Month: November 2026

Categories
The News And Times Blog

9/11 Revisited: Was it the Putin – Sharon – Schroeder’s Very Special Political Intelligence Operation?

Audio Post 

Synopsis 

1. Overview 

9/11 Revisited: 

Was it the Putin – Sharon – Schroeder’s Very Special Political Intelligence Operation? 

Putin The Mastermind: He communicates in accidents.  The 9/11 Attacks: The Special Tripartite Operation  Hypothesis – Google AI Review 

Was the Counterintelligence Investigation of 9/11 Attacks RESOLVED? 

The Significance of TRUTH in the 9/11 investigations

Investigations and Misinvestigations of 9/11 Attacks 

9/11 Truth movement and the alternative theories 



    1.1 The Declassified 9/11 PDBs

The Declassified 9/11 PDBs: what transpired? 

The Declassified 9/11 PDBs: The induced “warning fatigue”

The Declassified 9/11 PDBs: Questionable sources, skillful placements 

Induced “Warning Fatigue”: The Declassified 9/11 PDBs: questionable sources, skillful placements, warning fatigue – AI Mode

Analyzing 9/11 PDBs: Persistent but useless warnings about the Al Qaeda in intelligence reports, including from Russia, Germany, and Israel as the cover: questionable sources, skillful placements – GS

9/11 PDBs: Warning Fatigue and Sources – Gemini 

2. The Hypothesis: 

Russia, Germany, and Israel were behind the 9/11 Attacks 

    The Role of Russia in the background of the 9/11 Attacks 

        Putin: CIA Profile 

    The Role of Germany in the background of the 9/11 Attacks 

        Gerhard Schroeder: CIA Profile 

        August Hanning 

            August Hanning and his role in the investigations of the                9/11 Attacks

    The Role of Israel in the background of the 9/11 Attacks 

        Ariel Sharon: CIA Profile 

The 9/11 Hijackers were well trained in Operational Security 

The 9/11 Hijackers and their possible State connections and sponsorship 


3. Conclusions of the present, not mutually exclusive theories of 9/11 and the calls for Reinvestigation 


Links 

9/11 Revisited: Was it the Putin – Sharon – Schroeder’s Very Special Political Intelligence Operation?

Was the Counterintelligence Investigation of 9/11 Attacks RESOLVED? – AI Mode 


______________________________________


9/11 Revisited:  Was it the Putin – Sharon – Schroeder’s Very Special Political Intelligence Operation? 


Search: 

Retrospective Analysis of the 9/11 attacks as the Russian – German – Israeli Special Intelligence Operation 

Retrospective Approach in Counterintelligence Studies 


The 9/11 Attacks Revisited, 25 years later. 
Was it the Russian – German – Israeli “Special Operation”, with Putin as the Mastermind, at the head of this Anti-American Intelligence Alliance? Reading Putin’s mind: he communicates in accidents … – Google AI Review. 
We do need to reopen the 9/11 investigations, at least in the realm of the public discussions. The Al Qaeda version alone does not convince anyone. We need to dig deeper. 
The 9/11 Attacks were the terror act and the crime of the century. But it does not have to be the Big Lie and the mystery of the century. 

  

 

 

The “Tripartite Hypothesis” regarding Vladimir Putin and the 9/11 attacks is an unverified, alternative counterintelligence theory and conspiracy narrative popularized on niche open-source intelligence blogs—specifically curated by blogger Michael Novakhov on platforms like [Global Security And Intelligence News Review](globalsecuritynews.org “The Mastermind: Putin and the 9/11 Attacks – The “Tripartite Hypothesis” – Google AI Review”). [1]

The narrative utilizes AI-generated text analyses (such as Gemini prompts) to stitch together historical intelligence gaps, geopolitical timelines, and the arrest of foreign officials to argue that Al-Qaeda was merely a front for a sophisticated, state-sponsored operation masterminded by Vladimir Putin in alliance with elements of German and Israeli intelligence. 

Distorting the Context of “Google AI Reviews”
The title’s reference to a “Google AI Review” stems from the blog author’s method of using large language models to evaluate counterintelligence concepts. When prompted with hypothetical scenarios—such as the plausibility of “backstopping” (creating a false trail of intelligence warnings to build a cover story)—the AI outlines how such espionage tactics work theoretically. The blog then aggregates these structural definitions to give the appearance of an algorithmic “validation” of the conspiracy theory itself. 

The use of the AI large language models to evaluate counterintelligence concepts: 

AI Overview

Large language models (LLMs) and generative artificial intelligence are increasingly integrated into intelligence and counterintelligence (CI) operations to process vast data streams, assist human analysts, and evaluate tradecraft standards.

The September 11 terrorist attacks have been the subject of the most extensive investigations in modern U.S. history. Official government inquiries, independent commissions, and academic studies have definitively established the sequence of events and identified the perpetrators.
The primary responsibility for the planning and execution of the attacks rests with the terrorist network al-Qaeda, led by Osama bin Laden and operational mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. 
The phrase “he communicates in accidents” highlights a defining feature of Vladimir Putin’s political strategy: leveraging deniable, chaotic, or seemingly accidental events to signal power, enforce internal discipline, and keep external adversaries off balance.
Whether examining his psychological profile, his inner circle dynamics, or geopolitical standoffs, analyzing Putin’s “mind” requires looking past standard diplomatic rhetoric. Instead, observers must decode the calculated patterns behind events officially dismissed as mere mishaps or coincidences. 

Reading Putin’s mind: he communicates in accidents -Review -GS 

The phrase “he communicates in accidents” highlights a defining feature of Vladimir Putin’s political strategy: leveraging deniable, chaotic, or seemingly accidental events to signal power, enforce internal discipline, and keep external adversaries off balance.
Whether examining his psychological profile, his inner circle dynamics, or geopolitical standoffs, analyzing Putin’s “mind” requires looking past standard diplomatic rhetoric. Instead, observers must decode the calculated patterns behind events officially dismissed as mere mishaps or coincidences. [1, 2, 3, 4]
1. The Strategy of “Strategic Ambiguity”
Putin’s background in the KGB heavily influences his communication style. In traditional diplomacy, leaders use speeches, press releases, and treaties to signal intent. Putin frequently communicates through manufactured ambiguity.
  • Calculated Chaos: When opposition figures fall ill, infrastructure suffers sudden failures, or military maneuvers push boundaries, the Kremlin routinely claims these are “accidents” or internal matters.
  • The Message: The underlying message to the world is highly deliberate: We can disrupt your security or stability at any moment, and we will maintain total deniability while doing so.

2. Internal Discipline: The “Accident” as a Warning
Domestically, communicating in accidents is an effective tool for maintaining autocratic control over the Russian elite. [1]
  • Enforcing Loyalty: When high-ranking oligarchs, military officials, or dissidents experience sudden, fatal falls from windows, unexplained poisonings, or unexpected plane crashes, it sends a clear message to the remaining elite.
  • The Psychological Effect: The lack of an official admission of guilt creates an atmosphere of pervasive paranoia. It signals that no one is untouchable, forcing absolute loyalty to the state without the Kremlin needing to trigger formal, politically disruptive executions. [1, 2]

3. Geopolitical Brinkmanship: Testing Red Lines
On the international stage, this communication style manifests as geopolitical testing.
  • Plausible Deniability: Cyberattacks on Western infrastructure, GPS jamming over the Baltic region, and close-quarters military intercepts are often shrugged off by Russian officials as technical glitches or rogue operations.
  • Pushing Boundaries: By framing these escalations as accidental, Putin tests the boundaries of NATO and Western resolve. It forces Western leaders into a difficult position: either accept the “accident” explanation to avoid direct conflict, or risk escalating a war over an event Russia claims it did not intend. [1]

4. The Risk of Miscalculation
While communicating through accidents keeps adversaries guessing, analysts warn that this strategy carries severe dangers:
  • The Paranoia Trap: Isolating himself within a tight, highly filtered echo chamber increases the risk that Putin may misjudge how the West responds to these “accidents.”
  • Escalation Management: When brinkmanship relies heavily on chaotic, deniable events—such as kinetic operations near nuclear facilities or critical energy sectors—the line between a controlled “accidental” signal and a catastrophic, real-world crisis becomes dangerously thin. [1, 2, 3]

Summary: The Core Takeaway
To understand Putin’s decision-making, observers must realize that the accident is often the message itself. By utilizing events that occupy the gray zone between deliberate aggression and random misfortune, the Kremlin successfully projects power, commands fear, and avoids direct accountability. [1, 2] 

Putin communicates in accidents like he did he he was an enraged little boy 

INTERPRETATION

thenewsandtimes.blogspot.com/2026/10/the-mi
Putin: It is an Art, a Game, the Striker Sport for me. A football. They got a goal, you got a goal. It is a fight, a struggle. The smartest and the boldest win.


And I would add: It is also A DEEP RAGE, WELL CONTROLLED, CALCULATED, AND WEAPONIZED.

–

The Synopsis
The Contents: Thoughts and Links


The Mastermind: Putin and the 9/11 Attacks – The “Tripartite Hypothesis” – Google AI Review 

The Significance 

The scholarly and historical consensus states that thoroughly investigating the September 11 attacks is critical because 9/11 served as the foundational catalyst for 21st-century global geopolitics, national security frameworks, and civil liberties. Over two decades of extensive analysis by government bodies, independent researchers, and historians underscore that a precise understanding of the event’s planning, execution, and state-sponsored or institutional enablers is vital for preserving democratic accountability, international stability, and historical truth.
The multifaceted significance of establishing an exhaustive and accurate record of the attacks spans several critical domains.
🏛️ Political Significance & Democratic Accountability
The political ramifications of 9/11 reshape governance and the relationship between citizens and the state.
  • Foreign Policy Sanity: The official findings of the 9/11 Commission directly shaped the “Global War on Terror,” leading to the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. Ensuring complete accuracy regarding state complicity or funding is essential to prevent misdirected military actions and long-term foreign policy blunders.
  • Oversight of Intelligence Apparatchiks: Deep investigations expose systemic vulnerabilities and the failure of intelligence sharing among agencies like the CIA and FBI. Identifying these breakdowns holds institutions accountable and forces necessary, transparent reforms rather than unchecked expansion of bureaucratic power.
  • Combating Government Secrecy: Continuous public pressure to declassify related documents—such as the declassification of files regarding potential foreign government links—strengthens the principle of democratic transparency, ensuring that diplomatic or economic alliances do not shield culpable entities.

🛡️ Social Significance & Domestic Fabric
Sociologically, the precision of 9/11 investigations directly impacts public trust, civil rights, and social cohesion.
  • Restoring Institutional Trust: When gaps or inconsistencies persist in high-profile investigations, public faith in democratic institutions erodes. Clear, verified truths are the primary antidote to institutional cynicism and pervasive misinformation.
  • Civil Liberties Protection: The attacks prompted sweeping domestic legislation, most notably the USA PATRIOT Act, which fundamentally altered privacy laws and expanded state surveillance. Thorough retrospective analysis determines whether these sacrifices of civil liberties were genuinely justified by facts or driven by reactionary panic.
  • Mitigating Xenophobia and Islamophobia: Pinpointing the precise individuals, radical networks, and specific state factions responsible prevents the broad, dangerous scapegoating of entire religious, ethnic, or national groups, protecting vulnerable communities from collective blame.

📜 Historical Significance & Systemic Lessons
From a historical perspective, establishing a definitive, factual baseline prevents the distortion of collective memory.
  • Preventing Historical Revisionism: A rigorously documented, evidence-based record ensures that future generations understand the event based on empirical facts rather than political spin, state propaganda, or unverified fringe theories.
  • Evolving Counter-Terrorism Doctrines: Accurate identification of how the logistics, illicit financing, and radicalization networks functioned allows global security experts to develop precise counter-terrorism frameworks that target actual systemic threats rather than superficial symptoms.
  • Justice for Victims and Survivors: For the families of the victims and the survivors, identifying every tier of culprit—from the hijackers to the financiers—is a fundamental prerequisite for legal justice, financial restitution, and psychological closure.


Part 1: 9/11 Investigations and Misinvestigations 

Part 1: The Mastermind and the Investigation – Feed

The official narrative of the 9/11 attacks overlooks foreign state sponsorship, the non-state actors like Al-Qaeda were merely “foot soldiers” rather than the true architects. The true “Mastermind” was Putin. It was his operation, one of the series of many, with the common contextual, conceptual, and operational patterns, bearing the traces of his complex political personality, including the traits of the Recruiter and the Uniter.
AI Mode 
Historical records show that while the George W. Bush administration initially opposed creating an independent commission, official oversight investigations attribute 9/11 failures to systemic intelligence sharing breakdowns rather than a coordinated suppression of the truth.
Critics, including some lawmakers involved in the early congressional inquiries, have argued that the Bush Administration and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) under Robert Mueller resisted transparency, pointing to delayed clearances and redacted documents. 

Summary

The institutional friction between investigators and the executive branch is well-documented. 
Rather than a coordinated conspiracy to hide the “true” architects of the attacks, the actions taken by the Bush administration and Mueller’s FBI are widely understood by historians and investigators as efforts to protect classified intelligence-gathering methods, avoid public institutional embarrassment, 
(!) and preserve sensitive foreign diplomatic alliances. 
My question: Including Russia, Israel, and Germany? 

Analyzing 9/11 PDBs
Persistent but useless warnings about the Al Qaeda in intelligence reports, including from Russia, Germany, and Israel as the cover: questionable sources, skillful placements – GS:
U.S. intelligence files declassified by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) confirm that the United States received a high volume of vague, non-specific threat alerts from multiple global entities prior to September 11, 2001. These documents—including President’s Daily Briefs (PDBs) spanning from 1998 through September 2001—show that while foreign services like those of Russia, Germany, and Israel frequently flagged Al Qaeda intentions, the raw intelligence often suffered from “warning fatigue,” questionable sources, and a lack of specific, actionable data. [1, 2, 3]
The systemic breakdown described as “questionable sources and skillful placements” manifests across the intelligence chain in several distinct ways.




On September 11, 2026—the 25th anniversary of the September 11 terrorist attacks—the CIA declassified 71 President’s Daily Brief (PDB) products related to al-Qa’ida and Osama bin Laden.

Analyzing 9/11 PDBs and Deception Hypotheses – Gemini 



The intelligence documents reveal that by late 1999, the frequency of conflicting threat targets was so high that senior officials—including Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld—questioned whether Al-Qaeda was intentionally feeding the U.S. false information to force them into wasting resources.

My opinion:

AI Overview

U.S. intelligence files declassified by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) confirm that the United States received a high volume of vague, non-specific threat alerts from multiple global entities prior to September 11, 2001. These documents—including President’s Daily Briefs (PDBs) spanning from 1998 through September 2001—show that while foreign services like those of Russia, Germany, and Israel frequently flagged Al Qaeda intentions, the raw intelligence often suffered from “warning fatigue,” questionable sources, and a lack of specific, actionable data. [1, 2, 3]
The systemic breakdown described as “questionable sources and skillful placements” manifests across the intelligence chain in several distinct ways:




PERSISTENT WARNINGS AS THE COVER

“Fourty warnings in three years” is on average one warning monthly. Nice job of Cover building.
The info was coming from Russia, Germany, and Israel. among the others. Is it not interesting?

“Title and Intent: Titled “Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US,” the brief was compiled by the CIA at the request of President Bush, who had specifically asked if any intelligence pointed to a domestic threat.”
– Who helped him to formulate this question? The one who knew the answer?

Presidential Daily Briefs (PDBs), intelligence warnings
Analyzing 9/11 PDBs and Deception Hypotheses – GS

AI Mode
The relationship between Presidential Daily Briefs (PDBs), intelligence warnings, and the subsequent “deception hypotheses” surrounding the September 11 attacks centers on what the U.S. government knew prior to 9/11 and how agencies responded afterward.
For decades, the historical debate was shaped by a high-volume “signal-to-noise” problem. However, newly declassified materials have provided more granular insights into how information flowed to the highest levels of government. [1, 2]







While no verified evidence links these intelligence services to the orchestration of the attacks, various historical intelligence points and persistent geopolitical conspiracy theories involve these three nations.

“Evaluating the “Tripartite Hypothesis” (Russia, Germany, Israel) – Gemini
Nikolai Patrushev, August Hanning, Efraim Halevy, and the 9/11 Attacks – Google Search
In alternative counterintelligence literature and fringe OSINT analysis, Patrushev, Hanning, and Halevy are sometimes grouped together as the alleged nexus of a covert state-sponsored operation behind 9/11.” – Gemini.
Intelligence Chiefs and 9/11 Analysis share.gemini.google/53XOpjhmd1sk
Nikolai Patrushev, August Hanning, and Efraim Halevy sat at the helm of their respective nations’ primary intelligence services on September 11, 2001—leading Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB), Germany’s Federal Intelligence Service (BND), and Israel’s Mossad.

Call the 911!

9/11 WARNINGS ABOUT THE PILOTS TRAINING

#Israel: “Do not train the Saudi pilots, they will turn against you!”
#Russia: ” Do not send your Saudi pilots to Chechnya, they will turn against you!”
#Germany: “Send these moronic pilots anywhere, we don’t care; but not against us, we had enough!”

The role of the numbers of the well trained pilots in the military competition between Israel and Saudi Arabia: How 9/11 affected this balance? – Google Search google.com/search?q=The+r
The official narrative of the 9/11 attacks overlooks foreign state sponsorship, the non-state actors like Al-Qaeda were merely “foot soldiers” rather than the true architects. The true “Mastermind” was Putin. It was his operation, one of the series of many, with the common contextual, conceptual, and operational patterns, bearing the traces of his complex political personality, including the traits of the Recruiter and the Uniter.


While mainstream intelligence agencies and the 9/11 Commission report attribute the attacks strictly to Al-Qaeda operating out of Afghanistan and Pakistan, the testimonies of Litvinenko and Borovoy remain the foundation for theories that the Kremlin conducted a dangerous “double game” with the hijackers’ leadership.

Search:


Russia historically weaponized and infiltrated international terrorist organizations to serve its geopolitical interests—specifically utilizing them as leverage against Western powers.



WHO BENEFITED? RUSSIA, GERMANY, ISRAEL.

THE EFFECTS: WHAT HAPPPENED AFTER 9/11?

The After Effects of 9/11 in suspected players and US:
THE RIGHTIST REALIGNMENT:
9/11 caused a global shift to the Right, in tune with Putin’s “conservatism”.
Mission accomplished!
Search:
How did Israel benefit geopolitically from 9/11?
How did Schroeder’s Germany change politically and geopolitically after 9/11?
How did Putin’s Russia change politically and geopolitically after 9/11?
Political shift to the Right in US after 9/11
RIGHTIST REALIGNMENT after 9/11
Putin’s conservatism



The nature of the investigative hypotheses in the counterintelligence investigations of 9/11 attack

    
Search:

The Mastermind: Putin and the 9/11 Attacks – All Feeds Review



Part 1: The Mastermind and the Investigation


Встреча с председателем «Деловой России» Алексеем Репиком • Президент России

My opinion: PUTIN THE MASTERMIND

The official narrative of the 9/11 attacks overlooks foreign state sponsorship, the non-state actors like Al-Qaeda were merely “foot soldiers” rather than the true architects. The true “Mastermind” was Putin. It was his operation, one of the series of many, with the common contextual, conceptual, and operational patterns, bearing the traces of his complex political personality, including the traits of the Recruiter and the Uniter.

At the center of this hypothesis is the political personality of V. Putin, the true Mastermind of the 9/11 attacks. 9/11 is the counterintelligence error, with failure to monitor the foreign leaders closely and to try to understand better their motivations and actions, both overt and the covert.

When the advantages gained by Russia, Germany, and Israel are so obvious and dramatic, just like the general shift to the Right; it is more than just a lucky and random fruit falling in their laps. There must be a causal connection there, especially from the counterintelligence perspectives.
Search:





Instead of the Foreword:




#CIA CIA #FBI FBI #Mossad Mossad

The two co-chairs of the 9/11 Commission, Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton, believe that the government established the 9/11 Commission in a way that ensured that it would fail.
…
“So there were all kinds of reasons we thought we were set up to fail”, Hamilton argues.

Criticism of the 9/11 Commission – Wikipedia en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism

SEARCH: Criticism of the 9/11 Commission:

The 9/11 Commission has faced significant criticism from political figures, intelligence officials, civil liberties advocates, and families of the victims.


Search also:




My opinion: 
By “true culprits” I mean the masterminds and the behind the scenes organizers, not just the foot soldiers – the hijackers. 
It is impossible to take the “Al Qaeda” version seriously, and something more than just the elaborate, meticulously prepared in advance COVER.

Search: 

Lack of Analytical Focus: The Bureau operated primarily as a reactive law enforcement agency built to solve crimes after they occurred, rather than an intelligence agency designed to preemptively disrupt complex global terrorist plots.




#CIA CIA #FBI FBI #Mossad Mossad
Google AI: “The FBI actively restricted, delayed, or classified critical pieces of evidence in investigation of 9/11.”

(My Opinion: Under the orders from ABOVE, pushing their lame “Al Qaeda” version.)

The claim that the Bush Administration and Robert Mueller’s FBI suppressed the 9/11 investigation is a subject of significant historical debate, involving documented political friction, institutional resistance, and subsequent declassifications rather than a blanket suppression. While official investigations did take place, multiple independent sources and former officials have detailed specific instances where the administration and the FBI actively restricted, delayed, or classified critical pieces of evidence.

The true, in depth 9/11 investigation was suppressed by the Bush Administration and Robert Mueller’s FBI

– Google Search

And more than that: The views that disagreed and challenged the “Al Qaeda” version of 9/11 were actively and systematically suppressed by the U.S. Government and its extensions, which reminds the Soviet style of global censorship, and possibly a sign of Putin’s political personality.



AI Mode 
Historical records show that while the George W. Bush administration initially opposed creating an independent commission, official oversight investigations attribute 9/11 failures to systemic intelligence sharing breakdowns rather than a coordinated suppression of the truth.
Critics, including some lawmakers involved in the early congressional inquiries, have argued that the Bush Administration and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) under Robert Mueller resisted transparency, pointing to delayed clearances and redacted documents. Conversely, government reviews, such as the 9/11 Commission Report and subsequent Department of Justice Inspector General reports, concluded that the primary issue was institutional inertia and poor coordination between agencies, not a cover-up. [1, 2, 3, 4]

Summary

The institutional friction between investigators and the executive branch is well-documented. 
Rather than a coordinated conspiracy to hide the “true” architects of the attacks, the actions taken by the Bush administration and Mueller’s FBI are widely understood by historians and investigators as efforts to protect classified intelligence-gathering methods, avoid public institutional embarrassment, and preserve sensitive foreign diplomatic alliances. 
Search: 
My opinion – Search: 







My impression: It looks like the paper and/or cyber trail were carefully and skillfully constructed as the part of the Cover in preparation for the 9/11 attacks. This is not the style of the non-state actors, such as “Al Qaeda”.

Search also:



9/11 truth movement – W


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Supporters of the 9/11 Truth movement at an anti-war demonstration in Los Angeles, October 2007

The 9/11 truth movement encompasses a disparate group of adherents to a set of overlapping conspiracy theories that dispute the general consensus of the September 11 attacks that a group of Al-Qaeda terrorists had hijacked four airliners and crashed them into the Pentagon and the original World Trade Center Twin Towers, which consequently collapsed. The primary focus is what the movement perceives as missed information that they allege is not adequately explained in the official National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) reports, such as the collapse of 7 World Trade Center. They believe in a cover-up and, at the least, complicity by insiders.[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8]

They analyze evidence from the attacks, come up with different conspiracy theories about how the attacks happened and call for a new investigation into the attacks

Alternative theories regarding the September 11 attacks—commonly referred to as 9/11 conspiracy theories—contend that the official account of the attacks is either incomplete or intentionally fabricated. While structural engineers, aviation experts, and the official 9/11 Commission Report conclude that the destruction was caused by four hijacked commercial aircraft operated by al-Qaeda terrorists, various alternative narratives have persisted since 2001. [1, 2, 3]
These alternative theories generally fall into two main categories of government complicity or look toward completely separate actors:



While no verified evidence links these intelligence services to the orchestration of the attacks, various historical intelligence points and persistent geopolitical conspiracy theories involve these three nations.

THE MISSING LINK: GERMANY’S STATE SUPPORT FOR THE HAMBURG CELL

Search:

GERMANY’S STATE SUPPORT FOR THE HAMBURG CELL

#CIA CIA #FBI FBI #Mossadd Mossad


The phrase “9/11: the missing link” refers to a prominent public theory and a series of high-profile statements made by August Hanning – News Review
thenewsandtimes.blogspot.com/2026/10/the-ph
My impression:
Hanning was on the right track with his “frequent” remarks about the role of the “STATE SUPPORT” for Hamburg cell, although it is unclear if he considered Germany itself in this role. It was a powerful opinion, at odds with the official version of the non-state Al Qaeda, and someone (the true culprits) probably did not like it, because it could lead directly to them. What followed, looks like a SETUP, the series of traps for Hanning, from his financial ruin (prearranged?) to his various unrelated private investigations which eventually lead to his arrest and current predicament. Now he is effectively shut off from the world and can talk only to his native BND. His former boss Gerhard Schroeder looks unconcerned about this, and, to the contrary, rather happy in his meeting with Putin: was this his birthday present?
It looks like the “STATE SUPPORT” for the Hamburg Cell, of which Hanning frequently spoke out, went directly from Gerhard Schroeder through his own channels, via the local Hamburg politicians, bypassing Hanning; otherwise Hanning would not speak about it so readily, risking to implicate himself and Germany.
The aim of this support was to help the future hijackers in their adaptation to the life in the western society, so they could fit seamlessly, inconspicuously, and unsuspiciously into the life in the US, while attending the pilots schools. At the same time, they were continuously “egged on” and WEAPONIZED.

–


9/11: the missing link – August Hanning – Google AI Mode: The phrase “9/11: the missing link” refers to a prominent public theory and a series of high-profile statements made by August Hanning, the former head of Germany’s Federal Intelligence Service (BND), regarding the 2001 terrorist attacks. [1, 2] Hanning, who led the BND from 1998 to 2005, has frequently spoken out about a missing link in the official 9/11 investigations—specifically targeting the logistical and financial state support given to the Hamburg Al-Qaeda cell, which included lead hijacker Mohamed Atta.

Hanning has argued that the hijackers could not have lived and operated so seamlessly in Germany without structured, domestic assistance that went largely unmapped by the initial U.S. and German investigations. [1, 2]


9/11: the missing link – August Hanning – Google Search google.com/search?q=9%2F1


Severe Intelligence Oversight

The Historical Investigation (August Hanning vs. The 9/11 Hamburg Cell)

Following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, Hanning—acting as the BND chief—headed the German intelligence apparatus tasked with mapping how al-Qaeda pilots like Mohamed Atta operated undetected from Germany. [1, 2]
Operational Failures: The investigation revealed severe intelligence oversight. German authorities admitted they actually had members of the cell and their Marienstrasse apartment under surveillance in 1998 and 1999 due to a suspected bin Laden operative. However, the surveillance was abandoned when investigators failed to connect the students to an active threat. [1]
The Chechnya Pivot: Intelligence records compiled during the post-9/11 investigations showed that the Hamburg cell members initially intended to fight in Chechnya. A chance encounter on a German train with an extremist named Khalid Masri redirected them to a Mauritanian businessman, who subsequently introduced them to Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan, where they were recruited for the plane operation. [1]
Logistical Support: The intelligence findings mapped out how the cell utilized individuals like Said Bahaji and Mounir El Motassadeq to manage routine banking and university affairs while the primary pilots were away training in Afghanistan and the United States, allowing them to avoid drawing the suspicion of immigration officials. [1, 2]
The intersection of these two timelines created a massive political scandal in Germany, shifting August Hanning’s legacy from the man who investigated the 9/11 Hamburg terrorists to a suspect arrested because of a Hamburg police raid on his own home. [1, 2]

The results of Hanning’s investigation of the Hamburg cell: summary – Google Search google.com/search?q=The+r

August Hanning and 9/11 Intelligence – Gemini

Germany’s former foreign intelligence chief August Hanning and 9/11


August Hanning served as the President of the Bundesnachrichtendienst (BND), Germany’s foreign intelligence agency, from 1998 to 2005. This placed him at the helm of German intelligence during the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

(Note: In a major breaking development as of October 6, 2026, Hanning was arrested in Germany on suspicion of espionage and treason. He is accused of purchasing classified intelligence documents from a former BND employee, identified as Manfred D., in order to resell them.)

Hanning’s tenure and his agency’s connection to 9/11 and its aftermath are defined by three major intelligence events:

The Hamburg Cell Oversight


AI Overview

August Hanning served as the President of Germany’s Federal Intelligence Service (BND) from 1998 to 2005, a crucial tenure that directly overlapped with the September 11 attacks and the subsequent international counterterrorism investigations. [1, 2, 3]
Because the central operational cell behind the attacks—including lead hijacker Mohamed Atta—lived, studied, and planned the logistics of the plot in Hamburg, Germany, Hanning and the BND occupied a pivotal role in the post-9/11 investigations. [1, 2]
His role and historical legacy regarding the 9/11 investigations are defined by three major areas:

1. Overseeing the Investigation into the Hamburg Cell

Immediately following the attacks, Hanning directed the BND’s internal investigations into the Al-Qaeda infrastructure within Germany. The BND worked extensively to uncover how the “Hamburg Cell” had operated undetected on German soil, mapping out their logistical networks, banking records, and foreign communications. Under his leadership, the BND heavily restructured to pivot away from traditional Cold War espionage and lean toward aggressive anti-terror strategy and intelligence-sharing with allies like the CIA and MI6. [1, 2, 3, 4]

2. Proposing the 9/11 “Missing Link” Theory

In the years following his intelligence career, Hanning became a prominent voice commenting on the blind spots of the initial 9/11 investigations. He famously raised public theories regarding what he termed the “missing link” of 9/11. 
Hanning argued that the official U.S. and international investigations left a critical gap: how Mohamed Atta and his co-conspirators managed to seamlessly live, study, and finance their operations in Germany for years without some level of structured domestic or external state-backed logistical support. He contended that the full extent of this potential support network was never fully mapped out by investigators. [1, 2]




Nikolai Patrushev, August Hanning, Efraim Halevy, and the 9/11 Attacks – Google Search
Nikolai Patrushev, August Hanning, and Efraim Halevy sat at the helm of their respective nations’ primary intelligence services on September 11, 2001—leading Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB), Germany’s Federal Intelligence Service (BND), and Israel’s Mossad.

Examining these three figures together requires separating two distinct frameworks: the documented historical record of pre-9/11 intelligence warnings, jurisdictional blind spots, and post-9/11 geopolitical realignment; and the alternative counterintelligence hypothesis that attempts to link Moscow, Berlin, and Tel Aviv as covert facilitators of the attacks.

1. The Counterparts in September 2001



August Hanning and Gerhard Schroeder – Google Search

The simple and brutal messages of 9/11 Attacks:
Call the 911!
9/11 WARNINGS ABOUT THE PILOTS TRAINING

#Israel: “Do not train the Saudi pilots, they will turn against you!”
#Russia: ” Do not send your Saudi pilots to Chechnya, they will turn against you!”
#Germany: “Send these moronic pilots anywhere, we don’t care; but not against us, we had enough!”


The military balance between the Israeli Air Force (IAF) and the Royal Saudi Air Force (RSAF) has historically favored Israel due to human capital rather than airframe counts, and the post-9/11 era shifted political dynamics that preserved Israel’s qualitative pilot and doctrinal edge while redirecting Saudi strategic priorities away from direct competition.


The role of the numbers of the well trained pilots in the military competition between Israel and Saudi Arabia: How 9/11 affected this balance? – Google Search


The September 11 attacks shifted this dynamic by significantly modifying how both nations trained their pilots, and altering the structural military relationship between the United States and Saudi Arabia.

The number and exceptional preparation of combat pilots have historically formed the cornerstone of Israel’s Qualitative Military Edge (QME), a U.S.-mandated policy ensuring Israel maintains a regional technological and operational advantage. While Saudi Arabia historically possessed superior numbers of advanced airframes, it faced systemic challenges in building a massive, natively trained elite pilot corps, relying heavily on U.S.-led training pipelines. [1, 2, 3, 4]
…

The Shift from Rivals to Shared Security Concerns

Paradoxically, the post-9/11 era altered the competitive nature of Israel-Saudi relations. As the U.S. focus shifted toward global counter-terrorism and countering Iran, the perceived threat of a conventional air war between Israel and Saudi Arabia diminished. [9]
The two nations transitioned into a framework of tacit intelligence sharing and airspace coordination. This transformation became evident during civil aviation emergencies, such as the foiled flydubai hijacking attempt where both Israeli and Saudi air defense forces actively scrambled jets in a synchronized response to a mutual 9/11-style threat. [9, 10, 11] 

If Russia, Israel, and Germany are behind 9/11, here are their hypothetical motivations.
Russia intended to stop further unravelling of the USSR by turning the tables on the Western sponsors of Chechen separatists, including the US, Saudi Arabia, and other Muslim countries, by forming the anti-American Al Qaeda as the cover.
Israel intended to ignite the intense hostilities between the Saudi Arabia, other Arab countries, and the US, in the hope of benefitting from it, and strengthening the alliance with the US.
Germany, namely Schroeder, found the way to express their post-WW2 hatred for the US and to affirm their short lived, post-German unification gratitude and closeness with Russia.
These were the large scale, strategic, long term motivations and plans, with 9/11 as the “proper” action and the Special Operation.
The technical acumen of the Operation 9/11 points to the state sponsored operation, not the half-literate “Al Qaeda”.

All this is pretty much on the surface, and it does not require the deep digging.
What does, is the ease and readiness to be deceived on the part of the CIA, FBI, and other investigators.
The famous American group think and conformity may be the answers to this question.
And of course our universal, human, all too human ability for Denial and Self-deception.
It protects us from the Unbearable Pain of Knowledge.

  • Intelligence Profiles: Declassified CIA psychological profiles from that era characterized Sharon as a “brilliant, ruthless, and ambitious” military and political strategist. [1]

  • Post-9/11 Counterterrorism: During his time as Prime Minister, the CIA worked intimately with Israeli intelligence to manage counterterrorism operations in the West Bank and Gaza, despite the public political clashes between Sharon and the Bush administration regarding settlement expansion and his fiery rhetoric. [1, 2, 3, 4]


Ariel Sharon’s fierce independence
and his aggressive, no holds barred attitude in defending the Israel’s interests, as he saw them; and his political personality and his past history (see the Iran-Contra affair below), make his clandestine (and very effective) role and participation in the 9/11 Attacks, in cahoots with Putin, not only quite possible but very likely.
His illness, probably induced by the CIA, confirms this hypothesis.
It is also quite possible that Putin “sold him out” to the CIA prior to that: blamed everything on him, as the Russian common criminal habit is, to save his own skin.
The future declassifications may shine some dimmed light on this thesis.

Ariel Sharon and Iran-Contra affair – Google Search


Ariel Sharon played a direct, foundational role in early Israel-Iran arms channels and regional maneuvers that later intertwined with the origins of the Iran–Contra affair. [1, 2]

Role as Defense Minister (1981–1983)

Arms Sales to Iran: As Israel’s Defense Minister, Sharon publicly and privately defended and oversaw Israeli arms sales and spare parts shipments to Iran during the Iran–Iraq War, operating on the strategic premise that Iraq was Israel’s primary threat. [1, 2]
U.S. Authorization Conflicts: In 1981, an arrangement was made with U.S. Secretary of State Alexander Haig allowing case-by-case reviews of U.S.-origin equipment transfers to Iran. However, the U.S. rescinded the agreement in 1982 after concluding that Sharon was shipping American-made military hardware to Iran without proper U.S. clearance. [1]
1982 Anti-Khomeini Coup Plot: According to historical accounts such as Samuel Segev’s The Iranian Triangle: The Untold Story of Israel’s Role in the Iran-Contra Affair, Sharon met secretly in Kenya in 1982 with Saudi businessman Adnan Khashoggi and associates connected to Reza Pahlavi (son of the deposed Shah of Iran) to back a planned coup against Iran’s government. Sharon allegedly agreed to provide up to $800 million in arms and instruction, though the plot collapsed after Sharon was forced to resign as Defense Minister. The Kahan Commission had found him indirectly responsible for the Sabra and Shatila refugee camp massacres. [1]

Connection to the Iran-Contra Scandal (1985–1986)

Laying the Groundwork: Israel’s initial intelligence and logistical channels to Iran—championed and expanded by figures like Sharon, David Kimche, and arms dealers in the early-to-mid 1980s—paved the way for the later U.S. “arms-for-hostages” dealings with Iran. [1, 2]
Central America and the Contras: Israel also acted as an early conduit for military assistance to the Nicaraguan Contras before and during the period when the Reagan administration sought to bypass U.S. congressional restrictions (such as the Boland Amendment), embedding Sharon’s earlier defense-establishment policies into the broader triangular web of Israel, Iran, and the U.S.–Contra operations. [1, 2, 3, 4]


Israel
See also: September 11 attacks advance-knowledge conspiracy theories § Israel
A conspiracy theory documented by the Anti-Defamation League, Thom Burnett and others is that the state of Israel was involved in the attacks, and may have planned them. A variety of motives are suggested, including: to cause the United States to attack enemies of Israel; to divert public attention away from Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians; to help Zionists take control of world affairs; and to persuade Americans to support Israel.

Variants of the theory contend that the attack was organized by then-Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon, the intelligence agency Mossad, or other actors from the Israeli government.
[149][150]

According to Slate, Kevin Barrett, a former lecturer at the University of Wisconsin, is a “leading advocate of theories that Israel’s Mossad orchestrated the 9/11 attacks.”[151]

My opinion:
It is entirely possible that The Bulldozer Sharon went to bed (IN CAHOOTS) with The Mastermind Putin in orchestrating the 9/11, with the intent of igniting the Anti-Arab sentiments and preserving the Israel’s air superiority.
It would be in line with his character, political personality, and very complex relationship with the U.S..

This thesis has to be investigated; in details and objectively: what, how, when, why, etc.
By whom?

Putin, Ariel Sharon, their political relationship, and the 9/11 attacks – GS

Top Secret!
The Operation of Opening the America’s Eyes (9/11)
(And benefiting in the Process!)
The role of Israel in the 9/11 Attacks –
feeder.co/out/collection
Putin and Sharon met in the Kremlin on 9.4.01 (just one week prior to 9/11 Attacks).
What was on the agenda?
“Russia strongly condemns violence and calls for taking effective measures to fight terrorism”, the minutes said.
They have found a common ground with the “International Islamic Terrorism” (the wars in Chechnya and the West Bank), and the America ‘s reluctance to see it as the big problem.
As if they wanted to say:
“Something has to happen to open their eyes on this subject.
This is an Emergency!
Call 911!
We give our final approval!
Yeapps!”

Putin – Sharon 2001, (1.1.2001 – 12.31.2001)
Between January 1, 2001, and November 31, 2001, Russian President Vladimir Putin and Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon held one official face-to-face bilateral summit and at least three documented telephone conversations. Their interactions primarily revolved around the escalation of the Second Intifada, the U.S.-brokered peace blueprints, and deep Israeli concerns regarding Russian military and nuclear technology exports to Iran.

“The Bulldozer”
Ariel Sharon: political personality – Google Search

THE DELICATE QUESTIONS



“The FBI and CIA had investigated potential leads connecting Saudi nationals and officials to some of the hijackers.”
Search: Were the “potential leads” of 9/11 to Russia, Germany, and Israel ADEQUATELY investigated?
Google AI: It remains a subject of historical debate …
My Opinion: The ADL frivolous accusations of antisemitism related to 9/11 Israel investigations are inappropriate.
“Mossad Role (False Claims): Claims that the Mossad or Israel orchestrated 9/11 are widely documented by organizations like the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) as antisemitic conspiracy theories and historical tropes lacking any factual or forensic backing.”
Search: “9/11 hijackers and Mossad”.
ADL is not the FBI to conduct the investigations.
Search: FBI and Anti-Defamation League (ADL)







Search Also: 

“The Bulldozer”Ariel Sharon and the CIA: a complex relationship


At the center of this hypothesis is the political personality of V. Putin, the true Mastermind of the 9/11 attacks. 9/11 is the counterintelligence error, with failure to monitor the foreign leaders closely and to try to understand better their motivations and actions, both overt and the covert.

He is the consensus builder, the recruiter, the uniter, the builder of the geopolitical alliances and coalitions, including very much in the spheres of Security and Intelligence.
That’s how he put himself and Russia at the head of the anti-American Intelligence alliance with Germany and Israel in the Operation 9/11.
AI Mode

The political personality of Russian President Vladimir Putin is widely analyzed by political psychologists, biographers, and intelligence experts as an “expansionist hostile enforcer” or a highly deliberative, high-dominance introvert whose behavior is deeply rooted in his background as a KGB officer. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
Political scientists and psychological profilers break down his political personality through several primary frameworks:

1. The Psychodiagnostic Profile: “Expansionist Hostile Enforcer”

Using the Millon Inventory of Diagnostic Criteria (MIDC) via open-source intelligence, researchers like Aubrey Immelman have classified Putin’s personality as a composite of three primary patterns: [1, 2]


My Opinion:
It is very unlikely that any documents on the true origins of 9/11 exist in principle – the matter is so sensitive and explosive. The plan was known to the very few people, presumably to Putin the Mastermind, his seconds, Patrushev and Bortnikov, likely, Schroeder, and probably some Mossad Chiefs. Hanning’s knowledge and tasks were likely limited by the Hamburg Cell. However, his ability to communicate with Russia and Israel, directly or via Azerbaijan, point to possibility of sharing this information and coordination. Hanning can disclose this and other information if he is given a good enough incentive in the process of further investigations.






While there is a verified historical intersection between Russian security agencies and a key architect of the 9/11 plot, mainstream intelligence and historical consensus attribute this to an operational failure rather than a collaborative overlap.
The connection primarily centers around Ayman al-Zawahiri, who later became the co-orchestrator of the September 11 attacks and leader of al-Qaeda. [1]
The Verified Contact: The 1996 Dagestan Detention
In December 1996, Ayman al-Zawahiri traveled to the North Caucasus to establish a base of operations in Chechnya. He was arrested by Russian authorities in Dagestan for entering the country illegally without a proper visa. [1, 2, 3]
#Russia and 9/11: Zawahiri, #Litvinenko, #Borovoy

While mainstream intelligence agencies and the 9/11 Commission report attribute the attacks strictly to Al-Qaeda operating out of Afghanistan and Pakistan, the testimonies of Litvinenko and Borovoy remain the foundation for theories that the Kremlin conducted a dangerous “double game” with the hijackers’ leadership.

Search: Russia historically weaponized and infiltrated international terrorist organizations to serve its geopolitical interests—specifically utilizing them as leverage against Western powers.

–

Russian security agencies had deep, complex, and unacknowledged historical overlaps with figures who later formed the backbone of the 9/11 plot.

Search also:

The effect of 9/11 on the Second Chechen War 

WHO BENEFITED? RUSSIA, GERMANY, ISRAEL.

THE EFFECTS: WHAT HAPPPENED AFTER 9/11?

The After Effects of 9/11 in suspected players and US:
THE RIGHTIST REALIGNMENT:
9/11 caused a global shift to the Right, in tune with Putin’s “conservatism”.
Mission accomplished!
Search:
How did Israel benefit geopolitically from 9/11?
How did Schroeder’s Germany change politically and geopolitically after 9/11?
How did Putin’s Russia change politically and geopolitically after 9/11?
Political shift to the Right in US after 9/11
RIGHTIST REALIGNMENT after 9/11
Putin’s conservatism

Search:
How did Israel benefit geopolitically from 9/11?
Geopolitical analysts and historians state that the September 11 attacks significantly altered the strategic landscape of the Middle East, yielding several geopolitical shifts that aligned with Israeli security objectives. While the immediate aftermath introduced complex diplomatic dynamics, the long-term changes fundamentally integrated Israel’s localized conflicts into a broader global framework.
According to assessments by foreign policy experts and historical analyses, Israel’s geopolitical position shifted in the following key ways:

Convergence of the Counter-Terrorism Narrative

Search: How did Schroeder’s Germany change politically and geopolitically after 9/11?

Following the September 11 attacks, Chancellor Gerhard Schröder’s Germany experienced a profound political transformation and structural geopolitical shift, fundamentally moving away from its post-WWII military reluctance toward an assertive, independent role in global security.

Political Changes: Domestic Security and Coalition Strain

  • The Proclamation of “Unlimited Solidarity”: Immediately after the attacks, Schröder declared Germany’s “unlimited solidarity” (uneingeschränkte Solidarität) with the United States. This was a massive psychological pivot for a nation deeply anchored in post-war pacifism.
  • The 2001 Vote of Confidence: To fulfill his promise of military support in Afghanistan, Schröder faced fierce resistance from fundamentalist factions within his own center-left SPD-Green coalition. To force compliance, he tied the deployment of 3,900 Bundeswehr troops to a vote of confidence in November 2001. He narrowly won, consolidating his leadership but exposing deep ideological rifts on the German left.

Search: How did Putin’s Russia change politically and geopolitically after 9/11?
The September 11 attacks served as a major catalyst for Vladimir Putin to reshape Russia’s domestic and foreign policy. Putin leveraged the global War on Terror to consolidate domestic political power and launch a dramatic, albeit short-lived, geopolitical pivot toward the West.
This period fundamentally transformed how Russia interacted with global powers and accelerated its transition toward centralized authoritarianism.

Geopolitical Transformations

The immediate aftermath of 9/11 marked a radical departure from traditional Russian foreign policy paradigms. [1]


August Hanning’s communications implicate both Israel and Russia in the hypothetical origins of 9/11

Search also:

The blame for MISINVESTIGATION of 9/11 is on Bush administration, FBI at that time, and Robert Mueller.
REINVESTIGATE THE 9/11!

Kash Patel, please add it to your list of the FBI historical mistakes, on the number 1 slot.
Thank you.
–


Search:

In counterintelligence and intelligence investigations surrounding the September 11 attacks, investigative hypotheses primarily focused on state-sponsored orchestration versus non-state actor autonomy, the operational security (OPSEC) tradecraft of the hijackers, and systemic structural vulnerabilities within U.S. intelligence. Rather than viewing 9/11 purely as a criminal act, counterintelligence (CI) investigators evaluated how foreign intelligence and extremist networks successfully penetrated domestic borders without triggering strategic warnings. [1, 2, 3]

1. State Sponsorship vs. Autonomous Network Support

A central counterintelligence hypothesis examined whether the al-Qaeda network operated entirely independently or relied on the covert assistance of foreign governments or intelligence services.
  • Foreign State Facilitation: The FBI’s massive PENTTBOM investigation and subsequent congressional inquiries heavily evaluated whether elements within foreign governments provided logistical, financial, or intelligence support to the hijackers. This included intensive vetting of figures like Omar al-Bayoumi to determine if they acted as foreign intelligence assets helping the hijackers embed in the U.S. [2, 4, 5]
  • Financial Intelligence: Investigators tested hypotheses concerning insider trading and illicit international banking systems. The 9/11 Commission Report ultimately concluded that while unusual pre-9/11 market transactions occurred, they lacked an intelligence-linked nexus to advance knowledge of the attacks. [6, 7]

…

4. Systemic Vulnerabilities and the Intelligence “Wall”

A critical hypothesis evaluated by post-9/11 reviews—including the Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General—was that domestic legal barriers effectively blinded U.S. counterintelligence. [11]
  • The Information Barrier: Legal interpretations in the 1990s built a rigid “wall” preventing foreign intelligence investigators from sharing data with domestic criminal investigators. [12, 13]
  • Tracking Failures: The investigative hypothesis confirmed that this separation caused systemic communication failures. For instance, though the CIA and NSA possessed data regarding hijackers Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Mihdhar, the information was not successfully integrated into FBI domestic counterintelligence operations until it was too late. [12, 14, 15]

…

The nature of these investigative hypotheses is defined by several core analytical focus areas:

1. The Operational Security (OPSEC) and Counter-Espionage Hypothesis

A primary hypothesis in CI investigations is determining how a hostile network operated undetected within domestic borders for an extended period.
  • The “Zero Lapses” Premise: Investigators evaluate how the 19 hijackers maintained stringent operational security over 20 months in the United States. [1, 2]
  • Tradecraft Assessment: Counterintelligence personnel form hypotheses regarding whether the operatives received formal intelligence training. For 9/11, subsequent investigations—including testimony to the 9/11 Joint Inquiry—concluded that the conspirators executed highly effective defensive counterintelligence tradecraft, showing no major operational slips that would tip off federal agencies. [1, 2, 3]

2. The Foreign State Sponsorship and Facilitation Hypothesis

Counterintelligence investigations routinely establish hypotheses regarding whether non-state terrorist actors are operating as proxies or receiving active facilitation from foreign intelligence services (FIS).
  • Logistical Support Networks: Investigators look for anomalies in funding, travel documentation, and housing to hypothesize whether foreign intelligence officers or diplomatic staff aided the cells.
  • State vs. Non-State Dynamics: In the context of 9/11, massive investigative resources were dedicated to exploring potential institutional links to foreign governments, specifically examining whether foreign intelligence entities provided safe passage, funding, or strategic cover.

See Also:


Search also: 

AI Mode

The 19 al-Qaeda hijackers successfully maintained strict operational security (OPSEC) and counterintelligence tradecraft over 20 months in the United States by operating with calculated deception rather than reckless fanaticism. According to the 9/11 Commission Report and subsequent intelligence studies, the conspirators successfully blended into Western society and exploited systemic loopholes while avoiding behaviors that would trigger law enforcement scrutiny. [1, 2, 3]
The cell utilized several foundational strategies to safeguard their plot:
1. Cultural Assimilation and Broad Deception
The operatives went to great lengths to alter their lifestyles and appearances to pass as ordinary Western students or tourists. [1, 2]


Search also: 

My opinion: 

The future hijackers were seamlessly guided, assisted, and continuously weaponized by the invisible networks of the expert forces in both Germany and the US. 

The high level of this expertise and skills indicate their hypothetical connection with the professional intelligence services: Russian, German, Israeli, or all three, in some sort of coordinated fashion. 





LINKS 


The News And Times

1 day ago

The Mastermind Putin and the 9/11 Attacks:: The Russia – Germany – Israel Hypothesis – Google AI Review

 The Mastermind: Putin and the 9/11 Attacks – All Feeds Review – The Mastermind: Putin and the 9/11 Attacks – The “Tripartite Hypothesis” – Google AI Review The Operati…

The News And Times

1 day ago

Operation 9/11: Putin was the Mastermind at the head of the Anti-American Alliance of the Intelligence Services of Russia, Germany, and Israel – the Hypothesis.

The 9/11 Reexamined: Putin was the Mastermind at the head of the Anti-American Alliance of the Intelligence Services of Russia, Germany, and Israel – the HypothesisThe Operation 9/…

The News And Times

1 day ago

Putin the Mastermind

Putin the Mastermind  -The News And Times Information Network – Blogs By Michael Novakhov – thenewsandtimes.blogspot.com

Get updates to your inbox

The News And Times

1 day ago

Recent Posts: Reading Putin’s mind: he communicates in accidents – Review

The 9/11 Reexamined: Putin was the Mastermind at the head of the Anti-American Alliance of the Intelligence Services of Russia, Germany, and Israel – the HypothesisThe Operation 9/…

The News And Times

2 days ago

Reading Putin’s mind: he communicates in accidents – Review

 Reading Putin’s mind: he communicates in accidents – Review  -The News And Times Information Network – Blogs By Michael Novakhov – thenewsandtimes.blogspot.com

The News And Times

2 days ago

Latest Starred Posts – Review

Latest Starred Posts -The News And Times Information Network – Blogs By Michael Novakhov – thenewsandtimes.blogspot.com

The News And Times

2 days ago

The very strange case of August Hanning – Review

The very strange case of August Hanning  -The News And Times Information Network – Blogs By Michael Novakhov – thenewsandtimes.blogspot.com

The News And Times

2 days ago

The role of Israel in the 9/11 Attacks – Review

x.com1d@mikenov: #CIA CIA #FBI FBI #Mossad Mossad It is entirely possible that The Bulldozer Sharon went to bed (IN CAHOOTS) with The Mastermind Putin in orchestrating the 9/11, wi…

The News And Times

2 days ago

Sharon remained perpetually suspicious that Washington would pressure him into territorial or security concessions

The Mastermind: Putin and the 9/11 Attacks – All Feeds Reviewx.com2h@mikenov: Sharon remained perpetually suspicious that Washington would pressure him into territorial or security…

The News And Times

2 days ago

All Feeds Review: The Mastermind: Putin and the 9/11 Attacks

All Feeds Review: Mastermind: Putin and the 9/11 Attacks -The News And Times Information Network – Blogs By Michael Novakhov – thenewsandtimes.blogspot.com

The News And Times

2 days ago

Экономический и гуманитарный форум Россия – Африка

 Articles and TweetsX12mЭкономический и гуманитарный форум Россия – АфрикаX15m#News #Israel #Netanyahu News Israel Netanyahu Israel election resultsX1hRT by @mikenov: 🇮🇱 Israel’s…

The News And Times

3 days ago

THE PARTNERS

Articles and TweetsX2hRT by @mikenov: The Soviet Union collapsed in 1991. But its KGB spies didn’t vanish. Some now hold powerful positions in Russia’s intelligence agencies, targe…

The News And Times

11 days ago

Articles and Tweets: The Mastermind – Selected Tweets

Articles and TweetsX8m#CIA CIA #FBI FBI #Mossad Mossad The Mastermind Selected TweetsX1hRT by @mikenov: Unity Mitford (Unity Valkyrie Freeman-Mitford; 1914-1948), a British aristoc…

The News And Times

12 days ago

The Mastermind: Selected Tweets

Putin The Mastermind: The Russia – Germany – Israel Hypothesis in the investigation of 9/11 Attacks1000 Latest Starred PostsIntroduction: Putin The MastermindINTERPRETATIONPutin: I…

The News And Times Information Network – Blogs By Michael Novakhov – thenewsandtimes.blogspot.com

Categories
The News And Times Blog

The Declassified 9/11 PDBs

 The Declassified 9/11 PDBs


    1.1 The Declassified 9/11 PDBs

The Declassified 9/11 PDBs: what transpired? 

The Declassified 9/11 PDBs: The induced “warning fatigue”

The Declassified 9/11 PDBs: Questionable sources, skillful placements 

Induced “Warning Fatigue”:

The Declassified 9/11 PDBs: questionable sources, skillful placements, warning fatigue – AI Mode

Induced “Warning Fatigue”
The Declassified 9/11 PDBs: questionable sources, skillful placements, warning fatigue – AI Mode
Pic.: YouTube: youtube.com/watch?v=LkAGZI
The massive September 2026 declassification by the CIA of 71 Presidential Daily Briefs (PDBs) spanning 1998 to 2001 provides a granular look at the agonizing intelligence mosaic presented to Presidents Clinton and Bush before the September 11 attacks. [1, 2, 3]
Rather than revealing a single “smoking gun,” these highly guarded documents illustrate the complex, systemic friction of counterterrorism in the pre-9/11 era. The core themes of your query highlight exactly why the strategic warnings failed to translate into tactical prevention: [1, 2]

1. Questionable Sources vs. Plausible Threats

Before the modern mandate of explicitly grading analytical “confidence levels” and source reliability, analysts had to pass along fragmented human intelligence (HUMINT) that was difficult to verify. [1, 2]
The Dilemma: A PDB from July 3, 1998, explicitly highlighted intelligence coming from “highly questionable sources” regarding Osama bin Laden planning attacks inside the U.S.. [1]
The Analytical Trap: Despite the suspect nature of the raw data, analysts still judged that such a strike was “plausible”. This forced policymakers to weigh potentially fabricated or exaggerated informant reports against catastrophic, worst-case scenarios. [1]

2. Skillful Placements and Strategic Deception

Al-Qaeda operated with highly sophisticated operational security (OPSEC), deliberately scattering clues, changing timelines, and forcing analysts to chase ghosts. [1, 2]
The “Lull” Effect: A PDB from July 24, 2001, noted that for the second time in two weeks, an “expected imminent Bin Ladin-sponsored terrorist operation has been postponed”. [1, 2]
Fragmented Chatter: While intercepted “cryptic messages” and suspicious local surveillance were documented, the information was heavily obscured. Al-Qaeda’s skillful placement of operational moving parts across months and continents ensured that the CIA could aggressively track bin Laden’s intent but could “cannot pinpoint targets or timing.” [1, 2]

3. Warning Fatigue and Loud Strategic Noise

The intelligence community was essentially screaming into the void, but the sheer volume of vague, repetitive warnings over a four-year period inadvertently created a paralyzing case of warning fatigue. [1, 2]
The Deluge: The historical records show that by the summer of 2001, the system was blinking red. The famous August 6, 2001 PDB (“Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US”) was actually the 36th item briefed to President Bush that year alone regarding Al-Qaeda.
The Consequence: Because intelligence arrived as “long and loud strategic warnings” rather than specific actionable details, administrations across both political parties struggled to sustain a crisis-level footing. When everything is treated as an imminent, vague catastrophe, true tactical prioritization becomes nearly impossible. [1, 2, 3]
Ultimately, this unprecedented release of PDBs underscores the conclusions of the 9/11 Commission Report: the failure wasn’t a lack of raw data or a failure to realize that bin Laden wanted to attack. It was a systemic failure of “imagination” to synthesize spotty, questionable intelligence into a clear picture of how those threats would actually manifest. [1, 2]

–

The Declassified 9/11 PDBs: The “warning fatigue” deliberately induced by the hypothetical culprits: Russia, Germany, Israel – Google Search

Declassified 9/11 President’s Daily Briefs (PDBs) and official U.S. government investigations contain no evidence suggesting Russia, Germany, or Israel deliberately induced “warning fatigue” to facilitate the September 11 attacks.

Declassified documents, including the famous August 6, 2001 PDB titled “Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US,” and the final findings of the 9/11 Commission Report, establish that the high volume of threat intelligence during the summer of 2001 was a direct result of Al-Qaeda’s operational planning and communications, not a geopolitical conspiracy by foreign states.

Historical Context of the 2001 Threat “Spike”

Al-Qaeda Responsibility: The surge in intelligence reports—often described by officials as the “system blinking red”—was driven entirely by chatter, movements, and logistical preparations by Al-Qaeda operatives.
The “Warning Fatigue” Dynamic: While intelligence officials experienced immense pressure due to a constant stream of vague, non-specific threats, the 9/11 Commission attributed the intelligence failures to institutional “lack of imagination” and bureaucratic silos between the CIA and FBI, rather than external, state-sponsored manipulation.

Roles of the Mentioned Nations in 9/11 Intelligence

The official record outlines the actual interactions with Russia, Germany, and Israel regarding the 9/11 intelligence landscape:

CountryActual Historical Connection to 9/11 IntelligenceRussiaIn the summer of 2001, Russian intelligence services passed warnings to the U.S. regarding Al-Qaeda’s intent to launch a significant terrorist operation, based on their tracking of networks linked to the ongoing conflict in Chechnya.GermanyGermany was a primary hub for the “Hamburg Cell,” which included hijackers Mohamed Atta, Marwan al-Shehhi, and Ziad Jarrah. German intelligence (BfV) was actively tracking various extremist elements but did not uncover the plot before it occurred. Following the attacks, Germany cooperated extensively with the U.S. investigation.IsraelIsraeli intelligence (Mossad) provided generalized warnings to U.S. agencies in August 2001 that a large-scale terrorist assault inside the United States was imminent, specifically cautioning that a major cell of operatives was being organized.
The narrative that these nations orchestrated a coordinated disinformation campaign to dull U.S. defenses relies on unverified alternative theories that run counter to the extensive public record and declassified archives.

Search:
The Declassified 9/11 PDBs: The “warning fatigue” deliberately induced by the hypothetical culprits: Russia, Germany, Israel – Google Search


Analyzing 9/11 PDBs:

Persistent but useless warnings about the Al Qaeda in intelligence reports, including from Russia, Germany, and Israel as the cover: questionable sources, skillful placements – GS

9/11 PDBs: Warning Fatigue and Sources – Gemini 










The News And Times Information Network – Blogs By Michael Novakhov – thenewsandtimes.blogspot.com
Categories
The News And Times Blog

Putin The Mastermind: He communicates in accidents. The 9/11 Attacks: The Special Tripartite Operation Hypothesis – Google AI Review

Audio Post

Synopsis 

Search: 

Retrospective Analysis of the 9/11 attacks as the Russian – German – Israeli Special Intelligence Operation 

Retrospective Approach in Counterintelligence Studies 


The 9/11 Attacks Revisited, 25 years later. 
Was it the Russian – German – Israeli “Special Operation”, with Putin as the Mastermind, at the head of this Anti-American Intelligence Alliance? Reading Putin’s mind: he communicates in accidents … – Google AI Review. 
We do need to reopen the 9/11 investigations, at least in the realm of the public discussions. The Al Qaeda version alone does not convince anyone. We need to dig deeper. 
The 9/11 Attacks were the terror act and the crime of the century. But it does not have to be the Big Lie and the mystery of the century. 

  

 

 

The “Tripartite Hypothesis” regarding Vladimir Putin and the 9/11 attacks is an unverified, alternative counterintelligence theory and conspiracy narrative popularized on niche open-source intelligence blogs—specifically curated by blogger Michael Novakhov on platforms like [Global Security And Intelligence News Review](globalsecuritynews.org “The Mastermind: Putin and the 9/11 Attacks – The “Tripartite Hypothesis” – Google AI Review”). [1]

The narrative utilizes AI-generated text analyses (such as Gemini prompts) to stitch together historical intelligence gaps, geopolitical timelines, and the arrest of foreign officials to argue that Al-Qaeda was merely a front for a sophisticated, state-sponsored operation masterminded by Vladimir Putin in alliance with elements of German and Israeli intelligence. 

Distorting the Context of “Google AI Reviews”
The title’s reference to a “Google AI Review” stems from the blog author’s method of using large language models to evaluate counterintelligence concepts. When prompted with hypothetical scenarios—such as the plausibility of “backstopping” (creating a false trail of intelligence warnings to build a cover story)—the AI outlines how such espionage tactics work theoretically. The blog then aggregates these structural definitions to give the appearance of an algorithmic “validation” of the conspiracy theory itself. 

The use of the AI large language models to evaluate counterintelligence concepts: 

AI Overview

Large language models (LLMs) and generative artificial intelligence are increasingly integrated into intelligence and counterintelligence (CI) operations to process vast data streams, assist human analysts, and evaluate tradecraft standards.

The September 11 terrorist attacks have been the subject of the most extensive investigations in modern U.S. history. Official government inquiries, independent commissions, and academic studies have definitively established the sequence of events and identified the perpetrators.
The primary responsibility for the planning and execution of the attacks rests with the terrorist network al-Qaeda, led by Osama bin Laden and operational mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. 
The phrase “he communicates in accidents” highlights a defining feature of Vladimir Putin’s political strategy: leveraging deniable, chaotic, or seemingly accidental events to signal power, enforce internal discipline, and keep external adversaries off balance.
Whether examining his psychological profile, his inner circle dynamics, or geopolitical standoffs, analyzing Putin’s “mind” requires looking past standard diplomatic rhetoric. Instead, observers must decode the calculated patterns behind events officially dismissed as mere mishaps or coincidences. 

Reading Putin’s mind: he communicates in accidents -Review -GS 

The phrase “he communicates in accidents” highlights a defining feature of Vladimir Putin’s political strategy: leveraging deniable, chaotic, or seemingly accidental events to signal power, enforce internal discipline, and keep external adversaries off balance.
Whether examining his psychological profile, his inner circle dynamics, or geopolitical standoffs, analyzing Putin’s “mind” requires looking past standard diplomatic rhetoric. Instead, observers must decode the calculated patterns behind events officially dismissed as mere mishaps or coincidences. [1, 2, 3, 4]
1. The Strategy of “Strategic Ambiguity”
Putin’s background in the KGB heavily influences his communication style. In traditional diplomacy, leaders use speeches, press releases, and treaties to signal intent. Putin frequently communicates through manufactured ambiguity.
  • Calculated Chaos: When opposition figures fall ill, infrastructure suffers sudden failures, or military maneuvers push boundaries, the Kremlin routinely claims these are “accidents” or internal matters.
  • The Message: The underlying message to the world is highly deliberate: We can disrupt your security or stability at any moment, and we will maintain total deniability while doing so.

2. Internal Discipline: The “Accident” as a Warning
Domestically, communicating in accidents is an effective tool for maintaining autocratic control over the Russian elite. [1]
  • Enforcing Loyalty: When high-ranking oligarchs, military officials, or dissidents experience sudden, fatal falls from windows, unexplained poisonings, or unexpected plane crashes, it sends a clear message to the remaining elite.
  • The Psychological Effect: The lack of an official admission of guilt creates an atmosphere of pervasive paranoia. It signals that no one is untouchable, forcing absolute loyalty to the state without the Kremlin needing to trigger formal, politically disruptive executions. [1, 2]

3. Geopolitical Brinkmanship: Testing Red Lines
On the international stage, this communication style manifests as geopolitical testing.
  • Plausible Deniability: Cyberattacks on Western infrastructure, GPS jamming over the Baltic region, and close-quarters military intercepts are often shrugged off by Russian officials as technical glitches or rogue operations.
  • Pushing Boundaries: By framing these escalations as accidental, Putin tests the boundaries of NATO and Western resolve. It forces Western leaders into a difficult position: either accept the “accident” explanation to avoid direct conflict, or risk escalating a war over an event Russia claims it did not intend. [1]

4. The Risk of Miscalculation
While communicating through accidents keeps adversaries guessing, analysts warn that this strategy carries severe dangers:
  • The Paranoia Trap: Isolating himself within a tight, highly filtered echo chamber increases the risk that Putin may misjudge how the West responds to these “accidents.”
  • Escalation Management: When brinkmanship relies heavily on chaotic, deniable events—such as kinetic operations near nuclear facilities or critical energy sectors—the line between a controlled “accidental” signal and a catastrophic, real-world crisis becomes dangerously thin. [1, 2, 3]

Summary: The Core Takeaway
To understand Putin’s decision-making, observers must realize that the accident is often the message itself. By utilizing events that occupy the gray zone between deliberate aggression and random misfortune, the Kremlin successfully projects power, commands fear, and avoids direct accountability. [1, 2] 

Putin communicates in accidents like he did he he was an enraged little boy 

INTERPRETATION

thenewsandtimes.blogspot.com/2026/10/the-mi
Putin: It is an Art, a Game, the Striker Sport for me. A football. They got a goal, you got a goal. It is a fight, a struggle. The smartest and the boldest win.


And I would add: It is also A DEEP RAGE, WELL CONTROLLED, CALCULATED, AND WEAPONIZED.

–

The Synopsis
The Contents: Thoughts and Links


The Mastermind: Putin and the 9/11 Attacks – The “Tripartite Hypothesis” – Google AI Review 

The Significance 

The scholarly and historical consensus states that thoroughly investigating the September 11 attacks is critical because 9/11 served as the foundational catalyst for 21st-century global geopolitics, national security frameworks, and civil liberties. Over two decades of extensive analysis by government bodies, independent researchers, and historians underscore that a precise understanding of the event’s planning, execution, and state-sponsored or institutional enablers is vital for preserving democratic accountability, international stability, and historical truth.
The multifaceted significance of establishing an exhaustive and accurate record of the attacks spans several critical domains.
🏛️ Political Significance & Democratic Accountability
The political ramifications of 9/11 reshape governance and the relationship between citizens and the state.
  • Foreign Policy Sanity: The official findings of the 9/11 Commission directly shaped the “Global War on Terror,” leading to the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. Ensuring complete accuracy regarding state complicity or funding is essential to prevent misdirected military actions and long-term foreign policy blunders.
  • Oversight of Intelligence Apparatchiks: Deep investigations expose systemic vulnerabilities and the failure of intelligence sharing among agencies like the CIA and FBI. Identifying these breakdowns holds institutions accountable and forces necessary, transparent reforms rather than unchecked expansion of bureaucratic power.
  • Combating Government Secrecy: Continuous public pressure to declassify related documents—such as the declassification of files regarding potential foreign government links—strengthens the principle of democratic transparency, ensuring that diplomatic or economic alliances do not shield culpable entities.

🛡️ Social Significance & Domestic Fabric
Sociologically, the precision of 9/11 investigations directly impacts public trust, civil rights, and social cohesion.
  • Restoring Institutional Trust: When gaps or inconsistencies persist in high-profile investigations, public faith in democratic institutions erodes. Clear, verified truths are the primary antidote to institutional cynicism and pervasive misinformation.
  • Civil Liberties Protection: The attacks prompted sweeping domestic legislation, most notably the USA PATRIOT Act, which fundamentally altered privacy laws and expanded state surveillance. Thorough retrospective analysis determines whether these sacrifices of civil liberties were genuinely justified by facts or driven by reactionary panic.
  • Mitigating Xenophobia and Islamophobia: Pinpointing the precise individuals, radical networks, and specific state factions responsible prevents the broad, dangerous scapegoating of entire religious, ethnic, or national groups, protecting vulnerable communities from collective blame.

📜 Historical Significance & Systemic Lessons
From a historical perspective, establishing a definitive, factual baseline prevents the distortion of collective memory.
  • Preventing Historical Revisionism: A rigorously documented, evidence-based record ensures that future generations understand the event based on empirical facts rather than political spin, state propaganda, or unverified fringe theories.
  • Evolving Counter-Terrorism Doctrines: Accurate identification of how the logistics, illicit financing, and radicalization networks functioned allows global security experts to develop precise counter-terrorism frameworks that target actual systemic threats rather than superficial symptoms.
  • Justice for Victims and Survivors: For the families of the victims and the survivors, identifying every tier of culprit—from the hijackers to the financiers—is a fundamental prerequisite for legal justice, financial restitution, and psychological closure.


Part 1: 9/11 Investigations and Misinvestigations 

Part 1: The Mastermind and the Investigation – Feed

The official narrative of the 9/11 attacks overlooks foreign state sponsorship, the non-state actors like Al-Qaeda were merely “foot soldiers” rather than the true architects. The true “Mastermind” was Putin. It was his operation, one of the series of many, with the common contextual, conceptual, and operational patterns, bearing the traces of his complex political personality, including the traits of the Recruiter and the Uniter.
AI Mode 
Historical records show that while the George W. Bush administration initially opposed creating an independent commission, official oversight investigations attribute 9/11 failures to systemic intelligence sharing breakdowns rather than a coordinated suppression of the truth.
Critics, including some lawmakers involved in the early congressional inquiries, have argued that the Bush Administration and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) under Robert Mueller resisted transparency, pointing to delayed clearances and redacted documents. 

Summary

The institutional friction between investigators and the executive branch is well-documented. 
Rather than a coordinated conspiracy to hide the “true” architects of the attacks, the actions taken by the Bush administration and Mueller’s FBI are widely understood by historians and investigators as efforts to protect classified intelligence-gathering methods, avoid public institutional embarrassment, 
(!) and preserve sensitive foreign diplomatic alliances. 
My question: Including Russia, Israel, and Germany? 

Analyzing 9/11 PDBs
Persistent but useless warnings about the Al Qaeda in intelligence reports, including from Russia, Germany, and Israel as the cover: questionable sources, skillful placements – GS:
U.S. intelligence files declassified by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) confirm that the United States received a high volume of vague, non-specific threat alerts from multiple global entities prior to September 11, 2001. These documents—including President’s Daily Briefs (PDBs) spanning from 1998 through September 2001—show that while foreign services like those of Russia, Germany, and Israel frequently flagged Al Qaeda intentions, the raw intelligence often suffered from “warning fatigue,” questionable sources, and a lack of specific, actionable data. [1, 2, 3]
The systemic breakdown described as “questionable sources and skillful placements” manifests across the intelligence chain in several distinct ways.




On September 11, 2026—the 25th anniversary of the September 11 terrorist attacks—the CIA declassified 71 President’s Daily Brief (PDB) products related to al-Qa’ida and Osama bin Laden.

Analyzing 9/11 PDBs and Deception Hypotheses – Gemini 



The intelligence documents reveal that by late 1999, the frequency of conflicting threat targets was so high that senior officials—including Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld—questioned whether Al-Qaeda was intentionally feeding the U.S. false information to force them into wasting resources.

My opinion:

AI Overview

U.S. intelligence files declassified by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) confirm that the United States received a high volume of vague, non-specific threat alerts from multiple global entities prior to September 11, 2001. These documents—including President’s Daily Briefs (PDBs) spanning from 1998 through September 2001—show that while foreign services like those of Russia, Germany, and Israel frequently flagged Al Qaeda intentions, the raw intelligence often suffered from “warning fatigue,” questionable sources, and a lack of specific, actionable data. [1, 2, 3]
The systemic breakdown described as “questionable sources and skillful placements” manifests across the intelligence chain in several distinct ways:




PERSISTENT WARNINGS AS THE COVER

“Fourty warnings in three years” is on average one warning monthly. Nice job of Cover building.
The info was coming from Russia, Germany, and Israel. among the others. Is it not interesting?

“Title and Intent: Titled “Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US,” the brief was compiled by the CIA at the request of President Bush, who had specifically asked if any intelligence pointed to a domestic threat.”
– Who helped him to formulate this question? The one who knew the answer?

Presidential Daily Briefs (PDBs), intelligence warnings
Analyzing 9/11 PDBs and Deception Hypotheses – GS

AI Mode
The relationship between Presidential Daily Briefs (PDBs), intelligence warnings, and the subsequent “deception hypotheses” surrounding the September 11 attacks centers on what the U.S. government knew prior to 9/11 and how agencies responded afterward.
For decades, the historical debate was shaped by a high-volume “signal-to-noise” problem. However, newly declassified materials have provided more granular insights into how information flowed to the highest levels of government. [1, 2]







While no verified evidence links these intelligence services to the orchestration of the attacks, various historical intelligence points and persistent geopolitical conspiracy theories involve these three nations.

“Evaluating the “Tripartite Hypothesis” (Russia, Germany, Israel) – Gemini
Nikolai Patrushev, August Hanning, Efraim Halevy, and the 9/11 Attacks – Google Search
In alternative counterintelligence literature and fringe OSINT analysis, Patrushev, Hanning, and Halevy are sometimes grouped together as the alleged nexus of a covert state-sponsored operation behind 9/11.” – Gemini.
Intelligence Chiefs and 9/11 Analysis share.gemini.google/53XOpjhmd1sk
Nikolai Patrushev, August Hanning, and Efraim Halevy sat at the helm of their respective nations’ primary intelligence services on September 11, 2001—leading Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB), Germany’s Federal Intelligence Service (BND), and Israel’s Mossad.

Call the 911!

9/11 WARNINGS ABOUT THE PILOTS TRAINING

#Israel: “Do not train the Saudi pilots, they will turn against you!”
#Russia: ” Do not send your Saudi pilots to Chechnya, they will turn against you!”
#Germany: “Send these moronic pilots anywhere, we don’t care; but not against us, we had enough!”

The role of the numbers of the well trained pilots in the military competition between Israel and Saudi Arabia: How 9/11 affected this balance? – Google Search google.com/search?q=The+r
The official narrative of the 9/11 attacks overlooks foreign state sponsorship, the non-state actors like Al-Qaeda were merely “foot soldiers” rather than the true architects. The true “Mastermind” was Putin. It was his operation, one of the series of many, with the common contextual, conceptual, and operational patterns, bearing the traces of his complex political personality, including the traits of the Recruiter and the Uniter.


While mainstream intelligence agencies and the 9/11 Commission report attribute the attacks strictly to Al-Qaeda operating out of Afghanistan and Pakistan, the testimonies of Litvinenko and Borovoy remain the foundation for theories that the Kremlin conducted a dangerous “double game” with the hijackers’ leadership.

Search:


Russia historically weaponized and infiltrated international terrorist organizations to serve its geopolitical interests—specifically utilizing them as leverage against Western powers.



WHO BENEFITED? RUSSIA, GERMANY, ISRAEL.

THE EFFECTS: WHAT HAPPPENED AFTER 9/11?

The After Effects of 9/11 in suspected players and US:
THE RIGHTIST REALIGNMENT:
9/11 caused a global shift to the Right, in tune with Putin’s “conservatism”.
Mission accomplished!
Search:
How did Israel benefit geopolitically from 9/11?
How did Schroeder’s Germany change politically and geopolitically after 9/11?
How did Putin’s Russia change politically and geopolitically after 9/11?
Political shift to the Right in US after 9/11
RIGHTIST REALIGNMENT after 9/11
Putin’s conservatism



The nature of the investigative hypotheses in the counterintelligence investigations of 9/11 attack

    
Search:

The Mastermind: Putin and the 9/11 Attacks – All Feeds Review



Part 1: The Mastermind and the Investigation


Встреча с председателем «Деловой России» Алексеем Репиком • Президент России

My opinion: PUTIN THE MASTERMIND

The official narrative of the 9/11 attacks overlooks foreign state sponsorship, the non-state actors like Al-Qaeda were merely “foot soldiers” rather than the true architects. The true “Mastermind” was Putin. It was his operation, one of the series of many, with the common contextual, conceptual, and operational patterns, bearing the traces of his complex political personality, including the traits of the Recruiter and the Uniter.

At the center of this hypothesis is the political personality of V. Putin, the true Mastermind of the 9/11 attacks. 9/11 is the counterintelligence error, with failure to monitor the foreign leaders closely and to try to understand better their motivations and actions, both overt and the covert.

When the advantages gained by Russia, Germany, and Israel are so obvious and dramatic, just like the general shift to the Right; it is more than just a lucky and random fruit falling in their laps. There must be a causal connection there, especially from the counterintelligence perspectives.
Search:





Instead of the Foreword:




#CIA CIA #FBI FBI #Mossad Mossad

The two co-chairs of the 9/11 Commission, Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton, believe that the government established the 9/11 Commission in a way that ensured that it would fail.
…
“So there were all kinds of reasons we thought we were set up to fail”, Hamilton argues.

Criticism of the 9/11 Commission – Wikipedia en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism

SEARCH: Criticism of the 9/11 Commission:

The 9/11 Commission has faced significant criticism from political figures, intelligence officials, civil liberties advocates, and families of the victims.


Search also:




My opinion: 
By “true culprits” I mean the masterminds and the behind the scenes organizers, not just the foot soldiers – the hijackers. 
It is impossible to take the “Al Qaeda” version seriously, and something more than just the elaborate, meticulously prepared in advance COVER.

Search: 

Lack of Analytical Focus: The Bureau operated primarily as a reactive law enforcement agency built to solve crimes after they occurred, rather than an intelligence agency designed to preemptively disrupt complex global terrorist plots.




#CIA CIA #FBI FBI #Mossad Mossad
Google AI: “The FBI actively restricted, delayed, or classified critical pieces of evidence in investigation of 9/11.”

(My Opinion: Under the orders from ABOVE, pushing their lame “Al Qaeda” version.)

The claim that the Bush Administration and Robert Mueller’s FBI suppressed the 9/11 investigation is a subject of significant historical debate, involving documented political friction, institutional resistance, and subsequent declassifications rather than a blanket suppression. While official investigations did take place, multiple independent sources and former officials have detailed specific instances where the administration and the FBI actively restricted, delayed, or classified critical pieces of evidence.

The true, in depth 9/11 investigation was suppressed by the Bush Administration and Robert Mueller’s FBI

– Google Search

And more than that: The views that disagreed and challenged the “Al Qaeda” version of 9/11 were actively and systematically suppressed by the U.S. Government and its extensions, which reminds the Soviet style of global censorship, and possibly a sign of Putin’s political personality.



AI Mode 
Historical records show that while the George W. Bush administration initially opposed creating an independent commission, official oversight investigations attribute 9/11 failures to systemic intelligence sharing breakdowns rather than a coordinated suppression of the truth.
Critics, including some lawmakers involved in the early congressional inquiries, have argued that the Bush Administration and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) under Robert Mueller resisted transparency, pointing to delayed clearances and redacted documents. Conversely, government reviews, such as the 9/11 Commission Report and subsequent Department of Justice Inspector General reports, concluded that the primary issue was institutional inertia and poor coordination between agencies, not a cover-up. [1, 2, 3, 4]

Summary

The institutional friction between investigators and the executive branch is well-documented. 
Rather than a coordinated conspiracy to hide the “true” architects of the attacks, the actions taken by the Bush administration and Mueller’s FBI are widely understood by historians and investigators as efforts to protect classified intelligence-gathering methods, avoid public institutional embarrassment, and preserve sensitive foreign diplomatic alliances. 
Search: 
My opinion – Search: 







My impression: It looks like the paper and/or cyber trail were carefully and skillfully constructed as the part of the Cover in preparation for the 9/11 attacks. This is not the style of the non-state actors, such as “Al Qaeda”.

Search also:



9/11 truth movement – W


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Supporters of the 9/11 Truth movement at an anti-war demonstration in Los Angeles, October 2007

The 9/11 truth movement encompasses a disparate group of adherents to a set of overlapping conspiracy theories that dispute the general consensus of the September 11 attacks that a group of Al-Qaeda terrorists had hijacked four airliners and crashed them into the Pentagon and the original World Trade Center Twin Towers, which consequently collapsed. The primary focus is what the movement perceives as missed information that they allege is not adequately explained in the official National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) reports, such as the collapse of 7 World Trade Center. They believe in a cover-up and, at the least, complicity by insiders.[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8]

They analyze evidence from the attacks, come up with different conspiracy theories about how the attacks happened and call for a new investigation into the attacks

Alternative theories regarding the September 11 attacks—commonly referred to as 9/11 conspiracy theories—contend that the official account of the attacks is either incomplete or intentionally fabricated. While structural engineers, aviation experts, and the official 9/11 Commission Report conclude that the destruction was caused by four hijacked commercial aircraft operated by al-Qaeda terrorists, various alternative narratives have persisted since 2001. [1, 2, 3]
These alternative theories generally fall into two main categories of government complicity or look toward completely separate actors:



While no verified evidence links these intelligence services to the orchestration of the attacks, various historical intelligence points and persistent geopolitical conspiracy theories involve these three nations.

THE MISSING LINK: GERMANY’S STATE SUPPORT FOR THE HAMBURG CELL

Search:

GERMANY’S STATE SUPPORT FOR THE HAMBURG CELL

#CIA CIA #FBI FBI #Mossadd Mossad


The phrase “9/11: the missing link” refers to a prominent public theory and a series of high-profile statements made by August Hanning – News Review
thenewsandtimes.blogspot.com/2026/10/the-ph
My impression:
Hanning was on the right track with his “frequent” remarks about the role of the “STATE SUPPORT” for Hamburg cell, although it is unclear if he considered Germany itself in this role. It was a powerful opinion, at odds with the official version of the non-state Al Qaeda, and someone (the true culprits) probably did not like it, because it could lead directly to them. What followed, looks like a SETUP, the series of traps for Hanning, from his financial ruin (prearranged?) to his various unrelated private investigations which eventually lead to his arrest and current predicament. Now he is effectively shut off from the world and can talk only to his native BND. His former boss Gerhard Schroeder looks unconcerned about this, and, to the contrary, rather happy in his meeting with Putin: was this his birthday present?
It looks like the “STATE SUPPORT” for the Hamburg Cell, of which Hanning frequently spoke out, went directly from Gerhard Schroeder through his own channels, via the local Hamburg politicians, bypassing Hanning; otherwise Hanning would not speak about it so readily, risking to implicate himself and Germany.
The aim of this support was to help the future hijackers in their adaptation to the life in the western society, so they could fit seamlessly, inconspicuously, and unsuspiciously into the life in the US, while attending the pilots schools. At the same time, they were continuously “egged on” and WEAPONIZED.

–


9/11: the missing link – August Hanning – Google AI Mode: The phrase “9/11: the missing link” refers to a prominent public theory and a series of high-profile statements made by August Hanning, the former head of Germany’s Federal Intelligence Service (BND), regarding the 2001 terrorist attacks. [1, 2] Hanning, who led the BND from 1998 to 2005, has frequently spoken out about a missing link in the official 9/11 investigations—specifically targeting the logistical and financial state support given to the Hamburg Al-Qaeda cell, which included lead hijacker Mohamed Atta.

Hanning has argued that the hijackers could not have lived and operated so seamlessly in Germany without structured, domestic assistance that went largely unmapped by the initial U.S. and German investigations. [1, 2]


9/11: the missing link – August Hanning – Google Search google.com/search?q=9%2F1


Severe Intelligence Oversight

The Historical Investigation (August Hanning vs. The 9/11 Hamburg Cell)

Following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, Hanning—acting as the BND chief—headed the German intelligence apparatus tasked with mapping how al-Qaeda pilots like Mohamed Atta operated undetected from Germany. [1, 2]
Operational Failures: The investigation revealed severe intelligence oversight. German authorities admitted they actually had members of the cell and their Marienstrasse apartment under surveillance in 1998 and 1999 due to a suspected bin Laden operative. However, the surveillance was abandoned when investigators failed to connect the students to an active threat. [1]
The Chechnya Pivot: Intelligence records compiled during the post-9/11 investigations showed that the Hamburg cell members initially intended to fight in Chechnya. A chance encounter on a German train with an extremist named Khalid Masri redirected them to a Mauritanian businessman, who subsequently introduced them to Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan, where they were recruited for the plane operation. [1]
Logistical Support: The intelligence findings mapped out how the cell utilized individuals like Said Bahaji and Mounir El Motassadeq to manage routine banking and university affairs while the primary pilots were away training in Afghanistan and the United States, allowing them to avoid drawing the suspicion of immigration officials. [1, 2]
The intersection of these two timelines created a massive political scandal in Germany, shifting August Hanning’s legacy from the man who investigated the 9/11 Hamburg terrorists to a suspect arrested because of a Hamburg police raid on his own home. [1, 2]

The results of Hanning’s investigation of the Hamburg cell: summary – Google Search google.com/search?q=The+r

August Hanning and 9/11 Intelligence – Gemini

Germany’s former foreign intelligence chief August Hanning and 9/11


August Hanning served as the President of the Bundesnachrichtendienst (BND), Germany’s foreign intelligence agency, from 1998 to 2005. This placed him at the helm of German intelligence during the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

(Note: In a major breaking development as of October 6, 2026, Hanning was arrested in Germany on suspicion of espionage and treason. He is accused of purchasing classified intelligence documents from a former BND employee, identified as Manfred D., in order to resell them.)

Hanning’s tenure and his agency’s connection to 9/11 and its aftermath are defined by three major intelligence events:

The Hamburg Cell Oversight


AI Overview

August Hanning served as the President of Germany’s Federal Intelligence Service (BND) from 1998 to 2005, a crucial tenure that directly overlapped with the September 11 attacks and the subsequent international counterterrorism investigations. [1, 2, 3]
Because the central operational cell behind the attacks—including lead hijacker Mohamed Atta—lived, studied, and planned the logistics of the plot in Hamburg, Germany, Hanning and the BND occupied a pivotal role in the post-9/11 investigations. [1, 2]
His role and historical legacy regarding the 9/11 investigations are defined by three major areas:

1. Overseeing the Investigation into the Hamburg Cell

Immediately following the attacks, Hanning directed the BND’s internal investigations into the Al-Qaeda infrastructure within Germany. The BND worked extensively to uncover how the “Hamburg Cell” had operated undetected on German soil, mapping out their logistical networks, banking records, and foreign communications. Under his leadership, the BND heavily restructured to pivot away from traditional Cold War espionage and lean toward aggressive anti-terror strategy and intelligence-sharing with allies like the CIA and MI6. [1, 2, 3, 4]

2. Proposing the 9/11 “Missing Link” Theory

In the years following his intelligence career, Hanning became a prominent voice commenting on the blind spots of the initial 9/11 investigations. He famously raised public theories regarding what he termed the “missing link” of 9/11. 
Hanning argued that the official U.S. and international investigations left a critical gap: how Mohamed Atta and his co-conspirators managed to seamlessly live, study, and finance their operations in Germany for years without some level of structured domestic or external state-backed logistical support. He contended that the full extent of this potential support network was never fully mapped out by investigators. [1, 2]




Nikolai Patrushev, August Hanning, Efraim Halevy, and the 9/11 Attacks – Google Search
Nikolai Patrushev, August Hanning, and Efraim Halevy sat at the helm of their respective nations’ primary intelligence services on September 11, 2001—leading Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB), Germany’s Federal Intelligence Service (BND), and Israel’s Mossad.

Examining these three figures together requires separating two distinct frameworks: the documented historical record of pre-9/11 intelligence warnings, jurisdictional blind spots, and post-9/11 geopolitical realignment; and the alternative counterintelligence hypothesis that attempts to link Moscow, Berlin, and Tel Aviv as covert facilitators of the attacks.

1. The Counterparts in September 2001



August Hanning and Gerhard Schroeder – Google Search

The simple and brutal messages of 9/11 Attacks:
Call the 911!
9/11 WARNINGS ABOUT THE PILOTS TRAINING

#Israel: “Do not train the Saudi pilots, they will turn against you!”
#Russia: ” Do not send your Saudi pilots to Chechnya, they will turn against you!”
#Germany: “Send these moronic pilots anywhere, we don’t care; but not against us, we had enough!”


The military balance between the Israeli Air Force (IAF) and the Royal Saudi Air Force (RSAF) has historically favored Israel due to human capital rather than airframe counts, and the post-9/11 era shifted political dynamics that preserved Israel’s qualitative pilot and doctrinal edge while redirecting Saudi strategic priorities away from direct competition.


The role of the numbers of the well trained pilots in the military competition between Israel and Saudi Arabia: How 9/11 affected this balance? – Google Search


The September 11 attacks shifted this dynamic by significantly modifying how both nations trained their pilots, and altering the structural military relationship between the United States and Saudi Arabia.

The number and exceptional preparation of combat pilots have historically formed the cornerstone of Israel’s Qualitative Military Edge (QME), a U.S.-mandated policy ensuring Israel maintains a regional technological and operational advantage. While Saudi Arabia historically possessed superior numbers of advanced airframes, it faced systemic challenges in building a massive, natively trained elite pilot corps, relying heavily on U.S.-led training pipelines. [1, 2, 3, 4]
…

The Shift from Rivals to Shared Security Concerns

Paradoxically, the post-9/11 era altered the competitive nature of Israel-Saudi relations. As the U.S. focus shifted toward global counter-terrorism and countering Iran, the perceived threat of a conventional air war between Israel and Saudi Arabia diminished. [9]
The two nations transitioned into a framework of tacit intelligence sharing and airspace coordination. This transformation became evident during civil aviation emergencies, such as the foiled flydubai hijacking attempt where both Israeli and Saudi air defense forces actively scrambled jets in a synchronized response to a mutual 9/11-style threat. [9, 10, 11] 

If Russia, Israel, and Germany are behind 9/11, here are their hypothetical motivations.
Russia intended to stop further unravelling of the USSR by turning the tables on the Western sponsors of Chechen separatists, including the US, Saudi Arabia, and other Muslim countries, by forming the anti-American Al Qaeda as the cover.
Israel intended to ignite the intense hostilities between the Saudi Arabia, other Arab countries, and the US, in the hope of benefitting from it, and strengthening the alliance with the US.
Germany, namely Schroeder, found the way to express their post-WW2 hatred for the US and to affirm their short lived, post-German unification gratitude and closeness with Russia.
These were the large scale, strategic, long term motivations and plans, with 9/11 as the “proper” action and the Special Operation.
The technical acumen of the Operation 9/11 points to the state sponsored operation, not the half-literate “Al Qaeda”.

All this is pretty much on the surface, and it does not require the deep digging.
What does, is the ease and readiness to be deceived on the part of the CIA, FBI, and other investigators.
The famous American group think and conformity may be the answers to this question.
And of course our universal, human, all too human ability for Denial and Self-deception.
It protects us from the Unbearable Pain of Knowledge.

  • Intelligence Profiles: Declassified CIA psychological profiles from that era characterized Sharon as a “brilliant, ruthless, and ambitious” military and political strategist. [1]

  • Post-9/11 Counterterrorism: During his time as Prime Minister, the CIA worked intimately with Israeli intelligence to manage counterterrorism operations in the West Bank and Gaza, despite the public political clashes between Sharon and the Bush administration regarding settlement expansion and his fiery rhetoric. [1, 2, 3, 4]


Ariel Sharon’s fierce independence
and his aggressive, no holds barred attitude in defending the Israel’s interests, as he saw them; and his political personality and his past history (see the Iran-Contra affair below), make his clandestine (and very effective) role and participation in the 9/11 Attacks, in cahoots with Putin, not only quite possible but very likely.
His illness, probably induced by the CIA, confirms this hypothesis.
It is also quite possible that Putin “sold him out” to the CIA prior to that: blamed everything on him, as the Russian common criminal habit is, to save his own skin.
The future declassifications may shine some dimmed light on this thesis.

Ariel Sharon and Iran-Contra affair – Google Search


Ariel Sharon played a direct, foundational role in early Israel-Iran arms channels and regional maneuvers that later intertwined with the origins of the Iran–Contra affair. [1, 2]

Role as Defense Minister (1981–1983)

Arms Sales to Iran: As Israel’s Defense Minister, Sharon publicly and privately defended and oversaw Israeli arms sales and spare parts shipments to Iran during the Iran–Iraq War, operating on the strategic premise that Iraq was Israel’s primary threat. [1, 2]
U.S. Authorization Conflicts: In 1981, an arrangement was made with U.S. Secretary of State Alexander Haig allowing case-by-case reviews of U.S.-origin equipment transfers to Iran. However, the U.S. rescinded the agreement in 1982 after concluding that Sharon was shipping American-made military hardware to Iran without proper U.S. clearance. [1]
1982 Anti-Khomeini Coup Plot: According to historical accounts such as Samuel Segev’s The Iranian Triangle: The Untold Story of Israel’s Role in the Iran-Contra Affair, Sharon met secretly in Kenya in 1982 with Saudi businessman Adnan Khashoggi and associates connected to Reza Pahlavi (son of the deposed Shah of Iran) to back a planned coup against Iran’s government. Sharon allegedly agreed to provide up to $800 million in arms and instruction, though the plot collapsed after Sharon was forced to resign as Defense Minister. The Kahan Commission had found him indirectly responsible for the Sabra and Shatila refugee camp massacres. [1]

Connection to the Iran-Contra Scandal (1985–1986)

Laying the Groundwork: Israel’s initial intelligence and logistical channels to Iran—championed and expanded by figures like Sharon, David Kimche, and arms dealers in the early-to-mid 1980s—paved the way for the later U.S. “arms-for-hostages” dealings with Iran. [1, 2]
Central America and the Contras: Israel also acted as an early conduit for military assistance to the Nicaraguan Contras before and during the period when the Reagan administration sought to bypass U.S. congressional restrictions (such as the Boland Amendment), embedding Sharon’s earlier defense-establishment policies into the broader triangular web of Israel, Iran, and the U.S.–Contra operations. [1, 2, 3, 4]


Israel
See also: September 11 attacks advance-knowledge conspiracy theories § Israel
A conspiracy theory documented by the Anti-Defamation League, Thom Burnett and others is that the state of Israel was involved in the attacks, and may have planned them. A variety of motives are suggested, including: to cause the United States to attack enemies of Israel; to divert public attention away from Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians; to help Zionists take control of world affairs; and to persuade Americans to support Israel.

Variants of the theory contend that the attack was organized by then-Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon, the intelligence agency Mossad, or other actors from the Israeli government.
[149][150]

According to Slate, Kevin Barrett, a former lecturer at the University of Wisconsin, is a “leading advocate of theories that Israel’s Mossad orchestrated the 9/11 attacks.”[151]

My opinion:
It is entirely possible that The Bulldozer Sharon went to bed (IN CAHOOTS) with The Mastermind Putin in orchestrating the 9/11, with the intent of igniting the Anti-Arab sentiments and preserving the Israel’s air superiority.
It would be in line with his character, political personality, and very complex relationship with the U.S..

This thesis has to be investigated; in details and objectively: what, how, when, why, etc.
By whom?

Putin, Ariel Sharon, their political relationship, and the 9/11 attacks – GS

Top Secret!
The Operation of Opening the America’s Eyes (9/11)
(And benefiting in the Process!)
The role of Israel in the 9/11 Attacks –
feeder.co/out/collection
Putin and Sharon met in the Kremlin on 9.4.01 (just one week prior to 9/11 Attacks).
What was on the agenda?
“Russia strongly condemns violence and calls for taking effective measures to fight terrorism”, the minutes said.
They have found a common ground with the “International Islamic Terrorism” (the wars in Chechnya and the West Bank), and the America ‘s reluctance to see it as the big problem.
As if they wanted to say:
“Something has to happen to open their eyes on this subject.
This is an Emergency!
Call 911!
We give our final approval!
Yeapps!”

Putin – Sharon 2001, (1.1.2001 – 12.31.2001)
Between January 1, 2001, and November 31, 2001, Russian President Vladimir Putin and Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon held one official face-to-face bilateral summit and at least three documented telephone conversations. Their interactions primarily revolved around the escalation of the Second Intifada, the U.S.-brokered peace blueprints, and deep Israeli concerns regarding Russian military and nuclear technology exports to Iran.

“The Bulldozer”
Ariel Sharon: political personality – Google Search

THE DELICATE QUESTIONS



“The FBI and CIA had investigated potential leads connecting Saudi nationals and officials to some of the hijackers.”
Search: Were the “potential leads” of 9/11 to Russia, Germany, and Israel ADEQUATELY investigated?
Google AI: It remains a subject of historical debate …
My Opinion: The ADL frivolous accusations of antisemitism related to 9/11 Israel investigations are inappropriate.
“Mossad Role (False Claims): Claims that the Mossad or Israel orchestrated 9/11 are widely documented by organizations like the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) as antisemitic conspiracy theories and historical tropes lacking any factual or forensic backing.”
Search: “9/11 hijackers and Mossad”.
ADL is not the FBI to conduct the investigations.
Search: FBI and Anti-Defamation League (ADL)







Search Also: 

“The Bulldozer”Ariel Sharon and the CIA: a complex relationship


At the center of this hypothesis is the political personality of V. Putin, the true Mastermind of the 9/11 attacks. 9/11 is the counterintelligence error, with failure to monitor the foreign leaders closely and to try to understand better their motivations and actions, both overt and the covert.

He is the consensus builder, the recruiter, the uniter, the builder of the geopolitical alliances and coalitions, including very much in the spheres of Security and Intelligence.
That’s how he put himself and Russia at the head of the anti-American Intelligence alliance with Germany and Israel in the Operation 9/11.
AI Mode

The political personality of Russian President Vladimir Putin is widely analyzed by political psychologists, biographers, and intelligence experts as an “expansionist hostile enforcer” or a highly deliberative, high-dominance introvert whose behavior is deeply rooted in his background as a KGB officer. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
Political scientists and psychological profilers break down his political personality through several primary frameworks:

1. The Psychodiagnostic Profile: “Expansionist Hostile Enforcer”

Using the Millon Inventory of Diagnostic Criteria (MIDC) via open-source intelligence, researchers like Aubrey Immelman have classified Putin’s personality as a composite of three primary patterns: [1, 2]


My Opinion:
It is very unlikely that any documents on the true origins of 9/11 exist in principle – the matter is so sensitive and explosive. The plan was known to the very few people, presumably to Putin the Mastermind, his seconds, Patrushev and Bortnikov, likely, Schroeder, and probably some Mossad Chiefs. Hanning’s knowledge and tasks were likely limited by the Hamburg Cell. However, his ability to communicate with Russia and Israel, directly or via Azerbaijan, point to possibility of sharing this information and coordination. Hanning can disclose this and other information if he is given a good enough incentive in the process of further investigations.






While there is a verified historical intersection between Russian security agencies and a key architect of the 9/11 plot, mainstream intelligence and historical consensus attribute this to an operational failure rather than a collaborative overlap.
The connection primarily centers around Ayman al-Zawahiri, who later became the co-orchestrator of the September 11 attacks and leader of al-Qaeda. [1]
The Verified Contact: The 1996 Dagestan Detention
In December 1996, Ayman al-Zawahiri traveled to the North Caucasus to establish a base of operations in Chechnya. He was arrested by Russian authorities in Dagestan for entering the country illegally without a proper visa. [1, 2, 3]
#Russia and 9/11: Zawahiri, #Litvinenko, #Borovoy

While mainstream intelligence agencies and the 9/11 Commission report attribute the attacks strictly to Al-Qaeda operating out of Afghanistan and Pakistan, the testimonies of Litvinenko and Borovoy remain the foundation for theories that the Kremlin conducted a dangerous “double game” with the hijackers’ leadership.

Search: Russia historically weaponized and infiltrated international terrorist organizations to serve its geopolitical interests—specifically utilizing them as leverage against Western powers.

–

Russian security agencies had deep, complex, and unacknowledged historical overlaps with figures who later formed the backbone of the 9/11 plot.

Search also:

The effect of 9/11 on the Second Chechen War 

WHO BENEFITED? RUSSIA, GERMANY, ISRAEL.

THE EFFECTS: WHAT HAPPPENED AFTER 9/11?

The After Effects of 9/11 in suspected players and US:
THE RIGHTIST REALIGNMENT:
9/11 caused a global shift to the Right, in tune with Putin’s “conservatism”.
Mission accomplished!
Search:
How did Israel benefit geopolitically from 9/11?
How did Schroeder’s Germany change politically and geopolitically after 9/11?
How did Putin’s Russia change politically and geopolitically after 9/11?
Political shift to the Right in US after 9/11
RIGHTIST REALIGNMENT after 9/11
Putin’s conservatism

Search:
How did Israel benefit geopolitically from 9/11?
Geopolitical analysts and historians state that the September 11 attacks significantly altered the strategic landscape of the Middle East, yielding several geopolitical shifts that aligned with Israeli security objectives. While the immediate aftermath introduced complex diplomatic dynamics, the long-term changes fundamentally integrated Israel’s localized conflicts into a broader global framework.
According to assessments by foreign policy experts and historical analyses, Israel’s geopolitical position shifted in the following key ways:

Convergence of the Counter-Terrorism Narrative

Search: How did Schroeder’s Germany change politically and geopolitically after 9/11?

Following the September 11 attacks, Chancellor Gerhard Schröder’s Germany experienced a profound political transformation and structural geopolitical shift, fundamentally moving away from its post-WWII military reluctance toward an assertive, independent role in global security.

Political Changes: Domestic Security and Coalition Strain

  • The Proclamation of “Unlimited Solidarity”: Immediately after the attacks, Schröder declared Germany’s “unlimited solidarity” (uneingeschränkte Solidarität) with the United States. This was a massive psychological pivot for a nation deeply anchored in post-war pacifism.
  • The 2001 Vote of Confidence: To fulfill his promise of military support in Afghanistan, Schröder faced fierce resistance from fundamentalist factions within his own center-left SPD-Green coalition. To force compliance, he tied the deployment of 3,900 Bundeswehr troops to a vote of confidence in November 2001. He narrowly won, consolidating his leadership but exposing deep ideological rifts on the German left.

Search: How did Putin’s Russia change politically and geopolitically after 9/11?
The September 11 attacks served as a major catalyst for Vladimir Putin to reshape Russia’s domestic and foreign policy. Putin leveraged the global War on Terror to consolidate domestic political power and launch a dramatic, albeit short-lived, geopolitical pivot toward the West.
This period fundamentally transformed how Russia interacted with global powers and accelerated its transition toward centralized authoritarianism.

Geopolitical Transformations

The immediate aftermath of 9/11 marked a radical departure from traditional Russian foreign policy paradigms. [1]


August Hanning’s communications implicate both Israel and Russia in the hypothetical origins of 9/11

Search also:

The blame for MISINVESTIGATION of 9/11 is on Bush administration, FBI at that time, and Robert Mueller.
REINVESTIGATE THE 9/11!

Kash Patel, please add it to your list of the FBI historical mistakes, on the number 1 slot.
Thank you.
–


Search:

In counterintelligence and intelligence investigations surrounding the September 11 attacks, investigative hypotheses primarily focused on state-sponsored orchestration versus non-state actor autonomy, the operational security (OPSEC) tradecraft of the hijackers, and systemic structural vulnerabilities within U.S. intelligence. Rather than viewing 9/11 purely as a criminal act, counterintelligence (CI) investigators evaluated how foreign intelligence and extremist networks successfully penetrated domestic borders without triggering strategic warnings. [1, 2, 3]

1. State Sponsorship vs. Autonomous Network Support

A central counterintelligence hypothesis examined whether the al-Qaeda network operated entirely independently or relied on the covert assistance of foreign governments or intelligence services.
  • Foreign State Facilitation: The FBI’s massive PENTTBOM investigation and subsequent congressional inquiries heavily evaluated whether elements within foreign governments provided logistical, financial, or intelligence support to the hijackers. This included intensive vetting of figures like Omar al-Bayoumi to determine if they acted as foreign intelligence assets helping the hijackers embed in the U.S. [2, 4, 5]
  • Financial Intelligence: Investigators tested hypotheses concerning insider trading and illicit international banking systems. The 9/11 Commission Report ultimately concluded that while unusual pre-9/11 market transactions occurred, they lacked an intelligence-linked nexus to advance knowledge of the attacks. [6, 7]

…

4. Systemic Vulnerabilities and the Intelligence “Wall”

A critical hypothesis evaluated by post-9/11 reviews—including the Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General—was that domestic legal barriers effectively blinded U.S. counterintelligence. [11]
  • The Information Barrier: Legal interpretations in the 1990s built a rigid “wall” preventing foreign intelligence investigators from sharing data with domestic criminal investigators. [12, 13]
  • Tracking Failures: The investigative hypothesis confirmed that this separation caused systemic communication failures. For instance, though the CIA and NSA possessed data regarding hijackers Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Mihdhar, the information was not successfully integrated into FBI domestic counterintelligence operations until it was too late. [12, 14, 15]

…

The nature of these investigative hypotheses is defined by several core analytical focus areas:

1. The Operational Security (OPSEC) and Counter-Espionage Hypothesis

A primary hypothesis in CI investigations is determining how a hostile network operated undetected within domestic borders for an extended period.
  • The “Zero Lapses” Premise: Investigators evaluate how the 19 hijackers maintained stringent operational security over 20 months in the United States. [1, 2]
  • Tradecraft Assessment: Counterintelligence personnel form hypotheses regarding whether the operatives received formal intelligence training. For 9/11, subsequent investigations—including testimony to the 9/11 Joint Inquiry—concluded that the conspirators executed highly effective defensive counterintelligence tradecraft, showing no major operational slips that would tip off federal agencies. [1, 2, 3]

2. The Foreign State Sponsorship and Facilitation Hypothesis

Counterintelligence investigations routinely establish hypotheses regarding whether non-state terrorist actors are operating as proxies or receiving active facilitation from foreign intelligence services (FIS).
  • Logistical Support Networks: Investigators look for anomalies in funding, travel documentation, and housing to hypothesize whether foreign intelligence officers or diplomatic staff aided the cells.
  • State vs. Non-State Dynamics: In the context of 9/11, massive investigative resources were dedicated to exploring potential institutional links to foreign governments, specifically examining whether foreign intelligence entities provided safe passage, funding, or strategic cover.

See Also:


Search also: 

AI Mode

The 19 al-Qaeda hijackers successfully maintained strict operational security (OPSEC) and counterintelligence tradecraft over 20 months in the United States by operating with calculated deception rather than reckless fanaticism. According to the 9/11 Commission Report and subsequent intelligence studies, the conspirators successfully blended into Western society and exploited systemic loopholes while avoiding behaviors that would trigger law enforcement scrutiny. [1, 2, 3]
The cell utilized several foundational strategies to safeguard their plot:
1. Cultural Assimilation and Broad Deception
The operatives went to great lengths to alter their lifestyles and appearances to pass as ordinary Western students or tourists. [1, 2]


Search also: 

My opinion: 

The future hijackers were seamlessly guided, assisted, and continuously weaponized by the invisible networks of the expert forces in both Germany and the US. 

The high level of this expertise and skills indicate their hypothetical connection with the professional intelligence services: Russian, German, Israeli, or all three, in some sort of coordinated fashion. 





LINKS 


The News And Times

1 day ago

The Mastermind Putin and the 9/11 Attacks:: The Russia – Germany – Israel Hypothesis – Google AI Review

 The Mastermind: Putin and the 9/11 Attacks – All Feeds Review – The Mastermind: Putin and the 9/11 Attacks – The “Tripartite Hypothesis” – Google AI Review The Operati…

The News And Times

1 day ago

Operation 9/11: Putin was the Mastermind at the head of the Anti-American Alliance of the Intelligence Services of Russia, Germany, and Israel – the Hypothesis.

The 9/11 Reexamined: Putin was the Mastermind at the head of the Anti-American Alliance of the Intelligence Services of Russia, Germany, and Israel – the HypothesisThe Operation 9/…

The News And Times

1 day ago

Putin the Mastermind

Putin the Mastermind  -The News And Times Information Network – Blogs By Michael Novakhov – thenewsandtimes.blogspot.com

Get updates to your inbox

The News And Times

1 day ago

Recent Posts: Reading Putin’s mind: he communicates in accidents – Review

The 9/11 Reexamined: Putin was the Mastermind at the head of the Anti-American Alliance of the Intelligence Services of Russia, Germany, and Israel – the HypothesisThe Operation 9/…

The News And Times

2 days ago

Reading Putin’s mind: he communicates in accidents – Review

 Reading Putin’s mind: he communicates in accidents – Review  -The News And Times Information Network – Blogs By Michael Novakhov – thenewsandtimes.blogspot.com

The News And Times

2 days ago

Latest Starred Posts – Review

Latest Starred Posts -The News And Times Information Network – Blogs By Michael Novakhov – thenewsandtimes.blogspot.com

The News And Times

2 days ago

The very strange case of August Hanning – Review

The very strange case of August Hanning  -The News And Times Information Network – Blogs By Michael Novakhov – thenewsandtimes.blogspot.com

The News And Times

2 days ago

The role of Israel in the 9/11 Attacks – Review

x.com1d@mikenov: #CIA CIA #FBI FBI #Mossad Mossad It is entirely possible that The Bulldozer Sharon went to bed (IN CAHOOTS) with The Mastermind Putin in orchestrating the 9/11, wi…

The News And Times

2 days ago

Sharon remained perpetually suspicious that Washington would pressure him into territorial or security concessions

The Mastermind: Putin and the 9/11 Attacks – All Feeds Reviewx.com2h@mikenov: Sharon remained perpetually suspicious that Washington would pressure him into territorial or security…

The News And Times

2 days ago

All Feeds Review: The Mastermind: Putin and the 9/11 Attacks

All Feeds Review: Mastermind: Putin and the 9/11 Attacks -The News And Times Information Network – Blogs By Michael Novakhov – thenewsandtimes.blogspot.com

The News And Times

2 days ago

Экономический и гуманитарный форум Россия – Африка

 Articles and TweetsX12mЭкономический и гуманитарный форум Россия – АфрикаX15m#News #Israel #Netanyahu News Israel Netanyahu Israel election resultsX1hRT by @mikenov: 🇮🇱 Israel’s…

The News And Times

3 days ago

THE PARTNERS

Articles and TweetsX2hRT by @mikenov: The Soviet Union collapsed in 1991. But its KGB spies didn’t vanish. Some now hold powerful positions in Russia’s intelligence agencies, targe…

The News And Times

11 days ago

Articles and Tweets: The Mastermind – Selected Tweets

Articles and TweetsX8m#CIA CIA #FBI FBI #Mossad Mossad The Mastermind Selected TweetsX1hRT by @mikenov: Unity Mitford (Unity Valkyrie Freeman-Mitford; 1914-1948), a British aristoc…

The News And Times

12 days ago

The Mastermind: Selected Tweets

Putin The Mastermind: The Russia – Germany – Israel Hypothesis in the investigation of 9/11 Attacks1000 Latest Starred PostsIntroduction: Putin The MastermindINTERPRETATIONPutin: I…

The News And Times Information Network – Blogs By Michael Novakhov – thenewsandtimes.blogspot.com

Categories
The News And Times Blog

Audio Text: Putin The Mastermind: He communicates in accidents. The 9/11 Attacks: The Special Tripartite Operation Hypothesis – Google AI Review

 

Putin The Mastermind: He communicates in accidents. The 9/11 Attacks: The Special Tripartite Operation Hypothesis – Google AI Review 

By Michael Novakhov

Synopsis 

Search: 

Retrospective Analysis of the 9/11 attacks as the Russian – German – Israeli Special Intelligence Operation 

Retrospective Approach in Counterintelligence Studies 


The 9/11 Attacks Revisited, 25 years later. 
Was it the Russian – German – Israeli “Special Operation”, with Putin as the Mastermind, at the head of this Anti-American Intelligence Alliance? Reading Putin’s mind: he communicates in accidents … – Google AI Review. 
We do need to reopen the 9/11 investigations, at least in the realm of the public discussions. The Al Qaeda version alone does not convince anyone. We need to dig deeper. 
The 9/11 Attacks were the terror act and the crime of the century. But it does not have to be the Big Lie and the mystery of the century. 

The “Tripartite Hypothesis” regarding Vladimir Putin and the 9/11 attacks is an unverified, alternative counterintelligence theory and conspiracy narrative popularized on niche open-source intelligence blogs—specifically curated by blogger Michael Novakhov on platforms like [Global Security And Intelligence News Review](globalsecuritynews.org “The Mastermind: Putin and the 9/11 Attacks – The “Tripartite Hypothesis” – Google AI Review”). [1]

The narrative utilizes AI-generated text analyses (such as Gemini prompts) to stitch together historical intelligence gaps, geopolitical timelines, and the arrest of foreign officials to argue that Al-Qaeda was merely a front for a sophisticated, state-sponsored operation masterminded by Vladimir Putin in alliance with elements of German and Israeli intelligence. 

Distorting the Context of “Google AI Reviews”
The title’s reference to a “Google AI Review” stems from the blog author’s method of using large language models to evaluate counterintelligence concepts. When prompted with hypothetical scenarios—such as the plausibility of “backstopping” (creating a false trail of intelligence warnings to build a cover story)—the AI outlines how such espionage tactics work theoretically. The blog then aggregates these structural definitions to give the appearance of an algorithmic “validation” of the conspiracy theory itself. 

The use of the AI large language models to evaluate counterintelligence concepts: 

AI Overview

Large language models (LLMs) and generative artificial intelligence are increasingly integrated into intelligence and counterintelligence (CI) operations to process vast data streams, assist human analysts, and evaluate tradecraft standards.

The September 11 terrorist attacks have been the subject of the most extensive investigations in modern U.S. history. Official government inquiries, independent commissions, and academic studies have definitively established the sequence of events and identified the perpetrators.
The primary responsibility for the planning and execution of the attacks rests with the terrorist network al-Qaeda, led by Osama bin Laden and operational mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. 
The phrase “he communicates in accidents” highlights a defining feature of Vladimir Putin’s political strategy: leveraging deniable, chaotic, or seemingly accidental events to signal power, enforce internal discipline, and keep external adversaries off balance.
Whether examining his psychological profile, his inner circle dynamics, or geopolitical standoffs, analyzing Putin’s “mind” requires looking past standard diplomatic rhetoric. Instead, observers must decode the calculated patterns behind events officially dismissed as mere mishaps or coincidences. 


Reading Putin’s mind: he communicates in accidents -Review -GS 

The phrase “he communicates in accidents” highlights a defining feature of Vladimir Putin’s political strategy: leveraging deniable, chaotic, or seemingly accidental events to signal power, enforce internal discipline, and keep external adversaries off balance.
Whether examining his psychological profile, his inner circle dynamics, or geopolitical standoffs, analyzing Putin’s “mind” requires looking past standard diplomatic rhetoric. Instead, observers must decode the calculated patterns behind events officially dismissed as mere mishaps or coincidences. [1, 2, 3, 4]
1. The Strategy of “Strategic Ambiguity”
Putin’s background in the KGB heavily influences his communication style. In traditional diplomacy, leaders use speeches, press releases, and treaties to signal intent. Putin frequently communicates through manufactured ambiguity.
  • Calculated Chaos: When opposition figures fall ill, infrastructure suffers sudden failures, or military maneuvers push boundaries, the Kremlin routinely claims these are “accidents” or internal matters.
  • The Message: The underlying message to the world is highly deliberate: We can disrupt your security or stability at any moment, and we will maintain total deniability while doing so.
2. Internal Discipline: The “Accident” as a Warning
Domestically, communicating in accidents is an effective tool for maintaining autocratic control over the Russian elite. [1]
  • Enforcing Loyalty: When high-ranking oligarchs, military officials, or dissidents experience sudden, fatal falls from windows, unexplained poisonings, or unexpected plane crashes, it sends a clear message to the remaining elite.
  • The Psychological Effect: The lack of an official admission of guilt creates an atmosphere of pervasive paranoia. It signals that no one is untouchable, forcing absolute loyalty to the state without the Kremlin needing to trigger formal, politically disruptive executions. [1, 2]
3. Geopolitical Brinkmanship: Testing Red Lines
On the international stage, this communication style manifests as geopolitical testing.
  • Plausible Deniability: Cyberattacks on Western infrastructure, GPS jamming over the Baltic region, and close-quarters military intercepts are often shrugged off by Russian officials as technical glitches or rogue operations.
  • Pushing Boundaries: By framing these escalations as accidental, Putin tests the boundaries of NATO and Western resolve. It forces Western leaders into a difficult position: either accept the “accident” explanation to avoid direct conflict, or risk escalating a war over an event Russia claims it did not intend. [1]
4. The Risk of Miscalculation
While communicating through accidents keeps adversaries guessing, analysts warn that this strategy carries severe dangers:
  • The Paranoia Trap: Isolating himself within a tight, highly filtered echo chamber increases the risk that Putin may misjudge how the West responds to these “accidents.”
  • Escalation Management: When brinkmanship relies heavily on chaotic, deniable events—such as kinetic operations near nuclear facilities or critical energy sectors—the line between a controlled “accidental” signal and a catastrophic, real-world crisis becomes dangerously thin. [1, 2, 3]
Summary: The Core Takeaway
To understand Putin’s decision-making, observers must realize that the accident is often the message itself. By utilizing events that occupy the gray zone between deliberate aggression and random misfortune, the Kremlin successfully projects power, commands fear, and avoids direct accountability. [1, 2] 

Psychology Note  

Search: 


INTERPRETATION of the recent accident:
Putin: It is an Art, a Game, the Striker Sport for me. A football. They got a goal, you got a goal. It is a fight, a struggle. The smartest and the boldest win.

And I would add: It is also A DEEP RAGE, WELL CONTROLLED, CALCULATED, AND WEAPONIZED.


The Significance 

The scholarly and historical consensus states that thoroughly investigating the September 11 attacks is critical because 9/11 served as the foundational catalyst for 21st-century global geopolitics, national security frameworks, and civil liberties. Over two decades of extensive analysis by government bodies, independent researchers, and historians underscore that a precise understanding of the event’s planning, execution, and state-sponsored or institutional enablers is vital for preserving democratic accountability, international stability, and historical truth.
The multifaceted significance of establishing an exhaustive and accurate record of the attacks spans several critical domains.
🏛️ Political Significance & Democratic Accountability
The political ramifications of 9/11 reshape governance and the relationship between citizens and the state.
  • Foreign Policy Sanity: The official findings of the 9/11 Commission directly shaped the “Global War on Terror,” leading to the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. Ensuring complete accuracy regarding state complicity or funding is essential to prevent misdirected military actions and long-term foreign policy blunders.
  • Oversight of Intelligence Apparatchiks: Deep investigations expose systemic vulnerabilities and the failure of intelligence sharing among agencies like the CIA and FBI. Identifying these breakdowns holds institutions accountable and forces necessary, transparent reforms rather than unchecked expansion of bureaucratic power.
  • Combating Government Secrecy: Continuous public pressure to declassify related documents—such as the declassification of files regarding potential foreign government links—strengthens the principle of democratic transparency, ensuring that diplomatic or economic alliances do not shield culpable entities.
🛡️ Social Significance & Domestic Fabric
Sociologically, the precision of 9/11 investigations directly impacts public trust, civil rights, and social cohesion.
  • Restoring Institutional Trust: When gaps or inconsistencies persist in high-profile investigations, public faith in democratic institutions erodes. Clear, verified truths are the primary antidote to institutional cynicism and pervasive misinformation.
  • Civil Liberties Protection: The attacks prompted sweeping domestic legislation, most notably the USA PATRIOT Act, which fundamentally altered privacy laws and expanded state surveillance. Thorough retrospective analysis determines whether these sacrifices of civil liberties were genuinely justified by facts or driven by reactionary panic.
  • Mitigating Xenophobia and Islamophobia: Pinpointing the precise individuals, radical networks, and specific state factions responsible prevents the broad, dangerous scapegoating of entire religious, ethnic, or national groups, protecting vulnerable communities from collective blame.
📜 Historical Significance & Systemic Lessons
From a historical perspective, establishing a definitive, factual baseline prevents the distortion of collective memory.
  • Preventing Historical Revisionism: A rigorously documented, evidence-based record ensures that future generations understand the event based on empirical facts rather than political spin, state propaganda, or unverified fringe theories.
  • Evolving Counter-Terrorism Doctrines: Accurate identification of how the logistics, illicit financing, and radicalization networks functioned allows global security experts to develop precise counter-terrorism frameworks that target actual systemic threats rather than superficial symptoms.
  • Justice for Victims and Survivors: For the families of the victims and the survivors, identifying every tier of culprit—from the hijackers to the financiers—is a fundamental prerequisite for legal justice, financial restitution, and psychological closure.


Part 1: 9/11 Investigations and Misinvestigations 

Introduction: Putin and the 9/11 

The official narrative of the 9/11 attacks overlooks foreign state sponsorship, the non-state actors like Al-Qaeda were merely “foot soldiers” rather than the true architects. The true “Mastermind” was Putin. It was his operation, one of the series of many, with the common contextual, conceptual, and operational patterns, bearing the traces of his complex political personality, including the traits of the Recruiter and the Uniter.


The 9/11 Commission Report and FBI Investigation

AI Mode 
Historical records show that while the George W. Bush administration initially opposed creating an independent commission, official oversight investigations attribute 9/11 failures to systemic intelligence sharing breakdowns rather than a coordinated suppression of the truth.
Critics, including some lawmakers involved in the early congressional inquiries, have argued that the Bush Administration and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) under Robert Mueller resisted transparency, pointing to delayed clearances and redacted documents. 

Summary

The institutional friction between investigators and the executive branch is well-documented. 
Rather than a coordinated conspiracy to hide the “true” architects of the attacks, the actions taken by the Bush administration and Mueller’s FBI are widely understood by historians and investigators as efforts to protect classified intelligence-gathering methods, avoid public institutional embarrassment, 
(!) and preserve sensitive foreign diplomatic alliances. 
My question: Including Russia, Israel, and Germany? 
Analyzing 9/11 PDBs
Persistent but useless warnings about the Al Qaeda in intelligence reports, including from Russia, Germany, and Israel as the cover: questionable sources, skillful placements – GS:
U.S. intelligence files declassified by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) confirm that the United States received a high volume of vague, non-specific threat alerts from multiple global entities prior to September 11, 2001. These documents—including President’s Daily Briefs (PDBs) spanning from 1998 through September 2001—show that while foreign services like those of Russia, Germany, and Israel frequently flagged Al Qaeda intentions, the raw intelligence often suffered from “warning fatigue,” questionable sources, and a lack of specific, actionable data. [1, 2, 3]
The systemic breakdown described as “questionable sources and skillful placements” manifests across the intelligence chain in several distinct ways.




On September 11, 2026—the 25th anniversary of the September 11 terrorist attacks—the CIA declassified 71 President’s Daily Brief (PDB) products related to al-Qa’ida and Osama bin Laden.

Analyzing 9/11 PDBs and Deception Hypotheses – Gemini 



The intelligence documents reveal that by late 1999, the frequency of conflicting threat targets was so high that senior officials—including Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld—questioned whether Al-Qaeda was intentionally feeding the U.S. false information to force them into wasting resources.

My opinion:
AI Overview

U.S. intelligence files declassified by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) confirm that the United States received a high volume of vague, non-specific threat alerts from multiple global entities prior to September 11, 2001. These documents—including President’s Daily Briefs (PDBs) spanning from 1998 through September 2001—show that while foreign services like those of Russia, Germany, and Israel frequently flagged Al Qaeda intentions, the raw intelligence often suffered from “warning fatigue,” questionable sources, and a lack of specific, actionable data. [1, 2, 3]
The systemic breakdown described as “questionable sources and skillful placements” manifests across the intelligence chain in several distinct ways:


















The News And Times Information Network – Blogs By Michael Novakhov – thenewsandtimes.blogspot.com
Categories
The News And Times Blog

The Mastermind Putin and the 9/11 Attacks: The Russia – Germany – Israel Hypothesis – Google AI Review. Reading Putin’s mind: he communicates in accidents …

Retrospective Approach in Counterintelligence Studies 


Retrospective Analysis of the 9/11 attacks as the Russian – German – Israeli Special Intelligence Operation


  
 

The “Tripartite Hypothesis” regarding Vladimir Putin and the 9/11 attacks is an unverified, alternative counterintelligence theory and conspiracy narrative popularized on niche open-source intelligence blogs—specifically curated by blogger Michael Novakhov on platforms like [Global Security And Intelligence News Review](globalsecuritynews.org “The Mastermind: Putin and the 9/11 Attacks – The “Tripartite Hypothesis” – Google AI Review”). [1]

The narrative utilizes AI-generated text analyses (such as Gemini prompts) to stitch together historical intelligence gaps, geopolitical timelines, and the arrest of foreign officials to argue that Al-Qaeda was merely a front for a sophisticated, state-sponsored operation masterminded by Vladimir Putin in alliance with elements of German and Israeli intelligence. 

The September 11 terrorist attacks have been the subject of the most extensive investigations in modern U.S. history. Official government inquiries, independent commissions, and academic studies have definitively established the sequence of events and identified the perpetrators.
The primary responsibility for the planning and execution of the attacks rests with the terrorist network al-Qaeda, led by Osama bin Laden and operational mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. 
The phrase “he communicates in accidents” highlights a defining feature of Vladimir Putin’s political strategy: leveraging deniable, chaotic, or seemingly accidental events to signal power, enforce internal discipline, and keep external adversaries off balance.
Whether examining his psychological profile, his inner circle dynamics, or geopolitical standoffs, analyzing Putin’s “mind” requires looking past standard diplomatic rhetoric. Instead, observers must decode the calculated patterns behind events officially dismissed as mere mishaps or coincidences. 

Reading Putin’s mind: he communicates in accidents -Review -GS 

The phrase “he communicates in accidents” highlights a defining feature of Vladimir Putin’s political strategy: leveraging deniable, chaotic, or seemingly accidental events to signal power, enforce internal discipline, and keep external adversaries off balance.
Whether examining his psychological profile, his inner circle dynamics, or geopolitical standoffs, analyzing Putin’s “mind” requires looking past standard diplomatic rhetoric. Instead, observers must decode the calculated patterns behind events officially dismissed as mere mishaps or coincidences. [1, 2, 3, 4]
1. The Strategy of “Strategic Ambiguity”
Putin’s background in the KGB heavily influences his communication style. In traditional diplomacy, leaders use speeches, press releases, and treaties to signal intent. Putin frequently communicates through manufactured ambiguity.
  • Calculated Chaos: When opposition figures fall ill, infrastructure suffers sudden failures, or military maneuvers push boundaries, the Kremlin routinely claims these are “accidents” or internal matters.
  • The Message: The underlying message to the world is highly deliberate: We can disrupt your security or stability at any moment, and we will maintain total deniability while doing so.

2. Internal Discipline: The “Accident” as a Warning
Domestically, communicating in accidents is an effective tool for maintaining autocratic control over the Russian elite. [1]
  • Enforcing Loyalty: When high-ranking oligarchs, military officials, or dissidents experience sudden, fatal falls from windows, unexplained poisonings, or unexpected plane crashes, it sends a clear message to the remaining elite.
  • The Psychological Effect: The lack of an official admission of guilt creates an atmosphere of pervasive paranoia. It signals that no one is untouchable, forcing absolute loyalty to the state without the Kremlin needing to trigger formal, politically disruptive executions. [1, 2]

3. Geopolitical Brinkmanship: Testing Red Lines
On the international stage, this communication style manifests as geopolitical testing.
  • Plausible Deniability: Cyberattacks on Western infrastructure, GPS jamming over the Baltic region, and close-quarters military intercepts are often shrugged off by Russian officials as technical glitches or rogue operations.
  • Pushing Boundaries: By framing these escalations as accidental, Putin tests the boundaries of NATO and Western resolve. It forces Western leaders into a difficult position: either accept the “accident” explanation to avoid direct conflict, or risk escalating a war over an event Russia claims it did not intend. [1]

4. The Risk of Miscalculation
While communicating through accidents keeps adversaries guessing, analysts warn that this strategy carries severe dangers:
  • The Paranoia Trap: Isolating himself within a tight, highly filtered echo chamber increases the risk that Putin may misjudge how the West responds to these “accidents.”
  • Escalation Management: When brinkmanship relies heavily on chaotic, deniable events—such as kinetic operations near nuclear facilities or critical energy sectors—the line between a controlled “accidental” signal and a catastrophic, real-world crisis becomes dangerously thin. [1, 2, 3]

Summary: The Core Takeaway
To understand Putin’s decision-making, observers must realize that the accident is often the message itself. By utilizing events that occupy the gray zone between deliberate aggression and random misfortune, the Kremlin successfully projects power, commands fear, and avoids direct accountability. [1, 2] 

Putin communicates in accidents like he did he he was an enraged little boy

The Mastermind: Putin and the 9/11 Attacks – All Feeds Review

–

The Synopsis: The Contents: Thoughts and Links


The Mastermind: Putin and the 9/11 Attacks – The “Tripartite Hypothesis” – Google AI Review 

The Significance 

The scholarly and historical consensus states that thoroughly investigating the September 11 attacks is critical because 9/11 served as the foundational catalyst for 21st-century global geopolitics, national security frameworks, and civil liberties. Over two decades of extensive analysis by government bodies, independent researchers, and historians underscore that a precise understanding of the event’s planning, execution, and state-sponsored or institutional enablers is vital for preserving democratic accountability, international stability, and historical truth.
The multifaceted significance of establishing an exhaustive and accurate record of the attacks spans several critical domains.
🏛️ Political Significance & Democratic Accountability
The political ramifications of 9/11 reshape governance and the relationship between citizens and the state.
  • Foreign Policy Sanity: The official findings of the 9/11 Commission directly shaped the “Global War on Terror,” leading to the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. Ensuring complete accuracy regarding state complicity or funding is essential to prevent misdirected military actions and long-term foreign policy blunders.
  • Oversight of Intelligence Apparatchiks: Deep investigations expose systemic vulnerabilities and the failure of intelligence sharing among agencies like the CIA and FBI. Identifying these breakdowns holds institutions accountable and forces necessary, transparent reforms rather than unchecked expansion of bureaucratic power.
  • Combating Government Secrecy: Continuous public pressure to declassify related documents—such as the declassification of files regarding potential foreign government links—strengthens the principle of democratic transparency, ensuring that diplomatic or economic alliances do not shield culpable entities.

🛡️ Social Significance & Domestic Fabric
Sociologically, the precision of 9/11 investigations directly impacts public trust, civil rights, and social cohesion.
  • Restoring Institutional Trust: When gaps or inconsistencies persist in high-profile investigations, public faith in democratic institutions erodes. Clear, verified truths are the primary antidote to institutional cynicism and pervasive misinformation.
  • Civil Liberties Protection: The attacks prompted sweeping domestic legislation, most notably the USA PATRIOT Act, which fundamentally altered privacy laws and expanded state surveillance. Thorough retrospective analysis determines whether these sacrifices of civil liberties were genuinely justified by facts or driven by reactionary panic.
  • Mitigating Xenophobia and Islamophobia: Pinpointing the precise individuals, radical networks, and specific state factions responsible prevents the broad, dangerous scapegoating of entire religious, ethnic, or national groups, protecting vulnerable communities from collective blame.

📜 Historical Significance & Systemic Lessons
From a historical perspective, establishing a definitive, factual baseline prevents the distortion of collective memory.
  • Preventing Historical Revisionism: A rigorously documented, evidence-based record ensures that future generations understand the event based on empirical facts rather than political spin, state propaganda, or unverified fringe theories.
  • Evolving Counter-Terrorism Doctrines: Accurate identification of how the logistics, illicit financing, and radicalization networks functioned allows global security experts to develop precise counter-terrorism frameworks that target actual systemic threats rather than superficial symptoms.
  • Justice for Victims and Survivors: For the families of the victims and the survivors, identifying every tier of culprit—from the hijackers to the financiers—is a fundamental prerequisite for legal justice, financial restitution, and psychological closure.



Part 1: The Mastermind and the Investigation

The official narrative of the 9/11 attacks overlooks foreign state sponsorship, the non-state actors like Al-Qaeda were merely “foot soldiers” rather than the true architects. The true “Mastermind” was Putin. It was his operation, one of the series of many, with the common contextual, conceptual, and operational patterns, bearing the traces of his complex political personality, including the traits of the Recruiter and the Uniter.
AI Mode 
Historical records show that while the George W. Bush administration initially opposed creating an independent commission, official oversight investigations attribute 9/11 failures to systemic intelligence sharing breakdowns rather than a coordinated suppression of the truth.
Critics, including some lawmakers involved in the early congressional inquiries, have argued that the Bush Administration and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) under Robert Mueller resisted transparency, pointing to delayed clearances and redacted documents. 

Summary

The institutional friction between investigators and the executive branch is well-documented. 
Rather than a coordinated conspiracy to hide the “true” architects of the attacks, the actions taken by the Bush administration and Mueller’s FBI are widely understood by historians and investigators as efforts to protect classified intelligence-gathering methods, avoid public institutional embarrassment, 
(!) and preserve sensitive foreign diplomatic alliances. 
My question: Including Russia, Israel, and Germany? 




On September 11, 2026—the 25th anniversary of the September 11 terrorist attacks—the CIA declassified 71 President’s Daily Brief (PDB) products related to al-Qa’ida and Osama bin Laden.

Analyzing 9/11 PDBs and Deception Hypotheses – Gemini 



The intelligence documents reveal that by late 1999, the frequency of conflicting threat targets was so high that senior officials—including Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld—questioned whether Al-Qaeda was intentionally feeding the U.S. false information to force them into wasting resources.

My opinion:

AI Overview

U.S. intelligence files declassified by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) confirm that the United States received a high volume of vague, non-specific threat alerts from multiple global entities prior to September 11, 2001. These documents—including President’s Daily Briefs (PDBs) spanning from 1998 through September 2001—show that while foreign services like those of Russia, Germany, and Israel frequently flagged Al Qaeda intentions, the raw intelligence often suffered from “warning fatigue,” questionable sources, and a lack of specific, actionable data. [1, 2, 3]
The systemic breakdown described as “questionable sources and skillful placements” manifests across the intelligence chain in several distinct ways:



PERSISTENT WARNINGS AS THE COVER

“Fourty warnings in three years” is on average one warning monthly. Nice job of Cover building.
The info was coming from Russia, Germany, and Israel. among the others. Is it not interesting?

“Title and Intent: Titled “Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US,” the brief was compiled by the CIA at the request of President Bush, who had specifically asked if any intelligence pointed to a domestic threat.”
– Who helped him to formulate this question? The one who knew the answer?

Presidential Daily Briefs (PDBs), intelligence warnings
Analyzing 9/11 PDBs and Deception Hypotheses – GS

AI Mode
The relationship between Presidential Daily Briefs (PDBs), intelligence warnings, and the subsequent “deception hypotheses” surrounding the September 11 attacks centers on what the U.S. government knew prior to 9/11 and how agencies responded afterward.
For decades, the historical debate was shaped by a high-volume “signal-to-noise” problem. However, newly declassified materials have provided more granular insights into how information flowed to the highest levels of government. [1, 2]







While no verified evidence links these intelligence services to the orchestration of the attacks, various historical intelligence points and persistent geopolitical conspiracy theories involve these three nations.

“Evaluating the “Tripartite Hypothesis” (Russia, Germany, Israel) – Gemini
Nikolai Patrushev, August Hanning, Efraim Halevy, and the 9/11 Attacks – Google Search
In alternative counterintelligence literature and fringe OSINT analysis, Patrushev, Hanning, and Halevy are sometimes grouped together as the alleged nexus of a covert state-sponsored operation behind 9/11.” – Gemini.
Intelligence Chiefs and 9/11 Analysis share.gemini.google/53XOpjhmd1sk
Nikolai Patrushev, August Hanning, and Efraim Halevy sat at the helm of their respective nations’ primary intelligence services on September 11, 2001—leading Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB), Germany’s Federal Intelligence Service (BND), and Israel’s Mossad.

Call the 911!

9/11 WARNINGS ABOUT THE PILOTS TRAINING

#Israel: “Do not train the Saudi pilots, they will turn against you!”
#Russia: ” Do not send your Saudi pilots to Chechnya, they will turn against you!”
#Germany: “Send these moronic pilots anywhere, we don’t care; but not against us, we had enough!”

The role of the numbers of the well trained pilots in the military competition between Israel and Saudi Arabia: How 9/11 affected this balance? – Google Search google.com/search?q=The+r
The official narrative of the 9/11 attacks overlooks foreign state sponsorship, the non-state actors like Al-Qaeda were merely “foot soldiers” rather than the true architects. The true “Mastermind” was Putin. It was his operation, one of the series of many, with the common contextual, conceptual, and operational patterns, bearing the traces of his complex political personality, including the traits of the Recruiter and the Uniter.


While mainstream intelligence agencies and the 9/11 Commission report attribute the attacks strictly to Al-Qaeda operating out of Afghanistan and Pakistan, the testimonies of Litvinenko and Borovoy remain the foundation for theories that the Kremlin conducted a dangerous “double game” with the hijackers’ leadership.

Search:


Russia historically weaponized and infiltrated international terrorist organizations to serve its geopolitical interests—specifically utilizing them as leverage against Western powers.



WHO BENEFITED? RUSSIA, GERMANY, ISRAEL.

THE EFFECTS: WHAT HAPPPENED AFTER 9/11?

The After Effects of 9/11 in suspected players and US:
THE RIGHTIST REALIGNMENT:
9/11 caused a global shift to the Right, in tune with Putin’s “conservatism”.
Mission accomplished!
Search:
How did Israel benefit geopolitically from 9/11?
How did Schroeder’s Germany change politically and geopolitically after 9/11?
How did Putin’s Russia change politically and geopolitically after 9/11?
Political shift to the Right in US after 9/11
RIGHTIST REALIGNMENT after 9/11
Putin’s conservatism



The nature of the investigative hypotheses in the counterintelligence investigations of 9/11 attack



______________________________________________


The Mastermind: Putin and the 9/11 Attacks – The “Tripartite Hypothesis” – Google AI Review 

    
Search:

The Mastermind: Putin and the 9/11 Attacks – All Feeds Review



Part 1: The Mastermind and the Investigation


Встреча с председателем «Деловой России» Алексеем Репиком • Президент России

My opinion: PUTIN THE MASTERMIND

The official narrative of the 9/11 attacks overlooks foreign state sponsorship, the non-state actors like Al-Qaeda were merely “foot soldiers” rather than the true architects. The true “Mastermind” was Putin. It was his operation, one of the series of many, with the common contextual, conceptual, and operational patterns, bearing the traces of his complex political personality, including the traits of the Recruiter and the Uniter.

At the center of this hypothesis is the political personality of V. Putin, the true Mastermind of the 9/11 attacks. 9/11 is the counterintelligence error, with failure to monitor the foreign leaders closely and to try to understand better their motivations and actions, both overt and the covert.

When the advantages gained by Russia, Germany, and Israel are so obvious and dramatic, just like the general shift to the Right; it is more than just a lucky and random fruit falling in their laps. There must be a causal connection there, especially from the counterintelligence perspectives.
Search:







#CIA CIA #FBI FBI #Mossad Mossad

The two co-chairs of the 9/11 Commission, Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton, believe that the government established the 9/11 Commission in a way that ensured that it would fail.
…
“So there were all kinds of reasons we thought we were set up to fail”, Hamilton argues.

Criticism of the 9/11 Commission – Wikipedia en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism

SEARCH: Criticism of the 9/11 Commission:

The 9/11 Commission has faced significant criticism from political figures, intelligence officials, civil liberties advocates, and families of the victims.


Search also:




My opinion: 
By “true culprits” I mean the masterminds and the behind the scenes organizers, not just the foot soldiers – the hijackers. 
It is impossible to take the “Al Qaeda” version seriously, and something more than just the elaborate, meticulously prepared in advance COVER.




#CIA CIA #FBI FBI #Mossad Mossad
Google AI: “The FBI actively restricted, delayed, or classified critical pieces of evidence in investigation of 9/11.”

(My Opinion: Under the orders from ABOVE, pushing their lame “Al Qaeda” version.)

The claim that the Bush Administration and Robert Mueller’s FBI suppressed the 9/11 investigation is a subject of significant historical debate, involving documented political friction, institutional resistance, and subsequent declassifications rather than a blanket suppression. While official investigations did take place, multiple independent sources and former officials have detailed specific instances where the administration and the FBI actively restricted, delayed, or classified critical pieces of evidence.

The true, in depth 9/11 investigation was suppressed by the Bush Administration and Robert Mueller’s FBI

– Google Search

And more than that: The views that disagreed and challenged the “Al Qaeda” version of 9/11 were actively and systematically suppressed by the U.S. Government and its extensions, which reminds the Soviet style of global censorship, and possibly a sign of Putin’s political personality.



AI Mode 
Historical records show that while the George W. Bush administration initially opposed creating an independent commission, official oversight investigations attribute 9/11 failures to systemic intelligence sharing breakdowns rather than a coordinated suppression of the truth.
Critics, including some lawmakers involved in the early congressional inquiries, have argued that the Bush Administration and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) under Robert Mueller resisted transparency, pointing to delayed clearances and redacted documents. Conversely, government reviews, such as the 9/11 Commission Report and subsequent Department of Justice Inspector General reports, concluded that the primary issue was institutional inertia and poor coordination between agencies, not a cover-up. [1, 2, 3, 4]

Summary

The institutional friction between investigators and the executive branch is well-documented. 
Rather than a coordinated conspiracy to hide the “true” architects of the attacks, the actions taken by the Bush administration and Mueller’s FBI are widely understood by historians and investigators as efforts to protect classified intelligence-gathering methods, avoid public institutional embarrassment, and preserve sensitive foreign diplomatic alliances. 
Search: 
My opinion – Search: 





My impression: It looks like the paper and/or cyber trail were carefully and skillfully constructed as the part of the Cover in preparation for the 9/11 attacks. This is not the style of the non-state actors, such as “Al Qaeda”.

Search also:



9/11 truth movement – W


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Supporters of the 9/11 Truth movement at an anti-war demonstration in Los Angeles, October 2007

The 9/11 truth movement encompasses a disparate group of adherents to a set of overlapping conspiracy theories that dispute the general consensus of the September 11 attacks that a group of Al-Qaeda terrorists had hijacked four airliners and crashed them into the Pentagon and the original World Trade Center Twin Towers, which consequently collapsed. The primary focus is what the movement perceives as missed information that they allege is not adequately explained in the official National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) reports, such as the collapse of 7 World Trade Center. They believe in a cover-up and, at the least, complicity by insiders.[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8]

They analyze evidence from the attacks, come up with different conspiracy theories about how the attacks happened and call for a new investigation into the attacks

Alternative theories regarding the September 11 attacks—commonly referred to as 9/11 conspiracy theories—contend that the official account of the attacks is either incomplete or intentionally fabricated. While structural engineers, aviation experts, and the official 9/11 Commission Report conclude that the destruction was caused by four hijacked commercial aircraft operated by al-Qaeda terrorists, various alternative narratives have persisted since 2001. [1, 2, 3]
These alternative theories generally fall into two main categories of government complicity or look toward completely separate actors:


THE MISSING LINK: GERMANY’S STATE SUPPORT FOR THE HAMBURG CELL

Search:

GERMANY’S STATE SUPPORT FOR THE HAMBURG CELL

#CIA CIA #FBI FBI #Mossadd Mossad


The phrase “9/11: the missing link” refers to a prominent public theory and a series of high-profile statements made by August Hanning – News Review
thenewsandtimes.blogspot.com/2026/10/the-ph
My impression:
Hanning was on the right track with his “frequent” remarks about the role of the “STATE SUPPORT” for Hamburg cell, although it is unclear if he considered Germany itself in this role. It was a powerful opinion, at odds with the official version of the non-state Al Qaeda, and someone (the true culprits) probably did not like it, because it could lead directly to them. What followed, looks like a SETUP, the series of traps for Hanning, from his financial ruin (prearranged?) to his various unrelated private investigations which eventually lead to his arrest and current predicament. Now he is effectively shut off from the world and can talk only to his native BND. His former boss Gerhard Schroeder looks unconcerned about this, and, to the contrary, rather happy in his meeting with Putin: was this his birthday present?
It looks like the “STATE SUPPORT” for the Hamburg Cell, of which Hanning frequently spoke out, went directly from Gerhard Schroeder through his own channels, via the local Hamburg politicians, bypassing Hanning; otherwise Hanning would not speak about it so readily, risking to implicate himself and Germany.
The aim of this support was to help the future hijackers in their adaptation to the life in the western society, so they could fit seamlessly, inconspicuously, and unsuspiciously into the life in the US, while attending the pilots schools. At the same time, they were continuously “egged on” and WEAPONIZED.

–


9/11: the missing link – August Hanning – Google AI Mode: The phrase “9/11: the missing link” refers to a prominent public theory and a series of high-profile statements made by August Hanning, the former head of Germany’s Federal Intelligence Service (BND), regarding the 2001 terrorist attacks. [1, 2] Hanning, who led the BND from 1998 to 2005, has frequently spoken out about a missing link in the official 9/11 investigations—specifically targeting the logistical and financial state support given to the Hamburg Al-Qaeda cell, which included lead hijacker Mohamed Atta.

Hanning has argued that the hijackers could not have lived and operated so seamlessly in Germany without structured, domestic assistance that went largely unmapped by the initial U.S. and German investigations. [1, 2]


9/11: the missing link – August Hanning – Google Search google.com/search?q=9%2F1


Severe Intelligence Oversight

The Historical Investigation (August Hanning vs. The 9/11 Hamburg Cell)

Following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, Hanning—acting as the BND chief—headed the German intelligence apparatus tasked with mapping how al-Qaeda pilots like Mohamed Atta operated undetected from Germany. [1, 2]
Operational Failures: The investigation revealed severe intelligence oversight. German authorities admitted they actually had members of the cell and their Marienstrasse apartment under surveillance in 1998 and 1999 due to a suspected bin Laden operative. However, the surveillance was abandoned when investigators failed to connect the students to an active threat. [1]
The Chechnya Pivot: Intelligence records compiled during the post-9/11 investigations showed that the Hamburg cell members initially intended to fight in Chechnya. A chance encounter on a German train with an extremist named Khalid Masri redirected them to a Mauritanian businessman, who subsequently introduced them to Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan, where they were recruited for the plane operation. [1]
Logistical Support: The intelligence findings mapped out how the cell utilized individuals like Said Bahaji and Mounir El Motassadeq to manage routine banking and university affairs while the primary pilots were away training in Afghanistan and the United States, allowing them to avoid drawing the suspicion of immigration officials. [1, 2]
The intersection of these two timelines created a massive political scandal in Germany, shifting August Hanning’s legacy from the man who investigated the 9/11 Hamburg terrorists to a suspect arrested because of a Hamburg police raid on his own home. [1, 2]

The results of Hanning’s investigation of the Hamburg cell: summary – Google Search google.com/search?q=The+r

August Hanning and 9/11 Intelligence – Gemini

Germany’s former foreign intelligence chief August Hanning and 9/11


August Hanning served as the President of the Bundesnachrichtendienst (BND), Germany’s foreign intelligence agency, from 1998 to 2005. This placed him at the helm of German intelligence during the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

(Note: In a major breaking development as of October 6, 2026, Hanning was arrested in Germany on suspicion of espionage and treason. He is accused of purchasing classified intelligence documents from a former BND employee, identified as Manfred D., in order to resell them.)

Hanning’s tenure and his agency’s connection to 9/11 and its aftermath are defined by three major intelligence events:

The Hamburg Cell Oversight

The simple and brutal messages of 9/11 Attacks:
Call the 911!
9/11 WARNINGS ABOUT THE PILOTS TRAINING

#Israel: “Do not train the Saudi pilots, they will turn against you!”
#Russia: ” Do not send your Saudi pilots to Chechnya, they will turn against you!”
#Germany: “Send these moronic pilots anywhere, we don’t care; but not against us, we had enough!”


The military balance between the Israeli Air Force (IAF) and the Royal Saudi Air Force (RSAF) has historically favored Israel due to human capital rather than airframe counts, and the post-9/11 era shifted political dynamics that preserved Israel’s qualitative pilot and doctrinal edge while redirecting Saudi strategic priorities away from direct competition.


The role of the numbers of the well trained pilots in the military competition between Israel and Saudi Arabia: How 9/11 affected this balance? – Google Search google.com/search?q=The+r

The September 11 attacks shifted this dynamic by significantly modifying how both nations trained their pilots, and altering the structural military relationship between the United States and Saudi Arabia.

The number and exceptional preparation of combat pilots have historically formed the cornerstone of Israel’s Qualitative Military Edge (QME), a U.S.-mandated policy ensuring Israel maintains a regional technological and operational advantage. While Saudi Arabia historically possessed superior numbers of advanced airframes, it faced systemic challenges in building a massive, natively trained elite pilot corps, relying heavily on U.S.-led training pipelines. [1, 2, 3, 4]
…

The Shift from Rivals to Shared Security Concerns

Paradoxically, the post-9/11 era altered the competitive nature of Israel-Saudi relations. As the U.S. focus shifted toward global counter-terrorism and countering Iran, the perceived threat of a conventional air war between Israel and Saudi Arabia diminished. [9]
The two nations transitioned into a framework of tacit intelligence sharing and airspace coordination. This transformation became evident during civil aviation emergencies, such as the foiled flydubai hijacking attempt where both Israeli and Saudi air defense forces actively scrambled jets in a synchronized response to a mutual 9/11-style threat. [9, 10, 11] 

If Russia, Israel, and Germany are behind 9/11, here are their hypothetical motivations.
Russia intended to stop further unravelling of the USSR by turning the tables on the Western sponsors of Chechen separatists, including the US, Saudi Arabia, and other Muslim countries, by forming the anti-American Al Qaeda as the cover.
Israel intended to ignite the intense hostilities between the Saudi Arabia, other Arab countries, and the US, in the hope of benefitting from it, and strengthening the alliance with the US.
Germany, namely Schroeder, found the way to express their post-WW2 hatred for the US and to affirm their short lived, post-German unification gratitude and closeness with Russia.
These were the large scale, strategic, long term motivations and plans, with 9/11 as the “proper” action and the Special Operation.
The technical acumen of the Operation 9/11 points to the state sponsored operation, not the half-literate “Al Qaeda”.

All this is pretty much on the surface, and it does not require the deep digging.
What does, is the ease and readiness to be deceived on the part of the CIA, FBI, and other investigators.
The famous American group think and conformity may be the answers to this question.
And of course our universal, human, all too human ability for Denial and Self-deception.
It protects us from the Unbearable Pain of Knowledge.

Israel – 9/11 conspiracy theories – Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_conspiracy_theories#Theories
Israel
See also: September 11 attacks advance-knowledge conspiracy theories § Israel
A conspiracy theory documented by the Anti-Defamation League, Thom Burnett and others is that the state of Israel was involved in the attacks, and may have planned them. A variety of motives are suggested, including: to cause the United States to attack enemies of Israel; to divert public attention away from Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians; to help Zionists take control of world affairs; and to persuade Americans to support Israel. Variants of the theory contend that the attack was organized by then-Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon, the intelligence agency Mossad, or other actors from the Israeli government.[149][150] According to Slate, Kevin Barrett, a former lecturer at the University of Wisconsin, is a “leading advocate of theories that Israel’s Mossad orchestrated the 9/11 attacks.”[151]



“The FBI and CIA had investigated potential leads connecting Saudi nationals and officials to some of the hijackers.”
Search: Were the “potential leads” of 9/11 to Russia, Germany, and Israel ADEQUATELY investigated?
Google AI: It remains a subject of historical debate …
My Opinion: The ADL frivolous accusations of antisemitism related to 9/11 Israel investigations are inappropriate.
“Mossad Role (False Claims): Claims that the Mossad or Israel orchestrated 9/11 are widely documented by organizations like the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) as antisemitic conspiracy theories and historical tropes lacking any factual or forensic backing.”
Search: “9/11 hijackers and Mossad”.
ADL is not the FBI to conduct the investigations.
Search: FBI and Anti-Defamation League (ADL)







Search Also: 

“The Bulldozer”Ariel Sharon and the CIA: a complex relationship


At the center of this hypothesis is the political personality of V. Putin, the true Mastermind of the 9/11 attacks. 9/11 is the counterintelligence error, with failure to monitor the foreign leaders closely and to try to understand better their motivations and actions, both overt and the covert.

He is the consensus builder, the recruiter, the uniter, the builder of the geopolitical alliances and coalitions, including very much in the spheres of Security and Intelligence.
That’s how he put himself and Russia at the head of the anti-American Intelligence alliance with Germany and Israel in the Operation 9/11.
AI Mode

The political personality of Russian President Vladimir Putin is widely analyzed by political psychologists, biographers, and intelligence experts as an “expansionist hostile enforcer” or a highly deliberative, high-dominance introvert whose behavior is deeply rooted in his background as a KGB officer. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
Political scientists and psychological profilers break down his political personality through several primary frameworks:

1. The Psychodiagnostic Profile: “Expansionist Hostile Enforcer”

Using the Millon Inventory of Diagnostic Criteria (MIDC) via open-source intelligence, researchers like Aubrey Immelman have classified Putin’s personality as a composite of three primary patterns: [1, 2]


My Opinion:
It is very unlikely that any documents on the true origins of 9/11 exist in principle – the matter is so sensitive and explosive. The plan was known to the very few people, presumably to Putin the Mastermind, his seconds, Patrushev and Bortnikov, likely, Schroeder, and probably some Mossad Chiefs. Hanning’s knowledge and tasks were likely limited by the Hamburg Cell. However, his ability to communicate with Russia and Israel, directly or via Azerbaijan, point to possibility of sharing this information and coordination. Hanning can disclose this and other information if he is given a good enough incentive in the process of further investigations.






While there is a verified historical intersection between Russian security agencies and a key architect of the 9/11 plot, mainstream intelligence and historical consensus attribute this to an operational failure rather than a collaborative overlap.
The connection primarily centers around Ayman al-Zawahiri, who later became the co-orchestrator of the September 11 attacks and leader of al-Qaeda. [1]
The Verified Contact: The 1996 Dagestan Detention
In December 1996, Ayman al-Zawahiri traveled to the North Caucasus to establish a base of operations in Chechnya. He was arrested by Russian authorities in Dagestan for entering the country illegally without a proper visa. [1, 2, 3]
#Russia and 9/11: Zawahiri, #Litvinenko, #Borovoy

While mainstream intelligence agencies and the 9/11 Commission report attribute the attacks strictly to Al-Qaeda operating out of Afghanistan and Pakistan, the testimonies of Litvinenko and Borovoy remain the foundation for theories that the Kremlin conducted a dangerous “double game” with the hijackers’ leadership.

Search: Russia historically weaponized and infiltrated international terrorist organizations to serve its geopolitical interests—specifically utilizing them as leverage against Western powers.

–

Russian security agencies had deep, complex, and unacknowledged historical overlaps with figures who later formed the backbone of the 9/11 plot.

Search also:

The effect of 9/11 on the Second Chechen War 

WHO BENEFITED? RUSSIA, GERMANY, ISRAEL.

THE EFFECTS: WHAT HAPPPENED AFTER 9/11?

The After Effects of 9/11 in suspected players and US:
THE RIGHTIST REALIGNMENT:
9/11 caused a global shift to the Right, in tune with Putin’s “conservatism”.
Mission accomplished!
Search:
How did Israel benefit geopolitically from 9/11?
How did Schroeder’s Germany change politically and geopolitically after 9/11?
How did Putin’s Russia change politically and geopolitically after 9/11?
Political shift to the Right in US after 9/11
RIGHTIST REALIGNMENT after 9/11
Putin’s conservatism

Search:
How did Israel benefit geopolitically from 9/11?
Geopolitical analysts and historians state that the September 11 attacks significantly altered the strategic landscape of the Middle East, yielding several geopolitical shifts that aligned with Israeli security objectives. While the immediate aftermath introduced complex diplomatic dynamics, the long-term changes fundamentally integrated Israel’s localized conflicts into a broader global framework.
According to assessments by foreign policy experts and historical analyses, Israel’s geopolitical position shifted in the following key ways:

Convergence of the Counter-Terrorism Narrative

Search: How did Schroeder’s Germany change politically and geopolitically after 9/11?

Following the September 11 attacks, Chancellor Gerhard Schröder’s Germany experienced a profound political transformation and structural geopolitical shift, fundamentally moving away from its post-WWII military reluctance toward an assertive, independent role in global security.

Political Changes: Domestic Security and Coalition Strain

  • The Proclamation of “Unlimited Solidarity”: Immediately after the attacks, Schröder declared Germany’s “unlimited solidarity” (uneingeschränkte Solidarität) with the United States. This was a massive psychological pivot for a nation deeply anchored in post-war pacifism.
  • The 2001 Vote of Confidence: To fulfill his promise of military support in Afghanistan, Schröder faced fierce resistance from fundamentalist factions within his own center-left SPD-Green coalition. To force compliance, he tied the deployment of 3,900 Bundeswehr troops to a vote of confidence in November 2001. He narrowly won, consolidating his leadership but exposing deep ideological rifts on the German left.

Search: How did Putin’s Russia change politically and geopolitically after 9/11?
The September 11 attacks served as a major catalyst for Vladimir Putin to reshape Russia’s domestic and foreign policy. Putin leveraged the global War on Terror to consolidate domestic political power and launch a dramatic, albeit short-lived, geopolitical pivot toward the West.
This period fundamentally transformed how Russia interacted with global powers and accelerated its transition toward centralized authoritarianism.

Geopolitical Transformations

The immediate aftermath of 9/11 marked a radical departure from traditional Russian foreign policy paradigms. [1]


August Hanning’s communications implicate both Israel and Russia in the hypothetical origins of 9/11 – Google Search google.com/search?q=Augus
The order of importance:
Putin – FSB – Russia – Israel – Germany, each of whom had their own goals
The miserable Arab “culprits” are just the patsies and the SCAPEGOATS!

Search also:

The blame for MISINVESTIGATION of 9/11 is on Bush administration, FBI at that time, and Robert Mueller.
REINVESTIGATE THE 9/11!
Kash Patel, please add it to your list of the FBI historical mistakes, on the number 1 slot.
Thank you.
–


Search:

In counterintelligence and intelligence investigations surrounding the September 11 attacks, investigative hypotheses primarily focused on state-sponsored orchestration versus non-state actor autonomy, the operational security (OPSEC) tradecraft of the hijackers, and systemic structural vulnerabilities within U.S. intelligence. Rather than viewing 9/11 purely as a criminal act, counterintelligence (CI) investigators evaluated how foreign intelligence and extremist networks successfully penetrated domestic borders without triggering strategic warnings. [1, 2, 3]

1. State Sponsorship vs. Autonomous Network Support

A central counterintelligence hypothesis examined whether the al-Qaeda network operated entirely independently or relied on the covert assistance of foreign governments or intelligence services.
  • Foreign State Facilitation: The FBI’s massive PENTTBOM investigation and subsequent congressional inquiries heavily evaluated whether elements within foreign governments provided logistical, financial, or intelligence support to the hijackers. This included intensive vetting of figures like Omar al-Bayoumi to determine if they acted as foreign intelligence assets helping the hijackers embed in the U.S. [2, 4, 5]
  • Financial Intelligence: Investigators tested hypotheses concerning insider trading and illicit international banking systems. The 9/11 Commission Report ultimately concluded that while unusual pre-9/11 market transactions occurred, they lacked an intelligence-linked nexus to advance knowledge of the attacks. [6, 7]

…

4. Systemic Vulnerabilities and the Intelligence “Wall”

A critical hypothesis evaluated by post-9/11 reviews—including the Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General—was that domestic legal barriers effectively blinded U.S. counterintelligence. [11]
  • The Information Barrier: Legal interpretations in the 1990s built a rigid “wall” preventing foreign intelligence investigators from sharing data with domestic criminal investigators. [12, 13]
  • Tracking Failures: The investigative hypothesis confirmed that this separation caused systemic communication failures. For instance, though the CIA and NSA possessed data regarding hijackers Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Mihdhar, the information was not successfully integrated into FBI domestic counterintelligence operations until it was too late. [12, 14, 15]

…

The nature of these investigative hypotheses is defined by several core analytical focus areas:

1. The Operational Security (OPSEC) and Counter-Espionage Hypothesis

A primary hypothesis in CI investigations is determining how a hostile network operated undetected within domestic borders for an extended period.
  • The “Zero Lapses” Premise: Investigators evaluate how the 19 hijackers maintained stringent operational security over 20 months in the United States. [1, 2]
  • Tradecraft Assessment: Counterintelligence personnel form hypotheses regarding whether the operatives received formal intelligence training. For 9/11, subsequent investigations—including testimony to the 9/11 Joint Inquiry—concluded that the conspirators executed highly effective defensive counterintelligence tradecraft, showing no major operational slips that would tip off federal agencies. [1, 2, 3]

2. The Foreign State Sponsorship and Facilitation Hypothesis

Counterintelligence investigations routinely establish hypotheses regarding whether non-state terrorist actors are operating as proxies or receiving active facilitation from foreign intelligence services (FIS).
  • Logistical Support Networks: Investigators look for anomalies in funding, travel documentation, and housing to hypothesize whether foreign intelligence officers or diplomatic staff aided the cells.
  • State vs. Non-State Dynamics: In the context of 9/11, massive investigative resources were dedicated to exploring potential institutional links to foreign governments, specifically examining whether foreign intelligence entities provided safe passage, funding, or strategic cover.

See Also:


Search also: 

AI Mode

The 19 al-Qaeda hijackers successfully maintained strict operational security (OPSEC) and counterintelligence tradecraft over 20 months in the United States by operating with calculated deception rather than reckless fanaticism. According to the 9/11 Commission Report and subsequent intelligence studies, the conspirators successfully blended into Western society and exploited systemic loopholes while avoiding behaviors that would trigger law enforcement scrutiny. [1, 2, 3]
The cell utilized several foundational strategies to safeguard their plot:
1. Cultural Assimilation and Broad Deception
The operatives went to great lengths to alter their lifestyles and appearances to pass as ordinary Western students or tourists. [1, 2]


Search also: 

My opinion: 

The future hijackers were seamlessly guided, assisted, and continuously weaponized by the invisible networks of the expert forces in both Germany and the US. 

The high level of this expertise and skills indicate their hypothetical connection with the professional intelligence services: Russian, German, Israeli, or all three, in some sort of coordinated fashion. 







LINKS 



The News And Times

1 day ago

The Mastermind Putin and the 9/11 Attacks:: The Russia – Germany – Israel Hypothesis – Google AI Review

 The Mastermind: Putin and the 9/11 Attacks – All Feeds Review – The Mastermind: Putin and the 9/11 Attacks – The “Tripartite Hypothesis” – Google AI Review The Operati…

The News And Times

1 day ago

Operation 9/11: Putin was the Mastermind at the head of the Anti-American Alliance of the Intelligence Services of Russia, Germany, and Israel – the Hypothesis.

The 9/11 Reexamined: Putin was the Mastermind at the head of the Anti-American Alliance of the Intelligence Services of Russia, Germany, and Israel – the HypothesisThe Operation 9/…

The News And Times

1 day ago

Putin the Mastermind

Putin the Mastermind  -The News And Times Information Network – Blogs By Michael Novakhov – thenewsandtimes.blogspot.com

Get updates to your inbox

The News And Times

1 day ago

Recent Posts: Reading Putin’s mind: he communicates in accidents – Review

The 9/11 Reexamined: Putin was the Mastermind at the head of the Anti-American Alliance of the Intelligence Services of Russia, Germany, and Israel – the HypothesisThe Operation 9/…

The News And Times

2 days ago

Reading Putin’s mind: he communicates in accidents – Review

 Reading Putin’s mind: he communicates in accidents – Review  -The News And Times Information Network – Blogs By Michael Novakhov – thenewsandtimes.blogspot.com

The News And Times

2 days ago

Latest Starred Posts – Review

Latest Starred Posts -The News And Times Information Network – Blogs By Michael Novakhov – thenewsandtimes.blogspot.com

The News And Times

2 days ago

The very strange case of August Hanning – Review

The very strange case of August Hanning  -The News And Times Information Network – Blogs By Michael Novakhov – thenewsandtimes.blogspot.com

The News And Times

2 days ago

The role of Israel in the 9/11 Attacks – Review

x.com1d@mikenov: #CIA CIA #FBI FBI #Mossad Mossad It is entirely possible that The Bulldozer Sharon went to bed (IN CAHOOTS) with The Mastermind Putin in orchestrating the 9/11, wi…

The News And Times

2 days ago

Sharon remained perpetually suspicious that Washington would pressure him into territorial or security concessions

The Mastermind: Putin and the 9/11 Attacks – All Feeds Reviewx.com2h@mikenov: Sharon remained perpetually suspicious that Washington would pressure him into territorial or security…

The News And Times

2 days ago

All Feeds Review: The Mastermind: Putin and the 9/11 Attacks

All Feeds Review: Mastermind: Putin and the 9/11 Attacks -The News And Times Information Network – Blogs By Michael Novakhov – thenewsandtimes.blogspot.com

The News And Times

2 days ago

Экономический и гуманитарный форум Россия – Африка

 Articles and TweetsX12mЭкономический и гуманитарный форум Россия – АфрикаX15m#News #Israel #Netanyahu News Israel Netanyahu Israel election resultsX1hRT by @mikenov: 🇮🇱 Israel’s…

The News And Times

3 days ago

THE PARTNERS

Articles and TweetsX2hRT by @mikenov: The Soviet Union collapsed in 1991. But its KGB spies didn’t vanish. Some now hold powerful positions in Russia’s intelligence agencies, targe…

The News And Times

11 days ago

Articles and Tweets: The Mastermind – Selected Tweets

Articles and TweetsX8m#CIA CIA #FBI FBI #Mossad Mossad The Mastermind Selected TweetsX1hRT by @mikenov: Unity Mitford (Unity Valkyrie Freeman-Mitford; 1914-1948), a British aristoc…

The News And Times

12 days ago

The Mastermind: Selected Tweets

Putin The Mastermind: The Russia – Germany – Israel Hypothesis in the investigation of 9/11 Attacks1000 Latest Starred PostsIntroduction: Putin The MastermindINTERPRETATIONPutin: I…

The News And Times Information Network – Blogs By Michael Novakhov – thenewsandtimes.blogspot.com

Categories
The News And Times Blog

Putin, Ariel Sharon, their political relationship, and the 9/11 attacks

 

Putin, Ariel Sharon, their political relationship, and the 9/11 attacks

Tuesday November 3rd, 2026 at 7:51 AM

1 Share

AI Mode reply for Putin, Ariel Sharon, their political relationship, and the 9/11 attacks

The political relationship between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon was defined by mutual pragmatism, a shared approach to counter-terrorism, and a major alignment following the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Both leaders took office during a period of intense internal conflict—Putin during the Second Chechen War and Sharon during the Second Intifada. The 9/11 attacks served as a massive geopolitical catalyst, allowing both men to reframe their local, controversial military campaigns into a unified, global war against Islamic extremism.

The Core of the Relationship

Prior to Putin’s rise in 2000 and Sharon’s election in 2001, Russia-Israel relations were historically fraught due to Soviet-era alignment with Arab states. However, Sharon famously referred to Putin as “a true friend of Israel,” signaling a new era of diplomatic warmth.

  • The Chechnya-Intifada Parallel: According to historical archives from the Middle East Forum, Sharon openly validated and praised Putin’s aggressive military policy in Chechnya, comparing it to Israel’s defense needs. In return, Putin shifted Russia’s traditionally pro-Arab foreign policy to show greater understanding of Israel’s security operations against Palestinian factions.
  • Personal Rapport: Despite disagreements—such as Russia’s weapon sales to Syria—Putin held great respect for Sharon’s unyielding stance on state security. In later years, Putin recalled personal conversations with Sharon, noting that the Israeli leader had once bluntly advised him never to trust anyone in the Middle East.

The Impact of the 9/11 Attacks

The immediate aftermath of the 9/11 attacks completely reshaped the international legitimacy of both leaders’ military strategies:

  • The Moscow Meeting (September 2001): Just days after the 9/11 attacks, Ariel Sharon traveled to Moscow to meet with Vladimir Putin. During this historic meeting, they jointly condemned international terrorism, explicitly declaring that both Russia and Israel were victims of the same global threat.
  • The “Global War on Terror” Rebranding:
    • For Putin: The 9/11 attacks allowed Russia to pivot away from Western criticism regarding human rights abuses in Chechnya. Putin framed the Chechen separatists not as local rebels, but as part of the broader, Al-Qaeda-linked global terrorist network.
    • For Sharon: Following 9/11, Sharon quickly aligned Israel with the U.S. and Russia, declaring the fight against terrorism an “international struggle of the free world against the forces of darkness”. By linking Palestinian suicide bombings to global terrorism, Sharon successfully shifted Western perspectives on Israel’s military actions during the Second Intifada.

The foundation built around their shared post-9/11 counter-terrorism stance resulted in several high-profile diplomatic engagements:

  • Frequent Summits: Sharon made multiple high-stakes state visits to Russia (September 2001, September 2002, and November 2003) to solidify intelligence and diplomatic cooperation.
  • Historic 2005 Visit: In April 2005, Putin became the first Russian leader to make an official visit to Israel, sitting down for extensive talks with Sharon to manage Middle East tensions.
  • Enduring Legacy: When Sharon passed away in 2014, Putin issued a highly respectful message commending Sharon’s “high personal qualities” and his fierce commitment to defending Israel’s interests. According to analysts at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Sharon’s model of a strong, hyper-militarized state remained a profound point of professional admiration for Putin.

  • From Russia with love

    Meetings In September 2001, then prime minister Ariel Sharon and Russian President Vladimir Putin met in Moscow and jointly condem…

  • Russian

    Russian-Israeli relations In December 1991, Israel opened an embassy in Moscow while Russia opened an embassy in Tel Aviv. Israel’

  • Israel–Russia relations – Wikipedia

    The relationship between Israel and Russia substantially began to improve only in 2000, with the election of the more pro-Israel V…

  • Putin’s Pro-Israel Policy – Middle East Forum

    Soon thereafter, Israeli voters gave Ehud Barak’s Labor Party a resounding defeat, and Sharon became the new prime minister. Vilif…

  • Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

    A Message to Israel and a Message from Israel

    Vladimir Putin’s respectful message on the passing of former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon proves that to quite a few Russia…

  • Putin: Israel’s Sharon warned me against trusting anyone in Middle …

    Google * Russian President Vladimir Putin discusses Middle East tensions and reveals private conversations he had with former prim…

  • World shock over U.S. attacks – September 11, 2001 – CNN

    In Kabul, Afghanistan, Wakeel Ahmed Mutawakel, the foreign minister of Afghanistan’s ruling Taliban government, told the Arab tele…

  • Israel-Russia: a history of complex relations – CGTN

    In September 2001, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and Russian President Vladimir Putin condemned “terrorism” in Moscow. Both …

Copied to clipboardFailed to copy to clipboard. Try again later.

Read the whole story
· · · · · ·

Sharon – US relations, the Second Intifada, and the 9/11 Attacks

Tuesday November 3rd, 2026 at 7:11 AM

1 Share

AI Mode reply for Sharon – US relations, the Second Intifada, and the 9/11 Attacks

The intersection of Ariel Sharon, U.S.–Israel relations, the Second Intifada, and the September 11 attacks marked a major shift in Middle Eastern geopolitics and security alignment.

The Outbreak of the Second Intifada (2000)

  • The Spark: On September 28, 2000, Israeli opposition leader Ariel Sharon visited the al-Aqsa Mosque/Haram al-Sharif compound in Jerusalem accompanied by hundreds of security personnel. Palestinians viewed the visit as deeply provocative, igniting widespread protests and the outbreak of the Second Intifada (al-Aqsa Intifada).
  • Sharon’s Election: Amidst escalating suicide bombings and violence, Israelis elected Ariel Sharon as Prime Minister in February 2001 on a platform promising to restore security.

The Impact of the 9/11 Attacks (2001)

  • Framing the Conflict: Following the September 11 attacks on the United States, Sharon and Israeli officials sought to align Israel’s campaign against Palestinian militant groups with the broader U.S. “War on Terror”.
  • The “Bin Laden” Parallel: Sharon publicly framed Palestinian Authority leader Yasser Arafat as Israel’s equivalent of Osama bin Laden and targeted the Palestinian Authority’s security infrastructure.
  • U.S. Administration Stance: The Bush administration increasingly sidelined Yasser Arafat, whom Washington viewed as an obstacle to peace, and pressured the Palestinians to transition to new leadership.

Tensions in U.S.–Israel Relations

  • Clashes Over Military Tactics: Despite ideological alignment against radical militant groups, Sharon occasionally ran into friction with the Bush administration. In late 2003, tensions peaked when Sharon sharply criticized U.S. pressure and policy directions regarding Israeli incursions and settlement actions in Palestinian territories.
  • Shift to Unilateralism: Frustrated by the breakdown of peace talks during the height of the Intifada, Sharon eventually pivoted away from bilateral negotiations toward unilateral measures, most notably the 2005 Israeli disengagement from the Gaza Strip, which was later supported by Washington and regional mediators like Egypt.

  • Second Intifada – Wikipedia

    An uptick in violent incidents started in September 2000, after Israeli politician Ariel Sharon made a provocative visit to the Te…

  • The legacy of 9/11 in the Middle East Peace Process

    Sep 10, 2021 — … or Intifada, that included waves of suicide attacks on Israelis, as well as massive Israeli military reprisals that resulted i…

  • How 9/11 helped Israel sell its war on Palestinians to America

    Sep 11, 2026 — With the second Palestinian Intifada under way, the September 11 attacks on the US provided an opportunity to once again put Israe…

  • Interactive Encyclopedia of the Palestine Question

    XI. Second Intifada and the Post-Arafat Era

    Jan 15, 2005 — Two months after the collapse of the US-Israeli-Palestinian peace summit at Camp David , Israeli politician Ariel Sharon made a hi…

  • University of New Brunswick | UNB

    Background and Causes of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

    Third, Sharon and Arafat helped shift the status quo from a tense situation to a violent one. Sharon’s visit was the spark that se…

  • The Palestinians after September 11 – The Electronic Intifada

    Sep 11, 2003 — Within a month, Sharon grew frustrated at Washington’s gentle rebuffs. Relations with Bush reached a low point when Sharon accused…

  • Egypt and the Second Palestinian Intifada – ASMEA

    However, this truce collapsed within a few months. As a result of that and against the background of Abbas’ resignation, Prime Min…

  • Israeli disengagement from the Gaza Strip – Wikipedia

    In 2005, following the Second Intifada (2000–05), Israel withdrew its forces from the Gaza Strip and dismantled and evacuated the …

  • Arab Center Washington DC

    How 9/11 Helped Israel Sell Its War on Palestinians to America

    Sep 11, 2026 — With the second Palestinian Intifada under way, the September 11 attacks on the US provided an opportunity to once again put Israe…

Copied to clipboardFailed to copy to clipboard. Try again later.

Read the whole story
· · · · · ·

Retrospective Approach in Counterintelligence Studies

Tuesday November 3rd, 2026 at 7:06 AM

1 Share

AI Mode reply for Retrospective Approach in Counterintelligence Studies

In counterintelligence (CI) studies, the . It shifts the focus from real-time monitoring to diagnostic, hindsight-driven evaluation.

This methodology bridges theory and practice by turning historical intelligence failures and caught-spy case studies into foundational frameworks for modern defense.

Core Applications of Retrospective Analysis

The retrospective approach is applied across several domains within counterintelligence:

  • Post-Mortem Case Studies: Analyzing caught spies (e.g., Aldrich Ames, Robert Hanssen, Edward Snowden) to reconstruct their path to radicalization or compromise. This helps behavioral analysts refine insider threat detection matrices.
  • Institutional Counterintelligence Analysis (ICA): Reconstructing past relational networks and institutional flaws. By looking back at how a hostile service penetrated an agency, analysts map systemic risk before it manifests in new operations.
  • Cyber Forensics and Incident Response: Going back in time to investigate past network activities following a breach. It traces what systems an Advanced Persistent Threat (APT) touched and what data was exfiltrated before an alert was triggered.
  • Deception Analysis: Studying historical enemy campaigns to recognize patterns in how foreign intelligence services feed false data to manipulate policy decisions.

Methodological Benefits vs. Strategic Limitations

Evaluating security via hindsight provides a robust educational baseline, but relying solely on the past introduces cognitive blind spots.

Dimension Benefits of the Retrospective Approach Trade-offs & Limitations
Data Integrity Offers access to complete historical archives, open-source records, and declassified files. Subject to hindsight bias, making past events seem more predictable than they actually were.
Pattern Recognition Identifies recurring adversary behaviors, motivations, and operational tradecraft. Limited by survival bias; it only analyzes the spies who were caught, leaving the successful ones unstudied.
Systemic Repair Pins down structural holes, poor access controls, and policy gaps that allowed a breach to happen. It is inherently reactive, preparing an organization to fight the “last war” rather than predicting novel threat vectors.

Theoretical Synergy: The Look-Back to Look-Forward Pipeline

In academic counterintelligence studies, the retrospective approach is rarely used in isolation. It acts as the anchor for anticipatory or predictive analysis.

  1. Retrospective Interpretation: Analysts break down the telemetry, human behavioral shifts, and communication pathways used in a past adversarial operation.
  2. Theoretical Modeling: The variables are extracted to form a broader theory of intelligence learning or vulnerability (e.g., Karl Weick’s retrospective approach to organizational sensemaking).
  3. Anticipatory Deployment: The resulting models are applied to modern data pipelines to flag early warning signals of strategic manipulation or systemic risk before the threat becomes fully visible.

  • Institutional Counterintelligence Analysis (ICA)

    A final methodological component of Institutional Counterintelligence Analysis is anticipatory analysis. The purpose of the discip…

  • Your Secret Weapon Against Advanced Persistent Threats

    Retrospective analysis means going back in time to investigate past network activity, especially before and after an alert was tri…

  • CIA World Factbook Archive

    Counterintelligence: The Unfixed Failure

    ODNI stood up. CI Enhancement Act passed. Peak reform article publication. The system reorganizes around itself. Structural Reform…

  • Genesis of Counterintelligence Activities of Border Authorities …

    Feb 3, 2026 — The purpose of the study is to analyse the historical aspects of the development of counterintelligence activities and counterinte…

  • (PDF) HISTORICAL ASPECTS OF INTELLIGENCE ANALYSIS …

    As already evident, the history of intelligence development is crucial in ensuring an efficient intelligence arm and analysis. How…

  • Case Western Reserve University

    Learning through Dialogue during Intelligence Assessments

    We translate a theory into the practice of intelligence assessments. Following Karl Weick’s (1993) retrospective approach, the tra…

  • IntelArchive Intelligence Studies Database | Zotero

    Aug 15, 2026 — Varouhakis discusses the lack of a theoretical framework in counterintelligence (CI). CI training and operations have been modeled…

  • Article: Deconstructing and Reconstructing Strategic … – CIA

    CI is the bedrock of intelligence and operational functions. Sound CI processes and activities applied to the collection and analy…

Copied to clipboardFailed to copy to clipboard. Try again later.

Read the whole story
· · · · ·

Ariel Sharon, Second Intifada, 9/11 Attacks, November 2001 Speech and Apology, bribery case, sudden illness, CIA involvement

Tuesday November 3rd, 2026 at 7:04 AM

1 Share

AI Mode reply for Ariel Sharon, Second Intifada, 9/11 Attacks, November 2001 Speech and Apology, bribery case, sudden illness, CIA involvement

The provided terms trace a highly volatile and transformative period in the life of former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, spanning his role in triggering the Second Intifada, a critical post-9/11 diplomatic standoff with the Bush administration, domestic bribery scandals, and the sudden medical incapacitation that abruptly ended his political career.

🏛️ The Second Intifada (2000)

On September 28, 2000, Ariel Sharon, then the right-wing opposition leader of the Likud party, made a highly controversial and heavily guarded visit to the Al-Aqsa complex on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem.

  • The Spark: Palestinians viewed the high-profile tour as an aggressive provocation.

  • The Fallout: The visit triggered massive riots that quickly mushroomed into the multi-year armed conflict known as the Second Intifada.

  • Political Ascent: Sharon used the resulting security crisis to run a hardline campaign, defeating incumbent Prime Minister Ehud Barak in early 2001.

✈️ Post-9/11 Standoff & The October 2001 “Appeasement” Speech

Following the September 11 attacks, the United States under President George W. Bush sought to build a broad international counter-terrorism coalition that included Arab and Muslim nations.

  • The Accusation: Fearing the U.S. would pressure Israel into concessions to appease its new Arab allies, Sharon gave an extraordinary speech on October 4, 2001. He warned the Bush administration not to repeat the “terrible mistake of 1938” when European democracies sacrificed Czechoslovakia to Adolf Hitler. He bluntly added, “Israel will not be Czechoslovakia.”
  • The Apology: The White House reacted with fury, publicly calling Sharon’s comparison of Bush to Neville Chamberlain “unacceptable.” Facing a catastrophic rift with Israel’s closest ally, Sharon issued a formal statement on October 7, 2001, apologizing for the “misunderstanding” and expressing regret over how his metaphor was interpreted.

💼 The Bribery Cases (“The Greek Island Affair”)

Throughout his premiership, Sharon and his sons, Omri and Gilad, were dogged by intense corruption investigations.

  • The Allegation: Prominent real estate developer David Appel was charged with attempting to bribe Sharon in the late 1990s (when Sharon was Foreign Minister).

  • The Scheme: Appel allegedly hired Sharon’s son, Gilad, as a highly paid “consultant” on a Mediterranean resort project to secure his father’s diplomatic and bureaucratic help in bypassing Greek government hurdles.

  • The Outcome: Though Israeli state prosecutors strongly considered indicting the Prime Minister, the charges against Sharon himself were ultimately dropped due to a lack of definitive evidence linking him directly to the transactions, though the scandal significantly damaged his political standing.

🩺 Sudden Illness (2005–2006)

In late 2005, Sharon shocked the political landscape by breaking away from the Likud party to form Kadima, a new centrist party designed to bypass hardline opposition to his unilateral disengagement from the Gaza Strip.

  • The Stroke: While positioned to easily win the upcoming election, Sharon suffered a minor stroke in December 2005, followed by a catastrophic, massive hemorrhagic stroke on January 4, 2006.

  • The End of an Era: The sudden illness left him permanently incapacitated. He fell into a vegetative coma and never regained consciousness, remaining hospitalized for eight years until his death in January 2014.

Historically, the CIA maintained a deeply complex, dual-faceted relationship with Sharon throughout his military and political careers:

  • Intelligence Profiles: Declassified documents show the CIA closely tracked Sharon for decades, explicitly characterizing him as a “brilliant, ruthless, and ambitious” strategist.

  • Lebanon War Coordination: As Defense Minister during the 1982 Lebanon War, Sharon directly petitioned CIA Director William Casey for secret paramilitary funding ($10 million) to support Bashir Gemayel’s rightist Christian Phalangist militia in their joint effort to expel the PLO from Lebanon.

  • Trilateral Security Commitments: During the Second Intifada, Sharon’s administration regularly coordinated field security investigations and trilateral security meetings directly alongside CIA personnel to establish local ceasefires.

  • Sharon’s scandals | News – Al Jazeera

    The following offers some background on the scandals surrounding Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. Will ‘the Bulldozer’ be forc…

  • Ariel Sharon – Wikipedia

    ^ Upon leaving the military, Sharon entered politics, joining the Likud party, and served in a number of ministerial posts in Liku…

  • U.S. Department of State (.gov)

    Remarks With Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon

    PRIME MINISTER SHARON SECRETARY POWELL: Thank you very much, Mr. Prime Minister. And thank you for your hospitality this evening. …

  • The Israel Democracy Institute

    Remembering Ariel Sharon (1928–2014)

    Position In the fall of 2000, Sharon decided to take a tour of the Temple Mount. This highly publicized tour is commonly seen as t…

  • Ariel Sharon – a monster or a martyr for Israel?

    Jan 11, 2014 — Ariel Sharon – a monster or a martyr for Israel? right from the 1950s onwards culminating in the notorious. massacre at Sabra and …

  • Ariel Sharon dies at 85; Israel’s controversial, iron-willed …

    Jan 11, 2014 — In 2000, Sharon was widely blamed for helping spark a bloody conflict with the Palestinians, the second intifada, which followed t…

  • Furious Bush hits back at Sharon | World news – The Guardian

    This article is more than 25 years old Suzanne Goldenberg in Hebron, West Bank and Julian Borger in Washington Fri 5 Oct 2001 21.1…

  • Sharon Speech Riles U.S.

    Sharon Speech Riles U.S. Israeli Warned U.S. Not to ‘Appease’ Arabs to Gain Support October 5, 2001More than 25 years ago By Alan …

  • Sharon Apologizes Over Dispute With U.S. – The New York Times

    On October 7, 2001, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon apologized for a misunderstanding over his remarks that the United States was appe…

  • Reflecting on the life and legacy of Ariel Sharon

    Jan 11, 2014 — Reflecting on the life and legacy of Ariel Sharon he was one of his nation’s most controversial figures a ferocious military strat…

  • ARIEL SHARON | CIA FOIA (foia.cia.gov)

    ARIEL SHARON: When a Jew was killed, immediately we were asked to show self-restraint. I mean from all around the world we got req…

  • ROAD TO NICARAGUA: HOW THE CIA INHERITED THE …

    In early 1982, CIA Director William Casey received a visit from Israel`s defense minister, Ariel Sharon, a burly, truculent former…

Copied to clipboardFailed to copy to clipboard. Try again later.

Read the whole story
· · · · · · · ·

Ariel Sharon: critical post-9/11 diplomatic standoff with the Bush administration

Tuesday November 3rd, 2026 at 7:02 AM

1 Share

AI Mode reply for Ariel Sharon: critical post-9/11 diplomatic standoff with the Bush administration

The critical post-9/11 diplomatic standoff between Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and the George W. Bush administration peaked on October 4, 2001, when Sharon publicly accused the United States of trying to appease Arab nations at Israel’s expense, comparing Western diplomatic maneuvering to the 1938 Munich betrayal of Czechoslovakia.

The fiery rhetoric triggered an immediate, furious rebuke from the White House, marking one of the most severe fractures in modern U.S.–Israel relations before the two leaders ultimately realigned their anti-terrorism strategies.

🌐 The Catalyst: Building the Post-9/11 Coalition

Following the September 11 terrorist attacks, the Bush administration urgently sought to build a broad international counter-terrorism coalition. To secure the vital participation of Arab and Muslim-majority states (such as Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Egypt), Washington began adjusting its Middle East diplomacy:

  • The “Hands-Off” Reversal: Before 9/11, President Bush had maintained a relatively hands-off approach to the Second Intifada. Post-9/11, Washington fast-tracked a diplomatic initiative.
  • Endorsing Palestinian Statehood: On October 2, 2001, President Bush publicly declared that a Palestinian state had always been “part of a vision” for the Middle East, an idea subsequently echoed by Secretary of State Colin Powell.
  • Sidelining Israel: To avoid alienating Arab partners needed for the upcoming war in Afghanistan, the U.S. intentionally kept Israel at arm’s length from the formal coalition.

🎙️ The “Czechoslovakia” Speech

Fearing that Israel was being sacrificed for American geopolitical interests, Sharon delivered a blunt, televised address in Tel Aviv on October 4, 2001. He issued a stark warning to Western democracies:

“Do not repeat the dreadful mistake of 1938, when enlightened European democracies decided to sacrifice Czechoslovakia for a convenient temporary solution. Do not try to appease the Arabs at our expense. Israel will not be Czechoslovakia.”

Sharon’s historical analogy directly implied that President Bush was acting like Neville Chamberlain, the British Prime Minister who capitulated to Adolf Hitler.

⚡ The White House Fury and Apology

The speech deeply offended President Bush. The response from Washington was swift and uncharacteristically severe:

  • The Rebuke: White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer issued a sharp statement, declaring Sharon’s remarks “unacceptable” and asserting that “Israel can have no better or stronger friend than the United States and better friend than President Bush.”
  • The Retraction: Recognizing the danger of alienating Israel’s most vital ally, Sharon quickly walked back his comments. Within 48 hours, he contacted American media and officials to convey a “clarification-cum-apology,” claiming he never intended a personal comparison to Bush.

🔄 The Turning Point and Realignment

Though the standoff was volatile, it ultimately paved the way for a profound strategic realignment between Bush and Sharon:

Phase U.S.–Israel Dynamic (Late 2001) Strategic Outcome (2002 onward)
The Standoff U.S. sidelines Israel to court Arab states; Sharon publicly accuses U.S. of appeasing terrorists. Sharon successfully forces the Bush administration to reconsider its regional demands.
The Realignment The U.S. adopts Bush’s doctrine: “You’re either with us, or you’re with the terrorists.” Sharon successfully frames Israel’s fight against Palestinian suicide bombers as an identical front in the Global War on Terror.
The Resolution The January 2002 Karine A arms-smuggling incident proves Yasser Arafat is trading weapons with Iran. Bush concludes Arafat is compromised by terror. By June 2002, Bush fully aligns with Sharon, calling for total Palestinian leadership change before any statehood talks proceed.

  • Before Attacks, U.S. Was Ready To Say It Backed Palestinian State

    Before Attacks, U.S. Was Ready To Say It Backed Palestinian State The Israeli prime minister, Ariel Sharon, and some Jewish groups…

  • Furious Bush hits back at Sharon | World news | The Guardian

    Oct 5, 2001 — … felt personally affronted by the comparison to Neville Chamberlain and the discredited policies of appeasement in the run up t…

  • Sharon Apologizes Over Dispute With U.S. – The New York Times

    On Thursday, Mr. Sharon addressed the United States and other Western democracies, saying, ”Do not repeat the dreadful mistake of…

  • Sharon warns U.S. not to ‘appease’ Arabs – October 5, 2001

    Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon bluntly warned the United States on Thursday not to “appease” Arabs at Israel’s expense and sa…

  • YouTube·WashingtonInstitute

    Ariel Sharon’s Road from Settlement Building to Gaza Withdrawal

    Jan 5, 2023 — he will pursue the policies of Bush the father is he used to call him George H.W bush and I think Sharon did not really know what …

  • How 9/11 Changed U.S. Policy Toward Israel – U.S. News – Haaretz

    The blunt speech shocked the U.S. administration, which was still counting the bodies in the ruins and attempting to track down th…

  • Globes – Israel Business News

    A wise, brave speech

    Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s remarks about Czechoslovakia were not meant to be historically accurate. He wanted to cause a stir a…

  • U.S. rejects Israel’s charge of appeasing Arabs | CBC News

    Oct 5, 2001 — Social Sharing. The White House rebuked Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon Friday for suggesting the Bush administration was appe…

  • Sharon Speech Riles U.S. – The Washington Post

    Oct 5, 2001 — The U.S.-Israeli dispute began after Sharon suggested in a speech on Thursday that the administration risked repeating the mistake…

  • U.S.

    U.S.-Israel Tension in the Aftermath of September 11 The tension peaked at the end of last week when Israeli prime minister Ariel …

Copied to clipboardFailed to copy to clipboard. Try again later.

Read the whole story
· · · · · · ·

Sharon – US relations and the Second Intifada

Tuesday November 3rd, 2026 at 6:42 AM

1 Share

AI Mode reply for Sharon – US relations and the Second Intifada

Overview of the Relationship

During the Second Intifada (September 2000 – February 2005), the relationship between Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and the United States evolved into a close, pragmatic alliance, particularly after George W. Bush took office in January 2001.

Key Elements of Sharon-US Dynamics

  • The Sharon–Bush Alliance: Prime Minister Sharon and U.S. President George W. Bush forged a relationship characterized by deep mutual trust and open political alignment. According to Sharon’s bureau chief, Dov Weissglass, this strong bond ensured firm U.S. backing for Israel’s military campaign against Palestinian militant groups and suicide bombings.
  • The Second Intifada Catalyst and Context: Sharon’s visit to the Temple Mount/Al-Aqsa compound in September 2000—while he was still in the opposition—served as a major spark for the outbreak of the Second Intifada. When Sharon won a landslide election in February 2001 on a platform of strong security and counter-terrorism, the Bush administration engaged directly with him rather than isolating him.
  • U.S. Policy Shifts and Support:
    • In November 2001, President Bush became the first U.S. president to publicly endorse the creation of a Palestinian state living alongside Israel (the two-state framework).
    • Over the course of the intifada, the U.S. administration backed Israel’s security measures, including military incursions into West Bank cities during 2002 (such as the Battle of Jenin), while intermittently pushing diplomatic roadmaps like the Quartet’s “Roadmap for Peace.”
  • Major Political Understandings:
    • Sharon secured important written assurances from President Bush regarding permanent-status negotiations, including U.S. acknowledgment of demographic realities and Israel’s retention of major West Bank settlement blocs.
    • Bush also expressed support for the idea that Palestinian refugees would be resettled within a future Palestinian state rather than inside Israel.
  • The Transition to Unilateralism (Gaza Disengagement): Frustrated with the lack of a reliable Palestinian peace partner under Yasser Arafat, Sharon quietly coordinated his shift toward unilateral steps with Washington. In 2003, Sharon communicated his intention to withdraw from the Gaza Strip to U.S. officials, culminating in the 2005 Gaza disengagement plan which had tacit U.S. backing as the Second Intifada drew to a close.

  • Second Intifada – Wikipedia

    … that the visit could trigger violence, and that the purpose of his visit was political. According to one observer, Sharon, in …

  • Election Day in Israel, from Sharon to Netanyahu | Brookings

    Mar 17, 2015 — Ariel Sharon won the February 2001 election in a landslide. The second intifada was underway and Israelis wanted a strongman with …

  • The Implications of the Second Intifada on Israeli Views of Oslo

    The Implications of the Second Intifada on Israeli Views of Oslo Ehud Barak, elected in 1999, likewise met with Arafat under the a…

  • Sharon prized ties with US, didn’t want to lead Iran struggle …

    Late PM’s bureau chief Dov Weissglass highlights trusting, affectionate alliance with president George W. Bush In a conference cal…

  • University of New Brunswick | UNB

    Background and Causes of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

    Third, Sharon and Arafat helped shift the status quo from a tense situation to a violent one. Sharon’s visit was the spark that se…

  • YouTube·WashingtonInstitute

    Ariel Sharon’s Road from Settlement Building to Gaza Withdrawal

    Jan 5, 2023 — in the early 1990s Sharon would become infamous for announcing a new settlement project each time U.S Secretary of State James Bak…

  • U.S. Role in the Israeli

    U.S. Role in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict The administration of President George W. Bush endorsed the Mitchell Report on Midea…

  • Ariel Sharon was a long-term advocate for Israeli settlements …

    April 16, 2026 — Sharon’s Policy Shift: Ariel Sharon’s seemingly contradictory moves, such as the 2005 Gaza disengagement and his early statements …

  • Facebook·Middle East Institute

    What was it like to meet with Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon …

    Oct 8, 2025 — What was it like to meet with Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon? In this week’s episode of Taking the Edge Off the Middle East, …

Copied to clipboardFailed to copy to clipboard. Try again later.

Read the whole story
· · · · · ·
Next Page of Stories
Loading…
Page 2

Reading Putin’s mind: he communicates in accidents -Review

Monday November 2nd, 2026 at 8:45 AM

1 Share

AI Mode Conversation: Reading Putin’s mind: he communicates in accidents -Review

Reading Putin’s mind: he communicates in accidents -Review

AI Mode reply for Reading Putin’s mind: he communicates in accidents -Review

The News And Times Information Network – Blogs By Michael Novakhov – thenewsandtimes.blogspot.com
Categories
The News And Times Blog

The “Tripartite Hypothesis” regarding Vladimir Putin and the 9/11 attacks is an unverified, alternative counterintelligence theory

 
Michael Novakhov – SharedNewsLinks℠

The Mastermind: Putin and the 9/11 Attacks – The “Tripartite Hypothesis” – Google AI Review

Sunday November 1st, 2026 at 3:21 PM

1 Share

The Mastermind: Putin and the 9/11 Attacks – The “Tripartite Hypothesis” – Google AI Review

AI Mode reply for The Mastermind: Putin and the 9/11 Attacks – The “Tripartite Hypothesis” – Google AI Review

The “Tripartite Hypothesis” regarding Vladimir Putin and the 9/11 attacks is an unverified, alternative counterintelligence theory and conspiracy narrative popularized on niche open-source intelligence blogs—specifically curated by blogger Michael Novakhov on platforms like [Global Security And Intelligence News <a href=”http://Review%5D%28globalsecuritynews.org” rel=”nofollow”>Review](globalsecuritynews.org</a> “The Mastermind: Putin and the 9/11 Attacks – The “Tripartite Hypothesis” – Google AI Review”).

The narrative utilizes AI-generated text analyses (such as Gemini prompts) to stitch together historical intelligence gaps, geopolitical timelines, and the arrest of foreign officials to argue that Al-Qaeda was merely a front for a sophisticated, state-sponsored operation masterminded by Vladimir Putin in alliance with elements of German and Israeli intelligence.

There is no credible legal, forensic, or intelligence evidence from any official international body to substantiate this theory.

Core Tenets of the Hypothesis

According to the self-published reviews and blog feeds, the theory breaks down into three key pillars:

  • The Russia Connection (The “Mastermind”): Proponents argue that the technical precision of the September 11 attacks points to state-backed intelligence tradecraft rather than non-state actors. The hypothesis claims Putin orchestrated the plot as a strategic chess move to reverse the unraveling of the post-Soviet sphere by trapping the U.S. in a global counter-terrorism conflict, thereby securing a “carte blanche” to execute the Second Chechen War under the guise of fighting Islamic extremism.
  • The Germany Connection (“State Support”): The hypothesis heavily leverages public remarks made by August Hanning (the head of Germany’s BND foreign intelligence from 1998 to 2005). Hanning historically noted that a “missing link” in 9/11 investigations was the highly structured logistical and financial domestic support that allowed the Hamburg Al-Qaeda cell (led by Mohamed Atta) to operate seamlessly. The online theory expands on this, alleging that high-level German political channels deliberately facilitated the cell to insulate them from domestic immigration scrutiny.
  • The Israel Connection (“Strategic Hostility”): The hypothesis claims that elements of Israeli intelligence passively or actively co-aligned with the operation to force a permanent geopolitical rupture between the United States and Arab nations (specifically Saudi Arabia), thereby cementing an unbreakable U.S.–Israeli strategic alliance.

Distorting the Context of “Google AI Reviews”

The title’s reference to a “Google AI Review” stems from the blog author’s method of using large language models to evaluate counterintelligence concepts. When prompted with hypothetical scenarios—such as the plausibility of “backstopping” (creating a false trail of intelligence warnings to build a cover story)—the AI outlines how such espionage tactics work theoretically. The blog then aggregates these structural definitions to give the appearance of an algorithmic “validation” of the conspiracy theory itself.

Official Intelligence vs. The Theory

Official, consensus-backed investigations—most notably The 9/11 Commission Report and the FBI’s PENTTBOM probe—concluded that Al-Qaeda acted as an independent, non-state terrorist network. While declassified Presidential Daily Briefs (PDBs) highlight that foreign intelligence services (including Russian, German, and Israeli liaison wings) frequently passed warnings to the CIA regarding Osama bin Laden’s intent to strike inside the U.S., these communications are officially recognized as genuine, fragmented intelligence failures rather than a coordinated deception matrix.

AI can make mistakes, so double-check responses

Copied to clipboardFailed to copy to clipboard. Try again later.

  • Global Security And Intelligence News Review – Audio Posts

    Oct 9, 2026 — The “Tripartite Hypothesis” Putin was the Mastermind at the head of the Anti-American Alliance of the Intelligence Services of Rus…

Read the whole story
· · ·

The Mastermind: Putin and the 9/11 Attacks – The “Tripartite Hypothesis” – Google AI Review

Sunday November 1st, 2026 at 3:19 PM

1 Share

AI Mode reply for The Mastermind: Putin and the 9/11 Attacks – The “Tripartite Hypothesis” – Google AI Review

The “Tripartite Hypothesis” is an alternative online narrative and conspiracy theory associated with Michael Novakhov and digital media reviews (such as through Global Security And Intelligence News Review).

Core Claims of the Hypothesis

  • The Mastermind: It posits Vladimir Putin as the central mastermind behind the 9/11 attacks.

  • The Tripartite Alliance: It alleges an anti-American alliance involving the intelligence services of Russia, Germany, and Israel.

  • Google AI / Gemini Reviews: The subject refers to AI-generated summaries, prompts, and analytical reviews (via Google Gemini) processing or critiquing these fringe theories and related materials compiled online.

Factual Consensus and Context

  • Official Findings: The 9/11 Commission Report and multi-year investigations by US intelligence and federal agencies established that al-Qaeda—led by Osama bin Laden and planned by operatives like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed—perpetrated the September 11 attacks.
  • Watchdog Scrutiny: Similar speculative or conspiratorial claims involving foreign intelligence agencies (such as allegations concerning Israel’s Mossad or other state actors) have been widely documented by watchdogs like the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) as relying on unsubstantiated or anti-Semitic tropes.

  • Global Security And Intelligence News Review – Audio Posts

    Oct 9, 2026 — The Mastermind: Putin and the 9/11 Attacks – The “Tripartite Hypothesis” – Google AI Review The Operation 9/11 The 9/11 Reexamined…

  • Russia News: Articles and Tweets

    Oct 31, 2026 — The role of Israel in the 9/11 Attacks – Review – Anti-Semitic Tropes: Prominent watchdogs such as the Anti-Defamation League (ADL…

  • Putin the Mastermind – Global Security And Intelligence News …

    Oct 29, 2026 — Google AI Review: 9/11 and the Second Chechen war. September 17, 2026. Gemini, Google AI, Michael Novakhov. Is Putin behind the 9/

Copied to clipboardFailed to copy to clipboard. Try again later.

Read the whole story
· ·

The Mastermind: Putin and the 9/11 Attacks

Sunday November 1st, 2026 at 3:13 PM

1 Share

AI Mode Conversation: The Mastermind: Putin and the 9/11 Attacks

The Mastermind: Putin and the 9/11 Attacks

AI Mode reply for The Mastermind: Putin and the 9/11 Attacks

There is no credible historical or intelligence evidence linking Russian President Vladimir Putin to the planning, execution, or masterminding of the September 11 attacks.

Official investigations, including the comprehensive 9/11 Commission Report, conclusively established that al-Qaeda, led by Osama bin Laden, was solely responsible for the coordinated hijackings. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (KSM) was identified as the principal architect of the operation.

Far from masterminding the tragedy, Vladimir Putin’s actual historical role in the immediate aftermath of 9/11 was that of an American ally against terrorism.

Putin’s Documented Response to 9/11

Historical records outline a vastly different relationship between Putin and the 9/11 attacks than one of orchestration:

  • First to Call: Putin was the first foreign head of state to call US President George W. Bush after the planes struck, offering immediate solidarity and a forty-minute conversation of support.
  • Intelligence Sharing: The Russian government actively shared intelligence regarding al-Qaeda and terrorist training camps in Afghanistan with US agencies.
  • Logistical & Base Access: Putin facilitated US military access to critical airspace and bases in Central Asia, a move that aided the initial American operations to overthrow the Taliban.
  • Ground Zero Visit: On November 16, 2001, Putin personally visited the World Trade Center site in New York City to pay tribute to the victims and express admiration for the resilience of New Yorkers.

Geopolitical Motivation

As detailed in assessments by organizations like the Wilson Center, Putin viewed the tragedy as a strategic opportunity to form a long-term counter-terrorism alliance with the West. By aligning with the United States against Islamic extremism, Putin sought to frame Russia’s concurrent military campaigns in Chechnya as part of the broader global war on terror.

While US-Russia relations eventually deteriorated over subsequent decades due to conflicting geopolitical interests, the historical consensus remains absolute: Russia had no part in masterminding the 9/11 attacks.

AI can make mistakes, so double-check responses

Copied to clipboardFailed to copy to clipboard. Try again later.

  • Russia’s Tattered 9/11 Promise | Wilson Center

    Russian President Vladimir Putin saw the 9/11 attacks as an opportunity to make common cause with the United States. Putin was the…

  • President Vladimir Putin visited the site of the tragedy of 9/11

    * Wrote on the wall, “I bow to the victims’ memory, and admire New Yorkers’ courage. The great city and the great American nation …

  • Facebook·Embassy of Russia in the USA / Посольство России в США

    Russia and US cooperation against terrorism 25 years after 9/11

    Sep 10, 2026 — After the attacks, President Putin was the first world leader to call President George Bush; they spoke for a full forty minutes.

  • THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT – GovInfo

    mastermind of the 1993 World Trade Cen= ter bombing inspired KSM to become involved in planning attacks against the. United States…

  • 9/11 at the Pentagon

    On the morning of September 11, 2001, al-Qaeda terrorists hijacked four commercial airplanes in a coordinated assault on the Unite…

  • 9/11 and US-Russia relations – highlights

    Sep 10, 2021 — Following 9/11, Russia provided significant intelligence and logistical support to the early phases of the American operation in A…

  • 9/11 and US-Russia relations

    Vladimir Putin was reportedly the first foreign leader to call George W. Bush after the attacks. He also facilitated US access to …

Read the whole story
· · · · ·

The Mastermind: Putin and the 9/11 Attacks

Sunday November 1st, 2026 at 3:13 PM

1 Share

AI Mode reply for The Mastermind: Putin and the 9/11 Attacks

Russian President Vladimir Putin was not the mastermind behind the 9/11 attacks; instead, he was the first world leader to call U.S. President George W. Bush to express solidarity and offer assistance immediately after the tragedy.

Putin’s Reaction and Actions After 9/11

  • First Call: Putin was the first foreign head of state to reach out to President Bush, speaking with him for 40 minutes to offer condolences and share intelligence.
  • Concrete Support: Russia shared maps of Afghan caves, supported the U.S.-led campaign against the Taliban, and allowed the U.S. military to use air bases in Central Asia.
  • Ground Zero Visit: On November 16, 2001, Putin visited the World Trade Center site in New York City, laid a floral wreath, and wrote in the memorial book: “I bow to the victims’ memory, and admire New Yorkers’ courage. The great city and the great American nation will win!!!” as reported by the Official Kremlin Website.
  • Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (KSM): The 9/11 Commission identified Khalid Sheikh Mohammed as the principal architect and mastermind of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, working under al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden.

How the Relationship Changed

  • The initial post-9/11 partnership—detailed by the Wilson Center—was short-lived.
  • Tensions soon re-emerged over U.S. withdrawal from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq, and NATO expansion into Eastern Europe, leading to a sharp cooling of U.S.-Russia relations in the years that followed.

  • Russia’s Tattered 9/11 Promise – Wilson Center

    Sep 10, 2026 — … had a famously friendly, although often unpredictable relationship with Bill Clinton, but the Kremlin chafed at American criti…

  • President Vladimir Putin visited the site of the tragedy of 9/11

    On November 16, 2001, Russian President Vladimir Putin visited the site of the 9/11 terrorist attack in New York City. Putin was t…

  • Facebook·Embassy of Russia in the USA / Посольство России в США

    Russia and US cooperation against terrorism 25 years after 9/11

    Sep 10, 2026 — “We entirely and fully share and experience your pain. ” Some Americans, remembering and mourning 9/11, may wish also to remember …

  • 9/11 and US-Russia relations

    The 9/11 attacks had a short-lived impact on bilateral relations between the United States and Russia. Russia was disappointed tha…

  • THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT – GovInfo

    that attack, KSM and Yousef had numerous telephone conversations during which Yousef discussed his progress and sought additional …

Copied to clipboardFailed to copy to clipboard. Try again later.

Read the whole story
· · ·

Evidence, legal and otherwise, that the so called “Al Qaeda” is the original primary source behind the 9/11 attacks?

Saturday October 31st, 2026 at 2:14 PM

1 Share

AI Mode reply for Evidence, legal and otherwise, that the so called “Al Qaeda” is the original primary source behind the 9/11 attacks?

.

The evidentiary record spans multiple independent categories:

1. Forensic & Documentary Evidence (FBI PENTTBOM Investigation)

The Federal Bureau of Investigation’s 9/11 Investigation (PENTTBOM)—the largest investigation in the bureau’s history—directly linked all 19 hijackers to al-Qaeda networks:

  • Physical Artifacts & Manifests: Flight manifests, passenger seat assignments, passports, flight training logs, and handwritten wills recovered at crash sites and from luggage left behind in Boston and Portland directly identified the 19 hijackers.
  • The “Hamburg Cell” Link: Three of the pilot hijackers (Mohamed Atta, Marwan al-Shehhi, and Ziad Jarrah) were documented as members of an al-Qaeda cell in Hamburg, Germany. Intelligence and travel records showed their travel to al-Qaeda training camps in Kandahar, Afghanistan, in late 1999, where they swore fealty (bay’ah) to Osama bin Laden.
  • Financial Paper Trails: Bank transfers through Citibank, SunTrust, and wire services tied financial facilitator Mustafa al-Hawsawi in the United Arab Emirates directly to funding the hijackers’ U.S. flight lessons, living expenses, and vehicle rentals. Surplus funds were wired back to al-Qaeda accounts days before the attacks.

2. Legal Precedents & Court Convictions

Multiple civilian and military legal bodies have entered evidence of al-Qaeda’s responsibility into the public judicial record:

  • The Zacarias Moussaoui Case (U.S. Federal Court): In 2005, Zacarias Moussaoui pled guilty in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia to six felony conspiracy counts related to the 9/11 plot. The prosecution introduced thousands of declassified trial exhibits, communications records, and banking transactions proving his direct instructions from al-Qaeda leadership.
  • Civil Court Judgments: In extensive federal civil litigation brought by victims’ families (such as In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001), U.S. courts evaluated multi-source intelligence, banking documents, and expert testimony, entering binding legal findings of fact establishing al-Qaeda’s organizational liability.
  • Guantánamo Military Commissions: In United States v. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed et al., the military tribunal docket contains extensive unclassified financial records, seized computing equipment, and phone records establishing the logistical spine of the operation separate from disputed interrogation statements.

3. Captured Material & Digital Media

Physical evidence recovered from al-Qaeda safe houses in Afghanistan and Pakistan following the 2001 invasion produced primary-source confirmation:

  • Martyrdom Videos: Pre-recorded video wills and farewell messages by hijackers (including Mohamed Atta, Ziad Jarrah, and Ahmed al-Haznawi) showed them posing against al-Qaeda imagery, declaring their mission under Osama bin Laden’s guidance.
  • Seized Computers & Operational Documents: Electronic media recovered during the 2002–2003 arrests of Ramzi bin al-Shibh and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed contained flight simulator data, lists of operatives, timetables, and drafts of operational plans.

4. Voluntary Public Claims of Responsibility

Beyond coerced or courtroom statements, primary figures within al-Qaeda repeatedly claimed ownership of the plot via open-source broadcast channels:

  • Osama bin Laden’s Statements: In a video aired by Al Jazeera in October 2004, bin Laden explicitly detailed his reasoning and direction of the plot, stating that the idea originated in 1982 and that he directed the hijackers to strike the towers. In an earlier videotape recovered in Jalalabad in November 2001, bin Laden was recorded privately describing having advance knowledge of the strikes and calculating the fire damage to the World Trade Center.
  • Al Jazeera Interviews: In April 2002, investigative journalist Yosri Fouda interviewed Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and Ramzi bin al-Shibh in Karachi for an Al Jazeera special; during the taped interviews, Mohammed openly declared himself the head of al-Qaeda’s military committee and detailed the operational planning of the “Holy Tuesday” attack.

5. Official Bipartisan Inquiries

  • The 9/11 Commission Report: Congress established the independent National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States. Drawing on more than 2.5 million pages of intelligence and diplomatic documents and interviews with over 1,200 individuals across 10 countries, the report systematically reconstructed al-Qaeda’s organizational hierarchy, funding channels, and execution chain.

  • 9/11 Investigation – FBI

    9/11 Investigation By the end of the day, the FBI had established command posts for each of the three crash sites. Thousands of ag…

  • Responsibility for the September 11 attacks – Wikipedia

    At around 9:30 pm on September 11, 2001, George Tenet, director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), told President George W.

  • Where the case against the alleged 9/11 plotters stands 25 …

    A 2024 plea agreement that would have spared Mohammed and two co-defendants the possibility of execution was ultimately abandoned,

  • THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT – GovInfo

    THE 9/11. COMMISSION. REPORT. Final Report of the. National Commission on Terrorist. Attacks Upon the United States official gover…

  • The Case of Zacarias Moussaoui, 2001–2006 – Project MUSE

    Military commissions are said to be designed specifically for wartime situations; differences with federal courts include the admi…

  • United States v. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed – Wikipedia

    The five individuals are charged under the military commission system, as established by Congress under the Military Commissions A…

  • Judge throws out KSM confession in 9/11 case in blow to prosecution

    The ruling throws another wrench into the long-running death penalty case involving Khalid Sheikh Mohammed on the eve of the 25th …

  • University of North Texas (UNT)

    Chapter 5: Al Qaeda Aims at the American Homeland

    By early 1999, al Qaeda was already a potent adversary of the United States. Bin Ladin and his chief of operations, Abu Hafs al Ma…

Copied to clipboardFailed to copy to clipboard. Try again later.

Read the whole story
· · · · · ·

Evidence, legal and otherwise, that hypothetically, the professional intelligence services of Rusia, Germany, and Israel are the original primary source behind the 9/11 attacks?

Saturday October 31st, 2026 at 2:11 PM

1 Share

AI Mode reply for Evidence, legal and otherwise, that hypothetically, the professional intelligence services of Rusia, Germany, and Israel are the original primary source behind the 9/11 attacks?

establishing that the professional intelligence services of Russia, Germany, or Israel were the original primary sources behind or orchestrators of the September 11 attacks. Official investigations, such as the 9/11 Commission Report, concluded that the attacks were entirely planned and executed by al-Qaeda.

However, looking at the historical record, declassified documents, and various geopolitical analyses regarding Russia, Germany, and Israel in relation to 9/11 reveals a complex picture. The actual legal and intelligence documentation regarding these three countries involves foreknowledge, counterterrorism warnings, or the presence of the hijackers on their soil, rather than operational sponsorship.

Russia: Intelligence Warnings

There is no legal evidence implicating Russian intelligence (SVR or FSB) as a sponsor of the attacks. Instead, documentation shows that Russia actively tried to warn the United States beforehand.

  • The Putin Warning: Official records show that on September 9, 2001, Russian President Vladimir Putin called U.S. President George W. Bush. Putin warned the U.S. that Russian intelligence had detected a heightened state of readiness from al-Qaeda following the assassination of Afghan Northern Alliance leader Ahmad Shah Massoud, warning that “something larger might be afoot”.
  • Prior Intelligence Tracking: Russian intelligence had been deeply active in tracking Islamist militancy in the Caucasus and Central Asia throughout the 1990s. They routinely shared general warnings with Western counterparts regarding al-Qaeda’s global ambitions, but lacked specific operational details regarding the domestic U.S. aviation plot.

Germany: The Hamburg Cell

German intelligence (BfV/BND) and law enforcement were not sources behind the attacks, but Germany served as a primary legal and investigative focus because the operational core of the 9/11 hijackers lived and organized in Hamburg.

  • The Hamburg Cell: Key conspirators—including operational leader Mohamed Atta, Ramzi bin al-Shibh, Marwan al-Shehhi, and Ziad Jarrah—formed a tight-knit extremist cell while studying at the Hamburg University of Technology in the late 1990s.
  • Legal & Intelligence Records: Extensive German federal investigations and subsequent trials (such as the prosecution of Mounir el-Motassadeq, who was convicted by a German court for aiding the Hamburg cell) documented that the cell operated via deep operational security. German intelligence had monitored certain individuals associated with the cell prior to 2001 due to peripheral links to other suspected radicals, but they did not uncover the active 9/11 plot before it occurred.

Israel: Claims of Foreknowledge & Surveillance

No credible evidence or legal findings connect the Israeli government or Mossad to the execution of 9/11. The intersection of Israeli intelligence with the history of 9/11 centers entirely on unverified theories of passive foreknowledge and documented counter-intelligence monitoring.

  • The “Moving Company” Surveillance: Following the attacks, the FBI detained a group of five Israeli nationals employed by a moving company in New Jersey after witnesses reported them acting suspiciously and photographing the World Trade Center site. A thorough FBI counterintelligence investigation concluded that while some of the individuals may have been conducting low-level surveillance operations targeting local fundraising networks, they had no operational connection to or advance knowledge of the al-Qaeda plot. They were subsequently deported for visa violations.
  • Intelligence Sharing: Israeli intelligence routinely passed generalized warnings to the CIA and FBI throughout the summer of 2001 regarding imminent, large-scale attacks by al-Qaeda against American targets. According to the 9/11 Commission Report, these warnings were among dozens received from various foreign agencies that pointed to an escalating threat level but lacked specific targets, dates, or methodologies.
  • Conspiracy Theories: Disproven claims alleging Israeli orchestration—such as the widely circulated online falsehood that 4,000 Jewish or Israeli workers were told to stay home from the World Trade Center on September 11—have been thoroughly debunked by official casualty records and analyzed as antisemitic disinformation campaigns.

Summary of Official Findings

The consensus of global intelligence services, international law enforcement, and independent legal bodies maintains that the 9/11 attacks were exclusively an al-Qaeda operation financed and coordinated out of Afghanistan and Pakistan. The involvement of Russia, Germany, and Israel in the historical record is restricted to inter-governmental threat warnings (Russia/Israel) and the investigation of domestic sleeper cells operating within sovereign borders (Germany).

  • THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT – GovInfo

    3.1 From the Old Terrorism to the New: The First World Trade Center Bombing 71. 3.2 Adaptation—and Nonadaptation— in the Law Enfor…

  • September 11 intelligence before the attacks

    Contents * April 2001 Massoud speech Another warning came from Ahmad Shah Massoud, leader of the anti-Taliban Northern Alliance, i…

  • 9/11 conspiracy theories

    Foreign governments See also: Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda link allegations and Foreign government foreknowledge There are allegati…

  • What did US intelligence know before the 9/11 attacks?

    What did US intelligence know before the 9/11 attacks? The CIA have declassified documents showing US presidents were warned about…

  • Antisemitic Conspiracies About 9/11 Endure 20 Years Later

    Sep 8, 2021 — ADL published its first major report on antisemitic 9/11 conspiracy theories in 2003. ADL’s subsequent reports in 2006, 2011, and …

  • The 9/11 Commission Report – Avalon Project

    12.4 Protect against and Prepare for Terrorist Attacks 383. 13. HOW TO DO IT? A DIFFERENT WAY OF. ORGANIZING THE GOVERNMENT 399. 1…

  • The people who think 9/11 may have been an ‘inside job’

    The people who think 9/11 may have been an ‘inside job’ * AE911 Truth board member Roland Angle alleges there are significant erro…

Copied to clipboardFailed to copy to clipboard. Try again later.

Read the whole story
· · · · · ·
Next Page of Stories
Loading…
Page 2

Nikolai Patrushev, August Hanning, Efraim Halevy, and the 9/11 Attacks

Saturday October 31st, 2026 at 2:06 PM

1 Share

Nikolai Patrushev, August Hanning, Efraim Halevy, and the 9/11 Attacks

AI Mode reply for Nikolai Patrushev, August Hanning, Efraim Halevy, and the 9/11 Attacks

The connection between Nikolai Patrushev, August Hanning, Efraim Halevy, and the 9/11 attacks stems from a specific genre of geopolitical conspiracy theories and internet blog posts. These figures were all top intelligence directors during the September 11 attacks in 2001. Theorists often link their names to speculate on what global intelligence agencies knew prior to the attacks.

The individual roles of these figures around the time of 9/11 and how they intersect in public discourse break down as follows:

1. The Context of 9/11

At the time of the September 11, 2001 attacks, these three men headed some of the world’s most powerful foreign and domestic intelligence agencies:

  • Nikolai Patrushev: Director of Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB) from 1999 to 2008.
  • August Hanning: President of Germany’s Federal Intelligence Service (BND) from 1998 to 2005.
  • Efraim Halevy: Director of Israel’s intelligence agency (Mossad) from 1998 to 2002.

2. Overlap in “9/11 Truth” Circles

Online theories frequently group these specific names together when discussing “foreknowledge” of the attacks.

  • The Hamburg Cell: Because the 9/11 hijackers (including Mohamed Atta) operated out of Hamburg, Germany, August Hanning’s BND and German law enforcement faced heavy scrutiny regarding what they knew about the cell before 2001.
  • Intelligence Warnings: In the days following 9/11, reports emerged that both Russian intelligence (under Patrushev) and Israeli intelligence (under Halevy) had passed generic warnings to the United States in the summer of 2001 regarding imminent, large-scale terrorist attacks by Al-Qaeda.
  • Conspiracy Narrative: Websites and blog posts (such as those by online commentators like Michael Novakhov) string these specific heads of intelligence together to allege a broader, coordinated awareness—or a cover-up—surrounding the structural failures of global intelligence leading up to the attacks. There is no verified institutional evidence supporting claims of a shared conspiracy among them.

3. Recent Developments Re-igniting Interest

This combination of names has resurfaced in public search trends due to a massive espionage scandal in Germany.

On October 6, 2026, August Hanning was arrested by German federal prosecutors on charges of treason and espionage. He is accused of paying a former subordinate to funnel him over 2,000 classified BND documents after his retirement, which he allegedly used to draft intelligence briefs for foreign entities.

As investigators look into Hanning’s past, media outlets have scrutinized his historic relationships with foreign spy chiefs, highlighting instances where Hanning was photographed alongside Nikolai Patrushev at security forums in Russia. This arrest has renewed public interest in Hanning’s entire career timeline, including his actions during the 9/11 era.

AI can make mistakes, so double-check responses

Copied to clipboardFailed to copy to clipboard. Try again later.

  • Posts – Russia News

    Dec 10, 2025 — Nikolai Patrushev, August Hanning, and Efraim Halevy. Nikolai Patrushev, August Hanning, Efraim Halevy, and the 9/11 …

  • Bloggers, Unite! – <a href=”http://bloggersunite.net” rel=”nofollow”>bloggersunite.net</a> – Bloggers, Unite …

    Oct 15, 2026 — Referencing speculative interpretations of statements by former German intelligence officials (such as former BND chief August Han…

  • Michael Novakhov on X: “Nikolai Patrushev, August Hanning …

    Oct 25, 2026 — Nikolai Patrushev, August Hanning, Efraim Halevy, and the 9/11 Attacks – Google Search

  • 9/11 truth movement – Worldwide Realty

    Sep 11, 2005 — Nikolai Patrushev, August Hanning, Efraim Halevy, and the 9/11 Attacks – Google Search

  • In Germany, the former head of intelligence is suspected of …

    Oct 19, 2026 — Russian Security Council Nikolai Patrushev. In 1999-2008 (when Hanning headed intelligence), Patrushev was the director of FSB, an…

  • Ex-German spy chief arrested: A history of spooks working for …

    Oct 7, 2026 — Hanning, 80, headed up the Federal Intelligence Service, known by its German acronym BND, from 1998 to 2005.

  • Germany arrests former spy chief over alleged spying

    Oct 6, 2026 — August Hanning, head of the BND foreign intelligence agency for seven years until 2005, faces charges of treasonous espionage afte…

  • Germany: Ex-spy chief sent to pretrial detention

    August Hanning has been remanded into pretrial detention after his arrest. The case has prompted calls for transparency when spies…

  • Arrest of former German spy chief alarms US and British …

    Oct 7, 2026 — August Hanning, who led the Federal Intelligence Service, or BND, from 1998 to 2005, was arrested Tuesday on suspicion of espionag…

  • Implications of the Latest German Spy Scandal – The Long Brief

    Oct 22, 2026 — Speculation of a potential Russian line has also emerged because of Hanning’s undisclosed connections with Russian individuals and…

Read the whole story
· · · · · · ·

Nikolai Patrushev, August Hanning, Efraim Halevy, and the 9/11 Attacks

Saturday October 31st, 2026 at 2:05 PM

1 Share

AI Mode reply for Nikolai Patrushev, August Hanning, Efraim Halevy, and the 9/11 Attacks

  • Nikolai Patrushev: Served as Director of the Russian FSB (Federal Security Service) from 1999 to 2008.
  • August Hanning: Served as President of Germany’s BND (Federal Intelligence Service) from 1998 to 2005. In October 2026, Hanning was arrested in Germany on charges of espionage, treasonous espionage, and scouting state secrets regarding a case involving the alleged leakage of classified BND information.
  • Efraim Halevy: Served as Director of the Israeli Mossad from 1998 to 2002.
  • Connection to the 9/11 Attacks: The names of Patrushev, Hanning, and Halevy appear together primarily in online forums, social media posts, and speculative or fringe geopolitical conspiracy hypotheses (such as those shared by aggregator/curation accounts like Michael Novakhov) linking intelligence chiefs from Russia, Germany, and Israel around the time of the September 11, 2001, attacks.
  • Factual Status: Mainstream historical records, the 9/11 Commission Report, and official intelligence investigations attribute the 9/11 attacks directly to al-Qaeda. Speculative online narratives attempting to tie Patrushev, Hanning, or Halevy to orchestration, advance knowledge, or state-level enablement lack credible evidence or verification from official investigations.

  • Bloggers, Unite! – <a href=”http://bloggersunite.net” rel=”nofollow”>bloggersunite.net</a> – Bloggers, Unite …

    Oct 15, 2026 — Between 1998 and 2003, the relationship between Israel’s Mossad and Russian Intelligence services—primarily the SVR (Foreign Intel…

  • Nikolai Patrushev, August Hanning, and Efraim Halevy – X

    Michael Novakhov @mikenov Nikolai Patrushev, August Hanning, and Efraim Halevy – Google Search <a href=”http://google.com” rel=”nofollow”>google.com</a> 🔎 Nikolai Patrushev, Au…

  • US intelligence reportedly vexed by German ex-spy chief’s arrest

    Oct 30, 2026 — US intelligence reportedly vexed by German ex-spy chief’s arrest. DPA. Fri, October 30, 2026 at 8:48 AM PDT. 1 min read. Add Yahoo…

  • Українські Національні Новини (УНН)

    The US may restrict intelligence sharing with Germany over a …

    The US may restrict intelligence sharing with Germany over a scandal involving a former intelligence chief Kyiv • UNN October 30 2…

Copied to clipboardFailed to copy to clipboard. Try again later.

Read the whole story
· ·

Ariel Sharon and Iran-Contra affair

Saturday October 31st, 2026 at 2:00 PM

1 Share

AI Mode Conversation: Ariel Sharon and Iran-Contra affair

Ariel Sharon and Iran-Contra affair

AI Mode reply for Ariel Sharon and Iran-Contra affair

Former Israeli Defense Minister Ariel Sharon laid the early strategic groundwork for Israeli arms sales to Iran in the early 1980s, which ultimately evolved into the complex international political scandal known as the Iran–Contra affair.

While Sharon was no longer the Defense Minister when the formal, covert U.S.-led operation launched in 1985, his policies during the early years of the Iran–Iraq War established the channels and justification for selling American-made weaponry to the Iranian regime.

🏛️ The Geopolitical Strategy: “The Periphery Doctrine”

During his tenure as Defense Minister (1981–1983), Sharon openly championed the idea that Iraq, under Saddam Hussein, posed a far more immediate and dangerous threat to Israel than the newly established Islamic Republic of Iran.

  • The Goal: Israel wanted to keep Iran viable in the war to tie down the Iraqi military.
  • The Outlook: Sharon famously stated in a May 1982 interview with the Washington Post that Iraq was Israel’s enemy and that Israel had a “vital interest in the continuing of the war in the Persian Gulf, and in Iran’s victory.”
  • The Admission: Sharon later directly acknowledged this policy, noting that Israel sold weapons to Iran “so that it would defeat Iraq.”

🤝 Sharon’s Early Involvements

Sharon actively sought permission from the United States to sell military equipment to Iran, utilizing intermediaries and shadow networks:

  • U.S. Authorization Attempts: In May 1982, Sharon officially briefed the Reagan administration that Israel had signed a new contract to sell arms to Iran, pushing the U.S. to look the other way regarding the use of American-manufactured parts.
  • The Anti-Khomeini Coup Plot: Investigative reporting and historical texts, such as Samuel Segev’s The Iranian Triangle, show that Sharon met secretly in 1982 with Saudi businessman Adnan Khashoggi and Reza Pahlavi (the son of the deposed Shah of Iran). Sharon reportedly agreed to support a $800 million arms plan intended to bolster anti-Khomeini forces inside Iran.

🔄 Transition to the Iran-Contra Scandal

Sharon was forced to resign as Defense Minister in 1983 following the Kahan Commission’s investigation into the Sabra and Shatila massacre during the Lebanon War. Consequently, he was not the architect of the actual 1985–1986 triangular trade route (where the U.S. sold arms to Iran via Israel, and redirected the profits to fund the Contra rebels in Nicaragua).

Instead, other Israeli officials—such as diplomats David Kimche and Amiram Nir—took over the operational handling of the secret channels that Sharon had originally helped open and validate within the Israeli security establishment.

AI can make mistakes, so double-check responses

Copied to clipboardFailed to copy to clipboard. Try again later.

  • August 20: Israel Sells Weapons to Iran

    Israeli Defense Minister Ariel Sharon told the Washington Post that Iraq was Israel’s enemy and that they hoped to renew diplomati…

  • Sharon Linked to ’82 Anti-Khomeini Coup Plot – Los Angeles Times

    According to a book by Samuel Segev, former Israeli Defense Minister Ariel Sharon met with Reza Pahlavi, the son of the deposed Sh…

  • Israeli Agency in the Iran-Contra Affair – PDXScholar

    In May 1982, Israeli Minister of Defence Ariel Sharon informed the United States that another contract had been signed with

  • Iran–Contra affair – Wikipedia

    [Ariel] Sharon violated it, and Haig backed away”. A former “high-level” Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) official who saw report…

  • Israeli support for Iran during the Iran–Iraq War – Wikipedia

    Israel facilitated from 1985 to 1986 arms shipments from the United States to Iran as part of the Iran–Contra Affair.

  • Why Did Israel Sell Arms to the Ayatollahs’ Iran, Its Bitterest …

    Jan 16, 2026 — Haaretz quoted Ariel Sharon in May 1984: “We sold weapons to Iran so that it would defeat Iraq.” Sharon, a former defense minister

  • Israel and the Contras: a Buried History Itai Segre

    Mar 9, 2013 — Various reports on such contacts circulated before November of 1986, after which the Iran-. Contra Affair painted a tangled web in…

  • Middle East Research and Information Project

    Israel, the Contras and the North Trial – MERIP

    Kimche promoted a shift in US policy toward Iran during his May 1985 visit. * Kimche promoted the secret provision of arms through…

Read the whole story
· · · · ·

Ariel Sharon and Iran-Contra affair

Saturday October 31st, 2026 at 2:00 PM

1 Share

AI Mode reply for Ariel Sharon and Iran-Contra affair

As Israel’s Defense Minister in the early 1980s, Ariel Sharon played a central role in initiating and publicly disclosing early Israeli arms sales to Iran, laying the groundwork for the channels that later expanded into the broader Iran-Contra affair.

Key Connections and Actions

  • Early Arms Sales to Iran (1981–1982): Sharon was a key architect in establishing Israel’s covert military and arms supply lines to Iran during the Iran-Iraq War. In May 1982, Sharon publicly and privately acknowledged to U.S. officials that Israel had signed contracts to supply military equipment and spare parts to Tehran.
  • The 1982 Anti-Khomeini Coup Plot: Reports and historical accounts (such as those by researcher Samuel Segev) revealed that Sharon was involved in a 1982 intelligence-backed plan—with knowledge of figures like CIA Director William Casey—to supply hundreds of millions of dollars in arms to factions trying to overthrow Iran’s Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. The plot fell apart after Sharon was forced to resign as Defense Minister following the Sabra and Shatila massacre inquiry.
  • Connection to the Contra and Iran Channels: Israel’s initial outreach and military contacts with anti-Sandinista Nicaraguan Contras in Central America also began around late 1982 under Sharon’s tenure as Defense Minister (such as meeting contra leaders in Honduras while promoting Israeli military hardware like Kfir fighter jets).
  • Transition into the 1985–1986 Scandal: While Sharon was no longer Defense Minister when the U.S.–Israeli arms-for-hostages and Contra-fund-diversion network crystallized under the Reagan administration (managed by figures like David Kimche, Al Schwimmer, and Amiram Nir), his early policies established the precedent of using Israel as a middleman for arms transfers to Iran.

  • Sharon Linked to ’82 Anti-Khomeini Coup Plot – Los Angeles Times

    JERUSALEM — Former Israeli Defense Minister Ariel Sharon was involved in an ill-starred 1982 plot to overthrow Iran’s Ayatollah Ru…

  • Israeli Agency in the Iran-Contra Affair – PDXScholar

    be publically denied if unrecovered.133 This materiel began to arrive on July 11 1981, hidden in an Argentinian cargo plane claimi…

  • Israeli support for Iran during the Iran–Iraq War – Wikipedia

    Ariel Sharon, Israel’s defense minister, was the first to publicly disclose Israeli sale of military equipment to Iran during his …

  • Israel and the Contras: a Buried History Itai Segre

    Page 2 Long denied by Israeli officials, Israel maintained military support for the Nicaraguan Contras in Honduras and Costa Rica …

  • Middle East Research and Information Project

    Israel, the Contras and the North Trial – MERIP

    Sep 12, 1989 — Israel’s commitment to the contras almost certainly began not in 1983 but in late 1982, when Israeli Defense Minister Ariel Sharon…

  • Why Did Israel Sell Arms to the Ayatollahs’ Iran, Its Bitterest Enemy?

    Khomenei arriving at Tehran’s airport on February 1, 1979. Credit: The Associated Press Khomenei arriving at Tehran’s airport on F…

Copied to clipboardFailed to copy to clipboard. Try again later.

Read the whole story
· · ·

Ariel Sharon, 9/11 investigations, and CIA

Saturday October 31st, 2026 at 1:54 PM

1 Share

AI Mode reply for Ariel Sharon, 9/11 investigations, and CIA

  • Ariel Sharon and the 9/11 Timeline: According to The 9/11 Commission Report, al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden pushed Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (KSM) in mid-2000 to accelerate the terrorist attacks. Bin Laden wanted to strike early to punish the United States for its support of Israel, citing public outrage in the Middle East following Israeli opposition leader Ariel Sharon’s visit to the Temple Mount in Jerusalem in September 2000. KSM resisted this pressure, arguing the operatives needed more time for flight training.
  • Conspiracy Theories Involving Sharon, the CIA, and Mossad: Unfounded conspiracy theories—documented by organizations like the and analyzed in entries like —falsely allege that Ariel Sharon, the Israeli intelligence agency Mossad, or the CIA orchestrated or had foreknowledge of the September 11 attacks. Official investigations found zero evidence supporting these claims.

  • 9/11 conspiracy theories

    Israel Variants of the theory contend that the attack was organized by then-Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon, the intelligence …

  • The 9/11 Commission Report – CIA

    As a result of the investigations and arrests, the U.S.Attorney for the South- ern District of New York prosecuted and convicted m…

  • Unraveling Anti-Semitic 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

    Page 9 The Mossad, which had long ago infiltrated Al Qaeda, then tricked unsuspecting Muslims into thinking they were following bi…

  • Facebook·The Buffalo News

    Among other old theories, Carlson’s documentary series … – Facebook

    Tucker Carlson ChatGPT5 Great — I compared Tucker Carlson’s new The 9/11 Files claims with the major official investigations and o…

  • CIA Director George Tenet Testifies before 9-11 Commission – KCRW

    CIA Director George Tenet made a reluctant concession to the 9-11 Commission today, saying -we made mistakes. – He admitted that f…

Read the whole story
· · ·

Ariel Sharon, 9/11 investigations, and CIA

Saturday October 31st, 2026 at 1:53 PM

1 Share

AI Mode Conversation: Ariel Sharon, 9/11 investigations, and CIA

Ariel Sharon, 9/11 investigations, and CIA

AI Mode reply for Ariel Sharon, 9/11 investigations, and CIA

Ariel Sharon, the 9/11 investigations, and the CIA are connected in the official historical record primarily through the geopolitical timing of the attacks and documented intelligence failures, though they are also frequently grouped together within fringe conspiracy theories.

The actual factual intersections documented by the 9/11 Commission Report and CIA declassifications contrast sharply with the claims found in alternative narratives.

1. The Official Record: Geopolitical Intersections

  • The Trigger for Urgency: In September 2000, Ariel Sharon (then the Israeli opposition leader) made a highly controversial visit to the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. This event triggered the Second Intifada.
  • Bin Laden’s Pressure: The 9/11 Commission documented that after Sharon’s visit, Osama bin Laden repeatedly pressured the plot’s mastermind, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (KSM), to accelerate the operation. Bin Laden wanted to strike the United States immediately to punish it for its diplomatic support of Israel.
  • The June 2001 Target: Bin Laden specifically requested that the hijackings take place in June 2001, to coincide with an official visit by Prime Minister Ariel Sharon to meet President George W. Bush at the White House. KSM resisted this pressure because the hijacker pilots were not yet fully trained, forcing the timeline to slip to September.
  • The Morning of September 11: Historical accounts note that then-Mossad chief Efraim Halevy was in a live meeting with Prime Minister Sharon in Jerusalem when the first plane struck the North Tower.

2. CIA Findings and Intelligence Failures

Official 9/11 investigations focused heavily on what the CIA knew prior to the attacks and how intelligence was handled:

  • Strategic Warnings: Declassified documents, including dozens of Presidential Daily Briefs released by the CIA, show that analysts explicitly warned both the Clinton and Bush administrations that al-Qaeda was planning a major attack and might “fly an explosive-packed airplane into a US city”.
  • The “Mistakes” Concession: During public hearings, CIA Director George Tenet admitted to the 9/11 Commission that the agency made critical errors, specifically failing to penetrate al-Qaeda’s operational core or properly share data with the FBI regarding the entry of hijackers Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Mihdhar into the U.S..
  • No Inside Knowledge: The 9/11 Commission concluded that while the CIA suffered from “failures of imagination, policy, capabilities, and management,” there was no evidence that the agency or any foreign government had specific tactical foreknowledge of the date, time, or exact targets of the 9/11 plot.

3. Fringe Conspiracy Theories

Outside of the verified historical and archival records, Ariel Sharon, the CIA, and Israel’s intelligence agency (Mossad) are central figures in various debunked 9/11 conspiracy theories:

  • The “Controlled Demolition” and “Remote Control” Myth: Some fringe elements claim that the hijackers were part of a “false flag” operation orchestrated or managed by elements within the CIA and Mossad to justify the subsequent U.S. invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq.
  • The Advanced Warning Rumor: Theories popularized on the internet falsely claim that Prime Minister Sharon or the Mossad had exact advance knowledge of the strikes and deliberately withheld it from the U.S. to realign Western foreign policy against Arab nations.
  • The “4,000 Jews” Canard: A widespread anti-Semitic theory claims that Sharon’s government warned thousands of Jewish or Israeli workers to stay away from the World Trade Center on September 11. Investigations by the 9/11 Commission, journalists, and independent researchers confirmed this was entirely fabricated; hundreds of Jewish individuals and dozens of Israeli citizens were among the victims killed in the attacks.

Copied to clipboardFailed to copy to clipboard. Try again later.

  • The 9/11 Commission Report – CIA

    Ladin told him it would be enough for the hijackers simply to down planes rather than crash them into specific targets. KSM says h…

  • Mossad spy chief on 9/11: We realized rules for fighting terror …

    Sep 11, 2021 — then-Mossad chief Efraim Halevy was in the middle of a meeting with then-prime minister Ariel Sharon. under fire for failing to an…

  • Facebook·The Buffalo News

    Among other old theories, Carlson’s documentary series …

    The CIA knew about — or was recruiting — some hijackers and covered that up / “false flag” recruiting gone wrong.

  • Unraveling Anti-Semitic 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

    Sharon, the CIA, the Mossad and forces complicit in the Bush administration were able to blame Al Qaeda for the attacks, and now h…

  • CIA releases dozens of declassified documents on bin Laden …

    Sep 12, 2026 — Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda leading up to the hijackings that killed nearly 3,000 people

  • The 9/11 Plot | PBS News

    Jun 16, 2004 — The 9/11 commission reported that it found “no credible evidence” that Saddam Hussein had helped al-Qaida target the United States…

  • The Tel Aviv plot – Brookings Institution

    Sep 8, 2021 — then-Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon was visiting the White House in June 2001 to dramatize the Israeli connection. the date s…

  • What did US intelligence know before the 9/11 attacks?

    The CIA have declassified documents showing US presidents were warned about Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda before 9/11.

  • CIA Director George Tenet Testifies before 9-11 Commission

    Apr 14, 2004 — CIA Director George Tenet made a reluctant concession to the 9-11 Commission today, saying -we made mistakes.-

  • CIA warned of threat of ‘explosive airplane’ years before 9/11 …

    Sep 11, 2026 — Newly declassified documents show that three years before 9/11, US intelligence officials were discussing the possibility that al-

  • Here’s what the CIA kept secret for 25 years since the 9/11 …

    On Friday the CIA released 71 Presidential Daily Briefs … warnings about Al Qaeda’s desire to attack the U.S. homeland.

  • 9/11 conspiracy theories – Wikipedia

    Various conspiracy theories attribute the preparation and execution of the September 11 attacks against the United States to parti…

  • Washington Report on Middle East Affairs

    Did Israel Have Advance Warning of 9/11 Attacks?

    Shortly after the Sept. 11 attacks, there was a report that Israel had warned the FBI and CIA in August that there might be a “maj…

Read the whole story
· · · · · · · · ·
Next Page of Stories
Loading…
Page 3

The social, political, and historical significance of proper, in depth investigations of the 9/11 events and the correct identification of the ultimate culprits

Friday October 30th, 2026 at 7:35 AM

1 Share

The social, political, and historical significance of proper, in depth investigations of the 9/11 events and the correct identification of the ultimate culprits

AI Mode reply for The social, political, and historical significance of proper, in depth investigations of the 9/11 events and the correct identification of the ultimate culprits

The scholarly and historical consensus states that thoroughly investigating the September 11 attacks is critical because Over two decades of extensive analysis by government bodies, independent researchers, and historians underscore that a precise understanding of the event’s planning, execution, and state-sponsored or institutional enablers is vital for preserving democratic accountability, international stability, and historical truth.

The multifaceted significance of establishing an exhaustive and accurate record of the attacks spans several critical domains.

🏛️ Political Significance & Democratic Accountability

The political ramifications of 9/11 reshape governance and the relationship between citizens and the state.

  • Foreign Policy Sanity: The official findings of the 9/11 Commission directly shaped the “Global War on Terror,” leading to the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. Ensuring complete accuracy regarding state complicity or funding is essential to prevent misdirected military actions and long-term foreign policy blunders.
  • Oversight of Intelligence Apparatchiks: Deep investigations expose systemic vulnerabilities and the failure of intelligence sharing among agencies like the CIA and FBI. Identifying these breakdowns holds institutions accountable and forces necessary, transparent reforms rather than unchecked expansion of bureaucratic power.
  • Combating Government Secrecy: Continuous public pressure to declassify related documents—such as the declassification of files regarding potential foreign government links—strengthens the principle of democratic transparency, ensuring that diplomatic or economic alliances do not shield culpable entities.

🛡️ Social Significance & Domestic Fabric

Sociologically, the precision of 9/11 investigations directly impacts public trust, civil rights, and social cohesion.

  • Restoring Institutional Trust: When gaps or inconsistencies persist in high-profile investigations, public faith in democratic institutions erodes. Clear, verified truths are the primary antidote to institutional cynicism and pervasive misinformation.
  • Civil Liberties Protection: The attacks prompted sweeping domestic legislation, most notably the USA PATRIOT Act, which fundamentally altered privacy laws and expanded state surveillance. Thorough retrospective analysis determines whether these sacrifices of civil liberties were genuinely justified by facts or driven by reactionary panic.
  • Mitigating Xenophobia and Islamophobia: Pinpointing the precise individuals, radical networks, and specific state factions responsible prevents the broad, dangerous scapegoating of entire religious, ethnic, or national groups, protecting vulnerable communities from collective blame.

📜 Historical Significance & Systemic Lessons

From a historical perspective, establishing a definitive, factual baseline prevents the distortion of collective memory.

  • Preventing Historical Revisionism: A rigorously documented, evidence-based record ensures that future generations understand the event based on empirical facts rather than political spin, state propaganda, or unverified fringe theories.
  • Evolving Counter-Terrorism Doctrines: Accurate identification of how the logistics, illicit financing, and radicalization networks functioned allows global security experts to develop precise counter-terrorism frameworks that target actual systemic threats rather than superficial symptoms.
  • Justice for Victims and Survivors: For the families of the victims and the survivors, identifying every tier of culprit—from the hijackers to the financiers—is a fundamental prerequisite for legal justice, financial restitution, and psychological closure.

Copied to clipboardFailed to copy to clipboard. Try again later.

Read the whole story
· · ·

The social, political, and historical significance of proper, in depth investigations of the 9/11 events and the correct identification of the ultimate culprits

Friday October 30th, 2026 at 7:26 AM

1 Share

AI Mode reply for The social, political, and historical significance of proper, in depth investigations of the 9/11 events and the correct identification of the ultimate culprits

The thorough investigation of the September 11 attacks holds profound significance, as the event fundamentally reshaped modern global history. Official investigations, primarily conducted by the 9/11 Commission, established that the attacks were executed by the terrorist group al-Qaeda. .

🏛️ Political Significance

  • Foreign Policy and Warfare: The identification of al-Qaeda as the perpetrator served as the direct political and legal justification for the “Global War on Terrorism.” This led to the invasions of Afghanistan (2001) and Iraq (2003), fundamentally altering the geopolitical landscape of the Middle East.

Here’s what the CIA kept secret for 25 years since the 9/11 attacks

Tuesday October 27th, 2026 at 11:33 AM

MS NOW
1 Share

On Friday — 25 years after the Sept. 11 attacks — the CIA released a trove of presidential daily briefings leading up to that day, providing a stark chronological timeline of flashing warning signs missed by multiple administrations.

The CIA said the collection is the agency’s single largest release of declassified President’s Daily Brief products related to 9/11, “providing unprecedented transparency on America’s most sensitive intelligence publication from the years before and the day after one of the darkest moments in our history.”

“The products trace the story of CIA analysts’ evolving understanding of al-Qa’ida and efforts to highlight and warn of Usama Bin Ladin’s attack plotting despite sparse, vague, and imperfect information,” the CIA said in its release.

While much of the information had been revealed in the last 25 years, including through the 9/11 Commission Report, most of the documents themselves have not been seen by the American public. The documents reveal the consistent drumbeat of intelligence presented to then-Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush about the threat posed by Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida.

Most striking is a PDB from Dec. 4, 1998, detailing a suspected hijacking plot. Previously reported on by The Washington Post in 2004, the memo — starkly titled “Bin Ladin Preparing To Hijack US Aircraft and Other Attacks” — wrote in plain language, “Bin Ladin and his allies are preparing for attacks in the US, including an aircraft hijacking.”

The memo indicates sources said that “two members of the operational team had evaded security checks during a recent trial run at an unidentified New York airport” and noted “some members of the Bin Ladin network have received hijack training,” raising questions as to why airport security was not increased in the subsequent years leading up to 9/11.

A U.S. official told MS NOW that CIA analysts at the time struggled to obtain information about al-Qaida and fully analyze it.

“It was a small team, a few dozen people,” the official said. “Counterterrorism was not a priority.”

The official said leading up to 9/11, Bin Laden was not a top focus in terms of intelligence collection.

“[Bin Laden] was not a priority collection target,” the official said, adding that information on the terrorist leader was “extremely sparse.”

But throughout the 71 documents starting on Feb. 13, 1998, CIA intelligence paints a clear picture of a Bin Laden determined to attack the United States — while being unable to pinpoint specifics.

The briefs repeatedly detail Bin Laden’s efforts to “procure unspecified chemical, biological, and nuclear substances” and his dependence on Taliban’s “goodwill” to provide safe harbor for him and his associates to conduct terrorist plots in Afghanistan.

As of June 1998, the U.S. had no information indicating Bin Laden had a terrorist cell in the U.S., with a September 1998 memo describing Bin Laden’s nongovernmental organization-funded network in the U.S. as “loosely connected.”

A July 3, 1998, memo detailing four reports from “highly questionable sources” suggests Bin Laden planned to conduct an attack in the U.S., including one in Washington “probably at a shopping mall.”

“We have little information on Bin Ladin’s operatives in the US,” it said.

Still, in September 1998 the U.S. maintained that the “most serious threat” of terrorism came from Bin Laden and affiliated groups despite his U.S. associates seeming “less structured than cells in other countries,” with Europe viewed more at risk.

“Intelligence provides no conclusive information on Bin Ladin’s intentions for future attacks,” a Sept. 10, 1998, memo says.

“Bin Ladin late last month said his preferred option is to strike the US on its own soil in Washington,” the memo warns. “The same group responsible for the bombings in Africa may fly an explosive-packed airplane into a US city.”

A Dec. 11, 1998, memo built on the PDB a week earlier warns of an aircraft hijacking (see above) — “over the past two months suggest Bin Ladin’s group is preparing one or more terrorist attacks in the near future” … “several reports of impending anti-US terrorist operations” … “planning to hijack aircraft before Ramadan.”

By May 25, 1999, the daily brief reports that Bin Laden “is pursuing a variety of options for developing chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear capabilities” and includes a stark warning: “Scientists are developing a “nuclear weapon” at a facility in Heart, and Bin Ladin believes it could be ready in one to two months.”

Through the fall and winter of 1999 — two years before the 9/11 attack — intelligence memos consistently reported Bin Laden’s determination to target and attack the U.S., with an Aug. 3, 1999, memo noting, “The ongoing activity of Bin Ladin operatives reflects the resilience of his organization in the face of setbacks … his personnel still are planning attacks in widely scattered locations such as Washington.”

“The extent of Bin Ladin’s reach and the variety of targets make anticipating attacks difficult,” the report says. A manifesto seized in March 2000 recommended attacking “population targets, such as skyscrapers, airports, or nuclear power plants.”

The documents reveal an intelligence community struggling to “pinpoint targets of timing” for a possible Bin Laden-ordered attack, but still, the memos do not indicate an urgency to track down the al-Qaida leader nor meaningfully increase pressure on the Taliban to surrender him.

In the wake of the 9/11 attacks, Clinton vigorously defended his administration’s counterterrorism record, saying his team broke up al-Qaida cells, prevented several terrorist incidents and tried numerous times to get Bin Laden. Clinton told the 9/11 commission that if the U.S. had actionable intelligence about where Bin Laden was, he would have mobilized special operations forces to take action.

“Usama Bin Ladin’s al-Qua’ida and sympathetic groups are determined to carry out spectacular terrorist attacks against the US before yearend,” a December 2000 briefing warns.

But the alarms persisted long after Clinton left office.

Several memos prepared for Bush throughout early 2001 caution against the threat of Bin Laden’s “extensive program to develop or acquire chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear weapons and materials,” as well as his desire to drive U.S. forces from the gulf and willingness to “try unconventional attacks to advance this goal.” One memo says Bin Laden designing or testing a nuclear device was the “least probable scenario,” with another noting, “Bin Ladin and his associates have experimented by crude means to make and deploy biological agents.”

Over the course of the spring and summer of 2001, threats became more specific — and prescient.

A May 22, 2001, memo says “planning is under way for three separate operations in [REDACTED] to take US diplomats or civilians hostage,” warning conspirators seeking release of U.S.-held prisoners “may hijack an aircraft or storm a US Embassy.”

“For the second time in two weeks [REDACTED] indicates that an expected imminent Bin Ladin-sponsored terrorist operation has been postponed, but preparations for other near-term attacks may still be in train,” a July 24, 2001 report says, adding, “Something they had expected to hear in the news is still planned but has been delayed a few months.”

A month before 9/11, the intelligence community warned of al-Qaida’s ability to attack within U.S. borders

“Al-Qa’ida members-including some who are US citizens—have resided in or traveled to the US for years, and the group apparently maintains a support structure that could aid attacks,” an Aug. 6, 2001, memo says, noting that while the U.S. had not been able to corroborate “some of the more sensational threat reporting, such as that from a service in 1998 saying that Bin Ladin wanted to hijack a US aircraft,” FBI information since then still “indicates patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York.”

Bush told the 9/11 commission that that memo — the 36th item that year related to Bin Laden or al-Qaida and the first specifically devoted to the possibility of an attack within the U.S. — was “historical in nature,” but did not recall discussing it with the attorney general or whether his national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice, had done so.

“[Bush] said that if his advisers had told him there was a cell in the United States, they would have moved to take care of it,” the 9/11 Commission Report says. “That never happened. “

Speaking at a memorial ceremony at the Pentagon 25 years later, Rice gave a “deeply personal” apology to the families of the nearly three thousand people who lost their lives.

“Those of us in authority on that day did not see the nature of the danger in time to prevent the attack of 9/11,” she said. “We did what we knew to do, but by definition, it was not enough.”

She called it a “miracle” that there was not a follow-up attack, expressing gratitude for the armed forces and intelligence community.

“Their service and their sacrifice in the war on terror kept us safe,” Rice said. “But I will always carry deep personal remorse for the pain that you, the families of the fallen, still feel, and for the trauma that our country endured.”

Nora McKee, Peggy Helman, Kevin Frey and David Rohde contributed to this report.

Read the whole story
· · · · · · · · ·

“The Bulldozer”Ariel Sharon and the CIA: a complex relationship

Tuesday October 27th, 2026 at 7:37 AM

1 Share

You said: “The Bulldozer”Ariel Sharon and the CIA: a complex relationship

“The Bulldozer”Ariel Sharon and the CIA: a complex relationship

AI Mode reply for “The Bulldozer”Ariel Sharon and the CIA: a complex relationship

The relationship between Ariel Sharon, the polarizing Israeli military commander and former Prime Minister nicknamed “the Bulldozer“, and the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) was structured by a complex blend of deep operational intelligence sharing, friction over unilateral military actions, and a shared focus on counter-terrorism. Historically, U.S. intelligence agencies viewed Sharon as a headstrong and unpredictable figure, while simultaneously relying on the strategic, real-time intelligence infrastructure he and his close allies maintained in the Middle East.

The dynamics of this complex intelligence and political relationship spanned across several distinct eras:

1. High-Stakes Friction and the 1982 Lebanon War

During his tenure as Defense Minister under Menachem Begin, Sharon’s relationship with Washington and U.S. intelligence reached a point of severe tension.

  • The Invasion of Lebanon: Sharon masterminded the 1982 invasion of Lebanon. While the Reagan administration and the CIA sought to contain regional conflict, Sharon pushed past agreed-upon geographic limits to besiege Beirut. This unilateral expansion often blindsided U.S. intelligence analysts who were attempting to track Israeli troop movements and intentions.
  • Sabra and Shatila: Following the massacre of hundreds of Palestinian civilians by Christian Phalangist militiamen in the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps, Sharon was found indirectly responsible by an Israeli tribunal and forced to resign. CIA intelligence reporting during this period closely monitored Sharon’s actions, and the fallout temporarily sidelined his formal relationship with U.S. officials.

2. Operational Backchannels and Covert Geopolitics

Despite official diplomatic standoffs, Sharon frequently engaged in or supported covert actions that overlapped with—or directly challenged—the broader geopolitical chessboard monitored by the CIA.

  • African Interventions: In the late 1970s and 1980s, Sharon engaged in independent security diplomacy in Africa, including visiting Angola to observe and advise forces backed by South Africa. This occurred at a time when the CIA was heavily involved in funding and supporting anti-communist rebel movements in the region.
  • Tracking Settlement Growth: While Sharon fiercely advocated for the expansion of Jewish settlements in the West Bank, the CIA served as one of the primary intelligence collectors mapping this growth. The agency routinely utilized high-resolution satellite photography to generate classified status reports on the physical expansion of settlements—a direct counterweight to the master plans Sharon spent decades championing.

3. The Counter-Terrorism Alliance (2001–2006)

When Sharon became Prime Minister in 2001, his relationship with the CIA evolved from cautious observation into a robust counter-terrorism partnership, particularly following the September 11 attacks.

  • The Mossad Connection: Sharon appointed Meir Dagan as the head of the Mossad in 2002. Dagan, a highly aggressive operator who had previously served as a commando leader and national security adviser under Sharon, established exceptionally tight, synchronized operational pipelines with the CIA.
  • Shared Intelligence: Under Sharon and Dagan, the Mossad and the CIA shared extensive intelligence regarding regional threats, specifically focusing on al-Qaeda, Palestinian militant networks, and Iran’s emerging nuclear ambitions.
  • A Shared Pragmatism: During the George W. Bush administration, the CIA and U.S. policymakers began to view Sharon not merely as a hawk, but as a pragmatic strategist capable of major geopolitical shifts—culminating in his unilateral withdrawal of Israeli forces and settlers from the Gaza Strip in 2005.

Copied to clipboardFailed to copy to clipboard. Try again later.

  • Battle For The Holy Land – Combatants | FRONTLINE – PBS

    Sharon was forced to resign in 1983, after an Israeli tribunal found him indirectly responsible for the massacre of hundreds of Pa…

  • The Crimes of Ariel Sharon – <a href=”http://CounterPunch.org” rel=”nofollow”>CounterPunch.org</a>

    Sharon was the commander who led the full dress 1982 assault on Lebanon, with the express design of destroying the PLO, driving as…

  • The Christian Science Monitor

    Ariel Sharon: A timeline of a controversial life

    As the army advanced to Beirut, Israeli-allied Christian militiamen killed hundreds of Palestinians in the city’s Sabra and Shatil…

  • Ariel Sharon’s complicated legacy: ‘The Bulldozer’ to some, ‘Butcher of Beirut’ to others – The World from PRX

    Sharon was Israel’s defense minister. Sharon was also known by other nicknames, including: * **The Bulldozer** This nickname was u…

  • What is the reality behind Mossad and Arial Sharon relationship?

    In 1970, then GOC Southern Command Ariel Sharon appointed him head of of the Rimon anti-terror unit, which carried out commando ra…

  • Obituary: Ariel Sharon – BBC News

    Sharon was a heroic warrior, having led decisive campaigns in the 1967 and 1973 wars. But to many Palestinians he was The Butcher,

  • How Ariel Sharon Shaped Israel’s Destiny | The Nation

    “Israel doesn’t want witnesses against it in this historic case. Ariel Sharon,” citing Sharon’s diplomatic immunity.

  • | Ariel Sharon, apartheid South Africa and mutual military interests

    South African troops had by then repeatedly invaded and commenced occupation in part of Angola – in support of the CIA-backed Unit…

  • The Wall and the Eye: An Interview with Eyal Weizman

    The best source for mapping the West Bank was always the CIA. A few they took satellite photographs … trace almost all the master …

  • Ariel Sharon, Israel’s bulldozer in politics, dies at 85 – The Desert Sun

    Ariel Sharon, Israel’s bulldozer in politics, dies at 85 NEWS. Jan. 11, 2014, It was vintage Ariel Sharon: ex-general led a march …

  • Homeland

    Developed by Howard Gordon and Alex Gansa, this series is based on the Israeli show ‘Hatufim’. It ran for 8 seasons (96 episodes) …

  • universityofleeds.github.io

    The Bush Doctrine – universityofleeds.github.io

    iron-fisted prime minister, Ariel Sharon (affectionately known as “The Bulldozer”). Though they dispense foreign policy directives…

  • U.S. Department of State (.gov)

    10/8/00 Albright on NBC’s Meet The Press – state.gov

    QUESTION: In Israel they call him the “bulldozer.” Is Mr. Sharon taking “political steps” which really may jeopardize the peace? S…

Read the whole story
· · · · · · · ·

Mossad and 9/11

Monday October 26th, 2026 at 12:54 PM

The History Reader
1 Share
By Gordon Thomas

Anti-Semitic conspiracists plan to flood the internet to mark the tenth anniversary of 9/11 attacks by resurrecting the old canard that Mossad, Israel’s secret intelligence service, knew in advance of the attack – and did not warn the CIA and FBI.

The conspiracists say that the attack on the Twin Towers was a “false flag” operation organised by Mossad as part of an ongoing attempt by Israel to launch a war against its Muslim “enemies”.

The fact is that Mossad warned that an attack was impending.

From the day bin Laden’s suicide bombers partly destroyed the World Trade Center in 1993, Mossad had placed him at the top of its own list of most wanted terrorists. Its deep-cover field agents had picked up “whispers in the wind” that bin Laden was planning “something big,” said one report. Another spoke of a “strong rumour bin Laden is planning a Hiroshima type attack.” Still another revealed a flight simulator being used in an al-Qaeda training camp near Kabul. Then came the news that bin Laden had been trying to obtain chemical and nuclear weapons.

While Mossad analysts tried to connect the dots, the reports were also passed on through the long-established back channel to the CIA. The Pentagon was asked to evaluate the threat of an air strike. One of its analysts, Marvin Cetron, wrote, “Coming down the Potomac, you could make a left turn at the Washington Monument and take out the White House.” Another analyst, Martin Clefran, was told “look we can’t manage a crisis until it is a crisis”.

Before 9/11, there was a feeling in Washington that Mossad was once more crying wolf, that it had a vested interest in promoting Islamic fundamentalism as a threat because it feared its terrorists and wanted to persuade the United States that it also faced a similar threat. By the time Efraim Halevy, head of Mossad before 9/11, had come into office, dutifully read the files on terrorism threats, and seen the reaction to Mossad’s warnings, he had decided that, in the words of one of his senior officers, “there was no point in pushing against a bolted door.”

However, Haleavy confirmed to me that Mossad “had sent several warnings in the week prior to September that an attack was coming” and cited “credible chatter” Mossad agents had picked up in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Yemen. In his diplomatic way, he implied that the growing turf war between the FBI and CIA in 2001 was one reason why the warnings were ignored Both agencies had concrete evidence that al-Qaeda was an increasing threat: one of its operatives had been stopped at the last moment from flying a hijacked plane into the Eiffel Tower in Paris, and intel had emerged at Langley, indicating bin Laden was planning an air strike against the economic summit it Italy earlier in 2001. But the sense of paralysis and denial, compounded by the growing turf war between the FBI and the CIA, had continued to hold the U.S. intelligence community in its grip

After 9/11 Haleavy recalled the “hot line from Langley was superheated”. A dozen calls a day from George Tenet, then the CIA chief.

In one call Haleavy had snapped: “Where was your electronic surveillance?” to Tenet, who was facing intense criticism himself and wanted to know how much Mossad had known about the impending attack.

As conspiricists continue to spin their lies, the reality is that Mossad tried to warn the United States. As some choose to attack past events, those in the intelligence world need to continue to improve contact and sharing of vital information.

GORDON THOMAS is a bestselling author of dozens of books published worldwide, including many on the international intelligence community, such as Secret Wars. His awards include the Citizens Commission for Human Rights Lifetime Achievement Award for Investigative Journalism, the Mark Twain Society Award for Reporting Excellence, and an Edgar Allan Poe Award for Investigation. You can visit him online at www.gordonthomas-author.com.

Read the whole story
· · ·

2 ex-FBI officials charged with lying about involvement in investigation into Hunter Biden’s laptop

Saturday October 24th, 2026 at 8:10 AM

1 Share

WASHINGTON (AP) — Two former FBI officials were charged Friday with lying to Congress about their involvement in investigating Hunter Biden’s laptop in the run-up to the 2020 presidential election, the latest in a series of splashy and politically charged actions the Justice Department has undertaken ahead of next month’s midterm contests.

Nikki Floris and Bradley Benavides, former leaders of a since-disbanded task force set up to counter foreign election interference, appeared in federal court in Washington, where their lawyers pressed for a speedy hearing to contest allegations their clients lied to lawmakers by saying that they did not participate in FBI investigations of Biden.

The prosecution, a rare Department of Justice criminal case against a former employee, revisits a tangled and peculiar saga that roiled the final weeks of the 2020 race. It also comes amid a broader, backward-looking effort by FBI Director Kash Patel, who before taking over the nation’s premier law enforcement agency was a harsh critic of it, to scrutinize high-profile episodes from the bureau’s recent past that for years have animated President Donald Trump’s conservative base.

Report Ad

Floris’ attorneys called her “a patriot” and said she has “served our nation as a dedicated FBI intelligence officer for nearly 20 years.”

Two ex-FBI officials who specialized in foreign election interference have been charged with making false statements about Hunter Biden’s laptop. The AP’s Marcela Sanchez has more.

“Yet today, the DOJ has accused her falsely of a crime on the say-so of politicians, not on the facts,” her attorneys said in a statement. “It’s no coincidence the government is filing these nonsense charges now, years later, on the eve of an election.”

Attorneys for Benavides accused the government of bringing “baseless criminal charges against him in a transparently political complaint.”

“This is another sad day for the Department of Justice,” his lawyers said in an emailed statement. “But now we are in court, and the truth will come out: Brad Benavides is a true patriot who devoted his career to protecting this country and its people. These charges are a disgrace.”

A criminal complaint comes just before the midterms

The case was filed less than two weeks before the Nov. 3 elections via criminal complaint, which means prosecutors have not yet presented the allegations to a grand jury for an indictment. The Justice Department has repeatedly struggled in high-profile cases to convince grand juries in the nation’s capital to return indictments.

During the former FBI employees’ court appearance, both defense attorneys and the judge noted the unusual move to charge the case through a complaint, which is more often used by prosecutors when they have an urgent need to take people into custody because, for example, they present a danger or a risk of flight.

U.S. Magistrate Judge Zia Faruqui remarked that it is “rare that we have charges this old coming in this nature,” and over the objections of prosecutors who pushed for more time, set a preliminary hearing for next Tuesday, citing what he said was the “sword of Damocles” hanging over the defendants’ heads.

The laptop discovery created turmoil in 2020 election

The revelation of the laptop’s existence in October 2020 injected a thorny storyline in the race between Trump, the Republican incumbent, and Biden’s father, Joe Biden, Trump’s Democratic challenger who went on to win the race.

The laptop was publicized by the New York Post, which said it had obtained from Trump ally Rudy Giuliani a hard drive of a computer dropped off by Hunter Biden at a Wilmington, Delaware, repair shop about a year earlier.

The criminal complaint aims to build on longstanding congressional Republican complaints about the FBI’s handling of the laptop, including allegations that the bureau was not forthcoming to the public that the materials on it — including emails that showed discussions of the younger Biden’s foreign business dealings — were authentic and not the product of Russian disinformation.

The curious circumstances of the laptop’s discovery raised concerns among Democrats and former intelligence officials about the possibility of Russian involvement, particularly at a time when the Trump administration’s own intelligence community had assessed that Moscow that Russia was attempting to interfere in Trump’s favor in the election and as Giuliani had traveled abroad looking for dirt on the Bidens. Dozens of former U.S. intelligence officials signed a letter saying that the laptop bore the “classic earmarks of an Russian information operation.”

But Trump’s then-director of national intelligence, John Ratcliffe, said in a letter to Congress that there was no proof foreign actors had anything to do with the laptop. The FBI under then-Director Chris Wray subsequently endorsed that position.

Hunter Biden was charged with, and convicted of, gun and tax offenses during his father’s administration. Joe Biden pardoned him in his final weeks in office.

The case shines a light on an FBI task force on foreign intelligence

The complaint alleges that in their capacity as leaders of the Foreign Influence Task Force, Floris and Benavides were deeply engaged in the investigations into Hunter Biden, and that Biden was a recurring subject at FITF meetings.

Yet, the complaint says, both downplayed their firsthand knowledge of the laptop or involvement in investigations during 2023 testimony to lawmakers who were doing their own Biden investigation.

It accuses Benavides of making a false statement by saying he learned through Wikipedia that the FBI was in possession of the laptop, and says Floris falsely claimed to have had no knowledge of Hunter Biden having been the subject of discussions at FITF.

“Lying to Congress by senior FBI officials strikes at the heart of our system. No one is above the law,” Patel said.

The case brings renewed attention to the work of the task force, which was established in the first Trump administration to police influence campaigns staged by Russia and other nations aimed at sowing discord, undermining democracy and spreading disinformation. The task force became a magnet of congressional Republican criticism in part because of the Hunter Biden investigation and was disbanded in February 2025 by then-Attorney General Pam Bondi.

The Justice Department has made other splashy moves

As FBI director, Patel has presided over widespread firings of agents who were involved in investigations of Trump or who are perceived as being against the Republican administration’s agenda.

He has also focused attention on years-old investigations like the Hunter Biden one that occurred before he became director and that have been the subject of grievances and complaints by Trump allies.

The Justice Department historically looks to avoid public and overt investigative acts in the direct lead-up to an election that involve candidates or that risk influencing a political outcome. But officials in the last two weeks have made a series of bold moves in cases with political undertones, including a search of Democratic Rep. Ilhan Omar’s house in an immigration fraud investigation and a corruption indictment unsealed Thursday against powerful Democratic Virginia state Sen. L. Louise Lucas.

Omar and Lucas are both Trump critics. Omar, who’s from Minnesota, has called the search of her Washington home an “attempt to target political enemies and weaponize federal law enforcement.” Lucas has said she won’t be intimidated or bullied by the federal government in its case against her and “will not back down.”

The News And Times Information Network – Blogs By Michael Novakhov – thenewsandtimes.blogspot.com