Winter Patriot Community Blog

Why The Facts About 9/11 Must Be Suppressed

(1) The official story of 9/11 has been used to justify drastic military actions by the United States and its allies, actions which have brought death, destruction, and chaos to Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Libya, Syria, Pakistan, and many other countries.

(2) The same story has also been used to justify drastic changes in domestic policy, in the United States and in much of the world. These changes have resulted in the persecution, incarceration, torture, and death of many innocent people, not to mention the erosion of civil rights and the perversion of the democratic process in every nation that once enjoyed these things.

(3) If it were widely and clearly understood that the official story of 9/11 is not only obviously false but a carefully crafted fiction:

Apologies for writing something personal, but this is a special anniversary for me.

I was born in 1957, so I was six years old when President Kennedy was assassinated. At the time, I didn't even know what the word "assassinated" meant, much less understand what it meant that this particular President had been assassinated. But I saw how the news affected my parents, and all the other adults, and I realized I needed to start paying attention to the news -- and especially to politics, which previously had seemed boring.

For those who were alive on September 11th, 2001, the events of the day seemed horrible beyond measure. But with the sober perspective that comes from two decades of hindsight, we're bound to admit that things could have turned out much worse, in countless ways.

For instance, even though only two of the seven buildings that made up the World Trade Center complex were hit by airplanes, all seven suffered heavily. Early media attention focused on the "collapse" of Buildings 1 and 2. And later we learned that Building 7 had also "collapsed". But until recently, only a few dedicated researchers were aware that Buildings 3, 4, 5, and 6 were also destroyed on the same day. Nowadays, thanks to the exceedingly free flow of information that we currently enjoy, most people know all about this.

View on YouTube

Retired US Colonel James Steele

After establishing that the Iraqi Government had no chemical weapons as either left-overs from the Iran Iraq war (which the US military had supplied) or from their own manufacture in the intervening years, the US military invaded the sovereign territory of Iraq.

The US had no business being in Iraq and knew full well that their exceedingly thin excuse for the attack and occupation searching for “Weapons Of Mass Destruction” would evaporate back into the smoke from which it came in the first place. So they needed a replacement excuse to remain in occupation. The US found this excuse by fabricating a civil war within Iraq and then claiming they had to stay to 'bring peace' to the country.

All the while, though, they were stoking the chaos, of course.
The CIA and their progenitors, the British SIS, are past masters at this game of internecine chaos.

Enter James Steele. Steele, as you will hear from the documentary (linked at the foot of this article) is a veteran of the chaos of Vietnam and, more particularly, the bloody civil wars of terror in Central America. Steele learned his trade directly from a Son of Darkness, the curiously named US Ambassador, John Negroponte.

The minority Sunni population, who had controlled the Iraqi military, had already been betrayed by the US having been promised to be left in place during the occupation if they (the Iraqi [Sunni] military) did not resist the incoming invasion. They did not resist and the US promptly disbanded the Iraqi military!

The CIA and Mossad arranged false flag attacks on the (heavily armed) Sunni population. The Sunnis (many now ex-military) returned the attacks but aimed them, as intended, at the Shia population. The Shia population was offered training and weapons as you will see in the documentary (link below) and the rest is history, as they say.

Torture became 'de rigueur' and was intended to intimidate (passivity which invites more violence) and/or outrage and retaliation (which provokes escalating violence). Torture programs are mass behaviour modification programs. They are not about obtaining information.

Though Pompeo asserts that the CIA's actions "have kept us safe since 9/11," the Senate torture report shows no evidence that any useable information was extracted through torture.

But, torture programs (programmes) are great for starting wars and civil wars.

Well done, Colonel. (Too easy, isn't it?!)

. . . . . . . . .

(originally posted Apr 5th 2013. The following is a repost of an article originally written and posted here at Winter Patriot on Apr 5th 2013. It is presented here as background for following articles on the present day situation and likely near future in Iraq, Iran and the pivotal role played by oil and banking in the centuries long game to control the world.)

Below is a link to a BBC film about retired Colonel James Steele who was employed by the US to foment civil war in Iraq after the invasion in 2003. Colonel Steele is a veteran of the bloody terror campaigns in Central America. No doubt, it was that experience in bringing terror and destruction upon whole civilian populations that made him the candidate of choice for a similar program in Iraq.

The Americans, of course, would have had a very difficult time in occupying and remaining in Iraq if the Iraqi factions were united against them. Hence the need for what amounted to civil war. It's an old strategy. English governments at the behest of their masters, the merchant bankers, have used it for centuries to further their commercial interests. Nothing changes. 'Divide and conquer' goes back to at least the Romans.

The film is remarkably candid. So what is the BBC doing backing the making of it?

Well, it is more about what is not in the film. There is no mention of the benefits for Israel of this invasion and the subsequent destruction of civil life in Iraq. There is no mention of the israeli assassination squads that roamed Iraq murdering doctors, academics and other middle class professionals together with any capable local leaders.

So the fact is that this mayhem is entirely deliberate and all the consequences were planned. Against this larger scenario, it could be reasonably said that the film amounts to a 'limited hangout'

It could be argued that the film crew were focussing on one character, James Steele, and that was the point of the film. All true and reasonable. A film cannot be about everything. However, there is one point that pervades the film that is obviously there but the salient truth about it is not. And that is torture.

The perpetrators are interviewed, one in particular. The torture is justified on the usual, 'we needed the information and the situation was desperate', type of thing. But I cannot believe that anyone seriously researching this topic, (which would have been done for the film) would not have come across the widely known truth in military and intelligence circles that 'truth' is more often than not, the last thing you hear from those who are tortured. They want, above all, to stop the pain and terror. So the victims will say whatever they think the torturers want to hear; whatever will fit with torturers' psychotic view of the situation.

So what do the torturers want if it is not the truth? They want to terrorise the whole community into cowering submission or violent reprisals which escalates the violence and helps those intent on destruction. This is why mutilated bodies are dumped in public places for everyone to see.

That information should have been central to the film and its absence is inexcusable. The result is that it misrepresents the uses and purposes of torture and so goes some way towards legitimising it.

The purpose of torture is to destroy the victim and the society that the victim is connected to and part of. How many times does this destruction have to play out wherever the US (and now NATO) go before the world recognises that this is the primary objective? "By their deeds, you shall know them"

So we start to see why the BBC might finance this film and why the Guardian publicises it. Both media organisations are often cited as being under banker control who also control the direction of US and NATO forces. We have yet again the 'scapegoat ritual' whereby we have two goats; a sacrificial goat, Iraq, to be ceremonially sacrificed and a scapegoat, the US administration and military, to carry the blame for the ritual bloodshed.

At first it was the Sunnis and Shia militants and civilians who were both sacrificial and scapegoats. Now, through this lens, we see that the Sunnis and Shia militants as largely (though not blameless) victims and the US military (hardly blameless, either) as the perps and scapegoats all orchestrated by the High Priests.

Will the camera pan out far enough to take in the involvement of the israelis and their masters, the bankers, behind the scenes? Somehow, I think not.

This scapegoating reminds me of the Palestinian camp massacres (Shabra and Shatila) of the defenceless Palestinians by the Maronite Christian forces (sacrificial goat and scapegoat) in Lebanon and, again, all orchestrated by israel.

However, after criticising the film, it is well worth watching from the point of view of what is there while being mindful of what is not there. It shows well the psychopathy that surrounds war and violence. It shows that psychopaths are so far away from the consciousness of ordinary human beings. It shows evil talking and almost sounding reasonable.

You can watch it at youtube - Iraq's sectarian war | James Steele: America's mystery man

Or at The Guardian (but you'll get an advertisement first).

There is also a link on the Guardian page to a short 5minute edited version

On Monday 6th Jan 2020 at 8pm local time, the Iraqi Government received a letter from William H Seely III, Commanding General US Marine Corps, informing them that the American military would be withdrawing from Iraq and that the government should expect to witness increased flights in and out of the International Zone (IZ).
The Letter
Also see here

This increased air activity at night was nothing to worry about as it was being undertaken to “alleviate any perception that we may be bringing more Coalition Forces to the IZ (International Zone)”.

When the letter became public, the military first denied its authenticity and then claimed it was an unsigned draft that had been sent out prematurely. This last excuse had some surface plausibility because the contents were extremely odd. Here is a military commander saying they will be withdrawing because the Iraqi Parliament voted on them leaving. So they were going to leave because, "We respect your sovereign decision to order our departure"! What's wrong with that picture?

Much of the international press got it wrong. Here is an example of that misunderstanding complete with an amusing cartoon-
Daft Draft

The leaked letter was unsigned but the acting Iraqi Prime Minister, Adel Abdul-Mahdi, confirmed that he had actually received this letter and that his copy, complete with Arabic translation was signed and there were in fact two versions of it – the second one had an amended Arabic translation on the reverse side.
https://www.france24.com/en/20200107-iraq-pm-abdel-mahdi-says-he-receive...

So the US military are lying about the letter being first a fraud, then the letter being a draft and never being intended to be sent. Should we be surprised at the lies when we know that General William H Seely III is in charge of Marine Intelligence? What do we know about all intelligence agencies? They Lie. Lies are their 'stock in trade'. That's what they do. Its not called Psychological Warfare (Psy-Ops) for nothing.

So what's going on? Here is what I think William of Ockham would say about it.

'The Letter' was sent as designed and received by the Iraqi Prime Minister as intended and its purpose was to deceive the Iraqi government into thinking that troops were leaving the International Zone at night when in fact, under the cover of darkness, more troops were being brought into the IZ.

After all, if you want to avoid the perception that troops might be coming in when in fact they were going out, wouldn't it be better to do that in daylight? Clearly, Seely III's intention was to deceive and that was the purpose of the letter.

What General William H Seely III didn't count on was someone in his command taking a picture of it (before it has been signed) and releasing it on the net. He also didn't calculate on the Iraqi PM confirming its existence when asked. Seely III would have had a reasonable expectation that it all would be confidential as the Iraqi PM admitted that multiple threats of extra-judicial killings had been threatened over the years and had even been carried out and all without the public being any the wiser. (Folks, you need to read that last link!) Here is an example from it -

"Later on, when the Iraqi Minister of Defense publicly said that a third side was targeting both protesters and security forces alike, Abdul-Mahdi allegedly received a new call from Trump who threatened to kill both him and the Minister of Defense if they kept talking about this "third side".

That, along with much else in the Middle East has changed now courtesy of the US/Israel extra-judicial killing of Iranian General Qassem Soleimani.

Well done, chaps!

POSTSCRIPT

Here is a very important article written by Frederico Pieraccini that directly quotes Iraqi acting Prime Minister, Adel Abdul-Mahdi addressing the Iraqi parliament regarding Trumps threats of violence -

The Deeper Story Behind the Assassination of Soleimani