At one level, connecting the dots helps demonstrate that these seemingly inconsequential executions are not as they appear, and that they have been staged. These events however, represent years of strategic planning and the investment of hundreds of thousands of dollars. If they are part of a grander strategy, that should be evident in a broad pattern of events and relationships that form a coherent, logical and strategic intent. That intent begins to take shape as domination of the portion of the Middle East occupied by Israel, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan.
Figure 1
There are quite a few writers who argue that the events leading to, and resulting in, the World Trade Tower tragedy were brought about as part of a US military-industrial conspiracy to create a rational for invading Afghanistan and Iraq, solely for the purpose of securing control of very significant oil and natural gas deposits in those countries. The arguments and activities that support this contention include:
• The establishment of US bases in Afghanistan geographically mirrors the route of the planned natural gas pipeline. The US had been locked out of the bidding for this pipeline, just months prior to the invasion. A major investment by Enron in the region was threatened by the loss of this pipeline. Now, in a fortuitous change of governments caused by the destruction of a conservative Muslim government (in the name of democracy, for the benefit of specific US oil interests,) these contracts would be awarded to US construction firms.
"The Israeli newspaper Ma'ariv astutely notes: "If one looks at the map of the big American bases created [in the Afghan war], one is struck by the fact that they are completely identical to the route of the projected oil pipeline to the Indian Ocean." Ma'ariv also states, "Osama bin Laden did not comprehend that his actions serve American interests... If I were a believer in conspiracy theory, I would think that bin Laden is an American agent. Not being one I can only wonder at the coincidence." [Chicago Tribune, 3/18/02]
Figure 2
• There was no proven link between terrorism and the Iraqi government, although a very large segment of Americans believe this to be true, and President Bush has done nothing to counter this belief.
"January 31, 2003, when a reporter asked both Bush and British Prime Minister Blair, “Do you believe that there is a link between Saddam Hussein, a direct link, and the men who attacked on September the 11th?” Bush replied, “I can't make that claim.” Blair then replied, “That answers your question.”[White House, 1/31/2003] A New York Times/CBS poll from earlier in the month indicates that 45 percent of Americans believe Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein was “personally involved” in the 9/11 attacks. [New York Times, 3/11/2003] The Christian Science Monitor notes, “Sources knowledgeable about US intelligence say there is no evidence that Hussein played a role in the Sept. 11 attacks, nor that he has been or is currently aiding al-Qaeda. Yet the White House appears to be encouraging this false impression….” For instance, Bush claims Hussein has supported “al-Qaeda-type organizations,” and “al-Qaeda types.” [New York Times 3/9/2003]
Nevertheless, the invasion occurred, and while museums, schools and hospitals went unprotected – securing the oil fields and oil pipelines remained the primary defensive strategy for security forces. There too, the placement of US military bases follows the pipeline, as seen in Figure 3.
Figure 3
Map created by overlaying maps found at the BBC website
• The construction of permanent bases in both countries suggests that the US plans to ‘occupy’ in some sense, these countries – laying claim to the governments and mineral privileges. Construction contracts for ‘bases’ went to firms traditionally strong in the petrochemical industry.
"US military bases here (Afghanistan), “originally agreed as temporary and emergency expedients, are now permanent.” [Guardian, 1/16/2002]
"It is reported that the US military is drawing up a plan for a long-term military “footprint” in Central Asia. The US says it plans no permanent bases, but the leaders of Central Asia speak of the US being there for decades, and inside US bases temporary structures are being replaced by permanent buildings." [AP, 4/30/2002, Washington Post, 8/27/2002, Los Angeles Times, 4/4/2002]
• The observation that a large segment of the Bush administration’s national security and defense planning structure came from the energy industry, and set national defense policy lends some suspicion to the objectivity of that policy. An extension of this lack of objectivity would include the new President of Afghanistan, Hamid Karzai who formerly worked for Unocal.
Any and all four arguments might easily lead one to conclude that the invasions sparked by the attack on the World Trade Center were conducted more for the benefit of the American oil industry that for the sake of world security.
There is a second group of independent writers that claim that attacks on the World Trade Center were conducted totally by right-wing elements of the Mossad for the intent of providing a justification for an attack on Iraq. Under this scenario, writers refer to the bulk of evidence presented earlier in this article, as well as the history of the policy making group that can claim responsibility for swaying George Bush to attack Iraq. This group is referred to under several names – neo-conservatives, neocons, neokons, PNAC, and Hillary Clinton’s unidentified “right wing conspiracy.”
"In 1997 a group of neo-conservatives founded the 'Project for the New American Century' (PNAC) - A year later PNAC called for the removal of Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq - In 2000 they predicted that the shift in US foreign policy towards that aim would come about slowly, unless there were "some catastrophic and catalyzing event, like a new Pearl Harbor". That event happened on September 11th 2001 - Ten people in the Bush administration are currently members of PNAC. They include Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Armitage, John Bolton, Zalmay Khalilzad and member of the advisory Defense Science Board, Richard Perle " [The Dossier, ukonline.co.uk]
The publicly acknowledged intent of the PNAC group is the ‘furtherance of democracy,’ in a manner that was inconceivable under prior US administrations. Essentially, the PNAC model for US foreign policy is one of unilateral aggression, putting the US foreign policy in the company of many historical aggressors: the Crusades, the Ottomans, the British Empire, Napoleon, Hussein’s Iraq, Hitler’s Germany, and Stalin’s Russia, to mention a few.
"Bill Kristol, (is) one of the most sought-after political commentators in the US, editor of The Weekly Standard, and President of The Project for a New American Century. In his talk, entitled “US Foreign Policy after 9-11: The Bush Doctrine,” Kristol declared that “for the US, the world really changed on September 11.” “We are no longer prepared to rely mainly on negotiations, trade pressures, arms control regimes and international institutions in order to solve critical world problems. The Israeli operation against the Iraqi nuclear reactor in Osirak is our new paradigm. Time is not on our side. We need to act soon, act preemptively, and act alone if necessary. Osirak is now the model of how foreign policy has to be conducted,” said Kristol. “Indeed, today the US is committed to forcing regime change in Iran, Iraq, and North Korea,” continued Kristol. “We will be much more aggressive in pursuing this goal; no longer are we content to wait for history to work things through. Unfortunately, Europe does not yet seem to understand our new world. They wish to return to pre-September 2001 rules.” [Begin –Sadat Center For Strategic Studies, May 2002 No. 14 ]
"Later in the year, Bush's influential advisor Richard Perle states, “No stages. This is total war. We are fighting a variety of enemies. There are lots of them out there. All this talk about first we are going to do Afghanistan, then we will do Iraq … this is entirely the wrong way to go about it. If we just let our vision of the world go forth, and we embrace it entirely and we don't try to piece together clever diplomacy, but just wage a total war … our children will sing great songs about us years from now.” [New Statesman, 12/16/2002]
While the praises for the victory of democracy in these conquered countries are widely sung, those who visit these countries are aware of the realities of this new policy, which do little to change the ways these countries operate:
"Apart from notional freedoms, little has changed. The warlords installed to power by America are as bad as the Taliban, terrorising whole communities, and ensuring that 90 per cent of Afghan women remained oppressed and that pledges of Western reconstruction aid remain empty promises."[ The Betrayal Of Afghanistan, John Pilger, The Guardian, 11/22/2003]
The background of many of these key policy players however, suggests they are far more interested in the security of Israel than that of the US. Two of the key architects of this group – Perle and Wolfowitz- have a well documented (both Congressional and FBI investigations) past of being alleged agents for the Israeli government, and have been directly responsible for the employment by US Policy making groups (Office of Special Plans OSP) of at least four other similarly documented and alleged agents of Israel: Douglas J. Feith (Undersecretary of Defense for Policy), Lawrence Franklin (currently under investigation by the FBI as being a potential Israeli spy), Michael Ledeen and Dr. Stephen Bryen. Lawrence Franklin works in an office overseen by Douglas J. Feith, the Defense Undersecretary for Policy. Feith is an influential aide to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. Also included in this list is Dr. Rabbi Dov Zakheim, who at the time was acting as chief-financial officer for the Department of Defense. A signer of the “Pearl Harbor” statement and an original member of the PNAC, Dr. Dov Zakheim’s personal and family’s significant involvement in Yeshivat Sha’alvim is a clear demonstration of his loyalties. "Sha'alvim is a dynamic and comprehensive educational community where … students are imbued with …an abiding commitment to the People and the State of Israel.”[ www.shaalvim.org]
From all available evidence it was these “unofficial” political advisers organized by Wolfowitz, Feith and Rumsfeld in the US Office of Special Planning (OSP) who were the source of the fabricated evidence, which was used to “justify” the invasion and occupation of Iraq.
"The OSP and the other members of the networks that operated throughout key US agencies shared a right-wing, pro-militarist ideology and are fanatically pro-Israel. Feith and Perle authored an infamous policy paper in 1996 for the Likud Party extremist, Benjamin Netanyahu, entitled “A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm.” This strategy called for the destruction of Saddam Hussein and his replacement by a Hashemite monarch. Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia and Iran would then have to be overthrown or destabilized for Israel to be secure in a kind of ‘Greater US-Israel Co-Prosperity Sphere.’ The OSP was an arm of the Wolfowitz-Feith policy of furthering the policies of the most extremist groups of the Sharon regime, forging close ties with a parallel ad hoc intelligence operation in the Israeli regime according to a report from the British newspaper, The Guardian" [“Who fabricated the Iraq War Threat: An Inside View” James Petras, Centre for Research on Globalisation, 8/22/2003]
To that end, the invasion of Iraq was as much a foregone conclusion as was the invasion of Afghanistan. It was a decision made by this group years before ‘weapons of mass destruction’ were presented to the public as the excuse for invasion, and years before the attack on the World Trade Center. Nothing would have prevented the invasion, because it could easily have been prevented – and spared thousands of lives and injured. According to the Chicago Tribune, Saddam Hussein was more than ready to leave Iraq, but the US Government chose to start a war instead.
"As Trireme (Richard Perle’s and Henry Kissinger’s venture capital firm)solicited investors at the end of 2002, Harb al-Zuhair (a wealthy and politically connected Saudi businessman) made a trip to his native Iraq, and met with government officials including Saddam's intelligence chief -- Tahir Abd' Jalil Habbush al-Tiktriti, head of Iraq's Mukhabarat, or General Intelligence Service. He returned with an important message for the U.S. government: On the eve of war, Saddam wanted to throw in the towel, Zuhair reported to Khashoggi. The Iraqi dictator sought back channel negotiations with America that might offer him a safe exit. Harriman and Khashoggi decided to arrange for Zuhair to tell his story to Perle…."[Hersh uncovered Pentagon adviser Richard Perle’s role in securing homeland security contracts, David Jackson, Chicago Tribune, 6/25/2004]
Both so called “conspiracy” interpretations (one in which oil interests are responsible, another in which pro-Israelis are responsible) provide compelling insights, and may explain the Bush administration’s behavior after the WTC tragedy, but do little to explain events leading up to the attack. The hard truth is, this tragedy was beginning to unfold before Bush won the election, before he won the Republican National convention. President Bush initially declined the recommendations of the PNAC, preferring to invade Afghanistan before paying attention to Iraq. Information suggests that Bush may have been knowledgeable and supportive of allowing what he was probably told would be a ‘controlled’ terrorist attack, but there is nothing to suggest he was responsible. The Republican convention hadn’t even occurred when the actual perpetrators were organizing in the US. Similarly, all the credible information available suggests Osama Bin Laden was not responsible. Who then was? There is a need to identify a new and viable master criminal behind these tragedies. For all the effort being put into the search for who is responsible, there are no alternatives being offered other than Osama Bi Laden or the Bush administration: but neither of these is credible, and the search should pick up on a trail dropped by nearly everyone doing research long ago.
An often forgotten set of events leading up to the WTC attack include the financial market “put” options placed up to four days before the attack. These were initially the most obvious trades with the “unclaimed” payout.
Table 1
Target |
Put Options |
Starting |
Of Interest |
Merrill Lynch & Co |
12,215 |
four trading days before the attacks |
Occupied 22 floors of the World |
Morgan Stanley Dean Witter & Co |
2,157 |
three trading days |
Occupied 22 floors of the World Trade Center |
United Airlines |
4,744 |
two and three trading days |
|
American Airlines |
4,516 |
one trading day |
|
These are the data points one always sees in the news, but there were other trades – significant trades, in financial companies!
• "Citigroup Inc., which has estimated that its Travelers Insurance unit may pay $500 million in claims from the World Trade Center attack. It had a jump in trading of October options that profit if shares fall below $40 apiece. Almost 14,000 of those options contracts were traded from Sept. 6 to Sept. 10 -- about 45 times the previous daily average. Citigroup shares fell $2.85 today to $39.60. "
• " Bear Stearns & Cos., where investors traded 3,979 contracts from Sept. 6 to Sept. 10 on September options that profit if shares fall below $50. The previous average volume for those options was 22 contracts. Bear Stearns shares fell $3.79 today to $46.45. "
• " Marsh & McLennan Cos., the biggest insurance brokerage, which had 1,700 employees working in the World Trade Center. Traders on Sept. 10 exchanged 1,209 contracts on options that profit if company shares fall below $90 through the third week of September. Previously, 13 contracts had traded on an average day. Marsh & McLennan shares fell $2.50 today to $84.50.'
• "The Wall Street Journal reported on October 2 that the ongoing investigation by the SEC into suspicious stock trades had been joined by a Secret Service probe into an unusually high volume of five-year US Treasury note purchases prior to the attacks. The Treasury note transactions included a single $5 billion trade. As the Journal explained: “Five-year Treasury notes are among the best investments in the event of a world crisis, especially one that hits the US. The notes are prized for their safety and their backing by the US government, and usually rally when investors flee riskier investments, such as stocks.” The value of these notes, the Journal pointed out, has risen sharply since the events of September 11. The article went on to quote Michael Shamosh, a bond-market strategist for Tucker Anthony Inc., who said, “If they were going to do something like this they would do it in the five-year part of the market. It’s extremely liquid, and the tracks would be hard to spot.” The SEC has been extremely tight-lipped about its probe, in which it has enlisted securities firms and government agencies in Europe, Canada and other countries. But on Tuesday the Investment Dealers Association, a trade association for the Canadian securities industry, posted on its web site a list sent by the American SEC of 38 stocks. The US agency had asked the Canadians to look into trading in these stocks between August 27 and September 11. As soon as US officials became aware of the Internet posting, they demanded that the Investment Dealers Association yank it from the web site, and the Canadian organization complied. However, reporters and others were able to copy the list before it was pulled. The list includes the parent companies of American, Continental, Delta, Northwest, Southwest, United and US Airways, as well as Carnival and Royal Caribbean cruise lines, aircraft maker Boeing and defense contractor Lockheed Martin. Several insurance companies are on the list—American International Group, Axa, Chubb, Cigna, CNA Financial, John Hancock and MetLife. The SEC list also includes several big companies that were tenants in the collapsed Twin Towers of the World Trade Center: investment firms Morgan Stanley, the complex’s largest occupant; Lehman Brothers; Bank of America; and the financial firm Marsh & McLennan. Other major companies listed include General Motors, Raytheon, LTV, WR Grace, Lone Star Technologies, American Express, Bank of New York, Bank One, Citigroup and Bear Stearns. [Suspicious trading points to advance knowledge by big investors of September 11 terror attacks, Barry Grey, 10/5/2001]
It is also fair to speculate that the breadth of the pre-attack investments trades was far broader than ever admitted to by the investigators. The general literature suggests trading in four companies, using one mentioned bank. These four, however, seem to be the “unclaimed’ trades – suggesting a potentially larger number of successful trades having taken place. The reality was far greater than generally reported. Trades were placed across the globe, far in excess of the few million dollars of “unclaimed” trades. More simply, a lot of the trades were successfully claimed.
"ABC World News reported on Sept. 20, "Jonathan Winer, an ABC News consultant said, 'it's absolutely unprecedented to see cases of insider trading covering the entire world from Japan, to the U.S., to North America, to Europe."
"How much money was involved? Andreas von Bülow, a former member of the German Parliament responsible for oversight of Germany's intelligence services estimated the worldwide profits amount at $15 billion, according to Tagesspiegel on Jan. 13. Other experts have estimated the profit at $12 billion. CBS News gave a conservative estimate of $100 million."
"According to Phil Erlanger, a former Senior Technical Analyst with Fidelity , and founder of a Florida firm that tracks short selling and options trading, insiders made off with billions (not mere millions) in profits by betting on the fall of stocks they knew would tumble in the aftermath of the WTC and Pentagon attacks." [ http://www.erlangersqueezeplay.com ]
"Richard Wagner, a data retrieval expert estimated that more than $100 million in illegal transactions appeared to have rushed through the WTC computers before and during the disaster."
During that week, demand for almost 86 tonnes of gold, or almost $900 million dollars was created by demands in the Far East. These purchase did not go into the jewelry market, but were primarily targeted at investment hedge funds.
"While hedge funds are a rapidly growing part of the financial industry, the fact that they operate through private placements and restrict share ownership to rich individuals and institutions frees them from most disclosure and regulation requirements that apply to mutual funds and banks. Funds legally domiciled outside the main financial market countries are generally subject to even less regulation." [Hedge Funds: What Do We Really Know? Barry Eichengreen, Donald Mathieson ,©1999 International Monetary Fund]
It is proposed that to launder the profits of the anonymous trades, the profits from the attack on the World Trade Center were shifted into gold, then hedge funds- both of which are easy to conceal ownership with, especially in places like Thailand and Vietnam, which is where this gold went. With the range of leverage currently used by financial institutions (between 100:1 and 400:1, although it does go as high as 600:1), it might be fair to say the people responsible for this crime converted it into a leveraging of between $75 and $200 Billion dollars. Additionally, as will be discussed in Section 6.7, there were individuals like Adnan Khashoggi and institutions like Deutsche Bank Securities that may have made other types of investments that benefited from the effects of 9/11.
These options suggest a number of observations being made in advance about who stood to “lose” or “gain” during the aftermath of the attack:
• The first target and primary target (as determined by the level of investment and number of days preceding the attack) was Merrill Lynch.
• The secondary targets were Morgan Stanley and insurance companies.
• It appears as an afterthought that someone decided the airlines stood to lose as well. It is very possible that these airline trades were not placed by the true criminals, but were the product of normal, but sporadic trading. Given that nearly all airlines were spiked during the time period – not just those involved in the attack – the following explanation makes more sense.
"Adam Hamilton of Zeal LLC, a consulting company that does research on markets worldwide, has crunched the numbers and recently told Insight magazine: "The market was in bad shape in the summer and early fall, and you know there were a lot of people who believed that there would be a sell-off in the market long before Sept. 11. For instance, American Airlines was at $40 in May and fell to $29 on Sept. 10; United was at $37 in May and fell to $31 on Sept. 10. These stocks were falling anyway, and it would have been a good time to short them." The downward trend in the airline stocks was backed up in the pre-Sept. 11 trading picture."
"Insight reported that there were repeated spikes in put options on American Airlines during the year before Sept. 11 (June 19 with 2,951 puts, June 15 with 1,144 puts, April 16 with 1,019 and Jan. 8 with 1,315 puts). In the same period, United Airlines had slightly more action (Aug. 8 with 1,678 puts, July 20 with 2,995, April 6 with 8,212 and March 13 with 8,072)." [Dave Eberhart, “Still Silence From 9-11 Stock Speculation Probe”, NewsMax, 6/3/2002]
On the other hand, almost always, if investors believe the airline industry is due to drop, they will short all three major carriers. This was not the case here because Delta did not see spikes similar to UAL and AMR.
• It appears financial companies were the focal point of investors with apriori knowledge of the attack on the WTC. These criminals were sophisticated investors, with inside knowledge which identified the insurers of these building and financial targets. Inside knowledge of this sort might easily be established by a competitor who worked that market – a competitor like Allianz.
• The attack was on financial companies (especially investment banking) in the World Trade Center as well as financial companies in general, including Citibank, Bear Stearns & Cos., Marsh & McLennan Cos. American Express, Bank of New York, and Bank One, which are not in the World Trade Center. The plan was to create an event that would shake the American economy to its core, and cripple the highly leveraged investment banks. In another of a long list of strange co-incidents, all of these banks have a unique and special relationship with the President Bush when it comes to economic policy.
"President George W. Bush played host to the heads of several top US banks at a private meeting in the White House this week, in an effort to persuade the markets of his commitment to deficit reduction. Mr. Bush's invitation underscores his desire to secure Wall Street's support for the ambitious economic reform agenda planned for his second term. Vice President Dick Cheney, political strategist Karl Rove, chief of staff Andrew Card, outgoing commerce secretary Don Evans and the White House economic team were also present for the talks with the heads of Merrill Lynch, Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, Wachovia, Credit Suisse First Boston, Morgan Stanley, Citigroup, and American Express." [Bush Holds Private Meeting With Bank Chiefs, Copyright 2004, InvestmentsMagazine.com, 11/18 2004]
• Interestingly, if oil was the objective as claimed by so many, someone might have invested in ‘Call options’ on companies who would obviously benefit –such as Halliburton. This didn’t happen, because an invasion of Iraq was not contemplated. (More on this later.) Moreover, in one story that received no follow-up, oil related companies were traded with “calls” shortly after the attack.
"Sadi, a Geneva-based investment group that is controlled by the Bin Laden family, is under investigation for an appalling interpretation of insider-trading. Twenty minutes before the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, the Sadi group instructed to sell certain stock portfolios at several European stock markets. In the days following the attacks, large buying-orders, especially in the oil and chemical sector, were placed. The world-wide investigation in the Sadi-group's actions have been felt also on the Italian stock market based in Milan. "[Stock Speculations of Bin Laden Investment Group Investigated]
Another set of clues which have been commented on, and again generally ignored – is a series of articles in Pravda during the summer of 2001, and comments by Vladimir Putin. In these comments, Russian intelligence was predicting a catastrophic financial event in late August of 2001 (a couple weeks before September 11). This unidentified event was expected to bring about the collapse of the dollar, and Russians were being advised to get out of dollars. Similarly, the chief economic strategist for Dresdner Wasserstein was predicting a major crash in the American stock-market for that same time-frame, in a sense, encouraging the Dresdner Wasserstein customer base to get out of dollar based assets. These are clear indicators that the financial impact of the attack was a consideration by those with pre-knowledge.
The first and cardinal rule of any criminal investigation has been totally ignored in an attack on the headquarters of three of the world’s largest investment banks. That rule is “Follow the money.” The 9/11 Commission Report does not even acknowledge the occurrence of any of this crime. The terrorist gambit has convinced most of the world this atrocity was the responsibility of fanatics with little concern for wealth. As a result, what little thought was given to the “apparent” money trail – the put options – was dropped as incidental to a bigger evil –global terrorism. What if, however, the attack was about “the money?”
For the moment, please assume the actual targets were the three largest equity banking firms of Merrill Lynch & Co., Morgan Stanley Dean Witter & Co (MSDW), and Goldman Sachs – filling 22, 22, and 15 floors of the WTC respectively. (Goldman Sachs had a significant presence in the WTC, but the instigators did not take “put options” on Goldman Sachs.) In the course of a normal investigation, one might ask – who stood to gain from the direct disruption of these financial giants. These giants, along with Citibank and JP Morgan Chase represented the five major threats to the German banking market, and as a result the Dresdner Bank (a subsidiary of Allianz) and Deutsche Bank stood to gain from a temporary disruption of the capabilities of Merrill Lynch, MSDW, Goldman Sachs, Citibank and JP Morgan Chase.
A brief bit of background on these two German banks, and the German banking industry in general, is relevant.
Banks have created a bank-center culture, with banking centers created in New York, London, Paris, Tokyo and Frankfurt. These centers become fairly ‘incestuous,’ swapping employees and favors. These centers represent common interests and policies generally based on their country’s primary currency values. Today, Paris and Frankfurt are creating a unity around the Euro, and incorporating Basel into the Frankfurt center, while London and New York operate around the dollar.
During World War II, the two German banks represented the primary banking powers in Nazi Germany. There are two events that occurred during the last 50 years which have provided a basis for resentment on their part with the American banking community. When the Allies took over Germany, the British generally left the banking structure in their zone as they found it. The Americans, however, broke up these banks into 30 autonomous regional banks and put in place a number of regulations to prevent these banks from ever re-establishing themselves as major global powers. Those rules, however, were ultimately circumvented, and the banks manage to re-establish themselves in the 1960’s.
Just as these banks were re-emerging as global players, the Richard Nixon administration unilaterally took the dollar off the Bretton Woods System of Fixed Exchange Rates, which then created an advantage for the American banks and economy that has taken the rest of the world several decades to recover from. It seriously undermined the German competitiveness in the export market, which took the Germans years to recover from. The advantages that came with the move off the Bretton Woods agreement – in terms of enhanced perceived value of the dollar– has given a global advantage to the New York bank center for almost two decades.
Over the next three decades, Europe was able to muscle its way back to a position where the banks were almost on par with New York. Together, the two banks represented a coordinated and balanced global strategy: Deutsche Bank had 21 of its 28 foreign affiliates in Africa and Asia, Dresdner had 16 of its 21 affiliates in Latin America. Not all of this “comeback” can be attributed to the inherent attractiveness of the Euro or European currencies. At one point, Tokyo banks, representing the growth of the orient, stood to overwhelm European banks in the 80’s. In response, the International Bank of Settlements (heavily weighted by participants from Paris, Frankfurt and Basel, and taking advantage of the unfortunate absence of the American delegate) voted to establish new bank capitalization requirements which targeted the Tokyo banking practices of defining property value as equity with which to create loans. This redefinition of the asset base with the stroke of a pen essentially drove the collapse of the Tokyo banking system, and subsequently, the rest of the Pacific Rim. Currently, this same group is driving another round of re-defining capitalization requirements which is designed to cripple the US banking industry by regulating the use of government debt as a capital base. Given that a devaluation of the dollar is globally perceived as inevitable, requiring the US banking system to hold large amounts of US government debt will automatically devalue the reserves of the American banks.
One might conclude that the bankers from Germany center play hard, and have some reason for resentment of the US banking circles. Which brings the analysis back to threats to the German banking center in 2001.
• Merrill Lynch was in the process of bringing electronic banking to the European market, being the first overseas bank to directly attempt to challenge the German’s lock on their traditional customer base. As a German foundation, Merrill Lynch had acquired Sannwald Jaenecke Bank, and was heavily recruiting German resources. Neither Dresdner (a subsidiary of Allianz), Commerzbank nor Deutsche Bank were in a position to counter that technology.
• The US banks were positioning themselves for a major penetration of the European equity market. In the US, equity banking fees were at 6-7% less than 1998 levels, while in Europe, the market was expected to be 44% above 1998 levels. The profitability on this business had increased due to the introduction of the Euro, which simplified and encouraged cross border banking. Because of a history of national banking, cross border trades were allowed to increase commission rates, thus making the European business even more attractive.
• Five US banks were seen as threatening the equity banking market formerly dominated by Germany: Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley Dean Witter, Goldman Sachs, Citibank and JP Morgan Chase. Goldman Sachs had 15 floors in the WTC, Merrill Lynch had 22 floors as did Morgan Stanley. (Investment Banking in Europe, August 2001, Freeman and Co. LLC)
• More importantly though, in 2000, both Goldman Sachs, Merrill Lynch and MSDW had risen to the top three investment banks in Europe, bumping Dresdner out of the top 5 and pushing the Deutsche Bank to the number 4 slot. The European market for equity underwriting was expected to generate $913 billion in new offerings, which would have generated $23 billion in revenue. Twenty three billion dollars, while significant, is relatively small in comparison to the larger losses if Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs cemented themselves into the European market. Dresdner was already suffering financially due to this competition. Faced with insolvency, it had to be rescued by a white knight investor named Allianz – the one major insurance company that remained untouched by the WTC attack.
That being said, the German banking group, after years of planning a comeback and revenge, was anticipating a collapse of the US economy within a month of the date of the WTC attack. The chief economic strategist for Dresdner Wasserstein was publicly predicting a major crash in the American stock-market for that same time-frame, publicly covering Dresdner Wasserstein’s (and other Germans’) retreat out of dollar based assets, when other forecasters saw little reason to move away from the dollar at that time.
One might say the German banks had specific motives ($23 Billion) and reason for seething resentment (due to US attempts to destroy them after WWII and take unfair advantage of them in the 1970’s.) This could be considered motive for attacking the banks in the World Trade Center. (Later, another equally lucrative and more compelling motive these banks may have had for attacking the WTC will be discussed. For now, let’s assume this motive would be sufficient.) But motive isn’t enough. One needs to be able to demonstrate that these “old men of Europe” had the means and connections to execute this deed. These old men that virtually rule the world banking environment needed to be able to reach deep into the Mossad, and finance the attack on the American equity banking establishment. Once the dark side of the Mossad was involved, its criminal elements used it’s pre-knowledge of the attacks to benefit from this knowledge by manipulating the stock market across thirty eight stocks. They used the Deutsche Bank subsidiary of AB Brown, and made investments in exchanges that were weak in control: Canada.
There is a common perception that the Mossad is a group of extremely efficient and dedicated patriots of Israel. Most likely, most agents that are just that. There is however, another side of the Mossad. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, there has been a steady stream of ex-KGB agents and Russian Mafiya thugs into the Mossad. This has resulted in a unique relationship between the Mossad and former KGB intelligence groups. When the Cold War came to an end, and the Soviet Union started to collapse economically, the KGB did exactly what the Nazis did towards the end of WWII. They started stripping national and party assets and bank accounts, and investing the funds in foreign companies. At the same time, millions of Soviet citizens were allowed to emigrate to Israel, to the point where one in five Israelis is Russian or of Russian heritage.
"Starting in December 1990, Vladimir Ivashko and Nikolai Kruchina, and senior officers of the KGB, organized a new department of the KGB which began transferring of a major part of Communist Party money to the bank accounts of dozens of foreign enterprises created by the KGB for laundering money. The classic example of this relationship is found in a company called Nordex, an international company based in Austria. Nordex is widely recognized as having been a front for post Cold War KGB money-laundering. "
"A classified report from the German intelligence agency BND on Loutchansky, obtained by Time, charged that Nordex had been created as an espionage front "to earn hard currency for the KGB." The report continued, "Nordex subsidiaries are alleged to be defrauding Russian firms, i.e., the Russian state, of several millions in hard currency annually." [Time, 7/8/1996]
In return for laundering money through Israel, Nordex (a company owned by Robert Maxwell) provided cover for Israeli agents applying for access throughout Eastern Europe. This interplay between rogue agents of the KGB, Russian Mafiya and Israeli secret service soon resulted in a major corruption of the Israeli secret service.
"By the time Netanyahu was running for Prime Minister in 1996, in the wake of the Rabin assassination, the Russian Mafiya factor had become so prominent, that some top Israeli law enforcement officials broke their code of silence and went public with their concerns. Moshe Shahal, the country's chief of internal security, warned that "Elements of the Russian Mafiya are effectively trying to control Israel. The gangsters are now trying to buy and influence politicians," he warned. Shahal and others warned of credible reports that the Russian Mafiya was prepared to spend between $1.5 and $4 billion to "secure political power," according to Robinson." [1/10/2003, Executive Intelligence Review. Sharon and His Mafiya Allies Plot Israel Election Theft, by Jeffrey Steinberg]
Using Nordex as the example, and knowing other such companies existed, the search started for a link between German banking and the Russian/Israeli underworld. Another such KGB money-laundering company in Austria and Bulgaria is reputed to be MG Corp. or Multi-Group. Just like in other countries (e.g. Nordex in Austria), Multigroup was involved in the scheme to loot the country after the breakup of the USSR. The scheme involved the highest levels of the Communist Party and the KGB/mafia with help from Westerners. This former Maxwell subsidiary came into the public light in 1996, when the President of MG (Iliya Pavlov), was assassinated the day after he testified in the trial of the murder of the Bulgarian Prime Minister, Andrei Lukanov. The BBC (3/8/2003) reported that: “Mr. Lukanov, who masterminded the downfall of Bulgaria's long-serving communist leader Todor Zhivkov in 1989, was found shot in front of his Sofia home in October 1996. At the time, Bulgarian media said Mr. Lukanov's death was a contract killing related to his business activities.”
Pavlov – the President of MG Corp. - was ranked as the wealthiest person in Bulgaria and the eighth richest in Eastern Europe. Pavlov’s wife, Toni Chergelanova, was the daughter of Chergelanov, the chief of the Bulgarian Intelligence Service, according to the Nova Makedonija (11/2/1995). This connection identifies Multigroup’s links to the KGB and mafia, as well as intelligence organizations in Macedonia and Serbia.
In looking at this revolving doorway for the Mossad into Eastern Europe, and KGB/Russian mafia into Israel, the Board of Directors and current ownership of Multi-Group is quite interesting. Allianz, owner of Dresdner Bank owns 10.1% of MG, Deutsche Bank owns 9.04%, and the Kuwait Investment Office owns 7.9%. On its board we find:
• Dr. Diethart Breipohl, Icking, (until June 3, 2003)
Former Member of the Management Board of Allianz AG, former CFO of Allianz, (and in the all-too-small world, probable cousin to Dr. Arthur Breipohl of Norman Oklahoma.)
• Dr. Jürgen Krumnow, Königstein/Ts., Member of the Advisory Board of Deutsche Bank AG
• Bernhard Walter, Bad Homburg v.d.H., Former Spokesman of the Board of Managing Directors of Dresdner Bank AG
• As well as Board representatives from ThyssenKrupp and Siemens. (These are mentioned only because it is of interest to those who track the lineage of where the Nazi’s put their stolen assets at the end of the war. All of these were heavy recipients of government funding: Deutsche Bank, Dresdner, Allianz, Krupp, Siemens, and Thyssen.)
This interest in MG by such banking luminaries really places munitions and explosives in the ‘key competencies’ of German bankers. If Board Members are usually selected so they can bring the appropriate experience and expertise to the direction of the company, why would so many financial types be sitting on the board of a company whose primary holding (at the time) was Dynamit Nobel – defined in the company literature and press as a “specialty chemical company” – whose specialty was munitions and land-mines.
This is not an unimportant factor. Directing a company whose product is highly desired by terrorists and militia groups allows one to come into regular contact with warlords of various sorts who are willing to arrange just about anything to get the weapons that allow them to stay in power. Through its sales and distribution channels of independent distributors, the Board can set up nearly anyone it chooses to represent the product line, while claiming to maintain total lack of accountability for its sales. Deutsche Bank seems to have had a number of such arms merchants using its banking services.
"Just 32 days before the attack on the World Trade Center and Pentagon, a Financial Times of Asia (FT) Wire-Business Line report linked Deutschebank to the United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), Pakistani and Afghani heroin smuggling, and money laundering of narcotics proceeds (8-10-2001). Retired Pakistani intelligence chief Brig Imtiaz was jailed for eight years on July 31, 2001 for laundering heroin profits -- for covert actions -- via a CIA-linked drug smuggling cell, using Deutschebank and other financial entities and properties." [Tom Flocco and Michael C. Ruppert, Edited by Michael C. Ruppert, © Copyright 2001, From The Wilderness Publications]
"On June 15, 2001, the New York Post, reported that experts said the most likely buyers (of weapons) connected to the former Deutschebank securities trader and the two Pakistanis were current U.S. ally Pakistan or Osama bin Laden."
The German bankers had financial and emotional motive to attack the World Trade Center, and they had the connections and capability.
The scenario is summed up like this: two top German banks, working with four other companies who benefited immensely from the Nazi looting of German government accounts (Allianz, Thyssen, Krupp and Siemens), have purchased major ownership positions of a company formerly owned by a Russian/Israeli Mossad agent (Robert Maxwell), managed by the son-in-law of the Bulgarian Secret Police, and invested in by the KGB and Russian Mafiya. (Now there is one hell of a company picnic!) This group uses its contacts to set up a false flag operation to destroy (murder) its key competitors: Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs, Citibank and JP Morgan Chase. Rogue Mossad agents set up a false flag operation to attack the WTC, and monitored their recruits closely to ensure the success of the attack. These same rogue agents – barely distinguishable from the Russian Mafiya – capitalize on this knowledge in their own manner by shelling short 38 stocks on the stock market.
"Between August 26 and September 11, 2001, a group of speculators, identified by the American Securities and Exchange Commission as Israeli citizens, sold “short” a list of 38 stocks that could reasonably be expected to fall in value as a result of the pending attacks. These speculators operated out of the Toronto, Canada and Frankfurt, Germany, stock exchanges and their profits were specifically stated to be “in the millions of dollars.” [SEC Secret Probe of Stock Dealings Before 911]
There is a bit of a jump from “Israeli citizens” to “Russian Mafiya” that is made with the presented information. The actual clues which allow this assumption are the trade exchanges used for the suspicious trades. The Toronto Exchange is extremely well known for it’s listing of mining and mineral companies. At the end of 1996, there were about 1400 mining companies listed on Canadian stock exchanges. The Canadian financial services sector appears to have raised more equity capital for the mineral industry than was raised in Australia, the United States and South Africa combined. These companies are heavily traded by players in gold and diamonds – of which there are more than a few in Israel. These are companies that hone the skills of a speculator. The reality of the Israeli role in the minerals and mining market is that it is dominated by black marketers and Russian Mafiya. These are the folks that ‘trade’ arms for gold and diamonds. These are the distributors for companies such as MultiGroup’s Dynamit Nobel. People such as Shaptai Kalmonovitch or Yair Klein (with ten more identified in Section 6.6, page 76):
"Russian-born Shaptai Kalmanovitch and his Israeli-based enterprise, the LIAT construction and Finance Company. While in Sierra Leone, Kalmanovitch brought in other money launderers, drug traffickers and arms dealers, all scrambling to gain access to diamonds. In 1986, Marat Balagula, considered the ‘Godfather’ of Russian mafia in Brooklyn, N.Y., found a safe haven in Sierra Leone and was known to be operating with Kalmanovitch. Balagula was considered one of the initiators of the Antwerp operations of the Russian Mafia. He and Kalmanovitch became involved briefly in the importation to Sierra Leone of gasoline, in a deal reportedly backed by a fugitive American businessman, Marc Rich, and guaranteed by the Luccheses, an old-time American crime family…. Kalmanovitch was reportedly expelled later from the South African ‘homeland’ of Bophutatswana and arrested in Israel, where he stood trial as a spy for the Soviet Union. He was released in 1993 and is currently thought to be living in the Baltic region. A more credible and better organized Israeli company appeared in Sierra Leone soon after Kalmanovitch's arrest. The N.R. SCIPA Group, owned by Nir Guaz (known as ‘The Skipper’), set up diamond buying offices in Freetown and Kenema." [The Heart of the Matter: Sierra Leone, Diamonds & Human Security, Ian Smillie, Lansana Gberie, Ralph Hazleton]
"In January 1999, the West African ECOMOG force apprehended an Israeli named Yair Klein attempting to sell helicopter spare parts to the Freetown authorities just after the devastating attack by the RUF on the capital. Klein is a former Israeli military officer. He was (at the time of writing this report) facing trial in a Freetown court, accused of spying for the rebels, and supplying them with arms through Liberian networks directly linked to the Liberian President. Klein had been involved in the training of Taylor’s elite fighters and before that, through his company, Spearhead Inc., he worked in Colombia. He is still wanted by Colombian authorities for providing ‘instruction and training in terrorist activities’ to paramilitary and vigilante groups in Colombia’s Magdalena valley region between 1987 and 1989, according to the warrant issued by Colombian judicial authorities for his arrest in February 1994. The trainees later joined the Medellin drug cartel. Freetown authorities say that Klein provided them with information about the RUF’s drug and arms trade, implicating the Liberian president. Curiously, the same informant claimed that Israel has been quietly putting pressure on the authorities to have Klein, a former senior member of the Israeli reserve force, released.' [The Heart of the Matter: Sierre-Leone, Diamonds and Human Security, Ian Smillie, Lansana Gberie, Ralph Hazleton]
Here is the perfect win-win scenario for everyone except the victims in the WTC. The German financiers eliminate their competition. The Mossad whips up American public support for the Israeli counter-terrorist assault on Palestine, the Russian Mafiya exploits the stock market, and a group of exploited Muslims get to die as martyrs. George Bush and his administration of oil industry executives (without understanding the real motives and conspirators) – ignore numerous warnings of the attack because they are expecting a hi-jacking they think they can both control and leverage as an excuse to further their own aims. These warnings come from the same intelligence groups whose darker side is populated with thugs and criminals.
By not stopping the event – the US oil oligarchs conveniently had an excuse to invade Afghanistan and take over the natural gas and pipeline construction contracts, where previously they were being frozen out of by the Taliban.
"The BBC reported that Niaz Niak, a former Pakistan foreign secretary, was told by senior American officials at a meeting in Berlin in mid-July 2001 that 'military action against Afghanistan would go ahead by the middle of October'. Until July 2001 the US government saw the Taliban regime as a source of stability in Central Asia that would enable the construction of hydrocarbon pipelines from the oil and gas fields in Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, through Afghanistan and Pakistan, to the Indian Ocean. But, confronted with the Taliban's refusal to accept US conditions, the US representatives told them 'either you accept our offer of a carpet of gold, or we bury you under a carpet of bombs' .... The 9/11 attacks allowed the US to press the 'go' button for a strategy in accordance with the PNAC agenda which it would otherwise have been politically impossible to implement. (It allowed the US to build and control two pipelines, one of which) would extend eastwards through Afghanistan and Pakistan and terminate near the Indian border. This would rescue Enron's beleaguered power plant at Dabhol on India's west coast, in which Enron had sunk $3bn investment and whose economic survival was dependent on access to cheap gas..."[The Guardian, 9/6/2003]
"Niaz Naik, a former Pakistani Foreign Secretary, was told by senior American officials in mid-July that military action against Afghanistan would go ahead by the middle of October.... he said it was doubtful that Washington would drop its plan even if Bin Laden were to be surrendered immediately by the Taleban." ["US planned attack on Taliban," BBC Online, 9/18/ 2001]
In addition to an excuse to invade Afghanistan, the attack on the WTC provided the “Pearl Harbor” catalyst that was envisioned by the tight-knit group of neo-conservative defense analysts as the necessary and sufficient condition to invade Iraq, and then the rest of the Middle East. This invasion was required for the ‘security’ of Israel.
The explanation and hypotheses in this article addresses many of the strange information coincidences and contradictions that exist in the world as we know it:
• How is it that Russian, German and Israeli intelligence organizations knew in advance of the attack on the WTC?
• How is it that Russian and German financial advisors could forecast such a pinpointed time for a collapse of the dollar, which coincided with an attack on the WTC?
• Why would the Israeli secret service – purportedly an ally of the United States – go to such extensive lengths to execute this attack on the WTC and US intelligence agents in Iraq?
• How can so much evidence point to Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda without them being the responsible parties?
• Why is it that large investment banks were targets of the WTC conspiracy?
• How is it that Nazi sympathizers and Israeli patriots could find themselves on the same side of a fight?
• Why would the Bush Whitehouse cover-up the warnings it had received?
• Why would the Bush Whitehouse attack Iraq, when Saddam had nothing to do with the international terrorists?
This hypothetical explanation seems to fit together previously contradictory and inconsistent pieces of information known about the attack. This explanation however, is only the tip of the iceberg.
Here is the ironic twist in the story. The invasion of Iraq was not part of the original plan. This same group that planned and financed the WTC attack had a vested interest in Saddam Hussein staying in power, and keeping the US and Israel out of Iraq. As this report later unveils Adnan Khoshoggi’s involvement in this plan, it should be noted that in a meeting arranged by him with Richard Perle (the Whitehouse ‘neocon’ advisor), Khashoggi tried to broker a deal that would prevent the attack. The financial organization behind Total Elf Fina – the oil company representing European oil interests in Iraq – is inextricably linked to the same old men of Europe than planned the attack on the WTC, and the Russian Mafiya that helped execute it. The group that started the series of events that precipitated the Invasion of Iraq wants Iraq for its own. The Mossad wants to keep other intelligence organizations out of its sphere of influence. Hence, it executes American agents. The bankers – whose fortunes are heavily linked to the Euro – want the Iraq oil revenues to use Euros as the reserve currency rather than the dollar. The Russian Mafiya, who has a significant ownership in the Russian oil industry, had the balance of the oil contracts being offered by Saddam that were not taken up by the French Total Elf Fina interests.
The Bush White House needed to invade Iraq, not so much for the oil – but to prevent the further erosion of the value of the dollar – which was threatened by the attack on the WTC, the American banking system, and the American economy. Saddam Hussein threatened to break the US stranglehold on the oil market which required US Dollars as the reserve currency for trading oil. If he had been successful, the value of the dollar would have dropped precipitously. Bush had to prevent that, and create a managed decline. Whether deliberate or not, by invading Iraq, Bush parried the financial attack on the US economy created by the attack on the World Trade Center. This may have been the issue that put George Bush in alignment with the PACN, whereas he had not been earlier.
Heidner Report Table of Contents >2 I 3 I 5 I 6 I 7
See also: Clues to the Murderers of 9-11
No Need for Hijackers
Rumsfeld a Co-Conspirator of 9-11 Stand Down
