Just released new docs -
” . . . The US Govt needs to make body pics available like the MX’s do, with OBL’s
pants pulled down, to shout down the lunatics like Alex Jones and Glenn
Beck. . . . “
Just released new docs -
” . . . The US Govt needs to make body pics available like the MX’s do, with OBL’s
pants pulled down, to shout down the lunatics like Alex Jones and Glenn
Beck. . . . “
By General Leonid Ivashov, former Chief of Russian Military Staff
As the current international situation shows, terrorism emerges where contradictions aggravate, where there is a change of social relations or a change of regime, where there is political, economic or social instability, where there is moral decadence, where cynicism and nihilism triumph, where vice is legalized and where crime spreads.
It is globalization what creates the conditions for the emergence of these extremely dangerous phenomena. It is in this context that the new world geo-strategic map is being designed, that the resources of the planet are being re-distributed, that borders are disappearing, that international law is being torn into pieces, that cultural identities are being erased, and that spiritual life becomes impoverished.
The analysis of the essence of the globalization process, the military and political doctrines of the United States and other countries, shows that terrorism contributes to a world dominance and the submissiveness of states to a global oligarchy. This means that terrorism is not something independent of world politics but simply an instrument, a means to install a unipolar world with a sole world headquarters, a pretext to erase national borders and to establish the rule of a new world elite. It is precisely this elite that constitutes the key element of world terrorism, its ideologist and its “godfather”. The main target of the world elite is the historical, cultural, traditional and natural reality; the existing system of relations among states; the world national and state order of human civilization and national identity.
In this context, if we analyze what happened on September 11, 2001, in the United States, we can arrive at the following conclusions:
1. The organizers of those attacks were the political and business circles interested in destabilizing the world order and who had the means necessary to finance the operation. The political conception of this action matured in the face of emerging tensions in the administration of financial and other types of resources. We have to look for the reasons of the attacks in the coincidence of interests of Big Capital at global and transnational levels, in the circles that were not satisfied with the rhythm of the globalization process or its direction. Unlike traditional wars, whose conception is determined by generals and politicians, the oligarchs and politicians were the ones who did it this time.
2. Only secret services and their current chiefs, or those retired but still with influence inside the state organizations, have the ability to plan, organize and conduct an operation of such magnitude. Generally, secret services create, finance and control extremist organizations. Without the support of secret services, these organizations cannot exist, let alone carry out operations of such magnitude inside countries so well protected. Planning and carrying out an operation on this scale is extremely complex.
3. Osama bin Laden and “Al Qaeda” cannot be the organizers nor the performers of the September 11 attacks. They do not have the necessary organization, resources or leaders. Thus, a team of professionals had to be created, and the Arab kamikazes are just extras to mask the operation. The September 11 operation modified the course of events in the world in the direction chosen by transnational mafias and international oligarchs; that is, those who hope to control the planet’s natural resources, the world information network and financial flows. This operation also favored the US economic and political elite that also seeks world dominance.
The use of the term “international terrorism” has the following goals:
1. Hiding the real objectives of the forces deployed all over the world in the struggle for dominance and control;
2. Creating a public demand for a struggle with undefined goals against an invisible enemy;
3. Destroying basic international norms and changing concepts such as: aggression, state terror, dictatorship or movement of national liberation;
4. Depriving peoples of their legitimate right to resist aggression and to reject the work of foreign intelligence services;
5. Establishing the principle of renunciation to national interests, transforming objectives in the military field by giving priority to the war on terror, violating the logic of military alliances to the detriment of a joint defense and to favor the anti-terrorist coalition;
6. Solving economic problems through a tough military rule using the war on terror as a pretext. In order to fight in an efficient way against international terrorism it is necessary to take the following steps:
1. To confirm before the UN General Assembly the principles of the UN Charter and international law as principles that all states are obliged to respect;
2. To create a geo-strategic organization (perhaps inspired in the Cooperation Organization of Shanghai comprised of Russia, China, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan) with a set of values different to that of the Atlantists; to design a strategy of development of states, a system of international security, another financial and economic model (which would mean that the world would again rest on two pillars);
3. To associate (under the United Nations) the scientific elites in the design and promotion of the philosophical concepts of the Human Being of the 21st Century.
4. To organize the interaction of all religious denominations in the world, on behalf of the stability of humanity’s development, security and mutual support.
This article was written (January 22, 2006) as a follow-up to the Axis For Peace Conference, Brussels, 2005
Who is General Ivashov?
General Leonid Ivashov is the vice-president of the Russian Academy on geopolitical affairs. He was the chief of the department for General affairs in the Soviet Union’s ministry of Defense, secretary of the Council of defense ministers of the Community of independant states (CIS), chief of the Military cooperation department at the Russian federation’s Ministry of defense. General Leonid Ivashov was the Chief of Staff of the Russian armed forces when the September 11, 2001, attacks took place. Ivashov, who lived the events from the inside, offers an analysis which is very different from that of his American colleagues. As he did during the Axis for Peace 2005 conference, General Ivashov now explains that international terrorism does not exist and that the September 11 attacks were the result of a set-up. What we are seeing is a manipulation by the big powers; this terrorism would not exist without them. He affirms that, instead of faking a “world war on terror”, the best way to reduce that kind of attack is through respect for international law and peaceful cooperation among countries and their citizens.
Reprinted from http://physics911.net/ivashov
emphasis ours – F.C.
ALSO - this essay is added to the sidebar for future reference.
by Trowbridge H. Ford
In the so-called war against terror, the role of eavesdropping upon its participants has become increasingly important despite the opposition of humint agents on the ground, whether it be catching terrorists before they do something, or apprehending them after they have. While the hardware involved in doing so, whether it be tapping land or fiber optic cables or wireless communications, has been extensively discussed, too little has been said about the technicians who collect the messages, whether it be encrypted or not, and the analysts who determine what it all means. Of course, the biggest reasons that their role is not mentioned is because it would tip off potential terrorists about the risks involved, and would put the lives of those agents involved in greater danger.
Still, the increasing role of cryptologists and linguists in the process must be evident to all. If the open messages by the 9/11 suicide bombers had been focused on, and their import had been determined, there is little doubt that the bombings would have been prevented. As James Bamford has stated in The Shadow Factory: The Ultra-Secret NSA from 9/11 to the Eavesdropping on America regarding Osama bin-Ladin’s calls to action: “But inexplicably, the fact that the calls from Mihdhar had a U. S. country code and a San Diego area code – something that should have been instantly obvious to the NSA’s signals intelligence exerts – was never passed on to the FBI, CIA or anyone else.” (1) To confound counter-terrorist experts about what they were up to, “…the group had worked out a series of code words, and using those terms…” (2) – ‘architecture’ meant the WTC, ‘arts’ the Pentagon, ‘law’ the Capitol, and ‘politics’ the White House – kept themselves informed about what was being planned, and what was required.
Of couse, when the bombings proved so successful, the National Security Agency (NSA), Britain’s Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ), and others amounted a great effort to capture such messages, and determine what they meant so that there would be no recurrence of the tragedy. Unfortunately, they were repeated in Madrid in March 2004 (3), and in London in July 2005 (4) where messages were not received, were ignored, or were misunderstood. The basic problem, though James Bamford has nothing to say about its cause, was that GCHQ, MI6, and MI5 were convinced that Al-Qaeda was going to pull off a terrorist attack around London, thanks to the electronic chatter that it was picking up in Britain and Spain from jihadist mullahs. When this proved terribly wrong, they dismissed as a danger the Leeds group, led by Mohammad Sidique Khan – which they had already tried unsuccessfully to set up as terrorists during Operation Crevice – only for it to be totally ignored in surveillance operations, allowing it to pull off the 7/7 bombings with no interference.
“In an effort to attract new Web-savvy recruits,” Bamford explained after the tragedies had occurred, “GCHQ has turned to ad campaigns within online computer games such as Tom Clancy’s Splinter Cell Double Agent and Rainbow Six Vegas. And to find talented cipher-brains, the agency joined the British Computer Society to sponsor a code-breaking competition called the National Cipher Challenge.” (5) The challenge was carried out on the Internet, lasted three months, and obliged competitors to decipher coded messages exchanged between Lord Nelson and British naval intelligence during the wars against revolutionary France. They were required to keep on top of a Napoleonic plot to buy a mysterious Chinese weapon – what could only be fully understood by decrypting writings that Elizabethan spy Christopher Marlowe had written two centuries before. It was a good test for future cryptographers to meet the demands of qualitative literacy in this field for today’s covert world.
The problems, though, are more complicated than the test and what Bamford indicated. Today, the messages are in all kinds of languages, and what they mean is more difficult than understanding anything Christopher Marlowe may have written. Cryptographers have not only to break down messages in all kinds of esoteric codes but also linguists must be able to make sense of them, especially since the controlling language is often not English, and the real meaning of ones in another language will require a colloquial understanding of their use. Little wonder that Bamford immediately added GCHQ’s, like NSA’s, need for linguists in all kinds of languages without explaining why, particularly in all kinds of European languages like Polish, Albanian, Bulgarian, Chechen, Georgian, Basque, Greek, etc.(6) It is interesting to note, though, that Bamford made no mention of the most likely European languages – German, French, Spanish, Russian, and Italian – an oversight which does not seem accidental.
Of course, the Treasury allocated all kinds of money to GCHQ to recruit such experts, but the money failed to meet the demand, as they, especially the linguists, were reluctant to join the spy agency in sufficient numbers. “At $1.6 billion,” Bamford explained. “GCHQ was the most expensive part of the budget, yet it was still overstretched.” (7) The lack of proper staff was dramatically indicated in not only Operation Crevis but also in Operation Overt. It was a massive surveillance and intelligence collecting investigation where securocrats hoped to prove that two cells of wantabe militants were seriously involved in plots to blow up transatlantic airliners – thanks to MI5 prodding – when they seemed to be more interested in making films, showing the plight of Muslams in Islamic countries. The problem was really caused by the eavesdroppers not being able to understand what the suspects were really up to, given their most crude messages.
To remedy the problem, Sir David Pepper, GCHQ’s Director, started recruiting mathematicians and linguists through the backdoor from his base at St. John’s College, Oxford, where he had received his Ph.D. in theoretical physics thirty years before. During Pepper’s thirty years at ‘ the Q’, he was able to establish a most solid base at the college for training the proper analysts.
He and Principal Sir John Scholar became the closest of friends through their interests in music, walking and gardening. The Modern Language Department and its Associate Schools deeply trained graduates in just the languages Bamford made no mention of – German, Russian, Italian, French and Spanish.(8) The teaching and translations of its German experts – Taylor Professor Ritchie Robertson, now of the University of Oxford, and Lecturer in German Gudrun Loftus up until her mysterious death – have made its graduates the cream of the crop as many surveys have shown. Little wonder that some in German, and others in other European languages, have gone on to do secret work at Cheltenham, especially since continued professional work at university or in the private sector would give them excellent cover for what they are doing. It’s always easier to have a most acceptable peg to hang one’s covert work on when asked by the public.
Pepper has been the biggest opponent of disclosing anything about GCHQ, even himself, especially in court cases, claiming that it will only benefit terrorists who the agency is having trouble keeping up with. “…As the GCHQ packed more and more eavesdroppers and analysts into the doughnut,” Bamford explained, “the quality of the intelligence went down.” (9) Of course, allowing the introduction of intercepts into court cases would not only divert needed resources from more important assignments in preparing them but more importantly disclose intelligence collection techniques. While Sir David, the perfect technospy according to Bamford, went on about keeping up with coded messages on the Internet, he made no mention of the role of GCHQ linguists. Given the failure of Bamford to mention their role in deciphering German, Russian, Spanish, Italian and French messages, it seems that Cheltenham’s linguists are the hub of such activity in Europe – what London is desperate to keep secret. It would show that the Scope system – a secure one to connect GCHQ with other intelligence agencies and their overseas offices – is superfluous. The Intelligence and Security Committee has increased GCHQ’s ability to access, process, and store Internet data and telephone calls by twenty fold.
