CAN WE EXCLUDE BEN-GURION / HIS ISRAELI GOVERNMENT FROM THE JFKA SUSPECTS?

[Paul Brancato]

William - we went back and forth about this 4 years ago. Like you I had to revisit everything, your current FBI report links included. The evidence that the Israelis were setting up to film the event is flimsy, whereas the evidence that they filmed and celebrated after it began is strong. They were clearly happy. The evidence of foreknowledge relies on one witness who says they were in place at 8am. Then there is the question of phone calls made to Jews who worked at the WTC. First, you’ve dropped your view on Al Franken admitting he got a warning call from Ed Koch, at least I hope so. That was definitely sarcasm. Can you imagine otherwise? He wrote that in his book. The developer Silverstein not being there because of a dentist appointment - hardly evidence. Jews who were called only cared about other Jews working there? We would have to do a careful study of all who showed up for work and all who didn’t, and literally question all those who didn’t. Otherwise it’s circumstantial, and very illogical. This effort to warn Jews on the morning of or night before needs to be thoroughly substantiated for it to have any validity, and it’s so darn farfetched and inherently anti-Semitic. Is there even agreement on how many Jews died? Have you gone through the list of names? 
 

[W. Niederhut]

Paul,

    I'm responding to your important detailed comment in red (below.)

Paul Brancato wrote:

William - we went back and forth about this 4 years ago.

Not sure which thread or discussion you're referencing here, Paul.  Link?   In general, I have been reluctant to comment on 9/11 on the JFKA forum, except in response to blatantly false claims posted by others.

Like you I had to revisit everything, your current FBI report links included.

Paul, please recall that I didn't start this thread.  I only posted some references and comments during the course of the thread to correct some disinformation.

The evidence that the Israelis were setting up to film the event is flimsy, whereas the evidence that they filmed and celebrated after it began is strong. They were clearly happy. The evidence of foreknowledge relies on one witness who says they were in place at 8am.

They said on Israeli television in November of 2001 that they were there to "document the event."  They appeared to be celebrating the WTC demolitions with cigarette lighters (in the FBI photos.) 

Their boss, Dominick Suter, fled the country after their arrest on 9/11.

Then there is the question of phone calls made to Jews who worked at the W.)stoTC. First, you’ve dropped your view on Al Franken admitting he got a warning call from Ed Koch, at least I hope so. That was definitely sarcasm. Can you imagine otherwise? He wrote that in his book.

See Ron Ecker's post (above) about the 9/11 Israeli Odigo message story.   Is it true?

The developer Silverstein not being there because of a dentist appointment

Larry Silverstein, apparently, skipped his daily breakfast meeting in the WTC on 9/11 because of a dermatology appointment.  That's all I know about that subject.

What I do know about Silverstein is that his buildings, WTC1, WTC2, and WTC7, were demolished by explosives on 9/11, after being hit by the two planes.  That scientific data is quite clear. 

Who put the explosives in the buildings?

Silverstein collected $4.5 billion in insurance, and no forensic arson investigation was ever conducted.

He was never interviewed by Phillip Zelikow's 9/11 Commission, nor were multiple witnesses who described serial explosions and liquefied steel "flowing like a foundry" during the demolitions of the Twin Towers.

Burning jet fuel cannot liquefy steel.  Period.

 

Edited July 12, 2023 by W. Niederhut

[Anthony Thorne]

W. Niederhut, thanks for the clip. I've seen it before, as it appears to be the only clip online with footage from the later Israeli TV interview of the young men. (There was also a British TV series that interviewed them, possibly the BBC or Channel 4).

I stand by my comment that researchers should be cautious about claiming that the men stated 'our purpose was to document the event'.

We see footage of the guys talking. We hear some intro music from the show, and the sound of the host chatting to them. After that, for whatever reason, we don't get to hear what they say and read any accompanying subtitles. Instead, we get our unknown narrator talking over the top of them. So we're left to guess if the translation is accurate, and whether the men said the attributed statement. Did they? I have no idea. At around 1:40 into the video, the narrator replays the clip twice where the audio track quotes the man as saying 'our purpose was to document the event', and the second replay of it is over footage of the guy saying maybe two syllables at most. So good luck finding where he actually said it.

Realistically, if there was a subtitled clip of the guy making the claim, and you could clearly hear him saying it, with all the words discernible, and subtitles at the bottom of the screen, you could take the footage to your nearest Jewish pal, or the Israeli embassy, or a local community TV outlet, play the clip, and say "Hey, what was this all about?". Then anyone watching it would have to debate or discuss or query the point, and uncomfortable questions might get asked. But this has never happened, and won't happen, because we can't hear the audio of what the guy is saying, and we just have to take the word of the narrator. So the 9/11 truth movement gets a tidbit thrown their way at them to keep everyone occupied and make everyone excited, but it's a piece of evidence that you can't use, can't quote, and can't actually show anyone else, because we have no way of clearly verifying the above. Funny how that works. You'd think that if the guy had made the comment on Israeli TV, and someone wanted to prove to us that he had made the comment on Israeli TV, they would just play us the clip, subtitled, so we could see and hear it for ourselves. But not here. 

Either way, aside from that statement, the rest of the evidence is on target. It's worth noting that researcher Ryan Dawson has given a much longer breakdown of the Israeli events of that day in his documentary work, and he very recently spent a few hours covering it all again for the Fresh and Fit podcast, a popular lad's lifestyle show on Rumble (which usually focuses on interviews with bikini-clad bimbos and wannabe rappers) where the hosts, more red-pilled than you'd expect, basically turned the show over to Dawson for three episodes and allowed him to detail the above to more than half a million people. The episodes are worth a listen, as Dawson made some FOIA requests of his own, connected the dots to some other news reports, and overall turned up way more to the story than what we'd heard before. FWIW, Dawson talks about the events of that day for a couple of hours, but from memory he also doesn't cite the 'document the event' claim in his breakdown of it.

Just a side note if my perspective on things isn't clear. I think both Paul and W. Niederhut are more on target than most with their observations, and I also think if you play devil's advocate and take the 'document the event' claim out of the breakdown cited above, everything else still hangs together. It's that one claim I'd suggest people be wary of.

Edited July 13, 2023 by Anthony Thorne

[W. Niederhut]

2 hours ago, Anthony Thorne said:

W. Niederhut, thanks for the clip. I've seen it before, as it appears to be the only clip online with footage from the later Israeli TV interview of the young men. (There was also a British TV series that interviewed them, possibly the BBC or Channel 4).

I stand by my comment that researchers should be cautious about claiming that the men stated 'our purpose was to document the event'.

We see footage of the guys talking. We hear some intro music from the show, and the sound of the host chatting to them. After that, for whatever reason, we don't get to hear what they say and read any accompanying subtitles. Instead, we get our unknown narrator talking over the top of them. So we're left to guess if the translation is accurate, and whether the men said the attributed statement. Did they? I have no idea. At around 1:40 into the video, the narrator replays the clip twice where the audio track quotes the man as saying 'our purpose was to document the event', and the second replay of it is over footage of the guy saying maybe two syllables at most. So good luck finding where he actually said it.

Realistically, if there was a subtitled clip of the guy making the claim, and you could clearly hear him saying it, with all the words discernible, and subtitles at the bottom of the screen, you could take the footage to your nearest Jewish pal, or the Israeli embassy, or a local community TV outlet, play the clip, and say "Hey, what was this all about?". Then anyone watching it would have to debate or discuss or query the point, and uncomfortable questions might get asked. But this has never happened, and won't happen, because we can't hear the audio of what the guy is saying, and we just have to take the word of the narrator. So the 9/11 truth movement gets a tidbit thrown their way at them to keep everyone occupied and make everyone excited, but it's a piece of evidence that you can't use, can't quote, and can't actually show anyone else, because we have no way of clearly verifying the above. Funny how that works. You'd think that if the guy had made the comment on Israeli TV, and someone wanted to prove to us that he had made the comment on Israeli TV, they would just play us the clip, subtitled, so we could see and hear it for ourselves. But not here. 

Either way, aside from that statement, the rest of the evidence is on target. It's worth noting that researcher Ryan Dawson has given a much longer breakdown of the Israeli events of that day in his documentary work, and he very recently spent a few hours covering it all again for the Fresh and Fit podcast, a popular lad's lifestyle show on Rumble (which usually focuses on interviews with bikini-clad bimbos and wannabe rappers) where the hosts, more red-pilled than you'd expect, basically turned the show over to Dawson for three episodes and allowed him to detail the above to more than half a million people. The episodes are worth a listen, as Dawson made some FOIA requests of his own, connected the dots to some other news reports, and overall turned up way more to the story than what we'd heard before. FWIW, Dawson talks about the events of that day for a couple of hours, but from memory he also doesn't cite the 'document the event' claim in his breakdown of it.

Just a side note if my perspective on things isn't clear. I think both Paul and W. Niederhut are more on target than most with their observations, and I also think if you play devil's advocate and take the 'document the event' claim out of the breakdown cited above, everything else still hangs together. It's that one claim I'd suggest people be wary of.

Thanks, Anthony.

I'm more familiar with the scientific research on the explosive demolitions of the WTC.

The piece of the 9/11 jigsaw puzzle relating to the arrest of five "dancing" Israelis, and the alleged Odigo warning, is interesting, but somewhat peripheral.

Another major piece of the 9/11 jigsaw puzzle has to do with the PNAC actors in the Bush-Cheney administration, including Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Feith, Condolezza Rice, et.al.

They, clearly, wanted a pretext for deposing Saddam Hussein and implementing the Wolfowitz Doctrine in the Middle East-- long before George W. Bush became the GOP Presidential nominee in 2000.

George W. Bush's Secretary of the Treasury, Paul O'Neill, published an interesting memoir, The Price of Loyalty, after Dubya fired him for opposing Cheney's 2003 tax cuts.  In the memoir, O'Neill reported that Rumsfeld was talking about invading Iraq as early as January of 2001, and was blathering about Saddam being involved in 9/11 immediately after the WTC demolition on 9/11.

Rumsfeld also told a reporter, at the time, that he had "never heard" of WTC7-- which is strange, because Rumsfeld had been Chairman of the Board of Smith Barney, which had its headquarters in WTC7.

Edited July 13, 2023 by W. Niederhut

[Anthony Thorne]

6 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

Another major piece of the 9/11 jigsaw puzzle has to do with the PNAC actors in the Bush-Cheney administration, including Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Feith, Condolezza Rice, et.al.

They, clearly, wanted a pretext for deposing Saddam Hussein and implementing the Wolfowitz Doctrine in the Middle East-- long before George W. Bush became the GOP Presidential nominee in 2000.

George W. Bush's Secretary of the Treasury, Paul O'Neill, published an interesting memoir, The Price of Loyalty, after Dubya fired him for opposing Cheney's 2003 tax cuts.  In the memoir, O'Neill reported that Rumsfeld was talking about invading Iraq as early as January of 2001, and was blathering about Saddam being involved in 9/11 immediately after the WTC demolition on 9/11.

Rumsfeld had sent a letter to (I think) William Colby in the year or so before Colby's death, asking for his feedback and possible endorsement of a military strategy Rumsfeld was fixated on at the time. The strategy was 'shock and awe' and in the letter I read that Colby had sent back to Rumsfeld, Colby essentially said "Yeah, that's great, thanks for filling me in Donald, it's definitely interesting." or polite words to that effect. The strategy team that Rumsfeld was working with later distributed a study covering the tactic that Rumsfeld was keen on. It's here.

http://www.dodccrp.org/files/Ullman_Shock.pdf

That document was published in October 1996. The plan to invade Iraq appears to have been floating around through the 90's, and Rumsfeld was likely keen on the tactic as he knew it would get a good workout in the future.

The first two names on the cover are James Wade and Harlan Ullman. Wade appears again below. A year before she died, Ullman was cited by DC Madam Deborah Palfrey as a regular customer. Go figure.

https://edition.cnn.com/2007/LAW/04/12/dc.madam/index.html

Quote

 

The alleged "D.C. madam" dropped a name in court documents filed Thursday, but the man named laughed at being accused of hiring the high-end escort service run by Deborah Jeane Palfrey.

Government prosecutors say Pamela Martin and Associates was actually a prostitution ring that Palfrey operated in the Washington area for 13 years. Palfrey denies that her business provided sexual services to its customers.

In her motion to reconsider appointment of counsel, Palfrey named Harlan K. Ullman as "one of the regular customers" of the business.

Ullman is one of the leading theorists behind the "shock and awe" military strategy that was associated with the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

"The allegations do not dignify a response," Ullman told CNN. "I'm a private, not a public, citizen. Any further questions are referred to my attorneys."

 

The full 9/11 story has a lot of deep rabbit holes, but I'd boil some of it - not all of it - down to the following. The requirement for a catalysing event, and plans to carry it out, were devised over the course of a few years at the very end of the 80's when various government and industry figures became extremely alarmed at the imminent drop in defense spending as the Cold War drew to a close. The trickle-down effect of diminished military technology investment was viewed as a potential national security crisis by insiders. The decision that 'something needs to be done' was conveyed within limited circles. People who could be convinced, were convinced. People who could be encouraged to help out for a big future financial reward were encouraged to do so. In a few instances, people who would ultimately need to be blackmailed, to encourage them to either help or to keep quiet, were potentially blackmailed. And people who were best kept out of the loop, and in the dark, were not told of what was being prepared. 

Prominent figures involved in the activities described in the above paragraph, took place in some of the annual American Assembly conferences in Washington from 1989 to 1991. Go through the books that the Assembly prepared for each gathering, and you'll see members from the Israeli security scene popping up in the first, and Wolfowitz and a lot of hawks gathering together for the final one. (The 1991 conference received funding from the armaments industry, btw). Wolfowitz put together his Defense Planning Guidance around the time of the final conference, and gave a talk giving a preview of what was on his mind.

I think some insiders knew that the future catalysing event would enable a reciprocal attack against a Middle Eastern target,. Some figures expected that target to just be Afghanistan. A deeper layer of participants felt that they could piggy back the event to direct a second attack against Iraq. The Afghanistan attack occurred not long after 9/11. The Iraq invasion took some insiders by surprise, and took the George W Bush admin a year and a half of extra effort to get off the ground. It's worth pondering whether some insiders knew the WTC buildings would be hit, and only a smaller circle knew that those buildings wouldn't be left standing.

If you want a name to place near the very top, try Norman Augustine. He was the former government insider who had reached an elevated position both in industry and as an advisor to government. He led the circles that started the panic in the late 80's, and pops up in key places in what came afterwards.

For additional reference, check the article at the end of this post detailing the scratch-each-other's-back govt/business relationship between eventual CIA director John Deutch and Augustine. The Defense Science Board, cited below, led the various studies that created the panic around defense spending in the late 80's. Augustine's 1987 study into the semiconductor industry, done at the request of Caspar Weinberger, was the trigger for those, see here.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/business/1987/05/10/us-chip-industrys-gloomy-future/93b379fd-1e80-48b1-8d78-08461e556606/

Quote

"There's a great deal of urgency on this matter," Augustine said. "Time is running out, and I really don't think we're going to like the world we're living in 20 years from now if we don't address this problem."

Augustine's 'the sky is falling' activities (there were several more than are cited here) took place just as a wave of Reagan administration figures had exited or were preparing to leave government, and were looking for new avenues of making some cash. Cited below, James P Wade, the co-author with Ullman of Rumsfeld's later Shock and Awe planning. 

Quote

 

https://www.nytimes.com/1987/03/24/us/washington-talk-pentagon-with-new-curb-life-after-government-more-officials.html

WASHINGTON TALK: PENTAGON; With New Curb on Life After Government, More Officials Leave

A new regulation prohibiting Pentagon officials from taking jobs in the defense industry for two years after they leave Government has nudged some toward the door earlier than they might have been as the Reagan Administration draws to a close. ...

 ... Mr. Zakheim said he would leave the Pentagon at the end of this week, also to join System Planning, which is based not far from the Pentagon in Arlington, Va. 

''I've had six satisfying years here,'' Mr. Zakheim said in a telephone interview. ''Now I want to spend more time with my family and, frankly, to make more money.''

The president of System Planning is James P. Wade Jr., a former Assistant Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Logistics. He resigned last year when he was not named Under Secretary for Acquisition in the Pentagon's new procurement setup.

 

A decade after Augustine began rattling the cage, Deutch would sit on a 1997 group alongside Philip Zelikow at Harvard studying castrophic terrorism as a likely imminent event for the country, and co-author the Foreign Affairs paper on the topic with Zelikow and Ashton Carter, another Defense Science Board figure.

https://web.mit.edu/chemistry/deutch/policy/1998-CatastrophicTerrorism.pdf

Bruce P Jackson, who worked under Augustine at both Martin Marietta and Lockheed, later served as Executive Director of the Project for a New American Century.

https://powerbase.info/index.php/Bruce_P._Jackson

https://www.vice.com/en/article/avygxk/how-to-make-millions-by-selling-war-917

Below, Deutch helps Augustine make some extra cash. There are additional names and events that flesh out the above narrative significantly, but this will do for now.

 

Quote

 

TAXPAYERS TAPPED FOR SWEET DEALS AT DEFENSE

Sun Sentinel, Nov 7th, 1996

https://www.sun-sentinel.com/1996/11/07/taxpayers-tapped-for-sweet-deals-at-defense/

In 1994, Defense Secretary William Perry, a charter member of the Military Industrial Congressional Complex, paid defense contractor Martin Marietta $350 million of your tax dollars to cover costs in restructuring when Martin Marietta purchased General Electric’s aerospace division and General Dynamic’s space systems division.

Perry gave an already bloated defense contractor big dough to buy another chunk of the defense welfare system, guaranteeing at least 20 percent profit on everything built – and not built.

In 1991, for example, the Pentagon canceled the Navy’s A-12 bomber because the program cost buckets more than the contractors had estimated and was simply the Navy’s version of the Air Force’s B-2 stealth bomber. Though $3 billion was spent and not a single flying machine built, it looks like we taxpayers will be slugged with $1.5 billion more for breach of contract.

The $350 million payoff deal to Martin Marietta smells like a barnyard because Perry had long-term business links with Martin Marietta, which was a client of his consulting firm, Technology Strategy & Alliances – Perry’s cash machine when the Democrats weren’t running the Pentagon.

Perry became the Pentagon’s No. 1 man after the late Secretary of Defense Les Aspin got sacked for failing to send tanks to our Ranger Task Force in Somalia. In this musical chairs exercise, John Deutch became the No. 2 man, and Paul Kamininski became No. 3.

Kamininski is also a long-term MICC player; he’d replaced Perry as CEO of Technology Strategies & Alliances. Deutch, a MICC charter member like Perry, had been a player on the Martin Marietta advisory board, receiving $42,500 in consulting fees the year before the cozy deal was done.

So by the end of 1994, the three top civilians in the Pentagon were all former defense consultants with deep ties to each other, to Martin Marietta and to other top defense contractors. All three belong to the MICC millionaire’s club, thanks to your hard-earned tax dollars.

Nice scam, if you can get away with it.

Norman Augustine, Martin Marietta’s head man, served on the Defense Science Board together with Perry and Deutch, and Augustine worked closely with Deutch at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Lincoln Laboratory, a long-term MICC suckling, while Deutch ran MIT.

You’d have thought this kind of back-room deal would violate Clinton’s ethics regulations and that even the slime inside the Beltway would have screamed, “How could the top three Pentagon civilians cut such a sweet deal with their former client?!”

Easy. Congress – our watchdog – just scarfed up its share of the scam in PAC dollars and looked the other way.

Playing Pentagon monopoly the way Perry, Deutch and Kamininski did is nothing new. Over 20,000 employees checked out of the Pentagon and cashed in with defense contractors between 1975-85. Over one-fifth of these modern-day carpetbaggers went to work in the defense industry on the very same projects they’d worked on in the Pentagon. Because, like Perry and friends, they’re all in bed with one another – and Congress – while you the taxpayer keep getting screwed.

A lot of these Pentagon brass end up on the boards of big defense contractors, too. Former Defense Secretary Melvin Laird and retired Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. John Vessey served on the board of Martin Marietta.

When Laird and Vessey retired after the restructuring, Martin Marietta paid them almost half a million dollars each. In all, Martin Marietta paid out almost $2 million to retiring board members, including $236,000 to Republican presidential candidate Lamar Alexander.

Of course, the dumb old taxpayer picked up the tab for the Martin Marietta scam, including an $8.2 million wet kiss for Martin Marietta’s CEO Norman Augustine. Oh, and don’t fret about Perry; he’s set to retire to Fat City come 1997. His replacement, current CIA director Deutch, has the nod from his pal Bill Clinton – so the Pentagon revolving door will spin again.

Meanwhile, it’s the old story: no dough to spare for our grunts. Once again, our kids will go into battle with secondhand gear that is third-rate compared to what’s toted by many of our potential foes.

The author is a retired U.S. Army colonel whose military and journalism careers spanned nearly a dozen wars and conflicts. Write to him in care of King Features, 216 E. 45th St., New York, N.Y. 10017, or visit his home page at http://www.hackworth.com.

 

 

Edited July 13, 2023 by Anthony Thorne

[Pamela Brown]

On 7/11/2023 at 11:10 AM, Calvin Ye said:

The book Secret War Against Jews implied that the Jews blackmailed Angleton into becoming an Zionist

Care to provide a page number for this?

[Pamela Brown]

I am also among those wondering just who is this 'guest' who is posting a thread in the EF?  And on a topic that tends to be controversial?

[Calvin Ye]

2 hours ago, Pamela Brown said:

I am also among those wondering just who is this 'guest' who is posting a thread in the EF?  And on a topic that tends to be controversial?

Pamela, the guest is actually Chris Barnard, an former member who deleted his account

Edited July 13, 2023 by Calvin Ye

[Calvin Ye]

The identity of this guest is actually Chris Barnard, an former member of this forum. Chris deleted his account

Edited July 13, 2023 by Calvin Ye

[Calvin Ye]

2 hours ago, Pamela Brown said:

Care to provide a page number for this?

https://archive.org/details/john-loftus-mark-aarons-the-secret-war-against-the-jews-how-western-espionage-be_202012/page/300/mode/2up?q=reputation

[W. Niederhut]

15 hours ago, Anthony Thorne said:

Rumsfeld had sent a letter to (I think) William Colby in the year or so before Colby's death, asking for his feedback and possible endorsement of a military strategy Rumsfeld was fixated on at the time. The strategy was 'shock and awe' and in the letter I read that Colby had sent back to Rumsfeld, Colby essentially said "Yeah, that's great, thanks for filling me in Donald, it's definitely interesting." or polite words to that effect. The strategy team that Rumsfeld was working with later distributed a study covering the tactic that Rumsfeld was keen on. It's here.

http://www.dodccrp.org/files/Ullman_Shock.pdf

That document was published in October 1996. The plan to invade Iraq appears to have been floating around through the 90's, and Rumsfeld was likely keen on the tactic as he knew it would get a good workout in the future.

The first two names on the cover are James Wade and Harlan Ullman. Wade appears again below. A year before she died, Ullman was cited by DC Madam Deborah Palfrey as a regular customer. Go figure.

https://edition.cnn.com/2007/LAW/04/12/dc.madam/index.html

The full 9/11 story has a lot of deep rabbit holes, but I'd boil some of it - not all of it - down to the following. The requirement for a catalysing event, and plans to carry it out, were devised over the course of a few years at the very end of the 80's when various government and industry figures became extremely alarmed at the imminent drop in defense spending as the Cold War drew to a close. The trickle-down effect of diminished military technology investment was viewed as a potential national security crisis by insiders. The decision that 'something needs to be done' was conveyed within limited circles. People who could be convinced, were convinced. People who could be encouraged to help out for a big future financial reward were encouraged to do so. In a few instances, people who would ultimately need to be blackmailed, to encourage them to either help or to keep quiet, were potentially blackmailed. And people who were best kept out of the loop, and in the dark, were not told of what was being prepared. 

Prominent figures involved in the activities described in the above paragraph, took place in some of the annual American Assembly conferences in Washington from 1989 to 1991. Go through the books that the Assembly prepared for each gathering, and you'll see members from the Israeli security scene popping up in the first, and Wolfowitz and a lot of hawks gathering together for the final one. (The 1991 conference received funding from the armaments industry, btw). Wolfowitz put together his Defense Planning Guidance around the time of the final conference, and gave a talk giving a preview of what was on his mind.

I think some insiders knew that the future catalysing event would enable a reciprocal attack against a Middle Eastern target,. Some figures expected that target to just be Afghanistan. A deeper layer of participants felt that they could piggy back the event to direct a second attack against Iraq. The Afghanistan attack occurred not long after 9/11. The Iraq invasion took some insiders by surprise, and took the George W Bush admin a year and a half of extra effort to get off the ground. It's worth pondering whether some insiders knew the WTC buildings would be hit, and only a smaller circle knew that those buildings wouldn't be left standing.

If you want a name to place near the very top, try Norman Augustine. He was the former government insider who had reached an elevated position both in industry and as an advisor to government. He led the circles that started the panic in the late 80's, and pops up in key places in what came afterwards.

For additional reference, check the article at the end of this post detailing the scratch-each-other's-back govt/business relationship between eventual CIA director John Deutch and Augustine. The Defense Science Board, cited below, led the various studies that created the panic around defense spending in the late 80's. Augustine's 1987 study into the semiconductor industry, done at the request of Caspar Weinberger, was the trigger for those, see here.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/business/1987/05/10/us-chip-industrys-gloomy-future/93b379fd-1e80-48b1-8d78-08461e556606/

Augustine's 'the sky is falling' activities (there were several more than are cited here) took place just as a wave of Reagan administration figures had exited or were preparing to leave government, and were looking for new avenues of making some cash. Cited below, James P Wade, the co-author with Ullman of Rumsfeld's later Shock and Awe planning. 

A decade after Augustine began rattling the cage, Deutch would sit on a 1997 group alongside Philip Zelikow at Harvard studying castrophic terrorism as a likely imminent event for the country, and co-author the Foreign Affairs paper on the topic with Zelikow and Ashton Carter, another Defense Science Board figure.

https://web.mit.edu/chemistry/deutch/policy/1998-CatastrophicTerrorism.pdf

Bruce P Jackson, who worked under Augustine at both Martin Marietta and Lockheed, later served as Executive Director of the Project for a New American Century.

https://powerbase.info/index.php/Bruce_P._Jackson

https://www.vice.com/en/article/avygxk/how-to-make-millions-by-selling-war-917

Below, Deutch helps Augustine make some extra cash. There are additional names and events that flesh out the above narrative significantly, but this will do for now.

 

 

Interesting references, Anthony.

Phillip Zelikow is, certainly, an interesting figure in 21st century American history.

He was an associate of Bush/Cheney NSC advisor (and eventual SOS) Condoleezza Rice, before chairing the 9/11 Commission-- after Henry Kissinger turned down the job offer from George W. Bush.

Zelikow approached the 9/11 Commission job with a pre-written narrative, and assiduously suppressed all contrary evidence debunking the official government narrative about 9/11-- in a manner quite similar to Allen Dulles's "Lone Nut" approach to the Warren Commission investigation.

[Anthony Thorne]

Zelikow was brought into the NSC by Robert Blackwill, and he and Blackwill then became fixtures at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard, run by its Dean, Graham Allison.

The Kennedy School was and is no ordinary school, and Allison was not an ordinary figure running it. Both Allison and the School had been joined at the hip to the Pentagon, CIA and military figures within government since the late 60's. Allison had started off in the 60's co-chairing a study group under Ernest May - known as the 'May Group' - for the Joint Chiefs to debate what had gone wrong during the Cuban missile crisis. In the 70's, Allison ran a program at the school preparing senior figures for positions in government. In the 80's, the school did work for the CIA, and created a permanent position for a CIA figure on campus. Allison also worked as an advisor to Dick Cheney, and worked for a strategy group run by the former Chairman of the JCOS, William Crowe. In personal correspondence to Barry Goldwater through this period, Crowe was adamant the country needed a new military build-up. Allison was doing other things of importance in the same vein through the 80's as well, but that's just a few of them.

Allison's mentor Ernest May had been a historian for the Joint Chiefs in the 50's, was enlisted again to write further Pentagon studies and reports and histories in the late 80's, and was very enthusiastic about the 9/11 Commission report when it eventually came out. Zelikow, in turn, was enthusiastic about May's work and May's influence on his writings. You can take the notion of someone writing an 'official history' for the Joint Chiefs, or an official history providing the Pentagon's view of a particular incident to the public, and view the 9/11 Commission report under that light. It explains a couple of things. In the late 90's, Allison and Zelikow did a rewrite together of Allison's original ESSENCE OF DECISION text.

Allison and other Kennedy School members also appear in the full roster of participants from the 1997/1998 Catastrophic Terrorism Study Group (CTSG) - this is the name given to it by Zelikow - that led to the Foreign Affairs article I linked to above. More than a few members of the Defense Science Board also appear in the roster of the CTSG. This was a group set up to deliberate on how an incident of catastrophic terrorism would affect the USA, and what the repercussions would be afterwards.  When the Kennedy School eventually did a 20th anniversary discussion on the importance of 9/11, what it meant for the world, how to view it today, Zelikow gave the opening talk, and Allison gave the closing one.

9/11 researchers might need to read between the lines a little bit, and then maybe dig further to see what comes up, but any planning for 9/11 would have entailed a number of things that would need to be discussed and figured out in advance. Not just the attacks on September 11, 2001, but also

The official story, including the narrative of what the hijackers had been up to

The story of why the hijackers had not been captured, what went wrong, how mistakes were made, etc

The subsequent War on Terror, in its specifics

and how the War on terror would be presented to the public.

That's the least of it, but if you go in with the notion that 9/11 was planned, you have to expect that some of the above was part of the planning, and that they needed a group to do the planning for them, and a place to do at least some of that planning. Who was Allison a personal advisor to again?

Edited July 14, 2023 by Anthony Thorne

[Pamela Brown]

On 7/13/2023 at 11:01 AM, Calvin Ye said:

https://archive.org/details/john-loftus-mark-aarons-the-secret-war-against-the-jews-how-western-espionage-be_202012/page/300/mode/2up?q=reputation

Interesting...

[Matthew Koch]

On 7/11/2023 at 2:39 PM, Allen Lowe said:

I am amazed - if that's a strong enough word - that ANYONE is repeating the thing about Israelis dancing on top of a van, or smiling or whatever TF they were supposed to be doing. Dancing on top of a van? Try doing this with one person let alone 3. You will fall on your dumb asses. Are you aware that American Nazis have been involved in spreading this crap? And that these men were sighted by a lady looking at the WTC with binoculars who said they were smiling - as though she could see all this - then WHAT THE HELL was she doing watching the burning WTC? Maybe exactly what these guys were doing - this is all so repulsive and stupid that I just had to post this to tell you how dumb anyone who spreads this stuff is. Shame on you all. Moderators, how can you permit this?

Your comment is not completely coherent Allen... Why do you want to censor real information??

What about you is offended by this topic? You sound like Roberty Montenegro American Nazis??? Can you cite something to back this allegation up? 

Because it's been undisputed since the clips came out in 2005 and later when the Urban Movers FOIAs came out and again later when the declassified pictures from the Urban Movers FOIA came out in 2015. These same Israelis were working with the National Spy ring that was living next to the hijackers and shadowing them.. 

 

https://rumble.com/v2ds6fu-core-of-corruption-in-the-shadows.html

Edited July 22, 2023 by Matthew Koch

[Robert Montenegro]

1 hour ago, Matthew Koch said:

What about you is offended by this topic? You sound like Robert Montenegro American Nazis??? Can you cite something to back this allegation up? 

 

See here, herr Koch, I cite academic sources on post-WWII, transnational fascist networks, not "...American Nazis...," you slanderous, fatuous nincompoop!

 

As far as the Mossad goes, yes, they did not want President Kennedy removed, the Gehlen Organization wanted JFK dead, and one of their motivations was the Diamora Reactor.

 

The State of Israel was being used as a pawn to counter President Kennedy's non-proliferation policies concerning the total disarmament of nuclear weapons with the USSR!

 

It must be understood that the comptroller who loaned the Israeli military intelligence the covert funds to build the reactor, was a Nazi war criminal, a commander of the German-branch of Operation GLADIO, and the man who organized the Nazi Party's first legal actions against the Jewish population of Nazi Germany:

 

 

Hans Josef Maria Globke, commander of the German-branch of Operation GLADIO, & co-creator of the Gehlen Organization, seen in this photograph in his handsome looking Nazi attire...

 

Hans Josef Maria Globke, was a senior Ministerialdirigent in the Nazi Party's Office for Jewish Affairs in the Ministry of the Interior, an author of deadly "Namensänderungsverordnung" decree that forced all Jews living in Nazi-occupied Germany to change their first names—German Jewish men had to change their first name to "Israel," while German Jewish women had to change their first name to "Sara." 

 

The name change decree made it easier for the Nazi's to process persons practicing the Jewish faith into the concentration camp system.

 

Hans Josef Maria Globke had the blood of at least six-and-a-half-million practitioners of the Jewish faith on his hands and was arguably the most wanted war criminal of the post World War Two era.

 

So, it is disturbing that Hans Globke was commander of the German-branch of Operation GLADIO and also the Central Intelligence Agency's top asset in the administration of Chancellor Konrad Hermann Joseph Adenauer's Federal Republic of Germany.

 

The reason why Hans Globke secured a secret $5.5 billion dollar loan to Israeli military intelligence to develop the Diamora Reactor, is because Globke and his Gehlen Organization, cohorts were afraid that after the trial of SS-Obersturmbannführer Otto Adolf Eichmann, as top-functionary of the Holocaust, that they would be next.

 

In overly simplistic terms, Hans Globke was protecting Nazi war criminals in the Western intelligence services from the Mossad, and used the multi-billion dollar loan for the Diamora Reactor as a covert bribe!

 

Allen Welsh Dulles was Hans Globke's silent partner in arranging the bribe, to the effect of fighting President Kennedy's nonproliferation policies with the Soviet Union.

 

And here are my sources for the above information, Koch, ya creep:

 

 

• https://www.timesofisrael.com/report-official-at-heart-of-nazis-racial-laws-worked-to-help-israel-go-nuclear/

 

• https://www.haaretz.com/life/books/2017-08-27/ty-article-magazine/.premium/eichmann-and-the-bomb-how-israels-fledgling-nuke-program-impacted-the-trial/0000017f-dc5a-df62-a9ff-dcdf98300000

 

• https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/hans-globke-hitlers-former-henchman-was-true-architect-of-modern-germany-7sw76fvkd

 

• https://www.theguardian.com/world/2006/jun/07/secondworldwar.usa

 

• https://www.irishtimes.com/culture/heritage/the-senior-nazi-who-became-postwar-germany-s-top-civil-servant-1.4874766

 

• https://www.jta.org/archive/eichmann-to-testify-on-dr-globkes-role-in-deportation-of-greek-jews

 

• https://www.archives.gov/iwg/research-papers/eichmann.html

 

• https://www.npr.org/transcripts/5458425?storyId=5458425

 

 

Edited July 22, 2023 by Robert Montenegro