Good GaWd!<br><br>How tragic, and ineffably sad, and downright obscene.<br><br>Good thing I've trained my jaw to only fall an inch at a time, and promptly return to closed-mouth default on seeing/reading/learning some new aspect of how utterly criminal, corrupt, duplicious, foul, murderous, despicable (*etc.) the nation's illegitimate ruling class and their corporate/war industry/lie factory clients/agencies and allies are -- or my lower jaw would be emerging from the other side of the earth someplace.<br><br>Thanks for bringing this forgotton issue of horrible injustice and cover-up back into awareness, PW; Now, the topic of covert US links to arming Iran is less obscure than it was just a couple years ago, even as its become MUCH more important in understanding the cynical, twisted plot the US has been involved in to create the demon of Terrorism that has become the smoke-screen and cause celebre behind which the forces and interests behind Perpetual War and globalist NWO are perpetrating the biggest racket ever. <br><br>While a horrible tragedy, it's NO surprise that Lindauer has become a victim for running afoul of the Octopus's tentacles. Her great sin or crime was apparently in attempting to make a small bit of the damning truth known to a public that evidently can't recognize --or protect-- those who truly honor the principles of human rights and social justice -- as opposed to the war-criminals, profiteers, despots and their fawning apologists/enablers/lackies who secretly despise and fear genuine citizen participatory democracy and the rule of law.<br><br>JeezUS...<br>Starman<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.meib.org/articles/0007_me2.htm">www.meib.org/articles/0007_me2.htm</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br>Lockerbie Trial Document: Susan Lindauer Deposition<br>4 December 1998<br><br>Last month, MEIB reported that Dr. Richard Fuisz, a major CIA operative in Syria during the 1980s, met with a congressional staffer by the name of Susan Lindauer in 1994 and told her that that the perpetrators of the December 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland were based in Syria [see "The Lockerbie Bombing Trial: Is Libya Being Framed?" Middle East Intelligence Bulletin, June 200<!--EZCODE EMOTICON START 0] --><img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/alien.gif ALT="0]"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> . One month after their meeting, the Clinton administration, which holds Libya responsible for the bombing, placed a gag order on Dr. Fuisz to prevent him from publicly discussing the issue.<br><br>While Dr. Fuisz is still unable to comment on this matter because of the gag order, MEIB has obtained a copy of a formal deposition filed by Lindauer in 1998 in which she recounts this conversation in detail. This deposition (see below) has been submitted to the court in which two Libyan suspects are currently on trial and to U.N. officials, who have attempted to persuade the Clinton administration to lift the gag order on Dr. Fuisz.<br><br>Lindauer says that she has been subject to intense surveillance, threats, and attacks since she began meeting with Libyan officials in 1995 to discuss her knowledge of the Lockerbie bombing. "Someone put acid on the steering wheel of my car on a day I was supposed to drive to NYC for a meeting at the Libya House. I scrubbed my hands with a toilet brush, but my face was burned so badly that 3 weeks later friends worried I might be badly scarred," Lindauer told MEIB. "Also, my house was bugged with listening devices and cameras -- little red laser lights in the shower vent. And I survived several assassination attempts."<br><br>She has agreed to publish her email address,
slndau@aol.com, along with this deposition so that journalists, researchers and others interested in learning more about this issue can contact her.<br><br>Text of Deposition<br><br>My name is Susan Lindauer. I reside in Silver Spring, Maryland, one of the suburbs outside the District of Columbia in the United States of America. At the time these events took place, I was living inside the District of Columbia, at 1002 C Street NE on Capitol Hill.<br><br>In offering this deposition, I hereby inform the court and all interested parties at the United Nations that I have never accepted any financial compensation from any of the individuals, or governments involved in this case, in any form of cash or non-cash payment. Furthermore, I have never solicited nor received promise of future payments in exchange for this testimony. My reasons for coming forward reflect my own deepest personal values, and my sense of obligation to the cause of international peace and security. I remain deeply persuaded that justice must never be confused with convenience or political scapegoating, and that the issues of this case, including the prosecution of terrorist activities and the imposition of sanctions that seek to isolate an entire Arabic population, are too important in this contemporary age for a lie to stand unchallenged. And so let it be understood by the court: I make these statements of my own free will, out of respect to my own conscience and sense of obligation as a world citizen.<br><br>This deposition pertains to my direct and immediate knowledge of an American named Dr. Richard Fuisz, and unequivocal statements by Dr. Fuisz directly to me that he has first hand knowledge about the Lockerbie case. Dr. Fuisz has told me that he can identify who orchestrated and executed the bombing. Dr. Fuisz has said that he can confirm absolutely that no Libyan national was involved in planning or executing the bombing of Pan Am 103, either in any technical or advisory capacity whatsoever. He has also made direct statements to me describing harassment that he has suffered for trying to provide this information to the families of Pan Am 103 and prosecuting authorities in the United States government.<br><br>I first met Dr. Richard Fuisz in his business office in Chantilly, Virginia in the United States of America. The date was September,1994. I had been invited to meet Dr. Fuisz by a mutual acquaintance because of my position as press secretary to former Congressman Ron Wyden (a Democrat from Oregon), and because of my known longstanding interest in the Middle East. Wyden is now a United States Senator, and I have continued my career in TV journalism and public affairs. For the record, my relationship with Dr. Fuisz has remained purely professional, and based strictly on my respect for his integrity and incredible, indepth knowledge of the Middle East.<br><br>Dr. Fuisz told me in September, 1994 that he had lived in Syria during the 1980s, and that he maintained close ties to Saudi Arabia and the Middle East overall. Mutual friends and associates have confirmed this. He was vague as to what capacity he was working, but after our conversation, I concluded by myself that he must have been feeding U.S. intelligence efforts. He told me that he had infiltrated a network of Syrian terrorists tied to the Iranian Hezbollah, who, at the time of his residence in Damascus, were holding Americans hostage in Beirut. Dr. Fuisz impressed on me that he had identified the organizers behind the hostage crisis, and that he had actually located the streets and buildings where those Americans were being held captive, at tremendous personal risk, in order to try to orchestrate a rescue. This information was later confirmed by a third party source.<br><br>We talked a great deal about how the sale of heroin/opium from the Bekaa Valley in Lebanon is financing terrorist activities on a global scale. I must add, the rise of heroin in street markets all over the U.S. is a most insidious trend with enormous human costs, which has further motivated my determination to stay involved in this question of Pan Am 103. (The bombing of Pan Am 103 was intended to strike drug enforcement agents of the United States, in reprisal for their aggressive efforts.)<br><br>As further evidence of his deep infiltration of terrorist circles, occasionally Dr. Fuisz pointed to photographs on his wall that showed individuals engaged in social activities at private homes. He said they were some of the "most famous terrorists in the Middle East," to use his words. Obliquely he told me they might be household names in the United States.<br><br>Dr. Fuisz asked for my help as a congressional staffer because he said he had a problem. After testifying before a congressional committee about an American company that supplied Iraq with SCUD mobile missile launchers, he complained of being seriously harassed in lawsuits and by the U.S. Internal Revenue Service. Efforts by his attorneys to stop this harassment had been answered with warnings from the highest levels that he should never have talked about U.S. arms supplies to Iraq, and that he should stop trying to contact families tied to Pan Am 103.<br><br>In fact, this was the context for how the Pan Am bombing came up in our conversation. He said to me, gosh, [note to MEIB: he used much stronger language and profanities that I did not think would be appropriate for a deposition] I could be providing so much more information about Middle Eastern terrorists, except the United States government doesn't want anybody talking about Syria. Then he jumped into the Lockerbie case by way of example of unsolved bombing cases that he said has the immediate capability to resolve. He complained that he was getting shafted for trying to assist a cause that American leaders profess to care very much about. In essence, he insisted the messenger was getting shot for delivering the message.<br><br>Dr. Fuisz made it very clear that he knows a great deal of insider knowledge about this case. Because of his Syrian ties, he told me he "was first on the ground in the investigation," to use his words. At one point, I said to him, "Oh yeah, everybody knows Syria did it, and the U.S. repaid them for supporting us during the Iraqi War by shifting the blame to Libya."<br><br>Immediately he cut me off.<br><br>"Susan ‚ Do you understand the difference between a primary source and a secondary source? Those people in Virginia are analysts. They're reading reports from the field, but they don't have first-hand contact with events as they're happening on the ground. Or first hand knowledge about what's taking place. So they don't actually know it, even if they think they do."<br><br>"I know it, Susan. I know it. That's the difference. Because of my Syria contacts, I was the first on the ground in the investigation. I was there. They're reading my reports." (His emphasis. Then he laughed sarcastically.) "In this case, they're reading them and destroying them." (And he threw up his hands.)<br><br>He continued on:<br><br>"Susan, if the (United States) government would let me, I could identify the men behind this attack today. I could do it right now. You want a police line up? I could go into any crowded restaurant of 200 people, and pick out these men."<br><br>"I can identify them by face, by name." He started gesticulating, and counting off on his fingers. "I can tell you the address where they work, and what time they arrive at their office in the morning. I can tell you what time they go to lunch, what kind of restaurants they go to, and what time they leave their offices to go home for the day. I can tell you their home addresses, the names of their wives if they're married, the names and ages of all their children. I can tell you about their girlfriends. I can even tell you what type of prostitutes they like."<br><br>"And you know what, Susan? You won't find this restaurant anywhere in Libya. No, you will only find this restaurant in Damascus. I didn't get that from any report, Susan." Dr. Fuisz started shaking his head. "I got it because I was investigating on the ground, and I know. Do you understand what I'm saying to you now? I know!"<br><br>To which I answered. "For God's sakes tell me, and I'll get my boss to protect you."<br><br>Then he got really mad. "No, no ‚ It's so crazy. I'm not even allowed to tell you, and you're a congressional staffer." Then he repeated his story about the Terex lawsuit against both him and New York Times reporter Seymour Hirsch, (the famous Pulitzer Prize winner), whose only crime was reporting Dr. Fuisz testimony at the congressional hearing. <br><br>This was how I learned that Dr. Fuisz is covered by the Secrets Act, which severely restricts his ability to communicate information about Pan Am 103. Though he says freely that he knows first hand that Libya was not involved in any capacity whatsoever, it's my understanding that he can provide no further details regarding his part in the investigation, or details identifying the true criminals in this case.<br><br>This is tragic on two accounts. First, the accused Libyans are effectively denied the right to a fair trial where they might bring forth witnesses in their own defense, which could immediately exonerate them of all charges. And secondly, the families are denied the ability to close this terrible wound, and experience the healing that would be gained from discovering the complete truth and facts surrounding this case.<br><br>On both accounts, I cannot be silent. I suspect my disclosure will grieve the families with the horrible revelation that U.S. government officials have behaved so cynically and despicably as to withhold evidence in this case. And yet such a cynical and desperate act must be condemned by civilized society. I dare say Libya is entitled to financial compensation for the economic harassment her people have endured because of these blatantly false accusations, and the deliberate efforts to mislead potential judges, and victimize potential witnesses by a policy of aggressive harassment and punishment for speaking out. Meanwhile, the true culprits have literally gotten away with murder.<br><br>For shame on all of you!<br><br>This ends my deposition.<br><br>Signed this 4th Day of December, 1998 In the presence of a notary public.<br><br>(Lindauer's signature and the crest of the notary stamp)<br><br>****<br>See: <!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.leftist.org/haightspeech/archives/000155.html">www.leftist.org/haightspe...00155.html</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br>-- for a crisp example (not that anyone needs one) of a zealous rightwing character-assassination blog-attack on Landauer as an 'Enemy of the State' re: US charges against her, allegedly from official documents acquired by The Smoking Gun, including, "... meeting with agents of the Iraqi Intelligence Service, traveling to Iraq as their guest, accepting a task from them, and accepting cash payments in various amounts.<br><br>"That constitutes material support of an enemy government, a government that was actively engaged in training, financing, and facilitating acts of terrorism all over the world. People died in those terrorist acts, many of them Americans." -- Anne Haight, Haight Speech (2004)<br><br>(Haight shows typical raving-right hostility based entirely on innuendo and unsubstantiated allegations, even parroting the favorite divide-and-conquer Bush Inc. meme that 'Democrats can't be trusted in government.')<br><br>But thankfully, a VERY intelligent, poised poster replies with a sensitive and logical response to contrast Haight's emotional tirade:<br><br>--quote--<br>A few things.<br><br>Susan Lindauer is accused, not guilty. Until a court of law finds her guilty of the things mentioned in the TSG documents, she should be considered innocent.<br><br>Secondly, she's accused of accepting money from a country listed under the export administration act as countries knowingly supporting terrorism, without reporting it to the appropriate instances, and also of conspiring with people who gave information about iraqi defectors to the iraqi government.<br><br>With regards to the first accusation, at the time she received that payment (in 2002), the EAC had lapsed (in late 2001), reverting export controls to emergency powers enacted by the president, which are a lot vaguer, and which she might not have violated.<br><br>As for the second accusation, the documents have zero evidence for that. There is no evidence whatsoever that she actively helped people pass information about iraqi defectors to the iraqi government. It is also not necessarily treasonous to do that, unless those iraqi defectors were helping the US government (which after the iraq war has become clear they weren't, since none of their wmd claims have held true).<br><br>She is not accused in those documents of giving information that could harm the united states to the iraqi's. Now, she got paid, so she must have done something, but they don't know what, so again, she should have the benefit of the doubt.<br><br>Anyway, she could very well be telling the truth. That iraq hired her to try to keep war from happening. That wouldn't have been a treasonous thing, unless it's treasonous to try to avoid the death of your fellow countrymen in all-out war.<br><br>To me this could go two ways, either she did sell out the US government, in which case they'll have to provide some actual evidence that she did (after all, a fair trial is a human right). Or this is a political character assassination. She stepped on the wrong toes, and now they're out to get her. It happens all the time, in all countries, and the press is most often very willing to cooperate in exchange for insider info. Both cases would explain her agitation, in the first it would caused by guilt and fear, in the second by anger and indignation.<br><br>Posted by: Joeri at March 30, 2004 08:29 AM <br>****<br>Comment -- Apparently, the US COULDN'T actually pull-off a fair trial, and since they couldn't shut-her-up or erase the waves she created, they had to discredit her -- easily done with all the resources of state to frame-her as a paranoid-delusional psychotic.<br><br>What's one-more victim (according to their defunct thinking)added to the what, 20, 30 million dead and untold hundreds of million rendered homeless, injured, criminalized, tortured, sick, and starving, collateral damage re: the west's postwar neocolonial, imperialist racketeering scams?<br><br>Lindaeur and uncounted other victims like her are PRECISELY why we can't afford to remain ambivalent and detached or uninvolved in the struggle for truth and justice. There have been so many articles and topics in the last several days that make me reflect on how appropriate Stan Goff's recently posted article is on why we, thinking/feeling/concerned people need to create new political ideas and strategies outside the box (and across the line), and properly bury the democratic party as an obsolete, coopted monstrous FUBAR miscarriage (my description) in order to create a true opposition of citizens who refuse to be marginalized, divided, compromised, or diverted from realizing the true power and potential of We, The People.<br><br>After all, the people shouldn't be afraid of their government; The government should be afraid of its People.<br><br>Starman<br> <p></p><i></i>
by Project Willow » Thu Feb 16, 2006 7:20 pm 
