Shayler: Can I tell you something about MI5, certainly is that what people don’t realize, something else I was blowing the whistle on was, in the mid-1990s they had declared Al-Qaeda to be the new flavour of the month after the collapse of Communism. But what they were doing, even though they were saying this was a new terrorist threat, they were letting lots and lots of veterans of things like Afghanistan, and so on, who were what they would think of as Islamic extremists, and actually tens of thousands into the country.Robles: I see, so what can you tell us about Al-Qaeda’s link to the West, to the CIA, to MI6? I know they were …
Now, these people were there to look at what was going on now basically. So it’s like they let all these people in to create the new terrorist threat to the West, basically, and allowed these people to live in Britain, and the CIA has called us Londonistan basically. But I was one of the first people to blow the whistle on that, and again people in the government didn’t take my evidence at the time, and I’m saying to them: “I was going to tell you that in terms of effectively, at the very least turning a blind eye to allowing these people in to create the new terrorist threat, basically, if not obviously actively encouraging it”.
Robles: How is it profitable or beneficial to those in power now in the United States and in the UK to propagate terrorism and continue having this terrorist threat?
Shayler: It’s all part of the mechanism it’s what I saw in MI5 as well, and I wouldn’t say MI5 were backing false flag operations, but what they were doing was giving advice to the other side wherever they could. They would put completely incompetent officers in charge of operations; there were times when evidence wasn’t passed on quickly enough, or they had intelligence, they didn’t react, and at the time my prejudice, I just thought this was like posh people who were stupid and couldn’t do the job properly, but in time, I looked back on it, I realized that this was strategic and deliberately.
So there are a few terrorist bombs going off, that it’s all part of, one, keeping up the fear levels amongst the population, if you keep the population in a state of fear they are more likely to want to be protected. It’s a basic human psychology thing. It’s like you do with anybody. So on one level it’s fear, but also obviously, to keep up their own power, and to keep up their own budgets, if there’s no terrorist attacks going off they can’t, you know, people aren’t going to be budgeting loads of money to the intelligence services.
But I see this whole thing as part of a wider issue, I don’t know how far you go on your program, but I see this as all part of the changing world in 2012, but what we are seeing at the moment in terms of truth movements, in a much greater appreciation of love and spirituality, rather than things like religions and political parties. We have a new spiritual activism now. It’s a very much more individually determined, much quicker, much more nimble, and that’s all part of the new world basically, that we are moving to a new form of consciousness.
Obviously governments and corporate consciousness are behind the curve on that, and what we’ve got with a few people like the Zionists, is they’re trying to stop that awakening. This is why they are poisoning our air, they’re poisoning our food, they’re working us till we die, this is why they’re encroaching the Third World War, is they are trying to do anything they can to control humanity and stop that spiritual awakening.
Robles: Wonderful. Listen, one more question, one more area I’d like to get your comments on and then we’ll have to finish up. You mentioned the fear thing, that’s also right out of Oceania, this endless war and this endless threat, right - right out of 1984?
You talk about terrorism, how those in power need it to propagate fear to stay in power, to keep their budgets up, etc. My big question: what do you think about 9-11? Now the first attack on the World Trade Center, a lot of US officials they were not pleased that only a couple of hundred people died. It wasn’t enough to start a global war on terror. What’s your view on whether that was some sort of an inside job?
Shayler: Yes, well we’ve got recordings of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, of the guy who subsequently gave evidence who was a source, an agent, an asset of the FBI talking about how he gave them real bomb making equipment. Now I know, again from working in Intelligence, the convention is in those circumstances you give them a dud basically, and so he can then put the bomb down, and you’ve got all the evidence to show that they’ve put a bomb, but nothing goes off and no one gets hurt.
So again, it’s extraordinary that the FBI have allowed, or in fact appear to have supplied the explosives for the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. But that as we see is now all part of a pattern, isn’t it? It was the same with the Oklahoma bombing, which was initially blamed on Islamic terrorists, it was only because McVey was caught by accident, in a routine traffic stop, that it was McVey, otherwise they’d still be blaming so-called Islamic terrorists for that attack to this day. So you kind of saw a pattern emerging in 1990s in which they were trying to get this new Islamic threat off the ground basically.
But let’s not forget with these intelligence services, they say they are out to protect us, yes? There are two people they say have been the greatest, or the two organisations or people, they said have been the greatest threats for the last 20 years, they say, are Saddam and Al-Qaeda. That’s their reckoning, not what I’m saying, that’s their reckoning. However, we know from public record that the CIA funded both the Mujahidin and Saddam Hussein. The Mujahidin of course turned into Al-Qaeda.
Robles: Right, right, right!
Shayler: What we have now is a situation, is Western Intelligence Services who are supposed to be protecting us, created what they have admitted are the 2 biggest threats to our security in the last 20 years. And you won’t hear anything about that in Parliament or Congress.
Robles: Right, and that’s why they didn’t go after Osama Bin Laden. I mean, he used to be an agent Tom Osman, I’m sure you’ve heard about that?
Shayler: Yes, I know, I’ve seen all this stuff as well. Obviously the Bin Laden family were very closely involved in things like the Carlyle Group as well, and again we live in so, the problem with the initial War on Terror is they cast it a bit like a Bond film, didn’t they: Osama Bin Laden in his lair in Tora Bora, he’s got a load of guys running around in all these jump suits. If we take him out, then we end the war.
They did take him, but that was the problem then, they couldn’t then end the war because it was all about a bigger War on Terror wasn’t it, so that’s a lie. Bin Laden wasn’t dead, you’ve then got a very dodgy videos of him for about 10 years until he is finally supposed to be killed in Pakistan. Again, none of that holds up at all if you bother to study it.
It now appears that some of the Navy Seals involved in that have met mysterious deaths, as happens in all these circumstances. If you know too much then, the man who knows too much gets killed and, as I say, I’m only here because someone up there likes me basically.
Robles: I see. Listen, now, the last thing, my view on 9-11was that it was the most precision controlled demolition in the history of mankind, the way those building were taken down. Who do you think …?
Shayler: No, I agree, I figure out. That’s because I think it was done with some kind of directed energy weapon, that’s why it was so precise. It doesn’t show the hallmarks of a normal controlled demolition: the dust is very very fine that comes off it, the way the floors come down, the way that actually bits of masonry just dissolve in the air, if you slow down the footage. So, again, much as I’d like these to be conventional controlled demolitions, the evidence doesn’t support that. They clearly used some advance technology to bring those buildings down.
Robles: Who do you think was behind it?
Shayler: It’s hard to say with all of these things, once you get behind the scenes, because it’s a funny old game, because once you start doing that obviously they will blame each other. They will read false trails of evidence to you. You might see with a very convenient trail of evidence in terms of banking, for example, and banking is germane to all of this, that leads to the Rothschilds. Now all that evidence seems to check out, it’s just very funny how it all suddenly appeared at one point on the Internet, obviously very good evidence pointing to the Rothschild family, almost like somebody had laid it there for us to follow.
Now with other organisations like, that you never get to hear on, I mean people describe Bilderberg, that just makes me laugh. I mean Bilderberg is so low down the pecking order it’s frightening, I mean I could virtually get into Bilderberg. You know what you ought to look at is Le Cercle, things like that, they’re it’s much more secretive, much more clandestine, much more dangerous sounding, let’s get some knowledge of these people on the bulletin boards.
And the other one is the Sovereign Military Order of The Knights of Saint John of Jerusalem Rhodes and Malta. People think the smallest principality in the world is The Vatican City, it’s not, it is a courtyard in Malta, owned by this ancient secret society basically, and because they own this courtyard, they have observer status at the UN basically. Now these are the people I think who are running the world in one way or another. Now I can’t pin anything on these people but all I know is that they seem to be very secretive and seem to have a lot of influence.
I think that what we are seeing on the Bulletin boards and people on forums and stuff like that is just all controlled, even the alternative stuff we all see the same names over and over again. So it’s very hard to know what’s going on but behind the scenes, certainly we know it is going on, certainly we know that people like the Rothschilds, the Rockefellers in terms of families are involved, and then we know about these other weird organisations as well. What I just don’t understand at the moment is how anybody can actually believe the official story of 9-11, and actually believe the government is trying to help them.
You are listening to an interview in progress with David Shayler, a former MI5 officer and a whistle blower in the UK



Read more: