Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

The Long Road In, and the Short Way Out: How the West Built Ukraine into a Weapon Against Russia

By Larry C. Johnson | Sonar21 | September 10, 2026 

Across three pieces I’ve written for Sonar21, I have been making one continuous argument: The war in Ukraine was not a crisis that erupted in 2022. It was the payoff of a deliberate, decades-long Western project to turn Ukraine into an instrument for weakening Russia — carried out under the cover of “partnership” and “peacekeeping.” And having spent thirty years building that instrument, Washington and NATO will do with Ukraine exactly what they have done with every client before it: discard it the moment it stops paying.

The camel’s nose: 1992–1999

The West slipped its nose under the Ukrainian tent almost the instant the Soviet Union collapsed. The formal machinery started in 1992, when Ukraine joined NATO’s North Atlantic Cooperation Council. The practical military ties came fast behind it: the U.S.–Ukraine State Partnership Program with the California National Guard in 1993, Ukraine’s entry into the Partnership for Peace and its first joint exercise in 1994, and the standing-up of the Yavoriv training area near Lviv.

The “peacekeeping” label was camouflage, and the drills themselves give it away. Once the Sea Breeze exercises in the Black Sea began incorporating anti-submarine warfare in the late 1990s, the humanitarian pretense was finished. You do not rehearse hunting submarines to deliver disaster relief. You do it to prepare to fight the Russian navy. I spent 23 years scripting military exercises for U.S. Special Operations Forces, and I know the difference between a training game and a rehearsal for war. These were rehearsals — a structured program to train and equip Ukraine to fight Russia, if need be with NATO at its side.

Set that against 1999, when NATO took in Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic. That expansion broke James Baker’s assurance that the alliance would not move “one inch” to the east — a promise Bill Clinton simply threw away. And it is no accident that when the war came, Russia struck the Yavoriv facility in the opening weeks of March 2022. They knew exactly what had been built there, and why.

From partner to de facto member: 2000–2010

The next decade finished the job, turning Ukraine into a NATO member in everything but name. Consider one figure: between 2000 and 2010, Ukraine ranked among the top six hosts of NATO and U.S. European Command exercises, with Georgia right behind it. Two non-members hosted more allied exercises than the overwhelming majority of the actual member states. That is not partnership. That is prima facie evidence that the West meant to bring both countries in, whatever Moscow said.

By 2010, only two things still separated Ukraine from a full member: it paid no dues, and it had no Article 5 guarantee. In every operational sense — Sea Breeze, Rapid Trident, the Yavoriv pipeline, the annual target plans — it was already inside the alliance. And this was never only a military effort. U.S. and British intelligence, the CIA included, were coordinating with NATO and EUCOM to pry Ukraine out of Russia’s orbit and lock it into the West’s. When the 2008 Bucharest Summit declared that Ukraine “will become a member” — even as France and Germany blocked the formal Membership Action Plan — the trajectory to 2014 and everything after was set.

The exit: under the bus

That is how the instrument was built. Here is how it gets discarded. Any foreign government that trusts an American security promise should first study what happened to the South Vietnamese, the Afghans, the Iraqis, the Libyans, the Cambodians. When a war stops serving Washington’s purposes, the U.S. says adios.

The recriminations over the failed counteroffensive are the opening of exactly that. The West is lining up to blame Kyiv while its pledges of weapons turn out to be lip service. The maritime-drone strikes on Russian ships are pinpricks — militarily trivial, and dangerous mainly because the Western surveillance that guides them invites Russian retaliation against NATO reconnaissance over the Black Sea and stiffens Moscow’s resolve to strangle Ukraine’s ports. If you want an honest barometer of where this war is heading, forget the briefings from British intelligence and the Institute for the Study of War. Watch for the day the London bookmakers start taking bets on when Zelensky falls.

The through-line

Lay the three pieces end to end and the shape is plain. The first two document the patient construction — three decades of exercises, training centers, intelligence coordination, and summit declarations, all aimed at Russia. The third describes the disposal: the moment the project stumbles on the battlefield, the same patrons who spent thirty years cultivating it start hunting for the door. The line running from the 1992 partnership councils to the blame game of 2023 is not accident, and it is not drift. It is design. The men who built the road into this war have no intention of walking back out of it alongside the country they sent down it.

Videos

September 10, 2026 Posted by | Deception, Militarism, Video | , , | Comments Off on The Long Road In, and the Short Way Out: How the West Built Ukraine into a Weapon Against Russia

Kiev plotted terror attack on UK ambassador in Moscow – FSB

RT | September 10, 2026

Russian security operatives have foiled a Ukrainian plot to carry out a false-flag attack on the British ambassador and other diplomats in Moscow, which was intended to draw the UK into a direct conflict with Russia, the Federal Security Service (FSB) has said.

In a statement on Thursday, the agency said it had detained a Russian national who worked for an organization contracted to protect the British Embassy in Moscow. The man collected sensitive information about embassy security on instructions from a Ukrainian contact, as well as personal data on diplomatic personnel, including photographs, home addresses, details of vehicles, and itineraries, the FSB said.

“The Kiev regime planned to carry out sabotage and terrorist attacks against British diplomatic representatives in Moscow to subsequently blame Russia for them in order to draw the United Kingdom into direct armed conflict with the country, secure additional weapons deliveries [to Kiev], and ramp up sanctions on Russia,” the agency said.

Neither the UK Embassy in Moscow nor British Ambassador Nigel Casey has commented on the statement.

The FSB said the suspect had been recruited by the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) and acted on instructions of Ukrainian blogger Dmitry Karpenko, also known as “Apostle Dmitry.”

Karpenko, 44, became known for recording interviews with Russian prisoners of war and covering POW swaps between Moscow and Kiev, as well as for propagating videos featuring Russian nationals collaborating with the Ukrainian military.

Karpenko was also criticized by Ukraine’s Commission on Journalistic Ethics, which said his videos exposed prisoners’ identities and at times resembled interrogations. The blogger also faced accusations of Islamophobia after an interview with a captured Russian serviceman from Chechnya, during which he made remarks widely seen as offensive to Muslims.

Britain has been one of Ukraine’s biggest backers since the escalation of the conflict in 2022, providing billions of pounds in military and financial assistance to Kiev. London has also refrained from condemning Kiev over a string of assassinations and bombings targeting Russian military officials and public figures inside Russia.

After Ukraine claimed responsibility for the 2024 killing of Russian General Igor Kirillov, commander of the Radiological, Chemical, and Biological Protection Forces, Downing Street said Britain would “not mourn” his death.

September 10, 2026 Posted by | False Flag Terrorism | , | Comments Off on Kiev plotted terror attack on UK ambassador in Moscow – FSB

Douglas Macgregor: U.S. Defeated in Iran & Israel Will Not Survive

Glenn Diesen | September 9, 2026

Douglas Macgregor is a retired Colonel, combat veteran, and former senior advisor to the U.S. Secretary of Defense. Please like, subscribe & share!

Colonel Macgregor’s substack – Trump is not in Hell, Yet: https://substack.com/home/post/p-2140…

Follow Prof. Glenn Diesen:

Substack: https://glenndiesen.substack.com/

X/Twitter: https://x.com/Glenn_Diesen

Patreon:   / glenndiesen  

Support the research by Prof. Glenn Diesen:

PayPal: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/glenn…

Buy me a Coffee: buymeacoffee.com/gdieseng Go Fund Me: https://gofund.me/09ea012f

Buy Diesen merchandise: https://diesen-shop.fourthwall.com/en…

 Books by Prof. Glenn Diesen

September 9, 2026 Posted by | Video, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Comments Off on Douglas Macgregor: U.S. Defeated in Iran & Israel Will Not Survive

9/11 was an Inside/Outside Job

“Inside” or “Israeli” Job?

Video Link
By Luke Marshall | Sigh Ops | September 9, 2026

You know the drill by now: 19 Muslim hijackers directed by a man on dialysis in an undisclosed cave in Afghanistan outsmarted NORAD, the CIA, and the FBI armed with nothing more than box-cutters and blind optimism.

You also know that even if these coke-snorting, liquor-guzzling, religious fundamentalists weren’t too busy hitting strip clubs or gambling in Vegas to finally get around to their plans of jihad, a number of logistical hurdles should have stopped them: airport security, military interceptor planes, or their inability to fly single-engine Cessnas, let alone commercial airliners.

So that leaves two important questions unanswered: who did 9/11, and how did they pull it off?

Skeptics of the official story have supplied their own answers to these questions.

You have probably heard the 9/11 Truth Movement’s Greatest Hits play on an endless loop for the past twenty years.

WTC 7, “Dancing Israelis”, the Project for a New American Century, a New Pearl Harbor, etc.

Even Roger Waters took some time out of his busy schedule to go on Tucker Carlson so he could do his best rendition of the 9/11 Truth Movement’s Greatest Hits as opposed to his own catalogue of Greatest Hits from the Pink Floyd days.

But you’ve heard all of that.

You’re not here for the greatest hits.

You’re here for the blueprint. The who and the why.

No more entry-level 9/11 Truth for Dummies tier drivel. If you want that, you’re in luck because the internet is saturated with trite, stale information regarding what took place on 9/11.

In my last video, I discussed some of the nonsense holding back 9/11 Truth from becoming 9/11 Justice.

So let’s shift our focus to what really matters: who did 9/11 and how they did it.

What we will see is that the complex operation behind 9/11 involved both an inside and an outside layer. The outside handled sensitive issues like the logistics of airport security and ensuring that the World Trade Center Complex fell into the right hands. The inside made sure that WTC security didn’t get in the way and that the attacks were profitable, among other things.

Who was in charge of securing the hijacked planes? Who had access to the WTC buildings? Who amongst them had access to demolition explosives? Who profited? Who made sure these individuals were never found out?

Without these two operational layers working in tandem to accomplish all this, 9/11 would not have been possible.

So let’s move past surface-level talk of steel’s melting point and the physics of free-fall speed.

Let’s explore the ins and outs of this inside-outside job.

Act I: The Outside Element – The Gatekeepers

Of the four planes hijacked on 9/11, three departed from airports whose security was provided by one company: Huntleigh USA, a subsidiary of ICTS International.

So who is ICTS?

A quick Google search might net someone the answer that ICTS is a Dutch aviation security firm. However, ICTS is about as Dutch as Benjamin Netanyahu is Palestinian.

The company was formed in 1982 by alumni of Shin Bet, Israel’s internal security and counter-intelligence agency, and former employees of El Al, Israel’s national airline. Shin Bet has a long, sordid history of extrajudicial killings, assassinations, and torture. El Al has its own unique past regarding international drug smuggling. As early as 1973, an El Al steward was arrested for attempting to smuggle a quarter million dollars in opium and hashish into the United States. Decades later, the pattern of El Al drug trafficking continued, with a cocaine smuggling ring involving the security liaison between El Al and Shin Bet teaming up with a former Shin Bet official and head of security for the Office of the Prime Minister.

In short, ICTS was not your typical security outfit. Based off all outward appearances, it appears to be an Israeli intelligence front. A look at the upper brass of ICTS reveals a number of interesting connections pertaining to 9/11.

The Airport Security-WTC Nexus

Menachem Atzmon joined the supervisory board of ICTS in 1999, eventually becoming the Director, Chairman of the Board, and majority shareholder.

Before taking over ICTS, Atzmon was the Director of Zim Shipping—an Israeli state-affiliated shipping giant with offices in the World Trade Center since the early seventies. Zim completed their move from the 16th and 17th floor of WTC 1 just a week prior to 9/11. Defenders of the official narrative point out that Zim had announced their departure from the WTC in April of 2001. However, they leave out one crucial detail: Zim was in such an incredible rush to vacate the WTC that they broke their lease five years early.

At the time of 9/11, Zim Shipping was co-owned by The Israel Corporation and the Government of Israel. Atzmon was the CEO of the Israel Corporation from 1984 until 1986—the period of time he was the Director of Zim.

Avraham Shalom

The Israel Corporation was founded by the State of Israel and Shaul Eisenberg. Eisenberg’s multinational conglomerate—The Eisenberg Group—had as one of its subsidiaries Atwell Security. Atwell was the recipient of a contract with the New York Port Authority in 1987 to provide security for the World Trade Center complex. Atwell lost the contract after the discovery that Atwell’s President Avraham Shalom (operating under the alias Avraham Bendor) was the former Head of Shin Bet responsible for the murder of two Palestinians and its subsequent cover-up. To spare himself from criminal prosecution, Shalom blackmailed the Israeli government with a list of extrajudicial assassinations by various Israeli agencies, securing himself and his co-conspirators a presidential pardon in exchange for his resignation, as detailed in Rise and Kill First by Ronen Bergman.

Israeli Nuclear Theft, PROMIS Software, and the WTC

The New York representative for Atwell during the WTC contract negotiations was Peter Malkin, the former Chief of Operations for the Mossad, legendary for his role in capturing Adolf Eichmann. Shalom and Malkin worked alongside Rafi Eitan, the handler of the Jonathan Pollard espionage ring.

Rafi Eitan

Eitan’s shadow looms large in the seedy annals of Israeli Intelligence.

  • Eitan posed as a chemist while traveling to Pennsylvania to visit NUMEC, a nuclear processing plant alleged to have supplied Israel with the enriched uranium the country used to acquire its nuclear arsenal. A declassified FBI document lists an individual named Avraham Bendor accompanying Eitan on this Pennsylvania trip. The FBI released a detailed statement in 1980 made by a former NUMEC employee who said in 1965 that he “encountered armed strangers on the uranium plant’s loading dock one night in early 1965. The NUMEC employee said they were loading what appeared to be canisters of HEU onto a truck in racks that he had not seen before.” The man also saw a shipping manifest showing the ship was bound for Israel indicating it was likely on the Zim-Israel shipping line which it was according to the National Security Archive. He said that a NUMEC manager later “threatened him to keep his mouth shut about what he had seen.”
  • According to the testimony of ex-Mossad agent Ari-Ben Menashee, Eitan was the brainchild of installing a trapdoor for Israeli intelligence into PROMIS software—the software later sold by Robert Maxwell to sensitive US defense facilities such as Sandia National Laboratories, which is at the center of US nuclear weapons systems.

Notice the incestuous loop: Zim Shipping, Atwell Security, and the WTC complex were all tethered to NUMEC-era Israeli intelligence networks. Menachem Atzmon not only had a position with both Zim and the Israel corporation at the time of the failed Atwell contract, but he went on to hold a senior position at the company responsible for the security of three of the four airports from which planes were hijacked on 9/11.

The Atzmon-Friedman-Netanyahu Axis

Atzmon’s network extended directly into the highest echelons of power where Israeli and American interests meet through Steven L. Friedman—a childhood friend of Benjamin Netanyahu and the American legal counsel for the Likud Party. Friedman was officially registered with the Justice Department as a foreign agent for the Likud Party until 1996.

Atzmon was the President of the Israel Development Fund. The fund was established by Friedman in 1989. During the time period when Atzmon worked as the President of the Israel Development Fund, he also worked as the national treasurer of the Likud Party. In Israel, Atzmon was convicted of campaign finance fraud and given a suspended one-year prison sentence. Despite denials by Atzmon, close associates of Netanyahu claimed that the fund functioned as a source for illicit cash for Netanyahu’s successful 1993 campaign to lead the Likud party.

ICTS Financial Crimes

Atzmon wasn’t the only questionable figure at ICTS.

Ezra Harel worked on the Supervisory board with Atzmon at the time of 9/11. At one point, Harel even became the majority shareholder of ICTS.

Ezra Harel, Harel’s father, and Atzmon were arrested and questioned in Israel after driving a separate company, Rogosin, into total insolvency. According to Haaretz, the company suffered from years of odd investments and high-management fees that Harel himself pocketed. The company eventually grew incapable of paying back bondholders after torching more than 100 million shekels.

Harel just so happened to be the chairman of Dash 200+, a company that modified Boeing 747 aircraft from passenger to cargo use.

Security Failures?

Against this backdrop of Israeli intelligence and financial crime, the ICTS track record of “security failures” borders on the unbelievable.

Richard Reid
  • The Shoe Bomber (Richard Reid): ICTS guarded the departure gate for Reid’s flight. Just a day earlier, Reid had been flagged and delayed by an ICTS agent due to his disheveled appearance and lack of luggage. Yet the next day, Reid waltzed through security with a Walkman loaded with anti-Israeli messages, an issue of Newsweek featuring pictures of Osama bin Laden, and explosives. As The Sword and the Neck describes it, “looking like he just finished shopping at Terrorists-R-Us.” Not too long before the attempted attack, Reid had been flying around on El Al to Tel Aviv. Reid’s father said, “My son is a determined boy, and I can imagine him being determined enough to blow himself to bits, but I just can’t believe that he would want to hurt anyone else in doing it unless, that is, he has been brainwashed.”
    Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab
  • The Underwear Bomber (Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab): Farouk departed from a flight in Amsterdam with screening provided by ICTS. Farouk was known to US intelligence after his father warned two CIA officers at the US embassy in Nigeria of Farouk’s extremist views. US State Department officials were prevented from revoking his visa by US intelligence lest their Al Qaeda investigation be foiled.

The Surveillance Afterlife

ICTS didn’t vanish after the War on Terror reached its apex. It evolved.

AU10TIX, an ICTS subsidiary founded by former Unit 8200 man Ron Atzmon alongside others previously belonging to military intelligence, makes facial ID verification for online platforms, which has been used by Twitter, Airbnb, Paypal and Fiverr. This is only one example of the Israeli intelligence-to-privatized surveillance-state pipeline we have seen time and time again.

Securing the airports was only half of the equation.

To pull off an operation of the magnitude of 9/11, the target—the World Trade Center—had to fall into the right hands.

Act II: The Outside Element – Privatization and Payout

The Likud Fingerprint

One of the individuals instrumental in the privatization of the WTC was Lew Eisenberg, the NY Port Authority Chairman. Eisenberg was the man responsible for negotiating the long-term leasing of the WTC complex with Larry Silverstein. Lew Eisenberg donated to the formerly discussed Israel Development Fund at the behest of Steven Friedman. The Jewish Telegraphic Agency describes Eisenberg as a friend of Netanyahu.

Eisenberg got his start at the Port Authority after being nominated by Governor Christine Todd Whitman to chair the Commission on Privatization and Competitive Contracting in 1994. After the 9/11 attacks, Whitman, the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency at the time of 9/11, assured the public within days of the attacks that the air in Manhattan was safe to breathe despite the buildings containing lead and asbestos because the concentrations were such that they didn’t “pose a health hazard.”

A class action lawsuit was filed against Whitman and the EPA, with Judge Deborah Batts of the Federal District Court in Manhattan saying that the “allegations in this case of Whitman’s reassuring and misleading statements of safety after the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks are without question conscience-shocking.”

The effort to privatize the WTC complex was in large part spearheaded by the economic strategy of New York Governor George Pataki. Lew Eisenberg worked on the transition teams of Pataki, Whitman, and even the Bush-Cheney transition team.

Another prominent individual largely responsible for ensuring that the WTC complex ended up in the right hands was billionaire Ronald Lauder, the sole heir of the Estee Lauder cosmetics fortune.

From Reagan to Netanyahu to Epstein to the World Trade Center

Ronald Lauder

Lauder was the Chairman of George Pataki’s New York State Research Council on Privatization, which influenced the decision to privatize the WTC complex. Pataki and Lauder shared a close relationship, with Pataki’s wife working as an employee of Lauder. Lauder was one of Pataki’s largest campaign contributors.

Not only was Lauder on Pataki’s Council on Privatization, but he was also a major donor to none other than Steven Friedman’s charity, the Israel Research Foundation, which was closely tied to the Israel Development Fund. Lauder not only abetted Netanyahu’s ascent to power through financial contributions alongside Friedman and Eisenberg, but the cosmetics heir also helped pull political strings for his friend Bibi.

Lauder brought Republican campaign strategist Arthur Finkelstein in on Netanyahu’s campaign against Shimon Peres. Finkelstein’s propaganda, in addition to a series of conveniently timed suicide bombings in the weeks leading up to the elections, led to Netanyahu winning in a shocking upset. Finkelstein worked as a strategist for other people inside the Lauder orbit, including not only Lauder himself during his failed 1989 New York City Mayoral Campaign, but for George Pataki and New York Senator Alfonso D’Amato, the man who urged Lauder to run for office.

To understand the importance of this nexus of connections centering on Lauder, we must pull back and look at Lauder himself. Lauder’s role extends far beyond just New York City Politics and the ascendancy of Benjamin Netanyahu.

In addition to being the sole heir of the Estée Lauder Cosmetics fortune, Lauder has long been a prominent figure in the world of Jewish philanthropy, currently holding the position of President of the World Jewish Congress, where he works alongside others like Baron David de Rothschild of the infamous Rothschild banking dynasty.

Lauder was also a friend and supporter of Donald Trump, with the two having known each other for more than fifty years. They share an interesting connection, with Lauder being a long-time friend of Trump’s mentor Roy Cohn. Cohn was a prominent lawyer with high-level connections to the Reagan White House, the CIA, FBI, and organized crime. Cohn ran a sexual blackmail ring involving pedophilia that allegedly ensnared none other than former FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover in its kompromat.

Lauder held a position in Ronald Reagan’s cabinet during the Republican’s first term as the United States Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for European and NATO Affairs. During Reagan’s second term, Lauder landed a position as the US Ambassador to Austria. While this ambassadorship may seem like a dull, historical footnote at first, it becomes much more interesting when one realizes that Lauder may have been the individual responsible for securing Jeffery Epstein his fake Austrian passport.

Lauder’s later ties to Epstein and those in his circle are a matter of record.

Ronald Lauder was a member of the Mega Group, which was co-founded by billionaire Leslie Wexner. Epstein set up an LLC for billionaire Leon Black and Lauder to acquire a $25 million work of art. Epstein and Lauder communicated for years. It’s really no secret.

Epstein’s Austrian passport featured a photograph of him alongside a non-Jewish name, which would have had to have come to him through an unconventional channel since Epstein did not meet the requirements needed to obtain the passport, such as long-term residency in Austria. Given Lauder and Epstein’s mutual acquaintances Donald Trump, Leslie Wexner, and Epstein’s former Bear Stearns employer Alan Greenberg, Lauder as the unconventional channel through which the passport was obtained would make sense. Also, given the history of Israeli intelligence using ambassadors to procure fake passports for operatives and Lauder’s undeniable sympathies for the Zionist cause, the likelihood of Lauder procuring the passport seems high.

The tight-knit milieu of wealthy businessmen and Israeli-intelligence-linked individuals with ties to the World Trade Center, the airports from which the 9/11 planes were hijacked, and the Likud Party comes full circle with Larry Silverstein—the man who acquired the World Trade Center complex only six weeks before the buildings he purchased became cemented in the public mind as the symbol of terrorism.

Lucky Larry

Larry Silverstein

The financial windfall Larry Silverstein found himself at the center of as a result of the September 11th attacks is nothing short of mind-boggling.

  • The Insurance Heist: In April of 2001, a group of several different investors led by Silverstein Properties came to an agreement, and Larry Silverstein, who had already acquired WTC 7, signed a 99-year lease for $3.2 billion for buildings 4 and 5. Silverstein only put $14 million of his own money down on the lease. The WTC had earlier that year been estimated to be worth $1.2 billion, and the Port Authority only had $1.5 billion in insurance coverage on the WTC, yet Silverstein managed to finagle $3.55 billion of insurance on the buildings.
  • Right to Rebuild: Silverstein’s insurance broker was unable to cover such a large amount, and the deal had to be split among 25 different dealers. The complicated and unusual deal was finalized the month of the attacks. The Silverstein group was even given the right to rebuild and expand if the buildings were destroyed.
  • Removing the Asbestos Removal Problem: The WTC buildings were in the process of having asbestos removed from the buildings, which was an extremely costly process. As of May of 2001, prior to Silverstein acquiring the buildings, the Port Authority received a ruling on a longstanding suit against their insurers seeking more than $600 million dollars to cover the costs of asbestos removal. Ultimately the ruling was that the all-risk insurance policy held did not entitle their insurers to include this under their coverage.
  • The Double-Indemnity Jackpot: As James Corbett of the Corbett Report states in 9/11 Trillions: Follow the Money, “Within hours of the destruction of the Twin Towers on September 11th, Silverstein was on the phone to his lawyers, trying to determine if his insurance policies could construe the attacks as two separate, insurable incidents rather than one.”

Not only would Silverstein rake in cash hand over fists as a result of the attacks and avoid all the prickly complications of asbestos abatement which would have costed hundreds of millions of dollars, but the SEC offices in WTC 7 which were investigating systemic financial corruption stemming from the dot-com bubble were conveniently destroyed along with the offices of some of the other tenants housing sensitive information such as the Department of Defense, CIA, Secret Service, and New York Office of Emergency Management. Similar to the Pentagon being struck in the Budget Analyst Office the day after Donald Rumsfeld announced $2.3 trillion the Pentagon couldn’t account for.

Silverstein—similar to many individuals involved in the decision to privatize the WTC complex—is no stranger to those in the highest echelons of Israeli political power. Silverstein collected friendships with Israeli Prime Ministers the way a more normal individual might collect postage stamps or trading cards. Former Israeli Prime Ministers Silverstein counts as friends are Yitzhak Rabin, Benjamin Netanyahu, Ehud Barak and Ariel Sharon. Silverstein is also a friend of current Israeli president Isaac Herzog. Netanyahu and Silverstein were so close that despite political differences, Bibi found time every Sunday to call Silverstein. Silverstein offered Epstein-associate Ehud Barak a job as his representative in Israel after Barak left the army in 1995. Many of these friendships were accrued by Silverstein when he was in the process of attempting to create a free trade initiative in the Negev. Some in Israel were skeptical of the proposal, due to such free trade zones having been established in third-world countries where workers receive starvation wages while entrepreneurs reap the benefits of tax exemption and high profits. Others were concerned the free trade zone would be a hub for money laundering. Eventually, after numerous unsuccessful attempts, Silverstein dropped the initiative.

With the airports’ security secured and the ink still drying on the World Trade Center’s paperwork, Israeli operatives were operating on American soil en masse while suspicious tenants roamed the halls which Lucky Larry Silverstein had just acquired.

Act III: The Outside Element – Soothsayers and Prophets

Israel’s role as the beneficiary of the American empire’s war on terror is obvious, with the policy goals stated in the Oded Yinon plan, the Clean Break memo, and the various writings of the Neo-Conservative, Project for a New American Century aligned think tanks largely accomplished as a result of America’s declaration to fight a global war against terrorism as a result of 9/11. However, one can simply turn to Benjamin Netanyahu, whose lackeys were securing their positions in the World Trade Center and the airports from which the planes were hijacked on 9/11 to gather his feelings regarding the worst crime to ever take place on American soil.

“Asked tonight what the attack meant for relations between the United States and Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, the former prime minister, replied, ‘It’s very good.’ Then he edited himself: ‘Well, not very good, but it will generate immediate sympathy.’” (“A Day of Terror: The Israelis; Spilled Blood is Seen as Bond That Draws Two Nations Closer,” New York Times, Sept. 12, 2001.)

While the remains of corpses still burned in the rubble and a country that is supposedly Israel’s greatest ally still reeled from the devastation of the attacks, Netanyahu stated that the attacks were very good for American-Israeli relations to none other than The New York Times—what many would consider the most prominent and prestigious publication in the world.

The Israeli Prime Minister’s thoughts regarding 9/11 and its benefit to Israel didn’t change in the following years.

“We are benefiting from one thing, and that is the attack on the Twin Towers and Pentagon, and the American struggle in Iraq.” — Benjamin Netanyahu, ‘Did Israel Benefit from the 9/11 Attacks?, The Economist (April 16, 2008)

Netanyahu’s callous feelings regarding the attacks, combined with the fact that prominent individuals responsible for his ascendancy to power held sensitive positions in the World Trade Center and three of the four airports from which planes were hijacked, are a cause for concern.

Other high-level Israeli political figures and intelligence personnel displayed a seemingly prophetic intuition regarding Arab terrorism in New York City and the alleged culprit of the attacks in the immediate aftermath of 9/11.

Former Israeli Prime Minister and a fellow friend of Lucky Larry Silverstein, Ehud Barak, went on the BBC possibly only an hour after the attacks to insinuate that Osama Bin Laden had perpetrated the attacks, then stated that Bin Laden was hiding in Afghanistan, and then declared that America needed to wage a war on terror in response to the attacks.

Not only did Netanyahu and Barak share a commonality despite their political differences in being chummy with WTC owner Silverstein, but the two were in the IDF Unit Sayaret Maktal, with one of the unit’s specialties being response to airplane hijackings.

Arnon Milchan, the Israeli spy turned Hollywood Mogul producing films such as L.A. Confidential, Pretty Woman, Natural Born Killers, and JFK, was involved with a couple of films with, let’s call it, fortuitous imagery pertaining to 9/11. (Say what you will about the man, but he has some heavy hitters under his filmography.)

Israeli intelligence asset Milchan was the Executive Producer of The Medusa Touch, in which a commercial airliner crashes into a skyscraper.

Milchan was also one of the producers of David Fincher’s Fight Club, which ends with Ed Norton and Helena Bonham Carter watching a series of high-rise towers brought down via controlled demolition by a terrorist organization targeting banking institutions, accompanied by the eerie track “Where’s my mind?” by The Pixies.

Milchan belonged to Israel’s top secret intelligence-agency Lekem, and was involved in espionage, arms dealing, and securing components for Israel’s nuclear arsenal.

The former Director of the Mossad, Isser Harel, in a 1979 conversation with journalist Michael Evans, had what one could generously call incredible foresight. Evans recalls the interview in the Jerusalem Post, “I sat with former Mossad chief Isser Harel for a conversation about Arab terrorism. As he handed me a cup of hot tea and a plate of cookies, I asked him, ‘Do you think terrorism will come to America, and if so, where and why?’ Harel looked at his American visitor and replied, ‘I fear it will come to you in America. America has the power but not the will to fight terrorism…’ As to the where, Harel continued, ‘New York City is the symbol of freedom and capitalism. It’s likely they will strike the Empire State Building, your tallest building [he mistakenly thought] and a symbol of your power.’ … Twenty-one years later, the first part of Harel’s prediction came true; except, of course, that the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center were much taller than the Empire State Building.”

Act IV: The Outside Element- The Intelligence Web

“Dancing Israelis”

Leading up to 9/11, Israeli intelligence continued to weave its web of influence not only through the halls of the World Trade Center complex and the runways from which the hijacked planes took off, but through the entire American political and economic ecosystem.

The most well-known example of the Israeli intelligence presence in the United States as it pertains to 9/11 is in the case of the “Dancing Israelis.”

On the morning of 9/11, within minutes of the first plane striking the WTC, three men were spotted seated on top of a moving van, taking pictures of the towers, laughing, and celebrating. After being spotted, they fled the scene, and the FBI put out an all-points bulletin for officers to look for a white van with Urban Moving Systems on its side. Later on at 3:56 PM, the van was pulled over, and five men were inside: Sivan Kurzberg and his brother, Paul, Yaron Shmuel, Oded Ellner, and Omar Marmari.

Kurzberg, according to the police report, told the officers, “We are Israeli. We are not your problem. Your problems are our problems. The Palestinians are the problem.”

Despite the men telling police an innocent explanation for their behavior that day, when the photographs were developed, it was revealed that the men were indeed celebrating, laughing, high-fiving, and Sivan Kurzberg was even photographed holding up a lighter to the flame-engulfed WTC building in the background.

The FBI confirmed that two of the men had ties to Israeli intelligence and believed them to be working on some kind of Mossad operation. One of them had $4,700 in his sock, and the men had plane tickets for various places around the globe for their immediate departure. FBI reports show the men making contradictory statements to investigators. The men were held in federal custody for 71 days, then deported back to Israel. The owner of Urban Moving Systems, Dominik Sueter, was questioned by the FBI, with the agency concluding that “Urban Moving may have been providing cover for an Israeli intelligence operation”.

When investigators returned to question Sueter, they found that he had hastily fled to Israel.

What conclusions did the FBI draw from their investigation? Well, they thought they were likely Israeli intelligence, but don’t worry, they think their target was not the US but rather studying Islamic Groups and Charities with potential ties to terrorist networks.

Later on, on Israeli television, where the men were being interviewed, Oded Ellner said they were there to document the event.

It was none other than Epstein associate Alan Dershowitz who stepped in as a negotiator on behalf of the men when they were being held in federal custody in order to smooth things over with the U.S. Government, as Christopher Ketcham reported in CounterPunch.

The Israeli “Art Students”

In January of 2001, the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) began receiving a number of reports of young Israeli “art students” attempting to gain access to the offices of the DEA and other law enforcement and Department of Defense agencies. A deluge of these kinds of reports came in from over 40 cities within the first six months of 2001. Israelis were discovered diagramming the inside of federal buildings and possessing photographs of federal agents. One report claimed that between March of 2001 and September 11th, 140 Israelis were detained or arrested, with another report claiming that an additional 60 were detained or deported following the attacks.

One can read about these Israeli “art students” in a 60-page DEA memo intended only for senior officials at the Department of Justice, which was leaked to the press. The memo contains a summation of the modus operadi of these “art students”: “In general, these individuals appear to be organized in teams of 8 to 10 people, with one person described as the ‘Team Leader’. They are usually encountered in pairs or individually carrying a makeshift art portfolio. Several times, they have been seen or admitted to being dropped off in an area by the Team Leader, who returns later to pick them up. The females are usually described as very attractive, and all are generally in their early to mid-20s. Most admit to having served in the Israeli military. This is not surprising given the mandatory military service required in Israel; however, a majority of those questioned have stated they served in military intelligence, electronic signal intercept, or explosive ordnance units. Some have been linked to high-ranking officials in the Israeli military. One was the son of a two-star general, one served as the bodyguard to the head of the Israeli Army, one served in a Patriot missile unit. That these people are now traveling in the U.S. selling art seems not to fit their background.”

Not only does the memo mention that some of the Israeli nationals had a background in demolition and explosive ordinance units, but the Orlando DEA had linked these “art students” to an ongoing drug investigation involving MDMA. However, Ketcham in his article mentions that this could possibly be a smokescreen to conceal the more obvious spying angle.

In December of 2001, Fox News aired a four-part series conducted by Carl Cameron where he reported that these “art students” were at the center of an investigation by federal officials into the existence of a possible Israeli espionage ring which was tracking Al Qaeda leading up to 9/11. One investigator said to Cameron, “Evidence linking these Israelis to 9/11 is classified. I cannot tell you about evidence that has been gathered. It’s classified information.”

In the four-part series when the question was put forward by a Fox anchor to Cameron as to the question of Israeli foreknowledge of 9/11 and how clear it was to ‘investigators that some Israeli agents may have known’, Cameron states, “Well, it’s very explosive information obviously and there’s a great deal of evidence that they say they have collected none of it necessarily conclusive it’s more when they put it all together a bigger question they say is ‘How could they not have known?’ Almost a direct quote.”

Israeli Intelligence and the 9/11 Hijackers

Christopher Ketcham, who wrote a piece on the Israeli art students for Salon, later wrote a piece for CounterPunch magazine expanding upon this research, delving into the story of the Urban Moving Systems employees detained after 9/11. Ketcham, in an outstanding feat of journalism, unveiled a number of damning revelations relating to the vast network of Israeli nationals operating in the United States and the alleged 9/11 hijackers. Perhaps the most damning of these is the proximity of the Urban Moving Systems and art-peddling Israeli nationals to the 9/11 hijackers.

All five hijackers of American Airlines 77, which struck the Pentagon, had addresses or were active within a six-mile radius of towns associated with the Urban Moving Systems Israelis. They were all operating on the same stomping grounds of northern New Jersey.

One of the “art students”, former Israeli Military Intelligence Officer Hanan Serfaty, rented two separate apartments close to the mail-drop location and apartment of Mohammed Atta. The distance between Atta’s mail-drop and one of Serfaty’s apartments was approximately 2,700 feet. Atta and the hijacker pilot of United Airlines 175 shared an apartment only 1,800 feet from Serfaty’s apartment. Serfaty was moving around significant sums of cash. These strange happenings occurred in Hollywood, Florida, an area which, according to the aforementioned DEA memo, appeared to be “a central point for these individuals, with several having addresses in this area”.

More than thirty of the 120 “art students” lived in Hollywood, which was home to nine of the nineteen 9/11 hijackers, with five more in the surrounding area.

Christopher Ketcham writes in CounterPunch, “In at least six urban centers, suspected Israeli spies and 9/11 hijackers and/or al-Qaeda–connected suspects lived and operated near one another, in some cases less than half a mile apart, for various periods during 2000–01 in the run-up to the attacks. In addition to northern New Jersey and Hollywood, Florida, these centers included Arlington and Fredericksburg, Virginia; Atlanta; Oklahoma City; Los Angeles; and San Diego.”

German publication Die Zeit reported that the Mossad provided US intelligence with the names of two of the hijackers prior to the attacks—Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi—with these two operating in Hollywood, Florida, in close proximity to Israeli “art students” as well as the Urban Moving Systems Israelis in New Jersey. Hazmi also visited Oklahoma City on almost the same dates as three of the art students. (Interesting aside: Zacarias Moussaoui, who allegedly planned to participate in 9/11, was in flight school in Oklahoma from February to May of 2001. This school was visited by Atta and al-Shehhi. Moussaoui just so happened to meet the shoe bomber that ICTS let through their gates, according to some accounts.)

One of the “art students” arrested leading up to 9/11, Michal Gal, was bailed out by an employee of Amdocs, an Israeli telecommunications company which counted some of the largest phone companies and US government agencies among its clients. The company, whose upper brass was filled with former Israeli Military personnel, was investigated twice within a single decade on charges involving espionage-related leaks of data. This in part resulted in them becoming one of the subjects of the four-part Carl Cameron Fox News investigation.

Amdocs acquired an Israeli company called Comverse. Comverse bought the Israeli instant messaging company Odigo in 2002, but already had a stake in the company as early as January of 2001. Odigo is notorious amongst those who believe that Israel is responsible for 9/11 due to two Odigo employees working at the company’s offices just outside Tel Aviv receiving warning of a non-specific terrorist attack about to take place only two hours prior to the 9/11 attacks in New York. The Odigo offices in New York were within a mile of the WTC complex.

One of the Odigo co-founders created the first internal web network for the IDF. Another Odigo co-founder worked at AMDOCS after his time in R&D for the Israeli Air Force. Comverse founder Kobi Alexander fled to Namibia after facing multiple accounts of fraud and charges related to irregular stock trading in the United States. He had been an intelligence officer in the Israeli army. Two other executives were charged with the same options backdating scandal.

Now some have theorized that the Israeli “art students” as well as the Urban Moving Israelis were not necessarily directing the hijackers, but were merely monitoring Islamic Fundamentalist groups. Others have theorized that the “art students” may not have been intelligence at all, but part of an Israeli ecstasy peddling ring, an idea hinted at in the DEA memo. Ketcham mentions that the mention of MDMA trafficking could possibly serve as a smokescreen. Ketcham even makes the astute observation that the obvious nature of the Israeli “art students” and their spying might have been serving the purpose of drawing attention to themselves to either distract from the real Israeli operatives at work on American soil or to confuse and muddy the waters of any potential investigation.

A cousin of one of the 9/11 hijackers was reported by the New York Times to be a potential Israeli spy reporting on Hezbollah and Palestinian groups to Israeli intelligence.

What we can say is that the “dancing Israelis” and their fellow countrymen and women, in conjunction with the ties of Israeli intelligence to the WTC and airport security through ICTS, Zim, Silverstein, Lauder, Friedman, and the other assorted cast of characters, paint an obvious picture of who plays the outside role in this inside-outside job. Through Ketcham’s investigative journalism, we can see how not only did the outside angle ensure control of airport security and the World Trade Center, but they even managed to keep tabs on and possibly direct the hijackers themselves.

Act V: The Outside Element- The Clean-Up Crew

Just as important as having people in place at the World Trade Center complex and airports was having people amenable to the plans of the Inside-Outside plotters who could ensure that no legitimate investigation into the attacks ever took place. Even a cursory glance at the official story, which men like Ehud Barak were seeding into the public consciousness within moments of the attacks, reveals obvious inconsistencies. So how did the plotters manage to keep the legal system from becoming a thorn in their side?

One such mechanism of control was the 9/11 Victims Compensation Fund. In my previous piece, I mentioned how Jordana Feldman, who ran the Epstein Victim’s Compensation Fund, was a crucial individual when it came to the 9/11 Victims Compensation Fund. Feldman designed the fund alongside Ken Feinberg. Feinberg was one of three arbitrators who helped determine the market value of the Zapruder film, the video showing the assassination of President Kennedy. The Zapruder film was purchased by Time-Life, whose co-founder Henry Luce had a relationship with the CIA. The role of two of the individuals heading the fund in the aftermath of separate historical events widely considered to be subject to institutional cover-up remains pertinent to the role of both Feinberg and Feldman with the 9/11 fund.

A non-negotiable clause of the 9/11 Victims Compensation Fund was that, in order to receive any kind of settlement, no lawsuit could be filed against the airlines for any lack of security. This helped to further shield companies like ICTS from legal culpability and suspicion. That this clause was worked into the conditions of the Compensation Fund perhaps shouldn’t come as a surprise when we see the conflicts of interest involving people involved in the distribution of the funds.

All of the cases were presided over by Judge Alvin Hellerstein of the Southern District of New York. Hellerstein did not disclose his own conflict of interest in his rulings, specifically as it relates to Huntleigh USA and ICTS. Hellerstein’s son Joseph Hellerstein worked for law firm Amit, Pollak, Matalon and Company, based in Tel Aviv, Israel. The firm represented an Israeli defense contractor partnered with Boeing, a sister company of ICTS, and RFID device company Better Online Solutions (BOS).

Boaz Harel, the brother of Ezra Harel, took over the majority interest of ICTS after the death of his brother, who sat on the board of BOS. The chairman of the BOS board was Edouard Cukierman, the president of a private equity firm that owned Catalyst Investments, which had as its president Boaz Harel. Catalyst Investments was a major shareholder of BOS. While this convoluted thread is difficult to untangle, one can read the motion filed in the US second court of Appeals by 9/11 widow Ellen Miriani, which parses out the incestous nature of the Hellserstein-ICTS axis in detail. (Side note: the Israeli defense contractor Hellerstein’s son represented, Aeronautics Defense Systems, specializes in unmanned aerial systems including the Dominator UAS which is modeled on twin-engine passenger aircraft.)

Hellerstein also represented Cantor Fitzgerald. Those who read my last piece will be familiar with the head of Cantor, Howard Lutnick, an Epstein associate currently working in the Trump administration who was conspicuously absent from his office in the direct impact zone of the North Tower on 9/11. Lutnick gave office space to fellow Epstein-associate and former wife of Prince Andrew, Sarah Ferguson, who also was absent from the North Tower on 9/11 despite a meeting she had scheduled. After 9/11, Cantor allegedly brought in more money than they had before the attacks. The company was fortunate not to suffer from an inability to trade due to the existence of their revolutionary electronic trading platform e-speed. This type of software is reminiscent of software owned by other tenants in the Twin Towers, whom we will address in detail later.

Hellerstein appointed Sheila Birnbaum to settle as many of the cases as possible. Birnbaum was a lawyer at the firm Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom.

The law firm Skadden had a history of serving Israeli companies. One senior partner, Ken Bialkin, was the National Chairman of the ADL in addition to working for a host of other Zionist groups. Bialkin was instrumental in forging ties between American and Israeli companies and guiding Israeli companies to go public in the United States.

The Jewish Telegraphic Agency reported that in Bialkin’s office at Skadden, one might find him hosting Neo-Conservative thought leader Norman Podhoretz or Henry Kissinger.

We can also see people friendly to Israel in the institutional cover-up of 9/11 heading the legal proceedings involving Larry Silverstein and his World Trade Center insurance settlement.

Who was the judge presiding over Silverstein’s case?

None other than Michael Mukasey.

Michael Mukasey

In my previous article, I mentioned Mukasey and his son’s role in Jeffrey Epstein’s legal defense as well as the father-son duo’s overall careers as legal fixers for white-collar criminals. However, I think we all need a quick refresher. For more detail, I encourage you to visit my previous article, 9/11 was an Epstein Job.

  • Michael Mukasey grew very close to 9/11 cover-up artist and later Mayor of New York Rudy Giuliani when the two worked at the same law firm in the seventies.
  • Michael, along with his son Marc, worked as a justice advisor on Giuliani’s presidential campaign.
  • Michael Mukasey was the US Attorney General from September of 2007 to January of 2009, meaning he was the Attorney General during the finalization of Jeffrey Epstein’s Sweetheart Deal, as well as Epstein’s conviction and sentencing. Epstein’s sweetheart deal seemingly would need the institutional blessing of Michael Mukasey.
  • Epstein and Ghislaine acquired legal counsel from Michael’s son Marc, who worked for Giuliani’s law firm.
  • Marc, in addition to representing people such as FTX’s Sam Bankman-Fried for his cryptocurrency fraud arrest and Congressman Matt Gaetz after allegations of sex trafficking, also represented Epstein associate Trump during his first term when people were probing into the president’s finances.
  • Marc Mukasey represented Israeli entrepreneur Joel Zamel, who formed a strategic partnership between his firm, Psy-Group, and Cambridge Analytica that helped propel Trump into the Oval Office. Psy-Group was an Israeli Private Intelligence agency with headquarters in Tel Aviv and Washington, D.C.
  • Michael Mukasey penned a letter in 2010 to Obama advocating for the President to pardon Israeli Spy Jonathan Pollard.

Larry Silverstein violated Mukasey’s order not to make inflammatory statements regarding the case of his WTC insurance settlement publicly when Silverstein criticized the slow payout on his settlement. However, Mukasey did not find Silverstein in contempt despite his blatant violation of the aforementioned order.

Silverstein, who argued that the events of 9/11 should count as two separate insurable incidents, something he had discussed on the phone with his lawyers within hours of the attacks, would in part get his way due to the rulings of Mukasey, who saw to it that the attacks were considered two separate incidents.

The same outside element that had ties to the World Trade Center complex, airport security, and even the movements of the hijackers themselves also left behind their indistinguishable fingerprints on the legal proceedings and investigations into the attacks. But what about those on the inside?

Act VI: The Inside Element

While the outside element managed to obtain a presence on the inside, we will see that several connections extending past the explicitly Israeli-Outside faction exist and are worthy of consideration. The outside and inside elements should not be viewed as conflicting or opposing groups. Rather, 9/11 was the result of a confluence of this outside-Israeli faction and the Inside element—a circle of WTC tenants, Bush Administration officials, prominent Neo-Conservatives, intelligence assets, and private interests with these two groups sharing mutual interests and ideologies in common. In fact, the confluence is so complete that at times the groups can seemingly lose contrast, operating as one singular entity. This group cohesion was essential to the success of their operation.

So what groups and individuals comprise the inside element?

Private CIA for Hire

Kroll, a financial and risk advisory firm, according to some, largely functions as a private intelligence firm, having been called the “CIA of Wall Street”. The company routinely hires former Mossad, CIA, and MI5 employees. French intelligence even suspected that the company had at times served as a front for CIA activity. The founder of Kroll, Jules Kroll, was hired by Robert Maxwell two weeks before his mysterious death to investigate the “dark forces” he said had mobilized against him. More recently, the firm was hired by Harvey Weinstein to wipe the electronic devices of one of his alleged victims of any evidence of sexual assault.

After the 1993 WTC bombing, Kroll was contracted to revamp the security of the complex.

Jerome Hauer

Jerome Hauer, the Managing Director of Kroll at the time of 9/11, instead of going to his office in the WTC, made television appearances announcing that the man responsible for the attacks was none other than Osama Bin Laden, as well as dismissing the notion that any kind of explosives had been used. This display, reminiscent of Ehud Barak’s appearance on the BBC, is even more conspicuous given Hauer’s position managing security for the WTC.

Hauer’s position at Kroll was not his first job at the WTC complex.

As part of the mayor’s office under Giuliani, in 1996, the Office of Emergency Management (OEM) was created to respond to emergencies and help facilitate communications between different agencies in the event of an emergency. The OEM’s emergency operations center was housed on the 23rd floor of WTC 7, a controversial decision following the 1993 WTC attacks. The decision to place the Emergency Operations Center in the WTC was allegedly made by Jerome Hauer, the first director of the OEM, who had been appointed to the position by Giuliani.

The New York Times described Hauer’s job with the OEM as “sitting around all day thinking up horrifying ways for things to be destroyed and people to die.”

Speaking to the Times, Hauer mentioned the kinds of emergencies he was concerned with, saying, “helicopter crash, subway fire, water main break, ice storm, heat wave, blackout, building collapse, building collapse, building collapse.”

Not only was Hauer obsessed with building collapses, even going so far as to keep trophies from building collapses the way a serial killer might collect the jewelry of the women he dismembers, but he was also tapped into the Bush administration. On the day of 9/11, Hauer advised top officials in the Bush administration to start taking the antibiotic Cipro. Hauer also began hinting to the media that Saddam Hussein was going to unleash an anthrax attack through foreign terrorists.

Hauer had previously worked at Scientific Applications International Corporation, which employed Stephen Hatfill, the initial suspect in the investigation of the Anthrax attacks. SAIC worked on developing protocols for handling anthrax “hoax letters”.

SAIC just so happens to hold patents related to thermite.

Hauer’s strange connections relating to 9/11 do not end here. Hauer hired John P. O’Neill to Kroll just before 9/11. O’Neill had been an FBI Special Investigator with expert knowledge of Osama bin Laden and the Al-Qaeda networks alleged to have committed the 1993 WTC bombing. O’Neill would not be as lucky as Hauer and other top executives at the WTC complex. O’Neill died in the attacks.

In the aftermath of 9/11, public officials and the mainstream media repeated that the poor response to the attacks largely centered around a failure of imagination. After all, who could have foreseen planes flying into buildings as an act of terrorism?

As it turns out, many individuals had foreseen the possibility of just such a scenario, with one of them being Brian Michael Jenkins, the Deputy Chairman of Kroll from 1989 to 1998. After the 1993 attacks, Jenkins assessed the potential for a terror attack on the WTC involving planes.

During his career, Jenkins served as an advisor to many different government agencies, including the State Department and the Department of Defense. Jenkins is an expert on terrorism and transportation security, and in 2000 was an advisor to the National Commission on Terrorism. In addition to all of this, Jenkins had been an advisor to the president of the RAND Corporation after his time in the Special Forces. Some other RAND advisors during the time of Jenkins’ advisory role were Donald Rumsfeld, Frank Carlucci of the Carlyle Group, Condoleezza Rice, and PNAC member Francis Fukuyama.

Perhaps the most interesting endeavor Jenkins undertook during his career as a civil servant, as it pertains to 9/11, was his time as a member of the White House Commission on Aviation and Security in the late 90’s. In this position, Jenkins worked with CIA director John Deutch and James Abrahamson of Securacom, a company that provided security services for the WTC after the 1993 bombing by integrating the various electronic security systems installed in the buildings. The commission, with Abrahamson, Deutch, and Jenkins, recommended that all airliners and the FAA’s Wide Area Augmentation System should be updated with a modernized Global Positioning System (GPS). Some authors have theorized that GPS-guided autopilot systems took remote control of the planes hijacked on 9/11.

Securacom Secures Control?

A discussion of the World Trade Center wouldn’t be complete without delving deeper into the previously mentioned Securacom, which James Abrahamson was employed by in addition to his role with Jenkins on aviation security for the Clinton White House.

Securacom began work for the WTC following the 1993 bombing. The company later changed its name to Stratesec after a lawsuit was filed against them by a smaller company named Securacomm. The court found an effort by Securacom to financially “bury” the plaintiff in an attempt to crush the smaller company through “vexatious litigation”.

In addition to James Abrahamson of the Aviation and Security Commission, Stratesec also had Wirt Walker III, a relative of the Bush family, and Marvin Bush, the brother of George W. Bush, on its board. Marvin Bush sat on the Board of Directors from 1993 to 2000, leaving to work for HCC Insurance, one of the many companies providing insurance coverage to the WTC.

Stratesec had several interesting clients in light of the September 11 attacks. Not only did they provide security for the WTC, but they also were contracted by United Airlines and Dulles Airport for security purposes.

Another Stratesec client of note is Los Alamos National Laboratory, which developed thermite electric matches. The dynamic gas-phase condensation method of producing thermite was pioneered by Wayne Danen and Steve Son at Los Alamos National Laboratory.

An FBI memo details how the FBI was considering investigating potential 9/11 related insider trading involving Stratesec after discovering 56,000 shares of Stratesec were purchased between September 6th and September 10th. Stratec shares went from $.75 a share to $1.49 once the markets opened back up after the attack, with the companies airport security systems being in higher demand after the attacks. An investigation was not pursued, with the FBI memo stating that “no ties to terrorism or other negative information” was discovered during their investigation of the two redacted individuals.

Profiteers? Perpetrators?

The North Tower was struck by American Airlines Flight 11 between floors 93 and 99. A single tenant, Marsh and McLennan, occupied all of these floors as well as one floor above the point of impact. Tenants of the WTC were responsible for any upgrades in leased spaces. Marsh fireproofed floors 93-100. Additionally, Marsh demolished floors 95-98 before updating the fire alarm and sprinkler systems of those floors. Marsh made modifications to floor 94 in 1998 and floor 95 in 2000.

The chairman and CEO of Marsh and McLennan at the time of 9/11 was Jeffrey Greenberg. In 1993, American International Group (AIG), a finance and insurance company, bought 23% of Kroll. The head of AIG at the time was Maurice Greenberg. Maurice’s son, Jeffrey Greenberg, two years after AIG acquired the 23% stake in Kroll, left AIG to work at Marsh and McLennan.

Greenberg was a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) as well as a trustee of the Brookings Institution. Lee Hamilton, the co-chairman of the 9/11 Commission, was also a trustee of the Brookings Institution.

The CEO of Marsh, Jeffrey Greenberg, was in midtown Manhattan at the time of the attacks at the company’s headquarters, where he had an “unobstructed view of lower Manhattan,” where he saw “smoke rising from One World Trade Center and the fireball erupt from the second tower.”

Greenberg stepped down from his position at Marsh after being charged by New York State Attorney Elliot Spitzer of running a kickback scheme, but “Mr. Greenberg was never charged with any wrongdoing, while Mr. Spitzer was later engulfed in a prostitute scandal.”

Maurice Greenberg was also in Spitzer’s crosshairs, with Spitzer alleging that AIG was involved in sham reinsurance transactions and shady accounting practices.

AIG has a colorful history that has been the source of scrutiny and questions regarding the monumental bailout they received after 2008, as well as the company’s ties to the CIA’s precursor, the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), and allegations of money laundering possibly related to cocaine trafficking out of Mena, Arkansas during Bill Clinton’s tenure as Governor.

Donald Rumsfeld (Left) and Paul Bremer (Right)

Paul Bremer worked as the CEO of Marsh Crisis Consulting, a subsidiary of Marsh and McLennan. And maybe not so coincidentally, just hours after the attacks, he would appear on MSNBC to announce that the attacks were carried out by Osama Bin Laden. Bremer and 1,700 other employees of Marsh had offices in the North Tower from floors 93 to 100, the exact area of the collision. 294 of Marsh’s employees died in the attacks while Bremer spoke cool, calm, and collected to his televised audience—just like fellow WTC employee Hauer.

Bremer held various positions in the US State Department, working for a time as an assistant to Henry Kissinger. Bremer was the Managing Director of Kissinger Associates. Kissinger Associates had deep ties with BCCI. BCCI was a bank with deep ties to the world of intelligence and eventually became embroiled in scandal. The BCCI scandal involved laundering drug money, financial crimes, sex trafficking, and the funding of terrorism. Ronald Reagan appointed Bremer as the ambassador-at-large for counterterrorism and coordinator for counterterrorism in 1986. After his time at Marsh, in 2003, George W. Bush appointed Bremer the presidential envoy to Iraq, and Bremer became the country’s Chief Executive Authority under the Coalition Provisional Authority.

Paul Bremer was also on the Board of AkzoNobel, a company that makes fireproofing coating for skyscrapers called Interchar. Bremer was also on the International Advisory Board of the Japanese company Komatsu, which manufactures mining, construction, and military-grade equipment. In 1996, Komatsu patented a thermite device which could “demolish a concrete structure at a high efficiency, while preventing a secondary problem due to noise, flying dust and chips, and the like.”

Another such individual worthy of consideration is Stephen Friedman (not to be confused with Netanyahu’s childhood chum), who worked as a Senior Principal at Marsh and McLennan Capital Corp at the time of the attacks.

Friedman’s resume reads like a who’s who of the Western establishment.

Marsh, which was in the direct impact zone of the North Towers, occupying floors 93-100, had 294 of their employees die in the attacks. One lucky survivor who just so happened to be running late due to traffic, Richard Groves, exposed the link between the company AIG and Marsh, a software called Silverstream possibly used to funnel money through the WTC during the 9/11 attacks.

The year before 9/11, Marsh contracted Silverstream software to create a digital connection between Marsh and their clients for the purpose of paperless transactions. Silverstream had already provided similar software for companies like Alex Brown, Deutsche Bank, and Morgan Stanley, but the software created for Marsh far exceeded the software Silverstream created for these other companies. Richard Andrew Grove, a salesman who managed the project for Silverstream, noticed fiscal anomalies in the billing of the account of this project. After discovering $10 million in suspicious purchase orders with vendors appearing to sell Marsh large quantities of suspicious hardware.

Grove approached Marsh executives with these anomalies, and some executives urged him to keep quiet. Executives at Marsh Grove felt he could trust were killed on September 11th during a conference call, which Grove was running late to due to traffic. The Marsh executives who had told Grove to keep quiet were the ones who had scheduled the meeting and were also the ones absent.

After September 11th, Convar, a German firm was hired to retrieve data from hard disks discovered at Ground Zero.

In an article published on CNN titled Computer Disk Drives from WTC Could Yield Clues, states, “An unexplained surge in transactions was recorded before the attacks, leading to speculation that someone might have profited from previous knowledge of the terrorist plot by moving sums of money. But because the facilities of many financial companies processing the transactions were housed in New York’s World Trade Center, destroyed in the blasts, it has until now been impossible to verify that suspicion.”

A separate article from Reuters reported this suspicious surge in transactions: “The suspicion is that inside information about the attack was used to send financial transaction commands and authorizations in the belief that amid all the chaos the criminals would have, at the very least, a good head start. Of course, it is also possible that there were perfectly legitimate reasons for the unusual rise in business volume. It could turn out that Americans went on an absolute shopping binge on that Tuesday morning. But at this point there are many transactions that cannot be accounted for. Not only the volume but the size of the transactions was far higher than usual for a day like that. There is a suspicion that these were possibly planned to take advantage of the chaos.”

One of Convar’s data retrieval experts said, “There is a suspicion that some people had advance knowledge of the approximate time of the plane crashes in order to move out amounts exceeding $100 million. They thought that the records of their transactions could not be traced after the mainframes were destroyed.”

Some have speculated that this technology connecting Marsh to their clients via Silverstream was used to carry out these transactions.

Former LAPD officer and investigative journalist Michael Ruppert said that one of Marsh’s e-clients, Deutsche Bank, had its computer systems externally taken control of immediately prior to the attacks, “Within, I would guess — I’d have to go back and look at the book, but it was no more than a week of the attacks — I was being contacted by a lot of people, from inside official sources who were raising a lot of questions. This one particular person was extremely credible. They absolutely convinced me they had been an employee of Deutsche Bank in the Twin Towers, and they told me very clearly that in the moments right before the attacks and during the attack — there was a 40-minute window between the time the first plane struck the World Trade Center and the second plane — that Deutsche Bank’s computers in New York City had been ‘taken over.’ Absolutely co-opted and run. There was a massive data purge, a massive data download, and all kinds of stuff was moving. And what this person said very clearly was that no one in the Deutsche Bank offices in the towers at the time had the ability to prevent what was going on from any of their terminals.”

Convar never confirmed whether or not Marsh’s unique Silverstream software was the mechanism through which these large transactions immediately preceding the attacks were cleared through.

Explosive Connections

United Airlines Flight 175 crashed into the south face of the South Tower from floor 77 to floor 85. One of the companies in the impact zone, Baseline Financial Services, had offices on the 77th and 78th floors of the South Tower. The company was led by Joseph Kasputys. Kasputys was the head of a company called Primark from 1987 to 2000, which, for a period of time, owned the company Triad International Maintenance Company, which modified Boeing Airplanes. Baseline, according to NIST, made modifications to the southeast of floor 78, which would later be the location where Flight 175 struck.

On floor 91 of the South Tower, Washington Group International had offices. The construction and mining firm acquired the government services business of Westinghouse Environmental Services Co., a company which operated the Savannah River National Laboratory. The Washington Group operated Savannah beginning in 1999 through the end of their contract with the DOE in 2009. Savannah Labs had shared tech with Lawrence Livermore Labs beginning in 1997. Savannah Labs developed sol-gel technology. Lawrence Livermore Labs used sol-gel when making nano-thermite. An interesting aside: Savannah Labs assisted in rescue operations after 9/11.

E. Preston Rahe Jr, became the President of Westinghouse Environmental Services Co in 2000 after being appointed by Washington Group after the buyout. Later, Rahe would go on to work for Lawrence Livermore National Security, the managing contractor of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, which was founded by Washington Group International, Bechtel, the University of California, and Amentum, with Rahe being the representative of Washington Group International’s interest. There, he served on the Board, and on the advisory Board was John Gordon. Gordon was a former Homeland Security Advisor and Deputy National Security Advisor for George W. Bush. He was also the Deputy Director of the CIA from October of 1997 to June of 2000. Gordon was also on Bush Sr.’s National Security Council.

Kevin Ryan points out that Gordon would have worked closely with A. B. Krongard, the Executive Director of the CIA. Krongard has been suspected by some of insider trading in relation to 9/11 due to the firm he headed until 1998, Alex Brown Inc., buying many of the suspicious put options on United Airlines before the 9/11 attacks.

In 1996, Washington Group International acquired Morrison Knudsen Co., a civil engineering and construction company with a history of building demolition, with The Seattle Daily Journal of Commerce Reporting that the company was hired by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to demolish over 200 buildings.

Inside the Pentagon, the comptroller at the time of 9/11, Dov Zakheim, had previously worked for SPC International, a subsidiary of Systems Planning Corporation. SPC developed a “flight termination system” for the US military, which claims on its website to provide “a fully redundant turnkey range safety and test system for remote control and flight termination of airborne test vehicles.”

SPC’s fire safety and emergency research division, Tridata Corporation, carried out an analysis of the WTC’s safety for the US Fire Administration after the 1993 bombing.

As Comptroller of the Pentagon, Zakheim was responsible for overseeing the $2.3 trillion, which Donald Rumsfeld announced could not be accounted for prior to a plane striking the Pentagon’s Budget Analyst Office.

The Final Act

The public was told immediately after the attacks what beliefs were within the narrowly prescribed parameters of safe opinion by people like Ehud Barak, Jerome Hauer, and Paul Bremer.

We were told the attacks were a failure of imagination despite the people responsible for the WTC complex’s security envisioning such an incident.

We were told that no explosives were used by Jerome Hauer, who worked in the World Trade Center and previously held a position with a company that holds patents related to thermite and developed protocols for handling anthrax letters.

There was no systemic failure of imagination.

On 9/11, the system functioned exactly the way it was designed to.

And to be clear, the name of any given individual or group here does not necessarily imply direct involvement in 9/11. I’m not trying to present some kind of cartoonish view of the attacks where every single individual mentioned was brought into a smoke-filled room and debriefed on what their role would be in the conspiracy. Power doesn’t work that way and neither do intelligence operations. At least for the most part. What we are looking at here is a network—an ecosystem of intelligence operatives, private interests, Zionist operatives, and legal fixers with shared interests, institutional alignments, and ideologies. On 9/11, those with direct involvement knew that they could count on this system to operate the way it was designed to. The point of detailing this network’s ties to the WTC, airports, and the larger system at play is to show how such a conspiracy could have functionally taken place without making the execution of the 9/11 attacks seem like something one would have watched in a poorly written 80’s crime thriller.

The outside layer of Israeli-intelligence-aligned assets secured ownership of the World Trade Center Complex and the security of the airports, kept tabs on the men who supposedly hijacked the planes, had people amenable to the cause in place for damage control, and delivered the narrative that suited their purposes on the BBC.

The inside layer, through shady tenants like Kroll and Stratesec, was in the position to make sure that all the logistics inside the buildings took place without a hitch once the environment was made safe by the outside layer.

The 9/11 Truth Movement largely ignores the material, on-the-ground, documentary evidence involving suspicious tenants, financial crimes, intelligence operatives, and legal chicanery in favor of focusing on debates revolving around fringe physics or low-brow conspiracies with vague perpetrators instead of naming names.

The mainstream narrative that maintains that 9/11 was all a failure of imagination and that the truth is too difficult to parse out ignores the fact that the blueprint is out in the open for anyone to see. It lives in corporate filings, lease termination dates, archived articles, and leaked FBI documents.

The blueprint is drawn.

The question is: what do we do with it?

Selected Resources and Further Reading:

September 9, 2026 Posted by | False Flag Terrorism, Timeless or most popular, Video, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Comments Off on 9/11 was an Inside/Outside Job

Israeli military court sentences Palestinian journalist to 4 years for ‘incitement’

MEMO | September 9, 2026

An Israeli military court on Tuesday sentenced Palestinian journalist Mahmoud Fatafta to four years in prison on charges of so-called “incitement”, the Palestinian Journalists’ Syndicate said.

The syndicate condemned the sentence in a statement, calling it “a new chapter in the targeting of Palestinian journalists and a systematic attempt to silence voices and suppress freedom of opinion and expression”.

The Israeli army arrested Fatafta on 30 May 2024 while he was passing through the Container checkpoint northeast of Bethlehem in the southern occupied West Bank.

The syndicate said prosecuting journalists in Israeli military courts over their journalistic work or expression of their views was “a flagrant violation of international law and international humanitarian law”. It said the military justice system was being used to punish and intimidate journalists and prevent them from carrying out their professional duties.

It added that the sentence against Fatafta came as part of an ongoing Israeli policy of pursuing, arresting and prosecuting Palestinian journalists in an attempt to “hide the Palestinian narrative and silence voices reporting the truth about what is happening on the ground”.

The syndicate said “incitement” charges had become a broad pretext used by Israeli authorities to pursue journalists, activists and people expressing their views, in violation of the right to freedom of expression and journalistic work.

September 9, 2026 Posted by | Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , | Comments Off on Israeli military court sentences Palestinian journalist to 4 years for ‘incitement’

Iran, Russia, China Demand Guarantees Against Further Attacks on Iranian Nuclear Sites

Sputnik – 09.09.2026

MOSCOW – Iran, Russia and China have demanded guarantees against further attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities, Iran’s mission in Vienna said on Wednesday.

“China, Iran, and Russia, in a joint statement to the [IAEA] BoG [Board of Governors] today, condemned repeated attacks against Iran’s nuclear facilities under IAEA safeguards, together with continuing threats of further aggression. In this regard, effective assurances, in particular guarantees of the non-recurrence of such actions, are indispensable for further development of Iran’s cooperation with the Agency,” the mission wrote on X.

The prevailing security conditions have effectively made the normal implementation of IAEA safeguards in Iran impossible, the mission added.

The US and Israel struck a number of Iranian nuclear facilities during the conflict of June 2025. Iranian nuclear sites were also hit during the latest escalation that began in late February 2026. Tehran blamed the US for the strikes.

The IAEA Board of Governors began its regular session on Monday in Vienna. The session, which runs until September 11, will address issues related to the implementation of safeguards in Iran and developments surrounding Iran’s nuclear program.

September 9, 2026 Posted by | Wars for Israel | , , , , , , | Comments Off on Iran, Russia, China Demand Guarantees Against Further Attacks on Iranian Nuclear Sites

How the Latest Iran Sanctions Could Impact Central Asia

The US Iran strategy is working against its Central Asia strategy; Secondary sanctions may push the region closer to China and Russia.

By James D. Durso | The National Interest | September 8, 2026

On August 19, US President Donald Trump announced an “ECONOMIC D-DAY” against the Islamic Republic of Iran, warning of “tremendous economic consequences” for any country allowing its financial institutions, businesses, airports, or government entities to provide Iran a “lifeline.” On August 24, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent announced “Operation Economic Outcast,” which sanctions Iran and its facilitators in third countries (but no major Chinese banks), and declared, “you are either with us or against us.”

Potential secondary sanctions threaten Central Asia’s developing trade, energy, and transport links with Iran, raising costs, disruption risks, and pressure to diversify routes. The Central Asian republics are not major supporters of Iran, but Iran is becoming an increasingly important southern outlet for their trade and connectivity. The biggest risk is therefore collateral damage to legitimate commerce and transportation, rather than a confrontation over Iran policy.

The Effect of Secondary Sanctions on Central Asia’s Economy

Banking and financial services could become the most immediate problem. Central Asian banks and companies may decide that even legitimate transactions involving Iran are not worth the compliance risk. If a Kazakh or Uzbek bank processes an Iranian payment and Washington later determines the transaction constitutes a prohibited “lifeline,” the bank could lose access to the US financial system.

That creates a powerful chilling effect: the US threatens sanctions, banks become risk-averse, Iranian transactions become difficult, and Central Asia-Iran trade declines as the republics lose access to a market of over 90 million people.

Washington is already targeting Iranian shadow-banking networks and foreign facilitators for enabling Iran’s rahbar banking system. The Treasury Department said its August 7 action involved networks spanning several countries and hundreds of millions of dollars in Iranian transactions.

The result could be over-compliance: Central Asian banks might stop handling perfectly legal Iran-related transactions simply because determining what Washington will regard as a “lifeline” is too difficult. Secondary sanctions can dampen commerce even without formal designations, as private actors withdraw to avoid US financial-system exclusion or penalties.

Transportation and logistics corridors could become economically unattractive, potentially with greater strategic consequences than the direct loss of trade. A container originating in Uzbekistan or Kazakhstan and traveling through Iran to a Persian Gulf port might have nothing to do with Iran politically. Still, it could require an Iranian trucking company, an Iranian railway, an Iranian port, Iranian customs services, Iranian insurance, an Iranian bank, and fuel purchased in Iran. As the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) is a major player in Iran’s economy, it will be tough not to deal with an IRGC-affiliated business.

If Washington interprets normal business activity as supporting the Iranian government, the entire corridor could become commercially radioactive. Iran offers a continuous land route southward and onward to the Persian Gulf petrostates, South Asia, East Asia, and East Africa.

The Central Asian republics are landlocked and have pursued pragmatic economic ties with Iran primarily for southern access to the Persian Gulf and Indian Ocean via ports such as Bandar Abbas and Chabahar. These routes form part of the International North-South Transport Corridor (INSTC) and related rail and road networks, offering alternatives or complements to routes that transit Russia, China, or Afghanistan.

Energy relationships are another vulnerability, particularly for Turkmenistan and Tajikistan. Energy swaps, fuel purchases, and other transactions involving Iranian counterparties could become more expensive or difficult if banks, insurers, shippers, or trading companies conclude that they face sanctions exposure.

A prior Turkmen gas-swap arrangement involving Iran was disrupted by US sanctions, illustrating how sanctions can affect nonmilitary transactions. Tajikistan has also sought large preferential fuel supplies from Iran amid unreliable Russian supplies.

Central Asian governments may therefore face higher freight and insurance rates, longer transit times, additional compliance costs, and pressure to use alternative corridors. They may also see greater use of barter or non-US Dollar settlement mechanisms where feasible.

Trade and regional connectivity. The economic effect is likely to be less a complete collapse of trade than higher prices and greater complexity of using Iran. The region may accelerate diversification toward the Trans-Caspian International Transport Route (the “Middle Corridor”), Pakistani ports, or Chinese routes, although each has capacity, cost, or security limitations.

Kazakhstan is probably the most exposed, given its long-term connectivity strategy and interest in an outlet to the Persian Gulf. It has been developing multiple routes to diversify its export geography, including the Middle Corridor through the Caspian and South Caucasus, as well as routes through Iran. Its development of port infrastructure in Iran illustrates that Astana sees Iranian territory as part of its long-term connectivity portfolio.

Bilateral trade rose 26.4 percent in 2025 to about $430 million, with ambitions to reach $3 billion, supported by the Eurasian Economic Union-Iran free trade agreement. Rail freight with Iran increased 69 percent, while INSTC freight overall grew 12 percent to 3.5 million tons. In June 2026, Kazakhstan signed a 27-year Build-Operate-Transfer (BOT) deal for its own logistics terminal at Bandar Abbas, aimed at Persian Gulf, South Asian, Southeast Asian, and East African markets. Secondary sanctions could delay or derail the terminal project and raise logistics costs; banks and carriers could also self-sanction and chill transactions even without formal government action.

Washington now faces a dilemma: the more aggressively it sanctions Iranian transit infrastructure, the harder it becomes for Central Asian states to build the independent trade routes Washington claims it wants them to develop.

Uzbekistan has an especially strong reason to maintain multiple southern options. Tashkent has pursued routes through Turkmenistan and Iran toward the Persian Gulf while also developing routes westward via the Middle Corridor and eastward (the China-Kyrgyzstan-Uzbekistan Railway).

Roughly 9 percent of imports and 10 percent of non-gold exports transited Iran in 2025. Officials have estimated potential losses from Middle East logistics disruptions at $1–$1.5 billion (0.7–1 percent of GDP). Sanctions pressure could force costly rerouting toward the Middle Corridor or other paths, raise freight rates, and reduce competitiveness.

In June, Tashkent concluded a successful investment forum that saw interest from 193 American companies and investors, and where Washington and Tashkent launched a joint investment platform to “identify strategic investments in Uzbekistan for the US and US allies in key sectors.” In February 2026, the United States and Uzbekistan established a critical-minerals partnership, including a framework for up to $400 million in investment in the two countries.

Uzbekistan’s president, Shavkat Mirziyoyev, visited the White House in February 2026, and the leaders concluded agreements in critical minerals, energy and petrochemicals, agriculture and poultry, and irrigation and water-saving technology, the latter a critical issue in the water-stressed country. They also announced a three-year, $35 billion Economic Cooperation Program. Uzbekistan’s World Trade Organization accession got a boost, and the Board of Peace gave Uzbekistan a role in Trump’s Middle East initiative.

The Uzbek leader has made a substantial personal investment in the relationship with the United States, and Uzbekistan has an incentive to comply with US sanctions on prohibited Iranian entities while preserving legitimate transit and commercial relationships wherever possible. That said, Trump must ensure his attack on Iran’s economy doesn’t damage the economies of countries that want a serious relationship with America, as future leaders will not again expose themselves politically if the Americans are careless.

Turkmenistan could face a somewhat different problem. It has extensive energy and transportation ties with Iran and depends on its neighbors for alternative routes. At the same time, Ashgabat traditionally values neutrality (and it is official state policy) and is unlikely to want to become involved in a US-Iran confrontation.

Turkmenistan is expanding cooperation with Iran in transport, energy, communications, and construction. US sanctions disrupted a prior gas-swap arrangement, so secondary measures could freeze or raise the cost of energy swaps and transit.

If Washington begins sanctioning Iranian transportation or energy counterparties broadly, Turkmenistan could be forced to choose between maintaining economically useful relationships with Iran and avoiding exposure to the US financial system, an uncomfortable choice for a country that works not to take sides.

Tajikistan’s direct trade with Iran is smaller, but its exposure is growing. Freight with Iran rose 17.5 percent in the first half of 2026 to 433,000 tons, mostly by rail. Tajikistan has sought large preferential fuel supplies from Iran—2.55 million tons of crude and products, including 2 million tons of crude plus diesel, gasoline, and aviation fuel—amid unreliable Russian supplies. It has also discussed joint road corridors with Iran and Afghanistan, potentially extendable regionally and toward China.

Disruptions could therefore hit fuel access, raise costs, and complicate logistics. Tajikistan may seek alternative suppliers and routes, but those alternatives could be more expensive or less reliable.

Kyrgyzstan is less directly tied to Iran than the other republics, so immediate sanctions exposure should be lower. Nevertheless, it could feel the effects indirectly through higher regional freight costs, fuel prices, insurance costs, banking restrictions, and shared corridor dependencies.

The Strategic Consequences of US Secondary Sanctions in Central Asia

The Central Asian governments pursue multi-vector policies and generally avoid open confrontation with Washington. They are unlikely to disregard US pressure or politically champion Iran, but will manage exposure carefully, possibly scaling back high-visibility projects while seeking workarounds.

Their most likely strategy is: comply with US sanctions on prohibited Iranian entities while preserving legitimate transit and commercial relationships wherever possible. They may also seek explicit US assurances or exemptions for infrastructure projects, but that may dissuade US investors if multiple approvals are needed over a project’s lifetime. And US policy can change overnight.

Washington says it wants Central Asia to become less dependent on Russia and China, and Central Asian governments want that too; one way to do it is by developing connectivity through Iran.

Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan joined Trump’s Board of Peace, but that may not protect them if Trump decides “all hands” must support America’s crusade against Iran. The point of maximum danger for the two republics may come if Trump can’t force China to isolate Iran and tries to punish Beijing by punishing Astana and Tashkent for trans-shipping Chinese goods while allegedly concealing their true origin to take advantage of lower tariffs. There is always the chance a Trump-affiliated investor may ask the White House to attack Tashkent’s trade with Iran, $578 million in 2025, if it doesn’t like Tashkent’s terms and conditions for a deal.

Consequently, an overly broad sanctions campaign could produce greater dependence on China and Russia, the opposite of the strategic objective Washington often advocates for Central Asia, consequences that probably weren’t considered before Trump and Bessent took to social media. Russian State Railways is sanctioned by the United States and the European Union, so Central Asian businesses may be stuck between two transport options, both sanctioned by the West.

The consequences will depend on how Washington defines a “lifeline.” If “lifeline” means financing Iran’s military or IRGC, oil exports, weapons procurement, or sanctions-evasion networks, the Central Asian impact could be manageable. If it means ordinary transportation, banking, aviation, port services, and non-military government-to-government commerce involving Iran, the consequences could be much larger.

The American administration has already demonstrated that it is willing to sanction foreign transport and financial networks supporting Iran’s military and procurement activities. That distinction is central to the policy question. If Washington wants Central Asia to have “connectivity without dependence,” it may need to distinguish carefully between Iranian military lifelines and Iranian transportation infrastructure that Central Asian states use simply to reach global markets.

Central Asia probably will not be the principal target of the new sanctions, but it could be the sanctions’ most significant collateral damage. The danger is not that the republics will support Iran, but that Washington could make legitimate Iranian transit so financially risky and demand that Iran’s neighbors help quarantine the Islamic Republic, undermining Central Asia’s effort to develop alternative routes to the world to the benefit of China and Russia.


James Durso is a regular commentator on foreign policy and national security matters. Mr. Durso served in the US Navy for 20 years and has worked in Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and Iraq. His writing has appeared in The Hill, The National Interest, Defense News, and Responsible Statecraft. Follow him on X: @james_durso

September 9, 2026 Posted by | Economics, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , , | Comments Off on How the Latest Iran Sanctions Could Impact Central Asia

Pakistan threatens Yemeni strikes on KSA ‘could trigger’ Mecca defense pact

The Cradle | September 9, 2026

Pakistani Defense Minister Khawaja Asif threatened in comments published on 9 September that the Ansarallah-led Yemeni Armed Forces (YAF) attacks “could trigger” the Mecca Defense Pact between Riyadh, Islamabad, and Ankara.

The Pakistani war chief’s comments coincide with a massive YAF campaign of retaliatory strikes on Saudi Arabia and its assets in Yemen, as well as brutal Saudi bombing against the Arab world’s poorest nation.

“Under the trilateral agreement, any aggression against any of the three [countries] is regarded as an aggression against all. There is no ambiguity about that,” the Pakistani minister said in an interview with Geo News.

He added that the YAF retaliations “could trigger the pact” between the three states, which was finalized and signed last month.

According to Saudi authorities, over 70 people were wounded by YAF strikes on Tuesday, which targeted military and energy infrastructure.

The kingdom’s Energy Ministry acknowledged fires and a halt to operations at a number of sites on 8 September due to Sanaa’s attacks.

Pakistan’s threat against Yemen coincided with a statement by the YAF, condemning Saudi Arabia’s “attempts to evade responsibility” for war crimes against Yemen, including the kingdom’s Monday strike on a prison in Yemen’s Al-Jawf governorate.

The attack killed at least 16 people and injured scores.

“At 4:30 pm, an F-15SA fighter aircraft took off from King Khalid Air Base in Khamis Mushait and carried out two airstrikes targeting the prison. It then returned to the same base in Khamis Mushait at 4:45 pm,” the Yemeni army said.

“The Saudi enemy’s attempts to evade responsibility for its crimes and aggression against our country will not absolve it of the consequences and repercussions of this aggression and criminal conduct, no matter how hard it tries to conceal or cover up what happened,” it added.

Saudi Arabia’s Khamis Mushait site was among those targeted by YAF ballistic missiles and drones this week. The new YAF statement on Wednesday came hours after heavy Saudi bombing targeted multiple governorates in Yemen. At least 32 Saudi airstrikes were carried out across Marib, Taiz, Hodeidah, and Al-Jawf.

Yemen’s retaliatory operations come as part of a string of recent Yemeni strikes in recent days, which inflicted heavy damage on Saudi-backed forces in Yemen.

The YAF announced several military operations on 7 September, including the destruction of weapons shipments coming in from Saudi Arabia.

Footage of the operation was released. It shows Saudi military equipment – en route to Riyadh’s proxies in Yemen – being struck and blown up by Yemeni forces.

The YAF recently released footage of multiple other attacks targeting Saudi-backed mercenary groups and forces loyal to the Aden-based Presidential Leadership Council (PLC), backed by the kingdom. The footage was captured by YAF drones.

Sanaa’s recent escalation of retaliatory operations was prompted by Saudi Arabia’s July attack on Sanaa International Airport, which has been under blockade by the kingdom for more than a decade since Riyadh launched its brutal war on Yemen in 2015 at the head of an Arab coalition.

A 2023 Saudi–Yemeni peace process nearly resulted in an agreement between the two sides.

The peace talks stalled but prevented a major escalation from erupting. Yet the kingdom for years continued attacks and its illegal and deadly blockade on Yemeni ports and airports.

Pakistan’s threats in defense of the kingdom’s brutal war on Yemen come weeks after a Reuters report cited sources as saying that Islamabad is concerned it may be “drawn” into the fighting between Riyadh and Sanaa.

September 9, 2026 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Comments Off on Pakistan threatens Yemeni strikes on KSA ‘could trigger’ Mecca defense pact

Iran War Just Got Much Bigger / Matt Bracken & Lt Col Daniel Davis

Daniel Davis / Deep Dive – September 8, 2026

September 8, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Video, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Comments Off on Iran War Just Got Much Bigger / Matt Bracken & Lt Col Daniel Davis

Qatar Warns of ‘Industrial Catastrophe’ If Strait of Hormuz Remains Closed

By Kyle Anzalone | The Libertarian Institute | September 8, 2026

Qatar is warning that there will be significant global consequences if the Strait of Hormuz is not reopened soon. Iran closed the Strait in response to the war started by the US and Israel. President Donald Trump also imposed a blockade of Iranian ports.

On Monday, Qatar’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson, Mohammed Al-Ansari, said reopening the Strait of Hormuz remains a priority, warning that the prolonged disruption could lead to an “industrial catastrophe.”

The Strait of Hormuz has become a major issue for Trump. Before the war, the Strait was treated as an international waterway. However, after the US and Israel attacked Iran, Tehran seized control of the Strait.

Since then, Tehran has limited traffic to nations that are not participating in the war against Iran. Additionally, Iran is requiring vessels to use preapproved shipping lanes and pay a “service fee.”

Tehran says any agreement to end the conflict must recognize Iran’s sovereignty over the Strait. Iran is in negotiations with Oman to establish new protocols for ships transiting the waterway. Washington is demanding that Tehran return the Strait to its pre-war status.

The US has attempted to force open the Strait of Hormuz. The US is currently escorting tankers through the waterway in hopes of defending the vessels from Iranian missiles and drones. Over the past week, US warships and tankers were targeted by Iranian missiles and drones.

While US officials have claimed that the amount of oil exiting the Strait is close to prewar levels, monitoring agencies say only a small fraction is getting out of the Persian Gulf.

Trump has attempted to pressure US allies into joining a coalition to reopen the Strait without success. The President has recently turned his focus toward South Korea. He recently scaled back war games with Seoul, in part, because South Korea refused to aid the war against Iran.

On Tuesday, Seoul said it still had not determined if it would provide assistance to the war. “We are closely consulting with the international community, including the US, on ways to make a substantive contribution toward the swift restoration of freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz and peace and stability in the Middle East,” Defense Ministry spokesperson Chung Bin-na said. “No specific measures have been decided at this point.”

Iran warned South Korea that any involvement in the US war would have “consequences.”

September 8, 2026 Posted by | Economics, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Comments Off on Qatar Warns of ‘Industrial Catastrophe’ If Strait of Hormuz Remains Closed

Israeli Army Closes Tulkarem Zakat Committee Headquarters

IMEMC | September 8, 2026

Israeli forces invaded and closed the Tulkarem Central Zakat Committee headquarters in the northwestern West Bank before dawn Tuesday. After the soldiers withdrew, Palestinians found the body of Gaza Strip resident As’ad Mleiha inside.

Media sources said several Palestinian workers from the Gaza Strip had been living in part of the facility since October 7, 2023. When a large contingent of Israeli soldiers invaded the building, the soldiers forced the workers to leave.

Soldiers then abducted an unspecified number of workers and transported them by military truck to an undisclosed location.

The sources added that the soldiers vandalized the contents of the headquarters and then posted a notice at the entrance alleging that the committee was “illegal,” “supports terrorism,” and had been shut down.

During the invasion, Israeli soldiers fired concussion grenades and tear gas canisters at journalists covering the events and chased several reporters in the surrounding area. No injuries were reported.

Following the army’s withdrawal, Civil Defense and Palestinian Red Crescent Society crews recovered As’ad Mleiha’s body from inside the committee headquarters.

Civil Defense and Palestinian Red Crescent Society crews transferred the body to a hospital. The circumstances surrounding Mleiha’s death and how his body came to be inside the building remain unknown.

No information has been released regarding the fate of the Gaza workers abducted by Israeli forces during the invasion.

The closure of the committee comes amid ongoing Israeli military assaults throughout the Tulkarem governorate.

The Tulkarem Central Zakat Committee is a charitable institution affiliated with the Palestinian Ministry of Endowments and Religious Affairs.

The committee uses donations and zakat funds to provide humanitarian, social, educational, and financial assistance to families in need, orphans, and other vulnerable groups.

Once a refuge for Palestinians from Gaza stranded in the occupied West Bank after the since October 2023, the Tulkarm Central Zakat Committee headquarters has now become the scene of an Israeli military operation.

The development highlights the vulnerability of Gaza residents living in the West Bank, where ongoing Israeli invasions and abductions continue to expose them to heightened security and legal risks.

September 8, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , | Comments Off on Israeli Army Closes Tulkarem Zakat Committee Headquarters

Blaming the Victim in the Gaza Genocide

Amnesty International blames the victim in a time of genocide

By Paul de Rooij • Unz Review • September 8, 2026

The late Dr. Israel Shahak once related that during WWII when a collaborator at the Warsaw ghetto was eliminated, the jubilant inmates (himself included) danced with joy.[0] Maybe the extreme situation didn’t permit the semblance of a legal process, but natural law ran its course. Now imagine if at that time a sanctimonious body were to pop up and chastise the inmates for this “crime”. Under the circumstances, it would appear hypocritical for anyone to criticise the inmates, let alone refer to their action as “unlawful” and demand “accountability”.

Well, Amnesty International just published an article that fits that description in a contemporary setting. It just published a news release, “Hamas must stamp out extrajudicial executions…”[1], which is an indictment of the execution or beatings of collaborators in Gaza. Amnesty’s rumination amounts to blaming the victim.

About Collaborators

For many decades Israel sought to recruit Palestinian collaborators. These were used as an enforcement arm of the oppressor; to inform on the Palestinian society and the resistance; to undermine the cohesion of the society, to sow distrust; act as propaganda agents; and to create dependence on the oppressor. The Israeli desire to destroy the Palestinian society has been ever present.

From the early days prior to the formation of Israel, zionists sought informers and traitors. Bedouins and the “peace bands” acted as trackers to find and eliminate Palestinian fighters. Wealthy Palestinians sold land or acted as agents for the zionists to acquire land. There are gradations of collaboration — from the ones who were involved in violence against their own people, to those engaged in acts that undermined Palestinian society[2].

Today the so-called Palestinian Authority (PA) are collaborators in the Israeli project; they suppress Palestinian resistance, maintain dependence and subjugation, and protect the network of Palestinian collaborators created by Israel. Prominent Palestinians opposed to Israeli oppression have been murdered by the PA; the PA goons have been tasked with suppressing resistance in key areas such as Jenin and Nablus; and PA forces coordinate their actions with Israeli forces.

Israeli prisons use collaborators (aka Asafir) placed in cells together with Palestinian prisoners to get them to divulge information. Asafir collaborators are also used to break the solidarity between prisoners; any activity that might create a spirit of resistance is broken up.

Notorious armed collaborators roam in the West Bank where they harass and intimidate victims at the behest of their handlers. But to create a culture subservient to the Israeli occupation, Palestinians are told to petition the collaborators to obtain permits, access to land or work. The collaborators simply do Israel’s dirty work.

Drug dealing and collaboration go hand in hand. There is a history of Israel supplying drugs and fostering the criminal gangs in Gaza and the West Bank.[3]

Yet another true and tested way to undermine a society. Drug dealers also act as armed enforcers.

It is fairly easy for Israelis to recruit collaborators. Any Palestinian who has to cross a checkpoint is easy prey for Israeli agents to coerce or bribe victims to become collaborators. No cooperation results in blocked access, and thus no work and the like. If a child requires to go to an Israeli hospital or a health facility in Jerusalem, the parents are often confronted with the choice of obtaining a permit by collaborating, or being turned back. Students seeking to go to study abroad are also put in the same quandary, collaborate or have passage denied. There is an upside to collaborating (obtaining access or favours), and the downside is minimal because collaborators aren’t persecuted. So, now there are collaborators everywhere in the West Bank.

Collaborators in Gaza

When Hamas took over Gaza after it won the elections in 2006, it displaced the collaborationist Palestinian Authority. But most of the ejected members of the PA forces, predominantly Fatah members, remained in Gaza and many were willing to collaborate with Israel. The Palestinian resistance has to contend with collaborators who would pinpoint tunnels, weapons or key personnel. Several resistance commanders were likely killed when exposed by collaborators. Hooded collaborators enable the Israeli military to identify and separate Palestinian prisoners who are either in or assist the resistance.

Some collaborators were tasked with spreading false rumours in crowded places. A favourite tactic was for a collaborator to take a shared taxi ride, and then loudly claim that a given official was corrupt or criminal. Others were instructed to paint defeatist or hateful graffiti.

And at present Israel is arming and organising Palestinian criminal gangs to terrorise neighbourhoods to drive people out of their homes. The Middle East Eye reports:[4]

Based on testimony from Israeli soldiers, UN reports and satellite imagery, the investigation found that increasingly well-armed collaborator militias have expelled Palestinians from their homes and carried out operations across Gaza. Israel has trained at least five militia groups, and potentially a sixth, operating from heavily fortified bases inside Israeli-occupied areas of the enclave.

One Israeli soldier described how the state, army and Shin Bet intelligence service send armed and “trained militias to commit war crimes, …”.

One can well understand Palestinian anger against the collaborators’ treasonous and criminal behaviour, and their attempts to poison Palestinian society.

Amnesty on rough justice

Although Israel is responsible for recruiting and exploiting a collaborator network, Amnesty portrays Hamas’ rough justice as “unlawful” and it calls for Hamas to be held accountable. It doesn’t portray the collaborators as an Israeli instrument.

Amnesty portrays the issue of collaborators as one between the Palestinian population at large and Hamas; not as one where Israel is the oppressor, and the Palestinians are the oppressed. And under the circumstances (Amnesty plainly admits there is “a collapse of law and order in Gaza”), how are Palestinians supposed to dispense justice? On the one hand Amnesty wants Hamas to operate under a legal framework, yet it plainly downplays the Israeli violations of most laws that should confer all Palestinians some protection. It is a clear double standard.

Israeli forces have targeted the police and courts. On day one of the 2014 attack, dozens of police were bombed and killed. In the recent past, police have been similarly targeted. So, it seems that Amnesty expects Hamas to operate within a legal framework meant to mediate societal tension in a state of peace. When Hamas establishes that organised crime in Gaza operates in tandem with Israeli forces, then it has the right to defend itself. Amnesty may not like the rough justice this entails, but it has no standing to criticise the way Palestinians defend themselves.

Erika Guevara Rosas, the author of the “Hamas must stamp out extrajudicial executions” article, seems to dismiss the accusations made by Hamas against collaborators. When referring to the collaborators, the article is sprinkled with the usual Amnesty weasel words: “suspected”, “alleged”. The word informant is put in quotation marks. Amnesty confers no credibility to statements made by Hamas. One wonders why Palestinians should be required to justify their actions when Israel carries on with impunity.

A legal argument

Anyone hiring a hitman for an assassination or any serious crime would face severe legal consequences. In the same manner, when Israel hires or coerces collaborators to perpetrate serious crimes, e.g., murder, then the contracting party should also bear severe legal consequences. Alas, this is not an argument that Amnesty understands.

There is a pattern

Most articles/news releases published by Amnesty seem to follow a pattern. One article will criticise Palestinians, and it is shortly thereafter followed by an article which criticises Israel. In the current context, we have the article about execution of collaborators, and it was followed a few days later by an article restating that Israel has done nothing to end the genocide and to abide by the ICJ’s ruling.[5] Amnesty seeks to portray itself as a neutral organisation which sits on the fence criticising “both sides”. Amnesty’s actions are neither proportional to the violence or injustice of the current situation. The reason it takes this dubious stance is because it doesn’t want to be in solidarity with the Palestinians, but it similarly doesn’t want to be antagonistic towards Israelis. The actions of the oppressed and oppressor are held to the same ahistorical standard.

Amnesty and genocide

It took a long time for Amnesty to unequivocally refer to Israeli crimes as genocide. On 28 October 2023, Craig Mokhiber, the former UN official in the High Commission for Human Rights, resigned because his agency was not reacting given the unfolding situation in Gaza, and stated in his resignation letter: “this is a textbook case of genocide”. It was only 13 months later that Amnesty acknowledged the nature of Israeli crimes, thus Amnesty was rather late to announce that Palestinians were subject to a genocidal campaign.[6] But then one would expect more action from “the leading human rights organisation”. Currently, several weeks transpire before it cursorily mentions genocide. It seems that Amnesty’s actions aren’t proportional to the severity of the crime — and to boot, Amnesty will regularly chastise Palestinians for the way they deal with collaborators or protestors.

A matter of timing

There are many egregious cases of Israeli violence or threats to perpetrate heinous acts. On 15 August 2026, Itamar Ben Gvir, the Israeli security minister, stated that he sought to kill 30 to 40 Palestinians every day. The man interviewing him helpfully volunteered to kill with his own bare hands. This is only Ben Gvir’s latest statement about an intent to kill many Palestinians, and he certainly belongs in the same dock as Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant to answer for all their mass crimes. Amnesty’s article chastising Palestinians for the assassination of collaborators coincided with Ben Gvir’s statements about criminal intent. What is worse, the elimination of collaborators or the threat to kill 30 to 40 Palestinians every day? What is surprising is that Amnesty didn’t utter a peep about Ben Gvir’s threats — hardly empty threats.

Human rights are for the birds

Human rights organisations think that they can opine on everything, and they believe that they can offer recommendations to everybody. Alas, the human rights framework is problematic and deficient, and human rights organisations are mostly compromised and propaganda tools for those who pay for them.

When confronted with mass crimes what is needed is justice, and not one of its bastardised, neutered, malleable and ineffective substitutes. If one wants justice then it behooves one to speak in terms of justice, and to avoid the human rights mumbo jumbo. When faced with mass crimes one should demand justice, and not merely seek some bandages. This is specially the case when human rights have been cynically exploited and weaponised by the US and UK. A framework that can be used to justify wars, the so-called humanitarian interventions (even humanitarian bombing!!), cannot be a framework that advances justice or motivates people to act against mass crimes.

Most human rights NGOs don’t even condemn the forever wars, the US/Israeli wars of aggression. Amnesty International is “not an anti-war organisation”.[7] How one can favour human rights and not oppose wars is a mystery. But then Amnesty is against capital punishment, but not opposed to some killing by the military. However, all killings by the Palestinian resistance are condemned or criticised in Amnesty’s weasel-like inimitable style. The same demands don’t apply when Israel bombs refugee camps, or hires, arms and organises collaborators to terrorise and expel the residents of the refugee camps. Here another standard applies.

Amnesty International is not part of the solution; it is part of the problem.

Notes

[0] Frank Collins, “Why Palestinians Kill Palestinians in Israeli-Occupied Territories”, WRMEA, Nov. 1989.https://www.wrmea.org/1989-november/why-palestinians-kill-palestinians-in-israeli-occupied-territories.html

[1] “Palestine: Hamas must stamp out extrajudicial executions and ensure justice for victims”, 21 August 2026.
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2026/08/palestine-hamas-must-stamp-out-extrajudicial-executions-and-ensure-justice-for-victims/

[2] A good overview of early Palestinian collaboration see: Joseph Massad , “Palestinian elites have been collaborating against the resistance for a century”, 12 June 2026.

[3] Here is a recent example: Joe Glenton, Israel is smuggling narcotics into Gaza, Palestinian tribal council warns, The Canary, 17 December 2025.

https://www.thecanary.co/global/world-analysis/2025/12/17/israel-narcotics/

[4] Israel arms drug dealers to commit new ‘Sabra and Shatila’ in Gaza, MEE Staff, MEE, 27 August 2026.

See also: Palestine Information Center, “Agent militias in Gaza: Temporary occupation tool or project to reshape society”, 3 September 2026.

https://english.palinfo.com/reports/2026/09/03/369484/

[5] “Israel/OPT: South Africa ICJ submission must spur states to press Israel to end its genocide in Gaza”, Amnesty International, 1 September 2026.

[6] Amnesty International investigation concludes Israel is committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza, Amnesty International, 5 December 2024.

[7] Personal communication with Donatella Rovera, an Amnesty researcher, January 2003.

September 8, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Progressive Hypocrite | , , , | Comments Off on Blaming the Victim in the Gaza Genocide