Categories
October Surprise 2016

Audio Text: Putin The Mastermind: He communicates in accidents. The 9/11 Attacks: The Special Tripartite Operation Hypothesis – Google AI Review

Audio Post

Putin The Mastermind: He communicates in accidents. The 9/11 Attacks: The Special Tripartite Operation Hypothesis – Google AI Review 

By Michael Novakhov

Synopsis 

Search: 

Retrospective Analysis of the 9/11 attacks as the Russian – German – Israeli Special Intelligence Operation 

Retrospective Approach in Counterintelligence Studies 


The 9/11 Attacks Revisited, 25 years later. 
Was it the Russian – German – Israeli “Special Operation”, with Putin as the Mastermind, at the head of this Anti-American Intelligence Alliance? Reading Putin’s mind: he communicates in accidents … – Google AI Review. 
We do need to reopen the 9/11 investigations, at least in the realm of the public discussions. The Al Qaeda version alone does not convince anyone. We need to dig deeper. 
The 9/11 Attacks were the terror act and the crime of the century. But it does not have to be the Big Lie and the mystery of the century. 

The “Tripartite Hypothesis” regarding Vladimir Putin and the 9/11 attacks is an unverified, alternative counterintelligence theory and conspiracy narrative popularized on niche open-source intelligence blogs—specifically curated by blogger Michael Novakhov on platforms like [Global Security And Intelligence News Review](globalsecuritynews.org “The Mastermind: Putin and the 9/11 Attacks – The “Tripartite Hypothesis” – Google AI Review”). [1]

The narrative utilizes AI-generated text analyses (such as Gemini prompts) to stitch together historical intelligence gaps, geopolitical timelines, and the arrest of foreign officials to argue that Al-Qaeda was merely a front for a sophisticated, state-sponsored operation masterminded by Vladimir Putin in alliance with elements of German and Israeli intelligence. 

Distorting the Context of “Google AI Reviews”
The title’s reference to a “Google AI Review” stems from the blog author’s method of using large language models to evaluate counterintelligence concepts. When prompted with hypothetical scenarios—such as the plausibility of “backstopping” (creating a false trail of intelligence warnings to build a cover story)—the AI outlines how such espionage tactics work theoretically. The blog then aggregates these structural definitions to give the appearance of an algorithmic “validation” of the conspiracy theory itself. 

The use of the AI large language models to evaluate counterintelligence concepts: 

AI Overview

Large language models (LLMs) and generative artificial intelligence are increasingly integrated into intelligence and counterintelligence (CI) operations to process vast data streams, assist human analysts, and evaluate tradecraft standards.

The September 11 terrorist attacks have been the subject of the most extensive investigations in modern U.S. history. Official government inquiries, independent commissions, and academic studies have definitively established the sequence of events and identified the perpetrators.
The primary responsibility for the planning and execution of the attacks rests with the terrorist network al-Qaeda, led by Osama bin Laden and operational mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. 
The phrase “he communicates in accidents” highlights a defining feature of Vladimir Putin’s political strategy: leveraging deniable, chaotic, or seemingly accidental events to signal power, enforce internal discipline, and keep external adversaries off balance.
Whether examining his psychological profile, his inner circle dynamics, or geopolitical standoffs, analyzing Putin’s “mind” requires looking past standard diplomatic rhetoric. Instead, observers must decode the calculated patterns behind events officially dismissed as mere mishaps or coincidences. 


Reading Putin’s mind: he communicates in accidents -Review -GS 

The phrase “he communicates in accidents” highlights a defining feature of Vladimir Putin’s political strategy: leveraging deniable, chaotic, or seemingly accidental events to signal power, enforce internal discipline, and keep external adversaries off balance.
Whether examining his psychological profile, his inner circle dynamics, or geopolitical standoffs, analyzing Putin’s “mind” requires looking past standard diplomatic rhetoric. Instead, observers must decode the calculated patterns behind events officially dismissed as mere mishaps or coincidences. [1, 2, 3, 4]
1. The Strategy of “Strategic Ambiguity”
Putin’s background in the KGB heavily influences his communication style. In traditional diplomacy, leaders use speeches, press releases, and treaties to signal intent. Putin frequently communicates through manufactured ambiguity.
  • Calculated Chaos: When opposition figures fall ill, infrastructure suffers sudden failures, or military maneuvers push boundaries, the Kremlin routinely claims these are “accidents” or internal matters.
  • The Message: The underlying message to the world is highly deliberate: We can disrupt your security or stability at any moment, and we will maintain total deniability while doing so.
2. Internal Discipline: The “Accident” as a Warning
Domestically, communicating in accidents is an effective tool for maintaining autocratic control over the Russian elite. [1]
  • Enforcing Loyalty: When high-ranking oligarchs, military officials, or dissidents experience sudden, fatal falls from windows, unexplained poisonings, or unexpected plane crashes, it sends a clear message to the remaining elite.
  • The Psychological Effect: The lack of an official admission of guilt creates an atmosphere of pervasive paranoia. It signals that no one is untouchable, forcing absolute loyalty to the state without the Kremlin needing to trigger formal, politically disruptive executions. [1, 2]
3. Geopolitical Brinkmanship: Testing Red Lines
On the international stage, this communication style manifests as geopolitical testing.
  • Plausible Deniability: Cyberattacks on Western infrastructure, GPS jamming over the Baltic region, and close-quarters military intercepts are often shrugged off by Russian officials as technical glitches or rogue operations.
  • Pushing Boundaries: By framing these escalations as accidental, Putin tests the boundaries of NATO and Western resolve. It forces Western leaders into a difficult position: either accept the “accident” explanation to avoid direct conflict, or risk escalating a war over an event Russia claims it did not intend. [1]
4. The Risk of Miscalculation
While communicating through accidents keeps adversaries guessing, analysts warn that this strategy carries severe dangers:
  • The Paranoia Trap: Isolating himself within a tight, highly filtered echo chamber increases the risk that Putin may misjudge how the West responds to these “accidents.”
  • Escalation Management: When brinkmanship relies heavily on chaotic, deniable events—such as kinetic operations near nuclear facilities or critical energy sectors—the line between a controlled “accidental” signal and a catastrophic, real-world crisis becomes dangerously thin. [1, 2, 3]
Summary: The Core Takeaway
To understand Putin’s decision-making, observers must realize that the accident is often the message itself. By utilizing events that occupy the gray zone between deliberate aggression and random misfortune, the Kremlin successfully projects power, commands fear, and avoids direct accountability. [1, 2] 

Psychology Note  

Search: 


INTERPRETATION of the recent accident:
Putin: It is an Art, a Game, the Striker Sport for me. A football. They got a goal, you got a goal. It is a fight, a struggle. The smartest and the boldest win.

