More Evidence That The Project For A New American Century Controlled White House Was Manipulating The Pentagon & U.S. Intel Into Waging War On Iraq

Are PNAC's Neocon's About To Hit Us With A New 9-11?
As of today, the FBI is again using its scare tactics claiming that it has plausible information that an Al Qaeda attack may take place against the New York City subway system over the holiday season. This is yet another scare tactic in the PNAC controlled Bush Administration's bogus war on terror. In this evil machination it is the FBI's job to maintain an element of fear within American society through such manipulations of the media.

That is not to say that a terrorist attack might not occur; only that if one does, it will likely be the same culprits who were behind the attacks on 9-11. The PNAC controlled Bush Administration along with the hierarchy of the Military Industrial Intelligence Complex, whose covert manipulations become more obvious over time as one observes how crafty they are in controlling the media in this country for their own means.

With the Taj Mahal Hotel in India presently burning in a scene indicative of the attacks on 9-11-2001, and the U.S. Media discussing the FBI's role in investigating this international terrorist attack, exactly what would the FBI accomplish in such an investigation? Find the real terrorists, or fabricate a bogus investigation as it has on myriad occasions in the past, including covering up the U.S. Navy's accidental shooting down of TWA Flight 800 in 1996, its seizure of and obfuscation of key evidence in other attacks which include but may not be limited to the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, the 1995 bombing of the Murrah Federal Building, and of course the attacks on the Pentagon and World Trade Center on 9-11?

In the past the FBI has shown us how effective it can be at suppressing key evidence in terrorist attacks; however, it's role in actually offering up such legitimate evidence for public awareness continues to be in doubt.

Especially at a time where there are a number of Americans who are wondering if those who perpetrated the 9-11 attacks (i.e. the PNAC controlled White House)would in desperation give Americans another 9-11 scenario in order to declare the United States a militarized police state in which to nullify the present election?

I have been concerned about something like this happening for the past few years, and at this point would put nothing past the PNAC controlled Bush Administration, which I am certain was responsible for the attacks on 9-11 -- To them these attacks were just part of an international business deal in which to ensure that Unocal would have control over the construction of the Trans-Afghanistan oil pipeline -- which it now has.

What else does the PNAC controlled Bush Administration have up their sleeves?



The PNAC Controlled White House & U.S. Intel
'Very Damning' Report: Pentagon Manipulated Pre-war Intel

Published: February 09, 2007 10:45 AM ET

WASHINGTON A "very damning" report by the Defense Department's inspector general depicts a Pentagon that purposely manipulated intelligence in an effort to link Saddam Hussein to al-Qaida in the runup to the U.S. invasion of Iraq, says the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee.

"That was the argument that was used to make the sale to the American people about the need to go to war," said Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich. He said the Pentagon's work, "which was wrong, which was distorted, which was inappropriate ... is something which is highly disturbing."

The investigation by acting inspector general Thomas F. Gimble found that prewar intelligence work at the Pentagon, including a contention that the CIA had underplayed the likelihood of an al-Qaida connection, was inappropriate but not illegal. The report was to be presented to Levin's panel at a hearing Friday.

The report found that former Pentagon policy chief Douglas J. Feith had not engaged in illegal activities through the creation of special offices to review intelligence. Some Democrats also have contended that Feith misled Congress about the basis of the administration's assertions on the threat posed by Iraq, but the Pentagon investigation did not support that. Two people familiar with the findings discussed the main points and some details Thursday on condition they not be identified.

Levin has asserted that President Bush took the country to war in Iraq based in part on intelligence assessments some shaped by Feith's office that were off base and did not fully reflect the views of the intelligence community.

In a telephone interview Thursday, Levin said the IG report is "very damning" and shows a Pentagon policy shop trying to shape intelligence to prove a link between al-Qaida and Saddam.

Levin in September 2005 had asked the inspector general to determine whether Feith's offices' activities were appropriate, and if not, what remedies should be pursued.

The 2004 report from the Sept. 11 commission found no evidence of a collaborative relationship between Saddam and Osama bin Laden's al-Qaida terror organization before the U.S. invasion.

Asked to comment on the IG's findings, Feith said in a telephone interview that he had not seen the report but was pleased to hear that it concluded his office's activities were neither illegal nor unauthorized. He took strong issue, however, with the IG's finding that some activities had been "inappropriate."

"The policy office has been smeared for years by allegations that its pre-Iraq-war work was somehow 'unlawful' or 'unauthorized' and that some information it gave to congressional committees was deceptive or misleading," Feith said.

Feith called "bizarre" the inspector general's conclusion that some intelligence activities by the Office of Special Plans, which was created while Feith served as the undersecretary of defense for policy the top policy position under Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld were inappropriate but not unauthorized.

"Clearly, the inspector general's office was willing to challenge the policy office and even stretch some points to be able to criticize it," Feith said, adding that he felt this amounted to subjective "quibbling" by the IG.

Feith left his Pentagon post in August 2005 and now teaches at Georgetown University's School of Foreign Service. He has maintained throughout the controversy over the role of the Office of Special Plans, as well as other small groups that were created after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, that their intelligence activities were prudent, authorized and useful in challenging some of the intelligence analysis of the CIA.

At the center of the prewar intelligence controversy was the work of a small number of Pentagon officials from Feith's office and the office of Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz who reviewed CIA intelligence analyses and put together their own report. When they briefed Rumsfeld on their report in August 2002 a period when Vice President Dick Cheney and other administration officials were ratcheting up their warnings about the gravity of the Iraq threat Rumsfeld directed them to also brief CIA Director George Tenet.

Their presentation, which included assertions about links between al-Qaida and the Iraqi government, contained a criticism that the intelligence community was ignoring or underplaying its own raw reports on such potential links.

The controversy has simmered for several years. The Senate Intelligence Committee included the Office of Special Plans in its investigation into the prewar intelligence on Iraq, but the committee did not finish that portion of its work when it released the first part of its findings in July 2004.



Sourced From Editor & Publisher:


http://tinyurl.com/2dqz67