26 June 2002
Did Our Intelligence Community Really Fail Us?
Perhaps the real issue is Homeland Defense.
By Allan B. Colombo
Recent reports have routinely asked the question, who knew what and who failed to act prior to 9/11? It has been inferred time and time over that President George Bush, as well as others in the intelligence community held certain knowledge before 9/11, but they failed to act on this information in a timely manner—or so the story alleges.
Of such serious concern are these nagging questions that the Congress decided to launch an investigation—or two… perhaps three, maybe four. If you look carefully, each of them were initiated by a different political or governmental faction. Of course, this will almost assure as many "conclusions" as there are investigations. Many of them will most assuredly seek to maintain the agenda of its respective group—whatever that agenda may be.
"So what’s the big deal?"
Here, there appears to be two pieces of information that would suggest that this nation’s intelligence community DID, indeed, know ahead of time that something was going to happen on the 11th of September 2001 and that they did, indeed, do something about it.
I shared the first piece of information with you in the 02 January 2002 commentary. In that commentary there appeared an alleged quote from Tom Kennedy, head of FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency), regarding his agency’s presence in NYC the evening before the WTC (World Trade Center) was destroyed. In the sound clip that accompanied that quote, Tom Kennedy was interviewed by Dan Rather.
Dan Rather: "Tom Kennedy, a rescue worker with the National Urban Search and Rescue which is part of FEMA..."
Tom Kennedy: "We are currently one of the first teams that was deployed to support the city of New York for this disaster. We arrived on late Monday night and went into action on Tuesday morning. And not until today did we get a full opportunity to work the entire site....."
In that same commentary, this author composed an Editor’s Note that read:
As the anti-terrorism effort mounts, so is a large body of evidence that supports the notion that someone in government may have known about the WTC-Op beforehand but failed to act. Some of this evidence is circumstantial while other bits and pieces are not as easy to dismiss. You decide for yourself whether there is merit to these allegations.
At the time this author included a sidebar warning that it was very possible that the presence of FEMA the night before may be misleading, that it may have been, indeed, in response to a vague terrorist threat that included only the day and the time, but no specific target. Shortly thereafter, someone whom alleged to work at some level of government contacted this author, telling him that the information on the web site was, for all intents and purposes, correct.
According to an undisclosed source, this nation’s intelligence community WAS, indeed, given the day and the time that the incident was to take place, but not the target. Their solution, according to this anonymous source, was to station first responders in all major cities of the United States, including NYC. This is why FEMA was there, on site, the previous day, on the 10th; but, according to this anonymous source, the attack was far worse than they anticipated.
As pointed out in the January 2nd commentary, there was an explosion on the 23rd floor of the WTC before the plane hit the building. The 23rd floor, I am told, housed a FBI office. Not only did this explosion occur shortly before the plane hit, but the explosion, itself was 40 floors below the point of impact where the plane finally hit.
In the January 2nd commentary, material, provided by an anonymous investment banker, offered a possible insight into why the explosion on the 23rd floor took place:
"The FBI offices on the 23rd floor of the North Tower were bombed to prevent agents from removing grand jury evidence stored there following the jet crashbombings. Evidence for this was given on the CBS news program 60 Minutes, although CBS seems unaware of its implications."
To read more about this explosion and its "implications," go to January 2, 2002 Commentary
According to our anonymous, undisclosed source, at the time of the WTC incident, it was not known why the premature explosion took place or who was responsible, but it was confirmed that federal investigators were aware of it.
Here’s the point of today’s commentary:
Would not such a revelation, openly disclosed and discussed by the White House, squelch all of these damning reports? Would it not save Congress time and money investigating these allegations needlessly? Why has this President been silent? Why has mainstream news failed to pick up on all of these facts so to disclose them to the general public? Who is it that put the muzzle on the truth?
This author has pondered several answers to this question and all the other facts presented above. First, I pondered the idea that none of this was true, that it could possibly be misinformation, given to this author to further cloud the facts and hide the truth by virtue of its dissemination on www.giantkillers.org. However, in light of the very same information being collaborated by multiple, unrelated sources, I have to admit that it is highly unlikely that the information itself is entirely unreliable.
Allow this author to share with you a small segment from the book, The Naked Capitalist, written by W. Cleon Skousen, which may shed some light on how matters such as these work in the real world we live in. This particular segment of Skousen’s book deals with the non-governmental agency of the federal government called the Federal Reserve Corporation, AKA: the FED.
…the promoters of the central bank set up a front organization to create a public climate which would be favorable to the Federal Reserve idea. Professor Kelko says: "During the spring of 1911 the backers of the plan moved to create the ‘National Citizens League for the Promotion of a Sound Banking System’ to accomplish the task. Warburg and the other New York bankers behind the Aldrich plan arranged to have the league centered in Chicago." …
To prevent opponents of Wall Street from identifying the Federal Reserve Act with the international bankers, a smoke-screen of opposition was fulminated. In his autobiography, William McAdoo, [President] Wilson’s Secretary of the Treasury and son-in-law, wrote:
"Bankers fought the Federal Reserve legislation—and every provision of the Federal Reserve Act—with the tireless energy of men fighting a forest fire. They said it was populistic, socialistic, half-baked, destructive, infantile, badly conceived and unworkable." (p.213)
However, McAdoo talked with these heated opponents of President Wilson’s Federal Reserve project and decided there might be something phoney about the smoke-screen of opposition. "These interviews with bankers led me to an interesting conclusion. I perceived gradually, through all the haze and smoke of controversy, that the banking world was not really as much opposed to the bill as it pretended to be…. (p.225)" (The Naked Capitalist, W. Cleon Skousen, ©1970, p.20,21)
At various times, this author has also alluded to the idea that it matters not whether we’re talking about Republicans or Democrats, that the Elite Int’l Bankers own both entities, for all intents and purposes. The following quote, taken from Skousen’s book, should serve at least as partial proof of this premise:
It was decided that the Republican Party was too closely connected with Wall Street and the only hope of getting a central bank adopted would be to get the Democrats in power and have a new bill introduced which would be promoted into popular acceptance by claiming that it was a measure designed to strip Wall Street of its power. The Wall Street cadre thereupon set forth to achieve this in the presidential election of 1912. (The Naked Capitalist, W. Cleon Skousen, ©1970, p.18)
What all of this appears to mean, and the purpose of Skousen’s book, is that the int’l bankers run the show. They often plan and initiate what would appear to most as an organized opposition to their own political and monetary efforts. However, as can be seen above, this is often done to throw off the more honest members of Congress, as well as the general public. Such an effort readily seeks to perpetuate their own agendas because, in reality, the organized opposition actually seeks to establish the very thing that these int'l bankers want to take place.
So, to what possible advantage to the int’l banking community would the current illusion of a massive intelligence breakdown serve in this day and age?
Perhaps the American people have been LED (by OWNED news media) to believe that a deficiency in intelligence occurred so they would more readily accept a Homeland Security Defense bill. Just consider the immense power that such centralization of policing powers will give certain folks at the top. The only other comparison would be the KGB of the former U.S.S.R. and the former German Gestapo.
Another revealing piece of the puzzle was also recently revealed by Chuck Baldwin, writer. According to Baldwin, former President Bill Clinton was quoted while speaking to a CFR (Council on Foreign Relations) gathering:
Referring to President G. W. Bush's new Homeland Security department, former President Bill Clinton told a gathering of Council on Foreign Relations members last week, "We have been building this for a long time." For once, Clinton told the truth. What he began constructing following the Oklahoma City bombing, Bush has succeeded in bringing to fruition. America is about to have its very own Gestapo.
This author’s analysis of this additional information is that if Clinton had been speaking to a mixed crowd containing both Leftists and Rightists, then I might view what he had to say as misinformation designed to cast a doubt on the integrity of the administration now in power. However, the fact that he was speaking to a left-leaning group, I would have to consider his comments as relevant and important for future analysis regarding President George Bush and his administration.
Allow me to remind you of former President Clinton’s huge effort to defraud the ACM (American Citizen Militia) after the Oklahoma City Bombing in 1995. If you will recall, the dust hadn’t yet settled on the downed federal building when Clinton appeared on television shaking his hand and asking all Americans to turn their attention on their militia neighbors.
Clinton worked to create a similar homeland defense plan. Not only that, but President Clinton worked hard, as well did certain Congressmen, to enact some of the very same privacy-intrusive laws that the recent passage of the Patriot Act—all in the name of an illusive safety and security.
The view from my desk changes with almost each passing day. Deciphering truth from fiction in life is, indeed, difficult, and now we are charged with the task of sorting truth from fiction as events related to 9/11 continue to come forth. Add to this the issue of a Homeland Defense Department the likes which Americans would never have accepted before that fateful day.
We must work to classify issues pertaining to homeland defense and globalism in general according to 1) their relevance to one another, 2) their relevance to seemingly disconnected events, 3) their relevance to agendas promoted by former Presidents of the United States, 4) their relevance to agendas obviously in the best interest of those who run the financial show, 5) their impact on events remote from the United States., and 6) how they fit into the global agenda at hand.
This author has spend considerable time and effort writing commentaries that talk of a global conspiracy being perpetrated by a relatively small, tight-knit group of family bankers that most experts refer to as international bankers. You should now be asking yourself, "What does this man have against those who own, operate, and control our money."
To answer that question, all that can be said is that this author holds no animosity toward these powerful folks. However, I do have a keen sense of right and wrong, and the manipulation of governments and people by virtue of ownership and control of our money is not a good thing nor is it right under God’s eyes, so this author believes.
We must not lose faith, for those who persevere will realize a profit beyond the scope of money. If you will recall, Jesus Christ, the Son of the MOST HIGH, was tempted by the fallen angel, Lucifer (AKA: Devil/Satan) while he was in the desert fasting. If I may quote a short passage from the Christian New Testament Bible—Matthew 4:1-11:
Source: Good News For Modern Man
American Bible Society 1966; p.9
Obviously, where the Son of God was able to say NO to Lucifer, many now powerful men and women were unable to do so.
To those, both great and small, who willingly participate in the current plan to control all of society, monetarily and politically, all this author can ask is, Why? Why are you willing to risk all of eternity for such a small, short-term spot of profit? From you, I would enjoy hearing what you have to say. Please write me @ firstname.lastname@example.org.
|Editor's Note: The opinions expressed in today's commentary are that of the author and not necessarily that of Al Colombo or others who appear in this publication. Thank you.|
Permission is granted to reproduce this or any of the other articles
and commentaries that appear on this web site, providing they appear in
their entirety with the author's name, e-mail address, and www.GiantKillers.Org included. |
Thank you. --Al Colombo
Return to Comments Menu
Return to Main Menu