Anthrax scientist commits suicide as FBI closes in

By LARA JAKES JORDAN and DAVID DISHNEAU 

 A top U.S. biodefense researcher apparently committed suicide just as the Justice Department was about to file criminal charges against him in the anthrax mailings that traumatized the nation in the weeks following the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, according to a published report.

The scientist, Bruce E. Ivins, 62, who worked for the past 18 years at the government’s biodefense labs at Fort Detrick, Md., had been told about the impending prosecution, the Los Angeles Times reported for Friday editions. The laboratory has been at the center of the FBI’s investigation of the anthrax attacks, which killed five people.

Ivins died Tuesday at Frederick Memorial Hospital in Maryland. The Times, quoting an unidentified colleague, said the scientist had taken a massive dose of a prescription Tylenol mixed with codeine.

Tom Ivins, a brother of the scientist, told The Associated Press that another of his brothers, Charles, told him Bruce had committed suicide.

A woman who answered the phone at Charles Ivins’ home in Etowah, N.C., refused to wake him and declined to comment on his death. “This is a grieving time,” she said.

A woman who answered the phone at Bruce Ivins’ home in Frederick declined to comment.

Justice Department spokesman Peter Carr and FBI Assistant Director John Miller declined to comment on the report.

Henry S. Heine, a scientist who had worked with Ivins on inhalation anthrax research at Fort Detrick, said he and others on their team have testified before a federal grand jury in Washington that has been investigating the anthrax mailings for more than a year.

Heine declined to comment on Ivins’ death.

Norman Covert, a retired Fort Detrick spokesman who served with Ivins on an animal-care and protocol committee, said Ivins was “a very intent guy” at their meetings.

Ivins was the co-author of numerous anthrax studies, including one on a treatment for inhalation anthrax published in the July 7 issue of the journal Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy.

Just last month, the government exonerated another scientist at the Fort Detrick lab, Steven Hatfill, who had been identified by the FBI as a “person of interest” in the anthrax attacks. The government paid Hatfill $5.82 million to settle a lawsuit he filed against the Justice Department in which he claimed the department violated his privacy rights by speaking with reporters about the case.

The Times said federal investigators moved away from Hatfill and concluded Ivins was the culprit after FBI Director Robert Mueller changed leadership of the investigation in 2006. The new investigators instructed agents to re-examine leads and reconsider potential suspects. In the meantime, investigators made progress in analyzing anthrax powder recovered from letters addressed to two U.S. senators, according to the report.

Besides the five deaths, 17 people were sickened by anthrax that was mailed to lawmakers on Capitol Hill and members of the news media in New York and Florida just weeks after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. The victims included postal workers and others who came into contact with the anthrax.

In the six months following the anthrax mailings, Ivins conducted unauthorized testing for anthrax spores outside containment areas at USAMRIID — the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases at Fort Detrick — and found some, according to an internal report by the U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command, which oversees the lab.

In December 2001, after conducting tests triggered by a technician’s fears that she had been exposed, Ivins found evidence of anthrax and decontaminated the woman’s desk, computer, keypad and monitor, but didn’t notify his superiors, according to the report.

The report says Ivins performed more unauthorized sampling on April 15, 2002, and found anthrax spores in his office, in a passbox used for moving materials in and out of labs, and in a room where male workers changed from civilian clothing into laboratory garb.

Ivins told Army investigators he conducted unauthorized tests because he was worried that the powdered anthrax in letters that had been sent to USAMRIID for analysis might not have been adequately contained.

In January 2002, the FBI doubled the reward for helping solve the case to $2.5 million, and by June officials said the agency was scrutinizing 20 to 30 scientists who might have had the knowledge and opportunity to send the anthrax letters.

After the government’s settlement with Hatfill was announced in late June, Ivins started showing signs of strain, the Times said. It quoted a longtime colleague as saying Ivins was being treated for depression and indicated to a therapist that he was considering suicide. Family members and local police escorted Ivins away from the Army lab, and his access to sensitive areas was curtailed, the colleague told the newspaper. He said Ivins was facing a forced retirement in September.

The colleague declined to be identified out of concern that he would be harassed by the FBI, the report said.

Ivins was one of the nation’s leading biodefense researchers.

In 2003, Ivins and two of his colleagues at the USAMRIID received the highest honor given to Defense Department civilian employees for helping solve technical problems in the manufacture of anthrax vaccine.

In 1997, U.S. military personnel began receiving the vaccine to protect against a possible biological attack. Within months, a number of vaccine lots failed a potency test required by federal regulators, causing a shortage of vaccine and eventually halting the immunization program. The USAMRIID team’s work led to the reapproval of the vaccine for human use.

The Times said Ivins was the son of a Princeton-educated pharmacist who was born and raised in Lebanon, Ohio. He received undergraduate and graduate degrees, including a Ph.D. in microbiology, from the University of Cincinnati.

He and his wife, Diane, owned a home just outside the main gate to Fort Detrick.

Dishneau reported from Hagerstown, Md.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gH1fcT1QrjvwIaAZTO63_lxHs9EQD929C5F00

“9/11’s a lie” (pulled down by youtube after 100000 hits, but people keep reposting)

This is one of the BEST evidence yet of humanoids on the planet
Greetings to all
Informatron

Update: Unfortunately, the video was pulled down by youtube after getting 100000 hits. But people keep reposting it. Latest available here:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=tAkWNxhBWjs

Music to lift the heart in victory.

