Christopher Bollyn on KRXA on 9-11

Christopher Bollyn

Christopher Bollyn

On September 11, 2013, I was a guest on the Michelle Jackson show on KRXA (540 AM) in the Carmel Valley/Monterey Bay area of central California.  The show aired at 3 p.m. and I was on for the first 20 minutes, which meant that I had to be quick and concise with my responses.

The 18-minute archived interview can be heard here:

microphonenewwww.themichellejacksonshow.com/2013/09/christopher-bollyn-author-of-surviving.html

Michelle had not heard that the story of the 4,000 Israelis who should have been at the World Trade Center had originated with the Jerusalem Post and that the story was based on the number of calls made to the Israeli foreign ministry by concerned relatives.  I tried to clarify that point with her at the beginning of the interview.

IN AN ATTEMPT TO SMEAR BOLLYN CNN intentionally lied to Wilton Sexer, who lost his son on 9-11, saying that 4,000 “Jews” had been warned to stay away from work. The actual report was that 4,000 Israelis were thought to have been at the World Trade Center on 9-11. The report came from the Jerusalem Post Online and was based on information from the Israeli foreign ministry. The evidence of Israelis being forewarned is based on reports that users of the Israeli instant messaging system Odigo received accurate warnings of the attacks – several hours earlier – that were precise to the minute.

In the anti-Bollyn piece, which aired the night before my trial was to begin, CNN intentionally substituted the word “Jews” for “Israelis” to confuse Mr. Sexer and the viewer. This is an example of how the Zionist-controlled media uses false information to control the thinking and emotions of American Jews and the general public.

As Mark Twain said,

 “There are laws to protect the freedom of the press’ speech, but none that are worth anything to protect the people from the press.”

I have clarified the story about the Israelis being forewarned of the World Trade Center attacks in several articles.  Here is what I wrote in the article “Mossad – The Israeli Connection To 911” in April 2005:

ISRAELIS FOREWARNED

On September 12, 2001, the Internet edition of the Jerusalem Post reported, “The Israeli foreign ministry has collected the names of 4,000 Israelis believed to have been in the areas of the World Trade Center and the Pentagon at the time of the attack.”

Yet only one Israeli was killed at the WTC and two were reportedly killed on the “hijacked” aircraft.

Although a total of three Israeli lives were reportedly lost on 9/11, speechwriters for President George W. Bush grossly inflated the number of Israeli dead to 130 in the president’s address to a joint session of Congress on September 20, 2001.

The fact that only one Israeli died at the WTC, while 4,000 Israelis were thought to have been at the scene of the attacks on 9/11 naturally led to a widespread rumor, blamed on Arabic sources, that Israelis had been forewarned to stay away that day.

“Whether this story was the origin of the rumor,” Bret Stephens, the Post’s editor-in-chief wrote in 2003, “I cannot say. What I can say is that there was no mistake in our reporting.”

ODIGO INSTANT MESSAGES

Evidence that Israelis had been forewarned several hours before the attacks surfaced at an Israeli instant messaging service, known as Odigo. This story, clear evidence of Israeli prior knowledge, was reported only briefly in the U.S. media – and quickly forgotten.

At least two Israel-based employees of Odigo received warnings of an imminent attack in New York City more than two hours before the first plane hit the WTC. Odigo had its U.S. headquarters two blocks from the WTC. The Odigo employees, however, did not pass the warning on to the authorities in New York City, a move that could have saved thousands of lives.

Source

5 thoughts on “Christopher Bollyn on KRXA on 9-11

  1. For the purposes of casting aspersions on 9/11 witnesses (additionally, Miriam Carey hoax/Capitol Shooting Car Chase, another tie to Congressman’s boss, a NY pol) – and the same exact Congressman’s stomping grounds – by studying the entire CLAN. Interesting reading.

  2. In addition – it may pique your interest to know that both the Navy Yard attack in Sept. (Alexis), and the next weeks Kenya Mall hoax, were both tied in via background checks of Alexis entire clan, + Frank Lowey’s ownership of Westgate Mall, to my timing on youtube bringing public the firsthand 9/11 info Sept. 6th. Both had ties to the same clan, this “hijacker” met with, AT scene of crime, mid 80s, i.e. a convicted NY Congressman related to the NY Rothschilds branch, i.e. Standard Oil Nasties that rhyme with wrecker-fella.

  3. Hello,
    I am a firsthand 9/11 witness, and have videos up on youtube that began this past Sept. to let the public know what I identified, and was held back from public knowledge. They are under this name, and currently under attack for no specific reason given, by youtube. (All are handmade original videos, no basis for youtube to single out).

    The 4000 number is actually closer to 1000; it was reported in Times vaguely as “non citizens”, and revealed after watchdog group got freedom of info. request back, naming of that 1000, 990+ Israeli citizens, and 3 spaniards…something close to this.

    I’m very tired of seeing people clamor “oh no, I’m so insulted” when the Israeli ID comes to light, for the “hijacker” listed (but still very much alive), is mentioned — are they kin? Surely the cretans who carried out 3000 dead NYers, have no religion whatsoever, but money.🙂 I dont ever see that, say, with the Arabs, or the Blacks, or the Italians. A criminal is a criminal, and their whining and squeaking is getting very old. In light of the Israeli origin of that one “hijacker”, the USA is owed back 3.1 billion per year military aid, x 12 years, for a total close to $33 billion refund. (We cannot aid and abet the enemy, and Bush knew from my info, week one of the event, yet chose to ignore it). I am not the only witness.😉
    Have a nice weekend

  4. OPEN LETTER TO 911 TERRORIST, LARRY SILVERSTEIN

    Mr. Larry Silverstein
    President, Silverstein Associates
    530 5th Ave.
    New York,
    NY 10036
    USA
    Phone: 212-490-0666
    Fax: 212-687-0067

    Shalom Larry,

    RE: Ownership, Control, and Insurance of The World Trade Center

    I would like to know if the article below is correct:

    The World Trade Center complex came under the control of a private owner for the first time only in mid-2001, having been built and managed by the Port Authority as a public resource. The complex was leased to a partnership of Silverstein Properties and Westfield America. 1 2 The new controllers acquired a handsome insurance policy for the complex including a clause that would prove extremely valuable: in the event of a terrorist attack, the partnership could collect the insured value of the property, and be released from their obligations under the 99-year lease. 3

    Ownership Change
    Author Don Paul investigated this and related issues for his 2002 book, which contains the following passage detailing financial aspects and ownership changes of the complex preceding the attack.
    On April 26 of 2001 the Board of Commissioners for the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey awarded Silverstein Properties and mall-owner Westfield America a 99-year-lease on the following assets: The Twin Towers, World Trade Center Buildings 4 and 5, two 9-story office buildings, and 400,000 square feet of retail space.
    The partners’ winning bid was $3.2 billion for holdings estimated to be worth more than $8 billion. JP Morgan Chase, a prestigious investment-bank that’s the flagship firm of its kind for Rockefeller family interests, advised the Port Authority, another body long influenced by banker and builder David Rockefeller, his age then 85, in the negotiations.
    The lead partner and spokesperson for the winning bidders, Larry Silverstein, age 70, already controlled more than 8 million square feet of New York City real estate. WTC 7 and the nearby Equitable Building were prime among these prior holdings. Larry

    Silverstein also owned Runway 69, a nightclub in Queens that was alleged 9 years ago to be laundering money made through sales of Laotian heroin. 4

    In December 2003, the Port Authority agreed to return all of the $125 million in equity that the consortium headed by Silverstein originally invested to buy the lease on the World Trade Centre. The Port Authority rejected a request by the Wall Street Journal to review the transaction. 5 A press report from November 2003 about the same transaction noted that it would allow Silverstein to retain development rights. 6
    The lease deal didn’t close until July 24th, just 6 weeks before the attack. 7
    Insurance Payouts
    Don Paul also documented the money flows surrounding the loss of Building 7.
    In February of 2002 Silverstein Properties won $861 million from Industrial Risk Insurers to rebuild on the site of WTC 7. Silverstein Properties’ estimated investment in WTC 7 was $386 million. So: This building’s collapse resulted in a profit of about $500 million. 8

    The insurance money flows involved in the destruction of the original six World Trade Center buildings were far greater. Silverstein Properties, the majority owner of WTC 7, also had the majority interest in the original World Trade Centre complex. Silverstein hired Willis Group Holdings Ltd. to obtain enough coverage for the complex. Willis undertook “frenetic” negotiations to acquire insurance from 25 carriers. The agreements were only temporary contracts when control of the WTC changed hands on July 24. 9
    After the attack, Silverstein Properties commenced litigation against its insurers, claiming it was entitled to twice the insurance policies’ value because, according to a spokesman for Mr. Silverstein, “the two hijacked airliners that struck the 110-story twin towers Sept. 11 were separate ‘occurrences’ for insurance purposes, entitling him to collect twice on $3.6 billion of policies.” This was reported in the Bloomberg News less than one month after the attack. 10
    The ensuing legal battle between the leaseholders and insurers of the World Trade Center was not about how the 9/11/01 attack on the WTC could be considered two attacks, when the WTC was only destroyed once. Rather it seemed to revolve around whether the beneficiaries thought it was one or two “occurrences.” The proceedings before U.S. District Judge John S. Martin involved a number of battles over the insurers’ discovery rights regarding conversations about this issue between insurance beneficiaries and their lawyers. 11 12

    In December 2004, a jury ruled in favor of the insurance holders’ double claim. 13

    A Parable
    To put these events in perspective, imagine that a person leases an expensive house, and immediately takes out an insurance policy covering the entire value of the house and specifically covering bomb attacks. Six weeks later two bombs go off in the house, separated by an hour. The house burns down, and the lessor immediately sues the insurance company to pay him twice the value of the house, and ultimately wins. The lessor also gets the city to dispose of the wreckage, excavate the site, and help him build a new house on the site.
    ________________________________________
    References

    1.Westfield Nabs Trade Center mall, ICSC.org, 6/2/2001
    2. Governor Pataki, Acting Governor DiFrancesco Laud Historic Port Authority Agreement to Privatize World Trade Center, Port Authority on NY & NJ, 7/24/01
    3. Reinsurance Companies Wait to Sort Out Cost of Damage, New York Times, 9/12/01, page C6
    4. Facing Our Fascist State, I/R Press, 2002, page 38
    5. MetLife Will Sell Sears Tower, Wall Street Journal Online, 3/12/04
    6. Most of WTC Down Payment to Be Returned, 11/22/03
    7. Insurers Debate: One Accident or Two?, Bloomberg News, 10/10/01
    8. Facing Our Fascist State, , page 47
    9. Double Indemnity, law.com, 9/3/02
    10. Judge John S. Martin Jr.’s Latest Opinion in Swiss Re v. WTC., Newsday, 09/25/02
    11. Twin Tower Insurers Win Discovery Fight, 6/20/02
    12. World Trade Center’s Mortgage Holder Loses Discovery Fight, 7/8/02
    13. Jury Awards $2.2 Billion in 9/11 Insurance, United Press International, 12/6/04
    *******

    Well, Larry what do you think? It looks like the Goyim think you set it up from the start! They think us Jews would do such things to the Goyim!

    All the article proves is how clever you are, and how dumb the Goyim are.

    Is it true you sing Frank Sinatra’s song, “I Did It My Way” in the shower?
    Larry if you are buying any property in the future, give me a call. I will buy the property next door and make sure I take out an insurance policy covering the entire value of the property.

    **************************

    To:
    Mr. Larry Silverstein
    President, Silverstein Associates
    530 5th Ave.
    New York,
    NY 10036
    USA
    Phone: 212-490-0666 Fax: 212-687-0067
    Jan 8, 2008

    Shalom Larry,

    There is talk going round that you owned the three (3) buildings that collapsed in the 9/11 disaster? Is this true? Would you please clarify the comments you made regarding WTC-7? In a PBS documentary aired in 2003, you stated:

    “I remember getting a call from the fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, ‘We’ve had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.’ And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse.”

    Your comments created some concern and speculation – as you are probably aware. In the course of the 9/11 Commission hearings, a question regarding your statement was forwarded directly by 9/11 family group leaders to the 9/11 Commission. They asked the commissioners to inquire about WTC-7 and your statement in the course of former mayor Rudoplh Guliani’s public testimony. Many people hoped that Mr. Guliani’s account would shed light on what you said.

    Unfortunately, the Commission did not raise the question. Therefore, I am writing to sincerely request that you issue me with a statement to clarify your remarks.
    The words “pull it” refer, in typical jargon, the demolition of a building. Is that how you were using the phrase? The last sentence in your statement quoted above has such a “cause and effect” type of syntax that it seems to many as if you are saying the FDNY made the decision to “pull” the building and it was then done that day. Given the lack of closure on the reason for WTC-7’s collapse, a clarification on your part would be most helpful and appropriate.

    PS. Were the Twin Towers due for demolition in 2007?

    If one believed in Fairies, they would say that you found your Pot of Gold at the bottom of WTC1, WTC2 and TOWER7.

    Well, Larry, what have you to say about those facts? If the Goyim ever find out that you were behind the deaths of more than 3,000 Americans and the thousands that will die from Asbestosis from WTC 1, WTC 2 and WTC 7, then there will be indeed another Holocaust someday in the future.

    Yours sincerely,

    Rabbi Gerald Goldberg

  5. If you ask me this Michelle Jackson sounds like a “Shill”!
    The government did it, the government did! But don’t dare mention it was “israel”, it’s “sayanim”, and “shabezz goy” in the US government that actually did it!
    Disinfo is usually 90% truth, and 10% lies!

    US Army Vet
    Marc C. Daniele

Comments are closed.