Surging Interest Rates Ahead

Surging Interest Rates Ahead, Part I

by Martin D. Weiss, Ph.D. and Mike Larson 04-12-10
Martin D. Weiss, Ph.D. and Mike Larson

Brace yourself for one of the greatest interest-rate surges in decades — beginning first in the long-term Treasury markets … later spreading to shorter term Treasuries … and ultimately enveloping nearly every loan, debt, credit, and money market instrument on the planet.

This rise may not begin with great fanfare. Nor will it immediately upset the apple cart of the economic recovery. But with the march of time, it WILL gain momentum and reach critical mass.

We have little doubt about this outcome. And today, we begin a two-part series to explain why — plus what to do about it.

Five BIG Reasons Interest Rates MUST Rise
Risk of sovereign debts going through the roof!

The first big reason is the growing RISK of lending money to sovereign countries.

Naturally, the more that lenders distrust their borrowers, the more interest they must charge to offset the risk.

And right now, the distrust of sovereign debts is going through the roof!

Indeed, last week, just when everyone thought the canary in the Treasury coal mine — Greece — had quieted down, it began to scream bloody murder.

This is directly relevant because Greece’s fiscal and financial disaster bears uncanny resemblance to what America’s could be in the future.

And based on the current cost of insuring against a Greek default within the next five years, that disaster is now measurably WORSE than it was last month, last year, or at any time in prior history!

Result: Much higher borrowing costs — not only for the Greek government, but for any government that has lost control over its spending, borrowing, and money printing, which leads us to …
Worst US Deficits in History

The second big reason interest rates must rise — massive federal deficits in the United States.

The bigger the deficit, the more Washington must borrow. And the more it borrows, the more it must bid up the rate it pays.

Look. If today’s massive federal deficits were merely a typical, cyclical phenomenon, we might be less concerned.

But nothing could be further from the truth! What we are witnessing now is a dramatic fiscal upheaval of historic dimensions.

Except for those during major wars, today’s federal deficit is, by far, the largest in U.S. history as a percent of GDP. And it’s more than TWICE as bad as the worst deficits during the Great Depression.

Direct implication: Unprecedented upward pressure on interest rates.
Greatest reliance on foreign lenders since Amercian Revolution!

The third big reason is Washington’s unfortunate reliance on foreign lenders to finance its follies — the worst since Benjamin Franklin went to Paris, hat in hand, pleading for money to help pay for America’s war of independence.

Fast forward to the 20th century: Until the 1970s, the U.S. government rarely relied on foreign lenders for more than a small fraction of its privately held debt — less than 10 percent. Now, it relies on them to the tune of 51.4 percent.

Implication: Any international loss of confidence in the U.S. — in its economy, credit rating, or overall future — could make it that much harder for Washington to raise the funds it desperately needs to cover its gaping budget deficits, forcing it to bid even HIGHER interest rates.
Massive monetary inflation points to surging interest rates ahead.

The fourth big reason: Inflationary forces and fears!

While Fed Chairman Bernanke says he’s not too worried about rising consumer prices right now, a growing minority of Fed governors say the true inflationary signs are being temporarily covered up by depressed housing costs.

Moreover, Bernanke is conveniently ignoring the elephant-in-the-room monetary explosion he himself has engineered.

As we explained last month in “Bernanke Running Amuck,”

“From September 10, 2008 to March 10 of this year, he has increased the nation’s monetary base from $850 billion to $2.1 trillion — an irresponsible, irrational, and insane growth of 2.5 times in just 18 months.

“It is, by far, the greatest monetary expansion in U.S. history. And you must not underestimate its sweeping historical significance.

“Precisely 218 years ago, Treasury Secretary Alexander Hamilton established the dollar as America’s national currency when Congress passed the Coinage Act of 1792.

“Since that memorable date, the United States has suffered through one pandemic, two depressions, 11 major wars, and 44 recessions.

“Four U.S. presidents have been assassinated while in office. Hundreds of thousands of businesses have gone bankrupt; tens of millions of Americans have lost their jobs.

“In the wake of these disasters, there were, to be sure, monetary and fiscal excesses. But never did the U.S. government resort to extreme abuses of its money-printing power!

“Until now.

“Now, all those years of suffering and sacrifice — all that history of leadership and discipline — have been trashed. All for the sake of perpetuating America’s addiction to spending, borrowing, and the wildest speculations of all time.”

End result: Powerful inflationary pressures and worries, naturally driving interest rates higher.

http://www.moneyandmarkets.com/surging-interest-rates-ahead-part-i-38722?FIELD9=1


TODAY'S CHART



Current Track Record

Greece's Sovereign Debt Problem May Have No Solution

Greece's Sovereign Debt Problem May Have No Solution

by Satyajit Das APR 12, 2010 9:20 AM


High levels of sovereign debt are sustainable where three conditions are met. Greece meets none of them.



Contained Again

The language is reminiscent of the start of the sub-prime mortgage problems. The problem is "small" and "contained.” Despite the "solution" announced by the European Union (EU), the problems of Greece have deepened.

Greek borrowing costs have increased sharply. Greece now must pay around 4.00 % p.a. more for their debt than Germany, the most creditworthy EU borrower. That is, if anyone will lend to them. This is a rise of over 1.00% p.a. over the last few days and roughly a doubling of the margin since January 2010.

Recent Greek debt issues are now deep under water. The most recent attempt by Greece to raise money was substantially under subscribed, proving almost as popular as Ebola fever. This combined with the day-to-day volatility of the risk margin for Greece makes it difficult for traders to price and investors to commit to purchases of Greek securities.

Greek banks are now experiencing difficulties in funding in international markets and have been forced to seek government support.

Greek Salad

Greece’s immediate problem is one of liquidity -- it must find cash to roll over existing debt. Greece needs around Euro 50 billion in 2010, of which around Euro 25 billion is needed by June. With characteristic insouciance, Greek officials have assured creditors that they’re fine until the end of April 2010!

Unfortunately, the Greek problems run far deeper. Beyond 2010, Greece needs to refinance borrowings of around 7%-12% of its Gross Domestic Product (GDP) (around Euro 16 billion to Euro 28 billion) each year till 2014. There are significant maturing borrowings in 2011 and 2012. In addition, Greece is currently running a budget deficit of over 12% that must be financed. Greece total borrowing, currently around Euro 270 billion (113% of GDP), is forecast to increase to around Euro 340 billion (over 150% of GDP) by 2014.

Greece’s problems were inevitable. Like many of the economically weaker EU members, Greece fudged the numbers to meet the qualifications for entry into the Euro. One example of this is the use of derivative transactions with Goldman Sachs (GS) to disguise the level of its real borrowing.

Membership of the Euro resulted in Greece losing its costs competitiveness. The sharply lower Euro interest rates set off a credit-driven real estate boom and chronic over-borrowing.

Membership of the Euro also reduced the ability of Greece to manage its economy. It lost the ability to use its currency via devaluations, to improve competitiveness, and to stimulate exports. It also lost the ability to set interest rates (now set by the European Central Bank (ECB)). It also cannot print its own currency to fund sovereign borrowing.

Greece also has low levels of domestic saving and is heavily reliance on international capital flows.

The current episode exposed an underlying weak and unbalanced economy with few sustainable competitive advantages. It has also exposed poor political leadership and inadequate financial controls.

Stephen Jen, a former economist at the International Monetary Fund, told the New York Times on April 8, 2010, that: "This is no longer about liquidity; it’s a solvency issue." The language was eerily similar to statements earlier in the global financial crisis (GFC). Pouring Olive Oil on Troubled Finances

In March 2010, after protracted and acrimonious negotiations, the EU and International Monetary Fund (IMF) announced a "bailout" package. The flowery rhetoric of "familial" duty and EU "unity" was taken at face value by gullible investors who assumed that the problem was "fixed.” In reality, despite changes announced in April, the package is highly conditional and doesn’t address core issues.

The now Euro 40-45 billion package, up from the original Euro 22 billion, (no one seems absolutely sure of what’s been agreed to!) proposed still falls short of the Euro 50-75 billion that Greece needs at a minimum.

The package requires that Greece exhaust commercial debt market sources prior to accessing the package. The aid requires unanimous agreement amongst the EU members. All money will be provided at market rates, rather than on concessionary terms (although under new proposals full market rates won’t be used). The entire package requires IMF participation, which limits the amount of any bailout package and also makes it conditional on Greece meeting the Fund’s stringent economic prescriptions. Germany’s original support was also conditional on enacting changes in the EU framework to tighten control over future bailouts of this type.

The poor design of the "bailout" package is evident in the fact that it assumes that the announcement will cause Greek risk margins to fall to the level prescribed under the bailout funding. If it doesn’t and remains above the 3.00% p.a. agreed to, then Greece will have no incentive to fund in capital markets and will need to access the package.

The position is exacerbated by Greek’s indifferent attitude to its current problems. For much of this year, the Greek government insisted that it didn’t need and hadn’t asked for any help. Lack of transparency about the level of debt, actions taken to deliberately disguise borrowings, and generally poor information about public finances has presented an increasingly unfavorable image to foreign investors and international agencies. Greece appears unwilling or unable to meet the draconian conditions prescribed.

Greek fund-raising has bordered on the farcical. Earlier in the year, Greek officials hinted at Chinese purchases of Greek debt, which was promptly denied by the putative investors. Most recently, seeing its problems as one of marketing and branding, Greece proposed to re-position itself as an "emerging country" borrower, rather than an advanced EU member. As one wag pointed out, "submerging country" would be closer to the reality.

Earlier in the year, the Deputy Prime Minister of Greece blamed Germany for it troubles: "They took away the gold that was in the Bank of Greece, and they never gave it back. They shouldn't complain so much about stealing and not being very specific about economic dealings…" The Greek version of "how to win friends and influence people" did little to endear them to potential saviors or investors. Beyond Saving

Greece’s problems are probably incapable of solution and terminal. Temporary emergency funding may help meet immediate liquidity needs but don’t solve fundamental problems of excessive debt and a weak economy.

Orthodox economic theory suggests that the Greeks must cut government expenditure and raise taxes to reduce their stock of debt. But the government is too large a part of the economy and the suggested austerity measures will put the economy into a severe recession. In turn, this will drain tax revenues making it difficult to reduce the budget deficit.

Greece has limited opportunity to grow or inflate itself out of the problem. Without the ability to devalue the currency, Greece cannot address its fundamental lack of competitiveness quickly. The narrow economic base -- primarily agriculture, tourism, and construction -- further limits options.

Greek’s level of indebtedness may already be too high. Kenneth Rogoff and Carmen Reinhart in their survey of financial crises This Time It’s Different argue that once the debt of a country goes above 60%-90% of GDP, it acts to restrain growth. Greece’s high levels of debt mean that interest payments now total around 5% of GDP and are scheduled to rise over 8% by GDP. Rising interest costs will only worsen this problem.

High levels of sovereign debt are sustainable where three conditions are met. Firstly, the debt is denominated in its own currency. It’s helpful if the currency is also a major reserve currency, an advantage enjoyed by the US dollar. Secondly, there’s a large domestic saving pool to finance the borrowing, such as exists in Japan. Finally, the country possesses a sound and sustainable economic and industrial base. Greece doesn’t meet any of the above criteria.

There are no more easy solutions to Greece’s problems. Deep spending cuts, higher taxes, and structural reforms will curtail growth. If Greece is unable to finance its debt or elects to default and exit the euro, then Greece will become isolated and enter a period of forced economic and financial decline.

The likely social and political consequences are extremely severe. They point to the real issue: Greeks have lived unsustainably beyond their means and now must face a sharp reduction in living standards.

Greek Lessons

Ironically, the optimal course of action for Greece may be to withdraw from the euro, default on its debt (by re-denominating it in a re-introduced drachma), and then undertake a program of necessary structural reform.

Lenders to Greece would take significant write-downs on their debt, reducing its debt burden and give it a chance from emerging as a sustainable economy. The current debate misses the fact that the "bailouts" are mainly about rescuing foreign investors. These investors were imprudent in their willingness to lend excessively to Greece assuming EU "implicit" support and are now seeking others to bail out them out of their folly. Such default wouldn’t affect the euro. Many countries have defaulted on their US dollar obligation without any effect on the currency.

Much depends on the politics of the EU and the attitude of Chancellor Angela Merkel who’s more Deutschland-centric than her predecessors. Support for Greece may depend on her judgment of ordinary Germans’ willingness to aid their Club Med neighbor and the risk of future claims on the German taxpayer.

The chance of a clean and logical solution is minimal as the EU may mistakenly try to defer the inevitable. Greece may face a future of a "rolling crises" and stopgap measures, much like Argentina from 1999 until its eventual default in 2002.

Greece highlights a few new and old truths about the GFC: The level of global debt hasn’t been addressed. Sovereign debt was substituted for private-sector debt. As trillions of dollars of private and government debt matures and must be refinanced, the next stage of the process of de-leveraging will play out. Vulnerable borrowers, such as Greece and earlier Dubai, highlight this risk.

The problems of contagion in highly interconnected economic and financial systems haven’t abated.

As at June 2009, Greece owed US $276 billion to international banks, of which around US $254 billion was owed to European banks with French, Swiss, and German banks having significant exposures. What happens in Greece is unlikely to stay in Greece, creating new problems for the fragile global banking.

Greece’s problems have also drawn attention to the looming financing problems of other sovereigns. In a world with significant reduced liquidity, the strain of funding these requirements is likely to restrain growth prospects.

The EU bailout of Greece would require the participation of Spain, Portugal, and Ireland (the other three members of the debt-laden "PIGS") further straining their weak finances. The bailout would also merely transfer the problem from the “weak" economies to the "stronger" European countries. In a nice irony, the EU attempts to ensure financial stability though the bailout increases the risk of longer-term financial instability (the economist Hyman Minsky would smile!).

The Greek bailout also has interesting parallels to the shotgun marriage of Bear Stearns (JPM) before the precipitous collapse of Lehman Brothers.

Iceland’s problems brought forth creative headlines: "Iceland Erupts,” "Iceland Melts," and "Geyser Crisis.” The common refrain this time has been about the "Greek Tragedy.” The term describes a specific form of drama based on human suffering rather than anything Athenian. But it seems this Greek tragedy is coming soon to a location near you in the new phase of the GFC.

http://www.minyanville.com/articles/print.php?a=27726



TODAY'S CHART



Current Track Record

911 Conver Up

9/11 conspiracy theories

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from 911 conspiracy)

The collapse of the two World Trade Center towers and the nearby WTC7 (in this photo, the brown building to the left of the towers) is a major focus of 9/11 conspiracy theories.



9/11 conspiracy theories allege that the September 11 attacks in 2001 were either intentionally allowed to happen or were a false flag operation orchestrated by an organization with elements inside the United States government.[1] A poll taken in 2006 by Scripps Howard and Ohio University showed that, "More than a third of the American public suspects that federal officials assisted in the 9/11 terrorist attacks or took no action to stop them so the United States could go to war in the Middle East."[2] The most prominent theory is that the collapse of the World Trade Center and 7 World Trade Center were the result of a controlled demolition rather than structural weakening due to fire.[3][4] Another prominent belief is that the Pentagon was hit by a missile launched by elements from inside the U.S. government[5] or that a commercial airliner was allowed to do so via an effective standdown of the American military.[6][7] The commonly claimed motives are to justify the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq, to expand U.S. control of the Middle East's oil resources, to facilitate increased military spending; and to restrict domestic civil liberties.[citation needed]

Published reports and articles by the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology, Popular Mechanics and mainstream media have rejected the 9/11 conspiracy theories.[8][9] The civil engineering establishment generally accepts that the impacts of jet aircraft at high speeds in combination with subsequent fires, rather than controlled demolition, led to the collapse of the Twin Towers.[10]
Contents
[hide]

* 1 History
* 2 Supporters
* 3 Mainstream account
* 4 Variants
o 4.1 "LIHOP" and "MIHOP"
o 4.2 Investigation-oriented approach
* 5 Main theories
o 5.1 Foreknowledge
o 5.2 World Trade Center collapse
o 5.3 The Pentagon
o 5.4 Flight 93
o 5.5 Hijackers
o 5.6 Phone calls
o 5.7 Jewish and Israeli involvement
* 6 Other theories
o 6.1 Cover-up allegations
+ 6.1.1 Cockpit recorders
+ 6.1.2 Bin Laden tapes
o 6.2 Foreign governments
o 6.3 No plane theories
o 6.4 Reptilian shape-shifting aliens
o 6.5 Drug industry cartel
* 7 Motives
o 7.1 Pax Americana
o 7.2 Invasions
o 7.3 Suggested historical precedents
* 8 Media reaction
o 8.1 In popular culture
* 9 Criticism
o 9.1 In the political arena
* 10 Notes
* 11 Bibliography
* 12 See also
o 12.1 External links
+ 12.1.1 United States government sources
+ 12.1.2 Engineering publications
+ 12.1.3 Proponents of 9/11 conspiracy theories
+ 12.1.4 Debunkers of 9/11 conspiracy theories

History

Since the September 11 attacks, a variety of conspiracy theories regarding the 9/11 attacks have been put forward in Web sites, books, and films. Many groups and individuals advocating 9/11 conspiracy theories identify as part of the 9/11 Truth Movement.[11][12][13] Unlike conspiracy theories about the death of Princess Diana, 9/11 conspiracy theories did not emerge immediately after the event. Indeed, most professional conspiracy theorists in the United States appeared to be as shocked as the rest of the population.[14] The first theories that emerged focused primarily on various anomalies in the publicly available evidence, and proponents later developed more specific theories about an alleged plot.[14] One allegation that was widely circulated by e-mail and on the Web, is that not a single Jew had been killed in the attack and that attacks must have been the work of the Mossad, not Islamic terrorists.[14]

The first elaborated theories appeared in Europe. They include a blog published by Mathias Bröckers, an editor at the German newspaper Die Tageszeitung at the time, the book 9/11: The Big Lie by French journalist Thierry Meyssan, the book The CIA and September 11 by former German state minister Andreas von Bülow and the book Operation 9/11, written by the German journalist Gerhard Wisnewski.[14]

While these theories were popular in Europe, they were treated by the U.S. media with either bafflement or amusement and were dismissed by the U.S. government as the product of anti-Americanism.[15][16] In an address to the United Nations on November 10, 2001, United States President George W. Bush denounced the emergence of "outrageous conspiracy theories [...] that attempt to shift the blame away from the terrorists, themselves, away from the guilty."[17]

By 2004, conspiracy theories about the September 11 attacks began to gain ground in the United States. One explanation for the increase in popularity was that it was not the discovery of any new or more compelling evidence or an improvement of the technical quality of the presentation of the theories, but rather the growing criticism of the Iraq War and the presidency of George W. Bush, who had been reelected in 2004.[14] Revelations of spin doctoring and lying by federal officials, such as the claims about the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, the belated release of the President's Daily Brief of August 6, 2001 and reports that NORAD had lied to the 9/11 Commission, may have fuelled the conspiracy theories.[14]

Between 2004 and the fifth anniversary of the September 11 attacks in 2006, mainstream coverage of the conspiracy theories increased.[14] Reacting to the growing publicity, the U.S. government issued responses to the theories, including a formal analysis by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) about the collapse of the World Trade Center,[18] a revised 2006 State Department webpage to debunk the theories,[19] and a strategy paper referred to by President Bush in an August 2006 speech, which declared that terrorism springs from "subcultures of conspiracy and misinformation," and that "terrorists recruit more effectively from populations whose information about the world is contaminated by falsehoods and corrupted by conspiracy theories. The distortions keep alive grievances and filter out facts that would challenge popular prejudices and self-serving propaganda."[20] Al-Qaeda has repeatedly claimed responsibility for the attacks, with chief deputy Ayman al-Zawahiri accusing Shia Iran and Hezbollah of intentionally starting rumors that Israel carried out the attacks to denigrate Sunni successes in hurting America.[21][22][23][24][25][26]

Some of the conspiracy theories about the September 11 attacks do not involve representational strategies typical of many conspiracy theories that establish a clear dichotomy between good and evil, or guilty and innocent. Instead, they call up gradations of negligence and complicity.[14] Matthias Bröckers, an early proponent of such theories, dismisses the official account of the September 11 attacks as being itself a conspiracy theory that seeks "to reduce complexity, disentangle what is confusing," and "explain the inexplicable".[14]

Just prior to the fifth anniversary of the attacks, mainstream news outlets released a flurry of articles on the growth of 9/11 conspiracy theories,[27] with an article in the magazine Time stating that "This is not a fringe phenomenon. It is a mainstream political reality."[28] An August 2007 Zogby poll commissioned by 911Truth.org[29] found that 63.6% of Americans believe that Arab fundamentalists were responsible for 9/11 while 26.4% of believed that "certain elements in the U.S. government knew the attacks were coming but consciously let them proceed for various political, military and economic reasons" and 4.8% of them believe that "certain U.S. Government elements actively planned or assisted some aspects of the attacks".[30] (See 9/11 opinion polls.) In 2008, 9/11 conspiracy theories topped a "greatest conspiracy theory” list compiled by The Daily Telegraph. The list was based on following and traction.[31][32] Mainstream coverage generally presents these theories as a cultural phenomenon and is often critical of their content.[citation needed]
Supporters
Main article: 9/11 Truth movement

Many individuals and organizations that support or discuss 9/11 conspiracy theories consider themselves to be part of the 9/11 Truth movement.

Prominent adherents of the movement include, among others, theologian David Ray Griffin, physicist Steven E. Jones, software engineer Jim Hoffman, architect Richard Gage, film producer Dylan Avery, former Governor of Minnesota Jesse Ventura, former member of the U.S. House of Representatives Cynthia McKinney,[33] actors Daniel Sunjata, Ed Asner, and Charlie Sheen, political science professor Joseph Diaferia and journalist Thierry Meyssan.[34][35][36] Adherents of the 9/11 truth movement come from diverse social backgrounds and hold diverse views on other political issues.

Among the organizations that actively discuss and promote such theories are Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, a group that focuses on the collapse of the World Trade Center buildings and collects signatures for a petition to the United States Congress that demands "a truly independent investigation with subpoena power" of the September 11 attacks; 9/11 Truth, founded in 2004; Scholars for 9/11 Truth, founded in 2005, and Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice, a group that split from Scholars for 9/11 Truth in 2007 and runs the online publication Journal of 9/11 Studies; 9/11 Citizens Watch, which was already formed in 2002; and the Hispanic Victims Group.
Mainstream account
Main article: September 11 attacks

On September 11, 2001, 19 al-Qaeda terrorists hijacked four commercial passenger jet airliners. The hijackers intentionally crashed two of the airliners into the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center in New York City, killing everyone on board and many others working in the buildings. Both buildings collapsed within two hours, destroying at least two nearby buildings and damaging others. The hijackers crashed a third airliner into the Pentagon and a fourth plane crashed into a field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania after the passengers and flight crew revolted.[37]

The 9/11 Commission Report disclosed prior warnings of varying detail of planned attacks against the United States by al-Qaeda. The report said that the government ignored these warnings due to a lack of communication between various law enforcement and intelligence personnel. For the lack of inter-agency communication, the report cited bureaucratic inertia and laws passed in the 1970s to prevent abuses that caused scandals during that era. The report faulted the Clinton and the Bush administrations with “failure of imagination”. Most members of the Democratic and the Republican parties applauded the commission's work.[38]

Within the context of 9/11 conspiracy theories, the terms 'mainstream account,' 'official account' and 'official conspiracy theory' all refer to:

* The reports from government investigations — the 9/11 Commission Report (which incorporated intelligence information from the earlier FBI investigation (PENTTBOM) and the Joint Inquiry of 2002), and the studies into building performance carried out by the Federal Emergency Management Agency[39] (FEMA) and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).
* Investigations by non-government organizations that support the mainstream account — such as those by the National Fire Protection Association, and by scientists of Purdue University and Northwestern University.[40][41][42]
* Articles supporting these facts and theories appearing in magazines such as Popular Mechanics, Scientific American, and Time.
* Similar articles in news media throughout the world, including The Times of India,[43] the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC),[44] the BBC,[45] Le Monde,[46] Deutsche Welle,[47] the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC),[48] and The Chosun Ilbo of South Korea.[49]
* President Barack Obama's June 2009 speech to the Muslim world where he said "I am aware that some question or justify the events of 9/11. But let us be clear: al-Qaeda killed nearly 3,000 people on that day."[50]

Variants

Most 9/11 conspiracy theories generally originate from dissatisfaction with the mainstream account of 9/11.[51]
"LIHOP" and "MIHOP"

Less extensive theories allege that official reports have covered up incompetence or negligence from U.S. personnel or the Bush Administration,[52] or involvement of a foreign government or organization other than al-Qaeda.[53] The most prevalent theories can be broadly divided into two main forms:

* LIHOP ("Let it happen on purpose") - suggests that key individuals within the government had at least some foreknowledge of the attacks and deliberately ignored them or actively weakened America's defenses to ensure the hijacked flights were not intercepted.[51][54]
* MIHOP ("Make it happen on purpose") - that key individuals within the government planned the attacks and collaborated with or framed, al-Qaeda in carrying them out. There is a range of opinions about how this might have been achieved.[51][54]

Investigation-oriented approach

Other critics of the account of the September 11 attacks provided by the U.S. government are not proposing specific theories, but try to demonstrate that the U.S. government's account of the events is wrong. This, according to them, would lead to a general call for a new official investigation into the events of September 11, 2001. According to Jonathan Kay, managing editor for comment at the Canadian newspaper National Post,[55] who is currently working on a book about proponents of 9/11 conspiracy theories, "they don't feel that that's their job. They feel their job is to show everybody that the official theory of 9/11 is wrong. And then, when everybody is convinced, then the population will rise up and demand a new investigation with government resources, and that investigation will tell us what actually happened."[56]
Main theories
Foreknowledge
Main article: 9/11 advance-knowledge debate
See also: U.S. military response during the September 11 attacks and United States government operations and exercises on September 11, 2001

It has been claimed that action or inaction by U.S. officials with foreknowledge was intended to ensure that the attacks took place successfully. For example, Michael Meacher, former British environment minister and member of Tony Blair's Cabinet until June 2003 claims that the United States knowingly failed to prevent the attacks.[57][58] Author David Ray Griffin alleges that the 9/11 conspiracy was considerably larger than the government claims and that the entire 9/11 Commission Report "is constructed in support of one big lie: that the official story about 9/11 is true."[59]

One popular conspiracy theory suggests there was a suspiciously high volume of put options placed on United Airlines and American Airlines stocks just before 9/11. According to this theory, trading insiders knew in advance of the coming events of 9/11 and placed their bets accordingly. While this may look suspicious in isolation, the general volume of put trading on these stocks reached similar levels at earlier points in the year.[60] In fact, American Airlines had just released a major warning about possible losses.[61]

Another common claim is that the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) issued a stand down order or deliberately scrambled fighters late to allow the hijacked airplanes to reach their targets without interference. According to this theory, NORAD had the capability of locating and intercepting planes on 9/11, and its failure to do so indicates a government conspiracy to allow the attacks to occur.[61] The Web site emperors-clothes.com argues that the U.S. military failed to do their job. StandDown.net's Mark R. Elsis says "There is only one explanation for this.... Our Air Force was ordered to Stand Down on 9/11."[62][63]

In September 2001, NORAD generals said they learned of the hijackings in time to scramble fighter jets. Later, the U.S. government released tapes claiming to show the Federal Aviation Agency (FAA) did not tell the military about the hijackings until three of the four planes had crashed, a fact that would indicate that the FAA repeatedly lied to other U.S. government agencies.[34]

Phil Molé of Skeptic magazine has explained that it is neither quick nor easy to locate and intercept a plane behaving erratically, and that the hijackers turned off or disabled the onboard radar transponders. Without these transponder signals to identify the airplanes, the hijacked airplanes would have been only blips among 4,500 other blips on NORAD’S radar screens, making them very difficult to track.[61][62]

According to Popular Mechanics, in fact, only 14 fighter jets were on alert in the contiguous 48 states on 9/11. There was no automated method for the civilian air traffic controllers to alert NORAD.[62] A passenger airline hadn't been hijacked in the US since 1979.[64] "They had to pick up the phone and literally dial us," says Maj. Douglas Martin, public affairs officer for NORAD. According to Popular Mechanics, "In the decade before 9/11, NORAD intercepted only one civilian plane over North America: golfer Payne Stewart's Learjet, in October 1999."[62] With passengers and crew unconscious from cabin decompression, the plane lost radio contact but remained in transponder contact until it crashed. Even so, it took an F-16 22 minutes to reach the stricken jet from the time when contact was lost.[62] In fact, Norad intercepted off course or ceased responding aircraft on 129 occasions in the year 2000 and on 67 occasions in the period from September 2000 to June 2001 (FAA news release, 8/9/02).

Rules in effect at that time, and on 9/11, barred supersonic flight on intercepts. Before 9/11, all other NORAD interceptions were limited to offshore Air Defense Identification Zones (ADIZ). "Until 9/11 there was no domestic ADIZ," says FAA spokesman Bill Schumann. After 9/11, the FAA and NORAD increased cooperation. They set up hotlines between command centers while NORAD increased its fighter coverage and installed radar to watch airspace over the continent.[62]
World Trade Center collapse
Main article: World Trade Center controlled demolition conspiracy theories
Criticism of the reports published by NIST on the destruction of the World Trade Center buildings plays a central role in theories about an alleged controlled demolition. The picture shows the simulated exterior buckling of 7 WTC during the collapse.

The controlled demolition conspiracy theories claim that the collapse of the North Tower, South Tower and 7 World Trade Center was not caused by the plane crash damage, or by resulting fire damage, but by explosives installed in the buildings in advance. The reasoning behind this explained that if the US Government had planted explosives in the building but made it look like terrorists had done the damage, it would have given them a perfect excuse to go to war in Iraq.[65]

Demolition theory proponents, such as physicist Steven E. Jones, architect Richard Gage, software engineer Jim Hoffman, and theologian David Ray Griffin, argue that the aircraft impacts and resulting fires could not have weakened the buildings sufficiently to initiate a catastrophic collapse, and that the buildings would not have collapsed completely, nor at the speeds that they did, without additional energy involved to weaken their structures. Jones has presented the hypothesis that thermite or nanothermite[66] was used to demolish the buildings and says he has found evidence of such explosives in the WTC dust.[67][68][69][70]

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has rejected the theory and the NIST and many mainstream scientists refuse to debate conspiracy theorists to avoid giving them unwarranted credibility.[71] Specialists in structural mechanics and structural engineering generally accept the model of a fire-induced, gravity-driven collapse of the World Trade Center buildings, an explanation that does not involve the use of explosives.[72][73][74]

Soon after the day of the attacks, major media sources published that the towers had collapsed due to melted steel.[75][76] Knowledge that the burning temperatures of jet fuel would not melt the steel support structure of the WTC contributed to the belief among skeptics that the towers would not have collapsed without external interference (something other than the planes). NIST does not claim that the steel was melted, but rather that the weakened steel (at 1000 degrees Celsius steel weakens to roughly 10% of its room temperature strength), together with the damage caused by the planes' impacts, caused the collapses.[77] NIST reported that a simulation model based on the assumption that combustible vapors burned immediately upon mixing with the incoming oxygen showed that "at any given location, the duration of [gas] temperatures near 1,000°C was about 15 min to 20 min. The rest of the time, the calculated temperatures were 500 °C or below."[78]

Coincidentally, in the two years before the attacks, NORAD conducted exercises using scenarios in which hijacked jets were used as weapons, and one imagined target was the World Trade Center [79][80], which has been used as an argument in various conspiracy theories.
The Pentagon
The first of the five video frames leaked in 2002 showing the Pentagon just before impact.[81]
The Pentagon, after collapse of the damaged section.
Debris scattered near the Pentagon.

According to some theories, the U.S. administration deliberately chose not to shoot down a plane that was heading for the Pentagon, while others contend that no plane hit the Pentagon at all.

Theories that allege deliberate inaction by the U.S. administration cite former transportation secretary Norman Mineta's testimony to the 9/11 Commission, in which he stated that an aide asked then Vice President Dick Cheney whether the "orders still stand". Cheney answered that they did. Mineta assumed that the orders were to shoot down the plane, while conspiracy theorists see this as an indication that the orders were not to shoot down the plane.[34]

Thierry Meyssan and Dylan Avery argue that American Airlines Flight 77 did not crash into the Pentagon. Instead, they argue that the Pentagon was hit by a missile launched by elements from inside the U.S. government. Reopen911.org says that the holes in the Pentagon walls were far too small to have been made by a Boeing 757: "How does a plane 125 ft. wide and 155 ft. long fit into a hole which is only 60 ft. across?" Meyssan’s book, L’Effroyable Imposture (published in English as 9/11: The Big Lie) became an instant bestseller in France and is available in more than a dozen languages. When released, the book was heavily criticized by the French press. The French newspaper Liberation called the book "a tissue of wild and irresponsible allegations, entirely without foundation."[82][83][84]

According to Mete Sozen, a professor of structural engineering at Purdue University, a crashing jet doesn't punch a cartoon-like outline of itself into a reinforced concrete building. When Flight 77 hit the Pentagon, one wing hit the ground and the other was sheared off by the Pentagon's load-bearing columns.[82] According to ArchitectureWeek, the reason the Pentagon took relatively little damage from the impact was because Wedge One had recently been renovated.[85] (This was part of a renovation program which had been begun in the eighties, and Wedge One was the first of five to be renovated.[86])

Airplane debris including Flight 77's black boxes, the nose cone, landing gear, an airplane tire, the fuselage, an intact cockpit seat, and the tail number of the airplane were recovered at the crash site.[citation needed] The remains of passengers and crew from Flight 77 were found at the Pentagon crash site and their identities confirmed by DNA analysis.[citation needed] Many eyewitnesses saw the plane strike the Pentagon. Further, Flight 77 passengers made phone calls reporting that their airplane had been hijacked. For example, passenger Renee May called her mother to tell her that the plane had been hijacked and that the passengers had been herded to the back of the plane. Another passenger named Barbara Olson called her husband (U.S. Solicitor General Theodore Olson) and said that the flight had been hijacked, and that the hijackers had knives and box cutters.[5][82][87]

A year before the attacks, a massive casualty (MASCAL) exercise was conducted in which a hijacked plane crashed into the Pentagon [88], which has raised suspicion amongst some.
Flight 93

The fourth plane hijacked on 9/11, United Airlines Flight 93, crashed in an open field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania after the passengers revolted. Out of the four planes hijacked on that day, it was the only one not to reach its target.[89]

One of the popular conspiracy theories surrounding this event is that Flight 93 was actually shot down by a U.S. fighter jet. David Ray Griffin and Alex Jones say that large parts of the plane including the main body of the engine landed miles away from the main wreckage site, too far away for an ordinary plane crash. Jones says that planes usually leave a small debris field when they crash, and that this is not compatible with reports of wreckage found farther away from the main crash site. A posting on Rense.com claimed that the main body of the engine was found miles away from the main wreckage site with damage comparable to that which a heat-seeking missile would do to an airliner.[82][89][90]

According to some theories, the plane had to be shot down by the government because passengers had found out about the alleged plot.[91]

According to the magazine Skeptic, "[this] claim rests largely on unsupported assertions that the main body of the engine and other large parts of the plane turned up miles from the main wreckage site, too far away to have resulted from an ordinary crash. This is incorrect, because the engine was found only 300 yards from the main crash site, and its location was consistent with the direction in which the plane had been traveling."[92] Michael K. Hynes, an airline accident expert who investigated the crash of TWA Flight 800 in 1996, says that, at very high velocities of 500 mph or more, it would only take a few seconds to move or tumble across the ground for 300 yards.[82][92]

Reports of wreckage discovered at Indian Lake by local residents are accurate. CNN reported that investigators found debris from the crash at least eight miles away from the crash site, including in New Baltimore.[93] However, according to CNN, this debris was all very light material that the wind would have easily blown away, and a Pittsburgh Post-Gazette article from September 14, 2001 describes the material as "mostly papers", "strands of charred insulation", and an "endorsed paycheck". The same article quotes FBI agent Bill Crowley that, "Lighter, smaller debris probably shot into the air on the heat of a fireball that witnesses said shot several hundred feet into the air after the jetliner crashed. Then, it probably rode a wind that was blowing southeast at about 9 m.p.h."[94] Also, the distance between the crash site and Indian Lake was misreported in some accounts. According to the BBC, "In a straight line, Indian Lake is just over a mile from the crash site. The road between the two locations takes a roundabout route of 6.9 miles — accounting for the erroneous reports."[89]

Some conspiracy theorists believe a small white jet seen flying over the crash area may have fired a missile to shoot down Flight 93.[95][dubious – discuss] However, government agencies such as the FBI assert this was a Dassault Falcon business jet asked to descend to an altitude of around 1500 ft to survey the impact.[96] Ben Sliney, who was the FAA operation manager on September 11, 2001, says no military aircraft were near Flight 93.[97]

Some internet videos, such as Loose Change, speculate that Flight 93 safely landed in Ohio, and a substituted plane was involved in the crash in Pennsylvania.[98] Often cited is a preliminary news report that Flight 93 landed at a Cleveland airport;[99] it was later learned that Delta Flight 1989 was the plane confused with Flight 93, and the report was retracted as inaccurate. Several websites within the 9/11 Truth Movement dispute this claim, citing the wreckage at the scene, eyewitness testimony, and the difficulty of secretly substituting one plane for another, and claim that such "hoax theories... appear calculated to alienate victims' survivors and the larger public from the 9/11 truth movement".[90][100] The editor of the article has since written a rebuttal to the claims.[101]

The woman who took the only photograph of the mushroom cloud from the impact of Flight 93 hitting the ground says she has been harassed by conspiracy theorists, who claim she faked the photo. The FBI, the Smithsonian, and the National Park Service’s Flight 93 National Memorial have found it to be authentic.[102]

Conspiracy theorists have claimed that passengers of Flight 93 and/or Flight 77, were murdered or that they were relocated, with the intent that they never be found.[91]
Hijackers
See also: Hijackers in the September 11 attacks and 9/11 advance-knowledge debate#Blocked al-Qaeda investigations

During the initial confusion surrounding the immediate aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, the BBC published the names and identities of what they believed to be some of the hijackers.[103] Some of the people named were later discovered to be alive, a fact that was seized upon by 9/11 conspiracy theorists as proof that the hijackings were faked.[103][104] The BBC explained that the initial confusion may have arisen because the names they reported back in 2001 were common Arabic and Islamic names.[103] In response to a request from the BBC, the FBI stated:[103]

The FBI is confident that it has positively identified the nineteen hijackers responsible for the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Also, the 9/11 investigation was thoroughly reviewed by the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States and the House and Senate Joint Inquiry. Neither of these reviews ever raised the issue of doubt about the identity of the nineteen hijackers.

The New York Times also acknowledged these as cases of mistaken identity.[105]

According to John Bradley, the former managing editor of Arab News in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, the only public information about the hijackers was a list of names issued by the FBI on September 14, 2001. When the FBI released photographs four days after the cited reports on September 27, the mistaken identities were quickly resolved. According to Bradley, "all of this is attributable to the chaos that prevailed during the first few days following the attack. What we're dealing with are coincidentally identical names." In Saudi Arabia, says Bradley, the names of two of the allegedly surviving attackers, Said al-Ghamdi and Walid al-Shari, are "as common as John Smith in the United States or Great Britain."[104]

According to Thomas Kean, chair of the 9/11 Commission, "Sixteen of the nineteen shouldn't have gotten into the United States in any way at all because there was something wrong with their visas, something wrong with their passports. They should simply have been stopped at the border. That was sixteen of the nineteen. Obviously, if even half of those people had been stopped, there never would have been a plot."[106]

Khalid al Mihdhar and Nawaf al Hazmi had both been identified as al-Qaeda agents by the CIA, but that information was not shared with the FBI or U.S. Immigration, so both men were able to legally enter the U.S. to prepare for the 9/11 attacks.[107]

Five of the alleged hijackers may have received training at U.S. military facilities.[108] The Defense Department confirmed that three of the hijackers, Mohamed Atta, Abdulaziz al-Omari and Saeed al-Ghamdi, "have the same names as alumni of American military schools." A Mohamed Atta attended the International Officers School at Maxwell Air Force Base in Alabama; an Abdulaziz al-Omari went to the Aerospace Medical School at Brooks Air Force Base in Texas; and a Saeed al-Ghamdi was at the Defense Language Institute at the Presidio in Monterey, California.[109]
Phone calls

After 9/11, cellular experts said that calls were able to be placed from the hijacked planes, and that they were surprised that they lasted as long as they did. They said that the only reason that the calls went through in the first place is that the aircraft were flying so close to the ground.[110] Alexa Graf, an AT&T spokesperson said it was almost a fluke that the calls reached their destinations.[111] Other industry experts said that it is possible to use cell phones with varying degrees of success during the ascent and descent of commercial airline flights.[112] Marvin Sirbu, professor of engineering and public policy at Carnegie Mellon University said on September 14, 2001, that "The fact of the matter is that cell phones can work in almost all phases of a commercial flight."[112]

According to the 9/11 Commission Report, 13 passengers from Flight 93 made a total of over 30 calls to both family and emergency personnel (twenty-two confirmed air phone calls, two confirmed cell phone and eight not specified in the report). According to Debunk911myths.org, all but two calls from Flight 93 were made on air phones, not cell phones, and both calls lasted about a minute before being dropped.[113] Brenda Raney, Verizon Wireless spokesperson, said that Flight 93 was supported by several cell sites.[111] There were reportedly three phone calls from Flight 11, five from Flight 175, and three calls from Flight 77. Two calls from these flights were recorded, placed by flight attendants Madeleine Sweeney and Betty Ong on Flight 11.
Jewish and Israeli involvement
See also: 9/11 advance-knowledge debate#Israel

There are theories that 9/11 was part of an international Jewish conspiracy. According to Cinnamon Stillwell, another myth popular with 9/11 conspiracy theorists[114] is that 4,000 Jewish employees skipped work at the World Trade Center on September 11. This was first reported on September 17 by the Lebanese Hezbollah-owned satellite television channel Al-Manar and is believed to be based on the September 12 edition of the Jerusalem Post that stated "The Foreign Ministry in Jerusalem has so far received the names of 4,000 Israelis believed to have been in the areas of the World Trade Center and the Pentagon at the time of the attacks."[115] Both turned out to be incorrect; the number of Jews who died in the attacks is variously estimated at between 270 to 400.[116][117][dead link][118][119] The lower figure tracks closely with the percentage of Jews living in the New York area and partial surveys of the victims' listed religion. The U.S. State Department has published a partial list of 76 in response to claims that fewer Jews/Israelis died in the WTC attacks than should have been present at the time.[120][121] Five Israeli citizens died in the attack.[122]

It has been claimed that Israeli agents may have had foreknowledge of the attacks. Four hours after the attack, the FBI arrested five Israelis who had been filming the smoking skyline from the roof of a white van in the parking lot of an apartment building, for "puzzling behavior". The Israelis were said to have been videotaping the events with cries of "joy and mockery".[123][124][125] While The Forward, a New York Jewish news magazine, reported that the FBI considered them to be intelligence operatives, a spokesperson for the Israeli Embassy in the United States said that they had not been involved in any intelligence operation in the United States.[123]

Imam Anwar al-Awlaki of Virgnia initially condemned the attacks. But just six days after the attack, he wrote on the IslamOnline.net website a suggestion that Israeli intelligence agents might have been responsible for the attacks, and that the FBI "went into the roster of the airplanes and whoever has a Muslim or Arab name became the hijacker by default.[126] After the 9/11 investigations, he became known as the "9/11 Imam" who had met with or inspired 3 of the hijackers, and became known for contacts with 2009 Fort Hood shooting suspect Nidal Malik Hasan and Northwest Airlines Flight 253 suspect Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab after which he "blessed" both of the attacks in statements to the press, and identified as a likely target for an airstrike in Yemen.
Other theories
Cover-up allegations

Conspiracy theorists say they detect a pattern of behavior on the part of officials investigating the September 11 attack meant to suppress the emergence of evidence that might contradict the mainstream account.[127][128][129][citation needed] The debris from ground-zero, for example, was removed without a proper forensic investigation, making it very difficult to discover why the World Trade Center buildings collapsed.[130][131]
Cockpit recorders

According to the 9/11 Commission Report, the cockpit voice recorders (CVR) or flight data recorders (FDR), or "black boxes", from Flights 11 and 175 were not recovered from the remains of the WTC attack; however, two men, Michael Bellone and Nicholas DeMasi, who worked extensively in the wreckage of the World Trade Center, stated in the book Behind-The-Scenes: Ground Zero[132] that they helped federal agents find three of the four "black boxes" from the jetliners:[133][134]

"At one point I was assigned to take Federal Agents around the site to search for the black boxes from the planes. We were getting ready to go out. My ATV was parked at the top of the stairs at the Brooks Brothers entrance area. We loaded up about a million dollars worth of equipment and strapped it into the ATV. There were a total of four black boxes. We found three."[135]

The cockpit voice recorder from Flight 77 was heavily damaged from the impact and resulting fire.

According to the 9/11 Commission Report, both black boxes from Flight 77 and both black boxes from Flight 93 were recovered. However, the CVR from Flight 77 was said to be too damaged to yield any data. On April 18, 2002, the FBI allowed the families of victims from Flight 93 to listen to the voice recordings.[136] In April 2006, a transcript of the CVR was released as part of the Zacarias Moussaoui trial.[137] Some conspiracy theorists[who?] do not believe that the black boxes were damaged and that instead there has been a cover up of evidence.[citation needed]
Bin Laden tapes
Main article: Videos of Osama bin Laden

A series of interviews, audio and videotapes have been released since the 9/11 attacks that have been reported to be from Osama bin Laden. At first the speaker denied responsibility for the attacks[138] but over the years has taken increasing responsibility for them culminating in a November 2007 audiotape in which the speaker claimed sole responsibility for the attacks and denied the Taliban and the Afghan government or people had any prior knowledge of the attacks.[139][140][141] According to the Central Intelligence Agency, the speaker was most likely Osama bin Laden. Some observers, especially people in the Muslim world, doubt the authenticity of the tape.[142]
Foreign governments
See also: Responsibility for the September 11 attacks#Other alleged responsibility and 9/11 advanced-knowledge debate#Foreign government foreknowledge

There are allegations that individuals within the Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) may have played an important role in financing the attacks. There are also claims that other foreign intelligence agencies, such as the Israeli Mossad, had foreknowledge of the attacks, and that Saudi Arabia may have played a role in financing the attacks. Francesco Cossiga, former President of Italy from 1985 until his resignation over Operation Gladio, asserts that it is common knowledge among democratic circles in the U.S. and Europe, and primarily in the Italian center-left, that the 9/11 attacks were a joint operation of the CIA and the Mossad.[143] General Hamid Gul, a former head of ISI, believes the attacks were an “inside job” originating in the United States, perpetrated by Israel or neo-conservatives.[144]
No plane theories
The "no plane theory," promoted by internet-only videos like 911 Taboo,[145] asserts that this shot of the second impact, taken from a news helicopter, depicts a video composite of a Boeing 767 accidentally appearing from behind a Layer Mask.

Nico Haupt and Morgan Reynolds, formerly the chief economist within the Labor Department under the Bush administration argue that no planes were used in the attacks. Reynolds claims it is physically impossible that the Boeing planes of Flights 11 and 175, being largely aluminium, could have penetrated the steel frames of the Towers, and that digital compositing was used to depict the plane crashes in both news reports and subsequent amateur video.[146] "There were no planes, there were no hijackers," Reynolds insists. "I know, I know, I'm out of the mainstream, but that's the way it is." According to David Shayler, "The only explanation is that they were missiles surrounded by holograms made to look like planes," he says. "Watch footage frame by frame and you will see a cigar-shaped missile hitting the World Trade Center." Truth movement veterans tend to distance themselves from "no-planers".[63][146] Discussion of no plane theories have been banned from certain conspiracy theory websites while advocates have been threatened with violence by posters at other conspiracy theory websites.[147]
Reptilian shape-shifting aliens
See also: David Icke

English author and public speaker David Icke argues that reptilian, shape-shifting extraterrestrial humanoids are responsible for the 9/11 attacks. According to Icke, a reptilian global elite is behind all things that occur in the world. Icke's theories are rejected by 911blogger.com and other conspiracy theory sites.[148][149]
Drug industry cartel

In September 2009 public health expert Leonard G. Horowitz and journalist Sherri Kane published online and sent to the F.B.I. an affidavit with documents they claim prove the 9/11 attacks were part of a population reduction conspiracy by an international drug industry cartel that involves leading business and media figures. The pair alleged the documents show a link between the 9/11 attacks, Larry Silverstein and a conspiracy that also involved creating the swine flu pandemic.[150]
Motives
Pax Americana
Main article: Pax Americana

In 2006, members of the group Scholars for 9/11 Truth argued that a group of US neo-conservatives called the Project for a New American Century (PNAC), which included Paul Wolfowitz, Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, set on US world dominance and orchestrated the 9/11 attacks as an excuse to hit Iraq, Afghanistan and later Iran.[151] In September 2000 the PNAC released a strategic treatise entitled Rebuilding America's Defences. David Ray Griffin in his 2004 book The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions About the Bush Administration and 9/11 argued that the treatise may have been the blueprint for 9/11 attacks. Specifically the language in the paper that read "the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor" was describing an alleged motive.[152][153][154]

The Defense Planning Guidance of 1992, was drafted by Paul Wolfowitz on behalf of then Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney. This was described as "a blueprint for permanent American global hegemony" by Andrew J. Bacevich in his book American Empire: The Realities and Consequences of U.S. Diplomacy.[155]

Matt Taibbi argued in his book The Great Derangement that conspiracy theorists have taken what is written in the paper "completely out of context", and that the "transformation" referenced in the paper is explicitly stated to be a decades-long process to turn the Cold War-era military into a "new, modern military" which could deal with more localized conflicts.[156] He stated that, for this to be evidence of motive, either those responsible would have decided to openly state their objectives, or would have read the paper in 2000 and quickly laid the groundwork for the 9/11 attacks using it as inspiration.[156]
Invasions

Conspiracy theorists[who?] have questioned whether the Oil Factor and 9/11 provided the United States and the United Kingdom with a reason to launch a war they had wanted for some time, and suggest that this gives them a strong motive for either carrying out the attacks, or allowing them to take place. For instance, Andreas von Bülow, a former research minister in the German government, has argued that 9/11 was staged to justify the subsequent wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.[157] Former Malaysian premiere Mahathir Mohamad was quoted as saying that there was "strong evidence" that the attacks were faked so the United States could go to war against Muslims.[158]
Suggested historical precedents

Time magazine contrasted events which inspired past conspiracy theories with those that inspire 9/11 conspiracy theories such as the assassination of John F. Kennedy. Time called the public assassination of Kennedy a "private, intimate affair" when compared with the attack on the World Trade Center, which was witnessed by millions of people and documented by hundreds of videographers; and stated, "there is no event so plain and clear that a determined human being can't find ambiguity in it."[28]
Media reaction

While discussion and coverage of these theories is mainly confined to Internet pages, books, documentary films, and conversation, a number of mainstream news outlets around the world have covered the issue.

The Norwegian version of the July 2006 Le Monde diplomatique sparked interest when they ran, on their own initiative, a three page main story on the 9/11 attacks and summarized the various types of 9/11 conspiracy theories (which were not specifically endorsed by the newspaper, only recensed).[159] The Voltaire Network, which has changed position since the September 11 attacks and whose director, Thierry Meyssan, became a leading proponent of 9/11 conspiracy theory, explained that although the Norwegian version of Le Monde diplomatique had allowed it to translate and publish this article on its website, the mother-house, in France, categorically refused it this right, thus displaying an open debate between various national editions.[160] In December 2006, the French version published an article by Alexander Cockburn, co-editor of CounterPunch, which strongly criticized the alleged endorsement of conspiracy theories by the U.S. left-wing, alleging that it was a sign of "theoretical emptiness."[161][162]

Also, on the Canadian website for CBC News: The Fifth Estate, a program titled, "Conspiracy Theories: uncovering the facts behind the myths of Sept. 11, 2001" was broadcast on October 29, 2003, stating that what they found may be more surprising than any theories.[163] On November 27, 2009 the The Fifth Estate aired a documentary entitled The Unofficial Story where several prominent members of the 9/11 Truth Movement made their case.[164][165]

An article in the September 11, 2006 edition of Time magazine comments that the major 9/11 conspiracy theories “depend on circumstantial evidence, facts without analysis or documentation, quotes taken out of context and the scattered testimony of traumatized eyewitnesses”, and enjoy continued popularity because “the idea that there is a malevolent controlling force orchestrating global events is, in a perverse way, comforting”. It concludes that “conspiracy theories are part of the process by which Americans deal with traumatic public events” and constitute “an American form of national mourning.”[166]

The Daily Telegraph published an article titled "The CIA couldn't have organised this..." which said "The same people who are making a mess of Iraq were never so clever or devious that they could stage a complex assault on two narrow towers of steel and glass" and "if there is a nefarious plot in all this bad planning, it is one improvised by a confederacy of dunces". This article mainly attacked a group of scientists led by Professor Steven E. Jones, now called Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice. They said "most of them aren't scientists but instructors... at second-rate colleges".[167]

A major Australian newspaper The Daily Telegraph, published an article in May 2007 that was highly critical of Loose Change 2, a movie which presents a 9/11 conspiracy theory.[168]

Doug MacEachern in a May 2008 column for the Arizona Republic wrote that while many "9/11 truthers" are not crackpots that espouse "crackpot conspiracy theories". He wrote that supporters of the theories fail to take into account both human nature and that nobody has come forward claiming they were participants in the alleged conspiracies.[169] This view seconded by Timothy Giannuzzi, a Calgary Herald op-ed columnist specializing in foreign policy.[170]

On June 7, 2008, The Financial Times Magazine published a lengthy article on the 9/11 Truth Movement and 9/11 conspiracy theories.[171]

Charlie Brooker a British multimedia personality in a July 2008 column published by The Guardian as part of its "Comment is free" series agreed that 9/11 conspiracy theorists fail to take in account human fallacies and added that believing in these theories gives theorists a sense of belonging to a community that shares privileged information thus giving the theorists a delusional sense of power.[172] The commentary generated over 1700 online responses, the largest in the history of the series.[173] In a September 2009 piece, The Guardian were more supportive of 9/11 conspiracy theories however, asking, "when did it become uncool to ask questions? When did questioners become imbeciles?"[174]

On September 12, 2008, Russian State Television broadcast in prime time a documentary made by Member of the European Parliament Giulietto Chiesa entitled Zero sympathetic to those who question the mainstream account of the attacks according to Chiesa. According to Thierry Meyssan in conjunction with the documentary, Russian State Television aired a debate on the subject. The panel consisted of members from several countries including 12 Russians who hold divergent views. The motive of Russian State Television in broadcasting the documentary was questioned by a commentator from The Other Russia who noted that Russian State Television had a history of broadcasting programs involving conspiracy theories involving the United States government.[175][176][177]

Nasir Mahmood in a commentary printed by the Pakistan Observer wrote favorably about a 9/11 truth lecture and film festival held in California and quoted a Jewish speaker at that festival who said that none of the 19 suspected hijackers had been proven guilty of anything and compared racism against Muslims resulting from what he called false accusations to the racism against Jews in the Nazi era.[178]

On November 10, 2008, ITN broadcast a story summarizing various 9/11 conspiracy theories.[179]

The emergence of the birther movement in 2009 has led to comparisons between that movement and the 9/11 Truth Movement, with both movements seen in a very negative light. Moon Landing conspiracy theories have also been compared to the birther and 9/11 conspiracy theories. James Borne, a journalist for The Times who covered the September 11 Attacks, described his assignment covering a 9/11 truth meeting "Perhaps the most intellectually scary assignment I have had in recent years".[180][181][182][183]

On August 31, 2009, the National Geographic Channel aired the program 9/11 Science and Conspiracy, in which the Energetic Materials Research and Testing Center tested some of the claims frequently made by those who question the official 9/11 account. Specifically, the experiments concluded that burning jet fuel alone can sufficiently raise the temperature of a steel support column to the point of structural failure, that a controlled demolition using conventional techniques would leave clear evidence that was not found at Ground Zero, that using thermite is not an effective technique to melt a steel column, and that even if thermite chemical signatures were found, it would be impossible to tell if thermite was actually used or if the traces came from the reaction of aircraft aluminum with other substances in the fire. The testing also concluded that the type of hole found at the Pentagon was consistent with the mainstream scenario, and that damage from a bombing or missile attack would differ from the damage that occurred. In the program, several prominent 9/11 conspiracy theorists viewed rough edits of the experiments, and expressed their disagreement with the findings.[184][185]

The British left wing magazine New Statesman listed David Ray Griffin as the 41st most important person who matters today. The magazine said that Griffin's "books on the subject have lent a sheen of respectability that appeals to people at the highest levels of government". The publication listed 9/11 conspiracy thories as "one of the most pernicious global myths".[186]

Denver public television KBDI-TV has aired 9/11 truth documentaries several times. The stations spokesperson claimed airing these documentaries have been a boom for the stations fund raising efforts.[187]

Glenn Beck, television and radio host, said of the allegations: "There are limits to debasement of this country, aren't there? I mean, it's one thing to believe that our politicians are capable of being Bernie Madoff. It's another to think that they are willing to kill 3,000 Americans. Once you cross that line, you're in a whole new territory."[188]

In March 2010 The Washington Post editorialized against Yukihisa Fujita, a prominent Japanese politician who has espoused 9/11 conspiracy theories. They described Fujita as "a man so susceptible to the imaginings of the lunatic fringe".[189]
In popular culture

In June 2005 the popular German State Television murder mystery program Tatort ran an episode in which a woman who claims the 9/11 attacks were instigated by the Bush family for oil and power is targeted by FBI and CIA hitmen after her male roommate is found dead. The roommate was trained to be a 9/11 pilot but was left behind. The episode viewed by 7 million people ended when the detectives investigating the death believed her and she escapes to an unnamed Arab country.[190]

In season 10 of the animated show South Park, the episode "Mystery of the Urinal Deuce" centers around 9/11 conspiracy theories. After Eric Cartman, a main character in the show, blames Kyle Broflovski of causing 9/11, Kyle and his friend Stan Marsh end up in the White House, where they are told that the government did in fact cause the 9/11 attacks. They escape, and eventually it is revealed that the government wants people to think that they caused 9/11, so that they think the government has more power than it does.[191]

A Rescue Me episode featured a character played by actor Daniel Sunjata who is a 9/11 conspiracy theorist in real life, explaining to a French journalist that the 9/11 attacks were a “neoconservative government effort” to create a new Pearl Harbor to control oil and increase military spending.[192][193] According to Denis Leary major plot lines in the first 10 episodes of the show's season 5 revolved around reinvestigation and conspiracy theories surrounding the 9/11 attacks.[194]
Criticism

Critics of these conspiracy theories say they are a form of conspiracism common throughout history after a traumatic event in which conspiracy theories emerge as a mythic form of explanation.[195] A related criticism addresses the form of research on which the theories are based. Thomas W. Eagar, an engineering professor at MIT, suggested they "use the 'reverse scientific method'. They determine what happened, throw out all the data that doesn't fit their conclusion, and then hail their findings as the only possible conclusion." Eagar's criticisms also exemplify a common stance that the theories are best ignored. "I've told people that if the argument gets too mainstream, I'll engage in the debate." According to him, this happened when Steve Jones, a physics professor at Brigham Young University took up the issue.[196]

Michael Shermer, writing in Scientific American, said: "The mistaken belief that a handful of unexplained anomalies can undermine a well-established theory lies at the heart of all conspiratorial thinking. All the evidence for a 9/11 conspiracy falls under the rubric of this fallacy. Such notions are easily refuted by noting that scientific theories are not built on single facts alone but on a convergence of evidence assembled from multiple lines of inquiry."[197]

Scientific American,[198] Popular Mechanics,[199] and The Skeptic's Dictionary[200] have published articles that rebut various 9/11 conspiracy theories. Popular Mechanics has published a book entitled Debunking 9/11 Myths that expands upon the research first presented in the article.[201] In the foreword for the book Senator John McCain wrote that blaming the U.S. government for the events "mars the memories of all those lost on that day" and "exploits the public's anger and sadness. It shakes Americans' faith in their government at a time when that faith is already near an all-time low. It trafficks in ugly, unfounded accusations of extraordinary evil against fellow Americans."[202] Der Spiegel dismissed 9/11 conspiracy theories as a "panoply of the absurd", stating "as diverse as these theories and their adherents may be, they share a basic thought pattern: great tragedies must have great reasons."[203] David Ray Griffin has published a book entitled Debunking 9/11 Debunking: An Answer to Popular Mechanics and Other Defenders of the Official Conspiracy Theory,[204][citation needed] and Jim Hoffman has written an article called 'popular mechanics assault on 9/11 truth" where he attacks the methods Popular Mechanics uses in forming their arguments.[205][citation needed]

Journalist Matt Taibbi, in his book The Great Derangement, discusses 9/11 conspiracy theories as symptomatic of what he calls the "derangement" of American society; a disconnection from reality due to widespread "disgust with our political system".[156] Drawing a parallel with the Charismatic movement, he argues that both "chose to battle bugbears that were completely idiotic, fanciful, and imaginary," instead of taking control of their own lives.[156] While critical, Taibbi explains that 9/11 conspiracy theories are different from "Clinton-era black-helicopter paranoia", and constitute more than "a small, scattered group of nutcases [...] they really were, just as they claim to be, almost everyone you meet."[156] Taibbi also argued that 9/11 conspiracy theorists form "completely and utterly retarded" narratives to explain the attacks because of "defiant unfamiliarity with the actual character of America's ruling class".[156]

Historian Kenneth J. Dillon argues that 9/11 conspiracy theories represent an overly easy target for skeptics and that their criticisms obfuscate the underlying issue of what actually happened if there wasn't a conspiracy. He suggests that the answer is criminal negligence on the part of the president and vice president, who were repeatedly warned, followed by a cover-up conspiracy after 9/11.[206] This was expanded upon by columnist Matt Mankelow writing for the Socialist Workers Online. He concludes that 9/11 truthers while "desperately trying to legitimately question a version of events" end up playing into the hands of the neoconservatives they are trying to take down by creating a diversion. Mankelow noted that this has irritated many people who are politically left wing.[207]

David Aaronovitch, a columnist for The Times, in his book entitled Voodoo Histories: The Role of the Conspiracy Theory in Shaping Modern History that was published in May 2009, claimed that the theories strain credulity.[91] Aaronovitch also charged that 9/11 conspiracy theorists have exaggerated the expertise of those supporting their theories, and noted that 9/11 conspiracy theorists including David Ray Griffin cross cite each other.[208]
In the political arena

Former Canadian Liberal Party leader Stéphane Dion forced a candidate from Winnipeg, Lesley Hughes, to terminate her campaign after earlier writings from Hughes surfaced in which Hughes wrote that U.S., German, Russian and Israeli intelligence officials knew about the 9/11 attacks in advance.[209][210] Earlier, Peter Kent, Deputy Editor of Global Television Network News and Conservative Party candidate in the 2008 Canadian election, had called for Hughes's resignation saying that the 9/11 truth movement is "one of Canada’s most notorious hatemongering fringe movements" composed of "conspiracy theorists who are notorious for holding anti-Semitic views."[211] On June 16, 2009, Hughes sued Kent, the Canadian Jewish Congress, the B'Nai Brith of Canada and four senior members of the two organizations alleging the anti-Semitic allegations were untrue and defamatory and ruined her career.[212] Later another Conservative Party candidate called for the leader of the New Democratic Party to fire a candidate for her pro 9/11 truth views.[213]

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, described the 9/11 attacks on the Twin Towers as a "suspect event"[214] and suggests that the Bush Administration was involved in 9/11.[215][216]

In 2008 calls for the resignation of Richard Falk, the special rapporteur on human rights in the Palestinian territories for the United Nations, were partially based on his support investigating the validity of 9/11 conspiracy theories.[217]

In February 2009, Aymeric Chauprade (fr), a professor of geopolitics at CID military college in Paris, was fired by French Defence Minister Herve Morin for writing a book entitled Chronicle of the Clash of Civilizations that espoused 9/11 conspiracy theories.[218]

In September 2009 Van Jones, an adviser to US President Barack Obama, resigned after his signature on a 2004 petition calling for an investigation into whether government officials deliberately allowed the 9/11 attacks to occur and other controversial statements came to light drawing criticism. Van Jones said he was a victim of a smear campaign, adding that he does not currently, nor ever has agreed with that theory.[219]

9/11 conspiracy theorist critic David Aaronovitch claims the popularity of 9/11 conspiracy theories has hurt the War on Terror. According to Aaronovitch, because a significant portion of educated Pakistanis believe that George W. Bush brought the towers down, dealing with the Taliban is difficult “because they actually don't believe the fundamental premise on which the war against terror was waged”.[220]

The 9/11 truth movement became an issue in the 2010 Texas Gubernatorial Republican primary when candidate Debra Medina replied when asked by Glenn Beck about US government involvement in the 9/11 attacks: "I think some very good questions have been raised in that regard, There are some very good arguments, and I think the American people have not seen all of the evidence there, so I have not taken a position on that." After being criticized for the remarks by opposing candidates, Medina stated that she has never been a 9/11 truth movement member and believes the twin towers were attacked by Muslim terrorists.[221][222]

List of Proven Conspiracies - from Wikipedia

Monday, January 1, 2007

List of Proven Conspiracies - from Wikipedia

[This appears to have been removed from Wikipedia, where it originally was posted]

List of proven conspiracies

Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Cite This Source

This is a list OR INDEX of conspiracies considered proven to have existed or officially covered-up (and or later discovered) with or without newer evidence.

Included are events described by different meanings of the word conspiracy: an agreement between two or more natural persons to break the law (or have the law unconstitually changed) at some time in the future (civil conspiracy and criminal conspiracy); conspiracy in the sense of conspiracy theory; or actions undertaken in secret (and outside public legislative processes) to obtain some goal, usually understood with negative connotations.

1st century BC

63 BC The second Catiline conspiracy
Failed assassination of Cicero on the morning of November 7 and plans to take control of the government through arson and slaughter of the senators.
44 BC Caesar assassination plot
On March 15, 44 BC, Julius Caesar was assassinated by a conspiracy that included his friend Brutus.

1600s
1605 The Gunpowder Plot
An attempt by a group of provincial English Catholic extremists to kill King James I of England, his family, and most of the Protestant aristocracy in one attack by blowing up the Houses of Parliament during the State Opening. Guy Fawkes Day is named after one of the (lesser) conspirators and is celebrated with fireworks. Some modern historians believe the plot may have been either orchestrated or allowed to run its course by the Protestant elite for propaganda value. See also: Popish Plot.

1700's
1763 Small pox infected blankets given to Native Americans
In response to the 1763 uprising known as Pontiac's Rebellion, Jeffrey Amherst, 1st Baron Amherst suggested using smallpox as a weapon for ending the rebellion. In a series of letters to his subordinate Colonel Henry Bouquet, the two men discussed the possibility of infecting the attacking Indians with smallpox through gifts of blankets that had been exposed to the disease. Apparently unbeknownst to both Amherst and Bouquet, the commander at Fort Pitt had already attempted this very tactic. Although Amherst's name is usually connected with this germ warfare because he was the overall commander and because of his correspondence with Bouquet, evidence appears to indicate that the attempt was made without Amherst's prior knowledge. See Pontiac's Rebellion for references and details.

1800's
1810 to 1850 the Underground Railroad
The Underground Railroad was a network of clandestine routes by which African slaves in the United States escaped to freedom, with the aid of abolitionists. It consisted of clandestine routes, transportation, meeting points, and safe houses maintained by sympathizers. These individuals were organized into small groups who, for the purpose of maintaining secrecy, knew only of connecting "stations" along the route.
1865 The Assassination of President Abraham Lincoln
President Lincoln was murdered by John Wilkes Booth but Booth was involved in a larger conspiracy to kill Lincoln and several members of his cabinet.
1894 The Dreyfus affair
In 1894 Alfred Dreyfus, a Jewish officer in the French army, was convicted of treason. Dreyfus was innocent; the conviction rested on false documents, and when officials realised this they attempted a cover up. The writer Émile Zola exposed the affair.
1894 Overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii
Queen Lili'uokalani was selected as the successor to King Kalākaua by Kalākaua upon his election in 1874. During her brother's reign the monarchy was left impotent by the Bayonet Constitution of 1887. In 1893, American businessmen organized in response to an attempt by Lili'uokalani to subvert the 1887 constitution, and took over the government of the Kingdom of Hawai'i. American troops aboard the USS Boston landed in Honolulu to protect American lives and property, while Sanford B. Dole and Lorrin A. Thurston's Committee of Safety, a 13 member council of businessmen, organized the Honolulu Rifles to depose Queen Lili'uokalani. The overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawai'i and the subsequent annexation of Hawai'i are sometimes cited as examples of American imperialism.
1898-1913 Western Water Rights: Los Angeles vs. Owens Valley
The agent of the Bureau was a close friend of Eaton, so Eaton had access to inside information about water rights. Eaton bought land as a private citizen, hoping to sell it back to Los Angeles at a vast profit. Eaton lobbied Theodore Roosevelt and got the local irrigation system cancelled. Mulholland misled residents of the Owens Valley, by claiming that Los Angeles would take water only for domestic purposes, not for irrigation. By 1905, through purchases and bribery, Los Angeles purchased enough water rights to enable the aqueduct. The aqueduct was sold to the citizens of Los Angeles as vital to the growth of the city. However, unknown to the public, the initial water would be used to irrigate the San Fernando Valley, north of the city. A syndicate of investors (again, close friends of Eaton, including Harrison Gray Otis) bought up large tracts of land in the San Fernando Valley with this inside information. This syndicate made substantial efforts to the passage of the bond issue that funded the aqueduct including creating a false drought (by manipulating rainfall totals) and publishing scare articles in the Los Angeles Times. See California Water Wars.

1900's
1913 Federal Reserve Act
Claimed to have been written by Paul Warburg. Passed by quorum remaining as many left for Christmas break. Planned in secret on Jekyll Island some 3 years earlier1910. See among other sources "The Creature from Jekyll Island" by G. Edward Griffin; Secrets of the Federal Reserve by Eustace Mullins
1919 Black Sox Scandal
During the 1919 World Series, Eight members of the Chicago franchise conspired with gamblers to intentionally lose games.
1930's National Crime Syndicate
1932 General Motors streetcar conspiracy
Before WWII, Los Angeles had the largest electric trolley system in the world. It is generally believed that General Motors, Firestone Tire and Rubber, Standard Oil, and National City Lines conspired to eliminate it. A federal court decided that the companies had violated the Sherman Antitrust Act and each was "fined" the paltry sum of $5,000. Company officials were also found guilty and fined one dollar each.
1932 to 1972 Tuskegee Syphilis Study
U.S. Public Health Service monitors 399 poor blacks with syphilis and withholds their diagnosis from them. Partners and children (congenially) are subsequently infected.
1945 Nazi gold
The whereabouts of the Nazi regime's gold deposits are still unknown. See also PBS Frontline: Nazi Gold
1950 Project MKULTRA
Project MKULTRA (also known as MK-ULTRA) was the code name for a CIA mind-control research program lasting from the 1950s through the late 1960s. It was first brought to wide public attention by the U.S. Congress (in the form of the Church Committee) and a presidential commission (known as the Rockefeller Commission) (see Revelation below) and also to the U.S. Senate. Also mentioned in the Rockefeller Commission report are other operations where informed consent was waived or unethically ignored for other operations like Operation Whitecoat.
1953 Operation Midnight Climax
Operation Midnight Climax was an operation initially established by Dr. George Hunter White under the alias of Morgan Hall for the CIA. The project consisted of a web of CIA run brothels in San Francisco and New York. It was established in order to study the effects of LSD on unconsenting individuals after the supply of consenting patients ran out.
1953 Operation Ajax
Operation Ajax (officially TP-AJAX) was an Anglo-American covert operation to overthrow the democratically elected government of Iran and Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh and restore the exiled Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi to the throne as a dictator.
1954 Operation PBSUCCESS
Operation PBSUCCESS was a CIA-organized covert operation that overthrew the democratically-elected President of Guatemala, Jacobo Arbenz Guzmán in 1954.
1956 COINTELPRO
An FBI program originally begun to "increase factionalism, cause disruption and win defections" inside the Communist Party U.S.A., the program was soon enlarged to include the Socialist Workers Party, it quickly expanded to cover Black Liberation groups, Puerto Rican independence groups, the American Indian Movement, the Students for a Democratic Society & Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, antiwar, community, and religious groups. Its most infamous act was the assassination, carried out by the Chicago Police Department, of Black Panther Fred Hampton. The program was secret until 1971, when an FBI field office was burglarized by a group of left-wing radicals calling themselves the Citizens' Commission to Investigate the FBI.
1961 Bay of Pigs invasion
Cuban expatriates backed by the U.S. government attempted to invade Cuba at Cuba's Bay of Pigs in the Bay of Pigs invasion of April 1961. The expected urban revolt failed to materialise due to popular support for Castro. The Soviet Union had also warned Castro, who ordered executions and preemptive mass arrests of those thought likely to support a counter-revolution.
1961 The Cuban Project
The Cuban Project, also known as "Operation Mongoose" is the general name for CIA covert operations and plans initiated by President John F. Kennedy on November 30, 1961 which authorized aggressive covert terrorist operations against Communism in the Cuban Republic, including several assassination attempts against the Cuban head of state, Fidel Castro. The operation was led by Air Force General Edward Lansdale and came into being after the failed Bay of Pigs invasion.
The goal of The Cuban Project was to "help Cuba overthrow the Communist regime", overthrow its leader Fidel Castro, and aim "for a revolt which can take place in Cuba by October 1962". See also, "Operation Northwoods", proposed by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, which included terrorist actions against targets in the U.S. that were to be blamed on Cuba ("false flag" operations), which was never carried out.
1962 Operation Northwoods
Operation Northwoods or Northwoods was the code name for various proposals for false flag actions, including domestic terror attacks on U.S. soil, proposed in 1962 by senior U.S. Department of Defense leaders to generate U.S. public support for military action against Cuba. The proposal was presented in a document entitled "Justification for US Military Intervention in Cuba," a draft memorandum pdf) written by the Department of Defense (DoD) and Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) representative to the Caribbean Survey Group. The draft memo was presented by the JCS to Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara on March 13 with one paragraph approved, as a preliminary submission for planning purposes. However, McNamara rejected the proposal. The draft memorandum was declassified in recent years through a Freedom of Information Act request by the National Security Archive.
1964 Gulf of Tonkin incident
On August 4, 1964, North Vietnamese ships had allegedly attacked US destroyers, in what has come to be known as the Gulf of Tonkin Incident which led to Lyndon B. Johnson to drastically increase troop levels in Vietnam. On November 30, 2005, the National Security Archive released hundreds of pages of documents revealing that President Johnson was shown only selective intelligence and that the August 4th attack in all likelihood never occurred.
1965 Suppressing Sarkhan
The followup book to The Ugly American by William Lederer and Eugene Burdick disappears from bookstores. Lederer claims the CIA did it because it revealed too much about then current operations in Thailand. It was finally released in 1977 under the title 'The Deceptive American'.
1967 to ? USS LIBERTY
Attack on USS Liberty (AGTR-5) LBJ called back rescue planes TWICE after Radio operator found a workaround jamming and called to carrier group for mayday. Israel used unmarked planes and boats to twice attack U.S.Navy listening post ship; jamming American radio channels as a "no flag"/false flag operation. Ruled officially a accident but some largely symbolic reparations were paid. Official coverup continues. The purpose was allegedly to suggest an attack on US by Egypt, in an attempt to get USA involved in the war, fighting on the Israeli side.
1969 Secret Bombing of Cambodia
Operation Menu was the codename for secret US bombing of alleged North Vietnamese strongholds and supply lines in Cambodia during the Vietnam War in 1969. The bombing, of a nation the US was not at war with, began with Operation Breakfast on March 17, 1969 and was conducted in secret until the New York Times broke the story on May 8, 1969.
1969 to 1982 Italian Strategy of tension
Conspiracy involving NATO and the Italian masonic lodge Propaganda Due
1970 to ? Air America & Operation Scatback
(linked to Mena Arkansas) Book By Terry Reed Contra/CIA contractor flight instructor:
Compromised: Clinton, Bush and the CIA* (How
the Presidency was co-opted by the Central Intelligence Agency) *
1972 to 1974 Watergate scandal
Grand conspiracy involving the President of the United States.
1975-1999 Indonesian occupation of East Timor
U.S. President Gerald Ford and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger had met President Suharto of Indonesia in Jakarta where Ford made it clear that "we will not press you on the issue" of the invasion and occupation of East Timor. Several U.S. administrations up to and including that of Bill Clinton did not ban arms sales to the Indonesian government, though the latter did eventually end U.S. support of Suharto's regime. The territory was declared the 27th province of Indonesia in July 1976 as Timor Timur. However, internationally its legal status was that of a "non-self-governing territory under Portuguese administration." See also Manufacturing Consent: Noam Chomsky and the Media: A centerpiece of the film is a long examination into the history of The New York Times's coverage of Indonesia's invasion and occupation of East Timor, which Chomsky claims exemplifies the media's unwillingness to criticize an ally and uses as an example of self-censorship in western media.
1981 to 1986 Iran-Contra
The Iran-Contra Affair (also known as "Irangate") was a mid-1980s political scandal in the United States. President Ronald Reagan's administration sold arms to Iran, an avowed enemy. At the time, Americans were being held hostage in Lebanon by Hezbollah, a militant Shi'a organization loyal to Ayatollah Khomeini, and it was hoped that Iran would influence them to release the hostages; at the same time, Iran, which was in the midst of the Iran-Iraq War, could find few nations willing to supply it with weapons. The U.S. diverted proceeds from the sale to the Contras, anti-Communist guerrillas engaged in an insurgency against the left wing Sandinista government of Nicaragua. Both the sale of weapons and the funding of the Contras violated stated administration policy as well as legislation passed by the Democratic-controlled Congress, which had blocked further Contra funding. * Incomplete without mentioning Mena Arkansas as a base of operations and the drugs for arms bartering * with among other connections, to The Bluegrass Conspiracy a book by Sally Denton detailing drugs and corrupton involving the commissioner of Kentucky State Police, (who resigned) officers and other officials as reported in newspapers.
1988 Nelson Bunker Hunt and Silver Thursday
Nelson Bunker Hunt declared bankruptcy and was convicted in August 1988 of conspiring to manipulate the market.
1990 Las Vegas American Coin Fixed Video Poker Conspiracy
Las Vegas Sun: November 06, 1997 Arrest made in '90 murder; warrant issued for second man "American Coin, at the time, was the state's fourth largest slot route operator, with more than 1,000 machines in various Las Vegas locations. The company was charged with altering 300 machines." "After Volk told authorities of the computer chip scam at American Coin, the company was closed and the gaming licenses of the owners -- Rudolph and Rudy M. LaVecchia and Frank Romano -- were surrendered in a deal that required them to pay a $1 million fine to the state in the February 1990 deal." Larry Volk, the programmer of the fixed computer chip (ROM), was found shot dead, execution style, after agreeing to testify in the case. See also Comdex '99: The mysterious death of Larry Volk, Las Vegas Review Journal: Harris case nothing compared to the big one that went away
1993 Assassination plot against President George H.W. Bush
On April 13, 1993, several Iraqi nationals were arrested in Kuwait and charged with plotting to assassinate former President Bush via car bomb during a visit to Kuwait. Later, a court in Kuwait convicted all but one of the defendants. On 26 June, 1993, President Clinton launched a missile attack targeting Baghdad intelligence headquarters in retaliation for the attempted attack against Bush.
1993 WTC terrorist attack
In the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, a truck filled with explosives was planted by terrorists and detonated in the underground garage of the north tower, opening a 30m hole through 4 sublevels of concrete. Six people were killed and over a thousand injured.
According to a presiding judge, the conspirators' chief aim at the time of the attack was to de-stabilize the north tower and send it crashing into the south tower, toppling both landmarks.
1994 Diamonds are forever?
In 1994 De Beers was charged by the United States Justice Department with Sherman Antitrust Act violations for conspiring to fix prices for industrial diamonds. On 14 July 2004 De Beers pleaded guilty to the charges and paid a $10 million fine. According to PBS: Frontline: The Diamond Empire: "EDWARD EPSTEIN, Author, "The Rise and Fall of Diamonds": Well, what I learned was that the diamond business wasn't a business of extracting, as I originally expected, something of enormous value and then simply seeing how much of this object you could get out of the ground and selling it. That was what the business appeared to be when I started my venture. But their real business was restricting what came out of the ground, restricting what was discovered, restricting what got cut, restricting what actually found its way into the retail market and, at the same time, through movies, through advertising, through Hollywood, through the manipulation of perceptions, creating the idea that there was this enormous demand for these shiny little objects that they seemed to have in abundant supply. So I wound up on this voyage of discovery starting off with the idea that there was this object of great value, and it was just a question of how many could you get out, and I wound up discovering it was just the opposite." See also Crater of Diamonds.
1995 The Bojinka Plot
The Bojinka plot refers to a three-part conspiracy: the plot to destroy 11 airliners on January 21 and 22, 1995; the plan to kill Pope John Paul II on January 15, 1995 during a papal visit to the Philippines; and the third part of this conspiracy was a plan to crash a plane into the CIA headquarters in Fairfax County, Virginia and other buildings. The Bojinka plot was prevented on January 6 and 7, 1995.
1995 Oklahoma City bombing
The Oklahoma City bombing was a terrorist attack on April 19, 1995, in which the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building, a U.S. government office complex in downtown Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, was destroyed, killing 168 people. The (Oklahoma) McCurtain Daily Gazette has reported that at least one member of the secret services and an informant for the BATF (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms) had prior knowledge that the attack was about to take place, a charge which the FBI deny. The newspaper also alleges that the FBI and the Southern Poverty Law Section, as part of a top-secret undercover operation, may have indeed assisted the bombers in their plans as part of a failed sting operation, citing evidence given in a court case by a BATF informant and data published under the Freedom of Information Act as 'proof'.
Other reports point variously to the quick response of agents dressed in full 'mop-gear' clothing, as if pre-prepared for an explosion; the fact that the BATF offices (in the bombed building) were empty at the time of the explosion; FBI reluctance to release sensitive documentation relating to the case, and rumours of an SMS warning sent out to BATF staff as further 'evidence' of a major conspiracy. These reports are largely based on empirical evidence and circumstantial information, and remain unproven.
1995 to 2004 Jack Abramoff Indian lobbying scandal
The Jack Abramoff Indian lobbying scandal is a United States political scandal relating to the work performed by political lobbyists Jack Abramoff, Ralph E. Reed, Jr., Grover Norquist and Michael Scanlon on behalf of Indian casino gambling interests for an estimated $85 million in fees. Abramoff and Scanlon grossly overbilled their clients, secretly splitting the multimillion-dollar profits. In one case, they secretly orchestrated lobbying against their own clients in order to force them to pay for lobbying services.

2000's
2001 Enron and Arthur Andersen
The company and its Big Five accounting firm conspired to commit accounting fraud. Fortune named Enron "America's Most Innovative Company" for six consecutive years.
2002 Las Vegas Venetian Rigged Drawing
The Venetian casino employees conspired to rig drawings. According to the Las Vegas Sun: July 15, 2004 Venetian contest rigger lectured by regulators: "Mok said he rigged the drawing because a high-roller he was hosting lost $5 million gambling and the employee "didn't want to see him go home empty-handed."" The Venetian agreed to pay a $1 million fine to settle a 12 count complaint. "Board member Bobby Siller ... compared the additional damage inflicted by attempting to cover up the scheme with the trouble former President Richard Nixon brought upon himself during the Watergate burglary investigation." Four Venetian employees lost their licenses to work in the Nevada gaming industry but were quickly hired by casinos in other states. According to the Las Vegas Sun: "Michael French, the former senior vice president of operations, became the chief operating officer for the Inn of the Mountain Gods casino in Mescalero, N.M. Brian Parrish, formerly the vice president of marketing, became the marketing director for the same New Mexico tribal casino. The Mescalero Apache Tribe said they believed the involvement by French and Parrish in the scheme was more than offset by their wide-ranging experience. Don Richardson, another Venetian executive involved in the incident, surfaced as the director of operations at the Wildfire, a small casino owned by Station Casinos Inc. Station officials said the company's regulatory compliance department investigated the matter and determined that Richardson was suitable for the position."
2004 Secret CIA Prisons
A story by reporter Dana Priest published in The Washington Post of November 2, 2005, reported that "The CIA has been hiding and interrogating some of its most important al Qaeda captives at a Soviet-era compound in Eastern Europe, according to U.S. and foreign officials familiar with the arrangement."[4]
The report contends that the CIA has a worldwide covert prison system with facilities in Asia, Eastern Europe, and in Guantanamo Bay in Cuba. The system is central to the agency's anti-terror role, and according to the report has been kept secret from government officials (including Congressional committees that oversee the CIA) through the agency's own efforts as well as cooperation with foreign intelligence services.
This conspiracy was proven in 2006 when President Bush admitted that indeed there are secret CIA prisons in Europe and elsewhere.
2005 Ahmed Omar Abu Ali
On November 23 a federal jury convicted Ahmed Omar Abu Ali, a citizen of the United States, on nine counts, including conspiracy to assassinate the president, and conspiracy to commit aircraft piracy.
2005 DRAM price fixing
In October Samsung pled guilty to conspiring with other companies, including Infineon and Hynix Semiconductor, to fix the price of DRAM. Samsung was the third company to be charged in connection with the international cartel and was fined $300M. In October 2004 four executives from Infineon were sentenced to 4 to 6 months in prison and $250,000 in fines after agreeing to aid the U.S. Department of Justice with their investigation of the conspiracy.
2005 Bernard Ebbers
He was convicted of fraud and conspiracy in the largest (to date) accounting scandal in U.S. history, as a result of WorldCom's false financial reporting, and subsequent 180 billion dollar loss to investors.


Notable political conspiracies

* The Catiline conspiracies in the first century BC.
* A group of Roman senators, calling itself the Liberatores, hoped to restore the Roman Republic by killing Julius Caesar in 44 BC.
* The Pisonian conspiracy AD 65.
* The Pazzi conspiracy, which included the Pope, of the late 1400s.
* The Babington Plot, as the event which most directly led to the execution of Mary, Queen of Scots. This was a second major plot against Elizabeth I of England after the Ridolfi plot. It was named after the chief conspirator Sir Anthony Babington (1561–1586), a young Catholic nobleman from Derbyshire.
* The Throckmorton Plot, was an attempt by English Roman Catholics in 1583 to murder Queen Elizabeth I of England and replace her with her cousin Mary, Queen of Scots. The plot is named after the key conspirator, Sir Francis Throckmorton, a catholic nobleman, who confessed to the plot under torture.
* The Main Plot of 1603, was a conspiracy by English Catholics, allegedly led by catholic noblemen Henry Brooke, Lord Cobham, Sir George Brooke and Thomas Grey, 15th Baron Grey de Wilton, to remove King James I from the English throne, replacing him by aid of Spain with his cousin Arabella (or Arbella) Stuart.
* The Bye Plot of 1603, led to the execution of Sir George Brooke
* The Gunpowder Plot of 1605, in earlier centuries often called the Gunpowder Treason Plot, was a failed assassination attempt against King James I of England and VI of Scotland by a group of provincial English Catholic Noblemen and Gentry led by Sir Robert Catesby. The plan was to blow up the House of Lords during the State Opening of Parliament on 5 November 1605, the prelude to a popular revolt in the Midlands during which James's nine-year-old daughter, Princess Elizabeth, was to be installed as the Catholic head of state. Catesby may have embarked on the scheme after hopes of securing greater religious tolerance under King James had faded, leaving many English Catholics disappointed. His fellow plotters included Thomas Wintour, Robert Wintour, John Wright, Christopher Wright, Guy Fawkes, Robert Keyes, John Grant, Lord of the Manor, Sir Thomas Percy, Sir Ambrose Rookwood, Sir Everard Digby, Sir Francis Tresham and Thomas Bates
* The Anjala conspiracy of 1788
* The conspiracy of 1865 to assassinate U.S. President Abraham Lincoln and members of his cabinet
* The French government's attempted cover-up following Émile Zola's accusations in the Dreyfus Affair, starting in 1894.
* The 1903 efforts by the Tsar's secret police to foment anti-Semitism by presenting The Protocols of the Elders of Zion as an authentic text.[1]
* The 1933 Business Plot - Fascists Coup d'état attempt in USA
* The 1939 Operation Himmler and its Gleiwitz incident - False Flag Terrorism by Nazi Germany in order to get a pretext for Invasion of Poland
* The 1939 Shelling of Mainila, False Flag Terrorism by USSR in order to get a pretext for Winter War
* CIA Operation Mockingbird, from 1948. In 1976, then CIA director George H. W. Bush ordered that paid media recruiting would be prohibited.
* The 1942 Wannsee Conference, 3rd Reich Nazis related to Final Solution.
* The 1945 OSS Operation Paperclip, the extraction of top Nazi scientists (incl. SS nazi Party members).
* CIA MKULTRA mind control program, from 1953 to late 1960s
* The 1954 'Lavon affair'- Operation Susannah; False Flag Terrorism by Mossad
* The 1962 CIA Operation Northwoods
* CIA Project Cherry, United States non-stop attempt to Assassinate Norodom Sihanouk
* The 1969 Manson Family murders
* The 1972 Watergate burglary and cover-up scandals
* The 1980 October surprise
* The 1984 Rajneeshee bioterror attack
* The 1987 Iran-Contra Affair
* The Enron manipulation of the California Electricity Market during the California electricity crisis
* The Mafia
* Various CIA involvements in overseas coups d'état
* The 1991 Testimony of Nayirah before the U.S. Congress to rally the support of the U.S. public to launch the Gulf War
* The Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the Negro Male[2]
* The General Motors streetcar conspiracy[3]
* The plot by some gaullists of the French Secret Service to destabilise future president Georges Pompidou, known as the Markovic affair
* The series of incidents in Italy connected to the so called "strategy of tension"
* CIA Operation Gladio, a NATO 'stay-behind' Operation
* The 2000 CIA Operation Merlin
* The 2002 Downing Street Memo
* The 2002 September Dossier UK and USA Governments Lies and Forgeries to Justify invasion of Iraq
* The 2002 Yellowcake forgery
* The 2003 Iraq and weapons of mass destruction reports in order to get a United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441 pretext to Iraq War
* The 2003 Iraq Dossier
* The 2003 Plame Affair
* The 2003 Mobile weapons laboratory Forgeries by Government of United States of America to justify Iraq War



Posted by the Curmudgeon at 4:24 AM
http://conspiraciesthatweretrue.blogspot.com/2007/01/list-of-proven-conspiracies-from.html




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_%28political%29


TODAY'S CHART



Current Track Record