See other World News Articles
Title: THE HIGHJACKING OF A NATION by Sibel Edmonds
Source:
National Security Whistleblowers Coalition
URL Source: http://www.nswbc.org/Op%20Ed/Op-ed-Part1-Nov15-06.htm
Published: Nov 15, 2006
Author: By Sibel Edmonds
Post Date: 2006-11-15 18:09:12 by palo verde
Keywords: Sibel Edmonds, corruption, traitorsim
Views: 1685
Comments: 76
November 15, 2006 THE HIGHJACKING OF A NATION Part 1: The Foreign Agent Factor By Sibel Edmonds In his farewell address in 1796, George Washington warned that America must be constantly awake against “the insidious wiles of foreign influence…since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government.” Today, foreign influence, that most baneful foe of our republican government, has its tentacles entrenched in almost all major decision making and policy producing bodies of the U.S. government machine. It does so not secretly, since its self-serving activities are advocated and legitimized by highly positioned parties that reap the benefits that come in the form of financial gain and positions of power. Foreign governments and foreign-owned private interests have long sought to influence U.S. public policy. Several have accomplished this goal; those who are able and willing to pay what it takes. Those who buy themselves a few strategic middlemen, commonly known as pimps, while in DC circles referred to as foreign registered agents and lobbyists, who facilitate and bring about desired transactions. These successful foreign entities have mastered the art of ‘covering all the bases’ when it comes to buying influence in Washington DC. They have the required recipe down pat: get yourself a few ‘Dime a Dozen Generals,’ bid high in the ‘former statesmen lobby auction’, and put in your pocket one or two ‘ex-congressmen turned lobbyists’ who know the ropes when it comes to pocketing a few dozen who still serve. The most important facet of this influence to consider is what happens when the active and powerful foreign entities’ objectives are in direct conflict with our nation’s objectives and its interests and security; and when this is the case, who pays the ultimate price and how. There is no need for assumptions of hypothetical situations to answer these questions, since throughout recent history we have repeatedly faced the dire consequences of the highjacking of our foreign and domestic policies by these so-called foreign agents of foreign influence. Let’s illustrate this with the most important recent case, the catastrophe endured by our people; the September Eleven terrorist attacks. Let’s observe how certain foreign interests, combined with their U.S. agents and benefactors, overrode the interests and security of the entire nation; how thousands of victims and their loved ones were kicked aside to serve the interests of a few; foreign influence and its agents. Senator Graham’s Revelation It has been established that two of the 9/11 hijackers had a support network in the U.S. that included agents of the Saudi government, and that the Bush administration and the FBI blocked a congressional investigation into that relationship. In his book, "Intelligence Matters," Senator Bob Graham made clear that some details of that financial support from Saudi Arabia were in the 27 pages of the congressional inquiry's final report that were blocked from release by the administration, despite the pleas of leaders of both parties in the House and Senate intelligence committees. Here is an excerpt from Senator Graham’s statement from the July 24, 2003 congressional record on the classified 27 pages of the Congressional Joint Inquiry into 9/11: “The most serious omission, in my view, is part 4 of the report, which is entitled Finding, Discussion and Narrative Regarding Certain Sensitive National Security Matters. Those 27 pages have almost been entirely censured….The declassified version of this finding tells the American people that our investigation developed information suggesting specific sources of foreign support for some of the September 11 hijackers while they were in the United States. In other words, officials of a foreign government are alleged to have aided and abetted the terrorist attacks on our country on September 11, which took over 3,000 lives.” In his book Graham reveals, “Our investigators found a CIA memo dated August 2, 2002, whose author concluded that there is incontrovertible evidence that there is support for these terrorists within the Saudi government. On September 11, America was not attacked by a nation-state, but we had just discovered that the attackers were actively supported by one, and that state was our supposed friend and ally Saudi Arabia.” He then cites another case, “We had discovered an FBI asset who had a close relationship with two of the terrorists; a terrorist support network that went through the Saudi Embassy; and a funding network that went through the Saudi Royal family.” The most explosive revelation in Graham’s book is the following statement with regard to the administration’s attitude on page 216: “It was as if the President’s loyalty lay more with Saudi Arabia than with America’s safety.” Further, he states that he asked the FBI to undertake a review of the Riggs Bank records on the terrorists’ money trail, to look at other Saudi companies with ties to al-Qaeda, to plan for monitoring suspect Saudi interests in the United States; however, Graham adds: “To my knowledge, none of these investigations have been completed…Nor do we know anything else about what I believe to be a state-sponsored terrorist support network that still exists, largely undamaged, within the United States.” What Graham is trying to establish in his book and previous public statements in this regard, and doing so under state imposed ‘secrecy and classification’, is that the classification and cover up of those 27 pages is not about protecting ‘U.S. national security, methods of intelligence collection, or ongoing investigations,’ but to protect certain U.S. allies. Meaning, our government put the interests of certain foreign nations and their U.S. beneficiaries far above its own people and their interests. While Saudi Arabia has been specifically pointed to by Graham, other countries involved have yet to be identified. In covering up Saudi Arabia’s direct role in supporting Al Qaeda, the 9/11 Commission goes even a few steps further than the congress and the Executive Branch. The report claims "there is no convincing evidence that any government financially supported al-Qaeda before 9/11." Their report ignores all the information provided by government officials to Congress, as well as volumes of published reports and investigations by other nations, regarding Muslim and Arab regimes that have supported al Qaeda. It completely disregards the terrorist lists of the Treasury and State Departments, which have catalogued the Saudi government's decades of support for Bin Laden and al-Qaeda. Why in the world would the United States government go so far to protect Saudi Arabia in the face of what itself declares to be the biggest security threat facing our nation and the world today? Why is the United States willing to set aside its own security and interests in order to advance the interests of another state? How can a government that’s been intent upon using the terrorist attacks to carry out many unjustifiable atrocities, prevent bringing to justice those who’ve been established as being directly responsible for it? More importantly, how is this done in a nation that prides itself as one that operates under governance of the people, by the people, for the people? How did our government bodies, those involved in drafting and implementing our nation’s policies, evolve into this foreign influence-peddling operation? In order to answer these questions one must first establish who stands to lose and who stands to gain by protecting Saudi Arabia from being exposed and facing consequences of its involvement in terrorist networks activities. In addition to identifying the nations in question, we must identify the interests as well as the actors; their agents. Let’s look at Saudi Arabia as one of the successful foreign nations that have mastered the art of ‘covering all the bases’ when it comes to buying and peddling influence in Washington DC, and identify its hired ‘agents’ and ‘agents by default.’ Foreign Agents by Default Although when it comes to our complex diplomatic threading with Saudi Arabia the easiest answer appears to be the ‘oil factor,’ upon further inspection the Saudi’s influence and role extends into other areas, such as the Military Industrial Complex and the too familiar Lobbying Games. According to the report published by the Federation of American Scientists (FAS), Saudi Arabia is America’s top customer. Since 1990 the U.S. government, through the Pentagon’s arms export program, has arranged for the delivery of more than $39.6 billion in foreign military sales to Saudi Arabia, and an additional $394 million worth of arms were delivered to the Saudi regime through the State Department’s direct commercial sales program. Oil rich Saudi Arabia is a cash-paying customer; a compulsive buyer of our weaponry. The list of U.S. sellers includes almost all the major players such as Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, and Boeing. The report by FAS establishes that despite the show of U.S. support demonstrated by this astounding quantity of arms sales, Saudi Arabia’s human rights record is extremely poor; see the U.S. State Department’s 2000 Human Rights Report. Saudi Arabia’s position as a strategic Gulf ally has blinded U.S. officials into approving a level and quality of arms exports that should never have been allowed to a non-democratic country with such a poor human rights record. Further, there are indications of Saudi’s active role as a player in the nuclear black-market. According to Mohammed Khilewi, first secretary at the Saudi mission to the United Nations until July 1994, the Saudis have sought a bomb since 1975; they sought to buy nuclear reactors from China, supported Pakistan's nuclear program, and contributed $5 billion to Iraq's nuclear weapons program between 1985 and 1990. While the U.S. government vocally opposes the development or procurement of ballistic missiles by non-allies, it has been very quiet in Saudi Arabia’s case, considering the fact that it possesses the longest-range ballistic missiles of any developing country. The Military Industrial Complex certainly seems to be a winner in having the congressional report pertaining to the Saudi government’s role in supporting the 9/11 terrorist activities being classified. The exposure would have meant grounds for U.S. sanctions and retributions; it would have risked the loss of billions of dollars in revenue from its ‘top customer.’ These companies don’t even have to officially register as foreign agents; after all, their strong loyalty and unbreakable bond with foreign elements exists by default; it is called mutual benefit. They are ‘Foreign Agents by Default.’ This holds true for other parties and players involved within the MIC network; the contractors and the investors. Let’s look at one of these famous and influential players; another foreign agent even if only by default; a man who defended the Saudis against a lawsuit brought by the 9/11 victims’ family members; a man who happens to be the senior counsel for the Carlyle Group, which invests heavily in defense companies and is the nation's 10th largest defense contractor with ties to the Saudi Royal Family, Enron, Global Crossing, among others; James Baker; Papa Bush’s Secretary of State. On the morning of September 11th, 2001, Baker was reportedly at a Carlyle investor conference with members of the Bin Laden family in the Ritz Carlton in Washington DC, while Bush Sr. was on the payroll of the Carlyle group. The Carlyle Group, a Washington, DC based private equity firm that employs numerous former high-ranking government officials with ties to both political parties, was the ninth largest Pentagon contractor between 1998 and 2003, an ongoing Center for Public Integrity investigation into Department of Defense contracts found. According to this report, overall, six private investment firms, including Carlyle, received nearly $14 billion in Pentagon deals between 1998 and 2003. Considering the fact that Saudi Arabia is the top buyer of the U.S. weapons industry, Carlyle’s investment and its stake, and of course Jimmy Baker’s far reaching influence within the Pentagon and congress, everything seems to come together and fit perfectly to shield this foreign interest no matter the price to be paid by the American public. The political action committees (PACs) of the biggest defense companies have given $14.2 million directly to federal candidates since Clinton's first presidential bid, according to the Center for Responsive Politics (CRP). In 1997 alone the defense industry spent $49.5 million to lobby the nation's decision-makers. Between 1998 and 2004, for the six-year period, Boeing Company spent more than $57 million in lobbying. For the same period of time, Lockheed Martin poured over $55 million into lobbying activities. Northrop Grumman exceeded both by investing $83 million in lobbying, and based on a report issued by POGO, it contributed over $4 million to individuals and PACs. With ‘dime a dozen’ generals on their boards of directors, numerous high-powered ex congressmen and senators at their disposal in the ‘K Street Lobby Quarter,’ tens of millions of dollars in campaign donations, and billions of dollars at stake, the Military Industrial Complex surely had all the incentives to act just as foreign agents would, and fight for their highly valued client; the Saudi Government. They appear to have had all the reasons to ensure that the report would not see the light of the day; no matter what the effect on the country, its security, and its interests. K Street Lobby Quarter The fact that Saudi Arabia pours large sums into lobbying firms and public relations companies with close ties to congress does not come as a big surprise. The FARA database under the DOJ website lists Qorvis Communications as one of Saudi Arabia’s registered foreign agents. In 2003, for only a six months period, Qorvis received more than $11 million from the Saudi government. Another firm, Loeffler Tuggey Pauerstein Rosenthal LLP, another registered foreign agent, received