On the CNN’s Fareed Zakaria GPS program dated November 12, 2017, Fareed invited the Prime Minister of Turkey, Binari Yildirim.
Turkey presented the case that Fethullah Gulen, an american cleric living in the USA, is behind the 2016 failed coup against President Erdogan of Turkey and it wants M. Gulen extradited.
To explain the USA’s refusal to send Fethullah Gulen over to Turkey, Fareed Zakaria said something along the lines : « My contacts say that there is nothing solid that supports the fact that the 2016 coup against Turkey was organized by the Imam Fethullah Gulen ».
The well-prepared Prime Minister of Turkey then responded : « When you said that Osama Bin Laden was behind the September 9/11 attacks, we did not ask for proof of that. We just supported you ». [And immediately went to war in Afghanistan without proof of Bin Laden’s involvment].
In other words, to stay friends with the United States, Turkey did not ask that the USA prove with any hard facts that Bin Laden was behind the 9/11 attacks, a fact that Bin Laden denied from day one. They knew that the United States had strategic interests in Afghanistan and they supported whatever reason, proven or not, that would justify an invasion of Afghanistan.
Now, Turkey says that the Unites States are not willing to commit themselves to Turkey’s national interests the same way Turkey supported the USA. It is like saying to the United States : « Don’t ask for hard facts, just do it, like we did for you. » In 2016, on the same issue, Erdogan said : « If we are strategic partners or model partners, do what is necessary“.
We can extract two things out of this discussion between Fareed Zakaria and Binari Yildirim:
1) That the cleric Fethullah Gulen has possibly nothing more to do with the coup in Turkey than Bin Laden had to do with the 9/11 attacks. But as Gulen strongly opposes Erdogan, he is considered a threat to Turkey’s national interests (or to Erdogan’s chance to stay indifinitely in power?).
Turkey expects the United States to refrain from looking for hard facts of any wrong doings by Gulen and nonetheless send the cleric to Turkey as a sign of goodwill and friendship between the two countries.
2) That friends of the United States don’t seem to ask a lot of questions and proof when it comes to the 9/11 attacks. They go with the flow and expect a return of favors when comes the time…
Fareed quickly changed subject …
For more explanations on the failed coup in Turkey, click on the following link on CNN : Turkey failed coup explainer
About the September 9/11 attacks, you will find several facts presented in a book written by a former well-known french journalist, Éric Reynaud, in the « controversial issues» section of my website :
“Patrick Cockburn spotted the emergence of ISIS much earlier than anybody else and wrote about it with a depth of understanding that was in a league of its own.” – Press Gazette Journalist of the Year Judges
The book presents a bigger picture of what is happening in the Middle East than what we are normally allowed to watch in the news. The reader is presented with both sides of several stories and this really helps to get a better understanding of the different conflicts.
Cover of Patrick Cockburn’s book “The Rise of Islamic State”
Of lies and limited accuracy of the news
The author shows how lies are easily fabricated on a battlefield. He also explains the limited accuracy of news reports, such as when a “chosen” reporter is travelling, protected by an army or when reporters use second-hand information (often not verified) to prepare their news reports. It also seems pretty hard for a news channel to refuse to air a story when there are doubts about it, especially when all the competitors are reporting the same news.
I am including quotes (in italic) from the book as they provide excellent summaries. Some are from the author himself, others are from the sources he found to write his book. The author addresses so many subjects that it impossible to cover everything in a small review like the present one. So I’ll be as succinct as possible to present the reader with a broad idea of the book’s content.
Fear
Fear is the main factor behind many irrational political decisions. Fear leads to radical policies, religions and propaganda. It is often related to the fact that a very small group of people leading a country, a state or a region think that they can lose the political power that gives them undue privileges over the rest of their population. The greater the advantages, the greater the fear.
The political “solutions”, most of the time irrational, create tensions or aggravate the existing problems and only help to increase instability.
Saudi Arabia was initially helping ISIS because of fear of Jihadists operating within Saudi Arabia and fear of Shia powers abroad. As for Turkey, it is more afraid of the Kurds than it is of ISIS. So for a long period of time, it kept its border with Syria open: it helped ISIS to maintain a rear base.
The author says: “There is something hysterical and exaggerated about Saudi fear of Shia expansionism, since the Shia are powerful only in the handful of countries where they are in the majority or are a strong minority. Of fifty-seven Muslim countries, just four have a Shia majority” (p.102)
The demonization of religions other than Wahhabism
In the case of Saudi Arabia, the demonization of religions other than Wahhabism and the spreading of hate through social media have created a fertile ground for ISIS to grow.
The author says: “[…] The Saudis need a serious attempt to reform their educational system which currently demonizes Shias, Sufis, Christians, Jews and other sects and religions. They need to stop the preaching of hate from so many satellite stations, and not allow a free ride for their preachers of hate on the social media”.(p.107)
“The “Wahhabization” of mainstream Sunni Islam is one of the most dangerous development of our era” (p.108)
Money helps increase the polarization between Sunni and Shia
ISIS could not have risen without the financial help from Saudi Arabia, Qatar, United Arab Emirates and Turkey. Since ISIS thrives on tensions between Sunni and Shia, anything that increase that tension will benefit this terrorist group: “There is no doubt that well-financed Wahhabi propaganda has contributed to the deepening and increasingly violent struggle between Sunni and Shia” (p.99)
“A crucial feature in the rise of Wahhabism is the financial and political might of Saudi Arabia. Dr Allawi says that if, for example, a pious Muslim wants to found a seminary in Bangladesh, there are not many places he can obtain £20,000 other than from Saudi Arabia. But if the same person wants to oppose Wahhabism, then he will have “to fight with limited resources”” (p. 108)
“This polarization between the two religious groups was only intensified by the hot and cold war between the US and Russia. Proxies were at play here with Saudi Arabia and the Gulf monarchies, backed by the US, facing off against Iran, Syria, and Hezbollah in Lebanon, supported by Russia”(p.71)
Back cover of Patrick Cockburn’s book: “The Rise of Islamic State”
Propaganda that made al-Qaeda look stronger and more effective than it actually was, with reference to the 9/11 attacks
There are multiple sections in the book which relate to the September 11th 2001 attacks. Here are some of the author’s observations (in italic). I have also added some personal comments which are clearly identified as such:
The Pearl Harbour moment of the 9/11 attacks
The author says: “The shock of 9/11 provided a Pearl Harbor moment in the US when public revulsion and fear could be manipulated to implement a pre-existing neo-conservative agendaby targeting Saddam Hussein and invading Iraq”(p.100).
Note: the following four paragraphs are my personal comments on the “Pearl Harbor moment”:
A “Pearl Harbor” moment means that in order for the American public to approve an attack in a foreign country, it needed to see something terrible happening in the United States. For example, before the very obvious destruction of war ships at Pearl Harbor by the Japanese, the American population refused to be engaged in World War 2.
During the 9/11 attacks and later on, the Pentagon’s eighty cameras have not captured anything close to a Boeing hitting the building. You had to believe that it happened the way the news told you since there were no pictures and no videos of a Boeing close to or in pieces on the Pentagon property.
The Medias showed instead, over and over, the World Trade Center Twin Towers crashing to the ground after being hit by one aircraft, even though the buildings were built to resist multiple impacts, through a “mesh” design, a lesson learned after what happened on the Empire State Building years ago. Some people believed that the buildings crumbled due to the high temperature, but most neglected the FEMA’s report that got out later on stating that the temperature never rose above 300 or 400 degrees in the buildings, hundreds of degrees short from what was needed to melt steel.
The free-falling towers of the World Trade Center were the Pearl Harbor moment needed to instill fear and facilitate the implementation of a pre-existing neo-conservative agenda. The American voters would not have approved a war abroad if the buildings had been standing after a single impact. It’s almost like the world should believe that the World Trade Center was built using the poorest American engineering possible, while not learning from lessons of the past. For more info on this specific subject:
In 2001, al-Qaeda was an “ineffectual” organization
Mr Cockburn is one of very few reporters who is not afraid to present al-Qaeda as it really was in 2001, an emerging organization that was far from being able to mastermind and execute complex attacks such as the 9/11 attacks. (This also explains why, soon after the attacks, international news reports presented a video of Ben Laden denying responsibility for the attacks. A video that was not shown ever again. But millions of people saw it before it was censored by the main news channels).
“At the time of 9/11, al-Qaeda was a small, generally ineffectual organization” (p.59). The term “ineffectual” refers to the inability to produce a desired effect.
The implementation of the neo-conservative agenda
This really means that the pre-existing American neo-conservative agenda could not rely on Al-Qaeda’s experience. Instead, one or more experienced organizations were needed for the financing, planning and execution of the 9/11 attacks. Only after the facts could the blame be put on Al Qaeda since it was, after all the media propaganda, very well-known to the American public. An artificial link was then made with Iraq, allowing for an invasion that sixty percent of the American voters approved.
Sixty percent of the US voters were misled
“The name al-Qaeda has always been applied flexibly when identifying an enemy. In 2003 and 2004 in Iraq, as armed Iraqi opposition to the American and British-led occupation mounted, US officials attributed most attacks to Al-Qaeda, though many were carried out by nationalist and Baathist groups. Propaganda like this helped to persuade nearly 60 percent of US voters prior to the Iraq invasion that there was a connection between Saddam Hussein and those responsible for 9/11,despite the absence of any evidence for this. In Iraq itself, indeed throughout the entire Muslim world, these accusations have benefited al-Qaeda by exaggerating its role in the resistance to the US and British occupation” (p. 53).
The fall of Mosul
ISIS needed only 6000 fighters to win the Battle of Mosul. Yet, they were facing one million Iraqi soldiers. How was that possible? The author sees three reasons:
The cooperation from the Iraqi Sunnis, who were sensing that they would be better off with ISIS than the Shias.
Corruption at all levels in the Iraqi army. “As one former minister put it “the Iraqi government is an institutionalized kleptocracy”. Another politician who does not want to be named says “[…] People pay money to get into the army [so they can get a salary] – but they are investors not soldiers” (p.77)
The fact that the Iraqi army was no longer a national army since the well-trained Iraqi Sunni soldiers were sidelined.
Syria: President Bachar Assad was not as weak as expected
Both the outside world and opposition viewed President Assad as far weaker than he actually was. They both thought that he would be defeated without an organized air campaign.
A major oversight on the war in Syria
“A blind spot for the US and other Western powers has been their failure to see that by supporting the armed uprising in Syria, they would inevitably destabilize Iraq and provoke another round of its sectarian civil war” (p.73)
Five different conflicts within Syria
The Syrian conflict is extremely complicated since there are many different political and religious interests at stake: “The Syrian crisis comprises five different conflicts that cross-infect and exacerbate each other. The war commenced with a genuine popular revolt against a brutal and corrupt dictatorship, but it soon became intertwined between the Sunni against the Alawites, and that fed into the Shia-Sunni conflict in the region as a whole, with a standoff between the US, Saudi Arabia and the Sunni states on the one side, and Iran, Iraq and the Lebanese Shia on the other. In addition to this, there is a revived cold war between Moscow and the West, exacerbated by the conflict in Libya and more recently made even worse by the crisis in the Ukraine” (p.94)
In Syria, it is either Assad or ISIS
ISIS is the strongest opposition force in Syria. If Assad falls, ISIS takes his place: “Syrians have to choose between a violent dictatorship, in which the power is monopolized by the presidency and brutish security services, or an opposition that shoots children in the face for minor blasphemy and sends pictures of decapitated soldiers to the parents of their victims.” (p.81)
The God-given victories
“The appeal of the Islamic State to Sunni Muslims in Syria, Iraq, and across the world comes in part from a sense that its victories are God-given and inevitable, so any failure damages its claim to divine support” (p.159)
The solution to the Syrian conflict will come from outside the country
“Many Syrians now see the outcome of their civil war resting largely with the US, Russia, Saudi Arabia, and Iran. In this, they are probably right”.
Side notes
War is never about “combat” only. There is always an underlying political process going on. So, even if a country seems defeated militarily, enormous political efforts will have to be made in order to create a new stable order.
“Conviction that a toxic government is the root of all evil is the public position of most oppositions, but it is dangerous to trust one’s own propaganda”.
“A government or an army can try to maintain secrecy by banning reporters but they will pay the price as the vacuum of news is filled with information supplied by their enemies”.
Islamic State, Daesh and ISIS: three names that represent the same terrorist group
In order to avoid any confusion, the author, Alexandre Adler, immediately makes clear that three names represent the same group: Islamic State, Daesh and ISIS. He explains what the ultimate goal of ISIS is: to establish a Caliphate on the Levant, a territory that spreads from Mediterranean to the Persian Gulf and that includes Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Palestine.
The concept of “caliphate” and the reasons behind the desire to re-establish it are explained clearly.
Changes in the balance of power between Sunnis and Shiites
ISIS uses decomposing zones to settle. The group feeds on very high tensions created by increased inequality between two groups: Sunnis and Shiites. The Sunnis, a more conservative religious group, has lost a lot of influence following Saddam Hussein’s death. Today, there is an effort to ensure that the leaders in charge of Iraq take into consideration the interests of both groups.
Radical movements look for dissatisfied people
Sunnis are aware of the increasing strength of the Shiite axis: Beirut, Damascus, under Bachar Assad, Bagdad under Maniki, and Iran, who is inhabited by a vast majority of Shiites. Acting on the new imbalance of powers, ISIS has managed to recruit military officers as well as dissatisfied Sunnis and Arab tribe’s chiefs.
The author insists on the fact that radical movements basically dig in the dissatisfied crowd, the left aside individuals. He gives another example of a situation that is almost certain to create dissatisfaction: colonization.
Dividing a territory without taking into account the human factor
Colonization modifies the balance of power within a population. The author being French, he writes about the way France intervened in Sahara, dividing the territory without taking into account the human factor. As new boundaries were being drawn, the Touareg tribe was suddenly divided in three. This tribe refusing to obey to a new authority, in this case the Malian government, tensions built up and increased with time, since no acceptable compromise could be found.
From Libya, dictator Gaddafi understood that he could take advantage of the situation. He started supporting the Touareg resistance movement. After Gaddafi was killed, the Touareg looked for support by getting closer to jihadists. Progressively, a historically autonomous tribe became a friendly land for jihadists.
Between Al Qaeda and ISIS, Boko Haram chooses ISIS
The author explains that in Nigeria, Boko Haram was born of internal tensions between the north side of the country, which holds the political power, and the south where the population benefits from revenues generated by vast petroleum resources. In 2014, Boko Haram chose to fight along ISIS. Why? ISIS, contrary to Al Qaeda, wants a total war against the Shiites. Boko Haram picked the most radical movement.
Appearance and disappearance of the caliphal power
The caliphal power establishes a theological and political continuity of the State created in 622 by the Prophet in Medina. The author explains the reasons for the multiple appearances and disappearances of that caliphal power since the year 622. The last change was brought in 1923, when Mustapha Kemal abolished the caliphate.
Which religious group represents the real Islam?
Tensions exist between Sunnis and Shiites about the caliphate and the group which really represents the real Islam. This division dates from centuries ago. Shiites consider that Ali, the fourth successor of the Prophet, was victim of a plot at a time when he was attempting to achieve a moral and state straightening of Islam. Shiites consider that they are the real Islam beholders. They have been defending that point of view for centuries, even through Sunnis persecutions against them.
Shiites are against an early reestablishment of the caliphate
The author explains the profound differences of opinion as for the philosophic, theological and political views between both groups. Because of those reasons, Shiites are against an early reestablishment of the caliphate, which leads the most radical Sunnis, and through them ISIS, to lead a total war against them.
The Sunni axis is represented by Saudi Arabia and Egypt, although there is a degree of rivalry between those two countries.
Saudi Arabia’s fear
Saudis fear the birth of a powerful Shiite political movement on their territory. They estimate that there would be a risk to lose the control on oil installations, which constitute the base of Saudi Arabia’s economic wealth. The author writes that Saudis are financing “[my translation] all the anti-Shiites movement in the Arab world, including the Sunni jihad in Iraq”.
The return of Iran
The return of Iran, a Shiite power, on the world stage, adds to an already complex equation. The reader is told that there are natural tensions between Persian Iran and the Arab world. But there is something else: Iran, as well as few other countries in the region, is now supporting more moderate policies: “[my translation] Iran is radically changing its orientation and now prepares his return on the world stage as a more open country, pluralist, supporting a Shiite democracy. Although this is not a perfect democracy, the country is now living its perestroika”.
A fight between extremism and moderation
The adoption of more moderate positions is far from pleasing an extremist political group like ISIS. The 2013 americano-iranian agreement on nuclear talks, and the continued progress made in 2015, corresponds to a net increase in terrorist acts committed by ISIS.
Atrocities against humanity set in an historical context
The Medias constantly report on the atrocities perpetrated by ISIS. According to the author, all that media attention gives a false impression on the real strength of Islamic State: ISIS would now be down to committing those terrible acts against humanity due to its relative weakness.
The author links ISIS actions with war crimes and atrocities perpetrated by other regimes throughout decades. He situates those actions at a time that always corresponds to a last attempt to survive before being completely defeated and replaced by modern and moderate political parties.
A little reserve
The only reserve I have on the book concerns the passage where the author repeats, without nuances and like other well-known Medias, that Ben Laden is responsible for the New York 9/11 attacks. This version of facts has always been strongly debated, the disagreements starting within hours after the attack. And, contrary to popular belief, it was not brought forward only by what we call the “conspirationists”. But everyone knows that the more you repeat something, the more it becomes a reality, an undisputable truth. Noam Chomsky and other renowned authors have covered this aspect at length.
Title: Le Califat du sang Author: Alexandre Adler Edition: Grasset&Fasquelle, 2014. ISBN : 978-2-246-85457-9
11 Septembre – Les vérités cachées (September 11- The hidden thruth)
11— Septembre : les vérités cachées (September 11 – The Hidden Truth)
For those of you who are bilingual, here is an interesting book analyzing the September 2001 events. Two planes went through the Twin Towers. We have seen those images over and over again. A Boeing 757 crashed into the Pentagon. At least, that is what has been reported since 2001. I knew that I would eventually see live footage of the plane hitting the building, and pictures of Boeing 757 parts, like it is always the case with crashes around the world. With tens of cameras surrounding the Pentagon and the nearby buildings, and reporters on site, there were surprisingly neither credible pictures nor videos showing 757 parts. Years went by, and nothing popped up. That raised my curiosity.
I knew that it was in the American government’s interest to show photos or videos of the plane, like it did for the Twin Towers. But with the Pentagon, there was nothing. We could obviously see a small hole in the building, but nothing else. I wanted to learn more about those attacks and, among all the documents and books that I read, there was this book written by Éric Raynaud.
Éric Raynaud is an investigation journalist who has written about important personalities like Ingrid Betancourt, Benazir Bhutto, Pierre Bérégovoy and others. He has worked for twenty years for daily newspapers before becoming an independent journalist. In his book titled “11-Septembre: les vérités cachées”, the author aligns facts, studies and verifiable testimonies that can be confirmed by the reader. He provides, at the bottom of pages, his sources and original references to all the medias. That includes books, interviews, newspaper articles, TV programs, videos and multiple internet sites.
Here are some of the subjects that the reader will find in the book. I can only present them very briefly here:
Pentagon: identification of the parts found on site
The author says that [my translation]:“the Commission of inquiry established that only part of one engine was found, and that it presented, as a proof, a totally inadequate picture”. It was not a part of a 757 engine but something else. A clue is given through a citation from Barbara Honegger (former advisor in political analysis to the United States President, between 1981 and 1983) during an interview [my translation]: “Some parts found in the Pentagon have been identified as compressor pieces that are part of a turbo JT8D engine, used for the A-3 Sky Warrior fighting aircraft […]”.
Pentagon: where is the Boeing 757?
There are many other sources of concern, like the obvious lack of important pieces. Their absence is noted, without any given explanations. Bob Pugh is a reporter with twenty-five years of experience and he is the first reporter to arrive on site, five minutes after the firemen. When he is interviewed by other medias on what he just saw, he declares [my translation]: “I look for significant parts, for the aircraft’s wreck, I do not see anything that I can recognize…I don’t see the tail. I don’t see the wheels. I don’t see the engines. There are no seats…there is no luggage.” The author writes [my translation]: “nothing has been found that would even look a bit like airliner parts”.
Pentagon: no serial numbers, no landing gear, no 757 engines
George Nelson, a Colonel in the US Air Force, has a direct experience as an investigator in aircrafts accidents. He declares that a fire resulting from an airplane crash cannot destroy every significant piece like the landing gear or the engines; neither can it make all the serial numbers disappear. He says [my translation]: “I repeat: this is impossible […]. Any objective and rational investigator would only be able to conclude the following: no Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon, as opposed to the official statement”.
Pentagon: depleted uranium detected on the site where the building was damaged.
Another surprising discovery was made by two scientists, Leuren Moret and Janette Sherman. Leuren Moret spent her career in the nuclear field, working among other places in California in the Livermore Nuclear Weapons Laboratory. She says [my translation]: “What happened at the Pentagon appeared highly suspicious to me. That led me to contemplate the use of a missile fueled by depleted uranium, and to make an immediate research with my colleague and great friend, Dr Janette Sherman. Janette went to take radiation measurements using a Geiger counter, a very short time after the crash. From fifteen kilometers, under prevailing winds from the Pentagon, she detected radiations that were eight to ten times higher than normal…” They learned, only four years later, that other experts had also detected similar levels where the Pentagon had been damaged.
WTC7 (building 7): bombs explode in the lower floors.
Numerous witnesses heard powerful explosions in the basements of the two towers (WTC1 and WTC2) and in the building 7 (WTC7), all while the Twin Towers where still standing.
Barry Jennings, the Assistant Director of the Emergency Services Department of New York was trapped in the superior floors of the building 7: he could no longer go down since the lower floors had been blown away. He declares [my translation]: “Once we arrived on the sixth floor, the level supporting the stairs we were about to use had disappeared! There was an explosion and the floor disappeared…the whole level had given in. I found myself there, suspended in the air! I had to climb back to go up to the eight floor…the explosion happened just beneath us…and when it exploded, we were projected backward…and the two buildings [the Twin Towers] where still standing…we were trapped there for hours. I was still there when the towers went down”.
This capital witness died two days before he was scheduled to testify. His testimony would have contradicted the main version. The Commission of inquiry, across its six hundred page report, does not mention the WTC7 name.
Twin Towers: bombs explode in the basements.
William Rodriguez, an employee with twenty years of experience, was at the B1 level of the WTC1 tower. He says that there were six basements, called B1 to B6. There was such a powerful explosion between B2 and B3 that they were lifted off the floor. Soon after, they heard another BOUM and it was the plane arriving in the tower. Many other testimonies, also visible on videos, show the employees and firemen reacting in surprise toward the series of explosions that they were able to hear.
How were the Twin Towers built?
Nine months before the attacks, one of the designers of the towers, Franck Martini, explains how the Twin Tower’s construction was thought through. He knew that there had already been a crash against the Empire State Building during the Second World War. A bomber, lost in fog, had hit the building straight on (a building that stayed up). Now knowing that a passenger jet could mistakenly hit the new towers that would be built, he explains [my translation]: “the steel networks structure is built as “mosquito screen”. A plane colliding with the towers would have the same effect as a pen going through a mosquito screen: the hole stays, but the global structure around it does not change. The Twin Towers (WTC1 and WTC2) are conceived to resist the impact of an airliner, even many…”
And if the architects had planned the possibility of one or more impacts against their new towers, they also knew that once the crash would occur, the fuel would start burning. There is no surprise here.
The steel’s melting point.
Steel melts at 1538 Celsius degrees. According to Thomas Eagar, teacher of material physics at the renowned MIT, a kerosene fire generates temperatures between 870 and 930 degrees. The author declares [my translation]: “In 2008, an engineer who participated in the FEMA inquiry admitted that even their studies could not demonstrate with absolute certainty that the [Twin Towers] fires had generated temperatures higher than 300 or 400 degrees […]”.
The abnormal falling rate of the buildings
The towers went down at free fall speed. Between 9 and 10 seconds, according to observers; this is totally impossible without the use of accelerators. The most pessimist scenario, applied to the “pancake theory” collapse, requires a minimum of 21 seconds… The author writes [my translation]: “Numerous expert calculations hover around thirty to forty seconds”.
Kevin Ryan, from Underwriter Laboratories, a well-known institution in USA, says this [my translation]: “We tested the floor very well, by means of faithfully reconstituted models, in August 2004”. These tests totally refuted the main theory, the “pancake theory”.[…] Months later, the government published an update on its own conclusions, indicating not only the absence of the floors collapsing but also that examinations of the areas touched by fire proved that the temperatures…were very low”.
We are then back to the unexplained free fall. Or even the multiple unexplained free falls. Such gigantic buildings crashing down 1) totally, without leaving major parts standing 2) in a perfectly vertical way and 3) at free fall speed are sure to attract the attention and comments of experts in controlled demolition. On this subject, there are lots of testimonies.
In 2009, a crucial discovery from Danish scientists radically modified the main version.
2009: Niels Harrit and the nanothermite
In 2009, an internationally renowned scientific researcher, Niels Harrit, writes an article in the Open Chemicals Physics Journal. This magazine’s editorial team is composed of one hundred scientists coming from five continents. The article, which is written in collaboration, is titled: “Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe”. They are nine scientists to announce that they have discovered nanothermite, a new and extremely powerful explosive, in the World Trade Center.
[My translation]: “According to what we choose to do with it, it can be an extremely powerful explosive, or it can melt metal at high speed.” Thermite has been known for a long time, but nanothermite is much more recent. The more the mixture is refined, the more it is powerful [my translation]: “ Activated to melt steel, for example, nanothermite will only take a fraction of a second to pass from the ambient temperature to 2500 degrees…steel, itself, melts at a little above 1500 degrees. I let you conclude…” The author finally understands [my translation] “the pockets of molten metal that were found in the Twin Towers debris and in WTC7, that New-York firemen took two months and a half to definitely neutralize”.
We then learn that nanothermite is [my translation] “made under license, to the exclusive use of the army and under the seal of secret defense”. The author refers to an interview given by Niels Harrit where the scientist says that ten tons of nanothermite are needed to cause the fall of the towers. And how is it possible to bring ten tons of that product in a place with such tight security? He writes that the company in charge of the security had forsociety director the President Bush’s brother and as general director the President Bush’s cousin.
It was possible to see the interview, with French subtitles, on (http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x273rhq_de-la-nanothermite-le-11-septembre-2001-par-le-scientifique-niels-harrit_webcam), but like many other links available for a few years only, this one has also been blocked.
Obstructions made against the Congress inquiry
The senator Tom Daschle complained several times, and on many different medias, of obstruction problems he was facing from Dick Cheney and from President Bush, that were asking him no to investigate and even to stop the Congress inquiry.
The money allotted to the new 2004 independent Commission of inquiry.
The author notes that in order to understand everything about the sexual scandal involving Bill Clinton, 100 million dollars were spent. In order to know what happened on September 11 2001, the Commission of inquiry was given 3 million dollars. It is only after multiple complaints that this amount was finally reviewed to 14 million. Three thousand American lost their lives in that tragedy but a battle was necessary to get more than three million dollars…
The facts discarded by the independent Commission of inquiry.
The Commission seems to have found an easy way to deal with the most troubling testimonies: when this happens, instead of writing the details in the report and risk raising even more troubling questions, the subject is simply avoided. There is nothing written. So, in 600 pages, there is no mention of WTC7 whose lower floors were destroyed by explosions even before the planes arrived in the towers.
Nothing can be found about the Minister of Transport Norman Mineta’s testimony as to what he saw and heard with regards to Dick Cheney before the attacks. Mineta was nonetheless a direct witness; he was in the room with Cheney. Éric Raynaud cites what Mineta said and it is obvious that if those words would have found their way in the Commission’s report, this would have created a crisis.
There have been multiple testimonies received by the FBI as to the fact that something smaller than a B757 hit the Pentagon. Nothing can be found on those testimonies in the Commission’s report.
On that subject, you can read a Washington Post article dated from August 2, 2006 and signed by Dan Eggen: “9/11 Panel Suspected Deception by Pentagon Allegations Brought to Inspectors General”. Another book written on the subject in 2009, whose author, John Farmer, is a former General Attorney of the New Jersey State, is available: “The Ground Truth: the story behind America’s Defense on 9/11”. He says [my translation]: “The public has been seriously duped with regards to what happened on the morning of the attacks”.
Cases of insider trading
Numerous cases of insider trading were detected, starting September 6th, which is five days before the attacks. They involved “put option” to sell United Airlines, American Airlines, as well as reinsurance giants like Munich Re and AXA and financial companies that would be impacted within a few days like Morgan Stanley, Merrill Lynch, Bank of America, etc. However, enormous amounts of shares were bought on Raytheon, a military armament producer, just before the attacks. There was an inquiry, but no details were released.
The Osama Ben Laden case
The book’s chapter 8 holds surprising details about Osama Ben Laden. This information, that most of us ignored, brings a new light on what is generally known about him. It is said that Ben Laden rapidly denied being involved with the attacks. Normally, an attack is quickly reclaimed with pride by its mastermind. It is not the case here. I remember having seen Ben Laden on the news at the moment where he was saying that he was not behind the 9/11 attacks. Some details are given in the Éric Raynaud’s book as to why Ben Laden was not behind those attacks.
On this subject, the reader might, for example, take note of Bénazir Bhutto’s testimony, the woman coming back to Pakistan with the intention of running her own country once more [my translation]: “Osama Ben Laden has been killed by a former member of the Pakistani secret services, Omar Sheikh”. This link was available on dailymotion.com. The Omar Sheikh name often surfaces when the 9/11 attacks are concerned.
A few weeks after she confessed what she knew about this delicate subject to Al Jazeera in 2007, Bhutto herself was killed. She was not the only one to have publicly spoken on that subject. A former very high ranking CIA manager, David Baer, also confirms to Persian CNN, in 2009, that [my translation]: “ Ben Laden died many years ago, and videos and sound recordings that are episodically broadcasted are obviously false…” (www.persiancnn.com).
This book reports that the Dalle Molle Artificial Perceptual Intelligence Swiss Institute studied the messages supposedly recorded and sent to medias by Ben Laden throughout the years. The result [my translation]: “None of the recordings provided by the CIA or Al Jazeera correspond to the real voice of Ben Laden”.
United 93
Few pages are dedicated to the United 93 flight, which in itself was an issue that has given rise to many comments. We read about visual witnesses who see an aircraft explode in flight. The official story is also presented, which says that the aircraft crashed in a field. [My translation]: “The big, the huge problem, is that the rescuers, firemen, witnesses, and even the Shanksville mayor, who arrived quite rapidly on the site, effectively found a crater, but…absolutely empty”.
I’ve been interested in aviation all my life. Wanting to understand as soon as possible what had just happened, I had rapidly watched the live news and videos released by the media. At the time, it was not yet a question of conspiracy. News reports were live and journalists were doing their best to describe the scene. It was quite something to see a nearby farmer, who had rapidly gained access to the site. He was certainly anticipating, like everybody, to find many dead people here and there around the site. But he was talking to the camera and saying that there was nobody. He did not understand how it was possible.
It was also something to hear that reporter, on board a news helicopter, trying to describe what he was…not seeing. The helicopter’s camera was pointing to the site where the crash supposedly happened. All the viewers could see the scene at the same time as the reporter. But there was almost nothing to comment about. We could not see anything that would look like something we are used to see when there is a crash. And God knows we’ve seen a lot throughout the years. The reporter was unsure, he was improvising to kill time.
Conclusion
Through all the quotations and references offered in the book, among which some of David Ray Griffin, the author wants the reader to understand the following facts: in order to maintain its global domination, the United States needed to control the vast oil reserves of Central Asia. In 2001, there was a meeting between American and Taliban representatives. The Americans wanted to build an oil pipeline and needed the consent of the Taliban. This project having been refused by the Taliban, the latter were advised that a war would be started against them in October 2001. But a war lead by USA in a foreign country needed the strong support of the American population. In order to gain that kind of support, many neoconservatives like Zbigniew Brzezinski and Philip Zelikow had underlined, over different decades, that a new “Pearl Harbor” would be necessary.
What I understand of the book is that an attack without a very strong visual impact would not mobilize the American population and ensure that the latter would support a war in a foreign territory. Airplanes crashing in the Twin Towers, but more importantly the towers crumbling down would constitute this new “Pearl Harbor”. The freefalling towers would be played and replayed by all the media, reinforcing the desired impact.
But there had to be a certainty that the towers would both completely come down to reach that visual impact. The majority of viewers would certainly not notice that the buildings were all freefalling.
But there was nonetheless a major obstacle: the towers had been built in such a way that many airliners could hit them without destroying them totally, due to the “moustiquaire” design. Added help was required. And this is why there are so many testimonies, from firemen and workers that were present in the buildings, of multiple explosions in the buildings, down to the basements, and this just before the planes hit the buildings. Nobody expected the 2009 discovery of nanothermite in the Twin Towers ashes made by Niels Harrit and his team of scientists. This nanothermite created molten steel. It transformed steel into a metal softer than butter.
To suggest that Ben Laden was still alive, even though his death had been announced by many political personalities and intelligence sources, led the American public to concentrate their attention on a number one public enemy. There was no more moral dilemma to authorize military attacks in Afghanistan, supposedly to kill the perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks. The promised war against the Taliban was now a reality. They did not support an oil pipeline controlled by the Americans and they paid the price for a while.
The reader has to decide what to make of that information. As a controversial subject, I could not find a better one. If you want to look deeper into the subject, there are many books available. Other than Éric Raynaud’s book, published in French, there is no doubt that David Ray Griffin’s analysis and research, initially published in English, might surprise you. The title is: 9/11 Contradictions – An Open Letter to Congress and the Press (ISBN: 978-1-56656-716-9). There are also many documentaries on the subject, among which the well-known video, available on You Tube: 2014 New Loose Change 3rd Edition.
September-11 attacks are the only event in which it is not acceptable to be curious. Here, there is only black and white. You are either on the government side, or you are an advocate of conspiracy theories. Like Bush would put it: “You are either with us, or against us”.
