Comment on this article |
Email this article |
THE PEARL HARBOR LIE AND SEPTEMBER 11 (July 19, 2002 version)
by ADRIAN MORE
19 Jul 2002
I argue that President Bush may have known in advance of the planned September-11 attacks but may have allowed them to happen, and why.
THE PEARL HARBOR LIE AND SEPTEMBER 11 (July 19, 2002 version)
a T.I.P. (Text in Progress) by
the arguable likelihood (especially after Robert B. Stinnett's wonderful 'Day of Deceit', The Free Press, 2000) that FDR had foreknowledge of the planned attack on Pearl Harbor, but didn't tell to whip Americans up into a war frenzy, prompts me to ask a few analogical questions about September 11:
1 - Is it true that the local CIA station chief met Osama Bin Laden at the American hospital in Dubai in July 2001, as reported by Le Figaro and by Radio France Internationale on Oct.31,2001?
If it isn't true, then:
- why wouldn't Doctor Terry Callaway, reported to have treated Bin Laden, HIMSELF PUBLICLY comment on the reports? Is it out of fear you would have him harmed if he went public and confirmed the Figaro story?
According to Le Figaro as translated into English in:
Dr Callaway "reached by telephone, several times…did not want to answer our questions."
- why did you reportedly recall the CIA station chief on July 15, the day after the reported departure of Bin Laden from Dubai?
- why did Emirates officials make no comment on the reports?
2 - Is it true that by mid-July 2001 you had already planned the war on Afghanistan and its October timing, and that you had already stationed military advisers in Tajikistan, and that senior US officials told Niaz Naik, a former Pakistani Foreign Secretary, in mid-July (BBC World News, September 18,2001,11:27 GMT 12:27 UK)?
The BBC story did indeed describe an already planned war, as everyone can verify: http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/south_asia/newsid_1550000/1550366
Here are some excerpts [I capped all-important details]:
"Pakistani official claims US PLANNED INVASION OF AFGHANISTAN PRIOR TO WTC EVENTS...Niaz Naik, a former Pakistani Foreign Secretary, was told by senior American officials in mid-July that MILITARY ACTION AGAINST AFGHANISTAN WOULD GO AHEAD BY THE MIDDLE OF OCTOBER... Mr Naik told the BBC that...the US representatives told him that unless Bin Laden was handed over swiftly America would take military action to kill or capture both Bin Laden...and Mullah Omar.
The wider objective, according to Mr Naik, would be to TOPPLE THE TALIBAN REGIME AND INSTALL A TRANSITIONAL GOVERNMENT OF MODERATE AFGHANS IN ITS PLACE...Mr Naik was told that WASHINGTON WOULD LAUNCH ITS OPERATION FROM BASES IN TAJIKISTAN, WHERE AMERICAN ADVISERS WERE ALREADY IN PLACE. He was told that UZBEKISTAN WOULD ALSO PARTICIPATE IN THE OPERATION... Mr Naik was told that IF THE MILITARY ACTION WENT AHEAD IT WOULD TAKE PLACE…BY THE MIDDLE OF OCTOBER AT THE LATEST...And he said he was doubtful that Washington would drop its plan even if Bin Laden were to be surrendered...by the Taliban".
QUITE AN ACCURATE PROPHECY, ISN’T IT? WERE ALL HIS DEAD-ON-TARGET DETAILS OF THE FUTURE REVEALED TO NAIK IN A DREAM? HOW COULD HE POSSIBLY HAVE KNOWN EVERYTHING AS EARLY AS SEPT.18, 2001 (OR EVEN EARLIER, IF HIS STATEMENT’S DATE DOESN’T COINCIDE WITH THE BBC REPORT’S DATE), HAD NOBODY TOLD HIM?
Furthermore, president, you knew all too well, just like FDR back then, that YOUR PLANNED WAR WOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN SUPPORTED BY ENOUGH AMERICANS WITHOUT A COLLECTIVE SHOCK OF SEPT.11 (PEARL-HARBOR) MAGNITUDE. Neither would most of the rest of the world have greenlighted your war so easily, without Sept.11. That's why you needed Sept.11 so badly, right? That's why you may have allowed it to happen, thus co-massmurdering so many of your fellow citizens.
Given the plausibility of Naik's story, it would at this point make perfect sense if, around the same time (July 2001), you, president, had both geared up for your Afghan war and had Osama treated at the American hospital in Dubai: Osama had to live - until Sept.11. Had Osama died of kidney failure, there would have been NO SEPTEMBER 11 – NO MASS CONSENSUS FOR WAR IN THE U.S. – NO WAR – NO U.S. MILITARY/BUSINESS EXPANSION IN CENTRAL ASIA. Bin Laden, unwittingly or not, has been your and your oil/defense regime's best friend - thus far.
3 - It is known that:
a) renewable-energy lobbies don't have the kind of soft money the oil industry has;
b) U.S. oil reserves are dwindling fast;
c) the U.S. won't depend on Gulf oil alone;
d) Caspian oil seems at present a significant additional source;
e) radical, anti-american Islam has been threatening to seize power in the Caspian area; Iran, Russia and China are in the game too;
f) the best (for the U.S.) Caspian oil- and gas-pipeline route would have to cross Afghanistan and Pakistan, to avoid Russia and Iran; and even the newly announced construction start of the BTC pipeline through Azerbaidjan, Georgia and Turkey, also bypassing Russia and Iran, would never have been made without the "reassuring" presence (as of July 2002) of 7,000 U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan, U.S. airfields all over the Caspian region, hundreds if not thousands more of U.S. troops in other Caspian states (including Georgia): all of which is a result (or better the achieved goal of) 911. The BTC has been on hold for 10 years. Coincidentally, after 911 it’s magically coming true. In other words: you mess with the BTC pipeline – we’re right around the block (Afghanistan etc.) ready to kick your ass.
g) Russia needs the Taliban to go or be curbed because they are the rear base of Chechen rebels; therefore weak Russia must come to terms with U.S. military presence in central Asia, and give up a chunk of oil/gas business to U.S. companies;
h) Chinese influence in Central Asia is contrary to American interests;
i) imperial wars are best served in 'self-defense' sauce.
4 - Just out of curiosity: on September 11, 8:46am you famously happened (?) to be in Florida - safely out of harm's way. Colin Powell happened (?) to be in Peru – safely out of harm’s way. But - it escapes me - where exactly was Rudy the Hero? CIA director Tenet? FBI director Mueller?
To sum it all up: you are not yet another U.S. President who will live on in infamy - are you, mr Bush?
July 19, 2002 version; I wrote the first version on October 29, 2001.
No rights reserved. This material MAY and OUGHT be published, broadcast, rewritten and redistributed, as long as Adrian More is credited as author.