more than $840,000 for the same six-month period, and the list goes on. Just for this six month period the government of Saudi Arabia paid a total of more than $14 million to 13 lobbying and public relations companies; all registered as foreign agents. Why do the Saudis spend nearly $20 million per year in lobbying activities in the U.S. via their hired agents? What kind of return on investment are they getting out of the United States Congress? Let’s take Loeffler’s group and examine its value for the Saudi government, since it was paid over $3 million in three years between 2003 and 2005. The firm was founded by former Republican Congressman Tom Loeffler of Texas. Loeffler served in the Republican Leadership as Deputy Whip, and as Chief Deputy Whip during his third and fourth term. He was a member of the powerful Appropriations Committee, Energy and Commerce Committee and Budget Committee. In the two Bush campaigns for governor, Loeffler, who contributed $141,000, was the largest donor. In 1998, he served as national co-chair of the Republican National Committee's "Team 100" program for donors of $100,000 or more, and afterwards held the same title during George W. Bush's presidential campaign. Loeffler’s generosity extends to the members of congress as well. In 6 years, he has given more than $185,000 to members of congress, 97% of it going to only Republican members. During the same six-year period, Loeffler’s firm received more than $18 million in lobbying fees. The firm’s managing director happens to be William L. Ball. Ball served as Chief of Staff to Senators John Tower (R-TX) and Herman Talmadge (D-GA). In 1985, he joined the Reagan Administration as Assistant Secretary of State for Legislative Affairs. Later he was assigned to the White House to serve President Reagan as his chief liaison to the Congress. Wallace Henderson is also a Partner; he was Chief Counsel and Chief of Staff to Representative W. J. Tauzin (R-LA), Chief of Staff to U.S. Senator John Breaux (D-LA). By having foreign agents such as the Loeffler Group, in addition to their foreign agents by default, the MIC, the Saudis seem to have all their bases covered. Former secretaries and deputy secretaries with open access to the current ones, former congressmen and senators who used to be positioned on strategically valuable committees and know the rules of the congressional game, and millions of dollars available to be spent and channeled and re-channeled to various PACs go a long way toward ensuring results. Money counts. Money is needed to bring in votes. Professional skills and discretion are required to get this money to various final destinations. The registered foreign agents, the lobby groups, are geared for this task. The client is happy in the end; so are the foreign agents and the congressional actors. Other Savvy Nations Of course, the sanction and legitimization of far reaching foreign influence and strongholds in the U.S., despite the many dire consequences endured by its citizens, is not limited to the government of Saudi Arabia. Numerous well-documented cases can be cited for others such as Turkey, Pakistan, and Israel, to name a few. I won’t get into the details and history of my own case, where the government invoked the state secrets privilege to gag my case and the congress in order to ‘protect certain sensitive diplomatic relations.’ The country, the foreign influence, in this case was the Republic of Turkey. The U.S. government did so despite the far reaching consequences of burying the facts involved, and disregarded the interests and security of the nation; all to protect a quasi ally engaged in numerous illegitimate activities within the global terrorist networks, nuclear black-market and narcotics activities; an ally who happens to be another compulsive and loyal buyer of the Military Industrial Complex; an ally who happens to be another savvy player in recruiting top U.S. players as its foreign agents and spending million of dollars per year to the lobbying groups headed by many ‘formers.’ Turkey’s agent list includes generals such as Joseph Ralston and Brent Scowcroft, former statesmen such as William Cohen and Marc Grossman, and of course famous ex-congressmen such as Bob Livingston and Stephen Solarz. Turkey too seems to have all its bases covered. Another well-known and documented case involves Pakistan. Over two decades ago Richard Barlow, an intelligence analyst working for then-Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney issued a startling report. After reviewing classified information from field agents, he had determined that Pakistan, despite official denials, had built a nuclear bomb. In the March 29, 1993 issue of New Yorker, Seymour Hersh noted that “even as Barlow began his digging, some senior State Department officials were worried that too much investigation would create what Barlow called embarrassment for Pakistan.” Barlow's conclusion was politically inconvenient. A finding that Pakistan possessed a nuclear bomb would have triggered a congressionally mandated cutoff of aid to the country, and it would have killed a $1.4-billion sale of F-16 fighter jets to Islamabad. A few months later a Pentagon official downplayed Pakistan's nuclear capabilities in his testimony to Congress. When Barlow protested to his superiors, he was fired. A few years later, the Executive Branch would slap Barlow with the State Secrets Privilege. As we all now know, Pakistan provided direct nuclear assistance to Iran and Libya. During the Cold War, the U.S. put up with Pakistani lies and deception about their nuclear activities, it did not enforce its restrictions on Pakistan's nuclear program when it counted, and as a result Pakistan ended up with a U.S.-made nuclear weapons system. Yet again, after 9/11, the Bush administration issued a waiver ending the implementation of almost all sanctions on Pakistan because of the perceived need for Pakistani assistance in the fight against Al Qaeda and the Taliban, who ironically were brought to power by direct U.S. support in the 1980s in the first place. Weiss, in the May-June 2004 issue of the Bulletin states: “We are essentially back where we were with Pakistan in the 1980s. It is apparent that it has engaged in dangerous nuclear mischief with North Korea, Iran, and Libya (and perhaps others), but thus far without consequences to its relationship with the United States because of other, overriding foreign policy considerations--not the Cold War this time, but the war on terrorism.” He continues: “But now there is a major political difference. It was one thing for Pakistan, a country with which the United States has had good relations generally, to follow India and produce the bomb for itself. It is quite another for Pakistan to help two-thirds of the "axis of evil” to get the bomb as well.” FARA & LDA An agent of a ‘foreign principal’ is defined as any individual or organization which acts at the order, request, or under the direction or control of a foreign principal, or whose activities are directed by a foreign principal who engages in political activities, or acts in a public relations capacity for a foreign principal, or solicits or dispenses any thing of value within the United States for a foreign principal, or represents the interests of a foreign principal before any agency or official of the U.S. government. In 1938, in response to the large number of German propaganda agents in the pre-WWII U.S., Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) was established to insure that the American public and its lawmakers know the source of propaganda intended to sway public opinion, policy, and laws. The Act requires every agent of a foreign principal to register with the Department of Justice and file forms outlining its agreements with, income from, and expenditures on behalf of the foreign principal. Any agent testifying before a committee of Congress must furnish the committee with a copy of his most recent registration statement. The agent must keep records of all his activities and permit the Attorney General to inspect them. However, as is the case with many laws, the Act is filled with exemptions and loopholes that allow minimization of, and in some cases complete escape from, warranted scrutiny. There are a number of exemptions. For example, persons whose activities are of a purely commercial nature or of a religious, academic, and charitable nature are exempt. Any agent who is engaged in lobbying activities and is registered under the Lobbying Disclosure Act (LDA) is exempt. The LDA of 1995 was passed after decades of effort to make the regulation and disclosure of lobbying the federal government more effective. However, LDA also has serious and important loopholes and limitations that can be summed up as: Inadequate Disclosure, Inadequate Enforcement, and Inadequate Regulation of Conduct. The recent congressional scandals make this point very clear. In addition, neither act deals with an important issue: Conflict of Interest. Many of these agents, with their loyalty to the foreign hand that feeds them, end up being appointed to various positions, commissions and special envoys by our government. Recall Kissinger and his appointment to head the 9/11 Commission, and of course the recent revelation by Woodward on his advisory position to the current White House. Take a look at Jimmy Baker’s current appointment on the Iraq commission. Same goes for the father of all the ‘dime a dozen generals’, Brent Scowcroft, and one of his new protégés, General Joseph Ralston. In short, neither FARA nor LDA creates meaningful oversight, control, or enforcement; neither deals with conflict of interest issues, and neither provides any deterrence or consequences for unethical or illegal conduct. It used to be congressional ‘pork projects’ and ‘corporate influence’ that raised eyebrows now and then; here and there. Gone are those days. Today the unrestricted and uncontrollable money game and influence peddling tricks within the major decision-making and policy producing bodies of the U.S. government have reached new heights; yet, no raised eyebrows are registered. Sadly, today, a new version of ‘The Manchurian Candidate’ would have to be produced as a documentary. The other day I received a request to sign on to a petition put forth by a group of 9/11 family members urging the congress to reopen the investigations of 9/11 and declassify the infamous 27-pages which deal with foreign governments, U.S. allies, that provided support for those who carried out the attacks on our nation. My heart goes out to them. I do sympathize with them. I am known to take on similar propositions and methods of activism myself. However, looking at the realities, seeing what it takes to get things done in Washington, realizing how this beast works in the Real Sin City, I would encourage them to look at the root cause, rather than the symptoms. There are only two ways I can see that can bring about what they have been fighting for and what the majority of us desire to see in terms of bringing about Truth, Oversight, and Accountability; Justice. The family members, and their supporters, us, either have to tackle the major cause; the corruption of our government officials via unrestricted and undisciplined ‘revolving doors’ and ‘foreign influence & lobby’ practices, and push for expedient meaningful reforms by the new ambitious congress, and have them prove to us their worth. Or, they may as well give up their long-held integrity, go bid high for one or two former statesmen, hire a few dime a dozen generals, and buy themselves a couple of ex-congressmen turned lobbyists; that will do the job. # # # # Sibel Edmonds is the founder and director of National Security Whistleblowers Coalition (NSWBC). Ms. Edmonds worked as a language specialist for the FBI. During her work with the bureau, she discovered and reported serious acts of security breaches, cover-ups, and intentional blocking of intelligence that had national security implications. After she reported these acts to FBI management, she was retaliated against by the FBI and ultimately fired in March 2002. Since that time, court proceedings on her case have been blocked by the assertion of “State Secret Privilege”; the Congress of the United States has been gagged and prevented from any discussion of her case through retroactive re-classification by the Department of Justice. Ms. Edmonds is fluent in Turkish, Farsi and Azerbaijani; and has a MA in Public Policy and International Commerce from George Mason University, and a BA in Criminal Justice and Psychology from George Washington University. PEN American Center awarded Ms. Edmonds the 2006 PEN/Newman's Own First Amendment Award. (Sibel provides links to everything she mentions here, but it was too much for me to copy. If you click on Sibel's own posting of this article, you can press all her links)
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-36) not displayed.
.
.
.
#37. To: palo verde (#0)
Hi palo, mice to see you. You get tired of the bots on ElPee or are you here slumming? ;0)
“The tendency of democracies is, in all things, to mediocrity, since the tastes, knowledge, and principles of the majority form the tribunal of appeal.” James Fenimore Cooper
That discomfort that is experienced is a direct result of conditioning by the same groups that you mention. The ADL has been in operation since 1913 and they've been "training" various American police forces since the early 1950's. Their presence in American schools wouldn't be tolerated if they were a Christian group. No other private group in America has "trained" more cops and students than the ADL. On top of that, the ADL is merely the tip of the Goldberg.
"...it is unlawful in the ordinary course of things or in a private house to murder a child; it should not be permitted any sect then to sacrifice children." -Thomas Jefferson
well done, Mark
Sibel bump. She, alone almost, talks about the Senate report with its 27 or so censored pages that only Graham had the guts to talk about. Saudi influence runs silent and deep, but it is telling, that not even one Senator defied Bush and read the 27 pages into the record. They could have dared Bush to come arrest them. But,then again, NO ONE wants to talk about the money and influence of the Saudis.
Certainly not the Bush family.
"The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer." Or the Dems, for that matter, either.
Saudi influence runs silent and deep, but it is telling, that not even one Senator defied Bush and read the 27 pages into the record. They could have dared Bush to come arrest them. But,then again, NO ONE wants to talk about the money and influence of the Saudis. So you take Graham's word at face value that only information relating to the Saudis was redacted? Perhaps there was incriminating information about another group whose influence "runs silent and deep." Regardless of the Saudis' ties to the WH due to oil, ( btw this is not too "silent" an issue since numerous books have been written re: the subject) on a more practical level politicians like Senator Graham from Florida relied heavily on votes and campaign contributions NOT from the Saudis but RATHER from American Jews. So common sense would suggest that it would have been in Graham's interest to point away from the hand that kept his butt in office over the years and the Saudis did not represent that hand. Here's some handy dandy stats for you to ponder about campaign contributions: http://www.jta.org/page_view_story.asp? intarticleid=17212&intcategoryid=3 "...While Arab Americans have made progress in fund raising, they lag considerably behind pro-Israel groups. From 1990 through 2004, Arab Americans gave $788,968 in individual donations, political action committee contributions and soft money to federal parties and candidates, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a Washington-based research and advocacy group. During the same period, pro-Israel groups and individuals donated $56.8 million." Gary Leupp, an an associate professor in the Department of History at Tufts University and coordinator of the Asian Studies Program, wrote an excellent article in counterpunch that reveals that the neocons and their tools ( Graham) made it their project to fault Saudi Arabia for 9/11 and for everything bad in the ME and in the Muslim world generally to purposely re-direct the sheeple's attention from the obvious. And in fact, what people on this forum and elsewhere forget is that the Saudi government begged the US gov't and 9/11 Commission report to release the redacted information to exonerate them from the implication that it was the Saudis that the 9/11 Commission was covering up for. This hardly sounds like the action of a guilty party - the Saudis wanting the information to be released to clear the air. The US gov't did not comply with the Saudis request and so this rumor about them being mentioned in the redacted pages still goes round and round the Internet. http://www.counterpunch.or g/leupp08092003.html "On Terrorism, Methodism, Saudi "Wahhabism" and the Censored 9-11 Report" August 08, 2003 "...Operation Vilify the Saudis began in earnest last summer. As usual, official thinking was first articulated in non-official think tanks. On June 6, 2002 the Hudson Institute (its mission: "to be America's premier source of applied research on enduring policy challenges"), which includes on its Board of Trustees such well-connected figures as Richard Perle, Max Singer, Donald Kagan, and Dan Quayle, sponsored a seminar entitled, "Discourses on Democracy: Saudi Arabia, Friend or Foe?" Among the participants was one Laurent Murawiec, RAND policy analyst, Senior Fellow at the Hudson Institute, and author of the (apparently forthcoming) book Taking Saudi Out of Arabia. On June 19, the Institute hosted a discussion of the best seller Hatred's Kingdom: How Saudi Arabia Supports the New Global Terrorism by former Israeli ambassador to the United Nations Dore Gold. On July 10, at the invitation of Perle (fervent Likudist and then chair of that mysterious, unaccountable "advisory" Defense Policy Board at the Pentagon), Murawiec spoke to the DPB as well. Saudi Arabia, he told the illustrious body, is the "kernel of evil" in the Middle East. In both his presentations he averred that Saudi nationals, with regime support, served in capacities "from planners to financiers, from cadre to foot-solider, from ideologist to cheerleader" in global terrorist activities. Murawiec's DPB talk, summarized on the front page of the Washington Post August 6, produced a political firestorm and official disclaimers. Colin Powell (irked by the episode) told the Saudi foreign minister that Murawiec's opinions had no bearing on U.S. policy (but of course, there was already a big and obvious disconnect between Powell-policy and Rumsfeld/Wolfowitz-policy.) Also in August, Hudson Institute's co-founder Max Singer presented a paper to the Pentagon's Office of Net Assessment, in which ("thinking outside the box" as Rumsfeld likes to say), he urged the dismemberment of Saudi Arabia, in the spirit of the post-World War I reconfiguration of what had been Ottoman Arab territory. The Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia could, Singer argued, constitute a new "Muslim Republic of East Arabia," peopled primarily by Shiite Muslims unsympathetic to the dominant "Wahhabi" school of Islam in Saudi Arabia, leaving Mecca and Medina in the hands of the "Wahhabis" while placing the oil fields, concentrated in the east, in the hands of western oil companies. [1] (The Saudi regime, meanwhile, was hit that same August with a one trillion dollar lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia by 9-11 family members, firefighters and rescue workers.) Not good times at all for Washington-Riyadh ties. True, President Bush hosted Saudi Arabian ambassador Bandar bin Sultan at an August lunch at his Texas ranch, and called Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah to assure him that these recent controversial presentations would not "affect the eternal friendship between the two countries." But in fact the relationship was fraying. The Saudis firmly opposed (in words) the U.S. invasion of Iraq and refused to participate in it. They were quietly requesting that U.S. troops be withdrawn from their country, where they'd been stationed since 1990 as a "temporary" measure preparatory to the Gulf War, their presence producing mounting anger among the citizenry. (The troops are now being redeployed to Qatar and Bahrain.) The Saudis are currently purchasing more weaponry from France, Russia, even China, than from the U.S. In this context, Congress released the above-mentioned report, with its censored pages that constitute the chapter spookily entitled (as if to legitimate in advance its withholding) "Certain Sensitive National Security Matters." The content of those pages has of course been leaked; they charge that Saudi nationals with known contacts to two of the 9-11 hijackers are also known to have received money and had contact with Saudi officials, and that Saudis have willfully provided al-Qaeda with assistance through Muslim charities. Josh Meyer's piece makes the case look really damning. He quotes an unnamed source "familiar with the report" as alleging, "If this comes out, it will blow the top off the relations with [the Saudi] government because the American people will just be outraged." (Imagine how anti-Saudi outrage would advantage the Bushites as their Iraq policy faces further scrutiny.) But if you read way, way down the Meyer article (paragraph 18 out of 19) you learn that "a host of senior intelligence and law enforcement officials" disagree with the report. Says one "official familiar with the classified section": "There is a lot of information in there that's inflammatory but not accurate, or inferential or open to interpretation. Some of it is based on information that is partial, fragmentary and wrong. It is certainly not conclusive." The Saudi government, naturally, was deeply upset by the allegations. On July 26, the Arab News, which reflects Riyadh's views, editorialized that the censored report was "nothing less than a charter for Saudi-bashing an invitation to the U.S. and other media to speculate It will be open season on Saudi Arabia." *****Riyadh urged transparency; Foreign Minister Saud Al-Faisal, who charged that the report "wrongfully and morbidly accused" the kingdom, made an emergency trip to Washington July 29 to urge the censored pages be released so that his government could make a detailed reply. In a statement issued after meeting Bush, he declared, "We have nothing to hide. And we do not seek nor do we need to be shielded. We believe that releasing the missing 28 pages will allow us to respond to any allegations in a clear and credible manner; and remove any doubts about the Kingdom's true role in the war against terrorism and its commitment to fight it." But his plaint was rejected; Bush declared it would make "no sense to declassify [the censored pages]because it would help the enemy." Instead we have instead more secrecy, more scary leaks.****** Sound familiar? Again, it looks like a split between the mainstream, the traditional "host of senior intelligence and law enforcement officials" to whom Meyer alludes, and the cutting-edge proponents of deception-as-policy, in this case operating through a Congressional investigation. (I don't mean to suggest that those steering the investigation at the time of the joint inquiry, Florida Democrat Bob Graham and Alabama Republican Richard Shelby, are full participants in the neocon cabal, but it's quite likely that the intelligence they credit passed through the same hands that provided us with evidence that Saddam and bin Laden have been buddies for a long time. The new chairman and vice-chairman of the committee are Kansas Republican Pat Roberts and West Virginia Democrat Jay Rockefeller. Roberts is a Bush loyalist, Rockefeller a somewhat timid critic of the war.)..."
We'll disagree on Saudi culpability.
Remember that we simultaneously prop up the House of Saud and the House of Zion - it keeps the profits rolling in...
Thank you for the condensed version.
"The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer." Not to mention the current defacto alliance between the Saudis, other Sunnis states and Israel against Hizbullah and Iran. Tony Khater's blog is thoughtprovoking and very interesting.
The House of Saud keeps profits rolling in for oil industry and it is a nation that contributes a fossil fuel resource directly to our nation that keeps our auto wheels rolling as well as the wheels of our industry. How does the House of Zion keep the profits rolling? I see US $ going the other way with regards to the House of Zion.
They're both rackets. Taxpayer $$ goes to Israel, comes back in the form of congressional bribes for more taxpayer $$ to go to Israel. In return we lose our civil liberties, gain a whole slew of new enemies every year, not to mention thousands of dead/wounded Americans and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis (and whoever is next). Of course the entire Bush Cabal are now individually multi-billionaires.
"The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer." Facts on the ground now suggest otherwise. I read in the Asia Times acouple of weeks ago that the House of Saud was really pissed about Israel's recent attack on Lebanon. Unbeknowns to most of us in America, the Saudis had contributed a heck of a lot money to Lebanon in the past to rebuild Lebanon after the previous Israeli occupation and destruction of Lebanon. The Saudis wanted to get a self-serving happy happy the Saudis are so generous foothold of course. So this summer the Israelis were in fact destroying the Saudis' INVESTMENT in Lebanon. Secondly, I posted an article a week ago or so that had the House of Saud curiously acting as Iran's defender in a round about way - they sent their representatives to the WH to plead with GWB NOT TO ATTACK Iran because it would inflame the Muslims in the ME region worse than the way things exist now due to Iraq and Lebanon. The House of Saud would not be able to withstand the negative effects of another ME war where they are viewed as being too pro-America.
I think the Saudis weren't unhappy with Israel's attack on Hizbullah, but the sheer savagery of Israel's campaign and Saudi public opinion(even monarchial theocracies need to be in touch with the public pulse) caused them to think twice. Especially since Hizbullah stood up to the Israelis. The Shias of Saudia's provinces, the oil rich ones, have been kept under control. A US attack on Iran may cause them to get restive.
I'm a Reader's Digest kind of guy these days. Actually, I've always been that way - I went through college using the Classics Illustrated comics for my English/Literature classes. It works for me.
Their presence over there insures that the wars keep going on, is my take. The state of Israel is a blasphemous, unholy, unGodly creation of the zionist/marxist/vatican/illuminatti/nwo/ whatever you want to call the satanists that are running this planet. imo
Secondly, I posted an article a week ago or so that had the House of Saud curiously acting as Iran's defender in a round about way - they sent their representatives to the WH to plead with GWB NOT TO ATTACK Iran because it would inflame the Muslims in the ME region worse than the way things exist now due to Iraq and Lebanon. The House of Saud would not be able to withstand the negative effects of another ME war where they are viewed as being too pro-America. Thanks for this information that I'd not seen. It supports the notion that X41's team is being recalled to reign in smirk's madness.
I'm sorry but I still don't see how the House of Saud is anywhere near as harmful to America as the House of Zion. Saying that they are "both rackets" - huh, how does that translate into benefits or deficits to our nation's foreign policy and economic policies? American soldiers are not dying in Saudi Arabia for the princes' benefit. In fact the House of Saud is building a fence on the border between Saudi Arabia and Iraq to keep the tsunami of Iraqi refugees and insurgents we have created in Iraq from rolling over into Saudi Arabia. Our invasion of Iraq has caused significent problems for the stability of the Saudi's Kingdom. Also, the only reason we are not paying $5 or more dollars per gallon for gas at the pumps these days is because Saudi Arabia consistently sides with America and under cuts other OPEC partners who want to reduce oil supplies to increase the value of fossil fuel on the world markets. The Saudis do not just benefit the Bush Family's bottom line. The Saudis benefit Americans and American industry. While the Saudis are no longer #1 exporter of fossil fuel products to America, Saudi remains #4 or so, it's Saudi Arabia's important pro-America positioning at OPEC meetings that keeps folks like Nigeria and Venuezuela in line and keeps prices much lower than they would be if we did not have Saudi Arabia on our side. The House of Saud may not be the nicest guys on this planet, but our relationship with them brings far more benefits to the American people at large than most of us are willing to credit them with. We need Saudi Arabia far more than they need us. In fact now adays the House of Saud's big albatross in the Muslim world is the fact that they are allied with us. Putting Israel and Saudi Arabia on the same level of negatives to America has no basis in fact. Israel costs us tax money. Israel recycles $ we give them to buy off pols' votes that are counter to America's interests. Our alliance with Israel caused us to invade Iraq. And now Israel is trying to propel our nation into anoother war with Iran. As for the counterpunch article if it was too long for you to read, here's the telling fact with regards to the 9/11 Commission report and Graham leading people to think the 28 pages of the redacted information was for Saudi Arabia's benefit...the Saudis asked for the 28 pages of information to be released to clear their names and GWB refused to comply with their request. So therefore the foreign gov't that was being protected in the redacted pages was not the Saudi Government. It was another foreign government. Consider that the Commission's Executive Director was Philip D. Zelikow.
Thanks. Try and find a copy of House of Bush, House of Saud - it explains most of the ideas that we're discussing. The main theme is how, going back to the Brits, the conquering nation selects a MINORITY group of people to govern the majority of the rest country with the on-going support of the conquering nation. We can see this plan in action around the world.
I don't think anyone was.
