Skip to content

9/11 – A Cheap Magic Trick

How false flag attacks are manufactured by the world's elite.

On the day of the 9-11 attacks, former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was asked what the attacks would mean for US-Israeli relations. His quick reply was: “It’s very good……. Well, it’s not good, but it will generate immediate sympathy (for Israel)”

The FBI came to the conclusion… that the five Israelis arrested in New Jersey last September were conducting a Mossad surveillance mission and that their employer, Urban Moving Systems of Weehawken, N.J., served as a front. -Forward (A Jewish Magazine) March 15, 2002

“Evidence linking these Israelis to 9/11 is classified. I cannot tell you about evidence that has been gathered. It’s classified information.” –US official quoted in Carl Cameron’s Fox News report (that was later erased from the Fox News website) on the Israeli spy ring and its connections to 9-11.

According to ABCNEWS sources, Israeli and U.S. government officials worked out a deal — and after 71 days, the five Israelis were taken out of jail, put on a plane, and deported back home. While the former detainees refused to answer ABCNEWS’ questions about their detention and what they were doing on Sept. 11, several of the detainees discussed their experience in America on an Israeli talk show after their return home. Said one of the men, “Our purpose was to document the event.”

But how did they know there was going to BE an “event”?

A Mossad “surveillance team” made quite a public spectacle of themselves on 9-11. The men set up cameras by the Hudson River and trained them on the twin towers.

Police received several calls from angry New Jersey residents claiming “middle-eastern” men with a white van were videotaping the disaster with shouts of joy and mockery. (HA’ARETZ 9/17/01)

“They were like happy, you know … They didn’t look shocked to me” said a witness. [T]hey were seen by New Jersey residents on Sept. 11 making fun of the World Trade Center ruins and going to extreme lengths to photograph themselves in front of the wreckage. (AP and GI)

Witnesses saw them jumping for joy in Liberty State Park after the initial impact. Later on, other witnesses saw them celebrating on a roof in Weehawken, and still more witnesses later saw them celebrating with high fives in a Jersey City parking lot. (Yediot America 11/2/01)

The FBI sent out an alert to area cops, reading: “Vehicle possibly related to New York terrorist attack . . . Three individuals with van were seen celebrating after initial impact and subsequent explosion.” (New York Post) “It looked like they’re hooked in with this. It looked like they knew what was going to happen when they were at Liberty State Park.” (The Record N.J. News)

One anonymous phone call to the authorities actually led them to close down all of New York’s bridges and tunnels. The mystery caller told the 9-1-1 dispatcher that a group of Palestinians were mixing a bomb inside of a white van headed for the Holland Tunnel. Here’s the transcript from NBC News:

Dispatcher: Jersey City police.
Caller: Yes, we have a white van, 2 or 3 guys in there, they look like Palestinians and going around a building.
Caller: There’s a minivan heading toward the Holland tunnel, I see the guy by Newark Airport mixing some junk and he has those sheikh uniform.
Dispatcher: He has what?
Caller: He’s dressed like an *Arab. (Channel 4 WNBC Post of the Transcript)

Read more

Dec. 7, 2017
Corbett report

Read more

President* Trump plots to bring the opposite of peace to the Middle East.

By Charles P. Pierce
Dec 5, 2017

The president* has decided to play with matches again. There are very few things that would touch off the situation in the Middle East. Moving the American embassy to Jerusalem, thereby implicitly acknowledging the, ahem, controversial notion that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel, is almost universally recognized as being one of these. So, the president* has found a lovely pool of shiny gasoline into which he can’t resist tossing a match—or a Tiki torch, for all that. From The New York Times:

President Trump told Israeli and Arab leaders on Tuesday that he plans to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, a symbolically fraught move that would upend decades of American policy and upset efforts to broker peace between Israel and the Palestinians. Mr. Trump is expected to announce his decision on Wednesday, two days after the expiration of a deadline for him to decide whether to keep the American Embassy in Tel Aviv. Palestinian officials said Mr. Trump told the president of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas, that the United States would move the embassy to Jerusalem. Jordan said the president gave a similar message to King Abdullah II. American officials, however, said such a move could not occur immediately for logistical reasons, given the lack of facilities to house the embassy staff. As a result, Mr. Trump is expected to sign a national security waiver that would authorize the administration to keep it in Tel Aviv for an additional six months.

People who believe that the president* is a dealmaking genius—or, more precisely, the people who are paid to tell him they believe it—likely will see this move as a clever ploy to shock both sides into serious negotiations. Sensible people, however, will see this move as a man who fingerpaints with botulism. World leaders, of course, are basically aghast. Even Jared Kushner’s new pals, the Saudis, consider this a reckless idea. From Haaretz:

“Any U.S. announcement on the status of Jerusalem prior to a final settlement would have a detrimental impact on the peace process and would heighten tensions in the region,” Saudi Ambassador Prince Khalid bin Salman said in a statement. “The kingdom’s policy – has been – and remains in support of the Palestinian people, and this has been communicated to the U.S. administration.”

This announcement came on the same Tuesday on which the Republican Party joined its leader in the White House in getting behind Roy Moore in the Alabama Senate race. Moore demonstrated his gratitude by going on the radio and attacking George Soros. Wonder why. Again, from Haaretz:

“He is pushing an agenda and his agenda is sexual in nature, his agenda is liberal, and not what Americans need. It’s not our American culture. Soros comes from another world that I don’t identify with. No matter how much money he’s got, he’s still going to the same place that people who don’t recognize God and morality and accept his salvation are going. And that’s not a good place.”

None of this is in any way normal.


Jason Liosatos
Outside The Box
Dec. 5, 2017

We talk of hope, Armageddon, freedom, enslavement, deep state insanity, Venezuela, Brexit, Brussels, digital currency, and the urgency that people understand how our system is manipulated and structure

911 Blogger

General John M. “Jack” Keane was the most senior Army officer in the United States on September 11, 2001. Working at the Pentagon, he was ideally placed to respond promptly and effectively to the terrorist attacks that day. And yet he appears to have done alarmingly little while the attacks were underway.

The only action he has recalled taking after learning about the crashes at the World Trade Center was ordering that the Army Operations Center (AOC) at the Pentagon be brought up to full manning. He apparently did not order the activation of the Army’s Crisis Action Team (CAT), even though this was designed for dealing with emergencies like the one taking place at the time.

When the Pentagon was hit, more than 50 minutes after the attacks began, Keane initially spent time helping people get out of the building–a task that anyone could have performed–instead of carrying out his duties as head of the Army. He only went to the AOC, a facility that was ideally equipped for dealing with the crisis, when one of his staffers pointed out that he should “leave the recovery to other people” and go and “take command of the Army.”

We need to consider why Keane, despite being an experienced military man, apparently performed very poorly in response to the crisis on September 11. Was his inaction due to incompetence or was there a more sinister reason for it? Might he have been confused because he mistook actual events for simulations, as part of a training exercise? Might he even have been to some degree complicit in what happened and so his inaction was intended to help ensure that the military was unable to stop the attacks before the targets were hit?

Keane was one of a number of key officials who surely had essential duties to perform in coordinating the military’s response to the 9/11 attacks but failed to get properly involved in responding to the crisis until it was too late to make a difference to the outcome of the attacks. His actions on September 11, though, have so far avoided serious scrutiny. We therefore need to examine what he did, and what he failed to do, while the attacks were underway.

Jack Keane was vice chief of staff of the U.S. Army–the Army’s second-highest-ranking officer–from 1999 to 2003. On September 11, however, General Eric Shinseki, chief of staff of the U.S. Army, was out of the country attending the Pacific Armies Management Seminar, a conference in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. [1] This meant Keane was the highest-ranking Army officer in the U.S. that day and presumably served as the acting chief of staff of the Army while Shinseki was away. [2] He would therefore likely have been responsible for taking charge of the Army’s response to the terrorist attacks in New York and at the Pentagon, and his actions would surely have had a significant impact on how effectively the Army performed.

The Army in fact had a unique and important role to play on September 11. As “executive agent” for the Department of Defense, it was responsible for coordinating with the Navy and the Air Force on “proposed action to support civilian authorities during emergencies involving mass casualties,” according to the Defense Department’s book about the Pentagon attack. [3] It was presumably, therefore, particularly important that Keane acted promptly and effectively in response to the attacks.


Keane was at the Pentagon–the headquarters of the Department of Defense–on the morning of September 11. This was probably an ideal location from which to respond to the 9/11 attacks. And yet descriptions of his actions indicate that his reaction to the crisis was far less adequate than we might reasonably expect.

He was in his office when the attacks began and was promptly alerted to the first crash at the World Trade Center. American Airlines Flight 11 flew into the North Tower at 8:46 a.m. and CNN started reporting the incident at 8:49 a.m. Apparently very shortly after this, a member of his staff ran into the room and said, “Sir, something terrible is going on in New York.” She turned on the television and Keane then saw the reports stating that a plane had hit the Trade Center.

Keane has recalled that, unlike many people, he realized right away that the incident was a terrorist attack. Noticing that it was a cloudless day, he thought, “Nobody could ever hit the World Trade Center on a day like that by accident.” He also remembered that the Trade Center had been the target of a terrorist attack before, with a bomb going off in the underground parking garage there in February 1993. Therefore, he has commented, “I knew instinctively it had to be a terrorist attack and said as much.”

In response to the event, he called General Peter Chiarelli, the Army’s director of operations, readiness, and mobilization, who was also at the Pentagon that morning, and ordered him to bring the Army Operations Center up to full manning. [4] The AOC, located in the Pentagon basement, was normally staffed by 35 to 40 men, but during a crisis the number of people working there would be significantly increased. [5]

The AOC was “the Army’s command and control center,” Chiarelli has commented. [6] And yet, while Chiarelli headed to it after Keane called him, Keane remained in his office at that time. Even after he saw the second hijacked plane–United Airlines Flight 175–crashing into the World Trade Center on television, at 9:03 a.m., he stayed where he was.


At some point after the second attack in New York occurred but before 9:37 a.m., when the Pentagon was hit, Chiarelli called Keane from the AOC. He reported that the Operations Center was fully manned and alerted Keane to a suspicious aircraft that had been noticed flying toward Washington, DC.

He said he was monitoring Federal Aviation Administration communications and, Keane recalled, had learned that “a plane that took off from Washington, DC, had turned around in the vicinity of Ohio and approached DC from the south along I-95 before turning east, short of the city, and then south again.” (He was presumably referring to American Airlines Flight 77, the plane that supposedly crashed into the Pentagon.) “We were obviously aware then that there was a plane targeting Washington,” Keane has commented.

Keane and Chiarelli started discussing the procedures for evacuating buildings in the capital. But then the Pentagon was hit. Keane felt his office shake violently, even though it was located far from the crash site, and, he recalled, the office “immediately” began to fill with smoke. He alerted Chiarelli to the incident right away. “Pete, that plane [that was approaching Washington] just hit us,” he said.

Even then, however, Keane apparently issued no orders or did anything else to help protect America and prevent further attacks. Instead, he recalled, he told Chiarelli “to tell the U.S. Army around the world what happened [at the Pentagon] and that, given the status of the AOC, which was unharmed, we would still maintain command and control of the Army.”

Read more

As one fake scandal fades, a real one emerges

by Justin Raimondo
December 04, 2017

Life is full of surprises. Like that time you were counting on a new bike for Christmas, and were totally certain your parents were going to come through, and then – lo and behold! – on Christmas morning there it was: a spanking brand-new Segway! The final evidence that, despite your best efforts, you’d always be a nerdy little dork. (And yes, a pocket calculator turned up in your stocking,)

That’s just what happened to #TheResistance this holiday season. For months they’ve been salivating heavily in anticipation of the turning of Michael Flynn, the former National Security Advisor now charged with lying to the FBI. Flynn has admitted doing so on at least two occasions, both involving his answers to questions about his conversations with Russian ambassador Sergey Kisylak. During the transition – after Trump’s election but before he took office – Flynn was talking to the Russians about two subjects: the possible blowback from the Obama administration’s decision to impose more sanctions and close the Russian compound in Maryland, and the Russian position on the controversial UN resolution condemning Israel for building yet more “settlements” on Palestinian land.

The incoming Trump team was “intensely focused on improving relations with Moscow and was willing to intervene to pursue that goal,” as the New York Times phrased it, even as the war cries in the Democratic party got louder and demagogues like Adam Schiff waved the bloody shirt of Russia-gate. That took balls: and here’s another instance where the alleged non-interventionists ensconced in the world of thinktanks and academia fail to give the Trump people the credit that is their due.

Think about it, folks: both the US and the Russians possess enough nuclear firepower to destroy all life on earth several times over. This sword of Damocles is hanging over us by a thread, just as it loomed large during the last cold war with Moscow. It’s a machinery of annihilation that is set on hair-trigger alert, and any number of events could unleash it: a miscalculation, a foolish bluff, a misunderstanding, a technical glitch, a showdown similar to the Cuban missile crisis. All that stands between us and utter extinction is the hope that this apparatus of death can be restrained by mutual agreement. Bravo to the Trump administration for making peace a priority. If this is now a crime, and even “treason,” as the mouth-breathers of #TheResistance would have it, well then let the Washington Inquisition make the most of it.

Read more

The Saker
December 1, 2017
The Unz Review

I am often asked if the US and Russia will go to war with each other. I always reply that they are already at war. Not a war like WWII, but a war nonetheless. This war is, at least for the time being, roughly 80% informational, 15% economic and 5% kinetic. But in political terms the outcome for the loser of this war will be no less dramatic than the outcome of WWII was for Germany: the losing country will not survive it, at least not in its present shape: either Russia will become a US colony again or the AngloZionist Empire will collapse.

In my very first column for the Unz Review entitled “A Tale of Two World Orders” I described the kind of multipolar international system regulated by the rule of law that Russia, China and their allies and friends worldwide (whether overt or covert) are trying to build and how dramatically different it was from the single World Hegemony that the AngloZionists have attempted to establish (and almost successfully imposed upon our suffering planet!). In a way, the US imperial leaders are right, Russia does represent an existential threat, not for the United States as a country or for its people, but for the AngloZionist Empire, just as the latter represents an existential threat to Russia. Furthermore, Russia represents a fundamental civilizational challenge to what is normally called the “West” as she openly rejects its post-Christian (and, I would add, also viscerally anti-Islamic) values. This is why both sides are making an immense effort at prevailing in this struggle.

Last week the anti-imperial camp scored a major victory with the meeting between Presidents Putin, Rouhani and Erdogan in Sochi: they declared themselves the guarantors of a peace plan which will end the war against the Syrian people (the so-called “civil war”, which this never was) and they did so without inviting the US to participate in the negotiations. Even worse, their final statement did not even mention the US, not once. The “indispensable nation” was seen as so irrelevant to even be mentioned.

To fully measure how offensive all this is we need to stress a number of points:

First, led by Obama, all the leaders of the West declared urbi et orbi and with immense confidence that Assad had no future, that he had to go, that he was already a political corpse and that he would have no role whatsoever to play in the future of Syria.

Read more

For all the talk about spending and debt, wars are never on the table.

By Jon Basil Utley
December 1, 2017
The American Conservative

For all the talk about the big Republican tax cut it’s really only about $150 billion per year—although proponents multiply it by 10 years, so that $1.5 trillion sounds like a lot. Arguments about how to pay for it may end up derailing or neutering it in the end. Which is ironic, since Trump wants to add $50 billion to the defense budget. But no one wants to talk about defense waste during these tax debates. Why is the Pentagon budget untouchable?

The waste in defense today is incredible. It’s not that Americans don’t inherently care: My 2013 article, 16 Ways to Cut Defense is still at the top of the search engines after four years. Just to mention a few of the 16 ways: Cut some of the 4,000 military bases in the U.S. Most of them were set up in horse and buggy days before highways and helicopters brought them all closer together. Another, combine the Army and Navy hospital system. Furthermore, TRICARE costs another $50 billion to give mainly non-combat veterans free family health insurance for the rest of their lives.

Here’s another suggestion: Test military weaponry before the Pentagon orders it. There is vast corruption in placing supply factories in key congressional districts to build a constituency for new weapons even before their design is tested. The biggest boondoggle from this is the $1.4 trillion F-35 fighter plane program. We should return to bidding out contracts for the lowest costs.

As for personnel, cut the number of civilian Pentagon employees, which is now around 800,000 persons. There are too many officers—the Army and Navy have about one for every four to five enlisted men, some triple the number compared to World War II. Generals are equally super abundant and never get fired. In World War II, General Marshall fired dozens of them. And when every bomb now hits its target why do we need so many bombers?

And let’s not forget the trillion-dollar nuclear weapons modernization program started by President Obama, and continued with President Trump, which will add new nuclear weapons to the arsenal.

Read more

Stephen J. Sniegoski
November 27, 2017
The Unz Review

Israel has considered Iran to be Israel’s major enemy since the end of the Gulf War of 1991. But why, it might be asked, did the neocons promote war with Iraq, rather than Iran, in 2003? The neocons were in accord with Israeli thinking but planned to begin with Saddam’s Iraq, the elimination of which, they believed, would pave the way for regime change elsewhere in the Middle East. This especially included Iran, which bordered Iraq. Despite all-out efforts by the neocons to have the U.S. attack Iran after occupying Iraq, this failed to materialize, and later President Obama moved in the opposite direction, overriding strong opposition from Israel and its American supporters, and made a deal with Iran that precluded its development of a nuclear weapon, which had been the professed main concern of Israel.

Now with the Islamic State’s significant loss of territory, which the U.S. helped to bring about, Israel and its American supporters are expressing deep concern that the void left by its defeat is being filled by Iran, which supposedly threatens to attain regional hegemony. President Trump, who takes a very negative view of the nuclear deal and describes Iran as a terrorist state, is promoting a tougher line toward Iran. However, Israel and its American myrmidons see Trump’s hard-line position as insufficient, contending that much more must be done to effectively counter the Iranian threat.

Nonetheless, the Trump administration has designated Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) as a terrorist organization. This puts it on the same level as al Qaeda and the Islamic State.[1] And Trump followed up this action by calling for stiffer sanctions against Iran. All this implies that the American goal is not only to prevent Iran from achieving nuclear weapons capability but also to prevent it from developing a productive economy, which might enable it to establish a stronger conventional military force and be more effective in arming its allies.

As Joshua Landis, a professor and director of the Center for Middle East Studies at the University of Oklahoma, contends: “The renewed US offensive against Iran is not so much about its nuclear capability or even its missile program; it is about Iran rollback and hobbling its economy.

“Ever since President Obama signed the Iran agreement, howls of disapproval were heard from both Israel and a number of Gulf States, which were not dismayed so much at the sunset clause on Iran’s nuclear refinement as they were at Iran’s escape from economic sanctions. The real danger, in their eyes, is Iran’s economic break out and potential success. The more money Iran has, the more it can consolidate the success of its Shiite allies in the region: Hezbollah, the Syrian government and the Iraqi government.

Read more

The Trump administration wants Congress to add $5.9 billion in “emergency” spending to the Pentagon’s 2018 budget. Except there isn’t really an emergency.

Benjamin H. Friedman
November 29, 2017
The National Interest

The Trump administration wants Congress to add $5.9 billion in “emergency” spending to the Pentagon’s 2018 budget. Most of the request would go toward boosting funding for missile defense in the name of stopping North Korean missiles. Smaller slices would pay to add troops to the war in Afghanistan and to repair two Navy ships damaged in accidents. To these requests, Congress should demand offsets.

While the increase in defense spending might be popular in Congress, designating the funds as “emergency” requirements would exempt the money from budget caps Congress imposed on itself in 2011 to control the nation’s burgeoning debt—now at $20 trillion.

That means that instead of forcing tradeoffs among Pentagon programs, the measure becomes a slush fund that soaks future taxpayers. Worse, by using the emergency designation for activities that aren’t truly related to war or emergencies, the request threatens to destroy the cap and open fiscal floodgates. Doing so while cutting taxes could make the current national debt look mild.

$4 billion of the request would go to missile defense for new interceptors for the three major U.S. systems—Ground-Based Midcourse Defense, AEGIS, and Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD)—plus various related surveillance and intercept capabilities. $700 million of the request would repair two Navy ships damaged in accidents last summer: the USS John S. McCain and USS Fitzgerald. $1.2 billion would fund the administration’s 3,500 troop increase in Afghanistan.

Missile defense funding, naval repairs, and increased troop numbers abroad are the normal, everyday responsibilities of the Pentagon—not sudden emergencies.

North Korea isn’t attacking the United States, and U.S. missiles defenses were designed with North Korea missiles in mind. Even if they work well, these investments would have little short-term impact. As for the ships, though no accident is ever anticipated, mishaps that damage military platforms in service are inevitable. The war cost increase for the new troops in Afghanistan, meanwhile, would be minor absent the military’s bad habit of funding military personnel through the war account. Those 3,500 troops would still be in the military if they weren’t deployed, so their full cost is not truly a war cost.

Nor is the request due to a funding shortfall. Congress has not passed regular appropriations for the 2018 fiscal year, which started October 1. But the Pentagon, like other agencies, is funded by a continuing resolution until December, which keeps funds at about at last year’s level. That leaves the war accounts flush, since Congress last year repeatedly increased the Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) funding them, from an initially planned $59 billion to $83 billion.

Meanwhile, the two houses have a deal on the 2018 defense authorization bill, which envisions defense spending increasing 10 percent to $634 billion, plus $66 billion for OCO. That includes a 4 percent increase in missile defense to $8.5 billion.

That total spending authorized is unlikely to be appropriated, however. The 2011 Budget Control Act, which was designed to limit debt, caps the non-war part of the 2018 defense budget at $549 billion. Under the law, that $84 billion excess would be sequestered—taken proportionately from all Pentagon accounts—to keep spending at the cap level.

Read more

Better Tag Cloud