Webster Tarpley: "Filibuster Al Qaeda Founder Robert Gates"

(Today, Webster Tarpley released a statement against Robert Gates' nomination as Secretary of Defense. Gates' relationship to the Muj has also recently been explored at the Daily Kos, in a post called, Robert Gates Promoted and Financed Osama Bin Laden. -r.)


Wednesday, December 6, 2006

"Most damning of all is the fact that Gates was one of the founders of al Qaeda, the CIA’s Arab Legion which was assembled to attack the Soviets in Afghanistan. Gates is thus part of the infrastructure that produced the patsies of 9/11..."


The nomination of Robert Gates to be Secretary of Defense must be rejected. Gates is deeply implicated in three decades of crimes by the intelligence community. There is no reason to think he intends to begin the necessary rapid departure of US forces from Iraq. His nomination by Bush can only be read as a deliberate provocation directed against the new Democratic Congress. Will the Democrats fight back, or will they capitulate? The American people are watching the Democratic Senators carefully, and they are appalled by the self-congratulatory and clubby narcissism of the Senate at a time when US forces are facing encirclement and decimation in Iraq and Afghanistan. Senators must not only vote against Gates; they must stop the confirmation process with a filibuster. A look at Gates’ sordid record shows why.

Robert Gates was an integral part of the gun-running, drug-running, and death squad murders lumped under the heading of the Iran-Contra scandal. Gates started in Iran-contra as a stooge of William Casey, and continued under Bush the elder.

When Gates was nominated by Reagan to be head of the CIA in 1987, his role in Iran-contra crimes was already so filthy and so blatant that he was forced to drop out of contention under questioning. In doing this, Gates was seeking to defend his new master, George H.W. Bush, who at that time was preparing a presidential bid for 1988. The elder Bush was the czar of all Reagan-Bush covert operations, including Iran-contra. Gates fell on his sword to avoid revelations which would have doomed the candidacy of Bush the elder. Payback for Gates came in June 1991, when he was nominated once again to be head of the CIA, this time by Bush the elder. Sam Nunn and some others posed embarrassing questions, but this time the cover-up of Gates’ Iran-contra role was supervised by Sen. David Boren of the Bush Skull & Bones clique. The Democrats, intimated by the elder Bush’s apparent victory in the first Gulf war, rolled over. If Gates was too dirty to even get to a vote in committee in 1987, how can he be acceptable today? If Democratic Senators like Levin and Biden opposed Gates in 1991, how can they find him acceptable for a much more important post at a time of far greater crisis?

Gates’ resume is marked by a total absence of independent and competent judgment. His pedigree is rather that of a stooge who serves powerful masters. The first was Reagan’s CIA Director William Casey, the kingpin of Iran-contra. The second was George H.W. Bush, who took over that role from Casey. Gates appears as a Bush family retainer, as when he was tapped by the family in 1999 to become Dean of the George Bush School of Government and Public Service at Texas A&M University. Gates is a secret government toady, not the autonomous figure of integrity required to terminate US involvement in Bush’s catstrophic Iraq adventure.

The Bush regime has become infamous for fixing the facts and the intelligence to suit the pre-determined policy of aggression and adventurism. As Pentagon chief, Gates would control the majority of the US intelligence budget. His track record promises nothing but more faked intelligence. In September 1991, Time Magazine cited widespread reports that Gates “cooked the books” while he was at the CIA to support the political demands of the Reagan and Bush regimes. A New York Times editorial of November 4, 1991 concluded that "charges that Mr. Gates slanted intelligence assessments, leaving Congress in the dark and more amenable to administration policy, stand unrefuted." George Shultz reports in his memoirs that he “felt that Gates was giving me an idealized picture of what was an altogether different reality,” and complained to Gates on January 5, 1987, “I don't have any confidence in the intelligence community… I feel you try to manipulate me. So you have a very dissatisfied customer. If this were a business, I'd find myself another supplier." The Senate would be well advised to find itself another supplier today. Will Gates resist the new attacks on Iran, Syria. North Korea, demanded by Cheney and the neocons? His assurances in this regard are worthless.

In the final report of the Independent Counsel for Iran/Contra Matters, Lawrence Walsh left little doubt that he believed Gates had given perjured testimony during that investigation. But Walsh concluded that the matters involved were so complicated that it would be very difficult to prove them before a jury. For this reason and for no other, Gates did not face criminal charges for perjury.

Most damning of all is the fact that Gates was one of the founders of al Qaeda, the CIA’s Arab Legion which was assembled to attack the Soviets in Afghanistan. Gates is thus part of the infrastructure that produced the patsies of 9/11:

According to former CIA Director Robert Gates’s memoir From the Shadows, the big expansion of the US covert operation in Afghanistan began in 1984. During this year, “the size of the CIA’s covert program to help the Mujaheddin increased several times over,” reaching a level of about $500 million in US and Saudi payments funneled through the Zia regime in Pakistan. As Gates recalled, “it was during this period [1985] that we began to learn of a significant increase in the number of Arab nationals from other countries who had traveled to Afghanistan to fight in the Holy War against the Soviets. They came from Syria, Iraq, Algeria, and elsewhere, and most fought with the Islamic fundamentalist Muj groups, particularly that headed by Abdul Resaul Sayyaf. We examined ways to increase their participation, perhaps in the form of some sort of ‘international brigade,’ but nothing came of it. Years later, these fundamentalist fighters trained by the Mujaheddin in Afghanistan would begin to show up around the world, from the Middle East to New York City, still fighting their Holy War – only now including the United States among their enemies. Our mission was to push the Soviets out of Afghanistan. We expected a post-Soviet Afghanistan to be ugly, but never considered that it would become a haven for terrorists operating worldwide.” (Gates 349) But the international brigade Gates talked about was in fact created – as the group now known as al Qaeda. (Tarpley, 9/11 Synthetic Terror, pp.139-140 )

This is the same al Qaeda which provided the troupe of patsies, psychotics, and double agents (bin Laden, Atta, Moussaoui, etc.) which were used to pin the 9/11 attacks on Arabs and Moslems – instead of the US bankers’ rogue network which actually carried out 9/11 for geopolitical reasons. Gates is up to his ears in the terror apparatus of this rogue network, the September criminals who created 9/11.

There can be no question of approving such a candidate. Even the Senate’s willingness to hold hearings for so compromised a figure amounts to an obscene farce. In the recent election, Democrats campaigned against the rubber-stamp Republican Congress. These same Democrats dare not rubber stamp the Gates nomination now. In particular, Democratic presidential candidates in the Senate are reminded that if they fail to filibuster Gates, the aroused anti-war base of the Democratic Party will demand accountability on the campaign trail. We do not want bi-partisan sellouts, but rather a real opposition to the Bush regime and its crimes. Above all, we want 9/11 truth as the essential precondition for restoring lawful government.

Webster G. Tarpley
Washington DC

Show "NO Hijackers" by Amanda Reconwith

Amanda, Take Off the Tin Hat

Amanda, I was standing two blocks from the Trade Center on the morning of 911, along with countless others, we all saw the plane hit Tower # 2. Afterwards, all of America watched thousands of times on network news images of both Towers being hit by planes. The only place none of us have ever seen a plane is at the pentagon. I suspect a plane did hit the pentagon as well, but what sort of plane, I have no idea about. What is highly suspicious is the fact that the FBI has failed to release any of the hundred or so available videos of whatever it was that hit the pentagon. Keep your head clear, we are dealing with possible enemies within our own ranks. These are serious times.


Did you consider the other evidence that shows AA 77 did in fact hit the Pentagon? If so, why would a video make any difference whatsoever?

It does not make a bit of difference, of course. We know the Titanic sank without a video. How did we know that?

Oh Really

First off, they found the Titanic at the bottom of the sea, we never found the plane which hit the pentagon. Secondly, there are well over 100 different videos showing something hitting the pentagon, why haven't we seen any of them? This is even after countless request from conservative groups like Judicial Watch. There's not a legitimate reason in the world to not show the demanding public the videos (all of them). The fact that haven't shown them only breeds suspicion. They could settle the whole matter by simply releasing the videos (all of them).

Hey Amanda, is this CB

Hey Amanda, is this CB Brook's day off? How's life at the Pentagon?

no planes?

The Pentagon possibly had no plane...but all 9/11 no planes? Cmon now

Unanswered questions remain

Five Years On, Unanswered Questions About December Seventh Remain

In honor of tomorrow\'s sixty-fifth anniversary of Pearl Harbor, I\'ve dredged up a sixty-year-old Routers piece on who was really behind it...

December 7, 1946

HONOLULU (Routers) Five years after the sinking of the battleships in Pearl Harbor, many still question the official government story of what happened on that fateful day, and who was responsible. Some believe that the Roosevelt administration did it themselves, deliberately, making it look like Japanese religious fanatics were responsible, in order to drag the country into a war that they could get by no other means, to benefit arms merchants and the Jews.

The controversy has been renewed by a recently released film documentary, titled \"Loose Ships.\" It makes a compelling case against the Shinto extremist theory, citing inconsistent eyewitness reports, mistaken radar readings, and structural analysis of the sunken battleships.

\"It makes no sense to think that Japanese Shintoists could have done this,\" explains one of the film\'s producers. \"Shinto is a deeply spiritual religion, derived from Buddhism, worshiping nature. A Shintoist would never have desecrated Pearl Harbor with all of that leaking and burning diesel fuel and oil. It is fundamentally a religion of peace.\"

He points out that many eyewitnesses saw American planes in the air that day, and that the radar images that many claim, preposterously in his view, were of the attacking Japanese aircraft, were actually a squadron of American B-17s on its way to Hickam Air Force Base, perhaps to take part in the plot. The Truman administration itself has admitted that there was a group of bombers in the area that morning, on its way from the mainland, though a War Department spokesman claimed that it was too far away and in the wrong direction to appear on radar at that point in time.

The documentarian went on to expand on his theory. \"We don\'t think that Japanese aircraft would have the range to get here all the way from Japan, but if by some miracle they did, it was probably to protect Honolulu, in which many Japanese live, from the administration plot. That\'s probably what people were seeing.\"

Some have examined the wreckage of the Arizona, and claim that it wasn\'t brought down by aerial bombs, but by charges planted on the ship beforehand.

\"Look at those two huge circular holes in the front and rear of the sunken ship,\" he said. \"No bomb is big enough to make a hole that size, and do it so cleanly. It was obviously a shaped charge of some kind. It\'s just not possible to take down ships that big with the little bombs that are carried in those little Japanese airplanes.\"

\"They killed thousands of sailors for their filthy war, and many of them died a long and horrible death in air pockets. And take a look at the roster of the people who died on the Arizona. How many Jewish names do you see there? I think they were warned ahead of time.\"

\"It was all part of the Zionist neo-liberal conspiracy to drag America into a needless war of choice.\"

In response to suggestions that the Japanese used aircraft carriers, and that many of the Japanese planes were torpedo bombers, and that the large holes were the empty sockets for the gun turrets, that were removed afterward, he scoffed. \"That\'s all just Franklin Delano Rosenfeld administration propaganda,\" he sneered knowingly.

Some enterprising and innovative people have carried the analysis further. In one sequence shown in the documentary, a man built a wooden model of the ship in his pond, and filmed himself dropping lit firecrackers on it from above, to demonstrate how preposterous was the notion that ships could be sunk by bombs. They seemed to have no effect other than a slight scorching of the deck, and the sturdy little toy remained afloat.

He was proud of his own small part in uncovering the cover up. \"Other than the fact that the ship is wood, which is much weaker than steel, and I used firecrackers instead of iron bombs, and that there was no ammunition magazine aboard to explode, this is a perfect simulation of what the Roosevelt administration claims happened to the Arizona. But there the ship floats, to show to one and all the administration\'s lie. And how convenient of Roosevelt to die a year and a half ago, so he can avoid having to answer these questions.\"


no plane at pentagon or in PA, two non-hijacked planes in NY

to clarify, I do mean no arab muslim hijackings. The planes were real, the flights MAY have been real, and MAY have been hijacked--by remote control. It's not that hard to keep straight, even with all the disinfo bandied about by the ever-hopeful shills!


Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero

WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force


he's just another dirtbag, goon.....

from our CIA. There's going to be something shaking very soon I fear.

Repukes and Dems

A like can't wait to anoint Gates.

He is exactly who they are looking for and without a full blown revolution by the people to stop this madness nothing is ever going to change.

The Democrats aren't going to do a damn thing in January except a few pretend investigations.


You have to love conspiracy theory logic. He quotes Gates stating that they didn't support the Arab Mujahadeen as evidence to support his assertion that the CIA did support them.

As Gates recalled, “it was during this period [1985] that we began to learn of a significant increase in the number of Arab nationals from other countries who had traveled to Afghanistan to fight in the Holy War against the Soviets.They came from Syria, Iraq, Algeria, and elsewhere, and most fought with the Islamic fundamentalist Muj groups, particularly that headed by Abdul Resaul Sayyaf. We examined ways to increase their participation, perhaps in the form of some sort of ‘international brigade,’ but nothing came of it.

Operation Cyclone

Robert Gates

Rumsfeld out. Gates In. This is a different skunk but has the same smell to him. Fact be known he work under Bush Sr Also.

9/11 truth on The View?

Actor James Brolin Latest Celebrity To Publicly Doubt 9/11
Follows in footsteps of David Lynch on same day

Actor James Brolin, the husband of Barbara Streisand, has today become the latest celebrity figure to publicly question the official story behind 9/11, after he encouraged viewers of a top rated ABC talk show to check out a 9/11 truth website.

Brolin appeared as a guest on The View Wednesday morning and according to e mails we have been receiving in numbers, towards the end of the show the actor questioned 9/11 and urged the audience to check out the website 911weknow.com, which is a website that purports to expose how the twin towers and Building 7, which wasn't hit by a plane, were brought down via controlled demolition.

We have received multiple reports that The View, which airs live from the West Coast in Pacific and Mountain time zones, was pre-empted by breaking news of the study group on Iraq in Eastern and Central time zones.


to: alex jones, david lynch<--- old news

i wonder how Alex Joens chimed in soooooo late on this news. He is usually right on top of things and Lynch pubically released a video from his web diary over 5 months ago (when the sheen story broke) urging the visitors of his website to watch 'loose change'. Alex you're slipping! (j/k) . But anyways alex lists all the celeberties who have questioned 9/11 besides 1, Ed Bagley Jr. Not only has he pubically questioned the official story, he has also hosted /been MC at several 9/11 truth conferences evidengt by the recent Bob Bowman speech with introduction by Bagley.

for anyone not familiar with his work he is a regular in Christopher Guest's mockumentary movies and played Rossane's husband in 'She-devil'

Alex get Bagley on your show! the guy is extremely articulate

Word on Lynch, though Bagley

Word on Lynch, though Bagley is seen in "Confronting the Evidence" saying that buying gasoline gives money to those around the world who want to do us harm. True in a sense, but I wonder how exactly he meant it. Ed, go out and clarify!

BTW, loved ya in

BTW, loved ya in "Transylvania 6-5000!"

Show "You are a real Woo-Woo" by Anonymous (not verified)

you know----that is some

you know----that is some serious karma

he just went on the view on told everyone to go to a 911truth website

that is freaking awesome!!

supposedly the rothschild

supposedly the rothschild lobby is getting ticked off that bush is surrounding himself with "non jews"

what if bush himself wasnt involved in 911?

what if he was betrayed by beauracrats and cheney and mossad?

possibly bush is just now asserting himself and maybe he was really that naive

took the 30 pieces of silver back


The Truth Nazi

Maybe you're James Brolin, sick of his whining wife.

Show "I heard Steven Jones finally" by Anonymous (not verified)


Anonymous you are going from Anonymous to Monotonous. Steven Jones is going to continue his research on the 9/11 truth movment. He siad in his own words that his leave from BYU will give him more time. To study his research. Just because he is not at BYU or a part of schlolars for now. He is still going to rearch his studies and continue his finds. Thank You

ignore the clown!

Just shows his research ability!
hahaha...but seriously don't respond to this guy he's just here to stir up trouble! Bad bad shill!

Show "First off...I think you" by Anonymous (not verified)

The trolls, they have trouble with the grammar :(


Don't bitch about someone's spelling and punctuation and then write something as grammatically flawed as this:

"which would be needed to progress your movement forward. He also understands that whatever concocted drivel he may conclude to cannot possibly stand up to the NIST report."

OTOH, for someone with the catastrophic mental impairment necessary to believe that the NIST report satisfactorily explains the physical evidence of 9/11, you're doing pretty well just stringing some words together. Kudos!

Show "Actually dumbass...that" by Anonymous (not verified)

...But not the need for

...But not the need for critical thinking or genuine debate, creep.

Uh, no.

No, they're not, f*cktard. I'm a graduate student in English and I know the language pretty well myself. That is some seriously fucked up grammar to go with your seriously fucked up lack of critical thinking skills.

Show "graduate" by Eric Blair (not verified)

I'll cut you a tiny bit of slack with "progress," moron,

as a transitive verb, since that's a correct but obsolete usage. (I guess that's what they teach in journalism school these days -- Make it punchy! Find an obsolete way to say it!) "Conclude to": No, ain't gonna happen. Even if one "concluded to" something, which one does not, it would be "the something something to which he will conclude." So I guess you could say that's not only wrong, it's doubly wrong.

Now I know they train you guys to find things that really irritate individuals and milk 'em for every drop of irritating potential, so I'm dropping it here. You can feel free to demonstrate your idiocy again with a final post, if you must. Then run along and go back under your bridge.

Show "You need a lesson" by Anonymous (not verified)

"Steven Jones will slowly

"Steven Jones will slowly disappear from the denial movement because even he understands that any research he does cannot be substantiated, proven or filed as irrefutable evidence...which would be needed to progress your movement forward"

interesting statement. Its as if you would love to see the 911 truth movement collapse more than the government being accountable for what happened that day. You sound like you are intelligent, why do you want so badly the 9/11 truth movement to fail? If you just simply think we're wrong why the desire and strange need for the movement to implode on itself?

"he understands that any

"he understands that any research he does cannot be substantiated, proven or filed as irrefutable evidence"

Uhh, without subpoena power, anyway. This is just mocking truthers for not having commandeered a judge yet.

'Omnipotent' observations, or pure science?

Having witnessed all this, I wish 'God' would explain why 'he' let it happen at all:

"The planes were real, the flights MAY have been real, and MAY have been hijacked--by remote control. It's not that hard to keep straight, even with all the disinfo bandied about by the ever-hopeful shills!"

VOTE: Tarpley '08!

Where are the bullhorns, dudes? We seem to be stuck on a lot of idle chatter over our 20/20 -9.11 hindsight!


Some days I think, why don't these 'Al-CIA-dugh' just go ahead and nuke the US? But then I realize that they haven't quite got all the infrastructure together to permit the pResident to really behave as a tyrannical dictator,locally, -not quite yet. They'll still need worker-bees, that's the catch! And they have to accelerate the investments into the DOW, ( as the dollar slides to nill.)

If we are to follow the Jesuit's script; {vis-a-vie; Nostra-saddamas,} surely they will have to attack the Catholic community soon, as required to entertain the Spanish vote of terror-confidence... Oh, my God, surely they won't hit ROME!!!

The only reason I joke about Italy is because it reminds me so much of rural Arkansas. Here we also have a premium supply of premium 'church-chattle,' all fed on freedom-fries and Tyson's fired-chicken. Actually, it's a very real, and necessary culinary distinction, this prerequisite to 'diss' everyone that likes pasta. ( Do I get bonus --negative points-- for being a "no-Pope-er?")

In the end, what will you have if you keep arguing about the means of the attacks? Your asses will ALL be parked in the Red-Zone if you complain!


Yeah it's sad there isn't a '08 Truth candidate yet... they would need all of the next two years to even come close to winning. Bowman? Tarpley? You guys ready?

Tarpley /Bowman '08!

I posted this the day after the election.

WTC-7 Any

this is beautiful:

Gates Win 95 to 2

The two opponents were Republicans who felt Gates was too friendly with Syria.

Show "Tarpley's comments about" by andrewkornkven

Mike Malloy

Man Im glad Malloy is back, he was just talking about David Lynch. So good to hear a truther on the airwaves!

Malloy is THE MAN! I

Malloy is THE MAN! I podcast his show everyday, wait until I have to do the most unpleasant task of my day, and pop in the ear buds to transform the experience.

Did you here him play 5

Did you here him play 5 minutes straight of "shock and awe", it was amazing and horrible.


"hear" him


Man I just posted this information about Gates and James Brolin on www.CrooksandLiars.com and on the www.Democrats.org blog and no one even cares. It is sickening how few people want to educate themselves or discuss things of importance. They just want to rant and rave and vent about stupid shit. It pisses me off.

well here 'tis

Gates confirmed as secretary of defense

Associated Press Writer 1 hour, 57 minutes ago