noworldsystem.com


Media Hypes Blond, Blue-Eyed Terrorists

Media Hypes Blond, Blue-Eyed Terrorists

Steve Watson
Infowars.net
June 25, 2008

Following in the footsteps of Fox News, and almost word for word repeating unsubstantiated claims by the head of the CIA, ABC News ran a piece earlier this week alleging that white westerners are being trained in Al Qaeda terror camps in Pakistan with the intention of carrying out attacks in Europe and the USA.

The ABC report appeared on World News With Charles Gibson this past Monday. Gibson stated:

“Intelligence officials say it is their number one concern. Caucasians from a European country who have graduated from an al Qaeda training camp. Such potential terrorists would be dressed in western clothing, drawing little notice as they board a plane bound for the US, coming to launch an attack. There’s no indication such an attack is imminent, but this scenario is of great concern to experts in and out of the government.”

In addition, an article from the London Telegraph today relates that police in Yorkshire have identified a 12 year old blonde haired schoolboy as an Al Qaeda extremist after he sent links to beheading videos posted on the internet to his classmates.

The boy was reported to police by his school, who also indicated that he had an “unnatural interest in guns and weapons”.

Clearly the child is a hardcore terrorist.

Police revealed that they are monitoring hundreds of children in a new anti-terrorism scheme which is designed to “target al-Qaeda inspired youths”.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBO7xBpJtoc

As we have documented, the blue eyed blonde haired Al-Qaeda line is a familiar talking point that has been pushed on Fox News and within other Neo-Con circles in an attempt to turn the anti-terror apparatus around to target dissidents, protesters and the American people in general.

The origin of the concept was based on a comment by a single MI5 source that was subsequently picked up in a Scotsman article back in January, which claimed that Al-Qaeda have recruited 1,500 white Britons to carry out attacks in the UK.

Since that time the corporate media has increasingly focused on the idea and returned to the story again and again.

This hype culminated in a March announcement by CIA boss Michael Hayden that Al-Qaeda is training new fighters that “look western” and could easily cross U.S. borders.

“They are bringing operatives into that region for training — operatives that wouldn’t attract your attention if they were going through the customs line at Dulles (airport outside Washington) with you when you were coming back from overseas,” Hayden told NBC’s Meet The Press.

“(They) look western (and) would be able to come into this country without attracting the kinds of attention that others might,” he added, with Reuters forced to point out that Hayden offered nothing to substantiate his claim.

In addition, the concept was even debated earlier this month by elitists at the secretive 2008 Bilderberg meeting.

Sources inside the meeting leaked details of elitist talking points which included the need to highlight a new phenomenon of terrorist groups, recruits and sympathizers identified as blonde haired, blue eyed westerners.

“Under the heading of resisting terrorism there were points made about how the terrorist organizations are recruiting people who do not look like terrorists – blonde, blue eyed boys – they’re searching hard for those types to become the new mad bombers,” reported veteran Bilderberg sleuth Jim Tucker.

Police Say 12-Year Old Is With Al-Qaeda
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/m..008/06/23/ccview123.xml

ABC News: White European Al-Qaeda training in Pakistan
http://www6.lexisnexis.com/publis..007216&docId=l:811400925&start=4

 



Syria says US reactor charges as fake as Iraq WMD claims

Syria says US reactor charges as fake as Iraq WMD claims

AFP
April 28, 2008


Syria said on Monday that US accusations it had been building a nuclear reactor until its destruction in an Israeli air raid last September were as bogus as American claims that Saddam Hussein’s regime had weapons of mass destruction in 2003.

The ruling Baath party’s mouthpiece daily compared the photographs of the bombed site shown to US congressmen last week to the images Washington presented to the UN Security Council as alleged evidence of Iraq’s non-conventional arsenal in the run-up to the US-led invasion.

“When you look at these pictures… a single image comes to mind — that of US Secretary of State Colin Powell accusing Iraq of hiding weapons of mass destruction and presenting as proof a dossier of photographs,” Al-Baath said.

“Of course Mr Powell later acknowledged that he had been fooled by the US intelligence services and by conservatives within the administration.

“The new US campaign of lies should surprise nobody — it’s a continuation of the same policy of US pressure against Syria that’s been going on” for the past five years, the paper added.

“Syria again rejects the US allegations and reaffirms that it has nothing to hide concerning its legitimate national defences. Syria wants to see peace in the region, unlike the current US administration which has been behind all its wars and crises.”

Read Full Article Here

 

Assad denies building nuclear reactor

AFP
April 27, 2008

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad denied in remarks published on Sunday that a site raided by Israel last year was a nuclear reactor under construction as charged by the United States.

Last September’s Israeli air strike “hit a military site under construction, not a nuclear site as Israel and America claimed,” Assad told the Qatari daily Al-Watan in an interview.

“Does it make sense that we would build a nuclear facility in the desert and not protect it with anti-aircraft defences?” he asked.

“A nuclear site exposed to (spy) satellites, in the heart of Syria and in an open space?

“We don’t want a nuclear bomb even if Iran acquires one,” added Assad, whose country is a close ally of Tehran, itself embroiled in a standoff with Washington over its nuclear activities.

“Where would we use it?… War in the region will effectively remain conventional,” he said.

Assad underlined that he believed Iran “does not think differently” on this score.

Iran has repeatedly rejected Western suspicions that its nuclear programme is cover for a drive to develop an atomic bomb.

It says nuclear weapons are un-Islamic and insists the programme is aimed solely at generating power for a growing population once fossil fuels run out.

The United States has accused Syria of building a secret atomic reactor with North Korean help.

On Thursday, US national security officials briefed US congressmen, presenting intelligence they said showed Syria had been building a secret nuclear reactor for military ends.

They said the plant was being built with the help of North Korea, until its destruction by Israel in an air raid on September 6.

The International Atomic Energy Agency launched an investigation into the US accusations on Friday but chided both Israel and the United States for their handling of the affair.

Syria promised its full cooperation.

SYRIA: More questions about alleged nuclear site
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/babylonbeyond/2008/04/syria-more-ques.html

General Hayden: Syrian site could have produced fuel for 2 weapons
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080428/ap_on_go_ot/nuclear_syria

Syrian envoy says CIA fabricated evidence
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5h9koW8sbYaxGGzOuU1O6cntXva1AD9095UJ80

 



Musharraf Approves US Military Strike in Pakistan

Musharraf Approves US Military Strike in Pakistan

The Times of India
March 24, 2008

The Musharraf regime has indirectly approved the US Drone (pilotless plane) attacks on al-Qaida targets in tribal areas of Pakistan bordering Afghanistan.

Since January, missiles have been fired from the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) operated Predator drones and have hit at least three suspected hideouts of Islamic militants, including a strike on March 16 in Toog village in South Waziristan that left 20 dead.

Sources said that the recent wave of Predator attacks are the result of Musharraf’s understanding with the US officials and other top Pakistanis which gave Washington virtually unrestricted authority to hit targets in the border areas.

The surge began after senior US official’s visit to Pakistan including intelligence czar Mike McConnell, CIA director General Michael Hayden and William Fallon, who recently resigned as Commander of the US forces in the region.

Bruce Riedel, a retired CIA expert on the region, said that a new wave of terrorism inside Pakistan (there were 62 suicide attacks last year, after just six in 2006) has forced Musharraf and the new military chief Ashfaq Kiyani to acknowledge that the extremists threatening Americans now also pose a growing threat to Pakistan’s internal security.

 

Another US strike inside Pakistan’s border region

WSWS
March 19, 2008

An air strike on Sunday on a compound in the Pakistani tribal area of South Waziristan that borders Afghanistan has left up to 20 people dead. While Washington has not acknowledged responsibility, there is little doubt that the US military or the CIA carried out the attack as part of a widening covert war against anti-American militants entrenched in the Pakistani border areas.

Up to seven missiles or bombs flattened the compound just south of the regional centre of Wana at around 3 p.m. “When I heard the explosions, I rushed to the place where it happened. I saw dead bodies scattered everywhere,” a villager Aziz Ullah Wazir told the Washington Post. Local residents and officials claimed that the house belonged to a Taliban sympathiser, Noorullah Wazir, and was frequented by “Arabs”—the term used to denote foreign supporters of the Taliban and Al Qaeda.

Veteran journalist Sailab Masood told the Guardian, however, that local tribesmen were angry that innocent civilians had been killed.

Details of the attack are scanty. According to the New York Times, villagers said a B-52 bomber carried out the raid. Other reports cite locals who claim to have heard the sound of a US Predator drone—an unmanned surveillance vehicle that has been used in previous attacks inside Pakistan. The Pakistani military acknowledged that the blasts had occurred, but pointedly refused to identify the attackers, saying only that the army had no operations in the area.

Both Washington and Islamabad are deliberately playing down the attack, which will only further fuel anger at Pakistan’s support for the US-led occupation of Afghanistan. President Pervez Musharraf’s involvement in the Bush administration’s bogus “war on terrorism” and tacit approval of US operations inside Pakistan were a major factor in generating opposition to his regime.

The issue remains highly sensitive as the winners of last month’s elections—the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) and the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N)—prepare to form a government. Whatever their limited criticisms of US militarism during the campaign, both parties have a long record of supporting Pakistan’s alliance with Washington and collaborating with the US military. Significantly, neither party has protested against the latest missile strike, an indication that the new government, like Musharraf, will acquiesce to US strikes in the tribal areas.

There are many signs that the Bush administration has expanded covert operations inside Pakistan since the beginning of the year. In early January, the New York Times reported that a top-level White House meeting, involving Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley and other senior officials, discussed in detail “far more aggressive covert operations” inside Pakistani border areas.

“The new operations for expanded covert operations include loosening restrictions on the CIA to strike selected targets in Pakistan, in some cases using intelligence provided by Pakistani sources, officials said. Most counter terrorism operations in Pakistan have been conducted by the CIA… [I]f the CIA were given broader authority, it could call for help from the military or deputise some forces of the Special Operations Command to act under the authority of the agency,” the article stated.

While the New York Times claimed that no decisions were taken at the January meeting, another article last month reported that the CIA had established a base inside Pakistan. “Among other things, the new arrangements allowed an increase in the number and scope of patrols and strikes by armed Predator surveillance aircraft launched from a secret base in Pakistan—a far more aggressive strategy to attack Al Qaeda and the Taliban than had existed before,” the Times explained.

In its report of Sunday’s strike, the Times noted that Mike McConnell, director of national intelligence and General Michael Hayden, director of the Central Intelligence Agency, reached an agreement in January with the new Pakistani army chief, General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, to allow the US greater freedom to strike targets in the tribal areas without specific permission from the Pakistani Army. The article claimed that the US was receiving “better on-the-ground human intelligence” by providing “large cash payments to tribesmen”.

There has been a marked increase in visits to Pakistan this year by senior American military officers, including two by the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen. During his latest visit on March 4, Admiral Mullen discussed US assistance to expand Pakistan’s Frontier Corps to a force of around 85,000 recruited from tribesmen in the border areas. The Pentagon has already spent around $25 million to provide the Frontier Corps with equipment, including vehicles, radios and surveillance devices, and plans to spend another $75 million over the next year.

At least two other US aerial attacks have taken place inside Pakistan this year. On January 29, a missile destroyed a compound in the village of Khushali Torikhel in North Waziristan, killing 13 people. US and Pakistani officials claimed that Abu Laith al-Libi, a senior Al Qaeda commander, was among the dead. On February 28, a missile strike destroyed an alleged Taliban safe house in the village of Kaloosha in South Waziristan, killing at least 10 people. A local tribal leader told the Washington Post that women and children were among the dead, and that at least six others were injured.

It is not possible to confirm the identity of the victims of these attacks. In neighbouring Afghanistan, US officials routinely brand the casualties of US operations as “Taliban” and “Al Qaeda” and deny civilian deaths even in cases where locals have provided clear evidence to the contrary. On-the-ground intelligence provided by paid informants is often unreliable and coloured by local rivalries and animosities. Claims about the outcome of US strikes inside Pakistan are undoubtedly just as uncertain.

Other attacks on targets within Pakistan are taking place from US bases inside Afghanistan. Pakistani officials lodged a formal complaint with the US military after artillery fire from Afghanistan hit a house in North Waziristan last Wednesday, killing two women and two children. According to the Pakistani-based News, last Friday four missiles fell on the village of Botraki, just inside the Pakistani border.

The extent of Washington’s covert war inside Pakistan remains unclear, but such operations are fuelling widespread anger and provoking a rising number of suicide bombings and attacks on Pakistani security forces and other targets. Last Saturday, a bomb blast at a restaurant in Islamabad popular with foreigners killed a Turkish woman and wounded at least 10 others, including five American officials, two Japanese journalists and a British police officer. Four of the five Americans were FBI agents operating in Pakistan.

The escalation of US operations can only have a profoundly destabilising impact, not just in the border regions, but throughout Pakistan, which is already wracked by deep political crisis. While the PPP and PML-N won a decisive victory in last month’s election, in part because of their criticism of Musharraf’s collaboration with the US, the mood will quickly turn as the new government seeks to maintain the US alliance amid ongoing American strikes on Pakistani soil.

Pak spies ’keeping lid on dark secrets’
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=48357§ionid=351020401

 



Tortured Patsies To Take Fall For 9/11

Tortured Patsies To Take Fall For 9/11
Pentagon hopes executed scapegoats will make questions disappear

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
February 11, 2008

Fbiiraqisbein_mn

After half a dozen years of waterboarding, genital zapping, sleep deprivation and brainwashing, the Pentagon has finally found six patsies who will readily welcome their 72 virgins and take the fall for 9/11, providing debunkers with ample ammunition to dismiss questions about the gaping holes in the official story of the terror attacks.

“Among those held at Guantanamo is Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the suspected mastermind of the attack six years ago in which hijacked planes were flown into buildings in New York and Washington. Five others are expected to be named in sworn charges,” reports the Associated Press.

The fact that KSM’s confession included a plan to target the Plaza Bank building in Washington state, which was not founded until 2006, four years after the alleged Al-Qaeda mastermind’s arrest, should provide a clue as to the reliability of the “terror mastermind’s” culpability for 9/11.

But that was not the only plan that Sheik Mohammed was alleged to have hatched, as he claimed responsibility for everything from three assassination plots against Clinton, Carter and the Pope, to the FBI sponsored 1993 World Trade Center bombing. He surprisingly stopped short of accepting the blame for global warming and the Challenger space shuttle disaster.

Even CNN’s audience was not buying the propaganda at the time, with 74% saying they disbelieved the authenticity of KSM’s confession. CIA veteran Robert Baer wrote a stinging Time Magazine piece dismissing the supposition that KSM was “responsible for the 9/11 operation from A-Z” as he claimed in between cattle prod sessions.

It would be very clear why the establishment would be interested in hanging out the Ron Jeremy of terrorism to dry as the scapegoat for an official 9/11 story that holds about as much weight as a Milan cat-walk model. By invoking the “but he admitted it” line, any debate about the mountain of unanswered questions surrounding the attacks, which prompted 9/11 families to demand a new investigation last week, is effectively silenced. The fact that the 9/11 Commission was riddled with Bush administration cronies can also be swept under the rug.

But this cuts both ways.

In his first interview following 9/11, Osama Bin Laden denied any involvement in the attacks.

“I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States. As a Muslim, I try my best to avoid telling a lie. I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the killing of innocent women, children and other humans as an appreciable act. Islam strictly forbids causing harm to innocent women, children and other people. Such a practice is forbidden even in the course of a battle,” Bin Laden told the Pakistani based Ummat newspaper.

If Bin Laden wasn’t involved in 9/11 then KSM’s “confession” is rendered obsolete.

Since Khalid has squealed on the “A to Z” of 9/11 and will face a lethal injection, perhaps he can provide some answers to a few troubling little questions that still have us 9/11 “conspiracy nuts” running around in circles before he kicks the bucket;

– Was Khalid Shaikh Mohammed responsible for the FBI ordering the 1993 World Trade Center bombing to go ahead? In his confession, KSM says he ran the attack but fails to explain why it was the FBI who provided the terror cell with the bomb materials through their informant.

– Was Khalid Shaikh Mohammed responsible for NORAD completely reversing its standard operating procedure on the day of 9/11?

– Was Khalid Shaikh Mohammed responsible for the collapse of three steel buildings, one that was not hit by a plane, from fire damage alone for the first and only time in history?

– Was Khalid Shaikh Mohammed responsible for warning, according to Newsweek, a group of top Pentagon officials to cancel their flights on the evening of September 10th due to security concerns?

– Was Khalid Shaikh Mohammed responsible for the record number of ‘put’ options, speculation that the stock of a company will fall, that were placed on American and United Airlines in the days preceding September 11th? This despite a September 10th Reuters report stating ‘airline stocks set to fly.’

– Was Khalid Shaikh Mohammed responsible for blocking FBI anti-terrorism investigations before 9/11 related to the bin Laden family and Saudi charities that were front groups for Al-Qaeda?

– Was Khalid Shaikh Mohammed responsible for advising the Secret Service not to remove President Bush from a completely unsecured Florida elementary school by letting them know he wasn’t a target on 9/11?

Of course if the Pentagon gets their way, such questions will disappear along with any chance that the executed patsies could ever recant and contribute to the true perpetrators of 9/11 being identified.

Scalia Defends Torture: It’s ‘Absurd’ To Say The Gov’t Can’t ‘Smack’ A Suspect ‘In The Face’
http://prisonplanet.com/articles/february2008/120208_scalia.htm

U.S. Wants To Execute Six Patsies For 9/11
http://www.roguegovernment.com/news.php?id=6592

US to Try 9/11 Suspects in “Kangaroo Court”
http://www.independent.co..ptember-11-attacks-781007.html

More evidence of Pre-9/11 Inside Trading: Follow the Money? God forbid
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?c..va&aid=8046

‘I was waterboarded during my training as a Navy flight crew member… [C]utting off a finger would have been preferable’
http://www.washingtonpo..008020803156.html?nav=rss_print/outlook

Hayden Admits: Contractors Lead ‘Enhanced Interrogations’ at CIA Black Sites
http://blog.wired.com/defense/2008/02/in-testimony-be.html

CIA chief doubts waterboarding tactic is still legal
http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/02/08/america/08intel.php

AP Confirms Secret Camp Inside Gitmo
http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-7288144,00.html

6 Guantánamo Detainees Are Said to Face Trial Over 9/11
http://www.nytimes.com/200..&hp&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

 



White House and Congress knew about the CIA tapes

The White House and Congress Knew about the CIA Interrogation Videotapes

George Washington’s Blog
December 12, 2007

According to a former “senior intelligence official”, the White House knew of the existence of the CIA interrogation tapes since 2003, at the very latest, and tacitly approved the destruction of the tapes in 2005.

Indeed, former CIA agent and State Department counterterrorism official Larry Johnson said that it was “highly likely” that President Bush himself had viewed the videotapes of the 2002 interrogations that were later destroyed. Is that why the White House has instructed its spokesperson not to answer any questions on the subject?

And according to the Director of the CIA, Congress was also informed about the existence of the tapes, and — later — of the CIA’s intention to destroy them.

Indeed, Senator Rockefeller has confirmed that the Senate Intelligence Committee knew of the existence of the videotapes in 2003. And Congresswoman Harman has confirmed that the House Intelligence Committee also learned of the existence of the videotapes in 2003. Is that why Senator Rockefeller opposes any real investigation into the destruction of the tapes, saying “I don’t think there’s a need for a special counsel, and I don’t think there’s a need for a special commission”?

The obstruction of justice regarding the tapes appears to have been orchestrated by the very highest levels of the U.S. Government.

 

Guantanamo Legal Adviser Refuses To Say Iranians Waterboarding Americans Would Be Torture

Think Progress
December 12, 2007

During a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on “The Legal Rights of Guantanamo Detainees” this morning, Brigadier General Thomas W. Hartmann, the legal adviser at Guantanamo Bay, repeatedly refused to call the hypothetical waterboarding of an American pilot by the Iranian military torture. “I’m not equipped to answer that question,” said Hartmann.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), who asked the hypothetical, pushed Hartmann on his answer, asking him directly if it would be a “violation of the Geneva Convention”:

GRAHAM: You mean you’re not equipped to give a legal opinion as to whether or not Iranian military waterboarding, secret security agents waterboarding downed airmen is a violation of the Geneva Convention?

HARTMANN: I am not prepared to answer that question, Senator.

After Hartmann twice refused to answer, Graham dismissed him in disgust, saying he had “no further questions.” Watch it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89cYbggdGVQ

Longer Version: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3jbcWzSVcco
Hartmann’s non-answer is reminiscent of State Department Legal Adviser John Bellinger’s refusal in October to condemn “the use of water boarding on an American national by a foreign intelligence service.”

But not every lawyer who’s worked for the Bush administration has been so hesitant to call waterboarding torture.

In 2004, after then-acting assistant attorney general Daniel Levin had himself waterboarded, he concluded that the interrogation technique “could be illegal torture.” For his efforts, “Levin was forced out of the Justice Department when Alberto Gonzales became Attorney General.”

Sen. Graham, a former military judge advocate, has said before that someone doesn’t “have to have a lot of knowledge about the law to understand this technique violates Geneva Convention Common Article Three.”

 

Let’s (Not) Go to the Videotape!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bX_1Qsq0DTM

Related News:

Ex-CIA Larry Johnson: ‘Highly likely’ Bush saw torture tapes
http://billpressmedia.com/highlylikely.mp3

Ex-CIA agent: Waterboarding approved at top levels
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20…co/cia_videotapes

White House Was Ordered Not To Destroy Torture Evidence
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/2007…eotapes_courts

CIA may have more interrogation tapes, detainee’s lawyer suggests
http://rawstory.com/news/2007/White_H…on_of_1211.html

CIA Failed To Inform Congress About Tapes
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2…ecrypt/main3611381.shtml

White House goes ‘no comment’ on CIA video case
http://rawstory.com/news/afp/W…video_c_12102007.html

Former CIA: Waterboarding Useful But Torture
http://in.reuters.com/article/worldNews…0938320071211

CIA Director To Testify About Destroyed Tapes
http://www.reuters.com/articl…654798320071210?sp=true

Secretly briefed, Pelosi did not object to waterboarding in 2002
http://rawstory.com/news/200…t_to_waterboarding_1209.html

Destroyed CIA torture tapes said to implicate Pakistan and Saudi Royal Family in 9/11 attacks
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ge….destroyed-inter_b_75850.html

Photos Show UK Gitmo Detainee Was Tortured
Man Held By CIA Says He Was Tortured
McCain: No Investigation Needed
Congress Looks Into C.I.A. Obstruction As Calls for Justice Inquiry Rise
‘Well-Informed’ Source Tells CBS That Tapes Were Destroyed To Prevent Prosecution
Lee Hamilton Says the CIA Obstructed the 9/11 Commission
Inquiry into CIA interrogation tapes’ destruction begins
CIA destroyed video of ‘waterboarding’ al-Qaida detainees
C.I.A. Destroyed Tapes of Interrogations
C.I.A. Destroyed 2 Tapes Showing Interrogations
CIA admits destroying interrogation tapes

 



CIA’s Destroyed Torture Tapes and the Saudi-Pakistani 9/11 Connection

Destroyed CIA torture tapes said to implicate Pakistan and Saudi Royal Family in 9/11 attacks

Huffington Post
December 7, 2007

On December 5, the CIA’s director, General Michael V. Hayden, issued a statement disclosing that in 2005 at least two videotapes of interrogations with al Qaeda prisoners were destroyed. The tapes, which the CIA did not provide to either the 9/11 Commission, nor to a federal court in the case of Zacarias Moussaoui, were destroyed, claimed Hayden, to protect the safety of undercover operatives.

Hayden did not disclose one of the al Qaeda suspects whose tapes were destroyed. But he did identify the other. It was Abu Zubaydah, the top ranking terror suspect when he was tracked and captured in Pakistan in 2003. In September 2006, at a press conference in which he defended American interrogation techniques, President Bush also mentioned Abu Zubaydah by name. Bush acknowledged that Zubaydah, who was wounded when captured, did not initially cooperate with his interrogators, but that eventually when he did talk, his information was, according to Bush, “quite important.”

In my 2003 New York Times bestseller, Why America Slept: The Failure to Prevent 9/11, I discussed Abu Zubaydah at length in Chapter 19, “The Interrogation.” There I set forth how Zubaydah initially refused to help his American captors. Also, disclosed was how U.S. intelligence established a so-called “fake flag” operation, in which the wounded Zubaydah was transferred to Afghanistan under the ruse that he had actually been turned over to the Saudis. The Saudis had him on a wanted list, and the Americans believed that Zubaydah, fearful of torture and death at the hands of the Saudis, would start talking when confronted by U.S. agents playing the role of Saudi intelligence officers.

