US funded 911 through Al Qaeda & Anwar Awlaki

I think this is where the money trail leads to regarding 911.

The U.S. Department of Labor gave millions of dollars to a joint venture that included a Yemeni charity with extensive links to Al Qaeda. At least $3.5 million was allocated by the Labor Department to fund a three-year partnership between the Charitable Society for Social Welfare (CSSW), based in Yemen, and CHF International, a Maryland-based foundation, to fight child labor and child trafficking starting in fiscal year 2008. The money was provided through a grant by the Labor Department's Office of Child Labor, Forced Labor, and Human Trafficking (OCFT), according to a Labor Department press release, the agency's Web site and Middle Eastern news sources. CSSW, based in Yemen, was founded by Abdul Majid Al Zindani, a veteran of the jihad against the Soviet Union and its civil war aftermath. Zindani was an associate of Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan, according to published reports and exclusive documents obtained by INTELWIRE. The U.S. government believes he is an Al Qaeda recruiter and fundraiser.

Intelwire

Rest of the story here

Dept. of Labor document

I think this is but one of many 911 fund sources that will be exposed in the future. And hopefully one day the truth will come out about who all is involved.
And in a related note, Yemen is now a primary focus by the US so this is worth watching closely (Yemen connection) as the US military is starting to forward position items there now. There have been equipment and other resources owned by the US there for a while, but the build up is on!

[edit on 4/17/2010 by mikelee]

The whole "Al-Quada" group was originally started by CIA if that wasn't enough to raise an eyebrow anyway.

I do not believe I have ever heard this though touted on MSM as this would be giving too much information to the drones.

reply to post by GreenBicMan


Yes, AQ was actually the left over Mujihadeen fighting the Soviet Union renamed by the CIA as they tried to get Bin Laden to be their middle man for weapons.

If you really think "al Qaida is a CIA asset" and "the US paid off Bin Laden to stage 9/11" then why do you people turn around and insist all the Al Qaida broadcasts admitting their guilt are all false? According to you, Bin Laden is a CIA employee so they don't need to fake any broadcasts. Simply pay him to put out real ones.

Methinks the only real agenda you conspiracy people are following is to pursue runaway abject paranoia, and you don't particularly care if you contradict each other or even yoursleves with all these never ending claims of conspiracies and secret plots. For one thing, why would these conspirators need to waste their time staging these fake plane crashes to conceal planted bombs when bombs were already planted in the WTC in 1993?

"For one thing, why would these conspirators need to waste their time staging these fake plane crashes to conceal planted bombs when bombs were already planted in the WTC in 1993?"

Because everybody with half of a brain (and less) knows that you need airline fuel fires to melt steel and cause buildings to collapse.

Labor Department's Office of Child Labor, Forced Labor, and Human Trafficking (OCFT)

What an unfortunate name

reply to post by GoodOlDave


Care to address the OP? It shows evidence that AQ was indeed funded with American tax dollars, and it's not the only case of this happening.

Is Usama bin Laden the leader of Al Qaeda?

Has Usama bin Laden claimed responsibility for 9/11?

Is there any evidence linking Al Qaeda / Usama bin Laden to 9/11 besides "confessions on video"?

Is Usama bin Laden wanted by the FBI for 9/11? That would tell us if there was real evidence or not or if he had admitted it or if the government believes he's responsible.

If he is the leader of Al Qaeda, and Al Qaeda is responsible for 9/11, why isn't he?

edit: Almost forgot to address op!

I think that this is an interesting piece of documentation, I'd like to see a direct link of wealth transfer from this organization to Al Qaeda before I jumped to a conclusion though. While this is VERY interesting and an extremely good find, I feel that more research needs to be done.

The question is, is it possible that the government group that gave out this money did not realize what they were doing? Is this government organization that gave out the money controlled by the CIA?

Could this government organization have been tricked into giving this money by CIA? Who proposed giving the money initially, who said "hey guys let's consider donating to this group!"

I think that THAT is where we need to look.

[edit on 18-4-2010 by sremmos]

Originally posted by GreenBicMan
I do not believe I have ever heard this though touted on MSM as this would be giving too much information to the drones.

it may be that
they are giving out small segments at a time
so the sheeple waking up don't go into
shock all at once.

Remember the line:

You can't handle the truth!!!

it applies here

but small truths can be comprehended
at a steady pace.

reply to post by boondock-saint


Wouldn't want to give half the south a sudden heart attack all at one time releasing this on FOX would you?

But seriously, I live in the South and I rarely come into contact with people that stupid (minus x gf) unless you are off the coast line. Once you travel off the Florida coast about 40 miles.. well that is another world.

Originally posted by SphinxMontreal
Because everybody with half of a brain (and less) knows that you need airline fuel fires to melt steel and cause buildings to collapse.

The problem here is, everyone who has the ability to read knows that that it was *never* claimed the fires melted the steel. The NIST report, the FEMA report, and even the MIT report all state the fires heated the steel nonuniformly causing irregular thermal expansion which led to structural failure. It's only those damned fool conpspiracy web sites spreading this "melted steel" bit to deliberately get people all paranoid over shadows.

Not that it matters, siince if it really was a bomb hidden in the structure, they wouldn't need to hide what kind of bomb it was. Terrorists should be able to get their hands on thermite much more readily than Jumbo jet trainiing sessions.

Oh yeah, I almost forgot-

reply to post by GoodOlDave


We know the steel didn't "melt" and people who are more concerned with the truth instead of spreading half assed statements that incorporate everyone when its just a few folk, are the problem here.

Oh yea, the steel "got weak" theory may suffice simple minds but to those of us whose minds aren't clouded by gov lies and fairy tales combined with rhetoric spewed by those for nefarious purposes, those lies do not and never will suffice simply because its not the truth.

[edit on 4/25/2010 by mikelee]

reply to post by GoodOlDave


Could you clarify what you meant by bombs being 'planted' in 1993 ?

And oh , you slipped up and forgot to include 'damned fool conspiracy websites' in your latest post .

reply to post by GoodOlDave


Aaah , there it is , in your next post . Had me concerned there for a minute .

Funny thing is , I had heard these theories of melted steel long before I ever started browsing these 'damned fool conspiracy websites' .

Originally posted by mikelee
Oh yea, the steel "got weak" theory may suffice simple minds but to those of us whose minds aren't clouded by gov lies and fairy tales combined with rhetoric spewed by those for nefarious purposes, those lies do not and never will suffice simply because its not the truth.

Well, sorry to burst your bubble, but it's an established metallurgical fact that metal doesn't need to be heated completely to its melting point before it loses its structural integrity. Every blacksmith for the last 5000 years or so know that fire and a hammer can change the shape of a metal object without needing to actually melt it. Even the NYPD helicopter pilots flying eye level to the impact areas were reporting the suppports were glowing red from the fires and looked liek they were about to collapse.

So, I can either believe the NYPD helicopter pilots who were actually there (as well as all the blacksmiths for the last 5,000) years, or I can believe you and those damned fool conspiracy web sites you're getting this paranoid drivel from. Care to guess who I'm putting my money?

Originally posted by okbmd
Could you clarify what you meant by bombs being 'planted' in 1993 ?

Terrorists funded by Al Qaida planted a truck bomb in the underground parking lot of the north tower in 1993 to get it to fall over into the south tower. It blew up and smashed the bejesus out of the basement levels but it didn't destroy the building.

1993 WTC bombing

No offense intended, guy, but you can't NOT know this.

reply to post by GoodOlDave

Terrorists funded by Al Qaida planted a truck bomb in the underground parking lot of the north tower in 1993 to get it to fall over into the south tower. It blew up and smashed the bejesus out of the basement levels but it didn't destroy the building.

1993 WTC bombing

Humm… whatever the government says happened must be the truth, G-d forbid if our government ever tells any lies.

Fact is, the CIA & the FBI had their hands in the bombing of 1993 WTC, not a made up organization that our CIA created and funded and name it, the invisible boogieman called Al Qaida.

[color=gold]Rep. Dana Rohrabacher links WTC 1993 bombing to OKC bombing and 9/11 in 15th anniversary speech - February 26, 2008

On February 26, 2008, [color=gold]Congressional Representative Dana Rohrabacher of California made some very interesting observations on the House floor;

So what is my point with this long and winding post? Fifteen years after the WTC 93 bombing, and we still don't know the truth. Nearly thirteen years following OKC, and we still don't know the truth. There are troubling parallels and repeating patterns and players in multiple terrorist incidents in the US, and US intelligence agencies are one of the repeating elements, with deeply placed "informants" in key positions every time.

According to Richard Labeviere in his book, "Dollars for Terror" (pp. 220-221), Yousef was recruited by the CIA;
"Ramzi Ahmed Youssef does not come across as a lost soul or a fanatic ready to make the supreme sacrifice; he is characterized rather as "a top terrorism professional", according to the FBI's notes. Youssef had a collection of forged passports and borrowed names ... A former mujaheddin of the Afghanistan "holy war", he apparently learned the arts of bomb-making, urban guerilla warfare, disguise and forged identity papers in Peshawar, Pakistan. A classified FBI file indicates that he was recruited by the local branch of the CIA."
[color=gold]So now we have two CIA agents, one a CIA/FBI agent, linked to the WTC 93 bombing and 9/11.

To even things out we have Emad Salem, bomb-maker, [color=gold]FBI informant, deep withing the WTC 93 plot.
Further, there is another FBI asset/informant deeply involved in the OKC bombing, a German national by the name of Andreas Strassmeir (also Strassmeyer). Strassmeir lived for a time at Elohim City, and on April 8, 1995 was witnessed at the Lady Godiva strip club in Tulsa, in the company of Timothy McVeigh, bragging to one of the waitresses that she would remember him on April 19, '95, and would remember him for the rest of her life.
No doubt!
You can see the eyewitness account of this episode, which was caught on a security camera, in Jon Ronson's documentary, "Secret Rulers of the World", fast-forward to the 1:00 mark of this YouTube excerpt;

www.911blogger.com...

I hope your not going to say [color=gold]Congressional Representative Dana Rohrabacher of California is a lair, without showing credible evidence.

[edit on 26-4-2010 by impressme]

reply to post by GoodOlDave


No , I knew this , I was just wanting to be sure what you meant by 'planted' .

The Murrah building here in OK was also destroyed by a truck bomb , but I can't relate that with 'planted' .

Just wanted clarification , that's all .

reply to post by GoodOlDave


You must know this then, the FBI informant that used real explosives and FBI money to blow up the WTC! Instead of fake explosives like the plan.

Emad Salem

You should research the '93 bombing it doesn't help the MSM stance much!

reply to post by GoodOlDave


I rarely agree with anything you post but I do agree that you have presented a fair argument here. And here is my reply:

In the places where the aircraft landed we are supposed to believe that within those confined and limited spaces of impact, that the fires were so hot it allowed the beams to become so heated that their structual integrity failed then ripped out the pins/bolts and caused the entire building(s) to collaspe? There is and never have been any proof that the fuel from the sircrafts provided the required intensity to create that type of sustained & prolonged heating environment to cause this. Its simply a fairy tale at best and treason at worst for anyone to repeat that type of rhetorical conspiracy based garbage. And its an insult to all that died on 911.

The MAJORITY of the fuel ignited & burned off on the outside of the towers, that is evident and proven from every single video that exists of that day. When the planes struck, it wasn't the desks, chairs, filing cabinets, computers, carpet, water coolers that caused the explosion & fire on the outside of the buildings...It was the fuel. After the initial impact the fuel burned up within a 25 minute window and what did burn after that was the consumables in the towers. They were not enough of those consumables to cause the amount of heat to cause the collaspes. I'm sure that some fuel soaked some of the items and cause them to burn but again, not with enough heat to cause the beams to fail. Many people wish to make this argument into something that only a person with a degree could possible begin to argue, but there are many things about 911 in which to see the truth, it only takes one to open their eyes to what is right in front of them instead of being so caught up in explanations after explanations that they end up so full of information that they arrive at the same conclusion as that of the OS only because of being overloaded with information.

The towers did not collaspe due to the aircrafts causing them to. The damage from that occurence I'm sure was massive, but not so massive that their collaspe could be attributed to the aircraft alone.