All language subtitles for The Empire Unmasked_CLIP_1

Conspiracy has become quite the tar
baby.

There exists much asinine sensationalism
and fear -mongering nonsense parading

the banner of conspiracy.

Total conspiracy denial is also as
foolish a priesthood as total unfiltered

acceptance of every story of corruption.

The truth is hard to sort out.

Corruption and lies are part of the real
world.

And there is a mask in our own national
identities.

that hides a very dark and sinister
history of deception and destruction.

The truth is, the OSS or CIA grew out of
existing government industries that

were already involved in drug
trafficking and organized crime.

The State Department and the Federal
Bureau of Narcotics were both immersed

the drug trade.

This grew into a multinational
syndicate.

that uses narco money to pay for covert
operations, including all of the banana

wars, multiple coups, Iran -Contra, the
Mujahideen, 9 -11, the civil war

in Ukraine, and ISIS.

Likewise, wars have resulted from the
actions of these secretive agencies,

China to Cuba, and from Vietnam to
Afghanistan, the CIA has peddled opium.

They finance rented terrorist privateers
and use them as proxy forces or as

pretext for military intervention, and
to get billions of dollars dumped into a

massive security state.

The nexus of covert operations works for
corporate interests and for self

-interests, not national interests, and
includes agencies in the United States,

Israel, and Saudi Arabia.

They work in tandem with criminal groups
globally, and they have been for

decades. The story is complicated.

It takes books or a very long film to
explain, so I appreciate your patience.

Since the end of World War II, the
American government has murdered

people across the world.

American culture and ingenuity,
creativity, invention and discovery have

substantially benefited the world.

Despite the accomplishments of its
citizens, however, a parasitic class of

psychopaths ascended from the war
economy to utilize the monopoly of force

legalized immunity to create an empire
of violently maintained corporate

cartels, predatory banks, and an
enormous system of propaganda.

Only a tiny portion of government is
elected, the lawmaking body.

Government is a vast array of
departments and agencies.

some of whom are clandestine, none of
whom are democratic.

They exist as the managerial arms for a
fascist enterprise.

Imperialism is undeniable.

Parasites always flock to the most
powerful hosts. States lie.

Not a decade has gone by without grand
deception, covert criminality, and

conspiracy.

To lessen the shock of how the US and
foreign insiders would conspire to

9 -11, one simply has to realize that
this is nothing new.

It was the continuation of a long series
of covert activities and policies which

press on today.

Terrorism and sectarian violence are the
desired outcomes.

The transition to the war on terror from
the Cold War all got jump -started with

9 -11.

The parasites, the neocons, manipulated
power by way of deception.

This group is not secret or invisible,
clever or invincible.

They simply enjoy a near total monopoly
in mass media, which is why we need

independent films to expose their lies
and deceptions.

For all war begins with deception.

Every time the CIA or any other
intelligence agency does a covert

that's a conspiracy.

It's a bunch of people getting together
in secret to do something illegal and

lying to everyone else.

They took the babies out of incubators.

We don't want the smoking gun to be a
mushroom cloud.

There is no question whatsoever that
Saddam is seeking and is working.

and is advancing towards the development
of nuclear weapons. No question

whatsoever.

In order to better understand 9 -11 and
the empire's latest rationale for its

activity, the war on terror, it's good
to examine some past rationales such as

fighting communism and to have an
overview on the methods of finance,

execution, and cover -up of covert
warfare.

Prolonged conflicts were predicated on
triggers.

For example,

The Vietnam War was an event, and the
Gulf of Tonkin was the trigger. The

invasions and occupations of Afghanistan
and Iraq were triggered by 9 -11.

To better understand the empire's
relationships with ISIS and Al -Qaeda in

recent times, it is worth it to go back
to the Iran -Contra operation, and to

better understand the methods used in
Iran -Contra, turn the pages back to the

Banana Wars.

which were themselves extensions of the
Indian Wars, perhaps the largest

genocide in the history of the world.

For most of what the American regime
claims it does, the opposite is true.

war on drugs or terrorism, fighting for
democracy or to defend the country, it's

usually the complete reverse of the
truth.

When you see the historical nature of
war and deception, covert and overt,

happened on 9 -11 is far less shocking.

A clear pattern will emerge from
studying history.

There are a lot of asinine conspiracies
about many things, but that is not a

reason to reject conspiracy
categorically.

For example, the Iran -Contra affair was
a massive government conspiracy that

was hidden from the press and public for
years.

It happened in my lifetime, and it
involved billions of dollars and

countries. This was a case where one
part of the government didn't even know

what another part of the government was
doing.

Tens of thousands of people were
murdered.

Multiple countries in Central America,
as well as Iran and Israel, were

involved. And yet it was kept secret
from the media, or perhaps by the media,

for years.

Not only was it possible to hide this
from the public, most of the government

was unaware of the activities of a small
cabal from within.

Despite long congressional hearings into
the illegal weapons trade, the full

scope of the money laundering through
narcotics trafficking inside the United

States would not be revealed for another
decade.

Covert actions and deception in the
press aren't irregular.

They're normal.

Much has been said about the CIA
facilitating rather than preventing the

flow of narcotics, the profits of which
are used to finance political dissent

and covert mercenaries.

But before the Iran -Contra affair
exposed this gambit to the world, before

CIA or even the OSS, the relationship
between narcotics traffickers, the U .S.

government, and organized crime already
existed.

Long before the CIA was working with Sam
Giacana in the Chicago outfit, or

Costello and Lansky of the New York
Mafia, before Traficante Jr.

or the Marcello brothers were even on
the scene.

Before the CIA or the Cold War, the
State Department was running the drug

behalf of corporate America's interests
in creating and sustaining banana

republics in the Third World.

What is a banana republic?

Again, a little history is needed.

Following the Spanish -American War in
1898, the victorious United States

engaged in a series of military
conflicts and occupations.

in Central America and the Caribbean up
until 1934.

These are collectively referred to as
the Banana Wars.

The Banana Wars are one of many missing
chapters in U .S. school textbook

history. The term comes from the term
Banana Republic, which describes the

exploitive nature, particularly over
exports, in U .S.-dominated Latin

countries.

North Carolina writer O. Henry William
Sidney Porter coined the term in The

Banana Republic, in his book Cabbages
and Kings, 1904, to describe his

experiences in Honduras.

In 1934, the Banana Wars were over.

The U .S. implemented what it called the
Good Neighbors Policy.

This was a policy change to puppet
governments from occupation.

Hitler had been voted Chancellor in 1933
and was then the Fuhrer in 1934.

The U .S. decided it was more expedient
and efficient.

to end military occupation and change to
puppet governments as a form of

exploitation throughout Latin America.

This is just one of many such cases
involving the Federal Bureau of

the State Department, the Mafia, drugs,
guns, and money.

Just four years after the formation of
the Federal Bureau of Narcotics after

Rothstein fallout, one of its agents,
Maurice Helbrandt, was stumbled across a

major operation out of Louisiana.

The scandal involved the Mafia, the
TACA, the government of Honduras, and

criminals in Louisiana.

TACA was a cargo airliner owned by
Lowell Eurex from New Zealand and

Raymond J. Kennett. They used a
furniture company in Louisiana as a

Furniture, run by Isidore Slobrowski,
himself involved in narcotics trade.

They were getting drugs from Honduras
and selling them to the New Orleans Mob

Syndicate, whose boss was Sam Carolla,
predecessor of Carlos Mochelo.

The Carolla Syndicate sold the drugs to
supply arms to Jose Marina Julian Vales

to support a rebellion in Honduras.

However, President Fibrocino Carillas
Andino, who Julian opposed, also turned

selling drugs and also was using the
TACA for transport.

Federal Bureau of Narcotics agent
Maurice Hellbrant was an American who

served as a spy for the British in
Palestine during World War I.

He was from New York, so he returned to
Brooklyn after the war.

He got a job working under Henry
Anslinger at the Federal Bureau of

Hellbrant stumbled over this
international arms for drugs ordeal

and the Louisiana mob and the TACA
serendipitously, only to discover...

that they had U .S. government
protection.

Using an informant, Halbrant caught a
middleman, Goindad Aguilera, selling

heroin.

Upon searching his house, he uncovered
$100 ,000 worth of heroin and a list of

guns to buy with the money.

The trial led to the TACA manager, Ray
J. Kennett, who had also been arrested

selling heroin in the past.

However, Kennett got a reduced sentence,
and then the New Orleans Chief of

Police, Guy Maloney, coincidentally took
a job offer in Honduras as their

arsenal inspector.

It was a payoff.

The State Department ordered that all
surveillance of TACA curtailed, and in

1936, Correas won the election and
continued smuggling drugs, with the

Bureau of Narcotics intentionally
looking the other way.

The TACA then opened cargo services in
Costa Rica, Guatemala, El Salvador, and

Nicaragua. The drug operation was left
alone as the U .S. government and its

corporate backers preferred the
political policies of Correos and

Honduras would later serve as the U .S.
launching pad into Central America.

It was the original banana republic.

Sam Carolla was convicted of murder
after he killed a Federal Bureau of

Narcotics agent, Cecil Moore. You can
imagine how this infuriated Hal Bryant

Anslinger. But after two years served,
Carolla got a pardon from Louisiana

Governor O .K. Allen, whom he had bribed
with the heroin money, which was

protected. His heroin racket was
protected since his supplier was the

was in league with the U .S. corporately
-backed president of Honduras.

As a consequence, New Orleans Mob was
able to funnel its drug money profits

more legit and illegit businesses,
including casinos in the U .S. and Cuba,

shared with the New York Mafia.

Costello, Lansky, Luciano, and Louis
Picalter, who it turns out was even more

actively working with the U .S.
government and also had protection, just

their predecessor Rothstein had done
before with his involvement in the

narcotics division as well as the Green
Gang in China and criminal mafia in

France.

You can see this pattern as it starts
small where the mob plausible

certain corporate companies for
transport, and the U .S. government and

international governments like Honduras,
or in the case of Iran -Contra, Iran

and Israel.

And later, we find out in the Luciano
Project, China and France work together

manage and sell drugs, opium in
particular, illegal arms, and in between

of murders to prop up Those the U .S.
government finds far politically in line

with its policies.

Central America enjoyed a series of
assassinations and coups prompted by the

CIA, who eventually will overtake the
Federal Bureau of Narcotics.

The new assault on former Banana
Republics during the Cold War era

pretext to fighting communism.

But this was disingenuous. See Operation
Washtub as a blatant example.

In reality, it was just a continuation.

of the old banana wars.

Now, the CIA runs the drug trade. But
this relationship has always existed

between organized crime, the U .S.
government, and international partners

corporations.

Just as the Contras were used to kill
Nicaraguans, the Mafia was used to run

drugs for Honduras.

You won't see any of this on the TACA's
Wikipedia page.

They continued to smuggle drugs.

for decades, unimpeded, because of its
relations with the government of

Louisiana, the U .S. government, and of
course the government in Honduras, later

El Salvador, and other Central American
nations.

Transportes Ero Centro Americanos went
on to procure fat contracts from

then Boeing, and of course, Lockheed
Martin.

The war on drugs is not sincere.

It is more of a...

War on managing drugs and who gets the
profits and who does not.

The British Empire financed itself with
opium products, as have the Chinese and

others. So when you look at the opium
liberated from Afghanistan today, you

should take a deeper look into history
of the opium trade and how it's really

been managed and how there is a
partnership between organized crime,

or warlords, or cartel bosses, or
terrorist factions, and the U .S.

None of the major players are
independent from intelligence agencies.

Not for drugs or arms, including ISIS.

In order to transition to the war of
terrorism and covertly support narcotics

-funded Wahhabi cannon fodder as proxy
forces to tear apart and prevent any

economic or military challenge from
arising to threaten U .S. hegemony in

Middle East, controlling the Golden
Crescent was a must.

Re -invading Vietnam or Indochina was
politically not feasible.

Afghanistan would have to be occupied
and its opium secured.

Al -Qaeda or Al -Qaeda affiliates later.

would need a big event in order to
become the everlasting pretext for

intervention.

Black markets serve as cover and
explanations for black operations.

A little historical background is
necessary.

From its inception, the Federal Bureau
of Narcotics and later the CIA have

worked hand in glove with the
underworld.

Because of the Cold War and anti
-communist factions largely financing

forces with narcotics, such as KMT, in
China, U .S. agencies have never been in

the business of a war on drugs, but
rather in the business of drug

The upper echelons of the mafia
recognized quickly that they'd never be

to trial over narcotics trafficking so
long as they incorporated anti

factions as their suppliers.

They did this first with China and later
Cuba. This is how and why the organized

crime was involved with anti -Castro
Cubans and was approached by

agencies of the government.

The CIA needed plausible deniability and
the dissidents needed the mob's

distribution.

This was a system that Kennedy
disrupted.

Today, the U .S. and Israel also finance
Wahhabi religious fanatics by

laundering money through narcotics,
religious schools, aid to moderates,

language schools, and a slew of other
fronts and NGOs.

The entire war on drugs and the war on
terror are not what they appear to be.

Everything is in aim for Western
hegemony.

and a corporate oligarchy.

Assisting murderers and criminals
doesn't bother anyone.

One of the CIA's earliest coup d 'etats,
Operation Ajax in Iran, was as much

about opium as it was oil.

The Shah's family personally owned vast
poppy fields.

Several of his family members were
busted and released, quietly.

To justify their existence, the Federal
Bureau of Narcotics would arrest hapless

minorities from time to time.

But the real drug running and weapons
running was overseen by the intelligence

agencies themselves.

Because of the international nature of
the trade, the CIA has always worked

closely with foreign agencies.

This long -standing alliance is vital to
understanding how false flags are often

international.

and financing dissidents.

When patriots expose how blatantly
obvious it is that there is a cover -up,

regardless of how much evidence there
is, the criminal's last refuge is to

behind the stigma of conspiracy.

They want you to ignore history in favor
of beliefs based on authority.

Off -the -wall conspiracies do not help
lift this stigma.

CIA finances operations with illegal
arms and drug sales, opium from Laos

the Vietnam War in the Golden Triangle,
cocaine from Central and South America,

and opium in the Golden Crescent in
Afghanistan.

The black market weapons trade and the
sale of cocaine and opium are routine

methods to finance black ops, off -the
-book operations hidden from oversight.

In fact, some of the same people
involved in the Contra operation,

O'Dean and Gorbanifar, have themselves
neck deep in the Nasir forgery, which

acted as a central lie of pre -war
propaganda about weapons of mass

used as an excuse to launch a preemptive
war on Iraq.

A faction called the Continuity of
Government was acting with a compartment

the CIA and other intelligence agencies
for selective business interests.

And it had made plans to subvert the
Constitution of the United States in the

event of a disaster.

Tom North, in your work at the NSC, were
you not assigned at one time to work on

plans for the continuity of government
in the event of a major disaster?

Mr. Chairman, I believe that question
touches upon

a highly sensitive and classified area.

So may I request that you not touch upon
that, sir.

That was Senator Daniel Inouye, AIPAC's
most loyal man.

His very first job was selling Israeli
war bonds.

He never allowed Israel to be mentioned.
Instead, as with the plane affair and 9

-11, they were simply referred to as
foreign country, eh?

However, there was no mystery that a
cabal of Americans and Israelis were

working together. We knew for a fact
they were smuggling U .S. weapons into

Iran, breaking the Arms Export Control
Act.

as far back as 1980.

The most crippling evidence being an
Israeli chartered plane full of U .S.

weapons crashed in Russia, bound for
Iran.

Robert McFarland, Counselor to the
Secretary of State, received a memo, now

uncovered, from Paul Wolfowitz, then the
State Department's Director of Policy

Planning, stating, For this dialogue to
be fruitful, it must remain restricted

to an extraordinarily small number of
people.

He was talking about dialogue and a deal
with Israel.

as Nicholas Villalete, Assistant
Secretary of State for the Middle East,

uncovered in his investigation.

Paul Wolfowitz went on to become Deputy
Secretary of Defense, again working with

an Israeli partisan cabal in 2001 during
the September 11th attacks.

And he was an architect for the Second
Iraq War, lying about that and 9 -11, as

will be further explored later. In a
future film, The Iran Contra Deception,

will argue that the October surprise and
the Iran -Contra affair were one

continuous plan whose players overlap on
both sides of the timeline with the 9

-11 attacks and the Kennedy
assassinations, as Miles Copeland dubbed

CIA within the CIA.

Conspiracies happen, covert war is real,
and America must uncover this hidden

history. It is absolutely vital to
understand that the U .S. and the

have a long history of secret covert
warfare together.

not excluding attacking America itself,
as in the case of the USS Liberty.

I want to make the case for secrecy in
government when it comes to the conduct

of national security affairs, and
possibly for deception where that's

appropriate. You know, Winston Churchill
said during World War II that in

wartime, truth is so important it should
be surrounded by a bodyguard of lies.

Do you really believe that? Absolutely.

Iran -Contra was a conspiracy.

National Security Advisor John
Poindexter was convicted of conspiracy.

Here we had a massive geopolitical,
covert, and illegal operation done by a

faction within the American government
concentrated in the unelected offices of

government working jointly with a
faction in Israel to illegally sell arms

narcotics in order to prolong a war and
produce profits to pay off the Contras

to fight the Santinistas in Nicaragua.

And the entire time...

The Americans and Israelis were working
together to do this. The Israelis were

spying on the United States and stealing
nuclear secrets.

It wasn't until after Iran -Contra fell
apart that Jonathan Pollard was outed as

a spy for Israel and thrown in jail.

Later, in the build -up to 9 -11, once
again, we had a cabal within the U .S.,

concentrated in the offices of the Vice
President and the Defense Department,

working with Israel to set up this
event.

And the entire time, again, Israel was
spying on the United States and stealing

nuclear technology.

Then, if that wasn't enough, the same
men who whitewashed the investigation

Iran -Contra were chosen again to
whitewash the investigation into 9 -11.

That is why I am bringing up Iran
-Contra and Israel.

The Iran -Contra affair was admitted.

However, many of the criminals involved
were not held accountable.

They were simply given presidential
pardon, either by Bush Jr. or Bill

And the commission chosen to investigate
the affair was actually chosen to cover

it up.

This pattern of crime and damage control
continues.

Richard Pearl, next face Saddam Hussein?

Absolutely.

One person close to the debate said to
me this week that it's no longer a

question of if, it's a question of how
we go after Saddam Hussein.

It is crucial to understand the national
security state.

and its capacities before discussing 9
-11 and the lies about preemptive wars.

A lead investigator into Iran -Contra
gave most of the key suspects immunity.

His name was Lee Hamilton.

Lee Hamilton was later chosen to be the
co -chairman of the 9 -11 Commission.

The 9 -11 Commission was a complete
farce and a total whitewash, but we'll

digging into this bunch later.

Let's just say Lee Hamilton had
experience covering for the national

state.

On the House Select Committee to
investigate illegal arms trades with

Iran was the ranking Republican, Dick
Cheney.

Later made Secretary of Defense after
the Senate refused to confirm alcoholic

John Tower of the Tower Commission
whitewashed.

Dick Cheney, of course, would serve as
Vice President for George Bush's son,

the President during 9 -11.

These crooks continued to work in
government regardless of what

was in charge.

And if you're still under the delusion
that the left or right matter, you won't

be by the end of this film.

The CIA and Mossad have conducted
countless covert operations and false

too many to name.

Heads of state have been assassinated.

Puppets have been installed.

The security state's personal interests
were thinly cloaked under the guise of

fighting communism, or now, terrorism.

The rest assured the invasion of
Afghanistan had nothing to do with

Osama bin Laden or 9 -11, and invading
Iraq even less.

Invading Iraq under such a pretext, even
if one swallowed the official version,

would be as silly as invading Mexico
after Pearl Harbor.

Of course, one would think differently
after watching the mass media in the run

-up to the war.

The press is a PR machine for the
Pentagon. They acted as nothing but

heads for Pentagon talking points.

The state -run media, if it reports a
scandal at all, reports a filtered

of it.

In the state -run education, well, we're
lucky if our children can speak their

own native language.

It is crucial for people to understand
this, because one of the reasons they

reject conspiracy theories about 9 -11
or about Iraq

is because they just can't fathom that
it could be done.

They assume wrongly that the media would
say something.

That the Baghdad regime is a serious
danger to world peace.

Weapons of mass destruction in the hands
of Saddam Hussein, plus his known

contact with terrorists, including al
-Qaeda terrorists, is simply a threat

large to continue to tolerate.

Millions protested the Iraq war before
it began, but were ignored in the media.

Unfortunately, alternative media has
been polluted by well -poisoning

and alarmists.

Purposely promoting the asinine,
obfuscates investigation, poisons

and misdirects valuable time and
research.

State deception and conspiracy aren't
rare.

They're normal.

Blindly believing your TV is
irresponsible and it's stupid. There's

kooky or funny about covert warfare or
assassinations.

It deserves open scrutiny and sincere
investigation.

To pretend that America's foreign policy
is based on benevolence is

outstandingly ignorant, and to deny the
actuality of covert actions and massive

deceptions is equally as naive.

There are many examples of successful
conspiracies and hoaxes.

And we're not just talking about
assassinations.

The U .S. has been able to kill millions
using covert warfare.

See here John Stockwell talk about the
CIA's wars on the third world.

And we wound up creating the golden
triangle in which the CIA, Air America

airplanes, We're flying in arms to our
allies and flying back out with the

heroin. We launched the largest, this is
something that Jimmy Carter did,

Admiral Turner brags about it, the
operation in Afghanistan.

Biggest single operation, I'm told, in
the history of the CIA secret war. And

sure enough, very quickly we produced
the Golden Crescent, which is still the

largest source of heroin perhaps in the
world today.

Trying to summarize this Third World War
that the CIA, the U .S. National

Security Complex, with the military all
interwoven in it in many different ways,

has been waging, let me just put it this
way, the best heads that I coordinate

with studying this thing, we count at
least, minimum figure, 6 million people

who've been killed in this long 40 -year
war that we've waged against the people

of the Third World.

6 million people who've been killed.

The Contras were involved with rape,
executions, and torture.

They even executed an American
journalist, and this was widely seen by

public.

And so, publicly, the U .S. denounced
them and condemned their actions.

But privately, their government, under
the Reagan administration, continued to

aid them in secret.

37 ,000 Nicaraguans were murdered.

Iran -Contra took the Kissinger model to
new heights.

Never before had the military and
intelligence agencies sought so many

sector sources of finance to such a
degree.

And in keeping with the distancing
factor of the old British system of

privateering, Combined with the global
arms industry market, the U .S. had no

shortage of willing partners to
needlessly kill for profit.

The fact that it was done showed a new
step in the magnitude and capacity for

multinational covert activity completely
divorced from moral limits or even

common interests other than profit.

George Bush Sr. was the director when
the CIA was preparing intelligence cells

in Pakistan and Afghanistan to fight a
proxy war with the Soviet Union in

Afghanistan. Call them modern
privateers.

It's worth it to take the time to
explain what a privateer is.

Back in the day when pirates were the
great outlaws, a country could attack

another country and risk war, or they
could covertly pay pirates to do it,

would make them privateers.

For example, if the British wanted to
attack a Spanish ship coming out of the

Caribbean, they couldn't do it with an
English ship with an English flag

that could start a war.

And at that time, Spain was really
strong.

So what they could do is pay off a
pirate to do it. The pirate, who has a

relationship to the royals, would be
sharing their loot and paid by the state

secretly. They would never attack
British ships. They would only attack

ships, French, Spanish, whatever.

And if a pirate attacks the ship and
gets caught, they hang.

No war. He did it as an individual.

There's nothing they can do about it.
This is a way the British could

attack Spanish ships covertly through
privateers.

All the Spanish could do was to continue
to routinely capture individual

pirates, try them, and hang them.

And the British, of course, would act
like they were trying to fight pirates

too. The whole time, however...

They had their own payroll with their
own pirates who attacked who they asked

them to attack.

This system of privateering is exactly
how our modern terrorist cells work.

The United States and other nations
payroll their own terrorist groups, such

Al -Qaeda.

They'll attack the Russians in
Afghanistan. They'll attack the Russians

Chechnya. They'll fight for us in Bosnia
and Kosovo and wherever we tell them

to. including the United States itself
in a false flag operation.

If a terrorist is caught or killed, so
what? They're just a terrorist.

But the fact that the CIA puts them on
the payroll means they're our

They are modern privateers.

You can look at Libya or Syria as an
example. The U .S. paid off a bunch of

sloppy jihadist religious nuts.

to go and do its fighting for them, and
NATO did the air campaign in Libya.

They couldn't do the same thing in Syria
because of Syria's anti -air defense,

but they've continually, through Qatar,
Turkey, and Saudi Arabia, multiple

countries, note, as well as the same
sloppy jihadists they used in Libya,

the terrorists into Syria, called them
the Free Syrian Army, and are

Syria. These are known terrorists, real
terrorist organizations, and the

privateers were often real pirates as
well.

But there are portions of them,
especially in the leadership, which are

paid off by intelligence agencies.

And the money for this comes from the
drug war, because Congress can't

appropriate money to say, hey, we're
going to go pay terrorists with that.

Even the CIA likes to lie. You say,
well, why would they lie?

They do.

They probably could have just said F .U.
World and gone ahead and did a war in

Iraq, but they didn't. They lied about
weapons of mass destruction and mobile

labs and anthrax and yada yada.

They're still at the point where they
feel like they have to at least try to

to us. And the CIA lies.

Making everything secret also makes
everything a lot more expensive and

more manipulatable.

It's easy to control the middlemen this
way. The opium from Afghanistan is used

both in heroin and morphine, so legal
and illegal drugs. With this money, the

illegal drugs is where they're using the
black budgets for the black operations

to pay off our privateers, to hit
targets.

without having to risk our own soldiers.

This is why on 9 -11 it was so confusing
and strange that the FBI and the NSA

and our different alphabet soup
organizations were fighting internally

themselves to allow certain terrorists
to live openly in the United States and

blocking investigations into them
because they were our terrorists. They

a look -away list for our own
privateers.

Al -Hazmi and Al -Meidhar were examples
of this who had been used in the USS

Cole bombing.

Now it's up to you to think, did our
privateers double -cross us, or was it

plan the whole time?

You may ask, was that A, incompetence,
because our government is incredibly

stupid, B, benevolence, they planned the
whole thing and they're genius and they

pulled it out like that, or C...

A portion of them know what's going on,
the majority of them are in the dark,

and the faction puppeteering everyone
else is using them because they surround

themselves with dupes and incompetent
people on purpose because they're easy

manipulate, and that's how our
government works.

I go with option C.

Do you think the U .S. or U .N. forces
should have moved into Baghdad? No.

Why not?

Because if we'd gone to Baghdad, we
would have been all alone. There

have been anybody else with us. It would
have been a U .S. occupation of Iraq.

None of the Arab forces that were
willing to fight with us in Kuwait were

willing to invade Iraq.

Once you got to Iraq and took it over
and took down Saddam Hussein's

then what are you going to put in its
place?

That's a very volatile part of the
world. And if you take down the central

government in Iraq, you can easily end
up seeing pieces of Iraq fly off part of

it.

The Syrians would like to have to the
west, part of eastern Iraq.

The Iranians would like to claim fought
over for eight years. In the north,

you've got the Kurds, and if the Kurds
spin loose and join with the Kurds in

Turkey, then you threaten the
territorial integrity of Turkey.

It's a quagmire if you go that far and
try to take over Iraq.

The other thing was casualties.

Everyone was impressed with the fact
that we were able to do our job with as

casualties as we had.

But for the 146 Americans killed in
action and for their families, it wasn't

cheap war.

And the question for the president in
terms of whether or not we went on to

Baghdad and took additional casualties
in an effort to get Saddam Hussein was

how many additional dead Americans is
Saddam worth. And our judgment was not

very many, and I think we got it right.

This system of proxy wars and false
flags and using mercenaries really

during the time of the Cold War.

