Former FBI Translator: Bin Laden Worked for U.S. Right Up Until 9/11

Before you hear what Sibel Edmonds has to say, you should know a little about her background.

Edmonds is a former FBI translator, who the Department of Justice's Inspector General and several senators have called extremely credible (free subscription required).

And some of Edmonds allegations' have already been confirmed by the British press.

Now, Edmonds is saying that Osama Bin Laden worked for the U.S. right up until 9/11,and that that fact is being covered up because the US outsourced terror operations to al Qaeda and the Taliban for many years.

Outrageous claim, right?

Actually, there are several lines of confirmation of Edmonds' claim.

• According to one of the most reputable French papers, CIA agents met with Bin Laden two months before 9/11, when he was already wanted for the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole.

• Two days before 9/11, Bin Laden called his stepmother and told her "In two days, you're going to hear big news and you're not going to hear from me for a while.” US officials later told CNN that “in recent years they've been able to monitor some of bin Laden's telephone communications with his [step]mother. Bin Laden at the time was using a satellite telephone, and the signals were intercepted and sometimes recorded." Indeed, before 9/11, to impress important visitors, NSA analysts would occasionally play audio tapes of bin Laden talking to his stepmother.

In other words, American forces had many opportunities to capture Bin Laden, and yet failed to do so.

Indeed, even after 9/11, the U.S. military intentionally let Bin Laden evade capture. Outrageous? Don't believe it?

See for yourself:

• The CIA commander in charge of the capture of Bin Laden during the invasion of Afghanistan said that the U.S. let Bin Laden escape from Afghanistan

• A retired Colonel and Fox News military analyst said:

  "We know, with a 70 percent level of certainty — which is huge in the world of intelligence — that in August of 2007, bin Laden was in a convoy headed south from Tora Bora. We had his butt, on camera, on satellite. We were listening to his conversations. We had the world’s best hunters/killers — Seal Team 6 — nearby. We had the world class Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) coordinating with the CIA and other agencies. We had unmanned drones overhead with missiles on their wings; we had the best Air Force on the planet, begging to drop one on the terrorist. We had him in our sights; we had done it ....Unbelievably, and in my opinion, criminally, we did not kill Usama bin Laden."

• French soldiers insist that they easily could have captured or killed Bin Laden, but that the American commanders stopped them

This is how a government treats its own agents, not foreign terrorists.

For background, you may wish to note that the government not only listened in on Bin Laden's calls, they also heard the hijackers' plans from their own mouths.

And the Congressional Joint Inquiry into 9/11 discovered that an FBI informant had hosted and rented a room to two hijackers in 2000 and that, when the Inquiry sought to interview the informant, the FBI refused outright, and then hid him in an unknown location, and that a high-level FBI official stated these blocking maneuvers were undertaken under orders from the White House (confirmed here by the Co-Chair of the Joint Inquiry and former Head of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Bob Graham; and see this Newsweek article).

And a key Al Qaeda trainer actually worked with the Green Berets and the CIA and was an FBI informant.

And the CIA may have helped many of the 9/11 hijackers get their visas to the U.S.

And the former director of the National Security Agency said "By any measure the US has long used terrorism. In ‘78-79 the Senate was trying to pass a law against international terrorism - in every version they produced, the lawyers said the US would be in violation" (the audio is here).

And, as documented by the New York Times, Iranians working for the C.I.A. in the 1950's posed as Communists and staged bombings in Iran in order to turn the country against its democratically-elected president (see also this essay).

Moreover, recently declassified documents show that in the 1960's, the American Joint Chiefs of Staff signed off on a plan to blow up AMERICAN airplanes (using an elaborate plan involving the switching of airplanes), and also to commit terrorist acts on American soil, and then to blame it on the Cubans in order to justify an invasion of Cuba. If you view no other links in this article, please read the following ABC news report; the official documents; and watch this interview with the former Washington Investigative Producer for ABC's World News Tonight with Peter Jennings.

And Pulitzer-prize winning investigative reporter Seymour Hersh says that the Bush administration funded terrorist groups (see confirming articles here and here).

What does all this mean about Bin Laden? Make up your own mind.

Text taken from here.

Water Boarding of Abu Zubaydah and Khaled Sheikh Mohammed

According to new transcripts from of a 2007 Combatant Status Review Tribunal held at Guantanamo Bay, detainee Abu Zubaydah said that his CIA captors told him after he was subjected to torture that “they had mistakenly thought he was the No. 3 man in the organization’s hierarchy and a partner of Osama bin Laden.” “They told me, ‘Sorry, we discover that you are not Number 3, not a partner, not even a fighter,’” Zubaydah said. Zubaydah, who was subjected to waterboarding 83 times in one month, also said that he nearly died in prison:

Abu Zubaida, a nom de guerre for Zayn al-Abidin Muhammed Hussein, told the 2007 panel of military officers at the detention facility in Cuba that “doctors told me that I nearly died four times” and that he endured “months of suffering and torture” on the false premise that he was an al-Qaeda leader.

Despite President Bush’s rhetoric, Zubaydah’s torture “foiled no plots,” a point that one of his interrogators confirmed during a congressional hearing last May. The portion of the 2007 Combatant Review Status hearing transcript in which Majid Khan — an alleged associate of Khalid Sheik Mohammad — discussed his treatment at CIA black sites was “blacked out for eight consecutive pages.”

The Bush administration has also long justified its use of torture by claiming that it obtained valuable information from torturing 9-11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. Late last year, former Vice President Dick Cheney said, “Did it produce the desire results? I think it did.” He explained:

I think, for example, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who was the number three man in al Qaeda, the man who planned the attacks of 9/11, provided us with a wealth of information.

But according to documents released by the Obama administration in response to a lawsuit brought by the ACLU, Cheney was lying. Mohammed told U.S. military officials that he gave false information to the CIA after withstanding torture:

“I make up stories,” Mohammed said, describing in broken English an interrogation probably administered by the CIA that concerned the location of Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden.

“Where is he? I don’t know. Then he torture me,” Mohammed said. “Then I said, ‘Yes, he is in this area.’”

The torture of Mohammed, who we know was waterboarded 183 times in one month, “underscores the unreliability of statements obtained by torture.”

In an interview with Fox News’ Brit Hume earlier this year, President Bush admitted that he personally authorized the torture of Mohammed. He said he personally asked “what tools” were available to use on him, and sought legal approval for waterboarding him:

BUSH: One such person who gave us information was Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. … And I’m in the Oval Office and I am told that we have captured Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and the professionals believe he has information necessary to secure the country. So I ask what tools are available for us to find information from him and they gave me a list of tools, and I said are these tools deemed to be legal? And so we got legal opinions before any decision was made.

