December 7, 2006
Sixty-five years ago Japanese bombers launched an early morning surprise attack on the U.S. fleet at Pearl Harbor killing some 2,400 seamen and bringing the United States into World War II. The next day, President Franklin D. Roosevelt called December 7, 1941 “a date which will live in infamy” and asked Congress for a declaration of war against Japan. September 11, 2001 is another date which will live in infamy. Like the attack on Pearl Harbor, 9-11 was a surprise attack to most Americans — but not all.
Like the Japanese attack on the U.S. fleet, 9-11 was a catastrophic and transforming event that brought the United States into war, the so-called “War on Terror.” Unlike Pearl Harbor, however, 9-11 was not committed by an easily identifiable foe. Pronouncements by President George W. Bush and senior government officials notwithstanding, the solid evidence pinning the blame for the catastrophic terror attacks of 9-11 on 19 Arabs with box cutters has yet to be seen.
Despite the various government sponsored reports and commissions about the events of September 11, 2001, the attacks and the destruction they caused remain largely uninvestigated. The Federal Bureau of Investigation has not released the evidence it has to support the stated position of the government that 19 Arabs working with Al Qaida carried out these attacks on their own. To this day, the FBI has not even provided the physical evidence to identify the aircraft involved in the attacks, although there must be an adequate number of identifiable airplane parts from the four crash sites to do so. The FBI is clearly not interested in proving anything about 9-11 to the nation or the public.
WHO’S IN CONTROL?
So what’s going on? Why are the most catastrophic terror attacks in U.S. history uninvestigated and why is the interpretation of the attacks left to the controlled media and politicians? Who has the power to control the media, the government, and the FBI to conceal the truth about what really happened on 9-11? To understand who is really behind 9-11 requires a comprehensive investigation of the key players who played a role or who controlled the non-investigation and subsequent media-driven “interpretation” of the terror attacks.
Today, five years and three months after 9-11, we are able to look back at the people who have played these key roles. What we find is a small group of people who are linked in a global Zionist network, individuals who are connected by family, ethnic, and business ties to an organized network dedicated to supporting the state of Israel and its agenda.
By exposing the members of this Zionist network and their connection to 9-11 and the so-called “War on Terror,” we can identify the chief architects, sub-contractors, and workers who pulled off the false-flag terror attacks of September 11, 2001.
Shortly after 9-11, I spoke with Eckehardt Werthebach, the former president of Germany’s domestic intelligence service, the Verfassungsschutz. He said that “the deathly precision” and “the magnitude of planning” behind the attacks would have required “years of planning.” Such a sophisticated operation, Werthebach said, would require the “fixed frame” of a state intelligence organization, something not found in a “loose group” of terrorists like the one allegedly led by Mohammed Atta. Many people would have been involved in the planning of such an operation, Werthebach said. The absence of leaks indicates that the attacks were “state organized actions,” he said.
Andreas von BÃ¼low, the former German parliamentarian, served on the commission which oversees the three branches of the German secret service from 1969 to 1994. Von BÃ¼low told me in the fall of 2001 that he believed that the Israeli intelligence service, Mossad, was behind the 9-11 terror attacks. These attacks, he said, were carried out to turn public opinion against the Arabs and boost military and security spending. “You don’t get the higher echelons,” von BÃ¼low said, referring to the “architectural structure” which masterminds such terror attacks. At this level, he said, the organization doing the planning, such as Mossad, is primarily interested in affecting public opinion.
In a classic false-flag terror attack, the architectural level planners will use unwitting or corrupt “guns for hire” in order to have the blame assigned to the desired target. The terrorists who actually carry out the crimes are what von BÃ¼low calls “the working level,” such as the 19 Arabs who allegedly hijacked the planes on Sept. 11. “The working level is part of the deception,” he said. “Ninety-five percent of the work of the intelligence agencies around the world is deception and disinformation,” von BÃ¼low said. The deception is then widely propagated in the mainstream media creating an accepted version of events. “Journalists don’t even raise the simplest questions,” he said. “Those who differ are labeled as crazy.”
“YEARS OF PLANNING”
The “years of planning” that Eckehardt Werthebach referred to are obvious to anyone who has read the real history of 9-11. The smaller false-flag terror attacks that preceded the catastrophic terror of 9-11 were meant to instill in the mind of the public the fear of a massive attack in the United States. The equally suspect and unproven bombings of the federal building in Oklahoma City and the first attack in the World Trade Center were meant to prepare public opinion for “the transforming event” of 9-11.
At the academic level, the architects of 9-11 have been working on U.S. public opinion since the mid-1980s to prepare the political and media elites for a catastrophic terror attack on American soil, and beyond that to focus on how the U.S. should respond to such an attack. Benjamin Netanyahu, the American-educated hard-line former prime minister of Israel, is probably the most conspicuous architect of terrorism and the so-called “War on Terror.” Netanyahu, a Jabotinsky Zionist of the right wing Likud party, published a book in 1986 entitled Terrorism: How the West Can Win in which he laid out precisely the blueprint for what has become the “War on Terror” in Iraq and Afghanistan. Netanyahu’s book, and its seriously flawed and racist thesis, has been rewritten, reprinted, and propagated ad nauseam.
Netanyahu’s thesis is that Israel is attacked by “terrorists” only because it is “western and democratic,” like European nations and the United States. For this reason, Netanyahu says, Americans and Europeans need to join the fight against those who are opposed to the Zionist state of Israel. In Netanyahu’s distorted view of the world, Palestinian grievances and their nationalist aspirations have no place or merit. Palestinians and Arabs are simply “terrorists,” he says, against whom the West should wage war, as we now do. Reading the controlled press or listening to the pundits on the U.S. mass media, it is clear that they have acted as agents of Zionist propaganda and should be held accountable for having snookered the United States into fighting costly and disastrous wars against Israel’s enemies.
There are other agents, many of them highly-placed Americans, who clearly and specifically pushed the agenda, which we now call the “War on Terror,” as a response to a catastrophic terror attack long before 9-11.
Three men authored an article in 1998 in Foreign Affairs, the bi-monthly publication of the Council on Foreign Relations, in which they laid out what changes would need to made within the U.S. government in the wake of “catastrophic terrorism,” which is also the title of the article.
The “Catastrophic Terrorism” article, written by Ashton B. Carter, John M. Deutch, and Philip D. Zelikow, appeared in the last issue of Foreign Affairs in 1998. It begins with the strange subtitle “Imagining the Transforming Event,” as if what was actually desired by the authors was a transformation of the U.S. government and the way Americans live. The authors of the article, like Netanyahu, do not even mention the political causes of terrorism. Understanding the causes of terrorism in an effort to prevent it does not even occur to them. No, these three architects are busy “imagining the transforming event” — and how to respond to it.
This article is clearly an architectural level document. It is meant to explain what should be done in the event of the catastrophic terror attack its authors are “imagining.” For this reason, the authors deserve to be investigated to see what kind of relationship they might have to those who carried out the false flag terror attacks of 9-11.
“LIKE PEARL HARBOR”
“Catastrophic terrorism has moved from far-fetched horror to a contingency that could happen next month,” the essay warns. “Although the United States still takes conventional terrorism seriously it is not yet prepared for the new threat of catastrophic terrorism. The bombings in East Africa killed hundreds. A successful attack with weapons of mass destruction could certainly take thousands, or tens of thousands, of lives. If the device that exploded in 1993 under the World Trade Center had been nuclear, or had effectively dispersed a deadly pathogen, the resulting horror and chaos would have exceeded our ability to describe it. Such an act of catastrophic terrorism would be a watershed event in American history. It could involve loss of life and property unprecedented in peacetime and undermine America’s fundamental sense of security, as did the Soviet atomic bomb test in 1949. Like Pearl Harbor, this event would divide our past and future into a before and after. The United States might respond with draconian measures, scaling back civil liberties, allowing wider surveillance of citizens, detention of suspects, and use of deadly force. More violence could follow, either further terrorist attacks or U.S. counterattacks. Belatedly, Americans would judge their leaders negligent for not addressing terrorism more urgently.”
With amazing prescience the authors were right about all eight things they said “might” happen as a result of an attack of “catastrophic terrorism” like Pearl Harbor. The authors go on to recommend specifically what the U.S. government should do in the wake of such an event of “catastrophic terrorism,” which they concluded is “an eminent threat.”
”¢ The U.S. government should have the authority to monitor any group and its potential state sponsors that might have the motive and the means to use weapons of mass destruction;
”¢ The United States needs a new institution to gather intelligence on catastrophic terrorism – a National Terrorism Intelligence Center – that would collect and analyze information so it could warn of suspected catastrophic terrorist acts ahead of time;
”¢ Washington must now work with other countries to extend the prohibitions against development or possession of weapons of mass destruction;
”¢ International norms should adapt so that states are obliged to reassure other states that are worried and to take reasonable measures to prove they are not secretly developing weapons of mass destruction. Failure to supply such proof or to prosecute the criminals living within their borders should entitle worried nations to take all necessary actions for their self-defense;
”¢ The United States should aspire as a long-term objective to identify every person and all freight entering the country;
”¢ The United States should support a system to ensure that every country’s passports are computer readable, with every country’s passport control station linked to a database.
In the same issue of Foreign Affairs in which the prescient essay on “catastrophic terrorism” appeared there is an essay about Osama Bin Laden’s “License to Kill” by Bernard Lewis, the British Zionist mastermind of academia. After reading the Lewis article, in which he says Osama Bin Laden calls on Muslims to “kill the Americans and plunder their possessions wherever he finds them and whenever he can” there can be no doubt who should be the prime suspect behind any event of “catastrophic terrorism.” So who are the authors of this prescient article about how the U.S. should respond to an act of “catastrophic terrorism?”
ASHTON B. CARTER
Ashton B. Carter is a Ford Foundation Professor of Science and International Affairs at Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government and a former Assistant Secretary of Defense. The 1998 essay he co-wrote with Deutch and Zelikow was published in a book he wrote with William Perry entitled Preventive Defense: An American Security Strategy for the 21st Century.
Carter is also a member of Board of Trustees for MITRE, where he was a trustee from 1988 to 1993. The MITRE Corp. is a major defense contracting organization based in Bedford, Massachusetts, which is headed by the former Director of Central Intelligence (DCI), Dr. James Rodney Schlesinger. MITRE’s crucial communication, command and control systems clearly failed on 9-11, something that deserves investigating.
From 2001 to 2002, Carter served on the National Academy of Sciences Committee on Science and Technology for Countering Terrorism and advised on the creation of the Department of Homeland Security. Carter is also a senior partner in a company called Global Technology Partners, LLC (GTP), of which William J. Perry is the chairman. John Mark Deutch, the former Director of Central Intelligence and co-author of the article, is also a senior partner in GTP.
AFFILIATE OF ROTHSCHILD
What is GTP? Global Technology Partners, LLC is “an exclusive affiliate of Rothschild North America, formed to make acquisitions of and investments in technology, defense and aerospace-related companies,” according to a biographical sketch of one of the corporation’s senior partners, Paul G. Kaminski. Elsewhere it is described as “an aerospace and defense investment banking boutique affiliated with the Rothschild Group” or “a professional services firm associated with the Rothschild Group of investment banks.”
So Ashton B. Carter, John M. Deutch, William J. Perry, and the other fellows at GTP work for the Rothschild family, the Jewish financiers of governments — and founders of the state of Israel.
JOHN MARK DEUTCH
This explains how Deutch, who was born in Belgium, and his father, who was born in Russia and who only came to the United States in 1940, were so quickly advanced within the Washington power structure. Deutch’s father, Michael J. Deutch, was born in Smolensk, Russia in 1907. The Deutch family came to the United States in 1940 where Michael quickly became deputy director at the War Production Board, in charge of making synthetic rubber.
A December 27, 1946 article in the Chicago Tribune entitled “List Alien ‘Rulers’ in U.S.” listed some of the foreigners found in a secret 71-page report who had received high government wartime posts. Michael J. Deutch was one of them. “Correspondence passing between the Secretary of the Interior and the Office of War Mobilization indicate that Deutch was pushed up the ladder of promotion with unusual vigor by some one,” the secret report from the House Committee on Un-American Activities said.
Michael Deutch was a Russian Jew whose family supposedly “fled the Bolshevik Revolution for Belgium.” In Belgium, where he studied chemical engineering, he married Rachel Fischer, the daughter of Jean “Yonah” Fischer, a diamond merchant of Antwerp who ran the Zionist Federation of Belgium. This connection could explain why Deutch was promoted so quickly when he came to Washington.
John Deutch’s maternal grandfather, Yonah Fischer, was a prominent Zionist and friend of Israel’s first president, Chaim Weizmann. Fischer was a very high level Zionist within the international military-political network centered in London. Yonah had extensive business arrangements in Palestine/Israel and even started a town which is named after him — Kefar Yonah.
John Deutch has served as a director of Citigroup and Citibank since 1987. He is also a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).
PHILIP D. ZELIKOW
Philip David Zelikow is all over 9-11, its aftermath, and the subsequent wars in the Middle East. Three years after warning of “catastrophic terrorism,” Zelikow became the Executive Director of the 9-11 Commission, the appointed government whitewash which utterly failed to address the key questions and evidence of the terror attacks of 9-11.
Zelikow, from Houston, served on President George W. Bush’s transition team in 2001. After Bush took office, Zelikow was named to the President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board, and served on the National Commission on Federal Election Reform, which produced the extremely flawed Help America Vote Act of 2002.
Zelikow had been a career foreign service officer overseas and served on to the National Security Council. More recently, Zelikow was a member of the Iraq Study Group, which pretended to study what went wrong with the disastrous, illegal, and ill-advised war that Jewish Zionist Neo-Cons, the controlled media, and the Bush administration all pushed so hard for. Zelikow, the grandson of a Russian Jewish immigrant tailor, is very close to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. He can be seen as having been her legal and Zionist handler. Zelikow joined the National Security Council in the George H.W. Bush administration, at the same time as Condoleezza Rice. Only recently Zelikow resigned as Counselor of the U.S. Department of State, where he served as a senior policy advisor to the Secretary of State.
The Global Technology Partners who work for the Rothschild family in North America. Chairman of the GTC LLC, William Perry sits in the middle. The Zionist agent John Deutch is standing behind him in the blue sweater. Ashton B. Carter is standing at the far left.
Note: Due to the transfer of information from the original website to this updated format, some article post dates may differ from the date they were originally published. However, most articles contain the actual publish date at the top of the article.