Document:Making sense of the media cover-up of 9/11

From Wikispooks
Revision as of 16:42, 26 September 2014 by Robin (talk | contribs) (Text replacement - "|sourceURL" to "|source_URL")
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Disclaimer (#3)Document.png article  by Christopher Bollyn dated 2010-08-25
Source: Christopher Bollyn's Web site (Link)

★ Start a Discussion about this document


Making sense of the media cover-up of 9/11

The theory of the free press is not that the truth will be presented completely or perfectly in any one instance, but that the truth will emerge from free discussion.

Walter Lippman, American editor and writer, 1889-1974

Anyone who has looked at the events of 9-11 knows there are basically two competing histories. First, there is the official version, presented by President George W. Bush in a speech given shortly after the attacks and bolstered by the appointed 9-11 commission, that Muslim terrorists were responsible for the death and destruction. This version has since been adopted and supported by the Obama administration and virtually every member of Congress.

The second version is fundamentally opposed to the official version in that it claims that the terror attacks were a sophisticated "false flag" operation carried out by Israelis with the assistance of highly-placed Zionist agents inside the U.S. government. This version posits that the Israeli plan was for the attacks to be blamed on Al Qaida in order to usher in the Zionist-designed "War on Terror" with its pre-planned invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq.

While the official version is the only one discussed in the mainstream media, various strands of the unofficial version are found primarily on the Internet. As any serious student of 9-11 knows, the mainstream media ignores a whole host of legitimate questions, facts, and evidence about the attacks that would be reported and examined by the media if it were free to do so.

Americans are raised with the cherished belief that the United States has a free and unfettered press in which important matters are freely discussed. Yet, if the United States truly has a free press, how do we explain the conspicuous failure of the mainstream media, over a period of nine years, to discuss the crucial facts and discoveries about 9-11? If we believe that the press in America is free, how can we make sense of the media's blatant cover-up?

For nine years, in lockstep with the government, the mass media has followed a strategy of concealment of the facts and evidence that contradict the official version. The media cover-up is meant to protect and bolster the official version of the terror atrocity by preventing the general public from being aware of the facts. By censoring any serious discussion of the evidence, the mass media has protected the criminal scheme and those who carried out the terror atrocity of our time.

Is The Press Free?

Paramount among the responsibilities of a free press is the duty to prevent any part of the government from deceiving the people and sending them off to distant lands to die of foreign fevers and foreign shot and shell.

Hugo Black, American jurist and politician, 1886-1971

To grasp what is meant by the term "media cover-up", let's start with a simple question: Are the reporters and writers in the mainstream media free to discuss the pertinent facts and evidence of 9-11, or is this discussion being controlled and censored by a hidden hand? By "mainstream media" I simply mean the large national networks of print, television, and radio news outlets. These are the well known commercial and "public" media networks that inform and entertain Americans on a daily basis. For many Americans these mass media outlets actually define their reality. For these people, a subject is not considered "real" until it has been discussed and approved by the talking heads on the news programs they consume.

Although 9-11 ranks as one of the most outrageous criminal atrocities of all time, there is a long list of unanswered questions that the mainstream media avoids. As an independent journalist, I have covered many 9-11 events and discoveries that have been completely ignored by the mainstream media. The media's refusal to cover significant 9-11 events has often been the subject of my articles, e.g. "Mass Media Avoids Questions about 9-11" (2002) and "How the Controlled Press Avoids 9-11 Truth" (2005).

Ignoring The Facts

A nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people.

John F. Kennedy, U.S. President, 1961-1963

In March 2009, Professor Steven E. Jones of Brigham Young University published photographic evidence of an extremely explosive compound of super-thermite, which he discovered in large amounts in the dust of the pulverized Twin Towers. The chips of super-thermite were fragments of a bi-layered coating, made using nanotechnology and applied to the interior surfaces of the Twin Towers.

While this discovery explains the pulverization of the 220 concrete floors and the steel pans that held them, it also exposes the falseness of the government claim that burning jet fuel caused the towers to collapse. Like the many unanswered questions about the demolition of the three towers of the World Trade Center, Jones' crucial discovery has been completely avoided by both the government and the media. How can such an important discovery be ignored by the government and media in a free and open society?

If the editors and journalists employed by the thousands of newspapers, magazines, television and radio stations across the United States were truly free to discuss the relevant facts and evidence of 9-11, how could it be that not a single national news outlet has covered Dr. Jones' published discovery of super-thermite after two years?

Secret Israeli Visit

The press is the hired agent of a monied system, and set up for no other purpose than to tell lies where their interests are involved. One can trust nobody and nothing.

Ehud Olmert, the Israeli mayor of Jerusalem, was in New York City on the very eve of 9-11 and was probably in the city during the attacks, something I discovered several years ago. As the mayor of New York's sister city, Olmert (from the hard-line Likud, the party founded by Zionist terrorists) later made a high-profile sympathy visit to New York City about 10 days after the attacks, yet the Jewish-owned newspapers and tabloids of New York City completely ignored Olmert's visit to their city the day before the attacks, something they and Mayor Rudy Giuliani certainly must have known about. How can this be? Why would the visit by a high-level Israeli politician to New York on the eve of 9-11 be kept out of the press – especially after the fact?

Ehud Olmert resurfaced in New York City on September 21, 2001, when tens of thousands were thought to have been killed. Why has the U.S. media failed to report that Olmert was in New York City on September 10 - the day before the attacks? The media silence makes no sense unless his visit was connected to the false-flag terror attacks. Was Olmert on the El Al flight that left New York City on the afternoon of 9-11?

If the press in the United States were truly free, it would mean that thousands of news editors from each and every media outlet have consistently made the same decision that important 9-11 discoveries, events, and facts were not to be discussed in their newspaper, magazine, television or radio network. Because this is not possible, it must be that a hidden hand dictates what is reported about 9-11 in the mainstream media.

The Nature Of The Hidden Hand

The individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists.

J. Edgar Hoover, First Director of the FBI, 1935–1972

Having concluded that the mass media in the United States is controlled, we should ask who controls it, and how. Considering the air-tight media cover-up of 9-11, what can we discern about the nature of the hidden hand controlling the media? Using Socratic dialectic we can ask questions and use logic to identify the nature of the power controlling the media.

Our first question would be: Is the control mechanism external or internal? Has an outside force, such as the government, imposed itself upon the media in order to stifle coverage of 9-11, or is the media controlled from within? While governments certainly do suppress and censor media coverage, it is highly unlikely that the U.S. government is behind the media censorship of 9-11. Any government edict of that sort would have been discovered and exposed during the past nine years. Therefore, we can conclude that the control mechanism must be internal and intrinsic to the ownership of the media.

Having concluded that the controlling hand is intrinsic to the ownership of the media, we need to determine if the various owners of the major media networks are independent of each other or are they somehow united in a conspiracy to cover-up the truth of 9-11 and deceive the public? Judging from the 9-11 cover-up, which has been complete and universal throughout the mass media for nine years, we can see that the owners are united in purpose and working in concert. That is to say that the owners of the commercial media networks and directors of the public broadcasting system are all working under the same hidden hand. There is no dissent. The controlling power is pervasive throughout the media sphere of the United States, Britain, Canada, Australia, and Europe. Given today's consolidation of the global media, one individual such as Rupert Murdoch of News Corporation may own hundreds of newspapers, magazines, and television stations around the world. But Rupert Murdoch must be controlled by the same hidden hand as the owners of Time Warner (CNN), CBS Corporation, and the other media networks.

Sumner Redstone (born Rothstein) is majority owner of CBS Corporation, Viacom, MTV Networks, BET, Paramount Pictures, and DreamWorks movie studios. Leslie Moonves, a former used car dealer, is president and CEO of CBS Corporation. Moonves also happens to be the great-nephew of David Ben-Gurion, the Zionist leader of the Haganah who became the first Prime Minister of Israel. Whatever organization Redstone, Moonves, Murdoch, and the other media owners belong to and from whom they evidently take their marching orders, it must be a very secretive cabal.

What else can we tell about the secret organization that the owners of the media belong to? One of the most conspicuous and peculiar characteristics of the U.S. media is its unquestioning support of Zionism and the state of Israel. Although Israel is a tiny state, about the same size as Slovenia or Albania, it is always discussed in the U.S. mass media, but its overtly racist policies and blatant war crimes are never criticized. The mainstream media in the United States is actually more supportive of the hard-line Zionist policies of Israel's Likud extremists than the Israeli press, which indicates that the secret organization behind the media must be extremely Zionist and pro-Israel by ideology.

As explained in my book, Solving 9-11 – The Deception that Changed the World, there is a great deal of evidence of Israeli and Zionist involvement in the "false flag" terror attacks of 9-11 – and the criminal destruction of evidence and cover-up that followed. Having concluded that the owners of the mass media networks are bound together in a secret Zionist organization, we can now understand how it is that they are in complete agreement in their refusal to cover or publish anything that would question the official version and shed light on the evidence of Zionist involvement in the terror atrocity that killed thousands of Americans on 9-11. This is evidently what the elders of their secret organization have ordered and what they must do.

Is there a secret international Zionist brotherhood of prominent Jewish men? Actually there are several, the largest being the International Order of B'nai B'rith (Sons of the Covenant), which was founded in New York City in 1843. The first lodge was founded by twelve German Jews and sponsored by a Baruch Rothschild, a member of the Rothschild family, who came to America on a mission to organize the creation of a Jewish brotherhood of Freemasons.

A Secret Society Within A Secret Society

There is nothing so despicable as a secret society that is based upon religious prejudice and that will attempt to defeat a man because of his religious beliefs. Such a society is like a cockroach -- it thrives in the dark. So do those who combine for such an end.

William Howard Taft, U.S. President, 1909-1913

While the B'nai B'rith is an exclusively Jewish brotherhood closed to all non-Jews, members of the B'nai B'rith are often the highest-level members of other orders of Freemasonry. This means that members of the Jewish secret society are free to join and hold the highest positions in other non-Jewish orders. This relationship of a secret society within a secret society explains how Jewish members of B'nai B'rith can control any other order of Freemasons.

This is a pattern that is commonly seen in Zionist history. The Zionist movement has always been run by secret societies. The B'ne Moshe, for example, was the secret order behind the Hoveve Zion (Lovers of Zion) movement, with chapters in Russia and Poland in the late 1800s. The B'ne Moshe was founded in Odessa in 1889 and its statement of policy written by Ahad Ha'Am (a.k.a. Asher Zvi Ginzberg). The order was composed of an "elite body" of Zionists who "would serve their people with complete unselfishness and devotion and prepare it for national rebirth in the ancestral Homeland", according to the Encyclopedia of Zionism and Israel. "Membership was not open to all but was limited to men of high moral caliber. New entrants were inducted in a solemn ceremony and sworn to observe the order's rules and to keep its existence secret."

The B'nai B'rith is a secret society very much like the B'ne Moshe. It is an international secret brotherhood of Zionists whose stated goal is to support the state of Israel. The B'nai B'rith is a Masonic-like organization that has more than 500,000 members in 58 nations. Despite the fact that it is an international organization that works on behalf of a foreign state, the B'nai B'rith enjoys the tax exemptions of a non-profit charitable organization.

The B'nai B'rith is also the parent organization behind the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), which liaises, trains, and informs police departments, prosecutors, and judges across the United States. As an independent journalist writing about 9-11, I was first accused by the ADL in late 2001 of anti-Semitism because of my articles about the evidence of Israeli involvement in 9-11. Although I wrote for the Washington-based American Free Press, which was extremely careful about what it published and had never published anything that could be construed as anti-Semitic, the owner of the paper did not sue the ADL for defamation. This is probably because the owner of the paper was himself a Zionist lawyer named Mark Lane.[1]

Later, I received the same kind of treatment from Murdoch's FOX News and CNN in interviews in which they pretended to be interested in the facts about 9-11, but were actually set-up to smear me as an anti-Semite. The CNN television interview was chopped and only presented in small bits so that the listener heard none of the context. An ADL spokesman was spliced in to give the impression that I was an anti-Semite. This show aired the night before my trial was scheduled to begin in January 2007.

When my trial finally began in June 2007, I realized that the B'nai B'rith and the ADL had influence or control over the local police who had attacked me at my home, the Jewish prosecutor, the Jewish judge and his clerk, who instructed the jury. The prosecutor – in the middle of America - had even stated that he was prosecuting me because of my writings. Although the police attack was highly irregular and despite the fact that I had ample evidence of a police conspiracy to attack and injure me, I was powerless to defend myself in a system in which a secret society controls all the levers of power - in the court and the media. When all was said and done, although the police clearly lied on the stand and presented fabricated evidence, I was found guilty on both misdemeanor charges. Having gone through a brutal attack by undercover police and the long hellish process of a rigged trial, I then faced sentencing at the hands of the corrupt Zionist judge, a situation which compelled us to leave our happy home in order to preserve the safety and security of our family.

Sources and Recommended Reading

References

  1. ↑ Not all that glitters is gold - I was told that Mark Lane acquired the assets of the Liberty Lobby in 1994 by L.T. Patterson, publisher of Criminal Politics. Patterson discovered that Lane was the real legal owner of the assets of the Liberty Lobby during a court process in which Lane was suing Patterson for $10 million, which would have ruined Patterson had he not prevailed. I have every reason to believe that Patterson's information is correct. There is no transparency at the Liberty Lobby about finances or ownership. Like the missing piece of a puzzle, Lane's key role explains the bizarre behavior of the people at American Free Press and why they treated me as they did. I believe that they were involved in helping set up the ADL's undercover police assault I suffered in August 2006 at my home outside Chicago.
Retrieved from "https://wikispooks.com/w/index.php?title=Document:Making_sense_of_the_media_cover-up_of_9/11&oldid=51939"