Watch it:

How Important is Cheney's Admission that There was NEVER Any Evidence Linking Iraq and 9/11?

Cheney said in an interview on Fox News:

"On the question of whether or not Iraq was involved in 9-11, there was never any evidence to prove that," he told the Fox host. "There was "some reporting early on ... but that was never borne out... [President] George [Bush] ... did say and did testify that there was an ongoing relationship between al-Qaeda and Iraq, but no proof that Iraq was involved in 9-11."

How important is Cheney's admission?

Well, 5 hours after the 9/11 attacks, Donald Rumsfeld said "my interest is to hit Saddam".

He also said "Go massive . . . Sweep it all up. Things related and not."

And at 2:40 p.m. on September 11th, in a memorandum of discussions between top administration officials, several lines below the statement "judge whether good enough [to] hit S.H. [that is, Saddam Hussein] at same time", is the statement "Hard to get a good case." In other words, top officials knew that there wasn't a good case that Hussein was behind 9/11, but they wanted to use the 9/11 attacks as an excuse to justify war with Iraq anyway.

Moreover, "Ten days after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, President Bush was told in a highly classified briefing that the U.S. intelligence community had no evidence linking the Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein to the [9/11] attacks and that there was scant credible evidence that Iraq had any significant collaborative ties with Al Qaeda".

And a Defense Intelligence Terrorism Summary issued in February 2002 by the United States Defense Intelligence Agency cast significant doubt on the possibility of a Saddam Hussein-al-Qaeda conspiracy.

And yet Bush, Cheney and other top administration officials claimed repeatedly for years that Saddam was behind 9/11. See this analysis. Indeed,Bush administration officials apparently swore in a lawsuit that Saddam was behind 9/11.

Moreover, President Bush's March 18, 2003 letter to Congress authorizing the use of force against Iraq, includes the following paragraph:

(2) acting pursuant to the Constitution and Public Law 107-243 is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.

Therefore, the Bush administration expressly justified the Iraq war to Congress by representing that Iraq planned, authorized, committed, or aided the 9/11 attacks. See this, this, this and this.

Article taken from here.

Traces of explosives in 9/11 dust, scientists say

Tiny red and gray chips found in the dust from the collapse of the World Trade Center contain highly explosive materials — proof, according to a former BYU professor, that 9/11 is still a sinister mystery.

Physicist Steven E. Jones, who retired from Brigham Young University in 2006 after the school recoiled from the controversy surrounding his 9/11 theories, is one of nine authors on a paper published last week in the online, peer-reviewed Open Chemical Physics Journal. Also listed as authors are BYU physics professor Jeffrey Farrer and a professor of nanochemistry at the University of Copenhagen in Denmark.

For several years, Jones has theorized that pre-positioned explosives, not fires from jet fuel, caused the rapid, symmetrical collapse of the two World Trade Center buildings, plus the collapse of a third building, WTC-7.

The newest research, according to the journal authors, shows that dust from the collapsing towers contained a "nano-thermite" material that is highly explosive. Although the article draws no conclusions about the source and purpose of the explosives, Jones has previously supported a theory that the collapse of the WTC towers was part of a government conspiracy to ignore warnings about the 9/11 terrorists so that the attack would propel America to wage war against Afghanistan and Iraq.

Jones made headlines in 2005 when he argued that the rapid and symmetrical fall of the World Trade Center looked like the result of pre-positioned explosives. He argued that fires alone wouldn't have been hot enough to crumble the buildings; and that even if struck by planes, the towers should have been strong enough to support the weight of the tops as they crumbled — unless they were leveled by explosives.

The Petition of the Religious Leaders for 911 Truth

The religions of the world share universal values of love, truth, and justice, and believe in helping those who are oppressed or otherwise in need. Many religious persons try to engage in activities to make the world a better place, and they trust in a Higher Power to assist them.

When faced with actions that conflict with the universal moral principle that we should not do to others what we would not want done to ourselves or our loved ones, members of faith communities have a responsibility to voice their opposition to those actions. Many religious leaders throughout history have publicly challenged morally unacceptable practices---recently, for example, in the civil rights and anti-apartheid movements.

A significant moral challenge has emerged due to glaring discrepancies between the official version of the events of September 11, 2001, and the results of extensive independent research by individuals with relevant scientific or professional expertise.

“Independent” here means independent from the U.S. administration that was in power at the time of the 9/11 attacks. The official reports about 9/11 were not independent in this sense. The 9/11 Commission was run by its executive director, Philip Zelikow, who was closely associated with the Bush administration. The official reports on the World Trade Center were produced by the National Institute of Standards and Technology, which, as an agency of the U.S. Commerce Department, was run by people employed by the Bush administration.

The independent research, which has led to conclusions that differ radically from the official account, has been carried out by scientists and professionals in many relevant fields. It has led to the creation of several professional organizations, including Veterans for 9/11 Truth, S.P.I.N.E.: The Scientific Panel for the Investigation of Nine-Eleven, Pilots for 9/11 Truth, Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice, Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, Firefighters for 9/11 Truth, Lawyers for 9/11 Truth, Healthcare Professionals for 9/11 Truth, and Political Leaders for 9/11 Truth.

As a result of this extensive research carried out by scientists and professionals, it can now be seen that the official account of 9/11 is false beyond any reasonable doubt.

This conclusion presents a significant moral challenge because this false account has been used as the pretext for the so-called War on Terror, which has had enormous negative consequences, including:

1. the killing and maiming of millions of innocent people;
2. the portrayal of Islam as an inherently violent religion, of Muslims as especially likely to be terrorists, and of Muslim nations as devoid of any right not to be attacked;
3. the employment of torture, extraordinary rendition, and other practices---including curtailment of the civil liberties of American citizens---that violate the US Constitution, international law, and the moral conscience of the world;
4. the expenditure of hundreds of billions of dollars for militaristic, imperialistic purposes; and
5. the acceleration of the ecological destruction of our planet, including widespread radioactive poisoning caused by depleted uranium munitions.

Because the false account of 9/11, besides being an enormous lie told to the American public and the world as a whole, has led to all these evils, it is incumbent on religious leaders, once they realize that the official account is a lie, to speak out, because to fail to speak out is to acquiesce to the cover-up.

Religious leaders from every tradition are encouraged to sign the petition and thereby become members of Religious Leaders for 9/11 Truth. "Religious Leaders" are here defined as people who exercise (or have exercised) a leadership role, whether in a lay or professional capacity, in or on behalf of some religious community or organization, or who teach (or have taught) religion from a faith perspective.

Becoming a member of Religious Leaders for 9/11 Truth will not necessitate any further action other than signing the petition---although further action to spread 9/11 truth is certainly encouraged.

If you are ready to join Religious Leaders for 9/11 Truth and would like to sign the petition, go to the Sign the Petition page and state your name, religious affiliation, and leadership role, along with (optional) anything you would like to say about your reason for signing.

PETITION

WHEREAS religious leaders seek to promote various universal values, including love, justice, and truth; and

WHEREAS religious leaders throughout history have spoken out on moral issues; and

WHEREAS the official account of 9/11 has been shown by scientists and professionals in relevant fields to be false beyond a reasonable doubt; and

WHEREAS the official account of 9/11 has been used as a pretext for wars that have killed and maimed millions of innocent people and caused enormous ecological damage to our planet; and

WHEREAS the official account of 9/11 has been used to increase military spending and thereby to withhold needed spending for health, education, welfare, infrastructure, and the environment; and

WHEREAS the official account of 9/11 has been used to indict Islam as an inherently violent religion and to justify discrimination against Muslims and attacks on Muslim countries; and

WHEREAS the official reports about 9/11 have been produced by individuals closely affiliated with, or even employed by, the Bush administration;

THEREFORE we, the undersigned members of Religious Leaders for 9/11 Truth, ask President Obama to authorize a new, truly independent, investigation into the attacks of 9/11 immediately, because such an investigation is long overdue, being owed to the 9/11 families, the American people, and the peoples of the world - especially the peoples of Afghanistan and Iraq.

Text taken form here.

Aafia Siddique — a woman guilty only of being Muslim

Post-9/11, the “war on terror” has been a jihad against Islam, the colonizers v. the colonized, or what Edward Said called “the familiar (America, Europe, us) and the strange (the Orient, East, them).” 

Dr. Aafia Siddiqui is one of its most tragic, aggrieved, and ravaged victims. Her ordeal continues horrifically.

She went to MIT and Brandeis, married a Brigham and Women's physician, made her home in Boston, cared for her children, and raised money for charities. Aafia Siddiqui was a normal woman living a normal American life. To those who knew her, Aafia Siddiqui was a kind, quiet woman living the normal life of a Pakistani expat in Boston. To the FBI, which displayed her photograph at that press conference in May, she was a suspected terrorist with ties to a chief mastermind of 9/11 -- and the knowledge, skills, and intention to continue Al Qaeda's terror war in the United States and abroad. Could one woman embody such diametrically opposed identities?

Against her and others, no evidence exists so prosecutors invent it. Most (or key parts) is kept classified, unavailable to the defense, and trials are judicial equivalents of circuses. Witnesses are enlisted, pressured, coerced, and/or bought off to cooperate. Proceedings are carefully orchestrated. Due process is effectively denied, and juries are intimidated to convict the innocent for political advantage.

Aafia is one of its most aggrieved. She’s been destroyed physically and emotionally. Her former being no longer exists. Her survival is in jeopardy, yet she remains incarcerated, has been indicted, will be tried, likely convicted, and may spend the rest of her life in prison. And for what? For her faith, devoutness, ethnicity, humble charity, all at the wrong time in America. The message to everyone is clear. We’re all Aafia Siddiquis.

Read further the article The Abduction, Secret Detention, Torture, and Repeated Raping of Aafia Siddiqui and WHO'S AFRAID OF AAFIA SIDDIQUI?

Also in wiki here.

Is it A Collateral Damage on Mumbai?

When we say, "Nothing can justify terrorism," what most of us mean is that nothing can justify the taking of human life. We say this because we respect life, because we think it's precious.

So what are we to make of those who care nothing for life, not even their own? The truth is that we have no idea what to make of them, because we can sense that even before they've died, they've journeyed to another world where we cannot reach them.

One TV channel (India TV) broadcast a phone conversation with one of the attackers, who called himself "Imran Babar." I cannot vouch for the veracity of the conversation, but the things he talked about were the things contained in the "terror emails" that were sent out before several other bomb attacks in India. Things we don't want to talk about any more: the demolition of the Babri Masjid in 1992, the genocidal slaughter of Muslims in Gujarat in 2002, the brutal repression in Kashmir.

"You're surrounded," the anchor told him. "You are definitely going to die. Why don't you surrender?"

"We die every day," he replied in a strange, mechanical way. "It's better to live one day as a lion and then die this way." He didn't seem to want to change the world. He just seemed to want to take it down with him.

If the men were indeed members of the Lashkar-e-Taiba, why didn't it matter to them that a large number of their victims were Muslim, or that their action was likely to result in a severe backlash against the Muslim community in India whose rights they claim to be fighting for?

Terrorism is a heartless ideology, and like most ideologies that have their eye on the Big Picture, individuals don't figure in their calculations except as collateral damage.

It has always been a part of, and often even the aim of, terrorist strategy to exacerbate a bad situation in order to expose hidden fault lines. The blood of "martyrs" irrigates terrorism. Hindu terrorists need dead Hindus, Communist terrorists need dead proletarians, Islamist terrorists need dead Muslims. The dead become the demonstration, the proof of victimhood, which is central to the project.

A single act of terrorism is not in itself meant to achieve military victory; at best it is meant to be a catalyst that triggers something else, something much larger than itself, a tectonic shift, a realignment. The act itself is theater, spectacle, and symbolism, and today the stage on which it pirouettes and performs its acts of bestiality is Live TV. Even as TV anchors were being condemned by other TV anchors, the effectiveness of the terror strikes was being magnified a thousand-fold by the TV broadcasts.

Through the endless hours of analysis and the endless op-ed essays, in India at least, there has been very little mention of the elephants in the room: Kashmir, 2002 Gujarat genocide, and the demolition of the Babri Masjid.

Read further 9 Is Not 11 (And November Isn't September) by Arundhati Roy

Read also Organized Crime, Intelligence and Terror: The D-Company's Role in the Mumbai Attacks.

GITMO Military Prosecutor Breaks His Silence

Watch the clip.

Bush: I Was Right To Use Non-Existent Link Between Saddam-9/11 To Push For War

Today, President Bush defended his foreign policy over the past eight years in an address to the Saban Center for Middle East Policy in Washington, DC. At one point, he acknowledged that there was no link between Saddam Hussein and the 9/11 attacks but justified using such a connection to push for the Iraq war:

It is true, as I have said many times, that Saddam Hussein was not connected to the 9/11 attacks. But the decision to remove Saddam from power cannot be viewed in isolation from 9/11. In a world where terrorists armed with box cutters had just killed nearly 3,000 people, America had to decide whether we could tolerate a sworn enemy that acted belligerently, that supported terror, and that intelligence agencies around the world believed had weapons of mass destruction. It was clear to me, to members of both political parties, and to many leaders around the world that after 9/11, this was a risk we could not afford to take.

