portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article commentary united states

9.11 investigation


An article from ZNET written by Michael Albert and Stephen Shalom which attack the questions about 9-11 coming from various "conspiracy theorists." In particular, the ZNET writers attack Mike Ruppert and Jared Israel. These ZNET people essentially adopt the Official American line that 9-11 was due to incompetence, not complicity or conspiracy. To me, what's interesting is the timing of the piece. This article is part of a spate of RECENT pieces coming from the "The Left" which attempt to debunk the "Conspiracy Theories"--despite the fact that Ruppert and Israel published their 9-11 work last year. Curious.
Conspiracies Or Institutions: 9-11 and Beyond

by Stephen R. Shalom & Michael Albert

June 2, 2002


(1) What Is a conspiracy and a conspiracy theory?

The most common definition of a conspiracy is two or more people secretly planning a criminal act. Examples of related conspiracy theories include belief that JFK was assassinated by rogue CIA elements attempting to ward off unwanted liberalism; that negotiations between the United States government and Iran to release American hostages in Carter's last year failed because Reagan aides secretly struck a deal with Iran to hold the hostages until after the election; or, more recently, that 9-11 was a plot by a rogue CIA/Mossad team cunningly engineering rightward alignments in the United States or Israel.

A broader definition of conspiracy includes legal acts that are, however, sufficiently misleading. For example, even if the U.S. president and his top aides could legally perpetrate the secret 9-11 attacks, doing so would still be a conspiracy. Legal assassination disguised as an accident or secretly pinned on someone else might also fit the second, broader definition because it's not just secret, but actively deceptive. But no definition of conspiracy, however broad, includes everything secret.

People often secretly get together and use their power to achieve some result. But if this is always a conspiracy, then virtually everything that happens is a conspiracy. When General Motors executives get together and decide what kind of Chevy to produce next year, it would be a conspiracy. Every business decision, every editorial decision, even a university academic department getting together in a closed session to make a personnel decision, would be a conspiracy. Conspiracy would be ubiquitous and therefore vacuous. Even in the broadest definition, there must be some significant deviation from normal operations. Thus, no one would call all the secret acts of national security agencies conspiracies. Spying is sufficiently normal and expected that no one calls it a conspiracy.

Most business decisions and government policy decisions are made in secret but are only deemed a conspiracy when they transcend "normal" behavior, either by working against the norms of surrounding institutions, in the narrow definition, or by manipulating and actively imposing wrong perceptions, in the broader definition. No matter what definition we use, we don't talk of a conspiracy to win an election when the suspect activity includes only candidates and their handlers working privately to develop effective strategy. Seeking to win an election, even secretly, is operating "normally" within the bounds of surrounding institutions. We do talk about a conspiracy, however, if the electoral behavior includes stealing the other party's plans, spiking their Whiskey Sours with LSD, having a campaign worker falsely claim he or she was beaten up by the opposing camp, or other exceptional activity transcending electoral institutions or actively misleading and manipulating events.

(2) What characterizes conspiracy theorizing?

Any particular conspiracy theory may or may not be true. Auto, oil, and tire companies did conspire to undermine the trolley system in California in the 1930s. Israeli agents did secretly attack Western targets in Egypt in 1954 in an attempt to prevent a British withdrawal. The CIA did fake a shipload of North Vietnamese arms to justify U.S. aggression. Conspiracies do happen.

But a conspiracy theorist is not someone who simply accepts the truth of some specific conspiracies. Rather, a conspiracy theorist is someone with a certain general methodological approach and set of priorities.

Conspiracy theorists begin their quest for understanding events by looking for groups acting secretly, either outside usual institutional norms in a rogue fashion, or, at the very least to manipulate public impressions, to cast guilt on other parties, and so on. Conspiracy theorists focus on conspirators' methods, motives, and effects. Personalities, personal timetables, secret meetings, and conspirators' joint actions claim priority attention. Institutional relations largely drop from view.

Thus, conspiracy theorists ask "Did Clinton launch missiles at Sudan in 1998 in order to divert attention from his Monica troubles?" rather than seeking a basic understanding of U.S. foreign policy. They ask "Did a group within the CIA kill Kennedy to prevent his withdrawing from Vietnam?" rather than examining the shared Vietnam assumptions and policies of Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson, as an examination of institutions would emphasize.

Because personalities matter so much in conspiracy theories, attention focuses largely on what one individual said to another, whether a phone conversation implicates so and so, the credibility of this or that witness, and who knew what when. Suspicion abounds. For conspiracy theorists, no sooner does something happen, then a conspiracy is suspected. Is there a new disease called AIDS? A biological warfare lab must have created it. Did Clinton aide Vincent Foster appear to commit suicide? Someone must have killed him. Did flights TWA 800 and Airbus 587 crash? There must have been a missile involved.

(3) What characterizes institutional theorizing?

An institutional theory emphasizes roles, incentives, and other institutional dynamics that promote or compel important events and, most important, have similar effects over and over. Institutional theorists of course notice individual actions, but don't elevate them to prime causes. The point of an institutional explanation is to move beyond proximate personal factors to more basic institutional factors. The aim is to learn something about society or history, as compared to learning about particular culpable actors. If the particular people hadn't been there to do the events, most likely someone else would have.

To the institutional theorist, the behavior of rogue elements is far less important than the ways in which the defining political, social, and economic forms lead to particular behaviors. An institutional theory of the U.S. missile attacks on Sudan or the Iran-Contra affair focuses on how and why these activities arose due to the basic institutions of U.S. society, not on the personal quirks of a womanizing Clinton or a loose-cannon Ollie North.

(4) Can thinking about conspiracies ever be institutional? Can thinking about institutions ever highlight conspiracies?

There are, of course, complicating borderline cases. A person investigating personal proximate causes of some occurrence in what appears to be a conspiracy-minded way could do so to make a larger institutional case. Thus, a person trying to discover a CIA role in 9-11 could be trying to verify a larger (incorrect) institutional theory -- that the U.S. government is run by the CIA. Or, more subtly, a person might be trying to demonstrate that some set of U.S. institutions propels actors toward conspiring. Someone studying Enron, for example, may be doing so not as a conspiracy theorist concerned with condemning the proximate activities of the board of Enron, but rather to make a case (correctly) that U.S. market relations instill motivations and provide the contexts that make conspiracies against the public by major corporate decision makers highly probable. The difference is between, on the one hand, trying to understand some broad claim about society by understanding its institutional dynamics, and, on the other hand, trying to understand some singular event by understanding the activities of the direct actors in it.

(5) What are the relative features and attributes of conspiracy theorizing and institutional theorizing?

For social activists, it makes sense to develop institutional theories because they uncover lasting features with ubiquitous recurring implications. On the other hand, if an event arises from a unique conjuncture of particular people who seize extra-systemic opportunities, then even though institutions undoubtedly play some role, that role may not be generalizable and an institutional theory may be impossible to construct. For a district attorney, it is sufficient to identify individual wrong-doers, but for those seeking social change it is important to go beyond particular participants. Unique events, of course, could be hugely consequential -- as in the attempt to assassinate Hitler -- but exploring the details of such events rarely if ever facilitates understanding society or history.

Institutional theories claim that the normal operations of some institutions generate behaviors and motivations leading to the events in question. For example, an institutional theorist is much more likely to explain U.S. foreign policy in terms of corporate and geopolitical interests, than in terms of the operations of shadowy characters, and when they look at corporate interests they are much more likely to focus on corporate interests generally rather than the interests of one rogue corporation that tries to hijack U.S. foreign policy to its narrow interests at the expense of the corporate system more broadly. When institutional theories address personalities, personal interests, personal timetables, and meetings, it will be to enumerate facts that need explanation, not because these are seen as explanations themselves. With institutional theories, organizational, motivational, and behavioral implications of institutions are the heart of the matter. Particular people, while not becoming mere ciphers, are not regarded as primary causal agents.

With conspiracy theories, regardless of the type of conspiracy identified, the balance of attention is inverted. The specific deceptive actions of rogue or at least greatly duplicitous and deceptive actors are highlighted.

Consider the media. A person seeking conspiracies will listen to evidence of media subservience to power and see a cabal of bad guys, perhaps corporate, perhaps religious, perhaps federal, censoring the media from doing its proper job. The conspiracy theorist will want to know about that cabal and how people succumb to its will, when they meet, etc. Discussion will highlight the actions of some coterie of editors, writers, newscasters, particular owners, or even a lobby of actors. In contrast, an institutional theorist will highlight the media's internal bureaucracy, socialization processes, profit seeking motivations in a market system, and funding mechanisms (selling audience to advertisers), as well as the interests of media owners directly and more broadly due to their class position. The institutional theorist will want to learn more about the media's structural features and how they work, and about the guiding interests and what they imply. The conspiracy approach will tend to lead people to believe that either they should educate the media malefactors to change their motives, or they should get rid of these malefactors and endorse new editors, writers, newscasters, or owners who will behave differently. The institutional approach will note the possible gains from changes in media personnel, but will explain how limited these changes will be. It will incline people toward a campaign of constant pressure to offset the constant intrinsic institutional pressures for obfuscation, or toward the creation of new media free from the institutional pressures of the mainstream.

(6) Why and how does much (but not all) conspiracy theorizing create a tendency for people to depart from rational analysis?

In a famous study back in the 1950s, researcher Leon Festinger wanted to find out how a religious sect would react when its prophecy that the Earth was going to come to an end failed to come true on the predicted date. When the fateful date arrived and nothing happened, did the believers cease to be believers? No. Instead they revised their beliefs to explain away the failed prediction by asserting that God had given humankind one more chance, and they maintained the rest of their belief system intact. One is entitled, of course, to hold whatever beliefs one wants, but beliefs like those of the religious sect are not rational or scientific, for it is a basic requirement of scientific beliefs that they be in principle falsifiable, that there be the possibility of disconfirming evidence. If a scientific hypothesis predicts X, and instead not-X occurs (and recurs repeatedly with no off-setting explanations for the discrepancy), then the hypothesis ought to be doubted. If the hypothesis flouts prior knowledge as well as current evidence, and is accepted nonetheless, then the behavior is often no longer scientific, nor even rational.

Conspiracy theorists tend to develop a similar attitude as Festinger's religious zealots toward counter-evidence. Where God's mysterious ways salvage the religious believers' failed predictions, added layers of conspiracy salvage disconfirmed conspiracy theories. To the conspiratorial mind, if evidence emerges contradicting a claimed conspiracy, it was planted. If further evidence shows that the first evidence was authentic, then that further evidence too was planted. One website, for example, claims that the Palestinian suicide bombers are actually hoaxes by Israeli intelligence organizations wherein bombs are set off by Israeli agents and a Palestinian body is later added to the debris. But what about the family members of the suicide bomber who speak to the media? This seems like pretty strong counter-evidence against the conspiracy claim. But this it poses no problem for the conspiracy theorist. He or she promptly claims that the family member interviews are all also staged by the Israelis. (See  http://www.public-action.com/911/toothfairies.html.)

But don't we all ignore evidence that goes counter to long-held beliefs? And aren't we often right to do so? When magician David Copperfield apparently saws a woman in half, most of us don't suddenly give up our belief in physics and biology. We instead stand by past evidence and suspect a hoax and even if we can't figure out how Copperfield did it, we're not likely to walk into a chain saw anytime soon. We sensibly maintain our beliefs because we have an immense body of prior evidence supporting the prevailing view, and only the one televised magical counter-example.

Conspiracy theorists rarely have a vast amount of evidence confirming the conspiracy with only a little detail or two that doesn't quite fit and can reasonably be set aside. Quite the contrary, conspiracy theories are often strung together from the thinnest reeds of evidence and the counter-evidence is often an irrefutable negation of the very piece of evidence that the conspiracy theorist previously claimed was decisive.

Obviously the World Trade Center attack was a U.S. government hoax, declared conspiracy fans within days of 9-11, because most of the hijackers have turned up to be still alive. This claim took advantage of early confusions, but became completely discredited a short time later. The conspiracy theorists didn't miss a beat. The loss of their crucial evidence weakened their belief in a conspiracy not one iota. Likewise, why is the government not letting people listen to the voice recorders for Flight 93, the plane that went down in Pennsylvania, they intoned. To conspiracy theorists, this hid the fact that the official story of the hijacking was bogus. But when the government belatedly allowed the families of the victims to hear the tapes, few if any conspiracy theorists retracted their claims.

(7) Is a conspiracy theory regarding 9-11 credible?

There is no single conspiracy theory regarding 9-11, there are dozens of them, often mutually contradictory. Thus, it's not just institutional theorists who reject most conspiracy theories, but most conspiracy theorists reject most of them as well, except, of course, the one they happen to champion.

Here are some of the leading 9-11 conspiracy theories:

The World Trade Center was destroyed not by planes but by explosives.

The planes were not hijacked at all, but commandeered by remote control by NORAD (the North American Aerospace Defense Command).

The planes were hijacked, but the hijackers were double-crossed and the planes were taken over by remote control by NORAD.

The hijackers were actually working for the U.S. government.

U.S. intelligence knew about the plot, but intentionally did nothing so as to cause massive deaths that would mobilize public support for a war on terrorism that would benefit the government.

The plot was actually organized by the Mossad.

The Mossad knew about the plot, but did nothing, hoping that the massive deaths would mobilize public support for Israel's war on the Palestinians.

Tower 2 of the World Trade Center was hit by a missile.

There was a joint plot by rogue elements in the CIA, the Mossad, other U.S. government agencies, Mobil (being investigated in a criminal case, all of the evidence against whom was in FBI offices in the World Trade Center), and Russian organized crime (which profited especially from Afghan heroin with which the Taliban was interfering).
We should be forthright here. None of the above strike us as remotely interesting much less plausible. Neither of us would ordinarily have ever spent even five minutes exploring the above claims, because they all fly in the face of our broad understanding of how the world works. But, because such theories seem to have some popularity among progressives, we are taking the time in this essay to briefly address them. However, before considering some of these specific theories, we need to be clear what isn't a conspiracy.

(8) Doesn't the existence of lies and cover-ups point to a conspiracy? And aren't lies and cover-ups profoundly politically important?

To the 9-11 conspiracy theorists, the U.S. (or Israeli or other) perpetrators were individuals of great evil, who intentionally slaughtered or allowed the slaughter of thousands. If it turns out that 9-11 occurred in part because one or more government officials were careless or inept, and those officials later conspired to hide their carelessness or ineptitude, it would be a conspiracy of an entirely different level of significance than the intentional mass murder put forward by the conspiracy theorists, of course.

Yes, ineffective and bungling officials should be taken to task. And officials who illegally try to hide their failings should be prosecuted. But neither problem bears on Left politics or even rises to significant importance. The aftermath of 9-11 saw the U.S. bomb a country despite warnings that doing so might kill millions by starvation. To focus on officials trying to hide their incompetence most likely only distracts from paying appropriate attention to the overt choices of Bush and Co. to endanger a huge number of people.

9-11 may well have involved a great intelligence failure, so it wouldn't be surprising for lots of officials to try to cover their posteriors. Thus we see lots of official cover stories and lots of inconsistencies in these official stories. This does not, however, prove the conspiracy theories. On the contrary, if events were as carefully choreographed as the conspiracy theorists claim, shouldn't the conspirators have been better at coordinating their stories?

Prominent conspiracy theorists Illarion Bykov and Jared Israel say: "It appears that Cheney may have blurted out the crucial fact that the Secret Service had an open line to the FAA, then realized he was talking too much and stopped before completing his sentence. But if he did indeed talk too much, he also stopped talking too late" ( http://www.emperors-clothes.com/indict/indict-3.htm).

So here is Cheney, who has just successfully plotted to incinerate thousands of Americans, and, if we pay attention to this sort of discussion at all, we're supposed to believe that he didn't prepare his cover story well enough to avoid blurting out too much.

Who should investigate 9-11: Congress, an independent panel, or no one? Bush and Cheney have been trying to restrict the investigation. The conspiracy theorists take this as further proof of guilt. But if Bush and Cheney really had just plotted the murders of thousands of people, why would they "ask" Daschle to limit the probes? If he is intransigent, why wouldn't they just arrange for him to have a little "accident," thereby throwing control of the Senate back to the GOP (since South Dakota's Governor, who would appoint a replacement, is a Republican)? Why weren't nosy reporters who've tried to find documents relating to what Bush knew accidentally struck by trucks? Here are some of the most ruthless and devious murderers in history, we are told, and they "blurt out too much" and "ask" their foes not to probe too deeply.

Once one enters the terrain of conspiracy theorizing, there is a slippery slope to morass because no counter-evidence is ever enough and every report can be reinterpreted via new assumptions. There is an apocryphal story about Bertrand Russell giving a public talk and afterward an elderly woman walks up and says, "You got a lot right, but about the universe, you missed the point. Everything we see is on the back of a giant turtle." And Russell pondered a moment and says, "Well, okay, what's holding up the turtle?" And she replies, "another larger turtle." And Russell asks what supports that one. And she replies: "It is turtles all the way down." Conspiracy theorizing is often quite like that. If at first one conjured claim doesn't work, no matter, manufacture another.

(9) Do all the ignored warnings about 9-11 prove conspiracy or just incompetence?

Actually, ignored warnings prove neither. It is possible, for example, that there were many warnings but that these warnings were not readily distinguishable from the thousands of other intelligence reports being received at the same time. Despite the conspiracy theories claiming FDR knew in advance about Pearl Harbor, it remains the case that the most compelling explanation for the missed warnings in 1941 was the inability to detect the significant information from the noise. (This is the argument of Roberta Wohlstetter, Pearl Harbor: Warning and Decision, 1962.)

Consider: should we have known that the Golden Gate Bridge was going to be blown up in the months following 9-11? There were certainly warnings available. But it was not blown up. If the bridge had been destroyed, we could point to all the signs that it was going to happen. But how were we to know that these warnings were to be taken seriously, while the dozens of warnings that focused on other targets were not? We didn't, and that's why most residents of the Bay area, probably including all those in the area who hold a conspiracy view, didn't steer clear of the Golden Gate Bridge.

There certainly could have been gross incompetence regarding 9-11. But even if it turns out that someone should have known what was going to happen, not just with hindsight, but by examining available intelligence information, both relevant and irrelevant, this would be a far cry from proving conspiracy.

One of the main arguments for foreknowledge of 9-11 is that any rational person looking at the warnings and evidence accumulated by U.S. officials before 9-11 would have concluded that an attack was going to occur. To not have put in motion measures to stop it therefore proves complicity.

Consider two clues:

The FAA has a "Red Team" whose job it is to try to smuggle explosives and weapons past airport checkpoints to test airport security. According to Bogdan Dzakovic, a member of the team, airport security failed 90 percent of the tests, but the FAA did nothing about it, essentially blocking further tests.

A report by the Library of Congress to the National Intelligence Council stated: "Suicide bomber belonging to Al Qaeda's Martyrdom Battalion could crash land an aircraft packed with high explosives into the Pentagon, the headquarters of the C.I.A. or the White House."
These clues would lead some to conclude that the president "must have known": But the "president" who must have known in these cases was Bill Clinton. Dzakovic had his tests squelched in 1998 (Blake Morrison, USA Today, 25 Feb. 2002, pp. A1, A4) and the Library of Congress study was written during the Clinton administration (quoted in William Safire, "The Williams Memo," New York Times, 20 May 2002, p. A19). So either Clinton too was in on the plot (and his top aides, Gore, Cohen, Albright?) or else it's possible to have received such reports and still not done anything even though one wasn't a conspirator.

Conspiracy theorists often endow their enemies (whether the CIA or capitalists or Jews or Freemasons) with immense powers and near infallibility. Nothing is accidental or unintended. Therefore, since Bush and Co. must have perceived relevant evidence of an impending terror strike, say the conspiracy theorists, and would not have overlooked evidence if they didn't want such a strike to occur, they must have been in on it. But consider these indications of less than infallible perception:

The INS sent a student visa to two of the hijackers six months after 9-11.
Richard Reid, the shoe bomber, was allowed on a plane despite his suspicious behavior and an FAA advisory to watch for shoe bombs.
Reporters tested security at airports post-9-11 and were able to get weapons past checkpoints. (Surely it can't look good for the Bush administration to appear so inept that he can't protect the public.)
Conspiracy theorists, of course, seeing turtles all the way down, may next claim that each of these instances were deliberate blunders carried out by U.S. officials in on the charades in order to give the impression of incompetence to cover up their masters' earlier crimes. And perhaps all of Bush's malapropisms are also part of the ruse. And his drug use and drunk driving and his C- grade in International Relations, or whatever. Again, it is a morass, distracting and unproductive.

(10) Why are conspiracy theories regarding 9-11 not credible?

For each of the different conspiracy theories, various possibilities exist for who was conspiring. Thus, when we take into account all the permutations of who was involved for each different theory, we have at least several dozen different conspiracy theories for 9-11. The average Leftist is supposed burrow among all this, virtually endlessly. Yet in fact none of these theories is even moderately persuasive.

Consider first those variations that have Bush pulling the attacks off alone, with perhaps a few trusted aides. One feels like one is entering a twilight zone of inattentiveness to reality even engaging in such discussion, but surely Bush couldn't arrange for U.S. agents to orchestrate the plot without the cooperation of top CIA or military intelligence officials; surely he couldn't get NORAD to take over the planes by remote control without the cooperation of top NORAD officials. Or imagine that the plot was the version requiring the least pre-planning -- namely, that Bush was surprised when the first tower was hit, but then consciously decided to act to allow the rest of the strikes to take place in order to reap the benefits of a war on terrorism. Could it be that Bush was able to figure out the implications of that initial attack, but that none of his other top advisers insisted that he take action? If it was obvious enough to Bush where all this was leading, wouldn't it have been obvious to top national security advisers who were not privy to the plot that something had to be done? Would these advisers have let Bush continue with his elementary school visit (where he was between 9 and 9:30 the morning of September 11) without insisting on an urgent meeting?

If Bush deciding alone on the spot to let the attacks continue is scarcely credible, no matter, consider another variation: that Bush had advance warning of what was going to happen and that he decided to let it happen, again in order to garner the benefits of the ensuing war fever. Bykov and Israel claim that there is no way that the president would have continued his elementary school visit after the Twin Towers were struck unless he knew about it in advance:

There is only one explanation for the Secret Service allowing President Bush to take the deadly risk of going to the Booker School on the morning of September 11th.

George Walker Bush knew the plans for 9-11. And because he knew those plans, he knew that nobody was going to attack the Booker School ( http://emperors-clothes.com/indic t/indict-3.htm).

The premise here is that anyone aware that the Twin Towers were struck would know that the president and the country were in immediate danger. But then why didn't the Secret Service demand to rush Bush to safety? If Bush were going to overrule his Secret Service team, wouldn't we have seen some evidence of it between 9:05 (when Tower 2 was struck) and 9:30? And if Bush were so smart to have planned this whole thing, why would he interfere with the Secret Service's routine procedures? Why not let them rush him to safety? Or, if the Secret Service is in on it -- could the plotters really be certain that they all would maintain perfect silence about a mass murder plot?

Bush later allowed the Secret Service to hide him on various military bases rather than return directly to Washington, a decision that led to much criticism of the president for failing to lead the nation in a crisis. You'd think with advance planning, Bush could have arranged to look properly cautious at first and then like a heroic leader later. Instead he seemed confused and then chicken. (Of course, conspiracy theorists will say that the initial confusion and then the hiding were all part of the deception, finding turtles all the way down. Sure, sometimes it pays to feign stupidity -- as when Reagan said he couldn't recall anything about Iran-Contra -- but this was only after the plot was discovered. In the 9-11 case, however, according to these conspiracy theorists the initial plot is supposedly intended to make the president look like an idiot.) Criminals usually take care to prepare their alibis. Are we to believe that Bush planned the largest peacetime terrorist plot in history and didn't bother thinking through what would make his behavior seem least suspicious and most praiseworthy?

Would everyone hearing of the second attack on the World Trade Center at 9:05 a.m. have immediately known what was going on? Some of the conspiracy theorists say yes. But then why did the FAA not ground all U.S. flights until 9:40 a.m.? (Evan Thomas and Mark Hosenball, Newsweek, 24 Sept. 2001) Four planes were already known to have been hijacked, two had already plowed into buildings more than half an hour earlier. There are two possibilities. Either the FAA was in on the plot too, and its officials have been silent since, or else there was genuine confusion that morning and it was quite possible to not know what was happening. For that matter, even if the FAA were in on the plot, it's hard to see what purpose could be served by delaying the grounding of the planes. The morass.

What other top officials might have been involved in the plot in addition to Bush? Bykov and Israel say (with no particular evidence) that Rumsfeld and Myers, the Secretary of Defense and the acting Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff were involved. If he wants to argue that according to the established chain of command, these are the individuals responsible for protecting U.S. national security and that they failed, that is surely true, but hardly something to warrant the political attention of the Left. But Bykov and Israel don't want to make this argument. They say explicitly: "Their behavior, as described in the media, presents the appearance of bewilderment, naivet and lack of preparedness. But we shall prove this appearance was contrived" ( http://emperors-clothes.com/indic t/indict-2.htm).

So we are supposed to believe that the top Pentagon officials have arranged an attack on the Pentagon, where lots of their cronies and top aides worked. (Yes, maybe they could have arranged for their closest friends to be on the other side of the building, but this seems rather difficult to pull off -- and now we are into the morass, one claim after another, again.) And why, by the way, attack the Pentagon at all? Wouldn't Bush have gotten just as much support for his war on terrorism if just the WTC was hit and not the Pentagon?

Was the CIA involved? If not, how could the plotters be sure that the CIA wouldn't find out about the conspiracy and blow the whistle? If the CIA was involved, however, what about the fact that CIA chief Tenet was a Clinton appointee. (Yes, Democrats are as imperialist as Republicans; but a secret plot to commit mass murder is likely to be closely held. And if the Democrats are in on the plot, then why are folks like Hillary Clinton calling for an investigation?) One can weave a bigger web, with more turtles, ad infinitum. There is no proving a negative, particularly about events that are intrinsically largely beyond our purview of investigation. In such cases our overarching understanding of the context, the institutional situation, and our broader agendas should come into play. But not for those who see turtles all the way down.

One of Bush's closest cronies is Ted Olson. Olson was the lawyer who argued the Bush-should-be-president case before the Supreme Court and was made Solicitor General as pay-off. Was Olson in on the plot? Does it matter that Olson's wife, Barbara, was on the plane that hit the Pentagon? Was this too just to throw investigators off the scent of the plot? (Yes, we know, Ted may have wanted to leave Barbara for some super-model, and Barbara wouldn't give him a divorce, so maybe the whole plot was just a cover to get Ted out of his marriage.)

What about Attorney General John Ashcroft? Was he in on it? As the author of the Patriot Act that was made possible by the war on terrorism, he seems like someone with something to gain from 9-11. And we know that he was told by the FBI in July that for his safety he should avoid commercial flights (Newsweek, 27 May 2002). Doesn't this prove conspiracy? Well, no. It may show a callous disregard for the well-being of the American public -- instead of making the skies safe for all passengers, the privileged are taken care of and the rest are ignored -- but it doesn't indicate that Ashcroft or anyone else knew about 9-11. (For example, leaders often have access to better medical care than the population at large; rather than improve medical care for all, selfish elites provide themselves with first-class care and let others fend for themselves. This is contemptible behavior, of course, but it is systematically produced by the institutions of capitalist and elite-dominated societies and it is very different from suggesting that members of the elite secretly inject the general population with cancer cells.) In any event, if Ashcroft were privy to the 9-11 plot he certainly left himself vulnerable to charges of gross incompetence, rejecting in the months before 9-11 FBI requests for more counter-terrorism analysts (Newsweek, 27 May 2002).

If, to go on with the line-up of options, as in some versions of the conspiracy theories, bin Laden is controlled by or faked by the U.S. government, then why didn't the plotters arrange for the "evidence" to implicate Iraq (a place they're much more eager to invade than Afghanistan)? The hijackers could have left all sorts of material behind linking themselves to Saddam Hussein. Mohammed Atta's will could have referred to funds and direction from Baghdad. If, on the other hand, the U.S. plotters didn't control bin Laden, but only knew of his plans through some sort of electronic or human intelligence, then how could they be sure that the plane that struck the Pentagon wouldn't instead hit some target they really cared about?

Bush, of course, knows no history. But if any of the bright people around him were in on the plot, surely they would have told him how hard it is to keep a secret. Kissinger ordered the secret falsification of records of where U.S. planes in Indochina were bombing to hide the fact that Cambodia was being targeted. A radar operator spilled the beans. And what was at stake there was something that many US soldiers might not have cared very much about. But to have several hundred people involved in a plot to commit mass murder, not of people who can be considered sub-human, or "other," etc., but thousands of Americans -- that's a secret that would be extraordinary to expect to be kept secret. To take that risk at all, much less when they already had immense power, is simply not believable.

(11) What about bin Laden's former ties to the U.S.? Don't they reveal the secret roots of conspiracy?

Conspiracy buffs have given major play to the testimony of Michael Springman, a former U.S. consular official in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Springman has related that he was told by his superiors to admit into the United States a large number of Middle Easterners for terrorist training. But Springman served in Jeddah while the Soviet Union was still in Afghanistan. Thus, Springman can testify to nothing more than what we already knew: namely, that the CIA was backing bin Laden and other Arab terrorists in Afghanistan. Why does it follow that because the U.S. supported bin Laden (or other particular terrorists) at one point in time, thereafter these terrorists must be still working for the U.S. government? It doesn't, of course. Springman himself is an example of someone who was working for the U.S. government at one time and then broke with them. Another is Michael Ruppert, a former cop and now a leading conspiracy theorist.

Some conspiracy theorists claim that bin Laden never broke with the U.S. For example, in 1995, the US failed to take up Sudan's offer to extradite bin Laden. Jared Israel says "the simplest explanation" is "that bin Laden was a U.S. asset -- either part of the CIA, or someone whom the CIA used. Perhaps the 'Washington Post' writers were hinting at this explanation when they wrote:

"And there were the beginnings of a debate, intensified lately, on whether the United States wanted to indict and try bin Laden or to treat him as a combatant in an underground war." ('The Washington Post,' 3 October 2001)

And Jared Israel adds "Emphasis on the word 'treat' as in 'pretend that he was'" (  http://emperors-clothes.com/news/probestop-i.htm).

But the Washington Post writers (actually "writer") were hinting at nothing of the sort. They were referring to the debate in the U.S. government over whether to try bin Laden or kill him. (The article goes on to say that U.S. officials were reluctant to put bin Laden on trial in the United States -- a reluctance expressed post 9-11 as well -- and tried to get him extradited to Saudi Arabia, where he could be summarily beheaded, but the Saudis balked.)

Conspiracy enthusiasts have also given a lot of attention to a story in Le Figaro alleging that the CIA met with bin Laden in a hospital in the United Arab Emirates in July 2001. This story has never been confirmed and there are many reasons to doubt it. The article claims that "the local CIA agents known to many in Dubai" boasted to friends of meeting with bin Laden. Would the most heinous plot in history be entrusted to a well-known CIA agent who blabs to friends? And then implemented? Is this the way that U.S. government officials would choose to communicate with a co-conspirator. The hospital head denied the story, noting that "this is too small a hospital for someone to be snuck through the backdoor" (Joseph Fitchett, International Herald Tribune, 1 Nov. 2001). It should be noted that not all conspiracy theorists credit this story; one argues that the story was in fact a CIA plant: If bin Laden did meet with the CIA, "why are they telling us about it? Answer: Because they want us to know. Question: Why would they want us to "know"? Answer: Because it serves their purposes." ( http://www.public-action.com/911/ ob_cia.html). Same evidence, two meanings, three meanings, no matter, turtles all the way down.

(12) What about looking at who benefits to see who must be responsible - doesn't that imply conspiracy?

There is a rule of thumb in mysteries to ask who benefits. This is often useful, but hardly definitive. First of all, we know from mystery writers that there is often more than one suspect with a motive. Does the US government gain from 9-11? Yes. Does Israel? Yes. But what about Russia (which now has a freer hand in Chechnya)? Yes also. How about China? Yes, also, with its free hand in Xinjiang, and the far lower likelihood that the United States will try to isolate it.

If one goes through history and uncritically and mechanically applies the "who benefits?" principle, one finds it a poor guide to understanding. The tragedy of the 1911 Triangle Shirtwaist factory fire (where 146 women died when their employer kept the exit locked to prevent them from taking breaks) was a great boon to the garment workers union -- should we conclude that the union was secretly behind the fire? The bombing of the Sixteenth Street Baptist Church in Birmingham, Alabama, helped galvanize public opinion behind civil rights legislation. Was the bombing a plot by civil rights organizers? The Bolshevik revolution was made possible by World War I. Were the Bolsheviks secretly behind the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand in Sarajevo in 1914? Teddy Roosevelt became president after McKinley's assassination. Was he the secret paymaster behind assassin Leon Czolgosz?

"Who benefits?" has another problem in historical analysis. Sometimes it's quite easy to predict the consequences of an action. Kill your well-insured, wealthy spouse and inherit a lot of money. But what are the consequences in a country teetering on the edge of recession of causing hundreds of billions of dollars of damage? George Bush certainly had the memory of his father's experience, whose war popularity didn't help him win re-election in the face of an economic downturn. And however much one could predict a rallying around the flag in the face of crisis, it is also true that presidents often get blamed for things that go wrong on their watch. As predictable as the wartime bounce in presidential popularity was that the inevitable search for who was responsible would lead many individuals -- an FBI agent here, an FAA bureaucrat there -- to try to cover their own butts by pointing the finger at higher ups. Whether Bush will emerge from all this stronger or weaker is by no means obvious.

(13) But surely the U.S. government is capable of committing atrocities, isn't it? Doesn't that make plausible a conspiracy?

Bush may kill millions of foreigners, millions of faceless Americans (with cigarettes, but probably not machine gun them), and probably not his mother (yes, if she were going to turn him in, etc., but not routinely or easily). Ten members of the ruling class could probably conspire to kill 1,000 foreigners and take the secret with them to their graves, but it is much less likely that they could conspire to kill 1,000 Americans or their mothers and be sure that this would remain a secret.

Conspiracy theorists have pointed to the Operation Northwoods document as proving that U.S. leaders were capable of 9-11. The document is a recently released top secret 1962 memorandum from the Joint Chiefs of Staff proposing the staging of attacks on U.S. targets that would appear to be coming from Cuba, as a way to justify a U.S. attack on the island.

Thus, Jared Israel writes:

That is why Operation Northwoods is so important. For we now know that in 1962 the Joint Chiefs of Staff proposed staging phony attacks to destroy U.S. property, killing Cuban refugees and U.S. citizens, in order to create a wave of indignation and rage, to justify an invasion of Cuba... ( http://emperors-clothes.com/i mages/north-int.htm)

But, as Jared Israel knows -- and acknowledges later in his article, though others who cite the document ignore this -- the Joint Chiefs didn't call for killing U.S. citizens. They did propose sinking a boatload of Cuban refugees (though we don't know whether the Joint Chiefs would have arranged for a U.S. vessel to fortuitously be on hand to pick up the refugees in the water), but with regard to the shoot down of a plane filled with U.S. college students, the plan was to switch an actual planeload of students with an "unmanned" drone that would be shot down, supposedly by Cuba. Elsewhere, Operation Northwoods proposes blowing up a U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay in a "Remember the Maine" replay, but explicitly refers to a "non-existent crew." The document also suggests attacks on Cuban refugees in the United States "even to the extent of wounding." So if this document is supposed to show us what U.S. officials are morally capable of, it seems to suggest that they are capable of lying, deceit, conspiring to wage a war of aggression -- but not killing U.S. citizens.

Moreover, as far as we can tell, the plan proposed by the Joint Chiefs was rejected by the U.S. civilian leadership. (Actually, we didn't need this document to tell us that U.S. policymakers were willing to falsify an incident to justify invasion of Cuba. We've known for quite a while that during the Cuban missile crisis Bobby Kennedy proposed that Washington stage a "Remember the Maine" incident as a justification for war.) It should be noted that not all conspiracy theorists have been promoting the Operation Northwoods document. Carol A. Valentine argues that the document is itself a forgery, probably planted by Israeli intelligence, as proven by the fact that it uses the phrase "college students off on a holiday," which, says Valentine, no American would say ( http://www.public-action.com/91 1/northwds.html).

Now imagine a committed conspiracy theorist reading the above paragraph. Whichever side they are on about Northwoods, they can go on and on with debate and assertion, piling hypothesis on top of hypothesis, turtles galore -- and what is one to do? When does one say, "Enough! This is just distracting attention from serious priorities"? Very early on, as in our view? Somewhat later? Later still? Never? Each has to decide for themselves.

(14) Why is conspiracy theorizing popular among critics of injustice?

Conspiracy theorizing that highlights individuals is the modus operandi of prosecutors, of course. After all, they must identify proximate causes and human actors to punish. But why does conspiracy theorizing appeal to people concerned to change society? Many possible answers arise.

First, the evidence conspiracy theories reveal can identify actual events needing other explanation. More, describing the detailed entwinements can become addictive. We find one puzzle and then another and another to uncover. The appeal is of the mysterious. It is dramatic, vivid, and human. And we can make steady progress, like in a murder investigation. Finally, the desire for retribution fuels forays into personal detail. It is a journalistic task with clear parameters and obvious satisfaction to be had, unless, of course, one rejects the entire premise, logic, method, and prioritization.

Second, conspiracy theories have manageable implications. They imply that all was well once and that it can be okay again if only the conspirators can be removed. Conspiracy theories explain ills without forcing us to disavow society's underlying institutions. They allow us to admit horrors and to express our indignation and anger or undertake vendettas, but without rejecting the basic norms of society. We discover that a particular government official or corporate lawyer is bad, but the government and law per se remain okay. We urge getting rid of bad apples, but leaving the orchard intact. All this is convenient and seductive. We can reject specific candidates but not government, specific CEOs but not capitalism, specific writers, editors, and even owners of periodicals, but not mainstream media. We can reject vile manipulators, but not basic institutions. And we can continue to appeal to the institutions for recognition, status, or payment.

Third, and least likely among Leftists, conspiracy theory can provide an easy and quick outlet for pent-up passion withheld from targets that seem unassailable or that might strike back. This is conspiracy theory turned into scapegoat theory. Some minority, some enemy, is tarred, and the talons are unleashed. Racism and conspiracies have long gone together, if not universally, certainly frequently.

Evaluating all this, it would be bad enough if conspiracy theorizing just attuned people to search after coteries while ignoring institutions, thereby reducing energies applied to useful ends as in the wasteful misallocation of energies of the many Kennedy assassination theorists of past decades. At least in that case the values at play could be progressive and we could hope, however faintly, that people involved would in time gravitate toward real explanations of more structural and important phenomena. But the sad fact is that the effects of adopting a conspiracy theory orientation can be and often are still worse.

(15) How do conspiracy theories lead to harmful political inclinations and allegiances?

Conspiracy theories often lead Leftists to establish connections to or tolerate alliances with right-wing crazies. One of the authors of this article was handed a stack of materials by a Leftist conspiracy enthusiast that included print-outs from Public Action, Inc. ( http://www.public-action.com/), which, in addition to its 9-11 conspiracy claims, has links to many Holocaust denial sites. This is regrettably typical.

Conspiracy theories often lead to the foolish glorification of people who were supposedly not in on the conspiracy, but whom Leftists ought not be glorifying. Thus, John F. Kennedy has become something of a hero to JFK-assassination conspiracy theorists on the (probably false) grounds that he was going to get us out of Vietnam, a claim needed by them to provide rationales for various of their hypotheses, and so asserted no matter how divorced from serious evidence.

Conspiracy theories lead us to counterproductive and wrong priorities. There are many pressing issues for U.S. Leftists today -- preventing war in Iraq, restraining Israeli aggression, fighting the assault on civil liberties, exposing the phony U.S.-Russian nuclear arms deal, and so on. Unfortunately too many Leftists have gotten wrapped up in supporting the Democratic-party-led campaign to investigate what Bush knew and when. Just in the past few weeks, how much energy from people well on the Left has gone to the Bush question, with no credible gains, and away from directions where our energies are sorely needed? Leftists have gone from planning teach-ins on the Mideast to planning gatherings to talk about the detailed claims of who knew what when. (In fact, if we were to apply the "who benefits?" principle, we might ask whether conspiracy theorizing itself is a plot by the CIA to distract us all from the struggle against globalization? Imagine debating that conspiracy theory, hour after hour, and then debating about debating about....)

Conspiracy theorists cause the Left not to be taken seriously. Much of the public finds conspiracy theories loony. This is true of course, about lots of Left ideas, but (a) most Left ideas are true, unlike a lot of the conspiracy theories, and (b) most Leftists take their Left politics seriously. But on a certain level, many conspiracy theorists give the impression that they are playing games. Do they really believe what they write? If we thought the government was run by out-of-control murderers with immense power who would stop at nothing to get their way, would we be hanging around writing articles? Or would we be underground? Which is the appropriate response if one expects an imminent fascist takeover?
Conspiracy theorist Michael Ruppert reports that his conspiracy web site has been hacked a number of times and he suggests that this is the work of those who want to shut him up. But he promises to make his site ever more hack-proof. Can he really believe that the CIA is attacking his site? If so, is it credible that his technical fix is going to stump the most well-paid and technologically-sophisticated intelligence service in the world that has just wiped out thousands of Americans and is being exposed by Ruppert? Credibility and seriousness are not enhanced by checking the links on Ruppert's site that he specifically recommends as providing "reason and reliable information." In addition to links to right-wing rumor-monger Matt Drudge (Ruppert's "favorite news site on the web"), TWA 800 conspiracy theories, Vincent Foster conspiracy theories, and the like, there is a link to "We the People," a site "dedicated to two of the most pressing issues of our time," CIA complicity in the crack-cocaine epidemic and the murder of Princess Diana in accord with orders from Queen Elizabeth and Bill Clinton. Another Ruppert recommended site is the Conspiracy Theory Research List, which leads us to the Bilderberg conspiracy site which, in a show of even-handedness, presents both sides of the question regarding whether the Protocols of the Elders of Zion is a valid proof of a Zionist conspiracy. Elements of the Left taking Rupert seriously contributes to average folks ignoring not only Rupert, but the Left too.

As bad or even worse than the fact that many find conspiracy theories loony, is that all too many people take conspiracy theories seriously. Not only is it a way to rationalize horrible injustices and suffering without calling basic institutions into account, it is part and parcel of thinking that injustice is an inevitable part of the human equation. Some folks are bad, so we get lots of bad outcomes. We can't do anything beyond having a good district attorney and going on about our business. If everything is under the control of immensely powerful and incredibly evil forces, there is no point in fighting injustice. Left-wing conspiracy theorizing, no less than right wing conspiracy theorizing, when it appeals to the public is worse than when it doesn't.

Finally, conspiracy theories lead to bizarre judgments of who one's enemies are. We're not talking here about Jared Israel's characterizing Noam Chomsky, Howard Zinn, and Michael Albert as "accomplices in genocide" ( http://www.emperors-clo thes.com/analysis/revenge.htm) because this is not a function of his conspiracy theorizing but of his Milosevic worshipping. But consider some other conspiracy theorists' political judgments. One brands The Progressive, Z Magazine, and The Nation as "supposed leftist media organs" because their writers don't accept the Kennedy-assassination conspiracy theories ( http://www.emperors-clo thes.com/analysis/revenge.htm) because this is not a function of his conspiracy theorizing but of his Milosevic worshipping. But consider some other conspiracy theorists' political judgments. One brands The Progressive, Z Magazine, and The Nation as "supposed leftist media organs" because their writers don't accept the Kennedy-assassination conspiracy theories ( link to www.webcom.com tis.com/reg/bcs/pol/touchstone/february97/worsham.htm). Such confusions don't help the struggle for social justice.

homepage: homepage: http://www.zmag.org/content/Instructionals/shalalbcon.cfm

Explain the put options on UA and American 03.Jun.2002 05:46


Then please explain the put options that were made betting against United and American airlines. Explain why that prosecutor in San Diego said that broker (who allegedly conspired with FBI agents) had advance knowledge of 911. Is it all just coincidence?

nice try but......... 03.Jun.2002 06:18

momo http://www.ifrance.com/silentbutdeadly/

Richard Mueller, FBI
Why did the FBI close their files in Mid 1996 (marked Secret and coded 199) to investigate two of Osama bin Laden's relatives in Washington and a Muslim organisation, the World Assembly of Muslim Youth?
When did you stop monitoring Khalid Al-Midhar and Nawaq Alhazm?
Why did you stop monitoring Khalid Al-Midhar and Nawaq Alhazm in August 2000?
What did you decide after the French Secret Service told you in August 2001, that Zacarias Massoui might be involved in a hijack of a commercial passenger jet?
Why did George W.Bush stop inquiries into the terrorist connections of the Bin Laden family in early 2001?
Did you get any information of the Florida police or any other police officers that Mohammad Atta was searched because of an expired Visa?
If so, at which time?
Did you get any information of the Florida police or any other police officers that Mohammad Atta was searched because of driving a car without a license?
Did you get any information of the Broward County police, Florida that Mohammad Atta was searched because of driving a car without a license?
Did you get any information of the Florida police or any other police officers that Mohammad Atta was searched because of an incident at Miami Airport?
Who gave the decision of John O'Neills resignement to stop investigating Al-Aqueada accounts?
Who gave the decision to give him a security job at the World Trade Center?
Did John O'Neill meet anyone of the FEMA in the night of September 1oth?
Why did you stop inform the public about the anthrax investigations in November 2001?
Did you ever investigate at any of these institutes:
USArmy Medical Research Institute for Infectious Diseases (Ft. Detrick, MD)#*
Dugway Proving Ground (Utah)#*
Naval Research Medical Center and associated military labs (MD)#
Battelle Memorial Institute (Ohio; plus laboratories in many other locations)#*
Duke University Medical School, Clinical Microbiology Lab. (NC)
VA Medical Center, Durham (NC)
USDA laboratory and Iowa State College of Veterinary Medicine, Ames (Iowa)
LSU College of Veterinary Medicine*
Northern Arizona State University (Arizona)*
Illinois Institute of Technology Research Institute (IL)
University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center, Albuquerque (NM)*
Institute for Genomic Research (MD)
Chemical and Biological Defense Establishment, Porton Down (UK)*
Center for Applied Microbiology and Research, Porton (UK)*
Defense Research Establishment, Suffield (CA)*
In addition, CDC, NIH, and Los Alamos?
What about New Jersey Institute of Wildlife Fund in Trenton New Jersey, who examined animal anthrax in 2000?
Can you explain, why some media reports said, that two of the hijackers had bought tickets for flights scheduled after the Sept. 11 attacks?
Can you explain, why Ahmed Alghamdi, who was on the United Airlines plane that hit the World Trade Center, had also purchased tickets for a flight the next day from Dulles Airport in Washington D.C. to Saudi Arabia?
Can you explain, why Mohammad Atta also appears to have been booked on a Delta flight from Baltimore to San Francisco; the date of that flight however is unclear?
Which two men did Mohammad Atta and Marwan Al-Shehh met in Harry's Bar
at the Helmsley Hotel in Manhattan (East 42nd Street) on September 8th 2001?
Who called the Westmoreland County 911 and claimed that he is sitting in a plane which had been hijacked?
Why none of the 19 hijackers appeared on the passenger lists?
Can you explain, why Muslims frequent bars and drink alchoholic beverages or leave their Qurans there?
Can you explain, why the so called professional hijackers used credit cards with their correct names, and allowed drivers licenses with photos to be Xeroxed?
Can you explain, why the hi-jackers did force passengers to call relatives?
Can you explain, why the hijackers were able to deviate from the flight plan and crash into their targets without any effort from law enforcement or the military to stop them?
Which passport of the hijackers did you find in the rubble of the WTC and who found it at what time?
How could the FBI distinguish between "regular" Muslims and hijacker Muslims on those flights?
Can you explain the coincidence why no other "innocent" muslim was on board of any of these flights?
Did you just go through the passenger lists culling out the Muslim-sounding names and labeling the people bearing those names as hijackers?
Can you explain, why Mohammad Atta left his bag at the airport or the employees
didn't put it on board?
Who found his bag?
How you was sure, it was his bag?

