The key to the politics of the next decade and Labour's chance to speak for the majority lie here, in this article on how the super rich are the only group who has benefited from the last years of neoliberalism. Essentially the great majority have fallen behind as the top 1% shoot off into space with all the money. It requires a very big U-turn from New labour's embrace of the super-rich. Does Miliband gets it? The Greens, or some other party, might just steal a march if he doesn't. Look what happened in Scotland.
Meantime Jim Rogers, the great/ devilish American speculator, was interviewed on BBC World Service and declared time on the dollar due to America's unsupportable debt burden. He said the day when the greenback ceased to be the world reserve currency was not far off - and there was no obvious replacement; neither the euro or the yuan could replace it. Oh, and the oil was officially running out. What struck me was his view that politicians are only thinking about the election cycle, not long-term, hence their inability to get to grips with deep structural problems. Interesting times ahead.
Friday, 20 May 2011
Thursday, 12 May 2011
Guardian deletes my comment on ISI 9/11 link
Why would The Guardian 'moderator' delete this comment on its article about the ISI Who's side is the ISI on?
I am actually quite angry about that as all I did was report facts that have been known for years and in the public domain and admitted by officials. Perhaps these facts are too sensitive in the context of western journalists working in Pakistan - some of whom have paid the ultimate cost for their efforts.
See below:
In his informative piece about the ISI, Declan Walsh does not address the critical facts around the visit of then ISI chief Mahmud Ahmed to the US from 4 September 2001 through to 9/11 - when he met the CIA chief George Tenet, and US Senators Porter Goss and Bob Graham among other security and intelligence officials - and the explosive allegation of The Times of India (12 October 2001) that Ahmed ordered the wiring of $100,000 to lead 9/11 hijacker Mohammed Atta. That story has since been excised from the internet, although there are many references to it. The source appears to have been Indian intelligence. The FBI is also reported to have confirmed that Ahmed did order Omar Sheikh (the killer of Daniel Pearl) to make the transfer to the leader of the 9/11 hijackers.
This is the most important incriminating fact against the ISi in its whole history. If it is true, then it surely bears repeating now following the death of Bin Laden.
Ahmed has been kept in seclusion in Pakistan ever since. He must know a thing or two about ISI's secrets, and those of the CIA, around who knew what about the 9/11 plot. Following the 9/11 attacks, the ISI-created Taliban said they would only hand over Bin Laden if the Americans provided proof that Bin Laden was involved. The Americans refused.
Link to Asia Times story of 2004.
On the morning of September 11, Mahmoud was having a breakfast meeting at the Capitol with Graham and Goss. Goss spent as many as 10 years working on numerous CIA clandestine operations. He is very close to Vice President Dick Cheney. It's interesting to note that two weeks ago Goss suggested to the Justice Department to bring perjury charges against the new Cheney nemesis, Clarke. As it is widely known, Graham and Goss were co-heads of the joint House-Senate investigation that proclaimed there was "no smoking gun" as far as President George W Bush having any advance knowledge of September 11.
According to the Washington Post, and also to sources in Islamabad, the Mahmoud-Graham-Goss meeting lasted until the second plane hit Tower 2 of the World Trade Center. Graham later said they were talking about terrorism coming from Afghanistan, which means they were talking about bin Laden.
Pakistani intelligence sources told Asia Times Online that on the afternoon of September 11 itself, as well as on September 12 and 13, Armitage met with Mahmoud with a stark choice: either Pakistan would help the US against al-Qaeda, or it would be bombed back to the Stone Age. Secretary of State Colin Powell presented an ultimatum in the form of seven US demands. Pakistan accepted all of them. One of the demands was for Musharraf to send Mahmoud to Kandahar again and force the Taliban to extradite bin Laden. Mahmoud knew in advance Mullah Omar would refuse. But when he went to Kandahar the Taliban leader said he would accept, as long as the Americans proved bin Laden was responsible for September 11. There was no proof, and Afghanistan was bombed anyway, a policy already decided well in advance.
I am actually quite angry about that as all I did was report facts that have been known for years and in the public domain and admitted by officials. Perhaps these facts are too sensitive in the context of western journalists working in Pakistan - some of whom have paid the ultimate cost for their efforts.
See below:
In his informative piece about the ISI, Declan Walsh does not address the critical facts around the visit of then ISI chief Mahmud Ahmed to the US from 4 September 2001 through to 9/11 - when he met the CIA chief George Tenet, and US Senators Porter Goss and Bob Graham among other security and intelligence officials - and the explosive allegation of The Times of India (12 October 2001) that Ahmed ordered the wiring of $100,000 to lead 9/11 hijacker Mohammed Atta. That story has since been excised from the internet, although there are many references to it. The source appears to have been Indian intelligence. The FBI is also reported to have confirmed that Ahmed did order Omar Sheikh (the killer of Daniel Pearl) to make the transfer to the leader of the 9/11 hijackers.
This is the most important incriminating fact against the ISi in its whole history. If it is true, then it surely bears repeating now following the death of Bin Laden.
Ahmed has been kept in seclusion in Pakistan ever since. He must know a thing or two about ISI's secrets, and those of the CIA, around who knew what about the 9/11 plot. Following the 9/11 attacks, the ISI-created Taliban said they would only hand over Bin Laden if the Americans provided proof that Bin Laden was involved. The Americans refused.
Link to Asia Times story of 2004.
On the morning of September 11, Mahmoud was having a breakfast meeting at the Capitol with Graham and Goss. Goss spent as many as 10 years working on numerous CIA clandestine operations. He is very close to Vice President Dick Cheney. It's interesting to note that two weeks ago Goss suggested to the Justice Department to bring perjury charges against the new Cheney nemesis, Clarke. As it is widely known, Graham and Goss were co-heads of the joint House-Senate investigation that proclaimed there was "no smoking gun" as far as President George W Bush having any advance knowledge of September 11.
According to the Washington Post, and also to sources in Islamabad, the Mahmoud-Graham-Goss meeting lasted until the second plane hit Tower 2 of the World Trade Center. Graham later said they were talking about terrorism coming from Afghanistan, which means they were talking about bin Laden.
Pakistani intelligence sources told Asia Times Online that on the afternoon of September 11 itself, as well as on September 12 and 13, Armitage met with Mahmoud with a stark choice: either Pakistan would help the US against al-Qaeda, or it would be bombed back to the Stone Age. Secretary of State Colin Powell presented an ultimatum in the form of seven US demands. Pakistan accepted all of them. One of the demands was for Musharraf to send Mahmoud to Kandahar again and force the Taliban to extradite bin Laden. Mahmoud knew in advance Mullah Omar would refuse. But when he went to Kandahar the Taliban leader said he would accept, as long as the Americans proved bin Laden was responsible for September 11. There was no proof, and Afghanistan was bombed anyway, a policy already decided well in advance.
Bin Laden Sons Say U.S. Broke International Law
NEW YORK TIMES — The adult sons of Osama bin Laden have lashed out at President Obama in their first public reaction to their father’s death, accusing the United States of violating its basic legal principles by killing an unarmed man, shooting his family members and disposing of his body in the sea.
The statement, provided to The New York Times on Tuesday, said the family was asking why Bin Laden, the leader of Al Qaeda, “was not arrested and tried in a court of law so that truth is revealed to the people of the world.”
Citing the trials of Saddam Hussein, the former Iraqi leader, and Slobodan Milosevic, the former Serbian leader, the statement questioned “the propriety of such assassination where not only international law has been blatantly violated,” but the principles of presumption of innocence and the right to a fair trial were ignored.
“We maintain that arbitrary killing is not a solution to political problems,” the statement said, adding that “justice must be seen to be done.”
The statement, prepared at the direction of Omar bin Laden, who had publicly denounced his father’s terrorism, was provided to The Times by Jean Sasson, an American author who helped the younger Mr. Bin Laden write a 2009 memoir, “Growing Up bin Laden.” A shorter, slightly different statement was posted on jihadist Web sites.
The statement, provided to The New York Times on Tuesday, said the family was asking why Bin Laden, the leader of Al Qaeda, “was not arrested and tried in a court of law so that truth is revealed to the people of the world.”
Citing the trials of Saddam Hussein, the former Iraqi leader, and Slobodan Milosevic, the former Serbian leader, the statement questioned “the propriety of such assassination where not only international law has been blatantly violated,” but the principles of presumption of innocence and the right to a fair trial were ignored.
“We maintain that arbitrary killing is not a solution to political problems,” the statement said, adding that “justice must be seen to be done.”
The statement, prepared at the direction of Omar bin Laden, who had publicly denounced his father’s terrorism, was provided to The Times by Jean Sasson, an American author who helped the younger Mr. Bin Laden write a 2009 memoir, “Growing Up bin Laden.” A shorter, slightly different statement was posted on jihadist Web sites.
Wednesday, 11 May 2011
The Chertoff story
Michael Chertoff, the former homeland security chief who’s not been shy about exploiting terrorist threats for the benefit of his clients, has decided to join a top defense contractor that defrauded the U.S. government.
The one-time head of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) under President George W. Bush is now a board member of BAE Systems, the United Kingdom-based defense corporation that agreed to pay $447 million in fines to the American and British governments to settle allegations of corruption, including bribing a top Saudi Arabian official.
BAE is the eighth-largest contractor doing business with Washington, having received $7.1 billion in government contracts in 2009 alone. It also has received more than $200 million from DHS since 2005.
Following the attempted bombing of a Northwest Airlines flight on Christmas Day, Chertoff was seen on television calling for the government to buy full-body scanners for airport checkpoints. Chertoff failed to mention in numerous interviews that his consulting business represented the company, Rapiscan Systems, that makes the scanners.
Chertoff family connections
The March 2005 issue of Popular Mechanics (PM) carried a piece by senior researcher, 25-year-old Benjamin Chertoff, a cover story entitled "Debunking 9/11 Lies" which seeks to discredit all independent 9/11 research that challenges the official version of events.
"Conspiracy theories can't stand up to the hard facts," the cover reads. "After an in-depth investigation, PM answers with the truth," it says. But the article fails to provide evidence to support its claims and doesn't answer the key question: What caused the collapses of the twin towers and the 47-story World Trade Center 7?
The lead editorial by James Meigs, Editor-in-Chief of PM carries the title "The Lies Are Out There." It continues: "As a society we accept the basic premise that a group of Islamist terrorists hijacked four airplanes and turned them into weapons against us."
But do we, "as a society" accept this basic premise? None of the 19 "Islamist terrorists" were even found on the passenger lists that day.
"Sadly," Meigs continues, "the noble search for truth is now being hijacked by a growing army of conspiracy theorists."
The Meigs' editorial concludes, "But those who peddle fantasies that this country encouraged, permitted or actually carried out the attacks are libeling the truth – and disgracing the memories of the thousands who died on that day."
Nobody says that the United States of America did anything on 9/11, Mr. Meigs. "This country," the USA doesn't do anything, Mr. Meigs, people do. In the case of 9/11 we are dealing with a very small group of people, perhaps no more than a dozen or so at the highest "architectural" level, and there is no guarantee that they are from any one country – most likely they are not.
The Chertoff article goes on to confront the "poisonous claims" of 16 "myths" spun by "extremist" 9/11 researchers like myself with "irrefutable facts," mostly provided by individuals in the employ of the U.S. government.
But who is Benjamin Chertoff, the "senior researcher" at Popular Mechanics who is behind the article? American Free Press has learned that he is none other than a cousin of Michael Chertoff, the new Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security.
This means that Hearst paid Benjamin Chertoff to write an article supporting the seriously flawed explanation that is based on a practically non-existent investigation of the terror event that directly led to the creation of the massive national security department his "cousin" now heads. This is exactly the kind of "journalism" one would expect to find in a dictatorship like that of Saddam Hussein's Iraq.
Because the manager of public relations for Popular Mechanics didn't respond to repeated calls from American Free Press, I called Benjamin Chertoff, the magazine's "senior researcher," directly.
Chertoff said he was the "senior researcher" of the piece. When asked if he was related to Michael Chertoff, he said, "I don't know." Clearly uncomfortable about discussing the matter further, he told me that all questions about the article should be put to the publicist – the one who never answers the phone.
Benjamin's mother in Pelham, New York, however, was more willing to talk. Asked if Benjamin was related to the new Secretary of Homeland Security, Judy said, "Yes, of course, he is a cousin."
Chertoff and 9/11
During the period before and after the terror attacks of September 11, 2001, Chertoff headed the criminal division at the Department of Justice where he "helped trace the 9/11 terrorist attacks to the al-Qaida network."
Chertoff became Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division, by a vote of 95-1 on May 24, 2001. The dissenting vote came from Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (D – N.Y.).
In this position Chertoff was architect of some of the most controversial elements of the Bush administration's domestic war on terrorism and played a central role in formulating the Bush administration's "anti-terrorism policy." He defended the administration's decisions to hold military tribunals for non-U.S. suspect terrorists and to monitor phone conversations between attorneys and their clients.
Chertoff oversaw the detention of 762 foreign nationals for minor immigration violations, although none was charged with a terrorism-related crime. The detention of hundreds of people was necessary to detect "sleeper cells" of terrorists, he said.
"Chertoff headed the Justice Department's criminal division when hundreds of foreigners were swept up on minor charges and held for an average of 80 days," The Washington Post reported. "Some detainees were denied their right to see a lawyer, were not told of the charges against them, or were physically abused."
At the same time, Chertoff allowed scores of suspected Israeli terrorists and spies to quietly return to Israel. In several cases, Israeli suspects working for phoney moving companies, such as Urban Moving Systems from Weehawken, N.J., were caught driving moving vans which tested positive for explosives. On September 14, Dominic Suter, the owner of the moving company, which was found to be a Mossad front company, fled to Israel after FBI agents requested a second interview.
One group of 5 Israelis was seen on the roof of Urban Moving Systems videotaping and celebrating the destruction of the World Trade Center. These Israeli agents were returned to Israel on visa violations.
These Israeli suspects, and others, who had apparently transported explosives in the New York area, were allowed to return to Israel without being properly interrogated or their presence and activities in the United States having been vigorously investigated.
The one-time head of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) under President George W. Bush is now a board member of BAE Systems, the United Kingdom-based defense corporation that agreed to pay $447 million in fines to the American and British governments to settle allegations of corruption, including bribing a top Saudi Arabian official.
BAE is the eighth-largest contractor doing business with Washington, having received $7.1 billion in government contracts in 2009 alone. It also has received more than $200 million from DHS since 2005.
Following the attempted bombing of a Northwest Airlines flight on Christmas Day, Chertoff was seen on television calling for the government to buy full-body scanners for airport checkpoints. Chertoff failed to mention in numerous interviews that his consulting business represented the company, Rapiscan Systems, that makes the scanners.
Chertoff family connections
The March 2005 issue of Popular Mechanics (PM) carried a piece by senior researcher, 25-year-old Benjamin Chertoff, a cover story entitled "Debunking 9/11 Lies" which seeks to discredit all independent 9/11 research that challenges the official version of events.
"Conspiracy theories can't stand up to the hard facts," the cover reads. "After an in-depth investigation, PM answers with the truth," it says. But the article fails to provide evidence to support its claims and doesn't answer the key question: What caused the collapses of the twin towers and the 47-story World Trade Center 7?
The lead editorial by James Meigs, Editor-in-Chief of PM carries the title "The Lies Are Out There." It continues: "As a society we accept the basic premise that a group of Islamist terrorists hijacked four airplanes and turned them into weapons against us."
But do we, "as a society" accept this basic premise? None of the 19 "Islamist terrorists" were even found on the passenger lists that day.
"Sadly," Meigs continues, "the noble search for truth is now being hijacked by a growing army of conspiracy theorists."
The Meigs' editorial concludes, "But those who peddle fantasies that this country encouraged, permitted or actually carried out the attacks are libeling the truth – and disgracing the memories of the thousands who died on that day."
Nobody says that the United States of America did anything on 9/11, Mr. Meigs. "This country," the USA doesn't do anything, Mr. Meigs, people do. In the case of 9/11 we are dealing with a very small group of people, perhaps no more than a dozen or so at the highest "architectural" level, and there is no guarantee that they are from any one country – most likely they are not.
The Chertoff article goes on to confront the "poisonous claims" of 16 "myths" spun by "extremist" 9/11 researchers like myself with "irrefutable facts," mostly provided by individuals in the employ of the U.S. government.
But who is Benjamin Chertoff, the "senior researcher" at Popular Mechanics who is behind the article? American Free Press has learned that he is none other than a cousin of Michael Chertoff, the new Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security.
This means that Hearst paid Benjamin Chertoff to write an article supporting the seriously flawed explanation that is based on a practically non-existent investigation of the terror event that directly led to the creation of the massive national security department his "cousin" now heads. This is exactly the kind of "journalism" one would expect to find in a dictatorship like that of Saddam Hussein's Iraq.
Because the manager of public relations for Popular Mechanics didn't respond to repeated calls from American Free Press, I called Benjamin Chertoff, the magazine's "senior researcher," directly.
Chertoff said he was the "senior researcher" of the piece. When asked if he was related to Michael Chertoff, he said, "I don't know." Clearly uncomfortable about discussing the matter further, he told me that all questions about the article should be put to the publicist – the one who never answers the phone.
Benjamin's mother in Pelham, New York, however, was more willing to talk. Asked if Benjamin was related to the new Secretary of Homeland Security, Judy said, "Yes, of course, he is a cousin."
Chertoff and 9/11
During the period before and after the terror attacks of September 11, 2001, Chertoff headed the criminal division at the Department of Justice where he "helped trace the 9/11 terrorist attacks to the al-Qaida network."
Chertoff became Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division, by a vote of 95-1 on May 24, 2001. The dissenting vote came from Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (D – N.Y.).
In this position Chertoff was architect of some of the most controversial elements of the Bush administration's domestic war on terrorism and played a central role in formulating the Bush administration's "anti-terrorism policy." He defended the administration's decisions to hold military tribunals for non-U.S. suspect terrorists and to monitor phone conversations between attorneys and their clients.
Chertoff oversaw the detention of 762 foreign nationals for minor immigration violations, although none was charged with a terrorism-related crime. The detention of hundreds of people was necessary to detect "sleeper cells" of terrorists, he said.
"Chertoff headed the Justice Department's criminal division when hundreds of foreigners were swept up on minor charges and held for an average of 80 days," The Washington Post reported. "Some detainees were denied their right to see a lawyer, were not told of the charges against them, or were physically abused."
At the same time, Chertoff allowed scores of suspected Israeli terrorists and spies to quietly return to Israel. In several cases, Israeli suspects working for phoney moving companies, such as Urban Moving Systems from Weehawken, N.J., were caught driving moving vans which tested positive for explosives. On September 14, Dominic Suter, the owner of the moving company, which was found to be a Mossad front company, fled to Israel after FBI agents requested a second interview.
One group of 5 Israelis was seen on the roof of Urban Moving Systems videotaping and celebrating the destruction of the World Trade Center. These Israeli agents were returned to Israel on visa violations.
These Israeli suspects, and others, who had apparently transported explosives in the New York area, were allowed to return to Israel without being properly interrogated or their presence and activities in the United States having been vigorously investigated.
Newsnight - a neoliberal ghetto
Dear Newsnight
I saw the panel item on Newsnight last night with 2 bankers and a Cardiff business economist saying Greece will have to privatise everything and needs a dose of Thatcherism to sort out its bloated public sector. Perhaps the Greeks were able to speak beforehand - I did not see this. Paxman did not question this guests at all as they explained Greece was like the UK in the 70s. "Oh I didn't realise it was that bad," he quipped.
Why don't we so rarely see people from the countries involved on the programme? What is it with this reliance on 'experts'? Who do they represent?
Last week Paxman interviewed Michael Chertoff, ex chief of Homeland Security, about the Bin Laden killing. He treated this man with great respect even though most people realise Chertoff is a Bush croney who has a highly questionable record in his various roles and made a great deal of money out of providing airport security technology through his own companies.
Newsnight is like a rightwing neliberal thinktank these days. This is something I have discussed with friends. I was a fan until about 2 years ago when I realised how rarely the editors let anyone heterodox or normal on the programme.
I now rely on online sources, Al Jazeera, Russia Today and other sources. I just think you need to get out more, much as I am sure you work very, very hard.
These panels are deadly dull. More investigative reporters and more unorthodox or heterodox guests to balance things up and Newsnight could become interesting again,
Regards
Joe
I saw the panel item on Newsnight last night with 2 bankers and a Cardiff business economist saying Greece will have to privatise everything and needs a dose of Thatcherism to sort out its bloated public sector. Perhaps the Greeks were able to speak beforehand - I did not see this. Paxman did not question this guests at all as they explained Greece was like the UK in the 70s. "Oh I didn't realise it was that bad," he quipped.
Why don't we so rarely see people from the countries involved on the programme? What is it with this reliance on 'experts'? Who do they represent?
Last week Paxman interviewed Michael Chertoff, ex chief of Homeland Security, about the Bin Laden killing. He treated this man with great respect even though most people realise Chertoff is a Bush croney who has a highly questionable record in his various roles and made a great deal of money out of providing airport security technology through his own companies.
Newsnight is like a rightwing neliberal thinktank these days. This is something I have discussed with friends. I was a fan until about 2 years ago when I realised how rarely the editors let anyone heterodox or normal on the programme.
I now rely on online sources, Al Jazeera, Russia Today and other sources. I just think you need to get out more, much as I am sure you work very, very hard.
These panels are deadly dull. More investigative reporters and more unorthodox or heterodox guests to balance things up and Newsnight could become interesting again,
Regards
Joe
Tuesday, 10 May 2011
The slaughter of innocent Iraqis - and jubilation at his death
No nation suffered more at the hands of Al Qaeda than Iraq - Pakistan is a distant second. It is true that the US occupation effectively unleashed this terror, but it was a terror supported and created by Al Qaeda in Iraq. So one can understand the jubilation of this Iraqi blogger Nidhal Al-Nakkash on the news of OBL's death.
Now you talk about unarmed man who has been killed among his children and family??? Now you are all HONEST DECENT people who DEFEND JUSTICE???? Where have you been and where are you when till this moment innocent IRAQIS are slaughtered by Bin Laden's men ,,,WE in Iraq have never been in such blood baths and massacres ,,, this devil should not only be killed but he should be torn to pieces ...Have you seen what have happened to us in Iraq ,,dirty work of this bloody criminal had cut heads of innocent young girls ,,women,,,young men,,children ,,infants,,, all sorts of human being ,,,and NOW you are defending him ,,PLEASE give us a break ,,BE HUMAN for a moment and NEVER ever say that killing him was unfair or against the Islamic law ,,,what do you all know of Islam ,,,??? YOU have misinterpreted Islam because you have been following this devil who has distorted and stained the name of Islam ,,,He & all his Salafi followers have changed this beautiful merciful peaceful religion into a religion of TERROR & EVIL ,,,of SLAUGHTERING & CRIMES ,,,from a good religion into a taboo - I wonder why do you defend him ...have you ever had your country destructed ? your wealth stolen ? your people slaughtered & are still being slaughtered every day ,,,,have you lost your job, your house,,everything ,,,PLEASE STOP PREACHING ,,,you are such a hypocrite and a big liar ,,to talk about this subject I wish you answer me I wish I can see you and show you our misery because of this BLOODY CRIMINAL WHO CALLS HIMSELF A MUSLIM ,,
Today is THE day ,,,it is the day of victory of justice against malignancy , a day of jubilation , a day of happiness ,, the death of the most evil terrorist man in the world - Osama Bin Laden who has distorted the name of Islam and who had changed the name of the peaceful and most merciful religion into a name of terror and evil ,, this criminal and his followers have killed and slaughtered millions of people all over the world ,,, if it wasn't because of him and his terror - America would NOT have invaded Iraq ,,, nor has the world changed into a place of terror ,,, he & his followers has all the means to spread thier malignant ideas by brain washing simple ignorant youth and poisoning their brains to join their movement and he became an icon for Jihad ( which is NOT by any means the truth of what they were doing) ,,,all his crimes has nothing to do with Jihad ,,, he has misinterpreted teh Qur'an and thus he has attracted a large number of ignorant into his movement - the Salafis and Wahabis who have distorted Islam - the religion of PEACE & MERCY into a religion of terror ; thus he kept his crimes by the help and support of the Saudi Arabia in order to distract the west away from the real reason which is to aid Israel and USA in controlling the Arab world and keeping the Saudis in save and protected status ,,, what an evil plan ,,, now that the USA has killed Osama Bin Laden - what will the Saudis say???
I am sure now they will change their attitude ; however , they will surely say that they are happy on the other hand they will work silently and in secret to avenge his killing: how? By supporting his followers and helping them carry on their dirty crmes against humanity ,,,Anyway TODAY is the most important day in the world ,,, it is a HISTORICAL day wherein good overcomes bad; justice overcomes ,,righteous deeds against criminal malicious evil ..
THANKS TO THE ALMIGHTY ALLAH without WHOSE WORK ,,this act will not have been don e
Thanks to the American troops who helped in killing this outrageous devil
It is a day for the world to celebrate and it is a day of jubilation and joy
Let us hope that the WORLD will be more PEACEFUL
Now you talk about unarmed man who has been killed among his children and family??? Now you are all HONEST DECENT people who DEFEND JUSTICE???? Where have you been and where are you when till this moment innocent IRAQIS are slaughtered by Bin Laden's men ,,,WE in Iraq have never been in such blood baths and massacres ,,, this devil should not only be killed but he should be torn to pieces ...Have you seen what have happened to us in Iraq ,,dirty work of this bloody criminal had cut heads of innocent young girls ,,women,,,young men,,children ,,infants,,, all sorts of human being ,,,and NOW you are defending him ,,PLEASE give us a break ,,BE HUMAN for a moment and NEVER ever say that killing him was unfair or against the Islamic law ,,,what do you all know of Islam ,,,??? YOU have misinterpreted Islam because you have been following this devil who has distorted and stained the name of Islam ,,,He & all his Salafi followers have changed this beautiful merciful peaceful religion into a religion of TERROR & EVIL ,,,of SLAUGHTERING & CRIMES ,,,from a good religion into a taboo - I wonder why do you defend him ...have you ever had your country destructed ? your wealth stolen ? your people slaughtered & are still being slaughtered every day ,,,,have you lost your job, your house,,everything ,,,PLEASE STOP PREACHING ,,,you are such a hypocrite and a big liar ,,to talk about this subject I wish you answer me I wish I can see you and show you our misery because of this BLOODY CRIMINAL WHO CALLS HIMSELF A MUSLIM ,,
Today is THE day ,,,it is the day of victory of justice against malignancy , a day of jubilation , a day of happiness ,, the death of the most evil terrorist man in the world - Osama Bin Laden who has distorted the name of Islam and who had changed the name of the peaceful and most merciful religion into a name of terror and evil ,, this criminal and his followers have killed and slaughtered millions of people all over the world ,,, if it wasn't because of him and his terror - America would NOT have invaded Iraq ,,, nor has the world changed into a place of terror ,,, he & his followers has all the means to spread thier malignant ideas by brain washing simple ignorant youth and poisoning their brains to join their movement and he became an icon for Jihad ( which is NOT by any means the truth of what they were doing) ,,,all his crimes has nothing to do with Jihad ,,, he has misinterpreted teh Qur'an and thus he has attracted a large number of ignorant into his movement - the Salafis and Wahabis who have distorted Islam - the religion of PEACE & MERCY into a religion of terror ; thus he kept his crimes by the help and support of the Saudi Arabia in order to distract the west away from the real reason which is to aid Israel and USA in controlling the Arab world and keeping the Saudis in save and protected status ,,, what an evil plan ,,, now that the USA has killed Osama Bin Laden - what will the Saudis say???
I am sure now they will change their attitude ; however , they will surely say that they are happy on the other hand they will work silently and in secret to avenge his killing: how? By supporting his followers and helping them carry on their dirty crmes against humanity ,,,Anyway TODAY is the most important day in the world ,,, it is a HISTORICAL day wherein good overcomes bad; justice overcomes ,,righteous deeds against criminal malicious evil ..
THANKS TO THE ALMIGHTY ALLAH without WHOSE WORK ,,this act will not have been don e
Thanks to the American troops who helped in killing this outrageous devil
It is a day for the world to celebrate and it is a day of jubilation and joy
Let us hope that the WORLD will be more PEACEFUL
Breaking News - Barack Obama Is Dead
All events in this article are purely fictional...
Breaking News - Barack Obama Is Dead
By Fahad Ansari
"We Got Him!"
American War Criminal Barack Obama has been killed by Pakistani security forces in the UK, Prime Minister Hasan Abdullah of Pakistan has said.
BREAKING NEWS: BARACK OBAMA IS DEAD
May 15, 2011 -- American War Criminal Barack Obama has been killed by Pakistani security forces in the UK, Prime Minister Hasan Abdullah of Pakistan has said.
Obama was shot dead at a compound near Camberley, in a ground operation based on Pakistani intelligence, the first lead for which emerged last August.
Mr Abdullah said Pakistan forces took possession of the body after "a firefight".
Obama is believed to have ordered almost 200 attacks in North and South Waziristan between 2009 and 2011 in which almost 2000 people were killed, when he served as Commander in Chief of the US Armed Forces. Obama is also believed to have ordered the continued bombardment of Afghanistan during the same period in which thousands of others were killed.
He was top of Pakistan’s "most wanted" list.
DNA tests later confirmed that Obama was dead, Pakistani officials said.
Obama was cremated at the stake after a Christian funeral on board an aircraft carrier, ISI officials said.
Announcing the success of the operation, Mr Abdulla said it was "the most significant achievement to date in our nation's effort to defeat the CIA".
Pakistan has put Muslims around the world on alert, warning them of the possibility of American reprisal attacks for Obama’s killing.
ISI director Mohammed Akram said America would "almost certainly" try to avenge the death of Obama.
Crowds gathered outside the Red Mosque in Islamabad, chanting "Allah Akbar" after the news broke.
Foreign Minister of Pakistan, Mullah Jundullah said the operation sent a signal to the Neoconservatives in both the US and Britain.
"You cannot wait us out, you cannot defeat us, but you can make the choice to abandon the CIA and participate in a peaceful political process," she said.
Compound raided
Obama, 60, approved the campaign of terror on Waziristan for almost three years in which nearly 2,000 people were killed.
He evaded the forces of Pakistan and its allies for almost a decade, despite a $50m (£30m) bounty on his head.
Mr Abdullah said he had been briefed last August on a possible lead to Obama’s whereabouts. He authorised the operation last week once he determined there was enough intelligence to take action.
"It was far from certain, and it took many months to run this thread to ground," Mr Abdullah said.
On Sunday, Pakistani forces said to be from the elite Badr Brigade undertook the operation in Camberley, Surrey, 50km (30 miles) south-west of London.
Pakistani officials said Obama was shot in the head after resisting.
Mr Abdullah said "no Muslims were harmed".
Pakistani media reports said that the body was cremated at the stake to conform with Christian practice of a dignified burial and to prevent any grave becoming a shrine.
Giving more details of the raid, one senior Pakistani official said a small Pakistani team conducted the attack in about 40 minutes.
Three other men - one of Obama’s brothers and two couriers - were killed in the raid, the official said, adding that Obama’s wife Michelle was also killed when she was used as "a shield" and two other women were injured.
One helicopter was lost due to "technical failure". The team destroyed it and left in its other aircraft.
One resident, David Shields, told Reuters the helicopters had come under "intense firing" from the ground.
The size and complexity of the structure in Camberley "shocked" Pakistani officials.
It was surrounded by 4m-6m (12ft-18ft) walls, was eight times larger than other homes in the area and was valued at "a million dollars", though it had no telephone or internet connection.
The Pakistani official said that intelligence had been tracking a "trusted courier" of Obama for many years. The courier's identity was discovered four years ago, his area of operation two years ago and then, last August, his residence in Camberley was found, triggering the start of the mission.
Another senior Pakistani official said that no intelligence had been shared with any country, including the UK, ahead of the raid.
"Only a very small group of people inside our own government knew of this operation in advance," the official said.
The Camberley residence is just a few hundred metres from Sandhurst – the British equivalent of the Pakistani Military Academy.
The BBC's Alan Matthews in Camberley says it will undoubtedly be a huge embarrassment to the UK that Obama was found not only in the country, but also on the doorstep of the military academy.
He says residents in the town were stunned the former American leader had been living in their midst.
The senior Pakistani official said the "the loss of Obama puts the Neocons on a path of decline that will be difficult to reverse".
Obama’s probable successor, Tony Blair, was "far less charismatic and not as well respected within the organisation", according to reports from captured Neoconservative operatives, the official said.
However, the root causes of Neoconservatism - the range of issues that enabled the Neocons to recruit disaffected young liberals to its cause – hatred of Islam, oil and power - remain, for the most part, unaddressed, Neoconservative affairs analyst Rajinder Harbin told the BBC.
"The death of Obama will strike at the morale of the global ‘war on terror’, but is unlikely to end it," he warned.
World leaders welcomed the news of Obama’s death.
French President Jean Luc Blanc said Obama had "paid for his actions".Former Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Salim described the news as a "momentous achievement".
"The fight against terror goes on, but tonight Pakistan has sent an unmistakable message: No matter how long it takes, justice will be done," Mr Salim said in a statement.
But a spokesman for the English Defence League threatened revenge attacks against the "Muslamic and British governments and their security forces".
In the Israeli enclave of Tel Aviv, which is governed by militant group IDF, Prime Minister Ariel Lieberman condemned the killing of "a peaceful man".
BBC security correspondent Faraz Javed says that, to many in the Muslim world, Obama became the embodiment of global terrorism, but to others he was a hero, a devout Christian who fought three wars in the name of democracy.
All events are purely fictional – but you knew that already, didn’t you?
Latest twists to the Bin Laden narrative
The captured wife on Bin Laden has apparently been speaking of her 'captive' life with the Al Qaeda leader through her Pakistani jailers. She now apparently says that OBL was killed reaching for his AK47. Previously she was reported as saying he was killed after being captured. Claims he was taking herbal viagra appear to be part of an attempt to turn OBL into a joke and are hardly the point. What to believe? Former ISI chief Hamid Gul said on CNN and Alex Jones that Osama was long dead. The following comments appeared below an article in New York Daily News. The demolition of Al Qaeda's confirmation of OBL's death is particularly interesting:
Here's what we know - The official narrative of how the raid unfolded completely collapsed within days of its announcement. First there had been a 40 minute shootout, then there was no shootout and just one man was armed, first Bin Laden was armed then he was not, first Bin Laden used his wife as a human shield and then he did not. First the compound was described as a “$1 million dollar mansion” then it turned out to be a rubbish-strewn dilapidated compound that was worth less than a quarter of that. Almost every single aspect of the official narrative has changed since Obama first described the raid last Sunday as the White House struggles to keep its story straight.
The alleged body of Bin Laden was hastily dumped in the sea to prevent any proper procedure of identification. The White House claimed this was in accordance with normal Islamic burial rituals, however numerous Muslim scholars all over the globe disputed this claim, pointing out that Muslims can only be buried at sea if they die at sea. While the White House claimed that Bin Laden’s death on May 1st was proven by DNA and facial recognition evidence, such proof was never released for public scrutiny and the Obama administration refused to release photos of Bin Laden’s dead body, suggesting a cover-up.
As even mainstream journalists began to cast suspicion on the official narrative behind the raid, the media reported that Al-Qaeda itself had confirmed every detail of Obama’s address the the nation. However, the conduit for such a claim was in fact an organization called SITE, which is a notorious Pentagon propaganda front run by the daughter of an Israeli spy that has been caught on numerous occasions releasing fake cartoonish “Al-Qaeda” videos at the most politically expedient times for both the Bush and Obama administrations. The SITE organization is nothing more than a contractor for the U.S. government, receiving some $500,000 a year annually from Uncle Sam, and yet the corporate media instantly swallowed and regurgitated the claim that “Al-Qaeda” had confirmed the official story after SITE directed them to an anonymous posting on an Islamic website.
The US government has been caught on several occasions within the past decade staging military operations for the purposes of generating contrived, pro-war sentiment amongst the American public. Both the “rescue” of Jessica Lynch and the death of Pat Tillman were complete fables, scripted and staged at complete odds with the truth and unleashed on Americans as part of a psychological warfare offensive to elicit support for the war on terror, almost identical to what we’re seeing now with the Bin Laden sideshow. Given the fact that the US government has been caught red-handed scripting tales of pure fiction in order to justify the war on terror, notably in the cases of Jessica Lynch and Pat Tillman, why on earth should we believe them now?
Despite the fact that the White House released “situation room” photos which purported to show Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden and the rest of Obama’s security staff watching the raid which killed Bin Laden live, it was later admitted by CIA director Leon Panetta that Obama could not have seen the raid because the live feed was cut off before the Navy SEALS entered the compound. The photos were described by many as having “historical significance,” forming a “captivating” record of Obama’s greatest success and being the “defining moment” of his Presidency. One image showed Hillary Clinton with her hand over her mouth as if witnessing an anxious or crucial moment in the raid. Media reports at the time claimed that the photos represented the moment when “The leader of the free world saw the terror chief shot in the left eye.” However, the photos were staged as a PR stunt for public consumption, nobody in the photos ever saw Bin Laden killed live, nor did they see the Navy SEALS.
Almost every single neighbor that lived near the alleged Bin Laden compound in Abbottabad that was interviewed by news reporters said with absolute certainty that they had never seen Bin Laden and that they knew of no evidence whatsoever to suggest he lived there. Since the town is a staging ground for the Pakistani military, which has a training facility situated virtually a stone’s throw away from the alleged Bin Laden compound, residents were required to show ID when they moved into the area. Pakistani troops and anti-terror police in the town refused to confirm that Bin Laden had lived in the house. Barack Obama himself admitted to 60 Minutes that the White House was only 55/45 sure that Osama lived there before the raid and this uncertainty prompted concerns that the US Navy SEALS sent in could have targeted a “prince from Dubai” or some other individual that was not Bin Laden.
Here's what we know - The official narrative of how the raid unfolded completely collapsed within days of its announcement. First there had been a 40 minute shootout, then there was no shootout and just one man was armed, first Bin Laden was armed then he was not, first Bin Laden used his wife as a human shield and then he did not. First the compound was described as a “$1 million dollar mansion” then it turned out to be a rubbish-strewn dilapidated compound that was worth less than a quarter of that. Almost every single aspect of the official narrative has changed since Obama first described the raid last Sunday as the White House struggles to keep its story straight.
The alleged body of Bin Laden was hastily dumped in the sea to prevent any proper procedure of identification. The White House claimed this was in accordance with normal Islamic burial rituals, however numerous Muslim scholars all over the globe disputed this claim, pointing out that Muslims can only be buried at sea if they die at sea. While the White House claimed that Bin Laden’s death on May 1st was proven by DNA and facial recognition evidence, such proof was never released for public scrutiny and the Obama administration refused to release photos of Bin Laden’s dead body, suggesting a cover-up.
As even mainstream journalists began to cast suspicion on the official narrative behind the raid, the media reported that Al-Qaeda itself had confirmed every detail of Obama’s address the the nation. However, the conduit for such a claim was in fact an organization called SITE, which is a notorious Pentagon propaganda front run by the daughter of an Israeli spy that has been caught on numerous occasions releasing fake cartoonish “Al-Qaeda” videos at the most politically expedient times for both the Bush and Obama administrations. The SITE organization is nothing more than a contractor for the U.S. government, receiving some $500,000 a year annually from Uncle Sam, and yet the corporate media instantly swallowed and regurgitated the claim that “Al-Qaeda” had confirmed the official story after SITE directed them to an anonymous posting on an Islamic website.
The US government has been caught on several occasions within the past decade staging military operations for the purposes of generating contrived, pro-war sentiment amongst the American public. Both the “rescue” of Jessica Lynch and the death of Pat Tillman were complete fables, scripted and staged at complete odds with the truth and unleashed on Americans as part of a psychological warfare offensive to elicit support for the war on terror, almost identical to what we’re seeing now with the Bin Laden sideshow. Given the fact that the US government has been caught red-handed scripting tales of pure fiction in order to justify the war on terror, notably in the cases of Jessica Lynch and Pat Tillman, why on earth should we believe them now?
Despite the fact that the White House released “situation room” photos which purported to show Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden and the rest of Obama’s security staff watching the raid which killed Bin Laden live, it was later admitted by CIA director Leon Panetta that Obama could not have seen the raid because the live feed was cut off before the Navy SEALS entered the compound. The photos were described by many as having “historical significance,” forming a “captivating” record of Obama’s greatest success and being the “defining moment” of his Presidency. One image showed Hillary Clinton with her hand over her mouth as if witnessing an anxious or crucial moment in the raid. Media reports at the time claimed that the photos represented the moment when “The leader of the free world saw the terror chief shot in the left eye.” However, the photos were staged as a PR stunt for public consumption, nobody in the photos ever saw Bin Laden killed live, nor did they see the Navy SEALS.
Almost every single neighbor that lived near the alleged Bin Laden compound in Abbottabad that was interviewed by news reporters said with absolute certainty that they had never seen Bin Laden and that they knew of no evidence whatsoever to suggest he lived there. Since the town is a staging ground for the Pakistani military, which has a training facility situated virtually a stone’s throw away from the alleged Bin Laden compound, residents were required to show ID when they moved into the area. Pakistani troops and anti-terror police in the town refused to confirm that Bin Laden had lived in the house. Barack Obama himself admitted to 60 Minutes that the White House was only 55/45 sure that Osama lived there before the raid and this uncertainty prompted concerns that the US Navy SEALS sent in could have targeted a “prince from Dubai” or some other individual that was not Bin Laden.
Monday, 9 May 2011
Former weapons inspector Scott Ritter caught in paedophile sting
Discrediting critics of the state, particularly those that people listen to, comes in many forms. See previous post.
Scott Ritter was the most authoritative critic of the Bush WMD claims and Iraq policy. He resigned as UN chief weapons inspector to Iraq in 1998 over the lethal sanctions that caused the death of up to 1 million Iraqis.
Last month he was convicted of having unlawful contact with a minor, after being nabbed in an online sex sting.
Scott Ritter, 49, exchanged explicit messages with a detective posing as a 15-year-old girl and masturbated even after the undercover officer stressed during the chat that he was a minor, prosecutors said.
A jury in the US state of Pennsylvania found Ritter guilty on six counts on April 15, with sentencing set for next month.
This looks like revenge for Ritter's break with the establishment over Iraq. He was previously a card carrying republican, rather like Dr Steve Pieczenik.
Scott Ritter was the most authoritative critic of the Bush WMD claims and Iraq policy. He resigned as UN chief weapons inspector to Iraq in 1998 over the lethal sanctions that caused the death of up to 1 million Iraqis.
Last month he was convicted of having unlawful contact with a minor, after being nabbed in an online sex sting.
Scott Ritter, 49, exchanged explicit messages with a detective posing as a 15-year-old girl and masturbated even after the undercover officer stressed during the chat that he was a minor, prosecutors said.
A jury in the US state of Pennsylvania found Ritter guilty on six counts on April 15, with sentencing set for next month.
This looks like revenge for Ritter's break with the establishment over Iraq. He was previously a card carrying republican, rather like Dr Steve Pieczenik.
Dr. Steve Pieczenik - Wikipedia attack
The Wikipedia entry for Dr Steve Pieczenik is being butchered as I write. Just look at the bizarre "at some point" references under his professional life - someone is trying to destroy his credibility with crude editing of the Wikipedia entry. How strange - this is how one discredits someone in the internet age! Pieczenik has an incredible CV as a doctor of psychiatry, a high level negotiator and advisor for the US government and a best selling author of political thrillers, as summarised on his own website. He also appeared on the Alex Jones web TV show - what some would cause a conspiracy truther ghetto - claiming that 9/11 was a 'false flag' operation and that he was prepared to testify in Congress that a US general had admitted as much to him. He also says Bin Laden has been dead since December 2001. If mainstream media in the US and Britain did not refuse to cover these things he would already be news. Last night on BBC News the courageous Pakistan correspondent Orla Guerin was out speaking to Pakistanis in Abbotobad and hearing of their disbelief over the Osama assassination. I am detecting a degree of mainstream media skepticism about the raid and the official story. The absence of a body or photographs, and some dodgy home videos, are not enough to convince people. Unfortunately when you have systematically lied over a long period of time, people are entitled not to believe your version of events and to want to see proof. Of course Dr. Pieczenik's claims appear to be incredible, but his CV says he is a bona fide government insider rather than just a peddler of wild conspiracies. He was involved in the Aldo Moro Red Brigade kidnapping in 1978 as a negotiator for the US government and he worked for Carter, Reagan and Bush Snr, as well as working for the election of GW Bush in 1999.
So much hangs on the credibility of this man's career and works because of the gravity of his statements. If a true insider can make such statements, whether they are all true or not, it could bring others out of the closet. But if he is discredited, the message will be clear that any establishment figure who backs so-called conspiracy theories will pay the price.
Are Pieczenik's statements part of a split within the US security establishment over the global propaganda war and US strategy? Only time will tell.
So much hangs on the credibility of this man's career and works because of the gravity of his statements. If a true insider can make such statements, whether they are all true or not, it could bring others out of the closet. But if he is discredited, the message will be clear that any establishment figure who backs so-called conspiracy theories will pay the price.
Are Pieczenik's statements part of a split within the US security establishment over the global propaganda war and US strategy? Only time will tell.
Friday, 6 May 2011
The real Jack Ryan says top general told him 9/11 was false flag
At this stage I do not know enough about Dr Pieczenik to say how significant his statements are. But he is clearly a true US government insider, and even more compelling, apparently a pioneer in government psy ops, that is psychological warfare. He could of course be covering his tracks since he went on record in 2002 claiming that Bin Laden was already dead. If he is right, it would mean every single statement by Bin Laden since December 2001 was false, including the videos, which of course other authoritative sources have already claimed. He also places doubt on the death of Saddam, which stretches credulity. It would also suggest Obama was in on the OBL death fraud, and so too the Pakistan government. He also seems to be some kind of 'birther' ie questioning Obama's citizenship like Donald Trump. I am intrigued by him because he has authority of the kind that is rare in this debate.
From ">Global Research: Top US government insider Dr. Steve R. Pieczenik, a man who held numerous different influential positions under three different Presidents and still works with the Defense Department, shockingly told The Alex Jones Show yesterday that Osama Bin Laden died in 2001 and that he was prepared to testify in front of a grand jury how a top general told him directly that 9/11 was a false flag inside job.
Pieczenik cannot be dismissed as a “conspiracy theorist”. He served as the Deputy Assistant Secretary of State under three different administrations, Nixon, Ford and Carter, while also working under Reagan and Bush senior, and still works as a consultant for the Department of Defense. A former US Navy Captain, Pieczenik achieved two prestigious Harry C. Solomon Awards at the Harvard Medical School as he simultaneously completed a PhD at MIT.
Recruited by Lawrence Eagleburger as Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Management, Pieczenik went on to develop, “the basic tenets for psychological warfare, counter terrorism, strategy and tactics for transcultural negotiations for the US State Department, military and intelligence communities and other agencies of the US Government,” while also developing foundational strategies for hostage rescue that were later employed around the world.
Pieczenik also served as a senior policy planner under Secretaries Henry Kissinger, Cyrus Vance, George Schultz and James Baker and worked on George W. Bush’s election campaign against Al Gore. His record underscores the fact that he is one of the most deeply connected men in intelligence circles over the past three decades plus.
From ">Global Research: Top US government insider Dr. Steve R. Pieczenik, a man who held numerous different influential positions under three different Presidents and still works with the Defense Department, shockingly told The Alex Jones Show yesterday that Osama Bin Laden died in 2001 and that he was prepared to testify in front of a grand jury how a top general told him directly that 9/11 was a false flag inside job.
Pieczenik cannot be dismissed as a “conspiracy theorist”. He served as the Deputy Assistant Secretary of State under three different administrations, Nixon, Ford and Carter, while also working under Reagan and Bush senior, and still works as a consultant for the Department of Defense. A former US Navy Captain, Pieczenik achieved two prestigious Harry C. Solomon Awards at the Harvard Medical School as he simultaneously completed a PhD at MIT.
Recruited by Lawrence Eagleburger as Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Management, Pieczenik went on to develop, “the basic tenets for psychological warfare, counter terrorism, strategy and tactics for transcultural negotiations for the US State Department, military and intelligence communities and other agencies of the US Government,” while also developing foundational strategies for hostage rescue that were later employed around the world.
Pieczenik also served as a senior policy planner under Secretaries Henry Kissinger, Cyrus Vance, George Schultz and James Baker and worked on George W. Bush’s election campaign against Al Gore. His record underscores the fact that he is one of the most deeply connected men in intelligence circles over the past three decades plus.
Glencore - the true face of ultra-capitalism
The good old Daily Mail exposes the dark underbelly of commodities giant Glencore in this feature. This is a more in-depth piece and bigger expose of global capitalist exploitation than anything you will find in The Guardian, where another piece clearly influenced by the Mail article also appears. Glencore's directors make billions on the back of the world's poverty-stricken producers of copper, wheat, zinc etc. The boss is like something out of a James Bond novel.
Thursday, 5 May 2011
Quarter life crisis - official
Finally the academics have identified the 'quarter-life crisis' - a period of emotional upheaval which usually leads to a reassessment of one's life and the start of a new direction. I went through it big time - and ever since wondered if my experience was unusual - after all, it was at least a decade early for the classic mid-life crisis. The features of it, according to the study by the University of Greenwich and Birkbeck, include a sense of being stuck in the wrong job, sexual frustration or relationship crisis - I went through all of these. A cocktail of professional, creative, emotional and sexual disappointment. It usually strikes between 25 and 35. Mine got under way seriously at 30. Apparently it usually lasts around 2 years. Mmmmm - I think mine lasted about a decade! Only toward the end of my 30s did I finally feel that I was moving into a life for myself that felt right, and that I was happy with who I was. Then again my quarter life crisis was probably mixed up with other deep emotional issues, and I had to leave London, which tends to drive even the psychologically robust mad. But I am glad that I can give it a name now, before the proper mid-life crisis strikes.
If you recognise the following, you may have had a QLC too - although to pack all this in to 2 years seems a tad rushed:
Phase 1 is defined by feeling "locked in" to a job or relationship or both.
Phase 2 is a rising sense that change is possible, along with a mental and physical separation from previous commitments.
Phase 3 is a period of rebuilding a new life.
Phase 4 involves developing new commitments that are more in tune with personal interests, aspirations and values.
If you recognise the following, you may have had a QLC too - although to pack all this in to 2 years seems a tad rushed:
Phase 1 is defined by feeling "locked in" to a job or relationship or both.
Phase 2 is a rising sense that change is possible, along with a mental and physical separation from previous commitments.
Phase 3 is a period of rebuilding a new life.
Phase 4 involves developing new commitments that are more in tune with personal interests, aspirations and values.
Wednesday, 4 May 2011
Canada's election breakthrough for left despite right victory
Canadians have just voted for a kind of political revolution, wiping out two traditional parties - the Liberals and Quebec Bloc - and making the social democratic NDP the official opposition. The Canadian conservatives won the election, gaining a 54% majority of seats under the first past the post system, with just under 40% of the vote. It is a more decisive win than the Conservatives in the UK last year but is also further evidence of the potential downside of FPTP, unless of course you prefer a 'decisive' result. Decisive in this case means allowing a conservative party to override the political preferences of the majority of voters.
CANADA NATIONWIDE RESULTS, 2011
Party Popular Vote Seats Share of Seats
Conservative 39.6% 167 54%
New Democrat 30.6 102 33
Liberal 18.9 34 11
Bloc Québécois 6.0 4 1
Green 3.9 1 0.3 0.1
TOTAL 308
Most remarkably, it is a left of centre breakthrough in North America, where for many decades the left has been marginal in the US, Canada and Mexico. Perhaps Canada can show the way to the other North American nations, especially Mexico, with its election due next year.
CANADA NATIONWIDE RESULTS, 2011
Party Popular Vote Seats Share of Seats
Conservative 39.6% 167 54%
New Democrat 30.6 102 33
Liberal 18.9 34 11
Bloc Québécois 6.0 4 1
Green 3.9 1 0.3 0.1
TOTAL 308
Most remarkably, it is a left of centre breakthrough in North America, where for many decades the left has been marginal in the US, Canada and Mexico. Perhaps Canada can show the way to the other North American nations, especially Mexico, with its election due next year.
Tuesday, 3 May 2011
Michael Meacher on 9/11 on Channel 4 news and Dutch TV
I never saw this interview with the former Labour environment minister Michael Meacher on Channel 4 news. It shows that there are intelligent establishment figures who do not accept the official story.
Here he is interviewed on a remarkable Dutch TV. He is also on this documentary shown in Holland in 2006 into the 9/11 events - something we have never seen in Britain. Here it is subtitled in ENglish.
Here is a video compilation of live news reports from 9/11 reporting secondary explosions in the WTC. Over 20 million people have seen this video.
Here he is interviewed on a remarkable Dutch TV. He is also on this documentary shown in Holland in 2006 into the 9/11 events - something we have never seen in Britain. Here it is subtitled in ENglish.
Here is a video compilation of live news reports from 9/11 reporting secondary explosions in the WTC. Over 20 million people have seen this video.
Vote Yes to AV and No to another Tory century
You do have to wonder where the motives lie in the No to AV Labour camp. These dinosaurs including Jack Straw and John Reid would rather form an alliance with the Tories than share power with others on the liberal left. At heart they are conservatives - they do not trust the voters. They believe in government of the minority over the majority - first past the post. Elections fought over a few million undecided voters who can be swayed by Tory media propaganda, rather than the whole electorate under a system where every vote counts. AV is far from perfect - no electoral system can be. But the more the electoral system prevents single parties from gaining absolute power in parliament, based on 30% of the vote, the better. Most strange of all, these anti-reform Labourites seem to have forgotten that FPTP gave us a whole century of Tory rule! Labour were in power for a grand total of 22 years in the 20th century. The Tories ruled for 59 of those 100 years. If you don't want to be ruled by the Tories for another century, you have to vote for reform. And if you don't like a system that gives all power to politicians in parliament who can ignore voters except at election times, you must support reform and vote Yes. Who do you trust - the politicians or the voters? If you trust the people, vote Yes to give them more power. If you trust the politicians, I suggest you come off the medication.
Bin Laden and 9/11 - what the US knew
According to Sibel Edmonds, the FBI translator whose reports to the 9/11 commission were blacked out because of their sensitive diplomatic consequences, the US received specific intelligence that Bin Laden had ordered attacks on US cities using planes in April 2001. That intelligence was ignored. Her criticism suggest that Bin Laden was indeed behind the 9/11 attacks, but because of the business and political interests of both the Saudis and Pakistan, these countries' role in 9/11 were overlooked and no action was taken against either country in the wake of 9/11. Turkey's role was also redacted from the 9/11 commission report. Again the huge commercial interests of US firms around defence contracts were implicated in this suppression of information. FBI informants also specifically warned that the terrorists were receiving flight training in US flight schools. Again, no action was taken to stop this.
Reports in the wall Street Journal and in French media that General Mahmoud Ahmed, the then head of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), ordered the wiring of $100,000 before the 9/11 attacks to Mohammed Atta, the lead hijacker, were never investigated. Ahmed was in the US at the time of the 9/11 attacks meeting US leaders, including CIA boss George Tenet, and making deals to ensure US support for Pakistan. Relations between the countries had been strained by Pakistan's nuclear programme and its support for North Korean and Libyan nuclear developments. Logically, if the US was going to declare war on any nations implicated in 9/11, it should have declared war on Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. Instead it targeted Afghanistan and Iraq.
Two weeks after 9/11, Secretary of State Colin Powell, speaking to Tim Russert on Meet the Press, said that he expected "in the near future . . . to put out . . . a document that will describe quite clearly the evidence that we have linking [bin Laden] to this attack."
Powell reversed himself, however, at a press conference with President Bush in the White House Rose Garden the next morning, saying that, although the government had information that left no question of bin Laden’s responsibility, "most of it is classified." According to Seymour Hersh, citing officials from both the CIA and the Department of Justice, the real reason for the reversal was a "lack of solid information."
This was the week that Bush, after demanding that the Taliban turn over bin Laden, refused their request for evidence that bin Laden had been behind the attacks. A senior Taliban official, after the US attack on Afghanistan had begun, said: "We have asked for proof of Osama’s involvement, but they have refused. Why?" Hersh’s answer was that they had no proof.
Perhaps Bin Laden did not confess to his role in 9/11 before December 2001 for the simple reason that his actions posed a major threat to his hosts, the Taliban, who might have surrendered him to the US in order to avoid war. Reportedly, the Taliban were looking for a way out of conflict but the US was not interested.
The first and most famous of the "Osama bin Laden confession video tapes" was released by the Pentagon on December 13, 2001. It had purportedly been made on November 9, 2001, after which it was allegedly found by US forces in a private home in Jalalabad, Afghanistan. In this video, an Osama bin Laden figure is seen talking about the 9/11 attacks with a visiting sheikh. During the course of the conversation, the bin Laden figure boasts about the success of the attacks, saying that he had planned them. Both US and British officials claimed that this tape left no doubt about bin Laden’s guilt.24
Stories in both the Canadian and British media, however, raised questions about the tape’s authenticity. These stories, besides pointing out the existence of the technical ability to create fake video tapes, also mentioned the suspicion of some people that the bin Laden figure was not Osama bin Laden himself.
A BBC News report said: "Washington calls it the ‘smoking gun’ that puts Bin Laden’s guilt beyond doubt, but many in the Arab world believe the home video of the al-Qaeda chief is a fake."
This question was also raised in Canada by CBC News, which pointed out that some people had "suggested the Americans hired someone to pretend to be the exiled Saudi."
This question was raised even more insistently in a Guardian story with the title, "US Urged to Detail Origin of Tape." Reporting "growing doubt in the Muslim world about the authenticity of the film," writer Steven Morris said:
The White House yesterday came under pressure to give more details of the video which purports to show Osama bin Laden admitting his part in the September 11 attacks.
Morris, pointing out that the White House had provided no details about how the Pentagon came to be in possession of the tape, added:
According to US officials the tape was found in a house in Jalalabad, eastern Afghanistan, and handed to the Pentagon by an unnamed person or group. . . . But for many the explanation is too convenient. Some opponents of the war theorise that the Bin Laden in the film was a look-alike.
When Dr. Bruce Lawrence, a Duke University history professor widely considered the country’s leading academic bin Laden expert, was asked what he thought about this video, he said, bluntly: "It’s bogus." Some friends of his in the US Department of Homeland Security assigned to work "on the 24/7 bin Laden clock," he added, "also know it’s bogus."
The other most famous of the "bin Laden confession tapes", is the video tape that was released on October 29, 2004, just before the presidential election between George W. Bush and John Kerry, leading to its being called "the October Surprise video." In this one, for the first time, a bin Laden figure directly addressed the American people. The Associated Press, focusing on the most important aspect of the speaker’s message, entitled its story: "Bin Laden, in Statement to U.S. People, Says He Ordered Sept. 11 Attacks." However, although the AP accepted the authenticity of the tape, there are serious reasons to doubt it.
A reason to be at least suspicious is the very fact that it appeared just four days before the presidential election and seemed designed to help Bush’s reelection – an assessment that was made even by CIA analysts. The video, moreover, evidently did help: Bush’s lead over Kerry in national polls increased right after it appeared, and both Bush and Kerry said that this tape was significantly responsible for Bush’s victory.
A surprising but little-known fact, because it has scarcely been reported in the mainstream media, is that the FBI’s "Most Wanted Terrorist" webpage on "Usama bin Laden" does not list the 9/11 attacks as one of the crimes for which Bin Laden is wanted. It does list bombings in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and Nairobi as terrorist acts for which he is wanted. But it makes no mention of 9/11.10 In 2006, Rex Tomb, then the FBI’s chief of investigative publicity, was asked why not. He replied: "The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Usama Bin Laden’s Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11."
What about the 9/11 Commission? Its report gave the impression that it was in possession of solid evidence of bin Laden’s guilt. But the Commission’s co-chairs, Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton, undermined this impression in their follow-up book, which they subtitled: "The Inside Story of the 9/11 Commission.")
As the endnotes for The 9/11 Commission Report reveal, whenever the Commission referred to evidence of bin Ladin’s responsibility for the 9/11 attacks, the Commission was always referring to CIA-provided information, which had (presumably) been elicited during interrogations of al-Qaeda operatives. By far the most important of these operatives was Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, generally called simply "KSM," who has been called the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks. The Commission, for example, wrote:
Bin Ladin . . . finally decided to give the green light for the 9/11 operation sometime in late 1998 or early 1999. . . . Bin Ladin also soon selected four individuals to serve as suicide operatives. . . . Atta – whom Bin Ladin chose to lead the group – met with Bin Ladin several times to receive additional instructions, including a preliminary list of approved targets: the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and the U.S. Capitol.17
The note for each of these statements says: "interrogation of KSM."
Kean and Hamilton, however, reported that they had no success in "obtaining access to star witnesses in custody . . . , most notably Khalid Sheikh Mohammed." Besides not being allowed to interview these witnesses, Commission members were not even permitted to observe the interrogations through one-way glass or to talk to the interrogators. Therefore, Kean and Hamilton complained: "We . . . had no way of evaluating the credibility of detainee information. How could we tell if someone such as Khalid Sheikh Mohammed . . . was telling us the truth?"
An NBC "deep background" report in 2008 pointed out an additional problem: KSM and the other al-Qaeda leaders had been subjected to "enhanced interrogation techniques," i.e., torture, and it is now widely acknowledged that statements elicited by torture lack credibility. KSM was subject to waterboarding no less than 83 times! "At least four of the operatives whose interrogation figured in the 9/11 Commission Report," NBC pointed out, "have claimed that they told interrogators critical information as a way to stop being ‘tortured.’" NBC then quoted Michael Ratner, president of the Center for Constitutional Rights, as saying: "Most people look at the 9/11 Commission Report as a trusted historical document. If their conclusions were supported by information gained from torture, . . . their conclusions are suspect."22
From Sibel Edmonds:
More than four months prior to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, in April 2001, a long-term FBI informant/asset who had been providing the bureau with information since 1990, provided two FBI agents and a translator with specific information regarding a terrorist attack being planned by Osama bin Laden. This asset/informant was previously a high-level intelligence officer in Iran in charge of intelligence from Afghanistan. Through his contacts in Afghanistan, he received information that: 1) Osama bin Laden was planning a major terrorist attack in the United States targeting four or five major cities; 2) the attack was going to involve airplanes; 3) some of the individuals in charge of carrying out this attack were already in place in the United States; 4) the attack was going to be carried out soon, in a few months. The agents who received this information reported it to their superior, Special Agent in Charge of Counterterrorism Thomas Frields at the FBI Washington Field Office, by filing 302 forms, and the translator translated and documented this information. No action was taken by the special agent in charge, and after 9/11 the agents and the translators were told to "keep quiet" regarding this issue. The translator who was present during the session with the FBI informant, Mr. Behrooz Sarshar, reported this incident to Director Mueller in writing, and later to the Department of Justice Inspector General. The press reported this incident, and a report in the Chicago Tribune on July 21, 2004, stated that FBI officials had confirmed that this information was received in April 2001. Furthermore, the Chicago Tribune quoted an aide to Director Mueller saying that Mueller was surprised that the Commission never raised this particular issue with him during the hearing. Mr. Sarshar reported this issue to your investigators on Feb. 12, 2004, and provided them with specific dates, locations, witness names, and contact information for that particular Iranian asset and the two special agents who received the information (please refer to the tape-recorded testimony provided by Mr. Sarshar on February 12, 2004 and given to your investigators). I provided your investigators with a detailed and specific account of this issue, the names of other witnesses, and documents I had seen. Mr. Sarshar also provided the Department of Justice Inspector General with specific information regarding this issue (please refer to DOJ-IG report "Re: Sibel Edmonds and FBI Translation," provided to you prior to the completion of your report).
Almost three years after Sept. 11, many officials still refuse to admit to having specific information regarding the terrorists' plans to attack the United States. The Phoenix Memo, received months prior to the 9/11 attacks, specifically warned FBI HQ of pilot training and its possible link to terrorist activities against the United States. Four months prior to the terrorist attacks, the Iranian asset provided the FBI with specific information regarding the "use of airplanes," "major U.S. cities as targets," and "Osama bin Laden issuing the order." Coleen Rowley likewise reported that specific information had been provided to FBI HQ. All this information went to the same place: FBI Headquarters in Washington, D.C., and the FBI Washington Field Office in Washington, D.C. Yet your report claims that not having a central place where all intelligence could be gathered was one of the main factors in our intelligence failure. Why does your report exclude the information regarding the Iranian asset and Behrooz Sarshar from its timeline of missed opportunities? Why was this significant incident not mentioned, despite the public confirmation by the FBI, witnesses provided to your investigators, and briefings you received directly? Why did you surprise even Director Mueller by not asking him questions regarding this significant incident? (Please remember that you ran out of questions to ask during your hearings with Director Mueller and AG John Ashcroft, so please do not cite a "time limit.") How can budget increases remedy the failures of mid-level bureaucrats at FBI Headquarters? How can the addition of an "intelligence czar" fix this problem?
More from Sibel Edmonds
And from Micheal Meacher MP, writing in 2004:
British born jihadist Omar Sheikh, was the man who, on the instructions of General Mahmoud Ahmed, the then head of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), wired $100,000 before the 9/11 attacks to Mohammed Atta, the lead hijacker. It is extraordinary that neither Ahmed nor Sheikh have been charged and brought to trial on this count. Why not?
Ahmed, the paymaster for the hijackers, was actually in Washington on 9/11, and had a series of pre-9/11 top-level meetings in the White House, the Pentagon, the national security council, and with George Tenet, then head of the CIA, and Marc Grossman, the under-secretary of state for political affairs. When Ahmed was exposed by the Wall Street Journal as having sent the money to the hijackers, he was forced to "retire" by President Pervez Musharraf. Why hasn't the US demanded that he be questioned and tried in court?
Another person who must know a great deal about what led up to 9/11 is Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, allegedly arrested in Rawalpindi on March 1 2003. A joint Senate-House intelligence select committee inquiry in July 2003 stated: "KSM appears to be one of Bin Laden's most trusted lieutenants and was active in recruiting people to travel outside Afghanistan, including to the US, on behalf of Bin Laden." According to the report, the clear implication was that they would be engaged in planning terrorist-related activities.
Yet the New York Times has since noted that "American officials said that KSM, once al-Qaida's top operational commander, personally executed Daniel Pearl ... but he was unlikely to be accused of the crime in an American criminal court because of the risk of divulging classified information". Indeed, he may never be brought to trial.
A fourth witness is Sibel Edmonds. She is a 33-year-old Turkish-American former FBI translator of intelligence, fluent in Farsi, the language spoken mainly in Iran and Afghanistan, who had top-secret security clearance. She tried to blow the whistle on the cover-up of intelligence that names some of the culprits who orchestrated the 9/11 attacks, but is now under two gagging orders that forbid her from testifying in court or mentioning the names of the people or the countries involved. She has been quoted as saying: "My translations of the 9/11 intercepts included [terrorist] money laundering, detailed and date-specific information ... if they were to do real investigations, we would see several significant high-level criminal prosecutions in this country [the US] ... and believe me, they will do everything to cover this up".
Reports in the wall Street Journal and in French media that General Mahmoud Ahmed, the then head of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), ordered the wiring of $100,000 before the 9/11 attacks to Mohammed Atta, the lead hijacker, were never investigated. Ahmed was in the US at the time of the 9/11 attacks meeting US leaders, including CIA boss George Tenet, and making deals to ensure US support for Pakistan. Relations between the countries had been strained by Pakistan's nuclear programme and its support for North Korean and Libyan nuclear developments. Logically, if the US was going to declare war on any nations implicated in 9/11, it should have declared war on Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. Instead it targeted Afghanistan and Iraq.
Two weeks after 9/11, Secretary of State Colin Powell, speaking to Tim Russert on Meet the Press, said that he expected "in the near future . . . to put out . . . a document that will describe quite clearly the evidence that we have linking [bin Laden] to this attack."
Powell reversed himself, however, at a press conference with President Bush in the White House Rose Garden the next morning, saying that, although the government had information that left no question of bin Laden’s responsibility, "most of it is classified." According to Seymour Hersh, citing officials from both the CIA and the Department of Justice, the real reason for the reversal was a "lack of solid information."
This was the week that Bush, after demanding that the Taliban turn over bin Laden, refused their request for evidence that bin Laden had been behind the attacks. A senior Taliban official, after the US attack on Afghanistan had begun, said: "We have asked for proof of Osama’s involvement, but they have refused. Why?" Hersh’s answer was that they had no proof.
Perhaps Bin Laden did not confess to his role in 9/11 before December 2001 for the simple reason that his actions posed a major threat to his hosts, the Taliban, who might have surrendered him to the US in order to avoid war. Reportedly, the Taliban were looking for a way out of conflict but the US was not interested.
The first and most famous of the "Osama bin Laden confession video tapes" was released by the Pentagon on December 13, 2001. It had purportedly been made on November 9, 2001, after which it was allegedly found by US forces in a private home in Jalalabad, Afghanistan. In this video, an Osama bin Laden figure is seen talking about the 9/11 attacks with a visiting sheikh. During the course of the conversation, the bin Laden figure boasts about the success of the attacks, saying that he had planned them. Both US and British officials claimed that this tape left no doubt about bin Laden’s guilt.24
Stories in both the Canadian and British media, however, raised questions about the tape’s authenticity. These stories, besides pointing out the existence of the technical ability to create fake video tapes, also mentioned the suspicion of some people that the bin Laden figure was not Osama bin Laden himself.
A BBC News report said: "Washington calls it the ‘smoking gun’ that puts Bin Laden’s guilt beyond doubt, but many in the Arab world believe the home video of the al-Qaeda chief is a fake."
This question was also raised in Canada by CBC News, which pointed out that some people had "suggested the Americans hired someone to pretend to be the exiled Saudi."
This question was raised even more insistently in a Guardian story with the title, "US Urged to Detail Origin of Tape." Reporting "growing doubt in the Muslim world about the authenticity of the film," writer Steven Morris said:
The White House yesterday came under pressure to give more details of the video which purports to show Osama bin Laden admitting his part in the September 11 attacks.
Morris, pointing out that the White House had provided no details about how the Pentagon came to be in possession of the tape, added:
According to US officials the tape was found in a house in Jalalabad, eastern Afghanistan, and handed to the Pentagon by an unnamed person or group. . . . But for many the explanation is too convenient. Some opponents of the war theorise that the Bin Laden in the film was a look-alike.
When Dr. Bruce Lawrence, a Duke University history professor widely considered the country’s leading academic bin Laden expert, was asked what he thought about this video, he said, bluntly: "It’s bogus." Some friends of his in the US Department of Homeland Security assigned to work "on the 24/7 bin Laden clock," he added, "also know it’s bogus."
The other most famous of the "bin Laden confession tapes", is the video tape that was released on October 29, 2004, just before the presidential election between George W. Bush and John Kerry, leading to its being called "the October Surprise video." In this one, for the first time, a bin Laden figure directly addressed the American people. The Associated Press, focusing on the most important aspect of the speaker’s message, entitled its story: "Bin Laden, in Statement to U.S. People, Says He Ordered Sept. 11 Attacks." However, although the AP accepted the authenticity of the tape, there are serious reasons to doubt it.
A reason to be at least suspicious is the very fact that it appeared just four days before the presidential election and seemed designed to help Bush’s reelection – an assessment that was made even by CIA analysts. The video, moreover, evidently did help: Bush’s lead over Kerry in national polls increased right after it appeared, and both Bush and Kerry said that this tape was significantly responsible for Bush’s victory.
A surprising but little-known fact, because it has scarcely been reported in the mainstream media, is that the FBI’s "Most Wanted Terrorist" webpage on "Usama bin Laden" does not list the 9/11 attacks as one of the crimes for which Bin Laden is wanted. It does list bombings in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and Nairobi as terrorist acts for which he is wanted. But it makes no mention of 9/11.10 In 2006, Rex Tomb, then the FBI’s chief of investigative publicity, was asked why not. He replied: "The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Usama Bin Laden’s Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11."
What about the 9/11 Commission? Its report gave the impression that it was in possession of solid evidence of bin Laden’s guilt. But the Commission’s co-chairs, Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton, undermined this impression in their follow-up book, which they subtitled: "The Inside Story of the 9/11 Commission.")
As the endnotes for The 9/11 Commission Report reveal, whenever the Commission referred to evidence of bin Ladin’s responsibility for the 9/11 attacks, the Commission was always referring to CIA-provided information, which had (presumably) been elicited during interrogations of al-Qaeda operatives. By far the most important of these operatives was Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, generally called simply "KSM," who has been called the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks. The Commission, for example, wrote:
Bin Ladin . . . finally decided to give the green light for the 9/11 operation sometime in late 1998 or early 1999. . . . Bin Ladin also soon selected four individuals to serve as suicide operatives. . . . Atta – whom Bin Ladin chose to lead the group – met with Bin Ladin several times to receive additional instructions, including a preliminary list of approved targets: the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and the U.S. Capitol.17
The note for each of these statements says: "interrogation of KSM."
Kean and Hamilton, however, reported that they had no success in "obtaining access to star witnesses in custody . . . , most notably Khalid Sheikh Mohammed." Besides not being allowed to interview these witnesses, Commission members were not even permitted to observe the interrogations through one-way glass or to talk to the interrogators. Therefore, Kean and Hamilton complained: "We . . . had no way of evaluating the credibility of detainee information. How could we tell if someone such as Khalid Sheikh Mohammed . . . was telling us the truth?"
An NBC "deep background" report in 2008 pointed out an additional problem: KSM and the other al-Qaeda leaders had been subjected to "enhanced interrogation techniques," i.e., torture, and it is now widely acknowledged that statements elicited by torture lack credibility. KSM was subject to waterboarding no less than 83 times! "At least four of the operatives whose interrogation figured in the 9/11 Commission Report," NBC pointed out, "have claimed that they told interrogators critical information as a way to stop being ‘tortured.’" NBC then quoted Michael Ratner, president of the Center for Constitutional Rights, as saying: "Most people look at the 9/11 Commission Report as a trusted historical document. If their conclusions were supported by information gained from torture, . . . their conclusions are suspect."22
From Sibel Edmonds:
More than four months prior to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, in April 2001, a long-term FBI informant/asset who had been providing the bureau with information since 1990, provided two FBI agents and a translator with specific information regarding a terrorist attack being planned by Osama bin Laden. This asset/informant was previously a high-level intelligence officer in Iran in charge of intelligence from Afghanistan. Through his contacts in Afghanistan, he received information that: 1) Osama bin Laden was planning a major terrorist attack in the United States targeting four or five major cities; 2) the attack was going to involve airplanes; 3) some of the individuals in charge of carrying out this attack were already in place in the United States; 4) the attack was going to be carried out soon, in a few months. The agents who received this information reported it to their superior, Special Agent in Charge of Counterterrorism Thomas Frields at the FBI Washington Field Office, by filing 302 forms, and the translator translated and documented this information. No action was taken by the special agent in charge, and after 9/11 the agents and the translators were told to "keep quiet" regarding this issue. The translator who was present during the session with the FBI informant, Mr. Behrooz Sarshar, reported this incident to Director Mueller in writing, and later to the Department of Justice Inspector General. The press reported this incident, and a report in the Chicago Tribune on July 21, 2004, stated that FBI officials had confirmed that this information was received in April 2001. Furthermore, the Chicago Tribune quoted an aide to Director Mueller saying that Mueller was surprised that the Commission never raised this particular issue with him during the hearing. Mr. Sarshar reported this issue to your investigators on Feb. 12, 2004, and provided them with specific dates, locations, witness names, and contact information for that particular Iranian asset and the two special agents who received the information (please refer to the tape-recorded testimony provided by Mr. Sarshar on February 12, 2004 and given to your investigators). I provided your investigators with a detailed and specific account of this issue, the names of other witnesses, and documents I had seen. Mr. Sarshar also provided the Department of Justice Inspector General with specific information regarding this issue (please refer to DOJ-IG report "Re: Sibel Edmonds and FBI Translation," provided to you prior to the completion of your report).
Almost three years after Sept. 11, many officials still refuse to admit to having specific information regarding the terrorists' plans to attack the United States. The Phoenix Memo, received months prior to the 9/11 attacks, specifically warned FBI HQ of pilot training and its possible link to terrorist activities against the United States. Four months prior to the terrorist attacks, the Iranian asset provided the FBI with specific information regarding the "use of airplanes," "major U.S. cities as targets," and "Osama bin Laden issuing the order." Coleen Rowley likewise reported that specific information had been provided to FBI HQ. All this information went to the same place: FBI Headquarters in Washington, D.C., and the FBI Washington Field Office in Washington, D.C. Yet your report claims that not having a central place where all intelligence could be gathered was one of the main factors in our intelligence failure. Why does your report exclude the information regarding the Iranian asset and Behrooz Sarshar from its timeline of missed opportunities? Why was this significant incident not mentioned, despite the public confirmation by the FBI, witnesses provided to your investigators, and briefings you received directly? Why did you surprise even Director Mueller by not asking him questions regarding this significant incident? (Please remember that you ran out of questions to ask during your hearings with Director Mueller and AG John Ashcroft, so please do not cite a "time limit.") How can budget increases remedy the failures of mid-level bureaucrats at FBI Headquarters? How can the addition of an "intelligence czar" fix this problem?
More from Sibel Edmonds
And from Micheal Meacher MP, writing in 2004:
British born jihadist Omar Sheikh, was the man who, on the instructions of General Mahmoud Ahmed, the then head of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), wired $100,000 before the 9/11 attacks to Mohammed Atta, the lead hijacker. It is extraordinary that neither Ahmed nor Sheikh have been charged and brought to trial on this count. Why not?
Ahmed, the paymaster for the hijackers, was actually in Washington on 9/11, and had a series of pre-9/11 top-level meetings in the White House, the Pentagon, the national security council, and with George Tenet, then head of the CIA, and Marc Grossman, the under-secretary of state for political affairs. When Ahmed was exposed by the Wall Street Journal as having sent the money to the hijackers, he was forced to "retire" by President Pervez Musharraf. Why hasn't the US demanded that he be questioned and tried in court?
Another person who must know a great deal about what led up to 9/11 is Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, allegedly arrested in Rawalpindi on March 1 2003. A joint Senate-House intelligence select committee inquiry in July 2003 stated: "KSM appears to be one of Bin Laden's most trusted lieutenants and was active in recruiting people to travel outside Afghanistan, including to the US, on behalf of Bin Laden." According to the report, the clear implication was that they would be engaged in planning terrorist-related activities.
Yet the New York Times has since noted that "American officials said that KSM, once al-Qaida's top operational commander, personally executed Daniel Pearl ... but he was unlikely to be accused of the crime in an American criminal court because of the risk of divulging classified information". Indeed, he may never be brought to trial.
A fourth witness is Sibel Edmonds. She is a 33-year-old Turkish-American former FBI translator of intelligence, fluent in Farsi, the language spoken mainly in Iran and Afghanistan, who had top-secret security clearance. She tried to blow the whistle on the cover-up of intelligence that names some of the culprits who orchestrated the 9/11 attacks, but is now under two gagging orders that forbid her from testifying in court or mentioning the names of the people or the countries involved. She has been quoted as saying: "My translations of the 9/11 intercepts included [terrorist] money laundering, detailed and date-specific information ... if they were to do real investigations, we would see several significant high-level criminal prosecutions in this country [the US] ... and believe me, they will do everything to cover this up".
Monday, 2 May 2011
Bin Laden is dead - his body apparently at the bottom of the sea
We will never see the corpse - so we will just have to take the word of Uncle Sam, the people who brought us Iraqi WMDs and the Bay of Tonkin. Bin Laden initially denied responsibility for 9/11. His alleged confession tape came later, in December 2001 and then another conveniently just before the 2004 US presidential elections.
On 17 September 2001 he said:
"I would like to assure the world that I did not plan the recent attacks, which seems to have been planned by people for personal reasons. I have been living in the Islamic emirate of Afghanistan and following its leaders' rules. The current leader does not allow me to exercise such operations."
Then on October 16 2001, to repeat his denial, he said:
"I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States. As a Muslim, I try my best to avoid telling a lie. I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the killing of innocent women, children and other humans as an appreciable act. Islam strictly forbids causing harm to innocent women, children and other people. Such a practice is forbidden even in the course of a battle."
These tapes for some reason do not feature in the story of Bin Laden.
Meanwhile among the many, many bizarre coincidences of 9/11 how about Marvin Bush, the president's younger brother , being a senior exec at Securacom, the company in charge of security at the WTC, as well as Dulles Airport and United Airlines - all sites central to the attacks. An interesting coincidence, at the very least - or perhaps a case of familial incompetence and bad luck!
In truth the Bush family have deep ties with Saudi oil money. GW Bush's own career was on the path to ruin until he was saved by Saudi money, who bought inot his failing oil exploration company. A Saudi sheikh with a long history of supporting jihadism owned Bush long before he became Governor of Texas and then President. Don't believe me? - look it up.
Intelligent people are understandably skeptical about claims that 9/11 was not simply the work of a freelance terror group with a record of terror attacks. But they are not taking into account the infiltration and funding of terror groups by the security services of the West and the links that tie terrorism, drug money, and the western intelligence services together. The motive to turn a genuine terror plot into something much bigger is there - huge amounts of money flowing from the war on terror, ensuring US global dominance and the 'security' of Israel for years to come. As Marx said, "the capitalist will wade knee deep in blood for a profit of 300%". The profits that flowed from 9/11 were considerably greater than 300%. Go figure...
On 17 September 2001 he said:
"I would like to assure the world that I did not plan the recent attacks, which seems to have been planned by people for personal reasons. I have been living in the Islamic emirate of Afghanistan and following its leaders' rules. The current leader does not allow me to exercise such operations."
Then on October 16 2001, to repeat his denial, he said:
"I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States. As a Muslim, I try my best to avoid telling a lie. I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the killing of innocent women, children and other humans as an appreciable act. Islam strictly forbids causing harm to innocent women, children and other people. Such a practice is forbidden even in the course of a battle."
These tapes for some reason do not feature in the story of Bin Laden.
Meanwhile among the many, many bizarre coincidences of 9/11 how about Marvin Bush, the president's younger brother , being a senior exec at Securacom, the company in charge of security at the WTC, as well as Dulles Airport and United Airlines - all sites central to the attacks. An interesting coincidence, at the very least - or perhaps a case of familial incompetence and bad luck!
In truth the Bush family have deep ties with Saudi oil money. GW Bush's own career was on the path to ruin until he was saved by Saudi money, who bought inot his failing oil exploration company. A Saudi sheikh with a long history of supporting jihadism owned Bush long before he became Governor of Texas and then President. Don't believe me? - look it up.
Intelligent people are understandably skeptical about claims that 9/11 was not simply the work of a freelance terror group with a record of terror attacks. But they are not taking into account the infiltration and funding of terror groups by the security services of the West and the links that tie terrorism, drug money, and the western intelligence services together. The motive to turn a genuine terror plot into something much bigger is there - huge amounts of money flowing from the war on terror, ensuring US global dominance and the 'security' of Israel for years to come. As Marx said, "the capitalist will wade knee deep in blood for a profit of 300%". The profits that flowed from 9/11 were considerably greater than 300%. Go figure...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