Free Bees – 9/11’s a Lie (Stayin’ Alive)

The ‘Free Bees’ are looking for help in spreading their ‘9/11’s a lie’ music video and song far and wide. Reluctantly they have decided that even though they’re extremely proud of the work, they are releasing it anonymously.

They believe that this music video has the potential to reach a large audience and as a work of infotainment is amusing, informative and thought provoking.

Watch the clip:

[http://youtube.com/watch?v=tAkWNxhBWjs]
Update: over 3000 hits in 24 hours. Could be more, youtube count not updating. Anyway, needs more… Much more…

Largest Swiss Newspaper Asks if Bush Was Behind 9/11

2,973 humans died with the attacks of 9/11. “Bin Laden” and “Al Qaeda”, the Bush clan cried. The world believed themm. In the meantime even scientists doubt the Bush version. Now, Swiss university professors Albert A. Stahel and Daniele Ganser raise new questions.

“Something is not correct”, says strategy expert Stahel in “World Week”, and here he refers to the “incomplete” official US Government 9/11 Report of 2004.

The university professor confirms his criticism in BLICK: “Osama Bin Laden cannot be ‘the large godfather’ behind the attacks. He did not have enough means of communication”.

Dr. Stahel doubts that a passenger airliner crashed into the Pentagon: “For trainee pilots it is actually impossible to crash into the building so exactly. Seven hours after the Twin Towers collapsed, the World Trade Center Building 7 next to it also collapsed. The official version: It burned for a long time. Nothing at all is clear.”

Raising questions along with Stahel is historian Dr. Daniele Ganser, his colleague at the University of Zurich. Dr. Ganser also calls the official US version “a conspiracy theory”.

“There are three theories, which we should treat equally”:

1. “Surprise theory” – Bin Laden and Al Qaeda implemented the attacks.

2. “Let it happen on purpose” – The US Government knew the Al Qaeda plans and did not react in order to legitimize a series of wars.

3. “Made it happen on purpose” – The attacks were actually planned and orchestrated by the Pentagon and/or US secret services.

Ganser: “3,000 humans were sacrificed for strategic interests. The more we research, the more we doubt the Bush version. It is conceivable that the Bush government was responsible. Bush has lied so much already! And we already know that the US government planned an operation in 1962 Operation Northwood that was approved by the Pentagon that would have sacrificed innocent US citizens for the government’s own interests.”

As for Ganser and Stahel: “We only ask questions.”

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/

Air Force officer disciplined for saying

Bush allowed September 11 attacks
 

By: WSWS

on: 28.03.2008

The $200 billion bail-out for predator banks and Spitzer charges are intimately linked

by Greg Palast

Global Research, March 14, 2008
GregPalast.com

While New York Governor Eliot Spitzer was paying an “escort” $4,300 in a hotel room in Washington, just down the road, George Bush’s new Federal Reserve Board Chairman, Ben Bernanke, was secretly handing over $200 billion in a tryst with mortgage bank industry speculators.

Both acts were wanton, wicked and lewd. But there’s a BIG difference. The Governor was using his own checkbook. Bush’s man Bernanke was using ours.

This week, Bernanke’s Fed, for the first time in its history, loaned a selected coterie of banks one-fifth of a trillion dollars to guarantee these banks’ mortgage-backed junk bonds. The deluge of public loot was an eye-popping windfall to the very banking predators who have brought two million families to the brink of foreclosure.

Up until Wednesday, there was one single, lonely politician who stood in the way of this creepy little assignation at the bankers’ bordello: Eliot Spitzer.

Who are they kidding? Spitzer’s lynching and the bankers’ enriching are intimately tied.

How? Follow the money.

The press has swallowed Wall Street’s line that millions of US families are about to lose their homes because they bought homes they couldn’t afford or took loans too big for their wallets. Ba-LON-ey. That’s blaming the victim.

Here’s what happened. Since the Bush regime came to power, a new species of loan became the norm, the “sub-prime” mortgage and it’s variants including loans with teeny “introductory” interest rates. From out of nowhere, a company called “Countrywide” became America’s top mortgage lender, accounting for one in five home loans, a large chuck of these “sub-prime.”

Here’s how it worked: The Grinning Family, with US average household income, gets a $200,000 mortgage at 4% for two years. Their $955 a month payment is 25% of their income. No problem. Their banker promises them a new mortgage, again at the cheap rate, in two years. But in two years, the promise ain’t worth a can of spam and the Grinnings are told to scram – because their house is now worth less than the mortgage. Now, the mortgage hits 9% or $1,609 plus fees to recover the “discount” they had for two years. Suddenly, payments equal 42% to 50% of pre-tax income. Grinnings move into their Toyota.

Now, what kind of American is “sub-prime.” Guess. No peeking. Here’s a hint: 73% of HIGH INCOME Black and Hispanic borrowers were given sub-prime loans versus 17% of similar-income Whites. Dark-skinned borrowers aren’t stupid – they had no choice. They were “steered” as it’s called in the mortgage sharking business.

“Steering,” sub-prime loans with usurious kickers, fake inducements to over-borrow, called “fraudulent conveyance” or “predatory lending” under US law, were almost completely forbidden in the olden days (Clinton Administration and earlier) by federal regulators and state laws as nothing more than fancy loan-sharking.

But when the Bush regime took over, Countrywide and its banking brethren were told to party hardy – it was OK now to steer’m, fake’m, charge’m and take’m.

But there was this annoying party-pooper. The Attorney General of New York, Eliot Spitzer, who sued these guys to a fare-thee-well. Or tried to.

Instead of regulating the banks that had run amok, Bush’s regulators went on the warpath against Spitzer and states attempting to stop predatory practices. Making an unprecedented use of the legal power of “federal pre-emption,” Bush-bots ordered the states to NOT enforce their consumer protection laws.

Indeed, the feds actually filed a lawsuit to block Spitzer’s investigation of ugly racial mortgage steering. Bush’s banking buddies were especially steamed that Spitzer hammered bank practices across the nation using New York State laws.

Spitzer not only took on Countrywide, he took on their predatory enablers in the investment banking community. Behind Countrywide was the Mother Shark, its funder and now owner, Bank of America. Others joined the sharkfest: Goldman Sachs, Merrill Lynch and Citigroup’s Citibank made mortgage usury their major profit centers. They did this through a bit of financial legerdemain called “securitization.”

What that means is that they took a bunch of junk mortgages, like the Grinnings, loans about to go down the toilet and re-packaged them into “tranches” of bonds which were stamped “AAA” – top grade – by bond rating agencies. These gold-painted turds were sold as sparkling safe investments to US school district pension funds and town governments in Finland (really).

When the housing bubble burst and the paint flaked off, investors were left with the poop and the bankers were left with bonuses. Countrywide’s top man, Angelo Mozilo, will “earn” a $77 million buy-out bonus this year on top of the $656 million – over half a billion dollars – he pulled in from 1998 through 2007.

But there were rumblings that the party would soon be over. Angry regulators, burned investors and the weight of millions of homes about to be boarded up were causing the sharks to sink. Countrywide’s stock was down 50%, and Citigroup was off 38%, not pleasing to the Gulf sheiks who now control its biggest share blocks.

Then, on Wednesday of this week, the unthinkable happened. Carlyle Capital went bankrupt. Who? That’s Carlyle as in Carlyle Group. James Baker, Senior Counsel. Notable partners, former and past: George Bush, the Bin Laden family and more dictators, potentates, pirates and presidents than you can count.

The Fed had to act. Bernanke opened the vault and dumped $200 billion on the poor little suffering bankers. They got the public treasure – and got to keep the Grinning’s house. There was no “quid” of a foreclosure moratorium for the “pro quo” of public bail-out. Not one family was saved – but not one banker was left behind.

Every mortgage sharking operation shot up in value. Mozilo’s Countrywide stock rose 17% in one day. The Citi sheiks saw their company’s stock rise $10 billion in an afternoon.

And that very same day the bail-out was decided – what a coinkydink! – the man called, “The Sheriff of Wall Street” was cuffed. Spitzer was silenced.

Do I believe the banks called Justice and said, “Take him down today!” Naw, that’s not how the system works. But the big players knew that unless Spitzer was taken out, he would create enough ruckus to spoil the party. Headlines in the financial press – one was “Wall Street Declares War on Spitzer” – made clear to Bush’s enforcers at Justice who their number one target should be. And it wasn’t Bin Laden.

It was the night of February 13 when Spitzer made the bone-headed choice to order take-out in his Washington Hotel room. He had just finished signing these words for the Washington Post about predatory loans:

“Not only did the Bush administration do nothing to protect consumers, it embarked on an aggressive and unprecedented campaign to prevent states from protecting their residents from the very problems to which he federal government was turning a blind eye.”

Bush, said Spitzer right in the headline, was the “Predator Lenders” Partner in Crime.” The President, said Spitzer, was a fugitive from justice. And Spitzer was in Washington to launch a campaign to take on the Bush regime and the biggest financial powers on the planet.

Spitzer wrote, “When history tells the story of the subprime lending crisis and recounts its devastating effects on the lives of so many innocent homeowners the Bush administration will not be judged favorably.”

But now, the Administration can rest assured that this love story – of Bush and his bankers – will not be told by history at all – now that the Sheriff of Wall Street has fallen on his own gun.

A note on “Prosecutorial Indiscretion.”

Back in the day when I was an investigator of racketeers for government, the federal prosecutor I was assisting was deciding whether to launch a case based on his negotiations for airtime with 60 Minutes. I’m not allowed to tell you the prosecutor’s name, but I want to mention he was recently seen shouting, “Florida is Rudi country! Florida is Rudi country!”

Not all crimes lead to federal bust or even public exposure. It’s up to something called “prosecutorial discretion.”

Funny thing, this “discretion.” For example, Senator David Vitter, Republican of Louisiana, paid Washington DC prostitutes to put him diapers (ewww!), yet the Senator was not exposed by the US prosecutors busting the pimp-ring that pampered him.

