If you like this blog

Don't miss Kevin Barrett's radio shows! And visit TruthJihad.com for more...

Friday, January 21, 2011

Debating 9/11 hijackers with ex-CIA asset Susan Lindauer

Susan Lindauer will be my guest tomorrow, Saturday January 22nd, on Truth Jihad Radio.  On my Tuesday, Jan. 4th show, she broke the story about CIA foreknowledge of 9/11 and how her CIA handler, Dr. Richard Fuisz, stated on 9/11/01 that the Mossad did it.

We recently had a brief email debate about whether or not there were any actual hijackers on 9/11. Et voilà:

Hi Susan,

I transcribed and posted the first half of the interview yesterday. Things get around fast these days!

You'll probably hear from some wack jobs as well as thoughtful people, if my experience is any indication. But most of the 9/11 truth community - the bulk of my audience - is well-informed and rational.

Speaking of borderline wacky  responses...

One of the big points of controversy is your belief in hijackers. (Some of the more paranoid truthers have emailed me "If she supports hijackers she must be disinfo.") So allow me to explain why I think you're wrong; perhaps you can show me if I'm missing anything.

First is the absence of the evidence we would have been shown had any of these 19 guys (or any hijackers) boarded the planes: Official passenger lists, ticket stubs, testimony from airline employees, security videos, and DNA evidence (which the relatives of the falsely-blamed patsies have been screaming for, with no response from US officialdom).  See Elias Davidsson's article: http://www.opednews.com/articles/There-is-no-evidence-that-by-Elias-Davidsson-100811-366.html?show=votes

Second is the fact that obviously bogus "evidence" has been manufactured in an unbelievably lame attempt to implicate these guys. Atta's supposed will (found in baggage supposedly checked on board a suicide plane, and miraculously left at the airport to be discovered) is an absurdly bad forgery, as Robert Fisk among others has pointed out; an outrageously fake video purporting to show "hijackers" boarding Flight 77 is equally ludicrous (see here and here); and let's not even get started with the "magic passport" that floated down from the Towers and the "magic Shiite bandana" found outside the debris-free fifteen-foot hole in Pennsylvania. Whichever intelligence agency did this needs to hire better Orientalists -- people who can write wills that don't mangle the Islamic formulas, who can tell Shiites from Sunnis, and so on! They could also use some lessons in planting plausible evidence.

Third is the fact that the FBI finally admitted, after years of false statements, that its original claim of about 15 cell phone calls from impossible altitudes is false, and that Ted Olson's seminal claim about the alleged call from his wife Barbara was also false. Close study of this issue suggests that covert operators used voice morphing and spoofing to create at least a few bogus calls from loved ones--and that perhaps some or most of these stories, like Olson's, were invented out of whole cloth.

Fourth is that if you accept controlled demolition, there cannot have been hijackings.  Whatever hit the Towers had to have been guided into them with 99.9% certainty of an accurate hit, in order to provide a cover story for the demolitions. No human hijackers could be trusted to even gain control of planes, much less hit difficult-to-impossible targets at absurdly high speeds.  (The South Tower was hit at almost 600 mph at sea level, probably above the speed at which a 767 would fall apart, and obviously too fast for even the world's best pilot to hit such a narrow target with any consistency). Check out the videos by Pilots for 9/11 Truth: http://www.pilotsfor911truth.org

Fifth is the activities and deportment of the alleged hijackers, who were not even practicing Muslims much less al-Qaeda types, trained and partied at Maxwell AFB and Pensacola Naval Air Station, hung around with CIA-authorized drug importers including Jack Abramoff and enjoyed endless supplies of cocaine, pretended to take flying lessons they either didn't take, were incompetent pilots with no experience in big jets, had no interest in, or didn't need, made obviously serious and sincere plans for activities after 9/11/01, and in 10 cases turned up alive, briefly at least, after 9/11/01.

On the improbable Atta: http://www.madcowprod.com/index60bb.html

And see Kolar's article.

Given this evidence and much more, I think it's clear that the "al-Qaeda" cell blamed for 9/11 was in fact a CIA/Mossad troupe of actors, many using stolen identities, that had little or no connection to any actual Islamist militancy, and that their duties as actors did not include boarding any of the alleged attack planes, much less hijacking them. Whoever ran them did a stunningly poor job of producing a convincing "suicide hijackers" storyline.

If you think about this from the standpoint of a covert ops specialist tasked with creating (the appearance of) a spectacularly successful suicide airplane attack on the Towers and the Pentagon, you'll quickly realize that using actual hijackers, or even actual airliners with pilots and passengers aboard, would probably create unnecessary complications. See: http://www.truthjihad.com/storyboard.htm

These issues have been debated quite a bit in the 9/11 truth community, with the result that the better-informed people have mostly taken a no-hijackings position. The more excitable among them suspect that those who argue irrationally (as they must) for hijackings are supporting the "evil radical Muslims" storyline for nefarious reasons.

I would love to hear your thoughts on this.


* * *


   This is an email that requires more time than I have right now to answer. I promise to come back to you with a response worthy of the time you took to pose all of these questions.

   For now, you will see from my book that I believe it was both hijackings & a demolition. Previous terrorist attacks created mayhem, but minimal damage once the sensational smoke cleared the site. Five people died in the first WTC attack in 1993. I believe 12 people died in the U.S.S. Cole. Yes, there were hijackings (though we might have named the wrong hijackers, and gone into kill them & dumped their bodies in the desert later on).

   My belief is that knowing the hijackings and strike on the WTC would occur--- and would provoke a War in Iraq, if the damage proved suitably devastating---- an orphan team sympathetic to Israel accessed the WTC and planted the explosives in elevator shafts, where it would be concealed from visual sight until the appropriate moment.

   That all fits with the airplane wreckage found on at Ground Zero. That's not a holograph. Those are two real airplanes. As they were flying below radar, cell phone transmissions should have worked for part of the flight, especially as the planes approached Manhattan.

    It's not one or the other. It's both. The missing explanation is the motive. People believe that war in Iraq was an after-thought. In fact, it formed the whole basis for tacit U.S. consent by the top echelons of the Bush Administration. They were so gung ho for War that they threatened Iraq aggressively from April and May, 2001 onwards with War. And that provided the motivation to accept a modern day Pearl Harbor and to stand down from obvious opportunities to protect the Twin Towers, even briefly for a few weeks. Command negligence was deliberate.

   It's really that simple, Kevin. The cover up was more imaginative than the original acts.


* * *



 >"My belief is that knowing the hijackings and strike on the WTC would occur --- and would provoke a War in Iraq, if the damage proved suitably devastating---- an orphan team sympathetic to Israel accessed the WTC and planted the explosives in elevator shafts, where it would be concealed from visual sight until the appropriate moment."

Given that the odds of hijackings plus a strike on even one Tower succeeding were one in a million -- there had not been a successful hijacking in US airspace in twenty years -- there would be no reason to set up the WTC for demolitions. Additionally, the alleged hijackers were clowns. They were about as likely to succeed in taking over a plane as the Florida street people were likely to bring down the Sears Tower. And none of them, except "Atta" (the Hebrew-speaking one in Florida) when he wasn't drunk and on drugs which was seldom, could even pilot Cessnas competently. Not that it matters, because even the world's fifteen best special forces soldiers and the world's four best pilots couldn't have done what these clowns are said to have done. (Not one plane even squawked the hijack code, which takes about two seconds!)

Yes, there were planes -- either military planes capable of accurate remote-control strikes at those speeds, or (just possibly) 767s under remote control.  If the latter, the perps had to have done high speed remote control flying tests of 767s and discovered their astonishing capabilities. Most pilots think 767s would be torn to pieces long before reaching almost 600 mph at sea level.

Bottom line: If the buildings were rigged for demolition, there were no hijackers.  Human hijackers and pilots could not be trusted to hit the targets.

Please re-think this, and address my points, for your more in-depth response.

And by the way, keep up the good work! Our interview is still going viral.


[PS Or we could discuss this in another interview...]

* * *


That sounds great! Let's book it@ That gives you time to read the book, and gives your listeners time to digest this. We can talk about how the Patriot Act was used in the cover up, and how the FBI/ US Attorneys office & Bureau of Prisons confirmed the 911 warnings & lied to Judge Mukasey.

you'll understand when you read my book

We can debate hijackers vs. detonations vs. both. Your information is very important for my theory, too!



  1. Maybe you could ask why she thinks Arabs are responsible for WTC1993 despite the factual evidence that it was the FBI.

    Maybe you could ask why she thinks Arabs were involved in Oklahoma City.

    Maybe you could ask why she thinks Arabs were involved in the USS Cole.

    Maybe you could ask if she's ever read Bryzinski's 'Chess' or Quigley's "Tragedy and Hope."

    Maybe you could ask her if she's ever read Blum's "Killing Hope" or Perkins's "Economic Hit Men."

    Maybe you could ask her how many other CIA assets are out there doggedly pursuing peace and trying to avoid war, the way she (supposedly) did... and why they fail so often.

    Hijackers vs. No hijackers is about as relevant to the story as the melting point of steel. Either there are Arab terrorists out to kill us or there aren't. Which is it?

  2. Zakheim Remote Control Corp PLJanuary 22, 2011 at 1:43 AM

    Yes, the three WTC towers were wired up with demolition explosive long before the day of 911. Two plans HAD to hit WTC 1 and 2 or their massive shock and awe false flag spectacular for a television audience of millions fails miserably - and the basis of their criminal wars of aggression in the Middle East flops before the anti-Muslim propaganda gets into top gear.

    I believe that is why four planes were used. If either or both of the remotely controlled first two planes had failed, missed, whatever, the conspirators had a huge (unfixable) problem in New York (without backup planes).

    Obviously they could not be 100 percent certain that nothing might go wrong with the remote control guidance of planes 1 and 2 - therefore, had that happened, the Shanksville "plane" would have been guided to New York for a second attempt at whichever tower had been missed (don't know what they did with it after 1 and 2 succeeded at their first attempt, but it did not end up in a 15 foot hole in the ground in Shanksville). Had both of the first planes failed in some way to impact the towers, then both backup planes would have been guided to New York.

    WTC 1 and 2 were the absolute primary target. Particularly the South Tower, as they knew that the live television audience by then would most likely be in the hundreds of millions around the world. No way would they have used human pilots on those planes. The very idea is ludicrous. Remote control of planes has been used for decades.

    There had to be a cover story (weak as it is) for the controlled demolition of the three towers. Would they still have launched the missile into the Pentagon had both backups been needed in New York? Don't know. They are so insane they may have still done that and dreamed up another big lie to explain it away.

    It seems their only major problem during the false flag was the failure of WTC 7 to collapse while obscured from view by the massive dust cloud of the North Tower's controlled demolition. Oooops.

    They cordoned off a four block radius around WTC 7 afterward (no eye witnesses to the team sent in to find the problem) and it took them till 5 pm to fix whatever the problem was with their explosives firing sequence. Had to make sure they had a story to cover the "disappearance" of all those Enron, Worldcom, etc files.

    Why this woman is so attached to the "piloted planes" dead-end would be interesting to know.

    p.s. One other thought - that very large cylinder attached under the right side of the plane which hit the South Tower was filled with napalm, I think.

    More shock and awe for the television audience with the gigantic fireball. Have a look online at some of the (large format) pics from the Vietnam War of napalm strikes - identical to the South Tower fireball.

    Let's hope the real mass murderers are brought to justice soon.


  3. There were only 2 reported cell phone calls from any of the 4 hijacked planes, not 15, and they were made at very low altitude fron UA 93 right before Jarrah crashed it at Shanksville. All of the other calls were made from seatback phones.
    The 4 hijacker/pilots named by the FBI all had FAA commercial pilot certificates, and weren't trained to fly Cessnas. If you think any of the 19 are still alive, Kevin, please feel free to get interviews with them. The networks will pay you a fortune.

  4. Why is it that you Americans always try to put the blame on your own security people as you can't come to terms that you are as vulnerable as any other state. The super power era is over for you guys. Admit that thru' lack of security @ airports, ports, thru' lack of security within your own naturalization service, thru' lack of security of your visa policies, you got inundated with Muslim Terrorists - same as with UK, and same as with France. Admit your own mistakes - there was a complete lacuna in security, thanks to your freaking human rights groups. Now that Washington is invaded, CAIR is doing its best to cry blue murder every time they feel they have been snubbed, as they are trying to enforce Shari'a in your freaking country-it's too damn late to do anything. You guys blame people without reading academic reports, without reading proper literature - the most important thing for you blind guys is blame shifting!!! You have lost, America has lost - not thanks to CIA or FBI, or NSA or DIA, America has lost because the people has turned a blind eye to what has been going on for years. You guys want to read a good report re 9/11 and Terrorism-There is a report written by Janice Kephart - director of the Centre for Immigration Studies in Washington. When you get your act right, when you start putting civil rights for Americans before human rights for freaks like CAIR, perhaps you'll start moving forward. As it is, you continue to wallow in self pity, shift the blame, and continue to deserve the word Losers with a capital L.

  5. What is it??????????????? Censorship in the land of the free???????? Oh my God........so if you don't like what I wrote you won't publish it???????????? I thought that this is America - the champion of freedom of speech, freedom of expression, freedom of media.......freedom my eye. Perhaps I was not too politically correct for the freaks in Washington???????? I'm glad i wasn't!!!!!!!

  6. I get the strongest feeling that "Janice Kephart and the Centre for Immigration Studies in Washington," are funded by the usual suspects.

    I could be wrong though. Maybe the good Ms Kephart's Centre has produced a report on 9/11 and Mossad Terrorism, but I doubt it.

  7. There were no seat back phones on the airplanes. This has been confirmed by the airlines.

  8. interesting stuff here... but no 19 arabs hijackers ever existed during 911... even the father of Mohamd Atta said he was not involved, Atta phoned hiss sister the 12 september 2001 as mentioned by Yusri Fouda from aljazeera, aljazeera now under the hands of zio puppets... 2 parts in arabic but can be found translated on the internet... road to 911 top secret aljazeera



  9. As Kevin Barrett remarked above, whoever was running the "19 Arab-Muslim religious extremist suicide-hijackers-cum-ace-Boeing-767-stuntflying-pilot" actors did a remarkably poor job, which nevertheless sufficed for the purpose thanks to the smooth working of the MSM gristmill.

    To create a more plausible storyline with ample supporting evidence, the conspirators could have arranged for actual Arab hijacker patsies, led by ethnically-Arab Mossad undercover operatives, to board the 4 commercial flights in full view of surveillance video cameras, using plausible Arab names appearing on the original passenger manifest.

    Flying at low altitude under cover of the NORAD anti-hijacking exercises, the SCAD operatives could have made it possible, and even planted the suggestion, for unwitting passenger patsies to make the dramatic, heart-rending cellphone calls to loved ones and co-workers, inculpating Arab Muslim religious extremists as the hijackers.

    As envisioned in Operation Northwoods, the 4 commercial flights could have been remotely piloted or intercepted by fighter aircraft and forced to land at a convenient military airfield.

    This would allow for suitable disposition of any passenger and/or hijacker patsies, and the extraction of any valuable human assets, before continuing the now remotely-piloted flights using suitably-outfitted aircraft to create the spectacular visual effects upon automatically-guided impact with the WTC twin towers.

    Susan Lindauer is right that in principle the 9/11/01 attacks could have involved apparent Arab hijackers, remotely and auto-piloted planes, and prepared demolition of all 3 WTC towers.

    It's not logically either/or with respect to hijackers and controlled demolition of the WTC, but the partial evidence available thus far suggests that the SCAD planners and operators were not as good, or as lucky as they might have been--just good enough for the MSM to grind out the official story.