TVWho: Gen. Wesley Clark Shocker on 9/11 “Policy Coup”

At the most, Al Qaeda was a subcontractor, IMHO. The question is: Who was the cabal that came up with the idea to implement the operation and act as the general contractor?

We know the “what”, and can make inferences as to “why”, but the question of the Century is “WHO?”. Because this affects all of us, we are OWED an answer.

I also agree that these guys come out after the fact.

Aah but he left out the group that benefits from all those oil and gas pipelines and reserves, as well as the rare minerals in Afghanistan. It is just like Haiti, the populations is left to their own devices while the gold discovered on their tiny island will be extracted leaving nothing for the populace but an environmental mess. Globally people have little importance anymore except to pay taxes and kept quiet.

Probability tells me that what those 2 towers experienced in their
demolition are considered State Secrets’. That is why there is no
hint of a re-investigation for what happened on 9/11/2001.
How those disruptions occurred and are occurring in those targeted
countries would also be considered State Secrets’ covered under an Act of our congress which may be a target also.

Interesting list of countries. Did Obama add Tunisia and Egypt, or were those regime changes a surprise? It should be noted that Tunisia and Egypt were nonviolent; obviously not American!

its great! But he can say anything now hindsight is 20-20! If he listens to russ baker/dave emory he could get this info from the past,postings everyone overlooks the obvious he is selling a book and if he had spoken up at the time he would be dead! Money makes the world go round! I.e. Try buying a coffee without a dollar!russ already said that most people dont have the bandwith to pay any mind!! They have to eat ! They dont give a sbit

You guys keep asking who who like a flock of owls,the answer of course is Mr evil himself …Dr Cheney.

It might be enlightening to put Clark’s revelations into the context of the “Silk Road Strategy” that was being formulated in the same time period. Here is an excerpt from a post by Michel Chossudovsky: “America’s Silk Road Strategy: The
Trans-Eurasian Security System

The Silk Road Strategy (SRS)
constitutes an essential building block of US foreign policy in the
post-Cold War era.

The SRS was formulated as a bill presented to the US Congress in
1999. It called for the creation of an energy and transport corridor
network linking Western Europe to Central Asia and eventually to the
Far East.

The Silk Road Strategy is defined as
a “trans-Eurasian security system”. The SRS calls for the “militarization
of the Eurasian corridor” as an integral part of the “Great Game”.
The stated objective, as formulated under the proposed March 1999
Silk Road Strategy Act, is to develop America’s business empire
along an extensive geographical corridor.

While the 1999 SRS legislation (HR
3196) was adopted by the House of Representatives, it never became
law. Despite this legislative setback, the Silk Road Strategy became,
under the Bush Administration, the de facto basis of US-NATO
interventionism, largely with a view to integrating the former
Soviet republics of the South Caucasus and Central Asia into the US
sphere of influence.

The successful implementation of the
SRS required the concurrent “militarization” of the entire Eurasian
corridor from the Eastern Mediterranean to China’s Western frontier
bordering onto Afghanistan, as a means to securing control over
extensive oil and gas reserves, as well as “protecting” pipeline
routes and trading corridors. The invasion of Afghanistan in October
2001 has served to support American strategic objectives in Central
Asia including the control of pipeline corridors. Afghanistan border
onto Chinese Western frontier. It is also a strategic landbridge
linking the extensive oil wealth of the Caspian Sea basin to the
Arabian Sea.

The militarization process under the SRS is largely directed against
China, Russia and Iran. The SRS, called for:

“The development of strong
political, economic, and security ties among countries of the
South Caucasus and Central Asia and the West [which] will foster
stability in this region, which is vulnerable to political and
economic pressures from the south, north, and east. [meaning
Russia to the North, Iraq, Iran and the Middle East to the South
and China to the East]

(106th Congress, Silk Road Strategy Act of 1999)

The adoption of a neoliberal policy
agenda under advice from the IMF and the World Bank is an integral
part of the SRS, which seeks to foster “open market economies… [which]
will provide positive incentives for international private
investment, increased trade, and other forms of commercial
interactions”. (Ibid).

Strategic access to South Caucasus
and Central Asian oil and gas is a central feature of the Silk Road
Strategy:

“The region of the South Caucasus
and Central Asia could produce oil and gas in sufficient
quantities to reduce the dependence of the United States on
energy from the volatile Persian Gulf region.” (Ibid)

The SRS is also intent upon
preventing the former Soviet republics from developing their own
economic, political and military cooperation ties as well as
establishing broad ties up with China, Russia and Iran. (See Michel
Chossudovsky,
America’s “War on Terrorism”, Global Research, Montreal, 2005).

In this regard, the formation of GUAM,
which was launched in 1997, was intended to integrate the former
Soviet republics into military cooperation arrangements with the US
and NATO, which would prevent them from reestablishing their ties
with the Russian Federation. ”

In the light of this information, the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as the “civil war” in Syria stirred up by NATO organized mercenaries, and the ongoing threats of an invasion of Iran all take on a new meaning. It seems evident that the intention is to take control of a large swath of territory running from the Mediterranean to the Caspian Sea region as a means to secure a safe corridor under the control of the NATO powers to direct the oil and gas wealth of the middle east and central Asia to the West, as well as to Asian markets via conduits under western control.
If you look at a map, you can easily see that Iran is an essential piece that must be captured… and this of course explains the persistent buildup in saber rattling threats from the west against Iran. A westward pipeline route that bypasses the Caucasus region to the south must go through Iran. (not to mention the fact that Iran itself sits on one of the largest reserves of light sweet crude oil in the world).
The bogus hullabaloo a regarding the non-existent Iranian nuclear weapons program is no more the real reason for the looming invasion there than the bogus “Weapons of Mass Destruction” were the real reason for the invasion of Iraq.

Another flaming, molten, reeking, stinking brick in the now massive wall of incontrovertible direct and circumstantial evidence; substantiated by means, motive, and opportunity (cui bono) that shrieks, cries out, admonishes 9/11 was an inside job.

This so-called “policy coup” was just the initiation of plan that was already been in-the-works for some time. 9-11 was the pretext used to secure regimes that are favorable to the US (particularly the oil and banking interests) in countries with ‘strategically vital resources’ or somehow connected to maintaining access to these resources. And to change domestic policy that would to restrain internal dissent and be even more favorable to the major corporations and their ruling-class owners. And to do both by whatever overt or convert means possible. Clark’s said that he was told (he doesn’t say who told him) that “We’ve got about five years to clean up the Soviet client regimes before another superpower comes along and challenges us.” If ‘they’ believed this to be the case would they just wait around hoping for some ‘trigger event’ to happen? Of course not. So once again the more important story is what really happened on 9-11-01 -probably the CIA’s most elaborate convert operation to date.

It’s amazing to me how many people still do not get what’s going on. The whole Republican vs Democrat, Left vs Right thing is itself a Machiavellian ruse (to pit the 80% ‘economic majority’ against each other). I don’t know if Obama is just playing the game or if he is the fully embedded. Do people really think that out of the 250 million adults over age of 18 in the US, our Presidents have all been the brightest, most ethical, most qualified person for the job? Anyone can not grow up to be President.