DisInfoWars with Tom Secker- 9/11 and Gladio B

From triple agents training terrorists in the mountains of Turkey to the CIA cable that was never sent, this episode examines the context around 9/11 to identify several people and part of the story of how the 9/11 attacks were a Gladio operation. I focus in on two of the supposed hijackers - Nawaf Al Hazmi and Khalid Al Mihdhar - and their connections to intelligence assets Luai Sakra and Anwar Al Awlaki, and how the CIA's failure to notify the FBI about them is a strong indication that information was being compartmentalized to enable and protect this black operation.

I also touch on the two sources for the idea that the supposed 9/11 hijackers used box cutters to help take over the planes - phone calls from Barbara Olson to her husband, then Solicitor General Ted Olson, and another triple agent in the form of Ali Mohamed. I round off by looking at the CIA's man on the 9/11 Commission, Michael Hurley, and how his career all but confirms his status as a Gladio B operative.

Listen to the Preview Clip Here


Listen to the full episode here (BFP Subscribers Only):

FB Like

Share This

This site depends….

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by SUBSCRIBING, and by ordering our EXCLUSIVE BFP DVDs.


  1. Arnar Steinsson says:

    Excellent work Tom, thanks.

  2. Another thought provoking episode. The box cutter story has always seemed a bit far fetched, so this muslim plot involved several people smuggling knifes onto planes, then somehow taking over, then figuring out how to direct the planes in the right direction, its a badly thought out plan, there’s too many things that could go wrong. Whereas, remotely taking over planes, starve the people of oxygen, land in secret base, fire missiles disguised as planes etc, or something like that seems so much more possible. But who ultimately pulled the strings? It may go higher than we realise.

    • One plane was definitely diverted to Cleveland. Research that one up, with people being told to go into a building that didn’t make sense for them to go and such, my memory is rusty on that one. But it’s definitely a real event with people who were there describing events, they weren’t on the planes though.

      I’ll look it up when it’s not so late.

  3. The FBI UBLU was told about al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar in late August. Dina Corsi and Rod Middleton acted just like Alec Station members and continued to obstruct the investigation. It should be noted that Wilshire was posted at the FBI during this time and seemed to be involved in the FBI side obstruction. FBI agents like Mark Rossini and Ali Soufan do not mention what happened at the FBI UBLU. They always limit their discussion to the CIA conduct. Did some low level FBI personnel risk jail time because Wilshire said it would be cool to obstruct the investigation? No way. FBI bigshots probably told them to back off and they did.

    The question for me is about the what the (non Gladio) intelligence and government people really believe. Are they hard core authoritarians who simply do not question authority even when there are obvious indications of corruption? Do they dream of living in a fascist state of torture, drones and surveillance? Or is the fascist state an outcome they are willing to live with if it means collecting large WoT paychecks?

    • albatross0612 says:

      Tom, are there any MI6 whistelblowers or agnts that have spoken out that tie into this or anything relevent from England that those of us in the US might not be aware of? Thanks for the great show.

      • candideschmyles says:

        There is MI5 whistleblower Annie Machine. She has a few videos on YouTube.

        • candideschmyles says:

          Machon, sorry about autocorrect.

          • I can’t think of any British whistleblowers worth a damn. Annie Machon/David Shayler are full of nonsense (and the occasional truth).

            You will find that there are a lot more whistleblowers in the US than over here. For one thing, there’s a lot more people employed by the government because it is a larger country. For another, your intelligence services are a bit more public than ours. In some ways a lot more public.

          • Tom,

            How about that Immigration/Customs agent who blew the whistle on ‘Baybasin’ case (Gladio A operative)? I know he was silenced and the case went away but …

          • Sure, there have been some proper whistleblowers in the UK but none that got a lot of attention or coverage.

            Let me be more specific – I cannot think of a high-profile British whistleblower who is worth a damn. The ones who genuinely blow the whistle are silenced or ignored. People like Shayler are just more Snowdens, people who are so obviously still working for the intelligence agencies that they are barely worth acknowledging. Or you get people like David Kelly, who blow the whistle then end up ‘committing suicide’ in extremely unusual circumstances.

            I don’t mean to sound defeatist, but they’ve got it so well wrapped up over here that people like Tony Farrell get taken seriously (at least by the alt media crowd). We’re so starved of genuine whistleblowers than even the world’s most obvious fakes get put up on a pedestal. In fact, that’s not defeatist at all, it’s just the realisation that even genuine whistleblowers can only do so much.

          • CuChulainn says:

            isn’t it the definition of a genuine whistleblower not to get a lot of attention or coverage?
            this is not happenstance but the nature of the society of the spectacle, where the trivial is valorized and everything of real significance is hidden from view

          • I think whether what they are saying is true and important is the measure of a genuine whistleblower, but I know what you mean.

            What pisses me off is that I expect the mainstream to fall into the society of the spectacle, after all they are concerned with a mass audience for advertising revenue, blah blah. But when the alt media does the exact same thing, and just feeds off the establishment in the hope of sharing a bit of the spotlight, then I find it very frustrating. The way the Snowden operation was seen by 95% of the alt media as a validation of everything we’d been saying, like we somehow made this happen, was so childlike and naive. 2013 was not a good year for the alt media…

          • CuChulainn says:

            the alt media are not a repudiation but an alternate version of the spectacle.

    • All classified activities operate with compartmentalized information that prevents other coworkers in the organizations from knowing what else is going on. And like you said, once you’re involved in these agencies for enough time the idea of being singled out or losing your career weighs heavily. Especially if hard data vindicating your views is hard to come by.

      The whole snowed-in job was certainty a ruse but for what end? To warn other potentialwhistleblowers and to promote good encryption? If he’s so clearly an disinfo agent practicing limited hang out, does that mean he’s actually stuck in Russia?

      Does it mean there’s a chance the Russian government is working with us? Why wouldn’t they cut him loose once they realized he wasn’t going to provide them with special information?

  4. Ronald Orovitz says:

    I did not know that Awlaki himself was writing about being approached by the CIA. There were also also reports (in FOX News of all places) about his “dining at the Pentagon” and such. It seems his cover was unraveling and this is why he had to go, the Bill of Rights be damned.

    • There are documents showing Awlaki under long term FBI surveillance, including when he went to the Pentagon. And yes, I think they had bigger plans for him but the cover story was falling apart so they killed him. It’s the only way his story makes sense to me.

  5. Gary Binmore says:

    Good show, Tom
    Where does one start with this subject?

    9/11 only makes sense as a Gladio B op, but even then it doesn’t make much sense – how could the CIA/NATO etc mess it up so badly? There’s hardly a single element of the op that can with any plausibility be blamed on Islamist terrorists.

    Maybe some of the chiefs realized the myth they were trying to craft around a blatant false flag was so implausible they stuffed in as many contradictions and confusing details as possible – like the meme of the CIA withholding info from the FBI – Tenet clearly knew everything and his organization has never exactly been known for ruthlessly rooting out crime. The idea that al Hazmi and al Mihdhar were sneaked into the US because the FBI didn’t know about them is also ridiculous, given that as you said their neighbour Shaikh was an FBI asset.

    These details are in keeping with the “unprecedented incompetence” “finding” of the 9/11 commission. The powers that be had to fall back that far because no other explanation was plausible (apart from the obvious) and there was no other way to create any air of innocence. So many other parts of the story seem contrived – like Able Danger – destroying the data then burning Shaffer’s book.

    I’d better stop at that. I doubt that any other Gladio op had half as much witting disinfo. Whichever way you look at it, they went too far yet still they got away with it.

    • Gary et al, check out this piece from Valentine published in CounterPunch from November of 2001.


      What I particularly like about Doug’s work is that he’s able to structurally break down 9/11 and the tools of terror without getting bogged down in the details of the crime itself (though he clearly indicates that he smells a rat). I think he’s able to do that because 9/11 was but a spectacular extension of forms familiar to him and a few others who have studied the uses and tools of terror. When one is not in ‘shock and awe’ (like I certainly was then), then one can analyze and think. Like many here I had to figure it out working backwards by first understanding clearly that 9/11 was a constructed, fraudulent event. Tom’s piece clearly adds to that understanding.

      • Being 5 hours away up north, but albeit in another country. I felt pretty terrorized during the morning, watching CNN (basic cable comes with the CNN American feed, in Canada, for some reason). Then it turned into incredulity when this nobody of a dweeb who’s actually some major spook, L.Paul Bremer said when the towers still standind that that this the job of Al-Quaeda and that that whoever did this needed to suffer the most extreme form of reprisal possible. Then when the towers up to where the “planes” (aluminum doesn’t pierce steel thick like the front of a tank, nevermind the speed, and also the physical impossibility (it’s funny to watch pilotsfor911truth use that top of the line plane simulator all fail at hitting the north tower the way its said to have happened, most of the time the plane would destroy itself losing wings and pieces from the speed said the “planes” said to be going at, out of a bunch of them, only 1 struck the north tower, after 20 tries). No way these retards like Hanjour who got angry at his teacher pilot when he spoke french to him (he’s supposed to be a french citizen) and couldn’t answer and also wasnt even able to fly the plane most of the time he’s been on a practice flight, which is a very low number of times. I wonder if Tom will ever touch how the “al-queda” guys living in the US all had Israeli neighbors/handlers, well, all, I know a lot of them did. I’m thankful the wonderful piece of investigative journalism Carl Cameron did for Fox News on that Israeli spy ring in october 2001, I think only the first segment or 2 were broadcasted, but all 4 were available to download from hidden url’s of course on FOX News’ site.And it was a bit before FOX turned into the insanity cognitive dissonance box, that mostly happened when the push for attacking Iraq (seemingly out of nowhere to anyone with a brain). In the 90’s, I hear they were promoting the “right wing” thing but they didn’t employ shrill batshit insane people as regular commentators on these “debates” they had. CNN became as horrible around when Obama was in.

        Anyways, I’m piling up the subjects. Thanks for this Tom, you informed me about the definitive trauma and kind of message to the generation of people coming into adulthood when this disaster now used for any unconstitutional laws and crazy decisions made at the highest levels, not counting the ridiculous threat levels thing going red every 2 years at ekectuib tune,,

        • I fell asleep here, not kidding. I meant every 2 years when it was election season. I know they got rid of the ridiculous cooking oven terrorism colour threat thing, as a “sign they were logical unlike Bush”. Something Obama with the 2 goddamn houses could have rocked the house so bad some of the republican mastodons like Christie would all have had simultaneous strokes and heart attacks. But no, this obsession with reaching to the other side…your opponents didn’t reach to you guys at all….Anyways, not like it matters anyway, the 2010 elections with the tea parties insane asylum getting in more and more, I stopped thinking, the system could be reset to back when JFK got in. (yeah, epic delusion, but its what so much people hoped for, even foreigners…I’d go as far as to say especially foreigners.

    • Gary Binmore says:

      I meant Louis Freeh in my first reply, not Tenet. Obviously Tenet knew all about 9/11, but I was suggesting that Freeh and hence the rest of the top brass of the FBI did too. Under Freeh, the FBI got away with OKC 95, TWA 800 and the aftermath of WTC 93.

      The idea that the CIA was withholding info from the FBI because it feared they would spill the beans I find far-fetched – as much as the organizations might hate each other they know too much about each other to disclose secrets like that. Freeh’s leaving in June 2001 wouldn’t have changed the culture of the place – not after Freeh had molded it in his image – and if any whistleblowers did come forward they wouldn’t have been listened to anyway.

      Yes, PeterM the Valentine piece is very good, especially for 2 months after the event – “The “new times” means a society in which the organizing principle is terror.”

      • I know what you mean, Gary, but I think it’s important to acknowledge that there are different levels and different groups within any large organization like the FBI (or the CIA for that matter). A case like Coleen Rowley’s makes that clear: some FBI agents are trying seriously to investigate; some higher-ups are trying to shut them down.

        So it’s too broad a brush to say “the CIA was withholding information from the FBI”. It might make better sense to say a certain group (seemingly led by Tom Wilshere and/or Blee) at CIA was withholding information from some FBI agents who were actually trying to do their jobs.

        Kevin Fenton’s book (Disconnecting the Dots) goes into all the specifics in some detail and paints a pretty compelling picture. Highly recommended if you haven’t checked it out yet.

        • Gary Binmore says:

          Agreed, John, none of these organizations are monolithic, and there might have been some CIA men terrified of some honest FBI agents discovering the truth, but I doubt that it would it would have bothered the higher ups very much. They know how to deal with Colleen Rowleys – ignore them, discredit them with distortions and lies, blackban journalists who talk to them and, if all that fails, anybody can have an unfortunate accident.
          Yes, I’ve added Disconnecting the Dots to my next to buy basket.

          • Sure, they could have shared the information and then made sure the investigation got squashed, but that wouldn’t have been terribly clever. The best way to squash an investigation is before it starts, so why complicate things? Fenton provides good evidence that information about Al Hazmi and Al Midhar was deliberately withheld by the CIA from inquiring FBI minds. There’s a pattern of things-the-CIA-definitely-knew and questions-the-FBI-agents-got-misleading-answers-to that strongly suggests that deliberate withholding is way more likely than, say, repeated forgetting-to-mentions or didn’t-think-it-was-importants.

  6. Nice one Tom, this was superb. You did an excellent job showing the relationship between these events and painting a picture of how they fit into the larger continuum of Gladio/Gladio B operations. This is the kind of podcast which would serve as a great primer for people who want to better understand the relationship between 9/11 and other false flag operations. It’s comprehensive, yet accessible. I’m going to bookmark it.

  7. candideschmyles says:

    I agree. I think you brought some pieces of the jigsaw of the people involved into a coherrant alignment. They may be bit players in the whole scheme of things and those alive never face prosecution but there is a human need for real history to be recorded.

  8. saulman says:

    Thanks Tom., great work. This topic is so vast and complex, it’s great to hear fresh information, views and analysis to ponder. Just trying to make sense of it all is such a tall order in itself, so podcasts such as this make for great listening. Cheers.

  9. jackdonovan says:

    We should do better than simply throw out the official story.

  10. One of the members at James Corbett’s site posted a link to a video: Revealed; The Men Who Own and Run the U S Government, which probably does the best job of any documentary I’ve seen of explaining the nature of power as we know it today, starting roughly with the creation of the Federal Reserve, through to the various false flag attacks used to justify wars, from the sinking of the Lusitania, to the attack on Pearl Harbor, to the Gulf of Tonkin incident, (maybe one or two others I’m forgetting), through to 9/11. I think the way it’s presented is along the lines of what Tom’s been stressing about: avoiding the specifics on 9/11 and call it out for what it was: another false flag attack to justify war.

    I’m still not signing off on the idea that getting people to wrap their heads around the fact that our government is willing to attack itself; it’s citizens, as I think the primary purpose of doing so isn’t to convince people about the extent that what happened was an inside job, but simply the fact that it was, so that the next time something happens people who are skeptical will be less likely to fall for the specific “responses” or “solutions” the government and the media try to sell. 9/11 validated the idea that Al Qaeda posed an existential threat to our “national security” in the mind of the public. The truth matters because it holds the potential to downgrade the market value of the “official” narratives and, at best, give people pause before they pull out their wallet to buy into the BS.

    That said, as I mentioned I think what Tom did in this podcast was very valuable in presenting 9/11 as part of a continuum and not just some sort of isolated event. The documentary I posted the link for does this in a similar way, but with an emphasis on the role of finance. We need as many tools as possible to pull back the curtain and expose the way the system works and I think this documentary is a good complementary supplement to the angle I feel Tom was going for in this podcast.

    • Gary Binmore says:

      The 9/11 “truth movement” succeeded if a majority of people are sceptical about the next major false flag they try. The idea that anybody in the whole despicable crew was going to get hauled into court was pure fantasy.

      I might be wrong, but I doubt that they’ll try something that dramatic and amateurish on friendly soil again. Future events will be more of the white collar Lehman Brothers-moment type from September 2008 – Look world credit is about to freeze, the world economy is about to crash, if we don’t shovel trillions ASAP to Big Finance we’ll soon be living in caves! More abstract and tech-based. No doubt, blood and guts type false flags will continue in nations populated by subhumans in the Anglo-American world view.

      • Garry, I totally agree with you on all points. I suspect there’s going to be a major “cyber terror” attack, most likely with financial implications: i.e. “I’m sorry we don’t have your money sir, a Chinese hacker group working on behalf of a Russian separatist cell, based in Chechnya has infiltrated our banking system and the money’s gone! Until this is resolved, we’ve issued iLiberty-Coin, which uses fingerprint technology to keep your assets secure. Rest assured, it will function just like regular money, but we’re going to have to implement significant devaluation to the currency to compensate for the cost of creating the digital infrastructure. This will only be for a limited time though and corporations and small businesses will be eligible for a special discounted rate if they adopt the new technology within the fiscal year.”

        I can only coldly laugh at that, as it doesn’t seem like a stretch. Still, I’ll pose the same question that I did over at James’ website: Given the fact that we know something of this nature is in the works, is there anything we can learn by looking at how 9/11 was exploited and see whether there are failures and missteps that we took then now that we’ve had time to reflect on that? Particularly taking into consideration the fact that there are more people who are “awake” about the modus operandi that accompanies these events. Is there a discussion we can have beforehand which will lead to a more decisive response? Are there lessons we can learn from what’s been happening in Greece?

        I don’t have any answers to these questions at the moment, but I think they’re worth throwing out there.

    • Ribbit-Mark says:

      One of the members at James Corbett’s site posted a link to a video: Revealed; The Men Who Own and Run the U S Government, which probably does the best job of any documentary I’ve seen of explaining the nature of power as we know it today, starting roughly with the creation of the Federal Reserve, through to the various false flag attacks used to justify wars, from the sinking of the Lusitania, to the attack on Pearl Harbor, to the Gulf of Tonkin incident, (maybe one or two others I’m forgetting), through to 9/11.

      Great video Benny.
      I just finished watching an even more compelling one which may be of interest to others:
      JFK to 911 Everything Is A Rich Man’s Trick
      Get out the popcorn, it’s a long one. 🙂

  11. Well, some of the 19 highjackers, at least 3 were pilots for Saudi Arabia’s nationalized airline who were very much alive. Another guy, not sure if he was a pilot, was also falsely accused, said he had his passport stolen and brought the US to court to have his name removed from the list.

    Pretty sure he failed even if he was there in the flesh saying that the list was random BS (for the most part).

  12. It is hard to believe a parody of this thing has not been created. “OUR PLANE HAS BEEN HIJAKCED BY SMALL ARABS WITH BOX CUTTERS!” Will Samuel L. Jackson save the day or no? Oh, the drama!

  13. Bamford wrote another article about the NSA’s Yemen hub lies in regard to al-Mihdhar’s calls.


    I’m not sure why he presents NSA withholding out of context. When CIA, FBI, NSA and DIA all have a pattern of obstruction in regard to al-Mihdhar it’s safe to safe something weird was going on. What is really sad about this story is the way high level officials brazenly tell lies about a mass murder and the media lets them.

  14. Well…May I ask a ?..Tom..
    Perhaps it is silly…!
    But who is Kevin Fulton..!
    And….hmmm..MI5 ‘helped IRA buy bomb parts in US’…?
    ( Fulton claims this technology was used in the Troubles and forms the basis for insurgent bombs in Iraq ).
    Kind Regards

    • Did I say Kevin Fulton? If so then I’m sorry, I meant Kevin Fenton.

      Though, oddly, I mention Kevin Fulton in the next episode, which should be out in the next day or two. Sneak preview: I think he’s full of shit.

  15. What’s the intro music?

Speak Your Mind