Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

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

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

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

IRGC Navy seizes cutting-edge US unmanned submersible in Strait of Hormuz

Photo released by the IRGC Navy shows an advanced US underwater vehicle captured by the IRGC forces near the Strait of Hormuz on September 8, 2026
Press TV – September 8, 2026

The Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) Navy announced that it has successfully intercepted and captured a highly advanced, unmanned American underwater vehicle at the entrance of the strategic Strait of Hormuz.

In a statement released on Tuesday, the IRGC Navy stated that the seizure was carried out in the early hours of the day following a “complex intelligence and operational action.”

The unmanned submersible incorporates some of the world’s most advanced underwater technology and was delivered to the US terrorist military in 2025, the statement said.

The IRGC announced that photographic evidence and detailed footage of the captured US asset would be released in the coming hours.

Iranian news agency Tasnim identified the captured system as a Dive-LD, an autonomous unmanned underwater vehicle developed by US defense technology company Anduril Industries and first delivered to the US Navy’s Unmanned Undersea Vehicle Group 1 in 2025.

The vehicle is approximately 5.8 meters long, has a diameter of about 1.2 meters and weighs roughly 2.7 tonnes.

Its published specifications include an endurance of up to 10 days underwater and a maximum operating depth of around 6,000 meters.

Designed as a modular autonomous platform, the Dive-LD can be configured for missions including intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance, seabed mapping, infrastructure inspection and mine-countermeasure operations.

The capture comes amid a sharp escalation between Iran and the United States over the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most strategically important maritime chokepoints.

The waterway has increasingly become a key arena in the US war on Iran, prompting Tehran to assert greater control over maritime activity in and around the strait.

Recent military exchanges have included US strikes on Iranian oil tankers and Iranian missile attacks targeting US naval forces.

On September 6, Iran said it had struck a US unmanned vessel attempting to enter a restricted area near Hormuz.

The capture of the unmanned underwater vehicle (UUV) marks the latest in a long history of Iran intercepting and seizing advanced Western military technology.

Over the past decade, Iranian forces have successfully downed or captured numerous high-value US assets, including the RQ-170 Sentinel stealth drone, MQ-9 Reaper drones, and various underwater gliders and surface vessels in the Persian Gulf.

Reverse-engineering these captured technologies has historically played a significant role in accelerating Iran’s domestic drone and unmanned naval programs.

September 8, 2026 Posted by | Illegal Occupation, Militarism, Wars for Israel | , | Comments Off on IRGC Navy seizes cutting-edge US unmanned submersible in Strait of Hormuz

Massie And Burlison Introduce Bill To Defund Flock Surveillance Cameras

By Ken Macon | Reclaim The Net | September 8, 2026

Two Republican members of Congress have introduced a bill that seeks to stop the federal government from funding surveillance cameras that are used to build mass vehicle and biometric location tracking systems.

Representative Thomas Massie of Kentucky and Eric Burlison of Missouri introduced the Flock-Off Act, H.R. 10221, on September 2.

Massie and Burlison want to cut off the flow of federal money to local and state law enforcement that is used to purchase, maintain, and operate the controversial Flock Safety cameras, but also other similar systems, and any data they produce.

And the proposal seeks to stop federal funding of any cloud services that store data collected by Flock Safety and similar companies, as well as any data-sharing agreements involving these systems.

Massie and Burlison are joined by five other representatives as original cosponsors of the bill: Lauren Boebert of Colorado, Paul Gosar of Arizona, Ro Khanna of California, Chip Roy of Texas, and Victoria Spartz of Indiana.

If it becomes law, the Flock-Off Act would represent a significant limitation on the ability of the federal government to help build and maintain surveillance systems that can track people’s movements and identify them through biometric data.

The bill covers automated license-plate readers, cameras that can identify or extract vehicle characteristics, and biometric surveillance cameras. Biometric data is defined as including facial recognition, voiceprints, iris or retinal scans, fingerprints, and gait recognition.

The bill would require federal agencies to decommission federally funded covered systems within 180 days, while state and local recipients would have to stop operating federally supported systems to continue receiving money under the relevant federal program. If they violate the spending prohibition, relevant program funds would be withheld until the improperly spent amount is repaid to the US Treasury.

There are some exceptions: the border, and toll roads. Federal funds could continue to be used for cameras located within one mile of the northern or southern US border, if they are used to detect or interdict “unlawful entry, human trafficking, or drug smuggling.” In addition, automated license-plate readers used solely to collect, administer, or enforce tolls would also be exempt.

Massie said the purpose of the bill is to stop the federal government from helping local police and cities that have “gone beyond the pale” by deploying mass surveillance systems that are reminiscent of those described in George Orwell’s dystopian novel 1984.

“The federal government shouldn’t provide ‘security’ grants to cities and police departments that have gone beyond the pale and turned their communities into a version of 1984,” Massie said. “The Flock-Off Act withholds federal money from municipalities and police departments that deploy Flock cameras to surveil law-abiding citizens. Federal taxpayers should not be forced to fund the surveillance state.”

“Technology may change, but our constitutional rights do not,” Burlison said. “The Fourth Amendment protects Americans from unreasonable searches, and advances in surveillance technology should not come at the expense of our privacy and liberty.”

H.R. 10221 was referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

September 8, 2026 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Comments Off on Massie And Burlison Introduce Bill To Defund Flock Surveillance Cameras

US Warns UK Against Forcing Platforms to Promote Preferred News

By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | September 8, 2026

The US government has urged its British counterpart to give up on plans to make social media and video sharing platforms give more prominence to news from mainstream media outlets.

The US government’s objection is that this would amount to “mandating that platforms algorithmically amplify government-preferred media.”

The UK proposal was contained in a green paper published in June, titled “Watch This Space: A New Strategic Direction for UK Media.” The document said that the government will “explore legislative options to require social media to make news content from PSM providers, and potentially also national and local news publishers, prominent and easily discoverable.”

The US response to the UK Department for Culture, Media and Sport’s consultation, which closed on August 31, argues that the idea of official judgments about which media outlets are trustworthy is dangerous because it can be used to suppress others and thus harm free expression and competition.

Unlike direct censorship, this would work by promoting government-preferred media, but the effect would be to make it even harder for others to be heard. This is because of the way recommendation algorithms work, and the limited space on a user’s feed – promoting some content means suppressing other content, and thus, speech.

The US government also warned that this policy would have “significant effects beyond UK borders” because of the global nature of the platforms that would be forced to implement it. This could lead to “extraterritorial censorship of protected speech by Americans online.”

The US Embassy and Consulates in the UK published the US government’s response. The British government’s preference is to have voluntary industry agreements. However, if these prove insufficient, the government says it is prepared to legislate.

The UK Department for Culture, Media and Sport reacted to the US criticism by saying that it “strongly believes” in free expression and fair competition, and that any future action will ensure those are protected.

This is not the first time the UK proposal has been criticized. Among those who previously spoke against it were House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, YouTube, and Reform UK leader Nigel Farage.

The UK green paper cites countering “misinformation” during “crisis” or “unrest” as the reason to make sure that news from public service media providers is easily accessible and prominent. It does not set out a final test for deciding which national or local publishers might also qualify, but that is the crux of the US criticism, and the question remains unanswered.

September 8, 2026 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , | Comments Off on US Warns UK Against Forcing Platforms to Promote Preferred News

Mark Levin Trashes the Constitution to Protect Violent West Bank Settlers

By Kurt Nimmo | Another Day in the Empire | September 8, 2026

Mark Levin is at it again. He is livid over a decision by the UK government to ban trade with violent illegal settlers in the West Bank. Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband said this week the UK will ban imports of all goods from settlements in the occupied West Bank, in addition to services including financing, construction, infrastructure, real estate, and advertising for settlements.

For Levin and the Zionists in Israel and the United States, a boycott of Kahanist settlers is antisemitism, the same as public criticism of Israel over its slaughter of Palestinians, most of whom are women and children, is hatred of Jews.

Levin considers himself a constitutional lawyer. However, his interpretation of the US Constitution is highly selective. As an ardent and outspoken Zionist and defender of apartheid and genocide, he believes a boycott of Israel is not protected by the First Amendment. The right to boycott was reaffirmed in 1982 with a Supreme Court ruling on NAACP v. Claiborne Hardware Co. It held that nonviolent political boycotts are a form of protected speech. However, this is irrelevant when it comes to Israel.

The case centered around a civil-rights boycott of white-owned businesses in Mississippi. The Court upheld the right to peaceful advocacy, association, and political expression that were integral to the campaign.

In 2022, the US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit affirmed Arkansas’ anti-boycott contracting legislation. The majority determined that the law governed commercial purchasing choices rather than safeguarding speech. In February 2023, the Supreme Court decided not to review an appeal.

However, court rulings in Texas, Arizona, and Arkansas have upheld the right to boycott as as a protected form of political expression under the First Amendment, challenging the legality of anti-BDS laws across the United States.

“Close to 40 states across the U.S. have laws that require ending contracts with and/or divesting from companies that engage in antisemitic boycotts, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) against Israel,” Levin posted to social media on September 7.

These states whose combined GDP is significant should publicly make clear to countries such as the UK that companies that engage in BDS because of their decisions will face consequences under state anti-BDS laws. By the way, Florida and Texas combined have a much larger GDP than the UK.

The Boycott, Divestment, and Sanction (BDS) movement is now illegal in 38 states. Congress has also considered anti-boycott legislation. In 2019, the Senate passed S.1, which contains anti-boycott provisions. In 2023, Republicans, including Marco Rubio, reintroduced the Combating BDS Act.

Most Americans oppose anti-BDS laws by a wide margin. 72% oppose laws penalizing people who boycott Israel while 22% supported such laws, according to the University of Maryland’s Critical Issues Poll.

Levin is not opposed to BDS if it focuses on the correct target. In 2021, for instance, he demanded a BDS-style boycott of big tech and major television networks in response to criticism of Israel. “He argues that the way to fight against distortions and false claims, and to counter the media censors, is take a page from the anti-Israel activists’ playbook,” reported the Jerusalem News Syndicate in 2021.

Does Levin disagree with the colonial protests against British goods in the 1760s and 1770s that led to the Boston Tea Party? Does he believe the Montgomery bus boycott in the mid-1950s was illegitimate? How about the United Farm Workers boycotts in the 1960s, or the NAACP Mississippi boycott of white-owned businesses, also in the 60s?

No, probably not. The only legitimate opposition to BDS concerns Israel. The Zionist state gets a pass and the Constitution is null and void when confronted with spurious accusations of antisemitism.

September 8, 2026 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , , , , | Comments Off on Mark Levin Trashes the Constitution to Protect Violent West Bank Settlers

US ambassador threatens Britain with economic retaliation over Israeli settlement trade ban

The Cradle | September 8, 2026

US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee has said Washington will certainly hit back if Britain proceeds with trade sanctions targeting illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank, telling BBC that a response could come from the federal government and from individual US states.

Huckabee said acting in this way against “a partner, Israel” risked a “huge economic impact on British businesses,” which he warned could find themselves “banned” from operating “in a number of states.”

He told BBC the planned ban on illegal Israeli settlement goods would be “discrimination against the Jewish people,” singling out Florida as a state that could move against British trade.

The ambassador had already accused the British government of “Jew hate” over the weekend, responding to criticism of Israel’s actions in Gaza by British Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband, who is himself Jewish.

Florida Republican Congressman Randy Fine issued a parallel threat, saying legislation he pushed through as a state lawmaker “would ban any British company forced to comply from doing business with any state or local government in Florida.”

Firms joining the boycott would also be shut out of the state if they needed permits or tax dealings with authorities to function, he said.

Israeli President Isaac Herzog, in a filmed statement, said Britain would land on “the wrong side of history,” calling the step “a grave miscalculation” and “a gross interference in the democratic elections of a sovereign nation.”

This comes after UK Prime Minister Andy Burnham moved to impose a full ban on trade with illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank, along with possible sanctions on Israeli ministers and individual settlers.

Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar has publicly attacked British Foreign Secretary Miliband, calling his statement on the E1 settlement project patronizing.

The illegal E1 settlement bloc would cut the occupied West Bank in half, isolate it from occupied East Jerusalem, and bury any prospect of a Palestinian state, an outcome Israeli officials have stated as the goal.

September 8, 2026 Posted by | Economics, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Illegal Occupation, Wars for Israel | , , , | Comments Off on US ambassador threatens Britain with economic retaliation over Israeli settlement trade ban

Buck-Dancing for Zion: Hakeem Jeffries

How Brooklyn’s point man in Congress was groomed to serve Jewish interests over his own constituents

José Niño Unfiltered | September 7, 2026

Jared Kushner and Hakeem Jeffries met privately in New York City in recent weeks, and neither man wanted to discuss it afterward.

The New York Times reported the encounter on August 23, citing five people with knowledge of a session held in a New York City space a mutual friend provided. The two men discussed housing, immigration, and the cost of living. Kushner urged Jeffries to sit down with White House chief of staff Susie Wiles as a follow-up. NBC News confirmed the account the same day. Jeffries’s initial statement never acknowledged the meeting at all, insisting only that “the affordability crisis is not a hoax and nothing short of transformational policy change is acceptable.” He later posted a video on X acknowledging that “Kushner asked for a meeting.”

The timing carried its own message. Democrats lead in nearly every midterm poll, and Jeffries becomes speaker if they capture the House in November. Kushner has told associates that Jeffries ranks as “the most serious” Democratic leader. House Speaker Mike Johnson shrugged at the news on Fox News, saying “I don’t know what that’s about.” Crooked Media co-founder Tommy Vietor was less charitable, posting on X: “Jared Kushner has no actual government job; he just uses his family connections to get money from gulf autocrats and fund corrupt deals. The only way Jeffries should work with him is with demands for documents and subpoenas.”

That reaction captures a long-standing problem with Jeffries. Namely, the qualities that make Jeffries someone Trump’s inner circle can work with are the same qualities that have made him a target inside his own party and nowhere is more apparent than on the issue of Israel.

Jeffries reached that position by a steady ascent through the House. He won New York’s 8th Congressional District in 2012, succeeding Ed Towns, and quickly built a legislative profile around criminal justice reform. He introduced legislation to criminalize chokeholds after Eric Garner’s death and served as the lead Democratic sponsor of the bipartisan First Step Act of 2018, a jailbreak bill that became one of Donald Trump’s most significant legislative accomplishments of his first term.

House Democrats unanimously elected Jeffries to succeed Nancy Pelosi as House minority leader on November 30, 2022, making him the first Black American to lead either party in either chamber of Congress. He was re-elected to the post in 2024. In July 2025 he set the record for the longest House floor speech in modern history, speaking for eight hours and 44 minutes against the One Big Beautiful Bill Act and breaking the mark Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) set in 2021. Heading into the 2026 midterms, Jeffries is widely positioned to become speaker if Democrats retake the House.

With Jeffries potentially becoming House Speaker, American Jewry could breathe a sigh of relief knowing that they have a safe pair of hands wielding the speaker’s gavel. Jeffries represents Brooklyn’s 8th District, which Jewish Currents has described as the 15th most Jewish congressional district in the country, and he was raised in Crown Heights, home to the global headquarters of the Chabad-Lubavitch movement. He has extolled that constituency, telling reporters and audiences that “in New York City we consider Jerusalem to be the sixth borough.”

His public language and, more importantly, his legislative record on Israel have been reliably pro-Zionist throughout his congressional career. Jeffries backed the $1 billion Iron Dome replenishment in September 2021, which passed 420 to 9 over objections from eight progressive Democrats. He voted in favor of the $26.4 billion Israel Security Supplemental, H.R. 8034, in April 2024, which split House Democrats 173 to 37. He voted no on a GOP standalone Israel aid bill, H.R. 6126, in February 2024 that Democrats viewed as a partisan maneuver, and he supported the 2019 anti-BDS resolution H.Res.246 as well as the Antisemitism Awareness Act in May 2024. By 2022 alone, Jewish Currents documented Jeffries raising $440,000 from Israel-advocacy groups—the sixth-highest total among House members that cycle, per OpenSecrets—and he has traveled to Israel five times on AIPAC-sponsored trips since entering Congress in 2013. Jeffrie’s pro-Israel funding surged to over $1 million by the 2024 election cycle.

In July 2026, Jeffries continued his pro-Israel antics. Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) offered an amendment stripping $3.3 billion in Foreign Military Financing for Israel from the fiscal 2027 State Department bill. It failed 104 to 314. Among Democrats, 103 voted yes, 98 voted no, and 10 voted present, with Massie the lone Republican supporter. Jeffries voted no. In a Dear Colleague letter, he called the measure “overly broad,” arguing it would hinder humanitarian aid efforts, refugee resettlement, and efforts to undermine resistance groups like Hamas. Notably, he declined to whip the vote, telling members there would be “good faith reasons that will result in members voting in a variety of different ways.”

They would proceed to do so, with his own deputy, Minority Whip Katherine Clark (D-MA), announcing she would vote yes because “the status quo is not tenable.” Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi voted yes as well, saying “the Netanyahu government cannot maintain its current course.” Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar (D-CA) stayed with Jeffries. The party’s top two leaders had split publicly on the defining foreign policy question of the cycle, and Jeffries found himself on the shrinking side.

The money surrounding that vote drew immediate scrutiny. Sludge reported that on May 20, AIPAC’s PAC routed two earmarked payments totaling $149,300 to the Jeffries Battleground Protection Fund, the largest earmarked disbursement in the PAC’s history, listed in Federal Election Commission records as an earmark of Jewish billionaire investor Daniel Och.

The AIPAC money flowing into Jeffries’ coffers has raised concerns among progressives. When Jeffries told WNYC’s Brian Lehrer Show in November 2025 that AIPAC’s PAC could give only “$5,000 or $10,000 per cycle, that’s it,” Sludge called the characterization misleading, noting the group’s conduit system has funneled more than a million dollars in earmarked donations to his campaigns.

That financial relationship has fueled further backlash. When AIPAC’s United Democracy Project super PAC spent $14.5 million in June 2024 to defeat Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-NY), Jeffries offered only a muted response, telling Punchbowl News that “pro-Israel groups are going to support pro-Israel members of Congress.” Radio host Charlamagne tha God has mockingly nicknamed Jeffries “AIPAC Shakur” for his close alignment with pro-Israel donors.

Other leftist outlets have taken Jeffries to task for his devotion to Israeli interests. His 2026 partnership with liberal Zionist organization J Street to oppose the Massie-sponsored arms amendment drew a pointed critique from CounterPunch, which accused him of coupling rhetoric about restraint with continued support for weapons transfers amid allegations of Israeli conduct in Gaza.

Jeffries’s financial entanglements do not end with AIPAC. Sam Bankman-Fried, the FTX founder later convicted of fraud, donated to Jeffries’s campaign, and Jeffries pledged to donate the funds after FTX’s collapse, according to Bloomberg. Separately, 2026 reporting found that committees tied to Jeffries and other Democratic leaders donated to candidates who had pledged to reject corporate PAC money, even as those same committees accepted funds from corporations including Barclays, CVS and UnitedHealthcare, raising accusations of an indirect funding workaround.

The financial ties only reinforce a rhetorical record that consistently delegitimized Palestinian resistance to Israeli transgressions. In February 2022, he called claims that Israel is an apartheid state “demonstrably false, dangerous and designed to isolate Israel in one of the toughest neighborhoods in the world,” responding directly to Amnesty International’s report on Israeli apartheid. After October 7, 2023, he declared in a press release that “America stands firmly and unequivocally with Israel” and that Congress “must stand with Israel until the invasion by Hamas has been crushed.” He also criticized the phrase “from the river to the sea” in a November 2023 statement as a call for “the complete destruction of Israel,” and stressed in February 2025 that “our commitment to Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish and Democratic state and eternal homeland for the Jewish people is ironclad.”

The most recent flashpoint in Jeffries’s career came in August 2026 with a private meeting with Jared Kushner, President Trump’s son-in-law and top outside adviser, to discuss “potential areas of common ground” on housing, immigration, and the cost of living. The New York Times noted the meeting’s timing “underscored that those around Mr. Trump were well aware of the likelihood of a Democratic-led House,” and that Kushner suggested Jeffries also meet with White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles. Kushner reportedly told associates that if anything bipartisan gets done with Congress, Jeffries is “the most serious person among Democratic leaders.”

Despite the criticism he received from progressives, Jeffries defended the meeting on CNN and in a video posted to X, insisting “no one from the Trump cartel is getting a pass” and that he agreed to the sit-down only to “discuss the affordability crisis that exists, that is not a hoax.” This was not the first time Jeffries and Kushner had found common ground. He and Kushner have a prior working relationship dating to their collaboration on the 2018 First Step Act.

Taken together, Hakeem Jeffries is a reliable servant of Israel and the broader Jewish community. Both Trump terms have been Judeo-accelerationist to the core, with Israel getting nearly everything it wants. Naturally, the American public has grown tired of these escapades that only advance Jewish interests and are now prepared to vote the bums out in the upcoming midterms.

Though it should be stressed that in the Jewish-dominated plutocracy we live in there is no meaningful opposition to the Pan-Judah. At best, voters will have to pull the lever for another competing faction of Jewish proxies.

Enter Hakeem Jeffries and his minions.

Regardless of how the political pendulum swings later this year, the Jewish donor networks and political action committees backing Israel face no real downside, secure in the knowledge that a Democratic flip merely elevates Jeffries, an empty suit who is a certified coon for the Cohens in word and in deed.

September 8, 2026 Posted by | Corruption, Deception, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , | Comments Off on Buck-Dancing for Zion: Hakeem Jeffries

US, South Korea and Japan Begin Joint War Games

By Kyle Anzalone | The Libertarian Institute | September 7, 2026

The US, South Korea, and Japan kicked off five-day Freedom Edge war games in and around the Korean Peninsula.

“The exercise will also incorporate multi-national maritime and aviation capabilities, and introduce enhanced air defense scenarios, medical evacuation training, and maritime interdiction operations,” a statement from Pacific Command (PACCOM) said. “Building on the foundation of Freedom Edge 25, as well as regular trilateral ballistic missile defense and defensive counter-air exercises throughout the year, Freedom Edge 26 stands as our most advanced trilateral cooperation to date.”

The US, South Korea and Japan began holding Freedom Edge in 2024. For the second year in a row, the drills will occur without an American aircraft carrier. The US carrier fleet has been strained by the wars in the Middle East, and the Japan-based USS George Washington was recently deployed to the region.

The military drill often provokes a hostile response from North Korea. During last year’s iteration of Freedom Edge, Pak Jong Chon, vice-chairman of the Central Military Commission of the Workers’ Party of Korea, said the drills “pose a grave challenge to the security interests of our state and a major danger of undermining regional stability and escalating military tension.”

On Monday, North Korean Minister Kim Song-gi said Freedom Edge was pushing the situation to the brink. “US-led military demonstrations are being held one after another, without any break in time or space, as military cooperation between the United States, Japan and the Republic of Korea evolves into a dangerous offensive alliance with nuclear elements.” He continued, “This reality poses a serious security threat, pushing instability on the Korean Peninsula and beyond to the brink.”

Last month, President Donald Trump said that the US and South Korean bilateral Ulchi Freedom Shield (UFS) war games were unnecessarily hostile toward North Korea. “These exercises are not only costly, with much of these costs paid for by the United States of America (as usual!), but send a signal that is totally inappropriate and hostile, to a Country that, as long as Donald J. Trump has been President, has been unthreatening and respectful,” he posted on Truth Social.

While Trump cut the UFS drills in half, the Freedom Edge war games have gone forward as planned. South Korean Rear Adm. Kim Ji-hoon called the Freedom Edge drills the “most effective” exercises. “The trilateral Freedom Edge exercise is being executed to counter North Korean nuclear and missile threats and that’s the main purpose of the exercise,” he added.

Trump’s decision to scale back the UFS drills appeared to be part of a push to secure a meeting with North Korean Supreme Leader Kim Jong Un. Kim’s sister, Kim Yo Jong, rebuked the overture, saying that merely scaling back the war games did not change the hostile US policy towards North Korea.

Supreme Leader Kim said Pyongyang remains focused on establishing a nuclear deterrent to prevent Washington and South Korea from starting a war. On Monday, North Korea put its second 5,000 ton destroyer into service.

“The enemies’ concerns will surely be deepened,” Kim said at the commissioning ceremony. “We must establish more clearly a powerful and reliable nuclear war deterrent, to put into practice the diverse and effective operation of our nuclear combat systems and further strengthen our military activities for maritime defense and war deterrence.”

September 7, 2026 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Comments Off on US, South Korea and Japan Begin Joint War Games