Who's A Rat - Largest Online Database of Informants and Agents
HomeMembers LoginLatest NewsRefer A LawyerMessage BoardOnline StoreAffiliatesAbout UsContact Us
Who's A Rat - Largest Online Database of Informants and Agents Worldwide!
Site Navigation
Visit Our Store
Refer A Lawyer
Link To Us
Latest News
Top Secret Documents
Make A Donation
Important Case Law
Members Login
Message Board
Legal Information
Advertise your AD, Book or Movie

Informants and Agents?Who's a Rat Message Board

joeb Show full post »

1993 1st World Trade Center bombing created by FBI informant Amed Salem  see 

1995 Oklahoma City bombing created by FBI  informant Timothy McVeigh  see

Omargh Ireland bombing created with C4 explosives provided by Boston FBI  SAC James Greenleaf to Whitey Bulger who gave it to IRA.
see  http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/how-the-ira-set-up-an-arms-deal-with-boston-gangster-james-whitey-bulger-29090605.html
Mumbai India Terrorist attack organized by FBI  informant David Headley  see  http://norcaltruth.org/2010/10/18/david-headley-american-terrorist-or-fbi-informant-or-both/
Quote 0 0
When you are the law enforcement agency called the FBI  investigating another crime you just committed called the Boston Marathon bombing you can certainly invite inquiries . If members of Congress or the US Senate get too uppity you can pull their FBI  file and tell them to go into the corner, they need some quiet time. If Boston voters and taxpayers had a volunteer civilian review police board with subpoena powers they could conduct their own investigation. !st question they would ask is was local and federal law enforcement involved in the planning, carrying out and coverup of the Boston Marathon bombing. They would ask this question for 5 reasons. !st reason: FBI informant David Headley was behind the Mumbai Terrorist attack. 2nd reason: Timothy McVeigh was a FBI  informant and FBI  supervisor Larry Potts was his handler before McVeigh was arrested for the Oklahoma City bombing. 3rd reason: FBI  informant Whitey Bulger was given C4 explosives by his Boston FBI  Office agent handlers to give to the terrorist group in Ireland called the IRA .The C4 was then used to create the Omargh bombing. Another FBI official involved with the IRA was named Ruppert. 4th reason:
New York FBI  agents Anticev and Floyd paid  $1 million of your tax dollars to FBI informant Ahmed Salem to organize a group of Arabs in New York City and teach them to build a truck bomb.
When the bomb was built the FBI  agents allowed the group to detonate the  bomb in the garage of the World Trade Center in 1993. 5th reason  Was Tamerlan Tsarnaev a Double Agent Recruited by the FBI? By Peter Dale Scott on Jun 23, 2013 http://whowhatwhy.com/2013/06/23/was-tamerlan-tsarnaev-a-double-agent-recruited-by-the-fbi/
Quote 0 0

Paper Says FBI Blocked Plan to Foil N.Y. Blast
[Home Edition]
Los Angeles Times (pre-1997 Fulltext) - Los Angeles, Calif.
Date:Oct 28, 1993
Start Page:21
Section:PART-A; National Desk
Text Word Count:206
 Abstract (Document Summary)

Tape recordings secretly made by an FBI informer reveal that authorities were in a far better position than previously known to foil the Feb. 26 bombing of New York's tallest towers, the New York Times reported.

The New York Times published conversations the informer, a 43-year-old former Egyptian army officer, Emad Ali Salem, taped with his FBI handlers.

Quote 0 0
see link for full story

 Feds Accused of Harassing “Boston Bomber” Friends, and Friends of Friends
By Dave Lindorff, Russ Baker and Milicent Cranor on Oct 29, 2013

In the six months since the Boston Marathon bombing, the FBI has by all appearances been relentlessly intimidating, punishing, deporting and, in one case, shooting to death, persons connected, sometimes only tangentially, with the alleged bombers.

All of these individuals have something in common: If afforded constitutional protections and treated as witnesses instead of perpetrators, they could potentially help clear up questions about the violence of April 15.  And they might also be able to help clarify the methods and extent of the FBI’s recruitment of immigrants and others for undercover work, and how that could relate to the Bureau’s prior relationship with the bombing suspects—a relationship the Bureau has variously hidden or downplayed.

Who Cares? We Do

The Boston tragedy may seem like a remote, distant memory, yet the bombing warrants continued scrutiny as a seminal event of our times. It was, after all, the only major terror attack in the United States since 9/11. With its grisly scenes of severed limbs and dead bodies, including that of a child, it shook Americans profoundly.

As importantly, in its aftermath we’ve seen public acquiescence in an ongoing erosion of civil liberties and privacy rights that began with 9/11—and to an unprecedented expansion of federal authority in the form of a unique military/law enforcement “lockdown” of a major metropolitan area.

Nonetheless, at the time, most news organizations simply accepted at face value the shifting and thin official accounts of the strange events. Today few give the still-unfolding saga even the most minimal attention. And it is most certainly still unfolding, as we shall see.

The Little-Noticed Post-Marathon Hunt

The FBI’s strange obsession with marginal figures loosely connected to the bombing story began last May, with the daily questioning of a Chechen immigrant, Ibragim Todashev, and of his girlfriend and fellow immigrant, Tatiana Gruzdeva. Todashev had been a friend of the alleged lead Boston Marathon bomber, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, who died in a hail of police gunfire four days after the bombing. Tsarnaev’s younger brother Dzhokhar barely survived a massive police strafing of a trailered boat in which he was hiding, trapped and unarmed.

During one interrogation in Orlando, Florida, where Todashev was living, something went awry and he ended up dead from gunshots. Although to date the FBI has provided only hazy and inconsistent accounts of that incident, the killing of a suspect and potential witness in custody was clearly a highly irregular and problematical occurrence, replete with apparent violations of Bureau and standard law-enforcement procedure.

On the heels of those two deaths and the one near-death has followed what appears to be a concerted effort directed against a larger circle of people connected, if not to the Tsarnaevs, then to Todashev.

The purpose of this campaign is not clear, but it has raised some eyebrows.

In an interview with WhoWhatWhy, Hassan Shibly, executive director of the Florida chapter of the Center for American Islamic Relations (CAIR), described aggressive behavior directed by FBI agents at vocal friends of the dead Todashev: using suspected informants to monitor their press conferences, following targeted individuals around, interrogating them for hours—often without an attorney, and jailing them on what he says are trumped-up charges.

Shibly further claims that government agents are threatening these immigrants with deportation unless they agree to “cooperate”—a tactic which he portrays as seeking to enroll these people as de facto spies for the federal government.

Two people have left the country to escape further harassment. Another has been deported, while a fourth is currently facing deportation; none  of them has a criminal record. The bulk of this group were at most friends of a friend of Tamerlan Tsarnaev—and apparently didn’t personally know either of the Tsarnaevs.

Tatiana Gruzdeva

Tatiana Gruzdeva

One of these targets was Tatiana Gruzdeva, Todashev’s 20-year-old girlfriend. She was deported to Russia on October 11.

Gruzdeva had been in the US on a student visa. According to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) public affairs officer Carissa Cutrell, Gruzdeva had overstayed that visa—a common situation for foreign students studying in the US—but on August 9 she had been granted a “deferred action” status valid for one year, and therefore was for that period in the country legally.

Gruzdeva was nonetheless picked up by FBI and ICE agents on Oct. 1 while attending a scheduled meeting with an immigration officer to obtain a work visa.  According to Gruzdeva, she was told she was being taken because she had “talked to Boston Magazine” and had described Todashev as “a good guy.”

Actually, she had done more than that. She had described for the magazine in vivid detail what happened when several FBI agents back in May had showed up at the Orlando apartment she and Todashev shared and accused him of involvement in the Boston bombing.  Days of harassment and interrogation followed, she said, as the FBI tried to get Todashev to confess to involvement in the Boston bombing, and to get her make statements implicating her boyfriend, but she continued to insist Todashev had been in Orlando with her when the bombing occurred.

Then, she said, the government agents surprised her with a new accusation: Todashev, they alleged, had been involved in a gruesome, drug-related, 2011 triple murder in Waltham, Massachusetts.  The agents tried, without success, to force her to implicate Todashev in that crime. Then, while she was still in shock from that latest assertion, they demanded she tell them what further criminal activities he had in store.

When she did not tell them what they apparently wanted to hear, she says, they had her arrested on immigration violation charges. Soon after, she was thrown into solitary confinement—treatment normally used only to protect inmates from other inmates, or to punish them for bad behavior. She was not released until August 8.

It was while she was held in solitary confinement that she learned of Todashev’s shooting death at the hands of an FBI agent.

Todashev and Gruzdeva during happier times.

Miraliev’s “Voluntary” Questioning Without an Attorney

Gruzdeva also told Boston Magazine about the FBI’s treatment of Ashurmamad Miraliev, a 20-year-old friend of Todashev’s also living in Florida.

Just days before the magazine interview, agents had grabbed Miraliev, she said, denied his request for an attorney, and then interrogated him for over six hours before dumping him in the Orange County Correctional Facility, a local jail.

Miraliev remained locked up for over three weeks on $50,000 bail on what CAIR’s Shibly, contends were trumped-up charges of brawling outside a bar and “intimidating a witness.” According to Shibly, an attorney who is representing Miraliev, the charges were subsequently tossed out as baseless.

That didn’t end the young man’s problems, however. When the county no longer had grounds for holding him, the FBI had Miraliev transferred to an immigration detention center, where he is now awaiting deportation. (Shibly says his client is currently requesting to be allowed to voluntarily leave the country, rather than be forcibly deported by ICE.)

WhoWhatWhy tried without success to obtain comment from both the FBI and the immigration authorities concerning these two cases and the other examples of alleged harassment of Todashev associates. The FBI refused to respond.  A public affairs officer from ICE said she could not disclose reasons for why Gruzdeva and Miraliev were being deported because of “privacy concerns.”

When asked (by a reporter from the Miami Herald) why Miraliev’s request for an attorney during his interrogation was ignored, the FBI’s public affairs director, Paul Bresson, said that while he couldn’t comment about an “ongoing investigation,” he could state unequivocally that “anytime the FBI interviews an individual it is done either with his/her consent or with an attorney present.”
Ashurmamad Miraliev and Tatiana Gruzdeva

Ashurmamad Miraliev and Tatiana Gruzdeva

In fact, agents are actually permitted to question witnesses without an attorney, against their will, in certain narrow circumstances. This is the case when authorities assert a timely matter of “public safety”—for example when they have basis to believe that a bomb is about to go off. (FBI agents claimed such justification when they questioned the gravely wounded alleged Boston Marathon Bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev for hours in the hospital shortly after his capture. That interrogation was stopped by a federal judge, who did not accept the Bureau’s assertion that Tsarnaev might know about other imminent terror attacks.)

