at Herblay, if there is an increasing number of people who saying that George Bush is lying about 911 and that 911 was an inside job, I did not find a single Herblaysien to be with me today. Today made new contacts especially with Pascal and Jean. We will see in the weeks to come if they will go further than just words. Had many encouragements but am still wondering how so many people can except the bad things happening to day like our soldiers being sent to a useless death, the creation of the "Police State" data base called EDVIGE , etc
Concerning Afghanistan many people explained to me that the French solidiers were set up to be slaughtered inorder to stir up a hatred against the Muslims and to put the finger against the Afghans.
Below are my signs of the day.
Am taking a day off work next 11th of September 2008 to be free to participe in the 911 truth day in Paris.
I just stumbled on this must-read article concerning Taliban and a US State Department paid Afghan businessman.
Cockburn and St. Clair lay out shocking evidence that implicates both Clinton And Bush (although they only blame Bush in their editorializing) for deliberately leaving bin Laden free and at large, despite numerous offers by Taliban to turn him over, kill him or deal with him in any other way -- unconditionally.
Note, that bin Laden was indeed on the FBI Most Wanted List for the African embassy bombings of 1998, at the time the article recounts. Bin Laden had also declared war on the US and "the Jews," in two fatwas issued in 1998. The fatwas encouraged Muslims to attack US and Israeli civilians as well as military targets.
So, why would the US government -- across two administrations -- repeatedly refuse the Taliban's offers of extradition?
The below information fits in seamlessly with other reports of a similar nature.
CounterPunch's editorializing (spin) is the weak part. This insider witness, Mr. Mohabbat, should be a household name and a part of any new investigation into 9/11.
The War on Drugs. The War on Terror. Narco-Terrorism.
Prior to 9/11, the poppy production levels in Afghanistan were at a low and many of the Taliban were against heroin and the poppies. However, since U.S. forces entered after 9/11, the poppy crop has skyrocketed. The UN released a report saying that the six-year boom has lead to the Afghan crop being responsible for 92% of the world's heroin trade. With Homeland Security and the War on Terror, it's amazing that the drug still gets into the USA, one of it's strongest marketplaces.
I write letters to Mr. MacKay on a regular basis, asking for investigations, reasons for policies, and to provide him with reasons why the public is skeptical of 9/11. This is the text of a letter response from Minister of National Defence, Peter G. Mackay, dated May 16, 2008. I have bolded text in the letter for easier reading.
My analysis is such: Peter MacKay endorses the Manley Report's findings. The Manley Report takes the official conspiracy theory as fact (see the timeline, Appendix 6). But MacKay cannot comment on the integrity of the 9/11 Commission. If MacKay cannot comment on or confirm the integrity of the 9/11 Commission, where does the Canadian Government (and the Manley Report) get its "well established" information about 9/11?
Dear Mr. Parrott:
Thank you for your letter in response to mine concerning spending in Afghanistan.
From the latest issue of American Interest magazine, an interview with Obama foreign policy adviser, Trilateralist, Soviet-phobe, former National Security Adviser and Rockefeller stooge Zbigniew Brzezinski. Notice the condescending tone that this lich evokes towards the general public. We are imbeciles in his opinion.
AI: I have just three specific and related questions for you, Zbig. The first is about Afghanistan, then and now, and the supposed lingering burdens of certain key decisions made when you were National Security Advisor to President Carter. The second is about how, as you’ve put it many times, we need to understand complex parts of the world for what they are, rather than impose our own preconceptions on them. And the third concerns how well the intelligence community serves us in this regard.
Zbigniew Brzezinski: OK, sounds like fun.
Please visit opednews.com for the live html links in the pasted article- also, the Google Alerts referred to in the below article have been pasted in the comments over there.
"Information wants to be free" vs. "Don't be evil". When you search online and use search "Alerts", do you want to get the info you want, or do you want the info you receive to be only what Google (and their partners in business and government) want you to know about? If you have concerns about Google's record on search quality/censorship, privacy, human rights, collaboration with people who may pose a serious threat to US sovereignty and security or anything else, read this article and please comment.
This article is a continuation of the "Open Letter to the People & Google" article:
Fourteen Points of Agreement with Official Government Reports on the World Trade Center Destruction
Fourteen Points: World Trade Center Destruction Media Visibility Week
Open Letter to the People & Google
There are several updates in the ongoing fallout from Michael Mukasey's patently false claims made in the speech he delivered several weeks ago in San Francisco regarding FISA and the 9/11 attacks. This week, Mukasey responded to a letter he received from John Conyers and two other Subcommittee Chair in which Mukasey acknowledged (because he was forced to) that the call he claimed originated from an "Afghan safe house" into the U.S. was fictitious, but he nonetheless vaguely asserted that his underlying point -- that FISA unduly restricted pre-9/11 eavesdropping and prevented detection of those attacks -- was somehow still accurate.
The Justice Department has acknowledged that Attorney General Michael Mukasey was mistaken when he told a San Francisco crowd that intelligence agencies couldn't trace a pre-9/11 phone call from Afghanistan to the United States.
Whether he was deliberately lying or simply misinformed is still an open question, but the administration is sticking to the general arguments Mukasey outline, provoking intense furor from House Democrats.
Mukasey's deputy said the attorney general was referring to a phone call placed not from Afganistan but another unidentified country before the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. In an April 10 letter to members of the House Judiciary Committee, Deputy Assistant Attorney General Brian Benczkowski stuck to the general line being advanced by Mukasey and others in the Bush administration -- that limitations on foreign intelligence collection within the US meant to protect Americans civil liberties hindered efforts to detect the 9/11 plot before it happened.
Two weeks after Attorney General Michael Mukasey tearfully told a San Francisco audience the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks could have been prevented if the government had been able to wiretap a phone call from Afghanistan, the Justice Department is still trying to explain what he meant, and a congressional leader is demanding answers.
Among the questions posed by House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers, D-Mich., to Mukasey is whether any such phone call actually occurred and, if so, why the government wasn't able to use its legal and technological powers to monitor it.
The attorney general, speaking to the Commonwealth Club on March 27, defended President Bush's program of wiretapping calls between Americans and suspected foreign terrorists without court authorization and said no warrant should be needed to eavesdrop on a phone call from Iraq to the United States.
The San Francisco Chronicle became one of the few media outlets to report on the multiple false claims about 9/11 and FISA in Michael Mukasey's speech two weeks ago, as they adeptly summarized the key events in this article today. As the article, using the Lee Hamilton and other quotes reported here, put it: "It seemed like a sensational disclosure -- a phone call that, if traced and monitored, could have allowed authorities to thwart the attacks -- but it has proved difficult to verify."
Also, Mukasey appeared yesterday before a Senate Appropriations subcommittee and was questioned on this matter by Pat Leahy:
On his third question, Leahy asked Mukasey to clarify a recent comment he made in San Francisco where he implied that the failure to listen in on a phone call from Afghanistan to the United States prior to the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks had cost 3,000 lives.
"Nobody else seems to know about this. Can you tell me what the circumstances were and why?" Leahy said.
Posted by Kurt Opsahl
Yesterday, Senator Leahy asked tough questions [Audio Excerpt MP3, 2.75MB] and this morning the San Francisco Chronicle continued its investigation of the mysterious phone call that Attorney General Mukasey referenced while speaking at the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco a few weeks ago. During the questions after his speech, Mukasey said that the government:
shouldn't need a warrant when somebody picks up the phone in Iraq and calls somebody in the United States because that's the call that we may really want to know about. And before 9/11, that's the call that we didn't know about ... We knew that there has been a call from someplace that was known to be a safe house in Afghanistan and we knew that it came to the United States. We didn't know precisely where it went.
Posted on Youtube...
"1993 WTC ATTACK: CIA OPERATIVES & THE FBI
CIA's connection to the bombers of the World Trade Center attack in 1993, and how all of them, except for the FBI informant planted inside the group, had been on the CIA's payroll in Afghanistan fighting the Soviets before settling in the New York area.
Also examined are the entrapments of FBI infiltrated groups where an informant is planted in a so-called terrorist group, but is actually the person who organizes and is the key person in the commission of the crime.
In short this presentation is about how the U.S. government will sometimes create "terrorists" to serve a political agenda."
RUNNING TIME 30 MINUTES
Joseph A. Calhoun, broadcast journalist
A letter to Attorney General Michael Mukasey demands he explain a recent public statement in favor of warrantless wiretapping that suggests that federal authorities, prior to the 9/11 attacks, failed to intercept a call from suspected terrorists in Afghanistan, when doing so could have prevented the attacks from taking place.
The FISA law that existed at the time, the letter points out, would have allowed such a call to be intercepted and permission granted by the courts retroactively to do so.
Also in the letter is a repeated demand that a secret 2001 Office of Legal Counsel memorandum, outlining the Executive Branch's authority in combating terrorism, be provided to Congress.
The letter, signed by House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI) and Subcommitee Chairmen Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) and Robert C. Scott (D-VA), appears below.
April 3, 2008
The Honorable Michael Mukasey
Attorney General of the United States
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20530
Dear Mr. Attorney General:
Télé 01 34 50 13 90
le 31 mars 2008
à France 2
Présentateur: David Pujadas
ce soir sur le journal de 20h00, vous justifiez l'envoi de 1000 troupes françaises supplémentaires en Afghanistan à cause des attentats du 11 septembre 2001 commandité par Ben Laden.
Mais sur quelle base vous dites que ça a été Ben Laden ? George Bush vous l'a dit ? Mais vous n'êtes pas au courant que ce monsieur est un menteur notoire
Même Colin Powell n'est pas capable de nous donner son "White Paper" promis en 2001 prouvant la complicité de Ben Laden dans ces attentats.
Le FBI ne recherche pas Ben Laden pour les attentats du 11 Septembre 2001.
Hear No Evil, See No Evil
Americans’ ever-enduring, catatonic sleepwalk through the Empire’s vast array of bread and circus, as always produced by the Ministry of Truth and the Department of Propaganda, better known as the corporatist media, has succeeded in the creation of an ignorant, incurious and dumbed down populace completely bereft of knowledge of what is done in its name. With no concern for or understanding of geography, cultures, history, alien societies, the outside world and of the imperial aspirations of the Empire, Americans have proved easy targets to the manipulations and deceptions of the corporatist world. Seemingly unwilling to gain knowledge of anything outside American Idol or the weekly NASCAR rat race, the soldier ants and worker bees of the Empire are content to circumvent the horrors of war and the myriad crimes against humanity committed in their name in order to maintain their beautiful minds at peace.
Indeed, the corporatist media has triumphed in completely erasing America’s two disastrous occupations of Muslim lands from the peoples’ conscious and concern, in effect shifting the ongoing debacles away from the daily reality of Americans and towards the abyss of a most cavernous memory hole. Methodically and systematically, the quagmires of Iraq and Afghanistan, with all their inconvenient truths, with all their disturbing realities, with all their corresponding death, suffering and destruction, have virtually vanished into a vacuum of nothingness, transported by the corporatist state into a clandestine and secretive reality, making of these disasters non-existent nightmares that vanish upon the waking of a new day.
In the near future Canadians will be asked to choose a new government based on Canada's support of the Afghanistan mission. The Conservatives want to extend the open ended mission till 2011 and beyond. The Liberals want to change it to a peace keeping mission after one year and the Bloc Quebecois and the New Democrats want out completely.
You may have noticed that none of the above parties are questioning the validity or the justification of the mission. We all know it was undertaken as a result of 9/11 and we all know the official story of 9/11 has been proven a mass of lies and disinformation.
I realize that south of the 49th parallel, this is not news but I would like to urge concerned citizens in Canada as well as our friends around the world to use this opportunity to ask questions and demand answers of our elected representatives as well as journalists.
Here are a few I have come up with;
Why should young Canadian men and women fight and die on foreign soil for the cause of expanding the American empire?
Why should Canadian taxpayers bear the cost of advancing the American empire, while wealthy International Corporations enjoy the return on our investment?
Canada fighting in Afghanistan for Power, Money, Resource Control, Integration into the Global Economic System
PEJ News - Guy Selzler
December 02, 2007
"the real reasons we are fighting in Afghanistan are: Power, Money, Resource Control, Integration into the Global Economic System."
To The Independent Panel on Canada’s Future Role in Afghanistan,
I am submitting you my personal assessment of the real reasons we are in Afghanistan in support of option 4, to withdraw all Canadian military personnel except a minimal force to protect aid workers and diplomats.
We have been told ad naseum by the mainstream media over and over again that we are fighting a war in Afghanistan as part of the war on terrorism, for democracy and for women's rights.
Each one of these assertions is false.
From a source such as AlterNet, the admission that 9/11 skeptics are "neither extreme nor trivial" is a strong statement. Behan does not elaborate, and in places he supports the official story, but this is a useful timeline for demonstrating to mainstream liberals that the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq were already planned prior to 9/11, and therefore only a fool would believe that 9/11 was a happy accident.
The Mega-Lie Called the "War on Terror": A Masterpiece of Propaganda
By Richard W. Behan, AlterNet
Posted on September 27, 2007, Printed on September 28, 2007
"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the state can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie ... The truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the state." --Joseph Goebbels, minister of propaganda in Nazi Germany, 1933-1945
This undated photo shows al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan. Bin Laden will address Americans on the sixth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks with a new video, Al-Qaida's media arm announced. (AP Photo, File) (Anonymous - Associated Press)
Groups: Bin Laden Plans Video on 9/11
By LEE KEATH
The Associated Press
Thursday, September 6, 2007; 6:43 PM
CAIRO, Egypt -- Osama bin Laden plans a new video to be released in the coming days ahead of the sixth anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks in what would be the first new images of the terror mastermind in nearly three years, al-Qaida's media arm announced Thursday.
The al-Qaida leader has not appeared in new video footage since Oct. 29, 2004, and he has not put out a new audiotape in more than a year.
"There Are Indications That Public Representatives And Officials Are Involved In The (Drug) Business"
I also recommend my blog on Opium. - Jon
Wednesday, August 15, 2007
KABUL: Delegates at a joint Pak-Afghan peace jirga last week evinced a keen interest to solve problems facing the two neighbours - including drug trafficking.
Recommendations by the fourth of five working committees underlined the need to purge Afghanistan of drugs and the Taliban insurgency and to expand the Afghanistan government’s writ beyond Kabul, officials said. The committee acknowledged Pakistan’s efforts to make the country drugs-free. It asked Kabul to follow the Islamabad way of achieving success against drugs.
Take a look at this very interesting speech by investment banker Karl Schwartz:
The Caspian Sea Basin (Kazakstan, Turkmenistan etc.) holds between 11 and
12 trillion dollars in oil and gas resources. There are only three ways to
get it out:
- East to China
- West through Iran, Russia, and Turkey to Europe
- South through Afghanistan and Pakistan
The Taliban who controlled Afghanistan before 9/11 made pipeline deals
with non-US companies and refused to change them to give control of the
region's resources to the US.
Thanks to Brasscheck TV (www.brasschecktv.com)
I just came over this one hour documentary at YouTube. It has some interesting interviews (see full list of persons below). Zbigniew Brzezinski gets eight minutes on his role in Afghanistan in the late 1970s.
Part 1 of 7:
Go here to watch part 2-7:
OUR OWN PRIVATE BIN LADEN is a film about understanding the creation of the persona of Osama bin Laden as a phenomenon of the interplay between history, politics, global economics and the media. The film highlights the historical background that led to the fatal link between post-Cold War politics and the emergence of new forms of terrorism that succeeded in establishing their own economy. It traces the connection between privatization, deregulation and free market and the globalization of terrorism.
OUR OWN PRIVATE BIN LADEN examines the complicity between economic structures of "terror" and "the war on terror," their interdependencies, and the creation of the Bin Laden industry as a consequence.
The film explains why the world after September 11, 2001 is less the result of a stray act of terror but the consequence of a series of fatal decisions made from 1945 onwards.
Named Best Foreign Documentary and Best Film of the Festival at the inaugural European Independent Film Festival in Paris, Samira Goetschel's consuming work achieves the brilliance of Michael Moore with a great degree of dignity and restraint. By sheer determination, she collected a trove of high-caliber interviews with eminent investigative journalists and political figures such as Cold War-era CIA director Stansfield Turner, former national security advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski, Pakistani ex-prime minister Benazir Bhutto and the world's leading "public intellectual” Noam Chomsky.
The Great Anglo-American Energy Miscalculation?
In far off countries, about which we know little, deals are being struck that will bring exasperation and ever increasing degrees of desperation to the "Anglo-American Military Industrial Complex's" aspirations of controlling the world energy markets.
There are hot wars, and there are cold wars, both are going on right now. The general public is largely oblivious to them both. The hot wars are in Afghanistan and Iraq, these are waged for the very same reasons that the cold ones are currently being fought out. The most obvious cold war currently is the war against Iran, but a few degrees cooler than this is the war being carried out against Russia.
Medina-Gazette - Mar 20 12:04 AM
Iraq war anniversary misses 9/11 focus
It's the fourth anniversary of the start of the Iraq War. It also feels like the anniversary of the end of our national focus on bringing the architect of 9/11 to justice.
Just a quick tour of the numbers, to help us get our bearings.
According to the Pentagon, there are about 27,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan — the highest number since the October 2001 invasion. They are part of a NATO-led force of around 50,000. According to the Department of Defense, there have been 369 American service personnel killed in Afghanistan, as well as 676 who were wounded and unable to return to action.
In Iraq, there are upwards of 142,000 U.S. troops. The Associated Press puts the current number killed at 3,217. Those wounded and unable to go back: 10,685, according to the DOD.
Bin Laden’s Confession; is that what it is?
March 15, 2007 -- The tape released by the Pentagon on December 13, 2001 in which Osama Bin Laden is seen describing the events of 9/11 to a paraplegic visitor, Khaled Al-Harbi, is as close to a confession of prior knowledge as anyone is going to get at a dinner gathering.
Bin Laden: So if the plane hits the building here [gestures with hands], the portion of the building above will collapse. That was the most we could hope for, the most we expected: that the floors above the point of entry would fall. We were at one of the canyons at the time of the event, and we knew since Thursday that it would be on Tuesday. So we had the radio on.
That is enough for me, still, there are those who doubt and might say, well, the event had already taken place and Bin Laden knew enough detail to make up a story and take credit. Yes, there are those who might say that and for various reasons.
Defence Minister explains campaign
Its all about retribution for 9/11, says Canadian Defence Minister O’Connor?!
“What it means is, if our country is attacked, we are not going to stand blandly by and not do anything about it”, O’Conner said.
This uber-hawkish utterance could’ve come straight from the American White House. It clearly portrays a Canadian government out of sync with what it means to be Canadian. Pursuing justice without resorting to “might makes right policies” is not “standing blandly by.” The empire to the south may believe in wreaking vengeance, but it is not the Canadian way. Sounds like Harper’s Defence Minister has been choking down too much American policy in his North American integration sessions.
Drug mafia, CIA blamed for sacking of Afghan governor
Devlin Buckley, 12/11/06
The American Monitor
In a country flooded with narcotics traffickers and corrupt government officials, one of Afghanistan’s few remaining ‘clean’ governors, Mohammed Daud, has been removed from his position, and many are blaming the drug mafia and the CIA for his abrupt dismissal.
Daud was appointed at the request of the British government in order to oversee Helmand province, the country’s largest opium producing region. The former and now possibly future governor of Helmand, Sher Muhammad Akhunzada, whom Daud replaced earlier this year, has been widely implicated in the drug trade.
Contrary to Akhunzada, “British officials regarded Mr Daud as the cleanest governor in Afghanistan and hoped that his extensive experience in development would help to win over Helmand’s population,” The Times reported.
Last month, however, the British government expressed frustration with the effort, pointing to the fact that Afghan President Hamid Karzai continued to meet with the former governor, Akhunzada. Adding further strain on the situation, Karzai appointed Akhunzada as a Senator and made his brother, Amir Muhammad Akhundzada, Daud's deputy.
"The president is undermining his own governor," one British official told The Times. "It doesn’t help what we’re trying to do."
It would appear U.S. officials, particularly from the Central Intelligence Agency, were influencing Karzai’s actions, undercutting the efforts of their British counterparts. Moreover, as The Independent reported, “British sources have blamed pressure from the CIA for President Hamid Karzai's decision to dismiss Mohammed Daud as governor".
“The Americans knew Daud was a main British ally,” one official explained to The Independent, “yet they deliberately undermined him and told Karzai to sack him.”
The U.S. apparently favors Daud's predecessor and purported drug lord, Akhunzada...
It is official, Donald Rumsfeld is out and former CIA Director Robert Gates, if confirmed, will be in as the new Defense Secretary. As usual, the more you read, the worse it get...
In November of 1999, Mr. Gates openly expressed his satisfaction with the arming of the Afghan Mujahhadin during the 1980s, a covert policy that gave rise to 'al-Qaeda'.
At a Texas A&M University Dinner, Mr. Gates stated the following:
"Operationally, CIA had important successes in covert action. Perhaps the most consequential of all was Afghanistan where CIA, with its management, funneled billions of dollars in supplies and weapons to the Mujahhadin, and the resistance was thus able to fight the vaunted Soviet army to a standoff and eventually force a political decision to withdraw."
To his credit, Gates does acknowledge that the "training and weapons we provided after the conflicts ended sometimes were put to unwelcome purposes and even used in actions hostile to US interests," but nonetheless, he states, "All in all, CIA uniquely among the world's intelligence services, endeavored to conduct its operations according to presidential directive under the rule of law and in every way possible consistent with American values. ... In sum, CIA in my view was remarkably successful".