Make your own free website on Tripod.com
This Is Not A Conspiracy Theory
Bill Clinton
Home
Paul Craig Roberts: Real-time live-feed didn't happen
Mike Rogers: Conspiracy Theorists Same No OBL Photo Released GWB had something to do with 9/11
Paul Craig Roberts: Osama bin Ladens Useful Death
Paul Craig Roberts: Osama Bin Laden Second Death
Classified Document Obscured in Real-Time bin Laden Kill Watch Photo
28 October 2011
A Scanner Darkly
Details
Clinton Culpable
The Order
Analysis The Shoot-Down Order
Fiction Scenarios
Nothing... would have changed the course of history
Alive 9/11 hijackers and BBC News
Poll Find
Video
North American Union
9/11 Bush not really the President
End of Serenity Photo
TWA Flight 800
Find Truth
Sites Skewed Time
Hoax No Planes
Bill Clinton
A republic, if you can keep it
Bush History
Why No Footage
George W. Bush Mock War Crimes Trial
Documentaries
Flights and Passengers
Balance: Questioning Conspiracy Theories
Net the Truth Online (after 9/11)
WTC identifications
Visas and IDs
911 Commission
Net Truth
Beware wrong time
only known footage 1st plane hit
Will 9/11 commission ask
In & Out of Focus
Timeline Off
Who did what when
Timetable G.W. Bush 911
This is Not A Conspiracy Theory
Common Sense
Shuttle Lost
Bush Morning
Bush at School
Bush: Dawdler in Chief
Bush Pilot Error
Bush Remains in Second Grade Classroom
Bush in Second Grade Classroom
Contact Us
Resources
Research Links Bush Reading
Bush Early Timetable

Enter subhead content here

doesn't want to see the truth, perhaps?
 
Apr 2, 2004
pick op/ed apart

What conclusions can be drawn after this week's lively unfolding and scolding of events leading up to Sept. 11? Did the White House ignore or mishandle signals that terrorists would attack on our soil? Is Richard Clarke, the counterterrorism adviser to the past three presidents, correct that President Bush and his top people were fixated on Iraq and failed to heed his warnings? Or is the White House correct that Clarke never warned of domestic attacks and that in the days after Sept. 11 he praised the administration?

There is probably a little truth and a little fiction coming from both sides. The closer people are to the center of events the more likely they are to block out peripheral activities and to practice selective amnesia. Those with an agenda still to advance (the president in seeking a second term, Clarke in selling his book) tend to revise historical events to fit their agendas. That's simply human nature.

Neither Bush nor Clarke should be blamed for Sept. 11. President Bush isn't culpable for failing to conceive of terrorists hellbent on such mass destruction that they would turn commercial airlines into deadly missiles. Nor is President Clinton before him to be held responsible.

We all share some responsibility for our ignorance in assuming that terrorism happened elsewhere and that we needn't be concerned about such things. We wouldn't have stood still then for the type of heightened security we accept and demand these days.

What is most troubling about the sniping this week is that it has become little more than partisan bickering in an election year. Isn't it a shame that the energy that united Republicans and Democrats toward common goals in the wake of Sept. 11 now lies in shambles?

 

ŠThe Herald Standard 2004

forgetful democrats Jun 28, 04 It isn't surprising that the liberal Democrats have forgotten former President Bill Clinton instituted the no fly zones over Iraq, not Ronald Reagan.

That tidbit came across during a call-in to C-Span with guest Michael Isikoff

Lliberal Democrats conveniently apparently leave out all of the facts and only present what they want you to know.

Mr. Isikoff set the callers straight each and every time misinformation was presented.  It was a joy to watch this episode of C-Span.

program for June 28, 2004

Terrorism in Iraq
C-SPAN, Washington Journal
Washington, District of Columbia (United States)
ID: 182457 - 2 - 06/28/2004 - 0:45 - No Sale

Isikoff, Michael, Correspondent, [Newsweek]


Mr. Isikoff will talk about his article on Abu Mussab al-Zarqawi. He will discuss who he is, how he came to power in Iraq, and why he is becoming the most powerful terrorist in the world. He will respond to telephone calls, faxes, and electronic mail from viewers.


Aug 18, 2005
Able Danger for Sheeples

The formerly unidentified Army Intelligence officer spoken of by Representative Curt Weldon - who we know now as Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer - appeared on Fox N Friends August 18, 2005.  Shaffer said he met with Philip Zelikow in Afghanistan and told him about Able Danger.  Now we know the 9/11 Commission's--
 
 
 
 
 
and that's the same person who met with the formerly unidentified Army Intelligence Officer in Afghanistan, (now we know is Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer).  Eric got the Solodad O'Brian interview with Shaffer.

So piecing this all together Zelikow didn't tell the Commission about Able Danger or Able Danger's identification of Mohammed Atta and three other known terrorists, though Zelikow was an expert on al Qaeda, and submitted 'STAFF" testimony to the Commission.  In other words, Philip Zelikow had the opportunity to provide to the 9/11 Commission the fact that he'd had a conversation with Shaffer in Afghanistan about the covert intel operation Able Danger.  

Zelikow and 9/11 Commission copy transcripts  http://www.sacred-texts.com/ame/911/911tr/032404.htm
Weldon Special Order Speech copy liberty post  http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=105231

You all can skip on to find out more about Able Danger.  warandpeace

However, come on back soon because this is the only place you will find this analysis that Able Danger, whatever it eventually found and compiled on who, what, when, and where, is for Sheeples.

The curtain of illusion is so gigantic it covers the globe.

Not surprisingly, and extremely interestingly "Bush aides block Clinton's papers from 9/11 panel, (April 2, 2004 report)
 
http://www.theocracywatch.org/blocks_clinton_papers_times_apre2_04.htm

Right, Clinton was ok with releasing all the papers to the 9/11 Commission.  Hey what are you gonna do when the next President differs with you?  Have Sandy Berger retrieve them and make copies and send them to the panel anonymously?

Consider this:  The first National Security Presidential Directive released by George Walker Bush on March 13, 2001 (dated February 13, 2001) "reorganized and expanded the National Security Council and added six new regional NSC coordinating committees plus an eleven new coordinating committees." (variety of resources)

Among these eleven NSC/PCCs:

Proliferation, CounterProliferation, and Homeland Defense.

So during reorganization of the National Security Council, President Bush establishes a committee which will have something to do with Homeland defense, seven months before September 11, 2001.

Why isn't this PDD listed on the National Memorial Institute for the Prevention of Terrorism library site?  http://www.mipt.org/Presidential-Decision-Directives.asp  

Where is this PDD (1) noted in the 9/11 Commission report?

For that matter, where is the Presidential Daily Briefing President Bush had on September 11, 2001 at the resort before he motorcaded to the Emma Booker Elementary School?  Did the 9/11 Commission ask President Bush about that?  Bill Sammon mentions the factoid of such a briefing in his book, Fighting Back.

Consider this, long before George W. Bush stepped into the White House and issued his first National Security Presidential Decision Directive, (pre-September 11, 2001 recall) former President Bill Clinton was told all about bin Laden - and just because Zelikow didn't tell the 9/11 Commission about his meeting with Shaffer and the info about Able Danger - that doesn't mean that President Clinton wasn't informed about Able DAnger.  He was informed about everything else.

"In 1996 the Clinton Administration was well aware of bin Laden, Operation Bojinka, and was warned about the possibility of airplanes used as weapons," says Lt. Col. Buzz Paterson upon questioning by Fox 'n Friends hosts Brian Kilmeade and E.D. Hill this day of August 18, 2005  Paterson said there were 8 terrorist incidents during the Clinton Administration.  Kilmeade remarks, these were treated as law enforcement issues, right?  Paterson agrees.  Paterson further says the Clinton Administration was warned about bin Laden's location in 1996.  Brian Kilmeade asks about Sandy Berger and the documents he took from the National Archives.  "What did Berger take?"  Paterson says without hesitation, "Documents about the 2000 Millennium plot."