Naming and shaming and ruining Spitzer – rarely done in these cases – was made at the “discretion” of Bush’s Justice Department.

Or maybe we should say, ‘indiscretion.’

Greg Palast, former investigator of financial fraud, is the author of the New York Times bestsellers Armed Madhouse and The Best Democracy Money Can Buy.

Greg Palast is a frequent contributor to Global Research. Global Research Articles by Greg Palast

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8336

______________________________________________________________

Comment :

Keep in mind that under Amerikan fascism — and also keep in mind, PLEASE, that 9/11/01 was not the beginning of US fascism, but the BEGINNING OF THE END of US fascism — the illusion (national mythology, ULTIMATE OBJECTIVE #3) of “freedom and democracy” must be kept alive at all costs. So Palast is right when he says “that’s not how the system works”. At this particular point in time, even the needle full of death-dope in the haystack of Spitzer’s body (e.g., behind his ear) would have been too obvious to the great brainwashed masses.

Spitzer Filed Legal Brief,

Helped Silverstein Win $4.5 B

EXCLUSIVE!

“The Real Spitzer Scandal” a 9/11 Spitzer Scandal

The Spitzer scandals continue.

On the 6th anniversary of the 9/11 attack, Brooklyn activist newspaper the/ New York Megaphone/ breaks this exclusive story:NY Governor Eliot Spitzer filed an amicus brief on 1/15/03 on behalf of the World Trade Center’s controversial lease-holder, the real estate magnate Larry Silverstein.

This document shows that Spitzer, as Attorney General, helped Silverstein get the whopping $4.5 billion windfall for the 9/11 attacks.

The record is clear: Spitzer helped reverse a lower court’s decision, by making credible Silverstein’s argument that the two different plane crashes on 9/11/01 should be compensated as two different terrorist attacks. This amicus brief has never been reported before today, in print or online. It was discovered in the court archives on the 17th floor of the 2nd Circuit Court (NYC), and released to the/ New York Megaphone/ by attorney Carl Person. In reporter Sander Hicks’s exclusive story, author and lawyer Carl Person says:“I was surprised to see that Spitzer had used his position as attorney general to support one private litigant over another. Normally, this is not done.” Hicks’ story also covers Governor Spitzer’s recent scandals with police spying on rival Joe Bruno, the Roger Stone voice mail threat, as well as new information and interviews regarding the Spitzer links to Kroll executives Michael Cherkasky and Jerome Hauer. Hicks hands in an original interview with Jerome Hauer, probing his documented links to anthrax suspect Steven Hatfill. Hauer is widely believed to be the source of the White House’s foreknowledge about the anthrax attacks on 9/11/01.

In 2004, Eliot Spitzer was asked to investigate 9/11 by 66% of New Yorkers. Those pleas were ignored. 51% of the USA wants Bush and Cheney investigated for 9/11, according to a Zogby poll last week.

This is the 6th issue of the New York Megaphone, a quarterly newspaper published by activist writers and “Citizen Journalists Pursuing the Unreported Story” at the Vox Pop coffeehouse and community center in Ditmas Park, Brooklyn.

http://voxpopnet.net

“The Real Spitzer Scandal” is currently distributed in a print run of 40,000 for the Fall NY Megaphone, distributed throughout NYC. Circulation is estimated to be over 62,000.

“The Real Spitzer Scandal” is also online, free and in full, at http://www.nymegaphone.com/node/24

This issue of the New York Megaphone also includes a wide variety of quality original reporting, small business features, and humor.

Hicks’ original interview with “bio-terror expert” Jerome Hauer is at http://www.voxpopnet.net/podcasts/hauer.mp3

The Spitzer/Silverstein Amicus Brief is at:

http://voxpopnet.net/Documents/spitzerbrief.pdf

The story was reported and written by Sander Hicks, with reporting help from Igor Kossov and Kempshall McAndrew

‘9/11 attacks made up, ‘ says French best actress Oscar-winner

By: PETER ALLEN
on: 02.03.2008

Oscar-winner Marion Cotillard has accused America of fabricating the 9/11 attacks
Actress Marion Cotillard sparked a political row yesterday after accusing America of fabricating the 9/11 attacks.

The 32-year-old French actress, who received an Oscar last month for her performance as singer Edith Piaf in La Vie En Rose, openly questioned the truth behind the terrorist atrocity in an interview broadcast on a French website.

“I think we’re lied to about a number of things,” Cotillard said, singling out the 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center as an example of the US making up horror stories for political ends.

Referring to the two passenger jets being flown into the Twin Towers, Cotillard said:

“We see other towers of the same kind being hit by planes. Are they burned? They sic was a tower, I believe it was in Spain, which burnt for 24 hours. It never collapsed. None of these towers collapsed. And there in New York, in a few minutes, the whole thing collapsed.”

She added that the towers, planned in the early Sixties, were an outdated “money-sucker” that would have cost more to modernise than to rebuild altogether, which is why they were destroyed.

She said: “It was a money-sucker because they were finished, it seems to me, by 1973, and to re-cable all that, to bring up-to-date all the technology and everything, it was a lot more expensive, that work, than destroying them.”

Cotillard’s stardom and increased earning power looked assured following her Oscar win.

But after her outburst, in which she also queried the 1969 Moon landings, a successful future in Hollywood appears to be in jeopardy.

She said: “Did a man really walk on the Moon? I saw plenty of documentaries on it, and I really wondered. And in any case I don’t believe all they tell me, that’s for sure.”

Cotillard, who was born and brought up in Paris, made the comments on Paris Première – Paris Dernière, a programme broadcast a year ago.

Stars in their eyes: Elton John and partner David Furnish cosy up to the hottest new actress in Hollywood

Celebration: Marion celebrated her win with Hollywood’s A-listers – including Sharon Stone – at Elton John’s party in Hollywood

At the time her remarks were largely ignored, but their appearance yesterday on the French magazine website Marianne2 comes at a time when Cotillard’s profile is sky-high.

She is shortly due to fly to Chicago to star alongside Johnny Depp in Public Enemies, a gangster movie expected to be her first big money-spinner.

Cotillard’s film career began in Luc Besson’s 1998 film Taxi – a huge hit in France but less so around the world.

She is slowly becoming a household name in France, in a list most recently topped by her close friend Audrey Tautou and previously by women such as Catherine Deneuve and Brigitte Bardot.

‘I think we’re lied to about a number of things’ Cotillard said, singling out the 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center as an example of the US making up horror stories for political ends

But Cotillard, who lives with actor and director Guillaume Canet, frequently tells interviewers she has no interest in money or prestige.

Denying that she had any kind of “Anglo-Saxon ambition”, she said she prefers to “choose roles which suit me”.

Despite her low-key image, Cotillard is an environmental activist who once worked as a spokesman for Greenpeace.

News of her anti-Americanism comes as Franco-American relations appear to be thawing, following Paris’s refusal to show support for the invasion of Iraq.

President Nicolas Sarkozy insists he is pro-American, even supporting so-called “Anglo-Saxon” economic reforms.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/showbiz/showbiznews.html?in_article_id=523729&in_page_id=1773

FBI Says Barbara Olsen Did Not Call Ted Olsen.

Bush Solicitor General LIED

21.02.2008

Nationally syndicated talk show host Charles Goyette uncovered blockbuster information in his drive-time interview with author David Ray Griffin.

A center piece of the increasingly apparent BULLSH*T story our government and corporate media have fed us for six long years was a complete fabrication!

We were fed a lie by Ted Olsen who served as Solictor General for the Bush Administration, when on 9/11 he held a press conference to tell America and the world that his dead wife had called him before her demise from the jet she was on that had just been hijacked.

Personally, I thought it was odd at the time that a man would decide to hold a press conference minutes after hearing of his own wife’s death, when it happened on 9/11. If my own wife had just died, the last thing I’d want to do would be to talk to anyone, let alone call a press conference. It didn’t “smell” right.

Now we know why it didn’t smell right. It was a lie. The FBI has reported that no such call between Barbara Olsen and Ted Olsen ever took place on 9/11/2001.

It was part of the rapidly unraveling scam that is the official story of 9/11.

In fact, Griffin went on to explain that there is zero evidence that any hijackers had commandeered a plane at all. True Bush believers will say, whao, wait a minute, we all know they did. How do you know? Because Bush told you.

But, as Griffin rightly points out, in this interview, there is no “EVIDENCE” of their existence.

Which also reveals that mis-information shill, Popular Mechanics, in their 9/11 interview on the Charles Goyette Show months ago, lied when they told us there was DNA evidence of the so-called Muslim hijackers. LIES, all lies.

Find links to the entire interviews of February 19, 2008, at:

http://www.911blogger.com/node/13946

When will corporate media stop their participation in a criminal cover up? If the former Solicitor General lying to America by creating a complete fabrication he spread around the world through corporate media, is not a story worthy of CNN, FOX, ABC, NBC, CBS, Democracy Now, The Nation, Rolling Stone, PBS, NPR, and all the other fourth estate . . . then they have no right to refer to themselves as media.

They should forever in the future refer to themselves as “The Propaganda Ministry.”

http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_bill_dou_080219_breaking_9_2f11_news_3a_.htm

________________________________________________________________ 

 The 9/11 Solution: The Big Clue Everyone Missed

 Video linked below

Two major 9/11 anomalies have been thoroughly documented, specifically:

1) The stand down of US air defense on the morning of 9/11 that permitted commercial jet aircraft to fly erratically and in restricted air space without challenge

2) Overwhelming physical evidence that World Trade Center buildings #1, #2, and #7 were brought down by controlled demolition

A third significant anomaly has not been discussed, let alone acknowledged: the reporting by the major US TV news networks in the first hours few hours immediately after the attacks.

Specifically:

1. MSNBC presented an elaborately detailed story about the lifestyle and anti-US philosophy of Osama bin Laden – while both towers were still burning and long before Bin Laden had been accused by anyone.

2. Fox News featured a “man in the street” eye witness who explained in strangely formal language the science behind why the towers collapsed when most engineers and firemen were utterly baffled and in shock by what had just taken place.

3. CBS featured a Bush administration insider (and not identified as such) as a guest who actively worked to dissuade Dan Rather (and viewers) from speculating that there must have been explosive charges placed in the buildings for them to have collapsed the way they did.

How was it that these stories – based on no fact, no research and no inquirry – appeared in full blown form so quickly on US news networks and then became part of the core myths of what happened on 9/11?

Were these stories prepared in advance?

There’s an old intelligence saying that “once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, but three times is enemy action.”

Because most of these clips ran only once and were not repeated after they’d done their job, it made it difficult, if not impossible, for viewers to analyze them critically.

Now, thanks to the magic of video tape and a few people who immediately started taping the news after the attacks, we have this important evidence that at the very least these attacks appear to have been anticipated and prepared for by forces that have the ability to exert strong influence over the output of the newsrooms of major US news networks.

Now watch this essential video here.

Source: http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/80.html

_______________________________________________________

 Comment :

Because there were no record of phone call; she did not travel with her celular and she never used credit car! ALSO HIS WIFE WAS SPOTTED IN USA SWEEDEN EMBASSY!But it laso probes that the people on the plane were taken to the air force base – changed to a new plane ANS SHIPPED TO THE ATLANTIC!

 You cannot call from 5 miles from a plane today. Much less 7 yrs ago.“Hi, Mom, this is Mark Bingham!…you believe me don’t you?”

LETTRE OUVERTE A TOUS LES PEUPLES DU MONDE

La dissémination volontaire d’OGM, orchestrée par les multinationales biotech, fait partie d’un ensemble d’orientations plus larges qu’il serait imprudent de perdre de vue.

La mainmise d’une minorité sur l’alimentation mondiale et les semences, avec toutes ses conséquences, n’est que la partie émergée d’un iceberg de cynisme et de démence. Afin que rien ne vienne contrecarrer les plans de la minorité au pouvoir qui entend dominer le monde, tous les moyens sont non seulement considérés comme utilisables mais sont aussi utilisés.

Aussi l’actualité de la « guerre des OGM » pourrait se trouver soudain occultée par une actualité bien plus sinistre encore: celle d’une guerre véritable dans laquelle nous serons entraînés bien malgré nous contre l’Iran.

L’initiative récente de hautes personnalités états-uniennes – une lettre publique adressée au peuple états-unien, mais aussi à tous les peuples du monde, pour les mettre en garde contre la préparation avancée d’une provocation terroriste organisée par Dick Cheney et le cercle de GW Bush pour justifier l’attaque de l’Iran—doit être prise très au sérieux. D’autant plus au sérieux que le président français prépare l’opinion à la « nécessité » des bombardements sur l’Iran pour contrer la nucléarisation de ce pays, nonobstant les gestes de bonne volonté accomplis par ce dernier (voir www.acdn.net.)

Selon Steve Watson de infowars.net, (27 août 2007), « Un groupe d’anciens responsables du gouvernement avec des candidats au Congrès, des auteurs et des activistes a publié une alerte urgente selon laquelle une faction du gouvernement alliée à Dick Cheney projette de mettre en scène un événement ou une provocation terroriste en prétexte au lancement d’attaques militaires contre l’Iran et à la mise en application de pouvoirs d’urgence aux USA.

L’ancienne député Cynthia McKinney, avec l’ancien diplomate et colonel de réserve de l’armée Ann Wright ont apposé leur signature sur une lettre publique avertissant que d’énormes indications signalent un événement prochain.

Les actuels candidats députés Cindy Sheehan et Craig Hill sont aussi parmi les signataires à la lettre que voici, intitulée Aux Américains, et aux individus pacifiques de partout : « De grands indices portés à notre attention prouvent que les partisans, les contrôleurs, et les alliés du vice-président Dick Cheney sont déterminés à orchestrer et à fabriquer un nouvel incident type 9/11, et/ou une nouvelle provocation de guerre type Golfe du Tonkin, dans les semaines ou les mois à venir.

Cet événement servirait de prétexte à l’administration Bush pour lancer une offensive de guerre contre l’Iran, très probablement avec des armes nucléaires, et pour imposer un régime de loi martiale ici aux États-Unis. Nous invitons la Chambre des députés à procéder immédiatement à la mise en accusation de Cheney, en mesure d’urgence pour éviter une guerre plus étendue et plus catastrophique. Dès que l’impeachment sera en route, il sera plus facile aux officiers militaires dévoués et patriotes de refuser les ordres illicites venant de la faction de Cheney.

Nous avertissons solennellement les peuples du monde que toute attaque terroriste avec des armes de destruction de masse ayant lieu à l’intérieur des États-Unis ou ailleurs dans l’avenir immédiat doit être considérée à première vue de la responsabilité de la faction de Cheney. Nous invitons les dirigeants politiques responsables partout à commencer immédiatement à immuniser l’opinion publique de leurs pays contre une opération terroriste sous fausse bannière.

Signé: Un groupe de leaders de l’opposition politiques US rassemblés dans la manifestation au domaine de Bush à Kennebunkport dans le Maine, du 24 au 25 août 2007,

CYNTHIA MCKINNEY, ancienne député de Géorgie,

CINDY SHEEHAN, candidate au Congrès de Californie,

CRAIG HILL, candidat au Congrès du Parti Vert du Vermont,

BRUCE MARSHALL, délégué syndical, Tribune de Philadelphie,

JAMILLA EL -SHAFEI, Département de la Paix de Kennebunk,

WEBSTER G. TARPLEY, auteur, ANN WRIGHT, colonel de réserve de l’armée US, ancien diplomate, Dr. DAHLIA WASFI,

www. liberatethis.com, GEORGE PAZ MARTIN, JOHN KAMINSKI, président des avocats pour la démocratie du Maine. »

La lettre a été signée par le groupe de protestation contre la guerre ce week-end (24-25 août) durant lequel quatre mille personnes ont manifesté près de la résidence de la famille Bush à Walker’s Point à Kennebunkport.

L’avertissement suit de près une avalanche récente de bulletins d’informations et de rumeurs sur un événement terroriste.

Des indices supplémentaires de l’imminence de quelque forme d’événement ont surgi avec l’étrange activité du marché boursier se produisant exactement comme dans les semaines et les jours précédant le 9/11. (http://infowars.net/articles/august…) ou http://www.alterinfo. net/USA-D-anci…

Comprendre les enjeux La résistance à la dissémination volontaire des OGM s’inscrit dans la résistance active à cette dictature.

Au-delà des problèmes réels graves que suscitent cette dissémination, il s’agit bien en effet de refuser une décision prise par des représentants du peuple, de refuser l’étau de la légalité au nom de laquelle ces décideurs prétendent pouvoir nous imposer une technologie, une conception de la science et du progrès, et ce en dépit des conséquences réelles.

De la même façon qu’on cherche à nous imposer les applications sauvages de cette technologie, en agitant le spectre des nuisibles, de la famine, de la sécheresse, etc… et en présentant ces applications comme la seule solution ou comme une panacée, on cherche à nous imposer des guerres sordides, en agitant le spectre du terrorisme, du fanatisme, etc…et en présentant la guerre comme la seule solution.

A chaque fois, au coeur du dispositif, se trouvent les médias qui préparent efficacement l’opinion à accepter l’inacceptable en présentant les décisions à venir comme les seules décisions possibles.

Si les décideurs prennent la peine de « gagner » l’opinion en leur faveur, et d’acheter les médias pour ce faire, c’est bien parce qu’ils la redoutent. Mais que redoutent-ils au juste?

Ils redoutent avant tout que les gens ne découvrent qu’ils naviguent sur le même bateau qu’eux. Et que, découvrant cela, ils réalisent la facilité et la portée d’une mutinerie : la tête de l’équipage ne peut rien sans ses matelots.

Aussi, tout l’art de leur communication consiste t’il à faire oublier au peuple cette simple vérité. Toutes les institutions emploient leur énergie essentiellement à maintenir l’illusion d’une séparation entre les décideurs et le peuple, l’illusion qu’il existerait deux bateaux distincts, l’un dirigeant l’autre, tout en restant hors de portée.

La multiplication des moyens de communication menace néanmoins l’édifice de duperie soigneusement entretenu. Aussi est-il apparu nécessaire aux décideurs de veiller à prévenir une éventuelle mutinerie en commençant à installer de véritables entraves juridiques, en guise de chaînes, pour pouvoir éventuellement ligoter les matelots trop éveillés.

Notre vieille tradition légaliste en France nous empêche de questionner pertinemment l’activité permanente qui se déploie dans le sens d’un verrouillage consciencieux de toute protestation au moyen de lois votées à la hâte, et par un Parlement composé en majorité de gens qui ne sont pas en capacité de mesurer les enjeux véritables.

Elle nous contraint de même à accepter le jeu de négociations sans fin destinées principalement à épuiser notre énergie, reprenant sans cesse ici ce qui a été octroyé là-bas.

Avant de nous retrouver définitivement ligotés à fond de cale, il paraît donc nécessaire maintenant de nous comporter selon ce que nous sommes : libres de mener le bateau où nous le voulons.

3eme guerre mondiale, “La terreur Fabriquee” 

Ce livre constitue une vive réaction à l’incapacité des services de renseignement étasuniens, comme celle de l’enquête conjointe du Congrès ou de la Commission Kean-Hamilton sur le 11 Septembre à dégager les faits essentiels relatifs aux attentats terroristes de septembre 2001.

L’auteur prend pour point de départ le mythe officiel du 11/9 (19 pirates de l’air arabes, al-Qaida, Oussama ben Laden, un ordinateur portable dans une grotte afghane) et montre comment ce mythe a été fabriqué dans les 10 jours qui ont suivi le 11 Septembre par des fuites organisées par George Tenet et Richard Clarke auprès des médias, par des remarques faites par Colin Powell, ainsi que par le discours prononcé par Bush au Congrès le 20 septembre. Depuis lors, chacun d’eux a été pris en flagrant délit de mensonge sur l’Irak et sur d’autres sujets, si bien qu’il est grand temps de mettre à nu leurs mensonges sur le 11/9.

Après avoir passé en revue les faits établis, afin de démontrer que la véracité du compte-rendu officiel du 11/9 n’a jamais été prouvée, l’auteur élabore une théorie du terrorisme international fondée sur les expériences faites avec l’assassinat de Kennedy, les Brigades rouges, le groupe Baader-Meinhof et d’autres affaires plus récentes.

Il affirme que le terrorisme international, y compris le 11/9, est en grande partie le produit des services de renseignement, et met en lumière le rôle des lampistes et des boucs émissaires, des réseaux de “taupes” à l’intérieur du gouvernement et des médias, des professionnels anonymes qui sont les véritables auteurs des atrocités, et des cellules de commandement secrètes existant dans des contextes paramilitaires privatisés.

Une fois ce cadre posé, Tarpley procède à l’analyse d’une douzaine de points sur lesquels le compte-rendu officiel du 11/9 se révèle absurde, contradictoire, éminemment douteux, ou simplement physiquement impossible. En répondant aux objections, l’auteur montre que des moments clés de l’histoire américaine tels que la Déclaration d’Indépendance, le House Divided Speech de Lincoln ou le programme du Parti Républicain en 1860 seraient qualifiés aujourd’hui de théories du complot par les néo-conservateurs qui se sont autoproclamés gardiens de l’orthodoxie.

Tarpley présente la longue histoire du terrorisme comme un outil permettant de manipuler l’opinion publique en faveur de la guerre et de la dictature, depuis Guy Fawkes jusqu’à l’opération Northwoods en passant par l’attentat contre le Maine. On voit alors se dresser l’ombre d’Abraham Lincoln, qui, par le biais de sa fameuse série de résolutions qui récusaient le compte-rendu officiel de l’origine de la guerre du Mexique dressé par l’administration Polk, symbolise l’aspiration américaine classique à la vérité et au rejet de toute manipulation de la part du gouvernement.

Le livre se conclut par un aperçu de l’élection présidentielle de novembre 2004 aux États-Unis et de la lutte géopolitique qui oppose l’expansionnisme des néo-conservateurs étasuniens à la Fédération de Russie ; c’est le premier livre à replacer le 11 Septembre dans le contexte d’une guerre froide toujours d’actualité.

Webster G. TARPLEY

Historien spécialisé dans le terrorisme après la seconde guerre mondiale, journaliste, Webster G. TARPLEY, s’est fait connaître en 1978 par son enquête sur l’assassinat d’Aldo Moro, à la demande de parlementaires italiens. Sa biographie de George W. Bush père et ses essais sur les dérives fascistes du gouvernement américain en font un opposant farouche du gouvernement actuel des États-Unis.

RADICAL.

« Le terrorisme d’origine incertaine, utilisé comme justification de guerres menées à l’étranger et contre ses propres citoyens : une étude comme La Terreur fabriquée de M. TARPLEY était attendue depuis longtemps et ouvrira, espérons-le, les yeux de nombreuses personnes…»
Gerhard WISNEWSKI, producteur de télévision allemand, auteur de Operation 9/11 et de Mythos 9/11.

«Je ne connais personne d’autre qui dénonce sans aucune crainte le terrorisme d’État comme [le fait] Webster G. TARPLEY, une référence pour de nombreux journalistes d’investigation. Il déploie sa vision globale d’historien avec la précision d’une vigie de nos sombres élites actuelles.» Barrie ZWICKER, journaliste canadien primé, auteur de documentaires.

«Le livre de M. TARPLEY est, sans conteste, le plus important et le meilleur jamais écrit sur le sujet. Il s’agit d’une excellente combinaison d’analyse géopolitique, de philosophie et de recherche sur tous les aspects du 11 Septembre… [un travail] qui va très loin.» Nico HAUPT, chercheur indépendant sur le 11 Septembre, collabore à différents sites Internet.

« La Terreur fabriquée est brillamment écrit ; on ne peut s’arrêter de le lire. Webster rend un jugement dévastateur. Mes félicitations ! Je le recommande de tout cœur.»
Andréas VON BÜLOW, ancien ministre allemand de la Recherche et de la Technologie, membre de la commission parlementaire sur le Renseignement. et auteur de La CIA et le 11 Septembre.

———————————————————

———————————————————–

Related links :

Barksdale Revisisted – Did the USAF Lose a Nuke ? Someone, operating under a special chain of command within the United States Air Force, just stole a nuclear weapon.

Missing Nukes: Treason of the Highest Order

Poutine prévient l’Iran que la guerre est proche

La radio russe avertit du danger imminent d’une guerre contre l’Iran

George Bush serait prêt à décréter l’état d’urgence (expert américain)

Nicolas Sarkozy rencontre le gourou de l’ « Exécutif Unitaire »

L’impérialisme sous le voile de la lutte contre l’islamisme

Le ministre de l’Intérieur allemand appelle à interner et à exécuter des personnes suspectées de terrorisme

Les pseudo-attentats à l’“explosif liquide” et ses implications

U.S. Veterans reveals atomic bombs dropped on Afghanistan and Iraq

Ten Reasons Why “Save Darfur” is a PR Scam to Justify the Next US Oil and Resource Wars in Africa

Israel Air Force Train Intensively for Iran Strike with Mini-Nukes

US, NATO and Israel Deploy Nukes directed against Iran

U.S. Nuclear Weapons Being “Guarded” by Israel

Al-Baradei To Al-Hayat : I fear a surprising terrorist attack with radioactive materials in a major world capital. Iran is not an imminent danger and any military action against it may put the fate of Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal for negotiation.