In Miraliev’s case, the FBI never even claimed that he posed an imminent threat. Initially, they told him they wanted to question him about the alleged bar fight and the allegation that he had “intimidated a witness.”  But these are local, not federal matters; clearly trivial; and not even the FBI’s responsibility.

After that ordeal, Miraliev told CAIR the FBI had never even asked about those local matters. Instead, he said, they focused only on Todashev and his presumed relationship to Tsarnaev.

Shibly calls Bresson’s implication that Miraliev willingly gave up his right to counsel “absurd”: “Knowing that his friend Todashev was killed by an agent during his FBI interrogation, it’s hardly voluntary if Miraliev agrees to answer questions after the agents holding him tell him he can’t have an attorney.”

Courts have held that authorities need not necessarily read a detainee Miranda rights—but they must desist as soon as a demand for an attorney has been made.

Release of Autopsy Report Forbidden

The FBI has shut down any attempts at unraveling the ongoing mystery. It demanded that Todashev’s autopsy’s report be sealed, and not released even to family members.

“The FBI has ordered us not to release the autopsy report while they are investigating the shooting,” says Tony Miranda, forensic records coordinator for Florida’s Orange and Osceola counties. “The hold is currently on until the first week of November, when they will contact us again and let us know if it is extended.”

Such holds on coroner’s reports, especially such lengthy holds, even in cases of police shootings, are unusual, to say the least. And that hold is certain to interfere with the Florida state’s attorney in Orlando, Jeff Ashton, who is also actively investigating the FBI shooting of Todashev.

Shibly believes, based on its overall behavior, that the FBI’s sealing of the Todashev autopsy report has nothing to do with its stated reason of enabling an ongoing investigation into the shooting. “It’s very possible that the FBI is just delaying the release of the coroner’s report because they know it will be embarrassing,” he says.

“He felt inside he was going to get shot.”

Khusn Taramiv, a friend of Todashev’s, said the FBI had begun questioning both young men shortly after the April 15 Boston Marathon bomb attack. But by May 22, the day Todashev died, according to Taramiv, his friend believed something bad was about to happen to him.

“He felt inside [that] he was going to get shot,” Taramiv told WESH-TV in Orlando.

They were talking to us, both of us, right? And they said they need him for a little more, for a couple more hours, and I left, and they told me they’re going to bring him back.

They never brought him back.

The FBI asserts that Todashev had implicated Tamerlan Tsarnaev in the Waltham drug dealer murders, and was about to sign a confession to his own involvement in the crime just before he was shot.

The Waltham matter, a two-year-old, extravagantly staged, ritualistic drug homicide, was apparently a cold case when, after the Marathon bombing, local authorities began focusing on Tamerlan Tsarnaev as the possible killer—and then on Todashev as a possible accomplice—an allegation Todashev’s friends have challenged as baseless.


444444While some of this circle of friends in Florida, like Todashev, faced pressure to confess to participating in or having knowledge of the Waltham crime, others, according to CAIR’s Shibly, have been told that if they want to be left alone and not deported, they need to become informants. He says several of those harassed have opted to return to Russia rather than become spies for the FBI in Florida’s Muslim community.

“I know of a half dozen who’ve been contacted,” says Shibly. “They’ve been told to cooperate and to spy for the FBI on mosques and local restaurants–or the government will go after their legal status.” He says the FBI’s harassment campaign is continuing and is spreading to more people in the Florida area who knew the slain Todashev.

Gruzdeva’s deportation shows that the agency’s deportion threats were no bluff.  As mentioned above, on October 11 Gruzdeva, despite her clean record and her “deferred action” legal status, was whisked to the airport for a flight to Russia by ICE agents so fast she was not even able to fetch her winter coat from her apartment. She has reportedly gone to her native Moldova, a country neighboring Rumania that was formerly a part of the old Soviet Union.

Miraliev, who had been granted asylum by the US and saw it as a safe haven, is awaiting what may be a similar fate.

Spreading the Net

Shibly says several other family members and friends of Todashev’s have also been harassed by the FBI since his slaying.  One is the mother of Todashev’s former wife. The mother, who works for the federal government, was interrogated by the FBI “right after attending a press conference about his killing,” Shibly says, adding that a suspected FBI informant had, unannounced, also attended that press event, apparently monitoring who participated. He says the person was identified by CAIR lawyers investigating the FBI’s harassment campaign.

By shooting Todashev, then claiming he was about to confess to a crime, then hounding Todashev’s friends and family, and sending or driving them out of the country to Russia or other regions of the former Soviet Union, says Shibly, the FBI gives the impression it is urgently trying to hide something.

“Look, the FBI screwed up in killing Todashev,” Shibly told WhoWhatWhy from Saudi Arabia, where he was on Hajj — a pilgrimage to Mecca that Muslims are supposed to try to make at least once in their lives. He added: “Now it is clear that they’re trying to get as much dirt on him as they can to make what they did to him look less heinous.”

What really happened? Pick a story.

From the first moments after the Boston Bombing, the public has been besieged with official accounts, often rendered through news leaks, whose profound inconsistencies have never been ironed out. (For more on that, see previous WhoWhatWhy stories, including this, this, this, and this.)

The same is true of Todashev’s killing, where essential details have varied greatly. But certain elements can be established:

Late in the day on May 22, FBI agents went to Todashev’s house and interrogated him—without an attorney present—according to some accounts, for eight hours.

The agents were accompanied by officers from the Massachusetts State Police, who were investigating the 2011 Waltham murders.

According to the Washington Post, at some point after midnight, the state cops—and, allegedly, all but one member of the FBI contingent—left the room, leaving Todashev, unrestrained, alone with one agent.

If that’s correct, then the FBI violated one of its rules: a suspect should always be in the company of more than one agent. Perhaps even more striking is that they purportedly left that one agent alone with an unrestrained man known by  the FBI to have had martial arts training—and, moreover, a man very publicly being investigated for possible participation in a multiple murder case. You couldn’t have created a more perfect scenario for a no-questions-asked, quick disposition of a problematical person.

This curious scenario is further compounded by the several conflicting explanations for the incident offered by “FBI sources” who were not identified by reporters:

First, they claimed thatTodashev—who had just undergone knee surgery– had nonetheless lunged at the lone officer with a knife. No mention of how Todashev would have produced a knife since they would presumably have routinely frisked a potentially dangerous suspect.

Next, they said he had upended a table, possibly injuring the agent.

Then, they said he had attempted to grab a sword. The notion that this possible terrorist, triple homicide suspect would be left alone with a single officer, with a knife and/or even more stunningly a sword ought to raise serious questions about whom we can trust to tell us the truth. And if that weren’t enough, the weapon of choice later morphed in some reports into a metal pole, and then into a broom handle.

There is more variation in the accounts of what happened just before Todashev allegedly lunged:

After two hours, Todashev asked to take a break, went to “get a cigarette or something and then he goes off the deep end… and goes after the agent.”  It was not clear “why, with at least three law enforcement officials in the room, deadly force was used…”

He started to write a statement while sitting across from the agent and one of the detectives “when the agent briefly looked away….Todashev picked up the table.”

After one of the detectives left the room, the other noticed Todashev was acting odd, and he texted that sense to the FBI agent with him… Suddenly, Todashev knocked over a table…”
Hassan Shibly

Hassan Shibly

As noted earlier, only one agent was left in the room alone with Todashev, according to the Washington Post. That scenario seems supported by the fact that all shots fired came from one agent’s gun. Shibly notes that, by training and protocol, if Todashev had constituted an imminent threat, and more officers were present in the room, all would have fired at him.

The attorney argues that there are “only two possibilities” to explain what happened to Todashev:

Either the FBI violated its own protocol by having one agent left alone in the room or there were actually two or more agents in the room and only one fired.

FBI Accountability: Zero

After Todashev’s slaying, the FBI claimed—though it produced no evidence—that he had been “about to” sign a confession to the triple murder in Waltham, Massachusetts.

Incredibly, no one had taped the interrogation—or, if anyone did, the Bureau is neither admitting it nor offering it as evidence to back up its assertions. When Christina Sterling, the US prosecutor in the Dzhokhar Tsarnaev terrorism case in Boston, cited Todashev’s alleged confession during interrogation by FBI agents, she did not say she had a tape to back up the FBI’s claim.  In a court filing asking the judge in that case to deny Tsarnaev’s defense team access to investigative files from the Waltham case, the only evidence she referenced was the reported  hearsay from the agents who were in the room with Todashev.


No high officials in the Bureau or the Justice Department have publicly expressed concern about this shooting of an unarmed man in custody. The FBI says only that it is “investigating” the incident. And if  past experience is any indication, the Bureau is unlikely to find itself or its agents at fault. The New York Times reports that though FBI agents have killed 70 “subjects” and injured another 80 in the last two decades, the Bureau’s self-investigations have never once found that an agent’s shooting of a suspect was unjustified.

This tragicomedy of “errors” must generate some head-shaking in a community made up of immigrants from the old Soviet Union, where people being interrogated routinely happened to fall down stairs or jump out of high windows.

At minimum, given the appearance of a cover-up, one must wonder why the FBI would kill a key associate of Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, especially when the latter is currently facing murder and terrorism charges in federal court in Boston for the Boston Marathon bombing. Todashev could have been an important defense witness. Could he also have had damaging information about links between Tamerlan Tsarnaev and the FBI that predated the interest of the Russian authorities in him?

The American people have to this moment not been leveled with by their government—and are only being provided with hints by the establishment media that anything is seriously amiss. Indeed, few are aware of the larger pattern, and understandably give the FBI the benefit of the doubt in light of the fear following the bloodshed of April 15. A few elected representatives have expressed concerns (see this and this) but these have been isolated and not followed by concrete action.

Moreover, no one has taken the politically explosive step of asking whether, like the friends of Todashev, Tamerlan Tsarnaev could himself could have been pressured—successfully— to become an FBI undercover informant/provocateur. Such inquiries lead to places that make Americans deeply uncomfortable. But certain indisputable facts do suggest a basis for pursuing these questions. For one thing, there’s the FBI’s effort to hide its prior relationship with the Tsarnaevs. After claiming it didn’t know who the Tsarnaev brothers were when they were first identified as suspects on the basis of spectators’ photos of the bombing scene, the FBI was essentially forced—by the Russian government, no less—to  admit that it had been monitoring and interacting with the Tsarnaev family two years before the Boston bombing.

This must be coupled with Tamerlan’s striking transition in the last few years. A seemingly happy and comparatively “normal” young man eager to become an American citizen and live the American dream morphed into a conspicuous radical, loudly acting out in a mosque and traveling to his home in Dagestan, where he aroused suspicion of being a provocateur, openly trying to convince others to take up arms.

He could have been an authentic convert, or he could have been something else.

As is well established and well documented, the FBI has a long history of recruiting vulnerable individuals to infiltrate organizations and networks, gain their trust, and in some cases to encourage violent acts. Just one of many examples is the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center (the “first” attack on the WTC), with an FBI undercover informant at the core of the plot—which resulted in a bomb attack that killed six people and did considerable structural damage to one of the buildings’ basement pilings.

Deeper and Deeper

In the case of Tamerlan Tsarnaev, we’ve noticed a perplexing discrepancy. While the FBI claims that it began interviewing the Tsarnaevs in response to a request from the Russians, the New York Times has cited a meeting that would predate the Russian request:

“In January 2011, two counterterrorism agents from the bureau’s Boston field office interviewed Tamerlan and family members, a senior law enforcement official said.”

Yet, in an article that appeared three days later, the same authors reported that,

“The first Russian request came in March of 2011 through the F.B.I.’s office in the United States Embassy in Moscow.”

If these dates are correct, then the FBI was talking to Tamerlan before the Russians asked them to. Why? (An email from WhoWhatWhy to Eric Schmitt, the Times’s lead reporter on the two articles, remains unanswered.)
Quote 0 0
The FBI should be investigated

Says Livio Di Celmo, brother of the young Italian killed by a bomb placed in a Havana hotel by order of Posada Carriles

BY JEAN-GUY ALLARD — Granma International staff writer—

BY failing to act after receiving information from businessman Antonio Álvarez, who exposed Posada Carriles as he was directing the 1997 attacks in Havana, “by not acting on this information, the FBI becomes, then, another entity to add to the list of those directly and indirectly responsible for terrorism-related activities and as such should be investigated, denounced and exposed for the all world to see.”

That was the affirmation of Livio Di Celmo, brother of Fabio Di Celmo, victim of a bomb explosion on Sept. 4, 1997 in the Hotel Copacabana in the Cuban capital.

In an interview with GI, the Italian-born Canadian explained how, after reading the article by Ann Louise Bardach published on Nov. 12 The Washington Post, he became convinced that if the FBI had used Álvarez’ information like it should have, the attack could have been prevented.

Álvarez shared an office in Guatemala with buddies of Posada and had alerted the FBI regarding anti-Cuba terrorist activities that were going on before his very eyes.

“Reading that intelligence-related detectives in the Miami MDPD force have family ties with anti-Castro right-wing extremists (involved in bombings, etc..); the fact that Ed Pesquera (son of Hector Pesquera FBI director in Florida in 2003) has destroyed key evidence relating to Carriles in the summer of 2003, clearly point out a level of corruption, criminal intent, and obstruction of justice that show the degenerated level of American institutions.”

Fabio di Celmo’s brother said that “the level of corruption at Miami FBI has played a crucial role in the terrorist acts” that were carried out at that time in Cuba. “...It is evident, even to a child, that had not the FBI in Miami been infiltrated by Cuban-American terrorists (with Pesquera and his friends), and had the FBI acted on the information they had, perhaps Fabio would still be alive.”

According to Livio di Celmo, the problem does not lie solely with the FBI but also in U.S. policy toward Cuba.

“...If institutions such the FBI, CIA or Justice Department have been so much infiltrated by supporters of terrorism against Cuba, we must look at the role played by the Bush family,” Livio said, commenting that the Bush clan maintains “a tradition of fostering and courting terrorism,” and he noted the relationship between Prescott Bush – grandfather of the current U.S. president – and the Nazis in Germany.

In addition, Livio di Celmo said he was outraged by the four-year sentence handed down to Santiago Álvarez and Osvaldo Mitat: “I wonder: if they were Arabs caught with all these weapons, what sentence would they get?”
Quote 0 0

Pakistan Samaa TV Interview With Eyewitness To Alleged Osama Bin Laden Killing

November 15, 2013


Quote 0 0
If the FBI agents  keeps you scared they bring home a weekly paycheck,eh?
Booh! Did I scare you?  So this is how you allow your tax dime to be spent.

In three steps. As always see link for each step.

Step 1.
Documentary on the Detroit Sleeper Cell that Wasn’t

DETROIT — It’s been about a decade since the “Detroit Sleeper Cell”  case imploded and ended up being a big embarrassment to the Justice Department and the FBI.

You might recall, shortly after Sept. 11, 2001,  four men were charged in Detroit with operating a sleeper cell that was plotting to pull off terrorist acts.  In 2003, two of the four men were convicted of terrorism charges.

But the defense learned that the government withheld information that might have helped their clients, and eventually in 2004 U.S. District Judge Gerald Rosen vacated the terrorism convictions. Essentially, the judge concluded the case was nonsense.
- See more at: http://ticklethewire.com/#sthash.6f66yHe3.dpuf

Step 2

Inside the Terror Factory
Award-winning journalist Trevor Aaronson digs deep into the FBI’s massive efforts to create fake terrorist plots.

—By Trevor Aaronson
| Fri Jan. 11, 2013

Editor's note: This story is adapted from The Terror Factory, Trevor Aaronson's new book documenting how the Federal Bureau of Investigation has built a vast network of informants to infiltrate Muslim communities and, in some cases, cultivate phony terrorist plots. The book grew from Aaronson's award-winning Mother Jones cover story "The Informants" and his research in the Investigative Reporting Program at the University of California-

Step 3

Nichols says bombing was FBI op

Detailed confession filed in S.L. about Oklahoma City plot

 Feb. 22 2007


The only surviving convicted criminal in the April 19, 1995, bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City is saying his co-conspirator, Timothy McVeigh, told him he was taking orders from a top FBI official in orchestrating the bombing.

A declaration from Terry Lynn Nichols, filed in U.S. District Court in Salt Lake City, has proven to be one of the most detailed confessions by Nichols to date about his involvement in the bombing as well as the involvement of others.

The declaration was filed as part of Salt Lake City attorney Jesse Trentadue's pending wrongful death suit against the government for the death of his brother in a federal corrections facility in Oklahoma City. Trentadue claims his brother was killed during an interrogation by FBI agents when agents mistook his brother for a suspect in the Oklahoma City bombing investigation.

The most shocking allegation in the 19-page signed declaration is Nichols' assertion that the whole bombing plot was an FBI operation and that McVeigh let slip during a bout of anger that he was taking instruction from former FBI official Larry Potts.
Quote 0 0
Every major terrorist event to hit the US has a FBI  informant leading the people who create the event.

1993 1st World Trade Center bombing -FBI  informant Amad Salem
1995 Oklahoma City bombing-Timothy McVeigh FBI  informant

Two reads about two FBI  informants who helped the FBI  create the Omargh bombing.
Google titles if FBI  changes my links

In Ireland  the Omargh Bombing
Whitey Bulger-FBI  informant
David Rupert FBI  informant
see link for full story


Flemmi Testifies That FBI  informant Bulger Strangled His Girlfriend
July 19, 2013

Flemmi said Bulger strangled Davis in a house Flemmi bought for his mother in South Boston — a house next door to that of Bulger's brother William, president of the Massachusetts state Senate.

"He grabbed her by the neck," Flemmi testified. "I couldn't do it."

"Did you tell him that?" Wyshak asked.

"He knew it," Flemmi said. "He said 'Don't worry, I'll take care of it'."

When it was over, Flemmi said, Bulger stretched out for a nap while he wrapped up and removed the body. At a marsh near the Neponset River in Quincy, where they buried the body, Flemmi said, Bulger sat and rested while Flemmi dug the hole.

"You had to dig the hole?" Wyshak asked

"That's what he does," Flemmi said.

"He just kills people and lets somebody else do all the work?" Wyshak asked.

"Yes," Flemmi said.

The confrontation between Flemmi and Bulger this week, the first meeting between the two gangsters in 17 years, has captivated the city. People trying to get seats in the courtroom were lined up outside at 1:30 a.m. Friday. Five courtrooms with television monitors handled the overflow.

Flemmi testified that he and Bulger created a special fund with a portion of the proceeds from their crimes and used it to pay FBI agents and other law enforcement officers.

He said they paid Connolly about a quarter-million dollars and that Bulger had to put him on an allowance to curtail his "ostentatious" spending. Five other Boston-based agents received sums in the thousands of dollars, Flemmi testified.

One of those agents, John Newton, supplied the gangsters with a box of C4 plastic explosives, Flemmi said.

"It was a surprise when we got it," Flemmi testified.
He said Bulger shipped half of it to the Irish Republican Army and the other half ended up with a gang of criminals across the city in Charlestown.

2nd read

Intelligence on Omagh bomb 'withheld from police'
Security forces had two agents in the Real IRA but did not share that information with Northern Ireland officers, report claims

    Henry McDonald, Ireland correspondent
    The Guardian, Wednesday 7 August 2013
Quote 0 0
How many terrorist events that you know of were created by FBI  informants?

1993 1st World Trade Center bombing-FBI  informant Amad Salem
FBI  agents who handle Salem- Anticev  and Floyd
1995 Oklahoma City bombing-FBI  informant Timothy McVeigh
FBI agent who handled McVeigh-Larry Potts
Omargh bombing in Ireland
Whitey Bulger -FBI  informant who supplied C4 explosives to IRA
FBI  agent who was his handler -John Connolly
Dave Rupert -FBI  informant

Mumbai terrorist attack - created by FBI  informant David Headley

see link for full story

Tue, Nov 26th, 2013

Mumbai Attacks from 2008 to 2013


Mumbai Attacks from 2008 to 2013

A Case of Inter-NationalTerrorism

Today, Pakistans social media is full of hue that the Mumbai Attacks 26/11 were a false flag operation, having preplanned ulterior motives – is this counter-propaganda or does this popular public sentiment hold some grounds in truth?

Indeed, the elongation of the trials related to Mumbai 26/11, huge and repeated international bullying from the Indian side purporting Pakistan to be an instigator of terror, and the demeaning of the national morale of the Pakistani people lead to the desire of extensive scrutiny and counter-investigation over the case by many intellectuals, on individual and institutional basis. In this continuation, PKKH, an institution aspiring to be a leading policy-giver to the state, has most recently gathered its resources to be able to discover any possible conclusion to the demise, and perhaps bring some kind of respite to the people of Pakistan and that part of the world community which is always waiting for common-sense-conclusive truth.

In the process of our investigation, we have found that Mumbai 26/11 presents a copious exhibition of how terrorism is an inter-national phenomenon and how the theme of terror facilitates the accomplishment of goals otherwise abstract to the social status-quo. The Mumbai Case alone puts into question the involvement of at least six states in its making; Pakistan, Kashmir, Nepal, Russia, the United States and India itself.

Kassab’s claim that he was arrested 20 days prior to the attacks – Fahim Ansari providing hand-sketched maps to Shahabuddin (both in Indian jail at that time), and Sahabuddin handing the maps to Zaki ur Rehman Lakhvi stationed in Paksitan via someone in Nepal – the US giving 18 warnings of an attack on Mumbai via sea, and the Indians not securing their coast – the email account from which India alleged ‘claimed responsibility’ of attacks being later disclosed by Google as located in Russia; all this clues of a game being cooked between many friends and foes. It gives an insight on how the US, wishful of the superpower status, while on the face deems it necessary to ‘pressure other countries to adopt American values and practices regarding human rights and democracy’; but in this case, it is evident that it covertly sold a false-flag option from its well-tried Chaos Theory to India.

The United States’ giving prior warnings of the attacks to India are two-faced – on one side, they show a US concerned with the greater good of humanity, and the other side shows their inability to convince a favorite ally to secure its coast of such a national calamity! How extensive was their intelligence in India, what exactly did they warn of and who were their informants, would perhaps be questions the answers of which would be the easiest way to come to quick conclusions, keeping in mind the precision of fact-finding the US is capable of – Why can’t the US be questioned? The US itself has kept David Headley for his involvement in the Mumbai Case; why has the US delayed Headley’s case for 5 years now, when he has reportedly been in the FBI and worked as an undercover agent for the CIA too; if so, they could sentence him for treason against their own state too. Above all this, the US provided the diplomatic backing required by India to voice its claims against Pakistan in the international podium. In fact, the US insisted on Pakistan to fulfill India’s demands without delay or question every time their delegates would meet. The same was repeated five years onward when Pakistan PM N. Sharif visited American President Obama last month. Why does the US not question India to make a complete, viable court case before it accuses Pakistan?

Quote 0 0
300 fighter pilots.airline pilots. say 911 was created by FBI  agents and other US Government agencies in this new documentary film  SKYGATE 911 release by their group.

You are the Jury as new and existing evidence is gathered with regard to the aviation related events of September 11, 2001. Analysis includes in depth study of the Departure Gate at Dulles, In-Flight navigation and alignment combined with further scrutiny of the data provided by government agencies which far exceed the capabilities of the alleged aircraft reported. Encompassing a fresh comprehensive examination into the extreme speeds reported based on new evidence as it compares to precedent set by other aircraft accidents on the record with respect to manufacturer limitations... and more. Exhibits are presented making a strong case for a new independent investigation into the day which changed our world.


Quote 0 0

Bob Graham on 9-11:

You Don't Have Everyone Moving the Same Direction Without a Head Coach Somewhere

Dec. 3, 2013

The last part of the interview of former Senator Bob Graham with the Real News Network has been posted. The theme of the interview was the culture under Bush and Cheney of "not wanting to know." Graham brings up very specifically what the FBI calls the "coincidence" of the two hijackers in the same restaurant as a Saudi agent dispatched by a Saudi consular official, who invites them to San Diego.

When the interviewer asks what should be taken up in a re-opened investigation, Graham says that a new probe should ask whether there was someone assisting the hijackers, and what was "the extent of Saudi involvement."

Asked whether there is any evidence linking Prince Bandar to the attacks, Graham responds that there is some evidence that he can't talk about, and adds:

"But the fact that he [Bandar] had, and exercised as aggressively as he did, his special entrée at the White House, raises questions about why was he using that special entrée, for instance, to get people who were persons of interest to U.S. intelligence and law enforcement, out of the country before they could be interviewed."

The interviewer presses on Bush and Bandar, and whether there was a deliberate attempt "not to know." Graham answers:

"[I]t was so pervasive that virtually all of the agencies of the federal government were moving in the same direction, from a Customs agent at an airport in Orlando who was chastised when he denied entry into the United States to a Saudi, to the President of the United States authorizing large numbers of Saudis to leave the country, possibly denying us forever important insights and information on what happened. You don't have everybody moving in the same direction, without there being a head coach somewhere who was giving them instructions as to where he wants them to move."

Asked if this includes both before and after the events of 9/11, Graham says:

"Primarily before the event. After the event, it shifts from being an action that supports the activities of the Saudis, to actions that cover up the results of that permission given to the Saudis to act."

Quote 0 0
The FBI  Sensitive Informant Program is a taxpayer funded FBI  program where FBI  agents and FBI  informants
are assigned to work for members of Congress and the US Senate; for members of the US Supreme Court; in radio television and print media; to spy on and control these organizations and individuals.


Redacted in 4-Page Document About the FBI’s ‘Sensitive Informant Program’
December 5, 2013

Salt Lake City attorney Jesse Trentadue has received three heavily-redacted batches of recently-declassified documents from the FBI in recent days as partial responses to his ongoing quest for materials related to the Bureau’s “Sensitive Informant Program.”  The most recent document, however, could qualify as the most-heavily-redacted document ever offered in response to a Freedom of Information Act request.  Everything — four pages in all — is redacted!  See pics below.



In an email message Thursday morning, Trentadue describes this latest set of documents as “certainly in line with the Administration’s position on FOIA and the need for ‘transparency.’”

Trentadue has sought details about the “Sensitive Informant Program” in an effort to learn more about the brutal death of his brother, Kenneth Trentadue, under suspicious circumstances while in custody at the U.S. Bureau of Prisons Federal Transfer Center in Oklahoma City in 1995 and about the connection he believes exists between his brother’s death and the investigation of the Oklahoma City Bombing.

As I reported in a Nov. 21 update to this post, federal Judge Clark Waddoups has set May 5, 2014, as the date on which a new Oklahoma City Bombing trial will begin in the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah, Central Division.  The trial will begin at 8:30 a.m. local time, is expected to last three days and could produce some bombshells.

To learn more about Trentatude’s long-running legal battle with the FBI, watch the chilling one-hour video below:

Quote 0 0

* DXer: The USAMRIID today formally refused to disclose where the mice were kept in the Bacteriology Suite B3 pursuant to this passive mouse experiment that Bruce Ivins worked on in September 2001 on the grounds that “the public interest consideration in the disclosure of such information does not outweigh preventing the disclosure of such information.”

Posted by Lew Weinstein on December 6, 2013


DXer reasons that if USAMRIID had not withheld and destroyed the documents that would have permitted Dr. Ivins to reconstruct his time in September and October 2001, perhaps his suicide could have been avoided. USAMRIID wrongly told him his emails could not be retrieved. The person forgot to provide the documents relating to activity in his suite until after the grand jury. Then key Lab Notebooks were withheld from him, courtesy of the FBI. Key notebooks from 2001 have still not been produced.

Years later, USAMRIID now has chosen to block the path that might allow Dr. Ivins’ name to be cleared and his alibi tested. Given that the public interest clearly outweighs any countervailing interest in the identification of one animal room in the B3 suite (as it existed in 2001) versus another, USAMRIID will owe attorneys fees. The people deciding the issue appear not to understand Amerithrax or the public interest in knowing why Dr. Ivins was in the lab late onSeptember 28, 29, 30, 2001. It was a failure to understand such operational security issues that led to the decades-long mess in the first place.

Quote 0 0

Utahn battling U.S. over brother's death

Quote 0 0
FBI informant linked to the creation of 911
see link for full story

9/11 Link To Saudi Arabia Is Topic Of 28 Redacted Pages In Government Report; Congressmen Push For Release
By Jamie Reno
on December 09 2013 2:09 PM

Since terrorists attacked the United States on Sept. 11, 2001, victims’ loved ones, injured survivors, and members of the media have all tried without much success to discover the true nature of the relationship between the 19 hijackers – 15 of them Saudi nationals – and the Saudi Arabian government. Many news organizations reported that some of the terrorists were linked to the Saudi royals and that they even may have received financial support from them as well as from several mysterious, moneyed Saudi men living in San Diego.

Saudi Arabia has repeatedly denied any connection, and neither President George W. Bush nor President Obama has been forthcoming on this issue.

But earlier this year, Reps. Walter B. Jones, R-N.C., and Stephen Lynch, D-Mass., were given access to the 28 redacted pages of the Joint Intelligence Committee Inquiry (JICI) of 9/11 issued in late 2002, which have been thought to hold some answers about the Saudi connection to the attack.

"I was absolutely shocked by what I read," Jones told International Business Times. "What was so surprising was that those whom we thought we could trust really disappointed me. I cannot go into it any more than that. I had to sign an oath that what I read had to remain confidential. But the information I read disappointed me greatly."

    Readers' Stories From The Morning of 9/11
    The U.S.'s New Day of Infamy

The public may soon also get to see these secret documents. Last week, Jones and Lynch introduced a resolution that urges President Obama to declassify the 28 pages, which were originally classified by President George W. Bush. It has never been fully explained why the pages were blacked out, but President Bush stated in 2003 that releasing the pages would violate national security.

While neither Jones nor Lynch would say just what is in the document, some of the information has leaked out over the years. A multitude of sources tell IBTimes, and numerous press reports over the years in Newsweek, the New York Times, CBS News and other media confirm, that the 28 pages in fact clearly portray that the Saudi government had at the very least an indirect role in supporting the terrorists responsible for the 9/11 attack. In addition, these classified pages clarify somewhat the links between the hijackers and at least one Saudi government worker living in San Diego. 

Former Sen. Bob Graham, D-Fla., who chaired the Joint Inquiry in 2002 and has been beating the drum for more disclosure about 9/11 since then, has never understood why the 28 pages were redacted. Graham told IBTimes that based on his involvement in the investigation and on the now-classified information in the document that his committee produced, he is convinced that “the Saudi government without question was supporting the hijackers who lived in San Diego…. You can't have 19 people living in the United States for, in some cases, almost two years, taking flight lessons and other preparations, without someone paying for it. But I think it goes much broader than that. The agencies from CIA and FBI have suppressed that information so American people don't have the facts."

Jones insists that releasing the 28 secret pages would not violate national security.

“It does not deal with national security per se; it is more about relationships,” he said. “The information is critical to our foreign policy moving forward and should thus be available to the American people. If the 9/11 hijackers had outside help – particularly from one or more foreign governments – the press and the public have a right to know what our government has or has not done to bring justice to the perpetrators."

It took Jones six weeks and several letters to the House Intelligence Committee before the classified pages from the 9/11 report were made available to him. Jones was so stunned by what he saw that he approached Rep. Lynch, asking him to look at the 28 pages as well. He knew that Lynch would be astonished by the contents of the documents and perhaps would join in a bipartisan effort to declassify the papers.

"He came back to me about a week ago and told me that he, too, was very shocked by what he read,” Jones said. “I told him we need to join together and put in a resolution and get more members on both sides of the aisle involved and demand that the White House release this information to the public. The American people have a right to know this information."

A decade ago, 46 senators, led by Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., demanded in a letter to President Bush that he declassify the 28 pages.

The letter read, in part, "It has been widely reported in the press that the foreign sources referred to in this portion of the Joint Inquiry analysis reside primarily in Saudi Arabia. As a result, the decision to classify this information sends the wrong message to the American people about our nation's antiterror effort and makes it seem as if there will be no penalty for foreign abettors of the hijackers. Protecting the Saudi regime by eliminating any public penalty for the support given to terrorists from within its borders would be a mistake.... We respectfully urge you to declassify the 28-page section that deals with foreign sources of support for the 9/11 hijackers."

All of the senators who signed that letter but one, Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kansas), were Democrats.

Lynch, who won the Democratic primary for his congressional seat on that fateful day of Sept. 11, 2001, told IBTimes that he and Jones are in the process of writing a “Dear Colleague” letter calling on all House members to read the 28 pages and join their effort.

"Once a member reads the 28 pages, I think whether they are Democrat or Republican they will reach the same conclusion that Walter and I reached, which is that Americans have the right to know this information," Lynch said. “These documents speak for themselves. We have a situation where an extensive investigation was conducted, but then the Bush [administration] decided for whatever purposes to excise 28 pages from the report. I'm not passing judgment. That was a different time. Maybe there were legitimate reasons to keep this classified. But that time has long passed.”

Most of the allegations of links between the Saudi government and the 9/11 hijackers revolve around two enigmatic Saudi men who lived in San Diego: Omar al-Bayoumi and Osama Basnan, both of whom have long since left the United States.

In early 2000, al-Bayoumi, who had previously worked for the Saudi government in civil aviation (a part of the Saudi defense department), invited two of the hijackers, Khalid Almihdhar and Nawaf Alhazmi, to San Diego from Los Angeles. He told authorities he met the two men by chance when he sat next to them at a restaurant.

Newsweek reported in 2002 that al-Bayoumi’s invitation was extended on the same day that he visited the Saudi Consulate in Los Angeles for a private meeting.

Al-Bayoumi arranged for the two future hijackers to live in an apartment and paid $1,500 to cover their first two months of rent. Al-Bayoumi was briefly interviewed in Britain but was never brought back to the United States for questioning.

As for Basnan, Newsweek reported that he received monthly checks for several years totaling as much as $73,000 from the Saudi ambassador to the United States, Prince Bandar, and his wife, Princess Haifa Faisal. Although the checks were sent to pay for thyroid surgery for Basnan’s wife, Majeda Dweikat, Dweikat signed many of the checks over to al-Bayoumi’s wife, Manal Bajadr. This money allegedly made its way into the hands of hijackers, according to the 9/11 report.

Despite all this, Basnan was ultimately allowed to return to Saudi Arabia, and Dweikat was deported to Jordan.

Sources and numerous press reports also suggest that the 28 pages include more information about Abdussattar Shaikh, an FBI asset in San Diego who Newsweek reported was friends with al-Bayoumi and invited two of the San Diego-based hijackers to live in his house.

Shaikh was not allowed by the FBI or the Bush administration to testify before the 9/11 Commission or the JICI.

Graham notes that there was a significant 9/11 investigation in Sarasota, Fla., which also suggests a connection between the hijackers and the Saudi government that most Americans don’t know about.
Quote 0 0
David Headley was a FBI  informant

Quote 0 0

9/11 : The National Sore-Spot

by James Hufferd, PhD                                                                            Coordinator, 911 Truth Grassroots Organization


     One of the great themes of modern literature is that of the Chosen, the few, the proud, survivors of a cataclysm or apocalypse. So, welcome to the party! You are The Redeemed! Let me explain before you go and blow it. It seems the emergent world (if that’s what it was doing) of rational humans ended on September 11, 2001. And you who stubbornly continue to apply the promising highest product of mind-propelled civilization, millennia-distilled principled scientific reasoning, to its ultimate test-case for most among us, at least in modern times, our understanding of 9/11, are in a real sense the survivors, the surviving seed for repopulating an evolved human culture on this planet.

     All others capable of apprehending mega-events remain in various phases of denial or still holed up in protective caves of their own construction, amounting in practical terms to the same thing.

     Meanwhile, myth-dependence and faith-based, as distinguished from evidence-based navigation as a mode of global- or cosmic-scale understanding, long thought to be dying out among the normally- or well-educated, seems to have received a spectacular shot of adrenaline as a protective reflex in the presence of what people are told, and the untrained eye construes as a terrifying, purely-evil alien attack, well beyond our capacity (we are told) to construe rationally otherwise: What you see is what you get, to quote Walter Mitty, or somebody.

     Hence, we’re told, it’s foolish (as well as unpatriotic, mischievous, and affording comfort to the enemy) to consort with anyone who’s such a blatant idiot as to not accept what couldn’t be more obvious. They are out to get us, and that’s that, it’s reasoned, shortsightedly, by nearly everyone for outward consumption. We know who did it and we saw what they did, leaving no need to quibble. Go sick ‘em!

     And beyond the simpleminded reluctance to critically examine society-wide, as Constitutionally-guaranteed due process would require, there is a profound fear dictating avoidance for most “good citizens” in the prospect of being seduced by heresy. Religious dissenters have traditionally been shunned and avoided by others, who want to claim and keep all the goodies, assurances, and comforts held out as rewards and inducements for conformity to community-wide consensual beliefs. If all else fails to dissuade from straying, resort is even made by those in gainful authority to ginned-up threats of eternal torment, based on “the Deity said…” And in the case of 9/11-related obedience to orthodoxy, all things quite literally work together for bad for you, at least superficially, if you seriously wander, and especially if you try to persuade others to deviate from the explanation that serves and suits authority.

     All other conspiracy theories are authoritatively declared “outrageous” (implying that the official conspiracy – OCT – is merely “rageous”, one must suppose). And if you deviate, you will lose or loosen ties with friends and relations. Many of your fledgling social contacts and prospective friends in particular will cut you off and avoid any and all contact. People will warn others about you. Your employer and public and private patrons, funders, and buyers of your services will set you adrift. Your career, if any, might well be toast, your perks gone. Another step beyond: many fear that FEMA camps that some warn of will turn out to be the new post-modern leper colonies, Gulags, or “resettlement centers”, mostly incommunicado, placed away from access to the herd in cold, isolated places with inadequate heat and dwindling edibles.

     I don’t personally know if the FEMA camp legends are true or to what extent. But I do know that 9/11 is a sore-spot in our scoured and myth-laced national record even to professional chroniclers and mainstream historians of all stripes, who conspicuously leave its details and origins either out of their otherwise just-coherent-enough narratives altogether or deliberately render it vague and indeterminate. Because they could easily simply plug in the official story (as a few do) to fill in these gaps, this maddening tendency of the balance of them probably means they secretly comport with our assessment that the truth has been covered up, but would fight to the death to avoid actually saying so – because they know the consequences. It’s a glaring instance of the “spiral of silence” spotlighted by German writer Elisabeth Noelle-Neumann in her 1990s book by that title: don’t dare be caught naked alone.

     To tempt ostracism myself, even here (though I am not an atheist, and probably he isn’t), I quote the wisely-anonymous little boy who once observed, “Religion is believin’ what you know ain’t so.” And venture to opine that most people probably know down-deep lots of things they won’t let on and are unwilling to face head-on. But, in this case, what they refuse to embrace or believe can hurt and maybe kill them. Because the perpetrator strain are still at large and at work.

     Our national motto ought to be, “Say it isn’t so.” Which doesn’t change one iota the verifiable fact that it is. If there is a breaking point to come at which all of that deeply-held knowledge I posit exists will come whooshing out and can’t be bottled back up is anybody’s guess.


Quote 0 0
see link for full story

2 stories as always about your bodyguyards funded by your tax dime

1st read
see link for full story
Judge orders detention of Maplewood National Guardsman suspected of ID theft

An FBI agent acknowledged Monday that two undercover employees posing as members of a militia group came up with the idea of buying a secret list of names from a Minnesota Army National Guard member, and not vice versa.

But Special Agent Chris Crowe said that the soldier, Keith Michael Novak, self-styled commander of a Minnesota militia named the 44th Spatha Libertas ("Swords of Freedom") knew his list was valuable "prior to any dollar value being put on those names."

Crowe said that list of service members' names, Social Security numbers and other data could be used to make fake IDs to get on military bases or even get into the Utah Data Center, the facility operated by the National Security Agency. The undercover FBI employees had posed as members of a Utah-based militia.

2nd read

“Compelling, shocking, and gritty with intrigue.”

—Publishers Weekly

“A real eye-opener that questions how well the country’s security is being protected.”
—Kirkus Reviews

“The Terror Factory is a damning exposé of how the government’s front line against terrorism has become a network of snitches at the end of their ropes, and FBI agents desperate to thwart a terrorist plot even if it means creating one.”
—Will Potter, Green is the New Red: An Insider’s Account of a Social Movement Under Siege

“A disturbing window into America’s war on terror. In story after story, Aaronson reveals in detail how the FBI and its informants are creating crime rather than solving it. This is an important piece of journalism.”
—Alexandra Natapoff, Snitching: Criminal Informants and the Erosion of American Justice

“Aaronson explains just how misguided and often deceptive FBI terrorism sting operations have become.”
—James J. Wedick, former FBI Supervisory Agent
Quote 0 0

see link for full story
 Boston Bomber Believed He Was a Victim of Mind Control


Tamerlan Tsarnaev feared he had been brainwashed to act on trigger phrase

Paul Joseph Watson
December 16, 2013

Suspected Boston marathon bomber Tamerlan Tsarnaev believed that he was a victim of mind control, according to the results of a five month investigation published yesterday by the Boston Globe.

Tsarnaev, who was killed in a shootout with police four days after allegedly carrying out the bombings with his brother Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, was thought to have “some form of schizophrenia,” according to family friends, while his mother said Tsarnaev “felt like there were two people living inside of him.”

    “He believed in majestic mind control, which is a way of breaking down a person and creating an alternative personality with which they must coexist,” Donald Larking, a 67-year-old who attended a Boston mosque with Tamerlan, told the Globe. “You can give a signal, a phrase or a gesture, and bring out the alternate personality and make them do things. Tamerlan thought someone might have done that to him.”

The link between allegations of mind control and violent acts such as political assassinations or terror attacks has been a running theme in numerous different high profile cases.

Aurora theater gunman James Holmes said he was “programmed” to carry out the massacre by an “evil” therapist, according to an alleged inmate of the ‘Batman’ shooter. Steven Unruh claims that Holmes told him he “felt like he was in a video game” during the shooting and that he had been brainwashed with the aid of neuro-linguistic programming.

The parallels between James Holmes and another alleged victim of mind control – RFK assassin Sirhan Sirhan - are astounding.

As the London Independent reported in 2005, evidence strongly indicates that Sirhan was a Manchurian candidate, a victim of mind control who was set up to be the fall guy for the murder. Sirhan was described by eyewitnesses as being in a trance-like state as he pulled the trigger.

“There was no way Sirhan Sirhan killed Kennedy,” said (Sirhan’s lawyer Larry) Teeter….He was the fall guy. His job was to get busted while the trigger man walked out. He wasn’t consciously involved in any plot. He was a patsy. He was unconscious and unaware of what was happening – he was the true Manchurian Candidate.”

The CIA’s use of mind control to create killers is a matter of historical record. MK-ULTRA was the code name for a covert, illegal CIA human research program, run by the Office of Scientific Intelligence that came to light in 1975 through investigations by the Church Committee, and the Rockefeller Commission. 14-year CIA veteran Victor Marchetti insists that the program is ongoing and has not been abandoned.

According to his lawyers, Sirhan Sirhan “was an involuntary participant in the crimes being committed because he was subjected to sophisticated hypno programming and memory implantation techniques which rendered him unable to consciously control his thoughts and actions at the time the crimes were being committed,” and served only as a diversion for the real assassin.

Jared Lee Loughner, the gunman who shot Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and killed six other people, was also obsessed with mind control.

Were the Tsarnaev brothers set up or brainwashed into carrying out the Boston marathon bombing? It’s a claim that would be virtually impossible to prove, but it would explain a number of extraordinary contradictions pertaining to the case, including why the brothers apparently shouted “we didn’t do it” during their shootout with police.

The aunt of Tamerlan Tsarnaev claims that the footage which emerged of police arresting a naked uninjured man was her nephew, contradicting the official narrative that Tsarnaev was critically injured in a shootout and suggesting he may have been killed while in custody.

According to Tamerlan’s mother Zubeidat Tsarnaeva, the FBI “were controlling his every step.” It was subsequently confirmed that both the FBI and the CIA added the brothers to at least two terrorist watch lists in late 2011.

Quote 0 0
two stories
see link for stories

1st story
 USAMRIID does not want you to see this sworn statement by Ivins’ colleague who had the experiment with 52 rabbits
Posted by Lew Weinstein on December 16, 2013

Screen shot 2013-12-16 at 8.40.22 AM

2nd story

* Congressman Rush Holt has raised questions about the FBI investigation of the anthrax attacks for years … He has asked the GAO to investigate … but no answers are forthcoming … is the GAO now part of the coverup?

Posted by Lew Weinstein on December 16, 2013
Quote 0 0

see link for full story


Source cites probable link between Montevideo, Minn., militia suspect and arrested Guardsman

 December 20, 2013
‘High probability’ that ‘Keith’ mentioned by Buford Rogers is Keith Novak, suspected of ID theft.

On the day he was arrested last May, Montevideo militia group member Buford “Bucky” Rogers told an FBI agent that he knew a man named Keith who was involved in intelligence work for the National Guard and was also involved in militia activity, according to an FBI interview transcript made public Friday.

There is “a high probability” that the “Keith” that Rogers named is Keith Novak of Maplewood, Minn., the Guardsman and member of a militia organization who was arrested last week for stealing the names and Social Security numbers of Army members as part of an identity theft scheme, according to a source who has knowledge of both cases.

The source said Novak had his security clearance removed last summer when he was under investigation.

The FBI has made no statement that the two men are linked. Both men, however, are alleged by the FBI to have spoken of bombing government facilities, although neither been charged for a such a crime.

Rogers, a member of a small group called the Black Snake Militia, planned an attack on the police station and National Guard facility and the bombing of a radio tower, all in Montevideo, the FBI alleged at the time of his arrest. He was indicted for possessing illegal explosives and a firearm.

An FBI agent testified Monday that Novak belonged to the 44th Spatha Libertas or “Sword of Freedom” militia and had discussed bombing a National Security Agency facility in Utah, although he has not been charged with that. He was described in court documents as a “Human Intelligence Collector” for the Minnesota Army National Guard and an “intelligence analyst” when he was a member of the Army’s 82nd Airborne Divison.

Novak’s case has been forwarded to a federal grand jury for possible indictment.

Asked if the “Keith” Rogers spoke about to the FBI was Novak, Nicole Engisch, chief of the criminal division of the U.S. attorney’s office in Minneapolis, which is prosecuting both cases, declined to comment.

Transcript covers three hours

A redacted portion of the transcript of Rogers’ interview was made public by U.S. Magistrate Judge Jeanne Graham as a result of a motion filed by Star Tribune attorney John Borger.

A transcript for the first 40 minutes was not released because FBI Agent Shane Ball had not yet read Rogers his rights, Graham ruled. But the remaining portion, which lasted about three hours, was made available. Because of the redactions it is not clear whether Rogers ever mentioned Keith’s last name.

Rogers refers to other alleged militia members in the interview, including a man named Tim from Texas who stayed with the Rogers family and left after a disagreement. While it is not spelled out, the FBI has previously referred to an unidentified man who stayed with the family, then fled to Texas and told the FBI that Rogers was planning a terrorist attack. That prompted the FBI to arrest Rogers.

If Tim is the informant, Rogers appeared to have a completely different take on the disagreement.

“He likes bombs and the reason we basically just kicked him out of the group is because he was violent and we don’t want that kind of [expletive],” Rogers says of Tim. “Everything about law enforcement and government he does not like. And I would consider him dangerous, yes.”

Despite the explosive devices the FBI found, Rogers told Agent Ball that he was opposed to violence, including the 1995 bombing of the Oklahoma City federal building and the Boston Marathon bombing this year.

“Don’t tell anybody this, but I always wanted to be an FBI agent,” Rogers told Ball.
Quote 0 0
see link for full story

Are 9/11 Truthers Anti-Israel?

An interview with Elias Davidsson

More than twelve years have passed since 9/11 happened. Although the 9/11 Commission produced a voluminous “9/11 Commission Report”, it did not provide answers to central questions concerning the circumstances of this horrendous crime. Critical observers have noted numerous glaring omissions, contradictions, anomalies and misrepresentations in this report. Even the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the 9/11 Commission admitted in a joint book they later published, that their report was deficient in many ways and that the Commission had been lied to by government agencies. One of the reactions to this deficient report was the emergence of a “truth movement”, which consists of experts from different scientific fields, who question the official narrative and demand a truly independent investigation of the crime.

Elias Davidsson is one of these “truthers” who challenges the official narrative on 9/11.

He is also concerned about the claim made by some “truthers” that Israel was behind the attacks. He is not, by any means, a sympathizer of Israel. On the contrary, as his writings demonstrate, he not only denounces the oppressive policies of the State of Israel against the Palestinians, but considers that state as inherently dangerous for its neighbors. The fact should be mentioned that he is Jewish and has family in Israel.

Davidsson’s concern appears justified. The catchwords “9/11 and Israel” produce over 66 million hits on Google. Immediately after the attacks some traces to an “Israeli connection” were publicized in U.S. media, including by media notoriously supportive of Israel, such as Fox News.
About this and other topics regarding 9/11, I talked to Mr. Davidsson after he presented in Bonn, Germany, in November 2013, his book Hijacking America’s Mind on 9/11: Counterfeiting Evidence, released in May in New York.

Ludwig Watzal: A few months ago you published the book Hijacking America’s Mind on 9/11. What made you write this book twelve years later, when all questions concerning the 9/11 attacks seem to have been answered?

hijack_DVElias Davidsson: In 2002, it was pointed out to me, that the official account on 9/11 is dubious. Until then, I believed what mass media told us, namely that the mass murder had been orchestrated by Al Qaeda, led by Osama bin Laden and executed by 19 fanatic Muslims. At first, I doubted that the contrary evidence – published by Thierry Meyssan – was credible. Yet, my sense of curiosity led me nevertheless to check the facts. I discovered that grounds for suspicion were justified. This led me to extend my research of 9/11. I was not alone in this endeavor. One of the main focuses of such research was the puzzling demise of the Twin Towers. A consensus is gradually emerging among engineers and architects that the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center and building WTC No 7 had been demolished by explosives and/or more exotic means. This conclusion implies official malfeasance and complicity in mass murder. Yet the question remained nagging me: what to make of the other part of the official account, namely the alleged participation of 19 Islamic fanatics in hijacking four airliners, steering them to death and succeeding to avoid interception by the US air force. I decided, therefore, to search for evidence supporting these claims. I discovered that such evidence does not exist. Not a shred of it. This may sound unbelievable, yet despite the most exacting searches, I could not find any such evidence. I also discovered that there exists no evidence that passenger airliners crashed on 9/11: The FBI actually admitted to have failed to link the wreckage of the crashed aircraft to the airliners that were allegedly hijacked. Having made these discoveries, I found it necessary to deal with an additional puzzle, namely what to make of the telephone calls that were allegedly made from the hijacked planes and in which passengers and crew members reported hijackings. I spent a great deal of time to track and analyze all known phone calls. These analyses represent until now, to my knowledge, the most thorough examination of the 9/11 phone calls. I concluded that the callers did not report real events. They did not lie, yet did not say the truth. I won’t reveal here the solution of this paradox and its sinister sequels. Readers are invited to track my analysis and draw their own conclusions from the wealth of details provided in the book. As I finished the book, any doubt that might have lingered in my mind regarding the identity of the 9/11 plotters, dissipated: I became convinced that 9/11 was an inside job by the US military.

LW: There are still many people who believe that the alleged hijackers were able to steer an airliner onto the Pentagon.

ED: To these individuals I only say: The first step in investigating a plane crash is to determine its identity and the identities of its passengers. The next step would be to determine who among the passengers might have had a motive and the capabilities to cause the crash. In the case of 9/11, neither the identities of the debris were determined nor was the presence of the 19 suspects in the planes ever proven. For this reason, it is moot to examine their alleged flight skills. One does not examine the flight skills of ghosts. Those who nevertheless attempted to examine the flight skills of the alleged hijackers discovered that precisely the pilot of flight AA77, which allegedly crashed on the Pentagon, was a completely incompetent pilot who could not, according to his teachers, properly maintain a one-motored Cessna in the air. While even an amateur pilot might have been able to steer an aircraft onto the huge roof of the Pentagon, professional pilots doubt that any pilot could have steered a Boeing 757 horizontally at 500 mph with an altitude of 15 feet above the ground (the aircraft is said to have crashed horizontally on the side of the Pentagon between the first and second floor).

LW: Shortly after the attacks the story of Osama bin Laden and his men were aired worldwide and nobody dared to question it. Do you think that bin Laden from a cave in Afghanistan could have masterminded such an attack with dilettantes armed with box cutters?

ED: Before asking whether bin Laden could have masterminded anything, it is worthwhile to note that the U.S. government had never accused him of complicity in 9/11, as admitted by the FBI in 2006. The U.S. government did not even take seriously the conclusion of the German Upper Court of Hamburg (Oberlandesgericht), that Osama bin Laden had selected Mohamed Atta and his friends to conduct 9/11. This conclusion was not shared by the US. This leaves us with the question what role Osama bin Laden played during the years in which he was depicted as a master terrorist: Was he a willing or unwitting US agent, as some maintain, or a genuine, but pathetic, fighter against Americans and Jews, as others maintain? This question has, however, no direct bearing on 9/11. A true history of Osama bin Laden has still to be written.

LW: In a speech before the Commonwealth Club of California in San Francisco on October 3, 2007, General Wesley Clark mentions an accidental meeting with Paul Wolfowitz in 1991 at the Pentagon in which Wolfowitz said that the US could use its military in the Middle East without being stopped by the Russians: “We have got about 5 to 10 years to clean up those old Soviet client regimes – Syria, Iran, Iraq – before the next great superpower comes on to challenge us.” And Clark continued: “This country was taken over by a group of people with a policy coup. Wolfowitz and Cheney and Rumsfeld, you can name a half of dozen collaborators from the ‘Project of a New American Century’. They wanted us to destabilize the Middle East, turn it upside down, and make it under our control.” Taking this statement into account and linking it to the call of this “Project” for a “new Pearl Harbor”, what comes up to your mind regarding 9/11?

ED: It is fairly logical that after the demise of the Soviet bloc, the US had an immense window of opportunity to secure its global hegemony for decades to come. But doing so required immense resources and thus the approval of the US population. Such approval could only be secured if a traumatic event would arise, which could be ascribed to a deadly enemy. The mass-murder of 9/11 filled the bill. Such reasoning is no proof that 9/11 was an inside job. It is, however, a proof that the U.S. administration, acting on behalf of Corporate America and the military-industrial complex, possessed a huge motive to see a “new Pearl Harbor” occur.

Wolfowitz was correct in assessing the window of opportunity as five to ten years. There exists evidence that the United States began “manufacturing” its new epochal enemy (Islamic terrorism), replacing the Red Menace, precisely around 1990.

LW: The circumstances surrounding 9/11 seem to be the West’s newest and greatest taboo. To question the official narrative endangers a person’s career. Even the academic community seems afraid to ask the relevant questions. You have been in direct contact with representatives of academia over 9/11. What is your experience?

ED: The overwhelming majority of academics do not wish even to discuss 9/11, let alone examine the nuts and bolts of these events. Part of this fear is that of being ostracized by peers or even endangering one’s career. Another part of the fear is that discovering the truth about 9/11 would inevitably shatter the questioner’s comfortable world view. I suspect that many academics regard 9/11 as a Pandora’s Box, best kept locked. If 9/11 was indeed an “inside job”, that would mean that political parties, media, the business community and the judiciary have been lying to us through their teeth for more than a decade and based their various policies, including wars and massive surveillance, on a monumental lie. Not many people are willing to live with such conclusions about their cherished institutions, even if such conclusions are, in my view, justified. We have here, I argue, an unprecedented case of mass denial, a pathological phenomenon that undermines the fundaments of the Age of Reason.

LW: In an recently published article by Eric Walberg on the website Dissident Voice, the author hinted at a connection between Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and the CIA concerning the 9/11 attacks. Does such collaboration makes more sense to you than the “official” story?

ED: It is possible that various states, including Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Israel, Germany have provided the United States some assistance in preparing 9/11. However – and this is an important caveat – I do not believe that the governments of these states or even their intelligence services, knew about the plans of 9/11. The U.S. planners would have been foolish to share the plans of 9/11 with other states. Thus, it is likely that the Saudi authorities helped recruit some individuals to be used as patsies in the United States and later designated as hijackers. But it is unlikely that the Saudis were advised about the ultimate role of these patsies.

LW: Shortly after the attacks, there were media reports on a possible “Israeli connection”. These reports centered on Larry Silverstein, Dov Zakheim, the five “dancing Israelis” and the “Israeli art students”. Please could you unravel this tangle of guesswork for the public and give us your judgment?

ED: Larry Silverstein was and is a known real-estate mogul in New York. He is Jewish and a known friend of Israeli politicians, such as Ariel Sharon and Benyamin Netanyahu. He was for many years the owner of WTC No. 7, a 47-floor building that housed, inter alia, New York City’s Emergency Center, offices of the CIA, SEC, the Secret Service and other government bodies. In 2001, the City of New York decided to lease out the Twin Towers to private investors. One of the bidders was Larry Silverstein.

Larry Silverstein is suspected in some circles for the above reasons to be an accomplice to the mass murder of 9/11, in which several of his own employees died. Yet, he did not make any effort to cover his alleged tracks. He leased the WTC just six weeks before 9/11, announced this lease to the world, insured it against terrorism for a whopping $3.2 billion and “admitted” in a documentary film to have given on 9/11 the authorization to “pull” WTC 7 (that is to demolish the building). He then sued insurance companies for double damages, because each tower was hit by a separate aircraft, thus displaying what would be widely regarded as greed. He even admitted to have escaped death by canceling a meeting at the WTC on 9/11. And he has never attempted to conceal his friendship with controversial Israeli politicians, such as Ariel Sharon and Benjamin Netanyahu.

We have here all the requisite elements: A greedy Jew, proximity to the crime, motive. It is precisely the high visibility of Larry Silverstein as an ideal villain that makes me hesitate to implicate him in the crime. His alleged complicity is simply too obvious. It is difficult to believe that a person implicated in planning arson would take out a lease of the building six weeks before the crime and announce his agreement publicly. It is even more difficult to believe that a smart businessman, such as Silverstein, would risk the electrical chair in a criminal enterprise whose outcome he could not foresee. It is far more probable that Silverstein was framed into leasing the World Trade Center by the real plotters, precisely because he is greedy, because he is Jewish, and because of his ties to Israel. More to the point: Silverstein was not in a position to manage the hijacking exercises conducted by the military on the morning of 9/11, not in a position to steer airplanes against buildings and not in a position to wire WTC 7 within hours to demolish the building. Whatever his alleged role in 9/11, if any, the coordinators of Operation 9/11 did not sit in his office, but presumably in the Pentagon, led by Donald Rumsfeld. Larry Silverstein, however, represents an ideal bogeyman.

The fact that Mr. Silverstein did not demonstrate any interest in investigating the demise of the Twin Towers he had leased, is no evidence of malfeasance. In that he acted like most Americans, who till this day do not wish to ask questions and know the truth.

Dov Zakheim is another such ideal bogeyman. He is an ordained rabbi who made it to a high position in both government and private business. He worked in the Pentagon between 1985 and 1987. From 1987-2001, Zakheim was CEO of SPC International, a high-technology firm that manufactures, inter alia, equipment to remotely control aircraft. During 2000, he served as a foreign policy advisor to George W. Bush. He was hired as a Comptroller of the Pentagon in the spring of 2001. On September 10, 2001, Donald Rumsfeld, Defense Secretary, announced to a stupefied internal Pentagon audience that the Pentagon could not track $2.3 trillion dollars in its books. This statement disappeared, as it were, into the memory hole the next day because of the deadly events, but continues to be widely quoted by Jew-bashers, who connect these missing funds to Zakheim. A Google search on the string “$2.3 billion Zakheim” yields no less than 150,000 hits. But is it at all true that the Pentagon could not track $2.3 trillion, as Rumsfeld claimed? And if that was the case, could Zakheim make that money disappear from Pentagon accounting within a few months? And if he could do so, why wasn’t he accused, charged, and prosecuted? But probably the most important question is: Why did Rumsfeld make at all this statement, and precisely on the eve of 9/11? Wouldn’t a political leader rather attempt to conceal such apparent malfeasance? Or was there a hidden motive behind this bizarre announcement?

In order to implicate Israel in the events of 9/11, the story of the “five dancing Israelis” is often invoked. There is no dispute that five young Israelis were seen photographing the Twin Towers after they were hit and possibly making signs that were interpreted as celebration. They were arrested by the New York police after a woman, only known as Maria, called the police to report their suspicious conduct, as seen from her window. Interestingly, it was highlighted in the media that these Israelis were found in the possession of box cutters when they were arrested. The theme of box cutters was to remain attached to the alleged hijackings. A mere coincidence? The boys were, anyway, kept in detention in the United States for several weeks, and then deported to Israel. Two of them appeared in an Israeli TV show and said that they were photographing the Twin Towers to “document the event”. They implied that this had been their task but did not say who tasked them with that mission. This episode suggests Israeli foreknowledge of the events. Another case of foreknowledge, also involving Israelis, is an email message received by two employees of the Israeli company Odigo two hours before the attacks. It has not been determined who sent the message and the reason for informing Odigo. One explanation would be that the plotters wished to connect Israel somehow to the attacks.

And finally, we have the canard that 4,000 Jews, forewarned, did not come to work to the World Trade Center on 9/11. A mere glance at the names and backgrounds of the WTC victims suffices to rubbish this story. Many Jews died in the Twin Towers. While this story is false, it is actually based on an authentic news report that appeared in the Jerusalem Post on September 12, 2001. According to that report, the Israeli Foreign Ministry expressed its concern about the fate of 4,000 Israelis (not “Jews”) believed to be present around or in the World Trade Center. It is not known from where the Ministry obtained the figure of 4,000. As it turned out, only 2-3 Israelis died at the World Trade Center. In order to assess whether this low ratio of Israeli fatalities is plausible or not, it would have been necessary to know how many Israeli nationals actually worked in the Twin Towers and on which floors they worked. I could find no such information. It is known, however, that an Israeli shipping company (ZIM) moved its offices from the WTC shortly before 9/11. It is not known where exactly these offices were located in the buildings. This move is also invoked by some observers as a sign of foreknowledge. If ZIM was forewarned, who was doing the warning and made ZIM thus a suspect?

LW: What might be the motives for linking Israel to 9/11?

ED: Presuming, as I do, that 9/11 served U.S. imperial – and more generally Western – interests and was executed by entities under the control of the U.S. military, the plotters had evidently to conceal their trail and engage in serious efforts to impute their crime to others. Until now they did so by attributing the crime to 19 Islamic hijackers, who are presumably dead (or never existed). As this initial story is being increasingly debunked, a fall-back position for the plotters would be to blame the attack on other entities. Recent attempts are made by members of the U.S. Congress, for example, to blame 9/11 on the Saudis. But who are better placed as bogeymen than Jews or Israel? The Nazis used this method with great success. Why wouldn’t the US elite repeat this sordid game, if it fears that its days are counted? I suspect therefore that the “Israel did it” meme in regard to 9/11 is maintained over low fire by powerful forces in the United States in reserve for the day when the American people will discover that 9/11 was an inside job. If that should happen, the US elite would suddenly “discover” evidence that Jews within the Pentagon orchestrated 9/11 in cooperation with the Mossad; that American Jews led hapless Americans to attack other countries; that Jews were responsible for the introduction of torture and extra-judicial executions and that the PATRIOT Act was a Jewish project to control Americans.

LW: After you rubbished the official narrative and the so-called Israel link, who, in your view, could have had the largest interest to commit such a horrendous crime? What geopolitical and geostrategic interests could the US have in engineering such an operation?

ED: As I already mentioned above, I consider it beyond dispute that the US military planned and executed the mass-murder of 9/11 on behalf of the US elite (which, evidently, includes also persons of Jewish descent). The operation served multiple purposes, all beneficial to the US elite: It provided justification for the occupation of Afghanistan, a strategically location in Central Asia; it provided justification for destroying and rebuilding Iraq (both of which were profitable to U.S. corporations); it provided justification for a U.S.-led global War on Terrorism; it provided justification for huge increases in military appropriations and corresponding profits of the military-industrial complex; it provided justification for the erosion of constitutional rights and international law; it provided justification for global Big Brother measures, led by the NRO and NSA; and it provided the justification for the establishment of a new and profitable security industry. All of these developments have been detrimental to human rights, individual freedoms and global peace. That is one of the reasons why I consider that challenging the official myth of 9/11 is one of the most urgent tasks facing humanity today.

LW: Mr. Davidsson thank you very much for the interview.

Elias Davidsson was born in 1941 in Palestine to Jewish parents. His parents were born in Germany but had to immigrate to Palestine due to the Nazi persecution of Jews. He lived in his youth in France, Germany and the United States until he settled finally in Iceland in 1962. After working for 20 years in the computer field, he changed to musical occupation, as a music teacher, choir master, arranger and composer. In parallel to his profession, Davidsson has for many years been involved in activism and research regarding social and global justice, peace, anti-racism and human rights. Since 1990, Davidsson has focused on the role of international law as a tool for peace and published several scholarly articles in legal journals.

Quote 0 0

see link for full story



Jim Swire

Jump to: navigation, search
Dr Jim Swire, Lockerbie victim Flora's father
Frank Duggan accuses Dr Swire of lying

James 'Jim' Swire (born 1936) is an English doctor who is best known for his involvement in the aftermath of the 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103, in which his daughter Flora was killed.[1]

Dr Jim Swire is a founder member of the Justice for Megrahi campaign group and is a signatory of its PE1370 e-petition which calls on "the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to open an independent inquiry into the 2001 Kamp van Zeist conviction of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi for the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 in December 1988."[2]

Dr Swire described the Scottish Government's reaction to JFM's petition, with its 1,646 signatures, as "despicable".[3]

In November 2013, in response to Frank Duggan's accusation that UK relatives of Lockerbie victims were liars, Jim Swire wrote:

I do not usually reply to statements in the media from Mr Frank Duggan, however he has recently very publicly accused me of lying, concerning an event which happened in the United States embassy, where Mr Duggan was present, acting as relatives' liaison officer over the Lockerbie case, I believe.
I was also present. Mr Duggan now claims that an alleged remark to one of the British relatives was not made. It is hard to understand how he would know that because the remark was made 'off the record', confidentially in an aside to the father of another British victim. I know and trust that victim's father. The remark made to him was "Your government and ours know exactly what happened but they're never going to tell."
That is not the kind of remark which any bereaved parent is ever likely to forget, but Mr Duggan could not have overheard it; perhaps he also does not understand its implications for a bereaved family.
Perhaps whatever Mr Duggan does not hear does not happen?
I do however owe Mr Duggan and others an apology: the meeting in the US embassy in London apparently took place in February 1990 not in 1989 as I had thoughtlessly previously claimed. Forgive the weakness of an old man's memory for dates, Mr Duggan, but these days there is always Google.
Those who wish to view Mr Duggan in action may like to dig out of the net the Channel Four showing of a film about Lockerbie called The Maltese Double Cross, which was followed by a live on air discussion where again I was present, as was Mr Duggan and where I had to ask a Mr Buck Revell of the FBI (appearing by satellite) why his son had cancelled his flight on Pan Am 103 instead of getting murdered like my daughter. Mr Revell is, I understand, no longer in the FBI. If I recall correctly he told us that his son had received an unexpected change of leave dates from the army. His son was not claimed to be a member of the staff at the US Embassy in Moscow, where warnings about a terrorist threat specific to Pan Am had been posted on a staff notice board well before the tragedy.
We have always been mystified as to why the Pan Am 103 plane was 'only' 2/3 full just before Christmas.
I won't ascribe a date to that discussion group, in case my memory might again prove defective.
There was also a British near equivalent to this amazing revelation from PCAST. In her autobiographical book published in 1993 - two years after the two Libyans had been indicted over involvement in the Lockerbie disaster. Lady Thatcherwrote, speaking of the attack by the USAF on Tripoli in 1986, itself an alleged reprisal for a terrorist bombing of a German disco:
It turned out to be a more decisive blow against Libyan sponsored terrorism than I could ever have imagined....the much vaunted Libyan counter attack did not and could not take place. Gaddafi had not been destroyed but he had been humbled."[4]
I fear, Mr Duggan, we shall continue to seek the truth and since we are European citizens we have an inalienable right to that truth under the provisions of the ECHR. Please Google that.[5]
Quote 0 0

Legal complaint in New Jersey for next month's agenda

Given the technical issues around this conference call, it was proposed and agreed to list on next month's agenda a focused discussion on the attempt to prosecute the crime of 9/11 in New Jersey.  The 62-page Complaint filed with the New Jersey  Office of Investigation on Oct. 31, 2013 is at:  http://nj911aware.org/ 


Barbara announced that the press release, tying the DC 9/11 conference appeal for release of 9/11 government evidence to a similar need from the Kennedy Assassination archives, was sent via PRNewswire to all U.S. mainstream media, press, radio and online publications on Nov. 21, 2013, and was picked up by 115 mainstream press and media and put out under their own banners on Nov. 21 or Nov. 22, 2013, the 50th Anniversary of the JFK Assassination.  These include such major papers as the Boston Globe.  This release, whose follows, 
is 400 words, which is the limit for PRNewswire.  http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/911-truth-movement-makes-major-advances-in-2013-supports-jfk-assassination-truth-movement-in-calling-for-full-disclosure-of-all-records-relating-to-both-events-232818021.html  Background Video on Attorney David Meiswinkle who wrote and filed the Complaint: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jeIcA_KCYvU\
Barbara also announced that the video of the DC 9/11 presentations is now available online.    Please go to http://www.dc911conference.org to access the videographer's list of speakers and presentations.

Open discussion on a variety of topics of interest to the 9/11 Truth community then took place.

The teleconference was adjourned at about 9:30 p pst.

An audio recording of this teleconference can be heard here: http://houston911truth.net/audio/112713.wav

The next regular 9/11 Truth Teleconference is tentatively scheduled for Sunday 29 December at 2p EST.   Please send advance agenda items to facilitator Ken Freeland, diogenesquest@gmail.com, by 26 December.
Minutes and audio recordings of the 911 Truth Teleconference

(This monthly teleconference for leaders and representatives of local 9/11 truth activist organizations from around the United States and Canada, and other entities of the 9/11 truth movement, is held on the last Wednesday evening of each month at 8 pm Eastern time.  For more information, or to request an invitation to the teleconference, please write  Ken Freeland or Craig McKee.)

Quote 0 0

Declaration of Richard L. Wade, PhD MPH on Deficient Security in Fall 2001 At USAMRIID Relating To Control of Anthrax

Posted by Lew Weinstein on January 1, 2014

Screen shot 2013-12-31 at 6.37.06 AM




Screen shot 2013-12-31 at 6.40.19 AM


Screen shot 2013-12-31 at 6.41.56 AM


Screen shot 2013-12-31 at 6.44.15 AM


Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: Richard L. Wade | Leave a Comment »

* DXer … It’s naive and uninformed to think that Al Qaeda could not have obtained Ames just because it tended to be in labs associated with or funded by the US military. … The reality is that a lab technician, researcher, or other person similarly situated might simply have walked out of some lab that had it.

Posted by Lew Weinstein on December 29, 2013

bin laden 2 

a recent comment from DXer …

In mid-December 2003, two brothers, Michael Ray and James Stubbs, were arrested in a Manila suburb where they were fundraising for a charity that supported the militant islamists and allegedly in contact with militant brothers. Michael Ray, an American, had been a HVAC technician at Lawrence Livermore near San Francisco — until March 2000 — where the Defense Threat Reduction Agency had launched a program to combat the Bin Laden anthrax threat in 1998.  He had a high security pass that he permitted him to go to labs throughout Lawrence Livermore, including those combatting the Bin Laden anthrax threat.

His brother, James, Jr., also known as Jamil Daud Mujahid. James reportedly was monitored saying that he had been a classmate of bin Laden and had named his son Osama. James once was a policeman in California and a teacher in Missouri. James allegedly met with members of Abu Sayyef and Moro Islamic Liberation Front while in the Philippines doing charity fundraising. The brothers had been under surveillance at the time of their arrest. James Stubbs, according to some reports, had recently left a job as a teacher in California to study Arabic in Sudan. Other reports suggested that his recent work instead involved training dogs. Authorities allege that the brothers in May 2003 had met with several charity groups suspected of being al-Qaida fronts, founded by Osama bin Laden’s brother-in-law Khalifa.

In mid-April 2004, Patrick Hughes, Lieutenant General (Retired), Assistant Secretary for information Analysis, Homeland Security Department testified before the 9/11 Commission. He explained that interrogations and other evidence revealed that Al Qaeda wanted to strike the US with a nonconventional weapon, most notably anthrax.

It’s naive and uninformed to think that Al Qaeda could not have obtained Ames just because it tended to be in labs associated with or funded by the US military.

US Army Al Qaeda operative Sgt. Ali Mohammed accompanied Zawahiri in his travels in the US. (Ali Mohamed had been a major in the same unit of the Egyptian Army that produced Sadat’s assassin, Khaled Islambouli). Ali Al-Timimi was working in the building housing the Center for Biodefense funded by the DARPA and had access to the facilities at both the Center for Biodefense and the adjacent American Type Culture Collection. For example, Michael Ray Stubbs was an HVAC system technician at Lawrence Livermore Lab with a high-level security clearance permitting access; that was where the effort to combat the perceived Bin Laden anthrax threat was launched in 1998. Aafia Siddiqui, who attended classes at a building with the virulent Vollum strain. She later married a 9/11 plotter al-Balucchi, who was in UAE with al-Hawsawi, whose laptop, when seized at the home of a bacteriologist, had anthrax spraydrying documents on it.  Indeed, Bruce Ivins had supplied virulent Ames to a non-citizen from Egypt whose friends and classmates had been recruited personally by Dr. Ayman Zawahiri.

The reality is that a lab technician, researcher, or other person similarly situated might simply have walked out of some lab that had it.

Quote 0 0

Add a Website Forum to your website.

? ?
Copyright ? 2001-2004 Who?s A Rat. All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or in part in any form or medium without express written permission is prohibited.