All the Government’s Men: Agents of Terror on Payroll

The Establishment Says “2 + 2 + 2 + 2 + more 2’s = 0”

Since the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, through quasi investigative reports, leaks, whistleblowers and numerous court documents, several key 9/11 operatives have been identified and confirmed as assets and or informants of the United States government. Further, all details of these operatives’ positions, functions and employment records have been sealed and protected as beyond top secret classified.

Whether it is Ali Mohamed’s employment with the United States Army and his connections with the Federal Bureau of Investigation, or Anwar al-Awlaki on the payroll of the Bureau, or the landlord of two 9/11 hijackers in San Diego, who happened to be a highly valued long-term FBI informant, we are looking at incomplete profiles and missing crucial information. In each of these cases we are dealing with a government engaged in an extraordinary level of secrecy and protection. And with every single case we are faced with the crucial why question.

While each case, individually, on its own, paints an extremely troubling picture with serious implications, we must delve into the cases as a whole, collectively, in order to see the larger theme and an even more telling story. Despite my extensive research I have not seen a report where the cases in question are presented and examined together-in one place. I believe putting together documentation like that would be a good starting point for an ongoing and evolving report that can take us further in our search for needed answers, and the truth.

I want to emphasize the importance of this being a starting point, and an ongoing and evolving report. What do I mean by that? We need your participation and input to take this report further. I know some of our readers have spent tremendous amounts of time writing about and analyzing the key figures in question. As you read this first report with background information and case summaries, you may think of other missing facts and documents. Please send us those missing pieces of information, but please make sure that your sources are legitimate and of positive reputation. We want to keep this ongoing report factual and bullet-proof.

Anwar Awlaki- An Established FBI Informant & Pentagon Insider

On October 4, 2013, lawyers for Ali Al-Timimi, a Virginia man serving a life sentence for supporting jihad against the U.S., pushed to obtain more information from the federal government on evidence pertaining to the cleric Anwar Al-Awlaki’s recruitment as a U.S. government informant a decade ago. According to Al-Timimi’s defense lawyer Jonathan Turley, recently-released FBI files suggest that Al-Awlaki may have been acting as an “asset” for some government agency. In response to Turley’s request for this crucial evidence government prosecutors insisted that they had no obligation to provide the detail of its dealings with Al-Awlaki:

“Mr. Turley has no right to know [whether the government] had an asset into Awlaki at that time. Mr. Turley has no right to know if Mr. Awlaki was an asset at that time!”

Leonie Brinkema, the presiding U.S. District Court Judge on the case, has not been inclined to grant motions filed by Muslim scholar Ali Al-Timimi seeking more details on the government’s relationship with Al-Awlaki. Further, Brinkema suggested that part of the answer to these concerns is so highly classified that she is the only person at the court who is allowed to see it, and that even a number of other personnel with “Top Secret” clearance were not allowed to see the documents pertaining to these concerns.

You can read Al-Tamimi’s motion seeking evidence about Al-Awlaki here , and the government’s response here.

Even former FBI Director Robert Mueller does not deny the official working relationship between the Bureau and Awlaki:

FBI director does not deny al-Awlaki may have been government asset

Awlaki was born in the United States. He was raised in an affluent family, with a highly educated father who was a Fulbright scholar:

Al-Awlaki was born in the United States. His parents were from Yemen. His father did his graduate work at U.S. universities, receiving his doctorate at the University of Nebraska, and later working at the University of Minnesota (1975 to 1977).

Awlaki pursued higher education at prestigious U.S. universities as well:

Al-Awlaki earned his B.S. in Civil Engineering from Colorado State University (1994). He also studied at San Diego State University, and worked on a doctorate degree in Human Resource Development at George Washington University Graduate School of Education & Human Development (2001).

Strangely, despite his preacher, aka Imam, positions, al-Awlaki never received any formal Islamic education. In fact, this is what other Islamic preachers said about him:

Some Muslim scholars said they did not understand alAwlaki's popularity, because while he spoke fluent English and could therefore reach a large non-Arabic-speaking audience, he lacked formal Islamic training and study.

Awlaki’s upbringing and higher education took place here in the United States. His family was not Islamist or radicalized. He never went to Madrasas or Islamic preaching schools. So was he really radicalized? From documented facts and his history it seems as if he had later assumed the role of a radical Islamist. He was playing that role.

Now things get a bit more interesting: Awlaki spent a summer of his college years training with the Afghan Mujahideen. Why is this interesting? Because this summer training took place sometime between 1991 and 1994. We are not talking about the era when the Mujahideen fought the Soviets. No, this is not the 80s we are talking about. During this period there were no Taliban guys; Taliban had not yet been formed. The only Mujahideen in operation were the ones backed and directed by Pakistan’s ISI, with foreign participants mainly backed by Saudi Arabia:

Pakistan's ruling military establishment was opposed to the new developments in neighboring Afghanistan. Afghanistan expert Neamatollah Nojumi writes, "[t]hese new political and military developments in Afghanistan forced the Pakistani intelligence agency ISI to organize a military plan with forces belonging to Hekmatyar's Hezb-i Islami ... This militaristic plan aimed to capture Kabul and was in full force when ... the rest of the Mujahideen leaders in Pakistan agreed to the UN peace plan. On the eve of the successful implementation of the UN peace plan in Afghanistan the ISI, through Hekmatyar and non-Afghan volunteers, led hundreds of trucks loaded with weapons and fighters to the southern part of Kabul.”

When we delve in further, we see Awlaki’s main interest area:

In 1994 Awlaki began service as a part-time imam of the Denver Islamic Society, where he encouraged Saudis to fight in Chechnya against the Russians.

Let’s see. Who else would have interests in that region that would be against the Russian interests? Remember we are talking about the Post-Soviet period here. So the relationship between Awlaki and the CIA-Pentagon cannot be written off as one of those overly used ‘well, that was during the Afghan-Soviet War when we aligned ourselves with one evil against another evil,’ lines. This was the era when we began competing with Russia over the resource-rich region. Chechens have been one of our main tools to sabotage Russian interests in this region. So basically, Awlaki was encouraging terror operations against our competitor, and that would make him someone who was suavely playing a radical Islamist role for our side and special interests.

So what happened next? Based on documented background, by 2000-2001 Awlaki had ties to and relationships with high-ranking FBI officials:

In 2001 Awlaki settled on the East Coast in the Washington Metropolitan Area where he served as imam at the Dar al-Hijrah mosque. This is where he led academic discussions and preaching frequented by FBI Director of Counter-Intelligence for the Middle East Gordon M. Snow.

Awlaki was also a sought after figure by the Pentagon-he even dined with top brass, and he was a chosen man on Capitol Hill as well.

This is the same man, who from very early on during the 9/11 investigation, was tied in many way to the supposed 9/11 terrorist attacks:

When police investigating the 9/11 attacks raided the Hamburg, Germany, apartment of Ramzi bin al-Shibh, they found the telephone number of al-Awlaki among bin al-Shibh's personal contacts.

One detective later told the 9/11 Commission he believed al-Awlaki "was at the center of the 9/11 story". And an FBI agent said, “if anyone had knowledge of the plot, it would have been" him, since "someone had to be in the U.S. and keep the hijackers spiritually focused".[5

Anwar al-Awlaki, a man who was born and highly educated in the United States, who fought on our side against our competitors’ interests, who was a regular figure in the Pentagon & the brass’ dinner companion, who was on the FBI’s payroll, who was highly valued in the US Congress, has been identified as one of the 9/11culprits.

Ali Mohamed- A Double Agent for the CIA, FBI Informant & Pentagon Insider with the Green Berets

Ali Mohamed is well-known for his position as a CIA Agent, a man who was selected by Special Forces in the United States Army, a man who taught courses on Arabic culture at the John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School, a man who trained anti-Soviet fighters en route to Afghanistan in early 80s, a man who FBI special agent Jack Cloonan called "bin Laden's first trainer,” a man who was a major in the Egyptian army's military intelligence unit, a man who used U.S. military information to train al-Qaeda and other Muslim militants, and to write al-Qaeda's multivolume terrorist training guide, and also a major trainer for Al Qaeda terrorists, and Bin Laden’s bodyguard, and a man who was charged with the 1998 bombings of the United States embassies in Nairobi, Kenya and in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.

Are you dizzy yet? Let’s breakdown Ali Mohamed’s background, skills and resume:

Mohamed was a major in the Egyptian army's military intelligence unit.

Mohamed enlisted in the U.S. Army and was selected by U.S. Army Special Forces, who sent him to Special Warfare School and encouraged him to pursue a doctorate in Islamic Studies and teach courses on the Middle East.

He was highly educated and spoke fluent English, French, and Hebrew in addition to his native Arabic.

In America he married an American woman from Santa Clara, California and became a U.S. citizen

While in the United States he helped train a number of Jihadis, such as El Sayyid Nosair and Mahmud Abouhalima, who assisted Ramzi Yousef in his 1993 attack on the World Trade Center.

In 1984 the CIA recruited him to be a junior intelligence officer.

The FBI publicly used Ali Mohamed as an informant

During the 1980s, Ali Mohamed was involved in the training of Anti-Soviet forces, which included members of the mujahideen, Osama bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri, and terrorist members responsible for the bombings of the two US embassies

In 1992, Ali Mohamed made at least 58 trips to Afghanistan as part of the training of terrorist cells while under the surveillance of the CIA.

In 1998 Mohamed was charged with the 1998 bombings of the U.S. embassies in Nairobi, Kenya and in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. In 2000, he pleaded guilty to five counts of conspiracy to kill nationals of the United States and to destroy U.S. property

Just as in the case of Awlaki, all court sessions and documents, all reports and all investigations pertaining to Ali Mohamed are highly classified and not available to even those with TS clearance.  Unlike Awlaki, who was fried and turned into ashes by a US drone, Mohamed was quietly jailed in a high-security prison and he has not been interviewed or seen by any outsiders.

Even more glaring than in the Awlaki case is the absence of any documents or historical connections in Ali Mohamed’s case that show even the slightest trace of Islamization or Radicalization. None whatsoever. We have a man who was educated with incredible linguistic skills including fluency in English, Hebrew and French. A man who married an American woman. We have a man who was a Pentagon darling- a valued member of U.S. Army’s Special Forces.  A man who was recruited and watched by the CIA for over a decade. A man who worked as an FBI informant.

CIA Trademark vs. FBI Modus Operandi

Despite the fact that the major emphasis with regard to the two above cases has been placed on the FBI and its relationship or connections with Mohamed and Al-Awlaki, their backgrounds, qualifications, world residency and travel patterns, and operational modes clearly establish them as CIA-Pentagon operatives rather than FBI assets-informants. No question about that.

Note- These standards don’t apply to regular CIA US Origin operatives (NOCs). Many of the operatives are from a lower-class background, mentally unstable, and without strong educational or linguistic capabilities. With agents such as Mohamed, we are talking about foreign military operations (Remember Gladio Operations)- Think of these characters as our Generals & Lt. Generals for overseas paramilitary operations or home-front terror operations.

Let me recap trademark characteristics and qualifications:

· Upper and Upper Middle Class Upbringing in the Middle East

· Highly Educated- Either in the U.S. or UK; possess graduate degrees

· Linguistic Skills-Three Languages or more

· Extensive Travelling; Significant Travel Pattern

· Comfortable in Official or Formal settings: Pentagon, Congress, NGO Heads, etc.

· Charismatic

· Social and or Skilled Communicator

· Military Training

Mohamed and Awlaki would Ace 85% + of the above CIA sought qualifications. These men are way above the FBI’s pay-grade and playing field.  Despite the emphasis and publicity on their roles and connections with the bureau (which is very possibly a method to redirect attention) they have ‘active’ CIA operative (not only asset or informant), I’m talking agent here, written all over their CV.

Another good example of a perfect CIA profile is Ayman al-Zawahiri-the real operator of the brand called al-Qaeda, despite other claims. Let me put it in illustrated bullet points to compare with the above general characteristic points:

· Ayman al-Zawahiri's parents both came from prosperous families. Ayman's father came from a large family of doctors and scholars. Mohammed Rabie became a surgeon and a medical professor at Cairo University. Ayman's mother, Umayma Azzam, came from a wealthy, politically active clan

· Zawahiri excelled in school. He became a doctor and in1978 earned a master's degree in surgery.

· Zawahiri speaks three languages: Arabic, English and French

· He served three years as a surgeon in the Egyptian Army

· His early travel Pattern: Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Afghanistan, United States, Switzerland, Sarajevo, Malaysia, Russia (Dagestan, Chechnya), Hong Kong, Bosnia, Azerbaijan, Albania …

· Highly Passionate and Radical Orator; Leadership & Organizing Skills: He became one of Egyptian Islamic Jihad's leading organizers and recruiters.

No wonder he is referred to as al-Qaeda’s Brain. Compare him to Bin Laden-who meets the qualifications sought by the CIA?

To further make the point, let me present a couple of FBI informant cases:

Abdussattar Shaikh (San Diego Landlord)- FBI Informant

This case exhibits more FBI informant-asset characteristics than the two cases above.

Abdussattar Shaikh is another mysterious and highly-protected person related and linked directly to two of the supposed 9/11 hijackers, Alhazmi and Almihdhar. All we have is the man’s name, home address in San Diego, that his native language is not Arabic, and that he housed two 9/11 hijackers, opened bank account for them and prayed with them, and that other key hijackers such as Mohamed Atta were his regular visitors …yes,  all that, and the fact that this man was FBI’s longtime asset and informant.

Two of the Sept. 11 hijackers who lived in San Diego in 2000 rented a room from a man who reportedly worked as an undercover FBI informant, highlighting the lack of cooperation by the nation's law enforcement and intelligence agencies.

Newsweek magazine reports that Khalid Almihdhar and Nawaf Alhazmi lived with a "tested" undercover "asset" who had been working closely with the FBI office in San Diego.

While there, the FBI informant prayed with them and even helped one open a bank account. Alhazmi and Almihdhar took lessons at a flight school while living in San Diego.

The FBI refused to allow the 9/11 Congressional inquiry to interview either Shaikh or his FBI contact. The FBI refused to provide him to the pseudo Commission on 9/11. How could they refuse it? On what grounds? None cited.

Generally speaking, and based on bits and pieces of information leaked over time, Shaikh fits the general profile of an informant-asset operating on the FBI payroll:

· No significant educational background

· No particular linguistic abilities

· No militaristic background or training

· No unusual international background and travel history

The Iranian-Another Longtime FBI Informant

The following case is another typical FBI informant-asset profile:

In January 2011 we published a series of articles and documents pertaining to the case of Behrooz Sarshar, Former FBI Language Specialist who held TS clearance and worked for the bureau for over ten years.

In February 2004 I accompanied Sarshar to the office of 9/11 Commissioners where he was taken inside a SCIF (Secured Compartmentalized Intelligence Facility) and was interviewed for nearly two hours. He provided the commissioners with documented and witnessed FBI case involving a longtime Iranian informant-asset. Several months prior to the September 11 attacks the FBI asset had provided the bureau with detailed information on the coming attack:

According to previously published sources, in April 2001 Mr. Sarshar, in his position as FBI interpreter/translator, attended a meeting between a long-term, reliable FBI asset and two additional FBI agents from the Washington Field Office. That FBI asset told the two FBI agents that his sources in Afghanistan had information of an al-Qaeda plot to attack America in a suicide mission involving planes. It would appear that when Mr. Sarshar filed his reports within the Bureau, they were titled “Kamikaze Pilots”.

After leaving the FBI in 2002, Mr. Sarshar provided the same information to various Congressional offices and investigators, such as staffers for the Senate Judiciary Committee and Senator Patrick Leahy. The Justice Department’s Inspector General also interviewed him.

Thus, we were shocked to find that Mr. Sarshar’s relevant information was missing from the “System Was Blinking Red” section of the 2004 Final Report issued by the 9/11 Commission. Now, six and a half years past the publication of the Final Report, the transcript of Mr. Sarshar’s interview has been released with all of its substance redacted. In light of the fact that the majority of his information does not meet the standard for classification, which is to protect “sources and methods”, it is unclear as to why that information was blocked. Covering up incompetence, or worse, malfeasance, is not a valid reason for classification.

In this particular case, the FBI prevented the informant-asset from providing his direct testimony to either the Commission or Congress, and this, despite the asset’s willingness and consent to come forward with details of his pertinent information and how he’d obtained it.

This case also fits the typical FBI informant-asset profile. The informant is a much older individual, with no particularly interesting educational or linguistic qualifications (outside of Farsi he barely speaks English), no significant world trotting patterns, reclusive, shy …

Now that we have identified the US government two-track terrorist recruitment and management systems - CIA-Backed & FBI-Connected, the differences between the two camps, and the status and roles of those recruited, we must go back and ask the real question: How is it that these notorious 9/11 terror operatives and lower-grade facilitators happen to all be on the US government’s payroll, and that before, during and after the September 11 attacks? Whether it is the Pentagon Special Forces, the CIA, or the FBI, wouldn’t they All be considered The Government’s Men? And if that’s the case, whose attack did we suffer on September 11, 2001?

# # # #

Sibel Edmonds is the Publisher & Editor of Boiling Frogs Post and the author of the Memoir Classified Woman: The Sibel Edmonds Story. She is the recipient of the 2006 PEN Newman's Own First Amendment Award for her “commitment to preserving the free flow of information in the United States in a time of growing international isolation and increasing government secrecy” Ms. Edmonds has a MA in Public Policy and International Commerce from George Mason University, a BA in Criminal Justice and Psychology from George Washington University.

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by SUBSCRIBING, and by ordering our EXCLUSIVE BFP DVDs.

FB Like

Share This

This site depends….

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by SUBSCRIBING and/or DONATING.


  1. dutchbradt says:

    Still the question is: Was the attack a USG operation, an instance of blowback, or a non-USG plot that was allowed to happen?

  2. This is a very valuable thing to put together, thanks Sibel. Great idea.

    One quick thing to note, about Anwar Al Awlaki. These stories get so twisted in the house of mirrors it’s very hard to keep things straight. I don’t think the case that he was “at the center of the 9/11 events” has been made very strongly at all. I mean, we are supposed to accept that his job was “to keep the hijackers spiritually focused”? Really? The getting drunk and doing coke with strippers hijackers? Hmmmm. Then all we have to tie him to 9/11 is this blatant nonsense from some detective, plus the alleged fact that al-Shibh had his phone number?

    I don’t think this particular part of the Awlaki story passes your “bulletproof” test!

    I do think it’s clear he was recruited by FBI and/or CIA, but given that they killed him, clearly something went sour somewhere. The narrative according to Scahill in Dirty Wars (the book at least, haven’t seen the movie) is that yes he was recruited, or a recruitment was attempted, but he went off the reservation and took serious exception to US policies, evolving from quite a moderate Islamic voice to a fire-breathing radical because he was pushed in that direction by the indiscriminate killing by the United States in its so-called war on terror.

    I don’t personally think Scahill’s story goes far enough or deep enough, but this narrative does not appear to be in obvious conflict with anything we know about Awlaki. Scahill does not mention, as I recall, or at least does not emphasize, that Awlaki had no formal training and was a strange candidate for imam-hood. So there may be something interesting in there. But in general terms, that narrative makes sense. It causes no obvious dissonance as far as I know. Always ready to be further educated. But if you want to suggest that his “fire-breathing radical” period was under the secret auspices of the US government as well…is there any more evidence of it than you have presented here?

    Well that’s my quick two cents anyway. Thanks again, and I really look forward to seeing this document evolve!

  3. jackdonovan says:

    That’s amazing, Sibel. I know there’s stuff you can only mention without diving in; but it’s still invaluable information.

    I have not finished reading it, but I was wondering if you have heard of Google Fusion. I know it’s a device from The Empire, but it’s actually quite amazing to visualize data in it. I’m sure well-informed individuals can gain a lot by simply organizing a few ideas…

    Thank you for your incredible work, rest assured your voice will echo louder and louder…

  4. jackdonovan says:

    In response do dutchbradt, if I may, there’s no way of telling what nation built this or that plot. In fact, nationalities play a key role in the way “terrorism” is structured. That is, either because the target is foreign, or because it’s harder to track foreign nationals, many terror plots involve mixed nationalities. Each national government cannot control its individuals, and the military simply operates without boundaries. They already have control of space and satellite systems. So I think it’s safe to say that in fact, the world is already ruled by something else that is not simply a elected, democratic government. Neither the borders we see in our maps matter that much.

    The rules that are enforced to people that go through TSA scanning are definitely not the same that are enforced to, let’s say, the military. The term putocracy comes to mind, and the plutocrats definitely enjoy the safety of the air that the military has to guarantee (ahem, except on very specific wargames), but they don’t pay the same costs. In fact, they usually pay very low taxes in relation to their total wealth and income. There are all sorts of ways to evade taxes, and lower the public perception of one’s wealth, which are perfectly legal. So what I’m saying is: follow the money, follow the oil, follow the drugs and follow the guns. Big money, big oil, big drugs, big guns. Not a lot of companies are capable of moving around these kinds of goods – in big quantities, in a coordinated way. It’s a superb effort to build the kind of cooperative work that allows for the 24/7 operation of an unparalleled military might. That is why the United States has nine Unified Combatant Commands, two of which created after 2001, and one of which is called USTRANSCOM, dedicated exclusively to transportation (presumably all around the world).

    Ok, if you’re still following, two of those commands are located in Germany. That’s clearly a territorial issue, and we all know that the US has populated the world with troops and bases. From The Sorrows of the Empire, p. 156-160, there were “over 100” troops deployed in: Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Germany, Greece, Greenland, Iceland, Italy, Macedonia(formerly Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia), Netherlands, Portugal (including Azores), Serbia (including Kosovo), Spain, Turkey, United Kingdom, Australia, Japan (including Okinawa), Republic of Korea (South Korea), Singapore, Thailand, Bahrain, Diego Garcia, Egypt, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Canada, Chile, Cuba (Guantánamo) and Honduras, by September 2001. I don’t think that those troops were staying in hotels, so we can say there is an United States garrison in each of the aforementioned countries. Any operation can be launched from a combination of local commands.

    This omnipresence of United States militarism around the world is unprecedented in human history. No empire could claim the whole world to itself, they were ultimately constrained even when there was an effort to expand. With the United States military, there’s really only outer space left to colonize, once all the war criminals are arrested. Until then, they will “rule” the Earth thinking Justice won’t be brought to them, and humanity will be constrained to watch the insane power games from a distance, or horribly close to it if you’re on the ground in Yemen, Pakistan, Syria, Libya, Sudan, Somalia, Iran and North Korea. There’s a clear intent of somehow “controlling the regimes” of these countries. Why? Have they expressed a clear desire of destroying the United States “homeland”? Why can’t they broadcast their opinion? This goes a long way, but the basic idea behind this is: a nation in which the most important election can be defrauded with total impunity and whose President has a “kill list” CANNOT refer to other leaders as “dictators” without referring to their own as one. Dictator Bush, Dictator Obama. There was a great heist of public opinion in 2000, then the kidnapping of freedom in 2001, which we are being forced to pay ransom even though freedom is already dead. September 11th 2001 was a coup d’etat, in plain sight, for those who could see. While everyone was still in a state of shock, the state of “national emergency” was proclaimed on September 14th, 2001, which means that the measures planned through decades of Countinuity of Government exercises are still needed, until today. The National Emergecy was declared on 9/11 when the COG plans were activated; in its planning there was the future legislation needed to maintain the legitimacy of the new, COG government (those selected officials that went into “bunker duty” after 9/11). This is mainly the PATRIOT Act, but it also contains things like the Sept 14th Proclamation 7463…

  5. Priceless

  6. Great article, Sibel.

    One more thing to add to the Al-Awlaki story is his being busted for soliciting prostitues twice during his time in the US in the 1990s. (Unless, of course, this is bogus) In my mind, this would make him good FBI-informant fodder, however, considering his extensive education, a CIA recruit does seem to be a better fit.
    If he truly is at the center of the 9/11 story, do we take his and his son’s drone strike deaths as “tying up loose ends”? No longer needed, as with bin Laden earlier that year, so he was expendable at that point?
    It would seem that Awlaki and Ali Mohamed were the fruits of the Gladio B strategy, to foster “radical Islam” as the new bogeyman as World Communism had faded as the ulimate exisential threat.

  7. colinjames says:

    Nice work, great idea. I zuppos Kevin Ryan’s latest book would be good source, especially if you want to add the other side of the equation, the US agents/operatives/gov officials/businessmen. So you have who’s on the payroll on one side, and who are the payees, so to speak, on the other Just a thought. I’m not sure if his book goes into much detail on the foreign terrorists at all, there must be some mention.

  8. tonywicher says:

    colinjames, I also recommend Kevin Ryan’s book “Another Nineteen – Investigating Legitimate 9/11 Suspects”. He does not cover “Al Qaeda” operatives, who were all patsies having no real operational involvement in 9/11. He is trying to track down the people who really did it, which is why he calls the book “Another Nineteen”. He begins with Cheney and Rumsfeld, then goes on to the Carlyle Group’s Frank Carlucci, the State Department’s Richard Armitage, FBI director Louis Freeh, DCI George Tenet, Counter-terrorism chief Richard Clarke, Rudy Giuliani, military contractors Stratesec and SAIC, Porter Goss, etc. Kevin Ryan is a very serious guy who with Sibel is one of the original 9/11 whistleblowers. He was a chemist at Underwriters Laboratories who was fired by UL during the NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) investigation into the collapse of the Twin Towers. He is a member of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth ( and had done scientific research proving beyond the shadow of a doubt that the towers and Building Seven did not collapse but were demolished with explosives. I have promised not to argue for this on BFP. I will only say that I have spent a lot of time looking into the evidence and analysis presented by Ryan and many other highly qualified engineers, architects and scientists at, and for me there is no question about it. Links to all Ryan’s research and publications may be found at

  9. tonywicher says:

    I think Sibel’s last question is the right one: whose attack did we suffer on 9/11? By this we do not mean who flew the planes into the towers (I believe they were remote controlled) nor who placed the explosives in the buildings. The question, of course, is who gave the orders at the highest level, whose intention was being carried out? It sure wasn’t the CIA operative/patsy Osama bin Laden. Surely it wasn’t all Cheney and Rumsfeld’s idea – they are just Bush operatives. So does 9/11 begin with the Bush family? Is it the crowning accomplishment of Poppy Bush’s illustrious criminal career? I am inclined to look at it this way. But we can’t single out the Bushes either. They, too, are only agents of a global financial oligarchy. We, the United States were attacked by this oligarchy. We can say that it was a false flag in which the USG staged an attack on itself, but it would be better to say that it was ordered by an international criminal organization, outside the USG or any other national government and carried out by treasonous agents of this organization within the USG such as Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld. The Saudis are very important agents of this international criminal organization, especially ambassador to the the U.S. Bandar bin Sultan, aka Bandar Bush (now Saudi intelligence chief) who has long controlled terrorist militias around the world. British prime minister Tony Blair is another such high-level agent. There presumably is some decision-making body of the oligarchy, some supreme council that made the decision and sent out the orders to top agents such as Bush, Blair and Bandar. This is the best I can come up with.

  10. thoughts in attempt to address concept of ‘allow’. Was 911’Allowed” to happen’.

    Brinkema halts evidence enquiry into existent information that would answer the question AT her bench – not ‘suspected’ but existent information she is privy to – hidden behind state secrets privilege. Her status allows her to block habeas corpus. She controls that gate. Just as Hellerstein did with ALL 911 cases (Bollyn) .
    Why would Maddow etal not be interested in investigating that and attendant deepstate connect between all major terrorists/plots Wars of past twenty years + and USA number1 intel /NATO agencies? If they genuinely represented 4th estate?
    Why have NONE of the major structural absurdities identified by AE911/firemen/pilots been addressed by NYT?

    Bernays found ‘control’ of populations thru systems ‘allowing us’ belief In ‘our’ own cleverness, our own ability ‘to know’….”If it was a conspiracy, I would have heard it by now, and I haven’t, so it wasn’t”. CIA identified ‘Commissions and staff an excellent safeguard against over-commitment to any one theory and against the illicit transformation of probabilities into certainties’. Keep it doubtful. Confuse by asking questions the individual cannot answer . Sunstein/Vermule ‘identify’ any questioner of official narratives as having a ‘crippled epistemology’. Denigrate the questioner. A narrative is created(creatioNISTreport), the organs of state produce and protect it. Keepers keep the gates. We know this. Vested interest IS the ‘crippled epistemology’, but knowing that does not stop it proceeding. It wins every fight. Can legislate. Is corrupt at its heart but still remains.
    The question was 911 allowed to happen can easily be answered ” Yes” . It was and more importantly IS continuously ‘allowed’ to happen every day you turn on your radio and hear it NOT being discussed in light of 12 years expert testimony saying the official account is false. Every day you pick up NYTimes or TIME and see the alQaeda hi- jack narrative confirmed by absence of any fair discussion opposite.
    The absence of any discussion of any evidence to contrary being given public airing continues to allow 911 ‘to happen’. Brinkema is ‘allowing 911 to happen’ by blocking examination of evidence proving contrary to the official narrative.

  11. A few practical suggestions.

    1. Speaking of what Sibel correctly calls “quasi-investigative” journalism, we need to be clear and open about its limited and hypothetical nature. There can be nothing conclusive and “proven” about this discourse. It’s not to uncover some admissible evidence for the court of law. It’s all about the court of public opinion, about compromising the existing system of government and the power elites behind it.

    2. The mechanical and seemingly endless accumulation of facts and alleged facts about 9-11 or similar events can lead nowhere unless there are working hypotheses which can be tested against these huge pools of information and also help to arrange it in a more meaningful order than purely chronological, the likes of Thompson’s timeline.

    Does Sibel have a working hypothesis to be tested?

    3. If characters like Ali and Zawahiri have been indeed US operatives and the so-called Al-Qaeda at its inception was little more than a CIA/Nato database of anti-Soviet “freedom fighters” I cannot think but of two possible scenarios for 9-11. One is that on 9/11/01 “Al-Qaeda” chieftains acted in good faith and blew up the symbols of US might as loyal US/Nato agents and even, if we to believe Sibel’s take on Zawahiri, officers in the chain of Nato command. Two is that people like Ali and Zawahiri were not loyal agents but had their own game to play. It was and perhaps still is a marriage of convenience between Nato and radical Islamists, just as it was between the US/UK/Nato and the Nazis after WWII and, as some would claim, even before and during it.

    4. Is it fair to describe Russia as a “competitor” of the United States and their allies and rationalize US terrorist activities against Russia as struggle for “control over the resource-rich region”? Let us recall that according to Sibel the US government stands “directly” behind all large terrorist strikes in Russia at least in the period from 1996 to June 2002 when Sibel was fired from FBI. If so, these include episodes like the 1996 bombing of the apartment building in Kaspiysk, with 69 people dead, including 21 children and the Kizlyar Raid of the same year in which the Chechen warlord Raduev captured the maternity ward, with 78 people dead; the 1998 bombings in Makhachkala with 18 dead and 28 buildings destroyed; the 1999 bombing of main farmers market in Vladikavkaz with 59 people dead
    and,of course, the 1999 bombings of apartment buildings in Moscow, Buynaisk, and Volgodonsk, with over 300 dead and over 1000 wounded. And the list of large-scale terrorist attacks for this period goes on and on. Moreover, unless nothing short of a miracle happened in the city of Washington, DC after the FBI had fired Sibel, so that a furious Saul had turned into a meek Paul, I see no reason to assume that the US government did not stay “directly” behind the 2002 Dubrovka and the 2004 Beslan Elementary episodes in which about 500 hostages died, including about 200 children. This does not look like a “competition” to me. It looks more like a war. Wars are waged against enemies. This word is more accurate to describe Russia as seen through Nato’s scope. Is the choice of words here that important? Yes and no. No, if we remain on the level of “quasi-journalism” and mechanical accumulation of facts and alleged facts of compromising nature. Yes, if we want to rise to a level of hypothesizing. In this case we must proceed from the analysis of the geopolitical context of 9-11 and the strategic objectives of US/Nato elites, including the place and status of Russia in them. It is on this level that the difference between Russia as a “competitor” and Russia as an “enemy”, let alone THE enemy,can be decisive in making sense of 9-11.

  12. tonywicher says:


    From the standpoint of rationality and science, why should Russia or China even be seen as “competitors” for resources, much less enemies? What’s the difference, really? Such competition always leads to war. The rational policy is not one of competition but of cooperation with Russia and China on infrastructure projects of global scope such as the New Silk Road, space exploration, etc. The oligarchical system is a system of conquest and exploitation, one that has dominated the world for thousands of years, but is not inevitable. Only from the oligarchical standpoint do competition and war seem inevitable. We are now at a point as a species where we will either be destroyed by this ancient system or we will overthrow it and build a higher civilization.

  13. Litvinenko/Felshtinsky determined 1999 Buinaksk Moscow and Volgodonsk bombings were false flag FSB.? Their book ‘Blowing up Russia’ investigates those three in particular and Ryazan, where the fourth attack was foiled on Sept.23. Cannot speak to other s quoted by netter, but be a hard push to have GLADIO doing Ryazan. ??
    However. 911 proves everything possible…..

  14. colinjames says:

    Thanks Tonywicher. I’ve so far only heard the interview with James Corbett, will get the book when i have the money. Just starting new job next week. Just in time to save my BFP subscription!

  15. mariotrevi says:

    Concerning the double agent Ali Mohamed, I found another resource besides Wikipedia, etc. I thought I’d share this with the others here; it’s from :

    The timeline relates that Ali Mohamed was secretly arrested in September 1998. They mention Patrick Fitzgerald: “Patrick Fitzgerald is on the prosecutor team that subpoenaed Mohamed to appear, but apparently he and the other prosecutors know very little about Mohamed. Fitzgerald blames this on a legal “wall” between intelligence gathering and criminal prosecution.”

    So, how much does the CIA share with the FBI about its assets who are US residents?

  16. jackdonovan says:

    Wanna look for some 9/11 “insiders”?

    This is a good place to start.


  17. tonywicher says:

    Everybody has got to see this! JUST OUT! Recommended by two of the most illustrious names in 9/11 truth, Paul Craig Roberts and David Ray Griffin, as the most comprehensive documentary on 9/11 ever made, the one we have all been waiting for.

    Paul Craig Robert’s article with David Ray Griffin’s review:

    This documentary has been made available completely free at:

    I haven’t watched it yet myself but I will be spending the rest of the evening doing so. It’s got to be great!

  18. A great article Sibel, and I sincerely hope you can find the time to keep this ‘report’ evolving.

    As to the comments here – Awlaki’s sexual appetite may well have been a way in which he was either blackmailed or seduced into working for the FBI, the papertrail behind these claims is pretty solid.

    As to his connections to the alleged 9/11 hijackers – Awlaki admitted during one of several immediately post-9/11 interviews with the FBI that he knew Nawaf Al Hazmi and Hani Hanjour, though he denied knowing Khalid Al Midhar. He also appears to have bought airline tickets for several of the alleged hijackers in the months prior to the attacks.

  19. So, were there foreign people on US soil attending flight schools prior to the “attacks”? Note: that I make no implication that these guys flew any planes on that day. IMO I’m still unclear on the events. But one interesting thing… My father lived in Venice Florida from the late 1990’s up through oh, 2005. During a visit in either 2004, or 2005 he told me an interesting story. The house diagonal to him, across the street was a rent house. And prior to 2001 two (might have been 3) Muslim guys moved in and lived there. They attended a local flight school and according to him seemed like regular people, didn’t act strange or anything. Prior to Sept. in 2001 they threw a neighborhood party where they (apparently) celebrated their moving somewhere. My father and his wife attended the party and he said they grilled food, drank beer and were generally social able and “ok”. Well he maintains that this was Mohamed Atta and one of the other “attackers”. So I am inclined to believe that there were Muslims here, whatever their true role in the events of that day may be.

Speak Your Mind