There is a story I heard that I keep thinking about. It really underlines the problem I have in trying to counter the bad science behind the global warming scare predictions. So here is the story:
A group of over 200 environmentalists were in an auditorium listening to a symposium about climate change, i.e. global warming or climate disruption. One of the speakers asked, “If I could instantly produce a genie with a magic wand to stand here before you today. And if, that genie could wave his magic wand and wall-la….carbon dioxide would no longer be a greenhouse gas that produced uncontrollable global warming….How many in this room would be happy, satisfied and pleased?” Two people out of two hundred hesitatingly raised their hands. Of the others, some smirked, some laughed and some yelled out, “No, no. Hell no.”
I cannot testify that this event actually occurred. But, I heard it as though it was a truthful report. In any case it haunts me because it demonstrates what I perceive to be something akin to the actual state of affairs in our efforts to quiet the Algorian scare predictions about the consequences of global warming. There are large segments of the population that believe the global warming pronouncements. They have heard them over and over again from people they trust and respect, in school, on television, in the news and in their communities.
They have become “believers”, not unlike those who believe in a set of religious beliefs. All good Democrats believe in global warming, after all, it is the science of one of their key heroes, former Vice President and Senator Al Gore. And all good environmentalists are aboard the global warming band wagon. And, for all of them, the Agenda is what is important. Their Agenda is to eliminate fossil fuels and the internal combustion engine from our civilization. The carbon dioxide, CO2, thing is simply the means to the end. And if the means is not true; who cares. It is only the Agenda that is important. To all of these people, my effort to debunk the CO2 greenhouse gas science is irrelevant.
When I present my scientific arguments in a speech, their common reaction, “so what” and they ask me, even if you are right, isn’t the change to clean energy still the best move for our society? When I make my argument in response, that I also favor alternate energy, but that it will be thirty to fifty years before it can replace fossil fuels as the primary source of power for our civilization and that alternate energy in its current state of development is not economically viable, they doubt my facts. They have heard the hype and bought the dream without stopping to absorb the reality.
Next, when they realize they have not persuaded me to join their point of view, they challenge me with “And, what if it turns out that you are wrong and Al Gore is right? Your argument could cost us everything as climate change makes the Earth unlivable. So let’s just eliminate the greenhouse gases as insurance.” I argue back that the insurance will financially destroy us, wreck our way of life and that because I am right about the science, the move to alternate energy will not make an iota difference in our climate.
At this point, they dismiss me a stupid, old heretic.
My only option is to keep trying. That is why I make the new videos like the one posted on February 22nd. But, I am frustrated and not optimistic about penetrating our scientific institutions and organizations that are in the control of their well paid scientists and persuading them to reconsider the roll of carbon dioxide and accept climate reality. What are the odds they will “see the light” and abandon their richly rewarding global warming positions? Nil, I fear.
It appears, as of now, victory, if it were to come, would be on a political level, not a scientific one. Just as “the climate according to Al Gore” has become the Democrat Party mantra, “global warming is not real” has become the rally call of the Republican Party. As a Journalist (I am a member of the television news team at KUSI-TV) I try hard to avoid taking political positions. For instance, I pass on invitations to speak at political events even when handsome stipends are offered.
So I keep focused on the bad science behind global warming. If my team (There are over 31,000 scientists on my team) can make headway in correcting the science, then I will be happy to let the politics, environmentalism and alternate energy movement fight the policy battles without me.
John Coleman
Associated climate kinks: http://www.kusi.com/story/13257602/global-warming-links
Saturday, February 26, 2011
Friday, February 18, 2011
FBI Translator Submitted Report Entitled "Kamikaze Pilots" to Bureau 5 Months Before 9/11 Warning of Al Qaeda Attacks on U.S. Cities
FBI Translator Submitted Report Entitled "Kamikaze Pilots" to Bureau 5 Months Before 9/11 Warning of Al Qaeda Attacks on U.S. Cities
Submitted by George Washington on 02/18/2011 00:25 -0500
Afghanistan Department of Justice FBI Middle East MSNBC national intelligence national security New York Times Testimony Tribune White House World Trade
→ Washington’s Blog
According to newly-declassified documents (and see this), an FBI translator filed a report with the Bureau entitled "Kamikaze Pilots", warning of an al-Qaeda plot to attack America in a suicide mission involving planes within the near future.
As Sibel Edmonds (herself a former FBI translator) wrote last month:
The memorandum [prepared by the 9/11 Commission], after establishing [Former FBI translator Behrooz Sarshar's] credibility and vaguely referring to his documented and witnessed testimony regarding specific tip(s) provided to the FBI in April and June 2001 regarding planned imminent "Kamikaze Pilots" attacks targeting major cities in the United States, leaves out the entire testimony. This testimony was also entirely left out of the Commission's final report released in July 2004.
Behrooz Sarshar worked as a GS 12 language specialist with Top Secret Clearance at the FBI Washington Field Office. After leaving the FBI in 2002, he provided his testimony on "Kamikaze Pilots" to several Congressional offices and investigators, including staff of the Senate Judiciary Committee and the Committee's leading Democrat at the time, Senator Patrick Leahy, and the Justice Department's Inspector General Office. The congressional sources familiar with Mr. Sarshar's case and briefing found him and his report credible:
A former Grassley investigator says he found Sarshar credible, too. "We thought he was a pretty credible guy," said former Senate Judiciary Committee investigator Kris Kolesnik.
In April and June of 2001 a long-term FBI informant told two FBI agents from the Washington field office that his sources in Afghanistan had provided him with information regarding a terrorist plot to attack the US in a suicide mission involving airplanes. Mr. Sarshar acted as an interpreter at both meetings after which the case agents filed a report (on 302 Forms) with their squad supervisor.....
***
The 9/11 Commissioners had initially refused to interview Mr. Sarshar. He was one of several witnesses from the intelligence and law enforcement organizations with relevant testimonies and reports who were denied access to the commission (the ones that we know of). It was only after pressure from members of the 9/11 Family Steering Committee and memorandums from the congressional offices that the commission reluctantly agreed to interview Mr. Sarshar. However, his entire testimony was omitted from their final report. According to a Chicago Tribune investigative reporter even FBI Director Mueller appeared baffled by the Commission's lack of inquiry into this particular case:
FBI Director Robert Mueller, who expected to be asked about the case during an appearance before the commission in April, was surprised when the commissioners never raised the question, according to aides.
***
During my short tenure with the Bureau, I was briefed about this case by not only Mr. Sarshar but other firsthand witnesses, and I saw the actual 302 forms filed with the unit's squad supervisor (FBI language specialists get to keep a copy of their reports/forms).
***
I believe not only the families of the September 11th attacks but every American has the right to know about this case. They need to know that this significant report was completely censored by a quasi commission, that this is one of many cases that were omitted from this staged and rehearsed show to pacify the public's need to know, and that there never was any real investigation into this horrific event used in reshaping not only our country, but the entire world.
Sibel Edmonds herself has been deemed credible by the Department of Justice's Inspector General, several senators (free subscription required), and a coalition of prominent conservative and liberal groups.
Edmonds says that the government was provided with information about the planned attacks, including the fact that the attacks would be carried out using airplanes ("I saw papers that show US knew al-Qaeda would attack cities with airplanes"), and some information about date ranges and targets.
But two FBI translators' claims cannot possibly discredit the claims of the Bush administration that terrorists crashing planes into buildings was not foreseeable, right?
Corroborating Evidence
In fact, according to MSNBC, "There have been a slew of reports over the past decade of plots to use planes to strike American targets".
In 1994, the government received information that international terrorists "had seriously considered the use of airplanes as a means of carrying out terrorist attacks" (see also this article).
According to the New York Times, "The F.B.I. had been aware for several years that Osama bin Laden and his terrorist network were training pilots in the United States ...."
In 1998, U.S. officials received reports concerning a "Bin Laden plot involving aircraft in the New York and Washington, areas." Officials received reports that al Qaeda was trying to establish an operative cell in the United States and that bin Laden was attempting to recruit a group of five to seven young men from the United States to travel to the Middle East for training in conjunction with his plans to strike U.S. domestic targets.
Indeed, the report concluded that "a group of unidentified Arabs planned to fly an explosive-laden plane . . . into the World Trade Center".
A 1999 report for the National Intelligence Council warned that fanatics loyal to bin Laden might try to hijack a jetliner and fly it into the Pentagon.
There were extraordinarily high terrorist attack threat levels in the summer of 2001, involving threats of attack within the U.S., and the U.S. government knew there were Al-Qaeda cells within the U.S. (or watch the video here).
In July 2001, a briefing prepared for senior government officials warned of "a significant terrorist attack against U.S. and/or Israeli interests in the coming weeks. The attack will be spectacular and designed to inflict mass casualties ... (it) will occur with little or no warning.".
Shortly afterwards, the Attorney General stopped flying commercial aircraft within the United States based on a threat assessment by the FBI.
FBI agents recommended to FBI headquarters, in July 2001, an urgent nationwide review of flight schools regarding terrorism, and mentioned Bin Laden by name.
2 months before 9/11, intelligence services believed that Bin Laden intended to crash airplanes into the G8 Summit in order to kill President Bush and other world leaders. Condoleezza Rice was very focused on this threat to President Bush.
A pre-9/11 National Intelligence Estimate was entitled "Islamic Extremists Learn to Fly", and was apparently about Islamic people taking classes at U.S. flight schools.
The Federal Aviation Administration “had indeed considered the possibility that terrorists would hijack a plane and use it as a weapon,” and in 2001 it distributed a CD-ROM presentation to airlines and airports that cited the possibility of a suicide hijacking.
President Bush was told in August 2001 that supporters of Bin Laden planned an attack within the U.S. with explosives and that they wanted to hijack airplanes.
A month before 9/11, the CIA sent a message to the Federal Aviation Administration warning of a possible hijacking "or an act of sabotage against a commercial airliner".
"Israeli intelligence officials say that they warned their counterparts in the United States [in August 2001] that large-scale terrorist attacks on highly visible targets on the American mainland were imminent."
The August 6, 2001 Presidential Daily Brief was entitled "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US".
According to National Public Radio, the former CIA Director had warned congress shortly before 9/11 "that there could be an attack, an imminent attack, on the United States of this nature. So this is not entirely unexpected".
U.S. intelligence officials informed President Bush weeks before the Sept. 11 attacks that Bin Laden's terrorist network might try to hijack American planes, and that information prompted administration officials to issue a private warning to transportation officials and national security agencies.
It was widely known within the FBI shortly before 9/11 that an imminent attack was planned on lower Manhattan.
An employee who worked in the Twin Towers stated "How could they let this happen? They knew this building was a target. Over the past few weeks we'd been evacuated a number of times, which is unusual. I think they had an inkling something was going on".
And a guard who worked in the world trade center stated that "officials had recently taken steps to secure the towers against aerial attacks".
On September 6, 2001, Condoleezza Rice was warned that a terrorist attack inside the United States was imminent.
Also on September 6th, author Salman Rushdie was banned by US authorities from taking internal US flights; the FAA told his publisher the reason was that it had “intelligence of something about to happen”.
The National Security Agency and the FBI were both independently listening in on the phone calls between the supposed mastermind of the attacks and the lead hijacker. Indeed, the FBI built its own antenna in Madagascar specifically to listen in on the mastermind's phone calls. The day before 9/11, the mastermind told the lead hijacker "tomorrow is zero hour" and gave final approval for the attacks. The NSA intercepted the message that day and the FBI was likely also monitoring the mastermind's phone calls. (The NSA claims that it did not translate the intercept until September 12th; however, the above-mentioned FBI translator said that she was frequently ordered to falsify dates of translations regarding 9/11).
Newsweek stated "On Sept. 10, NEWSWEEK has learned, a group of top Pentagon officials suddenly canceled travel plans for the next morning, apparently because of security concerns" (pay-per-view; cached version of article here).
9/11 family member and "Jersey Girl" Patty Casazza was told by whistleblowers that -- before 9/11 -- the government knew the exact day, the type of attack, and the targets.
The Military Had Drilled for Attacks Such as 9/11
Indeed, the military had actually drilled for aerial attacks with planes.
The North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD), the military air defense agency responsible for protecting the U.S. mainland, had run drills for several years of planes being used as weapons against the World Trade Center and other U.S. high-profile buildings, and "numerous types of civilian and military aircraft were used as mock hijacked aircraft". In other words, drills using REAL AIRCRAFT simulating terrorist attacks crashing jets into buildings, including the twin towers, were run.
And the military had conducted numerous drills of planes crashing into the Pentagon. For example, see this official military website showing a military drill conducted in 2000 using miniatures; this article concerning a May 2001 exercise of a plane crashing into the Pentagon (see also this article and this one); and this article about yet another drill of a plane hitting the Pentagon from August 2001.
The military had also run war games involving multiple, simultaneous hijackings (first paragraph), so this aspect of 9/11 was not as overwhelming as we have been led to believe.
See this short excerpt of a Peter Jennings newscast on 9/11 (excuse the music and subtitles).
There are literally hundreds of further examples of facts which tend to show that 9/11 was foreseeable (see this timeline for additional information).
If It Wasn't Foreseeable Before, It Was Then ...
Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta testified to the 9/11 Commission:
"During the time that the airplane was coming into the Pentagon, there was a young man who would come in and say to the Vice President … the plane is 50 miles out…the plane is 30 miles out….and when it got down to the plane is 10 miles out, the young man also said to the vice president “do the orders still stand?” And the Vice President turned and whipped his neck around and said “Of course the orders still stand, have you heard anything to the contrary!?"
(this testimony is confirmed here and here).
So even if 9/11 wasn't foreseeable before 9/11, it was foreseeable to Dick Cheney - the man in charge of all counter-terrorism exercises, activities and responses on 9/11 (see this Department of State announcement, this CNN article and this essay) - as the plane was still 50 miles away from the Pentagon.
