Friday, September 20, 2019

BDS Israelis Murder Palestinians and their Olive Trees For Settler Occupiers

Down in the Jordan Valley, the Cruel Wheels of the Israeli Occupation Keep on Turning.....



https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-in-the-jordan-valley-the-cruel-wheels-of-the-israeli-occupation-keep-turning-1.7867122



Gideon Levy 

Down in the Jordan Valley, the Cruel Wheels of the Israeli Occupation Keep on Turning


Shortly after Netanyahu announced his plan to annex the Jordan Valley, the Israeli authorities arrived at hilltop olive groves owned by Palestinians there, and destroyed them, days before the planned harvest





An uprooted olive tree on Mt. Tamoun.
Alex Levac


Two days after Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared, on Tuesday last week, his intention to annex the Jordan Valley after the election, forces of the Civil Administration carried out yet another brutal operation of destruction. The target this time was particularly remote: a rocky hillside adjacent to the village of Tamoun in the northern valley. The goal was singularly vicious: the uprooting of hundreds of olive trees that were about to yield their first fruit, and demolition of the cisterns holding the water that was used to irrigate them.
Four days later, on Monday, the groves’ owners stood next to their felled trees and their ruined cisterns, sadly rolling bits of olives from the felled trees between their fingers. The first crop of these seven-year-old trees was set to be harvested in another few days, but the Civil Administration’s terminators got here just before – as if to rub salt in the wound. The butchered trees are withering on the ground; their fruit is dying on the slashed branches. The Civil Administration also uprooted in full some large olive trees, about 50 years old, from this privately owned grove and buried them under the rubble of the reservoirs they had devastated, lest the farmers try to replant them, here or elsewhere.


Also on Monday, ministers of the symbolic Palestinian government left Ramallah and cruised east in their official vehicles, to hold a symbolic cabinet meeting in the village of Fasayil. They were protesting the meeting held a day earlier by Israeli ministers at the outpost of Mevo’ot Yericho, which they agreed to legalize on the spot. Few people took an interest in the Palestinian cabinet meeting.

The sign above the local council building in the small Palestinian village of Atouf says “State of Palestine,” but the reality on the ground tells a different story. There’s no state and no government – not even a security force to protect farmers from the violent dispossession of their land. The demolished cisterns on Mount Om Ekbesh and the whitewashing of the settlement of 175 residents north of Jericho are the real story of the Jordan Valley. They signify who is sovereign here, and the type of regime that exists under that sovereign
But neither the possibility of annexation nor the Israeli election was of interest to any Palestinians in the Jordan Valley this week. All that remained amid the rubble was pent-up grief and a feeling of helplessness in the face of the crushing machine of occupation, whose engine no ruling party in Israel intends to shut down. Even Kahol Lavan’s Benny Gantz promised that under his government, too, Israel would remain here for all time. That’s a well-known fact among every last Palestinian farmer whose land has been plundered near the hill between the villages of Atouf and Tamoun, above the verdant, budding settlements of Ro’i and Beka’ot. Neither the results of the election nor the implementation of the outgoing government’s annexation decision will have the slightest effect on the lives of anyone here or make a difference vis-à-vis the flagrant apartheid here, as witnessed by the flourishing, illegal settlements of the Jews and the demolished water holes and fields of the Palestinians.
Last Thursday morning at about 7:30, local shepherds called Mursheid Bani Odah and Jihad Bani Odah, both residents of Tamoun, to say that large military forces were moving from the direction of Atouf toward the mountaintop. Arif Daraghmeh, a field researcher for the Israeli human rights organization B’Tselem – who also serves, on a voluntary basis, as head of the Palestinian council of villages in the northern Jordan Valley – followed the Israeli troops in his car. He had no idea where they were headed, but it was clear from the equipment they carried that they were bent on destruction. As they approached Tamoun, he became increasingly concerned that they were going to raid the town. Daraghmeh counted four bulldozers, two power shovels and two excavators, escorted by three jeeps of the Israel Defense Forces and three more belonging to the Civil Administration.The two landowners and the B’Tselem field researcher tried to drive up the mountain but were blocked by soldiers on the pretext that the site had been declared a closed military zone. Instead, the trio climbed seven kilometers by foot and approached their land, whereupon the former two discovered that their olive groves and cisterns were that day’s wrecking project.
Mursheid worked for 20 years in the fields of Beka’ot for a settler named Ilan Tzach, until he became fed up with the exploitative wages he received – a mere 100 shekels ($28) for a long workday that began at 6 A.M. His daily expenses were 20 shekels for travel, plus another 20 shekels for food and cigarettes, so he was left with very little. Now he does odd jobs and devotes part of his time to tending his family’s olive trees on the mountain. Jihad is a carpenter who specializes in doors. Their world collapsed last Thursday, when they reached their land and saw the contract workers of the Civil Administration uprooting trees and wreaking destruction.
The sight on the mountain does not make for easy viewing.

Jihad Bani Odah surveying the rubble, this week. He’s convinced that the Israeli forces left a small part of his grove intact, “so we will know what we are missing, so we will remember what was here.”
Alex Levac

Shallow graves in the thorny, rock-strewn area, where the young olive trees were buried; demolished concrete walls of the six reservoirs, each of which held 70 cubic meters of water. It’s a remote place, up here, far from any habitation. Signs alongside the dirt road leading up the mountain, put up by the Environmental Quality Authority of the Palestinian Authority and by the United Nations Environment Program, declare the area to be a nature reserve. The signs bear colorful pictures of local birds and plants.
“I worked here seven years,” Mursheid says, standing on his devastated property. “Why didn’t they come to me in the first year and tell me it was forbidden to plant here? Why did they wait seven years,” the period it takes for an olive tree to begin bearing fruit. To make the point, he picks up an olive branch torn off a tree, with its first fruits. “Here is a sapling, an olive tree just a few years old.” He speaks to the olives with compassion, as though he’s talking to his children.
On Thursday, he tells us, he asked the officer in charge of the demolition operation: “Why are you doing this? Whom are these olive trees bothering? If people want to hike around here, why shouldn’t they sit in the shade of an olive tree?”
His questions went unanswered, but Mursheid surely knows who’s bothered by the groves: the settlers in the valley, the lords of the land who are served by the Civil Administration, who is their contract worker.
Jihad and Mursheid initially began to clear the land here about a decade ago, and planted the trees in November 2012 after the PA’s Ministry of Agriculture helped them build the first section of the road. A month ago, a few dozen trees owned by Jihad were uprooted; Thursday was a repeat performance. Amazingly, a swath of land with about 30 trees on it was left untouched. So, in the heart of the darkness, there is still a blossoming grove, a remnant, a mute memorial to what was and is no more. The soldiers explained: “That is yours. It’s not ours.” But Jihad says the entire area of 20 dunams (5 acres), of which only one dunam remained intact, is registered in his name. He is convinced that they left him a small part of the grove “so that we will know what we are missing, so we will remember what was here.”
The Israeli forces also smashed the purple plastic chairs that were here, leaving us with nothing to sit on. As we speak, Jihad caresses an amputated branch, a man in mourning. Again he wonders why this happened. He said he hoped to rescue a few large trees that were buried beneath the ruins of a cistern, but was afraid to bring in a power shovel to pull them out, because he figured the machinery would be confiscated.
On Saturday, he says, he will plant a few new olive trees here.
All told, in the two rounds of destruction, a month ago and last week, about 240 trees belonging to Jihad were uprooted, along with about 250 of those owned by Mursheid. When the two reached their property on Thursday, they saw workers using electric saws on the trees while bulldozers laid waste to the cisterns they had built. Local people began to arrive to see what had happened. Now they’re worried in Tamoun that the Civil Administration will ravage more groves and reservoirs, such as those lining the dirt road up the mountain.
Three months ago, someone planted the Palestinian flag on the slope of the hill across the way. According to one theory, that is the root of the locals’ troubles. But Jihad tells us that he received a stop-work order a few years ago and waged an ongoing, losing legal battle for his land. Mursheid says that no one told him that he was prohibited from planting olive trees on his own land.
In response to a request for comment, Haaretz received the following statement from the Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories: “On September 12, 2019, the supervisory unit of the Civil Administration undertook an enforcement operation at Mt. Tamoun against an illegal incursion that included planting of trees and creation of water-storage facilities on state lands, and a nature reserve.
“It should be stressed that, in contradiction to what is claimed [in the article], the illegal work was not undertaken on private lands but encroached on a nature reserve and state lands, as was determined by the High Court of Justice after it considered several appeals on the subject. The enforcement was executed in accord with the authority [of the unit] and proper procedure.”
“You took our land, you took our water, you took our food – what do we have left? You expect that after all this we will be your friends? Anyone who takes our food, land and water cannot be my friend,” Mursheid says.
Adds Jihad, “The olive branch is the symbol of peace. At Oslo we offered it to you” – a reference to the Israeli-Palestinian accords signed in 1993.
A young eucalyptus tree remains among the ruins. The terminators didn’t touch it. It stands erect, as though defiant, among the uprooted olive trees and decimated cisterns. Maybe it was left there to signify the Civil Administration’s love of nature and the land.

Wednesday, September 18, 2019

9/11:Saudi Oil:North-North West Direction Of Israel NOT Iran

The earliest reports were that attack originated from the North Northwest which points back to Israel NOT Iran.Even at this late date Saudis who hate Iran have not accused them because they know the truth.Only pressure from U.S. and Saudi Arabia's dangerous  pseudo ally Israel will pressure them to lie.But perhaps like the UAE they will wake up to the fact that after Israeli staged 9/11 to incite U.S. to attack Iraq and Afghanistan,then Libya and Syria for Israel that they and the UAE are Israel's ultimate targets in the Nazi like plan to form Greater Israel on the graves.
And just as Israel's control of the U.S. allowed the Zionists to destroy the Christians of the Middle East who they hated,Israel is quite happy to juse the U.S. to destroy itself for their Russia which is the cradle of Israeli Zionists and a country that they control with Jewish oligarchs.

3 days ago - [Investigation: Who was behind the Saudi oil attacks? .... the attack came from the north or northwest, consistent with an attack from Iran or Iraq, ..


2 days ago - Saudi oil attacks: Nato chief 'extremely concerned' about escalation .... oil facilities, and instead were launched from the north or north-west.
2 days ago - Saudi oil attacks: Images show detail of damage ... a west-north-west direction, not Houthi-controlled territory which lies to the south-west of the ...
2 days ago - The US blames Iran for the Saudi Arabia oil attacks, further ... the north or northwest — suggesting the attack originated not in Yemen, which is



http://aanirfan.blogspot.com/2019/09/israel-attacked-saudis-to-blame-iran.html


Wednesday, 18 September 2019


'ISRAEL ATTACKED SAUDIS - TO BLAME IRAN'



The Iranians signed a nuclear deal with Obama in 2015, so that they could trade with the world.

Trump scrapped this nuclear deal.

However, John Bolton failed to get Trump to bomb Iran.

Trump's willingness to consider easing sanctions on Iran alarmed John Bolton.

A false flag attack on Saudi oil facilities, organised by Israel and Saudi Arabia, might persuade Trump to aid attacks on Iran?

Israel and Saudi Arabia are alleged to have been involved in the 9 11 false flag attack.



Unnamed US officials have been speaking to the New York Times, ABC and Reuters.

More than one US official said the attacks had come from the west and north-west.

Saudi oil attacks

On 17 September 2019, the Trump regime was saying that the attacks had come from the East.

Reportedly, the US has identified locations in Iran from which drones and cruise missiles were launched against major Saudi oil facilities on 14 September 2019.

Senior officials told CBS News that the locations were in southern Iran, at the northern end of the Gulf.

Drones and missiles were launched from Iran - US officials



Saudi Arabia executions spike in 2019 – with 134 crucified and beheaded including six who were kids


Trump supports the Saudi leadership.


'Parts of a cruise missile placed near the Saudi oil plant.'

"Oh, you thought cruise missiles, even though they were 'duds', would somehow cause a disturbance to the sand upon impact?"

False Flag? US Blames Iran For Attack ... - silverdoctors.com

You thought that the USA had sold equipment to the Saudis to protect them?

"Saudi Arabia has spent billions of dollars in recent years purchasing US Patriot missile defense systems and supposedly cutting-edge radar technology from the Pentagon."

US defense failure… Why Washington has to blame Iran 



The New York Times commented: “The satellite photographs released on Sunday did not appear as clear cut as officials suggested, with some appearing to show damage on the western side of facilities, not from the direction of Iran or Iraq.”
  ...

Who is responsible?



Who attacked the oil facilities in Saudi Arabia?



On 14 September 2019, there was a major attack on the Saudi Aramco oil production facilities at Abqaiq and Khurais in eastern Saudi Arabia.

A senior US official said the attack involved some dozen cruise missiles and more than 20 drones. (10)

The direction and extent of the attacks cast doubt on Houthi involvement.

Unnamed US officials have been speaking to the New York Times, ABC and Reuters.

One official said the attacks had come from the west and north-west - not Houthi-controlled territory in Yemen, which lies to the south-west of the Saudi oil facilities.


According to Gordon Duff:

Saudi Arabia believes that Israel has been planning a false flag attack on their oil facilities, in order to blame Iran.



Could Israel be in league with Israel?



Trump says the US is 'locked and loaded' after drone attack on Saudi oil fields



Oil prices soar after attacks on Saudi facilities

Sunday, September 15, 2019

September 11,2001 and 1984:9/11,Pearl Harbor,Pro-Israel Brainwashing,Linguistic Programming



Big Jew Cass Sunstein,Cognitive  Dissonance,(Well Maybe not the biggest Jew but he works for them)

http://politicalandsciencerhymes.blogspot.com/2015/09/911jew-cass-sunstein-cognitive.html



According to a document released by the White House at that time the program was modeled on one implemented in the U.K. in 2010. That initiative created a Behavioral Insights Teams, which used “iterative experimentation” to test “interventions that will further advance priorities of the British government.” .....................



''The initiative draws on research from University of Chicago economist Richard Thaler and Harvard law school professor Cass Sunstein, who was also dubbed Obama’s regulatory czar. The two behavioral scientists argued in their 2008 book “Nudge” that government policies can be designed in a way that “nudges” citizens towards certain behaviors and choices.'' - dailycaller.com





Why I Don’t Speak of the Fake News of “9/11” Anymore

The future editor of The New York Times and Iraq war promoter, Bill Keller, introduced the emergency phone connection on the morning of September 12th in a NY Times op-ed piece, “America’s Emergency Line: 911.” The linkage of the attacks to a permanent national emergency was thus subliminally introduced, as Keller mentioned Israel nine times and seven times compared the U.S. situation to that of Israel as a target for terrorists. His first sentence reads: “An Israeli response to America’s aptly dated wake-up call might well be, ‘Now you know.’” By referring to September 11 as 9/11, an endless national emergency fear became wedded to an endless war on terror aimed at preventing Hitler-like terrorists from obliterating us with nuclear weapons that could create another ground zero or holocaust. Mentioning Israel (“America is proud to be Israel’s closest ally and best friend in the world,” George W. Bush would tell the Israeli Knesset) so many times, Keller was not very subtly performing an act of legerdemain with multiple meanings. By comparing the victims of the 11 September attacks to Israeli “victims,” he was implying, among other things, that the Israelis are innocent victims who are not involved in terrorism, but are terrorized by Palestinians, as Americans are terrorized by fanatical Muslims. Palestinians/Al-Qaeda. Israel/U.S. Explicit and implicit parallels of the guilty and the innocent. Keller tells us who the real killers are. His use of the term 9/11 is a term that pushes all the right buttons, evoking unending social fear and anxiety. It is language as sorcery. It is propaganda at its best. Even well-respected critics of the U.S. government’s explanation use the term that has become a fixture of public consciousness through endless repetition. As George W. Bush would later put it, as he connected Saddam Hussein to “9/11” and pushed for the Iraq war, “We don’t want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud.” All the ingredients for a linguistic mind-control smoothie had been blended.- Edward Curtin


by Edward Curtin
Behind the Curtain


September 11, 2019 ejcurtin 19 Comments


This article was posted last year but is still pertinent, so I am re-posting it.





http://edwardcurtin.com/why-i-dont-speak-of-the-fake-news-of-9-11-anymore/?unapproved=32742&moderation-hash=cd7b790857666ce5d778fecdd12322d8#comment-32742


Tuesday, September 11, 2001, was a non-teaching day for me. I was home when the phone rang at 9 A.M. It was my daughter, who was on a week’s vacation with her future husband. “Turn on the TV,” she said. “Why?” I asked. “Haven’t you heard? A plane hit the World Trade Tower.”

I turned the TV on and watched a plane crash into the Tower. I said, “They just showed a replay.” She quickly corrected me, “No, that’s another plane.” And we talked as we watched in horror, learning that it was the South Tower this time. Sitting next to my daughter was my future son-in-law; he had not had a day off from work in a year. He had finally taken a week’s vacation so they could go to Cape Cod. He worked on the 100th floor of the South Tower. By chance, he had escaped the death that claimed 176 of his co-workers.

That was my introduction to the attacks. Seventeen years have disappeared behind us, yet it seems like yesterday. And yet again, it seems like long, long ago.

Over the next few days, as the government and the media accused Osama bin Laden and 19 Arabs of being responsible for the attacks, I told a friend that what I was hearing wasn’t believable; the official story was full of holes. I am a born and bred New Yorker with a long family history rooted in the NYC Fire and Police Departments, one grandfather having been the Deputy Chief of the Fire Department, the highest ranking uniformed firefighter, and the other a NYPD cop; a niece and her husband were NYPD detectives deeply involved in the response to that day’s attacks. Hearing the absurd official explanations and the deaths of so many innocent people, including many hundreds of firefighters, cops, and emergency workers, I felt a suspicious rage. It was a reaction that I couldn’t fully explain, but it set me on a search for the truth. I proceeded in fits and starts, but by the fall of 2004, with the help of the extraordinary work of David Ray Griffin, Michael Ruppert, and other early skeptics, I could articulate the reasons for my initial intuition. I set about creating and teaching a college course on what had come to be called 9/11.

But I no longer refer to the events of that day by those numbers. Let me explain why.

By 2004 I had enough solid evidence to convince me that the U.S. government’s claims (and The 9/11 Commission Report) were fictitious. They seemed so blatantly false that I concluded the attacks were a deep-state intelligence operation whose purpose was to initiate a national state of emergency to justify wars of aggression, known euphemistically as “the war on terror.” The sophistication of the attacks, and the lack of any proffered evidence for the government’s claims, suggested that a great deal of planning had been involved.

Yet I was chagrined and amazed by so many people’s insouciant lack of interest in questioning and researching the most important world event since the assassination of President Kennedy. I understood the various psychological dimensions of this denial, the fear, cognitive dissonance, etc., but I sensed something else as well.  For so many people their minds seemed to have been “made up” from the start. I found that many young people were the exceptions, while most of their elders dared not question the official narrative. These included many prominent leftist critics of American foreign policy, such as Noam Chomsky, Howard Zinn, Alexander Cockburn, and others, whose defenses of the official government and media explanations (when they even made such defenses; often they just trashed skeptics as “9/11 conspiracy nuts,” to quote Cockburn) totally lacked any scientific or logical rigor or even knowledge of the facts. Now that seventeen years have elapsed, this seems truer than ever. There is a long list of leftists who refuse to examine matter to this very day. And most interestingly, they also do the same with the assassination of JFK, the other key seminal event of recent American history.

I kept thinking of the ongoing language and logic used to describe what had happened that terrible day in 2001 and in the weeks to follow. It all seemed so clichéd and surreal, as if set phrases had it been extracted from some secret manual, phrases that rung with an historical resonance that cast a spell on the public, as if mass hypnosis were involved. People seemed mesmerized as they spoke of the events in the official language that had been presented to them.

So with the promptings of people like Graeme MacQueen, Lance deHaven-Smith, T.H. Meyer, et al., and much study and research, I have concluded that my initial intuitive skepticism was correct and that a process of linguistic mind-control was in place before, during, and after the attacks. As with all good propaganda, the language had to be insinuated over time and introduced through intermediaries. It had to seem “natural” and to flow out of events, not to precede them. And it had to be repeated over and over again.

In summary form, I will list the language I believe “made up the minds” of those who have refused to examine the government’s claims about the September 11 attacks and the subsequent anthrax attacks.

Pearl Harbor. As pointed out by David Ray Griffin and others, this term was used in September 2000 in The Project for the New American Century’s (PNAC) report, “Rebuilding America’s Defenses” (p.51). Its neo-con authors argued that the U.S. wouldn’t be able to attack Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, etc. “absent some catastrophic event – like a new Pearl Harbor.” Then on January 11, 2001, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld’s “Space Commission” warned that the U.S. could face a “space Pearl Harbor” if it weren’t careful and didn’t increase space security. Rumsfeld urged support for the proposed U.S. national missile defense system opposed by Russia and China and massive funding for the increased weaponization of space. At the same time he went around handing out and recommending Pearl Harbor: Warning and Decision (1962) by Roberta Wohlstetter, who had spent almost two decades working for The Rand Corporation and who claimed that Pearl Harbor was a surprise attack that shocked U.S. leaders. Pearl Harbor, Pearl Harbor, Pearl Harbor – those words and images dominated public consciousness for many months before 11 September 2001, and of course after. The film Pearl Harbor, made with Pentagon assistance and a massive budget, was released on May 25, 2001 and was a box office hit. It was in the theatres throughout the summer. The thought of the attack on Pearl Harbor (not a surprise to the U.S. government, but presented as such) was in the news all summer despite the fact that the 60th anniversary of that attack was not until December 7, 2001, a more likely release date. So why was it released so early? Once the September 11 attacks occurred, the Pearl Harbor analogy was “plucked out” of the social atmosphere and used constantly, beginning immediately. Another “Day of Infamy,” another surprise attack blared the media and government officials. A New Pearl Harbor! George W. Bush was widely reported to have had the time that night, after a busy day of flying hither and yon to avoid the terrorists who for some reason had forgotten he was in a classroom in Florida, to allegedly use it in his diary, writing that “the Pearl Harbor of the twenty-first century took place today. We think it is Osama bin Laden.” Shortly after the 50th anniversary of Pearl Harbor on December 7th, Bush then formerly announced, referencing the attacks of September 11, that the U. S. would withdraw from the ABM Treaty. The examples of this Pearl Harbor/ September 11 analogy are manifold, but I am summarizing, so I will skip giving them. Any casual researcher can confirm this.
Homeland. This strange un-American term, another WW II word associated with another enemy – Nazi Germany – was also used many times by the neo-con authors of “Rebuilding America’s Defenses.” I doubt any average American referred to this country by that term before. Of course it became the moniker for The Department of Homeland Security, marrying home with security to form a comforting name that simultaneously and unconsciously suggests a defense against Hitler-like evil coming from the outside. Not coincidentally, Hitler introduced it into the Nazi propaganda vernacular at the 1934 Nuremberg rally. Both usages conjured up images of a home besieged by alien forces intent on its destruction; thus preemptive action was in order. Now the Department of Homeland Security with its massive budget is lodged permanently in popular consciousness.
Ground Zero. This is a third WWII (“the Good War”) term first used at 11:55 A.M. on September 11 by Mark Walsh (aka “the Harley Guy” because he was wearing a Harley-Davidson tee shirt) in an interview on the street by a Fox News reporter, Rick Leventhal. Identified as a Fox free-lancer, Walsh also explained the Twin Towers collapse in a precise, well-rehearsed manner that would be the same illogical and anti-scientific explanation later given by the government: “mostly due to structural failure because the fire was too intense.” Ground zero – a nuclear bomb term first used by U.S. scientists to refer to the spot where they exploded the first nuclear bomb in New Mexico in 1945 – became another meme adopted by the media that suggested a nuclear attack had occurred or might in the future if the U.S. didn’t act. The nuclear scare was raised again and again by George W. Bush and U.S. officials in the days and months following the attacks, although nuclear weapons were beside the point in terms of the 11 September attacks, but surely not as a scare tactic and as part of the plan to withdraw from the ABM treaty that would be announced in December. But the conjoining of “nuclear” with “ground zero” served to raise the fear factor dramatically. Ironically, the project to develop the nuclear bomb was called the Manhattan Project and was headquartered at 270 Broadway, NYC, a few short blocks north of the World Trade Center.
The Unthinkable. This is another nuclear term whose usage as linguistic mind control and propaganda is brilliantly analyzed by Graeme MacQueen in the penultimate chapter of his very important book, The 2001 Anthrax Deception. He notes the patterned use of this term before and after September 11, while saying “the pattern may not signify a grand plan …. It deserves investigation and contemplation.” He then presents a convincing case that the use of this term couldn’t be accidental. He notes how George W. Bush, in a major foreign policy speech on May 1, 2001, “gave informal public notice that the United States intended to withdraw unilaterally from the ABM Treaty”; Bush said the U.S. must be willing to “rethink the unthinkable.” This was necessary because of terrorism and rogue states with “weapons of mass destruction.” PNAC also argued that the U.S. should withdraw from the treaty. A signatory to the treaty could only withdraw after giving six months notice and because of “extraordinary events” that “jeopardized its supreme interests.” Once the September 11 attacks occurred, Bush rethought the unthinkable and officially gave formal notice on December 13 to withdraw the U.S. from the ABM Treaty, as previously noted. MacQueen specifies the many times different media used the term “unthinkable” in October 2001 in reference to the anthrax attacks. He explicates its usage in one of the anthrax letters – “The Unthinkabel” [sic]. He explains how the media that used the term so often were at the time unaware of its usage in the anthrax letter since that letter’s content had not yet been revealed, and how the letter writer had mailed the letter before the media started using the word. He makes a rock solid case showing the U.S. government’s complicity in the anthrax attacks and therefore in the Sept 11 attacks. While calling the use of the term “unthinkable” in all its iterations “problematic,” he writes, “The truth is that the employment of ‘the unthinkable’ in this letter, when weight is given both to the meaning of this term in U.S. strategic circles and to the other relevant uses of the term in 2001, points us in the direction of the U.S. military and intelligence communities.” I am reminded of Orwell’s point in 1984: “a heretical thought – that is, a thought diverging from the principles of Ingsoc – should be literally unthinkable, at least as far as thought is dependent on words.” Thus the government and media’s use of “unthinkable” becomes a classic case of “doublethink.” The unthinkable is unthinkable.
9/11. This is the key usage that has reverberated down the years around which the others revolve. It is an anomalous numerical designation applied to an historical event, and obviously also the emergency telephone number. Try to think of another numerical appellation for an important event in American history. It’s impossible. But if you have a good historical sense, you will remember that the cornerstone for the Pentagon was lain on September 11, 1941, three months before the attack on Pearl Harbor, and that the CIA engineered a coup against the Allende government in Chile on Sept 11, 1973. Just strange coincidences? The future editor of The New York Times and Iraq war promoter, Bill Keller, introduced the emergency phone connection on the morning of September 12th in a NY Times op-ed piece, “America’s Emergency Line: 911.” The linkage of the attacks to a permanent national emergency was thus subliminally introduced, as Keller mentioned Israel nine times and seven times compared the U.S. situation to that of Israel as a target for terrorists. His first sentence reads: “An Israeli response to America’s aptly dated wake-up call might well be, ‘Now you know.’” By referring to September 11 as 9/11, an endless national emergency fear became wedded to an endless war on terror aimed at preventing Hitler-like terrorists from obliterating us with nuclear weapons that could create another ground zero or holocaust. Mentioning Israel (“America is proud to be Israel’s closest ally and best friend in the world,” George W. Bush would tell the Israeli Knesset) so many times, Keller was not very subtly performing an act of legerdemain with multiple meanings. By comparing the victims of the 11 September attacks to Israeli “victims,” he was implying, among other things, that the Israelis are innocent victims who are not involved in terrorism, but are terrorized by Palestinians, as Americans are terrorized by fanatical Muslims. Palestinians/Al-Qaeda. Israel/U.S. Explicit and implicit parallels of the guilty and the innocent. Keller tells us who the real killers are. His use of the term 9/11 is a term that pushes all the right buttons, evoking unending social fear and anxiety. It is language as sorcery. It is propaganda at its best. Even well-respected critics of the U.S. government’s explanation use the term that has become a fixture of public consciousness through endless repetition. As George W. Bush would later put it, as he connected Saddam Hussein to “9/11” and pushed for the Iraq war, “We don’t want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud.” All the ingredients for a linguistic mind-control smoothie had been blended.
I have concluded – and this is impossible to prove definitively because of the nature of such propagandistic techniques – that the use of all these words/numbers is part of a highly sophisticated linguistic mind-control campaign waged to create a narrative that has lodged in the minds of hundreds of millions of people and is very hard to dislodge.

It is why I don’t speak of “9/11” any more. I refer to those events as the attacks of September 11, 2001, which is a mouth-full and not easily digested in the age of Twitter and texting. But I am not sure how to be more succinct or how to undo the damage, except by writing what I have written here.

Lance deHaven-Smith puts it well in Conspiracy Theory in America.

The rapidity with which the new language of the war on terror appeared and took hold; the synergy between terms and their mutual connections to WW II nomenclatures; and above all the connections between many terms and the emergency motif of “9/11” and “9-1-1” – any one of these factors alone, but certainly all of them together – raise the possibility that work on this linguistic construct began long before 9/11….It turns out that elite political crime, even treason, may actually be official policy.

Needless to say, his use of the words “possibility” and “may” are in order when one sticks to strict empiricism. However, when one reads his full text, it is apparent to me that he considers these “coincidences” part of a conspiracy. I have also reached that conclusion. As Thoreau put in his underappreciated humorous way, “Some circumstantial evidence is very strong, as when you find a trout in the milk.”

The evidence for linguistic mind control, while the subject of this essay, does not stand alone, of course. It underpins the actual attacks of September 11 and the subsequent anthrax attacks that are linked. The official explanations for these events by themselves do not stand up to elementary logic and are patently false, as proven by thousands of well-respected professional researchers from all walks of life – i.e. engineers, pilots, scientists, architects, and scholars from many disciplines (see the upcoming 9/11 Unmasked: An International Review Panel Investigation by David Ray Griffin and Elizabeth Woodworth, to be released September 11, 2018). To paraphrase the prescient Vince Salandria, who said it long ago concerning the government’s assassination of President Kennedy, the attacks of 2001 are “a false mystery concealing state crimes.” If one objectively studies the 2001 attacks together with the language adopted to explain and preserve them in social memory, the “mystery” emerges from the realm of the unthinkable and becomes utterable. “There is no mystery.” The truth becomes obvious.

How to communicate this when the corporate mainstream media serve the function of the government’s mockingbird (as in Operation Mockingbird), repeating and repeating and repeating the same narrative in the same language; that is the difficult task we are faced with, but there are signs today that breakthroughs are occurring, as growing numbers of international academic scholars are pushing to incorporate the analysis of the official propaganda surrounding 11 September 2001 into their work within the academy, a turnabout from years of general silence. And more and more people are coming to realize that the official lies about 11 September are the biggest example of fake news in this century. Fake news used to justify endless wars and the slaughter of so many innocents around the world.

Words have a power to enchant and mesmerize. Linguistic mind-control, especially when linked to traumatic events such as the September 11 and the anthrax attacks, can strike people dumb and blind. It often makes some subjects “unthinkable” and “unspeakable” (to quote Jim Douglass quoting Thomas Merton in JFK and the Unspeakable: the unspeakable “is the void that contradicts everything that is spoken even before the words are said.”).

We need a new vocabulary to speak of these terrible things. Let us learn, as Chief Joseph said, to speak with a straight tongue, and in language that doesn’t do the enemies work of mind control, but snaps the world awake to the truth of the mass murders of September 11, 2001 that have been used to massacre millions across the world.




19 thoughts on “Why I Don’t Speak of the Fake News of “9/11” Anymore”
Tony Ryals says:
September 15, 2019 at 10:01 pm
Your comment is awaiting moderation. This is a preview, your comment will be visible after it has been approved.
Excellent.But one lingistic or numeric symbol you overlooked is that of the biblical or talmudic armageddon that was never mentioned by the government but has silently offered up to zionist fundamentalists by planning the op to coincide with the 2nd millenium of christianity.

This allowed big brother judaism to lead little brother christianity around by the ring of its nose as usual all for the benefit of our corrupt,decadent,ignorant elites.

I even remember an Israeli woman working for Israeli government tourism office I met in 1997 asking if I wanted to visit Israel for a millenial event which certainly as an agnostic had no meaning nor importance to me whatsover.But she knew enough to know that some could be manipulated or influenced by the year 2000 or 2001
and no doubt so did her boss Moshe Katsav.

I think Jung should have written another book titled,’Man and his Confused Symbols’.