In the July Issue:
Researchers Release 9/11 Pentagon Attack Report
By Sheila Casey / RCFP
Among 9/11 truth activists, there is little disagreement about what happened at the World Trade Center and at Shanksville. Although it’s not possible to know all the details of what transpired until there is an independent, impartial investigation, there is wide agreement among 9/11 researchers that World Trade Center buildings 1, 2 and 7 were brought down by controlled demolition and that the hole in the ground that was presented to us as the crash site of flight 93 in Shanksville does not contain the remnants of an airplane.
But when it comes to the Pentagon, the truth community has yet to reach a consensus, and 9/11 forums are filled with bitter arguments from proponents of one view or another. It is assumed by most savvy 9/11 activists that the truth movement has been infiltrated by intelligence agents tasked with crippling activists in any way possible, and that many of the most strident arguments come, not from sincere researchers, but from disinformation agents intent on spreading confusion and discord. These agents are in a position to know the truth about what happened and can be expected to mount vigorous arguments against that truth, the better to keep the movement divided and to prevent a clear, cogent message about the false flag attack at the Pentagon from reaching the masses.
To many activists, the Pentagon attack stands as the single most incriminating feature of 9/11. The official conspiracy theory (OCT) would have us believe that the world’s only superpower, with the most powerful military that has ever existed, was unable to defend its own headquarters 51 minutes after the north WTC tower had been hit, 34 minutes after the south WTC tower had been hit, and 41 minutes after the FAA knew that there was an emergency aboard flight 77 (the plane that supposedly hit the Pentagon). Regarding flight 77, Wikipedia states:
“By 08:56, the flight was turned around, and the transponder had been disabled. The FAA was aware at this point that there was an emergency aboard the plane. By this time, American Airlines Flight 11 had already crashed into the World Trade Center, and United Airlines Flight 175 was known to have been hijacked and within minutes of also striking the World Trade center.”
Where was America’s air defense during the 41 minutes after it was known that flight 77 was hijacked and before the Pentagon was attacked?
Read the full story here.
US and British Stoke Iran Unrest
Caught in a deception. BBC misrepresents photo of Ahmadinejad rally as opposition protest. Was it part of a propaganda campaign?
By Matt Sullivan / RCFP
In the heat of the election controversy in Iran, the BBC was caught in a rather embarrassing misrepresentation. In a page one story, the BBC claimed that thousands of followers of opposition candidate Mousani turned out to rally in defiance of official bans on such demonstrations. As proof, the BBC displayed a photo of a sea of placard-carrying supporters. The only problem: the photo was actually of Ahmadinejhad supporters at a government-sanctioned rally in Tehran.
The deception was exposed when the LA Times published a nearly identical photo which included a smiling, waving Ahmadinejhad in the foreground.
Was this embarrassing slip up just sloppy reporting on the part of the BBC or is something more sinister afoot?
Could the government-run British media monopoly be engaged in public “perception management” and propaganda?
It wouldn’t be the first time.
During the fall of Baghdad in 2003, BBC broadcast the famous “mass uprising” in which Iraqis toppled the Saddam Hussein statue. Only later did a wide-angle view of the event surface showing a mere handful of Iraqis orchestrated by US troops in what was clearly a staged photo-op event.
On September 11, 2001, the BBC famously reported the collapse of World Trade Center 7 more than twenty minutes before the building actually fell. Remarkably, the building can be seen standing tall in the background behind the reporter on the scene. Even more remarkable, the satellite feed from the live shot becomes fuzzy and the signal is “lost” just seconds before the building actually collapses. The BBC has no creditable explanation, as they claim to have ‘lost the tapes” of that broadcast. (Thankfully it is preserved on the internet.)
The use of propaganda to destabilize foreign countries is a well used tactic of US and British intelligence.
As reported in the Washington Post, Sunday Telegraph and elsewhere, in May 2007 President George W. Bush signed “A non-lethal Presidential Finding” (fatwa) on plans for a propaganda and disinformation campaign intended to destabilize and eventually topple the Iranian regime. The plan also included efforts to manipulate the country’s currency and international financial transactions.
The CIA would also supply communication equipment to enable opposition groups in Iran to bypass internet censorship.
It has also been reported by Seymour Hersh, among others, that the CIA is secretly funding militant ethnic separatist groups (terrorists) inside Iran.
In the past year there has been a wave of unrest: including bombing and assassinations of soldiers and government officials by Kurds in the west of the country, Azeris in the north, and Ahwazi Arabs in the southwest and Baluchis in the southeast.
Fred Burton, former US State Department Counter-terrorism agent, recently told the Sunday Telegraph. “The latest attacks inside Iran fall in line with US efforts to supply and train Iran’s ethnic minorities to destabilize the Iranian regime.”
On June 1, 2009, Iran hung a terrorist named Nasrollar Zehi for a bomb attack that killed eleven Revolutionary Guards in Zahedan. The Fars News Agency reported that the weapons used in the attack were British and US made.
The US admits to secretly funding opposition terrorists in Iran, and the Iranian government confirms it. George W. Bush authorized funding of propaganda and disinformation campaigns against Iran, and the BBC, by their actions, would seem to confirm this, too.
In the June Issue:
Pulitzer Prize Winning Story News Networks Won’t Report
By Matt Sullivan / RCFP
The Pulitzer Prize for investigative reporting was awarded last month to David Barstow of the New York Times but you didn’t hear a word about it from the TV and cable networks. The reason for their silence is obvious; they don’t want you to know what Barstow revealed: that the networks have been active participants in a Pentagon sponsored propaganda campaign intended to sell the Iraq and Afghanistan wars (among other things) to the American public.
In the words of the Pulitzer Committee, Barstow’s prize was “for his tenacious reporting that revealed how some retired generals, working as radio and television analysts, had been co-opted by the Pentagon to make its case for the war in Iraq, and how many of them also had undisclosed ties to companies that benefited from policies they defended.”
The prize-winning stories appeared in The New York Times on April 20, 2008 and November 29, 2008 and were the product of a three year “Freedom of Information” effort to wrench documentation of the propaganda effort out of the Department of Defense (DoD).
Barstow revealed Pentagon documents that repeatedly refer to the military analysts as “message force multipliers” or “surrogates” who could be counted on to deliver administration themes and messages to millions of Americans as if were their their own opinions.
The Pentagon-controlled pundits, most of them retired generals, were given hundreds of classified Pentagon briefings, provided with Pentagon-approved talking points and flown at Pentagon expense to Iraq and other sites. But this extraordinary access came with a condition. “Participants were instructed not to quote their briefers directly or otherwise describe their contacts with the Pentagon.” In their television appearances, the military analysts did not disclose their ties to the Pentagon, let alone that they were its surrogates. The military analysts were little more than puppets for the Pentagon. In the words of Robert S. Bevelacqua, a retired Green Beret who was a Fox News military analyst, “It was them saying, ‘We need to stick our hands up your back and move your mouth for you.’”
David Barstow wrote, “Records and interviews show how the Bush administration has used its control over access and information in an effort to transform the analysts into a kind of media Trojan horse — an instrument intended to shape terrorism coverage from inside the major TV and radio networks.”
The blatant refusal of the TV and cable news organizations involved to even mention what Barstow uncovered in his reporting, reveals a lot about the depth of the networks’ involvement in the deception. In fact, many of the Pentagon sponsored “analysts” named in Barstow’s story are still employed, still being given air time and are still spinning their views at the very same cable news outlets that now refuse to inform viewers about this Pulitzer Prize winning story.
NBC’s Brian Williams is singled out for particular criticism from Media Matters. “For his refusal to inform his readers about this now-Pulitzer-winning story is particularly notable given his direct personal involvement in the secret, joint attempts by NBC and McCaffrey to contain PR damage to NBC from Barstow’s story, compounded by the fact that NBC was on notice for these multiple conflicts as early as April, 2003, when The Nation first reported on them.” In fact, in the very same broadcast in which Williams concealed from his viewers any mention of the Pulitzer Prize winning story about the Pentagon propaganda program, he hosted commentary from one of the retired generals involved in that propaganda program.
Glenn Greenwald reported in Salon magazine that “CNN ran an 898-word story on the various Pulitzer winners — describing virtually every winner — but was simply unable to find any space even to mention David Barstow’s name, let alone inform their readers that he won the Prize for uncovering core corruption at the heart of CNN’s coverage of the Iraq War and other military-related matters. No other major television news outlet implicated by Barstow’s story mentioned his award, at least as far as I can tell.”
Even Congress has gotten involved, since government propaganda directed at the American public is clearly illegal. When Barstow’s stories first ran in April of 2008, Congress members were so concerned that 45 of them signed a letter requesting that the office of DoD Inspector General (IG) investigate the charges including claims that some of the retired generals had financial ties to defense contractors who benefited from their appearances.
In January of 2009 the IG released a report saying that its investigation could find no evidence of a concerted effort to assemble a group of talking heads who could be depended on to talk up DoD policy, and could not identify any retired military analysts (RMA’s) who had used their role in the imbedded analyst program to benefit a company with which they had ties.
Congressional critics called the report a “whitewash”.
On May 5, the Defense Department Inspector General’s office announced that it was withdrawing its report on the Pentagon pundit program, even taking the unusual step of removing the file from its website. “Shortly after publishing the report ... we became aware of inaccuracies in the data,” states the withdrawal memo from the Inspector General’s office. The office’s internal review of the report — which it has “refused to release,” according to the Times — “concluded that the report did not meet accepted quality standards.” The report relied on “insufficient or inconclusive” evidence, the memo admits. The Pentagon pundit program “has been terminated, and responsible senior officials are no longer employed by the Department.”
While the Defense department has withdrawn the whitewash report it is still refusing to investigate the propaganda program. While it says the program has been terminated we still have the Pentagon sponsored pundits appearing regularly on the “news”. While Congress complains, they have not taken action. Unsurprisingly, the networks refuse to cover their own criminal behavior. Now it’s up to Congress to demand that the Government Accountability Office and the Federal Communications Commission pursue real investigations on this (and any other) media propaganda programs.
Spanish Government Divided Over Indicting Bush Administration Torturers
By Sheila Casey / RCFP
An internationally renowned Spanish judge is attempting to prosecute six former Bush officials for their role in allowing torture at the US prison camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Despite being urged by the Spanish Attorney General to drop the case, Judge Baltasar Garzon has submitted the case to a lottery system which will now assign it at random to one of six high court judges. As one of those high court judges, Garzon has a one in six chance of getting the case back. Spain has jurisdiction in the case because five Spanish citizens or residents claim to have been tortured at Guantanamo Bay.
The language used by Spanish Attorney General Conde-Pumpido, such as calling the case “fraudulent,” has led some observers to conclude that Conde-Pumpido bowed to pressure from the Obama administration. The AG also said: “If one is dealing with a crime of mistreatment of prisoners of war, the complaint should go against those who physically carried it out.”
US Attorney General Eric Holder said that he isn’t going to prosecute any Central Intelligence Agency employees who water-boarded suspects. Holder said that it would be unfair to prosecute those who actually carried out acts of torture because it was considered legal at the time by the Justice Department. Holder also said the US would defend the CIA torturers against attempted prosecutions from overseas.
The 1984 Convention Against Torture states: “An order from a superior officer or a public authority may not be invoked as a justification of torture…” Both Spain and the US are signatory to the Convention, which the US was involved in negotiating.
Judge Baltasar Garzon is well known as a fearless crusader against tyranny and torture. Garzon had Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet served with an arrest warrant while he was visiting Britain in 1998. During 17 years in office, Pinochet ordered the murders of thousands of his political enemies and the torture and imprisonment of tens of thousands of others.
Read the full story here.
Noted For The Record Without Comment
Scientists Find Explosives in World Trade Center Dust
By Matt Sullivan / RCFPScientists have detected flecks of undetonated explosives in four samples of dust from the World Trade Center catastrophe. A paper just published in the peer-reviewed Open Chemical Physics Journal describes the findings of nine scientists after 18 months of work.
The paper is titled “Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe”. The primary authors are Niels Harrit, professor of chemistry at the University of Copenhagen, and Jeffrey Farrer, professor of Physics at Brigham Young University (BYU), Provo, Utah.
The research was initiated when Dr. Steven Jones, then also at BYU, observed small red/grey chips in the magnetic fraction of dust he was analyzing from the WTC disaster. The scientists studied four independently collected samples of dust. One sample was collected by a Manhattan resident about ten minutes after the collapse of the second WTC tower, two samples were collected the next day, and a fourth was collected about a week later. The properties of these chips were analyzed using optical microscopy, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), X-ray energy dispersive spectroscopy (XEDS), and differential scanning calorimetry (DSC).
After careful study of the material the scientists concluded that the red component of the bi-layer chips is a
high-tech explosive nano-material known as super-thermite. The material is composed of ultra-fine grains of
iron oxide intimately mixed with nano-sized aluminum metal in a matrix of silicon and organic compounds.
While these chips are very small (typically less than a millimeter) tests show that the material is highly
energetic and can be ignited to produce a micro-explosive effect. The observed properties and composition of the
thermitic material appears to match the published descriptions of nano-thermite fabricated at the Lawrence Livermore
National Laboratory and elsewhere. These high-tech explosives were relatively new at the time of the disaster, with
some of the first published descriptions appearing in the literature in the late 1990s.Read the full story here.
View Open Chemical Physics Journal article here.
Eyewitnesses Contradict Pentagon 9/11 Story
BY SHEILA CASEY / RCFP
Two California men who call themselves the Citizen Investigation Team (CIT) have compiled impressive video evidence that the plane seen flying towards the Pentagon on the morning of September 11, 2001 could not have caused the death and damage at the Pentagon, nor the damage to five light poles outside the Pentagon.
Frustrated with the inability of 9/11 researchers to do anything other than speculate about what really happened that day, Craig Ranke and Aldo Marquis decided to take matters into their own hands. They have repeatedly flown in from southern California, canvassed the area near the Pentagon on foot to find people who saw a plane just prior to the fireball, and then quizzed these eyewitnesses extensively on camera to establish exactly what they saw, when they saw it and where they saw it from.
Their research is summarized at their website: thepentacon.com, as well as in four DVDs containing interviews with 13 witnesses who attest that they saw a plane fly to the north of the Citgo gas station on Pentagon property, not south of the Citgo station as required by the official story.
CIT had each witness draw the flight path he witnessed on a map; the compilation from all the witnesses is shown in the photo above. The yellow curved lines clustered together toward the top of the map are from the witnesses; the single straight line angling up from the bottom edge of the map is the official flight path of the plane, as described by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB).
Taken together, the 13 witnesses deliver a devastating blow to the official story about the Pentagon attack.
Read the full story here.
Cheney Directed Assassination Ring
BY MATT SULLIVAN / RCFPInvestigative journalist Seymour Hersh revealed during a talk at the University of Minnesota, March 10, that Dick Cheney orchestrated assassination squads directly out of the office of the vice president.
Here is what Hersh said: “After 9/11, I haven’t written about this yet, but the Central Intelligence Agency was very deeply involved in domestic activities against people they thought to be enemies of the state. Without any legal authority for it. They haven’t been called on it yet. That does happen.
“Right now, today, there was a story in The New York Times that if you read it carefully mentioned something known as the Joint Special Operations Command — JSOC it’s called. It is a special wing of our special operations community that is set up independently. They do not report to anybody, except in the Bush-Cheney days, they reported directly to the Cheney office. They did not report to the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff or to Mr. [Robert] Gates, the secretary of defense. They reported directly to him [Cheney].
“Congress has no oversight of it. It’s anexecutive assassination ring essentially, and it’s been going on and on and on. Just today in the Times there was a story that its leader, a three star admiral named [William H.] McRaven, ordered a stop to it because there were so many collateral deaths.
“Under President Bush’s authority, they’ve been going into countries, not talking to the ambassador or the CIA station chief, and finding people on a list and executing them and leaving. That’s been going on, in the name of all of us.” Interestingly, Hersh gives us two pieces of information here. First he tells us that the CIA has been “deeply involved” in domestic operations; something that is forbidden by law. And second, he reveals that the office of vice president has been directing assassination squads abroad, also clearly illegal underdomestic and international law.
Read the full story here.
NYTimes Complicit in FBI Anthrax Coverup
BY SHEILA CASEY / RCFPBack in 2001, just months after the anthrax attacks that killed five people, several articles came out in mainstream newspapers that pointed clearly to the CIA and Army as the most likely sources of the weaponized anthrax. Articles in The Baltimore Sun, Miami Herald, Washington Post and New York Times laid out the facts that incriminated Battelle Memorial Labs in West Jefferson, Ohio, and the Army's lab at the Dugway Proving Grounds in Utah as the only logical sources for the anthrax. These facts, as reported in 2001, include:
1. For over a decade, Army scientists at Dugway have been making weapons-grade anthrax that is "virtually identical" to the anthrax used in the attacks.
2. The anthrax used in the 2001 attacks was extremely concentrated, with a trillion spores per gram. The Dugway anthrax had a similar concentration.
3. The FBI was increasingly focused on US government bioweapons research programs as the source of the deadly anthrax.
4. Both the lab in Utah and the lab in Ohio received anthrax samples from the United States Army Medical Research Institute for Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID) at Fort Detrick, although USAMRIID deals only with wet anthrax and ships it wet.
5. The investigation was focused on the Dugway anthrax, and Dugway was described as the only facility that was known to be weaponizing anthrax.
6. One FBI official said that the CIA's anthrax was "the best lead we have at this point."
7. Army officials said that Fort Detrick did not have the equipment for weaponizing anthrax.
The FBI has never explained what became of this initial focus on the labs in Utah and Ohio. Instead, after the death of Fort Detrick anthrax researcher Bruce Ivins in July, 2008, the FBI attempted to make the case that Ivins was the murderer and all other suspects had been cleared of suspicion.
Full Story
Sheila Casey is a DC-based journalist. Her work has appeared in The Denver Post, Reuters, Chicago Sun-Times, Dissident Voice, Common Dreams and the Rock Creek Free Press. She blogs at SheilaCasey.com
Wall Street Bailout Exceeds Cost of All US Wars Combined
And you can throw in the New Deal, Marshall Plan and Moon Shots as well
Casey Research, of Vermont, has analyzed the costs of the government bailouts of the housing crisis, the credit crisis and others and has concluded that the total is $8.5 trillion, which is more than the cost of all US wars, the Louisiana Purchase, the New Deal, the Marshall Plan and the NASA Space Program combined.
According to CRS, the Congressional Research Service, all major US wars (including such events as the American Revolution, the War of 1812, the Civil War, the Spanish American War, World War I, World War II, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan, the invasion of Panama, the Kosovo War and numerous other small conflicts), cost a total of $7.5 trillion in inflation-adjusted 2008 dollars.
Top Scientists Ask Journal Science To Retract Original AIDS Papers
BY SHEILA CASEY / RCFP
Thirty-seven doctors, senior researchers and attorneys have asked the journal Science to retract four articles published in 1984 that supposedly established that HIV was the cause of AIDS. The articles, by a group led by Dr. Robert Gallo, have drawn criticism for some time. An investigation in the early 90s by the US Department of Health and Human Services concluded that the lead paper was “fraught with false and erroneous statements.” A Congressional Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations produced a staff report onthe papers which contains scathing criticisms of their integrity.
Now, new analysis of the documentation behind the papers has revealed even more reason to doubt Gallo’s findings. The letter refers to “recent revelation of an astonishing number of previously unreported deletions and unjustified alterations made by Gallo…”
Dr. Mikulas Popovic wrote the manuscripts while Gallo was in Europe, but Gallo made handwritten changes to the manuscripts upon his return. Popovic wrote: “Despite intensive research efforts, the causative agent of AIDS has not yet been identified.” This sentence was deleted and replaced by a statement that the findings suggest that HIV is the cause of AIDS.
Gallo submitted micrographs to Science that were identified as containing the HIV virus. But just four days before he submitted them, Dr. Matthew A. Gonda, then head of the Electron Microscopy Laboratory at the National Cancer Institute, wrote a letter to Gallo and Popovic stating that he “does not believe” that the micrographs contain images of HIV. The micrographs were published in Science on May 4, 1984 and identified as containing HIV.
These developments add to the mounting body of evidence that the original conclusion that HIV causes AIDS is deeply flawed.
Thus far there has been no response from Science regarding the request for retraction.
A Call for a Re-evaluation of the AIDS Dogma
By Matt Sullivan / RCFP
A paper about to be published in a scientific journal raises the intriguing possibility that many AIDS cases are in fact misdiagnosed cases of syphilis. The paper was authored by an International group of scientists led by National Academy of Sciences member Lynn Margulis, of the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, and Wolfgang E. Krumbein, professor of Geo-microbiology in Oldenburg, Germany.