Richard Mueller, FBI (Pt.2)

Can you explain, why Mohammad Atta did put a video "how to fly planes",
an uniform and his last will into his bag, knowing that he will commit suicide anyway?
Can you explain, why Mohammad Atta did leave his drivers license in a rental car?
Can you explain, why none of the 8 indestructible Black Boxes had been found at all 3 crash centers?
Why didn't the FBI release the air traffic controllers protocols?
Why did the FBI not release the Flight Data Recorder info, absolutely harmless?
Who was that gentleman on the street on Septemner 11th at about 8:48 a.m. with a cam-corder in
his hands making the video, which captured and recorded the incident of the
first plane hitting the tower?
Why he never appeared in the media again?
How did the FBI receive a tip from a passenger who boarded a different plane and
reached his destination safely that he had a confrontation with two Middle
Eastern gentlemen at the Logan airport in Boston, MA?
Who gave the FBI the tip to storm the Westin Hotel in Boston on September 12th?
Can you explain, why helping hands of the hijackers were still waiting in that Hotel and ordered "a pizza with black olives and took short naps before?" 29 hours after the initial attack?
Why did the FBI ignore other ties of Bin Ladens family, who later had been able to leave the United States without further investigations?
(including Sheik Bakr Mohammed bin Laden, Mohammed M. bin Laden)
What do you know about these 6 hijackers identities who are still alive?
Can you explain the odd coincidence why almost everyone of them are pilots?
Was there never a reason to change the list with the 19 hijackers?
What happened with Ayub Ali Khan and Mohammed Jaweed Azmath who have been in jail since September 2001, because of a possession of box cutters on a train?
Who gave the tip to arrest them?
How many other arabs have been arrested since September 11th?
What do you know about the current whereabouts of Said Bahaji, who was claimed to buy the tickets for some of the hijackers?
What exactly did you do on September 18th, when an employee of Batelle Memorial Institute was involved in a so called anthrax hoax on that day?
Did you ever arrest him?
Why did you start to investigate on that case again in December 2001?
Can you explain why eye-witness Madeline Amy Sweeney described how hijackers stabbed passengers and then diverted the plane and why The FBI has named five hijackers on board Flight 11, whereas Ms Sweeney spotted only four.
Also, the seat numbers she gave were different from those registered in the hijackers' names?
Why did it take 4 months before you promoted Ramsi Binalschibhs name again,
who was a good friend of Mohammad Atta and lived in his same apartment in Hamburg?
Why did it take 4 months until December 11th, when Zacarias Moussaoui is charged over September 11 attacks when his case was known worldwide for months, but not promoted in the American media?
Whatever happened with Lotfi Raissi who was arrested in UK for teaching the terrorist pilots?
What is the current status of the investigation of Mamoun Darkazanli Import-Export-Company in Hamburg and Al Taqwa Management Organisation in Lugano?
What was in the memo of Dr. Leonard Horowitz, a Public health consumer advocate and author of "Death in the Air" on October 1, 2001, almost two weeks before the first anthrax letter was sent from Trenton, New Jersey to the American media building in Boca Raton, Florida?
What do you think about his other letter from November 13th, in which he claimed, that BAYER is behind the anthrax infections?
What do you think about the possibility that US BioDefense laboratories sent
the anthrax-laced letters to get a new budget for their research?
Did you ever recognize the statement of former UN-weapons inspecteur of Iraq, Richard Spertzel, who told ABC, "...he knows only five scientists in the USA who would be in the situation to produce such a fine, highly developed spore material.."?
Why did it take 48 hours to inform Bob Stevens, that he has anthrax?
Can you still not explain, why you never found envelopes at Bob Stevens,
Amelie Lundgren and Mia Nguyen?
Can you explain the odd coincidence that Microsoft got a hoax anthrax letter
from Malaysia on the same day when President Bush said, that Malaysia might be one of the next targets of the United States?

Richard Mueller, FBI (Pt.3)
Is it correct, as FOX reported, that FBI agent Robert Hanssen sold high-tech PROMIS software to Russia, and that Osama bin Laden allegedly purchased it from Russian organized crime sources?
Why did the FBI never investigate in the case Don C Wiley, a BioScientist who
disappeared on November 13th, 2001?
Why did the FBI then start to investigate after his dead body was found on December 22nd 2001, 300 miles away?
Did you ever investigate at the military hydro plant next to his body, when
Workers of that plant found him?
Can you explain, why the media wrote different versions about how, when and where he was found?
Why did the police report then changed after 2 months from suicide to an accident?
What was the result of your investigation in India at a Chinese software company, Huawei Technologies, which has been later cleared of any links to the Taleban in Afghanistan?
Why was Richard Reid able to enter the paris airport twice and who paid for his hotel?
Why did you think that Abdallah Higazy had something to do with the attack on the Twin Towers and why did you report about his pilot radio only almost 4 months later?
Who was the real owner of that radio?
Zacarias Massoui
Who exactly hired you to learn how to fly passenger jets in the United States?
Who hired your lawyer?
Can you explain, why the FBI or CIA didn't interrogate you between August 2001 and December 2001?
What can you tell us about Ramzi Omar (alias Binalshibh) ?
Admiral William Crowe (former Chairman of two Accountability Review Boards)
+ Al-Hibri (Ex-Porton International UK), Bioport:
What was the purpose of BioPort in 1997?
Is it correct that the schedule for developing anti-anthrax vaccines was exactly 3 years, starting in 1998?
Mr. Crowe, when did you think about producing anthrax vaccines, before or after the time when you was charged in September 1998 with investigations of the August 7, 1998 bombings of Embassy Nairobi and Embassy Dar Es Salaam?
Dr. John Brown, Finance Director Acambis Inc, Chief Executive in 1997, former Oravax:
Is it correct that the schedule for developing anti-anthrax vaccines was exactly 3 years, starting in 1998?
Dr. Manfred Schneider , BAYER:
When exactly did the US Government ask you for help and sending anti-anthrax vaccines to the United States?
When did you start sending the vaccines?
When did you double your production of vaccines?
King Fahd, Saudi Arabia:
When was the last time George H.W. Bush travelled to South Arabia on behalf of the privately owned Carlyle Group, the 11th largest defense contractor in the U.S. and what was the purpose of that meeting?

George Tenet, CIA:
Can you confirm as dailynews yahoo reported, that you already started to monitor Usama Bin Laden in 1998 with the help of 15 afghan agents, who got paid $1,000 a month?
Can you tell us something about the whereabouts of this agents?
Are they still the same agents?
Was Johnny "Mike" Spann one of them?
Was John Walker Lindh one of them?
Is any afghan agent also member of the ISI?
Is any afghan agent also working for Bin Laden?
Is any afghan agent also working at any of the following companies:
UNOCAL, Halliburton, BinLadin Group Inc, Afghan Development Company, Telephone Systems International (TSI) , Consolidated Contractors International,
SG Asia Project Finance, Caspian Pipeline Consortium (CPC)
Why did you stop to monitor Chalid al-Midhar in 2000 in Malaysia?
When was the first time you mentioned an Al-Quaeda group to any member of the Senate?
At which time did you find the Bin Laden Home Video?
Who found the video?
Why was it possible to find that video at a time when none of the Northern Alliance or US -Troops have yet
arrived in Kandahar or Jahlalabad?
Is it correct that from the timestamp on the Home Video of Bin Laden you found the HomeVideo of Bin Laden already two weeks after it was produced?
Why didn't you tell the public when and who found the Home Video of Bin Laden?
What can you say about the translation of MONITOR magazine, germany, who proved that the most controversial statements have been translated wrong?
Why did you release that Home Video?
Who gave the final decision to release that HomeVideo?
Do you know the home video of Bin laden of June 2001 in which he praised an attack and can be ordered over the Internet?
What do you think about Bin Ladens statements on Al-Jazeera in June 2001 about the bombing on USS Cole, which has a similar conversation like the one from November 2001s homevideo?
Why do you think Bin Laden stated in Umman Magazine in September 2001 that he wasn't involve in the attack on America on September 1th?
Is Bin Laden still on the payroll of the CIA or ISI?
Is it not correct that Bin Ladin Group Inc. helped to build ToraBora together with the CIA?
Is it correct that you relocated Chalid Al-Midhar and Nawaq Alhamzi in October 2000 again?
Why did you stop monitoring them again a second time?
Did you ever read the trial transcripts of the bombing on the embassies of Kenia and Tansania?
Do you know that some of the Al-Quaeda accounts have been mentioned in that Trial already in February 2001?
Do you know that Al-Zawahiri was mentioned as Bin ladens account manager in the trial transcripts in February 2001?
What was the purpose of the meeting with General Pervez Musharraf in May 2001?
What exactly did the CIA do on September 11th?
Is it correct that some US Airbases have been on high alert on September 1oth and for which purpose?
Did you speak with Richard Cheney on September 11th?
Can you explain, why you released a press statement that Al-Khalifa bin Laden did a telephone call with Bin Laden on September 9th, who is not the real mother of Bin Laden, but Alia Ghanem, who is?
Can you explain, why Bin Ladens real mother Alia Ghanem thinks that Bin Laden didn't plan the attack on America?
Where did you get the photos of all 19 hijackers?
How did you get all 19 names so fast 2 days after the attack?
Why all 19 names still didn't appear on the passenger list 2 days after the hijacker list was released?
How did you get the first five names of the hijackers on the same day of September 11th?
Can you explain, why none of the names appeared on any passenger list, UA and AA gave out to CNN?
How could the hijackers disable the defense systems?
What happened with the updates about the whereabouts of Al-Zawahiri since October 2001?

George Tenet, CIA (Pt.2)
What can you tell us about your meetings with the Government of India, Maj.Gen. (retd) Mahmud Ali Durrani, who like Gen.Musharraf, was a blue-eyed boy of the late Gen.Zia-ul-Haq and who is now a close confidante of the self-styled Chief Executive?
Maj.Gen.Durrani had in the past served as the ISI station chief in
Washington and was responsible for the ISI's liaison with the CIA and the FBI. Last year, Jamaat-e-Islami circles in Pakistan had alleged that he had, at the
instance of the CIA, played a role, in consultation with Gen.Musharraf, in
persuading the Hizbul Mujahideen to agree to a cease-fire."
Why did the NSA have been destroying data collected on Americans or US companies since the Sept. 11 attacks?
Why did the CIA or Pentagon trust a document about nuclear bombs in a house in Kandahar, which has been proved as a parody from 1979, which also the NY Times reported?
Who do you think put that fake document into the house or do you think,
That even Al-Aqueade didn't realize that the documents have been useless?
Did you ever investigate in the death of Vladimir Pasechnik,
former director of the Institute of Ultra Pure Biochemical Preparations,
a component of the Soviet biowarfare establishment, Biopreparat in November 2001?
What about the other deaths of Scientists Robert M. Schwartz, Dr. Benito Que and Set Van Nguyen in the same month?
Is Set van Nguyen in any way related to one anthrax victim Mia Nguyen?
What about the death of Nancy Sonnenfeld (FEMA-Wife)?
Why officials lost interest about Sudanese Files on Bin Laden in 1997?
The U.S. AMBASSADOR to Sudan, whose posting ended in 1997 : "The fact is, they were opening the doors, and we weren't taking them up on it. The U.S. failed to reciprocate Sudan's willingness to engage us on some serious questions of terrorism"
General Richard B. Myers, Pentagon
Why did the Pentagon release a new video version or translation of the Bin Laden Homevideo and can you explain the odd coincidence why that happened only 8 hours after a new translation by german magazine MONITOR on December 2oth?
Can you explain, why all 4 translators have been working for the US-Government before?
What exactly happened on September 11th, 2001 and at which time did you inform President Bush?
Why was President Bush scheduled for a lecture at a school and who decided that at which time?
Richard Armitage, Deputy Secretary of State
What was the purpose of the meeting in India in May 2001?
Who did you meet at that time?
General Mahmud Ahmad, former head of the ISI
What was the decision to step back from your position from the ISI?
Can you explain the decision why the retaliation against the Taliban started on the same day when you stepped down?
Can you tell us, who of the ISI paid $100.000 to Mohammad Atta?
Why do you think, that another secret service has been involved in the attack on America?
Which Secret Service did you talk about?
Can you imagine, that some officials of the ISI also helped to reach that purpose?
Can you imagine, that some officials of the CIA also helped to reach that purpose?
Can you imagine, that some officials of the Mossad paid or helped to reach that purpose?
What was the purpose of your visit in Washington on September 11th, 2001?
Igor Ivanov, Russian Foreign Minister
Who told you to stop an air strike against Afghanistan in May 2000?
Is it correct, that Russian intelligence notified the CIA in 2001, that 25 terrorist pilots have been specifically training for suicide missions, which was reported in the Russian press?
Rudie Dekkers, Huffmann Aviations
At which time Marwan Al-Shehai and Mohammad Atta started to learn on your airline jets?
Why wasn't Mohammad Atta arrested when he was involved in an accident at Miami Airport?
Bob McDowell, Director NJ Division of Fish and Wildlife?
What was the purpose of examining Anthrax in August 2000?
Do you know anyone of your employees in Trenton who has the same handwriting as on the envelopes who are in connections of the Anthrax-Cases?
Did you ever think about the coincidence that your laboratory is based in Trenton, too?
Chuck Dasey, Mark Mansfield, Spokesman Fort Detrick
Did the FBI ever ask you to examine your anthrax spores?
Do you know the list of Barbara Rosenberg of 15-20 other laboratories who have been able to use your spores?
Do the CIA have other spores than from yours?
A.B. "Buzzy" Krongard, CIA:
Is it true, that the CIA is in possession of a software called PROMIS?
What is the purpose of PROMIS?
Do you or did you own any stocks of United Airlines, American Airlines, Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley, AXA Re (insurance) which owns 25% of American Airlines, and Munich Re.?
What is your connection to Alex Brown, Deutsche Bank?
Did you give any insider information about Stocks to George Tenet, CIA?
Represantatives of the Consortium Afghan Development Company, e.g. Ghulam Jeloni Popal:
When was the last time you have been in touch with any member of the US-Government?
Who did you meet?
What do you know about Telephone Systems International (TSI) who announced in January 1999 a $240 million contract with the Taliban to establish a network of satellite-call centers in Afghanistan's major cities and a 30,000-line wireless phone system in Kabul?
< link to www.trilliuminvest.com
< http://www.jxj.com/suppands/renenerg/companies/121.html>
Tim Shepheard-Walwyn , former class risk management Barclays Bank until 16th January 2002:
Is it correct, that you invested in Afghan Development Company in Fall 1998?
Who was the executive in Fall 1998, who was in Afghanistan?
What did you exactly do in Fall 1998 in Afghanistan?
Helen Harris, TSI Telecommunication Services Inc. , since January 2002 GTCR Golden Rauner:
What was the purpose of ENRON/Enron Online and TSI in Afghanistan and Pakistan since 1998?
When was it sure, that TSI has to be sold to GTCR Golden Rauner on December 10th, 2001?
Richard Cellar, UNOCAL Pakistan:
When was the last time Richard Cheney meet UNOCAL?
When was the last time Henry Kissinger meet US-Ambassador in Pakistan, Robert Oakley?
Charlie Santos, former colleague of the UN-Sondermission in Afghanistan:
When was the last time you meet anyone of the Taliban?
Hamed H. Amin , chief executive Consolidated Contractors International:
What was exactly the purpose of CCI in Afghanistan since 1998?
Have you been in touch with any represantatives or executives of any of these companies:
UNOCAL, Halliburton, Carlyle, BinLadin Group Inc., Afghan Development Company, Barclays Bank, Telephone Systems International (TSI), SG Asia Project Finance, Northrop Grunman, ISI, CIA, Caspian Pipeline Consortium (CPC), Bristol-Myers Squibb, Americans for Affordable Electricity (ENRON is member)?
Have you been in touch with any represantatives of Barclays Bank?
SG Asia Project Finance, 15 QUEEN'S ROAD, HONG KONG
Is your account in Hongkong in any way related to an Al-Quaeda account, what you didn't know before?
Deutschebank-Alex Brown
Who was the investor who purchased 2,000 United Airlines (UAL) put option contracts between August 8th, 2001 and September 11th, 2001?
Did you or do you own any stocks of UA, AA, Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley, AXA Re (insurance) which owns 25% of American Airlines, and Munich Re.?
What can you say about 2,500 UA-contracts which were "split into 500 chunks each, directing each order to different U.S. exchanges around the country simultaneously." on August 10th, 2001?
Did you purchase UAL options in August 2001?
Is it correct that you purchased 4,744 put options (a speculation that the stock will go down) on United Air Lines stock as opposed to only 396 call options (speculation that the stock will go up) between September 6th and September 7th, 2001?
What was your intention of doing that?
What is your conection to Wally Kromgaard?
Is it correct that you or Wally Kromgaard purchase 4,516 put options on American Airlines as compared to 748 call options on September 10th, 2001?
What was the reason of Mayo Shattuck III resignment on September 15th?
Abdul Jalil,Taliban's deputy foreign minister, (if he is Still alive):
When was the last time you meet any represantatives of the US-Government?
What was the purpose of these meetings?
Do you know Karl E. Inderfurth and State Department counterterrorism chief Michael Sheehan?
Do you know which US-Represantative told you in February 2001:
"Either you accept our offer of a carpet of gold, or we bury you under a carpet of bombs"?
When was the last time you have been in touch with this represantative?
Mowlawi Yar Mohammad Rahimi, former Talibans Communications Minister (if he is Still alive):
What was the purpose of meetings with Telephone Systems International (TSI) ?
Did you ever meet any represantative of any of these companies:
UNOCAL, Halliburton, Carlyle, BinLadin Group Inc., Kissinger Associates Inc., Pentagon, Afghan Development Company, Barclays Bank, Telephone Systems International (TSI), Consolidated Contractors International,
SG Asia Project Finance,ISI, CIA, Caspian Pipeline Consortium (CPC)?
Is it correct that the Taliban was in possession of functionable Satellite Phones in June 2001?
Scott Ritter, former UN Inspecteur in Baghdad:
Do you know Ahmed Khalil Ibrahim Samir al-Ani?
Do you know which persons he met between April 8th and April 11th, 2001?
What was the purpose of monitoring Ahmed Khalil Ibrahim Samir al-Ani?
Stanislav Gross, Czech interior minister:
Who told you that Mohammad Atta met Ahmed Khalil Ibrahim Samir al-Ani?
Can you explain, why Mohammad Atta was able to hire a car on April 11th in Florida,if he still was on a jetleg?
What do you know about an attack on Radio Free Europe's office?
Why did you and Prime Minister Milos Zeman later change the confirmation about that meeting?
Kent Kresa, Chairman of Northrop Grunman,
Ollie Boileau, COO Northrop Grunman Saratoga, WY:
Is it correct that the Global Hawk technology was able to remote control one or more unmanned planes in 1999 for 27 hours?
Is it correct that you use or used Global Hawk technology in the war in Afghanistan since October 2001?
What is the purpose of unmanned technology?
Are you in contact with any engineers of Boeing?
Did you ever build in Global Hawk technology in a commercial airplane?
Tommy Franks, Commander in chief of Central Command,
Marine Lt. Gen. Michael P. DeLong
Is it correct that two U.S. carrier battle groups arrived on station in the Gulf of Arabia just off the Pakistani coast before September 11th?
Is it also correct that at the same time, some 17,000 U.S. troops join more than 23,000 NATO troops in Egypt for Operation 'Bright Star.'?
What was the purpose of both of these operations?
To Tommy Franks only:
When did you learn, that you will start to use Thermobarics in ToraBora?
Do you know if they had been tested on December 12th in Nevada?
Who told you that Bin Laden might hide in ToraBora?
Is it correct that the main purpose of Thermobarics is to destroy buried bio and chemical stocks?
Do you know if Thermobarics have been developed for the purpose to use them one day in Iraque?
When was the first time you used Thermobarics?
Was it before or after the announcement of the end of ABM Treaty (December 11th)?
When did the US Military decide to use B61-11 which is the " nuclear version" of its "conventional" BLU-113 counterpart?
Why did the Pentagon ignore that the Taliban established a new party in Pakistan
On December 10th, 2oo1 called KFJ?
Bill Clinton:
Why did you abort an attack on Bin Laden in October 1999?
Who was responsible for that operation?
Why did this person put that operation on hold?
General Pervez Musharraf, Pakistan:
Why did you halt a covert operation to attack Bin Laden in October 1999?
Richard Reid:
Who hired you to threaten a passenger plane in Paris?
Who did you send an email in Pakistan?
Have you ever been in touch with any represantatives of the ISI or CIA?
Do you know the difference between an explosive and a detonator?
How many ounces you had in your shoes?
What size are your shoes?
Who build or prepared your shoes?
John Walker Lindh:
Have you ever been in touch with the CIA?
Did you ever work for the CIA?
Who arrested you in 2001?
Why didn't you escape in a tumult in October 2001 nearby Masar-e-Sharif?
Who hired your lawyer Richard Brohanan?
Who paid your lawyer Richard Brohanan?
Can you imagine why you need not to go to Guantanamo Bay?
Dick Cheney, Vice President and former CEO of Halliburton
When did you stop working for Halliburton?
Are you still in possession of any Halliburton Stocks?
Are you still in contact with Halliburton?
Is it correct that Halliburton was invited to an oil conference in May 2002?
Do you know since which date that was planned?
Did you have any influence about contracts of Halliburton with the Pentagon?
Are you in contact with any represantatives of any of these companies or institutions:
UNOCAL, Halliburton, Carlyle, CDC, Department of Health and Human Services (HHS),BAYER, BioPort, BinLadin Group Inc., Kissinger Associates Inc., Pentagon, Acambis (former OraVax), DeutscheBank Alex Brown, Afghan Development Company, Barclays Bank, Telephone Systems International (TSI) , Consolidated Contractors International, SG Asia Project Finance, Northrop Grunman, ISI, CIA, American Airlines, United Airlines, Caspian Pipeline Consortium (CPC), Kevin Ingram, Ft. Detrick, MD, Battelle Memorial Institute (and various other US-Labs), General Motors (owned by ENRON), Bristol-Myers Squibb, Americans for Affordable Electricity (ENRON is member), if so what's the purpose?
What exactly did you decide on September 11th?
Did you speak with any Air Force Commander especially Lt. Gen. Charles F. Wald on that day?
When did you inform the president about the hijacked airplanes on September 11th?
Who called the White House on September 11th at 9:30 PM about a possible threat?
Why was no air security at the White House or the Pentagon at 9:30 PM?
When or who did give the ok to evacuate the White House at 9:45 PM?
What was the purpose of a meeting with Indian opposition leader Sonia Gandhi last June 2002 about a multimillion-dollar debt owed to Enron from a major energy project in Indian Power Plants?
When was the last time you spoke with anyone from ENRON?
What was the role of Colin Powell?
Colin Powell, Secretary of State
Who decided to give you $43 million in aid to the Taliban regime in May 2001?
Do you know, that the Production of opium in Afghanistan fell from 3276 tonnes in 2000 to 185 tonnes in 2001?
What was the purpose of your decision to treat the Taliban prisoners as War Prisoners?
Is this decision in any way related to the media reports only 2 days earlier that you have been involved in negotiations with Indian Power Plants?
What was the purpose of a short trip to Latin America on September 11th?
Who decided that you have to fly to Latin America on that day?
Can you imagine, why someone plotted a threat on you in Afghanistan on January 17th, 2002 as Nesweek reported?
What was the purpose of a meeting with India's foreign minister last April 6, 2001?
Did Enron or Dick Cheney ask for your help at ENRON, who was trying to collect a $64 million debt on an Indian plant project?
Thomas White, Secretary of the Army
Are you still in contact with ENRON and did this at anytime influence your decisions at the army?
Do you still own ENRON stocks?
Delmart Edward Joseph Michael Vreeland II, former US Navy intelligence:
Is it correct that you warned the Canadian Intelligence in May 2001 about a possible terrorist attacks on New York and the Pentagon?
Is it correct that you wrote that down in an envelope in a prison in Toronto, Canada?
Where did you get your information?
Who did you give that envelope?
Why you came into jail?
Philip Lumsden, Nicholas Hart, Karl Gebhard Jaeger, Andrew Nunn, Jeremy Burgess, all BinLadin Group:
Is it correct that you own the domain SAUDI-BINLADIN-GROUP.COM?
Is it correct that you created that domain on September 11th, 2000?
Who paid for that domain?
Is it correct that you own percentages of Iridium Satellites?
Can you tell us since which date you stopped the contact with any relative of the Bush family?
George H.W. Bush, Former President of the United States:
When was the last time you travelled to Saudi Arabia on behalf of the privately owned Carlyle Group, the 11th largest defense contractor in the U.S.?
What was the purpose of that meeting?
At which time you resigned from Carlyle Group?
Are you still in touch with any of their represantatives?
Stephen Lander , Director MI5?
Is it correct that you monitored a phone conversation between Zacarias Moussaoui and Richard Reid in December 2000?
What exactly did you tell any represantative of the CIA about Zacarias Moussaoui?
Why did you stop monitoring Djamel Beghal, member of Takfir-wal-Hijra (financed by Osama bin Laden) in August 2001?

Henry George, Training Center Manager, SimCenter Inc.:
At which time Mohammad Atta did train on a flight simulator?
Do you know if he ever left the United States in between and came back?
Is it correct that your classes start every year in February, April and November?
Can you imagine why Mohammad Atta decided to learn at Opa Locka, which is a famous hub of 6 Navy training bases and include government partners like U.S. Coast Guard Air Station, Police (Miami-Dade) Aviation Unit,?
Can you imagine why he was there though Mohammad Atta was searched by the police for driving without a license and violating his visa?
Chris McArthur, Airport Manager Miami International Airport Opa-locka:
Which Federal Aviation Administration official placed an angry call on Dec. 27 because of an incident of Mohammad Atta and Marwan al-Shehhi?
Why was the investigation of that incident cancelled?
Who cancelled it?
Robert McFarlane, former national security adviser in the Reagan administration:
Is it correct , that Abdul Haq, the former mujahedin leader (executed in sep/oct 2001 by Taliban) decided in Winter 2000 to attack the Taliban?
Do you know Peter Tomsen?
When was the last time you had been in touch with any of these mentioned persons?
Mullah Omar (if able to capture him)
Is it correct, that the Production of opium in Afghanistan fell from 3276 tonnes in 2000 to 185 tonnes in 2001?

Al-Zawahiri (if able to capture him)
Is it correct that you visited Osama Bin laden in July 2001 in an american hospital in Dubai?
Do you know a Larry Stevens?
Bernard Koval, CEO American Hospital
Is it correct that Osama Bin laden arrived on 4th July, 2001 on a flight from Qetta, Pakistan in your hospital?
Is it true, that he was at your hospital between 4th and 11th July 2001?
Did you ever speak with Doctor Terry Callaway about that visit?
Why did you change your statements that this story is not true and later that you "asked around"?
Can you tell us something about the difference between Continuous Ambulatory Peritoneal Dialysis and Continuous Cycling Peritoneal Dialysis?
Do you know a Larry Stevens?
Can you explain, why Richard Labeviere, a serious author, who released the book "Terror Dollars" about illegal Al-Quaeda accounts wrote this story about Osama Bin Ladens kidney operation?
President George Bush:
When exactly did you learn about the first crash into the WTC?
Can you explain us, how you have been able to see that on TV?
Why didn't you interrupt your meeting at that school when you learned about the first plane crash into the WTC, an important national symbol?
Did you ever wonder how Bin Laden was able to follow the first plane crash live on the radio?
What do you think, which radio station he was listening to?
Can you explain the odd coincidence why someone found Bin Ladens Home Video only two weeks after it was produced?
Why you decided to release Bin Ladens Home Video?
What is the current purpose of the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation (WHISC) in Fort Benning, Georgia, where terrorists have been trained for undercover agents in South America?
You stated in 2001, "if any government sponsors the outlaws and killers of innocents they have become outlaws and murderers themselves". What do you think about this sentence now if you think of Fort Benning?
What is the role of Zalmay Khalilzad (former UNOCAL) in the National Security Council ?
What is the current role of Zalmay Khalilzad (former UNOCAL) in Afghanistan?
Can you explain us the incident with the Pretzel again?
When was your last contact with anyone from ENRON?
Why was China able to admit to the World Trade Organization quickly on
September 13th, after 15 years of unsuccessful attempts?
Why did you postpone to release Ronald Reagans records?
What do you think of the idea to investigate the CIA because of many mistakes?
Do you agree with Senator John McCain, Senator Joseph I. Lieberman,
Porter J. Goss, former C.I.A. clandestine case officer and a Florida Republican, Senator Richard C. Shelby of Alabama and Ron Paul, US Congreessman, who wants to have an examination and said "Secret government is winning out over open government"?
Jeb Bush:
Why did you declare Martial Law In florida on September 7th, 2001?

Zalmay Khalilzad, former UNOCAL:
What is your current role in Afghanistan?
Are you still in contact with any represantatives of UNOCAL?
George Robertson, Secretary General, NATO
Mohammed Nashashibi, Former Roving Ambassador of the Arab League; Finance Minister for Palestine Authority
Kenneth S. Dam, Deputy Secretary designate at US Department of the Treasury, Council on Foreign Relations,
Daniel L. Vasella, Chairman & C.E.O., Novartis AG (Pharmaceuticals)
What exactly did you discuss on the Bilderberg meeting last year in May 2001?
Tony Blair, British Prime Minister:
Is it correct that 25,000 British troops and the largest British Armada since the Falkland Islands War, part of Operation 'Essential Harvest,' planned to be pre-position in Oman, the closest point on the Arabian Peninsula to Pakistan before September 11th, 2001.
Is it correct that these troops had been underway before September 11th, 2001?
At which time after September 11th did you exactly start to put SIS-Special Forces in Afghanistan?
Dr.August Hanning , President BND (Bundesnachrichtendienst Germany)
At which time did you inform the CIA, that "Middle Eastern terrorists are 'planning to hijack commercial aircraft ?"
What was their reaction?
Is it correct, that you allowed an iranian prisoner in Hamburg to call the CIA in Summer 2001 about an attack on America?
What was their reaction?
Joanne Solic , Owner Bimini Motel, Hollywood
At which time in 1999 was Waleed Alshehri registered at your address?
Can you explain, why he was the same time registered Boynton Beach hotel as well?
Tayseer Allouni , Kabul correspondent Al-Jazeera:
At which time did you receive your first video from Bin Laden?
Can you explain why the lights on that first video on October 7th 2001, the day of the retaliation, looked like it was recorded in the morning?
Do you know another homevideo of Bin Laden from June 2001, in which he praised an attack?
Did you know that Bin Laden was in an american hospital in Dubai in July 2001?
What's your personal explanation that General Mahmud resigned on the same
Day, when the retaliation started?
Kevin Ingram, former Deutschebank:
What was the main purpose of your trades of nuclear weapons with Pakistan?
Do you know Wally Kromgaard?
Valrie Williams , housekeeper Homing Inn on Federal Highway in Boynton Beach
Do you know, which two men Waleed M Al Shehri met in your motel between June 21 to July 26, 2001 in Room B-308
Tom Simmons (former U.S. Ambassador to Pakistan), Karl Inderfurth (former Assistant Secretary of State for South Asian affairs) and Lee Coldren (former State Department expert on South Asia):
Is it correct that you decided or said on a meeting in July 2001, that you planned an attack on the Taliban in October 2001?

Ms Barbara Bodine, US ambassador to Yemen:
Why didn't you allow John O'Neill to investigate Al-Quaeda accounts in July 2001?
Vladimir Putin, Russian President
When did you warn the CIA about a possible terrorist attack and what was their reaction?
Gloria Irish
Is it correct that you own an unit 1504 at the Delray Racquet Club, 755 Dotterel?
Did you rent that property to Hamza Alghamdi in August 2001?
Can you explain, why the media didn't report much about a connection of the Sun-Sentinel and the hijackers?
Can you imagine, why it first looked that the hijackers had anything to do with the anthrax attacks?
Can you imagine,why this connection or coincidence never appeared in the media again?
What was the connection between your husband Michael Irish (SunSentinel) and Bob Stevens (who died from Anthrax)?
Christina Rocca, the director of Asian affairs at the State Department
What was the purpose of your meeting with the Taliban ambassador Mollah Abdul Salam Zaeef in Islamabad in August 2001?
Why did you oversee the delivery of Stinger missiles in the 80s to Afghan mujaheddin?
Walid Arkeh, Seminole County jail:
Is it correct that you informed the FBI in August 2001 about an attack on America?
What was the reaction of the FBI?
Dr. Jeffrey Starr, U.S. department of defense official
What was the purpose of your visit in Tajikistan in January 2001?
Jean-Claude Cousseran, Director DGSE , French Secret Service:
At which time did you inform the CIA about terrorist attacks on America?
What was their reaction?
What can you tell us about the monitoring of Djamel Beghal, member of Takfir-wal-Hijra (financed by Osama bin Laden) and Kamel Daoudi?
Did you ever inform the CIA about that and at which time?
Italian Deputy Prime Minister Gianfranco Fini Mr Fini:
At which time did you inform the CIA about a possible attack on the american president "with the use of an airplane"?
What was their reaction?
President Mubarak, Egypt
At which time did you inform the CIA about a possible attack on america with an "airplane stuffed with explosives"?
What was their reaction?
Efraim Halevy , Director of Mossad since 1998 (unconfirmed)
At which time did you inform the CIA about a possible attack with "200 terrorists" on america?
What was their reaction?
Is it correct that you warned Ariel Sharon not to travel to New York on September 11th to speak
on a festival?
Mr Loxley Banks, Director Radio Cayman Islands =====================================================================
Is it true, that a caller to one of your radio talk shows between September 3rd and 10th, 2001 gave several warnings of an imminent attack on the U.S.A?
NOTE: The Cayman Islands has six local radio stations: Government-owned Radio Cayman, which is heard throughout the three islands; Z-99 FM; Heaven 97 Christian radio; Vibe 98.9; Ocean 95.5 and ICCI-FM, based at the International College of the Cayman Islands and staffed by Journalism student volunteers
Salman Rushdie
Is it correct, as London Times reported, that someone of the FAA warned you not to travel to the United States on September 3rd?
If so, who was it?
Harry's Bar at the Helmsley Hotel in Manhattan (East 42nd Street)
Do you know if the FBI investigated, which two men met Mohamed Atta and Marwan Al-Shehhi in your bar on September 8th, 2001?
Can you maybe say, who the two men had been?
Abdullah Abdullah, Northern Alliance:
Who do you think killed Commander Ahmad Shah Massoud on September 9th, 2001?
At which time and why did you decide to attack Kabul on September 11th at 5:30 PM?
When did you decide to invade Masar-i-Scharif , before September 22nd?
Is it correct that the CIA helped you to provoke a tumult?
Did you ever meet John Walker Singh?
Major John Kenny, Commander Wright Patterson Air Base, Dayton
Why have you been on high alert on September 1oth?
Is it true that you informed any other companies in Dayton to shutdown their offices?
Colonel William M. Dietrick , Commander Defense Language Institute in Garrison, Monterey
Why have you been on high alert on September 1oth?
Kenneth (Ken) Weinbrecht, President SAMS
Is it correct that one of your executives say on September 10th, 2001, 'Wildcard. Ruthless and cunning. Has capability to target US forces and make it look like a Palestinian/Arab act.'"
Jean-Louis Bruguiere, anti-terrorism Judge France:
Did you inform the CIA on September 1oth about your investigation about a possible terrorist attack?
If so, what was their reaction?
Portland, Maine motel (unidentified):
Do you know, why Atta and hijacker Abdulaziz Alomari checked in a motel on September 10th?
Elisa Dozono , Media Contact Portland, Airport:
Why was your airport, due to some eye-witnesses, with all respect, in full charge of more military officials and soldiers than usual, since weeks before September 11th, 2001?
Mayor Brown, LA:
Is it correct, as San Francisco Chronicle reported,that you have been warned to be "cautious in your travel" in the night of September 10th?
Who informed you?
Alex Diamandis, vice president of sales and marketing Odigo:
Is it correct, that you get a warning on your messenger service about a possible attack on America on September 11th, 2001?
At which time?
Daniel P. Burnham, Chairman of the Board of Directors Raytheon:
What was the purpose of travel of Kenneth Waldie, Stanley Hall, Herbert Homer and Peter Gay on September 11th?
Can you confirm that Global Hawk technology can be used for at least 27 hours?
Do you know of any use of Global Hawk technology in commercial airplanes?
Danielle O'Brien, air traffic controller
At which time did you inform any other air traffic control center about a fast plane southwest of Dulles after you saw it at 8:18, September 11th and who was it?
What happened after you informed the other air traffic control center?
Dr. James G. Roche, Secretary of the Air Force:
Why didn't you try to reach the airplanes in NYC (7 minutes time for McGuire AFB in New Jersey ) and at the Pentagon (10 minutes time)?
Did you ever try to shutdown the plane in Pennsylvannia?
Can you explain, why magazines of that plane have been found many miles away from the crash?
Andrews AFB is 13 miles away, You had one hour and fifteen minutes to respond to the plane that ended up hitting the Pentagon-what happened during that time?
Can you explain why many ear- and eye witnesses, including workers of the road construction company New Enterpise saw or heard F-16s next to the Pennsylvannia machine?
Why did President Bush said only one week later that he tried to shutdown that plane?
Who gave that decision?
Why did George Bush leaft Barksdale Air Force Base aboard Air Force One and flew to an Air Force base in Nebraska on 1:48 PM on September 11th, 2001 and returned to Washington at 4:30 PM?
What exactly did Donald Rumsfeld do that day until he arrived at the Pentagon at around 3:55 PM?
How did you know at 5:30 PM on September 11th, that the plane in Pennsylvannia could have been headed for one of three possible targets:
Camp David, the White House or the U.S. Capitol building?
Can you explain why early media reports told us that no squadrons of combat-ready fighter jets have been at Andrews and later changed their reports that they haven't been on high alert only?
Why was Air Force Lt. Col. Vic Warzinski, another Pentagon spokesman so sure on September 11th, that aircraft was coming your way?
What did the D.C. Air National Guard in Washington do on September 11th?
Can you explain, what those 3 fighters did do from 9:40AM until 9:55AM when they finally turned towards Flight 93 and were 60 miles out at 10:06am?
Can you explain, why Air Traffic Controllers in a Nashua Telegraph article did report an F-16 was circling Flight 93 and was in visual range at the time of crash?
Can you confirm a witness report, that National Guard F-16's have been at Hancock field in Syracuse NY in the air early that morning before 9AM?
How could the hijackers disable the defense systems?
Maj. Gen. Richard A. Mentemeyer Commander, 305th Air Mobility Wing, McGuire Air Force Base, New Jersey
What was the official reason that none of your fighters did reach the 2nd hijacker plane in New York in time,
Which would have been possible in 7 minutes after 8:48 AM on September 11th, 2001?
Lieutenant Colonel Brad O. Buchanan, commander of the 459th Aircraft Generation Squadron, Andrews AFB
Due to your own homepage, Andrews AFB is only 10 miles away from Washington DC.
What was the official reason that none of your fighters did reach the hijacker plane which crashed into the Pentagon, in time?
Col. Ken McClellan, Air Force spokesman:
Is it correct, that as you said on September 11th, that Mohammad Atta had once attended the International Officer's School at Maxwell/Gunter Air Force Base in Montgomery, also due to some eye-witnesses?
What did he do there?
Why did you later deny that report?
Why did you decide not to shutdown ECHELON base Bad Aibling in Germany as planned for 2002?
What was the official reason that none of any Air Force fighters did reach the hijackers plane in time?
What can you tell us about many eye- and witnesses who think that the machine in Pennsylvannia was shut down?
What could be the scientific explanation, that an official magazine of the Pennsylvannia airplane wasn't found right at the debris, but many miles away?
Jack Kelly, idefense.com
Why did you inform the media (USA Today) only 12 minutes after the first crash on the WTC (8:48AM), that terror groups behind Web encryption might have been responsible for that crash?
And why you have been so sure before the second crash which happened at 9:03 PM?
Is it correct that you served with the U.S. government where you managed several significant programs for the information warfare and intelligence communities?
Joseph J. Esposito, Chief of Department NYPD:
Is it correct that you tried to contact the Pentagon at 9:06 AM on September 11th?
What was their reaction?
General Elwood "Pete" Quesada, Leader of FAA:
Why didn't you inform President Bush between 8:15 and 9:05 about four simultaneously hijacked planes?
Who did you inform and what was their reaction?
Nicholas Scoppetta , new commissioner of FDNY since December 30th, 2001?
Can you tell us something about the latest reports about the destruction on the Twin Towers?
Can you explain why many ear- and eyewitnesses recognised more than two explosions in the WTC?
Can you explain why both Twin Towers and Building 7 collapsed in that way?
Can you explain why a gas tank was in Building 7?
Can you explain why no passengers have been in the subway under the WTC?
Can you explain why no guard was at the gold reservoir under the WTC?
Dr. Jeffrey P. Koplan, Director CDC:
Why did you prepare,as CNN reported emergency-response teams on September 11th at 11:16 PM?
John R. Samuel , Vice President American Airlines,
Rono Dutta's , President United Airlines:
Why none of the 19 hijackers did appear on the official passenger lists you gave out on September 11th to CNN?
Why did you remove your own lists on your websites only 2, 3 days later?
Former afghan Minister of Mining and Industries (if he's still alive)
What was the purpose of signing a memorandum of understanding with the Chinese economic and technical cooperation delegation on September 11th, 2001?
Frank Sesno, CNN Washington Bureau Chief:
Which government official told you there was an open microphone on one of the hijacked planes and that sounds of discussion and "duress" were heard?
Niaz Niak, former Pakistani Foreign Secretary:
Is it correct that you said in mid July 2001, that the USA have planned military action against Osama Bin Laden and the Taliban?
Hameed Gul, retired Pakistani general of Pakistan's Inter Services Intelligence:
Is it correct that you said, a secret service have been involved in the attack on America and which one do you think?
Tommy Thompson, The Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services
Why did you and other Bush cabinet members meet secretly (that is, illegally) with officials of the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) to develop plans for their Emergency Preparedness Task Force in October 2001?
Why did you decide on October 25th, 2001 to ask the Congress for another $500 million to produce enough of Acambis's smallpox vaccine?
Jean Marie Malecki , Director Palm Beach County Health Department
Why did it take 4.5 hours until you pick up he phone for employees of the
AMI-Building, Boca Raton, which editor Bob Stevens had anthrax?
Why did it take 2 days until you visited that building again?
Walter Gilbert, Director Myriad Genetics
Did you ever get official permissions of all relatives of the World Trade Center
to examine the DNA of their dead relatives?
Rudy Guilani:
Why was the rubble of the Twin Towers sold to India for recycling and other parts to China? Who gave that decision?
Tamas Hevizi, President and Chief Executive Officer, Zero-Knowledge Systems
Why did you decide to stop your anonymous Program and PGP-Encryption on October 6th?
Did anyone threaten you to do that?
Wendy Chamberlain, U.S. Ambassador
What was the purpose of the telephone call on October 10th, 2001 to
Pakistani oil minister?
Why you have been so sure that day, that a previously abandoned Unocal pipeline from Turkmenistan, across Afghanistan, to the Pakistani coast, for the purpose of selling oil and gas to China, is now back on the table in view of recent geopolitical developments?
C. Paul Robinson, President and Director, Sandia National Laboratories
Is it correct, that Sandia increased their weapon productions already in mid 2001?
Is it correct that you promoted new nuclear weapons in 2001,as in one of your statements: "It also seemed abundantly clear that any use of nuclear weapons is, and always will be, strategic"?
nice try but.........
nice try but.........

Momo Farts Again 03.Jun.2002 06:59


Momo wrote:

"Nice try but..."

And he concludes:

"...I'm not listening to you! My fingers are in my ears, I've got a million niggling questions to keep the Left busy chasing geese, and I have faith that it's turtles all the way down. You can never prove me wrong because I can always come up with another excuse. And once we get a Democrat in the White House, everything will be fine."

Conspiracy theroy is for liberals.

are you guys still in diapers? 03.Jun.2002 07:24


OK, not even sure where to begin with an article so removed from reality.
I am truly curious, did you guys take any other subject besides English and typing?
What would I find if I explored your library, would I find history, political science, sociology books by the thousands?
I suspect not, in fact I KNOW NOT, no one who has even the most rudimentary education in history would make a statement so ignorant.
Since written history began there have been evidence of conspiracies both large and small. Were the masses aware at the time, mostly not.
One can even skip all of ancient history of the economic wars of the Greeks and Romans and just concentrate on English history.
Entire libraries can be filled with the volumes of conspiracies of the 'royals'.

Did we, by simple virtue of crossing an ocean, establish an entirely new society void of the greed and corruption that the political/economic elites use to achieve their goals.

Of course not, we have simply become a nation where few people read, where our news is filtered by corporate concerns, and those concerns are rarely with the common people.

You are correct in one aspect, in the beginning days of
awareness of the facts that don't fit, we often don't get it quite right. But in the end, thesis vs. thesis, facts vs. facts, we will come close to the truth.

In the end on this evil act, I believe we will find enough evidence of foreknowledge to conclude that certain selected CEO's were removed for the morning of the attack. That act alone is enough evidence of the when and where. The trading of American and United airline stocks for profits by members of our intelligence agencies is evidence enough of foreknowledge of the means.

The complete blackout by the major media of the Judicial Watch news conference that brought forth the statements of FBI Special Agent Wright shows the fear of the corporate class that 'their' administration could collapse as the evidence of a Bush family 'survival of the economic fittest' policy emerges.

Go back to square one, conspiracies do exist, and they do exist in American history. Maybe not in the history taught in the classroom, but that is the responsibility of each citizen to self educate, turn off the TV, the sports, the video games, make the time to educate yourself and others, let that become the true conspiracy, the education of the good citizen.

The Undeniable Conspiracy Regarding 911 03.Jun.2002 07:28

charles amsellem blackreb@earthlink.net

Any idea that there was not conspiracy to coverup the JFK assassination is ludicrous. The Warren commission's conclusions that there was a lone assassin in Oswald itself is a conspiracy to cover up the truth at least. Aside from the patent fiction and gross fabrication of the magic bullet theory, Allen Dulles, the CIA chief who was fired by Kennedy after the Bay of Pigs fiasco was appointed to the commission to investigate. A clear conflict of interest. The desperate nature of the attempts to sweep the whole affair under the rug and get on with the Vietnam War clearly marks the inteligence establishment as guilty of a conspiracy of implicit negligence or obstruction of justice even if they didnt have anything to do with Kennedy's death. Other information that I wont get into here clearly points to the inteligence establishment as the prime suspects in the assassination.

Insiders and family of civil rights leaders Martin Luthor King Jr and Malcom X have long alleged that the FBI was up to more than the already proven survielance and Hoover's personal obsession with them. They stopped short of saying they had them killed outright. MLK was killed soon after expanding his civil rights activites in opposition to the Vietam war and in solidarity with labor rights.

Im not going to go into what I think about the Oklahoma City bombing and its yet another lone nut explanation except to say that the national hysteria was methodically used to pass anti terrorism legislation that seriously eroded our rights (clearly stated to be inalienable by the way) and that is much more important than a who done it expedition. That aspect of the previous posts comments I agree with. It is important to think analytically about where this is all going.

Plenty of evidence of the Bush administration's criminal activities from election fraud to Enron to the appointment of former iran contra criminals into their ranks to 911 and resulting coverups of the above have already been spoken of frequently on this newswire. The unending war and Patriot Act was waiting in the wings like the escalation of the vietnam war was after the assassination of JFK. The military industrial complex of which oil interests are a vital part failed to enact a patriot act in the 60's and dissent was the major force that ended US involvement in that conflict. The patriot act was planned beforehand and and it may have had far broader opposition and inspired dread in the populace if they didnt have something more fearsome to terrify them into a stupor. It also not accidentally is designed to broaden powers to quell dissent.

The undeniable conspiracy behind 911 is that it has given the war department and military industrial complex a desperately needed post cold war enemy to justify their obscene budget. Oil profits and the opium fields of Afganistan are not far from the picture either. The fervor with which the administration has pushed their ridiculous axis of evil propoganda demonstrates that they need to construct an implacable and effectual enemy. Panama, Kosovo, Iraq, were all pathetic opponents and americans did not recieve their anitcipated and deserved peace dividend after the fall of the Soviet Union. The military budget is perpetuated at the expense of vital social programs like education and universal health care, and these actions are tantamount to misappropriation of funds and mass murder. Words like conspiracy and propoganda shouldnt give us pause from calling those things what they are when we see them.
The Undeniable Conspiracy Regarding 911
The Undeniable Conspiracy Regarding 911

explain this 03.Jun.2002 08:16


September 6-7, 2001: 744 put options (a hedge that a stock will decline in value) are purchased on United Air Lines. Only 396 call options (a hedge that a stock will increase in value) are purchased. This is an unusual increase in put options.

A large number of the UAL put options are purchased through Deutsche Bank/AB Brown.

September 10, 2001: 4,516 put options are purchased on American Airlines compared to 748 call options.

The put options on United and America airlines were 600 percent above normal. They were the only airlines with such trading patterns the week of September 6-11.

On September 29, the San Francisco Chronicle reported that investors left more than $2.5 million in profits they made trading options in the stock of United Airlines before the September 11 terrorist attacks uncollected. "The uncollected money raises suspicions that the investors-whose identities and nationalities have not been made public-had advance knowledge of the strikes . . .

Dismal Article 03.Jun.2002 10:56


The article is badly written, repetitive ( conspiracy theories x10+) rambling and boring. It presents no useful information or opinion and fails to address any of the major facts (not conspiracy theories) that Ruppert and Jared point out.

They are also extremely patronising. Us poor souls are incapable of distinguishing fact from conspiracy theory, or the theories that are credible.
They also seem to forget the fact that the government's version is the largest conspiracy ever.

Please Stephen R. Shalom & Michael Albert, go and sell your government propaganda somewhere else.

Don't let IMC-Portland become a fruit basket! 03.Jun.2002 11:11

Too much heat to drop my name here

Thanks to the work of a small clique of I-want-to-believe-so-bad-it-hurts features editors ("deva" in particular, as far as I can tell), IMC-Portland's editorial crew has egged on conspiracy nuts to take over this site and turn it into a fruit basket. Case-in-point: this article. Other cases-in-point: center column features giving space to Michael Ruppert, Lyndon LaRouche, and Al Martin.

Now, don't get me wrong. Much of the local news coverage on this site is well constructed and vital - and updated far more frequently than on other IMC's. But still, giving such space to Ruppert, LaRouche, and Al Martin (who's next? Art Bell?) does a disservice to our city. I say: let's take back IMC-Portland and inject some journalistic standards into this operation.

Give me a break. 03.Jun.2002 11:39


If those of you who like your head up your asses don't want to the see the truth, fine. Keep your heads there. But, what your smelling isn't credibility.

too much heat to not put my name here 03.Jun.2002 12:08


"Thanks to the work of a small clique of I-want-to-believe-so-bad-it-hurts features editors ("deva" in particular, as far as I can tell), IMC-Portland's editorial crew has egged on conspiracy nuts to take over this site and turn it into a fruit basket. Case-in-point: this article. Other cases-in-point: center column features giving space to Michael Ruppert, Lyndon LaRouche, and Al Martin.

Now, don't get me wrong. Much of the local news coverage on this site is well constructed and vital - and updated far more frequently than on other IMC's. But still, giving such space to Ruppert, LaRouche, and Al Martin (who's next? Art Bell?) does a disservice to our city. I say: let's take back IMC-Portland and inject some journalistic standards into this operation."

case in point this article? this article is rebutting 'conspiracy nuts'

Michael Ruppert is making news. . .asking interesting questions and is worth covering. . .

Lyndon LaRouche has never been the focus of the center column, so you are mistaken there

al martin, well, that was personally an embarrassing gaff, i stated so without hesitation right on the feature. . .and not because it was al martin, but because i did not check enough to see what was true and not in the story. . .however, the subject of the feature is newsworthy and of importance to people and it would have been an excellent story if told without exageration. . .since it is set right now, it is a good story to have on the site and i am glad it is up there. . .warts and all

as for portland indymedia. . .you mistake what it is. . .it is a peoples resource for news and commentary. . .if you want to see other/different stories covered you can write a good story, post it to the newswire, and it will get turned into a feature. . .

what you are talking about when you say 'journalistic standards' i would like to see you clarify

we all do our best to print factual information when reporting or researching an article, we come right out and declare and correct mistakes, and we try to cover a broad range of issues. If you look back over the past few months, you will find that a wider range of issues are covered here, than in many indymedia sites.

i suspect what you really mean when you say journalistic standards, is to only cover stuff and from a perspective that is politically correct

SF indymedia now censors posts and comments that the editorial group does not ideologically agree with. . .

i disagree with that approach, and yes, if Art Bell said something, that could be backed up, and it seemed relevent to the cause of truth and social justice, i would not hesitate to quote it in a feature

Michael Moore is speaking to packed auditoriums, and his book was #1. . .Michael Rupperts videos are being shown in Libraries, Schools, Churches and to various organizations across the political spectrum

people all over this country are very interested in this story and the 9.11 investigation

i am proud that portland indymedia is providing people a forum to talk about what is important to them, rather than trying to shut them up, or marginalize that interest like the elitist leftist/progressive publications are doing (we wont even talk about mainstream media)

these elitist leftist pundits, like Norman Solomon, Michael Albert, David Corn and so on are scrambling to deter the voice of people everywhere. . .they arrogantly seek to tell what are now millions of people, that they are nuts for asking questions, that they are kooks for not believing what is a very dubious official story of what happened on Sept 11th

if journalistic standards means being a government apologist in the face of so much evidence to the contrary, then i want nothing to do with it. . .

and just to state it yet once again. . .you are not a conspiracy theorist for simply not believing a bullshit conspiracy theory put forth by the government without proof and which is profitting enormously from it.


Stifling Questions or Challenging Assumptions 03.Jun.2002 13:54

inquiring mind

Deva wrote: "they [the critics of conspiracy theory] arrogantly seek to tell what are now millions of people, that they are nuts for asking questions, that they are kooks for not believing what is a very dubious official story of what happened on Sept 11th."

Sure the government story has holes, but even Washington can be right occasionally. But that isn't even what Albert and Shalom are writing about with this essay.

They aren't telling people that it's wrong to ask questions. They're reminding us that it's a mistake to jump to conclusions. There are plenty of people who rightly distrust and abhor George W. Bush and his gang, but too many of them seem to be ready to accept any negative rumor about them.

And if Gore had been in office, you know what Free Republic and WorldNetDaily would be doing now, don't you? Or do you think the September 11 attacks would not have happened?

But I know I can't defend the article at the Portland IMC. You guys and your friends will just find more "turtles."

re: inquiring mind 03.Jun.2002 15:32


inquiring mind. . .

i think it is important to keep ones mind open, and not get fixated on a conclusion

for example, the website whatreallyhappened.com is convinced it is Israel that carried out the attacks. . .and yes there is some evidence pointing that way and it is a possible scenario

however, i am not comfortable myself to decide anything. . .there are too many unknowns. . .i simply do not know what happened. . .but i do know that what the government is telling me is crap. . .all one needs is an open mind and common sense to see this

i disagree with you what Albert and Shalom are writing about. . .

one point to make is that criticizing conspiracy theory is all they ever focus on. . .

IT IS NOT CONSPIRACY THEORY TO REFUSE TO ACCEPT A BULLSHIT CONSPIRACY THEORY. . .the majority of people i talk to, are not engaging in theories (though it is natural to speculate) but in criticizing the official story, and angry at being lied to

in otherwords, stop calling people conspiracy theorists for using common sense. . .its damn insulting

now if someone made a clear argument regarding the lies we have been told by the government, and then cautioned not to come to a conclusion, i can respect that. . .

however, Albert has not once addressed the holes in the government story that you yourself admit are there. . .
why has the FBI not put forth a list of names of alleged hijackers that reflects the inaccuracies of the first?

why are there no Arab names on the flight lists?

why has no action been taken on the insider stock trades?

why is the FBI dragging its feet in the anthrax case and acting like there are no legitimate suspects when there clearly are?

why is the discrepancy between the quotes from the flight instructors indicating poor piloting skills, and the quotes from civil and miliatry authorities indicating thatv the pilots of the hijacked planes had to be skilled to do what they did never addressed?

why were the alleged hijackers waltzing around using their own names, when we are being told that it was super secret cells of terrorists who did this?

what were the false names they used? when did they switch from using their real names, to using false names? (remember they were supposed to have used fake names)

Albert has not once recognized nor praised to courageous voices that have demanded truth in the face of heavy criticism. . .he and others like Corn, Solomon etc are effectively ridiculing anyone who smells something rotten, and speaks up about it. . .

their inability to talk about anything but their self labeled conspiracy theory mania shows a narrowness of mind and focus. . .

once someone is ignoring something critical, repeatedly. . .and only focussing on a false characterization, then their motivations are very suspect as far as i am concerned

i also think Alberts analysis of conspiracy theory vs institutional analysis is next to useless. . .it is making a dichotomy that is not real

Institutional analysis is important - very important PART, just as the conspiring of individuals is a very important PART

the open mind will look to see what is the case, in a given situation, or more accurately, how those two facets blend together to create the current situation.

what i see, with Albert and the insitutional analysis thinkers, is that the institution of their ideology has blinded them. . .i do not think they are secretly in cahoots with the CIA. . .but attachment to ideology blinds them to observing openmindedly. . .

Institutional analysis shows that most people in an institution based on strict obedience, most underlings, even well meaning, will not overtly challenge their superiors orders, and will generally shut up. . .give people a semi-reasonable excuse, and they will follow it, even though inside, they know it is false

this is how many well meaning people within the ranks of the CIA or FBI can end up going along with a policy even though they are not part of a conspiracy as such. . .

conspiracy and the dynamics of social groups and insititutions are really undividable facets of a whole system. . .

it is my assertion that the established leftist opposition, through the subtle interplay of social dynamics (insitutional analysis) recognizes the limits it has to adhere to to keep its position in society. . .i would further assert that they have adopted a position looking only at the social factors at the institution, and never the conspiracy (the people) as a way to hide from danger of really calling these people on their shit. . .

that is my institutional analysis of the situation. . .

face it. . .conspiracy is everywhere. . .small groups sit in boardrooms everywhere and conspire how to maximize profits. . .corporate espionage is a huge business. . .

activist conspire in affinity groups

to ignore this integral facet of the social structure, is to doom yourself to impotence, and is a way to stay relatively safe.

speculation about Gore is meaningless. . .and just as good a case can be made that the 9.11 attacks would not have happened were not Dubya illegally occupying the White House

as for George Bush. . .he conspired with his brother to steal the election through voter fraud. . .the citizens of this country should have stood right up and thrown him out right from the first day. . .


Three Cheers for Diva! 04.Jun.2002 00:01

Bob Fuller

Three cheers for Diva! I cancelled my subscription to The Nation when they published their "Supreme Court" issue, shortly before the 2000 election, wherein they urged progressives to vote for Al Bore instead of Ralph Nader.
"Forget that Clinton-Gore expanded the phony war on drugs, dragged us into NAFTA, gave away the public airwaves to the media giants, repealed FDR's banking regulations and gutted AFDC, and completed many other Republican wet dreams - "it's the Supreme Court, stupid." Riight... (And forget, too, that the Democrats helped put the same GOP assholes who annointed Bush on the court)

The authors of this hit piece on "conspiracy theorists" want us to view the Democratic party as representing
"the left," instead of seeing it for what it really is - the ass end of the Republicrat party. What disgusting hypocrisy it is for them to tell us that we should ignore these "kooky 9-11 theories" and concentrate instead on stopping Smirk from waging a new war on Iraq - after Clinton and Gore killed half a million Iraqi children with their sanctions! (Or is that just a "conspiracy theory," too?) In short, they want us to stay asleep, and go on believing in the corporate globalist's Republicrat dog and pony show.


Father was a powerful Washington insider

Bush - yes, Gore - yes

In the richest 5% of population

Bush - yes, Gore - yes

Opposes raising the minimum wage to match the cost of living

Bush - yes, Gore - yes

Supports corporate-managed trade:

Bush - yes, Gore - yes

Favored repeal of federal guarantee of assistance to poor children

Bush - yes, Gore - yes

Got rich in a business subsidized by taxpayers
Bush: oil & gas, baseball stadiums;
Gore: agribusiness

Bush - yes, Gore - yes

Supports Federal Reserve policy of keeping wages low to prop up stock prices

Bush - yes, Gore - yes

Supports the phony, civil libeties destroying "drug war"

Bush - yes, Gore - yes

Supports continuing the Iraq sanctions, which kill 5,000 children a month

Bush - yes, Gore - yes

Supports NATO expansion

Bush - yes, Gore - yes

Will continue to increase the already bloated Pentagon budget

Bush - yes, Gore - yes

Will continue taxpayer subsidies of generous CEO salaries

Bush - yes, Gore - yes

Supports tens of billions of dollars in corporate subsidies

Bush - yes, Gore - yes

Will continue to tax earnings from stock market at lower rate than income from actual work

Bush - yes, Gore - yes

Supported repeal of Depression-era banking regulations designed to protect small depositors

Bush - yes, Gore - yes

Raised record amounts of campaign cash from wealthy corporate donors

Bush - yes, Gore - yes

Same color and gender as every other President

Bush - yes, Gore - yes

Mediocre golfer

Bush - yes, Gore - yes


Bush - yes, Gore - yes


Albert not a &quot;liberal&quot; 04.Jun.2002 07:27


Michael Albert has writen extensively about the the abolition of both capitalism and markets, and has developed an alternate "Parecon" system of participatory economics. He has presented numerous radial analyses of power relationships and imperialism in the current capitalist system.

Such views could hardly be regarded as those as a "liberal". To suggest that he is somehow supporting some government line is preposterous.

This incessant focus on these "conspiracy theories" will destroy the left.

The only "conspiracy" out there is the awful system itself.

Pulling my hair out. 04.Jun.2002 09:12

Too much heat to drop my name here

How unbelievably arrogant of IMC-Portland's cabal of editors. You've single-handedly declared yourselves to be more wise, more in-the-know, more informed, than all "other" leftist writers and journalists.

Here's a short list of some of the less-informed "elitist leftist pundits" who don't share your views:

Michael Albert
Amy Goodman
Robert Fisk
Lee Siu Hin
Juan Gonzalez
Tariq Ali
Arundhati Roy
Noam Chomsky
To rational thinkers in Portland: let's reclaim our IMC and inject some rational thought to the process of deciding what is center-column news, and what should be left to languish in the newswire.

Otherwise, we're allowing this space to be run by someone who recently said, "and yes, if Art Bell said something, that could be backed up, and it seemed relevent to the cause of truth and social justice, i would not hesitate to quote it in a feature"

re: Too much heat to drop my name here 04.Jun.2002 12:39


<<<How unbelievably arrogant of IMC-Portland's cabal of editors.>>>

you clearly do not have a good grasp of how the editorial group works. . .

it is completely open. . .there is no cabal as you put it. . .you can come to an editorial meeting, learn how to make features, and put up features that you think are of value

you also mistake me, for portland indymedia. . .

i am one contributor, who is expressing my views through this resource. . .they are my views, and do not represent the views of all people involved in editorial, although other contributors are also convinced that this is a critical story to talk about

<<<You've single-handedly declared yourselves to be more wise, more in-the-know, more informed, than all "other" leftist writers and journalists.>>>

yes, its unbelievable isn't it? that someone would think for themselves and disagree with some of the leftist pundits, and dare to say so publically. . .my god, how scandalous!

incidently, the list you put forth is your list, and i have made no mention of agreeing, or disagreeing with all the people you have listed

<<<To rational thinkers in Portland: let's reclaim our IMC and inject some rational thought to the process of deciding what is center-column news, and what should be left to languish in the newswire.>>>

yes yes. . .exert control. . .try your hand at suppression. . .i can tell by the fact that you do not dare to put your name due to the "heat" as you put it, that if you could control everyones voices as you seem to desire, that you would never stray beyond what was safe and politically correct, for fear of your reputation

that is exactly the same bullshit that keeps DC locked into politics as usual

portland indymedia website is rockin. . .it has never been so dynamic and productive. . .nor has it ever received so many compliments from all sorts of people from various walks of life. . .

if you dont like this story of 911 investigation, then don't read it. . .or answer these qustions for starters:

why are there no Arab names on the flight lists?

why has no action been taken on the insider stock trades?

why is the FBI dragging its feet in the anthrax case and acting like there are no legitimate suspects when there clearly are?

why is the discrepancy between the quotes from the flight instructors indicating poor piloting skills, and the quotes from civil and miliatry authorities indicating that the pilots of the hijacked planes had to be skilled to do what they did never addressed?

why were the alleged hijackers waltzing around using their own names, when we are being told that it was super secret cells of terrorists who did this?

what were the false names they used? when did they switch from using their real names, to using false names? (remember they were supposed to have used fake names)

who killed the woman the day before she was supposed to testify on her connections to obtaining fake drivers licenses?

that is a start for an honest inquiry


You are either with us or... 04.Jun.2002 13:12


The left has created a new version of "you are either with us or with the terrorists" and it goes something like "if you try to dig up the truth about 9/11 you are working to destroy the work of everyone on the left and therefore, you are with the enemy."

The so-called radical left has created this slick straw man to squash dissent and cover up their fear of investigating 9/11. They have figured out that all you have to do is claim or imply that getting to the bottom of worst attack perpetrated against innocent American citizens actually PREVENTS activists from tackling the root of society's problems. How the fuck do they come up with this logically-challenged argument? They hope it will inflict so much guilt upon the real radicals who are seeking the truth that they'll just shut the fuck up.

Now that the blame can't squarely be placed on "those angry Arabs", the mainstream radical left and anarchist communities have now resorted to riding on the "we'll never know what happened" fence. But one would have to wonder why so-called radicals weren't complaining when all the blame was placed on angry Arabs or the lone nut, USAma bin Laden. When this was happening in the mainstream media, the "radicals" and "progressives" like Amy Goodman and Noam Chomsky went around saying "We know they hate us enough to kill thousands of Americans, but we should try to understand them and how our foreign policy made them do it, not attack them". Amy Goodman and Noam Chomsky ARE NOT FUCKING GODS, OKAY? THEY ARE NOT INFALLIBLE! THEY ARE HUMAN BEINGS WITH EGOS LIKE EVERYONE ELSE!!! They deserve to be knocked off the pedestals that so-called progressives and anarchists have put them on and BOTH should be called to task for allowing people of middle-eastern descent to be vilianized for so long because of the gross negligence and oversight in their shitty coverage of 9/11.

This has been such a position to take that has, IMO, been partly responsible for the beatings and murders of Arabs, Moslems, and South Asians in the United States. If the left had the balls to come out and demand a thorough investigation when the attack first happened, it probably could have prevented this needless cruelty toward people of middle-eastern descent living in America. But nooooooo, when the public started asking the infamous question "WHY DO THEY HATE US?" the so-called radical activist left immediately and selfishly seized upon the blame-the-Arabs bandwagon to get the general public to finally listen to them explain foreign policy for a change. Noam should really be ashamed of himself. I wonder how many of these groups were sick enough to go out and fund raise off the WHY DO ARABS HATE US? question?

The blatantly classist remarks about "conspiracy theorists" to paint all those who put the pieces together as single-wide trailer dwelling looney loners who don't bathe and who look like Ted Kaczinsky and listen to Art Bell and hand out white supremacist hate literature to high school students and manufacture crystal meth to supplement an income from the Quickie Mart reveals what phonies and hypocrites so many so-called "radicals" are. They pretend to care about the poor and the "class war" but make blatantly snobbish, classist remarks at the expense of the poor in order to silence dissent.

So what's really behind the fear of investigating 9/11? It's partly ego, partly the uncomfortable feelings of vulnerability and the blind faith in institutions that middle class radicals won't admit having, partly the racism that allows one to rationalize that it's better to scapegoat people of color than white, middle class radicals, and partly because of the fact that it doesn't fit neatly into the missions of established organizations and their fund raising campaigns. In other words, it's just too inconvenient.

BIN WHO? 04.Jun.2002 14:53


bin laden did what?

evidence, wheres the evidence? Half the fucking western world automatically assumed it was a-rabs.

george (o&b) would be proud.

Why didn't any of those white mother fuckers on the planes with cell phones, calling loved ones and priests say hijacked by "arabs"- like most white americans would.

why didn't any one call 9-11 (which would have been recorded)?

this is all soo fucked.

you call this a debate?!? 04.Jun.2002 19:23


deva, you say you keep your mind open. it doesn't look that way to me. you have been highly judgemental of and severely misrepresented what you call the "elitist" leftist journalists. if you wrote the feature, that too was highly inflammatory, hardly "open". one of the many assumptions i've seen made of the followers of ruppert et al is that solomon, berlet, etc are saying to just accept the government's version. on the contrary, they are all asking us to think rationally and with a healthy skepticism. and frankly, the followers of ruppert et al have not been making very sound arguments and its coming across as a bit nuts. in my observation, the skepticism of the followers of ruppert et al has not been healthy.

it's like you're trying to build a fire with green wood. it makes a lot of smoke, is very noticeable, but as fires go, its not a very good one. a healthy skepticism will allow those facts to age, let more truths come out, let some criticism arise and respond to criticism with reasonable arguments that actually address the criticisms. a healthy skepticism will apply that skepticism not only to the ones they distrust such as bush, but also to the ones they're inclined to believe, such as ruppert. let the wood dry out, build a good clean burning fire: folks are more likely to congregate around it.

radical=root 05.Jun.2002 07:20

Methinks Enji doth project too much

When you can't make a strong argument, resort to condescending, insulting attacks like this:

>>one of the many assumptions i've seen made of the followers of ruppert et al is that solomon, berlet, etc are saying to just accept the government's version. <<

Followers of Ruppert? Condescending remarks like that are mere projections by so-called radicals and progressives. They are projecting their own tendancy to leap to conclusions and to follow-the-leader onto 9/11 dissidents. So why did your so-called "healthy skeptics" immediately buy into the "Arabs did it" story and continue to trashed everyone who questioned the "Arabs did it" story nine months later, even after questions started appearing in the mainstream media? IMO, I don't think anyone who came to the "Arabs did it" conclusion are in any position to judge what's reasonable. Unlike your "healthy skeptics" (i.e., sheep) the "followers of ruppert" first started questioning the "Arabs did it" story on September 11, prior to reading a word of Ruppert or Portland Indymedia anyone else.

>>on the contrary, they are all asking us to think rationally and with a healthy skepticism. and frankly, the followers of ruppert et al have not been making very sound arguments and its coming across as a bit nuts. in my observation, the skepticism of the followers of ruppert et al has not been healthy. <<

What's so healthy about rejecting all the facts that have come out? Regardless of whatever conclusions were drawn there are too many cold, hard facts and documents, regardless of who made them public, that cannot be disputed.

>>it's like you're trying to build a fire with green wood. it makes a lot of smoke, is very noticeable, but as fires
go, its not a very good one. a healthy skepticism will allow those facts to age, let more truths come out,<<

When do "healthy skeptics" (sheep) consider wood ready for to start the fire? Facts are like fine wine to the so-called radical/progressive community: They're no good unless until they're presented 20 years later, like most stories that appear in the progressive media.

Has it ever occured to you that more people aren't congregating because all the facts have been blocked out by the mainstream media and most of the progressive media? I think it's time to start following the money and try to figure out why the mainstream left is trying to halt the pursuit of the truth. What are they hiding?


re: enji. . . 05.Jun.2002 17:27


i have done my research on this issue. . .have you? or are you taking Corn, Albert and Solomons word for it?. . .i really doubt you have spent much time looking into the various websites that outline all the facts. . .

stop focusing on Ruppert or me as a person and look at the issue

show me that you have actually read Rupperts site. . .did you read MalcontentX's excellent and well sourced 140 page report? how about his follow-up report?. . .what other sites? i think you focus on Ruppert or on me as a person, because you are not informed enough to actually talk about 911

can you tell me the time each plane was hijacked? when they hit the buildings? how long did the FAA know and when did they act?. . .have you actually informed yourself?

go look at the nose of the fake Osama in the US released video, and tell me you think it looks like Osama. . .i have showed those side by side to dozens of people and not a one said they even looked remotely close

the damn noses aren't even close!! but rather than be outraged over the blatant lie of a fake video put out by the Bush adminstration in order to further a criminal agenda, you would rather criticize the people who are outraged and trying to do something about it. . .who cares if there are a few outlandish theories around. . .it is human nature to speculate when lied to. . .

forget Corn, forget Ruppert. . .forget whatever theories get you upset. . .and answer this

since virtually the whole progressive left has allowed the official story to go unchallenged right from the start, it is you, and Corn, and Solomon who have to answer questions and prove something. . .show me the proof that it was Arabs. . .i want to see it

then show me where Corn, Berlet, Albert, Solomon, Chomsky etc have used the word ALLEGED hijackers in their writings

if you cannot show these things to me, then i say that these people should publically acknowledge this, and make an apology to all Arab Americans for not even having the little bit of courage to stand by the principle of innocent until proven guilty. . .

now answer these questions. . .

*first, do you believe that a passport, that just happened to belong to, of all people, an alleged hijacker, managed to fly out of his/her pocket or bag, and survive the explosion of the plane that allegedly raged hot enough to melt the building steel, and found its way down to the street virtually unscathed?

tell me that you believe this is at all a plausible scenario?

*second, suppose the government is right about who did it, and the passport was faked to build the case against them and to cover incompetence. . .how did they know, at that time, what name to put on that passport and have it ready in order to 'find' right then?

explain that please. . .

then here are a few more questions. . .

*why are there no Arab names on the flight lists?

* why when numerous names on the FBI list of 19 alleged hijackers are proven false, has no subsequent list been released by the FBI?

* why has no action been taken on the insider stock trades which prove foreknowledge of an exact nature? You cannot make anonymous stock trades. . .the identities of those who placed the put options must be known.

* why is the FBI dragging its feet in the anthrax case and acting like there are no legitimate suspects when there are?

* why is the discrepancy between the quotes from the flight instructors indicating poor piloting skills, and the quotes from civil and miliatry authorities indicating that the pilots of the hijacked planes had to be skilled, never addressed? This one point invalidates the entire FBI scenario

* why were the alleged hijackers waltzing around using their own names, when we are being told that it was super secret cells of terrorists who did this?

* what were the false names they used? when did they switch from using their real names, to using false names? (remember they were supposed to have used fake names)

* who killed the woman the day before she was supposed to testify on her connections to obtaining fake drivers licenses? why was she killed?

if someone is not interested to pursue this inquiry, and wants to focus on community organizing etc, that is fine, go to it. . .then dont try to hinder those who feel such inquiry is one of the most vital issues of our time. . .

so far every request to focus on the events and subsequent public information has been met with character attacks and cries of conspiracy theory, even when there is no alternate theory put forth. . .if you are ready for a serious discussion and inquiry. . .lets have it. . .address the above points and questions


FBI &quot;conspired&quot; to kill Judi Bari 05.Jun.2002 21:50


Did the FBI (and Oakland Police) not "conspire" to kill Judi Bari when they planted a bomb under her seat?