Published in full text with permission. Downloadable printable document (15 pages) : Abudara False Flag State-Sponsored Terrorism
The Era of Terrorism
Collaboration submitted for the 17th anniversary of the terrorist attack on the Pentagon and the World Trade Center (Washington DC, September 11, 2018)
By Dr. Oscar Abudara Bini, Coordinator of the Observatory for Comparative Studies on Terrorism since 2006 (Lockerbie, Buenos Aires, US, Madrid, London and Paris attacks) (*) (**)
Carl Philipp Gottlieb von Clausewitz has stated that war is a continuation of politics through other means. Mutatis mutandis, changing the names, so is terrorism.
Terrorist attacks, events and periods abound throughout history. Let us remember the Reign of Terror in the French Revolution carried out by Robespierre. Peoples in South America are especially sensitive in respect of State Terrorism which took place from 1973 in Chile and 1976 in Argentina.
In turn, false flag operations go through all of history. Since the fire in Rome by Nero to the incidents of the Maine and Manchuria, the fire of the Reichstag and the Northwoods operation. The Vietnam War began after the false flag episode of the Tonkin Gulf.
The invasion to Libya was preceded by the Lockerbie attack, and a good part of the geopolitics against Iran is explained by the attacks in Buenos Aires. The demolition of Iraq and Afghanistan are justified by the attack on the Pentagon and the WTC.
We live in an Era of Terrorism, a period that begins with the Lockerbie attack in 1989, followed by the attacks in Argentina (Israel Embassy in 1992, AMIA 1994) and the first attack on the Twin Towers in 1993. This era reached its peak and zenith in the spectacular attack on the Pentagon and the Twin Towers on September 11, 2001. Then the attacks in Madrid (2004), London (2005) and more recently in Paris (Charlie Hebdo, 2015) took place. This period that began in 1989 and continues to this day has over a quarter of a century.
After the implosion of the Soviet Union, the world lost the global enemy that had been maintained for five decades after World War II. After a momentary End of History and Ideologies claimed by Francis Fukuyama, Samuel Huntington arose and convinced the world that a clash of civilizations was beginning. The axis of evil was no longer communism; the Muslim world was now attacking us urbe et orbi, everywhere and all of us.
Two stories; two versions on terrorism are always confronted
This time has an Official Story and an Alternative Story. According to the official version, all the attacks have been perpetrated by Muslims. According to the alternative version, the lack of evidence in the official story leads to considering these attacks as false flag operations whose aim is to blame Muslims for them. The idea that even though not all Muslims are terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslims, has been imposed globally. In these 30 years, most reputable terrorism investigators have not found solid evidence to really blame the Muslims for any of these attacks.
As alternative investigations are consolidated, all attacks remain having three and no more than three versions. One version held by all the official stories guarantees that it was the Muslims and the Western world did not notice and could not foresee or prevent the attack despite the power of its intelligence services. The second version claims that it was the Muslims and that the Western world was permissive. The third version, hard to accept for those who have not done a serious study of the investigations, claims with overwhelming evidence that these are Western attacks or acts of war. With respect to the Madrid attack, the Spanish talk about the works of the “sewers”, because this is how they refer to their intelligence services. American investigators – clearly in higher numbers, better organized and much more determined than others – consider that the most famous of the attacks, 9/11, was an inside job.
The classic concept for war by Carl Philipp Gottlieb von Clausewitz finds a new confirmation in the Era of Terrorism. If the attacks are Western operations to start or justify wars, this is an old weapon like the false flag for the new forms. The greatest novelty is not this, but the fact that attacks on one’s own population are needed to justify wars. David Ray Griffin – American scholar and 9/11 investigator – has entitled his work on the attack on the Pentagon and the WTC “The New Pearl Harbor”, remembering the incident that gave rise to the US entering World War II (The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions about the Bush Administration and 9/11).
Inside job is not the same as self-attack
Self-attack is not the same as Inside Job. It is not appropriate to talk about a terrorist attack or self-attack if the slightest care is taken to keep internal casualties to a minimum and to prevent affecting the “self” or one’s own people. In the case of the Israel Embassy in Buenos Aires, they waited until the important people that were present on that day (who were many and highly qualified) had left the building. For Madrid, if they had wanted to harm individuals of upper-middle class, they would have attacked the high-speed train and not a train on which blue-collar workers and lower-class employees travel. In the Pan Am airplane used for the Lockerbie attack, the embassies advised several diplomats against taking the flight on that day. If they had not alerted the white-collar employees of the WTC, the casualties would have been much greater.
Scientific differences between the official and alternative stories
Strong supporters of the official versions as well as alternative investigators consider that all the terrorist attacks involve conspiracies, agreements between several parties to attack or take down a powerful party, although in opposite ways. The supporter of each version considers himself to be rational and considers the other one to be irrational, untruthful and conspiratorial or paranoid in a pejorative sense. The official versions and coverups are the work of governments that have the power to omit facts, plant evidence and publish all kinds of stories. The alternative investigators only have access to the official evidence on the surface, and in this first quarter of a century of attacks no voluntary repentant criminals have come forward. Paul Craig Roberts has pointed out that the possibility of such individuals coming forward is only a matter of money and some businessman providing it.
Torture and jail for Muslim suspects and silk glove for Western suspects
There is a debate on the potential right to torture a person firmly suspected to be a terrorist with the purpose of preventing other attacks, and this has been done with some poor Muslims. My country has duly corroborated accessories to the AMIA attack at the highest governmental and journalistic levels but treats them with a silk glove in the judicial procedure that has been pending for over 20 years. This difference shows again the abyss between the official and alternative stories. The suspects in official stories deserve jail or torture in Guantanamo. But the government officials who are proved accessories and possibly accomplices of terrorist operations have a “right” to impunity.
Confrontations between conspiratorial government officials faced by alternative investigators
There is not only confrontation of ideas or investigators, because the conspiratorial government officials have all the power of the state, the political elites and the mass media on their side, all of which is supported by enormous budgets. The alternative conspiratorial proponents are few, except in the US, and the only budget they have is their own resources. Despite this difference between Goliath armies and modest Davids, the critical mass of the alternative investigations has a relevant place in world culture and even more so in the countries that have suffered attacks. There are polls stating that more than half of New Yorkers have more trust in alternative investigation than in the official ones. In Argentina, and after 25 years of clumsy and messy coverups, there is a huge number of citizens with reasonable doubts about the official story.
In Argentina, from 1994 until 2003, the government achieved worldwide credibility when it claimed that it had incarcerated a car thief that had sold the bomb car to the terrorists that attacked the AMIA. My country claimed at the time that there was a conspiracy between international terrorists and local criminals. When it was discovered that the government, the judiciary and the intelligence services – with the support of the mass media – had concealed the fact that USD 400,000 had been paid to a prisoner to make false accusations, it was proved that the Argentine government was a great conspirator. Some time after that, the government itself confessed to being guilty of coverup, thus accepting that its Conspiratorial Doctrine about the attacks was false.
Official stories are compulsive; alternative stories are scientific and persuasive
The conspiratorial story successfully claimed by the Argentine government for 10 years was based on lies, planting of evidence and bribery of witnesses to make them lie. In epistemological and psychiatric terms, it was a Compulsive Story that was not imposed through debating facts but rather by forceful imposition. It did not allow for any doubt or discussion, against basic requirements of rational and scientific methods.
On the contrary, the Argentine investigators that did their job during those 10 years were presenting it to the public for analysis and debate, so I call this Persuasive Scientific Story.
The conspiratorial story of the Argentine government claimed that a bomb car had crashed into the entrance to the Jewish entity AMIA before it exploded. A famous journalist investigated each and every one of the witnesses that were near the explosion on that day and first discovered that none of them had seen any cars approaching the building. And on top of that, warned that the Argentine government had pressed the wounded so that they would state that they had seen a bomb car, but none of them caved in to the pressure. This journalist stated that the presentation of false witnesses, the pressure on real witnesses and the lack of minimum evidence on a bomb car placed the official story as a gigantic lie which was the product of a conspiracy from a government and not from terrorists. The journalist that did this investigation is Jorge Lanata and the book that documents his work can be found at this link:
Ten years after the attack, a court ruled that innocent individuals had been kept in jail during that time on the basis of false evidence articulated by the Argentine government. Many believed that a new era of light and truth would come after this ruling, but the opposite happened.
The judge (Galeano) who had conducted the case of the initial falsification was discharged and under trial, and a district attorney (Alberto Nisman) was appointed to replace him. This new player made a powerful conspiratorial move with the United States, competing with the discharged judge in falsification and planting of evidence. After a well-publicized trip, district attorney Nisman returned from the US promising everyone and the whole world that he had achieved a confession from the siblings of the alleged suicide driver of the unproved car bomb, with the support from a Detroit district attorney and the FBI itself. The existence of a car bomb had not been proved, but Nisman affirmed that he had succeeded in proving the existence of a suicide driver. If the district attorney was right, the world would be able to know of an important piece of evidence on the international conspiracy that had caused the attack. Before 24 hours had passed, a journalist from an important network (Rolando Hangling, La Nacion newspaper) phoned Messrs. Berro, brothers of the alleged suicide driver who were living in Detroit. Messrs. Berro confirmed that indeed they had met with the Argentine district attorney Nisman, but instead of confessing that their brother was a terrorist who had attacked AMIA, they explained to Nisman that their brother had never set foot in Argentina and that he had died in his country. In this way it was proved that not only the conspiracy proclaimed by Nisman was false, but also that the real falsifier and conspirator was the Argentine judiciary again. The actions of this district attorney proclaiming false conspiratorial doctrines all over were so many that they motivated a new article from journalist Jorge Lanata that lists them all. See article in this link:
www.perfil.com › columnistas
November 19, 2006. The AMIA case has up to this day 113,600 pages. It is 568 files of 200 pages each to be added.
Hours after the AMIA attack, president Menem claimed in front of the world that there had been an international terrorist conspiracy for the attack. Thus, the doctrine about a conspiracy from foreign terrorists to attack Argentina was born. But then, a reputable and prestigious journalist presented official diplomatic evidence that proved that a foreign government had ordered Menem to publicize this doctrine, and that the Argentine president had dutifully obeyed.
July 18, 2004. The infamy in AMIA. By Horacio Verbitsky.
The order given by another country to make a false accusation is a conspiratorial doctrine. The journalistic investigation that unravels diplomatic documents ordering false guilty subjects to an entire government also shows a conspiracy. Does the reader prefer to deceive himself with the lies or to cultivate his knowledge and enrich his spirit with the truth? I accept that the reader may say that if he subjects himself to the official conspiracy he may be able to have a more peaceful life, and that if he digs into the alternative investigations he may be frightened. Since the Bible we have been told that the truth will set us free, but since the beginning of time non-official truths are not gratuitous and may remove us from our comfort zone.
Few hours after the Madrid attack, the Spanish government claimed that this barbaric act had been perpetrated by Arabic terrorists that carried explosives in their backpacks. But in less than 48 hours Spain dismantled the trains and prevented any forensic examinations on whether military explosives (instead of backpacks with explosives) had been placed on the floor of the trains. Again, the reader chooses which conspiratorial doctrine to stick with; the official one or the alternative one. The Spanish authorities found a backpack with undetonated explosives (Vallecas Backpack) and claimed that it had been abandoned by the terrorists. The investigators point out that this backpack had a machinegun along with the explosives, but none of the victims that were wounded in the attack had machinegun injuries.
Two great works of investigation on the truth about the Madrid attacks have been published. One of them was done by an officer of the Spanish army, coronel José M. Manrique García. And the other one by a renowned journalist, Luis del Pino. I strongly recommend the reader to read them and analyze them carefully and passionately, as both are master pieces. These investigators provide numerous and varied pieces of evidence to sustain their opinion that this attack is an internal operation (work of services or intelligence sewers, as they call them).
June 26, 2016. The attack was attributed with surprising impatience to Islamic terrorism… García-Abadillo; “Las mentiras del 11M”, by Luis del Pino; “La cuarta trama”, by José … the enimgas of 11M; and recently Madrid 11M Alta Traición, by coronel of artillery of the State José María Manrique García.
March 11, 2018 – Journalist Luis del Pino in his blog “Libertad Digital” remembers about one of the wagons in the attacks of 11M in Madrid/EFE.
According to the Conspiratorial Official theory, on 9/11 a group of Saudi terrorists hijacked and blew up Boeing airplanes carrying passengers by crashing one of them against the Pentagon and two against the Twin Towers. The whole world believed that rookies with scarce training could fly airplanes of this size and make the necessary maneuvers to crash their targets. The first thing that alternative investigators did was consult with elite military pilots to see if they could repeat this. An overwhelming number of professional pilots responded that this kind of flying was impossible even for the best professionals. Did you know that most of these Saudi “pilots” allegedly killed in the attacks appeared alive in their respective countries? You choose who to believe; my work is to show you that you have two alternatives, and I also recommend that you do not just accept my point of view but investigate on your own.
Elementary geopolitics of these times: Reign of Unipolarity
This Age of Terrorism coincided with the implosion of the Soviet Union and a period where the US and its allies are without adversaries. For 50 years the Western world had communism as its perfect and permanent enemy. Once this enemy disappeared, another one appeared shortly after: the Muslim world that came into play by perpetrating terrorist attacks and all kind of atrocities in the recent war in Syria.
First the BRICs (economic union of Brazil, Russia, China and India) and recently the Syrian war have placed a neo multipolarity in the board of world power, where we can see the reconstruction efforts of a new international order coordinated by the leaders of Russia, China and President Donald Trump himself.
Pivot on which the Official Compulsive Stories and the Alternative Persuasive Stories are faced: a few basic facts
The official stories are held by governments, while alternative stories are defended sometimes by judicial procedures, families of victims, and mostly by independent investigators. Focusing on the rational, meticulous and scientific study of Basic Facts is the best remedy to avoid getting lost and at the mercy of campaigns of confusion, falsification and manipulation. Many are surprised that after separating the thousand branches and leaves of the trees there are only a few facts left separating both versions. It is important to note that these facts, as in every criminal scene, tend to be few and significant, as we will see.
Let us go back to Argentina to see how there is no in-between in light of the basic facts. Both attacks in Argentina were external to the buildings and perpetrated with bomb cars (Israel Embassy 1992 and AMIA 1994) as claimed by the government, or explosives were placed inside both buildings as claimed by investigators. In the US, the Pentagon was attacked by a Boeing airplane as claimed by the American government, or hit by a missile. The Twin Towers were brought down by Passenger airplanes as claimed by the official version, or by the placement of different kinds of explosives as claimed by investigators.
In the US 9/11 there were airplanes that allegedly hit the Twin Towers, but no airplane hit the gigantic Building 7. However, this building was demolished, and this time coincidence made a powerful businessman such as Larry Silverstein state that it had to be demolished because it was at risk of collapsing. Notwithstanding the arguments on the need to pull it down or lack thereof, since it had little fire and scarce damage, investigators ask: how long does it take to place explosives to demolish a building with that many floors? It is likely true, as investigators state, that the explosive charges in this Building 7 were placed with much anticipation. The reader will surely understand the magnitude of this healthy rational doubt. Kurt Sonnenfeld, cameraman for FEMA (official government office in the US) who is now a refugee in Argentina did a tour of Ground Zero in the area of the attacks hours after it, and thought he saw that enormous government offices seemed to have been emptied before the attack.
The Madrid trains had terrorists that carried conventional explosives in their backpacks, or military plastic explosives were placed on the base of the trains. The terrorists that attacked the magazine Charlie Hebdo were Muslim or Western military specialists.
Let us now do a panoramic overview on the official stories and the alternative investigations on the most important attacks in these 30 years.
Lockerbie attack: 1989, 259 dead passengers and 11 that were on the ground and were hit with pieces of the plane.
Firstly, Iran was accused of it; then Libya, and then back to Iran:
March 12, 2014. The Lockerbie attack in December 1988 was ordered by the Iranian regime to avenge the hitting of a commercial flight a few months before…
However, and after a long process, it was decided to invade and dismantle Libya. As one can see, the Official Story has had its turns and in every case, it has sworn to have the truth. Many investigators believe that these turns between accusing one country and then another one are evidence of serious irresponsibility by the governments, and a sign that their conspiratorial doctrines may be dangerously false.
The irony in the investigation of the Lockerbie attack that has been going on for 29 years is that neither the families of the deceased nor the families of the Libyans accused accept the official story, and both have joined forces in claiming for the truth.
February 9, 2015. Just like AMIA, the Lockerbie attack may end up in doubt and darkness.
April 10, 2011. Does Moussa Koussa know the truth about Lockerbie or not?
Attack on the Israel Embassy in Buenos Aires 1992, 22 dead and 242 wounded
For the alternative investigators, the explosives were inside the building, and it was waited until there were no important personalities inside for the attack. For the official story, the attack was done with a bomb car. The large media networks and investigators presented evidence that the crater from the alleged and false bomb car was dug days after the attack. Such untidiness is not only found in the Argentina attacks, but along with investigators such as Luis del Pino from Spain, we have noted in this the distance between the teams of explosives placement, very professional for sure, and the teams of coverup, relying more on manipulating people than covering up the facts well.
Forensic experts of the highest academic level in Argentina drafted a report proving that the explosion had taken place inside; a horrible truth that created a national scandal so that Argentineans and the whole world would find out. A book written by Supreme Court Justice Carlos Fayt pointed out the significant contribution by a witness. This witness whose last name is Sedarri testified before President Menem himself that seconds before the attack he saw a person running down the street near the embassy and carrying a remote control device in his hands. After this person activated the remote control, the building blew up. The reader should evaluate the difference between a poorly planted bomb car and a witness to the activation of a remote control device to blow up the building. Even though an Argentine Supreme Court Justice mentioned this witness, his existence is withdrawn from the debate, the story, the judicial process and the whole world.
Attack on the Israeli association “AMIA” 1994, 86 dead and 300 wounded. Attack where the USA’s contribution to the truth is significant and undisputable
Since this is the attack that Argentine investigators have studied most, we will explain this with further detail. We apologize in advance if the reading is dense, but only studying the step by step can one understand the magnitude of the coverup operations that are about to be one quarter of a century long.
Again, the official story stated here that there had been a bomb car, but its remains were not found until long afterwards, and the finding was irregular, if not illegal. Jorge Lanata, an important independent journalist, interviewed all the witnesses that were present and none of them saw any bomb car. Those seriously injured people that were hospitalized were then pressured by the police and the intelligence services to say that they had seen a bomb car, but all of them bravely stated that there had been none. The Argentine government paid USD 400,000 to a prisoner so that he would make up false guilty people. After years of trial, innocent men who were 10 years in jail recovered their freedom when a court proved that all the evidence against them was false.
Official US investigation on the Buenos Aires attack
Odd as it may sound, the truth is that there are “two United States” in this attack. One US is the one that supports the official version, and the other one is the one that provides undisputable evidence to the alternative investigation. Professor Carlos Escudé did an update on this investigation and obtained a Fulbright scholarship for PhD studies at Yale. In 1983 he got a post-doctoral scholarship from the Social Science Research Council (SSRC). In 1984 he got the Guggenheim Fellowship. In 1994 he was a Visiting Professor of Government at Harvard University.
In December 2009 the US unclassified documents from August 1994, one month after the attack, where the then American ambassador for Argentina James Cheek had informed the Secretary of State Warren Christopher about the plot of post-truth at stake.
The report by the US Congress on the September 28, 1995 hearing entitled “Terrorism in Latin America – AMIA bombing in Argentina” was decisive and explained that the FBI had sent its explosive expert Charles Hunter who, four days after the attack stated that the explosion scene was incompatible with a bomb car and compatible with an inside explosion. Also, Hunter stated in that US Congress report that the Argentine police had hindered his investigations. All the American investigations in this sense have been ignored by the government, the judiciary and the Argentine communication networks. The important contribution from the US government to the truth about this attack has been recently updated in Carlos Escudé’s book (PhD Yale, CONICET lead investigator, National Council for International Relations, conservative Jew, scholarship holder from Fulbright and Guggenheim).
April 18, 2018 … in ND Ateneo about Luis D´Elía, who was right… The author of the book is Carlos EScudé, who was joined by D´Elía…
Step by step and day by day of a gigantic coverup operation in the TSI (Terrorism Scene Investigation)
1- July 18, 1994, 9.53 am. AMIA is blown up. The authorities that should have normally been there coincidentally went somewhere else for breakfast on that day.
2- July 18, 2pm. Warren Christopher, Secretary of State for President Bill Clinton calls the Argentine Minister of Internal Affairs who was in the US (Ruckauff) and tells him that “it was Hezbollah and Iran”. Christopher does not suggest or propose but rather “gives orders” and from that moment the Argentine government will see to “obtaining the evidence” at all costs.
3- July 19, evening. An Israeli airplane with diplomats and military lands in Buenos Aires.
4- Dov Shomrack, special diplomat sent by the Premier I. Rabin “orders” President Menem that the responsibility is and must be with Iran. The pincer movement on the Argentine government is perfect and is performed by two powerful players who can influence and order what will be (Israel and the US).
5- July 18, 19, 20, 21, 22. The major newspapers (Clarin, La Nacion) publish several articles and follow the authorized word of Hunter, the explosives specialist sent by the FBI: there is no bomb car.
6- July 23. Clarin newspaper changes and as of this time states that there are two hypotheses, an inside explosion and a bomb car.
7 July 25. Israeli military “find” a piece of engine within the debris in a finding outside of the laws and protocols of the Argentine justice system and claim that this is the bomb car. In a first stage a firefighter (Lopardo) agrees to be a witness for the finding of the engine, but then during the trial before the Oral Federal court he breaks down and confesses that he did not witness any finding, that the foreign military “told him” and that he accepted this version. Then the firefighter took the piece of engine to a tent and, again without any witnesses and in breach of all laws he sent the “false evidence” to the authorities. Despite the irregular finding, despite the confession of the firefighter and despite the fact that the court held that the evidence was irregular, the most important proof of the coverup and false flag operation was installed.
From this moment, as if they had received an order of absolute obedience, the mass media stopped talking about an inside explosion.
Step by step of the planting of evidence and coverup operations in the court case
1- page 114 of the court file, dated July 20 but added to the file on July 25.
Before the “finding” i.e. planting of the bomb car, there was an order to tap the phones of Carlos Telleldin, who shortly after became the seller of the vehicle that would be the virtual, imaginary and planted bomb car. That is, first a car seller was “planted” and days later the engine of the bomb car was “found”.
2- The owner of the bomb car “is known” i.e. planted on July 20 but the number of the engine of the planted bomb car was known only on the evening of July 25. This is one of the crucial pieces of evidence that proves that a guilty person was decided before planting the false evidence that would incriminate him.
3- July 26, pages 855, 856 and 870. SIDE (Argentine State Intelligence Services) ordered more tappings on the phone of the alleged seller of the phantom bomb car and also of an Argentinian of Syrian origin (Edul) who asked the car seller (Telleldin) about a traffic van. From this moment, two essential guilty suspects are installed, a seller of the fake bomb car and a possible buyer (who never bought anything).
Why the bomb car necessarily had to be a Renault traffic van
Months before the attack and in broad daylight, Sheik Moshen Rabbani who was in charge of the cultural affairs at the Iranian embassy in Argentina asked publicly about a Renault traffic van. For the investigators, this settled the brand of the bomb car that would be later planted in the attack.
Ten years of innocent men in jail
A group of innocent men including Carlos Telleldín and chief police Ribelli among others spent 10 years in jail due to the planted evidence. The oral federal court ordered their release.
The explosion of a truth “bomb”
The coverup worked almost perfectly for many years. A video showing a judge (Galeano) agreeing with prisoner (Telleldín) for the latter to make false accusations in exchange for USD 400,000 paid by the government was revealed and created an enormous scandal that forced the federal oral court to dismantle part of the coverup. The payment of nearly half a million dollars for the fabrication of false evidence an guilty suspects was a chain that began with the presidency of Carlos Menem, the head of SIDE (Hugo Anzorregui), the Minister of Internal Affairs (Carlos Corach), the highest Jewish leader (Beraja), an appeal judge (Riva Aramayo) and the judge (Galeano).
Zenith of the Era of Terrorism and the most spectacular attack: USA 9/11 2001. 3000 dead and 6000 wounded.
I started studying the era of terrorism for my first films in 1994 and as from 2006 inspired by Thierry Meyssan I started the coordination of an Observatory for Terrorism seeking to publicize and synthesize the official and alternative investigations of each attack. My observation of this first quarter of a century is that the most prolific, blunt, numerous and most distinguished investigators are the American ones. They hardly and tirelessly seek the truth about what is considered to be the zenith of terrorism (9/11/2001). In early 2002, soon after the attack, we had access to the prime work of Thierry Meyssan which was so clearly explained even a school child could understand, helping us understand that the official story about a Boeing attacking the Pentagon sounded false from any angle. Meyssan’s book has been translated into more than 20 languages and seems to be the most persuasive work among the alternative investigations.
https://www.casadellibro.com/libro-la-gran-impostura-ningun-avion-se…/829540. LA GRAN IMPOSTURA: NINGUN AVION SE ESTRELLO EN EL PENTAGONO del autor THIERRY MEYSSAN (ISBN 9788497340588).
Argentina has its alternative investigators on 9/11, among others economist Walter Grazziano who wrote a best seller (“Hitler won the war”) and famous poet Juan Gelman who wrote an extraordinary article: Página/12 :: Contratapa :: Entonces, ¿cómo fue?
October 2, 2008. By Juan Gelman. The lies that the White House fabricated to justify the invasion and occupation of Iraq are notorious.
In my case I published a book in 2008 entitled “9/11, the most famous attack in history”. My country has harbored Kurt Sonnenfeld, a FEMA cameraman that studied the zone of the 9/11 attack (Ground Zero) and published a best-selling book:
By mid-2018, an elite group of American investigators presented their investigations in an open letter to President Trump in a compilation edited by Robert Steele (Memoranda for the President on 9-11). In this work there are brilliant contributions from James Fetzer, Barbara Honegger, Richard Gage, David Ray Griffin, Christopher Bollyn, Tom-Scott Gordon, Fred Burk, Peter Dale Scott, Susan Lindauer, Kevin Barret, Joe Olson, Judy Wood, John Lear and others. These names may not sound familiar for the general public from whom most information is kept. James Fetzer is a former marine officer later graduated from Princeton. Barbara Honegger was a star journalist on military issues for the White House. Richard Gage runs a group of no less than 3000 architects and engineers working on the subject. John Lear is a pilot and son of the creator of the Lear. Judy Wood is a college professor in engineering. David Ray Griffin is a university academic who has published about a dozen books on 9/11.
Most people don’t understand and only alternative specialists understand why American investigators address the President of the US so directly. A silence campaign reigns globally so that no one will know that at the time of the attack on the WTC on 9/11/2001 and amidst the chaos of the moment, construction businessman Donald Trump publicly expressed his major doubts about the official story that had been released on that same day.
At the risk of being wrong, and hoping that specialists will correct me in such case, I believe that in these 30 years of the Era of Terrorism President Trump has been one of the first and most important alternative investigators. This bravery and courage was ratified and maintained by president Trump in the debate for the primary elections when discussing the issue with Jeff Bush, brother of former president George W. Bush.
Atocha attack, Madrid, 2004. 193 dead, 2000 wounded
The event called “the killing of El Leganés” eloquently reproduces what was done in this attack. Two days after the massacre, the photos of the alleged Muslim terrorists appeared in all the Spanish communication media, but the criminals strangely did not leave the country but rented an apartment in a Madrid neighborhood called “El Leganés”. Surrounded by special groups, the terrorists – armed with long-rage weapons – were involved in a shooting with the police during some time. These weapons fire between 500 and 900 bullets, and out of respect to the reader I hesitate to say how many empty bullet shells were found on the floor after the terrorists immolated themselves (six bullet shells sound like a bad joke if we were not talking about an attack with so many dead and wounded).
Seven terrorists immolated themselves with explosives but there was not a drop of blood on the walls, and the criminals could not be properly identified since none of them had kept their fingerprints. Even more surprising and sarcastic than the six bullet shells was the fact that one of the Muslims had the zipper of his pants on the side of the bottom. Sit gratia jocandi, we can joke on whether Muslims urinate from the front or from behind. Or the truth as stated by the alternative investigators is that Muslims urinate from the front of their body much like Western people, but it is possible that some poor guy was murdered and dressed in a hurry.
London, 2005. 56 dead and 700 wounded
In this attack the use of backpack was copied, but this time the perpetrators also had to kill themselves at the time of the explosion and not afterwards as in Spain (in the killing of El Leganés). As in the case of the trains in Spain, investigators believe that the use of explosive backpacks is not real and is only a decoy, considering that the explosives were placed on the floor of the buses. Coincidentally on that day and time there was a terrorist attack drill in London so all the emergency and security forces were in a stage of “terrorism”.
Charles Avelino Meneses was a Brazilian worker who resided in London who was “mistakenly” killed by the police who “thought” he was a terrorist. The government and Scotland Yard apologized for killing an innocent man, but there are investigators stating that Meneses worked at the workshops where the buses that later blew up were repaired. And it seems that he had witnessed that the night before the attack there were unknown mechanics working on the vehicles.
Paris attack, Charlie Hebdo and Supermarket. 2017.
There were 17 dead: ten journalists that worked for the magazine “Charlie Hebdo”, two cops in the assault to the magazine offices, a municipal cop in Paris and four hostages in the supermarket. We must point out that this is the first attack investigated by a spontaneous group of investigators from different countries: US, France and Argentina.
Let us go over the sequence of the facts, because just by looking closely it will open everyone’s eyes.
January 7, 2015. Two men with masks attacked the offices of the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo and killed 12 people. One of them “left behind” his ID.
About 80,000 law enforcement officials started looking for the terrorists who were suspected of having attacked the place.
January 8. Amedi Coulibaly, a man from the Antilles who was known even by former President Sarkozy himself, killed a policewoman in the outskirts of Paris and wounded another one. The 80,000 policemen did not find or arrest him, so after killing a policewoman this heavily armed “terrorist” roamed for 24 hours around a Paris full of law enforcement officials.
January 9. The law enforcement officials cornered and killed the terrorists accused of the killing at Charli Hebdo.
In this city of Paris full of policemen and military, Amedi Coulibaly hid from those looking for him, returned to the city from the outskirts, travelled around Paris, walked into a supermarket and held hostages. At the end of this same day he was surrounded by the police and shot down. Before this he had time to kill some of the hostages.
January 11. The largest demonstration held in Paris since the end of World War II was held and presided by important heads of state who accompanied President Francois Hollande.
The cumulative effect of so many years of fishy terrorist attacks and the repetition of the suspicious finding of ID documents of alleged Muslim terrorists motivated for the first time in 30 years the union and joint work of French, American and Argentine investigators. In the US Paul Craig Roberts stated that the “finding” of the ID documents of an alleged Muslim terrorist was something that has also been repeated or “planted” in other attacks, starting with the passport of Mohammed Atta on 9/11. In Paris, journalist Hicham Pananza kept and studied in detail all the videos of the official television networks showing the world that the evidences of false flag were understandable even for a school child. Specialist Thierry Meyssan also commented on this. In Argentina we summarized these findings and presented our work in a documentary.
Morgan Reynolds, renowned criminalist and famous for starting with the frame-by-frame and slow motion study of the official videos on 9/11 has forever laid the foundation for something that is essential in criminalistics: the safeguarding and protection of the first photos and videos at the scene of the attack. The attack on Charlie Hebdo brutally shows like no other how television networks broadcast unedited shows allowing thousands of people to notice that this was a false flag operation with action scenes worthy of a Class C film. After the investigators publicly denounced the huge holes in the official story, the videos were edited and many disappeared from YouTube. But it was too late as the investigators had made copies already.
The modest documentary that you are about to see, subject to the rigor of the most basic criminalistics, has simply recovered the unedited official videos, all belonging to the major TV networks. When you see this documentary, you will notice what pioneer Thierry Meyssan originally proved with respect to the attack on the Pentagon. The images of official TV that were not falsified due to coverup acts allow even a small child to understand that the facts are not what the official story says.
According to the official story, two Muslims with masks first hurt and then killed a policeman by a shot in the head. In the official video it is obvious and disgusting how the shot to the head hits 1.5 feet in front of the cop, who is a terrible actor.
In the attack on the Israeli Embassy in Buenos Aires (1992) they forgot to make the crater to plant evidence on the false bomb car, so they had to make it in a rush days later, after reputable journalists pointed this out. The French policeman killed in Charlie Hebdo with the powerful shot of an AK does not shed a single drop of blood at the time of the shooting, similarly to the terrorists who were blown into pieces in the Spanish El Leganés. But the blood that di not appear at the time the Charlie Hebdo policeman was killed somehow appeared on the next day and was portrayed by British TV. In colloquial and humorous terms we could say that the blood from a powerful bullet wound does not come immediately but a day afterwards. Not even a Class C filmmaker would have such a great slip. Every action scene has a handbook of procedures to recreate reality: after a shot or a knife wound, blood should ooze right away.
It would be frustrating to put into words the super film production with which the French police shot Amedi Coulibaly at the door of the supermarket where the hostages had been held. Irony aside, after watching the official video of Coulibaly’s death, the reader will be able to say whether this death is not worthy of a Jean Claude van Damme.
First double attack?
In Argentina, the Charlie Hebdo attack has been inextricably linked to the death of Nisman, district attorney in the judicial investigation of the AMIA attack in 1994.
According to the official story, compulsive and brutal like all the others, the Paris attack was perpetrated by Muslims, and Nisman was killed by an Iranian-Venezuelan-Argentine command group (affiliated with Kirchner followers).
The official story of Nisman’s death begins with a motive: the claim that the then President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner had agreed coverup operations with Iran, the alleged terrorist country guilty of the AMIA attack. These coverup actions involved INTERPOL which was supposed to drop the red alert orders or international police search against Iranian officials who were allegedly involved in the attack.
On January 11, 2015 the huge demonstration in Paris took place, presided by different presidents including the French president himself under the motto “I am Charlie Hebdo”. On January 12, Nisman returned from his vacation to Argentina in an apparently surprising way and with such haste that he left one of his daughters alone at Barajas airport. The district attorney filed his claim and then a series of events was triggered and concluded with his death on January 18.
Let us take a closer look at the Command Operation of the group of Iranian-Venezuelan-Argentine-Kirchner follower assassins. Nobody knows precisely how this group entered the country or what weapons they brought. according to the official story, this group broke into Nisman’s apartment but oddly did not use their own weapons, which is surprising since it is hard to imagine an elite command group without weapons. Once inside the apartment, they allegedly took him and forced him to call one of his employees (Diego Lagomarsino) to ask for a gun. The employee agreed and went to the apartment with a 22-caliber gun. The hired killers of the group killed him with a shot on the side of his forehead. The body fell in such a way that it obstructed the door to the bathroom where he was allegedly killed and when his death was discovered it was necessary to force the door and partially tampering with the position of the body that was blocking access to the bathroom. This three-party command that came to kill someone without guns must have exited somehow. If they did not leave through the door, we are forced to imagine how they could have left. Maybe through the bathroom window and parachuting to the floor?
I have to ask readers to please not laugh at this explanation of the official story which is all over my country about an elite command group that came to kill someone without guns and has to ask the victim for help so that the victim will borrow a gun from someone else. And again, please do not laugh at the way the elite command group had to leave through the window in some unimaginable way. The official story about this murder is broadly publicized by the major media networks in Argentina and seems to have been adopted and accepted by thousands of communication networks all over the world.
Before moving to alternative investigations, let us look at an important point which is the only one on which the official and alternative story agree: the connection between the death of the Argentine district attorney and the global impact of the Charlie Hebdo attack. The claim from Nisman had a brutal impact on Argentina not only due to its tenor but because we were all still shocked by the Paris attack.
One of the most important facts in the alternative story is the official testimony of the INTERPOL chief who publicly informed the judges and the Argentine population that the Argentine government had never ever asked him to drop the red alert orders that INTERPOL had and has against the Iranian officials who are allegedly responsible for the Buenos Aires attack in 1994.
The alternative investigation about Nisman’s death considers that it was suicide, on the basis of the judicial investigation and the most prestigious forensic experts in the country. Within the suicide hypotheses in the alternative investigation, some experts consider it was a common suicide (Dr. O. Raffo), suicide for narcissistic fracture (Dr. Mariano Castex), induced suicide (congressman Leopoldo Moreau) and forced or compulsive suicide (Dr. Oscar Abudara Bini).
The official story tried to make Argentinians believe that Nisman had returned to the country in a rush and that this could be seen in how he abandoned his daughter at Barajas airport. But the judicial investigation has proved that Nisman had bought a double set of tickets and that by December 31 he had already bought a ticket to return to Argentina on January 12, 24 hours away from the Charlie Hebdo demonstration. Why had Nisman decided in December to return hours after the Paris attack on January 12, as this is a time of judicial recess in Argentina, to make such a claim? Was there a special urgency for him to make this claim in the context provided by the world context brought by the Paris attack?
January 28, 2015. Fein has informed that according to information fro Iberia Airlines, the district attorney bought the return ticket to Buenos Aires on December 31 to return on the 12th.
The national and foreign communication networks have taken both versions, the official and the alternative one.
April 4, 2015. Charlie Hebdo and the death of the district attorney.
January 21, 2015. Nisman’s death is comparable to the Charlie Hebdo attack.
We have seen in the documentary the overwhelming evidence that alternative investigators have to state that the official story about the Paris/Charlie Hebdo attack looks like a Western false flag operation. Nisman’s death by forced suicide has created a highly complex scenario in Argentina, where the former President and a large part of her cabinet are still accused of complicity with an alleged terrorist State.
The alternative investigation about the forced suicide of Nisman has connections to the Paris attack. And since the alternative investigations are subject to scientific requirements, they reveal that this is the conclusion at this stage. In other words, investigators suggest – like the official story – that there is a connection between the Paris attack and Nisman’s death, but there are still more and better pieces of evidence that are to be found about this connection.
Presidents accused of terrorism
As far as I know, there are only three presidents accused of terrorism. Libyan coronel Mohamed Kadafi was accused of the Lockerbie attack and then he was murdered in his devastated country. Iraqi general Sadam Hussein was accused of the 9/11 attack, and then Iran was demolished and Hussein assassinated. In Argentina, former president Cristina Kirchner is accused of complicity with the alleged terrorist state of Iran and for now only seems to be at risk of going to prison.
Investigators refer to groups of people that should have been at the time and place of the attack but that were somehow informed to not be there as “warned individuals”. In the Lockerbie attack (1989) this was a Christmas flight from Frankfurt-London-New York, day on which it was expected to have a full plane, but the plane only was half full. Personalities and diplomats cancelled on the last minute, and the Soviet and other European embassies warned about the inconvenience of taking that flight. In 1992 the Israeli Embassy in Buenos Aires had a morning meeting including some of the most prominent individuals in Latin America, but the “terrorists” waited until the afternoon when only staff of scarce relevance was there. It was habitual for the Commission Board of AMIA to meet in the building at the time when the bomb exploded in 1994, but coincidentally on that day they decided to have coffee in a place out of reach of the explosion.
And when talking about “warned invidivuals”, the spectacular 9/11 attack took place at the time when most white-collar employees had not yet arrived, and as if this was not enough, investigators state that there is evidence that important groups of people were notified that they should not go there on that day. Some investigators consider that this considerable care to avoid casualties of important people is a clear sign that these terrorism operations are true acts of war staged by the Western world to the utmost detail.
The most famous warned individuals in the Era of Terrorism: President George Bush and President Donald Trump
9/11 has the most famous warned individuals in the Era of Terrorism and also the very famous and first leader of the alternative investigation: former president Bush, and current President of the US, shrewd businessman in the NY construction industry at the time of the attack, Donald Trump.
The most famous Freudian slip in the Era of Terrorism
4-12-2001 Press conference with president George W. Bush
Question: how did you feel when you heard the news about the 9/11 attack?
President: I was in a classroom talking about a reading program. I was sitting outside of the classroom waiting to go in and I saw a plane hit the tower. The TV was obviously on.
5-01-2002 California Town Hall
When we went into the classroom I saw the plan go into the building. There was a TV on and I thought it was an error by the pilot and I was surprised that someone could make such a terrible mistake.
In his book “Hitler won the war”, Argentine economist Walter Grazziano states that “on two occasions, president Bush referred to the first attack on the towers. However, no TV network had broadcast the first attack live. How did Bush see the first impact? Bush “ratted himself out” twice. He had no reason to lie, but if he saw it, it means that he had seen the attacked on closed circuit TV and that he only went into the school once he was sure that the operation had been successful (pages 67 and 68 of the book).
The pioneer of alternative investigations: Donald Trump
By the year 2001, Donald Trump was one of the main businessmen in construction in NY, and he was interviewed on the day of the attack. As he stated in the interview that will be seen below, Donald Trump discovered a great part of the holes in the official story that were afterwards investigated over and over by the alternative investigators that came along. Fifteen years later, at the debate with Jeff Bush for the primary elections, Trump returned to the subject showing the world that within the US there are two stories about 9/11: an official one sustained by President Bush’s brother, and an alternative one sustained by the current President Trump.
This is the video about the interview to Donald Trump on the day of the attack:
The Black Pearl of Terrorism: the mass (un)communication media
Before World War II, the great Orson Welles showed the world in 1938 that the power of fiction was such that a radio representation of the novel The War of the Worlds by H. G. Welss convinced thousands of Americans that Martian spaceship had landed. Six decades after, the work of American TV about 9/11 convinced the world of an official story plagued with holes. In Argentina, the mass uncommunication media have managed to maintain the official story about the attacks, and for this they have to censor the alternative investigations and even the results of the judicial investigation. The difference is that the extraterrestrial invasion caused by Orson Welles lasted hours and only created traffic chaos. But the “Muslim invasion and terrorist attack” of 9/11 is still being broadcast 17 years later and confusing millions of people in the whole world and has justified devastation and demolition wars in several countries (Libya, Iraq and Afghanistan) with hundreds of thousands of dead and millions of refugees.
CONCLUSION: what we have and what we are missing
We have a critical mass of investigations and investigators that have earned respect for their work on the attacks of the entire era. We have books, judicial presentations, documentaries and even songs. For the first time we have in the US a meeting of all the investigators working jointly and presenting their contributions to the President of the Great American Nation. What we still miss is a reunion of the investigators of each attack in a first major Congress for Alternative Investigators on Terrorism. And as in the case of President JFK’s assassination, we need a great film to show the world the magnitude of the truth. We have the impression that the TV series “Designate Survivor” is an advance on this. We still need the new leaders of this multipolarity to find a way to put an end to this Era of Terrorism.
Dr Oscar ABUDARA BINI
MD University of Buenos Aires, Specialist on child and youth psychiatry University of Buenos Aires, psychoanalyst full member of IPA (International Psychoanalytical Association, scientific award Faculty Candidates APA (Argentine Psychoanalytical Association), former chief of Adolescent Psychopathology of the Italian Hospital of Buenos Aires, former Professor of Psychoanalysis at CIP (Center of Investigations on Psychoanalysis), former Professor on Psychopathology at APBA (Association of Psychologists of Buenos Aires). Papers published on books and congresses, books about State Terrorism in Argentina and about 9/11. Filmmaker. Columnist in alternative communication media on terrorism. Conferences on terrorism held in Argentina, Madrid and Paris. Summoned to testify by district attorney Nisman as specialist on terrorism in the judicial investigation on the AMIA attack. Coordinator of the Observatory for Comparative Studies on Terrorism since 2006. Buenos Aires host for terrorism investigators such as Giulietto Chiesa (Italy), James Fetzer (US) and Thierry Meyssan (France).
(*) independent investigator without financial funding or sponsorship from business, politicians, communication networks, study centers or universities. I have taken on the task to publicize and coordinate my work and the work of alternative investigators because I believe it is necessary to. I hope that this work that has always been conducted with other investigators will make a contribution to the truth and to the families of the victims who tirelessly seek it and to other citizens working on this for years as those who approach the subject every day.
(**) I owe my first approach to the study of the TSI (Terrorism Scene Investigation) of my country (1992 Israel Embassy and 1994 AMIA) first to Osvaldo Laborda, Gendarmerie Commander, specialist on explosives and in charge of special effects in my first movie. After, I worked until 2002 with engineer Pedro de Aguirre and as of 2001 with engineer José Petrosino. In Argentina we are indebted to the families of the victims such as Laura Gynsberg, Diana Malamud and Sergio Burstein, who have been fighting for the truth for over a quarter of a century, and we have been enriched by the contributions of investigators such as Gabriel Levinas, Horacio Verbitsky, Nueva Sión, Jorge Urien Berri, Jorge Lanata and many others.
In 2007 I was summoned to testify as a specialist by district attorney Alberto Nisman. As of 2006, I traveled to Paris to ask for help and assistance from Thierry Meyssan, and in the same year I met the investigators of the Madrid-Atocha attack, and since then I started coordinating the investigations of the series of attacks.