The Chilcot Inquiry: Britain’s 9/11 Commission
by Maidhc Ó Cathail / January 5th, 2010
All too often, official inquiries are conducted by the very people who should themselves be under investigation.
In this respect, Britain’s Chilcot Inquiry on the Iraq war bears a distressing similarity to the 9/11 Commission.
In a remarkable symmetry, both inquiries involve a Jewish Zionist historian, who not only advised his country’s leader to go to war against Iraq, but actually provided the ideological justification for that unnecessary war.
Perhaps Philip Zelikow was one of the few people who was not surprised by his appointment as executive director of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States, better known as the 9/11 Commission. After all, the Professor of History at the University of Virginia had shown uncanny prescience in foreseeing an event such as 9/11 itself. In 1998, as project director of the Catastrophic Terrorism Group, Zelikow had written:
Several of the new additions to the 9/11 Timeline this week concern the 9/11 Commission, in particular its executive director Philip Zelikow, who played a significant role in shaping the commission's take on assistance allegedly provided to the 9/11 hijackers by elements linked to the Saudi government. First, he blocked+requests+for+interviews by commission investigators researching the allegations, then he denied them access to a key document, the 28+redacted+pages+from+the+Congressional+Inquiry, and finally he fired+one+of+the+investigators.
please forward this if you agree...
Don't succumb to the invitations by Glen Beck and others, including agent provaceteurs in the truth and freedom movements to get violent in our actions.
people will wake up.
it might take them losing their 401K's or whatever but eventually when they have nothing left to protect or somewhere between now and that point they will wake up.
perhaps our greatest contribution will be seen by historians as that we led the way in a peaceful fashion.
the people that have not woken up by this point are less enlightened individuals.
when they do wake up, these same people will have not only their ire against the counter efforts and the sources of these counter efforts towards their survival but also the guilt of not having acted sooner.
these same people will also be woken up rather abruptly and you know that is not good for maintaining an even temper.
so the more that we expand in influence the more responsibility that we have to set a good example in a Ghandi-like, MLK-like fashion.
Original Content at http://www.opednews.com/articles/Are-you-ready-for-nuclear-by-Paul-Craig...
August 18, 2008
Are you ready for nuclear war?
By Paul Craig Roberts
Pervez Musharraf, the puppet installed by the US to rule Pakistan in the interest of US hegemony, resigned August 18 to avoid impeachment. Karl Rove and the Diebold electronic voting machines were unable to control the result of the last election in Pakistan, the result of which gave Pakistanis a bigger voice in their government than America's.
It was obvious to anyone with any sense--which excludes the entire Bush Regime and almost all of the "foreign policy community"--that the illegal and gratuitous US invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, and Israel's 2006 bombing of Lebanon civilians with US blessing, would result in the overthrow of America's Pakistani puppet.
The imbecilic Bush Regime ensured Musharraf's overthrow by pressuring their puppet to conduct military operations against tribesmen in Pakistani border areas, whose loyalties were to fellow Muslims and not to American hegemony.
I spent a long time this morning posting a long, detailed blog here about Shadia Drury but for some reason it didn't go up. So here we go again.
Shadia Drury, a philosophy professor at the University of Regina, is THE person most responsible for "outing" the neocons. She has published the two best introductions to neoconservatism, The Philosophy of Leo Strauss and Leo Strauss and the American Right. I don't think she has yet been interviewed in a 9/11 truth context, so it will be interesting to see how she answers the inevitable questions about the new Pearl Harbor.
Drury's work makes it abundantly clear how the philosophy of Straussian neoconservatism, the most important academic movement of the 20th century, leads directly to 9/11 and the bogus "war on terror." She was the inspiration for the Adam Curtis BBC documentary The Power of Nightmares. Curtis actually flew from London to freezing Regina in the dead of winter and did two full days of interviews with Drury, but didn't use any of it in the film. She promised to tell me tonight why she thinks she was left on the cutting room floor.
9-11 pm CT tonight, Tuesday 10/9/07, http://www.wtprn.com
It should come as no surprise that Fox News has come to the support of Stu Bykofsky and his article, which essentially calls for another 9/11 attack in order to justify Bush's policies and unite Americans.
John Gibson....actually says.... “I think it’s going to take a lot of dead people to wake America up.”
In case video doesn't plug, here's the link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mAoVkD_0sVM
Important new documentary - from the makers of 911 Solution
Two brief videos on the Neoconservatives. The first is an excerpt from Rep. Cythia McKinney's 2005 Congressional Briefing, "The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - A Citizen's Response: Did They Get it Right?" An important thing to note is that the Neocons derive at least part of their ideology from an actual Nazi, Carl Schmitt, the "Crown Jurist of the Third Reich."
To follow-up, a few more minutes on Leo Strauss, from Adam Curtis' documentary, The Power of Nightmares
Neocon Imperialism, 9/11, and the Attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq
Tuesday, 27 February 2007
By David Ray Griffin
My purpose in publishing this essay is to introduce a perspective, relevant to the debates about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the impeachment of President Bush and Vice President Cheney, that thus far has not been part of the public discussion.
02/27/07 "ICH" -- - -One way to understand the effect of 9/11, in most general terms, is to see that it allowed the agenda developed in the 1990s by neoconservatives—-often called simply “neocons”---to be implemented. There is agreement on this point across the political spectrum. From the right, for example, Stefan Halper and Jonathan Clarke say that 9/11 allowed the “preexisting ideological agenda” of the neoconservatives to be “taken off the shelf . . . and relabeled as the response to terror.”1 Stephen Sniegoski, writing from the left, says that “it was only the traumatic effects of the 9/11 terrorism that enabled the agenda of the neocons to become the policy of the United States of America.”2
"We know that y'all did it!"
Aaron Dykes & Kevin Smith/ JonesReport.com | October 5, 2006
William Kristol, chairman of the Project for a New American Century (founded in 1997) spoke at the University of Texas in Austin about the current political climate and the "new order" or "new world" that emerged after 9/11. He was confronted by a large number of protesters who carry banners and question his role in 9/11. The event was covered by the Daily Texan.
Regarding The Case Against The Mossad: Who Is The New World Order? The Subversion of Judaism and Chrisianity
Although the Mossad's "warning" did name the "lead hijacker patsies" it was *non-specific regarding targets*, and less than three weeks later, Mossad agents were filming the first hit on the target.
That's criminal and treasonous.
That the Israelis were dancing is not hearsay. Police reports describe them jumping up and down and high-fiving. Look at the Wayne Madsen piece again
and the original report for Scotlands's Sunday Herald:
Here's one of the relevant quotes:
"Police Chief John Schmidig said: "We got an alert to be on the lookout for a white Chevrolet van with New Jersey registration and writing on the side. Three individuals were seen celebrating in Liberty State Park after the impact. They said three people were jumping up and down.""
Although other nations gave warnings, no other nation besides Israel had several instances where their own agents were caught surveilling the patsies and documenting and celebrating the first attack.
Although top officials at NORAD are certainly involved, Wolfowitz and Feith were number 2 and 3 at the Pentagon. Wolfowitz was Deputy Director, Feith was in charge of policy and "special plans." (The translated name of the Mossad is the Foundation for Intelligence and *Special Tasks*) They had to be aware of or responsible for the stand-down policy. In America, the military takes orders from the DoD.
Although the Mossad's warnings regarding 9/11 appear to exonerate it, that is not the case. Former Mossad case officer Victor Ostrovsky in his two excellent books By Way of Deception and The Other Side of Deception demonstrates that the Mossad often uses useless warnings as a way of making themselves look innocent when in fact the opposite is true:
"Admony, then the head of Mossad, decided they would simply give the Americans the usual general warning, a vague notice that they had reason to believe someone might be planning an operation against them. But this was so general and so commonplace, it was like sending a weather report; unlikely to raise any particular alarm or prompt increased security precautions. In the six months following receipt of this information, for example, there were more than 100 general warnings of car-bomb attacks. One more would not heighten US concerns or surveillance."
"Admony, in refusing to give the Americans specific information on the truck, said, "No, we're not going to protect the Americans. They're a big country. Send only the regular information."
Once one understands the methodology of the Mossad and its management of false flag attacks - as well as the massive involvement of the US - Israeli axis in manufacturing the "War on Terror" - to accept the idea that the Mossad is innocent because it gave weak and useless warnings to its partner in crime the CIA becomes absurd.