A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Military Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Bu$h Jr's Iran-Contra -- The Pentagone's Reign of Terror

Thread Tools Display Modes
Old September 3rd 03, 09:29 PM
external usenet poster
Posts: n/a
Default Bu$h Jr's Iran-Contra -- The Pentagone's Reign of Terror

Walter E. Davis, PhD blames the entire tragedy on the victims. Now we will
see the criminals pay.

How do you figure that? He blames the Bush family, which has benefitted
enormously from 9/11.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~

Keeper of the Humour List at

"Mother, mother ocean... I have heard your call" - Jimmy Buffett, A Pirate
Looks At Forty.

Old September 6th 03, 10:05 AM
Matt Wiser
external usenet poster
Posts: n/a

"Acharya" wrote:
Walter E. Davis, PhD blames the entire tragedy
on the victims. Now we will
see the criminals pay.

"֧m Ko" wrote
in message
.. .
Just as illegal business deals were at the

heart of Iran-Contra, so
are they at the heart of 9/11. Once again

with the CIA, and ex-CIA
director HW Bu$h in the middle. This time,

Bin Laden, not the Contras
was at the other end of the deal.

Bu$h went from petty Texas corporate crook,

to CIA director, to
president, and now finally to Emperor of the

fledgling Amerikan
Empire/NWO. Don't think Bu$h, Jr is in control

of the country, he's a
semi-retarded puppet, the people truly behind

the terror are no
innocent, jovial fools who have the interests

of the "comman man" in
mind. That innocent image cultivated by Bu$h

Jr hides the horrific
evil that is currently in control of Amerika's

military and

September 11th And The Bush Administration
Compelling Evidence for Complicity
Walter E. Davis, PhD
Information Clearing House


Clearly, one of the most critical questions

of the twenty-first
century concerns why the terrorist attacks

of September 11, 2001 were
not prevented. As I outline below, there are

numerous aspects
regarding the official stories about September

11th which do not fit
with known facts, which contradict each other,

which defy common
sense, and which indicate a pattern of misinformation

and coverup. The
reports coming out of Washington do very little

to alleviate these

For example, the Congressional report released

on July 25, 2003 by a
joint panel of House and Senate intelligence

committees concluded that
9/11 resulted in C.I.A. and F.B.I. "lapses."

While incompetence is
frightening enough given a $40 billion budget,

it is simply not
consistent with known facts. It is consistent

with the reports from
other government scandals such has the Iran

Contra Affair which
produced damage control and cover up but not

answers to the more
probing questions. But perhaps a comparison

to Watergate is more
apropos since we now have twenty-eight pages

of this report, which the
Bush Administration refuses to release. The

report from the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is believable

unless you are
seriously interested in the truth. Under more

careful scientific
scrutiny, it does not answer some very important


Newspapers across the country call for an

investigation into Bush's
lies about the reasons for war on Iraq. Many

people may accept the
fact of Bush's false pretext for a war on

Arab people in a distant
place, especially after the fact. However,

few people will be as
accepting if it is shown that this Administration

was complicit in
acts of atrocities against its own people.

The magnitude of the crisis is readily apparent

by noting that 9/11
serves as a pretext for a never-ending war

against the world,
including preemptive strikes against defenseless,

but resource rich
countries. It also serves as a pretext for

draconian measures of
repression at home, including the cabinet

level Department of Homeland
Security and Patriot Act I, and its sequel.

September 11th has become
the cause for numerous other acts from massive

increases in military
spending and to a Fast Track Trade Agreement

for the President.

To date, investigations stop far too short,

the public is left in the
dark on too many questions easily answered,

and no one in the Bush
Administration has been held accountable for

any actions surrounding
the attacks of September 11, 2001. The National

Commission on
Terrorists Attacks Upon the United States,

which was formed at the
insistence of the family of some of the victims,

is continuing to hold
hearings and a final report is expected by

May, 2004. It remains to be
seen if, after a two-year lapse, they can

come closer to the truth
about September 11th. I believe that this

would only happen if public
pressure were brought to bear and accountability

demanded from the
Bush Administration. Accountability for any

atrocity should attract
the attention of serious investigative reporters,

media critics and
even news commentators. That is their chosen

responsibility. Who is to
raise the question of why journalists and

others in the mass media are
failing the people of the U.S. and the world?