Scholar obtained all the proper academic credentials at Oxbridge’s other St. John’s College in Cambridge, and the administrative ones by serving at the Treasury, and becoming ultimately the Permanent Secretary of the Welsh Office, and then the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI). His being a political insider was best illustrated when he became Prime Minister Thatcher’s Private Secretary (1981-3), just when she was cutting the unions, especially at GCHQ, down to size, and when reconnecting London to the Reagan administration in Washington became so important. NSA knew all about Thatcher’s problems because it “…always has a sizable number of its own personnel working at GCHQ…” (10) Scholar had his hands full while dealing with GCHQ Director Brian Tovey in getting rid of the unions there, and while getting essential intelligence from NSA during the risky war with Argentina over the Falklands Islands. Scholar is quite beholden to the Americans.
While at the Welsh Office, Scholar became so helpful in integrating its universities into meeting GCHQ’s needs that he was unprecedentedly honored by them. The University of Wales, Aberystwyth, and the University of Cardiff made him an Honorary Fellow. He was awarded an honorary doctorate by the University of Glamorgan in 1999. While at DTI, Scholar became responsible for handling the affairs of the Carroll Foundation Charitable Trust – what became the largest one in the world during the 1990′s, controlling 85 large corporations. (11)
In addition, in August 2007, Scholar became the shadow director of the UK Statistical Agency. It seems that he used this post to help recruit qualitatively relevant experts covertly for GCHQ by acting as a front for it for those who were nervously interested in joining it – what was apparently in violation of its steering clear of engaging in politics. He seemed most certainly inclined to dispel this by speaking out against anyone who used Britain’s statistics improperly, even Prime Minister Gordon Brown and Home Secretaries Jaci Smith and Alan Johnson, once the agency was officially established.
At the center of this whole network was St John’s College Senior Language Lecturer in German Gudrun Loftus. She was a refugee from East Germany who made her way West, and up the academic scale in an unprecedented way despite her only having an undergraduate degree from Tubingen University. She was able to do so because of her ability to plumb the depths of the language, and teach it most effectively to those just starting out but not in a misleadingly simplistic way or taking out of context the subtleties of modern German. At the same time, she was so proficient in English that she soon became an actress for Buckinghamshire’s theatrical group, The Old Gaolers.
She co-authored three books, one with her husband Gerry, about learning German basic grammar, practicing its use, and providing a learning resource for more advanced students about the colloquial use of the language – what she and Ms.I. Scheiblauer expanded upon by running the Oxford Language Centre. The Centre provides classes in the five key European languages, plus Japanese, Chinese, and Arabic, and its library has sources for 135 other languages for students to study independently. And being only 37 miles away from Cheltenham, it is ideally placed for any students who may want to go there, or any spooks who have any questions about the subtleties of any language they are dealing with.
The basic counter-terrorist aim that NSA/GCHQ has is to make sure that another 9/11 or worse terror act doesn’t occur. While the activities of its leader Khalid al-Mihdhar is most often discussed, what went on at its operational center, Hamburg, was most important in knowing if a recurrence was not to happen. Counter-terrorists needed to know where the terrorists live, where they went, what kind of mosque they attended, what kinds of communications did they carry on with one another, what kinds of covert words did they use, and what did they mean, etc.
Here the center of attention should have been on Mohamed Atta, the organizer of the 9/11 attacks. If the three German intelligence agencies had had an inkling of what Atta and his associates were planning, they might well have stopped it, but because of their lack of technical and analytical expertise, they didn’t have a clue. They didn’t know just how mad Atta and his friends had become after Israel’s April 1996 Grapes of Wrath massacres in South Lebanon – what resulted in his signing his last will and testament against Israel and its allies in Hamburg’s al-Quds mosque (12) – the code words they developed for their targets in Washington (13), and that the plot was completed on July 16, 2001.(14)
The expertise that Loftus’s network provided European securocrats is well documented, though, understandably, without any acknowledgement. Germany, while having twice as many Muslims as either Britain or Spain, has not experienced a counter-terrorist cockup like either Madrid’s 3/11 or London’s 7/7. Its best example of stopping a 9/11 attack was its dogged pursuit of Eric Breininger, a German national who hoped to become a home-grown Mohamed Atta. In September 2007, the Federal Crime Office and the Foreign Intelligence Service (BND) caught three members of his notorious Sauerland group – two native-born Germans who had converted to Islam, and a Turkish resident planning attacks on German cities and American bases.
They were not worse than anything Europe had ever experienced (15), thanks to technical equipment they had used to break into their communications, and analysis of its take by Loftus-trained analysts that GCHQ had supplied them. By the time Breininger was finally killed in April 2010, GCHQ/MI6 agent Gareth Willaims was playing a role in the ongoing process not only in Washington but also in Afghanistan. (16)
When Williams was found dead on August 23rd, it seems murdered, Loftus apparently began to have second thoughts about what she had been involved in, and when I wrote my article about the background to his murder, someone, apparently she, wrote an most approving endorsement of it which a poster, using the site name of Shader Writing, passed along: “This is obviously a great post. Thanks for the valuable information and insights you have so provided here. Keep it up!”
Of course, I was most pleased, especially since it showed much more clearly where I was headed than I imagine the vast majority of viewers possessed. The person had apparently been most taken by my mentioning the murder of former DCI William Colby, and the priority that NSA put on recruiting foreign experts, especially in Britain, for cryptological and linguistic posts in Appendix C of Bamford’s Body of Secrets. The quoted source had digested all I had said about the illegal, covert, and, if necessary, the murderous ways of the NSA/GCHQ organization, and where I was headed when it came to what happened to Williams.
When I supplied the follow-up about Willaims’ murder on October 4th, I was most distressed to learn that Loftus had been killed early the next morning when she visited the Senior Common Room around 6 AM, apparently to meet someone about a most unexpected development. It seems that she had decided to go public – what GCHQ could have easily learned by eavesdropping on her conversations – and the agency had sent a person to check out just how serious she was about her plans to blow the whistle on it too.
When the person she met learned of her determination, she was pushed backwards down the steep, spiral staircase from the landing outside the Senior Common Room, falling all the way down to the bottom, fatally injuring herself in the process. There were, it seems, no witnesses to the killing, and the person who discovered her body, possibly even her killer, has not been identified. And my plea to Shader Writing afterwards to confirm that her comments about my article regarding the background to the Williams one had nothing to do with Loftus has gone unanswered.
It was right after Williams’ body had been found, apparently a murder NSA arranged just before he left the States on August 10th, that President Obama joined law-enforcement officials on both sides of the Atlantic in getting the new Attorney General, Dominic Grieve, to stop stonewalling the prosecution of the Carroll Trust Case (17) – one which apparently is most threatening to Scholar while he was Permanent Secretary of the DTI. The idea that Grieve is protecting the head of the UK Statistical Agency is best illustrated when he went out of his way to agree with Scholar’s criticism of Labour Ministers using statistics about knife crime in Britain incorrectly. One can only wonder that Loftus’s killing is to deflect further pressure in the States against him by his seeing that a favor for all the eavesdroppers is achieved.
The former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher helped deflect any embarrassing moments or comments by deciding not to attend her 85th birthday party at No. 10 shortly afterwards. Her former Private Secretary and wife had been invited, and there would have been uncomfortable conversation about the killing of Mrs. Loftus at St. John’s, and the unprecedented scandal at the Carroll Trust, so the ‘Iron Lady’ turned yet again – what she had done before when it came to getting of the Soviets and the Provisionals by force – not ‘returning’ to Downing Street, claiming conveniently yet again her sickly condition.
She has not managed a makeup party at No. 10 for either last year or this.
Where the Loftus killing ends up is anyone’s guess, like the Williams one.
1. p. 27.
2. p. 70.
3. For more, see my article: http://codshit.blogspot.com/2004/04/why-spain-suffered-its-911-attacks.html
4. For more, see my article: http://codshit.blogspot.com/2005/07/perfect-conspiracy-london-bombings.html
5. Op. cit., p. 219.
7. Ibid., p.230.
8. For more, see: http://www.sjc.ox.uk//368-748/Modern-Languages-and-joint-schoools.html
9. Op. cit., pp. 220-1.
10. James Bamford, Body of Secrets: How America’s NSA and Britain’s GCHQ Eavesdrop on the World, p. 398.
11. For more, see this link:http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=fb6_1277386170
12. Bamford, The…, p. 42.
13. Ibid., p. 71.
14. Ibid., p. 62.
15. See this link: http://www.rusi.org/analysis/commentary/ref:C48EOFBFBOEC6C/
By Trowbridge H. Ford
In the closed discussions that followed the attacks on New York City and the Pentagon, authorities in Washington initially appeared to act in a manner as if the incidents had occurred without warning. Congressional intelligence committees closed rank and immediately threw a blanket of exoneration over all agencies and personnel concerned.
Officials assumed that the hijackings had simply been the result of institutional inadequacies and shortcomings which could be remedied by a few decisions of senior level. This involved FBI Director Louis Freeh, who had just retired, and to advance huge amounts oif money to combat the growing threat of international terrorism. Other prominent officials thought that the problem would be reduced forever if DCI George Tenet, a Clinton appointee, had the grace to step aside quietly.
Washington simply lacked the ‘road map’ that the terrorists had used to get on the airliners in unison, hijack them, and crash them into two hugely important targets. Of course, individual agencies had picked up bits of information about what was planned -euphemistically called ‘dots’ – but no service had seen them all, nor was anybody in a position to put them into proper perspective. It seemed impossible for any reasonable agent to guess, much less determine, where the terrorists were headed, and why. The FBI’s counter-terrorist people had been starved of resources by Congress and of intelligence by other agencies, especially from the CIA.
During the past year, we have slowly learned that this convenient cover up of the tragedies is not necessarily true. FBI agents in Minneapolis had well-founded suspicions that Zacarias Moussaoui was involved in a huge conspiracy to hijack airliners for some deadly purpose. The agents were prevented by superiors in Washington from pursuing the matter. A similar situation occurred in Phoenix.
A memorandum written by Special Agent Ken Williams supplied headquarters with information concerning a number of people who sought ‘limited pilot instruction’ at a nearby flying school. State Police could have interfered, if not ended, the extensive activities of several key 9/11 hijackers had cooperation been better. A number of the would-be hijackers committed speeding violations, and had police been informed of the FBI suspicions, they would surely have been detained. Instead, the intelligence community was caught totally off guard.
There have been suggestions that the FBI and CIA were involved in a deadly competition to outwit and out-do each other. Freeh wanted to prove that it was his service that was the leading agency when it came to preventing international terrorism, while Tenet’s agency hoped to show that it knew best how to handle the threat. It was a deadly game of deception, especially in the case of one John O’Neill.
O’Neill was tragically killed during the attacks on the World Trade Center. Previous to his death, he was head of counter-terrorism at the FBI’s New York office. O’Neill had just resigned from the FBI because he had hit a stone wall from headquarters after trying to capture those responsible for the attack on the destroyer USS Cole in Yemen in October 2000. He took up the lucrative post as chief security officer at the Trade Center. On one occasion, he told Mayor Giuliani’s counter-terrorist Czar, Jerry Hauer, “they’ll never stop trying to take down these buildings.”
O’Neill blossomed in the FBI, especially when he arrived in New York shortly after the first attack on the WTC in 1993. Thanks to his growing understanding of Islamic fundamentalism, he put together the special operations team which captured Ramzi Ahmed Youseff in Pakistan for his part in the bombing, plotting to kill 4,000 airliner passengers by bringing down a dozen planes, and to assassinate Pope John Paul II. O’Neill was also influential in the arrest of the terrorists living in New York, and persons who killed 224 people at the American Embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania in 1998.
O’Neill was not just obsessed with catching terrorists. While working as a fingerprinter and tour guide, he earned a Master of Science degree in forensic science from Georgetown University. Due to his educational background, O’Neill took a broader view of terrorist crime than his colleagues. When TWA Flight 800 exploded over Long Island in July 1996, O’Neill’s boss, James Kallstrom, put together a team to try and prove that it was more handywork from Youseff’s followers. Oliver ‘Buck’ Revell, the Bureau’s former head of criminal investigations and controller its investigation into the PAN AM bombing over Lockerbie, concluded that the TWA airliner was blown up by a Semtex bomb. The controversial Pierre Salinger, JFK’s former Press Secretary, claimed that a rocket had brought down the airliner.
O’Neill hardly made any friends when he conclusively proved that the airliner had been brought down by the ignition of leaking fuel from one of its petrol tanks. Mary Jo White, the former US Attorney for the Southern District of New York, and with whom O’Neill had connected the dots in the Youseff case, said of O’Neill: “He had elbows – he’s press his point very hard.”
FBI and CIA Rivalry
The rivalry between the CIA and the FBI, and growing resentment of O’Neill within the FBI leadership, came to a head when he started investigating al-Qaida’s bombing of the USS Cole in Aden. In January 1999, the CIA had taped a meeting between al-Qaida operatives, Khalid Al-Midhar, Nawaf Al-Hamzi, Ramzi Bin Al-Shibh, and Tawfi Bin-Atash aka Khallas, in Kuala Impur, Malaysia. They even managed to discover that Al-Midhar had a passport with a valid American visa in his own name. The group discussed terrorist attacks against American targets – which resulted in the ramming of the Cole a few months later.
The CIA claimed that it e-mailed the FBI about the meeting and Al-Midhar’s visa. The FBI denied ever receiving it. Still, the CIA tracked Al-Midhar and Al-Hamzi to Los Angeles where they soon set-up residence in San Diego. The FBI’s claim of ‘total ignorance’ is odd for it allegedly recruited the landlord of the mens apartment as an informant, and that he regularly reported to an FBI handler. The Bureau is now stonewalling any appearance by either of the men before the joint congressional intelligence committee inquiry. They would reveal how the relationship started; what the informant knew of the comings-and-goings; a record of their calls, thought, and visitors; and information that the FBI tried to cover up by going after scapegoats, especially Jordanian college student Osama Awadallah after the attacks.
While this was going on behind O’Neill’s back, he was struggling in Yeman to catch the culprits in the Cole attack. O’Neill pushed his agents to get answers. However, ambassador Barbara Bodine agreed to Yemeni demands in November 2000 that O’Neill be barred from entering the country. The only result he achieved was the discovery and arrest of Al-Quso who only the suspects by sight.
Nothing changed for O’Neill with the election of George Bush. Washington considered O’Neill’s concerns about al-Qaida and the Taliban but failed to take them seriously. The White House thought that it could do business with Taliban leader Mullah Omar, until his friend bin-Laden assassinated Northern Alliance leader Ahmed Shah Masood. Washington believed Omar could help secure an oil pipeline to transmit Caspian oil to the Indian Ocean and circumvent Russian and Arab domination of the process.
The State Department and the Justice Department did nothing to rescind the restriction which had been placed on O’Neill’s activities.
Washington’s readiness to stop the terrorist attacks was well captured in Freeh’s departing message to the Senate in May 2001, when he equated the international threats to America to those domestically generated regarding human and animal rights, the environment, and states’ rights. The Director, along with Kallstrom and Revell, called upon Bush to bomb Iran, the leading state on the State Department’s list of countries “sponsoring terrorism.”
The CIA was sufficiently concerned about the FBI’s lack of action in the face of the growing threat of terrorism, and arranged a meeting at its New York office on 11 June 2001. The meeting turned into a shouting match when CIA agents refused to tell what they knew about Al-MIdhar and Al-Hamzi. By this time, O’Neill was in the process of resigning and talking to French reporters Jean-Charles Brisard and Guillaume Dasque, who were researching The Forbidden Fruit about how the White House plan was the Taliban was interfering with the war on terrorism.
On 4 July, Al-Midhar and Al-Hamzi came to New York, but apparently, nothing was done by the Bureau to keep track of the men; it was simply counting on the landlord in San Diego to inform them. In August, the CIA added the men to its Watch List. After receiving no response from the FBI, the CIA sent the NYC Field Office a memo on 23 August asking for help in tracking them down.
The FBI discovered that the prime suspects had checked into New York’s Marriott Hotel quite close to the WTC, but had immediately disappeared. O’Neill assistant asked for a criminal investigation of Al-Midhar, but headquarters refused on the grounds that there was insufficient evidence.
In late August, O’Neill’s last act for the FBi ws to authorise the investigation of Yemeni Al-Quso. The request was not acted upon until after 11 September. When Al-Quso was shown the CIA photographs of Al-Midhar, Al-Hamzi, and Al-Shibh from Kuala Lumpur, he immediately recognised the men as the perpetrators of the attack on the USS Cole. If O’Neill had not been barred from Yemen and shut out of any meaningful discussions of what the terrorists might be planning, the tragic attacks might not have taken place.
After his three decades with the FBI, the UPI’s Mike Kirland recently wrote: “O’Neill was a near legend in the counter-terrorism field.”
Yet only in death did the FBI give O’Neill his due. At his funeral, his body having been found among the rubble of the WTC 11 days after the attacks, Freeh declared: “He was paramount, the most knowledgeable agent we had in the FBI, probably in the government with respect to counterintelligence matters. The human embodiment of unheeded warnings.”
The former Director did not explain why O’Neill’s abilities were simply discarded when it needed them most.
We sort of thought that all along … F.C.
Financial Times reports that Chinese military engineers took photographs and samples from wreckage in Abbottabad
Pakistan let Chinese military engineers photograph and take samples from the US helicopter that was left behind when American special forces killed Osama bin Laden, it has been reported.
If true, the claim would underline the deterioration in US-Pakistani relations since the raid in May in Abbottabad, outside Islamabad in which the al-Qaida leader died.
Members of the Chinese military were allowed to survey the wreckage of the hi-tech helicopter and take samples of its “stealth” skin, which allowed it to enter Pakistan undetected by radar, the Financial Times reported, quoting US sources.
“The US now has information that Pakistan, particularly the ISI [Pakistan's intelligence agency], gave access to the Chinese military to the downed helicopter in Abbottabad,” an intelligence figure was quoted as saying. . . (more)
White House Obama bin Laden Kill Show Gaps
21 July 2011. Timeline corrected for post-bin Laden kill times in Washington DC. Thanks to A. Thus, the first White House photo was taken 21:25 hours after the killing, a substantial delay. But it does not indicate how soon the White House was informed and when the national security team assembled at the White House, only that arrangements had been made for a photographer to record the response in anticipation of releasing photos to the public.
18 July 2011. Cryptome filed today an online request with the White House for all photographs by White House photographers taken on May 1, 2011 concerning the Osama bin Laden operation, at original resolution and containing EXIF information for the original shoot and subsequent modification. . . (more + PHOTOS)