Response to Christopher Ketcham's take on Bob Baer (CIA)

Response to:

The Education of Bob Baer
Unlearning the CIA

Ketcham keeps bolstering the Big Lie by pretending that the incompetence theory of 9/11 has merit. In numerous ways he defends the criminal actions of high level players who have a long history of helping terrorists and funding their networks. While admitting to such practices in the distant past, Ketchum ignores the period leading up to 9/11 as well as the present.

What Ketcham should have grilled Baer about is terrorism by proxy: ISI and Saudi intelligence in particular, (MI6, BND and Mossad also engage in this practice).

It is no longer even denied that ISI created and protected "Al Qaeda," and assists the Taliban to this day, nor is it reasonable to deny that the USA funds the ISI.

Much credible evidence links the Saudi government to the 9/11 hijackers, and we don't hear anything about that, despite Senator Graham's open admissions of the facts. FBI surveillance showed links between a Saudi agent and the Saudi embassy, as he assisted hijackers in San Diego.

If the Saudi government sponsors "act of war" and US government officials protect Saudis from repurcussions, then US government officials are committing high treason = "aid and comfort" to the "enemy."

Let's also ask Mr. Baer about "Visa Express." How did ALL of the hijackers receive US entry visas despite being profoundly unqualified to receive them?

Why have former State Department official Michael Springman's accusations gone unanswered? Springman states unequivocally that numerous radical Islamist "terrorists" were given visas by CIA after state department officers denied them.

We also have a BLOCKED, that's right blocked memo from CIA Counter Terrorism Center liason who worked for FBI. Blocked memo allows known "Al Qaeda" terrorist to come into USA and allegedly fly plane into Pentagon. No follow up? More treason.

More presidential medals of grandeur?

Further issues with this Ketchum article:

"He says he prevented a terrorist attack on the USS New Jersey, which was to be rocketed off the coast of Lebanon."

Everyone concerned knows the difference between a military attack and a terrorist attack. This is juvenile.

"But the WMDs were an illusion, and meanwhile there were dissenters on the ground in the CIA who said as much and were ignored."

FABRICATION, not "illusion." Lying to Congress and the world, ergo a criminal fraud and conspiracy.

Numerous crimes are discussed, numerous violations of international law, the UN charter -- but no calling a conspiracy a conspiracy.

The CIA should be dismantled and its operations made illegal. Its partnerships with other criminal intelligence agencies should be terminated, and terrorism should actually be opposed, not just in soundbites.

Even the drug trafficking references ignore the elephant in the room right now: Afghanistan. It also ignores the CIA's long involvement in Afghanistan with drug lords being the main allies. As in Colombia, drugs are a profitable side-venture for the CIA and are not opposed despite the "possible severe consequences." The USA partners with drug lords around the world and protects them. This is big business.

Numerous ignored facts surrounding the 9/11 treason

The Limits of Christopher Ketcham's / Counterpunch's Israeli Hangout

ORWELL'S TRIUMPH: There is no van full of explosives reported at the George Washington Bridge

Corroborating a van full of explosives reported at the G.W. Bridge

John Doraemi publishes Crimes of the State at:

Legal Culpability for 9/11 Ready To Go To Court

There is NO incompetence argument for why the government continues to lie about NORAD not monitoring American (and Canadian) territorial airspace on 9/11. Since September 12, 2001 the government has been involved in a de jure criminal conspiracy to obstruct justice in it's continued denial that NORAD monitored aircraft within America on 9/11.

Exhibit A for the prosecution:

In 2008 NORAD wrote, "Since the tragic events of 9/11, NORADs role which previously was outward-looking now includes monitoring airspace within North America."

In 2004 the Air Force said, "Before 2001, 1st Air Force was charged with keeping an eye on the nation’s borders, usually looking for threats in the form of Russian aircraft skirting too close for comfort to the mainland. In those few hours, the command’s mission went from looking outward to looking inward."

Now take a look at what the National Guard Association of the United States, Canada’s Department of National Defense, Syracuse University, NORAD, and the General Accountability Office said before September 11, 2001 about NORAD’s monitoring capabilities within the United States:

In 1997 the National Guard Association of the United States said NORAD insures, "Aircraft flying over our air space are monitored seven days a week, 24 hours a day." – National Guard Association of the United States, 1997.

In 1998 Canada’s Department of National Defense said, "In 1998, Canada posses the ability to detect, identify, and if necessary intercept aircraft over Canadian territory. The "Canadianisation" of NORAD operations over Canada is complete. Though we still rely heavily on the Americans for the Integrated Tactical Warning and Attack Assessment and mutual defense, we have successfully transitioned on at least one of the three core functions of NORAD.” – Department of National Defense (Canada), 1998.

Before 1995, Syracuse University said, "The NORAD mission is threefold. NORAD's first responsibility is to provide SURVEILLANCE AND CONTROL of the airspace covering North America, specifically the airspace of Canada and the United States.” -- Northeast Parallel Architectures Center, Syracuse University, pre-1995.

In 1997, NORAD itself said, "The Air Operations Center (AOC) (also known as the Air Defense Operations Center – ADOC) maintains CONSTANT SURVEILLANCE OF NORTH AMERICAN AIRSPACE TO PREVENT OVERFLIGHT by hostile aircraft. It TRACKS over 2.5 million aircraft annually." – NORAD, 1997.

And lastly, in 1994 the General Accountability Office said, "NORAD defines air sovereignty as providing surveillance and control of the territorial airspace, which includes:

1. intercepting and destroying uncontrollable air objects;
2. tracking hijacked aircraft;
3. assisting aircraft in distress;
4. escorting Communist civil aircraft; and
5. intercepting suspect aircraft, including counterdrug operations and peacetime military intercepts." -- Government Accountability Office, 1994.

And here is the April 2000 Air Force Instruction 13-1AD, Volume 3 on Air Defense Command and Control Operations (in effect on September 11, 2001) where it states in Chapter 3.1, under Mission, "The First Air Force Commander (1 AF/CC), in his role as the CONUS NORAD Region Commander, provides CINCNORAD/Commander US Element NORAD with TW/AA, surveillance and control of the airspace of the United States and appropriate response against air attack."

This Instruction is an official ORDER to be followed by the Air Force. As Chapter 1.1 of the Instruction says, "General. This instruction and the references herein outline procedures TO BE FOLLOWED [emphasis mine] by units/ele­ments of the Air Combat Command (ACC) Air Defense System (ADS)."

The government should never have said NORAD didn't monitor American airspace on 9/11. Because of the pre-9/11 literature on NORAD, the government should have come up with some other implausible explanation for NORAD's stand down. That is, an implausible explanation that didn't have an historical paper trail that contradicts it!

Lawyers for 9/11 Truth should find the above a good starting point in presenting a motion of government obstruction of justice in a criminal case (and any other charges that might be applicable).

Once the NORAD lies are exposed, persons who were once suspicious or not sure about the 9/11 Truth Movement will see the Truth Movement in a new light.

One more little fact. Guess when the April 2000 Air Force instruction on Air Defense Command and Control Operations was revised? Give up? Would you believe June 2009?

Dean Jackson/Editor-in-Chief
Washington, DC

About those revisions

Thanks for that great summation. A couple of questions, though. Since one of the statements is sourced to the Northeast Parallel Architectures Center at Syracuse University, I wonder whether you know anything about this institution. Does it have any particular relation to NORAD or USAF?

And about those revisions to Air Force instructions made just a few months ago, I can't help but wonder--revised to what? Since those instructions have long provided for monitoring all US airspace, what do they say now?--that the Air Force is NOT going to be monitoring US airspace any longer?

Eight years without official orders to protect American airspace


The Northeast Parallel Architectures Center was doing simulation software work for NORAD.

The April 2000 instruction was a revised version of the 1997 instruction.

Instructions are revised to take account of new developments (such as NEADS and SEADS merging post 9/11). The question is why did it take so long to revise the April 2000 instruction if NORAD didn't monitor American airspace on 9/11? Nearly eight years went by!

Dean Jackson/Editor-in-Chief
Washington, DC

Legal Strategy

Now, the legal strategy should not concentrate on NORAD or its personnel, but instead focus on the Justice Department and the FBI’s collusion in covering up NORAD’s true monitoring capabilities over the United States and Canada. While NORAD surely would have a motive to lie about it’s dismal record on 9/11, the Justice Department/FBI wouldn’t. Leaving NORAD/Air Force alone could also assist in encouraging those present/former personnel of NORAD/Air Force to come forward without fear of retribution.

Dean Jackson/Editor-in-Chief
Washington, DC

Baer generates garbage stories for a distraction

I recently read an article by Baer in Time Magazine.

It was one of those pieces where Baer supposedly reveals inside info: in this case it was that the CIA has been secretly trying to assassinate Al Qaeda leaders without the approval of Congress.

Talk about smoke and mirrors. Baer actively works for the cover-up. Admit something supposedly secret the CIA has been doing - as though they are making an admission - but it's really something to bolster the official fairy tale.

Love Alison

I think Bob Baer's story is legit.

Sometime you just gotta see if the story passes the smell test, and to me, Baer's story seems legit, and probably pretty typical

Bob Baer was a fairly low level field operative in one of the US's 16 intel agencies. He wasn't a decision maker. He didn't know a whole lot. He worked hard, seemed to do his job fairly well.

That's means Baer made people that weren't doing their job well nervous and/or angry, and Baer nearly got killed because of it.

Baer's story is fairly typical for this type of job description. I've known a few low level covert ops/intel personel. Mostly from the Vietnam era, but not all.

Basic similaries in the stories are...

-the covert power structure is highly corrupt. People who try to actually do their job they are supposed to do can makes some powerful people angry very quickly.

The legit former operatives really don't know much about things outside their direct experience. All info is need to know basis.

Everything Baer says reeks of disinfo

Edit: This is meant to be a reply to Adam1, but I posted it as a new comment by mistake.

No, I am hardly in a position to agree with these sentiments.

The story of how he gets charged with planning to murder a foreign leader then six months later the charges are dropped and he is magically exonerated smells like a pretext to me. What better way to set up a Mockingbird type asset than to create a pretence of dishonour at the agency prior to resignation, supposed "disillusionment" and so on,

I guess the smell test has different results on different people!

But surely you can't imagine, with all the nonsense he says about Bin-Laden, 911 planning, Al-Qaeda and so on, that Baer is an innocent commentator. Read the article and look at how many statements Baer makes that support the OFT.

Look, I'll state it clearly for you: Baer is now a media propagandist, he is actively working to maintain and strengthen the Official 911 Fairy Tale, is part of the cover - up, writes for CIA magazine Time, and in my opinion is a suspect for involvement in the crime - or, if not, an accessory after the fact.

Love Alison