News Of Great Interest Page XIII
September 11, 2001
There were NO hijackers By Anonymous
THE ANTHRAX VACCINE SNAFU - MEDIUM RARE By Jim Rarey October 10, 2001
THE ANTHRAX VACCINE LABYRINTH - MEDIUM RARE By Jim Rarey October 16, 2001
Who Benefits from the World Trade Center/Pentagon Attacks?
Who Benefits from the World Trade Center/Pentagon Attacks Part 2/BIG CLUE!! Why did the Towers IMPLODE instead of EXPLODE?
U.S. NURTURED RADICAL ISLAM, IGNORED DRUG DEALING Geoff Olson/Vancouver Courier, 1 Oct 2001
All I Am Saying Is Give War a Chance by Michael Moore 10/08/01
The Guardian (London), September 29, 2001 "The algebra of infinite justice", by Arundhati Roy
TYRANNY, TREACHERY, TERRORISM & TRAUMA: A FORMULA FOR TOTALITARIANISM
By Anonymous
The attack on September 11, 2000, was highly professional. The primary target was the World Trade Center (WTC), with the Pentagon [probably] only a decoy. There were NO hijackers on board on any of the four aircraft, or cell phone calls to anxious relatives. This is pure hysterical media hype.
Aircraft systems were functioning perfectly, including the IFF transponders, which were providing ATC with correct aircraft idents and telemetry. There were no mayday calls or "hijack" codes transmitted, despite the fact that the latter can be activated from four discrete locations on all of the aircraft involved. Once activated, a transponder "hijack" signal cannot be canceled inside the aircraft and can only be deactivated by ground engineers after landing.
The FAA knew this, and because there were no warnings at all, was compelled to immediately ground all four hundred aircraft in US airspace, all of which were potential flying bombs. At the same time the trigger-happy USAF was faced with an identical problem. How could it tell which potential "bombs" full of Americans it might have to shoot down next?
I don't think the USAF shot down the aircraft in Pennsylvania. Most probably it was a back-up aircraft, destroyed when it was confirmed primary and decoy targets accomplished. That said, shoot-downs could happen in the future. Your 50,000 reservists being called up include a large chunk of Air National Guard aircrew tasked with "Defending American Cities from the terrorists." Freudian slip from the White House there. How can you use Air Guard F-15 and F-16 interceptors to defend the cities from the "terrorists," if the "terrorists" are more "hijackers" already on your own airliners and already airborne en-route to their next targets.
The National Guard versions of F-15 and F-16 interceptors are both air superiority fighters designed to shoot down other aircraft. Cheney announced on TV that orders have now been issued for these aircraft to shoot down American or other airliners deviating from their flight paths. Travelling Amtrak will be a lot safer than flying.
Though I personally participated in UK in classified autoland (automatic landing) projects during the sixties, I cannot comment specifically on that because of the Official Secrets Act. However, I suggest you read the fictional story at the link cited below. Believe me when I say that what the author writes about is entirely possible, and far more beyond that. Think of radio controlled model planes and you might get close to the nature of the technology used.
Autoland is a system designed to completely control an aircraft from middle altitudes to precise touchdown on runway at a distant airport, with zero intellectual or physical input from pilots. Nowadays entire integrated aircraft systems are controlled by computers 1,000+ times more powerful than we had then.
It is 100% possible to take over the flight control computers of the 747, 757 and 767 if you have the right access codes and op frequency. The computers can also lock out radio communications including IFF transponders. Under these circumstances the pilots would be completely powerless, able only to look out of the window to see where they were being taken.
While I cannot disclose sources, I can say it was disclosed that the Pentagon [Boeing 757] CVR was "blank". CVR is in the tail section and cannot be "disabled" by a physical hijacker on board.
In the mid-nineties Lufthansa, appreciating the potentially catastrophic effect of "boffins" hijacking their Jumbos by remote control, and assisted by the Luftwaffe, stripped out the American computers and replaced them with classified German equipment. At the time I thought Lufthansa's investment extravagant and slightly paranoid. Now as I look at the video of those planes crashing into the World Trade Center, I marvel at the foresight of a few clever Germans. They at least are safe from a repeat performance of this sort, but alas, the remaining 2,000 American heavies are not.
MINI NUKES
After the strikes on the north and south World Trade Center towers, both could be seen to be completely stable. Then without warning the south WTC tower imploded vertically downwards, almost impossible after the massive west-east sheer forces imposed by the strike. Then the north tower imploded vertically as well, a scientific impossibility with the massive north-south sheer stress imposed by the strike.
Plus/minus five seconds after the first tower collapse, all cellphone contact in New York ceased, though that in Washington remained unaffected. On this, research for yourself of the web, "Source Region Electromagnetic Pulse (SREMP)." The worst effect is on extremely high frequency equipment [including cellphones]. SREMP decays over time, in simple terms like the ripples on a pond. The risk of SREMPs in war is the reason you have a nationwide very low frequency (150 KHz) emergency communications network. The cellphones don't melt. Sub-surface micro nukes of the W54 (etc) class do not produce a flash. Forget Hiroshima. It is the cellphone operating frequency that is temporarily disrupted, not the handset.
THE FALLOUT
Within minutes of this event, Air Force One diverted to Offutt AFB, Nebraska, where George W. was secured in an underground bunker for more than two hours. Offutt is also home to the special "war room" Jumbos equipped to allow the US President to control WWIII from international airspace.
As for who the responsible parties may be, remember the occupants of the WTC have over the last two decades destroyed the currencies and lives of at least a dozen different nations, so the queue of "suspects" would probably stretch for miles, including a few Russians, British, French etc. Need I go on? Much more likely targets for Muslim nations would have been the UN & US State Department. The list of suspect nations with very serious grudges against occupants of WTC should [realistically] be extremely long. Why focus idiotically on a single deeply religious Arab, sitting in a tent reading the Koran and drinking a cup of mint tea?
I cannot confirm or deny US involvement. Were the factions within the US responsible for the WTC bombings, I don't believe George W. was involved. While I appreciate George W. may have a slightly higher IQ than Dan Quayle, he would never be advised of a forthcoming strike of this magnitude. When Air Force One diverted to Offutt it did so to protect and preserve the integrity of the Presidency itself, not George W. Bush personally, who is of absolutely no strategic or tactical importance to anyone.
If your political masters and lobbies had been directly involved in [or behind] the attack, a shower of punitive Tomahawk missiles and other assorted junk would have hit Kabul and Baghdad within hours of the WTC. They did not, and the former bullies in the school yard are now running round the world trying to get the weaklings to join them in "crushing terrorism". An extraordinary sight.
They have much to worry about. How long and how much do you think it takes to strip the computer flight control gear out of every modern heavy in the USA? One hiccup in the wrong direction with punitive strikes on the wrong people, and next "terrorist" targets could be Hollywood and Los Angeles, for example. Despite the tough talk, the US military and government are already being extraordinarily careful. After all, Afghanistan and Iraq are still on the map after the WTC bombing.
To read the prologe to The Millennium Project, click here
Reproduced From: The Konformist
MEDIUM RARE
By Jim Rarey
October 10, 2001
With the possibility of an anthrax terrorist incident in Florida, the anthrax vaccine has regained prominence in the news. In that respect, there is bad news and worse news, both for those who want the vaccine and those who have taken it.
There is only one source for the vaccine in the United States and that is Bioport located in Lansing, Michigan. The company has not shipped any in three years due to a string of foul-ups that could portend long range health problems and even death for American servicemen forced to take the vaccine.
In September of 1998 a group of unidentified investors, organized by Fuad El-Hibri, acquired the assets of the Michigan Biologic Products Institute (a state agency) after a public bidding process. The for profit company created was named Bioport.
El Hibri, who became Chairman and CEO of the company, is an international wheeler-dealer who specializes in acquisitions. He has been involved in setting up companies around the world in the biomedical and telecommunications fields. El Hibri has managed projects for the high-powered law firm of Booze-Allen & Hamilton in Indonesia, Singapore, Australia and New Zealand. He also set up large telecommunication operations in Russia and Poland.
Prior to his association with the law firm he was manager for Citigroup of their Mergers and Acquisitions from New York and Operations and Credit in Saudi Arabia.
Another member of the four-man Board of Directors for Bioport is Admiral William J. Crowe, Jr., former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and former chairman of the President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board.
Crowe, a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), is also chairman of the Senior Advisory Board for Global Options which has five other CFR members including R. James Woolsey former CIA director.
Global Options is a multinational company that provides consulting on security, intelligence and propaganda to a variety of private and governmental entities.
Bioport was obviously created in anticipation of large-scale military operations by U.S. servicemen facing possible exposure to biological agents including anthrax. Bioport’s only customer is the Department of Defense (DOD) which has an exclusive contract forbidding sale of the vaccine to anyone except the DOD.
The original vaccine produced by the State of Michigan was primarily used to immunize animals against anthrax as well as veterinarians and others coming into close contact with animals or animal products. That vaccine had received approval from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)
When the Pentagon began placing orders for huge quantities of the vaccine, Bioport brought in three scientists who changed the "recipe" (formula) for the vaccine that allowed faster (and cheaper) production. That vaccine has never received FDA approval to this day despite the fact it has been "given" to over 500,000 servicemen.
One of the several reasons FDA approval is withheld is that the three scientists who developed the new formula have refused to divulge it to Bioport (or the FDA) until they obtain royalty agreements. As of September of last year, the matter was still in the courts.
Over 400 servicemen have been subjected to disciplinary measures for refusing to take the vaccine. One is Air Force doctor Captain John Buck. Buck refused to allow the vaccine to be injected in him citing a stack of solid scientific reasons why he considered it unsafe, untested and unnecessary.
Buck asserts that Russia has developed a strain of anthrax (among the thirty in existence) that is totally resistant to our vaccines. As of Feb. 20th of this year, Buck was facing a courts-martial (not yet scheduled).
An October 26, 2000 FDA report of an inspection at Bioport detailed other problems. Bioport failed to meet FDA sterility standards. It failed to follow-up on reports of adverse reactions to vaccine forwarded to it by the Pentagon. Quality control forms were post-dated and improper calculations were made.
Bioport failed to investigate the death of Army Sergeant Sandra Larson who died twelve weeks after receiving the last in a series of six shots the vaccination procedure requires. Cause of death was determined to be "aplastic anemia" an autoimmune disease.
In a congressional hearing Larson’s sister testified, "This was not a gradual case of aplastic anemia. She went from a healthy woman just four weeks prior to having no bone marrow, platelets and an extremely low count of red and white blood cells. It was as if there was something in her that was killing her immune system, shutting her down."
The FDA report also said Bioport failed to accurately track vials of vaccine rejected by the Pentagon and returned to Bioport and in one case had changed its records.
Bovine derived materials have traditionally been used in the manufacture of vaccines. In 1993 and again in 1996 the FDA warned manufacturers, including the Institute in Michigan, not to use materials derived from cattle that were "born, raised or slaughtered" in countries where Mad Cow disease is known to exist.
Last fall the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research reported that Bioport was still using bovine-derived materials of unknown geographic origin.
A spokesperson for Bioport, Chief Scientific Officer Robert C. Myers claims, "Now licensed for thirty years, with two million doses given in the last two and a half years alone, the vaccine is proven safe. In total, there have been 13 safety studies of many types involving 366,000 patients and there is no pattern emerging that would call the vaccine’s safety into question."
What Mr. Myers conveniently omits is that those two million doses were of the new "recipe" and has not been licensed by the FDA.
The Pentagon also dissembles on the question. A spokesperson stated, "Thirty years of experience with anthrax vaccine in the United Sates suggests that it has a side-effect profile similar to other commonly used vaccines."
Pentagon stocks of the vaccine were down to 60,000 at the end of last year. Only troops deployed in the Persian Gulf region and on special missions are receiving the vaccinations.
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 .
MEDIUM RARE
By Jim Rarey
October 16, 2001
Which of the following is dissembling about the anthrax vaccine, The Department of Defense (DOD), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Bioport, or the news media? Answer, all of the above.
Get comfortable in your chair as you read this because it gets pretty complicated.
In an earlier article (The Anthrax Vaccine Snafu) this writer detailed how Bioport has changed the recipe (formula) of its anthrax vaccine. This was done in anticipation of receiving a huge contract from the DOD for enough vaccine to vaccinate all of the men and women in the armed forces.
Although Bioport had received several warnings from the FDA that it needed to improve the quality of its laboratory processes, Bioport voluntary shut down its lab to install new equipment and renovations. The news media erroneous reported that the FDA had shut them down.
Bioport announced yesterday that it had completed all the paperwork necessary to obtain FDA approval of its improved processing and expected to start shipping vaccine again (after a three-year delay) within six months.
Approval of a vaccine involves two licenses. One, a product license, establishes the chemical composition of the drug. The other is a site license, which controls the procedures used on the production line.
Bioport, The FDA, and DOD are all proceeding as if the lab conditions (site license) were the only problem to be resolved. Consider the following facts uncovered in an in-depth review of all the available material on the subject.
In the original formula, (which had FDA approval) two principal ingredients (formaldehyde and benzethonium chloride have not been evaluated for human consumption. Actually, The FDA never tested the state’s vaccine for human consumption. The license issued to the state lab was based on evaluation of a sample made by another manufacturer (Merke, Sharpe and Dohme) The vaccine is only effective against cutaneous (skin contact) anthrax. It has never been tested against inhaled anthrax (the deadliest form that would be used in biological weapons). Thus, neither Bioport’s "old" formula nor the new formula (being ignored by virtually everyone) has ever been evaluated for human consumption.
When the Pentagon decided to vaccinate all the troops, it acknowledged that the vaccine (old formula) had not been tested or approved for those under 18 years of age, over 65 and for pregnant women. It contemplated using both the vaccine and antibiotics to treat those exposed to anthrax (evidently not understanding or not making the distinction between cutaneous and inhaled anthrax).
When the State of Michigan decided to sell its anthrax lab, two employees of the lab formed a company to buy it. However, another company, Bioport, put together by Fuad El-Hibri persuaded the two to join with Bioport, which purchased the assets of the lab basically with promissory notes to the state.
When El-Hibri testified before a congressional subcommittee in June of 1999 (in conjunction with an increase in Bioport’s prices to the DOD for the vaccine) he described the ownership of Bioport.
Bioport’s stock was split into two classes, 80% of the shares were voting, 20% non-voting. The non-voting shares were distributed to lab employees. The controlling shareholder of the voting stock is Intervac LLC. That company is owned by El-Hibri, his wife Nancy and Admiral William Crowe.
Bioport owes money to the State of Michigan for royalties and promissory notes in conjunction with the purchase. It also owes several million dollars advanced to it by "I & F Holdings" (remember that name).
When Michigan State authorities were contemplating awarding the purchase to Bioport, concern was raised about a federal law that prohibits giving a sole source contract to a foreign controlled company (Intervac). El-Hibri was a German citizen at the time although he had applied for American citizenship
El-Hibri was known to have facilitated shipments of anthrax vaccine from a British company he was affiliated with to Saudi Arabia after the Saudi’s had been turned down by the Pentagon. It was feared he might also ship vaccine to Iraq. In order to develop vaccines, companies must first possess live anthrax bacteria.
Since Mrs. El-Hibri and Admiral Crowe were both U.S. citizens, and in view of Crowe’s "service to the country," national security considerations were dismissed. Crowe later testified that he had made no investment in Intervac although some shares are in his name.
To further complicate matters, last week it was announced that Avant Immunootherapeutics Inc. was licensing its vaccine producing technology to a defense contractor that is working to improve anthrax vaccines. The contractor was identified as Dynport Vaccine Company LLC, a subsidiary of Dyncorp a major defense contractor.
Dyncorp of course has been in the news in recent years as the hirer of mercenary soldiers for various uses under state department contracts and working with the CIA.
Dnycorp hired former police officers (and some current ones who took leaves of absence from their departments) to train the KLA narco-terrorists in Kosovo to perform the police function. Officers were paid as much as $101,000 per year for this service.
It was also Dyncorp employees who flew the CIA plane that "fingered" the missionary plane that was shot down in Peru. Its employees are also involved in the crop eradication programs in Colombia and Peru reminiscent of the Agent Orange fiasco in Vietnam.
However, a perusal of Dyncorp’s website reveals that Dynport is not exactly a subsidiary, it is a joint venture between Dyncorp and Porton Products Ltd. (Porton) in the United Kingdom.
Porton is the British equivalent of Bioport, in several respects. It is the "privatization" of a laboratory owned by the British government. The private buyout was organized by no other person than Fuad El-Hibri who, as a director of Speywood Holdings Ltd. (the owner of Porton) exercised oversight responsibility over Porton. It was in that capacity that he oversaw shipment of anthrax vaccine to at least Saudi Arabia.
In turn, Speywood Holdings is a subsidiary of I & F Holdings (there’s that name again), an investment firm incorporated in the Netherland Antilles, a notorious haven for money laundering. In his congressional testimony, Fuad El-Hibri said I & F Holdings is owned by his father, Ibrihim El-Fuad. He did not say "sole" owner and no further questions were asked.
The British have their share of problems with the anthrax vaccine they used on their troops during the Gulf War. The military had discovered that combining the drug with the vaccine for whooping cough significantly sped up the reaction in the anthrax procedure. This was done despite warnings by the civilian health authorities that such a combination would greatly magnify the side effects. Just as a side note, the former director of the British lab was arrested for evading over 500,000 pounds (Sterling) in value added taxes (VAT).
At this point, we should take note of Fuad El-Hibri’s stint at CitiGroup, the dominant investment banking fir in New York.. Fuad, at one time, was in charge of the group’s operations and credit arrangements in Saudi Arabia. Although the name of bin Laden was not the household word is today, it beggars belief not to think that Fuad had extensive dealings with the bin Laden family. Aside from the royal family, the bin Laden construction empire is one of the dominant forces in Saudi Arabia.
We know from other sources that the bin Laden family had chosen Citibank and CitiGroup to handle its banking and investment interests in the United States and elsewhere.
The situation today screams for an investigation into who really controls the production of anthrax vaccines, both in the U.S. and Britain, and what is in them.
Don’t hold your breath waiting for such an investigation. There are too many oxen to be gored.
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.
Robert Sterling Editor, The Konformist http://www.konformist.com
http://www.konformist.com/911/mossad-911.htm
United Press International September 26, 2001
RAWALPINDI, Pakistan -- The retired Pakistani general who is closest to the Taliban and Osama bin Laden contends the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on New York City and Washington were the work of renegade U.S. Air Force elements working with the Israelis. Gen. Hameed Gul led Pakistan's Inter Services Intelligence during the war against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. Gul serves as an adviser to Pakistan's extremist religious political parties, which oppose their government's decision to support the United States in any action against Afghanistan's Taliban regime. Gul contends bin Laden had nothing to do with the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, saying instead that they were the work of the Mossad, the Israeli intelligence service -- a version of events that has been endorsed by Islamic fundamentalist clerics and is widely accepted by Muslims throughout the Arab world.
Here is the transcript of the exclusive interview Gul gave to Arnaud de Borchgrave, United Press International editor at large:
De Borchgrave: So who did Black Sept. 11?
Gul: Mossad and its accomplices. The U.S. spends $40 billion a year on its 11 intelligence agencies. That's $400 billion in 10 years. Yet the Bush Administration says it was taken by surprise. I don't believe it. Within 10 minutes of the second twin tower being hit in the World Trade Center CNN said Osama bin Laden had done it. That was a planned piece of disinformation by the real perpetrators. It created an instant mindset and put public opinion into a trance, which prevented even intelligent people from thinking for themselves.
Q: So you're already convinced bin Laden didn't do it?
A: I know bin Laden and his associates. I've been with them here, in Europe and the Middle East. They are graduates of the best universities and are highly intelligent with impressive degrees and speak impeccable English. These are people who have rediscovered fundamental Islamic values. Many come from the Gulf countries where ruling royal families have generated hatred by the way they flout divine law, wasting billions on gratifying their whims, jetting around in large private jets by themselves, and sailing the Mediterranean in big private boats for weeks on end. Osama's best recruits come from feudal areas that are U.S. protectorates and where millions of poor people are seeking human dignity. I have even visited a Christian convent school in Murree, 60 miles from here, where my 13-year-old daughter is studying. The young girls there have told me Osama is their hero. Osama's followers identify with Mujahideen freedom fighters wherever they are defending Islam and its values.
Q: So what makes you think Osama wasn't behind Sept. 11?
A: From a cave inside a mountain or a peasant's hovel? Let's be serious. Osama inspires countless millions by standing up for Islam against American and Israeli imperialism. He doesn't have the means for such a sophisticated operation.
Q: Why Mossad?
A: Mossad and its American associates are the obvious culprits. Who benefits from the crime? The attacks against the twin towers started at 8:45 a.m. and four flights are diverted from their assigned air space and no air traffic controller sounds the alarm. And no Air Force jets scramble until 10 a.m. That also smacks of a small scale Air Force rebellion, a coup against the Pentagon perhaps? Radars are jammed, transponders fail. No IFF -- friend or foe identification -- challenge. In Pakistan, if there is no response to IFF, jets are instantly scrambled and the aircraft is shot down with no further questions asked. This was clearly an inside job. Bush was afraid and rushed to the shelter of a nuclear bunker. He 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?
Q: At this point, someone might be asking what you've been smoking. What is Israel's interest in such a monstrous plot, which, of course, no one believes except Islamist extremists who concocted this piece of disinformation in the first place, presumably to detract from the real culprits?
A: Jews never agreed to Bush 41 (George H.W. Bush, the 41st president) or 43 (his son George W. Bush, the 43rd president). They made sure Bush senior didn't get a second term. His land-for-peace pressure in Palestine didn't suit Israel. They were also against the young Bush because he was considered too close to oil interests and the Gulf countries. Bush senior and Jim Baker had raised $150 million for Bush junior, much of it from Mideast sources or their American go- betweens. Bush 41 and Baker, as private citizens, had also facilitated the new strategic relationship between Saudi Arabia and Iran. I have this from sources in both countries. So clearly the prospect of a Bush 43 was a potential danger to Israel.
Jews were stunned by the way Bush stole the election in Florida. They had put big money on Al Gore. Israel has given its imperialist guardian parent opportunities to turn disaster into a pretext for imposing an all-encompassing military, political and economic agenda to further the cause of global capitalism. While Colin Powell is cautious and others are reckless and want to make up for their failure to defeat Saddam Hussein in the Gulf War 10 years ago, the global agenda is the same.
Israel knows it has a short shelf-life before it is overwhelmed by demographics. It is a state that was born in terrorism that terrorized Palestinians into the exile of refugee camps, where they have now subsisted in squalid refugee camps, and is now very much afraid of Pakistan's nuclear capability.
Israel has now handed the Bush family 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. Bush conveniently overlooks -- or is not told -- the fact that Islamic fundamentalists got their big boost in the modern age as CIA assets in the covert campaign I was also involved with to force the Soviets out of Afghanistan. Bush senior was vice president during that entire campaign. And no sooner did he become president on Jan. 20, 1989, than he summoned an inter-agency intelligence meeting and issued an order, among several others, to clip the wings of ISI (Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence) that had been coordinating the entire operation in Afghanistan. I know this firsthand as I was DGISI at the time (director general, ISI).
Q: So how do you read U.S. strategy in Pakistan?
A: The destabilization of Pakistan is part of the U.S. plan 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.
All summer long we heard about America's shrinking surplus and that the Pentagon would not have sufficient funds to modernize for the 21st century. And now, all of a sudden, the Pentagon can get what it wants without any Democratic Party opposition. How very convenient! Even your cherished civil liberties can now be abridged with impunity to protect the expansion of the hegemony of transnational capitalism. There is now a new excuse to crush anti-globalization protests.
Bush 43 follows Bush 41. Iraq was baited into the Kuwaiti trap when the U.S. told Saddam it was not interested in his inter-Arab squabbles. Two days later, he moved into Kuwait, which was an Iraqi province anyway before the British Empire decreed otherwise. Roosevelt baited the Pearl Harbor trap for the Japanese empire, which provided the pretext for entering World War II. And now the Israelis have given the U.S. the pretext for further expansion into an area that will be critical in the next 25 years - the Caspian basin.
Q: Were you a fundamentalist in the days of the war against the Soviets in Afghanistan when you worked closely with the CIA?
A: Not as much as I am today.
Q: What turned you against America?
A: Betrayals and broken promises and what was done to my army career.
Q: And what was that?
A: President Ishaq Khan, who succeeded Zia ul-Haq after his plane was blown out of the sky, wanted to appoint me chief of staff, the highest position in the Pakistani army. The U.S., which by then had clipped ISI's wings, also blocked my promotion by informing the president I was unacceptable. So I was moved to a corps commander position. As ISI director, I held the whole Mujahideen movement in the palm of my hands. We were all pro-American. But then America left us in the lurch and everything went to pieces, including Afghanistan.
The U.S. pushed for a broad-based Afghan government of seven factions and then waved goodbye. Even in the best of democracies, a broad- based coalition does not work. So we quickly had seven jokers in Kabul interested in only one thing - jockeying for power. The gunplay quickly followed, which led to the creation of Taliban, the students of the original Mujahideen, who decided to put an end to it.
Q: What happened to the 1,000 shoulder-fired Stinger anti-aircraft missiles that were supplied by president Reagan in 1986 and 87 to the Mujahideen, and that literally grounded the Soviet air force?
A: After the Soviets pulled out, the CIA allocated $60 million to try to buy them back. This just drove the black market price up for one Stinger from $100,000 to $300,000. The Taliban still have about 250 of them for the kind of situation they face today against U.S. aircraft.
Q: Is the U.S. now your enemy?
A: 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. Prof. Sam Huntington in his "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. We are on the brink of disaster. It is time to pull back from the brink and reassess before we blow ourselves up. The purpose of Islam is service to humanity. The time for like-minded people to have a meeting of the minds is now.
Q: But you are against democracy, so how can there be a meeting of the minds?
A: Democracy does not work. Politicians are constantly thinking of their next election, not the public good, which means, at best, constantly shading the truth to hide it from their constituents. Their pronouncements are laced with lies and the voters are lulled or gulled into believing utter nonsense. The Koran says call a spade a spade. It is the supreme law and tells right from wrong. There is no notion of "my country right or wrong" under divine law. The creator's will predominates. All if subservient to Allah's will and adherence to a set of basic, fundamental values.
Q: So what kind of a system are you advocating?
A: The world needs a post-modern state system. Right now, the nation- state and round the clock satellite TV lead people to imitate America's way of life. Which is mathematically impossible. You have 4 percent of the world's population consuming 32 percent of the world's resources. The creator through Prophet Mohammed said equal distribution. Capitalism is the negation of the creator's will. It leads to imperialism and unilateralism.
Q: So what does this post-modern state system look like?
A: A global village under divine order, or we will have global bloodshed until good triumphs over evil. Islam encapsulates all the principal religions and what was handed down 1,400 years ago was the normal evolutionary sequel to Judaism and Christianity. The prophet's last sermon was a universal document of human rights for everyone that surpasses everything that came since, including America's declaration of independence and the U.N. Charter of universal rights. If you superimpose true secular values on true Islamic values, there is no difference. So surely divine law should supersede man-made law. Islam is egalitarian, tolerant and progressive. It is the wave of the future.
Q: Marxism also believed that the nation-state would eventually wither away.
A: Socialism jumped the rails when it was co-opted by the imperialist Soviet state. Islam believes in dynamism, Christianity stands for static statism. The pope in all his pronouncements has expressed a dogmatic attachment to the status quo. Why are so many black Americans converting to Islam? Because they are looking for true equality which they cannot find under capitalism. Allah has no gender, neither male nor female. Islam has no indirect taxation in an interest-free economy. Usury was a Jewish concept.
Q: Is Iran your model?
A: There isn't a single true Islamic state in the world today. Iran has moved forward from its 1979 revolution, but I am not sure whether it's the right direction.
Q: And Taliban?
A: They represent Islam in its purest form so far. It's a clean sheet. And they were also moving in the right direction when this crisis was cooked up by the U.S. Until Sept. 11, they had perfect law and order with no formal police force, only traffic cops without sidearms. Now, in less than two weeks, they have mobilized some 300,000 volunteers to fight American and British invaders if they come.
Q: And your reaction to U.S. demands on Pakistan?
A: If Pakistan gives the U.S. base rights we will have a national upheaval. And if the U.S. attacks Afghanistan, there will be a call -- a fatwa -- for a general jihad. All borders will then disappear and it will be a no-holds-barred Islamic uprising against Israel and American imperialism. Pakistan will be engulfed in the firestorm. So I can only hope that cooler heads will prevail in Washington.
Q: What about the other U.S. demands?
A: Overflight rights are meaningless since the U.S. violates air space daily all over the world. As for intelligence sharing with
ISI, you can't even catch your own terrorists. And what ISI gives you will be of marginal value anyway.
Q: President (Pervez) Musharraf has made strong statements supporting the U.S.
A: He was my student in the army. He is a good man, but he doesn't understand Islam. The army will never fight the masses. If push comes to shove, Musharraf will say no to the Americans rather than turn against the people. He is not just facing a handful of angry people. By his own admission, it's 10 percent to 15 percent of the population, or at least 10 million people willing to fight. For openers, they would close the port of Karachi. A country cannot breathe without lungs.
Q: Back to Osama's terrorist network. Who was behind the bombing of the U.S. Embassies in Tanzania and Kenya?
A: Mossad is strong in both countries. Remember the Israeli operation to free hostages in Entebbe (Uganda)? Both Kenya and Tanzania were part of the logistical tail. A so-called associate of Osama was framed at Karachi airport. The incidents took place on Aug. 8, 1999, and on the 10th a short, clean-shaven man disembarks at Karachi airport and presents the passport of a bearded man. Not your passport, he was told. He then tries to bribe the clerk with 200 rupees. A ludicrously small sum given the circumstances. The clerk says no and turns him in and he starts singing right away. Not plausible. Osama has sworn to me on the Koran it was not him and he is truthful to a fault. Pious Muslims do not kill innocent civilians who included many Muslim victims. The passport must have been switched while the man was asleep on the plane in what has all the earmarks of a Mossad operation. For 10 years, the Mujahideen fought the Soviets in Afghanistan and not a single Soviet embassy was touched anywhere in the world. So this could not have been Osama's followers.
Q: What if bin Laden has been lying to you and is guilty. Is that inconceivable?
A: 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 in turn extradite Osama to the Netherlands.
If you are interested in a free subscription to The Konformist Newswire, please visit:
http://www.eGroups.com/list/konformist
Robert Sterling Editor,
The Konformist http://www.konformist.com
Missing - Crucial Facts From The Official Charges Against bin Laden By Chris Blackhurst
The Independent - London 10-7-1
It was too good to be true. We were told we would be getting evidence of Osama bin Laden's guilt. Instead, close analysis of the 21-page document put out by the Government on Thursday reveals a report of conjecture, supposition and unsubstantiated assertions of fact. It uses every trick in the Whitehall drafter's arsenal to make the reader believe they are reading something they are not: a damning indictment of Mr bin Laden for the events of 11 September.
No wonder Tony Blair and his officials are delighted with the reaction to publication of the dossier. One Whitehall source told the Independent on Sunday they were "chuffed with two newspapers for hailing it as 'proof' of bin Laden's involvement and delighted it got such a good reaction overall". Ministers believe the document has sealed the propaganda war, convincing the country of the need to move against Mr bin Laden and al-Qa'ida and to accept limited British and civilian casualties. To their relief they are not being subjected to rigorous questioning on the report, either from their own supporters, the Opposition, or much of the media. Officials are also pleased: the document successfully papers over the cracks in their own intelligence operations.
The report was put together by a committee which included senior members of MI5 and MI6, working round the clock, with drafts going backwards and forwards to Washington. Within Whitehall, the dossier was seen as vital to gaining the approval of a naturally cautious and sceptical British public. As a paper produced by mandarins anxious to brook no argument it is a classic of its kind, straight from the script of Yes Minister: short on checkable detail; long on bold assertion; highly selective with the choice of facts.
Officials when they prepare such reports operate to a set of principles. They know that unlike the US, and thanks to their efforts in suppressing freedom of information down the years, Britain is a secret society. We are not used to having anything presented to us about intelligence matters and threats to national security. That, plus the British characteristic of not defying authority, especially in times of crisis, means that if the Government says loudly enough that something is "evidence", even if it is not, we will accept it as such.
That is why the very first sentence in the paper, in the introduction, states: "The clear conclusions reached by the government are: Osama bin Laden and Al Qaida, the terrorist network which he heads, planned and carried out the atrocities on 11 September 2001." This is the introduction, not the conclusion or an executive summary. Introductions, as the authors knew too well, normally set up a document, relating the background as to why the book or, in this instance, a government document, has been written. Here, that convention was rejected: from the word go, the Government wanted to ensure the point of the document was conveyed.
The document carries a health warning that intelligence material has been withheld to protect the safety of sources. But, lawyers point out, this is not good enough. Assuming one aim of the military build- up is to try to capture Mr bin Laden and put him on trial, that so- far-unseen evidence would have to be displayed because on the basis of what has been released there is no chance of his being prosecuted, let alone convicted. "The Prime Minister told Parliament that this evidence was of an even more direct nature indicating guilt," said Richard Gordon QC. "The document makes it clear that the additional evidence is 'too sensitive to release'. That may be so, but in any criminal prosecution against bin Laden the necessary evidence would have to be adduced for the case to be proved."
For page after page, the paper spews out facts about Mr bin Laden. In 1996, he issued a declaration of jihad, or holy war. In February 1998 he issued and signed a fatwa which included a decree to all Muslims that "the killing of Americans and their civilian and military allies is a religious duty for each and every Muslim to be carried out..." In the same year he also said that acquiring chemical or nuclear weapons for the defence of Muslims was a "religious duty". It might look like evidence of something, but it is not proof he organised the 11 September attacks. "All this shows, in the language of the lawyers, propensity, but it proves little," said Mr Gordon.
More pertinent to 11 September were two TV interviews he gave, in 1997 and 1998, in which he referred to the terrorists who carried out the earlier attack on the World Trade Centre in 1993 as "role models". In December 1999, a terrorist cell linked to al-Qa'ida was discovered trying to carry out attacks in the US. Other attacks on US targets by al-Qa'ida or terrorists trained at bin Laden camps were made in January and October 2000.
Again, said Mr Gordon, it is not enough. "This material shows that bin Laden may well have been responsible for the 11 September massacre but it does not, of itself, prove that he was." The document goes into great detail about the bombings of the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998. But there is not one single fact presented that was not already known. While the operation was similar to 11 September well planned, two attacks on the same day, suicide attackers indiscriminate killing of civilians, including Muslims it does not prove anything.
Officials deny that the minute description of the previous bombings was designed to cover up cracks in their own intelligence about 11 September. Nevertheless, it is noticeable that in a 21-page document the overwhelming bulk of it is devoted to rehashing old information. It is not until page 18 and paragraph 61 that the reader is told something new about 11 September.
This is that three of the 19 hijackers have been "positively identified as associates of Al Qaida" and that one of them "has been identified as playing key roles in both the East African embassy attacks and the USS Cole attack". The word "associates" suggests the authorities lack intelligence on al-Qa'ida: they think they know who may be involved but they are not sure, and they are not certain where they come in the pecking order hence the catch-all, "associates". The three are understood to be: Khalid Almihdhar and Nawaf Alhazmi, both filmed secretly in Kuala Lumpur meeting other al-Qa'ida members involved in the USS Cole bombing in Aden; and Mohamed Atta. Suspected of being the ringleader, Atta is believed to have been a member of Islamic Jihad, a major grouping within al-Qa'ida, and the authorities are convinced he received training at a bin Laden camp in Afghanistan. The hijacker who played a key role in the embassy, USS Cole and 11 September attacks, is thought to refer to Almihdhar. If there is a hijacker linking all three, that is a crucial piece of evidence since there is no doubt al-Qa'ida committed the earlier bombings.
The next paragraph, 62, promises much and delivers little. Prefaced with another rider about names remaining anonymous to protect sources, it begins by saying how, prior to 11 September, Mr bin Laden "mounted a concerted propaganda campaign ... justifying attacks on Jewish and American targets". It was well known in the Middle East that, earlier this year, a bin Laden recruitment video was in circulation, exhorting Muslims to lay down their lives for the jihad. The video makes no mention of any coming big assault nor does it refer to 11 September or possible targets in the US.
Last week it emerged that Mr bin Laden called his adoptive mother in Syria on 10 September to tell her there would be "big news", subsequent to which he might be out of touch for some time. It is hard to believe that someone as cautious as him would risk such a call. However, this is understood to be what is being referred to when the document says, in paragraph 62: "We have learned, subsequent to 11 September, that bin Laden himself asserted shortly before 11 September that he was preparing a major attack on America." The document goes on, saying that in August and early September, close bin Laden associates were warned to return to Afghanistan by 10 September.
This is new, and odd. Since the attacks, known al-Qa'ida associates have been picked up or they are being watched. If there was advice to go to Afghanistan presumably they ignored it or did not receive it. The names of the "close associates" are not specified, neither is any more detail made available which is a mystery. It is hard to see why giving a bit more detail would compromise anybody or a foreign intelligence service that may be monitoring their calls.
Again, this tantalising paragraph by far the most intriguing in the document says that just before the attacks "some known associates of bin Laden were naming the date for action as on or around 11 September". What associates? How? When? Again, no detail is supplied.
Then, the paragraph continues, "one of bin Laden's closest and most senior associates was responsible for the detailed planning of the attacks". This is thought to be a reference to either Mohamed Atef, al-Qa'ida's operations chief, or Ayman al Zawahiri, Mr bin Laden's deputy. Another senior al-Qa'ida member being mentioned by those close to the investigation is Abu Zubeidah.
After all this, the most vital paragraph in the paper ends with this curious sentence: "There is evidence of a very specific nature relating to the guilt of bin Laden and his associates that is too sensitive to release."
What this document is not is a detailed exposition of the investigation to date. To be fair, that is still ongoing, but providing that amount of information would distract from the paper's main purpose, to blame Mr bin Laden. This is summarised in the final narrative paragraph, 69: "No other organisation has both the motivation and the capability to carry out attacks like those of the 11 September only the Al Qaida network under Osama bin Laden." This smacks of exasperation. To ram that point home, paragraph 70, "conclusion", repeats the message of the introduction. This, in the end, is what the paper is for, a Government plea for trust: it was Mr bin Laden. To which the response must be: we believe you but prove it.
If you are interested in a free subscription to The Konformist Newswire, please visit:
http://www.eGroups.com/list/konformist
From:
http://www.goodnewsaboutgod.com/studies/currentevents2.htm
from the World Trade Center/Pentagon Attacks?
Who Benefits? That's always the first question to consider when a "terrorist" attack occurs. Instead of clenching one's fist, waving one's flag and shouting vindictive slogans, let's just stop for a moment of calm analysis of the basic facts. When we analyze who benefits, we immediately will know with over 99% surety, who did it!
What was the tone of U.S. and world opinion just a week or two before the attacks?
In the U.S., the economy was lagging badly, the stock market was falling, many were questioning if the government's taxes were legal, the Gary Condit case had been poorly handled, people continued to question Waco and the Oklahoma City bombing, they questioned our support of Israel in her policies regarding the Palestinians, and the approval rate of President Bush was low.
What about World Opinion? Just 8 days before the WTC/Pentagon attacks, Israel was stunned by a UN decision equating Zionism with Racism, according to Ha'aretz Daily.com.
Israel was branded a "racist apartheid" state by thousands of non- governmental organizations (NGOs) attending a U.N. World Conference Against Racism in Durban, South Africa. The conference was attended by representatives of 153 governments.
The declaration, adopted by 3,000 NGOs in 44 regional and interest- based caucuses, shocked Jewish groups.
Foreign Minister Shimon Peres called the anti-Israel declarations a disgrace, and said that Israel was "seriously" contemplating withdrawing from the conference in protest. The Israeli delegation to the conference blasted the language of the NGO declaration as an incitement to hatred of Jews.
Jewish delegates walked out. The U.S. delegates followed.
The Forum accused the Jewish state of "systematic perpetration of racist crimes including war crimes, acts of genocide and ethnic cleansing" in its treatment of the Palestinians.
In addition, the head of the Danish Red Cross, Freddy Karup Pederson, told the Danish Parliamentary Foreign Affairs Committee that the lifestyle of Jewish settlers in the Palestinian territories resembles that of whites under the former racist apartheid system. He also criticized Israel's collective punishment of the Palestinian population.
So, just 8 days before the attacks, the overwhelming attitude of the nations of the world was against Israel's policies and in support of the Arab countries' charges against Israel, a nation heavily supported by, and allied with, the U.S.
What has happened to U.S. and World Opinion SINCE the attacks?
Immediately AFTER the attack, public opinion was turned 180 degrees. Now the Arab countries are being demonized, the U.S. population is overwhelmingly backing the President (according to the Washington Post), urging him to punish, kill, destroy, annihilate the perpetrators of this crime, even though no one really has any proof who did it, the U.S. government is preparing for war, the U.S. and Israel have carte blanche support to bomb nearly every Arab country out of existence.
No one is questioning anymore the "apartheid" policies of the Israelis against the Palestinians. War, as politicians have known throughout history, stimulates the economy and (if the propaganda is handled properly) unifies the population behind the President and squelches ALL criticism.
Anyone who is not 100% behind the President is considered a traitor. President Bush in a televised Speech to Congress, urged global support for his war on terrorists, warning the world: "either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists." (Washington AFP) 9-21-01 (An effective way to stifle all dissent!)
If you don't go along with the plan for destruction of the Arabs advocated by the government, you become the target of threats and must have bodyguards, as California Democrat Barbara Lee has discovered. She cast the lone vote in Congress against the use of military force in response to the WTC/Pentagon attacks and now must have Police guarding her Capitol Hill office. (Reuters, AP, ABCNEWS.com 9-18-01)
What ELSE has happened since the attacks?
1) The population has been prepared for a long term war where the number of U.S. casualties will be high (Washington Post Online September 21, 2001).
2) Bush creates a High Office of "Homeland Security" supposedly to protect Americans from attack. The job would involve coordination of government-wide domestic security efforts, including meshing domestic FBI and foreign CIA intelligence, working with U.S. military, emergency officials and state and local governments.
The Homeland Defense position "would probably not need Senate confirmation, which other Cabinet jobs require, nor legislation to create" White House officials said. So there would be no investigation, oversight nor accountability for this person. (Reuters - Washington 9-21-01) (Perfect conditions to appoint a crony)
3) U.S. orders 40 million doses of smallpox vaccine for $343 million in preparation for a possible bioterrorism assault. The contract has been given to a small, Cambridge-based firm, Acambis, a British biotechnology company who reported a net loss of $8 million in the six months prior to June 30, unchanged from last year. (How convenient to get this huge order! It would be interesting to find out the conflict of interest issues here.) (Reuters News, London 9-20- 01) PREPARING THE POPULATION TO EXPECT BIO-TERRORISM.
4) "America and Britain are producing secret plans to launch a ten year "war on terrorism" - Operation Noble Eagle - involving a completely new military and diplomatic strategy to eliminate terrorist networks and cells around the world." (The Times - London 9- 20-01)
5) The Senate OKs FBI Spying on the Internet: FBI agents soon will be able to spy on Internet users legally without a court order. Two days after the terrorist attack, the Senate approved the "Combating Terrorism Act of 2001" which enhances police wiretap powers and permits monitoring in more situations. The FBI's surveillance system is called Carnivore. (Lycos Network 9-20-01) MORE CONTROL!
6) The U.S. Plans to overthrow Taliban and put Afghanistan under UN Control, according to The Guardian - London (9-21-01) NOTE: Yugoslavia is ALREADY under UN control. (MORE UN CONTROL)
7) A global surveillance system known as Echelon exists and has the ability to eavesdrop on telephone calls, faxes and e-mail messages, a European Parliament committee has concluded. (Lycos Network 9-20-01) MORE CONTROL!
8) Face-ID Technology gains new support. "State lawmakers who were planning to sponsor legislation restricting its use now say they are reassessing their plans." MORE CONTROL! (Denver Post Capitol Bureau, 9-20-01)
9) "Experts See a High-Security America of Surveillance & Seizures": New York: Security Experts in the United States are describing a new kind of country that could emerge, where electronic identification might become the norm, immigrants might be tracked far more closely and the airspace over cities like New York and Washington might be off-limits to all civilian aircraft." (The International Herald Tribune 9-19-01) MORE SURVEILLANCE OF U.S. CITIZENS.
10) "Lawmakers See Need to Loosen Rules on CIA" Congressional leaders who oversee the nation's intelligence system have concluded that America's spy agencies should be allowed to combat terrorism with more aggressive tactics, including the hiring of unsavory foreign agents, including revived discussion of reversing the US 25 year ban on using covert agents to assassinate foreigners. R. James Woolsey, the former director of the CIA said that "Washington has absolutely undergone a sea change in thinking this week." (New York Times, 9-16- 01) MORE SURVEILLANCE OF U.S. CITIZENS!
11) NATO Announces a Third World War is Almost Upon Us. A pentagon spokesman hinted towards potential targets being Libya, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, North Korea, Syria and others. (NATO Secretary-General Lord Robertson)
12) California Congresswoman, Mary Bono, R-Palm Springs warned that the country should prepare for a fight against international terrorists that will likely include personal sacrifice, the use of ground troops overseas and the risk of retaliation against civilians by the enemy. She also predicts intense scrutiny of airline passengers, a national system of fingerprinting and identification cards and the specter of chemical and biological attacks on the U.S. (The Desert Sun 9-18-01)
13) An enemy is needed to justify a $344 Billion War Budget, when the federal government currently spends only $42 billion on education, $26 billion on affordable housing and $1 billion on school construction.
14) President Bush sent his anti-terrorism bill to Congress one week after the WTC/Pentagon attack, launching an emotional debate that will force U.S. politicians to choose between continued freedom for Americans or greater security. (Lycos Network 9-20-01) DOES ANYBODY KNOW HOW LONG IT TAKES TO WRITE ONE OF THESE BILLS? IT TAKES MONTHS! They are hundreds of pages long. THIS ONE WAS OBVIOUSLY WRITTEN BEFORE THE ATTACK! How convenient! Wake up America!
15) "President George Bush focused his energy on building a GLOBAL ALLIANCE for a fight against terrorism..." (MSNBC 9-18-01) Here comes the New World Order!
16) Fast-Moving House Bill Restricts Liberties - Much of it Unrelated to Terrorism! Congress is being asked to rush to pass emergency anti- terrorist legislation written by the Department of Justice, but much of the legislation turns out to have nothing to do with fighting terrorism. Instead, the legislation contains a host of items which have been on the bureaucratic wish lists for many years.
17) "We Must Ignore the Peace Lobby and Show No Restraint" says The Independent - London (9-24-01)
18) Bush Suspends Habeas Corpus: Legal Immigrants May Be Held Without Cause: "The Bush Administration today announced it is using its powers under the National Emergency Act to suspend the right of Habeas Corpus for all immigrants in the country, including legal immigrants, meaning that any immigrant in the U.S. right now can be held INDEFINITELY by the police or government WITHOUT TRIAL OR DEMONSTRATION OF CAUSE TO HOLD THEM."
Though no one has yet suggested infringing the rights of U.S. citizens, the move is a frightening first step to a national tyranny, based on perpetual suspension of the Constitution in the name of fighting perpetual war."
19) President Bush has agreed to bail out the airlines with BILLIONS of dollars, an industry that was swimming in red ink LONG BEFORE the WTC/Pentagon attacks.
What was known BEFORE the attack - and by whom?
1) Echelon Gave Authorities 3 Month Warning of Attacks - German Paper: Frankfurt, Germany - U.S. and Israeli intelligence agencies received warning signals at least three months ago that terrorists were planning to hijack commercial aircraft to use as weapons to attack important symbols of American culture, according to a story in Germany's daily Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeiung (FAZ). Newsbytes.com
2) U.S. planned to attack Taliban BEFORE WTC/Pentagon Attacks: A former Pakistani diplomat has told the BBC that the U.S. was planning military action against Osama Bin Laden and the Taliban even before last week's attacks. Niaz Naik, a former Pakistani Foreign Secretary, was told by senior American officials in mid-July that military action against Afghanistan would go ahead by the middle of October. (BBC News 9-18-01)
3) Expert - Russia Knew In Advance...Encouraged Citizens to Cash Out Dollars: Russian press accounts and other activities by the Russian government this summer indicate that the Russians knew in advance that something would happen to America, including a "financial attack" against the U.S. During the past three months, Russian media and officials have encouraged citizens to cash out of U.S. dollars pending an economic collapse there after an "attack." (NewsMax.com 9-17-01)
4) FBI tracked man in custody 2 weeks before attacks: "Two weeks before the terrorist attacks in New York City and Washington, D.C., FBI agents were at a flight school in Oklahoma asking questions about a man now suspected of having a link to those attacks", according to CNN.
"The fact that FBI agents were at the Airman Flight School in Norman, Oklahoma, two weeks before any attacks would seem to contradict the agency's assertion that it was not aware of any connection between aviation schools and suspected terrorists. FBI Director Robert Mueller has stated publicly, "There were NO warning signs that I'm aware of that would indicate this type of operation in the country," (CNN.com 9-18-01) SOMEBODY IS LYING!
5) U.S. Pulled Plug on 500 Arab/Muslim Websites the Day BEFORE Jetliner Attacks: Five hundred websites - many of them with an Arab or Muslim connection - crashed when an anti-terrorism task force raided InfoCom Corporation in Texas. The 80-strong task force that descended upon the IT company included FBI agents, Secret Service agents, Diplomatic Security agents, tax inspectors, immigration officials, customs officials, department of commerce officials and computer experts. (Brian Whitaker 9-12-01)
6) U.S. was warned in 1995 of plot to hijack planes, attack buildings: The FBI was warned six years ago of a terrorist plot to hijack commercial planes and slam them into the Pentagon, The CIA headquarters and other buildings, Philippine investigators told CNN. The plan was termed Project Bojinka. (Manila, Philippines CNN 9-18-01)
7) "U.S. Government Had Prior Knowledge of Emergency: The most massive so-called "terrorist" attacks on U.S. soil since the Oklahoma City bombings of 1995, were known, a week ahead of time, by the American CIA. Among the foreign intelligence agencies who penetrated the plots were the French CIA and Israel's The Mossad, units of both often working with one another.
"Foreign intelligence sources confirm the validity of this story. And they state that they informed the U.S. secret police who absolutely failed, neglected, and outright refused to take action as to known prior specifics of which the top-level of the CIA were informed in advance." (www.skolnicksreport.com 9-13-01) HOW INTERESTING!
8) Spy in the White House? "Terrorists" had Ultra Secret Codes on 911: (DEBKA Intelligence Files 9-22-01)
9) More Unusual Market Activity Reported BEFORE Attacks: "Chicago traders on Wednesday cited unusual activity in airline options up to a month before attacks on U.S. landmarks, and German bankers reported brisk activity in reinsurer Munich Re shares, adding to speculation that those behind the attacks tried to profit from their acts. (Reuters 9-20-01)
So how come EVERYONE else knew this was going to happen? Why would the U.S. refuse to investigate when told, unless it was their own plan all along?
If you are interested in a free subscription to The Konformist Newswire, please visit:
http://www.eGroups.com/list/konformist
Robert Sterling Editor, The Konformist http://www.konformist.com
Why did the Towers IMPLODE instead of EXPLODE?
The towers came down as gracefully as a fountain of water. "Too methodical to be a chance result of airplanes colliding with the structures" said Van Romero, vice president for research at New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology.
"My opinion is that after the airplanes hit the World Trade Center there were some explosive devices inside the buildings that caused the towers to collapse," Romero said. Romero is a former director of the Energetic Materials Research and Testing Center at Tech, which studies explosive materials and the effects of explosions on buildings, aircraft and other structures.
The Towers IMPLODED! They did NOT explode! A fuel fire causes an EXplosion, not an IMplosion. Explosions explode OUT. Implosions, implode IN!
IMPLOSIONS can ONLY occur with immense planning by a highly skilled group of craftsmen educated in the unique skill of demolishing buildings by strategically placing explosive devices within the building. This requires many experts, much time and significant access to the building beforehand.
The skill of implosion of buildings was developed primarily to demolish buildings in areas of high building density, so the destruction of the structure will not cause damage to the surrounding buildings.
In addition, the towers came down long after the planes struck. To suggest that fuel dumping from the airplanes caused a fire hot enough to melt the inner structure is ludicrous.
First of all, who can prove the planes dumped all of their fuel into the core of the building?
Second, why did the fuel take so long to catch fire?
Third, fuel-fires cause EXplosions, NOT IMplosions!
Fourth, the structure was built to withstand temperatures of 2000 degrees Fahrenheit, according to the architect and designer of the building, a man who is now deceased, but who preserved this nugget of information in an interview he recorded in 1998.
Hyman Brown, a University of Colorado civil engineering professor and the World Trade Center's construction manager, watched in confusion as the towers came down. "It was over-designed to withstand almost anything including hurricanes, high winds, bombings and an airplane hitting it," he said. (Scripps Howard News Service 9-11,01 and 9-12- 01)
So, why was it necessary to implode the whole structure? To eliminate evidence, just as was done to the Murrah building in Oklahoma City, before the forensic specialists could get in to examine the evidence.
Just like the Branch Davidian compound at Waco was bulldozed by the government before any evidence could be examined.
Conclusion: This was a highly skilled endeavor by a large group of well-trained people with access to the buildings, the airplanes and the explosives. They would have had to blend into the population and not look suspicious.
Question: Who would have these qualifications? Certainly not a large group of Arab "terrorists"!
Where are the "Indestructible" Black Boxes?
All four Black Boxes were supposedly destroyed and rendered unusable in spite of the fact that they are designed specifically for plane crashes which result in insurmountable conditions. In fact there are reported to be TWO Black Boxes on each plane, but apparently ALL EIGHT of the Black Boxes are completely destroyed.
Strange indeed!
ABC News Reports: The Black Box is "ALMOST INDESTRUCTIBLE. IT IS DESIGNED TO WITHSTAND HEAT OF UP TO 2,000 DEGREES FAHRENHEIT FOR ONE HOUR, salt water for at least 30 days, immersion in a variety of liquids such as jet fuel and lubricants, AND AN IMPACT OF 3,400 G's. By comparison, astronauts are typically exposed to up to six Gs during a shuttle takeoff."
Yet CNN reported that "In New York, several blocks from the ruins of the World Trade Center, a passport authorities said belonged to one of the hijackers was discovered a few days ago, according to city Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik."
The paper passport apparently survived intact!
The "indestructible Black Boxes were destroyed!
Hmmm!
Who Has Claimed Responsibility?
Within HOURS after the attack the U.S. was aggressively touting Osama bin Laden as the "terrorist" responsible for this dastardly deed. As one writer to a popular website noted, "I find it laughable that the agency notorious for its inability to find a bleeding elephant in a snowbank suddenly (within hours of the attack) has the culprit pinpointed!"
The media continuously whips up the public to indiscriminate hatred of almost any Arab. On radio, on TV, in the newspapers and in magazines, all one hears or reads is HATE towards Osama bin Laden, or any other Muslim. The Globe, a well-known grocery store rag, contains pictures of Osama Bin Laden with rifle "cross-hairs" targeted over his face and a soldier in fatigues pointing an automatic rifle at his head. Yet these same media outlets pompously demand the elimination of "hate!"
It is USUAL and CUSTOMARY for Terrorist groups to claim responsibility for an attack. Yet no such claim has been made.
Osama bin Laden says he didn't do it. "We have been blamed in the past, but we were not involved," he said. (The Guardian - London 9-17- 01)
"Egyptian President Mubarak still has not seen bin Laden proof," according to a Paris AFP report. "Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak says he has not seen any proof of Osama bin Laden being "the brains" behind the terrorist attacks on the United States and warns Washington against over-hasty reprisals, in a newspaper interview published on 9-24-01.
Saddam Hussein, in a letter to the American People noted that "when the event took place, Arab rulers and the rulers of countries whose religions is Islam, rushed to condemn the event." (Iraqi News Agency 916-01)
There are even reports that Osama bin Laden has been, and may still now be, an operative of the U.S. CIA.
And now, according to The Washington Post (9-25-01), The U.S. is now "Unsure" of Going Public with the "Proof" of Osama bin Laden's responsibility for the "terrorist" attack. With the U.S. public, and other nations, demanding proof, the Bush administration is hiding behind the cloak of "National Security."
Secretary of State Colin Powell promised that the U.S. "soon" would "put out a paper. . that will describe quite clearly the evidence that we have linking" bin Laden to the attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon. But Rep. Porter Goss (R-Fla), chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, said that the administration cannot present its full case "without revealing some sources and methods that we would not want to reveal." HOW INTERESTING AND CONVENIENT FOR THEM!
Now Let's Consider -
Are There Other Countries, besides the Arabs,
who have ever been involved in terrorism?
According to the Washington Report, "In 1967 on the fourth day of the Six Day War, the armed forces of Israel attacked the American intelligence ship USS Liberty for 90 minutes in international waters in broad daylight following several hours of close, low-level reconnaissance. Thirty-four men died, 171 were hurt, and the ship was so badly damaged that it had to be scrapped.
The government of Israel has lied about the circumstances ever since, telling a story markedly different from that told by American survivors. Congress has refused to question Israel's demonstrably false account.
Why would Israel risk alienating its American friends? Why did Israel attack?
According to eyewitness accounts by Israeli officers and journalists, the Israeli Army executed as many as 1,000 Arab prisoners during the 1967 war. Historian Gabby Bron wrote in the Yediot Ahronot in Israel that he witnessed Israeli troops executing Egyptian prisoners on the morning of June 8, 1967, in the Sinai town of El Arish, including about 150 Egyptian POWs. They made the prisoners dig their own graves then they were shot as they stood at the edge of the grave.
As those executions were underway, America's most sophisticated intelligence platform, USS Liberty, was less than 13 miles from El Arish, close enough to see the town mosque with the naked eye. With binoculars one could make out individual buildings and might have seen the executions if one had looked in the right place.
The attack on the USS Liberty lasted 75 minutes. It was not brief nor accidental as Israel claims. The Israelis wantonly destroyed life rafts in the water and they jammed international radio distress frequencies while Americans, who might have been saved, died!
The United States is no stranger to perpetrating acts of terrorism against other countries. The U.S. bombed Iraq unmercifully during the Gulf War. Thousands of private citizens were slaughtered. Then a deadly embargo was put in place to destroy them slowly by illness and starvation. What was the crime of the common people?
The U.S. CIA has also been involved in covert wars all over the globe, raping and pillaging entire economies of Central American and other countries.
In addition, the U.S. is not above turning on its own citizens with vengeance.
FDR Knew About Pearl Harbor: John Flynn made a sound case for Roosevelt's foreknowledge in 1946, the historian Charles Beard confirmed it in 1948 with his book FDR and the Coming of the War 1941. John Toland told the story in Infamy in the early 1980s, and John Stinnett followed with Day of Deceit. They all understood FDR's manipulation of, and complicity in, the attack on Pearl Harbor. It was done to incite the U.S. citizens to hate the Japanese and push them to support the U.S. entry into World War II.
And it worked beautifully! Americans willingly gave their own lives and the lives of their sons to fight a war that had nothing to do with them.
FDR knew in advance of the attack on Pearl Harbor. Not only did he refuse to stop it, he encouraged it by his manipulative treatment of Japan prior to the attack, and his stationing of ships in the Hawaiian port, an easy target for the Japanese. (Antiwar.com)
It worked magnificently then - and it is working magnificently now!
Other acts of violence that must be considered are: The Randy Weaver family killings by the U.S. government in Idaho, the Waco horror where the U.S. shot, bulldozed and set on fire its own citizens, and the Oklahoma bombing, where there is abundant information pointing to U.S. Government involvement .
Why would a government plan an attack its own citizens, while blaming another?
What would it have to gain?
The answer is: EVERYTHING!
Go back and review what has happened
SINCE the attack:
The U.S. Government has dramatically increased its control over the American population while destroying the rights of the people, a situation necessary for the takeover of the U.S. and eventually, all other countries, by the New World Order to be run by the United Nations. And they're doing it with the citizens' complete support.
"The President has the power to seize property, organize and control the means of production, seize commodities, assign military forces abroad, call reserve forces amounting to 2 1/2 million men to duty, institute martial law, seize and control all means of transportation, regulate all private enterprise, restrict travel, and in a plethora of particular ways, control the lives of ALL Americans...While the danger of a dictatorship arising through legal means may seem remote to us today..."
--A Joint Statement by Senators Frank Church (D-ID) and Charles McMathias (R-MD) September 30, 1973. HOW PROPHETIC!
A SURE ROAD TO DICTATORSHIP!
U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft Seeks Sweeping Powers!
"The United States will remain vulnerable to terrorist attacks unless law enforcement agencies are given a wide range of new counterterrorism tools, including improved wiretap capabilities and easier access to voice mail and Internet user's personal information, Attorney General John Ashcroft told lawmakers Monday." (MSNBC 9-25-01)
A third of New Yorkers support internment camps (concentration camps) for "individuals who authorities identify as being sympathetic to terrorist causes," according to a poll form the Siena College Research Institute. (Newsday.com 9-25-01) (Remember that President Bush has said that if you don't support the U.S. government 100% in their handling of this situation - - - YOU ARE SIDING WITH THE TERRORISTS!)
Public Opinion has overwhelming turned from support for the Arabs and against Israel, to supporting Israel and their ally, the U.S. and hatred against the Arab countries.
And now the U.S. has the support of the entire nation, and much of the world, for its unrestrained unleashing of vengeance on ANY and EVERY Arab nation.
But it's not surprising that the U.S. and Israel are the ONLY countries where the majority backs a military strike (Reuters 9-22- 01).
From Stern.Intel: Israeli Mossad Links to World Trade Center Attack: "A U.S. military intelligence source revealed details of an internal intelligence memo that points to the Israeli Mossad intelligence service having links to the World Trade Center and Pentagon attacks...
"The attacks have certainly turned U.S. public opinion firmly back in Israel's favor after eleven months of Palestinian uprising, heavy criticism of Israel over war crimes allegations and racism by a UN conference in Durban."
Lebanese Druze Leader Believes CIA, Mossad Responsible for U.S. Attacks! Lebanon's anti-Syrian Druze leader Walid Jumblatt believes the CIA and Israel's secret service Mossad are behind the terrorist attacks in the United States, and that Saudi extremist Osama bin Laden is an "American agent," newspaper reports said. (Beirut AFP 9- 15-01)
Fake Terror has been the Road to Dictatorship for thousands of years. It's the oldest trick in the book, dating back to Roman times.
Create the enemies you need!
A wise philosopher has unveiled the irony of it all: "To restore our freedom, we will need to be deprived of it. To recover from senseless murder, we will need to perpetrate more of it," or so says the President.
So, Who's Responsible?
The Answer is: Who Benefits?
You figure it out!
Note: If all of this is discouraging to you, there is a Bright Side. Human governments ARE NOT MEANT to work well. They will ALL fail.
If you are interested in a free subscription to The Konformist Newswire, please visit:
http://www.eGroups.com/list/konformist
Vancouver Courier, 1 Oct 2001
U.S. NURTURED RADICAL ISLAM, IGNORED DRUG DEALING
Geoff Olson
Most of us have heard the mainstream media's drill on Osama bin Laden, chief suspect as ringleader in the terrorist attacks on Washington and New York. The scion of a wealthy Saudi family, finding purpose in fundamentalist Islam, becomes a "freedom fighter" in the Afghan-Soviet war, and ends up exporting terrorism a decade later.
This tale of faith, double-dealing, and vengeance is as old as Jericho, but with a modern twist: boy meets religion, boy gets religion, boy goes nuts and blows up assets belonging to the Great Satan.
While the outlines of bin Laden's past have received mention by Ted Koppel and co.-sometimes even with passing mention of the CIA's covert support for the mujahideen's 1979-1992 war against the Soviets-it might be instructive to look a closer at the historical roots of the Islamic fundamentalist movement in Afghanistan, and the source of the militant's fanatical hatred of the United States.
In 1979 the largest covert operation in the history of the CIA was launched in response to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Working with Pakistan's Inter Service Intelligence-an entity midwived by American interests-the idea was to turn the Afghan war into a total holy war against the Soviet Union by all Muslim States. According to the foreign policy journal Foreign Affairs, "some 35,000 Muslim radicals from 40 Islamic countries joined Afghanistan's fight between 1982 and 1992. Tens of thousands more came to study in Pakistani madrasahs.
Eventually more than 100,000 foreign Muslim radicals were directly influenced by the Afghan jihad." Financial support for the resistance was supplied by Saudi Arabia. Among the supporters was the rich young financier Osama bin Laden, who travelled to Afghanistan to join the anti-Soviet resistance.
Arms supplies rose to 65,000 tons annually by 1987, accompanied by a "ceaseless stream' of CIA and Pentagon specialists who travelled to the secret headquarters of Pakistani's ISI.
The mujahideen' did not deal directly with American intelligence, but through the ISI instead.
Afghanistan's CIA-funded guerrilla camps-ironically, now prime targets for an American counterattack-were responsible for the training of the freedom fighters, integrating military instruction with the teachings of Islam. Using U.S. marine manuals translated into Arabic, and the time-tested principles of CIA psychological operations, the ISI worked with peoples' beliefs rather than against them. Guerrillas in training were taught that Islam was a complete socio-political ideology, that holy Islam was being violated by the atheistic Soviet troops, and that the Islamic people of Afghanistan should reassert their independence by overthrowing the leftist Afghan regime propped up by Moscow.
A lesser known aspect of American involvement in the Afghan-Soviet war were the consequences for the global drug trade.
On June 18, 1986, The New York Times reported that the mujahideen "have been involved in narcotics activities as a matter of policy to finance their operations.The opium warlords worked under cover of the U.S./Saudi/Pakistani axis that funded their arms sales and aided the conveyance of the drugs into the European and North American markets where they account for 50 per cent of heroin sales."
According to University of Wisconsin history professor Alfred McCoy, author of The Politics of Heroin in Southeast Asia, CIA assets again controlled the heroin trade in the region, as they did in Vietnam and Laos a decade earlier. "As the Mujahideen guerrillas seized territory inside Afghanistan, they ordered peasants to plant opium as a revolutionary tax. Across the border in Pakistan, Afghan leaders and local syndicates under the protection of Pakistan Intelligence operated hundreds of heroin laboratories." During a full decade of wide open drug dealing, McCoy discovered, the American Drug Enforcement Agency in Islamabad failed to make one major seizure or arrest.
American intelligence looked the other way, preferring the war on drugs-which would have run counter to subsidies for the fighters, after all-to be subordinated to the war on the Soviet Union. The fallout: a worldwide heroin epidemic beginning in the mid-seventies, traceable in retrospect to the Afghan-Soviet war.
More on the "blowback" from American support for the Islamic militants in Afghanistan next week.
From: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v01.n1730.a03.html
michaelmoore-l@cloud9.net
All I Am Saying Is Give War a Chance
by Michael Moore 10/08/01
Dear Friends,
It's about time! I was beginning to worry that George II didn't have it in him, that he might wander off to vacation in Omaha again. But finally, the bombs are raining down on Afghanistan and, as Martha Stewart says, that's a good thing.
Oh, don't get me wrong -- I deplore war and killing and violence. But, hey, I'm a pragmatist, I know where I live, this is America and dammit, somebody's ass had to get kicked!
Our Leader, a former baseball club owner, could have at least had the decency to wait one more day until the baseball season was over. Poor Barry Bonds -- will anyone even remember what he did a month from now? At least Fox had the good grace to get the football game back on the tube within an hour of the war's start! They KNEW none of us could stomach looking at Stepford Drones from Fox News for the rest of the day.
Fellow liberals, lefties, Greens, workers, and even you loveable Gore voters and recovering Democrats -- let me tell you why I think this war on Afghanistan is good for all of us:
1. Network Unanimity in Naming The War. It has been so confusing the past four weeks, what with all the networks calling this thing we are in by so many names: "America's New War," "American Under Attack," America Fights Back," "War on Terrorism," etc. Now, nearly every network has settled on "America Strikes Back."
I like this because, first of all, it honors George Lucas. We're a humble people, we Americans, so we can't quite bring ourselves to call it "The Empire Strikes Back." "Empire" sounds a little scary, and there's no use reminding the rest of the world that we call all the shots now. So "America Strikes Back" is appropriate (and, as Sunday was the last day of baseball, "strikes" has the necessary sports metaphor we like to use when bombing other countries).
2. The Citizenry Can Now Go Back to What They Were Doing. I don't know about you, but nearly four weeks of anxious and tense anticipation of what would happen next was starting to wear me down. I thought nothing could top what spending the whole summer agonizing over whose baby it was on "Friends" did to me.
But the last four weeks was worse than a bad classic rock extended drum solo. NOW we have resolution. NOW we know the ending -- the bombing to smithereens of a country so advanced it has, to date, laid a total of 18 miles of railroad tracks throughout the entire country! How very 19th century of them! I hope our missiles were able to take them out. I don't want this thing going on forever. Best that we obliterate them before they come up with some smart idea like the telegraph.
3. Dick Cheney Has Been Moved Into Hiding Again. This can only help. The farther this mastermind can be kept from young Bush, the better. He's like that creepy friend of your dad's who has taken a bit too much of a shine to you. Wait -- he *is* that creepy friend of his dad's! Anytime I hear they have transported Cheney out of town and into a bunker in the woods, I feel safe. And don't worry about him having any workable form of communications with Bush -- remember, this is a government which discovers that a known terrorist is taking flying lessons in Florida and does nothing.
4. Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, Orrin Hatch Will All Be Fighting This War for Us! These are all honorable men, men of their word, men who would not expect someone else to fight their battles for them. They have all called for war, revenge, blood -- and, by God, it is blood I want them to have! Now that we are at war, let us insist that those who have cried the loudest for the killing be the first to go and do just that!
I would like to see, by the end of the day, Rush and Bill, Orrin and the rest of their colleagues down at the recruiting station signing up to join the U.S. Army. Sure, I know they are no longer young, but there are many jobs they will be able to do once they get through the Khyber Pass. Surely these men would not expect our sons and daughters to die for something that they themselves would not be willing to die for. To make it easy, guys, you can just go to the Army's website right now!
http://www.goarmy.com/index02.htm
Get your butts over there to Afghanistan and defend a way of life that allows companies like Boeing get rid of 30,000 people while using the tragedy in New York as their shameful excuse.
5. Really Cool War Footage. It's been way too long since we've been able to watch those cruise missiles and smart bombs with their little cameras on them sail in and blow the crap out of a bunch of human beings. This time, let's hope the video is in color and that it's attached with a miniature set of Dolby speaker microphones so we can hear the screams and wails of those Afghanis as our shrapnel guts them into strips of bacon. Oh, and let's pray the video can be loaded into my Sony Playstation!!
6. Better a Quickie War Than the Permanent War. Orwell warned us about this one. Big Brother, in order to control the population, knew that it was necessary for the people to always believe they were in a state of siege, that the enemy was getting closer and closer, and that the war would take a very long time.
That is EXACTLY what George W. Bush said in his speech to Congress, and the reason he said it is because he and his buddies want us all in such a state of fear and panic that we would gladly give up the cherished freedoms that our fathers and those before them fought and died for. Who wouldn't submit to searches, restrictions of movement, and the rounding up of anyone who looks suspicious if it would prevent another September 11?
In order to get these laws passed that will strip us of our rights, they have been telling us that we are in a LONG and PROTRACTED war that has no end in sight. Don't buy it! We are bombing Afghanistan, and THAT is the only war in progress. It should be over anywhere from a few days from now or in about nine years (Soviet-style). Either way, it will end. The good guys will win. And, if George II is anything like George I, then the bad guy will win, too, getting to live and go on doing what he enjoys doing (what were we, like, 40 miles from Baghdad?) while we continue to bomb the innocents (540,000 Iraqi children killed by U.S. in last ten years from bombs and sanctions).
As I'm sure you must agree, there are many upsides to this war. Sure, The Emmys got cancelled again, and, as a nominee this year, I already found out that I wasn't getting one of those little gold people so who cares if I can't walk down the red carpet in my Bob Mackie gown? I don't even wear a gown -- I wear pants, ill-fitting pants at that! Yesiree, I say, BOMBS AWAY! Rockets red glare! We are all WHITE WITH FOAM!
And please, dear friends, let's look at the bright side for once: The last time a Bush took us to war and got a 90% approval rating, he was toast and a ghost the following year. You can't get better than that.
Yours,
Michael Moore mmflint@aol.com www.michaelmoore.com
The Guardian (London), September 29, 2001
"The algebra of infinite justice", by Arundhati Roy
In the aftermath of the unconscionable September 11 suicide attacks on the Pentagon and the World Trade Centre, an American newscaster said: Good and evil rarely manifest themselves as clearly as they did last Tuesday. People who we don't know massacred people who we do. And they did so with contemptuous glee.' Then he broke down and wept.
Here's the rub: America is at war against people it doesn't know, because they don't appear much on TV. Before it has properly identified or even begun to comprehend the nature of its enemy, the US government has, in a rush of publicity and embarrassing rhetoric, cobbled together an international coalition against terror, mobilised its army, its air force, its navy and its media, and committed them to battle.
The trouble is that once America goes off to war, it can't very well return without having fought one. If it doesn't find its enemy, for the sake of the enraged folks back home, it will have to manufacture one. Once war begins, it will develop a momentum, a logic and a justification of its own, and we'll lose sight of why it's being fought in the first place. What we're witnessing here is the spectacle of the world's most powerful country reaching reflexively, angrily, for an old instinct to fight a new kind of war. Suddenly, when it comes to defending itself, America's streamlined warships, cruise missiles and F-16 jets look like obsolete, lumbering things. As deterrence, its arsenal of nuclear bombs is no longer worth its weight in scrap. Box-cutters, penknives, and cold anger are the weapons with which the wars of the new century will be waged. Anger is the lock pick. It slips through customs unnoticed. Doesn't show up in baggage checks.
Who is America fighting? On September 20, the FBI said that it had doubts about the identities of some of the hijackers. On the same day President George Bush said, 'We know exactly who these people are and which governments are supporting them.' It sounds as though the president knows something that the FBI and the American public don't. In his September 20 address to the US Congress, President Bush called the enemies of America 'enemies of freedom'. Americans are asking, "Why do they hate us?" he said. "They hate our freedoms our freedom of religion, our freedom of speech, our freedom to vote and assemble and disagree with each other." People are being asked to make two leaps of faith here. First, to assume that The Enemy is who the US government says it is, even though it has no substantial evidence to support that claim. And second, to assume that The Enemy's motives are what the US government says they are, and there's nothing to support that either.
For strategic, military and economic reasons, it is vital for the US government to persuade its public that their commitment to freedom and democracy and the American Way of Life is under attack. In the current atmosphere of grief, outrage and anger, it's an easy notion to peddle. However, if that were true, it's reasonable to wonder why the symbols of America's economic and military dominance - the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon - were chosen as the targets of the attacks. Why not the Statue of Liberty?
Could it be that the stygian anger that led to the attacks has its taproot not in American freedom and democracy, but in the US government's record of commitment and support to exactly the opposite things to military and economic terrorism, insurgency, military dictatorship, religious bigotry and unimaginable genocide (outside America)? It must be hard for ordinary Americans, so recently bereaved, to look up at the world with their eyes full of tears and encounter what might appear to them to be indifference.
It isn't indifference. It's just augury. An absence of surprise. The tired wisdom of knowing that what goes around eventually comes around. American people ought to know that it is not them but their government's policies that are so hated. They can't possibly doubt that they themselves, their extraordinary musicians, their writers, their actors, their spectacular sportsmen and their cinema, are universally welcomed. All of us have been moved by the courage and grace shown by firefighters, rescue workers and ordinary office staff in the days since the attacks. America's grief at what happened has been immense and immensely public. It would be grotesque to expect it to calibrate or modulate its anguish.
However, it will be a pity if, instead of using this as an opportunity to try to understand why September 11 happened, Americans use it as an opportunity to usurp the whole world's sorrow to mourn and avenge only their own. Because then it falls to the rest of us to ask the hard questions and say the harsh things. And for our pains, for our bad timing, we will be disliked, ignored and perhaps eventually silenced.
The world will probably never know what motivated those particular hijackers who flew planes into those particular American buildings. They were not glory boys. They left no suicide notes, no political messages; no organisation has claimed credit for the attacks. All we know is that their belief in what they were doing outstripped the natural human instinct for survival, or any desire to be remembered. It's almost as though they could not scale down the enormity of their rage to anything smaller than their deeds. And what they did has blown a hole in the world as we knew it.
In the absence of information, politicians, political commentators and writers (like myself) will invest the act with their own politics, with their own interpretations. This speculation, this analysis of the political climate in which the attacks took place, can only be a good thing.
But war is looming large. Whatever remains to be said must be said quickly. Before America places itself at the helm of the international coalition against terror, before it invites (and coerces) countries to actively participate in its almost godlike mission - called Operation Infinite Justice until it was pointed out that this could be seen as an insult to Muslims, who believe that only Allah can mete out infinite justice, and was renamed Operation Enduring Freedom - it would help if some small clarifications are made.
For example, Infinite Justice/Enduring Freedom for whom? Is this America's war against terror in America or against terror in general? What exactly is being avenged here? Is it the tragic loss of almost 7,000 lives, the gutting of five million square feet of office space in Manhattan, the destruction of a section of the Pentagon, the loss of several hundreds of thousands of jobs, the bankruptcy of some airline companies and the dip in the New York Stock Exchange?
Or is it more than that? In 1996, Madeleine Albright, then the US secretary of state, was asked on nacional television what she felt about the fact that 500,000 Iraqi children had died as a result of US economic sanctions. She replied that it was a 'very hard choice', but that, 'all things considered, we think the price is worth it'. Albright never lost her job for saying this. She continued to travel the world representing the views and aspirations of the US government. More pertinently, the sanctions against Iraq remain in place. Children continue to die.
So here we have it. The equivocating distinction