Sep 122020

9/11, as we were told repeatedly in the days, weeks, and months after the attack, was the day that changed everything. And now a new event has come along to once again throw the world into chaos. But whereas the post-9/11 era introduced America to the concept of homeland security, the COVID-19 era is introducing the world to an altogether more abstract concept: biosecurity. This is the story of the COVID-911 security state.

Sep 122020

From 9/11 Terrorists to 2020 Viruses: Dystopian Progress

For anyone old enough to have been alive and aware of the attacks of September 11, 2001 and of so-called COVID-19 in 2020, memory may serve to remind one of an eerie parallel between the two operations. However, if memory has been expunged by the work of one’s forgettery or deleted by the corporate media flushing it down the memory hole, or if knowledge is lacking, or maybe fear or cognitive dissonance is blocking awareness, I would like to point out some similarities that might perk one up to consider some parallels and connections between these two operations.

The fundamental tie that binds them is that both events aroused the human fear of death. Underlying all fears is the fear of death. A fear that has both biological and cultural roots. On the biological level, we all react to death threats in a fight or flight manner. Culturally, there are multiple ways that fear can be allayed or exacerbated, purposely or not. Usually, culture serves to ease the fear of death, which can traumatize people, through its symbols and myths. Religion has for a long time served that purpose, but when religion loses its hold on people’s imaginations, especially in regard to the belief in immortality, as Orwell pointed out in the mid-1940s, a huge void is left. Without that consolation, fear is usually tranquilized by trivial pursuits.

In the cases of the attacks of September 11, 2001 and the current corona virus operation, the fear of death has been used by the power elites in order to control populations and institute long-planned agendas. There is a red thread that connects the two events.

Both events were clearly anticipated and planned.

In the case of September 11, 2001, as I have argued before, linguistic mind-control was carefully crafted in advance to conjure fear at the deepest levels with the use of such repeated terms as Pearl Harbor, Homeland, Ground Zero, the Unthinkable, and 9/11. Each in its turn served to raise the fear level dramatically. Each drew on past meetings, documents, events, speeches, and deep associations of dread. This language was conjured from the chief sorcerer’s playbook, not from that of an apprentice out of control.

And as David Ray Griffin, the seminal 9/11 researcher (and others), has pointed out in a dozen meticulously argued and documented books, the events of that day had to be carefully planned in advance, and the post hoc official explanations can only be described as scientific miracles, not scientific explanations. These miracles include: massive steel-framed high-rise buildings for the first time in history coming down without explosives or incendiaries in free fall speed; one of them being WTC-7 that was not even hit by a plane; an alleged hijacker pilot, Hani Hanjour, who could barely fly a Piper Cub, flying a massive Boeing 757 in a most difficult maneuver into the Pentagon; airport security at four airports failing at the same moment on the same day; all sixteen U.S. intelligence agencies failing; air traffic control failing, etc. The list goes on and on. And all this controlled by Osama bin Laden. It’s a fairy tale.

Then we had the crucially important anthrax attacks that are linked to 9/11. Graeme MacQueen, in The 2001 Anthrax Deception, brilliantly shows that these too were a domestic conspiracy.

Read more

Jul 172020

The first draft of this article was written in 2014. It is now ready for publication (including several corrections).

The first overt diplomatic achievement by the United States related to 9/11, was Resolution No. 1368. It was adopted at noontime by the UN Security Council on September 12, 2001. The resolution contained the obligatory statements of condemnation and of solidarity with the 9/11 victims and their families. But this particular resolution manifested three puzzling features whose implications are unsettling.

Resolution 1368 included a one-paragraph preamble in which the Council “recognized the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence in accordance with the Charter.” There was no need to mention this particular principle in the resolution unless it was the intent of the Council to give the United States a wink that it may, if it wishes, use military force against any country it chooses as a response to 9/11.


Note that the Council did not “authorize” the United States to use military force, as it had done in the case of the invasion and occupation of Kuwait by Iraq in 1990,[1] but chose to convey to the United States indirectly the message that the Council would look the other way and ask no questions, if the United States would use military force against foreign states in response to 9/11.

That is precisely what happened: The U.S. bombing campaign against Afghanistan and the subsequent occupation of that country was not condemned by any member of the Security Council, although it was a violation of customary international law – as established on the basis of the so-called Caroline doctrine – and of the U.N. Charter.

According to the Caroline doctrine, the resort to self-defense requires “a necessity of self-defence, instant, overwhelming, leaving no choice of means, and no moment of deliberation.” Furthermore, any action taken must be proportional, “since the act justified by the necessity of self-defence, must be limited by that necessity, and kept clearly within it.”

Resolution 1368 also condoned a blatant act of aggression. The International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg (1945) called the waging of aggressive war “not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime, differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole.” [2]

I argue that by including the Charter’s provision on self- defense into Resolution No. 1368, Council members contributed to the violation of customary international law and the commission of the supreme international crime by the U.S. government, namely aggression.

Was 9-11 an International Act? 

Furthermore, the Council designated the events of the preceding day as an act of “international” terrorism, and “a threat to international peace and security” without being provided with the slightest evidence in support of both of these assertions. The Council is not known to have at any time requested or obtained such evidence.

Note: it is the formula “threat to international peace” that gives the UNSC the authority to issue resolutions that bind member states. I am referring to Article 39 of the UN Charter:

” The Security Council shall determine the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression and shall make recommendations, or decide what measures shall be taken in accordance with Articles 41 and 42, to maintain or restore international peace and security.”

According to the US’s official account, four airliners in domestic routes were hijacked by 19 passengers on September 11, 2001. Even if that account had been true – which it is not – it would not have amounted to an act of “international” terrorism, but would remain a large-scale act of domestic terrorism by travelers whose real identities remain in question.

A further puzzling feature is the swiftness with which Resolution 1368 was adopted. Had the above two features not been included in the resolution – calling 9/11 international terrorism and designating terrorism as a threat to peace — there would be nothing odd about the fact that it was adopted one day after the attacks.

Numerous governments and inter-governmental organisations adopted resolutions on the very day of the attacks, September 11, 2001, in which they condemned the attacks and expressed solidarity with the victims.  They, however, carefully refrained from designating the attacks as containing an international dimension.

Vast Implications 

The two features discussed above were neither self-evident nor necessary, yet have vast legal and political implications. It is inconceivable that individuals sitting in the Council, representing their governments, would approve the wording of Council resolutions on the base of their personal feelings, no matter how strong.

Drafts of Security Council resolutions, particularly those which contain legal precedents or entail legal consequences, are typically examined – down to their punctuation – by legal experts in the home countries of the Council’s members. It is inconceivable that experts around the world would be able to assess within hours the legal and political ramifications of the features discussed above.

I can conceive of only two explanations for this apparent swiftness: Either the United States (backed by its NATO allies) threatened the governments of the other Security Council members with severe sanctions, should they fail to adopt this resolution, or the draft resolution had been circulated to, and approved by selected members of the Security Council prior to the events of 9/11, in order to ensure its speedy adoption on September 12, 2001. Both explanations give rise to highly disturbing questions.

Now for a comment on the probity of information put before the UNSC. The Security Council does not have to base its decisions on proven facts. It may legally base its operative decisions on hunches, hypotheticals, hearsay and even fantasy. The Security Council would be legally entitled to determine that the earth is flat, if such determination would politically suit its members.

The members of the Security Council are admittedly under the legal obligation to act in good faith, but no international entity has been set up to examine whether they have complied with this principle, and if violated, to invalidate decisions based on the breach of this principle.[3]

The readiness of all members of the Security Council to underwrite American foreign policy aims, as reflected in the provisions of Resolution No. 1368, must be regarded as a historical watershed.

The UN’s Fourth Pillar 

For years, I have been a lonely voice pointing out that the UNSC’s Permanent Five (US, UK, France, Russia and China) have committed themselves to define “international terrorism” as a major threat to world peace. This definition is a monumental lie, for terrorism is not even a threat to the sovereignty, national defense, or political order of any country. While terrorism (attacks on civilians for political purposes) is a crime, the number of people killed yearly by terrorist acts in most countries lies between zero and and 10.  In Europe, a territory of over 500 million people, about 44 people die on the average yearly in terrorist attacks (compared to over 5,000 yearly homicides).

I have repeatedly warned that the United Nations have adopted the ideology of “counter-terrorism” as one of the pillars for the entire UN system. Now, finally and belatedly, others vindicate my warnings. In June 2020, the UK-based organization Saferworld has lamented the mainstreaming of the counter-terrorism ideology within the United Nations Organization.

“For three-quarters of a century, peace, rights and development have been the three core pillars that define the UN’s unique purpose. However, in the post-9/11 era, governments’ collective determination to define terrorism as the pre-eminent global security challenge has made a deep impression on the UN [sic]. Counter-terrorism has come to the fore through a flood of UN Security Council resolutions, General Assembly strategies, new funding streams, offices, committees, working groups and staff – all dedicated to counter-terrorism.” [4]

Any Good Guys? 

I urge all those who for various reasons believe Russia and China to be “the hope for Mankind” as opposed to Western imperialism, to take a second look at this perception. The five permanent members of the UN Security Council are firmly committed to the fraudulent counter-terrorism ideology, for it provides all governments around the globe with justifications to abolish democracy and institute a digital dictatorship.

The counter-terrorism ideology, now complemented by a global health-scare campaign, is precisely the cement that binds the rulers of the P5, and it bears no relation to Al Qaeda, ISIS or other real or fake terrorist organisations. The P5, serving their ruling classes, have thus declared a war against the world’s peoples. The United Nations, once a hope for the world, have become a tool of oppression. “We the People” can trust no government and no organisation of states to ensure our rights and liberties. We must join hands across borders without state or corporate interference to restore an acceptable world order.


Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Elias Davidsson is an Icelandic citizen living in Germany. He is a composer, human rights and peace activist and author of several books on 9/11 and false-flag terrorism.


Jun 042020

By Kevin Ryan
Global Research, June 03, 2020

Governments have used psychological warfare throughout history to manipulate public opinion, gain political advantage, and generate profits. Western governments have engaged in such tactics in the war on terrorism as well as in its predecessor, the war on communism. In both cases, state-sponsored terrorism and propaganda were used to distort the public’s perception of the threats, leading to increased governmental control of society and huge financial benefits for corporations. It appears that the same kinds of effects are being seen as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Many of the features and outcomes seen in the war on terrorism and the war on communism are evident in this new “war on death.” Therefore, it’s reasonable to wonder if the extreme response to COVID-19, and its associated virus SARS-COV-2, could be another psychological operation against the public. Considering facts about the disease and the disproportionate response emphasizes the possibility.

If COVID-19 has been co-opted for manipulation of the public, through hyping the threat and pushing exploitive solutions, who is behind it and who benefits?

Let’s first review what features and outcomes the “coronavirus scare’ shares in common with the “red scare” that drove the perceived threat of communism and the “Muslim scare” behind the perceived threat of terrorism. Here are a dozen characteristics that these perceived threats share.

Fear-based and globally directed
Media saturation with bias toward fear
Data manipulation and propaganda
Censorship of opposing views
Intelligence agency control of information
Preceded by exercises mimicking the threat
Series of claims made that are later proven false
Response threatens democracy
Large increase in wealth and power for a few; increase in social inequality
Increased government control of the public and reduced individual freedoms
Response kills far more than the original threat
Evidence for manufactured events (see below)

There are also differences between the COVID-19 pandemic response and the “wars” on communism and terrorism. One difference is that, for the virus, agencies dedicated to public health have taken the lead. Although the central characters that hyped the communism threat and the terrorism threat were sometimes the same people, they tended to represent military, diplomatic, or intelligence agencies.

The primary actors driving the coronavirus lockdowns and associated control mechanisms are political leaders. However, the directives being acted upon come from the World Health Organization (WHO), an agency of the United Nations ostensibly responsible for international public health. Others controlling the coronavirus scare are national health agencies, most notably the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the United Kingdom’s National Health Service (NHS).

Are these agencies acting solely in the interest of public health?

Read article here

Apr 272020

We live in very strange times. Just a couple of months ago none of us would have thought that we’d be “locked down” at home because of a virus. Hardly anyone had even used the term ‘Social Distancing’ before and now it’s a part of everyday language. Precedents have been set during this outbreak. This video explores those precedents and why we are being told that life may not ever be the same. I’d like to remind you that in Australia the deaths from COVID19 are still way below the average for Influenza yet we are still living with dramatically curtailed freedoms. Something to think about.

Jan 272020

The dubious legal proceedings at the Guantanomo Bay (Gitmo) prison camp continue to promote the idea of justice for victims of 9/11. Unfortunately, these proceedings do not represent an administration of law but an unstated claim that the Global War on Terror is above the law. More importantly, the Gitmo antics have one obvious objective—to perpetuate willful ignorance of the 9/11 crimes. There is a dangerous elephant in the Gitmo courtroom, however, and if it ever gets reported it could bring down the terror-torture house of cards.

Reporters covering Gitmo continue to call it a trial but it is not a trial, it is a “military tribunal.” They continue to call the site “Camp Justice” when justice is as far from the prison camp as it has ever been from any human endeavor. What they don’t do is think critically about the information they are parroting from court sources.

The history is profoundly absurd. The suspects were brutally tortured and held without charges for up to 18 years. The alleged evidence obtained from the torture was made secret. Then the records of the secret torture evidence were illegally destroyed. Then the secret evidence simply turned out to be completely false. FBI and CIA officers then began to make a mockery of the whole thing, secretly bugging defense team discussion rooms and covertly inserting themselves as translators and defense team members.

This is not just a matter of an extreme violation of human rights and an utter disrespect for the law. Within this sequence of stupidity looms the mother of all oversights. That is, the secret evidence that turned out to be false was used as the basis for The 9/11 Commission Report.
At the center of the media’s willful ignorance is “forever prisoner” Abu Zubaydah, the first alleged al Qaeda leader captured and tortured. In 2009, the U.S. government began correcting the record by admitting, in habeus corpus proceedings, that Zubaydah was never associated with al Qaeda and that he had no role in, or knowledge of, the 9/11 attacks. That Zubaydah was never associated with al Qaeda is no longer challenged by anyone and is regularly repeated in the mainstream press. What is not mentioned is the astounding implication of that admission.

Abu Zubaydah’s “torture testimony” was used to construct the official narrative of 9/11 that is still accepted as fact today.

Check for yourself. Do a quick search for the word “Zubaydah” in The 9/11 Commission Report. You’ll find it 52 times. As you read these references and claims, ask yourself—how could a man who the government now says had nothing to do with al Qaeda have known any of these things? How could he be a key travel facilitator for al Qaeda operatives when he wasn’t associated in any way with al Qaeda? How could Zubaydah give detailed accounts of Osama bin Laden and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (KSM)’s plans for 9/11 when he had no knowledge of those plans?

Disassociating Zubaydah from al Qaeda causes so many problems for the official narrative of al Qaeda and 9/11 that people like Lee Hamilton, the co-chairman of the 9/11 Commission, simply develop amnesia when asked about him.

As seen in the 9/11 Commission Report, the official account begins with linking “Mukhtar” (KSM) to “al Qaeda lieutenant Abu Zubaydah,” who we now know was never associated with al Qaeda. Both FBI interrogator Ali Soufan, in a 2009 New York Times opinion piece, and Vice President Dick Cheney, in his 2011 book, claimed that Zubaydah (who never had any knowledge or connection to 9/11) identified KSM as the “mastermind of the 9/11 attacks.” The official account of 9/11, and the ongoing fake trial at Gitmo, all proceeded from there.

But none of it was true.

The latest crime of 9/11 is that this fact is not being reported. The media admits that Zubaydah was never associated with al Qaeda but entirely ignores the devastating consequences of that admission. The false official account for 9/11 is the root cause and ongoing justification for greater crimes—1) wars of aggression in multiple countries that have destroyed millions of lives, 2) the public’s acceptance of torture and indefinite detention, and 3) mass surveillance and an overall attack on freedom.

Instead of reporting that the basis for those greater crimes has been obliterated, the media reduces the subject to a discussion of how torture is bad but perhaps still justified by the gain. Of course, torture is bad but mass murder is much worse and the justification for both the wars and the torture is now indefensible! Until the media reports this fact there will be no justice for victims of 9/11 or for the victims of the resulting wars and torture.

We know that there are many striking anomalies and inexplicable facts about 9/11 that have yet to be resolved. But the fake Gitmo trial stands as a final absurd crime in the history of 9/11 as it is represented as an attempt at justice yet includes more farcical elements every day. For example, the CIA-driven architect of the torture program recently claimed that he was acting on behalf of the 9/11 families and that he would do it again.

The final proceedings have been set to officially begin in January 2021, aligning with the 20th anniversary news cycle and re-emphasizing that propaganda is the primary goal. The propaganda narrative focuses on setting the false official account in stone and further normalizing torture. Sadly, reporters and editors covering these events don’t seem to have an interest in challenging any substantial part of the story. Let’s hope that one or more of them comes to their senses and proves that suspicion wrong.


Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

This article was originally published on the author’s blog site, Dig Within.

The original source of this article is Global Research
Copyright © Kevin Ryan, Global Research, 2020

Aug 042016

Kevin Barrett’s new edited book Orlando False Flag: The Clash of Histories is now available for purchase:

Below is the Afterword, list of contributors, and blurbs.

This is an ideal book to read, and give people, during the run-up to the 15th anniversary of 9/11. It basically brings us up to date on the “9/11 and false flags” issue.

Kevin Barrett

“You had to attack civilians, the people, women, children, innocent people, unknown people far removed from any political game. The reason was quite simple. They were supposed to force these people, the Italian public to turn to the State to ask for greater security.” – testimony of convicted Operation Gladio terrorist Vincenzo Vinciguerra during his trial[i]

As this book was going to press in July 2016, a series of spectacular violent events exploded across headlines and television screens in the US and Europe.

On July 7 2016, five Dallas police officers were killed, and nine others injured, along with two civilians, by gunshots fired during a Black Lives Matter protest. Initial reports cited multiple shooters. As one headline stated, “Two snipers dressed in military garb shot 10 police officers ‘from elevated positions’ in Dallas.”[ii]

Indeed, there were not just a few isolated reports of mulitiple shooters, but a plethora of them. According to the Washington Post, “Dallas Police Chief David Brown…believes the four suspects worked together with rifles….”[iii] NBC News reported: “We believe that these suspects were positioning themselves in a way to triangulate on these officers from two different perches in garages in the downtown area, and planned to injure and kill as many law enforcement officers as they could.” Dallas TV station 13WHOTV was later nonplussed by the sudden, radical change in the official story from multiple gunmen to a single shooter: “Previously, authorities had said three people were in custody, and that multiple shooters were involved in the attack.”

The alleged lone gunman was Micah Xavier Johnson, an angry Afghan war veteran who was conveniently killed, eliminating the opportunity for a trial and formal investigation. The story of his killing by a police robot has been called absurd by police and intelligence experts including star contributor to this book Robert David Steele.[iv]

The Dallas police shooting was the deadliest event for US law enforcement since September 11th, 2001. It served to turn public opinion against the Black Lives Matter movement while exacerbating race-based fear and hysteria, showering political benefits on authoritarian politicians and policy-makers and galvanizing the white pro-law-and-order segment of American society. Suspicions of a false flag were expressed by many Black Lives Matter leaders including Johnetta Elzie, whose tweets casting doubt on the official story were noted by the Daily Beast:

On Friday afternoon, activist Johnetta Elzie suggested the massacre was intended to turn opinion against peaceful protesters. “I will not let go of the fact that I know cointelpro exists,” Elzie tweeted, echoing other users who have expressed suspicion over details of the shooting. “From my experience, whenever public opinion shifts to strongly support the movement an act of violence against the police happens,” she also suggested.[v]

Like another suspicious Dallas event that happened just a few blocks away—the November 22, 1963 killing of President John F. Kennedy—the Dallas police shooting may turn out to be a major historical turning point for US policy, and could even lead to the installation of a more right-wing authoritarian regime in the White House. The climate of fear, insecurity, and polarization triggered by the 7/7/2016 Dallas event was a major factor in enabling Donald Trump’s spectacular “triumph of the will” acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention on July 21, which roused Trump’s base, terrified his opponents, and all but eliminated Hillary Clinton’s double-digit lead in the polls.

The cultural, psychological and political effects of the Dallas shooting were intensified by an apparent follow-up police shooting in Baton Rouge, Louisiana on July 17, 2016, which killed three officers and wounded another three, one of them critically. As in Dallas, early reports from witnesses and law enforcement cited multiple shooters. Local Channel TV 2 News reported: “Authorities have confirmed that one suspect is dead while two others remain at large.”[vi] As in Dallas, mainstream news stories, including the one cited above, were re-written to eliminate early references to multiple gunmen. Official guilt devolved on yet another lone gunman, Gavin Eugene Long, who was killed by a SWAT team, once again eliminating the need for a courtroom investigation.

Meanwhile in Europe, the other principle bastion of what passes for Western civilization, back-to-back anti-Islam false flags in Nice, France and Munich, Germany were both recorded and propagandized by the same Israeli-Mossad-linked photographer. Richard Gutjahr, a cameraman whose wife Einat Wilf is a leading Israeli operator, was pre-positioned on a balcony in Nice to film the beginning of the July 14, 2016 truck attack. Gutjahr’s iconic footage was heavily promoted in the global media; no mainstream journalists bothered to ask why Gutjahr happened to be on that balcony and for no discernable reason began to film what must have appeared to be an ordinary truck before it had begun to mow people down.

Then on July 22, Gutjahr was apparently once again in the right place at the right time, photographing the Munich, Germany shopping mall shooting and posting the images to his Twitter account—then taking down the images, which simultaneously disappeared from a Russia Today report, just minutes after being exposed in a Veterans Today article by this author.[vii]

Gutjahr’s wife Einat Wilf is a former Israeli Intelligence Officer in Unit 8200 who served as foreign policy advisor to Shimon Peres. She is a strategic consultant to MacKenzie and Co. in New York, and a general partner in Core Venture Capital in Israel. In 2007 she ran for the presidency of the World Jewish Congress.[viii] The claim that such a person’s spouse’s apparent foreknowledge of two back-to-back terror attacks can be accounted for by coincidence would boggle the mind of the craziest coincidence theorist.

Gutjahr is hardly the only apparent Israeli agent pre-positioned to crank out anti-Islam propaganda in the wake of spectacular terror events. On September 11th, 2001, former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, who had stepped down in March 2001 and come to America “to oversee the terror attacks of 9/11” in the words of journalist Christopher Bollyn, was in the BBC Studios in London just minutes after news of the airliner crashes broke, purveying what became the official story and calling for US invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq.[ix] Like Gutjahr on the balcony in Nice, Barak can hardly have found himself in the BBC studios at that moment, fully prepared with the official conspiracy theory and details about upcoming wars, by coincidence.

Likewise, the Naudet brothers, surmised by some to be French Jews and likely Israeli agents,[x] were able to miraculously capture the only footage of the first 9/11 attack plane hitting the North Tower. Studies of their famous 9/11 video shows that they must have carefully chosen the location—one of the very few spots in Manhattan where such a shot would be possible—well in advance, and carefully rehearsed the seemingly spontaneous panning motion so as to be prepared to film the iconic image of the initial attack. The odds of such footage being captured by luck, especially in 2001 when video cameras were far from ubiquitous, are effectively zero.[xi]

Jules and Thomas Naudet were not the only apparent Israeli agents pre-positioned to film the attacks on the Twin Towers. Five so-called “dancing Israelis”—Sivan and Paul Kurzberg, Oded Ellner, Omer Marmari, and Yaron Schmuel—were spotted in multiple locations filming and wildly celebrating the successful 9/11 attacks. The five men, two of them positively identified as Mossad agents, were subsequently arrested by the NYPD, held for 71 days, administered lie detector tests (which they failed) and finally sent back to Israel at the behest of suspected Israeli agent Michael Chertoff, then head of the Criminal Division of the Justice Department.[xii] “Witnesses reported they had set cameras PRIOR to the first plane strike, and were seen congratulating one another afterward.”[xiii] Police confirmed the Israelis’ apparent foreknowledge of the attacks to mainstream media: “It looked like they knew what was going to happen when they were at Liberty State Park” (set up in advance to film).[xiv] The Israelis laughed and cheered, taking trophy pictures of each other flicking cigarette lighters in front of the burning and exploding Towers where 3,000 people were dying.

Back home in Israel, the men appeared on national television and bragged that they had been sent to New York “to document the event.”[xv] How could they have known there would be an event to document, and where and when to set up to film it? Obviously they were working for the team that orchestrated the event. There is no other possible explanation.

Like 9/11, Nice, and Munich, the January 7 2015 Charlie Hebdo massacre, November 13 2015 Paris attacks, and the March 22 2016 Brussels Airport attacks all featured pre-positioned publicists who appeared to be Israeli agents. The mainstream media has been grossly negligent in failing to report this information, which turns the entire narrative of the war on terror upside down. Fortunately the internet-based alternative media has not been so derelict of duty.

Hicham Hamza of has thoroughly documented Israeli involvement in the two 2015 Paris attacks. Hamza’s reports are the most important single source for my two earlier edited books, We Are NOT Charlie Hebdo and ANOTHER French False Flag?

In a February 2015 article, Hamza discovered that a mysterious figure who filmed iconic images of the Charlie Hebdo terrorists fleeing—and who had to have been pre-positioned on a private balcony with a perfect view of the scene—is linked to Laurent Dassault, a radical right-wing Franco-Israeli billionaire, close friend of Netanyahu, and pillar of the Israeli military-industrial complex.[xvi] Mainstream media covered up the identity of the Israeli-agent photographer by intentionally degrading the quality of photos in which he appeared.[xvii]

Hamza also found that the single most iconic image to emerge from the November 13 2015 Paris attacks, the corpse-strewn “blood heart” photo of the Bataclan nightclub, was originally “published by an Israeli organization headed by the US neoconservative Mark Gerson.”[xviii] This is the only publicly available photo of any dead bodies following the 11/13/15 Paris attacks. The Israeli agents responsible for taking and disseminating this photo committed an illegal act under French law, which prohibits images that supposedly injure the dignity of terrorism victims. But rather than track down and arrest those behind the photo, the French government instead arrested journalist Hicham Hamza for exposing them! The pretext: Hamza reproduced their photo, which supposedly injured the dignity of the victims, as part of his news story exposing the original criminals. (I used the same “blood heart” photo in the cover collage of ANOTHER French False Flag and challenged whoever owns the photo to sue me; unsurprisingly, the Mossad has not come forward to claim ownership of the photo and seek royalties.)

Another intrepid independent journalist, Ole Dammegard, discovered that the “blood heart” inexplicably smeared on the floor of the Bataclan is virtually identical to the “smeared heart” in the logo of the Brussels Airport, “the heart of Europe.” Dammegard argues that the apparent Israeli agents who produced and disseminated the Paris “blood heart” photo were signaling that their next big attack would hit the Brussels Airport—which is precisely what happened on March 22, 2016. And there, once again, Israeli-linked individuals were pre-positioned to disseminate the first, iconic images of the carnage.[xix] (Brussels Airport security is controlled by the Israeli firm ICTS, which also ran the 9/11 attack airports, as well as the Amsterdam Airport where the Underwear Bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab was escorted onto the plane, despite lacking a passport, by a “well-dressed” security agent, according to eyewitness Kurt Haskell.)[xx]

The facts listed above, along with countless others, suggest that the “war on terror” is a fictional narrative driven primarily by false flag terror events staged by agents of the state of Israel. The apparent motive: Drag the entire West into Israel’s endless war on its Muslim neighbors.

Western governments, corporations, and media, which gain wealth and power from false flag terror, are also complicit—though on rare occasions, the media actually does its job. In the wake of the 7/14/16 Nice truck attack, the two most prestigious French newspapers, Le Monde and Le Figaro, reported an astonishing and deeply disturbing fact: The French National Police had ordered the complete and irretrievable destruction of all security camera evidence for the 24 hours before and during the attacks. The Figaro story began:

Panic and incomprehension at City Hall in Nice. Wednesday at 11 a.m., the anti-terrorist branch of the National Police (SDAT) sent to agents who manage video surveillance of the city a requisition citing articles 53 and L706-24 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and Article R642-1 of the Penal Code asking them to ‘complete’ the erasing of 24 hours of footage from six camera named and numbered, but also all the scenes from the beginning of the attack that took place on the promenade des Anglais, on the night of July 14.
The request stunned agents from the Urban Supervision Center of Nice. ‘It is the first time we have been asked to destroy evidence,’ says a source close to the dossier.[xxi]

The same facts implicating the French national government in criminal destruction of evidence were reported by Le Monde.[xxii]

Why would the French government partner with the Israeli government, alongside privatized false flag terror networks, in an attack on French citizens? For the same reasons so many other governments have engaged in exactly the same kind of behavior. (Well-documented American examples include President Johnson’s complicity in the Israeli massacre of USS Liberty sailors in 1967, and the Cheney-Bush Administration’s complicity in Israel’s false flag attack on America on 9/11/01).[xxiii] Western governments can enhance their own war plans, gain emergency powers, and demand vast sums of money from taxpayers, all based on the public panics that follow false flag terror events.

As of July 2016, the public panic seems permanent. New false flags are occurring on almost a weekly or even daily basis, and the perpetrators seem unconcerned with hiding their tracks, since the heightened panic following each attack quickly wipes out detailed memory of, and concern for, the actual facts of the previous attack.[xxiv] The plethora of attacks merge, in public consciousness, into a vague but terrifying master narrative: “The Muslims are out to kill us.” Or: “Police are gunning down black people with impunity.” (That one is reality-based and may not require much bolstering with false flags.) Or: “Angry black ex-military men are mass-murdering police officers in revenge, and want to kill all white people.”

Cognitive scientist George Lakoff has shown that such master narratives are far more powerful than the mere facts, real or manufactured, on which they are based.[xxv] No rational, factual presentation is likely to free someone who is trapped in a bad master narrative. This is particularly true when the master narrative has been installed deeply into the unconscious mind of its victims via trauma-based mind control, as on September 11th, 2001—a date seared indelibly into public memory by an orchestrated spectacle that left almost half the American population with clinical Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) stemming from television images manufactured by the mind-controllers behind the false flag terror operation.[xxvi]

Lakoff suggests that the best antidote to bad master narratives—those that disempower, exploit, and hurt large numbers of people while lavishing benefits on the narrative-manufacturers and their paymasters—is not facts and logic, but better master narratives. If we remain within the frame of our opponent’s narrative, we lose: When we say “don’t think of an elephant,” our interlocutor thinks of an elephant. Likewise, when we say “most Muslims aren’t terrorists” the audience walks away with only two words, Muslims and terrorists, linked even more tightly than before. When we say “Muslims hate ISIS,” the audience hears “Muslims” and “ISIS” and walks away with the neoconservative master narrative reinforced.

So while it is perfectly true that 99.999+% of Muslims are not terrorists, and the vast majority of Muslims loathe ISIS, if we state these facts within the context of the master narrative of the war on terror, which holds that Muslims have indeed been behind spectacular, “searing” (Philip Zelikow’s word) terror events, we simply reinforce Islamophobia. The only way we can free the American, Western, and world public from this bad master narrative is by forcefully promulgating a completely different narrative: The one offered by this book and its predecessors. That alternative narrative happens to be based on facts, as the endnotes demonstrate. But it is not the facts themselves, but the (truthful but galvanizing) storytelling, that will carry the day.

The alternative narrative has been marginalized, terrorized, and witch-hunted. Yet it continues to gain adherents. It will gain even more adherents as the “purveyors of conspiracy theories” that ex-Obama information czar Cass Sunstein wants to “disable” become conscious of their role as authors of an alternative narrative, not just fact-disputers and geeky logistics experts on magic bullets, controlled demolitions and holes in the Pentagon.

The alternative narrative, unlike the official War on Terror narrative, offers hope. Whereas the official narrative urges an endless, unwinnable, ruinous war against an abstract noun, moving us ever-closer to dystopia, the alternative narrative offers a relatively optimistic view of human nature and human prospects, opening out on a radically better future. The key to this optimism is the realization that the only reason false flags are necessary is that ordinary people reject aggressive warfare and tyranny. Those like Paul Wolfowitz and other neoconservatives who, in the 1990s, wanted the US to wage wars of aggression against Middle Eastern nations, knew that such wars would be politically impossible “absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event—like a new Pearl Harbor.”[xxvii] Likewise, Israeli leaders know that their endless wars of aggression in search of ever-more Middle Eastern lebensraum, and their genocidal dispossession of the Palestinian people, will never be accepted by ordinary people worldwide, or even in Israel itself, unless emotionally-galvanizing big lies, the most important of which are false flags, are dispensed in ever-larger doses. Leaders everywhere, who did not rise to positions of power through naïveté or stupidity, understand perfectly well that motivating people to engage in acts of aggressive brutality requires extremely strong coercive measures, and that false flags fit the bill.

The general population’s increasing awareness of false flags means that unscrupulous leaders’ time-honored tricks for inciting aggression and mass murder will not work forever. Since every war begins with a disguised act of aggression by a predatory more-powerful nation or entity against a less-powerful one, with the aim of stealing resources and power; and since human nature is basically defensive, allowing and encouraging us to fight, kill and die in legitimate self defense, but not as an aggressor; the slow demise of false flags as a tool of aggression and tyranny, thanks to the rising public awareness fostered by the contributors to this book and their colleagues, promises to end war and radically reduce the tyranny of the strong over the weak. We can have a more egalitarian, less bloody planet if we want it.

That is why I put this book together. Now that you have read it, I hope you will join me in creating and propagating the alternative narrative, thereby helping save our species and the beautiful planet we must learn to inhabit, together, as responsible custodians.

– Lone Rock, WI

July 25, 2016

[i] Daniele Ganser, “NATO’s Secret Armies. Operation GLADIO and the Strategy of Tension.” (

[ii] “Two snipers dressed in military garb shot 10 police officers ‘from elevated positions’ in Dallas.” 8 July, 2016. (

[iii] The intial Washington Post story ( has been altered to eliminate this statement, which is archived at: “Dallas ‘Lone Gunman’ Narrative Falls Apart—Multiple Shooter Reports, Misidentified Weapon, Eyewitness Accounts, All Point To A Massive Cover-Up.” (

[iv] Personal communication.

[v] “BLM Leader Suggests Dallas a False Flag.” (

[vi] (reference to multiple gunmen eliminated from version retrieved July 24 2016; earlier version archived at

[vii] Kevin Barrrett, “BREAKING! Same Israeli photo-propagandist pre-positioned in Nice AND NOW MUNICH.” (

[viii] Interview with Ole Dammegard, July 20, 2016. ( Also see:

[ix] Christopher Bollyn, “How Ehud Barak Pulled Off 9/11.” (

[x] DaveyJones, “The Incredible Vanishing Naudet Brothers.” (

[xi] Leslie Raphael, “Jules Naudet’s 9/11 Film Was Staged.” (

[xii] “The Five Dancing Israelis Arrested on 9/11.” Includes reports, citations and links from the New York Times, The Forward, ABC News, Gotham Gazette, the Bergen Record, and other sources. (

[xiii] “9-11/Israel Did It.” (

[xiv] Paulo Lima, “Five Men Detained as Suspected Conspirators.” Bergen, New Jersey Record, September 12, 2001. Archived at

[xv] ABC News, “Were Israelis Detained on Sept. 11th Spies?” (

[xvi], “Find out how— and Why—the First Images of the Attack on Charlie Hebdo Were Deliberately Altered.” Tr. Kevin Barrett. (

[xvii] Ibid.

[xviii] Hicham Hamza, “French Journalist Arrested for Exposing Israeli Connection to 11/13/15 False Flag.” Tr. Kevin Barrett. (

[xix] Kevin Barrett, Interview with Ole Dammegard, “Ole Dammegard on new Brussels bombing witnesses; Randy Short says ‘save Rev. Pinkney and Congressman Walter Fauntroy’_ on Kevin Barrett’s Truth Jihad Radio.” (

[xx] Pete Johnson, “The Underwear Bomber: More to the story; Kurt Haskell Describes the Well Dressed Man and the Man in Orange.” (

[xxi] Eugénie Bastié, Paule Gonzales, “Attentat de Nice : la ville refuse de détruire 24 heures d’images de vidéosurveillance.” Tr. Kevin Barrett. (

[xxii] Le Monde, “La justice ordonne à la ville de Nice de supprimer les images de l’attentat, la mairie refuse.” (

[xxiii] Christopher Bollyn, Solving 9/11: The Deception that Changed the World (Christopher Bollyn, 2012).

[xxiv] Kevin Barrett, “Nice/Munich terror suspect Einat Wilf linked to false-flag-loving WINEP: They Aren’t Even Trying to Hide It Any More.” (

[xxv] George Lakoff, Don’t Think of an Elephant!: Know Your Values and Frame the Debate—The Essential Guide for Progressives (Chelsea Green, 2004).

[xxvi] On 9/11 PTSD, see Martha Stout, The Paranoia Switch: How Terror Rewires Our Brains and Reshapes Our Behavior—and How We Can Reclaim Our Courage (Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2007). On trauma-based mind control, see Naomi Klein, The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism (NY: Henry Holt, 2008) and Kevin Barrett, “Apocalypse of Coercion” (



Kevin Barrett, an American Muslim and Ph.D. Islamic Studies scholar, is one of America’s best-known critics of the War on Terror. He has authored and edited several books, including ANOTHER French False Flag (2016) and We Are NOT Charlie Hebdo (2015) and appeared many times on Fox, CNN, PBS, and other broadcast outlets, and has been widely covered by print media. Dr. Barrett is a former teacher of French, Arabic, Islamic Studies, and Humanities. He currently works as a talk radio host, nonprofit organizer, editor at Veterans Today, and pundit at Press TV and other international channels. His website is

Christopher Black is an international criminal lawyer based in Toronto, Ontario, Canada where he has defended a wide variety of criminal offenses, including acting as counsel in several murder trials. He has been involved in high-profile cases involving human rights and war crimes, including representing those accused of crimes in Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia, and is on the list of counsel at the International Criminal Court. He has had his poetry published in Russia, the United States, and Canada and on his blog, One Voyce of the World found at

Christopher Bollyn is an American investigative journalist and author whose early reporting on the September 2001 attacks blazed a trail the 9/11 truth movement eventually followed. He holds a degree in History from University of California–Santa Cruz with a focus on Palestine-Israel and has traveled widely in the US, Europe, and the Middle East. His books Solving 9/11 and Solving 9/11: The Original Articles are among the most important publications on the subject.

Lawrence Davidson is a retired professor of history from West Chester University in West Chester, Penn. His academic research focused on the history of American foreign relations with the Middle East. He taught courses in Middle East history, the history of science, and modern European intellectual history. Hailing from a secular Jewish background, he has published many works on Islam, Zionism, and US foreign policy, including Islamic Fundamentalism: An Introduction (1998), America’s Palestine: Popular and Official Perceptions from Balfour to Israeli Statehood (2001), A Concise History of the Middle East (2006), and Cultural Genocide (2012).

Gordon Duff is the Senior Editor of Veterans Today, the most-read veterans publication in America and leading outlet for the global open-source intelligence community. A Marine combat veteran of the Vietnam War, he is a disabled veteran and has worked on veterans and POW issues for decades. He is also an accredited diplomat and is generally accepted as one of the top global intelligence specialists.

Joachim Hagopian is a West Point graduate and former US Army officer. He has written a manuscript based on his unique military experience entitled “Don’t Let The Bastards Getcha Down.” It focuses on US international relations, leadership, and national security issues. After serving in the military, Joachim earned a master’s degree in Clinical Psychology and worked as a licensed therapist in the mental health field with abused youth and adolescents for more than a quarter century. In recent years he has focused on his writing, becoming an alternative media journalist. His blog site is at

John Hankey is a high school history teacher who refuses to uncritically accept the textbook versions of controversial events. His documentary film The Assassination of JFK Jr. is a major contribution to the study of political assassinations.

James Hufferd has a BA in History, an MA in International Studies, and a Ph.D. in Geography. He has taught in various schools and universities, and has traveled and researched in 19 countries, including the Arctic and Brazil. Fluent in Portuguese, he was a research associate at Federal University of Rio de Janeiro. He has written The Bells of Autumn, a Western historical novel; Cruzeiro do Sul, A History of Brazil’s Half-Millennium (2005, two volumes), the first history of Brazil published in English since 1819; The Majoritarian Solution, an assessment of American corporatism (1985); Homeland: A Comedy (a satiric novel); and Troublesome Country (a historical-political essay). The founder of a local 9/11 Truth group, he serves as Grassroots Coordinator for

Javed Jamil is a medical doctor, Islamic scholar and leading Muslim intellectual. He has published more than a dozen books and hundreds of articles in a wide range of fields, including medicine, religion, economics, current affairs, physics, political sciences, philosophy, literature (Urdu poetry), and planning. Much of his work focuses on a potential Islamic alternative to the Western atheist-materialist-capitalist model. His book Muslims Most Civilized, But Not Enough debunks the canard of Islamic civilizational backwardness, showing that Muslims are statistically out-performing non-Muslims on almost all key well-being indicators.

E. Michael Jones, Ph.D., one of America’s most notable Catholic intellectuals, is the editor of Culture Wars magazine and the author of numerous books and e-books. His fields include history and cultural critique, focusing on the relationship between Catholicism and secular culture. He has worked as an independent scholar and intellectual since being forced out of an academic position at St. Mary’s College in Indiana—an ostensibly Catholic institution—due to his public opposition to abortion.

Dave Lindorff is a founding member of the journalist-run online newspaper, a Project Censored award-winning collective. Lindorff has long been active on journalistic issues, and was a founder of the National Writers Union in 1983, serving for many years in leadership positions in that union. He is a columnist for Counterpunch and the author of several books, including This Can’t Be Happening! Resisting the Disintegration of American Democracy; Killing Time: An Investigation into the Death Penalty Case of Mumia Abu-Jamal; and The Case for Impeachment: The Legal Argument for Removing President George W. Bush from Office.

Thierry Meyssan is a leading French intellectual, founder and chairman of Voltaire Network and the Axis for Peace Conference. His columns specializing in international relations are featured in newspapers and magazines in Arabic, Spanish, and Russian. His last two books published in English are 9/11 The Big Lie and Pentagate, both of which were early and seminal contributions to 9/11 research.

Feroze Mithiborwala is an Indian secular activist who devotes his efforts principally to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and Western imperialism in Asia. He is best known for having lead a humanitarian convoy that travelled from India to Gaza in the winter of 2010–11. Mithiborwala is president of Awami Bharat, an Indian political group involved in an “international struggle against imperialism, Zionism, and Brahmanism.” He is the founder-convener of the Muslim Intellectual Forum of India and of the South Asian Solidarity Initiative. Mithiborwala is perhaps India’s most prominent voice of the global movement to expose state-sponsored false flag terrorism.

Kadir A. Mohmand is the former representative for North America of the Afghan Freedom Fighters in the 1980s. Born in Kabul, Afghanistan, Mr. Mohmand interrupted his university studies in Europe during the 1980s, and returned to Afghanistan to fight as a freedom fighter against the Soviets and Afghan communists. Through an arrangement with Borgess Hospital in Kalamazoo, Michigan, Mr. Mohmand would bring back wounded Afghan children and Mujahideen for medical treatment at Borgess and recuperation in his home in Kalamazoo. He has served as president of a nonprofit, Aid for Afghanistan, and currently works as an advocate for a true Afghan peace process.

Miko Peled is an Israeli writer and activist living in the US. He was born and raised in Jerusalem. Driven by a personal family tragedy to explore Palestine, its people, and their narrative, he has written a book about his journey called The General’s Son, Journey of an Israeli in Palestine. In the forward to the book, Pulitzer prize-winner Alice Walker writes: “There are few books on the Palestine/Israel issue that seem as hopeful to me as this one.”

James Petras is a Bartle Professor (Emeritus) of Sociology at Binghamton University, New York. He is the author of more than 62 books published in 29 languages, and over 600 articles in professional journals, including the American Sociological Review, British Journal of Sociology, Social Research, and Journal of Peasant Studies. He has published over 2,000 articles in nonprofessional journals such as The New York Times, The Guardian, The Nation, The Christian Science Monitor, Foreign Policy, New Left Review, Partisan Review, TempsModerne, and Le Monde Diplomatique.

Rafiq is the pen name of writer and filmmaker Robert Sean Lewis. He wrote his first book, Gaj: The End of Religion (2004), to counter the idea of “God” as an individual who could take sides in the “war on terror.” His memoir, Days of Shock, Days of Wonder (2016), tells the story of his confrontation with the spiritual and cognitive dissonance of the 9/11 age. His documentaries Be Smile: The Stories of Two Urban Inuit (2006) and Khanqah: A Sufi Place (2011) are online at Vimeo.

The Saker is a pseudonym for a top-level American military analyst who lives in Florida. (A saker is a very large falcon, native to Europe and Asia.) An expert in military and strategic analysis, intelligence issues, Russian geopolitics, and traditional Orthodox Christianity, the Saker is the author of a leading world affairs blog, The Vineyard of the Saker, which gets 50,000 page views per day. Volunteers have begun putting out French, German, Serbian, and Russian language versions, and there is even a New Zealand edition. These editions add another 20,000 views per day to his global reach.

Robert David Steele is a former CIA Clandestine Services Case Officer (C/O) who is also the most published intelligence reformer in the English language with eight books, two of them with Forewords by Senators. For a quarter century he has sought to redirect the craft of intelligence (decision-support) away from spies and secrecy enabling war and waste, toward open sources and methods favorable to peace and prosperity. Steele is the pro bono Chief Enabling Officer of Earth Intelligence Network, a 501(c)(3) devoted to teaching holistic analytics, true-cost economics, and open source everything engineering (OSEE).

“Fierce debate” over Orlando False Flag The Clash of Histories (and its editor)

“Mr. Barrett’s views . . . have outraged some Wisconsin legislators and generated a fierce debate about academic freedom.” – The New York Times

Barrett “never expected to find himself carrying the banner for one of the most controversial theories of our times.” – Chicago Tribune

“Kevin Barrett is to be applauded for Orlando False Flag, his latest instant anthology false flag exposé. It presents a variety of sometimes clashing views. As such it’s an example of much-needed radical informational democracy in print, devoted once again to the key challenge of our time: vast manipulative deception by the American Empire.” ­– Barrie Zwicker, author of Towers of Deception: The Media Cover-up of 9/11

Kevin Barrett should be “in the Charles River, floating down towards the harbor.” Bill O’Reilly, Fox News commentator

“Under these circumstances, the patriotic act is disbelief of the government narrative thereby rendering the actions of the Deep State dysfunctional.”

– Cynthia McKinney, former six-term Congresswoman and Green Party Presidential Candidate

“I consider Kevin Barrett the top analyst for false flags.” – Robert David Steele, former CIA covert operations specialist and pioneer of the Open Source Intelligence (OS-INT) movement