Zelikow: 9/11 Master Criminal Appointed By Obama

9/11 Commision Report cover.

Image via Wikipedia

‘Sott.net’ has posted this article by Kevin Barrett, ‘Veterans Today’, to reveal to the public, very convincing information about the truths of incidents called “false flags” by internet blog truth seekers, but for which truth claims are regarded as “conspiracy theories” by the instigators and the public who have not yet become aware!

9/11 and Pearl Harbour are mentioned and the source of this information is one Philip Zelikow. Read about what he has had to say in the past, his writing of the 9/11 report and the fact that he is now a member of Obama’s ‘Intelligence Advisory Board’.

© Veterans Today

Zelikow has admitted that the US public has been terrorized by nonexistent threats: “I’ll tell you what I think the real threat [is] and actually has been since 1990 – it’s the threat against Israel,” Zelikow told a crowd at the University of Virginia on September 10, 2002, speaking on a panel of foreign policy experts assessing the impact of September 11 and the future of the war on al-Qaeda.

“And this is the threat that dare not speak its name, because the Europeans don’t care deeply about that threat, I will tell you frankly. And the American government doesn’t want to lean too hard on it rhetorically, because it is not a popular sell,” said Zelikow. – Asia Times 9/11 was “The New Pearl Harbor” – a made-for-television spectacular, complete with amazing pyrotechnic special effects and the on-screen murder of almost 3,000 extras.

The question is, who wrote the script?

My best guess: Philip Zelikow – the man Obama just appointed to the President’s Intelligence Advisory Board.

Zelikow describes himself as an expert in the “creation and maintenance of public myths.” He defines “public myth” as a “public presumption” about history that may or may not be true, but which nevertheless exerts a powerful influence on public opinion, and through that influence affects history.

Zelikow gives the official account of Pearl Harbor – the story of the “dastardly Japanese sneak attack” – as a prime example of the kind of “public myth” he specializes in creating and maintaining. Zelikow’s close colleague and fellow neocon extremist Paul Wolfowitz has exhibited a lifelong obsession with the immense strategic value of Pearl Harbor. Wolfowitz has repeatedly cited a remark by Albert Speer to the effect that if Germany had been blessed with a Pearl Harbor it would have won World War II. (Source: Brian Bogart, University of Oregon – Truth Jihad Radio interview, 2007)

Therefore, in the eyes of neocons such as Zelikow, FDR was wise to adopt McCollum’s Eight Point Plan designed to force the Japanese to launch a sneak attack on America. (Stinnett, Day of Deceit, 6-11). Pearl Harbor was not just a godsend – it was a US-orchestrated event, and the 2,403 Americans murdered. They were murdered by the US government as well as the Japanese.

As Robert Stinnett has shown, the US High Command knew exactly when and where the attacks were coming, and intentionally left American sailors and Marines in harm’s way so that their murder would enrage US public opinion and reverse the prevailing majority sentiment against entry into World War II. In other words, Pearl Harbor, like 9/11, was a human sacrifice used to initiate a war – a pattern that recurs throughout history.

Circumstantial evidence suggests that Philip Zelikow scripted that human sacrifice. Zelikow co-authored a 1998 article in Foreign Affairs speculating on the likely political, social, and psychological consequences of a new Pearl Harbor style terrorist event, such as the destruction of the World Trade Center.

Despite this smoking-gun evidence of his foreknowledge of 9/11, Zelikow was chosen by Cheney-Bush to run the 9/11 Commission. According to Philip Shenon, Zelikow had written all of the chapter outlines of The 9/11 Commission Report before the Commission even began its investigation. Zelikow completely controlled the investigation, ordering underlings to basically just fill in the chapter outlines of his pre-scripted novel. The Report became a “surprise bestseller” because it reads like a novel – which is exactly what it is.

The core story – the alleged plot by 19 alleged hijackers led by a guy on dialysis in a cave in Afghanistan – is supported by nothing remotely resembling evidence that would stand up in a court of law. If you follow the footnotes, you’ll find that the whole thing is supposedly based on third-hand testimony taken under brutal torture from Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who apparently had to be waterboarded 183 times in one month in order to brainwash him into remembering and parroting the details of Zelikow’s novel.

The article is linked here.  Read it all and watch a video confirming the claims against Zelikow.

About Ken McMurtrie

Retired Electronics Engineer, most recently installing and maintaining medical X-Ray equipment. A mature age "student" of Life and Nature, an advocate of Truth, Justice and Humanity, promoting awareness of the injustices in the world.
This entry was posted in 'WAR on(of) TERROR', 9/11 tragedy, Conspiracies, Cover-ups, Politics, united states and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Zelikow: 9/11 Master Criminal Appointed By Obama

  1. Martin_Lack says:

    I believe that my post on “Conspiracy theory – history for losers” pretty-much nails this one (no doubt deeply offensive to anyone personally affected). In addition, much of my post on “How to be a climate chage ‘sceptic'” can be applied to belief in this – and any other – conspiracy theory. Discuss.

    • No intention to censor/ignore/shun you Martin.
      Too late at night now too get too serious about this.
      I don’t think however there is much point in discussing what you have raised.
      First there is the science/facts. Next its application/significance. Next are the repercussions/sheeting home the responsibility.
      I am only interested in these aspects and in what is the truth and what is not.
      Discussing attitudes, agendas and personal traits is basically irrelevant. To me, it is just so much rhetoric.
      Putting labels on people and discussing their motivations or whatever is really non-productive.
      Just as is this particular comment of mine, and yours. A waste of time and energy.
      It contributes nothing to the topic “9/11 is a false flag operation” – my post provides meaningful support to this claim.
      If you wish to discuss the details of the events, their actualities or their distortions, the truths, lies and cover-ups, that is fine.
      But please no rhetoric or philosophy, no diversions, no red herrings.

  2. Martin_Lack says:

    I don’t want to debate the facts of history or the science when it comes to 9/11 because (1) I am quite content to accept that the most likely explanation for what I saw on live television is the right one; and (2) whatever I say you will just respond with an unfalsifiable or self-referential counter-argument such as that to accuse me of being duped by the conspiracists and/or unquestioningly repeating their propaganda.

    Furthermore, if, having read them, you consider the items to which I provided links, to be mere rhetoric, philosophy and/or red-herrings; I think this discussion may be over. However, for the record, I consider that what I have written is merely a series of logical arguments that are strongly suggestive of the fact that 99% of alleged conspiracies fall apart under anything approaching an objective assessment of the evidence (particularly when the events in question were broadcast live on television and/or transmitted in real-time to relatives of those who died.

    It’s a bit like when a child tells a lie and is found out but, rather than admit their misdemeanour, they tell another lie… And so it goes on; with the lies getting bigger and bigger each time they are told. How many millions, yes millions, of people does it now require to be “in on it” for the 9/11 Truth Movement’s version of events to be workable? Truly, the mind boggles! However, I suspect that you are right, I was wasting my time presenting logical arguments to you because, Ben Goldacre is probably right, “You cannot reason people out of positions they didn’t reason themselves into.

    • Well Martin, a few pertinent points come to mind.
      There are quite a few aspects of the 9/11 tragedy that build in me full confidence that all is not as officially claimed. Many, in fact.
      There are two which stand out:
      1. The Pentagon damage could not have been caused by a 757. Before the walls eventually collapsed, there is no structural damage coinciding with the tail, wings and in particular, the engines. If the authorities wanted to prove this ‘truther’ claim wrong, they could release surveillance videos, but won’t. I am not sure if even the commission got to see them.
      2. WTC7 collapse. Although much counter evidence video has been released on the internet, showing how demolitions are accompanied by lots of loud explosions, I and a large number of experts assert that WTC7 did not collapse because of fire damage.
      I am completely satisfied that what we are told officially about these two incidents is not the truth. Although I can assess each bit of the puzzle independently, there are substantial grounds for not believing most of the official story.
      Books have been written about this incident. You and I are not going to solve anything with a few comments. Not even a few books, if our eyes and brains perceive different scenarios from the same evidence. My earlier post “False Perception- A Modern Philosophy (Comments On- )” touches on this non-technical issue. Also a post on TIP called “Jumping Rope and 9/11 Truth”

      Which brings me to your end quote – I believe I have reasoned myself into the conclusions I hold. It appears that you have simply accepted what is told/shown to the public. I can only be reasoned out of my position(s) by a stronger counter-reason. Such evidence is still to be offered.

      I have enjoyed the debate, so far only enhancing my beliefs, rather than the contrary.

  3. Martin_Lack says:

    I am very much afraid, Ken, that you will never get the “counter-evidence” you require precisely because you believe it is being kept from you (i.e. an unfalsifiable argument).

    Notwithstanding this, I could, of course, point out to you that experiments have been done and filmed in slow motion to show that the circular hole in the Pentagon is entirely consistent with crashing of a plane into a building constructed as it is. I could also point-out that controlled demolition requires an awful lot of pre-treatment to exposed RSJs, etc., etc., but…

    With regret, I think you are too far down the conspiracy theory rabbit-hole for there to be any point in continuing this (or any other) discussion.

    • No problem Martin.
      I must say though, I don’t believe that I am a bunny, but whatever I am, there are many of us, some even quite intelligent and knowledgeable. It is warm and comfortable in our rabbit-hole. (Not overwarm of course, no global warming in here!)
      Keep in touch!

  4. Marbles Lines says:

    VRy intriguing to read it

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s