Wednesday, November 2, 2016

841 Claim that Saudis did 9/11 shields the Perpetrators who brought down WTC 1, 2 & 7 by Controlled Demolition

Claim that Saudis did 9/11 shields the Perpetrators who brought down WTC
1, 2 & 7 by Controlled Demolition

Newsletter published on 22 July 2016

(1) Saudi 9/11 Story Part Of The Deception? — Paul Craig Roberts
(2) Debunking the "The Saudis did 9-11" nonsense! - Michael Rivero
(3) Claim that Saudis did 9/11 shields the Perpetrators who brought down
WTC 1, 2 & 7 by Controlled Demolition - Michel Chossudovsky

(1) Saudi 9/11 Story Part Of The Deception? — Paul Craig Roberts

http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2016/07/20/is-the-saudi-911-story-part-of-the-deception-paul-craig-roberts/

Is the Saudi 9/11 Story Part Of The Deception?

Paul Craig Roberts

July 20, 2016

James Jesus Angleton, head of CIA counterintelligence for three decades,
long ago explained to me that intelligence services create stories
inside stories, each with its carefully constructed trail of evidence,
in order to create false trails as diversions. Such painstaking work can
serve a variety of purposes. It can be used to embarrass or discredit an
innocent person or organization that has an unhelpful position on an
important issue and is in the way of an agenda. It can be used as a red
herring to draw attention away from a failing explanation of an event by
producing an alternative false explanation. I forget what Angleton
called them, but the strategy is to have within a false story other
stories that are there but withheld because of "national security" or
"politically sensitive issues" or some such. Then if the official story
gets into trouble, the backup story can be released in order to deflect
attention into a new false story or to support the original story.
Angleton said that intelligence services protect their necessary
misdeeds by burying the misdeed in competing explanations.

Watching the expert craftsmanship of the "Saudis did 9/11" story, I have
been wondering if the Saudi story is what Angleton described as a story
within a story.

The official 9/11 story has taken too many hits to remain standing. The
collapse of Building 7, which, if memory serves, was not mentioned at
all in the 9/11 Commission Report, has been proven to have been a
controlled demolition. Building 7 collapsed at free fall acceleration,
which can only be achieved with controlled demolition.

Over 100 firemen, policemen, and building maintenance personnel who were
inside the two towers prior to their collapse report hearing and
experiencing multiple explosions. According to William Rodriguez, a
maintenance employee in the north tower, there were explosions in the
sub-basements of the tower prior to the time airplanes are said to have
hit the towers.

An international team of scientists found in the dust of the towers both
reacted and unreacted residues of explosives and substances capable of
instantly producing the extreme temperatures that cut steel.

A large number of pilots, both commercial and military, have questioned
the ability of alleged hijackers with substandard flight skills to
conduct the maneuvers required by the flight paths.

2,500 architects and engineers have called for an independent
investigation of the failure of the towers that were certified to be
capable of withstanding a hit by airplanes.

The revelation that the 9/11 attack was financed by the Saudi government
has the effect of bolstering the sagging official story while
simultaneously satisfying the growing recognition that something is
wrong with the official story.

Commentators and media are treating the story of Saudi financing of 9/11
as a major revelation that damns the Bush regime, but the revelation not
only leaves in place but also strengthens the official story that Osama
bin Laden carried out the attack with precisely the hijackers identified
in the original story. The Bush regime is damned merely for protecting
its Saudi friends and withholding evidence of Saudi financing.

The evidence of Saudi financing is what restores the credibility of the
original story. Nothing changes in the story of the collapse of the
three WTC buildings, the attack on the Pentagon, and the crashed
airliner in Pennsylvania. American anger is now directed at the Saudis
for financing the successful attacks.

To hype the Saudi story is to support the official story. A number of
commentators who are usually suspicious of government are practically
jumping up and down for joy that now they have something to pin on Bush.
They haven’t noticed that what they are pinning on him supports the
official 9/11 story.

Moreover, they have not explained why the Saudi government would finance
an attack on the country that protects it. Saudi Arabia is a long-time
partner. They accept pieces of paper for their oil and then use the
paper to finance the US Treasury’s debt and to purchase US weapons
systems, purchases that lead to larger weapons sales, thus spreading R&D
costs over larger volume.

What do the Saudis have to gain from embarrassing the US by
demonstrating the total failure of US national security? Really, if a
few hijackers can outfox the NSA, the CIA, and the national security
state, we clearly aren’t getting out money’s worth and are giving up our
civil liberties for nothing.

Saudi financing does not explain who had access to wire the buildings
for demolition, or to schedule on 9/11 a simulated attack that the
actual attack modeled, thus causing confusion among some authorities
about what was real and what was not.

Saudi financing does not explain the dancing Israelis who were
apprehended filming the attacks on the towers and who later said on
Israeli TV that they were sent to New York to film the attack. How did
the Israelis know? Did Prince Bandar tell them? Bush didn’t tell us
about the Saudis, and the Israelis didn’t tell us about the attack.
Which is worse?

This Saudi revelation is too convenient for the official story. How do
we know that it was not devised as a story inside the story to be used
when the story got into trouble? The Saudis would be a logical choice to
be put in such a position as the original neoconservative plan for
overthrowing Middle Eastern governments included overthrowing Saudi
Arabia. Now we have an excuse.

I have doubts that the alleged hijackers played any role other than
cover for bringing down buildings by controlled demolition. Possibly the
hijackers and the Saudis who financed them, if the evidence is real and
not concocted, were not aware of their role and thought they were
participating in a different deception.

Are we being deceived again with a story inside a story? Will it succeed
along the lines that Angleton explained? Or will it possibly backfire?
If the US government will hide some of the truth from us for 13 years,
why not all of the truth? What else in the official story is false?

(2)Debunking the "The Saudis did 9-11" nonsense! - Michael Rivero

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/debunksaudis.php

Debunking the "The Saudis did 9-11" nonsense!

Michael Rivero

The official story of 9-11 is collapsing almost as fast as the Obamacare
website. Most Americans are now well aware of the strange collapse of
WTC Building 7, the video that captures the sound of the actual
explosion that initiates the collapse of WTC7, the very strange behavior
of the Secret Service as President Bush read about goats at Booker
Elementary School. We have all seen the photographs that confirm the
remains of demolition "cutter charges" in the remains of the towers. And
we all know how the BBC reported that Building 7 collapsed 26 minutes
before it actually happened. indicating a script was being followed (but
alas, not carefully enough).

With the official story in free fall, Americans are wondering just who
did this heinous deed. With the US Government itself the prime suspect,
many are asking if the US Government had help from an outside nation,
one with a long track record of world-changing dirty tricks.

There is a great deal of evidence that implicates the nation of Israel
as a co-conspirator with the Bush administration. First, there was the
massive Israeli spy ring uncovered in the United States just before
9-11, and how some of the "Dancing Israelis" arrested after being seen
cheering and dancing as the World Trade Towers collapsed turned out to
be Mossad spies! Then there was the strange case of Odigo, an
Israeli-owned company whose New York offices received a warning about
the attacks before the planes used in the attacks had even left the
ground! All four of the hijacked planes departed from airport gates
whose security was provided by the same Israeli security company. Israel
has a long track record of playing dirty tricks against the United
States and other countries, including the Lavon affair (framed on
Egypt), Israel's attack on the USS Liberty (initially framed on Egypt),
and Israel's smuggling a radio transmitter into Libya that was used to
send fake messages that tricked President Reagan into bombing Libya.

As people start to seriously examine the plethora of evidence regarding
Israel's numerous perfidies it comes as no surprise that recently we
have seen Israel's "useful idiots" launch a propaganda campaign to claim
that Saudi Arabia was behind the 9-11 attacks, based on a lawsuit
brought against Saudi Arabia by the families of the victims, and a
secret report that Representatives Stephen F. Lynch and Walter B. Jones
are demanding be made public; a report that purportedly claims Saudi
arabia was behind 9-11. But anyone can bring a lawsuit against anyone
for anything. That does not mean the lawsuit allegations are true.
Nonsense lawsuits are a reality of the modern US court system, as are
lawsuits staged primarily as political and propaganda stunts, which is
what this appears to be. Likewise, the report the Representatives wish
to make public appears to be the US Government's attempt to "get ahead
of the ball" and craft a new lie to replace the one that has failed. At
the very least these two pieces of propaganda are intended to deflect
interest away from Israel. At worst, it is the start of the campaign to
justify military invasion of that country, just as Saddam's nuclear
weapons were the excuse to invade Iraq, and the more recently (and
thankfully failed) attempt to justify invasion of Syria by claiming
Syria's government was gassing their own people.

As I have mentioned before, the best way to tell if you are being lied
to is to look for what should be there but isn't. In the case of the
claim that Saudi Arabia was behind 9-11, what should be there and isn't
is a motive for Saudi Arabia to do something like that.

George Bush had a motive to do 9-11. He needed that "new Pearl Harbor"
to enrage Americans into the century of war called for by the Project
For The New American Century. Israel certainly had a motive to do 9-11
and frame Muslims for it, to trick Americans into siding with Israel's
continued land grabs and wars against Israel's enemies, with Israel's
agenda being (as it was with the Lavon affair, the USS Liberty, and the
Libyan radio hoax) that Americans fight those wars for them!

Saudi Arabia does not have a history of dirty tricks, nor a demonstrated
ability to carry out such deceptions. More to the point, Saudi Arabia
has no motive to attack the United States. The Saudi princes have grown
very rich indeed through the Petrodollar arrangement. Saudi Arabia buys
many American products and weapons ($61 billion in 2011), and unlike
Israel, the American taxpayer does not have to give them the money first
with which to buy those weapons. Whereas Israel constantly takes money
out of the US, the Saudis pour it in! Private Saudi investment in the US
economy is over $400 billion. Saudi Arabia is a major creditor to the US
Government. Exact figures are hard to find but Saudi Arabia has loaned
the US Government hundreds of billions of dollars.

Saudi Arabia is not going to risk an attack on the US because all that
wealth would vanish. The Saudi wealth inside the US would be frozen or
seized, and the outstanding loans to the US would never be repaid. The
"useful idiots" trying to save Israel by blaming 9-11 on Saudi Arabia
have yet to come up with a motive for the Saudis to do something like
9-11 that risks losing all that cash.

Remember that Saudi Arabia was being framed for 9-11 right from the
start. One of the accused hijackers, a Saudi Pilot named Saeed
Al-Ghamdi, was still alive after 9-11 and sued the US Government for
defaming him.

And finally, here is some common sense that totally undermines the
attempt to frame Saudi Arabia for 9-11. If Saudi Arabia really wanted to
hurt the United States, they don't need to fly airplanes into
skyscrapers to do it. All they have to do is ask for their money back,
all at once. The resulting damage to the US financial system would make
9-11 look like a minor inconvenience in comparison.

And it would be perfectly legal for Saudi Arabia to ask for their money
back.

Which is why we know that the claim that Saudi Arabia was behind 9-11
has no more basis in fact than the claim that Saddam had nuclear weapons
or that Assad gassed his own people right in front of the UN chemical
weapons inspectors.

As the media tries to blame Saudi Arabia for 9-11, it is worth recalling
that the Bush administration initially claimed that Iraq was behind 9-11
to sell the 2003 invasion, then later admitted Iraq had actually been
innocent. So there is a pattern of the US simply using 9-11 as a "one
size fits all" excuse to invade yet another oil rich nation.

At the very least, even if you accept the new claim that Saudi Arabia
was behind 9-11, then it means the US Government was lying when they
claimed Afghanistan and then Iraq were behind it! So why would you trust
them now?

(3) Claim that Saudis did 9/11 shields the perpetrators who brought down
WTC 1, 2 & 7 by Controlled Demolition - Michel Chossudovsky


http://www.globalresearch.ca/saudi-arabias-alleged-involvement-in-the-911-attacks-red-herring/5442545

Saudi Arabia’s Alleged Involvement in the 9/11 Attacks and the 28 Pages:
"Red-Herring", Propaganda Ploy

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky

Global Research, July 17, 2016

Author’s note

The following article was published in April 2015.  In the meantime, the
issue of the mysterious 28 pages has resurfaced. the 28 pages were made
public. Essentially they serve as a distraction, they revive the role of
Al Qaeda supported by Saudi Arabia. But Al Qaeda was not behind the
attacks and therefore its links to Saudi Arabia constitute a non sequitur .

It is fairly well established that Al Qaeda could not have been behind
the 9/11 attacks. This is confirmed by the analysis of Richard Gage and
Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. The WTC towers were brought
down through controlled demolition.

Al Qaeda did not have the technical capabilities of bringing down the
WTC buildings 1, 2 and 7.

Osama bin Laden was said to have coordinated the attacks. Where was he
on the morning of 9/11?  According to Dan Rather in a special CBS News
report, Osama bin Laden had been admitted to a Pakistani military
hospital in Rawalpindi on the 10th of September, one day before the
tragic events of 9/11. His whereabouts were known to both Pakistani and
US authorities.

Al Qaeda is known to be supported by Saudi Arabia in liaison with the CIA.

But there is a lot more to this saga.

The two key figures behind this new wave of propaganda are former
Senator Bob Graham, who led the joint inquiry of the Senate and the
House intelligence committees together with Rep. Porter Goss, a career
CIA official who was subsequently appointed Director of National
Intelligence (DNI) by the Bush administration.

Graham coordinated the drafting and editing of the report including the
28 classified pages on Saudi Arabia.

While Graham is now heralded by the mainstream media as a 911 Truther,
the evidence suggests that immediately in the wake of 9/11, he was
involved (together with Porter Goss) in a coverup on behalf of Bush-Cheney.

The 28 pages have nothing to with 9/11 Truth.  This alleged Saudi
involvement in the 9/11 attacks has served to precipitate segments of
the 9/11 Truth movement into an erroneous and contradictory discourse.

The objective of the Saudi connection propaganda ploy is to ultimately
sustain the official narrative which states that Islamic terrorists were
behind the 9/11 attacks, which has been disproved by Architects and
Engineers for 9/11 Truth.

Even assuming that Al Qaeda were behind the attacks, it is amply
documented that al Qaeda, "the Base" was a creation of the CIA and that
Osama bin Laden was a CIA intelligence asset. In this regard, Saudi
Arabia as well Pakistan were involved in close liaison with the CIA in
the recruitment and training of terrorists.

And because Bob Graham accuses the FBI and the federal government, the
9/11 Truth movement applauds without realizing that these accusations
directed against the FBI are "framed" with a view to sustaining the
mainstream 9/11 narrative. What is at stake is a desperate ploy to
uphold the legend that Muslims were behind 9/11 and that Saudi Arabia
was behind the terrorists giving them money, with the FBI involved in a
coverup, George W. Bush  protecting his Saudi cronies because the Bushes
and the bin Ladens were "intimo amigos".Porter Goss and Bob Graham
played a direct role in sustaining the propaganda ploy in the immediate
wake of the 9/11 attacks. (quoted from article below)

In late August 2001 Bob Graham and Porter Goss were in Pakistan for
consultations with the head of Pakistani military intelligence (ISI),
General Mahmoud Ahmad. The Inter-services Intelligence (ISI) was known
to having provided covert support to various al Qaeda affiliated
organizations in liaison and consultation with the CIA.

General Ahmad travelled to Washington in early September. On the morning
of 9/11 he was having breakfast with Sen Bob Graham and Rep Porter Goss.

Michel Chossudovsky, April 28, 2016, updated July 17, 2016

*       *      *

The 9/11 narrative in the mainstream media has taken on a new slant. The
FBI is now accused of whitewashing Saudi involvement in the 9/11 attacks.

The alleged Saudi involvement in supporting Osama bin Laden, not to
mention the classified 28 pages of the 9/11 joint Congressional inquiry
pertaining to the insidious role of Saudi Arabia in supporting the
hijackers is  part of a propaganda ploy.

     When the report of Joint Congressional Inquiry into 9/11 was
released in December 2002, it was met with considerable skepticism. That
skepticism grew for a period of time but then was reduced to speculation
about what was contained in the 28 pages that had been redacted by the
Bush White House.

     Various U.S. government leaders have since suggested that the
missing 28 pages point to Saudi Arabia’s complicity in the 9/11 crimes.
However such musings fail to discuss other important issues, like the
links between the Saudi regime and the Western deep state, or the fact
that, from the start, even the Saudis were calling for the 28 pages to
be released. Discussion of the missing 28 pages also omits mention of
the highly suspicious nature of the Inquiry’s investigation and its
leaders. (Kevin Ryan, The 9/11 Joint Congressional Inquiry and the 28
Missing Pages, Global Research, March 14, 2014

The report of the FBI 9/11 Review Commission (25 March 2015) has
revealed circumstances which allegedly were withheld by the FBI from
both the 9/11 Commission headed by former Jersey Governor Thomas Kean as
well from the joint Senate House inquiry committee chaired by former
Senator Bob Graham. Graham.

And now agencies of the US government including the FBI are being
accused of protecting the Saudis.  This alleged Saudi involvement in the
9/11 attacks has served to precipitate segments of the 9/11 Truth
movement into an erroneous and contradictory discourse. On the part of
the US government and its intelligence apparatus, the objective is to
ultimately to build a narrative which will weaken the 9/11 Truth movement.

The purpose of this new propaganda ploy is ultimately to sustain the
legend that Osama bin Laden was behind the attacks and that Saudi Arabia
relentlessly supported Al Qaeda, namely that Saudi Arabia acted as a
"state sponsor of terrorism".

In this regard, the media reports intimate that if the Saudi connection
is confirmed by the 28 classified pages, this "would make 9/11 not just
an act of terrorism, but an act of war by a foreign government."

There is, however, an obvious hiccup in this reasoning: if  the Saudis
were indeed the State sponsors of 9/11, why on earth did the US and the
Atlantic Alliance (under the doctrine of collective security) choose to
wage a "Just War" of retribution against Afghanistan. Did they get their
countries mixed up?

9/11 Truth

Many 9/11 Truthers across America are now calling for the release of the
28 classified pages.  They are also accusing the FBI of coverup and
complicity.

All eyes are on the classified 28 pages, which document Saudi support
for the alleged hijackers. Meanwhile, the irrefutable evidence of
controlled demolition of the Twin Towers –not to mention the mysterious
collapse of WTC 7 which was announced by CNN and the BBC more than 20
minutes before it occurred–  no longer constitutes the centrefold of the
9/11 Truth movement:   ’The Saudis are behind 9/11 and our government is
protecting them."

Framed in a "Tele Novela" style scenario featuring wealthy Saudis in the
plush suburban surroundings of Sarasota, Florida two weeks before 9/11,
the New York Post describes the circumstances of Saudi involvement
(quoting the FBI 9/11 Review Commission Report) in an article entitled
How the FBI is whitewashing the Saudi connection to 9/11: .

     "Just 15 days before the 9/11 attacks, a well-connected Saudi
family suddenly abandoned their luxury home in Sarasota, Fla., leaving
behind jewelry, clothes, opulent furniture, a driveway full of cars —
including a brand new Chrysler PT Cruiser — and even a refrigerator full
of food.

     About the only thing not left behind was a forwarding address. The
occupants simply vanished without notifying their neighbors, realtor or
even mail carrier.

     The 3,300-square-foot home on Escondito Circle (see image right)
belonged to Esam Ghazzawi, a Saudi adviser to the nephew of then-King
Fahd. But at the time, it was occupied by his daughter and son-in-law,
who beat a hasty retreat back to Saudi Arabia just two weeks before the
attacks after nearly a six-year stay here.

     Neighbors took note of the troubling coincidence and called the
FBI, which opened an investigation that led to the startling discovery
that at least one "family member" trained at the same flight school as
some of the 9/11 hijackers in nearby Venice, Fla.

     … The Saudi-9/11 connection in Florida was no small part of the
overall 9/11 investigation. Yet it was never shared with Congress. Nor
was it mentioned in the 9/11 Commission Report.

     Now it’s being whitewashed again, in a newly released report by the
9/11 Review Commission, set up last year by Congress to assess "any
evidence now known to the FBI that was not considered by the 9/11
Commission." Though the FBI acknowledges the Saudi family was
investigated, it maintains the probe was a dead end.

     The panel’s report also doesn’t explain why visitor security logs
for the gated Sarasota community and photos of license tags matched
vehicles driven by the hijackers, including 9/11 ringleader Mohamed Atta.

     The three-member review panel was appointed by FBI Director James
Comey, who also officially released the findings.

     Former Democratic Sen. Bob Graham, who in 2002 chaired the
congressional Joint Inquiry into 9/11, maintains the FBI is covering up
a Saudi support cell in Sarasota for the hijackers. He says the
al-Hijjis "urgent" pre-9/11 exit suggests "someone may have tipped them
off" about the coming attacks.

     Graham has been working with a 14-member group in Congress to urge
President Obama to declassify 28 pages of the final report of his
inquiry which were originally redacted, wholesale, by President George
W. Bush.

     ….

     Sources who have read the censored Saudi section say it cites CIA
and FBI case files that directly implicate officials of the Saudi
Embassy in Washington and its consulate in Los Angeles in the attacks —
which if true, would make 9/11 not just an act of terrorism, but an act
of war by a foreign government. The section allegedly identifies
high-level Saudi officials and intelligence agents by name, and details
their financial transactions and other dealings with the San Diego
hijackers. It zeroes in on the Islamic Affairs Department of the Saudi
Embassy, among other Saudi entities.

     The [FBI] review commission, however, concludes there is "no
evidence" that any Saudi official provided assistance to the hijackers,
even though the panel failed to interview Graham or his two key
investigators — former Justice Department attorney Dana Lesemann and FBI
investigator Michael Jacobson — who ran down FBI leads tying Saudi
officials to the San Diego hijackers and documented their findings in
the 28 pages. (emphasis added)

The key figure behind this new wave of propaganda is former Senator Bob
Graham, who led the joint inquiry of the Senate and the House
intelligence committees together with Rep. Porter Goss, a career CIA
official who was subsequently appointed Director of National
Intelligence (DNI) by the Bush administration. Graham coordinated the
drafting and editing of the report including the 28 classified pages on
Saudi Arabia.

While Graham is now heralded by the mainstream media as a 911 Truther,
the evidence suggests that immediately in the wake of 9/11, he was
involved (together with Porter Goss) in a coverup on behalf of
Bush-Cheney. According to Kevin Ryan, "in the months following 9/11,
both Goss and Graham rejected calls for an investigation":

     The Senate voted for one anyway, however, and that led both Bush
and Cheney to attempt to stop it or limit its scope. Apparently the best
they could do was to make sure that Goss and Graham were put in charge.
That seemed to work as the Inquiry began in February 2002, more than
five months after the attacks, and the approach taken was one of
uncritical deference to the Bush Administration and the intelligence
community.

     Goss immediately made it clear that the Inquiry would not be
looking for guilt or accountability with regard to 9/11. Saying he was
"looking for solutions, not scapegoats," Goss continued to defend the
White House with regard to warnings the president had received about an
impending attack, saying it was "a lot of nonsense." The FBI did not
cooperate but that didn’t seem to bother Goss and Graham. (Kevin Ryan,
The 9/11 Joint Congressional Inquiry and the 28 Missing Pages, Global
Research, March 14, 2014

Both the joint inquiry led by Graham and the 9/11 Commission were part
of a Big Lie.  And now Bob Graham and 9/11 Commission Chairman Thomas
Kean are accusing the FBI of camouflage and the Saudis of collusion in
the 9/11 attacks, while failing to acknowledge coverup and complicity at
the highest levels of the US government.

According to Bob Graham in an interview with the Miami Herald,

      ’The FBI has served America through most of its history. There
were stumbles by the agency before 9/11 and since the tragedy there has
been a consistent effort to cover up the extent of Saudi Arabia’s
involvement.’ (emphasis added)

And because Bob Graham accuses the FBI and the federal government, the
9/11 Truth movement applauds without realizing that these accusations
directed against the FBI are "framed" with a view to sustaining the
mainstream 9/11 narrative. What is at stake is a desperate ploy to
uphold the legend that Muslims were behind 9/11 and that Saudi Arabia
was behind the terrorists giving them money, with the FBI involved in a
coverup, George W. Bush  protecting his Saudi cronies because the Bushes
and the bin Ladens were "intimo amigos".

Former Senator Graham  "smells a rat" and that rat is the FBI and
complicit government agencies:

     "This is a pervasive pattern of covering up the role of Saudi
Arabia in 9/11 by all of the agencies of federal government which have
access to information that might illuminate Saudi Arabia’s role in 9/11."

     "The 28 pages primarily relate to who financed 9/11, and they point
a very strong finger at Saudi Arabia as being the principal financier,"
he said, adding, "I am speaking of the kingdom," or government, of Saudi
Arabia, not just wealthy individual Saudi donors.

But who is the rat? The FBI or Senator Bob Graham who is visibly
involved in a coverup on behalf of US intelligence? He accuses US
government agencies of negligence, which serves to arouse protest
against the FBI by many 9/11 Truthers.

Graham’s staged accusations thereby serve to distract the American
public’s attention from the real evidence, amply documented  that the
WTC towers were brought down through controlled demolition and that
Islamic terrorists were not behind the 9/11 attacks. The issue of Saudi
financial support of al Qaeda is not only known and documented since the
heyday of the Soviet Afghan war, it is irrelevant in establishing who
was behind the terror attacks. Moreover, the contents of the 28
classified pages are known.

In a bitter irony, Graham’s track record (mentioned above) in supporting
the official 9/11 narrative on behalf of Bush-Cheney is not mentioned:

     Former Senator Bob Graham (D-Fla.), who co-chaired a congressional
inquiry into 9/11 — separate from the 9/11 Commission — stated, as
though now it was obvious, "None of the people leading this
investigation think it is credible that 19 people — most who could not
speak English and did not have previous experience in the United States
— could carry out such a complicated task without external assistance."

     Now, Graham says, a breakthrough may finally be around the corner
with the upcoming declassification of the 28 pages of the "Joint Inquiry
into Intelligence Community Activities Before and After the Terrorist
Attacks of September 11, 2001."

Calling for the official release and publication of the 28 page
classified section of the joint inquiry report pertaining to Saudi
Arabia is an obvious red-herring. The objective is to confuse matters,
create divisions within the 9/11 Truth movement and ultimately dispel
the fact that the 9/11 attacks were a carefully organized False Flag
event which was used to declare war on Afghanistan as well as usher in
sweeping anti-terrorist legislation.

Both the Congressional inquiry as well the 9/11 Commission report are
flawed, their objective was to sustain the official narrative that
America was under attack on September 11, 2001. And Graham’s role in
liaison with the CIA, is "damage control" with a view to protecting
those who were behind the demolition of the WTC towers as well
sustaining the Al Qaeda legend, which constitutes the cornerstone of US
military doctrine under the so-called "Global War on Terrorism".

Without 9/11 and the "Global War on Terrorism", the warmongers in high
office would not have a leg to stand on. In turn, 9/11 Truth is an
encroachment which undermines war propaganda and the US-led campaign of
Islamophobia, which is sweeping the Western World.

No comments:

Post a Comment