HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK ---------------------------
Hi , I flatenned the first translation to fit more closely the original text in french... HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK --------------------------- on 10/4/02 18:16, Richard Roper at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK > --------------------------- > > Can someone please supply an English translation? > > > --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK >> --------------------------- Here it comes. Though the text mainly comes from babelfish I checked its accuracy and looks more or less ok. Cheers! > > Conference of Thierry Meyssan under the auspices of the Arab League Who financed the attacks of September 11? > > > We reproduce below the text of the conference held by Thierry Meyssan, > April 8, 2002, in the Zayed Centre, Abu Dhabi (United Arab Emirates), > under > the auspices of the Arab League, in the presence of the diplomatic corps > and > of the international press. This intervention was followed by questions > and > answers which are in the course of transcription and translation. > > Your Majesty, Excellencies, Mesdames, Messrs, > > > As of the first minutes which followed the first attack against World > Trade > Centre, officials suggested at the press that the sleeping partner was > Oussama > Ben Laden, the paradigm of Eastern fanaticism. A little later the very > new > director of the FBI, Robert Mueller III, listed by names nineteen > kamikazes and > required all the means of his agency and of intelligence services to > track > their accomplices. The FBI never proceeded to such an investigation, but > co-ordinated a man-hunt that took, on the eyes of the American > public, the pace of an Arab-hunt. So much, that some excited indivuduals > attacked, even killed Arabs whom they naively regarded as collectively > responsible for the attacks. > > There was no investigation of the Congress. This one gave up exerting > its constitutional function at the request of the White House, allegedly > not > to threat the national security. > > There was neither investigation of the press. This one was convened in > the > White House and was summoned to abstain from any investigation in order > not to harm the > national security. > > If we analyse the attacks of September 11, we notice initially that > they are > vaster than recognised in the official version: > > 1) We know only the implication of four planes, whereas it has been > question of eleven planes. Moreover, the examination ofcases of crime of > insider trading, in margin of the attacks, shows bear speculations on three aviation > companies: American Airlines, United Airlines and Royal KLM Deutch > Airlines. > > 2) We did not integrate the attack made into the dependencies of the > White House, > Old Executive Office Building (known as " Eisenhower building "). > However, the >station ABC diffused on line, the morning of September 11, the images >of a > fire devastating the services of the presidency. > > 3) We either did not take the measurement of the collapse of a third > building > in Manhattan, independently of the Twin Towers. This third building had > not been >stroken by a plane. It also was however devastated by a fire before >breaking > down in its turn, following an unknown cause. This building sheltered > the > principal secret base of the CIA in the world. This base devoted its > means to > economic intelligence to the detriment of strategic information > and larged the dam of the lobby military-industrialist. > > If we consider the attack made on the Pentagon, we note that the > official > version is an enormous lie. > > According to the Defence Department, a Boeing 757, which one had lost > the > track above Ohio would have flown 500 kilometres without being traced. > It > would have entered the airspace of the Pentagon and would have descended > on the > lawn from the heliport, would have rebounded on this one, would have > broken > its right wing against a power generating unit, would have struck the > frontage > on the level of the ground floor and of the first stage, would have > entirely > engulfed itself in the building, and would have been entirely consumed > there, leaving as remainders only two unusable black boxes and fragments > of > bodies of the passengers. > > It is obviously impossible that a Boeing 757 can escape during 500 > kilometres > from the civil radars, the military radars, the fighters launched to its >tail, and with the observation satellites which had been just > activated. > > It is also impossible that a Boeing 757 enters the airspace of the > Pentagon > without being destroyed by the five batteries of missiles, which protect > the > building. > > When one observes the photographs of the frontage, taken in the few > minutes > which followed the attack, before even the civil firemen of Arlington have time to deploy, one observes no trace of the right wing on fire in > front of the frontage, nor any hole in the frontage having allowed the > plane > to engulf itself in the building. > > Without fear of ridiculous, the Defence Department affirms that the > tempered > steel engines would have been dematerialised under the effect of the > shock, > without so to speak damaging the frontage. The aluminium of the fuselage > would > have entered in combustion to more than 2 500° Celsius inside the > building and > would have been gasified (NDLR-into Aluminum oxide), but the bodies of > the passengers whom it contained > would have burned so little which they could have been later on > identified > thanks to their fingerprints. > > Answering the journalists at the time of a Pentagon press conference, > the head of the firemen indicated that there remained " no bulky remains > of > the apparatus ", " neither piece of fuselage, nor nothing of this kind > ". He > declared that neither him, nor its men, knew what happened to the > aircraft. > > The study of the official photographs of the scene of the attack, taken > and > diffused by the Defence Department, shows that no part of the Pentagon > carries > mark of an ascribable impact by a Boeing 757. > > It is necessary to face to the obviousness: it is impossible that the > attack on September 11 at the Pentagon,which killed 125 people, was done > by > an airliner. > > The scene of the attack having been devastated as of the following day > by work > immediately undertaken, one has only partial elements to reconstitute > the > event. These elements converge towards a single assumption which it is > not > possible to validate with certainty. > > An air controller of Washington testified to have observed by radar the > trace of a flying machine flying close to 800 km/h, > moving initially towards the White House, then operating a very brutal > turn > towards the Pentagon where it would have crashed. This controller > attested that the characteristics of the flight could be only those of a > military machine. > > Several hundreds of witnesses indicated to have heard " a strident noise > comparable with that of a fighter ", and not at all with that of a civil > aircraft. > > Eyewitnesses indicated to have observed " something like a cruise > missile with > wings " or a machine of small size, " like a plane which can contain 8 > to 12 > people ". > > The machine penetrated in the building without causing significant > damage on > the frontage. It penetrated several rings of the Pentagon, opening in > each > partition which it crossed a hole increasingly broader. The final > opening, of > perfectly circular form, measured approximately 1,80 meter diameter. > While > crossing the first ring of the Pentagon, the machine caused a fire, as > gigantic as sudden. Immense flames came out of the building by licking > the > frontages. They were withdrawn also quickly, leaving behind them a black > soot > cloud. The fire was propagated in a portion of the first ring of the > Pentagon > and in two perpendicular corridors. It was so suddenly that fire > protections did not have time to be activated. > > All these testimonies and these observations could correspond to the > shooting > of a missile of the last generation of type MGA, containing a > hollow-charge > and a point of depleted uranium of type BLU, guided by GPS. This type of > machine has the appearance of a small civil aircraft, but it is not a > plane. > It produces a whistle comparable with that of a fighter, can be guided > with > sufficient precision to enter through a window, bores the most resistant > shieldings, and causes - independently of its perforating-effect an > instantaneous firethat realeases a heat of more than 2000° Celsius. > > This type of machine is developed jointly by the Navy and the Air Force. > It is > shoot from a plane. The machine which was used on the Pentagon destroyed > the > part of the building in which the new centre of command of the Navy was > under > installation. Following this attack, the head of staff of Navy, the > admiral > Vern Clark, did not join the room of command of the National Joint > Intelligence Military Centre like the other staff officers, but left the > Pentagon precipitately. > > Who could thus fire a missile from the last generation on the Pentagon? > The > answer is brought to us by the confidences of Ari Fleischer, spokesman > of the > White House, and Karl Rove, secretary-general of the White House, before > journalists of the New York Times and Washington Post. Confidences which > the > interested parties themselves contradicted eighteen days later, > pretexting to > have expressed themselves inappropriately under the blow of the emotion. > > According to these close collaborators of George W Bush, the Secret > Service > received during the morning a phone call of the sleeping partners of the > attacks, probably to establish requirements. To credit their call, the > attackers revealed the secret codes of transmission and authentication > of the > presidency. However, only some people of confidence, located at the node > of > the apparatus of State could have these codes. It follows that at least > one of > the sleeping partners of the attacks of September 11 is one of the > leaders, > civil or military, of the United States of America. > > To credit the fable with the terrorists islamists, the American > authorities > imagined kamikazes. > > > Although it is possible to organised people to introduce guns > into airliners, the kamikazes would have used as only weapons paper > cutters. > They would have learned how to control of the Boeing 757 in a few hours > of > simulator and would have become better pilot than professionals. They > could > thus have realised without hesitation the complex manoeuvres of > approach. > > The department of the Justice never explained how it had drawn up the > list of > the kamikazes. The aviation companies indicated both the exact number > of > passengers on each aircraft and the incomplete lists of passengers not > mentioning the people embarked to the last moment. By controlling these > lists, > one observes that the names of the kamikazes do not appear in them, and > that the > number of non- identified passengers is only three in flight 11 and two > in flight 93. It is thus impossible that the nineteen kamikazes all > embarked. Moreover, several of the people blamed since showed up. The > FBI > however maintains that the hijackers were identified without possibility > of > error, and complementary information disclosure as the dates of birth > makes any homonymy improbable. To those who would still doubt, the FBI > brings a > ridiculous proof: whereas the planes burned down and the Twin Towers > broke down, > the passport of Mohammed Atta would have been miraculeusly found intact > on the > smoking ruins of World Trade Centre. > > The existence of hijackers, these or others, is attested to us by > telephone > calls that the passengers would have passed to their families and to the > authorities. Unfortunately, those are known to us only based on hearsay > and were > not published, even if they would have been recorded. It was not > possible to > check that they were actually passed from such or such mobile telephone, > or of > such or such interphone. There still, we are summoned to believe the FBI > on > word. > > Moreover, it was not essential to have hijackers to carry out these > attacks. > Technology Global Hawk (NDLR-correction), developed by the US Air Force, > makes it possible to > take the control of an airliner in spite of the crew and to guide it > remotely. > > Remain the scarecrow Oussama Ben Laden. If it is admitted that he was a > collaborator or agent of the CIA during the war against the Soviets in > Afghanistan, one tries to make believe that he would have been turned > over and > would have become the public enemy n° 1 of the United States. This fable > does > not resist, it either, with the analysis. The French daily newspaper, Le > Figaro, revealed that last July, Oussama Ben Laden was hospitalised at > the > American hospital of Dubai, where he accepted noteworthy the visit of > the > head of post office the CIA. American chain CBS revealed that, September > 10, > Oussama Ben laden was under dialysis at the military hospital of > Rawalpindi, > under the protection of the Pakistani army. And international reporter > French, > Michel Peyrard - who was a prisoner of the taliban- told how Oussama Ben > Laden > lived openly in Jalalabad, in November, while the USA bombarded other > areas of > the country. Moreover, can one believe that the largest army of the > world come > to stop it in Afghanistan did not reach that point, while mullah Omar > would > have escaped with the American armada while fleeing with a scooter? > >According to the elements I have just presented to you, it appears > that the attacks of September 11 are not ascribable to foreign > terrorists > from the arabo-Moslem world - even if certain performers may be > Muslims -, but to American terrorists. > > Shortly after the attacks of September 11 2001, Resolution 1368 of the > Security Council of the United Nations recognised " the inherent right > to > individual or collective self-defence in accordance with the Charter " > and > stipulated: " the Security Council invites all the States to work > together to >bring to justice the authors, organisers and sleeping partners of these > terrorist attacks and stresses that those which take the responsibility > to > help, support and lodge the authors, organisers and sleeping partners of > these > acts will have to return accounts ". > > If one wishes to answer the call of the Security Council, to apply > Resolution > 1368 and to punish the real guilties, the only means of identifying them > with > precision would be to constitute a board of inquiry, whose independence > and > objectivity are guaranteed by the United Nations. It would be also the > only > means of preserving international peace. While waiting, Your Majesty, > Excellence, Mesdames, Messrs, the military actions outside the United > States of America are deprived of legitimate base in international law, > as are those recent actions in Afghanistan or actions planned in > Iran, Iraq and in many other countries. > > Site of the Zayed Centre: www.zccf.org.ae Text in Arabic: > www.zccf.org.ae/LECTURES/A2_lectures/201.htm --------------------------- --------------------------- ANTI-NATO INFORMATION LIST ==^================================================================ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?a84x2u.a9617B Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^================================================================
