Executive Intelligence Review
This article appears in the October 19, 2012 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.

To Stop '9/11 Two,' Expose
Brit-Saudi-Obama Deadly Game

by Nancy Spannaus

[PDF version of this article]

Oct. 16—With the explosive revelations at the Oct. 10 hearings of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee about the failures of the Obama Administration to provide requested security at the Benghazi consulate, and other lapses, the well-deserved process of "Benghazi-gate" against President Obama and his administration is fully on. Charges and countercharges are flying—and the exposure of who, and what sequence of events, are responsible for the murder of Amb. Christopher Stevens and three other American personnel on Sept. 11, 2012 is just beginning.

While this news service obviously doesn't know the details of what occurred on the ground, Lyndon LaRouche, as in the original Sept. 11, 2001 attack, has definitively identified the "animal" at work: the de facto alliance of the British and Saudi monarchies, and British tool Barack Obama. As in the original 9/11, in which the Bush-Cheney team took the part of Obama, this cabal is intent on unleashing a process of global chaos in the service of the British Queen's objective of eliminating what remains of the system of sovereign nation-states, which stands in the way of the financial oligarchy's demand for total global domination. In this gameplan, terrorist groups such as al-Qaeda are simply the expendable pawns of a deadly end-game, especially with Russia and China—and ultimately, so is the majority of the human race.

The removal of Obama from control over the U.S. government, especially of the nuclear button, is clearly essential to preventing short-term disaster as a result of a continuation of 9/11 Two—especially as that alliance is proceeding to carry out "new Libyas" in Syria and Iran, and throughout Africa. But to stop the process in its tracks, requires political leaders in the United States and elsewhere, to finally expose and shut down the British-Saudi apparatus.

New EIR Report

The release of EIR's latest Special Report, "Obama's War on America: 9/11 Two," this week, will play the crucial role in uprooting the British-Saudi-Obama nexus. The 136-page report draws on EIR's unique and substantiated intelligence in three areas: 1) the Obama Administration's alliance with, and protection of, the British-Saudi al-Qaeda networks; 2) the London-Saudi role in international terrorism, both historically and today; and 3) the real story of the British-Saudi collusion in carrying out the original 9/11 attack.

The identification of the Saudi role, as a tool of the British monarchy and the prime player in the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, is a particularly crucial aspect of this exposé. The story ranges from the role of BAE Systems, in providing a terrorist slush fund, to copies of some of the documents identifying the Saudi foot soldiers who were protected by the Bush Administration in their preparations for the 9/11 atrocity, and whose bosses, such as former Saudi Ambassador to the U.S. Prince Bandar bin-Sultan, are still being protected by Obama today.

By refusing to declassify critical documentation of the Saudi role, Obama has guaranteed that the Saudi-funded terrorist networks who did the original 9/11, still operate freely today.

Of crucial importance as well, is the inclusion of LaRouche's policy warnings during 2001, which not only forecast the horrors of what would occur, but provided the "road not taken" to avoid the strategic catastrophe in which the world currently finds itself. All the more important, then, that LaRouche's judgment of the current crisis, and what must be done, be listened to today.

Other Warnings

Fortunately, LaRouche is not the only political figure warning of the disaster impending from continuing the policy that led to the Libya atrocity. Both Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) and Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) issued statements on Oct. 10 that warned of Obama starting new wars.

Most striking was Paul, who, in a long interview with CNN-TV, both attacked Obama's "illegal and unconstitutional" war in Libya—which led to the current dominance of jihadi groups in that country—and warned of a new war against Syria:

"I'm concerned that, you know, we could be at war with Syria even before the election occurs if things escalate across Turkey's border. You know, you have the head of NATO now saying that if Turkey's attacked, all of a sudden all of NATO might be involved in this war.... I don't want to see world war where all of NATO comes on to the Turkish-Syria border and we're involved in a huge Middle East conflagration" (emphasis added).

Kucinich raised a similar issue both in the House hearing, and in an interview with U.S. News & World Report. In the hearing Kucinich was blunt:

"But we owe it to the diplomatic corps, who serves our nation, to start at the beginning, and that's what I shall do. The security threats in Libya, including the unchecked extremist groups who are armed to the teeth, exist because our nation spurred on a civil war, destroying the security and stability of Libya.... We bombed Libya. We destroyed their army. We obliterated their police stations. Lacking any civil authority, armed brigades controlled security. Al Qaida expanded its presence. Weapons are everywhere. Thousands of shoulder-to-air missiles are on the loose. Our military intervention led to greater instability in Libya."

Kucinich went on to blast Congress itself for failing to stop Obama's illegal war in Libya. The next day, he called the question on Obama moving to launch the next illegal war against Syria, noting the announced deployment of 100-plus U.S. troops into Jordan, on the border, and the fact that the deployment "immeasurably" raises the danger of U.S. military action in a conflict there.

Obama Lies Exposed

Clearly, Obama, who has faithfully followed the "preemptive war" policy of the British Queen, cannot be trusted not to do so again. In fact, as the Oct. 10 hearing showed, he can't be trusted to provide security for Americans, or to tell the truth.

On the eve of the hearing, the Obama Administration had already tried to cover its tracks, for having blamed the murder of Stevens and his associates on a demonstration gone amok. A State Department official called some media and Congressional staff the night of Oct. 9, to say there had been no protest demonstration, that the attack was not sparked by a video, and that it was a preplanned terrorist attack. Thus, the Administration itself had already gone a long way to discrediting UN Ambassador Susan Rice, and Obama himself, in their many lying statements linking the attack to a non-existent demonstration.

During the hearing, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Charlene Lamb testified that she had not only been informed of the Sept. 11 attack immediately, but had been in real-time contact with the personnel there. It was reported that there was a 50-minute video of the attack, which could not be handed over to the Committee.

Much of the other testimony was related to the security situation in Benghazi. The Democratic Party line that the Republicans had cut the budget for security there was countered by the report that security at the Benghazi compound was provided by the Africa Command, which had sufficient funds. Yet, according to the uncontested testimony of former Site Security Team (SST) head Lt. Col. Andy Wood, his team in Benghazi was terminated in August despite deteriorating security conditions, which Wood described as follows:

"From my personal point of view, things in Libya always remained difficult and uncertain and could devolve at any moment into further problems and result in loss of life almost at any minute.... A lawless situation was pretty much the norm.... There was no control of the borders of weapons smuggling in and out of the country.... We did notice an increase in targeted attacks toward Americans. These indicators spelled out to me that the country was far from secure and that the SST as it had been originally conceived was still in need at that location."

'Taliban on the Inside of the Building'

One of the most striking elements of the hearing came from the former Regional Security Officer in Libya, Eric Nordstrom. Nordstrom had been the official who had requested an extension of the SST, in light of the worsening security situation. However, Nordstrom testified, Lamb had told him that if he made the request, it would be rejected.

"We were not going to get resources until the aftermath of an incident," Nordstrom said. When he returned to the U.S., Nordstrom testified, he was told by a superior whose first name is Jim, that "you are asking for the Sun, the Moon and the stars."

Then Nordstrom shocked those present, concluding:

"For me the Taliban is on the inside of the building."

Why No More Security?

Throughout the hearing, and elsewhere, the Obama White House officials repeatedly insisted that the intelligence they received did not anticipate or confirm a terrorist attack on the consulate. Any blame for negligence had to go to intelligence failures, or the State Department, they implied.

Yet, qualified U.S. intelligence sources have told EIR, and other media such as Newsweek's Eli Lake, that, not only was it obvious that security should be beefed up on the eve of the 9/11 anniversary, but that the White House Counterterror Tsar and Assistant to the President John Brennan would have been advised.

And while Director of National Intelligence James Clapper early on denied that his services had knowledge of a coming terror attack, this is widely seen as a cover for the President. Former CIA Director Michael Hayden and former Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff responded Oct. 12 to attacks on the intelligence community with a statement that said, in part: "Given what has emerged publicly about the intelligence available before, during, and after the September 11 [2012] attack, it is clear that any failure was not on the part of the intelligence community, but on the part of White House decision-makers who should have listened to, and acted on, available intelligence. Blaming those who put their lives on the line is not the kind of leadership this country needs."

It should be no secret to anyone that terrorists were running rampant in Libya: The Obama Administration was working hand-in-glove with al-Qaeda terrorists, many of whom had been incubated in London, in overthrowing Qaddafi. And now they are working with many of those same terrorists in Syria, or the surrounding nations, in the British-Saudi drive to overthrow the Assad government, and move on to confrontation with Iran, Russia, and China. That strategy was cooked up in London, funded in Saudi Arabia, and carried out in Washington.

It's up to patriotic Americans, without regard to party, to stop it, before it leads to global sectarian warfare, and World War III.

Subscribe to EIW