With George W. Bush's Record, Never Again will a 'BUSH' become President

  The failed presidency of George W. Bush, the U.S. 43rd President, now comes to haunt the Republican wanna-be for president. Jeb Bush ignorantly wants to be the 45th president, thinking that he has a chance to be the 3rd person with the name of Bush to be President of the United States. It didn't take long for many to realize that all the money in the world could not help him but he continues to run. He owns the name of Bush, and in fact IS the brother of George W. Bush, one of the most failed presidents in U.S. history. To date, Jeb has spent more than any other candidate, almost as much as all of the other candidates combined. Still, he is in single digits when it comes to voter support in every poll. He is trying very hard to gain recognition in the polls, but the Republican supporters want somebody different, an outsider, someone who is not 'politically correct'. They seem to have no where to go except to now follow Donald Trump. The Republicans may have had a chance to regain the White House, but the party seems to continuously try to destroy itself, some in an attempt to support anyone who holds the last name of Bush which is a big mistake. The Bush ego continues to shine, as the candidate realizes that he cannot win, but he continues to try and challenge the front line candidate - Donald Trump, another mistake. Neither candidate has a chance to win the White House.
   Even George W. Bush would admit for what we know now, that he would not have invaded Iraq. Thousands of U.S. soldiers died because of his decision to attack Iraq.  The war is widely accepted to have been a disastrous mistake, but what is more disastrous is the fact that George W. Bush ignored numerous warnings of a major terrorist plot, leading up to September 11, 2001. He continued to make one mistake after another, even fooling the American people for his intentions to invade Iraq. In a special televised report, it was stated that George W. Bush's intention to invade Iraq is because he wanted to take the country's oil. Many people are not aware of that.  Yes, he was a newly elected president, but he did absolutely nothing to help prevent such an attack on the mainland of the United States. He continued to only take advise from his ill-informed advisers.
   In the Republican field of contestants today now running for the nomination of President to replace Barack Obama in 2016, one of the candidates named Donald Trump, now leading in the polls, openly states in an interview on October 16, 2015 said " When you talk about George W. Bush--I mean, say what you want, the World Trade Center came down during his time."
   Jeb Bush obviously heard these comments by Donald Trump at a debate, after Jeb had said, "We were attacked, my brother kept us safe." Really?!@/@!?%/@/$!. How did he keep Americans safe when the Twin Towers came down?  How many lives were lost?
  How could he keep America safe when all he wanted to do was to take vacations. Yes, George W. Bush took more vacation time than ANY other President in modern history. A CBS White House reporter named Mark Knoller stated in a tweet on August 8, 2014, that Obama had taken 19 vacations totaling 125 days by August last year. But now let's compare with George W. Bush. The Republican president took at least 65 combined trips to his Texas ranch and his parents' home in Kennebunkport, Maine, which totaled 407 days at the same point in his presidency. Not included in this data are trips to the Camp David presidential retreat in western Maryland, which Knoller doesn’t count as "vacation." Knoller told Yahoo! News that, through Aug. 12, 2014, Obama had made 33 visits to Camp David for all or part of 84 days, while Bush had been there 108 times for all or part of 341 days. President Bush spent at least 20% of his presidency vacationing at the Crawford ranch.
  So what does this data prove? It displays a totally different leadership style between Obama and George W. Some of the late-night comics said that this symbolized a lackadaisical approach to the world's most important day job, an impression bolstered by Bush's periodic two-hour midday exercise sessions and his disinclination to work nights or weekends. Now, the last noted fact here is disastrous to George W Bush. He spend at least a month at the ranch shortly before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, when critics assert he could have been more attentive to warning signs. Yes, even at the ranch, George W. did receive national security briefings, had to sign documents, hold teleconferences with aides and military commanders, and even meet with foreign leaders, but he did this in the midst of taking vacation upon vacation at his ranch.

Enhanced Interrogation (TORTURE) Report Now Released

The Senate Intelligence Committee released the "Interrogation Report", otherwise known as "The Torture Report".

In an exclusive interview on December 9, 2014, Michael Hirsh of "Politico", asked Bush's former CIA director some questions. One of them is the following question, quoted out of that same "Politico" article, dated December 9, 2014, that can be found at the following URL...

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/12/torture-report-michael-hayden-not-sorry-113450.html?ml=po#.VIkrQjHF98E  .....

"According to CIA records, it concludes, no CIA officer including Directors George Tenet and Porter Goss briefed the president on the specific enhanced interrogation techniques before April 2006. Is that true?"
Michael Hayden: "It is not. The president personally approved the water-boarding of Abu Zubaydah [in 2002]. It’s in his book! What happened here is that the White House refused to give them [the Senate Intelligence Committee] White House documents based upon the separation of powers and executive privilege. That’s not in their report, but all of that proves that there was dialogue was going on with the White House. What I can say is that the president never knew where the [black] sites were. That’s the only fact I’m aware that he didn't know."

So it is George W. Bush's own CIA director that claims that the 43rd President of the United States, George W. Bush did know of the torture techniques, and he knew about everything except where the "black sites" were. The black sites are now known to be located all across the world. How would the leader of the United States not know? The fact is what Michael Hayden is saying MUST be correct. He is going on record stating the facts. Vice President Dick Cheney and the President himself condones torture as legal and just. The vice president has recently been quoted that if he were to do it over again, he would gladly do it. President Bush mentioned how he condoned the torture techniques in his book.

What were the techniques?  Here is a list of highlights of the torture techniques. Immediately to follow is the abbreviated version of a several thousand page document that took over 6 years to accumulate and declassify for the public to read.

Here are the points the report makes, according to its summary:

#1: The CIA's use of its enhanced interrogation techniques was not an effective means of acquiring intelligence or gaining cooperation from detainees.

#2: The CIA's justification for the use of its enhanced interrogation techniques rested on inaccurate claims of their effectiveness.

#3: The interrogations of CIA detainees were brutal and far worse than the CIA represented to policymakers and others.

#4: The conditions of confinement for CIA detainees were harsher than the CIA had represented to policymakers and others.

#5: The CIA repeatedly provided inaccurate information to the Department of Justice, impeding a proper legal analysis of the CIA's Detention and Interrogation Program.

#6: The CIA has actively avoided or impeded congressional oversight of the program.

#7: The CIA impeded effective White House oversight and decision-making.

#8: The CIA's operation and management of the program complicated, and in some cases impeded, the national security missions of other Executive Branch agencies.

#9; The CIA impeded oversight by the CIA's Office of Inspector General.

#10: The CIA coordinated the release of classified information to the media, including inaccurate information concerning the effectiveness of the CIA's enhanced interrogation techniques.

#11: The CIA was unprepared as it began operating its Detention and Interrogation Program more than six months after being granted detention authorities.

#12: The CIA's management and operation of its Detention and Interrogation Program was deeply flawed throughout the program's duration, particularly so in 2002 and early 2003.

#13: Two contract psychologists devised the CIA's enhanced interrogation techniques and played a central role in the operation, assessments, and management of the CIA's Detention and Interrogation Program. By 2005, the CIA had overwhelmingly outsourced operations related to the program.

#14: CIA detainees were subjected to coercive interrogation techniques that had not been approved by the Department of Justice or had not been authorized by CIA Headquarters.

#15: The CIA did not conduct a comprehensive or accurate accounting of the number of individuals it detained, and held individuals who did not meet the legal standard for detention. The CIA's claims about the number of detainees held and subjected to its enhanced Interrogation techniques were inaccurate.

#16: The CIA failed to adequately evaluate the effectiveness of its enhanced interrogation techniques.

#17: The CIA rarely reprimanded or held personnel accountable for serious and significant violations, inappropriate activities, and systemic and individual management failures.

#18: The CIA marginalized and ignored numerous internal critiques, criticisms, and objections concerning the operation and management of the CIA's Detention and Interrogation Program.

#19: The CIA's Detention and Interrogation Program was inherently unsustainable and had effectively ended by 2006 due to unauthorized press disclosures, reduced cooperation from other nations, and legal and oversight concerns.

#20: The CIA's Detention and Interrogation Program damaged the United States' standing in the world, and resulted in other significant monetary and non-monetary costs.

At the conclusion of the report, regardless of what was found, President Obama and legal consul has decided not to prosecute George W. Bush, or Dick Cheney, or the CIA Director Micael Hayden. This may be true for the moment, but there will be some lawsuits on indictments to follow such a report as this, as someone has to be accountable for what has happened. In my book, it should start at the top, indicting George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney, because both of these people were ultimately  responsible for everything that happened in the military.

FACTs ABOUT GEORGE W. BUSH, our 43rd President of the United States

HERE IS A FACT ABOUT GEORGE W. BUSH, our 43rd President of the United States....

The present civil war within IRAQ is a direct result of President George W. Bush's involvement in destroying the Saddam Hussein regime in an attempt to gain access to billions of barrels of oil to be exported back to the United States. Not too many people know that fact.  In a recent report by Rachael Maddow listed in my previous story, these facts are now known. Now because of unrest that Bush initiated years ago, ISIS or ISUL is now killing innocent Iraqi's throughout-the country. If George W. Bush did not intervene in his war in Iraq, ISUS would have never gained power in the country. We have George W Bush to thank for, for the atrocities that are happening today.
The prior president who wants the world to forget what he is responsible for, the killing of over 4,000 Americans in the foreign country of Iraq, hides from the truth like a scared sheep. He refuses to defend his action in Iraq, and continues to live a life as a previous President in riches and wealth that he does not deserve. He lives for the world to forget what he has done, thinking that future generations will think of him in a more positive light.
How can this man sleep at night? Does he care that under his PONTUS direction, that he sent thousands upon thousands of American solders into harms way for his entire Presidency, and is responsible for their deaths. If it weren't for his direction, these American soldiers would be living. President Bush has forever destroyed thousands of American families just for his sickness to proclaim war on the world. What right did he have to con so many Americans into thinking that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction? How could such a man so deceptively win election, let alone re-election in America as our President. How could he fool so many? I am ashamed of being a citizen of a country with a tyrant President such as him. President George W. Bush is as guilty as Saddam Hussein himself, along with his vice President Dick Chaney, who condoned unjust punishments of torture. Thank God that our present President, Barack Obama will never condone torture on anyone, not even our worst enemies.
The phrase, "do unto others, as others shall do unto you" is what should happen to George W. Bush. Has he ever been tortured? No. Has he ever served in the military, under any President who put his troops into war? Absolutely not, and in matter of fact, George W. Bush did everything possible to stay out of the service, and he received a specialized deferment just so that he would not have to go into the military.

That my friends of this blog is what our past president is all about.

The Real Reason for the Iraq War

As reported for the first time yesterday, March 6, 2014, Rachel Maddow, a commentator from MSNBC, outlined what was to be the real reason for the Iraq War, in her commentary "Why We Did It". People just need to know the truth. Who would have thought that the story would begin with the activity in N. Korea. As reported, on October 9, 2006, seismic recorders recorded what was thought to be an earthquake, located in North Korea. What it turned out to be was an underground nuclear test by North Korea. Our secret intelligence was caught off guard, as North Korea just set off its first nuclear bomb. It is important to note that President Bush didn't see a need to disarm that country,  as there was no move by the U.S. to do so. Even after the actions of of Osama bin Laden for the 9/11 attack on Sept. 11 2001, the United States did not directly go and seek out whom was considered now the number one terrorist in the world. The President and Vice President repeatedly said that they could not find the very elusive terrorist.
Instead, the United States under false pretenses made a premeditated attack on Iraq. So what was the reason? Was Osama bin Laden in Iraq? What people didn't recognize is the fact that even prior to Sept. 11 2001, the United States led by George W. Bush had been working on something totally outside the scope of seeking out terrorists, even though central intelligence reports showed increased activity by Osama bin Laden, and intelligence gathered that Osama bin Laden was planning an attack on America.
The President of the United States, along with the Vice-President of the United States, Dick Cheney, were more interested in Iraq, and purposely hid secrets concerning their real objectives for attacking Iraq. The Secretary of Defense at the time Donald Rumsfeld, serving under George W. Bush, purposely hid secrets from the United States Congress, along with the President and Vice President. What they claimed was the immediate issue was the fact that Saddam Hussein, the reining president of the time in Iraq, was producing and stockpiling weapons of mass destruction. Was that true? It was proven after the U.S. attack on Iraq that Saddam Hussein did not have any weapons of mass destruction. So what just happened was that the United States started a war under false pretense and went through one of the longest wars in U.S. history.
So what is this hidden secret? Behind closed doors, not even privy to the U.S. Congress, the President, Vice President and Secretary of Defense along with a few select others who are not important to this story, were secretly figuring out a way to take over the Iraq oil fields. The very rich reserves of oil in the country of Iraq proved to be of very high interest to oil billionaire George W. Bush from Texas. An oil company called Halliburton, had two major headquarters, one in Dubai, and another in Houston, Texas. David J Lesar has been CEO of Halliburton (HAL) for 12 years. Mr. Lesar has been with the company for 19 years. The 59 year old executive ranks 8 within Oil & Gas Operations. His prior boss was Dick Cheney. So here you have it, two Texas Oil men, George W. Bush and David Lesar worked in Texas with oil. In September of 2000, the price of oil kept climbing, affecting the United States, especially with global energy demand on the rise. The U.S. dependence of foreign oil hit an all-time high. Just before becoming the President, George W. Bush was interviewed and ran for President with the premise that foreign oil was going to be a big problem for his administration. The President met in Houston, and plans to take over Iraqi oil were made. The President had secret meetings with Haliburton, just before the insurgence into Iraq. Not known at the time by the American people, plans were being made to secure oil fields in that country.
When George W. Bush became President, he immediately began to try and find a way to work on the foreign oil issue. He determined that what better way to get allot of oil if the United States were to take it from Iraq. Not long after his election as President, the attack of the World Trade Center took place on Sept. 11 2001, and now the President  found a reason to enter Iraq and get approval from Congress to do so. His claim, to attack Saddam Hussein, because he had weapons of mass destruction. What we know now is that this was a lie, as he involved the United States in a foreign war. He became directly responsible for thousands of U.S. lives lost on foreign soil. The sad thing about the war is that we were not hunting for Osama bin Laden, but used Saddam Hussein as a scapegoat with weapons of mass destruction, just so that we could enter Iraq and secure the oil fields. Ultimately by securing the oil fields, the production of oil greatly increased from Iraq. But was it worth the invasion of Iraq, and the loss of so many American lives, along with the innocent citizens of this country that were caught up in a war started by the United States? The unnecessary loss of American soldiers lives because of President Bush's selfish and greedy interests makes him directly responsible for the lives of the thousands of dead Americans. Has the cost of oil gone down because of the attack on Iraq and increased production from the oil fields? Absolutely not, and in matter of fact, the oil prices have continued to go up.
President Bush claims that history will judge him over time in a more favorable light. He doesn't seem concerned on what people think of him now. All that I plan to do about it is publish articles like this to help bring to light what exactly happened during the Presidency of George W. Bush and how bad I consider him for America.
One thing is certain. If Democratic contender for President, Al Gore was to become president instead of George W. Bush, the Iraq war would have never happened. Thousands of American soldiers would be living today and the United States wouldn't have been the reason for so much death and destruction in the foreign country of Iraq. I say this because no American president of that time would have started a war in a foreign country just to secure oil fields. The United States was not being threatened by Saddam Hussein by weapons of mass destruction.

Immediately below is a video clip, narrated by Rachel Maddow of MSNBC in her commentary that was aired yesterday on her news station.



Below, Rachel offers a bit of a preview to The Daily Show's Jon Stewart.

The Daily Show
Get More: Daily Show Full Episodes,The Daily Show on Facebook

Mr. Bush wants People to Forget Who He Truly Is

Mr. Bush thinks that trying to do something right in his life for others will correct what he has done in his. He is presently on a good will mission to poor people in far away lands. That is what is called wishful thinking. Readers of this blog may wonder why I'm so negative when it comes to Mr. Bush. Maybe I can shed some of the light here. He wants to be remembered as something else than what he truly is, even though he would not like to admit it. What is he? How about a murderer for starters because of all the innocent people that he killed, like members of our dead that were killed in the war because of him. Everyone was afraid of him, not knowing where he would strike next. He became a terrorist in his own right. How about other innocent people, like the people of these ravaged countries like in Iraq and Afghanistan, the same type of people he is now out and about in his mission, now in his sickening sympathetic effort to try and do something good for the kind of people that he killed.
The United States was involved in a war, I get that. Innocent people do get killed in battles. Actually in two wars, President Bush  put our troops into harms way. He is responsible for the thousands of innocent lives that have perished because of his actions. The truth is coming out, even before he is dead, even before the historians can tell us and our children about his legacy. The truth is already out that we, the United States should have NEVER been involved in those wars. The good that was done from them, does not even come close or even justify the means in which he took to accomplish his goals. He had no idea that it would draw our country in a war lasting a decade. What did he know? The secret intelligence at the time gave so many false readings on the state of foreign affairs, especially telling him that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. That is what he wanted to hear because he wanted to attack and he wanted to start a war.
Now the families of the sick and fallen of that war have to forever live with the fact that their loved one will be forever affected because of the war. Apparently he forgets about the past and what people overseas think of him. In an article by Ray McGovern, the title read, "George Bush Can't Travel Overseas for Fear of Arrest and Prosecution". Back then, highlighted in the article dated February 9, 2011, he avoided a flight and appearance in Geneva to avoid the risk of arrest on a torture complaint.  There it is, in plain sight, the leader of the free world afraid to travel to avoid arrest, just like Mr. Snowden. The difference between Bush and Snowden is that Bush got away with mass murder, and Mr. Snowden will be forever haunted by the U.S. government for leaking classified secret information to the world.  Mr. Snowden has to forever stay away from the United States in fear of getting arrested, but Bush can come and go as he pleases. As the article continues to read, "Doomed to become America's first better-stay-at-home former president". And how about another quote from the same article... "Remember, Mr. President, it was Richard Nixon who pronounced the principle of presidential impunity in his famous statement to interviewer David Frost. When the president does it, that means it's not illegal."

You can read the entire article at the following URL.....

http://www.alternet.org/story/149855/george_bush_can't_travel_overseas_for_fear_of_arrest_and_prosecution.

Bush Recent Interview with Robyn Curnow

In an interview with Robyn Curnow, president George W. Bush starts off explaining how Snowden has damaged the country.
But then he goes on explaining that he put protections in place to protect the country, meaning that he had allot to do with the ways and means of the government spying on other countries but he says it is done with the protection on peoples civil liberties. But then he again came out of his shell being very disrespectful not allowing Robyn Curnow to get her questions fully out before he breaks in and starts talking says that "The only time I cared was on election day".
Ok, what does that mean? That S.O.B president used the country, used our troops and then he brushes it off lightly by saying "I did what I did". "Ah, I know the spirit in which I did it."

 Just watch the video below and see how sick minded the 43rd president of the United States was by making comments as he did in this interview.

He sincerely believes that historians will be the best to judge him, and that time would be when he is dead. Well, I'm here as an American in the year 2013, and I believe that he needs to be judged now, before he is dead. Maybe he doesn't think I would be objective, and maybe not, but people who just want the truth and are not biased read this blog.

 The world is getting educated now, while he is living, and I hope that someday when historians recant the workings of President George W. Bush that he is still living to be able to read in print how it has been objectively decided that he was absolutely the worst president in U.S. History and that his is judged. I hope that the President lives to be 100 years old, just to make sure that he is living when he is judged, way before he is dead. He may be right by saying that it will take some time before objective historians judge him, or at least that is what he thinks in his mind. People who think objectively right now have the right to make their own judgments on this President right now and they most certainly will.



                         Robyn Curnow sits down with former President George W. Bush to discuss
                                                Edward Snowden and the legacy of his office.

A transcript of the interview is immediately below.

Curnow: Do you think he is a traitor? (Curnow asks Bush about Snowden)

Bush: I know he damaged the country. The Obama administration will deal with it.

Curnow: Do you think it is possible for one man to damage the security of the nation?

Bush: I think he damaged the security of the country.

Curnow: And when it comes to surveillance,(then rudely, George Bush interrupts Curnow...)

Bush: I put the program into place to protect the country. And one of the certainties is civil liberties is guaranteed.

Curnow: So you don't think there was a compromise between security and privacy?

Bush: I think that there needs to be a balance and I think as the president explained there must be a proper balance.

Curnow: No one criticized the Obama administration and that's something,  that you really made the decision?

Bush interrupts again: It doesn't do any good.  It's a hard job. He's got plenty on his agenda and ah, it's difficult, and a former president doesn't need to make it harder.

Then she asks him a question about polls and what people think.. He interupts and says..

Bush: I could care less. THe only time I really cared was on election day. Did I? I guess it's nice. Let me rephrase that. Thank you for bringing it up.

Curnow: You like the idea that people are perhaps looking at you differently?

Bush says... Ah, Ultimately history will judge, ah the decisions I've made, ah, I won't be around because it's going to take a while for the objective historians to show up.  So I'm pretty comfortable with it. I did what I did. Ah, I know the spirit in which I did it.

A Gread President He is NOT - George W. Bush is Already Judged

In a conversation with CNN just prior to the dedication of his new Presidential library, George W. Bush still does not openly admit that he really made mistakes starting the IRAQI war, nor does he believe that he was ultimately responsible for not supporting help and rescue plans during Hurricane Katrina that devastated New Orleans. Here is a man that follows the footsteps of his father, George H.W. Bush and became the 43rd President of the United States, and he now says in the CNN interview "History will ultimately judge the decisions that were made for Iraq and I'm just not going to be around to see the final verdict.". Then he says, "In other words, I'll be dead.". Also, stepping  back when he was president, George W. Bush staunchly supported his own form of terrorism, as he practiced a method called 'water-boarding' on his Iraqi prisoners. Everyone knows that the presidency of George W. Bush was a failure, and his right wing agenda and policies crippled the country, and during his two terms as president, he started a systematic bankruptcy of the country. The U.S. government, who had a surplus of money during the presidency of Bill Clinton, quickly evaporated when George W. Bush became president, and since, the deficit has grown to unbelievable proportions. Of course, the Republicans blame the Democrats for the money deficits, because President Obama had no choice than to spend money to try and bring the country back together again when in fact the country technically entered another depression era during the Bush presidency.
Appearently, George W. Bush doesn't read this blog, and if he has, he should realize that authors like me will never let the atrocities such as the ones he made as president ever go away. I'm not waiting for him to be judged after he is dead, as he puts it, to let people know how disastrous of a president he truly was.
What ultimately upset me about this man is that he threw the country in a war under false pretenses, explaining to the country that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. Of course as we know now, this is totally untrue. There never was one bit of evidence turned up in Iraq during the U.S. occupation in that country that proved at the slighted possibility that there ever was weapons of mass destruction in that country.
Thousands of American soldiers died in a war that they never should have participated in. Still George W. Bush doesn't feel guilty for their lives, and doesn't admit to wrongs. He blames the actions that were taken to invade Iraq due to inaccurate reports given to him by the CIA and FBI. But the fact is, George W. Bush knew there were no weapons of mass destruction there. His right hand man, the vice president of the United states at the time was Dick Chaney, and even still today, the vice-president openly admits that attacking Iraq was the right thing to do.
So it begs the question, why were we ever in Iraq? Cheney's answer is that we belonged in Iraq to get rid of Saddam Hussein, a president who had weapons of mass destruction, even though to this day that there never was an ounce of proof that there ever was weapons of mass destruction.
For the dedication today, accompanying George W. Bush and his father H.W., Presidents Obama, Carter and Clinton were on hand for the dedication for the George W. Bush library. 
I have just one thing to thank President George W. Bush for, and of course it is not for his service as president. I think that most will agree it's a presidency that everyone would like to forget. But for me, waking up to the extreme right wing thinking and ideology of Republicans and of George W. and Dick Cheney during his two terms of office, spurred me into openly supporting Democratic President Barrack Obama as I started writing the blog "Obama in the White House",immediately after Barrack's election in 2008.
As the saying goes, time fly's when you are having fun, and I just hope that someday I would soon forget the likings of such a failed president, George W. Bush.  

Death Penalty for Bush?

Bugliosi Makes the Case

by CORPORATE CRIME REPORTER

June 2008

If Vincent Bugliosi were prosecuting George W. Bush for the murder of the more than 4,000 American soldiers who have died in Iraq, he would seek the death penalty.

“If I were the prosecutor, there is no question I would seek the death penalty,” Bugliosi told CORPORATE CRIME REPORTER in a wide-ranging interview.

Bugliosi is the author of the just published book The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder (Vanguard Press, 2008).

“I’m urging here that an American jury try George Bush for first degree murder. I want to see him on trial for murder before an American jury. And if they convict him, it will be up to the jury to decide what his punishment is. One of the options would be the imposition of the death penalty. If I were prosecuting him, absolutely I would seek the death penalty. As Governor of Texas, George Bush signed death warrants – 152 out of 152 – most of them for people who only committed one murder.”

Bugliosi said he is sending a copy of his book to all fifty state Attorneys General, offering his assistance in prosecuting Bush for homicide.

“I’m herein enclosing a copy of my book The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder,” Bugliosi writes in the letter to the Attorneys General. “I hope you will find the time to read it and that you will agree with its essential conclusion – that George W. Bush is guilty of murder for the deaths of over 4,000 American soldiers who have died fighting his war in Iraq.”

Bugliosi said he’s also meeting with a high profile California District Attorney to urge him to bring the case.

“I am going to meet here soon with a very prominent DA,” Bugliosi said. “I don’t think he is going to do it. But I do think he will give me some ideas as to who would be likely to do it. I’m going ask him to do it. My guess is he is not going to do it. But he attends DA conventions. And he may very well know someone. There may be a case where a DA or an AG lost a son over in Iraq.”

“I offer my services to help out in any way that they see fit,” Bugliosi said. “But I want to convey the thought that this is a serious thing. This is not a fanciful reverie. At my age, I don’t have time for fanciful reveries. If I had to guess what the probabilities are, my guess is that there is not a high probability of it. But I think there is a very substantial probability that George Bush, as a direct result of this book, will end up in an American courtroom being tried for murder. And the main reason that I say that is because of the great number of American prosecutors that I’ve established jurisdiction for.”

Bugliosi said that the homicide prosecution against Bush can be brought by the U.S. Attorney General, any of the U.S. Attorneys, any of the 50 state Attorneys General, or any of the hundreds of district attorneys – if a U.S. soldier killed in Iraq is from their districts.

Bugliosi says that even if the prosecution of Bush doesn’t come about for a number of years, he wants to plant in the President’s mind the idea that such a prosecution is possible.

“The least I can do is put that thought in his mind until he goes to his grave,” Bugliosi said. “That’s the least I can do for the thousands of American soldiers who came back in an aluminum box or came back as a jar of ashes. And the parents are told – don’t open the box, it is unviewable. They are getting back limbs and body parts. And this – I don’t want to use a cuss word here – this small, horrible human being – while young men who never had a chance to live out their dreams, being blown to pieces by roadside bombs – and this guy is having a ball dancing. I want to put the thought in his mind that in any time in the future, five years from now, ten years from now, some aide is going to tap him on the shoulder and say – Mr. President, there is this prosecutor, I don’t know how to pronounce his name, he’s up in Fargo, and he’s charging you with murder sir, and we are due for an arraignment next Wednesday in Fargo, sir.”

“Bush will never know whether that will happen. They went after (former Chilean strongman Augusto) Pinochet for murder 33 years later. I want to put that thought in Bush’s mind. This guy has been enjoying himself throughout this entire war. And the suffering and the horror and blood is unbelievable. And he has enjoyed himself throughout this whole thing.”

At the center of Bugliosi’s indictment of Bush is a October 7, 2002 speech to the nation in which Bush claims that Saddam Hussein was a great danger to this nation either by attacking us with his weapons of mass destruction, or giving these weapons to some terrorist group.

“And he said – the attack could happen on any given day – meaning the threat was imminent,” Bugliosi says.

“The only problem for George Bush – and if he were prosecuted, there is no way he could get around this – is that on October 1, 2002, six days earlier, the CIA sent George Bush its 2002 National Intelligence Estimate, a classified top secret report. Page eight clearly and unequivocally says that Saddam Hussein was not an imminent threat to the security of this country. In fact, the report says that Hussein would only use whatever weapons of mass destruction he had against us if he feared that America was about to attack him.”

[For a complete transcript of the Interview with Vincent Bugliosi, see 22 CORPORATE CRIME REPORTER 22, June 2, 2008, print edition only.]

The Bush Tax Cuts destroyed the American Economy

Opinion of the Editor 'James'

The Clinton administration left office while at the same time leaving the country in an envyable fiscal position. The U.S. had no deficit and was on track to have no debt at all. With that said, George W. became President and passed his enormous tax cuts in June of 2001. The tax cuts in 2001 were $1.3 trillion dollars, which esentially put the country in reverse and undid the successes of Bill Clinton with the economy in a very short period of time.
What people may not remember is that George W. introduced his tax cuts just three months before 9/11. Then because of 9/11, the United States went to war, and on a global scale. To show how morally and fiscally irresponsible George W. was, he cut taxes and then started a major war that still is in operation today. If he was a fiscally responsible and morale president, the sobering thing to do would be to resind those brand new tax cuts. If he would have said this at that time right after the start of the war, nobody would have blinked an eye. He didn't resind the tax, but instead continue to wage a very expense war at the same time.
The story gets even more rediculas at this point. In 2003 George W. decided to start another war simitaniously with the war already running in Afghanistan, this time in Iraq. Ironically, not only did George W. decide to wage two wars and not resind his tax cuts, but he created another $300 Billion dollar tax cut and signed the bill on May of 2003 just months after the war in Iraq commenced. He claimed it would help boost the economy. But why did the United States let the president act morally irresponsible by cutting taxes after starting yet another war? George W. didn't have the funds to pay for the war, but he took advantage of the American people and first tricked them that the second war in Iraq was necessary because Sadaam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, when it was later proven that they did not have any weapons of mass destruction. He convinced the country that U.S. tax cuts was more important than funding the war or protecting the American people both at home and abroad.
Was he out of touch with the problems that this country was now facing or what. It was ok that the Federal government continue to wage war without no longer having the funds to do it, but he doubled-down on his stupidness by creating more tax cuts that crippled the economy almost immediately. President George W is so proud of what he accomplished as far as his 'Bush Tax Cuts'. Then, he gets re-elected, because the country had blindfolds on. The country belived in President Bush and what he was doing in Afghanistan and Iraq, and none of these followers could or would ever had believed that this war would be waging even today. Now his party has the outright gaul to say that President Obama is the cause for why this country is in debt. What George W. and his pea-brain followers do not know is that the only way to reverse the damage George W. has created is to introduce new taxes. The sad thing is that if George W. would have resinded his 'Bush Tax Cuts' after the war he had started, we would not be in such a fiscal nightmare, and our national credit rating would still be AAAA.

Need I say more. If anyone believes that President Obama is at fault with his method of balancing the budget, just take one step back and realize about what was said here. Understand how the country went into debt in the first place and than unless taxes are collected, the U.S. debt will never go down. Yet, the conservative republicans believe that there should never be new taxes. All of the republican presidential candidates believe in that fact.

One thing is for sure. George W. proved himself time and time again that he hadn't a clue as to what was going on in the world, not even at home, as his two wars were much more important than health care and the well being of the American people. George W. continued to put American soldiers in harms way just for his pushing of soldiers in a war that still hasn't been won ten years later.

George W., the epitimy of failure as a president of the United States, and believes with his heart and soul that he was a great war time president, but only in his pea-brain mind could such a belief exist.

George W - A Disgusting President with NO SHAME

Opinion of the Editor 'James'

In a recent report, it says that George W. was troubled to make the decisions he had to make. That was evident when his secret service told him again that a second plane struck the world trade center. At that moment in time, he realized when White House Chief of Staff Andy Card's of Massachusetts whispered again in his ear while at the gradeschool in Florida. George W. was literally frozen with fear and disbelief. But for a long moment that seemed to be an eternity, George W. just sat there in front of the children, and did not react. Eventually he did make an announcement at the school about the planes flying into the world trade center and that he had to return to Washington D.C. immediately, even though his Secret Service refused to take him  immediately back to Washington. In mid-air they were diverted to a plane un-announced.
Then when George W. heard about the plane that turned around and started heading towards Washington which eventually crashed in Shanksville PA, he then ordered planes to intercept and shoot down if necessary any planes that did not respond with the orders to land as immediately as possible because orders were now given by the President that all planes must land immediately.
Today in a CNN report, he claims that he was very troubled to send military jets armed with missles to shoot down comercial aircraft with civilians on board just because the plane may pose a threat to the United States.
But this is the same man that initiated a war in Iraq, and is responsible for killing 4000+ American troops, and now George W's supporters want to blame our present President Barack Obama. What a sense of mis-justice. Everything George W. stood for was bad for the country. It is a wonder how George W. sleeps at night. Does he even feel any sense of remorse or regret for sending American troops into harms way to fight his war that shouldn't have started in the first place. He received permission from the Congress to attack Iraq and begin the hunt of Osama bin Laden on unjust grounds, stating that there were weapons of mass destruction, and there wasn't any to be found, not even a trace.
To be honest, I don't feel any safer now that I was then, so what good has his war on terror done. Yes it was done for a good cause, but at what price. For him, it's ANY price for freedom from the tyranny of Al-Qaeda even at the cost of more American lives, as if not enough people died on that fateful day on 9/11.

Bush Lied about 911 Attack and Got Caught

Fact and Opinion by the editor 'James'

Here are two shocking videos of George W. as he accounts for what happened when he was present at the elementary school the morning of September 11th and a third video who claims conspiracy on 911. Obviously, it was an outright lie, and possibly a cover-up of facts we may never know. This video shows him at that devastating moment when he actually found out about the 2nd airplane hit, his inability to take action, and in a sense, his inability to comprehend what his staff had just told him.  At that moment in time, what was more important, talking to the children in class, and listening to their stories, or tending to the crisis at hand? One of the more damning bits of evidence of U.S. government complicity in 9/11 is that George Bush has informed us, on more than one occasion, that he saw the first (1st) WTC tower aerial impact, on TV, before he entered that Florida classroom at 9 a.m. (cached timeline visual timeline)
However, the only known video of that event spent the day at Ground Zero, in the videographer's camera. It was first broadcast about 15 hours after it happened.

Check out the following links and watch the videos that support proof that Bush lied about 911. The last video shows the 911 conspiracy, than shows the destruction of the towers were not completely caused by the airplane hits, rather than internal explosives placed inside the building. The third building, World Trade Center #7, went down as did the Twin Towers and it wasn't even hit.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-sulDYYAiCU&NR=1.

http://911blimp.com/aud_BushImplicatesBush.shtml

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

The Military Service of George W. Bush

FACT : George W. took tests to enter the Guard, and despite scoring low on the entrance exam, Bush was accepted.

FACT:  George W.  never made up five months of drills he missed in 1972.

FACT: George W.  was given gratuitous points so that he could fulfill requirements. 

FACT: George W. failed an annual physical examination and no longer allowed to fly as of August 1, 1972.

People may just not know, but George W. displayed terrible accountability during his tenure in the Texas Air National Guard. To me, it is hard to imagine that a future President of the United States would have displayed such unaccountability towards his duties as a reservist in the Texas Air National Guard, and then become the President. Do you think he was a good role model?  Records show that George W. graduated from Yale University (commendable), and he became eligible for the draft so that it was no secret that his ulterior motive would be so that it would minimize his chances of being dispatched to Vietnam. He took tests to enter the Guard, and despite scoring low on the entrance exam, Bush was accepted. George W was given a honorable discharge in 1973, and many believe since he signed a 6-year obligation that the rules required that he attend at least 44 inactive-duty training drills each fiscal year beginning July 1. But Bush's own records show that he fell short of that requirement, attending only 36 drills in the 1972-73 period, and only 12 in the 1973-74 period. He was assigned to the Houston Air National Guard base between 1968 and 1973, as he graduated from flight school in November 1969, following his fathers footsteps as a pilot. Then he decided to go further with 6 months of training in the F-102 fighter-interceptor. For almost 2 years until May of 1972, he flew frequently with his unit.
In May of 1972, he moved to Alabama to work on Winston Blount's Senate Campaign. Three months later, George W. failed an annual physical examination and no longer allowed to fly as of August 1, 1972. Since then, here are the following   FACTS....

1) No duty with the National guard between April 16 and October 28, 1972.


2) No duty in December 1972, nor in the months of February and March in 1973.


3) No military records that show that he served ANY military unit in Alabama.It is a requirement of members of the National Guard that they accumulate a minimum of 50 service points in a year. (Each full day of weekend training is worth two points).


4) He accumulated only 41 points and awarded an additional 15 'gratuitous' service points - enough to get him across the 50 service points threshold.


5) Last day of service was July 30, 1973 when he was originally supposed to serve through November 1974.

6) He was honorably discharged early to enable him to attend Harvard Business School.


7) During his last two years of his obligation, Bush did not comply with Air Force regulations that impose a time limit on making up missed drills.


8) Bush never made up five months of drills he missed in 1972.

Prior to both of his terms as President, he was questioned about his service, whether he completed his military service in the National Guard. The Boston Globe reported that "there is no evidence that he appeared for duty for a year just before his 1973 discharge from the Texas Air National Guard" In 2004 during his re-election campaign, his lack of record in the military service surfaced again.

In summary from most accounts, Bush appears to have received preferential treatment to get into the Air National Guard and avoid the draft after he graduated from Yale University in 1968. He was initially regarded as a good pilot, but his performance faded over his final two years in the Guard and he was suspended from flight status. He did not fly for the remaining 18 months he served in the Guard, though he was obligated to do so. And for significant chunks of time, Bush did not report for duty at all. His superiors took no action, and he was honorably discharged in 1973, six months before he should have been.

Unbelievable stories are out there for the taking, the following article written by Cheryl Seal on June 12, 2002. In the article, Cheryl Seal details 9/11 Evidence that may hang George W. Bush, less than one year after the planes struck and took town the Twin Towers in New York City.

The 911 Evidence that May Hang George W. Bush

Wednesday, 12 June 2002, 2:37 pm
Article: Cheryl Seal

The 9/11 Evidence that May Hang George W. Bush

By Cheryl Seal
Also published - 02 June 2002
http://web11.superb.net/www.nodomain.com/editorials/smoking_gun.html The Case Against G.W. Bush: a Preliminary "Hearing" in the Court of Common Sense
At the very least Bush allowed 9/11 to happen. But the evidence indicates his guilt involves more than just a huge intentional sin of omission – this now seems certain. So it is ulcer-fomenting to watch him, Cheney, Condoleeza Rice and their PR army try to sell America yet another Big Lie – that they had no idea such a thing as 9/11 could happen...they could never have imagined it in their wildest dreams...they had no specific warnings...there was nothing unusual about the summer 2001 warnings, etc, etc, ad nauseam. I have compiled some material that clearly shows that the above litany is blatantly, arrogantly false. But first, let's hold a preliminary hearing in the "Court of Common sense".

Related Stories on Scoop

• The George W. Bush Legacy Project 22/07/2008
• The Fundamentalist Shadow of George W. Bush 19/09/2005
• Paul Levy: The Madness Of George W. Bush 13/12/2004
• George W. Bush And The Stealing Of America 26/01/2004
• Scoop Link: CBS News - George W. Nixon 25/07/2003

Results powered by search.scoop.co.nz More Related Stories >>>

To see through a wall of propaganda and determine what's really going on, one must tune out the spin completely and take a good, objective look at what has been DONE and what the parties involved have to GAIN by their actions. Let's look at the well-documented facts:
First, when Bush, Rice and the other top Reichmeisters discarded the warning on August 6, Bush's approval ratings had sunk to just 49% – this is the red zone for a president. As any political expert or presidential historian: Hit 45%, and impeachment may soon loom on the horizon.
Second, Bush's actions throughout his entire life show a clear and consistent pattern: without exception, he has always chosen the path that will benefit himself and his corporate friends the most and will do so in the face of even the most outraged criticism.
Third, the stolen election of 2000 proves that Bush was willing to participate in a very daring, very large scale crime in pursuit of power.
Fourth, Bush's father's approval ratings went from shaky to astronomical within a month of declaring war on an "evil terrorist" leader back in 1991. This lesson could hardly have been lost on Bush, Jr.: Start a war and the emotions of the public can be whipped up to a point that will push presidential approval ratings way, way up.
So, given the above facts as "evidence," what do you imagine a self-serving man who has faced no serious opposition from Congress, the press, or the American public would be likely to do? A bookie would most certainly lay odds that Bush would stand aside and allow an event like 9/11 to happen.
Another action that must be considered in the cold hard light of day is Bush's behavior after 9/11. He seized upon national fears, worked at intensifying them, and immediately, without waiting for Congress or serious discussions with other nations, called for an attack on Afghanistan and a global war on terrorism. At the same time, he worked through John Ashcroft with stunning swiftness to dismantle civil liberties. These are not the actions of a leader who wants to keep his nation calm, reassured, and standing tall in its principles in the wake of tragedy. They are the actions of an opportunist who knows, from watching his father's presidency, that the window of opportunity for consolidating his power will be narrow: Bush Sr.'s approval rating high lasted only a few months.
Last, why would Bush admit to having been warned about 9/11 in the first place? In the corporate and political world, this admission is a strategy that has been used over and over by creeps who are guilty of huge crimes and know the heat is on. By confessing to a lesser charge, they try to draw the heat away from the main, more dangerous issue. Ken Lay, the head of Anderson, and every criminal who has ever copped or tried to cop a plea bargain have used this ploy. If Bush were innocent of any complicity in 9/11, why should he make ANY statement? It is always the guilty who feel the need to make statements: "I am not a crook!", "I never had sex with that woman!" Or how about that row of tobacco industry CEO's who all swore that none of them knew their product was harmful or addictive?
Therefore, based on the evidence, I would say we have a phony president who is as guilty as hell, who knows that someone has the goods on him and is breathing down his neck. He is gambling that by making a preemptive strike while he still has control of the media, he can spin a protective wall around himself. Thus, we have Dick Cheney appearing on 5/19 on Meet the Press, being "interviewed" about the 9/11 flap by his friend and neighbor Russert. Yep, that's right –both interviewer and interviewee live in the feudally exclusive Kalorama suburb of D.C., where houses START at around $1 million. In fact, on the same program, Russert had the arrogance to even mention how he'd seen his buddy out taking the air on his new "It" scooter. How cozy! And this is what is being served to America in the name of a free and honest press. Ya got a problem? Just pick a pal in the press corps and tell him what questions you want him/her to ask you so you can spin them in just the way you want.
Russert asked Cheney how he responded to charges that the information existed in several reports which showed that a WTC-type attack was a possibility. Cheney responded –incredibly!– that reading all those reports weren't his concern. There's just too darn many of them. Russert let this ridiculous response go totally unchallenged and unqualified.
Here are the questions that are missing –the questions a real journalist would have asked: "So then, Mr. Cheney, just what are your criteria for a report that is important enough for you to read? How do you prioritize what you read or what those under you are directed to call to your attention? What reports on this matter DID you read?"
It is insulting to America's intelligence that such questions are not being asked. It's like a grand jury that refuses to ask a murder suspect questions like "Where were you on the night of such and such? What was your relationship to the victim?" but instead says, "Well, here's what we heard from the police that someone thinks you may have killed someone. Go ahead and explain yourself. Don't worry –we won't interrupt you or ask you any uncomfortable questions. And, by the way, your good pal who lives down the block volunteered to serve as jury foreman!"
Here's one last FACT to consider. The GOP spent $40 million to pursue an ultimately merit-less case against Clinton that involved diddling an intern and some questionable real estate deals. Since Bush took office, not one dime has been spent by Congress to investigate Cheney and his secret energy dealings, Bush's stolen election, Tom Delay's boiler room scams that have bilked doctors out of millions, the mysterious wild trading of American and United Airlines stock the week before 9/11 or any of the other crimes that were far more serious than Clinton's offenses. Meanwhile, the GOP –so eager to spend millions to investigate an office romance– has worked overtime to block the initiation of any serious investigation into the biggest crime to have ever been perpetrated on American soil that claimed nearly 3,000 lives. WAKE UP AMERICA!!
"Vague Warning" or Blueprint for Disaster?
The story Bush wants the world to buy is that the warnings he received were vague, routine, too general to act upon. Condi Rice wants us to believe that no one in the administration could have dreamed the hijackers would fly into a landmark building. But, as they say in show biz, this is "lies, lies, and damn lies."
Since 1993, scores of people, collectively, in the White House, Pentagon, State Department, FBI, and CIA have know that an attack like 9/11 was not only a possibility –but an increasingly likely probability. Because I am not writing a book here, I will confine myself to summarizing the most obvious pieces of evidence that Bush and his team had to work with. However, they are enough to convict him in any court of opinion.
Terrorism 2000 Report
Don't confuse this 1993 study with the report turned out by the Bush administration in April 2001 under the same title. The 2001 release, a summary of terrorist activity in 2000, lifted the title of the original document, no doubt as a smokescreen to confuse anyone who might be seeking the 1993 document through a search engine or library archives.
In 1993, the Pentagon commissioned, via the Department of Defense's office of Special Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict, a think tank-style study of the ways terrorists could execute large-scale acts of terrorism on the US. Participants in the $150,000 study consisted of a panel of 41 intelligence/security experts that included former ranking CIA, FBI, State Department and Rand Corporation officials, as well as an ex-KGB general and Israeli intelligence agent.
One of the problems the team brainstormed over was the various ways an airplane could be used to destroy national landmarks –in fact, the WTC was most certainly on the panel's list of possible targets. One conclusion reached by the team as a future trend in terrorist activity was that extremists would seek to maximize their impact by escalating their attacks from one-at-a-time truck bomb/suicide bomber events to multiple, simultaneous targeting, thereby touting their power and stretching the victim governments' ability to respond.
The possible terrorist scenarios the team outlined scared the socks off folks in the government. One high-level official described it as "too outrageous." As a result, the team's report, Terrorism 2000 (a reference to terrorism in the new millennia) was blocked from public release. Even a toned down version that had been proposed as a way to raise public awareness and improve national preparedness was killed! A draft of the report was nonetheless passed on through the Pentagon, the Justice Department and the Federal Emergency Management Agency. There is absolutely no doubt that this information was available to everyone in the Bush Administration, including Ms. Rice. It should have been required reading –especially since many of the predictions made by the report had already come true before 9/11.
Four instances of planes used as weapons before 2001
1994: A Federal Express Flight engineer was apprehended as he tried to storm the cockpit of a DC-10. The engineer, despondent over his impending firing, had planned to crash the plane into a Fed Ex building in Memphis.
1994: A pilot stole a Cessna and tried to crash it into the White House. He instead hit a tree on the White House grounds, not far from Clinton's bedroom.
1995: An Islamic fundamentalist group hijacked an Air France flight and loaded the plane with 27 tons of fuel in Marseilles as a way to turn it into an incendiary bomb when they crashed it into the Eiffel tower. This plan was thwarted when Special Forces stormed the craft before it could leave Marseilles.
1995: Abdul Hakim Murad confessed to planting timed explosive devices on eleven US airline flights in an attempt to create a "multiple attack" event (as outlined in the "too outrageous" Terrorism 2000 report). The same terrorist group also planned to crash on airplane into CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia, and another into the Pentagon (but Condi didn't dream anyone would ever try such a thing in 2001?). This scheme was not a wild and fevered plot. It was in the advanced planning stages –to the point where specific flights had already been selected. Murad himself was going to be the suicide pilot who hit the CIA headquarters. Where did he get his pilot training? In a US flight school.
The specifics of the "vague warning"
The most glaring lie Bush is using in his current spin is his claim that the warnings he received were too vague to act upon. However, the facts all by themselves scream "liar!"
From April, 2001 right up to the day the WTC and Pentagon were slammed, urgent warnings of impending large-scale attacks by terrorists had been issued to the Bush administration from multiple sources. Germany, Egypt, Russia and Israel all delivered alerts that accurately foretold the scale of the attack and that it would involve a prominent landmark of some type. This would automatically put the WTC and Pentagon on the short list, especially as both landmarks had been targeted before (as mentioned above, the Pentagon attack was averted).
The German intelligence agency BND warned the US and Israel both in June that Middle Eastern terrorists were "planning to hijack commercial aircraft to use as weapons to attack important symbols of American and Israeli culture." This is hardly vague, and hardly refers to an "overseas danger" to Americans (which of our prominent landmarks is in Europe or Asia, pray tell?).
On June 13, Egypt sent an urgent warning that a plane stuffed with explosives could be used as a weapon against George Bush. It was assumed, incorrectly at that time that the target could be the G-8 summit in Genoa, held in June 2001.
Vladimir Putin was so certain of the information he received in the summer of 2001 of an impending attack that he personally instructed Russian intelligence to tell Bush "in the strongest possible terms" (his own words on September. 15, 2001) of an impending attack involving airports and government. The Russians told the CIA that 25 terrorist pilots had been specially trained to execute suicide missions. It was around the same time that the FBI was receiving tips about suspicious Arabic men in US flight schools.
In August, 2001, the Israeli intelligence agency Mossad warned the CIA and FBI that as many as 200 al Qaeda members were infiltrating the US and planning "a major assault on the US" against "a large-scale target" in a setting where Americans would be "very vulnerable."
The NSA cracked bin Laden's encryption code by February 2001
Even before April, the Bush administration HAD TO KNOW something was up and probably had info that was even more specific than the warnings given above. According to UPI correspondent Richard Sale, by February 2001, the National Security Agency had broken Osama bin Laden's communications encryption system. We know that the encryption was broken because the Bush administration reported AFTER 9/11 that it had intercepted encrypted calls bin Laden made to his mother two days before the attack, saying "In two days, you're going to hear big news, and you're not going to hear from me for a while." If this message was intercepted before the attack, what others were intercepted as well that the Bush administration did NOT reveal? Most likely six-months'-worth of terrorist planning.
The CIA knew of suspicious airline stock trades by September 7
Last but not least, the CIA knew a week before the attack WHICH airlines were most likely to be hijacked. The Agency maintains an advanced program called Promis, which monitors unusual stock market activity, SPECIFICALLY as a way to anticipate potential terrorist attacks. Promis provides 24-hour continuous real-time data on stock market activity and the FBI and Justice Department have both admitted that Promis was up and running all through the summer and fall of 2001. So there is no doubt whatsoever that as early as September. 7, the CIA knew that something was going down and knew which airlines were being targeted. Even a third-grader could have put this information together with the long litany of warnings above from foreign sources and come up with the conclusion that an American or United Airlines craft was going to be hijacked in the near future and most likely used to crash into a landmark, quite possibly the World Trade Center.
More smoking facts
According to the official government web site of the Military District of Washington the Pentagon ITSELF planned in detail how it would respond to just such a scenario from October 24-26 2000. And this was no low-level exercise, since it took place in the Office of the Secretaries of Defense conference room. This story was run in Unknown News and picked up the same day by Democrats.com which fortunately, kept a copy because within 24 hours, the story –along with the entire Military District website– was scrubbed by the White House!
The model used in this simulation and the response plan was developed by Don Abbott, who is the founder of FieldSoft, a company that makes emergency-response software programs and systems, including FdonScene. This program, according to the FieldSoft site, "is the first –and only– fire service, software application specifically designed for incident commanders and their staff in-the-field. The commercial off-the-shelf software (COTS) product is designed to support in field operations for any type of emergency response. Basically, FDonScene is an automated COTS tool that actively facilitates control and coordination of people, procedures, events, and other resources with the touch of a finger.The application is specifically designed for fast, simple and easy use by the incident commander, as well as members of the command staff."
Bush was without doubt very familiar with FdonScene because it was first endorsed by the Texas Fire Chiefs Association while he was governor (1998). And, as the FieldSoft brochure mentions, "FieldSoft has engineered software necessary to integrate FDonScene with a consequence management system under development by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA)." So this is definitely a program well known to and used by the military.
Now, in light of this, consider this fact: By a "miracle" of coincidence, the FdonScene program had been set up and made ready to go for use by the emergency response teams at the WTC disaster just a few days before the disaster, as if in anticipation. The brochure boasts: "Over 700 victims passed through the Atlantic Highlands Ferry Port in New Jersey following the September 11, 2001 WTC attack. Two fire departments, three local police departments, as well as representatives from county, state, and federal agencies were on hand to assess and assist the victims as they embarked. Emergency units on the scene included 40 ambulances, an FD communications unit, a decontamination unit, and 10 pieces of fire apparatus. A communications unit member on scene at the Port, who had seen a ninety minute demonstration of the software a few days earlier, brought a trial copy of FDonScene on line and used it to track people, resources, and events. A second person watched how the software was being used, and took over operation of it a few hours later. Overall, the software was operated successfully for 14 hours." Nowhere can any reference to WHO the "unit member" was, or who the "second person" was.
In another FieldSoft "success story" for a different product, the same ominous vagueness is found: "The Organization of American States (OAS) planned a major meeting in a North American city. Intelligence gathering operations revealed that anarchists planned to disrupt the meeting. The local police service evaluated a number of software systems that could be used to help manage law enforcement activities from the joint operations center (JOC). PDonScene was elected 3 weeks prior to the opening ceremonies." The software was configured and in place at the JOC as delegates commenced OAS activities. PDonScene was used throughout the 4 day event to manage hundreds of local, provincial, and federal law enforcement officers. The software helped law enforcement managers successfully manage peaceful labor –and not so peaceful anarchist– demonstrations by thousands of people, at several different venues throughout the community. "We [the agency] purchased the software because operation of it looked simple," stated a JOC Staff Sergeant. That Sergeant went on to say that "we found it [PDonScene] exceptional in that it showed the situation in real time with both [officer] names and call signs".
July: Shortly after the Bay of Pigs crisis, the Kennedy administration allowed the FAA to pass a rule that permitted commercial airline pilots to be armed. The rule was passed to protect flights from possible hijacking by Cubans. Although no airline ever availed themselves of this right, it seems very strange that the rule was rescinded in July 2001, right at the HEIGHT of the most serious terrorist warnings to be issued by intelligence sources in decades. It seems, instead, that this should have been the time for the Bush administration to insist that pilots be armed! Just like the timing of everything that happened in the second half of 2001, we sniff something a lot more foul than politics
Mid-August: A flight school in Minnesota flight reported Zacharias Missouri to the local FBI office after Missouri requested training in how to fly a jet, but not in how to land or take off. Although Moussaoui was arrested, agents did not search his computer and thus missed vital clues.
Early September: (from a letter from a reader): I was listening to "The Connection" on PBS this morning. The subject was terrorism (of course). During the show, a man called in who said his wife was a VP at an all-girls college. Just before 9/11, a Saudi prince called up and said to cancel his daughter's registration for the fall and send him a refund. On 9/11, at 9:30, Saudi security was there to pick up 3 princesses from the school. The man said his wife called the FBI, but they didn't pay any heed to her. Hopefully, you will hear that from this link.
This incident most certainly was reported to the FBI after September 11 and most clearly indicated there could be a Saudi connection. Yet the Bush administration has refused to pursue an active investigation of Saudi ties to September 11 and instead focused entirely on Afghanistan –though NONE of those responsible for September 11 came from Afghanistan, and, as it turns out, none trained there, they all trained in Europe or the US. However, there was nothing in it for Bush to bomb Saudi Arabia –we already get their oil!
Bin Laden's hunter O'Neill was killed at WTC: Was he also a casualty of the Bush administration?
Until he resigned, in August of 2001, John O'Neill was the director of antiterrorism for the FBI's New York office. O'Neill had worked on the investigations of the first WTC bombing in 1993 and the attacks on the American embassies in Africa in 1998. He became one of the world's top experts on Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda. O'Neill believed that "All the answers, everything needed to dismantle Osama bin Laden's organization can be found in Saudi Arabia." Yet the Bush administration blocked O'Neill's efforts to investigate the Saudi ties to bin Laden. The main obstacles to investigating Islamic terrorism, asserted O'Neill, were US oil corporate interests and the role played by Saudi Arabia in it.
For example, Bush blocked an FBI investigation of the bin Laden family and kept his family's business ties to the bin Ladens as secret as possible. Among these business dealings were bin Laden investments in the Carlyle Group and connections between bin Laden and George W. Bush's first oil companies. It must have truly enraged O'Neill if he knew that Osama bin Laden had flown to Dubai for 10 days for treatment at the American hospital, where he was visited by local CIA agent Larry Mitchell on July 12.
O'Neill was very well aware of the warnings that came out in the summer of 2001. But it was obvious that he was considered more of a liability than an asset to the oil-obsessed Bush administration. Back in 2000, O'Neill had been investigating the bombing of the SS Cole, for which he was sure bin Laden was responsible. However, the US ambassador to Yemen, one Barbara Bodine, hamstrung FBI efforts at every turn, publicly calling O'Neill a liar, refusing to allow his men to be armed with more than small handguns and, in general, crippling the investigation. Although Bodine claims she was trying to keep diplomatic relations running smoothly, her history shows otherwise:
Barbara Bodine has served primarily under rightwing old boys and in areas where their oil interests are being served. Under Reagan she served as Deputy Principle Officer in Baghdad, Iraq. Under Bush, Sr., she served as Deputy Chief of Mission in Kuwait and was there during the Gulf War. She has also worked for Bob Dole, and far more ominously, for Henry Kissinger. Now, under Bush, Jr., she is in Yemen impeding an FBI investigation that focused on the son of a Bush family business associate.
What makes Bodine's actions toward O'Neill particularly despicable is that she was said to be in part to blame for the Cole disaster. Even though she had been warned that the risk of attacks on Americans in the Yemen area were extremely high at that time, the Cole entered port under the lowest grade of security permitted in the Middle East with no warning to the destroyer. A top military analyst for the Pentagon's Defense Intelligence Agency quit in protest the day after the bombing because of Bodine and General Anthony Zinn's decision to allow the Cole to come into the port.
In July, Bodine had O'Neill and the FBI barred from Yemen. About that time, O'Neill's name had been proposed by Richard Clarke as Clarke's successor as terrorism czar at the National Security Council. But a very mysterious incident that had happened nearly a year before was dredged up and used to blow that possibility out of the water. In November of 2000, at a retirement seminar in Tampa, O'Neill left his briefcase for a few moments in the convention room to go around the corner to use the phone. When he returned in a few minutes, the brief case, containing some papers considered classified, was gone. It soon turned up, but the incident was seized upon as an excuse to guarantee O'Neill would not get promoted. Was it a real theft? Or a set up to squeeze out the man who asked too many questions about Saudis and oil? O'Neill had finally had enough and quit.
Meanwhile, from February through August, the entire time that the danger from bin Laden was the greatest, Bush was focusing most of his efforts on persuading the Taliban to allow him and his oil pals put a pipeline through Afghanistan. Bush wanted to swipe the oil-rich Caspian region from Russian control. Back when Bush thought he could cut a deal with the Taliban, he did not consider them "evil." In fact, back when he smelled an easy deal in the wind, Bush described the Taliban's repressive regime as "a source of stability in Central Asia" that would enable the construction of an oil pipeline. So, in Spring of 2001, in Texas oil wheeling-dealing style, Bush handed $43 million in taxpayer dollars over to the Taliban to sweeten the pot. Still, however, there was no deal.
Laila Helms, the niece of former CIA director Richard Helms, worked as a public relations coordinator for the Taliban at this time. According to Helms, the Taliban offered to turn over bin Laden or provide the coordinates of his whereabouts. However, apparently under Bush's orders, the State Department refused this deal –a deal that would have removed Bush's best trump terrorist card from his stacked deck. Instead, on August 2, State Department officials met with Taliban reps in Islamabad and there delivered this ultimatum: give us what we want for the oil companies and we will "carpet your with gold." If you don't, "we will bury you beneath a carpet of bombs." The Taliban still held out.
Four days later, Bush was given the warning that could have, if acted upon, saved 3,000 American lives and the thousands of civilian lives lost in Afghanistan since October. Instead, he chose to ignore it.
In early September, O'Neill took a job at the WTC as head of security there. Right before the disaster, he told friends he felt sure an attack was imminent and that he feared that terrorists would try to finish the job they had begun in 1993 to destroy the WTC. John O'Neill was in the first tower when it was hit. He was on his way into the second tower to help evacuate people when he was killed.
O'Neill must have sensed –the best detectives have that uncanny "sixth sense"– that something very big, very horrendous might go down and that he might not survive. In June and July, 2001 he met with French intelligence analyst Jean-Charles Brisard (in June in Paris and in July in New York City). O'Neill confided much of what he knew about the bin Laden situation and Bush to Brisard –a fellow intelligence officer, but one who was not under the Bush administration's thumb. Brisard and his associate Guillaume Dasquié, an intelligence analyst and the editor of Intelligence Online, dedicated their book "Bin Laden: the Forbidden Truth" (released in France in November 2001) to O'Neill. The book has been vigorously avoided by US publishers and everyone in the mainstream US press except Paula Zahn, who has presented excerpts of it.
History will be kind to John O'Neill. It will not be kind to George W. Bush.
The Pentagon Tragedy: A Plot that Keeps on Thickening
One of the things that has bothered me since the morning of 9/11 is how little attention the Pentagon tragedy received. All you could hear screamed from the media and White House for months was WTC! WTC! WTC! Heroes of Flight 93! Heroes of Flight 93! It was an endless litany –education through repetition. In fact, 9/11 became synonymous, almost forcibly, with the WTC. Yet, over 200 people died at the Pentagon, including the ill-fated passengers on Flight 77, right at the heart of the city. Why so little focus on this tragedy? I believe that of all the events of 9/11, the crash of Flight 77 into the Pentagon was the most telling, it was the hottest, smokiest of the smoking guns. The key to the whole mystery may well lie in this five-sided building built by FDR's administration. First, here's a little long-overdue background on the Pentagon.
The history of the Pentagon
When war broke out in Europe in 1939, even before the US entered the conflict, our War Department was gearing up for the possibility. However, there was no real home for the Department of Defense –it was scattered across DC in 17 different buildings. Back then, there wasn't a whole lot of red tape to cut through –when the green light was given to come up with a place to put the DOD, by God, they came up with a plan in four days! In this relative blink of an eye, Brigadier General Brehon B. Somervell developed a scheme for a three-story humongous complex capable of housing 40,000 workers (it later grew to five floors after WWII broke out). But, Somervell's plan for a five-sided structure was not, as one might expect, symbolic, or an effort to create a stylized giant chevron. Instead, it was the most practical idea that suggested itself: the 67-acre site chosen (a former Deptartment of Agriculture Farm on the Potomac) was bound on five sides by five existing roads. Voila! The Pentagon. Cost estimates for the original project was $35 million –about what a couple of out buildings for storing old munitions might cost now! Believe it or not, the project was considered highly controversial. Some complained that it took up land intended for the expansion of Arlington Cemetery. Others said the DOD shouldn't be housed outside the District of Columbia, while some (we jaded 21st centurians would have to laugh at this) complained that the cost was too high.
One problem Congress wrangled over was what to do with the building once WWII was over. Although some wanted to turn it into a warehouse, most people assumed that the building would become a veterans' hospital. It is very telling that no one believed there would be a need for 40,000 defense department workers after the War. That was because no one foresaw that war was soon to become a way of life –in one form or the other– for Americans. This shift to an all-war (ours or someone else's we supply weapons for) all the time focus can be traced to the Cold War mentality that many in high places locked into during the 1950s and never left (and has never allowed the rest of us to leave).
In any case, the classic monster of a building (over 5 million square feet!) that we call the Pentagon was begun in 1941 a few months before Pearl Harbor (the appropriations bill was signed by FDR in August 1941). Spurred to heroic efforts by the declaration of war in December, the construction crews –13,000 men at one point– completed the building in an astounding 16 months. As with all government projects, the final cost was nearly three times higher than first estimates (it came in at $83 million). Because a war was on, reinforced concrete was used instead of steel in most of the building's structure (in contrast to the WTC, which was a mass of steel beams). There were no elevators –instead, concrete ramps go between levels. The finished building consists of five nested concentric pentagons (called rings), with a 5-acre courtyard at the heart. The building is really a small town –with its own shopping concourse, banks, and even its own subway station. In 1993, the Clinton administration decided to upgrade the Pentagon, for many reasons, not least of which was the growing concern over terrorist attacks. In addition to new plumbing, the upgrade included putting in heavy duty fireproofing in the walls, reinforcing the walls, and improving security in general. The final reconstruction strategy called for the work to be divided into five "wedges," each wedge encompassing a corner and a rectangle of the Building. The first wedge to be tackled was the one facing west, covering 1.2 million square feet. By September 2000, work on this wedge was about 70% complete. The wedge was supposed to have been completely done by July 2001, but, as with rebuilding any old "house," more problems kept being uncovered. For example, all sorts of interesting goodies were found in the walls: a secure vault no one knew about, old whiskey bottles (hmm, wonder who went to such lengths to hide their booze!), and other items. Then of course, there were supports that needed more reinforcement, asbestos to be removed, etc. Among the improvements made to Wedge One: Blast resistant windows and brick backup walls behind the building's limestone outer facade. These inner walls contain a metal fabric mesh similar to the mesh used in vehicle air bags. This mesh was designed specifically to CONTAIN DEBRIS FRAGMENTS in the event of a blast.
The bloody morning of September 11.
On the morning of September 11, 2001, about 20,000 people were at work in the Pentagon. Almost no one was in Wedge one, except workers who were moving furniture in –the last step before the wedge was reopened for business. When the news of the planes hitting the WTC came, Pentagon personnel were horrified and clustered round radios and television sets to follow the coverage. One man remembered remarking to another worker that he feared the Pentagon was vulnerable to all types of terrorist assaults. Then, at 9:43, there was a huge explosion and fire and smoke rose from wedge one. By evening, it would be known that at least 180 people had been killed, including the 64 passengers on Flight 77.
So, what is wrong with the whole Pentagon disaster picture? For starters, here are a few interesting facts:
As mentioned earlier, the Bush administration had PLENTY of information that would lead them to believe the Pentagon and other major national landmarks were at high risk of a terrorist attack, especially in the summer and fall of 2001. Many warnings had come over the previous 8 years that the Pentagon could be a target of a terrorist attack, not only that but part of a multiple-strike terrorist attack. In fact, this possibility seemed so plausible that in November 2000 a disaster response exercise was held by the Military District of DC that simulated a plane hitting the Pentagon. So, September 11 finds Bush and several other key administrators safely removed from DC –Bush, at a Florida elementary school, is strategically NOWHERE NEAR a national landmark that morning. John Ashcroft has stopped flying on commercial airliners and is in the wilds of Missouri, via private jet, fishing. Cheney is at an "undisclosed location" (his bunker, probably). Jeb Bush, from September 7, has the Florida National Guard on standby. A collection of top CEOs of companies based at the WTC are attending a charity event at Offutt Air Base in Omaha at 8:00 AM on 9/11 (rather odd time, doncha think?) –the same base to which Bush flees later in the same day. Rumsfeld is at the Pentagon –but in the wedge FURTHEST from what will be the point of impact.
So, while the Bush administration and its pals were maneuvering into the safest possible positions, the folks at the Pentagon (and the workers and "expendable" CEOs at the WTC, of course) were left to their fate, no warning given to them at all. Given the above info on the administration's awareness of the threat to the Pentagon, it seems reasonable to expect that the MINUTE the news was heard about the WTC being hit that the Pentagon should have been evacuated IMMEDIATELY as a precaution until further notice. At the very least, after the SECOND TOWER was hit! At that point, the multiple-strike scenario should have been so hideously obvious. Yet the workers were left at their posts like sitting ducks. Was this incompetence, intent to kill, or was it something else?
Let's try applying a different hypothesis and see how the pieces fit. HYPOTHESIS: That person or persons unknown in the Bush administration were involved in planning the attack on the Pentagon. Let's examine the likely objectives of the Perpetrator(s) and their objectives according to this hypothesis compared to actual events.
A. Minimize loss of life while creating a terrorist event of frightening proportions
ACTUAL EVENTS: 1. Published reports following 9/11 say the number of passengers on all four hijacked flights was remarkably light –under half capacity. There were just 64 people on Flight 77. (Possible modus operandi: One writer has theorized that a computer hacker could have manipulated the bookings for these flights in such a way that they would appear to have been full after a reasonable number of people and thus no more passengers could be accepted.)
2. The plane struck the almost empty, but newly reinforced, fire resistant wedge. In fact, the plane underwent an elaborate maneuver to be able to line its trajectory up with Wedge One –not only that, but to strike the newly reinforced, collapse-resistant WALL in wedge one. A suicide pilot would likely have made a beeline for the building and done a nosedive into the top, which would have caused more damage.
3. No one in the Pentagon had been put on alert –from the time of the Bush's receipt of the August 6 memo to the morning of 9/11, when, for over 40 minutes, it was known that a hijacked plane-turned-bomb was in the air.
CONCLUSION: In their own sick way, the perpetrators tried to keep the loss of life minimized. They kept the number of passengers on the planes to a minimum, then made sure the plane would hit Wedge One, a well-reinforced fire-resistant area where few people would be that day. In addition, they did not issue alerts because they assumed emergency evacuation might place workers in greater danger– many may actually have sought shelter, ironically, in the newly reinforced Wedge. (In an interesting side note, it has been pointed out by some observers that the planes that hit the WTC seemed to aim for the top 1/4 of the towers, as if to avoid destroying the towers and, again, in a bizarre, perverted way, to minimize loss of life).
B. Eliminate any trace of the plane –a challenge because of the special mesh in the new wall designed to capture any debris.
ACTUAL EVENTS: 1. Flight 77 was a Boeing 757, an aircraft that is about 60 feet long, with a wingspan of 125 feet. Yet, it appears to have left essentially not a trace of material inside the building. Brigadier General Arthur F. Diehl III, Air Force, gave this first hand account of the crash site: "No one could believe the catastrophic damage –it was horrible. A whole wedge had collapsed; the aircraft had penetrated about three of the five rings of the building. There wasn't a single piece of the jet to be seen anywhere".
2. Several accounts and filmed shots of the event suggest an explosion OUTSIDE the wedge. Construction foreman Joe Harrington, standing in parking lot near the impact point said: "It seemed like it made impact just before the wedge. It was like a Hollywood movie or something."
3. Although there was seismic activity associated with the WTC event and Flight 93, both of which involved direct impacts with a solid object, no significant seismic activity was recorded for the Pentagon explosion.
CONCLUSION: The plane exploded and was essentially vaporized the split second before actual impact with the wall. What actually struck and penetrated the Wedge was not the solid body of the plane but a fireball from the explosion –moving forward with the combined momentum of the moving plane and the explosion. Because the actual explosion occurred in the air and the destruction in the building was due to the fireball and to implosive forces and not a solid-solid impact, there was no seismic activity.
C. You do not want this airplane intercepted or shot down, because your plot would be revealed if too much evidence becomes accessible (even in the form of plane fragments).
ACTUAL EVENTS: 1. The transponder in this plane was turned off –a move seen by investigators as a highly sophisticated action on the part of the hijackers. This renders the plane untraceable by ground control. (I believe there was another reason for this –see below).
2. Even though it was known by about 08:55 that Flight 77 had been hijacked and that the Pentagon could be a target, no defensive moves were made to protect the Pentagon. F-16s were finally scrambled into the air, but too late. These planes, by the way, were scrambled out of Langley Airforce base. While Langley is about 130 miles southwest of the Pentagon, Bolling AFB just across the Potomac from the Pentagon, is at most 5 miles southeast while Andrews is 10 miles. The Langley F-16 left the ground two minutes before the Pentagon was hit. In any case, I find it extremely hard to believe that the most important military command structure in the US is not defended by surface to air missiles! I mean, we are supposed to believe that there are antiaircraft weapons atop the White House but NOT deployed anywhere near the Pentagon? Give us a break!
D. You want to make absolutely sure that this is a precision hit –nothing left to chance.
ACTUAL EVENTS: 1. Eyewitness observers say that Flight 77 performed a 180-degree "G" turn before diving for the center of the long wall of Wedge One. The plane was estimated to be rocketing at an estimated speed of 400 mph. Several experienced pilots have claimed that the final maneuver of the 757 could not have been performed by a human pilot because of the tremendous G-forces that would have been exerted, rending even the simplest movements exceedingly difficult (picture your arms each suddenly weighing about 100 pounds and each finger about 10).
2. Eyewitnesses and the evidence of a security camera show a fiery explosion OUTSIDE the wall.
3. The transponder was OFF.
CONCLUSION: The plane was remotely controlled by a command transmitter system at least in the final minutes. There was an explosive device on board, which was detonated immediately before impact, probably remotely controlled as well. The timing, trajectory, etc, may have been generated by a software program of some sort that could work this out to the millisecond. The plane's own transponder would have had to have been turned off so that it's operation would not interfere with a second transponder placed aboard by the perpetrators –a transponder designed to pick up the signal of a command system transmitter operated somewhere in the area. Or, of course, the plane's own transponder was not actually off –it was just changed to a new setting. In any case, turning the transponder off would not have helped the hijackers to hide from the battery of sophisticated radars encircling DC, so this motivation (hiding from radars) does not make any sense. Here is a description of an advanced, "fully mobile" CTS built Systems Planning Corp, the CEO of whih is Bush's undersecretary of defense and long time Texas pal Dov Zakheim.
More Disturbing 9/11 facts
While the workers in the Pentagon who were to die on 9/11 were putting in their last week, serving their country at the nation's military nerve center, one of the co-perpetrators of WTC was walking the same halls, escorted as the special guest of the Bush administration.
September 4: Lt. General Mahmoud Ahmad, former director of the ISI (the Pakistani version of the CIA), arrives in DC In the days leading up to 9/11. Ahmad spent time in the State Department, at CIA headquarters, and at the Pentagon. Not long before arriving in D.C., Ahmad had overseen the wiring of $100,000 to Mohammad Atta, one of the hijackers aboard one of the planes striking the WTC. This revelation was made in October, after 9/11 by Indian intelligence sources and reported in the Times of India. The news was not reported by US officials or American journalists.
What does India know?
September 9: While Ahmad was in DC, Commander Ahmad Shah Masood, leader of the Afghan Northern Alliance, was assassinated by persons connected to the ISI. The 47-year old Masood was a wildly popular, charismatic leader known to Afghans as the "Lion of Panjsher." His biggest goal: the true freedom and independence of Afghans. Fiercely independent and anti-interventionist, he would most certainly have opposed the Bush administration's war plans and would not have played ball with any oil pipeline scheme. The Cold War Clan (as I call the Bushes, Kissinger, Rumsfeld and the rest of the power-hungry old fossils in charge) have never had a use for charismatic leaders –look what happened to Allende...or Kennedy, for that matter.
From all of the accumulated evidence, there is little doubt in my mind that Indian intelligence has the goods on the Bush administration. It was Indian intelligence that "discovered" the links between ISI's Mahmoud Ahmad and the WTC attacks. We suspect this connection was, of course, already known to the Bush administration, which, for all anyone knows, supplied the $100,000. But, according to several sources, Indian intelligence knows far more than this. One Dehli government source told a reporter with Agence France Press last October: "The evidence we have supplied to the US [re: the ISI-WTC connection] is of a much wider range and depth than just one piece of paper linking a rogue general to some misplaced act of terrorism." So, if India is the potential source of Bush's downfall, then what better way to silence India than to threaten her, via our now totally dependent "ally" Pakistan (complete with its fraudulently elected president), with nuclear annihilation? Alternatively, is this latest "global world crisis" merely yet another Bush-engineered ploy designed to divert attention away from the real danger –THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION? By inducing Musharraf to trump up a "confrontation" with India and convincing the world that nuclear war may be impending, Rumsfeld and Bush can appear to "ride" to the rescue...it also affords them a slick way to get US troops out of the area. In short, whatever this latest scenario is, you can be sure it isn't what it appears to be. Like everything else about this administration.
FINAL TIMELINE: The Events, Planes and Players of September 11. Putting It All Together
Psychologists say during the Vietnam war, soldiers were more prone to PTSD than their WWII counterparts in large part because of the way post-action reentry was handled. Vietnam vets were shuffled from the front right back to the states -usually alone, and expected to jump right into life, but often in an atmosphere of tension where they were viewed with suspicion and contempt. There was no time for real healing. The nation was in turmoil; home was not a peaceful place.
I believe that since 9/11, Americans have been suffering from a case of collective PTSD. After 9/11, Bush immediately seized on America's fears - instead of helping the nation to heal, to be TRULY united, he whipped up anger, fanned paranoia, created a much deeper divide while forcing people to feel they must give lip service to the new "brand" of patriotism. We were wounded casualties with nowhere to go to lick our wounds, no atmosphere of hope and security to help soothe our minds and spirits. Instead, we were under constant attack - just like Vietnam vets on those endless missions in the jungle that never seemed to gain any real ground. There was one vague threat after the other; one basic right after the other stripped away leaving us to feel chronically uneasy.
Then there was the war against Afghanistan. This frenzy of revenge forced us to mobilize and to push aside any misgivings or (for some of us), to suffer sleepless nights worrying about the consequences of a war we felt was wrong. The weeks, then months, following 9/11 were, in short, a period of relentless stress for all Americans. As a result, many people now say they can't really remember what the specific events were surrounding 9/11 -some can't even remember seeing the time line, though timelines were run in nearly every newspaper and magazine right after the tragedy.
I think this stress-amnesia syndrome may very well be why George Bush has had such a cakewalk until recently. He took advantage of an entire nation that was numbed by shock and grief and unable to defend itself as it might otherwise have done. In short, we couldn't see the sleight of hand through the blur of tears.
Now we are coming to, shaking off the fog that has confused us and seeing the facts clearly -for the first time, really, it seems.
Here, presented as clearly as possible for Americans ready to look with cooler heads and drier eyes are the events, players and planes of 9/11.
Who Was Responsible for What on the Day of September 11, 2001?
The responsibility for protecting America's skies from terrorist attack falls upon the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD, also simply called the "Space Command."). Established in 1958, NORAD is a US-Canadian command that provides warning of missile and air attack against both member nations, according to the organization's Web site. In the Eastern US, NORAD has at its disposal, several Air Force Bases from which F-16s and F-15s can be scrambled at a moment's notice. Among these bases are Otis AFB in Cape Cod, Mass, Griffis AFB in Rome, NY, Andrews AFB just outside DC, and Langley AFB in Eastern Virginia. NORAD's mission statement on its website states:
"The Northeast Air Defense Air Sector's area of responsibility covers more than one-half million square miles of airspace including that over New York City; Washington, D.C.; Chicago and other major metropolitan areas."
THE CHAIN OF COMMAND DURING A TERRORIST ATTACK:
A: The FAA reports hijackings and other threats to NORAD's First Air Force Commander, who is based in Tyndall, FLA. On Sept. 11, this was Gen. Larry K. Arnold.
B: The First Air Force Commander then relays this info to The Commander in Chief (CINC) of NORAD. On 9/11, this was Gen. Ralph "Ed" Eberhardt
C: In a grave situation where force seems warranted, the CINC reports to the Commander in Chief......George Bush. Also notified are Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and acting Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Richard B. Myers
The fact that NORAD was well aware that a major attack was a possibility is made obvious by the command's planning, well before Sept. 11, for a major exercise, slated for June 4, 2002. This is from a NORAD announcement:
"On June 4, 2002, the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) will sponsor a multi-agency, bi-national exercise, Amalgam Virgo 02, involving an airborne terrorism scenario over the United States and Canada. The exercise, which was planned prior to the events of Sept. 11, is designed to allow many US and Canadian agencies to test, improve and validate their coordination and operational procedures."
Regardless of what warnings Bush may have received, NORAD was well aware of the threat to American skies.
The Planes and Players of 9/11
THE PLANES
F-16: (Fighting Falcon) From USAF Fact Sheet: "The F-16 Fighting Falcon is a compact, multi-role fighter aircraft. It is highly maneuverable and has proven itself in air-to-air combat and air-to-surface attack his highly maneuverable aircraft." The craft can go from zero to 500 mph in about 2 minutes. It's top speed is about 1,500 mph, while its typical cruising speed is nearly 600 mph. In other words, if a plane had been scrambled from Andrews, just 10 miles away as the crow (or F-16) flies, it would have been able to engage Flight 77 within 15 minutes from the time the call came in. To decide to scramble a plane out of Langley seems to indicate just one thing: help was intentionally delayed by 10 minutes.
F-15 (Eagle): (from Air Force Fact Sheet): "The F-15 Eagle is an all- weather, extremely maneuverable, tactical fighter designed to permit the Air Force to gain and maintain air superiority in aerial combat." This plane can reach a maximum astounding speed of 1,875 mph.
The time required from the notification to scramble to one of these planes being airborne and at top speed is about 12-15 minutes.
THE PLAYERS
The Bush administration had in place, on Sept. 11 in the top five posts relevant to the terrorist attack, men who totally support the administration's vision for a "Star Wars" style military, for the militarization of space and the merging of the military with domestic law enforcement agencies into one big "Homeland Security" entity. The five top players were: Larry K. Arnold, First Air Force Commander of NORAD, Ralph "Ed" Eberhardt, Commander-in-Chief of NORAD, Richard B. Myers, Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense, and George W. Bush.
George W. Bush: Guess we don't need to add much here, except to say that Bush did not make it plain to the public at any time since 9/11 that HE was the person that, according to the established chain of command, called the final shots on 9/11.
Donald Rumsfeld: Of course, we know all about Mr. Rumsfeld's lust for power. He is a good pal of Ralph Eberhardt and, in fact, in May of 2001, said Eberhardt was his first choice for chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Rumsfeld is one of the architects of the military-police complex.
Larry K. Arnold: Has, since 9/11, helped in the push toward the militarization of America. On February 20, 2002, gave a talk on "Homeland Defense" at the SpaceComm 2002 conference in Colorado that had as its topic: "Shaping Information Operations and Space Leadership" i.e. -the extension of the military not just into the "Homeland," but into space.
Ralph "Ed" Eberhardt: Eberhardt is a fanatical supporter of the Missile defense scheme and the militarization of space. In fact, in May, 2001, Eberhardt said in a speech that he believed control of space was America's "destiny"! Eberhardt is also an enthusiastic supporter of the merging of law enforcement and the military and making technology such as military spy satellites available to police.
Richard B. Myers: Less than three weeks after Bush received the now- famous memo of August 6, Myers was named by Bush to the top post in the US military: Chairman of Joints Chief of Staff. This is what a non-American (and thus less spun) news source (Pravda) had to say about that appointment: "Gen. Myers was chosen for the job precisely because his views are shared by both of his bosses, President George W. Bush and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. He is considered an active advocate of deploying the National Missile Defense program. He told a news conference that he would be working on the materialization of the idea "relentlessly" and "with his sleeves rolled up." Right after 9/11, Myers was caught in a lie when he claimed that no orders were given re: launching aircraft until AFTER the Pentagon was hit, "We did scramble fighter aircraft, AWACs, radar aircraft and tanker aircraft to begin to establish orbits in case other aircraft showed up in the FAA system that were hijacked. That order, to the best of my knowledge, was after the Pentagon was struck." However, Marine Corps Maj. Mike Snyder of NORAD told a Boston Globe reporter that the command had been told about the hijacking 10 minutes before the first plane hit the first World Trade Center tower. Snyder said the fighters remained on the ground until after the Pentagon was hit, even though "fighters routinely intercept aircraft."
TIMELINE
7:59: American airlines flight 11, a Boeing 767 takes off from Logan Airport in Boston with 92 people, headed for Los Angeles.
8:01: United Airline Flight 93, a Boeing 757, bound for San Francisco, is delayed for 40 minutes on run way, with 45 people on Board.
8:13: Boston Ground control loses contact with Flight 11 First red flag for Flight 11.
8:14: United Flight 175, a Boeing 767, takes off from Logan for Los Angeles with 65 passengers.
8:17: American Airlines Flight 77 (Boeing 757) leaves Dulles in D.C. headed for Los Angeles with 64 passengers.
8:20: Flight 11 reaches the Hudson River in NY and stops transmitting its IFF signal. Second Red flag for flight 11. Had Bush put the airlines on high alert after August 6 when he received the warning, there is no doubt at all that these warnings would have evoked at very different response...if, indeed, the hijackers had even gotten that far (under a high alert, they very well may have been apprehended at the airports).
8:24: Hijackers on Flight 11 accidentally broadcasts warning to the passengers over its radio: "Everything will be OK. If you try to make any moves, you'll endanger yourself and the airplane. Just stay quiet." Third Red Flag for flight 11.
8:25: Boston air traffic controllers notify other air traffic control centers of hijacking. Why wasn't NORAD (North American Aerospace Defense Command) notified at this time?
8:27: Flight 11 heads south toward Manhattan; flight attendant Betty Ong calls American Airlines reservations and reports that two flight attendants had been stabbed and a passenger had had his throat slashed. She identifies the seat numbers of the hijackers. Fourth red flag for flight 11 - this one a BLOODY RED and wildly waving, yet it will be about 10 minutes AFTER THIS before NORAD is notified.
8:33: Last transmission from Flight 11: Hijacker is heard telling passengers not to move.
8:38: Boston Air Traffic control notifies NORAD that Flight 11 has been hijacked.
8:42: Flight 175 is hijacked. It begins to make a U-turn over New Jersey, reading for its northward assault on Manhattan.
8:42: Flight 93 takes off from Newark International Airport, headed for San Francisco.
8:43: FAA notifies NORAD that Flight 175 has been hijacked.
8:44: Two F-15 eagles are ordered scrambled out of Otis Air National Guard Base in Cape Cod. If NORAD had been notified (or was it??) at 8:27, when the plane was obviously hijacked and heading to NYC, an F-16 from Otis or Griffis would have been about 10 minutes from Manhattan at this point. In addition, since the WTC was high on the list of known targets, and since some of the warnings to Bush indicated airplanes could be used as "bombs," the WTC should have been given an alert and the building evacuated. If evacuation had started at 8:30, there would have been no one in the upper floors when the first plane hit and the loss of life would have been minimized.
8:45: Flight 11 strikes WTC's north tower at the 80th floor.
8:46: Flight 175 stops transmitting beacon signal.
8:52: Two F-15 eagles take off from Otis. If F-15s had been scrambled from Otis at 8:27, they would now be in a position to engage the hijacked flight 175 headed for the WTC.
8:56: Flight 77's transponder is cut. If F-15s had been scrambled from Otis at 8:27, they would now be in a position to engage the hijacked flight 175 headed for the WTC.
9:00: United Airlines learns that Flight 93 flying over western PA may be in process of being hijacked.
9:00: Flight 77 makes U turn and heads back for Washington. This is when the FAA should have notified NORAD, and NORAD should have ordered F-16s into the air FROM ANDREWS. If they had, by 9:15, F-16s may have been in a position to deflect Flight 77 AWAY from DC altogether.
9:02: Flight 175 strikes the WTC at the 60th floor.
9:16: FAA informs NORAD that Flight 93 may have been hijacked.
9:17: Federal Aviation Administration closes all airports.
9:24: FAA notifies NORAD that Flight 77 is hijacked.
9:24: NORAD orders three F-16s scrambled from Langley. The timing here is absolutely diabolical. It is EXACTLY not enough time for either a jet from Langley, which will be 10 minutes too late, or one from Andrews, which would have had just about 3 minutes between reaching the airspace over D.C. and dealing with the incoming Boeing 757. That Langley was chosen indicates a FEAR that in that 3 minutes a good pilot from Andrews just might have succeeded in aborting the disaster, despite the split second time frame.
9:25: Air traffic controllers notify Secret Service as Flight 77 makes dramatic maneuver just south of the Pentagon.
9:29: Bush, at Booker Elementary school says an "apparent terrorist attack" under way. No orders are give to evacuate any buildings in D.C., or to even urge residents and workers to seek shelter.
9: 40: Three F-16 fighting falcons take off from Langley. They reach Washington by 9:55, moving at least 550 mph. - the trip takes 14 minutes. The time from Andrews to D.C.: under 2 minutes. The time from Bolling: almost instantaneous Not only is this a tragedy for the victims of the Pentagon, it was unspeakably cruel to those pilots, who, thanks to their delayed orders, have to live with the crushing feeling of having been 15 minutes too late. Here is a description of Andrews from its website: "Training for air combat and operational airlift for national defense is the 113th's primary mission. However, as part of its dual mission, the 113th provides capable and ready response forces for the District of Columbia in the event of a natural disaster or civil emergency." Yet Bush chooses Langley.
9:43: Plane crashes into Pentagon - a full 40 minutes after being reported hijacked and the likelihood of its being used as a weapon of mass destruction obvious. You will notice that now, everything seems to start happening - it seems as if everything were put on hold until the Pentagon was struck.
9:45: White House Evacuates.
9:57: Bush leaves Florida.
10:05: South Tower of World Trade Center collapses.
10:08: Armed agents deployed around White House.
10:10: Penn plane crashes, part of Pentagon collapses.
10:13-10:45: federal buildings in D.C. evacuated.
10:28: WTC north tower collapses.
10:46: Colin Powell heads for D.C. from Latin America. Again, notice that Powell is in Latin America, Bush is in Florida, Ashcroft in Missouri, and Rumsfeld in the part of the Pentagon most remote from the impact point.
1:04: Bush speaks from Barksdale Air Force Base in Louisiana.
1:27: State of emergency declared in D.C.
1:44: warships from VA are deployed to protect coastline.
2:00: Bush at Offutt AFB in Omaha NE. - this is not revealed until almost 4:00 pm. Also at Offutt that day from 8:00 am on, are several CEOs -at a "charity event" that just happens to be held at a SECURE AIR FORCE BASE? And it just happens that several of the CEOs WOULD HAVE BEEN at the WTC had they not been at Offutt.
6:54: Bush back in White House.
8:30: Bush addresses nation.
ADDITIONAL TIMELINE NOTES
Oct. 1: Richard B. Myers Officially Becomes the Number One Man in the US Military.
April 2002: Ralph Eberhardt is proposed as "supreme commander" of Northcom, the mega-military entity pushed for by the Bush Administration.
Putting It All Together:
Putting It All Together With the hotlines that exist between these offices, the time that it would take from the moment the FAA put in its call to Arnold for Bush to respond (allowing 2 minutes tops per communication) would have been roughly 6 minutes, plus or minus as minute or two. The FAA called NORAD at 8:38 am about the first hijacking. It was 6 minutes later - right within the above timing estimates made above -that two F-15s were ordered - by Bush - to be scrambled from Otis AFB. The evidence clearly shows that Bush had decided AHEAD OF TIME how to handle Flight 77. The FAA call to NORAD that Flight 77 had been hijacked was made at 9:24 -it was at 9:24 that the order to scramble planes from LANGLEY was given.
This means this move had already been authorized by BUSH. How could he have pre-authorized such a response unless he had 1) been told about the plane some minutes before when it was obvious to NORAD's radar system that the plane was headed for DC (NORAD did not require an active transponder on Flight 77 to track the plane), or 2) Bush knew before 9/11 that a plane would be hitting the Pentagon at around 9:45 am. Bush also had the authority, at all times after 8:44 (when he obviously gave his first orders re: Otis) to call for an evacuation of the WTC and, at the LATEST, by 9:24 to order federal buildings and landmarks in D.C. to be evacuated. Had he made these orders, hundreds of lives would have been saved. Even if the order to evacuate the second tower of the WTC had been made by 8:50, that precious 12 minutes would have made all the difference to hundreds of WTC workers. The Pentagon workers would have had nearly 15 minutes to evacuate if a call had come in by even 9:30.
Because he had seen the warnings throughout the summer, and the last, strongest one on August 6, he should have been completely prepared for every scenario he had been briefed on and read to take decisive, urgent action to save lives. But he didn't. Instead, as Pentagon workers sat at their desks or moved down the halls, oblivious to the impending danger, at 9:29, Bush had just finished reading the Hungry, Hungry Caterpillar and was getting ready to announce that an "apparent" terrorist attack was underway. Apparent?
But let's take a look for a moment at the bigger picture: From the first, the plan of the Bush administration has been to extend military power into space while creating a domestic police state in the name of "Homeland Security. In this scheme, the line between military and police would be blurred. Elements of the CIA, which has traditionally worked more with the military, have now been folded into the FBI, while yet more restrictions on the power of the agencies over ordinary citizens have been removed. For a grim picture of where Bush et al were trying to take America as of August, 2001, see "The Next Battlefield," by Jack Hitt. Here's an excerpt fromthat article:
"The political attention devoted to national missile defense, which is an updated version of President Reagan's Strategic Defensive Initiative, has obscured its larger purpose. According to the Strategic Master Plan, N.M.D. is but one part of a triad of technologies -along with improved space surveillance and anti-satellite offensive weaponry- that, the Air Force hopes, will lead to total "space control." George Friedman, an intelligence consultant and the author of "The Future of War," calls the national missile defense plan a "Trojan horse" for the real issue: the coming weaponization of space. The cost of expanding our space assets is only now beginning to show itself. Many of the specific systems for space have had their budgets increased in President (G.W.) Bush's first defense-spending."
The three major proponents of this "new military": Richard B. Myers, Ralph Eberhardt, and Donald Rumsfeld.
However, in the summer of 2001, the American public's support for the Bush administration's schemes, in general, was weak and waning fast. In August, 2001 Bush's approval rating had slumped to under 50%. However, within just a few weeks of 9/11, with virtually no opposition from Congress, Myers had been confirmed as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. By Nov. 2001, Homeland Security had been established, and the Patriot Act been passed. By April 2002 - Rumsfeld, Myers and Eberhardt had announced the formation of NORTHCOM, the mega military complex that consolidated their power Here's an excerpt from an April 18, 2002 article in the Boston Globe:
"Air Force General Richard B. Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who was responsible for drafting the new command plan -and who calls the establishment of the new command the most significant structural change in his 37 years in uniform- said yesterday that the Northern Command (NORTHCOM) 'takes the various homeland security missions being performed by various combatant commanders and some agencies and puts them under one commander [to] bring unity and focus to the mission.' Air Force General Ralph E. Eberhardt is slated to head the new command, which will also include oversight of NORAD and the territorial defense missions of the JFCOM."
In short, 9/11 was used as a springboard for the pre-9/11 Bush scheme. The steps taken in the name of Homeland security that were done in the name of 9/11 were actually already planned well before that event. It was the event that made it possible to implement them. If you want to get an idea of where this merger between the military and law enforcement is headed, how about this statement made by Ralph Eberhardt at the Space Symposium held in Colorado Springs in early 2002: "Over time we can leverage our space assets to support homeland security and law enforcement. " So, for example, does this mean the use of military satellites to spy on citizens?
Now ponder this point: Since Bush took office, he has richly rewarded every single person who helped him substantially, usually with top posts or the legislation they wanted. After 9/11, we see Myers and Eberhardt moving up into top posts of incredible power. What were they being rewarded for?
Now, back to 9/11. The simple fact is, if Bush had not ignored the August 6 (and earlier) warnings of terrorist strikes, and had instead acted decisively and responsibly, the scenario that unfolded on 9/11 would have been very different. First of all, on high alert, the airports may have screened passengers more carefully - some or all of the hijackers may have failed to get aboard their target aircraft. Secondly, if they had succeeded in boarding the craft, the FAA would have been in a state of readiness for a serious event. At 8:25 AM, Boston FAA would have immediately called NORAD, who would have been in readiness, perhaps even with preauthorized orders from Bush. The WTC would have been on high alert from Aug 6 on and an evacuation could have been undertaken as early as 8:30 - time enough to save countless lives.
But instead, Bush did not warn the public. When called by NORAD, he failed to respond in a way designed to save lives. In short, the trail of smoke from the smoking gun leads ultimately...and unavoidably, back to G. W. Bush.

Copyright © 2002 by the News Insider and Cheryl Seal. Republished with the permission of the Author.