And I would add: It is also A DEEP RAGE, WELL CONTROLLED, CALCULATED, AND WEAPONIZED.


The Significance 

The scholarly and historical consensus states that thoroughly investigating the September 11 attacks is critical because 9/11 served as the foundational catalyst for 21st-century global geopolitics, national security frameworks, and civil liberties. Over two decades of extensive analysis by government bodies, independent researchers, and historians underscore that a precise understanding of the event’s planning, execution, and state-sponsored or institutional enablers is vital for preserving democratic accountability, international stability, and historical truth.
The multifaceted significance of establishing an exhaustive and accurate record of the attacks spans several critical domains.
🏛️ Political Significance & Democratic Accountability
The political ramifications of 9/11 reshape governance and the relationship between citizens and the state.
  • Foreign Policy Sanity: The official findings of the 9/11 Commission directly shaped the “Global War on Terror,” leading to the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. Ensuring complete accuracy regarding state complicity or funding is essential to prevent misdirected military actions and long-term foreign policy blunders.
  • Oversight of Intelligence Apparatchiks: Deep investigations expose systemic vulnerabilities and the failure of intelligence sharing among agencies like the CIA and FBI. Identifying these breakdowns holds institutions accountable and forces necessary, transparent reforms rather than unchecked expansion of bureaucratic power.
  • Combating Government Secrecy: Continuous public pressure to declassify related documents—such as the declassification of files regarding potential foreign government links—strengthens the principle of democratic transparency, ensuring that diplomatic or economic alliances do not shield culpable entities.
🛡️ Social Significance & Domestic Fabric
Sociologically, the precision of 9/11 investigations directly impacts public trust, civil rights, and social cohesion.
  • Restoring Institutional Trust: When gaps or inconsistencies persist in high-profile investigations, public faith in democratic institutions erodes. Clear, verified truths are the primary antidote to institutional cynicism and pervasive misinformation.
  • Civil Liberties Protection: The attacks prompted sweeping domestic legislation, most notably the USA PATRIOT Act, which fundamentally altered privacy laws and expanded state surveillance. Thorough retrospective analysis determines whether these sacrifices of civil liberties were genuinely justified by facts or driven by reactionary panic.
  • Mitigating Xenophobia and Islamophobia: Pinpointing the precise individuals, radical networks, and specific state factions responsible prevents the broad, dangerous scapegoating of entire religious, ethnic, or national groups, protecting vulnerable communities from collective blame.
📜 Historical Significance & Systemic Lessons
From a historical perspective, establishing a definitive, factual baseline prevents the distortion of collective memory.
  • Preventing Historical Revisionism: A rigorously documented, evidence-based record ensures that future generations understand the event based on empirical facts rather than political spin, state propaganda, or unverified fringe theories.
  • Evolving Counter-Terrorism Doctrines: Accurate identification of how the logistics, illicit financing, and radicalization networks functioned allows global security experts to develop precise counter-terrorism frameworks that target actual systemic threats rather than superficial symptoms.
  • Justice for Victims and Survivors: For the families of the victims and the survivors, identifying every tier of culprit—from the hijackers to the financiers—is a fundamental prerequisite for legal justice, financial restitution, and psychological closure.


Part 1: 9/11 Investigations and Misinvestigations 

Introduction: Putin and the 9/11 

The official narrative of the 9/11 attacks overlooks foreign state sponsorship, the non-state actors like Al-Qaeda were merely “foot soldiers” rather than the true architects. The true “Mastermind” was Putin. It was his operation, one of the series of many, with the common contextual, conceptual, and operational patterns, bearing the traces of his complex political personality, including the traits of the Recruiter and the Uniter.


The 9/11 Commission Report and FBI Investigation

AI Mode 
Historical records show that while the George W. Bush administration initially opposed creating an independent commission, official oversight investigations attribute 9/11 failures to systemic intelligence sharing breakdowns rather than a coordinated suppression of the truth.
Critics, including some lawmakers involved in the early congressional inquiries, have argued that the Bush Administration and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) under Robert Mueller resisted transparency, pointing to delayed clearances and redacted documents. 

Summary

The institutional friction between investigators and the executive branch is well-documented. 
Rather than a coordinated conspiracy to hide the “true” architects of the attacks, the actions taken by the Bush administration and Mueller’s FBI are widely understood by historians and investigators as efforts to protect classified intelligence-gathering methods, avoid public institutional embarrassment, 
(!) and preserve sensitive foreign diplomatic alliances. 
My question: Including Russia, Israel, and Germany? 
Analyzing 9/11 PDBs
Persistent but useless warnings about the Al Qaeda in intelligence reports, including from Russia, Germany, and Israel as the cover: questionable sources, skillful placements – GS:
U.S. intelligence files declassified by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) confirm that the United States received a high volume of vague, non-specific threat alerts from multiple global entities prior to September 11, 2001. These documents—including President’s Daily Briefs (PDBs) spanning from 1998 through September 2001—show that while foreign services like those of Russia, Germany, and Israel frequently flagged Al Qaeda intentions, the raw intelligence often suffered from “warning fatigue,” questionable sources, and a lack of specific, actionable data. [1, 2, 3]
The systemic breakdown described as “questionable sources and skillful placements” manifests across the intelligence chain in several distinct ways.




