formalize them, with the result that we get not universal smallness and humility, but universal greatness and pride, till some Orc gets hold of a ring of power–and then we get and are getting slavery” –J.R.R. Tolkien
Here for updates, additions, comments, and corrections.
AND, “Like,” “Tweet,” and otherwise, pass this along!
NOTES:
[1] Bin Laden urges Pakistanis to fight “Crusader” Americans. -FOX NEWS banner, September 24, 2001, 10:31:11 return
[2] Taliban demands Americans leave the Gulf and stop helping Israel against the Palestinians, which isn’t fair. -FOX NEWS, September 24, 2001, 10:37:35 return
[3] Reuters: 82% [of Pakistani’s] regard Ossama bin Laden as a Holy Warrior and not a terrorist. -FOX NEWS banner, October 15, 2001, 15:39:08 return
[4] They later changed the name from “Operation Infinite Justice” to “Operation Enduring Freedom” because the former name implied usurping Allah’s prerogatives. return
[5] Originally from http://www.newnetizen.com/bilderberg/mediaprotects.htm, successor to the legendary populist newspaper, The Spotlight, run out of business by nuisance law suits filed by ADL & Bn’ai Birith return
[6] The USS Cole was blown up last year and, strangely, several observers claimed the attackers saluted the sailors just before the explosion. return
[7] THIS IS AN ABSOLUTE CLASSIC MUST-READ INCREDIBLY ENTERTAINING HISTORY LESSON, BEGINNING WITH THE ROMAN CRASSUS, WHO’S NOTORIOUS BEHAVIOR IS MEMORIALIZED IN THE WORD “CRASS,” APPROPRIATELY DERIVED DIRECTLY FROM HIS NAME. -LRW] return
[8] Robert B. Stinnett has worked as a journalist for the Oakland Tribune and the BBC, and is the author of the book, Day of Deceit: The Truth about FDR and Pearl Harbor (Free Press, 2000). This article is adapted from his presentation before the Independent Policy Forum held earlier this year at The Independent Institute in Oakland, California. return
[9] THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 13. LET’S TRY TO TIE A FEW THINGS TOGETHER. Who carried out the WTC/Pentagon attacks? Was it bin Laden? Was it a group of Iraqi ex-Republican Guard soldiers who had been brought to the US by Buqh and/or Clinton, in “thanks” for their covert support against Saddam in the US-Iraq war? Was the attack run by Pakistan using the Taliban and bin Laden? (By the way, some of these Republican Guard soldiers settled in Oklahoma City, and a fomer NBC reporter, Jayna Davis, believes that at least one of them was involved in the OKC bombing.) – Jon Rappoport, nomorefakenews.com, Sept. 13, 2001 return
[10] “They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”– Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania (1759) (-LRW) return