"The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer." robin: Putting Israel and Saudi Arabia on the same level of negatives to America has no basis in fact. I thought you did in earlier posts on this thread when you agreed with lodwick that they're "both rackets" and when you agreed with swarthyguy when the subject came up about Graham implicating the Saudis in the 28 page redacted 9/11 commission report. I guess I misread your comments to be moral equivocation about Israel and Saudis being equal "evils" to our nation. They are not on equal footing at all. It could be argued that our gov't alliance with Saudi Arabia is a necessary evil., whereas the same cannot be said about Israel. With regards to the book you mention House of Bush, House of Saud by Craig Unger, I'm sure it does a good job of damning the relationship that exists otherwise Michael Moore would not have included his interview with Unger in his movie, yes. Btw, did some one on this forum bring out the fact that Rahm Emmanuel's brother was responsible for cobbling together the necessary funding for Moor's 911 movie? The House of Saud helps Americans in addition to helping feather the coffers of the Bush Family bank account. And the Bush presidents are far from the only pols who supported an alliance of America with the House of Saud - I think our alliance dates back to the Eisenhower years. And this lengthy bipartisan alliance with the Saudis is because the alliance is beneficial to this country when all is said and done. Without the help of the Saudis America would be screwed. However, without Israel America would profit greatly. One is a necessary evil the other is not. Much like comparing abortion to murder as an analogy of a different order. Read the counterpunch article I posted earlier. Here's the link again. The neocons made it a conscious goal to back authors and research studies to purposely point fingers at the Saudis as being America's great albatross, an "evil" in our midst to draw attention from the obvious problem. Who knows maybe Unger might have been part of the neocons' campaign. http://www.counterpunch.or g/leupp08092003.html "On Terrorism, Methodism, Saudi "Wahhabism" and the Censored 9-11 Report"
If they did I missed it. Emmanuel's nothing but Trouble, with a capital T. There are plenty of rackets and evil to ponder, some much greater than others. I don't have a score card, but one really isn't necessary.
"The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer." I have read that article - and while Leupp makes a convincing case, I fear he discounts the power of theology, how a secretive subsect of a religion, wielding great wealth and great power, operating behind the cover of a totalitarian theocratic monarchial structure, having become very knowledgeable in various facets of intelligence, via a long cooperation with the CIA, could grow in a host that is ostensibly allied with the US. Simply put, 11.9 was the Mother of all BlowBacks. SaudiUSA Alliance to overthrow the Soviets using various Islami fundy groups was the catalyst. It's not like the US hasn't supported Islamic fundamentalism - Two books that make a decent case - Dollars for Terror by Richard LaBeviere And The Devil's Game - How the US helped unleash fundamentalist Islam by Richard Dreyfuss
robin: If they did I missed it. Emmanuel's nothing but Trouble, with a capital T. There are plenty of rackets and evil to ponder, some much greater than others. I don't have a score card, but one really isn't necessary. Here's the link to brother Ari Emanuel's efforts that got Fahrenheit distributed through a patrnership of Endeavor and Lions Gate, IFC, Fellowship Adventure Group and most importantly the Weinstein Brothers from Miramax. Otherwise Moore's film would have rotted in Disney's unreleased film library. http://www.fahrenhei t911.com/about/lapremiere/02.php Also, fyi, Ari Emanuel politicked the Hollwood community to never give Mel Gibson a job again after Mel's drunk "anti-semetic" encounter this summer. Ari is a big IsraelFirster. As for evils, I am a realist - I see some evils as necessary for the world to go round so I respectually disagree with you regarding the Saudis.
The Saudis WANTED, in fact REQUESTED that the 28 redacted pages of the 9/11 Commission report released to the American public. They did this because they had nothing to hide. In fact, the House of Saud is hated as much or more than the USA by OBL and AQ. Why would the Saudis take part in an attack against America? Like Leupp and Justin Raimondo have argued, [http://www.antiwar.com/justin/ j121802.html ]it makes no sense whatsoever for the Saudis to be party to 911. Furthermore, the Saudis had a good deal of $ tied up in the USA - an economic hit like 911 would not be helpful to them - nor would the Saudis benefit from US "revenge" ie. post 9/11 regime change plans against Iraq. Remember it was the Saudis who helped underwrite 41's Gulf War to repel Saddam from Kuwait's oil fields, on the condition that the USA not remove Saddam from power. The Saudis did not want a political reconfiguration of ME. There is only one single nation that benefited from 9/11 - in the words of Netanyahu after 911, "we are all Israelis now." I am not convinced that Israel directly caused 9/11 to happen but I have no doubt that the Israelis had prior knowledge that 911 was going down - the Israeli agents were camera ready to film 9/11. Read the transcripts of Carl Cameron's 4 part series that was shown on FOX News in December 2001 about Israel's anti-American antics prior to 911. These items have since been removed from the FOX News official web site but informationclearinghouse kept the records. Those facts are an eye opener. There is no way that the Saudis had such a spy network set up in the USA - the Saudis cannot keep their oil rigs running without American expertise, never mind set up intel networks in the US prior to 911. Intelligence gathering, technology generally is not the House of Saud's strong suit you must admit. There is a single ME nation that excels in both areas.
sibel is so important to america but now the democrats are controlling the republicans too love, shallow http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=166361&Disp=All#C149
Um, I think Scrapper2 knows what she is talking about.
shallow shit?
our media (as watchdog) is worthless look who they took their bosom the fraudster Joe Wilson and the fraudulent case of the Valerie Plame outing the media as it is now is merely Democratic propaganda machine your perception of events is very different than mine.
As did Russian, French, Egyptian, Jordanian, and Indian intel services. The Saudis and Pakistanis knew, because they were instrumental in carrying out the attacks. As I said, we will disagree.
There is far more to implicate US Intelligence, financial and corporate sources in the Attacks then Israel. You can believe what you want. If Israel as the center of history and worldwide machinations floats your boat, so be it. As it is, like many historical pivotal events, 11/9 is virtually a question of faith. Very few minds left to change from what they currently believe.
Technology, agree. Espionage, don't, the Saudis have learned from their long cooperation with CIA and the British. And, it's not like they were completely dumbfucks to begin with. Arab political machinations can be as Byzantine as the Byzantinians. It's a stereotype you're catering to, that somehow the Saudis are not capable of such clever and wily deviousness. Why, we hardly even know the name of their intelligence service.
oui, ma chere.
Yo, Palo!
Leveller!!!
All the refugees from Likud Post are here: the banned, the near-banned, and the would-be banned. You should enjoy these happy hunting grounds.
Leveller, were you banned at LP? I was away from LP from time of the elections now that Ron Paul Presidency is the solution to everything Love, Palo
No. I made the switch after Aristeides was banned. I checked Likud Post comment lines and discovered others had been banned, apparently for criticizing Israel.
I am not very much in the loop on LP I got email from a friend of mine she wrote in email that Aristeides was the greatest poster on LP he did some great work on LP
#38. To: who knows what evil, robin, Tauzero, Cynicom, christine (#34)
I used to be very uncomfortable with people that were critical of Israel or Jews, but it is becoming apparent that organizations like the ADL, AIPAC, and PNAC do NOT have the best interests of this country or its people at heart.
#39. To: Kamala (#27)
#40. To: palo verde, Destro (#0)
#41. To: swarthyguy (#40)
NO ONE wants to talk about the money and influence of the Saudis.
---Henry Kissinger, New York Times, October 28, 1973
#42. To: robin (#41)
#43. To: swarthyguy, robin, Diana, All (#40)
She, alone almost, talks about the Senate report with its 27 or so censored pages that only Graham had the guts to talk about.
#44. To: scrapper2 (#43)
#45. To: swarthyguy, scrapper2, all (#44)
#46. To: lodwick (#45)
Remember that we simultaneously prop up the House of Saud and the House of Zion - it keeps the profits rolling in...
---Henry Kissinger, New York Times, October 28, 1973
#47. To: lodwick (#45)
#48. To: lodwick, robin (#45)
Remember that we simultaneously prop up the House of Saud and the House of Zion - it keeps the profits rolling in...
#49. To: scrapper2, lodwick (#48)
---Henry Kissinger, New York Times, October 28, 1973
#50. To: swarthyguy (#47)
Not to mention the current defacto alliance between the Saudis, other Sunnis states and Israel against Hizbullah and Iran.
#51. To: scrapper2 (#50)
#52. To: robin (#46)
Thank you for the condensed version.
#53. To: scrapper2 (#48)
How does the House of Zion keep the profits rolling? I see US $ going the other way with regards to the House of Zion.
#54. To: scrapper2 (#50)
I read in the Asia Times acouple of weeks ago that the House of Saud was really pissed about Israel's recent attack on Lebanon. Unbeknowns to most of us in America, the Saudis had contributed a heck of a lot money to Lebanon in the past to rebuild Lebanon after the previous Israeli occupation and destruction of Lebanon. The Saudis wanted to get a self-serving happy happy the Saudis are so generous foothold of course. So this summer the Israelis were in fact destroying the Saudis' INVESTMENT in Lebanon.
#55. To: robin, lodwick (#49)
They're both rackets.
#56. To: scrapper2 (#55)
I hate it when a friend puts up a good post to which I can't do justice.
#57. To: scrapper2 (#55)
Putting Israel and Saudi Arabia on the same level of negatives to America has no basis in fact.
---Henry Kissinger, New York Times, October 28, 1973
#58. To: robin, lodwick, swarthyguy (#57)
scrapper: Putting Israel and Saudi Arabia on the same level of negatives to America has no basis in fact.
#59. To: scrapper2 (#58)
did some one on this forum bring out the fact that Rahm Emmanuel's brother was responsible for cobbling together the necessary funding for Moor's 911 movie?
---Henry Kissinger, New York Times, October 28, 1973
#60. To: scrapper2 (#58)
(Edited)
#61. To: robin (#59)
scrapper: did some one on this forum bring out the fact that Rahm Emmanuel's brother was responsible for cobbling together the necessary funding for Moor's 911 movie?
#62. To: swarthyguy (#60)
have read that article - and while Leupp makes a convincing case, I fear he discounts the power of theology, how a secretive subsect of a religion, wielding great wealth and great power, operating behind the cover of a totalitarian theocratic monarchial structure, having become very knowledgeable in various facets of intelligence, via a long cooperation with the CIA, could grow in a host that is ostensibly allied with the US.
#63. To: Cynicom, christine, all (#7)
because she exposes the gangsters in congress
who just happen to be democrats
i don't know why god let the democrats win this election
but there must be a reason for it
because god also told bush to run for president
joe wilson and valerie plame will be held accountable
for their actions
sibel will see to that
vice president cheney is a good man
who did not deserve the smear
that those whores plame and wilson place upon him
#64. To: swarthyguy, Scrapper2 (#44)
We'll disagree on Saudi culpability.
#65. To: shallow merde (#63)
#66. To: shallow merde, palo verde (#63)
the media will never pay attention to Sibel Edmonds because our mass media is in bed with the Democrats and Sibel exposes Democrat corruption
#67. To: scrapper2 (#62)
I have no doubt that the Israelis had prior knowledge that 911
#68. To: Diana (#64)
#69. To: scrapper2 (#62)
Intelligence gathering, technology generally is not the House of Saud's strong suit you must admit
#70. To: Diana (#65)
#71. To: palo verde (#0)
#72. To: leveller (#71)
Yo, Palo!
long time no see
I am so happy to see you 
Love, Palo
#73. To: palo verde (#72)
long time no see
#74. To: leveller (#73)
they just had fundraiser, and you were not there as my partner
I am used to being team with you
till about a week ago
because I had stopped paying attention to the news
I clicked it on to lurk on fundraiser, then started handing out bouquets
then suddenly it was announced Ron Paul was running for President
I jumped out of my skin with JOY
and have been psoting my heart out about Ron Paul Presidency ever since
altho I am not posting on the other news threads
it is pointless to argue any more about where the source of evil is
#75. To: palo verde (#74)
Leveller, were you banned at LP?
#76. To: leveller (#75)
I made the switch after Aristeides was banned
(you know what a kook I am)
but my intution is you were never banned
I am glad it is confirmed
(I had no idea she was on LP
she never let on, because she and I don't always see eye-to-eye
(in fact she had me on bozo :)
she was really shook up when he got banned
supporting Sibel Edmonds, and an another issue I really cared about
he is talented poster
LP's loss is 4um's gain
plus they got you
you're a great poster too
Love, Palo
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest