FTR#1321 The Assassination of John Lennon
Introduction: As the title suggests, this program sets forth facts about John Lennon’s murder.
Key Points of Discussion of Lennon’s Killing Include: The fact that the bullets that killed Lennon entered from his left side, whereas patsy Mark David Chapman was on Lennon’s right; The doorman at Lennon’s residence, who was standing on Lennon’s left was José Sanjenís Perdomo, a “former” operative for the CIA; Perdomo’s background in the CIA’s Bay of Pigs operation and prior service as a chief of police in pre-Castro Cuba; Perdomo’s alleged links to Watergate burglar and JFK assassination participant Frank Sturgis; Perdomo’s six-hours of conversation with Chapman prior Lennon’s return from the recording studio; an eyewitness’s allegation that Perdomo did the shooting; Perdomo’s seizing of the alleged murder weapon, which was not tested for fingerprints; Chapman’s participation in a music club in Hawaii, to which American Nazi, Reagan shooting patsy and Bush associate John Hinckley, Jr. also belonged; The extremely unlikely possibility that Chapman could have performed the marksmanship required to kill Lennon; The possibility that Chapman may have been a mind-controlled patsy; Chapman’s prison visits by MKULTRA associates Bernard Diamond and Nathan Kline; Yoko Ono’s cremation of Lennon’s corpse within 36 hours of the killing; Ono’s strong links to the Yasuda Zaibatsu; Ono’s participation in the reconsecration of a Japanese Shinto temple, destroyed in the aftermath of the attack on Pearl Harbor; Ono’s association with an antique dealer and alleged CIA contract agent.
FTR#1320 “La Plus Ca Change. . . .”
This program is a “blast from the past.” Recorded just past midnight on 9/20/2001, this broadcast is a [somewhat distorted] conversation recorded via telephone hookup.
Speaking with the late Roy of Hollywood, Mr. Emory parsed some of the intelligence information that was available a little over a week after the attacks.
The program concludes with an eerie statement by Roy, foreshadowing what is taking place in the Middle East today.
FTR#‘s 1309 and 1310 Deep Politics and the Death of Iris Chang, Parts 3 and 4
These broadcasts supplement FTR#‘s 509, 1107 and 1108.
Significant sections of the latter two broadcasts are recapped in these programs and this description.
Key Points of Discussion and Analysis Include:
1.–Iris Chang’s mother, Ying-Ying Chang, could not rule out the “dark conspiracy” that Iris was facing. Ying-Ying’s point of view was shaped, in part, by Steven Clemons’ observations.
2.–In an appendix titled “Requiem for Iris Chang,” Steven Clemons noted the alleged “suicide” of his associate Juzo Itami, who was battling the same forces as Iris Chang. “I have never bought the story about Juzo Itami, who was at war in his films with the Japanese right-wing crowd and yakuza.”
3.–Iris’ best-known work, “The Rape of Nanking”, inspired a congressional resolution supporting Japanese compensation for those who had been compelled to labor as slaves and slave prostitutes or “comfort women.”
4.–Iris was working on a book and documentary film project about the survivors of the Bataan Death March. Some of those veterans had been used as slave laborers by Japanese corporations during the war. The Bataan Death March veterans were among those who sued the Japanese corporations that had enslaved them.
5.–The presiding judge ruled against the veterans and for the Japanese corporations. On the day of Iris’ “suicide” Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger was meeting with Japanese businessmen to promote California-Japanese trade.
6.–In early September of 2001, Iris spoke at a conference assembled to protest the celebration of the 50th anniversary of the U.S./Japanese treaty of 1951 (negotiated by John Foster Dulles). Iris called “the San Francisco Peace Treaty a travesty of justice, a betrayal of our own American veterans.” Recall the congressional resolution passed in the aftermath of, and because of The Rape of Nanking.
7.–After watching a spirited discussion between Iris and the Japanese ambassador to the U.S., a friend of Iris’ father advised her to hire a bodyguard.
8.–As will be noted at greater length below, Iris was very critical of the George W. Bush administration and had written several articles critical of his policies.
9.–Iris was very critical of the George W. Bush administration, and had taken stances against many features of his foreign policy, Bush’s invasion of Iraq in particular. Iris had long opposed all forms of racism in this country.
10.–Sadly, many of those close to Iris dismissed her fears concerning the government’s targeting of her and the overlapping ideological animosity and targeting of her by the Japanese right-wing. The historical and operational overlap between the two is fundamental and is explored in some of the material below.
11.–When she traveled to Louisville, Kentucky to interview survivors of the Bataan Death March, she felt she was under physical surveillance and harassment. We note below that Kentucky was a place where Bush confidant William Stamps Farish III had powerful connections.
12.–During her book tour for The Rape of Nanking, Iris was approached by someone she felt was recruiting her. He said “You will be safer to join us.” Was this and attempt at recruitment by the CIA?
13.–We repeat the information in #11, for purposes of emphasis.
14.–Iris was convinced to her dying day that she was the focal point of hostility from the Bush administration. A remake of the movie The Manchurian Candidate heightened her anxiety. Her articles critical of the Bush administration and, as we have and shall see, the overlapping dynamics of her work on The Rape of Nanking and Gold Warriors further deepened her peril. She first purchased a firearm for protection and was hoping that John Kerry would defeat Bush in 2004.
15.–Despite the fact that Iris’ corpse was found in her car in the early morning, her parents weren’t notified of her death until almost midnight. Why?
16.–Iris’ corpse was discovered early in the morning with her head against the driver’s side window, her hands crossed in her lap and the gun on her left leg. While not physically impossible, this is altogether unlikely for someone who had allegedly committed suicide by firing a powerful hand gun into her mouth. She felt that her problems were “external,” while those around her thought they were “internal,” i.e. “all in her head.”
17.–Same as 16.
18.–Iris’ ordeal was remarkably similar to what Rita Katz endured following her work on Operation Green Quest and the SAAR investigation.
19.–George W. Bush was pursuing Philippine Golden Lily loot in order to increase U.S. gold reserves and, perhaps more importantly, to fortify his blind trust. That trust was overseen by William Stamps Farish III, who had considerable political and economic gravitas in the state of Kentucky.
20.–Bush’s Harken Energy may well have served as a money laundering front, perhaps for some of the gold recovered in the Philippines. We note that a director of Harken, Talat Othman, interceded directly with then Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill on behalf of the targets of the 3/20/2002 raids. The SAAR network was a primary target of those raids: we have seen how Rita Katz and her fellow investigators came under surveillance and harassment for digging into that case.
21.–We revisit the deep politics of the Bush family, the family of Douglas MacArthur and William and Alan Quasha.
22.–More about the deep politics of the Philippines, the Bush family, father and son Quasha, and the possibility that Alan Quasha’s dominant presence in Harken Energy may be derivative of the clandestine acquisition of Golden Lily loot.
23.–The program concludes with review of the operations of Golden Lily and their involvement with things Iris was investigating. The Rape of Nanking marked the formal beginning of Golden Lily.
24.–Colonel Tsuji Masanobu was heavily involved with Golden Lily and the Bataan Death March, the survivors of which were a focal point of Iris Chang’s research at the time of her death.
Failure
In the first two programs after the 9/11 attacks, Mr. Emory presented excerpts from his programs which directly foreshadowed the attacks. That event and those that followed embody the failure of American society. Serge Schmemann wrote the lead article for “The New York Times” the day after the attack. He also crafted a “hit-piece” review of Christopher Simpson’s “Blowback.” That is not surprising, given Schmemann’s background and some of the “Gray Lady’s” hiring practices. WFMU-FM is podcasting For The Record–You can subscribe to the podcast HERE.
Reflections on the Collapse in Afghanistan
The Afghan collapse was not a surprise. Emblematic of the failure of the military effort was the Bush administration’s evacuation of Al-Qaeda and Taliban combatants so they could escape U.S. military encirclement. In the last program Mr. Emory did in 1999, he examined George W. Bush’s political CV and heritage, in order to gain perspective on what a Bush presidency might be like. Side 1 of the program began with discussion of the Bin Laden family’s financing of George W. Bush’s first energy company. WFMU-FM is podcasting For The Record–You can subscribe to the podcast HERE.
FTR#1189 The Oswald Institute of Virology, Part 8: Covid-19 and The American Deep State, Part 2 (The Cover-Up Obviates the Conspiracy)
This program continues our series analyzing the Wuhan Institute of Virology as having been set up to take the fall for the Covid-19 pandemic, which–in our considered opinion–is a covert operation by the U.S. as part of the full-court press against China.
Underscoring a point of analysis from previous broadcasts, we note that, of paramount importance in this context, is the fact that ANY virus can be made in a laboratory, from scratch as is being done for the SARS-CoV‑2 (Covid-19) virus.
Ralph Baric–who did the gain-of-function modification on the Horseshoe Bat coronavirus, has been selected to engineer the Covid-19.
Note what might be termed a “virologic Jurassic Park” manifestation: ” . . . . The technology immediately created bio-weapon worries. . . . Researchers at the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) drove that point home in 2005 when they resurrected the influenza virus that killed tens of millions in 1918–1919. . . .”
Central to the inquiry about a laboratory genesis for the virus is Ralph Baric. We note that:
1.–Baric’s modification of a horseshoe bat virus to make it more infectious (in collaboration with Shi Zhengli and in an EcoHealth Alliance affiliated project) took place in North Carolina, not Wuhan. “. . . . Critics have jumped on this paper as evidence that Shi was conducting “gain of function” experiments that could have created a superbug, but Shi denies it. The research cited in the paper was conducted in North Carolina.
2.–Baric has been using related techniques to text remdesivir (in 2017) and the Moderna vaccine. This places him in a milieu inextricably linked to the military and pre-dating the pandemic. ” . . . . Using a similar technique, in 2017, Baric’s lab showed that remdesivir — currently the only licensed drug for treating covid — could be useful in fighting coronavirus infections. Baric also helped test the Moderna covid vaccine and a leading new drug candidate against covid. . . .”
Next, we present analysis of a very important, albeit slanted Vanity Fair article:
1.–Pompeo State Department officials pursuing the lab-leak hypothesis were told to cover it up lest it shed light on U.S. government funding of research at the “Oswald Institute of Virology!”: ” . . . . In one State Department meeting, officials seeking to demand transparency from the Chinese government say they were explicitly told by colleagues not to explore the Wuhan Institute of Virology’s gain-of-function research, because it would bring unwelcome attention to U.S. government funding of it. . . . . In an internal memo obtained by Vanity Fair, Thomas DiNanno, former acting assistant secretary of the State Department’s Bureau of Arms Control, Verification, and Compliance, wrote that. . . staff from two bureaus . . . “warned” leaders within his bureau ‘not to pursue an investigation into the origin of COVID-19’ because it would ‘open a can of worms’ if it continued.’ . . . . As the group probed the lab-leak scenario, among other possibilities, its members were repeatedly advised not to open a ‘Pandora’s box,’ said four former State Department officials interviewed by Vanity Fair. . . .”
2.–Setting the orthodoxy in early 2020 with a Lancet article ruling out a laboratory origin for the virus was Peter Daszak, with approval from Ralph Baric: ” . . . . It soon emerged, based on emails obtained by a Freedom of Information group called U.S. Right to Know, that Daszak had not only signed but organized the influential Lancet statement, with the intention of concealing his role and creating the impression of scientific unanimity. . . .”
3.–” . . . . In late March, former Centers for Disease Control director Robert Redfield received death threats from fellow scientists after telling CNN that he believed COVID-19 had originated in a lab. . . . ”
4.–Matthew Pottinger, a China hawk in the Trump administration, headed up a team to investigate the Wuhan lab leak hypothesis. Note that the gain-of-function milieu in the U.S. national security establishment was a retarding factor in the inquiry: ” . . . . By then, Matthew Pottinger had approved a COVID-19 origins team, run by the NSC directorate that oversaw issues related to weapons of mass destruction. A longtime Asia expert and former journalist, Pottinger purposefully kept the team small . . . . In addition, many leading experts had either received or approved funding for gain-of-function research. Their ‘conflicted’ status, said Pottinger, ‘played a profound role in muddying the waters and contaminating the shot at having an impartial inquiry.’ . . . .”
5.–Note that Lawrence Livermore scientists were involved with the genesis of the “China did it” hypothesis, after allegedly being alerted by a foreign source to look into their own files. ” . . . . An intelligence analyst working with David Asher sifted through classified channels and turned up a report that outlined why the lab-leak hypothesis was plausible. It had been written in May by researchers at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, which performs national security research for the Department of Energy. But it appeared to have been buried within the classified collections system. . . .”
6.–Note, also, that Chris Ford, a China hawk, was working to suppress the Wuhan lab leak hypothesis: ” . . . . Their frustration crested in December, when they finally briefed Chris Ford, acting undersecretary for Arms Control and International Security. He seemed so hostile to their probe that they viewed him as a blinkered functionary bent on whitewashing China’s malfeasance. But Ford, who had years of experience in nuclear nonproliferation, had long been a China hawk. . . .”
7.–The “China did it/Wuhan lab leak” hypothesis survived from the Trump administration and Mike Pompeo’s State Department to the Biden administration: ” . . . .. . . . The statement withstood ‘aggressive suspicion,’ as one former State Department official said, and the Biden administration has not walked it back. ‘I was very pleased to see Pompeo’s statement come through,’ said Chris Ford, who personally signed off on a draft of the fact sheet before leaving the State Department. ‘I was so relieved that they were using real reporting that had been vetted and cleared.’ . . . .”
8.–Avril Haines, whom we have cited in this series as a key participant in the Deep State shepherding of the “Lab-Leak Hypothesis,” looms large in the inquiry into the perpetuation of this propaganda meme: ” . . . . Inside the U.S. government, meanwhile, the lab-leak hypothesis had survived the transition from Trump to Biden. On April 15, Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines told the House Intelligence Committee that two ‘plausible theories’ were being weighed: a lab accident or natural emergence. . . .”
9.–The article concludes with the interesting use of the term “cut-out” to describe the EcoHealth Alliance. The term generally refers to an intelligence-community front organization. Is the author hinting at more? Did her editor take information out? ” . . . . The United States deserves a healthy share of blame as well. Thanks to their unprecedented track record of mendacity and race-baiting, Trump and his allies had less than zero credibility. And the practice of funding risky research via cutouts like EcoHealth Alliance enmeshed leading virologists in conflicts of interest at the exact moment their expertise was most desperately needed. . . .”
We conclude with two important points from an article used earlier in the program.
1.–Shi Zhengli has noted that opening up the WIV’s records is unacceptable: ” . . . . That demand is ‘definitely not acceptable,’ responded Shi Zhengli, who directs the Center for Emerging Infectious Diseases at the Wuhan Institute. ‘Who can provide evidence that does not exist?’ she told MIT Technology Review. Shi has said that thousands of attempts to hack its computer systems forced the institute to close its database. . . .”
2.–The U.S. would not be acceptable to such a proposition, if the Chinese demanded access to Ft. Detrick (part of which was shut down by the CDC in early August of 2019 on the eve of the pandemic). A commenter also noted the Rocky Mountain lab in his analysis, which we noted was one of the areas where Willy Burgdorfer appears to have worked on the development of Lyme Disease.) ” . . . . If a disease had emerged from the U.S. and the Chinese blamed the Pentagon and demanded access to the data, ‘what would we say?’ [Dr. Getrald] Keusch asked. ‘Would we throw out the red carpet, ‘Come on over to Fort Detrick and the Rocky Mountain Lab?’ We’d have done exactly what the Chinese did, which is say, ‘Screw you!’’ . . . .”
FTR#1188 The Oswald Institute of Virology, Part 7: Covid-19 and The American Deep State
This program continues our series analyzing the Wuhan Institute of Virology as having been set up to take the fall for the Covid-19 pandemic, which–in our considered opinion–is a covert operation by the U.S. as part of the full-court press against China.
As the “Lab Leak Hypothesis” of the pandemic’s origins moves toward becoming a mainstreamed propaganda theme, we note that:
1.–Anthony Fauci himself set forth the “lab leak” scenario in his 2012 endorsement of a moratorium on gain-of-function manipulations, setting the intellectual stage for the “gaming” of just such a scenario. In FTR#1187, we noted that Fauci’s NIH NIAID was among the institutions that presided over EcoHealth Alliance’s funding of experimentation on bat-borne coronaviruses at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. ” . . . . In 2012, Dr. Anthony Fauci, who leads NIH’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, came out in support of a moratorium on such research, posing a hypothetical scenario involving a poorly trained scientist in a poorly regulated lab: ‘In an unlikely but conceivable turn of events, what if that scientist becomes infected with the virus, which leads to an outbreak and ultimately triggers a pandemic?’ Fauci wrote. . . .”
2.–USAID’s PREDICT project trained many of the scientists at the WIV. From the standpoint of covert operations, this would afford the opportunity to place one or more operatives inside that apparently targeted institution: [USAID is a State Department subsidiary that is one of the largest funders of the EcoHealth Alliance and a frequent cover for CIA activity.] ” . . . . . . . . Many of the scientists at the Wuhan Institute of Virology have been trained by the U.S. government’s PREDICT project. . . .”
3.–The journalistic generation of the lab-leak theory comes, in part, from Michael R. Gordon, who has a history of generating dubious journalism to support the plans of the national security establishment. Gordon: ” . . . . was the same man who, along with Judith Miller, wrote the September 8, 2002 article falsely asserting that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein was seeking to build a nuclear weapon. . . The claim was a lie, funneled to the Times by the office of US Vice President Dick Cheney. . . On May 26, 2004, the Times published a letter from its editors entitled ‘FROM THE EDITORS; The Times and Iraq,’ ‘acknowledging that the Times repeatedly ‘fell for misinformation.’ . . . The letter notes: ‘But we have found a number of instances of coverage that was not as rigorous as it should have been... On Sept. 8, 2002, the lead article of the paper was headlined ‘U.S. Says Hussein Intensified Quest for A‑Bomb Parts.’ That report concerned the aluminum tubes that the administration advertised insistently as components for the manufacture of nuclear weapons fuel. … it should have been presented more cautiously . . . .”
4.–Gordon: ” . . . . On April 20, 2014 . . . co-authored an article entitled ‘Photos Link Masked Men in East Ukraine to Russia,’ which claimed to identify masked men operating in eastern Ukraine in opposition to the US-backed coup regime as active-duty Russian soldiers. . . .Four days later, the Times Public Editor was again compelled to retract the claims in Gordon’s reporting, calling them ‘discredited.’ . . .”
5.–New York Times right-wing columnist Ross Douthat has highlighted the propaganda significance of pinning the “Lab Leak Theory” on China: ” . . . . to the extent that the United States is engaged in a conflict of propaganda and soft power with the regime in Beijing, there’s a pretty big difference between a world where the Chinese regime can say, We weren’t responsible for Covid but we crushed the virus and the West did not, because we’re strong and they’re decadent, and a world where this was basically their Chernobyl except their incompetence and cover-up sickened not just one of their own cities but also the entire globe. . . .”
6.–Pompeo State Department officials pursuing the lab-leak hypothesis were told to cover it up lest it shed light on U.S. government funding of research at the “Oswald Institute of Virology!”: ” . . . . In one State Department meeting, officials seeking to demand transparency from the Chinese government say they were explicitly told by colleagues not to explore the Wuhan Institute of Virology’s gain-of-function research, because it would bring unwelcome attention to U.S. government funding of it. . . . .In an internal memo obtained by Vanity Fair, Thomas DiNanno, former acting assistant secretary of the State Department’s Bureau of Arms Control, Verification, and Compliance, wrote that. . . staff from two bureaus . . . “warned” leaders within his bureau ‘not to pursue an investigation into the origin of COVID-19’ because it would ‘open a can of worms’ if it continued.’ . . . . As the group probed the lab-leak scenario, among other possibilities, its members were repeatedly advised not to open a ‘Pandora’s box,’ said four former State Department officials interviewed by Vanity Fair. . . .”
7.–Setting the orthodoxy in early 2020 with a Lancet article ruling out a laboratory origin for the virus was Peter Daszak, with approval from Ralph Baric: ” . . . . It soon emerged, based on emails obtained by a Freedom of Information group called U.S. Right to Know, that Daszak had not only signed but organized the influential Lancet statement, with the intention of concealing his role and creating the impression of scientific unanimity. . . .”
8.–” . . . . In late March, former Centers for Disease Control director Robert Redfield received death threats from fellow scientists after telling CNN that he believed COVID-19 had originated in a lab. . . . ”
FTR#1182 Terror, the Afghanistan War and The American Deep State, Part 2
The program begins with material overlapped from our previous program, delineating U.S. government protection of Jihadist elements, in order that they could be used as proxy warriors in ongoing covert operations.
Key Points of Discussion and Analysis Include: The FBI’s limiting of the investigation of the assassination of extremist Rabbi Meir Kahane; the fact that the limiting of that investigation permitted Ali Mohamed, Mahmoud Aboulihama and Mohammed Salameh to participate in future terrorist attacks, including the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and the 1998 Nairobi Embassy bombing; the FBI’s blaming of the attenuation of the investigation of the Kahane murder on New York DA Robert Morgenthau; Morgenthau’s previous investigation of the CIA-linked BCCI; the FBI’s shielding of Army Special Forces operative Ali Mohamed in the1993 World Trade Center bombing; the FBI’s shielding of Mohamed in the 1995 “Landmarks Case”—the plot to blow up the United Nations, the George Washington Bridge and both the Lincoln and Holland Tunnels; the probability that Mohamed’s utility as a trainer of mujahadeen for covert operations in Afghanistan, Bosnia and parts of the former Soviet Union was the cause of his inviolability.
The next section of the program presents information about the genesis of Ali Mohamed as a U.S. agent and trainer of mujahadeen.
Key Points of Discussion and Analysis Include: Zbigniew Brzezinski’s creation of the mujahadeen training and recruitment organization at the outset of the Afghan war against the Soviet Union; the training of Egyptian president Anwar Sadat’s elite personal guard (of which Ali Mohamed was a member) by J.J. Capucci and Associates, headed by “ex” CIA-agent Edwin Wilson and Theodore Shackley; the handing over of the training of Sadat’s guard to the CIA following Brzezinski’s visit to Egypt in 1980; Ali Mohamed’s training at Fort Bragg in the U.S. by Special Forces; Mohamed’s networking with and allegiance to both Sheikh Rahman (involved with the Al-Kifah Center mujahadeen effort, the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and the Landmarks case) and Ayman Al-Zawahiri, Osama bin Laden’s right-hand man and eventual successor.
Next, we dolly back and examine the continued domestic and foreign operations of the Al-Kifah Center milieu, including operations involving drug trafficking and other criminal activity, support for the Al-Kifah Center by Saudi Arabia and the Center’s involvement in covert operations in Xinjiang Province in China, Chechnya in Russia, Uzbekistan and other former parts of the Soviet Union and the Balkans.
Key Points of Discussion and Analysis Include: The transition of Ali Mohamed’s mujahadeen-training program from sending fighters to Afghanistan to sending fighters to Bosnia; the Saudi government’s partial financing of Sheikh Rahman’s defense fund (Rahman was indicted in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing); Al-Kifah trainees’ participation in covert operations in Chechnya, Tajikistan and fighting alongside the Uighurs in Xinjiang province; Al-Qaeda’s alliance with the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan; the Al-Qaeda/IMU use of heroin trafficking to finance combat and terror operations; the 9/11 Commission Report’s dismissal of the verifiable fact that Al-Qaeda helped finance its operations with the Afghan drug trade; the Al-Kifah Center milieu’s involvement in the drug trade, as well as arson-for-hire and counterfeiting; Mujahid Abdulqaadir Menepta, a Muslim suspect in both the 9/11 case and the Oklahoma City bombing; Menepta’s alleged involvement in organized crime and drug trafficking; the Al-Kifah Center’s joint operations with the Saudis; Sphinx Trading’s link to the Al-Kifah operation; the protection of Sphinx Trading even after 9/11.
Fleshing out the jihadist milieu, we note bin Laden relatives and their involvement in Al-Qaeda fronts and the cover-up of their activities by the Deep State milieu.
Key Points of Discussion and Analysis Include: the World Assembly of Muslim Youth and its links to mujahadeen and terrorism; Abdullah bin Laden’s leadership of the WAMY; Abdullah bin Laden’s evacuation by jet along with other Saudis and members of the bin Laden family after 9/11; the Golden Chain letter discovered in the IIRO office in Bosnia, containing the names of key Al-Qaeda financiers; the presence in the “Golden Chain’ of Khalid bin Mahfouz, the top banker in Saudi Arabia; the IIRO’s founding by Jamal Kalifa, Osama bin Laden’s nephew.
The last part of our program reviews two elements presented in FTR#1181.
In the trial of Ramzi Yousef, a lay-out of the terror scenario that became the 9/11 attacks was on Yousef’s laptop, yet was never brought to light.
Likewise, the name of Khalid Shaikh Mohamed–dubbed the mastermind of the 9/11 and currently the focal point of ongoing legal proceedings–was all but omitted from Yousef’s trial, despite his participation in the aborted “Operation Bojinka” plot to blow up a number of airliners over the Pacific.
In our series, we note the exclusion of key participants in the murder of extremist Rabbi Meir Kahane, which permitted co-conspirators to participate in the first World Trade Center attack in 1993 and Nairobi U.S. Embassy bombings in 1998.
Among the probable motives for these key, deadly omissions is the use of these Al-Qaeda, Muslim-Brotherhood derived terrorist elements as proxy warriors in Afghanistan, Bosnia, Chechnya and Uzbekistan.
We conclude by reviewing how cynical the Deep State can be, acting with a complete disregard for American combat military personnel.
FTR #1181 Terror, The Afghanistan War and the American Deep State, Part 1
With President Biden having announced the withdrawal of U.S. combat forces from Afghanistan, we contemplate the events that led to that involvement, especially terrorist incidents culminating in the 9/11 attack.
We rely on research done by the brilliant, venerable Peter Dale Scott.
We begin by noting how cynical the Deep State can be, acting with a complete disregard for American combat military personnel: ” . . . . Just how subordinated official policy could become to deep state needs was demonstrated in November 2001, when Cheney, at the request of [Pakistan’s head of state] Musharraf and the ISI [Pakistan’s primary intelligence service], approved secret airlifts to ferry surrounded Pakistani and high-level al-Qaeda fighters out of Afghanistan, to safety in Pakistan. . . .”
In the trial of Ramzi Yousef, a lay-out of the terror scenario that became the 9/11 attacks was on Yousef’s laptop, yet was never brought to light.
Likewise, the name of Khalid Shaikh Mohamed–dubbed the mastermind of the 9/11 and currently the focal point of ongoing legal proceedings–was all but omitted from Yousef’s trial, despite his participation in the aborted “Operation Bojinka” plot to blow up a number of airliners over the Pacific.
In our series, we note the exclusion of key participants in the murder of extremist Rabbi Meir Kahane, which permitted co-conspirators to participate in the first World Trade Center attack in 1993 and Nairobi U.S. Embassy bombings in 1998.
Among the probable motives for these key, deadly omissions is the use of these Al-Qaeda, Muslim-Brotherhood derived terrorist elements as proxy warriors in Afghanistan, Bosnia, Chechnya and Uzbekistan.
“. . . . In Triple Cross, Peter Lance, who does not mention KSM’s escape from Qatar, focuses instead on the way that, later in the same year, U.S. federal prosecutors kept his name out of the trial of Ramzi Yousef in connection with the 1993 World Trade Center bombing: “Assistant U.S. Attorneys Mike Garcia and Dietrich Snell presented a riveting, evidence-driven case . . . and characterized the material retrieved from Ramzi’s Toshiba laptop as ‘the most devastating evidence of all. . . .’ . . . While Yousef’s laptop . . . contained the full details of the plot later executed on 9/11, not a word of that scenario was mentioned during trial . . . . Most surprising, during the entire summer-long trial, the name of the fourth Bojinka conspirator, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed . . . . was mentioned by name only once, in reference to a letter found in [Yousef’s apartment] . . . .”
Illustrating the machinations of what Professor Scott terms “The American Deep State” are the interactions between Big Oil, Sullivan & Cromwell, the Dulles brothers and the Eisenhower administration to destabilize the Mossadeq regime in Iran.
Key Points of Discussion and Analysis Include: A letter written by Sullivan & Cromwell attorney John Foster Dulles in the 1930s to a British colleague, celebrating cartels and the triumph of international businessmen in overcoming barriers to geopolitical maneuvering erected by “nationalist” politicians; collaboration by the “Seven Sisters” of Big Oil (Standard Oil of New Jersey [now Exxon], Standard Oil of New York [now Mobil], Standard Oil of California [now Chevron], Gulf Oil, Texaco, Royal Dutch Shell and Anglo-Iranian [now BP] in controlling the international oil business; a cooperative effort by the Seven Sisters to successfully reduce Iranian oil production from 241 million barrels a year in 1950 to 10.6 million barrels a year in 1952 in order to destabilize premier Mossadeq; Professor Scott’s point that the CIA’s overthrow of Mossadeq in 1953 represented a “Deep State” realization of the goal of the oil cartel; the role of ARAMCO in the strangling of Iranian oil production, offsetting the drop in Iranian production by increasing its own; change of a Justice Department suit against Big Oil from a criminal proceeding to a civil suit prosecuted by the Department of State; the predictable resolution of that suit in favor of big oil; the fact that the oil cartel was represented in that suit by Sullivan & Cromwell and John Foster Dulles was in charge of the State Department; the fact that John Foster Dulles’ brother and Sullivan & Cromwell associate Allen was in charge of the CIA at the same time and oversaw the removal of Mossadeq; Allen Dulles’ successful gambit to sidestep President Eisenhower by securing British Prime Minister Harold MacMillan as an executive authority to dispatch U‑2 flights..
The program concludes with delineation of U.S. government protection of Jihadist elements so that they could be used as proxy warriors in ongoing covert operations.
Key Points of Discussion and Analysis Include: U.S. government protection for Ali Mohamed, an al-Qaeda operative who doubled as a Special Forces operative training mujahadeen for combat operations in Afghanistan, Bosnia, Chechnya among other places; FBI agent John Zent’s communication to the RCMP in Vancouver, leading to Mohamed’s release from custody; Mohamed’s training of mujahadeen at the Al-Kifah Refugee Center in Brooklyn; the assassination of extremist Rabbi Meir Kahane by trainees of Mohamed’s including El Sayyid Nosair; the FBI and New York Police Department’s cover-up of the participation in the Kahane killing of Nosair/Mohamed associates; the eventual participation of some of those associates in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing; the FBI’s sabotage of New York County District Attorney Robert Morgenthau’s attempts to widen the investigation of the Al-Kifah milieu; the central role of Ali Mohamed’s Al-Kifah trainees in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.
Afghan Overture
In a series of programs we are recording, we highlight the vital research of the brilliant, venerable Berkeley researcher Peter Dale Scott, who has chronicled the shocking behavior of elements of our government, covering up the involvement in terrorist incidents of individuals and institutions that, if properly pursued, could have prevented the 9/11 attacks–the event that precipitated our entry into that conflict. “. . . . In Triple Cross, Peter Lance, who does not mention [9/11 mastermind Khalid Shaikh Mohammed’s] escape from Qatar, focuses instead on the way that, later in the same year, U.S. federal prosecutors kept his name out of the trial of Ramzi Yousef in connection with the 1993 World Trade Center bombing: ‘Assistant U.S. Attorneys Mike Garcia and Dietrich Snell presented a riveting, evidence-driven case . . . and characterized the material retrieved from Ramzi’s Toshiba laptop as ‘the most devastating evidence of all. . . .’ . . . While Yousef’s laptop . . . contained the full details of the plot later executed on 9/11, not a word of that scenario was mentioned during trial . . . . Most surprising, during the entire summer-long trial, the name of the fourth Bojinka conspirator, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed . . . . was mentioned by name only once, in reference to a letter found in [Yousef’s apartment] . . . .”
Recommended Reading
- Spitfire List is licensed under Creative Commons.
Recent Comments