The Banned FOX News Report on Israel’s Role in 9/11Spencer J. Quinn
If the fraudulent 2020 elections have taught us anything, it’s that if you want to find what a country’s elites are most threatened by, look for what they are trying to suppress.
A four-part FOX News report from December 2001 recently resurfaced on YouTube, garnering millions of views. And then, suddenly, it was purged. You can still find it on Bitchute, Rumble, and Odysee — but not so easily on YouTube anymore. As one can guess, the subject is a touchy one for our nation’s Jewish elite: Israel’s role not only in spying on the United States prior to 9/11, but also in the obstruction of subsequent investigations.
Perhaps high-ranking people in Mossad knew the terror attacks were imminent and did not give their American ally sufficient warning. The report, presented by Carl Cameron, relied greatly on US intelligence officials and other unnamed government sources who were unhappy with the way the investigations were going in the wake of the deadly attacks — and all the fingers of frustration were pointing at Israel.
One can see how the US-Israeli apple carts could tumble like dominos if this information ever went mainstream, hence its suppression. I have transcribed the video here, in case it ever gets purged again.
PART 1: KEEPING SECRETS
Shortly after the 9/11 attacks, more than 60 Israelis were arrested or detained either under anti-terrorism laws or for immigration violations. Some were active Israeli military, and some failed polygraph tests when asked about Israeli surveillance against the United States. US intelligence personnel suspected that these detainees knew more about 9/11 than they were sharing. But when FOX News asked “a highly-placed investigator” for evidence that linked Israel to 9/11, they were told that such information was classified. Still, FOX managed to get their hands on enough classified information to start connecting the dots.
Prior to the attacks, some 140 Israelis had been arrested for espionage across the country. In many cases they had been spying on Arabs — who, of course, were likely up to no good as well. But investigators also concluded that these Israelis were engaging in an “organized intelligence-gathering activity” on a level higher than just Middle East intrigue. Often using mall kiosks as fronts, these Israelis allegedly interacted with US government personnel and infiltrated military bases, the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA), the FBI, and other government facilities. Back in Israel, the majority of them had “served in military intelligence, electronic surveillance intercept, and/or explosive ordinance units.”
One investigation reported that Israel “conducts the most aggressive espionage operation against the US of any US ally.” Another reported that Israel sought information voraciously and was “motivated by strong survival instincts which dictate every facet of their political and economic policies.” The United States, the report stated, “is a high priority target.”
Of course, the Israeli embassy denied all of this. The following exchange between Cameron and Brit Hume is quite telling:
HUME: Carl, what about this question of advance knowledge of what was gonna happen on 9/11? How clear are investigators that some Israeli agents may have known something?
CAMERON: Well, it’s very explosive information, obviously, and there’s a great deal of evidence that they say they have collected, none of it necessarily conclusive. It’s more when they put it all together. A bigger question, they say, is how could they not have known?
How could they not have known?
Later in the report, both Hume and Cameron admit that Mossad agents had reached out to US officials before 9/11 to warn them of the attack. But Cameron states that the warning was too vague and general to be useful, and he suspected that Mossad had worded their warning in such a way to protect their intelligence “sources and methods” in the United States.
PARTS 2 & 3: IMPEDING THE INVESTIGATION
US investigators were beginning to realize that certain Israeli espionage suspects were keeping a step ahead of them through data leaks from an Israeli telecommunications company called Amdocs Limited. Back in 2001 Amdocs had contracts with the 25 biggest phone companies in America, and it would have been nearly impossible for anyone in the country to make a phone call and for Amdocs not to have a record of it. Perhaps not coincidentally, Amdocs had also employed six of the 60 Israelis who ended up being detained after 9/11.
Another Israeli company, Comverse Infosys, may have also interfered with US wiretapping efforts. The company provided wiretapping equipment for law enforcement, and thanks to Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA) was able to maintain access to the computers collecting the wiretapping information — supposedly so they could service them. This, according to senior government officials, rendered the entire wiretapping system seriously vulnerable.
Attorney General John Ashcroft and FBI Director Robert Mueller had been warned in person by 15 local and state law enforcement officials who claimed that, thanks to this vulnerability, CALEA had actually made electronic surveillance less effective.
The concern was that the programs developed by Comverse had a back door “through which wiretaps themselves can be intercepted by unauthorized parties.” Making matters even more suspicious, Comverse worked closely with the Israeli government, and at times got reimbursed for up to 50% of its research and development costs by the Israeli Ministry of Industry and Trade.
And what troubles investigators most, particularly in New York, in the counter-terrorism investigation of the World Trade Center attack is that on a number of cases, suspects that they had sought to wiretap and surveil immediately changed their telecommunications processes. They started acting much differently as soon as those supposedly secret wiretaps went into place.
The FBI had been aware of the suspicions surrounding Comverse, but whenever agents tried to investigate, their efforts were halted by their superiors. People from the DEA, Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), and FBI had all told FOX News that “to pursue or even suggest Israeli spying through Comverse is considered career suicide.”
Predictably, both Amdocs and Comverse insisted that their data and operations were secure.
PART 4: THE PRECEDENT AND THE DODGE
In Los Angeles in 1997, a major drug sting was stymied when the suspects, who were linked to Israeli organized crime, had obtained beeper numbers, cell phone numbers, and in some cases the home phone numbers of the police. They were, in effect, surveilling the surveillers. Those whom the police managed to arrest admitted to possessing hundreds of these numbers and had used them to avoid capture.
Investigators suspected both Amdocs and Comverse at the time, but when they came back to these companies after 9/11, they were thwarted by people in their own agencies where vicious turf wars were apparently being waged over it. When asked about potential Israeli spying and the suspected link between these companies and the 9/11 investigation, the Bush administration “treated the questions like hot potatoes,” according to Cameron, and punted them all to the Department of Justice.
Cameron ends his report by describing the “pandemonium” at the FBI, the DEA, and the INS as agents struggled with their compromised investigations while avoiding the political pitfalls of “the explosive nature and very political ramifications of the story itself.”
9/11 Trutherism has always seemed to me more like a White Nationalist side project than part of its central platform. Important, yes, and a great example of the dangers of multiracialism — especially when it involves Jews. But it is certainly not the only reason why we think what we think and do what we do. In those circles one finds a mix of American patriots, conspiracy theorists, outspoken engineers, still-grieving family members, and anti-Zionists who are willing to keep diving into this fascinating rabbit hole for that proverbial pot of gold. This, of course, remains entirely worthwhile over 20 years after the fact — more so than the endless Kennedy assassination investigations, in my opinion. Other than the Summer of Floyd and the stolen 2020 presidential election, 9/11 was the most profound history-altering event since the fall of the Soviet Union. Thus, we should of course be grateful that there are still many people trying to get to the bottom of it.
Even at their most controversial, however, the FOX News reports do not implicate Israel as a culprit in the attacks. Instead, the worst they suggest is that prior to 9/11, Israel had been spying on suspected Arab terrorists in the United States as well as on targets within the US government itself. Further, Israelis, or people acting in Israel’s interests, impeded the subsequent terrorism investigations through sophisticated espionage techniques, or by making it “career suicide” for US intelligence officers to fully perform these investigations to begin with.
This is not to say that Israel was not one of the culprits behind the 9/11 attacks, or that 9/11 wasn’t in any way an inside job. Either or both of these possibilities could very well have been the case. This is also not letting Al Qaeda or Muslim extremists off the hook. Yet, questions remain. Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth maintains that the destruction of the World Trade Center buildings resembled more of a controlled demolition than a collapse due to plane impacts. There are likewise many other anomalies that challenge the official narrative of the attacks, such as molten metal appearing in the wreckage and the complete loss of the planes’ black boxes. How can the official narrative explain all this?
As for possible Israeli — or more accurately, Mossad — culpability, Laurent Guyénot is an excellent source. He offers the famous case of the “dancing Israelis,” who were disguised as Arabs and who were clearly celebrating the attacks as they were happening. They seemed to know exactly where and when the planes were going to strike beforehand. They also failed lie detector tests in prison. (These five men were among the 60 Israelis detained after 9/11 mentioned above.) Even more baffling is the FBI’s sudden lack of interest in these men a mere two weeks after the attacks. They were all let go after 71 days.
Moreover, there are strange connections that beggar explanation, such as the presence of 30 of the 140 Israelis who had been detained prior to 9/11 in the town of Hollywood, Florida, where 15 of the 19 9/11 hijackers had also been staying. There’s also Ali al-Jarrah, the cousin of one of the 9/11 hijackers, who spent 25 years as a Mossad spy.
The circumstantial evidence just keeps piling up in favor of the Jews, and never the other way around. Guyénot reports the following:
- Wealthy Zionist — and George W. Bush financier — Maurice Greenberg, who owned the firm that was in charge of the World Trade Center’s security, was also one of the Twin Towers insurers — except that on July 24, 2001, he had the contract reinsured by competitors. What a coincidence.
- In spring 2001, real estate mogul Larry Silverstein leased the Twin Towers, which needed to be decontaminated for asbestos — a billion-dollar job, at the very least. He immediately renegotiated the buildings’ insurance to cover terrorist attacks, doubling their coverage. After 9/11, Silverstein, who had close ties to Benjamin Netanyahu, pocketed $4.5 billion. What a coincidence.
- On the morning of 9/11, rather than having breakfast at the North Tower as he always did, Silverstein just happened to be seeing his dermatologist. What a coincidence.
- The planes that crashed into the towers took off from Boston’s Logan Airport, which subcontracted its security to an Israeli firm — the same firm responsible for security at the Newark Airport, from where the flight that crashed in Shanksville had taken off. What a coincidence.
- The American branch of the Israeli shipping company Zim Israel Navigational moved its offices out of the World Trade Center one week before the attacks. What a coincidence.
- I don’t even know what to make of this one: Two hours before the first plane hit, some employees at the World Trade Center received instant messages from an Israeli company called Odigo which announced “almost to the minute” the time of the first strike. What a coincidence.
- The head of the Department of Justice’s Criminal Division, who released the Israelis arrested before and after 9/11, including the “dancing Israelis,” was Michael Chertoff — a Jew. What a coincidence.
- One of the biggest mysteries of the day was the $3.4 trillion that had disappeared from the Department of Defense in 1999 and 2000 (under the watch of Bill Clinton’s Defense Secretary William Cohen, a Jew). On the morning of September 11, 2001, financial analysts at Resource Services Washington were working on locating this money — until Flight AA77 slammed directly into their Pentagon offices and killed them all. What a coincidence.
The case for Mossad’s 9/11 culpability is, of course, highly compelling — but compelling in the way that Graham Hancock is compelling. That is, the case is short on direct evidence and rich with questions that are either unanswered, unanswerable, or unconvincingly answered by the prevailing narrative. And any censorship or suppression of information only lends more urgency to the questions themselves. If the prevailing narrative was true, why do its proponents make information so hard to find and smear opposing voices as crackpots? Why do Carl Cameron’s FOX News segments get purged from YouTube? And why do Jews keep popping up at the crucial junctures of the 9/11 narrative when official sources deny Jewish blame for anything? Such inconsistencies do little to instill confidence, and in the wake of the resulting skepticism, competing theories begin to thrive.
Some theories are better than others, of course, and I will leave it to the reader to do his own research and come to his own conclusions. But one thing we can say for certain is that, through their suppression of information, both the United States and the Israeli governments are not being honest about what happened on September 11, 2001. Perhaps that’s because these two entities are effectively one and the same.
Enjoyed this article?
Be the first to leave a tip in the jar!
* * *
Counter-Currents has extended special privileges to those who donate at least $10/month or $120/year.
- Donors will have immediate access to all Counter-Currents posts. Everyone else will find that one post a day, five posts a week will be behind a “paywall” and will be available to the general public after 30 days. Naturally, we do not grant permission to other websites to repost paywall content before 30 days have passed.
- Paywall member comments will appear immediately instead of waiting in a moderation queue. (People who abuse this privilege will lose it.)
- Paywall members have the option of editing their comments.
- Paywall members get an Badge badge on their comments.
- Paywall members can “like” comments.
- Paywall members can “commission” a yearly article from Counter-Currents. Just send a question that you’d like to have discussed to [email protected]. (Obviously, the topics must be suitable to Counter-Currents and its broader project, as well as the interests and expertise of our writers.)
To get full access to all content behind the paywall, please visit our redesigned Paywall page.
We Get the Crime We Deserve
G. Gordon Liddy’s When I Was a Kid, This Was a Free Country, Part 2
Counter-Currents Radio Podcast No. 560: Is Elon Musk the New Henry Ford?
G. Gordon Liddy’s When I Was a Kid, This Was a Free Country, Part 1
On Generational Identity
Osama bin Laden’s Letter to America
Why Is Support for Israel Collapsing?
The Black Gestapo