Instead, when confronted by his “Saudi” interrogators, Zubaydah showed no fear. Instead, according to the two U.S. intelligence sources that provided me the details, he seemed relieved. The man who had been reluctant to even confirm his identity to his U.S. captors, suddenly talked animatedly. He was happy to see them, he said, because he feared the Americans would kill him. He then asked his interrogators to call a senior member of the Saudi royal family. And Zubaydah provided a private home number and a cell phone number from memory. “He will tell you what to do,” Zubaydah assured them

That man was Prince Ahmed bin Salman bin Abdul-Aziz, one of King Fahd’s nephews, and the chairman of the largest Saudi publishing empire. Later, American investigators would determine that Prince Ahmed had been in the U.S. on 9/11.

American interrogators used painkillers to induce Zubaydah to talk — they gave him the meds when he cooperated, and withdrew them when he was quiet. They also utilized a thiopental sodium drip (a so-called truth serum). Several hours after he first fingered Prince Ahmed, his captors challenged the information, and said that since he had disparaged the Saudi royal family, he would be executed. It was at that point that some of the secrets of 9/11 came pouring out. In a short monologue, that one investigator told me was the “Rosetta Stone” of 9/11, Zubaydah laid out details of how he and the al Qaeda hierarchy had been supported at high levels inside the Saudi and Pakistan governments.

He named two other Saudi princes, and also the chief of Pakistan’s air force, as his major contacts. Moreover, he stunned his interrogators, by charging that two of the men, the King’s nephew, and the Pakistani Air Force chief, knew a major terror operation was planned for America on 9/11.

It would be nice to further investigate the men named by Zubaydah, but that is not possible. All four identified by Zubaydah are now dead. As for the three Saudi princes, the King’s 43-year-old nephew, Prince Ahmed, died of either a heart attack or blood clot, depending on which report you believe, after having liposuction in Riyadh’s top hospital; the second, 41-year-old Prince Sultan bin Faisal bin Turki al-Saud, died the following day in a one car accident, on his way to the funeral of Prince Ahmed; and one week later, the third Saudi prince named by Zubaydah, 25-year-old Prince Fahd bin Turki bin Saud al-Kabir, died, according to the Saudi Royal Court, “of thirst.” The head of Pakistan’s Air Force, Mushaf Ali Mir, was the last to go. He died, together with his wife and fifteen of his top aides, when his plane blew up — suspected as sabotage — in February 2003. Pakistan’s investigation of the explosion — if one was even done — has never been made public.

Zubaydah is the only top al Queda operative who has secretly linked two of America’s closest allies in the war on terror — Saudi Arabia and Pakistan — to the 9/11 attacks. Why does Bush, and the CIA, continue to protect the Saudi Royal family and the Pakistani military, from the implications of Zubaydah’s confessions? It is, or course, because the Bush administration desperately needs Pakistani and Saudi help, not only to keep Afghanistan from spinning completely out of control, but also as counterweights to the growing power of Iran. The Sunni governments in Riyadh and Islamabad have as much to fear from a resurgent Iran as does the Bush administration. But does this mean that leads about the origins of 9/11 should not be aggressively pursued? Of course not. But this is precisely what the Bush administration is doing. And now the cover-up is enhanced by the CIA’s destruction of Zubaydah’s interrogation tapes.

The American public deserves no less than the complete truth about 9/11. And those CIA officials now complicit in hiding the truth by destroying key evidence should be held responsible.

Related News:

Man Held By CIA Says He Was Tortured
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/09/washin…./hArvvL67u7/dpvA

McCain: No Investigation Needed
http://politicalinquirer.com/2007/1…stigation-needed/

Congress Looks Into C.I.A. Obstruction As Calls for Justice Inquiry Rise
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/08/washi….Uioe%2BjiIYg

‘Well-Informed’ Source Tells CBS That Tapes Were Destroyed To Prevent Prosecution
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/12/08/cbs-source-tapes/

Lee Hamilton Says the CIA Obstructed the 9/11 Commission
http://www.911blogger.com/node/12894

Inquiry into CIA interrogation tapes’ destruction begins
http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Inquiry_…s_1208.html

CIA destroyed video of ‘waterboarding’ al-Qaida detainees
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,2223738,00.html

C.I.A. Destroyed Tapes of Interrogations
C.I.A. Destroyed 2 Tapes Showing Interrogations
CIA admits destroying interrogation tapes

 



Bush says U.S. ‘does not torture people’

Bush says U.S. ‘does not torture people’
President responds to report that 2005 memo relaxed interrogation rules

MSNBC
October 5, 2007

WASHINGTON – President Bush defended his administration’s detention and interrogation policies for terrorism suspects on Friday, saying they are both successful and lawful.

“When we find somebody who may have information regarding a potential attack on America, you bet we’re going to detain them, and you bet we’re going to question them,” he said during a hastily called appearance in the Oval Office. “The American people expect us to find out information, actionable intelligence so we can help protect them. That’s our job.”

Bush was referring to a report on two secret memos in 2005 that authorized extreme interrogation tactics against terror suspects. “This government does not torture people,” the president said.

The two Justice Department legal opinions were disclosed in Thursday’s editions of The New York Times, which reported that the first 2005 legal opinion authorized the use of head slaps, freezing temperatures and simulated drownings, known as waterboarding, while interrogating terror suspects, and was issued shortly after then-Attorney General Alberto Gonzales took over the Justice Department.

That secret opinion, which explicitly allowed using the painful methods in combination, came months after a December 2004 opinion in which the Justice Department publicly declared torture “abhorrent” and the administration seemed to back away from claiming authority for such practices.

A second Justice opinion was issued later in 2005, just as Congress was working on an anti-torture bill. That opinion declared that none of the CIA’s interrogation practices would violate the rules in the legislation banning “cruel, inhuman and degrading” treatment of detainees, The Times said, citing interviews with unnamed current and former officials.

“We stick to U.S. law and international obligations,” the president said, without taking questions afterward.

‘Highly trained professionals’

White House and Justice Department press officers have said the 2005 opinions did not reverse the 2004 policy.

Bush, speaking emphatically, noted that “highly trained professionals” conduct any questioning. “And by the way,” he said, “we have gotten information from these high-value detainees that have helped protect you.”

He also said that the techniques used by the United States “have been fully disclosed to appropriate members of the United States Congress” — an indirect slap at the torrent of criticism that has flowed from the Democratic-controlled Congress since the memos’ disclosure.

“The American people expect their government to take action to protect them from further attack,” Bush said. “And that’s exactly what this government is doing. And that’s exactly what we’ll continue to do.”

The 2005 opinions approved by Gonzales remain in effect despite efforts by Congress and the courts to limit interrogation practices used by the government in response to the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. The authorizations came after the withdrawal of an earlier classified Justice opinion, issued in 2002, that had allowed certain aggressive interrogation practices so long as they stopped short of producing pain equivalent to experiencing organ failure or death. That controversial memo was withdrawn in June 2004.

The dispute may come down to how the Bush administration defines torture, or whether it allowed U.S. interrogators to interpret anti-torture laws beyond legal limits. CIA spokesman George Little said the agency sought guidance from the Bush administration and Congress to make sure its program to detain and interrogate terror suspects followed U.S. law.

Democrats want memos

Senate and House Democrats have demanded to see the memos.

“Why should the public have confidence that the program is either legal or in the best interests of the United States?” Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., wrote in a letter to the acting attorney general.

House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers and Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., promised a congressional inquiry.

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said he was “personally assured by administration officials that at least one of the techniques allegedly used in the past, waterboarding, was prohibited under the new law.”

A White House spokesman, meanwhile, criticized the leak of such information to the news media and questioned the motivations of those who do so.

“It’s troubling,” Tony Fratto said Friday. “I’ve had the awful responsibility to have to work with The New York Times and other news organizations on stories that involve the release of classified information. And I can tell you that every time I’ve dealt with any of these stories, I have felt that we have chipped away at the safety and security of America with the publication of this kind of information.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-kWGwOVuLBY

CIA detention program still active: official
http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenew….TERROGATIONS.xml

White House Says US Does Not Torture
http://www.globalsecurity.org/intell/library/news/2007/intell-071004-voa01.htm

The Guantanamo Guidebook (2005)
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1403370850111668271&hl=en