Saturday, January 30, 2010

SLEDGEHAMMER AND 9 11

General Firtina was attache in Washington in 1991. The Middle East Report concluded in 1998 that probably the greatest strategic move in the Clinton years was "The Ankara Pact"- an alliance between the Turkish military and the USA and Israel. (Turkey, Drugs, Faustian Alliances & Sibel Edmonds)

Operation Sledgehammer (OPERATION SLEDGEHAMMER AIMED TO DOWN AN AIRCRAFT) helps us to understand 9 11 and the London tube bombings.

It is a suitcase of documents which reveals Operation Sledgehammer, the 2003 plan for acts of terrorism and a Turkish coup

In January 2010, Mehmet Baransu, a journalist at Taraf newspaper (Turkey) told The Times (UK) that "My source brought the originals of all this stuff in a suitcase one night last week.

"He had been in the First Army and was uncomfortable with developments."

The 'digital imprints' on the files lead back to military computers. Taraf has handed the documents to Istanbul prosecutors.

Reportedly, the CIA, Mossad and the Turkish military want to topple Turkey's Prime Minister Erdogan, because he is not sufficiently pro-Israel and pro-USA. Erdogan is a moderate, but he has criticised Israel.

Many top military people are named in the Sledgehammer documents.

The documents reveal that the Turkish military planned to down a Turkish aircraft.

General Ibrahim Firtina, who went on to command the Turkish air force, is linked to this plan for the Turkish aircraft to be downed and the attack blamed on Greece.

The idea was to create the nationalist unity needed for a coup.

The Sledgehammer documents reveal the military's plans to detonate bombs in mosques.

The idea of killing people in mosques was to get the survivors to riot and to create the idea that there were lots of mad Moslems around.

The main Sledgehammer document discusses how to take advantage of the chaos after co-ordinated attacks in large cities, especially Istanbul.

This was written several months before attacks against the British consulate, the HSBC bank and synagogues in Istanbul.

The Sledgehammer documents reveal that Stadiums were to be prepared for mass detentions.


A Turkish court, on 16 February 2007, sentenced seven 'suspected al-Qaida militants' to life in prison for the November 2003 bombings in Istanbul, which hit the British consulate, the HSBC bank and two synagogues.

The defendants included Syrian Loa'i Mohammad Haj Bakr al-Saqa, also known as Luai Sakra . ( Al-Qaida suspects on trial for Istanbul bombings give final ...)

The British Consul General Roger Short was killed by the bomb as he was entering the consulate building. Press reports confirmed that he had cancelled an appointment at the last minute and "if he had gone to his appointment, he would have been alive."

According to Michel Chossudovsky, at globalresearch.ca/articles/ANA311A.html, "The attacks created conditions for Turkey's participation in the war on terrorism.

"The attacks served to strengthen the Anglo-American military axis and the legitimacy of Bush's 'War on terrorism.'"

Ercan Gun, at zaman.com (TODAY'S ZAMAN ), 15 Agust 2005, reported on the Syrian 'Al Qaeda Militant' Luai Sakra (Saqa) who was arrested for organizing the double bomb attacks in Istanbul on 15-23 November 2003.

Sakra 'has confessed to Turkish police that he provided the attackers of 9 11 with passports'.

Sakra 'claims that he knew Muhammad Ata'.

Sakra 'claims he drinks alcohol and does not pray'.

Sarka reportedly said: “I was one of the people who knew the perpetrators of September 11, and knew the time and plan before the attacks. I also participated in the preparations for the attacks to WTI and Pentagon. I provided money and passports.”

Reportedly, some of the passports, which Sakra claimed to have provided himself, were found in the ruins of World Trade Centre I.

Ercan Gun wonders if Al-Qaeda is a Secret Service operation.

Sakra was interrogated for 4 days at the Istanbul Anti-Terror Department Headquarters. Reportedly this has provided some important information.

According to Ercan Gun, Turkish intelligence specialists now believe:

1. Al-Qaeda is the name of a secret service operation.

2. Al Qaeda is linked to a strategy of tension.

3. Sakra, the fifth most senior man in al-Qaeda, was offered employment by the CIA. The CIA gave him a large sum of money.


The CIA claimed it eventually lost contact with him.

Reportedly, in 2000, the CIA asked the Turkish security service MIT to capture Sakra. MIT caught Sakra in Turkey and interrogated him.

At a different period of time, Sakra was sought and caught by Syria's al-Mukhabarat. Syria too offered him employment. Sakra eventually became a triple agent for the secret services.

Terrorism: Top al Qaeda operative, Sakra, 'worked for the CIA'.


The 1980 Bologna Bombing was blamed on agents of the CIA and NATO, working for Operation Gladio.

Operation Gladio involved “the strategy of tension”. The strategy involved getting right-wing terrorists to carry out terrorist attacks in Europe and in Turkey. Operation Gladio was reportedly organised by Nato and the CIA.

http://www.stopthenato.org/m/zit/id_ses/2337520f9/id_p/10/opt/read_e/id_s/433.html

"The CONTRA-GUERRILLAS, which were the GLADIO organisation in Turkey, were set up from the 1950s onwards and played a significant part in fascist governments during the modern history of Turkey, irrespective of whether these had a veneer of parliamentary democracy or were an overt military junta."


http://www.spitfirelist.com/f059.html

"Utilizing the fascist and ultra-nationalist National Action Party and its youth wing, the Gray Wolves, the Turkish 'Stay Behind' also resulted in the type of right-wing terror program and destabilization effort that it did in Italy."

~~~~~~~~

When the Islamist prime minister Necemettin Erbakan took power in 1996, the Turkish military, quickly eased him out of power.

In elections for the Turkish parliament on November 3, 2002, a new party formed out of a banned Islamic movement - the Justice and Development Party (AKP) - won 35 percent of the popular vote and 363 of the 550 seats.This may have worried the Pentagon, Israel, the Turkish military and the Turkish drugs industry.

~~~~~~~~

http://www.hr-action.org/archive1/990225tjp1.html

According to a report in The Jerusalem Post, intelligence cooperation between the Mossad and the Turkish security service, MIT, "was enshrined in a 12-clause agreement that was signed during a 1993 visit to Israel by then-Turkish foreign minister Hikmat Chetin".

Soon after, according to the London-based newsletter Foreign Report, a large Mossad operation was established in Turkey, with Mossad agents based in both Istanbul and Ankara.

~~~~~~~~

Turkish Top Military Brass meets Wolfowitz one day before Istanbul Attacks

http://globalresearch.ca/articles/ANA311A.html

The two Istanbul attacks respectively on the HSBC in the financial district and on the British Consulate were, according to media reports "timed to coincide with President George Bush's state visit to London."

The attacks took place one day following the completion of the annual Turkish-US Joint Defense Group meeting (17-19 November 2003).

The British Consul General Roger Short, was killed by the bomb as he was entering the consulate building. Press reports confirmed that he had cancelled an appointment at the last minute and "if he had gone to his appointment, he would have been alive."

The attacks create conditions for Turkey's participation in the war on terrorism.

The attacks serve to strengthen the Anglo-American military axis and the legitimacy of Bush's "War on terrorism."

The Istanbul bombings also serve to uphold the shaky legitimacy of Prime Minister Tony Blair in the face of mounting political opposition to Britain's' participation in the US led war.

Michel Chossudovsky, 11/21/03

~~~~~~~~

http://www.mediareviewnet.com/Zionist%20intelligence%20engineered%20Istanbul%20blasts.htm

"A Turkish daily close to the ruling justice and development party quoted Turkish intelligence sources as saying that the Mossad had established the organization that launched the two attacks on 15th November, 2003."


~~~~~~~~

http://www.onlinejournal.com/Special_Reports/062904Stanton/062904stanton.html

Turkey is a major refining and transit point for the flow of heroin from Southwest Asia to Western Europe.

Kendal Nezan, writing for Le Monde Diplomatique, has reported that MIT and the Turkish National Police force were actively supporting the trade in illicit drugs not only for fun and profit, but out of desperation...

"According to the daily Hürriyet, Turkey's heroin trafficking brought in $25 billion in 1995 and $37.5 billion in 1996 . . . Only criminal networks working in close cooperation with the police and the army could possibly organize trafficking on such a scale. Drug barons have stated publicly, on Turkish television and in the West, that they have been working under the protection of the Turkish government and to its financial benefit. The traffickers themselves travel on diplomatic passports. The drugs are even transported by military helicopter from the Iranian border."


~~~~~~~

The Middle East Report concluded in 1998 that probably the greatest strategic move in the Clinton post-Cold War years is what could be called "The Ankara Pact"—an alliance between the US, Turkey, and Israel that essentially circumvents and bottles up the Arab countries.

Earlier in 1998, Israeli, Turkish and American military forces engaged in exercises in the Mediterranean, according to Reuters and Agencie France Press. "'[These exercises] signal to the radical states in the region that there is a strong alliance between Israel, Turkey and the United States which they must fear."

Reports also indicated that the CIA and Pentagon intelligence organizations had regularly chaired meetings of Turkish and Israeli officers in Tel Aviv for years.


aangirfan: Turkey, terror bombs, the CIA and Mossad

Friday, January 29, 2010

OPERATION SLEDGEHAMMER AIMED TO DOWN AN AIRCRAFT


In January 2010, Turkey's liberal newspaper Taraf daily reported on a plot by the Turkish army to topple the current Turkish government.

The Turkish military plotters reportedly aimed to carry out terrorist attacks and asssassinations, leading to chaos and a military takeover. (Turkey army chief and coup plot allegations)

Reportedly, the military plotted to bomb crowded mosques in İstanbul and plotted to down a Turkish plane and blame this on Greece. (Reactions grow against Sledgehammer military plot )

The plot, called Sledgehammer, was reportedly drawn up in 2003 shortly after AK Party came to power.

Reportedly, the masterminds of the plan were General Cetin Dogan, then commander of the Turkish army, former Air Forces Commander General Ibrahim Firtina and now retired General Ergin Saygun.

Reportedly, the plan was agreed at a military meeting attended by 162 active army members, among them 29 generals.

Istanbul by Nevit Dilmen

Suitcase of documents reveals plan for yet another very Turkish coup

In Turkey, the fascist generals are in bed with the Islamists?

aangirfan: 'The deep state' behind the anti-Christian terror in Turkey.

aangirfan: Mossad falls out with certain generals in Turkey?


aangirfan: CRYPTO JEWS, TURKEY, AND 9 11

aangirfan: TURKEY LINKS WITH IRAN

aangirfan: Turkey, terror bombs, the CIA and Mossad

aangirfan: TOP US OFFICIALS REPORTEDLY INVOLVED IN GANGSTERISM ...


aangirfan: The 'CIA's coup' in Turkey in 1980

aangirfan: Istanbul Bombs

aangirfan: Jewish control of Turkey?

~

Monday, January 11, 2010

9 11 REVEALED - THE DAILY MAIL



Tony Rennell, in the UK's Daily Mail, 6th August 2005, wrote:

"Towers that fell 'like a controlled demolition'. Planes that vanished then mysteriously reappeared. And crucial evidence that has been lost for ever. A new book raises bizarre yet deeply unsettling questions about the world’s worst terror atrocity….."

The book being reviewed by Rennell:

9/11 Revealed: Challenging The Facts Behind The War On Terror, by Ian Henshall and Rowland Morgan, published by Robinson at £8.99.

The review:

The plot by America’s military bosses was devilish in both design and intent – to fabricate an outrage against innocent civilians, fool the world and provide a pretext for war.

In the pentagon, a top secret team drew up a plan to simultaneously send up two airliners painted and numbered exactly the same, one from a civil airport in America, the other from a secret military airbase nearby.

The one from the airport would have military personnel on board who had checked in as ordinary passengers under false names. The one from the airbase would be an empty drone, a remote-controlled unmanned aircraft.

Somewhere along their joint flight paths, the passenger-carrying plane would drop below radar height, and disappear, landing back at the airbase and unloading its occupants in secret.

Meanwhile, the drone would have taken up the other plane’s designated course. High over the island of Cuba, it would be exploded in mid-air after broadcasting an international distress call that it was under attack from enemy fighters.

The world would be told that a plane load of blameless American holidaymakers had been deliberately shot down by Fidel Castro’s Communists – and that the US had no choice but to declare war and topple his regime.


This ‘agent provocateur’ plan – code named OPERATION NORTHWOODS and revealed in official archives – dates from 1962 when the Cold War was at its height.

Four decades later, there are a growing number of people who look back at this proto-conspiracy and then to the events of 9/11 and see uncanny and frightening modern parallels.

For Cuba, read Iraq, say these skeptics. For the dummy airliner, read the Twin Towers in New York.

The Northwoods plan is crucial to the argument presented in a hugely provocative – many would say fantastical – yet, at times, genuinely disturbing new analysis of 9/11 by two radical British based journalists, Ian Henshall and Rowland Morgan.

In it, they examine various conspiracy theories that suggest the Bush administration connived in the devastating aerial attacks on New York and Washington four years ago. The reason? To give Bush the excuse he wanted to push ahead with his secret, long-held plane to invade Iraq and capture its oilfields...

Much of evidence the authors present is undeniably compelling – and their arguments sound rather less preposterous in the light of OPERATION NORTHWOODS all those years ago.

That plan was proposed in all seriousness by America’s Joint Chiefs of Staff in a memo to the Secretary of Defence. It got as far as the Attorney General – Robert Kennedy, brother of the president, John Kennedy, before being vetoed.

It is proof, says Henshall and Morgan, that forces at the top of the US Government are capable of conceiving a deadly, devious and fraudulent plan to further their own secret ends – even under such a supposedly ‘nice guy’ president as JFK.

In which case, can the idea of a 9/11 plot by those who serve the deeply mistrusted Bush really be ruled out with total certainty, without at least considering the arguments?


Of course, the official explanation for 9/11 is that Al Qaeda just got lucky that sunny morning in September 2001. The terrorists conducted their attacks without outside help, by this account, and intelligence and other blunders by the US authorities that contributed to their terrible success – for example, ignored warnings that an attack involving aeroplanes was likely, or issuing US entry visas to 19 Islamic fanatics set on murder – were just that: blunders.

This is the White House’s version and it was endorsed by a Washington commission of inquiry under Thomas Kean published last year.

But, according to Henshall and Morgan, the story is full of gaping holes and unanswered questions.

And the most startling question, which remains unresolved, they say, is why the hijackers’ principal target, the two 110-storey towers at the World Trade Centre in New York crumbled so easily. No-one who watched each building suddenly cascade into dust and debris in just 20 seconds will ever forget the slow-motion horror.

But now the question is asked: was it all too pat, too neat?

Though 30 years old, the towers had expressly been built to survive the impact of a Boeing 707, a plane the same size and carrying as much fuel as the ones that struck.

That they collapsed after being hit and fell at such speed was unprecedented in the history of architecture.

It astonished many engineers.


The official explanation is known as the Pancake Effect – steel supports melting in the intense fireball, causing the floors to tumble down on each other.

The problem here is that the heat from the explosions was probably not nearly as great as people tend to assume.

There was indeed a lot of kerosene from the aircraft fuel tanks when flight 11 from Boston hit the North Tower between the 94th and the 98th floors but pictures show that most of this fireballed outwards.

Experts have questioned whether the fire ever got hot enough to melt the buildings’ steel frames.

Oddly, too, original estimates by firefighters after the second plane, Flight 175, hit the South Tower, were that the blaze was containable.

Two firefighters actually reached the crash zone on the 78th floor and a tape exists of them radioing down that just two hoses would be enough to get the fire under control – in which case the situation should have been little different from a ‘normal’ office fire, and no steel tower ever collapsed as the result of such a blaze.

‘The fire wasn’t hot enough to cause a collapse’ Kevin R Ryan, laboratory director at a US underwriting firm specializing in product safety, was sacked from his job last year after questioning the official explanation.

“The buildings should have easily withstood the thermal stress caused by the burning jet fuel”, he said. “If steel did soften or melt, this was certainly not due to jet fuel fires of any kind, let alone the briefly burning fires in those towers. That fact should be of great concern to all Americans.”


Intriguingly, Ryan claimed that his firm had checked and approved the steel used in the towers when they were built. This was later vehemently denied by the bosses who sacked him.

To add to the mystery, the tape of the two firemen was kept secret and when relatives were finally allowed to listen to it, they had to sign strict confidentiality agreements.

If the Pancake Effect theory is wrong, there’s one obvious alternative: that the towers were brought down by the sheer impact of the planes hitting them. But this, according to the skeptics, ignores basic physics. The initial hit on the North Tower, for example, destroyed 33 of the 59 columns in its north face. This meant the damage was asymmetrical, so any resulting collapse would surely have been lopsided. In fact, the building fell evenly.

The TV aerial on the summit sank vertically, in a straight line.

There were other strange anomalies. According to the Kean Commission, when the first plane struck: ‘A jet fuel fireball erupted and shot down a bank of elevators, bursting into numerous lower floors, including the lobby level, and the basement four storeys below ground.’ Unlikely, say Henshall and Morgan.

A film by a French documentary crew, who by chance were following a New York firefighting team that day, shows the first men arriving. The lobby was covered in fine debris and the windows were shattered but there was none of the soot or oily residue that burning jet fuel would have left behind.

Meanwhile down in the basement, a 50-ton hydraulic press was reduced to rubble and a steel and concrete fire door demolished. Witnesses there said the destruction was less like that from a fireball flash and more like that from a bomb.

Some firefighters told reporters that day that they thought there had been bombs in the building – before apparently being silenced by their chiefs.

Atta chose to learn to fly at a Venice Florida airfield long used for CIA operations.

So had Al Qaeda cleverly placed explosives inside the towers as well as attacking them from the air? Or, as conspiracy theorists would have it, had some homegrown agency mined the towers to make sure they fell – but neatly without collapsing over the rest of Manhattan, America’s financial and business heartland?

The authors quote an expert demolition contractor from Pennsylvania, Michael Taylor, who said the fall of the buildings ‘looked like a controlled demolition’.

Another expert, Van Romero, vice-president for research at the New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology, reached the same opinion after studying videos of the disaster, and concluded that ‘explosive devices inside the buildings’ caused them to collapse.

Strangely and without explanation, he recanted that view just ten days after going public with it. Might he possibly have been leaned on?

Even stranger, say Henshall and Morgan, was the collapse of a third building on the World Trade Centre site, a smaller 47-storey block known as WTC7, which was largely ignored by the world’s media.

It had not been hit by a plane yet it, too, mysteriously fell many hours after the Towers had gone. The official explanation for this was that fuel stores caught fire as a result of debris from the burning towers, the building began to bulge in one corner, and after that it was unsalvageable. But remember that, according to Henshall and Morgan, a steel-framed building had never collapsed as a result of a fire before this day. And, again according to the authors, WTC7 appears almost untouched by fire in photographs taken at the time.

The landlord of the World Trade Centre site, Larry Silverstein, explicitly suggested at one point that WTC7 was deliberately demolished. He told a US TV documentary that a decision was taken to ‘pull’ the building rather than risk loss of life, though this was later denied.

Certainly, according to Henshall and Morgan, the building’s fall in seven seconds was just as textbook-tidy and suspicious as the collapse of the Twin Towers. Given that it also housed offices of the US Secret Service, the CIA and the Defence Department, this has led conspiracy theorists to give it a key role in the supposed 9/11 plot – as we will see shortly.

Part of the whole problem, according to Henshall and Morgan, is that vital evidence about what happened was destroyed or muddied in the wake of the atrocity.

One expert said there were bombs inside the towers.



Ground Zero, the base of the towers, was fiercely protected by the authorities – understandably so because it not only contained human remains but a cache of seized drugs held in an FBI office and more than $1 billion of gold from bank vaults in the Buildings. Yet what went on behind all the heavy security?

After most air disasters, the wreckage of the planes is meticulously gathered up and pieced together in search of clues. Extraordinarily, in the course of removing the rubble from the Twin Towers to a nearby landfill site, the 9/11 salvage operation seems to have ‘lost’ four six-ton aircraft engines, besides failing to find the ‘black box’ flight data recorders and cockpit voice recorders from either of the planes.

These data boxes – which could have revealed exactly what happened in the doomed jets – are deliberately designed to withstand heavy impacts and exceptionally high temperatures. It is, according to experts, very rare for them not to be recovered after an accident.

Unfortunately, according Henshall and Morgan, there was a singular lack of official zeal even to establish the very basic fact that the aircraft that hit the Twin Towers were the same as those that took off from Boston.

Perhaps, with almost the entire world watching the attacks on TV, it hardly seemed necessary to prove the glaringly obvious. But this failure to follow standard procedures for accident investigation once again gave encouragement to the conspiracy theorists.


And then there was the oddity of the single passport. The black boxes may have been destroyed and steel girders melted – yet somehow one of the hijackers’ passports avoided this inferno and was found intact in a nearby street by ‘a passer-by’.

To Henshall and Morgan, that seems absurd, as does the almost instant identification of this person as a hijacker rather than a passenger or a Twin Towers office worker.

Conspiracy theorists suspect the passport was planted to help establish the official story in the first, critical hours after the disaster.

Why didn't fighter planes intercept the hijackers?

Still more unanswered questions surround what happened at the Pentagon in Washington, in the third successful terrorist attack that day.

After taking off from Dulles Airport, Washington, American Airlines Flight 77 dropped off the radar screens for 36 minutes when its transponders sending signals back to air traffic control were switched off.

When the blip reappeared, it was closing on the city but where precisely the aircraft had been for the past half an hour was a mystery. Nor could anyone in air traffic control figure out what it was.

Experienced officials apparently watched its speed and maneuverability and thought it must be a military plane.

Conspiracy theorists maintain this is precisely what it was.

In a repeat of New York, no evidence has ever been produced from the wreckage to prove that it was Flight 77 that hurtled into the side of the Pentagon at 350mph. Photographs show that the hole it made was large enough for the fuselage of a Boeing 757 but not for the wings and the tail, though these supposedly disappeared through the gap and then vapourised.

For the conspiracy theorists, this points to a conclusion that what hit was not Flight 77, and not even a jetliner. Some witnesses claim the plane they say hit the Pentagon was a small one, an eight – or 12-seater, and that it did not have the roar of an airliner but the shrill whine of a fighter plane. One witness is convinced it was a missile.

The authors say the matter could be cleared up by CCTV footage of the crash from a nearby filling station, a hotel and traffic surveillance cameras.

There were plenty of Nazis in the USA in the 1930s.

Unfortunately, the FBI seized all three videos within minutes of the crash and they have never been released.

If they were produced, they might lay to rest the theory that what hit the Pentagon was a military drone painted in airline livery and that just before impact it fired a missile to enable a clean entry which would explain the lack of debris. But until they are, the skeptics will continue to have a field day.

In essence, to the extreme conspiracy theorists, what took place on 9/11 was a repeat of the aborted OPERATION NORTHWOODS.

Far from being an attack by Islamic terrorists, they say, the events were a complete hoax, a conjuring trick by the US government in just the same way that Kennedy’s generals wanted to fool the world over Cuba.

Planes were swapped, ‘drones’ slammed into the World Trade Centre (which was mined with explosives as well) and the Pentagon, and the identities of alleged hijackers from the Middle East were stolen or invented to put the blame on Al Qaeda.

Along with the ‘passengers’ who apparently boarded the planes, the ‘suicide hijackers’ are now either dead or living under different identities, just as the pentagon planned fro the military personnel it was going to use back in 1962.

The theory seizes on the fact that, like the plane that apparently hit the Pentagon, both Flight 11 and Flight 175 switched off their transponders on their way to the Twin Towers and disappeared from Radar screens.

According to the skeptics, this gave them time and opportunity to land at the handily located Griffiss Air Force Base, a Pentagon command center which also houses research laboratories into advanced computers and radar.

There, they were supposedly replaced by remote-controlled substitutes.

In technical terms, this is not as far fetched as it sounds.

The US military experimented with unmanned aircraft as far back as World War II and there have been successful jet models since. Well-connected conspirators, so the theory goes, would have little difficulty getting their hands on a system to fit in an airliner. The switch would supposedly be foolproof because, as we have seen, the aircraft in the ruins would not be properly identified.

Then there was the smaller building known as WTC7. It was the obvious point from which to run the New York end of the scam, guiding the planes into their target. Afterwards, of course, the evidence had to be destroyed, hence its demolition...

Bologna 1980 reportedly showed that agents of the CIA and NATO were prepared to kill innocent civilians.

An operation of such intricacy and complexity would require the co-operation – and the silence until death – of thousands of people. Everything we have read about the victims on the planes, and their heartbroken relatives, would be a carefully constructed sham...

Why ... were air traffic controllers so slow to report suspected hijackings to the military that day in breach of standard procedures, with the result that fighter planes arrived too late to intercept?

Flight controllers in four separate incidents were unaccountably slow to realize that something was wrong and alert the military authorities.

Even after one plane was definitely known to have been hijacked, they failed to respond promptly when others went missing. The air force scrambled from the wrong base. For some reason, too, when fighter planes eventually were scrambled to New York, they were from an airbase 150 miles away, rather than the much closer one in New Jersey. The Twin Towers were ablaze before they got there.

All the while the local TV channels were smoothly getting eye-in-the-sky helicopters into the air over the World Trade Centre. In the words of the authors: “Their routine mobilizations stand in stark contrast to the apparent impotence and indecisiveness of the $350-billion-a-year US military. Yet for all the shortcomings of the Federal Aviation Authority and the US Air Force that day, no-one was ever fired or reprimanded.

One explanation for this paralysis is that there was, as fate would have it, an air defence exercise going on in US airspace that same day, codenamed Vigilant Guardian. The air traffic controllers were confused by this, thinking the planes disappearing from their screens might be part of the exercise.

Coincidence? No say the 9/11 sceptics. This was exactly the sort of smokescreen operation that anyone wanting to make life easier for the hijackers would launch to paralyse any authorities that might get in the way. When the first evidence came that hijackings were taking place, traffic control officials wasted valuable time wondering whether or not this was part of the Vigilant Guardian exercise. Suck a smokescreen fits well with two types of government-inspired plot postulated by 9/11 sceptics – popularly known as ‘LIHOP’ and ‘MIHOP’.

Operation Gladio was CIA-NATO terrorism in Europe.

‘LIHOP’ – ‘Let It Happen On Purpose’ – holds that since the turn of the new century, radical right-wingers in Washington (the so-called neo-cons) had been keen to get a US military presence in the Middle East oilfields and were also desperate to do something about Al Qaeda, which had been targeting US interests overseas.When evidence came in of an impending terrorist attack, they decided to ignore it. They intended that it should succeed. It would act at the very least as a ‘wake-up’ call to their apathetic fellow countrymen and at best as an excuse for war. In the much the same way, some historians believe, President Roosevelt knew in advance from broken codes about the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour in 1941 – but let it happen, at the cost of 2,400 lives, because he wanted an excuse to join World War II.

‘MIHOP” takes a step on from this – ‘Make it Happen On Purpose’. This theory has the same motivation but the active involvement of US agents. Planted in Al Qaeda, they helped organize the plot, or at the very least cleared a path for the hijackers.These agents may even have tried to keep down casualty figures, which some think were suspiciously small in the circumstances.

The plane that hit the Pentagon was seen to swerve at the last minute and hit an area of the building that was largely unoccupied – and which had just been fitted with reinforced external walls and blast-resistant windows.

A crash into the other side would have killed and maimed many thousands instead of just 125.

In New York, too, more than 50,000 inhabitants of the Towers were targeted but just 2,600 killed – not least because of the orderly way in which the buildings collapsed, after most of the occupants had been evacuated. Was this an example of a ‘managed’ atrocity?

According to Le Figaro and French radio, Osama stayed in an American hospital in Dubai just before 9 11.

For most observers, the idea of US involvement in the attacks still strains credulity beyond breaking point. Yet that catalogue of unanswered questions remains troubling.Some are very basic.

How, for example, did the hijackers manage to slip past airport security with weapons?...

How did the passengers make those phone calls?

Another problem here is those very phone calls from the planes. Experts in Henshall and Morgan’s book say it is all but impossible to make a mobile phone call above 8,000 feet – let alone four times that altitude, as the jet passengers are alleged to have done.

So how were these calls on which so much of the 9/11 narrative has been built ever made? Could they possibly have been invented?

The authors write: ‘Few issues cause as much controversy amongst 9/11 sceptics as these, not least because they were cited – by Tony Blair among others – as eyewitness reports and proof positive the official narrative was true.’

Doubts are even raised over the gung-ho story of Flight 93, the fourth plane in the attacks, which passengers apparently seized back from the hijackers, causing it to crash into a field but miss Washington.The legend of the heroic cockpit-storming, launched to cries of ‘Let’s Roll’, was a product of tapes that have never been authenticated or released to anyone other than the victims’ relatives, who were sworn to secrecy.

Henshall and Morgan say the matter could be cleared up if recordings or billing evidence from phone companies were produced but they never have been.This call for transparency is the thrust of their whole argument. It is time, they say, for a full and truly independent inquiry into 9/11 that will reveal all the facts and silence the rumours.

One thing it could consider would be the anthrax attack on America three weeks after 9/11. Five recipients of contaminated letters died, postal facilities were closed, as were office buildings on Capitol Hill where hundreds of lawmakers and staff were tested and given an antibiotic.

At the time, this was seized on by the Washington power-brokers pressing for action against Iraq. ‘Who but Saddam Hussein could have supplied Arab terrorists with anthrax,’ they asked.


By contrast, skeptics about 9/11 see this as this finishing touch to the grand plot – an attempt to distract attention from any doubts about the atrocities and the lessons to be learned from them.They may have a case. The letters mysteriously stopped and the anthrax spores were identified by scientists as a particular strain stemming only from the government’s own labs in Maryland.

But by then the scare had shut down congress at a crucial time, when questions about 9/11 were beginning to surface, and helped deepen the mood of fear and paranoia among ordinary Americans.It was those fears, say the skeptics, that Bush exploited to get his way on Iraq. Had he plotted it that way all along?

Henshall and Morgan raise enough awkward points to make it a thought that cannot simply be laughed out of court.

After all, Bush and Blair, took us to war assuring us that ‘the Iraq regime continues to possess some of the most lethal weapons ever devised’. Yet those weapons of mass destruction have not been found and many doubt they existed.

With public trust one of the major casualties of the war, can any of us be absolutely sure we have not been caught up in a lie and perhaps a bigger one even than we ever though possible?..

Henshall and Morgan ... have certainly left a whiff of something sinister in the air.

9/11 Revealed: Challenging The Facts Behind The War On Terror, by Ian Henshall and Rowland Morgan is published at £8.99.

~~

DID PAKISTAN'S ISI KILL THE CIA AGENTS IN AFGHANISTAN?.

MOSSAD and THE CIA TURN UP THE HEAT.

Monday, January 04, 2010

HOW THE SPOOKS RECRUIT PATSIES

Patsies, doubles, double agents?

How do you persuade ordinary people to join in false flag terror attacks?

You can threaten them.

On 5 January 2010, in The Independent (UK), we read that MI5 is 'still using threats to recruit Muslim spies'

According to The Independent:

Isahaq Elmi, 31, claims that for nine months he has been harassed by MI5 agents in order to force him to work for them.

Isahaq Elmi says he has been bombarded with phone calls and tricked into attending meetings at police stations in Birmingham.

Ahmed Diini, 21, says that he was visited by spooks at the Birmingham school where he worked and threatened with arrest.

When he went on holiday he says he was twice detained at UK airports.

He alleges he was bombarded with phone calls and threatened with detention under the Terrorism Act.

He claims MI5 suggested that his life would be made easier if he agreed to work for MI5.

In 2009, The Independent reported five cases where people complained of similar harassment.

Isahaq Elmi reports that at Heathrow anti-terror police officers threatened to arrest him and detain him at Paddington Green police station where terror suspects are held.

Some months later, Isahaq Elmi was persuaded to go to a police station where MI5 agents said "they were recruiting young Western fighters."

After leaving the police station, the phone calls continued. Reportedly, one of the MI5 agents began shouting and said, 'One way or another we are going to get you.'"

Classic Double Agents in False Flag Operations

The classic false flag operation.

Caution - FBI fit-ups of Muslim patsies in progress • The Register

~~

UNDERWEAR MAN IN BED WITH INDIANS?

Photo: sisley

Underwear seems to have been used by the CIA as part of its plan to move the Russians and Chinese out of Yemen, and balkanise Saudi Arabia and Pakistan? (USA VERSUS RUSSIA & CHINA; YEMEN & SAUDI ARABIA)

And the 'terrorists' like Nigerian Abdulmutallab and American David Headley seem to work for the CIA, who are in league with Mossad, elements of India's RAW and many others?

Prakash Singh, former chief of India's Border Security Force, has said, "It is well-known that Headley was a CIA agent who later started working for the ISI and some militant outfits in Pakistan." ('Extraditing Headley will expose CIA')

And the spooks have links to crime? "There is a history of Chabad Houses not only being used as safehouses and logistics centers for Israeli intelligence but as storefronts for criminal activity." (Chabad Houses have history of criminal activity)

Abdulmutallab, the 23-year-old Nigerian bound for Detroit, checked in no bags and left no contact information.

On 4 January 2010, Gary Young, in the Guardian, writes: "For seven years the American state manipulated the public with its multicoloured terror alerts.

"But when all the warning lights were flashing red, it did nothing."
(The war on terror has been about scaring people, not protecting them )

aangirfan: Who really controlled the Red Brigades and other terror groups?..

On 3 January 2010, at Pacific Free Press, Tom Burghardt tells the story of the Weird Underpants: The Untold Tale of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab's Christmas Flight.

Among the points made:

1. People like Mohamed Atta, Richard Reid, Mohammad Sidique Khan and Abdulmutallab often work "with a wink-and-a-nod" from the CIA and MI6 when it serves "the geostrategic ambitions of their political masters."

2. Security researcher and analyst Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed wrote in New Internationalist in October 2009:

"Islamist terrorism cannot be understood without acknowledging the extent to which its networks are being used by Western military intelligence services, both to control strategic energy resources and to counter their geopolitical rivals.

"Even now, nearly a decade after 9/11, covert sponsorship of al-Qaeda networks continues."

3. The terrorist networks, as analysts such as Michel Chossudovsky, Peter Dale Scott and Richard Labévière have documented, "enjoy the closest ties with Western intelligence agencies stretching back decades."

4. Intelligence officers did nothing to stop Abdulmutallab, the Christmas Day Bomber, from getting on that plane.

5. Did the CIA and its friends suppress intelligence on the would-be bomber?

The Independent on Sunday reported: "the revelation of Abdulmutallab's background has confounded terror experts."

One such "expert," Dr Magnus Ranstorp of the Center for Asymmetric Threat Studies at the Swedish National Defence College, told IoS that "the attempted bombing 'didn't square'."

"On the one hand" Ranstorp said, "it seems he's been on the terror watch list but not on the no-fly list."

"That doesn't square" Ranstorp elaborated, "because the American Department for Homeland Security has pretty stringent data-mining capability. I don't understand how he had a valid visa if he was known on the terror watch list."

Operation Gladio involved the CIA and NATO 'carrying out acts of terrorism' in Europe. (informationliberation - Operation Gladio)

On 4 January 2010, Wayne Madsen, at Online Journal, has an article entitled: Intelligence sources: Plane incident a false flag involving trinity of CIA, MOSSAD and RAW.

According to Wayne Madsen:

1. The Christmas Day flight 253 event was a false flag operation carried out by the CIA, Mossad, and India’s Research and Analysis Wing (RAW), according to Asian intelligence sources.

2. The CIA, Mossad, and RAW were behind the Mumbai Attacks of 2008.

3. On 28 December 2009, Rupee News reported the same three agencies, along with former Afghan KHAD intelligence agents, assassinated Benazir Bhutto.

The purpose being to destabilize Pakistan.

4. The eyewitness testimonies of Michigan attorney Kurt Haskell and his attorney wife Lori Haskell are being attacked by the corporate media.

Haskell and his wife witnessed a "well-dressed Indian man" arrange for Mutallab to board Delta 253 without a passport at the check-in desk at Schiphol.

Haskell told CBS News: "Only the Indian man spoke, and what he said was, this man needs to board the plane, and he doesn’t have a passport. And the ticket agent then responded saying you need a passport to board the plane, and the Indian man then said he's from Sudan. We do this all the time."

5. The security company that cleared Mutallab in Schiphol is ICTS, a firm that is headquartered in Israel and Amstelveen, Netherlands.

The firm also cleared attempted shoe bomber Richard Reid for a Miami-bound American Airlines flight from Paris in December 2001.

The Indian media (Headley's girlfriend crossed Wagah into India) tells us more about David Headley's 29-year-old Moroccan girlfriend-wife Faiza Outalha.

Indian investigators have found that Faiza travelled to Manali in Himachal Pradesh during a 2008 trip and befriended a US couple at the hill station.

The American couple also operated out of Goa, where they reportedly met Headley.

Israeli newspapers have said that Morocco's late king, Hassan II, allowed Mossad to set up a station in Morocco and develop close ties with Moroccan security forces. (King Hassan of Morocco: world leaders mourn a ruthless despot)