Exclusive : 9/11 was carried out by elements in the American government on behalf of the New World Order.

Click banner for more info

The western mass media and the security services are happy to allow left-wing parties, activists and even subversive left-wing groups to flourish, because they are in fact part of the system. The system is controlled by bankers and the what might be labeled the New World Order and when someone actually threatens their system, one largely based on usury that person needs to be quickly shut up or even assassinated.

This was stated by Mr. David Shayler, a former MI5 officer, in a recent interview.

Hello this is John Robles, I'm speaking with Mr. David Shayler, a former MI5 officer turned whistleblower and truth campaigner. This is part three of an interview in progress. Y

Robles: What do you think about the FBI? They recently came out with a statement, or the Director of the FBI had said that he was … theyare afraid, and I know this is an issue in the UK as well, of British subjects or citizens going to Syria, probably mostly Muslims, to fight Bashar al-Assad and then returning home as terrorists. Is this a real threat; is this fabricated?

Shayler:It is hard to tell. But generally speaking, from my knowledge of how people work, people who go and join resistance forces are not the kind of people who carry out terrorism basically. So, if they are going to a legitimate theatre ofwar,and they are protecting people from occupying forces, and again, they are doing God’s work and the law is on their side. And those kind of people, generally, aren’t the same kind of people who would let offan indiscriminate terrorist bomb.

In fact, the only people it seems who set off indiscriminate terrorist bombs or target civilians are people who carry out false-flag operations, as we’ve seen with 9/11 and 7/7, but also with Operation Gladios, where we had a bomb going off at a railway station and civilians being gunneddown at a supermarket in Belgium.

So you see,so again, there is more sophistication in these things. We can talk about this threat from those guys, but that is all just a smoke screen, it it’s all a smoke screen to get us stopped from just looking at the fact that actually 9/11 was carried out by elements in the American Government on behalf of the New World Order, in the same way that 7/7 was orchestrated in Europe as well.

And all again, to distract from the divisions of wealth and poverty that were going on at the time. You know, while all those wars were going on we were distracted. The Blair Government in the UK trebled the wealth of billionaires. To be fair we are seeing the biggest divisions of wealth and poverty that forever and againhad existed in human history.

You've got to look at all this stuff and it is all a distraction, and all the stuff that goes on the main-stream, all these people who come on from these so-called defense experts and so on, they are just in the pay of the intelligence services, they are just out there to put out propaganda, and it is in the interests of these private security services to put these messages out there, and in principle because that is how they make their money. It is not rocket science, so you are not going to get these objective voices coming from them, you are going to get a very slanted view.

Robles: So, you said that you see a change on the narrative of 9/11 where Saudis are going to be blamed, right?

Shayler:That is being floated on the Internet at the moment.That’s what they are doing, as you say the tactic first - they don’t splash straight away with the mainstream, they will float something around the Internet first, to see how it bites. But also, it warns those people that they could expose this in the mainstream any moment.

They used to use the same tactics with Private Eye magazine in Britain. These people using Private Eye magazine -it’s a small circulation magazine read by journalists and politicos - you'd see something in that for sometimes nearly a year, and then suddenly it’ll break into the mainstream. And you’d always wonder why it was thissmall magazine for years and then suddenly in the mainstream. And now I know, in most of those cases, that person will have not complied with them; that person would probably be their own man and as a result of that, they’ve actually exposed him; they’vedisabled him.

Robles: I see. I'm kind of concerned with that myself, because, I don't know if you've followed my work, but I've done quite a lot on 9/11 interviews and written my own articles and stuff. And this Saudi connection first became known to me, in the current light that it is known,where they are supporting Al Qaeda and there is the Israeli Mossad element and everything. This was known to me, what about a year ago I suppose, and is there any chance this is all disinformation as well?

Shayler:Well, again, I think it is, because what they did prior to 9/11 was they just fedinloads of intelligence reports indicating these attacks were going to happen, but never with any kind of specific information that would allow you to take reasonable action to stop those attacks. But what they also did was leave a paper trail, looking like the intelligence services were ineffective in stopping this, whenin fact there was never any information that the intelligence services had, and that again is, you know, if there had been real intelligence,so why weren't they able to use these agents to get more specific information?

So, as I say, they’re just going around the world, they’refeeding false intelligence into intelligence services. You know, because they work in their own little knowledge group, then faithfully report this to government, and weof course don't know what is going on behind the scenes. We see glimpses of that when we get the Iraq weapons of mass destruction dossier and all the current intelligence in that turned out to be what - a British, you have a category one targetfor all the current intelligence know about weapons of mass destruction.

We solved everything again with Syria where it emerged again, we have to … you only had because we were again about to go to war, so they released summaries of intelligence and again that all turned out to be nonsense.  I just wanted to say that these people protect you, but every time they are actually publically scrutinized they are not just slightly wrong, they are catastrophically wrong.

Robles: Yeah, but everything you are talking about there, I mean, I think things have gotten a littledifferent lately, in the half a year or so. I mean, the events you are talking about, the yellowcake and all that. That stuff was all pretty much revealed to be false pretty quickly. I’m worried that now the truth is having a harder time going out, possibly, and would you agree with that? Do you think they’ve managed to stifle the truth on the Internet at all?

Shayler:Well only in the mainstream, that’s the point, this is why we have to have leaks in our intelligence because it never gets scrutinized anywhere, don’t they? It’s like when that whole Syria thing was happening – to me I was talking to activists, people who work on UK projects - and one guy said, he said:‘no one believes the Syrian Government is behind these chemical attacks’. I said:‘no, no one we talk to around here does, but everybody in the mainstream believes it.’

It is like there is this division going on on the planet at the moment – the nonsense that goes on on the mainstream and the truth, which you can get at by using discernment on the Internet.

Now they really see again how the society can maintain, and it’s just entirely built on falsehood. And of course we know that that ties in with the law it’s built on. Legality is not reality -legality is all about the legal fiction. And that is the system of law they’re operating, so this thing is again false accounting systems, double entry bookkeeping.They are not actually … nothing is real about that system atall, it is not built on anything. It’s not built on … you know, money is not built on gold. The whole thing is just one shimmering illusion, one house of cards, about to collapse from its own internal contradictions really.

Robles: I see. So, would you say that the 9/11Saudi connection is real in the end? Regarding 9/11 again, what is your opinion about who was actually behind it? Do you think it was really the Saudi-Bush, New World Order, neoconservative people or …?

Shayler:I think that obviously again there may have been elements of the Saudi Government behindit, in the same way that obviously elements of the American Government were behind it. But those people ultimately do not … I wouldn’t think would be answerable to the regime. I mean, even if you are selling oil at 10 dollars a barrel to the US, you are not going to annoy the biggest military machine on the planet by committing mass murder in broad daylight. It just doesn’t make any sense for any of those regimes to do that.

The only people that 9/11 makes sense for is the war machine. And we know a year before 9/11 the Project for the New American Century was saying they needed their cataclysmic and catastrophic event like a new Pearl Harbor and then 9/11 happens. So, I don’t genuinely believe the actual official Saudi Arabian regime was behind 9/11 in anyway.

But of course whatwe’ve got to bear in mind is the way that things are organized in terms of the intelligence services– compartmentalization and the need to know. There may be people now in the US, in the military for example, or somewhere else like research and development, that worked on things that were used in 9/11, but to this day they have no idea that they were complicit in those attacks, because the small element of work they did, they didn’t realize that was how they were going to be used necessarily.

So, yeah you see, with all this stuff you’ve got to be very careful and that is one thing people misunderstand about the nature of conspiracy. They assume that everybody in the conspiracy knew of it, but it doesn’t work like that. It works on a need to know basis and people only know their little compartmentalized bit.

Robles: I see. Do you think - now I talked to Wayne Madsen not long ago - I don’t know if you had a chance to read his interview or listen to him? And he was talking about a pilot that was writing a book, he’s written several books on 9/11. And he was going to write about this graveyard in Arizona in the United States, and, apparently they arranged his…are you familiar with that case, or …?

Shayler:And I’m not, no, no.

Robles: … with what I’m talking about. The reason I’m asking, regarding for example, 9/11… the Kennedy assassination apparently, I think the count was about over 6000 people were killed who may have seen or heard or been somewhere, known something. How long do you think they are going to keep going after people who might know something about 9/11? Is there any end to this, or …?

Shayler:Well not really, no. That’s the point is that while you’re in Rome ... while that remains secret – well 9/11 hasn’t been out to a large audience – or notinto the mainstream, they can maintain their power. But if that does start to come out, anybody who is doing that or is behind that, they are going to come down like a ton of bricks. And as I say, I saw it myself, you know you get on the wrong side of them and they will literally kill you, rather than allow you to have your say, and if it is something that genuinely will undermine their power.

They are very happy to allow mainstream politics and left-wing parties and activists, and even what would be considered, supposed to be subversive left-wing groups to essentially flourish, because they really are part of the paradigm, part of the system. When people are genuinely coming out with a message that could undermine their system, more like what I say about not paying your mortgage by using the law to say you don’t have to engage in any relationship or contract that is based on usury. That threatens their whole system, and it’s so simple and so peaceful, and so speaking a language they understand. So they are not going to let me go on BBC 1 in this country and start telling ten million viewers that, are they?

Robles: No, I’m sure they are not. Governments, secret services – they never forget this stuff, do they, in your opinion?

Shayler: No, well these people they never forget, they never forget. And as I say they will only be happy when people are either dead or they’ve given up the ghost, or given up the fight basically. That’s what they … that’s the thing they want. So, if you constantly keep protesting out in a meaningful way, in an effective way, not in just going through the motions. You know, you keep getting, getting under their skin, and that works you know.

And listen, I’ve always said that you’ve got to essentially take the attack to them. These people are not particularly clever or bright, or anything else, they’ve just got a lot of secret knowledge and influence in key places. But all that influence and knowledge is all based upon the … on one big governments and big banks, because if we start to undermine that foundation, we start to undermine the whole fabric of the surveillance state.

And that is the only way it will happen, because you can’t reason these people. Once you have security, and big security, there is always a need for more security. And if there is nota need for more security, like when defense spending went down in the late1990s– they will invent another reason for you to spend defense money. It is effectively welfare for the rich, it really is.

So, as I say, the only way to really relate to these systems is to completely change the nature of the way we are governed. No political party is going to change that. People in this country are looking at the UK Independence Party, but once they get into power, they’ll be just the same because they are essentially puppets of the bankers. They are essentially working through the official receiver or the administrator of the bankrupt entity United Kingdom Limited.

And so they have to obey what official receiver says, and therefore policies which work in the interest of banks will be funded, policies that don’t work in the interest of banks won’t. And there again, it’s not rocket science to see what is really going on, you’ve just got to do your research.

Robles: So, David, so how is your life going, I mean personally? Have they backed off on you at all, or?

Shayler:I’m still totally broke basically, as ever, and trying to make ends meet, and keep my head above water. I have been trying to get my books out there. It’s very … hopefully I’ll be getting, I’ve got some interest from an online publisher. So, Spies, Lies, and Whistleblowers will be republished online along with my research into the Law, and also some other stuff.

Robles: Can you tell us about your books? How many books have you written?

Shayler:Well, essentially it’s the … it’s Spies, Lies, and Whistleblowers, I wrote but it was published under Annie Machon’s name. It’s the three parts of The Third and Final Testament, part of which is my novel, which is a novel about a journey to a spiritual redemption.

Robles: What’s it called? Here is your chance to plug it, if you want. I’m interested.

Shayler:Well a lot of that is in … it is the third part of The Third and Final Testament, but it also called The Organization.

Robles: The Organization.

Shayler:It’s had coverage in the media before. If you put in “David Shayler The Organization” you’ll see there’s excerpts on the Guardian’s website. And there’s been coverage of it in the local media in Middleborough, and in the Observer newspaper. So, this book has been covered quite a bit, but it’s never found a publisher, and again you wonder why a novel… I mean even if it’s a load of rubbish written by an ex-intelligence officer,it would sell. It’s never been published, and again, that’s my evidence that I’m blacklisted. But as I say I’m trying to get that out through an online publisher now and make a bit of money from it, so I can make ends meet.

But, at the same time, I’ve been writing to people like the High Sheriffs in the UK. People tend to think these High Sheriffs of each county are ceremonial titles. But these people are, they have a responsibility for the enforcement of Common Law. And so, I’ve just been sending my research into the Law to them, pointing out that they delegate law enforcement to a Chief Constable of a constabulary in a county. So, the High Sheriff who is responsible for Common Law, comes above it with him going on.

So, this is opening a, hopefully, some kind of relationship in which we can point out to people who are supposed to be enforcing law, what their duties are and how they’ve got to stop the enforcement of legislation, which isitselfper se unlawful.

This is John Robles, you were listening to part 3 of an interview with David Shayler, a former MI5 officer, a truth campaigner and a whistleblower and truth campaigner. Thank you very much for listening. You can find the rest of this interview on our website in the near future at voiceofrussia.com