Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

bush

2 views
Skip to first unread message

k00...@webtv.net

unread,
Jun 16, 2002, 10:06:31 AM6/16/02
to
CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN NEWS
4:20am
Dr.Gottlieb:repost->aLd52
Who Killed John O'Neill?
  If you believe the media, John P. O'Neill was simply another
innocent victim killed in the September 11 attacks on the World Trade
Center. But you don't need much imagination to suspect something deeper
was at work. oneil.jpg, JPG image, 110x142
Clearly, O'Neill was a man Osama bin Laden wanted dead. O'Neill had been
a Deputy Director of the FBI, and Osama bin Laden's main pursuer in the
US government. O'Neill had investigated the bombings of the World Trade
Center in 1993, a US base in Saudi Arabia in 1996, the US embassies in
Nairobi and Dar-Es-Salaam in 1998, and the USS Cole last year. But once
the first plane hit the North Tower, Osama bin Laden wouldn't be the
only man to profit from O'Neill's death. At the moment of impact,
O'Neill became the man who knew too much. Just two weeks, TWO WEEKS,
prior to the attack, O'Neill had left his job with the FBI. O'Neill had
quit because he believed that the Bush administration had stymied the
intelligence agency's investigations on terrorism. O'Neill charged that
it had done so even as it bargained with the Taliban on handing over of
Osama bin Laden in exchange for political recognition and economic aid.
In the ultimate irony, O'Neill had gone public with these charges at the
same time that he was leaving the FBI to become the head of security at
the World Trade Center. "The main obstacles to investigate Islamic
terrorism were US oil corporate interests, and the role played by Saudi
Arabia in it," O'Neill reportedly told the authors of an explosive new
book, Hidden Truth, by intelligence analysts Charles Brisard and
Guillaume Dasquie. Brisard met O'Neill several times last summer and
reports that O'Neill complained bitterly that the US State Department -
and behind it the oil lobby who make up President Bush's entourage -
blocked attempts to prove bin Laden's guilt. Released just last
November, Brisard and Dasquie's book was mostly ignored by the US media.
But it is beginning to cause a stir. Just two days ago, the story aired
for the first time on US television when CNN's Paula Zahn interviewed
former Iraqi chief U.N. weapons inspector Richard Bulter. "The most
explosive charge, Paula, is that the Bush administration -- the present
one, just shortly after assuming office slowed down FBI investigations
of al Qaeda and terrorism in Afghanistan in order to do a deal with the
Taliban on oil -- an oil pipeline across Afghanistan" Butler said.
Maybe part of the reason Paula left Faux news is because she knew her
right wing bosses would never let her run a story like this one. But
what Paula didn't explore, or even mention, was that O'Neill was not
alive to confirm or refute those charges. What CNN didn't find
interesting was the fact that John P. O'Neill was in his 34th-floor
office in the World Trade Tower when the first of two hijacked planes
hit the building, or that he phoned a son and a friend to reassure them
he was fine.
What the US media have apparently found less interesting than the death
of Clinton's dog is that we have only the government's version of what
happened next. O'Neill is reported to have called FBI headquarters, and
then re-entered one of the towers to help others. The official story is
that O'Neill was inside when the buildings collapsed. How convenient for
the Bush administration that Mr. O'Neill would not only die in the
attack, but also that he would make such a call. Not only was the Bush
administration's most dangerous critic forever silenced, but he also
provided the administration the perfect story to explain his death. Can
you imagine how the events of the past four months would have differed
had John P. O'Neill, former Deputy Director of the FBI and head of
security at the World Trade Tower at the time of the attacks, had been
alive to tell this story?
Can you imagine the uproar this story would be causing if Bill Clinton
were still president?
As things stand, only time will tell if O'Neill's story is investigated
by the US press that found Monica Lewinsky worthy of two years of our
lives. Certainly, the authors who have reported it are credible. Till
the late 1990s, Brisard was the director of economic analysis and
strategy for Vivendi, the giant French conglomerate that owns Universal
Studios and effective control of USA Networks. He also worked for French
secret services (DST), and wrote for them in 1997 a report on the now
famous Al Qaeda network, headed by bin Laden. Dasquie is an
investigative journalist and publisher of Intelligence Online, a
respected newsletter on diplomacy, economic analysis and strategy. And
Richard Bulter, who put the story in play on the US cable networks, is
hardly an excitable conspiracy nut.
Perhaps the CIA will investigate. But I wouldn't expect much from them.
After all, they were apparently unable to penetrate the same Al Qaeda
network that welcomed in John Walker, a confused 20 year old kid from
California, who is reported to have met bin Laden himself. Just for a
few moments, let's delve into the world of the conspiracy theorist and
make a few assumptions.
Let's start by assuming that the real motives for the 9-11 attacks were
much more than just a desperate attack by Islamic extremists on the West
and the real motives and perpetrators are much more sinister - as well
as being conveniently covered by a smokescreen of government and media
lies.
Let's say for example - there is a secret government whose aim is
control of the world's remaining resources and ultimately total global
domination - as Osama Bin Laden himself said "a government within the
government". This so called "Secret Government" used various
intelligence agencies to arrange the attacks, deliberately arranged the
collapse of the buildings and arranged a convenient cover story to
justify the immediate invasion of Afghanistan. The immediate benefits of
this being control of the vast oil resources in the Caspian Basin, not
to mention the massive strategic benefits gained by controlling this
area.
Suppose a high ranking figure in the FBI is doing his best to track down
the leading figures of modern-day Islamic terrorism and just happens to
start poking his nose in to business that may cause "issues" for your
hidden agenda - what do you do?
Suppose this same FBI character decides to start blabbing to some French
intelligence experts about how his efforts to investigate the terrorist
activities of one former CIA asset, Osama Bin Laden, are being blocked -
what do you do?
Smear him and/or damage his reputation
Make it impossible for him to continue in the FBI Have him permanently
removed from the equation. The Hit?
Shortly after leaving the FBI, John O'Neill was offered a job offering
three times the salary he had previously received - approximately $300,
000
The job was head of security for the World Trade Center. His first day
was the 11th Sept.
He apparently went back into the building to help with the rescue
operation and was killed when the building collapsed on top of him Is
this just a coincidence? If it is, it's a very big one. We've all seen
films, usually featuring organized crime conspiracies where the whistle
blower just happens to get killed in a crash just before giving evidence
- is it beyond the realms of possibility that this could be a similar
situation?
Hopefully, this will at least have given you some insight into the life
of a very brave man.
Who gave the decision of John O'Neills resignement to stop investigating
Al-Aqueada accounts?
Who gave the decision to give him a security job at the World Trade
Center?
Did John O'Neill meet anyone of the FEMA in the night of September 1oth?
www.thedailybrew.com
        MKULTRA   MkuTRa
Who Killed John O'Neill?
  © 2000-2002 San Francisco Bay Area Independent Media Center.
Unless otherwise stated by the author, all content is free for
non-commercial reuse, reprint, and rebroadcast, on the net and
elsewhere. Opinions are those of the contributors and are not
necessarily endorsed by the SF IMC. Disclaimer | Privacy  
www.glennbeck.com/news/05172002.shtml 'wave that flag'  
www.truthout.com
   www.truemajority.com
www.gwbush.com www.bushwatch.com

0 new messages