Mulling over LEE LOFASO to STEVE ASHER 14 Sep 2003

Hi Lee!

>LL>Quite an accomplishment, how them nineteen hijackers managed to
>LL>plow passenger airlines into skyscrapers while living to tell the
>LL>tale.

SA>All they had to do was follow the scenarios laid out in "Operation
SA>Northwoods", which set out plans for staging phony attacks on the
SA>US to justify invading Cuba. It wasn't (apparently) implemented
SA>for Cuba, but it would be a doddle to modify the scenarios to
SA>justify attacking al-Qaeda, Taleban, Iraq etc etc.

 LL> There are many ways an administration can "fake" an attack in order
 LL> to justify an invasion.  But I find it extremely doubtful that the
 LL> Bush administration, or that of any other American administration,
 LL> would have knowingly allowed terrorists to hijack passenger
 LL> airlines and plow them into skyscrapers and the Pentagon.

I am 10,000 miles away, & from here, such an action by a U.S. 
administration just appears to be par for the course. They have
form for staging terror attacks on civilian populations, and
framing others for them. The US / CIA will set up proxy forces,
sometimes funded from the proceeds of criminal activity, such
as the Contras in Nicaragua, & use them to commit unspeakable
acts upon the civilian population. They "use terror to traumatize
society so that it cannot function".

E.g. John Stockwell, 13 year CIA veteran & former U.S. Marine
Corps Major, is recorded as saying that [Contras] "go into villages
... With the children forced to watch, they castrate the father ...
peel the skin off his face ... put a grenade in his mouth, and pull
the pin ... gang-rape the mother, and slash her breasts off ... and
sometimes, for variety ... they do these things to the children."

A search on "Nicaragua terror attacks CIA" etc will turn up rafts
of info on their heinous deeds.

SA>The scenario for Cuba involved portraying the Cuban government as
SA>"rash and irresponsible, and as an alarming and unpredicatble
SA>threat to the peace of the Western Hemisphere"
SA>( http://emperors-clothes.com/images/north-2.htm )

 LL> Unlike Saddam Hussein in Iraq, Fidel Castro did in fact have WMDs
 LL> on Cuban soil.  Fortunately, JFK convinced Kruschev to remove the
 LL> missiles from Cuba before an American invasion was incurred. 

Not quite true. The [unsuccessful] invasion of Cuba took place in 
April 1961 ["Bay of Pigs"]; "Operation Northwoods" is dated March
1962, nearly 12 months later; the Cuban Missile Crisis took place
in October 1962.

I.e., if the USA had not attempted to invade Cuba, & not imposed
crippling sanctions upon it, including a ban on oil exports, it is
possible that the missile crisis would not have occurred. The US
invasion & sanctions had the effect of driving Cuba into the Soviet
sphere.

SA>The US Government was prepared to initiate terror attacks upon
SA>the USA "in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in
SA>Washington", in order to frame the Communist Cubans, and the
SA>plans included the hijacking of civilian aircraft.

SA>( http://emperors-clothes.com/images/north-8.htm to north-10.htm )

 LL> There are contingency plans for everything, including invading the
 LL> Vatican.  Not that a contingency plan means that it will in fact be
 LL> carried out.

The invasion of Cuba was carried out, although unsuccessfully.

SA>If you are interested, read the whole sordid document, which is
SA>12 pages, plus introductions.

 LL> Contingency plans are one thing.  Actions taken are quite another. 

See above. The US's hostile actions against sovereign nations speak
louder than its "contingency plans".

>LL>Why would the American government allow terrorists to hijack
>LL>passenger airliners and plow them into skyscrapers?  According to
>LL>Minister Farrakhan, it was because the American government wanted
>LL>an oil pipeline to be built through Afghanistan, and the Taliban
>LL>refusal to allow for such a project to be done.

SA>I don't think that is quite correct.

 LL> It is Farrakhan's version of events. Not mine.

Not in dispute.

SA>It is more likely that UNOCAL, a
SA>member of the consortium building the pipeline, supsended work due to
SA>concerns about working with the Taliban & then withdrew from the
SA>consortium completely, thus stopping the project.
SA>( http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/caspoile.html & elsewhere )

 LL> That does sound more logical than Farrakhan's version.

It is consistent with Unocal's news releases (1) announcing the formation
of the consortium to build the Central Asia gas pipeline from Turkmenistan
to Pakistan via Afghanistan, & (2) the Unocal withdrawal from the project
in 1998, citing concerns that the project could not proceed "until there
was an internationally recognised government in place in Afghanistan
that fairly represented all its people", among other reasons.

As Unocal was 46.5% of the consortium, its withdrawal basically pulled
the plug on the pipeline.

>LL>The terrorist acts of 9-11 provided the perfect cover for the
>LL>American government to invade Afghanistan, thus getting the
>LL>pipeline built.

SA>Snap!

 LL> Who would argue against invading Afghanistan in order to go after
 LL> those terrorists who struck America?  Virtually every American
 LL> wanted Osama bin Laden's head on a pike.  And most still do.

So where is Osama bin Laden, and his head? This CIA asset seems to 
be largely untouched by those who would go after the terrorists.

Cheers, Steve..

---