We Were Lied To About 9/11 - Episode 7 - Dr. Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed


Dr. Nafeez Ahmed is an investigative journalist, bestselling author and international security scholar. He has contributed to two major terrorism investigations in the US and UK, the 9/11 Commission and the 7/7 Coroner’s Inquest, and has advised the Royal Military Academy Sandhust, British Foreign Office and US State Department, among other government agencies. His new novel, ZERO POINT, predicted a US-UK re-invasion of Iraq to put down an Islamist insurgency there. Nafeez is a regular contributor to The Guardian where he writes about the geopolitics of interconnected environmental, energy and economic crises via his Earth Insight global column. He has also written for The Independent, Sydney Morning Herald, The Age, The Scotsman, Foreign Policy, The Atlantic, Quartz, Prospect, New Statesman, Le Monde diplomatique, among many others.

Zero Point: http://www.amazon.com/Zero-Point-Nafeez-Ahmed/dp/1620075393/ref=sr_1_cc_1?s=aps&ie=UTF8&qid=1412118298&sr=1-1-catcorr&keyw...


Here is what is written about with regards to what Robin Cook said:


Here is what I was talking about with regards to a meeting to form "Al-Qaeda."


What's that smell?

I smell stale old incompetence and blowback memes, just what the PTB ordered, masked in the perfume of responsible use of language. Time to commit to some facts about Gladio Plan B. If you don't want to ask Sibel Edmonds about her new book, The Lone Gladio, then ask Marc Grossman. Ask Graham Fuller. Ask Fethullah Gulen. You might find out that:

  • We build mosques and madrasas. We identify, recruit, brainwash, indoctrinate, train, militarize, arm, equip, protect, transport, direct, and orchestrate individuals in each of these religious extremist groups who we have fighting in destabilization campaigns, in the Middle East, Central Asia, the Caucusus, and right here at home in the good ol' US of A.
  • This is not accidental, nor is it a relationship of convenience. We BUILT them from the ground up and control them. And the terror they have achieved, both at home and abroad, is SUCCESS for the likes of Grossman, Fuller, Gulen, and those wonderful dual nationals on the PNAC roster, who just got so gol darn lucky, when they got their new Pearl Harbor, which they had asked for just a year before 9/11/2001. And the death of a million plus which ensued was by design, and also very successful.

I'm sorry guys, but your professed reasonable rationale for not saying false flag has turned into ignorant dogma in support of a coverup. We've got a name for the office in the Pentagon, where this program of destabilization has been institutionalized. We've got a name that you won't speak. Nor will you say why.

Maybe you'll change your mind and try. Maybe find one of those mindfulness gurus who can teach you how to remember relevant things, such as Gladio Plan B and The Lone Gladio. Words you need to know and everyone needs to hear. Good luck!!!

Stop harassing me...

All over the internet to promote Sibel Edmonds, someone I have promoted MORE than anyone on Earth. Stop making "suggestions" like I'm pushing the idea of "stale old incompetence and blowback memes." Please, and thank you.

Unfortunate reaction to cognitive dissonance

WTF, Jon? You seriously think I'm harassing you? Is that how you avoid answering the questions about the content of my comments? By "all over the internet", do you mean the comment section of your YouTube show and these comments, promoting that show? A show that deals with subject matter relevant to what I'm asking about? That's a pretty small internet. But I suppose using the words "all over the internet" bolsters your "harassment" case. (Fail) At least Cindy did a good review of the book.

The Lone Gladio is about what I would say is the most important disclosure in our lifetimes. It centers on an institutionalized program, called Gladio Plan B, which is run out of an office in the Pentagon. You can get the concept easily by reading The Lone Gladio. You can get more non-fictionalized details by watching the six-part series Sibel did with Corbett on the subject:

Please watch all of these in order:
Sibel Edmonds on Gladio B – Part 1
Sibel Edmonds on Gladio B – Part 2
Sibel Edmonds on Gladio B – Part 3
Sibel Edmonds on Gladio B – Part 4
Sibel Edmonds Answers Your Questions on Gladio B
Sibel Edmonds Explains Who’s At The Top Of The Pyramid

You see, Jon, I actually think this is important stuff. And you have a show which talks about the surrounding factual context of it. So, I'm trying to ask you if you are going to reference it. I'm challenging other media producers to learn about Gladio Plan B. Some have responded incredibly positively. I have seen remarkable change in the perspectives of some, directly related to the profound effect The Lone Gladio had on them. You want to see a couple reviews from people who went from "meh" to "OMG!!!"? Try these:

Tom Secker's The Lone Gladio: A Video Review (Really well done)
Guillermo Jimenez Traces of Reality - Interview with Sibel about The Lone Gladio (Great interview skills - focused the discussion so well)

Guillermo has gone on to start including references to what he learned in his future podcasts already. This information has been available for almost two years from Sibel, but it was this book that made the difference. It's a really well written book and it's having a profound effect on the people who read it.

On the other hand, you did not/won't respond at all to that content, but now we find out are playing some weird defensive victim of harassment drama. Is that how you handle questions directly related to the content of your shows? Or is this the way you're dealing with the cognitive dissonance you're experiencing. It's totally natural, just before learning something that upsets your apple cart, but it looks like you've decided to deal with it in a fucked up way, if you ask me.

Guess what, I think you're being a dick about this and no, you won't be hearing from me anymore. I won't be promoting your show either. And you can definitely have your pissing contest by yourself, because I want no part in it.

(Updated URL in link to Guillermo's interview of Sibel, about The Lone Gladio)

Cognitive dissonance?

Who made this in 2009?

And who posted this on my site? It wasn't Nafeez or Sibel.

Who, me?

Are you talking to me? Do you want me to answer? A discussion? I don't want to be accused of harassment, so please let me know if you would give me consent. Thanks.

If you listen to the show...

You will hear me talk about how we will get into Gladio or Sibel "later" (I honestly forget). My whole intention was to talk about "Gladio B" towards the end, but Sibel came up before I asked this question which I wrote beforehand...

"Sibel Edmonds, a former FBI Translator, a 9/11 Whistleblower, someone who was retaliated against, someone who had 2 gag orders placed on her, someone the families brought before the 9/11 Commission, etc… and so on, made some alarming allegations with regards to the U.S. Government's relationship with Osama Bin laden. Can you tell us about this?"

Things didn't work out exactly as I'd planned, and I never got to mention "Gladio B." If you want "proof" that that's a question I wrote, you will have to ask Nafeez. I give all of my guests their questions ahead of time, so they can either correct me on something, or prepare themselves for the interview so the most accurate information is told.

We talked extensively about Sibel. "Gladio B" was never mentioned. I apologize that the phrase "Gladio B" never came up, but you must realize, as was stated in the introduction, that the whole premise of this show was to talk about how Governments like to use terrorism as a proxy.

I apologize for the charge of harassment. You posted the same thing on a different blog here, on a video of mine on youtube, then again in this blog. Some of your comments sounded like "insinuations" that I have some nefarious or psychological reason for why I didn't mention "Gladio B." I honestly couldn't believe someone would make the charge that I wasn't promoting Sibel or something Sibel related enough, after being the one person that has promoted her more than anyone else (so far as I know, with the exception of possibly Luke Ryland) on the planet, and as I've stated before, I actually took shit in the "movement" for promoting her.

Explain Myself - Kind of

I just wrote a whole bit explaining the context of my comments to you, then deleted it because I realized I'm too tired to be writing more tonight. But, specifically, I was explaining the challenging mode which I have been in, since 9/11/2014, when TLG was released, and before that when I had first finished the editorial advance copy of the book. I was disappointed in your interview, not because you didn't mention Gladio B or even discuss it broadly, but, with the iron hot from the recent book release and the incredible revelations inside the book, you guys were way off by focusing on inappropriate use of false flag etc for as long as you did. It looked like a dodge of non-committal to the ideas in TLG. What I probably should have assumed instead, is that you just haven't read it yet.

I'm way too tired at this point in the night and will leave it here. But, I think maybe I should just look forward to your review of TLG. Let me warn you that you'll have no problem saying false flag when you're finished. This book takes our understanding to a new, disturbing level. and when you're finished, I would guess you might be on a challenge-the-alt-media-specifically-about-GladioB and TLG kick. The point being that we now have reason to put Gladio B on the front burner and integrated into our understanding of a lot more of what we see and hear about current events. And especially about 9/11/2001. I know you have been non-speculation respectfully for good reason for a long time. But now, we've got a name for the culprits. Gladio B has been directly fingered by Sibel Edmonds. That's some Pentagon folks, some NATO folks, some Wall of Shame folks, some PNAC folks. But we have a name for their operation.

I honestly hope you will do a podcast review of TLG. BTW, I have been promoting your new show and I have know about your public support for Sibel.

Goodnight - I hope I can smooth things out a little better tomorrow. Though they probably won't get too smooth until you've read TLG and maybe shared your thoughts about it. To me it really shows that we've got the numbers, once we explain that the battle is for basic human decency.


Jon, I just want to express the respect I have for you and apologize for being aggressive in my comments and challenges to you. As I started to say before I conked out the other night, I have been in a slightly aggressive mode lately, brought on by frustration with some of the lack of reaction to The Lone Gladio. I expected more from more alt-media producers and, as you can tell by now, think this is the most important topic in the world today. I've been expressing frustration for the last couple years because the interview series with Corbett didn't catch on with some of the more in-depth commentators on the subject. I remember having several back-and-forths with Eric Draitser, when he was producing for BFP (I'm Xicha there, BTW) and couldn't believe he was going on and on in interviews with guests, about related subjects, but wouldn't reference Gladio B. He said he would try to consume the interviews but that it does take some time to do so. That was a big part of the problem before - the ideas weren't easy to package into 30 second sound bites or easily bring into a conversation, for that matter.

Enter The Lone Gladio. After reading the novel in August, I started getting my hopes up that it really had the power to finally get through to the people who were already the "good ones" - the ones who were good at critical thinking and were well beyond the official story, yet weren't suffering any partisanship or philosophical bent, so they were obviously the ones who could take on this information and integrate it into their worldview. Yes, TLG was a success in that manner, because it showed the narrative to the reader so effectively.

Throughout the month of September, my disappointment and frustration began to grow. I began to realize that many folks were just not open to changes in their perspective. Many have an "expertise" in the area, and do not want to have it suddenly flipped upside down. They had spent many years getting to the points where they were and weren't looking for a narrative that would so drastically affect their "expertise". As I began to take these ideas into consideration, I began to see directly challenging some of these people as the solution. I just wasn't going to let the information be ignored.

So, when I listened to your podcast with Dr. Ahmed, and I heard you guys discussing the over-use of "false flag" and the problems with "jumping to conclusions" (both of which are valid issues), as well as the focus on Saudi Arabia as a source of funding and orchestration of terrorists, I began to think that you guys had spent years developing your "expertise" and were going to deny the giant elephant that had just been dropped into the room by The Lone Gladio stork. And I thought to myself, nuh-uh. I am going to challenge these guys to take a look at TLG and Gladio B. I had been writing more than a few challenge comments during that time and I didn't stop to consider how much I like what both of you represent - good critical thinking, unbiased, un-bent philosophically, truth, justice, and accountability motivated alt-media producers. I didn't stop to consider that you might not have read TLG yet, and had not really internalized the six hours of interviews with Corbett, or, as you've mentioned above, previous interviews where the content is similar, but not as focused on the institutionalized program aspect of it.

So, I'm going to try again to comment on what you guys talked about, succinctly. Although you have referenced these ideas for a long time and are obviously tremendous supporters of what Sibel has said and done, I think that there is still something missing in the perspectives that you expressed during the interview. While I have great respect for what both of you have done, I would like to encourage you to read The Lone Gladio, and then reconsider just how urgently, and with what degree of priority, the narrative in the book needs to be conveyed.

A little while ago, Tom Secker and I were discussing Gladio Plan B in the comments of a BFP piece (I don't remember which one). I was in my usual "start talking more about Gladio Plan B" mode at the time and Tom attempted to cool down my message a little and give it a context that seemed, at the time, more reasonable to him. He said he thought that Gladio Plan B was a more limited operation than I was trying to convey. He also said maybe Corbett was bothered by people always saying Gladio Plan B about everything (kind of like the "jumping to conclusions" aspect of your conversation with Dr. Ahmed). I said I thought he was mistaken about that, because I don't ever see anybody mentioning Gladio Plan B, and it was probably COINTELPRO that James was talking about (which is true - it's become a common term which has lost some meaning because of over-use). I also directed him to the strong statements Sibel had made in the interviews about every major terror event in the last 15 years being directly managed by Gladio Plan B et al. These guys on Sibel's Wall of Shame, many of them, are Gladio Plan B folks. And, with The Lone Gladio, Sibel was no longer just alluding to it; she had directly fingered Gladio Plan B for the terrorist attacks in 2001. Yes, Gladio Plan B differed from th e old Gladio in a number of ways, but a major one is that there is no more invisible fence protecting the Homeland from its black operations.

Well, cut to 3 days ago. Tom releases this review of The Lone Gladio on YouTube:

I think this will show that, Tom, just like you and Dr. Ahmed, is a critical thinker who had not fully understood Gladio Plan B. But, The Lone Gladio was successful in changing his perspective on it. It really is the book I thought it would be, in terms of its ability to profoundly affect its readers.

With all due respect, I implore you to read The Lone Gladio, if you haven't already, and reconsider Gladio Plan B. Even though you have referenced it in the past, I think it's possible that your view of the scope of this institutionalized program may be profoundly affected.

Please let me know if you'll accept my apology and whether or not you have any feedback about my comments this time, as well as my recommendation and perspective on the narrative.


Zica how do you get alternative media to understand Gladio B?

Edmonds said in a recent interview that the government chose the wrong tact by invoking State Secrets because if they had reacted by letting her speak nobody would have believed her story. We have now experienced years of "Shock Doctrine" propaganda. By that I mean the propaganda has been enhanced by fearmongering and intimidation. An analogy would be the JFK assassination. There was the act itself and then the cover up/propaganda. When you look at the government media collusion in the cover up it is shocking to observe the contempt "the elite" have for the public. Another example would be the CIA's advocacy of torture. We have the use of torture and then the cover up intended to convince the public that the torture was a last resort good faith effort to prevent attacks. Inducing cognitive dissonance seems to be a key component of the propaganda effort.

hi noise

I'd say first, get them to read The Lone Gladio. As I mentioned in a previous comment, I have seen examples of alt-media producers who thought they knew what Gladio Plan B was. But, some of their main misconceptions had to do with the scope of the program. Once they read The Lone Gladio, they were profoundly affected by the narrative and Gladio Plan B took on a new importance and priority in their worldview.

Next, I think it's important to have an audience and peers who are capable of challenging them, if they choose to discount the narrative or hand-waive without making an honest attempt at internalizing the information.

Just as importantly, is a network of support and appreciation, for the courage it takes to make real efforts at relating the information to past and current events, from an audience and from peers who can work together to inform the public.