Are Illegal Drugs, Money Laundering, Cruise Ships, and 9/11 Terrorists Connected?
And if so, does the connection involve a shady Republican money-man?
By Joseph Cannon on 8/14/2005, 11:44pm PT  

Guest bloged by Joesph Cannon

A little bird has chirped in my ear, telling me to look closer at the possible connection between shady Republican money-man Jack Abramoff and the 9/11 terrorists. Uncharacteristically cryptic, the bird said no more.

I knew about the Associated Press story (referenced here) which reported that Atta and company had hopped aboard a SunCruz casino ship on September 5, 2001. Abramoff owned SunCruz. He acquired the company under circumstances many consider strange --- so strange as to have resulted in his recent indictment. So strange as to involve the murder of the former owner, Konstantinos "Gus" Boulis.

The feds had long suspected that SunCruz ships have been used for money laundering, and perhaps even drug importation. The ships are beyond all regulation --- nothing stops criminals from operating them.

Al Qaida operatives have made many a strange visit to casinos --- visits that most investigators feel had more to do with criminal activity than with gambling.

So what further information was the little bird chirping about?

I suspect the answer has much to do with courageous FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds, who is legally restricted from revealing in public all that she found out during her stint as a translator.

Here is a snip from an Edmonds interview conducted last January:

You get to a point where it gets very complex, where you have money laundering activities, drug related activities, and terrorist support activities converging at certain points and becoming one. In certain points - and they (the intelligence community) are separating those portions from just the terrorist activities. And, as I said, they are citing "foreign relations" which is not the case, because we are not talking about only governmental levels. And I keep underlining semi-legit organizations and following the money. When you do that the picture gets grim. It gets really ugly.... I can tell that once, and if, and when this issue gets to be, under real terms, investigated, you will be seeing certain people that we know from this country standing trial; and they will be prosecuted criminally.

Elsewhere she has hinted that the true tale of the terrorists related to intelligence-gathering activities by semi-legitimate organizations. "When you have activities involving a lot of money, you have people from different nations involved.... It can be categorized under organized crime, but in a very large scale."

"You have [a] network of people who obtain certain information and they take it out and sell it to... whomever would be the highest bidder. Then you have people who would be bringing into the country narcotics from the East, and their connections. [It] is only then that you really see the big picture."

"And you see certain semi-legitimate organizations that may very well have a legit front, but with very criminal illegitimate activities --who start coming at you from these investigations."

Of course, we have Sibel Edmond's open letter to Thomas Kean, Chairman of the National Committee on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States: (Emphasis added.)

To this date the public has not been told of intentional blocking of intelligence, and has not been told that certain information, despite its direct links, impacts and ties to terrorist related activities, is not given to or shared with Counterterrorism units, their investigations, and countering terrorism related activities. This was the case prior to 9/11, and remains in effect after 9/11. If Counterintelligence receives information that contains money laundering, illegal arms sale, and illegal drug activities, directly linked to terrorist activities; and if that information involves certain nations, certain semi-legit organizations, and ties to certain lucrative or political relations in this country, then, that information is not shared with Counterterrorism, regardless of the possible severe consequences. In certain cases, frustrated FBI agents cited 'direct pressure by the State Department,' and in other cases 'sensitive diplomatic relations' is cited.

All of which brings us to the questions:

Was Mohammed Atta involved in drugs or money laundering? Al Qaida did make its home in a country whose only real exportable crop was the poppy flower.

Was SunCruz involved in drugs or money laundering? Federal investigators have looked into that very possibility. Gus Boulis cannot testify --- but we can be certain that Abramoff and Kidan wanted his ships very badly. For some reason.

Why have investigators gone to such lengths to hide the fact that Mohammed Atta entered this country before June 2000? Why was the DIA team which had uncovered his activities, and had placed his picture on an Al Qaida flow chart, told by higher-ups to ignore him, and even to cover his image with tape?