National Security Archive: "No-Go" Tribal Areas

The war was planned prior to 9/11. Bush told a Pakistani and an Indian official in July 2001 that the U.S. would lead war on Afghanistan no later than October of that year and this was said in a definite way; not having spoken of possibly taking war to Afghanistan, but, instead, definitely doing so and no later than October 2001.

The war plans were on Bush's desk days before 9/11.

And isn't it "peculiar" that the convenient, convenient for hellishly strategic pretext for driving Americans to support the war, 9/11 attacks occurred days after the plans for the war were on Bush's desk.

I'm not a witness to that; it's what I've read. But it certainly seems to have been fact-based and there are other clues to the war having been planned before 9/11.

According to enough people who know enough about the military and war, there's no way that the U.S. could have lead this war as quickly as happened following 9/11 without months, perhaps a year, of preparation; because it takes considerable time to plan for placing forces and to move the heavy forces to where the war will be or is. It's not like the U.S. was being attacked. The 9/11 attacks happened, but it wasn't a war launched on the U.S. and it did not need immediate and maintained response until the attacking forces were defeated.

It was a war of or by choice, instead of a necessary one. But the Bush-Cheney cabal had the plan for immediate and long-maintained war on Afghanistan for as long as it would take to take or gain control of that country for Big Oil, Big Finance, or, like Lawrence Wilkerson said in the interview with Paul Jay on The Real News and posted here and Youtube on, I believe, September 12th, so two days ago, Big Money. And it's also for the Big Money power-goons aiming for global dominance by them through the use of their U.S. government and military forces.

It's their government and military forces, not ours. Remember, the Constitution, our Constitution, is "just a piece of paper", which is something a lot of people use to wipe themselves with when they go to the toilet. The Big Money power-goons likely enjoy thinking of our Constitution in this way.

The Taliban offered to hand over Osama bin Laden, who was the so-called justification for launching war on a country, because he supposedly was responsible for 9/11, an unproven allegation; well, they offered to hand him over three times and the third time was on October 7th, 2001 prior to the launch of the war machine lead by the U.S. And Bush had said that the Taliban had nothing to do with 9/11, claimed they refused to hand over OBL, and pretended to us, that this and OBL (supposedly) being responsible for 9/11 justified war. It really made no sense, because it makes no sense at all to war on a country or government unless they attack us or it's absolutely certain an attack on us is imminent. But many dufus Americans took the bait they were fed by a government that nearly constantly lies and always does when it's committing crimes, which are awfully often and extreme.

It's not a conspiracy theory that the above was definitely [deliberate] and criminal on the part of the Bush-Cheney cabal. Of course Bush and Cheney knew that it was criminal. They knew the laws, conventions, and so on. They knew they were disregarding the laws, et cetera. Anyone foolish enough to believe that the White House cabal didn't know the laws and so on is, well, a fool.

It was deliberate and it's why they deliberately lied to us, to gain support from those of us who'd be unthinking and to deliberately launch unjustifiable war.

Racketeers know they're racketeers! They know what they do and know it's illegal, so they [try] to not get caught and when they do, then they try to successfully use another racketeer tactic, the one to buy off judges, f.e.

And people doubt that the Bush-Cheney administration deliberately allowed the 9/11 attacks to happen after they had received forewarnings, including sufficiently detailed ones, from plenty of foreign intelligence agencies or services. They could and did deliberately launch wars of aggression on two countries, killing over a million people who had done nothing to the U.S. or any other western country, destroyed Iraq, have caused destruction in Afghanistan, have criminally acted against the sovereign rights of states or countries, forced four million Iraqis into being internally and externally displaced refugees, haven't done anything to restore water sanitation, et cetera; but they couldn't have deliberately allowed the 9/11 attacks to happen. That part specially had to be only negligence? Anyone who believes that is a fool or naive, or a malicious citizen.

Bill Clinton basically refused to talk with President Slobodan Milosevic in 1999. Clinton required that President Milosevic agree to the Rambouillet Accord, which Wikipedia says the proper appelation is Rambouillet Agreement, and President Milosevic accepted the accord, which evidently wasn't expected by Clinton et alia, because Clinton immediately responded by stating that his administration had forgotten to include a clause. When that clause was added, it was immediately clear that it would make the accord rejectable, because it was a racket, gangster kind of clause and President Milosevic would not accept it if he had honor. He had honor and the war was launched on no justifiable grounds.

Clinton is a gangster; no question about it. But he's far from the sole gangster who's been member of the body politic of the U.S.; far from it.