Editorial

The deep state does not respond to FOIA requests

Published in the September, 2009, Rock Creek Free Press

In an attempt to get to the bottom of what really happened on 9/11, citizen investigator Aidan Monaghan has filed dozens of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests with federal agencies such as the FBI, SEC, Department of the Navy, and the Port Authority of New York & New Jersey.  Agency after agency has refused to comply with his requests, instead claiming that the information cannot be found, does not exist, was never properly filed, or even, from the FAA, that it was simply “not in a position to release said records at this time.”

The Freedom of Information Act was signed into law by President Johnson in 1966.  It mandates that information held by federal agencies must be made available to any citizen requesting it, unless that information is exempt.  The Act specifies nine reasons why any given piece of information could be exempt, such as invasion of personal privacy, trade secrets, anything related to the supervision or regulation of financial institutions, and anything that could compromise either law enforcement or national security.  In addition, the FBI has put an exemption on all of their 9/11 information and will release information only if compelled to do so by a lawsuit, of which Monaghan has filed two.

Despite the persistent stonewalling, Monaghan has turned up some interesting discrepancies.   While it was widely reported in the media, such as by USA Today, that the flight data recorder (FDR)  also known as the “black box,” for American Airlines flight 77 (the plane that allegedly hit the Pentagon on 9/11) was found at 4 am on September 14, 2001, the file containing the FDR data was dated over four hours earlier.  In other words, we are asked to believe that the data from the FDR was downloaded prior to the FDR being found.

Researchers release 9/11 Pentagon Attack report

published in the July 2009 Rock Creek Free Press

Download July 2009 Rock Creek Free Press

Among 9/11 truth activists, there is little disagreement about what happened at the World Trade Center and at Shanksville. Although it’s not possible to know all the details of what transpired until there is an independent, impartial investigation, there is wide agreement among 9/11 researchers that World Trade Center buildings 1, 2 and 7 were brought down by controlled demolition, and that the hole in the ground that was presented to us as the crash site of flight 93 in Shanksville does not contain the remnants of an airplane.

But when it comes to the Pentagon, the truth community has yet to reach a consensus, and 9/11 forums are filled with bitter arguments from proponents of one view or another.  It is assumed by most savvy 9/11 activists that the truth movement has been infiltrated by intelligence agents tasked with crippling the movement in any way possible, and that many of the most strident arguments come, not from sincere researchers, but from disinformation agents intent on spreading confusion and discord.  These agents are in a position to know the truth about what happened, and can be expected to mount vigorous arguments against that truth, the better to keep the movement divided and to prevent a clear, cogent message about what happened at the Pentagon from reaching the masses. 

To many activists, the Pentagon attack stands as the single most incriminating feature of 9/11.  The official conspiracy theory (OCT) would have us believe that the world’s only superpower, with the most massive military that has ever existed, was unable to defend its own headquarters 51 minutes after the north WTC tower had been hit, 34 minutes after the south WTC tower had been hit, and 41 minutes after the FAA knew that there was an emergency aboard flight 77 (the plane that supposedly hit the Pentagon).  Regarding flight 77, Wikipedia states: 

By 08:56, the flight was turned around, and the transponder had been disabled. The FAA was aware at this point that there was an emergency aboard the plane. By this time, American Airlines Flight 11 had already crashed into the World Trade Center, and United Airlines Flight 175 was known to have been hijacked and within minutes of also striking the World Trade center.

Where was America’s air defense during the 41 minutes after it was known that flight 77 was hijacked and before the Pentagon was attacked?  In highly incriminating testimony given to the 9/11 Commission, then Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta stated that while he was in the bunker with Dick Cheney:

There was a young man who had come in and said to the vice president, "The plane is 50 miles out. The plane is 30 miles out." And when it got down to, "The plane is 10 miles out," the young man also said to the vice president, "Do the orders still stand?" And the vice president turned and whipped his neck around and said, "Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the contrary?"

A few minutes later, the Pentagon exploded in flames, killing 125 unsuspecting workers in the building.  No evacuation order had been given.

Norman Mineta’s testimony was not included in the 9/11 Commission Report.  Download 911 Commission Report

Given these facts, plus many other anomalies about the OCT, it is no surprise that millions of people have concluded that the government is lying about what happened at the Pentagon.  With the scene of attack completely controlled by the primary suspect, and with all video of the attack confiscated from nearby businesses by the FBI within minutes of the attack, for years 9/11 researchers wondered about what had actually transpired at the Pentagon, with little hard evidence to guide them.

Frustrated with idle speculation, two men from Southern California, Craig Ranke and Aldo Marquis, joined forces to form Citizen Investigation Team (CIT).  They traveled to the Pentagon and sought out eyewitnesses who saw the plane approach the Pentagon.  They interviewed their eyewitnesses, on camera, at the location where they had been standing on the morning of 9/11 when they saw the plane, and had all but a couple of the witnesses draw the plane’s flight path on a map and sign it. 

A pattern began to emerge, and the more witnesses CIT interviewed, the clearer the pattern became:  the plane had not taken the path claimed by the government, and the path that it did take proves that the plane did not hit the building.

CIT interviewed three Pentagon police officers, two of whom witnessed the flight path from the Citgo gas station (Officer William Lagasse, Officer Chadwick Brooks and Officer Roosevelt Roberts Jr.); five Arlington Cemetery workers (Darrell Stafford, Darius Prather, Donald Carter, William Middleton Sr. and George Aman); auto mechanic Edward Paik; Citgo gas station attendant Robert Turcios; air traffic controller Sean Boger (who was at the Pentagon Heliport at the time of the attack); Terry Morin, a project manager for Sparta (saw the plane from the Navy Annex); courier Levi Stephens (saw the plane from the Pentagon’s south parking lot); and Maria de La Cerda, a career musician with the Army band, who saw the plane from Arlington Cemetery.

Every one of these people clearly recalls seeing the plane take a path that disagrees with the government’s story.  Most of them saw the plane fly north of the Citgo station prior to the fireball at the Pentagon.  One witness, Roosevelt Roberts Jr., saw the plane after the explosion, banking low over the parking lot.  None of them report seeing the plane fly south of the Citgo station, where it would have had to have been to have caused the damage at the Pentagon.

Although there are other witnesses who claim the plane took the south path, they can be dismissed if they also claim absurd things, such as that the plane cartwheeled into the building, or if they were not in a position to see the things they claim to have seen. 

There is a zone of destruction heading towards the Pentagon, and into the building, that corresponds with a south side flight path.  Five light poles were destroyed, and the damage in the building lines up perfectly with those five light poles. 

Under most circumstances, physical evidence would trump eyewitness testimony.  But in this case, the crime scene was controlled by the primary suspect, tainting the credibility of the physical evidence.  In addition, there are many anomalies with the physical evidence. 

Right from the beginning, questions arose.  Where was the plane debris?  Photos taken immediately after the attack show no wings, tail or fuselage.  No luggage or bodies.  The damage to the building is inconsistent with the crash of an airliner with a 44 foot tall vertical stabilizer and 125 foot wingspan.

Even the downed light poles are suspicious.  Compared to a light pole that was knocked down by wind, and has a jagged edge where it broke at the base, the light poles downed on 9/11 appear to have been cut, neatly and cleanly.

This photo (below) clearly shows a long scratch mark on the asphalt where the 247 pound light pole -- that supposedly had been taken out of Lloyd England's windshield -- was dragged into position in front of his taxicab.

On top of this odd physical evidence, we now have 14 eyewitnesses who have stated that the plane was not where it would have needed to be to down the light poles and hit the Pentagon.

CIT is not the only group concluding that the plane didn’t hit the Pentagon.  Pilots for 9/11 Truth is a group of 200 aviation professionals who all agree that, according to the data released by the government, the government story is not correct. 

In August 2006, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) released the Flight Data Recorder data for flight 77.  According to Rob Balsamo, founder of Pilots for 9/11 Truth, the last recorded altitude for the plane (one second before the alleged impact) shows an altitude of 480 feet above sea level.  The top of the Pentagon is 112 feet above sea level.  Given this data, the plane cleared the building with 368 feet to spare. The NTSB has refused to comment on this.  

For the contingent within the 9/11 truth movement that is convinced that a plane did hit the Pentagon, the most convincing evidence comes from the dozens of witnesses who believe they saw the plane hit the building.  Six of these witnesses are editors or reporters for USA Today, and all claim to have been on the same quarter mile stretch of Rt. 27, heading the same way at the moment of the attack, late to work at the USA Today building in Rosslyn, three miles away. 

In a ten minute video called “The USA Today Parade,” CIT has demonstrated that the Pentagon is not visible for most of that quarter mile stretch of Rt. 27.  With video taken in a car driving that same route, it is clear that the Pentagon only becomes visible at the point at which the plane would have been over or behind the car. For much of the route, the Pentagon is obscured by large, bushy trees.  CIT interviewed alleged witness to the Pentagon impact and USA Today editor Joel Sucherman on camera in his office.  Sucherman insists that he saw the Pentagon at a location which CIT’s video clearly shows does not have a view of the Pentagon. 

USA Today is owned by the Gannett company, which also owns Army Times, Air Force Times, Marine Corps Times and Navy Times.

In the 9/11 truth movement, CIT’s work has been controversial.  They are banned from posting on the largest 9/11 truth forum, 911blogger.  Recent threads demonstrate that 911blogger has a pronounced preference for the “yes, a plane hit the Pentagon” version of events, with frequent anonymous contributors vehemently defending that point of view. 

The primary criticism of CIT’s work is that all of their witnesses believe the plane impacted the building.  As I reported in my story about CIT in the April 2009 Rock Creek Free Press:

All of CIT’s witnesses also believe that the plane they saw hit the Pentagon, although this cannot be possible.  This fact has been used to dismiss CIT’s work as irrelevant, but it’s not a compelling argument.

Less than an hour earlier, America had been treated to the sight of the south tower of the World Trade Center being hit by a plane and exploding into a huge fireball.  Most people were aware that an attack was underway.  If they saw a jet heading directly towards the Pentagon, and next saw a massive fireball, it is doubtful that one person in a thousand would question whether the plane had crashed and caused the fireball.  To conclude that the fireball was caused by explosives pre-planted in one of the most heavily guarded buildings on the planet, in an intentional false flag attack to justify war, would require observers to have a degree of perspicacity that was extremely rare in the pre 9/11 world, and only slightly less rare now.

For those who actually saw the plane fly over the building, there was a convenient cover story:  the second plane that came along three mintues after the first and flew over the building.  Anyone who saw the truth of what happened would conclude that they were seeing the second plane. 

The attack at the Pentagon is best understood as a gigantic magic show.  How many of us have ever seen a fireball hundreds of feet in diameter?  I am sure that if I were to see one, my eyes would be riveted on it and for at least a few moments I’d be completely unaware of anything else in my environment.  This is the essence of the magician’s trade – with flourishes and fanfare, he makes you look where he wants you to look, so you never see him slip the card behind his ear or up his sleeve.  With the news media batting clean-up, only witnesses who confirmed the OCT were given airtime, and any doubters who were interviewed were simply edited out of the evening newscast. 

In an effort to hold media and government officials responsible for their evidence, CIT has created a new film, National Security Alert.  This 80 minute video compresses all of the CIT interviews into a concise and serious presentation (sans music) that summarizes their evidence clearly and soberly.  Their site will also contain a section where citizens can record which officials have received a copy of the video, and their response (or lack thereof).

CIT will be showing excerpts of National Security Alert and addressing the implications of their findings at a free conference in Arlington, VA called Deconstructing the Pentagon Attack. The conference will also feature Shelton Lankford, Lt. Col. USMC (retired), a fighter pilot with over 300 combat missions, 10,000 hours of flight time, and a recipient of the Distinguished Flying Cross. As of publication, attendance by Rob Balsamo of Pilots for 9/11 Truth is unconfirmed.

Held at the NRECA Conference Center at 4301 Wilson Blvd, in Arlington, the event will run from 10 am to 2:30 pm on Saturday, July 11, and is sponsored by The Wisdom Fund. Both the conference and parking are free.

If Spain used rendition - as the US does - we could see the Bush 6 kidnapped off an American street and into a Spanish prison

Published in the May, 2009 Rock Creek Free Press

An internationally renowned Spanish judge is attempting to prosecute six former Bush officials for their role in allowing torture at the US prison camp at Guantanamo Bay.  Despite being urged by the Spanish Attorney General  to drop the case, Judge Baltasar Garzon has submitted the case to a lottery system which will now assign it at random to one of six high court judges.  As one of those high court judges, Garzon has a one in six chance of getting the case back. 

Spain has jurisdiction in the case because five Spanish citizens or residents claim to have been tortured at Guantanamo Bay.   

The language used by Spanish Attorney General Conde-Pumpido, such as calling the case “fraudulent,” has led some observers to conclude that Conde-Pumpido bowed to pressure from the Obama administration.  The AG also said "If one is dealing with a crime of mistreatment of prisoners of war, the complaint should go against those who physically carried it out.”

US Attorney General Eric Holder said that he isn't going to prosecute any Central Intelligence Agency employees who water boarded suspects.  Holder said that it would be unfair to prosecute those who actually carried out acts of torture, because it was considered legal at the time by the Justice Department. Holder also said the U.S would defend the CIA torturers against attempted prosecutions from overseas.

The 1984 Convention Against Torture states:  “An order from a superior officer or a public authority may not be invoked as a justification of torture…” Both Spain and the US are signatory to the Convention, which the US was involved in negotiating. 

How Citizen Investigation Team Solved the Pentagon Riddle

published in the April, 2009 Rock Creek Free Press

Two California men who call themselves Citizen Investigation Team (CIT) have compiled impressive video evidence that the plane seen flying towards the Pentagon on the morning of September 11, 2001 could not have caused the death and damage at the Pentagon, nor the damage to five light poles outside the Pentagon. 

Frustrated with the inability of 9/11 researchers to do anything other than speculate about what really happened that day, Craig Ranke and Aldo Marquis decided to take matters into their own hands.  They have repeatedly flown in from southern California, canvassed the area near the Pentagon on foot to find people who saw a plane just prior to the fireball, and then quizzed these eye-witnesses extensively on camera to establish exactly what they saw, when they saw it and where they saw it from.  

Their research is summarized at their website, as well as in four DVDs containing interviews with 13 people who attest that they saw a plane fly to the north of the Citgo gas station on Pentagon property, not south of the Citgo station as required by the official story. 

CIT had each witness draw the flight path they saw on a map; the compilation from all the witnesses is shown below.  The yellow lines clustered together towards the top of the map are from the witnesses, the straight blue line angling up from the bottom edge of the map is the official flight path of the plane, as described by the National Transportation Safety Bureau (NTSB).

Taken together, the 13 witnesses deliver a devastating blow to the official story about the Pentagon attack.  Five 40 foot, 247 pound light poles were knocked down that day, and if the plane flew north of the Citgo station, it could not have knocked down those poles.  The west side of the Pentagon was damaged as if it was hit by a plane heading north, with the zone of destruction angling north.  If the plane flew to the north of the Citgo station before hitting the Pentagon, it would not have caused this kind of damage.

CIT’s evidence is compelling for a number of reasons.  Three of their witnesses are Pentagon police officers who were on duty at the time of the attack.  Most of the others were government employees at their jobs, and their presence at that place and time can be verified.  This stands in sharp contrast to the witnesses who claim they saw the attack from their cars, as their presence on the road cannot be confirmed.   

NY Times Complicit in FBI Anthrax Coverup

Published in the March, 2009 Rock Creek Free Press

by Sheila Casey

Back in 2001, just months after the anthrax attacks that killed five people, several articles came out in mainstream newspapers that pointed clearly to the CIA and Army as the most likely sources of the weaponized anthrax. Articles in The Baltimore Sun, Miami Herald, Washington Post and New York Times laid out the facts that incriminated Battelle Memorial Labs in West Jefferson, Ohio, and the Army’s lab at the Dugway Proving Grounds in Utah as the only logical sources for the anthrax. These facts, as reported in 2001, include:

1. For over a decade, Army scientists at Dugway have been making weapons-grade anthrax that is “virtually identical” to the anthrax used in the attacks.

2. The anthrax used in the 2001 attacks was extremely concentrated, with a trillion spores per gram. The Dugway anthrax had a similar concentration.

3. The FBI was increasingly focused on US government bioweapons research programs as the source of the deadly anthrax.

4. Both the lab in Utah and the lab in Ohio received anthrax samples from the United States Army Medical Research Institute for Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID) at Fort Detrick, although USAMRIID deals only with wet anthrax and ships it wet.

5. The investigation was focused on the Dugway anthrax, and Dugway was described as the only facility that was known to be weaponizing anthrax.

6. One FBI official said that the CIA’s anthrax was “the best lead we have at this point.”

7. Army officials said that Fort Detrick did not have the equipment for weaponizing anthrax.

The FBI has never explained what became of this initial focus on the labs in Utah and Ohio. Instead, after the death of Fort Detrick anthrax researcher Bruce Ivins in July, 2008, the FBI attempted to make the case that Ivins was the murderer and all other suspects had been cleared of suspicion.

Since Ivins’ death, the media have, with very few exceptions, passively swallowed the line dispensed by the FBI, and have acted as little more than stenographers in parroting the hollow arguments presented by the FBI that Ivins is guilty.

Former Wall St. Journal editor savages the mainstream media

I have a soft spot in my heart for Paul Craig Roberts, as it was reading one of his columns in summer 2007 that got me started investigating 9/11. He is also a frequent contributor to the Rock Creek Free Press, where I am a staff writer. 

Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury under Reagan and served as associate editor of The Wall Street Journal.

In his January 7 column, Roberts  recommended that we look to non-American sources, such as Haaretz in Israel, or the Asia Times, for unbiased reporting.  He deplored the state of American mainstream media:

Today reporters write the stories that their masters want to hear, or they are out. The function of editors is to make certain that no uncomfortable information reaches the public.

The public is slowly catching on, and the print media is slowly dying. The New York Times, Chicago Tribune, and Los Angeles Times are all on the ropes to one extent or the other.

Americans are still subjected to Fox "News" and CNN propaganda piped into airport waiting rooms, doctors’ offices, and exercise centers. It is very much the situation that George Orwell describes in 1984.

But Roberts gave enthusiastic praise to the still little-known, but rapidly growing, Rock Creek Free Press:

The Rock Creek Free Press is terrific. After reading one issue, you will waste no more time on the "mainstream media." The Rock Creek Free Press is likely to rescue even the dullest mind from its brainwashed state.

The Creek is mailed out each month to subscribers in 50 states and six foreign countries.  A free issue of can be requested here. 

My work for the Creek on the issues of torture, liberal gatekeepers, the planned financial meltdown, the framing of Bruce Ivins for the anthrax attacks, and the crumbling of the AIDS dogma is here. 

Top scientists ask medical journal "Science" to retract original AIDS papers

Thirty-seven doctors, senior researchers and attorneys have asked the journal Science to retract four articles published in 1984 that supposedly established that HIV was the cause of AIDS.  The articles, by a group led by Dr. Robert Gallo, have drawn criticism for some time.  An investigation in the early 90s by the US Department of Health and Human Services concluded that the lead paper was “fraught with false and erroneous statements.” A Congressional Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations produced a staff report on the papers which contains scathing criticisms of their integrity.

Now, new analysis of the documentation behind the papers has revealed even more reason to doubt Gallo’s findings.  The letter refers to “recent revelation of an astonishing number of previously unreported deletions and unjustified alterations made by Gallo…”

Dr. Mikulas Popovic wrote the manuscripts while Gallo was in Europe, but Gallo made handwritten changes to the manuscripts upon his return.  Popovic wrote: "Despite intensive research efforts, the causative agent of AIDS has not yet been identified.”  This sentence was deleted and replaced by a statement that the findings suggest that HIV is the cause of AIDS.

Gallo submitted micrographs to Science that were identified as containing the HIV virus. But just four days before he submitted them, Dr. Matthew A. Gonda, then Head of the Electron Microscopy Laboratory at the National Cancer Institute, wrote a letter to Gallo and Popovic stating that he “does not believe” that the micrographs contain images of HIV.  The micrographs were published in Science on May 4, 1984 and identified as containing HIV. 

These developments add to the mounting body of evidence that the original conclusion that HIV causes AIDS is deeply flawed. 

Thus far there has been no response from Science regarding the request for retraction.

Everything you know about AIDS is wrong

 Published in the November, 2008 Rock Creek Free Press.

By Sheila Casey / RCFP

On April 23, 1984, Secretary of Health and Human Services Margaret Heckler and researcher Robert Gallo from the National Cancer Institute held a press conference and announced that Gallo had found the cause of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS), the retrovirus HIV. Heckler estimated that a vaccine would be available in just two years. That same day in 1984, Gallo patented the blood test to detect the HIV antibodies.

As a retrovirus researcher, Gallo had previously tried to pin the blame for Alzheimer’s, leukemia and neurological disorders on a retrovirus, all without success. Now AIDS was in his sights.

But Gallo had skipped an important step in the scientific process: his HIV research had never been subjected to peer review, and was not published until after the press conference with Heckler had already conferred legitimacy on it.

Billions of dollars poured into research programs and millions of people lined up to have their blood checked; by 2006, 72 million Americans had been tested, with a third of that number tested every year. As its creator, Gallo received a percentage of the cost of each test.

To receive a positive HIV test result was considered a death sentence: you would get AIDS and die a miserable death, sooner or later.

As the years passed, it became apparent that this was not true. Only five percent of the people who tested HIV positive went on to develop AIDS. A vaccine has never been found. And there is now a growing group of scientists who dispute that HIV causes AIDS.

Yes, the middle class will be destroyed. No, it's not an accident.

Published in the November, 2008 Rock Creek Free Press.

Economist and financial guru Karl Denninger has been railing for weeks about the lunacy of the bailout bill and the devastation it will bring to our financial markets.

Here's the key passage from Denninger's post on Market Ticker from Wednesday:

Oil will collapse in price to $20/bbl.  Unfortunately nobody will have any money to buy gasoline, or a car, so it won't matter.  As in The Depression millions of automobiles will be scrapped after being abandoned by their owners for lack of insurance and registration fee money.  Cheap scooters will become the dominant form of transportation for those with jobs, as they will be all most people can afford.

As credit collapses distribution of food and other essentials will break down.  Unable to access credit, trucking companies will be unable to get goods to market.  The current distribution system for food requires travel of over 500 miles from production to consumption; this is untenable in a market where stable credit is unavailable.  Food distribution will be severely impacted and in some areas may break down below critical levels.

Unemployment will reach 25% within two years.  Median income will fall by 30% nationally.  Foreclosures will reach 20 million homes.  The government will step in with HOLC-style remediation but it won't matter - the unemployed won't be able to pay irrespective of the price.

House prices will fall to well under $100,000 nationally on a median basis but with lending all but non-existent you'll need 50% down.  A few people will make out like bandits near the bottom, being able to buy up homes for $10,000 each in blocks of 10 at a time - for cash.  60% of America will be renters; nearly half of all homeowners will ultimately lose their homes to foreclosure.

Civil unrest will break out in major cities when incomes fall but the cost of food and essential services fail to come down materially, leaving millions of Americans hungry, broke and homeless.  Unlike in the 1930s America will not quietly stand in soup lines - instead they will riot, loot and burn.  The National Guard will be called up but will find it impossible to exert meaningful control without shutting down all commerce in the affected areas. The decision will be made to cordon off the cities and deny entry to anyone who does not live in that specific neighborhood, essentially shutting down commercial activity.  GDP will fall by 30%.

Confessions of a Conspiracy Theorist

Published in the October, 2008 issue of The Rock Creek Free Press

Over the past few decades, the CIA controlled mainstream media in America has achieved a significant PR objective:  they have made it socially unacceptable to believe that there is a conspiracy operating at the highest levels of our government.  This puts those of us who do know about the plot at high levels in an awkward position:  either we pretend that we don’t know what we know, or we risk being ridiculed and marginalized as a pathetic joke.

He who defines the language defines the parameters of the debate, and so far the conspirators are winning.  They have succeeded in imbuing the moniker “conspiracy theorist” with such intensely negative connotations that even most conspiracy theorists—such as 9/11 truth activists—tie themselves in knots to avoid earning that label.  

Is there anything wrong with having theories?  Of course not.  Knowledge progresses through scientists proposing a certain hypothesis (or theory) and then testing to see if it holds up.  It doesn’t mean they are flying blind, untethered by facts.  They use the facts they already know to create theories about things that are still unknown. 

Is there anything wrong with having theories about a conspiracy?  Is it akin to having  theories about leprechauns, poltergeists or Bigfoot?  Do conspiracies exist only in the realm of fantasy or the occult?

Definitely not.   There are dozens of vast conspiracies that have been validated by historians. Wikipedia lists 27 “proven conspiracies, some of which were not the subject of any widespread speculation until they were exposed.” 

That is, they used to.  The list of 27 proven conspiracies is in my article on the back page of  the June issue of the Rock Creek Free Press, exactly as copied from Wikipedia in May 2008.  That list of “proven historical conspiracies” was removed from Wikipedia on June 7, 2008, just a few days after the June issue of the Creek hit the streets of DC. 

But I digress.

High level government conspiracies definitely happen.  So what exactly is wrong with having a theory about a vast plot to deceive us?

From the point of view of the conspirators, plenty.  They cannot succeed unless their under-handed dealings remain well out of sight.  If the details of Operation Mockingbird became widely known, no one would read or watch any news from the mainstream media anymore, and their effort to control public opinion would fail.

Those in charge of the cover-ups had very good reasons for launching an all out attack on conspiracy theorists, and due to Operation Mockingbird, they are able to insert their memes into TV shows, news articles, books, movies, songs, greeting cards and comic books.  Without quite realizing how it happened, the population adopts the belief desired by the conspirators: that those who suspect conspiracies are deficient human beings in every respect. 

Based on my own exposure to the MSM, I could easily conclude that conspiracy theorists are:

Bruce Ivins the fall guy to cover secret anthrax weaponization program

By Sheila Casey

Published in the September, 2008 issue of The Rock Creek Free Press

US Attorney Jeff Taylor was sweating on August 6, as he laid out his case against the late Dr. Bruce Ivins at a news conference—and with good reason.  Anyone familiar with the case is well aware that Dr. Ivins was railroaded, and that the news conference was a flimsy web of lies.

Ivins had nothing to do with the 2001 anthrax attacks.  The attacks were almost certainly carried out by the only group that had the means to produce the highly weaponized anthrax in the letters:  the CIA, its contractor Battelle Memorial Institute of West Jefferson, Ohio., and the Army at Dugway in Utah.

The DOJ-FBI frame-up of Ivins rests heavily upon the claim of new advances in genetic testing which supposedly prove that the killer anthrax could have come only from Ivins’ flask.

Jeff Taylor stated: 

The FBI sought out the best experts in the scientific community and, over time, four highly sensitive and specific tests were developed that were capable of detecting the unique qualities of the anthrax used in the 2001 attacks.

This is an outright lie.  No special tests were required to assess the genetic heritage of the Ames strain in the envelopes.  The Washington Post reported on December 16, 2001 that “only five laboratories so far have been found to have spores with perfect genetic matches to those in the Senate letters.”

The distinguishing feature of the anthrax that killed five people in 2001 is not related to its genes.  What made that anthrax unique was that it was highly weaponized.  Anthrax is a common pathogen found in the soil in many places.  It doesn’t become lethal unless produced in such a way that it behaves like a gas, floating easily in the air and deep into a victim’s lungs. 

The anthrax used in the attacks was beyond cutting edge.  Donald A. Henderson, former assistant secretary for the Office of Public Health Preparedness at the Department of Health and Human Services, told Science magazine: "It just didn't have to be that good" to be lethal.

Why the killer anthrax was so deadly

1.    Precisely sized particles—1.5 to 5 microns.  Anything smaller is exhaled, anything larger tends to get caught either in the nose or in the cilia in the trachea.  

2.    Coated with silica.  The silica acted as a buffer, preventing spores from adhering to one another.  The silica on the attack anthrax rested on a thin layer of polymerized glass, which is a highly advanced technique for coating anthrax spores.  To do this required a “spray dryer,” the cheapest of which sells for $50,000.  The lyophilizer in Ivins’ lab is used to dry anthrax, but can NOT be used to coat the spores with silica.  Ivins did not have a spray dryer. 

3.    Highly concentrated.  The letter to Senator Daschle’s office contained two grams of anthrax, about the weight of a dime.  Each gram contained a trillion pure spores of anthrax, or enough to kill 200 million people. 

4.    Electro-statically charged.  The slight charge on each spore caused it to repel the other spores and spread out into the room after the envelope was opened. 

It is these attributes of the anthrax—not its genetic heritage—which made it so unique and so lethal. 

The source of the anthrax was clear in 2001

US Attorney Jeff Taylor characterized a flask in Dr. Ivin’s possession as “the murder weapon.”  But a Dec. 12, 2001 article in The Baltimore Sun stated:

For nearly a decade, U.S. Army scientists at Dugway Proving Ground in Utah have made small quantities of weapons-grade anthrax that is virtually identical to the powdery spores used in the mail attacks that have killed five people. 

The article refers to Dugway as “the only site in the United States where weapons-grade anthrax has been made in recent years,” and also includes this:

Dugway's production of weapons-grade anthrax, which has never before been publicly revealed, is apparently the first by the U.S. government since President Richard M. Nixon ordered the U.S. offensive biowarfare program closed in 1969.

The following day, The Washington Post echoed the Sun article:

An Army biological and chemical warfare facility in Utah has been quietly developing a virulent, weapons-grade formulation of anthrax spores since at least 1992.

On Dec 16, 2001, The Washington Post corroborated the Sun report by stating that “Dugway is the only facility known in recent years to have processed anthrax spores into the powdery form that is most easily inhaled,” also stating, “Army officials in Washington said yesterday that Fort Detrick does not have the equipment for making dried anthrax spores.”

On September 4, 2001, The New York Times explained:

Over the past several years, the United States has embarked on a program of secret research on biological weapons . . . even the [Clinton] White House was unaware of their full scope. The projects, which have not been previously disclosed . . . have been embraced by the Bush administration, which intends to expand them.

These projects involve the CIA, Battelle Memorial Laboratories in West Jefferson, Ohio, and the Army at Dugway in Utah.

[T]he need to keep such  projects secret was a significant reason behind President Bush's recent rejection of a draft agreement to strengthen the germ-weapons treaty, [the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention,] which has been signed by 143 nations.

Had the treaty been strengthened, the Dugway and West Jefferson sites would have been subject to international inspections. It is important to note that Battelle not only operates its own labs in West Jefferson, but also is contracted by the Army to operate the labs at Dugway.

The DOJ-FBI news conference on August 6, 2008 was a deliberate attempt to divert attention from the secret anthrax weaponization projects by pinning the crimes on a dead man. So far the DOJ-FBI have succeeded in covering up the real perpetrators of the crime, concealing the illegal weapons program, and persuading many that it is time to close the investigation.

Conference for Media Reform Goes Halfway with Truth

by Sheila Casey
Published in the July, 2008 issue of The Rock Creek Free Press

The National Conference for Media Reform made a good first impression.  It was held in the vast and beautiful Minneapolis convention center.  The press materials and handouts were professionally designed and accurate.  Well known media personalities such as Amy Goodman, Bill Moyers and Naomi Klein were in attendance as speakers.  But the conference pulled its punches and refused to consider the most serious problem confronting our media, i.e., control by the CIA.

The event got off to a rousing start in the main auditorium with speeches from Josh Silver, co-founder and head of Free Press, the organization putting on the conference; Larry Lessig, law professor at Stanford, and Keith Ellison, the only Muslim in the House of Representatives.   There were multiple standing ovations.   

Josh Silver’s best quote was, “we are living in the Matrix and big media is writing the script.”

Lessig delivered a well-rehearsed speech with accompanying slide show that focused on the flaw in our Constitution that allows money to corrupt government.  Lessig’s best quote:  “So long as there is private funding of public elections, corruption will continue.”

Ellison showed the clip of himself with CNN talk show host Glen Beck, where Beck says “I’m tempted to ask you…to prove to me that you’re not a terrorist.”  His best quote, in reference to having people who hate government running the government, was “Vegetarians do not make good steak house chefs.”

Over the next three days, there were dozens of smaller sessions on topics ranging from the corporate media to the WGA to black radio. 

Yet despite all the populist energy and wide-eyed optimism, it gnawed at me that 9/11 was not mentioned.  The only official group questioning 9/11 was Project Censored, the Sonoma State University project that puts out a publication each year on the top 25 most important censored stories.  I heard that panels on 9/11 had been proposed, but turned down because they had done one at the last NCMR in Memphis, and taken flack for it from the corporate media.

So the 2007 conference on media reform upset the corporate media.  “Big mistake,” the conference organizers decided.  “Let’s make sure we don’t do anything to upset them next time!”

I stood in line to ask a question at a panel called “Corporate Confidential,” with Catherine Crier of Cajole Entertainment, Jeff Cohen, founder of FAIR, and Cliff Schecter, author of The Real McCain. 

I tilted the microphone toward my mouth so my voice was loud and clear. 

“I write for a variety of left-leaning publications—Buzz Flash, Common Dreams, the Progressive Populist, Dissident Voice.  But I find that when I write about 9/11, I have a very hard time getting published.  These progressive outlets are certainly no friend of the current administration.  On this particular issue, they are unwilling to question the story the administration has fed to us.  I’ve conducted a comprehensive investigation into all aspects of the official 9/11 story, and have determined that it’s a lie.  Why is the progressive media so unwilling to look at this?”

There was scattered applause and cheers from the audience. 

Liberal Media Echo White House 9/11 Talking Points

by Sheila Casey

published in the June, 2008 issue of The Rock Creek Free Press.

When BuzzFlash editor and publisher Mark Karlin dipped his toe into 9/11 waters, he got an earful from his readers. In a May 12 blog post, Karlin states unequivocally that “9/11 was not an inside job,” (although he does concede an 80% probability that Flight 93 was shot down over Pennsylvania).

Judging from the comments, his audience was not impressed. Reader after reader tries to set Karlin straight by presenting pieces from the overwhelming mountain of evidence indicating that we were sold a bill of goods about 9/11. So far Karlin has been silent. If he’s reading the reactions to his post, he gives no sign of it.

Buzzflash is a liberal news site that accepts no advertising and prides itself on being an unadulterated alternative to the whorish mainstream media. It pulls no punches in exposing the mind-boggling awfulness of the current administration— with one major exception. Like almost every other liberal outlet, it gives the Bush administration a free pass on 9/11.

The position of BuzzFlash, AlterNet, The Huffington Post, Daily Kos, The Nation, The Progressive and many other liberal outlets seems to be:

• Bush and Cheney stole the 2000 and 2004 elections and are in office illegitimately.
• They lied shamelessly to get us into illegal wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, resulting in the death and injury of millions of innocents.
• They are torturing prisoners at Gitmo in violation of the Geneva Conventions.
• They have decimated the Constitution, abolished habeas corpus, and are in the process of instituting a police state.
• They directed the Justice Dept. to fire US attorneys who were not considered “good Bushies,” and then covered it up by flatly refusing to submit to Congressional oversight.
• They have spied on Americans illegally, reading our emails and listening to our phone calls without a court warrant.
• They let Americans die like rats in the streets of New Orleans and then lied about rebuilding the Gulf coast after Katrina.

They’re evil. They are devils straight from the bowels of hell. But would they kill US citizens and blame it on Osama bin Laden to create a pretext for war to steal oil in the Middle East?
Don’t be ridiculous! They may demonstrate all the wisdom and compassion of Attila the Hun, but surely they wouldn’t murder their ‘own people’ in cold blood. Only wacky conspiracy theorists think that. Certainly not solid, well-established liberal publications like us.

Speaking of 9/11 truthers, Manuel Garcia of Counterpunch (Sep. 9, 2006) makes accusations of “wild theories fueled by paranoia,” and states that “conspiracists” “cannot accept” the real reasons for the attack, and instead must “find comfort” in an irrational hypothesis.

Sure, Manuel. It’s much too scary to believe that we were attacked by bearded men hiding in caves nine time zones away. It’s so much more soothing to believe it was our own government, the nexus of which is located just down the road, and which, at its discretion, can label me a terrorist and lock me up indefinitely. It makes me feel so warm and cozy that I tell it to my kids as their bedtime story.

Rice Directed Torture from White House

by Sheila Casey

published in the May 2008 issue of The Rock Creek Free Press.

In December 2005, Condoleezza Rice testified to Congress “The United States does not permit, tolerate or condone torture under any circumstances.” 

But ABC news has now revealed that during 2002 and 2003, Rice led dozens of meetings to discuss specific torture techniques with the National Security Council Principals Committee in the White House Situation Room.  The committee included Vice President Dick Cheney and former Bush aides Attorney General John Ashcroft, CIA Director George Tenet, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Secretary of State Colin Powell.  They approved using the “enhanced interrogation techniques” of sleep deprivation, waterboarding, pushing and slapping. 

Comedian Jon Stewart has joked that waterboarding sounds fun, as in “I’m going to hop in my Chevy Tahoe, get a six pack, and head out for some waterboarding.”  But until recently the United States considered waterboarding to be torture, and prosecuted Japanese officers for subjecting prisoners to waterboarding in World War II.

In waterboarding, a prisoner is strapped to a board with his head lower than his feet, while water is poured steadily over his nose and mouth, until his lungs fill with water.  Prior to death, the process is stopped and the victim revived, often to endure it yet again.  It can leave victims with lung damage, brain damage and death, if they cannot be revived. 

Waterboarding was designated as illegal by U.S. generals in the Vietnam War.  On January 21, 1968, The Washington Post published a controversial photograph of two U.S soldiers and one South Vietnamese soldier waterboarding a North Vietnamese POW near Da Nang.   The photograph led to the soldier being court-martialled by a U.S. military court within one month of its publication, and he was discharged from the army.

Are Conspiracy Theorists out of Their Gourds?

by Sheila Casey

published November 19th, 2007 in Dissident Voice, and March 2008 in the Rock Creek Free Press. 

Of course conspiracies exist. Merriam-Webster says a conspiracy is ‘a secret agreement to do an unlawful or wrongful act.’ If two or more people plot to do something corrupt, criminal or not, it’s a conspiracy. The world is teeming with them.

But conspiracy theorists are assumed to fear something much larger and more insidious than run of the mill nastiness; their suspicions focus on vast schemes and secret societies that control the levers of government. Conventional wisdom calls these people crackpots, nut jobs, tin foil hatters. Wikipedia states that ‘conspiracy theorist is a pejorative term, used to dismiss claims that are considered paranoid, unfounded, outlandish, irrational, or otherwise unworthy of serious consideration.’

It seems that conspiracy theorists have all the credibility of members of the Flat Earth Society.

Are we to assume then that no governmental conspiracies exist? That the idea of the Bush administration lying to us, or pressuring other agencies such as the State Department, CIA, or Justice Department to lie to us is unthinkable? That it wouldn’t be possible, for example, for them to cook up a case for war against a country that never attacked us, using information they know to be false? That they might claim that we are invading to spread democracy, when they really have their eye on the $30 trillion in oil under Iraqi sands? That they are willing to be thought of as incompetent because they invaded without an exit strategy when not leaving is exactly what those double-dealing conspirators had in mind?

Me neither, that could never happen.