Secret Hearings Hide 911
Terrorist Links To White House

By Tom Flocco
9-2-2
Something strange has been occurring   on the fourth floor under the dome of the U.S. Capitol. The security is so   strict that even the representatives and senators from the joint-intelligence   committee investigating the September 11 attacks must check their cell phones   and pagers at the door of the sound-proof room -- a meeting place regularly   swept for listening devices.
These and other indications   reveal that no chances are being taken which might result in having words   spoken in confidence leak out of that room. And there are no reports   regarding whether legislators are more worried about U.S. citizens getting   wind of the contents of their discussions than the terrorists.
Senator Bob Graham (D-FL),   chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said it was the first time in   the history of the Congress that two standing committees have held joint   hearings. Moreover, some might question such extreme measures and whether   crucial truth is being held in the hands of too few -- given unspoken   congressional and administration links to terrorism.
Wide reports last week   revealed that an enraged White House had called joint-committee chairmen   Graham and Representative Porter Goss (R-FL) about classified leaks from the   members, which resulted in their requesting the FBI to ask members and staff   to undergo polygraph tests which clearly intrude upon the separation of   powers between the legislative and executive branches. This, as the   surreptitious hearings have been postponed till late September.
Genesis of a Cover Up
One reason for the furtive   activity may have a lot to do with why both the White House and CNN altered   the transcript of a 4 pm, May 16, 2002 press conference by National Security   Advisor Dr. Condoleezza Rice in the James Brady Briefing Room.
The machinations had their   genesis later in the day that Thursday, after the New York Post hit the   streets with its huge Bush Knew banner, adding Prez Was   Warned of Possible Hijacking Before Terror Attacks as a subheading.   Shortly thereafter, other papers began to reveal the contents of a   Presidential FBI briefing from August 6 -- just 36 days prior to the   September 11 attacks.
The top-secret briefing   said that Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda were going to "bring the fight to   America, according to the Toronto Star, for past attacks upon its   training camps in Afghanistan. So the wheels of presidential damage control   started turning, even as the New York Times was putting finishing touches on   an explosive May 19 story for the next day, reporting that President Bush had   also been briefed before September 11 regarding:
A 1999 report for the   National Intelligence Council, which oversees government intelligence   analysis, saying 'Suicide bomber (s) belonging to Al Qaeda's martyrdom   Battalion could crash-land an aircraft packed with high explosives into the   Pentagon, the headquarters of the [CIA] or the White House.'
Senate Majority Leader   Thomas Daschle (D-SD), said he was gravely concerned about the   information provided us just yesterday that the president received a warning   in August about the threat of hijackers..., adding Why did it   take eight months for us to receive this information, -- but failing at   the same time to use his senatorial power to subpoena the documents.
Then House Minority Leader Richard   Gephardt (D-MO) stepped up to the plate and called for a congressional   investigation into what the president and what the White House knew   about the events leading up to 9/11. But Gephardt has also been   convinced not to make waves -- grieving victim families who are depending on   him to fight for truth notwithstanding.
Sleeping With the Enemy?
While researching various   sections of a related story surrounding growing evidence that the FBI and   other government entities are more closely linked to pre-9/11 insider trading   than previously was thought, it was found that the Secretary of State and two   other State Department officials, the Central Intelligence Administration   (CIA) Director, three senators, and a congressman actually met with Pakistan's   Inter-Services Security Agency (ISI) chief, who had wired $100,000 to fund   the operations of terrorist hijacker leader Mohammed Atta just prior to the   attacks.
But worse, actual evidence   is available that the White House and CNN doctored the transcript of National   Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice's damage control press conference, held at   4 pm that afternoon on May 18, 2001.
In an updated, scholarly,   and thorough report entitled Political Deception: The Missing Link   Behind 9-11, Centre for Research on Globalisation (CRG), 6-20-2002 , by   Michel Chossudovsky, University of Ottawa Professor of Economics, these and a   number of other critical revelations are brought to the fore while other   media have ignored them -- not connecting the dots.
Noticing that a couple   words were deleted from the CNN transcript of Dr. Rice's May 16 remarks --   when compared to the transcript from the Federal News Service which had the   words ISI Chief included in its transcript, we placed a call to   the public information office at CNN in Atlanta yesterday. The story was too   compelling; it had to find more daylight.
After talking with a woman   named Devon, we were told, After checking the transcript for Dr. Rice's   May 16 press conference, you are correct that the words 'ISI Chief ' are   missing from our transcript." Devon emailed us a CNN office printout   copy, and the word inaudible was indeed found in parentheses.   Then we printed out the actual White House website transcript of the event;   and at that same place in the transcript, we found that ISI Chief   was also missing:
Q: Dr. Rice? Dr. Rice?
Ms. RICE: Yes?
Q: Are you aware of the   reports at the time that ----- was in Washington on September 11th; and on   September 10th, $100,000 was wired from Pakistan to these groups in this   area? And why was he here? Was he meeting with you or anybody in the   administration?
Ms. RICE: I have not seen   that report, and he was certainly not meeting with me.
The Washington Post   (5-16-2002) reported that Officials familiar with the White House's   strategy [during damage control], said senior aides were anxious to dispel   the notion of a cover up and said they wanted to avoid appearing defensive,   either in front of cameras or behind the scenes.
Terrorist Hijacker's   Financial Benefactor
According to the Times of   India (10-9-2001), Mohammed Atta's financial bagman, Lt. General Mahmoud   Ahmad had been fired as head of Pakistan's ISI, as U.S. authorities   [FBI] sought his removal after confirming that $100,000 had been wired to WTC   hijacker Mohammed Atta from Pakistan through Ahmad Sheikh at the instance   (sic) of General Mahmoud.
Times of India then   reported that Senior [U.S.] government sources have confirmed that   India contributed significantly to establishing the link between the money   transfer and the role played by the dismissed ISI chief. But ABC   investigative reporter Brian Ross had beaten them on the story, reporting to   Sam Donaldson and Cokie Roberts on September 30, 2001:
As to September 11, federal   authorities have told ABC News they've now tracked more than $100,000 from   banks in Pakistan to two banks in Florida to accounts held by suspected   hijack ringleader Mohammed Atta. As well this morning [Sunday's This   Week Show], 'Time' magazine is reporting that some of that money came   in the days just before the attack and can be traced directly to people   connected to Osama bin Laden.
But Roberts and Donaldson   kept adding fuel to the fire, when about one month later, on October 28   during This Week, Ms. Roberts asked Defense Secretary Donald   Rumsfeld: You've heard Brian Ross's report, the confirmation that   Mohammed Ata met with an Iraqi intelligence official....Do you think it was   -- the meeting with Mohammed Atta was significant, in terms of September 11?
Rumsfeld responded   cryptically, We will know that only after the proper law enforcement   people investigate that. Clearly, the meeting is not nothing. It is something   notable.
Atta's Money-man Meets With   9/11 Investigation Chairmen on Morning of Attacks
Three days after the   attacks on September 14, the New York Times reported that important members   of the Bush Administration met with the terrorist financier and ISI Chief,   General Ahmad: CIA Director George Tenet, Secretary of State Colin Powell,   Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage, Under-Secretary of State Marc   Grossman, and Senator Joseph Biden (D-DE) -- Chairman of the Senate Foreign   Relations Committee.
However, the Times also   revealed that on September 11 -- while the attacks were in progress -- the   two current Co-Chairmen of the Joint-Intelligence Committee investigating the   9/11 attacks, Senator Bob Graham (D-FL) and Representative Porter Goss   (R-FL), met for breakfast with the ISI Chief who had ordered $100,000 wired   from Pakistan to terrorist leader Mohammed Atta in the days immediately   preceeding the attacks.
All this, while General   Ahmad was in the United States meeting with multiple Bush Administration   officials and members of Congress:
When the news came,   the two Florida lawmakers who lead the House and Senate intelligence   committees were having breakfast with the head of the Pakistani intelligence   service. Rep. Porter Goss, Sen. Bob Graham, and other members of the House   Intelligence Committee were talking about terrorism issues with the Pakistani   official when a member of Goss' staff handed a note to Goss, who handed it to   Graham. 'We were talking about terrorism, specifically terrorism generated   from Afghanistan,' Graham said. [presciently]
In a skilled analysis of   the neglected yet important story, Professor Chossudovsky literally dug deep   to verify the participation of Bush Administration officials in the meetings   with the hijacker financier behind the September 11 attacks.
News Pakistan (9-10-2001)   reported that ISI Chief Lt. General Mahmoud Ahmad arrived in the U.S. on   September 4, adding that
Mahmoud's week-long   presence in Washington has triggered speculation about the agenda of his   mysterious meeting at the Pentagon and National Security Council....Official   sources confirm that he met with [George] Tenet this week. He also held long   parleys with unspecified officials at the White House and the Pentagon. But   the most important meeting was with Marc Grossman, U.S. Under-Secretary of   State for Political Affairs. One can safely guess that the discussions must   have centered around Afghanistan....and Osama bin Laden.
But this news report was   written on September 10 -- the day before the attacks.
According to the Miami   Herald (9-16-2001), Graham said the Pakistani intelligence official   with whom he met....was forced to stay all week in Washington because of the   shutdown of air traffic. 'He was marooned here, and I think that gave   Secretary of State Powell and others in the administration a chance to really   talk with him.'
Perhaps Chossudovsky's most   telling analysis comes in just one short sentence from congressional   intelligence investigation Co-Chairman Porter Goss: None of this is news,   but it's all part of the finger-pointing, Goss declared yesterday in a   rare display of pique. It's foolishness. (Washington Post,   9-18-2002)
Then the Ottawa professor   added: This statement comes from the man who was having breakfast with   the alleged 'money-man' behind 9/11 -- on the morning of September 11.
The Post topped off the   story, adding that [General] Ahmad ran a spy agency notoriously close   to Osama bin Laden and the Taliban. But Chossudovsky unearthed another   telling Goss statement from a White House bulletin: Chairman Porter   Goss said an existing congressional inquiry has so far found 'no smoking gun'   that would warrant another inquiry. (5-17-2002)
Moreover, Chossudovsky   reminds that CIA Director George Tenet also met with ISI Chief Ahmad just   prior to the 9/11 attacks, and that Tenet had regularly met with President   Bush nearly every morning at 8 am sharp for about a half hour.
But most curiously, a   document known as the President's Daily Briefing, OPDB, is prepared at   Langley by the CIA's analytical directorate, and a draft goes home with Tenet   each night. Tenet edits it personally and delivers it orally during his early   morning meeting with Bush. (Washington Post, 5-17-2002) But there are   no reports as to why the President prefers not to keep written records of   important CIA briefings.
The Ottawa professor added   that this practice of 'oral intelligence briefings' is unprecedented.   Bush's predecessors at the White House, received a written briefing:
With Bush, who liked   oral briefings and the CIA director in attendance, a strong relationship had   developed. Tenet could be direct, even irreverent and earthy."   (Washington Post, 1-29-2002) Investigating the Investigators?
A critical component of the   Joint-Intelligence Committee's investigation is the first part of what   Co-Chairman Bob Graham calls "a three-act play. The first act,   according to CNN.com will focus on establishing a factual timeline as   it relates to what was known before September 11.
Questions remain whether   Graham's timeline document will ultimately become required reading for every   member of Congress, along with the early July FBI briefing and the August 6   presidential briefing -- given the above evidence, multiple indications of a   cover up, links to Congress and the White House, and additional unanswered   questions of 9/11.
Another key Intelligence   Committee member, Richard Shelby (R-AL), was widely quoted in reference to   Co-Chairman Goss. Chiding his fellow Republican, You know, [House   committee chairman Goss] is a former CIA employee, and I know he's close to a   lot of people over there, Shelby told Roll Call (October, 2001).  I don't think we should be too close to anybody we have oversight of   because you can't do your job. You become subverted by the process.
As to other investigative   options, James Ridgeway added that [An Independent Commission] could   cause a dreadful scene, with senior lawmakers and their staffs in the   spotlight along with the intelligence chiefs. After all, what did the members   of Congress know before September 11? Might they have forewarned us? (Orange County Weekly, June 7-13, 2002)
Courageous members of   Congress may also have interest in Graham's notebooks filled with   jotted records of every meeting and phone call." (Associated Press,   5-30-2002) And Knight Ridder (6-4-2002) added that the relatively tight time   frame [Goss wants the 9/11 investigation report finished by January, 2003]   may encourage some [Administration agencies] to "run out the clock  and hold back potentially embarrassing information.
The evidence of White House   and media cover up of that important visit just prior to the attacks by the   individual supplying the money to finance the terrorists is only made more   crucial when one considers that so many high government officials met with   this person -- some while the attacks were in progress. However, Americans   are being denied an explanation and a carefully thorough public investigation   of this evidence.
Further completing the circle,   a Times of India report (3-7-2001) reveals that "The CIA worked in   tandem with Pakistan to create the 'monster' that is today Afghanistan's   ruling Taliban," a leading U.S. expert on South Asia had said months   prior to the attacks.
Selig Harrison from the   Woodrow Wilson International Centre for Scholars added, The CIA made a   historic mistake in encouraging Islamic groups from all over the world to   come to Afghanistan." But more importantly, Harrison reveals that   the old associations between the intelligence agencies continue....The   CIA still has close links with the ISI.
Americans may now wonder   what terrorist money man and ISI Chief Ahmad was discussing with George   Tenet, Colin Powell, and members of Congress during those long meetings prior   to the worst attacks on American soil in our history.
And after all this, some   U.S. citizens may even question whether there is anyone left to depose Bush   Administration officials and Members of Congress under oath who would never   subpoena themselves to offer explanations for demonstrated conflicts of   interest -- or worse.
Tom Flocco is an   independent American investigative journalist who has written for   Scoop.co.nz, AmericanFreePress.net. WorldNetDaily.com, FromTheWilderness.com,   NewsMax.com, NarcoNews.com, and JudicialWatch.org. He is also a frequent CRG   contributor. To Contact Tom Flocco:: TomFlocco@cs.com . Copyright © Thomas   Flocco. 2002. For fair use only
The URL of this article is:
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/FLO208A.html
Global Outlook , Issue No 2
9-11: Foreknowledge or   Deception? Stop the Nuclear Threat.
Now available (for details   click here) .
Order by phone from   publisher. Call (toll free) 1-888-713-8500.
Site Map
Site Map