News Of Great Interest Page XII
September 11, 2001
Kiss your civil liberties goodbye.
MEDIUM RARE By Jim Rarey September 28, 2001 - MAY GOD FORGIVE THEM
Noam Chomsky On The Events Of 911 As Interviewed On Radio B92, Belgrade 9-27-1
Pakistan's ex-spy chief blames Mossad By ARNAUD DE BORCHGRAVE, UPI Editor at Large
International Terrorist Support Groups Thrive in Belgium and Netherlands
PRACTISING FOR THE WTC/PENTAGON BLASTS IN ISRAEL by Barry Chamish
http://www.epic.org/privacy/terrorism/ata_analysis.html
September 24, 2001
Analysis of Provisions of the Proposed Anti-Terrorism Act of 2001
Affecting the Privacy of Communications and Personal InformationIn response to the horrendous attacks that occurred on September 11, Attorney General Ashcroft has proposed the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2001 (ATA), a far-reaching legislative package intended to strengthen the nation’s defense against terrorism. Several of ATA’s provisions would vastly expand the authority of law enforcement and intelligence agencies to monitor private communications and access personal information. Those provisions address issues that are complex and implicate fundamental constitutional protections of individual liberty, including the appropriate procedures for interception of information transmitted over the Internet and other rapidly evolving technologies. Despite the complexity of these matters, the Attorney General has urged Congress to quickly approve the proposal, which became available for analysis only within the last several days.
As Congress considers this important piece of legislation, it should be guided by several critical factors:
- Law enforcement and intelligence agencies already possess broad authority to conduct investigations of suspected terrorist activity. In fact, Congress approved new surveillance powers to combat terrorism in late 1998. Describing those provisions after enactment, an FBI national security official said that "any one of these extremely valuable tools could be the keystone of a successful operation" against sophisticated foreign terrorists.
- Any expansion of existing authorities should be based upon a clear and convincing demonstration of need. Congress should assess the likely effectiveness of any proposed new powers in combating the threats posed by terrorist activity.
- Any new authorities deemed necessary should be narrowly drawn to protect the privacy and constitutional rights of the millions of law-abiding citizens who use the Internet and other communications media on a daily basis.
- The longstanding distinction between domestic law enforcement and foreign intelligence collection should be preserved to the greatest extent possible consistent with the need to detect and prevent terrorist activity.
- Expanded investigative powers should be limited to the investigation of terrorist activity and should not be made generally applicable to all criminal investigations.
Analysis of Specific Provisions Pen Registers, the Internet and Carnivore
Currently, the statute authorizing the use of "pen register" and "trap and trace" devices governs real time interception of "numbers dialed or otherwise transmitted on the telephone line to which such device is attached." Although the use of such devices requires a court order, it does not require a showing of probable cause. There is, in effect, no judicial discretion, as the court must authorize monitoring upon the mere certification by a government attorney that the "information likely to be obtained by such installation and use is relevant to an ongoing criminal investigation." Therefore, these procedures lack almost all of the significant privacy protections found in Title III, the statute governing the interception of the actual "content" of a communication (e.g., a phone conversation or the text of an e-mail message).
The proposed ATA (Section 101) would significantly expand law enforcement authority to use trap and trace and pen register devices. Current law relating to the use of such devices was written to apply to the telephone industry, therefore the language of the statute refers only to the collection of "numbers dialed" on a "telephone line" and the "originating number" of a telephone call. The proposed legislation would redefine a pen register as "a device or process which records or decodes dialing, routing, addressing, or signaling information transmitted by an instrument or facility from which a wire or electronic communication is transmitted." A trap and trace device would be defined as "a device or process which captures the incoming electronic or other impulses which identify the originating number or other dialing, routing, addressing, and signaling information relevant to identifying the source or a wire or electronic communication."
By expanding the nature of the information that can be captured, the amendment clearly expands pen register capacities to the Internet, covering electronic mail, Web surfing, and all other forms of electronic communications. The full impact of this expansion of coverage is difficult to assess, as the proposed statutory definitions are vague with respect to the types of information that can be captured and are subject to broad interpretations. The proposed ATA does not take into account the unique nature of such information, which contains data far more revealing than phone numbers, such as URLs generated while using the Web which often contain a great deal of information that cannot in any way be analogized to a telephone number. Although the FBI has compared telephone calls to Internet communications to justify invocation of the existing pen register statute to authorize the use of its controversial Carnivore system, whether current law in fact grants such authority remains an open and debatable question. The proposed amendment would codify the FBI’s questionable interpretation of the pen register statute, thereby closing the door to fully informed and deliberate consideration of this complex issue.
When the FBI’s use of Carnivore was revealed in July 2000, there was a great deal of concern expressed by members of Congress, who stated their intent to examine the issues and draft appropriate legislation. To facilitate that process, former Attorney General Reno announced that issues surrounding Carnivore would be considered by a Justice Department review panel and that its recommendations would be made public. That promised report had not been released when Ms. Reno left office, and Attorney General Ashcroft recently announced that a high-level Department official would complete the review process. As a result of the delay, Congress does not yet have the benefit of the promised findings and recommendations. Because Carnivore provides the FBI with access to the communications of all subscribers of a monitored Internet Service Provider (and not just those of the court-designated target), it raises substantial privacy issues for millions of law-abiding American citizens.
Expanded Dissemination of Wiretap Information
The proposed ATA (Section 103) would amend the definition of "investigative or law enforcement officer" (for purposes of 18 U.S.C. § 2517) to include "any officer of or employee of the executive branch of the federal government." 18 U.S.C. 2517 governs the permissive disclosure and use of intercepted communications; information captured through interception can be disclosed to "another investigative or law enforcement officer to the extent that such disclosure is appropriate to the proper performance of the official duties of the officer making or receiving the disclosure," and the information can be used by any officer properly in possession of the information "to the extent appropriate to the proper performance of his duties." The amendment would thus permit broad disclosure of information obtained through wiretaps to any employee of the Executive branch, without clear limits on what information may be disclosed, to whom, or for what purposes. Although the Justice Department states that "[t]his section facilitates the disclosure of Title III [wiretap] information to other components of the intelligence community in terrorism investigations," the proposal is far more expansive, as the permitted disclosure to and use by Executive employees would not be limited to information relating to investigations of terrorist activitie.
Use of Wiretap Information from Foreign Governments
The proposed legislation (Section 105) would permit United States prosecutors to use against American citizens information collected overseas by foreign governments even if the interception would have violated the Fourth Amendment if conducted by the United States. The proposed amendment would not permit use of such information if obtained with the "knowing participation," or at the direction, of American law enforcement personnel if gathered in violation of constitutional protections. The most immediate problem with this provision is its general applicability; the amendment is not limited to use of intercepted information relating to terrorism investigations. Furthermore, permitting use of private communications obtained by foreign governments without Fourth Amendment compliance could easily invite undetectable collusion between U.S. and foreign agencies in circumstances where U.S. authorities would be constitutionally precluded from obtaining the information themselves.
Interception of "Computer Trespasser" Communications
Existing law prohibits anyone from intentionally intercepting or disclosing the contents of any intercepted communications without complying with the requirements of the wiretap statute, unless such interception and disclosure falls within one of several statutory exceptions. The proposed ATA (Section 106) would create a new exception, permitting government interception of the "communications of a computer trespasser" if the owner or operator of a "protected computer" authorized the interception. The proposed exception has potentially broad implication, given that a "protected computer" includes one "which is used in interstate or foreign commerce or communication."
In light of the potential breadth of this exception, it would be particularly inappropriate to remove any judicial oversight from surveillance of suspected "intruder" communications. The proposed amendment would place the determination solely in the hands of law enforcement and the system owner or operator. In those likely instances in which the interception does not result in prosecution, the target of the interception would never have an opportunity to challenge the activity. Indeed, such targets would never even have notice of the fact that their communications were subject to warrantless interception. For that reason, such a broad expansion of the now limited statutory exceptions should be carefully evaluated, and consideration of the issue should include an examination of current practices and experiences in cases involving suspected computer intrusions.
Expanded Scope of Subpoenas for Records of Electronic Communications
Current law delineates the requirements for law enforcement access to records concerning electronic communications service. A service provider must disclose to a government entity "the name, address, local and long distance telephone toll billing records, telephone number or other subscriber number or identity, and length of service or a subscriber to or customer of such service and the type of services the subscriber or customer utilized." The proposed ATA (Section 107) would expand the type of information that a provider must disclose to include, among other things, records of session times and duration; any temporarily assigned network address; and any means or source of payment. The proposed authority to use subpoenas (rather than court orders) for this broader (and more revealing) class of information would not be limited to investigations of suspected terrorist activity. Because the amendment would broadly apply to all government investigations, its impact on subscriber privacy interests must be closely examined.
Nationwide Application of Surveillance Orders
Current law -- relating to both wiretaps and pen register/trap and trace devices -- authorizes execution of a court order only within the geographic jurisdiction of the issuing court. The proposed ATA (Sections 101 and 108) would expand the jurisdictional authority of a court to authorize the installation of a surveillance device anywhere in the United States. The availability of nationwide orders for the interception and collection of electronic evidence would remove an important legal safeguard by making it more difficult for a distant service provider to appear before the issuing court and object to legal or procedural defects. Indeed, it has become increasingly common for service providers to seek clarification from issuing courts when, in the face of rapidly evolving technological changes, many issues involving the privacy rights of their subscribers require careful judicial consideration. The burden would be particularly acute for smaller providers -- precisely those, for instance, who are most likely (according to the FBI) to be served with orders requiring the installation of the Carnivore system.
Multi-Point ("Roving Wiretap") Authority
The proposed ATA (Section 152) would expand the government’s powers under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act ("FISA") to include "roving wiretap" authority, which would permit the interception of any communications made to or by an intelligence target without specifying the particular telephone line, computer or other facility to be monitored. Current law requires third parties (such as common carriers and others) "specified in court-ordered surveillance" to provide assistance necessary to accomplish the surveillance. The proposed change would extend that obligation to unnamed and unspecified third parties. According to the Justice Department, "Under the proposed amendment, the FBI could simply present the newly discovered carrier, landlord, custodian, or other person with a generic order issued by the Court, and could then effect FISA coverage as soon as technically feasible."
Such "generic" orders could have a significant impact on the privacy rights of large numbers of innocent users, particularly those who access the Internet through public facilities such as libraries, university computer labs and cybercafes. Upon the suspicion that an intelligence target might use such a facility, the FBI could monitor all communications transmitted at the facility. The problem is exacerbated by the fact that the recipient of the assistance order (for instance, a library) would be prohibited from disclosing the fact that monitoring is occurring.
The proposed "generic" roving wiretap orders raise significant constitutional issues, as they do not comport with the Fourth Amendment’s requirement that any search warrant "particularly describe the place to be searched." That deficiency becomes even more significant when there is a likelihood that the private communications of law-abiding American citizens could be intercepted incidentally.
Lowered Standard for Foreign Intelligence Surveillance
The proposed legislation (Section 153) would expand the application of FISA to those situations where foreign intelligence gathering is merely "a" purpose of the investigation, rather than, as current law provides, the sole or primary purpose. The more lenient standards that the government must meet under FISA (as opposed to the stringent requirements of Title III) are justified by the fact that FISA’s provisions facilitate the collection of foreign intelligence information, not criminal evidence. Were the lax FISA provisions made applicable to the interception of information relating to a domestic criminal investigation (as it would where foreign intelligence gathering is but one of the purposes of the investigation), this traditional justification would be eliminated. The proposed change would be a significant alteration to the delicate constitutional balance that is reflected in the current legal regime governing electronic surveillance.
Expansive Sharing of Foreign Intelligence Information
Section 154 of the proposed ATA would facilitate the sharing of any "foreign intelligence" information obtained as part of a criminal investigation. "Foreign intelligence information" is not defined, and the information could be disclosed to federal law enforcement, intelligence, protective, national defense, or immigration agents. The provision is not limited to information related to terrorism or national security interests, does not require a showing of necessity, provides for no oversight, and does not limit the purposes for which this information can be shared, used or redisclosed. It is unclear why this provision is contained in an "anti-terrorism" package; in its analysis of the ATA, the Justice Department offers examples of the provision’s potential utility in organized crime and computer intrusion investigations, but does not explain the relevance of this broad expansion of authority to the exigent circumstances of anti-terrorism activities.
Liberalized Use of Pen Register/Trap and Trace Devices
The proposed legislation (Section 155) would remove the existing statutory requirement that the government prove the surveillance target is "an agent of a foreign power" before obtaining a pen register/trap and trace order. Therefore, the government could obtain a pen register/trap and trace device "for any investigation to gather foreign intelligence information," without a showing that the device has, is or will be used by a foreign agent or by an individual engaged in international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities. As with Section 153, the proposed amendment would significantly eviscerate the constitutional rationale for the relatively lax requirements that apply to foreign intelligence surveillance. That laxity is premised on the assumption that the Executive Branch, in pursuit of its national security responsibilities to monitor the activities of foreign powers and their agents, should not be unduly restrained by Congress and the courts. The removal of the "foreign power" predicate for pen register/trap and trace surveillance upsets that delicate balance.
Broad Access to "Any Tangible Things"
Section 156 would grant the government the authority to "by administrative subpoena, require the production of any tangible things (including books, records, papers, documents, and other items) that are relevant" to an intelligence or terrorism investigation. Although the Justice Department has characterized this provision as applying to "business records," the scope of the proposed authority is far broader. The breadth of the power is compounded by the lack of any judicial involvement. Current law permits access to specified records only upon court order; the proposed amendment would allow access under a subpoena issued by investigators. Thus, the amendment removes judicial oversight and a reviewable standard from the process of obtaining access to a broad range of private records.
Removal of Existing Privacy Protections for Consumer and Educational Records
The proposed legislation (Section 157) would amend the National Security Letter authority within the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the Financial Right to Privacy Act, and the Electronic Communications Privacy Act to permit government access to banking, credit, and other records for foreign counterintelligence purposes upon "certification" by an FBI agent. Current law permits government access to such records upon a showing of relevance and that the consumer is an agent of a foreign power. The proposed amendment removes the "agent of a foreign power" requirement, providing government access to a multitude of private records upon the FBI’s certification that "the information sought is relevant to an authorized foreign counterintelligence investigation. Government access to private records would thus be greatly expanded, especially when exercised in conjunction with Section 153’s broader application of FISA authority.
Likewise, the ATA (Section 158) would amend the Federal Education Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) to permit access to educational records in the investigation of domestic or international terrorism, or national security. Current law prohibits the release of personally identifying information about students from education records without the consent of the student or parents, subject to limited exceptions.
Authority to Conduct Secret Searches
The proposed ATA (Section 352) contain a far-reaching provision that would eliminate the current requirement that law enforcement must provide a person subject to a search warrant or order with contemporaneous notice of the search. This significant change in current law would apply to all government searches for material that "constitutes evidence of a criminal offense in violation of the laws of the United States" and is not limited to investigations of terrorist activity. Currently, delayed notification of a search is authorized only under a very small number of circumstances (such as surreptitious electronic surveillance). The expansion of this extraordinary authority to all searches would constitute a radical departure from Fourth Amendment standards and could result in routine surreptitious entries (break-ins) by law enforcement agents.
Reproduced From:
By Jim Rarey
September 28, 2001
MAY GOD FORGIVE THEM
As one chapter of sneak attacks on America was closed out last week, another began on September 11th.
The two military commanders in charge at Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941 Admiral Kimmel and General Short were posthumously advanced on the promotion roster for field officers. The two had been scapegoated for "dereliction of duty" in failing to protect the navy and army on that fateful Sunday in Hawaii.
In truth, the Japanese code had been broken and President Roosevelt and his Washington staff knew exactly where and when the Japanese would attack. The disaster was caused by their failure to give timely warning to Kimmel and Short.
Rather than picking up a telephone or getting them on the radio, a Western Union "night letter" was sent warning of the attack. The wire arrived in Hawaii as the Japanese bombs were falling.
Although the U.S. had been clandestinely furnishing Britain with war materiel, Roosevelt was itching to get America formally involved in the war to take the pressure off of Britain and his friend "Uncle Joe" in the USSR. He sensed a mood of isolationism in the country and decided a catastrophic incident was needed to mobilize the American people behind a war effort. As the saying goes, the rest is history.
Are we seeing a "rerun" of this scenario in mobilizing public opinion for a "war against terrorism?" Sadly, the record indicates this may be the case.
Despite the denials of top public officials, evidence is accumulating that they knew, if not the time and targets, at least the methods that would be used to effect the attacks on the World Trade Center (WTC) and the Pentagon. They also knew that suspected terrorists were taking lessons in the U.S. to obtain commercial pilot licenses.
In 1995, one of bin Laden’s men (Abdul Hakim Murad) was arrested in the Philippines. On his laptop computer was found a plot that called for hijacking U.S. airliners and crashing them into targets. It even had a code name, "Project Bojinka." The FBI and CIA were notified. Murad was later convicted of participating in the first WTC bombing in 1993. Space does not permit going into an in depth analysis of the FBI’s complicity in that plot other than to note that their man on the inside had the opportunity to substitute a harmless powder in the bomb but was instructed not to by the FBI.
Over the period of five years, from 1996 to 2001, the FBI made numerous inquiries about suspected bin Laden associates taking pilot training in at least four flight schools in Arizona, Texas, Oklahoma and Florida. The last inquiry took place at the Airman Flight School in Norman Oklahoma just three weeks before the Sept. 11 disaster.
One case that is particularly frustrating is that of Mohamed Atta. Atta, now named as the ringleader of the suicide missions against the WTC and Pentagon, was a U.S. citizen and son of a prominent and wealthy family in Palestine.
According to the Debka Intelligence group, Atta set up an Islamic terrorist cell in Hamburg, Germany four years ago. Atta was implicated in a series of bus bombings in Jerusalem in 1996. He evaded capture by going underground in this country among relatives. U.S. authorities refused Israel’s request to extradite him for trial in Israel. Atta took pilot training at a Florida flight school and is believed to have piloted the plane that hit the first WTC tower.
In July of last year, American Airlines reported the theft in Rome of pilots’ uniforms and I.D. badges. Other airlines had earlier reported similar thefts. It is now believed some of the suicide pilots may actually have gained entrance to the cockpit because of the airlines’ policy of letting pilots from other airlines sit in the normally unoccupied jump seat in the cockpit.
When the FBI found luggage belonging to Mohamed Atta after the attacks, they discovered some airline uniforms in his bags.
Evidently none of this evidence was shared with the FAA or the airlines. Right up to the moment of the disaster, the FAA’s official recommendation to the airlines (which made it their policy) was to cooperate with hijackers to minimize the danger to passengers. That policy most certainly would have been reversed if they had been aware of the suicidal intentions of hijackers.
As was shown by the revolt of passengers on the plane that went down in Pennsylvania, once they knew of the suicidal intent, they took active measures. Although they all perished, they may well have saved thousands of other lives. Others on the three planes that hit targets were not given that chance because the government had withheld vital information from the FAA and the airlines.
We are asked to believe that our intelligence agencies (FBI, CIA, ETC.) failed utterly to discover the plot. How much evidence do they need? Even the average reader of spy novels could connect the dots they had in front of them. But the answer, we are told, is to give up "some" of our liberties for the promise (not the reality) of more security.
But what does this have to do with comparing the 911 attack with Pearl Harbor?
One result of the attack has been to mobilize strong public support for the president’s "War on Terrorism." At first it was billed as a frontal assault dedicated to eliminating terrorism from the world. But as the details emerge it is shown to be a narrowly focused attack on one terrorist organization and one country’s ruling government, bin Laden’s El Qaeda and the Taliban rulers of Afghanistan.
President Bush is assembling a "coalition" that includes most of the major supporters of state sponsored terrorism, including China and Russia. He has even asked the Congress to drop Iran and Syria from the list of terrorist states so he can offer them military aid to join the coalition. Only Iraq, Libya, North Korea and the Palestine Authority seem to be missing from this coalition of terrorists to fight terrorism.
When the list of terrorist organizations whose assets are to be frozen was issued, three of the most virulent were omitted, Hezbollah, Hamas and the Islamic Jihad (not the Egyptian one which was on the list). This cannot make Israel very happy, as it is the main (but not only) target of those organizations.
So what are the real objectives of the response to 911? (It is ironic that the numbers universally used in this country to plea for help are now associated with such a tragedy.) For the answers, we need go no further than to the organization that really calls the shots in this country. I speak of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR).
For the uninitiated, suffice to say that the CFR comprises the top movers and shakers of banking, industry, communications, education, and national government. The CFR is a virtual hiring hall for presidents and cabinet and sub cabinet level positions in Washington. In the current administration CFR members include Vice President Cheney, Secretary of State Powell, and National Security Adviser Rice
Since its inception during the Wilson administration, the unwavering goal of the CFR has been the establishment of a one-world government variously called the New World Order and now Global Governance. Of course in its drive to control all the people and resources on the planet, they also enrich themselves along the way.
Many (if not most) of the "pundits" beating the war drums on television shows are CFR members and some even identify themselves as staff members. The constant refrain is that we must put up with "inconveniences" i.e. infringements on liberty, to obtain security.
The president’s "proposal" for the Office of Homeland Defense was not a reaction to the 911 attack. Legislation to set it up was introduced in the Congress in March of this year. It is based on the recommendations of the "Commission on National Security for the 21st Century." Congress, evidently, will be relying on the recommendations of this commission as the basis for the country’s national security and foreign policy for the next twenty-five years. The commission comprises fourteen members of which eleven are members of the CFR including the two co-chairmen as well as the top executive of the CFR itself. (Doesn’t that give you a warm feeling?)
One of the basic premises of the agency created is to federalize the National Guards of the various states to be used as a national police force for "Homeland Defense." It will also pull in parts or all of various agencies such as Customs, FBI, INS, FEMA and others.
Along with the new police powers requested by the president, all the trappings of a police state will be in place in the name of fighting terrorism.
But back to the question of why just Afghanistan? Once again, the CFR supplies the answer.
A 31 page "working " document obtained from the CFR website in its "Caspian Sea Library", explains the importance of that country in the exploitation of its natural gas resources and as a route for major pipelines for Caspian Sea oil.
In the working paper, Author Sheila Heslin for the James A. Baker Public Policy Paper, states that the Taliban government is a "hindrance" to investment in the pipelines contemplated to transit that country and must be replaced.
The paper also describes competition between two consortiums vying for Caspian Sea oil. One group is Russia and the European countries that are becoming dependent on Russian energy supplies (particularly Germany). The other is the U.S. and its partners in Caspian Sea oil exploitation. Dependable pipelines are vital to both groups.
One of the major Russian pipelines goes through Chechnya, which explains the strife there. The Stratfor Intelligence Report suggests that there may be a quid pro quo between the U.S. and Russia with Russia furnishing intelligence on Afghanistan and the U.S. turning a blind eye from a brutal Russian conquest in Chechnya.
See the map below portraying existing and proposed pipelines:
http://www.treemedia.com/cfrlibrary/Library/policy/bremmermap.html - tophttp://www.treemedia.com/cfrlibrary/Library/policy/bremmermap.html - top
Copyright Council on Foreign Relations 1999. All Rights Reserved.
In every war of the Twentieth Century, the American public’s support was gained through rigged incidents by our own government.
In World War I it was the sinking of the Lusitania carrying munitions to Britain in violation of our declared "neutral" status.
World War II was Pearl Harbor discussed at the beginning of this article.
The Korean "police action" was the result of our Secretary of State declaring that Korea was outside our defense perimeter inviting North Korea to invade.
In Vietnam it was the phony "Gulf of Tonkin" incident.
In the Gulf War we saw a repeat of the Korean ploy where our Ambassador to Kuwait stated we had no treaty or other agreement requiring us to come to the aid of Kuwait, thus giving Iraq the green light to invade.
Is the "War on Terrorism" any different?
Certainly terrorism is a scourge that should be eliminated from this planet. But is the government’s program likely to do that. It seems more to be aimed at achieving the two CFR objectives outlined above.
We may never know if our government deliberately ignored the warning signs resulting in thousands of innocent deaths. If they did, may God forgive them. I’m not sure I can.
Permission is granted to reproduce this article in its entirety.
The author is a free lance writer based in Romulus, Michigan. He is a former newspaper editor and investigative reporter, a retired customs administrator and accountant, and a student of history and the U.S. Constitution.
If you would like to receive Medium Rare articles directly, please contact us at jimrarey@provide.net.
Although not necessary, we would appreciate an indication of the city and/or state or country (If outside the USA) in which you are located to give us an idea as to where our articles are being received.
From:
Noam Chomsky On The Events Of 911 As Interviewed On Radio B92, Belgrade 9-27-1
Q. Why do you think these attacks happened?
A. To answer the question we must first identify the perpetrators of the crimes. It is generally assumed, plausibly, that their origin is the Middle East region, and that the attacks probably trace back to the Osama Bin Laden network, a widespread and complex organization, doubtless inspired by Bin Laden but not necessarily acting under his control. Let us assume that this is true. Then to answer your question a sensible person would try to ascertain Bin Laden's views, and the sentiments of the large reservoir of supporters he has throughout the region. About all of this, we have a great deal of information.
Bin Laden has been interviewed extensively over the years by highly reliable Middle East specialists, notably the most eminent correspondent in the region, Robert Fisk (London Independent), who has intimate knowledge of the entire region and direct experience over decades. A Saudi Arabian millionaire, Bin Laden became a militant Islamic leader in the war to drive the Russians out of Afghanistan. He was one of the many religious fundamentalist extremists recruited, armed, and financed by the CIA and their allies in Pakistani intelligence to cause maximal harm to the Russians -- quite possibly delaying their withdrawal, many analysts suspect -- though whether he personally happened to have direct contact with the CIA is unclear, and not particularly important.
Not surprisingly, the CIA preferred the most fanatic and cruel fighters they could mobilize. The end result was to "destroy a moderate regime and create a fanatical one, from groups recklessly financed by the Americans" (London Times correspondent Simon Jenkins, also a specialist on the region). These "Afghanis" as they are called (many, like Bin Laden, not from Afghanistan) carried out terror operations across the border in Russia, but they terminated these after Russia withdrew. Their war was not against Russia, which they despise, but against the Russian occupation and Russia's crimes against Muslims.
The "Afghanis" did not terminate their activities, however. They joined Bosnian Muslim forces in the Balkan Wars; the US did not object, just as it tolerated Iranian support for them, for complex reasons that we need not pursue here, apart from noting that concern for the grim fate of the Bosnians was not prominent among them. The "Afghanis" are also fighting the Russians in Chechnya, and, quite possibly, are involved in carrying out terrorist attacks in Moscow and elsewhere in Russian territory. Bin Laden and his "Afghanis" turned against the US in 1990 when they established permanent bases in Saudi Arabia -- from his point of view, a counterpart to the Russian occupation of Afghanistan, but far more significant because of Saudi Arabia's special status as the guardian of the holiest shrines.
Bin Laden is also bitterly opposed to the corrupt and repressive regimes of the region, which he regards as "un-Islamic," including the Saudi Arabian regime, the most extreme Islamic fundamentalist regime in the world, apart from the Taliban, and a close US ally since its origins. Bin Laden despises the US for its support of these regimes. Like others in the region, he is also outraged by long- standing US support for Israel's brutal military occupation, now in its 35th year: Washington's decisive diplomatic, military, and economic intervention in support of the killings, the harsh and destructive siege over many years, the daily humiliation to which Palestinians are subjected, the expanding settlements designed to break the occupied territories into Bantustan-like cantons and take control of the resources, the gross violation of the Geneva Conventions, and other actions that are recognized as crimes throughout most of the world, apart from the US, which has prime responsibility for them.
And like others, he contrasts Washington's dedicated support for these crimes with the decade-long US-British assault against the civilian population of Iraq, which has devastated the society and caused hundreds of thousands of deaths while strengthening Saddam Hussein -- who was a favored friend and ally of the US and Britain right through his worst atrocities, including the gassing of the Kurds, as people of the region also remember well, even if Westerners prefer to forget the facts.
These sentiments are very widely shared. The Wall Street Journal (Sept. 14) published a survey of opinions of wealthy and privileged Muslims in the Gulf region (bankers, professionals, businessmen with close links to the U.S.). They expressed much the same views: resentment of the U.S. policies of supporting Israeli crimes and blocking the international consensus on a diplomatic settlement for many years while devastating Iraqi civilian society, supporting harsh and repressive anti-democratic regimes throughout the region, and imposing barriers against economic development by "propping up oppressive regimes." Among the great majority of people suffering deep poverty and oppression, similar sentiments are far more bitter, and are the source of the fury and despair that has led to suicide bombings, as commonly understood by those who are interested in the facts.
The U.S., and much of the West, prefers a more comforting story. To quote the lead analysis in the New York Times (Sept. 16), the perpetrators acted out of "hatred for the values cherished in the West as freedom, tolerance, prosperity, religious pluralism and universal suffrage." U.S. actions are irrelevant, and therefore need not even be mentioned (Serge Schmemann). This is a convenient picture, and the general stance is not unfamiliar in intellectual history; in fact, it is close to the norm. It happens to be completely at variance with everything we know, but has all the merits of self-adulation and uncritical support for power.
It is also widely recognized that Bin Laden and others like him are praying for "a great assault on Muslim states," which will cause "fanatics to flock to his cause" (Jenkins, and many others.). That too is familiar. The escalating cycle of violence is typically welcomed by the harshest and most brutal elements on both sides, a fact evident enough from the recent history of the Balkans, to cite only one of many cases.
Q. What consequences will they have on US inner policy and to the American self perception?
A. US policy has already been officially announced. The world is being offered a "stark choice": join us, or "face the certain prospect of death and destruction." Congress has authorized the use of force against any individuals or countries the President determines to be involved in the attacks, a doctrine that every supporter regards as ultra-criminal. That is easily demonstrated. Simply ask how the same people would have reacted if Nicaragua had adopted this doctrine after the U.S. had rejected the orders of the World Court to terminate its "unlawful use of force" against Nicaragua and had vetoed a Security Council resolution calling on all states to observe international law. And that terrorist attack was far more severe and destructive even than this atrocity.
As for how these matters are perceived here, that is far more complex. One should bear in mind that the media and the intellectual elites generally have their particular agendas. Furthermore, the answer to this question is, in significant measure, a matter of decision: as in many other cases, with sufficient dedication and energy, efforts to stimulate fanaticism, blind hatred, and submission to authority can be reversed. We all know that very well.
Q. Do you expect U.S. to profoundly change their policy to the rest of the world?
A. The initial response was to call for intensifying the policies that led to the fury and resentment that provides the background of support for the terrorist attack, and to pursue more intensively the agenda of the most hard line elements of the leadership: increased militarization, domestic regimentation, attack on social programs. That is all to be expected. Again, terror attacks, and the escalating cycle of violence they often engender, tend to reinforce the authority and prestige of the most harsh and repressive elements of a society. But there is nothing inevitable about submission to this course.
Q. After the first shock, came fear of what the U.S. answer is going to be. Are you afraid, too?
A. Every sane person should be afraid of the likely reaction -- the one that has already been announced, the one that probably answers Bin Laden's prayers. It is highly likely to escalate the cycle of violence, in the familiar way, but in this case on a far greater scale.
The U.S. has already demanded that Pakistan terminate the food and other supplies that are keeping at least some of the starving and suffering people of Afghanistan alive. If that demand is implemented, unknown numbers of people who have not the remotest connection to terrorism will die, possibly millions. Let me repeat: the U.S. has demanded that Pakistan kill possibly millions of people who are themselves victims of the Taliban. This has nothing to do even with revenge. It is at a far lower moral level even than that. The significance is heightened by the fact that this is mentioned in passing, with no comment, and probably will hardly be noticed. We can learn a great deal about the moral level of the reigning intellectual culture of the West by observing the reaction to this demand. I think we can be reasonably confident that if the American population had the slightest idea of what is being done in their name, they would be utterly appalled. It would be instructive to seek historical precedents.
If Pakistan does not agree to this and other U.S. demands, it may come under direct attack as well -- with unknown consequences. If Pakistan does submit to U.S. demands, it is not impossible that the government will be overthrown by forces much like the Taliban -- who in this case will have nuclear weapons. That could have an effect throughout the region, including the oil producing states. At this point we are considering the possibility of a war that may destroy much of human society.
Even without pursuing such possibilities, the likelihood is that an attack on Afghans will have pretty much the effect that most analysts expect: it will enlist great numbers of others to support of Bin Laden, as he hopes. Even if he is killed, it will make little difference. His voice will be heard on cassettes that are distributed throughout the Islamic world, and he is likely to be revered as a martyr, inspiring others. It is worth bearing in mind that one suicide bombing -- a truck driven into a U.S. military base -- drove the world's major military force out of Lebanon 20 years ago. The opportunities for such attacks are endless. And suicide attacks are very hard to prevent.
Q. "The world will never be the same after 11.09.01". Do you think so?
A. The horrendous terrorist attacks on Tuesday are something quite new in world affairs, not in their scale and character, but in the target. For the US, this is the first time since the War of 1812 that its national territory has been under attack, even threat. It's colonies have been attacked, but not the national territory itself. During these years the US virtually exterminated the indigenous population, conquered half of Mexico, intervened violently in the surrounding region, conquered Hawaii and the Philippines (killing hundreds of thousands of Filipinos), and in the past half century p particularly, extended its resort to force throughout much of the world. The number of victims is colossal.
For the first time, the guns have been directed the other way. The same is true, even more dramatically, of Europe. Europe has suffered murderous destruction, but from internal wars, meanwhile conquering much of the world with extreme brutality. It has not been under attack by its victims outside, with rare exceptions (the IRA in England, for example). It is therefore natural that NATO should rally to the support of the US; hundreds of years of imperial violence have an enormous impact on the intellectual and moral culture. It is correct to say that this is a novel event in world history, not because of the scale of the atrocity -- regrettably -- but because of the target. How the West chooses to react is a matter of supreme importance. If the rich and powerful choose to keep to their traditions of hundreds of years and resort to extreme violence, they will contribute to the escalation of a cycle of violence, in a familiar dynamic, with long-term consequences that could be awesome. Of course, that is by no means inevitable. An aroused public within the more free and democratic societies can direct policies towards a much more humane and honorable course.
If you are interested in a free subscription to The Konformist Newswire, please visit:
http://www.eGroups.com/list/konformist
From: Rense.com
Pakistan's ex-spy chief blames Mossad
Wednesday, 26 September 2001 15:05 (ET)
Pakistan's ex-spy chief blames Mossad
By ARNAUD DE BORCHGRAVE, UPI Editor at Large
RAWALPINDI, Pakistan, Sept. 26 (UPI) -- The Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on the United States were perpetrated by renegade U.S. Air Force elements working in conjunction with Mossad, the Israeli intelligence service, according to the retired Pakistani general who is closest to the Taliban and Osama bin Laden.
Gen. Hameed Gul, head of Inter Services Intelligence, the equivalent of a CIA-cum-FBI combination, during the war against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, spent two weeks in the war-torn country immediately prior to Sept. 11. He has been acting as "strategic adviser" to Pakistan's extremist religious political parties. Four religious leaders left his house in the army's principal garrison town as this reporter arrived at 9:30 p.m. Tuesday. The interview lasted 90 minutes.
Already countless millions of Muslims believe that the World Trade Center and Pentagon suicide attacks were part of a Mossad plot to force the United States into confrontation with the Muslim world. Now Gul has added a new disinformation wrinkle to the plot. And what Gul says or writes is taken at face value by religious leaders and is repeated in thousands of mosques at Friday prayers.
In an exclusive interview with United Press International, the fundamentalist general said it is now clear that there was also a plot by U.S. Air Force officers against the Pentagon.
"The twin towers were first attacked at 8:45 a.m.," he said, "and four flights were diverted from their assigned air space, and yet Air Force jets didn't scramble until 10 a.m. That smacks of a small-scale Air Force rebellion, a coup attempt against the Pentagon perhaps? Radars are jammed, transponders fail. No IFF -- friend or foe identification -- challenge ... This was clearly an inside job. (President) Bush was afraid and rushed to the shelter of a nuclear bunker.
"(Bush) clearly feared a nuclear situation. Who could that have been? Will that also be hushed up in the investigation, like the Warren report after the Kennedy assassination?"
Gul said that his friend bin Laden had sworn to him on the Koran that he was not involved.
"From a cave inside a mountain or a peasant's hovel," Gul asked, how could bin Laden mount such a sophisticated operation? "Let's be serious," he said with a smile. "Mossad and its American associates are the obvious culprits," he added by asking, "Who benefits from the crime?"
Asked why Israel would benefit, Gul replied, "Israel knows it has a short shelf-life before it is overwhelmed by demographics (and it) has now handed the (Bush administration) the opportunity it has been waiting for to consolidate America's imperial grip on the Gulf and acquire control of the Caspian basin by extending its military presence in Central Asia."
Gul said the U.S. plan was "the destabilization of Pakistan because it is a Muslim nuclear state. The U.S. wants to isolate Pakistan from China as part of its containment policy. President Nixon's book 'The Real War' said China would be the superpower of the 21st century. The U.S. is also creating hostility between Pakistan and Afghanistan, two Muslim states, to reverse the perception that the Islamic world now has its own nuclear weapons. Bush 43 doesn't realize he is being manipulated by people who understand geopolitics. He is not leading but being led. All he can do is think in terms of the wanted-dead-or- alive culture which is how Hollywood conditions the masses to think and act."
"Bush 43" is actually Washington shorthand for distinguishing President George W. Bush from his father. President George W. Bush is the 43rd president: George Bush Sr. was the 41st.
Gul admitted that he turned against America when the United States walked away from Afghanistan following the Soviet withdrawal in 1989.
"We were all pro-American (during the war) but then America left us in the lurch and everything went to pieces, including Afghanistan."
Asked if the United States was now his enemy, Gul replied, "Is the U.S. national interest in contradiction with the Muslim world? The U.S. needs oil, as do its European allies. You have between 6 and 8 million American Muslims and their ranks are growing. About the same number in Europe. Israel aside, we are America's natural allies. Professor Sam Huntington in his (book) 'Clash of Civilizations' puts Confucius and Judeo-Christians in one corner, and us in the other. His prescription is wrong but is being adopted by Bush 43 who has now put 60 countries on his hit list. This is the diabolical school that wants to launch an anti-Muslim 'crusade.' Muslims understood what Bush meant when he used that word. We need a meeting, not a clash, of civilizations."
If Pakistan gives the U.S. base facilities, Gul warned, "we will have a national upheaval" and if the United States attacks Afghanistan, there will be "a general jihad (holy war) ... and Pakistan will be engulfed in the firestorm. So I can only hope that cooler heads will prevail in Washington."
Asked to consider the possibility that bin Laden -- or OBL as he is referred to in Pakistani conversations -- was lying to him and is indeed guilty as charged by the United States, Gul said, "If Taliban are given irrefutable evidence of his guilt, I am in favor of a fair trial. In America one is entitled to a jury of peers. But he has no American peers. The Taliban would not object, in the event of a prima face case, to an international Islamic court meeting in The Hague. They would extradite Osama to the Netherlands." --
Copyright 2001 by United Press International. All rights reserved.
From: NewsMax.com. All rights reserved.
International Terrorist Support Groups Thrive in Belgium and Netherlands
Adriana StuijtROTTERDAM – Top international anti-terrorism experts have identified two of Europe's most legally tolerant regions – namely, the Dutch-language areas around Europe's most important west coast harbors, Antwerp and Rotterdam – as the main breeding ground for Muslim-fundamentalist terrorist groups. Osama bin Laden 's organization even runs shipping companies as fronts from Amsterdam.
Monday, Sept. 24, 2001The British researcher Dr. R. Gunaratna warned that, especially in The Netherlands, because of its total lack of anti-terrorism laws and its very high level of religious, cultural and judicial tolerance, Muslim-fundamentalist terrorist groups are allowed to thrive. They use Amsterdam and Rotterdam as central bases in the West from which they garnish funds, recruit activists from the local Muslim youth cultural groups, and purchase highly sophisticated arms in the world's largest trading hub: Rotterdam harbor.
The Kurdish PKK, the Tamil Tigers and the Philippines' New People's Army all use the liberal Dutch territory, from which they garnish new converts, turn them into activist supporters, launder and raise funds and purchase sophisticated equipment. These Dutch-based groups, especially, also create waves of propaganda material – and, being based in Amsterdam, Rotterdam and Antwerp, also have no difficulty in purchasing any weapons and other high-tech support materials with which to mount terrorist attacks abroad.
A New Form of Terrorism
Another new, disturbing pattern pointing to a new form of terrorism against the civilian population at large has been detected in both harbor towns of Antwerp and Rotterdam: "Muslim cultural organizations" have also turned the streets of Antwerp and Rotterdam into main battlegrounds for Muslim-fundamentalist male criminal youth gangs who deliberately attack, rob and invade ethno-European cultural events and throngs of shoppers in the large shopping districts.
These well-organized attacks are leaving the local Dutch-speaking ethno-Europeans totally vulnerable and defenseless because their governments have no anti-terrorist laws with which to stop such highly aggressive youth groups from forming in the first place.
For instance, about 5.1 percent of Rotterdam's population is of Moroccan origin – yet about 10 percent of all the city's arrested criminal suspects are of Moroccan origin, according to Rotterdam's latest police statistics issued by chief inspector J. Verbeek and Erasmus University.
In the Dutch-speaking region's latest criminal youth gang attack in Belgium, in the suburb of Hasselt in Antwerp on Sept. 24, large groups of Algerian-Moroccan youths, centrally organized by cell phones and armed with batons and insecticide spray, attacked hundreds of local Flemish citizens holding their traditional end-of-summer fair and circus event at Kruger market square.
Many eyewitnesses who described the terror and destruction at the usually jolly and peaceful Flemish circus fair said the Algerian and Moroccan youths targeted especially women and girls as the youth gangs tore into the carnival goers, spraying people's eyes with insecticides and deodorants; spitting at and insulting especially the Flemish; ordering the girls and women to wear headscarves and calling them whores; cursing the men as "Flemish pork-eaters"; spitting on and befouling with urine and soil the carnival's traditional pancake dinners and destroying the antique, highly valuable carousel and circus equipment hired for the Hasselt community carnival.
Flemish old-age pensioners and children alike were forced to flee in fear of being blinded by spray, and were beaten up and kicked. The Flemish carnival goers – all local residents – had to flee from a steady stream of loud, rude verbal abuse from the young Algerians and Moroccans invading their neighborhood. Many witnesses also said the youths chanted popular slogans used by the Muslim-terrorist organization GIA. Some of these events were described in a local Antwerp newspaper.
Carnival goers who tried to remain and finish their traditional pancake meals or who tried to protect the antique circus equipment were physically attacked by kick-boxing youths. The equipment and musical instruments were destroyed during the racist rampage. There were very few police in attendance. The mainstream Belgian news media briefly described the event as a "scuffle" at a local carnival without mentioning the racist overtones.
In Rotterdam, only about 60 miles north of Antwerp, a similar pattern has also been developing over the past year, with widespread reports of assaults by Moroccan-Algerian youth gangs – described by Dutch police as "criminal youth gangs of North African descent"– but who are described by the news media as being highly centrally organized through cell phones.
These gangs target major shopping districts and traditional European cultural and sporting events to rob, terrorize and abuse especially the ethno-Dutch population. During these organized attacks, the youths are also seen to deliberately target ethno-European girls and women, demanding that they start obeying the strict Muslim shari'a laws favored by terrorist regimes in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya, which require total subservience to males. Many women shoppers now shun these major shopping districts to avoid such confrontations.
A Sociological Explanation
Dutch sociologists do not link these aggressive criminal North African male youth gangs to any Muslim-fundamentalist terrorist organizations – instead claiming that this first generation of Algerian-Moroccan youths, primarily raised without fathers, were "deculturized" and therefore aimlessly floating into such destructive criminal behavior.
The sociologists, in fact, urged even more government subsidies to these "cultural" groups to try and combat such behavior. By tradition and unlike Christian women, these sociologists point out, Muslim women are never allowed to discipline any of their male children and the cultural groups might be able to better "channel their male energies."
However, there's a much more organized situation going on here than these Dutch sociologists would have us believe. For example, on the night after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks against the United States, large groups of North African youths congregated in the town squares in Antwerp and also in the town of Ede in The Netherlands. In this town, a huge crowd of Muslim male youths had started to congregate shortly after the attacks and started celebrating what they themselves told the horrified local citizens was their personal "victory against America."
This was too much even for the highly liberal Dutch – Ede citizens called in the local police and demanded the youths' removal. However, the local police station commander lamely excused his lack of inaction by saying that the youths had been "expressing their rights to free speech available to all Dutch citizens" and that he was not allowed to stop the distasteful celebration.
And in a shock survey carried out by Muslim cultural publications the day after the attack, a full 80 percent of the thousands of Dutch Muslims questioned said that they had been in favor of the terrorist attacks.
Besides these clear danger signals from the Muslim community in The Netherlands itself, the Dutch government this week was also warned by the British anti-terrorism expert Gunaratna, of the Centre for the Study of Terrorism and Political Science at St. Andrews University in Scotland, to "stop disregarding the international fight against terrorism, and start prohibiting these terrorist support groups by law."
He urged the Dutch government to immediately change its laws and immediately prohibit these support groups. "Your country must change its laws at once if it wants to remain free of terrorism," he said.
Dutch Law and Terrorism
The Netherlands does not have any anti-terrorism laws – and thus openly allowed fundraising and arms purchase exporting by, for instance, terrorist support groups during the anti-apartheid movement's support of the terrorist cells of the African Nationalist Congress (ANC) and the Pan-Africanist Congress (PAC) before 1994.
Many Dutch citizens – such as the head of the now-defunct "Anti-apartheid movement Netherlands," the journalist Connie Braam – even actively participated in smuggling weapons and bombs into South Africa from Dutch territory and without any intervention from the Dutch government, which even provided government funding for this terrorist support group.
Dutch law itself contributes to the thriving terrorist support-group culture in The Netherlands. It does not allow any actions to be undertaken against support groups of terrorist organizations if it cannot be firmly proven that their fundraising and other physical support led to the terror attacks.
However, the internal security service of The Netherlands (BVD) itself is also not concentrating on probing such Muslim-fundamentalist terrorist activities as much as they are infiltrating right-wing or neo-Nazi groups, as the Dutch government has traditionally viewed such fascism as the prime enemy of peace and prosperity since the Nazi occupation during WWII.
As long as the Muslim-fundamentalist terrorist support groups do not misbehave inside The Netherlands, they can therefore continue to use the Dutch territory from which to garnish economic and material support – including purchasing highly sophisticated weaponry from the local arms industry – even if these directly lead to terrorist attacks outside The Netherlands, as also happened during the terrorist campaign conducted by the ANC and the PAC against the apartheid government in South Africa prior to 1994.
Belgium does have some anti-terrorist legislation also primarily targeting right-wing neo-Nazi groups – but is juristically more lenient toward Muslim-fundamentalist terrorist support groups on Belgian soil.
Other European countries do have better anti-terrorist legislation, with Great Britain having the most stringent laws due to its Northern Ireland troubles.
Terrorist Support Groups
Gunaratna said many of these groups have been active in The Netherlands for many years. "They conduct fundraisers and launder funds in The Netherlands to carry out violent attacks in Asia and the Middle East," he said.
He also noticed such support groups among other Muslim communities not known for terrorist activities, such as the Sikhs, Sri Lankans, and Pakistani and Kurd cultural groups – many of which are even subsidized by the Dutch government.
American expert Yossef Bodansky, author of a book on bin Laden, also confirmed that Amsterdam-based shipping companies operate as front organizations for the Al Qaida organization. This was also confirmed by the French-Arabian newspaper Al Watan Al Arabi.
Dutch internal affairs minister De Vries shrugged a dismayed "So what can I do about it?" reaction when confronted with these warnings from international experts – telling the TV program "Buitenhof" that he actually "could not exclude that subversive activities might be taking place inside such Muslim cultural groups."
And he even warned a few days later after talks with the 25 mayors of the main Dutch cities in charge of the regional police corps that "the Dutch cannot now start waging a cold war against Muslim religious groups."
He also warned Amsterdam's chief justice officer L. de Wit – who had told the news media that he would call in the defense force in case of pro-bin Laden riots in the capital city – that it was "very foolish to speculate in public about possible riots."
He also considered it unnecessary to rush to protect and beef up the security for all the public buildings and public figures against terrorist attacks. "There is no concrete terrorist threat in The Netherlands," he concluded and advised that only "some public buildings" had had their security stepped up. Al Watan
Meanwhile, Rotterdam's mayor, Mr. I. Opstelten, said the four men arrested in his city last week as suspects connected to the terrorist attacks on America still have not provided any leads that could link them. One is in a routine holding facility for illegal aliens and the other three are in police custody pending the investigation, he said.
The Dutch internal security organization, the BVD, has managed to confiscate a "suspicious parcel" destined for the United States, which was posted in the Swartjan street post office in Rotterdam. The country's anti-terrorist expert P. van der Molen said the main suspect of this Muslim support group, a Tunisian citizen, is still in custody in Brussels, Belgium.
Some anti-Muslim reactions were also recorded in The Netherlands since the Sept. 11 infamy. About 25 incidents were recorded by Dutch police, including arson, graffiti, and threats against mosques and Islamic schools in the towns of Vlissingen, Uden, Zwolle, Heerlen, The Hague and Rijssen. Two Islamic schools were torched, one in Nijmegen and the other in Drachten.
The Dutch cabinet minister in charge of "integration management," Mr. Van Boxtel, said this "unacceptable behavior against our young new Dutch citizens, this mini-terrorism, will be punished with the full force of Dutch law."
Reproduced with the permission of NewsMax.com. All rights reserved.
From: NewsMax.com. All rights reserved.
Report: Calendar Showed Plane Crashing Near Manhattan
NewsMax Wires
Thursday, Sept. 27, 2001A calendar which was printed in Egypt and for the month of September shows a crashing passenger plane with Manhattan and the Statue of Liberty as a backdrop -- and which was printed in May, a full three months before the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on America -- has caused an uproar in the Dutch town of Almere, Netherlands, the newspaper De Telegraaf reported yesterday.
Islamic Calendar for Sept. 2001
Jet hitting lower ManhattanThe calendar was distributed at an Islamic school long before the World Trade Center attacks. Mayor Hans Ouwerkerk, who was alerted to the calendar's existence in the local Islamic school in the town of Almere, immediately notified the Dutch internal security service (BVD) about the strange coincidence. The BVD is reportedly investigating the matter.
"I am supported by Allah, to die for Allah" was quoted on the calendar, the same words reportedly used by an EgyptAir pilot who allegedly crashed a jet in November of 1999.
The Almere Town Council has "urgently advised" the management of the Islamic School Foundation to "cooperate with the Dutch authorities and help determine the calendar's origin."
Deputy Mayor Henk Smeeman said the distribution of such controversial Islamic-extremist fundamentalist propaganda material "cannot be tolerated in Almere. The Town Council is a strong supporter of maintaining good intercultural relationships with one another," he said. Some of the calendar's other illustrations show a stone-throwing Palestinian demonstrator in front of the Al-Aksa mosque in Jerusalem, an Egyptian military assault during the six-day war against Israel, and a futuristic image of a Palestinian "freeing" of Jerusalem.
The head of the Islamic school, Mrs. Dekker, allegedly had a large number of calendars in her possession from the end of May to the beginning of June, well-informed sources informed De Telegraaf. When confronted with the calendar images, she responded in a shocked, startled manner, asking "How did you get this" before shrouding herself in silence when further questioned by journalists.
De Telegraaf also reported today that Dutch authorities abruptly closed the major traffic arteries into Rotterdam and Amsterdam through four river tunnels -- in immediate response to a highly detailed letter to the Dutch news agency ANP that described the exact time (8:10 a.m.) and the colors and types of vehicles that would have been used in a closely timed wave of suicide attacks at the height of rush hour in two of the world's busiest harbor cities.
Dutch police arrested a large number of individuals who had been identified by the anonymous tipster, who also warned that a great many other terrorist attacks would be carried out worldwide. Collapsing these riverine tunnels would have meant the immediate closure of these busy international harbors, seriously disrupting international trade.
Reproduced with the permission of NewsMax.com. All rights reserved.
PRACTISING FOR THE WTC/PENTAGON BLASTS IN ISRAEL
by Barry Chamish
Operations as complicated and risky as the WTC/Pentagon attacks could not possibly have gone ahead without practise exercises. There are good reasons to suspect that Israel was chosen as the venue for at least two dry runs and that its government, under pressure, covered up both incidents. Consider two such exercises which preceded the Israeli events: Two years ago, an Egypt Air flight from New York crashed into the Atlantic when the co-pilot decided to commit suicide and take all passengers and crew down with him. Though the Egyptian government denied that any Muslim would ever commit suicide in this or any other fashion, the FAA insisted the black box recording proved that this was the case. The WTC/Pentagon bombers' Egyptian connection has been established. How the co-pilot was inducted into the terror syndicate and brainwashed to die in a plane crash on command has yet to be. Whatever the mind control techniques that were used on him, they were the products of Western technology. After the Egypt Air crash, the plotters knew that pilots could be brainwashed into turning their planes into potent bombs. But could the crew be overcome with just small knives? That was tested last Spring when a Russian passenger plane was hijacked to India. The hijackers were Chechnyan nationalists who overcame three stewardesses and stunned the passengers into inaction with the same type of knives used to the same effect in America. Lest there be any doubt that this was also a dry run, see who agrees that Chechnya was a training ground for the suspected terrorists of the WTC/Pentagon:
MOSCOW (AP) A senior aide to President Vladimir Putin said Tuesday that some of the perpetrators of terror attacks on the United States had trained in the breakaway republic of Chechnya. ''At least four of the suicide perpetrators of the terror attacks on the United States passed through Chechnya,'' said Sergei Yastrzhembsky, an aide to Putin and Russia's chief spokesman on Chechnya. ''The people who sent suicide attackers against New York and Washington conducted dress rehearsals for terror attacks in Chechnya,'' Yastrzhembsky told a news conference, according to the Interfax news agency.
A few months later, it was Israel's turn. A Jerusalem wedding hall, The Versailles, collapsed vertically killing 26 and wounding over 300. The venue had been under repair at the time and most of the workers at the site were Arab. One such laborer was interviewed by Israel television on the night of the disaster and blatantly lied about the type of work that was taking place in the building. One could easily dismiss the possibility that the Versailles was victimized by terror except for one fact: after examining the ruins for just a few days, the government refused to investigate any further. Despite the fact that this was Israel's worst building disaster ever and despite the pleas of the survivors and the families of the dead, the government could not be moved. Instead, it opened a general commission of inquiry into national building codes and practices. Within days of the building's collapse, the remains of the Versailles were hauled away in a blatant act of evidence destruction. Simply put, why wouldn't the government investigate the tragedy? Why was the blame put on a flooring system that never collapsed before? Why have no indictments come down four months after the atrocity? What is the government hiding and who ordered the coverup? The Versailles could have taught many lessons: how to drop a building straight down, how many casualties could be expected in such an operation, how to improve the percentage of dead, how quickly people could be evacuated, how rescue teams would react etc. The Israeli government's refusal to investigate the incident only fuels such, for now, speculation. However, if I was an American, I would be even more fearful of the significance of the next act of infamy. Just as Israelis were recovering from the shock of the Versailles, a third of their drinking water was poisoned. Over two million people in the Tel Aviv and central region of the country had water running through their pipes, heavily tainted with, they were told, ammonia. It took 150 million cubic meters of water, or three times the amount Israel supplies annually to Jordan, to flush out the poison. The public was told that agricultural waste seeped into a valve at a pumping station in the Jezreel Valley, and then flowed 80 km. undetected. As absurd as the explanation was, no one bothered to explain a far more frightening event. On the day the poisoned water entered the system, a security guard at a Water Authority station near Lod was murdered. The murder was written off as just another terrorism incident. Now why would terrorists climb over a chain link fence, risk barbed wire and entrapment in the middle of the country far from the safety of the Palestinian Authority, to murder an armed guard? Maybe they were thieves, risking life and limb to steal some water? Or maybe we should ask what the guard saw or what he stumbled into. This dry run was a valuable lesson. The perpetrators learned how to poison the most people possible, how many of them would be affected, how quickly the water authorities would detect the poison, how the public would be informed and how fast the system could be flushed clean. It might be a good idea for Americans to stock up on clean water.
end
Rabin News:
. SECOND ROOT & BRANCH ASSOCIATION JERUSALEM CONFERENCE ON THE RABIN ASSASSINATION (Sunday, October 28, 2001, 4:00-9:00 P.M.)
DATE: Sunday, October 28, 2000
TIME: 4:00-9:00 P.M.
PLACE: Windmill Hotel 3 Mendele Street (just off Keren HaYesod Street) Jerusalem
LANGUAGE: English (except where specified)
ADMISSION: NIS 25 per person
INFORMATION: [rb@rb.org.il] [www.rb.org.il]
PROGRAM: in formation
NOTE: Yom HaZikaron L'Yitzchak Rabin (Yitzchak Rabin Remembrance Day) is observed this year on 12 Cheshvan, 5762 (Monday, October 29)
I will be lecturing at the conference. Among the new evidence to be presented is a video of Amir's police interrogation where he attempts to spell out the real conspiracy, and the police forensic tests which show no gunpowder or metal traces on Amir's hands a half hour after he allegedly murdered Rabin.
These are the documents that apparently triggered a series of vicious attacks against my family. I will no longer be releasing such documentation. I will be handing my stack of unchecked documents to an energetic researcher, Yechiel Mann and any new revelations will come from him. I have taken the proper measures to keep home and hearth intact including exposing long past transgressions to neutralize further blackmail and I will no longer be the source of any more damning evidence. We are hoping Yechiel will report on his findings at the conference. The source of the attacks on my family have been traced to two radical left activists paid for by our city council. They will feel a counter-attack if my family is subjected to the same kind of inquisition.
On November 4, Avishai Raviv is scheduled to go on trial at the Jerusalem Courthouse, Russian Compound. The date is perfect and if enough people show up outside the trial demanding justice, the world media might take note that there is a side to the Rabin murder being covered up. I'll be there and hope I won't be alone. Time is running out, this has to be the year the truth breaks. I sure couldn't take another year of harassment and either can the country.
But it's not been in vain. The truth is ingrained in many fine people. Look at the World Affairs Brief analysis of Sharon's warning to the U.S. this week:
"Sharon's rebellion against his US masters (if not feigned, to appease his increasingly disgruntled supporters) is starting to look like a replay of the demise of former PM Yitzhak Rabin. Rabin, like Sharon, was elected with the help of US and European money in order to induce a sellout of Israel's security posture. In Rabin's case, the Clinton CFR team tried to push Rabin too far into compromises with the PLO, and he finally told them to "go to hell." He was dead within months, at the hands of the Israeli Shabak--who set up a patsy to try and make it look like a right wing assassination. Sharon, however, won't make as good a martyr as Rabin, so I think he'll be turned around or simply turned out of office in due time."
An archive of my past work is found at:
http://www.redmoonrising.com/bclist.htm
If you drop in, why not look at a heartfelt essay on thew WTC/Pentagon bombings by Peter Goodgame?
http://www.redmoonrising.com/trap.htm
The author's books, including, THE LAST DAYS OF ISRAEL are available through www.amazon.com , The toll free numbers to inquire about all books are:
USA - 1 877 RABINYY 7224699 ISRAEL - 1 800 RABINY 722469
Go to: Recent News of Great Interest - Page I
Go to: Recent News of Great Interest - Page II
Go to: Recent News of Great Interest - Page III
Go to: Recent News of Great Interest - Page IV
Go to: Recent News of Great Interest - Page V
Go to: Recent News of Great Interest - Page VI
Pages With Articles On 9-11:
Cocaine, Money Laundering, Oil, Afghanistan And Bush Family Links Page
Page VI Page VII Page VIII Page IX Page X
Page XI Page XII Page XIII Page XIV Page XV Page XVI
Want to Know What The World Thinks? Sick of Our Corporate Press?
All International Newspaper Reports !!!
