Compelling evidence was presented at conferences sponsored by the Schiller Institute and LaRouchePAC, on September 5 and 12, which showed that not only were there advance warnings of the 9/11/2001 attacks on the United States, but that the same networks which suppressed that intelligence, and covered it up after the attacks occurred, have been involved in the ongoing coup efforts against President Donald Trump, which continue to this day. The evidence was presented by former top technical experts and whistleblowers from the National Security Agency, Bill Binney and Kirk Wiebe, and the former head of the U.S. Army's Criminal Law Division at the Pentagon, Col. (ret.) Richard Black.

The three emphasized that they were calling on American citizens to mobilize to prevent an even worse catastrophe today, referring to the geopolitical provocations of the Anglo-U.S. War Party against Russia and China which could trigger a nuclear World War III. The networks they identified were called out by President Trump in a press conference on September 7, in which he emphasized that those committed to keeping the U.S. engaged in "endless wars" are the same networks referred to by President Eisenhower in his famous farewell address on January 17, 1961, as the "Military Industrial Complex" (MIC).

Since many mistakenly believe that Eisenhower—and Trump—were referring only to the U.S. military and the arms manufacturers, which make fortunes from weapon's development and procurement, it is essential to look at the broader strategic context behind these warnings. This context was provided by Lyndon LaRouche in two prescient statements in 2001, in which he identified the connection between the war hawks, and the financial and corporate oligarchs in the private sector who have been deploying the U.S. military to defend the interests of the City of London and Wall Street. To defeat the coup, and begin the dialogue among great powers essential to overcome the danger of new, broader, more devastating wars, it is urgent that citizens be educated on the connection between war and the breakdown of the post-World War II financial system.

This system has devolved over the last half century, due to the imposition of neo-liberal doctrines of "free market" deregulation and "globalization", into one characterized by accelerating deindustrialization of the Trans-Atlantic region, combined with the repeated inflating and, then popping, of speculative bubbles. Rather than put the system through a necessary bankruptcy reorganization, those who profit from it use war to crush nations which oppose its domination, and to divert attention away from its predatory swindles, to focus the people instead on an external "enemy." The swindlers are protected by the release of torrents of virtually free money from the central banks, while new mountains of unsustainable debt are added to the ledgers of already bankrupt governments and declining national economies.


It is entirely appropriate that forecasts made by LaRouche preceded the discussion of intelligence warfare at the September 12 conference, as his long successful career as a forecaster began with his prediction of the 1957-8 recession—which shaped Eisenhower's understanding of the MIC—and continued with his accurate assessments which preceded the succession of economic crises and crashes from 1987 to the present.

In a webcast on January 3, 2001, after presenting his proposed solutions to the implosion of the so-called Dot-com bubble, which popped at the end of the Clinton presidency, LaRouche warned of a "Reichstag Fire" event, staged by the incoming George W. Bush-Dick Cheney administration, to divert attention away from the systemic economic crisis:

"[E]ither we do the kinds of things I indicated in summary to you today, or else, what you’re going to have, is not a government. You’re going to have something like a Nazi regime….

"What you’re going to get with a frustrated Bush Administration, if it’s determined to prevent itself from being opposed — its will — you’re going to get crisis management. Where members of the Special Warfare types, of the Secret Government, the secret police teams, and so forth, will set off provocations, which will be used to bring about dictatorial powers and emotion, in the name of crisis management.

"You will have small wars set off in various parts of the world, which the Bush Administration will respond to, with crisis-management methods of provocation. That’s what you’ll get. And that’s what the problem is, and you have to face that."

LaRouche's analysis was confirmed just over nine months later, on September 11, when havoc was unleashed by catastrophic, near-simultaneous events at the World Trade Center in New York City, the Pentagon in Washington, D.C. and in a field in Pennsylvania. LaRouche was being interviewed by Dr. Jack Stockwell on KTKK, a radio station outside of Salt Lake City, Utah, as these events were unfolding, in real time. Stockwell asked LaRouche for his assessment. He responded:

"This is a very systematic operation. If they’re snatching planes … if all three of these planes — the two we have from New York and this thing on the Pentagon — to get that kind of thing, to snatch planes like that … This means that there’s been some kind of either incompetence or fix on the whole security operation, because you can’t get this kind of thing without a real goof-up, on the security side. So, somebody in charge of security was really not very effectively in charge.

"You can’t go around snatching planes in a coordinated fashion, like this. You can’t do it. Somebody has to be really sloppy."


In their presentations on September 5 and again, more emphatically on September 12, Kirk Wiebe and Bill Binney stressed that it was not mere sloppiness that allowed 9/11 to happen, but a conscious decision by intelligence officials to shift from a narrow, targeted focus of intelligence gathering—which their team had designed as the "Thin Thread" program—to the all-encompassing surveillance state, which kicked into high gear after 9/11. Wiebe confirmed that officials at NSA knew that the 9/11 attack "was coming." On September 5, he said that he was "100% certain" that using Thin Thread could have prevented the attacks. The next Saturday, he elaborated on this:

"The thing...that was shocking that I said, was that NSA knew about 9/11; that it was coming, ahead of 9/11. I don’t know how much ahead, but they knew about it. How do I know that? A trusted colleague, Thomas Drake, another NSA whistleblower, told Bill, told me that a small pocket of analysts in NSA put together a report to warn the nation, the world, our allies, our partners about 9/11; and was prevented from disseminating it by the Director of NSA. I say the Director of NSA; well that would be logical, because that’s who heads up the NSA. Who was really the decision-maker that prevented the data from going out? I am sure ...General Michael V. Hayden called the White House, and [would] have spoken to either Cheney or the President, George Bush, told them about the information, and probably went through some discussion about how to rationalize whether to send it out or not to send it out. And the ultimate decision was made not to send it out."

Bill Binney then developed how the decision to dump Thin Thread "set up a swindle", one which is costing American taxpayers not just the tens of billions of dollars in increased costs, from moving from targeted to mass data collection and storage, but also their freedom, for a system which is less capable of identifying potential enemies before they act. He said:

"I’d like to address what Lyndon LaRouche was quoted on some of the things you were playing before, where he talked about the intelligence failure. This set up the whole problem with it and what we were doing inside NSA to solve the problems of the digital age, set up a swindle; one of the more significant swindles, I would add, and the basis for a power grab not just for people of the United States, but for people all around the world.

"It went like this: They claimed you had to give up privacy for security. That meant they had to take everything in that you were doing, and they were justified because they said they were going to give you security. Well, that’s exactly what the Nazis did in 1933 with their Special Order 48, and that’s what they used to take over power. Well, it’s very similar to that. And this is what totalitarian states have done down through the ages. It’s nothing new; this is old. But the point was, when we were looking at all the information in the 1990s, from 1990 up, we could see the explosion of the digital age coming, and that we had to do things to try to address it. What they would do internally in the NSA was, they would have programs running where they were all funded. Anytime a new program came in, they would try to make it dependent on existing ones so that they would have to spend some of their funding to maintain the existing programs and the existing contracts. In other words, build an empire."

Wiebe then developed the implications of this enhanced "surveillance state", including its ability to exert control over the thinking and behavior of citizens: "Nothing prevents them. Business is now surveilling its customers like never before; wants to know everything, wants to predict what you’re going to do. We are the most surveilled people in the history of the world. And in our Revolutionary War, one of the things that caused us to fight a Revolutionary War against King George of England was his threat to put a soldier in every home, so that he would know that the colonists were thinking ahead of time. This thirst for information is out of control. And it undermines our very Constitutional republic. I would tell you that mass surveillance today undermines at least four of the ten rights in the Bill of Rights; at least four, and it’s not getting better. I see people in Congress on both sides of the political equation, dodging and weaving, trying to avoid this issue."

Those people in Congress he mentioned, which make up the vast majority of members of both parties, receive significant funding from the corporations of the MIC and its surveillance state, which today includes corporations such as Amazon, Microsoft, Yahoo, Facebook and Google. And they are the ones who have voted repeatedly to launch and continue the "endless wars", against President Trump's efforts to end them; extending the funding, and therefore the power of the surveillance state; and continue to spread the lies against Russia, such as those of Russiagate, and China, which put the United States on a course for new wars, which have nothing to do with defending the sovereign interests of the nation and its people.


Perhaps even more shocking than what was presented by Wiebe and Binney were the comments from Col. Black, who served as a Virginia State Senator after completing his career with the Army's Judge Advocate General staff. Black gave a precise warning of preparations for a military coup underway against Trump, after the fabricated Russiagate and Ukrainegate impeachment proceedings, and the launching of urban insurrection under the fake intent to achieve "social justice", failed to provide the ammunition to remove him.

At the September 5 conference, Black provided a detailed chronology of statements from leading military officials, including former Secretary of State General Colin Powell and Trump's former Defense Secretary James Mattis, designed to undermine the President's authority as Commander-in-Chief of the military. He quoted Mattis as saying Trump is "dangerous" and "unfit" for the office, warning the former Director of National Intelligence Coats that "there may come a time when we have to take collective action" against him.

Speaking after Wiebe and Binney on September 12, Black made a further connection between the events of 9/11 and the endless wars today. He said, "I think one of the big questions that should be asked is, why. We don’t know all of the parameters of 9/11. The investigation into it was effectively squelched, so that we would not determine exactly the origins. But we do know that al-Qaeda provided the suicide flyers who flew the jets into the Twin Towers and the Pentagon. I think one of the big questions that Americans should be asking in the aftermath of the anniversary of 9/11 is, why did we turn around and provide total diplomatic and military support to al-Qaeda, which was the group that killed 3000 Americans on 9/11? We did not attack Saudi Arabia, which provided almost all of the suicide flyers, and almost of the back-up for them through Saudi officials. One of the interesting things — very few people are aware of it — we had a total shutdown of civilian aviation right after 9/11. The President ordered every passenger jet grounded. The first plane that was allowed to go airborne was a jet that went around the country picking up relatives of Osama bin Laden and particular Saudi officials, and flew them out of the country where they were beyond the reach of investigation. This was reported in the New York Times, this is not some sort of a conspiracy theory. But it’s difficult to believe that anyone other than the President of the United States, who had ordered all planes grounded, could approve of the airlift of these particular Saudi individuals out of the country."

The protection of Al Qaeda continued throughout the Bush and Obama administrations, he said, especially through the "civil war" in Syria, in which the MIC has continued to aid them in their quest for "regime change" against President Assad. Why are we continuing this today, he asked, correctly identifying Pompeo's State Department as responsible, even when Trump has called for an end to U.S. military involvement there.

"We’ve imposed a total military blockade on Syria. They cannot receive food; they cannot receive fuel. We’ve actually taken their fuel away so that they will freeze in the winter time, they will starve other times. We’ve blockaded them so that they cannot receive medical supplies from any free country. All of this is done in order to support al-Qaeda in Syria, which now has been driven back to where they hold only Idlib province in Syria. The commander-in-chief of all of the military forces in Idlib is a fellow named al-Julani, who is on the State Department’s terrorist most wanted list; a $10 million bounty on his head. Yet, whenever Syria attempts to drive the terrorists from Idlib province, the State Department comes in and bemoans the fact that Syria is being so cruel to al-Qaeda.

"I think there’s a very real question that should be asked; I don’t expect it to be asked by our Federal government, but it should be asked by the American people. Why do we continue to support al-Qaeda, both with arms and with diplomatic support?"

Given the powerful reports from these three American patriots, who are working with the LaRouche organization to put down the coup against President Trump, and to mobilize support for him to participate in a series of summits with minimally Presidents Putin of Russia and Xi Jinping of China, the last question can be posed to the American people: Will you join this mobilization, before the geopolitical imperial faction representing the City of London/Wall Street interests plunge the world into a nuclear World War III?


Please check your e-mail for a link to activate your account.
  • rex willard
    commented 2020-09-25 13:15:41 -0400
    u connected a few dots for me today esp. on al qaeda but i still would like a reasonable answer on building 7 and other loose ends. however, this was a good editorial and i appreciate u taking the time to document ur thoughts . trump has been in danger from day one and i pray the ppl in charge of watching over him and his family don’t botch it.
  • Harley Schlanger
    published this page in Articles & Interviews 2020-09-25 09:32:42 -0400