In this article, I outline twenty-two items

of evidence and questions,
each one sufficient reason to demand an investigation

into why
September 11th was not prevented. Together,

these items suggest that
the most plausible explanation of events is

that the Bush
Administration was complicit in the terrorist

attacks. This should be
a national and international scandal. What

is being discovered will
shock many people, which is one of the reasons

for deliberate
corporate media coverup. But a significant

number of people within the
U.S. see (or will see) the consistencies in

the events surrounding
9/11 as described below, and what they know

about U.S. foreign policy.
Nevertheless, the degree to which this Administration

is pursuing a
course of world domination at any cost is

unprecedented. One of the
best ways of putting a halt to this destructive

course is to expose
the Bush Administration and insist on their

accountability to the
American people. Thus, the intent of this

article is to help fill the
void in the media on the issue of the Bush

Administration's complicity
in 9/11.

Here is the official story: On the morning

of September 11, 2001 four
Boeing passenger jets were hijacked within

an hour by nineteen Arab
terrorists armed with boxcutters. Pilots among

these terrorists took
control of the commercial planes and changed

course toward targets in
New York City and Washington D.C. Two of the

planes were deliberately
crashed into the Twin Towers, causing fires

within the towers, which
melted the steel support structures, thereby

causing the buildings to
collapse completely. A third plane was deliberately

crashed into the
Pentagon. Passengers on the fourth plane overpowered

the hijackers and
caused the plane to crash in Pennsylvania.

This was an attack on
America planned and directed by Osama bin

Laden as the leader of
Al-Qaeda, a previously obscure anti-U.S. international

organization composed mainly of Arabs. This

story cries out for
further explanations, but nothing official

is forthcoming. People are
simply expected to believe the official version

without question.

Evidence of Complicity by the Bush Administration

in 9/11 Terrorist

The following twenty-two separate and related

points, citing evidence
requiring further investigation, and include

questions that demand
answers, were formulated on the basis of the

information from the
several sources cited at the end, which should

be consulted for
verification and documentation. These sources

contain extensive
detailed information and analysis beyond what

is provided in this
summary. I hope that this information will

incite public outrage
leading to full accountability.

1) The entire United States intelligence community

knew of the 9/11
attacks before hand, including the fact that

commercial jets were to
be used as bombs; they also knew the approximate

dates and possible
targets but were called off their investigations.

Western intelligence
had been aware of plans for such terrorist

attacks on U.S. soil as
early as 1995. The plan was known as "Project

Bojinka." It was known
to both the CIA and FBI and was described

in court documents in the
trial in New York of Ramzi Yousef and Abdul

Murad for their
participation in the 1993 bombing of the World

Trade Center (WTC).

Seven to eight weeks prior to September 11th,

all internal U.S.
security agencies were warned of the impending

Al-Qaeda attacks. The
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) was

warned of the attack but did
nothing to beef up security. At least two

weeks prior to September
11th the FBI agents again confirmed that an

attack on lower Manhattan
was imminent. However, the FBI agents were

commanded to cut short
their investigations into the attacks and

those involved. Agents were
threatened with prosecution under the National

Security Act if they
publicized information pertaining to their

investigations. Some field
agents predicted, almost precisely, what happened

on September 11th.

As early as 1997, Russia, France, Israel,

the Philippines and Egypt
all warned the U.S. of the possibility of

the attack. Warning also
came from came from several others sources

as well. Recently (May 25,
2002), CBS revealed that President Bush had

been warned in an
intelligence briefing on August 6, 2001that

bin Laden might be
planning to hijack commercial planes for a

domestic attack in the U.S.

2) There is incontrovertible evidence that

the US Air Force all across
the country was comprehensively "stood down"

on the morning of
September 11th. Routine security measures,

normally in place, which
may well have been able to prevent the attacks,

or reduce their
impact, were suspended for one hour while

the attacks were in
progress, and re-instated once they were over.

Sequence of events:

8:46 a.m.: American Airlines Flight 11 from

Boston smashed into the
north tower of the WTC. The tower collapses

at 10:28 a.m.

9:03 a.m.: United Airlines Flight 175 from

Boston smashed into the
south tower. It completely collapses at 9:59am.

9:38 a.m.: AA Flight 77 from Dulles hits the


10:10 a.m.: United Flight 93 from Newark crashed

in Shanksville,

Andrews Air Force Base is a huge military

installation about 10 miles
from the Pentagon. On September 11th there

were two entire squadrons
of combat-ready fighter jets at Andrews. They

failed to do their job
of protecting the skies over Washington D.C.

Despite over one hour's
advance warning of a terrorist attack in progress,

not a single
Andrews fighter tried to protect the city.

The FAA, NORAD and the
military have cooperative procedures enabling

fighter jets to
automatically intercept commercial aircraft

under emergency
conditions. They do not need instructions

from the White House to
carry out these procedures, yet they were

not followed.

American Airline Flight 11 departed from Boston

Logan Airport at 7:45
a.m. Between 8:13 and 8:20 a.m. Flight 11

became unresponsive to
ground control and radar indicated that the

plane had deviated from
its assigned path of flight. Two Flight 11

airline attendants had
separately called American Airlines reporting

a hijacking, the
presence of weapons, and the infliction of

injuries on passengers and
crew. At this point an emergency was undeniably

clear. Yet, according
to NORAD's official timeline, NORAD was not

contacted until 20 minutes
later at 8:40 a.m. Tragically the fighter

jets were not deployed until
8:52 a.m., a full 32 minutes after the loss

of contact with Flight 11.

Flights 175, 77 and 93 all had this same pattern

of delays in
notification and delays in scrambling fighter

jets. Delays that are
difficult to imagine considering a plane had,

by this time, already
hit the WTC. The plane striking the pentagon

is particularly
spectacular. After it was known that the plane

had a problem, it was
nevertheless able to change course and fly

towards Washington, for
about 45 minutes, fly past the White House,

and crash into the
Pentagon, without any attempt at interception.

All the while two
squadrons of fighter aircraft were stationed

just 10 miles from the
eventual target. Unless one is prepared to

allege collusion, such a
scenario is not possible by any stretch of

the imagination.

3) Neither the Joint Chief of Staff, the Secretary

of Defense nor the
President of the United States acted according

to well established
emergency protocols. Acting Joint Chief of

Staff General Richard B.
Myers stated that he saw a TV report about

a plane hitting the WTC but
thought it was a small plane. So he went ahead

with his meeting. By
the time he came out of the meeting the Pentagon

had been hit. Whose
responsibility was it to relay this emergency

to the Joint Chief of

The Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld was

at his desk when AA77
crashed into the Pentagon. How is it possible

that the National
Military Command Center, located in the Pentagon

and in contact with
law enforcement and air traffic controllers

from 8:46 a.m., did not
communicate to the Secretary of Defense, also

at the Pentagon, about
the other hijacked planes especially the one

headed to Washington?
After he was notified, why did he go to the

war room?

The actions of the President, while the attacks

were occurring,
indicate that he deliberately avoided doing

anything reasonably
expected of a President wanting to protect

American citizens and
property. Why didn't the Secret Service inform

him of this national
emergency? When is a President supposed to

be notified of everything
the agencies know? Why was the President permitted

by the Secret
Service to remain in the Sarasota elementary

school? At 9.05, nineteen
minutes after the first attack and two minutes

after the second attack
on the WTC, Andrew Card, the presidential

chief of staff, whispered
something in President Bush's ear. The president

did not react as if
he was interested in trying to do something

about the situation. He
did not leave the school, convene an emergency

meeting, consult with
anybody, or intervene in any way, to ensure

that the Air Force
completed it's job. He did not even mention

the extraordinary events
occurring in New York, but simply continued

with the reading class.
His own explanations of his actions that day

contradict known facts.

In the case of a national emergency, seconds

of indecision could cost
thousands of lives; and it's precisely for

this reason that the
government has a whole network of adjuncts


advisors to insure that these top officials

are among the first to be
informed, not the last. Where were these individuals

who did not
properly inform the top officials?

In short, the CIA, the DCI, the State Department,

the President, and
key figures around him in the White House,

were ultimately responsible
for doing nothing in the face of the mounting

evidence of an impending
threat to U.S. national security. Incompetence

is a highly improbable

4) Prior to 9/11, the US intelligence agencies

should have stopped the
nineteen terrorists from entering this country

for intelligence
reasons, alone. Fifteen of the nineteen hijackers'

visas should have
been unquestionably denied because their applications

were incomplete
and incorrect. Most of the 19 hijackers were

young, unmarried, and
un-employed males. They were, in short, the

"classic over-stay
candidates". A seasoned former Consular officer

stated in the National
Review magazine, "Single, idle young adults

with no specific
destination in the United States rarely get

visas absent compelling

There are several cases damaging to the credibility

of the official
accounts of 9/11. But the U.S. response to

Mohamed Atta, the alleged
lead hijacker, is most extraordinary. The

FBI had been monitoring
Atta's movements for several months in 2000.

According to PBS'
Frontlines, the Immigration and Naturalization

Service failed to stop
Atta from entering the U.S. three times on

a tourist visa in 2001,
even though officials knew the visa had expired

in 2000, and that Atta
had violated its terms by taking flight lessons.

Furthermore, Atta had
already been implicated in a terrorist bombing

in Israel, with the
information passed on to the United States

before he was first issued
his tourist visa.

5) How did many of the hijackers receive clearance

for training at
secure U.S. military and intelligence facilities,

and for what
purposes? Many of the terrorist pilots received

their initial training
in Venice, Florida at one of two flight schools

of highly questionable
credibility and with approval of US intelligence.

Mohamed Atta had
attended International Officers School at

Maxwell Air Force Base in
Montgomery, Alabama; Abdulaziz Alomari had

attended Aerospace Medical
School at Brooks Air Force base in Texas;

Saeed Alghamdi had been to
the Defense Language Institute in Monterey,

California. These are all
names of identified hijackers, so why has

the U.S. government
attempted to deny the match? As early as three

days after the 9/11
attacks, FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III

claimed that these
findings were new and had not been known by

the FBI previously. This
claim is a lie.

Zacarias Moussaouri was arrested after his

flight trainers at the
Minnesota flight school, Pan Am International

Flight Academy, reported
highly suspicious behavior. He was greatly

unqualified; he wanted to
learn to fly a 747 but wasn't interested in

takeoffs or landings; he
was traveling on a French passport, said he

was from France, but could
not speak French. When

contacted, the French said he was a suspected

terrorist connected to
Al-Qaeda. However, a special counter terrorism

panel of the FBI and
CIA reviewed the case and dismissed it.

There are numerous glaring anomalies, illegalities

and scandals
connected with Wally Hilliard and Rudi Dekker's

Huffman Aviation
School at Venice, Florida where other hijackers

trained. Dekkers had
no aviation experience and was under indictment

in his native country,
The Netherlands, on financial charges. He

purchased his aviation
school at just about the time the terrorist

pilots moved into town and
began their lessons. He has yet to be investigated

even though he
initially trained most of the hijackers.

Britannia Aviation was awarded a five-year

contract to run a large
regional maintenance facility at Lynchburg

at a time when the company
virtually had no assets, employees, or corporate

history and did not
posses the necessary FAA license needed to

perform the maintenance.
Britannia was a company with known CIA connections.

It was operating
illegally out of Huffman Aviation, the flight

school which trained
Al-Qaeda hijackers and was given a "green

light" from the Justice
Department's Drugs Enforcement Administration,

and the local Venice
Police Department was warned to "leave them

alone." Why?

6) How were the hijackers able to get specifically

contraband items
such as box-cutters, pepper spray and, according

to one FAA executive
summary, a gun on those planes? On the morning

of September 11th, when
the 19 hijackers went to purchase their tickets

and to receive their
boarding passes, nine were singled out and

questioned through a
screening process. But they passed the screening

process and were
allowed to continue on with their mission.

7) At a time when the U.S. intelligence community

was on alert for an
imminent Al-Qaeda attack, the Bush Administration

made it easier for
Saudi visitors to come to the U.S. under a

program called U.S. Visa
Express, introduced four months before September

11th. Michael
Springmann, former head of the Visa Bureau

at the U.S. Consulate in
Jeddah, Saudi Arabia said that he was repeatedly

ordered by high-level
State Departtment officials to issue visas

to unqualified applicants.
His complaints to higher authorities at several

agencies went
unanswered. In a CBC interview, he indicated

that the CIA was indeed
complicit in the attacks.

8) Most of the hijackers were Saudis, as is

Osama bin Laden, and the
Saudi Arabian government is known to give

financial support to
terrorist organizations. Why is Iraq and not

Saudi Arabia a target if
the US government is concerned about terrorism?

Saudi Arabia's
government cooperates with US oil and arms

industries; Iraq did not.
Iraq is forced to now, of course. At least

fifteen of the far-flung
network of terrorist pilots received their

money from the same source.
There is specific evidence that Osama bin

Laden continues to receive
extensive support, not only from members of

his own family, but also
from members of the Saudi establishment. A

New Statesman report stated
that "Bin Laden and his gang are just the

tentacles; the head lies
safely in Saudi Arabia, protected by U.S.

forces." The hijackers
responsible for 9/11 were not illiterate,

bearded fanatics from
Afghanistan. They were all educated, highly

skilled, middle-class
professionals. Of the 19 men involved, 13

were citizens of Saudi

9) Why were the FBI called off its investigation

of Osama bin Laden
and the Saudi Royal Family prior to 9/11?

Moreover, why were the FBI
Agents ordered to curtail their investigation

of these attacks on
October 10, 2001? The FBI has repeatedly complained

that it has been
muzzled and restricted in its attempts to

investigate matters
connected to Bin Laden and Al Qeada. One law

enforcement official was
quoted as saying, "The investigative staff

has to be made to
understand that we're not trying to solve

a crime now." FBI Agents are
said to be in the process of filing a law

suit agents the Agency for
the right to go public.

10) Osama Bin Laden was unofficially convicted

of the attacks within a
time frame that could not possibly have allowed

any intelligence to
have been gathered which supported the accusation.

That is, it would
be impossible if they did not already have

that information. How could
they have had no warning of an operation,

which must have been very
difficult to keep under wraps, but then be

able to name the culprit in
less than a day? And if they had some forewarning

of the attack, even
if it was not specific, then it raises even

more questions about
government agencies' complicity.

It is not logical that Bin Laden was involved,

and actually
impossible, unless he was involved in the

capacity of collusion with
US authorities, or at best, in the context

of the US knowing all along
what he was up to, and deliberately allowing

him to do it. The point
has already been made that if he was involved,

then it cannot have
been a surprise, which in turn, points to

the President and others in
his administration.

From day one, there has not been a shred of

publicly available
evidence against Bin Laden. Up until mid December,

there was nothing
but the continued repetition of his name.

The official documents
detailing allegations against Bin Laden provide

no convincing
evidence. Of the 69 points of "evidence" cited,

ten relate to
background information about the relationship

between Bin Laden and
the Taliban. Fifteen relate to background

information regarding the
general philosophies of Al Qeada, and it's

relationship to Bin Laden.
None give any facts concerning the events

of 9/11. Most do not even
attempt to directly relate anything mentioned

to the events of that
day. Twenty-six list allegations related to

previous terrorist
attacks. Even if they were convictions of

previous terrorist attacks,
everybody knows that this isn't worth the

paper it's written on, in
terms of evidence for involvement of September


Within less than four hours of the attacks

taking place, the media
were fed comments, which assumed Bin Laden's

guilt, comments made on
the basis of events, which could not possibly

have occurred. The
Pentagon and the Department of Defense used

dialogue attributed to Bin
Laden, in an effort to incriminate him, while

refusing to release all
of the dialogue, and refusing to issue a verbatim,

translation. Why was it considered necessary

to lie, in order to
create a case against Bin Laden? The truth

could well implicate the
Bush administration.

11) Pakistan's Intelligence Agency (ISI) was

indirectly involved in
September 11th. The links between Al Qaeda,

Pakistan's ISI and the
CIA; and, between the ISI, Osama bin Laden

and the Taliban Axis are a
matter of public record. Pakistan has also

long been a supporter of Al
Qeada. The Pakistani ISI (secret service)

has been a mechanism by
which the CIA indirectly channeled support

to Al Qeada and has been
used by successive US administrations as a

"go-between." Pakistan's
military-intelligence apparatus constitutes

the core institutional
support to both Osama's Al Qaeda and the Taliban.

Without this
institutional support, there would be no Taliban

government in Kabul.
In turn, without the unbending support of

the US government, there
would be no powerful military-intelligence

apparatus in Pakistan.

It was reported that ISI's Director-General,

General Mahmoud Ahmad,
had funneled $100,000 to the lead hijacker,

Mohamed Atta, shortly
before September 11th. The U.S. government

protected him, and itself,
by asking him to resign quietly after the

discovery, thus blocking a
further inquiry and a potential scandal. In

the wake of 9/11, the Bush
Administration consciously sought the "cooperation"

of the ISI, which
had been supporting and abetting Osama bin

Laden and the Taliban. In
other words, the Bush Administration's relations

with Pakistan's ISI,
including its "consultations" with General

Mahmoud Ahmad in the week
prior to September 11th, raise the issue of

"cover-up" as well as
"complicity". While Ahmad was talking to U.S.

officials at the CIA and
the Pentagon, the ISI allegedly had contacts

with the 9/11 terrorists.

12) The USA and Bin Laden are not the enemies

they pretend to be. It
is established beyond doubt that senior members

of the Bush
administration have close links to the Bin

Laden Family and this
relationship is still going on behind the

scenes. In fact, there is
plenty of circumstantial evidence to indicate

that Bin Laden, may have
had something to do with 9/11, but the problem

is that it also
implicates the Bush Administration, the CIA,

George Bush Senior,
Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and The United Arab


It is well known that Bin Laden's close working

relationship with the
CIA began in the 1980's. The claim is that

they have since fallen out,
but this story is a lie. According to the

mainstream media spin, this
is OK, because the rest of the family has

disowned Osama for his
terrorist activities and anti-US views. This

spin is also a lie.

The "blowback" thesis is a fabrication. The

evidence amply confirms
that the CIA never severed its ties to the

"Islamic Militant Network".
Since the end of the Cold War these covert

intelligence links have not
only been maintained, they have become increasingly


13) How was it possible for the World Trade

Center's two towers to
have completely collapsed as a result of two

jet planes? The towers in
fact stood for forty-five and ninety minutes

after the crashes. The
official story is that the burning jet fuel

caused the steel girders
supporting them to melt. However, there is

simply no credibly
scientific evidence to support this story.

The WTC towers were
designed to take the impact of a Boeing 707.

It is highly unlikely
that fire from the jet fuel could have melted

the steel girders. This
is especially true of the South tower since

the plane did not hit it
directly. Therefore most of the fuel did not

fall inside the building.
The South Tower was hit second and fell first.

Both towers collapsed
evenly and smoothly in a manner consistent

with that caused by a
planned demolition. Based upon scientific

evidences, photos and videos
of the event, and reports of scientists, the

WTC architect and
engineers, it is highly unlikely that the

Towers collapsed because of
burning jet fuel rather than demolition. There

are also serious
questions regarding the collapse of the building

known as WTC7. It is
also noteworthy that ownership of the WTC

changed hands several months
earlier because if the towers collapsed because

of inside demolition,
such accomplishment would require cooperation

from the extensive WTC
security forces.

14) Why was Bin Laden not captured before

9/11, and why has he not
been captured since? There have been several

opportunities to capture
Osama bin Laden, but no effort to do so was

made. Two US allies, Saudi
Arabia, and The United Arab Emirates, have

colluded in deliberately
allowing Bin Laden to stay free. Bin Laden

was meeting with the CIA as
late as July 2001. An examination of U.S.

attempts to capture Osama
bin Laden show they have in fact consistently

blocked attempts to
investigate and capture him. Eleven bin Laden

family members were
flown safely out of the same Boston airport

where the highjacking took
place a few days earlier. Why were they not

detained for questioning?

15) The September 11th disaster has resulted

in power and profit at
home and abroad by both the Bin Laden and

the Bush families. There are
significant business ties between Bin Laden

and senior members of the
Bush administration. Reports have emerged

that Carlyle Group, the
giant U.S. defence contractor that employs

former President George W.
Bush Sr., has had long-standing financial

ties to the bin Laden
family. So while there is compelling evidence

that Osama bin Laden has
not broken away from his family, it is also

a matter of record that
the Bush administration is in turn very significantly

tied to the same
family. The Carlyle Group has profited immensely

from the wars on
Afghanistan and Iraq and from the militarization

of U.S. foreign

16) Revelations of profits made by insider

trading relating to the
9/11 attacks, point to the top levels of US

business and the CIA. The
intelligence community regularly analyzes

financial transactions for
any suspicious activity. Only three trading

days before September
11th, shares of American and United Airlines

-- the companies whose
planes were hijacked in the attacks on New

York and Washington -- were
massively "sold short" by investors. Executive

CIA Director AB "Buzzy"
Krongard was one of those who profited from

the deal. The names of the
other investors remain undisclosed and the

$5 million in profit taking
remains unclaimed in the Chicago Exchange

account. No similar trading
in other airlines occurred on the Chicago

exchange in the day
immediately preceding Black Tuesday. There

were also unusual trades on
several companies occupying the World Trade

Center, including Morgan
Stanley Dean Witter & Co., and Merrill Lynch

& Co. These multiple,
massive and unprecedented financial transactions

point unequivocally
to the fact that the investors behind these

trades were speculating in
anticipation of a mid-September 2001 catastrophe

that would involve
both United and American Airlines and offices

in the Twin Towers. To
date, both the Securities & Exchange Commission

and the FBI have been
tight-lipped about their investigations of

trades. A probe could
isolate the investors. Why has nothing been

made public?

17) Selected persons were told not to fly

that day. Newsweek reported
that on September 10th, "a group of top Pentagon

officials suddenly
canceled travel plans for the next morning,

apparently because of
security concerns." Why was that same information

not made available
to the 266 people who died aboard the four

hijacked commercial
aircraft? A significant number of selected

people were warned about
flying or reporting for work at the WTC. San

Francisco Mayor Willie
Brown received a phone call eight hours before

the hijacking warning
him not to travel by air. Salman Rushdie is

under a 24-hour protection
of UK Scotland yard; he was also prevented

from flying that day. Ariel
Sharon canceled his address to Israeli support

groups in New York City
just the day before his scheduled September

11th address. John
Ashcroft stopped flying on public airplanes

in July of 2001.

Other evidence exists indicating that government

officials knew of the
attacks beforehand. For example, Tom Kenny

who was with a rescue squad
from FEMA told Dan Rather of CBS News that,

"We arrived on Monday
night (September 10th) and went into action

of Tuesday." How is it
possible for high government officials to

have been caught by surprise
as some claimed?

18) There are reasonable grounds for suspicion

that the U.S. attack on
Afghanistan was already planned before September

11th. A pretext for
war is always needed. From investigative journalist

Patrick Martin,
"[t]his examination has found that a specific

war on Afghanistan . . .
launched in October 2001 had been planned

for at least a year, and in
general terms related to regional strategic

and economic interests,
had actually been rooted in at least four

years of strategic planning.
This planning, in turn, is the culmination

of a decade of regional
strategizing. All that was required was a

trigger for these war plans,
which was amply provided by the tragic events

of 11th September."

It is public knowledge that Unocal and others

in the oil industry were
negotiating with Afghan officials for a pipeline

across their country
as part of the "Silk Road" strategy. It was

also reported that the
talks had broken down. A specific threat made

at a meeting: the
Taliban can choose between a "carpets of bombs"

- an invasion - or a
"carpets of gold" - the oil and gas pipelines.

Experts agree that
Central Asia and the Caspian Basin are central

to energy in the 21st
century and that energy is central to political,

economic and military
power. James Dorian noted in the Oil & Gas

Journal: "Those who control
the oil routes out of Central Asia will impact

all future direction
and quantities of flow and the distribution

of revenues from new
production" (cited in Ahmed, 2002, p. 69).

The plans for global domination developed

by those of Project for the
New American Century, a neoconservative think

tank formed in the
Spring of 1997, are also a matter of public

record. These plans
included specifics for taking military control

of Central Asia,
including regime change in Iraq. The primary

architects of these plans
include Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Pearle, Richard

Cheney and Donald
Rumsfeld, all part of the first Bush Administration

ousted by Bill
Clinton and now back in power with George

W. Bush.

19) The 9/11 attacks came at an extremely

fortuitous time for the Bush
administration, the Pentagon, the CIA, the

FBI, the weapons industry,
and the oil industry, all of which have benefited

immensely from this
tragedy. It is worth noting the acute observations

of Canadian social
philosopher John McMurtry: "To begin with,

the forensic principle of
'who most benefits from the crime?' clearly

points in the direction of
the Bush administration. . . . The more you

review the connections and
the sweeping lapse of security across so many

coordinates, the more
the lines point backwards [to the White House]."

20) Both the U.S. and the USSR are responsible

for the rise of
religious extremism, terrorism and civil war

within Afghanistan since
the 1980s. The U.S., however, is directly

responsible for the
cultivation of a distorted 'jihadi' ideology

that fueled, along with
U.S. arms and training, the ongoing war and

acts of terrorism within
the country after the withdrawal of Soviet


21) The Bush Administration is clearly capable

of creating or allowing
such atrocities to occur. Hitler was able

to play the anti-communist
card to win over skeptical German industrialists.

Certainly the Bush
family are not newcomers to melding political

and business interests,
they got their start as key Hitler supporters.

Prescott Bush, father
of George Bush Sr., was Hitler's banker and

propaganda manager in New
York, until FDR confiscated his holdings.

George Bush Sr. used Manuel
Noriega as a scapegoat, killing thousands

of innocent Panamanians in
the process of re-establishing U.S. control

over Panama. It is also
widely believed that the current Bush Administration

knowingly misled
the people about the war in Iraq.

22) There are precedents for these kinds of

acts of complicity and
fabrications. Rejecting claim that the evidence

for collusion is
over-ruled by a belief that no country would

do this to its own
citizens, simply requires pointing out that

the contemplation of
terrorist attacks on U.S. citizens by the

CIA is a matter of public
record. The previously classified "Operation

Northwoods" document
reveals that in 1962, the CIA seriously considered

the possibility of
carrying out terrorist attacks against US

citizens, in order to blame
it on Cuba. The plans were never implemented,

but were given approval
signatures by all the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

The plan included several
options, including killing Cuban defectors

or U.S. soldiers, sinking
ships, and staging simulations of planes being

shot down. All this was
done to blame on Castro as a pretext for launching

a war against Cuba.

Far from being an unprecedented shocker, suspected

complicity in 9/11 builds on an august and

cynical tradition. "It's
the oldest trick in the book, dating back

to Roman times." Examples of
democracy being hoaxed include the sinking

of the Maine, Pearl Harbor
bombardment, which President Roosevelt is

believed to have known about
beforehand, and the hoax of the Gulf of Tonkin



The evidence seems clear that if the many

agencies of the U.S.
government had done their jobs, the September

11th attack would likely
have been prevented. If there had been an

immediate investigation into
the September 11th attacks, the wars on Afghanistan

and Iraq could not
have been justified simply on the basis of

terrorism. Surely questions
must be asked about why there is yet no accountability

of the Bush
administration and why the journalists and

others in mass media are
not held responsible for the coverup, deception

and lack of
investigative reporting. From the evidence

presented it would seem
that much public whistle-blowing ought to

be taking place. Why is it
not yet evident?

I believe that it is important not to approach

9/11 as the possibility
of some grand conspiracy, but a possible conspiracy

of some sort
nevertheless. One important insight is how

hierarchical authoritarian
social systems function. Top down directives

and commands, especially
if they carry the weight of threats of censorship

and punishment serve
to keep any dissent in check. There is a great

deal of self-censorship
operating in all institutions in the United

States. It is also
important to recognize the role of a shared

ideology among the
decision makers, or perhaps more specifically

the role of what social
psychologists, in studies of organizational

behavior, call
"groupthink." Groupthink is decision making

characterized by
uncritical acceptance of and conformity with

the prevailing view.
Thus, the will of a few key persons can be

spread within and across
government agencies.

Thus the possibility of complicity on the

part of the Bush
Administration is very real. At the very least,

further and more
honest investigations must take place and

some accountability exacted
from those responsible.

Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed, Executive Director

of the Institute for Policy
Research & Development, Brighton, England,


The executive branch of the federal government

has apparently enabled
a lethal surprise attack with mass murder

against two of the founding
thirteen colonies, New York and Virginia.

By such an act, the federal
government would grossly violate and void

its contract with the
states, and abrogate its own constitutional

rights and privileges.
Even if you do not accept the complicity argument,

it has failed to
protect its largest city from the consequences

of its overweening
foreign policies.

Like a loose handgun, our Federal government

has backfired on its
owners, the States. The executive has gone

to war in defiance of the
Constitution, and Congress has abdicated its

war-making authority on
at least 200 occasions since 1945, according

to the Federation of
American Scientists. The federal government

has proven utterly
incapable and unwilling to remedy its chronic

and world-threatening
sickness (p. 376-377).

It seems apropos to conclude: "if you are

part of the problem, then
you are not part of the solution." The solution

then lies with the
people themselves and not with any US government

agency, least of all
the Executive Branch.


Ahmed, Nafeez Mosaddeq (2002). The war on

freedom: How and why America
was attacked September 11, 2001. Joshua Tree,

CA: Tree of Life
Publications. AThe War on Freedom rips apart

the veil of silence
surrounding 9/11, and lets readers look at

the facts for themselves.
This riveting and thoroughly documented study

[718 citations] is a
"must" resource for everyone seeking to understand

the attack on the
World Trade Center of New York on September

11, 2001 and "America's
New War."

Bamford, James (2001). Body of secrets : anatomy

of the ultra-secret
National Security Agency : from the Cold War

through the dawn of a new
century. New York: Doubleday, 2001. See for

detailed information on
Operation Northwood and other "secrets."

Burbach, Roger, & Clarke, Ben (Eds.) (2002).

September 11 and the U.S.
war: Beyond the curtain of smoke. San Francisco:

City Light Books.
This is an anthology of 41 short pieces by

more than 30 authors who
dissent from the bellicose actions of the

U.S. government since
9-11-01. These essays provide the essential

background and analysis
needed to understand the origins and consequences

of the attack of
September 11th and the U.S. government's response.

Chossudovsky, Michel (2002). War and globalisation:

The truth behind
September 11. London: Zed Books. "In this

timely study, Michel
Chossudovsky blows away the smokescreen, put

up by the mainstream
media, that 9-11 was an 'intelligence failure'.

Through meticulous
research, the author uncovers a military-intelligence

ploy behind the
September 11 attacks, and the coverup and

complicity of key members of
the Bush Administration."

Grey, Steve (2002). September 11 Attacks:

Evidence of U.S. collusion.

Hopsicker, Daniel:

Jones, Alex: http://.

National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon

the United States
http://www.9-11commission.gov/hearings/. See

especially the testimony
of Mindy Kleinberg, Stephen Push and others

on the First Public
Hearings Archives, p. 163.

Thompson, Paul: http://cooperativeresearch.org.

See "US preparing for
a war with Afghanistan before 9/11, increasing

control of Asia before
& since" and several other articles.

http://emperors-clothes.com. See several short

articles by Jared
Israel, John Flaherty, Illarion Bykov, Francisco

Gil-White and George

http://globaloutlook.ca. This site has numerous

links to documented
articles and other valuable resources.

. This web site has extensive information

and detailed analysis. It
raises many serious questions about the official

stories and reports.
It has undergone recent revisions based upon

new evidence.



Address correspondence to: Walter E. Davis.

263 MACC Annex, Kent State
University Kent, OH 44242

Rebel Alliance Galactic Usenet News Service
http://snurl.com/25dw | http://snurl.com/25dx

Some of the criminals have already been caught and will pay-Khalid Sheikh
Mohammed, Ramzi Binalshibh, Abu Zubyadah, to name three of them; Mohammed
Atef was KIA in a airstrike in Afghanistan just before Kabul fell. And a
lot of smaller fry have either been caught or sent to the morgue. Next up
(and hopefully soon) is Bin Laden himself. Whether or not he winds up in
court or in a body bag is his choice, not ours....

Posted via www.My-Newsgroups.com - web to news gateway for usenet access!

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:18 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.