News Of Great Interest Page XIV
Click on map to see it enlarged.
September 11, 2001
Senate Terrorist Bill Blasted - 'Worse Than 1790 Sedition Laws'
Full Text of Terror Guide Saturday, September 29, 2001 Following is the full text from a document used by the terrorists responsible for the hijackings of four airplanes on Sept. 11. The document was released by the F.B.I. yesterday and translated for The New York Times by Capital Communications Group, a Washington-based international consulting firm and by Imad Musa, a translator for the firm. Fox News
SUPPRESED DETAILS OF CRIMINAL INSIDER TRADING LEAD DIRECTLY INTO THE CIA’s HIGHEST RANKS CIA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR “BUZZY” KRONGARD MANAGED FIRM THAT HANDLED “PUT” OPTIONS ON UAL by Michael C. Ruppert
The Lies About Taliban Heroin Russia and Oil the Real Objectives With Heroin As A Weapon of WarA Replay of CIA’s Vietnam-era Drug Dealing FTW Revises Its Map On Economic Impacts byMichael C. Ruppert
INTERVIEW: Congresswoman Lee Calls For Peace by - Davey D 9/20/01
WATCH WHAT YOU SAY! by Carl Jensen
White House censorship By Don Williams
The So-Called Evidence Is a Farce By Stan Goff
BIG BROTHER COMES TO WOODSTOCK
Senate Terrorist Bill Blasted - 'Worse Than 1790 Sedition Laws' From Kerry successmachine@home.com 10-9-1
Wednesday October 10 9:28 AM ET Senator Blocks Attempt to Pass Bill By JESSE J. HOLLAND, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) - The Bush administration's anti-terrorism legislation has stalled because of one senator's concern that it will erode civil liberties.
Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., tried to hurry the bill through Tuesday, but Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., refused Daschle's request to let the bill go through without debate or amendment.
``I can't quite understand why we can't have just a few hours of debate,'' said Feingold, who wants the chance to limit some of the police powers in the Senate legislation.
The House and Senate last week came up with anti-terrorism bills based on an outline offered by Attorney General John Ashcroft, who has been urging Congress to quickly pass the bill.
When Senate negotiations on an airline security bill stalled, Daschle asked senators to unanimously agree to move on to the anti-terrorism bill.
Under Daschle's plan, the Senate would have voted on final passage of the bill Tuesday evening and senators would not have been allowed to offer amendments. But Feingold refused to go along, saying he wanted to add four important amendments to limit some of the bill's police powers.
Feingold's amendments would:
-Eliminate a provision in the bill that would allow police to secretly search suspects' homes.
-Narrow a provision that allows federal officials to wiretap telephones.
-Keep the FBI from being able to access Americans' personal records.
-Clarify the federal government's ability to wiretap computers.
``It is crucial that civil liberties in this country be preserved,'' Feingold said. ``Otherwise the terrorists will win the battle against American values without firing another shot.''
The anti-terrorism bill now will have to wait until senators finish the aviation bill, which worries some senators. ``There is a danger that the aviation bill will tangle up the rest of this week, and we won't be able to get to it until next week,'' said Senate Republican Leader Trent Lott, R-Miss.
After a congressional leadership meeting with President Bush at the White House Wednesday, Lott said, ``We are very much committed to working through getting a counterterroism bill and also addressing the very important question of aviation security.
``These are not easy issues,'' he said. ``It is very important to find the right kind of balance. But we had an opportunity again to discuss it with the president and we're committed to working in the Senate and in the House to getting these two very important pieces of legislation, as we begin to go forward on appropriations bills also.''
The House, meanwhile, is expected to move on an anti-terrorism bill before the end of the week. However, House aides say administration officials are pressuring House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., to take the Senate bill instead of the bill approved by the House Judiciary Committee.
The Bush administration prefers the Senate bill to the House bill, which eliminates most of the bill's police power in 2004. The House bill also does not have anti-money-laundering provisions requested by the White House.
The Senate Judiciary Committee chairman, Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., said that regardless of what's in either bill, it will be changed in negotiations between the House and Senate.
-
The bills are H.R. 2975 and S. 1510.
-
On the Net:
Senate committee: http://judiciary.senate.gov
House committee: http://www.house.gov/judiciary
Congress: http://thomas.loc.gov
*****
Senate Terrorist Bill Blasted - 'Worse Than 1790 Sedition Laws' From Kerry successmachine@home.com 10-9-1
Note: U.S. Government agencies will be able to seize assets of citizens, 501C3 and other organizations and their members without ever disclosing the evidence against their property. Government need only allege that disclosing such evidence may compromise National security and/or an ongoing investigation.
STILL THINK YOUR GOOD OLD BOY IN OFFICE IS ON YOUR SIDE?
This is worse legislation than the Sedition Laws of the 1790's, later declared unconstitutional and leading to the end of John Adams' presidency. Land of the (formerly) free ??
Better contact your senators on this one...
___
Consider these items in the new Senate Terrorist Bill 1510:
"MONEY LAUNDERING ABATEMENT AND ANTI-TERRORIST FINANCING ACT OF 2001"
Political Activists and Demonstrators should Zero in on S.1510. The bill's provisions can be used to eradicate public dissent - - and you!
Under Senate Bill 1510, now being considered in the Senate as an Anti- terrorism act:
a.. An entire 501C3 organization or other organization, including its members, can have their assets seized for supporting bodily acts or international causes that the U.S. Secretary of State may deem terrorist activity. Political activities that were legal prior to S.1510 may "RETROACTIVELY" be deemed terrorist activity by U.S. Government. Participants and supporters may be charged with terrorist and other offenses.
If you want to read this bill for yourself, go to http://Thomas.loc.gov , to the 107th Congress, and Senate Bill 1510.
(2). S.1510 "RETROACTIVELY" abolishes the "Statue of Limitations" for many past offenses where no one was injured. After passage of S.1510, any past offense that can be broadly alleged to have put someone "at risk" may be used by federal and state prosecutors to charge a citizen with a terrorist act - even 30 years after the Statute of Limitations period had already passed. Government will have no difficulty manufacturing evidence to prosecute citizens once Constitutional safeguards against passing Retroactive Laws are abolished after passage of S.1510.
(3) No "innocent owner defense" allowed against Asset Forfeiture when, after passage of S 1510, U.S. Government agencies will be able to seize assets of citizens, 501C3 and other organizations and their members without ever disclosing the evidence against their property. Government need only allege that disclosing such evidence may compromise National security and/or an ongoing investigation. S 1510 provides for paying "unnamed informants huge rewards" resulting from arrests and forfeited assets. It is hard to believe any organization or citizen could ever recover their assets once they are seized by a government agency in the name of National Security. That may include a citizen's home in which an informant secretly alleges someone said the wrong thing.
(4) "D Below" is from the Senate Bill 1510.
So much for trusting attorneys!
"(d) UNDERCOVER ACTIVITIES- Notwithstanding any provision of State law, including disciplinary rules, statutes, regulations, constitutional provisions, or case law, a Government attorney may, for the purpose of enforcing Federal law, provide legal advice, authorization, concurrence, direction, or supervision on conducting undercover activities, and any attorney employed as an investigator or other law enforcement agent by the Department of Justice who is not authorized to represent the United States in criminal or civil law enforcement litigation or to supervise such proceedings may participate in such activities, even though such activities may require the use of deceit or misrepresentation, where such activities are consistent with Federal law.
(e) ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE- No violation of any disciplinary, ethical, or professional conduct rule shall be construed to permit the exclusion of otherwise admissible evidence in any Federal criminal proceedings".
This bill is similar to the one Adolf Hitler pushed through the Reichstag after the Reichstag fire in the early 1930's. German Jews, horrified by the chaos in Germany after the fire, supported Hitler's legislation - then found he could (and planned to) use it against them.
This is worse legislation than the Sedition Laws of the 1790's, later declared unconstitutional and leading to the end of John Adams' presidency.
Understand! Under the law as now written, you and anyone connected with any organization - 501(c)(3), church, Rotary, any organization - can be snagged under this legislation. Lifting the Statute of Limitations means that you could have your home and other assets seized if you were a member of an organization that supported, for example, Leonard Peltier, or sent food or medicine to Cuba, or even protested against nukes in the '60s - and the U.S.G. decided that that organization was then or is now in any way associated with someone or some organization that is somehow connected to a "terrorist organization."
Of course, it will be said that that is highly unlikely to happen if you keep your nose clean - and don't give financial or other support to any suspect organization.
There are thousands of people in our prisons now, put there by the testimony of paid/"rewarded" informers. All it takes is for some such person to provide "testimony" that the ACLU or the Sierra Club or Pastors for Peace, or other organization is "supporting" terrorists. Or maybe some member of such an organization does provide support to a terrorist: all members are liable to imprisonment and seizure of their assets.
Who, under a law like that, is going to give funding to any 501(c)(3) organization or any other actionist group - even for work with rehabilitating prisoners or drug addicts, or providing housing for the poor?
If this law passes in this form, kiss protest - by letter or demonstration - and democracy goodbye!
Go to www.senate.gov and send a note to your Senators and tell them to kill this bastard before it becomes law. At least to amend the damn thing!
And please forward this (or your own) message to EVERYONE on your e- mail list.
May God protect what democracy we have left.
Charles
P.S. If you want to read this bill for yourself, go to http://Thomas.loc.gov, to the 107th Congress, and Senate Bill 1510.
If you are interested in a free subscription to The Konformist Newswire, please visit:
http://www.eGroups.com/list/konformist
Or, e-mail konformist-subscribe@egroups.com with the subject: "I NEED 2 KONFORM!!!"
Fox News
Full Text of Terror Guide Saturday, September 29, 2001
Following is the full text from a document used by the terrorists responsible for the hijackings of four airplanes on Sept. 11. The document was released by the F.B.I. yesterday and translated for The New York Times by Capital Communications Group, a Washington-based international consulting firm and by Imad Musa, a translator for the firm. Fox News
The Last Night
1) Make an oath to die and renew your intentions. Shave excess hair from the body and wear cologne. Shower.
2) Make sure you know all aspects of the plan well, and expect the response, or a reaction, from the enemy.
3) Read al-Tawba and Anfal [traditional war chapters from the Quran] and reflect on their meanings and remember all of the things that God has promised for the martyrs.
4) Remind your soul to listen and obey [all divine orders] and remember that you will face decisive situations that might prevent you from 100 percent obedience, so tame your soul, purify it, convince it, make it understand, and incite it. God said: "Obey God and His Messenger, and do not fight amongst yourselves or else you will fail. And be patient, for God is with the patient."
5) Pray during the night and be persistent in asking God to give you victory, control and conquest, and that He may make your task easier and not expose us.
6) Remember God frequently, and the best way to do it is to read the Holy Quran, according to all scholars, as far as I know. It is enough for us that it [the Quran] are the words of the Creator of the Earth and the plants, the One that you will meet [on the Day of Judgment].
7) Purify your soul from all unclean things. Completely forget something called "this world" [or "this life"]. The time for play is over and the serious time is upon us. How much time have we wasted in our lives? Shouldn't we take advantage of these last hours to offer good deeds and obedience?
8) You should feel complete tranquility, because the time between you and your marriage [in heaven] is very short. Afterwards begins the happy life, where God is satisfied with you, and eternal bliss "in the company of the prophets, the companions, the martyrs and the good people, who are all good company." Ask God for his mercy and be optimistic, because [the Prophet], peace be upon him, (used to prefer optimism in all his affairs).
9) Keep in mind that, if you fall into hardship, how will you act and how will you remain steadfast and remember that you will return to God and remember that anything that happens to you could never be avoided, and what did not happen to you could never have happened to you. This test from Almighty God is to raise your level [levels of heaven] and erase your sins. And be sure that it is a matter of moments, which will then pass, God willing, so blessed are those who win the great reward of God. Almighty God said: "Did you think you could go to heaven before God knows who amongst you have fought for Him and are patient?"
10) Remember the words of Almighty God: "You were looking to the battle before you engaged in it, and now you see it with your own two eyes." Remember: "How many small groups beat big groups by the will of God." And His words: "If God gives you victory, no one can beat you. And if He betrays you, who can give you victory without Him? So the faithful put their trust in God."
11) Remind yourself of the supplications and of your brethren and ponder their meanings. (The morning and evening supplications, and the supplications of [entering] a town, and the [unclear] supplications, and the supplications said before meeting the enemy.
12) Bless your body with some verses of the Quran [done by reading verses into one's hands and then rubbing the hands over things over whatever is to be blessed], the luggage, clothes, the knife, your personal effects, your ID, your passport, and all of your papers.
13) Check your weapon before you leave and long before you leave. (You must make your knife sharp and you must not discomfort your animal during the slaughter).
14) Tighten your clothes [a reference to one making sure his clothes will cover his private parts at all times], since this is the way of the pious generations after the Prophet. They would tighten their clothes before battle. Tighten your shoes well, wear socks so that your feet will be solidly in your shoes. All of these are worldly things [that humans can do to control their fate, although God decrees what will work and what will won't] and the rest is left to God, the best One to depend on.
15) Pray the morning prayer in a group and ponder the great rewards of that prayer. Make supplications afterwards, and do not leave your apartment unless you have performed ablution before leaving, because (The angels will ask for your forgiveness as long as you are in a state of ablution, and will pray for you). This saying of the Prophet was mentioned by An-Nawawi in his book, The Best of Supplications. Read the words of God: "Did you think that We created you for no reason..." from the Al-Mu'minun Chapter.
The second step:
When the taxi takes you to (M) [this initial could stand for matar, airport in Arabic] remember God constantly while in the car. (Remember the supplication for entering a car, for entering a town, the supplication of place and other supplications).
When you have reached (M) and have left the taxi, say a supplication of place ["Oh Lord, I ask you for the best of this place, and ask you to protect me from its evils"], and everywhere you go say that prayer and smile and be calm, for God is with the believers. And the angels protect you without you feeling anything. Say this supplication: "God is more dear than all of His creation." And say: "Oh Lord, protect me from them as You wish." And say: "Oh Lord, take your anger out on them [the enemy] and we ask You to protect us from their evils." And say: "Oh Lord, block their vision from in front of them, so that they may not see." And say: "God is all we need, He is the best to rely upon." Remember God's words: "Those to whom the people said, 'The people have gathered to get you, so fear them,' but that only increased their faith and they said, God is all we need, He is the best to rely upon." After you say that, you will find [unclear] as God promised this to his servants who say this supplication:
1) They will come back [from battle] with God's blessings
2) They were not harmed
3) And God was satisfied with them.
God says: "They came back with God's blessings, they were not harmed, and God was satisfied with them, and God is ever-blessing."
All of their equipment and gates and technology will not prevent, nor harm, except by God's will. The believers do not fear such things. The only ones that fear it are the allies of Satan, who are the brothers of the devil. They have become their allies, God save us, for fear is a great form of worship, and the only one worthy of it is God. He is the only one who deserves it. He said in the verses: "This is only the Devil scaring his allies" who are fascinated with Western civilization, and have drank the love [of the West] like they drink water [unclear] and have become afraid of their weak equipment "so fear them not, and fear Me, if you are believers."
Fear is a great worship. The allies of God do not offer such worship except for the one God, who controls everything. [Unclear] with total certainty that God will weaken the schemes of the non-believers. God said: "God will weaken the schemes of the non-believers."
You must remember your brothers with all respect [?]. No one should notice that you are making the supplication, "There is no God but God," because if you say it 1,000 times no one will be able to tell whether you are quiet or remember God. And among its miracles is what the Prophet, peace be upon him, said: ("Whoever says, 'There is no God but God,' with all his heart, goes to heaven." The prophet, peace be upon him, said: ("If you put all the worlds and universes on one side of the balance, and ŒNo God but God¹ on the other, ŒNo God but God¹ will weigh more heavily." You can repeat these words confidently, and this is just one of the strengths of these words. Whoever thinks deeply about these words will find that they have no dots [in the Arabic letter] and this is just one of its greatnesses, for words that have dots in them carry less weight than those that do not. And it is enough that these are the words of monotheism, which will make you steadfast in battle [unclear] as the prophet, peace be upon him, and his companions, and those who came after them, God willing, until the Day of Judgment.
Also, do not seem confused or show signs of nervous tension. Be happy, optimistic calm because you are heading for a deed that God loves and will accept [as a good deed]. It will be the day, God willing, you spend with the women of paradise.
[poetry]
Smile in the face of hardship young man/For you are heading toward eternal paradise
You must remember to make supplications wherever you go, and anytime you do anything, and God is with his faithful servants, He will protect them and make their tasks easier, and give them success and control, and victory, and everything...
The Third Phase:
When you ride the (T) [probably for tayyara, airplane in Arabic], before your foot steps in it, and before you enter it, you make a prayer and supplications. Remember that this is a battle for the sake of God. As the prophet, peace be upon him, said: (An action for the sake of God is better than all of what is in this world), or as he said. When you step inside the (T), and sit in your seat, begin with the known supplications that we have mentioned before. Be busy with the constant remembrance of God. God said: "Oh ye faithful, when you find the enemy be steadfast, and remember God constantly so that you may be successful." When the (T) moves, even slightly, toward (Q) [unknown reference], say the supplication of travel. Because you are traveling to Almighty God, so be attentive on this trip.
Then [unclear] and then it takes off. This is the moment that both groups come together. So remember God, as He said in His book: "Oh Lord, pour your patience upon us and make our feet steadfast and give us victory over the infidels." And His words: "And the only thing they said Lord, forgive our sins and excesses and make our feet steadfast and give us victory over the infidels." And His prophet said: "Oh Lord, You have revealed the book, You move the clouds, You gave us victory over the enemy, conquer them and give us victory over them." Give us victory and make the ground shake under their feet. Pray for yourself and all of your brothers that they may be victorious and hit their targets and [unclear] and ask God to grant you martyrdom facing the enemy, not running away from it, and for Him to grant you patience and the feeling that anything that happens to you is for Him.
Then every one of you should prepare to carry out his role in a way that would satisfy God. You should clench your teeth, as the pious early generations did.
When the confrontation begins, strike like champions who do not want to go back to this world. Shout, "Allahu Akbar," because this strikes fear in the hearts of the non-believers. God said: "Strike above the neck, and strike at all of their extremities." Know that the gardens of paradise are waiting for you in all their beauty, and the women of paradise are waiting, calling out, "Come hither, friend of God." They have dressed in their most beautiful clothing.
If God decrees that any of you are to slaughter, you should dedicate the slaughter to your fathers and [unclear], because you have obligations toward them. Do not disagree, and obey. If you slaughter, do not cause the discomfort of those you are killing, because this is one of the practices of the prophet, peace be upon him. On one condition: that you do not become distracted by [unclear] and neglect what is greater, paying attention to the enemy. That would be treason, and would do more damage than good. If this happens, the deed at hand is more important than doing that, because the deed is an obligation, and [the other thing] is optional. And an obligation has priority over an option.
Do not seek revenge for yourself. Strike for God's sake. One time Ali bin Abi Talib [a companion and close relative of the prophet Muhammad], may God bless him, fought with a non-believer. The non-believer spit on Ali, may God bless him. Ali [unclear] his sword, but did not strike him. When the battle was over, the companions of the prophet asked him why he had not smitten the non-believer. He said, "After he spit at me, I was afraid that I would be striking at him in revenge for myself, so I lifted my sword." After he renewed his intentions, he went back and killed the man. This means that before you do anything, make sure that your soul is prepared to do everything for God only.
Then implement the way of the prophet in taking prisoners. Take prisoners and kill them. As Almighty God said: "No prophet should have prisoners until he has soaked the land with blood. You want the bounties of this world [in exchange for prisoners] and God wants the other world [for you], and God is all-powerful, all-wise."
If everything goes well, every one of you should pat the other on the shoulder in confidence that (M) and (T) number (K). Remind your brothers that this act is for Almighty God. Do not confuse your brothers or distract them. He should give them glad tidings and make them calm, and remind them [of God] and encourage them. How beautiful it is for one to read God's words, such as: "And those who prefer the afterlife over this world should fight for the sake of God." And His words: "Do not suppose that those who are killed for the sake of God are dead; they are alive..." And others. Or they should sing songs to boost their morale, as the pious first generations did in the throes of battle, to bring calm, tranquility and joy to the hearts of his brothers.
Do not forget to take a bounty, even if it is a glass of water to quench your thirst or that of your brothers, if possible. When the hour of reality approaches, the zero hour, [unclear] and wholeheartedly welcome death for the sake of God. Always be remembering God. Either end your life while praying, seconds before the target, or make your last words: "There is no God but God, Muhammad is His messenger".
Afterwards, we will all meet in the highest heaven, God willing.
* If you see the enemy as strong, remember the groups [that had formed a coalition to fight the prophet Muhammad]. They were 10,000. Remember how God gave victory to his faithful servants. God said: "When the faithful saw the groups, they said, this is what God and the prophet promised, they said the truth. It only increased their faith."
And may the peace of the God be upon the prophet ---- http://foxnews.com/story/0,2933,35389,00.html
SUPPRESED DETAILS OF CRIMINAL INSIDER TRADING LEAD DIRECTLY INTO THE CIA’s HIGHEST RANKS
CIA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR “BUZZY” KRONGARD MANAGED FIRM THAT HANDLED “PUT” OPTIONS ON UAL
by
Michael C. Ruppert
[© COPYRIGHT, 2001, Michael C. Ruppert and FTW Publications, www.copvcia.com . All Rights Reserved. – May be reprinted or distributed for non-profit purposes only.]
FTW, October 9, 2001 – Although uniformly ignored by the mainstream U.S. media, there is abundant and clear evidence that a number of transactions in financial markets indicated specific (criminal) foreknowledge of the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. In the case of at least one of these trades -- which has left a $2.5 million prize unclaimed -- the firm used to place the “put options” on United Airlines stock was, until 1998, managed by the man who is now in the number three Executive Director position at the Central Intelligence Agency. Until 1997 A.B. “Buzzy” Krongard had been Chairman of the investment bank A.B. Brown. A.B. Brown was acquired by Banker’s Trust in 1997. Krongard then became, as part of the merger, Vice Chairman of Banker’s Trust-AB Brown, one of 20 major U.S. banks named by Senator Carl Levin this year as being connected to money laundering. Krongard’s last position at Banker’s Trust (BT) was to oversee “private client relations.” In this capacity he had direct hands-on relations with some of the wealthiest people in the world in a kind of specialized banking operation that has been identified by the U.S. Senate and other investigators as being closely connected to the laundering of drug money.
Krongard (re?) joined the CIA in 1998 as counsel to CIA Director George Tenet. He was promoted to CIA Executive Director by President Bush in March of this year. BT was acquired by Deutsche Bank in 1999. The combined firm is the single largest bank in Europe. And, as we shall see, Deutsche Bank played several key roles in events connected to the September 11 attacks.
THE SCOPE OF KNOWN INSIDER TRADING
Before looking further into these relationships it is necessary to look at the insider trading information that is being ignored by Reuters, The New York Times and other mass media. It is well documented that the CIA has long monitored such trades – in real time – as potential warnings of terrorist attacks and other economic moves contrary to U.S. interests. Previous stories in FTW have specifically highlighted the use of Promis software to monitor such trades.
It is necessary to understand only two key financial terms to understand the significance of these trades, “selling short” and “put options”.
“Selling Short” is the borrowing of stock, selling it at current market prices, but not being required to actually produce the stock for some time. If the stock falls precipitously after the short contract is entered, the seller can then fulfill the contract by buying the stock after the price has fallen and complete the contract at the pre-crash price. These contracts often have a window of as long as four months.
“Put Options,” are contracts giving the buyer the option to sell stocks at a later date. Purchased at nominal prices of, for example, $1.00 per share, they are sold in blocks of 100 shares. If exercised, they give the holder the option of selling selected stocks at a future date at a price set when the contract is issued. Thus, for an investment of $10,000 it might be possible to tie up 10,000 shares of United or American Airlines at $100 per share, and the seller of the option is then obligated to buy them if the option is executed. If the stock has fallen to $50 when the contract matures, the holder of the option can purchase the shares for $50 and immediately sell them for $100 – regardless of where the market then stands. A call option is the reverse of a put option, which is, in effect, a derivatives bet that the stock price will go up.
A September 21 story by the Israeli Herzliyya International Policy Institute for Counterterrorism, entitled “Black Tuesday: The World’s Largest Insider Trading Scam?” documented the following trades connected to the September 11 attacks:
- Between September 6 and 7, the Chicago Board Options Exchange saw purchases of 4,744 put options on United Airlines, but only 396 call options… Assuming that 4,000 of the options were bought by people with advance knowledge of the imminent attacks, these “insiders” would have profited by almost $5 million.
- On September 10, 4,516 put options on American Airlines were bought on the Chicago exchange, compared to only 748 calls. Again, there was no news at that point to justify this imbalance;… Again, assuming that 4,000 of these options trades represent “insiders,” they would represent a gain of about $4 million.
- [The levels of put options purchased above were more than six times higher than normal.]
- No similar trading in other airlines occurred on the Chicago exchange in the days immediately preceding Black Tuesday.
- Morgan Stanley Dean Witter & Co., which occupied 22 floors of the World Trade Center, saw 2,157 of its October $45 put options bought in the three trading days before Black Tuesday; this compares to an average of 27 contracts per day before September 6. Morgan Stanley’s share price fell from $48.90 to $42.50 in the aftermath of the attacks. Assuming that 2,000 of these options contracts were bought based upon knowledge of the approaching attacks, their purchasers could have profited by at least $1.2 million.
- Merrill Lynch & Co., which occupied 22 floors of the World Trade Center, saw 12,215 October $45 put options bought in the four trading days before the attacks; the previous average volume in those shares had been 252 contracts per day [a 1200% increase!]. When trading resumed, Merrill’s shares fell from $46.88 to $41.50; assuming that 11,000 option contracts were bought by “insiders,” their profit would have been about $5.5 million.
- European regulators are examining trades in Germany’s Munich Re, Switzerland’s Swiss Re, and AXA of France, all major reinsurers with exposure to the Black Tuesday disaster. [FTW Note: AXA also owns more than 25% of American Airlines stock making the attacks a “double whammy” for them.]
On September 29, 2001 – in a vital story that has gone unnoticed by the major media – the San Francisco Chronicle reported, “Investors have yet to collect more than $2.5 million in profits they made trading options in the stock of United Airlines before the Sept. 11, terrorist attacks, according to a source familiar with the trades and market data.
“The uncollected money raises suspicions that the investors – whose identities and nationalities have not been made public – had advance knowledge of the strikes.” They don’t dare show up now. The suspension of trading for four days after the attacks made it impossible to cash-out quickly and claim the prize before investigators started looking.
“… October series options for UAL Corp. were purchased in highly unusual volumes three trading days before the terrorist attacks for a total outlay of $2,070; investors bought the option contracts, each representing 100 shares, for 90 cents each. [This represents 230,000 shares]. Those options are now selling at more than $12 each. There are still 2,313 so-called “put” options outstanding [valued at $2.77 million and representing 231,300 shares] according to the Options Clearinghouse Corp.”
“…The source familiar with the United trades identified Deutsche Bank Alex. Brown, the American investment banking arm of German giant Deutsche Bank, as the investment bank used to purchase at least some of these options…” This was the operation managed by Krongard until as recently as 1998.
As reported in other news stories, Deutsche Bank was also the hub of insider trading activity connected to Munich Re. just before the attacks.
CIA, THE BANKS AND THE BROKERS
Understanding the interrelationships between CIA and the banking and brokerage world is critical to grasping the already frightening implications of the above revelations. Let’s look at the history of CIA, Wall Street and the big banks by looking at some of the key players in CIA’s history.
Clark Clifford – The National Security Act of 1947 was written by Clark Clifford, a Democratic Party powerhouse, former Secretary of Defense, and one-time advisor to President Harry Truman. In the 1980s, as Chairman of First American Bancshares, Clifford was instrumental in getting the corrupt CIA drug bank BCCI a license to operate on American shores. His profession: Wall Street lawyer and banker.
John Foster and Allen Dulles – These two brothers “designed” the CIA for Clifford. Both were active in intelligence operations during WW II. Allen Dulles was the U.S. Ambassador to Switzerland where he met frequently with Nazi leaders and looked after U.S. investments in Germany. John Foster went on to become Secretary of State under Dwight Eisenhower and Allen went on to serve as CIA Director under Eisenhower and was later fired by JFK. Their professions: partners in the most powerful - to this day - Wall Street law firm of Sullivan, Cromwell.
Bill Casey – Ronald Reagan’s CIA Director and OSS veteran who served as chief wrangler during the Iran-Contra years was, under President Richard Nixon, Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission. His profession: Wall Street lawyer and stockbroker.
David Doherty - The current Vice President of the New York Stock Exchange for enforcement is the retired General Counsel of the Central Intelligence Agency.
George Herbert Walker Bush – President from 1989 to January 1993, also served as CIA Director for 13 months from 1976-7. He is now a paid consultant to the Carlyle Group, the 11th largest defense contractor in the nation, which also shares joint investments with the bin Laden family.
A.B. “Buzzy” Krongard – The current Executive Director of the Central Intelligence Agency is the former Chairman of the investment bank A.B. Brown and former Vice Chairman of Banker’s Trust.
John Deutch - This retired CIA Director from the Clinton Administration currently sits on the board at Citigroup, the nation’s second largest bank, which has been repeatedly and overtly involved in the documented laundering of drug money. This includes Citigroup’s 2001 purchase of a Mexican bank known to launder drug money, Banamex.
Nora Slatkin – This retired CIA Executive Director also sits on Citibank’s board.
Maurice “Hank” Greenburg – The CEO of AIG insurance, manager of the third largest capital investment pool in the world, was floated as a possible CIA Director in 1995. FTW exposed Greenberg’s and AIG’s long connection to CIA drug trafficking and covert operations in a two-part series that was interrupted just prior to the attacks of September 11. AIG’s stock has bounced back remarkably well since the attacks. To read that story, please go to http://www.copvcia.com/stories/part_2.html.
One wonders how much damning evidence is necessary to respond to what is now irrefutable proof that CIA knew about the attacks and did not stop them. Whatever our government is doing, whatever the CIA is doing, it is clearly NOT in the interests of the American people, especially those who died on September 11.
end
Russia and Oil the Real Objectives With Heroin As A Weapon of War
A Replay of CIA’s Vietnam-era Drug Dealing
FTW Revises Its Map On Economic Impacts
by
Michael C. Ruppert
[© Copyright 2001, Michael C. Ruppert and From The Wilderness Publications, www.copvcia.com . May be reproduced or distributed for non-profit purposes only]
FTW, October 10, 2001 – The governments of the United States and Britain - along with a lap-dog mainstream media all too willing to regurgitate falsehoods - are feeding us a line of demonstrably inaccurate lies about the Taliban and opium. We are being warned of a “new flood” of al-Q’aeda opium as the war expands. As British Prime Minister Tony Blair boasts, “We will bomb their poppy fields,” he neglects to mention that there aren’t any poppy fields in Taliban controlled areas to bomb. This outrageous deception of the public, in an effort to stir up support for the war effort, is further evidence that most of the rest of the government’s line following the attacks of September 11, is simply not credible. A simple side-by-side comparison of reports from the UN and the U.S. government, along with major media stories from before and after the Sept. 11 attacks exposes the lie.
Even the U.S. State Department (www.state.gov/www/regions/sa/facts_taliban_drugs.html.) acknowledges that in July 2000, Mullah Omar of the Taliban ordered a ban on poppy cultivation in all Taliban controlled regions of Afghanistan. That State Department Fact Sheet, published after Jan 1, 2000, however, expresses U.S. disbelief in the ban’s effectiveness. This position is, however, flatly contradicted by some very credible sources, including Secretary of State Colin Powell. He gave the Taliban $43 million this May to replace the income lost to Afghani farmers as a result of the ban. Their wheat crops had failed due to the drought and they had no money from opium harvests to buy food. The middlemen who had stockpiled the opium had income. But the farmers, who had harvested in the summer of 2000, had already been paid.
In February 2000 citing reports from Agence France-Presse, the AP, and UPI, FTW published a story describing the Taliban’s successful destruction of their poppy crop. We viewed this at the time – possibly incorrectly – as a move by the Taliban to take $90 billion in drug cash out of the western banking system. That sales remained stable, however, is reflected in the fact that heroin prices fell only slightly in 2000. Had Afghanistan stopped selling altogether, then Western Europe, which gets its opium from Afghanistan, would have seen a steep increase in prices. It did not. So why then did Powell give Afghanistan the $43 million? I wish I knew.
Now, based upon new evidence, we know that in 1999 Afghanistan produced a bumper crop of 4,600 metric tons of opium and that this has been verified by a number of sources including the United Nations Drug Control Program (UNDCP) as well as in a multitude of press stories. The 2000 harvest was close to 3,300 metric tons. The result, as Colombia expanded poppy cultivation in the late 1990s, and as the Golden Triangle in Southeast Asia showed only a minor drop in output, was a glut. Therefore the Taliban’s ban on production would have had the impact of creating a price support by reducing supplies. How successful was the ban and destruction of crops? Well, aside from the above reports, which all indicated that inspections confirming the ban had taken place, consider the following:
- On January 3, 2001 an ABC News story, posted on their web site stated, “Pakistan’s Foreign Secretary Inam ul-Haq’s claim to have eliminated all opium plantations in Taliban controlled territories – reported by Agence France-Presse -- seems to have been confirmed by a UN survey.
“This development could have several important ramifications for both the geopolitical situation in the region and the world drug trade...
“The center of world drug production will shift from Afghanistan, which accounted for 75 percent of world opium production last year, to Colombia and the Golden Triangle on the border between Myanmar (Burma) and Thailand.
A February 16, 2001 AP story by Kathy Gannon was headlined, “Taliban virtually wipes out opium production in Afghanistan.” It opened with these lines:
“U.N. drug control officers said the Taliban religious militia has virtually wiped out opium production in Afghanistan – once the world’s largest producer – since banning poppy cultivation in July.
“A 12-member team from the U.N. Drug Control Program spent two weeks searching most of the nation’s largest opium-producing areas and found so few poppies that they do not expect any opium to come out of Afghanistan this year.
“’We are not just guessing. We have seen the proof in the fields,’ said Bernard Frahi, regional director for the U.N. program in Afghanistan and Pakistan. He laid out photographs of vast tracts of land cultivated with wheat alongside pictures of the same fields taken a year earlier – a sea of blood red poppies.
On May 24, 2001 Barry Berak of the New York Times wrote a story entitled, “Taliban Ban on Drug Crops Is Working, U.S. Concludes.” Here are the lead paragraphs:
“ELMAND PROVINCE, Afghanistan, May 20 – This has been heroin’s great heartland, where the narcotic came to life as an opium resin taken from fragile buds of red and white poppies. Last year, 75 per cent of the world’s opium crop was grown in Afghanistan, with the biggest yield sprouting from here in the fertile plains of the country’s south, sustained by the meander of the Helmand River.
“But something astonishing has become evident with this spring’s harvest. Behind the narrow dikes of packed earth, the fields are empty of their most profitable plant. Poor farmers, scythes in hand, stoop among brown stems.
“Mile after mile, there is only a dry stubble of wheat to cut from the lumpy soil…
“But American narcotics officials who visited the country confirmed earlier United Nations reports that the Taliban had, in one growing season, managed a rare triumph in the long and losing war on drugs…”
Before looking at what the press is saying since the WTC attacks, take three facts and lock them firmly in your brain. First, the opium-growing season in the region, according to the UN and other drug monitoring agencies, is a planting in October and November with a harvest in May and June. There have been no crops planted or harvested in Afghanistan or Pakistan since the summer of 2000. The Taliban and farmers have been sustaining themselves by selling stockpiles, with the prices fairly stable since the ban.
Second, Afghanistan, for the last four years, has been suffering under one of the worst droughts in its history. The last year has been the worst.
Third, Central Asian expert, Vladimir Davlatov, writing for “1 world media,” from the Tajikistan capital of Dushnabe, interviewed a General [Rustam Nazarov] in command of Tajik border guards charged with intercepting heroin supplies smuggled out of Afghanistan. The August 31 story (Issue No. 67) quoted the General as saying, “The quality of Afghan heroin has recently deteriorate[d].”
The Propaganda
- “The West At War: Drugs Wipeout – We’ll Bomb Poppy Fields – Blair Targets Terror Profits – Poppy fields which supply the Taliban’s multi-billion pound drugs trade are to be a key target of military strikes in Afghanistan” read the headline of a September 30, 2000 story in the British paper, The Sunday Mirror. The story said:
“A senior Downing street aide said: ‘We have reliable information that the Taliban are planning to use money from drugs to finance military action, and that bin Laden has ordered farmers to step up production…” How can they step up production? It takes six months to grow a crop and they have to plant one first. The planting doesn’t start until November. Meantime we’re bombing the region to smithereens. Is this a new form of plowing the soil?
“There is an estimated 3,000 tonnes of opium stockpiled inside Afghanistan …” OK, what have they been selling for the last year, wheat? Mushrooms?
- “Flood of Cheap Afghan Heroin,” blazed the headline of a story in the Times of London dated September 25, 2001. The lead sentences of that story read:
“AFGHAN farmers are ready to swamp world markets with heroin amid signs that the Taleban has dropped its ban on opium growing.
“The ban was imposed by Mullah Muhammad Omar last year, leaving many farmers ruined. But the sudden halving of the price of raw opium to $250 a kg suggests the decree has been reversed.” So whose heroin is flooding the markets?
- The Los Angeles Times, The New York Times and the Washington Post, along with every network, have all reported that the Taliban’s response to U.S. attacks will be to increase heroin production. Strange for a country that is now militarily sealed off and has no remaining operable airfields and whose land borders are now sealed by the U.S. military. That gives a whole new meaning to the term “Thunder Road.”
- On September 30 The Chicago Tribune published a story entitled “Panicked Opium Traders Unload Huge Stocks. Implying that it was the Taliban doing so, the story opened with the lead:
“ISLAMABAD, Pakistan – Just as the Dow Jones industrial average fell precipitously in the wake of the terrorist attacks in the U.S., so did the main economic marker in the ramshackle street bazaars of Pakistan’s North West Frontier province.
“Traders from Peshawar reported that the price of opium had plunged from $700 a kilo to $90 since September 11…”
There is no mention in the story of the fact that Pakistan itself grows the opium poppy or that the Pakistani government of Musharraf Pervez – our erstwhile ally – has been dependent upon drug money to sustain itself for at least ten years. How come the story doesn’t look to the Pakistani issue?
- The Ananova press agency reported on September 29th, “…A Downing Street spokesman says there is evidence of a sudden movement of opium out of neighboring Pakistan where it was being stockpiled.” Now let me get this straight. The stockpiles are in Pakistan so we’re going to bomb Afghanistan for it. That makes real good sense!
- In this most outrageous propaganda of all, the Indian news service PTI in New Delhi, published a story on October 4, headlined, “Laden Planned to Wreak Havoc in U.S. Through Super Heroin.” It’s lead paragraph reads:
“The most wanted terrorist Osama bin Laden had planned to develop a ‘super heroin’ drug and export the same to United States and West Europe to wreak havoc there much before the deadly September 11 attacks. ‘The terror network headed by Osama bin Laden has tried to develop a high-strength form of heroin that it planned to export to United States and Western Europe,” a major American daily said today quoting intelligence reports.”
This is the most patent b.s. I have ever read. I specialized in heroin at LAPD. I was also trained by the DEA in 1976. There is no such thing as super heroin. Heroin is a chemical, diacetyl morphine. Its purest form is 100%. It is usually “cut” at least four times – each time by 50% - to 6.25% purity or less before it is sold on the streets. There is no way to make it stronger unless you just cut it less, which automatically cuts the profits to street vendors. And it is the middlemen and retailers who do the cutting, not the manufacturer. It is easier to smuggle one kilo of pure heroin from Afghanistan to Uzbekistan or Pakistan or Turkey than it is to smuggle eight kilos at 6.25%. It would take eight times as many airplanes and trucks.
Each time a middleman cuts the heroin he has twice as much to sell.
This lie of a story implies that Osama bin Laden controls street-level drug dealing in the United States from the black ghettos of New York and L.A to the white suburbs of San Francisco and Chicago. That’s the only way it is possible to get a higher-strength heroin on the streets of America.
And what about the fact that the U.S. receives – according to the DEA and the Department of Justice – more than 60 per cent of its heroin from Colombia. Does bin Laden control Colombia too?
“Oh Yeah, We Forgot To Tell You”
Only belatedly have major outlets like the Wall Street Journal (Oct. 2), The Associated Press (Oct. 5), and the Washington Post (Oct. 5) begun to acknowledge, in stories placed well back in the paper, and with much less emphasis, that the Northern Alliance – our allies against the Taliban – are now in real control of the heroin trade. Smuggling routes have shifted from south through Pakistan northward through Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, and Turkmenistan. They acknowledge the obvious – that the Taliban is no longer the primary supplier of heroin. How could they be?
The Real Story
In March 2001 FTW reported from Moscow that Uzbekistan was “awash” in a sea of poppies. Since September 11 we have seen Uzbekistan not surprisingly become the hub for all U.S. military operations going into Afghanistan. It was, in fact, the very first place that U.S. military and “special operations” forces deployed – within days of the attacks. Unmentioned in press stories is the fact that firms like Southern Air, Evergreen and other CIA proprietary or contract operations have been establishing a presence in the Uzbek capital of Tashkent for more than a year. And Tashkent is a surprisingly modern city. It even has an Intercontinental Hotel. This is undoubtedly due in part to increased oil exploration, but it hauntingly parallels our experience from another era - Vietnam.
Now, as we are hearing the first reports that the Uzbeki government, fighting its own battle against a Muslim insurgency, will permit offensive operations from its military bases, FTW has had two reports that CIA operative Richard Secord has recently traveled to Tashkent. Secord’s documented history of involvement in heroin smuggling, from Vietnam, Laos and Thailand in the 1960’s and his criminal involvement in illegal operations, including drug smuggling during the Iran-Contra years, tells us exactly what is happening. These same intelligence sources have also reported that many other CIA veterans of Iran-Contra and Vietnam – despite their age – are converging on Tashkent like bees to a field of flowers – poppy flowers.
In the 1960’s and 70’s, as the Vietnam War raged, the CIA fostered and maintained a series of covert wars in Laos and Cambodia. They did this by funding their operations with heroin, refined from opium grown by indigenous tribesmen including the Hmong in Laos. The Hmong, in turn became surrogate U.S. armies and the money from the trade supported the CIA and its allies as the region became totally unstable. In the years since, the only difference is that drug money has become a $500-600 billion a year cash flow that is now an essential part of the world banking and financial system because it provides the liquid cash necessary to make the “minimum monthly payments” on huge stock and derivative and investment bubbles in the U.S. and Britain. These bubbles were already bursting in the weeks prior to the September 11 attacks.
Now, as the CIA moves to control the drug trade in the region you can be sure of several things. First, when the world sees an explosion of heroin from the region it won’t be the Taliban’s doing. Second, the cash flows from the smuggling will now be directed through U.S. banks and stocks. That is what the CIA does. Third, those cash flows – as direct air operations from Tashkent to the U.S. become commonplace - will be taken away from Russia, the Balkans, Turkey and Eastern Europe. Fourth, the result of that will be de-stabilization of the entire region. Fifth, destabilization in the region will Balkanize Russia. Sixth, the increasing U.S. military and economic presence will consolidate U.S. control over the vast oil and gas reserves in the region. A revived Unocal-Saudi pipeline project, which will begin construction soon after the U.S. establishes control, will take the oil and gas from Central Asia, through Afghanistan, and down to the Pakistani coast where it will then be sold to China and Japan. The profits from those sales will come back into Wall Street. This will be a further drain on Russian influence in the region and greatly increase global instability.
Throughout the 1990s the United States - under an exclusive arrangement coordinated by the Harvard Endowment, Goldman Sachs and the U.S Treasury - looted some $300 billion from Russia. During the period from 1989-2001 the population of that country shrank from 165 to 145 million people. As infrastructure collapsed, as services disappeared, as unemployment skyrocketed, as the Ruble collapsed, the life expectancy for a Russian male dropped from 68 to 48 years.
Make no mistake. Russia is the target here just as much as is the propping up of a feeble U.S. economy with drug money. And remember that Russia still has most of its nuclear arsenal intact.
INTERVIEW
Congresswoman Lee Calls For Peace
by - Davey D 9/20/01
<http://www.daveyd.com/FullArticles/articleP80.asp >
Yesterday, Monday Sept. 17th, we had an opportunity to catch up with Congresswoman Barbara Lee and talk to her about her decision to cast the only vote opposing President Bush's War resolution. Not even her fellow colleagues from the Congressional Black Caucus voted with her on this one. That includes such notable people like Maxine Waters, Charles Rengel, Jesse Jackson Jr., Cynthia McKinney to name a few. What is this all about? Is Congresswoman Lee out of step with reality and the rest of the country? Or is she ahead of her time? Some people are saying she is unpatriotic for not supporting Bush on this one. They are angry with her to the point that she now needs police protection. Others are saying she did the right thing by not only following her conscience, but also bringing to the floor and public discussions, an alternative viewpoint that has been all but locked out of this past week's conversations. Many are claiming something is wrong with you if you are not advocating war. Here's what Congresswoman had to say...Let us know what you think. mailto:misterdaveyd@aol.com
DAVEY D: They took this vote in Congress about what should be the response to the tragedy this week...and elected to take military action. In a vote 420 to 1 you were the lone dissenting voice that said no, we should not go to war.
BARBARA LEE: First, our nation is in grieving, we're all mourning, we're angry; there are a range of emotions taking place. Myself personally, I am also grieving and I believe fully and firmly that the Congress of the United States is the only legislative body that can say, "Let's pause for a moment...and let's look at using some restraint before we rush to action." Because military action can lead to an escalation and spiral out of control. So, why I voted no, was one, the president already has the authority to execute a military action. He doesn't need Congress; under the War Powers Act he has that authority. But Congress is the people's house, and the Congress is responsible for providing checks and balances, and you cannot just allow the administration to run ahead with a strategy without reporting back and without having some oversight. Now we must bring the perpetrators to justice. International terrorism is upon us, this is a new world and we cannot make any mistakes in dealing with it. We do not want to see our reaction lead to another reaction which could allow this to spiral out of control. So while we grieve and while we provide assistance, and I did vote to provide assistance for the families and communities that have been devastated and also providing funding for anti-terrorist activities for securing our own country, we've got to conduct a full investigation and be really deliberate about how we move forward militarily. We cannot make any mistake about this, this is an unconventional war and we have to fight it in an unconventional way.
DAVEY D: We're talking about the nature of terrorism and whether it could be a tit-for-tat type of scenario if we go out and retaliate and hit the wrong targets or capture the wrong people, the next thing you know we could be involved in a situation where a can of worms has been opened that we just can't close it up.
BARBARA LEE: We don't know the real nature of terrorism in the true sense of the word. We have not invested in combating terrorism the way we should have, which involves many issues. It involves our foreign policy, it involves multinational cooperation, it involves diplomatic efforts. It involves pulling all of these very multifaceted areas together to come up with a real way to deal with terrorism. I don't believe we have faced the fact that terrorism is the new war that this country is going to have to fight. We're looking at putting up billions of dollars for national missile defense. Well, anti-ballistic missiles, that would not have saved the lives or prevented the horrible morning that we saw last Tuesday, it just wouldn't have done it. So, we're looking at putting military money into the wrong areas. We need to look at what this means in terms of securing our country, securing our world, and how to use our tax dollars toward that purpose. I am convinced that military action alone will not prevent further terrorist attacks.
DAVEY D: One of things I'm concerned about is the number of people of color who will be on these front lines. A third of the army is made up of people of color, because of the economic conditions we're in. If we have to go out there and fight a war, how is this going to impact our communities disproportionately, and are we going to have some dire effects that will be with us for generations?
BARBARA LEE: Certainly, that's always the case, our communities are always disproportionately represented in the military and we'll be called to serve and fight. Whenever that happens, whomever it is, we have to be very careful. We don't want our young men and women put in harm's way. I am a very patriotic person, and I support the United States and our government. And I believe that my support for our country and for our people dictates that I be prudent, that I not rush to judgment on any decisions, and that we step back for a minute and realize any impact that this could have on young men and women of color, and all young Americans as we move forward. Fighting a terrorist war...I'm not sure our young people are prepared for that, and we've got to stamp out terrorism in the world but it's very complicated.
DAVEY D: I've got the sense that people think that this will be over in a hurry, almost like you're playing a game, and I'm trying to tell people, that this is real stuff. You've got people that have committed themselves to dying, and that's kind of scary.
BARBARA LEE: We're all in trauma right now, in a state of disbelief and mourning. A member of my staff had a family member killed in one of the planes. This catastrophe has touched the lives of so many people. Going back to why I said "No, let's use restraint,"it's for that reason. My professional training is as a social worker, and I understand the human psyche, and the community psyche, and our country's psyche. Right not, were dealing with recovery, and we're dealing with mourning, and there's no way until we settle in, should we deal with decisions that could escalate violence and spiral out of control. We just all must be reasoned and reasonable about this. When we bring these terrorists to justice, we have to be pointed and know what we're doing. The world is a dangerous place.
DAVEY D: With all the money that we pay in tax dollars directed toward intelligence gathering, the CIA, the FBI, the racial profiling at airports and the like, how could we have someone come in to this country, learn to fly from our own schools, and fly an airplane for 20, 30 minutes and not be detected? Was this a breakdown in the intelligence community?
BARBARA LEE: Obviously, that money has not been spent properly and I think that one of the reasons I did vote for the $40 billion is that there's money in there to really look at how we increase the public safety of our people in this country, within the confines of civil liberties. We have to find that balance. Protecting the public, protecting the country, and not allowing our civil liberties to be eroded. That's where we need to put the funding and resources, and that's why I did support that money. But something went terribly wrong, and we'll see how these investigations go. But we have to insist on a full and thorough investigation.
DAVEY D: Do you think with all the concern right now, we will be finding our civil liberties actually taken off the paper altogether in the name of national security? Will people be pulled over, profiled, searched more? If I'm a part of an organization that says "Peace not war," will they label me a potential terrorist?
BARBARA LEE: Certainly we have to fight against that trend. There are those who would like to see that happen. They will overreact to a tragedy and use this opportunity to do just what you said. That's part of the danger in rushing to judgment. As a branch of the government that's responsible to the people, it's up to Congress to execute our Constitutional responsibilities to ensure that there's checks on policies that could be put in place under the name of national security. This is very serious.
DAVEY D: You've come from an era of the Black Panthers, from the Vietnam era, when there were a lot of groups that found themselves subjected to the Cointel policies of the FBI. They were harassed by the various government agencies, from the local police to the CIA, their patriotism was questioned. If we don't keep that in mind, do you think it might lead to us just falling in line and maybe not questioning government when we have a right to do so?
BARBARA LEE: We better understand the history, and I'm very on top of my own history with these agencies and I know what can happen. So we must be vigilant right now, because under the cloak of national security, many of our civil liberties could be just wiped off the floor. There are those of us who are going to fight to make sure that's not going to happen, but we're also going to fight to make sure justice is served by making sure that the people and organizations who did this are brought to justice. We also have to begin to look at our foreign policy, our diplomatic efforts, and some of the reasons why we don't engage in dialogue with certain countries and individuals and organizations. This is a very complex issue in the US, and we should be right now leading the world in showing our children how in the face of adversity we respond and minimize the loss of life. We don't want to see any more people lose their lives. We cannot tolerate another terrorist attack, and we certainly cannot tolerate any loss of life any more in our country, and anywhere in the world.
DAVEY D: Many are painting a picture that, "if you're not with the US, you're against us. " They would take a look at your dissenting vote and say, "Congresswoman Barbara Lee is not patriotic, she's not supporting the president, she's making it difficult for us to do what we need to do." How do you respond to that type of criticism?
BARBARA LEE: People have said that. And in my response, I tell them that I'm very patriotic. As a citizen, I have the right to represent a point of view. That's central to our democracy, the right to dissent, the right to provide a different point of view that's out in the open, in the full view of the American people. I did not make this decision behind closed doors; I've explained my decision. I think the beauty of democracy, and one of it's fundamental principles, is the right to free speech and the right to disagree. I support the administration in their actions; that's not the point. Their role is this, they're moving forward. What we have to understand, is that the Congress is a body that represents the people in our country. It's up to us to step back and say, "Okay, now we have an additional responsibility." We must make sure that the president reports to us, so that we can report back to our constituents what's going on. You don't want to not know, do you? Congress has a very critical role in this. So if I am going to be patriotic, and I am, and if I am going to be a good American, which I know I am, I am going to make sure that our democracy works and I'm going to hold it accountable, and make sure that it works not only for my constituents, but for the whole country. You don't want to rush to judgment while we're depressed and angry and frustrated. That's like herding cattle in one direction. You want people who are thinking clearly, who are working with the president, and giving them different ideas and insights. I'm an African-American woman, I'm on the International Relations committee. I have a point of view...as an American...that may be useful when we talk about international terrorism. There are many people who have different points of view...that's America. So to those people who say those things, they better check their own credentials. They may need to become more participatory in our democracy.
DAVEY D: That's a key word, participatory. I come across a lot of people who are waving the flag, but aren't registered to vote. All this information about foreign policy and our government's role has been out there, but a lot of people have ignored it until now. All of a sudden, they're out for blood, and don't even understand where Afghanistan is and what it would take to defeat it. This is a country that beat back Russia, a couple of times. It's not going to be an easy haul, and I'm afraid people aren't really thinking long term.
BARBARA LEE: Being patriotic at this moment in our history means participating in decisions about the future of our world. It means participating in decisions that will hopefully bring us to peace, and ensure that these terrorists are brought to justice and that no man, woman, or child, ever gets killed in such brutal assaults ever again That's what participatory democracy is about at this moment. People should feel understand and feel empowered that it's through their members of Congress that represent them, that they can make their voice be heard. Not just react, but engage.
DAVEY D: People would question, would you acting on behalf of Barbara Lee or were you acting on behalf of the Berkeley-Oakland district you represent when you decided to be that lone dissenting vote against Bush's resolution for war?
BARBARA LEE:: First of all, this was not a poll-driven vote. This was the most painful vote I have taken in Congress, really in all 12 years that I've been in elected office. It was a grueling experience for me. I have been in many briefings, classified and unclassified. I have been in so many meetings. I was in the Capitol when the plane went into the Pentagon, and we had to evacuate. It's been a nightmare. I went through the intellectual process, through the fact-gathering, through the policy analysis, looking through the foreign policy and intelligence and military implications of our move. It weighed heavily on me. I was not going to the National Cathedral for the prayer service..because I wanted to continue in my discussions, and reflect on the resolution that was coming up. But at the last minute, I decided to go, that I had to pray over this. I realized I had to settle down and say some prayers, to try to get some strength to help me through the rest of the week. It was a very powerful, very beautiful prayer service, very painful. I listened to the prayers, and prayed, and listened to the comments and the sermons. One of the clergy, very eloquently said, in his prayer, "As we act, let us not become the evil that we deplore, " And at that moment, I knew what the right vote was, and what I had to do. So it was a combination of factors that brought me to that place. There are very few times when there are votes of conscience that your moral compass must guide you, very few times that there's some bottom lines. And this was one of those times. I talked to my colleagues, and believe me, there are many members of Congress who feel as I feel, who are raising questions about not having the President report back on military action. People are concerned. I think my vote represented my week of deliberations, my discussions, my thoughts, my analysis, and my conscience, and I voted 'no.' I believe it was the right vote. I still say, and I said on the floor that night, "We must step back." We must allow time for the grieving, and the mourning. Congress has got to be the body that says, "Let's use some restraint, lets make sure that our actions lead to what we want to accomplish, and that's to make sure their are no more attacks on our people and on our country" We've got to make the most deliberate strategies that we can that are going to be effective.
DAVEY D: There's been a number of attacks throughout our country on our Arab brothers and sisters...even on those who look like they might be Arab. Sadly, some of this abuse has come at the hands of black and brown folks, who have gotten caught up in the wave of patriotism that has swept the country. What are your thoughts on this?
BARBARA LEE: This is very a serious problem. We passed a resolution on that same night that condemned attacks on Arab-Americans and Muslims and all those who could be under attack as a result of this. What we see now is an environment of fear. The worst is coming out in people. We've never had a war on our land before, other countries have, the US hasn't. Were vulnerable. When people react in fear, what do they do? They turn on each other. The person who looks the wrong way receives the brunt of your anger and fear. So I'm urging and encouraging young people to please understand that when these planes crashed into the towers, they killed people of all colors, ages, races. creeds. It was an equal opportunity destroyer.
DAVEY D: It just seems a shame that people who have been persecuted, especially blacks and Latinos, who have been the brunt of abuse by the military, are turning around and attacking people in our own communities. Once upon time Latinos in LA were attacked by US Sailors in what is now known as the Zoot suit riots. African Americans were at the short end of the stick in numerous situations and scenarios.
BARBARA LEE: We've got to pause and understand the moment that we're in. Moving forward, whether it's on a political level, or in our communities, against each other, there's some serious implications of this. If we donut understand that were grieving, we're baffled, we're afraid, this behavior is going to escalate. I'm trying to help young people understand who their enemy is and who it is not. In this moment of all moments, we should be embracing each other. My constituents are as conflicted and upset in California as people are all over the East Coast and the country.
DAVEY D: Do you think when you get back to Bay Area, you'll have some kind of a town hall so that those people that voted you into office can come on down and build with you?
BARBARA LEE: We' re definitely going to be holding events in our community to try and help sort though this grieving process. In terms of future direction, we want to bring some clarity and understanding as to how the Congress should function when we're in a vulnerable state, when we've been attacked and what our role is in terms of checks and balances. I want to do some education and forums and basic discussions with young people about their fears. I know children are scared about what they're seeing on TV But the way our country responds to it will ensure as they grow up that they are able to deal with their problems in a way that is appropriate. It's important that they see that rage and war gets out of control and leads to more violence. We have to be very measured in our response as we go after the perpetrators of this horror, and make sure that our children know that in the face of adversity, America can rise up and be the great democracy that it is, and deal with all these problems immediately.
DAVEY D: Have you heard from any high ranking officials about your vote. Also, Bush has two daughters who are college age...do you think that they would be on the front line? How do you think it will perceived if 19 and 20 year olds are being asked to serve this country and his daughters are still making headlines getting drunk at frat parties??
BARBARA LEE: That poses the kind of questions and dilemmas before us. There are many questions that have to be asked..the kind of terrain ahead of us in a country we don't know, how much collateral loss will we be inflicting in terms of innocent women and children? Loss of life is loss of life. The Congress needs to ask these questions, force the administration to answer these questions. That does not mean that we, and I, are not unified. I'm sure I will hear from the administration, I'm on the foreign affairs committee. I see Secretary Powell fairly frequently. I haven't talked to him. Hess been fairly measured in his response, I think Hess trying to bring some balance to the policy. But in terms of supporting the President, that Congress has to make sure that he is successful, that any reaction to this horrible attack does not come back in terms of any spiraling out of control. If you have nobody to check that, it could be very scary.
DAVEY D: Congresswoman Lee thank you so much for taking time out of your day to break it down for us. For those wishing to get in touch with Barbara Lee... her number is 510-763-0370
by Carl Jensen
(Press Democrat, Saturday, 10/13/01)
Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 13:28:48 -0700 From: Peter Phillips <peter.phillips@SONOMA.EDU > Project Censored http://www.projectcensored.org/ Subject: WATCH WHAT YOU SAY!
WATCH WHAT YOU SAY! by Carl Jensen
(Press Democrat, Saturday, 10/13/01)
The free flow of information in America is slowing to a carefully monitored trickle.
The President of the United States says he can only trust eight members of Congress.
The Attorney General admonishes Congress to pass the controversial Anti-terrorism Act without debate.
The National Security Adviser cautions the television networks not to broadcast press conferences with Taliban leaders because they may contain hidden messages.
The military tells the press this is a "different war" and thus can't observe the 1992 agreement allowing the media more access to information.
The State Department tells the Voice of America radio network not to broadcast an interview with Taliban leader Mullah Muhammad Omar.
The President's press secretary warns the media and all Americans, "to watch what they say and watch what they do."
These are ominous signs for a democracy. We may be united in our effort to bring the terrorists to justice but we should not be so willing to give up our civil rights and civil liberties.
We must not allow patriotism to become an excuse for censorship. This is where Project Censored, the national media research project headquartered at Sonoma State University, plays such an important role in our society.
Project Censored is an early warning system of the problems that plague us. Over the years it tried to warn us about many of the challenges we now face.
One of those challenges is the threat of biological and chemical attacks in the United States. In the past ten years, Project Censored raised the issue of biological and chemical warfare seven times. A 1981 story reported that while research on these weapons was banned in 1969 due to public pressure, the CIA still maintained biological warfare stockpiles. Further, a 1998 story revealed that the biological weapons materials the UN inspection teams were seeking in Iraq was supplied by U.S. firms.
Another challenge is the possible Taliban use of U.S.-made Stinger missiles against our aircraft. A censored story of 1993 told how the CIA was desperately but unsuccessfully trying to buy back hundreds of surface-to-air Stinger missiles that it secretly gave the Afghan guerrillas a few years earlier. The top censored story of 1997 said the U.S. was the principal arms merchant for the world and warned that U.S. troops may be at risk from our own weapons.
In 1984, Project Censored reported that the U.S. had secretly given the Afghan rebels up to $300 million in covert aid, far more than the controversial $24 million it had given the Nicaraguan contras. A censored story in 1989 revealed how CBS News broadcast pro-guerrilla biased news coverage of the Afghanistan war.
Ironically, one of the censored stories of 1983 reported how the Pentagon wanted to establish special "state defense forces" to prevent or suppress terrorism. The proposal failed. For more information on these and other censored stories, please visit www.projectcensored.org .
The tragic events of September 11 shocked many Americans who could not believe anyone could hate us that much. An explanation might be found in the number seven censored story of 1999. It reported how international news began to fade from America's newspapers in the 1970s following the Vietnam War.
Journalist Peter Arnett offered one explanation as to why Americans are less informed about what's going on in the rest of the world. "...most of the nation's newspapers and magazines and television stations, seeking greater profits through larger audiences, fed the public a diet of crime news, celebrity gossip, and soft features, choosing to exclude more serious topics that news managers feared would not stimulate public attention."
All this is not to say that the terrorist acts would not have taken place if the press had provided us with more objective coverage of the Middle East but perhaps it would have made us more vigilant and better prepared.
Unfortunately, instead of alerting us to these and other important issues, the news media distracted us with a phenomenon Project Censored calls junk food news--stories about O.J. Simpson, Y2K, Monica Lewinsky, Gary Condit, and "reality" television programs like "Survivor."
Finally we urge the press to be responsible in its coverage of this conflict. It is far easier but less responsible to beat the drums when jingoism runs loose in the streets than to carefully report events in a context that makes sense.
In the same way we survived Pearl Harbor, we will survive the 9/11 terrorist attack. In the meantime, let us not be terrorized into giving up any of our constitutionally guaranteed rights.
Carl Jensen Founder of Project Censored
Peter Phillips Ph.D. Sociology Department/Project Censored Sonoma State University 1801 East Cotati Ave. Rohnert Park, CA 94928 707-664-2588
Project Censored http://www.projectcensored.org/
By Don Williams
October 14, 2001—The TV networks should not let the White House censor their news, even if Condoleeza Rice's "gentle suggestion" had the implied threat of financial punishment via adverse FCC actions.
Americans need to hear Osama bin Laden's grievances, not because we will excuse Sept. 11 , but because we need to determine if actions abroad by our corporations and their supporters in the US government are contributing to the rise of attacks on America. The White House may be worried about what bin Laden will reveal.
The Bush administration's decision to let defense contractor Lockheed Martin sell 52 F16 fighters to Israel, announced on Sept.5, may have triggered the Sept. 11 attacks one week later.
The Arab world was enraged because Sharon had used F16s to attack the Palestinians this summer, after President Bush adopted his hands off policy. (Lockheed had sold 50 F16s to Israel earlier, in 1999, for $2.5 billion.
In interviews with CNN in 1997, with ABC News in 1998, and in his 1998 Jihad declaration, Osama Bin Laden had explicitly cited US's support of Israel—and its harmful effects on Muslim Palestinians—as one of the motivations for Jihad.
Why did Bush approve the F16 sale at this time? Vice President Dick Cheney's wife, Lynne Cheney, was on Lockheed Martin's Board of Directors from 1994 until January of this year—she may have exerted influence on Lockheed's behalf. The boost to the Fort Worth, Texas, economy may have been a factor. Maybe they had to spend the money before the end of the federal government's fiscal year—US taxpayers indirectly subsidize the weapons sales, via the $3 billion in foreign aid that the US gives Israel each year.
Another consideration is that Cheney has long been interested in the huge Caspian Sea oil deposits. While CEO at Halliburton, Cheney sat on Kazakhstan's Oil Advisory Board and his recent energy report advocated that Bush direct the cabinet to "deepen their commercial dialogue with Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, and other Caspian states." Interestingly enough, Kazakhstan also receives money from Lockheed Martin's satellite launches at the Baikonur spaceport.
In the past, Cheney advocated relaxation of sanctions against Iran so that a pipeline could be built to carry Caspian oil to a tanker terminal on the Indian Ocean. Given China's projected thirst for oil in the coming decades, the potential for profits is enormous. However, a pipeline from Kazakhstan to the Indian Ocean via Afghanistan and Pakistan would work equally well.
America will avenge Sept. 11. However, we should not be manipulated into a prolonged war that is not in the national interest, even if it does promote some private business agendas. Nor should US soldiers die simply to guard foreign investments of campaign donors.
A few months ago, Bush gave a huge tax break to America's wealthy. He should not now raid Social Security's Trust Fund to protect the foreign investments of those same plutocrats. Even before the Sept. 11 attacks, Bush's budget indicated that he would be borrowing heavily from government trust funds ( Social Security, Medicare,etc.)— by 2011, the trust funds' assets will consist of $6 trillion in IOUs.
Recently, Bush pushed through a huge increase in the defense budget. What he failed to mention is that the US already spends more than the next 15 major powers combined. It is not clear why $343 billion a year is not enough to protect the country, given that our major opponents and allies spend much, much less: Russia $56 billion, China $40 billion , Japan $46 billion, Britain $35 billion, Germany $23 billion, France $27 billion.
After the Sept. 11 attacks, the TV networks did something strange and unprecedented—they ran nearly 24-hour continuous coverage of the crisis for four days with no commercials. Normally, the networks charge very high prices for advertising and they don't give out much free airtime for public service—even during the national elections.
Yet, a stock market report indicates that the networks lost an estimated $100 million a day or $400 million for the week. Since the networks had large expenses providing the coverage, that's probably $400 million in lost profits. The owners of the four networks are: General Electric (NBC ), Viacom (CBS), Disney (ABC) and AOL's CNN. Why did the CEOs of all three corporations—known for an intense focus on profits—decide to suffer such heavy losses?
Were the voters being conditioned, by constant repetition of attack scenes and of people lost in grief, to support some future government course of action? For whose benefit?
If you are interested in a free subscription to The Konformist Newswire, please visit:
http://www.eGroups.com/list/konformist
From:
http://narconews.com/goff1.html
The So-Called Evidence Is a Farce By Stan Goff
I'm a retired Special Forces Master Sergeant. That doesn't cut much for those who will only accept the opinions of former officers on military matters, since we enlisted swine are assumed to be incapable of grasping the nuances of doctrine. But I wasn't just in the army. I studied and taught military science and doctrine. I was a tactics instructor at the Jungle Operations Training Center in Panama, and I taught Military Science at West Point. And contrary to the popular image of what Special Forces does, SF's mission is to teach. We offer advice and assistance to foreign forces. That's everything from teaching marksmanship to a private to instructing a Battalion staff on how to coordinate effective air operations with a sister service. Based on that experience, and operations in eight designated conflict areas from Vietnam to Haiti, I have to say that the story we hear on the news and read in the newspapers is simply not believable.
The most cursory glance at the verifiable facts, before, during, and after September 11th, does not support the official line or conform to the current actions of the United States government. But the official line only works if they can get everyone to accept its underlying premises. I'm not at all surprised about the Republican and Democratic Parties repeating these premises. They are simply two factions within a single dominant political class, and both are financed by the same economic powerhouses. My biggest disappointment, as someone who identifies himself with the left, has been the tacit acceptance of those premises by others on the left, sometimes naively, and sometimes to score some morality points. Those premises are twofold. One, there is the premise that what this de facto administration is doing now is a "response" to September 11th. Two, there is the premise that this attack on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon was done by people based in Afghanistan. In my opinion, neither of these is sound.
To put this in perspective we have to go back not to September 11th, but to last year or further. A man of limited intelligence, George W. Bush, with nothing more than his name and the behind-the-scenes pressure of his powerful father-a former President, ex-director of Central Intelligence, and an oil man- is systematically constructed as a candidate, at tremendous cost. Across the country, subtle and not-so-subtle mechanisms are put into place to disfranchise a significant fraction of the Democrat's African-American voter base. This doesn't come out until Florida becomes a battleground for Electoral College votes, and the magnitude of the story has been suppressed by the corporate media to this day. In a decision so lacking in legitimacy, the Supreme Court will neither by-line the author of the decision nor allow the decision to ever be used as a precedent, Bush v. Gore awards the presidency of the United States to a man who loses the popular vote in Florida and loses the national popular vote by over 600,000. This de facto regime then organizes a very interesting cabinet. The Vice President is an oil executive and the former Secretary of Defense. The National Security Advisor is a director on the board of a transnational oil corporation and a Russia scholar. The Secretary of State is a man with no diplomatic experience whatsoever, and the former Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The other interesting appointment is Donald Rumsfeld as Secretary of Defense. Rumsfeld is the former CEO of Searle Pharmaceuticals. He and Cheney were featured as speakers at the May, 2000, Russian-American Business Leaders Forum. So the consistent currents in this cabinet are petroleum, the former Soviet Union, and the military. Based on the record of Daddy Bush, in all his guises, and the general trajectory of US foreign policy as far back as the Carter Administration, I feel I can reasonably conclude that Middle Eastern and South Asian fossil fuels are one of their major preoccupations. Not just because this klavern has some very direct financial interests in fossil fuel, but because they surely know that worldwide oil production is peaking as we speak, and will soon begin a permanent and precipitous decline that will completely change the character of civilization as we know it within 20 years.
Even the left seems to be in deep denial about this, but the math is available. And, no, alternative energies and energy technologies will not save us. All the alternatives in the world can not begin to provide more than a tiny fraction of the energy base now provided by oil. This makes it more than a resource, and the drive to control what's left more than an economic competition. I further conclude that the economic colonization of the former Soviet Union is probably high on that agenda, and in fact has a powerful synergy with the issue of petroleum. Russia not only holds vast untapped resources that beckon to imperialism in crisis, it remains a credible military and nuclear challenger in the region. We have not one, but three members of the Bush de facto cabinet with military credentials, which makes the cabinet look quite a lot like a military General Staff. All this way before September 11th.
Then there's the subject of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. NATO might have expected consignment to the dustbin of the Cold War after the Eastern Bloc shattered in 1991. Peace dividend and all that. But it didn't. It expanded directly into the former states of the Eastern Bloc toward the former Soviet Union, and contributed significant forces to the devastation of Iraq-a key country in the world oil market, over which control translates into the ability to manipulate oil prices. NATO is a military formation, and the United States exerts the controlling interest in it. It seemed like a form without a function, but it remedied that pretty quickly. Then when Yugoslavia refused to play ball with the International Monetary Fund, the US and Germany began a systematic campaign of destabilization there, even using some of the veterans of Afghanistan in that campaign. NATO became the military arm of that agenda-the break-up of Yugoslavia into compliant statelets, the further containment of the former Soviet Union, and the future pipeline easement for Caspain Sea oil to Western European markets through Kosovo. You see, this is important to understand, and people-even those against the war talk-are tending to overlook the significance of it. NATO is not a guarantor of international law, and it is not a humanitarian organization. It is a military alliance with one very dominant partner. And it can no longer claim to be a defensive alliance against European socialists. It is an instrument of military aggression. NATO is the organization that is now going to thrust further along the 40th parallel from the Balkans through the Southern Asian Republics of the former Soviet Union. The US military has already taken control of a base in Uzbekistan. No one is talking about how what we are doing seems to be a very logical extension of a strategy that was already in motion, and has been in motion for two decades. Once we recognize the pattern of activity designed to simultaneously consolidate control over Middle Eastern and South Asian oil, and contain and colonize the former Soviet Union, Afghanistan is exactly where they need to go to pursue that agenda. Afghanistan borders Iran, India, and even China but, more importantly, the Central Asian Republics of the former Soviet Union, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Tajikistan. These border Kazakhstan. Kazakhstan borders Russia. Turkmenistan sits on the Southeastern quadrant of the Caspian Sea, whose oil the Bush Administration dearly covets.
Afghanistan is necessary for two things: as a base of operations to begin the process of destabilizing, breaking off, and establishing control over the South Asian Republics, which will begin within the next 18-24 months in my opinion, and constructing a pipeline through Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, and Pakistan to deliver petroleum to the Asian market. The BBC was recently told by Niaz Naik, a Pakistani Foreign Secretary, that senior American officials were warning them as early as mid-July that military action for mid-October was being planned for Afghanistan. In 1996, the Department of Energy was issuing reports on the desirability of a pipeline through Afghanistan, and in 1998, Unocal testified before the House Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific that this pipeline was crucial to transport Caspian Basin oil to the Indian Ocean.
Given this evidence that a military operation to secure at least a portion of Afghanistan has been on the table, possibly as early as five years ago, I can't help but conclude that the actions we are seeing put into motion now are part of a pre-September 11th agenda. I'm absolutely sure of that, in fact. The planning alone for operations, of this scale, that are now taking shape, would take many months. And we are seeing them take shape in mere weeks. It defies common sense. This administration is lying about this whole thing being a "reaction" to September 11th. That leads me, in short order, to be very suspicious of their yet-to-be-provided evidence that someone in Afghanistan is responsible. It's just too damn convenient.
Which also leads me to wonder-just for the sake of knowing-what actually did happen on September 11th, and who actually is responsible. The so-called evidence is a farce. The US presented Tony Blair's puppet government with the evidence, and of the 70 so-called points of evidence, only nine even referred to the attacks on the World Trade Center, and those points were conjectural. This is a bullshit story from beginning to end. Presented with the available facts, any 16-year old with a liking for courtroom dramas could tear this story apart like a two-dollar shirt. But our corporate press regurgitates it uncritically. But then, as we should know by now, their role is to legitimize.
This cartoon heavy they've turned bin Laden into makes no sense, when you begin to appreciate the complexity and synchronicity of the attacks. As a former military person who's been involved in the development of countless operations orders over the years, I can tell you that this was a very sophisticated and costly enterprise that would have left what we call a huge "signature". In other words, it would be very hard to effectively conceal. So there's a real question about why there was no warning of this. That can be a question about the efficacy of the government's intelligence apparatus. That can be a question about various policies in the various agencies that had to be duped to orchestrate this action. And it can also be a question about whether or not there was foreknowledge of the event, and that foreknowledge is being covered up. To dismiss this concern out of hand as the rantings of conspiracy nuts is premature.
And there is a history of this kind of thing being done by national political bosses, including the darling of liberals, Franklin Roosevelt. The evidence is very compelling that the Roosevelt Administration deliberately failed to act to stop Pearl Harbor in order to mobilize enough national anger to enter the World War II. I have no idea why people aren't asking some very specific questions about the actions of Bush and company on the day of the attacks. Follow along: Four planes get hijacked and deviate from their flight plans, all the while on FAA radar. The planes are all hijacked between 7:45 and 8:10 AM Eastern Daylight Time. Who is notified? This is an event already that is unprecedented. But the President is not notified and going to a Florida elementary school to hear children read. By around 8:15 AM, it should be very apparent that something is terribly wrong. The President is glad-handing teachers. By 8:45, when American Airlines Flight 11 crashes into the World Trade Center, Bush is settling in with children for his photo ops at Booker Elementary. Four planes have obviously been hijacked simultaneously, an event never before seen in history, and one has just dived into the worlds best know twin towers, and still no one notifies the nominal Commander in Chief.
No one has apparently scrambled any Air Force interceptors either. At 9:03, United Flight 175 crashes into the remaining World Trade Center building. At 9:05, Andrew Card, the Presidential Chief of Staff whispers to George W. Bush. Bush "briefly turns somber" according to reporters. Does he cancel the school visit and convene an emergency meeting? No. He resumes listening to second graders read about a little girl's pet fucking goat, and continues this banality even as American Airlines Flight 77 conducts an unscheduled point turn over Ohio and heads in the direction of Washington DC. Has he instructed Chief of Staff Card to scramble the Air Force? No. An excruciating 25 minutes later, he finally deigns to give a public statement telling the United States what they already have figured out; that there's been an attack by hijacked planes on the World Trade Center.
There's a hijacked plane bee-lining to Washington, but has the Air Force been scrambled to defend anything yet? No. At 9:30, when he makes his announcement, American Flight 77 is still ten minutes from its target, the Pentagon. The Administration will later claim they had no way of knowing that the Pentagon might be a target, and that they thought Flight 77 was headed to the White House, but the fact is that the plane has already flown South and past the White House no-fly zone, and is in fact tearing through the sky at over 400 nauts. At 9:35, this plane conducts another turn, 360 degrees over the Pentagon, all the while being tracked by radar, and the Pentagon is not evacuated, and there are still no fast-movers from the Air Force in the sky over Alexandria and DC. Now, the real kicker: A pilot they want us to believe was trained at a Florida puddle-jumper school for Piper Cubs and Cessnas, conducts a well-controlled downward spiral, descending the last 7,000 feet in two-and-a-half minutes, brings the plane in so low and flat that it clips the electrical wires across the street from the Pentagon, and flies it with pinpoint accuracy into the side of this building at 460 nauts.
When the theory about learning to fly this well at the puddle-jumper school began to lose ground, it was added that they received further training on a flight simulator. This is like saying you prepared your teenager for her first drive on I-40 at rush hour by buying her a video driving game. It's horse shit! There is a story being constructed about these events. My crystal ball is not working today, so I can't say why. But at the least, this so-called Commander-in-Chief and his staff that we are all supposed to follow blindly into some ill-defined war on terrorism is criminally negligent or unspeakably stupid. And at the worst, if more is known or was known, and there is an effort to conceal the facts, there is a criminal conspiracy going on.
Certainly, the Bush de facto administration was facing a confluence of crises from which they were temporarily rescued by this event. Whether they played a sinister role or not, there is little doubt that they have at the very least opportunistically pounced on this attack to overcome their lack of legitimacy, to shift the blame for the encroaching recession from capitalism to the September 11th terror attack, to legitimize their pre-existing foreign policy agenda, and to establish and consolidate repressive measures domestically and silence dissent.
In many ways, September 11th pulled the Bush cookies out of the fire. And given them the green light to begin constructing a long-term scenario within which to establish fascistic control measures at home and abroad as a citadel for the ruling class in the catastrophic conjuncture that we are entering based on the end of oil. This elephant in the living room is being studiously ignored. In fact, the domestic repression has already begun, officially and unofficially. It's kind of a latter day McCarthyism.
I participated in a teach-in at Chapel Hill, North Carolina, on the 17th of September, and though not a single person on the panel excused or justified the attacks, and every person there offered either condolences and prayers for the victims, we were excoriated within two days as "enemies of America." Yesterday an op-ed called for my deportation (to where, one can only guess). Now Herr Ashcroft is fast tracking the biggest abrogation of US civil liberties since the so- called anti-terrorism legislation after the Oklahoma City bombing - which by the way hasn't resulted in anti-terrorism but in the acceleration of the application of the racist death penalty.
The FBI has defined terrorist groups not by whether any given group has ever acted as terrorists, but by their beliefs. Some socialists and anti- globalization groups have already been identified by name as terrorist groups, even though there is not a single shred of evidence that they have ever participated in any criminal activity. It reminds me of the Smith Act that was finally declared unconstitutional, but only after a hell of a lot of people served a hell of a long time in jail for the crime of thinking.
I think this also points to yet another huge problems that the Bush regime was facing. Worldwide resistance to the whole so-called neoliberal agenda, which is a prettied up term for debt-leverage imperialism. While debt and the threat of sanctions has been used to coerce nations in the periphery, we have to understand that the final guarantor of compliance remains military action. For a global economic agenda, there is always a corresponding political and military agenda. The focal point of these actions in the short term is Southern Asia, but they have already scripted this as a worldwide and protracted fight against terrorism. It's far better than drug wars as a rationalization, and the drug war thing was being discredited in any case.
Leftists are regaining power and popularity in Venezuela, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Ecuador, Colombia, the Dominican Republic, Haiti, Brazil, and Argentina. Cuba has gained immense prestige over the last few years. The empire is beginning to unravel. We can hardly justify intervention in these places by saying they are not towing the economic line by allowing the absolute domination of their societies by transnational corporations. That exposes the agenda. So we simply claim they are supporting terrorism.
It's for all these reasons I say the left has missed the boat on this one, by allowing them to get away with rushing past the question of who did what on September 11th. If the official story is a lie, and I think the circumstantial case is strong enough to stay with this question, then we really do need to know what happened. And we need to understand concretely what the motives of this administration are. And we need to understand more than just their immediate motives, but where the larger social forces that underwrite our situation right now are headed. I do not think this administration is engaged in the deliberative process of a political grouping that is on top of their game. They are putting together some very deliberative technical solutions in response to a larger situation that it slipping rapidly out of their control. Like clear cutting. There's a very smart technology being employed to do a very dumb thing. What they are responding to is not September 11th, but the beginning of a permanent and precipitous decline in worldwide oil production, the beginning of a deep and protracted worldwide recession, and the unraveling of the empire.
This brings me to a point about what all this means for Americans' security, which they are perfectly justified to worry about. The actions being prepared by this administration will not only not enhance our security, it will significantly degrade it. Military action against many groups across the globe, which is what the administration is telling us quite openly they are planning to do, will put a lot of backs against the wall. That can't be very secure. The concept of war being touted here is a violation of the principles of war on several counts, and will inevitably lead to military catastrophes, if you're inclined to view this from a position of moral and political neutrality. And the people who are now in possession of half the world's remaining oil reserves are subject to destabilization for which we can't even pretend to predict the consequences-but loss of access to critical energy supplies is certainly within the realm of possibility. Worst of all, we will be destabilizing Pakistan, a nuclear power in an active conflict with its neighbor, and we will be provoking Russia, another nuclear power.
The security stakes don't get any higher, and Americans can ill afford to ignore nukes. And I think that this domestic agenda is a tremendous threat to the security of anyone who is critical of the government or their corporate financiers, and we already know that the real threats are against populations that can easily be scapegoated as the domestic crisis deepens. There is a very real threat right now of creeping fascism in this country, and that phenomenon requires its domestic enemies.
Historically those enemies have included leftists, trade unionists, and racially and nationally oppressed sectors. This whole "state of emergency" mentality is already being used to quiet the public discourses of anti-racism, of feminism, of environmentalism, and of both socialism and anarchism. And while there is token resistance by officials to anti-Muslim xenophobia, the stereotypical images have saturated the media, and the government is already beginning to openly re-instate racial profiling. It is only a short step from there to go after other groups. We have long been prepared by the ideologies of overt and covert racism, and racism as both institution and corresponding psychology in the United States is nearly intractable. It's for all these reasons that I say emphatically that we can not accept anything from this administration; not their policies nor their bullshit stories. What they are doing is very, very dangerous, and the time to fight back against them, openly, is right now, before they can consolidate their power and their agenda. Once they have done that, our job becomes much more difficult. The left, if it has the capacity to self-organize out of its oblivion, needs to understand its critical roles here. We have to play the role of credible, hard-working, and non-sectarian partners in a broader peace-movement. We have to study, synthesize, and describe our current historical conjuncture. And we have to prepare leadership for the decisive conflict that will emerge to first defeat fascism then take political power. Rosa Luxemburg's words are truer than ever right now. We are not faced with a choice between socialism and capitalism, but socialism or barbarism. And what we can least afford are denial and timidity.
If you are interested in a free subscription to The Konformist Newswire, please visit:
http://www.eGroups.com/list/konformist
BIG BROTHER COMES TO WOODSTOCK
10/1/01 babs7@ulster.net
Barbara Hartwell Legal Defense and Research Fund PO Box 832 Woodstock NY 12498 WEBSITE http://www.ulster.net/~babs7/
Please Post & Forward.
BIG BROTHER COMES TO WOODSTOCK
Woodstock has always been a special place to me. Less than a hundred miles north of New York City, nestled in the foothills of the Catskill mountains, it had for the past thirty years served as a haven I could periodically escape to. I had long had a premonition I would end up living here and since 1996, Woodstock has been my home. I didn't have friends or family here. I came mostly because I just wanted to be left alone.... Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.... which to me, first and foremost, means being as free as possible from the constant interference, intrusions and transgressions of Big Brother.
True, I couldn't stop Big Brother from tapping my phones. I couldn't prevent Big Brother from tampering with my mail; putting screws in my tires; hacking into my computers or subjecting me to satellite surveillance.
But the rural back road I live on, at the base of a mountain, is not ideally suited for the traffic of surveillance vans. Another plus: No SWAT teams. Those goons in their flak jackets would stand out here like a sore thumb. They don't have SWAT teams in Woodstock...at least not yet.
And harassment by military fighter jets at rooftop level ? Unheard of. They couldn't cruise low enough above the tree line before crashing into the mountain directly behind my house.
Another nice thing about Woodstock, I thought, is the people who live here. Mostly artists, musicians, aging hippies still stuck in the time-warp of the sixties and iconoclasts of every stripe, they seemed to have a healthy respect for individualism and peaceful coexistence. You don't bother them, they won't bother you. Woodstock seemed to me like the Land that Time Forgot.
Remember the peace sign ? Up until a few weeks ago, it was still the salute of choice in Woodstock. Up until a few weeks ago, Big Brother and his minions were nowhere to be seen.
But things have changed in Woodstock. Not that I didn't see it coming.....
Last year they moved the post office to a new site following a years- long battle between the powers-that-be and environmentalists in the community. The powers-that-be won out. The new post office now stands on former wetlands, once a refuge for birds and wildlife.
Oh, and while they were at it, building the new and improved post office, complete with convenient parking, they installed a few surveillance cameras. Just a friendly reminder that Big Brother is watching you. Cashing a postal money order used to be simple. The postal workers recognized you, greeted you with a smile and handed over the cash. Now they have a high-tech scanner and you have to show ID.
Being something of a recluse, I don't get out much. But then, since Big Brother has destroyed 8 of my cars since 1994, by acts of vandalism, high-tech exotic weapons and arranged "accidents", it's small wonder.
On the rare occasions when I did manage to get out and about, the people I met offered little opportunity for meaningful interaction. Despite the live-and let-live philosophy of most Woodstock residents, I still felt that I was viewed by the natives as a strange bird. (And believe me, it's not easy to be considered "strange" in Woodstock. Tourists routinely drive by just to gawk at the motley crew of weird characters hanging out on the Village Green in the center of town. )
Though I did try to talk to people about my own experiences and research, I rarely came across anyone who had ever heard about Big Brother's covert war on the American public.... even though it's been going on for at least 50 years. Most often their eyes would glaze over at the mention of electronic harassment, CIA mind control programs or the cabal of globalist fascists who control our government -- the enemy within -- intent upon destroying our national sovereignty and expunging our constitution. People would tell me I was "too negative"... that I was an "alarmist", or the old standby.... "paranoid".
But despite their overall tolerance and peaceful nature, sadly, the folks in Woodstock are more typical than not in their ignorance and complacency. Think about it. Really, how many people have you ever met ANYWHERE who even have a clue about what's going on in their own country ? Hello ?.... hello?
And then came Nine-One-One.
I hate to say I told you so..... this to the people who scoffed in disbelief at my tales of government harassment and political persecution. Illegal domestic covert operations of the CIA. Extortion of their hard-earned money by gun-toting IRS thugs. Erosion of their civil liberties by the encroaching police state. Gun-control, gun- grabbing and the Million Mom March. Mandatory SS# required to get a driver's license. Arrogant census-takers and their idle threats of legal action against private citizens like myself who refuse to tolerate invasions of privacy. Biowarfare "tests" on innocent civilians. Microwave towers spewing out a miasma of electromagnetic pollution. HAARP. Echelon. Carnivore. Mass mind control. Brainwashing of the general public by the Corporate-Fascist -Controlled -and- Owned-Media. The shameless drugging of American children with Ritalin and let's not forget other mind-control psychotropics designed to keep the adult populace in line.... and on and on and on....
But let's go back in time.... to the summer of 2000 and the political climate prevailing in the little town of Woodstock. In the months prior to the "election" of Dubya Bush, a constant stream of letters to the editor in the Woodstock Time angrily denounced Dubya as a warmonger. A polluter of Planet Earth. A dinosaur whose "unenlightened" politics were a throwback from the days of the Cold War. Certainly not the lesser of any number of possible evils.
But anyway, the good folks of Woodstock sure enough had no use for Dubya Bush. No, indeed. And they weren't happy when he "won" the "election".
And then came Nine-One-One.
You can't drive through Woodstock now without the flag-wavers accosting you at every turn. Doing an informal survey, I counted the cars sporting American flags. Probably one-third of all vehicles. I don't have to ask myself what that flag stands for, at least in the minds of those proudly displaying it.
Is it a symbol of FREEDOM ?
The Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave ?
Are the 'patriots' waving those flags telling the world that it's time to stand up and be counted among those who will no longer tolerate the political corruption and tyranny --the conspiracy of the ENEMY WITHIN-- that is destroying our country and sucking the life out of our people?
Are the flag wavers telling us that they love their freedom so much that THEY would be willing to lay THEIR lives down, if need be, defending that freedom ?
No, no.... these folks are waving the flag NOT in support of freedom - -and make no mistake, FREEDOM means the God-given INDIVIDUAL liberties SUPPOSEDLY protected by the U.S. Constitution--but because Big Brother Bush and his cronies in the Olympic Cartel manipulated them into a panic using Psy Ops...the oldest trick in the book.
How quickly they forget.....
Suddenly, miraculously, Big Brother Bush is seen NOT as the "warmonger" of the pre-"election" days. No, now he is a Holy Crusader on Mission from God: To Wipe Out Evil from the face of the earth.
Suddenly, miraculously, these same newly-converted 'patriotic' Americans --not just in Woodstock, but across the nation--are willing and even EAGER to hand over their OWN civil liberties in a show of patriotic solidarity, which they foolishly believe will protect them from "foreign terrorists".
Last Saturday I went to the local mall in Kingston, a nearby city and the former capital of New York State. Inside the window of a clothing store, I saw a black T-shirt prominently displayed. Only $19.99......In large white capital letters, the slogan read:
FUCK TERRORISM.
And of course, Nine-One-One has also spawned a cottage industry of mass-produced goods for sale: A frenzy of cashing in on the latest horrific tragedy by promoting other catchy slogans like: Nuke Afghanistan.... Osama bin Laden: Wanted Dead or Alive....America: United We Stand....
But "united" in support of WHAT ?
In support of wiping out MORE innocent civilians by nuking Afghanistan into the stone age ?
In support of Big Brother Bush, our fearless commander in chief, and the stormtroopers of his Homeland Security Force ?
In support of jack-booted thugs patroling our streets and trampling what is left of our INDIVIDUAL rights and liberties HERE AT HOME ?
In support of inviting Big Brother and his mainstream media toadies to commandeer our thinking process ?
In support of being herded like so many cattle into the waiting arms of Big Brother and his Global Fascist Police State ?
It took them awhile. Many years of illegal domestic covert operations. Treacherous and cowardly, creeping forward in stealth mode. But Big Brother and his demonic band of terrorists have finally arrived in Woodstock.
Speaking strictly for myself, NO WAY IN HELL will I let them take me alive.
I will not be wearing a brand-new T-shirt that reads FUCK TERRORISM.
I have my own worn-out T-shirt, worn long before Nine-One-One. It says NO GUTS NO GLORY.
And the flag waving in front of my door, here in Woodstock, says:
DON'T TREAD ON ME.
If you are interested in a free subscription to The Konformist Newswire, please visit:
http://www.eGroups.com/list/konformist
Go to: Recent News of Great Interest - Page I
Go to: Recent News of Great Interest - Page II
Go to: Recent News of Great Interest - Page III
Go to: Recent News of Great Interest - Page IV
Go to: Recent News of Great Interest - Page V
Go to: Recent News of Great Interest - Page VI
Pages With Articles On 9-11:
Cocaine, Money Laundering, Oil, Afghanistan And Bush Family Links Page
Page VI Page VII Page VIII Page IX Page X
Page XI Page XII Page XIII Page XIV Page XV Page XVI
Want to Know What The World Thinks? Sick of Our Corporate Press?
All International Newspaper Reports !!!