Was (9/11) The DeepState’s Reichstag?
‘THE
BOTTOM LINE’
Posted March 22, 2018
In 1933 the Reichstag fire was a disaster for the Communists
in Germany because they were blamed for starting it. But
it was a dream come true for Hitler and his cronies as it allowed them to
transform Germany from a democracy into a dictatorship almost overnight.
In 2001 the attack on the twin towers in New York and
the Pentagon in Washington was not only a horrifying event for America but it
was a disaster for the Middle East
because there has been devastating war there ever since. But it was a dream come
true for the DeepState and those who finance it, causing perpetual war and bankruptcy
for the United States.
A clear
parallel may exist in these historical events,
and that is, that there has also been a cover-up, or at least a remarkable lack
of interest by the authorities and the mainstream media in following-up the
anomalies of 9/11 attack.
In the view of the notable historian William Shirer and many others, it has been established "beyond a reasonable doubt" that on Feb. 27, 1933, a team of Hitler's commandos fanned out through the Reichstag (the German parliament Government building), using incendiary fluids to quickly touch off a massive blaze. Before the fire had even died down, Hitler proclaimed that the outrage must have been the responsibility of the Communist Bolsheviks.
The whole truth about the Reichstag fire will probably never be known. Nearly all those who knew about it are now dead, most of them killed by Hitler in the months that followed. Even at Nuremberg the mystery could not be entirely unraveled, though there is enough evidence to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that it was the Nazis who planned the arson and carried it out for their own political ends.
On the day following the fire, February 28, [Hitler] prevailed on President Hindenburg to sign a decree “for the Protection of the People and the State” suspending seven sections of the German constitution which guaranteed individual and civil liberties. Described as a “defensive measure against Communist acts of violence endangering the state, the decree laid down that:
Restrictions on personal liberty, on the right of free expression of opinion, including freedom of the press, on the rights of assembly and association; and violations of the privacy of postal, telegraphic and phone communications; and warrants for house searchers, orders for confiscations, as well as restrictions on property, are also permissible beyond the legal limits otherwise prescribed.
Just as Hitler did in Germany in 1933 within weeks after the (9/11) attack the patriot Act was passed. The Patriot Act was the first of many changes to surveillance laws that made it easier for the government to spy on ordinary Americans by expanding the authority to monitor phone and email communications, collect bank and credit reporting records, and track the activity of innocent Americans on the Internet. While most Americans think it was created to catch terrorists, the Patriot Act actually turns regular citizens into criminals.
In addition, the decree authorized the Reich government to take over complete power in the federal states when necessary and imposed the death sentence for a number of crimes, including “serious disturbances of the peace” by armed persons.
Thus with one stroke Hitler was able not only to legally gag his opponents and arrest them at his will but, by making the trumped-up Communist threat "official," as it were, to throw millions of the middle class and the peasantry into a frenzy of fear that unless they voted for Nazi National Socialism at the elections a week hence, the Bolsheviks will likely take over. Some four thousand Communist officials and a great many Social Democrat and liberal leaders were arrested, including members of the Reichstag, who, according to the law, were immune from arrest. This was the first experience Germans had with Nazi terror backed up by the government. The parallels between the 1933 Reichstag Fire and the 9/11/01 attack on New York City and Washington are striking.
The lesson here is, that it is important to know when you have entered the hall of mirrors created by so-called intelligence operatives and security agencies. Why would a British journalist go out of his way to exonerate Hitler? It is hard to explain by any conventional analysis, yet I maintain that it can and does happen. Perhaps for the same sorts of reason that Americans like Prescott Bush and George Herbert Walker Bush, the founders of the Bush dynasty, worked so hard to provide funding for Hitler's brownshirts -- and for the same reason that many German intelligence operatives were brought into the US intelligence fold after WWII, to create the embryonic CIA.
It has now been more than seventy years since the Reichstag fire, so we have the benefit of some historical perspective. It has only been a little more than fifteen years since 9/11, so we're just starting to accumulate some of that same sense of perspective. Nevertheless, we can now see quite clearly that war was launched, first in Afghanistan and later in Iraq, and the attacks of 9/11 have been given as the justification. Speaking about American casualties in Iraq, President Bush stated on Nov. 4, 2003: "We are at war, and it is essential that the people of America not forget the lessons of September 11, 2001." This in spite of the fact that no credible evidence has emerged linking 9/11 to Iraq.
So here we have the first analogy to the Reichstag Fire: a campaign to scapegoat an entire population (in this case, Iraqis) for the purported actions of a few, and along with that, an aggressive campaign of warfare. And not only that, it has come to light that the Saudi Royal Family who are buddies of the entire Bush family actually financed the 9/11 attack. Moreover G W Bush covered it up by the missing 28 pages of the 9/11 Report. Read about it here and here.
Another clear parallel that there has been a cover-up is for example, the insider trading that has been researched by Mike Ruppert, Tom Flocco and Kyle Hence. Obviously, if we want to know who was really responsible for the 9-11 attacks, it would be helpful to know who had managed to learn about them in advance. Yet, as Ruppert notes at his web site:
To quote 60 Minutes from Sept. 19, "Sources tell CBS News that the afternoon before the attack, alarm bells were sounding over unusual trading in the U.S. stock options market."
It is hard to believe that they missed:
- A jump in UAL put options 90 times (not 90 percent) above normal between Sept. 6 and Sept.10, and 285 times higher than average on the Thursday before the attack. [CBS News, Sept. 26]
- A jump in American Airlines put options 60 times (not 60 percent) above normal on the day before the attacks. [CBS News, Sept. 26]
-
No similar trading occurred on any other airlines. [Bloomberg Business Report, the Institute for Counterterrorism (ICT), Herzliyya, Israel citing data from the CBO.]
ABC World News reported on Sept. 20, "Jonathan Winer, an ABC News consultant said, 'it's absolutely unprecedented to see cases of insider trading covering the entire world from Japan, to the U.S., to North America, to Europe."
How much money was involved? Andreas von Bulow, a former member of the German Parliament responsible for oversight of Germany’s intelligence services estimated the worldwide amount at $15 billion, according to Tages Spiegel on Jan. 13. Other experts have estimated the amount at $12 billion....
Not a single U.S. or foreign investigative agency has announced any arrests or developments in the investigation of these trades, the most telling evidence of foreknowledge of the attacks. This, in spite of the fact that former Security and Exchange Commission enforcement chief William McLucas told Bloomberg News that regulators would "certainly be able to track down every trade."
As Ruppert also noted we know exactly where the trail was leading, when it suddenly went cold:
-the trading in United Airlines stock -- one of the most glaring clues -- was placed by Alex Brown the head of the firm Deutschebank until 1998. Alex Brown, became the executive director of the CIA, A.B. "Buzzy" Krongard.
But beyond the cover-up and the political use and
mis-use of 911, what evidence do we have of real US government complicity? As the
Internet columnist David
McGowan wrote:
let's start with what is perhaps the only incontrovertible evidence in the case our own observations, as witnesses, of what played out that day on live television.
Tens of millions of people across the country witnessed what happened, and had the images of that day seared into their memory. Such as the third building not even involved in the attack that mysteriously crumbled just as towers one and two. Indecently jet B fuel used in the month of September burns at compressed pressures inside a jet engine at no more than 1500 degrees F not enough to melt the engine and especially the steel in the core of a building which melts a 2700 degrees F. More importantly jet B fuel burns at less than 600 degrees F at sea level atmospheric pressure. Steel doesn’t lose its integrity until higher than 700 degrees F, making it highly unlikely that the kerosene fuel inside the tanks of a commercial plane caused the buildings to come down the way they did. And the fact that an aluminum airliner could not possibly have crashed through the outer rings of the pentagon’s 2 foot reinforced concrete walls and leave no debris of an airliner on the scene such as engines, landing gear etcetera. Moreover there was no fire, paper on desks was intact, no scorching. Where did 50,000 gal of fuel go?
But that being said, what we want to focus on here is what we didn't see happen that day, because some of the most compelling evidence lies, strangely enough, in what no one saw happen.
No one, for example, saw any defensive measures taken during the entire time that the lengthy spectacle played out. None whatsoever.
No one saw any fighter jets scrambled to intercept any of the hijacked aircraft, though their locations and flight-paths were known and there was more than ample time for a military response which is normal protocol. No one saw any jets scrambled to secure the airspace over Washington DC, though at least one of the hijacked flights were known to be headed that way, and interceptors were sitting on the tarmac just minutes away from likely targets.
And strangely enough, no one saw or heard any demands by television media talking-heads for the military to respond in some capacity, or any questioning of why no response had yet materialized. Not after the first WTC tower was hit. Not after the second WTC tower was hit. Not even during the agonizingly long interval before the Pentagon was hit. Not even after the Pentagon was hit when everyone knew we were being attacked. Who knew it was over???
We were instead all assigned the task of sitting back in fear and watching helplessly as the attack continued and the death toll mounted, encouraged to feel powerless not only as individuals, but as a nation -- as if we had no choice but to participate only as passive spectators, watching dumfounded as the carnage unfolded.
Yet, in the strange lack of response of the US military on 9-11, we have our first evidence of the actual complicity of the US government. For how could the hijackers themselves have arranged for the failure to respond to the Pentagon attack? As Bykov & Israel noted in their groundbreaking article "Guilty for 9-11 Bush, Rumsfeld, Meyer":
Some of what happened on 9-11, such as planes flying into buildings, is unusual. But most of what happened, such as commercial jets flying off-course, transponder failures, and possible hijackings, are everyday emergencies.... these emergencies are routinely handled with expert efficiency based on clear rules of protocol.
Bykov & Israel went on to argue quite persuasively that because of the hierarchical and distributed nature of the chain of command of the US military, it is impossible that these procedures would have failed so spectacularly unless there were explicit orders, right from the top, voiding standard response procedures.
The Reichstag fire gives us another clue as to how to understand the events of 9/11, look very carefully at the alleged perpetrator of the crime. What sort of patsy has been put forward as responsible for the disaster?
Just as in the case of the Reichstag Fire, there was
a rush to judgment on the part of the US government and the complicit media
after the catastrophe: it was immediately announced that Osama Bin Laden
and Al Qaida was responsable. Within days, names and photos of the hijackers
were released, and the evidence connecting them to Al Qaida was claimed to be
beyond dispute. Yet details emerged painfully and slowly, in self-contradictory
fits and starts. Only now, fifteen years later, do we have a reasonably
complete narrative from official sources, regarding the alleged mechanisms by
which the hijackings were organized and carried out. According to this tale,
mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (under the watchful eye of Osama Bin Laden)
assembled a team of terrorists headed by Mohammed Atta and Ramzi Binalshibh.
The hijackers went to the United States for flight training, and funds were
supplied by a paymaster named Mustafa Ahmad Al-Hiwasi.
It was reported by two airport towers watching radar
that the planes were flying at speeds approaching 500 mph when they hit the towers. Several airline
pilots were interviewed including one that actually flew two of the exact United
Air Lines jets in the past. All of them said that a commercial jet is not
designed to fly at those speeds below 10,000 feet. They all agreed including a Boeing
Aircraft engineer, they all said that the planes would begin to disintegrate
below 10,000 feet. (The atmosphere is much too dense). The Twin Towers are approximately
900 feet. ‘Something’ hit the towers but it wasn’t commercial airliners. I know
some of this first hand because I use to work for United Air Lines in the early 70's and was on the first United test flight for the newly delivered Boeing 747 from Seattle Washington.
Just as Hitler did in Germany in 1933 within weeks after
the (9/11) attack the U.S. patriot Act was passed, and in the name of national security signed by G.W Bush on October 26, 2001 without one member of
congress reading it. The Patriot Act was the first of many changes to
surveillance laws that made it easier for the government to spy on ordinary
Americans by expanding the authority to monitor phone and email communications,
collect bank and credit reporting records, and track the activity of innocent
Americans on the Internet. and included warrantless searches and seizures. While most Americans think it was created to catch
terrorists, the Patriot Act actually turns regular citizens into criminals. The Patriot Act violates virtually
every one of our rights.
THE BOTTOM LINE: So in my opinion, the events of 911
were orchestrated to create feelings of fear and helplessness in the face of
surprise attack -- fears which were later exploited by the Bush
administration's imagery that the waning Iraqi nuclear weapons program or WMD,
could be restarted and then unveiled by a mushroom cloud over a US city to
satisfy the greed of the Military Industrial Complex’s taste for money blood
and war, which in my opinion will never be over. There will be perpetual war
until ‘We The People’ cry out for peace at any cost, even at the expense of
freedom…we will even except tyranny.
One can be made to voluntarily swallow poison if it is given just a little at a time…
Thanks for listening my friend. Now go do the right
thing, pray and fight for truth and freedom.
If you would like to write me direct with a question or a comment you
can contact me at writedeandrea@hotmail.com
-
de Andréa
Please
pass on this article to everyone on your email list. It may be the only chance for your family and
friends to hear the truth.
The Fine
Print
Copyright © 2005 by Bottom Line Publishing, All Rights
Reserved - Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted,
provided full credit is given.
Disclaimer - The writer of this blog is not responsible
for the language or advertisements used in links to referenced articles as
source materials.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment