911
See other 911 Articles
Title: More Americans Questioning Official 9/11 Story As New Evidence Contradicts Official Narrative
Source:
MintPress News
URL Source: https://www.mintpressnews.com/ameri ... -11-new-wtc-7-evidence/261744/
Published: Sep 11, 2019
Author: Whitney Webb
Post Date: 2019-09-12 05:28:26 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 2791
Comments: 12
Yesterday the event that defined the United States’ foreign policy in the 21st century, and heralded the destruction of whole countries, turned 18. The events of September 11, 2001 remains etched into the memories of Americans and many others, as a collective tragedy that brought Americans together and brought as well a general resolve among them that those responsible be brought to justice. While the events of that day did unite Americans in these ways for a time, the different trajectories of the official relative to the independent investigations into the September 11 attacks have often led to division in the years since 2001, with vicious attacks or outright dismissal being levied against the latter. Yet, with 18 years having come and gone — and with the tireless efforts from victims’ families, first responders, scientists and engineers — the tide appears to be turning, as new evidence continues to emerge and calls for new investigations are made. However, American corporate media has remained largely silent, preferring to ignore new developments that could derail the “official story” of one of the most iconic and devastating attacks to ever occur on American soil. For instance, in late July, commissioners for a New York-area Fire Department, which responded to the attacks and lost one of their own that day, called for a new investigation into the events of September 11. On July 24, the board of commissioners for the Franklin Square and Munson Fire District, which serves a population of around 30,000 near Queens, voted unanimously in their call for a new investigation into the attacks. While the call for a new investigation from a NY Fire Department involved in the rescue effort would normally seem newsworthy to the media outlets who often rally Americans to “never forget,” the commissioners’ call for a new investigation was met with total silence from the mainstream media. The likely reason for the dearth of coverage on an otherwise newsworthy vote was likely due to the fact that the resolution that called for the new investigation contained the following clause: Whereas, the overwhelming evidence presented in said petition demonstrates beyond any doubt that pre-planted explosives and/or incendiaries — not just airplanes and the ensuing fires — caused the destruction of the three World Trade Center buildings, killing the vast majority of the victims who perished that day;” In the post-9/11 world, those who have made such claims, no matter how well-grounded their claims may be, have often been derided and attacked as “conspiracy theorists” for questioning the official claims that the three World Trade Center buildings that collapsed on September 11 did so for any reason other than being struck by planes and from the resulting fires. Yet, it is much more difficult to launch these same attacks against members of a fire department that lost a fireman on September 11 and many of whose members were involved with the rescue efforts of that day, some of whom still suffer from chronic illnesses as a result. Rescue workers climb on piles of rubble at the World Trade Center in New York, Sept. 13, 2001. Beth A. Keiser | AP Another likely reason that the media monolithically avoided coverage of the vote was out of concern that it would lead more fire departments to pass similar resolutions, which would make it more difficult for such news to avoid gaining national coverage. Yet, Commissioner Christopher Gioia, who drafted and introduced the resolution, told those present at the meeting’s conclusion that getting all of the New York fire districts onboard was their plan anyway. “We’re a tight-knit community and we never forget our fallen brothers and sisters. You better believe that when the entire fire service of New York State is on board, we will be an unstoppable force,” Gioia said. “We were the first fire district to pass this resolution. We won’t be the last,” he added. While questioning the official conclusions of the first federal investigation into 9/11 has been treated as taboo in the American media landscape for years, it is worth noting that even those who led the commission have said that the investigation was “set up to fail” from the start and that they were repeatedly misled and lied to by federal officials in relation to the events of that day. For instance, the chair and vice-chair of the 9/11 Commission, Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton, wrote in their book Without Precedent that not only was the commission starved of funds and its powers of investigation oddly limited, but that they were obstructed and outright lied to by top Pentagon officials and officials with the Federal Aviation Authority (FAA). They and other commissioners have outright said that the “official” report on the attacks is incomplete, flawed and unable to answer key questions about the terror attacks. Despite the failure of American corporate media to report these facts, local legislative bodies in New York, beginning with the fire districts that lost loved ones and friends that day, are leading the way in the search for real answers that even those that wrote the “official story” say were deliberately kept from them. Persuasive scientific evidence continues to roll in Not long after the Franklin Square and Munson Fire District called for a new 9/11 investigation, a groundbreaking university study added even more weight to the commissioners’ call for a new look at the evidence regarding the collapse of three buildings at the World Trade Center complex. While most Americans know full well that the twin towers collapsed on September 11, fewer are aware that a third building — World Trade Center Building 7 — also collapsed. That collapse occurred seven hours after the twin towers came down, even though WTC 7, or “Building 7,” was never struck by a plane. It was not until nearly two months after its collapse that reports revealed that the CIA had a “secret office” in WTC 7 and that, after the building’s destruction, “a special CIA team scoured the rubble in search of secret documents and intelligence reports stored in the station, either on paper or in computers.” WTC 7 also housed offices for the Department of Defense, the Secret Service, the New York Mayor’s Office of Emergency Management and the bank Salomon Brothers. Though the official story regarding the collapse of WTC 7 cites “uncontrolled building fires” as leading to the building’s destruction, a majority of Americans who have seen the footage of the 47-story tower come down from four different angles overwhelmingly reject the official story, based on a new poll conducted by YouGov on behalf of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth and released on Monday. That poll found that 52 percent of those who saw the footage were either sure or suspected that the building’s fall was due to explosives and was a controlled demolition, with 27 percent saying they didn’t know what to make of the footage. Only 21 percent of those polled agreed with the official story that the building collapsed due to fires alone. Prior to seeing the footage, 36 percent of respondents said that they were unaware that a third building collapsed on September 11 and more than 67 percent were unable to name the building that had collapsed. Ted Walter, Director of Strategy and Development for Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, told MintPress that the lack of awareness about WTC 7 among the general public “goes to show that the mainstream media has completely failed to inform the American people about even the most basic facts related to 9/11. On any other day in history, if a 47-story skyscraper fell into its footprint due to ‘office fires,’ everyone in the country would have heard about it.” The fact that the media chose not to cover this, Walter asserted, shows that “the mainstream media and the political establishment live in an alternative universe and the rest of the American public is living in a different universe and responding to what they see in front of them,” as reflected by the results of the recent YouGov poll. Another significant finding of the YouGov poll was that 48 percent of respondents supported, while only 15 percent opposed, a new investigation into the events of September 11. This shows that not only was the Franklin Square Fire District’s recent call for a new investigation in line with American public opinion, but that viewing the footage of WTC 7’s collapse raises more questions than answers for many Americans, questions that were not adequately addressed by the official investigation of the 9/11 Commission. The Americans who felt that the video footage of WTC 7’s collapse did not fit with the official narrative and appeared to show a controlled demolition now have more scientific evidence to fall back on after the release of a new university study found that the building came down not due to fire but from “the near-simultaneous failure of every column in the building.” The extensive four-year study was conducted by the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering at the University of Alaska and used complex computer models to determine if the building really was the first steel-framed high-rise ever to have collapsed solely due to office fires. The study, currently available as a draft, concluded that “uncontrolled building fires” did not lead the building to fall into its footprint — tumbling more than 100 feet at the rate of gravity free-fall for 2.5 seconds of its seven-second collapse — as has officially been claimed. Instead, the study — authored by Dr. J. Leroy Hulsey, Dr. Feng Xiao and Dr. Zhili Quan — found that “fire did not cause the collapse of WTC 7 on 9/11, contrary to the conclusions of NIST [National Institute of Standards and Technology] and private engineering firms that studied the collapse,” while also concluding “that the collapse of WTC 7 was a global [i.e., comprehensive] failure involving the near-simultaneous failure of every column in the building.” This “near-simultaneous failure of every column” in WTC 7 strongly suggests that explosives were involved in its collapse, which is further supported by the statements made by Barry Jennings, the then-Deputy Director of Emergency Services Department for the New York City Housing Authority. Jennings told a reporter the day of the attack that he and Michael Hess, then-Corporation Counsel for New York City, had heard and seen explosions in WTC 7 several hours prior to its collapse and later repeated those claims to filmmaker Dylan Avery. The first responders who helped rescue Jennings and Hess also claimed to have heard explosions in WTC 7. Jennings died in 2008, two days prior the release of the official NIST report blaming WTC 7’s collapse on fires. To date, no official cause of death for Jennings has been given. Eighteen years after the September 11 attacks, questioning the official government narrative of the events of those days still remains taboo for many, as merely asking questions or calling for a new investigation into one of the most important events in recent American history frequently results in derision and dismissal. Yet, this 9/11 anniversary — with a new study demolishing the official narrative on WTC 7, with a new poll showing that more than half of Americans doubt the government narrative on WTC 7, and with firefighters who responded to 9/11 calling for a new investigation — is it still “crazy” to be skeptical of the official story? Even in years past, when asking difficult questions about September 11 was even more “off limits,” it was often first responders, survivors and victims’ families who had asked the most questions about what had really transpired that day and who have led the search for truth for nearly two decades — not wild-eyed “conspiracy theorists,” as many have claimed. The only reason it remains taboo to ask questions about the official narrative, whose own authors admit that it is both flawed and incomplete, is that the dominant forces in the American media and the U.S. government have successfully convinced many Americans that doing so is not only dangerous but irrational and un-American. However, as evidence continues to mount that the official narrative itself is the irrational narrative, it becomes ever more clear that the reason for this media campaign is to prevent legitimate questions about that day from receiving the scrutiny they deserve, even smearing victims’ families and ailing first responders to do so. For too long, “Never Forget” has been nearly synonymous with “Never Question.” Yet, failing to ask those questions — even when more Americans than ever now favor a new investigation and discount the official explanation for WTC 7’s collapse — is the ultimate injustice, not only to those who died in New York City on September 11, but those who have been killed in their names in the years that have followed. Whitney Webb is a MintPress News journalist based in Chile. She has contributed to several independent media outlets including Global Research, EcoWatch, the Ron Paul Institute and 21st Century Wire, among others. She has made several radio and television appearances and is the 2019 winner of the Serena Shim Award for Uncompromised Integrity in Journalism.
Evidence continues to mount that the official narrative itself is the irrational narrative of September 11, and it becomes ever more clear that the media remains committed to preventing legitimate questions about that day from receiving the scrutiny they deserve.
Still “crazy” after all these years?
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Deckard (#0)
Intrigue: Hebrew-chalaqelaqqoth, smooth talk, plotting, planning, conspiracy, collusion, conniving, scheming, machination. According to Daniel 11:21, the anti-christ figure will come to power in the same way Antiochus Epiphanes did...by conspiracy. Apparently, being a conspiracy theorist, ("theorist" defined- "someone who develops ideas that explain events or behavior"), is a sound Biblical position.
I ask that because I find nowhere has anyone ever said that conspiracy theorist is not a sound Biblical position. But in posting that, you did get me thinking – and rationally objective exploratory thinking is always a good thing. Right? So, while thinking, I came up with some warnings concerning conspiracy theories. And like you, I tried to tie them to Scripture. I am not nearly as efficient in doing that as you are. So, I hope I don’t embarrass myself by trying to present two warnings concerning conspiracy theories, Here gores… Second, in 2 Timothy 1:7 we also learn that we should not fear. And there are some conspiracy theories that spread fear and prey on the ignorance and gullibility of some. The 911 Truthers have been obsessing for over 18 years now – and no doubt the will continue to do that. While their seemingly endless speculation about conspiracy theories is, by any measure, a complete waste of time – it has changed nothing. But then, what else do CT freaks have to do – except waste time? Salute,
Eventually, the ac will enter into world power...through conspiracy. Will those watching for him, and pointing him out, be called conspiracy theorists, as well?
One could say that parts of the Bible are based on "conspiracy". Not conspiracy theory, but fact. Satan has been conspiring against God from the time he was cast out from heaven.
Government is in the last resort the employment of armed men, of policemen, gendarmes, soldiers, prison guards, and hangmen. Eventually, the ac will enter into world power...through conspiracy. Will those watching for him, and pointing him out, be called conspiracy theorists, as well? I was in no way disagreeing with or trolling you. I was – and I am still – merely trying to tie the relevance of your posts to the article so I could follow along. With that in mind, I will however try to answer your question, which again was: If those watching for the ac believes that they are the only ones who hold the "absolute truth" and see everyone around them who disagree with them as being either naive, oblivious to truth or feel they have been bought off by some world power clandestine organizations who pull world strings to manipulate events in order that they may achieve world domination and if they are like the supreme majority of the conspiracy theorists who believe the many things that are proven to be pure fiction and are still willing to eat up everything that fits their story, even when that's debunked – then, I would call them conspiracy theorists. [Sorry for the long sentence, I should have used bullet points. Oh, well – please forgive this oversight by a very old “geezer.”] If on the other hand those watching for the ac are merely applying critical thinking, then I would indeed not call them conspiracy theorists because critical thinking should never be seen as conspiracy theory when it is objective critical thinking. That “yes” or “no” answer is the best I can give you without further details being supplied. Salute,
Calling people “trolls” on any forum designed for posted responses... is no different than calling someone a RACIST, as a defense for their shitty fucked up ideologies. Don’t let anyone suggesting you’re a “troll”, to get you down. Fuck them.
Yes, he has! And he has always had his minions here on the Earth helping him along...although I can never understand why. It's one thing to not believe in God and go about one's life as an atheist/agnostic. But is quite another to actually believe in God and then go join the opposing team! Especially if that team is foretold to lose mightily. Why would anyone join the losing team?
… and that is what the thread discussion is about – isn’t it? Yes, this thread is about more Americans questioning the official 9/11 story. People in a free society are obliged to ask questions, to challenge the official story. We have a Biblical command to do so...
To some folks here, questioning the government or challenging the official narrative of significant historical events is unpatriotic.
Government is in the last resort the employment of armed men, of policemen, gendarmes, soldiers, prison guards, and hangmen. Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. 1 Thes. 5:21 I of course most certainly believe you should by all means obey the biblical command to “prove all things.” And I have now come to fully realize that “prove all things” can also mean to just grab “a thing” out of the “clear blue” and do so since I never understood the association of your post with the article. Got it. Since I have no additional question – I wish to say thank you for your extremely enlightening response, and I … I bid you a “Good Day” – Sir. Salute,
And unChristian, too. Most noticeably MIA are Christians.
THE TOP 40 REASONS TO DOUBT THE OFFICIAL STORY OF SEPTEMBER 11th, 2001 … An outline in simple talking points … NEW for the 16th anniversary — We hope the updated site makes it easy to find what you are looking for among the thousands of articles here at 911Truth.org. (It will take quite a long time to get all of the articles connected.) Below is a sampling of the many articles that back virtually every point made by by James Corbett in the video above. Much of the basic research is supported by entries at the Complete 9/11 Timeline (formerly known as cooperativeresearch.org) and the NY Attorney General Spitzer petition and complaint (Justicefor911.org). THE DAY ITSELF – EVIDENCE OF COMPLICITY 1) AWOL Chain of Command 2) Air Defense Failures 3) Pentagon Strike 4) Wargames 5) Flight 93 THE DAY – POSSIBLE SMOKING GUNS 6) Did cell phones work at 30,000 feet in 2001? How many hijackings were attempted? How many flights were diverted? 7) Demolition Hypothesis FOREKNOWLEDGE & THE ALLEGED HIJACKERS 8) What did officials know? How did they know it? 9) Able Danger, Plus – Surveillance of Alleged Hijackers 10) Obstruction of FBI Investigations prior to 9/11 11) Insider Trading 12) Who were the perpetrators? THE 9/11 COVER-UP, 2001-2006 13) Who Is Osama Bin Ladin? 14) All the Signs of a Systematic 9/11 Cover-up 15) Poisoning New York 16) Disposing of the Crime Scene 17) Anthrax 18) The Stonewall 19) A Record of Official Lies 20) Pakistani Connection – Congressional Connection 21) 9/11 Commission: 22) Crown Witnesses Held at Undisclosed Locations 23) Spitzer Redux 24) NIST Omissions 25) Radio Silence 26) The Legal Catch-22 27) Saudi Connections 28) Media Blackout of Prominent Doubters GEOPOLITICS, TIMING AND POSSIBLE MOTIVES 29) “The Great Game” 30) The Need for a “New Pearl Harbor” 31) Perpetual “War on Terror” 32) Attacking the Constitution 33) Legal Trillions 34) Plundered Trillions? 35) Did 9/11 prevent a stock market crash? 36) Resource Wars 37) The “Little Game” HISTORY 38) “Al-CIA-da?” 39) Historical Precedents for “Synthetic Terror” 40) Secret Government REASON NUMBER 41: Ground Zero aftermath movements: Election fraud and black box voting, 2000 to 2004. (BlackBoxVoting.org) Lies to justify the invasion of Iraq. (afterdowningstreet.org) Use of depleted uranium and its multi-generational consequences on human health and the environment. Longstanding development of contingency plans for civil disturbance and military rule in the USA (See, “The War at Home”) Oklahoma City Truth movement. (Offline, but not forgotten – May 9, 2008!) Whether you call it “Globalization” or “The New World Order” – An unsustainable system of permanent growth ultimately requires warfare, fraud, and mass manipulation. GOING FORWARD … “But an inside job would involve thousands of people! How could they keep a secret?” Counter-arguments, red herrings, speculations and false information. Selected essays, books and websites that make the case for 9/11 as inside job. (See Resources) Demanding a real investigation of the September crimes – Not just a patriotic duty, but a matter of survival. SOURCE: https://911truth.org/top-40-reasons-doubt-offical-story/
In the post-9/11 world, those who have made such claims, no matter how well-grounded their claims may be, have often been derided and attacked as “conspiracy theorists”
Daniel 11:21 In his place a despicable person will arise, on whom the honor of kingship has not been conferred, but he will come in a time of tranquility and seize the kingdom by intrigue.
#2. To: watchman (#1)
(Edited)
Apparently, being a conspiracy theorist, ("theorist" defined- "someone who develops ideas that explain events or behavior"), is a sound Biblical position.
This statement has relevance to what? First, in 1 Timothy 1:4 we learn that we should not indulge in useless speculation. The phrase conspiracy theory is in itself sometimes seen as an attempt to imply that hypothetical speculation is not worthy of serious consideration.
While exposing truth is good, it is however the obsessing over rumor and hearsay with unproven allegations or half-proven truths by CT freaks that can be harmful.
Gatlin
#3. To: Gatlin (#2)
This statement has relevance to what?
#4. To: watchman (#1)
Apparently, being a conspiracy theorist, ("theorist" defined- "someone who develops ideas that explain events or behavior"), is a sound Biblical position.
The essential feature of government is the enforcement of its decrees by beating, killing, and imprisoning.
Those who are asking for more government interference are asking ultimately for more compulsion and less freedom.
#5. To: watchman (#3)
This statement has relevance to what?
The article is about … More Americans Questioning Official 9/11 Story As New Evidence Contradicts Official Narrative
… and that is what the thread discussion is about – isn’t it? Will those watching for him, and pointing him out, be called conspiracy theorists, as well?
Gatlin
#6. To: Gatlin (#5)
or trolling you.
#7. To: Deckard (#4)
Satan has been conspiring against God from the time he was cast out from heaven.
#8. To: Gatlin (#5)
More Americans Questioning Official 9/11 Story As New Evidence Contradicts Official Narrative
Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. 1 Thes. 5:21
#9. To: watchman (#8)
People in a free society are obliged to ask questions, to challenge the official story.
The essential feature of government is the enforcement of its decrees by beating, killing, and imprisoning.
Those who are asking for more government interference are asking ultimately for more compulsion and less freedom.
#10. To: watchman (#8)
(Edited)
We have a Biblical command to do so...
Gatlin
#11. To: Deckard (#9)
To some folks here, questioning the government or challenging the official narrative of significant historical events is unpatriotic.
#12. To: Deckard (#9)
(Edited)
a. It is well documented that the officials topping the chain of command for response to a domestic attack – George W. Bush, Donald Rumsfeld, Richard Myers, Montague Winfield, Ralph Eberhart – all found reason to do something else during the actual attacks, other than assuming their duties as decision-makers.
b. Who was actually in charge? Dick Cheney, Richard Clarke, Norman Mineta and the 9/11 Commission directly conflict in their accounts of top-level response to the unfolding events, such that several (or all) of them must be lying.
a. The US air defense system failed to follow standard procedures for responding to diverted passenger flights.
b. Timelines: The various responsible agencies – NORAD, FAA, Pentagon, USAF, as well as the 9/11 Commission – gave radically different explanations for the failure (in some cases upheld for years), such that several officials must have lied; but none were held accountable.
c. Was there an air defense standdown?
How was it possible the Pentagon was hit 1 hour and 20 minutes after the attacks began? Why was there no response from Andrews Air Force Base, just 10 miles away and home to Air National Guard units charged with defending the skies above the nation’s capital? How did Hani Hanjour, a man who failed as a Cessna pilot on his first flight in a Boeing, execute a difficult aerobatic maneuver to strike the Pentagon? Why did the attack strike the just-renovated side, which was largely empty and opposite from the high command?
a. US military and other authorities planned or actually rehearsed defensive response to all elements of the 9/11 scenario during the year prior to the attack – including multiple hijackings, suicide crashbombings, and a strike on the Pentagon.
b. The multiple military wargames planned long in advance and held on the morning of September 11th included scenarios of a domestic air crisis, a plane crashing into a government building, and a large-scale bio-terrorism emergency in New York. If this was only an incredible series of coincidences, why did the official investigations avoid the issue? There is evidence that the wargames created confusion as to whether the unfolding events were “real world or exercise.” Did wargames serve as the cover for air defense sabotage, and/or the execution of an “inside job”?
Did the Shanksville crash occur at 10:06 (according to a seismic report) or 10:03 (according to the 9/11 Commission)? Does the Commission wish to hide what happened in the last three minutes of the flight, and if so, why? Was Flight 93 shot down, as indicated by the scattering of debris over a trail of several miles?
What caused the collapse of a third skyscraper, WTC 7, which was not hit by a plane? Were the Twin Towers and WTC 7 brought down by explosives? (See “The Case for Demolitions,” the websites wtc7.net and 911research.wtc7.net, and the influential article by physicist Steven Jones. See also items no. 16 and 24, below.)[See Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth]
a. Multiple allied foreign agencies informed the US government of a coming attack in detail, including the manner and likely targets of the attack, the name of the operation (the “Big Wedding”), and the names of certain men later identified as being among the perpetrators.
b. Various individuals came into possession of specific advance knowledge, and some of them tried to warn the US prior to September 11th.
c. Certain prominent persons received warnings not to fly on the week or on the day of September 11th.
a. The men identified as the 9/11 ringleaders were under surveillance for years beforehand, on the suspicion they were terrorists, by a variety of US and allied authorities – including the CIA, the US military’s “Able Danger” program, the German authorities, Israeli intelligence and others.
b. Two of the alleged ringleaders who were known to be under surveillance by the CIA also lived with an FBI asset in San Diego, but this is supposed to be yet another coincidence.
A group of FBI officials in New York systematically suppressed field investigations of potential terrorists that might have uncovered the alleged hijackers – as the Moussaoui case once again showed. The stories of Sibel Edmonds, Robert Wright, Coleen Rowley and Harry Samit, the “Phoenix Memo,” David Schippers, the 199i orders restricting investigations, the Bush administration’s order to back off the Bin Ladin family, the reaction to the “Bojinka” plot, and John O’Neil do not, when considered in sum, indicate mere incompetence, but high-level corruption and protection of criminal networks, including the network of the alleged 9/11 conspirators. (Nearly all of these examples were omitted from or relegated to fleeting footnotes in /11 Commission Report.)
a. Unknown speculators allegedly used foreknowledge of the Sept. 11th events to profiteer on many markets internationally – including but not limited to “put options” placed to short-sell the two airlines, WTC tenants, and WTC re-insurance companies in Chicago and London. See Billions in Pre-911 Insider Trading Profits Leaves a Hot Trail and Criminal Insider Trading leads directly to CIA.
b. Initial reports on these trades, such as Profiting from Disaster and Suspicious Trading, were suppressed and forgotten, and only years later did the 9/11 Commission and SEC provide a partial, but untenable explanation for only a small number of transactions (covering only the airline put options through the Chicago Board of Exchange).
c. In addition, suspicious monetary transactions worth hundreds of millions were conducted through offices at the Twin Towers during the actual attacks. The German firm, Convar, recovered financial data from hard drives recovered from Ground Zero although the Commission published this FBI briefing on trading in which agents expressed a lack of knowledge and doubt about the data recovery long after the data was transmitted to the FBI. Here is an update on Oh the places you go (when you follow the money).
d. See this interview with Bill Bergman who worked at the Chicago Federal Reserve for over 13 years as an economist and financial markets policy analyst. He was fired when he raised concerns about unusual currency transactions pre- 9-11.
a. Much of the evidence establishing who did the crime is dubious and miraculous: bags full of incriminating material that happened to miss the flight or were left in a van; the “magic passport” of an alleged hijacker, found at Ground Zero; documents found at motels where the alleged perpetrators had stayed days and weeks before 9/11.
b. The identities of the alleged hijackers remain unresolved, there are contradictions in official accounts of their actions and travels, and there is evidence several of them had “doubles,” all of which is omitted from official investigations.
c. What happened to initial claims by the government that 50 people involved in the attacks had been identified, including the 19 alleged hijackers, with 10 still at large (suggesting that 20 had been apprehended)? http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/sns-worldtrade-50suspects,0,1825231.story
d. How did they enter the US? Where did they get their VISAS?
a. Who judges which of the many conflicting and dubious statements and videos attributed to Osama Bin Ladin are genuine, and which are fake? The most important Osama Bin Ladin video (Nov. 2001), in which he supposedly confesses to masterminding 9/11, appears to be a fake. In any event, the State Department‘s translation of it is fraudulent.
b. Did Osama Bin Ladin visit Dubai and meet a CIA agent in July 2001 (Le Figaro)? Was he receiving dialysis in a Pakistani military hospital on the night of September 10, 2001 (CBS)?
c. Whether by Bush or Clinton: Why is Osama always allowed to escape?
d. The terror network associated with Osama, known as the “base” (al-Qaeda), originated in the CIA-sponsored 1980s anti-Soviet jihad in Afghanistan. When did this network stop serving as an asset to covert operations by US intelligence and allied agencies? What were its operatives doing in Kosovo, Bosnia and Chechnya in the years prior to 9/11?
a. 911Truth.Org broke the story that Airplane black boxes were found at Ground Zero, according to two first responders and an unnamed NTSB official, but they were “disappeared” and their existence is denied in /11 Commission Report.
b. US officials consistently suppressed and destroyed evidence (like the tapes recorded by air traffic controllers who handled the New York flights). NEADS recordings damaged during transcription. Ground Zero steel sold for scrap.
c. Whistleblowers (like Sibel Edmonds and Anthony Shaffer) were intimidated, gagged and sanctioned, sending a clear signal to others who might be thinking about speaking out.
d. Officials who “failed” (like Myers and Eberhard, as well as Frasca, Maltbie and Bowman of the FBI) were given promotions.
The White House deliberately pressured the EPA into giving false public assurances that the toxic air at Ground Zero was safe to breathe. This knowingly contributed to an as-yet unknown number of health cases and fatalities, and demonstrates that the administration does consider the lives of American citizens to be expendable on behalf of certain interests.
The rapid and illegal scrapping of the WTC ruins at Ground Zero disposed of almost all of the structural steel indispensable to any investigation of the collapse mechanics. (See also item no. 23, below.)
Mailings of weapons-grade anthrax – which caused a practical suspension of the 9/11 investigations – were traced back to US military stock. Soon after the attacks began in October 2001, the FBI approved the destruction of the original samples of the Ames strain, disposing of perhaps the most important evidence in identifying the source of the pathogens used in the mailings. Were the anthrax attacks timed to coincide with the Afghanistan invasion? Why were the letters sent only to media figures and to the leaders of the opposition in the Senate (who had just raised objections to the USA PATRIOT Act)? Calls were issued to investigate the investigators.
a. Colin Powell promised a “white paper” from the State Department to establish the authorship of the attacks by al-Qaeda. This was never forthcoming, and was instead replaced by a paper from Tony Blair, which presented only circumstantial evidence, with very few points actually relating to September 11th.
b. Bush and Cheney pressured the (freshly-anthraxed) leadership of the Congressional opposition into delaying the 9/11 investigation for months. The administration fought against the creation of an independent investigation for more than a year.
c. The White House thereupon attempted to appoint Henry Kissinger as the chief investigator, and acted to underfund and obstruct the 9/11 Commission.
d. Failure to release the missing 28 pages from the Joint Inquiry.
a. “No one could have imagined planes into buildings” – a transparent falsehood upheld repeatedly by Rice, Rumsfeld and Bush.
b. “Iraq was connected to 9/11" – The most “outrageous conspiracy theory” of all, with the most disastrous impact.
c. CIA misleads FBI about hijackers in US.
a. The Pakistani intelligence agency ISI, creator of the Taliban and close ally to both the CIA and “al-Qaeda,” allegedly wired $100,000 to Mohamed Atta just prior to September 11th, reportedly through the ISI asset Omar Saeed Sheikh (later arrested for the killing of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl, who was investigating ISI connections to “al-Qaeda.”)
b. This was ignored by the congressional 9/11 investigation, although the senator and congressman who ran the probe (Bob Graham and Porter Goss) were meeting with the ISI chief, Mahmud Ahmed, on Capitol Hill on the morning of September 11th.
c. About 25 percent of the report of the Congressional Joint Inquiry was redacted, including long passages regarding how the attack (or the network allegedly behind it) was financed. Graham later said foreign allies were involved in financing the alleged terror network, but that this would only come out in 30 years.
a. The September 11th families who fought for and gained an independent investigation (the 9/11 Commission) posed 400-plus questions, which the 9/11 Commission adopted as its roadmap. The vast majority of these questions were completely ignored in the Commission hearings and the final report.
b. The membership and staff of the 9/11 Commission displayed awesome conflicts of interest. The families called for the resignation of Executive Director Philip Zelikow, a Bush administration member and close associate of “star witness” Condoleezza Rice, and were snubbed. Commission member Max Cleland resigned, condemning the entire exercise as a “scam” and “whitewash.”
c./11 Commission Report is notable mainly for its contradictions, obvious omissions, distortions and outright falsehoods – ignoring anything incompatible with the official story, banishing the issues to footnotes, and even dismissing the still-unresolved question of who financed 9/11 as being “of little practical significance.”
The alleged masterminds of 9/11, Khalid Sheikh Mohamed (KSM) and Ramzi Binalshibh, are reported to have been captured in 2002 and 2003, although one Pakistani newspaper said KSM was killed in an attempted capture. They have been held at undisclosed locations and their supposed testimonies, as provided in transcript form by the government, form much of the basis for the 9/11 Commission Report (although the Commission’s request to see them in person was denied). After holding them for years, why doesn’t the government produce these men and put them to trial?
a. Eliot Spitzer, attorney general of New York State, snubbed pleas by New York citizens to open 9/11 as a criminal case (Justicefor911.org).
b. Spitzer also refused to allow his employee, former 9/11 Commission staff member Dietrich Snell, to testify to the Congress about his (Snell’s) role in keeping “Able Danger” entirely out of /11 Commission Report.
After the destruction of the WTC structural steel, the official Twin Towers collapse investigation was left with almost no forensic evidence, and thus could only provide dubious computer models of ultimately unprovable hypotheses. It failed to even test for the possibility of explosives. (Why not clear this up?)
The 9/11 Commission and NIST both allowed the continuing cover-up of how Motorola’s faulty radios, purchased by the Giuliani administration, caused firefighter deaths at the WTC – once again showing the expendability, even of the first responders.
a. Hush Money – Accepting victims’ compensation barred September 11th families from pursuing discovery through litigation.
b. Judge Hellerstein – Those who refused compensation to pursue litigation and discovery had their cases consolidated under the same judge (and as a rule dismissed).
c. Foreign states have sovereign immunity. [See Saudi Connections below]
a. The 9/11 investigations made light of the “Bin Ladin Airlift” during the no-fly period, and ignored the long-standing Bush family business ties to the Bin Ladin family fortune. (A company in which both families held interests, the Carlyle Group, was holding its annual meeting on September 11th, with George Bush Sr., James Baker, and two brothers of Osama Bin Ladin in attendance.)
b. The issue of Ptech.
c. Saudi connections to terrorism financing and 9/11 hijackers.
The official story has been questioned and many of the above points were raised by members of the US Congress, retired high-ranking officers of the US military, the three leading third-party candidates for President in the 2004 election, a member of the 9/11 Commission who resigned in protest, a former high-ranking adviser to the George W. Bush administration, former ministers to the German, British and Canadian governments, the commander-in-chief of the Russian air force, 100 luminaries who signed the “9/11 Truth Statement,” and the presidents of Iran and Venezuela. Not all of these people agree fully with each other, but all would normally be considered newsworthy. Why has the corporate-owned US mass media remained silent about these statements, granting due coverage only to the comments of actor Charlie Sheen?
The Afghanistan invasion was ready for Bush’s go-ahead on September 9, 2001, with US and UK force deployments to the region already in place or underway. This followed the failure earlier that year of backdoor diplomacy with the Taliban (including payments of $125 million in US government aid to Afghanistan), in an attempt to secure a unity government for that country as a prerequisite to a Central Asian pipeline deal.
Principals in US foreign policy under the current Bush administration (including Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Perle and others) have been instrumental in developing long-running plans for worldwide military hegemony, including an invasion of the Middle East, dating back to the Ford, Reagan and Bush Sr. administrations. They reiterated these plans in the late 1990s as members of the “Project for a New American Century,” and stated a clear intent to invade Iraq for the purpose of “regime change.” After 9/11, they lost no time in their attempt to tie Iraq to the attacks.
9/11 is supposed to provide carte-blanche for an open-ended, global and perpetual “War on Terror,” against any enemy, foreign or domestic, that the executive branch chooses to designate, and regardless of whether evidence exists to actually connect these enemies to 9/11.
a. The USA PATRIOT Act was written before 9/11, Homeland Security and the “Shadow Government” were developed long before 9/11, and plans for rounding up dissidents as a means for suppressing civil disturbance have been in the works for decades.
b. 9/11 was used as the pretext to create a new, extra-constitutional executive authority to declare anyone an “enemy combatant” (including American citizens), to detain persons indefinitely without habeas corpus, and to “render” such persons to secret prisons where torture is practiced.
9/11 triggers a predictable shift of public spending to war, and boosts public and private spending in the “new” New Economy of “Homeland Security,” biometrics, AT&T Helped US Spy on Internet on Vast Scale" class="broken_link" rel="nofollow">universal surveillance, prisons, civil defense, secured enclaves, security,
etc.
On September 10, 2001, Donald Rumsfeld announced a “war on waste” after an internal audit found that the Pentagon was “missing” 2.3 trillion dollars in unaccounted assets. On September 11th, this was as good as forgotten.
Did anyone benefit from the destruction of the Securities and Exchange Commission offices at WTC 7, and the resultant crippling of hundreds of fraud investigations?
a. What was discussed in the Energy Task Force meetings under Dick Cheney in 2001? Why is the documentation of these meetings still being suppressed?
b. Is Peak Oil a motive for 9/11 as inside job?
Why was the WTC privatized just before its destruction?
The longstanding relationship between US intelligence networks and radical Islamists, including the network surrounding Osama Bin Ladin. (See also point 13d.)
a. In the past many states, including the US government, have sponsored attacks on their own people, fabricated the “cause for war,” created (and armed) their own enemies of convenience, and sacrificed their own citizens for “reasons of state.”
b.Was 9/11 an update of the Pentagon-approved “Project Northwoods” plan for conducting self-inflicted, false-flag terror attacks in the United States, and blaming them on a foreign enemy?
a. The record of criminality and sponsorship of coups around the world by the covert networks based within the US intelligence complex.
b. Specifically also: The evidence of crime by Bush administration principals and their associates, from October Surprise to Iran-Contra and the S&L plunder to PNAC, Enron/Halliburton and beyond.
RELATED MOVEMENTS AND PARALLEL ISSUES
– Justice for the air-poisoning cover-up (wtceo.org)
– “Radio Silence” (radiosilencefdny.com)
– Skyscraper Safety (www.skyscrapersafety.org).
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]