Saturday, May 27, 2006

Nico Haupt on the Bottom Line of 9/11

This note concerning feasible motives for Black Tuesday came by e-mail:

"There were many players in PNAC who were looking out for Israel exclusively JMHO and will involve the US to
protect their interests. ... "

Anyone who has toured the many 9/11 sites on the Net has been struck by the interminable arguments over who was ultimately responsible for 9/11. Passionate debates have raged for years within the movement over whether the American Reichstag was run by Mossad deceivers, CIA gunz 'n' drugz globe-trotters, Rumsfeld's DoD, Cheney's bunker, Syrian mullahs, etc. (I've been writing about Khashoggi a great deal, and my intention is to explain how the Arab/Iran-contra-players side of the operation ties to the inner 9/11, and in one section on the "Black Octopus" gave a glimpse of the beast.)

NSA under Hayden and SAIC under a group of ranking intelligence people wrote the script for 9/11, and had control over the operation. I recently came to this conclusion because connections to these two military-industrial enclaves recur in the most sensitive areas of the operation. Recently, I discovered that Nico Haupt was also saying the NSA and SAIC were behind it. Haupt makes a distinction between the 9/11 "plotline" and the actual military operation. So I've been reading his articles and following his leads. His latest installment discusses theories on the net "identifying" ethnic and political groups presumably responsible, and how this steers us away from the core of it.


NSA/SAIC is the beating heart of the actual "special operation," so the collective investigation of the 9/11truth movement ought to focus on it and its tentacles - but the movement is occupied with Israeli art students, Arab drug runners, Saudi oilmen, Cheney's bunker, wargames, etc., all of which have roles, but the core of the thing was NSA - which you rarely read about except in relation to Able Danger, a loudly-trumpeted, Neo-Con generated "scandal" (Fox News and NewsMax ahead of the pack jounralists) that blames Clinton for not preventing 9/11 - and SAIC, which also hasn't been examined in the detail that we hear of, say, the "Mossad" college-age art students. So to get to the bottom of it, we need to shift the focus to NSA/SAIC and its NGO and GO appendages, and not linger on the sideshows ...

Nico Haupt:

... Right after 9/11, self-appointed "Mossad researchers" often end up in debates on historical research from over 2000-3000 years ago, which is even more effective. The 'CIA distraction' also helps to stir a fight between?the supporters of the 'mossad'
distraction' and the 'CIA-NWO' sensationalists, often also accused as "zionists", especially if you deny ANY complicity of the Mossad. But what has 'complicity' to do with the actual performance of the inside operation?

Basically the same complicity of the so called '9/11 cover-up' can also be easily constructed with the Dutch-, German-, Saudi- or Pakistani intelligence.

The result is an endless debate on whether the one or other agency had more or less participation into 9/11. What almost noone realizes, all these 'complicities' refer in the majority to the plotline, not the military operation.

Therefore it doesn't matter if either CIA, BND, MOSSAD, Dutch Intelligence or "Able Danger" "observed" or "impostered" the alleged hijackers. It all represents just the 'plotline' and distracts from?the controlled demolition or the so called "controversial" TV fakery research.??( )??The "CIA connection" was also designed to distract from the Private Military- and intelligence Contractors (PMCs), which already replaced and dominated U.S. Intelligence anyway. ...