May 062022

By Emanuel Pastreich and Dan Hanley
Global Research, May 04, 2022

Hanley & Pastreich: Launch International 9/11 investigation from Emanuel Pastreich on Vimeo.

The reason that the United States has been overrun with COVID-19 propaganda and that the government acted as a toy of the rich, pushing through policies that have no support, is that the entire system was gutted in the aftermath of 9/11 and a stark tyranny has replaced the flawed republic that once stood behind the halls of government. The United States after 9/11 is a republic in the sense that Disneyland is a republic.

COVID-19 will be replaced by artificial food shortages, planned inflation, the end of money, the promotion of mass surveillance, social credit totalitarian economics, and a host of other strategies for control.

Only when we Americans are ready to go back to the original sin of 9/11 and look at ourselves in the mirror, only when we are ready to take brave action and to cut off the gangrene parts of the Federal government that have metastasized into an enemy within, only then can we make any progress in fighting against the techno-tyrants who call the shots for the narcissistic and indulgent politicians who appear on television.

The 9/11 incident, that is to say the bombing of the World Trade Center, the firing of a projectile in the Pentagon, and the various secret policies carried out to create a shadow government within the Federal government, in cooperation with foreign interests in Israel, in Great Britain, and elsewhere, was the final blow to what remained of republican government in the United States of America.

Our debased culture, from which philosophy, theology, and aesthetics have been expelled, is blind to shifts in governance and policy unless they are immediately visible, unless they are on the evening news.

The 9/11 incident not only reduced large sections of the government to pay-to-play appendages of private equity, it infected universities, newspapers, civic organizations, and even families with a horrific virus of the mind, with a corrupt vision that securing money and being recognized by a criminal system was the highest priority. There is literally no organization left in the United States that works for the national good, or even a concept of what that national good might be.

The pundits and reporters “attribute evil” to specific presidents and to specific policies and engage in a useless debate about the minor and the trivial. The 9/11 incident has become a taboo topic precisely because it introduced a civilizational cancer into the body politic. If we wish to save our children from slavery, or worse, in a dying empire, we had better muster the courage to pull back the curtains and to look directly, with no illusions, at the withered corpse that our nation has become.

Burying the truth and erecting Potemkin villages of the mind to convince us of lies is not an option.

We must be prepared to take action that will be so decisive as to overwhelm the gatekeepers and puppet masters who have skillfully kept us from making progress for decades, leading us down dead ends like the 9/11 Commission, and paying off, or intimidating, authority figures into embracing myths.

What happened?
Truth is the strongest weapon in our arsenal. We will not bring down these monsters by raising more money because they control money, or by building better political networks because they already own them all. We must prove that they are by nature criminal and that the nation itself no longer has legitimacy with regards to the Constitution—that agreement that established the United States as a nation state. That contract without which government is but a criminal syndicate.

The 9/11 attacks were planned in advance by shadowy figures, primary in the military and in intelligence, lurking in the grey territory of contractors, consulting firms and private equity that stretches out between Washington D.C., London, and Tel Aviv. The relationship of figures like Dick Cheney to the attacks are easily confirmed, whereas others have spent fortunes to hide their tracks.

The motivation of the attacks was to create a government in the United States that was owned by the rich and that no longer followed the constitution—essentially an empire belonging to a handful of self-appointed royalty.

The immediate play was to destabilize the entire Middle East, and to topple the governments of all nations that could possibly challenge the hegemony of Israel.

There were some seeped in Zionist, or Christian Zionist, ideology who believed they were offering Israel the promised land in accord with the prophesies of the Bible, and following the directives from the Greater Israel Project (Odin Yinon Plan).

Others wanted to make fortunes from weapons sales in a forever war that would guarantee high returns.

And then there were those who wished to restructure the international community into a new world order in which a tiny handful of elders would decide the fate of humanity.

The military and intelligence contractors, military officers, and various ambiguous actors in Israel, the United States, the United Kingdom and Saudi Arabia (and perhaps a few other places) who made the plans for this false flag operation, using the assets of Mossad, the CIA, the US Department of Defense, M16 and other agencies and private corporations, were many. Like Agatha Christie’s novel Murder on the Orient Express, everyone had a stab. But the operation was highly compartmentalized so as to make it difficult for those on the ground to grasp the full significance of their actions—or at least to give them the feeling that they were not culpable.

Thus those who made the plans for how to reduce the United States to a de facto “military dictatorship” with a passive population addicted to social media and consumption, for how to overthrow the governments of the entire Middle East and make it into Israel’s playpen, for how to create a new global governance model in which corporations and banks owned the entire Earth, that total plan was known only to the few.

Death threats, and real killings, were generously applied, as well as other economic and social punishments, to destroy, or to isolate, those brave souls who demanded the truth.

How did we get here?
Most educated people in the United States, and around the world, only know the fairytale of a handful of Arab Hijackers with box cutters hijacking four planes and taking down three World Trade Center towers, made of reinforced steel and concrete, and blowing up part of the Pentagon. The tale makes no sense. Yet the denial goes on, and on. Many suffer from cognitive dissonance, unable accept the possibility that the United States government was complicit in such a crime.

The psychology of denial is best understood through an analogy to incest.

If there is a fight in a family about money, it may be unpleasant, but it will be out in the open and can be debated, and even resolved. But in the case of incest, family members may go for decades playing stupid, pretending that the incestuous relationship does not exist. Incest is an attack on the family at a more profound level and so family members fall back on denial because the loss of face is too great.

Some Americans adopt the attitude of false pragmatism, convincing themselves that after twenty years the event is ancient history and we should move on. This dangerous attitude ignores the fundamental transformation of governance wrought by those attacks, to onset of totalitarian governance.

The consequence of that irresponsible attitude is COVID-19 in which the fusion of corporations and governments can now not only claim the right to wage endless wars for no reason other than profit, to can spy on citizens, and to control their every action with impunity, but it can also inject whatever substances it wishes into the bodies of citizens and attack the integrity of their genetic code.

There were Americans who were willing to stand up to this travesty from the moment that the twin towers collapsed defiance of the laws of physics any high school graduate could understand. It was clear that the outcry over this crime could not be completely silenced, but that those who were too effective would die mysteriously.

For example, Philip Marshall, published False Flag 911: How Bush, Cheney and the Saudis Created the Post-911 World (2008), The Big Bamboozle: 9/11 and the War on Terror (2012) and he was writing an even more comprehensive book when his neighbors found him, his two children and the family dog shot to death in their home in February, 2013. The police immediately ruled this improbable case as a murder suicide, thus sending an unmistakable message to other seekers of truth as to what awaits them. Among those truth seekers who survived, many have been subject to bogus psychological exams, dismissed from their jobs, and in many cases forced to leave the country.

How do we end the nightmare?
The Federal government based on the Constitution of 1787 was gradually weakened, especially by the first and second world wars. The process sped up after the Kennedy assassination in 1963 when the insiders making a fortune of the national security state made it clear that politicians at the highest level, with wealth and influence, were not immune from retribution.

The decay deepened with the bombing of the Afred P. Murrah Building in Oklahoma on April 19, 1995, a grotesque case in which criminal elements in the Federal government played footsie with anti-government forces to create a grey space wherein mass killing could be carried out with impunity.

Since the 9/11 attacks, a giant Homeland Security and National Security Agency bureaucracy has spread its tentacles to every corner of Washington D.C., taking on the unlimited, unconstitutional powers that were granted by the pre-prepared (and hurriedly pushed through congress) Patriot Act (October 26, 2001). Unlimited and unaccountable domestic spying has been the rule, not the exception, ever since.

We must first move beyond this culture of denial and fantasy and recognize that the governments of all the nations of the world are controlled by the rich and powerful and that citizens have access only to information presented by the media and by the schools that is created by multinational corporations to meet the needs of the globalists.

So complete is the control of information, and of all public intellectuals, that citizens have been overwhelmed, forced to embrace the implausible official 9/11 story, for over twenty years.

We must recognize that the only thing to fear is this fear itself. The powerful, through their multinational corporations, and through the politicians and journalists that they keep as pets, have done everything they could to induce fear and loathing among citizens.

If we remain fearful, clinging to what rights the billionaires condescend to grant us, our first amendment rights will be further eroded and the destruction of the Bill of Rights, including freedom from illegal search and seizure, will be assured. We will be left with an American republic only in the sense that Disneyland is a republic.

An International 9/11 Commission
The American 9/11 Commission was a travesty from the start that was intended to mislead and to confuse the public while making it clear to lawyers and politicians that there are certain topics that can never be discussed—a realm in governance that ordinary mortals cannot enter.

Few leaders in the world have dared to question the 9/11 fairytale. They are afraid that they will not get international financing, that they will be put at a disadvantage in trade, or that they personally will not enjoy the chance to grow rich—something assumed to be a natural benefit of political power.

The United Nations has been taken over by billionaires, as has almost every institution of global governance.

Perhaps the first step towards an International 9/11 Commission could start in the Organization for Islamic Cooperation (OIC). After all the 1.8 billion Muslims suffered the most from the post 9/11 wars and they have the greatest incentive to take such a brave step. Once such an investigation is launched, however, it must be global in scale and must include the victims on all sides, including victims of the wars that were justified by, and financed using, the 9/11 incident.

There must be a demand for the full release of all information (declassifying all relevant documents in the United States, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Great Britain, and elsewhere), for the purpose of the criminal prosecution of those responsible. We must assume that this commission will end with the release to the public of the complete story and their seizure of the assets of those who planned, and who profited from, this conspiracy for compensation of victims around the world.

We must create an accountable, transparent, and scientifically administered organization to run this investigation, one that is empowered to convict and to punish the criminals, and to seize assets for compensation.

In a real sense, the international 9/11 commission will be the first accountable form of governance on the planet in the last two decades and can start the great transformation of the corrupt systems of governance based on lies that have become commonplace.

Although Israel is not uniquely responsible for the 9/11 operation, its government is so corrupt, and has such deep links with criminal networks in finance, money laundering, intelligence and even local government around the world as part of a strategy for full-spectrum domination of global governance. There is no solution to the crisis of global governance post-9/11 that ignores the role of Israel.

AIPAC has replaced the US Federal government that was defined by the Constitution at all levels. Private private equity, often closely linked to Israel, controls the media so completely that the actions of Larry Silverstein, Dov Zakheim, Michael Chertoff, and Philip Zelikow (of the 9/11 Commission) cannot be mentioned in the sources that citizens turn to for information.

Part of the process of ending the 9/11 nightmare must involve providing access to reliable scientific information for citizens in the United States, and around the world. The massive consolidation of the media over the last two decades means that 96% of the news we have access to is filtered through six massive media conglomerates which are controlled by BlackRock, Vanguard, Goldman Sachs and other private equity firms, shell companies that conceal the influence of the billionaire class. The media-entertainment cartels must be completely dismantled and citizens given access to accurate information as part of the resolution.

Once we are on track to facing down the 9/11 fraud, we must terminate the deadly lobbying industry that has made bribery of congressmen and federal judges not only legal, but de jure. So also the criminal rackets within the Department of Justice must be rooted out completely.

This process will be painful and humiliating, but there is no other way forward. As President Lincoln demanded in Gettysburg Address, America must have a “new birth of freedom,” and an international 9/11 commission will serve as the midwife.

The failure of educated Americans to resist the drive for tyranny of the few is a sad, and perhaps final, chapter in the history of our republic. The horrific decadence, complacency, and narcissism in our culture made governance by fear possible.

The resulting absence in public discourse and politics of educated Americans is precisely what made the COVID-19 operation, the controlled demolition of the global economy, possible.

Unless we expose the “criminal cabal” that led us to this dangerous valley back in September, 2001, unless we denounce the public figures who caved in to threats and bribes to embrace this vast fabric of lies stretching to the horizon, our children will face a totalitarian government determined to reduce them to submission, step by step, and to pry away from their hands the last fragments of freedom.


Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Dan Hanley is director of 9/11 Pilot Whistleblowers.

Nov 102021

It’s not that I’m saying this IS going to happen, but I do want to put this out there, just in case.

Please share this video as widely as possible. The more people who see it, and are aware that this kind of thing is a possibility, the more chance, hopefully, it will not happen.

And for anyone who may not be so familiar with the documented history of false flag operations, I recommend you watch the video at the link below, a clip from which I’ve used at the start of my video.

The Corbett Report: False Flags and the Dawn of Bioterrorism:

False Flags and the Dawn of Bioterrorism

Aug 152021

20 Years Ago, Prior to 9/11: US Preparations for the Invasion of Afghanistan

The Bush administration was planning its invasion of Afghanistan before the 9/11 attacks

By Shane Quinn
Global Research, August 06, 2021

As George W. Bush entered the White House on 20 January 2001, having been granted a controversial election victory, his cabinet swiftly drew up a particularly hawkish foreign policy program. This included identifying a number of strategically important states to gain full ascendancy over, through military attack if needs be, and among the first countries selected for invasion was Afghanistan.

Due to America’s declining oil and natural gas stocks, the top priority for president Bush was to increase US influence over rich fossil fuel sources, constructing pipelines, refineries and other such infrastructure.

Contrary to what numerous mainstream outlets have claimed over the past two decades, the Bush administration was planning its invasion of Afghanistan before the 9/11 attacks on America, which were then used as a pretext for armed intervention. Niaz Naik, Pakistan’s experienced former foreign secretary, has provided testimony on this.

Naik informed the BBC a week after 9/11 how he was told by senior US officials, in mid-July 2001, that Washington was preparing military action against Afghanistan (1). Naik was informed by the Americans that their invasion of Afghanistan would begin, at the latest, in the middle of October 2001, before the first Afghan snow flurries arrived. The US Armed Forces would launch their attack from bases in Tajikistan, the Central Asian country, which borders Afghanistan to the north. US advisers were present in Tajikistan by the summer of 2001.

Consequently, Bush was planning to wage a war in Afghanistan at least 8 weeks prior to the 9/11 atrocities, and indeed most probably longer than that. Naik’s comments are supported by General Hamid Gul, the former head of ISI, Pakistan’s leading intelligence agency. General Gul believed that US plans to engage militarily in Afghanistan “predated 9/11” (2). It is not terribly surprising that he came to such a conclusion. The 9/11 attacks obviously occurred on 11 September 2001, while the US-led invasion of Afghanistan commenced on 7 October 2001 – that is 26 days after 9/11.

It is not possible to prepare and initiate a large-scale military assault in less than 4 weeks, especially against a country on the other side of the world. As any commander would surely admit the planning alone takes months, before the offensive can begin.

World Trade CentreUS drones, such as the RQ-1 Predator, were hovering above the Afghan skies before 9/11. These unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) were partaking in reconnaissance sorties, and collecting other information about Afghanistan, in preparation for the invasion. A US military operation in Afghanistan was not concerned with either “combating terrorists” or capturing Osama bin Laden, the Al Qaeda chief. President Bush said 5 months after the offensive had begun on 13 March 2002, “I am truly not that concerned about him [Bin Laden]”. The authenticity of this remark was confirmed by White House transcripts. (3)

Read more here

Jul 122021

In regard to the future of international travel, Ardern said Skegg noted it would likely change forever, much like it changed following the September 11 attacks in the United States two decades ago.

“After 9/11 our borders changed forever, and our borders are likely to change quite permanently as a result of Covid-19, but it will not be the same as it is today.”

“We’ll see those measures change.”

May 172021

Political decisions during the Corona crisis did not come out of the blue. The “war on viruses” began back in the 1990s as the “war on bioterror.” Research shows: For more than twenty years since then, pandemic scenarios have been repeatedly rehearsed in simulation exercises, first in the U.S., later coordinated internationally. The titles of these exercises are reminiscent of Hollywood productions: “Dark Winter” (2001), “Global Mercury” (2003), “Atlantic Storm” (2005) or “Clade X” (2018). High-ranking government representatives as well as well-known journalists were involved, most recently, at “Event 201” in October 2019, also board members of large global corporations. After the World Health Organization (WHO) declared a coronavirus pandemic in 2020, many of the measures that had been rehearsed and discussed for years were implemented globally.

Passages like the following appeared in scripts as early as 20 years ago: “The sight of an armed military presence in US cities has provoked protests about curtailment of civil liberties (…) The question is, however, how do we enforce it and to what degree? How much force do you use to keep people in their homes?” In the event of a pandemic, “basic civil liberties such as freedom of assembly or travel” could no longer „taken for granted”. Restrictions on liberty, as well as mass vaccinations, were regular features of the planning games.

This lecture will chronologically trace how these exercises came about, who organized them, and what parallels the scripts have to the current situation. Is the virus just a pretext for a longer-planned global transformation? And was a severe stock market quake in September 2019 perhaps the real trigger for the global lockdown?

Table of contents:

0:00:00 Pandemic exercisces – Preparation for a new era?

0:02:23 Era of the Cold War 1945 – 1990

0:05:05 The USA without an enemy

0:17:05 Bioterror exercises 1990 – 2005

0:23:51 The Exercise “Dark Winter”

0:30:44 Emergency plans for bioterror and flu pandemics

0:35:40 Interim conclusion

0:38:40 “Lock Step-Scenario” 2010

0:44:38 “MARS” and the G20 Health Minister meeting in Berlin

0:50:35 Why the Corona Pandemic startet in 2020

0:58:19 “Event 201“ – Training with a Corona pandemic

Nov 232020

For the past twenty years, the world has been in the midst of a so-called “war on terror” set in motion by a false flag attack of spectacular proportions. Now the stage is being set for a new spectacular attack to usher in the next stage in that war on terror: the war on bioterrorism. But who are the real bioterrorists? And can we rely on government agencies, their appointed health authorities, and the corporate media to accurately identify those terrorists in the wake of the next spectacular terror attack?

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.