Shoddy Alt-News ‘Journalism’ Boosts Mainstream ‘Journalism’ (Propaganda)

Eric Zuesse, originally posted in two parts at

Part One:


Whereas mainstream ‘journalism’ about international affairs is thoroughly controlled by (and usually owned by) the aristocracy that control the government, and therefore such ‘journalism’ boosts the government regardless of which of the government’s parties is in power (since they both are controlled by the aristocracy, instead of by the public such as they claim), a few of the alternative-news sites make serious attempts to present truthful news, and those few sites are more trustworthy than are any of the mainstream sites — or than are any of the sloppy ‘alt-news’ ones.

Most ‘alt-news’ sites are so sloppy that they end up just like the mainstream sites are, confusing or even deceiving their followers, and thus they do an important part of the job that the aristocracy everywhere wants done: to deceive, and/or outright confuse, the public, in order to control (manipulate) the public to accept things as they are, regarding the nation’s relationships with foreign countries, including even which ones are to be labelled as “allies” (such as Saudi Arabia), and which ones will be labelled “enemies” (such as Syria). This societal control-function, and source for invasions (and also for many domestic problems as well, such as for the public’s acceptance of enormous wealth-inequality) is the reality about the press. The press is a crucial lever to control the public’s view of national, and especially of international, affairs. It thus serves the aristocracy as a crucial tool to determine if, when, and whom, the nation’s government will invade, as well as to determine the government’s domestic policies.

However, standard myths about ‘our free press’ are, of course, to the exact contrary of this reality (and are thus promoted by the press as part of their service to the aristocracy) — namely,  that the press are independent of the nation’s aristocracy (instead of owned and controlled by it), and that the press care about finding and communicating to the public the truth, instead of about communicating whatever happens to be the most advantageous to convey to the public in order to get the public willingly to pay taxes and otherwise to support (and maybe directly to participate in) the nation’s military to invade other countries so as to overthrow the leaders that the nation’s aristocracy want to overthrow — such as (for America’s aristocracy): Saddam Hussein in 2003, Muammar Gaddafi in 2011, and Bashar al-Assad in 2011(-and-still-trying). The bloodshed and national expense drained by these invasions are catastrophic — and are far worse for the victim-countries, even than they are for the invading one — but the press are essential in making the public support and accept it.

Whereas all of the right-wing ‘alt-news’ press is conservative, and therefore ultimately supports the mainstream press’s view (the view that we live in a democracy, not in a dictatorship, and that ‘our’ military fights for ‘the right side’ — even though it creates mayhem around the world (such as those recent examples), in the propagandistic name of national ‘defense’ and supporting ‘freedom and democracy’), some of the left-wing ‘alt-news’ press actually do likewise, by their own form of sloppy thinking. The focus here will be on the left-wing type of sloppy-thinking ‘alt-news’ media, because all of the right-wing type is basically conservative and therefore is ultimately supportive of the aristocracy — like the mainstream press are (even if in different ways).

ISRAEL and 9/11

A good example of the latter type of ‘alt-news’ — the left-wing sloppy sort — is “The Corbett Report” and its 15-year-anniversary (2016) report about the origin of the 9/11 attacks. This example will be explored here in depth, because their ‘news’-report, on that subject, entrenches more deeply an old anti-Semitic lie, which many in the aristocracy promote so as to hide the actual (non-Jewish, purely aristocratic) source of the funding and organization (the actual elite people) behind the 9/11 attacks — in this particular case, the lie conveyed is that “the Jews did it” (as anti-Semites say), or that “Israel did it” (as both anti-Zionists and anti-Semites say) (but it’s false and hides the real perpetrators, in either case — as will here be shown):

Corbett’s video about the source of the 9/11 attacks, which was issued on 11 September 2016 to commemorate 9/11, headlined “9/11 Suspects: Dancing Israelis”, and it’s shown here:

It is full of unsupported assumptions and allegations, key ones of which are false. For examples: Corbett (5:40) “They [the ‘dancing Israelis’] had been sent there to document the event [the 9/11 attacks on the WTC].” He repeats that (as will be proven here) false assumption at 9:10-. Then, he alleges (13:40-) “The FBI were convinced that these spies knew about 9/11 in advance,” but presents no evidence to back up this (as will be proven here to be false) allegation. Israel is an apartheid state, and so should be abandoned by all nations (like South Africa was when it was apartheid) regardless, but prejudiced persons’ falsehoods are falsehoods, not facts — and these falsehoods hide the real source of the 9/11 attacks — and so protect the actual guilty parties.

That video is presented to its viewers as if Corbett himself had come up with this (as will be proven here to be false) storyline about the source of the 9/11 attacks; and, therefore, the video’s viewer-comments heap him with praises such as (this one that has 204 net up-votes) “You’re a madman, Corbett. People can’t handle all this truth, day after day. How do you expect them to cope with so much reality?” Or, (in response to the transcript-version) “Amazing work this week James….as always!” However, as will be shown below, Corbett is just rehashing here old similar videos, embellishing some of their false assumptions as if they are his originally created views, his ‘discovery’, while not even crediting his actual sources, which he himself didn’t even care enough to check and verify prior to citing them (to the extent he even does cite his sources). He virtually invites deception of his audience. And they believe him, and even pay him — he’s preaching to the choir, just exploiting his co-believers — and this is supposed to be ‘journalism’, instead of propaganda. But it’s red meat to his co-believers, who apparently, generally, don’t even know that he’s merely rehashing old distortions. Although his propaganda is different from that of, say, the New York Times, the business-model is basically the same; only the deceptions are not.

Much of this the-Jews-did-it talk comes from speculative videos like that, which fail to ask the intelligent questions, but instead are loaded with mere assumptions, some of which are false.

One example of an older video that might have been actually a source for Corbett’s, is dated 20 October 2010, “The Five Dancing Israelis – 9/11/2001 – Our Purpose Was To Document The Event”

which presents someone saying that Israelis who were involved in this alleged “dance” were “later revealed as Mossad assets” (no evidence given as to whom or how — or by whom — ‘revealed’) and then it shows Brit Hume of Fox News asking a reporter (5:20-) about “this question of advance knowledge of what was going to happen on 9/11. How clear are investigators that some Israeli agents might have known something?” The reporter replies: “Well it’s very explosive information, obviously” but he has no information about that ‘information’, and then quickly says “A bigger question is how could they NOT have known?” (Oh, really? Reporting that false allegation is ‘news’?) Then, one of those “dancing Israelis” — by now back inside Israel — is shown on Israeli TV saying “Our purpose was to document the event.” (We’ll get later to what that statement from him actually meant.)

Another of these speculative videos, dated 6 March 2012, “Dancing Israelis Our purpose was to document the event”

focuses especially on this “dancing Israeli” saying “Our purpose was to document the event,” and then it goes on to show a Jew alleging that Judaism (presumably meaning belief in the Pentateuch as being history instead of myth) is not only true but “breaking down all false gods” (implicitly attacking there perhaps both Christianity and Islam but certainly non-Abrahamic religions) and then showing other things that bait anti-Semites, and that make no appeal whatsoever to rational people. Individuals who have prejudices don’t need more than such rank trashy speculation in order to think that their prejudices are true. Perhaps most people are like this — which would make the aristocracy’s job much easier.

Regarding this “dancing Israelis” matter, just stop and think about it. What did that statement “Our purpose was to document the event” actually mean? Did it mean that this person had been filming the 9/11 attack before the event even started (such as all of these anti-Semites and anti-Zionists are assuming — and duping their viewers to believe)? The FBI found that the “dancing Israelis” had actually started to film it after the first jet hit the WTC. That’s a major reason why the FBI closed the case. The fact that those “dancing Israelis” were delighted that the attack had occurred, doesn’t prove that they had had anything whatsoever to do with causing the attack. Similarly, Benjamin Netanyahu, on 16 April 2008, said: “We are benefiting from one thing, and that is the attack on the twin towers and pentagon, and the American struggle in Iraq.” But this, too, doesn’t prove that he was at all involved in the 9/11 attacks.

The FBI, after an exhaustive three-year investigation, found that the “dancing Israelis” did not know about it in advance. See the “Full text of ‘Dancing Israelis Police and FBI Reports 9/11/01’”. For example, it says, in their report there, dated “July 10, 2003” (and I boldface the timeline-sensitive words): “Newark investigation found no factual or substantive circumstantial information to corroborate eyewitness accounts the five (5) Israeli Nationals ‘videotaped’ the attacks on the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center. Investigation did find that still photographs were taken of the attack by these individuals with a 35 mm camera found in their possession.” And: “Newark investigation found no factual or substantive circumstantial information to indicate the five (5) Israeli Nationals were on top of a parking garage ‘videotaping’ prior to first hijacked aircraft striking tower #2 of the World Trade Center. Numerous circumstantial facts strongly support the five (5) individuals statements they traveled to the roof of the parking garage after learning of the attacks from radio broadcasts and Internet news sites. None of the pictures developed from the film found inside the 35 mm camera depicted the twin towers prior to the attack.” Then, it said, “On 07/10/2003”, that “Newark investigation was completed and closed.” Then, on “Date: 04/14/2004”, the “Evidence Control Center” reported: “Details: The evidence related to the above-listed investigation was determined to be of no value to the PENTTBOMB investigation [i.e., to the FBI’s investigation into who had planned and financed the 9/11 attacks], but [and here the machine-read text is garbled, but approximately this] was found to be worthy of a Cl investigation. Newark’s inquiry TWIN TOWERS was closed in July of 03, however FBI HQ [garbled] is still pending. Newark is awaiting a summary of ___ to assist us in determining the final disposition of the evidence retained by Newark.” Then, on “Date: 02/18/2005”, from the Newark FBI office, was reconfirmed: “(Closed)”. So, apparently, “FBI HQ” (the J.Edgar Hoover Building in DC) had needed this confirmation from the Newark Field Office, in order to close completely the FBI’s “Dancing Israelis” part of the PENTTBOMB investigation. Ever since that time, anyone who was still alleging that the “Dancing Israelis” had possessed any advance-knowledge that the 9/11 attacks would occur as they did and when and where they did, was saying something that the FBI had already conclusively determined to be false.

And, also in the ‘news’ during 9/11 (and subsequently to become mixed into the myth about the “dancing Israelis”), had been this “911 Explosive laden van 2-3 arrests” video:

Dan Rather alleged there, on 9/11 (0:30-), that “Two suspects are in FBI custody after a truckload of explosives was discovered around the George Washington Bridge … enough explosives in the truck to do great damage to the George Washington Bridge.”

Rather had picked that allegation up from NYC’s local CBS affiliate station’s reporter:

She said that two men had just then been (0:26-0:29) “arrested at the George Washington Bridge with an entire truckload of explosives.”

But, actually, the next day,

“officials denied any explosives were found in the van.”

However, that finding was ignored by the national ‘news’ media. There was no further news-coverage about the matter. When the ‘bomb-van’ threat was found to have been non-existent, the ‘news’ media simply ignored the report that it was, and left the previous ‘news’ reports — the fake ones, which had misled people — standing, as if they had been true. 

Also on 9/11, a different news-report said that a van that was near “the Hackensack River Bridge” and carrying five possible “Israeli tourists” had been inspected by police for explosives, but a report the next day also indicated that no explosives had been in that van:

Subsequently, both of those two, separate, ‘bomb-van’ incidents became merged and mixed together, into what emerged to become an enduring myth, that “the dancing Israelis” had not only been part of the 9/11 plot, but were subsequently aiming to blow up the George Washington Bridge.

This is what happens when ‘news’ media report not actual news but mere arrests — which shouldn’t ever even be reported to the public unless and until charges are filed about the given matter. If a person is arrested but not charged, and the person isn’t a government-official, there should be no public report, because no public issue is involved in that event. People’s privacy, and defendants’ ability to be judged by an impartial jury if a court case does result from an investigation, both get thrown to the dogs, by such premature ‘news’ reports, which feed propaganda, because ‘news’ media care so little about accuracy, but care lots about being the first to report ‘news’ — which neither of those cases actually was, since no charges were ever filed.

More details about the truckload-of-explosives-in-a-van myth can be found here:

Part Two:


A credible journalist won’t report speculation. Speculation might subsequently be proven false. To publicize false allegations is to prejudice the public; only bad can come from it. What’s said in speculation (such as reporting anyone in authority saying, at the first heat of an alleged event, such a thing — actually tentative and only speculative — as “A truckload of explosives was discovered around the George Washington Bridge”), is something that a credible journalist, working for a credible news-medium, simply won’t do. And only a public who likewise don’t care much about truth would even want them to report speculation as being instead fact — not even if the ‘news’ being reported is someone else being quoted as passing his speculation off as being ‘fact’. Someone else’s stating his mere speculation as being instead fact is no excuse for reporting the statement. A public that cares a lot about truth won’t subscribe to ‘news’media that are such fakes as that. Someone else’s mistakes are no ‘justification’ for one’s own. There was no basis yet, for reporting, “A truckload of explosives was discovered around the George Washington Bridge.” It was not at that time — or ever — a confirmed allegation. A confirmed allegation would instead have been something like “Police somewhere in nearby New Jersey are said to be inspecting a vehicle to determine whether it contains explosives.”

The only circumstance where an authentic news medium will report a false allegation is in order to point out that an allegation that was published is false — to report that some fake ‘news’ medium had done that sort of thing. However, fake ‘news’ media never report about other such ones as being fake. They don’t expose their real “brothers in crime.” Only authentic news media (such as this) expose inauthentic ones. The inauthentic ones instead just continue to ‘report’ distortions and lies, mixed in with proven truths, in order to make their allegations seem ‘authoritative’ to the gullible. But that’s really no more credible than is paid advertising. It’s not news-reporting. News-reporting is 100% true, not truths mixed with errors and/or lies (i.e., “myths”). And, in the rare instance where a news-medium will make an error, the news-medium will be alarmed about it, report its error, and transform its operation so as never again to repeat any such thing. Did that happen with all of America’s ‘news’-media, which reported in 2002 and 2003 that Saddam Hussein had or was producing weapons of mass destruction (WMD)? It happened with none of them. Judy Miller was fired from the New York Times. She was a rotten ‘journalist’, but firing her still left a rotten ‘news’-medium, one just as unreliable, which is no better now than it was then — still systematically distorting reality (like all the rest of the mainstream press still do, at least in the United States).

Some of these videos about the “dancing Israelis” (such as this) were even blatantly anti-Semitic, obsessed about Jews, as if there aren’t evil (and also good!) people in every ethnicity or religious category. They ignore that George W. Bush wasn’t Jewish. They ignore that the 9/11 attackers weren’t Jewish. They ignore that Dick Cheney wasn’t Jewish. They ignore that Condoleezza Rice wasn’t Jewish. Their bigotry obsesses and blinds them, and so makes them at least as bad as their imaginings about some amorphous ethnic or religious category of ‘bad’ people. Bigots are only to be loathed, and despised — regardless of which category of people happens to obsess a given bigot.

The mainstream newsmedia aren’t like that: they hide their prejudices. But they feed the public’s prejudices, because the press are virtually prohibited from reporting the truths that would need to be reported in order for public affairs to make sense to the broad public. Hypocrisy thus reigns in the press, just as it does in the White House. This is why the public are confused.

A reader at one of my reports about the Sauds’ role in 9/11, objected to it by citing this very lengthy “The ‘Dancing Israelis’ FBI Report — Debunked”, which was an “Update” dated on 6 April 2015, and therefore was supposedly somehow more up-to-date (by 11 years) than were the FBI’s closing-actions on this case in 2004 and 2005, but which actually was presenting only the 40,000-words that had been in the files of the FBI and local police regarding the “Dancing Israelis” matter during the year it happened, 2001; so, instead of its being 11 years later than (and thus supposedly more comprehensive than) the FBI’s closing-action was, it was 3 years earlier than was the FBI’s closing-action, and this closing-action was based upon lots more than just what was known in 2001 about the matter. Moreover, near the end of that entire 40,000-word record, the person who was posting it, embedded (and featured) a video, which happened to be the very same one that I linked to above here, where I cited “Another of these speculative videos, dated 6 March 2012, ‘Dancing Israelis Our purpose was to document the event’,” except that this uploading of that same video, to youtube, was instead titled “Five Dancing Israelis Arrested On 9/11”, and was dated five years earlier, on 5 January 2007. People present ‘evidence’ that’s garbage, and then other garbage-believers repeat it through the years, long after it has already been proven false; but, they all believe it — and they will continue to believe it — because they are committed to garbage; they will not let go of it. They don’t just choose it; they hug it; they will not let go of a falsehood, no matter how many years after it has already been proven false. To them, Earth will always be flat, not round. It has become an article of faith, for them.

There is actually no reason for a person to trust ‘news’ just because it comes from a source that confirms his or her own prejudices, whatever they might happen to be. Constant intelligent skepticism — thinking things through in the way that a scientist is supposed to — is the only way to truth, not only about physics, but also about human affairs, too. There is no shortcut; scientific thinking is the only way, for any person who seeks the truth, instead of mere ‘confirmation’. People who seek only ‘confirmation’, end up ‘confirming’ their prejudices, and so being the fools of fraudsters; and these fools are the cheapest type of agent that any fraudster can obtain, because such fools are motivated by other people’s errors and outright lies, and not only by money (and not at all by good, which is always based only on truth — something that’s alien to people of prejudice).

And then, best-selling novels about the 9/11 plot become promoted and confused by ‘news’ media and their subscribers, as if the novel is presenting a real history of how 9/11 happened (alleging events “that prove … that the operation leads directly back to companies and intelligence assets deeply rooted in and connected to the state of Israel”). This particular book’s author posts online her ‘resources’ such as a section on the novel’s ‘Israeli art students’, whom the author alleges that the New York Times had reported about on 18 August 2001, but which article actually had said that these people were “Vienna-based artists,” who were “on the 91st floor of the World Trade Center” (which building-number wasn’t indicated in that news-report), and the author also assumes that those ‘Israeli art students’ were the very same people as a ring of fake Israeli art students that the DEA were tracking throughout the U.S. for years. No reason for that assumption was given. The object is to sell books to fools, because that’s such a huge market — it’s very profitable.

The case against the Sauds is instead based upon real (that is to say scientific) criminal investigation, by the FBI, and supported also by leaks from Wikileaks and others, and validated also in court testimony, and by other authentic evidence. But, among the public, there are many anti-Semites, and also both Jewish and non-Jewish anti-Zionists, who want to believe, in some form, that ‘the Jews did it’. There is a substantial public that believes in a big amorphous Jewish conspiracy behind everything bad. Whether they are racists or not, they are fools, and the organized gang that is actually in control appreciate them for helping to distract the broader public from the real crime-ring that’s at the top, and from precisely what its individuals are doing, and why they are doing it.

There are a lot of bigoted fools around. The real conspirators can easily get away with mass-murder, while such fools blame some amorphous mass of people (“the Jews,” “the Russians,” or otherwise) instead.

Anyone whose main sources of ‘news’ are the traditional ones — TV, radio, and print (the media in which there are no links that a member of the audience can click onto in order to check out immediately a ’news’-report’s sources) — is being blocked from access to the sources (since the viewers on such media can’t simply click onto and examine for themselves these sources), and therefore can’t reasonably trust those reports, at all. But in online news-reporting (or equivalent online historical reporting), the possibility exists, for a writer to link directly or indirectly (from the directly linked-to sources) to the original sources, for at least many of the key allegations in the given report; and, so, any intelligent reader can determine, for herself, whether a given online news-report is at all trustworthy. No longer must people depend only upon whatever prejudices they might happen to have — Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Republican, Democratic, Tory, Labour, or whatever. If a reader can’t click directly onto any questionable allegation to check its source, then the reasonable presumption would be that the given ‘news’ report is actually propaganda — unless and until the reader himself checks out and verifies its allegations (which very few will do, if the report isn’t online — and which few might do even if the report is online, but at least that site and its reporter respect their audience enough to empower them by providing those links, instead of merely to exploit or manipulate them).

My own practice, as a reporter, is to link to the best source I know of, regarding any questionable allegation that I make, and to check very carefully any video or other non-linked source, before qualifying it to be worthy of being linked-to in my own reports. I believe that this procedural standard should be routinely adhered-to in all online news-reporting or -commentary. But very few reporters do adhere to it. (And few news-consumers complain about their failure to do so. The market for high-quality journalism doesn’t yet exist, but maybe it will someday.)

If an alleged news-report or -commentary is written to be taken on faith, then the reasonable response would be to reject it on sight, so as not to pollute one’s mind with false beliefs, such as most minds tragically are.

Perhaps some way will be found to teach the public how to teach themselves how to find real truth. Ultimately, this is the skill that any authentic scientist, in any field, is applying in that person’s own research — regardless of the field. For example, it is what separates the field of journalism, from that of mere propaganda (fake ‘news’). On any important topic, fake ‘news’ now reigns. The public are thus confused. They are deeply misinformed. There is no shortcut.

For a good example of a video that I have, as of yet, found to be 100% truthful, and which was authentically original, published or posted to youtube barely two weeks after the incredibly complex and historically important event that it chronicled and explained, and which event is, even today, universally denied both by the U.S. regime and by the U.S. aristocracy’s ‘news’ media — that event being U.S. President Obama’s coup in Ukraine, which replaced the democratically elected government by a racist-fascist anti-Russian one in February 2014, and so kicked off the new Cold War, which Trump had promised to end but apparently can’t — see this ten-minute video; and, then, if that strikes your interest, see also an equally brilliant and truthful hour-long video-compilation, whose first ten minutes is that one (which first ten minutes can therefore be skipped if you don’t want to see the first one twice), this video, which hour-long compilation still managed to be published less than a month after the coup. The genius behind the basic ten-minute video is Aaron Hawkins, who is certainly one of the very great investigative journalists in our time. And that video is perhaps the best he has ever done. Even today, I find it stunning and the best 10-minute introduction anywhere, to Barack Obama’s biggest single curse upon the world, a curse worthy of George W. Bush, if not even worse. That video isn’t merely great journalism; it is great history, presented almost in real time, as a piece of video investigative journalism. It’s breathtaking — and it wouldn’t be so if it weren’t also true.


Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of  They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of  CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.
  • blue579

    Seems a lot of articles selected for W.B. are geared towards herding independent thinkers into a pseudo-left-wing holding pen.

    Too bad James Corbett was selected to be in the cross hairs. Corbett takes a firm stand against anti-semitic broad brush labels and happens to be the most careful true genuine alt researcher around.

    We’re approaching 7 decades of Operation Mockingbird and those tentacles are very far reaching into most popular “alt” media. We desperately need open source news community verification.

    With the Pope recently attacking Libertarians as dangerous elements to society, we know the war on independent critical thinkers (by whatever label) is here now.

    • nomadd

      “Corbett takes a firm stand against anti-semitic broad brush labels and happens to be the most careful true genuine alt researcher around.”
      I echo this. If I have to choose Corbetts take and Zeusse’s, its Corbett.

    • eddysachs

      …..ain’t that the truth…cheers on bringing this to our attention

  • kimyo

    The FBI found that the “dancing Israelis” had actually started to film it after the first jet hit the WTC

    you fail to document this particular claim. what is the source?

    • cettel

      I have now linked directly to it at the first mention, and then in the next paragraph, where that had already been linked-to and where now it’s being linked to yet again (i.e., a second time), I have added such things as saying “(and I boldface the timeline-sensitive words)” so as to help make even easier a reader’s knowing precisely what the evidence is for that important allegation.

  • jason walker

    Eric, great work again. Have you been following the George Webb youtube videos of his investigations? top notch, and worth your time to look at. Epic corruption evidence.

  • Marko

    I see a bit of the pot calling the kettle black here. Remember this ? :

    ” Seymour Hersh Says Hillary Approved Sending Libya’s Sarin to Syrian Rebels ” by ERIC ZUESSE

    • Eric Zuesse

      When someone called to my attention that Hersh had not explicitly said that sarin was in the Gaddafi weaponry that the U.S. State Department rat-lined into Syria, I phoned Hersh to ask about that, and he said that he had not said whether it was or wasn’t and that I shouldn’t have said that he did. But I called to his attention that other reliable press reports had said that Gaddafi’s army did have sarin. He told me that he, Hersh, never reported whether or not Gaddafi’s army had sarin, and that the only condition under which anyone should add two and two together in the way I did would be if both of the reports came from or were published by him. I asked him whether he thought that Gaddafi’s sarin ended up in that August 2013 “red line” sarin attack, and he said only that he objected to my saying that he had said that she did. But my error there wasn’t comparable to Corbett’s that I describe in this article. And I subsequently wrote an article to clarify what Hersh had said and not said on this matter:

      In other words, I don’t let even small errors that I make go unaddressed. I did address the matter. It’s the only error that has validly been called to my attention, and I did publicly acknowledge it to have been an error. But I still do believe that Hersh was withholding from me a direct answer to the question I posed. But, of course, that’s okay; it is the reason I published that correction.

      • Marko

        The subsequent article correcting the first is all well and good , but it doesn’t help those who are drawn to the original article via Google searches , etc. , of which there have been many , as I’m sure you’re aware.

        A note on the original linked to the correction would have been the more correct response , and would have prevented embarrassment of your readers who may have cited the first article while being unaware of the correction.

  • john

    As far as the above argument, I’ve always steered clear of the whole dancing Israelis thing, although I see you’re point that all of the stories of explosives in trucks etc were indeed quickly forgotten and never mentioned again, the police reports at the time do indeed mention explosives, and it would be consistent with 2 scenarios. 1. The original reports from the responding officers turned out to contain false info about explosives so they weren’t repeated by mainstream news (however Fox and the other channels never retracted their stories nor corrected them) or 2. the reports were correct but some of the same high level ultra Zionist Neo cons such as Michael Chertoff or others pulled strings and got them released and details changed and the stories buried by the corporate media. .
    However the dancing Israelis and the massive art student spy situation prior to that is only the tip of the iceberg concerning Israel. First, most of the PNAC conspirators are either dual citizens or at least Zionist. Second Netanyahu and Larry Silverstein were best friends since way back, talking every week on the phone. Another obvious issue is Odigo warning people before the attacks, which has not been debunked nor can be denied as it was widely reported in Israeli and other press:
    Then there’s Ehud Barak (the founder and master of the Israeli military’s covert operation force, the Sayeret Matkal) being in a London studio of the BBC World ready to provide a plausible (and political) explanation to the world within minutes after the attack. Barak, whom many cast as the true mastermind, was the first person to call for a “War on Terror” – and U.S. intervention in Afghanistan and the Middle East. He already knew it was Osama, nevermind that at that point it could have literally been any country or force, Nearly every country has a handful of pilots, but he like the whole corporate media knew it was Osama. Other corporate media sources that delivered the official Osama story way too early were owned by Zionist such CBS (close friend and Silverstein business partner Larry Tisch) and FOX.
    Theres also the clear Mossad links of the people behind the movies and TV programs that predicted the attack: The Medusa Touch and The Lone Gunman. Also when you say there is no proof the Urban Moving Systems has anything to do with the Mossad, I’m pretty sure that connection has been firmly established and admitted, as well as at least one or two of the “movers” I believe were admitted ex-Mossad but I’ll have research that and get back to you..
    In any case I’d love to see a debate with you, Ryan Dawson and James Corbett about this particular topic. Ryan Dawson seems to really have done his homework concerning the dancing Israelis and other Israeli involvement. Maybe throw Christopher Bollyn in the discussion too.

  • nomadd

    dancing Israelis is not the only thing that implicates israel. this does. bigly

  • American Terrorist

    Recommended: 9/11 and War by Deception.

    4-1/2 hour version is well worth the time. It seems that Washington’ s Blog complaint about alt journalism is ironic when it tries to dispel Israeli participation in 9/11.

  • Sister Jane

    After reading the article it reminded me of the same problem as the missing redacted 28 pages that is somehow showing Saudi involvement in 9/11. It seems that many people in America wish to cover for our so called foreign friends whenever possible, even at the expense of America itself and that goes for Israel in spades a well. In the Saudis case most of the 9/11 hijackers had Saudi passports, and in Israel’s case we have numerous art students and company’s that appeared to be fronts, in the US doing who knows what on 9/11 some of whom the people involved were military and perhaps Mossad agents, and some of those companies no longer exist now that the WTC has fallen. The overall trend has been to get the US involved in the middle east in a military manner. The Israelis went so far as to try and sink one of our Naval vessels at one time, and we the Americans did our best to try and cover that up, so there is a precedence here for murder and the blame game afterwards. One things for sure, just as with all State Run investigations, it always brings up more questions then a firm undoubtable conclusion. In almost all cases our own State covers up details of investigations, agents names are understandable, but there is always much more redacted than just peoples names. Then there is the fact that State investigations seem to have a conclusion and then they try to prove their conclusion rather than find out what really happened.

    The Saudis and the Israelis seem much more interested in defending their countries and their way of life, more so than many Americans, especially those running our State. With articles like this one, it seems some biases are saying we shouldn’t look at certain Nations in investigations because their even more trustworthy than our own people, some do not put their own Nation first and that’s obvious.

    So yeah, we should always try to look for facts, but in order to do that we first must speculate, then investigate, more and more as time passes the overall 9/11 investigation brings up more questions than answers and often the answers seem more of a cover up than a real investigation, and also bring little in the way of closure or any kind of satisfied feeling of an investigation done completely. State run investigations almost always tend to fall in that direction for some unknown reason, perhaps it is our States desire to write history as they themselves see it. Of course within speculation there rest exaggerations such as was described in this article of a van loaded with explosives, but taken for what really happened a much larger investigation was required, and as far as the American people know, that did not happen, it was more of the cover up smell to it.

    Back to Speculation, Main Stream American News reports speculation every single day, and so does Social Media, though both report BS also every single day also.

    • nomadd

      “Then there is the fact that State investigations seem to have a
      conclusion and then they try to prove their conclusion rather than find
      out what really happened.”

      yes and yes

  • iseeit

    I like and value Eric’s articles. It’s a bit amusing of him to make such a big deal of the ‘scientific method’.
    Who’s ‘science’ Eric?

  • kimyo

    apparently, oded ellner, one of the ‘5 dancing israelis’, did say ‘we were there to document the event’.

    What Did Israel Know in Advance of the 9/11 Attacks?

    What is perhaps most damning is that the Israelis’ celebration on the New Jersey waterfront occurred in the first sixteen minutes after the initial crash, when no one was aware this was a terrorist attack. In other words, from the time the first plane hit the north tower, at 8:46 a.m., to the time the second plane hit the south tower, at 9:02 a.m., the overwhelming assumption of news outlets and government officials was that the plane’s impact was simply a terrible accident. It was only after the second plane hit that suspicions were aroused. Yet if the men were cheering for political reasons, as they reportedly told the FBI, they obviously believed they were witnessing a terrorist act, and not an accident.

    After returning safely to Israel in the late autumn of 2001, three of the five New Jersey Israelis spoke on a national talk show that winter. Oded Ellner, who on the afternoon of September 11 had, like his compatriots, protested to arresting officer Sgt. Dennis Rivelli that “we’re Israeli”, admitted to the interviewer: “We are coming from a country that experiences terror daily. Our purpose was to document the event”. By his own admission, then, Ellner stood on the New Jersey waterfront documenting with film and video a terrorist act before anyone knew it was a terrorist act.

    video of an israeli tv interview with 3 of the ‘dancing israelis’ here (starts at 1:31):

    • cettel

      My article notes and links to his saying it. Do you not read?

  • john

    Interesting my comment below was posted before because someone replyed to it. Their reply is still there but now my comment says “Hold on, this is waiting to be approved by Washington’s Blog.” Interesting, I wonder who was able to censor; DISCUS or Eric…

  • kimyo

    the top two questions zuesse won’t answer:
    1) did the photos taken by the dancing israelis show them celebrating BEFORE the second tower was hit?
    2) did the planes cause the collapse of the 3 buildings in nyc?

    • cettel

      Did this not answer your question?:
      The FBI, after an exhaustive three-year investigation, found that the “dancing Israelis” did not know about it in advance. See the “Full text of ‘Dancing Israelis Police and FBI Reports 9/11/01’”. For example, it says, in their report there, dated “July 10, 2003” (and I boldface the timeline-sensitive words): “Newark investigation found no factual or substantive circumstantial information to corroborate eyewitness accounts the five (5) Israeli Nationals ‘videotaped’ the attacks on the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center. Investigation did find that still photographs were taken of the attack by these individuals with a 35 mm camera found in their possession.” And: “Newark investigation found no factual or substantive circumstantial information to indicate the five (5) Israeli Nationals were on top of a parking garage ‘videotaping’ prior to first hijacked aircraft striking tower #2 of the World Trade Center. Numerous circumstantial facts strongly support the five (5) individuals statements they traveled to the roof of the parking garage after learning of the attacks from radio broadcasts and Internet news sites. None of the pictures developed from the film found inside the 35 mm camera depicted the twin towers prior to the attack.”

      Did you read that?: “None of the pictures developed from the film found inside the 35 mm camera depicted the twin towers prior to the attack.”

      • kimyo

        however, the pictures DO portray the israelis celebrating B4 the SECOND plane hit.

        is this an accurate statement?

        you didn’t answer part 2, i’m waiting: did the planes cause the collapse of the 3 buildings in nyc?

        these are simple yes/no questions. stop obfuscating.

        there’s a reason zuesse won’t answer, which should be obvious to anyone here with a brain.

        • cettel

          It’s definitely not an accurate statement according to the FBI investigation into the matter. That investigation found that none of the shots in the 35mm camera that were taken of the WTC showed the WTC before the first plane hit. Are you lying, or do you not read? I linked to and even quoted the specific FBI findings. Are you oblivious to the relevant evidence? What motivates you to assert things that directly contradict it?

          • kimyo

            again, zuesse, cornered, chooses to answer a question i did not ask.

            the question is simple, and unambiguous.

            yes or no: do the photos taken by the dancing israelis show them celebrating BEFORE the SECOND tower was hit?

            frankly, what the fbi says is of zero interest to the vast majority of readers here. for the benefit of those who frequent these pages: what does the finely calibrated investigative mind of zuesse say?

            do the photos taken by the dancing israelis show them celebrating BEFORE the SECOND tower was hit?

            YES or NO?

          • Eric Zuesse

            You can’t read, or don’t notice: The FBI excerpts that I quote in which the FBI states why they are closing the investigation, makes unambiguously clear that they found proof that the “dancing Israelis” took only still photos of the attack, and that NONE of those photos were taken prior to the WTC being hit. Are you stupid? I’ve quoted the key passages. They were unequivocal. The photographing by them of the event started after the event started. The FBI examined all of the photos in that camera, and none of the shots preceded the attacks.

          • kimyo

            AGAIN you refuse to answer. why?

            yes or no. dead simple.

            do the photos taken by the dancing israelis show them celebrating BEFORE the SECOND tower was hit?

          • cettel

            I don’t respect irrelevant questions enough to respond to them except with contempt.

          • nomadd

            answer kimyos question, eric. it is a simple yes or no.

      • Jethro Bodine

        The dancing Israelis are misdirection. Focus on the people in the centers of power during 9/11. Also, the authors of Project for a New American Century (PNAC) is a good start.

        Here are a few of the people is centers of power during 9/11. You decide if they are complicit or not.

        Paul Wolfowitz — Deputy Secretary of War on 9-11; “dual citizen” of US and Israel

        Richard Perle — former assistant Secretary of War, chairman War Policy Board, and PNAC member; “dual citizen” of US and Israel

        Douglas Feith — effectively in command, with Wolfowitz, of War Department on 9-11; Undersecretary of War for Policy; “dual citizen” of US and Israel; Zionist

        Dov Zakheim — Pentagon comptroller when trillion dollars reported missing on 9-10-01; “dual citizen” of US and Israel; Zionist;

        George Tenet — director of the CIA on 9-11; was awarded the “Medal of Freedom” by Bush for his fine work on 9-11; reported to be “dual citizen” of US and Israel

        Michael Chertoff — Assistant Attorney General on 9-11; freed over 100 Israeli spies in the US after 9-11; promoted to head Homeland Security; “dual citizen” of US and Israel; Zionist; likely Mossad agent

        Benjamin Chertoff — 25-year-old cousin of Michael Chertoff; senior “researcher” for Popular Mechanics’ hit piece on 9-11 Truth Movement

        Michael Mukasey — federal judge in New York; presided over 1993 WTC bombing case; active in 9-11 cases, including Larry Silverstein’s insurance claims; oversaw the detained material witnesses of 9-11, including five dancing Israeli Mossad agents apprehended by FBI; recently appointed by Bush to be the next Attorney General; radical Zionist of Russian Jewish parentage; “dual citizen” of US and Israel

        Marc Grossman — Under Secretary for Political Affairs on 9-11; met with General Mahmoud Ahmad, head of Pakistan’s ISI and 9-11 financier, on or shortly after 9-11; “dual citizen” of US and Israel

        Philip Zelikow — led the 9-11 Cover-Up Commission; personally wrote the 9-11 Omission Commission Report, a best-selling work of fiction; appointed Counselor of US Department of State; “dual citizen” of US and Israel

        Ari Fleischer — White House spokesman for Bush on 9-11; “dual citizen” of US and Israel; connected to the extremist group called the Chabad Lubavitch Hasidics

        Elliot Abrams — former member of PNAC, National Security Council; pleaded guilty in 1991 to lying to Congress about Iran-Contra affair; “dual citizen” of US and Israel; Zionist

        Lewis “Scooter” Libby — former PNAC member; studied political science at Yale under Paul Wolfowitz; aid to Cheney; convicted for lying about outing of Valerie Plame; “dual citizen” of US and Israel; Zionist

        Lewis Eisenberg — chairman Port Authority of New York and New Jersey on 9-11; authorized transfer of WTC leases to Silverstein and Lowy just weeks before 9-11; later appointed chairman of Republican National Committee; Zionist

        Larry Silverstein — he and partner Frank Lowy obtained 99-year lease on WTC shortly before 9-11; made several billion dollars on 9-11 insurance fraud; admitted to “pulling” WTC 7; Zionist

        Frank Lowy — he and partner Larry Silverstein obtained 99-year lease on WTC shortly before 9-11; came to Palestine in 1945 from Hungarian to fight as Golani commando in Israeli “War of Independence”; Australia’s second richest person; in May 2007, investigated by Israeli police for corruption scandal involving Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert; Zionist

        Rupert Murdoch — key player in Zionist-controlled corporate media which began the 9-11 cover-up on day one; connected to individuals who privatized and leased WTC just weeks before 9-11; vocal supporter of Zionist extremists Benjamin Netanyahu and Ariel Sharon; honored by leading Zionist organizations such as the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) and the United Jewish Appeal (UJA), in which Silverstein, Lowy, and Eisenberg all hold senior positions; Zionist who tries to hide his Jewish heritag

        Jules Kroll — founder of Kroll Corporation, a “security services” company which was in charge of “security” at WTC on 9-11; has close links to CIA and is active private military contractor in Iraq; Zionist

        William Kristol — PNAC co-founder; adherent of Leo Strauss; editor of The Weekly Standard; strong advocate of the Iraq war; “dual citizen” of US and Israel; Zionist

        Henry Kissinger — long criminal history; wanted for war crimes in several countries; sat on War Policy Board under Perle; chosen to lead 9-11 Cover-Up Omission Commission; “dual citizen” of US and Israel

        Benjamin Netanyahu — former Israeli Prime Minister; said 9-11 was “good” for US-Israeli relationship; in NYC on 9-11 and in London on 7-7 bombings

        Ariel Sharon — Israeli Prime Minister on 9-11; heavy Mossad involvement in 9-11 (200 Israeli intelligence agents rounded up after 9-11, five Mossad agents arrested filming and celebrating WTC collapses, employees of Mossad-operated company at WTC notified hours before plane hit) implicates Sharon; infamous Zionist terrorist and war criminal;

        • cettel

          “The dancing Israelis are misdirection. Focus on the people in the centers of power during 9/11. Also, the authors of Project for a New American Century (PNAC) is a good start.”

          The article says that Israel gained from the attacks. But so did the Sauds. It doesn’t prove anything about who financed the operation. Who organized it. Who coordinated it with Dick Cheney etc. And who actually did it. If you are alleging that 15 of the 19 hijackers weren’t Saudi Arabians, but instead Israelis, you are wrong. If you are saying that at least two of them weren’t paid by Saudi government miners who got the money directly from Prince Bandar bin Sultan al-Saud and his wife, you are wrong. If you ignore the funding and the organization, you are wrong. What motivates you to ignore the little that is solidly known about how the actual attacks were financed and organized? Are you stupid?

        • Jethro Bodine

          I would like to clarify. There were many other actors (ie. Americans, Saudi’s) that were also complicit in 9/11 but to state that Israel wasn’t involved in any way is patently false in my opinion. 9/11 doesn’t play out the way it did without people in the power centers being involved.

  • john

    Can I ask why my comment is still waiting approval from washingtonblog and “flagged as spam”???
    Heres another one please don’t censor:

  • 1johnnyrotten1


  • carsondyal

    Although I have read articles of yours I’ve valued, Mr. Zuesse, you’re either woefully ignorant on the subject of 9/11, or you’re a Zionist gatekeeper. Who would use Robert Mueller and the FBI as the lynch pin for their argument? Their history of lying to the American public is legendary. Better sources than the FBI directly contradict them. But let’s get off the Dancing Israeli subject, which is just one of perhaps a hundred damning pieces to the puzzle.

    To pick just one example: What of the black boxes to the two planes which crashed into the Towers? Hasn’t it always been the Bureau’s contention that they were never found? In fact, they were, as firefighter Nick DeMasi writes in his 2004 book, “Ground Zero.” He had an ATV (All Terrain Vehicle) which an FBI agent asked if he could use with Nick to recover the boxes and anything else of import still somewhere on the pile. Nick states that they found three of the boxes over a two-day excursion (no doubt the Feds had already found the fourth themselves) Then Nick writes that he was sternly told by the agent not to tell anyone what they had found. Why? asked DeMasi. Just don’t, repeated the agent. Give me a good reason and I won’t, insisted DeMasi. The agent had no answer. He just reinforced the admonition, “Don’t tell anyone.” Nick DeMasi, by the way, actually believed the government’s absurd story of the 19 hijackers. I know this because by chance I met his brother, Joe, while teaching overseas in 2011. Joe was amazed that I knew his brother’s story of the recovered black boxes because the incident is simply mentioned in passing in DeMasi’s book. Nevertheless, a 9/11 researcher had discovered it.
    Just think how damning the evidence on those boxes must have been to the government’s story if the FBI had to lie that they were never found. Normally, it’s sufficient for government agencies to merely say that “national security” prevents certain information from being divulged. But here, they can’t afford to even allow people to IMAGINE what’s on them.

    The reality is that in the planning, execution, and coverup of the 9/11 attacks, all roads lead to Israel, dual-citizen American Jews, and Christian Zionists like Cheney and Rumsfeld. A few other countries were also involved, but blaming the Saudis is disinformation. Among the several excellent investigators out there, such as David Ray Griffin, Mike Rivero, and Ryan Dawson, the best one is easily the enormously thorough Christopher Bollyn. His book, “9/11: The Deception that Changed the World” is exhaustively researched.
    And BTW, it was Philip Zelikow who was in charge of the 9/11 Commission, not Dov Zakheim. He was the crooked comptroller who helped steal $2.3 trillion from the Pentagon, which Rumsfeld mentions on Sept. 10. Finally, Jews love Orwellian speech, but Arabs are by far the largest group of Semites in the world, so being anti-Semitic includes them, and is thus a deceptive and meaningless term. We should be above deception, Eric; it’s the Mossad’s motto for waging war.