Because of the advent of the nuclear
bomb and mutual destruction, the only

to really go to war any longer was to
attack through proxy and to use

mercenaries and to only attack nations
that didn't have the bomb.

Of course, they could be backed by other
nations that did, which is why everyone

is racing to get nuclear weapons, as we
can all see what happened when Gaddafi

decided not to. He ended up getting
sodomized by a knife.

But if you knock out the drug war, and
we're talking about $64 to $65 billion a

year annually from opium out of
Afghanistan, you would pull the plug on

finances for a lot of these black
operations.

And people can see clearly, there is no
grassroots revolution in Syria.

These are paid -off mercenary groups.

And each party and each faction have
different interests for wanting to

the regime.

But if you think it's too complicated
for multiple nations to get together and

use mercenary groups to attack other
nations or themselves, think again.

Syria is a very clear example.

Iran -Contra is another example where
multiple nations got together, secretly

created a lot of money selling drugs and
weapons, and paid off mercenaries to

fight in the third country, Nicaragua.

And 9 -11 worked very much the same way.
Our own Al -Qaeda.

attacked the United States with the U
.S.'s own help, and it was covered up by

the same intelligence agencies that
started it to begin with. It acted as a

pretext for the War on Terror, which
replaced the Cold War to justify all the

massive military spending we've seen
since, and the erosion of civil

and the rise of a despotic, fascist
police state.

Space wants to cure Afghanistan, control
the opium trade, which the Taliban had

cut off.

It's the opium wars too, just as the
British had done before.

The U .S. can create mass mercenary
armies and foster and utilize terrorist

groups at will.

There's a reason Al -Qaeda has never
attacked Israel.

A war on terror is endless profiteering.
The U .S. will have been in Afghanistan

for over a dozen years soon. The
objective has never been about winning,

less women's liberation or fighting for
freedom.

The whole point is to prolong conflict
for as long as possible.

This is why the U .S. preaches a war on
terrorism while simultaneously engaging

in acts of terrorism itself.

And it doesn't matter if that's the slow
boil by drones or by the quicker boil

by privateer proxies. It could be
Belhoss in Iraq or Libya, MEK in Iraq

Iran, Jandala in Balochistan, al
-Shabaab in Somalia, al -Nursa in Syria,

foreign aid Rina governments, which work
in the same way as the privateer

models, such as al -Hadi in Yemen.

formerly Mubarak in Egypt, Museveni in
Uganda, Bokogami in Rwanda, Sheikh

Sharif, al -Khalifa, Franco, and so on,
and of course, Karzai in Afghanistan.

The U .S. began its al -Qaeda
Frankenstein back in the 80s by backing

Mujahideen and their mercenary special
forces, al -Qaeda, and then the Taliban

in their civil war, and then the U .S.
changed sides on paper to the Northern

Alliance, but in reality, it's just the
CIA's occupation of the country for its

own interest.

the American government had a hand -in
-glove relationship with Osama bin Laden

while they were fighting the Soviets
together.

This privateer had a religious following
and a lot of financial overlap with

Saudi Arabia, who finances all of the
extreme Wahhabi Sunni terrorist

Al -Zawahiri was much more of an
influential privateer than bin Laden,

never use your real puppet's face for
the brand sold to the public.

As Oliver North infamously stated, you
must create.

Plausible deniability.

We wanted to be able to deny a covert
operation.

Plausible deniability.

What Keith said here is so huge.

Though the Iran -Contra operation in
particular ended, that style of

has been ongoing.

Gladio 2 .0 has been much in the same
vein.

There are a multitude of ways to launder
money, through Saudi Arabia, Turkey,

etc., through bogus NGOs, CIA -assisted
narcotics trafficking, and fake

foundations to create... plausible
deniability.

Take the case of Fethullah Gülen, living
in the U .S. as a preacher, but in

reality to anybody with any common sense
looking at it, he's just a transparent

conduit that the CIA needed to fund all
$20 billion worth of funds in the so

-called Islamic schools and mosques,
which are themselves fronts for training

the next round of renterists, a mixture
of privateers and useful idiots.

I want to stress that though naming
names and documenting who said what and

what is very important, All of these
neocons are exchangeable and expendable.

The criminals change from one
administration to the next, but the

MIC, the Military Industrial Complex,
always finds new profiteers to pick up

where the last ones left off. Though so
many of these players are Zionist

ideologues, it is only with the
overlapping mutual benefits for military

industry that these murder fantasies
become realities.

The MIC will always support.

The craziest, most racist, most
bloodthirsty factions you can find

they're good for business.

That's why PNAC's weekly standard prime
financial sponsor was Lockheed Martin.

Think of it like a car driving on a
road.

The road is war.

The car is government. The financial
institutions are the fuel. And the MIC

the driver.

Each needs the other.

As well as in Charlie Wilson's war,
where the U .S. supported Mujahideen and

-Qaeda in Afghanistan, the CIA moved
money around using BCCI, Bank of Credit

Commerce International.

The bank was finally closed in 1991
because it had so many scandals it could

longer stay afloat.

Some big names linked to a big scandal
this day. It involves the Bank of Credit

and Commerce International, which has
been shut down on evidence of massive

fraud. Today, the focus of the
investigation was on prominent figures

Washington, including a former Secretary
of Defense, Clark Clifford.

BCCI was created in the 70s and used by
the Safari Club to launder money on

behalf of the CIA.

They also used Riggs Bank, which was
used again in 9 -11, to launder money

Saudi sources to 9 -11 hijackers.

But what is a safari club?

Again, a little history is needed.

It is well known now that the CIA's
chief on counterintelligence, James

Angleton, had a special relationship
with Israel.

And although the Israelis did provide an
important source of intelligence on the

Soviet Union and Arab states, they were
turning around and providing the Soviets

with a lot more intelligence on the
Americans in exchange for Jewish

A number of other things were going on,
but suffice it to say, in 1974, William

Colby, the DCI, Director of Central
Intelligence, had had enough.

He fired Angleton, and three of
Angleton's top executives went with him.

Because of Watergate, the entire CIA was
under investigation, and it underwent

some massive housecleaning.

At the time, the Vietnam War, or the War
of Helicopters and Heroin, was ending,

and it was over by April of 1975.

The CIA would need to replace the
revenue from the drug trade.

The new DCI already had been making
moves before he had the position.

His name was George Bush Sr.

Bush's plan in response to the
investigations into the CIA's activities

hide things better rather than fix them.

To reduce the reliance on Israeli intel
on the Middle East and to create more

back channels of revenue, Bush
incorporated his already close business

the Saudi royal family.

Bush courted future Saudi General
Intelligence Director, Prince Turki bin

Assad, while Clark Clifford, a Truman
lackey with deep ties into intelligence,

approached the prince's uncle and
current G .I .D., Sheikh Kamal Havad,

plan. The idea was to move an
intelligence network outside the U .S.

worldwide covert operations for the
agency were funded by a host of Saudi

banking and charity enterprises.

And so, the Safari Club was created.

In a 2002 speech at Georgetown
University, Prince Turkey stated, In

the Watergate matters took place here,
your intelligence community was

tied up by Congress. It could not do
anything. It could not send spies.

It could not write reports. It could not
pay money.

In order to compensate for that, a group
of countries got together in the hope

of fighting communism and established
what is called the Safari Club. The

Club included France, Egypt, Saudi
Arabia, Morocco, and Iran.

The principal aim of this club was to
share information with each other and

each other in countering Soviet
influence worldwide, especially in

course, Iran was kicked out of that club
after the revolution in 1979, and this

group was just joining the U .S.-Israeli
nexus that already existed.

Researcher Peter Dale Scott refers to
the Safari Club as a second CIA.

At this time, over $10 million from CIA
operation accounts at Riggs Bank were

simply transferred over to Saudi Arabia.

To hide from Congress, they would need
to launder money overseas and in

institutions.

So, with the green light from Bush,
Adham transformed a small merchant bank

Pakistan into a worldwide network,
buying up banks to create a clandestine

laundering backbone for the empire.

And this was BCCI. From covert missions
in Africa to the Contras to Al -Qaeda,

everybody used BCCI.

And with the Safari Club, The CIA were
officially a multinational gang of drug

-running and terrorism.

Israel also was never purged from its
position in the syndicate. Even under

more even -handed Carter administration
with Admiral Turner as the DCI, the

Israelis maintained a mole with Turner's
underling Ted Shackley and proceeded to

integrate with all the U .S. departments
even deeper than Saudi Arabia.

Now, when it comes to 9 -11, let it be
no shock that all of these factions

again and cover for each other.

With BCCI gone in 91, the agency went
right back to its roots with old school

sources such as Riggs Bank.

Back in 1999, two men from Saudi Arabia,
we'll call them

Mach and Hash for simplicity, forced a
plane bound for Washington to ground

itself in Ohio, where the men were
arrested.

Both men had trained at Al -Qaeda camps
in Afghanistan.

Both were in contact with al -Qaeda
operatives, as well as the Saudi

and both had their plane tickets paid
for by the Saudi government.

They tried multiple times to enter the
cockpit, and their excuse to the FBI

we thought it was the bathroom.

Even though they had asked their
stewardess where the bathroom was, and

directed them to the back of the plane,
they go to the front of the, they knew

it was the cockpit.

But that was a good enough excuse
because the FBI let him go.

Later, another Al -Qaeda suspect under
investigation was discovered driving

Mock's car.

Why did he have his car?

Perhaps because this Arizona Al -Qaeda
recruiter is who drove them to the

airport the day they got on the flight
where they ended up getting arrested for

trying to enter the cockpit.

Robert Mueller of the FBI, even after
learning all about that and the Al

training camps and contact with
operational level operatives, was not

in investigating or even interviewing
these men.

All they did was a dry one of 9 -11.

Who'd want to talk to them about that?

Saudi Arabia was laundering money
through California Mosque, provided

and transportation, and lived with or
next to.

and provided money to at least three al
-Qaeda hijackers.

Israel knew, for they too lived next to
and helped hijackers move around,

literally.

It would not be the first time that
Israel, Saudi Arabia, and the United

covertly supported al -Qaeda, nor would
it be the last.

It's happening right now.

General Mahood Amin of Pakistan's ISI
took calls from Saeed Sheikh twice after

he wired $100 ,000 to lead hijacker
Mohammad Atta.

The time stamps overlapped twice.

On the morning of September 11th, Amin
was meeting with Safari Club founder and

former DCI, George Wood Sr., and the
chairman of the House and Senate

Intelligence Committees, which included
Congressman Porter Goss, the next DCI.

who was appointed by Bush's son,
President George W. Bush.

The general would retire from his
position shortly after the money

exposed.

Oddly, Bush Sr. had met with Osama bin
Laden's brother the day before.

Let's take a look at a couple of the
alleged hijackers of Flight 77 that hit

Pentagon. Future alleged 9 -11 hijackers
al -Hazmi and al -Mihar lived openly in

the U .S. under their real names.

despite attending an al -Qaeda summit
meeting in Malaysia, where they had been

photographed, and their hub in Yemen
being bugged.

Both got visas from the CIA's fast
-track program in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia,

did a majority of the hijackers. But the
CIA was preventing this information

from reaching the FBI.

Doug Mattson of the 9 -11 Commission
staff and a former CIA deputy director

expressed as much that the CIA was
intentionally omitting information.

And what's the gain by that?

Well, you have to ask yourself, just how
separate is Al -Qaeda and the CIA?

Why are so many terrorists who attack U
.S. targets ex -CIA?

Furthermore, why are so many CIA agents
blocking investigation into some of

these same terrorists? They can fight
side by side in Afghanistan, Chechnya,

Bosnia, or Kosovo, but that's when
they're our terrorists.

We know the CIA isn't losing any sleep
over the heroin trade being re -opened

Afghanistan.

Illegal drug markets are half the shadow
economy for key Central Asian states

like Azerbaijan, crucial in controlling
non -OPEC Caspian oil and gas.

Conflict in Afghanistan also forces oil
west and down through the Israeli

keyhole before it can go to East Asia,
the only potential break in that

now being a direct route from Iran.

Of course, there was a moment after the
Egyptian revolution that Libyan oil

could go through the Suez, but NATO took
care of that.

China still wants its contracts from
Gaddafi, though.

China worries over its Libyan interests
as the unrest in Libya continues to

unfold. The Chinese regime urged Libya's
rebels to keep their oil trade

agreements on Tuesday.

In light of the recent unrest and
political changes in Libya, the Chinese

is growing anxious over its existing
deals in the tumultuous country. Other

crucial access ports without a Western
military presence in the Gulf of Aden

Bassan of Somalia, and Aden of Yemen.

So odd how the USS Cole bombing was in
Aden in 2000, and it involved al

But of course, he gets to live openly in
the United States, and others allegedly

involved in the USS Cole attack all
escape or are released from prison.

At least they went to prison. That's
more than what was done after the USS

Liberty attack.

Was the USS Cole an al -Qaeda bombing,
or was al -Qaeda a front for a false

flag?

Barbara Boding blocked John O 'Neill's
investigations into the USS Cole

The captain just happened to be a close
personal friend of hers.

Irony is that the captain of the ship is
a personal friend of mine.

One of those odd coincidences.

O 'Neill probably wanted to answer the
most obvious questions about the event,

like why was the Cole even there instead
of going to refuel in Bahrain as it was

scheduled to do? How did the terrorists
know it was going to be there?

And just where did they get the C4?

We may never know the answers because
the investigation was about as open as

Oklahoma City investigation or the
anthrax investigation.

And once again, as always, the security
footage of the event was edited and is

useless. There's no footage of the
attack.

John O 'Neill also had his investigation
into bin Laden squashed and his

investigators pulled off hot trails.

They've been coming in and out of the U
.S. on legal visas.

John O 'Neill took a job with Kroll
after being hired by Jerome Hauer, who

involved in the actual anthrax attack.

Just two weeks after getting his job,
John O 'Neill died in the South Tower on

-11.

This could all be outrageous
incompetence and coincidence, or it

collusion. Then, look at the whole
picture.

If you stop thinking about it in terms
of U .S. interests, the puzzle is very

easy. The U .S. acts for only one
state's interest, and that's Israel.

APAC purchased Congress with the foreign
government's financial backing.

Since we learned nothing in school and
the press is a joke, I must go over some

background information about pipelines.

Pipelines are not just for transporting
oil and gas. They are for political

leverage as well.

Each country a pipeline passes through
greatly benefits as a middleman in the

flow of resources.

In order for energy to reach the open
market, the pipeline must reach a port.

After that, it can be shipped anywhere
in the world.

The major battle right now is over the
Cascade Basin.

It's a non -OPEC -sourced oil and gas,
and there is a lot of it.

The major markets are Europe and Asia.

The larger market, and undoubtedly the
larger future market, is certainly Asia.

China and India are emerging, and both
are strapped for oil and gas.

Japan is also a thirsty, virtually oil
-less country.

A direct line to China or India is out
of the question as conflict in

Afghanistan prevents investors from
joining any consortium. And without

there can be no pipeline.

No one wants to spend billions of
dollars on something that could be

destroyed and plagued with attacks.

Instead, at present, oil and gas going
to Asia is shipped west through the BTC

lines that start in Azerbaijan.

then pass through Georgia and conclude
in Cheyenne port of Turkey.

For that oil and gas to get to Asia, it
must pass through the Israeli line and

come out at the Red Sea.

Oil and gas going to Europe goes to
Italy, which is why Italy and Israel are

largest importers of PTC gas and oil.

Europe also has other sources of gas
from Russia, oil from Libya, etc.

Israel greatly enjoys this position as
the final middleman on the energy going

to Asia.

After the Egyptian revolution, when the
puppet dictator Mubarak was forced to

flee, Iran was free for the first time
to pass its ships through the Suez Canal

since 1979, before the revolution, while
they were under the thumb of the U .S.

and the puppet Shah, and could send oil
and gas to Europe.

Likewise, Libya could send its oil
southeast to Asia.

So shortly after the revolution, a
conflict was manufactured in Libya.

Libya was invaded.

Gaddafi removed.

and his contracts with the Chinese
reneged.

Europe was bullied into putting
sanctions on Iran.

While Iran has been expanding its gas
fields, they'd like to send gas to

southern Iran, which avoids Afghanistan,
directly to Pakistan and India, and

eventually to China.

China has made it very clear that they
are willing to overpay for gas and oil.

At the same time, with the U .S. being
kicked out of Iraq in 2011, Iran signed

$10 billion deal with Iraq and Syria to
build a line through Iraq and Syria.

Now, who is that a threat to? Turkey and
Israel, naturally, because it's an

alternative to the BTC monopoly.

So who has had mercenaries in Syria from
the beginning?

Israel and Turkey, of course. The goal
is not really regime change.

The goal, like in Afghanistan, is to
create a prolonged conflict to last for

years. Tear Syria apart and create
perpetual conflict preventing any new

from breaking the monopoly, and it also
creates a healthy environment for MIT

profiteers. In return, the Turks and the
Israelis will continue to buy all of

the U .S.'s toys, no matter how
worthless they are in actual combat,

money acquired from the U .S. to begin
with in the form of aid.

That keeps Lockheed and Kelhabi, and
thus the American media, in line.

Americans are getting robbed, Syrians
are being killed, Europe and Asia are

being deprived of new sources of oil and
gas, Iran and Pakistan are being pushed

into the arms of BRIC, and Israel is
laughing all the way to the bank.

If you understand pipelines and the
Israeli -centric grip on U .S. foreign

policy, it makes perfect sense.

At minimal, a gas line to Pakistan from
Iran is going to happen.

So look for more excuses for the U .S.
to bomb in Pakistan.

Everyone admits now that they know Iran
is not building a bomb.

The worry is that if Iran can build
nuclear power for electricity, it could

up all the oil they currently consume
and sell it.

PNAC wants to destroy any potential
economic or military rivals, and to hell

with the people living in any country.

President Obama, while he was a senator,
is who initially introduced the bill in

the Senate.

to attempt to put sanctions on Iran in
the first place.

And, once again, predictably, those
against the deal are Israeli firsters.

All the kicking and screaming we hear
about the deal is for Israeli interests,

not European or American interests.

The U .S.'s covert support for the
Contras in the 80s, as well as the

in Afghanistan, are well known now, and
the public is discovering that ISIS, the

Islamic State, is being covertly
supported, financed, trained, and

America through the same systems as
before.

The U .S.'s own agencies acknowledge and
admit this, and yet where is the press?

They have no interest in covering the
United States aiding al -Qaeda. This is

for a conglomeration of corporate
interests of Gulf states, Turkey, the

Israelis, and of course the M .I .C. in
the United States. There was no threat

to America from Syria.

But in order to combat Assad, the U .S.
financed covert mercenaries. It will

have consequences.

Have a look at this ISIS footage again.

They have a convoy of trucks.

New paint, same model, gun mount,
artillery.

Where are they getting these things?

They didn't build them.

And if they bought them, then from
where?

And with what money?

These weapons and gear are from state
sponsorship.

It's another opium army.

This is why ending the war in
Afghanistan is key in ending or reducing

empire's ability to wage proxy wars
around the world.

The U .S.'s own Defense Intelligence
Agency in 2012 leaked a report by

Watch. is admitting that the West
fostered ISIS.

This is something we've been saying from
the beginning, and we've been

presenting forensic evidence and other
evidence, but here, so that they don't

have plausible deniability or the
incompetence to produce, is the U .S.'s

agency's report, which was circulated
through the CIA and State Department and

all the alphabet soup networks,
admitting that they wanted ISIS, that

fostered ISIS, that they supported ISIS.

with Turkey and the Gulf states.

And if you can go way back to the
interview I did with William Engel, we

through this whole thing and why they
were really doing what they were doing

who was supporting it. My interviews
with Pepe Escobar have echoed the same

thing. But here it is in their own
words. Let me read you part of this

In Section B, Development of the Current
Events into Proxy War.

Opposition forces are trying to control
the eastern areas.

adjacent to the western Iraqi provinces,
in addition to neighboring Turkish

borders. Western countries, the Gulf
states and Turkey, are supporting these

efforts. This hypothesis is most likely
in accordance with the data from recent

events, which will help prepare safe
havens under international sheltering,

similar to what transpired in Libya when
Benghazi was chosen as a command center

for the temporary government.

Skipping down to 8C, if the situation
unravels, there is the possibility of

establishing a declared or undeclared
Salafist principality in eastern Syria.

And this is exactly what the supporting
powers to the opposition want, in order

to isolate the Syrian regime, which is
considered a strategic step of the Shia

expansion.

ISI could also declare an Islamic State,
through its union with other terrorist

organizations in Iraq and Syria, which
will create grave danger in regards to

unifying Iraq and the protection of its
territory.

The establishment of a Salafi
principality in eastern Syria is exactly

external powers supporting the
opposition want.

Internally, events are taking a clear
sectarian direction.

The Salafists, the Muslim Brotherhood,
and Al -Qaeda in Iraq are the major

forces driving the insurgency in Syria.

The West, Gulf countries, and Turkey
support the opposition.

The West supports al -Qaeda in Iraq. The
West is supporting al -Qaeda and a

Salafi principality to attack Syria.

This is why Israel has been al -Qaeda's
air force.

This is why the West, meaning America
and Turkey and its Gulf state allies,

have been financing.

and supplying arms to ISIS through the
FSA, the moderate Syriac that also go

around cutting off heads and grilling
people and eating organs, etc.

This is manufactured covert mercenaries,
the same as the Contras were in

Nicaragua during Iran -Contra. They
don't even try and hide it anymore.

This was the desired plan. They're
fostering ISIS to attack Syria. Why?

The whole thing is to weaken Iran, and
why?

Do they want to weaken Iran? Because the
ultimate aim is to weaken Hezbollah so

that Israel can have its plans for
greater Israel. It doesn't benefit the

States at all to be involved in these
Middle Eastern conflicts. We are there

because of the Israeli lobbies.

But getting back to bin Laden, it's
still important to hone in on this

because he's so essential to the
official story.

And yet...

He was supported by the U .S. throughout
his career.

In the early 1980s, bin Laden worked
with operatives from U .S. intelligence,

the Pakistani military, and Arab states.

They ran a wide -ranging covert network
that recruited and financed Muslim

fighters to battle the Soviet army.

Intelligence agencies were working
covertly with al -Qaeda before 9 -11,

they've been working covertly with al
-Qaeda since 9 -11.

But during 9 -11, they want you to
believe that they had no part in

protecting them and that it was a pure
terrorist attack out of the blue.

9 -11 was not a plot by 20 guys hatched
out of a cave.

Top US officials have refused to
investigate suspects and classified

that reveals the involvement of foreign
governments.

Someone was shielding the hijackers.
Someone was assisting them with

and operational support.

Top brass intentionally blocked the
FBI's attempt to investigate members of

hijacker cells.

The question is, Did the privateers
double -cross the U .S. in a form of

blowback, or was it jointly planned?

It was planned and assisted.

Not only were the bagmen involved in the
operation protected, the hijackers

themselves were relocated two steps
ahead of the FBI, thanks to the

phone taps and monitoring, not only of
the feds, but the hijackers themselves.

Some American terrorism investigators
fear certain suspects in the September

11th attack may have managed to stay
ahead of them.

by knowing who and when investigators
are calling on the telephone.

And what troubles investigators most,
particularly in New York in the

counterterrorism investigation of the
World Trade Center attack, is that on a

number of cases, suspects that they had
sought to wiretap and surveil

immediately changed their
telecommunications processes. They

differently as soon as those supposedly
secret wiretaps went into place.

As soon as Puppet Bush was appointed
into office, his handlers and he went to

work implementing their long push for
plans for Iraq.

War was a foregone conclusion.

I pointed out in my book that Bush and
Blair bombed Baghdad just 27 days after

Bush was sworn into office.

It only took Obama a mere three days to
bomb Pakistan.

The only thing changing between Bush and
Obama's imperialism was the logo and

the brand name.

For many Americans, political tribalism
enjoys the same level of excuse -making

and delusional loyalty as a religious
cult.

Every crime that one team does is
suddenly okay once it's their team doing

even though it's the same crime.

In psychological terms, this phenomenon
and type of behavior is called being an

idiot. It is easy to lie to an idiot.

Thus, idiots choose liars for leaders.

It becomes a cycle of choosing between
two evils, because you know there are

many idiots to stray away from the path
set before them by television.

Not only is war by deception,
warmongering uses deception as well.

However, idiots cannot retain
information long enough to remember the

by the next election, they repeat the
process.

Maybe I'm missing something here. I
mean, we're going to have kind of a

building core from America. Absolutely
not. Our military is meant to fight and

win war.

That's what it's meant to do. And when
it gets overextended, morale drops.

But I'm going to be judicious as to how
to use the military.

It needs to be in our vital interest.
The mission needs to be clear and the

strategy obvious.

I will promise you this, that if we have
not gotten our troops out by the time I

am president.

It is the first thing I will do. I will
get our troops home. We will bring an

end to this war. You can take that to
the bank.

The only thing that went to the bank was
trillions of our dollars.

Idiots are confused when their candidate
does the same things as the last guy.

When confronted with the obvious, they
will quickly get frustrated and angry.

They will make excuses, no matter how
retarded, to defend their brand.

Because admitting they were wrong would
also be admitting that they were an

idiot. and idiots rarely can acknowledge
that they are an idiot.

The war in Iraq wasn't based on mistaken
intelligence. It was based on lies,

known deceptions.

if a person relies only on television to
tell them that Iraq did not have

weapons of mass destruction and there
never was any evidence for that claim,

that the U .S. had no real interest in
liberating the Kurds or allowing a

legitimate democracy, that they planned
perpetual war from the start, and that

intelligence agencies intentionally
fostered religious infighting, even

far as posing to be one faction while
murdering another to set off cycles of

revenge killings.

Then they will always be in the dark,
because this is not going to be on

television. The media doesn't report it.
The media is owned by the Pentagon.

They have overlapping boarded records.

It is one large corporation.

They lie.

Wars of choice don't come out of the
blue.

The public must be primed with
propaganda.

Even idiots need a pretext, some slogan
to memorize, that they can pull out of

questions. Resource wars always need
some ideological cloak to mask their

imperialism.

War profiteers can make money off any
war.

So why specifically attack Iraq?

Some will say it was for oil.

The problem with that is it's ignoring
many facts.

It wasn't ExxonMobil creating myths
about Niger.

It wasn't Chevron Texaco saying Iraq got
anthrax from 9 -11 hijackers. It was

Israeli security forces.

It wasn't BP meeting with Israeli
generals to discuss the war. It was the

It wasn't big oil screaming about
weapons of mass destruction.

It was PNAC.

Iraq was a threat to Israel, not
America.

And each pre -war lie was a PNAC talking
point going as far back as the 90s.

PNAC's script for war was verbatim. The
rhetoric used, by the administration to

usher in a war with Iraq.

What was PNAC?

PNAC was the Project for a New American
Century, a neoconservative think tank

comprised of Zionists with prominent
positions in the media and government.

They published a large work of lies, but
because of the Pentagon -press

relationship, their deceptions got to be
front and center on the news channels.

And with the clout of 9 -11 being used
as an emotional club to beat down

dissenting voices, they got their way.

This was a war for and by Israeli
interest.

The rationales for the war would flip
-flop several times, but each pre

-invasion lie had its roots with the
PNAC cabal.

These very same people, working for an
Israeli group, IASPS, authored a paper

called The Israeli Clean Break, written
by Richard Pearl, which claimed that the

road to Damascus ran through Baghdad.

They also wrote in 2000, prior to 9 -11,
a report called the Afghan Vortex,

which called for war in Afghanistan.

This was all prior to 9 -11 and before
the hunting bin Laden rationale.

Of course we're after Saddam Hussein, I
mean bin Laden. He's isolated.

And, you know, again, I don't know where
he is.

I repeat what I said. I truly am not
that concerned about him.

Pakistan is on our side.

Afghanistan is half and half.

But right on that border is Osama bin
Laden, most likely.

And he's probably in Pakistan.

Some have expressed the notion that
Saddam was attacked suddenly for

to break the petrodollar monopoly.

Well, Iraq was placed on the misnamed
oil for food program.

We have heard that a half a million
children have died.

I mean, that's more.

Children then died in Hiroshima.

And, you know, is the price worth it?

I think this is a very hard choice. But
the price, we think the price is worth

it. Oil for not enough food would have
been more accurate.

However, the calls for attacking Iraq
lasted through three presidents.

And before that, Iraq was at war with
Iran, who Israel supported.

And Israel bombed Iraq's alleged
reactors themselves.

Iraq was a threat to Israel.

and Israeli furthers tried to manipulate
President Clinton into war as well.

Clinton finally attacked Iraq, as well
as Afghanistan and Sudan, during his

impeachment proceedings.

This war monitoring actually helped
rather than hurt his chances for getting

the hook.

Congressman Ron Paul saw it differently
than the new gun, and he said back in

1998, I have a prepared statement for
tomorrow, and in that statement I talk

about... A much more serious act that
the president committed than anything

we've generally talked about. And that
was the illegal bombing of Sudan and

Afghanistan. $200 million was spent for
that without congressional approval.

Not only is it annoying, I think it's
illegal.

I think it's unconstitutional.

I think it's an act of war.

And I think it's much worse than
anything that we have considered under

impeachment.

There's been a lot of talk about the
Constitution in the last several weeks,

last several months.

A lot of people holding up the
Constitution.

But I'd like them to read the
Constitution, everybody here in this

read the Constitution about committing
acts of war.

This, to me, is an outrage, and we
shouldn't be participating in it. We

not permit our president to do this.

There's no threat.

We're going to do more harm by doing
this.

If Congress were given an opportunity to
vote on whether we should bomb Iraq,

would you go along with that as long as
it went through the procedures?

No, I would strongly oppose it because
they're not a threat to our national

security.

Iraq has a third -rate army.

They have no ability to wage war. Our
policies are deliberately destroying the

country.

They can't feed their children. They're
not allowed to have medication.

There was a story in today's paper where
one of our private charity groups was

being fined because they were trying to
get medicines into the Iraqi people.

So for us to unleash bombs on Iraq at
this particular time to kill more

people for narrow political reasons, no,
there is absolutely no need to cause

more bombing because of a very...

overall flawed foreign policy. How are
you going to vote on impeachment?

I'll vote for impeachment.

For all four articles?

Yes.

Unenthusiastically, because I think the
charges are way too mild and not

touching the issues that I would like to
touch. I mean, that's what we should be

addressing.

But I wish the Congress would address
the unconstitutionality of presidents

waging war. That, to me, is a lot more
serious than Monica Lewinsky, let me

you. It has nothing to do with national
security.

Matter of fact, our national security is
more jeopardized by permitting this to

happen because we're liable to start a
war.

We're liable to have our military men
killed.

We're liable to have more attacks on us
by terrorists.

Hours after the verdict cleared Clinton,
he ended the bombings. The neocons did

not end their push for war.

Here's another paper from PNAC. It's
titled, How to Attack Iraq.

I'm not kidding. This was published on
PNAC's official website as well as the

Weekly Standard run by PNAC's co
-founders Kagan and Crystal.

How to attack Iraq.

You can't make this stuff up.

CIA Director George Tenet said last
January that Iraq already had the

expertise to produce biological weapons
in a matter of weeks.

Lie. And according to former UN weapons
inspector Scott Ritter, Saddam Hussein

needs only six months without inspectors
looking over his shoulder to build

those weapons and deploy them on
missiles capable of reaching Israel and

targets in the Middle East.

There may have been some deal -making
blackmail there with Ritter to get him

say that, considering he said the exact
opposite things later after he went to

court and was clear of what he was
accused of.

But we'll leave that alone.

Yes, Saddam did have missiles that could
reach Israel, that much was true.

Israel also had missiles that could
reach Iraq.

The inspectors were removed after they
were caught doubling as spies for the

CIA, which is another fact that Scott
Ritter pointed out.

All the Iraqi obstruction between 1996
and 1998 had nothing to do with weapons

of mass destruction, everything to do
with protecting themselves from the CIA

that was actively using the weapons
inspection process to spy on Saddam

So I think what the American people need
to know is that this was never about

weapons. This has always been about
getting Saddam Hussein. And even in the

recent spin -up of this whole weapons
issue, the Bush administration knew that

there were no weapons of mass
destruction in Iraq, and yet they

the inspection process as a vehicle to
achieve the ultimate goal and objective

of regime change.

Back to the PNAC authors.

Paul Wolfowitz made a statement before
the U .S. House National Security

Committee, which called for a war with
Iraq.

He also wrote a letter in 1999 claiming
that the bloodlust for Iraq wasn't

partisan because a couple of Democrats,
you may recognize them, Joseph Lieberman

and John Kerry, also agreed with their
position.

Wow, that is interesting.

A vice presidential and a presidential
hopeful just so happen to be those two

Democrats.

Well, Wolfowitz was right about
something. It was not partisan, because

parties are one party on foreign
affairs, and both parties wanted war.

Here's another one from the Zionist
think tank written by Robert Kagan, the

-founder of PNAC, titled Saddam's
Impending Victory.

It goes on to make comparisons to Hitler
in the first few sentences.

They love creating new Hitlers.

It also talks about weapons of mass
destruction and says that the lid is

to come off. Remember, this is in 1998.

The lid is about to come off.

The paper refers to Saddam's palaces as
the so -called palaces, as if they were

something else, and hiding something,
like the weapons of mass destruction it

mentions probably a dozen times.

Does that sound familiar?

It ought to, because it's the exact same
lie that Judith Miller wrote in the New

York Times.

December 20th, 2001.

She said that she heard about secret
weapons and mass destruction labs hidden

underneath the palaces of Saddam. She
bolsters her report by citing first Paul

Wolfowitz and then Richard Perle. And
she even went as far as trying to rope

Syria to weapons and mass destruction
myth by sourcing Israeli intelligence.

You know how that happened? That's
because the OSP and the DOD with Pearl

actually a mirror group for the Israeli
cabal and the Knesset. They're all

saying the same BS, and she's just a
media whore mouthpiece for this neocon

propaganda about Iraq.

To recap, she retold an older PNAC lie,
and then added that Syria was involved

in it, and quoted Wolfowitz, Pearl, and
Israel.

PNAC's co -founder Robert Kagan
continues, For Saddam, whose

military strength had been decimated in
1991 and could not be restored for many

years, weapons of mass destruction
provided the quickest, surest, and

only route back to strategic dominance
in the Middle East.

As Rolf Eckert, the former head of
UNESCO, the UN's weapons monitoring

operation, said last year, Weapons of
mass destruction make the difference

between Iraq's being a regional power
and a major international power.

Finding and destroying Saddam's ability
to produce weapons of mass destruction,

therefore, was an essential part of
guaranteeing that Saddam could not again

threaten neighboring states, Israel.

The UN's effort to rid Iraq of such
weapons capabilities was supposed to put

lid on Saddam's grand strategic
ambitions.

Today, the lid is about to come off.

Saddam Hussein, weak, isolated, and
impoverished as he is, has decided to

his big gamble.

The crisis he set off last October when
he blocked UN inspectors came to head

last week when Iraqi Deputy Prime
Minister Tariq Aziz told UNESCO Chief

Butler that a number of sites in Iraq,
the so -called presidential palaces,

would remain off -limits for two or more
months at least.

Saddam Hussein also issued an ultimatum
last week calling for the UN to wrap up

its inspections by May, and lift the
sanctions.

He was certain of it. He said Saddam was
sure to do this in a matter of months

if we didn't invade Iraq.

Of course, years went by. Nothing
happened.

But the same excuse and lies about
urgency were reused anyway.

As if all this hasn't been bad enough,
Robert Kagan wrote another piece called

Speaking of Iraq, which reiterated the
same rhetoric about weapons of mass

destruction, gotta have regime change,
etc., etc.

To give a quick quote, he said, The only
acceptable strategy is one that

eliminates the possibility that Iraq
will be able to use or threaten to use

weapons of mass destruction in the near
term.

This means a willingness to undertake
military action as diplomacy is clearly

failing. In the long run, it means
removing Saddam Hussein and his regime

power. That now needs to be the aim of
American foreign policy.

Well, I think we know whose foreign
policy that was really the aim of.

Next, we have a paper written by William
Crystal and Robert Kagan, the two co

-founders of PNAC.

It's titled, Bombing Iraq Isn't Enough,
January 30, 1998.

Doug Feist, working under the Zionist
madman, the Prince of Darkness, Richard

Pearl, ran a special office in the
Department of Defense called the Office

Special Plans. Oh, he was special, all
right. The OSP had a mirror group in

Israel and both met with Israeli
generals.

Feist's special cabal did a lot worse
than cherry -pick intelligence.

They flat -out fabricated it.

Feith used his Pentagon office to
produce alternative intelligence reports

linked Saddam to al -Qaeda and passed
them on to the White House. Some of it,

like a report that 9 -11 hijacker
Mohammed Atta met with Iraqi

Prague, has been widely discredited.

One of the reasons people were told we
were going to war in Iraq was because an

imminent attack with weapons of mass
destruction was about to happen.

I don't believe anybody in the U .S.
government said that.

This is Donald Rumsfeld. Iraq poses a
serious and mounting threat to our

country. No terrorist state poses a
greater or more immediate threat to the

security of our people and the stability
of the world than the regime of Saddam

Hussein. The Iraqi regime is a threat to
any American.

There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein
now has weapons of mass destruction.

There is no doubt that he is amassing
them to use against our friends, against

our allies, and against us.

Price's office took PNAC's old lies as
well as their new lies and presented

as intelligence.

These were not mistakes.

They were deceptions.

PNAC wrote the script.

To understand why I drive home the point
that PNAC was the central hub for

creating a case for war in Iraq, just
have a look at some of their policy

papers. These quotes are in their own
words from their own website.

And the authors, who also wrote Israeli
policy papers stating the same things,

wrote exactly what became the free
invasion rhetoric to invade Iraq.

1. The PNAC letter to President Clinton
in 1998, Paul Wolkowitz wrote,

The policy of containment of Saddam
Hussein has been steadily eroding over

past several months. As recent events
have demonstrated, we can no longer

on our partners in the Gulf War
Coalition to continue to uphold

punish Saddam when he blocks or invades
UN inspectors.

Our ability to ensure that Saddam
Hussein is not producing weapons of mass

destruction, therefore, has
substantially diminished.

Even if full inspections were eventually
to resume, which now seems highly

unlikely, experience has shown that it
is difficult, if not impossible, to

monitor Iraq's chemical and biological
production.

The lengthy period during which
inspectors have been unable to enter

facilities, has made it even less likely
that they will be able to uncover all

of Saddam's secrets.

As a result, in the not -too -distant
future, remember, this is 1998, in the

-too -distant future, we will be unable
to determine with any reasonable level

of confidence whether Iraq does or does
not possess such weapons.

Notice how he assumes that he has them
and that they are secrets.

and that they're just unable to find
them now.

He's starting with a conclusion and
supporting it with scare tactics.

Sound familiar?

Is that not verbatim what was used as
propaganda in 2002 and 2003 as a pretext

to invade Iraq?

They even use the same catchphrases.
Weapons of mass destruction.

Because it's not like the U .S. has or
sells any of those.

and a hoarding inspectors.

Of course, Paul Wolfowitz never offered
any evidence for the claims he was

making, and he would flip -flop his
rationale for a war in Iraq so long as a

in Iraq happened.

When he was finally cornered and
questioned about it, his only way out,

course, was to evoke 9 -11 and hope that
by repeating 9 -11 enough times, there

would be enough emotional smoke in the
room for him to worm away and not have

answer.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Welcome,
gentlemen.

As you can see, a lot of the questions
here relate to the high cost of the war,

not only in resources, but in human
lives, of course.

And I'd like to get at the key question
of what we're really doing there.

And, of course, in the months leading up
to the war, there was a steady drumbeat

of weapons of mass destruction, weapons
of mass destruction, weapons of mass

destruction. And Secretary Wolfowitz, in
your...

almost hour -long testimony here this
morning.

Once, only once, did you mention weapons
of mass destruction, and that was an ad

lib. I don't think it's in any of your
written testimony.

And so we're seeing shifting
justifications, I think, for what we're

there. At a hearing in May, I asked
Secretary Wolfowitz the question. A lot

your answer dealt with it will help with
the peace between the Israelis and the

Palestinians.

There's been allegations that this will
help with our war on terrorism. We just

haven't seen the proof of any linkage
between Saddam Hussein and al -Qaeda.

now, today, the testimony is over and
over again about what a despicable

Saddam Hussein is who brutalizes people.

But at the same time, in Liberia,
Charles Taylor has been indicted, and

according to the prosecutor, he's
responsible for the killing, raping, and

maiming of 500 ,000 people.

And the arrest warrant issued by the U
.N. back court in Sierra Leone charged

Taylor with unlawful killing, sexual and
physical violence, use of child labor

and child soldiers, looting, burning,
and the murder of U .N. peacekeepers.

alleges that Taylor had a close alliance
with the notorious murderous

Revolutionary United Front in Sierra
Leone. The RUF was infamous for

dismembering its victims, having a cut
hand unit to chop off limbs, and a burn

house unit to torch houses of suspected
opponents.

And Taylor once had a 13 -year -old
daughter publicly flogged for

school.

At the same time, Human Rights Watch is
saying that Charles Taylor is one of the

single greatest causes of spreading wars
in West Africa.

And so all the testimony this morning,
and indeed the submission of the

op -eds, is about what a tyrant Saddam
Hussein is, who brutalizes his people,

but we're doing nothing in Liberia. So
it comes back to...

to the questions of the unified message
coming from the administration as to

what we're doing there and why we didn't
wait for the United Nations Security

Council to do their inspections. Now
we're in this endeavor, huge cost not

only in resources but in lives. So I'll
ask the question, Secretary Wolfowitz,

give you a chance. What are we doing
there?

Senator Chafee, what we have done there
is to remove a regime that was a threat

to the United States.

We've said all along, if you go back to
Secretary Powell's presentation at the

United Nations, all three of those
concerns were stated very clearly.

The concern about weapons of mass
destruction, the concern about Saddam's

to terrorism, which are there, not as
clear as the case on weapons of mass

destruction. Secretary Chafee, I'm a
cynic.

So when you make these assertions, give
us some proof.

A threat to the United States? How?

I suggest go back and read, and if you
want to give me an hour, we can have a

different kind of hearing, but if you go
back and read Secretary Powell's

testimony, it is very clear, and it is
the concern that the combination of

weapons of mass destruction and
terrorists.

Okay, he didn't ask what the claims
were. He asked, what's the proof for

claims? We all know what Powell said.

We all know what the claims were.

Powell restated the stuff that you said,
and you're a liar.

Where's the proof for weapons of mass
destruction and links to terrorism?

All Wolfowitz can do is say, well, Colin
Powell said it too.

And, of course, 9 -11, 9 -11, 9 -11.

It poses a kind of threat which maybe 10
years ago we would have thought we

could live with. And I would have said
10 years ago my whole view about Iraq

would have been very different.

Ten years ago, I would have said Iraq,
as terrible as it is, is a problem of

Iraqi people.

I said all along I believe we should
have given those people more help in

getting rid of that tyrant.

But September 11th put it in a different
light, and taking on that tyrant

forcefully meant, in fact, if anything,
that we had to take that threat more

seriously. So all three of those
concerns are stated in Secretary

testimony. I talked about the
mistreatment of the people. Could I

because my time is limited,
unfortunately.

You just said that this is the 10 years
ago you wouldn't have agreed to regime

change. However, in 1998, you as a
member of the New American Century sent

letter to President Clinton. Senator, I
said something different. No, wait a

second. You were saying we're seeing it
in the light of September 11th. That's

just not true. You've been advocating
for regime change all through the late

90s. And in this letter.

Can I explain?

The strategy should aim above all. This
is 1998.

The strategy should aim above all at the
removal of Saddam Hussein's regime from

power. You signed that letter.

Senator, there's a very big difference.

I was very clear.

I don't know if it's in that letter, but
elsewhere. I never thought before

September 11th that we should use tens
of thousands of American troops to do

job for the Iraqis. I never thought we
should go to Baghdad even at the end of

the Gulf War when I thought we in.

Should have done some other things we
didn't do.

I thought up until September 11th that
our job was to help the Iraqi people.

I think the mistake we made in 1991 was
they rose up against Saddam. They got no

help from us.

September 11th changed the stakes, in my
view, for the United States and made it

a different matter in terms of using
American troops. The end is the same,

you're not distinguishing the means, and
the means are absolutely crucial.

Putting American troops' lives at stake
is something...

that we do when our security is
threatened. Our security was threatened.

The troops out there, I think,
understand that it is threatened. I

understand that they're part of fighting
the war on terrorism as we go on today,

and that is important.

I'll just finish up by saying I really
resent when witnesses talk that this is

in the light of September 11th when the
evidence is the contrary.

You're misrepresenting what I did in
that letter. Over and over again,

the late 90s, the Paris regime changed
in Iraq.

Can I try again then, since I believe
you're not representing my views

It is true. I thought from the end of
the Gulf War up until September 11th of

2001,

that it was important for the United
States to help Iraqis get rid of that

regime, and that is a policy of regime
change.

But I did not believe that it was either
necessary or justified to use large

-scale American military forces to do
that job.

At the end of the Gulf War, all it would
have taken was a minimum application of

U .S. air power and some of the
artillery that were sitting on the south

the Euphrates River.

September 11th changed the stakes for
us, in my view, dramatically, and it

changed the whole way of looking.

and an uncertain but still disturbing
threat of the combination of weapons of

mass destruction and terrorism.

Well, I wish we had more time.

Crystal and Kagan continue.

Saddam Hussein must go. This imperative
may seem too simple for some experts or

too daunting for the Clinton
administration, but if the United States

committed, as the President said in his
State of the Union message, to ensuring

that the Iraqi leader never again uses
weapons of mass destruction.

The only way to achieve that goal is to
remove Mr. Hussein and his regime from

power. Any policy short of that will
fail.

Mr. Hussein has obviously fought through
this scenario, and he likes his

chances. That is why he provoked the
present crisis, fully aware that it

lead to American bombing strikes.

He has survived them before, and he is
confident that he can survive them

They will not succeed in forcing him to
abandon his efforts to obtain weapons of

mass destruction.

The only way to remove the threat of
those weapons is to remove him. That

using air power and ground forces and
finishing the task left undone in 1991.

But wait, there's more.

PNAC cranked out this one on July 30,
2001.

just a month and 12 days before the
September 11th attacks.

It has a big fat picture of Osama bin
Laden's face on it. Again, this

information was juxtaposed with a bunch
of rhetoric about Saddam Hussein.

But they wrote, For bin Laden's
sleepers, agents already outside of

awaiting the right moment to strike an
American target, the situation is

probably a little better.

The lies about Iraq and 9 -11 are all
inside PNAC's papers.

The authors are the same people involved
in Israeli spy rings and Israeli arms

sales. and at least two of them, John
Lehman and James R. Thompson, were on

9 -11 Commission. From the pre -war hike
to the cover -up, they were involved

every step of the way.

Four months before the 9 -11 attacks,
Pearl Fife and Wolfowitz were discussing

with the Turkish ambassador about how to
divide up Iraq, and asked what Turkey

would need in exchange for allowing the
U .S. to hit the north through their

airspace.

and the Turks got it in the form of a $9
billion aid package awarded to

Turkey and Israel, which was lumped on
erroneously to the defense budget bill

large. Congress appropriated the money,
but then unconstitutionally, the Defense

Department allocated it out.

To itself, of course.

Douglas Veith and Paul Wolfowitz were on
the payroll of Northrop Grumman,

Richard Pearl, the Defense for Policy
chairman.

was locked in with Boeing through
Trireme and also Hollinger.

Pearl and Fife also set up a little go
-between in Turkey to act as a

selling arms there where they had sent
the newly acquired cash via aid, a .k

earmarked recycled military spending.

Anyone refusing to acknowledge that the
Iraq war was planned and sold to us by

this cabal of dual -citizen Israelis
must be a fool.

They wrote verbatim the pre -war hype,
Five years before the war, these same

people later faked evidence for their
deceptions and used moles in the media

repeat the garbage that they had already
been writing in the PNAC papers.

But until born -again Zionist Bush, no
one was stupid enough to listen to it.

200 spies were busted in the largest spy
ring ever conducted on U .S. soil.

Months after 9 -11, Israel was caught
spying again on the United States.

through Department of Defense employee
Lawrence Franklin, who worked out of an

office which met with Israeli generals
and was run by Douglas Feith, another

PNAC author.

Feith is a profiteer whose company,
Feith & Zell, is partners with an

settler, Mark Zell. The law firm got to
delegate reconstruction contracts in

Iraq.

Lieutenant Colonel Karen Krakowski
explains how military officers' opinions

dismissed or even punished by the
civilian cabal brought in by the

Enterprise Institute, the parent group
of PNAC.

She said, But in fact, my outspokenness
was probably never noticed because

civilian professionals and military
officers were largely invisible.

We were easily replaceable and
dispensable, not part of the team

the American Enterprise Institute, the
Center for Security Policy and the

Washington Institute for Near Affairs.

An early winter incident occurred that
was geared into my memory. A co -worker

and I were suddenly directed to go down
to the mall entrance to pick up some

Israeli generals.

Post 9 -11 rules require one escort for
every three visitors, and there were six

or seven of them waiting.

The Navy Lieutenant Commander and I
hustled down.

Before we could apologize for the delay,
the leader of the pack surged ahead,

his colleagues in close formation,
leaving us to double time behind the

they sped to the Undersecretary Pipe's
office on the fourth floor.

My fellow escort and I chatted on the
way back to our office about how the

generals knew where they were going.
Most foreign visitors to the five -sided

asylum don't. And how the generals
didn't have to sign in. I felt a bit

by the whole thing.

The Israelis were visiting the
Department of Defense without having to

and going straight to Feist's office,
where the secretive Office of Special

Plans was headed.

The same office Larry Franklin worked
for, who was sentenced to 12 years in

for spying for AIPAC, the Israeli lobby.

Why were Israeli generals visiting a
secretive group under the office of the

Clean Break and PNAC authors, where an
Israeli spy was also caught red -handed,

and none of it ever made the news media?
In fact, normal intelligence channels

weren't even aware that Fife's secret
office existed.

I'm not saying you did not do your duty,
please understand, but my point is, as

a congressman who trusted what I was
being told, I'm not only going to tell

committee, Senator Dorgan, but I am on
the Armed Services Committee, and I was

being told this information, and I wish
I'd had the wisdom then that I might

have now. I would have known what to
ask.

But I think many of my colleagues that
did not have the experience on the

Intelligence Committee, we just pretty
much accepted.

So where along the way, how did these
people so early on get so

much power?

that they had more influence in the
administration to make decisions than

the professionals.

Let me try to answer you first, but let
me say right off the bat I'm glad to see

you here. Thank you, sir.

As a Republican, I'm somewhat
embarrassed by the fact that you're the

member of my party here. I agree.

But I understand it.

I'd answer you with two words.

Let me put the article in there and make
it three.

The Vice President.

I'd have to interject something similar
to what I said to Senator Feinstein.

To a lot of the analysts working these
issues, we weren't aware of what was

going on up there, whether it was the
Vice President or somebody else. To give

you an illustration, I didn't even know
about the existence of the Fife office.

in the Pentagon until maybe six, seven
months before the war.

And the way I found out about the
existence of Mr. Feitz's office, because

somebody who worked on terrorism in our
bureau showed me a product produced by

that office.

As I recall, it was two pages long.

And it was the evidence linking Iraq
with terrorism.

And the person was giving it to me
effectively as comic relief.

saying, can you believe what's on this
paper was as if I had gotten my morning

traffic someday because there's a lot of
junk and intelligence that the analyst

knows that has to be sifted out to get
to the real colonels, and it looked like

an unsorted pile of junk.

And this is one reason the Fife office,
which does relate to the Secretary of

Defense and then to others, becomes
extremely important. And I didn't go

in what I read here. It's in my written.

those kinds of nodes and offices must be
completely eliminated because

people aren't even aware of them. There
aren't standard communications between

them and the rest of the intelligence
community.

And more importantly, there has been no
vetting of their personnel whatsoever

for professionalism, for experience in
that field. That office basically was

writing intelligence, which was getting
far more attention than a lot of what...

Carl and I, you know, were working on,
and yet it had none of the professional

standards, you know, that it applied to
the rest of the intelligence community.

And it was so low profile.

If you didn't know what was going on
behind the scene, to many of us, it was

utterly invisible until the last
moments.

Congressman Jones, if I can extend what
Wayne White mentioned with regard to the

detached nature of some of what was
going on in the Office of Secretary of

Defense and Office of Vice President.

what this little group under Mr. Fife
was doing and trying to come up with all

the scraps, trying to show a link with
al -Qaeda.

They did put together a briefing, which
was briefed out at Langley to Mr.

Tennant and to members of the
Counterterrorist Center. Again, I wasn't

on counterterrorism at the time. I
didn't receive the briefing.

But it wasn't the whole briefing, as we
later learned, that they...

provided down at the White House.

And the way I and others found out about
this was in a hearing of the Senate

Select Committee of Intelligence, a
closed hearing, in which one of Senator

Feinstein's colleagues had before him
the version of the briefing slides that

was given.

And my colleague, who was then Deputy
Chief of the Counterterrorist Center,

the version that he was given. And the
version that came to the Intelligence

Committee was missing the couple of
slides that were devoted to

criticizing the community for how they
were missing this big link between

and al -Qaeda. And here's what the
intelligence community is doing wrong

their analysis on this is so poor.

This was never briefed to Mr. Tenet or
the Counterterrorist Center. It was

briefed down at the White House.

And only thanks to one of the members of
the Senate Intelligence Committee did

we ever find out about it. But if I
could just add one more, and I would

disagree with my friend Carl Ford on
this.

that group wasn't established because
the intelligence community wasn't doing

its job.

It was doing its job rather intensively
and devoting a great deal of effort,

particularly the Counterterrorist
Center, again, I wasn't in it at the

this whole issue of Iraq and al -Qaeda
because they were asked so many

again and again and again and again and
again. So they wrote a bunch of papers.

It wasn't that they didn't do the good
analysis or come up with the specific

evidence.

The policymakers, these particular ones
in the Office of Secretary of Defense,

didn't like the answer.

And the answer was, there's no alliance.

And that was a very well -documented
answer.

And there was a lot of other information
that pointed in an opposite direction

from all these scraps that Mr. Feisoff
has put together and we later read about

in the Weekly Standard.

Evidence that showed, for example, that
there was not training going on, that

there were not contacts between Iraq
and...

just about any Islamist you could come
up with in Afghanistan. That was all the

other side that was ignored.

Now this one takes the cake. It was
written by Wolfowitz, the Kegans, and

Libby. If you're only going to read one
PNAC paper, let it be this one. And the

rest of the cabal all signed off on it.
It's called Rebuilding America's

Defenses, Strategy, Forces, and
Resources for a New Century.

It's probably PNAC's most infamous
paper.

It rehashes the same junk that's in all
the other papers and then adds that the

psychotic policies that they are
advocating probably won't be possible

some sort of catastrophe or crisis.

However, the insanity of that
hypothetical pales in comparison to the

eugenics that they also promoted.

It actually proposes using racially
specific bioweapons to get rid of

people.

This is the mindset of these Zionists.
Not only did they think of that, they

thought it would be okay to publish it.

They don't worry or care because they
know the press is not going to call them

out on it.

Of all the PNAC papers, this is probably
the most infamous one.

I believe a disproportionate amount of
attention has been pegged on this paper

because of the line and calling for a
new Pearl Harbor -like event to act as a

catalyst for their imperial escapades.

However, and I can't read this one to
you because it's too long, I think you

really need to read this entire document
if you haven't already because that

line just doesn't do it justice.

There are so many disgusting things in
this report.

And above you can see some more things I
didn't have time to get into, but

there's over 52 more papers they
published about War of the Rock, Syria,

Afghanistan.

their entire foreign policy for the
Middle East, and we've been following it

the T.

And it's all deception.

It's all lies.

And yet, with all the neocons' fanfare,
they just couldn't get the wars they

wanted until after 9 -11.

And after that, they associated those
lies to their original lies. And

they could push forward with their
dreams of bloody empire.

I think the president made the right
decision given what he knew.

Douglas Feith, of all the neocons, is
probably the dumbest person in the

which is saying a lot. Douglas Feith is
on his own level.

Lower than Bush, lower than Rumsfeld.

He gets his own category of stupid.

Under Secretary of Defense Douglas
Feith.

whom most of you probably know Tommy
Frank said was the stupidest blanky

man in the world. He was.

Let me testify to that. He was.

Seldom in my life have I met a dumber
man.

Vice office was passing classified
information to Israel through AIPAC

Keith Wiseman and Steve Rosen.

The man passing the documents, Lawrence
Franklin, was sentenced, but the people

receiving the information didn't get in
any trouble after threatening to knock

on everyone else who was involved, which
included the majority of the Bush

administration.

Fife with Pearl set up something called
IAI, International Advisors

Incorporated, in Turkey to act as a
miniature ATC. Fife was its sole

shareholder. It is essentially just
another bubble to profiteer through.

It's odd how the U .S. wrongly points
his finger at Iraq and even Iran,

them of building nuclear weapons, and
yet the real criminals trading nuclear

secrets and possibly nuclear material
are right here in our own government.

Our Undersecretary of State and former
Ambassador to Turkey, Mark Grossman, is

implicated in just such a crime. And
even though he'd been caught red -handed

with his dealings with the Turks and the
Israelis, nothing could be done about

it because the whistleblowers were
gagged.

To quote an old write -up from Justin
Raimondo, one of the best muckrakers out

there, immediately after 9 -11, the FBI
arrested a bunch of people suspected of

being involved with the attacks,
including four associates of key targets

counterintelligence operations.

Sabell heard the targets tell Mark
Grossman, we need to get them out of the

.S. because we can't afford them to
steal the beans.

Grossman duly facilitated their release
from jail and the suspects immediately

left the country without further
investigation or interrogation. That's

number three man at the State Department
facilitating the immediate release of 9

-11 suspects at the request of targets
of the FBI's investigation.

He's sourcing the Sunday Times, the same
paper that Mordecai Ben -Nunu turned to

to break the story about Israel's secret
nuclear arsenal.

Unfortunately, Ben -Nunu landed in jail
for that.

It would be Mark Grossman, who warned
his associates to stay away from

Jennings up front for the CIA,
particularly the wing that Valerie Plame

working for, which worked on tracking
nuclear weapons proliferation.

This became more public knowledge when
Novak and Louis Libby told the world to

stay away from Brewster Jennings and his
associates by ousting Valerie Plame as

a covert agent.

By ousting her, it was easy to deduce
that the company she worked for must

been a front, and thus all of the CIA
agents working for that were gone.

They're pointing the finger at Iraq and
Iran, but we know which country in the

Middle East secretly has nukes, and we
know which cabal within the United

is selling this information on the black
market, and it's in our own government.

It's Fife and Pearl and Grossman and the
same PNAC Zionist traitors that led to

the war in Iraq.

helped cover up Najir, ousted Valerie
Blaine, and blackmailed politicians for

their own financial interests.

And who were the end buyers for these
nuclear secrets?

General Mahmoud Ahmed.

The same man who wired $100 ,000 to 9
-11 hijacker Mohammed Atta, who, from

general, would pass on to AQ Khan, and
from there, to all the black markets, I

assume to the highest bidders.

Not only were they selling nuclear
secrets, they were also selling hooking

points.

Soft spots for blackmail to manipulate U
.S. officials.

Cybele Edmonds made valid complaints
about a colleague who was leaking

information illegally.

Cybele gets gagged and released from her
position, but the woman she complained

about turns out to be the daughter of an
official who worked for the general.

What happened to the other leakers?
Robert Novak would die, Louis Libby

have a trial, be convicted, found
guilty, and then Bush just commuted his

sentence anyway.

It's a little ironic that Louis Libby
gets his sentence commuted by George

when Louis Libby was the lawyer for the
Mossad agent Mark Rich, who got a pardon

from President Clinton for his role in
Iran -Contra illegal money laundering

not paying his taxes.

This point needs to be reiterated.

Why would State Department official Mark
Grossman get terror suspects out of

jail and say, we need to get them out of
the U .S.?

Because we can't afford them to spill
the beans.

Spill the beans on what?

And why would it matter if they were
outside the U .S.? Well, once they're

outside the U .S., they're no longer in
the FBI's jurisdiction.

They're in the CIA's jurisdiction.

And the CIA, we know, had withheld
information about terror suspects from

FBI. They knew al -Midhar and al -Hadmi
had been at an al -Qaeda summit meeting

in Malaysia.

and were living in the U .S. and San
Diego, and they refused to share that

information with the FBI.

Why?

Sabelle's three -hour interview report
in a SIF facility for the 9 -11

Commission was redacted, and I'd say
about 98 % of it completely censored.

She may as well have been talking to the
wall, because none of that information

was shared.

They just wanted to know what she knew.

Oddly, a male hooker, Jeff Gannon, who
Karl Rove brought in, who was pretending

to be part of a fake news agency, Talon
News, made references to internal

government memos about the plane affair
before they went public.

This is a male hooker spending the night
at the White House.

I wonder how he got access to that
information.

And where was the ISI's general on 9
-11?

He was having breakfast at Capitol Hill
with the director of the CIA, Porter

Goss, and also Bob Graham.

from Florida to Senator for the Senate
Intelligence Committee.

Around the same time, Osama bin Laden's
brother was having breakfast with George

Bush's father to discuss business deals.

George Bush Jr.

was in Florida reading a book to some
kids. Apparently, this book had a little

television inside of it which magically
had the first plane hitting the towers

on it because Bush claimed not once but
twice that he saw the first plane hit.

That was impossible because coverage of
the first plane hitting didn't air on

the day of 9 -11. It came after, when
they found the French filmmakers who

caught the attacks here indiscutously.

The chief of staff, well, first of all,
when we walked in the classroom, I had

seen this plane fly into the first
building. There was a TV set on, and,

know, I thought it was pilot error.

It's almost as if he had rehearsed what
to say and royally messed it up.

We're sitting outside.

The classroom waiting to go in, and I
saw an airplane hit the tower.

The TV was obviously on, and I used to
fly myself, and I said, well, there's

terrible pilot.

Why didn't the Secret Service react
after the second plane hit to get the

president out of his publicly announced
location if they were so worried about

terrorism? Israeli firsters were unable
to get their war until they could create

the myth of Saddam's men meeting with al
-Qaeda.

using moles in the media to repeat the
garbage of their own publications, which

is exactly what they did. There was pre
-written legislation ready to pass, and

when it looked like it might not work,
there was an anthrax attack to help push

it along.

This was initially blamed on Al -Qaeda,
who oddly, even though they hated for

our freedoms, decided to rope Israel
into the mix as well by declaring, death

America, death to Israel.

And just in case you forgot it was
Muslims, From 9 -11, they also wrote,

is great, and 9 -11 -2001 as well.

Which is funny because it would later be
the Israeli security forces claiming to

have witnessed a transfer of anthrax
from Iraqis to Al -Qaeda at a meeting in

Prague, which was impossible since
neither Iraq nor Al -Qaeda had anthrax,

there wasn't even a meeting in Prague
for them to meet in.

How does one witness the transfer of
something at a meeting that didn't take

place between two parties that didn't
have it? The target choices of the

military grade made in the USA anthrax
were interesting as well. The two

senators against the Patriot Act,
Patrick Leahy on the judiciary chair in

position to block it, the other, Tom
Daschle, the Senate Majority Leader,

calling to investigate 9 -11, were sent
to lethal spores, whereas...

Warmongering Fox News and Judith Miller,
a WMD liar, were sent hoax

anthrax, so they claimed.

Despite all these holes in the anthrax
story, it gets far worse.

A letter written to the Department of
Justice jumped the gun trying to frame

someone for the attacks, the problem
being it was mailed two days after the

first anthrax had been sent, but long
before any of the letters had been

or reported on.

Worst of all, even though by December of
2001, the FBI knew it was looking at

domestic terrorism,

the anthrax myth persisted about Iraq,
and Colin Powell used this scare tactic

in his speech to the UN as evidence of
weapons of mass destruction in Iraq,

saying they could produce anthrax and
kill thousands.

Speaking about mobile weapons labs, a
lie echoed by the now convicted criminal

Judith Miller, who spent 85 days in jail
over the...

plain Libby affair, Powell said to the
UN while holding a mock file of anthrax.

For example, they can produce anthrax
and botulinum toxins.

In fact, they can produce enough dry
biological agent in a single month to

thousands upon thousands of people.

Dry agent of this type is the most
lethal form for human beings.

Cheney also reiterated this lie on Meet
the Press restating the same propaganda.

The FBI ordered the Ames strain
destroyed and then went on a wild goose

through different suspects who had been
pegged by the ADL and ultimately landed

on a guy, Bruce Ivins, who had an odd
suicide, overdosing on Tylenol.

Later evidence shows he could not have
made the anthrax from his lab.

Dr. Perry McZell, a prior suspect, also
had a strange suicide.

The notes sent with the anthrax read,
death to America, death to Israel,

automatically associating Israel's
enemies with America's enemies.

Because the attackers had written 9 -11
and praise Allah on the notes and mailed

them from the same locations as the
hijacker cells in the U .S., the anthrax

attack was initially blamed on al
-Qaeda.

The mainstream press never asked for
evidence of the claims being made.

They just repeated them obediently and
blindly.

Some were even dumb enough to take the
Israelis at their word, as if Israel has

never lied to the United States and
would have no motive to implicate its

enemies with such a tale.

Not only that, they compounded on that
lie by adding that at this meeting, they

also got anthrax from the Iraqis, and
they blamed that on Al -Qaeda as well,

of which turned out to be lies.

The London Times reported that Iraqis
were seen passing anthrax to al -Qaeda.

Their sources were Israeli intelligence.

Here we can see the beginnings of the
setup.

With this lie, they connected 9 -11 to
Iraq.

Yet there was no meeting in Prague.

There were no Iraqis passing anthrax to
hijackers.

There were no Iraqis even talking to
hijackers.

Next, Iraq was accused of making
biological weapons, including anthrax,

mobile weapons labs.

This lie came from Judith Miller, who
wrote about it in the New York Times.

Judith Miller, the girlfriend of the
lawyer for the Mossad, Louis Libby.

Here's a woman who tried to blame both
the 1993 World Trade Center attack as

well as the Oklahoma City bombing on
Iraqis. She claimed that Iraq was using

mobile weapons labs to hide their
biological weapons of mass destruction

capable of producing anthrax.

Remember, Miller was also a journalist
who got a hoax letter of anthrax.

It's interesting because the postmark on
these letters, which had identical

notes as the real anthrax letters, were
sent before there was reporting about

them, as they had not been received yet.
So why would war -mongering Judith

Miller and Fox News be sent pretend
attacks, and yet real anthrax was sent

others who opposed the Patriot Act and
the war?

The formula is simple.

One.

State Al -Qaeda attacked the U .S. with
anthrax.

Two, state Iraq has biological and
chemical weapons of mass destruction,

including anthrax.

Three,

state that Al -Qaeda met with Iraq.

Four, state that Iraq gave anthrax to Al
-Qaeda.

All of these statements are lies, but it
leaves the public with the conclusion

that Iraq and Al -Qaeda were working
together.

The administration knows.

He's vowed, Hussein has vowed revenge.
He has anthrax. He loves biological

weapons. He has terrorist training
camps, including a 707 to practice on.

It wasn't just moles in the State
Department and DOD impeding the FBI's

investigation into 9 -11 suspects.

The FBI was impeding the FBI's
investigation into 9 -11.

It's a stretch, but one could still
claim maybe they're just trying to cover

their embarrassing failure and screw
-ups to save face.

Except there's absolutely no
rationalization in the world.

Why the FBI would allow the destruction
of Ames anthrax samples in Ames, Iowa.

I'll let you hear the words of Francis
Boyle in an interview with Boiling

Post, the man who drafted the Biological
Weapons Anti -Terrorism Act of 1989,

Harvard Law School grad, professor at
the University of Illinois. We've never

met, but he's coming up with the same
conclusions.

Get an updated list from the CIA.

And he said, well, we were working with
people at Fort Detrick on this matter.

And I said, well, Fort Detrick could
very well be the problem

here, not the solution.

Soon thereafter, within a few weeks, the
FBI authorized

the destruction of the United States
government collection

of Ames.

strain anthrax maintained out in Ames,
Iowa. And I was originally

hired here to teach criminal law. That
clearly was an obstruction of justice,

that you would be able to take those
Ames strains and reconstruct precisely

was involved in this attack.

So it became very clear to me that the
FBI, right from the get -go, was

in a cover -up here of who really was
behind the anthrax attacks.

Basically, the FBI has been lying about
it and covering it up.

I don't believe Ivins did it. Even the
people who work with him don't believe

did it.

And by the way, I should also point out,
Bowman was the same FBI guy

who sabotaged the request by the FBI

agents in Minneapolis, Rowley and the
rest of them, to get a subpoena

into Musawi's computer.

He was the exact same guy. That's right.
And Ullman had been ordered by someone

to sabotage that subpoena into Musawi's
computer.

The argument that the FISA court, there
wasn't enough evidence, that is total

baloney. If you study everything about
Moussaoui, there was more than enough

evidence for the FISA court to issue a
FISA warrant into his computer.

Later on then, Bowman was promoted and
given an award.

If we find out who was really behind the
anthrax attacks, perhaps we'll find out

who really was behind 9 -11.

On September 18th, two anthrax letters
were mailed.

Both came from New Jersey.

One had the Death to America and Death
to Israel letter inside of it, and it

addressed to Tom Brokaw of NBC.

This wouldn't be opened until October
12th. The other letter was sent to a New

York Post editor and would not be opened
until October 17th.

Two days later, still without any
letters having been opened yet,

On September 20th, three letters were
mailed.

Two of them were hoax letters sent from
Florida.

One was to Troxler, Howard Troxler, and
the other was to Judith Miller.

Troxler opened his on October 9th,
Miller opened hers on October 12th.

were hoax letters. However, the letter
inside, the written letter inside, had

the same rhetoric as the second letter
to Tom Brokaw.

The second letter to Ron Burkall also
came on September 20th and was opened on

October 5th. On September 26th, still,
no letters have been opened, no reports

have been made.

Philip Zack, somebody who got caught
stealing anthrax from a lab in Maryland,

sends a letter to the Justice Department
blaming Ayat Asad. That letter is open

on October 2nd.

How this person knew about anthrax
attacks and who to blame it on is a

because there hadn't been any reporting
on the anthrax attacks yet.

Also on October 2nd, the Patriot Act is
introduced, and it is opposed by Senator

Daschle and Senator Leahy, who are in a
position to prevent it from passing.

Leahy is the chairman of the Judicial
Committee and can block the bill.

Daschle is also in a position to block
the bill.

Daschle and Leahy opposed the Patriot
Act on October 6th, and sometime between

October 6th and 9th, we can't be sure
because the 7th was Sunday and the 8th

Columbus Day, anthrax was mailed to Tom
Daschle and Patrick Leahy, and it was

the deadliest anthrax so far meant to
kill him.

Daschle would open his letter on October
15th, and Leahy's, because it was

misrouted, would not be open until
November.

At least one other anthrax letter had
been mailed about September 21st or

They're not sure because it had already
been opened and was in the bag of mail

and contaminated all the rest of the
letters, so they don't have a clear

postmark. Around that date, it gets
opened on October 3rd, causes several

to get sick, and on October 4th, Robert
Stephen dies from anthrax, first person

to die from anthrax in the U .S. since
the 1970s.

And on October 5th, it is reported in
the news. This is the first report in

news about the anthrax.

James Woolsey, Judith Miller, Gary
Schmidt, Robert Kagan, William Crystal

all be blaming it on Iraq.

On October 15th, John McCain will go on
David Letterman, associating Iraq to Al

-Qaeda. If I could just make it very
quick, the second phase is Iraq.

There is some indication, and I don't
have the conclusions, but some of this

anthrax may, and I emphasize may, have
come from Iraq.

Bin Laden did not have the authority or
power to force FBI agents off of his

trail. Bin Laden didn't have the means
to set up a false flag and steal anthrax

from within American labs and take
credit for it with his hijackers and

associate it to Iraq to falsely lead
America into believing that Iraq and Al

-Qaeda were together and start a war
there to bog down American forces. The U

.S. and Israel did that all on their
own.

Carl Rove once professed that it didn't
matter what reality was because they

could make reality.

And that's exactly what they did in what
they rephrased as message force

multipliers, an old tactic borrowed from
Nazi propaganda about repeating a lie

enough times until the most prejudiced
or insecure among the populace start to

believe it. If they can get five or six
people to repeat the same lines in

different places in the press,
Regardless of how lacking in evidence

are, it will create the perception that
everybody is saying X, so X must be

true. This lemming effect works
particularly well with scare tactics,

used over and over by the mass media as
a form of deception or distraction.

Here is who all kept repeating the
Iraqis with Al -Qaeda lie, as well as

compounding lies that they merged with
it.

Once again, not a shred of evidence to
back any of this up. Pure scare tactics.

Same as the Iran is going to build a
nuclear bomb propaganda.

Intelligence relating to the Iraq -Al
Qaeda relationship was manipulated by

-ranking officials in the Department of
Defense to support the administration's

decision to invade Iraq when the
intelligence assessments of the

analysts of the intelligence community
did not provide the desired compelling

case. These monstrous lies were told by
embedded Zionist journalists who worked

with the administration's PNAC members.

For example, the lie that the lead
hijacker of 9 -11, Mohammad Atta, met

agents of Saddam was repeated by William
Sapphire of the New York Times May 9,

2002, which came from PNAC's Gary
Schmidt, who wrote in 2001 for the

Standard, an outfit run by PNAC's co
-founders Crystal and Kagan.

The story was leaked to Rutgers
September 18, 2001, just a week after 9

the same day as the first Anthrax
mailing.

Wow! They knew about the lead hijacker
as well as a meeting that never took

place within seven days.

They probably wanted to follow up on
this sooner than they did, adding the

anthrax part of the lie, assuming the
first letter would be open in just a

couple of days, but the mail didn't work
like that.

Reminds me of the BBC report plagiarized
from a college student in California.

This Atta met with Iraqi intelligence
lie was repeated by Vice President Dick

Cheney December 9, 2001 on national
television.

He later denied it in spite of being on
tape saying it. You have said in the

past that it was, quote, pretty well
confirmed.

No, I never said that. Okay. I never
said that. I think that is... Absolutely

not. What I said was it's been pretty
well confirmed that he did go to Prague

and he did meet with a senior official
of the Iraqi intelligence service in

Czechoslovakia last night.

He also ignorantly called the Czech
Republic Czechoslovakia.

One would think that if they had a
report from a country, that they would

least know the proper name for that
country. But he didn't.

What's sad is Cheney's considered to be
one of the smarter ones.

And he is, for a neocon.

I mean, the competition isn't fierce.

Gary Schmidt of PNAC wrote, Shortly
before getting on a plane to fly to New

Jersey from Europe in June 2000,
Mohammed Atta, the lead hijacker of the

jet airliner to slam into the World
Trade Center, and apparently the lead

conspirator in the attacks of September
11, met with a senior Iraqi intelligence

official. This was no chance encounter.

Rather than take a flight from Germany,
where he had been living, Atta traveled

to Prague, almost certainly for the
purpose of meeting there with Iraqi

intelligence operatives Ahmad Samir
Ahani.

This was a complete lie designed to
connect al -Qaeda to Iraq and thus Iraq

the 9 -11 attacks.

It was false.

Yet all the corporate news networks
repeated it anyway because it had been

the New York Times.

Of course, the Prince of Darkness was a
message force multiplier.

December 28, 2001, in an op -ed in the
New York Times, Richard Perle wrote, We

must strike Iraq.

Evidence of a meeting in Prague between
a senior Iraqi intelligence agent and

Mohammad Atta, the September 11th
ringleader, is convincing.

Another PNAC troll, Paul Wolfowitz,
added, Like the meeting of Mohammad Atta

with Iraqi officials in Prague, I think
the premise of a policy has to be...

We can't afford to wait for proof beyond
a reasonable doubt. February 23, 2002,

San Francisco Chronicle. Pearl was the
chairman of the Defense Policy Board in

the DOD and involved in too many other
criminal activities to get into just

Paul Wolfowitz was the Deputy Secretary
of Defense and later the head of the

World Bank and also involved in too many
crimes to get into just yet.

Later, neocons involved in the American
Turkish Council and the American

-Israeli Public Affairs Committee were
fingered in illegal black market weapons

trades, including nuclear material.

Sybil Edmonds, a translator for the FBI,
had the state secrets privilege enacted

on her as a gag order.

Every step has been taken to silence
investigation, information, and legal

action into these crimes.

AIPAC was also caught spying on the
United States.

Again. One of its moles, Larry Franklin,
who was sentenced to 12 years in jail,

was involved with the Nazir forgeries, a
bit of nuclear weapons propaganda,

which fit nicely with Judith Miller's
tube smith.

The British government has learned that
Saddam Hussein recently sought

significant quantities of uranium from
Africa.

If you don't know already, if you've
been living in a cave or getting all of

your news from TV, These forgers were so
sloppy that they didn't even fake the

right name on the documents and
ignorantly used the name of a former

minister who had not been in power for
more than a decade.

It would be the equivalent of trying to
pass off a modern document today and

signing it Ronald Reagan, which is not
even possible.

This bogus information was used anyway,
despite it being immediately debunked by

the CIA.

They knew it wasn't true.

The CIA is evil, but they're not stupid.

But it didn't matter, and they knew it
wasn't going to matter. The press never

took the 20 seconds or so that I just
did to explain this, with the exception

Bill Moyers on PBS.

All in one, you see the imperialists'
intentional deception and sloppiness

the media's yes -man partnership.

They can't claim incompetence when
they're the ones faking the documents.

And the media can't claim ignorance when
they will not report on the matter even

after the fact.

They lie to you together.

The mass media is just a pro -war PR
machine for the Pentagon.

Now, did Osama bin Laden set all that
up?

No. Osama bin Laden is dead.

Robert Mueller, the former director of
the FBI, finally told CNN in September

2002 that...

Quote, there was no legal proof to prove
the identities of the suicidal

hijackers. There seems to be a lot of
mystery surrounding Mohammed Atta.

He's the lead hijacker, dubbed so by the
mass media.

He was the one used to link Iraq to
anthrax, unfairly.

And then this guy takes a bag with him
on his final attack with all the plans

it and all the names of all the
hijackers on his final flight, which, if

discovered, would ruin the entire thing.

Agents in the Able Danger Program
tracking ATA had their reports redacted,

their accounts omitted from the 9 -11
Commission report, even after Zellacal

assured them that it would be in there.
They say they're afraid of our own

government, and when Colonel Schaefer
wrote a book about it, the Pentagon

up the copies and burned them.

Something to hide? Doing some follow -up
on what we knew about Mohammed Atta

leading up to 9 -11.

That's right. Some witnesses, apparently
there was a redacted form of what

people in the intelligence community
knew regarding that man right there,

Mohammed Atta.

in the Able Danger program.

And apparently the report had been
redacted. All the names had been blacked

Well, FoxNews .com got a clean copy and
called a number of the witnesses, five

in all. All of them said that we told
investigators one thing, and none of

things actually showed up in the 9 -11
commission. And, in fact, the

investigators from the Department of
Defense were a little agitated and

aggressive. So why wouldn't that show up
in that report? Well, these five

witnesses claimed that the Defense
Department was worried about taking some

the blame for 9 -11.

But here's what I don't understand.

Why wouldn't they put in the report
these findings?

maybe that would look at least like they
were kind of following the trail of

Mohammed Atta. Instead of just having
this whole situation happen, you know,

least it gives the American public the
image that at least we're kind of on to

him. I don't know which one's worse. But
were we on to him? And did we have a

picture of him? And did we know him by
name? And the name at that point was

Mohammed El -Saeed. And if we did know
him, why didn't we stop him? That's the

problem. But does it look any worse than
in August, bin Laden detained?

Determined to attack in the U .S. That
looks bad. There were so many mistakes.

There were so many times where we had a
chance to get bin Laden. You can go back

and back and back, but for some reason
the Defense Department put their line in

the sand and said these five people that
brought up the fact that we were

tracking a cell that included Mohammed
Atta in it leading up to 9 -11 was

redacted, not included. Now, Lieutenant
Colonel Tony Schaefer would not stand

for this. He said it was called
Operation Able Danger, and we were

Mohammed Atta.

And when he was interviewed... Phil
Zelkow, who ended up joining the State

Department, he said, you know, Tony,
this is an important part of the story.

We'll make sure it's in the 9 -11
report.

And it wasn't. There was no follow -up.
And Colonel Schaefer would not be

corralled. Now, I don't understand how
this led to Operation Dark Heart and the

purchases of 9 ,500 books by the Defense
Department that were intensely

destroyed. That were written by
Schaefer. Written by Schaefer.

They burned them. They did.

Well, what's going on? Some people who
agreed to speak to FoxNews .com did so

without giving their names because they
fear repercussions. I mean, come on.

What kind of repercussions could there
be? I mean, I believe that they fear

repercussions. What I'm saying is why
should they be put in that position

they would actually fear that?

I mean, are we all on the same team
here?

I think. Oh, somebody's on the same
team, all right, but we're not on it.

Yes, Atta's full name and his cell
number had been known since at least

of 1999.

Atta's handler or case agent, Mohammad
Zamar, who had also recruited Marwan Al

-Shahib, who was on Flight 175 in two
different money conduits, Saeed Bahaji

Ramzi bin Al -Shahib, had fought in
Bosnia and Afghanistan, and he, Ramzi,

and Marwan all lived together.

Zamar's phones had been tapped, and he
had also been mapped by Able Danger.

But the CIA acts like they learned
everything after the Moroccans captured

and sent him to Syria to be tortured.

Yet the CIA had been snooping on the man
that recruited and set up financial

channels for hijackers while he was
recruiting them. They had Marwan and

cell numbers and did nothing.

Nothing aside from cover it up, that is.
Months before the attack, a military

intelligence unit identified four men as
terrorists with al -Qaeda connections,

but government lawyers told them not to
share the information with the FBI.

According to Congressman Kurt Weldon, it
was a secret Pentagon intelligence

unit, codenamed Able Danger, that knew a
year before 9 -11 that lead hijacker

Mohammed Atta was in the United States
and connected to al -Qaeda. And as you

can see, they identified Mohammed Atta's
cell.

In the summer of 2000, he says, the
Pentagon Special Ops Command had

two terrorist cells inside the U .S. and
knew of the connection between Atta and

three other men who became hijackers. So
a year before 9 -11...

They had their picture? They had the
picture of Muhammad Atta and they knew

roughly where he was? Yes. Weldon, who's
a ranking member of both the Armed

Services and Homeland Security
Committees, says he got this story from

agents in the Able Danger Unit, one of
whom confirmed this to CBS News. But

there are major questions. If the
Pentagon ever knew in advance about

Atta, that was news to Secretary
Rumsfeld.

I have no idea.

I've never heard of it until this
morning. It was also news to the 9 -11

Commission, which looked extensively at
Atta's history. One Pentagon agent says

he told the Commission staff about Atta.
The Commission says the agent never

mentioned Atta's name.