- "When you eliminate the
impossible, whatever remains--however improbable--must be the truth."
--Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
- Not long after September 11, 2001,
a story surfaced on the Internet accusing the Israelis of taking part in
a conspiracy that resulted in the World Trade Center and Pentagon
attacks. The origin of the story was attributed to Jordan's Al Watan
newspaper; and it was reported that Pakistani publications followed by
Islamic clerics in the Middle East and Central Asia spread the
- Another tragedy was born and
reared out of those reports. A number of anti-Semitic bigots hopped on
the bandwagon of that ill-considered, wild conjecture and misused it to
feed their rant against Jews.
- As might be expected, a number of
people stormed onto the Internet to debunk the Israel conspiracy
theories. That effectively put an end to questioning the official story
of a plot generated by Osama bin Laden and executed by his Al-Qaeda
operatives. No one dared ask the most important question: Who stood to
benefit from the catastrophe that killed thousands on September 11,
- Al-Qaeda? What benefit? Even
terrorists need a cause. "They hate America" isn't a cause. They're
jealous of America's freedoms" isn't a cause.
- Saudi Arabia? Michael Moore
suggests this in Dude, Where's My Country. But why? If there were an
affair between Bush and the Saudi royal family, how would 9/11 ever
benefit the Saudis? No conceivable benefit accrues to either the Saudi
royal family or the Saudi military.
- America's oil interests? This
seems to be a favorite among guessing pundits. However, if the Bush
cabal and the Saudis are in cahoots, they already have Middle East oil
interests sewn up. There's plenty of time to worry about Afghanistan gas
pipes and Iraqi oil when supplies get dangerously low. Why burn up
millions of gallons of fuel in a war to protect fuel supplies for
control of Iraqi oil? For what? In order to pay for the war
- What about G.W. Bush and the
Republican Party? While the "Patriot theme and "fighting terrorism
undoubtedly aided the Republicans in the 2002 elections as well as their
legislative agenda, the risk of prolonged occupations accompanied by
deaths of military personnel argue against any long term benefit to Bush
and his party. Combine that with continued loss of credibility over the
falsehoods used to justify unilateral attacks on Iraq, and any potential
benefit seen earlier goes up in smoke.
- The Bilderberg group and the
financial interests of a "New World Order"? That international finance
has been served by 9/11 seems obvious with the US being looted to serve
a trans-national elite with no allegiance to any nation. That they're
organized enough to plan and execute a national disaster like 9/11 is
- Israel? Without a sliver of doubt,
Israel was/is the major benefactor of the 9/11 strike. How has Israel
benefited? Mossad, Israel's intelligence agency, believed that Iraq
could have weapons of mass destruction and http://pballes.com/updates9.htm Israel wanted Iraq
neutralized before they had a chance to use them against Israel.
- Israeli hawks have, since the
beginnings of their occupation of Palestine, wanted to rid Palestine of
the Palestinians. So long as Palestinians remained in the occupied
territories, an Iraqi missile strike that would kill more Palestinians
than Israelis was impossible. So long as Iraq possessed a capacity to
even develop WMD,s it would be impossible for Israel to get rid of the
Palestinians. Thus, getting control of Iraq facilitated Israel's
ultimate desire to eliminate the Palestinians.
- How does 9/11 fit into the
Iraq-Israel scenario? 9/11 provided the clarion call for the so-called
war against terrorism. Without 9/11, the U.S. would have had no excuse
for invading Afghanistan. The battle against Al-Qaeda and bin Laden was
the precursor to the invasion of Iraq; and the trumped up connection
between Iraq and Al-Qaeda provided the excuse for invading Iraq.
- There's no doubt that Israel's
Mossad, the Middle East intelligence experts as far as America is
concerned, provided the assessment of Iraq's WMD's to America. The
following Associated Press report (December 8, 2003) makes clear, though
perhaps unwittingly, that Israelis believed that Iraq had WMD's.
- ISRAELI intelligence overplayed
the threat posed by Iraq and reinforced an assumption by American and
British counterparts that Saddam Hussein had large caches of weapons of
mass destruction, a retired Israeli general said today, after studying
the run-up to the US-led invasion of Iraq.
- The Israeli assessment may have
been colored by politics, including a desire to see Saddam Hussein
toppled, said Shlomo Brom, once a senior Israeli military intelligence
officer and now a researcher with Israel's top strategic think
- Brom stopped short of accusing
intelligence officials of intentionally misleading Britain and the
- Brom said in an interview today
that "Israeli intelligence was a full partner with the United States and
Britain in developing a false picture of Saddam Hussein's weapons of
mass destruction capability".
- He said Israeli intelligence
"badly overestimated the Iraqi threat to Israel and reinforced the
American and British belief that the weapons existed".
- Brom said the Israeli assessment
might have been influenced by politics.
- Brom's last comment was a gross
understatement! And while he stopped short of accusing Mossad of
intentionally misleading Britain and the United States, there's little
doubt that's exactly what happened.
- Considering again the answer to
the question "who benefited from 9/11?" it becomes perfectly clear that
Israel, and Israel alone, had reason to plot and execute the disaster
that hit The World Trade Center, the Pentagon and the four flights
involved in that fateful September day in 2001. Israel, however,
couldn't possibly have executed such a plan alone without help from some
US authorities. Who might possibly provide the means for accomplishing
that genocidal goal?
- The FBI and the CIA along with the
general category of "the Bush Administration" have been suggested in
conjecture about possible accomplices in a conspiracy. "The Bush
Administration" is much too broad to even be nominated for serious
consideration, with the ever-present possibility that somewhere among
the ranks there might be a whistle blower with a conscience.
- The FBI has certainly refused to
cooperate with inquirers outside the government; but that refusal to
release information in ongoing investigations cannot be logically
interpreted as part of a cover-up. The same can be said for the CIA.
Additionally, people in both agencies have revealed that they had
advanced knowledge of the potential hijackings.
- Apart from other considerations,
the CIA, having shared intelligence with Mossad and having been burnt on
a number of those occasions with false intelligence, would have no love
lost for the deceivers among their Israeli counterparts. According to
Gordon Thomas, "both the FBI and CIA regard Mossad as a clear and
present danger to U.S. national security."
- (Note - We urge you to read the
USAF report on Israel's thermonuclear blackmailing of America: http://www.rense.com/general35/isrnuk.htm -
- Who's left as cooperative partners
in the 9/11 executions that would form the basis for the American
invasions against all objections from most of the rest of the world? The
process of elimination leaves only the Department of Defense (DoD). Its
leaders are secretive enough to keep its plans under wraps. To violate
the top-secret code of silence, even by someone who later felt moved by
conscience to disclose the truth, would be cause for court martial and a
death sentence for treason, if not to an assassination made to look like
- Unlike the CIA, which has "never
killed Americans" in its covert activities, the DoD has been responsible
for the deaths of thousands of Americans, both in the military and among
civilians considered as collateral damage. The DoD has no qualms about
killing Americans when it serves their purpose.
- For 60 years the DoD managed to
cover up their prior knowledge of the planned Pearl Harbor attack by the
Japanese that killed 4575 US Navy personnel. The DoD also stopped US
fighter jets from scrambling to end the Israeli massacre of US Navy
personnel on the http://www.ussliberty.org/USS
- The DoD is the only body that
could have kept the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD)
from performing its duty to http://www.publicaction.com/911/noradsend2.html
scramble fighter jets to intercept the hijacked planes on 9/11. The DoD
was in the position to stop the hijacked jets from performing their
mission. They didn't, and they've never answered the question as to why
- Similarly, just as they were in a
position to stop the attack on Pearl Harbor, they did not. There was no
excuse for that failure other than using the attack to justify U.S.
entry into WWII. That the DoD did not intercept the hijacked aircraft on
9/11 is evidence that they wanted the end result to happen and
participated in the attack.
- Leading civilians in the DoD
figure among US leaders serving Israel. Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle
and Douglas Feith have been more devoted to Israeli interests than they
have to those of America. At best, they have acted as "dual
- Some background on these dual
loyalists of the DoD:
- Paul Wolfowitz, United States
Secretary of Defense: "The neoconservative members of President Bush's
cabinet led by Wolfowitz advocated pre-emptive strikes on terror cells
- "Wolfowitz, a 'hawkish'
conservative military analyst under Ronald Reagan, had in the 1990s,
during the Clinton presidency formulated a new foreign policy with
regard to Iraq and other 'potential aggressor states', dismissing
"containment, in favour of 'pre-emption' http://www.disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?title=Paul_Wolfowitz
strike first to eliminate threats."
- Such a strike could not be made
without an attack like Pearl Harbor or like 9/11.
Richard Perle, previously chairman, now member of the Defense Policy
Board for the DoD: together with Douglas Feith and Richard Wurmser,
Perle authored a paper "A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the
Realm," in 1996 which declared that "removing Saddam Hussein from power
in Iraq" was an "important Israeli strategic objective..." That removal
could not be accomplished without a 'casus belli' (an event used to
- http://middleeastinfo.org/article701.html Douglas
Feith, Undersecretary of Policy at the U.S. Department of
Defence: "A prolific writer, Feith has left a long paper trail of
anti-Arab tracts and diatribes against those who challenge or seek to
compromise Israel's strength and as he defines it, 'moral superiority'
over the Arabs." Feith would participate in any plot to advance Israel's
interests at the expense of the Arabs.
- Along with the DoD triumvirate,
add the two white house controllers. First, http://www.disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?title=David_Wurmser
David Wurmser, whose Israeli wife and close friend Perle make him the
perfect conduit to VP Richard Cheney. "...it was precisely because of
the strategic importance of the Levant that Wurmser advocated
overthrowing Iraqi President Saddam Hussein in favor of an Iraqi
National Congress.... 'Whoever inherits Iraq dominates the entire Levant
strategically,' he wrote in one 1996 paper for the Jerusalem-based
Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies." Iraq could not
be 'inherited' without 9/11 as an excuse for a pre-emptive
- The second, Elliot Abrams,
described in The Nation as "the nastiest policy warrior as Washington
has seen in decades" was convicted of lying to Congress about the Iran
Contra affair and he serves Israel in the National Security Council. As
Jim Lobe observed in Tom Paine "Israel's Likud Scores Big With White
House Appointment." Abrams would have no qualms about sacrificing
American lives for Israel's benefit.
- All of these Likudite Bush aides
are unequivocal supporters of Israel's conservative Likud Party, now
headed by the 'Butcher of Sabra & Shatilla' Ariel Sharon; and the
dual loyalists have past ties either to Likud or to Israeli
- Having eliminated the impossible,
what remains is not as improbable as it might have looked at first. What
remains are people in the DoD with a motive. Combine that with the
history of deception of both Mossad and the DoD as well as their proven
willingness to sacrifice American lives for their causes.
- Victor Ostrovsky (http://users.cyberone.com.au/myers/ostrovsky.html
By Way of Deception and http://users.cyberone.com.au/myers/ostrovsky.html
The Other Side of Deception) made it perfectly clear that Mossad often
infiltrated any organization it wanted to watch and/or control. For
them, infiltrating Al-Qaeda cells would be a cinch; and getting a number
of Arabs to hijack planes under any ruse would be normal Mossad
behavior. Ostrovsky, former Mossad agent, revealed how Mossad got
America to bomb Libya and fight Iraq. There's plenty of evidence of
Mossad agents posing as Arabs, thus supplying the "means" for the
attacks and blaming Al-Qaeda and the Arabs.
- There's no reason to believe that
the Arabs involved in the hijacking, who were not the expert flyers with
the skills required to accomplish the flying feats of 9/11, had a clue
about where they would end up in planes guided by remote control. All
the hijackers had to do was http://www.911-strike.com/remote_bb.htm turn over
the guidance to ground control in the hands of the DoD.
- Since the supposed Arab hijackers
couldn't even fly small planes solo, according to the testimony of their
flight instructors, and since remote control devices had proven
effective, the process of elimination again points to the only
conclusion remaining: 9/11 was planned and executed by Mossad and the
DoD in order to justify military action in the Middle East for the major
- Until now, the belief that Israel
could have anything to do with planning or executing the atrocities of
9/11 have been arbitrarily dismissed as 'conspiracy theory'. The Anti
Defamation League (ADL) in America has labeled any such beliefs as
- Conveniently, the ADL has chosen
to ignore the fact that Arabs are also Semites. Furthermore, presenting
a well-reasoned case against Israel - even when it or its agent's
activities are criminal - does not constitute anti-Semitism. Israel,
through its admittedly deceptive intelligence arm, Mossad, in tandem
with a DoD run by "dual loyalists", had all that it takes to establish a
case in a court of law: the means, the motive and the
- If the ADL or any other group
wishes to protect its followers from the dangers of spreading
anti-Semitism, they need to closely examine the activities of the war
hawks in both Tel Aviv (or Jerusalem) and Washington. Most importantly,
they need to ask and seek an honest answer to the question: who
benefited from the catastrophe that killed thousands on September 11,
- *Dr. Balles is a retired
university professor who has spent 34 years in the Middle East.