Irresponsible Omissions (Open Letter to Ray McGovern formerly of CIA)

Re: "Shining a Light on the Roots of Terrorism"


Letting the "elephant out of the bag" on 9/11 would of course require the word "treason." You're a bright, studied guy. You know this.

Further, if your intent is to fight terrorism, as the article positions itself, then western INTELLIGENCE support for terrorism should be front and center. From Mujahadeen in 1979 to KLA in the 1990s, Jundullah and MEK today, and Alpha 66, death squads on most continents and other seedy CIA connected "terror," this is quite an omission.

Besides the Israeli question -- which is all well and good, but not the whole story by a long shot -- we have US ALLIES supporting Islamic terrorist networks.

Further, these networks could not have accomplished 9/11 or numerous other attacks without treasonous support by US leaders and their allies in the Saudi Arabian government, the Pakistani government and elsewhere. When are your readers going to see an in-depth analysis of these matters, truly the matters that bear on the issue?

You have legitimised the 9/11 Commission Report in your latest article, more than you have delegitimised it. The cover up of the "foreign governments" who aided and abetted the hijackers is enough to sink this fraud of an "investigation." You know this, Ray. Of course you do. So why aren't you saying it?

There's quite a long list of problems with the 9/11 Commission's version of both the attacks and the current "war on terrorism."

And, perhaps you could revisit how all the hijackers received US entry visas although they were outrageously unqualified to receive them. What of State Department official Michael Springman's charges that CIA arranged such visas by overruling State Department at the embassies, particularly in Saudi Arabia? Springman's charges of "visa express" could directly implicate US intelligene officers for high treason on 9/11. Couple that with CIA deliberately "hiding" al Hazmi and al Mihdhar from the FBI, and you can take 9/11 in quite a different light.

You also mention the 1993 WTC bombing without any mention that the guy who built the bomb was an FBI informant, as he admitted in open court! And that his FBI handlers told him to produce a live, exploding device instead of an inert non-exploding version! A narrow, blinkered view on this history does much more harm than good.

Perhaps this article will shed some light on what's not talked about...

Thanks, Ray Needs a Spankin'

If Not Me? Who? If Not Now? When?

Here's probably...

The greatest clip ever to be shown on TV. You need quicktime.

I read this, and thought the same exact things you did. I think it's possible Ray limited the approach so that it could be published. The point that he's making is a good one. Our policies regarding Israel DO cause MASSIVE resentments in that region. However, I don't put any stock into the statements of KSM. None whatsoever.

Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? The facts speak for themselves.

Can we get

the full transcript of all the torture sessions, and in fact all the sessions with KSM and all the other purported terrorists? Then we can assess if there is anything to the allegations that they were indeed connected with 9-11. For those who believe 9-11 was an inside job, there is virtually no room for an alleged mastermind. In fact, it has been quite obvious that the so-called terrorist threat is virtually nonexistent, and has been blown out of proportion for various reasons (John Mueller, "Overblown." 2006).

In the meantime, it is interesting that the press has already convicted KSM, so what does it think the trial is about? As I recently wrote on facebook:

"In a news story, AP says 'Mohammed will not be allowed the satisfaction of seeing the devastation he wrought--the concrete flatlands at Ground Zero.'...How is it that AP is so sure this man is guilty? Is not that what a trial is for--to sift through the evidence, and make a determination? Isn't AP jumping the gun a bit?"

If the people who allegedly perpetrated 9-11 were, as McGovern contends, so much up in arms about the Israel-Palestine conflict, why did they not announce the same immediately after 9-11, when such a statement would have the greatest impact. Instead, not one person or group took public responsibiity.

What's going on with Ray?

It all seems too convenient. I wonder if he is being pressured. He used to be a powerful ally to the truth side.