www.globalresearch.ca
Centre for Research on Globalisation
Centre de recherche sur la mondialisation

The Joint inquiry is to churn out red herrings: a data bank of unconnected occurrences on "intelligence failures", FBI lapses, etc.

Political Complicity and the 9/11 Joint Inquiry

by Michel Chossudovsky

Global Outlook, Fall 2002
www.globalresearch.ca 25 July 2003

The URL of this article is: http://globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO307F.html

Note: This article published in the Fall 2002 issue of Global Outlook , was written in June 2002 at the outset of the Joint committee's activities.

 

In June 2002, in a closed session, the House and Senate intelligence committees decided to probe "the evolution of the international terrorist threat… and scrutinize the intelligence community's response through Sept. 11 and beyond." 1 (SFC, 5 June 2002). The "intelligence panel" was given the mandate to comb through some 360,000 pages of top secret information "gathered by wiretaps, spies, and spy satellites" 2 (CBS, 4 June 2002).

Now it just so happens, or is a pure coincidence, that this Congressional inquiry on 9/11 is an initiative of the two individuals Sen. Bob Graham a Democrat and Rep. Porter Goss, a Republican, who were having breakfast on 9/11 with the alleged money man behind the terrorist attacks, General Mahmoud Ahmad, head of Pakistan's Military Intelligence (ISI). (For details see Michel Chossudovsky,  Political Deception: The Missing Link behind 9-11,  http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO206A.html )

Punishing the Whistleblowers

The mandate of the joint inquiry is to reveal the truth behind 9/11. What we want, said Rep. Porter Goss, is: "to explain to the executive branch, Congress and most importantly to the American people what happened, how it happened, and what we need to do to reduce the risk of a reoccurrence of such horrific events." 3 (Miami Herald, 4 June 2002)

The joint inquiry has focussed its attention on the "unauthorized disclosures" which triggered the foreknowledge "Prez knew" scandal last May. While seeking who is behind these "intelligence leaks" and punishing the whistleblowers, the broader issue of political accountability, which is on everbody's lips is not part of the inquiry's terms of reference.

The joint inquiry was also given the mandate to carefully "document" new "alleged terrorist threats". The thrust of this exercise --led by Rep. Porter Goss, a former uncover CIA agent of the Cold War era-- is crystal clear: distort the history of 9/11, churn out phony intelligence which justifies new military operations, conduct massive purges within the police and intelligence apparatus, while weeding out potential whistleblowers and trouble-makers.

Careful Omission

While mountains of intelligence material have already been collected, through careful omission, the numerous press and intelligence reports in the public domain (mainstream media, alternative media, etc), which confirm that key members of the Bush Administration were involved in acts of political complicity and camouflage, have been carefully removed from the panel's data bank and excluded from the joint committee's hearings, held behind closed doors.

The fact that Al Qaeda is a creation of the CIA, a so-called "intelligence asset" (confirmed by official reports and congressional transcripts), is not part of the Joint Inquiry's terms of reference, nor is the insidious role of Pakistan's military intelligence, which has consistently supported the "Islamic militant network", always acting on behalf of the CIA. More specifically, the role of the former head of the ISI, General Mahmoud Ahmad, who -according to official intelligence sources-- allegedly transferred money to the 9/11 terrorists is not part of the investigation, because this would inevitably reveal the cozy personal links between the General and key members of the Bush Cabinet, not to mention the personal relationship between the General and the two Florida lawmakers.

While "the elephant is sitting right on top of the stack of hay", the intelligence panel has been instructed "to look for pins rather than elephants". In other words, the joint inquiry is to churn out red herrings: a data bank of unconnected occurrences on "intelligence failures", FBI lapses, etc.


Notes

1. San Francisco Chronicle, 5 June 2002.

2.CBS News, 4 June 2002

3. Miami Herald, 4 June 2002.


 © Copyright 2003  For fair use only/ pour usage équitable seulement .


[home]