Startseite > Geo Politik > 11.9. 2001, der grösste Betrug der Geschichte, durch kriminelle US und Saudi Banden

11.9. 2001, der grösste Betrug der Geschichte, durch kriminelle US und Saudi Banden

u.a. warnte Georg Tenet, der Anti Terroristen Experte O’Neill : die Beraterin von Bush jun. Conelly Rice for dem Anschlag, wie US Politiker outeten, warnte mna sie an diesem Tage in ihre Büro’s zugehen und im WTC 7, wurden alle Ermittlungen gegen die Korruption im Pentagon und den Auftrags Vergaben vernichtet.

Prinz Bandar bin Sultan plaudert im August 2002 auf der Bush-Ranch in Crawford, Texas, mit dem Präsidenten. Schon damals verlangten Abgeordnete eine Untersuchung darüber, ob Geld aus Saudi-Arabien an die 9/11-Attentäter geflossen ist.

Prinz Bandar, finanzierte direkt über die Bankkonten der Ehefrau die Anschläge, was CIA Direktoren wie DEUCH, zu privaten Spekulations Gechäften mit PUT Scheinen für US Flugmaschinen verleitete. Der CIA liess, Terroristen direkt einfliegen, obwohl sie auf der Einreise Verbots Liste standen.

Richard Perle, Prinz Bandar, Prinz Turku organisierten den 11.9.2001

Einem in der New York Post erschienenen Artikel zufolge überwies Bandar als damaliger Botschafter im Vorfeld der Terroranschläge am 11. September 2001 130.000 Dollar an den saudischen Agenten Osama Bassnan, der die beiden Flugzeugentführer Khalid al-Minhdhar und Nawaf al-Hazmi unterstützte.[5][6]

Deutscher Professor, über die Geheimdienst Spezialisten welche den 11.9.2001 organisierten

Renommiertes Physik-Fachmagazin: „9/11 war kontrollierte Sprengung“

9/11: Die Bilder brannten sich ins Gedächtnis. Doch auch 15 Jahre später bleiben Fragen offen.

9/11: Die Bilder brannten sich ins Gedächtnis. Doch auch 15 Jahre später bleiben Fragen offen.
Was sonst eher auf randständigen Blogs Verbreitung findet, wurde nun vom renommierten Physik-Fachjournal „EuroPhysicsNews“ (EPN) publiziert: Alle drei Gebäude des World Trade Centers seien am 11. September 2001 durch eine „kontrollierte Sprengung“ zum Einsturz gebracht worden.

Zwar verweist ein redaktioneller Hinweis zu Beginn des Beitrages darauf, dass die folgende Abhandlung „einige Spekulationen“ enthalte, das Signal ist allerdings eindeutig: Pünktlich zum 15. Jahrestag der Anschläge auf das World Trade Center veröffentlicht der Dachverband der europäischen Physikgesellschaften in seiner offiziellen Publikation EuroPhysicsNews einen Beitrag, der sich nicht nur mit Sprengkraft beschäftigt, sondern diese auch in sich birgt.

Die drei Türme des World Trade Centers seien am 11. September 2001 nicht durch Flugzeugeinschläge zum Einsturz gebracht, sondern vielmehr kontrolliert gesprengt worden. Besonders neu ist diese These nicht, auch die Autoren des Beitrages vertreten diese schon länger. Doch obwohl es sich bei diesen um anerkannte Wissenschaftler handelt, verzichteten Fachmagazine bis dato darauf, derartig kontroversen Thesen zum Thema 9/11 Raum zu geben.

Nun durften Steven Jones, Physikprofessor im Ruhestand, der pensionierte Ingenieur-Wissenschaftsprofessor Robert Korol sowie die Ingenieure Anthony Szamboti und Ted Walter ihren Beitrag in EuroPhysicsNews veröffentlichen.

Die Autoren verweisen darauf, dass weder vor noch nach dem 11. September 2001 jemals ein Hochhaus nur aufgrund eines Feuers eingestürzt sei, genau dies postuliert aber die offizielle These für die WTC-Türme. Auch untersuchen die Wissenschaftler das Einsturzverhalten von Gebäuden bei Sprengungen. Das Fazit von Jones und seinen Kollegen lautet: Die Flugzeuge waren es wohl kaum.

Für die Kameras trauern sie am zehnten Jahrestag der Anschläge - Was wissen George W. Bush und Barack Obama?

Eine abschließende Erklärung bietet aber auch dieser Beitrag nicht. Die Autoren fordern daher eine neue Untersuchung, die ergebnisoffen die genauen Vorgänge am 11. September 2001 untersucht. Bisher wurden solche Forderungen in der Regel mit wüsten Vorwürfen des Verbreitens von Verschwörungstheorien zurückgewiesen.

