A WINDOW INTO THE INNER WORKINGS OF THE UNITED STATES

SUSAN LINDAUER AND THE SECRET GOVERNMENT

Come Carpentier de Gourdon

The “mysteries” surrounding the September 11th, 2001 attacks and many other momentous events in modern American history seem to be bottomless. After so many layers have been peeled, one sees that so many more remain.

Many insufficiently informed people think that those who believe in “conspiracy theories” fail to explain why no insider from the US supposedly democratic government has come out to expose the lies propagated by the successive administrations.

Skeptics also wonder why the surviving victims of the 911 attacks and their families seem to meekly accept the official version instead of challenging it, on the basis of the obvious inconsistencies and impossibilities that detractors have pointed out almost since that tragic day. Let us clarify that both those objections are invalid because they are wrong. Several people working inside the US Government at various levels –including, exceptionally military officers - have spoken out against their superiors on the truth behind those terrible events, at great personal cost and risk and numerous relatives of 911 victims have joined legal and public awareness campaigns to expose the truth. Others however accepted substantial financial rewards as a price for their silence and a few have died in suspicious circumstances after being too outspoken and affirmative in their conviction that the WTC had been destroyed by controlled demolition.

No single source of information on the conspiracy of 911 seems to possess all the facts, as can be logically expected in view of the systematic compartmentalization of information on the “Need to Know” basis practiced by the government, all the more so in its clandestine agencies. We are hence forced to build a puzzle with many separate pieces and some of the most valuable and impressive ones are provided by , daughter of a Republican candidate for the Governorship of her native Alaska, a cousin of President G W Bush’s Chief of Staff, Andy Card, who was employed as an asset by both the CIA and the DIA (Defence Intelligence Agency) for nine years, up to September 2011 and as a backchannel to Iraq and following the first . Her account, which she had to wait ten years to publish in her book “Extreme Prejudice – The Terrifying Story of the and the Cover Ups of 911 and Iraq” (2010), reads in part like a detective thriller and it also plants one more nail, after so many, into the coffin of so-called “American democracy”.

Susan Lindauer, a former Reporter and Press Secretary and Speech writer to Senator Moseley Braun of with an MS from the London School of Economics, reported to her CIA “handler”, a rather well known figure in the shadowy area where business and espionage overlap. , MD, a millionaire of Slovenian-American origin holds the rank of Lt-Commander in the US Navy and is known to be a CIA agent. He is also rumoured to work for the Mossad as a Sayan (plant and informant) like many other high- ranking members of the American Intelligence community and is an inventor holding some 200 patents. Among the companies he founded is Fuizs Tobacco, Fuisz Technology, Medcom, Kosmos Pharma and a Russian modeling agency (in partnership with subsequently jailed Israeli-Russian oligarch Mikhail Khodorkovsky, of Yukos fame). That agency, which he later sold to a larger one, specialized in bringing Russian models to America.

Fuisz was also an active monitor of US companies on behalf of the Israeli government, tracking down those that in any way violated the stringent US laws against boycott of Israeli goods. When he sold Medcom to Baxter Pharmaceutical in 1981, he became the head of the company’s operations in and at the same time reportedly the top US CIA agent in Damascus. After being recalled and “fired” by Baxter in 1985 he reported the company for violating the stringent US legislation against companies boycotting . His testimony led to Baxter being fined 6,5 millions in 1993 for collaborating with Syria. Later he also accused , another US firm of selling components for Scud missiles to Iraq, a charge which could not be proven at the time.

Fuisz was allegedly put in charge of the back channel that the Clinton Administration had opened with Saddam Hussain’s government in 1997 when the US sanctions regime, which had already brought about the deaths of over one million Iraqis, half of them children, was generating a growing backlash around the world. By then Baghdad had already destroyed all its “weapons of mass destruction” but Washington was unwilling to lift the sanctions for reasons that will be made clearer in the course of this article, and the CIA was working behind the scene to leverage the US stranglehold over Iraq into highly lucrative benefits for the American economy.

Susan Lindauer, as a NOC (Non Official Cover agent) was Fuisz’s envoy and spokesperson at the Iraqi and Libyan diplomatic missions to the UN in New York and over the years she developed a good personal rapport with her contacts. On behalf of the CIA she was able to secure a smorgasbord of appealing concessions from Baghdad for the US corporate sector. According to her testimony for which there are numerous corroborations, by December 2000, Saddam Hussain’s government had agreed to give American companies an almost unlimited access to the Iraqi market, especially in the priority areas of oil and gas exploration and development, telecommunications, air and road infrastructure and transportation, heavy industry, healthcare and pharmaceuticals.

Iraq was willing to commit to buy one million American cars a year for ten years and also provide full access to the FBI on its soil so as to enable the USA to carry out the anti- terrorist struggle with its cooperation. The initial sign of Baghdad’s commitment was to invite in the UN weapons inspectors so that they might complete their report and confirm that there were no more WMD stocks in the country.

In a sentence, Saddam Hussain was apparently willing to become a new , a client state of Uncle Sam in the Middle East.

As one who went to Iraq several times in the mid-nineties for work-related reasons, I can confirm that Saddam’s government desperately wanted to make peace with the USA in order to have the punishing sanctions lifted, realising that Washington DC alone had the power to remove them, since other western countries were behaving as American satellites devoid of any real autonomy in the matter.

By February 2001, always monitored by Fuizs, Lindauer had a confirmation that Baghdad was ready to invite the FBI on its soil to start formal cooperation in the anti- terrorist struggle but by then the new Republican administration of George W Bush was in place and, contrary to Clinton, who had resisted, if mainly through inertia, the pressing calls of the Neo-Conservative Faction, led by Norman Podhoretz, Elliot Abrams, Paul Wolfovitz, Bill Kristol and Richard Perle to attack Iraq, the new tenant of the White House had a personal grudge against Saddam Hussain, accused of having tried to kill his father and he also wanted to increase his stature by becoming a victorious war president. He was hence ready to listen to the “Vulcans” in his Party who were baying for blood.

Richard Fuisz also appeared to Lindauer increasingly ill disposed towards Iraq, whereas he was on the contrary seemingly favourable to Qaddafi’s Libya as he claimed to have proof of Libya’s innocence in the 1988 Lockerbie bombing plot and even had offered some years earlier to testify in favour of the two Libyan agents Fhima and Megrahi accused of planting the bomb on . For that reason, Fuisz had been placed under a permanent gag order by a US Court in 1994 with a ten year prison sentence if he broke it. The government’s concern is that he would “reveal information damaging to the national security and military interests of the United States”. Fuisz told Lindauer that he could “confirm absolutely that no Libyan national was involved in planning or executing the bombing of PanAm 103” and further that “could identify who orchestrated and executed the bombing”.

Although this is another story, Fuisz’s allegation corroborates the circumstantial evidence pointing to a shadowy Palestinian terrorist cell located in Syria as probable executor of the PanAm bombing on behalf of which was seeking revenge for the destruction of its own airliner by an American missile in the Persian Gulf during the Iran-Iraq war some years earlier. In the early nineties however the Americans needed the cooperation of Syria and Iran for success in their first war against Iraq and their Intelligence community accordingly decided to shift the blame for the bombing to Libya which had taken Saddam’s side. Another reason for the obvious US cover up is that the perpetrator was known to be a Palestinian “rogue” unit thoroughly infiltrated and controlled by the CIA and the Mossad. There are thus reasons to believe that the US might have tacitly agreed to let the terrorists have their way with Flight 103 in exchange for an agreement that this would be the last retaliation for America’s own terrorist strike against Iranian civilians.

In 2007, accordingly, the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission ruled that “exculpatory evidence for Megrahi had been suppressed at the trial” which was “a miscarriage of justice”. The knowledge at high levels that the Libyans were innocent of Lockerbie led the Scottish government to release him on “compassionate grounds” in 2010, reportedly in exchange for some attractive oil deals in Libya for British Petroleum. Naturally the conclusions casting doubt over the verdict were not publicized and American legislators continued to ask for Megrahi’s head after using the judgment to extract billions in compensation from the Libyan state in exchange for lifting sanctions.

The usual combination of disinformation, blackmail and corruption was used to secure all possible benefits for the western economies while protecting the real culprits from exposure and prosecution.

To return to the Iraqi case, one day in April 2001 Fuizs turned outspokenly abusive not only about Iraq but towards Lindauer herself whom he accused, in a private meeting of being too polite and friendly to the Iraqis. He ordered her in unusually rude terms to threaten them with the greatest penalty, namely all out bombing and invasion, if they did not offer all actionable intelligence they had on an expected terrorist attack on the USA, specifically on New York’s World Trade Centre with hijacked civilian aircraft.

Lindauer was understandably rattled and puzzled by her handler’s outburst at a time when Saddam’s government was being increasingly cooperative. She had to carry out his instructions and accordingly she informed her Iraqi contacts that unless they shared all the information they were believed to have on the rumored attacks they would suffer the gravest consequences after those attacks had taken place, if they did and that indeed “their country would be destroyed” as no other state had been so far.

She was not surprised to hear from the worried Iraqi representatives that they knew nothing about such a future attack on New York and were only hearing those forecasts from the American sources themselves. Yet, Lindauer, in keeping with the instructions she had received, had to intimate that the threat against their country came not from the top of the CIA or the State Department but from the highest level of the Government. Neither she nor her listeners could fail to understand that this cryptic reference meant that the President, the Vice-President and the Secretary of Defence were personally issuing that warning.

It seems that Lindauer could not fail to notice the discrepancy between the mission she had been pursuing for the last several years and the new policy, at the very moment when she had achieved all her CIA superiors had bargained for. The sudden rejection of the Iraqi offers and the resulting enormous economic opportunities was puzzling to say the least because it was contrary to American economic and strategic interests. Someone higher up had decided that cannons were better than butter, to refer to an old German metaphor. She observes that in the bonanza that Iraq was opening up for US corporations, the Military Industrial sector was largely forgotten and therefore had more to gain from war than from peace. However, it is hard to believe that such a martial regime as Saddam’s could ignore the military dimension of a relationship with the US and he would obviously have been too happy to purchase whatever weaponry the superpower agreed to supply him with. Hence the Pentagon and its contractors may have looked forward to a new war but they could have done well in peace too.

The opponent to any accommodation with Baghdad was elsewhere and although most were and are still afraid to mention him, he is not difficult to identify as will become apparent.

From May, the prospects became bleaker for Iraq. The CIA continued to insist that Baghdad had to “come clean” on the imminent attacks on American soil and provide “all actionable intelligence”. During June and July, every day worried discussions took place in various government agencies about the growing threat although it was not clear where those rumours had originated. When Lindauer in Washington offered to go to New York to meet with her Iraqi counterparts to seek clarifications once again, Fuisz discouraged her by claiming that the attack could take place any day and that he expected a “miniature atom bomb” to be detonated in New York, which would make the entire city uninhabitable.

Susan’s brother John confirmed to the Media that his sister had warned him about massive attacks on New York during the summer of 2001. She had even predicted to him that “lower Manhattan would be destroyed”. It is also worth noting that she was regularly dropping confidential letters to the house of her cousin, whom she addressed as “Andy”, about her talks with the Iraqis and Libyans. Those letters can now be read on the Internet.

On August 2nd the Senate held hearing on the confirmation of Robert Mueller as the new FBI director. Susan Lindauer had earlier been in contact with him and had a very unfavorable opinion as she accused him of having aborted and blocked investigations into sensitive terrorist cases like Lockerbie and the Oklahoma City bombing which have not been fully explored so far. She remembers being told by Fuisz that it would be tragic if the FBI did not have a director when the attacks began. She then realized that he expected them to occur at any time.

On August 6th, following several meetings in the White House during June and July, the famous memorandum about an “imminent threat” reached George Bush’s desk and shortly afterwards the CIA asked Attorney General John Ashcroft for an “emergency broadcast” to seek information from among any and all government agencies about possible terrorist suspects and plots they might have uncovered. Though there is evidence that Ashcroft took the information seriously he denied the request for reasons never explained.

On his end, the Bush Administration’s Counter-Terrorism Czar Richard Clarke has since publicly voiced his anger against three high ranking CIA officials, the then-Director , Cofer Black and Richard Blee, in charge at the time of the so-called Alec Station, a special department tasked with watching Osama Ben Laden and Al Qaida members. Clarke states that he was kept in the dark about details of the ongoing terrorist plot although his “friend” Tenet called him every morning at 7.30 a m to brief him on the Intelligence he had gathered the day before.

In a report dated August 11th, 2011 Jason Leopold details Clarke’s accusations against the three men, charged with purposely hiding information about the presence on US soil of two reported lieutenants of Ben Laden who were later mentioned on the list of the 19 alleged hijackers. It has been established that the CIA had no less than 60 of its staff “in the loop” on this and yet not one of them reported the information relating to those two suspected terrorists for the entire year preceding 911. Further, a Military Intelligence Unit (DIA) was ordered by an unspecified higher authority (Rumsfeld or Wolfowitz, his deputy?) to stop tracking the Al Qaida leader and his associates during the summer of 2001. “Someone” wanted to monopolise the information on those men, keeping all other services out of the loop. Another inescapable conclusion that this “someone” also wanted the suspected terrorists to act without impediment.

There is so much evidence about the allegations of a CIA cover up originating at the top that the agency is now suing to prevent the publication in full of a new book by former FBI agent Ali Soufan regarding the case. Soufan confirms that the CIA withheld information on the hijackers until after the 9/11 attacks and the Agency naturally wants the incriminating passages removed, as always on the grounds that they endanger national security.

Lindauer realized later that her own insistence on finding out what might be known in higher circles upset people at the top because, as she puts it, it deprived them of “plausible deniability”, i.e. being able to claim that they suspected no terrorist attack of that magnitude before September 11th, as Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and Condoleezza Rice repeatedly affirmed later. At that point she became a target, as she found out subsequently.

Much later, Susan was also told in confidence by a high unnamed source within the Intelligence community that some extensive and mysterious preparations had been taking place at the World Trade Center during the ten days between August 23rd and September 3rd approximately.

On each of those nights, after 3 am, following the departure of the janitorial trucks, a few unmarked vans were seen to drive into the basement of the towers and drive back out before 6 am. No official record of any kind has been found regarding the origin, mission and ownership of those vans but there are concordant testimonies, including some video footage “leaked” from the officially vanished surveillance camera tapes of 911, about their presence which must have been authorized by Securacom, the company contracted by the WTC and also in charge of security at Dulles and for United Airlines. It may not be a coincidence that Securacom had among its directors Marvin Bush, the brother of the president and a cousin of his.

William “Willy” Rodriguez is one well known and highly acclaimed survivor of September 11th. A maintenance worker for the World Trade Center North Tower, in charge of stairwells, Rodriguez was the last person to come out alive of that tower after returning three times inside, despite orders from the police not to do so, for rescuing trapped and wounded survivors. He managed to save fifteen persons from certain death. For his heroism he was given an award by George W Bush at a White House ceremony. Nobody in the Bush Administration however wanted to hear his story about the huge explosions that had thrown him and some of his co-workers down in the basement a few seconds before the tower was hit by the plane. He distinctly remembers that the blasts came from the -2 level (the “mechanical floor”) and then spread to the upper stories. Other witnesses- including John Mongello - recalled massive explosions also taking place in the South Tower minutes before it was hit by the second plane.

Even more interestingly, Rodriguez testified to having seen “in the weeks before September 11th”, some unidentified workers clad in white HazMat overalls and carrying heavy equipment. He was particularly mystified by noises of very heavy loads (“like huge metal dumpsters on wheels”) being rolled about on floor 34 which had been unoccupied for long and was locked. Some highly credible professional eye witnesses thus bear out Lindauer’s report but, predictably Rodriguez’s sworn testimony before the 9/11 official commission was omitted from the latter’s report and even after censored material left out of that report was finally released under strong public pressure in 2009, Rodriguez’s statement remains “restricted” to this day and hence unavailable for perusal. His RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organisation Act) lawsuit of 2004 against George W Bush and 155 co-accused in his administration was similarly dismissed on technical grounds by the Court.

Various scientific analyses conducted by recognized experts and published in peer-reviewed professional journals have established that high doses of the military explosive thermite, mixed with sulphur, were found in the ruins of the World Trade whose controlled demolition took place in a manner consistent with the effect of strategically positioned charges, intended to melt the steel of the supporting columns and blow the concrete into dust.

The WTC towers thus were turned into death traps for all those inside once the detonations were triggered, as they indeed were on 9/11 seconds before the impact of the planes, as attested by numerous live on site surviving witnesses, both inside and outside the buildings. Why the expected “micro-nuke” was apparently not used however, remains a mystery unless that was just a “scary” bit of disinformation.

Events in the life of Susan Lindauer were accelerating as well. On 11th September while the drama in Manhattan and Washington was being enacted, she was in her home near Washington DC and remembers Richard Fuisz telling her on the telephone, minutes after the North Tower had collapsed but before the South Tower fell there was a video of the plane crashing on the North Tower and that the filming was done by people who were posted there on purpose and expected it to happen. He added, according to her: “What do you think are the odds that two people were just standing on the sidewalk with a video camera waiting patiently for the planes to hit the building. These are Mossad agents”.

As an insider he knew a lot but surely not everything. He even blurted out, perhaps in the emotion of moment that the Mossad was aware in advance that the World Trade Center was going to be hit. This affirmation was subsequently confirmed by multiple sources and even by material evidence of Israeli teams filming the attacks on Manhattan from various vantage points and openly cheering the destruction. Some of those covert agents were arrested on that day and some were kept in detention for several weeks before being quietly released and sent back to Israel. Although many of the major news media reported on the arrests, any further information on that story was withheld by the US Government after being classified under the Official Secrets Act.

By then, Lindauer could not doubt that some very powerful entities in the USA had wanted the tragedy to happen and had monitored and probably organized it from the start. In fact almost immediately afterwards, a surprisingly candid Fuisz stated to her that there would be no proper official investigation of the events of 9/11 as it was not possible to let the public know the truth because it was more important to “keep them calm”.

Indeed President Bush himself consistently expressed his opposition to an investigation and only agreed to it because of a public outcry but under the tight control of his Administration and with stringent and exceptional constraints, almost a year and half later, by which time the debris of the WTC had had long been removed, some of which being stored in high security warehouse to which no access is permitted. Significantly, the Bush administration did not deal with the 9/11 site as the “scene of a crime”, which would have required forensic evidence to be collected but simply as a war zone in which the “aggressors” were supposedly known in advance so that there was no need for an inquiry.

Susan Lindauer confesses that she was always quite aware of the tremendous injustice that the sanctions on Iraq represented and that she equated their effects to genocide of the civilian population of that hapless country. What she had heard and seen on the weeks leading to September 11th led her to make independent attempts to expose the truth.

She continued her periodic meetings with the Iraqi envoys to the UN whom she found increasingly frightened by the prospect of a full-fledged US attack, knowing that Paul Wolfowitz and the other NeoCons in the Bush regime had pressed for an immediate assault on their country, though it was postponed until after the invasion of Afghanistan. Accordingly Baghdad multiplied its offers and entreaties and pressed for the return of the UN weapons inspectors. However their appeals fell on deaf American ears, despite Lindauer’s urgings to Andrew Card (the last in a letter dated January 8th 2003), as the decision to go to war had evidently been made and even the US President might not have had the power to reverse it, had he wanted to.

This realization made Susan Lindauer feel betrayed and she began to behave as an Iraqi sympathizer or even an agent of Saddam Hussain in the jaundiced view of the powers-that- be. After the invasion and occupation of Iraq had been effected in a striking display of high handed brutality and bad faith, in February 2004 she contacted the offices of Senators John McCain and Trent Lott, former Minority Leader of the Senate, to call their attention to the official deception that had led the US to war against an exhausted and isolated country that posed no threat. She soon realized the she had been naïve to think that they would support her or even want to find out the facts. About thirty days later on March 11th she was arrested in an early morning raid by an FBI squad under the recently passed Patriot Act, the second Non-Arab American after Jose Padilla to be imprisoned under a number of charges, some of which were secret. Released on bail a few days later, she was arrested anew on a non-bailable warrant, accused of being an unregistered lobbyist for a foreign power.

Under the new provisions, she could be kept in detention indefinitely without trial and without a hearing. The Government in fact asked for ten years. Her handler Richard Fuizs would not help nor agree to meet her and she eventually learnt that he had been paid thirteen million Dollars tax-free out of the Emergency Appropriation Fund earmarked for finding the WMD supposedly hidden in Iraq.

Though Lindauer has not spelt out, to my knowledge, what she believes was the motive for this payout from what was in effect a slush fund, the inescapable conclusion is that Fuisz was being compensated for his role in the highly sensitive preparations for 911. There is no gainsaying how many officials and covert agents were likewise paid off for their participation in one aspect or another of this massive False Flag “black Op” but, if we judge by the hundreds of billions that were mobilized for the war on terror in the wake of the attacks, without any real public accounting mechanism, money was then no object.

For eighteen months Lindauer was under indictment. Both charges and hearings could be kept secret. At the end of that first stage, she was confined for one year in the “communication center” – an ironic euphemism for a prison – at Carswell Air Force Base in Forth Worth, Texas, Bush’s home base, where many political dissidents and “terrorism suspects” have been secretly detained since 2001. During those twelve she was only given one hearing in the Federal Court of Manhattan (South District) by Judge , a close friend and synagogue “parishioner” of the WTC owner Larry Silverstein, who also conveniently handled his compensation claims for the destruction of his property on 911.

She had by then found out that the charges included her having paid for a lunch with three Iraqi diplomats, which was defined an “unlawful financial transaction” apart from having “unauthorized contacts” with Iraq, including a visit to Baghdad paid for by the Iraqi government. A secret charge that she pieced out was having received a book from a member of the Iraqi Mission to the UNO reporting the medical effects of depleted uranium (DU) used in American munitions. This was regarded as treasonable since the US authorities wanted to keep such information unknown to their own soldiers who were exposed to it.

One wonders how the hapless Lindauer could escape alive from her predicament. The prosecutor claimed she was mentally ill and “a religious fanatic” and proposed to put her on a heavy prescription of Prozac, Haldon and other drugs that would have drastically curtailed her awareness. However she still had some support, perhaps also because of her family connection with the President’s Chief of Staff, though the latter is not known to have made any open effort to help her and publicly dissociated himself from her as much as he could. A few of her friends and relatives campaigned tirelessly and although they could not convince any of the controlled Mass media to take up her story, (the otherwise anti-Republican Amy Goodman simply declined to report on it, finding it too dangerous and thereby showing the limits of officially tolerated dissent) they got some publicity on the Internet and “underground” radio network.

This growing “chatter” in the new media and the fact that Lindauer had a sterling record of mental health as a trusted negotiator probably convinced the judge that it would not have been credible to declare her insane and she was transferred to the Metropolitan Correction Center in Manhattan. However the government managed to have her declared mentally incompetent to stand trial so as to deprive her of credibility.

For another eighteen months afterwards, the Court declined to grant another hearing and the case took another year, the fifth, after it finally did with a new judge, (Mukasey had become Attorney General by then), for the accused to be released and free to speak, once charges were dropped five days before the inauguration of the Obama administration. The judge stated in her decision that she found the Lindauer “highly intelligent” but suffering from “a mental defect or illness”. No comment need be added about the character and integrity of the American court system.

Susan Lindauer is predictably wounded and angry but she is fighting back with courage and optimism, suing the government for damages. She travels around the country telling her story, promoting her book and answering the many questions she is asked with honesty, clarity and humility. She talks only about what she knows and avoids speculating about what she was not made privy to, willingly confessing her ignorance in many issues that were “over her pay grade”. However among the many conclusions that she feels entitled to make, the following ones are particularly revealing:

-The CIA and other relevant agencies of the government were manipulated from inside and outside and, ultimately overruled by certain higher powers which wanted the 911 attacks to take place and had long worked to pre-position Iraq as the country responsible for the outrage in the public mind. The White House was, knowingly or not pulled into that vortex of predictable retaliation and it could not have been difficult to goad an insecure, intellectually challenged George W Bush, haunted by his past as a “rich daddy’s boy” who had in effect dodged the draft by using family privileges, to seek glory and reelection as a “wartime president”.

-Whoever planned the 9/11 attacks may have felt that the hijackers who were admittedly CIA assets, knowingly or nor (in particular their “leader” Muhammad Atta) could not have created sufficient damage and had to be assisted in their task so that enough casualties could be caused. Hence, the WTC towers 1,2 and 7 were rigged with high explosive charges and accordingly brought down on cue just about the time when the probably remote controlled airplanes, (according to Lindauer and more than a few aeronautics experts) struck , since the hijackers seemed not have the piloting skills to achieve such a feat on four different targets.

-Lindauer points out that on September 11th, the strength of the electronic signals (GPS, cell phone lines etc…) in the Manhattan and Washington DC areas were boosted to maximum level, clearly in order to facilitate military communications, including the suspected remotely controlled takeover of the four diverted airplanes. This may be connected, or at least may have been officially justified by the large scale military exercises which were taking place on that day, one of which involved crashing civilian aircraft on buildings, as has been confirmed since.

She also claims that a US military pilot who shot down Flight 93 as he was ordered to on that day, was kept in military detention incommunicado in Florida until at least a few months ago although she does not know of his present whereabouts.

-From her analysis of their files, Lindauer concludes, like many other analysts, that the 19 hijackers were not fanatical religious Jihadis but more prosaically, rather low level Intelligence assets who were used by their handlers to carry out a small part of a job without being told what exactly was to happen. It is almost certain that they were brought to the USA under false names and identities so that they are extremely difficult to trace, whether or not they actually were on board the four planes involved in the attacks.

-Lindauer also acknowledges that the Pentagon was not hit by a plane (as the former chief of US Military Intelligence, General Albert Stubblebine has concluded and stated on the record) but by a missile probably shot from a clandestine military facility under the control of one of the “rogue” units involved in the plot.

A video released on You Tube on August 28th, 2011 (Before It’s News) shows a missile-like object hit the building at high speed. It could be one of the tapes of the surveillance video cameras set up around the Pentagon that were confiscated by the US Security Agencies immediately after the strike. Various surviving witnesses, including Captain April Gallop of the US air Force have since stated that the Pentagon was hit by a military projectile and not by a commercial airline while they were inside. The “plane story” was hurriedly put forth by the Government as a cover up.

-The only conclusion from all those facts, most of which have been extensively researched by hundred of experienced professionals and verified several times over, is that the US National Security organization operates in many cases if not permanently like a captive or hostage to a secret or unacknowledged power that runs a parallel structure to the subservient official one. Professor Peter Dale Scott calls this secret or shadow government the “Deep State” and many well known figures, from the late Hunter Thompson to President Clinton himself have talked about it. Franklin D Roosevelt and John F Kennedy also publicly alluded to its frightening power and impunity. It is not be regarded as hidden national and nationalist supra- statal agency but rather as an international “cabal” whose writ reigns supreme and whose obscure, often ruthless agenda brooks no interference from any other entity, be it the US Presidency itself. That entity accounts for the fact that USA has become an oligarchic one-party dictatorship masquerading as a bipartisan Republic.

-In the context of 911, it is perfectly clear that the “Cabal” would tolerate no accommodation between the United States and Iraq, probably because such an arrangement would bring America closer to a nationalist Arab state that was both a rival for influence and an enemy of Israel. As Kevin Barrett who interviewed Lindauer extensively on January 8th, 2001 (truthjihad.com blog): “A prosperous Iraq allied to the USA would actually be terrible for Israel”. The “Clean Break Strategy” supported by Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu and advocated by influential Zionist thinktanks in the USA was intended to bring about a decisive split between American and any potential Arab ally sufficiently powerful not to be under Israeli control.

A coordinated campaign was waged to paint Islam as the enemy of the United States, like Communism had been until the fall of the USSR. A 2011 130 page report of the Center for American Progress reveals the names of the most important promoters of this multi-sectoral efforts and records that more than 42 million Dollars were expended for the public outreach and media operations alone. The main funders are the David Horowitz Freedom Center, the Richard Scaife Foundation, Daniel Pipes’s Middle East Forum (which has raised money for the legal defense of “anti-Muslim” Dutch politician Geert Wilders), Frank Gaffney’s Center for Policy Security, whose members and honorees include the aforementioned Wolfowitz and Perle, the Russell Berrie Foundation and the William Rosenwald Fund.

The cast of “experts” hired to orchestrate the media blitz includes (predictably) Frank Gaffney (an adviser to the CIA-funded and Israel-backed Foundation for Democracy in Iran (FDI), David Yarushalmi, Daniel Pipes and Robert Spencer, helped by more “populistic” writers such Brigitte Gabriel, Bat Yeor and Pamela Geller, all of whom are well known champions of Zionism. Barack Obama himself is used a target (or rather a decoy posing as a scarecrow) and habitually depicted as a closet Muslim deputed by the International Terrorist Syndicate to subvert America, paving the way for a planned Jihadi invasion once Europe becomes “Eurabia” according to their predictions.

The 9/11 conspiracy appears to fall within the “wet”, military component of that multi-pronged strategy planned according to the Mathematical Games theory described in detail by Jeffrey Gates in his book Guilt by Association (2008).

-Additionally Iraq was also a challenger of Saudi Arabia for regional preponderance and ideology. It is hence quite possible that the Saudi monarchy lent its support to a plot intended to fatally hurt Saddam’s regime but it is however much less logical to assume that Riyadh would participate willingly and consciously in a devastating attack on the core of American military and financial might. The effect of such a dastardly blow could only turn overnight most Americans into vengeful foes of Islamic nations and Saudi Arabia could hardly agree to shoot itself in the foot, given the regime’s heavy reliance on American protection.

It thus appears that the Saudi monarchy must have played a relatively minor role as an unsuspecting sidekick which could be painted as a villain and a target after the facts, together with Iraq and Pakistan, another dodgy ally of the USA, also known for its semi-official patronage certain terrorist Jihadi groups.

The Saudi Mukhabarat may well have provided the “hijackers” to play small parts in the grand drama that was being rehearsed.

-Indeed, the US Government has clearly taken advantage of the post 9/11 situation to increase its control over the desert kingdom, dramatically escalating its lucrative arms sale while threatening Riyadh with dire consequences for its suspected complicity. For some time in 2002, there was widespread talk in America about suing the Wahabi State for over one trillion Dollars in damages and it took all the skills and clout of the Saudi rulers to avoid such an embarrassment but it stands to reason that they had to quietly provide substantial quid pro quos to their American friends and patrons.

-The figure of President Obama inevitably comes under the scanner in the aftermath of the murky Bush era. Any objective observer, even one who has personal sympathy for him and what he is supposed to represent, must conclude that the first Afro-American head of state has so far protected his predecessors from all possible damage resulting from investigations into their actions and exposure of their motives and methods.

Despite a widespread popular demand for the many crimes and illegal acts of the Republican administration to be disclosed and punished, Obama has ensured that the virtual immunity claimed by Bush and his lieutenants and underlings during their years in power is not challenged. This evidence forces one to see Obama as a dutiful keeper of the status quo, selected in view of his ethnic, religious and social profile as an unlikely protector of the secret government despite his manufactured image as a challenger of the system and a reformer of past abuses. Whether or not he is also a former or present CIA asset or operative as is alleged by certain researchers, he appears at best as “Uncle Tom in the White House”.

-Obama’s deeply ambiguous role as a sort of Manchurian candidate, expected to act as a credible mediator with the disgruntled left-wing sections of domestic society and also as a seductive ambassador to hostile African, Muslim and Latin American masses, is once again highlighted by his conduct in the ongoing war on Libya. Neither he nor his administration had any reason to hold a grudge against Colonel Qaddafi, whose sponsorship of the Lockerbie bombing has been shown to be doubtful to say the least. A reconciliation between the Jamahiriya and the West had taken place and Qaddafi, like Saddam before him, making efforts to show his favourable disposition towards the USA. Yet Obama ruthlessly crushed the Libyan army and overthrew the State after suddenly deciding to gang up with France and England in order to stage a civil war in that country and bring to power a little known group of disparate rebels, including hardline Jehadi Salafist squads (the Libyan Islamic Fighting Groups: LIFG) affiliated with Al Qaida.

It appears that the “Deep State” acted once more to stop an ongoing reconciliation between an Arab state with revolutionary pretensions and the NATO bloc, harnessing anew the skills of its old Al Qaida proxies, to reach its goals. An additional motive might be to nip in the bid Qaddafi’s policy of uniting Africa in alliance with the rising Asian and Latin American powers and thereby depriving the West of its colonial backyard. Should we be surprised if Israel early developed extensive relations with at least some of the rebel groups and has, according to Lindauer, struck a deal with them to build a secret military base, code-named “One to One” in the Green Mountains of that oil, gas, gold and water rich nation?

-None of the events we have reviewed are fully intelligible unless we take into account the Israeli factor, seen not only as sliver of land on the Eastern Mediterranean shore but as the “global Zionist superpower” freely alluded by the rulers of the Jewish state and their allies in the USA and many other countries. That supra-national entity and the secret government of the USA (or rather, over the USA), for many if not all practical purposes, may well turn out to be one and the same.

The End