A New Writing By Sibel Edmonds

E

Enlightened1

Guest
I'd like to know what you make of this. I am a firm believer that Israel had much to do with 9-11, however this is pretty damning:



November 15, 2006



THE HIGHJACKING OF A NATION



Part 1: The Foreign Agent Factor



By Sibel Edmonds

In his farewell address in 1796, George Washington warned that America must be constantly awake against "the insidious wiles of foreign influence...since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government."



Today, foreign influence, that most baneful foe of our republican government, has its tentacles entrenched in almost all major decision making and policy producing bodies of the U.S. government machine. It does so not secretly, since its self-serving activities are advocated and legitimized by highly positioned parties that reap the benefits that come in the form of financial gain and positions of power.



Foreign governments and foreign-owned private interests have long sought to influence U.S. public policy. Several have accomplished this goal; those who are able and willing to pay what it takes. Those who buy themselves a few strategic middlemen, commonly known as pimps, while in DC circles referred to as foreign registered agents and lobbyists, who facilitate and bring about desired transactions. These successful foreign entities have mastered the art of 'covering all the bases' when it comes to buying influence in Washington DC. They have the required recipe down pat: get yourself a few 'Dime a Dozen Generals,' bid high in the 'former statesmen lobby auction', and put in your pocket one or two 'ex-congressmen turned lobbyists' who know the ropes when it comes to pocketing a few dozen who still serve.



The most important facet of this influence to consider is what happens when the active and powerful foreign entities' objectives are in direct conflict with our nation's objectives and its interests and security; and when this is the case, who pays the ultimate price and how. There is no need for assumptions of hypothetical situations to answer these questions, since throughout recent history we have repeatedly faced the dire consequences of the highjacking of our foreign and domestic policies by these so-called foreign agents of foreign influence.



Let's illustrate this with the most important recent case, the catastrophe endured by our people; the September Eleven terrorist attacks. Let's observe how certain foreign interests, combined with their U.S. agents and benefactors, overrode the interests and security of the entire nation; how thousands of victims and their loved ones were kicked aside to serve the interests of a few; foreign influence and its agents.





Senator Graham's Revelation

It has been established that two of the 9/11 hijackers had a support network in the U.S. that included agents of the Saudi government, and that the Bush administration and the FBI blocked a congressional investigation into that relationship.



In his book, "Intelligence Matters," Senator Bob Graham made clear that some details of that financial support from Saudi Arabia were in the 27 pages of the congressional inquiry's final report that were blocked from release by the administration, despite the pleas of leaders of both parties in the House and Senate intelligence committees.



Here is an excerpt from Senator Graham's statement from the July 24, 2003 congressional record on the classified 27 pages of the Congressional Joint Inquiry into 9/11: "The most serious omission, in my view, is part 4 of the report, which is entitled Finding, Discussion and Narrative Regarding Certain Sensitive National Security Matters. Those 27 pages have almost been entirely censured [sic]....The declassified version of this finding tells the American people that our investigation developed information suggesting specific sources of foreign support for some of the September 11 hijackers while they were in the United States. In other words, officials of a foreign government are alleged to have aided and abetted the terrorist attacks on our country on September 11, which took over 3,000 lives."



In his book Graham reveals, "Our investigators found a CIA memo dated August 2, 2002, whose author concluded that there is incontrovertible evidence that there is support for these terrorists within the Saudi government. On September 11, America was not attacked by a nation-state, but we had just discovered that the attackers were actively supported by one, and that state was our supposed friend and ally Saudi Arabia." He then cites another case, "We had discovered an FBI asset who had a close relationship with two of the terrorists; a terrorist support network that went through the Saudi Embassy; and a funding network that went through the Saudi Royal family."



The most explosive revelation in Graham's book is the following statement with regard to the administration's attitude on page 216: "It was as if the President's loyalty lay more with Saudi Arabia than with America's safety." Further, he states that he asked the FBI to undertake a review of the Riggs Bank records on the terrorists' money trail, to look at other Saudi companies with ties to al-Qaeda, to plan for monitoring suspect Saudi interests in the United States; however, Graham adds: "To my knowledge, none of these investigations have been completed...Nor do we know anything else about what I believe to be a state-sponsored terrorist support network that still exists, largely undamaged, within the United States."



What Graham is trying to establish in his book and previous public statements in this regard, and doing so under state imposed 'secrecy and classification', is that the classification and cover up of those 27 pages is not about protecting 'U.S. national security, methods of intelligence collection, or ongoing investigations,' but to protect certain U.S. allies. Meaning, our government put the interests of certain foreign nations and their U.S. beneficiaries far above its own people and their interests. While Saudi Arabia has been specifically pointed to by Graham, other countries involved have yet to be identified.



In covering up Saudi Arabia's direct role in supporting Al Qaeda, the 9/11 Commission goes even a few steps further than the congress and the Executive Branch. The report claims "there is no convincing evidence that any government financially supported al-Qaeda before 9/11." Their report ignores all the information provided by government officials to Congress, as well as volumes of published reports and investigations by other nations, regarding Muslim and Arab regimes that have supported al Qaeda. It completely disregards the terrorist lists of the Treasury and State Departments, which have catalogued the Saudi government's decades of support for Bin Laden and al-Qaeda.



Why in the world would the United States government go so far to protect Saudi Arabia in the face of what itself declares to be the biggest security threat facing our nation and the world today?



Why is the United States willing to set aside its own security and interests in order to advance the interests of another state?



How can a government that's been intent upon using the terrorist attacks to carry out many unjustifiable atrocities, prevent bringing to justice those who've been established as being directly responsible for it?



More importantly, how is this done in a nation that prides itself as one that operates under governance of the people, by the people, for the people?



How did our government bodies, those involved in drafting and implementing our nation's policies, evolve into this foreign influence-peddling operation?



In order to answer these questions one must first establish who stands to lose and who stands to gain by protecting Saudi Arabia from being exposed and facing consequences of its involvement in terrorist networks activities. In addition to identifying the nations in question, we must identify the interests as well as the actors; their agents. Let's look at Saudi Arabia as one of the successful foreign nations that have mastered the art of 'covering all the bases' when it comes to buying and peddling influence in Washington DC, and identify its hired 'agents' and 'agents by default.'



Foreign Agents by Default

Although when it comes to our complex diplomatic threading with Saudi Arabia the easiest answer appears to be the 'oil factor,' upon further inspection the Saudi's influence and role extends into other areas, such as the Military Industrial Complex and the too familiar Lobbying Games.



According to the report published by the Federation of American Scientists (FAS), Saudi Arabia is America's top customer. Since 1990 the U.S. government, through the Pentagon's arms export program, has arranged for the delivery of more than $39.6 billion in foreign military sales to Saudi Arabia, and an additional $394 million worth of arms were delivered to the Saudi regime through the State Department's direct commercial sales program. Oil rich Saudi Arabia is a cash-paying customer; a compulsive buyer of our weaponry. The list of U.S. sellers includes almost all the major players such as Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, and Boeing.



The report by FAS establishes that despite the show of U.S. support demonstrated by this astounding quantity of arms sales, Saudi Arabia's human rights record is extremely poor; see the U.S. State Department's 2000 Human Rights Report. Saudi Arabia's position as a strategic Gulf ally has blinded U.S. officials into approving a level and quality of arms exports that should never have been allowed to a non-democratic country with such a poor human rights record.



Further, there are indications of Saudi's active role as a player in the nuclear black-market. According to Mohammed Khilewi, first secretary at the Saudi mission to the United Nations until July 1994, the Saudis have sought a bomb since 1975; they sought to buy nuclear reactors from China, supported Pakistan's nuclear program, and contributed $5 billion to Iraq's nuclear weapons program between 1985 and 1990. While the U.S. government vocally opposes the development or procurement of ballistic missiles by non-allies, it has been very quiet in Saudi Arabia's case, considering the fact that it possesses the longest-range ballistic missiles of any developing country.



The Military Industrial Complex certainly seems to be a winner in having the congressional report pertaining to the Saudi government's role in supporting the 9/11 terrorist activities being classified. The exposure would have meant grounds for U.S. sanctions and retributions; it would have risked the loss of billions of dollars in revenue from its 'top customer.' These companies don't even have to officially register as foreign agents; after all, their strong loyalty and unbreakable bond with foreign elements exists by default; it is called mutual benefit. They are 'Foreign Agents by Default.'



This holds true for other parties and players involved within the MIC network; the contractors and the investors. Let's look at one of these famous and influential players; another foreign agent even if only by default; a man who defended the Saudis against a lawsuit brought by the 9/11 victims' family members; a man who happens to be the senior counsel for the Carlyle Group, which invests heavily in defense companies and is the nation's 10th largest defense contractor with ties to the Saudi Royal Family, Enron, Global Crossing, among others; James Baker; Papa Bush's Secretary of State. On the morning of September 11th, 2001, Baker was reportedly at a Carlyle investor conference with members of the Bin Laden family in the Ritz Carlton in Washington DC, while Bush Sr. was on the payroll of the Carlyle group.



The Carlyle Group, a Washington, DC based private equity firm that employs numerous former high-ranking government officials with ties to both political parties, was the ninth largest Pentagon contractor between 1998 and 2003, an ongoing Center for Public Integrity investigation into Department of Defense contracts found. According to this report, overall, six private investment firms, including Carlyle, received nearly $14 billion in Pentagon deals between 1998 and 2003. Considering the fact that Saudi Arabia is the top buyer of the U.S. weapons industry, Carlyle's investment and its stake, and of course Jimmy Baker's far reaching influence within the Pentagon and congress, everything seems to come together and fit perfectly to shield this foreign interest no matter the price to be paid by the American public.



The political action committees (PACs) of the biggest defense companies have given $14.2 million directly to federal candidates since Clinton's first presidential bid, according to the Center for Responsive Politics (CRP). In 1997 alone the defense industry spent $49.5 million to lobby the nation's decision-makers.



Between 1998 and 2004, for the six-year period, Boeing Company spent more than $57 million in lobbying. For the same period of time, Lockheed Martin poured over $55 million into lobbying activities. Northrop Grumman exceeded both by investing $83 million in lobbying, and based on a report issued by POGO, it contributed over $4 million to individuals and PACs.



With 'dime a dozen' generals on their boards of directors, numerous high-powered ex congressmen and senators at their disposal in the 'K Street Lobby Quarter,' tens of millions of dollars in campaign donations, and billions of dollars at stake, the Military Industrial Complex surely had all the incentives to act just as foreign agents would, and fight for their highly valued client; the Saudi Government. They appear to have had all the reasons to ensure that the report would not see the light of the day; no matter what the effect on the country, its security, and its interests.



K Street Lobby Quarter

The fact that Saudi Arabia pours large sums into lobbying firms and public relations companies with close ties to congress does not come as a big surprise. The FARA database under the DOJ website lists Qorvis Communications as one of Saudi Arabia's registered foreign agents. In 2003, for only a six months period, Qorvis received more than $11 million from the Saudi government. Another firm, Loeffler Tuggey Pauerstein Rosenthal LLP, another registered foreign agent, received more than $840,000 for the same six-month period, and the list goes on. Just for this six month period the government of Saudi Arabia paid a total of more than $14 million to 13 lobbying and public relations companies; all registered as foreign agents.



Why do the Saudis spend nearly $20 million per year in lobbying activities in the U.S. via their hired agents? What kind of return on investment are they getting out of the United States Congress?



Let's take Loeffler's group and examine its value for the Saudi government, since it was paid over $3 million in three years between 2003 and 2005. The firm was founded by former Republican Congressman Tom Loeffler of Texas. Loeffler served in the Republican Leadership as Deputy Whip, and as Chief Deputy Whip during his third and fourth term. He was a member of the powerful Appropriations Committee, Energy and Commerce Committee and Budget Committee. In the two Bush campaigns for governor, Loeffler, who contributed $141,000, was the largest donor. In 1998, he served as national co-chair of the Republican National Committee's "Team 100" program for donors of $100,000 or more, and afterwards held the same title during George W. Bush's presidential campaign. Loeffler's generosity extends to the members of congress as well. In 6 years, he has given more than $185,000 to members of congress, 97% of it going to only Republican members. During the same six-year period, Loeffler's firm received more than $18 million in lobbying fees.



The firm's managing director happens to be William L. Ball. Ball served as Chief of Staff to Senators John Tower (R-TX) and Herman Talmadge (D-GA). In 1985, he joined the Reagan Administration as Assistant Secretary of State for Legislative Affairs. Later he was assigned to the White House to serve President Reagan as his chief liaison to the Congress. Wallace Henderson is also a Partner; he was Chief Counsel and Chief of Staff to Representative W. J. Tauzin (R-LA), Chief of Staff to U.S. Senator John Breaux (D-LA).



By having foreign agents such as the Loeffler Group, in addition to their foreign agents by default, the MIC, the Saudis seem to have all their bases covered. Former secretaries and deputy secretaries with open access to the current ones, former congressmen and senators who used to be positioned on strategically valuable committees and know the rules of the congressional game, and millions of dollars available to be spent and channeled and re-channeled to various PACs go a long way toward ensuring results. Money counts. Money is needed to bring in votes. Professional skills and discretion are required to get this money to various final destinations. The registered foreign agents, the lobby groups, are geared for this task. The client is happy in the end; so are the foreign agents and the congressional actors.





Other Savvy Nations

Of course, the sanction and legitimization of far reaching foreign influence and strongholds in the U.S., despite the many dire consequences endured by its citizens, is not limited to the government of Saudi Arabia. Numerous well-documented cases can be cited for others such as Turkey, Pakistan, and Israel, to name a few.



I won't get into the details and history of my own case, where the government invoked the state secrets privilege to gag my case and the congress in order to 'protect certain sensitive diplomatic relations.' The country, the foreign influence, in this case was the Republic of Turkey. The U.S. government did so despite the far reaching consequences of burying the facts involved, and disregarded the interests and security of the nation; all to protect a quasi ally engaged in numerous illegitimate activities within the global terrorist networks, nuclear black-market and narcotics activities; an ally who happens to be another compulsive and loyal buyer of the Military Industrial Complex; an ally who happens to be another savvy player in recruiting top U.S. players as its foreign agents and spending million of dollars per year to the lobbying groups headed by many 'formers.' Turkey's agent list includes generals such as Joseph Ralston and Brent Scowcroft, former statesmen such as William Cohen and Marc Grossman, and of course famous ex-congressmen such as Bob Livingston and Stephen Solarz. Turkey too seems to have all its bases covered.



Another well-known and documented case involves Pakistan. Over two decades ago Richard Barlow, an intelligence analyst working for then-Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney issued a startling report. After reviewing classified information from field agents, he had determined that Pakistan, despite official denials, had built a nuclear bomb. In the March 29, 1993 issue of New Yorker, Seymour Hersh noted that "even as Barlow began his digging, some senior State Department officials were worried that too much investigation would create what Barlow called embarrassment for Pakistan." Barlow's conclusion was politically inconvenient. A finding that Pakistan possessed a nuclear bomb would have triggered a congressionally mandated cutoff of aid to the country, and it would have killed a $1.4-billion sale of F-16 fighter jets to Islamabad. A few months later a Pentagon official downplayed Pakistan's nuclear capabilities in his testimony to Congress. When Barlow protested to his superiors, he was fired. A few years later, the Executive Branch would slap Barlow with the State Secrets Privilege.



As we all now know, Pakistan provided direct nuclear assistance to Iran and Libya. During the Cold War, the U.S. put up with Pakistani lies and deception about their nuclear activities, it did not enforce its restrictions on Pakistan's nuclear program when it counted, and as a result Pakistan ended up with a U.S.-made nuclear weapons system. Yet again, after 9/11, the Bush administration issued a waiver ending the implementation of almost all sanctions on Pakistan because of the perceived need for Pakistani assistance in the fight against Al Qaeda and the Taliban, who ironically were brought to power by direct U.S. support in the 1980s in the first place.



Weiss, in the May-June 2004 issue of the Bulletin states: "We are essentially back where we were with Pakistan in the 1980s. It is apparent that it has engaged in dangerous nuclear mischief with North Korea, Iran, and Libya (and perhaps others), but thus far without consequences to its relationship with the United States because of other, overriding foreign policy considerations--not the Cold War this time, but the war on terrorism." He continues: "But now there is a major political difference. It was one thing for Pakistan, a country with which the United States has had good relations generally, to follow India and produce the bomb for itself. It is quite another for Pakistan to help two-thirds of the "axis of evil" to get the bomb as well."



FARA & LDA

An agent of a 'foreign principal' is defined as any individual or organization which acts at the order, request, or under the direction or control of a foreign principal, or whose activities are directed by a foreign principal who engages in political activities, or acts in a public relations capacity for a foreign principal, or solicits or dispenses any thing of value within the United States for a foreign principal, or represents the interests of a foreign principal before any agency or official of the U.S. government.



In 1938, in response to the large number of German propaganda agents in the pre-WWII U.S., Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) was established to insure that the American public and its lawmakers know the source of propaganda intended to sway public opinion, policy, and laws. The Act requires every agent of a foreign principal to register with the Department of Justice and file forms outlining its agreements with, income from, and expenditures on behalf of the foreign principal. Any agent testifying before a committee of Congress must furnish the committee with a copy of his most recent registration statement. The agent must keep records of all his activities and permit the Attorney General to inspect them. However, as is the case with many laws, the Act is filled with exemptions and loopholes that allow minimization of, and in some cases complete escape from, warranted scrutiny.



There are a number of exemptions. For example, persons whose activities are of a purely commercial nature or of a religious, academic, and charitable nature are exempt. Any agent who is engaged in lobbying activities and is registered under the Lobbying Disclosure Act (LDA) is exempt. The LDA of 1995 was passed after decades of effort to make the regulation and disclosure of lobbying the federal government more effective. However, LDA also has serious and important loopholes and limitations that can be summed up as: Inadequate Disclosure, Inadequate Enforcement, and Inadequate Regulation of Conduct. The recent congressional scandals make this point very clear.



In addition, neither act deals with an important issue: Conflict of Interest. Many of these agents, with their loyalty to the foreign hand that feeds them, end up being appointed to various positions, commissions and special envoys by our government. Recall Kissinger and his appointment to head the 9/11 Commission, and of course the recent revelation by Woodward on his advisory position to the current White House. Take a look at Jimmy Baker's current appointment on the Iraq commission. Same goes for the father of all the 'dime a dozen generals', Brent Scowcroft, and one of his new proteges, General Joseph Ralston. In short, neither FARA nor LDA creates meaningful oversight, control, or enforcement; neither deals with conflict of interest issues, and neither provides any deterrence or consequences for unethical or illegal conduct.





It used to be congressional 'pork projects' and 'corporate influence' that raised eyebrows now and then; here and there. Gone are those days. Today the unrestricted and uncontrollable money game and influence peddling tricks within the major decision-making and policy producing bodies of the U.S. government have reached new heights; yet, no raised eyebrows are registered. Sadly, today, a new version of 'The Manchurian Candidate' would have to be produced as a documentary.



The other day I received a request to sign on to a petition put forth by a group of 9/11 family members urging the congress to reopen the investigations of 9/11 and declassify the infamous 27-pages which deal with foreign governments, U.S. allies, that provided support for those who carried out the attacks on our nation. My heart goes out to them. I do sympathize with them. I am known to take on similar propositions and methods of activism myself. However, looking at the realities, seeing what it takes to get things done in Washington, realizing how this beast works in the Real Sin City, I would encourage them to look at the root cause, rather than the symptoms. There are only two ways I can see that can bring about what they have been fighting for and what the majority of us desire to see in terms of bringing about Truth, Oversight, and Accountability; Justice.



The family members, and their supporters, us, either have to tackle the major cause; the corruption of our government officials via unrestricted and undisciplined 'revolving doors' and 'foreign influence & lobby' practices, and push for expedient meaningful reforms by the new ambitious congress, and have them prove to us their worth. Or, they may as well give up their long-held integrity, go bid high for one or two former statesmen, hire a few dime a dozen generals, and buy themselves a couple of ex-congressmen turned lobbyists; that will do the job.

# # # #



Sibel Edmonds is the founder and director of National Security Whistleblowers Coalition (NSWBC). Ms. Edmonds worked as a language specialist for the FBI. During her work with the bureau, she discovered and reported serious acts of security breaches, cover-ups, and intentional blocking of intelligence that had national security implications. After she reported these acts to FBI management, she was retaliated against by the FBI and ultimately fired in March 2002. Since that time, court proceedings on her case have been blocked by the assertion of "State Secret Privilege"; the Congress of the United States has been gagged and prevented from any discussion of her case through retroactive re-classification by the Department of Justice. Ms. Edmonds is fluent in Turkish, Farsi and Azerbaijani; and has a MA in Public Policy and International Commerce from George Mason University, and a BA in Criminal Justice and Psychology from George Washington University. PEN American Center awarded Ms. Edmonds the 2006 PEN/Newman's Own First Amendment Award.
 
Well, I don't have time now to dig into this, but I will say that if Bob Graham is pushing "the Saudis did it," that right there says a lot. Same with Michael Moore. All very useful deflections from Israel's role.

The Saudi role is irrelevant, since they (the Saudi Royal Family) have always worked for the interests of the United States and Israel. Same with the Pakistani ISI.
 
I've always found Sibel Edmonds very credible and articulate and have pointed often to her case as a major red flag -- a frightening reminder of how elements within governments work -- that is, for themselves first, pure STS, even if it means conflict with each other and a total disregard for the service they're supposed to perform. Interesting to see that Ms. Edmonds has started this NSWBC.

I had the same thought as DonaldJHunt, though, as I read it. "Michael Moore did the same thing, finger the Saudis first, and lay off Israel." Well, I guess it's a start. But, let's face it, because of the vast complexity of relationships between nations, and the money-oriented truth of them, which the average American will never even know exists, there is just no way that the U.S. gov't could "turn" on its supposed allies on the basis of such things. The public will not understand an investigation into such matters.

I think this is basically why gov'ts have to make up silly, simple-minded stories to explain the actions they take against each other -- there could be no public support otherwise. Is the average American going to care about threats to some multinational corporation's profits in a particular market from shadowy elements of another nation's business community that are funded secretly through heretofore unknown organs of the private businesses of elements of a foreign gov't? (That's just the headline.) Not a chance. That's why Henry Kissinger, for example, wanted everything done secretly by paid third parties that would ensure U.S.-gov't deniability of involvement. Henry, in fact, is still advising the White House, and I think we can be sure that secret action is taking place about which we may never know anything, but it will manifest is some publicly explainable way someday.

I imagine the U.S. gov't is like a mafia boss anyway. We, its "family and children," are protected from knowing the true nature and complexity of daddy's business, and don't understand why he suddenly seems to have enemies that want to harm him. Daddy says there are bad people who want to hurt us, so we believe and protect daddy. There can't be a public investigation that reveals what the PTB don't intend us to know. OSIT.
 
It wouldn't be the first time that things were "leaked" in order to point the finger the wrong direction. Remember the "accidental leaking"of the "WMD intell"? Well, we now know it was faked and "leaked" just to give support to the Bush rant.

I think that Edmonds is sincere, but she is naive. It wouldn't be too hard for the real culprits to set things up so that it seems that some other government is being protected just as one of the layers of protection.

You have to ask, first of all, CUI BONO? Who Benefits?

I'm sorry, but I can't see a single benefit for Saudi Arabia in 9/11 or anything that has transpired since then.

Let's look at the overall situation.

First, the perpetrators possessed the professional skill to fly an aircraft. We know that this excludes the Saudis that are listed as the hijackers based on testimony of those who knew them. We also know that several of them were reported to still be alive right after 9/11. I don't think anyone has heardd much about that since because, of course, if it is true, they would have been silenced rather quickly via any of the many means that the secret services have of silencing people.

Next, for each plane, assuming we are dealing with real hijackers, there had to be at least four hijackers with extras on hand in the event one (or a group) of them failed. In planning such an operation, it was undoubtedly calculated that there was a high probability that the hijacking would fail, thus there had to be stand-by hijackers and/or pilots in this eventuality.

Of course, these particular types of risk of failure are obviated if one factors in the use of computerized guidance systems such as this one: "Universal Pilot Replacement Program"

It also obviates the necessity for finding 19 (or more) people willing to sacrifice themselves, since such individuals are not easy to find.

Of course, this last objection could be managed by mind-control techniques, but that is not fail-safe. If there was any way around having to depend on human factors to carry out the objective, it would be found.

Finally, the departure times of the aircraft from four different points were coordinated minute by minute. This means that the routes and timing were known well in advance, and these particular flights were selected specifically for their routes and schedule.

So far we see that the operation was complicated enough to necessitate a long period of planning - many months, if not years.

Now we must consider the fact that the real perpetrators want, very much, to hide their true identity. So, we next look at the huge clue that was left behind: a copy of the Koran and instructions for flying a plane in Arabic left in a lease car at the airport.

We already know that the group was capable of coordinating an attack that took months of planning right down to every last detail. Do we think they would really have left a calling card?

With every other aspect of total control and professionalism, how could they make such a mistake? This does not compute with all the rest of the perfection of the operation.

All this says that the criminals want to create a false track.

And we can suspect that they have ways of creating MANY false tracks.

Consider the words of Andrey Kosyakov, a Russian Intell analyst:

[T]he target is precisely America; precisely civilians.

But, we remember that some analysts were claiming that if George Bush was in the White House on September 11, then the aircraft would have been aimed at the White House instead of the Pentagon.

This is highly improbable. In that case the White House or the Pentagon, but not peaceful population would be the first targets. Indeed after a first successful terrorist act, the chances of success for the rest fall. You see that the last action did fail in the crash of the aircraft in Pittsburgh. It was most certainly shot down. However hard it is to admit, this was the correct thing to do.

So it is clear that the main targets are civilians. ...

But I would like to repeat this: the fact that no terrorists are claiming responsibility, tells us that they will kill again and again until the next stage of global conflict is achieved. This is precisely the goal of these actions. Only then will they reveal their identity in order to get followers.

(interviewer) And who this? Ben Laden?

Hardly. Yes, there was the interception of his conversation with someone, where they reported to him the destruction of two targets.This was seen as indirect confirmation of his participation. But he is not an ideologist. He is too well known. And the one who organized all of this is too smart to be noticed. Ever.
 
Great post Laura! Exactly the logic puzzle that I approached some years ago when making my "scenario" 9-11 site. Not too often that people put all those relevant factors into one basket.

Laura said:
I'm sorry, but I can't see a single benefit for Saudi Arabia in 9/11 or anything that has transpired since then.
There are monetary links to the US which could explain benefits. In the dealings at that level, Saudi complicity could have been a payoff for US based power services provided many years ago.

Laura said:
Let's look at the overall situation.

First, the perpetrators possessed the professional skill to fly an aircraft. We know that this excludes the Saudis that are listed as the hijackers based on testimony of those who knew them. We also know that several of them were reported to still be alive right after 9/11. I don't think anyone has heardd much about that since because, of course, if it is true, they would have been silenced rather quickly via any of the many means that the secret services have of silencing people.

Next, for each plane, assuming we are dealing with real hijackers, there had to be at least four hijackers with extras on hand in the event one (or a group) of them failed. In planning such an operation, it was undoubtedly calculated that there was a high probability that the hijacking would fail, thus there had to be stand-by hijackers and/or pilots in this eventuality.

Of course, these particular types of risk of failure are obviated if one factors in the use of computerized guidance systems such as this one: "Universal Pilot Replacement Program"

It also obviates the necessity for finding 19 (or more) people willing to sacrifice themselves, since such individuals are not easy to find.
the balancing of all the above factors must be done with 2 others stated later on, but let's take this one first.

Laura said:
This does not compute with all the rest of the perfection of the operation.
Firstly, the attacks had a major imperfection. Really big. But I contend that the problem with "hard to find" and "human factors" was deemed to be less of a threat than the below issue.

Laura said:
Now we must consider the fact that the real perpetrators want, very much, to hide their true identity.
The strategy would have to balence imperfect performance due to human factors against the proximity of using remote control over anything in NYC.

Laura said:
Of course, this last objection could be managed by mind-control techniques, but that is not fail-safe. If there was any way around having to depend on human factors to carry out the objective, it would be found..
Meaning that the human factors were suffered and imperfections risked and suffered. It turns out that the infiltrations of the 9-11 truth movement are adequate to offset the imperfections while the general divisions of the American people are sufficient to disallow any effective unity using reason to utilize effectively the problems created with the imperfections.

The imperfections are that the wrong tower fell first. For me it is a BIG issue. I'm in construction, I've been a welder for 35 years. I'm quite familiar with concrete, so when a plane center punches a tower at 450MPH, the concrete core is breached, fuel runs into it and around the tower causing major fires, then the other tower is barely clipped at 550 MPH, the core barely breached, the fuel ends up burning outside the tower in a fireball, but THAT tower falls first, I have a BIG problem with it. Then they both fall ALL THE WAY TO THE GROUND. Ah oh I have a HUGE problem with that.

When the tops of both towers fall in the wrong direction according to the tower faces impacted (fires are not going to effect the towers at all), I have a BIG problem with it and view the entire thing as completely botched. But I'm just one guy and all the quasi authority of 9-11 truth seeking can't see concrete where only concrete can exist, they have no problem with the structure FEMA says existed, (even tho they know FEMA never had the plans and the structural elementsFEMA say existed are never seen in images of the towers coming down) and FEMA just happened to be set up for a major emergency 2 days prior to 9-11 2 miles away the quasi authority never doubts FEMA. All this while the structural elements FEMA shows cannot have been removed UNDER ANY CONDITIONS to create what was seen, but the quasi authority has no problem with that.

The perps have accurately assessed the human mental, social, psychological elements and the knowledge of one guy don't mean squat.

Yippee for the NWO and Happy New Year!

Oh BTW, Stratsec and the WTC, airport security breach shouldn't be overlooked in the scenario.
 
I don't get it. First she says this:
Sibel said:
Those who buy themselves a few strategic middlemen, commonly known as pimps, while in DC circles referred to as foreign registered agents and lobbyists, who facilitate and bring about desired transactions. These successful foreign entities have mastered the art of 'covering all the bases'
Gee Wizz, who are these embarrassing entities who are so much a thorn in the side of (anyone they chose to be)? Ten to one, they're not wearing Arabic headress, masquerading as Arabs or even involved in the oil industry. So, who are these people? They must be 'salesmen' of a sort and they probably don't fly in from overseas to 'do business' (manipulate) people in Washington. They would probably rather have longer to be in Washington to get their 'sales' done. They are salesmen. Yes, they sometimes are a thorn in the side because by their very nature, they are persistent.

And then she says this:
Sibel said:
In his book, "Intelligence Matters," Senator Bob Graham made clear that some details of that financial support from Saudi
or to paraphrase Senator Bob Graham, just say, Saudi, Saudi, Saudi!! And over-look everything else... please.

Just in time for this?
http://www.turkishdailynews.com.tr/article.php?enewsid=61815
British prosecutors dropped a two-year corruption inquiry into a multi-billion-pound defense deal with Saudi Arabia on Thursday after the government warned the investigation could undermine national security.
The reversal followed reports that Saudi Arabia had warned Britain it might cancel an order for 72 Eurofighter Typhoon jets from BAE Systems over the inquiry into past dealings involving Saudi officials and people working on behalf of BAE.
Apparently they are pretty tough customers. Yes that's it, they were buying, not selling! Surely people must know the difference? And money is important.

Sibel said:
According to the report published by the Federation of American Scientists (FAS), Saudi Arabia is America's top customer. Since 1990 the U.S. government, through the Pentagon's arms export program, has arranged for the delivery of more than $39.6 billion in foreign military sales to Saudi Arabia, and an additional $394 million worth of arms were delivered to the Saudi regime through the State Department's direct commercial sales program. Oil rich Saudi Arabia is a cash-paying customer; a compulsive buyer of our weaponry. The list of U.S. sellers includes almost all the major players such as Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, and Boeing.
America needs the business, lets face it, with most manufactuing out-sourced, or in China. Is it prepared to do anything to 'get' it? Maybe. And don't be thinking that this is setting a precident here. Its all about gain. They do what it takes.

Sibel said:
Let's look at Saudi Arabia as one of the successful foreign nations that have mastered the art of 'covering all the bases' when it comes to buying and peddling influence in Washington DC, and identify its hired 'agents' and 'agents by default.'
This is a trully wonderful idea, trouble is, Saudi Arabia is the wrong name. Is she aware?

Sibel said:
The Military Industrial Complex certainly seems to be a winner in having the congressional report pertaining to the Saudi government's role in supporting the 9/11 terrorist activities being classified.
Again, Saudi Arabia is the wrong name. What are they gaining? Nothing accept being defamed. How is that a gain?

Sibel said:
The Military Industrial Complex certainly seems to be a winner in having the congressional report pertaining to the Saudi government's role in supporting the 9/11 terrorist activities being classified. The exposure would have meant grounds for U.S. sanctions and retributions; it would have risked the loss of billions of dollars in revenue from its 'top customer.' These companies don't even have to officially register as foreign agents; after all, their strong loyalty and unbreakable bond with foreign elements exists by default; it is called mutual benefit. They are 'Foreign Agents by Default.'
Again wrong name, not Saudi, try Israeli. Is the woman that confused?

Sibel said:
With 'dime a dozen' generals on their boards of directors, numerous high-powered ex congressmen and senators at their disposal in the 'K Street Lobby Quarter,' tens of millions of dollars in campaign donations, and billions of dollars at stake, the Military Industrial Complex surely had all the incentives to act just as foreign agents would, and fight for their highly valued client; the Saudi Government. They appear to have had all the reasons to ensure that the report would not see the light of the day; no matter what the effect on the country, its security, and its interests.
Imagine how they would feel if the Saudi Government went elsewhere to 'do business'. Do you think they would be annoyed. They might be, well, just a little.

Sibel said:
Why do the Saudis spend nearly $20 million per year in lobbying activities in the U.S. via their hired agents? What kind of return on investment are they getting out of the United States Congress?
As a customer, what do they need to 'sell'? Surely, if they don't like the price, they will go to someone else? 20 million per year - compared to what? And to whom? Besides, we already know they have a lot of money to through around, for fun, if they chose to do so. 20 million? Is this a lot, or just spare change for Saudis? Is it a lot compared to other countries? This needs an answer, I think.

Sibel said:
Money counts. Money is needed to bring in votes. Professional skills and discretion are required to get this money to various final destinations. The registered foreign agents, the lobby groups, are geared for this task.
Gee, one wonders, what price does anyone charge for blackmail if 'getting the job done' is all that matters?

Sibel said:
Of course, the sanction and legitimization of far reaching foreign influence and strongholds in the U.S., despite the many dire consequences endured by its citizens, is not limited to the government of Saudi Arabia. Numerous well-documented cases can be cited for others such as Turkey, Pakistan, and Israel, to name a few.
Mirror, mirror on the wall, who's the 'fairest' of them all?

Sibel said:
In 1938, in response to the large number of German propaganda agents in the pre-WWII U.S., Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) was established to insure that the American public and its lawmakers know the source of propaganda intended to sway public opinion, policy, and laws. The Act requires every agent of a foreign principal to register with the Department of Justice and file forms outlining its agreements with, income from, and expenditures on behalf of the foreign principal. Any agent testifying before a committee of Congress must furnish the committee with a copy of his most recent registration statement. The agent must keep records of all his activities and permit the Attorney General to inspect them. However, as is the case with many laws, the Act is filled with exemptions and loopholes that allow minimization of, and in some cases complete escape from, warranted scrutiny.
Yes, I predict they'll be falling over themselves to do that, (not).

Sibel said:
There are a number of exemptions. For example, persons whose activities are of a purely commercial nature or of a religious, academic, and charitable nature are exempt. Any agent who is engaged in lobbying activities and is registered under the Lobbying Disclosure Act (LDA) is exempt.
Oh look, an anagram and an acronym to as well.

Sibel said:
The LDA of 1995 was passed after decades of effort to make the regulation and disclosure of lobbying the federal government more effective. However, LDA also has serious and important loopholes and limitations that can be summed up as: Inadequate Disclosure, Inadequate Enforcement, and Inadequate Regulation of Conduct. The recent congressional scandals make this point very clear.
I wonder who's idea the whole thing was?

Sibel said:
In addition, neither act deals with an important issue: Conflict of Interest. Many of these agents, with their loyalty to the foreign hand that feeds them, end up being appointed to various positions, commissions and special envoys by our government. Recall Kissinger and his appointment to head the 9/11 Commission, and of course the recent revelation by Woodward on his advisory position to the current White House. Take a look at Jimmy Baker's current appointment on the Iraq commission. Same goes for the father of all the 'dime a dozen generals', Brent Scowcroft, and one of his new proteges, General Joseph Ralston. In short, neither FARA nor LDA creates meaningful oversight, control, or enforcement; neither deals with conflict of interest issues, and neither provides any deterrence or consequences for unethical or illegal conduct.
Yes! And they're all Arabs too! How did we 'miss' that?! Ok, so what is this 'rogues gallery' really up to?

Sibel said:
The family members, and their supporters, us, either have to tackle the major cause; the corruption of our government officials via unrestricted and undisciplined 'revolving doors' and 'foreign influence & lobby' practices, and push for expedient meaningful reforms by the new ambitious congress, and have them prove to us their worth. Or, they may as well give up their long-held integrity, go bid high for one or two former statesmen, hire a few dime a dozen generals, and buy themselves a couple of ex-congressmen turned lobbyists; that will do the job.
No it won't Sibel and you know it won't either. Stop filling their heads with nonsense and start telling them to look for the truth!
 
Oops'


I forgot to mention that the "hard to find' and "human factors" as well as the imperfections caused therein were suffered in lieu of a method which completely separated the perps from the event. Which supports Lauras mention of how important concealing identities is.

THE TOWERS WERE ON TIMERS, and remotes were not used.

This is evidenced by the imperfections mentioned above and the simple fact of human nature which mandates that people who are conducting a ruse, will use everythign at their disposal to assure the ruse is as convincing as possible. In other words, had their been remote controlled planes, they would have been more perfectly controlled. Or had there been remote controlled explosives, the sequence of fall of the towers would have been logical according to sequence of damage as the improper sequence of impacts perceived by those in control could be compensated simply by detonating the towers in reverse of the plan.

Seeing as the fall of the towers was out of sequence, it is substancial evidence that there was no control over planes or explosives meaning the towers were on timers.

Flight 93 was a backup in case the second plane missed the tower. Evaluation of the publics disunity/confusion showed that even if there was a sequence problem that post event damage control of th eplanned infiltration into the 9-11 truth movement could effectively confuse the issue by implying that the fires or whatever difference of impacts caused the towers to fall out of sequence..

All that was required was that both towers be hit by planes. After that, flight 93 could be dispensed with.

The original plan was that the South tower was to be hit first on the west side and the North tower second on the south side. This can be deduced from the directions the tops of the towers were caused to fall by delayed, sequenced demolitions which were intended to mimic a delayed collapse borrowed from the effect of an immediate collapse caused by plane impacts at those locations. The pilots were told each others target and optimum elevations for impact. Probably that there were bombs with vibration detectors on those floors to increase damage. So, even though they hit the wrong side, the elevations were close enough to match the fixed beginnings of the demolition and post event infiltrations of the truth movement could deflect, more successfully, the attention to the inconsistency.

This issue of the planes hitting in the wrong sequence is evidenced by flight 175's steep dive to hit lower than was convienent for the approach. Also, flight 175 showed up on the proper flight path to find his target burning and so had to make that radical left turn to instead approach the south tower from the south, that combined with the steep dive almost caused the plane to miss the south tower.
 
Back
Top Bottom