Bush has repeatedly stated that Saddam was not connected to 9/11. However, those statements came only after the war. Prior to the war, Bush and other administration officials repeatedly strove to create the impression that the Iraqi dictator was directly involved in the attacks:

“We know that Iraq and the Al Qaida terrorist network share a common enemy: the United States of America. We know that Iraq and Al Qaida have had high-level contacts that go back a decade.” [Bush, 10/14/02]

“The use of armed forces against Iraq is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations or person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.” [Bush’s Letter to Congress, 3/21/03]

“If we’re successful in Iraq … we will have struck a major blow right at the heart of the base, if you will, the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11.” [Cheney on NBC’s Meet the Press, 9/14/03]

The effect was a public who supported Bush’s Iraq invasion based on this false premise, along with the equally false claim that Iraq had WMD. A Sept. 2003 poll found that seven in 10 Americans believed Saddam was personally involved in the 9/11 attacks. Nevertheless, Bush has tried to rewrite history and claim that he never made that connection in the first place, saying in May 2006, “First, just if I might correct a misperception, I don’t think we ever said — at least I know I didn’t say — that there was a direct connection between September the 11th and Saddam Hussein.”

Bush still embraces his pre-war lies, as he admitted in his Saban address today, because without them, the public wouldn’t have supported his case for war.

Text taken from here.

The Way Forward: Post-9/11 Principles

JURIST Contributing Editor Mary Ellen O'Connell of Notre Dame Law School and panel colleagues at a recent Washburn University School of Law symposium on "The Rule of Law and the Global War on Terrorism" offer their consensus on the appropriate way forward on critical issues in international law and policy that will confront President Barack Obama's Administration when it takes office on January 20, 2009...

Washburn Consensus on Post-9/11 Principles

1. The phrase "Global War on Terrorism" should no longer be used in the sense of an on-going "war" or "armed conflict" being waged against "terrorism". Nor should it serve as either the legal or security policy basis for the range of counter- and anti-terrorism measures taken by the Administration in addressing the very real and present challenges faced by the United States and other nations in addressing terrorism.

2. The Administration should announce that it is taking immediate steps to close the interrogation and detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, with a view to removing all remaining detainees by July 1, 2009.

3. The Military Commissions Act of 2006 should be repealed in its entirety, and all activities currently being conducted under the Military Commission process constituted by the Act should be terminated.

4. Persons accused of committing acts of terrorism, war crimes or other serious human rights violations should be tried, as appropriate, before Article III courts or, as provided for in the Uniform Code of Military Justice, by courts-martial or military commission.

5. The Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 should be amended to ensure the application of one standard of treatment and interrogation to all detainees held in U.S. custody or control.

6. The single standard for the treatment and interrogation of all detainees held in U.S. custody or control should be that reflected in Army Field Manual 2-22.3, Human Intelligence Collector Operations.

7. Any presidential findings, statements, Executive Orders, or other forms of authorization related to detainee treatment and interrogation that sanction or authorize methods inconsistent with Field Manual 2-22.3 should be withdrawn.

8. A comprehensive investigation of alleged post-9/11 U.S.-held detainee abuse should be undertaken by an independent, expert commission with the goal of producing a 2009 report detailing both the findings and recommendations of this commission.

Text taken here.

New collapse footage of WTC7 and North Tower - Nov 2008

The video shows perhaps the clearest view yet of World Trade Center 7 as it collapses directly into its own footprint at freefall gravitational speed in the late afternoon on September 11, 2001. This collapse has long interested 9/11 researchers as the building was not struck by a plane and only had two isolated office fires burning in it that afternoon before its sudden and complete collapse, an unprecedented event in the history of modern steel-framed skyscrapers. The video of the North Tower also shows an extremely detailed view of the bottom half of the building as the collapse reaches the lower levels, including a brief, clear glimpse of the 'spire' of interior columns before they disappear into the pyroclastic dust cloud at the base of the building, a feature not found in ordinary office collapses and also seen in the wake of the WTC7 collapse. Both videos also show clear views of the blast squibs preceding the collapses, another sign of controlled demolition.

The U.S. Administration Was Behind 9/11

Former Syrian Information Minister: The U.S. Administration Was Behind 9/11

In an article in the Syrian government daily Teshreen, former Syrian information minister Dr. Mahdi Dakhlallah wrote that the U.S. intelligence agencies were behind the 9/11 attacks, and that their aim in this was to pave the way for implementing a previously readied plan to invade Afghanistan and Iraq.

Following is a translation of the main points of Dakhlallah's article.

"On the Seventh Anniversary of 9/11, The Truth is Still Not Unequivocal, And the Mystery Remains"

"On the seventh anniversary of the September 11 events, the truth is still not unequivocal, and the mystery remains. The immediate and simple explanation according to the official version of the events is, to this day, the object of criticism and sometimes even of derision.

"The world may have to wait 25 years for the truth to come to light and for the secret documents and information about what happened to be presented. But who cares about the truth?

"What is important, always, is the use of the events in order to carry out a strategy planned in advance - which raises the possibility that the injured party itself carried out the deed, especially if the matter concerns a country with great strategic interests such as the U.S.

"Many are the instances of violence and terror in the land of Uncle Sam, and no one knows what is behind them. Who killed President Kennedy? To date, no one knows the truth. Who is behind the Oklahoma [City] bombing? Who is behind the many instances of violence that made possible [the implementation of] aggressive strategies and policies prepared in advance?...

"Today too, there are still those who seriously raise [the possibility] that American intelligence agencies were behind the September 11 events - whether directly by means of facilitating Al-Qaeda's plot or [indirectly] by means of involving [Al-Qaeda] in the events."

"The Mere Fact That These Questions Are Being Raised Means That There Is Doubt Regarding the Official Version [Of Events]"

"French journalist Thierry Meyssan was the first to raise this possibility and to try to prove it. [The Syrian government] newspaper Al-Ba'th published [Meyssan's] book in serial form in early 2002. After that, this possibility was also raised by Michael Moore in his famous film 'Fahrenheit 9/11.' Likewise, recently one of the Arab satellite channels showed a documentary film called 'September 11 - Another Story.'

"The mere fact that these questions are being raised means that there is doubt regarding the official version [of events], [even] without real proof that American intelligence agencies were involved [in the attacks]. But a logical analysis of the instrumentalist 'pragmatic' philosophy that leads the thinking of American politicians reinforces the possibility that the American establishment is involved in this act of terror."

"These Plans Were Ready and Prepared [In Advance] - And All That Was Needed Was to Find a Pretext to Begin Their Immediate Implementation"

"The American instrumental approach is based on the Machiavellian principle of 'the end justifies the means.' The aim was to invade Afghanistan... to get close to the Caspian Sea gas and oil pipelines, and then to invade Iraq and to fix the poles of the tent of unipolarity in the ground.

"These plans were ready and prepared [in advance] - and all that was needed was to find a pretext to begin their immediate implementation. Indeed, the shock following 9/11 created an American public opinion that supported the war, aggression, and madness of our time, to which Afghanistan, Iraq, and all global stability fell victim.

"No one believes that it was possible to invade Afghanistan and Iraq in the same way and so fast had it not been for the 9/11 attacks. That's how it always is: the end justifies the means."

Text taken from here.

The Truth Revealed - Anthrax No Link to Muslims, an inside job.

The FBI's lead suspect in the September, 2001 anthrax attacks, Bruce E. Ivins, died Tuesday night, apparently by suicide, just as the Justice Department was about to charge him with responsibility for the attacks. For the last 18 years, Ivins was a top anthrax researcher at the U.S. Government's biological weapons research laboratories at Ft. Detrick, Maryland, where he was one of the most elite government anthrax scientists on the research team at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Disease (USAMRIID).

The 2001 anthrax attacks remain one of the great mysteries of the post-9/11 era. After 9/11 itself, the anthrax attacks were probably the most consequential event of the Bush presidency. One could make a persuasive case that they were actually more consequential. The 9/11 attacks were obviously traumatic for the country, but in the absence of the anthrax attacks, 9/11 could easily have been perceived as a single, isolated event. It was really the anthrax letters -- with the first one sent on September 18, just one week after 9/11 -- that severely ratcheted up the fear levels and created the climate that would dominate in this country for the next several years after. It was anthrax -- sent directly into the heart of the country's elite political and media institutions, to then-Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle (D-SD), Sen. Pat Leahy (D-Vt), NBC News anchor Tom Brokaw, and other leading media outlets - that created the impression that social order itself was genuinely threatened by Islamic radicalism.

If the now-deceased Ivins really was the culprit behind the attacks, then that means that the anthrax came from a U.S. Government lab, sent by a top U.S. Army scientist at Ft. Detrick. Without resort to any speculation or inferences at all, it is hard to overstate the significance of that fact. From the beginning, there was a clear intent on the part of the anthrax attacker to create a link between the anthrax attacks and both Islamic radicals and the 9/11 attacks. This was the letter sent to Brokaw:

By design, those attacks put the American population into a state of intense fear of Islamic terrorism, far more than the 9/11 attacks alone could have accomplished.

And then, when President Bush named Iraq as a member of the "Axis of Evil" in his January, 2002 State of the Union speech -- just two months after ABC's report, when the anthrax attacks were still very vividly on the minds of Americans -- he specifically touted this claim:

"The Iraqi regime has plotted to develop anthrax, and nerve gas, and nuclear weapons for over a decade."

Bush's invocation of Iraq was the only reference in the State of the Union address to the unsolved anthrax attacks. And the Iraq-anthrax connection was explicitly made by the President at a time when, as we now know, he was already eagerly planning an attack on Iraq.

Read further here.

View Meryl Nass blogspot on many aspects of anthrax vaccine.
FBI was told to blame Anthrax scare on Al Qaeda by White House officials
Anthrax Mystery: Questions Raised over Whether Government Is Framing Dead Army Scientist for 2001 Attacks

Learning From History - The Way to Start A War

Let's see if history can teach us anything about 9/11:

• Historians agree that the Japanese bombed one of their own railways, and then blamed it on Chinese dissidents, as a justification for war against China.
  
• It is widely accepted that the Nazis, in Operation Himmler, faked attacks on their own people and resources which they blamed on the Poles, to justify the invasion of Poland.
  
• It has now been persuasively argued — as shown, for example, in this History Channel video — that Nazis set fire to their own government building and blamed that fire on others (if you have trouble playing the clip, it is because the website hosting the clip requires you to download the clip before playing it). The fire was the event which justified Hitler's seizure of power and suspension of liberties.
  
• In the early 1950s, agents of an Israeli terrorist cell operating in Egypt planted bombs in several buildings, including U.S. diplomatic facilities, in the hope that radical muslims would be blamed as the culprits (one of the bombs detonated prematurely, allowing the Egyptians to identify the bombers). Israel's Defense Minister was brought down by the scandal, along with the entire Israeli government. See also this confirmation.
  
• The Russian KGB apparently conducted a wave of bombings in Russia in order to justify war against Chechnya and put Vladimir Putin into power (see also this short essay and this report (a pdf file).
  
• The Turkish government has been caught bombing its own and blaming it on a rebel group in order to justify a crackdown on that group.
  
• The well-respected former Indonesian president said that the government had a role in the Bali bombings.
  
• As documented by the New York Times, Iranians working for the C.I.A. in the 1950's posed as Communists and staged bombings in Iran in order to turn the country against its democratically-elected president (see also this essay).
  
• As confirmed by a former Italian Prime Minister, an Italian judge, and the former head of Italian counterintelligence, NATO, with the help of the Pentagon and CIA, carried out terror bombings in Italy and blamed the communists, in order to rally people’s support for their governments in Europe in their fight against communism. As one participant in this formerly-secret program stated:
  

"You had to attack civilians, people, women, children, innocent people, unknown people far removed from any political game. The reason was quite simple. They were supposed to force these people, the Italian public, to turn to the state to ask for greater security."

• Recently declassified documents show that in the 1960's, the American Joint Chiefs of Staff signed off on a plan to blow up AMERICAN airplanes (using an elaborate plan involving the switching of airplanes), and also to commit terrorist acts on American soil, and then to blame it on the Cubans in order to justify an invasion of Cuba. If you view no other links in this article, please read the following ABC news report; the official documents; and watch this interview with the former Washington Investigative Producer for ABC's World News Tonight with Peter Jennings
  
• The FBI had penetrated the cell which carried out the 1993 world trade center bombing, but had -- at the last minute -- cancelled the plan to have its FBI infiltrator substitute fake powder for real explosives, against the infiltrator's strong wishes (summary version is free; full version is pay-per-view)? See also this TV news report.
  
• The anthrax attacks -- which were sent along with notes purportedly written by Islamic terrorists -- used a weaponized anthrax strain from the top U.S. bioweapons facility, the Fort Detrick military base? Indeed, top bioweapons experts have stated that the anthrax attack may have been a CIA test "gone wrong"; and see this article by a former NSA and naval intelligence officer; and this statement by a distinguished law professor and bioterror expert (and this one). It is also interesting that the only congress people mailed anthrax-containing letters were key democrats, and that the attacks occurred one week before passage of the freedom-curtailing Patriot Act, which seems to have scared them and the rest of congress into passing that act without even reading it
  
• The former director of the National Security Agency said "By any measure the US has long used terrorism. In ‘78-79 the Senate was trying to pass a law against international terrorism - in every version they produced, the lawyers said the US would be in violation"(the audio is here).
  
• A former National Security Adviser told the Senate that the war on terror is "a mythical historical narrative (a pdf)".
  
• Famous leaders have stated again and again that false flag terror is the name of the game:

U.S. President James Madison said: "If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy."


Adolph Hitler said: "Terrorism is the best political weapon for nothing drives people harder than a fear of sudden death".


Nazi leader Hermann Goering said: "Why of course the people don't want war ... But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship ... Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country".

Josef Stalin said: "The easiest way to gain control of a population is to carry out acts of terror. [The public] will clamor for such laws if their personal security is threatened"

Given the above-described history of false flag terror, it is beyond dispute that we must carefully scrutinize what really happened on 9/11, and that we cannot take the government's word for it.

Original blog is here.

What does the Professional Architects and Engineers have to say about the collapse of World Trade Center

A prominent engineer with 55 years experience, in charge of the design of hundreds of major building projects including high rise offices, former member of the California Seismic Safety Commission and former member of the National Institute of Sciences Building Safety Council (Marx Ayres) believes that the World Trade Centers were brought down by controlled demolition (see also this)

Two professors of structural engineering at a prestigious Swiss university (Dr. Joerg Schneider and Dr. Hugo Bachmann) said that, on 9/11, World Trade Center 7 was brought down by controlled demolition (translation here)

Kamal S. Obeid, structural engineer, with a masters degree in Engineering from UC Berkeley, of Fremont, California, says:

"Photos of the steel, evidence about how the buildings collapsed, the unexplainable collapse of WTC 7, evidence of thermite in the debris as well as several other red flags, are quite troubling indications of well planned and controlled demolition"

Ronald H. Brookman, structural engineer, with a masters degree in Engineering from UC Davis, of Novato California, writes:

"Why would all 110 stories drop straight down to the ground in about 10 seconds, pulverizing the contents into dust and ash - twice. Why would all 47 stories of WTC 7 fall straight down to the ground in about seven seconds the same day? It was not struck by any aircraft or engulfed in any fire. An independent investigation is justified for all three collapses including the surviving steel samples and the composition of the dust."

Graham John Inman, structural engineer, of London, England, points out:

"WTC 7 Building could not have collapsed as a result of internal fire and external debris. NO plane hit this building. This is the only case of a steel frame building collapsing through fire in the world. The fire on this building was small & localized therefore what is the cause?"

Paul W. Mason, structural engineer, of Melbourne, Australia, argues:

"In my view, the chances of the three buildings collapsing symmetrically into their own footprint, at freefall speed, by any other means than by controlled demolition, are so remote that there is no other plausible explanation!"

Mills M. Kay Mackey, structural engineer, of Denver, Colorado, points out:

"The force from the jets and the burning fuel could not have been sufficient to make the building collapse. Why doesn't the media mention that the 11th floor was completely immolated on February 13th, 1975? It had the weight of nearly 100 stories on top of it but it did not collapse?"

The Sign Petition of engineers and architects for, and demanding a truly independent investigation with subpoena power in order to uncover the full truth surrounding the events of 9/11/01 - specifically the collapse of the World Trade Center Towers and Building 7 can be found here.

9/11, Iraq & PNAC - The Connection

When the Bush administration started lobbying for war with Iraq, they used as rationale a definition of preemption (generally meaning anticipatory use of force in the face of an imminent attack) that was broadened to allow for the waging of a preventive war in which force may be used even without evidence of an imminent attack. They also were able to convince much of the American public that Saddam Hussein had something to do with the attacks of 9/11, despite the fact that no evidence of a link has been uncovered. Consequently, many people supported the war on the basis of 1) a policy that has no legal basis in international law and 2) a totally unfounded claim of Iraqi guilt.

What most people do not know, however, is that certain high ranking officials in the Bush administration have been working for regime change in Iraq for the past decade, long before terrorism became an important issue for our country. In 1997 they formed an organization called the Project for the New American Century. They have sought the establishment of a much stronger U.S. presence throughout the Mideast and Iraq's Saddam Hussein has been their number one target for regime change. Members of this group drafted and successfully passed through Congress the Iraqi Liberation Act (which declares that it should be the policy of the United States to seek to remove the Saddam Hussein regime from power in Iraq and to replace it with a democratic government), giving legal sanctions for an invasion of the country, and funneled millions of taxpayer dollars to Hussein opposition groups called the Iraqi National Congress and The Committee for the Liberation of Iraq.

The Project for the New American Century (PNAC) seeks to establish what they call 'Pax Americana' across the globe. Essentially, their goal is to transform America, the sole remaining superpower, into a planetary empire by force of arms. A report released by PNAC in September of 2000 entitled 'Rebuilding America's Defenses' (a Pdf file) codifies this plan, which requires a massive increase in defense spending and the fighting of several major theater wars in order to establish American dominance. The first has been achieved in Bush's new budget plan, which calls for the exact dollar amount to be spent on defense that was requested by PNAC in 2000.

Several original PNAC members, including Cheney, Khalilzad and the Bush family, have ties to the oil industry. Many other members have been long-time fixtures in the U.S. military establishment or Cold War "strategic studies," including Elliott Abrams, Dick Cheney, Paula Dobriansky, Aaron Friedberg, Frank Gaffney, Fred C. Ikle, Peter W. Rodman, Stephen P. Rosen, Henry S. Rowen, Donald H. Rumsfeld, John R. Bolton, Vin Weber, and Paul Dundes Wolfowitz. It should not be surprising, therefore, that while the group devotes inordinate attention to Iraq, its most general focus has been on a need to "re-arm America." The prospect of mining oil riches may explain part of the group's focus on Iraq, but this motivation has been buried under the rhetoric of national security and the need for strong national defense.

Their campaign to overthrow Saddam Hussein was unsuccessful during the Clinton presidency and early days of Bush's term, but on 9/11 they found the event they needed to push for the overthrow of Hussein. Within 24 hours both Wolfowitz and Cheney were calling for an invasion of Iraq, even before anyone knew who had been responsible for the attacks.

Four Vital Missions of PNAC

PNAC members believe that there are four vital missions "demanded by U. S. global leadership," but claim that "current American armed forces are ill-prepared to execute" these missions.

1. Homeland Defense. America must defend its homeland. During the Cold War, nuclear deterrence was the key element in homeland defense; it remains essential. But the new century has brought with it new challenges. While reconfiguring its nuclear force, the United States also must counteract the effects of the proliferation of ballistic missiles and weapons of mass destruction that may soon allow lesser states to deter U.S. military action by threatening U.S. allies and the American homeland itself. Of all the new and current missions for U.S. armed forces, this must have priority.
2. Large Wars. Second, the United States must retain sufficient forces able to rapidly deploy and win multiple simultaneous large-scale wars and also to be able to respond to unanticipated contingencies in regions where it does not maintain forward-based forces. This resembles the 'two-war' standard that has been the basis of U.S. force planning over the past decade. Yet this standard needs to be updated to account for new realities and potential new conflicts.
3. Constabulary Duties. Third, the Pentagon must retain forces to preserve the current peace in ways that fall short of conduction major theater campaigns. A decade’s experience and the policies of two administrations have shown that such forces must be expanded to meet the needs of the new, long-term NATO mission in the Balkans, the continuing no-fly-zone and other missions in Southwest Asia, and other presence missions in vital regions of East Asia. These duties are today’s most frequent missions, requiring forces configured for combat but capable of long-term, independent constabulary operations.
4. Transform U.S. Armed Forces. Finally, the Pentagon must begin now to exploit the so-called 'revolution in military affairs,' sparked by the introduction of advanced technologies into military systems; this must be regarded as a separate and critical mission worthy of a share of force structure and defense budgets" 

Nothing corrupts the human soul more than greed, but greed was not the only potential motivating factor for conducting such an event. The Project for a New American Century entire reason for being hinged on such an event. A huge part of that agenda was the invasion of Iraq. The invasion of Iraq was made possible only by the events of 9/11. To date we have not even heard a theory put forth on how Muslim extremists have, or would have benefited from those events. They had nothing to gain and from what we have witnessed as the world turned against the Muslim people, they had everything to lose. We have seen a great deal of EVIDENCE indicating, at the very least that many actions were taken by operatives within the Bush/PNAC administration to paralyze procedures that were in place to prevent and/or address an attack of that nature. Even more “EVIDENCE” has been uncovered that indicates a far greater level of involvement by insiders.

What we have here is a group of men (PNAC) who had a plan. The plan included invading Iraq. They openly admitted that this would not be possible without an event like 9/11. (They used the term new Pearl Harbor but you can obviously see the connection.) They were in key positions to ensure that events of 9/11 take place, either by conducting them or by permitting them to play out. Now they are being exposed for the lies they told about Iraq that permitted them to invade a nation and kill 10s if not 100s of thousands of people including 2000 Americans.

THE COMMON SENSE CONNECTION: THESE MEN LIED IN ORDER TO START A WAR AND IN THE PROCESS THEY SACRIFICED THE LIVES OF OVER 4000 AMERICAN SOLDIERS. WHAT MAKES YOU THINK THAT THEY DID NOT SACRIFICE 3000 TOTAL STRANGERS ON 9/11/2001 FOR THE SAME PURPOSE?

Among the key conclusions of PNAC's defense strategy document (Rebuilding America's Defenses) were the following:

• Develop and deploy global missile defenses to defend the American homeland and American allies, and to provide a secure basis for U.S. power projection around the world.
  
• Control the new 'international commons' of space and 'cyberspace,' and pave the way for the creation of a new military service--U.S. Space Forces--with the mission of space control.
  
• Increase defense spending, adding $15 billion to $20 billion to total defense spending annually.
  
• Exploit the 'revolution in military affairs' [transformation to high-tech, unmanned weaponry] to insure the long-term superiority of U.S. conventional forces.
  
• Need to develop a new family of nuclear weapons designed to address new sets of military requirements" complaining that the U.S. has "virtually ceased development of safer and more effective nuclear weapons.
  
• Facing up to the realities of multiple constabulary missions that will require a permanent allocation of U.S. forces.
  
• America must defend its homeland" by "reconfiguring its nuclear force" and by missile defense systems that "counteract the effects of the proliferation of ballistic missiles and weapons of mass destruction.
  
• Need for a larger U.S. security perimeter" and the U.S. "should seek to establish a network of 'deployment bases' or 'forward operating bases' to increase the reach of current and future forces," citing the need to move beyond Western Europe and Northeast Asia to increased permanent military presence in Southeast Asia and "other regions of East Asia." Necessary "to cope with the rise of China to great-power status.
  
• Redirecting the U.S. Air Force to move "toward a global first-strike force."
  
• End the Clinton administration's "devotion" to the Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty.
  
• North Korea, Iran, Iraq, or similar states [should not be allowed] to undermine American leadership, intimidate American allies, or threaten the American homeland itself.
  
• Main military missions" necessary to "preserve Pax Americana" and a "unipolar 21st century" are the following: "secure and expand zones of democratic peace, deter rise of new great-power competitor, defend key regions (Europe, East Asia, Middle East), and exploit transformation of war.

9/11, Iraq & PNAC - The Connection is very CLEAR & UNDENIABLE.

Read further "Rebuilding America's Defenses" – A Summary. Other link here.

We Are Not Crazy - 911 is an Inside Job

When David Ray Griffin conceived his first book regarding the events of Sept. 11, 2001, his interpretation of what transpired that day revolved around the concept of blowback, that the attacks were a byproduct of America’s decades of aggressive foreign policy toward the Middle East. In short, at the time, he bought the official story of 9/11. He wasn’t letting the United States government off the hook for their role in the attacks, but he wasn’t placing culpability where he would eventually place it: squarely on the shoulders of the Bush administration.

While researching for that first book, Griffin came across a growing community — concentrated mostly online — of people questioning the circumstances of Sept. 11 as reported by the mainstream media. Now, the retired professor, theologian and longtime Santa Barbara resident is one the leading voices of the so-called 9/11 Truth Movement, citizens who believe the horror of that day was not caused by radical Islamic terrorists but was orchestrated within the walls of the White House. Derided in the press as loony conspiracy theorists (if given any attention at all), the group, Griffin says, now includes intellectuals such as himself, as well as architects, engineers, pilots, former military officers and even ex-CIA operatives.

“The change in the movement has been rather drastic, because a few years back, people would dismiss us as a bunch of crazies on the Internet. And then when I joined, it was a bunch of crazies on the Internet and an aging theologian,” Griffin says. “But now they can’t make that charge anymore because there are far more intellectuals and professionals identified with the movement that have gone on record [opposing] the official story.” In addition, he says, polls indicate the general public is beginning to view the conventional portrayal of 9/11 with an increasingly skeptical eye as well. And to what does Griffin, who will speak at the Ventura Women’s Center on March 28, attribute the shifting tide? “Simply the power of truth — the old saying, ‘the truth will out.’ Once you start getting into it and looking at the evidence, it’s overwhelmingly obvious that the official story is false.”

On one of the interview "David Ray Griffin on the 9/11 Truth Movement and Bush-Cheney’s “stupid” imperialism" by Matthew Singer, 27 March 2008; 

Are you convinced the US government orchestrated 9/11, or do you simply believe there is enough inconsistencies in the official story to warrant a new investigation?

He replied:

If you read the first sentence of my Debunking 9/11 Debunking, you'll see that I say the evidence that 9/11 was an inside job is obvious. It was only in my first book, The New Pearl Harbor, when I was using the term prima facia, saying we have prima facia evidence that it was an inside job. But at that point, that was before the 9/11 Commission had issued its report, so I remained open to the possibility that they could answer the various questions we had raised. In that book, I was simply a stenographer, really, for the 9/11 Truth Movement. I just organized the various arguments and evidence that had been marshaled. But when the 9/11 Commission report appeared and I saw how they treated the evidence, they ignored 99 percent of it, and that 1 percent of it, where they thought they could distort the facts to make it look like it was OK, they did that. That book was called 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions, and at the end of that book, I said far from allaying my suspicions that it was an inside job, it confirmed them. Ever since then, I've clearly been on that side.

You can read further here and the following books.

The New Pearl Harbor
Disturbing Questions about the Bush Administration
David Ray Griffin

The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions
A Critique of the Kean-Zelikow Report
David Ray Griffin

Other Links
Condoleeza Rice Warned Willie Brown Not To Fly On 9/11
Government Insider Says Bush Authorized 911 Attacks From Thomas Buyea 9-17-4
Prior knowledge of 9/11 attacks overheard in Hebrew
Ex-Italian President: Intel Agencies Know 9/11 An Inside Job and the attack were runs by CIA and Mossad
Former German Defense Minister Confirms CIA Involvement in 9/11

Fact Sheet : 911 - The Coverup

We firmly believe (a pdf file) there is probable cause for such an investigation. The case for investigation is based on three pillars:
1) evidence of cover-up and a lack of serious investigation after the fact;
2) evidence of misconduct on the day of 9/11
3) evidence of foreknowledge and preparation before September 11th.

Undertaking a full-scale, truly independent investigation is imperative, not only because there must be justice for the victims, but also because of the role 9/11 has played in justifying policies of aggression supposedly justifed by 9/11 must be halted, and a shattered public trust must be repaired.

During their 2002 inquiry, the Congressional joint intelligence committees(who redacted 1/4 of their report) were scrutinized by an FBI counter-investigation, which invaded the Senate in search of an alleged leak. It was widely believed that the FBI investigation may have been intended to have a chilling effect on the conduct of the Congressional Joint Inquiry.

• The Congressional investigation failed to pursue solid evidence of a money trail to the alleged hijackers from the US-allied Pakistani intelligence agency (ISI). The ISI chief was removed from his post when strong evidence of his connection to the plot surfaced in early October 2001, but no serious punitive action was taken against him.
  
• Evidence was destroyed or withheld, including suppression of the discovery of black boxes from the two flights at Ground Zero and the destruction of tapes made by the air traffic controllers who handled the same flights.2
  
• Whistle blowers such as FBI translator Sibel Edmonds and Anthony Shaffer of “Able Danger” were disciplined or fired, even as FBI, CIA, and military officials who were blamed for failures received promotions and medals.
  
• The September 11th relatives who lobbied for the 9/11 Commission (after 14 months of White House resistance) submitted 400 questions that Commissioners accepted as a “roadmap.” 70 percent of the questions were fully ignored in The 9/11 Commission Report. Many of the relatives later declared the Report a whitewash.3
  
• 9/11 Commissioner Max Cleland resigned in late 2003, calling the panel a whitewash and saying, “Bush is scamming America.” There was no significant response or inquiry from anyone else in government, or the major media.4
  
• Philip Zelikow, the 9/11 Commission executive director who over saw the panel’s activities, refused to step down after the September11th families called for his resignation due to grave conflicts of interest (close association with Condoleezza Rice, member of White House national security staff both before 9/11 and in 2002, member of Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board).
  
• Rice may have committed perjury in her April 2004 Commission testimony that an August 2001 Presidential Daily Briefing to Bush was only of “historical significance,” when in fact it detailed current intelligence.
  
• The 9/11 Commission Report claimed the financial background of the attacks was unknown, but dismissed the question as being of “little practical significance” (page 172). Since when doesn’t an investigation “follow the money”?
  
• Large sections of the report are based on the confessions of “enemy combatants” such as Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, as provided in the form of transcripts by the government. The 9/11 Commission staff was not allowed to see or interview any of these “enemy combatants.”
  
• Over a period of several years, NORAD, FAA, White House and military officials gave widely divergent and conflicting accounts of the air defense response to 9/11, but no one was ever held accountable for upholding falsehoods. The 9/11 Commission chairs later admitted they considered a criminal investigation of NORAD’s statements, but preferred instead to present a unanimous report.
  
• The focus of the Commission will be on the future. We’re not interested in trying to assess blame. We do not consider that part of the Commission’s responsibility. – Lee Hamilton, 9/11 Commission vice-chairman.
  

The above is only a sampling of a large body of official misconduct after the fact. What is being hidden?

Read further here ( Note : All in Pdf format)

1. Whitewash as Public Service
2. Millions of New Yorkers Question the Official Story of 9/11
3. Connecting the Dots
4. Scamming America: The Official 9/11 Coverup Guide

Other Links Top 40 Reasons to Doubt the Official Story of September 11th, 2001

Read further Tags on 911 in this blog.

911 - Controlled Demolition - Is it an Inside Job?

Spot the Difference



Landmark



Aladdin Hotel and Casino



Everglades Hotel



WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 during 911 Tragedy. Note that WTC7 was not hit by a plane and is only few blocks away from WTC1 and WTC2.

Building implosion is a term in use in the controlled demolition industry. It refers to strategically placing explosive material and timing its detonation so that a structure collapses on itself in a matter of seconds minimizing the physical damage to its immediate surroundings. Numerous small explosives, strategically placed within the structure, are used to catalyze the collapse. Nitroglycerin, dynamite, or other explosives are used to shatter reinforced concrete supports. Linear shaped charges are used to sever steel supports. These explosives are progressively detonated on supports throughout the structure. Then, explosives on the lower floors initiate the controlled collapse.

On 9/11, there were multiple reports by credible witnesses of ground-level fiery explosions right before the collapse of the Twin Towers:

• A CBS News reporter on stated: "All of a sudden I heard a roar and I saw one of the towers blow ... I saw from street level as though it exploded up, a giant rolling ball of flame..."
  
• The same reporter stated: "I hear simultaneously this roar and see what appears to be a gigantic fireball rising up at ground level . . . giant ball of fire come out of the earth" (pages 119 & 239)
  
• A Port Authority Police Department officer, who was intimately familiar with the World Trade Center from his years of police duties patrolling there, said that hallway began to shudder as a "terrible deafening roar" swept over him, then a giant fireball exploded in the street seconds before the south tower collapsed
  
• An eyewitness reported a large explosion at ground level right before the collapse of the North Tower
  

What could have caused ground-level fiery explosions right before the collapse of each tower?