Islamic Conspiracy Theories on 9-11 (Arab TV 'news' VIDEO)

Video @: rtsp://s96wm.castup.net/server12/60169184-61.wmv?s=&rid=509100539523751&ct=US&rg=US&aid=214

9-11 was a show, a production to gain 'international legiticimy'
J00z all called off that day
150 Congressmen asked for inquires
Bush knew of bombings and let them happen (Washington Post Quoted)
Towers fell 'like a movie production' or 'play', not real.
J00s control Osama, and used to go into Afganistan and Iraq (proof is that it "was broadcast live", and that Bush said "Oh, what a wonderful pilot" while at the Elementary School

And thats just the 1st 10min of this clip (which runs over an hr)

For the Video challaned, here is a (long) transcript of the clips.

I recommend the video for easier viewing, but here ya go...

Egyptian Researcher Zaynab Abd Al-‘Aziz, Iqra TV, May 26, 2005

Abd Al-Aziz: When in January 2001, the World Council of Churches delegated this mission to the US - what did the US do? It fabricated the show of… is it September 9 or 11?

Host: Eleven. Please explain this to me.

Abd Al-Aziz: Yes, of course…

Host: You mean to say that the World Council of Churches delegated the mission of Christianizing of the world to the US.

Abd Al-Aziz: Yes. And how could the US win legitimacy for this without anyone saying that they are perpetrating massacres and waging a Crusader war? It fabricated the 9/11 show. I call it a fabrication because much has been written on this. We are also to blame. Why do we accept a single perspective? Countless books were written, some of which were even translated into Arabic, like Thierry Meyssan's 9/11 – The Big Lie and Pentagate. "Pentagate" like Watergate… He brings documents to prove that the method used in destroying the three (sic) towers was "controlled demolition." This is an architectural engineering theory, which was invented by the Americans. They teach it in their Universities. They make movies and documentaries about it. They incorporated it in movie scenarios and then carried it out in real life. Why do we accept this?

Host: My God, Doctor. This is unbelievable! You're saying that this destruction…

Abd Al-Aziz: ...was a controlled demolition. The building collapsed in its place, without hitting a single building to its left or right. The three towers fell in place.

Host: In the same method they use in movies and plays?

Abd Al-Aziz: Yes, Exactly like that. That is how the US won international legitimacy. You could sense the (9/11) operation was pre-planned because many things were revealed in the days that followed. For example 4,000 Jews caught influenza on that exact day. They set a timer, and all 4,000…

Host: By God, you crack me up! "They all set a timer and got influenza on the same day." So the building was completely empty of Jews.

Abd Al-Aziz: Much has been written about this. 150 Congressmen demanded an inquiry.

[…]

Egyptian General (Ret.), Dr. Mahmoud Khalaf, Egyptian Channel 1, May 5, 2005

Khalaf: When a terrorist hijacks a plane or any other vehicle… The terrorist is no general. When this terrorist hijacks a plane, he can crash into any target, and accomplish his goal.

But (on 9/11), there is a precise timeline: The hijacking of the planes and the circling in the air, even though the hijacker had a chance to attack, he didn't.

He waited so that the attacks would be according to the planned order: First the World Trade Center with two airplanes, then a delay, then the Pentagon, and then the fourth target which should have been – according to (the Americans) themselves…

He was waiting for the US president's airplane which was on it's way. That why the American President had to land in the Barksdale air force base in the south of the US. They switched his airplanes.

It was announced that (Vice) President Dick Cheney– this was published in the Washington Post – Cheney had called the secret phone on the American president's, and told him it's an "inside job", that there were traitors within the White House. The president slammed the phone and told his aides: "Air Force 1 is next," and he gave the order to land.

They published these things, not us, and in the Washington Post no less! On September 12th and 13th the press reported this, and the questions were asked.

But all the questions stopped, and nothing was said about this once the American President accused (bin Laden).

Another thing disappeared at the same time. We all know that there were Anthrax letters. At the same time they accomplished the rest of the goals.

The airplanes… The operation that took place on September 11th, had a civilian targets which was the World Trade Center, and a military target, as well as a planned political target. Then came the Anthrax, whose target was the media, the journalists, as well as the Congress.

All these operations were planned Is this a coincidence? On top of everything, it took the White House two months to declare the Anthrax operation an "inside job".

In this case too, we've heard nothing since. It took him two months to say it was an inside job, but the 9/11 operation and all the attacks we've seen – it took him only an hour…. At 19:30 he got to the White House, and at 20:30 he announced it was bin Laden. Does this make any sense? On the basis of what evidence does he declare this after only one hour?

The Pentagon has its own warning system. When the third plane flew to Cleveland, returned and took an angle towards the Pentagon…

The first airplane hit the WTC at 08:45 and the Pentagon was his at 09:35. After fifty minutes... The reason for the delay, as we understand from the generals' planning… They, of course, delayed the plane that was about to hit the Pentagon until the commanders left, because of the plane hitting the tower at 08:45. It was only natural for the Pentagon's emergency command to start operating. This was the reason for the delay.

First of all, this plane approached the Pentagon from the same angle used by military helicopters. This is a secret approaching angle known to pilots and navigators alone. The plane used the same secret angle! In addition, the Pentagon was informed that an airplane is heading its way, 12 minutes in advance, but nobody was warned.

We must recall that the Pentagon operation claimed the lives of 187 American soldiers. The building was not even evacuated, and Rumsfeld was told nothing. He heard the explosion himself and came out asking: "What was that explosion?"

[…]

Saudi Women's Rights Activist Suheila Zein Al-'Abedin Hammad, Al-Arabiya TV, April 12, 2005

Interviewer: You believe that global Zionism is behind 9/11?

Suheila Hammad: Yes, I have evidence for this and if you wish, I could present it. In the two books I provided endless evidence of this.

Interviewer: OK, but How do Osama bin Laden and Al-Qa'eda fit into this equation?

Suheila Hammad: Osama bin Laden? How could Osama bin Laden possibly carry out such a huge plot in the world's leading superpower, with its (renowned) intelligence agencies and defense department?

Interviewer: Just to set things straight, do you believe that Osama bin Laden was used by global Zionism or that he had nothing to do with it and his name got mixed up in this by chance?

Suheila Hammad: They got him involved from the beginning. He serves their goals.

Interviewer: You mean he works for them?

Suheila Hammad: Of course, who created Osama bin Laden? wasn't it the US?

Interviewer: (What's your evidence) that Zionism - and not only Al-Qa'eda - were behind 9/11?

Suheila Hammad: It is well known that it was premeditated. If not for the events of 9/11 – would the US have been able to occupy Afghanistan and Iraq and to interfere so bluntly in the affairs of the Arab and Islamic nation? Not only that, but now sanctions may be imposed on Sudan and Darfour.

Interviewer: Do you have tangible evidence, or is this just deductive reasoning?

Suheila Hammad: No, there is endless evidence…

Interviewer: Like what? What evidence do you have that global Zionism, and not bin Laden or Al-Qa'eda, was responsible for 9,11?

Suheila Hammad: Many things. First of all, the event was broadcast live. How was this possible unless they knew about it in advance? How come the first tower was attacked just as George Bush was entering elementary school to lecture? When his country was being attacked, he said: "Oh, what a brilliant pilot." Then he went to lecture.

Interviewer: Bush said, "Oh what a brilliant pilot"?!

Suheila Hammad: Yes.

Interviewer: Where did he say this?

Suheila Hammad: He said so himself. I've heard of the goat story he was reading, but not about "Oh, what a brilliant pilot."

Suheila Hammad: He said so. Read my book, The Events of September, you'll find it.

Interviewer: But where did you get this from?

Suheila Hammad: He said this on a TV interview, brother! Thierry Meyssan has mentioned all these terryifing facts.

Interviewer: Suheila, a moment ago you just said that the filming of 9/11 is one piece of evidence that it was planned by the US…

Suheila Hammad: It was broadcast live to the school in Florida, where George Bush was. It was broadcast live and he saw it with his own eyes.

Interviewer: The first plane was not broadcast live. the footage came later.

Suheila Hammad: He even said in a televised interview: "When I saw the plane I said, oh, what a brilliant pilot." Then he went in to lecture, and then Dick Cheney came in and told him the second tower had been hit – "We are under attack."

Interviewer: Dick Cheney was in another city.

Suheila Hammad: His aide came in and told him that the second tower had been hit. Then (Bush) said, "If so, we are facing a conspiracy." He didn't give an order to monitor these planes are take any measures to follow them. There were talks among the officials at the defense department, and they all said, "We don't know," as if they lived in the jungles of Africa, not in an advanced country.

Interviewer: Another question: Who do you think is behind the terrorism against Saudi Arabia?

Suheila Hammad: Zionism, of course.

[…]

Egyptian Professor Abd Al-Sabour Shahin, Saudi Channel 1, August 8, 2005

Shahin: One day, we awoke to the crime of 9/11, which hit the tallest buildings in New York, the Empire State Building (sic). There is no doubt that not a single Arab or Muslim had anything to do with these events. The incident was fabricated as a pretext to attack Islam and Muslims. The plan was to take over the world's energy sources, and to achieve this control by force and not by agreement or negotiations, by interests, free trade, or anything like that. This is what they wanted.

So this incident was fabricated - and Allah knows that the Arabs and Muslims are innocent of it - in order to serve as a pretext to attack Islam and the Muslims.

All of a sudden, after we were used to consider America to be a rational and balanced country... All of a sudden, it violates international conventions, cancels treaties, ignores the U.N., acts on its own accord, attacks nations, kills innocent people, and claims it has the right to do so - and all this is based on lies. These were lies from beginning to end, and we were not used to lying - not in policy, not in our discourse, and not in the media. Imagine what crisis the Arab and Islam nation finds itself in, in the midst of these peculiar events, which we cannot explain or believe. All of a sudden, we were framed for an international crime, on the basis of lies.

I believe a dirty Zionist hand carried out this act. Zionism has taken the opportunity to escalate the war in Palestine, killing hundreds of thousands so far, while we watch from the sidelines in astonishment and ask: What's going on?

[…]

Egyptian Author Hassan Al-Bana, Sahar 1 TV, September 11, 2004

Dr. Hasan Al-Bana:

Al-Bana: This is a book written by Benjamin Netanyahu on the uprooting of terrorism. He talks about attacking the Twin Towers, He talks about attacking the US National Security Council, and about attacking the UN. Take, for example, the Twin Towers operation. Such an operation doesn't require placing a car bomb under the two towers but placing small nuclear bombs and detonating them. The scenarios were ready. This scenario was prepared by the Jews at the Jonathan Institute.

Interviewer: What scenario are you talking about?

Dr. Hasan Al-Bana: The scenario of bombing (the WTC). I'm talking now about the bombing scenario and how it was a planned operation, and not an act of revenge. He had to find an excuse; a reason for intervention.

Interviewer: Dr. Hasan, you talk of the perpetrator. Are you saying there was an Israeli plan ready for operation?

Dr/ Hasan Al-Bana: The scenario was prepared by Israel and the US.

Henry Ford and George Bush attended the Jonathan Conference in 1984. They agreed with Netanyahu on the scenario for the bombing of the Twin Towers. When Netanyahu was asked how a force can be mobilized… He said: "In America you have religious factions who oppose abortions in hospitals. This religious sentiment can be exploited and channeled into these kinds of operations." This all exists (in writing). Anybody who read Uprooting Terrorism (sic.) and many other American books (would understand).

Moreover, there is no such thing as a conspiracy. What conspiracy? George Bush Sr. and George Bush Jr. are the only American presidents to control the CIA. George Bush Jr. declared that the Twin Towers operation would remain completely secret.

[…]

Ahmad Yousuf, editor-in-chief of the Washington-based Middle East Magazine, Al-Manar TV, December 30, 2004

Yousuf:These events [9/11] were preceded by very detailed planning, conducted by strategists who wove the strands of this plot. Some people were probably recruited, and, as has been pointed out by a certain Western intellectual, Israel excels at espionage within the U.S., and is capable of disguising many operations as Islamic. In other words, Israel is capable of penetrating certain Islamic circles, of directing and running them behind the scenes, so that they will conduct operations from which Israel benefits. Anyone who considers the events of 9/11 cannot say that the Muslims gained anything. There's another dimension, which some people may have noticed. No one could have captured the pictures [of the attacks] so perfectly except for the cameras in the hands of several Mossad agents, who were near the scene of events and succeeded in filming the scene so that it will always serve Zionism to remind the world of the Arabs' and Muslims' crimes against America. These pictures were filmed very expertly so that they would be a constant reminder to America and the Western world that Islamic terrorism is a threat to their culture, their ideals, and their values.

Host: Regardless of who the perpetrators were…

Yousuf: Today, there is much evidence casting doubt on the ability of these Muslims, with their meager means, to carry out such an operation, and there are others… Who profited from this operation more than the Zionist movement? Since the end of the Cold War, Israel has been trying to attain a position that would allow it to direct American policy, because Israel found it impossible to confront the Islamic enterprise and the Islamic resistance. Therefore, it had to drag America into the region. This was the grand scheme – and American right-wing forces may have participated in it, and Evangelical Christians agreed to it. All of them agreed that this scheme should be carried out in this way in order to push America into war.

We are told by many Americans that even Pearl Harbor… In order to bring America into the war… There is much talk about a plot that was hatched to bring about the attack on Pearl Harbor, so that the U.S. could justify entering this war and so that it would be easy to convince the American people to pay the billions of dollars and sacrifice hundreds of thousands of lives – to wage this war, so that some U.S. corporations and individuals will protect their interests, in this war with Japan and Germany.

[…]

Anwar ‘Ishqi, director of the Middle East Center for Strategic Studies in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, Al-Jazeera TV, February 16, 2005

’Ishqi: The CFR group is the secret government in America. They are the ones who came up with [globalization], and they are headed by David Rockefeller. They control and have hegemony over the world economy. Today's globalization is an outcome of this. Therefore, the agreement or coalition between them and Bin Laden's group developed the planning of Bin Laden's group. The Bin Laden group… it's improbable that someone who strolls in the mountains with a walking stick could plan things like this and upset the entire world and become the rival of the American president.

[…]

Muhammad Ali Al-Jozo, the Mufti of Mt. Lebanon, ANB TV, July 24, 2005

Al-Jozo: I cannot give bin Laden credit for the operation in America (9/11). He does not have the capabilities, and his personality in no way suggests that he may carry out an operation like those that occurred in America London, or Madrid. There are Zionist hands...

Host: You are trying to exonerate Al-Qaeda completely, even though it issues communiqués and...

Al-Jozo: It issues communiqués, but it cannot... I've said... I visited the US several times before this happened (9/11), and even clerics were thoroughly searched. Once I was at the Canadian-American border, going into America. They stopped my car and searched it for two hours. I laughed. They asked me if I had weapons, and I said yes. They asked what weapons, and I said a cannon and a few missiles. I was making fun of them. They searched the car like madmen. With such a meticulous search, and the security checks at the airports are the best, how did this happen?

Mufti Ali Al-Amin: You are exonerating them although they claimed responsibility.

Al-Jozo: That is nonsense. Nonsense. When bin Laden said "some of the good faithful men did this" – It's nonsense. He denied it at first and said he didn't carry out the operation.

[…]

Lebanese Researcher Hisham Jaber, Al-Manar TV, July 11, 2005

Jaber: I have some doubts about the September (2001) events - and some articles and books share my opinion. I believe the events of 9/11 were not planned, prepared, or perpetrated by Al-Qaeda alone. Absolutely not. A force greater than Al-Qaeda was behind these events. Whenever an ordinary crime takes place, the question is: "who benefits?" - let alone when the crime is of such huge proportions.

[...]

”The New Fascism” – an Iranian TV series

Iranian strategic expert 'Ali 'Askari: We have seen that 9/11 was a domestic need of the American administration as well as an external need. So, the following suspicions grow stronger: Either the Americans were involved in this matter or they let the events of 9/11 develop as they developed.

Iranian political expert Manouchehr Mohammadi: There are many events like these in American history. It has been proven that the Japanese military attack on Pearl Harbor and on the American war ships was planned in advance and implemented with the authorization, support, and encouragement of US President Roosevelt. They needed a pretext such as this to enter WW II and in order to affect public opinion so it would give its consent to enter the war. The exact same thing happened on 9/11. This (tactic) is not used only by Hitler and George Bush. All the influential people and all the arrogant politicians need this pretext in order to carry out their aggression.

[…]

Sheik 'Adel Al-Mu'ada, Bahrain's Deputy Speaker of Parliament, Al-Arabiya TV, September 1, 2004

Interviewer:Sheik 'Adel, you met Bin Laden once, later you described him as a good man. Do you still think so? You Met him in '89.

Sheik 'Adel Al-Mu'ada: Yes.

InterviewerPlease explain the circumstances of the meeting and what is your position on bin Laden now?

Sheik 'Adel Al-Mu'ada:Yes, I've met him and had wanted to meet him very much.

Interviewer Was he a symbol for you?

Sheik 'Adel Al-Mu'ada:He was a symbol of the Jihad, at the time.

Interviewer: Is he still a symbol for you?

Sheik 'Adel Al-Mu'ada: There is no doubt that there is a lot of good in him, but I disagree with him on a few issues.

Interviewer A few issues.

Sheik 'Adel Al-Mu'ada: Yes.

Interviewer: On what issues do you disagree?

Sheik 'Adel Al-Mu'ada: I disagree with him if he… First, I don't accuse him of what the West accuses him of and with no evidence. The truth is that I heard with my own ears what he said. He commended the bombings of 9/11, which I didn't and still don't. I believe these bombings were a mistake. But I didn't hear him confess that he was responsible. I don't accuse him without proof.

Interviewer:So you still believe Al-Qa'ida was not responsible for 9/11?

Sheik 'Adel Al-Mu'ada: Me?

Interviewer Yes.

Sheik 'Adel Al-Mu'ada: I have no proof of this. There Is no proof of this. The evidence that exists is like Powell's evidence for the existence of WMD in Iraq.

[…]

Lebanese MP Walid Jumblatt, Al-Arabiya TV, March 21, 2004

Jumblatt: I am of the opinion that somewhere, someplace, there is an intelligence agency profiting from Al-Qa'eda and Osama bin Laden. Osama bin Laden is like a ghost, popping up when needed. This is my conviction.

Interviewer: Even 9/11?

Jumblatt: Even 9/11. Since there are many circumstances…Why didn't the sirens go off when the four hijacked planes took off? This happened only after an hour and a half or an hour and twenty minutes. That is peculiar. The largest country in the world, with the largest intelligence budget of $70-80 billion for various agencies, could only put out a warning after an hour and twenty minutes?! A peculiar story.

[…]

Sheik Abd Al-Jalil Al-Karouri, Sudan TV, August 27, 2004

Al-Karouri: When September the ninth comes [i.e. 9/11] we will again review the material we handed out about the Jewish thumbprint. Let's say in brief, that whether the 9/9 events and the destruction of the two famous buildings in the US were carried out by Israel's enemies, as the US claims, or by Israeli agents, as we claim, the outcome is the same: the Jews are the cause.

[…]

Iraqi Analys Kazem Al-Qureishi, Sahar 1 TV, July 18, 2004

Al-Qureishi:Al-Zaraqawi, bin-Laden, and Mulla 'Omar, and all the leaders of the Salafi movement are tools created by the British Freemason movement 200 years ago. With these tools they wanted to create a new religion for us, to confront Islam. They filled this new religion with Jewish poison, the Masonic poison. Their religion is manifested by a long beard, a short garment, and killing Muslims.

Host: Do you think that the CIA participated in the events of 9/11, that they attacked the US, killed Americans and humiliated the US in front of the whole world?

Al-Qureishi The explosions of September… It has been three decades since plans to bomb these buildings, the Twins, were made. But they wanted to do it so it would not be in vain. I noticed that the planes hit the upper part of the buildings, but the buildings exploded from the bottom, which proves that they were booby-trapped. Neighboring building also collapsed without being hit by planes. In order to carry out this plan they dragged fools from the Salafi movement and trained them to fly planes, a few years ago. Does bin-Laden have airfields where he can train them, or what…?

[…]

Lebanese Cleric Muhammad Kan’an, Al-‘Alam TV, September 9, 2004

Kan’an: I think there is some exaggeration in the American response to the events of 9/11. At the end of last year, I was...

Interviewer: Exaggeration on the part of the regime?

Kan'an: On the part of the media and mostly the American media. I visited New York and asked many people, and even Muslims who live there, what the situation was like after 9/11. They replied: 24 hours of burying the dead, and that was it.

[...]

Syrian researcher Al-Tayyeb Tizini, Al-‘Alam TV, August 18, 2004

Tizini: The American order of globalization began to think how to penetrate the world in new ways…

Interviewer: Including the use of force…

Tizini: The answer came on 9/11. I would like to emphasize here…

Interviewer:Which was…

Tizini: Exactly, according to American and European documents, including the investigation of President Bush and his aides about 9/11, I'd like to say that 9/11 was an American action.

These Americans began to understand that the new order must be marketed by a great event that would create new dangers for the world. 9/11 was for this purpose, in order to emphasize the need of dividing the world in two. This is what this order strives for: The so-called terrorists on one side and the so-called democrats on the other.

[…]

Mustafa Shak’a, former dean of humanities, Cairo’s ‘Ein Shams University, Iqra TV, June 16, 2004

Shak'a: To this day, we don't know who attacked the US on September 11. Why is the attack attributed to Bin Laden although it has not been proven that he was involved in the operation? It is way above his capabilities. Those who created him have made him a legend.

The operation was 100% American, and this is not the place to elaborate, but what proves the operation was a Jewish one is that five Jews climbed up a high building and filmed the first attack of the first plane…

Moderator: Before it happened?

Shaka: Yes, before anything was known. They caused a commotion, then the police were called and arrested them and it turned out they were Jews. They were interrogated for a week. This was reported in Records, one of the reliable newspapers in the US. Ha'aretz also reported they were arrested. They were released a week later without their investigation being completed, which angered the US Justice Ministry and the FBI. Their investigation was not completed. Therefore, the attack was an internal American one, but was attributed to Islam from the very first moment.

[…]

Iranian TV series about 9/11, Jaam-e Jam 1 TV, June 1, 2004

Narrator: A short while before the blasts of September 11, Mercury, a local Pennsylvanian newspaper, reported that two Jews were arrested while filming the Twin Towers. At that time, Ha'aretz reported the arrest of five Israelis who had photographed the World Trade Center, a few hours before the blasts. Also, an editor in chief of an American newspaper who brought up Israel's involvement in the Twin Towers' affair was fired. Some hours after the Twin Towers were blasted, the FBI had arrested five Israelis who had planned to blow up the New York Bridge in the Manhattan and New Jersey area. Also, the absence of 4,000 Jews (working) in the Twin Towers strengthened the claim that they took a vacation on that day.

A while afterwards, a source in American military intelligence, raised details pertaining to an intelligence memo regarding Israel's espionage organization, the Mossad, and its role in the events of September 11. In fact, the claim that Israel was involved in the blasts of September 11 and used it as a basis of America's new strategy for fighting the world of Islam, disappeared in the media coverage, but world public opinion still believes this possibility.

[…]

'Abd Al-Halim 'Uweiss, history professor at Al-Azhar University, Iqra TV, July 26, 2004

'Uweis: Regarding 9/11… The truth is that as a historian, I cannot agree at all with the American view. Many Americans… I read that even one of the candidates for the nomination of the American Democratic Party doubted the events of 9/11.

The conspiracy, with all its briliance, and the manner it was carried out, is beyond what Osama bin Laden or others are capable of planning.

[…]

Former Lebanese culture minister Ghazi Al-‘Aridhi, Abu Dhabi TV, July 4, 2004

Al-‘Aridhi There have been doubts about those behind the events of 9/11. With due respect to what Mr. Mahmoud said, but these are not merely ghosts, because the Americans have defined their enemies. They said it was bin Laden, then they said Saddam, later they published lists of organizations they consider to be terrorist.

We must ask once again, who is bin Laden? Who created bin Laden? Who is responsible for bin Laden? When was bin Laden used? For what purpose and against whom? American intelligence and the successive American administrations fabricated bin Laden and used him to confront Soviet influence in Afghanistan.

[…]

Iranian TV series about 9/11, Jaam-e Jam 3 TV, June 15, 2004

Narrator: What group or organization was responsible for the events of 9/11? The intellectuals, who support globalization and oppose America's policy, believe that it was the US that created the events of 9/11 in order to expand its hegemony in the world.

The FBI and CIA experts attributed the Events of 9/11 to the Muslims and Al-Qa'ida. Moreover, two months after the events, part of Bin Laden's speech was broadcast by Al-Jazeera, in which he said, "We calculated the number of enemy victims ahead of time, and predicted the number of people to be killed in the towers." Some experts expressed doubts about tape's authenticity and considered it to be the work of the CIA. In light of the wide scope of the operation, which required coordinating four airplanes by at least 20 people, who would engage in combat and carry out a suicide operation, the likelihood that this was an Al-Qa'ida operation is low.

[…]

Saudi Cleric S’ad Al-Breik, Saudi Channel 1, August 16, 2004

Al-Breik: We must not inflate (the importance) of Al-Qa'eda, to the point of claiming that it is the main and only perpetrator of this large operation (9/11). I'm not here to defend (Al-Qa'eda), but we must not overstate this matter. And it does not justify It is a mistake to ignore the possibility that the Zionist hands used some people who were planted into one of the stages of this plan, from this issue.

I have read some books that were translated from English into Arabic in which the Americans themselves call 9/11 "The Great Deception" or the "The Great Game," so why do we use all sort of names to avoid this subject. No, we must be clear and not censor ourselves.

[…]

Hazem Saleh Abu Isma'il, Islamic preacher in the US, Iqra TV, July 15, 2004

Abu Isma'il: No... Sir, there is a difference between presenting the real issue and presenting the issue fabricated by the media.

Host: All right!

Abu Isma'il: I am one of those who believe these events were fabricated from the outset as part of the global groundwork for the distortion of Islam's image.I mean this is part of a comprehensive global plan that includes a media aspect. Even before these events took place there was preparation for them…

There is a fabricated plan, or a fabricated image of Islam. They say, "Come and we will show you Islam, which is such and such." They do not see that if they blame the Muslims for bringing down two buildings in the US on 9/11, so how many buildings did they bring down in Palestine, Afghanistan, or Iraq?

What is the number of buildings the US itself brought down in these countries? At the same time, the amazing thing is the shock in the US, producing national fundamentalism.

Later, I was surprised by a certain question, and the truth is I didn't make an effort to find it but read it in one of the newspapers published in the US. It said, "We are not going to tell you if it has been proved whether Muslims carried out the events of 9/11 or not.

We will tell you why the American authorities insist on not conducting an investigation into who caused these events?" The authorities there don't want to conduct an investigation.

[…]

French author Thierry Meyssan, Jaam-e Jam 2 TV, August 30, 2005

Meyssan: The events of 9/11 saddened me like everyone else. But I also felt that we were not being told everything.

Obviously, nobody knew everything at first, but it turned out later that they didn't want to tell us everything. As a matter of fact, on September 11 many people watched the events on TV, and we repeatedly saw the footage of a plane hitting a tower, and throughout that day all we saw was that footage. You have probably also seen the picture of people trapped in the tower throwing themselves out of the windows. But despite these details, people couldn't understand what was had happened. TV commentators said they didn't even know the whereabouts of the US president. Everything was mixed with violence that day, and it was impossible to understand anything.

In the following days, some senior US officials gave their impressions of what had happened, and recounted what they had been doing that day, and only then was it possible to reconstruct some of the events. But when we look back upon that day, we realize that what we were officially told about the events was presented hurriedly and without any investigation, and it was impossible to understand what had happened that day merely on the basis of this.

First of all, no investigation had been carried out. You might recall that when the news about the first plane crash was broadcast, it was clearly impossible to determine whether the crash was an accident or an attack. But one minute and 27 seconds after the first plane crash, CNN broadcast a picture of Manhattan - because there is always a static camera directed at Manhattan. Then the network broadcast footage of one of the twin towers burning and immediately afterwards, the CNN commentator said he had just talked to senior officials over the phone, and that this was not an accident but an attack by Osama Bin Laden. So this was the shortest and swiftest investigation in human history. They said: "We don't know anything, but we know who the criminal is, and we have nothing further to say about it." They said these attacks were carried out by Islamists from Afghanistan, and that they had hijacked four planes with box cutters. Of course, this is one possible use for a box cutter!

On the basis of what we were told, not all the details of the event are clear. First of all, we know that a week before 9/11, there were transactions in the world's leading stock markets involving the stocks of various airlines and insurance companies that subsequently became victims of the 9/11 events.

In order to organize such transactions, a special economic network is necessary. This can be easily detected, because every transaction and every stock are documented in archives. If we want, we can find out easily who was responsible for the attacks. All we have to do is repeal the Financial Privacy Act, and those responsible would be immediately detected. But we didn't do so because bank accounts are very sacred. They are even more sacred than world peace.

According to America's official account of the events, we don't have a clear picture of what happened in Manhattan. We all remember the scene of the two towers collapsing one after the other. But that afternoon, another tower collapsed. That third tower was not hit in any way by a plane, so there was no reason for it to collapse. Initially, people thought that the collapse of the two towers had caused an earthquake, causing the third tower to shake and collapse. But a committee of experts now says that such a thing is impossible. On the other hand, New York firefighters said that they themselves had seen and heard explosions in the third tower's foundations, as if dynamite had been placed in it. No investigation was carried out, and they don't want to know anything about this matter. But this is an extremely sensitive issue, because this tower was the world's largest headquarters of the CIA, except for its main headquarters.

The third thing that has not been clarified in any way was the issue of the fire in one of the buildings adjacent to the White House on September 11. We are used to seeing the famous picture of the White House and a large park. But right next to the White House there is a large building, which is rarely shown because it is very ugly, and it is related to the 1930's. It is called the Eisenhower Building. All the US presidential services are located in that building.

This building was completely destroyed by fire, but no explanation was given. Why has nothing been said about the third Manhattan tower and about the building adjacent to the White House? It's very simple. They did not have any plane that could serve as a pretext. It could not be said that some plane crashed here, and that this was the handiwork of Islamists from overseas. Therefore, since there was no plane, no explanation could be given. So it is presented as if nothing happened.

We see that what America says officially is not only incomplete but also falsified. If we examine some details carefully - particularly details pertaining to the Pentagon - we will realize many things. As for the incident that claimed 160 lives, they said it was because of a Boeing 757 that the Islamists hijacked and crashed into the Pentagon in a suicide attack. If we examine the details carefully, we see that some of the witnesses say something different about this Boeing.

They say that they saw some object hit the building at top speed, but they couldn't determine whether it was a Boeing or something else. If we examine the damage to the Pentagon, we conclude that this damage could not have been caused by a Boeing. It was caused by a missile. According to the Pentagon, the object that hit that spot was a plane. But a Boeing 757 weighs over 100 tons, and if it came close to the building, its speed would have been between 500 to 800 kilometers per hour, rising to between 800 to 1,200 kilometers per hour. But if a Boeing had indeed hit the building's first floor, the building would have been totally ruined. This is like a truck crashing into a building, and destroying it, not merely making a hole in it. When we magnify the picture, we see that the missile entered through this door, which is five to six meters wide. But the width of a plane is 38 meters, including the wings, and its tail is 12 meters long. Despite this, there is no sign of destruction in the vicinity. According to what they say, the attacking object entered here, passed through the building, and exited here. When it went through the building, it formed a tunnel. It passed through the walls, but did not cause any collapse or debris, and exited from here. The hole was 2.3 meters in diameter, and this clearly couldn't have been a plane.

We face an important issue: If this was a missile and not a plane, who fired it? After all, you cannot talk about Islamists or caves in Afghanistan anymore. This was a missile fired by American soldiers in order to kill another group of American soldiers. This points to an internal problem within the American system.

Behind the events of 9/11 there were clearly various groups, at odds with one another. It cannot be said that one man was behind these events and that the orders were given from one place. It should be said that the Manhattan events were terrorist acts. The destruction of the towers was intended to spread fear and terror. It terrified people. But the attacks on the building adjacent to the White House and on the Pentagon were not intended to spread fear. This was something else: an attempt to assassinate people in power. I don't think any of the assassination attempts were carried out by Islamists, as the official American version goes. That is an embellishment, a total lie, and an attempt to cover up internal disputes in America.

In my opinion, the US government was fully informed in this affair. I have mentioned this in my book. Many foreign intelligence agencies warned America about what was about to happen. The intelligence agencies of Egypt, the Zionist regime, France, Germany, and Russia sent reports to their American counterparts. All these reports had a clear and common message: Attacks would be carried out against American interests, and perhaps against Israeli interests as well. These attacks would be carried out by planes of American commercial airlines, which would be hijacked and crashed into targets. The targets would presumably be large buildings, the main target would be in Manhattan, and these events would will take place in the week of September 9. This is completely accurate information that would have helped (the US) to take measures that would have made the attacks more difficult, if not preventing them.

But the US government did nothing to prevent these attacks. On the contrary: While for 40 years there was an American aviation law requiring pilots to carry arms, this law was repealed right before 9/11, even though the US government had received warnings about the high likelihood of these events. If we disarm the pilots even though they are at risk - this means we want these events to happen. When the US government is now asked about this matter, it says that it has always received similar warnings and that it was impossible to know whether this warning was more important than the others, and that its only mistake was in sorting the information. This may be the case. Since this discussion began, it has been said that certain CIA, FBI and NSA officials conveyed messages to the US government that a certain incident is possible. They warned and sent reports about this. If these were only low-ranking officials, the fact their warnings were not taken seriously could be understood. But Russian President Vladimir Putin told an American TV channel, four days after the events, that when the Russian intelligence services had conveyed their initial report to America, he had called Bush personally to remind him of the report's importance. If one does not pay serious attention to information brought by a low-ranking official, this is one thing... But what about disregarding a phone-call by the Russian president? This is hard to believe. We see, therefore, that the US government allowed these events to happen. This is passive cooperation.

But if we examine the case more carefully, we see that this was not merely passive cooperation. Bush is directly responsible in this affair... Maybe not for all the incidents, but at least for the first. We have what Bush himself said at a press conference in Orlando, which he repeated seven days later at another press conference. Therefore, if he did not manage to make himself clear the first time, he could have made up for it the second time. But he repeated the exact same words, and said that on the morning of September 11 he was at a kindergarten in Florida, in the South, to deliver an important speech about the importance of learning to read in kindergarten.

When he went into the kindergarten he was told he had to hold a top secret phone call under strict security conditions with Mrs. Rice, his National Security advisor, and he was asked to go into a secure hall prepared for him for that purpose.

When the US president travels around a large country like America, halls are prepared along his route, equipped with means of communications, such as telephones, videos, and so on, so he can talk to his joint command, his residence, and with the White House, without fear of being tapped. Such a hall was prepared at the kindergarten. Bush calls Rice and says: "I have just seen on the secure video-screen that the first plane went into the first tower." Then he entered the kindergarten, and did not appear to be agitated. Actually, when such incidents occur, the US president immediately says a few words of condolence to the victims' families. But he goes in, and showing no concern, he makes his speech about learning to read in kindergarten. Then, while he is still talking to the small children in front of the TV cameras, one of his cabinet members comes up to him and tells him that a second plane hit the second tower. If you were in charge of the cabinet and said such a thing to the president, you would wait for an answer. The cabinet members generally have to wait around the president to receive instructions, but they moved away, as if they didn't have to wait for an answer. It was like reporting on some ongoing operation. At any rate, the US president is silent for a moment, his face grows a little dark, he makes his apologies, and leaves the kindergarten class to prepare a short speech. Then he leaves Florida. There is just one problem: Nobody knows what footage he saw of the first plane hitting the first tower. The reason is simple: None of the TV channels throughout the world had the footage of the first plane hitting the first tower. The first footage is by two brothers, French journalists. They were preparing a report on New York firefighters. That day they accompanied the firefighters, who went out to the area because of a gas leak. Suddenly they saw the plane coming and heard a terrible noise. They lifted their heads and saw the plane hitting the tower. Then the two reporters reached the World Trade Center with the firefighters to help the victims. The footage they filmed was later given to others through the Gamma press agency. The footage was broadcast at midnight Washington time. Therefore, when Bush saw the footage of the first plane hitting the tower, nobody had this footage except for the American intelligence cameras that were at the site to film the incidents. If they were present at the site to film the incidents, they must have anticipated such an event. And if the US president knew about such an incident, what does this mean? It means that politically he is directly responsible for the incident. I am not saying this about the other incidents as well, but he was responsible for the first. It is even possible that he was involved in giving approving the first operation, but encountered a more extensive operation.

Then the Pentagon affair occurs. Attacking the Pentagon with a plane or a missile poses one problem: There are missile launchers are installed around the Pentagon and on the roof. If a plane, a missile, or anything enters the Pentagon's airspace, the missile launchers would be activated. They may not be able to intercept the relevant object, but a missile will be fired. Either somebody deactivated the Pentagon's missile system - and that means that somebody in the American military was responsible - or else there is another reason, a very simple one. All the armies in the world have systems to prevent "friendly fire". In missile and anti-missile systems, before (a missile) is fired, a radio-wave is sent to identify whether the object in question is "friend" or "foe". If the code is "friend" - the code of the American military - the missile system is not activated. This is completely automatic, and there is no need to push a button, or anything. Therefore, the only way to attack the Pentagon with a flying object is for this object to have the American army's "friend" code. In fact, the Pentagon was attacked by a US army missile fired by American military personnel. So there was indeed a confrontation within the American apparatus. As you know, this is nothing new. Unfortunately, the internal dispute within the American apparatus goes back to the days of the wars between North and South. These internal disputes have never been resolved.

Over the past few years, the threat of domestic terrorism has hovered over America many times. Every year the FBI publishes a document about domestic terror attacks. (According to this document), there were at least 100 terror attacks perpetrated by Americans against Americans. In 1995, a significant terrorist attack was perpetrated: A bomb was planted in a building in Oklahoma City, and the main target was an FBI office. This attack exacted a toll of 108 victims. If we look at it closely, the target of the Pentagon attack was not the Secretary of Defense office. The Secretary's office was at another corner of the building. The was the new center of the American navy. This new command center was being built, and the new navy commander had come there to supervise the work was progressing. Only a few moments after he left, the missile struck the Pentagon. At that moment, all the senior officials in the joint command left their offices and entered the shelters under the Pentagon, except for the navy commander, who apparently felt he was the main target. Therefore, the only thing beyond doubt is that this assassination attempt is related to the American apparatus. Three days after the events of 9/11, the secretary-general (sic) and the White House spokesman were interviewed by various American newspapers, such as the New York Times, Washington Post, and New Yorker. They said: "We were very scared that day."

Around 10 a.m. - when the Pentagon and the White House were attacked - the secret service, responsible for protecting the president's life, received a phone-call from the people behind the attacks. This is very interesting. If they called, they must have presented a demand. But they said no such thing. All they said was that they had used the American president's secret code to demonstrate how dangerous they were. This code makes it possible to make changes in the command centers and in the president's instructions. So everybody was gripped with fear. This is why the president left secretly for a base in the center of the US to give instructions personally from there.

The fact that the attackers had the secret code shows they were not regular American soldiers. They belonged to the top US military officials, because only few people have America's code - they may even be counted on the fingers of one hand. The person responsible for at least one of these attacks was a top official in the American army. If a retaliation operation needs to be carried out against those responsible for these attacks, one must take action against the real perpetrators at the top of the U.S. military.

You just asked another question: Was there any indication that Islamists were involved? One might think that the Islamists were drawn into this affair, not as the main planners, but as those carrying out the plan, or as members of one American group against another. Maybe. That's a theory. But this is the only theory raised by the US government. In order to prove this theory, America is giving different indications. The problem is that whenever we look into these indications, they turn out to be false, erroneous, and an afterthought. Ultimately, we have no clear proof about the Al-Qaeda network's involvement. I'm not saying it's impossible, but I'm saying that it does not prove a thing. On the other hand, you recall that the US government had promised to provide sufficient evidence for Al-Qaeda involvement in the affair. US Secretary of State General Colin Powell undertook personally and publicly to present a comprehensive report on the affair. Until the war in Afghanistan, this was a genuine promise. Ten months have passed, and we still don't have this report. The reason is that they had no proof. One of the most well-known stories that they concocted for us is that there were 4 planes hijacked by 19 terrorists, and the FBI immediately published the list of the 19 terrorists. How could they have prepared this list? The FBI is not telling us since this is a secret. But why these 19, and not some other 19? Is it because they happened to follow them through phone-calls? Were the names of these 19 on the passenger lists? No. In my opinion, none of them were on the flight lists. But they say that there were a few who boarded the planes at the last moment, and their names were therefore not on the passenger lists. The problem is that the number of people who boarded the planes is smaller than those 19 terrorists that the US is presenting. So practically it is impossible that all 19 boarded the planes. However, among those 19, 6 are still alive, so they couldn't have been on the planes, or they would be dead. They are generally Saudis, and they held interviews with the international press. The strangest case is that of Muhammad 'Atta, who is mentioned as the leader of this terrorist group. Nobody tracked him down, but his father is certain that he is alive, and that he called him the day after 9/11. He says: "My son has never been involved in such crimes. He does not kill civilians this way. If he fights, he kills soldiers and not civilians." Whom should we believe - the FBI or Muhammad Atta's father?

[…]

Video clip for “Oh, Mr. Arab”, a song by Egyptian singer Sha’ban Abd Al-Rahim

Al-Rahim: There was a tower, oh people, and for sure his friends were the ones who toppled it. For sure his friends were the ones who toppled it, the ones who toppled it.

What kind of terrorism is this? It's been going on for some years. America and Israel play the bully. America and Israel play the bully, play the bully.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.