Much has been made recently of the "Dodgy Dossier" that was used by HMG to justify its participation in the invasion of Iraq. But nobody seems to have seen fit to ask about the Really Dodgy Dossier, the one put forward by Number 10 in the days immediately following the 9/11 massacre. The PMO's "Responsibility For The Terrorist Atrocities In The United States," are 70 points presented without any citations of sources or references, that are mainly unsupported innuendo. If this dossier is also Dodgy, then the whole Bin Laden Conspiracy Theory begins to unravel.
Much has been made recently of the "Dodgy Dossier" that was used by HMG to justify its participation in the invasion of Iraq. Although the government saved itself from reprimand by ensuring party partisanship on the parliamentary committee, it is clear that the dossier was plagiarised wholesale from an American graduate student's master's thesis a decade ago. [1]
But nobody seems to have seen fit to ask about the Really Dodgy Dossier, the one put forward by Number 10 in the days immediately following the 9/11 massacre. The "Responsibility For The Terrorist Atrocities In The United States, 11 September 2001" [2] was put forward by the PMO to show the "proof" of the involvement of Osama bin Laden in the 9/11 attacks, and was used by the Americans to justify their invasion of Afghanistan. As all good dodgy dossiers, it implied that it was the work of the intelligence community; as the US Secretary of State Colin Powell would go on to describe the Iraq Dodgy Dossier before the United Nations Security Council session of February 5, 2002:
"My colleagues, every statement I make today is backed up by sources, solid sources. These are not assertions. What we're giving you are facts and conclusions based on solid intelligence."
But given the outright plagiarism of decade old material that made up the bulk of the Iraq Dodgy Dossier, it is germane to examine the "facts" contained in the Afghanistan Dossier to see if it is dodgy too. At least the Iraq Dodgy Dossier had some academic merit, having been submitted as a Master's thesis, and published in a small academic journal. Not so of the Afghanistan Dodgy Dossier; it is a simple collection of 70 points that warrant scrutiny. It is important to recall that on the day of 9/11, the American media just passed on what they were being told by their government. (Or in the case of General Wesley Clark, telling the media what his government was telling him to tell the media, whether he believed it or not. [3]) No proof of bin Laden's guilt was provided by the American media; the Americans promised to put out a paper that "describes clearly the evidence", [4] but Number 10 came to their rescue by putting out a dossier instead. This was the same modus operandi that was used as with the Iraq Dodgy Dossier, and the world press must have assumed that HMG is honest and respectable. But is it?
In fact, the 70 points, presented without any citations of sources or references, are mainly unsupported assertions and innuendo. By the very nature of the 9/11 massacre, the critical link boils down to the link between bin Laden and the hijackers. On this, the Afghanistan Dodgy Dossier devotes a grand total of only 1 of the 70 points, namely:
61. Nineteen men have been identified as the hijackers from the passenger lists of the four planes hijacked on 11 September 2001. At least three of them have already been positively identified as associates of Al Qaida. One has been identified as playing key roles in both the East African embassy attacks and the USS Cole attack. Investigations continue into the backgrounds of all the hijackers.
The real dodgy nature of the dossier becomes apparent when continued investigations of the backgrounds of the hijackers revealed that 8 weren't even in the United States at the time, and are in fact very much alive. [5] A detailed examination shows that the "proof" of bin Laden's guilt is distinctly lacking. [6]
If the Afghanistan Dossier is Dodgy, then the whole Bin Laden Conspiracy Theory begins to unravel. [7] Although this may not have been the only lie told by the Prime Minister's Office in making the case for the Americans to invade Afghanistan, [8] it is by far the most important, as this would raise the following very pertinent question: if bin Laden didn't do it, who did?
There is much of the 9/11 story that does not stand up to scrutiny, and the Bush administration has strenuously fought against any independent or thorough investigation. If the BBC is truly independent, perhaps it would investigate if the Anglo-American governments lied about the invasion of Afghanistan (which had been planned long before 9/11), as well as investigating who is truly Responsible for the Terrorist Atrocities In The United States on 11 September 2001.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Global Outlook. "British Intelligence Iraq Dossier Relies on Recycled Academic Articles" by Glen Rangwala.
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/RAN302A.html
2. Prime Minister's Office, London, "Responsibility For The Terrorist Atrocities In The United States, 11 September 2001". http://www.number-10.gov.uk/output/Page3682.asp
3. New York Times, "Pattern of Corruption" by Paul Krugman. 15 July 2003. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/15/opinion/15KRUG.html Reprinted at: http://truthout.org/docs_03/01603E.shtml
4. WSWS, "White House reneges on proof of bin Laden’s guilt" By Kate Randall. 29 September 2001. http://www.wsws.org/articles/2001/sep2001/bush-s29.shtml;
Indymedia. "Mistranslated Osama bin Laden Video - the German Press Investigates" by Craig Morris. Dec 23 2001. http://dc.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=16389&group=webcast;
Centre for Research on Globalisation (CRG), Montréal. "Who Is Osama Bin Laden?" by Michel Chossudovsky. 12 September 2001. http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO109C.html
5. "Seven of the WTC Hijackers found alive!" http://www.mujahideen.fsnet.co.uk/wtc/wtc-hijackers.htm Cached at: http://propagandamatrix.com/seven_of_the_wtc_hijackers_found_alive.html ; BBC, "Hijack 'suspects' alive and well." September 23, 2001. http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/middle_east/newsid_1559000/1559151.stm ; http://muslimmedia.com/archives/world01/afgwar-die.htm ;
World Messenger. "Alleged Hijackers Alive and Well" http://www.worldmessenger.20m.com/alive.html;
Islam Online, "Saudi Suspects in U.S. Attacks Were Not in the U.S." September 17, 2001. http://www.islamonline.net/English/News/2001-09/17/article11.shtml
6. "Troubling Questions in Troubling Times: A critical look at the history of attacks on the World Trade Center" by James S. Adam. 5 October 2001, http://www.serendipity.li/wot/adam.htm
"George Bush, Jr., September 11th and the Rule of Law" by Francis A. Boyle, February 1, 2002. http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/CrimNukDetSI.html
7. Indymedia. "Debunking conspiracy theorists: paranoid fantasies about Sept 11 distract from the real issues" by Gerard Holmgren. http://buffalo.indymedia.org/display.php3?article_id=3265
8. About 90% of heroin on British streets originates in Afghanistan, the prime minister told the Labour Party Conference in October 2001. (BBC, "UK drugs trade 'funds Taleban'". 2 October, 2001). Yet at the time, before the American invasion, the Taliban had in fact banned the cultivation of opium. Now, almost 2 years after the American invasion, the production of opium in Afghanistan is at record levels. See: From The Wilderness Publications, "The Lies About Taliban Heroin" by Michael C. Ruppert. October 10, 2001. http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/10_10_01_heroin.html;
"The Secret Heroin War" by Adam Porter. October 23, 2001. http://www.guerrillanews.com/war_on_drugs/doc176.html
But nobody seems to have seen fit to ask about the Really Dodgy Dossier, the one put forward by Number 10 in the days immediately following the 9/11 massacre. The "Responsibility For The Terrorist Atrocities In The United States, 11 September 2001" [2] was put forward by the PMO to show the "proof" of the involvement of Osama bin Laden in the 9/11 attacks, and was used by the Americans to justify their invasion of Afghanistan. As all good dodgy dossiers, it implied that it was the work of the intelligence community; as the US Secretary of State Colin Powell would go on to describe the Iraq Dodgy Dossier before the United Nations Security Council session of February 5, 2002:
"My colleagues, every statement I make today is backed up by sources, solid sources. These are not assertions. What we're giving you are facts and conclusions based on solid intelligence."
But given the outright plagiarism of decade old material that made up the bulk of the Iraq Dodgy Dossier, it is germane to examine the "facts" contained in the Afghanistan Dossier to see if it is dodgy too. At least the Iraq Dodgy Dossier had some academic merit, having been submitted as a Master's thesis, and published in a small academic journal. Not so of the Afghanistan Dodgy Dossier; it is a simple collection of 70 points that warrant scrutiny. It is important to recall that on the day of 9/11, the American media just passed on what they were being told by their government. (Or in the case of General Wesley Clark, telling the media what his government was telling him to tell the media, whether he believed it or not. [3]) No proof of bin Laden's guilt was provided by the American media; the Americans promised to put out a paper that "describes clearly the evidence", [4] but Number 10 came to their rescue by putting out a dossier instead. This was the same modus operandi that was used as with the Iraq Dodgy Dossier, and the world press must have assumed that HMG is honest and respectable. But is it?
In fact, the 70 points, presented without any citations of sources or references, are mainly unsupported assertions and innuendo. By the very nature of the 9/11 massacre, the critical link boils down to the link between bin Laden and the hijackers. On this, the Afghanistan Dodgy Dossier devotes a grand total of only 1 of the 70 points, namely:
61. Nineteen men have been identified as the hijackers from the passenger lists of the four planes hijacked on 11 September 2001. At least three of them have already been positively identified as associates of Al Qaida. One has been identified as playing key roles in both the East African embassy attacks and the USS Cole attack. Investigations continue into the backgrounds of all the hijackers.
The real dodgy nature of the dossier becomes apparent when continued investigations of the backgrounds of the hijackers revealed that 8 weren't even in the United States at the time, and are in fact very much alive. [5] A detailed examination shows that the "proof" of bin Laden's guilt is distinctly lacking. [6]
If the Afghanistan Dossier is Dodgy, then the whole Bin Laden Conspiracy Theory begins to unravel. [7] Although this may not have been the only lie told by the Prime Minister's Office in making the case for the Americans to invade Afghanistan, [8] it is by far the most important, as this would raise the following very pertinent question: if bin Laden didn't do it, who did?
There is much of the 9/11 story that does not stand up to scrutiny, and the Bush administration has strenuously fought against any independent or thorough investigation. If the BBC is truly independent, perhaps it would investigate if the Anglo-American governments lied about the invasion of Afghanistan (which had been planned long before 9/11), as well as investigating who is truly Responsible for the Terrorist Atrocities In The United States on 11 September 2001.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Global Outlook. "British Intelligence Iraq Dossier Relies on Recycled Academic Articles" by Glen Rangwala.
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/RAN302A.html 2. Prime Minister's Office, London, "Responsibility For The Terrorist Atrocities In The United States, 11 September 2001".
http://www.number-10.gov.uk/output/Page3682.asp 3. New York Times, "Pattern of Corruption" by Paul Krugman. 15 July 2003.
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/15/opinion/15KRUG.html Reprinted at: http://truthout.org/docs_03/01603E.shtml 4. WSWS, "White House reneges on proof of bin Laden’s guilt" By Kate Randall. 29 September 2001.
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2001/sep2001/bush-s29.shtml; Indymedia. "Mistranslated Osama bin Laden Video - the German Press Investigates" by Craig Morris. Dec 23 2001.
http://dc.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=16389&group=webcast; Centre for Research on Globalisation (CRG), Montréal. "Who Is Osama Bin Laden?" by Michel Chossudovsky. 12 September 2001.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO109C.html 5. "Seven of the WTC Hijackers found alive!"
http://www.mujahideen.fsnet.co.uk/wtc/wtc-hijackers.htm Cached at: http://propagandamatrix.com/seven_of_the_wtc_hijackers_found_alive.html ; BBC, "Hijack 'suspects' alive and well." September 23, 2001. http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/middle_east/newsid_1559000/1559151.stm ; http://muslimmedia.com/archives/world01/afgwar-die.htm ; World Messenger. "Alleged Hijackers Alive and Well"
http://www.worldmessenger.20m.com/alive.html; Islam Online, "Saudi Suspects in U.S. Attacks Were Not in the U.S." September 17, 2001.
http://www.islamonline.net/English/News/2001-09/17/article11.shtml 6. "Troubling Questions in Troubling Times: A critical look at the history of attacks on the World Trade Center" by James S. Adam. 5 October 2001,
http://www.serendipity.li/wot/adam.htm "George Bush, Jr., September 11th and the Rule of Law" by Francis A. Boyle, February 1, 2002.
http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/CrimNukDetSI.html 7. Indymedia. "Debunking conspiracy theorists: paranoid fantasies about Sept 11 distract from the real issues" by Gerard Holmgren.
http://buffalo.indymedia.org/display.php3?article_id=3265 8. About 90% of heroin on British streets originates in Afghanistan, the prime minister told the Labour Party Conference in October 2001. (BBC, "UK drugs trade 'funds Taleban'". 2 October, 2001). Yet at the time, before the American invasion, the Taliban had in fact banned the cultivation of opium. Now, almost 2 years after the American invasion, the production of opium in Afghanistan is at record levels. See: From The Wilderness Publications, "The Lies About Taliban Heroin" by Michael C. Ruppert. October 10, 2001.
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/10_10_01_heroin.html; "The Secret Heroin War" by Adam Porter. October 23, 2001.
http://www.guerrillanews.com/war_on_drugs/doc176.html
Comments
Hide the following 2 comments
Dodgy dossier
21.07.2003 10:53
The 'dodgy dossier' was supposedly based more on scientific facts than the 'really dodgy dossier'.
Almost exclusively, the 'dodgy dossier' was given the scientific gloss by the half baked microbiologist Dr. Battyboy Kelly.
The reliance on someone who can blurt some scientific jargon has prooven to be the weak point for 'dodgy dossier' authors.
Having never achieved anything worthwhile in the biochemical field, a frustrated, phoney, prick of a man , probably over zealous to a Lord some day.... was drafted in to simply give some bullshit but it seems they recruited an idiot who had once functioned in the field of 'fixing Iraq' up.
The angry idiotic scientist, it seems, did not realise that he had no control over others introducing vital sentences and was evidently pissed orf becuase he had become the laughing stock of the scietific world.
It is very clear Battyboy Kelly, while massing a fortune as an UNSCOM inspector/spy did some intelligence work outside of UNSCOM. Tom Mangold, who is now on pig media everywhere doing some of the damage limitations had atleast once given it away in the past....
----------------------
Why Iraq inspections won't work
September 13 2002
Ordering UN weapons inspectors back to Iraq is doomed to failure, writes BBC reporter Tom Mangold, who talked to the last inspection team thrown out by Saddam Hussein.
........
In 1995, David Kelly, the senior British inspector, met an Israeli intelligence officer in a safe apartment in New York. The Israeli handed over documents showing that British and German companies had exported some 32 tonnes of growth medium for bacteria to the Iraqis - substantially more than could ever have been required for normal civilian use. Indeed, it was an indefensible figure. Only one conclusion could be drawn.
.......
----------------------
The above repeated here...
The one conclusion that could be drawn for me is actually transformed into few questions immediately.
1 - Why on earth is that such intelligence is not archived in the UNCOM files at UN?
2 - Why on earth did this information come through a junior inspector, clearly representing one of the warrign parties?
3 - Why on earth Israel's dismal record at providing true intelligence was not considered?
4 - why on earth Israel, a country with the third largest biochemical weapon stockpile and a known enemy of Iraq allowed to sneak in uncolloborated information through the back door?
5 - Did the former bio weapons head of UK with all its sordid history make contact with Israeli agents in such clandestine manner (were recipes to make bioweapons exchanged)?
Is it not amusing that Tom Mangold clearly gives it away in the above article, that the inspectors started looking for the tons of growth media (well inspectors from the pig nations, all on their own, _based on isreali intelligence_ which now claims!!)
Israel remains in contravention of about 40 UN resoultions.
(note to Dan and other fanatics --note I do not mention or implicate the Jewish people anywhere instead it is Isreal, the illegal colony if the west in the middle east for providing uncorroborated intelligence)
Kelly pig: burn in hell!
ram
Really dodgy dossier
21.07.2003 11:01
-----------------------------------------------------
CLARK: "There was a concerted effort during the fall of 2001, starting immediately after 9/11, to pin 9/11 and the terrorism problem on Saddam Hussein."
RUSSERT: "By who? Who did that?"
CLARK: "Well, it came from the White House, it came from people around the White House. It came from all over. I got a call on 9/11. I was on CNN, and I got a call at my home saying, 'You got to say this is connected. This is state-sponsored terrorism. This has to be connected to Saddam Hussein.' I said, 'But--I'm willing to say it, but what's your evidence?' And I never got any evidence.
-----------------------------------------------------
Pig CLARK is of course ....
What has all this got to do with the British dossier ....I do not know, sorry.
ram