S.Edmonds US Intimate Relations with Bin Laden

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

S.Edmonds US Intimate Relations with Bin Laden

Postby seemslikeadream » Thu Oct 15, 2009 11:35 pm

This is not news but read it again, please.

From Luke Ryland's blog Against All Enemies (links at original):

Former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds dropped a bombshell on the Mike Malloy radio show, guest-hosted by Brad Friedman (audio, partial transcript).

In the interview, Sibel says that the US maintained 'intimate relations' with Bin Laden, and the Taliban, "all the way until that day of September 11."

These 'intimate relations' included using Bin Laden for 'operations' in Central Asia, including Xinjiang, China. These 'operations' involved using al Qaeda and the Taliban in the same manner "as we did during the Afghan and Soviet conflict," that is, fighting 'enemies' via proxies.

As Sibel has previously described, and as she reiterates in this latest interview, this process involved using Turkey (with assistance from 'actors from Pakistan, and Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia') as a proxy, which in turn used Bin Laden and the Taliban and others as a proxy terrorist army.

Control of Central Asia
The goals of the American 'statesmen' directing these activities included control of Central Asia's vast energy supplies and new markets for military products.

The Americans had a problem, though. They needed to keep their fingerprints off these operations to avoid a) popular revolt in Central Asia ( Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan), and b) serious repercussions from China and Russia. They found an ingenious solution: Use their puppet-state Turkey as a proxy, and appeal to both pan-Turkic and pan-Islam sensibilities.

Turkey, a NATO ally, has a lot more credibility in the region than the US and, with the history of the Ottoman Empire, could appeal to pan-Turkic dreams of a wider sphere of influence. The majority of the Central Asian population shares the same heritage, language and religion as the Turks.

In turn, the Turks used the Taliban and al Qaeda, appealing to their dreams of a pan-Islamic caliphate (Presumably. Or maybe the Turks/US just paid very well.)

According to Sibel:

This started more than a decade-long illegal, covert operation in Central Asia by a small group in the US intent on furthering the oil industry and the Military Industrial Complex, using Turkish operatives, Saudi partners and Pakistani allies, furthering this objective in the name of Islam.

Uighurs
Sibel was recently asked to write about the recent situation with the Uighurs in Xinjiang, but she declined, apart from saying that "our fingerprint is all over it."

Of course, Sibel isn't the first or only person to recognize any of this. Eric Margolis, one of the best reporters in the West on matters of Central Asia, stated that the Uighurs in the training camps in Afghanistan up to 2001:

"were being trained by Bin Laden to go and fight the communist Chinese in Xinjiang, and this was not only with the knowledge, but with the support of the CIA, because they thought they might use them if war ever broke out with China."

And also that:

"Afghanistan was not a hotbed of terrorism, these were commando groups, guerrilla groups, being trained for specific purposes in Central Asia."

In a separate interview, Margolis said:

"That illustrates Henry Kissinger's bon mot that the only thing more dangerous than being America's enemy is being an ally, because these people were paid by the CIA, they were armed by the US, these Chinese Muslims from Xinjiang, the most-Western province.

The CIA was going to use them in the event of a war with China, or just to raise hell there, and they were trained and supported out of Afghanistan, some of them with Osama Bin Laden's collaboration. The Americans were up to their ears with this."

Rogues Gallery
Last year, Sibel came up with a brilliant idea to expose some of the criminal activity that she is forbidden to speak about: she published eighteen photos, titled "Sibel Edmonds’ State Secrets Privilege Gallery," of people involved the operations that she has been trying to expose. One of those people is Anwar Yusuf Turani, the so-called 'President-in-exile' of East Turkistan (Xinjiang). This so-called 'government-in-exile' was 'established' on Capitol Hill in September, 2004, drawing a sharp rebuke from China.

Also featured in Sibel's Rogues Gallery was 'former' spook Graham Fuller, who was instrumental in the establishment of Turani's 'government-in-exile' of East Turkistan. Fuller has written extensively on Xinjiang, and his "Xinjiang Project" for Rand Corp is apparently the blueprint for Turani's government-in-exile. Sibel has openly stated her contempt for Mr. Fuller.

Susurluk
The Turkish establishment has a long history of mingling matters of state with terrorism, drug trafficking and other criminal activity, best exemplified by the 1996 Susurluk incident which exposed the so-called Deep State.

Sibel states that "a few main Susurluk actors also ended up in Chicago where they centered 'certain' aspects of their operations (Especially East Turkistan-Uighurs)."

One of the main Deep State actors, Mehmet Eymur, former Chief of Counter-Terrorism for Turkey's intelligence agency, the MIT, features in Sibel's Rogues Gallery. Eymur was given exile in the US. Another member of Sibel's gallery, Marc Grossman was Ambassador to Turkey at the time that the Susurluk incident exposed the Deep State. He was recalled shortly after, prior to the end of his assignment, as was Grossman's underling, Major Douglas Dickerson, who later tried to recruit Sibel into the spying ring.

The modus operandi of the Susurluk gang is the same as the activities that Sibel describes as taking place in Central Asia, the only difference is that this activity was exposed in Turkey a decade ago, whereas the organs of the state in the US, including the corporate media, have successfully suppressed this story.

Chechnya, Albania & Kosovo
Central Asia is not the only place where American foreign policy makers have shared interests with Bin Laden. Consider the war in Chechnya. As I documented here, Richard Perle and Stephen Solarz (both in Sibel's gallery) joined other leading neocon luminaries such as Elliott Abrams, Kenneth Adelman, Frank Gaffney, Michael Ledeen, James Woolsey, and Morton Abramowitz in a group called the American Committee for Peace in Chechnya (ACPC). For his part, Bin Laden donated $25 million to the cause, as well as numerous fighters, and technical expertise, establishing training camps.

US interests also converged with those of al-Qaeda in Kosovo and Albania.

Of course, it is not uncommon for circumstances to arise where 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend.' On the other hand, in a transparent democracy, we expect a full accounting of the circumstances leading up to a tragic event like 9/11. The 9/11 Commission was supposed to provide exactly that.

State Secrets
Sibel has famously been dubbed the most gagged woman in America, having the State Secrets Privilege imposed on her twice. Her 3.5 hour testimony to the 9/11 Commission has been entirely suppressed, reduced to a single footnote which refers readers to her classified testimony.

In the interview, she says that the information that was classified in her case specifically identifies that the US was using Bin Laden and the Taliban in Central Asia, including Xinjiang. In the interview, Sibel reiterates that when invoking the gag orders, the US government claims that it is protecting " 'sensitive diplomatic relations,' protecting Turkey, protecting Israel, protecting Pakistan, protecting Saudi Arabia..." This is no doubt partially true, but it is also true that they are protecting themselves too, and it is a crime in the US to use classification and secrecy to cover up crimes.

As Sibel says in the interview:

I have information about things that our government has lied to us about... those things can be proven as lies, very easily, based on the information they classified in my case, because we did carry very intimate relationship with these people, and it involves Central Asia, all the way up to September 11.

Summary
The bombshell here is obviously that certain people in the US were using Bin Laden up to September 11, 2001.

It is important to understand why: the US outsourced terror operations to al Qaeda and the Taliban for many years, promoting the Islamization of Central Asia in an attempt to personally profit off military sales as well as oil and gas concessions.

The silence by the US government on these matters is deafening. So, too, is the blowback.


Here's the news - on to an actual court hearing


OEC rules in favor of Schmidt

By BRYAN PECK
Associate editor


A decision has been made by the Ohio Elections Commission regarding complaints filed against David Krikorian by Congresswoman Jean Schmidt earlier this month. Krikorian, a Democrat candidate in next year's primary, is not happy with the results. Schmidt originally filed nine complaints against Krikorian, stating that he had made false claims during the 2008 election about her taking thousands of dollars in Turkish Political Action Committee money in exchange for denying the Armenian genocide in World War I.

During the course of the proceedings, Schmidt dropped four of the complaints against Krikorian, leaving just five to be contested by the Ohio Elections Commission. During the course of the investigation, the commission heard from numerous witnesses, including a deposition from Jean Schmidt and former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds, a well known whistleblower. A video copy of Edmonds' deposition can be seen at www.newsdemocrat.com.

The Ohio Election Commission found in favor of Schmidt on the two claims that Krikorian had issued false statements in his 2008 campaign most notably calling contributions from Turkish PAC groups to Schmidt "blood money." Two other complaints did not get the required four votes for the commission to make a finding on, and the commission was split on the ruling for the last issue regarding Krikorian's comment that there was proof Schmidt had accepted money from Armenian government groups available on the Ohio Elections Commission website.

Krikorian is unhappy with the decision, and said that he plans to file an appeal.

"We are definitely appealing the decision," Krikorian said. "We objected to it right from the start. The Ohio Elections Commission does not have jurisdiction of a free speech debate."

Krikorian said that the Ohio Elections Commission should not have been presiding over the case, since he was speaking his opinion that Schmidt had accepted money in exchange for denying the Armenian genocide. According to Krikorian, the Ohio Elections Commission was looking for proof in the wrong places.

"They were looking for a bounced check or something in Jean Schmidt's account, but it's not going to be that obvious," Krikorian said. "I was extremely disappointed in the decision of the Ohio Elections Commission. Justice was not served. Any political body examining the situation in an objective way would find that what I was saying was true.

"In my opinion what I said was completely true, and we will be appealing their decision. We may be looking into some kind of legal action as well."

Krikorian said that he felt the Ohio Elections Commission was very biased in their decision, as three of the five people on the commission were Republicans. Krikorian said that one of the people on the commission had actually served with Schmidt in the state house.

"The whole thing was a sham, it was a kangaroo court and it has no place in this decision," Krikorian said. "I honestly can say I felt the fix was in from the start."

Phil Richter, executive director with the Ohio Elections Commission, said that out of the five commission members who had presided over the case, three were Republican, one was a Democrat, and one was an Independent. Richter said that if Krikorian chooses to file an appeal, the case will go to the Franklin County Court of Appeals.

Donald Brey, Schmidt's attorney on the case, said that he was happy with the decison made by the Ohio Elections Commission, and said that he hoped the issue ends here. Brey said that while they had the option to bring Krikorian up on criminal charges, they decided that a public reprimand would be enough.

"Voters have a right to the truth, and it's one thing to speak your opinion about an issue, but it's not okay to speak lies about your opponent just because it gets more votes," Brey said. "I don't know if they're planning on appealing, but I think they're going to have a hard time in appeal because I don't think they have much of a case."

Brey said that while three of the members on the Ohio Elections Commission had been Republicans, all five had voted in Schmidt's favor, including the Democrat and Independent commission members.

"We hope Mr. Krikorian has learned his lesson and if he wants to have a fair, open discussion, he's welcome to go for it," Brey said. "But it is not okay to spread lies about your opponent."

The commission gave Krikorian a public reprimand, but is not able to impose fines for public hearing cases.



FBI Veteran Executive Calls For Special Counsel Investigation, Prosecutions In Sibel Edmonds Case

Diary Entry by Jon Gold (about the author)


Details panic inside the Bureau, executive effort to 'keep this whole thing quiet' when matter first came to light in 2002. Further confirms FBI translator/whistleblower's allegations, credibility...


Source: www.bradblog.com

An 18-year Counterintelligence and Counterterrorism Manager for the FBI has called for a Special Counsel to be appointed to investigate the allegations of FBI translator-turned-whistleblower Sibel Edmonds. John M. Cole, who now works as an intelligence contractor for the Air Force, made his comments during an audio interview released late last week with radio journalist Peter B. Collins.

He also offered a detailed insiders look at the concerns among high-level officials inside the Bureau as Edmonds disturbing allegations began coming to light back in 2002, before they would be quashed for seven long years by the Bush Administration's unprecedented use of the so-called "State Secrets Privilege" to gag her.

Earlier last week, following the publication of a remarkable American Conservative magazine cover story interview with Edmonds --- detailing a broad bribery, blackmail and espionage conspiracy said to have been carried out between current and former members of the U.S. Congress, high-ranking State and Defense Department officials and covert operatives from Turkey and Israel, resulting in the theft and sale of nuclear weapons technology to the foreign black market --- Cole had been quoted by the magazine confirming one of Edmonds' key allegations.

"I am fully aware of the FBI's decade-long investigation of" Marc Grossman, he said in response to the AmCon article/interview. Grossman had served as the third-highest ranking official in the Bush State Department and was alleged by Edmonds in the interview, and in a sworn, video-taped deposition a month earlier, to have been the U.S. ringleader for a massive Turkish espionage scandal reaching through the halls of power and into top secret nuclear facilities around the country to the benefit of allies and enemies alike. Cole said that the FBI's counterintelligence probe "ultimately was buried and covered up," and that he believes it is "long past time" for an investigation of the case to "bring about accountability."

In his subsequent interview with Collins last week (audio and text excerpts posted below) Cole elaborated on those comments in much greater detail, noting that Edmonds has been "one hundred percent right on the money, on the mark" and confirming the existence of an "ongoing and detailed effort by Turkey to develop influence in the United States" through various illegal activities.

"Yes, I can confirm that," Cole told Collins, "That's true."

The FBI veteran executive also offered an insider's account of the panic that ensued inside the highest echelons of the Bureau following Edmonds first disclosure of information in 2002, recounting how an executive assistant director admitted to him at the time, just after the story first broke, "Well, all I know is that everything that Sibel is stating is true. I read her file. Everything she stated is, in fact, accurate."

Cole further describes how the concerns about Edmonds ultimately led to the Bush Administration's two-time use of the draconian "State Secrets Privilege" in hopes of keeping her extraordinary information from becoming public. "Everybody at headquarters level at the bureau knew that what she was saying was extremely accurate."

"I know they didn't want her to go out and speak about it at all," Cole revealed, "and I know they were trying to figure out ways of keeping this whole thing quiet, because they didn't want Sibel to come out."

He also offered information which directly counters one of the criticisms of Edmonds' allegations as frequently offered by skeptics. Namely, that as a short time FBI contract translator --- even though she was tasked to review some seven years of counterintelligence wiretaps made from 1996 to 2002 --- she couldn't have had enough understanding of the full scope of the investigations to understand what was really going on.

"The thing is," Cole explained to Collins, "the position that Sibel was in, she had access to extremely sensitive information. The translators have access to some of the most sensitive information that we receive."

He detailed how first-hand information goes first from the translators to the investigators who then act on it, as some of the most important information collected by FBI language specialists could have "implications that may affect even the White House, or policy."

"So what I'm saying is, I know she had access to some very sensitive stuff, and I could see why the Bureau would squirm over her coming out and speaking about some of the things that were going on."

The interview concluded with Cole's re-iteration of both his confidence in Edmonds' credibility, and his call for accountability.

"I would love to see, especially with the allegations that Sibel has come out with, her allegations --- which I believe are in fact true, I have no reason to doubt what she's saying --- I would love to see somebody take that, a Special Counsel or whatever, some group of people that you could trust, have them investigate those allegations and have people's feet held to the fire. Have them be held accountable for their actions --- and prosecuted if they've done wrong."

"You know, no one's above the law, and no one should be above the law," he added, along with one more chilling thought: "You know, it really irritates me that people are getting away with murder, in some cases. They should not be allowed to get away with that. There needs to be accountability. And that's what I'd love to see."



I've been seeking truth and accountability for the 9/11 attacks for the last 7 years.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Postby thatsmystory » Fri Oct 16, 2009 1:00 am

As I understand it:

Chomsky/Paul: 9/11 was retaliation for US foreign policy.

Edmonds: 9/11 was a preemptive strike between business partners.

Blowback doesn't fit the al Qaeda narrative--the formation of Alec Station in 1996. The embassy bombings in 1998. The thwarted Millennium attacks in late 1999. The Cole attack in 2000. The conduct of Alec Station in regard to ID'ed al Qaeda operatives. Manufactured blowback seems more likely.
thatsmystory
 
Posts: 416
Joined: Sun Jun 28, 2009 7:13 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby thatsmystory » Wed Oct 21, 2009 6:29 pm

thatsmystory wrote:As I understand it:

Chomsky/Paul: 9/11 was retaliation for US foreign policy.

Edmonds: 9/11 was a preemptive strike between business partners.

Blowback doesn't fit the al Qaeda narrative--the formation of Alec Station in 1996. The embassy bombings in 1998. The thwarted Millennium attacks in late 1999. The Cole attack in 2000. The conduct of Alec Station in regard to ID'ed al Qaeda operatives. Manufactured blowback seems more likely.


Anyone have an explanation? How does blowback make sense when the CIA was aware that al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar were in the US since 1/00?
thatsmystory
 
Posts: 416
Joined: Sun Jun 28, 2009 7:13 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby smiths » Wed Oct 21, 2009 9:04 pm

as i understand it

smiths: the brains of 9/11 are inside current and former US gov and US corporations, the operatives were mostly foreign and contracted through Saudi and Israeli channels

Osama was heard to yell from his 'cave', "I am just a patsy"
the question is why, who, why, what, why, when, why and why again?
User avatar
smiths
 
Posts: 2205
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 4:18 am
Location: perth, western australia
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby xsicbastardx » Wed Oct 21, 2009 9:48 pm

And people still wonder how and why Osama was allowed to walk across the border into waziristan with his doctors and bodyguards.

I bet dollars to sense the man is alive and well waiting to be served up to the American Public just like Oswald and McVeigh. I bet he also thinks he's really out smarted the Americans.

Talk about Political and Social Theatre.
The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist

Image
xsicbastardx
 
Posts: 254
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 5:33 am
Location: Colorado
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby 8bitagent » Wed Oct 21, 2009 10:43 pm

thatsmystory wrote:
Anyone have an explanation? How does blowback make sense when the CIA was aware that al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar were in the US since 1/00?


Precisely. I roll my eyes every time I hear Ron Paul, Schuer, or any liberal talking about "blowback" and "mistakes" were made. And its not even that I believe "the gub'ment" did 9/11 per se...I think there was a very complex
narrative running above and below. I think of 9/11 as a computer program really. Hey, isnt that what al Qaeda originally was?

al-Midhar and al-Hamzi are certainly key rosetta stones to unlocking the 9/11 taboo mystery

smiths wrote:as i understand it

smiths: the brains of 9/11 are inside current and former US gov and US corporations


I used to entertain such things, but the more I look into it...it almost seems like even the bad guy "neocons" truthers believe were behind 9/11 as well as the bulk of the CIA etc was caught off guard and scrambling on 9/11.

I have a feeling everyone got punk'd on 9/11, everyone got false flagged. The US apparatus, al Qaeda, etc...it's like a bully manipulating kids on a playground into fighting eachother. "pssst, did you hear what that kid said about you?" "hey, yeah you, you know Jimmy's been saying bad stuff about your mom, ya should go kick his ass!"

So we have al Qaeda operatives convinced they did 9/11 alone, and for "jihad against the west"

We have US officials perplexed and thinking 9/11 was merely the work of al Qaeda

And we have various nodes and nexus points across the global deep state and criminal networks conduited and used,

Aww, but who is the true puppet master? Im not sure there's prima facie for some smoke filled room guys in a US bunker somewhere, or "the military industrial complex and Bush white house" as many posit.
"Do you know who I am? I am the arm, and I sound like this..."-man from another place, twin peaks fire walk with me
User avatar
8bitagent
 
Posts: 12244
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 6:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby 8bitagent » Wed Oct 21, 2009 10:46 pm

xsicbastardx wrote:And people still wonder how and why Osama was allowed to walk across the border into waziristan with his doctors and bodyguards.

I bet dollars to sense the man is alive and well waiting to be served up to the American Public just like Oswald and McVeigh. I bet he also thinks he's really out smarted the Americans.

Talk about Political and Social Theatre.


Indeed. I never bought the "hijackers still alive meme", and I have a hard time buying the "bin Laden died years ago" thing. The reason why these heavily anomalous bin Laden tapes/audio tapes(like the infamous sept 2007 one) seem like their fake...is because its possible either bin Laden dont look so good...or they WANT us to believe he's dead.

We're talking about the two most infamous people on the planet right now in our story of the world, just in the last few years:
Osama and Obama. And the elite, who brought us both the devil Osama and lightbringer Obama Im pretty sure have one last surprise for us with this story.

Truthers claimed KSM was "killed", but clearly he is alive and possibly headed for a kangaroo trial in NYC with bin Alshidbh.
"Do you know who I am? I am the arm, and I sound like this..."-man from another place, twin peaks fire walk with me
User avatar
8bitagent
 
Posts: 12244
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 6:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby 8bitagent » Wed Oct 21, 2009 10:48 pm

Is it me, or does this "US worked with bin Laden right up to 9/11" story seem a little too convenient, a little too "bone throw to the ct'ers"?
Why did she never mention this?
Why has she always been a favored star to the CD/Inside Job folks
yet never really gave more than a vague reason why her info relates to 9/11?

I support her and Indira Singh strongly, but like everyone else I have to question all the information.
"Do you know who I am? I am the arm, and I sound like this..."-man from another place, twin peaks fire walk with me
User avatar
8bitagent
 
Posts: 12244
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 6:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby thatsmystory » Thu Oct 22, 2009 1:45 am

8bitagent wrote:Is it me, or does this "US worked with bin Laden right up to 9/11" story seem a little too convenient, a little too "bone throw to the ct'ers"?
Why did she never mention this?
Why has she always been a favored star to the CD/Inside Job folks
yet never really gave more than a vague reason why her info relates to 9/11?

I support her and Indira Singh strongly, but like everyone else I have to question all the information.


I don't understand this one either.

Edmonds' theory sounds similar to that of Peter Lance in regards to Ali Mohamed--US intel* was playing a dangerous game and got burned by a triple agent. As if US intel was truly fooled by Ali Mohamed. Trento pushes a similar concept in relation to al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar. Again he would have us believe that US intel trusted them.

What about the previous attacks?

*(to fit Edmonds' model) Deep state players were playing a dangerous game and got burned by their al Qaeda business partners.
thatsmystory
 
Posts: 416
Joined: Sun Jun 28, 2009 7:13 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby 8bitagent » Thu Oct 22, 2009 1:57 am

thatsmystory wrote:
8bitagent wrote:Is it me, or does this "US worked with bin Laden right up to 9/11" story seem a little too convenient, a little too "bone throw to the ct'ers"?
Why did she never mention this?
Why has she always been a favored star to the CD/Inside Job folks
yet never really gave more than a vague reason why her info relates to 9/11?

I support her and Indira Singh strongly, but like everyone else I have to question all the information.


I don't understand this one either.

Edmonds' theory sounds similar to that of Peter Lance in regards to Ali Mohamed--US intel* was playing a dangerous game and got burned by a triple agent. As if US intel was truly fooled by Ali Mohamed. Trento pushes a similar concept in relation to al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar. Again he would have us believe that US intel trusted them.

What about the previous attacks?

*(to fit Edmonds' model) Deep state players were playing a dangerous game and got burned by their al Qaeda business partners.


You pretty much summed it up.

Have you or anyone here seen Bush's War? Its a 2 hour 2008 PBS documentary about 9/11 and the neocons:
http://video.pbs.org/video/1278730554/

Now...why is it Coffer Black, Cheney, and all these top senior CIA
guys are so angry about 9/11, so angry at al Qaeda, etc? I've been in the truth movement/research thang' for 5 years, and the idea that the "governnent did 9/11" seems less and less plausible...just as implausible as "al qaeda concieving and acting out 9/11 alone".

So we have four mindsets:

The blowback/incompetence meme.

The "looming tower/triple cross/sibel edmonds/5 secrets of 9/11 book"
view that the CIA and US govt played a dangerous game using/associating/duping al Qaeda but burned.
Especially US is still incompetent and innocent of 9/11

Then theres the "US government and or Israel did 9/11"

And the "al Qaeda did 9/11, but US purposefully allowed it"

And from where Im sitting, none of these explanations fit well to me or answer anything.

I'm convinced there's something more shadowy and complex that used al Qaeda and played a fast one on the US.

And the whole Robert Wright-Yasin al Qadi-WAMY-Ptech-Saudi yarn,
the whole Phoenix Memo/Colleen Rowley/Harry Samit/John Oneil, James Bamford AND Peter Lance stuff fits into a side narrative where higher ups trickled down obstruction across the board.

But who was playing who? I've read Bamford, Peter Lance and others(including "Ghost War")

My only conclusion is that EVERYONE was getting played, and it wasnt "the US", or Saudi Arabia or a state per se...
"Do you know who I am? I am the arm, and I sound like this..."-man from another place, twin peaks fire walk with me
User avatar
8bitagent
 
Posts: 12244
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 6:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Nordic » Thu Oct 22, 2009 2:18 am

Well you can strain your brain as much as you want, but the parallels in M.O. between the JFK murder, the RFK murder, and 9/11 are something to always keep in mind.

Maybe we should find out who hypnotized Sirhan Sirhan. Might be a start.

I'm pretty much in Smiths' camp on this one.
Nordic
 
Posts: 14230
Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 3:36 am
Location: California USA
Blog: View Blog (6)

Postby thatsmystory » Thu Oct 22, 2009 2:27 am

8bitagent wrote:My only conclusion is that EVERYONE was getting played, and it wasnt "the US", or Saudi Arabia or a state per se...


I assume you are referring to something like PDS's Meta Group.

IMO such a group would be in league (a business relationship) with the US deep state.

The Black/Cheney overreaction seemed calculated. After all Halliburton/Black Water benefited from the WoT. The torture seemed intended for intimidation/false confessions/enraging the local population to justify continued occupation. The unitary executive theory seemed intended to move the US towards overt fascism.
thatsmystory
 
Posts: 416
Joined: Sun Jun 28, 2009 7:13 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby 8bitagent » Thu Oct 22, 2009 3:42 am

Nordic wrote:Well you can strain your brain as much as you want, but the parallels in M.O. between the JFK murder, the RFK murder, and 9/11 are something to always keep in mind.

Maybe we should find out who hypnotized Sirhan Sirhan. Might be a start.

I'm pretty much in Smiths' camp on this one.


Oh you couldn't be more right on with the parallels. In re-watching the JFK director's cut on dvd, I couldn't even keep track of all the eerie parallels between the JFK and 9/11 events.

Btw, the definitive RFK assassination documentary "RFK Must Die" is now online: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rz6tiAJq4vk
From 2007, it still stands as the most explosive and amazing documentary I've ever seen.
"Do you know who I am? I am the arm, and I sound like this..."-man from another place, twin peaks fire walk with me
User avatar
8bitagent
 
Posts: 12244
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 6:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby 8bitagent » Thu Oct 22, 2009 4:01 am

thatsmystory wrote:
I assume you are referring to something like PDS's Meta Group.

IMO such a group would be in league (a business relationship) with the US deep state.

The Black/Cheney overreaction seemed calculated. After all Halliburton/Black Water benefited from the WoT. The torture seemed intended for intimidation/false confessions/enraging the local population to justify continued occupation. The unitary executive theory seemed intended to move the US towards overt fascism.


Well it was this article here: http://www.lobster-magazine.co.uk/artic ... l-drug.htm as well as Indira Singh's Michael Corben interview(both exactly 4 years ago this week) that opened my eyes past the more short sighted "US mil/neocons did 9/11" frame of thinking.

One has to wonder, why are all the guys we think were in on 9/11, themselves genuinely concerned about al Qaeda and Islamic terrorism as some dire situation? To me I see it both ways...I see how global jihad's every movement, financial artery and command structure is directly controlled or tied to the outgrowth of what came from BCCI and other like nexus points.
But I also see how "Islamic terrorism" and organized jihad is *only* as dangerous as their handlers allow them to be...case in point, Richard Reid's "Shoebomber" escapade could have genuinely been a non agent provocateured al Qaeda event. An example of how pathetically inefficient and goofy their plots are when they act alone.

But then I also wonder...why is KSM allowed to teach courses to CIA students and be treated so laxed these days at Gitmo if he was the "one that masterminded the death of 3000 Americans"?
Afterall, KSM and cohorts might be given the royal NYC trial treatment in 2010.

Now it's clear as day to you and I that higherups under both Clinton and Bush stood down the FBI and handicapped them from going after Saudi terror financiers, terror charities and al qaeda operatives

It's clear the NSA, CIA, and Able Danger were all bound from "putting the puzzle pieces" together despite all three actively following and or monitoring the hijackers and bin Laden's inner circle.

Do we have proof of the ISI-Atta-$100,000 story? Do we have proof of the bin Laden-CIA-Dubai hospital story, or even if bin Laden truly has kidney issues? Do we really know if any of this stuff is true?

Ultimately, all we have are 19 names and a few men who float around bin Laden's circle. And it's precisely with this group that the official story can be shown to be more than an al Qaeda job. As al Qaeda seems part and parcel with something much bigger.

However...*something* has to convince authorities these guys are a threat, even tho VIRTUALLY EVERY "al Qaeda" linked major attack in a major city seems to have inside job elements. Be it attacks in Saudi Arabia, England, Spain, North Africa, etc.
"Do you know who I am? I am the arm, and I sound like this..."-man from another place, twin peaks fire walk with me
User avatar
8bitagent
 
Posts: 12244
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 6:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby smiths » Thu Oct 22, 2009 4:22 am

what makes you think cheney or cofer black was concerned about al-queda?
the question is why, who, why, what, why, when, why and why again?
User avatar
smiths
 
Posts: 2205
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 4:18 am
Location: perth, western australia
Blog: View Blog (0)

Next

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests