Startseite | Sitemap & Reisen
Sie sind hier: Startseite » Themen / News » Politik » Weltpolitik

Pipelines to 9/11 - Complete 911 Timeline

Backgrounds of the US war against Afghanistan

By Rudo de Ruijter,
Independent Researcher
Netherlands

Updated August 24, 2006

Short content "Pipelines to 9/11 - Analysis of the basis of the "Wars on Terror"

This article is about backgrounds of the US war against Afghanistan. It is
about oil, gas and pipelines around the Caspian Sea. To transport oil and
gas from the east side of the Caspian Sea, pipelines had been planned
through Afghanistan. Because a US company, UNOCAL, failed to control the
Afghan route, the war was prepared. When the military was ready to strike,
the terrorists of 9/11 gave Bush the pretext to start this war and obtain
support from Congress, the U.S. population and the rest of the world.

Contents:
Introduction
Timeline 1989 - 2000
Neo-conservative ideas
Wealthy actors and influences
Preparations for 9/11 and the invasion of Afghanistan
9/11 Conclusion


Introduction

Our politicians have shaped the idea many people have about our world.
They have divided our world into good and bad. Of course, they are always
the good guys and the ones they accuse are the bad guys. Simple, isn't it?

However, if we stick to the facts, and throw out all the information that
comes from unverifiable sources, our world looks very different. This
research is not meant to offend anyone. If you are pleased with the
"official" version of our history, don't read any further.

Bush said the attacks of 9/11 were the reason to invade Afghanistan. [1]
This article shows that the war was the logical result of an unsuccessful
struggle, by he U.S., to build and control pipelines through Afganistan,
and that preparations for this war took place before 9/11.

In 2000 the neoconservatives said they needed some catastrophic and
catalysing event.

This article shows how this event may have taken place on September 11,
2001.

The 1993 attack

The attacks on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon on September 11,
2001 eclipse an earlier attack on the World Trade Centre in 1993. On
January 20 1993, William (Bill) Clinton had become president. A month
later, on February 26, an "immense blast happened at 12:18 local time in
the Secret Service's section of the car park underneath and between what
are New York's tallest buildings." [2]

BBC published the words of an eyewitness: "It felt like an airplane hit
the building." Apparently the explosion was intended to bring both WTC
towers down. The New York Times found out that the FBI was involved in the attacks. The FBI would have infiltrated a group of terrorists, would have
known about their intentions and for some unknown reason let it happen.
[3] Six people died and a hundred were injured. [2]

Timeline 1989 - 2000

In this chapter I will present a timeline of Afghan events. I will also
mention events related to terrorism, which will become U.S. final pretext
for war.

Immediately after the attacks on September 11, 2001, U.S. officials
accused Osama bin Laden. Since the man would reside in Afghanistan, it
provided a pretext for George W. Bush to attack and invade Afghanistan.

Let's have a closer look at the situation prior to 9/11. As promised by
Soviet president Mikhail Gorbachev, the USSR had withdrawn its last
soldiers from Afghanistan on February 15, 1989. It was the end of ten
years of war. It was also the last war of the Soviet Union.

A few months later, on November 9, 1989, the Berlin wall fell. The Iron
Curtain broke down. The people living on the other side of the curtain, of
whom our leaders had always pretended they were dangerous and ferocious,
turned out to be as friendly as us.

With the concept of the Cold War our leaders had divided our world and
maintained fear in our minds for over forty years. This terror, fabricated
by our own governments, was finally over.

Pipeline projects through Afghanistan

On December 25, 1991, the Soviet flag was lowered from the Kremlin for the
last time. [4] The former Soviet republics become independent. Among them
were the countries around the Caspian Sea, all rich in oil and gas. [MAP:
http://worldatlas.com/webimage/countrys/as.htm ]

Before, the oil and gas went through pipelines to their soviet neighbours,
or were exported via Russia to Europe. Now each country could sell its own
oil and gas and explore new markets. Buyers showed up from everywhere.

In the beginning, the new leaders still had no experience with the world
oil business. One of the first deals of Turkmenistan was to auction an oil
well for as little as $100,000. [5] US companies showed up, too.

The biggest challenge was to get the Caspian oil and gas to the world
markets. The problem? The region is land-locked. If you trust neither
Russia on the North side of the Caspian Sea, nor Iran on the South side,
you need to build new pipelines. [MAP:
http://www.treemedia.com/cfrlibrary/library/policy/bremmermap.html ]

Today, from the West side of the Caspian Sea, oil is pumped through
several pipelines towards the Black Sea and the Mediterranean Sea from
where it can be shipped.

Big business on the East side of the Caspian Sea is still limited. To
unlock oil and gas from this side, pipelines have to be built through
Afghanistan. Here, since the early nineties, two pipelines - one for gas
and one for oil - have been in project. [MAP:
http://www.treemedia.com/cfrlibrary/library/energy/greatgamemaps.html#map2 ]

The oil pipe should go South to the Indian Ocean, ending at the port of
Gwadar in Pakistan. The gas pipe would turn East to Multan in the middle
of Pakistan. From Pakistan an extension is planned to Bombay (Mumbai,
India), where a U.S. company with close ties with father and son Bush,
Enron, has built a power plant. [6]

Contracts for pipelines are not just multi-billion dollar projects to
build them. The main contractor generally also buys and sells the oil or
gas going through them. With contracts he disposes of it, determines how
much the supplier gets in return, and what fee is paid to crossed
countries. He determines who gets it, how much, when, to what price and in
which currency it has to be paid.

In fact, he determines a lot in the economical developments of both the
selling and the buying countries. With Turkmenistan eager to sell its gas,
Pakistan eager to buy it and Enron in India hoping to see it arrive as
soon as possible, the pipelines through Afghanistan are of high interest.

However, in 2001, the work in Afghanistan had not yet started. Since the
withdrawal of the Soviets in 1989, unrest was still in the country.

The Taliban: From ally to terrorist

The unrest in Afghanistan that blocked the business is worth mentioning.
In 1992, the pro-Russian president Mohammad Najibullah was ousted. In
1993, Burhanuddin Rabbani became president, supported by the Tajik
minority of the population.

In 1994, the Pashtun, forming half of the population, challenged Rabbani.
Because the pipelines have to cross mainly Pashtun territory, their
movement, the Taliban, had support from the US and Pakistan.

In March 1995, two companies, BRIDAS from Argentina and UNOCAL from the
US, both claimed to have obtained the contracts from the seller of the gas
(Turkmenistan) and the buyer (Pakistan). At that moment no deal had yet
been signed with the Afghan authorities.

In October 1995, President Niyazov of Turkmenistan signed an official
agreement with UNOCAL, but in February 1996, president Rabbani of
Afghanistan signed an agreement with BRIDAS for the main section of 875
miles through Afghanistan. [7]

UNOCAL's chances seemed compromised. Fortunately for UNOCAL, the Taliban
wanted to oust president Rabbani. In September 1996, they took Jalabad,
Kandahar, and then Kabul. President Rabbani fled to join the Northern
Alliance.

UNOCAL sighed with relief. It expressed support for the Taliban takeover,
saying it makes the pipeline project easier. (Unocal later said it was
misquoted.)

Would BRIDAS now have lost the game? No. In November 1996, BRIDAS signed an agreement with the Taliban and Gen. Dostum to build the pipeline.
Unfortunately, except from Pakistan and Saudi-Arabia, the Taliban
government didn't obtain international recognition.

In April 1997, because work on the pipeline still had not started, the
Taliban announced it would award the contract to whomever starts first.
However, UNOCAL claimed there must be peace first.

In July 1997, Turkmenistan and Pakistan accepted a new delay and signed a
new contract with UNOCAL, saying they had to start the work within a year
and a half.

In December 1997, UNOCAL tried to become good friends with the Taliban and invited a delegation to their head office in Sugarland, Texas, where they
received a VIP treatment while staying in the best hotels. [8]

In Afghanistan, civil war went on. With no internationally recognized
legal representative of Afghanistan, the pipeline project seemed to be
deadlocked. [9]

US-bombs on Afghanistan after US embassies are attacked in Africa

On February 4, 1998 and May 30, 1998, very heavy earthquakes shook the
North East of Afghanistan. They attracted a lot of international attention
and many groups of relief workers came into the North-East of Afghanistan
to help. According to US accusations, this was the moment that somewhere
in this same region of Afghanistan a certain Osama bin Laden would have
been planning the bombings of two US embassies in Africa, one in Nairobi
(Kenya), and one in Dar es Salaam (Tanzania).

The bombings had a high impact in the press. 258 people were killed and
some 5,000 injured. The bombings occurred on August 7, 1998, apparently
for no specific reason. [10]

Apparently only president Clinton benefited from it. In the US, the Monica
Lewinsky affair had come to a height. The press and the public were
excited and angry. Clinton had stated under oath, that he had had no
sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky. Proof had come out he had. Clinton
was close to the point of being convicted of perjury.

The bombings of the embassies drew people\'s attention to the drama in
Africa. Finally, on August 17, Clinton came away with the perjury charge
by arguing that oral sex was not a sexual relation. [11]

A few days later, August 21, 1998, the US military threw bombs on Kandahar
and other targets in Afghanistan. Only afterwards Clinton explained to the
journalists that this was because of Osama bin Laden, who was supposed to
be behind the bombings of the US' embassies in Africa. [12]

Unlike George W. Bush in 2001, Clinton did not invade Afghanistan. An
invasion would have given hope to UNOCAL to see the Afghan deadlock
broken, but with the Lewinsky affair still being argued, Clinton did not
have enough credit for such a war.

On August 28, 1998, UNSC resolution 1193 blamed the Taliban for the
problems in Afghanistan. [13]

On November 5, 1998, a US Grand Jury indicted Osama Bin Laden. (Not for
the bombings of the embassies in Africa, but essentially for considering
the US as his enemy.) [14] & [15]

UNOCAL withdraws

In December 1998 UNOCAL withdrew from the pipeline consortium and, at
least for the outside world, the pipeline project seemed halted. [8]

However, in January, 1999, Turkmenistan\'s foreign minister visited
Pakistan, saying the pipeline project was still alive. In February, BRIDAS
had talks with leaders in Turkmenistan, Pakistan and Russia.

In March, Turkmenistan\'s Foreign Minister Sheikh Muradov met with Taliban
leader Mullah Omar in Kandahar to discuss the pipeline. In April,
Pakistan, Turkmenistan, and the Taliban signed an agreement to revive the
pipeline project. In May, a Taliban delegation signed an agreement with
Turkmenistan to buy gas and electricity. [8]

Terror warning

On June 25, 1999, the US State Department announced: \"As some of our
embassies in Africa have been under surveillance by suspicious
individuals, we are taking the precaution of temporarily closing our
embassies in Gambia, Togo, Madagascar, Liberia, Namibia and Senegal from
June 24 through the 27th of June - that is Sunday." [16]

The speaker seemed to have no idea where these countries are, considering
the strange order of announcing them. Besides, the only African countries,
where incidents like attacks and hostage taking have been reported that
year, are Sierra Leone, Nigeria, Burundi and Ethiopia. None of these
countries is on the list. [17]

On July 4, 1999, President Clinton issued an executive order prohibiting
commercial transactions with the Taliban. [18]

Back to Cold War budgets

On September 23, 1999, presidential candidate George W. Bush exposed his
views on the US military. He complained that since the end of the Cold War
the Defence budget had fallen 40 percent and that the army had never been
in such a bad shape since Pearl Harbor.

"As president, I will order an immediate review of our overseas
deployments - in dozens of countries. ... My second goal is to build
America's defences on the troubled frontiers of technology and terror."

Among his views of arms: \"In the air, we must be able to strike from
across the world with pinpoint accuracy - with long-range aircraft and
perhaps with unmanned systems.\" [19]

On October 15, 1999, things were getting more serious for the Taliban. UN
resolution 1267 against the Taliban threatened an aircraft ban and fund
freezing, if Osama Bin Laden was not handed over before November 14, 1999. [20] & [2]

On November 11, 1999, during a press conference, the Taliban minister of
Foreign Affairs said Osama bin Laden and the Taliban were unable to
organize attacks like those on the embassies in Africa and condemned these
actions.

In 2000 the US had presidential elections. It was time to postpone
delicate decisions.

On April 2, 2000, Richard Clarke, who had been appointed counter-terrorist
coordinator a few months before the attacks against the embassies in
Africa (on May 22), predicted: \"They will come after our weakness, our
Achilles heel, which is largely here in the United States.\" [21]

Curious No-Fly list

On April 21, 2000, something remarkable happened. As an antiterrorist
measure, the US Congress announced a single unified terrorist watch list,
the TID (or Terrorist Identities Database), into which all international
terrorist related data available to the US government - mainly the TIPOFF
no-fly list - would be stored in a single repository. In airports, this
list is used to prevent suspected people from going on board and from
entering the US. [22]

However, the same day that Congress announces the unified TID list, the
FAA created a new and separate domestic no-fly list and put only six names
on it. Two weeks before 9/11, the list was expanded with six other names,
making it a total list of 12 names.

Thanks to this separate list the hijackers of 9/11, using domestic
flights, and not listed among the 12 names, could board the planes without
difficulties. On August 23, 2001, two names, later published as being two
of the hijackers, had been added to the official TID-list, which counted
60,000 suspects, but was discarded for domestic flights. [23]

§ Neo-conservative ideas

This second chapter starts with September 2000, when the neo-conservatives
present their views. Their ideas will spread through the White House
Administration with the election of George W. Bush. Even before he enters
the White House, two imperialistic wars are on the agenda: Iraq and
Afghanistan. Afghanistan gets the priority.

In September, 2000, the neoconservative think tank Project for a New
American Century (PNAC) published their imperialistic views for the US.
[24] In the document, they warned that the process of transforming the US
into "tomorrow's dominant force" would likely be a long one in the
absence of "some catastrophic and catalysing event - like a new Pearl
Harbor". [25]

After 9/11, to those who would not yet have understood the benefits of the
events at Pearl Harbor in 1941, Bush would explain: "The four years that
followed transformed the American way of war "and" even more
importantly, an American President and his successors shaped a world
beyond a war." And, to make sure that people understood that 9/11 was
just like Pearl Harbor, he would add \"September 11th, 2001 - three months
and a long time ago - set another dividing line in our lives and in the
life of our nation." [27]

Many PNAC members would become members of the Bush administration. Those members include Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, and Richard Perle. [26]

On October 12, 2000, three weeks before the presidential elections, the US
population was shortly reminded of the terrorist threat in the world. The
US Navy destroyer USS Cole in the Yemeni port of Aden was rammed with an inflatable raft with explosives and was damaged. Published detail: it
looked as if the raft was coming to help the warship to moor to a buoy.
[28] Message: you can trust nobody.

On November 7, 2000 the elections took place. George W. Bush or Al Gore
would become President. The counting gave an extremely close result. The
results in the State of Florida became decisive, but the counting was and
remains far from clear.

The opponents fought in many different courts until December 13. It turned
out that in Florida, 180,000 votes had been thrown out of the counting.
This way Bush led by less than 600 votes. Partial recounts resulted in
much lower estimates. Finally, all recounts could not be executed within
the time limit set by the intervening Supreme Court. This is how Bush won
the elections. [29]

Dictator

A few days later, on December 18, speaking at the Capitol, Bush joked
about his new relationship with some congressional leaders: "If this were
a dictatorship, it would be a heck of a lot easier....just so long as I'm
the dictator." [30]

Just a slip of the tongue? Not really. In July 1998, about governing
Texas, he said already: "A dictatorship would be a lot easier." [31] And
on July 26, 2001, speaking once again about his struggles with Congress he
repeated: "a dictatorship would be a heck of a lot easier." [32]

Well, for the ambitious plans of the neoconservatives, the US Congress was
a major hurdle to clear. The budget of the military had shrunk by 40
percent after the Cold War and with the wars they had in mind they would
need a lot more money.

How would they get the budget they wanted? If the US would be attacked,
there would be no problem. They would receive all the budget, political
support and public sympathy they needed. But, as written in their
document, without a new Pearl Harbor things would go slowly. [25]

When Bush started his presidency, many neoconservatives considered Iraq as
the first target to hit. In their document of September 2000 they had
named Iraq as a \"potential rival\" of the US. [24]

First Target Iraq?

Iraq has the world\'s second largest oil reserves. The country was
exhausted. It had tried to conquer Iran from 1980 to 1988, had invaded
Kuwait in 1990, had been defeated by Operation Desert Storm in 1991, and a
subsequent UN embargo had brought the Iraqi economy to a standstill and
the population to the edge of starvation.

Since 1996, the Oil For Food program of the UN had brought some relief for
the Iraqi people. The country had been disarmed. Extensive weapon
inspections had concluded the country formed no threat anymore. Well, at
least, not military. In 2000, Saddam had still found a trick to hit the
main pillar of US hegemony, the dollar. He started to sell his oil in
euros, instead of dollars. [
http://www.raisethehammer.org/index.asp?id=252 , see: Dollar Hegemony]

Afghanistan back on the agenda

However, not even a week after George W. Bush had been declared winner of
the elections, Afghanistan was back on the international agenda. UN SC
resolution 1333 of December 19, 2000, imposed the sanctions the UN had
promised more than a year before, if the Taliban would not hand over Osama
bin Laden before November 14, 1999 (aircraft ban and funds freezing). [33]

Afghanistan in the Caspian context

Geopolitically, Afghanistan had become a more urgent target. Since 1996,
the US had experienced severe setbacks in their ambition to control gas
and oil on the East side of the Caspian Sea and was loosing influence. The
lack of control over Afghanistan was leading to severe complications.

As mentioned earlier, the problems had started in February 1996, when
Afghan president Rabbani signed a contract with UNOCAL\'s competitor
BRIDAS for the construction of the gas pipeline through Afghanistan,
between Turkmenistan and Pakistan. [8] In March 1996, the US tried to
block this deal, putting pressure on Pakistan and telling them they should
grant exclusive rights to UNOCAL. This resulted in a diplomatic clash with
the Pakistani government. [8]

Still, in the same month, Pakistan officially agreed to allow a proposed
Iranian pipeline to run over Pakistani territory on its way to India, thus
enabling Iranian gas sale to India. The gas would come from Iran\'s giant
South Pars Field in the Persian Gulf and cross the South of Iran
from West to East through a pipeline still to be constructed. [34]

Meanwhile, in February 1996, Turkmenistan had showed it did not want to
depend exclusively on the delayed Afghan pipeline project and had signed a
contract with Turkey to supply Turkmen gas via a pipeline to be
constructed along the North coast of Iran. If necessary, Turkey would be
able to absorb all the Turkmen gas. [34]

Iranian-Libyan Sanctions act

With these two aforementioned Iranian pipelines, the Afghan pipelines
would become more or less useless. To prevent the construction of the
Iranian pipelines the US Congress passed the Iranian-Libyan Sanctions act,
[35] threatening anyone who would help Iran to construct them, and forbid
transactions with Iran of $ 4 million or higher. That was on June 18, 1996.

Nevertheless on August 30, 1996 Turkey signed a 20-year deal to buy gas
from Iran. [34] & [36] The Turkish president would be punished for his
Islamic solidarity by a military coup forcing him to resign. That was on
June 18, 1997. [37]

With the Iranian-Libyan Sanctions act in place, another US company, Enron,
expanded its activities in the region. In Uzbekistan, Enron had obtained a
contract for 11 gas fields. In April 1997, George W. Bush himself had
intervened to help Enron obtain Uzbeki contracts. [38] Enron counted on a
US controlled pipeline through Afghanistan to export a part of the Uzbek
gas to its power plant in India. [39]

The US threatened sanctions and blocked the completion of the Turkish
pipeline connection to Iran, therefor the gas deliveries from Iran to
Turkey were delayed several years. In August 2000, Iran and Turkey agreed
the gas deliveries would start on July 30, 2001, which would be a few days
before the expiration date of the Iranian-Libyan Sanctions act. [40]

Despite the Iranian-Libyan Sanctions act, the construction of the northern
pipeline had started on the East side of Iran. With Iranian funding, Iran
and Turkmenistan opened an international pipeline connection of 200 km by
the end of 1997. [36]

Subsea shortcut avoiding Iran

To frustrate further development of the Iranian pipeline to Turkey, the US
came up with an idea for an alternative route from Turkmenistan, crossing
the Caspian Sea to Azerbaijan and from there to Turkey. Enron did the
study for this project. [39]

By that time it appeared as if the Afghan pipeline project would be
abandoned. In June 1998, Enron withdrew from its Uzbek gas projects [41]
and in December UNOCAL withdrew from its consortium for the Afghan
pipeline. [8]

The US threats did not prevent big companies like Shell and Total from
signing deals with Iran for exploration of oil and gas. [42] Nevertheless,
Shell withdrew from its pipeline project in Northern Iran. [43]

The undersea pipeline crossing the Caspian Sea now existed on the drawing
table, but in the waters the five surrounding countries (Azerbaijan,
Russia, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, and Iran) had not yet come to an
agreement about each other\'s borders, and thus about the ownership of oil
fields. As long as this would last, according to an existing agreement of
1940, Russia and Iran would have to agree with the pipeline project first.
And they did not. [44]

In 2000, the Turkmen president had blamed the US for the delay in the
trans-Caspian pipeline and had resumed gas deliveries to Russia. [45] That
May, president Putin had even come to Turkmenistan to offer extended deals
for several years. [9] Meanwhile, in Kazakhstan, the oil from the Tengiz
field (world's sixth largest oil field) was going to be pumped via Russia
to the Black Sea. [46]

§ Wealthy actors and influences

George W. Bush sworn in

On January 20, 2001, George W. Bush was sworn in as president of the US.
He is the son of ex-president George H.W. Bush. The family is from Texas
and has close ties with the oil and energy related companies there. These
companies have contributed a lot to Bush's election campaign.

Companies contributing to election campaigns is a common phenomenon in the US. The financial support for a candidate's campaign determines how much
marketing they can afford and, ultimately, their chances to win an
election. Of course, when these companies invest a lot of money, they
expect something in return when their candidate wins, such as nominations
within the administration, influence for big business orders or favourable
laws and amendments. [47]

Enron

Enron had been the biggest contributor of the Bush 2000 election campaign.
[48] In fact, the company had generously contributed to both father and
son's election campaigns since 1985. Enron\'s chairman, Kenneth Lay, had
close personal contacts with the Bushes. He had even been a sleeping guest
at the White House. [49] During these years, Enron had expanded from a
regional energy supplier to a giant multinational company, and the seventh
biggest in the US.

Although loaded with debts caused by its giant investments abroad, Enron
always showed splendid results. How? In 1997 the Securities and Exchange
Commission had exempted Enron from the Investment Company Act of 1940 that
prohibits US companies from leaving debt from overseas projects off the
books. [47] At the same time Andy Fastow, Enron\'s senior vice president
of finance, had started his "creative" financing. [50]

Since 1993, in India, Enron had invested $ 2.9 billion for a power plant
near Bombay. Originally it had counted on cheap supply of gas from
Turkmenistan via the planned pipeline through Afghanistan. The power plant
project had turned into a nightmare.

Enron had faced severe criticism over their contemptuous way of doing
business. They had experienced severe opposition from the local population
after hiring police officers to beat down protests of opponents. Charges
had been filed against the company for human right violations. [39]

Last but not least, Enron's deliveries to the regional electricity company
were invoiced more than double the price of power from other suppliers.
[51] Taking into account the real cost beared by the regional electricity
company, Enron's price was even 700 percent higher. [52] The regional
electricity company could not pay Enron's bills anymore. As retaliation,
in January 2001, Enron had cut the power to 200 million people in Northern
India, while demanding three times the normal price. [53] (Around the same
time, Enron was provoking power cuts in California as well, to force
higher prices. [54])

In 1997 Enron had started gas projects in Uzbekistan, for which George W.
Bush had had personal contacts with the Uzbek ambassador.

As soon as the Bush administration was in place, vice president Cheney
would reward Enron for their support during the elections. Enron's
chairman, Kenneth Lay, had a wish list that was almost entirely included
in Cheney\'s proposals for the new US energy policy. [55] Cheney also
intervened to help Enron collect a $64 million debt for its power plant
near Bombay, during a meeting with Indian opposition leader Sonia Ghandi
in Washington on June 27 2001. [56]

Enron - BinLaden

Enron had also connections with the construction firm BinLadin from Saudi
Arabia, with which it constructed a power plat in the Gaza strip. (The
power plant would not be finished before Enron\'s bankruptcy in December
2001.) [57]


BinLaden - Carlyle

The wealthy bin Laden family is well known to the Bush family. Salem bin
Laden supplied part of the money for George W. Bush's first oil company,
Arbusto, in 1978. [58] His father, George H.W. Bush, joined the Carlyle
group after being US\' president, [59] and developed relations with the
BinLadin company. [60] He met the family in November 1998 and in January
2000. [61]

Bin Laden also invested in the Carlyle group. H.W. Bush still met with
Shafig bin Laden, Osama\'s brother, on September 10, 2001, the day before
the attacks, at the annual investor conference of the Carlyle Group. [62]
Like Enron, Carlyle had grown tremendously.

In the early 1990s son Bush had been member of the board of a catering
service company for airliners. [60] Carlyle had bought the catering
company. Although the catering service crashed, Carlyle grew to be an
important defence contractor in the US. [61] A bunch of well-known former
politicians, including George W. Bush father, former UK Prime Minister
John Major and former president of the Philippines Mister Ramos, are
making a lot of money from the "war on terror". [59]

Osama

There is a terrible lot of information available about bin Laden\'s son,
Osama. However, almost all of it comes from sources that cannot be
verified, like comments by unknown people who would have known him or met him. Other stories are based on allegations by people who have big
business interests in the "war on terrorism", like the Bush. One step
further, you find the comments by officials \"convinced\" that everything
that has been said about Osama is true.

On the other extremity, there is the image Osama draws of himself in an
interview by CNN reporter Peter Arnett in 1997. According to this
interview he is, first of all, a man of faith, who understands people who
fight against the US soldiers that came to steal the oil and who attacked
the Islamic religion. He denies having organized any attacks against the
US himself. [63] (Many people will remember a videotape with "Osama\'s
confession", that he knew about the attacks of 9/11 in advance, which
turned out to be a fake. [64])

Osama would become Bush's key excuse to invade Afghanistan. On September 17, 2001 Bush would declare Osama bin Laden was wanted "dead or alive". [65]

Why did Osama bin Laden stay in Afghanistan? Here too, different sources
give different stories. He had already been in Afghanistan during the
eighties, helping the mudjahedeen fight against the Soviet occupation (as
did the US). Back in Saudi Arabia in 1989, he had opposed the king's
alliance with the US.

When his passport was confiscated, he at first fled back to Afghanistan,
and then settled in Sudan in 1992, where all Muslims were welcome after a
regime change the year before. In 1994, because of his support to
fundamentalist Muslim movements, Saudi Arabia revoked his citizenship and
froze his funds. [66]

After the assassination attempt against Egyptian president Mubarak in
Ethiopia on June 26, 1995, Sudan was accused of being behind it. The
relations between Egypt and Sudan deteriorated in the current of 1995.

At this point, let us jump to Afghanistan. In February 1996 things went
wrong for the US pipeline project in Afghanistan. President Rabbani of
Afghanistan contracted the Argentinean BRIDAS instead of UNOCAL for the
construction and exploitation of the gas pipeline. For the US, to get the
pipeline project back in the hands of UNOCAL, Rabbani would have to
disappear. But who could be accused if Rabbani were killed?

Back to Sudan. March 8, 1996, the US suddenly asked Sudan to extradite
Osama. It did not specify to which country. Since the Saudis took his
passport and nationality away, Osama had few options. On May 18, 1996, he
left Sudan and returned to Afghanistan. [67]

Years afterward, many people were still wondering why he had not been
arrested at that occasion.

In Afghanistan, events would take a different turn. From March 20 to April
4, 1996, Taliban leaders had held a shura (meeting) and concluded with a
jihad against Rabbani. [68] Osama arrived on May 18, but would not get
involved. On September 27, the Taliban conquered Kabul and president
Rabbani fled and joined the Northern alliance. At that moment things must
have looked hopeful for the UNOCAL pipeline project. Unfortunately for
them, in November 1996 BRIDAS signed a new contract with the Taliban.

Ultimately this would lead to the Taliban being evicted from power.
Clinton would not attack Afghanistan after the US embassy bombings in
Africa in 1998, maybe thanks to Monica Lewinsky. Bush did, after \"the
catastrophic and catalysing events\" of 9/11.

After having used the presence of Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan as his
key excuse to invade the country, Bush would state, on March 13, 2002, he
wasn't truly that concerned about Osama bin Laden. [69]

Karzai

After the US conquest of Afghanistan (or at least of its capital),
UNOCAL's advisor Hamid Karzai would be appointed Chairman of the interim
administration of Afghanistan. On June 16, 2002, even before there was an
elected president, Karzai would sign an official agreement with
Turkmenistan and Pakistan for a gas pipeline through Afghanistan. [70]

But even if the gas pipeline would come too late to transport Turkmen gas
to Pakistan, Afghanistan remains an interesting booty. It has its own
gigantic gas field south of the Turkmen field, near Mazar e Sharif. It has
also several oil fields and coal. Furthermore, in the 1970s British
geologists had already found 1600 locations with minerals.

Preparations for 9/11 and the invasion of Afghanistan

Timing of the attacks

As noticed above, the timing for the attacks on the US embassies in Africa
helped Clinton, as it drew away the attention from his threatening
conviction of perjury in the Monica Lewinsky affair, and focused on the
common enemies: the terrorists.

The invasion of Afghanistan would have to wait for the next US president.
Between 1998 and 2001 there was enough time to plan everything carefully.
Below we will notice, that the attacks of 9/11 occurred at the very moment
everything was in place. The only thing missing was a pretext to get
support from Congress, from the US population and the rest of the world.

Military preparations

For the US to invade Afghanistan at the other side of the world was a
delicate operation. Step by step the US had pushed its influence and
control in the former Soviet republics. US oil and gas related companies
had started up activities in Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and
Turkmenistan and the U.S. military had gained influence in the region,
challenging Russia and China in their backyards.

Already in 1997, north of Afghanistan, the US had considerably expanded
its military "cooperation" with Kazakhstan, which forms the buffer with
Russia. [71] In 1999, closer to Afghanistan, the US expanded its presence
in Kyrgyzstan [72], and in Uzbekistan, one of Afghanistan's direct
neighbours. [73] In April 14-15, 2000, Uzbek and US troops conducted joint
military exercises. [74]

East of Afghanistan the US administration has strong ties with the
Pakistani intelligence service. Its director, Lieutenant-General Mahmoud
Ahmad, was with U.S. officials the week before and during the attacks of
9/11. [75] On the west side, F-15s were based in Saudi-Arabia, Kuwait and
Turkey and the Fifth fleet was permanently based in the Persian Gulf. [76]

For the war in Afghanistan, huge transports of troops and material had to
be organized well before the invasion. On November 7, 2000, the day all
US-citizens were occupied with the election of their president, the UK
announced its biggest military exercise since the Gulf War, operation
Swift Sword (Saif Sareea in Arabic), involving 24,000 troops and a lot of
heavy material. [77]

The exercise took place on the coast of Oman, a strategic location, since
all oil tankers from the Persian Gulf region (Saudi-Arabia, the United
Arabic Emirates, Qatar, Quait, Iraq and Iran) have to cross the Gulf of
Oman. Here the UK maintains a War Material Storage. [78] The exercice had
been scheduled from September 15 until the end of October 2001, [79] The
UK would start moving troops and material to Oman in August 2001.[80] The UK participated in the invasion. [81]

From October 8 until the end of October, 2001 another military operation
was planned in Egypt: NATO Operation Bright Star. It was the world\'s
largest exercise including more than 11 Nations, and more than 70,000
troops (among which 23,000 from the US) participating. [82]

Among several other "coincidental" military moves towards Afghanistan,
we notice that on July 23, 2001, the aircraft carrier Carl Vinson was sent
out from Bremerton (on US West coast) to the Arabian Sea. It arrived just
in time to launch the first air strikes on Afghanistan on October 7, 2001.
[83]

Diplomatic preparations

On the diplomatic front, to lower the risk of upsetting China, on June 19
2001, Bush had proposed to attend the APEC summit in Shang Hai and was
expected to meet president Zemir between October 15 and October 21 2001.
[84] & [85] (Bush\'s meeting with presidents Zemir and Putin took place on
October 20, 2001) [86]

Besides, in 2001 China was completing its bilateral agreements with all 37
WTO members to become a full WTO-member. China wanted to become member since many years. China's bilateral agreement with Mexico would be the last and this would complete China's membership. [87] In July 2001 Bush
would polish his relations with Mexico, "lobbying" against US unfair
import restrictions on Mexican trucks. [88]

This was probably not only to get the Mexicans in the right mood to sign
with China, but also because Mexico would be a member of the UN Security
Council in 2002 and 2003. China reached its bilateral agreement with
Mexico and became a WTO member on September 13, 2001. [89]

Bush's unmanned systems

In the summer of 1999, a number of US embassies on the African continent
were closed for the weekend because of suspicious people hanging around.
[16] A few days later Clinton had issued its order prohibiting commercial
transactions with the Taliban. [18] A few months later George W. Bush
presented his ideas of defence "on the troubled frontiers of technology
and terror."

He said, "In the air, we must be able to strike from across the world
with pinpoint accuracy - with long-range aircraft and perhaps with
unmanned systems." [19]

In September 1999 Bush still said "perhaps". He was still considering.
This was at a time when the market for unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV's)
for both military as well as civil aviation was rapidly developing. [90]
By 2001 there were more than 60 types of UAVs world wide, from small
models to big planes. [91]

At the time of Bush\'s speech in 1999, the US was developing the Global
Hawk [92], a military UAV with a wing span comparable to a Boeing 737,
which had made its first flight from Edwards Air Force Base, CA on 28
February 1998. [93] After Bush became president, on April 23, 2001 the
Global Hawk made a historical first unmanned test flight to Australia. [94]

9/11

Not all of the material about 9/11 has been released to the public. Some
of the reliable evidence has been confiscated by the CIA. [95] Statements
of officials often turned out to be contradictory. And, in particular
about possible advanced knowledge, the White House has confiscated dozens
of documents from the 9/11 Commission. [96] It doesn\'t make truth finding
easier.

The official version of the events on 9/11 involves a very high number of
coincidences that facilitated the \"success\" of the attacks.

§ A nationwide military exercise, Global Guardian, originally
planned for November 2001, is in full swing, creating confusion between
exercises and real-world events. [97]

§ A large-scale military exercise, Vigilant Guardian, is taking
place and involves all of NORAD, that normally sends fighter jets after
civil airplanes several times a week, when flight control operators report
incidences. [97]

§ The Vigilant Guardian exercise simulates an air attack on the United States. [97]

§ NORAD is also running a planned real-world operation named
Operation Northern Vigilance, for which many NORAD fighters are located in
Alaska and Canada. [98]

§ Operation Northern Vigilance also creates false blips on radar
screens at least until the second plane crashes into the World Trade
Centre. [99]

§ In Washington a planned National Reconnaissance Office exercise
involves a scenario of an airplane as a flying weapon. [97]

§ The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is flying across the
Atlantic on the way to Europe. [97]

§ The Federal Emergency Management Agency Director is at a
conference in Montana. [97]

§ FAA hijack coordinator, who has to contact the National Military
Command Centre in case of hijacks, is in Puerto Rico and cannot be
reached. [97]

§ All of the FBI\'s anti-terrorist and top special operations
agents are, together with the members of the CIA\'s anti-terrorist task
force, on a training exercise in Monterey, California. [97]

§ For the day of 9/11, the commander of the National Military
Command Centre had requested to be replaced by someone without experience. [97]

§ For FAA\'s new National Operations Manager it is the first day
on the job. [98]

§ The hijackers can board without trouble, since the official
no-fly list is only used for international flights and, curiously, not for
domestic flights. [22] & [23]

§ Informed a few minutes after the start of the first hijack
(Flight 11), American Airlines top management decide to "keep it quiet". [97]

§ Boston flight controllers do not follow normal procedures and
waste time by contacting various military bases, instead of NORAD. [97]

§ After NORAD is finally informed, two F-15s will remain on the ground and only take off when Fligh 11 already crashes into the WTC. [97]

§ For various reasons F-16s will only arrive on the scene after
the last plane has crashed. [97] & [99]

§ A decision is taken to ground not only civil airplanes, but also all military planes. [99]

§ The presumed hijacker pilot of flight 77 was not able to fly a
Cessna without difficulty in August, but succeeded to spiral down a Boeing
757 and hit the Pentagon a few meters above the ground on September 11.
[100]

§ The President doesn\'t give any orders responding to the attack
until just before the last plane crashes. [97]

Above I only mentioned those coincidences that facilitated the success of
the attacks. If I were to build a story on such series of coincidences, no
one would believe me. Well, I would not either. Keeping the things in
their context, it makes more sense to look at them as facts, and not as
coincidences.

All released details show that the attacks of 9/11 were carried out with
military precision. However, the hijackers on the planes would have been
improvised pilots without the extraordinary skills needed to fly in the
way that has been reported. [101] & [102]

In addition, they would not have been intelligent enough to foresee the
reactions triggered by their actions. Apparently they had so little
political awareness, that they had not heard about the neoconservatives
waiting for such a "catastrophic and catalysing event" to speed up US'
conquests.

The success of the plan relied on a lot of advanced knowledge of the
situation that day, like the confusion offered by planned military
exercises and the scenarios played by them, like the confusion offered by
fake radar blibs, like traffic controllers lacking of primary radar images
in specific areas, like the absence of several experienced officers in the
command chains responding to the hijacks, like the absence of armed jet
fighters to frustrate their plans.

All this seems more likely to be the work of a more influential and well
trained organization, an organization willing to provide the justification
for the neoconservatives' conquest plans, with Afghanistan as the first
target.

It does not seem likely to me, that such an organization would let the
success of its operation depend on the improvised skills of the hijackers.
It makes more sense to suppose the hijackers were not in control. (In
spite of an overheard phrase in the cockpit of the fourth plane, having
been translated as "Pull it down" and by officials interpreted as "Crash the plane" [102]) It seems more likely the operation was conducted on the "troubled frontier of technology and terror", and that technology had taken over the controls.

Transponders

The two types of planes used, the Boeing 757 and 767, can be controlled
remotely. Robert Ayling, a former boss of British Airways, suggested in
the Financial Times a few days after 9/11, that those aircraft can be
commandeered from the ground and controlled remotely in the event of a
hijack. [13] On 9/11 the remote control would have been in the hands of
the wrong people.

If we look closer to the remote control scenario, we notice that if the
published details about the transponders are right:

1. the transponder of the second 767 is turned off shortly after the
first 767 crashes.
2. the transponder of the second 757 is turned off shortly after the
first 757 crashes.

So, it looks as if one remote pilot handled the two 767s one after the
other, and another remote pilot handled the two 757s one after the other.
([104] 9/11 Commission Report, P.32, 8:47 & 9:41)

It has also been reported that a C-130 military cargo plane was tailing
flight 77 when it crashed into the Pentagon. The same C-130 was behind
flight 93 when it crashed. Did the plane play a role? Or was it just a
coincidental tourist, flying around while all other planes had been
ordered to land? [101], [105], [106]

The hijackers hijacked?

Although the official story expects us to believe the hijackers wanted to
fly into the WTC and the Pentagon, the released pieces of cockpit
conversations offer no indications to support this theory. Although
mountains of stories and counter-stories have been published about the
hijackers, I did not find a single verifiable element.

If the hijackers were to support some Arabic or Islamic cause, they would
probably have been in a stronger position if they had returned to airports
with four planes and hundreds of US citizens in their might. They could
have negotiated the release of political prisoners. They could have
demanded a retreat of US forces from Saudi Arabia. They could have pleaded
any cause they were after.

Did the hijackers really have in mind to strike the WTC and the Pentagon
or were they overruled by the organization that had \"contracted\" them?
Will we find out? According to the official story, all radio contact and
overhearing of cockpit conversations stopped before the planes made their
final approach to the WTC and the Pentagon. If the hijackers were to
create the biggest possible spectacle, wouldn\'t they have shouted a last
accusation against the US? Or a last glorious prayer to Allah? Or were
they surprised and in panic when they flew into the buildings?

Conclusion

The Afghan pipelines are only one step in US political moves to take over
the influence in the oil and gas rich former Soviet republics. Consuming
25 percent of the world oil consumption, their imperialism is first of all
about energy. Today the US already relies for over 60 percent on foreign
oil, a percentage that is quickly increasing. The neoconservative ideas to
transform the US into a \"dominant force\" do not come out of nowhere.

The thought that they needed a \"catastrophic and catalysing event\" was
not just motivated by the personal financial benefits several of them get
from the war industries. It was also a sign of panic of a nation facing
drying up oil wells and preparing itself to conquer foreign oil wells
until the last drip is gone.

[1] http://www.september11news.com/DailyTimeline.htm

[2] http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/february/26/newsid_2516000/2516469.stm


[3] http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtcbomb.html

[4] http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/in_depth/europe/2001/collapse_of_ussr/timelines/late1991.stm


[5] http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/inatl/europe/caspian100598.htm


[6] http://www.hrw.org/reports/1999/enron/enron2-4.htm


[7] http://www.hri.org/news/balkans/rferl/1999/99-08-03.rferl.html


[8] http://www.worldpress.org/specials/pp/pipeline_timeline.htm


[9] http://www.gasandoil.com/goc/company/cnc02739.htm

[10]
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/august/7/newsid_3131000/3131709.stm

[11]
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/clinton081898.htm


[12] http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/155252.stm


[13] http://www.un.org/Docs/scres/1998/scres98.htm


[14] http://www.fas.org/irp/news/1998/11/98110602_nlt.html


[15] http://www.fas.org/irp/news/1998/11/indict2.pdf


[16] http://www.fas.org/irp/news/1999/06/990625db.htm


[17] http://www.fas.org/irp/threat/terror_99/appa.html


[18] http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/eo/eo-13129.htm


[19] http://www.citadel.edu/pao/addresses/pres_bush.html


[20] http://www.un.int/usa/sres1267.htm

[21]
http://web.archive.org/web/20000919212253/http://www.library.cornell.edu/colldev/mideast/terclrk.htm


[22] http://www.fas.org/irp/crs/RL32366.pdf


[23] http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/entity.jsp?id=1521846767-2057


[24] http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf


[25] http://politics.guardian.co.uk/iraq/comment/0,12956,1036687,00.html

[26]
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Bush_administration:_Project_for_the_New_American_Century


[27] http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/12/20011211-6.html


[28]
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/october/12/newsid_4252000/4252400.stm

[29]
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/november/8/newsid_3674000/3674036.stm


[30] http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/politics/july-dec00/trans_12-18.htm


[31] http://www.governing.com/archive/1998/jul/bush.txt


[32] http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/32902_bush27.shtml

[33]
http://daccessdds.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N00/806/62/PDF/N0080662.pdf?OpenElement


[34] http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/chrn1996.html


[35] http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/1996_cr/h960618b.htm


[36] http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/53/052.html

[37]
http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F00C12FF3F5A0C7A8DDDAF0894DF494D81&n=Top%2fReference%2fTimes%20Topics%2fPeople%2fE%2fErbakan%2c%20Necmettin


[38] http://www.publicintegrity.org/report.aspx?aid=104&sid=300


[39] http://www.monitor.net/monitor/0202a/enrontimeline.html


[40] http://www.gasandoil.com/goc/news/ntc03653.htm


[41] http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/entity.jsp?id=1521846767-525


[42] http://www.farsinet.com/news/nov99wk2.html#shell


[43] http://www.iranian.com/Times/Dec98b/Khorramabad/624front.html

[44]
http://www.pinr.com/report.php?ac=view_report&report_id=499&language_id=1


[45] http://www.first-exchange.com/FSU/azer/news/news031800.asp


[46] http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/chrn2000.html#FEB00


[47] http://www.publicintegrity.org/report.aspx?aid=104


[48] http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/SilkRoad.html


[49] http://www.thenation.com/blogs/capitalgames?pid=21


[50] http://www.cfo.com/article.cfm/2989389


[51] http://www.atimes.com/reports/CA13Ai01.html#top5


[52] http://www.alternet.org/story/12525/


[53] http://www.atimes.com/reports/CA13Ai01.html


[54] http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/1972574.stm


[55] http://www.thenation.com/doc/20020415/nichols


[56] http://www.guardian.co.uk/enron/story/0,,636530,00.html

[57]
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_911_timeline&startpos=300#a0699powerplant


[58] http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/conspiracytheories/saudi.html


[59] http://www.hereinreality.com/carlyle.html


[60] http://www.guardian.co.uk/wtccrash/story/0,1300,583869,00.html


[61] http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/entity.jsp?id=1521846767-479

[62]
http://complete911timeline.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_911_timeline&day_of_9/11=dayOf911


[63] http://www.anusha.com/osamaint.htm


[64] http://welfarestate.com/wtc/faketape/


[65]
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/09/18/wbush18.xml


[66] http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/binladen/etc/cron.html

[67]
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/context.jsp?item=a0396sudansquabble


[68] http://www.worldpress.org/specials/pp/taliban_timeline.htm


[69] http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/printer_101504W.shtml


[70] http://www.pakistaneconomist.com/issue2002/issue23/f&m.htm


[71] http://www.stimson.org/rd-table/ctr-kaz.htm


[72] http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/2002/t04282002_t0427jpc.html


[73] http://www.cdi.org/russia/johnson/5491-7.cfm

[74]
http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2005/09/383c3d03-2526-446e-943d-f81dfddbdc68.html


[75] http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/FD08Aa01.html


[76] http://www.eias.org/publications/bulletin/2001/eboctnov01.pdf


[77] http://www.wsws.org/articles/2001/oct2001/oman-o09.shtml


[78] http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/facility/thumrait.htm


[79] http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1012044.stm


[80] http://wsws.org/articles/2001/oct2001/oman-o09.shtml


[81] http://www.guardian.co.uk/waronterror/story/0,1361,581416,00.html


[82] http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/bright-star.htm


[83] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Carl_Vinson_(CVN-70)

[84]
http://transcripts.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/asiapcf/east/06/19/china.russia/index.html


[85] http://www.china.org.cn/english/12585.htm


[86] http://www.worldpress.org/europe/0302express.htm


[87] http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/IB91121.pdf


[88]
http://telaviv.usembassy.gov/publish/peace/archives/2001/august/0801e.html


[89] http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/IB91121.pdf

[90]
http://www.marketresearch.com/product/print/default.asp?g=1&productid=144390


[91] http://www.armada.ch/01-5/cgdrones.pdf


[92] http://www.fas.org/irp/program/collect/global_hawk.htm


[93] http://www.fas.org/irp/program/collect/global_hawk.htm


[94] http://www.spacedaily.com/news/uav-01d.html

[95]
http://web.archive.org/web/20010921200613/www.washtimes.com/national/20010921-90259475.htm

[96]
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&contentId=A30240-2004Feb10&notFound=true

[97]
http://complete911timeline.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_911_timeline&day_of_9/11=dayOf911


[98] http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/entity.jsp?id=1521846767-1683

[99]
http://complete911timeline.org/timeline.jsp?day_of_9/11=dayOf911&timeline=complete_911_timeline&startpos=100


[100] http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/hanjour.html

[101]
http://complete911timeline.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_911_timeline&day_of_9/11=dayOf911&startpos=200

[102]
http://complete911timeline.org/timeline.jsp?day_of_9/11=dayOf911&timeline=complete_911_timeline&startpos=300


[103] http://www.economist.com/science/displayStory.cfm?Story_ID=787987


[104] http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf


[105] http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/entity.jsp?id=1521846767-2034

[106]
http://news.minnesota.publicradio.org/features/2004/05/31_catlinb_airguardmuseum/


Pipelines to 9/11- backgrounds of the US war against Afghanistan
written by Rudo de Ruijter

Google "Rudo de Ruijter" to find more articles of the same author. He can
be contacted via rudoderuijter@wanadoo.nl