Obama Takes Bush’s Secrecy Games One Step Further

March 30, 2012

by Glenn Greenwald     source: Salon    Mar 30, 2012

The ACLU is suing the Obama administration under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), seeking to force disclosure of the guidelines used by Obama officials to select which human beings (both U.S. citizens and foreign nationals) will have their lives ended by the CIA’s drone attacks (“In particular,” the group explains, the FOIA request “seeks to find out when, where and against whom drone strikes can be authorized, and how the United States ensures compliance with international laws relating to extrajudicial killing”). The Obama administration has not only refused to provide any of that information, but worse, the CIA is insisting to federal courts that it cannot even confirm or deny the existence of a drone program at all without seriously damaging national security; from the CIA’s brief in response to the ACLU lawsuit:

. . .

(click on image to enlarge)

What makes this so appalling is not merely that the Obama administration demands the right to kill whomever it wants without having to account to anyone for its actions, choices or even claimed legal authorities, though that’s obviously bad enough (as I wrote when the ACLU lawsuit was commenced: “from a certain perspective, there’s really only one point worth making about all of this: if you think about it, it is warped beyond belief that the ACLU has to sue the U.S. Government in order to force it to disclose its claimed legal and factual bases for assassinating U.S. citizens without charges, trial or due process of any kind”). What makes it so much worse is how blatantly, insultingly false is its claim that it cannot confirm or deny the CIA drone program without damaging national security.

Read the rest of this entry »


95.1 FM The Bridge: The Chilean Coup of 9/11/1973, the CIA, Henry Kissinger and 9/11/01 (Part 2)

March 26, 2012

Nor Cal Truth   Mar 26, 2012

Milo is the host of Touch, a daily program from 5:00-6:00 PM Pacific on The Bridge, 95.1 FM in Guerneville. Milo has invited me (Brian Romanoff) to be a regular guest on his show to try to bring more light into the events of 9/11. I appreciate the opportunity and I hope you enjoy the show.

Today we follow-up on last week’s discussion of the events of September the 11th, 1973 in Chile, and the US backed interference with Chilean politics and society. A military coup took place in Chile on 9/11/73 and General Augusto Pinochet ruled the country for the next 17 years. Startling events took place in Chile that were known and backed by the CIA and covert operations by the Nixon administration, especially through people like Henry Kissinger. Pinochet would eventually set up DINA,  a Chilean CIA that hunted political critics throughout South America, Europe and even the US.

On September 21, 1976 a car-bomb went off in Washington DC, killing Orlando Letelier and US assistant Ronni Moffit, who were both critics of the brutal Pinochet regime. Before 9/11/01 Letelier’s assassination by DINA was considered the worst case of international terrorism on US soil. The man responsible, Michael Townley, was a CIA agent or asset along with the head of DINA, Manueal Contreras. At all points of covert activity, we can assume that Henry Kissinger was aware of what was going on via the CIA or DINA.

Remember: The attacks of 9/11/01 in the US may indeed have been completely averted, if not significantly altered had the CIA not intentionally allowed known criminals into the country without telling the FBI.

Available as a live-stream every Monday 5:00-6:00 PM Pacific at the website provided below:


95.1 FM The Bridge: The Chilean Coup of 9/11/1973, the CIA, Henry Kissinger and 9/11/01

March 19, 2012

Nor Cal Truth   Mar  19, 2012

Milo is the host of Touch, a daily program from 5:00-6:00 PM Pacific on The Bridge, 95.1 FM in Guerneville. Milo has invited me (Brian Romanoff) to be a regular guest on his show to try to bring more light into the events of 9/11. I appreciate the opportunity and I hope you enjoy the show.

Today we discuss the events of September the 11th, 1973 in Chile, and the US backed interference with Chilean politics and society. A military coup took place in Chile on 9/11/73 and General Augusto Pinochet ruled the country for the next 17 years. Startling events took place in Chile that were known and backed by the CIA and covert operations by the Nixon administration, especially through people like Henry Kissinger. Pinochet would eventually set up DINA,  a Chilean CIA essentially, that hunted political critics throughout South America, Europe and even the US.

 On September 21, 1976 a car-bomb went off in Washington DC, killing Orlando Letelier and US assistant Ronni Moffit, who were both critics of the brutal Pinochet regime. Before 9/11/01 Letelier’s assassination by DINA was considered the worst case of international terrorism on US soil. The man responsible, Michael Townley, was a CIA agent or asset along with the head of DINA, Manueal Contreras. At all points of covert activity, we can assume that Henry Kissinger was aware of what was going on via the CIA or DINA.

Remember: The attacks of 9/11/01 in the US may indeed have been completely averted, if not significantly altered had the CIA not intentionally allowed known terrorists into the country without telling the FBI.

Available as a live-stream every Monday 5:00-6:00 PM Pacific at the website provided below:


Launching the U.S. Terror War: the CIA, 9/11, Afghanistan, and Central Asia

March 18, 2012

by Peter Dale Cott   source: Global Research   Mar 18, 2012

On September 11, 2001, within hours of the murderous 9/11 attacks, Bush, Rumsfeld, and Cheney had committed America to what they later called the “War on Terror.” It should more properly, I believe, be called the “Terror War,” one in which terror has been directed repeatedly against civilians by all participants, both states and non-state actors.1 It should also be seen as part of a larger, indeed global, process in which terror has been used against civilians in interrelated campaigns by all major powers, including China in Xinjiang and Russia in Chechnya, as well as the United States.2 Terror war in its global context should perhaps be seen as the latest stage of the age-long secular spread of transurban civilization into areas of mostly rural resistance — areas where conventional forms of warfare, for either geographic or cultural reasons, prove inconclusive.

Terror War was formally declared by George W. Bush on the evening of September 11, 2001, with his statement to the American nation that “we will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them.”3 But the notion that Bush’s terror war was in pursuit of actual terrorists lost credibility in 2003, when it was applied to Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, a country known to have been targeted by terrorists but not to have harbored them.4 It lost still more credibility with the 2005 publication in Britain of the so-called Downing Street memo, in which the head of the British intelligence service MI6 reported after a visit to Washington in 2002 that “Bush wanted to remove Saddam Hussein, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy.”5 False stories followed in due course linking Iraq to WMD, anthrax, and Niger yellowcake (uranium).

This essay will demonstrate that before 9/11 a small element inside the CIA’s Bin Laden Unit and related agencies, the so-called Alec Station Group, were also busy, “fixing” intelligence by suppressing it, in a way which, accidentally or deliberately, enabled the Terror War. They did so by withholding evidence from the FBI before 9/11 about two of the eventual alleged hijackers on 9/11, Khalid Al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi, thus ensuring that the FBI could not surveil the two men or their colleagues.

This failure to share was recognized in the 9/11 Commission Report, but treated as an accident that might not have occurred “if more resources had been applied.”6 This explanation, however, has since been refuted by 9/11 Commission Chairman Tom Kean. Asked recently by two filmmakers if the failure to deal appropriately with al-Mihdhar and al-Hazmi could have been a simple mistake, Kean replied:

Oh, it wasn’t careless oversight. It was purposeful. No question about that .… The conclusion that we came to was that in the DNA of these organizations was secrecy. And secrecy to the point of ya don’t share it with anybody.7

Read the rest of this entry »


CIA Leaked bin Laden Operation Details to SOPA-Supporting Sony

January 21, 2012

source: RT       Jan 21, 2012

While the White House went to great lengths to keep the details of last year’s raid on the Osama bin Laden compound from penetrating the public peripheral, investigators are questioning how much intel the Pentagon passed to hotshots in Hollywood.

Lawmakers say that the May 2011 event that nearly ended the War on Terror was among the most secretive in the history of the CIA, and the Obama administration has since shunned the public from any details pertaining to the plan even after the former al-Qaeda leader’s execution and burial at sea. As skeptics scorned President Obama for his lack of transparency in the process and demanded proof, the White House largely left details of the event and what occurred before and after locked up in Washington.

According to Rep. Peter King (R-NY), insiders in Tinsletown were given the key.

King, who leads the House Homeland Security Committee, has for months questioned the relationship between the Pentagon and Hollywood. Although talks of a bin Laden biopic have allegedly existed since shortly after the September 11 terrorist attacks, director Kathryn Bigelow and screenwriter Mark Boal have been linked to an upcoming film that will dramatically reenact the May raid on the silver screen since as early as August of this year.

Read the rest of this entry »


What does 9/11 Commission Staffer Doug MacEachin Really Think Happened before 9/11?

November 11, 2011

by Kevin Fenton    source: Boiling Frogs Post   Nov 11, 2011

In his recent book The Black Banners, former FBI agent Ali Soufan portrays a key 9/11 Commission staff member, Doug MacEachin, as believing the CIA deliberately withheld information from the FBI in January 2001. This is in contrast with the Commission’s final report, which states that the CIA failed to pass on intelligence to the FBI on multiple occasions, but puts it down to honest failings.

MacEachin was one of the best-known of the Commission’s staffers before its formation. He was a career CIA officer and even served as Deputy Director for Intelligence between 1993 and 1996.

According to Soufan, MacEachin believed that the CIA purposefully withheld information placing al-Qaeda leader Khallad bin Attash at the Malaysia summit, a gathering of top al-Qaeda figures in Kuala Lumpur in January 2000 that was monitored by the CIA. This intelligence was especially significant because it linked bin Attash, then known to be a mastermind of the October 2000 USS Cole bombing, to future Flight 77 hijackers Khalid Almihdhar and Nawaf Alhazmi.

Read the rest of this entry »


Recently Deceased Crown Prince Sultan and his son Bandar “Bush” Epitomize Highly Questionable Saudi 9/11 Connections

October 31, 2011

by Brian Romanoff      Nor Cal Truth   October 31, 2011

News of the Saudi Crown Prince passing in the U.S. and his new successor to the post warrant a refresher on the attempts to name them in 9/11 lawsuits years ago.

ONE BIG FAMILY

Sultan bin Abdul Aziz Al Saud, the Crown Prince to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, died just a weeks ago in a New York hospital due to ill health. The world’s largest oil-exporting nation has quickly found an heir to the Crown Prince, a position directly under the most powerful of the King. The new Crown Prince has been named as Nayef bin Abdul Aziz, brother of the deceased Crown Prince Sultan. Both were half-brothers to the current King of Saudi Arabia, King Abdullah, and both are a part of the powerful Sudairi Seven.

The recently deceased Crown Prince Sultan bin Abdul Aziz

The old Crown Prince Sultan is the father of Prince Bandar. Bandar is known to many in the world as “Bandar Bush” for his extremely close relationship with the Bush family. Bandar served as the Ambassador of Saudi Arabia to the U.S. from 1983 until 2005. The Royal family’s relationship with the Bush family goes back even further.

"Bandar Bush" and Condoleezza Rice join the Saudi King and Bush at Bush's Texas property.

Prince Bandar has a history of involvement in scandals, undoubtebly we only know so much. A biography of Prince Bandar was written by William Simpson and praised by many, including Nelson Mandela and Margaret Thatcher. The website for the book contains a brief description of Prince Bandar:

Prince Bandar worked with CIA Director Bill Casey to fund covert CIA operations with Saudi petrodollars. He played a key role in the Iran-Contra affair…

Digging into Iran-Contra and Prince Bandar, an article from Surrendering Islam sums it up well:

The CIA’s backing of the Mujahideen war in Afghanistan would become its largest covert operation in history, funded by an intricate series of clandestine and illegal activities, known as the Iran-Contra Affair, which involved the complicity of the Muslim Brotherhood and the Saudi regime…

The Saudis agreed to fund anti-communist guerrillas in Afghanistan, Angola, and elsewhere, who were supported by the Reagan administration, including the Contras of Nicaragua…

The Reagan administration used proceeds from arms sales to Iran to fund the right-wing Contras, in an effort to overturn Nicaragua’s left-wing, but democratically elected, Sandanista government. Both actions were contrary to acts of Congress…

Initially, in order to side-step Congress, the U.S. approached Prince Bandar to solicit Saudi aid in funding the Contras. Prince Bandar bin Sultan, who was the grandson of Ibn Saud, was appointed Saudi ambassador to the U.S. in 1983….

After Hezbollah bombed American facilities in Beirut and kidnapped CIA station chief William Buckley, it was Casey and Bandar who agreed to assassinate Sheikh Fadlallah, the terrorist group’s leader. Control of the operation was handed to the Saudis, who turned to the services of an operative from Britain’s elite special forces. The plan backfired, however, when the car bomb took down an apartment building near Beirut, killing eighty innocent civilians. Fadlallah escaped unharmed. And, to cover their tracks, the Saudis provided Fadlallah with information identifying the operatives they had hired..

Bob Woodward asserted that Cheney and Rumsfeld informed Prince Bandar of the decision to invade Iraq before Defense Sec. Colin Powell. Woodward told CBS  60 Minutes, “Saturday, Jan. 11 [2003], with the president’s permission, Cheney and Rumsfeld call Bandar to Cheney’s West Wing office, and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Gen. Myers, is there with a top-secret map of the war plan. And it says, ‘Top secret. No foreign.’ No foreign means no foreigners are supposed to see this.” Defense Sec. Colin Powell was informed of the decision on Jan. 13th, 2003.

Defense Sec. Rumsfeld and Prince Bandar Visit the Pentagon in February, 2001

It did not take long for questions to arise regarding his indirect involvment in 9/11.

Prince Bandar’s wife was embroiled in bad press due to her donated money getting extremely close to a couple of the alleged hijackers. A late 2002 article from the Guardian explains:

The possibility of a Saudi intelligence link emerged just hours after widespread reports of bank cheques indirectly linking two of the hijackers to a bank account under the name of a Saudi princess, the wife of the kingdom’s ambassador to Washington.

The Saudi embassy angrily denied the suggestion, calling it “untrue and irresponsible”. A spokesman said there was no evidence that cheques from Princess Haifa bint Faisal’s Washington account went to the hijackers Nawaq al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Midhar.

A FBI investigation leaked over the weekend traced regular monthly bank-certified cheques worth $3,500 (£2,200) from the princess’s account to a Saudi woman called Majida Dwaikat starting in early 2000, which was when Mrs Dwaikat’s husband, Osama Basnan, befriended al-Hazmi and al-Midhar in San Diego.

Incidentally, those are the two alleged hijackers from 9/11 that former counterterrorism expert Richard Clarke seems to think the CIA was hiding in order to “recruit” them for double agent work. An article from The Daily Beast in August, 2011 provides more details:

Read the rest of this entry »