Paterson further says that the 9/11 commission failed there to learn what they (Clinton Administration) knew.  Paterson said his two books are Dereliction of Duty and Reckless Disregard.

Everybody, think again.  How many books have to be written from one perspective or another pro or anti American Republican or Democrat political parties, or pro or anti Bush or Clinton before the people of the United States realize what lengths the true conspirators will go to in order to obtain a planned for sixty years and possibly more One World Government?

Go back to the article about Bush aides blocking Clinton papers to 9/11 panel.

Speculate on this:  President Clinton issued a series of PDDs also.  Do any of them contain the term security of the homeland?  Sure, you have permission to leave for a while and conduct a search.

Doyle Reedy, an investigator for the General Accounting Office, who was requested by Congress in 1991 to obtain a list of the directives ran into a similar stone wall. Ready observed that "You can’t even say how many there are. You can’t confirm or deny whether they exist."

The CIA knows all about Osama bin Laden and report upon report is generated on how to deal with bin Laden during Bill Clinton's Administration.

Should the United States assassinate this threat to America?  Imagine the spirited conversations.

Well, of course not.  We can't just go out and assassinate people we think are threats.  Not without a lot of debate, first and foremost, behind closed doors.  What can we do?  We can damn well call it something else, for the sheeple.  We can say we won't intentionally go out and assassinate bin Laden, but if there is an authorized "covert" operation and bin Laden happens to be there and he's killed in the gunfire or cruise missile blasting or even in a building demolition, well that is perfectly fine.

Think about it this way.  That is perfectly fine.  Osama bin Laden is a known threat to the security of the United States of America.  Anybody who is anybody is aware of his everlasting plans to annihilate the United States government and if a million or more American citizens die in the process that is part of the package, the statement to the world, you are the next target.

Don't believe there was a plan during the Clinton years to eradicate bin Laden?

Richard Clarke said so.

According to Clarke's testimony, the legal thinking in the Clinton administration was that -- even without the invocation of the War Powers Act -- no special authorization was required for the use of military force.

"Our interpretation of the military's authority is that they can fire missiles when ordered to do so by the commander-in-chief, without regard of whether there is a finding or a (memorandum of notification)," said Clarke, referring to the two kinds of presidential documents that can authorize covert action.

http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=20050324-075226-2917r

Years later, along comes a Council of Foreign Relations Q and A session wherein yep, there was a plan to assassinate bin Laden, during the Clinton Administration.
 
 

But the trained to kill or be killed just didn't finish the job under Clinton.  Why there just weren't any documents in that Library of Congress room Sandy Berger visited that would show an authorized plot to get bin Laden because we better get the terrorists before they get us plot.

The policy was refurbished during the Bush Administration, now such as bin Laden are called enemy combatants.  Now we can go after bin Laden because he is responsible for the largest attack on United States soil ever perpetrated.

this is not a conspiracy theory:

The attempt to get bin Laden happened.  How convenient.  They tried, they really really did, but they just didn't succeed.

September 30, 2001 report revived just so we know they tried, really, but failed. 

http://www.sptimes.com/News/093001/Worldandnation/CIA_tried_to_have_bin.shtml

Yep, trained to the hilt military ops oops missed the number one sought after terrorist in the world.

Osama bin Laden was killed back in 1998.  There was no failure by our well-trained and highly trained covert military operatives. 

And we know this because this information is exactly the kind of information Sandy Berger would want to have suppressed beyond his and Bill Clinton's dying days.  That is the reason Berger went into the National Archives and took documents that were not ever backed up or scanned and duplicated in digitized form and on those newfangled memory sticks.

Keep it all a secret, though, cause if it is ever discovered that bin Laden was killed back in 1998 then the entire 9/11 plot did not happen the way we have been told over and over again.

No wonder why "Bush aides block Clinton's papers from 9/11 panel, (April 2, 2004 report)
 
http://www.theocracywatch.org/blocks_clinton_papers_times_apre2_04.htm

The tragedy of 9/11 happened, we know that.  But bin Laden did not plan or carry out 9/11.  Osama bin Laden had been dead for three years before September 11, 2001.

Manufacture a situation where innocent people from dozens of different countries (sovereign nations) are killed in a very dramatic way in order to pull the entire world together to fight international and domestic terrorism in the nation-states for the rest of time.  Almost the rest of time.  The reason for sacrificing a few is for the benefit of the billions and billions of people, all innocent, and their lives and posterity.

How will one-world government come about?  It couldn't be more simple than this.  Get the peoples of the world engaged in a war on terrorism for decades and decades.  Keep them all on the edge of their subway and bus and metro seats all over the world.  Finally, tired of the no-end-in-sight deficits,(no matter which party is in power, remember, when was the term homeland security or security of the homeland first used), tired of being searched everywhere they travel, the people unanimously clamor for a centralized government of the world for peace and in order to have one uniform system of global personal identification.

Don't believe there is a plan for one-world government across the earth?  Don't believe there have been proposals for one-world government by americans?
 
(http://www.worldgovernment.org/issues/febmar97/wch.html)

Don't believe bin Laden is dead?

"Many terrorism experts now believe that if bin Laden were captured or killed, it would be al-Zawahiri who would take over. " (Osama bin Laden:  High Priest of Terror, Court TV's Crime Library, "Right Hand Man," by Patrick Bellamy)

http://www.crimelibrary.com/terrorists_spies/terrorists/laden/8.html

"In a video broadcast Thursday on Arabic television station al Jazeera, Ayman al-Zawahiri issued a warning for the United States. 
"Our message is clear -- what you saw in New York and Washington (in 2001) and what you are seeing in Afghanistan and Iraq, all these are nothing compared to what you will see next."

"To the British, I am telling you that Blair brought you destruction in the middle of London and more will come, God willing," he said."

 
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/08/04/zawahiri.london/

Finally, remember, the 9/11 Commission allowed President Bush to testify to them in private.  We will never know what was asked.

Remember the 9/11 Commission allowed President Clinton to testify to them in private.  We will never know what was asked.

Remember, according to the 9/11 Commission's own report, and as summarized in the Special edition of the 9/11 Commission Report (American Media, Inc.)  "At 8:41, in American's operations center, a colleague told Marquis that the air traffic controllers declared flight 11 a hijacking and think he's (American 11) headed toward Kennedy (airport in New York City).  They're moving everybody out of the way.  They seem to have him on primary radar.  They seem to think that he is descending."

Boston Center did not follow the protocol in seeking military assistance through the prescribed chain of command.  In addition to notifications within the FAA, Boston Center took the initiative, at 8:34, to contact the military through the FAA's Cape Cod facility... At 8:37:52, Boston Center reached NEADS.  This was the first notification received by the military - at any level - that American 11 had been hijacked... NEADS ordered to battle stations the two F-15 alert aircraft at Otis Air Force Base in Falmouth, Massachusetts, 153 miles away from New York City.  The air defense of America began with this call."

Continuing... "F-15 fighters were scrambled at 8:46 from Otis Air Force Base.  But NEADS did not know where to send the alert fighter aircraft, and the officer directing the fighters pressed for more information: ..." (page 13 Special Edition of the 9/11 Commission Report Easy to understand synopsis and key elements of the 585-page official report)

Remember, we only have the 9/11 Commission report and we don't know what they asked of a former president and the current president.

We do know:  President George W. Bush arrived at the Emma Booker Elementary School prior to 9 a.m. September 11, 2001.  A call from Condoleeza Rice awaited him and he took that call in a room which had been secured by Secret Service prior to his scheduled appearance.  The room was adjacent to the second grade classroom where Bush was to listen to the children read a story about a pet goat.  The room was equipped with a secured phone line.

Reportedly, Bush said to Rice on the phone that he thought it was an accident.

We know Bush kept his scheduled appointment with the students.  We know that Andrew Card interrupted the president and whispered in his ear, "a second plane crashed into the World Trade Center, America is under attack."

We now can put things in perspective.  F-15 Fighter jets were scrambled before President George Bush arrived at the Emma Booker School.  Bush received a call from Condoleeza Rice.  Is there anybody awake who does not believe Rice had to have told him the plane crash in New York City was not a simple accident. 

We also know from Bill Sammon's book, Fighting Back, that Sammon says President Bush wrote on a yellow notepad notes about emergency funding for New York.  This was before Bush went into the second grade classroom.  Is there anybody left who will wonder why would President Bush plan to issue emergency funding when he couldn't have yet known that buildings were going to come tumbling down and couldn't have yet even fathomed the amount of people who would be killed?

talkacrosstown Don't Say Anything Yet September 11, 2001 Timeline

Piecing this all together anew now - we have to ask this:  did President Bush give the order to scramble airplanes from his motorcade enroute to the Emma Booker elementary School after 8:34 a.m. when Boston Center took the initiative to contact the military through the FAA's Cape Cod facility?

Is all of this too close to the truth?

We know that Bush knew before he went into the second grade classroom that the first plane crash into the Twin Towers was not an accident, the plane had been hijacked, and yet, Bush went into the classroom and remained seated listening to the children read.  At approximate 9:07 a.m. Card whispered the news about the second airplane crash into the Twin Towers.  Yet, Bush not only remained seated, he actually picked up a copy of the book the children were reading and he pretended to be following along with them.  That duplicitous action alone shows the character of George W. Bush.

Bush knew a plane had been hijacked and crashed intentionally before he went to sit in a classroom full of second graders.  He could have effectively said he had a situation and couldn't fulfill this scheduled class reading - he'd return another day.  He then could have done whatever necessary to make sure he was the one scrambling airplanes, and protecting this country.

But then, maybe he already had ordered planes scrambled enroute to the Emma Booker Elementary School, and if so, if that information were ever to be revealed then wouldn't we all know that all of this is lies, and illusion.

But then, Bush already knew that Osama bin Laden was dead, back in 1998, killed upon the order of Bill Clinton. 

Knowing that, conspirators could make Osama bin Laden do anything, be anything, plan anything.

The most wanted terrorist in the world did it, planned it five years ago, so our intel reveals.

Doesn't this make excellent sense.

Now everybody, why should we listen to any more such as the following report?  We know that bin Laden was already assassinated back during the Clinton Administration.  We know this because this is the only thing that makes any sense.  We know this because al-Zawahiri is the one going around making videotapes.  We know that there will have to be at least one more massive attack on some facility or building somewhere in the world where people of all nationalities work.

We know that this attack will be blamed on al-Zawahiri.

In the aftermath the world will unite behind the idea of a one-world government to pool resources, to obtain peace, to acquire international security...

All the following does is provide something for news operations to talk about to keep our focus off the truth.  But then, the truth is stranger than fiction.

 Aired August 17, 2005 The Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer
 
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0508/17/sitroom.01.html

 CNN TRANSCRIPT:

Excerpt:

COMMERCIAL BREAK) BLITZER: We turn now to "THE SITUATION ROOM Intelligence Report" to give you a look at several important security stories we're following right now.

Standing by, our State Department correspondent, Andrea Koppel, with word of an early warning, potentially, on Osama bin Laden. Also, our Kelli Arena on an alleged terror plot trying -- tied to street crime.

But let's begin with David Ensor on the claim that secret 9/11 intelligence never made it to the 9/11 Commission. What's going on, David?

DAVID ENSOR, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Wolf, veteran Army intelligence officer Lieutenant Colonel Anthony Shaffer is going public with his claim that his intelligence team repeatedly tried to warn the FBI back in 2000 about a U.S. based terrorist cell that included Mohammed Atta, the 9/11 hijacker, but that military lawyers blocked the team from sharing its fears with the FBI.

Shaffer insists he also told the 9/11 Commission about it, too.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LT. COL. ANTHONY SHAFFER, U.S. ARMY: We as through the Able Danger process discovered two of the three cells which conducted 9/11, to include Atta. Now that was to me significant in that they actually pulled me aside after the meeting and said, "Please come talk to us and give us more detail."

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ENSOR: The former 9/11 Commission responded to the allegation last week when Shaffer first made it anonymously, saying that their memorandum of meeting with him back in 2003, quote, "does not record any mention of Mohammed Atta or any of the other future 9/11 hijackers or any discussion that their identities were known to anyone at DOD before 9/11," unquote.

At the Pentagon, Wolf, officials say Undersecretary of Defense Steve Cambone and his staff are looking into this, as you might expect.

BLITZER: All right, David, thanks very much.

And this note to our viewers. Lieutenant Colonel Anthony Shaffer, the Army intelligence officer, is going public now with his remarks involving the 9/11 Commission. He will join us live here in THE SITUATION ROOM. That's coming up.

There's also word that the government got an intelligence warning about Osama bin Laden almost a decade ago. Let's turn to our State Department correspondent, Andrea Koppel. She's following that -- Andrea.

ANDREA KOPPEL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Wolf, that warning came in July 1996 in newly declassified documents from intelligence analysts here at the State Department, who warned the Clinton administration that if Osama bin Laden were to move his headquarters, as they suspected he was, from Sudan to Afghanistan, that he, quote, "could prove more dangerous to U.S. interests in the long run."

That was because analysts said something that we've all since learned all too well, that in Afghanistan there are hundreds of Arab Mujahideen who received terrorist training.

Now, two years later in August of 1998, bin Laden's al Qaeda network attacked the U.S. embassies in Kenya and in Tanzania, and then three years later after that came 9/11.

Wolf, we're going to have more for you at 5 p.m.

BLITZER: All right. Thanks very much. Andrea Koppel over at the State Department.

Entry: Clarke: don't ask, don't tell til $ in bank Mar 30, 04

One of the biggest credibility problems with Richard Clarke was his response when asked during 9/11 Commission March 24, 2004 public session why he didn't tell the Commission some of these things before during his closed-door private meeting with the Commission. What was his response: I wasn't asked... Hmm, why were you meeting with the 9/11 Commission, then, to talk about the new movie, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre? More...

Clinton culpability is discussed at Newsmax.com March 22, 2004 What Credibility to Richard Clarke's Charges on 60 Minutes? The Bush White House comes out swinging with facts to refute Clarke's allegations...

http://www.blogsforbush.com/mt/archives/000832.html

posted by Drudge Retort Wednesday, March 24, 2004 Transcript: Richard Clarke August, 2002 Briefing Note: Jim Angle question

http://www.drudgeretort.com/discuss/viewMessage.php/12676

Newshour March 22, 2004 Richard Clarke http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/terrorism/jan-june04/clarke_03-22.html 

CBS Reporter Questions Whether White House Delayed Clarke Book By Jeff Gannon Talon News March 24, 2004

CBS correspondent Bill Plante peppered Press Secretary Scott McClellan with questions concerning the security review process that books by former administration officials must undergo to ensure that classified material is not made public. Plante stated, "[Clarke] says that the book could have been published in December, but for the White House security review process."

McClellan responded, "His book went through the normal review process. This is standard practice to make sure that classified information is not inadvertently released." "Dick Clarke could have released his book at any time, but the fact is he chose to release it at a time and in a way where he could maximize coverage to sell books, and at a time when he could have the impact to influence the political discourse," McClellan added. "That's very clear."

 The press secretary went on to say, "If he had such grave concerns, he could have raised those a year ago when he was leaving the administration."

The CBS correspondent continued to press for a statement on when the book was cleared for publication, and McClellan shot back, "Keep in mind that his publisher put out that it would come out at the end of April."

He added, "He chose to release it at a time when he could influence the political discourse." GOPUSA.com

Many links here

http://www.drugwar.com/punheeded911.shtm

CNN Transcript Richard Clarke Testifies Before 9/11 Commission Aired March 24, 2004 - 13:30 ET http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0403/24/bn.00.html

 

Martial law
 
Martial Law 9/11: Rise of the Police State (Alex Jones)
 

Enter supporting content here