The paper, titled Spirochete round bodies. Syphilis, Lyme disease & AIDS: Resurgence of "the great imitator," will be published in SYMBIOSIS V47, No.1, 2009.
John Scythes, one of the researchers on the paper, reports that he has not found a single case of an immune suppressed patient (regardless of HIV status) who has died of complications of syphilis since the discovery of AIDS in the early 80s. The implications of this are staggering. It is simply not possible that syphilis stopped being fatal just as the new disease of AIDS came on the scene.
The researchers speculate that, because of its immune suppression effect and its ability to imitate other diseases, syphilis is being missed or misdiagnosed as AIDS. Now that improved tests for syphilis infection are available, the researchers urge a large scale investigation into the extent that this is happening.
Full Story
Everything You Know About AIDS is Wrong
By Sheila Casey / RCFPOn April 23, 1984, Secretary of Health and Human Services Margaret Heckler and researcher Robert Gallo from the National Cancer Institute held a press conference and announced that Gallo had found the cause of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS), the retrovirus HIV. Heckler estimated that a vaccine would be available in just two years. That same day in 1984, Gallo patented the blood test to detect the HIV antibodies.
As a retrovirus researcher, Gallo had previously tried to pin the blame for Alzheimer’s, leukemia and neurological disorders on a retrovirus, all without success. Now AIDS was in his sights.
But Gallo had skipped an important step in the scientific process: his HIV research had never been subjected to peer review, and was not published until after the press conference with Heckler had already conferred legitimacy on it.
Billions of dollars poured into research programs and millions of people lined up to have their blood checked; by 2006, 72 million Americans had been tested, with a third of that number tested every year. As its creator, Gallo received a percentage of the cost of each test.
To receive a positive HIV test result was considered a death sentence: you would get AIDS and die a miserable death, sooner or later.
As the years passed, it became apparent that this was not true. Only five percent of the people who tested HIV positive went on to develop AIDS. A vaccine has never been found. And there is now a growing group of scientists who dispute that HIV causes AIDS.
Peter Duesberg is a professor of molecular and cell biology at the University of California, Berkeley. Duesberg earned renown as one of the scientists to discover a cancer gene in 1970, and earned tenure at UC Berkeley at the age of 36. At 49 he was elected to the National Academy of Sciences, and in 1986 he received a prestigious grant from the National Institutes of Health.
He was on the fast-track to receive the Nobel until he published an article in 1987 in Cancer Research challenging the consensus that HIV is the cause of AIDS. After that his funding dried up and he was dismissed as a misguided contrarian by those with careers and billions in funding riding on the view that HIV is the cause of AIDS.
Full Story
Sheila Casey is a DC-based journalist. Her work has appeared in The Denver Post, Reuters, Chicago Sun-Times, Dissident Voice, Common Dreams and the Rock Creek Free Press. She blogs at SheilaCasey.com
November Issue of The Creek is Out!
The November issue of The Creek is packed with our usual mix of forbidden truth and historical context. This issue focuses on the economic disaster now unfolding. Articles in this issue include:
Foxes Loot Henhouse
Who Owns "the Fed"?
Troops Deploy for "Crowd Control"
Avoid the Flu Shot
"Of Course bin Laden is Dead"
and over a dozen other hard-hitting stories.Don't miss a single issue. Subscribe here for home delivery of the Creek.
"Of Course bin Laden is Dead"
former CIA agent Robert "Syriana" Baer tells Terry Gross
BY STEVE WATSON/INFOWARS.NET
An important news item that fl ew under the radar for the most part last month was the assertion from former CIA operative turned whistle-blower Robert Baer that Osama bin Laden is long dead.
The respected intelligence & foreign policy expert told Terry Gross, host of National Public Radio show Fresh Air, “Of course he is dead. Where are the DVDs? Bin Laden wouldn’t dye his hair, all these things can be manipulated.”
Baer, who has previously publicly questioned the offi cial story of the 9/11 attacks, continued, “He hasn’t shown up. I’ve taken in the last month a poll of CIA offi cers who have been on his trail, and what astounded me was not a single one was sure he was alive or dead. They have no idea, I mean this man disappeared off the side of the earth.”
Baer, who’s previous book See No Evil was the basis for the fi lm “Syriana”, asked “When in history has a country fought another country or another entity when the leader may be dead?” and warned that the so called war on terror could be an eternal war if the goal continues to be to capture Bin Laden.
Baer also warned that the war is shifting into Pakistan, a dangerous precedent that could see the vaguely defi ned confl ict move anywhere.
Full Story at INFOWARS.NET
A Guilty Agent:
The Shadowy Role of Timothy McVeigh
On the left, McVeigh in Waco in 1993. On the right, an alleged McVeigh from recently surfaced video at Camp Grafton, North Dakota fi lmed in August 1993-- well after McVeigh was honorably discharged from service in May 1992. Was McVeigh being secretly trained, as he told his sister, to be a paid government assassin? - JonesReport.com
By Wendy S. Painting
What may seem like conspiracy theories surrounding the April 19, 1995 bombing of the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, have been given more credibility do to newly released internal defense memos for Timothy James McVeigh, who was convicted and executed for his role as "Mastermind" and "Lone Wolf Bomber." McVeigh, who was said to have orchestrated the bombing with minimal help from two Army buddies, may not have been what he seemed.
A source out of Austin, Texas memorialized in the documents gives weight to previous evidence and supports the existence of a real life conspiracy theory. The source, who because of privacy concerns, will be referred to simply as "D." D was known to have had heavy ties to U.S intelligence agencies as well as groups targeted for Federal investigation and infiltration, such as White Supremacists, Neo- Nazis and Militia members. On March 9, 1996, D gave a statement to McVeigh's defense team, laying out several shocking details which have now, thirteen years later, been corroborated by other sources.
Full Story
Where Was NORAD on 9/11?
Dean M. Jackson -
Washington, DC
Testifying before the 9/11 Commission General Richard Myers, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told the commission in response to a question on NORAD's failure to anticipate the 9/11 attacks, "I can't answer the hypothetical. It's more - it's the way that we were directed to posture, looking outward." As we will see below NORAD, since its inception in 1958, was tasked with more than merely "looking outward".
I found General Myers' testimony on the capabilities of NORAD on 9/11 to be surprising, since it was long assumed that NORAD's mission was more than "looking outward". However, the 9/11 Truth Movement has been negligent in producing any documents that would confirm their suspicion that NORAD was tasked with watching over and intercepting errant aircraft in American skies before 9/11; that NORAD's mission was more robust than "looking outward". The following pre-9/11 citations conclusively documents the true capabilities of NORAD on the morning of 9/11.
"The NORAD mission is threefold. NORAD's first responsibility is to provide surveillance and control of the airspace covering North America, specifically the airspace of Canada and the United States. This mission is based on agreements between the two governments….
Full Story
FBI Sweeps Anthrax Under the Rug
Weaponized Anthrax Came from CIA/Battelle Program
By Sheila Casey and Barry Kissin / RCFP
US Attorney Jeff Taylor was sweating on August 6, as he laid out his case against the late Dr. Bruce Ivins at a news conference-and with good reason. Anyone familiar with the case is well aware that Dr. Ivins was railroaded, and that the news conference was a flimsy web of lies.
Ivins had nothing to do with the 2001 anthrax attacks. The attacks were almost certainly carried out by the only group that had the means to produce the highly weaponized anthrax in the letters: the CIA, its contractor Battelle Memorial Institute of West Jefferson, Ohio., and the Army at Dugway in Utah.
The DOJ-FBI frame-up of Ivins rests heavily upon the claim of new advances in genetic testing which supposedly prove that the killer anthrax could have come only from Ivins' flask.
Jeff Taylor stated:
The FBI sought out the best experts in the scientific community and, over time, four highly sensitive and specific tests were developed that were capable of detecting the unique qualities of the anthrax used in the 2001 attacks.This is an outright lie. No special tests were required to assess the genetic heritage of the Ames strain in the envelopes. The Washington Post reported on December 16, 2001 that "only five laboratories so far have been found to have spores with perfect genetic matches to those in the Senate letters."
The distinguishing feature of the anthrax that killed five people in 2001 is not related to its genes. What made that anthrax unique was that it was highly weaponized. Anthrax is a common pathogen found in the soil in many places. It doesn't become lethal unless produced in such a way that it behaves like a gas, floating easily in the air and deep into a victim's lungs.
Full Story
The story is also available in the PDF version of the September edition here.
The Creek's take on the New Yorker cover.
To see older stories click to go to Creek archive page.
