by ORHAN KEMAL CENGI.Z
Since the beginning of the Ergenekon investigation there has been an intensive discussion over the case.
According to some, the Ergenekon investigation is the panacea to correct all the wrongdoings of the deep state, whereas some others allege that this case was just a fabrication of this government and a pretext to weaken the secular system in Turkey.
While this lively debate continued in Turkey, there was also parallel coverage of the case in the Western media. Unlike the discussion in Turkey, foreign coverage of the case was predominantly in favor of the second view in Turkey: Islamists are trying to bring down the secular system, the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) is trying to get revenge on the military through this case and so on. To support their thesis, these pro-Ergenekon publications also tried to convince Western audiences that the Ergenekon case was only supported by Islamists and the government.
As the Human Rights Agenda Association and the Young Civilians, we wanted to examine the arguments used in these pro-Ergenekon publications and we wished to see "what were the common denominators" on the viewpoints of Turkish intellectuals and democrats on the Ergenekon case.
As a first step, we had scanned all Western media to identify the arguments against the Ergenekon case. We formulated all these arguments as 10 main claims and 24 sub-questions. We invited people from all parts of the political spectrum to take part in the workshop, focusing on two conditions only: a familiarity with the Ergenekon case and a good record of respect for human rights. In the two-day workshop that we held in I.stanbul on April 10-11, almost 40 participants attended our program. On the first day intellectuals, journalists and human rights defenders and on the second day well-known human rights lawyers were amongst the participants of the workshops.
These groups were divided into subgroups, and each subgroup was given a couple of claims and sub-questions to have an in-depth discussion over in line with their fields of expertise. On return, all these subgroups presented their conclusions in the plenary session so that the entire group could discuss and examine each argument raised during the sub-group discussions.
Using the transcripts of these discussions, we prepared a draft report and sent it to all participants to get their approval and amended the first draft according to the proposals of the participants. We finalized the report and called it "Ergenekon Is Our Reality" because we got the impression that this title was the most appropriate one to reflect the mood of the participants.
CIA DIA ONI MOSSAD BND ISI MI6
What were the claims and how did the participants evaluate them?
The first claim is the one that is used to deal a deadly blow to the whole Ergenekon trial: "Ergenekon does not exist." According to some pro-Ergenekon circles, there is no evidence in the court file showing that there is such an organization like Ergenekon. In my opinion, being able to cast doubt on the very existence of the organization has been the biggest achievement so far. According to participants in the workshops, Ergenekon exists and its existence was not a secret before the launch of the investigation. Ergenekon is what the organization calls itself. The important documents pointing to the existence of the organization are included in the Ergenekon case file. During the investigation so many documents were seized in the domiciles and business places of the suspects and from various other sources.
One of those documents, titled "Ergenekon, Analysis Project of Restructuring, Management and Development," consisting of 25 pages, explained the objectives and methods of the organization.
Six indictments have been prepared thus far as part of the ongoing probe. The indictments are basically based on two issues. The first one concerns the organization itself, while the second one is focused on coup and action plans. Some of the coup and action plans are directly linked to Ergenekon, while others are, however, being investigated without any reference to the shadowy organization.
According to indictments, the organization, to prepare a fertile ground for a new coup, launched or planned 15 violent incidents, including but not limited to, the Council of State shootings; hand grenade attacks on the Cumhuriyet daily headquarters; assassination plans for Diyarbakir Mayor Osman Baydmir, the Armenian patriarch, Alevi leaders and so on.
The indictments analyze in detail the fragmental structure of the Ergenekon network. You can have a look at the Gladio investigation in Italy to form an idea about the Ergenekon probe.
On Nov. 22, 1990, the European Parliament called on all European countries to expose the Gladio-linked formations within their borders. The only NATO member country that has failed to do so is Turkey.
Is Ergenekon a political case?
Another claim that we brought before the participants is whether Ergenekon is a political case, as is claimed by some circles. The proponents of this thesis claim that the government was long aware of both the existence and the activities of Ergenekon but that it just introduced the case in 2007 for political purposes. The participants first reminded listeners of what happened to two former public prosecutors (Ferhat Sar?kaya and Sacit Kayasu) when they tried to initiate cases against soldiers and against the 1980 military coup. These two prosecutors were removed from duty and were condemned to a kind of "civil death."
The participants also stated that prosecutors were unable to even interrogate suspects in crimes related to the deep state until the launch of the Ergenekon case. In addition, had the government been aware of the coup plan in 2002, it would not have been able to initiate legal action against it because neither sufficient political power nor an adequate amount of evidence existed for such an action.
Finally, when we asked the participants whether this case was only supported by the government and so-called Islamists, the participants stated that the case had quite a broad support base in Turkey, including liberals, leftists, non-Muslims, devout Muslims, Kurds, Alevis, in short, everyone who comes together in their support for a stronger democracy and rule of law and who have seen themselves as potential victims of the deep state. Actually the various backgrounds and identities of the participants were sufficient proof for their assessment. And participants commented on the government's support for this case: "What could be more ordinary than Prime Minister [Recep Tayyip] Erdog(an's support for a criminal case against an organization that planned to overthrow his government?"
False Flag Terrorism
"False flag terrorism" occurs when elements within a government stage a secret operation whereby government forces pretend to be a targeted enemy while attacking their own forces or people. The attack is then falsely blamed on the enemy in order to justify going to war against that enemy.
False flag operations are covert operations conducted by governments, corporations, or other organizations, which are designed to deceive the public in such a way that the operations appear as if they are being carried out by other entities. The name is derived from the military concept of flying false colors; that is, flying the flag of a country other than one's own. False flag operations are not limited to war and counter-insurgency operations, and have been used in peace-time; for example, during Italy's strategy of tension.
The term comes from the old days of wooden ships, when one ship would hang the flag of its enemy before attacking another ship in its own navy. Because the enemy's flag was hung instead of the flag of the real country of the attacking ship, it was called a "false flag" attack.
There are many examples of false flag attacks through history. For example, it is widely known that the Nazis, in Operation Himmler, faked attacks on their own people and resources which they blamed on the Poles, to justify the invasion of Poland. And it has now been persuasively argued — as shown, for example, in this History Channel video — that Nazis set fire to their own parliament, the Reichstag, and blamed that fire on others. The Reichstag fire was the watershed event which justified Hitler's seizure of power and suspension of liberties.
And in the early 1950s, agents of an Israeli terrorist cell operating in Egypt planted bombs in several buildings, including U.S. diplomatic facilities, then left behind "evidence" implicating the Arabs as the culprits (one of the bombs detonated prematurely, allowing the Egyptians to identify the bombers). Israel's Defense Minister was brought down by the scandal, along with the entire Israeli government. Click here for verification.
The Russian KGB apparently conducted a wave of bombings in Russia in order to justify war against Chechnya and put Vladimir Putin into power (see also this essay and this report). And the Turkish government has been caught bombing its own and blaming it on a rebel group in order to justify a crackdown on that group. Muslim governments also play this game. For example, the well-respected former Indonesian president claimed that their government had a role in the Bali bombings.
This sounds nuts, right? You've never heard of this "false flag terrorism," where a government attacks its own people then blames others in order to justify its goals, right? And you are skeptical of the statements discussed above? Please take a look at these historical quotes:
"If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy." - U.S. President James Madison
"Why of course the people don't want war ... But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship ... Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country." - Hermann Goering, Nazi leader.
What about the U.S.?
Is it logical to assume that, even if other countries have carried out false flag operations (especially horrible regimes such as, say, the Nazis or Stalin), the U.S. has never done so? Well, as documented by the New York Times, Iranians working for the C.I.A. in the 1950's posed as Communists and staged bombings in Iran in order to turn the country against its democratically-elected president (see also this essay).
And, as confirmed by a former Italian Prime Minister, an Italian judge, and the former head of Italian counterintelligence, NATO, with the help of the Pentagon and CIA, carried out terror bombings in Italy and blamed communists, in order to rally people's support for their governments in Europe in their fight against communism. As one participant in this formerly-secret program stated: "You had to attack civilians, people, women, children, innocent people, unknown people far removed from any political game. The reason was quite simple. They were supposed to force these people, the Italian public, to turn to the state to ask for greater security."
Moreover, recently declassified U.S. Government documents show that in the 1960s, the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff signed off on a plan code-named Operation Northwoods to blow up American airplanes (using an elaborate plan involving the switching of airplanes), and also to commit terrorist acts on American soil, and then to blame it on the Cubans in order to justify an invasion of Cuba. The operation was not carried out only because the Kennedy administration refused to implement these Pentagon plans.
For lots more on the astonishing Operation Northwoods, see the ABC news report; the official declassified documents; and watch this interview with James Bamford, the former Washington Investigative Producer for ABC's World News Tonight with Peter Jennings. One quote from the Northwoods documents states: "A 'Remember the Maine' incident could be arranged: We could blow up a US ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba. Casualty lists in US newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation."
What about Al-Qaeda?
You might think Al-Qaeda is different. It is very powerful, organized, and out to get us, right? Consider this Los Angeles Times article, reviewing a BBC documentary entitled The Power of Nightmares, which shows that the threat from Al Qaeda has been vastly overblown (and see this article on who is behind the hype). And former National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski testified to the Senate that the war on terror is "a mythical historical narrative."
And did you know that the FBI had penetrated the cell which carried out the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, but had – at the last minute – cancelled the plan to have its FBI infiltrator substitute fake powder for real explosives, against the infiltrator's strong wishes? See also this TV news report.
Have you heard that the CIA is alleged to have met with Bin Laden two months before 9/11? Did you know that years after 9/11 the FBI first stated that it did not have sufficient evidence to prosecute Bin Laden for 9/11? The agency apparently still does not have any hard evidence linking Bin Laden to the crime (see also this partial confirmation by the Washington Post). And did you see the statement by the CIA commander in charge of the capture that the U.S. let Bin Laden escape from Afghanistan?
Have you heard that the anthrax attacks – which were sent along with notes purportedly written by Islamic terrorists – used a weaponized anthrax strain from the top U.S. bioweapons facility? Indeed, top bioweapons experts have stated that the anthrax attack may have been a CIA test "gone wrong." For more on this, see this article by a former NSA and naval intelligence officer and this statement by a distinguished law professor and bioterror expert (and this one).
It is also interesting that the only Congress-members mailed anthrax letters were key Democrats, and that the attacks occurred one week before passage of the freedom-curtailing PATRIOT Act, which seems to have scared them and the rest of Congress into passing that act without even reading it. And though it may be a coincidence, White House staff began taking the anti-anthrax medicine before the Anthrax attacks occurred.
Even General William Odom, former director of the National Security Agency, said "By any measure the US has long used terrorism. In '78-79 the Senate was trying to pass a law against international terrorism, yet in every version they produced, the lawyers said the US would be in violation" (the audio is here).
Why Does This Matter?
Please read what the following highly respected people are saying:
Former prominent Republican U.S. Congressman and CIA official Bob Barr stated that the U.S. is close to becoming a totalitarian society and that elements in government are using fear to try to bring this about. Republican U.S. congressman Ron Paul stated that the government "is determined to have martial law." He also said a contrived "Gulf of Tonkin-type incident may occur to gain popular support for an attack on Iran." Former National Security Adviser Brzezinski told the Senate that a terrorist act might be carried out in the U.S. and falsely blamed on Iran to justify war against that nation.
The former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration, Paul Craig Roberts, who is called the "Father of Reaganomics" and is a former editor and columnist for the Wall Street Journal, BusinessWeek, and Scripps Howard News Service, has said:
"Ask yourself: Would a government that has lied us into two wars and is working to lie us into an attack on Iran shrink from staging 'terrorist' attacks in order to remove opposition to its agenda? ... If the Bush administration wants to continue its wars in the Middle East and to entrench the 'unitary executive' at home, it will have to conduct some false flag operations that will both frighten and anger the American people and make them accept Bush's declaration of 'national emergency' and the return of the draft. Alternatively, the administration could simply allow any real terrorist plot to proceed without hindrance."
General Tommy Franks stated that if another terrorist attack occurs in the United States "the Constitution will likely be discarded in favor of a military form of government." Daniel Ellsberg, the famous Pentagon Papers whistleblower, said "if there is another terror attack, I believe the president will get what he wants. And what he wants is a new Patriot Act, one that will make the current Patriot Act look like the Bill of Rights."
wtc not a collapse, but a clever demolition (molecular dissociation)
Former UN Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter stated before the Iraq war started that there were no weapons of mass destruction. He is now saying that he would not rule out staged government terror by the U.S. government. And British Parliament Member George Galloway stated that "there is a very real danger" that the American government will stage a false flag terror attack in order to justify war against Iran and to gain complete control domestically.
The abundance of reliable information in this essay suggests that not only has the U.S. in the past conducted false flag operations, but there is a possibility that 9/11 involved some element of this deceit, and a future false flag operation cannot be ruled out. Let us spread this news to all who care so that we might build the critical mass necessary to stop these secret operations and work together for a more caring civil society.
Department of Physics
Physics Department Home Page
The two most important words we know about the physics of 9/11 are: molecular dissociation
Analyses of air samples from the 9/11 WTC (""Ground Zero"") particle plume reveal the unexpected presence of many particles smaller than 1 micron (ie, nanoparticles). Among the smaller GZ particles, the distribution of their sizes clearly indicates that they were caused not by pulverization but by widespread molecular dissociation, which occurs only at energy levels higher than what could result from a collapse or even what can be achieved through the use of conventional weapons technology.
When matter is elevated to temperatures hotter than the surface of the Sun, molecular dissociation results. Molecular Dissociation (MD) is easy to understand once we realize that there are four (4) states of matter: solid, liquid, gas, and plasma. Just as ice has trouble surviving in water or steam, molecules have trouble surviving in plasma, which is highly energetic (ie, extremely hot). When molecules dissociate, they leave behind loose atoms and fragments of molecules. In other words, extremely small particles. In this sense, it is correct to think of molecular dissociation as disintegration.
Disintegration chambers based upon this principle are available; other forms of energy can also break down molecules. When molecular dissociation occurs, covalent molecular bonds are broken, but atomic bonds survive. The resulting particles -- loose component atoms and fragmented molecules -- are far tinier than what occur in any conventional explosive event, including the most violent volcanic eruptions:
Recognizing what happened at Ground Zero is key to understanding it. And vice versa.
There is no known "pulverization" mechanism which can account for so many unnaturally-tiny nanoparticles at Ground Zero. There are also other highly unconventional aspects to the devastation of the 3 WTC skyscrapers at Ground Zero, all of which indicate the release of an enormous amount of excess energy (heat), which has never been accounted for:
So once we confirm evidence of widespread molecular dissociation having occurred at Ground Zero in New York City, we have a very strong indication that only exotic, unconventional weaponry could have released that much extremely -- unimaginably -- high intensity energy which suddenly appeared just as the towers disintegrated from top to bottom. This understanding means we cannot blame the highly unconventional Ground Zero devastation on thermite/thermate/superthermate and "controlled demolition" any more than we can blame it on "jet fuel" or "box cutters".
Particle Size Distribution Confirmed
|"About 80-89% of the PM53 fraction was in the 10- to 53-µm size range, which is too large to use in respiratory toxicology studies, as deposition of particles > 5 µm is minimal in small laboratory animals (Raabe et al. 1988). The amount of the 2.5- to 10-µm fraction was very small (0.04-1.14% of the PM53 fraction, except 3.23% in sample 13) and was therefore not feasible to study. The PM2.5 fraction, however, was present in sufficient amounts (2.29-4.06% of PM53 fraction) to study for potential respiratory health effects."|
Pulverization would not cause that effect. So we have enough data to rule out "pulverization" as the cause of so many incredibly-fine particles within the WTC dust, and to rule in the likelihood of molecular dissociation.