On September 11, 2026—the 25th anniversary of the September 11 terrorist attacks—the CIA declassified 71 President’s Daily Brief (PDB) products related to al-Qa’ida and Osama bin Laden.

Analyzing 9/11 PDBs and Deception Hypotheses – Gemini 



The intelligence documents reveal that by late 1999, the frequency of conflicting threat targets was so high that senior officials—including Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld—questioned whether Al-Qaeda was intentionally feeding the U.S. false information to force them into wasting resources.

My opinion:
AI Overview

U.S. intelligence files declassified by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) confirm that the United States received a high volume of vague, non-specific threat alerts from multiple global entities prior to September 11, 2001. These documents—including President’s Daily Briefs (PDBs) spanning from 1998 through September 2001—show that while foreign services like those of Russia, Germany, and Israel frequently flagged Al Qaeda intentions, the raw intelligence often suffered from “warning fatigue,” questionable sources, and a lack of specific, actionable data. [1, 2, 3]
The systemic breakdown described as “questionable sources and skillful placements” manifests across the intelligence chain in several distinct ways:


PERSISTENT WARNINGS AS THE COVER

“Fourty warnings in three years” is on average one warning monthly. Nice job of Cover building.
The info was coming from Russia, Germany, and Israel. among the others. Is it not interesting?

“Title and Intent: Titled “Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US,” the brief was compiled by the CIA at the request of President Bush, who had specifically asked if any intelligence pointed to a domestic threat.”
– Who helped him to formulate this question? The one who knew the answer?

Presidential Daily Briefs (PDBs), intelligence warnings
Analyzing 9/11 PDBs and Deception Hypotheses – GS

AI Mode
The relationship between Presidential Daily Briefs (PDBs), intelligence warnings, and the subsequent “deception hypotheses” surrounding the September 11 attacks centers on what the U.S. government knew prior to 9/11 and how agencies responded afterward.
For decades, the historical debate was shaped by a high-volume “signal-to-noise” problem. However, newly declassified materials have provided more granular insights into how information flowed to the highest levels of government. [1, 2]





While no verified evidence links these intelligence services to the orchestration of the attacks, various historical intelligence points and persistent geopolitical conspiracy theories involve these three nations.

“Evaluating the “Tripartite Hypothesis” (Russia, Germany, Israel) – Gemini
Nikolai Patrushev, August Hanning, Efraim Halevy, and the 9/11 Attacks – Google Search
In alternative counterintelligence literature and fringe OSINT analysis, Patrushev, Hanning, and Halevy are sometimes grouped together as the alleged nexus of a covert state-sponsored operation behind 9/11.” – Gemini.
Intelligence Chiefs and 9/11 Analysis share.gemini.google/53XOpjhmd1sk
Nikolai Patrushev, August Hanning, and Efraim Halevy sat at the helm of their respective nations’ primary intelligence services on September 11, 2001—leading Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB), Germany’s Federal Intelligence Service (BND), and Israel’s Mossad.

Call the 911!

9/11 WARNINGS ABOUT THE PILOTS TRAINING

#Israel: “Do not train the Saudi pilots, they will turn against you!”
#Russia: ” Do not send your Saudi pilots to Chechnya, they will turn against you!”
#Germany: “Send these moronic pilots anywhere, we don’t care; but not against us, we had enough!”

The role of the numbers of the well trained pilots in the military competition between Israel and Saudi Arabia: How 9/11 affected this balance? – Google Search google.com/search?q=The+r
The official narrative of the 9/11 attacks overlooks foreign state sponsorship, the non-state actors like Al-Qaeda were merely “foot soldiers” rather than the true architects. The true “Mastermind” was Putin. It was his operation, one of the series of many, with the common contextual, conceptual, and operational patterns, bearing the traces of his complex political personality, including the traits of the Recruiter and the Uniter.


While mainstream intelligence agencies and the 9/11 Commission report attribute the attacks strictly to Al-Qaeda operating out of Afghanistan and Pakistan, the testimonies of Litvinenko and Borovoy remain the foundation for theories that the Kremlin conducted a dangerous “double game” with the hijackers’ leadership.

Search:


Russia historically weaponized and infiltrated international terrorist organizations to serve its geopolitical interests—specifically utilizing them as leverage against Western powers.



WHO BENEFITED? The After Effects of 9/11

WHO BENEFITED? RUSSIA, GERMANY, ISRAEL.

THE EFFECTS: WHAT HAPPPENED AFTER 9/11?

The After Effects of 9/11 in suspected players and US:
THE RIGHTIST REALIGNMENT:
9/11 caused a global shift to the Right, in tune with Putin’s “conservatism”.
Mission accomplished!
Search:
How did Israel benefit geopolitically from 9/11?
How did Schroeder’s Germany change politically and geopolitically after 9/11?
How did Putin’s Russia change politically and geopolitically after 9/11?
Political shift to the Right in US after 9/11
RIGHTIST REALIGNMENT after 9/11
Putin’s conservatism



Contents

My opinion: PUTIN THE MASTERMIND

The official narrative of the 9/11 attacks overlooks foreign state sponsorship, the non-state actors like Al-Qaeda were merely “foot soldiers” rather than the true architects. The true “Mastermind” was Putin. It was his operation, one of the series of many, with the common contextual, conceptual, and operational patterns, bearing the traces of his complex political personality, including the traits of the Recruiter and the Uniter.

At the center of this hypothesis is the political personality of V. Putin, the true Mastermind of the 9/11 attacks. 9/11 is the counterintelligence error, with failure to monitor the foreign leaders closely and to try to understand better their motivations and actions, both overt and the covert.

When the advantages gained by Russia, Germany, and Israel are so obvious and dramatic, just like the general shift to the Right; it is more than just a lucky and random fruit falling in their laps. There must be a causal connection there, especially from the counterintelligence perspectives.
Search:





Instead of the Foreword:


Analysis of 9/11 Conspiracy Hypothesis – Gemini


The 9/11 Commission Report and FBI Investigation




#CIA CIA #FBI FBI #Mossad Mossad

The two co-chairs of the 9/11 Commission, Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton, believe that the government established the 9/11 Commission in a way that ensured that it would fail.
…
“So there were all kinds of reasons we thought we were set up to fail”, Hamilton argues.

Criticism of the 9/11 Commission – Wikipedia en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism

SEARCH: Criticism of the 9/11 Commission:

The 9/11 Commission has faced significant criticism from political figures, intelligence officials, civil liberties advocates, and families of the victims.


Search also:





My opinion: 
By “true culprits” I mean the masterminds and the behind the scenes organizers, not just the foot soldiers – the hijackers. 
It is impossible to take the “Al Qaeda” version seriously, and something more than just the elaborate, meticulously prepared in advance COVER.

Search: 

Lack of Analytical Focus: The Bureau operated primarily as a reactive law enforcement agency built to solve crimes after they occurred, rather than an intelligence agency designed to preemptively disrupt complex global terrorist plots.




#CIA CIA #FBI FBI #Mossad Mossad
Google AI: “The FBI actively restricted, delayed, or classified critical pieces of evidence in investigation of 9/11.”

(My Opinion: Under the orders from ABOVE, pushing their lame “Al Qaeda” version.)

The claim that the Bush Administration and Robert Mueller’s FBI suppressed the 9/11 investigation is a subject of significant historical debate, involving documented political friction, institutional resistance, and subsequent declassifications rather than a blanket suppression. While official investigations did take place, multiple independent sources and former officials have detailed specific instances where the administration and the FBI actively restricted, delayed, or classified critical pieces of evidence.

The true, in depth 9/11 investigation was suppressed by the Bush Administration and Robert Mueller’s FBI

– Google Search

And more than that: The views that disagreed and challenged the “Al Qaeda” version of 9/11 were actively and systematically suppressed by the U.S. Government and its extensions, which reminds the Soviet style of global censorship, and possibly a sign of Putin’s political personality.



AI Mode 
Historical records show that while the George W. Bush administration initially opposed creating an independent commission, official oversight investigations attribute 9/11 failures to systemic intelligence sharing breakdowns rather than a coordinated suppression of the truth.
Critics, including some lawmakers involved in the early congressional inquiries, have argued that the Bush Administration and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) under Robert Mueller resisted transparency, pointing to delayed clearances and redacted documents. Conversely, government reviews, such as the 9/11 Commission Report and subsequent Department of Justice Inspector General reports, concluded that the primary issue was institutional inertia and poor coordination between agencies, not a cover-up. [1, 2, 3, 4]

Summary

The institutional friction between investigators and the executive branch is well-documented. 
Rather than a coordinated conspiracy to hide the “true” architects of the attacks, the actions taken by the Bush administration and Mueller’s FBI are widely understood by historians and investigators as efforts to protect classified intelligence-gathering methods, avoid public institutional embarrassment, and preserve sensitive foreign diplomatic alliances. 
Search: 
My opinion – Search: 


My impression: It looks like the paper and/or cyber trail were carefully and skillfully constructed as the part of the Cover in preparation for the 9/11 attacks. This is not the style of the non-state actors, such as “Al Qaeda”.

Search also:



9/11 truth movement – W – From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Alternative theories regarding the September 11 attacks—commonly referred to as 9/11 conspiracy theories—contend that the official account of the attacks is either incomplete or intentionally fabricated. While structural engineers, aviation experts, and the official 9/11 Commission Report conclude that the destruction was caused by four hijacked commercial aircraft operated by al-Qaeda terrorists, various alternative narratives have persisted since 2001. [1, 2, 3]
These alternative theories generally fall into two main categories of government complicity or look toward completely separate actors:




While no verified evidence links these intelligence services to the orchestration of the attacks, various historical intelligence points and persistent geopolitical conspiracy theories involve these three nations.

The Operation 9/11: Russia – Germany – Israel Hypothesis – the Missing Links


THE MISSING LINK: GERMANY’S STATE SUPPORT FOR THE HAMBURG CELL

Search:

GERMANY’S STATE SUPPORT FOR THE HAMBURG CELL

#CIA CIA #FBI FBI #Mossadd Mossad


The phrase “9/11: the missing link” refers to a prominent public theory and a series of high-profile statements made by August Hanning – News Review
thenewsandtimes.blogspot.com/2026/10/the-ph
My impression:
Hanning was on the right track with his “frequent” remarks about the role of the “STATE SUPPORT” for Hamburg cell, although it is unclear if he considered Germany itself in this role. It was a powerful opinion, at odds with the official version of the non-state Al Qaeda, and someone (the true culprits) probably did not like it, because it could lead directly to them. What followed, looks like a SETUP, the series of traps for Hanning, from his financial ruin (prearranged?) to his various unrelated private investigations which eventually lead to his arrest and current predicament. Now he is effectively shut off from the world and can talk only to his native BND. His former boss Gerhard Schroeder looks unconcerned about this, and, to the contrary, rather happy in his meeting with Putin: was this his birthday present?
It looks like the “STATE SUPPORT” for the Hamburg Cell, of which Hanning frequently spoke out, went directly from Gerhard Schroeder through his own channels, via the local Hamburg politicians, bypassing Hanning; otherwise Hanning would not speak about it so readily, risking to implicate himself and Germany.
The aim of this support was to help the future hijackers in their adaptation to the life in the western society, so they could fit seamlessly, inconspicuously, and unsuspiciously into the life in the US, while attending the pilots schools. At the same time, they were continuously “egged on” and WEAPONIZED.

–


9/11: the missing link – August Hanning – Google AI Mode: The phrase “9/11: the missing link” refers to a prominent public theory and a series of high-profile statements made by August Hanning, the former head of Germany’s Federal Intelligence Service (BND), regarding the 2001 terrorist attacks. [1, 2] Hanning, who led the BND from 1998 to 2005, has frequently spoken out about a missing link in the official 9/11 investigations—specifically targeting the logistical and financial state support given to the Hamburg Al-Qaeda cell, which included lead hijacker Mohamed Atta.

Hanning has argued that the hijackers could not have lived and operated so seamlessly in Germany without structured, domestic assistance that went largely unmapped by the initial U.S. and German investigations.


Severe Intelligence Oversight

The Historical Investigation (August Hanning vs. The 9/11 Hamburg Cell)

Following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, Hanning—acting as the BND chief—headed the German intelligence apparatus tasked with mapping how al-Qaeda pilots like Mohamed Atta operated undetected from Germany. [1, 2]
Operational Failures: The investigation revealed severe intelligence oversight. German authorities admitted they actually had members of the cell and their Marienstrasse apartment under surveillance in 1998 and 1999 due to a suspected bin Laden operative. However, the surveillance was abandoned when investigators failed to connect the students to an active threat. [1]
The Chechnya Pivot: Intelligence records compiled during the post-9/11 investigations showed that the Hamburg cell members initially intended to fight in Chechnya. A chance encounter on a German train with an extremist named Khalid Masri redirected them to a Mauritanian businessman, who subsequently introduced them to Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan, where they were recruited for the plane operation. [1]
Logistical Support: The intelligence findings mapped out how the cell utilized individuals like Said Bahaji and Mounir El Motassadeq to manage routine banking and university affairs while the primary pilots were away training in Afghanistan and the United States, allowing them to avoid drawing the suspicion of immigration officials. [1, 2]
The intersection of these two timelines created a massive political scandal in Germany, shifting August Hanning’s legacy from the man who investigated the 9/11 Hamburg terrorists to a suspect arrested because of a Hamburg police raid on his own home. [1, 2]

The results of Hanning’s investigation of the Hamburg cell: summary – Google Search


August Hanning and 9/11 Intelligence – Gemini

Germany’s former foreign intelligence chief August Hanning and 9/11


August Hanning served as the President of the Bundesnachrichtendienst (BND), Germany’s foreign intelligence agency, from 1998 to 2005. This placed him at the helm of German intelligence during the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

(Note: In a major breaking development as of October 6, 2026, Hanning was arrested in Germany on suspicion of espionage and treason. He is accused of purchasing classified intelligence documents from a former BND employee, identified as Manfred D., in order to resell them.)

Hanning’s tenure and his agency’s connection to 9/11 and its aftermath are defined by three major intelligence events:

The Hamburg Cell Oversight 

The role of Germany: Severe Intelligence Oversight or the possible STATE SUPPORT?


“Evaluating the “Tripartite Hypothesis” (Russia, Germany, Israel) – Gemini
Nikolai Patrushev, August Hanning, Efraim Halevy, and the 9/11 Attacks – Google Search
Nikolai Patrushev, August Hanning, and Efraim Halevy sat at the helm of their respective nations’ primary intelligence services on September 11, 2001—leading Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB), Germany’s Federal Intelligence Service (BND), and Israel’s Mossad.

Examining these three figures together requires separating two distinct frameworks: the documented historical record of pre-9/11 intelligence warnings, jurisdictional blind spots, and post-9/11 geopolitical realignment; and the alternative counterintelligence hypothesis that attempts to link Moscow, Berlin, and Tel Aviv as covert facilitators of the attacks.

1. The Counterparts in September 2001



August Hanning and Gerhard Schroeder – Google Search

9/11 WARNINGS ABOUT THE PILOTS TRAINING


The simple and brutal messages of 9/11 Attacks:
Call the 911!
9/11 WARNINGS ABOUT THE PILOTS TRAINING

#Israel: “Do not train the Saudi pilots, they will turn against you!”
#Russia: ” Do not send your Saudi pilots to Chechnya, they will turn against you!”
#Germany: “Send these moronic pilots anywhere, we don’t care; but not against us, we had enough!”


The military balance between the Israeli Air Force (IAF) and the Royal Saudi Air Force (RSAF) has historically favored Israel due to human capital rather than airframe counts, and the post-9/11 era shifted political dynamics that preserved Israel’s qualitative pilot and doctrinal edge while redirecting Saudi strategic priorities away from direct competition.


The role of the numbers of the well trained pilots in the military competition between Israel and Saudi Arabia: How 9/11 affected this balance? – Google Search


The September 11 attacks shifted this dynamic by significantly modifying how both nations trained their pilots, and altering the structural military relationship between the United States and Saudi Arabia.


The number and exceptional preparation of combat pilots have historically formed the cornerstone of Israel’s Qualitative Military Edge (QME), a U.S.-mandated policy ensuring Israel maintains a regional technological and operational advantage. While Saudi Arabia historically possessed superior numbers of advanced airframes, it faced systemic challenges in building a massive, natively trained elite pilot corps, relying heavily on U.S.-led training pipelines. [1, 2, 3, 4]
…

The Shift from Rivals to Shared Security Concerns

Paradoxically, the post-9/11 era altered the competitive nature of Israel-Saudi relations. As the U.S. focus shifted toward global counter-terrorism and countering Iran, the perceived threat of a conventional air war between Israel and Saudi Arabia diminished. [9]
The two nations transitioned into a framework of tacit intelligence sharing and airspace coordination. This transformation became evident during civil aviation emergencies, such as the foiled flydubai hijacking attempt where both Israeli and Saudi air defense forces actively scrambled jets in a synchronized response to a mutual 9/11-style threat.


If Russia, Israel, and Germany are behind 9/11, here are their hypothetical motivations.
Russia intended to stop further unravelling of the USSR by turning the tables on the Western sponsors of Chechen separatists, including the US, Saudi Arabia, and other Muslim countries, by forming the anti-American Al Qaeda as the cover.
Israel intended to ignite the intense hostilities between the Saudi Arabia, other Arab countries, and the US, in the hope of benefitting from it, and strengthening the alliance with the US.
Germany, namely Schroeder, found the way to express their post-WW2 hatred for the US and to affirm their short lived, post-German unification gratitude and closeness with Russia.
These were the large scale, strategic, long term motivations and plans, with 9/11 as the “proper” action and the Special Operation.
The technical acumen of the Operation 9/11 points to the state sponsored operation, not the half-literate “Al Qaeda”.

All this is pretty much on the surface, and it does not require the deep digging.
What does, is the ease and readiness to be deceived on the part of the CIA, FBI, and other investigators.
The famous American group think and conformity may be the answers to this question.
And of course our universal, human, all too human ability for Denial and Self-deception.
It protects us from the Unbearable Pain of Knowledge.

Intelligence Profiles: Declassified CIA psychological profiles from that era characterized Sharon as a “brilliant, ruthless, and ambitious” military and political strategist. [1]

Post-9/11 Counterterrorism: During his time as Prime Minister, the CIA worked intimately with Israeli intelligence to manage counterterrorism operations in the West Bank and Gaza, despite the public political clashes between Sharon and the Bush administration regarding settlement expansion and his fiery rhetoric. [1, 2, 3, 4]


Ariel Sharon’s fierce independence
and his aggressive, no holds barred attitude in defending the Israel’s interests, as he saw them; and his political personality and his past history (see the Iran-Contra affair below), make his clandestine (and very effective) role and participation in the 9/11 Attacks, in cahoots with Putin, not only quite possible but very likely.
His illness, probably induced by the CIA, confirms this hypothesis.
It is also quite possible that Putin “sold him out” to the CIA prior to that: blamed everything on him, as the Russian common criminal habit is, to save his own skin.
The future declassifications may shine some dimmed light on this thesis.

Ariel Sharon and Iran-Contra affair – Google Search


Ariel Sharon played a direct, foundational role in early Israel-Iran arms channels and regional maneuvers that later intertwined with the origins of the Iran–Contra affair. [1, 2]

Role as Defense Minister (1981–1983)

Arms Sales to Iran: As Israel’s Defense Minister, Sharon publicly and privately defended and oversaw Israeli arms sales and spare parts shipments to Iran during the Iran–Iraq War, operating on the strategic premise that Iraq was Israel’s primary threat. [1, 2]
U.S. Authorization Conflicts: In 1981, an arrangement was made with U.S. Secretary of State Alexander Haig allowing case-by-case reviews of U.S.-origin equipment transfers to Iran. However, the U.S. rescinded the agreement in 1982 after concluding that Sharon was shipping American-made military hardware to Iran without proper U.S. clearance. [1]
1982 Anti-Khomeini Coup Plot: According to historical accounts such as Samuel Segev’s The Iranian Triangle: The Untold Story of Israel’s Role in the Iran-Contra Affair, Sharon met secretly in Kenya in 1982 with Saudi businessman Adnan Khashoggi and associates connected to Reza Pahlavi (son of the deposed Shah of Iran) to back a planned coup against Iran’s government. Sharon allegedly agreed to provide up to $800 million in arms and instruction, though the plot collapsed after Sharon was forced to resign as Defense Minister. The Kahan Commission had found him indirectly responsible for the Sabra and Shatila refugee camp massacres. [1]

Connection to the Iran-Contra Scandal (1985–1986)

Laying the Groundwork: Israel’s initial intelligence and logistical channels to Iran—championed and expanded by figures like Sharon, David Kimche, and arms dealers in the early-to-mid 1980s—paved the way for the later U.S. “arms-for-hostages” dealings with Iran. [1, 2]
Central America and the Contras: Israel also acted as an early conduit for military assistance to the Nicaraguan Contras before and during the period when the Reagan administration sought to bypass U.S. congressional restrictions (such as the Boland Amendment), embedding Sharon’s earlier defense-establishment policies into the broader triangular web of Israel, Iran, and the U.S.–Contra operations. [1, 2, 3, 4]


Israel
See also: September 11 attacks advance-knowledge conspiracy theories § Israel
A conspiracy theory documented by the Anti-Defamation League, Thom Burnett and others is that the state of Israel was involved in the attacks, and may have planned them. A variety of motives are suggested, including: to cause the United States to attack enemies of Israel; to divert public attention away from Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians; to help Zionists take control of world affairs; and to persuade Americans to support Israel.

Variants of the theory contend that the attack was organized by then-Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon, the intelligence agency Mossad, or other actors from the Israeli government.
[149][150]

According to Slate, Kevin Barrett, a former lecturer at the University of Wisconsin, is a “leading advocate of theories that Israel’s Mossad orchestrated the 9/11 attacks.”[151]

My opinion:
It is entirely possible that The Bulldozer Sharon went to bed (IN CAHOOTS) with The Mastermind Putin in orchestrating the 9/11, with the intent of igniting the Anti-Arab sentiments and preserving the Israel’s air superiority.
It would be in line with his character, political personality, and very complex relationship with the U.S..

This thesis has to be investigated; in details and objectively: what, how, when, why, etc.
By whom?

Putin, Ariel Sharon, their political relationship, and the 9/11 attacks – GS


Top Secret!
The Operation of Opening the America’s Eyes (9/11)
(And benefiting in the Process!)
The role of Israel in the 9/11 Attacks –
feeder.co/out/collection
Putin and Sharon met in the Kremlin on 9.4.01 (just one week prior to 9/11 Attacks).
What was on the agenda?
“Russia strongly condemns violence and calls for taking effective measures to fight terrorism”, the minutes said.
They have found a common ground with the “International Islamic Terrorism” (the wars in Chechnya and the West Bank), and the America ‘s reluctance to see it as the big problem.
As if they wanted to say:
“Something has to happen to open their eyes on this subject.
This is an Emergency!
Call 911!
We give our final approval!
Yeapps!”

Putin – Sharon 2001, (1.1.2001 – 12.31.2001)
Between January 1, 2001, and November 31, 2001, Russian President Vladimir Putin and Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon held one official face-to-face bilateral summit and at least three documented telephone conversations. Their interactions primarily revolved around the escalation of the Second Intifada, the U.S.-brokered peace blueprints, and deep Israeli concerns regarding Russian military and nuclear technology exports to Iran.


“The Bulldozer”
Ariel Sharon: political personality – Google Search

THE DELICATE QUESTIONS



“The FBI and CIA had investigated potential leads connecting Saudi nationals and officials to some of the hijackers.”
Search: Were the “potential leads” of 9/11 to Russia, Germany, and Israel ADEQUATELY investigated?
Google AI: It remains a subject of historical debate …
My Opinion: The ADL frivolous accusations of antisemitism related to 9/11 Israel investigations are inappropriate.
“Mossad Role (False Claims): Claims that the Mossad or Israel orchestrated 9/11 are widely documented by organizations like the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) as antisemitic conspiracy theories and historical tropes lacking any factual or forensic backing.”
Search: “9/11 hijackers and Mossad”.
ADL is not the FBI to conduct the investigations.
Search: FBI and Anti-Defamation League (ADL)

The role of Israel in the 9/11 Attacks – Review 







Search Also: 

“The Bulldozer”Ariel Sharon and the CIA: a complex relationship


At the center of this hypothesis is the political personality of V. Putin, the true Mastermind of the 9/11 attacks. 9/11 is the counterintelligence error, with failure to monitor the foreign leaders closely and to try to understand better their motivations and actions, both overt and the covert.

He is the consensus builder, the recruiter, the uniter, the builder of the geopolitical alliances and coalitions, including very much in the spheres of Security and Intelligence.
That’s how he put himself and Russia at the head of the anti-American Intelligence alliance with Germany and Israel in the Operation 9/11.
AI Mode

The political personality of Russian President Vladimir Putin is widely analyzed by political psychologists, biographers, and intelligence experts as an “expansionist hostile enforcer” or a highly deliberative, high-dominance introvert whose behavior is deeply rooted in his background as a KGB officer. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
Political scientists and psychological profilers break down his political personality through several primary frameworks:

1. The Psychodiagnostic Profile: “Expansionist Hostile Enforcer”

Using the Millon Inventory of Diagnostic Criteria (MIDC) via open-source intelligence, researchers like Aubrey Immelman have classified Putin’s personality as a composite of three primary patterns: [1, 2]

The Role of Russia


My Opinion:
It is very unlikely that any documents on the true origins of 9/11 exist in principle – the matter is so sensitive and explosive. The plan was known to the very few people, presumably to Putin the Mastermind, his seconds, Patrushev and Bortnikov, likely, Schroeder, and probably some Mossad Chiefs. Hanning’s knowledge and tasks were likely limited by the Hamburg Cell. However, his ability to communicate with Russia and Israel, directly or via Azerbaijan, point to possibility of sharing this information and coordination. Hanning can disclose this and other information if he is given a good enough incentive in the process of further investigations.





While there is a verified historical intersection between Russian security agencies and a key architect of the 9/11 plot, mainstream intelligence and historical consensus attribute this to an operational failure rather than a collaborative overlap.
The connection primarily centers around Ayman al-Zawahiri, who later became the co-orchestrator of the September 11 attacks and leader of al-Qaeda. [1]
The Verified Contact: The 1996 Dagestan Detention
In December 1996, Ayman al-Zawahiri traveled to the North Caucasus to establish a base of operations in Chechnya. He was arrested by Russian authorities in Dagestan for entering the country illegally without a proper visa. [1, 2, 3]
#Russia and 9/11: Zawahiri, #Litvinenko, #Borovoy

While mainstream intelligence agencies and the 9/11 Commission report attribute the attacks strictly to Al-Qaeda operating out of Afghanistan and Pakistan, the testimonies of Litvinenko and Borovoy remain the foundation for theories that the Kremlin conducted a dangerous “double game” with the hijackers’ leadership.

Search: Russia historically weaponized and infiltrated international terrorist organizations to serve its geopolitical interests—specifically utilizing them as leverage against Western powers.

Russian security agencies had deep, complex, and unacknowledged historical overlaps with figures who later formed the backbone of the 9/11 plot.

Search also:

The effect of 9/11 on the Second Chechen War 

WHO BENEFITED? RUSSIA, GERMANY, ISRAEL.

THE EFFECTS: WHAT HAPPPENED AFTER 9/11?

The After Effects of 9/11 in suspected players and US:
THE RIGHTIST REALIGNMENT:
9/11 caused a global shift to the Right, in tune with Putin’s “conservatism”.
Mission accomplished!
Search:
How did Israel benefit geopolitically from 9/11?
How did Schroeder’s Germany change politically and geopolitically after 9/11?
How did Putin’s Russia change politically and geopolitically after 9/11?
Political shift to the Right in US after 9/11
RIGHTIST REALIGNMENT after 9/11
Putin’s conservatism

Search:
How did Israel benefit geopolitically from 9/11?
Geopolitical analysts and historians state that the September 11 attacks significantly altered the strategic landscape of the Middle East, yielding several geopolitical shifts that aligned with Israeli security objectives. While the immediate aftermath introduced complex diplomatic dynamics, the long-term changes fundamentally integrated Israel’s localized conflicts into a broader global framework.
According to assessments by foreign policy experts and historical analyses, Israel’s geopolitical position shifted in the following key ways:

Convergence of the Counter-Terrorism Narrative

Search: How did Schroeder’s Germany change politically and geopolitically after 9/11?

Following the September 11 attacks, Chancellor Gerhard Schröder’s Germany experienced a profound political transformation and structural geopolitical shift, fundamentally moving away from its post-WWII military reluctance toward an assertive, independent role in global security.

Political Changes: Domestic Security and Coalition Strain

  • The Proclamation of “Unlimited Solidarity”: Immediately after the attacks, Schröder declared Germany’s “unlimited solidarity” (uneingeschränkte Solidarität) with the United States. This was a massive psychological pivot for a nation deeply anchored in post-war pacifism.
  • The 2001 Vote of Confidence: To fulfill his promise of military support in Afghanistan, Schröder faced fierce resistance from fundamentalist factions within his own center-left SPD-Green coalition. To force compliance, he tied the deployment of 3,900 Bundeswehr troops to a vote of confidence in November 2001. He narrowly won, consolidating his leadership but exposing deep ideological rifts on the German left.

Search: How did Putin’s Russia change politically and geopolitically after 9/11?
The September 11 attacks served as a major catalyst for Vladimir Putin to reshape Russia’s domestic and foreign policy. Putin leveraged the global War on Terror to consolidate domestic political power and launch a dramatic, albeit short-lived, geopolitical pivot toward the West.
This period fundamentally transformed how Russia interacted with global powers and accelerated its transition toward centralized authoritarianism.

Geopolitical Transformations

The immediate aftermath of 9/11 marked a radical departure from traditional Russian foreign policy paradigms. [1]



METHODOLOGY: The nature of the investigative hypotheses in the counterintelligence investigations of 9/11 attack.



August Hanning’s communications may implicate both Israel and Russia in the hypothetical origins of 9/11 – Google Search

The miserable Arab “culprits” are just the patsies and the SCAPEGOATS!


Search also:

The blame for MISINVESTIGATION of 9/11 is on Bush administration, FBI at that time, and Robert Mueller.
REINVESTIGATE THE 9/11!

Kash Patel, please add it to your list of the FBI historical mistakes, on the number 1 slot.
Thank you.



Search also:

The blame for MISINVESTIGATION of 9/11 is on Bush administration, FBI at that time, and Robert Mueller.
REINVESTIGATE THE 9/11!

Kash Patel, please add it to your list of the FBI historical mistakes, on the number 1 slot.
Thank you.
–


Search:

In counterintelligence and intelligence investigations surrounding the September 11 attacks, investigative hypotheses primarily focused on state-sponsored orchestration versus non-state actor autonomy, the operational security (OPSEC) tradecraft of the hijackers, and systemic structural vulnerabilities within U.S. intelligence. Rather than viewing 9/11 purely as a criminal act, counterintelligence (CI) investigators evaluated how foreign intelligence and extremist networks successfully penetrated domestic borders without triggering strategic warnings. [1, 2, 3]

1. State Sponsorship vs. Autonomous Network Support

A central counterintelligence hypothesis examined whether the al-Qaeda network operated entirely independently or relied on the covert assistance of foreign governments or intelligence services.
  • Foreign State Facilitation: The FBI’s massive PENTTBOM investigation and subsequent congressional inquiries heavily evaluated whether elements within foreign governments provided logistical, financial, or intelligence support to the hijackers. This included intensive vetting of figures like Omar al-Bayoumi to determine if they acted as foreign intelligence assets helping the hijackers embed in the U.S. [2, 4, 5]
  • Financial Intelligence: Investigators tested hypotheses concerning insider trading and illicit international banking systems. The 9/11 Commission Report ultimately concluded that while unusual pre-9/11 market transactions occurred, they lacked an intelligence-linked nexus to advance knowledge of the attacks. [6, 7]

…

4. Systemic Vulnerabilities and the Intelligence “Wall”

A critical hypothesis evaluated by post-9/11 reviews—including the Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General—was that domestic legal barriers effectively blinded U.S. counterintelligence. [11]
  • The Information Barrier: Legal interpretations in the 1990s built a rigid “wall” preventing foreign intelligence investigators from sharing data with domestic criminal investigators. [12, 13]
  • Tracking Failures: The investigative hypothesis confirmed that this separation caused systemic communication failures. For instance, though the CIA and NSA possessed data regarding hijackers Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Mihdhar, the information was not successfully integrated into FBI domestic counterintelligence operations until it was too late. [12, 14, 15]

…

The nature of these investigative hypotheses is defined by several core analytical focus areas:

1. The Operational Security (OPSEC) and Counter-Espionage Hypothesis

A primary hypothesis in CI investigations is determining how a hostile network operated undetected within domestic borders for an extended period.
The “Zero Lapses” Premise: Investigators evaluate how the 19 hijackers maintained stringent operational security over 20 months in the United States. [1, 2]
Tradecraft Assessment: Counterintelligence personnel form hypotheses regarding whether the operatives received formal intelligence training. For 9/11, subsequent investigations—including testimony to the 9/11 Joint Inquiry—concluded that the conspirators executed highly effective defensive counterintelligence tradecraft, showing no major operational slips that would tip off federal agencies. [1, 2, 3]

2. The Foreign State Sponsorship and Facilitation Hypothesis

Counterintelligence investigations routinely establish hypotheses regarding whether non-state terrorist actors are operating as proxies or receiving active facilitation from foreign intelligence services (FIS).

Logistical Support Networks: Investigators look for anomalies in funding, travel documentation, and housing to hypothesize whether foreign intelligence officers or diplomatic staff aided the cells.

State vs. Non-State Dynamics: In the context of 9/11, massive investigative resources were dedicated to exploring potential institutional links to foreign governments, specifically examining whether foreign intelligence entities provided safe passage, funding, or strategic cover.


See Also:


Search also: 

AI Mode

The 19 al-Qaeda hijackers successfully maintained strict operational security (OPSEC) and counterintelligence tradecraft over 20 months in the United States by operating with calculated deception rather than reckless fanaticism. According to the 9/11 Commission Report and subsequent intelligence studies, the conspirators successfully blended into Western society and exploited systemic loopholes while avoiding behaviors that would trigger law enforcement scrutiny. [1, 2, 3]
The cell utilized several foundational strategies to safeguard their plot:
1. Cultural Assimilation and Broad Deception
The operatives went to great lengths to alter their lifestyles and appearances to pass as ordinary Western students or tourists. [1, 2]


Search also: 

My opinion: 

The future hijackers were seamlessly guided, assisted, and continuously weaponized by the invisible networks of the expert forces in both Germany and the US. 

The high level of this expertise and skills indicate their hypothetical connection with the professional intelligence services: Russian, German, Israeli, or all three, in some sort of coordinated fashion. 







Search also:



End

The News And Times Information Network – Blogs By Michael Novakhov – thenewsandtimes.blogspot.com