Archive for the Mossad’s 9/11 Category

Mossad in America

Posted in Mossad's 9/11 on November 3, 2010 by The 800 Pound Gorilla

The American Conservative; August 25, 2010

Israeli government claims that it does not spy on the United States are intended for the media and popular consumption. The reality is that Israel’s intelligence agencies target the United States intensively, particularly in pursuit of military and dual-use civilian technology.

Among nations considered to be friendly to Washington, Israel leads all others in its active espionage directed against American companies and the Defense Department. It also dominates two commercial sectors that enable it to extend its reach inside America’s domestic infrastructure: airline and telecommunications security.

Israel is believed to have the ability to monitor nearly all phone records originating in the United States, while numerous Israeli air-travel security companies are known to act as the local Mossad stations.

As tensions with Iran increase, sources in the counterintelligence community report that Israeli agents have become more aggressive in targeting Muslims living in the United States as well as in operating against critics. There have been a number of cases reported to the FBI about Mossad officers who have approached leaders in Arab-American communities and have falsely represented themselves as “US intelligence.”

Because few Muslims would assist an Israeli, this is done to increase the likelihood that the target will cooperate. It’s referred to as a “false flag” operation.

Mossad officers sought to recruit Arab-Americans as sources willing to inform on their associates and neighbors. The approaches, which took place in New York and New Jersey, were reportedly handled clumsily, making the targets of the operation suspicious.

These Arab-Americans turned down the requests for cooperation, and some of the contacts were eventually reported to the FBI, which has determined that at least two of the Mossad officers are, ironically, Israeli Arabs operating out of Israel’s mission to the United Nations in New York under cover as consular assistants.

In another bizarre case, USS Liberty survivor Phil Tourney was recently accosted in Southern California by a foreigner who eventually identified himself as an Israeli government representative. Tourney was taunted, and the Israeli threatened both him and journalist Mark Glenn, who has been reporting on the Liberty story. Tourney was approached in a hotel lounge, and it is not completely clear how the Israeli was able to identify him.

But he knew exactly who Tourney was, as the official referred to the Liberty, saying that the people who had been killed on board had gotten what they deserved. There were a number of witnesses to the incident, including Tourney’s wife. The threat has been reported to the FBI, which is investigating, but Tourney and Glenn believe that the incident is not being taken seriously by the bureau.

FBI sources indicate that the increase in Mossad activity is a major problem, particularly when Israelis are posing as US government officials, but they also note that there is little they can do to stop it as the Justice Department refuses to initiate any punitive action or prosecutions of the Mossad officers who have been identified as involved in the illegal activity.

In another ongoing Israeli spy case, Stewart Nozette appears to be headed towards eventual freedom as his case drags on through the District of Columbia courts. Nozette, an aerospace scientist with a top secret clearance and access to highly sensitive information, offered to sell classified material to a man he believed to be a Mossad officer, but who instead turned out to be with the FBI.

Nozette has been in jail since October, but he has now been granted an additional 90-day delay so his lawyers can review the documents in the government’s case, many of which are classified.

If Nozette demands that sensitive information be used in his defense, his case will likely follow the pattern set in the nine-times-postponed trial of AIPAC spies Steve Rosen and Keith Weissman, who were ultimately acquitted in April 2009 when prosecutors determined that they could not make their case without doing significant damage to national security.

A month after Rosen and Weissman were freed, Ben-Ami Kadish, who admitted to providing defense secrets to Israel while working as an engineer at Picatinny Arsenal in New Jersey, walked out of a Manhattan court after paying a fine. He did no jail time and continues to receive his substantial Defense Department pension.

The mainstream media reported the Rosen and Weissman trial intermittently, but there was virtually no coverage of Ben-Ami Kadish, and there has been even less of Nozette. Compare that with the recent reporting on the Russian spies who, by all accounts, did almost nothing and never obtained any classified information. It is hard to avoid the conclusion that spying for Israel is consequence free.

The above article can be found here:

Also see ‘Israeli airport-security firm blasted for letting Nigerian plane bomber slip through’ here:

Also see ‘State of Pennsylvania contracted Israeli security firm to collect data on would-be dissidents’ here:

Also see ‘Israeli telecom front ops penetrate Montreal metro’ here:

Also see ‘ABC News: Still active in US, Israeli art student spies case NSA data center here:

Also see ‘Counterpunch: Israeli spies, 9/11 hijackers lived and operated less than half mile apart in run-up to attacks‘ here:

Also see ‘Another Israeli spy goes scot-free; case shrouded in mystery, says judge’ here:

Also see ‘AIPAC spies set to walk (a dream scenario for the defense)’ here:

Israel benefited from 2005 Hariri assassination, ex-intel chief admits; Saad Hariri absolves Syria of blame for father’s murder

Posted in Mossad's 9/11 on October 31, 2010 by The 800 Pound Gorilla

‘Israel benefited from Rafiq Hariri murder’

PressTV (Iran); October 28, 2010

[Israeli] Major General Amos Yadlin said on Wednesday that Israel has been able to launch more than one operation in Lebanon following Hariri’s killing.

In 2005, Hariri was killed in a massive car bombing in the capital city of Beirut.

He also admitted that Tel Aviv carried out the terror assassination of Hezbollah’s commander Imad Mughniyeh in Syria two years ago.

The former official noted that Israel restored a huge number of espionage networks inside Lebanon and managed to assassinate Mughniyeh through the very same spy rings.

Yadlin claimed Mughniyeh’s murder helped Israel enter a new stage in its conflict with Hezbollah, adding that the Israeli Military Intelligence should proceed with such plans in Lebanon.

Earlier reports had revealed that chief of Israeli spy agency Mossad Meir Dagan personally planned the assassination at orders by former Israeli premier Ehud Olmert.

Mughniyeh, who was one of the most prominent Hezbollah figures, was assassinated in a car bomb explosion in the Syrian capital on February 12, 2008.

Hezbollah held the Israeli regime responsible for the assassination of Mughniyeh, but the regime’s officials at the time denied having any role in the assassination.

The above article can be found here:


‘Iran-funded book accuses Israel of Hariri assassination’

The Jerusalem Post (Israel); October 17, 2010

LONDON — Iran is accused of trying to propel Lebanon into a conflict with Israel by sponsoring a book which accuses the Jewish state of being behind 2005’s assassination of former Lebanese prime minister Rafiq Hariri.

According to a book, about to be published in English, it was Israel which carried out the assassination using a missile manufactured in the United States.

Thierry Meyssan, the French-born author, is alleged to have been paid one million dollars by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard to write the book.

The revelations come as heightened tensions in the region following a controversial two-day visit by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

A tribunal backed by the United Nations has been investigating the 2005 Beirut car bombing, which claimed the lives of Hariri and 21 others, and is expected to lay the blame for the killings at the door of Hizbullah.

According to a profile he has posted on the business website LinkedIn, Meyssan is now residing in Beirut, but the 53-year-old has spent half of the last year researching the book in Iran.

Titled L’effroyable Imposture II (“The Big Lie 2”), it is a follow-up to his 2002 book “9/11: The Big Lie,” which claimed that the 9/11 attacks were carried out by a rogue element within the US military.

Meyssan sparked fury within the US Senate by insisting that the Pentagon was hit by a US missile and not American Airlines Flight 77. In 2005, the US State Department took the unprecedented step of identifying him as someone who was actively promoting misinformation about America, saying he was persona non grata.

The book, which spawned a whole host of conspiracy theories, was translated into 26 languages, becoming a bestseller in the process.

Meyssan’s new book details what he claims is a cover up between Israel and America designed to hide the fact that they jointly carried out the assassination of Hariri.

He had hoped to keep its publication secret until a launch in Beirut later this month but leaks have already been appearing on various websites in the US and Lebanon.

According to a blogger on the 9/11 conspiracy website, Meyssan is using evidence provided to him by Hizbullah showing that an Israeli drone was tracking Hariri long before his assassination.

Hizbullah’s leader Hassan Nasrallah held a press conference in Beirut in August [see below] in which he claimed his scientists had hacked into the electronic data on the drone and been able to reproduce photographs it took of the former prime minister’s movements.

The full text of the above article can be found here:


‘France denies killing Hariri witness’

PressTV (Iran); April 10, 2008

Paris denies accusations that French agents murdered a witness in the probe into the assassination of ex-Lebanese Premier Rafiq Hariri.

“I formally deny these accusations,” French Foreign Ministry spokesman, Pascale Andreani, said on Thursday. His comment came as a response to the claim made by Imad al-Siddiq that French agents had killed his brother Mohammed Zuheir al-Siddiq.

Siddiq was detained in October 2005 in a Paris suburb in connection with the February 2005 assassination of Hariri. He was then under an international arrest warrant requested by a Lebanese prosecutor.

“The French authorities helped facilitate the disappearance of Mohammed Zuheir al-Siddiq with the aim of his being liquidated by another party or they liquidated him themselves,” Imad al-Siddiq said on Wednesday.

Paris refused to extradite Mohammed Zuheir to Lebanon because it had not been given guarantees that he would not be held liable to the death penalty there if convicted of a crime.

The above article can be found here:

‘Hezbollah urges STL misleaders probe’

PressTV (Iran); October 23, 2010

Hezbollah has stressed the need to investigate the case of false witnesses, who misled a UN tribunal on the assassination of Lebanon’s ex-premier Rafiq Hariri.

Deputy Secretary-General Sheikh Naim Qassem said on Friday that a close examination of the case of those who bore false witness to the United Nations Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL) would prevent disunity in the country, ISNA reported.

The UN Special Tribunal for Lebanon was set up by the world body and the Lebanese government in May 2007 to investigate the case.

The Hezbollah official made the comments during a meeting with Wiam Wahhab, the head of the Lebanese Tayyar al-Tawhid movement.

For his part, Wahhab identified the STL as a politicized court and called on Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri to settle the issue.

On Wednesday, Lebanon’s government postponed a study of the case of the UN tribunal false witnesses.

Western-backed parties in Lebanon accused Syria and the Lebanese Hezbollah resistance movement of involvement in a February 2005 explosion in Beirut that killed Rafiq Hariri along with more than 20 others, a claim vehemently rejected by both Damascus and Hezbollah.

Hezbollah categorically rejects the allegations and has called the tribunal an “Israeli project.”

Former Lebanese commander Jamil al-Sayyed said recently that Hariri’s death was being exploited to fight Syria and the Lebanese resistance movement, Hezbollah.

Early in September, Saad Hariri admitted to have wrongly accused Syria of being behind his father’s assassination and acknowledged that the accusations were politically charged [see below].

Hezbollah and Syria believe a UN-backed tribunal charged with investigating Hariri’s killing was marred by witnesses who gave false information.

The above article can be found here:

‘Hezbollah: STL spied for West, Israel’

PressTV (Iran); October 28, 2010

Hezbollah says the UN tribunal investigating the former Lebanese premier’s assassination has been channeling data on the country to the West and Israel.

Under the guise of solving the murder, the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL) has been penetrating “every single sector” within the country to obtain information, the Lebanese resistance movement’s Secretary General Seyyed Hassan Nasrallah said on Thursday.

It would then direct the data to the Western intelligence services and Tel Aviv, he added, addressing the faithful in the Lebanese capital, Beirut.

Former Lebanese prime minister Rafiq Hariri was killed alongside more than 20 other people in a massive car bombing in Beirut on February 14, 2005.

The STL was subsequently set up by the United Nations and the Lebanese government in May 2007 to investigate the assassination. The court is expected to announce its findings by the end of 2010.

Nasrallah said in July that he had been informed by the slain leader’s son and successor, Saad Hariri, that the court “will accuse some undisciplined [Hezbollah] members.”

He has rejected the allegation and warned that the plot was part of “a dangerous project that is targeting the resistance.”

In an August speech, Nasrallah presented evidence proving that Israel had masterminded the assassination. The televised address featured video materials captured by Israeli unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV), as well as recorded confessions by Israeli fifth columnists, substantiating that Tel Aviv had been behind the killing.

Nasrallah said the investigators had been infiltrating deep into the country even before the tribunal took its current form.

Why do the investigators want “medical files of women” who are related to members of Hezbollah? Nasrallah questioned after exposing that the team had asked for more than 7,000 of such files.

He said the intrusion impinged on the honor of the Lebanese.

“We always know the magnitude” of the scheme, the resistance leader said, but warned, “We stop here.”

He said the movement has been silent on the matter so that it is not accused of disrupting the investigation and causing tension within the country.

The above article can be found here:

‘Hariri comes clean on Syria accusations’

PressTV (Iran); September 6, 2010

Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri acknowledges that he made a mistake to accuse Syria of the murder of his father in a 2005 bombing in Beirut.

“At some point, we made a mistake,” AFP quoted Hariri as telling the Saudi-owned daily Asharq al-Awsat on Monday.

“At one stage, we accused Syria of assassinating the martyred premier…that was a political accusation, and that political accusation is over,” he told the London-based paper.

“There is a (UN) court that is doing its job, and we for our part must reassess what happened,” he went on to say.

Former Lebanese Premier Rafiq Hariri was killed, along with more than 20 others, in a massive bombing in the Lebanese capital on February 14, 2005.

Lebanon‘s Western-backed parties blamed the assassination on Syria, a charge Damascus vehemently rejected.

The above article can be found here:

‘Hariri absolves Syria’

Al-Ahram Weekly (Egypt); September 16, 2010

The slow but dramatic transformation of Syria’s relations with its erstwhile critics in Lebanon culminated in early September in Prime Minister Saad Al-Hariri’s unequivocal absolution of Damascus regarding his father’s 2005 assassination. That killing threw Lebanon into turmoil and was followed by accusations of Syrian culpability because of its long military and political domination over its smaller neighbor.

Although Syria subsequently withdrew its troops under Lebanese and international pressure, five years later it retains strong influence in Lebanon and appears to have weathered the worst of the regional and international storms. “At some point, we made a mistake,” Al-Hariri told the Saudi-owned daily Asharq Al-Awsat in remarks published on 6 September. “At one stage, we accused Syria … That was a political accusation, and that political accusation is over.”

Al-Hariri’s Damascene conversion comes amid a widespread belief that Syria is off the hook for the killing. Hizbullah leader Hassan Nasrallah announced that he expected (after receiving a tip-off from the premier himself) the Special Tribunal for Lebanon in The Hague to try “rogue elements” of his Shia organization for Al-Hariri’s death. So far all else is media speculation; the court has issued no charges and holds no suspects in custody. But the specter of a Hizbullah-related indictment has raised fears of strife, particularly between Sunnis and Shia.

Al-Hariri’s statement also follows a rapprochement between Al-Hariri’s chief backer, Saudi Arabia, and Syria, after Al-Hariri’s killing threw their ideological differences and rivalry for regional influence into sharp relief. Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad and Saudi King Abdallah met at an unprecedented Beirut mini-summit in July to discuss concerns about the repercussions of such an indictment.

Meanwhile, Al-Hariri’s statement was on the whole welcomed by both his supporters and critics, but Lebanese reaction took another twist this week with a press conference by former head of General Security Jamil Al-Sayed, one of the “four generals” arrested and held without charge after the Al-Hariri killing and released last year. Al-Sayed accused Al-Hariri of backing several witnesses, including Hossam Hossam and Zuheir Siddiq, who gave testimony pointing to Syrian involvement in the killing only to recant it later.

Hariri told Asharq Al-Awsat that false witnesses had “misled” the investigation and poisoned relations between Lebanon and Syria, but Al-Sayed accused Al-Hariri of using them to frame Syria early in the investigation. “Al-Hariri wanted to close the file with Syria but it backfired,” said Rosana Bou Monsef, an analyst for the pro-Hariri An- Nahar newspaper. “He is now being asked to go far beyond that.”

Al-Hariri’s statement cements the slow decline of the anti-Syrian movement, 14 March, named after the vast demonstration demanding Syria’s exit from Lebanon on that date in 2005. The movement’s driving force, Druze leader Walid Jumblatt, jumped ship last summer. Such shifts are common, and rarely held to account, under Lebanon’s sectarian political system. Meanwhile, Al-Hariri has visited Damascus several times since taking the reins of government last year.

The full text of the above article can be found here:

The following is a translated transcript of Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah’s August 9 press conference, in which he provided evidence suggesting Israeli complicity in the Hariri assassination:

YaLibnan (Lebanon); August 9, 2010

We Accuse Israel of Killing [Rafiq] Hariri. Israel has the capacity to carry out an operation that targets Rafiq Hariri. Lebanon is the best place for Israel to carry out its operations, due to its geographical location, etc. Israel has collaborators in Lebanon in all fields.

As for the motive; everyone knows that Israel’s rivalry with Hezbollah is extremely fierce. Israel hence seeks the opportunity to act against Hezbollah. Israel had no problem with Syria when it was in Lebanon. Israel has problems with Syria because it supports Hezbollah.

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad told me in 2004, before [UN Security Council] Resolution 1559 was issued, that the US does not mind having Syrian forces in Lebanon, but on two conditions: They need to disarm Hezbollah and Palestinian factions in Lebanon. Assad told the US that Hezbollah is part of Lebanon’s national security; hence, he denied the US request.

Then came the project to force Syria out of Lebanon and isolate Hezbollah.

The Rafiq Hariri assassination was used against Syria and Hezbollah. I will discuss Israel’s methods of operation which will help us understand the evidence I will present.

First: Israel depends on aerial surveillance. Israel uses the MK [unmanned aerial vehicle] to spy on towns in Lebanon. Second: I will discuss Israel’s use of technical support, including the telecom sector. Third: I will discuss Israel’s use of spies.

Has Israel conducted intelligence operations in Lebanon since 2004? When we answer this question, we will be able to understand the killings that were made.

We start with the Israeli collaborators who were arrested between 2009 and 2010. We start with the collaborators’ confessions to the Lebanese security forces. Let us take a sample of the collaborators, after which I will make some remarks.

The names of some of the collaborators who confessed to being spies include: Sader, who was born in 1964, started spying for Israel in 2006, and was arrested in 2010. His role was to gather information about the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) and political figures. He confessed to providing information on President Michel Suleiman and his residence in Amchit. Sader also confessed to gathering information on LAF commander General Jean Kahwaji.

I have to say that field inspections and the gathering of information is a phase that precedes the implementation [of an operation]. Does a spy inspect a site only to gather information, or to also plot for an operation?

Sader confessed to inspecting Kahwaji’s yacht. Could he have inspected the yacht because he wanted to put a bomb in it?

Why didn’t the International Independent Investigation Commission [commissioned by the UN to investigate the Hariri assassination] question Sader or other collaborators to see if they were involved in other killings?

Syrian officials were questioned by the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL), but none of the Israeli officers handling Israeli collaborators in Lebanon were questioned.

Hezbollah’s Al-Manar channel then showed a video on alleged Israeli spy Said Tanios Alam, who was arrested in 2009 and who started spying for Israel in 1990. He confessed to monitoring PM Saad Hariri and Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea as well as the movement of politicians in the Jbeil area.

Alam was asked to monitor Geagea. He was asked to determine when Saad Hariri visited Geagea. Why does Israel want to monitor Saad Hariri and Samir Geagea? This is the answer for the people asking “Why were March 14 alliance members assassinated?”

Who goes to Jbeil coffee shops? Most politicians visiting Jbeil were from the March 14 alliance.

Hezbollah’s Al-Manar then showed another video on alleged Israeli spy Nasser Nader, who was arrested in 2009 and who confessed to being involved in the 2004 killing of Hezbollah official Ghaleb Awali.

When Awali was killed, Jund al-Sham issued a statement that it was behind the assassination.

Hezbollah’s Al-Manar then showed another video on alleged Israeli spy Faysal Maklad, who confessed to harboring Israeli troops in Lebanon and transporting weapons.

Hezbollah’s Al-Manar then showed another video on alleged Israeli spy Adib Alam, who confessed to monitoring Lebanese regions as well as being involved, along with his wife, in the killing of Islamic Jihad Movement officials Mahmoud and Nidal al-Majzoub in 2006 in Saida.

The secret I want to reveal tonight is that before 1997, Hezbollah was able to catch an Israeli spy plane photographing South Lebanon and sending [the images] to an Israeli operations center. Hezbollah managed to access Israel’s spy maneuvers. This was a technical achievement for Hezbollah.

We kept this to ourselves at first. The images we intercepted were difficult to analyze. No one is capable of directly understanding these intercepted [images]. Our capacities did not allow us to intercept all the images taken by Israeli spy planes over Lebanon.

Israel later encrypted their [spy plane] operations, so sometimes we could not decipher what they photographed. Hezbollah caught pictures of Israel taking pictures from the shore to a road that leads to the southern Lebanese town of Ansariya.

We identified the place that Israel was focusing on. We wondered if Israel wanted to conduct an operation at that location.

On September 5, 1997, Israel commandos landed on the beach and took the road to Ansariya that had been photographed by the Israelis, after which there was a clash. We were not able to intercept the images of the Ansariya battle itself.

Hezbollah’s Al-Manar then showed another video of footage from an Israeli Unmanned Aerial Vehicle’s (UAV) showing where Hezbollah planned an ambush against Israeli commandos. The video then shows an Israeli helicopter approaching to rescue the commandos. The video also shows Hezbollah rockets targeting the Israeli soldiers waiting for the helicopter’s rescue.

The narrator of the video says: “Until now it is uncertain if the commandos were going to plant a bomb to target a Hezbollah official or to kidnap a Hezbollah official. The intercepted UAV’s footage proves that an assassination attempt was being planned.”

Hezbollah’s Al-Manar then showed more UAV footage showing surveillance of Hezbollah official Ali Dib as the plane flies over his house in Saida. Another spy plane monitors where he worked in Saida. The narrator of the video says: “The monitoring was conducted for two years, before Dib was killed by a car bomb on the Saida road.

A video is shown of more UAV footage depicting a surveillance operation over Mahmoud al-Majzoub’s residence and workplace in Saida. The narrator of the video explains that Majzoub was killed in Saida in 2006.

Following Rafiq Hariri’s assassination, I visited his family. They asked for Hezbollah’s help in finding out who was behind the assassination.

Syria was initially accused of assassinating Hariri, until German magazine Der Spiegel published an article in May 2009 accusing Hezbollah of murdering Hariri.

Hezbollah held a meeting addressing Israeli collaborators. We assumed many collaborators escaped from Lebanon, but a few others remained in Lebanon. We decided to go back to archives we had since 2005 to see if we can intercept Israeli UAV footage of roads used by Rafiq Hariri that could be targeted by Israel.

We will display footage of Israeli UAV surveillance, mostly over Beirut. You will notice that the surveillance that we intercepted is being made from different angles. It is not being made just to conduct surveillance in general, but to prepare for a possible operation.

I want you to watch how they spied on the various routes taken by Rafiq Hariri.

Al-Manar then showed video of Israeli UAV surveillance of routes used by Rafiq Hariri: Hariri’s house in Beirut is circled by the UAV, as is the PM’s palace, Nejmeh Square and the Parliament. The UAV also follows a road taken by Hariri along the sea, including the Saint George area where Hariri was killed. Surveillance focusing on the Saint George area in detail is shown. A red circle shows the spot where Rafiq Hariri was killed.

Are there any Hezbollah offices in these areas monitored by Israel? Why is Israel monitoring these locations? Is it a coincidence that Israel is monitoring Rafiq Hariri’s routes?

Al-Manar then showed a video of Israeli UAV surveillance focusing on the Nahr al-Kalb tunnel, Jounieh, Dbayeh, after which the UAV focuses on the Faqra-Ayoun al-Siman area, which is covered in snow. The footage then shifts to the Yasou al-Malak road, which is the only road that leads to Rafiq Hariri’s spa in Faqra.

Al-Manar then showed more Israeli UAV surveillance footage monitoring the Jiyeh highway and the Saida entrance. Al-Manar then showed another video of Israeli UAV surveillance in which the UAV reaches Nejmeh Square after which it flies over the residence of Rafiq Hariri’s brother, Chafik.

We think that these videos were made in preparation for an operation.

Now we will move on to Israel’s activity on February 14, 2005, the day of Rafiq Hariri’s assassination.

Al-Manar then showed another video on Israeli aerial activity over Lebanon on February 13 and 14, 2005: The video reports that Israeli reconnaissance planes flew over Saida on February 13, 2005, while several warplanes flew over Beirut (hours before Hariri was killed). On February 14, 2005, an Israeli AWACS plane flew over Beirut along with another Israeli spy plane.

This video can be acquired by any investigative commission to ensure it is correct. We are sure of this evidence, or else we would not risk showing it.

We have evidence that Ghassan al-Jedd, an alleged Israeli spy who hosted Israeli operations teams, was present at the Rafiq Hariri crime scene. We presented the evidence to the Lebanese authorities, but Jedd escaped from Lebanon before he was caught.

Al-Manar then showed a video on Jedd, who was born in 1940 and became an Israeli spy in the early 1990s, before he escaped from Lebanon in 2009. He hosted Israeli officers in Lebanon. In March 2004, Israeli officers entered Lebanon through the sea and were hosted by Jedd for 50 hours in a location in Mount Lebanon.

We don’t trust the investigation or the UN investigation committee, but if the Lebanese government wants to appoint a reliable entity or a committee to look into this evidence we are ready to cooperate. This is the evidence we have now and will hold onto the balance of the evidence until a later date.

The full text of the above article can be found here:


Also see ‘Israel takes control of Lebanon’ here:

Also see ‘Nasrallah: Israel behind 2005 assassination of Lebanese PM Rafiq Hariri’ here:

Also see ‘NYT: Israeli spy in Lebanon is cousin of alleged 9/11 hijacker’ here:

Counterpunch: Israeli spies, 9/11 hijackers “lived and operated” less than half mile apart in run-up to attacks

Posted in Mossad's 9/11 on October 2, 2010 by The 800 Pound Gorilla

Counterpunch (US); Vol. 14, No. 3/4 (2007)

[The following two articles from bi-weekly political magazine Counterpunch contain explosive material on some of the close links between Israeli intelligence and the 9/11 attacks, as well as the mainstream media’s disinclination to report those links. Unfortunately, the articles suggest the Israelis were merely tracking the alleged 9/11 hijackers rather than running them, as we now know to have been the case.

Nevertheless, the reports provide damning evidence of the intimate connection between the “hijackers” and Israeli intelligence agents — posing as “art students” — operating covertly in US cities. “In at least six urban centers, suspected Israeli spies and 9/11 hijackers and/or al-Qaeda-connected suspects lived and operated near one another, in some cases less than half a mile apart, for various periods during 2000-01 in the run-up to the attacks,” the lead article notes.

Although these reports generated surprisingly little interest when they were published in 2007, the intelligent reading public appears readier now to accept their more obvious implications — 800]

‘Cheering Movers and Art Student Spies: What Did Israel Know in Advance of the 9/11 Attacks?’

By Christopher Ketcham

On the afternoon of September 11, 2001, an FBI bulletin known as a BOLO — “be on lookout” — was issued with regard to three suspicious men who that morning were seen leaving the New Jersey waterfront minutes after the first plane hit World Trade Center 1. Law enforcement officers across the New York-New Jersey area were warned in the radio dispatch to watch for a “vehicle possibly related to New York terrorist attack”:

“White, 2000 Chevrolet van… with ‘Urban Moving Systems’ sign on back seen at Liberty State Park, Jersey City, NJ, at the time of first impact of jetliner into World Trade Center… Three individuals with van were seen celebrating after initial impact and subsequent explosion. FBI Newark Field Office requests that, if the van is located, hold for prints and detain individuals”.

At 3:56 p.m., twenty-five minutes after the issuance of the FBI BOLO, officers with the East Rutherford Police Department stopped the commercial moving van through a trace on the plates. According to the police report, Officer Scott DeCarlo and Sgt. Dennis Rivelli approached the stopped van, demanding that the driver exit the vehicle.

The driver, 23-year-old Sivan Kurzberg, refused and “was asked several more times [but] appeared to be fumbling with a black leather fanny pouch type of bag”. With guns drawn, the police then “physically removed” Kurzberg, while four other men — two more men had apparently joined the group since the morning — were also removed from the van, handcuffed, placed on the grass median and read their Miranda rights. They had not been told the reasons for their arrest.

Yet, according to DeCarlo’s report, “this officer was told without question by the driver [Sivan Kurzberg], ‘We are Israeli. We are not your problem. Your problems are our problems. The Palestinians are the problem.’

ABC’s 20/20, The Forward, and have all covered the story. But where’s the follow up? Democracy Now speak to the author of the article, Christopher Ketcham; Counterpunch editor Alexander Cockburn, and Marc Perelman, the Forward reporter who did one of the first reports on the story in 2002.

Real Video Stream

Real Audio Stream

MP3 Download

Another of the five Israelis, again without prompting, told Officer DeCarlo — falsely — that “we were on the West Side Highway in New York City during the incident”.

From inside the vehicle the officers, who were quickly joined by agents from the FBI, retrieved multiple passports and $4,700 in cash stuffed in a sock. According to New Jersey’s Bergen Record, which on September 12 reported the arrest of the five Israelis, an investigator high up in the Bergen County law enforcement hierarchy stated that officers had also discovered in the vehicle “maps of the city … with certain places highlighted. It looked like they’re hooked in with this”, the source told the Record, referring to the 9/11 attacks. “It looked like they knew what was going to happen when they were at Liberty State Park.”

The five men were indeed Israeli citizens. They claimed to be in the country working as movers for Urban Moving Systems Inc., which maintained a warehouse and office in Weehawken, New Jersey. They were held for 71 days in a federal detention center in Brooklyn, New York, during which time they were repeatedly interrogated by FBI and CIA counterterrorism teams, who referred to the men as the “high-fivers” for their celebratory behavior on the New Jersey waterfront.

Some were placed in solitary confinement for at least forty days; some were given as many as seven lie-detector tests. One of the Israelis, Paul Kurzberg, brother of Sivan, refused to take a lie-detector test for ten weeks. Then he failed it.

Meanwhile, two days after the men were picked up, the owner of Urban Moving Systems, Dominik Suter, a 31-year-old Israeli national, abandoned his business and fled the United States for Israel. Suter’s departure was abrupt, leaving behind coffee cups, sandwiches, cell phones and computers strewn on office tables and thousands of dollars of goods in storage.

Suter was later placed on the same FBI suspect list as 9/11 lead hijacker Mohammed Atta and other hijackers and suspected al-Qaeda sympathizers, suggesting that US authorities felt Suter may have known something about the attacks. The suspicion, as the investigation unfolded, was that the men working for Urban Moving Systems were spies. Who exactly was handling them, and who or what they were targeting, was as yet uncertain.

It was New York’s venerable Jewish weekly The Forward that broke this story in the spring of 2002, after months of footwork. The Forward reported that the FBI had finally concluded that at least two of the men were agents working for the Mossad, the Israeli intelligence agency, and that Urban Moving Systems, the ostensible employer of the five Israelis, was a front operation.

Two former CIA officers confirmed this to me, noting that movers’ vans are a common intelligence cover. The Forward also noted that the Israeli government itself admitted that the men were spies.

A “former high-ranking American intelligence official”, who said he was “regularly briefed on the investigation by two separate law enforcement officials”, told reporter Marc Perelman that after American authorities confronted Jerusalem at the end of 2001, the Israeli government “acknowledged the operation and apologized for not coordinating it with Washington”.

Today, Perelman stands by his reporting. I asked him if his sources in the Mossad denied the story. “Nobody stopped talking to me”, he said.

In June 2002, ABC News’ 20/20 followed up with its own investigation into the matter, coming to the same conclusion as The Forward. Vincent Cannistraro, former chief of operations for counterterrorism with the CIA, told 20/20 that some of the names of the five men appeared as hits in searches of an FBI national intelligence database.

Cannistraro told me that the question that most troubled FBI agents in the weeks and months after 9/11 was whether the Israelis had arrived at the site of their “celebration” with foreknowledge of the attack to come. From the beginning, “the FBI investigation operated on the premise that the Israelis had foreknowledge“, according to Cannistraro.

A second former CIA counterterrorism officer who closely followed the case, but who spoke on condition of anonymity, told me that investigators were pursuing two theories. “One story was that [the Israelis] appeared at Liberty State Park very quickly after the first plane hit. The other was that they were at the park location already”. Either way, investigators wanted to know exactly what the men were expecting when they got there.

Before such issues had been fully explored, however, the investigation was shut down. Following what ABC News reported were “high-level negotiations between Israeli and US government officials”, a settlement was reached in the case of the five Urban Moving Systems suspects. Intense political pressure apparently had been brought to bear.

The reputable Israeli daily Ha’aretz reported that by the last week of October 2001, some six weeks after the men had been detained, Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage and two unidentified “prominent New York congressmen” were lobbying heavily for their release.

According to a source at ABC News close to the 20/20 report, high-profile criminal lawyer Alan Dershowitz also stepped in as a negotiator on behalf of the men to smooth out differences with the US government. (Dershowitz declined to comment for this article.)

And so, at the end of November 2001, for reasons that only noted they had been working in the country illegally as movers, in violation of their visas, the men were flown home to Israel.

Today, the crucial questions raised by this matter remain unanswered. There is sufficient reason — from news reports, statements by former intelligence officials, an array of circumstantial evidence, and the reported acknowledgment by the Israeli government — to believe that in the months before 9/11, Israel was running an active spy network inside the United States, with Muslim extremists as the target [Targets, or patsies? — 800].

Given Israel’s concerns about Islamic terrorism as well as its long history of spying on US soil, this does not come entirely as a shock. What’s incendiary is the idea — supported, though not proven, by several pieces of evidence — that the Israelis did learn something about 9/11 in advance but failed to share all of what they knew with American officials. The questions are disturbing enough to warrant a Congressional investigation.

Yet none of this information found its way into Congress’s joint committee report on the attacks, and it was not even tangentially referenced in the nearly 600 pages of the 9/11 Commission’s final report. Nor would a single major media outlet track the revelations of The Forward and ABC News to investigate further.

“There weren’t even stories saying it was bullshit”, says The Forward’s Perelman. “Honestly, I was surprised”. Instead, the story disappeared into the welter of anti-Israel 9/11 conspiracy theories.

It’s no small boon to the US government that the story of 9/11-related Israeli espionage has been thus relegated: the story doesn’t fit in the clean lines of the official narrative of the attacks. It brings up concerns not only about Israel’s obligation not to spy inside the borders of the United States, its major benefactor, but about its possible failure to have provided the US adequate warning of an impending devastating attack on American soil.

Furthermore, the available evidence undermines the carefully cultivated image of sanctity that defines the US-Israel relationship. These are all factors that help explain the story’s disappearance — and they are compelling reasons to revisit it now.

Torpedoing the FBI Probe

All five [alleged] future hijackers of American Airlines Flight 77, which rammed the Pentagon, maintained addresses or were active within a six-mile radius of towns associated with the Israelis employed at Urban Moving Systems. Hudson and Bergen counties, the areas where the Israelis were allegedly conducting surveillance, were a central staging ground for the hijackers of Flight 77 and their fellow al-Qaeda operatives.

Mohammed Atta maintained a mail-drop address and visited friends in northern New Jersey; his contacts there included Hani Hanjour, the suicide pilot for Flight 77, and Majed Moqed, one of the strongmen who [allegedly] backed Hanjour in the seizing of the plane. Could the Israelis, with or without knowledge of the terrorists’ plans, have been tracking the men who were soon to hijack Flight 77? [Tracking, or running? — 800]

In public statements, both the Israeli government and the FBI have denied that the Urban Moving Systems men were involved in an intelligence operation in the United States. “No evidence recovered suggested any of these Israelis had prior knowledge of the 9/11 attack, and these Israelis are not suspected of working for Mossad”, FBI spokesman Jim Margolin told me. (The Israeli embassy did not respond to questions for this article.)

According to the source at ABC News, FBI investigators chafed at the denials from their higher-ups. “There is a lot of frustration inside the bureau about this case”, the source told me. “They feel the higher echelons torpedoed the investigation into the Israeli New Jersey cell. Leads were not fully investigated.” Among those lost leads was the figure of Dominik Suter, whom the US authorities apparently never attempted to contact.

Intelligence expert and author James Bamford told me there was similar frustration within the CIA: “People I’ve talked to at the CIA were outraged at what was going on. They thought it was outrageous that there hadn’t been a real investigation, that the facts were hanging out there without any conclusion.

However, what was “absolutely certain”, according to Vincent Cannistraro, was that the five Israelis formed part of a surveillance network in the New York-New Jersey area. The network’s purpose was to track [run] radical Islamic extremists and/or supporters of militant Palestinian groups like Hamas and Islamic Jihad.

The former CIA counterterrorism officer who spoke anonymously told me that FBI investigators determined that the suspect Israelis were serving as Arabic-speaking linguists “running technical operations” in northern New Jersey’s extensive Muslim communities. The former CIA officer said the operations included taps on telephones, placement of microphones in rooms and mobile surveillance.

The source at ABC News agreed: “Our conclusion was that they were Arab linguists involved in monitoring operations, i.e., electronic surveillance. People at FBI concur with this”. The ABC News source added, “What we heard was that the Israelis may have picked up chatter that something was going to happen on the morning of 9/11”.

The former CIA counterterrorism officer told me: “There was no question but that [the order to close down the investigation] came from the White House. It was immediately assumed at CIA headquarters that this basically was going to be a cover-up so that the Israelis would not be implicated in any way in 9/11. Bear in mind that this was a political issue, not a law enforcement or intelligence issue. If somebody says we don’t want the Israelis implicated in this — we know that they’ve been spying the hell out of us, we know that they possibly had information in advance of the attacks, but this would be a political nightmare to deal with.”

Israel’s “Art Student” Spies

There is a second piece of evidence that suggests Israeli operatives were spying on [running] al-Qaeda in the United States. It is writ in the peculiar tale of the Israeli “art students”, detailed by this reporter for in 2002, following the leaking of an internal memo circulated by the Drug Enforcement Administration’s Office of Security Programs.

The June 2001 memo, issued three months before the 9/11 attacks, reported that more than 120 young Israeli citizens, posing as art students and peddling cheap paintings, had been repeatedly — and seemingly inexplicably — attempting to penetrate DEA offices and other law enforcement and Defense Department offices across the country.

The DEA report stated that the Israelis may have been engaged in “an organized intelligence gathering activity”, but to what end, US investigators, in June 2001, could not determine. The memo briefly floated the possibility that the Israelis were engaged in trafficking the drug ecstasy.

According to the memo, “the most activity [was] reported in the state of Florida” during the first half of 2001, where the town of Hollywood appeared to be “a central point for these individuals with several having addresses in this area”.

In retrospect, the fact that a large number of “art students” operated out of Hollywood is intriguing, to say the least. During 2001, the city, just north of Miami, was a hotbed of al-Qaeda activity and served as one of the chief staging grounds for the hijacking of the World Trade Center planes and the Pennsylvania plane; it was home to fifteen of the nineteen future hijackers, nine in Hollywood and six in the surrounding area.

Among the 120 suspected Israeli spies posing as art students, more than thirty lived in the Hollywood area, ten in Hollywood proper. As noted in the DEA report, many of these young men and women had training as intelligence and electronic intercept officers in the Israeli military — training and experience far beyond the compulsory service mandated by Israeli law. Their “traveling in the US selling art seem[ed] not to fit their background”, according to the DEA report.

One “art student” was a former Israeli military intelligence officer named Hanan Serfaty, who rented two Hollywood apartments close to the mail drop and apartment of Mohammed Atta and four other hijackers. Serfaty was moving large amounts of cash: he carried bank slips showing more than $100,000 deposited from December 2000 through the first quarter of 2001; other bank slips showed withdrawals for about $80,000 during the same period.

Serfaty’s apartments, serving as crash pads for at least two other “art students”, were located at 4220 Sheridan Street and 701 South 21st Avenue. Lead hijacker Mohammed Atta’s mail drop was at 3389 Sheridan Street — approximately 2,700 feet from Serfaty’s Sheridan Street apartment.

Both Atta and Marwan al-Shehhi, the suicide pilot on United Airlines Flight 175, which smashed into World Trade Center 2, lived in a rented apartment at 1818 Jackson Street, some 1,800 feet from Serfaty’s South 21st Avenue apartment.

In fact, an improbable series of coincidences emerges from a close reading of the 2001 DEA memo, the 9/11 Commission’s staff statements and final report, FBI and Justice Department watch lists, hijacker timelines compiled by major media and statements by local, state and federal law enforcement personnel.

In at least six urban centers, suspected Israeli spies and 9/11 hijackers and/or al-Qaeda-connected suspects lived and operated near one another, in some cases less than half a mile apart, for various periods during 2000-01 in the run-up to the attacks. In addition to northern New Jersey and Hollywood, Florida, these centers included Arlington and Fredericksburg, Virginia; Atlanta; Oklahoma City; Los Angeles; and San Diego.

Israeli “art students” also lived close to terror suspects in and around Dallas, Texas. A 25-year-old “art student” named Michael Calmanovic, arrested and questioned by Texas-based DEA officers in April 2001, maintained a mail drop at 3575 North Beltline Road, less than a thousand feet from the 4045 North Beltline Road apartment of Ahmed Khalefa, an FBI terror suspect.

Dallas and its environs, especially the town of Richardson, Texas, throbbed with “art student” activity. Richardson is notable as the home of the Holy Land Foundation, an Islamic charity designated as a terrorist funder by the European Union and US government in December 2001.

Sources in 2002 told The Forward, in a report unrelated to the question of the “art students”, that “Israeli intelligence played a key role in helping the Bush administration to crack down on Islamic charities suspected of funneling money to terrorist groups, most notably the Richardson, Texas-based Holy Land Foundation, last December [2001]”. It’s plausible that the intelligence prompting the shutdown of the Holy Land Foundation came from “art student” spies in the Richardson area.

Others among the “art students” had specific backgrounds in electronic surveillance or military intelligence, or were associated with Israeli wiretapping and surveillance firms, which prompted further concerns among US investigators. DEA agents described Michael Calmanovic, for example, as “a recently discharged electronic intercept operator for the Israeli military”.

Lior Baram, questioned near Hollywood, Fla., in January 2001, said he had served two years in Israeli intelligence “working with classified information”. Hanan Serfaty, who maintained the Hollywood apartments near Atta and his cohorts, served in the Israeli military between the ages of 18 and 21.

Serfaty refused to disclose his activities between the ages of 21 and 24, including his activities since arriving in the USA. in 2000. The French daily Le Monde meanwhile reported that six “art students” were apparently using cell phones that had been purchased by a former Israeli vice consul in the USA.

Suspected Israeli spy Tomer Ben Dor, questioned at Dallas-Fort Worth Airport in May 2001, worked for the Israeli wiretapping and electronic eavesdropping company NICE Systems Ltd. (NICE Systems’ American subsidiary, NICE Systems Inc., is located in Rutherford, New Jersey, not far from the East Rutherford site where the five Israeli “movers” were arrested on the afternoon of September 11.)

Ben Dor carried in his luggage a print-out of a computer file that referred to “DEA Groups”. How he acquired information about so-called “DEA Groups” — via, for example, his own employment with an Israeli wiretapping company — was never determined, according to DEA documents.

“Art student” Michal Gal, arrested by DEA investigators in Irving, Texas, in the spring of 2001, was released on a $10,000 cash bond posted by Ophir Baer, an employee of the Israeli telecommunications software company Amdocs Inc., which provides phone-billing technology to clients that include some of the largest phone companies in the United States as well as US government agencies.

Amdocs, whose executive board has been heavily stocked with retired and current members of the Israeli government and military, has been investigated at least twice in the last decade by US authorities on charges of espionage-related leaks of data that the company assured was secure. (The company strenuously denies any wrong-doing.)

According to the former CIA counterterrorism officer with knowledge of investigations into 9/11-related Israeli espionage, when law enforcement officials examined the “art students” phenomenon, they came to the tentative conclusion that “the Israelis likely had a huge spy operation in the US and that they had succeeded in identifying a number of the hijackers”.

The German daily Die Zeit reached the same conclusion in 2002, reporting that “Mossad agents in the US were in all probability surveilling at least four of the 19 hijackers”.

The Fox News Channel also reported that US investigators suspected that Israelis were spying on Muslim militants in the United States. “There is no indication that the Israelis were involved in the 9/11 attacks, but investigators suspect that the Israelis may have gathered intelligence about the attacks in advance, and not shared it”, Fox correspondent Carl Cameron reported in a December 2001 series that was the first major exposé of allegations of 9/11-related Israeli espionage.

“A highly placed investigator said there are ‘tie-ins’. But when asked for details, he flatly refused to describe them, saying, ‘evidence linking these Israelis to 9/11 is classified. I cannot tell you about evidence that has been gathered. It’s classified information.’

One element of the allegations has never been clearly understood: if the “art students” were indeed spies targeting Muslim extremists that included al-Qaeda, why would they also be surveilling DEA agents in such a compromising manner? Why, in other words, would foreign spies bumble into federal offices by the scores and risk exposing their operation?

An explanation is that a number of the art students were, in fact, young Israelis engaged in a mere art scam and unknowingly provided cover for real spies. Investigative journalist John Sugg, who as senior editor for the Creative Loafing newspaper chain reported on the “art students” in 2002, told me that investigators he spoke to within FBI felt the “art student” ring functioned as a wide-ranging cover that was counterintuitive in its obviousness.

DEA investigators, for example, uncovered evidence connecting the Israeli “art students” to known ecstasy trafficking operations in New York and Florida. This was, according to Sugg, planted information. “The explanation was that when our FBI guys started getting interested in these folks [the art students] — when they got too close to what the real purpose was — the Israelis threw in an ecstasy angle”, Sugg told me.

“The argument being that if our guys thought the Israelis were involved in a smuggling ring, then they wouldn’t see the real purpose of the operation”. Sugg, who is writing a book that explores the tale of the “art students”, told me that several sources within the FBI, and at least one source formerly with Israeli intelligence, suggested that “the bumbling aspect of the art student thing was intentional”.

When I reported on the matter for in 2002, a veteran US intelligence operative with experience subcontracting both for the CIA and the NSA suggested a similar possibility. “It was a noisy operation”, the veteran intelligence operative said. The operative referred me to the film Victor, Victoria.

“It was about a woman playing a man playing a woman. Perhaps you should think about this from that aspect and ask yourself if you wanted to have something that was in your face, that didn’t make sense, that couldn’t possibly be them”. The intelligence operative added, “Think of it this way: how could the experts think this could actually be something of any value? Wouldn’t they dismiss what they were seeing?”

US and Israeli officials, dismissing charges of espionage as an “urban myth”, have publicly claimed that the Israeli “art students” were guilty only of working on US soil without proper credentials. The stern denials issued by the Justice Department were widely publicized in the Washington Post and elsewhere, and the endnote from officialdom and in establishment media by the spring of 2002 was that the “art students” had been rounded up and deported simply because of harmless visa violations.

The FBI, for its part, refused to confirm or deny the “art students” espionage story. “Regarding FBI investigations into Israeli art students”, spokesman Jim Margolin told me, “the FBI cannot comment on any of those investigations.”

As with the New Jersey Israelis, the investigation into the Israeli “art students” appears to have been halted by orders from on high. The veteran CIA/NSA intelligence operative told me in 2002 that there was “a great press to discredit the story, discredit the connections, prevent [investigators] from going any further. People were told to stand down. You name the agency, they were told to stand down”.

The operative added, “People who were perceived to be gumshoes on [this matter] suddenly found themselves hammered from all different directions. The interest from the middle bureaucracy was not that there had been a security breach but that someone had bothered to investigate the breach. That was where the terror was”.

Choking Off the Press Coverage

There was similar pressure brought against the media venues that ventured to report out the allegations of 9/11-related Israeli espionage. A former ABC News employee high up in the network newsroom told me that when ABC News ran its June 2002 exposé on the celebratory New Jersey Israelis, “Enormous pressure was brought to bear by pro-Israeli organizations” — and this pressure began months before the piece was even close to airing.

The source said that ABC News colleagues wondered, “how they [the pro-Israel organizations] found out we were doing the story. Pro-Israeli people were calling the president of ABC News. Barbara Walters was getting bombarded by calls. The story was a hard sell but ABC News came through — the management insulated [reporters] from the pressure”.

The experience of Carl Cameron, chief Washington correspondent at Fox News Channel and the first mainstream US reporter to present the allegations of Israeli surveillance of the 9/11 hijackers, was perhaps more typical, both in its particulars and aftermath.

The attack against Cameron and Fox News was spearheaded by a pro-Israel lobby group called the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA), which operated in tandem with the two most highly visible powerhouse Israel lobbyists, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (itself currently embroiled in a spy scandal connected to the Defense Department and Israeli Embassy).

“CAMERA peppered the shit out of us”, Carl Cameron told me in 2002, referring to an e-mail bombardment that eventually crashed the Fox servers. Cameron himself received 700 pages of almost identical e-mail messages from hundreds of citizens (though he suspected these were spam identities).

CAMERA spokesman Alex Safian later told me that Cameron’s upbringing in Iran, where his father traveled as an archeologist, had rendered the reporter “very sympathetic to the Arab side”. Safian added, “I think Cameron, personally, has a thing about Israel” — coded language implying that Cameron was an anti-Semite. Cameron was outraged at the accusation.

According to a source at Fox News Channel, the president of the ADL, Abraham Foxman, telephoned executives at Fox News’ parent, News Corp., to demand a sit-down in the wake of the Cameron reportage. The source said that Foxman told the News Corp. executives, “Look, you guys have generally been pretty fair to Israel. What are you doing putting this stuff out there? You’re killing us”.

The Fox News source continued, “As good old boys will do over coffee in Manhattan, it was like, well, what can we do about this? Finally, Fox News said, ‘Stop the e-mailing. Stop slamming us. Stop being in our face, and we’ll stop being in your face — by way of taking our story down off the web. We will not retract it; we will not disavow it; we stand by it. But we will at least take it off the web.’”

Following this meeting, within four days of the posting of Cameron’s series on Fox, the transcripts disappeared, replaced by the message, “This story no longer exists”.

What Did Mossad Know and Tell the US?

Whether or not Israeli spies had detailed foreknowledge of the 9/11 attacks, the Israeli authorities knew enough to warn the US government in the summer of 2001 that an attack was on the horizon. The British Sunday Telegraph reported on September 16, 2001, that two senior agents with the Mossad were dispatched to Washington in August 2001 “to alert the CIA and FBI to the existence of a cell of as many as 200 terrorists said to be preparing a big operation”.

The Telegraph quoted a “senior Israeli security official” as saying the Mossad experts had “no specific information about what was being planned”. Still, the official told the Telegraph, the Mossad contacts had “linked the plot to Osama bin Laden”.

Likewise, Die Zeit correspondent Oliver Schröm reported that on August 23, 2001, the Mossad “handed its American counterpart a list of names of terrorists who were staying in the US and were presumably planning to launch an attack in the foreseeable future”.

Fox News’ Carl Cameron, in May 2002, also reported warnings by Israel: “Based on its own intelligence, the Israeli government provided ‘general’ information to the United States in the second week of August that an al-Qaeda attack was imminent”. The US government later claimed these warnings were not specific enough to allow any mitigating action to be taken.

Mossad expert Gordon Thomas, author of Gideon’s Spies, says German intelligence sources told him that as late as August 2001 Israeli spies in the United States had made surveillance contacts with “known supporters of bin Laden in the USA. It was those surveillance contacts that later raised the question: how much prior knowledge did Mossad have and at what stage?”

According to Die Zeit, the Mossad did provide the US government with the names of suspected terrorists Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi, who would eventually hijack the Pentagon plane. It is worth noting that Mihdhar and Hazmi were among the hijackers who operated in close proximity to Israeli “art students” in Hollywood, Florida, and to the Urban Moving Systems Israelis in northern New Jersey.

Moreover, Hazmi and at least three “art students” visited Oklahoma City on almost the same dates, from April 1 through April 4, 2001. On August 24, 2001, a day after the Mossad’s briefing, Mihdhar and Hazmi were placed by the CIA on a terrorist watch list; additionally, it was only after the Mossad warning, as reported by Die Zeit, that the CIA, on August 27, informed the FBI of the presence of the two terrorists. But by then the cell was already in hiding, [allegedly] preparing for attack.

The CIA, along with the 9/11 Commission in its adoption of the CIA story, claims that Mihdhar and Hazmi were placed on the watch list solely due to the agency’s own efforts, with no help from Mossad. Their explanation of how the pair came to be placed on the watch list, however, is far from credible and may have served as a cover story to obscure the Mossad briefing [See accompanying story on page 8 — “The Kuala Lumpur Deceit”].

This brings up the possibility that the CIA may have known about the existence of the alleged Israeli agents and their mission, but sought, naturally, to keep it quiet. A second, more troubling scenario, is that the CIA may have subcontracted to Mossad, given that the agency was both prohibited by law from conducting intelligence operations on US soil, and lacked a pool of competent Arabic-fluent field officers.

In such a scenario, the CIA would either have worked actively with the Israelis or quietly abetted an independent operation on US soil. In his 9/11 investigative book, The Looming Tower, author Lawrence Wright notes that FBI counterterrorism agents, infuriated at the CIA’s failure to fully share information about Mihdhar and Hazmi, speculated that “the agency was shielding Mihdhar and Hazmi because it hoped to recruit them“.

The two al-Qaeda men, Wright notes, “must have seemed like attractive opportunities; however, once they entered the United States they were the province of the FBI…” Wright further observes that the CIA’s reticence to share its information was due to a fear “that prosecutions resulting from specific intelligence might compromise its relationship with foreign services“.

When in the spring of 2002 the scenario of CIA’s domestic subcontracting to foreign intelligence was posed to the veteran CIA/NSA intelligence operative, with whom I spoke extensively, the operative didn’t reject it out of hand. The operative noted that in recent years the CIA’s human intelligence assets, known as “humint” — spooks on the ground who conduct surveillances, make contacts, and infiltrate the enemy — had been “eviscerated” in favor of the NSA’s far less perilous “sigint”, or signals intelligence program, the remote interception of electronic communications.

As a result, “US intelligence finds itself going back to sources that you may not necessarily like to go back to, but are required to”, the veteran intelligence operative said. “We don’t like the fact, but our humint structures are gone. Israeli intel’s humint is as strong as ever. If you have an intel gap, those gaps are not closed overnight. It takes years and years of diligent work, a high degree of security, talented and dedicated people, willing management and a steady hand. It is not a fun business, and it’s certainly not one without its dangers. If you lose that capability, well… organizations find themselves having to make a pact with the devil. The problem [in US intel] is very great”.

If such an understanding did exist between CIA and Mossad with regard to al-Qaeda’s US operatives, the complicity would explain a number of oddities: it would explain the CIA’s nearly incoherent, and perhaps purposely deceptive, reconstruction of events as to how Mihdhar and Hazmi joined the watch list; it might even explain the apparent brazenness of the Israeli New Jersey cell celebrating on the morning of 9/11 (protected under the CIA wing, they were free to behave as they pleased).

It would also explain the assertion in one of the leading Israeli dailies, Yedioth Ahronoth, that in the months prior to 9/11, when the Israeli “art students” were being identified and rounded up, the CIA “actively promoted their expulsion”. The implication in the Yedioth Ahronoth article was that the CIA was simply being careless, not trying to spirit the Israelis safely out of the country. At this point we cannot be certain.

Israeli spying against the US is of course hotly denied by both governments. In 2002, responding to my own questions about the “art students”, Israeli embassy spokesman Mark Regev issued a blanket denial. “Israel does not spy on the United States”, Regev told me.

The pronouncements from officialdom are strictly pro forma, as it is no secret that spying by Israel on the United States has been wide-ranging and unabashed. A 1996 General Accounting Office report, for example, found that Israel “conducts the most aggressive espionage operation against the United States of any US ally”.

More recently, a former intelligence official told the Los Angeles Times in 2004 that “[t]here is a huge, aggressive, ongoing set of Israeli activities directed against the United States”. It is also routine that Israeli spying is ignored or downplayed by the US government (the case of convicted spy Jonathan Pollard, sentenced to life in prison in 1986, is a dramatic exception).

According to the American Prospect, over the last 20 years at least six sealed indictments have been issued against individuals allegedly spying “on Israel’s behalf”, but the cases were resolved “through diplomatic and intelligence channels” rather than a public airing in the courts.

Career Justice Department and intelligence officials who track Israeli espionage told the Prospect of “long-standing frustration among investigators and prosecutors who feel that cases that could have been made successfully against Israeli spies were never brought to trial, or that the investigations were shut down prematurely”.

The Questions That Await Answers

Remarkably, the Urban Moving Systems Israelis, when interrogated by the FBI, explained their motives for “celebration” on the New Jersey waterfront — a celebration that consisted of cheering, smiling, shooting film with still and video cameras and, according to the FBI, “high-fiving” — in the Machiavellian light of geopolitics.

“Their explanation of why they were happy”, FBI spokesman Margolin told me, “was that the United States would now have to commit itself to fighting [Middle East] terrorism, that Americans would have an understanding and empathy for Israel’s circumstances, and that the attacks were ultimately a good thing for Israel”.

When reporters on the morning of 9/11 asked former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu about the effect the attacks would have on Israeli-American relations, he responded with a similar gut analysis: “It’s very good”, he remarked. Then he amended the statement: “Well, not very good, but it will generate immediate sympathy [for Israel from Americans] “.

What is perhaps most damning is that the Israelis’ celebration on the New Jersey waterfront occurred in the first sixteen minutes after the initial crash, when no one was aware this was a terrorist attack. In other words, from the time the first plane hit the north tower, at 8:46 a.m., to the time the second plane hit the south tower, at 9:02 a.m., the overwhelming assumption of news outlets and government officials was that the plane’s impact was simply a terrible accident. It was only after the second plane hit that suspicions were aroused.

Yet if the men were cheering for political reasons, as they reportedly told the FBI, they obviously believed they were witnessing a terrorist act, and not an accident.

After returning safely to Israel in the late autumn of 2001, three of the five New Jersey Israelis spoke on a national talk show that winter. Oded Ellner, who on the afternoon of September 11 had, like his compatriots, protested to arresting officer Sgt. Dennis Rivelli that “we’re Israeli”, admitted to the interviewer: “We are coming from a country that experiences terror daily. Our purpose was to document the event”.

By his own admission, then, Ellner stood on the New Jersey waterfront documenting with film and video a terrorist act before anyone knew it was a terrorist act.

One obvious question among many comes to mind: If these men were trained as professional spies, why did they exhibit such outright oafishness at the moment of truth on the waterfront? The ABC network source close to the 20/20 report noted one of the more disturbing explanations proffered by counterintelligence investigators at the FBI: “The Israelis felt that in some way their intelligence had worked out — i.e., they were celebrating their own acumen and ability as intelligence agents”.

The questions abound: Did the Urban Moving Systems Israelis, ready to “document the event”, arrive at the waterfront before the first plane came in from the north? And if they arrived right after, why did they believe it was a terrorist attack?

What about the strange tale of the “art students”? Could they have been mere hustlers, as they claimed, who ended up repeatedly crossing paths with federal agents and living next door to most of the 9/11 hijackers by coincidence? Did the Israeli authorities find out more about the impending attacks than they shared with their US counterparts? Or did the Israeli spies on the ground only intercept vague chatter that, in their view, did not warrant breaking cover to share the information?

On the other hand, did the US government receive more advance information about the attacks from Israeli authorities than it is willing to admit? What about the 9/11 Commission’s eliding of reported Israeli warnings that may have led to the watch-listing of Mihdhar and Hazmi? Were the Israeli warnings purposely washed from the historical record? Did the CIA know more about pre-9/11 Israeli spying than it has admitted?

The unfortunate fact is that the truth may never be uncovered, not by officialdom, and certainly not by a passive press. James Bamford, who in a coup of reporting during the 1980s revealed the inner workings of the NSA in The Puzzle Palace, points to the “key problem”: “The Israelis were all sent out of the country”, he says.

“There’s no nexus left. The FBI just can’t go knocking on doors in Israel. They need to work with the State Department. They need letters rogatory, where you ask a government of a foreign country to get answers from citizens in that country”. The Israeli government will not likely comply.

So any investigation “is now that much more complicated”, says Bamford. He recalls a story he produced for ABC News concerning two murder suspects — US citizens — who fled to Israel and fought extradition for ten years. “The Israelis did nothing about it until I went to Israel, knocking on doors, and finally found the two suspects. I think it’d be a great idea to go over and knock on their doors”, says Bamford.

The suspects are gone. The trail is cold. Yet many of the key facts and promising leads sit freely on the web, in the archives, safe in the news-morgues at 20/20 and The Forward and Die Zeit.

An investigator close to the matter says it reminds him of the Antonioni film “Blow-Up”, a movie about a photographer who discovers the evidence of a covered-up murder hidden before his very eyes in the frame of an enlarged photograph. It’s a mystery that no one appears eager to solve.

Christopher Ketcham is a freelance journalist who has written for Harper’s and Salon. Many of his writings, including his groundbreaking story on the Israeli art students, can be read on his website:, as can the Shea memo.

‘Ketcham’s Story’

By Alexander Cockburn & Jeffrey St. Clair

Across these ten pages runs a sober, carefully reported narrative by a well-respected reporter, Christopher Ketcham. He’s a journalist whom publications such as Harper’s and have been happy to publish. Indeed, it was in May of 2002 that Salon published a 9,000-word story by Ketcham on the so-called Israeli “art students” whose curious activities before 9/11/2001, around US government offices and in locations in many cases identical to those frequented by the 9/11 hijackers, had been the subject of much speculation.

In the fall of 2005 Ketcham ran across a short report in the Philadelphia Times-Herald about a 166-page memorandum written by a retired corporate lawyer named Gerald Shea. The memo, which Shea sent to the 9/11 Commission and the relevant Senate and House intelligence committees, reviewed all publicly known information about the activities of possible Israeli intelligence operatives working in New Jersey, Florida and elsewhere, and posed the questions: how much had the Mossad learned about the hijackers’ plans; what had they divulged to the agencies of the US government?

These are not questions likely to receive an enthusiastic reception in the US press or in Congress. Shea’s memo, which he sent to many major news outlets, received almost no coverage aside from that tiny story in the Philadelphia Times-Herald (written, it should be noted, by Keith Phucas, who broke the Able Danger story).

After reading Shea’s full memo, Ketcham went back to the leads and sources he’d developed for the earlier piece that he’d done for Salon. By May 2006 he’d completed an 11,000-word report for Salon. One hour before it was due to go up on Salon’s site, the story was killed. The word from inside Salon is that the top editors suddenly decided that there was nothing newsworthy about Ketcham’s report.

Anyone familiar with the verbal smokescreens sent up by a publication killing a story knows well two standard ploys: one is the last-minute assertion, often after weeks of enthusiastic editorial preparation, that “there’s really nothing new here”, that “it’s an old story”. The other is that the facts are so explosive, so fresh, that unusually explicit corroboration is required, demanding the reporter get multiple named sources and so forth.

Salon’s editors obviously decided that an exposé with words like “Israeli spies” and “9/11” in the same headline was just too hot to handle. But in that case why wait to the last minute, after long hours of editorial work preparing the story for publication? They probably didn’t like to admit to themselves that were just not prepared to take heat for the story and that they simply got cold feet.

Ketcham took the story to a number of other magazines and got nowhere. Then, in the late summer of 2006 he took it to the Nation, whose editors said that yes, they wanted the story, but wouldn’t schedule it till after the crush of political coverage in the run-up to the November elections. The target publication date was December 8. At the last minute, the Nation pulled the piece.

When we first read it, we felt — and still feel — somewhat baffled at the difficulty this piece had in getting published. This is a report that deals with substantiated events that demand explanation, starting with the van on the New Jersey shore and the Israelis who were seen cheering as the planes crashed into the towers, and who on the afternoon of 9/11 were arrested following an FBI alert.

It is not as though Ketcham is alone in probing the background and activities of the celebrating Israelis. That has been the topic of a fine piece of investigation published in The Forward in 2002. The Forward’s sensational discoveries were studiously ignored by the press. (“Old story….”, “unsubstantiated”…) Similarly, the saga of the “art students” has been the object of careful investigation and broadcast pieces by Fox News’ Carl Cameron.

Yes, when it comes to Israel and the US press we are familiar with obstructions to raising edgy topics. That’s why we’re glad we have CounterPunch, to welcome good reporters like Ketcham in from the cold.

Pakistani ‘terror’ convict: ‘I have proof Israel masterminded 9/11…big wars are being planned’

Posted in Mossad's 9/11 on September 24, 2010 by The 800 Pound Gorilla

‘Judge throws book at Pakistani plotter’

The New York Post; September 24, 2010

[The following article, written by Bruce Golding for the contemptible Zionist rag The New York Post, is typically laden with half-truths, exaggerations and flagrant bias. Siddiqui’s reported statements about Israel’s central role in the 9/11 attacks, however, are not without relevance — 800]

Reputed al-Qaeda associate Aafia Siddiqui was sentenced to 86 years in prison yesterday for trying to kill American personnel after getting busted in Afghanistan carrying two pounds of poison and plans to attack New York City.

But the MIT-educated neuroscientist — and wife of accused 9/11 plotter Ali Abd al-Aziz Ali — took her punishment in stride, urging her supporters to “forgive everybody in my case, please.”

“This may shock the Muslims, and I don’t mean disrespect . . . but I do love America, too, and there is no harm,” she said during a marathon, three-plus hour hearing in Manhattan federal court.

The 38-year-old, petite Pakistani spouted bizarre theories about how one of her jailers was plotting against America and how terrorists posing as Hispanics could be exposed through DNA testing.

“I have very credible information that I have been desperately trying to give to the FBI, but they won’t let me,” she said during one of several rambling, and disjointed statements.

Siddiqui — who tried to bar jurors with “Zionist or Israeli background” from her trial — repeated her claims that the Jewish state was behind the 9/11 terror attacks.

“I’m not anti-Israel, but, yes, I have said that they masterminded 9/11, and I have proof of that. Now I am saying that there are attacks being planned against America, big wars being planned, and they are involved in it,” she said.

She also repeatedly shook her head, rolled her eyes, waved her index finger and threw her hands up in the air at suggestions that she’s schizophrenic or otherwise unhinged.

“No, I am not mentally sick, schizophrenia. Excuse me. No way on earth,” she said.

Defense lawyer Dawn Cardi urged a sentence of no more than 12 years, insisting that Siddiqui “suffers from diminished capacity, and that is clear.”

“I ask the world to read what she’s written. It is incoherent . . . It is the writing of a woman who is mentally ill,” Cardi said.

Prosecutor Christopher LaVigne urged a maximum life sentence plus 10 years, saying “a catastrophe was averted” when Siddiqui was shot after grabbing an automatic rifle and opening fire inside an Afghan police compound in July 2008.

Judge Richard Berman — who called Siddiqui an “enigma” while reciting a lengthy history of her case — said the need for “significant incarceration” was “completely obvious and, indeed, compelled.”

Socialist agitator Sara Flounders, of the International Action Center, shouted, “Shame! Shame! Shame on this court!” after Berman announced the sentence, then led a band of marchers in chants outside the courthouse.

Angry demonstrations also erupted in Pakistan, where protesters shouted, “Down with America!” and threw shoes at a picture of President Obama, The Associated Press reported.

The above article can be found here:

In Egypt, 9/11 questions linger (not least about the role of Israel)

Posted in Mossad's 9/11 on September 24, 2010 by The 800 Pound Gorilla

Al-Masry Al-Youm (Egypt); September 12, 2010

In the Muslim world, the nine years since the 9/11 attacks in New York City and Washington DC have seen wars waged, populations displaced and regimes changed. This year, the congregation of a Florida church had planned to mark the attacks’ anniversary by publicly burning copies of the Koran, before canceling the event at the last minute following an international outcry.

But in Egypt–as in the US itself–analysts continue to question the official US government account of 9/11, with many increasingly convinced the attacks were an “inside job” intended to justify subsequent US-led wars in Central Asia and the Middle East.

“Evidence to emerge since 9/11 points to a degree of foreknowledge of the attacks among US security agencies–along with others, perhaps–if not downright complicity,” Diaa Rashwan, senior analyst at the semi-official Al-Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies, told Al-Masry Al-Youm.

For one, critics of the official story continue to question how US air defenses–especially in and around the US capital–could have failed so egregiously on the morning of 11 September, 2001. They remain unconvinced by the findings of the official US 9/11 Commission, which, in its seminal 2004 report on the attacks, attributed the massive security failure on that day to a series of unlikely blunders on the part of US federal agencies.

“Until now, this remains the overriding question. Why didn’t the US military make any serious effort to thwart the attacks?” Rashwan asked. “A full hour and a half after the first tower was hit, a civilian plane allegedly managed to fly into the pentagon–the epicenter of American military power–without encountering any resistance whatsoever. This is inconceivable.”

“In nine years, virtually no evidence has been released–photographic or otherwise–that the pentagon was even hit by a plane,” added Rashwan.

Skeptics also point to the strange circumstances surrounding the collapse of the three skyscrapers in New York City–the iconic twin towers along with the 47-story World Trade Center (WTC) 7, which was not even struck by a plane–as further evidence of foul play.

“Numerous respected structural engineers in America have attested to the fact that the twin towers could not possibly have been brought down by the planes alone,” said Rashwan. “WTC 7, meanwhile, fell in such a way that could only have been the result of a controlled demolition.”

Hamdi Hassan, a parliamentary representative for Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood opposition movement, is no less dubious about the US government’s official version of events.

“The collapse of WTC 7 and the absence of any evidence of a plane hitting the pentagon, coupled with the conspicuous lack of any serious investigation into either of these issues, strongly suggest that the official story is a fabrication,” Hassan told Al-Masry Al-Youm.

In August 2008, US federal investigators released a report attributing WTC 7’s collapse to a few scattered fires that had broken out on some floors of the building as a result of falling debris from the nearby towers. While claiming to refute so-called conspiracy theories regarding the collapse of the structure–which fell neatly into its own footprint some eight hours after the twin towers came down–the report nevertheless admits the event represented the first time in history for a steel-reinforced building to collapse due solely to fire.

Critics of the official account of 9/11 also continue to question the role of the elusive Osama Bin Laden–and the “al-Qaeda” terrorist network he is said to lead–in the events of 11 September.

In the immediate wake of the attacks, Bin Laden, in a series of videotaped messages, denied any involvement. But in December 2001, the Pentagon released footage that it said depicted the alleged al-Qaeda leader discussing details of the operation with colleagues in Kandahar. “We calculated in advance the number of casualties… based on the position of the tower,” he says at one point, going on to note that the death toll had surpassed expectations.

Although the video was hailed by the media as definitive proof that Bin Laden–who remains at large until this day–was behind the attacks, many 9/11 skeptics remain unconvinced.

“No Arab or Muslim nation or group has the technical capacity to carry out an attack of such sophistication, which required a level of operational planning only found in the intelligence services of advanced nations,” said Hassan. “The so-called ‘evidence’ implicating Bin Laden and the 19 Arab hijackers, the latter of which included a passport found in the rubble of the WTC and Korans left at airports, is laughable.”

Supporters of the official US government line, for their part, point to a handful of additional video recordings to have emerged in recent years as proof of al-Qaeda’s culpability.

In September 2006, Arabic-language news channel Al Jazeera aired footage–said to have been taken before the attacks–showing Bin Laden in Afghanistan in the company of some of the alleged hijackers, including Ramzi Binalshibh. Otherwise known as the “twentieth hijacker,” Binalshibh was captured by the US in 2002 and is currently being held at Guantanamo Bay.

And in March 2007, Khaled Sheikh Mohammed, a Pakistani al-Qaeda member described by the official 9/11 Commission Report as the “principal architect” of the attacks, pled guilty to masterminding the operation before a US military tribunal. Skeptics, however, question the sincerity of the confession, which was made after four years in captivity–including six months of detention and alleged torture at Guantanamo Bay.

According to Gamal Mazloum, retired major-general and expert on geo-strategy and defense issues, the attacks could not have been executed by the kind of rag-tag guerrillas portrayed in the videotapes. “The 9/11 operation was carried out by people with access to the highest levels of planning, training and technology,” he said, “not a loose group or nebulous organization, but an advanced country.”

Besides a handful of snippets of grainy video footage, said Rashwan, “not a single bit of hard evidence has been produced within the last nine years implicating Bin Laden in the attacks.” Rashwan, an authority on Islamic movements, went on to point out that the behavior of the alleged hijackers–who reportedly drank alcohol and frequented strip-clubs in the days before 9/11–“was not that of Muslims preparing for a martyrdom operation.”

Skeptics further point to the notable absence of any criminal investigation, even though the attacks–which resulted in the death of almost 3000 people–constituted the single biggest mass murder in US history.

“What happened on 9/11 was a criminal act, not a political one, and therefore requires certain legal procedures, such as collection of evidence, questioning of suspects, and a trial before an independent court,” said Rashwan. “But since 9/11, none of this has happened, with the exception of a closed military trial of suspects held at Guantanamo Bay.”

As for motive, say Egyptian critics, this is obvious: the attacks were meant to furnish neo-conservative hawks in the George W. Bush administration with an excuse to invade and occupy energy-rich regions of Central Asia and the Middle East–a view largely borne out by subsequent events.

“9/11 was fabricated to justify the wars on Afghanistan and Iraq,” Mazloum told Al-Masry Al-Youm. “In the years since the attacks, the US has used the ‘al-Qaeda’ threat to build a new world order in which it controls all energy resources and has troops deployed across the globe, particularly in the Middle East and Muslim world.”

A report issued in September, 2000 by the Project for the New American Century, a Washington-based neo-conservative think-tank, explicitly stated that US geopolitical ambitions might be expedited by “some catastrophic and catalyzing event [in the US]–like a new Pearl Harbor.”

According to Rashwan, the 9/11 attacks were “instrumental” in convincing the US public that it was under threat from militant Islam. “They attacked Afghanistan for harboring Bin Laden, and two years later used the same excuse–Saddam Hussein’s alleged links with al-Qaeda–to mobilize public opinion against Iraq,” he said.

Hassan agreed, saying the attacks were intended to incite American sentiment against Islam in advance of a broad military campaign–on multiple fronts–against the Muslim world.

“The Muslim Brotherhood condemned the 9/11 crime the day it happened, and continues to do so,” he said. “Nevertheless, the US government has exploited the event to convince its public that Arabs and Muslims somehow represent a threat.”

Some Egyptian analysts also point to evidence of an Israeli role in the attacks–an issue that has become the subject of fierce debate on numerous internet forums devoted to researching 9/11.

Proponents of an Israeli connection note that five Israelis with intelligence backgrounds were arrested by New York police for “puzzling behavior” after being caught videotaping the first attack on the WTC while “shouting in what was interpreted as cries of joy and mockery,” as reported by Israeli daily Haaretz on 17 September, 2001. Several weeks later, they were quietly sent back to Israel without any explanation from US authorities.

Remarkably, during a subsequent interview on an Israeli television talk show, one of the five men admitted: “Our purpose [in New York City on 9/11] was to document the event.”

A further indication of possible Israeli foreknowledge and/or complicity, say skeptics, is the fact that more than 200 Israeli intelligence operatives–some of whom had reportedly lived next door to the alleged Arab hijackers–were arrested throughout the US in the months before and after the attacks. Although otherwise ignored by the mainstream media, the story was reported by the US Fox television network in a December, 2001 news report.

“The 9/11 tragedy was a conspiracy perpetrated by the Israeli-Zionist entity and its agents in the US,” asserted Hassan. “Israel’s role in the attacks is obvious; there is no lack of evidence.”

He went on to cite reports that Israelis working in the WTC at the time had received advance warning of the attacks, noting that only five Israelis were killed on 9/11 according to official tallies in the Israeli press. In December, 2002, Haaretz reported that employees of an Israeli mobile-phone messaging service “received messages two hours before the twin towers attack on September 11 predicting the attack would happen.”

“From the available evidence, logic dictates that Israel had a role in the event,” concluded Rashwan. “But without a criminal investigation, the nature of this role is impossible to determine.”

Mazloum, too, agreed that an Israeli role in the attacks “can not be ruled out,” noting that the self-proclaimed Jewish state had been “the only strategic beneficiary of 9/11 and the subsequent wars in the region.” What’s more, he added, “Israel has a historical tendency to carry out violent operations on which it can blame its adversaries.”

Mazloum went on to recall the infamous 1954 “Lavon Affair”–named after Israel’s defense minister at the time, Pinhas Lavon–when a number of Egyptian Jews working for Israeli intelligence were caught planting bombs at US and British targets throughout Egypt. Israel, it later emerged, had hoped to blame the bombings on its Egyptian enemies, including the Muslim Brotherhood.

“Israel has always tried to portray Arabs and Muslims–and especially the Palestinians–as terrorists in the eyes of the public, particularly the American public,” Mazloum said.

But while independent groups devoted to what has become known as “9/11 truth” have proliferated in the US and Europe, the issue has received relatively little attention in the Arab Middle East, where, ironically, the political fallout from 9/11 has had the greatest impact.

“Even though the truth of 9/11 would vindicate Arabs and Muslims from the blanket charge of terrorism, Arab governments don’t appear to be interested in the mounting evidence against the official story,” said Mazloum. “They’re only concerned with maintaining their tight grip on power.”

“As for the Arab public, given current economic realities,” he added, “they’re too worried about making ends meet to care.”

The above article can be found here:

Former US senatorial candidate talks Lavon Affair, Israel’s role in 9/11

Posted in Mossad's 9/11 on September 23, 2010 by The 800 Pound Gorilla

Press TV (Iran); September 22, 2010

Engineers and architects supporting the “911 Truth Movement” are requesting US attorney general Eric Holder to request a federal grand jury investigation into the alleged cover up of what took place on September 11, 2001 in Manhattan, New York also known as Ground Zero.

After documentaries and scientific research has probed the alleged so-called terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center, the official story is starting to crumble. Former US Senate candidate Mark Dankof joins Press TV to share his insights on the nature of a potential reinvestigation of the 9/11 events and how he believes that there was Israeli foreknowledge about the incident and explosives in the building explaining the perfect collapse of both buildings.

The following is a transcription of the exclusive interview with Press TV.

PressTV: Now for more on that story we are joined by former US Senate candidate Mark Dankof. Thank you very much for joining our broadcast. Now those who question the official take on 9/11 are labeled conspiracy theorists not only by Americans but by many across the globe and including those in Muslim countries. Can this be attributed to the power of US media or that a plan so evil could have been masterminded by none other than those who are blamed?

Dankof: Well, I think to really understand this you have to go back to what happened several generations ago during the Kennedy assassination. In the beginning, of course, the American government produced the so-called “Warren Commission” which indicated that the president was killed by one person firing three shots from a sixth floor window in a Texas school book depository.

Lee Harvey Oswald, we were told, acted alone; he was not a part of a conspiracy. However, that all began to unravel through the 1960s as several people including Mark Lane produced some very disquieting information in regards to discrepancies in what had been said by the Parkland hospital doctors in Dallas and what was said by the military physicians who attended the president’s autopsy at the naval hospital in Maryland.

All of those questions began to raise even further questions about the scientific veracity of the official story of what happened to Kennedy, and that of course, was quickly followed by those who became convinced that the truth had not been told, and they began to look for other explanations in regards to who was behind the president’s death. I kind of see that same thing emerging with 9/11 as well.

To me, yes there are conspiracy theories that are crazy, there are also conspiracy theories that are legitimate ones and are based upon very solid data that has not been refuted by the official version of things even related in this case to the Kennedy assassination or to 9/11.

I find it particularly interesting that just in the last couple of days, someone sent me something via email here in San Antonio indicating that the President of the American Jewish congress was issuing a statement decrying extremists who believed that the 9/11 version of events provided by the US government is in fact false and that these extremists were in fact acting out of malice and out of unsound mind.

That is not a direct quote but is basically the idea that was being conveyed. This is the same sort of thing that we saw in the 1960s and early 70s with the Kennedy assassination. I anticipate that we are going to get more of the same when it comes to 9/11.

Press TV: Soon after 9/11, the question of how the towers could fall the way they did as well as the collapse of building seven were brought up by many. Yet this was ignored… do you think that support of architects and engineers from 9/11 “Truth Movement” with regards to this question gives rise to a much more needed discussion on this?

Dankof: Well, it certainly should. If people go to my website: “Mark Dankof’s America at and go to my links page there, they will see that I have that website linked to the so-called engineers and architects for 9/11 Truth.

This is one of the things that I found to be most profoundly disturbing; when I started looking at some of the scientific credentials of some of the people that were a part of this organization… I mean after all we are talking about numbers of people with PhDs. in physics who have provided explanations to us as to why the official story simply could not have happened in the way that the US government said it happened.

I’m satisfied frankly after reading the work of Dr. Steven Jones, the former professor of Brigham Young University and a number of other people connected with this “9/11 Truth Organization,” that in fact these towers were brought down by a controlled explosion.

This of course suggests or in effect necessitates those charges had to be planted in those buildings. That raises the question by whom and why? That in conjunction with some very mysterious things which came to light as early as 2002 in French magazine Le Monde underscored to me that “Israeli intelligence” had more than a passing involvement in at least having foreknowledge about what was going to happen on September 11.

There are those who believe that Israeli intelligence might have had a more active role in at least directing some of what was going on through potential Mossad moles inside the Al-Qaeda organization.

I don’t have inside information on that but I found it to be significant that in February 2009 the New York Times ran a story that a fellow in Lebanon, Ali al-Jared, had been arrested as an Israeli spy. He had worked apparently for the Israeli Mossad for 25 years. He had posed very successfully as an activist for the Palestinians and Hamas and for Hezbollah only to have it revealed a quarter of a century later that he was in the employ of the Israeli Mossad the whole time.

And in that New York Times exposé of February 2009 they admitted that Ali al-Jared had a cousin, a second cousin named Ziad al-Jared, who in fact was one of the 9/11 hijackers.

[For more on this, see NYT: Israeli spy in Lebanon is cousin of alleged 9/11 hijacker‘ here:]

This does not prove of course that Ziad al-Jared himself had any connection to the Israeli Mossad but I think we can look and establish firmly and factually that there were at least five Israeli Mossad agents who had Muhammad Atta under surveillance for a significant period of time before the 9/11 attacks. They lived just down the street from him in Hollywood, Florida.

Then of course this drug administration agency official in the US who released information to the French magazine Le Monde in early 2002 did so because he was absolutely convinced that the American government was fully covering up the event of Israel’s foreknowledge of the attacks, and that basically the Israeli intelligence community allowed this whole thing to transpire at a bare minimum.

Press TV: Let’s get this last question in briefly if I may. The US National Security Strategy essentially calls for a New World Order with US dominance secure in every aspect. Now why aren’t the Americans willing to question why Bin Laden has not been caught yet? And why al-Qaeda, the Taliban, etc are blamed for all the woes of the world?

Dankof: Well, that’s a very compelling question. We might ask the same question in regards to why the American public has never had the full details of the Jonathan Pollard spy case explained to them, or has never had Israel‘s direct involvement in attacking the USS Liberty in June of 1967, and killing 34 Americans explained to them.

The average American knows nothing about the “Lavon Affair” where it has been very firmly established factually in 1954 that Pinhas Lavon, the then Foreign Minister of Israel directed a black operational “national security” operation in conjunction with Israeli intelligence that was designed and in fact did set off explosives at post offices in Egypt and set off explosives at American libraries in Cairo and in Alexandria with the expressed purpose of blaming Egypt for something which in effect was an Israeli operation in order that the United States might launch a military operation against Egypt for retaliations.

This is absolutely factual and your listeners can check this out on the net. It’s called the “Lavon Affair” and it’s absolutely suggestive of what could have taken place all these years later when we get to September 11, 2001.

The above article can be found here:

For some excellent interviews featuring Mark Dankof and hosted by Mark Glen, see “The Ugly Truth” here:

Nasrallah: Israel behind 2005 assassination of Lebanese PM Rafiq Hariri

Posted in Mossad's 9/11 on August 5, 2010 by The 800 Pound Gorilla

AFP (France)

August 3, 2010

BEIRUT– Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah on Tuesday openly accused Israel of the 2005 assassination of ex-premier Rafiq Hariri and said he would unveil proof to that effect at a news conference next week.

“I accuse the Israeli enemy of the assassination of (former) Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri and… I will prove this by unveiling sensitive information at a press conference on Monday,” Nasrallah said in a speech transmitted via video link.

The Shiite leader said he would present concrete and audiovisual evidence showing that Israeli agents had worked to exploit his Iranian-backed party’s “political rivalry” with Hariri, a Sunni Muslim who was close to Saudi Arabia, in an attempt to pin the murder on Hezbollah.

He did not give further details.

Nasrallah in July had revealed he was aware the UN-backed tribunal probing the Hariri murder was likely to indict members of his militant party, slamming the court as biased and part of an Israeli plot.

His statements sparked fears of an outbreak of violence in already tense Lebanon and prompted a landmark summit in Beirut last week between Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, Saudi King Abdullah and Lebanese leaders.

Hariri and 22 others were killed in a massive bombing on the Beirut seafront on February 14, 2005.

The assassination sparked an international outcry and led to the withdrawal of Syrian troops from Lebanon after a 29-year presence [making Israel, if you think about it, the ultimate beneficiary of the assassination — 800].

The Hariri murder has been widely blamed on Syria, a main backer of Hezbollah along with Iran.

Damascus has consistently denied involvement.

Nasrallah’s pre-scheduled speech on Tuesday came hours after clashes between the Lebanese and Israeli armies killed two Lebanese soldiers, a Lebanese journalist, and an Israeli commander.

The speech was initially intended to mark the four-year anniversary of the end of the 2006 war between his militant party and Israel.

The 34-day war ended on August 14 but Nasrallah was speaking ahead of the anniversary date because of the start of the holy fasting month of Ramadan next week.

The above article can be found at:

Hezbollah’s Nasrallah accuses Israel of 2005 killing of Lebanon’s Hariri

Bloomberg; August 3, 2010

Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah accused Israel of the 2005 assassination of former Lebanese leader Rafiq Hariri and urged UN investigators to consider Israeli involvement.

Nasrallah, addressing thousands of Hezbollah supporters in Beirut via a closed video link, said that he would present “evidence and figures” about Israel’s alleged involvement on Aug. 9.

Nasrallah has said that Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri, son of the late leader, has told him that members of the Shiite movement might be indicted by a United Nations tribunal in the killing. An initial United Nations investigation charged four senior pro-Syrian Lebanese security officials of masterminding the murder [without ever providing any proof of the allegations whatsoever — 800]

Syria and its Lebanese allies, including Hezbollah, have denied any role in the killing, which sparked a wave of protests in Beirut that led to the withdrawal of Syrian troops from the country after a 29-year presence.

The US and Israel list Hezbollah as a terrorist organization. The group has representatives in the Lebanese government and parliament.

Hariri and more than 20 other people were killed with more than 1 ton of explosives as his motorcade passed by Beirut’s seafront on Feb. 14.

The above article can be found at:

Nasrallah accuses Israel over Hariri murder

BBC (UK); August 3, 2010

The leader of the Lebanese militant group Hezbollah has accused Israel of being behind the 2005 assassination of former Lebanese PM Rafik Hariri.

In a fiery speech, Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah said he would prove the claim at a press conference next week.

The BBC’s Jon Leyne says Mr Nasrallah is trying to pre-empt a UN report due to implicate Hezbollah in the killing.

Mr Nasrallah was speaking hours after a firefight on the Lebanon-Israeli border left five people dead.

Referring to the rare exchange of fire, he said his forces were ready to join the fighting.

Mr Hariri and 22 other people were killed in Beirut in a car bomb in 2005.

In his address — broadcast to a huge crowd in Beirut via video-link — the Shia leader said he would prove that Israeli agents had exploited Hezbollah’s “political rivalry” with Mr Hariri, a Sunni Muslim. He did not give any further details.

“I accuse the Israeli enemy of the assassination of (former) Prime Minister Rafik Hariri and… I will prove this by unveiling sensitive information at a press conference on Monday,” he said.

Our correspondent says it is the first time Mr Nasrallah has accused Israel of being behind the assassination.

Israel has rejected the allegation, saying Hezbollah was to blame.

“Nasrallah is under heavy pressure,” said Israeli Intelligence Minister Dan Meridor, “because of the coming allegations that he or his people (Hezbollah) did kill Rafik al-Hariri, the former prime minister of Lebanon…They may try to divert the attention to another incident.”

In July the Hezbollah leader said he was aware that a UN-backed tribunal investigating Mr Hariri’s murder was likely to indict members of his party.

He alleged that the court was biased and part of a US and Israeli conspiracy.

Mr Nasrallah’s speech was arranged to mark the fourth anniversary of the end of the 2006 war between Hezbollah and Israel.

The above article can be found here: