Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2002 05:12:34 -0800
Subject: FRENCH BOOK EXPLAINS WTC ATTACKS AFTER KABUL TALKS FAIL


Hi

Finally this has explained to me why we didn't go after the terrorists
of the first WTC bombing, and the Cole, etc.  Please take a look at this
information and ask your representative to help us get an investigation
of these things! Where was the media during all of this? 

Peace!
Joan 


NEW FACTS: TERRORIST ACTS IN AMERICA TOOK PLACE AFTER UNSUCCESSFUL
NEGOTIATIONS WITH KABUL

This story is written in the book, which is now in stores of France.
"Only a month before the terror attack the American government had
active contacts with the Taliban. America wishes to get hold of
Kazakhstan's rich oil reserves and it hoped to build an oil pipeline for
that via Afghanistan, which is a neighbouring country to the republic of
Kazakhstan. The failure of negotiations is directly connected with the
attacks on the WTC and the Pentagon."

These words are taken from the book "Bin Laden: The Forbidden Truth",
which was written by two French authors. It is written in the book that
America's largest oil corporations - which were closely linked with
Bush's government,(Unocal, Chevron) were very active in the republic of
Kazakhstan. But the oil pipelines are controlled by Russians there. That
is why the corporations had an eye on Afghanistan. The negotiations with
the Taliban actually started in February, when George W. Bush took over
as president. The Talibs were ready to conduct negotiations to deliver
Bin Laden and asked to acknowledge their regime on the diplomatic level
in return.

The negotiations were intensified in April. Most often, they were held
in Berlin and lasted till August 2 and the Americans were hoping to keep
the Taliban as the ruling movement in Afghanistan. The US
representatives told the Taliban that they had better accept this
"carpet of gold" (the pipeline) or they would see a "carpet of bombs".

According to the authors of the book, the Americans made very serious
mistakes. They threatened the Taliban with violence, although at the
same time they did not seem to be determined to apply serious measures
against Bin Laden. They were well-aware of the fact that Bin Laden was
connected with the Saudi royal house and the American interests in Saudi
Arabia were more important to them. Also, the pipeline going through
Afghanistan was more important than fighting terrorism.  That is why
nothing happened.

***** John O'Neil resigned from his post (investigating international
terrorism) 5 months after Bush took office, because Bush put brakes on
his investigation of Saudia Arabia's Osama Bin Laden in June 2001.  He
was barred from going to Yemen to investigate the bombing of the Cole.
and he claimed that the Bush Foreign Policy was simply about OIL. No
media even took notice!. Mr. O'Neil then went to work as Chief of
Security for the World Trade Center in August 2001 after he resigned as
the FBI's Chief of International Terrorism. He died in his new office on
September 11, 2001 in the World Trade Center.

This might just be a coincidence, but:

THIS "PIPELINE" WAR HAS BEEN PLANNED FOR FOUR YEARS

It's been FOUR years since Congress discussed removing the government of
Afghanistan to make way for an oil pipeline: (See the Hearing before the
Sub-Commitee on Asia and the Pacific of the Commitee on International
Relations of the House of Representatives, February 12, 1998.) SEE:
http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/intlrel/hfa48119.000/hfa48119_0f.htm

It's been SEVEN MONTHS since the US Government told India there would be
an invasion of Afghanistan in October: (See the Special Report in the
Public Affairs Magazine: indiareacts.com called "India in anti-Taliban
military plan", June 26, 2001) SEE:
http://www.indiareacts.com/archivefeatures/nat2.asp?recno=10∓ctg=policy

It's been SIX MONTHS since BBC heard about the planned invasion of
Afghanistan: (See the BBC News' article by George Arney quoting Niaz
Naik, former Pakistani Foreign Secretary, who was told by senior
American officials in mid-July that military action would go ahead by
the middle October, September 18, 2001.) SEE:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/south_asia/newsid_1550000/1550366.stm

It's been TEN MONTHS since Jane's Defense News got word of the planned
invasion of Afghanistan: (See artcle by Rahul Bedi called "India joins
anti-Taliban coalition" March 15, 2001.) SEE:
http://www.janes.com/security/international_security/news/jir/jir010315_1_n.sh

and of course, only FOUR MONTHS since the attacks on the World Trade
Towers that got the American people angered into support of the war that
everybody on the planet BUT Americans had been told was on the way
before September 11. SEE: http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/ifiwere.html

During these last four months, the same American media that waved
non-stop Gary Condit in front of our faces to keep us from finding out
that plans for a war were being announced to other governments, is now
trying to keep the level of fear in the American public so high that
they cannot think.

The media has been pounding us all non-stop with Osama (you know, the
CIA's main asset in Afghanistan) in a fashion eerily similar to the
mythical dictatorship's use of Emmanual Goldstein and the "Two Minute
Hate" in George Orwell's "1984". The media's "scare-orrism" has
continued with the endless dire warnings regarding the Anthrax being
sent in letters, which in retrospect has to be the weakest form of
Anthrax, having killed far fewer people in the entire nation in the last
three months than are gunned down in Washington DC in any given week.
But the problem with using fear to keep people from thinking is that
sooner or later fear tires itself out. People habituate to it. They get
used to it. And they start thinking again. And, as people stop fearing
and start to think, they start to notice those things which the
government would prefer they don't. Things like the convenient timing of
the attacks on the World Trade Towers and the perfect fit into the
timetable of the war announced to other nations earlier in the year.
People are remembering that Osama bin Laden is a creation of the CIA,
the same CIA once headed by the President's father (who also got us into
a pointless war in the oil-rich regions of the middle east), the same
CIA that imports drugs and sells them to our children, the same CIA now
advocating the use of torture.

People are remembering that the initial Anthrax "attack" on the US
Congress occurred just as the draconian USA PATRIOT bill was about to be
voted on. People have noticed that the US Congress, out of their own
fear, voted to pass that bill without reading it at all!

(The second congressional Anthrax attack was sent to Senate Judiciary
Committee Chairman Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) "coincidentally" right after
he announced hearings on the military tribunals directive.)

People are remembering that the first suspects to be arrested after the
WTC attacks were not Arabs, but Israelis, and that Israelis (in one case
a known Mossad agent) were also arrested inside the Mexican Congress
carrying guns. Yet more suspected Mossad agents were arrested with plans
for US Nuclear power plants inside the US, but were strangely let go!
People are remembering that the Mossad has a past history of staging
fake terror attacks to blame on a third party, such as the successful
planting of fake radio traffic which tricked the US into bombing Libya,
and a failed attempt to blow up a US facility and blame it on Arabs in
1956.

Reports continue to circle in the foreign press blaming the Mossad for
the WTC attacks. People are noticing that the US Government does not
really have a case against Osama bin Laden having ANYTHING to do with
the attacks on the World Trade Towers. After announcing the evidence
would be made public, the US Government backtracked, and claimed that
the evidence had to remain secret to protect "National Security". Then
it turned out that what evidence existed was being destroyed by the NSA
and  by the FBI! While the only actual video tapes of Osama bin Laden
mentioning the WTC attacks consist of denials, a report was recently
published in the media that Osama had confessed and claimed to have
nukes. Both claims turned out to be hoaxes; an effort to manufacture a
phony confession to fill in the gap of any real evidence to justify the
bombing of Afghani civilians. The video taped confession claimed to be
the source of the transcript does not exist, and the BBC found no
mention of nuclear weapons in the original version. Careful examination
of what evidence has been presented shows it to be a total farce of
unsubstantiated and non-court-worthy claims, circumstantial at best.

And, as people stop being made blind by fear, they are starting to
realize that bombing the innocents of Afghanistan makes no sense at all
no matter what Osama bin Laden may have done, whether he still works for
the CIA or not. After all, were American citizens able to prevent the
CIA from killing 80 civilians, many of them children, with a car bomb in
Beirut in 1985. Had the CIA knocked on the doors of American citizens
and asked, "Is it okay if we blow up a bunch of kids to get at this one
target", I feel safe in saying that most Americans would have replied
that they didn't think it was a good idea (The intended target survived
the CIA's bomb). Likewise, had Osama bin Laden knocked on the doors of
the Afghani people and said, "Is it okay if we blow up a bunch of kids
to get at this one target", I feel safe in saying that most Afghanis
would have replied that they didn't think it was a good idea. Doubtless
the response was more agreeable from Osama's pals at Langley.