Date:   10/7/2003 4:27:08 AM ( 21 y ago)
Hits:   8,496
URL:   https://www.curezone.org/forums/fm.asp?i=620434

0 of 0 (0%) readers agree with this message.  Hide votes     What is this?

Considering the question of foreknowledge of the September 11 terrorism, we have to at some point deal with the fact that few if any really 'important' (I use quotes in my general anarchist view that all people are important) people died in either the WTC towers or the Pentagon. Interestingly enough, a lot of 'important' people died on the four planes. Consider:


The crash at the Pentagon apparently killed no really senior Pentagon officials. Of course, we know that senior Pentagon officials were warned on September 10 not to fly on September 11, and thus avoided any of the hijacked planes (too bad they didn't see fit to share this information with anyone else, but I guess such knowledge spread among the great unwashed would be bad for business). Lt. Gen. Timothy J. Maude, the U.S. Army's Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel (i. e., an important soldier but not likely a key player in the military-industrial complex), was the highest ranking soldier who died in the blast (I guess he didn't get the memo). Considering that the Pentagon is lousy with generals, that is a pretty good record. Avoiding flying on September 11 meant that senior Pentagon officials knew the time and the method; avoiding that part of the Pentagon on September 11 meant that they knew the fine details of the attack.

Considering that well over 2,000 prople died in the twin towers, it is more than somewhat remarkable that there were no CEO's or senior partners among them (the highest appear to be mostly senior vice presidents - the highest titles seem to be that of: 1) David D. Alger, executive vice president and chief financial officer, Fred Alger Management; 2) Joseph J. Berry,
chairman and CEO, Keefe, Bruyette & Woods; 3) Jeffrey L. Fox,
chief financial officer, Keefe, Bruyette & Woods; 4) Jeffrey Grant Goldflam,
senior vice president and chief financial officer, Cantor Fitzgerald; 5) Takashi Kinoshita,
president, Mizuho Capital Markets Corp.; and 6) Edward Joseph Mardovich,
president, Euro Brokers Inc.). I have read various anecdotal stories of 'important' people who missed death because of something that caused them to be outside of the office that morning. The fact that the first crash occurred before 9 a. m. may have saved some of them, but don't we always read, in these turbo-capitalist times, of how early these people get in to work? In this context, being an 'important' person means someone who is so important to the Powers That Be that it is worth the risk of warning him that he might want to come in to work a little late. Is it possible that some people received a memo similar to that circulated by Goldman Sachs in Tokyo on September 10 advising all employees of a possible terrorist attack and recommending that all its employees avoid any American government buildings?

A number (it hasn't been reported exactly how many but it was called 'a small group of business leaders') of CEO's from New York, including at least one from the WTC, were attending a breakfast meeting at Offutt Air Force Base in Omaha, Nebraska on the morning of September 11, guests of Warren Buffett (isn't he the same guy who has guaranteed that the United States will suffer a nuclear attack by terrorists?). Offutt Air Force Base is the base that Bush flew to on September 11, supposedly because it is the headquarters of the E-4B, the aircraft which is the "command, control and communications center to direct U.S. forces, execute emergency war orders and coordinate actions by civil authorities". He wanted to be on the scene in person, particularly as there was fear that the terrorists were in possession of the secret codes by which they could electronically impersonate Bush in giving military commands (interesting how we have heard nothing more of that story). So how much of a coincidence is it that this meeting with Warren Buffett was at the same air force base that Bush flew to (apparently Bush intended to fly directly to Offutt, but had to stop for refuelling in Louisiana)? Is it possible that Buffett's invitation to a bunch of 'important' New York City executives for a breakfast meeting at an air force base in Nebraska (just think about how weird that is!) was an attempt to save the lives of the invitees?

In stark contract to the miraculous way that 'important' people escaped death on the ground on September 11, many 'important' people died in the crashed planes. The only conclusion you can draw from this is that foreknowledge only extended to the timing and targets of the attacks, but not to the specific planes that would be used. People with the foreknowledge (John Ashcroft, high Pentagon officials, and, oddly enough, friends of Willie Brown and Salman Rushdie) simply avoided all planes on September 11.


It has to be statistically impossible that no 'important' people died in the WTC or the Pentagon on the morning of September 11. Therefore, these people had foreknowledge or were in some way protected by others who had foreknowledge. Of course, foreknowledge by 'important' people probably ties in to the short-selling profits made as a result of the terrorism, short-selling which unbelievably remains uninvestigated.
posted 4:01 AM | link



Thursday, June 13, 2002

Does this remind you of this?
posted 11:31 PM | link


Isn't the manipulation of the news on September 11 getting a bit obvious? Consider:


The recent revelations of Atta's amazing application for a $650,000 loan to buy a cropduster is just coming out now, although the loan officer claims she told the authorities shortly after September 11 when she recognized Atta's picture.

In the continual blame tossing game of the FBI and CIA, we've recently heard about the two terrorists who managed to move around the United States completely unimpeded despite being on a CIA watch list. The failure of the FBI to do anything to prevent the Terrorism has been blamed by the FBI (using a 'detailed chart'!) on the CIA's failure to tell them about these two terrorists (although the CIA claims in rebuttal that the FBI did know about them, and the FBI then claims that it didn't know enough, etc., etc.). The odd thing is that this isn't news. The fact that these terrorists were on a watch list was reported (with 'Salem Alhamzi' confused with Nawaf Alhazmi) shortly after September 11 (not to mention that the FBI had been looking for the two 'for weeks').

The NSA has managed to keep its head down while the CIA and the FBI duke it out. Now someone is raising the issue that the NSA had all the information on the terrorist plans due to its recording the communications of bin Laden and his henchmen, and knew on September 10 that 'something big' was coming. The fact that the NSA had knowledge of the attack through its Echelon program was known almost immediately after September 11 (reported in Germany on September 14, 2001, with specific knowledge that Middle Eastern terrorists were planning to hijack commercial aircraft to use as weapons to attack important symbols of American and Israeli culture), but is presumably being raised now as part of the game of the Bush junta to pass the blame around.

Abdullah al-Muhajir has been arrested for planning to build a 'dirty bomb' in Chicago, and for being linked to al-Qaeda. This is certainly dramatic news, and is particularly interesting as the junta seems to be planning to give an American citizen either a military trial, or if such a trial might not produce the desired result, just permanently lock him up with no trial (so now Americans know why they should have complained at the treatment of non-citizen detainees - ' . . . they first came for the Communists . . .', and they then came for the American citizens). Everyone seems to have noticed the oddity that he was arrested on May 8 but his arrest was only announced by Ashcroft on June 10. Now it is coming out that he didn't actually do anything, but there is a slight possibility that he might have been sort of thinking about maybe looking for some radioactive material, but as there was none around he didn't actually come close to finding any, but had he found some this street punk with presumably training in advanced nuclear physics from the al-Qaeda Institute of Technology in a field in Afghanistan would have considered possibly building some sort of a bomb from it! The whole thing stinks, and people have started to notice.


It is fairly obvious that the Bush junta is playing the mass media like a violin, largely in order to deflect the current criticisms of why it did absolutely nothing to prevent the terrorism. Will there ever be a time when Americans will rise up and say they've had enough of the obvious lies, the obvious false alarms to hide various errors and crimes of the Bush junta, and the increasingly numerous shreddings of the American Constitution?
posted 4:08 AM | link


I have to apologize for my remarks in my posting of June 5 when I snidely noted that Bush's statement that he read the EPA report confirming the fact that global warming is largely caused by human activities "contains the amazing admission that Bush can and does actually read!" This type of remark is completely uncalled for. As it turns out, Bush lied when he said he read the report, and we still have no conclusive proof that he either can or does read. I humbly apologize.
posted 2:23 AM | link



Wednesday, June 12, 2002

Zacarias Moussaoui is in jail facing the death penalty, and not the tiniest part of his story makes any sense:


He was arrested when he made himself conspicuous by being unnecessarily argumentative and refusing to speak French to a French speaker. This is exactly the kind of behaviour that the famous al-Qaeda manual would caution against. It is as if Moussaoui were trying to be arrested. This is yet another example of one of the terrorist suspects courting disaster for the whole project by being gratuitously visible to people in authority.

Moussaoui was arrested for odd reasons. In fact, his arrest still has not been satisfactorily explained. He was turned in by a flight instructor who phoned the FBI (and even made the connection that the type of plane he was training on could be used as a weapon, a connection that is supposed to have been beyond the ken of the Bush Administration!). It appears that local FBI suspicions were raised by his disruptive behaviour and the fact that he was an Arab man taking flying lessons. Apparently, the story that he claimed to only want to learn to fly in the air and not to take off or land is misinformation (although it is still being presented as fact), and may have been created to give the FBI an excuse to detain him. The main story is that the suspicions were raised when he spent a lot of money for a few lessons on a Boeing 747 flight simulator when he didn't have a pilot's license. Much of the rationale for arresting Moussaoui has appeared after September 11. It now appears that he may have had financial connections to a man (al Shibh) who was also financing some of the September 11 hijackers. On the other hand, this financier may simply have been forwarding charitable help to Moussaoui to allow him to learn to fly and obtain a job in the United States. The case against Moussaoui was so weak that he was actually originally detained only for being in breach of immigration law.

Moussaoui is facing the death penalty. Apparently this is a prosecutorial trick to obtain a jury more likely to convict (another reason that the existence of the death penalty makes the U. S. criminal justice system unjust). Given the paucity of evidence against him, the death penalty seems like an extreme overreaction. The authorities also seem to be psychologically torturing him by keeping him isolated, which may explain his bizarre courtroom behaviour. The main evidence against him seems to be the fact that he owned a crop-dusting manual and knew some suspicious people. There does not appear to be any evidence that he had anything to do with the terrorist planning, and, in particular, no evidence that he conspired with anyone to do an illegal act. If they eventually throw the switch and fry him, he will be the first person in the United States to be executed for owning a book.

Moussaoui has commonly been referred to as the '20th hijacker', i. e., the missing 5th hijacker on Flight 93 (all the other hijacked planes are said to have had 5 hijackers). It seems highly unlikely that he was a part of the hijacking group. The hijackers were careful to train together, live together, travel together, and generally associate in as public a manner as possible. As far as we know, Moussaoui did not associate with any of the others. The closest he came to the others was that he was living in Norman, Oklahoma when one of the hijackers (Alhazmi) got a speeding ticket nearby, an interesting fact, particularly given the oddly important role that Oklahoma City plays in the September 11 terrorism, but hardly enough to tie him to the terrorist group.

There has been much made of the fact that the FBI and the Department of Justice in Washington, D. C. refused to obtain a FISA warrant to allow local Minnesota FBI agents to search Moussaoui's hard drive. Indeed, this refusal now forms the crux of the attack on the FBI for its mistakes made prior to September 11. It appears that this wasn't just the usual bureaucratic bungling - there appears to be active intervention to prevent the warrant from being obtained, including much quibbling about the validity of evidence obtained from French intelligence sources and possibly going as far as efforts to sabotage the local FBI's investigation of Moussaoui. The right-wingers blame this on a bureaucratic fear of being accused of racial profiling, but if there was any racial profiling it had already been done when he was detained in Minnesota and so hardly seems to be the concern of Washington officials. The oddest thing about all this is that a post-September 11 search of his hard drive revealed: 1) a manual on crop-dusting (not an unlikely thing to have for someone training to be a pilot in the midwestern United States); 2) the phone number of someone who may have been a former roommate of Atta's (Ramzi bin al Shibh), the same guy who allegedly sent Moussaoui money; and 3) correspondence signed by a Malaysian named Yazid Sufaat, who the CIA had tied to the two hijackers who had been put on the CIA watch list. However, even if the FBI had contacted the roommate prior to September 11 (and they still don't know where he is), it is highly unlikely that they would have been led to Atta in time to stop the terrorism. Since the FBI wasn't aware, or at least fully aware, of the investigation by the CIA, the connections to the Malaysian almost certainly wouldn't have meant anything to them. It is therefore unlikely that a timely investigation of Moussaoui's hard drive would have prevented September 11, and it is odd that so much is being made of this unless someone is using it for political purposes to deflect the blame from the real responsible parties and, as a bonus, attack the restrictions on racial profiling (fear of racial profiling was an excuse used by the FBI early on to justify their lack of action in obtaining the FISA warrant). It is very telling that the CIA Director, George Tenet, is reported to have immediately thought of Moussaoui and bin Laden when he was informed of the September 11 terrorism, but there appears to have been no reason for the FBI to make that connection.


So what are we to make of all this weirdness? I have three possible solutions:


Moussaoui might have been a double-agent who had infiltrated the terrorist group and was working for some U. S. counterintelligence agency. This might explain his attempting to get arrested (an attempt to get out of the situation) and might explain the odd behaviour of Washington FBI in failing to obtain a FISA warrant. On the other hand, it is unlikely that they would be treating Moussaoui so badly if he had once worked for the U. S. government.

The FBI and Department of Justice might have been in the middle of a sting operation to stop and arrest as many terrorists as possible. Right in the middle of this, bungling local FBI agents stumbled onto Moussaoui, detained him, and then wanted to rummage through his hard drive. Washington had no way of knowing what may have been on Moussaoui's hard drive, were afraid that information contained on it might have prejudiced the whole sting operation, and therefore intentionally stalled for time by delaying the warrant until the operation could be concluded. This might explain why the agent who stalled the warrant was promoted. Of course, the problem with such an operation is that you have to wait until the last possible moment to make the arrests, both to get the maximum amount of evidence to make the strongest possible charges stick, and to try to capture the leaders of the terrorist group. If you wait too long, or if you are intentionally misled by your spy in the group that the attack is to take place later than it actually occurs, tragedy ensues. At that point, the investigatory agency who has conducted the sting tries to sweep it under the rug to avoid the inevitable questions of why it didn't act in a timely manner and what was it doing playing with the lives of the victims by taking risks just to make the operation look better. There is good reason to believe that just this sort of thing happened in the first WTC attack in 1993, and I've long been of the belief that the Oklahoma City bombing was a similar situation, with the spy (who might have been the mysterious Andy Strassmeir or even Timothey McVeigh himself) misleading the authorities as to when the bombing was to take place.

Some part of the United States government, perhaps in collusion with another government, might have been involved in the September 11 attack. The FBI would have been ordered to stall the FISA application in order to ensure that the operation was not stopped before September 11. There is at present no conclusive evidence that any part of the U. S. government was involved in September 11, but it is clear that many people close to the present administration have benefitted greatly from the terrorism, and so we have to keep this possibility in mind. I note that this possibility is not inconsistent with the previous one - a U. S. government counterterrorism sting operation might have been going on at the same time as some other part of the same government was actively involved in plotting the terrorism.


posted 5:02 AM | link



Sunday, June 09, 2002

Mohamed Atta apparently visited a U. S. government office (Department of Agriculture) to apply for a $650,000 loan to buy a cropdusting airplane. An interesting point is that he is supposed to have visited the office in the spring of 2000, about 17 months before September 11, 2001, i. e., the end of April (or perhaps May), but he is officially supposed to have arrived in the United States in June 2000! While discussing this doomed mission with the loan officer who turned him down because it did not make sense, Atta made many odd statements, all of which are an obvious attempt to leave the impression that he was really and truly a crazed fundamentalist Islamic terrorist. He lays it on so thick, I don't know how he managed to keep from laughing:


He almost refused to deal with her, because she is a woman.

He admired a picture of Washington, D. C. that she had hanging on the wall of her office to a ridiculous degree, pointing specifically to the White House and the Pentagon, and then offered to buy it with theatrical flourish by throwing a wad of money down on the desk. When she refused to sell it to him she recounts: "I believe he said, 'How would America like it if another country destroyed that city and some of the monuments in it' like the cities in his country had been destroyed?" This is very weird, as Atta is supposed to come from Egypt, where cities haven't been destroyed for a long time.

He gave her evil, terrorist looks with his 'very scary' black eyes.

She said he referred to a safe in her office and she recounts: "He asked me what would prevent him from going behind my desk and cutting my throat and making off with the millions of dollars in that safe."

He talked of the massive size of the chemical tank he wanted to install, filling the whole inside of the plane except for the pilot's seat.

He became 'very agitated' when he found out that there was an application process and she presumably wouldn't just hand him $650,000 in cash there and then.

He asked her about security at the World Trade Center and what she knew of Phoenix, Chicago, Seattle and Los Angeles, and was particularly interested in open-topped Texas Stadium.

He mentioned Osama bin Laden, who she had never heard of, and said that bin Laden "would someday be known as the world's greatest leader."


Of course, seeing as he was in the United States on a student visa, how he ever thought he would be entitled to such a loan is beyond belief. He knew he wasn't allowed to stay to ever be able to use the airplane for any plausibly legitimate purpose. Even if he mistakenly thought he could get away with this, what was his reasoning for sending three other terrorists to the same office on the much the same mission? In one case, he put on glasses as a disguise and pretended to be the accountant of one of the other hijacker-applicants, another obvious attempt to draw attention to himself. The whole thing must have sounded like a Monty Python sketch (it reminds me of the Dead Parrot sketch when Michael Palin puts on the fake mustache). The ridiculous overacting left the bureaucrat completely unsuspicious. I imagine if he had asked her if it would be OK for him to fill the plane full of explosives and fly it into the World Trade Center, she would have replied that she would strongly object to that as blowing up the collateral would be a breach of one of the terms of his loan agreement. If this isn't some kind of hoax, what we have here is another example of Atta creating his 'legend', filling out his terrorist personal identity before a witness who would surely remember him. Notice again that he appears to have no fear that this bureaucrat will report him before September 11 and end the terrorist project he has spent so much work on. One question: why has it taken this long for this story to come out when she is supposed to have informed the authorities about the incident shortly after September 11?

http://xymphora.blogspot.com/2002_06_09_xymphora_archive.html
 

<< Return to the standard message view

fetched in 0.06 sec, referred by http://www.curezone.org/forums/fmp.asp?i=620434