-Caveat Lector-

..............................................................

>From the New Paradigms Project [Not Necessarily Endorsed]
Note:  We store 100's of related "New Paradigms Posts" at:
http://www.msen.com/~lloyd/oldprojects/recentmail.html

From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "General Lee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: FORMER GREEN BERET SAYS BUSH IS LYING ABOUT 9-11
Date: Sunday, October 21, 2001 11:14 AM

Once again when Americans want to read the truth,
they have to turn to Pravda, a Russian newspaper!!!
This former Green Beret is daring to speak the
awful truth about the events of 9-11-01 even as
the entire American media remains silent.

His conclusions are right on target. The 'official'
explanation of the events on that horrific day is
highly suspect. At best, government officials were
"criminally negligent or unspeakably stupid" in
the conduct of their duties.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Source:
http://english.pravda.ru/usa/2001/10/17/18410.html

THE SO-CALLED EVIDENCE IS A FARCE:
FORMER GREEN BERET SAYS BUSH IS LYING

 Stan Goff: The So-Called Evidence Is a Farce

 I'm a retired Special Forces Master Sergeant. That doesn't cut much for those who 
will only
 accept the opinions of former officers on military matters, since we enlisted swine 
are assumed to
 be incapable of grasping the nuances of doctrine.

 But I wasn't just in the army. I studied and taught military science and doctrine. I 
was a tactics
 instructor at the Jungle Operations Training Center in Panama, and I taught Military 
Science at
 West Point. And contrary to the popular image of what Special Forces does, SF's 
mission is to
 teach. We offer advice and assistance to foreign forces. That's everything from 
teaching
 marksmanship to a private to instructing a Battalion staff on how to coordinate 
effective air
 operations with a sister service.

 Based on that experience, and operations in eight designated conflict areas from 
Vietnam to Haiti,
 I have to say that the story we hear on the news and read in the newspapers is simply 
not
 believable. The most cursory glance at the verifiable facts, before, during, and 
after September
 11th, does not support the official line or conform to the current actions of the 
United States
 government.

 But the official line only works if they can get everyone to accept its underlying 
premises. I'm not
 at all surprised about the Republican and Democratic Parties repeating these 
premises. They are
 simply two factions within a single dominant political class, and both are financed 
by the same
 economic powerhouses. My biggest disappointment, as someone who identifies himself 
with the
 left, has been the tacit acceptance of those premises by others on the left, 
sometimes naively, and
 sometimes to score some morality points. Those premises are twofold. One, there is 
the premise
 that what this de facto administration is doing now is a "response" to September 
11th. Two, there
 is the premise that this attack on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon was done 
by people
 based in Afghanistan. In my opinion, neither of these is sound.

 To put this in perspective we have to go back not to September 11th, but to last year 
or further.

 A man of limited intelligence, George W. Bush, with nothing more than his name and the
 behind-the-scenes pressure of his powerful father-a former President, ex-director of 
Central
 Intelligence, and an oil man-is systematically constructed as a candidate, at 
tremendous cost.
 Across the country, subtle and not-so-subtle mechanisms are put into place to 
disfranchise a
 significant fraction of the Democrat's African-American voter base. This doesn't come 
out until
 Florida becomes a battleground for Electoral College votes, and the magnitude of the 
story has
 been suppressed by the corporate media to this day. In a decision so lacking in 
legitimacy, the
 Supreme Court will neither by-line the author of the decision nor allow the decision 
to ever be
 used as a precedent, Bush v. Gore awards the presidency of the United States to a man 
who
 loses the popular vote in Florida and loses the national popular vote by over 600,000.

 This de facto regime then organizes a very interesting cabinet. The Vice President is 
an oil
 executive and the former Secretary of Defense. The National Security Advisor is a 
director on the
 board of a transnational oil corporation and a Russia scholar. The Secretary of State 
is a man with
 no diplomatic experience whatsoever, and the former Chair of the Joint Chiefs of 
Staff. The other
 interesting appointment is Donald Rumsfeld as Secretary of Defense. Rumsfeld is the 
former CEO
 of Searle Pharmaceuticals. He and Cheney were featured as speakers at the May, 2000,
 Russian-American Business Leaders Forum. So the consistent currents in this cabinet 
are
 petroleum, the former Soviet Union, and the military.

 Based on the record of Daddy Bush, in all his guises, and the general trajectory of 
US foreign
 policy as far back as the Carter Administration, I feel I can reasonably conclude 
that Middle
 Eastern and South Asian fossil fuels are one of their major preoccupations. Not just 
because this
 klavern has some very direct financial interests in fossil fuel, but because they 
surely know that
 worldwide oil production is peaking as we speak, and will soon begin a permanent and
 precipitous decline that will completely change the character of civilization as we 
know it within 20
 years.

 Even the left seems to be in deep denial about this, but the math is available. And, 
no, alternative
 energies and energy technologies will not save us. All the alternatives in the world 
can not begin to
 provide more than a tiny fraction of the energy base now provided by oil. This makes 
it more than
 a resource, and the drive to control what's left more than an economic competition.

 I further conclude that the economic colonization of the former Soviet Union is 
probably high on
 that agenda, and in fact has a powerful synergy with the issue of petroleum. Russia 
not only holds
 vast untapped resources that beckon to imperialism in crisis, it remains a credible 
military and
 nuclear challenger in the region.

 We have not one, but three members of the Bush de facto cabinet with military 
credentials, which
 makes the cabinet look quite a lot like a military General Staff. All this way before 
September
 11th.

 Then there's the subject of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. NATO might have 
expected
 consignment to the dustbin of the Cold War after the Eastern Bloc shattered in 1991. 
Peace
 dividend and all that. But it didn't. It expanded directly into the former states of 
the Eastern Bloc
 toward the former Soviet Union, and contributed significant forces to the devastation 
of Iraq-a
 key country in the world oil market, over which control translates into the ability 
to manipulate oil
 prices.

 NATO is a military formation, and the United States exerts the controlling interest 
in it. It seemed
 like a form without a function, but it remedied that pretty quickly.

 Then when Yugoslavia refused to play ball with the International Monetary Fund, the 
US and
 Germany began a systematic campaign of destabilization there, even using some of the 
veterans of
 Afghanistan in that campaign.

 NATO became the military arm of that agenda-the break-up of Yugoslavia into compliant
 statelets, the further containment of the former Soviet Union, and the future 
pipeline easement for
 Caspain Sea oil to Western European markets through Kosovo.

 You see, this is important to understand, and people-even those against the war 
talk-are tending
 to overlook the significance of it. NATO is not a guarantor of international law, and 
it is not a
 humanitarian organization.

 It is a military alliance with one very dominant partner. And it can no longer claim 
to be a
 defensive alliance against European socialists. It is an instrument of military 
aggression.

 NATO is the organization that is now going to thrust further along the 40th parallel 
from the
 Balkans through the Southern Asian Republics of the former Soviet Union. The US 
military has
 already taken control of a base in Uzbekistan. No one is talking about how what we 
are doing
 seems to be a very logical extension of a strategy that was already in motion, and 
has been in
 motion for two decades. Once we recognize the pattern of activity designed to 
simultaneously
 consolidate control over Middle Eastern and South Asian oil, and contain and colonize 
the former
 Soviet Union, Afghanistan is exactly where they need to go to pursue that agenda.

 Afghanistan borders Iran, India, and even China but, more importantly, the Central 
Asian
 Republics of the former Soviet Union, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Tajikistan. These 
border
 Kazakhstan. Kazakhstan borders Russia. Turkmenistan sits on the Southeastern quadrant 
of the
 Caspian Sea, whose oil the Bush Administration dearly covets.

 Afghanistan is necessary for two things: as a base of operations to begin the process 
of
 destabilizing, breaking off, and establishing control over the South Asian Republics, 
which will
 begin within the next 18-24 months in my opinion, and constructing a pipeline through
 Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, and Pakistan to deliver petroleum to the Asian market.

 The BBC was recently told by Niaz Naik, a Pakistani Foreign Secretary, that senior 
American
 officials were warning them as early as mid-July that military action for mid-October 
was being
 planned for Afghanistan. In 1996, the Department of Energy was issuing reports on the
 desirability of a pipeline through Afghanistan, and in 1998, Unocal testified before 
the House
 Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific that this pipeline was crucial to transport 
Caspian Basin oil
 to the Indian Ocean.

 Given this evidence that a military operation to secure at least a portion of 
Afghanistan has been
 on the table, possibly as early as five years ago, I can't help but conclude that the 
actions we are
 seeing put into motion now are part of a pre-September 11th agenda. I'm absolutely 
sure of that,
 in fact. The planning alone for operations, of this scale, that are now taking shape, 
would take
 many months. And we are seeing them take shape in mere weeks.

 It defies common sense. This administration is lying about this whole thing being a 
"reaction" to
 September 11th. That leads me, in short order, to be very suspicious of their 
yet-to-be-provided
 evidence that someone in Afghanistan is responsible. It's just too damn convenient. 
Which also
 leads me to wonder-just for the sake of knowing-what actually did happen on September 
11th,
 and who actually is responsible.

 The so-called evidence is a farce. The US presented Tony Blair's puppet government 
with the
 evidence, and of the 70 so-called points of evidence, only nine even referred to the 
attacks on the
 World Trade Center, and those points were conjectural. This is a bullshit story from 
beginning to
 end. Presented with the available facts, any 16-year old with a liking for courtroom 
dramas could
 tear this story apart like a two-dollar shirt. But our corporate press regurgitates 
it uncritically. But
 then, as we should know by now, their role is to legitimize.

 This cartoon heavy they've turned bin Laden into makes no sense, when you begin to 
appreciate
 the complexity and synchronicity of the attacks. As a former military person who's 
been involved
 in the development of countless operations orders over the years, I can tell you that 
this was a
 very sophisticated and costly enterprise that would have left what we call a huge 
"signature".

 In other words, it would be very hard to effectively conceal.

 So there's a real question about why there was no warning of this. That can be a 
question about
 the efficacy of the government's intelligence apparatus. That can be a question about 
various
 policies in the various agencies that had to be duped to orchestrate this action. And 
it can also be
 a question about whether or not there was foreknowledge of the event, and that 
foreknowledge is
 being covered up. To dismiss this concern out of hand as the rantings of conspiracy 
nuts is
 premature. And there is a history of this kind of thing being done by national 
political bosses,
 including the darling of liberals, Franklin Roosevelt. The evidence is very 
compelling that the
 Roosevelt Administration deliberately failed to act to stop Pearl Harbor in order to 
mobilize
 enough national anger to enter the World War II.

 I have no idea why people aren't asking some very specific questions about the 
actions of Bush
 and company on the day of the attacks.

 Follow along:

 Four planes get hijacked and deviate from their flight plans, all the while on FAA 
radar. The
 planes are all hijacked between 7:45 and 8:10 AM Eastern Daylight Time.

 Who is notified?

 This is an event already that is unprecedented. But the President is not notified and 
going to a
 Florida elementary school to hear children read.

 By around 8:15 AM, it should be very apparent that something is terribly wrong. The 
President is
 glad-handing teachers.

 By 8:45, when American Airlines Flight 11 crashes into the World Trade Center, Bush 
is settling
 in with children for his photo ops at Booker Elementary. Four planes have obviously 
been
 hijacked simultaneously, an event never before seen in history, and one has just 
dived into the
 worlds best known twin towers, and still no one notifies the nominal Commander in 
Chief.

 No one has apparently scrambled any Air Force interceptors either.

 At 9:03, United Flight 175 crashes into the remaining World Trade Center building.
 At 9:05, Andrew Card, the Presidential Chief of Staff whispers to George W. Bush. 
Bush "briefly
 turns somber" according to reporters.

 Does he cancel the school visit and convene an emergency meeting? No.
 He resumes listening to second graders read about a little girl's pet fucking goat, 
and continues this
 banality even as American Airlines Flight 77 conducts an unscheduled point turn over 
Ohio and
 heads in the direction of Washington DC.
 Has he instructed Chief of Staff Card to scramble the Air Force? No.

 An excruciating 25 minutes later, he finally deigns to give a public statement 
telling the United
 States what they already have figured out; that there's been an attack by hijacked 
planes on the
 World Trade Center.

 There's a hijacked plane bee-lining to Washington, but has the Air Force been 
scrambled to
 defend anything yet? No.

 At 9:30, when he makes his announcement, American Flight 77 is still ten minutes from 
its target,
 the Pentagon.

 The Administration will later claim they had no way of knowing that the Pentagon 
might be a
 target, and that they thought Flight 77 was headed to the White House, but the fact 
is that the
 plane has already flown South and past the White House no-fly zone, and is in fact 
tearing through
 the sky at over 400 nauts.

 At 9:35, this plane conducts another turn, 360 degrees over the Pentagon, all the 
while being
 tracked by radar, and the Pentagon is not evacuated, and there are still no 
fast-movers from the
 Air Force in the sky over Alexandria and DC.

 Now, the real kicker: A pilot they want us to believe was trained at a Florida 
puddle-jumper
 school for Piper Cubs and Cessnas, conducts a well-controlled downward spiral, 
descending the
 last 7,000 feet in two-and-a-half minutes, brings the plane in so low and flat that 
it clips the
 electrical wires across the street from the Pentagon, and flies it with pinpoint 
accuracy into the
 side of this building at 460 nauts.

 When the theory about learning to fly this well at the puddle-jumper school began to 
lose ground,
 it was added that they received further training on a flight simulator.
 This is like saying you prepared your teenager for her first drive on I-40 at rush 
hour by buying
 her a video driving game. It's horse shit!

 There is a story being constructed about these events. My crystal ball is not working 
today, so I
 can't say why.

 But at the least, this so-called Commander-in-Chief and his staff that we are all 
supposed to
 follow blindly into some ill-defined war on terrorism is criminally negligent or 
unspeakably stupid.
 And at the worst, if more is known or was known, and there is an effort to conceal 
the facts,
 there is a criminal conspiracy going on.

 Certainly, the Bush de facto administration was facing a confluence of crises from 
which they
 were temporarily rescued by this event. Whether they played a sinister role or not, 
there is little
 doubt that they have at the very least opportunistically pounced on this attack to 
overcome their
 lack of legitimacy, to shift the blame for the encroaching recession from capitalism 
to the
 September 11th terror attack, to legitimize their pre-existing foreign policy agenda, 
and to
 establish and consolidate repressive measures domestically and silence dissent.

 In many ways, September 11th pulled the Bush cookies out of the fire.

 And given them the green light to begin constructing a long-term scenario within 
which to establish
 fascistic control measures at home and abroad as a citadel for the ruling class in 
the catastrophic
 conjuncture that we are entering based on the end of oil.

 This elephant in the living room is being studiously ignored. In fact, the domestic 
repression has
 already begun, officially and unofficially. It's kind of a latter day McCarthyism. I 
participated in a
 teach-in at Chapel Hill, North Carolina, on the 17th of September, and though not a 
single person
 on the panel excused or justified the attacks, and every person there offered either 
condolences
 and prayers for the victims, we were excoriated within two days as "enemies of 
America."
 Yesterday an op-ed called for my deportation (to where, one can only guess). Now Herr
 Ashcroft is fast tracking the biggest abrogation of US civil liberties since the 
so-called
 anti-terrorism legislation after the Oklahoma City bombing - which by the way hasn't 
resulted in
 anti-terrorism but in the acceleration of the application of the racist death 
penalty. The FBI has
 defined terrorist groups not by whether any given group has ever acted as terrorists, 
but by their
 beliefs. Some socialists and anti-globalization groups have already been identified 
by name as
 terrorist groups, even though there is not a single shred of evidence that they have 
ever
 participated in any criminal activity. It reminds me of the Smith Act that was 
finally declared
 unconstitutional, but only after a hell of a lot of people served a hell of a long 
time in jail for the
 crime of thinking.

 I think this also points to yet another huge problems that the Bush regime was 
facing. Worldwide
 resistance to the whole so-called neoliberal agenda, which is a prettied up term for 
debt-leverage
 imperialism. While debt and the threat of sanctions has been used to coerce nations 
in the
 periphery, we have to understand that the final guarantor of compliance remains 
military action.
 For a global economic agenda, there is always a corresponding political and military 
agenda.

 The focal point of these actions in the short term is Southern Asia, but they have 
already scripted
 this as a worldwide and protracted fight against terrorism.

 It's far better than drug wars as a rationalization, and the drug war thing was being 
discredited in
 any case. Leftists are regaining power and popularity in Venezuela, El Salvador, 
Nicaragua,
 Ecuador, Colombia, the Dominican Republic, Haiti, Brazil, and Argentina. Cuba has 
gained
 immense prestige over the last few years. The empire is beginning to unravel. We can 
hardly
 justify intervention in these places by saying they are not towing the economic line 
by allowing the
 absolute domination of their societies by transnational corporations. That exposes 
the agenda. So
 we simply claim they are supporting terrorism.

 It's for all these reasons I say the left has missed the boat on this one, by 
allowing them to get
 away with rushing past the question of who did what on September 11th.

 If the official story is a lie, and I think the circumstantial case is strong enough 
to stay with this
 question, then we really do need to know what happened. And we need to understand 
concretely
 what the motives of this administration are.

 And we need to understand more than just their immediate motives, but where the 
larger social
 forces that underwrite our situation right now are headed. I do not think this 
administration is
 engaged in the deliberative process of a political grouping that is on top of their 
game. They are
 putting together some very deliberative technical solutions in response to a larger 
situation that it
 slipping rapidly out of their control. Like clear cutting. There's a very smart 
technology being
 employed to do a very dumb thing.

 What they are responding to is not September 11th, but the beginning of a permanent 
and
 precipitous decline in worldwide oil production, the beginning of a deep and 
protracted
 worldwide recession, and the unraveling of the empire.

 This brings me to a point about what all this means for Americans' security, which 
they are
 perfectly justified to worry about.

 The actions being prepared by this administration will not only not enhance our 
security, it will
 significantly degrade it. Military action against many groups across the globe, which 
is what the
 administration is telling us quite openly they are planning to do, will put a lot of 
backs against the
 wall. That can't be very secure.

 The concept of war being touted here is a violation of the principles of war on 
several counts, and
 will inevitably lead to military catastrophes, if you're inclined to view this from a 
position of moral
 and political neutrality.

 And the people who are now in possession of half the world's remaining oil reserves 
are subject
 to destabilization for which we can't even pretend to predict the consequences-but 
loss of access
 to critical energy supplies is certainly within the realm of possibility. Worst of 
all, we will be
 destabilizing Pakistan, a nuclear power in an active conflict with its neighbor, and 
we will be
 provoking Russia, another nuclear power. The security stakes don't get any higher, and
 Americans can ill afford to ignore nukes.

 And I think that this domestic agenda is a tremendous threat to the security of 
anyone who is
 critical of the government or their corporate financiers, and we already know that 
the real threats
 are against populations that can easily be scapegoated as the domestic crisis deepens.

 There is a very real threat right now of creeping fascism in this country, and that 
phenomenon
 requires its domestic enemies. Historically those enemies have included leftists, 
trade unionists,
 and racially and nationally oppressed sectors. This whole "state of emergency" 
mentality is already
 being used to quiet the public discourses of anti-racism, of feminism, of 
environmentalism, and of
 both socialism and anarchism. And while there is token resistance by officials to 
anti-Muslim
 xenophobia, the stereotypical images have saturated the media, and the government is 
already
 beginning to openly re-instate racial profiling. It is only a short step from there 
to go after other
 groups. We have long been prepared by the ideologies of overt and covert racism, and 
racism as
 both institution and corresponding psychology in the United States is nearly 
intractable.

 It's for all these reasons that I say emphatically that we can not accept anything 
from this
 administration; not their policies nor their bullshit stories. What they are doing is 
very, very
 dangerous, and the time to fight back against them, openly, is right now, before they 
can
 consolidate their power and their agenda. Once they have done that, our job becomes 
much more
 difficult.

 The left, if it has the capacity to self-organize out of its oblivion, needs to 
understand its critical
 roles here. We have to play the role of credible, hard-working, and non-sectarian 
partners in a
 broader peace-movement. We have to study, synthesize, and describe our current 
historical
 conjuncture. And we have to prepare leadership for the decisive conflict that will 
emerge to first
 defeat fascism then take political power.

 Rosa Luxemburg's words are truer than ever right now. We are not faced with a choice 
between
 socialism and capitalism, but socialism or barbarism.

 And what we can least afford are denial and timidity.


Forwarded for info and discussion from the New Paradigms Discussion List,
not necessarily endorsed by:
***********************************

Lloyd Miller, Research Director for A-albionic Research a ruling
class/conspiracy research resource for the entire political-ideological
spectrum. **FREE RARE BOOK SEARCH: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> **
   Explore Our Archive:  <http://a-albionic.com/a-albionic.html>

<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to