FlatPlanet.net

This post is in response to the series of comments I have received to the post, “CIA-Mossad connection to 9/11 “well known” in intelligence circles, says Italian Ex-President.”

A few new viewers stopped in to drop their two cents into the commentary piggy bank, and I thank them for their contribution.

Gab wrote, “Witnessing all what came after 911 it’s not so difficult to see who have benefited from that event. Obviously not the muslims but more probably zionists. I’ve seen some other very interesting articles about this issue.” He provided a link to a nice long translation to Cossiga’s statment.

Flowerpower wrote, “Exposing the criminals has nothing to do with semitism or anti-semitism. It is called JUSTICE for the 3000 victims.”

Flowerpower then contributed about a dozen links about 9/11, all from a site quixotically titled WhatReallyHappened.com. The links are off topic, delving into WTC demolition including the fact that BCC reported that Building 7 have collapsed due to fire before it actually did. However also included is the dubious story of the Israeli phone company Odigo warning workers not to show up to work at the Twin Towers, and an irrelevant story about 9/11 and an Anthrax suspect the FBI “won’t go near.”

sega wrote, “Very interesting that an ex-President would mention Mossad/CIA as being the masterminds of the 9/11 attack. This is something that I have been aware of for almost 2 years now and I have been trying hard to explain this to many people but unfortunately you usually get called a racist/anti-Semite which is so far from the truth…” Sega then provided some relevant links to HugeQuestions.com, the work of Eric Hufschmid. “Hufs” for short.

I once found value in Hufs’ slideshow presentation titled Painful Questions, most notably: Why were agents in suits collecting airplane debris from the Pentagon lawn instead of leaving that work to the hazardous materials team? If the the Towers were burning at steel-melting temperatures then how were people able to stand at the impact hole? While Painful Questions was worth exposing myself to, overall I found that he tended to go too far, too often, by venturing into speculation in the form of a question. I saw the video Painful Quesitons three years ago and it spurred me to investigate and think for myself about what happened. Investigation took the form of watching every viewable video (in the now-unimaginable days before YouTube and Google video), and reading many articles and having many debates. At the time I considered Hufs to be an weird and super nerdy guy who cared about 9/11.

Yet three years later Hufschmid’s is on the fringe of the fringes, possibly because of the poor production value, but it seems that in the years since Hufschmid released Painful Questions he has become much more pointed, now mincing no words on the top of his website, asking “Do you know what Zionism is?” next to a picture of a Rabbi burning an Isreali flag. Take a look. It’ll make you gag, especially if you’re web designer, but also quite flustering if you’re seeking truth.

As for the Painful Questions themselves, I have decided to reject all speculation about the Pentagon because I am not a historian so it does not matter to me what exactly happened to every last detail. I also am not interested in personally determining “who dun it.” I find that pointing the finger doesn’t help solve the crime. But again the point is I am in no position to solve this crime. I can only consider if the original guilty verdict was valid. Everything else seems to be blustering possibilities in a mysterious world.

I have before read all of the websites they linked. I have been traversing the 9/11 truth “info sphere” for nearly four years. I find that the more things I’m asked to consider in a short period of time the less clear the whole picture is. Almost a case of the more you know the less you know. Certainly there is a threshold for the number of ideas a person can take at a given time. The sheer number of links flowerpower provided did nothing to lend credibility. It was merely many possible entry points, sure, but I found that what flowerpower and sega posted reeked of “meh.” If you are truthers, you must do better.

Flowerpower, those stories on WhatReallyHappened are interesting, but you’d be better off picking only the ones that are strongest. Drop Odigo, that story goes no where except into eye-rolling territory. And the 9/11-Anthrax thing is interesting, but again, it’s just too far off topic to help convince anyone of anything.

If either of you had made one good point, and provided one good link, you might have gained some ground in convincing my friend Chris, an open minded fellow with anti-establishment leanings, about the “truth about 9/11.” Instead your all-out link assault makes it difficult to make any coherant point.

The best links of that bunch, in my opinion, were the WTC7-BBC story and this one, ‘The Dog That did Not Bark‘ which is a Sherlock Holmes allusion, suggesting that the secret service’s inaction on the morning of 9/11 indicates that they knew Bush was not a target.

I must tip my hat to Gab, who made a point with one sentence and provided one link, actually contributing to the topic by providing a link to a fuller translation. Thank you good sir! I hope you come again.

As for you, sega, by promoting Eric Hufschmid you seemed to do nothing but help to hurt the chances of other people finding acceptance of 9/11 truth. Hufs is at the fringe of the fringes, much kookier and far less credible than even Alex Jones. If you want to change people’s minds, the only thing Hufschmid is good for these days is making people turn away from continuing their 9/11 investigation online because they might end up on his website again. Then again, for many the same could be said about Jones.

Here’s an interesting exerpt. Hufschmid writes in an separate article on his own website title, “Why don’t I work with Smith any longer? ”

…. Smith didn’t want me putting links to information about the Apollo moon landing hoax, and he didn’t want me talking about the issue when he interviewed me for his radio shows. Smith trusted people such as Mike Rivero, who defend the Apollo moon landing. Even after I tried to explain that Apollo was a scam, he told me that it would do more harm than good to bring up the issue. I’ve heard this argument from many people in the 9/11 movement. It’s just another Zionist trick to convince people to ignore one of their big crimes.

Another gem, which I find amusing since i’m a listener of Alex Jones, who is on on the conspiracy-friendly GCN radio network.

…The GCN radio network turned out to be a Zionist operation. In February 2006 they decided to stop allowing Smith to produce radio shows.

Hahaha…Wow…I’m not going to spend any more time on that website, obviously. But that’s the point, isn’t it? I’m “travelling down a rabbit hole to see how far it goes,” and you, sega, try to send me and all my readers down a garbage chute.

Recently a gunman opened fire in an American shopping center, killing eight people and himself. Obviously this is a tragedy, and the result of someone who not understanding the true meaning of Christmas, which, as revealed in the 1999 cartoon Christmas classic, Christmas Evil, is you don’t shoot the place up. At the end of the film Dimitry discovers “the true meaning of Christmas” - by not shooting people. It’s a quaint and wholesome moral message which holds poignance in our ever more violent era, eight years since its release.

It pains me that the film was not able to make it to mass popularity in time to save these people’s lives. I only wish that the gunman had seen the film if only to discover that he wasn’t alone in his pain. Indeed, the lead antagonist of Christmas Evil had a rough childhood, and a “papa” who was “more interested in getting drunk” than being the young russian’s father. There was no stocking, nor christmas tree, and it was this that precipitated his North Pole ramage. We may find that may hold true for the self-dispatched shopping center gunman, except instead of accepting the true meaning of Christmas he turned gun on himself. Not a happy ending to an otherwise entertaining day at the mall.

I implore you, dear reader, to help us avert another tragedy. Please! Save lives by spreading this essential Christmas message: The true meaning of Christmas is you do not shoot the place up! This is the moral of the story of Christmas Evil, which, with your help, can be seen by millions of potential gunmen - before they go on their rampage. Thank you.

The historical mother load of false flag terrorism is Operation Gladio, which consisted of clandestine paramilitary groups that “stayed behind” after World War Two. The good guys, NATO, stuck around and blew up innocent civilians to maintain a “Strategy of Tension.” I’m not making this up. Eventually someone spilled the beans for whatever reason, and it was a big Scandal which caused the president, Francesco Cossiga, to step down. WikiPedia:

Only former [President] Francesco Cossiga confirmed Andreotti’s revelations, explaining that he was even “proud and happy” for his part in setting up Gladio as junior Defence Minister of the Christian Democratic Party. This lit up a political storm, requests were made for Cossiga’s (Italian President since 1985) resignation or impeachment for high treason. He refused to testify to the investigating Senate committee. Cossiga narrowly escaped his impeachment by stepping down on April 1992, three months before his term expired.

Paul Joseph Watson at PrisonPlanet.com writes a story headlined, “Ex-Italian President: Intel Agencies Know 9/11 An Inside Job,”

Cossiga’s tendency to be outspoken upset the Italian political establishment and he was forced to resign after revealing the existence of, and his part in setting up, Operation Gladio - a rogue intelligence network under NATO auspices that carried out bombings across Europe in the 60’s, 70’s and 80’s

And what does Watson say that Cossiga has been quoted as saying?

Cossiga’s new revelations appeared last week in Italy’s oldest and most widely read newspaper, Corriere della Sera. Below appears a rough translation.

“[Bin Laden supposedly confessed] to the Qaeda September [attack] to the two towers in New York [claiming to be] the author of the attack of the 11, while all the [intelligence services] of America and Europe … now know well that the disastrous attack has been planned and realized from the CIA American and the Mossad with the aid of the Zionist world in order to put under accusation the Arabic Countries and in order to induce the western powers to take part … in Iraq [and] Afghanistan…”

Cossiga first expressed his doubts about 9/11 in 2001, and is quoted in Webster Tarpley’s book as stating that “The mastermind of the attack must have been a “sophisticated mind, provided with ample means not only to recruit fanatic kamikazes, but also highly specialized personnel. I add one thing: it could not be accomplished without infiltrations in the radar and flight security personnel.”

Wow! That’s a real humdinger. Great scoop from Watson, but since he does not attribute the translation to anyone it wasn’t convincing. I had to see if Cossiga was who Watson says, and he is, according to WikiPedia. But! Did Cossiga really say that it is “well known” that that CIA and Mossad “planed and realized” the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001? I checked Babel Fish, which gave an awkward computerized translation, which I had to modify the grammar of first half just to make readable.

The video is not testified from the fact that Osama Bin Laden in it ‘confessa’ that al Qaeda was the author of the attack of the two towers in New York on September 11, while all the atmospheres democratics of America and Europe, with in front line those of the ‘centrosinistra’ Italian, by now know well that the disastrous attack has been planned and realized from the American CIA and the Mossad with the aid of the ’sionista ‘ world in order to put under accusation the Arabic Countries and in order to induce the western powers to take part are in Iraq are in Afghanistan. [emphasis portion unmodified from Babel Fish translation.]

My, my. That’s a very straight forward sentance that even Babel Fish couldn’t mix up or get confused. A little research and ‘Sionista’ is indeed “Zionist.” Evidently there was a recent Osama audio tape which mentioned the current Italian president. Cossiga doubted its veracity and referred to the entire thing a CIA-Mossad-Zionist plot. Watson uses Cossiga’s quote to support his view that “9/11 is an inside job.” Watson writes, “[Cossiga] can’t be sidelined as a crackpot conspiracy theorist.”

So, why would Cossiga say such a thing about 9/11? Is Cossiga the ‘Pen and Teller’ of the European Intelligence apartatus? A practiced magician who reveals how the tricks are done?

Why, in reply to an Osama audio tape, would he wade so deep into his opinion that he would go all-out and mention Zionists? His claim, not a new idea but coming from an interesting source, is the ultimate claim of our day. For me it is the big question because it is rife with taboo. When Cossiga attributes the attacks to Mossad interests with help from the “Zionist world” is this insipid “the Jews did it” theorizing, some sort of post 9/11 antisemitism? Does the truth about 9/11 actually include the phrase “Zionist,” and if so, I how do I proceed talking about it?

There is a blogger who calls himself George Washtington and he wrote a post called Are Those Who Questioion 911 Anti Semites?. He makes the point that Jewish individuals, who aren’t self hating, participate in “9/11 truth,” listing examples.

Blogspot George Washington also suggests that an honest investigation follows the facts and ignores the taboos:

As former Secretary of State Colin Powell once stated, “It is not anti-Semitic to criticize the policies of the state of Israel.” Presumably, criticizing illegal acts by Mossad or other Israeli services would also be acceptable.”
Therefore, there is nothing wrong with having a debate based upon whether or not there are credible facts justifying the hypothesis that portions of the 9/11 attacks were subcontracted out by rogue elements within the U.S. government to people associated with Mossad or other Israeli intelligence services, just as it is reasonable to discuss whether or not there are facts implicating British or other allied intelligence services in aiding and abetting the attacks.

Notably, five Israelis were arrested in New Jersey in on Sept. 11, 2001 for filming the attacks on the twin towers and “dancing,” and “giving each other high fives.” Supposedly they went investigation, the results of which not shared with the media. A TV news report, I don’t know the source, said that government officials said the investigation of the “dancing Israelis” could not be shared because it was “classified.” They were detained and deported on immigration violations. I’d provide a link if I could find a decent one.

The point is there was “from day one” evidence of Israeli (and Saudi Arabian and Pakistani, for that matter) involvement in the attacks, most of which was irrelevant for the official narrative which cast Osama bin Laden as the superhuman terror mastermind. And just because a certain group suffered genocide 60 years ago doesn’t mean they are incapable of being involved in this cultural war against Arabs.

Additionally, “Semitic” is defined as,”of, relating to, or constituting a subgroup of the Afro-Asiatic language group that includes Arabic, Hebrew, Amharic, and Aramaic.” Many definitions do say that it has come to refer to the Jewish people in particular. Yet, given that Arabs are Semites too maybe Israel-America, ironically, is the most antisemitic.