On Sunday, September 8, 2002, the New York Times in a front page article
entitled "Feeling Secure, U.S. Failed to Grasp bin Laden Threat," by Patrick E. Tyler, did its absolute best to keep America and, by proxy, the
rest of the world, as vulnerable to terrorist attacks as we were on September 10th, 2001.
Being a trained criminal investigator accustomed to presenting my conspiracy cases before grand juries and courts,
what I am going to do is present this article in the form of an investigative report typical of the type I was trained to prepare
during my years with the Department of Justice, formally, accusing the New York Times of violation of Title 18, 2001, False
Official Statement; a crime for which I have sent many to jail - Ironically for lies immeasurabily less damaging to America than
those published in this front-page article.
Translated, this means that, before I get into the specifics of this smoking-gun shill piece, why - as viewed
through the lens of my training and experience - it is mainly composed of distortions and outright lies and the potential damage
it will do to our national security, I will first set forth a little factual background that those unafraid of allowing hard facts
to cloud their media-shaped opinions, might want to check out for themselves.
Predicting September 11th
In Novemeber, 1998, I put together a panel of four federal agents who had seved a collective total of 102
years with CIA, FBI, DEA, Customs and Treasury Intelligence. In three on-air broadcasts of one-hour each, (heard
on WBAI in NYC and The Roy Tuckan Show, KPFK in Los Angeles) we predicted 9/11... and it was too, too easy.
Human Intelligence and covert operations experts with field experience, saw the tragedy of 9/11 coming for decades.
We knew that the real culprit behind the Keystone Kops FBI and CIA was a mainstream media that was easily manipulated into shilling
the American people and congress into believing these self-important clowns could actually protect us from even the most
bumbling of terror plots.
The recording is entitled "FIRST WARNING" and may be found on my web site
http://www.expertwitnessradio.org
If you don´t have the time or will to listen to this recording, or are the typical ditto head, who dismisses hard
evidence without checking it out because some talking head who probably has as much real life experience in the field as your grandmother
said he/she disagrees, then I urge you to stop reading and return your head to your favorite hole in the ground, because the
next big one is coming and both you and mainstream media are determined to stay at September 10th until it does.
And I do not want to be right again.
Smoking Gun Tapes of FBI/CIA Ineptitude
In my quest to present to my "grand jury" of listeners and readers smoking gun, court-quality proof
that both the FBI and CIA had hard evidence and informants to have stopped this terrorist act as early as 1993
and then both botched it in the most amateurish manner imaginable, we obtained the actual, secretly recorded phone call of an FBI
agent firing informant Emad Salim after he had successfully infiltrated the terror group that would go on to attack the Word Trade
Center twice, because the Famous But Incompetents (as DEA and other law enforcement agencies call them) did
not trust him enough to pay him a $500 a week salary.
Here again, if you are interested at all in the security of this nation and the quality of those we are paying to
protect us, you must listen to this recorded conversation yourself. Don´t let others interpret it for you. Have
a mind of your own, before you lose your head altogether. (The recording, "FINAL WARNING" aired on WBAI in NYC and by the ever
courageous Roy Tuckman of KPFK in Los Angeles is available for your listening on the web site).
If this is not enough, court-quality proof of our thesis that, you had been and are being lied to through an easily
manipulated, shill media, determined to con you into the belief that our national security is in good hands, I've got more.
In August, 2002, I learned of another FBI/CIA informant who had infiltrated the bin Laden organization and actually
trained in Afghanistan and fought Jihad; another credible man who mainstream media was avoiding. In fact, it was a retired CIA operative
who told me that "Aukai Collins is the real thing" just moments after Collins approached me at a large
conference given in New York City, by Emmanuel Goldstein, the host of
Off The Hook.
During the 2 hours of interview that I urge you to listen to (soon to be available on video), Aukai Collins tells of furnishing
the FBI and CIA with the identities of some of the actual terrorists of 9/11 whom were at the moment training at flight schools in Arizona and how the
information was ignored. The interviews and video are titled "My Jihad."
Now to the Details section of my prosecution report; the specifics of the Times´ latest shill piece.
Continuing in the format of an investigative report prepared for a district attorney or court, I will first set forth
the precise statement as excerpted from the Sunday piece, followed by a citation of hard evidence
indicating it to be false and/or intentionally distorted.
N.Y. Times article, excerpt #1
Since last Sept. 11, the authorities have disclosed how the hijackers trained at American flight schools; one suspected
conspirator was arrested a month before the attacks for his erratic statements and terrorist links in France.
Evidence of false and/or intentionally distorted statements in excerpt #1:
The hijacker, whose name, by now, we all know is Zacarias Moussaoui, has been left unnamed. In my opinion as a federal
investigator, the omission was intentional in that (as the evidence will show) it made the rest of the distortion easier for an inattentive
public to digest.
The truth was that Moussaoui was not arrested for "erratic statements" he was arrested as he was actually training
to fly a jumbo jet, because, as his flight instructor said, he was "only interested in learning to turn right and left, not in landings and
takeoffs."
The article intimates that Moussaoui was arrested by the FBI, which is also entirely untrue. Numerous poorly distributed
press reports, including a smattering of mainstream articles indicate clearly that Moussaoui was arrested for immigrations violations by the
Department of Immigrations.
In fact, talk about media bullshoot! Prize winning
Newsweek journalist Elaine Shannon even wrote that her top level
FBI sources told her that there was "no evidence whatsoever" linking Moussaoui to the 9/11 tragedy. Of course, this shill piece was
written a week before the FBI discovered that he was the "twentieth hijacker."
Maybe we ought to indict
Newsweek also. What do you think?
The facts that this latest Times article is clearly attempting to distort and cover-up, as the totality of the evidence will
prove during trial, is that, while the man Moussaoui was incarcerated, the FBI made no attempt whatsoever to speak directly to the man during
the full month he was incarcerated prior to 9/11. This in spite of French police notifying US Immigrations that Moussaoui had general ties to
Bin Laden and specific ties to a terrorist group that had been "planning to hijack airliners and run them into the Eiffel Tower."
Thus, the statement that he was arrested because of his ties to terrorists is, also, completely false. The fact is, as the
court records are beginning to reveal, the FBI not only neglected to speak directly to this illegal alien, terrorist, wannabe jumbo jet pilot,
but took no action whatsoever to investigate him.
N.Y. Times article, excerpt #2
an alert FBI agent with [stationed in] Arizona theorized that what occurred on September 11 could occur, but this premonition
never reached the White House Terrorism Chief, Richard A. Clark
Evidence of false and/or intentionally distorted statements in excerpt #2:
Part of my job when I served with the Department of Justice was as an Inspector of Operations. In that capacity, if this
"alert FBI agent" told me that he had failed to take immediate action when he had a man in jail, who was an illegal alien, a
suspected terrorist with links to bin Laden and previous plans to hijack planes and use them as missiles against buildings
and that at the time of his arrest he had been learning to fly jumbo jets, but was not interested in landings and takeoffs, and that this alert FBI
agents reason for taking no action whatsoever, was that he was "waiting for a decision from the White House," I would immediately recommend
that the man be fired and possibly prosecuted and that his sanity be examined.
I would recommend criminal prosecution for any of his superiors who were aware of this criminally moronic failure unequalled
in the annals of law enforcement history and who did nothing. I would consider their failure to act both treasonous and a violation of their
oath to protect the people who pay their salaries.
To understand just how absurd this N.Y. Times explanation is, just ask yourself the question: "If a New York City detective
had the same information, would he wait for the Mayor´s office to decide his next move?"
Perhaps this is why the NYPD has sent its anti-terrorist detectives to Israel for training instead of the FBI academy.
N.Y. Times article, excerpt #3
an extraordinary confluence of American instincts appears in hindsight to have dulled the nation&qcute;s readiness,
chief among them the complacency Americans shared about the security of their continent
Evidence of false and/or intentionally distorted statements in excerpt #3:
The Times left out of the equation a powerful truth that was covered directly in the "FINAL WARNING" shows aired in
1998, predicting 9/11: that there exists an impressive body of evidence indicating that mainstream media shilling was, and continues to be,
responsible for that complacency. And that the complacency alluded to here was not of the fault of the American people, but of the media that
shilled us (with reports like this one) into that complacency, and a congress that refused to take action in spite of well
documented knowledge of the extraordinary, decades-long ineptitude of both FBI and CIA.
For much more hard, court-qualified evidence of this, via the first-hand testimony of journalists, read "Into the Buzzsaw",
edited by Kristina Borjesson. The book can be ordered through the Web site. My God, you owe it to yourselves and your families.
N.Y. Times article, excerpt #4
there was also an innate resistance to the kind of domestic intelligence gathering that the authorities consider necessary for tracking
suspected terrorists
Evidence of false and/or intentionally distorted statements in excerpt #4:
This is one of the most obviously bullshoot statements I have ever seen produced by any media print outlet, not to mention
the New York Times. In court, if this reporter had uttered these words the judge would have jailed him on the spot for contempt and I wouldn´t
have to write this article.
What the Times calls "Innate resistance," as any cop with a badge who has studied the facts knows, is the FBI and
CIA´s pure, tragicomic ineptitude and inability to do the job they´re paid to do.
But what I do herewith submit to the jury of listeners and readers, is that, what the use of this vague, bullshoot phrase does
indicate, is the very intent of this front-page New York Times piece: to convince us that this Bozo of all failures was understandable and even acceptable.
The rest of the Times article, continues for about 2,000 plus words of complete and utter mushroom feed, that would require another
hundred excerpts of easily proven distortions and falsehoods, the sum total of which claims that the FBI and CIA did their jobs, it was the "system"
that failed. In fact, in the mass of shill-jibber these mokes even use those precise words:
The system was on yellow alert, but the system was flawed.
As everyone who has ever carried a badge knows, and the media never seems to learn is that, in the past five decades, whenever the
FBI and CIA bungle their jobs, their first and only reaction is to cover up their boobery and criminality by blaming it on the "system."
Each of these agencies has extraordinary, taxpayer funded public information offices that fly into action to use the media to not only cover-up the
bungling, but to actually convert failures to success.
If you listen to "FIRST WARNING," you will actually hear CIA officer McGeehee read from an inhouse CIA memo in which
the CIA PIO actually brags about their ability to "use media connections and influence to convert intelligence failures to successes."
I mean, talk about picking our pockets and bragging about it. The trouble is that, for the media and congress to continue to accept
that hackneyed, absurd explanation, they have to overlook five decades of Congressional reports like the Church Committee´s report; Congressional
ordered studies, like the Admiral Jeremiah report; the public statements of a couple of dozen federal agents with the courage to tell the truth, like FBI
agent Coleen Rowley and CIA agent Ralph McGeehee; all indicating that both the Famous But Incompetents and the Criminal Inept Agency could not
coordinate a food shopping expedition, no less our defense against terrorism. They are simply too inept to function in any investigative system devised by
man.
In 1996, for example, Admiral Jeremiah - commissioned by our government to evaluate and analyze the reasons for CIA´s many failures,
including its sophomoric attempts at overthrowing Sadaam Hussein after Desert Storm - reported that the entire agency was dysfunctional and had to be
revamped from top to bottom. He said they were simply incapable of doing their job. The admiral´s comments had nothing to do with a "system"
failure. Thanks to media shilling and a Congress with neither will nor scruples, nothing was done to address this report, and we continued headlong
toward 9/11.
Detailed discussions, by court-qualified experts, of the specifics of many of these reports and whistle-blowers referred to, can also
be heard on many of the taped interviews on the archive section of the web site, as well as on "FIRST WARNING").
In 2002, when Coleen Rowley came forward and said that FBI headquarters was regarded by the field agents as "moles for bin Laden,"
she was not referring to any damned system failure, she was talking plain and simple about the quality of her leadership. Anyone with any sense has got
to know that.
So ask yourself, how can it be that Coleen Rowley, now regarded and treated as a hero by Congress, is totally ignored by that same
Congress in its deliberations to effect the needed changes that might really save America? And how is it that, only one brave woman, out of 25,000
FBI agents stepped forward in the wake of 9/11, to tell us what a joke that agency really is; a truth that is now more vital to our future protection
than ever before in our history?
The answer to both those questions can be found in a 1970s movie "Three Days of The Condor." In the movie, a CIA officer who knew too much about a too typical agency
bizarro operation is targeted for death by the Criminal Inept Agency. The CIA guy in deep doo-doo, played by Robert Redford, manages to survive two
hours of typically bungled attempts to kill him by his fellow Americans. His terrifying odyssey finally ends at the front door of a huge American
newspaper (think New York Times). It´s broad daylight on a Monday morning, the streets are crowded, and there is nothing between Redford and
America´s watchdog media but space. He crosses toward the front doors of the big building, moving with the courage and determination that made America; he is
going to blow the damned whistle on the whole sordid operation.
At the door, waiting for him is the sinister CIA chief, played by Cliff Robertson, who smiles knowingly and utters the final words of
the movie: "What make you think they´ll print the story?"