But What Do High-Level Officials Say?
In addition to the former CIA director and other credible witnesses discussed above, many high-level officials have gone on record raising questions concerning the foreseeability of the attacks:
Former 9/11 Commissioner Max Cleland said "As each day goes by, we learn that this government knew a whole lot more about these terrorists before Sept. 11 than it has ever admitted" (he also said, when he resigned from the 9/11 Commission: "It is a national scandal"; "This investigation is now compromised"; and "One of these days we will have to get the full story because the 9-11 issue is so important to America. But this White House wants to cover it up".)
The former head of the Department of Homeland Security (then a top justice department terrorism prosecutor) said "As of Sept. 10th, each of us knew everything we needed to know to tell us there was a possibility of what happened on Sept. 11th . . . We knew the World Trade Center was a target . . . We knew an airplane could be used as a weapon."
Then-ranking Republican on the Senate Intelligence Committee and a member of the joint intelligence committee that investigated 9/11 stated "They don't have any excuse because the information was in their lap, and they didn't do anything to prevent it"
Then-current chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee was "not surprised there was an attack ...."
Pentagon Papers whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg said "very serious questions have been raised about what they [U.S. government officials] knew beforehand." See this, this and this.
Former White House counsel John Dean stated "It seems very probable that those in the White House knew much more than they have admitted . . . After pulling together the information in the 9/11 Report, it is understandable why Bush is stonewalling. It is not very difficult to deduce what the president knew, and when he knew it [Dean is echoing the questions asked by Watergate prosecutors]. And the portrait that results is devastating."
A British member of Parliament said "It is known that at least 11 countries provided advance warning to the US of the 9/11 attacks . . . . It had been known as early as 1996 that there were plans to hit Washington targets with airplanes. Then in 1999 a US national intelligence council report noted that "al-Qaida suicide bombers could crash-land an aircraft packed with high explosives into the Pentagon, the headquarters of the CIA, or the White House.'"
A 24-year Air Force veteran and former Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs at the Defense Language Institute said "Of course Bush knew about the impending attacks on America. He did nothing to warn the American people because he needed this war on terrorism".
U.S. General, Commanding General of U.S. European Command and Supreme Allied Commander Europe, decorated with the Bronze Star, Silver Star, and Purple Heart (General Wesley Clark) said "We've never finished the investigation of 9/11 and whether the administration actually misused the intelligence information it had. The evidence seems pretty clear to me. I've seen that for a long time".
Former Federal Prosecutor, Office of Special Investigations, U.S. Department of Justice under Presidents Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan; former U.S. Army Intelligence officer, and currently a widely-sought media commentator on terrorism and intelligence services (John Loftus) says "The information provided by European intelligence services prior to 9/11 was so extensive that it is no longer possible for either the CIA or FBI to assert a defense of incompetence".
The Group Director on matters of national security in the U.S. Government Accountability Office said that President Bush did not respond to unprecedented warnings of the 9/11 disaster and conducted a massive cover-up instead of accepting responsibility.
Obviously, given the above, terrorists crashing planes into buildings was foreseeable.
http://www.zerohedge.com/article/fbi-translator-submitted-report-entitled-kamikaze-pilots-bureau-5-months-911-warning-al-qaed?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+zerohedge/feed+(zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline,+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero)
Submitted by George Washington on 02/18/2011 00:25 -0500
Afghanistan Department of Justice FBI Middle East MSNBC national intelligence national security New York Times Testimony Tribune White House World Trade
→ Washington’s Blog
According to newly-declassified documents (and see this), an FBI translator filed a report with the Bureau entitled "Kamikaze Pilots", warning of an al-Qaeda plot to attack America in a suicide mission involving planes within the near future.
As Sibel Edmonds (herself a former FBI translator) wrote last month:
The memorandum [prepared by the 9/11 Commission], after establishing [Former FBI translator Behrooz Sarshar's] credibility and vaguely referring to his documented and witnessed testimony regarding specific tip(s) provided to the FBI in April and June 2001 regarding planned imminent "Kamikaze Pilots" attacks targeting major cities in the United States, leaves out the entire testimony. This testimony was also entirely left out of the Commission's final report released in July 2004.
Behrooz Sarshar worked as a GS 12 language specialist with Top Secret Clearance at the FBI Washington Field Office. After leaving the FBI in 2002, he provided his testimony on "Kamikaze Pilots" to several Congressional offices and investigators, including staff of the Senate Judiciary Committee and the Committee's leading Democrat at the time, Senator Patrick Leahy, and the Justice Department's Inspector General Office. The congressional sources familiar with Mr. Sarshar's case and briefing found him and his report credible:
A former Grassley investigator says he found Sarshar credible, too. "We thought he was a pretty credible guy," said former Senate Judiciary Committee investigator Kris Kolesnik.
In April and June of 2001 a long-term FBI informant told two FBI agents from the Washington field office that his sources in Afghanistan had provided him with information regarding a terrorist plot to attack the US in a suicide mission involving airplanes. Mr. Sarshar acted as an interpreter at both meetings after which the case agents filed a report (on 302 Forms) with their squad supervisor.....
***
The 9/11 Commissioners had initially refused to interview Mr. Sarshar. He was one of several witnesses from the intelligence and law enforcement organizations with relevant testimonies and reports who were denied access to the commission (the ones that we know of). It was only after pressure from members of the 9/11 Family Steering Committee and memorandums from the congressional offices that the commission reluctantly agreed to interview Mr. Sarshar. However, his entire testimony was omitted from their final report. According to a Chicago Tribune investigative reporter even FBI Director Mueller appeared baffled by the Commission's lack of inquiry into this particular case:
FBI Director Robert Mueller, who expected to be asked about the case during an appearance before the commission in April, was surprised when the commissioners never raised the question, according to aides.
***
During my short tenure with the Bureau, I was briefed about this case by not only Mr. Sarshar but other firsthand witnesses, and I saw the actual 302 forms filed with the unit's squad supervisor (FBI language specialists get to keep a copy of their reports/forms).
***
I believe not only the families of the September 11th attacks but every American has the right to know about this case. They need to know that this significant report was completely censored by a quasi commission, that this is one of many cases that were omitted from this staged and rehearsed show to pacify the public's need to know, and that there never was any real investigation into this horrific event used in reshaping not only our country, but the entire world.
Sibel Edmonds herself has been deemed credible by the Department of Justice's Inspector General, several senators (free subscription required), and a coalition of prominent conservative and liberal groups.
Edmonds says that the government was provided with information about the planned attacks, including the fact that the attacks would be carried out using airplanes ("I saw papers that show US knew al-Qaeda would attack cities with airplanes"), and some information about date ranges and targets.
But two FBI translators' claims cannot possibly discredit the claims of the Bush administration that terrorists crashing planes into buildings was not foreseeable, right?
Corroborating Evidence
In fact, according to MSNBC, "There have been a slew of reports over the past decade of plots to use planes to strike American targets".
In 1994, the government received information that international terrorists "had seriously considered the use of airplanes as a means of carrying out terrorist attacks" (see also this article).
According to the New York Times, "The F.B.I. had been aware for several years that Osama bin Laden and his terrorist network were training pilots in the United States ...."
In 1998, U.S. officials received reports concerning a "Bin Laden plot involving aircraft in the New York and Washington, areas." Officials received reports that al Qaeda was trying to establish an operative cell in the United States and that bin Laden was attempting to recruit a group of five to seven young men from the United States to travel to the Middle East for training in conjunction with his plans to strike U.S. domestic targets.
Indeed, the report concluded that "a group of unidentified Arabs planned to fly an explosive-laden plane . . . into the World Trade Center".
A 1999 report for the National Intelligence Council warned that fanatics loyal to bin Laden might try to hijack a jetliner and fly it into the Pentagon.
There were extraordinarily high terrorist attack threat levels in the summer of 2001, involving threats of attack within the U.S., and the U.S. government knew there were Al-Qaeda cells within the U.S. (or watch the video here).
In July 2001, a briefing prepared for senior government officials warned of "a significant terrorist attack against U.S. and/or Israeli interests in the coming weeks. The attack will be spectacular and designed to inflict mass casualties ... (it) will occur with little or no warning.".
Shortly afterwards, the Attorney General stopped flying commercial aircraft within the United States based on a threat assessment by the FBI.
FBI agents recommended to FBI headquarters, in July 2001, an urgent nationwide review of flight schools regarding terrorism, and mentioned Bin Laden by name.
2 months before 9/11, intelligence services believed that Bin Laden intended to crash airplanes into the G8 Summit in order to kill President Bush and other world leaders. Condoleezza Rice was very focused on this threat to President Bush.
A pre-9/11 National Intelligence Estimate was entitled "Islamic Extremists Learn to Fly", and was apparently about Islamic people taking classes at U.S. flight schools.
The Federal Aviation Administration “had indeed considered the possibility that terrorists would hijack a plane and use it as a weapon,” and in 2001 it distributed a CD-ROM presentation to airlines and airports that cited the possibility of a suicide hijacking.
President Bush was told in August 2001 that supporters of Bin Laden planned an attack within the U.S. with explosives and that they wanted to hijack airplanes.
A month before 9/11, the CIA sent a message to the Federal Aviation Administration warning of a possible hijacking "or an act of sabotage against a commercial airliner".
"Israeli intelligence officials say that they warned their counterparts in the United States [in August 2001] that large-scale terrorist attacks on highly visible targets on the American mainland were imminent."
The August 6, 2001 Presidential Daily Brief was entitled "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US".
According to National Public Radio, the former CIA Director had warned congress shortly before 9/11 "that there could be an attack, an imminent attack, on the United States of this nature. So this is not entirely unexpected".
U.S. intelligence officials informed President Bush weeks before the Sept. 11 attacks that Bin Laden's terrorist network might try to hijack American planes, and that information prompted administration officials to issue a private warning to transportation officials and national security agencies.
It was widely known within the FBI shortly before 9/11 that an imminent attack was planned on lower Manhattan.
An employee who worked in the Twin Towers stated "How could they let this happen? They knew this building was a target. Over the past few weeks we'd been evacuated a number of times, which is unusual. I think they had an inkling something was going on".
And a guard who worked in the world trade center stated that "officials had recently taken steps to secure the towers against aerial attacks".
On September 6, 2001, Condoleezza Rice was warned that a terrorist attack inside the United States was imminent.
Also on September 6th, author Salman Rushdie was banned by US authorities from taking internal US flights; the FAA told his publisher the reason was that it had “intelligence of something about to happen”.
The National Security Agency and the FBI were both independently listening in on the phone calls between the supposed mastermind of the attacks and the lead hijacker. Indeed, the FBI built its own antenna in Madagascar specifically to listen in on the mastermind's phone calls. The day before 9/11, the mastermind told the lead hijacker "tomorrow is zero hour" and gave final approval for the attacks. The NSA intercepted the message that day and the FBI was likely also monitoring the mastermind's phone calls. (The NSA claims that it did not translate the intercept until September 12th; however, the above-mentioned FBI translator said that she was frequently ordered to falsify dates of translations regarding 9/11).
Newsweek stated "On Sept. 10, NEWSWEEK has learned, a group of top Pentagon officials suddenly canceled travel plans for the next morning, apparently because of security concerns" (pay-per-view; cached version of article here).
9/11 family member and "Jersey Girl" Patty Casazza was told by whistleblowers that -- before 9/11 -- the government knew the exact day, the type of attack, and the targets.
The Military Had Drilled for Attacks Such as 9/11
Indeed, the military had actually drilled for aerial attacks with planes.
The North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD), the military air defense agency responsible for protecting the U.S. mainland, had run drills for several years of planes being used as weapons against the World Trade Center and other U.S. high-profile buildings, and "numerous types of civilian and military aircraft were used as mock hijacked aircraft". In other words, drills using REAL AIRCRAFT simulating terrorist attacks crashing jets into buildings, including the twin towers, were run.
And the military had conducted numerous drills of planes crashing into the Pentagon. For example, see this official military website showing a military drill conducted in 2000 using miniatures; this article concerning a May 2001 exercise of a plane crashing into the Pentagon (see also this article and this one); and this article about yet another drill of a plane hitting the Pentagon from August 2001.
The military had also run war games involving multiple, simultaneous hijackings (first paragraph), so this aspect of 9/11 was not as overwhelming as we have been led to believe.
See this short excerpt of a Peter Jennings newscast on 9/11 (excuse the music and subtitles).
There are literally hundreds of further examples of facts which tend to show that 9/11 was foreseeable (see this timeline for additional information).
If It Wasn't Foreseeable Before, It Was Then ...
Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta testified to the 9/11 Commission:
"During the time that the airplane was coming into the Pentagon, there was a young man who would come in and say to the Vice President … the plane is 50 miles out…the plane is 30 miles out….and when it got down to the plane is 10 miles out, the young man also said to the vice president “do the orders still stand?” And the Vice President turned and whipped his neck around and said “Of course the orders still stand, have you heard anything to the contrary!?"
(this testimony is confirmed here and here).
So even if 9/11 wasn't foreseeable before 9/11, it was foreseeable to Dick Cheney - the man in charge of all counter-terrorism exercises, activities and responses on 9/11 (see this Department of State announcement, this CNN article and this essay) - as the plane was still 50 miles away from the Pentagon.
But What Do High-Level Officials Say?
In addition to the former CIA director and other credible witnesses discussed above, many high-level officials have gone on record raising questions concerning the foreseeability of the attacks:
Former 9/11 Commissioner Max Cleland said "As each day goes by, we learn that this government knew a whole lot more about these terrorists before Sept. 11 than it has ever admitted" (he also said, when he resigned from the 9/11 Commission: "It is a national scandal"; "This investigation is now compromised"; and "One of these days we will have to get the full story because the 9-11 issue is so important to America. But this White House wants to cover it up".)
The former head of the Department of Homeland Security (then a top justice department terrorism prosecutor) said "As of Sept. 10th, each of us knew everything we needed to know to tell us there was a possibility of what happened on Sept. 11th . . . We knew the World Trade Center was a target . . . We knew an airplane could be used as a weapon."
Then-ranking Republican on the Senate Intelligence Committee and a member of the joint intelligence committee that investigated 9/11 stated "They don't have any excuse because the information was in their lap, and they didn't do anything to prevent it"
Then-current chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee was "not surprised there was an attack ...."
Pentagon Papers whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg said "very serious questions have been raised about what they [U.S. government officials] knew beforehand." See this, this and this.
Former White House counsel John Dean stated "It seems very probable that those in the White House knew much more than they have admitted . . . After pulling together the information in the 9/11 Report, it is understandable why Bush is stonewalling. It is not very difficult to deduce what the president knew, and when he knew it [Dean is echoing the questions asked by Watergate prosecutors]. And the portrait that results is devastating."
A British member of Parliament said "It is known that at least 11 countries provided advance warning to the US of the 9/11 attacks . . . . It had been known as early as 1996 that there were plans to hit Washington targets with airplanes. Then in 1999 a US national intelligence council report noted that "al-Qaida suicide bombers could crash-land an aircraft packed with high explosives into the Pentagon, the headquarters of the CIA, or the White House.'"
A 24-year Air Force veteran and former Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs at the Defense Language Institute said "Of course Bush knew about the impending attacks on America. He did nothing to warn the American people because he needed this war on terrorism".
U.S. General, Commanding General of U.S. European Command and Supreme Allied Commander Europe, decorated with the Bronze Star, Silver Star, and Purple Heart (General Wesley Clark) said "We've never finished the investigation of 9/11 and whether the administration actually misused the intelligence information it had. The evidence seems pretty clear to me. I've seen that for a long time".
Former Federal Prosecutor, Office of Special Investigations, U.S. Department of Justice under Presidents Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan; former U.S. Army Intelligence officer, and currently a widely-sought media commentator on terrorism and intelligence services (John Loftus) says "The information provided by European intelligence services prior to 9/11 was so extensive that it is no longer possible for either the CIA or FBI to assert a defense of incompetence".
The Group Director on matters of national security in the U.S. Government Accountability Office said that President Bush did not respond to unprecedented warnings of the 9/11 disaster and conducted a massive cover-up instead of accepting responsibility.
Obviously, given the above, terrorists crashing planes into buildings was foreseeable.
http://www.zerohedge.com/article/fbi-translator-submitted-report-entitled-kamikaze-pilots-bureau-5-months-911-warning-al-qaed?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+zerohedge/feed+(zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline,+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero)
Monday, February 7, 2011
The Bond Market Bust of the Early 1930s
by J. Irving Weiss (1908 - 1997)In the early 1930s, I had one of the greatest income opportunities in history.
I could have gotten high, juicy, double-digit yields on the best bonds of the strongest companies in America. And I could have locked in those high returns for 20 or 30 years with virtually no inflation.
The yields on guaranteed government bonds were not as high, of course. But even there, the income opportunity was unusual.
Unfortunately, I missed it entirely. I made the mistake of believing the textbook theory on interest rates.
That theory was based almost entirely on the economy and inflation. When we had more growth and inflation, interest rates were supposed to go up. When we had less growth and inflation, rates were supposed to go down.
Nobody looked at interest rates as separate and apart from growth or inflation, and neither did I.
Boy, was I in for a big surprise! In fact, just as I began to watch rates more carefully, every single thing I had read about them went by the wayside.
Here's what happened: After the Crash of 1929, interest rates fell sharply, which was to be expected, because of deflation.
But then, something absolutely astounding took place: Although we were still in a deflationary era, although the economy was still sinking, interest rates began to surge dramatically.
The immediate reason: Bond markets collapsed.
However, in the early 1930s, when I saw rates surging, I didn't understand the cause. It didn't make sense because we had deflation. And with deflation, the textbooks said interest rates were supposed to go down.
So I asked myself: Was inflation coming back? Did I read the textbooks upside down? The answer to both questions was a flat "no." Yields were surging because bond prices were crashing, just like stocks. And that's when I began to look at interest rates as a powerful fundamental force in their own right, separate from the economy or inflation.
The yields on low-grade corporate bonds were the first to surge as their prices plunged. It was like an aftershock from the stock market crash.
This made sense because these were bad bonds and they traded almost like common stocks. They were issued by companies that were expected to default on their payments; and a lot of the companies did just that. So it was natural that their bonds should fall in value or even become worthless.
As always, the lower the prices, the higher the yields. And wow! Did those yields surge! They went to 15 percent, 20 percent, 30 percent, even 45 percent. But what good was it if you lost your principal?
Then high-grade corporate bonds also got hit hard. Investors feared that any company — regardless of rating — could go belly-up, and they were right!
At some companies, finances deteriorated so quickly that, by the time the analysts got around to downgrading them, they were already in the bankruptcy courts. As the price of these high-grade corporate bonds crashed, their yields surged.
And amazingly, they surged beyond their 1929 highs. Someone was obviously selling the heck out of them. But who?
You'd think that at least government-guaranteed Treasury bonds would be spared from this selling panic. They weren't. Investors sold them aggressively, driving their prices to new lows, following in the path of corporate bonds. Yields surged.
Where was all the selling coming from? One source was the U.S. Treasury itself. In the sinking economy, the government's tax revenues plummeted. So it needed to borrow more to replace the missing revenues. And that meant it had to issue more Treasury bonds — more bond supplies, lower prices, and higher yields.
But that still wasn't enough to explain it. It still didn't tell us what drove interest rates up when every textbook in existence said they should be going down.
It wasn't until later that my brother Al and I figured it out. To understand what was going on, we had to forget about inflation, deflation, money supply, the Federal Reserve, and all the theories economists swore by.
Instead, we looked at bonds like any other kind of investment — no different from stocks or commodities. When investors sold them, they went down in price. When investors bought them, they went up.
These investors didn't give a hoot about textbooks. All they cared about was the fact that they needed cash.
The banks needed cash to meet huge demands by savers withdrawing their money. Businesses needed cash to pay bills. Insurance companies needed cash to pay claims.
So the execs went to their financial VPs to dig up something they could sell off for cash.
"What's this stuff?" they asked.
"They're bonds, sir," came the answer. "They're solid investments — not like stocks."
"Can you sell 'em?"
"Sure we can. But bonds are good for bad times. You shouldn't be selling them now because ..."
"I don't give a damn if they're good, bad, or in between. Sell 'em! Raise cash!"
Thus, tremendous amounts of bonds were dumped on the market. High-grade bonds. Low-grade bonds. Muni bonds. Treasury bonds. It didn't matter what color or denomination. Everywhere, individuals, financial institutions, and businesses were getting rid of their bonds.
If they were low grade or on the verge of default, they got no more than pennies on the dollar. And even with higher grade bonds, many investors were simply throwing the baby out with the bath water, driving prices to new lows.
Looking back, I wish I could have had the foresight to convert my winnings from the stock market crash into the highest grade bonds. On top of the high yields, the purchasing power of the dollar improved. And throughout the entire Depression, bonds outperformed virtually every other investment in the world, with far less risk.
But by the time we had figured it out, the opportunity was gone. As the Depression progressed, rates fell back down again, and only those who had locked them in during that unusual period were able to enjoy the higher incomes. — J. Irving Weiss
-------------------------------
What Will Trigger a Bond Market Bust?
Take your pick (one or more) ...
Trigger #1. Inflation and Inflation Fears. Inflation has been so low for so long, that the complacency on Wall Street and Washington is bordering on the pathological.
Here we are — with massive surges in the price of gold, silver, agricultural commodities, and now, energy to boot — but STILL most bond investors, including the "smartest" banks and insurance companies, don't seem to bat an eyelash.
Here we are — with money supply and inflation surging in China and other emerging markets — and again, virtually no one seems to care.
These price surges are bound to pop up in the U.S. producer and consumer price indexes, which investors DO pay attention to. And when they do, an instant bond market bust is a likely outcome.
Trigger #2. Deficit Inaction. When the Congressional Budget Office recently announced that THIS year's deficit would hit nearly $1.5 trillion, bond prices fell and interest rates rose.
Bond investors knew that the Treasury would have to issue huge new supplies of bonds to finance the deficit. And they knew that big new supplies equal even bigger price declines.
What happens if the deficit balloons to $2 trillion? Another big decline in bond prices!
And what if Obama and Congress continue do little or nothing to make good on their promises of deficit reduction? Still MORE steep price declines!
Trigger #3. Dollar Collapse. Three out of every five dollars financing the U.S. federal deficit now come from foreign investors. Only two out of five come from domestic investors (other than the U.S. government itself).
Heck, the last time America was so dependent on foreign money, Benjamin Franklin was sailing to Paris to beg the French to help finance the Revolutionary War!
What happens next? As long as those foreign investors believe they'll be paid back in dollars that are worth something, they may hang on.
But as soon as they see the value of their dollars collapsing, the only rational response is to dump their holdings — driving bond prices down and interest rates skyward.
Current TBT graphic.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)