'Israel tasked with spying on Americans'

The US entrusted Israeli intelligence services with spying on Americans after the 9/11 attacks, an intelligence journalist has revealed.

Dual Citizenship -- Loyal to Whom?

Since citizenship carries with it a responsibility to be exclusively loyal to one country, the whole concept of dual citizenship and nationality raises questions about which of the dual citizenships have priority. This is extremely important when the two countries have opposing interests. It can be a deadly problem when a dual citizen is in a high position within our American government.

Court throws out gov't appeals in AIPAC spying case

"A U.S. appeals court ruled in favor of two former AIPAC staffers who sought to narrow the government's appeal of rulings in a classified information case."

In Case You Missed It: US arrests 200 young Israelis in spying investigation

"Up to 200 young Israelis, some of them former members of military intelligence units, have been arrested in America in the past year, a leaked government report disclosed yesterday. Some had used cover stories to gain access to sensitive government buildings and the homes of American officials. The report said the actions of some of the Israelis, most of whom had outstayed tourist visas, "may well be an organised intelligence-gathering activity"."

Nukes, Spooks, and the Spector of 911

"Edmonds draws a picture of a three-sided alliance consisting of Turkish, Pakistani, and Israeli agents who coordinated efforts to milk U.S. nuclear secrets and technology, funneling the intelligence stream to the black market nuclear network set up by the Pakistani scientist A.Q. Khan. The multi-millionaire Pakistani nuclear scientist then turned around and sold his nuclear assets to North Korea, Libya, and Iran. "

For sale: West’s deadly nuclear secrets

"The Turks and Israelis had planted “moles” in military and academic institutions which handled nuclear technology. Edmonds says there were several transactions of nuclear material every month, with the Pakistanis being among the eventual buyers. “The network appeared to be obtaining information from every nuclear agency in the United States,” she said."

Many more Israelis than Turks I'd bet.

In Case You Miss It: Mystery of "Israeli Spies" in America: The Ecstasy Factor

"In May 2001, the Israeli mastermind of this operation, Oded Tuito, was arrested by Spanish police in Castelldefels outside Barcelona. His capture triggered a plethora of extradition requests from around the world, including the United States, and on Aug. 15, 2001, a federal grand jury in Los Angeles indicted him and 11 alleged associates for running an international drug trafficking ring that smuggled an estimated 100,000 pills a month into that city."

In Case You Missed It: Penetrating the Defenses at Defense – and State

"They Dare to Speak Out: The diplomat offers an example from his own experience. “I received a call from a friend of mine in the Jewish community who wanted to warn me, as a friend, that all details of a lengthy document on Middle East policy that I had just dispatched overseas were ‘out.’” The document was classified “top secret,” the diplomat recalls. “I didn’t believe what he said, so my friend read me every word of it over the phone.”"

In Case You Missed It: Excerpt from DEA report on Israeli spying

"Investigators within the DEA, INS and FBI have all told Fox News that to pursue or even suggest Israeli spying ... is considered career suicide." - -- Carl Cameron, as quoted in The Spies Who Came In From The Art Sale

Is U.S. gov't infested with terrorist moles?

Yes, but with the current Director of Homeland Security "Chertoff" being an Israeli, you've never know the moles are from Israel.

AIPAC, Espionage, and Legal Sabotage

Has the AIPAC spy trial been derailed?

by Justin Raimondo - Nov 5, 2007

CBS broke the story three years ago: a high-ranking Pentagon analyst had been caught handing over highly classified information to a foreign government – sensitive intelligence about al-Qaeda, U.S. policy deliberations regarding Iran, and other top-secret information of particular interest to his two American handlers. The spy's native-born confederates, top officials of one of Washington's most powerful lobbying groups, passed America's most closely guarded secrets directly to foreign government officials in hurried meetings in empty restaurants, outside a train station, and over the phone, whispering their treason in some of Washington's darkest corners so as not to leave a paper trail of purloined documents.

As clever as they were, however, these spymasters apparently outwitted themselves, because the FBI's counterintelligence unit was on to them from the very beginning: the two core members of the spy nest had been under surveillance for years, along with the foreignofficials who operated out of their Washington embassy. The FBI had everything on tape, and they let the Pentagon mole weave enough rope to hang himself with until they moved in on him: confronted with his treason, the mole – the Pentagon's top Iran analyst, working directly under then-undersecretary of defense for policy Douglas J. Feith – agreed to wear a wire to future meetings with his handlers. An extensive record of treason was documented, until indictments were issued and charges brought against all three. When the news first broke, it was a national scandal – and then the story sank like a stone, for three solid years, while the extensive litigation surrounding the case played out.

The analyst pled guilty to espionage and was sentenced to 13 years in prison and a substantial fine – with time off for his cooperation in the future trial of his two ex-cohorts. The trial, as I've said, has been delayed for nearly three years and is scheduled to finally begin on Jan. 14. But I wouldn't count on that happening: the trial has been delayed on several occasions through the years, and recent developments augur ill for the speedy resolution of this case.

You might think this is odd: after all, it seems like an open-and-shut case. With so much evidence accumulated by government prosecutors, one would think this would be a cakewalk. And it would be, if the recipient of this stolen intelligence weren't Israel. It would be, except the two key figures in this cloak and dagger episode were top officials of AIPAC, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, a Washington powerhouse whose former chief lobbyist once boasted to the New Yorker's Jeffrey Goldberg: "You see this napkin? In twenty-four hours, we could have the signatures of seventy senators on this napkin."

So said Steve Rosen, the spark plug behind AIPAC's legendary lobbying success – the very same Steve Rosen indicted for espionage, along with his top Iran specialist, Keith Weissman, on Aug. 4, 2005, and whose trial is scheduled for Jan. 14, 2008.

Rosen and Weissman contacted, cultivated, and befriended Pentagon analyst Larry Franklin for the specific purpose of culling classified information from him. They even promised to put in a good word for him with top Washington officials as a partial reward for his betrayal. However, Franklin, a committed neoconservative ideologue, didn't need much material incentive: he was convinced that U.S. policy in the Middle East wasn't nearly as pro-Israel as it ought to be, and he was particularly concerned about Iran.

Starting in the late summer of 2002 and continuing until the late summer of 2004, these three spun their web of subversion, gathering vital intelligence and passing it on to Israeli embassy officials. And the FBI has a great deal of this on its surveillance tapes, so much of it – "four years of tracking AIPAC staffers," according to the Jerusalem Post – that the footage could be made into a reality show with a unique "spy versus spy" theme.

The defense, in what would normally be an open-and-shut case, has been struggling frantically [.pdf] to avoid a trial at all costs. That's understandable: after all, the FBI has the whole thing – the entire course of their crimes against America – on record. The verbal transmission of classified information, the elaborate arrangements to avoid detection, the open boasting of the analyst's two handlers that they had a live one on the hook, it's all there: raw, naked treason. Rather than come up against the incontrovertible facts, the defense has tried hard to divert the energies of the court away from actually bringing this to trial, in the hopes that the administration will back down and drop the charges.

The defense strategy has been to constantly up the ante, daring government prosecutors to present the full scope of the recorded evidence in open court – and thus compromise the sources and methods of U.S. clandestine services, such as the FBI's counterintelligence unit. In addition, the nature and specific contents of various U.S. secrets stolen by the Rosen-Weissman-Franklin spy ring and transmitted to the Israelis could come out in open court.

This is why the government has made several attempts to mask the evidence, proposing that testimony made available to the public would be presented in a kind of code, but that was rejected byJudge T.S. Ellis, for the most part. A mediation process was set up, and for months the lawyers have been haggling over what is admissible evidence and what has to be kept secret in the national interest – with the defense constantly pressuring the court to be as liberal as possible, and government prosecutors arguing for secrecy.

Now there has been a major development on this front. No one took seriously the defense's motion, made a few months ago, that they be allowed to subpoena Condoleezza Rice, Paul Wolfowitz, National Security Council chief Stephen Hadley, and a whole platoon of government officials and former officials. The motion was made on the grounds that these officials, too, had transmitted classified information to AIPAC, and that this is proof that such behavior was and is routine, part of the normal way of doing business in the world of Washington lobbyists. The defendants' case has always been that they have a First Amendment right to commit espionage, and that their indictment amounted to a government assault on their right to "free speech." Gee, too bad the Rosenbergs never thought of this unique rationalization for treason, although I doubt it would've gotten them anywhere. The AIPAC defendants, however, may have more luck in this department…

No judge had ever allowed such a thing, at least in recent memory, and no one expected Judge Ellis to look favorably on this request. That he granted the defense motion in all but a few cases is bad news for the government – and good news for the Israel lobby, which may just be spared the embarrassment of having its essential nature as a fifth column for Israel exposed to the light of day.

In addition to Rice, Wolfowitz, and Hadley, the following can expect to be served with a summons to appear at a trial that may never happen: Larry Franklin's boss, Douglas J. Feith, former undersecretary of defense for policy; Elliott Abrams, neocon par excellence and Iran-Contra alumnus, who served as Bush's "deputy national security adviser for global democracy strategy"; Kenneth Pollack, a former National Security Council adviser to Bill Clinton and author of the now infamously influential book The Threatening Storm, which convinced so many liberal Democrats to support the invasion of Iraq; Marc Grossman, former undersecretary of state for political affairs; Marc Sievers, chief political affairs officer at the U.S. embassy in Tel Aviv and one of Rice's chief advisers on Iraqi affairs; David Satterfield, a political officer at our Tel Aviv embassy; William Burns, the American ambassador to Russia; Lawrence Silverman, currently a deputy chief at the American embassy in the Slovak Republic; Matthew Bryza, a deputy assistant secretary of state; and Michael Makovsky, a former staff member of the Office of Special Plans, the policy shop where the "intelligence" pointing to Saddam Hussein's fabled "weapons of mass destruction" was cooked up into talking points. Franklin also served in that policy shop.

The idea that the U.S. government is going to allow this is absurd. Rather than expose the entire Israeli covert operation in its midst and permit testimony that would dramatize how much access the Israelis already have to our officials and the policy-making process, the Bush administration now has an ideal excuse to shut this case down. Rice wouldn't even show up to a congressional hearing to answer questions about prewar intelligence, and she similarly tried to defy the 9/11 Commission on the grounds of "executive privilege." In spite of her expressed willingness to "cooperate with our legal system," I fully expect her to show the same disdain for Judge Ellis' court.

The recent book by John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt documenting the existence of a powerful Israel lobby has generated a storm of controversy, with the Lobby's advocates smearing the two professors as "anti-Semites" and the more reasonable members of the foreign policy community at least open to the argument that undue reverence for the Lobby – and its political clout – has distorted the policy-making process, perhaps fatally. Yet even Mearsheimer and Walt go out of their way to emphasize that the Lobby is "not a cabal" and "not a conspiracy," and, although they mention the AIPAC spy case briefly, they draw no conclusions from it. Perhaps they thought they had enough of a burden in making the case they did make, without sinking the knife in deeper. Yet this case shows that at the very core of the Lobby a cabal was operating, which was – and, for all we know, still is – engaged in a conspiracy to commit espionage on behalf of a foreign power.

This is undeniable to anyone who has followed the details of this case, and the embarrassment of a public trial would have rendered it irrefutable in the public mind: AIPAC would be ruined, its name and image forever associated with the stealing of U.S. secrets. Almost certainly a trial would force AIPAC to register as an agent of a foreign power, namely Israel, in which case its political effectiveness would be seriously impaired, and for all intents and purposes ended.

There is going to be tremendous pressure now, coming from the White House as well as the Lobby, to quash this trial before it ruins them all. The odds are that this effort will succeed, if only because the case has slipped beneath the media's radar. It has been going on, after all, for nearly three long years, during which time the original memory of the FBI's two raids on AIPAC's Washington office and the sensational confession and conviction of Franklin have faded in the public mind. Even the nearly unprecedented news that a judge has ordered such a personage as Rice to give testimony in this case hasn't garnered all that much notice. If the case dies, it will die a largely silent death. If it ever comes to trial, however, it will be the show of the decade, much more entertaining than anything remotely promised by the trial of Scooter Libby.

Rice's refusal to testify, and similar refusals by some or all of the currently serving U.S. officials, could torpedo the trial once and for all, or at least delay it indefinitely as the government appeals the judge's decision. Douglas Feith will never be asked why he was in such a hurry to resign, and Wolfowitz and Hadley will be spared the embarrassment of having to explain how Israeli agents managed to penetrate the Pentagon. The Lobby can breathe a sigh of relief, as can the White House – and, most importantly, from the Israeli point of view, their spy nest can continue to operate without further ado.

After all, you don't really believe that Franklin is the only neocon fish caught in AIPAC's web of espionage, do you? The existence of one spy implies the presence of others, and, in this case, it's a virtual certainty. A public trial would expose the whole network to the blinding light of day, an ugly scene that both Washington and the Israelis would much rather avoid. To obscure the implications of their espionage, the Lobby has done its best to sabotage this case – and it looks like they may have succeeded.

AIPAC Espionage Case, Court Memorandum

Court Memorandum:

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

V.

STEVEN J. ROSEN and KEITH WEISSMAN

http://www.fas.org/sgp/jud/aipac/memop110207.pdf

Rice to face subpoena in (AIPAC) espionage case

by MATT APUZZO, Associated Press - Nov 2, 2007

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and other senior intelligence officials will be subpoenaed to discuss their conversations with pro-Israel lobbyists, a federal judge ruled Friday in an espionage case.

Lawyers for two former American Israel Public Affairs Committee lobbyists facing espionage charges have subpoenaed Rice, National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley, Deputy National Security Adviser Elliott Abrams and several others to testify at their trial next year. Prosecutors had challenged the subpoenas in federal court.

Lobbyists Steven Rosen and Keith Weissman have argued that the Israeli interest group played an unofficial but sanctioned role in crafting foreign policy and that Rice and others can confirm it. If they ultimately testify in court, the trial in federal court in suburban Alexandria, Va. could offer a behind-the-scenes look at the way U.S. foreign policy is crafted.

The lobbyists are accused of receiving classified information from a now-convicted Pentagon official and relaying it to an Israeli official and the press. The information included details about the al-Qaida terror network, U.S. policy in Iran and the bombing of the Khobar Towers dormitory in Saudi Arabia, federal prosecutors said.

But defense attorneys suggested that top U.S. officials regularly used the lobbyists as a go-between as they crafted Middle East policy. If so, attorneys say, how are Rosen and Weissman supposed to know the same behavior that's expected of them on one day is criminal the next?

U.S. District Judge T.S. Ellis III said the lobbyists have a right to argue that "they believed the meetings charged in the indictment were simply further examples of the government's use of AIPAC as a diplomatic back channel."

Peres: Pollard was almost released

A passport issued by interior minister Haim Ramon in 1996 for Jonathan Pollard, when he was granted Israeli citizenship.

by GREER FAY CASHMAN, Jerusalem Post - Oct. 17, 2007

Israel once came close to securing the release of convicted Pentagon spy Jonathan Pollard, but the American security services pulled the plug on the move at the last moment, President Shimon Peres said on Wednesday.

During a tour of Safed, the president said that before the last-minute change, it seemed that the US had finally agreed to free the spy. Peres was probably referring to 1998's Wye River negotiations.

He noted that Washington was being "surprisingly stubborn" on the Pollard issue, adding that nevertheless, Israel was doing everything possible in order to bring about his release.

The president went on to say that Prime Minister Ehud Olmert was still working to free Pollard and had filed a new request to the US to secure a pardon for the prisoner.

Pollard, a US Navy civilian intelligence analyst, sold military secrets to Israel while working at the Pentagon. He was arrested in 1985 and pleaded guilty at his trial. He is serving a life sentence in a US federal prison.

Peres said negotiations for prisoner exchanges between Israel and Hizbullah should be conducted with the strictest secrecy. He conceded that there was no option other than to cooperate with the enemy, adding that in this case the enemies were cruel, inhuman extremists who have consistently refused to give any information to the Red Cross about the condition of Israel's abducted soldiers.

"They're not even prepared to give over a sign of life," he said, alluding to the emotional trauma under which the families of Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev were living. However, Peres said it was better that the public should know less.

Peres was not willing to share any details, but he did say that the relative quiet on the northern border was not something a matter of chance. Hizbullah has learned the cost of firing rockets into Israel and kidnapping soldiers, he explained, adding that he was convinced that the government of Israel had drawn the necessary conclusions from the Second Lebanon War.

Also during the tour, Peres, who in the past has been willing to make major concessions for the sake of peace, mentioned that he was unwilling to divide Jerusalem.

Peres said that Israel must ensure a Jewish majority in Jerusalem, and had to guarantee the security of all the residents of the city and of the holy places.

Bush Officials May Face New Subpoenas

by Nathan Guttman - August 3, 2007

High-profile Bush administration officials could be called to the witness stand if two deposed pro-Israel lobbyists have their way in a court case that is moving toward a January 2008 trial date.

Lawyers for two former lobbyists at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee have asked federal judge T.S. Ellis III to subpoena the highest-ranking foreign policy players in the administration, including Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley, Hadley’s deputy, Elliott Abrams, and other top officials from the White House, State Department and Pentagon.

The two Aipac lobbyists, Keith Weissman and Steve Rosen, are on trial for allegedly receiving classified information from government officials and relaying it to diplomats, journalists and other Aipac staff members. Their attorneys are seeking testimony from Rice and others in order to make the case that passing on classified information to lobbyists was routine conduct in Washington. The prosecution filed a series of motions asking that all subpoenas for government officials be dismissed.

If the subpoenas are approved by the court, the Aipac trial has the potential of turning into a major embarrassment for the Bush administration, which has made fighting leaks in the government one of its policy cornerstones. Having the most senior members of the administration testify under oath about conversations with lobbyists in regard to classified information could shatter what is left from the anti-leak posture the administration has adopted in its early years.

Last Tuesday, the judge moved closer to setting a trial date, securing January 14 — three-and-a-half years after the case first broke out — as the target for beginning the jury trial.

“We’ve got to get this done,” said Ellis in the hearing, while prodding the prosecution to speed up procedures. “This case has languished for quite a long time.”

Currently, the case’s closed-door discussions have reviewed the classified information that will be put forward. After that is completed, the proposed list of witnesses is expected to take center stage in the pretrial hearings.

The list contains some 30 witnesses, few of them directly involved in specific events mentioned in the indictment. Such is the subpoena requested for Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. When Rice was national security adviser during the first term of the Bush administration, she held a White House meeting with Aipac’s executive director, Howard Kohr, and with Rosen, who was then the lobby’s policy director. During the meeting, Rice allegedly revealed information that was later conveyed to Rosen and Weissman by former Pentagon analyst Larry Franklin, who already has admitted to passing on classified information as part of a plea agreement with the prosecution.

The purpose of having the government officials testify, defense sources said, is to prove to the jury that leaking classified information to Aipac members, as well as to other lobbyists, journalists and diplomats, was not only standard procedure but also a pattern of behavior directed from the highest ranks in the administration.“We want to show it was authorized from the top,” a defense source said.

In addition to members of the State Department and Pentagon, the list may include current senior staff members of Aipac, though defense sources would not confirm that they are actually on the final list.

Due to the nature of the case, which centers on the use and proliferation of classified information, the court is required to approve each of the witnesses, and the topics about which he or she will be asked, in order to ensure that classified information is not revealed during the testimonies.

The government prosecution has filed motions arguing that the subpoenas are not relevant to the case. But Ellis has given some indication that he sees things otherwise. During one of the closed-door hearings, Ellis said that testimonies dealing with the nature of the relationship between Aipac and America’s government are “flatly relevant to this case,” since it is important for determining the defendants’ state of mind when they encountered classified information.

It is already clear that court will not allow the entire witness list presented by the prosecution, since Ellis is attempting to keep the trial short and not all the officials requested are relevant to Aipac issues.

Meanwhile, as the trial date was postponed yet again, the legal bills of the defendants have reached a record high. According to unofficial estimates within the defense team, both defendants have already incurred $7 million in legal fees a figure that might grow to $10 million by the time the case is over, making this trial one of the costliest in American history.

An agreement reached several months ago between Aipac and lawyers for Weissman ensures that the lobby will cover Weissman’s legal costs. A similar agreement is still being negotiated between Aipac and Rosen’s lawyers.

Source: Forward.com

Physics911: The German Intelligence Report

by Physics911 - July 23, 2007

Original Document including German and English Translation

Original German Document Scan PDF

Source and authenticity of the document:

The following document was published in June of 2002. If genuine, it must rank as one of the most remarkable documents in history. It purports to be a top-secret report from the German external intelligence agency, the Bundesnachrichtendienst (BND) prepared with assistance from an internal German intelligence agency, the BfV. Among the most important claims it makes are the following: German intelligence detected plans for an attack by Arab extremists on the United States, to take place on September 10 or 11, 2001. Israel was aware of the plans and wished the attack to take place without hindrance. The German ambassador informed the President of the US of the impending attacks. He thanked the ambassador and said that he already knew. Subsequently, his administration urgently requested the suppression of information on this warning. The report elaborates that among the various reasons for the attack being encouraged by the US administration was a desire to have a pretext to attack Afghanistan to secure a pipeline route for western oil companies to export oil from the Caspian basin. Despite angry denunciations of the authenticity of the report from various quarters, the German government has to the best of our knowledge not issued a denial of its authenticity. Even if it were to do so, the alleged urgent request for secrecy could provide grounds for such a denial. No other effective refutation of the accuracy of the report has been seen by the editors of this website. Consequently, it is presented for what it is worth as a possibly genuine document of immense historical significance.

Fox News Series on Israeli Spying

The above link to the four-part Fox news report on Israeli spying in and on the US does indeed corroborate certain parts of the BND report. Corroborative elements include (among other items) the alleged Israeli tactic of supplying unusable warnings, links to drug-dealing organized crime, and failure to share information supposedly developed on terrorists with the FBI.

BACKGROUND REPORT ON 9/11/2001

TOP SECRET

On Monday 6, August, 2001, at 17:50, [German] Ambassador Ischinger personally notified the President of the United States that information developed by the Bundesamt fur Verfassungsschutz [German domestic secret service] as well as the BND [Bundesnachrichtendienst, German foreign secret service] indicated that an attack by a radical Arab group partially based in Germany was to occur on 10-11 September, 2001. The President was at that time in residence at his farm in Texas. Our [the German’s] Ambassador was acting in direct response to instructions from Foreign Minister Fischer.

This information was developed from official surveillance of Arab extremist groups operating in the Federal Republic as well as from intercepted communications between the Embassy of Israel and the Israeli Foreign Ministry in Tel Aviv concerning this matter.

The information was “gratefully received” by the US President who stated at the time that he was also aware of the same pending assaults.

Subsequent to these attacks, the office of the US President, through the US Department of State, made an urgent request to the government of the Federal Republic of Germany that no reference whatsoever should be made to the official warnings given by Ambassador Ischinger.

In order to clarify the background of this matter, this Gesamtubersicht [overall survey] of the events leading to the assault was prepared, basing on extracts of reports from our [BND’s] foreign stations. Overall, it is evident that the American authorities were aware of the pending attacks. Why they did nothing, is explained in the following.

Background: General Overview

Because of the Bush family’s involvement in oil (Zapata Oil Company), many important and wealthy individuals and corporations with oil interests financially supported the Bush political career. Today, the Bush administration is therefore strongly influenced by major American business groups.

The candidate for American Vice President, Richard “Dick” Cheney, had been the Chief Director of the Halliburton Company. This company, based in Dallas, Texas, where Bush was Governor, is the largest oil service company in the world.

Between 1991 and 1997, such important American oil companies as Texaco, Unocal, Shell, BP Amoco, Chevron and Exxon-Mobil became involved with the former Soviet state of Kazakhstan who holds enormous oil reserves. The government of Kazakhstan was eventually paid over $3 billions of corporate money to allow these companies to secure oil rights. At the same time, these companies agreed further to give the sums of 35 billion US Dollar in investments in plant and equipment to the Kazakhstan projects. A confidential project report of said US firms announced that the gas and oil reserves in Kazakhstan would amount to 4 trillion US Dollar.

The United States is not self-sufficient in oil and 50% of their supply is imported from various foreign sources. Some 80% of oil imported to the US comes from OPEC-Countries, the Arabian oil cartel. Because of the unconditional support by American political leaders of the state of Israel, these Arab governments have a very strained relationship with the USA.

A further small percentage of oil imported to the US comes from Venezuela. Just recently, the US government has been attempting to overthrow the government of Chavez with the help of the CIA and replace it with a government “more sympathetic to American oil needs.”

A position paper prepared by the office of the later-Vice President Cheney states that the Kazakhstan oil reserves would be “more than sufficient to supply US needs for at least a decade” and would further “reduce American dependence on OPEC.”

Unocal Oil Company signed an agreement with the reigning Taliban forces as well as their opponents, the Northern Alliance, in order to permit an oil pipeline to be built through Afghanistan direct through Pakistan to the Indian Ocean. by this, the exorbitant rates charged by the Russian to use their pipelines would be avoided. Unocal then opened official offices in Uzbekistan, Pakistan, Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan to facilitate the construction of this oil pipeline.

In December of 1997, official Taliban representatives were in the United States to attend a conference at Unocal headquarters in Texas to discuss the Afghanistan pipeline. These talks failed because the Taliban made what Unocal felt were excessive financial demands.

In 1998, internal strife in Afghanistan and inherent instability in Pakistan reached such levels as to render the pipeline project impossible to execute. In the same year, the Houston, Texas based firm of Enron suggested instead to build a $3 billion oil pipeline parallel to the Russian pipelines, running westwards rather than taking the shorter but more problematic route south.

In a secret memorandum by Cheney, it is stated that the Unocal company was prepared to finance the southern route. According to this, this project would take five years to complete and its annual revenues from the successful completion of this pipeline would approximate $2 billions. however, and this had been the subject of a number of secret American reports, the only thing standing in the way of the construction of the pipeline was the basic opposition of the Afghanistan government and its political supporters.

On May 8, 2001, the US Department of State, in the name of Secretary of State Powell, gave 43 million US Dollars to the Taliban in order to facilitate their cooperation in the pipeline project.

On June 10, 2001, the BND warned the CIA office in the US Embassy to the Federal Republic [of Germany] that certain Arab terrorists were planning to seize American commercial aircraft for use as weapons of destruction against significant American symbols. This was considered a general warning only. The Federal Republic’s warning of August 6, however, was specific as to date, time and places of the attacks.

On July 11, 2001, in Berlin, US officials: Thomas Simmons, a former American Ambassador to Pakistan, Lee Coldren, State Department expert on Asian matters, and Karl Inderfurth, Assistant Secretary of State for Asian matter met with Russian and Pakistani intelligence officers. At this meeting, which was under surveillance, it was stated by the Americans that the United States planned to launch military strikes against Afghanistan in October of that year. The purpose of these strikes was to topple the Afghanistan government and the Taliban in order to replace it with a government “more sensitive to the needs of American oil interests.”

In mid-August 2001, President of the Russian Federation Putin ordered that the American authorities be warned of pending attacks on government buildings inside the United States. This warning was conveyed to the US Ambassador in Moscow and via the Russian Ambassadors office directly to the US President.

On August 20, the Government of France, through the American Embassy in Paris and their Embassy in Washington, issued a more specific warning. This warning specified the exact date, time and places of the attacks.

On September 11, President Bush and top aides flew to the state of Florida so that the President could speak with children in a kindergarten. Also at that time, Vice President Cheney absented himself from Washington and went to the safety of the Presidential compound in the mountains of Maryland.

It was noted in Washington that Cheney remained sequestered in Maryland for some time and only appeared in public surrounded by heavy security.

The role of the Israeli Mossad in the terrorist attacks

Note: The following two sections are considered to be extremely sensitive due to the special relationship between the Federal Republic [of Germany] and its Jewish citizens as well as the State of Israel. This material is compiled from German and American sources.

During the term of President George HW Bush, the government of Israel made an official, but very secret, request to the American president. This request was to permit agents of the Mossad, Israeli Foreign Intelligence, to enter the United States and conduct surveillance operations against various Arab groups residing in that country.

The stated purpose of this surveillance was to permit Israeli early warning of terrorist plots against their country. Permission for this surveillance was granted with the caveat that the Mossad would have a liaison with the FBI and report any and all finding to that agency.

However, these conditions were not observed. The Mossad not only did not inform the FBI of any of its findings, it is known to have engaged in commerce with several groups of Israeli criminals of Russian backgrounds. These groups were engaged in extensive criminal activities inside the United States, to include the smuggling of the Ecstasy drug. Mossad agents were able to subvert American criminal investigations through their knowledge of American telephone surveillance of such groups.

It is very evident from surveillance conducted against Mossad agents in the Federal Republic as well as interceptions of Israeli diplomatic communication from the Federal Republic to Tel Aviv, that the Mossad has successfully penetrated various extremist Arab groups in both the Federal Republic and the United States.

These investigations disclosed in late May of 2001 that an attack was to be made against certain specified targets in the American cities of Washington and New York. But it was apparent that the Mossad was not only fully aware of these attacks well in advance but actually, though their own agents inside these Arab groups, assisted in the planning and the eventual execution of the attacks.

That the Israeli government was fully aware of these attack is absolutely certain and proven. Diplomatic traffic between the Israeli Embassy in the Federal Republic and the Israeli Foreign Office made it very clear that Minister President Sharon was fully aware of this pending attack and urgently wished that no attempt was made to prevent the attacks.

Although the Israeli officials were instructed to warn the American intelligence community that some kind of an attack might be possible, at no time were the specific dates and targets (known at that time to Israeli officials) to be given to the Americans.

The rationale for this attitude was expressed in a conversation on August 1, 2001, between the Israeli Military Attaché in the Federal Republic to a member of the Israeli General Staff. There it was stated that Israel believed an attack on the continental United States would so inflame American public opinion that they would permit Israel to “cleanse” their state of “Arab terrorists and those who support such terrorists”. This “cleansing” was explained as the expulsion of all Arabs, and even Christian groups, from the Palestine area.

American intelligence officials have repeatedly expressed great concern in meeting with our people that the Israeli government, through a company called Amdocs, was able to conduct surveillance of all telephone communications within the United States. It was categorically stated that this Israeli-based firm was given the American contract with 25 of the largest American telephone companies. This contract was granted over the objections and concerns of the American intelligence community.

The official reason given for this extraordinary arrangement that permitted Israeli agencies to observe all highly confidential investigative telephone calls was that the United States has a “special relationship” with the State of Israel and they had requested this.

The Israeli Political Influence in the United States

It should be noted here that the professional Israeli lobby in America is huge in size and is considered even by our American colleagues to be a very powerful and entirely dominant factor in American politics.

The American Israel Public Affairs Committee is the largest foreign lobby in Washington and fourth most powerful lobby in the country. Other Israeli groups also include the Anti-Defamation League (from whose national offices, along with the Israel Trade Mission and the many Israeli Consulates, many Mossad agents were working,) the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs and the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America.

These groups, in conjunction with Jewish dominated media giants like the New York Times, the Washington Post, Newsweek Magazine, the Los Angeles Times, Time- Warner-AOL and their CNN news network, basically control the dissemination of news in the United States. It is therefore almost impossible for any news that would be considered in opposition to Israeli interests to appear before the American public, although such stories are readily available in most European media.

The Role of the Christian Fundamentalists in American Politics

The so-called “Christian Right” consists of Protestant fundamentalists, where the so-called Pentecostals play a dominant role. This is a very fanatical and aggressively missionary denomination that believes in the return of a living Christ to earth and the subsequent elevation of its members to heavenly paradise.

In order for this appearance of Christ to occur, several factors must be in place according to the views of this denomination. In the first place, a number of Jews must convert to Christianity, and, in the second, there must be a rebuilding of the Jewish temple in Jerusalem. As the site of this temple is now occupied by a major Islamic mosque, it will be necessary to destroy this building.

Starting as an Episcopalian, Bush tried other Protestant denominations before joining the Pentecostals. Apart from US President Bush and his Attorney General John Ashcroft, other members of his administration are members of this denomination, too, which is the second largest Christian denomination after the Catholic Church. As a considerable part of the American public sentiment is strongly opposed to religious fanatics, these facts have been kept very quiet.

Bush and his entourage are very strong supporters of the State of Israel because of their belief, that the founding of this nation is viewed as another requirement for the return of Christ. For this reason, Bush unconditionally supports any program put forward by the Israeli government and is a devoted follower and supporter of Sharon, the Israeli right wing extremist Minister President.

Attorney General Ashcroft has stated in a public sermon (he is a lay preacher of the Pentecostal church) that Muslims are “agents of the Anti-Christ” and must be destroyed in the so-called “Battle of Armageddon”. According to the beliefs of fundamentalist Christians, this battle will be fought over Israel’s existence and will lead to the end of the world and the return of Christ.

It is generally known in Washington that Bush is entirely guided by his religious beliefs and that he has been attempting repeatedly to force his views onto the American public by means of various disguised programs, such as religious control of charities, unconditional support of Israel, and so forth.

Summary and Outlook

The terrorist attacks on American targets were fully known to many entities well in advance. The US President was fully informed as to the nature and exact time of these attacks.

The US government in general and the US President in specific have become subservient to the wishes and plans of the Israeli government. As these plans encompass the removal of the Arab population of Israel and adjoining territories, it is evident that the population of the United States is being pushed into a situation that could easily result in more, and terrible, attacks on their home country.

In view of this possibility, the US authorities are determined to limit any discussion of the 11 September attacks to the official version as it appears regularly in the US media.

It also appears from confidential sources that Bush’s plans to attack Iraq are based mainly on a desire on the part of Israel to remove Saddam Hussein. Tel Aviv views Hussein as a real threat and has already attacked that country before.

There is also evidence that if Hussein is toppled by American military forces, the oil resources of Iraq would be put under the control of a consortium of the American oil interests that so avidly support the Bush administration.

Pullach, April 5, 2002

Commentary by SPINE Intelligence Expert

The document purports to be from the German Bundesnachrichtendienst (BND), which has its headquarters at Pullach, near Munich. It was released by Gregory Douglas, author of Regicide: The Official Assassination of JFK at a meeting of the Barnes Review, in Washington DC. The original German document, complete with top secret classification markings and other details, is enclosed for scrutiny and verification. The document may or may not be genuine. It has not been proven to be a forgery. If Ambassador Ischinger did not go to Crawford, Texas, on the date named, nor made telephone contact with the President, then the document may not be truthful. If, on the other hand, Ischinger did telephone President Bush or go to Crawford to speak with him at the time and date mentioned, then the occasion must have been a matter of extreme urgency. It will be possible for someone to verify or refute the facts of Ambassador Ischinger’s whereabouts. If the document is genuine, it would go far to explain Germany’s reluctance to get involved in the so-called War on Terror, including aggression against the innocent nations of Iraq and Afghanistan. Germany’s public silence could well be explained by concern about the extremely sensitive relation of Germany to the state of Israel, and by the horrifying implications this document would have for its relation to its NATO ally, the USA. We offer this document for what it is worth. If anyone can find proof that it is spurious, we welcome such proof. If not, it must remain as a possibly genuine document with truly devastating implications.

Source: Physics911