De aanslagen van 9/11 (2001) werden niet door Al Qaida georganiseerd, iedereen die de officiële lezing nog steeds gelooft kan hiervan overtuigd worden mits deze enige tijd steekt in het lezen van rapporten en onderzoeken door
onafhankelijke organisaties, of door verklaringen van deskundigen, politeagenten en brandweermensen >> deze
aanslagen werden minstens gepleegd met medeweten en organisatie van
de federale overheid van de VS…….

Lauren
Guyénot schreef een artikel voor The Unz Review, dat door mij werd
overgenomen van Information Clearing House (ICH). Hierin betoogt hij dat
Israël de grote dader is achter de 9/11 aanslagen in 2001, uiteraard
met de toevoeging dat e.e.a niet mogelijk was zonder de hulp van de
VS overheid…..

Eén van de grootste bewijzen dat hier enorm is gelogen is wel het feit dat de vliegtuigen onmogelijk het instorten van de WTC torens konden hebben veroorzaakt…… Over die vliegtuigen gesproken: het was destijds onmogelijk om boven de stad te vliegen zonder dat de luchtmacht in zou grijpen en oh toevel die dag waren er geen straaljagers paraat om in te grijpen, daarnaast stellen ervaren piloten dat het bijzxonder moeilijk is om met een verkeersvliegtuig zo precies de toren in te vliegen (de piloten zoude de daders zijn geweest die trainig hadden gekregen in kleine vliegtuigen, maar die niet eens wisten hoe te moeten landen…)

Moet
wel opmerken dat Gyénot vooral Israël ziet als het land dat het
meest heeft geprofiteerd van deze aanslag, echter daar ben ik het
niet mee eens, immers de werkelijke grote profiteur van deze
aanslagen is de VS zelf en daarmee bedoel ik ook het Pentagon en de
rest van het militair-industrieel complex. De oorlog tegen terreur
deed de kassa’s van de wapenindustrie hard rinkelen, terwijl
het instorten van de Sovjet-Unie er op z’n zachts gezegd voor zorgde dat de winsten
van die industrie in de tien voorgaande jaren onder druk stonden…. Als gevolg van 9/11 kreeg het Pentagon er fiks wat geld bij, terwijl de geheime diensten (meer dan 25 in de VS!!) extra geld en bevoegdheden kregen…….

Bovendien was oorlog voeren, het ultieme
gevolg van die aanslagen (zoals de illegale oorlogen tegen Afghanistan
en Irak), ook een garantie voor extra geld in de kluizen van de
oliemaatschappijen (immers de koersen van oliemaatscfhappijen gaan dan omhoog), die daarnaast zelfs toestemming kregen voor het
winnen van olie op niet eerder geziene plekken (en dan bedoel ik niet alleen in Irak), gevolgd door de
peperdure en milieu-verrampenerende schaliegas, en -oliewinning)…. 

George W. Bush, destijds president,
stond in de peilingen over zijn populariteit lager dan
in vele decennia was gezien bij een zittende president, 9/11, de oorlog tegen terreur en de illegale oorlog tegen Afghanistan zorgden ervoor dat zijn populariteit als een speer de lucht inging……

Voorts verdween op 11 september 2001 een fiks deel van de VS
overheidsschuld, daar bepaalde servers in het WTC werden
vernietigd….. Dit nog naast het verdwijnen van een flinke voorraad goud…… Me dunkt alles bij elkaar fikse belangen voor de VS
zelf……

Al is het wel zo dat naast andere belangrijke figuren in Israël, ook Netanyahu blij was met de aanslag, daar de VS nu wist wat het betekende terreur op eigen grondgebioed te hebben (al had men daar al veel eerder meerdere terreuraanslagen), terwijl Israël al decennia te maken had met terreuraanslagen (vooral zelf uitgevoerd tegen het verdrukte Palestijnse volk…)…. Netanyahu stelde dan ook dat dit de banden tussen de twee landen verder zou versterken……. Het is wel zeker dat Israël, in de vorm van de Mossad, de geheime dienst van dat land, heeft meegeholpen aan de aanslagen…… Moet je nagaan: na de aanslagen beschuldigde men de Palestijnen er onterecht van feest te hebben gevierd n.a.v. die aanslagen….. (in New York werden 5 Joodse Israëliërs betrapt die feestvierden terwijl ze aan de overkant van een rivier de rokende puinhopen bekeken van de Twin Towers….)

Bij de aanslagen op het
WTC zouden 3.000 mensen zijn omgekomen, echter in de ‘war on terror’ die
de Bush administratie daarna ontketende zijn minstens 2 miljoen mensen
omgekomen en hebben de grote wapenfabrikanten en die van vliegend-,
varend- en rollend oorlogstuig zich helemaal scheel verdiend…… Dit
nog naast de zoals gezegd enorme budgetverhogingen voor leger en geheime diensten,
waar de laatsten ook nog eens veel meer bevoegdheden kregen, o.a.
middels de Patriot Act, die nu weer in het nieuws is daar een federale
rechter heeft bepaald dat het bespioneren van VS burgers illegaal is, dit bespioneren werd geopenbaard
door Edward Snowden in 2013…..*

Kritiek en weerlegging van de leugens over de aanslagen van 9/11 worden gezien als een complottheorieën, echter het echte complot is juist het neerhalen van de torens** middels deze ‘aanslagen’ en de aanslag op het Pentagon waarvan het vliegtuig niet werd gevonden…. Een ander vliegtuig dat gekaapt was, zou elders in een natuurgebied zijn neergestort, maar ook daarvan werd geen spoor gevonden…….
 

Lees het uitgebreide artikel van Guyénot, het is meer dan de moeite
waard en geeft ten overvloede nog eens aan dat 9/11 een false flag
operatie was ten dienste van wat mij betreft vooral de VS!! (vergeet
niet dat Osama bin Laden bij herhaling stelde dat Al Qaida niet
betrokken was bij deze aanslagen, terwijl terreurgroepen als Al Qaida
maar al te graag de verantwoording opeisen van geslaagde aanslagen,
zelfs als ze er niets mee te maken hebben….. Niet voor niets werd
Osama bin Laden onmiddellijk vermoord door speciale VS (terreur) commando’s toen men hem aantrof in Pakistan, het was uiteraard
niet de bedoeling dat bin Laden uit de school zou klappen tijdens een proces….

9/11
Was an Israeli JobHow
America was neoconned into World War IVBy
Laurent Guyénot

Technical
impossibilities

September
13, 2020 “Information
Clearing House”
–  Thanks to courageous investigators, many anomalies in the
official explanation of the events of 9/11 were posted on the
Internet in the following months, providing evidence that this was a
false flag operation, and that Osama bin Laden was innocent, as he
repeatedly declared in the Afghan and Pakistani press and on Al
Jazeera.[1] The proofs of this appalling fraud have been accumulating
ever since, and are now accessible to anyone willing to spend a few
hours of research on the Web. (Although, while preparing this
article, I noticed that Google is now making access to that research
more difficult than it was five years ago, artificially prioritizing
anti-conspiracy sites.)

For
example, members of Architects
and Engineers for 9/11 Truth have demonstrated that it was
impossible for plane crashes and jet fuel fires to trigger the
collapse of the Twin Towers. Even Donald
Trump understood this. In fact, speaking of “collapse” is
perhaps misleading: the towers literally exploded, pulverizing
concrete and projecting pieces of steel beams weighing several
hundred tons hundreds of meters laterally at high speeds. The
pyroclastic
dust that immediately flooded through the streets, not unlike the
dust from a volcano, indicates a high temperature mixture of hot
gasses and relatively dense solid particles, an impossible phenomenon
in a simple collapse. It is also impossible that WTC7,
another skyscraper (47 stories), which had not been hit by a plane,
collapsed into its own footprint at near free-fall speed, unless by
“controlled demolition.”

Testimonies
of firefighters recorded shortly after the events describe
sequences of explosions just before the “collapse”, well below
the plane impact. The presence of molten metal in the wreckage up to
three weeks after the attack is inexplicable except by the presence
of incompletely burned explosives. Firefighter Philip Ruvolo
testified before Étienne Sauret’s camera for his film Collateral
Damages
(2011): “You’d get down below and you’d see molten steel—molten
steel running down the channelways, like you were in a foundry—like
lava.”

Aviation
professionals have also reported impossibilities in the behavior
of the planes. The charted speeds of the two aircraft hitting the
Twin Towers, 443 mph and 542 mph, exclude these aircraft being Boeing
767s, because these speeds are virtually impossible near ground
level. In the unlikely event such speeds could be attained without
the aircraft falling apart, flying them accurately into the towers
was mission impossible, especially by the amateur pilots blamed for
the hijacking. Hosni
Mubarak, a former pilot, said he could never do it. (He is not
the only head of state to have voiced his doubts: Chavez
and Ahmadinejad
are among them.) Recall that neither of the black boxes of the
jetliners was ever found, an incomprehensible situation.

And
of course, there are the obvious anomalies of Shanksville and
Pentagon crash sites: no plane or credible plane debris can be seen
on any of the numerous photos easily available.

Inside
Job or Mossad Job?

Among
the growing number of Americans who disbelieve the official version
of the 9/11 attacks, two basic theories are in competition: I called
them “inside job” and “Mossad job”. 

The first one is the
dominant thesis within the so-called 9/11 Truth movement, and blames
the American government, or a faction within the American Deep State.
The second one claims that the masterminds were members of a powerful
Israeli network deeply infiltrated in all spheres of power within the
US, including media, government, military and secret services.

This
“Mossad job” thesis has been gaining ground since Alan Sabrosky,
a professor at the U.S. Army War College and the U.S. Military
Academy, published in July 2012 an
article entitled “Demystifying 9/11: Israel and the Tactics of
Mistake”, where he voiced his 

conviction that September 11^th
was “a classic Mossad-orchestrated operation.”

We
can notice from the outset that incriminating Israelis or Arabs are
both “outside job” theories (in fact, they are mirror images of
each other, which is understandable in light of what Gilad Atzmon
explains about Jewish “projected guilt”).[2] Before even looking
at the evidence, “outside job” sounds more credible that “inside
job”. There is something monstrous in the idea that a government
can deceive and terrorize its own citizens by killing thousands of
them, just for starting a series of wars that are not even in the
nation’s interest. By comparison, a foreign power attacking the
U.S. under the false flag of a third power almost seems like fair
play. Indeed suspicion of Israel’s role should be natural to anyone
aware of the reputation of the Mossad as: “Wildcard. Ruthless and
cunning. Has capability to target U.S. forces and make it look like a
Palestinian/Arab act,” in the words of a report of the U.S. Army
School for Advanced Military Studies quoted
by the Washington
Times,
September 10^th,
2001 — the day before the attacks.

This
is an important point, because it raises the question of how and why
the 9/11 Truth movement has been led to endorse massively the
outrageous “inside job” thesis without even considering the more
likely thesis of an attack by a foreign power acting under an Islamic
false flag—and what foreign power but Israel would do that?

Of
course, the two dissenting theses do not necessarily exclude each
other; at least, no one incriminating Israel denies that corrupted
elements from the American administration or deep state were
involved. The “passionate
attachment” between Israel and the U.S. has been going on for
decades, and 9/11 is one of its monstruous offsprings.

I
can think of no better symbol of that reality than the marriage of
Ted and Barbara
Olson. Ted Oslon, after having defended Bush in the disputed 2000
election, had been rewarded with the post of Solicitor General (he
also defended Dick Cheney when he refused to submit to Congress
Enron-related documents). Barbara was a famous CNN reporter, but
before that, she was born Barbara Kay Bracher of Jewish parents,
educated at Yeshiva University School of Law, and hired by the legal
firm WilmerHale, of which Jamie Gorelick, a future member of the 9/11
Commission, was also a member, and whose clients include powerful
Israeli firms like Amdocs, a digital communication company charged
with spying for
Israel in the United States. On September 11, 2001, Barbara Olson
alledgedly was on flight AA77, from which she made two telephone
calls to her husband. Her calls were reported on CNN in the
afternoon, and contributed to crystallize some details of the
official story, such as the “box cutters” used as only weapons by
the hijackers. Repeatedly invited on television shows after 9/11, Ted
Olson frequently contradicted himself when questioned about the calls
from his wife. In a 2006 report, the FBI identified only one call
from Barbara Olson, and it was an unconnected call lasting 0 seconds.
Like all other reported phone calls from desperate passengers
(including the famous “Hi, Mom. This is Mark Bingham”), Barbara’s
call was simply impossible, because the technology required to make
high-altitude phone calls was not developed until 2004.[3]

9/11
was made possible by an alliance between secret worshippers of Israel
and corrupted American elements. The question is: who, of the two,
were the masterminds of this incredibly daring and complex operation,
and for what “higher purpose”?

Another
question is: why do those who keep repeating as a mantra “9/11
was an inside job” ignore totally the compelling evidence
pointing to Israel? In other words, to what extent do they constitute
a “controlled opposition” intended to cover up for Israel? Asking
this type of question does not mean suspecting anyone who defends an
erroneous or incomplete theory of being a hypocrite. Most people
defending one theory or the other do so sincerely, based on the
information to which they have access. I have myself been a believer
in the official theory for 7 years, and in the “inside job”
theory for 2 years, before progressively moving on to the present
argument from 2010. On the other hand, we can assume that those who
lead the public into error on a long term are not just mistaken but
lying. In any case, it is legitimate to investigate the background of
opinion makers, and when they are caught lying or distorting the
truth, we can speculate on their motivation. I will come back to this
issue at the end of the article.

The
dancing Israelis

Researchers
who believe Israel orchestrated 9/11 cite the behavior of a group of
individuals who have come to be known as the “dancing Israelis”
since their arrest, though their aim was to pass as “dancing
Arabs.” Dressed in ostensibly “Middle Eastern” attire, they
were seen by various witnesses standing on the roof of a van parked
in Jersey City, cheering and taking photos of each other with the WTC
in the background, at the very moment the first plane hit the North
Tower. The suspects then moved their van to another parking spot in
Jersey City, where other witnesses saw them deliver the same
ostentatious celebrations.

One
anonymous call to the police in Jersey City, reported the same day by
NBC News, mentioned “a white van, 2 or 3 guys in there. They
look like Palestinians and going around a building. […] I see the
guy by Newark Airport mixing some junk and he has those sheikh
uniforms. […] He’s dressed like an Arab.” The police soon
issued the following BOLO alert (be-on-the-look-out) for a “Vehicle
possibly related to New York terrorist attack. White, 2000 Chevrolet
van with New Jersey registration with ‘Urban Moving Systems’ sign
on back seen at Liberty State Park, Jersey City, NJ, at the time of
first impact of jetliner into World Trade Center. Three individuals
with van were seen celebrating after initial impact and subsequent
explosion.”

By
chance, the van was intercepted around 4 pm, with five young men
inside: Sivan and Paul Kurzberg, Yaron Shmuel, Oded Ellner, and Omer
Marmari. Before any question was asked, the driver, Sivan Kurzberg,
burst out: “We are Israelis. We are not your problem. Your problems
are our problems. The Palestinians are your problem”.The Kurzberg
brothers were formally identified as Mossad agents. All five
officially worked for a moving company (a classic cover for
espionage) named Urban Moving Systems, whose owner, Dominik Otto
Suter, fled the country for Tel Aviv on September 14.[4]

This
event was first reported the day after the attacks by journalist
Paulo
Lima in the New Jersey newspaper The
Bergen Record,
based on “sources close to the investigation” who were convinced
of the suspects’ foreknowledge of the morning’s attacks: “It
looked like they knew what was going to happen when they were at
Liberty State Park”.The 579-page FBI
report on the investigation that followed (partially declassified
in 2005) reveals several important facts. First, once developed, the
photos taken by the suspects while watching the North Tower on fire
confirm their attitudes of celebration: “They smiled, they hugged
each other and they appeared to ‘high five’ one another”. To
explain their contentment, the suspects said they were simply happy
that, thanks to these terrorist attacks, “the United States will
take steps to stop terrorism in the world”. Yet at this point,
before the second tower was hit, most Americans believed the crash
was an accident. The five Israelis were found connected to another
company called Classic International Movers, which employed five
other Israelis arrested for their contacts with the nineteen presumed
suicide hijackers. In addition, one of the five suspects had called
“an individual in South America with authentic ties to Islamic
militants in the middle east”. Finally, the FBI report states that
the “The vehicle was also searched by a trained bomb-sniffing dog
which yielded a positive result for the presence of explosive
traces”.

After
all this incriminating evidence comes the most puzzling passage of
the report: its conclusion that “the FBI no longer has any
investigative interests in the detainees and they should proceed with
the appropriate immigration proceedings”. In fact, a letter
addressed to the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service, dated
September 25, 2001, proves that, less than two weeks after the
events, the FBI federal headquarter had already decided to close the
investigation, asking that “The U.S. Immigration and Naturalization
Service should proceed with the appropriate immigration proceedings”.
The five “dancing Israelis”, also known as “the high fivers”,
were detained 71 days in a Brooklyn prison, where they first refused,
then failed, lie detector tests. Finally, they were quietly returned
to Israel under the minimal charge of “visa violation.” Three of
them were then invited on an Israeli TV talk show in November 2001,
where one of them ingenuously declared: “Our
purpose was simply to document the event.”

The
Israeli spy network

The
five “dancing Israelis,” the only suspects arrested on the very
day of the 9/11 attacks, were just the tip of an iceberg. In
September 2001, the federal police were busy dismantling the largest
Israeli spy network ever uncovered on American soil. In the summer
preceding the attack, the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) compiled a
report which would be revealed to the public by the Washington
Post on
November 23^rd,
2001, followed by a Carl
Cameron’s four-part documentary broadcast on Fox News from
December 11^th,
2001. On March 14^th,
2002, an article in French newspaper Le
Monde
signed by Sylvain Cypel also referred to the report, shortly before
the French magazine Intelligence
Online
made it fully
accessible on the Internet.[5] It said that 140 Israeli spies,
aged between 20 and 30, had been arrested since March 2001, while 60
more were arrested after September 11. 

Generally posing as art
students, they visited at least “36 sensitive sites of the
Department of Defense.” “A majority of those questioned have
stated they served in military intelligence, electronic signal
intercept, or explosive ordnance units. Some have been linked to
high-ranking officials in the Israeli military. One was the son of a
two-star general, one served as the bodyguard to the head of the
Israeli Army, one served in a Patriot mission unit.” Another, Peer
Segalovitz, officer in the 605 Battalion of the Golan Heights,
“acknowledged he could blow up buildings, bridges, cars, and
anything else that he needed to.”[6]

Of
special interest is the mention that “the Hollywood, Florida, area
seems to be a central point for these individuals.”[7] More than 30
out of the 140 fake Israeli students identified before 9/11 lived in
that city of 140,000 inhabitants. And this city also happens to be
the place where fifteen of the nineteen alleged 9/11 Islamist
hijackers had regrouped (nine in Hollywood, six in the vicinity),
including four of the five supposed to have hijacked Flight AA11.
What was the relationship between the Israeli spies and the Islamist
terrorists? We were told by mainstream
news that the former were monitoring the latter, but failed to
report suspicious activities of these terrorists to American
authorities. From such a presentation, Israel comes out clean, since
a spy agency cannot be blamed for not sharing information with the
country it is spying in. At worst, the Israeli Intelligence can be
accused of “letting it happen”—a guarantee of impunity. In
reality, the Israeli agents were certainly not just monitoring the
future “hijackers,” but financing and manipulating them, before
disposing of them. We know that Israeli Hanan Serfaty, who rented two
flats near Mohamed Atta, had handled at least $100,000 in three
months. And we also learned from the New
York Times
on February 19, 2009, that Ali al-Jarrah, cousin of the alleged
hijacker of Flight UA93 Ziad al-Jarrah, had spent twenty-five years
spying for the Mossad as an undercover agent infiltrating the
Palestinian resistance and Hezbollah.

Israeli
agents apparently appreciate operating under the cover of artists.
Shortly before September 11, a group of fourteen Jewish “artists”
under the name of Gelatin
installed themselves on the ninety-first floor of the north tower of
the World Trade Center. There, as a work of “street art,” they
removed a window and extended a wooden balcony. To understand what
role this piece of scaffolding may have played, it must be remembered
that the explosion supposedly resulting from the impact of the Boeing
AA11 on the North Tower took place between the ninety-second and the
ninety-eighth floors. With the only film of the impact on the North
Tower being that of the Naudet brothers, who are under suspicion for
numerous reasons, many researchers are convinced that no aircraft hit
this tower, and that the explosion simulating the impact was provoked
by pre-planted explosives inside the tower.

Floors
ninety-three to one hundred of the North Tower were occupied by Marsh
& McLennan, whose CEO was Jeffrey Greenberg, son of wealthy
Zionist (and financier of George W. Bush) Maurice Greenberg, who also
happens to be the owner of Kroll Inc., the firm in charge of security
for the entire World Trade Center complex on 9/11. The Greenbergs
were also the insurers of the Twin Towers and, on July 24, 2001, they
took the precaution of having the contract reinsured by competitors.
In November 2000, the board of directors of Marsh & McLennan was
joined by (Lewis) Paul Bremer, the chairman of the National
Commission on Terrorism, who, on September 11, 2001, two hours only
after the pulverization of the North Tower, would appear
on NBC to name bin Laden as prime suspect, perfectly calm as 400
of his employees are missing (295 will finally be declared dead). “It
is the day that will change our lives,” he said. “It is the day
when the war that the terrorists declared on the US [. . .] has been
brought home to the US.” In 2003, Bremer would be appointed
administrator of the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq to level
the Iraqi state to the ground and oversee the theft of almost a
trillion dollars intended for its reconstruction.

The
super-sayanim

With
Goldberg and Bremer, we have reached the upper level of the
conspiracy, comprising a number of influential Jewish personalities,
working inside and outside the U.S. government — super-sayanim,
so to speak. The most representative of those outside government is
Larry Silverstein, the real estate shark who, with his partner Frank
Lowy, leased the Twin Towers from New York City in the spring of
2001. The head of the New York Port Authority, who granted
Silverstein and Lowy the lease, was none other than Lewis Eisenberg,
another member of the United Jewish Appeal Federation and former
vice-president of AIPAC. It appeared that Silverstein had made a
disastrous deal, because the
Twin Towers had to be decontaminated for asbestos. The
decontamination process had been indefinitely postponed since the
1980s because of its cost, estimated at nearly $1 billion in 1989. In
2001, the New York Port Authority had been all too happy to shift
responsibility to Silverstein.

Immediately
after acquiring the Twin Towers, Silverstein renegotiated the
insurance contracts to cover terrorist attacks, doubling the coverage
to $3.5 billion, and made sure he would retain the right to rebuild
after such an event. After the attacks, he took his insurers to court
in order to receive double compensation, claiming that the two planes
were two separate attacks. After a long legal battle, he
pocketed $4.5 billion. Silverstein is a leading member of the
United Jewish Appeal Federation of Jewish Philanthropies of New York,
the biggest fundraiser for Israel (after the US government, which
pays about $3 billion per year in aid to Israel). Silverstein also
maintained “close ties with Netanyahu,” according to Haaretz
(November
21, 2001): “The two have been on friendly terms since
Netanyahu’s stint as Israel’s ambassador to the United Nations.
For years they kept in close touch. Every Sunday afternoon, New York
time, Netanyahu would call Silverstein.” Besides being a powerful
man, Larry is a lucky man: as
he explained in this interview, every morning of the week, he had
breakfast at the Windows
on the World
on top of the North Tower, but on September 11th, he had an
appointment with his dermatologist.

Accomplices
to the 9/11 false flag attack with strong Israeli connections should
also be tracked at the other end of the trajectory of the planes
reported to have crashed into the Twin Towers. Flights AA11 and UA175
took off from Logan Airport in Boston, which subcontracted their
security to International Consultants on Targeted Security (ICTS),
a firm based in Israel and headed by Menachem Atzmon, a treasurer
of the Likud. So did Newark Airport where flight UA93 reportedly took
off before crashing in Shanksville.

A
serious investigation would follow many other trails, such as the
Odigo instant messages received by employees at the WTC two hours
before the plane crashes, as reported by Haaretz
on
September 27^th,
2001. The first plane hit the WTC at the precise time announced,
“almost
to the minute,” admitted Alex Diamandis, vice-president of
Odigo, headquartered in Israel. Also disturbing is the behavior of
the American branch of Zim
Israel Navigational,
a maritime shipping giant 48% owned by the Jewish state (occasionally
used as a cover for the Israeli secret services), which moved its
offices from the WTC, along with its 200 employees, September 4^th,
2001, one week before the attacks —“like an act of God, we
moved”,
said
the CEO Shaul Cohen-Mintz when interviewed
by USA
Today,
November 17^th,
2001.

But
of course, none of these trails were ever pursued. That is because
the most powerful conspirators were at the highest level of the
Justice Department. Michael Chertoff was head of the Criminal
Division of the Department of Justice in 2001, and responsible, among
many other things, for securing the release of the Israeli agents
arrested before and after 9/11, including the “dancing Israelis.”
In 2003, this son of a rabbi and of a Mossad pioneer would be
appointed Secretary of Homeland Security, in charge of
counter-terrorism on the American soil, which allowed him to control
dissenting citizens and restrain access to the evidence under the
pretext of Sensitive Security Information.

Another
chief of the cover-up was Philip Zelikow, the executive director of
the 9/11 presidential Commission established in November 2002.
Zelikow is a self-styled specialist in the art of making “public
myths” by “‘searing’ or ‘molding’ events [that] take on
‘transcendent’ importance and, therefore, retain their power even
as the experiencing generation passes from the scene” (Wikipedia).
In December 1998, he co-signed an article for Foreign
Affairs
entitled “Catastrophic Terrorism,” in which he speculated on
what would have happened if the 1993 WTC bombing (already attributed
to bin Laden) had been done with a nuclear bomb: “An act of
catastrophic terrorism that killed thousands or tens of thousands of
people and/or disrupted the necessities of life for hundreds of
thousands, or even millions, would be a watershed event in America’s
history. It could involve loss of life and property unprecedented for
peacetime and undermine Americans’ fundamental sense of security
within their own borders in a manner akin to the 1949 Soviet atomic
bomb test, or perhaps even worse. … Like Pearl Harbor, the
event would divide our past and future into a before and after. The
United States might respond with draconian measures scaling back
civil liberties, allowing wider surveillance of citizens, detention
of suspects and use of deadly force.” This is the man who
controlled the governmental investigation on the 9/11 terror attacks.
Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton, who nominally led the commission,
revealed in their book Without
Precedent: The Inside Story of the 9/11 Commission (2006),
that the commission “was set up to fail” from the beginning.
Zelikow, they claim, had already written a synopsis and a conclusion
for the final report before the first meeting. He controlled all the
working groups, prevented them from communicating with each other,
and gave them as sole mission to prove the official story; Team 1A,
for example, was tasked to “tell the story of Al-Qaeda’s most
successful operation—the 9/11 attacks.”

A
tight control of mainstream media is perhaps the most delicate aspect
of the whole operation. I will not delve into that aspect, for we all
know what to expect from the MSM. For a groundbreaking argument on
the extent to which 9/11 was psy-op orchestrated by MSM, I recommend
Ace
Baker’s 2012 documentary 9/11
The Great American Psy-Opera, chapters
6, 7 and 8.

Machiavellian
meta-Zionists

If
we move up to the very highest level of the conspiracy, we find
ourselves in Tel Aviv. The preparation for 9/11 coincided with the
coming to power of Benjamin Netanyahu in 1996, followed by Ehud Barak
in July 1999, and Ariel Sharon in March 2001, who brought back
Netanyahu as minister of Foreign Affairs in 2002 (with Netanyahu
again becoming prime minister in 2009). It must be noted that both
Netanyahu and Ehud Barak were temporarily out of the Israeli
government in September 2001, just like Ben-Gurion at the time of
Kennedy’s assassination (read
my article on JFK). A few months before 9/11, Barak, a former
head of Israeli military intelligence, was “recruited” as a
consultant to a Mossad front company, SCP Partner, specializing in
security and located less than seven miles from Urban Moving
Systems.[8] One hour after the explosion of the North Tower, Barak
was on BBC World to point the finger at bin Laden (the first to
do so), and concluded: “It’s a time to launch an operational,
complete war against terror.”

As
for Netanyahu, we are not surprised to hear him boast, on CNN
in 2006, of having predicted in 1995 that, “if the West doesn’t
wake up to the suicidal nature of militant Islam, the next thing you
will see is militant Islam bringing down the World Trade Center.”
Netanyahu is exemplary of the ever closer “special relationship”
between the US and Israel, which started with Truman and blossomed
under Johnson. Netanyahu had lived, studied, and worked in the United
States from 1960 to 1978, between his 11^th
and his 27^th
year—except during his military service—and again after the age
of 33, when he was appointed deputy ambassador to Washington and then
permanent delegate to the United Nations. Netanyahu appeared
regularly on CNN in the early 1990s, contributing to the
transformation of the world’s leading news channel into a major
Zionist propaganda tool. His political destiny was largely planned
and shaped in the United States, under the supervision of those we
now call neoconservatives, and the only thing that distinguishes him
from them is that, for public relations reasons, he does not possess
American nationality.

“What’s
a neocon?” once asked Bush 43 to his father Bush 41, after more
than three years in the White House. “Do you want names, or a
description?” answered 41. “Description.” 

“Well,” said 41,
“I’ll give it to you in one word: Israel.”[9] That anecdote,
quoted by Andrew Cockburn, sums it up. The neoconservative movement
was born in the editorial office of the monthly magazine Commentary,
which had replaced the Contemporary
Jewish Record
in 1945 as the press organ of the American Jewish Committee. “If
there is an intellectual movement in America to whose invention Jews
can lay sole claim, neoconservatism is it,” wrote Gal
Beckerman in the Jewish
Daily Forward, January
6, 2006. “It is a fact that as a political philosophy,
neoconservatism was born among the children of Jewish immigrants and
is now largely the intellectual domain of those immigrants’
grandchildren.”

The
founding fathers of neoconservatism (Norman Podhoretz, Irving
Kristol, Donald Kagan, Paul Wolfowitz, Adam Shulsky) were
self-proclaimed disciples of Leo Strauss, a German Jewish immigrant
teaching at the University of Chicago. Strauss can be characterized
as a meta-Zionist in the sense that, while an ardent supporter of the
State of Israel, he rejected the idea that Israel as a nation should
be contained within borders; Israel must retain her specificity,
which is to be everywhere, he said in essence in his 1962 lecture
“Why
We Remain Jews.” Strauss would also approve of being called a
Machiavellian, for in his Thoughts
on Machiavelli, he
praised the “the intrepidity of his thought, the grandeur of his
vision, and the graceful subtlety of his speech” (p. 13).
Machiavelli’s model of a prince was Cesar Borgia, the tyrant who
after having appointed the cruel Ramiro d’Orco to subdue the
province of Romania, had him executed with utter cruelty, thus
reaping the people’s gratitude after having diverted their hatred
onto another. Machiavelli, writes Strauss, “is a patriot of a
particular kind: He is more concerned with the salvation of his
fatherland than with the salvation of his soul” (p. 10). And that
happens to be exactly what Jewishness is all about, according to
Jewish thinkers such as Harry Waton: “The Jews that have a deeper
understanding of Judaism know that the only immortality there is for
the Jew is the immortality in the Jewish people” (read
more here). As a matter of fact, in the
Jewish
World Review
of June 7, 1999, Michael Ledeen, a neocon and founding member of
the Jewish
Institute for National Security Affairs
(JINSA), assumed that Machiavelli must have been a “secret Jew,”
since “if you listen to his political philosophy you will hear
Jewish music.”

The
neoconservatives of the first generation originally positioned
themselves on the far left. Irving Kristol, one of the main editors
of Commentary, had long claimed to be a Trotskyist. It was
soon after the 1967 successful annexation of Arab territories by
Israel that the Straussians experienced their conversion to
right-wing militarism, to which they owe their new name. Norman
Podhoretz, editor-in-chief from 1960 to 1995, turned from anti-war
activist to defense budget booster in the early 70s. He gave the
following explanation in 1979: “American support for Israel
depended upon continued American involvement in international
affairs—from which it followed that an American withdrawal into the
kind of isolationist mood [. . .] that now looked as though it might
soon prevail again, represented a direct threat to the security of
Israel.” (Breaking Ranks, p. 336). Leading the U.S. into war
for the benefit of Israel is the essence of the Machiavellian
crypto-Zionists known deceptively as neoconservatives.

The
Project for a new (((American))) Century

The
story of how the neoconservatives reached the position of influence
they held under George W. Bush is a complicated one, which I can only
outline. They entered the state apparatus for the first time in the
baggage of Rumsfeld and Cheney, during president Ford’s cabinet
reshuffle known as the “Halloween Massacre,” following Nixon’s
resignation. When the Cold War calmed down after America evacuated
its troops from Vietnam in 1973, and the CIA produced reassuring
analyses of the USSR’s military capabilities and ambitions,
Rumsfeld (as Secretary of Defense) and Cheney (as Chief of Staff)
persuaded Ford to appoint an independent committee, known as Team B,
to revise upward the CIA estimates of the Soviet threat, and
reactivate a war attitude in public opinion, Congress, and
Administration. Team B was chaired by Richard Pipes and co-chaired by
Paul Wolfowitz, both introduced by Richard Perle.

During
the Democratic parenthesis of the Carter presidency (1976–80), the
neoconservatives worked at unifying the largest number of Jews around
their policies, by founding the Jewish Institute for National
Security Affairs (JINSA), which became the second-most powerful
pro-Israel lobby after AIPAC. According to its “mission
statement”, it is “dedicated to educating Congressional,
military and civilian national security decision-makers on American
defense and strategic interests, primarily in the Middle East, the
cornerstone of which is a robust U.S.-Israeli security cooperation.”
In 1980, the neocons were rewarded by Ronald Reagan for their support
by a dozen posts in national security and foreign policy: Richard
Perle and Douglas Feith to the Department of Defense; Richard Pipes
at the National Security Council; Paul Wolfowitz, Lewis “Scooter”
Libby, and Michael Ledeen in the State Department. They helped Reagan
escalate the Cold War, showering billions of dollars on the
military-industrial complex.

The
long term planning of 9/11 probably started then. Isser Harel,
founder of Israeli secret services (Shai in 1944, Shin Bet
in 1948, Mossad until 1963) is reported as prophesizing in 1980, in
an interview with Christian Zionist Michael Evans, that Islamic
terrorism would end up hitting America in their “phallic symbol”:
“Your biggest phallic symbol is New York City and your tallest
building will be the phallic symbol they will hit”.[10]  (A
whole article would be needed to document and explain the revival of
the Jewish gift of apocalyptic prophecy in recent decades.)

In
1996, during the Clinton years, the neoconservatives threw all their
weight into their ultimate think tank, the Project for the New
American Century (PNAC), directed by William Kristol and Robert
Kagan. PNAC recommended taking advantage of the defeat of communism
to reinforce American hegemony by preventing the emergence of any
rival. Their Statement
of Principles vowed
to extend the current Pax
Americana,
which entailed “a military that is strong and ready to meet both
present and future challenges.” In its September 2000 report
entitled Rebuilding
America’s Defenses,
PNAC anticipated that US forces must become “able to rapidly deploy
and win multiple simultaneous large-scale wars.” This required a
profound transformation, including the development of “a new family
of nuclear weapons designed to address new sets of military
requirements.” Unfortunately, according to the authors of the
report, “the process of transformation […] is likely to be a long
one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event—like a new Pearl
Harbor.” It is certainly no coincidence that the three-hour-long
blockbuster Pearl
Harbor was
released in the summer 2001, conveniently entrenching the “New
Pearl Harbor” meme into the minds of millions.

PNAC’s
architects played the American hegemony card by draping themselves in
the super-patriotic discourse of America’s civilizing mission. But
their duplicity is exposed in a document brought to public knowledge
in 2008: a report published in 1996 by the Israeli think tank
Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies (IASPS),
entitled A
Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm, written
specifically for the new Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu.
The team responsible for the report was led by Richard Perle, and
included Douglas Feith and David Wurmser, who figured the same year
among the signatories of PNAC. As its title suggests, the Clean
Break
report invited Netanyahu to break with the Oslo Accords of 1993,
which officially committed Israel to the return of the territories it
occupied illegally since 1967. The new prime minister should instead
“engage every possible energy on rebuilding Zionism” and reaffirm
Israel’s right to the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.

In
November 2000, Bush Jr. was elected under conditions that raised
protests of electoral fraud. Dick Cheney, who had directed his
campaign, named himself vice-president and introduced two dozens
neoconservatives in foreign policy key positions. The State
Department was entrusted to Colin Powell, but he was surrounded with
neocon aides such as David Wurmser. As National Security Adviser,
Condoleezza Rice, a specialist of Russia with no expertise in the
Middle East, was entirely dependent on her neocon adviser Philip
Zelikow. William Luti and Elliott Abrams, and later Eliot Cohen, were
also tasked with steering Rice. But it was mainly from within the
Defense Department under Donald Rumsfeld that the most influential
neocons were able to fashion US foreign and military policy. Richard
Perle occupied the crucial position of director of the Defense Policy
Board, responsible for defining military strategy, while Paul
Wolfowitz became the “soul of the Pentagon” as deputy secretary
with Douglas Feith as under secretary.

The
Hanukkah miracle to start WWIV

After
eight months in the presidency, Bush was confronted with the
“catastrophic event,” the “new Pearl Harbor” that PNAC had
wished for a year earlier. 9/11 was a real “Hanukkah
miracle” for Israel, commented Mossad chief Ephraim Halevy and
Israeli National Security Council chairman Uzi Dayan. Netanyahu
rejoiced: “It’s very good […] it will generate immediate
sympathy […], strengthen the bond between our two peoples, because
we’ve experienced terror over so many decades, but the United
States has now experienced a massive hemorrhaging of terror.” On
September 21, he published an op-ed in the New
York Post
entitled “Today, We Are All Americans,” in which he delivered his
favorite propaganda line: “For the bin Ladens of the world, Israel
is merely a sideshow. America is the target.” 

Three days later the
New
Republic
responded with a headline on behalf of the Americans: “We are all
Israelis now.” Americans experienced 9/11 as an act of hatred from
the Arab world, and they felt an immediate sympathy for Israel, which
the neoconservatives relentlessly exploited. One of the aims was to
encourage Americans to view Israel’s oppression of the Palestinians
as part of the global fight against Islamic terrorism.

It
was a great success. In the years preceding September 11, Israel’s
reputation had bottomed out; condemnations had been raining from
around the world for its policy of apartheid and colonization, and
its systematic war against Palestinian command structures. Increasing
numbers of American voices questioned the merits of the special
relationship between the United States and Israel. From the day of
the attacks, it was all over. As Americans now intended to fight Arab
terrorists to the death, they would stop demanding from Israel more
reasonable, proportionate retaliation against Palestinian suicide
bombers and rockets.

Instead,
the president’s speeches (written by neocon David Frum)
characterized the 9/11 attacks as the trigger for a world war of a
new type, one fought against an invisible enemy scattered throughout
the Middle East. First, vengeance must come not only against bin
Laden, but also against the state harboring him: “We will make no
distinction between those who committed these acts and those who
harbor them” (Sept. 11). Second, the war extends to the world: “Our
war on terror begins with Al Qaeda, but it does not end there. It
will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been
found, stopped and defeated” (Sept. 20). Third, any country that
does not support Washington will be treated as an enemy: “Either
you are with us, or you are with the terrorists” (Sept. 20).

In
an article in the Wall Street Journal dated November 20, 2001,
the neoconservative Eliot Cohen dubbed the war against terrorism as
“World War IV,” a framing soon echoed by other American Zionists
(the odd choice of the name WWIV rather than WWIII comes, I suspect,
from the neocons’ ethnocentric worldview, in which every world war
is a step toward Greater Israel; since one major step was
accomplished in 1967, the Cold War counts as WW3). In September 2004,
at a conference in Washington entitled “World War IV: Why We Fight,
Whom We Fight, How We Fight,” Cohen said: “The enemy in this war
is not ‘terrorism’ […] but militant Islam.” Like the Cold
War, the imminent world war, according to Cohen’s vision, has
ideological roots, will have global implications, and will last a
long time, involving a whole range of conflicts. The self-fulfilling
prophecy of a new World War centered in the Middle East has also been
popularized by Norman Podhoretz, in “How to Win World War IV”
(Commentary, February 2002), followed by a second article in,
“World War IV: How It Started, What It Means, and Why We Have to
Win,” (September 2004), and finally a book titled World War IV:
The Long Struggle Against Islamofascism (2007).[11]

The
hijacked conspiracy and the controlled opposition

In
the case of 9/11 as in the case of Kennedy, controlled opposition
operates on many levels, and many honest scholars now realize that
the 9/11 Truth movement itself is partly channeled by individuals and
groups secretly aiming at drawing suspicions away from Israel. Such
is certainly the case of the three young Jews (Avery, Rowe, and
Bermas) who directed the film Loose
Change
(2005), the most widely watched 9/11 conspiracy film since its first
version in 2005. They hitched their whole thesis on a comparison with
the never carried-out false flag project Operation Northwoods (timely
revealed to the public in May 2001 in James
Bamford’s book Body
of Secrets,
written with the support of former NSA director Michael Hayden, now
working for Michael Chertoff), but they failed to mention the attack
on the USS Liberty, a well-documented false flag attack by Israel on
its U.S. ally. 

They did not breathe a word about the
neoconservatives’ loyalty to Israel, and treat anyone who cited the
Israeli role in 9/11 as anti-Semitic. The same can be said of
Bermas’s more recent film Invisible
Empire (2010),
also produced by Alex Jones: a compilation of anti-imperialist
clichés focusing on the Bushs and the Rockefellers, without a single
hint of the (((Others))).

It
is interesting to note that the 9/11 scenario put forward by Loose
Change
had actually been prewritten by Hollywood: on the 4^th
of March, 2001, Fox
TV broadcast the first episode of the series The
Lone Gunmen, watched
by 13 million Americans. The plot is about computer hackers working
for a secret cabal within the U.S. government, who hijack a jet by
remote control with the intent to crash it into one of the Twin
Towers, while making it appear to have been hijacked by Islamic
terrorists. At the last seconds, the pilots manage to regain control
of the plane. The purpose of the failed operation was to trigger a
world war under the pretext of fighting terrorism. Truthers of the
“inside job” school fancy that this episode must have been
written by some whistleblower inside Fox. Unlikely!

There
is, of course, some truth in the “inside job” theory, as I said
at the beginning. Israel (in the wider sense) would not be able to
pull such an operation and get away with it, without complicity at
the highest level of U.S. government. How does that work? Pretty much
like for the Kennedy
assassination, if you consider that the country was then ruled by
its vice-president Dick Cheney, the president being a mere dummy (see
Lou Dubose and Jake Bernstein, Vice:
Dick Cheney and the Hijacking of the American Presidency, Random
House, 2006). In my book JFK-9/11,
I have proposed a plausible scenario of how Israel had in fact
hijacked a smaller false flag attack on the Pentagon fabricated by
the American Deep State, for the limited purpose of justifying the
overthrow of the Talibans in Afghanistan, a goal fully supported by
such “Great Gamers” as Zbigniew Brzezinski, but which didn’t in
itself interest the neocons.