Tuesday, June 1, 2010
Monday, May 31, 2010
US / Israel Alliance Behind 9/11 Attacks
From the words of some one who knows and has been telling US for Years, just so it is clear, I'm running this old news by US again: Pay close aattention to the highlighted text;
Bin Laden Claims Responsibility for 9/11
Saturday, October 30, 2004
WASHINGTON — Usama bin Laden made his first televised appearance in more than a year Friday in which he admitted for the first time ordering the Sept. 11 attacks and accused President Bush of "misleading" the American people. (Blaming Iraq)
Injecting himself into the campaign four days ahead of the presidential election, bin Laden said the United States can avoid another Sept. 11-style attack if it stops threatening the security of Muslims. (Supporting Israel)
In the portion of the tape that was broadcast, the Al Qaeda leader refrained from directly warning of new attacks, although he said "there are still reasons to repeat what happened."
"Your security is not in the hands of Kerry, Bush or Al Qaeda. Your security is in your own hands," bin Laden said, referring to the president and his Democratic opponent. "Any state that does not mess with our security, has naturally guaranteed its own security."
Admitting for the first time that he ordered the Sept. 11 attacks, bin Laden said he did so because of injustices against the Lebanese and Palestinians by Israel and the United States. In what appeared to be conciliatory language, bin Laden said he wanted to explain why he ordered the airline hijackings that hit the World Trade Center and the Pentagon so Americans would know how to act to prevent another attack.
"To the American people, my talk is to you about the best way to avoid another Manhattan," he said. "I tell you: Security is an important element of human life and free people do not give up their security."
After the video was aired, President Bush said that "Americans will not be intimidated" by bin Laden. Sen. John Kerry criticized Bush for failing to capture bin Laden earlier and said that "I can run a more effective war on terror."
The political impact of the tape could cut both ways. It bolsters Bush's argument that the world is a dangerous place and plays to his strength as commander in chief in fighting the war on terror, but it also underscores that his administration has failed to capture or kill America's No. 1 enemy more than three years after the terror attacks on New York and Washington. (What about Israel?)
It was the first footage in more than a year of the fugitive Al Qaeda leader, thought to be hiding in the mountains along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border. The video, broadcast on Al-Jazeera television, showed bin Laden with a long, gray beard, wearing traditional white robes, a turban and a golden cloak, standing behind a table with papers and in front of a plain, brown curtain.
His hands were steady and he appeared healthy.
The Bush administration said it believes the videotape is authentic and was made recently, noting that bin Laden referred to 1,000 U.S. military deaths in Iraq -- which happened in early September. (What about Israel?)
White House press secretary Scott McClellan said the administration did not plan to raise the nation's threat level for now. The U.S. official said the 18-minute tape -- which carries English subtitles, though not in the portion shown on Al-Jazeera -- lacks an explicit threat and repeats well-worn themes. (What about Israel?)
Multiple sources told FOX News that the tape is authentic and that it was made recently.
(What abou Israel?)
Al-Jazeera, which is based in Qatar, broadcast about seven minutes of the tape. The station's spokesman, Jihad Ali Ballout, said Al-Jazeera aired what was "newsworthy and relevant" and refused to describe the unaired portions, including whether they included any threats. Ballout said the station received the tape Friday but would not say how.
Before the tape was aired, the State Department asked the government of Qatar to discourage Al-Jazeera from broadcasting it, a senior State Department official said.
(What about Israel?)
In the video, bin Laden accused Bush of misleading Americans by saying the attack was carried out because Al Qaeda "hates freedom." The terrorist leader said his followers have left alone countries that do not threaten Muslims.
"We fought you because we are free ... and want to regain freedom for our nation. As you undermine our security we undermine yours," bin Laden said.
He said he was first inspired to attack the United States by the 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon in which towers and buildings in Beirut were destroyed in the siege of the capital.
"While I was looking at these destroyed towers in Lebanon, it sparked in my mind that the tyrant should be punished with the same and that we should destroy towers in America, so that it tastes what we taste and would be deterred from killing our children and women," he said.
"God knows that it had not occurred to our mind to attack the towers, but after our patience ran out and we saw the injustice and inflexibility of the American-Israeli alliance toward our people in Palestine and Lebanon, this came to my mind," he said.
Bin Laden suggested Bush was slow to react to the Sept. 11 attacks, giving the hijackers more time than they expected. At the time of the attacks, the president was listening to schoolchildren in Florida reading a book.
"It never occurred to us that the commander in chief of the American armed forces would leave 50,000 of his citizens in the two towers to face these horrors alone," he said, referring to the number of people who worked at the World Trade Center.
"It appeared to him [Bush] that a little girl's talk about her goat and its butting was more important than the planes and their butting of the skyscrapers. That gave us three times the required time to carry out the operations, thank God," he said.
Excluding the hijackers, the Sept. 11 attacks killed 2,749 people at the World Trade Center, 184 at the Pentagon and 40 in Pennsylvania.
In planning the attacks, bin Laden said he told Mohammed Atta, one of the hijackers, that the strikes had to be carried out "within 20 minutes before Bush and his administration noticed."
Bin Laden compared the Bush administration to repressive Arab regimes "in that half of them are ruled by the military and the other half are ruled by the sons of kings and presidents."
He said the resemblance became clear when Bush's father was president and visited Arab countries.
"He wound up being impressed by the royal and military regimes and envied them for staying decades in their positions and embezzling the nation's money with no supervision," bin Laden said.
"He passed on tyranny and oppression to his son, and they called it the Patriot Act, under the pretext of fighting terror. Bush the father did well in placing his sons as governors and did not forget to pass on the expertise in fraud from the leaders of the (Mideast) region to Florida to use it in critical moments."
The image of bin Laden reading a statement was dramatically different from the few other videos of the Al Qaeda leader that have emerged since the Sept. 11 attacks.
In the last videotape, issued Sept. 10, 2003, bin Laden is seen walking through rocky terrain with his top deputy Ayman al-Zawahri, both carrying automatic rifles. In a taped message issued at the same time, bin Laden praises the "great damage to the enemy" on Sept. 11 and mentions five hijackers by name.
In December 2001, the Pentagon released a videotape in which bin Laden is shown at a dinner with associates in Afghanistan on Nov. 9, 2001, saying the destruction of the Sept. 11 attacks exceeded even his "optimistic" calculations.
But in none of his previous messages, audio or video, did bin Laden directly state that he ordered the attacks.
U.S. authorities have long said they believe bin Laden is hiding in a rugged, mountainous tribal region of Pakistan that borders Afghanistan, but there has been no firm evidence of his whereabouts for three years.
The last audiotape purportedly from bin Laden came in April. The speaker on the tape, which CIA analysts said likely was the Al Qaeda leader, offered a truce to European nations if they pull troops out of Muslim countries. The tape referred to the March 22 assassination by Israel of Hamas founder Sheik Ahmed Yassin.
Retired Lt. Col. Bill Cowen, a FOX News military analyst, said bin Laden timed the tape deliberately.
"I think he's just trying to slap the president around a little bit and in my opinion is trying to influence the election," Cowen said.
Cowen said that while the tape showed that the most wanted terrorist was still at large, it also should be seen in another light.
"This tape is also a reminder of how we've decimated the top Al Qaeda leadership," Cowen said. "It took us 20 years to find Ted Kaczynski, the Unabomber, right here in the United States
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,137095,00.html
Bin Laden Claims Responsibility for 9/11
Saturday, October 30, 2004
WASHINGTON — Usama bin Laden made his first televised appearance in more than a year Friday in which he admitted for the first time ordering the Sept. 11 attacks and accused President Bush of "misleading" the American people. (Blaming Iraq)
Injecting himself into the campaign four days ahead of the presidential election, bin Laden said the United States can avoid another Sept. 11-style attack if it stops threatening the security of Muslims. (Supporting Israel)
In the portion of the tape that was broadcast, the Al Qaeda leader refrained from directly warning of new attacks, although he said "there are still reasons to repeat what happened."
"Your security is not in the hands of Kerry, Bush or Al Qaeda. Your security is in your own hands," bin Laden said, referring to the president and his Democratic opponent. "Any state that does not mess with our security, has naturally guaranteed its own security."
Admitting for the first time that he ordered the Sept. 11 attacks, bin Laden said he did so because of injustices against the Lebanese and Palestinians by Israel and the United States. In what appeared to be conciliatory language, bin Laden said he wanted to explain why he ordered the airline hijackings that hit the World Trade Center and the Pentagon so Americans would know how to act to prevent another attack.
"To the American people, my talk is to you about the best way to avoid another Manhattan," he said. "I tell you: Security is an important element of human life and free people do not give up their security."
After the video was aired, President Bush said that "Americans will not be intimidated" by bin Laden. Sen. John Kerry criticized Bush for failing to capture bin Laden earlier and said that "I can run a more effective war on terror."
The political impact of the tape could cut both ways. It bolsters Bush's argument that the world is a dangerous place and plays to his strength as commander in chief in fighting the war on terror, but it also underscores that his administration has failed to capture or kill America's No. 1 enemy more than three years after the terror attacks on New York and Washington. (What about Israel?)
It was the first footage in more than a year of the fugitive Al Qaeda leader, thought to be hiding in the mountains along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border. The video, broadcast on Al-Jazeera television, showed bin Laden with a long, gray beard, wearing traditional white robes, a turban and a golden cloak, standing behind a table with papers and in front of a plain, brown curtain.
His hands were steady and he appeared healthy.
The Bush administration said it believes the videotape is authentic and was made recently, noting that bin Laden referred to 1,000 U.S. military deaths in Iraq -- which happened in early September. (What about Israel?)
White House press secretary Scott McClellan said the administration did not plan to raise the nation's threat level for now. The U.S. official said the 18-minute tape -- which carries English subtitles, though not in the portion shown on Al-Jazeera -- lacks an explicit threat and repeats well-worn themes. (What about Israel?)
Multiple sources told FOX News that the tape is authentic and that it was made recently.
(What abou Israel?)
Al-Jazeera, which is based in Qatar, broadcast about seven minutes of the tape. The station's spokesman, Jihad Ali Ballout, said Al-Jazeera aired what was "newsworthy and relevant" and refused to describe the unaired portions, including whether they included any threats. Ballout said the station received the tape Friday but would not say how.
Before the tape was aired, the State Department asked the government of Qatar to discourage Al-Jazeera from broadcasting it, a senior State Department official said.
(What about Israel?)
In the video, bin Laden accused Bush of misleading Americans by saying the attack was carried out because Al Qaeda "hates freedom." The terrorist leader said his followers have left alone countries that do not threaten Muslims.
"We fought you because we are free ... and want to regain freedom for our nation. As you undermine our security we undermine yours," bin Laden said.
He said he was first inspired to attack the United States by the 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon in which towers and buildings in Beirut were destroyed in the siege of the capital.
"While I was looking at these destroyed towers in Lebanon, it sparked in my mind that the tyrant should be punished with the same and that we should destroy towers in America, so that it tastes what we taste and would be deterred from killing our children and women," he said.
"God knows that it had not occurred to our mind to attack the towers, but after our patience ran out and we saw the injustice and inflexibility of the American-Israeli alliance toward our people in Palestine and Lebanon, this came to my mind," he said.
Bin Laden suggested Bush was slow to react to the Sept. 11 attacks, giving the hijackers more time than they expected. At the time of the attacks, the president was listening to schoolchildren in Florida reading a book.
"It never occurred to us that the commander in chief of the American armed forces would leave 50,000 of his citizens in the two towers to face these horrors alone," he said, referring to the number of people who worked at the World Trade Center.
"It appeared to him [Bush] that a little girl's talk about her goat and its butting was more important than the planes and their butting of the skyscrapers. That gave us three times the required time to carry out the operations, thank God," he said.
Excluding the hijackers, the Sept. 11 attacks killed 2,749 people at the World Trade Center, 184 at the Pentagon and 40 in Pennsylvania.
In planning the attacks, bin Laden said he told Mohammed Atta, one of the hijackers, that the strikes had to be carried out "within 20 minutes before Bush and his administration noticed."
Bin Laden compared the Bush administration to repressive Arab regimes "in that half of them are ruled by the military and the other half are ruled by the sons of kings and presidents."
He said the resemblance became clear when Bush's father was president and visited Arab countries.
"He wound up being impressed by the royal and military regimes and envied them for staying decades in their positions and embezzling the nation's money with no supervision," bin Laden said.
"He passed on tyranny and oppression to his son, and they called it the Patriot Act, under the pretext of fighting terror. Bush the father did well in placing his sons as governors and did not forget to pass on the expertise in fraud from the leaders of the (Mideast) region to Florida to use it in critical moments."
The image of bin Laden reading a statement was dramatically different from the few other videos of the Al Qaeda leader that have emerged since the Sept. 11 attacks.
In the last videotape, issued Sept. 10, 2003, bin Laden is seen walking through rocky terrain with his top deputy Ayman al-Zawahri, both carrying automatic rifles. In a taped message issued at the same time, bin Laden praises the "great damage to the enemy" on Sept. 11 and mentions five hijackers by name.
In December 2001, the Pentagon released a videotape in which bin Laden is shown at a dinner with associates in Afghanistan on Nov. 9, 2001, saying the destruction of the Sept. 11 attacks exceeded even his "optimistic" calculations.
But in none of his previous messages, audio or video, did bin Laden directly state that he ordered the attacks.
U.S. authorities have long said they believe bin Laden is hiding in a rugged, mountainous tribal region of Pakistan that borders Afghanistan, but there has been no firm evidence of his whereabouts for three years.
The last audiotape purportedly from bin Laden came in April. The speaker on the tape, which CIA analysts said likely was the Al Qaeda leader, offered a truce to European nations if they pull troops out of Muslim countries. The tape referred to the March 22 assassination by Israel of Hamas founder Sheik Ahmed Yassin.
Retired Lt. Col. Bill Cowen, a FOX News military analyst, said bin Laden timed the tape deliberately.
"I think he's just trying to slap the president around a little bit and in my opinion is trying to influence the election," Cowen said.
Cowen said that while the tape showed that the most wanted terrorist was still at large, it also should be seen in another light.
"This tape is also a reminder of how we've decimated the top Al Qaeda leadership," Cowen said. "It took us 20 years to find Ted Kaczynski, the Unabomber, right here in the United States
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,137095,00.html
Boycott Israel NOW!
Tell Prez. oBOMBa to Boycott Israel NOW! Our cozy relationship with Israel is the Reason Behind Our Wars - The reason Islamics Hate US: We are Fighting Israel's War - Plans to take over Middle East. Can you spell O-I-L R-E-S-E-R-V-E-S?
http://bdsmovement.net/?q=node/235
Listen to what Osama Bin Laden says about it;
http://thepeacebrigade.blogspot.com/2010/05/us-israel-alliance-behind-911-attacks.html
http://bdsmovement.net/?q=node/235
Listen to what Osama Bin Laden says about it;
http://thepeacebrigade.blogspot.com/2010/05/us-israel-alliance-behind-911-attacks.html
Anti-Western Forces Lining Up
May 28, 2010 5:00 AM
by Anna Mahjar-Barducci
The New Anti-Western Alliance: Iran, Turkey and Brazil
The West should be aware of a new alliance: Iran, Turkey and Brazil signed a joint declaration on May 17th to endorse a fuel swap whereby Iran will ship 1200 of its low enriched uranium to Turkey in exchange for the 20 percent uranium fuel needed for Tehran's research reactor. In late 2009, Iran had rejected an identical agreement proposed by the Vienna Group (the 5+1).
According to Iranian sources, it appears that Teheran is willing to transfer 1,200 kg of 3.5%-enriched uranium, which by now exceeds 2,000 kg, to Turkey for safekeeping, in order to receive in return 120 kg of 20%-enriched uranium Iran needs for its Tehran research reactor. The low-grade uranium, under the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), will be sent to Russia to be enriched up to 20% and then to France to be turned into nuclear fuel which will then be transferred back to Iran within one year. Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan clarified that if Ankara saw that Tehran was not receiving the 20%-enriched uranium, it would return to Iran its entire stock of 1,200 kg of uranium.
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad immediately called on the 5+1 to return to the negotiating table; at the same time, his spokesman, Ramin Mehmanparast, announced that the agreement did not prevent Iran from continuing its ongoing uranium enrichment activities.
Iran is already under three sets of UN sanctions for refusing to halt its uranium enrichment, which the West suspects is part of a covert nuclear weapons program. Tehran denies the claim and maintains that its nuclear program is for peaceful civilian use.
Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said there was "no need" for further UN sanctions against Iran in light of the deal:. "This agreement should be regarded positively and there is no need for sanctions now that we (Turkey and Brazil) have made guarantees and the low enriched uranium will remain in Turkey."
The agreement was received in the West with scepticism. The office of the EU foreign affairs chief, Catherine Ashton, in Brussels, said the deal "does not answer all of the concerns," and Germany underlined that no agreement could replace the draft inked between Iran and the IAEA last October. Israeli officials also declared that they would be studying the details of the agreement, but they anticipated that, in their view, this agreement is just for the show.
The agreement will not lessen diplomatic problems over Iran's nuclear program: Although it is the photocopy of what the West wanted to insert in the framework of the Vienna talks, it was agreed upon outside the IAEA context, and therefore fails to build up an atmosphere of trust so much needed to improve the relations between Iran and the West.
Instead, it serves the purposes of the Iranian regime, which can now present the agreement as the practical implementation of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's declared intent to create a new world order in which the Tehran regime will not only have a leading role in running the world, but will also represent a political, cultural, and moral alternative to the decadence of the Western World.
With the involvement of Turkey, a regional power and a member of NATO, and Brazil, a major emerging world power and a member of the U.N. Security Council, Iran has moved its initiative beyond the Iranian nuclear sphere: This appears to be the first step in Iran's building of a political trans-regional global front that it presents as an alternative to the West's hegemony.
For Turkey, the deal represents a major achievement in its effort to gain credentials as a regional mediator and diplomatic heavyweight. It was also meant to show that the new Islamic course set by the Erdogan government makes the country more authoritative, independent and relevant on the international arena. But the agreement could also end up driving a wedge in Ankara's relations with Washington and some of its European allies.
As far as Brazil is concerned, economics might be the correct means of showing its support to Iran. Trade between the two countries quadrupled since 2002, to around $1.8 billion in 2007, and continues to grow. The possibility of cooperation in science, industry, technology and culture was strengthened by a foreign ministers' exchange in November 2008. It may not be a coincidence that Iran was one of the most prominent supporters of Brazil's inclusion in OPEC. Brazil's state-controlled oil company, Petrobras, began exploration in the Iranian waters of the Persian Gulf in 2003 and the Caspian Sea in 2004. ,Brazil, looking for markets, evidently sees a rising Iran as inevitable. Still, President Lula might consider the consequences of finding himself in the company of such arch-enemies of the US and of the capitalistic system in general as Hugo Chávez of Venezuela and Bolivia's Evo Morales.
At a time when the Ayatollahs' regime is showing to the world its worst face by crushing internal opposition, eliminating civil liberties and threatening to become a nuclear power, Turkey's and Brazil's interventions seem to be ill-timed and short-sighted. They give Iran legitimacy to operate outside the boundaries set by the IAEA. Their mediation seems to constitute a political alliance that goes beyond the nuclear issue, and, instead of bringing Tehran closer to a settlement of its nuclear dispute, appears to provide fodder for even more Iranian stalling.
http://www.hudsonny.org/2010/05/the-new-anti-western-alliance-iran-turkey-and-brazil.php
by Anna Mahjar-Barducci
The New Anti-Western Alliance: Iran, Turkey and Brazil
The West should be aware of a new alliance: Iran, Turkey and Brazil signed a joint declaration on May 17th to endorse a fuel swap whereby Iran will ship 1200 of its low enriched uranium to Turkey in exchange for the 20 percent uranium fuel needed for Tehran's research reactor. In late 2009, Iran had rejected an identical agreement proposed by the Vienna Group (the 5+1).
According to Iranian sources, it appears that Teheran is willing to transfer 1,200 kg of 3.5%-enriched uranium, which by now exceeds 2,000 kg, to Turkey for safekeeping, in order to receive in return 120 kg of 20%-enriched uranium Iran needs for its Tehran research reactor. The low-grade uranium, under the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), will be sent to Russia to be enriched up to 20% and then to France to be turned into nuclear fuel which will then be transferred back to Iran within one year. Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan clarified that if Ankara saw that Tehran was not receiving the 20%-enriched uranium, it would return to Iran its entire stock of 1,200 kg of uranium.
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad immediately called on the 5+1 to return to the negotiating table; at the same time, his spokesman, Ramin Mehmanparast, announced that the agreement did not prevent Iran from continuing its ongoing uranium enrichment activities.
Iran is already under three sets of UN sanctions for refusing to halt its uranium enrichment, which the West suspects is part of a covert nuclear weapons program. Tehran denies the claim and maintains that its nuclear program is for peaceful civilian use.
Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said there was "no need" for further UN sanctions against Iran in light of the deal:. "This agreement should be regarded positively and there is no need for sanctions now that we (Turkey and Brazil) have made guarantees and the low enriched uranium will remain in Turkey."
The agreement was received in the West with scepticism. The office of the EU foreign affairs chief, Catherine Ashton, in Brussels, said the deal "does not answer all of the concerns," and Germany underlined that no agreement could replace the draft inked between Iran and the IAEA last October. Israeli officials also declared that they would be studying the details of the agreement, but they anticipated that, in their view, this agreement is just for the show.
The agreement will not lessen diplomatic problems over Iran's nuclear program: Although it is the photocopy of what the West wanted to insert in the framework of the Vienna talks, it was agreed upon outside the IAEA context, and therefore fails to build up an atmosphere of trust so much needed to improve the relations between Iran and the West.
Instead, it serves the purposes of the Iranian regime, which can now present the agreement as the practical implementation of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's declared intent to create a new world order in which the Tehran regime will not only have a leading role in running the world, but will also represent a political, cultural, and moral alternative to the decadence of the Western World.
With the involvement of Turkey, a regional power and a member of NATO, and Brazil, a major emerging world power and a member of the U.N. Security Council, Iran has moved its initiative beyond the Iranian nuclear sphere: This appears to be the first step in Iran's building of a political trans-regional global front that it presents as an alternative to the West's hegemony.
For Turkey, the deal represents a major achievement in its effort to gain credentials as a regional mediator and diplomatic heavyweight. It was also meant to show that the new Islamic course set by the Erdogan government makes the country more authoritative, independent and relevant on the international arena. But the agreement could also end up driving a wedge in Ankara's relations with Washington and some of its European allies.
As far as Brazil is concerned, economics might be the correct means of showing its support to Iran. Trade between the two countries quadrupled since 2002, to around $1.8 billion in 2007, and continues to grow. The possibility of cooperation in science, industry, technology and culture was strengthened by a foreign ministers' exchange in November 2008. It may not be a coincidence that Iran was one of the most prominent supporters of Brazil's inclusion in OPEC. Brazil's state-controlled oil company, Petrobras, began exploration in the Iranian waters of the Persian Gulf in 2003 and the Caspian Sea in 2004. ,Brazil, looking for markets, evidently sees a rising Iran as inevitable. Still, President Lula might consider the consequences of finding himself in the company of such arch-enemies of the US and of the capitalistic system in general as Hugo Chávez of Venezuela and Bolivia's Evo Morales.
At a time when the Ayatollahs' regime is showing to the world its worst face by crushing internal opposition, eliminating civil liberties and threatening to become a nuclear power, Turkey's and Brazil's interventions seem to be ill-timed and short-sighted. They give Iran legitimacy to operate outside the boundaries set by the IAEA. Their mediation seems to constitute a political alliance that goes beyond the nuclear issue, and, instead of bringing Tehran closer to a settlement of its nuclear dispute, appears to provide fodder for even more Iranian stalling.
http://www.hudsonny.org/2010/05/the-new-anti-western-alliance-iran-turkey-and-brazil.php
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
