Post by Steve Gardner on Nov 26, 2007 14:59:50 GMT
This, the first of a five part series, originally appeared here - THE ALL-SEEING i
At 08:46 EDT on September 11th 2001, the world changed forever. American Airlines Flight 11 was reported to have flown into WTC-1; America was under attack.
In the immediate aftermath, few people had any qualms about hunting down the alleged mastermind, Osama bin Laden. But there were some doubters. Over the years, their numbers have swollen. According to a Zogby International poll, dated August 30th 2004, 49.3% of New York residents believe that the US government ‘knew in advance that attacks were planned on or around September 11, 2001, and that they consciously failed to act.’ Another Zogby International poll, dated 24th May 2006, revealed that 42% of Americans ‘...believe that the US government and its 9/11 Commission concealed or refused to investigate critical evidence that contradicts their official explanation of the September 11th attacks, saying there has been a cover-up.’ Type “9/11 conspiracy” into a search engine today and you’ll find some 2,500,000 results, many of them arguing that, not only did the US government know of the attacks in advance, but that some elements actually played an instrumental part in planning and executing them.
The purpose of this, the first in a series of articles, is to try to understand what has led some to think the unthinkable. This is by no means an exhaustive study, nor is it intended to be conclusive. Readers are encouraged to follow the links provided and draw their own conclusions.
“Naturally the common people don't want war: Neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.” - Herman Goering.
In November 1997, the John F Kennedy Assassination Records Review Board declassified a quantity of previously secret military records. Among them one that has become known as the ‘Northwoods Document’. This document set out a plan, codenamed Operation Northwoods, which was designed to persuade both the American public and the international community to support US military action against Cuba.
This is a description of one of the plan’s most disturbing ‘projects’.
Other ‘projects’ or ‘incidents’ that were considered included:
The plan was approved and signed off on by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Lyman Louis Lemnitzer, in March 1962. It was, however, subsequently rejected, though it is not known for certain by whom. President Kennedy’s then Defense Secretary, Robert McNamara, has always claimed not to have known of the plan’s existence, which suggests that President Kennedy himself rejected the plan.
One interesting point of note is that, in an interview with the Baltimore Sun (archived at Yorkshire Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament) back in April 2001, Robert McNamara said: “I never heard of it. I can’t believe the chiefs were talking about or engaged in what I would call CIA-type operations.” His characterisation of Operation Northwoods as a ‘CIA-type’ operation is significant. It hints at what was considered typical and attaches a sense of legitimacy to the planners’ purpose.
As disturbing as the Northwoods Document is, ‘false flag’ operations are not uncommon. It is widely believed, for example, that the Reichstag Fire of 1933, which occurred in Germany just a few days before the 5th March elections, was a self-inflicted wound. Similarly, the 1954 Lavon Affair (or Operation Suzannah) and the Gleiwitz Incident of August 1939 are both believed to have been false flag attacks. Others are not so much single events as campaigns, as was the case with the Strategy of Tension (backed by a NATO stay-behind operation known as Operation Gladio) as well as the recent (unsubstantiated) claims made by the murdered Russian spy, Alexander Litvinenko, that the Russian government had committed acts of domestic terrorism and blamed them on the Chechnyans.
“By the time you become the leader of a country, someone else makes all the decisions. You may find you can get away with Virtual Presidents, Virtual Prime Ministers, and Virtual Everything.” - Bill Clinton
The Project for the New American Century (PNAC) was established in 1997. It describes itself as a non-profit, educational organisation. Its stated aim is to promote American global leadership. More specifically, it called for the ‘need to increase defense spending significantly’. This is necessary to both, ‘challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values’, and ‘accept responsibility for America’s unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles.’
Among it members, past and present, are Jeb Bush, thingy Cheney, Aaron Friedberg, Zalmay Khalilzad, Richard Perle, Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz.
Since its inception, PNAC has published various books, policy documents and letters. Perhaps the best known is a report entitled ‘Rebuilding America's Defenses’ (RAD), dated September 2000. This document appears to demonstrate that several of those who subsequently went on to become key policy-shapers within President Bush’s administration were, in advance of the 2000 election, drawing up plans to take military control of the Gulf region. According to PNAC, this American hegemony in the Middle East (or pax Americana) would serve, among other things, to protect ‘enduring American interests in the region.’
However, PNAC was acutely aware that the strategic ‘transformation’ of the U.S. military required to ‘fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars’ would take time and would necessitate a huge increase in defence spending. They estimated this additional amount to be between $15 billion to $20 billion per annum. They articulated both the problem and solution most succinctly in Chapter V of RAD, entitled ‘Creating Tomorrow’s Dominant Force’, by suggesting that ‘the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event — like a new Pearl Harbor.’
On the face of it, that seems benign enough, if perhaps a little insensitive. But for those familiar with the ‘McCollum Memo’, this particular evocation of the horrors associated with Pearl Harbor is a cause for some alarm.
“In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way.” - Franklin D. Roosevelt
The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor precipitated America’s immediate entry into World War II. Up until that point, public opinion towards entering the war had been divided. Pearl Harbor closed those divisions and caused Americans to unite. But did the attack really come as a surprise?
On October 7 1940, Lt. Com. Arthur McCollum, of the Office of Naval Intelligence, submitted a list of recommendations concerning America’s strategy in the Pacific to Navy Captains Walter Anderson and Dudley Knox, two of President Roosevelt’s most trusted military advisers. The memo outlined an eight-point plan apparently aimed at provoking Japan into attacking the United States. Throughout 1941, President Roosevelt implemented all eight recommendations and, on December 7th, Japan attacked.
Here is an extract from that memo (emphasis mine).
If, as seems possible, President Roosevelt implemented these recommendations in order to ‘engineer’ the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, what was PNAC really thinking when it raised the possibility of a ‘catastrophic and catalyzing event — like a new Pearl Harbor’ as a precursor to a pax Americana?
You can read more about the attack on Pearl Harbor both in an interview with Robert Stinnet, and in his book, ‘Day of Deceit’. There is also a great deal of information about the extent of President Roosevelt's alleged foreknowledge in an article entitled Pearl Harbor: Mother of all Conspiracies.
~~~~~
At 08:46 EDT on September 11th 2001, the world changed forever. American Airlines Flight 11 was reported to have flown into WTC-1; America was under attack.
In the immediate aftermath, few people had any qualms about hunting down the alleged mastermind, Osama bin Laden. But there were some doubters. Over the years, their numbers have swollen. According to a Zogby International poll, dated August 30th 2004, 49.3% of New York residents believe that the US government ‘knew in advance that attacks were planned on or around September 11, 2001, and that they consciously failed to act.’ Another Zogby International poll, dated 24th May 2006, revealed that 42% of Americans ‘...believe that the US government and its 9/11 Commission concealed or refused to investigate critical evidence that contradicts their official explanation of the September 11th attacks, saying there has been a cover-up.’ Type “9/11 conspiracy” into a search engine today and you’ll find some 2,500,000 results, many of them arguing that, not only did the US government know of the attacks in advance, but that some elements actually played an instrumental part in planning and executing them.
The purpose of this, the first in a series of articles, is to try to understand what has led some to think the unthinkable. This is by no means an exhaustive study, nor is it intended to be conclusive. Readers are encouraged to follow the links provided and draw their own conclusions.
~~~~~
“Naturally the common people don't want war: Neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.” - Herman Goering.
In November 1997, the John F Kennedy Assassination Records Review Board declassified a quantity of previously secret military records. Among them one that has become known as the ‘Northwoods Document’. This document set out a plan, codenamed Operation Northwoods, which was designed to persuade both the American public and the international community to support US military action against Cuba.
This plan, incorporating projects selected from the attached suggestions, or from other sources, should be developed to focus all efforts on a specific ultimate objective which would provide adequate justification for US military intervention. Such a plan would enable a logical build up of incidents to be combined with other seemingly unrelated events to camouflage the ultimate objective and create the necessary impression of Cuban rashness and irresponsibility on a large scale, directed at other countries as well as the United States. This plan would also properly integrate and time phase the courses of action to be pursued. The desired resultant from the execution of the plan would be to place the United States in the apparent position of suffering defensible grievances from a rash and irresponsible government of Cuba and to develop an international image of a Cuban threat to peace in the Western hemisphere.
This is a description of one of the plan’s most disturbing ‘projects’.
It is possible to create an incident which will demonstrate convincingly that a Cuban aircraft has attacked and shot down a chartered civilian aircraft enroute from the United States to Jamaica, Guatemala, Panama or Venezuela. The destination would be chosen only to cause the flight plan route to cross Cuba. The passengers could be a group of college students off on a holiday or any group of persons with a common interest to support chartering a non-scheduled flight.
a. An aircraft at Elgin AFB would be painted and numbered as an exact duplicate for a civil registered aircraft belonging to a CIA proprietary organization in the Miami area. At a designated time the duplicate would be substituted for the actual civilian aircraft and would be loaded with the selected passengers, all boarded under carefully prepared aliases. The actual registered aircraft would be converted to a drone.
b. Take off times of the drone and the scheduled aircraft will be scheduled to allow a rendezvous south of Florida. From the rendezvous point the passenger aircraft will descend to minimum altitude and go directly to an auxiliary field at Elgin AFB where arrangements will have been made to evacuate the passengers and return the aircraft to its original status. The drone craft meanwhile will continue to fly he filed flight plan. When over Cuba the drone will being transmitting to the international distress frequency a “MAY DAY” message stating he is under attack by Cuban MIG aircraft. The transmission will be interrupted by destruction of the aircraft which will be triggered by radio signal. This will allow ICAO radio stations in the Western hemisphere to tell the US what has happened to the aircraft instead of the US trying to “sell” the incident.
Other ‘projects’ or ‘incidents’ that were considered included:
A series of well coordinated incidents will be planned to take place in and around Guantanamo to give genuine appearance of being done by hostile Cuban forces.
Capture Cuban (friendly) saboteurs inside the base.
Lob mortar shells from outside the base into base; Some damage to installations.
Sabotage ships in harbour; large fires – napthalene.
We could blow up a US ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba.
We could develop a Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even Washington.
We could sink a boatload of Cubans enroute to Florida (real or simulated).
…the arrest of Cuban agents and the release of prepared documents substantiating Cuban involvement…
A “Cuban-based, Castro-supported” filibuster could be simulated against a neighboring Caribbean nation…
The plan was approved and signed off on by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Lyman Louis Lemnitzer, in March 1962. It was, however, subsequently rejected, though it is not known for certain by whom. President Kennedy’s then Defense Secretary, Robert McNamara, has always claimed not to have known of the plan’s existence, which suggests that President Kennedy himself rejected the plan.
One interesting point of note is that, in an interview with the Baltimore Sun (archived at Yorkshire Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament) back in April 2001, Robert McNamara said: “I never heard of it. I can’t believe the chiefs were talking about or engaged in what I would call CIA-type operations.” His characterisation of Operation Northwoods as a ‘CIA-type’ operation is significant. It hints at what was considered typical and attaches a sense of legitimacy to the planners’ purpose.
As disturbing as the Northwoods Document is, ‘false flag’ operations are not uncommon. It is widely believed, for example, that the Reichstag Fire of 1933, which occurred in Germany just a few days before the 5th March elections, was a self-inflicted wound. Similarly, the 1954 Lavon Affair (or Operation Suzannah) and the Gleiwitz Incident of August 1939 are both believed to have been false flag attacks. Others are not so much single events as campaigns, as was the case with the Strategy of Tension (backed by a NATO stay-behind operation known as Operation Gladio) as well as the recent (unsubstantiated) claims made by the murdered Russian spy, Alexander Litvinenko, that the Russian government had committed acts of domestic terrorism and blamed them on the Chechnyans.
“By the time you become the leader of a country, someone else makes all the decisions. You may find you can get away with Virtual Presidents, Virtual Prime Ministers, and Virtual Everything.” - Bill Clinton
The Project for the New American Century (PNAC) was established in 1997. It describes itself as a non-profit, educational organisation. Its stated aim is to promote American global leadership. More specifically, it called for the ‘need to increase defense spending significantly’. This is necessary to both, ‘challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values’, and ‘accept responsibility for America’s unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles.’
Among it members, past and present, are Jeb Bush, thingy Cheney, Aaron Friedberg, Zalmay Khalilzad, Richard Perle, Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz.
Since its inception, PNAC has published various books, policy documents and letters. Perhaps the best known is a report entitled ‘Rebuilding America's Defenses’ (RAD), dated September 2000. This document appears to demonstrate that several of those who subsequently went on to become key policy-shapers within President Bush’s administration were, in advance of the 2000 election, drawing up plans to take military control of the Gulf region. According to PNAC, this American hegemony in the Middle East (or pax Americana) would serve, among other things, to protect ‘enduring American interests in the region.’
However, PNAC was acutely aware that the strategic ‘transformation’ of the U.S. military required to ‘fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars’ would take time and would necessitate a huge increase in defence spending. They estimated this additional amount to be between $15 billion to $20 billion per annum. They articulated both the problem and solution most succinctly in Chapter V of RAD, entitled ‘Creating Tomorrow’s Dominant Force’, by suggesting that ‘the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event — like a new Pearl Harbor.’
On the face of it, that seems benign enough, if perhaps a little insensitive. But for those familiar with the ‘McCollum Memo’, this particular evocation of the horrors associated with Pearl Harbor is a cause for some alarm.
“In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way.” - Franklin D. Roosevelt
The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor precipitated America’s immediate entry into World War II. Up until that point, public opinion towards entering the war had been divided. Pearl Harbor closed those divisions and caused Americans to unite. But did the attack really come as a surprise?
On October 7 1940, Lt. Com. Arthur McCollum, of the Office of Naval Intelligence, submitted a list of recommendations concerning America’s strategy in the Pacific to Navy Captains Walter Anderson and Dudley Knox, two of President Roosevelt’s most trusted military advisers. The memo outlined an eight-point plan apparently aimed at provoking Japan into attacking the United States. Throughout 1941, President Roosevelt implemented all eight recommendations and, on December 7th, Japan attacked.
Here is an extract from that memo (emphasis mine).
9. It is not believed that in the present state of political opinion the United States government is capable of declaring war against Japan without more ado; and it is barely possible that vigorous action on our part might lead the Japanese to modify their attitude. Therefore, the following course of action is suggested:
A. Make an arrangement with Britain for the use of British bases in the Pacific, particularly Singapore.
B. Make an arrangement with Holland for the use of base facilities and acquisition of supplies in the Dutch East Indies.
C. Give all possible aid to the Chinese government of Chiang-Kai-Shek.
D. Send a division of long range heavy cruisers to the Orient, Philippines, or Singapore.
E. Send two divisions of submarines to the Orient.
F. Keep the main strength of the U.S. fleet now in the Pacific in the vicinity of the Hawaiian Islands.
G. Insist that the Dutch refuse to grant Japanese demands for undue economic concessions, particularly oil.
H. Completely embargo all U.S. trade with Japan, in collaboration with a similar embargo imposed by the British Empire.
10. If by these means Japan could be led to commit an overt act of war, so much the better. At all events we must be fully prepared to accept the threat of war.
If, as seems possible, President Roosevelt implemented these recommendations in order to ‘engineer’ the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, what was PNAC really thinking when it raised the possibility of a ‘catastrophic and catalyzing event — like a new Pearl Harbor’ as a precursor to a pax Americana?
You can read more about the attack on Pearl Harbor both in an interview with Robert Stinnet, and in his book, ‘Day of Deceit’. There is also a great deal of information about the extent of President Roosevelt's alleged foreknowledge in an article entitled Pearl Harbor: Mother of all Conspiracies.
