Osama bin Laden Patsy 9/11

Timeline: Osama Bin Laden Died on December 14, 2001 From Complications Due to Kidney Failure

In light of Sy Hersh’s claim that the raid on Osama bin Laden in 2011 is “one big lie,” here’s an overview of evidence in support of an alternative narrative: bin Laden died in December 2001 in Tora Bora from a lung complication as a result of kidney failure starting at least since mid-2000. All sources are from the mainstream media, many of which have since been “scrubbed” from the internet.

2000 to September 2001: Reports Emerge of bin Laden Dying From Kidney Disease

In March 2000 the Chicago Tribune reports that an Afghan witness and “Western intelligence official” say bin Laden is suffering from severe kidney and liver failure. Link: http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2000-03-25/news/0003250085_1_laden-bin-religious-militia

This story was also picked up by CBS News in 2000, who outright lead with the title that “Bin Laden Reported to be Dying” from “kidney disease.” Link: http://web.archive.org/web/20010212010328/http://www.cbsnews.com/now/story/0,1597,172666-412,00.shtml

In July 2001, the South Asia Analysis Group reports: “Bin Laden, who suffers from renal deficiency, has been periodically undergoing dialysis in a Peshawar military hospital with the knowledge and approval of the Inter-Services Intelligence, (ISI) if not of Gen.Pervez Musharraf himself.” Link: http://web.archive.org/web/20011007021426/http://www.saag.org/papers3/paper266.html

September to November 2001: bin Laden is Trapped in Afghanistan, Unable to Receive Kidney Treatments

In September 2001, PBS’ Frontline interviews the former general counsel for the CIA, mentioning reports from 1998 that the DEA found out Osama bin Laden was undergoing kidney dialysis with a doctor in Peshwar. They mention further that the DEA wanted to poison bin Laden through his dialysis machine, but the CIA allegedy rejected this due to the ban on assassinations. Link: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/terrorism/interviews/smith.html

In November 2001, The Guardian is reporting that French intelligence officials say bin Laden was flown to Dubai for kidney treatment in July of 2001, where he also met with several CIA agents and the head of Saudi intelligence. This story is also picked up by several French newspapers. Link: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/nov/01/afghanistan.terrorism

In his first interview since 9/11, in November 2001 bin Laden talks to a Pakistani newspaper and claims that his “kidneys are all right” and denies visiting a hospital in Dubai the previous year (note that he may have visited one in Pakistan). In the same interview he also asserts, clearly lying, that he has “nuclear weapons.” Link: http://dawn.com/news/5647/osama-claims-he-has-nukes-if-us-uses-n-arms-it-will-get-same-response/2

December 2001: bin Laden is Dead, Buried in Afghanistan

In December of 2001, the New York Times reports on “high-level murmurings that bin Laden is dead.” Link: http://www.nytimes.com/2001/12/26/international/asia/26LADE.html

That same day,citing a Taliban source, Fox News reports that bin Laden has died due to an “untreated lung complication” from kidney disease. About 30 “close associates” reportedly attended bin Laden’s funeral in the Tora Bora region of Afghanistan. A source concludes that the U.S. government and other forces are in a “mad search operation” but will never be able to locate the now-dead bin Laden, buried in an unmarked location. Link: http://www.foxnews.com/story/2001/12/26/report-bin-laden-already-dead/

Late December 2001 to March 2002: bin Laden’s “Death Video” is Released

In late December of 2001, after reports of bin Laden’s funeral, a new video appears of a gaunt, sickly Osama bin Laden. The London Telegraph reports, verbatim: “The recording was dismissed by the Bush administration yesterday as sick propaganda possibly designed to mask the fact the al-Qa’eda leader was already dead.” One aid further concludes that the video was created earlier in the event bin Laden is dead, who by December of 2001 was so heavily surrounded he would have been unable to escape to obtain kidney dialysis. Link: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/1366508/US-casts-doubt-on-bin-Ladens-latest-message.html

At this time CBS news also runs a story on bin Laden receiving kidney disease treatments in Pakistan the week before 9/11. Link:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmhXSUIFLZ4

In January of 2002, The Guardian reports that the president of Pakistan speculates that bin Laden is now dead of untreated kidney disease based on video and photographs of a gaunt-looking bin Laden. Link: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/jan/19/afghanistan.oliverburkeman

In January of 2002, based on his analysis of video and photographs of bin Laden from December 2001, CNN’s Dr. Sanjay Gupta says that bin Laden seems to be having renal failure. He notes kidney dialysis is expensive, and suggests bin Laden would need help in obtaining medical treatment. Link: http://edition.cnn.com/2002/HEALTH/01/21/gupta.otsc/

In March 2002, the BBC reports on an interview with bin Laden’s wife, who speaks of bin Laden in the past tense, notes his failing kidney and frequent use of pills and other medicines. She says she has not seen her husband since September 2001, but holds out hope that he is still alive: “I feel deep inside me that he is still alive.” She also notes that bin Laden’s wish was to die in Afghanistan and nowhere else: “He never spoke to me about his intention to leave Afghanistan and always wished to die there. He told me once that if he ever left Afghanistan, it would be to meet his Creator.” She also says that bin Laden “always suffered from kidney and stomach pains and that he “told me once that he was going to Pakistan for treatment.” Link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/monitoring/media_reports/1871182.stm

In March and April of 2002, U.S. officials downplay the threat of bin Laden, with Rumsfeld even saying the bin Laden threat has been “neutralized.” Even Bush, called out for rarely mentioning bin Laden in 2002, admits: “We haven’t heard from him [bin Laden] in a long time… I don’t know where he is. I really just don’t spend that much time on him, to be honest with you.” Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PGmnz5Ow-o

In May 2002, ABC News reports on a new spliced-together tape from unknown time periods in which bin Laden appears “about the same” (that is, sickly-looking) as in the tape from December 2011. ABC News also says they have “learned intelligence reports indicate bin Laden had received a kidney transplant in Pakistan,” but do not know when. Link: http://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=79973&page=1

July 2002: FBI Chief Says bin Laden is Most Likely Dead; Nothing from bin Laden Since December 2001

In July 2002, the BBC reveals a bombshell: the FBI’s counter-terrorism chief Dale Watson says bin Laden is ‘”probably dead.” Conveniently, bin Laden’s followers’ claim that bin Laden will “not make more video statements until his group launches another attack on the United States.” Link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/2135473.stm

In July 2002, CNN reports that bin Laden’s close bodyguards were captured in February of 2002, but not bin Laden. The article also quotes mentions some high-level officials: “Some high-level U.S. officials are already convinced by such evidence that bin Laden, who has not been seen or heard from in months, is dead.” Link: http://web.archive.org/web/20021204040117/http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/07/30/binladen.son/

In July 2002, Time Magazine reports that “intelligence officials are not certain whether Osama bin Laden is alive or dead” but that “they have found a tantalizing document that suggests he was living at least as recently as the last days of December [of 2001].” Link: http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1002840,00.html

In July 2002, The New York Times runs another article on how Osama bin Laden is likely dead. The author notes how unusual it would be for bin Laden, known for his constant desire for media attention, would be silent for over half a year. Link: http://www.nytimes.com/2002/07/11/opinion/the-death-of-bin-ladenism.html

October 2002: Intelligence Officials Confirm bin Laden is Dead; bin Laden’s Will is Released

Also in October 2002 the D.C.-based news service The World Tribune, citing Israeli intelligence sources, reports that the United States and Israel have concluded that bin Laden died in Afghanistan in December 2001. They note that additional bin Laden messages are “probably fabrications,” and that bin Laden’s heir has been chosen. Link: http://web.archive.org/web/20021205223313/

The president of Afghanistan also concludes that bin Laden is probably dead: “The more we don’t hear of him, and the more time passes, there is the likelihood that he probably is either dead or seriously wounded somewhere.” Link: http://edition.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiapcf/central/10/06/karzai.binladen/

In October 2002 CNN reports that U.S. intelligence officials have obtained Osama bin Laden’s will, which is dated December 14, 2001 (approximately the same date as has been reported bin Laden’s funeral in Tora Bora by Fox News and other outlets). CNN also reports that there has been no evidence of bin Laden since December of 2001. Link: http://edition.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/europe/10/26/binladen.will/

2002 Onwards: Efforts to Target bin Laden are Closed Down; bin Laden = “Elvis”

In 2004, the LA Times quotes Donald Rumsfeld (who mixes up Hussein with bin Laden) as admitting: “We’ve not seen him [bin Laden] on a video since 2001.” Link: http://newsmine.org/content.php?ol=9-11/binladen/death/rumsfeld-says-no-clues-to-bin-laden-since-2001.txt

In 2006 the New York Times reports the CIA had officially closed down the unit focused on capturing bin Laden the previous year. Link: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/04/washington/04intel.html?ex=1309665600&en=3779ed9b98bb9d22&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

In 2006, U.S. and Pakistani officials say they have not received any information about bin Laden in years: “no tips from informants, no snippets from electronic intercepts, no points on any satellite image.” The article rehashes the December 2001 video of bin Laden as the most recent evidence (other than a second-hand claim from 2003) of bin Laden’s existence. Some commandos are now giving Osama bin Laden the codename “Elvis.” Link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/09/AR2006090901105.html

The available reports overwhelmingly supports the view that bin Laden died of kidney failure in December of 2001. We have mainstream media reports from a variety of sources, and zero credible evidence since then, as admitted by top level offiicals. Even if you believe the official story, the evidence very strongly suggests some entity (either the CIA, Saudi Royal Family, the Pakistani government, or all the above) helped bin Laden survive long enough via medical treatments to be killed at a later point in time.

The Official Naritive

The Operation That Took Out Osama Bin Laden

“The American team engaged in a firefight. Osama bin Laden did resist.”

These words, uttered by a senior Pentagon official, summed up the now-historic raid on May 2, 2011, during which SEAL Team Six secretly descended upon a compound in Pakistan, blew down doors and engaged enemy combatants. The goal: kill or capture terrorist leader Osama bin Laden. 

Gunfire was exchanged as SEALs made their way through the compound, up to the second and third floors, where bin Laden and his family were hiding. Four combatants and one woman used as a human shield were killed in the raid, according to Pentagon statements.

“The sole focus of the operation was to kill or capture Osama bin Laden,” a DoD official told reporters after the raid, during a background briefing.  

As we recognize the anniversary of the raid, it would likely be an understatement to call it a “defining moment” in U.S. military history. With its successful completion, the operation ended the life of the man regarded as the mastermind behind the terror attacks of September 11, 2001 which claimed thousands of lives.

Tracking Down bin Laden

For years, military and intelligence forces had scoured the globe to find bin Laden’s hideout, and in September 2010, the CIA got the lead they needed when they used surveillance photos and intelligence reports to determine that a known al Qaeda courier was visiting a compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan.  

Over the next few months, the CIA used informants, surveillance and other intelligence gathering measures to arrive at the conclusion that bin Laden and his family were hiding out in the compound – but up until the attack, there was no hard proof that bin Laden was present, only the best guess available.

President Obama discussed the decision to attack with 60 Minutes following the raid. “This was a very difficult decision, in part because the evidence we had was not absolutely conclusive,” he said.

Obama said he and his team were not surprised to find bin Laden hiding in plain sight, but were surprised to learn that the compound had been there for so long without information leaking out about it. “I think the image that bin Laden had tried to promote was that he was an ascetic, living in a cave,” Obama told 60 Minutes. “This guy was living in a million-dollar compound in a residential neighborhood.”

 “It was the best intelligence work I’ve ever seen that enabled those in the military who executed this mission to do so successfully,” former Joint Chief of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen told a DoD reporter. “There was only a 55 percent chance that the 9/11 attack mastermind was in the compound.”



My Commentary

In my research experience the ‘Official Story’ is most often disinformation. As will be shown in forthcoming reports, the entire official narrative of the events of 9/11 is simply preposterous and must be considered a lie and a cover-up.


15 thoughts on “Osama bin Laden Patsy 9/11

  1. This historic interview with President Carter’s National Security advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski confirms that the so-called “Soviet-Afghan war” was triggered and initiated not by the Soviet Union but by the United States.

    America has been at war with Afghanistan for more than forty Years. It started in July 1979. It is still ongoing.

    America’s War against the people of Afghanistan started on July 3, 1979, when President Carter, on the advice of his National Security advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski “signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul”.

    Confirmed by this 1998 interview with Zbigniew Brzezinski, the CIA’s intervention in Afghanistan preceded the entry of Soviet forces into Afghanistan in the context of a military cooperation agreement with the Kabul government similar in form to that reached between Damascus and Moscow in the context of the ongoing war in Syria. That agreement between Moscow and Kabul was signed on December 24, 1979.

    Confirmed by Zbigniew Brzezinski, Soviet forces (in a cooperation agreement with a secular Afghan government) were fighting the Al Qaeda mercenaries who had been recruited by the CIA.

    Amply documented, the recruitment, training and indoctrination of the Mujahideen was financed by the drug trade which was supported covertly by the CIA.

    The terrorists were recruited starting in July 1979. They were used to undermine and destroy Afghanistan’s secular social structure. The decision of the Carter Administration in early July 1979 to intervene and destabilize Afghanistan’s secular government was conducive to Afghanistan’s destruction as a nation-state.

    These are the realities of history.

    The official justification for the US-NATO War on Afghanistan which started on October 7, 2001 was that an unnamed foreign power attacked America on September 11, 2001, and that consequently “the laws of war” apply, allowing the nation under attack, to strike back in the name of “self-defense”.

    And those same Al Qaeda affiliated Islamic terrorists had been recruited by the US starting in July 1979. They were supported and financed by the US.

    What was initiated in 1979 is best described as “America’s War With Terrorists” whereby Al Qaeda recruits are used to destroy secular sovereign nations in a diabolical covert operation which has now extended its thrust from the Middle East to South East Asia, sub-Saharan Africa and Beyond.


    Interview with National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski

    Question: The former director of the CIA, Robert Gates, stated in his memoirs [“From the Shadows”], that American intelligence services began their aid to the Mujahideen in Afghanistan 6 months before the Soviet intervention. In this period you were the national security adviser to President Carter. You therefore played a role in this affair. Is that correct?

    Brzezinski: Yes. According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahideen began during the 1980s, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, 24 December 1979. But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise.

    Indeed, it was on July 3, 1979 that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the president in which I explained to him that in my opinion this aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention.

    Q: Despite this risk, you were an advocate of this covert action. But perhaps you yourself desired this Soviet entry into war and looked to provoke it?

    B: It isn’t quite that. We didn’t push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would.

    Q: When the Soviets justified their intervention by asserting that they intended to fight against a secret involvement of the United States in Afghanistan, people didn’t believe them. However, there was a basis of truth. You don’t regret anything today?

    B: Regret what? That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it? The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter. We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam war. Indeed, for almost 10 years, Moscow had to carry on a war unsupportable by the government, a conflict that brought about the demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet empire.

    Q: And neither do you regret having supported the Islamic fundamentalism, having given arms and advice to future terrorists?

    B: What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Muslims or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the Cold War?

    Q: Some stirred-up Muslims? But it has been said and repeated Islamic fundamentalism represents a world menace today.

    B: Nonsense! It is said that the West had a global policy in regard to Islam. That is stupid. There isn’t a global Islam. Look at Islam in a rational manner and without demagoguery or emotion. It is the leading religion of the world with 1.5 billion followers. But what is there in common among Saudi Arabian fundamentalism, moderate Morocco, Pakistan militarism, Egyptian pro-Western or Central Asian secularism? Nothing more than what unites the Christian countries.

    **Translated from French by William Blum


    Michel Chossudovsky, August 22, 2021




    1. “Possible, but unlikely. That assumes the “military industrial complex” is unified and well organized.”–David

      It is not assuming anything at all. At the time the military industrial complex was in the hands of the people who wrote the Project for the American Century docuument,

      “Rebuilding America’s Defenses”

      Written before the September 11 attacks, and during political debates of the War in Iraq, a section of Rebuilding America’s Defenses entitled “Creating Tomorrow’s Dominant Force” became the subject of considerable controversy:

      **”Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor.”**

      Journalist John Pilger pointed to this passage when he argued that the Bush administration had used the events of September 11 as an opportunity to capitalize on long-desired plans.

      Some critics went further, asserting that Rebuilding America’s Defenses should be viewed as a program for global American hegemony. Writing in Der Spiegel in 2003, Jochen Bölsche claimed that Rebuilding America’s Defenses “had been developed by PNAC for Rumsfeld, Cheney, Wolfowitz and Libby,” and was “devoted to matters of ‘maintaining US pre-eminence, thwarting rival powers and shaping the global security system according to US interests.'”

      British MP Michael Meacher made similar allegations in 2003, stating that the document was “a blueprint for the creation of a global Pax Americana,” which had been “drawn up for” key members of the Bush administration.

      Academic Peter Dale Scott subsequently wrote

      “[PNAC’s] ideology was summarized in a major position paper, Rebuilding America’s Defenses, in 2000. This document advocated a global Pax Americana unrestrained by international law …”

      You need to actually read this link;




    2. The initial bombing US of Afghanistan; On October 7, 2001, a U.S.-led coalition begins attacks on Taliban-controlled Afghanistan with an intense bombing campaign by American and British forces, officially launched ‘Operation Enduring Freedom’. Yes, these were indeed war crimes,
      First because the Taliban had nothing to do with the attacks of 9/11. Second because Osama bin Laden had nothing to do with the attacks of 9/11, which was the excuse the Bush regime gave for the attacks, that the Taliban was “harboring” bin Laden.

      Third, and most importantly is because the US initially radicalized the Taliban, writing and producing the text books promoting violent Jihad in illustrated school books aimed at the young.

      The Taliban indoctrinates kids with jihadist textbooks paid for by the U.S.

      Osama bin Laden Patsy 9/11




  2. Al Qaeda a Subsidiary of Western Intelligence

    “al Qaeda” is in fact a tool of, funded by and equipped by western governments specifically the USA. ‘al Qaeda’ is essentially a subsidiary of CIA. See:



    . . . . . .
    Operation Cyclone was the code name for the United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) program to arm and finance the Afghan mujahideen prior to and during the Soviet war in Afghanistan, from 1979 to 1989. The program leaned heavily towards supporting militant Islamic groups that were favoured by neighbouring Pakistan, rather than other, less ideological Afghan resistance groups that had also been fighting the Marxist-oriented Democratic Republic of Afghanistan regime since before the Soviet intervention[citation needed]. Operation Cyclone was one of the longest and most expensive covert CIA operations ever undertaken;[1] funding began with $20–$30 million per year in 1980 and rose to $630 million per year in 1987.[2] Funding continued after 1989 as the mujahideen battled the forces of Mohammad Najibullah’s PDPA during the civil war in Afghanistan (1989–1992).[3]


    . . . . . . .

    How Washington Funded the Taliban
    by Ted Galen Carpenter – CATO Institute
    United States has made common cause with an assortment of dubious regimes around the world to wage the war on drugs. Perhaps the most shocking example was Washington’s decision in May 2001 to financially reward Afghanistan’s infamous Taliban government for its edict ordering a halt to the cultivation of opium poppies.

    When the Taliban implemented a ban on opium cultivation in early 2001, U.S. officials were most complimentary. James P. Callahan, director of Asian Affairs for the State Department’s Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs, uncritically relayed the alleged accounts of Afghan farmers that “the Taliban used a system of consensus-building” to develop and carry out the edict. That characterization was more than a little suspect because the Taliban was not known for pursuing consensus in other aspects of its rule. Columnist Robert Scheer was justifiably scathing in his criticism of the U.S. response. “That a totalitarian country can effectively crack down on its farmers is not surprising,” Sheer noted, but he considered it “grotesque” for a U.S. official to describe the drug-crop crackdown in such benign terms.

    Yet the Bush administration did more than praise the Taliban’s proclaimed ban of opium cultivation. In mid-May, 2001, Secretary of State Colin Powell announced a $43 million grant to Afghanistan in addition to the humanitarian aid the United States had long been providing to agencies assisting Afghan refugees. Given Callahan’s comment, there was little doubt that the new stipend was a reward for Kabul’s anti-drug efforts. That $43 million grant needs to be placed in context. Afghanistan’s estimated gross domestic product was a mere $2 billion. The equivalent financial impact on the U.S. economy would have required an infusion of $215 billion. In other words, $43 million was very serious money to Afghanistan’s theocratic masters.

    To make matters worse, U.S. officials were naive to take the Taliban edict at face value. The much-touted crackdown on opium poppy cultivation appears to have been little more than an illusion. Despite U.S. and UN reports that the Taliban had virtually wiped out the poppy crop in 2000-2001, authorities in neighboring Tajikistan reported that the amounts coming across the border were actually increasing. In reality, the Taliban gave its order to halt cultivation merely to drive up the price of opium the regime had already stockpiled.

    Even if the Taliban had tried to stem cultivation for honest reasons, U.S. cooperation with that regime should have been morally repugnant. Among other outrages, the Taliban government prohibited the education of girls, tortured and executed political critics, and required non-Muslims to wear distinctive clothing—a practice eerily reminiscent of Nazi Germany’s requirement that Jews display the Star of David on their clothing. Yet U.S. officials deemed none of that to be a bar to cooperation with the Taliban on drug policy.




  3. Hi, William. Rick here from substack. I read over a bit on both your blogs. I know a bit about the 9/11 stuff but not enough to be knowledgeable on it. Sure looks like you’ve put some time into it — and I’ll read over it some more.

    I hadn’t heard of this about Osama until now though. I don’t follow news of any kind any more — I all-but-abandoned social media a year ago. The only reason I do anything on it now is to spread the word about my blog a bit, but that’s it. I’m just disgusted by all of the media and all politics of all brands. I will say this much for now on the issues you’ve written about: For people who would manufacture a war in the Middle East — I wouldn’t put anything past them.

    The reason I focus so much on the nuclear claims on Iraq — is that there’s no argument to be made about it (it’s as demonstrably provable as it gets). There was never a genuine debate about those tubes — they just made it up. But what apologists do is muddy the waters by throwing in all this other garbage that has nothing to do with the tubes (like old sarin gas shells and such). That prevents the possibility of ever having the discussion on what the issue is actually about.

    For whatever reason, supporters can’t wrap their minds about the idea that their leaders would lie to them on this level — which prevents the possibility that they would ever believe something like 9/11 being rigged.

    In other words, Hitler was right:


    All this was inspired by the principle — which is quite true in itself — that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously.

    — Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf (James Murphy translation, page 134)


    I took a dual-level course on Hitler and 20th Century Germany at Purdue. Read Mein Kampf and some other great books as well (including one on Kaiser William II that was fantastic). A couple other quotes along those lines: https://onevoicebecametwo.life/principles-of-propaganda/

    By the way, since you like history — are you familiar with Dan Carlin’s podcasts? His Blueprint for Armageddon Series on WW I is out of this world.

    If you’re interested, I can send you a Dropbox or OneDrive link to them. I got them for free at first — and then later paid for them (it was the least I could do for such incredible work). So you’d essentially be using my free version. This guy brings WW I to life in ways I could not have imagined.


    1. Hi Rick,
      Thank you for your comment. You make a lot of points that may take me some time to respond to, and in more than one reply.

      I have read many books about the Third Reich. The first history book I bought and read after I graduated from high School was The Rise and Fall of The Third Riech by William L. Shirer. I have since that time read numerous books on the person Adolf Hitler himself, viewed from many perspectives, historical and psychological. I think I gained a very good insight into the pathological personality that spans the history of the world through such studies.

      Of course I read his own book, Mein Kampf. The insights on power politics are valuable – even if somewhat plagiaristic. The antisemic aspects of the book are not so unusual for that time period in much of Europe,or even the United States (if we are honest with ourselves). It was the way that these ideas were put in practice under the Reich that is so horrifying.
      .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

      As a general consideration when dealing with our detractors, we should always keep this in mind about the rules of debate and critical thinking:

      Argument from incredulity, also known as argument from personal incredulity or appeal to common sense, is a fallacy in informal logic. It asserts that a proposition must be false because it contradicts one’s personal expectations or beliefs, or is difficult to imagine.

      These types of arguments will be the most common from our detractors by far.

      I would like to introduce you to Antony Sutton, and urge you to read his books, especially his Wall Street series. And his masterpiece, SKULL & BONES by Sutton,. America’s secret establishment: An Introduction to the Order of Skull and Bones Includes bibliographical references and index.
      219 pages

      You can read it at this link:


      Carroll Quigley is another importand scholar to look into. His book Tragedy & Hope is a deep study into the conspiratorial worlld of Cecil Rhodes and his establishment of the Round Table Groups, that eventually evolved into Council of Foreign Relations and the Royal Instute of International Affairs (Chatham House)

      More to come later…


      1. Sounds like you’re really well-read (far more than I am). My God, I loved that class. Unfortunately, I loaned my copy of Mein Kampf to a friend several years ago and still haven’t gotten it back. I just contacted him a couple weeks ago to ask about that, in fact. By the way, have you ever read The Holcroft Covenant by Robert Ludlum? It’s fantastic. Sounds like some interesting stuff to check out — thanks for passing along your recommendations. I just got started reading a book called Enough Already (on the War on Terror). A friend of mine sent me a signed copy from a book signing she went to.

        Liked by 1 person

  4. No, I haven’t read The Holcroft Covenant, but I really love Ludlum’s Jason Bourne series.

    I haven’ read any novels for quit a long time. I’ve been reading mostly nonfiction for years. I do like to watch movies though. I really liked The Good Shepherd, which was very close to the reality of the beginning of the CIA. Loved the Bourne series. And I wantch Mel Gibson’s CONSPIRACY THEORY, at least once a year. I also watch Gibson’s THE PATRIOT, on July 4th every year.


    1. I’ll have to give The Good Shepherd another shot sometime. The Patriot is always gold. Conspiracy Theory is great but I haven’t seen it in ages. I just recently watched The Pianist for the first time. It was excellent. I mostly read non-fiction as well (I read The Holcroft Covenant in college). I brought it up because of its fictional Fourth Reich. I’m listening to Hamilton on audio book — it’s been amazing. Have you read McCullough’s John Adams and 1776? Both are phenomenal. As you probably noticed from my site, I’m a big fan of John and Abigail.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. My great-great-great grandfather was a major in the Continital Army during the Revolutionary War. I am so proud to be of his stock.

        Military Service On 15 Sep 1778 Andrew was appointed Major of the 2nd Virginia Battalion, and at one point was commander of Fort Dinwiddie in present day Bath County.

        Maj. Andrew Lockridge was born in 1730 in Augusta County, Virginia. He fought in the Revolutionary War as a rank of Major with the Militia of Augusta City, Virginia Infantry. Major Lockridge served as Captain under Gen. Andrew Lewis in the Point Pleasant campaign and belonged to Col. Charles Lewis’ regiment. He was in the battle of Point Pleasant Oct. 10, 1774, and left there in command of 119 men to guard wounded when on Oct. 17th Gen. Lewis crossed the Ohio. Following the fall of 1776, Capt. Lockridge was at times in command of Fort Dinwiddie, In 1777, he was at Vance’s Fort, and a year later at Clover Lick,

        Greenbriar County. In 1778, he was made Major of the second Battalion of the Augusta Militia. Regiments of this section were at the battle of Cowpens and Guilford. His place of residence during the Revolution was Cow Pasture, Augusta County, Virginia.[1] [2] He married Jean (Jane) Graham Apr. 7, 1762.[3] Andrew died on March 15, 1791, in Augusta County, Virginia, at the age of 61, and was buried in Augusta County (now Highland County), Virginia on his homestead in the Lockridge Family Cemetery.

        Andrew Lockridge
        Date: 10 Apr 1730
        Place: Virginia


        Liked by 1 person

  5. The essential core of the 9/11 false flag operation was that it was a PSYOP. One that at first galvonized the US population to support the phony “War on Terrorism” and then the psychological backlash and demoralization of that same populace with a massive outbreak of Post Tramatic Stress Syndrome.

    The first reaction gave the Neocons their “war on terrorism” and the domestic counterpart of draconian laws in the PATRIOT Act.

    The passion play of the “Grand Chessboard”, Zbigniew Brzezinski’s overarching plan for using the Middle East as a staging ground for global conquest. Plus a zombified domestic “audience” that would go along with any insane plan of the regime in power.

    20 years later the world is still reeling from this madness. The US still has troops in Afghanistan, and will leave “military contractors” when those the troops leave … just like has happened in every nation torn assunder by Brzezinski’s Mad Hatter Tea Party.

    And now America is suffering anew another Lewis Carroll nightmare with the Humpty Dumptyism of absurdist Woke ideology at play in the propaganda centers of US education system from University down to Kindergarten.

    ‘I don’t know what you mean by “glory”,’ Alice said.
    ‘Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. ‘Of course you don’t–till I tell you. I meant “there’s a nice knock-down argument for you!”’
    ‘But “glory” doesn’t mean “a nice knock-down argument”, Alice objected.
    ‘When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean–neither more nor less.’
    ‘The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean different things–that’s all.’
    ‘The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master–that’s all’



    1. That’s super cool about your great-great-great grandfather. I can certainly see how The Patriot brings extra-special meaning on that.

      By the way, you probably know this — but the British Dragoon uniforms in the movie (were actually green). They put some green into it for some authenticity, but didn’t want to confuse the audience — so the the outside was red.


  6. Prior to 9/11: US Covert Support to Al Qaeda in Macedonia, “Financing Both Sides”

    Michel Chossudovsky, August 9, 2021

    US Finances Ethnic Warfare in the Balkans
    by Michel Chossudovsky

    Antiwar.com, April 2001,

    Global Research, September 2001


    While Washington supports the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, it is at the same time – behind the scenes – funneling money and military hardware to the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) now engaged in a border war with the Macedonian Security Forces. In a cruel irony, Washington is arming and advising both the KLA attackers and the Macedonian defenders under military and intelligence authorization acts approved by the US Congress. Military Professional Resources Inc. (MPRI), a mercenary outfit on contract to the Pentagon, is helping Macedonia – as part of a US military aid package – “to deter armed aggression and defend Macedonian territory.” But MPRI is also advising and equipping the KLA, which is responsible for the terrorist assaults. In this war, the American military-intelligence apparatus is pulling strings “on both sides of the fence.” What is the hidden agenda?

    “[The] United States of America and the Kosovo Liberation Army stand for the same human values and principles … Fighting for the KLA is fighting for human rights and American values.”(Senator Joseph Lieberman, quoted in the Washington Post, 28 April 1999)


    The Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) – transformed in September 1999 into the Kosovo Protection Corps (KPC) under UN auspices – is behind the terrorist attacks in the Tetovo region of Macedonia as well as in Southern Serbia. In Macedonia, these assaults are waged by the KLA’s proxy: the Ushtira Clirimtare Komtare (UCK) or National Liberation Army (NLA). The terrorists operate from KLA bases inside Kosovo under KFOR protection.

    Supported by the US, the KLA and its various proxies are well equipped. According to Carl Bildt (special UN coordinator for the Balkans), the Macedonian Security Forces “are no match” for the rebels: “the guerrillas are a competent military organization… They have a core of very experienced fighters. They are well fortified, evidently well prepared, and in all probability they control substantial parts of the hinterland.”

    But where did they get the money? The Western media conveys the impression that the National Liberation Army (NLA) developed into a modern rebel force overnight, spontaneously “out of thin air” and that NATO leaders have no contacts with the KLA.


    According to the (London) Sunday Times,

    “American intelligence agents have admitted they helped to train the Kosovo Liberation Army before NATO’s bombing of Yugoslavia.”1

    A review of US Congressional documents would suggest that CIA support was not discontinued after the war.2 Moreover, while the KLA maintains its links both to the CIA and criminal syndicates involved in the Balkans narcotics trade, the paramilitary organisation -renamed the Kosovo Protection Corps (KPC) has been elevated to UN status, implying the granting of legitimate sources of funding through UN as well as through bilateral channels.

    Procurement of military supplies, training of the KLA and military advisers has been entrusted to Military Professional Resources Inc. (MPRI), a US based mercenary outfit linked to the Pentagon. The pattern is similar to that followed in Croatia and in the Bosnian Muslim-Croatian Federation where so-called “equip and train” programmes were put together by the Pentagon.


    But there is something else even more terrifying which has not been revealed to public opinion. The guerilla war in the Tetovo region of Macedonia is being financed and therefore controlled by Washington “on both sides” of the border. While Washington pumps money into the KLA, the FYR of Macedonia – which has been an obedient client state – is also the recipient of US military aid and training. Macedonia is a member of NATO’s Partnership for Peace (PfP) and aspires to acquire full NATO membership.

    The same group of US military advisers on contract with the KLA is also “helping” the Macedonian Armed Forces. The MPRI – while assisting the KLA in its terrorist assaults – is also present behind enemy lines in Macedonia under a so-called “Stability and Deterrence Program.” The later is intent upon “assisting the Macedonian Armed Forces … to deter armed aggression and, should deterrence fail, defend Macedonian territory….”14 What is happening is that the US mercenary company with a mandate “to defend the border” is also advising the KLA on how best “to attack the border.”

    Is this not crystal clear: The military-intelligence ploy is to finance both sides of the conflict, provide military aid to one side and finance the other side. And then “make them fight.” It’s a sinister military-intelligence game, an “insider operation” with US military advisers on both sides from the same mercenary outfit (the MPRI). Macedonia’s “Stability and Deterrence Program” is in fact largely supported by US foreign military sales (FMS), namely MPRI is in charge of delivering (i.e. dumping) to the Macedonian Armed Forces obsolete weapons and hardware which the US Department of Defense wants to get rid of.

    Moreover, with its various sources of financing (drugs, Islamic organisations, US military aid, contributions from the US-Albanian community), the KLA and its Macedonian proxy the Ushtira Clirimtare Komtare have the upper edge. The money channeled from various sources including the drug trade far exceeds the meager FMS allocations granted in the form of surplus military equipment to the Macedonian Ministry of Defence.15

    The friendly and cordial meetings held in Skopje (July 2000) between General Henry H. Shelton, Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff and his Macedonian counterpart, General Jovan Andrevski, constitute an obvious smoke screen. While America’s top brass pays lip service to its PfP partner and ally, the KLA – with the support of the Albanian American community – is actively recruiting US citizens to fight as volunteers against the Macedonian Security Forces.16 Bear in mind that this pattern of “financing both sides” is not limited to the Balkans: since the end of the Cold War, Washington has been involved in channeling covert financing and triggering civil conflicts in different parts of the World including Central Africa, the Caucasus and Central Asia. By financing both sides of the conflict, the US controls the outcome of the war.

    Read entire article:



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 )

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

%d bloggers like this: