Dr. Kevin Barrett, a Ph.D. Arabist-Islamologist, is one of America’s best-known critics of the War on Terror.

He is Host of TRUTH JIHAD RADIO; a hard driving weekly LIVE call in radio show. He also has appeared many times on Fox, CNN, PBS and other broadcast outlets, and has inspired feature stories and op-eds in the New York Times, the Christian Science Monitor, the Chicago Tribune, and other leading publications.

Dr. Barrett has taught at colleges and universities in San Francisco, Paris, and Wisconsin, where he ran for Congress in 2008. He currently works as a nonprofit organizer, author, and talk radio host.


View Latest Posts >>>

“Al-Qaeda,” “9/11 Truth”: Case Studies in Controlled Opposition

Anyone who accepts the official version of this event obviously has lost the ability to tell bad TV fiction from reality.

 

by Kevin Barrett, TruthJihad.com

 

It is now vastly easier to kill a million people than to control them. That, at least, is the view of Dr. Zbigniew Brezezinski, the leading political science practitioner of our time.

Most people are basically sheep who look to their leaders, and the rest of the flock, for guidance. So why is it so hard to control them?

The problem is what political scientists call “the rise of counter-elites.” Not all people are 100% subservient; some harbor aspirations for leadership. When status-quo leaders take the flock in a direction that serves their own interest, not the flock’s –

…say, by sending the flock off a cliff so the leaders will have the meadow to themselves – the stronger and smarter members of the flock will start bleating, “Hey sheeple! They’re running you off a cliff! Follow us instead!”

Did He Spawn the Patriot Act ?

How do status-quo leaders respond to this age-old problem?

One of their most effective techniques is to create, lead, or manipulate the opposition.

In Orwell’s 1984, for example, we learn that opposition leader Emmanuel Goldstein, or at least his book, is the creation of the Party elite.

It is my contention that the element of Western leadership behind the 9/11 false-flag attacks has also been trying to control its opposition, with mixed success.

Both al-Qaeda and the 9/11 truth movement – perhaps the two groups that most radically oppose the neocon-Zionist element of Western leadership that staged 9/11 and subsequent false-flag attacks – have been manipulated.

 

Elite manipulation of al-Qaeda has been more thoroughgoing and successful than efforts to manipulate and control the 9/11 truth movement. The reason is obvious:

al-Qaeda operates in a much more opaque information environment than the truth movement does. When a statement or action is attributed to al-Qaeda, it is almost impossible to verify who is really behind it. (Real al-Qaeda fighters and propagandists cannot operate openly and transparently, for if they do, they will quickly be killed or kidnapped and tortured.)

The result is that “al-Qaeda” has become a reality TV show largely controlled by those in charge of the mainstream media and their “official sources” – such as Mossad’s “terror experts” at the SITE Intelligence Group, which is basically a low-budget Hollywood studio selling fictitious terror scripts.

Al Qaeda, the Situation Comedy:

9/11 Conspiracy Theories ‘Ridiculous,’ Al Qaeda Says: http://www.theonion.com/video/911-conspiracy-theories-ridiculous-al-qaeda-says,14222/

Bad parody of The Onion, courtesy of the mainstream media: http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/al-qaeda-iran-ahmadinejad-stop-spreading-911-conspiracy/story?id=14620643

 

The Fat bin Laden

For those unconvinced that al-Qaeda is a neocon-Zionist-sponsored reality TV show, consider two examples: The “Fatty Bin Laden smoking-gun confession video” that supposedly implicates Bin Laden in 9/11; and the alleged killing of Bin Laden last spring.

According to Duke University professor Bruce Lawrence, one of America’s top Bin Laden experts, the Fatty Bin Laden alleged confession video is “bogus.” Not only that, he says, but the US cops, officers and spies tasked with hunting down Bin Laden know the “confession video” is bogus.

Then why is Bin Laden is being falsely blamed for 9/11? Because, Dr. Lawrence opines, that false story is convenient for certain elements of the US and world elites; asking the question “if not Bin Laden, who?” opens Pandora’s box.

(Listen to Bruce Lawrence: http://www.radiodujour.com/people/lawrence_bruce/ )

So where did the fabricated “confession video” come from? The official story is that some unnamed US soldier stumbled upon it in a house in Jalalabad. Why haven’t we seen this soldier on TV, or even heard his name? Why does the US government and media pretend the video is genuine, even though every informed person on earth, including everyone involved with studying or tracking Bin Laden, knows it is bogus?

To ask the question is to answer it: The “smoking gun confession video” is a fabrication created by the real perpetrators of 9/11 to cast blame on their chosen patsy. It is part of the Al Qaeda reality TV show.

Walter Cronkite - The Man America Trusted Most

There have been many moments of darkly hilarious absurdity on the Al Qaeda reality TV show.

One came in 2004, when a suddenly non-religious “Bin Laden” did a pseudo-endorsement of John Kerry for the benefit of Bush, right before the election – and Walter Cronkite blurted out that it was probably produced by Karl Rove!

A even more ludicrous episode aired in 2008, when a skinny little guy with a jet-black beard who didn’t look remotely like the real Bin Laden, much less Fatty Bin Laden or the many other versions, appeared on television spouting al-Qaeda platitudes.

But the height of absurdity was reached last spring, when Part One of “Al-Qaeda: The Reality Show” closed with the supposed killing of Bin Laden. If OBL were a terrorist mastermind, would they really hunt him down and kill him, rather than capturing him to extract information?

Would they immediately dump his body in the sea, before it could be identified by independent experts? Would they grotesquely blame “Islamic custom” for the sea burial?

Would they put out conflicting stories about whether the killing was watched live in the Oval Office, whether Bin Laden used his wife as a human shield, whether he fought back, whether he was armed, and so on?

And would the Navy Seal team credited with the operation suddenly find itself being shot down in a helicopter over Afghanistan? Anyone who accepts the official version of this event obviously has lost the ability to tell bad TV fiction from reality.

“Osama Bin Laden” watches himself starring in “Al-Qaeda: The Reality TV Show” (video courtesy of US military?)

bin Laden the Slender

How did an eloquent spokesperson for the Islamic world, Osama Bin Laden, turn into a cartoon character on a neocon-Zionist-scripted reality TV show?

The grievances the real Bin Laden aired so beautifully are very real.

And so are the strategic goals he espoused – return to indigenous Islamic legal systems, development of a pan-Islamic military deterrent to future genocidal attacks on Muslims, overthrow of Western-puppet Arab leaders AND the artificial nation-states they lead.

You can include merging the Muslim-majority nations into a re-united Caliphate or Umma that could defend itself and control its own resources – are the goals of the vast majority of Muslims everywhere.

And that, for the Zionist-neocon element of Western leadership, was the problem. The ideas espoused by Bin Laden are those of the whole Islamic world.

The “Islamic wave” threatened to keep rising until it achieved its goals – at which point both Israel and Western control of Muslim oil would be consigned to the proverbial garbage bin of history.

Because al-Qaeda was forced to operate in an opaque information environment, it was easily infiltrated and manipulated. The neocon-Zionist elite’s goal was to negatively brand al-Qaeda, and to use that negativity to smear the pan-Islamic projects it (and the majority of Muslims) supports.

And the easiest way to smear al-Qaeda was to make it appear responsible for reprehensible attacks on civilians. Muslims, even more than non-Muslims, oppose attacking non-combatants.

So by staging “al-Qaeda” attacks on innocent people, the enemies of al-Qaeda could ruin the group’s image among Muslims – and win support in the non-Muslim West for a war on Islam, a war whose real aim was to stop the Islamic wave from cresting and washing away the Zionism and imperialism-colonialism that continues to hobble the Muslim world.

WTC Building Seven - Waiting for Its Time

The establishment of a controlled-opposition version of al-Qaeda as the bad guys in a neocon-Zionist reality TV show was largely successful.

But the biggest mass slaughter attributed to al-Qaeda – the demolition of the World Trade Center – experienced some t-t-t-technical d-d-d-difficulties when World Trade Center Building 7 refused to come down on cue, and had to be demolished in broad daylight in front of cameras almost seven-and-a-half hours behind schedule.

This was the equivalent of allowing the audience watching the horror movie to see the string attached to the monster’s jaws.

The botched false-flag op on 9/11/2001 created a new kind of radical opposition: The 9/11 truth movement. This group would prove harder to manipulate than al-Qaeda. The 9/11 truth movement operates openly.

Every real member of the movement uses his or her real name and acts in the glare of total transparency.

Those who hide behind pseudonyms, or equivocate about their real identities or views, are gradually washed out of the movement as dross, due to the free competition in the information market offered by the transparent arena of digital communications combined with face-to-face meetings at talks and conferences.

The result is that authentic truther sites like VeteransToday.com, whatreallyhappened.com, AE911truth.org, pilotsfor911truth.org, LegitGov.org, AmericanFreedomRadio.com, Rense.com, and PrisonPlanet.com have built or are building sizable audiences, while infiltrated sites like 911blogger.com and disinfo sites like TruthAction.org and OilEmpire.us start flashy but then steadily lose traffic.

The latter three sites generally protect the neocon-Zionist orchestrators of 9/11; and the latter two are best viewed as completely-controlled disinfo sites, or “wreckers” as Webster Tarpley has called them.

And while it was fairly easy to sell the idea that al-Qaeda is a threat, and find people to work against it, the same is less true of the 9/11 truth movement.

Most people in the police and armed services are genuine American patriots, and while they may be motivated to exert themselves against “foreign terrorists,” they are much less willing to fight nonviolent activists working to expose an act of high treason, and thereby save the nation and its Constitution.

Cass Sunstein - Ruler of the Rules

As Cass Sunstein noted in his mendacious diatribe against 9/11 truth – one of the most pathetic excuses for a scholarly paper ever published – there is a danger that those assigned to undermining “conspiracy theorists” will become conspiracy theorists themselves.

This danger is proportional to the availability of evidence that the “conspiracy theorists” are right – and in the case of 9/11, that evidence is more than available, it is the elephant in the living room.

Since hardly anybody but committed Zionists wants to bash 9/11 truth, at least once they’ve looked into it, the result is that most of the concerted attacks on 9/11 truth have come from Zionist sources: Mossadniks like Jonathan Kay and his pal Michael Ross, Zionist neoliberals like Cass Sunstein, neocon extremists like Philip Zelikow and Benjamin Chertoff, and Israeli front groups like the ADL and the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Today, the 9/11 truth movement is a much greater threat to the NWO finance empire and its neocon-zionist controllers than al-Qaeda ever was. Attempts to plant forces of controlled opposition have apparently met with mixed success.

Many truth movement members have fallen into the trap of endlessly bickering with each other on the internet, rather than launching initiatives to help educate the general public. Some of that bickering is coming from controlled opposition. Its goal is to slow the movement, distract it, and above all, discourage its members.

Other forces of controlled opposition push limited hangouts, whose bottom line is: Keep blaming the Muslims! People who try to prevent the truth movement from naming and shaming the neocon-Zionist perpetrators are working for a limited hangout that will allow the war on Islam to continue.

People who keep the door open for a LIHOP (let it happen on purpose) interpretation work for the same goal. People who distract us from clear evidence that there were no Arab hijackers and no plane hijackings (with the possible exception of remote-control “hijackings”) likewise are working to help sustain the 9/11-sparked war on Islam.

Brzezinski - ' An Era of Extreme Populism '

And people who try to blame Saudis and Pakistanis rather than the real perpetrators – Israelis and their American agents – are pushing “blame the victim” to its absurd extreme.

Despite the smokescreen of lies and half-truths emitted by the controlled opposition elements of the 9/11 truth movement, the trend is unstoppable: More and more people are waking up to more and more truth.

As Brzezinski says, we are in the era of “extreme populism” brought on by the digital communications revolution. (“Populist extremism,” of course, just means that the people are waking up to how badly they’ve been screwed, and are fighting mad.)

Will the elite give up trying to control us, and just kill us off by the millions – or even the billions? Or will the flock get smart enough to see through controlled opposition, shake off the whole leadership structure, and mutate from sheeple into actual human beings?

Your choices will help provide the answer.   …. Kevin



The views expressed herein are the views of the author exclusively and not necessarily the views of VT, VT authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners, technicians, or the Veterans Today Network and its assigns. LEGAL NOTICE - COMMENT POLICY

Posted by on September 29, 2011, With Reads Filed under Of Interest. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

33 Responses to "“Al-Qaeda,” “9/11 Truth”: Case Studies in Controlled Opposition"

  1. DaveE  October 1, 2011 at 5:00 pm

    Sorry, Nelson’s right on, here. Jones’ investigation was as rock-solid as any that have ever been performed on the residue of the Towers. If you don’t agree, you got a LOT of work ahead to come up with something better.

  2. Nelson_2008  September 30, 2011 at 5:23 pm

    I can see that you’re not stupid. That you would imply as you did that the evidence for nanothermite is on a par with that for DEW therefore proves to me that you’re being dishonest.

    And I simply don’t have any patience left for dishonest “people”, especially when it comes to the mass murders of 9/11/2001 and the ruinous path the perps have subsequently put us on.

  3. Edward Rynearson  September 30, 2011 at 4:33 pm

    Kevin’s radio archive page @ http://www.americanfreedomradio.com/Barrett_11.html

    I always learn something.

  4. Edward Rynearson  September 30, 2011 at 4:25 pm

    Kevin Barrett, Dimitri Khalezov and Gordon Duff (audio)

    February 17, 2011

    Kevin Barrett speaks with intelligence community whistleblower Dmitri Khalezov and Veterans Today editor Gordon Duff. They discuss whether an infamous Mossad agent named Mike Harari brag of organizing 9/11? Dmitri Khalezov, author of The Third Truth About 9/11, was arrested in Thailand along with Mike Harari. Khalezov says Harari was his friend at the time of 9/11, invited him to a party on 9/12/01 celebrating the successful operation, and subsequently let it be known, in so many words, that he, Harari, was an organizer of the 9/11 false-flag event. Gordon Duff, editor of Veterans Today, knows the intelligence community well and says Khalezov should be taken seriously as a potential witness in the 9/11 mass murder case.

    http://eddieleaks.org/barrett-khalezov-duff/

  5. Nelson_2008  September 30, 2011 at 4:07 pm

    Then you should have no problem getting off your fat, lazy ass and publishing a peer reviewed paper refuting their conclusions, no?

    BTW, I watched them ignite a small piece of the material. And that proves it for me beyond any reasonable doubt. The stuff is energetic and carries it’s own oxygen. It’s thermite. And all the hand-waving and name-calling you Jews want to do won’t change that.

  6. Kevin Barrett  September 30, 2011 at 1:34 pm

    Gordon, I agree that class differentiation is the big problem. The rich elite is made up of secularists and pseudo-pious hypocrites, while the relatively poor majority are mostly pious Muslims. Islamic activists are the only people concerned about, helping take care of, or organizing the poor. So populist demands are “Islamic.” This makes sense, since the Qur’an excoriates the accumulation of wealth. See Surat at-Takathur for the short version. The Islamic ethic of taking care of ones family and neighbors, not accumulating too much, giving away whatever one accumulates but doesn’t really need, and demanding social justice would, if applied, solve this problem. And the prohibition of any form of lending at interest, a ban on corporations (except in the form of free associations of individuals who remain fully liable), and the zakat flat tax on all income AND wealth above minimal needs would also help. What I’m saying is the whole Islamic world needs an Islamic revolution sort of like Iran’s, but much more radical in terms of demanding economic justice and the full implementation of Islam. The people you hang out with in the Middle East, I’m sorry to say, are the parasites and hypocrites who need to be overthrown by this revolution.

  7. Kevin Barrett  September 30, 2011 at 5:57 am

    Gordon, I agree that al-Qaeda was created to negatively brand Muslims. Its roots go back to Bernard Lewis’s obsession with the Ismaili Assassins. Lewis’s article in the Netanyahu-edited “Terrorism: How the West Can Win” subtly argues for the creation of an “Islamic extremist” group modeled on the Assassins in order to divide, conquer, and negatively brand the Islamic resurgence. But you exaggerate the tribal divisions in the Islamic world, and ignore the rising trend towards Islamic unity, which is the product of modern communications. Today, it’s easy for every educated Muslim in the world to learn Standard Arabic, watch “ash-Sharia w’al-hayaa” on al-Jazeera, and see ourselves as members of the One Muslim Nation that we all admit we are supposed to be. This is precisely what terrified the likes of Lewis into creating the War on Islam, whose purpose is to pre-empt the rise of a modern, unified ummah.

    Americans have all sorts of divisions, ethnic, religious and ideological, yet have managed to unite into one nation. Muslims have a common language (standard Arabic), an increasingly common culture, plus the aspiration to unite, as reflected by the poll I cited.

    Ibram, I’m not sure I’d approve of Saudi “re-education” of “extremists.” It seems to me that Saudi Arabia needs a revolution even more than the US does, and many of the people being called “extremists” are actually the good guys.

    • Gordon Duff  September 30, 2011 at 7:21 am

      Kevin
      You and I both travel in the Islamic world, one of haves and have-nots.

      I spend the majority of my time either with military and government officials, media folks or academics..

      and the invisible army of people who guard them, clean their homes, shop for their food, serve tea…

      there is no such thing as a pan-islamic movement when class differentiation is so enduring

      i don’t know where to begin when discussing saudi arabia. too many of my friends work there.

      g

  8. Ibram  September 30, 2011 at 12:21 am

    Kevin,
    There are violent extremists who actually do carry out terrorist attacks against fellow Muslims and non-Muslims, in the name of their own ‘brand’ of faith. This is an actual threat which has been around for a long, long time. “I am holier than thou, you are no better than infidels and I have the right to spill your blood etc.”, and anyone who disagrees with them gets the chop.

    What the west does not know/chooses to ignore is the steps taken by the authorities in said Muslim countries to combat this distorted teaching, re-educating them and bringing them back into society. You should do a piece on this, e.g. look at the Saudi and Malaysian examples.

    None of this rendition, torture and Gitmo crap. That never works, it just produces more people pissed off with America.

  9. Ibram  September 29, 2011 at 11:49 pm

    God bless you akhi Kevin!

  10. Archer  September 29, 2011 at 9:40 pm

    How about we all just agree that everyone is PsyOps – but some are more PsyOps than others.

    PWS, based on his IQ but not his EQ – is more PsyOps than all others combined, rendering himself beyond invisible 🙂

    Maybe then we can move on to the next station.

    Somedays it’s a clownshow folks – not here, but everywhere.

    Not a bug but a feature, right?

    Thanks for the excellent article – eyes opening wider every day.

  11. reamonnk  September 29, 2011 at 8:25 pm

    Testing….

  12. hareli  September 29, 2011 at 2:40 pm

    Kevin, thanks for writing a piece I can hand to a non-believer.

  13. Nelson_2008  September 29, 2011 at 2:32 pm

    You have to distinguish between people that are just wrong or misguided, and people who are knowingly working against you, and it’s not always easy.

    IOW, just because there is an obvious “controlled opposition” working against us doesn’t mean there’s no such thing anymore as an occassional bad call by an otherwise reasonable person. For example I agree with you that Alex Jones is a fraud – a Zionist sympathizer or something, yes, yet I know some honest but somewhat ignorant people that would probably disagree.

    In any case, as far as Veterans Today is concerned, I admit I’m baffled by what I see going on here sometimes. However, as far as I know, most comments are allowed, even comments that go against the author’s viewpoint, and on that basis alone I have to disagree with you. Veterans Today may host some opinion pieces I strongly disagree with, but if they were a controlled or infiltrated site like 911blogger, we would have no say here whatsoever, so I don’t think you can justifiably impugn their motives.

    • reamonnk  September 29, 2011 at 8:41 pm

      Yeah, good point. I can pretty much post what I want here. For a “controlled site”, it doesn’t seem to be attempting to control it’s readers opinions . The only time I have gotten into hot water here is when I “go after” a VT writer or question VT’s integrity. Otherwise I go completely unmolested. Things are written all of the time on this site that I disagree with… but that’s life.

      It’s nearly impossible to agree with someone 100% of the time.

    • DaveE  September 30, 2011 at 12:34 pm

      Well put. I haven’t seen anything on VT defending the zionists, at most all I’ve seen are some hare-brained theories on what they may have done or may be doing.

      Arguing over how the deed was done is not the same as casting false aspersions. Arguing about details is counterproductive, but no-one here has shown any significant evidence that the zionists were NOT behind 9/11.

  14. Nelson_2008  September 29, 2011 at 2:07 pm

    Steve Jones is part of the “controlled opposition”? That’s pure nonsense.

    “You criticize Fetzer for a lack of scientific rigor in his asserting DEW as a primary cause of the disappearance of the Twin Towers in lower Manhattan, yet, the same slack analysis is true of Jones and his crew in their insistence of the primacy of nanothermite in the dastardly event.”

    Bullshit. The evidence for nanothermite is solid, whereas the evidence for DEW is nonexistent (as would be expected, based on the fact that no such DEW exist, nor will they anytime soon). And the issue whether or not nanothermite was “oversold” or not is a moot point, since nobody is excluding the possibility that conventional explosives were used along with the nanothermite.

    • Nelson_2008  September 29, 2011 at 4:59 pm

      Jones isn’t “playing” anybody. He may be a little eccentric, yes, and as a human being he’s not perfect (none of us are), but he’s honest, he’s courageous, he’s patriotic, and he found thermite where it shouldn’t have been found.

      Moreover, Jones et al. even published their findings in a peer reviewed journal, and their paper has not been refuted. Being an engineer myself, and having some chemistry experience (including pyrotechnics), I agree with their conclusion that nanothermite was used (with or without conventional explosives).

      You disagree? Then let’s hear your compelling counter-argument and let’s see your peer reviewed paper refuting theirs.

      For you to compare the situation with “nanothermite” to that of Judy Wood’s baseless, uninformed speculation regarding “directed energy weapons” indicates that you’re either being dishonest, or that you’re just a simple-minded imbecile.

    • Paul  September 29, 2011 at 10:08 pm

      While I am in agreement Jone’s findings, I also think that there may be something to Judy Wood’s assertion that directed energy weapons may have bee used also. It would seem for that to happen the weapon was either airborne or fired from a platform in low Earth orbit. But they missed with the first shot. An area away from the WTC wass noable in the amount of vehicles that were partially or completely toasted. Pix and vids are on-line. It might also go a long way to helping to describe this new thing of “Nuclear-binding” or rather, the unraveling of. The video of the inner core of one of the towers ,that survived the collapse up to about the 60th floor level, showing standing steel turning to dust has yet to be adequately explained. Wood’s theory might go a long way to doing just that. The debate wont be over until the money speaks up.

    • Nelson_2008  September 30, 2011 at 6:25 am

      As I’ve endeavored to point out: There are no “directed energy weapons” in existence that would have ANYWHERE NEAR the capabilities that Judy Wood and her followers imply. Moreover, there will probably never be any such weapons, EVER.

      TO DATE EVERY PROGRAM THEY EVER STARTED HAS FAILED TO DELIVER A VIABLE LASER WEAPON. EVERY SINGLE ONE. Do you understand that? And the goals of these failed DEW development programs were far, far, far more modest than what this technically illiterate Judy Wood cult is proposing.

      They can’t even field a viable megawatt class laser let alone hundreds of megawatts. And then make it covert? Assuming none of the other fundamental problems exist, how would you even power something outputting hundreds of megawatts? Does the plane flying around with this hundred megawatt laser have its own hydroelectric power plant, too?

      Even if such weapons did exist, the destruction of the WTC towers DOES NOT LOOK LIKE ANY KIND OF BEAM-TARGET INTERACTION. Do you understand that? How does a beam hit all four sides of a building at once? How does the beam not get blocked by the clouds of smoke and dust it would create? How do you propagate through the atmosphere a beam so intense that it would ionize the air creating a plasma that would disperse the beam?

      Lastly, if they had such weapons, they wouldn’t have needed 9/11 in the first place since they would already control the world.

      Will you morons shut-up about this nonsense already?

    • Jim Fetzer  September 30, 2011 at 1:47 pm

      Nelson_2008, Where have you been? Have you read “Is ‘9/11 Truth’ based upon a false theory?”? or “Confessions of a 9/11 Truth activist”? or “Nanothermite: If it doesn’t fit, you must acquit”? Some of your points are right, but your defense of nanothermite is wrong–even stunning in its display of a lack of knowledge about what we know now. Go back and do some homework!

    • foo  September 30, 2011 at 10:58 pm

      @ Woop

      “But Jones has a history, if you care to see it.”

      He sure does. To cite just one example, he was the government’s point man to debunk cold fusion.

      There are good reasons to doubt Jones’ integrity.

  15. AS  September 29, 2011 at 2:02 pm

    you guys know how the arab street calls brzezinsky ?

    oh my god if I translate it in english….

  16. AS  September 29, 2011 at 1:57 pm

    oh oh oh Kevin…. are sure about the name of the sheep, isn’t that Gordon!!! 😉

    very well articulated!

  17. hareli  September 29, 2011 at 1:46 pm

    “(Real al-Qaeda fighters and propagandists cannot operate openly and transparently, for if they do, they will quickly be killed or kidnapped and tortured.)”

    How about the supposed Al-Qaeda Magazine put out in July 2010. Here is the first issue, written entirely in English. You have to see this shit to believe it. Must be a big seller in Yemen, and other non-English-speaking countries.
    http://publicintelligence.net/complete-inspire-al-qaeda-in-the-arabian-peninsula-aqap-magazine/

  18. Gordon Duff  September 29, 2011 at 1:35 pm

    Kevin,
    My friends in Israel’s intel services will love reading this. You should hear them talk about all the phony Mossad “posers” they call them.
    The real Mossad has a lot of funny guys in it.
    When Israel’s “security message” fell apart, the Mossad was allowed to privatize. There are few projects that don’t partner with Mossad owned companies.
    From a work standpoint, they dozens, maybe hundreds of totally private firms now owed by those who we call “Mossad” are considered reliable subcontractors.
    What you won’t hear from any of them is Zionist political crap or anything nice about the ADL.
    The real Mossad has nothing to do with the armies of paid liars and sneaks running around the US and Canada.
    Accept this: all intel operatives, not analysts but real operational personnel are difficult to define.
    You will be getting a chance next week to debrief a real CIA handler who worked directly with bin Laden.
    This will give some you mention here a moment of pause.
    One more point….move this far…..that if Al Qaeda represents negative branding for Islam, then it isn’t a misrepresentation of Al Qaeda but rather the organization itself.
    There is NO reason for Al Qaeda to exist other than to provide negative branding.
    There is no pan-Islamic terrorist group because there are no real pan-Islamic movements at all.
    The only place you are likely to find the Taliban and PKK together is a video game.
    Dumber still is the move by Israel to tie Pakistan to the Taliban…
    duh
    Pakistan is run by Singh’s and Punjabi’s, the blood enemies of the pashtuns who are the Taliban
    when the US occupation ends, Afghanistan and Pakistan are likely to declare war on each other.
    g

    • Nelson_2008  September 29, 2011 at 4:06 pm

      Gordon says some bizarre things, doesn’t he?

      I’m sure nobody gets to be “Mossad” unless they’re thoroughly vetted and confirmed to be a hard-core Jewish supremacist extremist. I don’t know if Gordon actually knows anyone, as he claims, or if he’s just talkin’ nonsense, but if he does there’s one thing we can be sure of: regardless of how they may act in his presence, they see Gordon just the same as they see any other Goyim: as sub-human trash.

    • Joe in San Francisco  September 29, 2011 at 5:16 pm

      Going by the negative reaction by some of the posters against you, Gordon, I’m wondering if your use of the word “friends” for Israel Intelligence agents has more the meaning of “contacts” or even “acquaintances.” When I was ASA in Japan, I knew oyabun and yakuza but would never call them friends. Interesting people, yes, but never friends.

    • Jim W. Dean  September 29, 2011 at 8:48 pm

      Yes Peter, he can be the bearer of a lot of unhappy news, but he can be funny, too. He just can’t do both at the same time as they don’t really go together well 🙂

      Buddies in the business means people you can talk to without the phone blowing your head off. And there are many times when chats are needed. These folks have kind of their own internal diplomatic corp, but unofficial. It’s for the old folks.

      Dick Thompson, the greatest Naval Intelligence officer I ever met was a huge booster for the USS Liberty crew for many years. He coproduced the BBC documentary ‘Dead in the Water’, in return for the U.S. marketing rights, which turned out worthless as the Lobby banned the movie. He lost a bundle.

      He was so well regarded by the old Soviet Navy folks that they quietly flew him over there once and gave him everything they had on the Liberty incident, including gems like interviewing the missile sub cmdr who was off the coast of Israel with ten nukes during that time. That was back when sub nukes had short range, so you had little warning.

      He was not big on using the phone or email, and drove all the way up from Florida to Atlanta just to brief me for half a day…a memorable one. And when he was leaving to pay a surprise visit to General Ray Daving (MoH- Korea) on his way home, I had to give him the bad news that he had died two months earlier. The look on his face…I still remember.

    • reamonnk  September 29, 2011 at 11:06 pm

      Yeah, that’s the impression I got from Gordon’s comments. No big deal. To a skeptical conspiracy researcher it looks like Gordon is saying he is in cahoots with Mossad. I think he is just connected to the international intelligence community and is probably respected enough to have chats with Mossad guys that aren’t hardcore ideologues. He wouldn’t have said he talked to Mossad agents if he was really part of their team…..Think McFly!

    • Ibram  September 30, 2011 at 12:05 am

      Gordon,
      The Singhs are Sikhs. The Punjabi caste who run the Pakistani government and military are Sunni Muslim 😉

    • Gordon Duff  September 30, 2011 at 5:23 am

      One of them runs one of their think tanks. They are also considered, compared to Pashtuns, Europeans.

      He left for london eventually…..long story there.

      g

You must be logged in to post a comment Login


TOP 50 READ ARTICLES THIS MONTH
From Veterans Today Network