Original subtitles

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.