Zim Shipping: Evidence they Knew 9/11 ~ suggests Six Months Foreknowledge of the September 11th Attack

 

Friday, February 21st, 2014 | Veterans Today Keith Maart for Veterans Today

Zim American-Israeli Shipping (“Zim”) was the predecessor company of the present Zim Integrated Shipping Services and was 49 percent owned by the Israeli government on 9/11. In 2004, the Israeli government sold their interest to the Israeli Ofer Brothers Group, which then became the sole owner of the company.1 On 9/11, Zim’s headquarters’ was in Haifa, Israel, and it had worldwide regional offices in Hong Kong, Hamburg, Germany, and Manhattan, New York/Norfolk, Virginia.2

At the time of the 9/11 attacks Zim was one of two Israeli companies with lease contracts at the WTC. The other Israeli tenant, Clear Forest, had a small office of 18 employees on the 47th floor of WTC 1 (the North Tower). According to the Jerusalem Post, Clear Forest had only four or five employees at the WTC on 9/11 and all escaped uninjured.3 Although there were some variances in the WTC 1 tenant rosters between various media organizations, the majority showed that Zim occupied all of the 16th floor (WTC floor space approximated 50,000 square feet), 10,000 square feet of the 17th floor, and some space of the 29th floor of WTC 1.4 Zim had about 250 employees at the WTC before its move-out, which would require somewhere in the vicinity of 50,000 to 60,000 square feet of office space.5

Amazingly fortunate for Zim, the company moved out of the WTC around Sept. 4, 2001 and into a newly built office building in Norfolk, Va., even though they had a significant remaining lease obligation at the WTC.6 In fact, Zim picked this lucky move-out date about six months before they actually moved. An April 3, 2001 article in the Virginian-Pilot stated, “Zim expects to open the new (Norfolk) building by Sept. 4 and will eventually employ 235 people.”7 Coincidently, pilot hijackers Mohammed Atta and Marwan Shehhi were inexplicably in the Norfolk/Virginia Beach area in February and April 2001 at the time Zim was apparently in the search and planning process for their Norfolk building.8 Although Zim is reported to have had about 10 of its purported 20 remaining employees at the WTC on 9/11, none were killed or injured.9 However, other media reports stated that Zim had 35 sales and marketing people and additional computer personnel remaining at the WTC on 9/11, indicating Zim had a small percentage of its remaining staff at the WTC on 9/11.10

Zim found the site in Norfolk, obtained all permits, drew up the architectural plans, and built its 2-story 45,000 square-foot steel frame/brick veneer office building in only six months, which is about as fast as humanly possible for a commercial office project.11 It is so fast, that they even have a special name for it in real estate jargon; it’s called fast tracking, as a typical development period would be closer to one year.12 13 Fast track construction is utilized when a company needs to have their building completed in a short time as standard design and construction procedures are compressed to meet that goal. The added development challenges and construction risks of fast tracking were summed up by Zim’s real estate company when they stated in April 2001, “Since accepting Zim’s fast track project last month, Hunter has been involved in assisting with site location, selecting the development team of architects and general contractor, and developing strategic relocation plans for Zim’s employees… It is a terrific assignment that presents many challenges, not the least of which is to ensure that the site is completed by move-in by September 2001.”14

Zim’s remaining lease term had long been a point of debate, with 9/11 conspiracy debunkers claiming there was no evidence that Zim’s WTC lease term extended beyond their move-out date. However, a FOIA request to the Port Authority of New York-New Jersey by LetsRollForums.com resulted in a copy of the WTC tenant roster with lease expiration dates.15 The Port Authority document showed that Zim entered into a 10-year lease contract starting on March 1, 1996 and expiring on Feb. 28, 2006, or about four and a half years after Zim’s September 2001 move-out date.16 Confirmation that Zim’s remaining lease extended beyond their move-out date was further established by a Crain’s New York Business article on April 9, 2001 that stated, “Rising rent wasn’t an immediate concern [for Zim’s relocation decision] — several years remain on the lease”17. 2

Assuming Zim leased around 60,000 square feet at $30/square-foot at the WTC, its four and a half year remaining lease obligation would have been about $8 million.18 Strangely, Zim did not seem concerned about high leasing costs when it entered into a relatively long 10-year lease in March 1996, and there is also no evidence that Zim tried to sublease its space in the six months they were planning and building their new office building in Norfolk. This is not the expected action of a company that stated their reason to vacate the WTC was to cut costs. Fortunately for Zim any worry about their $8 million lease liability disappeared when the WTC came crashing down on 9/11.

The burning question is why did Zim have to chance the added risks and challenges of fast tracking the development of their Norfolk office to guarantee its completion by Sept. 4, 2001 when it still had perfectly fine office space at the WTC with an existing four and a half year $8 million lease obligation? Zim’s public excuse that they moved to cut costs does not explain why it was mandatory that the Norfolk office be completed by Sept. 4, 2001. The fast track development process cost Zim more money and added unecessary development risks. What difference would six months have made (i.e., fast track vs conventional development time period) when they still had occupancy rights with a significant lease obligation at the WTC? Apparently, Zim knew they had to be out of the WTC before September 11th, and that is why they did everything in their power to ensure they would be out of the WTC and in their new Norfolk office by Sept. 4th.

CIA Israeli Intelligence Assessment Regarding Zim Shipping and Mossad 

A 1979 CIA Assessment of Israeli Intelligence shows that the CIA has long suspected that Zim has been used for Israeli intelligence support and cover.19 20 The CIA Israeli Assessment had this to say about Zim: “Other Israeli government organizations that provide support to the [Israeli] intelligence and security community are the Ministries of Finance and tourism, El Al, and the national shipping line, Zim. Unofficial Zionist organizations based in Israel and Jewish communities throughout the world also give aid to Israel operations when needed… Official organizations used for [Israeli intelligence] cover are Israeli Purchasing Missions and Israeli Government Tourist, El Al, and Zim offices, Israeli construction firms, industrial groups and international trade organizations also provide non-official cover. Individuals working under deep or illegal cover are normally charged with penetrating objectives that require a long-range, more subtle approach, or with activities in which the Israeli Government can never admit complicity.”21

The CIA Israeli Assessment provides additional insight into Israel’s intelligence apparatus, including its methods and processes. In an interview with Israeli newspaper Ma’ariv in the early 80’s, former Mossad chief Isser Harel called the assertions of the document “malicious, dilettantish, distortions… but probably authentic,” and stated that the publication of the document had been a nightmare for him.22 The CIA document basically shows that Israel has the means and experience to carry out false flag attacks by recruiting Arabs as deep cover operatives in covert operations, something they could also have done in the 9/11 operation. Deep cover operatives are often planted years in advance of the execution of an operation and can take on identities and backgrounds to fit the operation. Among many other important findings, following are some Israeli intelligence processes and methods that could have been pertinent to the 9/11 operation (references to sections of the CIA Israeli Assessment are given in parentheses):

 The Israeli intelligence and security community is completely loyal and if the government requested the execution of a certain task, legal and illegal, it would be accomplished. (Section A.3.b)
 Mossad is also charged with inciting disturbances calculated to create mutual distrust among the Arabs and to draw Western sympathy away from the Arab cause. (Section B.1)
 The fact that Lebanon has a mix of Christians, Druze, and Muslim population has made that country attractive for intelligence projects and Israel has covert assets and has run operations in Lebanon. (Section B.1)
 Much of the activity against the Arabs in the Near East is based on “deep cover operations” by Israeli illegals or the recruitment of Arabs in third-countries followed by their dispatch or normal rotation back home to Arab areas. (Section B.2)
 Elishu (Eli) Cohen, an Egyptian-born Jew, was involved in Israeli sabotage operations (false flag attacks) against American and British installations in Egypt in 1952. (Section B.2) Cohen’s sabotage operation became known as the Lavon Affair, a confirmed Israeli false flag operation against the US.23
3
 The CIA Israeli Assessment provides two examples of Israeli “deep cover” operations, where Israeli operatives were put in place years in advance to establish other identities and backgrounds (i.e., “legends”). One operation required Eli Cohen to take the identity of a Syrian Arab while the other operation required an Israeli Johann Lotz to move to Germany for a couple of years to establish an identity of a German African Corps officer.24 (Section B.2) (Similarly, three of the pilot hijackers spent several years in Hamburg, Germany where they allegedly became radicalized Islamists.25)
 Mossad activities are generally conducted through Israeli official and semiofficial establishments, deep cover enterprises in the form of firms and organizations, some especially created for, or adaptable to, a specific objective, and penetrations effected within non-Zionist national and international Jewish organizations. (Section B.4)
 Many Israelis have come from Arab countries where they were born and educated and appear more Arab than Israeli in speech, demeanor, and attitude. By forging passports and identity documents of Arab and western countries and providing sound background legends and cover, Mossad has successfully sent into Egypt and other Arab countries Israelis disguised and documented as Arabs or citizens of European countries. (Section B.4)
 The Israelis have used false-flag recruitment pitches extensively and successfully. In several cases they approached citizens of Western European nations under the cover of a national NATO intelligence organization for operations in Arab target countries. (Section B.4)
 Shin Beth has picked up local Arab espionage agents on their way back to neighboring countries and doubled them (turned them into Israeli spies) in coordination with Military Intelligence. (Section C.4) 

Israel’s long history of false flag terror operations intended to blame Arabs is extensive and beyond the scope of this article; however, there are several confirmed and dozens of suspected operations since Israel’s creation in 1948.26 Israel’s skillful use of deep cover Arab operatives and other covert tactics listed above sometimes makes it difficult to link Israel directly to the false flag events. A case in point is where the CIA notes above that Israeli intelligence operatives working for Zim are “normally charged with objectives that require a long range approach where the Israeli Government can never admit complicity.” This covert activities concept is often referred to as “plausible deniability” and is used to remove any direct connection to the covert operation. Even though Israel’s fingerprints have been all over many false flag attacks in the past, the smoking gun has been eliminated by design. Thus, one has to look at all other evidence in likely false flag operations to assess involvement and guilt.

Pilot Hijackers Exhibit Modus Operandi of “Non-al-Qaeda” Deep Cover Operatives 

There are many anomalies and contradictions in the backgrounds, timelines, and activities of the 9/11 pilot hijackers which indicate they could have been deep cover operatives in a broader 9/11 conspiracy. A good analysis of the many hijacker contradictions between the 9/11 Commission findings (or omitted facts), the FBI’s Hijacker Timeline, and various media reports can be found at Historycommons.org.27 A prime example of one of the many contradictions is that at least two hijackers ended up on alleged Zionist Jack Abramoff’s connected Suncruz gambling boat on Sept. 5, 2001 when the FBI Hijacker Timeline showed the hijackers elsewhere.28 The 9/11 Commission also ignored this evidence and much more in their report.

The hijackers also did their best to leave behind an obvious trail of evidence that was easily found and quickly gave the FBI the support to tie them to the 9/11 operation stymying any substantive investigation of the many anomalies and contradicting evidence.29 30 Not to mention the obvious plants of evidence like hijacker passports in the WTC and other wreckage.31 Lastly, military operation Able Danger identified several al-Qaeda connections inside the US as early as December 1999, including Atta and other alleged 9/11 hijackers; however, the operation was shut down by senior military officials and lawyers who also prevented the unit from sharing the valuable information with the FBI for reasons that were wrong and inaccurate.32

Although the facts and evidence around the many hijacker anomalies and falsehoods are very detailed and complex and beyond the scope of this paper, following is a brief summary of some of the evidence suggesting the pilot hijackers were not what the US government said they were, and indicating that they may have been deep cover operatives (the Endnotes include references and links to sources with more detail). 4

Mohammed Atta – Journalist and author Daniel Hopsicker did very good investigative work around Atta when he interviewed various individuals who came across Atta; and found that Atta’s real life persona was nothing like the portrait painted by the FBI and the 9/11 Commission. In his book, “Welcome to Terrorland,” Hopsicker found among other things that Atta drank alcohol and ate pork (against Muslim beliefs), did drugs and partied heavily, slept with strippers, and spoke Hebrew.33 34

This is not the behavior of a devout Muslim who is planning to kill himself and then hopes to go to heaven and be greeted by 99 virgins. If Atta was not the Muslim extremist who believed deeply in his faith, as the US government made him out to be, then who was he? Atta came from an upper middle class Egyptian family and was fluent in 5 different languages, including English, despite supposedly never having spent any time in an English-speaking country before 9/11.35

Ziad Jarrah – Jarrah came from an affluent Lebanese family and by just about all accounts, was a non-political non-devout Muslim brought up in private Catholic schools. Ziad’s two Lebanese cousins, Ali and Yusef Jarrah, were confessed and convicted spies for Israel. Although the February 2009 New York Times stated, “the men [Ziad and Ali Jarrah] were 20 years apart in age [actually 16] and do not appear to have known each other well,” it is apparently a subjective statement that is not based on any specified fact.36 On the contrary, an October 23, 2001 article in the Los Angeles Times indicates that the cousins came from a “close-knit family” and that Ziad spent lots of time at the cousins house in Marj, as Ali’s apparently younger brother, Salim Jarrah, was Ziad’s age.37 Marj is a small town in the agricultural Bekka Valley area of Lebanon where Ali had been a spy for Israel since around 1983. As it appears that Ali helped recruit his brother Yusef as a spy for Israel, it is likely that he could have done the same for his cousin Ziad.

The contradictions and discrepancies with the official story concerning Jarrah are revealing and significant. An excellent and well referenced article by Paul Thompson in Sept. 2002, entitled “The Two Ziad Jarrah’s” shows that there were two similar looking Ziad Jarrah’s in different places at the same time on several occasions and that Ziad’s real life persona was also nothing like the one portrayed by the 9/11 Commission.38 Thompson also shows many timeline discrepancies in Jarrah’s alleged travels and activities and that a slew of people who knew him best said he never exhibited devout Muslim tendencies nor did he ever express extremist ideology. Ironically, the 9/11 Commission’s sole support for Jarrah’s radicalization comes from a July 2002 classified German intelligence report.39 The only noted source in the 9/11 Commission report on Jarrah’s Islamic radicalization comes from his girlfriend, Aisel Senguen, whose earlier statements in the press (as pointed out by Thompson) contradict statements attributed to her by the Commission.

Marwan Shehhi – Shehhi was Atta’s right hand man and shadowed him in the US for the 15 months before 9/11. He was also in the military of the United Arab Emirates (a US ally) while attending school in Hamburg from 1996 to 1999. Atta, Jarrah, and Shehhi allegedly went to Osama Bin Laden’s training camp in Afghanistan in December 1999 and met OBL for the first time. According to the 9/11 Commission, the speed with which OBL chose the three for the 9/11 operation was remarkable.40 Why did OBL so quickly choose three unknowns he had just met for the biggest and most complex terrorist operation in history, or could the three potential deep cover operatives actually have proposed the 9/11 plans to him?41 Was this “choice” actually a fictitious part of the official story of 9/11 intended to portray OBL as the culprit?

Hani Hanjour – Saudi pilot hijacker Hani Hanjour arrived for a second time in the US in April 1996, the exact month and year that Jarrah and Shehhi went to Hamburg, suggesting the deep cover operation may have begun as early as then.42 Although Hanjour was the most experienced of all the pilot hijackers, he was not allowed to rent a single-engine Cessna airplane several weeks before 9/11 because the instructors, after taking three test flights with him, judged his flying skills too poor.

However, the plane Hanjour allegedly flew on 9/11 (Flight AA 77 targeting the Pentagon) executed a very difficult turn and descent that reminded observers of a fighter jet maneuver, with one air traffic controller commenting, “The speed, the maneuverability, the way that he turned, we all thought in the radar room, all of us experienced air traffic controllers, that that was a military plane.”43 Hanjour’s sophisticated flying maneuver on 9/11 is contradicted by all the other information corroborating his poor flying skills.

Zim and Other Israeli Groups Potential Involvement in the 9/11 Deep Cover Operation

The fact that Zim probably had at least six months foreknowledge of the specific attack date would suggest they probably had foreknowledge of the entire 9/11 operation. Indeed, even the alleged 9/11 hijackers did not 5  start making their 9/11 flight reservations until Aug. 25, 2001.44 However, Zim’s 9/11 connections do not end with their timely move-out of the WTC or with their known support and cover for Israeli intelligence (with its history and means of false flag attacks against the US). Zim also happened to be a tenant in a building that was most likely taken down by controlled demolition and there is evidence linking explosives to other Israeli groups in the NY/NJ area.45 Coincidently, the owner of all three WTC towers that came down crashing down in controlled demolition style on 9/11, Larry Silverstein, was friends with three ex-Israeli Prime ministers, including Benjamin Netanyahu, to whom he was speaking weekly with at the time.46

An in-depth investigative report In December 2013 by this author on the “Celebrating/Dancing Israelis” shows that the FBI detected explosives in the Israelis’ van when they were apprehended on 9/11.47

Although the FBI analyzed explosive samples taken from the Celebrating Israelis’ (CIs) vehicle, the lab results were never revealed in the FBI investigative documents, and were curiously still pending about two weeks after they were taken.48 There is no rational or explainable reason for the FBI not to have completed the explosive tests in this timeframe and the most logical reason for the FBI not showing the results is because the van tested positive for explosives.

The CIs happened to work for an Israeli-related moving company in the NJ/NY area, Urban Moving Systems (“UMS”), which was also apparently searched for explosives two days after 9/1149 (There were also at least three other Israeli-related moving companies in the immediate area with one under investigation by the FBI in conjunction with moving one of the hijackers.)50 Coincidently, CI Yaron Shmuel worked for an Israeli explosives company after 9/11, which suggests he may have had a background in explosives.51 In addition, five of fourteen Israeli Art students, or 37 percent, who provided their Israeli military backgrounds to US investigators worked in explosive ordnance units.52

Thus, Israel had the expertise and human resources in the US to wire the WTC’s for demolition and the moving companies to help transport the explosives and devices.

It just so happens that at least two of the CIs were Mossad operatives and were involved in other US counterintelligence investigations according to various media sources.53 The New York Times noted that the FBI even suspected the CIs of assisting the hijackers.54 Several news agencies also reported that UMS was an Israeli intelligence front company.55 The owner of UMS, Dominik Suter, fled back to Israel on Sept. 14, 2001 after being questioned by the FBI two days earlier.56 In May 2002 the names of Suter and his wife appeared on an FBI 9/11 Watch List Report, which included among others, OBL, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (“KSM”), all 19 hijackers (why if dead?), and 15 Arab individuals from Hamburg.57 Out of over 300 names, those of Suter and his wife are two of just a few that are not Arab names.58 This author’s investigative report showed that there was an obvious FBI cover-up in the investigation and that the CIs had foreknowledge of the attacks and that the CIs and other Israelis were probably more deeply involved in the 9/11 operation.59

Given the CIs and UMSs various connections to Israeli intelligence and explosives, and Zim’s known support and cover for Israeli intelligence, there is the possibility that the explosives used to take down the three WTC towers were manufactured in Israel and imported to the US on Zim ships.

Coincidently, Zim’s main NY/NJ shipping port on 9/11 was Red Hook Port (“RHP”) in Brooklyn, which is a mere 3-mile drive to the WTC and by far the closest and most conveniently accessible to the WTC of the four NY/NJ area ports.60 However, RHP is also the smallest (less than 4% of total NY/NJ port volume) and most logistically inferior of all the ports with no rail or air service and poor highway access. A December 1996 New York Times article noted that RHP excels in “specialized cargoes” and products that can be uploaded quickly and delivered to the immediate New York City area at night.61 Although Zim received New York City tax credits in conjunction with the move to RHP, no other large international shippers like Zim appear to have chosen the small and inefficient RHP as their primary NY/NJ port. Zim is not at RHP now, and they may have moved out as early as November 2002.62

There are also several other potential Israeli connections to the Red Hook Port. At least one, and as many as four of the Celebrating Israelis, lived about one and a half miles from RHP. In addition, another large Israeli related moving company (Moishes Moving) had an office/warehouse within a couple miles of RHP and two rental trucks found at UMS shortly after 9/11, were from a rental company located about two miles from RHP.63 Zim first entered into its RHP contract in November 1996, and there is a confluence of alleged pilot hijackers and Israeli-connected events around that time which suggests the possible initiation of the 9/11 deep cover operation: 6
 March 1996 – Zim Shipping extends its lease at the WTC to February 28, 2006, locking itself into a long 10-year lease obligation with no apparent concern for high leasing costs (see above).
 April 1996 – Alleged pilot hijacker Ziad Jarrah arrives in Greifswald, Germany, and Marwan Shehhi moves to Hamburg (Jarrah moves to Hamburg around September 1997).64
 April 1996 – Alleged pilot hijacker Hani Hanjour moves to the US for seven months. Hanjour will have several stays in US and allegedly come back for the last time in Dec. 2000.65
 November 1996 – Zim Shipping transfers its NY/NJ port operations from the area’s most modern and busiest port of Port Elizabeth to the much smaller and logistically inferior Red Hook Port.66
 April 1997 – The likely Israeli intelligence front company Urban Moving Systems is incorporated.67

A second confluence of events between the hijackers and various Israeli groups takes place in late 1999/early 2000, perhaps indicating a subsequent phase of the deep cover operation: 

 December 1999/January 2000 – Hamburg pilot hijackers Atta, Jarrah, and Shehhi allegedly attend OBL’s training camp in Afghanistan and allegedly are quickly chosen by OBL for the 9/11 operation (though the hijackers Afghanistan travel is not substantiated by the redacted FBI Hijacker Timeline).68 69
 November 1999 – Zim renews its Red Hook Port contract with the City of New York, probably for the same three-year period as in the original contract.70
 December 1999 – Zim claims that they started looking for a new office location; although there is no other evidence to support this claim.71
 Around October 1999 – UMS moves from a personal residence into its Weehawken office.72
 Beginning of 2000 – Israeli Art Student activity begins in the US.73
 Beginning 2000 – Hijackers Khalid Mihdhar and Nawaf Hazmi enter the US and move to San Diego.74
 At least two of the CIs apprehended on 9/11 were under investigation in relation to other US counterintelligence investigations including one in San Diego.75

Other Important Geographic Nexus’ Between Pilot Hijackers and Zim 

It has been well documented that certain Israeli groups had very close geographic and timeline connections to the three Southeast Florida 9/11 hijacker cells and the one in Paterson, New Jersey.

The largest concentration of Israeli Art Students just happened to be located in Southeast Florida where the largest concentration of 9/11 hijacker cells were located.76 The Paterson hijacker cell was in very close proximity to the CIs, UMS, and at least three other Israeli-related moving companies in that immediate area.77 Zim’s WTC location was 25 miles from the Paterson cell’s apartment and Zim also has an office in Miami about 25 miles south of the hijackers’ main area of Hollywood, Florida.

Coincidently, the pilot hijackers spent time in 8 of the 11 US cities where Zim had offices on 9/11, also including Atlanta and Savannah, Georgia, Jacksonville, Florida, Chicago, and Los Angles.78 There is no obvious explanation for Jarrah’s two trips to Jacksonville and Atta and Shehhi’s stay in Brunswick, Georgia just happened to be approximately 75 miles between Savannah and Jacksonville.

Another critical area of activity for the alleged 9/11 hijackers was Hamburg, Germany. Hamburg was home to three of the pilot hijackers who had been living there since at least 1996 and where the 9/11 plans allegedly started to take form around early 2000.79 Coincidently, one of Zim’s four worldwide offices is in Hamburg, giving them a significant presence in two of the three areas most crucial to the alleged hijackers and the 9/11 operation (New York and Hamburg).80 In addition, 8 of 17 (44 percent) Israeli Art Students with known embarkation cities came to the US from Frankfurt, Germany in late March 2001.81 Also, CI Yaron Shmuel just happened to hold a German passport.82 Unfortunately, it is not known if, when, and where, Yaron Shmuel lived in Germany and if he had any potential connections to the Hamburg cell. In its investigation of the CIs, the FBI did not check with German intelligence to determine if Shmuel lived in Germany and if he may have had any association with the alleged Hamburg cell.83

Zim also had another of its four German offices in the river port city of Dusseldorf, a city which pilot hijacker Ziad Jarrah visited at least six times from October 2000 to August 2001.84 The story is that Jarrah had a German-born girlfriend of Turkish descent in the Dusseldorf area (Bochum), and that is why, in the midst of the allegedly most sophisticated terrorist operation of all time (that would lead to his death); he visited her regularly in the year before 9/11. Jarrah’s girlfriend, Aysel Senguen, may have been a cover story similar to that of 7  Israeli operative Johann Lotz, who married a German woman (while still being married to an Israeli woman) in order to establish his deep cover identity/legend while part of an Israeli intelligence operation.85

Between three of his trips to Dusseldorf Jarrah also visited Lebanon, a country bordering Israel and the home of his family, including his two cousins who were spies for Israel at the time. Jarrah’s travels during this time period also included stopovers in cities where Zim had other offices, including Hamburg, Munich, Athens, Newark/New York, Atlanta, Jacksonville, and Miami. Lastly, Jarrah inexplicably visited the city of Thessaloniki, Greece (May 16 to 22, 2000), a month before coming to the US, another city where Zim has an office.86 Dusseldorf and other cities may have been “debriefing” locations for Jarrah. Ziad’s Israeli spy cousin, Ali Jarrah, was debriefed by his Israeli handlers in Belgium, Italy, and Israel, and who also obtained travel documents to Israel from Greece, Turkey, and Jordan.87 Zim has offices in Belgium, Italy, and Greece, and Ziad Jarrah travelled to Greece and Jordan, and had a stop-over in Istanbul on Dec. 26, 2000 before continuing on to Lebanon the next day (per FBI Hijacker Timeline).

A final confluence of hijacker and Israeli group activities kicks off at the end of 2000 and continues through to the 9/11 attacks: 

 November/December 2000 – The number of Israeli Art Student incidents increase at this time and continue through at least June 2001.88
 December 2000 – Hamburg pilot hijackers Atta, Jarrah, and Shehhi spend their supposed first time in the Southeast Florida area which is the area of the largest concentration of Israeli Art Students.89
 December 2000 – Pilot Hijacker Hani Hanjour re-enters the US for the last time.90
 March 2001 – Zim enters into a fast track development contract to guarantee completion of its Norfolk office building by Sept. 4, 2001 (see above). Zim probably started its due diligence and negotiations of the development project a couple of months before.
 March 2001 – At least eight Israeli Art Students enter the US in Dallas from Frankfurt, Germany (see Endnote 81).
 April to June 2001 – The thirteen “muscle hijackers” (aka patsies) enter the US, primarily from Jeddah Saudi Arabia, a renowned CIA consulate/outpost.91 92
 April 2001- Alleged hijacker cells headed by Atta, Jarrah and Shehhi begin to be set up in the Southeast Florida area.93
 May 2001 – An alleged hijacker cell headed by pilot hijacker Hanjour is set up in Paterson, New Jersey.94 Alleged hijackers Khalid Mihdhar and Nawaf Hazmi are also members of this cell.
 May to July 2001 – Four of the five CIs start working at UMS and appear to enter US around this time.95 At least one, and possibly two CIs, had round trip air tickets coming from Israel to Newark on June 15, 2001 and returning Sept. 12, 2001, suggesting at least three months foreknowledge of the specific attack date. The other four CIs also had air tickets leaving the US immediately after Sept. 11th, suggesting not just foreknowledge, but probable involvement in the 9/11 operation.96
 May to 9/11 (approximately) – Employment at Urban Moving Systems increases.97
 July 2001 – Saudi hijacker Khalid Mihdhar re-enters the US for the last time.98.
 July/August 2001 – UMS inexplicably rents a second warehouse in Bayonne, New Jersey, next to Port Jersey, which is several miles south of the WTC and the second closest NY/NJ port to it.99
 July 2001 – Alleged Zionist and Israeli-connected Larry Silverstein closes on the acquisition of WTC Towers 1 and 2.100

Zim America’s president, Shaul Cohen-Mintz, was quoted in the Journal of Commerce on October 18, 2001: “Naturally, no one is debating any more whether we had to move or not… Some people said it [the move] was like an angel sitting on our shoulders.” 101 Unfortunately, Zim’s move had a lot less to do with an angel and divine intervention than with giving the devil his due, with the devil wearing the Star of David while waving the Zim Shipping flag. And the debate now is not whether Zim had to move — they knew they had to — but how much foreknowledge Zim had and how deeply they may have been involved in the 9/11 operation.

The evidence presented in this article shows that Zim most likely had six months or more foreknowledge of the 9/11 attack date and was probably more deeply involved in what was almost certainly a false flag operation. The evidence further suggests that at least two pilot hijackers (Atta and Jarrah), and possibly all four, were 8

References and Endnotes: (continued) >>
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/02/21/zim-shipping-evidence-they-knew-911-was-coming/