DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Office of Inspector General

A Review of Background Checks for

Federal Passenger and Baggage
Screeners at Airports

Office of Inspections, Evaluations, & Special Reviews

OIG-04-08 January 2004

 Basic Crew Member Security Training Standards

The Training Program

In designing an effective training program for Crew Members, airlines must ingiis consistent with the requirements of
the Vision 100-Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act. .i|

Each of the training standards established in this appendix to the AQSS^jrequire either a demonstratedjknowledge, or a demonstrated
performance, or both, in a subject area determined to be necessary for creujJmembers'.'Ffom an instructional design perspective,
students learn best by practicing and utilizing newly acquired knowledge andl^ki is. Therefore, situational training exercises are being
required to re-enforce learning. Since Crew Members must effectively work as kjteam, group-learning activities are strongly
encouraged. The training standards have been designed arouhil,three central theme!3J|jlj) requirements contained in Vision-100,
Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act, 2) the philosophy arid procedures delineatedjiftithe Common Strategy and, 3) other subjects
determined necessary by the Administrator. 'ji i!i||i!i J
l|, ,, Illinji"'
Using creative instructional design techniques:willpeTmit aircraft operators to deliver effective training solutions to meet the standards
established in this appendix. Delivery solutions sucli^s use of video, tapes, lecture, computer based training and written materials are
acceptable elements of an effective tramiqg';program.|'However, it is imperative to note that Vision 100 does not accept these training
methods alone. Training programs must include situati,onal training exercises consistent with these standards and geared toward re-
enforcing the knowledge gained during lecture O^jotner pa^fiiVBjdeliyery methods.

Keeping the Content

It is a prudent and conscientioUfcijdecision for the 'aircraft operator to conduct periodic and frequent reviews of the course content. This
will ensure content accuracy and currency in lignt'of developing national and international events affecting air transportation and
industry policy. Aircraft operators should consider an end-to-end review of their courseware annually, but more frequently as events
or new policy may dictate. ' '

Basic Crew Member Training Standards Page 1 of 6

 Amy Stovall, 7-7918
ACI-400
3/6/00

Threat Outlook

Issue: The threat level in the United States and abroad will remain at least as high as it is
at present, and will probably rise.

Note: Any adverse mention in the following narrative of individual members of any
political, social, religious, or national group is not meant to imply that all members of that
group are terrorists. Indeed, terrorists represent a small minority of dedicated, often
fanatical, individuals in most such groups. It is those small groups - and their actions -
that are the subject of the major points herein.

Major Points:

1. The range of terrorist activity is expanding. There is a growing presence of foreign

terrorist groups in the United States, and links between international terrorists are
being forged. Internationally, terrorist groups have evolved from the secular to the
religious-oriented. This religious inclination appeals to many and serves as a
justification to commit even the most appalling acts in the name of "holy war."
Director of Central Intelligence George Tenet has stated that the terrorist
infrastructure is "perhaps bigger than we anticipated."

2. Perceptions of the United States are negative. The U.S. is variously regarded as a
supporter of unpopular regimes, an enemy of Islam and an exponent of imperialism
(political, economic or cultural). Consequently, terrorist sponsors or groups view
U.S. interests as fundamentally hostile to their own, and may consider attacks against
the United States, either domestically or abroad, as justifiable or even obligatory.

3. Some aspects of the terrorist threat are changing. While there has been a significant
downward trend in the number of attacks, lethality is increasing. The World Trade
Center bombing in 1993; the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995; the bombing of
Khobar Towers in 1996; and the U.S. Embassy bombings in East Africa in 1998 are
major examples of the willingness of terrorists to carry out attacks that are intended to
maximize casualties.

4. The phenomenon of ad-hoc or non-traditional terrorist groups has introduced a factor

that has greatly complicated the task of preventing terrorist attacks worldwide. There
is an emerging trend among state sponsors to distance themselves from the
international terrorism scene; this allows the free agents, such as Usama Bin Ladin or
Ramzi Yousef, to step in and take up the cause. The advent of these unconventional
terrorists has made it extremely difficult to anticipate targets, timing and methods due
to the virtual anonymity of the operators and the lack of history by which to gauge
intentions. George Tenet told the Senate Intelligence Committee that recent
From the Editor: The following is the first in a series of articles and short features
focusing on aviation security prior to the creation of TSA. It is important to know where
we have been to help us see more clearly where we are going.

A Short History of Aviation Security

In the late 1960's and early 1970's, hijacking was a frequent occurrence. In 1968
and 1969, there were 46 successful hijackings of U.S. scheduled commercial
aircraft, numbering as many as two or three a week at one point.1 Everyone
agreed more needed to be done.

A Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Task Force on Deterrence of Air

Piracy was created on February 17,1969. The task force drafted legislative and
procedural recommendations, and devised a field test of an "operational screening
system for boarding airline passengers" with "weapon-detection devices" used in
conjunction with "FAA's evolving psychological profile to identify and isolate
suspicious individuals for further surveillance or search."2 Eastern Air Lines
voluntarily agreed to participate in the FAA test, joined later by TWA, Pan Am,
and Continental in "using the screening system."3 The work of the task force led
to the creation of an FAA Office of Ah" Transportation Security in 1970, over 30
years prior to the creation of TSA within the Department of Transportation.

The solution to the threat of hijacking and sabotage favored at that tune was to assign air
carriers the responsibility to provide screening personnel and airport operators to provide
law enforcement support. On February 2,1972, FAA published a rule requiring
scheduled air carriers to implement a passenger and baggage screening system, believing
that the "simple and inexpensive" system used by some carriers would have prevented
the majority of "recent hijackings" if used to the fullest extent possible. A month later on
March 18,1972, Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 1074 was issued
requiring each airport operator to implement prescribed security measures by developing
and using an approved airport-specific security program. Nevertheless, hijackings
continued.

End of First Installment—282 words

Second Installment—156 words

1 "Second Semi-annual Report to Congress on the Effectiveness of Passenger Screening Procedures," U.S. Department of
Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Civil Aviation Security Service, Washington, DC, October 6,1975, Chart I, p. 15

* Kent, Richard J., Jr., "Safe, Separated and Soaring: A History of Federal Civil Aviation Policy 1961 -1972," U.S. Department of
Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Washington, DC, 1980, p. 338.

3 Id., p. 340.

4 Recodified after the creation of TSA as 49 CFR 1540 and 1542

 MEMORANDUM

TO: Tim Roemer and Max Cleland

FROM: Dr.NormaCarr

RE: The Commission to Investigate 9/1 1

DATE: 9 April 03

I am contacting you two because I believe in you and your integrity. Please look at the recommended subpoena
list and do your best to call these individuals forward. Many of them are "just individual citizens" who may shed
some light on 9/11.

Connecting the dots is not so difficult if you look at the seemingly unimportant, minor points. I have included
documentation which may or may not be viable. However, I believe these minor points do add up to "real
information."

It is also important that you research The Project for the New American Century. Vice President Cheney
initiated this plan during the Bush-Quale administration, but was denied the opportunity to advance it. It was
thought to be too explosive. After President Clinton won the 1992 election, a cabal renamed it as The Project
for the New American Century (PNAC) and have been working on it for the past years since 1992. According to
PNAC, America must:

1. Reposition permanently based forces to Southern Europe, Southeast Asia and the Middle East;

2. Modernize U.S. forces;

3. Develop and deploy a global missile defense system and have strategic dominance of space;

4. Control the "International Commons" of cyberspace;

5. Increase defense spending to a minimum of 3.8% of GDP.

It has been said that "they" believed they would need a catastrophic event to put it this plan into action. 9/11???

Thank you for your attention to these ideas.

C:\OFFICE\WPWIN\WPDOCS\NJC\PERSONAL\COMMISSI.WPD
 To: The U.S. Senate

Petition to the Senate to Investigate Oddities Involving 9/11 Terrorist Attacks

We, the undersigned, do hereby petition the Senate of the United States of America
to thoroughly investigate the events surrounding the acts of terrorism that
transpired in the United States on September 11, 2001. Such an investigation
would include research into the following peculiarities relating to the terrorist attacks
on the United States on 9/11:

1.) Thousands of put stock options that were purchased on United and American
airlines immediately prior to 9/11/01

2.) Financial transactions totaling more than 100 million dollars that electronically
passed through the World Trade Center immediately prior to its destruction on 9/11

3.) Black-box recordings from the four planes which crashed on 9/11

4.) Cell phone calls made by passengers on hijacked flights on 9/11 which never
emerged on their cell-phone bills

5.) Interviews of any air-traffic controllers on duty on 9/11

6.) Eyewitness accounts detailing Flight 93's explosion prior to its crashing

7.) Aircraft debris strewn approximately seven miles from the crash site of Flight 93

8.) Unocal's role in its quest to build an oil pipeline across Afghanistan, plans
implemented prior to 2001

9.) Carlyle Corporation's role in overseeing Unocal's quest to have an oil pipeline
built across Afghanistan, plans implemented prior to 2001

10.) Role of remote-control software technology implemented in 9/11 hijackings and

crashes

11.) George W. Bush's possible foreknowledge of the terrorist attacks on 9/11

12.) Role of the Northern Alliance in explosive growth of opium production in

Afghanistan after U.S. military intervention

We respectfully petition the Senate to make public the results of this investigation.

Sincerely,

http://www.petitiononline.eom/11601TFS/petition.html 09/21/2002
 Unanswered Questions surrounding the
September 11, 2001 Worth Trade Center
Attac
Date: Friday, November 23 @ 18:20:46 CST
Topic: About the SHADOW Boxes

Why did a representative of UNOCAL indicate in 1998 Congressional testimony that a

multi-country plan to build an oil pipeline from North Afghanistan thru Pakistan to the
ocean would require a stable government in Afghanistan?

Why was a Pakistani Foreign Secretary informed in July of 2001 that the US would be at
war with Afghanistan by mid October?

Why did Bruce Hoffman of the Rand Institute in Washington DC indicate on November
12, 2000 that the next elected administration would have to develop a plan to deal with
Islamic fundamentalism?

Why did the State Department issue a warning of possible terrorist attacks involving
airline travel on Sept. 7, four days prior to the WTC attacks? (Confirmed by George
Schultz, former Secretary of State)

Why did the Federal Aviation Administration issue a warning two weeks prior to the
Sept. 11 WTC attack, concerning individuals linked with terror networks who were
planning to fly on US airlines?

Why was the antibiotic CIPRO issued to White House staff on the evening of Sept. 11,
three weeks prior to the first reports of anthrax in Florida?

Why did the 46-story World Trade Center #7, adjacent to the two 110-story towers,
catch fire and implode just like the other towers even though it was never hit by an
aircraft carrying jet fuel?

Why was CIPRO widely publicized as the antibiotic of choice against inhalational anthrax
when there is no data to support this recommendation and the data cited in the Journal
of the American Medical Assn. only indicates CIPRO is equivalent, not superior to other
antibiotics like penicillin and doxycycline?

Why did CNN air live reports from Kabul, Afghanistan on the evening of Sept. 11 before
any of the plane hijackers had been identified as being from Arabic countries?

Why did the US prop up the Taliban government with $43 million of humanitarian aid in
May of 2001 when it had already been identified as a harborer of anti-US terrorists?

Why did the director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency indicate to Dan
Rather on CBS News that their urban search and rescue teams arrived in New York City
on Monday nite, Sept. 10, a day prior to the WTC attack?

http://friendsoffreedom.org/print.php?sid=102 03/31/2003
 CIA admits foreknowledge of 9/11
by Larry Chin

Online Journal, 6 May 2002

Centre for Research on Globalisation (CRG), globalresearch.ca , 9 May 2002

CRG's Global Outlook, premiere issue on "Stop the War"provides detailed documentation on the war
and September 11 Order/subscribe. Consult Table of Contents

On April 11, 2002, CIA Deputy Director James Pavitt delivered an address to the
Duke University Law School Conference. This speech was covered by
AgenceFrance-Presse (AFP) on Sunday April 28, 10:59 AM in an article titled "Top
CIA official warns next terror attack unavoidable ." The CIA has released the
transcript of Pavitt's speech, which is posted at the CIA web_site .

The following are excerpts taken directly from Pavitt's address.

In this speech, Pavitt states clearly that the CIA had foreknowledge of the
September 11 attacks. My emphasis and in bold and my comments are in italics,
followed by the initials "LC."

Jim Pavitt, CIA Deputy Director for Operations

Excerpts from Address to Duke University Law School Conference
April 11, 2002

We had very, very good intelligence of the general structure and strategies of
the al Qaeda terrorist organization. We knew and we warned that al Qaeda
was planning a major strike. There need be no question about that, [my
emphasis LC]

[After seven months of CIA, the Bush administration and the mainstream corporate
media aggressively pushing the idea of an "intelligence failure" and that the CIA
was "caught unaware" by the September 11th attacks, the Deputy Director of the
CIA is clearly admitting foreknowledge. LC]

What didn't we know? We never found the tactical intelligence, never uncovered
the specifics that could have stopped those tragic strikes that we all remember so
well.

[This is flatly contradicted by what Pavitt states in another part of this address,
which is detailed below. It is also contradicted by credible and extensive reports of
successful pre-9/11 penetration of the bin Laden operation by the US intelligence
community, including CIA and National Security Agency, and the significant
technical expertise possessed by the US government, including Echelon and
Promts software. It is also contradicted by the fact that intelligence agencies

http://globalresearch.ca/articles/CHI205A.html 03/31/2003
U.S. Policy Towards Taliban Influenced by Oil -Say Authors
by Julio Godoy, Inter Press Service
at Truthout among other places
Thursday November 15 01:21 PM EST

PARIS, Nov 15 (IPS) - Under the influence of U.S. oil companies, the government of George
W. Bush initially blocked U.S. secret service investigations on terrorism, while it bargained with
the Taliban the delivery of Osama bin Laden in exchange for political recognition and
economic aid, two French intelligence analysts claim.

In the book "Bin Laden, la verite interdite" ("Bin Laden, the forbidden truth"), that appeared in
Paris on Wednesday,

the authors, Jean-Charles Brisard and Guillaume Dasquie, reveal that the Federal Bureau of
Investigation's deputy director John O'Neill resigned in July in protest over the obstruction.

Brisard claim O'Neill told them that "the main obstacles to investigate Islamic terrorism were
U.S. oil corporate interests and the role played by Saudi Arabia in it".

The two claim the U.S. government's main objective in Afghanistan was to consolidate the
position of the Taliban regime to obtain access to the oil and gas reserves in Central Asia.

They affirm that until August, the U.S. government saw the Taliban regime "as a source of
stability in Central Asia that would enable the construction of an oil pipeline across Central
Asia", from the rich oilfields in Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Kazakhstan, through
Afghanistan and Pakistan, to the Indian Ocean.

Until now, says the book, "the oil and gas reserves of Central Asia have been controlled by
Russia. The Bush government wanted to change all that".

But, confronted with Taliban's refusal to accept U.S. conditions, "this rationale of energy
security changed into a military one", the authors claim.

"At one moment during the negotiations, the U.S. representatives told the Taliban, 'either you
accept our offer of a carpet of gold, or we bury you under a carpet of bombs'," Brisard said in
an interview in Paris.

According to the book, the government of Bush began to negotiate with the Taliban
immediately after coming into power in February. U.S. and Taliban diplomatic representatives
met several times in Washington, Berlin and Islamabad.

To polish their image in the United States, the Taliban even employed a U.S. expert onpublic
relations, Laila Helms. The authors claim that Helms is also an expert in the works of U.S.
secret services, for her uncle, Richard Helms, is a former director of the Central Intelligence
Agency (CIA).

The last meeting between U.S. and Taliban representatives took place in August, five weeks
before the attacks on New York and Washington, the analysts maintain.

http://www.ucolick.org/~de/WTChit/Godoy.html 03/31/2003
Agent's Role in Inquiries Is Questioned
By NEIL A. LEWIS NY Times 5/26/02

WASHINGTON, May 25 — A bipartisan group of senators has demanded that the

Federal Bureau of Investigation explain why a senior agent who had access to two
important strands of counterterrorism information never put the information together in
a way that might have helped thwart the Sept. 11 attacks.

According to the three senators, a warning last summer from a Phoenix F.B.I, agent
about terrorists using American flight schools was sent to the same unit of the bureau
that was dealing with the Minnesota field office and its suspicions about Zacarias
Moussaoui, a flight student there who officials now say was supposed to be the 20th
hijacker.

The senators, Patrick J. Leahy, Democrat of Vermont; Charles E. Grassley, Republican

of Iowa; and Arlen Specter, Republican of Pennsylvania, raised questions about the
bureau's performance in a letter sent on Friday to the F.B.I, director, Robert S. Mueller
HI.

The senators, who released a copy of the letter to news organizations, asked Mr. Mueller
to explain how the head of the bureau's Radical Fundamentalist Unit, David Frasca,
dealt with the information from Minnesota and Phoenix.

"Please explain his role and the role of the R.F.U. in evaluating the requests from the
Minneapolis field office in the Moussaoui case," the senators wrote. "What connection,
if any, he or others drew between the two ongoing investigations; and whether he or
others brought such a connection to the attention of higher level F.B.I, officials."

Mr. Grassley, in separate comments, was more blunt. He castigated Mr. Mueller for
refusing to release to the Senate Judiciary Committee a letter that Coleen Rowley, a
senior F.B.I, agent in the Minneapolis office, wrote to him on Tuesday asserting that
officials at bureau headquarters stymied the Moussaoui investigation.

"This letter has me very alarmed about the nation's security," Mr. Grassley said today.
"If F.B.I, headquarters is still handling terrorism information like it handled the
Moussaoui case, we're in grave danger."

Mr. Grassley added: "This was worse than dropping the ball. This was bureaucrats at
headquarters actively interfering with an investigation that had a terrorist hi hand."

Steven Berry, a supervisory agent at F.B.I, headquarters, said today that officials had no
comment on the senators' letter or on Mr. Frasca's role.

Mr. Grassley, a persistent critic of the bureau, also said: "Director Mueller can label this
letter classified, and the F.B.I, can circle the wagons, but a cover-up is not going to
work. This letter documents exactly what headquarters knew and when, and how

http://www.policetalk.com/agent_frasca.html 03/31/2003
Has someone been sitting on the FBI? 6/11/01 WATCH/LISTEN
BULLETINS ON DEMAND
•wjBBC Radio latest
GREG PALAST:
nBBC News 24
The CIA and Saudi Arabia, the Bushes and the Bin Ladens. ««•>) BBC World Service radio
Did their connections cause America to turn a blind eye to CUBBC One TV news
terrorism?
>• Programme pages

UNNAMED MAN:
There is a hidden agenda at the very highest levels of our
government.
nle'-w s n i q h t
JOE TRENTO, (AUTHOR, "SECRET HISTORY OF THE
CIA"):
The sad thing is that thousands of Americans had to die
needlessly.

PETER EISNER:
How can it be that the former President of the US and the
current President of the US have business dealings with
War on
"O"
characters that need to be investigated?

PALAST:
In the eight weeks since the attacks, over 1,000 suspects and Arr.?ck o
potential witnesses have been detained. Yet, just days after
the hijackers took off from Boston aiming for the Twin
Towers, a special charter flight out of the same airport
whisked 11 members of Osama Bin Laden's family off to
Saudi Arabia. That did not concern the White House.

Their official line is that the Bin Ladens are above suspicion -
coming up
apart from Osama, the black sheep, who they say hijacked
DP, "
the family name. That's fortunate for the Bush family and the
Saudi royal household, whose links with the Bin Ladens could
otherwise prove embarrassing. But Newsnight has obtained 2C frO'^3 Of 20
evidence that the FBI was on the trail of other members of Newsnight
the] Bin Laden family for links to terrorist organisations
before and after September llth.
meet
This document is marked "Secret". Case ID - 199-Eye WF 213
589. 199 is FBI code for case type. 9 would be murder. 65
would be espionage. 199 means national security. WF
indicates Washington field office special agents were '
investigating ABL - because of it's relationship with the World
Assembly of Muslim Youth, WAMY - a suspected terrorist
organisation. ABL is Abdullah Bin Laden, president and
treasurer of WAMY.
U
This is the sleepy Washington suburb of Falls Church, Virginia
where almost every home displays the Stars and Stripes. On
this unremarkable street, at 3411 Silver Maple Place, we
located the former home of Abdullah and another brother,
Campbell v Paxman
Omar, also an FBI suspect. It's conveniently close to WAMY.
The World Assembly of Muslim Youth is in this building, in a
little room in the basement at 5613 Leesburg Pike. And here,

http://news.bbc.co.uk71/hi/events/newsnight/1645527.stm 03/31/2003
FLASH 34: Bush Given Invasion Plan Two Days Before 9/11

In the context of misleading statements from White House spokesman Ari Fleischer and
National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice about the degree of US foreknowledge of the 9/11
events, MSflBjCj^m/news has revealed that detailed plans for the US retaliation against al-
Qaeda and the Taliban reached the White House for Bush's signature on September 9, two
days before the attacks.

In the words of MSNBC

'President Bush was expected to sign detailed plans for a worldwide war against al-Qaida two
days before Sept. 11 but did not have the chance before the terrorist attacks in New York and
Washington, U.S. and foreign sources told NBC News.

The document, a formal National Security Presidential Directive, amounted to a "game plan to
remove al-Qaida from the face of the Earth," one of the sources told NBC News' Jim
Miklaszewski.

The plan dealt with all aspects of a war against al-Qaida, ranging from diplomatic initiatives to
military operations in Afghanistan, the sources said on condition of anonymity.' In many
respects, the directive, as described to NBC News, outlined essentially the same war plan that
the White House, the CIA and the Pentagon put into action after the Sept. 11 attacks. The
administration most likely was able to respond so quickly to the attacks because it simply had
to pull the plans "off the shelf," Miklaszewski said.'

http://ist-socrates.berkeley.edu/~pdscott/qf911 .html 03/31/2003

 >» On 11 December 2002, the Senate and House
Intelligence Committees released portions of their -joint
report on intelligence failures regarding the September
11 terrorist attacks. The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, on
PBS, reported on the release that day. After asking her
guests a bunch of predictable questions, and receiving
predictable answers, guest host Gwen Ifill asked Senator
Bob Graham, Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on
Intelligence, a good question and got an amazing answer.

GWEN IFILL: Senator Graham, are there elements in this report,

which are classified that Americans should know about but can't?

SEN. BOB GRAHAM: Yes, going back to your question about

what was the greatest surprise. I agree with what Senator Shelby
said the degree to which agencies were not communicating was
certainly a surprise but also I was surprised at the evidence that
there were foreign governments involved in facilitating the
activities of at least some of the terrorists in the United States.

I am stunned that we have not done a better job of pursuing that to

determine if other terrorists received similar support and, even
more important, if the infrastructure of a foreign government
assisting terrorists still exists for the current generation of terrorists
who are here planning the next plots.

To me that is an extremely significant issue and most of that

information is classified, I think overly-classified. I believe the
American people should know the extent of the challenge that we
face in terms of foreign government involvement. That would
motivate the government to take action.

GWEN IFILL: Are you suggesting that you are convinced that
there was a state sponsor behind 9/11?

SEN. BOB GRAHAM: I think there is very compelling evidence

that at least some of the terrorists were assisted not just in
financing — although that was part of it — by a sovereign foreign
government and that we have been derelict in our duty to track that
down, make the further case, or find the evidence that would
indicate that that is not true and we can look for other reasons why
the terrorists were able to function so effectively in the United
States.

GWEN IFILL: Do you think that will ever become public, which
countries you're talking about?

http://www.thememoryhole.org/911 /911 -graham-admits.htm 03/31/2003

 Video Description Ordering Information

AfterMath: Unanswered Questions From 9-11: 1. Order by phone via credit card (toll-free USA
and Canada) 1-866-470-0740
In this provocative investigative documentary, Former 2. Order online via credit cas'd at Unisun.org
Inspector General of the Dept. of Transportation and 3. Or by mail: please send a check or money
attorney Mary Schiavo, DC Professor Emeritus Peter Dale order for $25 made out to:
Scott, author and professor Michel Chossudovsky, From Kyle F. Hence
the Wilderness' Mike Ruppert, and author Nafeez Ahmed, P.O. Box 1255
among others, raise critical, unresolved questions Newport, RI 02840
surrounding the tragedy of September 11. AfterMath
investigates the troubling span of issues that have arisen
since the attacks, including: the negligence of military
officials in immediately reacting to the hijackings, proven
links between the hijackers, Pakistani intelligence (ISI)
and the CIA, the role of oil in the Eurasian conflict and,
finally, the impact of post-911 legislation on American civil
liberties.

UQ co-founder, Kyle F, Hence, was Associate Producer and

worked with the Sundance Award-winner Guerilla News
Network (GNN.tv).

http://www.unansweredquestions.org/ 03/31/2003
 Unexplained Anomalies

1. On September 10, 2001, there were 4,526 put options

bought on United Airlines and only 748 call options. For
American Airlines, the number of puts is 60 times the daily
average. Who were these traders?
2. The chief of the Pakistani Intelligence Service wired
$100,000 to Mohammed Atta before the attacks. On
September 11, he met with the heads of the House and
Senate Intelligence Committees in Washington, D.C. Why
did he send the money and why was he meeting with
congresspersons on September 11?
3. Why were Standard Operating Procedures,
designed to prevent, intercept, or terminate
an attack, utterly ignored or suspended on
9/11?
4. Why did George W. Bush continue to chat with Florida
elementary school children after he learned of the attack?
5. Why did Pentagon officials cancel their airline flights on
9/11?

One Possible Conclusion

Mary Schiavo, former Inspector General for the U.S.

Department of Transportation under both Bush I and
Clinton, and a lawyer for thirty-two families from all 9/11
hijacked planes, stated that every single aviation disaster
in history, except for 9/11, had been followed by not only a
http://www.hermes-press.com/keys9_11 .htm 03/31/2003
Eagan flight trainer wouldn't let unease about
Moussaoui rest
Greg Gordon, Star Tribune
Published December 21. 2001 HJT21

WASHINGTON, D.C. - When a Twin Cities flight instructor

phoned the FBI last August to alert the agency that a terrorist
might be taking lessons to fly a jumbo jet, he did it in a dramatic
way:

"Do you realize how serious this is?" the instructor asked an FBI
agent. "This man wants training on a 747. A 747 fully loaded with
fuel could be used as a weapon!"

The aviation student he was talking about was Zacarias

Moussaoui, who was arrested the following day and last week
was charged in a federal indictment with conspiring with Osama
bin Laden and others to carry out the Sept. 11 attacks.

New details of how Moussaoui raised suspicions at the Pan Am

International Flight Academy in Eagan - and the company's eerily
prescient tip - are emerging from the briefings the school recently
gave to congressional offices.

The still-unidentified flight instructor became wary of Moussaoui

immediately, according to Minnesota Rep. Jim Oberstar and
others with direct knowledge of the briefings.

Moussaoui first raised eyebrows when, during a simple

introductory exchange, he said he was from France, but then
didn't seem to understand when the instructor spoke French to
him.

Moussaoui then became belligerent and evasive about his

background, Oberstar and other sources said. In addition, he
seemed inept in basic flying procedures, while seeking expensive
training on an advanced commercial jet simulator.

Besides alerting the FBI about Moussaoui, the school's Phoenix

office called the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) early this
year about another student - Hani Hanjour, who was believed to
be the pilot of the plane that flew into the Pentagon on Sept. 11.
The school had raised questions about Hanjour's limited ability to
speak English, the universal language of aviation.

An FAA representative sat in on a class to observe Hanjour, who

was from Saudi Arabia, and discussed with school officials finding
an Arabic-speaking person to help him with his English, said
Oberstar and others with direct knowledge of the school's
http://www.startribune.com/stories/1576/913687.html 03/31/2003
S.F. attorney: Bush allowed
9/11
BY DAVID KIEFER
Of The Examiner Staff

Stanley Hilton now figures his case is stronger because of a

coalition of attorneys, victims' families and bipartisan legislators who
gathered in Washington on Monday to condemn the government's
lack of action in preventing the Sept. 11 attacks.

Hilton is the San Francisco attorney who filed a $7 billion lawsuit

in U.S. District Court on June 3 against President Bush and other
government officials for "allowing" the terrorist attacks to occur.

Among Hilton's allegations: Bush conspired to create the Sept. 11

attacks for his own political gain and has been using Osama bin
Laden as a scapegoat.

Hilton said he has information that bin Laden died several years
ago of kidney failure.

"I hope it will expose the fact that there are numbers of people in
the government, including Bush and his top assistants, who wanted
this to happen," Hilton said.

His class-action suit named 10 defendants, including Vice

President Dick Cheney, National Security Advisor Condoleezza
Rice, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, and Transportation
Secretary Norman Mineta. Hilton said he represents the families of
14 victims and that 400 plaintiffs are involved nationwide.

White House spokesman Ken Macias and Department of Justice

public affairs officer Charles Miller each said their departments were
unaware of the lawsuit.

Hilton, Sen. Bob Dole's former aide, has been publicly critical of
conservatives in books he has written about Dole and the Clinton
sex scandal. Hilton, who said he has sources within the FBI, CIA,
the National Security Agency and Naval intelligence, demands
Bush's impeachment and believes the truth will come out in trial.

Hilton claims the Bush administration ignored intelligence

information, refused to round up suspected terrorists beforehand,
and during the hijackings refused to disable pilot controls and switch
to a ground-based remote system.

He claims the government benefited from installing a puppet

Afghan government friendly to U.S. oil interests.

Hilton also says Bush used bin Laden's antagonist image to

create a public frenzy, which allowed the Bush administration to
tighten its political grip.

http://www.examiner.com/news/default.jsp?story=n.lawyer.0611w 09/21/2002
 Remarks By President George W. Bush At Town Hall Meeting
(Excerpt)...

Q Mr. President, I want to say they haven't won. I got in my car today,
and I'm in the same building with you, speaking to you. They have not
won.

PRESIDENT BUSH: Thank you very much.

Q And would you say hello to my son, Jordan, and my daughter,

Patricia?

PRESIDENT BUSH: Jordan and who?

Q Patricia.

PRESIDENT BUSH: Hi, Patricia. How are you?

How old is Patricia?

Q Five, and Jordan's in third grade. And Jordan has the question, if I
could give him the microphone.

PRESIDENT BUSH: You bet. That's - your mother's relaying the mike
to you, Jordan.

Q One thing, Mr. President, is that you have no idea how much you've
done for this country. And another thing is that - how did you feel when
you heard about the terrorist attack?

PRESIDENT BUSH: Well - (applause) - thank you, Jordan.

Well, Jordan, you're not going to believe where - what state I was in
when I heard about the terrorist attack. I was in Florida. And my chief of
staff, Andy Card - well, actually I was in a classroom, talking about a
reading program that works. And it - I was sitting outside the - the
classroom, waiting to go in, and I saw an airplane hit the tower of a - of
a - you know, the TV was obviously on, and I - I used to fly myself, and
I said, "Well, there's one terrible pilot." And I said it must have been a
horrible accident.

*** START Note from Jared Israel ***

[First, at 9am on September 11th, when Bush was at the Booker School, there was
no TV footage of the first plane hitting the World Trade Center for the very good
reason that the TV news people didn't know it was going to happen. As Peter
Jennings said on ABC *after* the second plane hit the World Trade Center, that is,
after the time when Bush claims he saw TV footage of the first crash:
http://www.scoop.co.nz/archive/scoop/stories/80/0c/200209131339.ba84c914.ht... 09/21/2002
 January 26,1998

The Honorable William J. Clinton

President of the United States
Washington, DC

Dear Mr. President:

We are writing you because we are convinced that current American policy toward Iraq is not succeeding, and
that we may soon face a threat in the Middle East more serious than any we have known since the end of the
Cold War. In your upcoming State of the Union Address, you have an opportunity to chart a clear and determined
course for meeting this threat. We urge you to seize that opportunity, and to enunciate a new strategy that would
secure the interests of the U.S. and our friends and allies around the world. That strategy should aim, above all,
at the removal of Saddam Hussein's regime from power. We stand ready to offer our full support in this difficult
but necessary endeavor.

The policy of "containment" of Saddam Hussein has been steadily eroding over the past several months. As
recent events have demonstrated, we can no longer depend on our partners in the Gulf War coalition to continue
to uphold the sanctions or to punish Saddam when he blocks or evades UN inspections. Our ability to ensure that
Saddam Hussein is not producing weapons of mass destruction, therefore, has substantially diminished. Even if
full inspections were eventually to resume, which now seems highly unlikely, experience has shown that it is
difficult if not impossible to monitor Iraq's chemical and biological weapons production. The lengthy period during
which the inspectors will have been unable to enter many Iraqi facilities has made it even less likely that they will
be able to uncover all of Saddam's secrets. As a result, in the not-too-distant future we will be unable to
determine with any reasonable level of confidence whether Iraq does or does not possess such weapons.

Such uncertainty will, by itself, have a seriously destabilizing effect on the entire Middle East. It hardly needs to
be added that if Saddam does acquire the capability to deliver weapons of mass destruction, as he is almost
certain to do if we continue along the present course, the safety of American troops in the region, of our friends
and allies like Israel and the moderate Arab states, and a significant portion of the world's supply of oil will all be
put at hazard. As you have rightly declared, Mr. President, the security of the world in the first part of the 21st
century will be determined largely by how we handle this threat.

Given the magnitude of the threat, the current policy, which depends for its success upon the steadfastness of our
coalition partners and upon the cooperation of Saddam Hussein, is dangerously inadequate. The only acceptable
strategy is one that eliminates the possibility that Iraq will be able to use or threaten to use weapons of mass
destruction. In the near term, this means a willingness to undertake military action as diplomacy is clearly failing.
In the long term, it means removing Saddam Hussein and his regime from power. That now needs to become the
aim of American foreign policy.

We urge you to articulate this aim, and to turn your Administration's attention to implementing a strategy for
removing Saddam's regime from power. This will require a full complement of diplomatic, political and military
efforts. Although we are fully aware of the dangers and difficulties in implementing this policy, we believe the
dangers of failing to do so are far greater. We believe the U.S. has the authority under existing UN resolutions to
take the necessary steps, including military steps, to protect our vital interests in the Gulf. In any case, American
policy cannot continue to be crippled by a misguided insistence on unanimity in the UN Security Council.

We urge you to act decisively. If you act now to end the threat of weapons of mass destruction against the U.S. or
its allies, you will be acting in the most fundamental national security interests of the country. If we accept a
course of weakness and drift, we put our interests and our future at risk.

Sincerely,

Elliott Abrams Richard L. Armitage William J. Bennett

Jeffrey Bergner John Bolton Paula Oobriansky

http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqclintonletter.htm 03/24/2003
World Socialist Web Site www.wsws.org

WSWS : News&_Anaiysjs : TheJJ|>WarmAfghanistan

US planned war in Afghanistan long before September 11

By Patrick Martin
20 November 2001

Back to screen version | Sejid.jMsJ.nlk_by_ema|l | EnjaJLthe..author

Insider accounts published in the British, French and Indian media have revealed that US
officials threatened war against Afghanistan during the summer of 2001. These reports include
the prediction, made in July, that "if the military action went ahead, it would take place before
the snows started falling in Afghanistan, by the middle of October at the latest." The Bush
administration began its bombing strikes on the hapless, poverty-stricken country October 7,
and ground attacks by US Special Forces began October 19.

It is not an accident that these revelations have appeared overseas, rather than in the US. The
ruling classes in these countries have their own economic and political interests to look after,
which do not coincide, and in some cases directly clash, with the drive by the American ruling
elite to seize control of oil-rich territory in Central Asia.

The American media has conducted a systematic cover-up of the real economic and strategic
interests that underlie the war against Afghanistan, in order to sustain the pretense that the
war emerged overnight, full-blown, in response to the terrorist attacks of September 11.

The pundits for the American television networks and major daily newspapers celebrate the
rapid military defeat of the Taliban regime as an unexpected stroke of good fortune. They
distract public attention from the conclusion that any serious observer would be compelled to
draw from the events of the past two weeks: that the speedy victory of the US-backed forces
reveals careful planning and preparation by the American military, which must have begun well
before the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

The official American myth is that "everything changed" on the day four airliners were hijacked
and nearly 5,000 people murdered. The US military intervention in Afghanistan, by this
account, was hastily improvised in less than a month. Deputy Defense Secretary Paul
Wolfowitz, in a television interview November 18, actually claimed that only three weeks went
into planning the military onslaught.

This is only one of countless lies emanating from the Pentagon and White House about the
war against Afghanistan. The truth is that the US intervention was planned in detail and
carefully prepared long before the terrorist attacks provided the pretext for setting it in motion.
If history had skipped over September 11, and the events of that day had never happened, it is
very likely that the United States would have gone to war in Afghanistan anyway, and on much
the same schedule.

Afghanistan and the scramble for oil

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2001/nov2001/afgh-n20_prn.shtml 07/24/2002
 TRY THIS ON FOR SIZE

President GHW Bush had an Ambassador who told Saddam Huessein that the
US would not interfere with his border disputes. President Bush invaded Irag
when they invaded Kuwait.

President GHW Bush had extremely high ratings by the voters, but was told (by
some unknown wealthy people/corporations/others) that he must lose the 1992
election because if he won he would have to deal with the Iran-Contra perjury and
other unlawful acts in a court of law. This would have soiled the name of a much
revered President, Ronald Reagan.

President Bush also was promised that his son would be well financed and would
become President in 1996. And so, President Bush lost in 1992. On 24
December 92 he pardoned Casper Weinberger, Robert C. McFarlane, Elliot
Abrams, Claire E. George, Alan D. Fiers and Duane R. Clarridge. They were all
key members involved in the Iran-Contra affair.

The son, Jeb Bush ran for Governor of Florida in 1992 so that he would be
positioned for the 1996 Presidential race. However, he lost that election to
Governor Chiles!

President Clinton won reelection in 1996.

The unknown wealthy people/corporations/others subsequently financed the

second (albeit less able) son for the 2000 Presidential race. And as we all know
the Supreme Court handed the title to George W. Bush.

In office, Mr. George W. Bush freezes the release of Presidential and Vice
Presidential papers. Now it will be difficult, if not impossible, to obtain
Reagan/Bush, Bush/Quayle and Clinton/Gore papers. Why?

C:\OFFICE\WPWIN\WPDOCS\NJC\PERSONAL\WHYBUSHW.WPD
March 13, 2002

Bush Employs Iran - Contra Veterans

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Filed at 1:33 a.m. ET

WASHINGTON (AP) - In the 1980s it was the biggest scandal of

the Reagan administration, a covert arms-for-hostages overture
to Iran - more popularly known as "Iran-Contra."

Today, a half-dozen alumni of that episode have found prominent

jobs in the Bush administration.

The most recent is former National Security Adviser John

Poindexter, 65. The retired admiral took over a new Pentagon
counterterrorism office last month.

Poindexter was convicted in 1990 on five felony charges of

conspiracy, making false statements to Congress and
obstructing congressional inquiries. He was sentenced to six
months in prison, time he never served.

An appellate court overturned the convictions in 1991, as well as

similar ones against former White House aide Oliver North, the
Marine lieutenant colonel who ran the illegal operation. The court
ruled that their testimony to Congress, for which they had been
given immunity from prosecution, had been improperly used
against them.

The Iran-Contra scandal is scarcely mentioned today. But it

brought near political paralysis to the closing days of the Reagan
presidency.

"It involved wrongdoing," said veteran GOP consultant Charles

Black. "People didn't serve the president well, and a lot of them
paid a price for that."

Another former Iran-Contra defendant is Elliott Abrams. He now

serves as Bush's special White House assistant for democracy
and human rights. An assistant secretary of state under Reagan,
Abrams pleaded guilty to withholding information from Congress,
then was pardoned by the first President Bush.

One of the most outspoken Iran-Contra figures is Otto Reich, the

State Department's top official for Latin America, who migrated to
the United States shortly after the 1959 revolution in Cuba. In his
first speech since joining the department in January, Reich said

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-lran-Contra-Reunion.html 03/15/2002
COMMISSION MEMBERS

Thomas Kean

Then let's begin with the chairman of the commission Thomas Kean, former New Jersey
Governor and President of Drew University. When Kean was appointed to replace severely
conflicted Henry Kissinger, he asserted his only constituency was the students at Drew.

Well, it turns out that is not exactly true. Kean sits on the Board of Directors of Amerada Hess,
one of the world's leading independent oil and gas companies. The company is coupled with
Delta Oil, a Saudi Arabia company in a joint venture called Delta-Hess. Delta-Hess in turn is a
partner in Azerbaijan with a consortium developing Caspian Sea oil resources.

Delta Oil is owned by the two Saudi families of Khalid bin Mahfouz and Mohammed Hussein
al Amoudi. Both are alleged to be major financial backers of Osama bin Laden and have been
named in a lawsuit by families and survivors of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Bin Mahfouz is
Osama's brother-in-law. His sister married bin Laden.

Delta-Hess owns 20% of the Azerbaijan consortium. SOCOL, the state owned Oil Company
has 50% and Frontera owns the remaining 30%. Frontera is headed by Bill White who was
Deputy Secretary of Energy in the first Clinton administration and the architect of Azerbaijans
first Caspian Sea offshore gas and oil consortium. Familiar names among its Board of
Directors and advisors include Lloyd Bentsen, former Senator and Treasury Secretary and
John Deutch, former Director of the CIA.

Kean also is co-chairman of Homeland Security Project, which had significant input into the
drafting of the Office of Homeland Security legislation. The long-time member of the CFR also
forgot to mention his role as general partner in Quad Ventures LLC. Quad is a limited
partnership operating in the $815 billion education industry whose partners include; Citigroup,
J.P. Morgan Chase, Merrill Lynch Community Development, Wells Fargo bank and insurance
giants Prudential Financial and Wachovia. Top officials in most of those companies are also
CFR members. Both Citigroup and Morgan Chase are deeply involved in the Enron scandal.
Citigroup received a slap on the wrist when found to have laundered hundreds of millions of
dollars in drug money which some suspect helped fund terrorism.

Lee Hamilton

Commission vice chairman and former congressman Lee Hamilton was appointed to replace
former senate majority leader George Mitchell (CFR), who like Kissinger declined to disclose
potential conflicts of interest and resigned. Hamilton, a CFR member since at least 1988, was
chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee and the House Select Intelligence
Committee.

In 1987, House Speaker Jim Wright (who later resigned in disgrace) appointed Hamilton to
chair a committee investigating the Iran/Contra affair. When a question was raised about
CIA/Contra drug smuggling, the response was release by Hamilton of a cursory review that
concluded there was no truth to the charges. The CIA recently released a report (that
received almost no publicity) admitting the drug connection. Jamie Gorelick

http://www.worldnewsstand.net/MediumRare/21 .htm 03/31/2003