Dass jedoch so einiges an der offiziellen These nicht ganz passt, zeigte jüngst auch die verspätete Freigabe der zuvor geschwärzten 28 Seiten des offiziellen 9/11-Untersuchungsberichtes. Demnach sei Saudi-Arabien tief in die Vorbereitung der Anschläge verwickelt. Der ehemalige Leiter der 9/11-Untersuchungskommission Bob Graham gab vor laufenden ARD-Kameras bekannt:

Iran-Contra Affäre, der Plan des US Botschafters Jeffrey Feltman, mit Prinz Bandar in 2008, wie man Syrien zerstören will

Kategorien:Geo Politik Schlagwörter: ,
  1. September 9, 2016 um 6:49 pm

    Hat dies auf Manfred O. rebloggt.

  2. balkansurfer
    Oktober 3, 2016 um 1:09 am

    Der hybride Krieg des Pentagon im Irak

    Florian Rötzer 03.10.2016
    Für eine halbe Milliarde US-Dollar wurde eine britische PR-Agentur beauftragt, gefälschte Videos unter die Menschen zu bringen, um die Zuschauer verfolgen zu können

    ……………………..

    Schon zur Vorbereitung des Golfkriegs 1991 hatte die in den USA sitzende (Lobby)Organisation Citizens for a Free Kuwait ein Jahr zuvor die PR-Agentur Hill and Knowlton beauftragt, finanziert durch Kuweit. Bekanntlich schickte die Agentur schließlich ein fünfzehnjähriges kuweitisches Mädchen, die als Krankenschwester „Nayirah“ auftrat, in den Menschenrechtsausschuss, wo sie in einer öffentlichen Anhörung erzählte, dass irakische Besatzer angeblich mit Gewehren in Krankenhäuser eingedrungen und Säuglinge aus den Brutkäsen geholt und auf den kalten Boden geworfen oder verkauft hätten.

    …………………

    Wie jetzt als Beispiel das Bureau of Investigative Journalism berichtet, beauftragte das Pentagon die britische PR-Firma Bell Pottinger, die u.a. für Margarete Thatcher und Asma al-Assad, die Frau des frau des syrischen Präsidenten Baschar al-Assad, für über 500 Millionen US-Dollar, um im Irak ein geheimes Propagandaprogramm aufzubauen und zu betreiben. Neben dem Pentagon waren auch die CIA und der Nationale Sicherheitsrat beteiligt, die Auftragsergebnisse sollen von General David Petraeus, dem damaligen Kommandeur der Koalitionstruppen im Irak, unterzeichnet worden sein. Petraeus war danach CIA-Chef und musste wegen einer Beziehungsaffäre zurücktreten.

    Das Bureau spürte dem Wirken der Agentur in Berichten des Pentagon-Generalinspektors, Army-Verträgen und Zahlungsaufzeichnungen ebenso wie in Arbeiten über militärische Propaganda und Unternehmensangaben von Bell Pottinger nach. Überdies wurden damals beteiligte Pentagon- und Agenturmitarbeiter in Interviews befragt. Bell Pottinger erhielt nur den größten Batzen, was offenbar amerikanische PR-Firmen erzürnte, das Bureau kam mehr als 40 Firmen wie Lincoln Group, Leonie Industries und SOS International oder Cradle of New Civilization Media, Babylon Media und Iraqi Dream, auf die Schliche, die zwischen 2006 und 2008 vom Pentagon für die Herstellung und Verbreitung von Medienprodukten bezahlt wurden: Radio- und Fernsehsendungen, Filmproduktionen, Meinungsumfragen, Werbung oder Plakate….. https://www.heise.de/tp/artikel/49/49587/1.html

  3. balkansurfer
    September 16, 2017 um 5:58 pm

    Alles lange bekannt, das der Afghanistan Feldzug vor dem 11.9.2001 geplant war, die Vorbereitungen auch für den Irak Einmarsch schon im Sommer 2001 anliefen in Kuvait und die Bombardierung von Afghanistan ebenso vorher im Sommer 2001 geplant war Öl Geschäfte, als Partner die Saudis

    US planned war in Afghanistan long before September 11
    By Patrick Martin
    20 November 2001

    Insider accounts published in the British, French and Indian media have revealed that US officials threatened war against Afghanistan during the summer of 2001. These reports include the prediction, made in July, that “if the military action went ahead, it would take place before the snows started falling in Afghanistan, by the middle of October at the latest.” The Bush administration began its bombing strikes on the hapless, poverty-stricken country October 7, and ground attacks by US Special Forces began October 19.

    It is not an accident that these revelations have appeared overseas, rather than in the US. The ruling classes in these countries have their own economic and political interests to look after, which do not coincide, and in some cases directly clash, with the drive by the American ruling elite to seize control of oil-rich territory in Central Asia.

    The American media has conducted a systematic cover-up of the real economic and strategic interests that underlie the war against Afghanistan, in order to sustain the pretense that the war emerged overnight, full-blown, in response to the terrorist attacks of September 11.

    The pundits for the American television networks and major daily newspapers celebrate the rapid military defeat of the Taliban regime as an unexpected stroke of good fortune. They distract public attention from the conclusion that any serious observer would be compelled to draw from the events of the past two weeks: that the speedy victory of the US-backed forces reveals careful planning and preparation by the American military, which must have begun well before the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

    The official American myth is that “everything changed” on the day four airliners were hijacked and nearly 5,000 people murdered. The US military intervention in Afghanistan, by this account, was hastily improvised in less than a month. Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, in a television interview November 18, actually claimed that only three weeks went into planning the military onslaught.

    This is only one of countless lies emanating from the Pentagon and White House about the war against Afghanistan. The truth is that the US intervention was planned in detail and carefully prepared long before the terrorist attacks provided the pretext for setting it in motion. If history had skipped over September 11, and the events of that day had never happened, it is very likely that the United States would have gone to war in Afghanistan anyway, and on much the same schedule.
    Afghanistan and the scramble for oil

    The United States ruling elite has been contemplating war in Central Asia for at least a decade. As long ago as 1991, following the defeat of Iraq in the Persian Gulf War, Newsweek magazine published an article headlined “Operation Steppe Shield?” It reported that the US military was preparing an operation in Kazakhstan modeled on the Operation Desert Shield deployment in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Iraq.
    ….
    https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2001/11/afgh-n20.html

  4. Oktober 17, 2018 um 1:49 am

    Finian CUNNINGHAM | 14.10.2018 | WORLD / Middle East | FEATURED STORY
    Did Saudis, CIA Fear Khashoggi 9/11 Bombshell?

    The macabre case of missing journalist Jamal Khashoggi raises the question: did Saudi rulers fear him revealing highly damaging information on their secret dealings? In particular, possible involvement in the 9/11 terror attacks on New York in 2001.

    Even more intriguing are US media reports now emerging that American intelligence had snooped on and were aware of Saudi officials making plans to capture Khashoggi prior to his apparent disappearance at the Saudi consulate in Istanbul last week. If the Americans knew the journalist’s life was in danger, why didn’t they tip him off to avoid his doom?

    Jamal Khashoggi (59) had gone rogue, from the Saudi elite’s point of view. Formerly a senior editor in Saudi state media and an advisor to the royal court, he was imminently connected and versed in House of Saud affairs. As one commentator cryptically put it: “He knew where all the bodies were buried.”

    For the past year, Khashoggi went into self-imposed exile, taking up residence in the US, where he began writing opinion columns for the Washington Post.

    Khashoggi’s articles appeared to be taking on increasingly critical tone against the heir to the Saudi throne, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. The 33-year-old Crown Prince, or MbS as he’s known, is de facto ruler of the oil-rich kingdom, in place of his aging father, King Salman.

    While Western media and several leaders, such as Presidents Trump and Macron, have been indulging MbS as “a reformer”, Khashoggi was spoiling this Saudi public relations effort by criticizing the war in Yemen, the blockade on Qatar and the crackdown on Saudi critics back home.

    However, what may have caused the Saudi royals more concern was what Khashoggi knew about darker, dirtier matters. And not just the Saudis, but American deep state actors as as well.

    He was formerly a media aide to Prince Turki al Faisal, who is an eminence gris figure in Saudi intelligence, with its systematic relations to American and British counterparts. Prince Turki’s father, Faisal, was formerly the king of Saudi Arabia until his assassination in 1975 by a family rival. Faisal was a half-brother of the present king, Salman, and therefore Prince Turki is a cousin of the Crown Prince – albeit at 73 more than twice his age.

    For nearly 23 years, from 1977 to 2001, Prince Turki was the director of the Mukhabarat, the Saudi state intelligence apparatus. He was instrumental in Saudi, American and British organization of the mujahideen fighters in Afghanistan to combat Soviet forces. Those militants in Afghanistan later evolved into the al Qaeda terror network, which has served as a cat’s paw in various US proxy wars across the Middle East, North Africa and Central Asia, including Russia’s backyard in the Caucasus.

    Ten days before the 9/11 terror attacks on New York City, in which some 3,000 Americans died, Prince Turki retired from his post as head of Saudi intelligence. It was an abrupt departure, well before his tenure was due to expire.

    There has previously been speculation in US media that this senior Saudi figure knew in advance that something major was going down on 9/11. At least 15 of the 19 Arabs who allegedly hijacked three commercial airplanes that day were Saudi nationals.

    Prince Turki has subsequently been named in a 2002 lawsuit mounted by families of 9/11 victims. There is little suggestion he was wittingly involved in organizing the terror plot. Later public comments indicated that Prince Turki was horrified by the atrocity. But the question is: did he know of the impending incident, and did he alert US intelligence, which then did not take appropriate action to prevent it?

    Jamal Khashoggi had long served as a trusted media advisor to Prince Turki, before the latter resigned from public office in 2007. Following 9/11, Turki was the Saudi ambassador to both the US and Britain.

    A tentative idea here is that Khashoggi, in his close dealings with Prince Turki over the years, may have gleaned highly sensitive inside information on what actually happened on 9/11. Were the Arab hijackers mere patsies used by the American CIA to facilitate an event which has since been used by American military planners to launch a global “war on terror” as a cover for illegal wars overseas? There is a huge body of evidence that the 9/11 attacks were indeed a “false flag” event orchestrated by the US deep state as a pretext for its imperialist rampages.

    The apparent abduction and murder last week of Jamal Khashoggi seems such an astoundingly desperate move by the Saudi rulers. More evidence is emerging from Turkish sources that the journalist was indeed lured to the consulate in Istanbul where he was killed by a 15-member hit squad. Reports are saying that the alleged assassination was ordered at the highest level of the Saudi royal court, which implicates Crown Prince MbS.

    Why would the Saudi rulers order such a heinous act, which would inevitably lead to acute political problems, as we are seeing in the fallout from governments and media coverage around the world?

    Over the past year, the House of Saud had been appealing to Khashoggi to return to Riyadh and resume his services as a media advisor to the royal court. He declined, fearing that something more sinister was afoot. When Khashoggi turned up in Istanbul to collect a divorce document from the Saudi consulate on September 28, it appears that the House of Saud decided to nab him. He was told to return to the consulate on October 2. On that same day, the 15-member group arrived from Riyadh on two private Gulfstream jets for the mission to kill him.

    Official Saudi claims stretch credulity. They say Khashoggi left the consulate building unharmed by a backdoor, although they won’t provide CCTV images to prove that. The Turks say their own CCTV facilities monitoring the front and back of the Saudi consulate show that Khashoggi did not leave the premises. The Turks seem confident of their claim he was murdered inside the building, his remains dismembered and removed in diplomatic vehicles. The two private jets left the same day from Istanbul with the 15 Saudis onboard to return to Riyadh, via Cairo and Dubai.

    To carry out such a reckless act, the Saudis must have been alarmed by Khashoggi’s critical commentaries appearing in the Washington Post. The columns appeared to be delivering more and more damaging insights into the regime under Crown Prince MbS.

    The Washington Post this week is reporting that US intelligence sources knew from telecom intercepts that the Saudis were planning to abduct Khashoggi. That implicates the House of Saud in a dastardly premeditated act of murder.

    But furthermore this same disclosure could also, unwittingly, implicate US intelligence. If the latter knew of a malicious intent towards Khashoggi, why didn’t US agents warn him about going to the Saudi consulate in Istanbul? Surely, he could have obtained the same personal documents from the Saudi embassy in Washington DC, a country where he was residing and would have been safer.

    Jamal Khashoggi may have known too many dark secrets about US and Saudi intel collusion, primarily related to the 9/11 terror incidents. And with his increasing volubility as a critical journalist in a prominent American news outlet, it may have been time to silence him. The Saudis as hitmen, the American CIA as facilitators.
    https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/10/14/did-saudis-cia-fear-khashoggi-9-11-bombshell.html

  1. September 11, 2017 um 7:03 am
  2. Dezember 23, 2018 um 6:49 am

Kommentar verfassen

Trage deine Daten unten ein oder klicke ein Icon um dich einzuloggen:

WordPress.com-Logo

Du kommentierst mit Deinem WordPress.com-Konto. Abmelden /  Ändern )

Google Foto

Du kommentierst mit Deinem Google-Konto. Abmelden /  Ändern )

Twitter-Bild

Du kommentierst mit Deinem Twitter-Konto. Abmelden /  Ändern )

Facebook-Foto

Du kommentierst mit Deinem Facebook-Konto. Abmelden /  Ändern )

Verbinde mit %s

%d Bloggern gefällt das: