9/11 Sixteen Years Later: Why do Bill Moyers and Robert Parry Accept Miracles?

Sixteen years ago when three buildings in the World Trade Center collapsed neatly into their own footprints, few people considered the possibility that the collapses were due to controlled demolition. Even in the days and weeks afterward, as the horror of the moment subsided, still few questioned or doubted the official story. Gradually however that started to change. And one of the first people who began significantly raising people’s consciousness on the matter is the man giving the talk in the video above.

David Ray Griffin is considered by some to be the father of the 9/11 truth movement. His books include The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions About the Bush Administration & 9/11 and Debunking 9/11 Debunking: An Answer to Popular Mechanics & Other Defenders of the Official Conspiracy Theory. Griffin is a retired professor of religious studies at Claremont School of Theology. The talk he gives in the above video took place six years ago–yet in it he examines a question that remains extremely crucial and relevant todayWhy do so many choose to remain willfully blind to the truth about 9/11? And specifically he singles out two people in particular whose blindness on this matter has been quite striking: Bill Moyers and Robert Parry.

Both Moyers and Parry have been viewed, correctly to a large extent, as outspoken adversaries of the power structure in Washington. Both are known for their investigative reporting and both have been perceived as crusading journalists for the truth. Journalists are trained to be skeptics. You would think that reporters of this caliber might at some point have considered it odd that one of the collapsed WTC buildings was never even hit by an airplane and decided to look into it. You would think that they might at least have interviewed an architect, engineer, or physicist who could have explained how the laws of physics apply to steel-framed office buildings. Yes, Moyers probably would not have been allowed to air such a report on his PBS program, but Parry, who operates his own Consortium News website, certainly could have written such a story and published it. But neither ever did.

And not only have Parry and Moyers both failed to look into the truth of what really happened on 9/11, but both have attacked the 9/11 truth movement. And this is the focus of Griffin’s talk. He makes a point–and it’s a valid one–that for Moyers and Parry to accept the official 9/11 story they must believe in “miracles.” For yes, building collapses under the circumstances that were in effect on 9/11 could be nothing short of that.

The issue of why so many people choose willful blindness over truth–not only the truth about 9/11 but the world in general, and the nature of the people running it–is a question I’m actually examining in a new essay I’m writing. I hope to have the essay posted in a day or two. In the meantime, on this anniversary of 9/11, please enjoy Griffin’s talk. If you can spare the hour and thirty-three minutes to watch it all the way through, I think you’ll find it both informative as well as entertaining. But you may want to do so pronto. This is one of those videos that might end up getting removed from YouTube fairly quickly. And as you see when you click the button, there are already restrictions on it.

Related

Advertisements

بعد انقلاب السحر الداعشي القاعدي على الساحر لا بد من اعادة بناء الجدران والتصدي للمقاومات العربية العابرة لحدود سايكس بيكو

Related Videos

Related Articles

Want to Stop Terrorism? Get out of the Middle East


By Dr Geoff Davies

 

June 10, 2017 “Information Clearing House” – The tragic loss of innocent lives to terrorist acts will not stop until we admit to the folly of current policies.

Lost amid the genuine anguish, the outrage, the media frenzy and the political posturing after each terrorist event in the West is a simple question: “Why are they so angry, these terrorists?”

You don’t really have to look far for an answer.

Western powers have been meddling in the Middle East for a very long time. A few examples will suffice.

In 1953, Britain and the U.S. conspired to overthrow democratically-elected Iranian Prime Minister Mossadegh and replace him with a tyrant — the Shah of Iran. Mossadegh wanted to nationalise a British oil company and reap the profits for Iran. It was Iran’s oil, after all. The Shah was more obliging, and let the flows of profits and cheap oil to the West continue.

We know how well that ended. The Shah’s iron-fisted repression eventually produced a fundamentalist theocratic revolution and a regime since labelled as one of the “axis of evil”.

Saudi Arabia is well-known to be the source of Wahhabism, the fundamentalist Islamic sect that promotes the Sharia law so loathed and dreaded by the likes of Pauline Hanson. Yet Saudi Arabia is an ally of the U.S. and, perforce, of Australia. How come? Well, Saudi Arabia sits on the world’s biggest pool of oil.

Saudi Arabia has also given the world Osama bin Laden and most of the terrorists who brought down the Twin Towers in New York in 2001. Saudi Arabia is widely reputed to be the major, though unofficial, source of funds supporting Middle Eastern terrorists. So why is Saudi Arabia an ally?

The 2003 invasion of Iraq has been an unmitigated disaster. A recent estimate is that there have been nearly 200,000 civilian deaths in the aftermath. Iraq quickly descended into civil war and anarchy (as widely predicted), the conflict spread into neighbouring Syria and Islamic State, or ISIS, spread out of Syria. The conflict has been the major recruiting incentive to Islamic extremism and terrorism. Assessments to that effect even by our own intelligence agencies are occasionally leaked or mentioned indiscreetly.

The invasion of Iraq was illegal and based on a transparently flimsy allegation that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction. It was inflicted by Western governments in the face of clear opposition from their citizens, voiced through polls and the biggest street demonstrations since the Vietnam War era. Even in the U.S. only 50% of the people supported it. It was principally driven by President George W. Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair, with our own Prime Minister Howard enthusiastically yapping along behind.

The U.S. regularly conducts remote drone assassinations around the world. They were presided over for eight years by the saintly Barack Obama. These regularly kill innocent people, along with the alleged enemy target. That is, if the intelligence supposedly identifying the target is even reliable. Can you argue that death falling unpredictably from the sky is not terrorism?

There are many more terrorist attacks and innocent casualties in the Middle East itself than in Western countries, though only the latter attract a Western media frenzy.

The collapse of Syria into anarchy, which is the source of recent tides of refugees into Europe, was precipitated by a combination of the war in neighbouring Iraq and a prolonged and severe drought, plausibly aggravated by global warming. The latter, of course, is due to burning fossil fuels, including Middle Eastern oil.

Middle Eastern terrorism has been generated or severely aggravated by a century or more of political interference by Western powers for reasons of empire and oil. The oil has been used for the maintenance of Western military and industrial superiority. Even so, it could simply have been purchased, more cheaply, for a fair market price.

The dark irony is that burning all that oil will bring down the Western industrial system anyway, along with much else, through global warming.

So why are these young terrorists so angry? Is it really so hard to figure out?

The currently escalating cycle of outrage and counter-attack is destroying their countries and our once-open, liberal democracies, as more and more draconian police-state measures are imposed on us in a futile quest for security.

Western blundering around in the Middle East has been profoundly counter-productive. Worse, many Western actions verge into tolerance of or active collusion in terrorism.

The remedy is obvious: withdraw from the Middle East.

We manage to ignore or tolerate plenty of other tyrannical regimes around the world, so the likely continuation of outrages within the Middle East is not a reason for us to stay on. Our presence routinely makes things worse. The sooner we get out the sooner they are likely to begin the slow process of settling into less lethal arrangements.

Dr Geoff Davies is an author, commentator and scientist. Geoff is the author of The Rise and Failure of the Radical Right (2017, BetterNature Books). He blogs at Better Nature.

Copyright © 2017 Independent Australia

The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Information Clearing House.

 

Click for Spanish, German, Dutch, Danish, French, translation- Note- Translation may take a moment to load.

How I Know That the Sauds Did the 9/11 Attacks

How I Know That the Sauds Did the 9/11 Attacks

ERIC ZUESSE | 10.06.2017 | WORLD

How I Know That the Sauds Did the 9/11 Attacks

As a historian, I recognize that everything we know about history is from sources, and depends upon the reliability of those sources. Here, my main sources will be identified, and linked-to, so that any reader online can go directly to them, and won’t need to rely upon me but can go directly to the sources and evaluate them (my evidence) on one’s own.

First of all, however, reference will be made here to the three main countries (other than Afghanistan, which America first invaded for having allegedly perpetrated 9/11; and Iraq, which we next invaded for having allegedly perpetrated it) that have been accused, at different times, for allegedly having done those attacks; and anyone who wants to see my main previous article on each of these three country’s involvement or non-involvement in the 9/11 attacks, can access that presentation simply by clicking onto the respective link here for that given country:

ISRAEL

IRAN

SAUDI ARABIA

Regarding each one of those three ‘suspects’, my article there links directly to its sources, so that the reliance is, again, not to my own evidence, but to the evidence that others have presented.

Of course, the CIA and the George W. Bush White House have also been alleged to have been involved. Anyone who scours the present article and its sources will find plenty of evidence implicating them; but the U.S. regime cannot go to war against itself; and, so, only the foreign government that actually financed and organized the 9/11 attacks, will be the focus here.

However, none of that will make much sense outside of the broader context of the article that I wrote documenting how the Cold War had ended in 1991 only on the Russian side while it was secretly continued on the U.S. side, which resolutely aims to conquer Russia. As things have turned out subsequent to 1990, ‘the war against communism’ had really been just the sales-pitch for a campaign ultimately to achieve U.S. control over the entire world — it was not really an ideological war — on the American side. Understanding this, is basic to everything. And America’s ‘war against terrorism’ is (as is well documented in the excerpts below) likewise fake. But that’s being said only in the way of preparation — any reader here will make his decisions solely upon the basis of the evidence, which is given here.

Other than your reading those basics, the following will present the supplementary evidence to my case that Saudi Arabia — that’s to say, the Saudi government; that’s to say, the Saudi royal family — did it. This will be the relevant back-story, to how and why they did it, but all of it will be presented here by others, not by me.

My function in setting forth this history will simply be organizing these sources for the back-story, as follows:

——

Nafeez Ahmed, 2005, The War on Truth: 9/11, Disinformation and the Anatomy of Terrorism:

pp.3-5:

In the summer of 1979, a group of powerful elites from various countries gathered at an internationcal conference in Jerusalem to promote and exploit the idea of ‘international terrorism.’ The forum, officially known as the Jerusalem Conference on International Terrorism (JCIT), was organized by Benjamin Netanyahu. … 

Over two decades ago, the JCIT established the ideological foundations for the ‘War on Terror.’ The JCIT’s defining theme was that international terrorism constituted an organized political movement whose ultimate origin was the Soviet Union. All terrorist groups were ultimately products of it, and could be traced back to, this single source, which — according to the JCIT — provided financial, military, and logistical assistance to disparate terrorist movements around the globe. The mortal danger to Western security and democracy posed by the worldwide scope of this international terrorist movement required an apropriate worldwide anti-terrorism offensive, consisting of the mutual coordination of Western military intelligence services.

But as Philip Paull documents extensively in his Masters thesis at San Francisco State University [and summarized in the link to this link], the JCIT’s own literature and use of source documentation was profoundly flawed [he shows they lied]. … 

Who exactly were the primary architects of the JCIT’s ‘international terrorism’ project? According to Paull, ‘present and former members of the Israeli and United States governments,… and reactionary British and French politicians and publicists.… [They] included: Menachim Begin,… Benzion Netanyahu, then Cornell University professor emeritus [and Benjamin Netanyahu’s father],… Paul Johnson,… Richard Pipes,… Ray S. Cline,… George Bush Sr. …

——

David B. Ottaway, 2008, The King’s Messenger: Prince Bandar:

pp.41-44:

In the fall of 1979, Bandar took eight courses in international economics and politics, political theory, U.S. foreign policy, and Middle Eeast politics, scoring four As, and four B pluses, according to a transcript of his school records.6 Mystery still surrounds his master’s thesis, which focused on the domestic origins of U.S. foreign policy. Though apparently it was extremely well written, Bandar received only a B plus. West said in one of his daily diary entries that the thesis was ‘exceptionally good’. … But in another entry, he said ‘I cannot help but wonder how much help he might have had with it.’8 One person who almost certainly helped Bandar was Fred Dutton.

West kept Bandar’s father informed abut his progress. When he went to tell Sultan about Bandar’s final grades in June 1980, Sultan joked that Bandar had ‘spent a lot of money’ on getting his degree, in resonse to which West quiped, ‘That was the reason he received a B plus instead of an A in economics.’9 Even [President] Carter’s national security adviser, Zbigniew Brzezinski, read the thesis, commenting that Bandar had learned a lot about the U.S. decision-making process and explained how it affected Saudi Arabia’s interests ‘in an interesting and imaginative way.’10…

Almost immediately after his return in June 1979, Bandar found himself called upon for help by President Carter once again. …

Secretly, Carter had already turned to the kingdom for help, calling in Bandar and asking him to deliver a message to [King] Fahd pleading for an increase in Saudi [oil] production. Fahd’s reply, according to Bandar, was ‘Tell my friend, the president of the United States of America, when they need our help, they will not be disappointed.’13 The king was true to his world. … 

West’s diary corroborates Bandar’s account of how Saudi Arabia came to Carter’s rescue. West wrote that on May 30 he began discussing with Hamilton Jordan what they could do to get Carter reelected. …

The success of this venture in oil diplomacy gave Bandar enormous standing in Washington. In early December 1979, Carter asked the prince to come to the White House so that he could thank him personally for the Saudi help in alleviating the U.S. energy crunch. … The meeting was kept secret even from the State Department. …

Bandar, still only a pilot and with no diplomatic standing, was becoming involved in every aspect of Carter’s Middle East policy.  …

pp.56-57:

The Saudi drive to export its religious influence eventually reached the United States. … In November 1980, a group of pro-Khomeni Iranian activists had seized control of the site [the Islamic Mosque and Cultural Center on Massachusetts Avenue] and ousted its Egyptian (Sunni) imam. …

In the turbulent decade after the Iranian revolution, the U.S. government welcomed this new Saudi religious activism, viewing it as a badly needed counterweight to help contain Iran’s drive to expand its religious and political influence. The Saudi export of Wahhabi Islam would eventually develop into an impressive soft power that the House of Saud could extend across the Muslim world. … Before long, this international activism took concrete form in a jihad aimed at the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, which had begun [invading on 24 December 1979] [months after having provided only advisors to an independent leftist-revolutionary government that turned out to be ignoring much of Moscow’s advice] the same year as Iran’s revolution. … Starting in the early 1980s, the Saudi government provided several billions of dollars in arms and other assistance to the cause of freeing Afghanistan from godless communists. Reagan, of course, was careful to call them ‘freedom fighters’ rather than ‘holy warriors.’

——

VIDEO: 1979 Zbigniew Brzezinski to the Mujahideen: “Your cause is right and God is on your side!”

——

The Brzezinski Interview with Le Nouvel Observateur (1998)

Translated from the French by William Blum and David N. Gibbs. This translation was published in Gibbs, “Afghanistan: The Soviet Invasion in Retrospect,” International Politics 37, no. 2, 2000, pp. 241-242/

Original French version appeared in “Les Révélations d’un Ancien Conseilleur de Carter: ‘Oui, la CIA est Entrée en Afghanistan avant les Russes…’” Le Nouvel Observateur [Paris], January 15-21, 1998, p. 76. Click here for original French text.

Note that all ellipses appeared in the original transcript, as published in Le Nouvel Observateur.

Question: The former director of the CIA, Robert Gates, stated in his memoirs that the American intelligence services began to aid the Mujahiddin in Afghanistan six months before the Soviet intervention. Is this period, you were the national securty advisor to President Carter. You therefore played a key role in this affair. Is this correct?

Brzezinski: Yes. According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahiddin began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan on December 24, 1979. But the reality, closely guarded until now, is completely otherwise: Indeed, it was July 3, 1979 that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the president in which I explained to him that in my opinion this aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention [emphasis added throughout].

Q: Despite this risk, you were an advocate of this covert action. But perhaps you yourself desired this Soviet entry into the war and looked for a way to provoke it?

B: It wasn’t quite like that. We didn’t push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would.

Q: When the Soviets justified their intervention by asserting that they intended to fight against secret US involvement in Afghanistan , nobody believed them. However, there was an element of truth in this. You don’t regret any of this today?

B: Regret what? That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it? The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter, essentially: «We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam war.” Indeed, for almost 10 years, Moscow had to carry on a war that was unsustainable for the regime , a conflict that bought about the demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet empire.

Q: And neither do you regret having supported Islamic fundamentalism, which has given arms and advice to future terrorists?

B : What is more important in world history? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some agitated Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?

Q: «Some agitated Moslems»? But it has been said and repeated: Islamic fundamentalism represents a world menace today…

B: Nonsense! It is said that the West has a global policy in regard to Islam. That is stupid: There isn’t a global Islam. Look at Islam in a rational manner, without demagoguery or emotionalism. It is the leading religion of the world with 1.5 billion followers. But what is t here in com m on among fundamentalist Saudi Arabia, moderate Morocco, militarist Pakistan, pro-Western Egypt, or secularist Central Asia? Nothing more than what unites the Christian countries…

Additional Sources: …

——

Anatomy of a Victory: CIA’s Covert Afghan War

By: Steve Coll, Washington Post, July 19, 1992

… In 1980, not long after Soviet forces invaded Afghanistan [on 24 December 1979] to prop up a sympathetic leftist government, President Jimmy Carter signed the first – and for many years the only -presidential “finding” on Afghanistan, the classified directive required by U.S. law to begin covert operations, according to several Western sources familiar with the Carter document.

The Carter finding sought to aid Afghan rebels in “harassment” of Soviet occupying forces in Afghanistan through secret supplies of light weapons and other assistance. The finding did not talk of driving Soviet forces out of Afghanistan or defeating them militarily, goals few considered possible at the time, these sources said.

The cornerstone of the program was that the United States, through the CIA, would provide funds, some weapons and general supervision of support for the mujaheddin rebels, but day-to-day operations and direct contact with the mujaheddin would be left to the Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence agency, or ISI. The hands-off U.S. role contrasted with CIA operations in Nicaragua and Angola.

Saudi Arabia agreed to match U.S. financial contributions to the mujaheddin and distributed funds directly to ISI. China sold weapons to the CIA and donated a smaller number directly to Pakistan, but the extent of China’s role has been one of the secret war’s most closely guarded secrets.

In all, the United States funneled more than $2 billion in guns and money to the mujaheddin during the 1980s, according to U.S. officials. It was the largest covert action program since World War II.

In the first years after the Reagan administration inherited the Carter program, the covert Afghan war “tended to be handled out of Casey’s back pocket,” recalled Ronald Spiers, a former U.S. ambassador to Pakistan, the base of the Afghan rebels. Mainly from China’s government, the CIA purchased assault rifles, grenade launchers, mines and SA-7 light antiaircraft weapons, and then arranged for shipment to Pakistan. Most of the weapons dated to the Korean War or earlier. The amounts were significant — 10,000 tons of arms and ammunition in 1983, according to Yousaf — but a fraction of what they would be in just a few years.

Beginning in 1984, Soviet forces in Afghanistan began to experiment with new and more aggressive tactics against the mujaheddin, based on the use of Soviet special forces, called the Spetsnaz, in helicopter-borne assaults on Afghan rebel supply lines. As these tactics succeeded, Soviet commanders pursued them increasingly. …

In March 1985, President Reagan signed National Security Decision Directive 166, and national security adviser Robert D. McFarlane signed an extensive annex, augmenting the original Carter intelligence finding that focused on “harassment” of Soviet occupying forces, according to several sources. Although it covered diplomatic and humanitarian objectives as well, the new, detailed Reagan directive used bold language to authorize stepped-up covert military aid to the mujaheddin, and it made clear that the secret Afghan war had a new goal: to defeat Soviet troops in Afghanistan through covert action and encourage a Soviet withdrawal.

New Covert U.S. Aid

The new covert U.S. assistance began with a dramatic increase in arms supplies — a steady rise to 65,000 tons annually by 1987, according to Yousaf — as well as what he called a “ceaseless stream” of CIA and Pentagon specialists who traveled to the secret headquarters of Pakistan’s ISI on the main road near Rawalpindi, Pakistan.

There the CIA specialists met with Pakistani intelligence officers to help plan operations for the Afghan rebels. …

——

Richard Labévière, 2000, «Dollars for Terror: The United States and Islam»

p.6:

…Between 1994 and 1997, Bill Clinton was happy to allow Pakistan and Saudi Arabia to support the Taleban, seeing them as a useful counterbalance to Iran’s influence. …

‘The policy of guiding the evolution of Islam and of helping them against our adversaries worked marvelously well in Afghanistan against the Red Army’ explains a former CIA analyst. ‘The same doctrines can still be used to destabilize what remains of Russian power. …’ In a certain sense, the Cold War is still going on. For years Graham Fuller, former Deputy Director of the National Council on Intelligence at the CIA, has been talking up the ‘modernizing virtues’ of the Islamists, insisting on their anti-Statist concepts of the economy. Listening to him, you would almost take the Taleban and their Wahhabi allies for liberals. ‘Islam, in theory at least, is firmly anchored in the traditions of free trade and private enterprise,’ wrote Fuller.2 … ‘Islam does not glorify the State’s role in the economy.’ …

——

U. S. – Jihadists Relation, Part II: Waging Jihad to Defeat the Soviet Union

Akbar Ganji [7 July 2014. The links have been updated here.]

…Bin Laden was a civil engineer and a member of a wealthy Saudi family, which was not, however, a part of the Saudi royal family. He recruited 4000 Saudi citizens and took them to Afghanistan. Altogether, 100,000 fighters were recruited and taken to Afghanistan, who were funded, armed and trained by CIA and Saudi Arabia. The high level of civilian casualties that the war would certainly entail was considered by the Carter administration, but was set aside. One senior official of the Carter administration said, «The question here was whether it was morally acceptable that, in order to keep the Soviets off balance, which was the reason for the operation, it was permissible to use other lives for our geopolitical interests». Representative Charles Wilson, a Texas Democrat, said that Carter’s CIA director Stansfield Turner said, «I decided I could live with that [high civilian casualties]».

But, the United States did not stop there. Meeting in 1985 with the Mujahideen leaders at the White House, Ronald Reagan referred to them as the «moral equivalent of America’s Founding Fathers». Think about it for a moment: Bin Laden and other hardline Muslim fundamentalists and leaders of the Mujahideen, such as Gulbuddin Hekmatyar and Taliban leader Mullah Omar, were moral equivalent of George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and other founding fathers. In the same meeting with the Jihadists, Reagan said, «We have here six Afghanistan freedom fighters. There is a man here whose wife was killed in front of his two children. Another one [is here] who lost his brother in a town, village, in which 105 people were massacred. One lost a brother who was the mayor of that village. They are here to tell the outside world, the free world, what is really going on in Afghanistan». Earlier in 1982, Reagan had dedicated the space shuttle Colombia to what he called freedom fighters in Afghanistan. «This is Colombia lifting, representing man’s finest aspirations in the field of science and technology, so too the struggle of the Afghan people represents man’s highest aspirations for freedom. I am dedicating on behalf of the American people the March 22 of Colombia to the people of Afghanistan,» he said. …

——

Panama Papers reveal George Soros’ deep money ties to secretive weapons, intel investment firm

By Peter Byrne · Published May 16, 2016

… Soros Capital [on 24 January 1995] set up an offshore company in the Cayman Islands for the purpose of investing private equity with the Carlyle Group, alongside members of Saudi Arabia’s Bin Laden family. Carlyle’s partners include ex-heads of state and former CIA officials. The private equity partnership specializes in buying and selling weapons manufacturing and intelligence gathering companies with government and military contracts and it also uses secret offshore companies to conduct business. …

Bin Laden Family Liquidates Holdings With Carlyle Group

By Kurt Eichenwald, New York Times, October 26, 2001

…In recent years, Frank C. Carlucci, the chairman of Carlyle and a former secretary of defense, has visited the [bin Laden] family’s headquarters in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, as have former President George Bush and James A. Baker III, the former secretary of state. Mr. Bush works as an adviser to Carlyle, and Mr. Baker is a partner in the firm.

The family’s financial relationship with Carlyle began in 1994. At that time, they committed $2 million to a buyout fund, Carlyle Partners II, a tiny fraction of the $1.3 billion raised for the fund. …

——

‘Sensitive’ UK terror funding inquiry may never be published

Investigation into foreign funding and support of jihadi groups operating in UK understood to focus on Saudi Arabia

Shares 27,931, Jessica Elgot, Wednesday 31 May 2017 10.20 EDT

An investigation into the foreign funding and support of jihadi groups that was authorised by David Cameron may never be published, the Home Office has admitted. …

——

SAUDI ARABIA LAVISHES CONSERVATIVE U.K. OFFICIALS WITH GIFTS, TRAVEL, AND PLUM CONSULTANCIES

Lee Fang, June 4 2017, 7:00 a.m.

NEW FIGURES RELEASED by British Parliament show that, at a time when U.K. Prime Minister Theresa May’s ties to Saudi Arabia have become an election issue, conservative government officials and members of Parliament were lavished with money by the oil-rich Saudi government with gifts, travel expenses, and consulting fees.

Tory lawmakers received the cash as the U.K. backs Saudi Arabia’s brutal war against Yemen, the poorest country in the Middle East. …

Qatar’s price is 400 billion dollars received by Trump سعر قطر 400 مليار قبضها ترامب

Qatar’s price is 400 billion dollars received by Trump

Written by Nasser Kandil,

مايو 30, 2017

Every reader can check the foisted part in the speech attributed to the Prince of Qatar when he reads the section about the US President “who will not continue due to legal prosecutions and legal irregularities” this talk cannot be issued by a major country that announces the hostility to America, so how from a small country that at the end it is under the control of America and its rule is protected by US military base.

The Saudi intention through the media platforms funded and operated by Mohammed Bin Salman on refusing the Qatari speech about violating the website of the Official News Agency and foisting a statement at the mouthpiece of the Prince means a deliberate intention to engage. The intention on preparing media reports and distributing them under the responsibility of Qatar about the relationship with Al-Qaeda, Taliban, Al Nusra, ISIS, Hezbollah, Hamas, Muslim Brotherhood, and Iran is a part of a preliminary campaign for a work that is supposed it needs the cover of Gulf, Arab, and international public opinion, so Egypt, UAE, Bahrain, America, and Israel are partners in estimating this coverage every one for a special reason regarding what is attributed to Qatar.

The interpretation of the war on Iran at Riyadh summit is by overpower Qatar which forms a Turkish expansion in the Gulf and a source of traditional inconvenience to Saudi Arabia, so controlling the Saudi leadership by a young Prince as Mohammed Bin Salman requires a prestige that did not obtained by the war on Yemen, so it is supposed to have another war, and to put the Gulf as a pure dominance area of Saudi Arabia in confronting Iran. Qatar has a huge gas wealth and an active satellite channel, so getting angry from them due to the Qatari rule that belongs to Saudi Arabia is a qualitative adding financially and in media.

King Salman gave the US President what he wants as money, deals, and politics especially regarding the relationship with Israel, so Qatar no longer has what distinguishes it in this respect. When Saudi Arabia joins the normalization, Qatar becomes small issue. What the King wants is to stabilize his successor his son in power and to compensate the loss in Syria and the inability in Yemen so that is represented by Qatar.

Probably the Saudi intelligence has opened the activities of the center of the electronic war which is called by the combating extremism center “moderation” in the presence of the US President Donald Trump. Its first duties was hacking the website of the Qatari Official News Agency and publishing attributed speech to the Qatari Price when he was sleeping, the statement has been published at midnight, so it is a strange timing to publish such a speech to the Prince of Qatar before the morning. The goal is to postpone the Qatari negation to what has been published and to accuse Qatar as a result of the delay of publishing speech and claiming the hacking, after it saw the dangerous reactions. This is said by the Saudis and whom they bring to comment on that speech.

Three years ago, the Saudis try to get the US green light to resolve the position of Qatar, and to put it under the Saudi control, it seems that the opportunity has not come but through the visit of Trump to Riyadh and his bartering the attracting deals with the Qatari rule especially in the light of the Turkish-American dispute, the position of Qatar with Turkey, and the Egyptian pressure on Washington to control the Qatari performance in the issue of the Muslim Brotherhood. Trump intended to name Hamas Movement as a terrorist movement in his speech at the summit, while Qatar boasts because it succeeded in bringing Hamas to the settlements through a new document, and the presence of Saudi-US understanding to escalate against Iran, and to consider the cooperation with Iran in Astana Path and the bilateral relationships by Qatar a double dealing. The result was selling Qatar to Saudi Arabia for four billion dollars received by Trump who  has given the green light.

Translated by Lina Shehadeh,

سعر قطر 400 مليار قبضها ترامب

ناصر قنديل

– يستطيع كلّ قارئ مدقق اكتشاف الدسّ في الكلام المنسوب لأمير قطر عندما يقرأ المقطع الخاص بالحديث عن الرئيس الأميركي «الذي لن يستمرّ بسبب ملاحقات عدلية وتجاوزات قانونية». وهو كلام لا يمكن صدوره من دولة عظمى تجاهر بالعداء لأميركا فكيف بدولة صغيرة تدور في الفلك الأميركي في نهاية المطاف، وتحمي حكمَها قاعدة عسكرية أميركية؟

– الإصرار السعودي عبر منابر الإعلام المموّلة والمشغّلة من محمد بن سلمان، على رفض الكلام القطري عن اختراق موقع وكالة الأنباء القطرية الرسمية ودسّ البيان بلسان الأمير، يعني نية مبيّتة بالاشتباك، والإصرار على إعداد تقارير إعلامية وتوزيعها عن مسؤولية قطر عن العلاقة بالقاعدة وطالبان والنصرة وداعش وحزب الله وحماس والإخوان المسلمين وإيران، هو جزء من حملة تمهيدية لعمل ما يُفترض أنه يحتاج لتغطية رأي عام خليجي وعربي ودولي، فتكون مصر والإمارات والبحرين وأميركا و«إسرائيل» شركاء في تقديم هذه التغطية كلّ لسبب يخصّه بما يُنسب لقطر.

– ترجمة الحرب على إيران في قمة الرياض هو بالاستيلاء على قطر، التي تشكّل امتداداً تركياً في الخليج ومصدر إزعاج تقليدي للسعودية. وضبط الزعامة السعودية بأمير شاب كمحمد بن سلمان يستدعي مهابة لم تأتِ بها حرب اليمن، ويفترض أن تأتي بها حرب أخرى، ووضع الخليج كمنطقة نفوذ خالصة للسعودية في مواجهة إيران، كيف وأنّ قطر ثروة غاز هائلة وقناة فضائية فاعلة يرتب الاستيلاء عليهما بحكم قطري تابع للسعودية إضافة نوعية مالياً وإعلامياً.

– منح الملك سلمان للرئيس الأميركي ما يريد من مال وصفقات وسياسة، خصوصاً في مجال العلاقة بـ»إسرائيل»، ولم يعُد لقطر ما تتميّز به في هذا المجال. فهذه السعودية عندما تنضمّ للتطبيع تصير قطر تفصيلاً صغيراً، وما يريده الملك تثبيت خلافة ولده في الحكم، وتعويضاً عن الخسارة في سورية والعجز في اليمن تمثله قطر.

– الأرجح أنّ المخابرات السعودية افتتحت نشاطات مركز الحرب الإلكترونية الذي أطلق عليه اسم مركز مكافحة التطرف «اعتدال»، بحضور الرئيس الأميركي دونالد ترامب، وكانت أولى مهامه قرصنة موقع الوكالة القطرية ونشر كلام منسوب للأمير القطري وهو نائم. فالبيان تمّ نشره على موقع الوكالة منتصف الليل، وهو توقيت غريب عجيب لنشر كلام قيل في وضح النهار لأمير الدولة، الذي يأوي إلى فراشه الساعة التاسعة ليلاً، والهدف تأخُّر النفي القطري لما نشر، واتهام قطر بسبب التأخير بأنها نشرت الكلام وتقوم بسحبه والادّعاء بالقرصنة لأنها تلمّست خطورة ردود الأفعال. وهذا ما يقوله السعوديون ومَن يستجلبونهم للتعليق على الكلام.

– منذ ثلاثة أعوام والسعوديون يسعون للحصول على الضوء الأخضر الأميركي لحسم وضع قطر ووضعها تحت الإبط السعودي. ويبدو أنّ الفرصة لم تحن إلا بزيارة ترامب للرياض ومقايضته الصفقات المغرية برأس الحكم القطري، خصوصاً في ظلّ الخلاف التركي الأميركي وموقع قطر مع تركيا، وضغط مصر على واشنطن طلباً لضبط الأداء القطري في قضية الإخوان المسلمين، وتعمّد ترامب تسمية حركة حماس كحركة إرهابية في خطابه في القمة، بينما تتباهى قطر بنجاحها في جلب حماس إلى خط التسويات بوثيقة جديدة، ووجود تفاهم سعودي أميركي على التصعيد بوجه إيران، واعتبار التعاون مع إيران في مسار أستانة والعلاقات الثنائية من جانب قطر لعباً على الحبال، وكانت الحصيلة بيع قطر للسعودية بأربعمئة مليار دولار قبضها ترامب، فأعطى الضوء الأخضر.

(Visited 348 times, 348 visits today)
Related Videos

 

Related Articles

The US-Jihadist Alliance Keeps Threatening the World

The US-Jihadist Alliance Keeps Threatening the World

ERIC ZUESSE | 26.05.2017 | WORLD

The US-Jihadist Alliance Keeps Threatening the World

With its $350 billion ten-year weapons-sale to the Saud family, the U.S. government’s alliance with the main family that funded and participated in the organization of the 9/11 attacks on the United States, and who have been protected now for 16 years by three successive U.S. Presidents — Bush, Obama, and currently Trump — reaches a higher level than ever before, and should finally begin to be recognized and widely discussed, no longer merely ignored, as it has been.

The former bagman who personally collected each one of the million-dollar-plus cash-donations to Osama bin Laden’s Al Qaeda until the organization’s bagman was captured by the FBI, said in his sworn court-testimony on 20 October 2014, «Without the money of the — of the Saudi, you will have nothing» of Al Qaeda. 9/11 required additionally the cooperation of George W. Bush. At first, Osama bin Laden blamed the Israeli government for the 9/11 attacks, but the flow of funds to the attackers came actually from the Saud family and their friends including the other royal families in the Gulf Cooperation Council, who are the other royal oil-Arabs, especially in Qatar and UAE — all of whom are allies of the Sauds and thus of the U.S. government. No money from Jews or from Israelis had actually supported anyone involved in producing the 9/11 attacks.

Furthermore, whereas anti-Semites, and also some anti-Zionists, picked up on bin Laden’s accusation that Israel was behind the 9/11 attacks, and they spread the myth of ‘the five dancing Israelis’ who allegedly had been somehow involved in or connected to the (supposedly unknown) perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks, the FBI’s investigation into that entire question ended finally on 14 April 2004, when an FBI agent in Newark, NJ, closed the case, by saying, after exhaustive investigation into a possible link of those ‘five dancing Israelis’ to the FBI’s PENTTBOM Investigation, which is the FBI’s investigation into the 9/11 attacks, «the evidence related to the above-listed investigation was determined to be of no value to the PENTTBOMB investigation».

So, the FBI’s three-year effort to find evidence that possibly might support bin Laden’s allegation against Israel, ultimately concluded that there was no evidence for it, at all. Actually, Osama bin Laden was a longtime agent of the Saud family to help the U.S. government to weaken the Soviet government, and he subsequently — after the end of the USSR and of its communism and of their entire Warsaw Pact military alliance — helped the U.S. government to weaken the lone rump remaining nation Russia, and to create the jihadist movement in the Chechnya region of Russia, in an attempt to break Russia apart. So, one might say that Osama bin Laden, like Saddam Hussein before him, had been a CIA asset whom the U.S. aristocracy later abandoned and killed, when the U.S. aristocracy concluded him to be no longer overall constructive for their purposes, but more of a detriment than an asset.

Though there is a ceaseless song-and-dance by the U.S. government pretending to oppose Al Qaeda and the many other jihadist groups that are trained and sometimes also led by Al Qaeda, and though Barack Obama in his first Presidential term killed many of Al Qaeda’s top leaders, the U.S. government has been working behind-the-scenes, along with the Sauds and its Arab allies, in order to arm and train the jihadists in Syria, Yemen, Libya, Chechnya, and other nations and regions where allies of either Russia or Iran can be overthrown and replaced by allies of the U.S.-jihadist alliance.

The aristocracies that constitute ‘the Western alliance’ ‘for freedom and democracy’, are actually determined to bring the entire world under their control, and the American aristocracy claims to lead them, but if they were ever to succeed, and both Russia and Iran and their allies were to come under their control, then there would first be a war between the major parties to the alliance in order to determine where the global center of power will be — in the United States, or in Saudi Arabia — one having a Christian majority, and the other being a Sharia law fundamentalist-Sunni-Islamic dictatorship and the symbolic and physical center of the world’s second-largest religion on its way to becoming the largest religion: Saudi Arabia. Israel, the Jewish dictatorship over its non-Jews, is on good terms with both the Saudi and the U.S. aristocracy, and Judaism is a tiny religion except amongst the world’s aristocracies, where it constitutes a significant player. Israel’s dictators would be satisfied regardless of whether the world is led from ‘Christian’ Washington, or from fundamentalist-Sunni Riyadh. Either way, no Shia political force would remain.

However, remarkably little thinking is being devoted to how the world would even be able to reach that stage, a unified dictatorial world government, because both Russia and Iran would need to be conquered in order to reach that stage, and this would inevitably entail a nuclear war between Russia and the United States, which would soon thereafter end life on this planet.

Now, under U.S. President Donald Trump, V.P. Mike Pence, and the entire Trump team, as well as under the prior Obama regime, the old anti-Semitic charge about 9/11, that ‘the Jews did it’, is replaced by the lie that «Iran did it».

President Trump, on 5 February 2017, was asked in a Super Bowl television interview, what his policies would be regarding Iran, and he answered (video here, transcript here): «They have total disregard for our country. They are the number one terrorist state». This (boldfaced) phrase is the standard one that Israel uses to refer to Iran — which, unlike Saudi Arabia, does support terrorism against Israel (which itself is a terrorist state). So: the U.S. President there was representing actually the Israeli people (or, specifically, Jewish Israelis), and not at all the American people. Trump had changed his tune on that as soon as he became elected, when he appointed a team of anti-Iranian bigots to lead his foreign policies, and broke practically every promise he had made in his campaign to go against «radical Islamic terrorism» — which, except against Israel, is entirely fundamentalist-Sunni, not at all Iranian (nor Shiite). Even George W. Bush didn’t blame Iran for it; he blamed Iraq.

But what, then, about «Russia did it?» Iran doesn’t have nuclear weapons, and in an environment such as this, maybe they should. Iranians would be idiots not to recognize where all of this is heading. They are now in America’s cross-hairs. And for Iranians (or anyone) to trust the U.S. would be insanity, under these conditions.

The real questions here are: Why is ‘the Western alliance’ ‘for freedom and democracy’ determined to conquer Russia and Iran? Why did U.S. President George Herbert Walker Bush, on 24 February 1990, secretly double-cross the then-Soviet leader— soon to be Russia’s President — Mikhail Gorbachev, so that the Cold War ended only on Russia’s side, and not also on America’s (NATO’s) side (such as GHW Bush promised but then secretly negated)? What, precisely, was GHW Bush’s actual plan? How did he see this ongoing war against Russia as ending? Was he simply obsessed with America’s global conquest? Why haven’t subsequent U.S. Presidents abandoned his secret plan, instead of carrying it out? Why haven’t the leaders and peoples of Europe, Japan, etc., abandoned the U.S government, and joined with Russia, in order to stave off a globe-ending nuclear war — or even just in order to put a stop to international jihadism? Will the public in at least one of the nations that claim to belong to ‘the Western alliance’ ‘for freedom and democracy’ need to overthrow their own government (not just its leaders) in order for freedom and democracy and peace to be able to return in even just one country?

The global dictatorship is already gripping pretty hard. Look at what has happened to the people of Syria. And of Iraq. And of Libya (now so bad that it’s no longer even being polled). And of Yemen. And of Ukraine. And that’s just for starters.

Douglas Valentine’s acclaimed new book, The CIA as Organized Crime, documents the shocking psychopathy of that organization; and, so, no one should be particularly surprised at the psychopathy of the organization that controls it.

How Trump Could Turn the Tables on His Political Enemies…and Crack Open the Deep State at the Same Time

911fol

Donald Trump seems to be like the guy in the old song: “Clowns to left of me, jokers to the right, here I am stuck in the middle with you.”

Between the clownish protesters-for-hire prancing around the streets of American cities, and the evil jokers of the deep state lurking in the shadows and aiming to annihilate him from the right, Trump seems to be getting into deeper and deeper difficulties. And to make matters more precarious, his transition team apparently is being infiltrated by some pretty shady characters. But there is a way Trump could turn the tables on his political enemies: launch a new investigation into 9/11 upon assuming office in January.

Suppose the Trump Justice Department were suddenly to “discover” the evidence of controlled demolition of the World Trade Center buildings. Or suppose the president were to appoint a special prosecutor to look into the matter. There are any number of ways the matter could be approached. But imagine if you will–Larry Silverstein being subpoenaed to testify about the insurance policies he took out less than 90 days before the 9/11 attacks; or expert after expert from Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth being called upon to give evidence about the unlikelihood of steel-frame buildings collapsing due to office fires. And if things got really down and dirty and nasty, Trump could issue an extradition warrant for the five dancing Israelis.

The deep state’s media apparatus would of course respond by accusing Trump of being a loony conspiracy theorist, but all the president would have to do is invite some 9/11 family members to the White House. Imagine a tearful 9/11 widow thanking the president for making it possible to see justice done at last. That would probably shut them up, or at least some of them at any rate.

The official 9/11 Commission Report is deeply flawed. The report doesn’t even mention the collapse of Building 7. All Trump would have to do is point to this to justify reopening the investigation. Such a move would immediately put Trump’s political enemies on the defensive, and would probably also have the effect of neutralizing some of the street protests. Additionally it could perhaps serve as a form of assassination insurance. Were the president to be assassinated in the middle of a newly-opened 9/11 investigation, hardly anyone would be willing to believe the “lone gunman” theory or buy into the possibility that it was an accident. Public suspicion would be aroused enormously. This does not necessarily mean Trump’s enemies would forego attempts to eliminate him through assassination. But it would make them more reluctant to try.

Maybe Trump should at least consider firing a shot over their bows. This could take the form of, say, a casual, fleeting reference in a speech to some aspect of 9/11–say for instance the fact that Building 7 was never hit by an airplane, and isn’t that curious. It would at least put his enemies on alert that if they don’t back off they could find their house of cards crumbling.

The following is an open letter to President-elect Trump from Christopher Bollyn, author of the Solving 9/11 series of books.

Donald J. Trump for President, Inc.
Trump Tower
725 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10022

November 11, 2016

Dear President-elect Trump,

My name is Christopher Bollyn. I am the author of Solving 9/11: The Deception that Changed the World. During my recent speaking tour across the United States, I was often asked about your position on 9/11 truth. The American people know that the government and media have covered-up the truth about 9/11. As president, many Americans hope you will help find the truth by carrying out a fully-fledged criminal investigation to determine who is really responsible for the terror atrocity that changed our nation.

The events of 9/11 profoundly changed this country and brought us the “War on Terror” with costly and disastrous wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

How can we go forward as a nation, crafting policies and waging war based on nothing but a pack of lies about what happened on 9/11?  How can we make America great again if we allow our nation to be governed by lies?

The 9/11 Commission members have gone on record saying that the government officials lied to the commission. John Farmer, for example, senior counsel to the commission, wrote:

“What government and military officials told Congress, the Commission, the media, and the public about who knew what when was almost entirely, and inexplicably, untrue.”

The American people are demanding a proper criminal investigation into the events of 9/11 to determine who is truly responsible for the terror atrocity that changed the world. We have every right to expect that from our government.

President Trump, will you initiate a proper criminal investigation into the events of 9/11?

Sincerely,

Christopher Bollyn

For more on Bollyn’s letter and the appeal he is sending to President-elect Trump click here.

%d bloggers like this: